Citation
Satisfaction and university involvement among black and white undergraduate students

Material Information

Title:
Satisfaction and university involvement among black and white undergraduate students
Creator:
Lindsey, Mary Davis, 1944-
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
xi, 70 leaves : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Academic degrees ( jstor )
College environment ( jstor )
College students ( jstor )
Colleges ( jstor )
High school students ( jstor )
Minority group students ( jstor )
Questionnaires ( jstor )
School dropouts ( jstor )
Undergraduate students ( jstor )
Universities ( jstor )
African American college students -- Florida ( lcsh )
College students -- Florida ( lcsh )
Counselor Education thesis Ph. D
Dissertations, Academic -- Counselor Education -- UF
Satisfaction ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1981.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 64-69.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Mary Davis Lindsey.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
028138789 ( ALEPH )
07961875 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text











SATISFACTION AND UNIVERSITY INVOLVEMENT AMONG
BLACK AND WHITE UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS










BY


MARY DAVIS LINDSEY


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



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1981






























Copyright 1981


by


Mary Davis Lindsey




















DEDICATED .' .' .' ' .' .' TO MY MOTHER

EVELEAN DAVIS

&

MY CHILDREN DAVID & APRIL




**THE MOST IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN MY LIFE WHO MADE COUNTLESS SACRIFICES FOR ME TO COMPLETE THIS PROJECT . . . .














ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


This project was made possible through the support, guidance, love and patience of many individuals. Neither time nor space would permit me to list each by name. However, there are a few individuals without whose faith and support I would not be at this point in my life. First, to Dr. Woodrow M. Parker, thank you for recruiting me from a laundry mat and for helping me "clean up my act."

To Dr. Roderick McDavis, my chairman, I am sincerely grateful for your continuous encouragement and faith in my ability to complete this task. You gave freely of your time and energies. For all of this I thank and respect you for your professionalism and friendship. Sincere appreciation is also extended to my other committee members, Dr. Larry Loesch and Dr. Joseph Vandiver. Dr. Loesch, your insightful suggestions and wisdom were especially helpful during my sampling procedures. Dr. Vandiver, I am especially appreciative for your objectivity and understanding support of my wanting to conduct this particular study.

Of the many friends to whom I owe thanks, I am indebted to Margaret Anderson (my typist), David Williams and Amos Tayo Qlagunju (my computer analysts) for persevering with me at all kinds of odd hours day or night. To Dr. Gail Miles, I appreciate your suggestions in the discussion and


-iv-










refinement of this study. To Johnny, Ted, Dontry, John, Sandra, Ida, Minerva, Ike, Sonia, Rhonne, Marvin, and Lynne, thank you one and all for your moral support and encouragement.

Dr. Earl Gordon, Florida State University; Dr. James Beck, Dr. Gertrude Simmons, and Dr. Joshua Williams of Florida A & M University; and Mr. Jack Kinzer, University of Florida, thanks to each of you and your institutions for the time, patience, assistance, and encouragement you gave me with coordinating the necessary activities to enable this project to be a success. Instructors and students, one and all, I thank you too, for without your cooperation none of this would have been possible.

In conclusion, I would like to thank my mother for her supportive patience, understanding, and love. Most of all, a special expression of love to my research assistants, my children, David and April, for their sacrifices, patience, and love throughout my educational adventure.














TABLE OF CONTENTS


Page


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........


LIST OF TABLES


ABSTRACT ..... ............


CHAPTER


INTRODUCTION .......

Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study . . . Need for the Study .... Significance of the Study . Definition of Terms .... Organization of the Study .


TWO REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ........

Introduction ................
Measuring and Defining Student Satisfaction .
Measuring the College Environment ........
Congruence and Environment .........
Variables Related to Student Satisfaction Problems of Black Students Attending Predominantly White Educational Institutions.
Summary ........ ...................

THREE METHODOLOGY ....... ..................


Introduction ..... Hypotheses ......
Population and Sample . Instruments ........
Procedures ......
Analyses of Data . . .


FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...........


Hypothesis 1 ..... Hypothesis 2 ..... Hypothesis 3 ..... Hypothesis 4 .....


-vi-


ONE


. . . . . . . . . . iv

. . . . . . . . . . viii

. . . . . . . . . . ix


� . . . . . . . . . 1


10 10 13
14 17

20 23


� . . . . . . . . . .


� . . . . . . . . . .
� . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .










Hypothesis 5 39 Hypothesis 6 40 Discussion 41 FIVE CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, SUMMARY AND
RECOMMENDATIONS 46

Conclusions 46 Implications 47 Summary 49 Recommendations for Further Research 50 APPENDICES

A LETTER TO INSTRUCTORS 53 B RESEARCH AND ADMINISTRATION INSTRUCTIONS 54 C LETTERS TO INSTITUTIONS 62 BIBLIOGRAPHY 64 BIOGRAPHICAL DATA 70


-vii-














LIST OF TABLES


Table Page

1. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values
for Black and White Students' Scores on
CSSQ Scales and Total CSSQ 35

2. Analysis of Variance of Black and White
Students' Mean Scores on the CSSQ by Academic
Levels 36

3. Point Bi-Serial Correlations Between Black
and White Students' Mean Scores on the CSSQ
and their Mean Scores on the UIQ 37

4. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for
UF Students' Scores on the UIQ 38

5. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for
FSU Students' Scores on the UIQ 38

6. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for
FAMU Students' Scores on the UIQ 39

7. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for
All Students' Scores on the UIQ 39

8. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for
Black Undergraduate Students Attending Predominantly Black or White Universities 40

9. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for
White Undergraduate Students Attending Predominantly Black or White Universities 41


-viii-










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



SATISFACTION AND UNIVERSITY INVOLVEMENT AMONG
BLACK AND WHITE UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS


By

Mary Davis Lindsey

August 1981


Chairman: Dr. Roderick McDavis Major Department: Counselor Education


The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments and their level of involvement in their environments. Specifically, the study examined differences in degrees of satisfaction among black and white students in the following university environment areas: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition.

A total of 800 undergraduate students participated in the study. Of that number, 373 were black students and 427 were white students. The students were selected from stratified random samples of classes from the University of Florida, Florida State University, and Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University. The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) and the University Involvement


-ix-










Questionnaire (UIQ) were administered to these students at the beginning of Spring quarter 1981.

A t-test indicated that there were no significant

differences between black and white undergraduate students' total scores on the CSSQ. Black students were less satisfied than white students on working conditions, compensation, and quality of education on the scale scores of the CSSQ. An analysis of variance showed no significant differences between black and white undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments based on their academic levels.

Point bi-serial correlation coefficients indicated

there were no significant relationships between black and white students' mean scores on the CSSQ and the UIQ. A ttest indicated that black students were more involved in organizations and activities within their university environments. A t-test indicated that there were no significant differences between the degree of satisfaction for blacks attending a predominantly black university and those attending predominantly white universities. A t-test indicated that there were no significant differences between the degree of satisfaction for white students attending predominantly white universities and those attending a predominantly black university.

Based on the results of this study, race, academic level, level of involvement, and attendance in predominantly white










universities or a black university did not affect students' degree of satisfaction with ,heir university environments.


-xi-














CHAPTER ONE


INTRODUCTION



Statement of the Problem


Educators are seriously concerned about the fact that only 40 percent of the students who enter college in the United States will graduate four years later (Freeman & Hollomon, 1975). Statistics indicate that of the estimated 7.6 million undergraduate students enrolled in colleges and universities in 1971, approximately 2.3 million will drop out of higher education completely (Eckland, 1964; Iffert, 1957; Statistical Abstracts, 1974). In the past 15 years, researchers have studied the effects of the college environment on students to determine if it is one of the variables that might influence the degree of satisfaction students find with their institutions. Prior to this time, the college environment has been treated as a constant for all students, and satisfaction had no role in retention studies (Pantages, 1978).

Pace and Stern (1958) urge that the college environment be given more emphasis in retention studies. Astin (1977) states that satisfaction with the college environment may have a substantial impact on how students perceive their


-1-










college experiences. Astin correlated students' overall satisfaction with specific aspects of the undergraduate experience (such as quality of instruction, curriculum, administration, contacts with faculty and fellow students, and intellectual environment). Of all the factors that correlated with satisfaction, involvement within the institution showed the strongest partial correlation with satisfaction of the intellectual environment. Unlike most other student characteristics, satisfaction depended less on the characteristics of the individual student and more on those of the institution. Thus, if students are to remain in the college environment, they should feel that they are a part of the institution (Astin, 1977).

The challenge of developing programs and maintaining activities that students find satisfying is much more complex today than it was 20 years ago. Then, it was possible to generalize the needs of the college population to an average 18 year old white male (Maw, 1971). Recent efforts, however, to recruit black students into previously all white institutions provide challenges for which few people, either black or white, are fully prepared to handle. Some researchers argue that black students attending predominantly white institutions are in an "alien environment" (Joseph, 1969).

These institutions, for the most part, have continued to provide traditional student services programs designed










to meet the needs of the majority population (MadrazaPeterson & Rodriguez, 1978). If black students perceive that their concerns are not a part of the mainstream of activities, they tend to withdraw from the institution, by dropping out or associating primarily with other black students. Thus, the notion is perpetuated that black students are not interested in activities sponsored by the university community.

Aside from the problem of identification with the

predominantly white university, Gibbs (1973) reports conflicts between the expectations of black students and the expectations of white staff and administrators. Gibbs states that predominantly white universities expect black students to assimilate into the system without substantial alteration of the academic environment. These students are expected to compete academically with the white students and to be "grateful" for having the opportunity to obtain a quality education. On the other hand, black students expect predominantly white universities to be flexible in responding to their needs. They envision college as being a continuation of high school and expect a greater diversity of cultural and social activities (Gibbs, 1973).

In addition to the differences between the levels of expectations between students and administrators, personal and social barriers exist between black and white students. Cultural values and lifestyles are significantly different,






-4-


especially between black students from the inner city and white students from the suburbs. There are difficulties for both in dormitories when neither group has had any prior contact or exposure to the other (Wharton, 1972). As a result of these social and cultural barriers, there is less interaction between black and white students. Lack of interaction sometimes leads to lack of involvement and alienation of black students toward the university.

The articles reviewed above suggest that interaction

between students and their environments may have a significant effect on whether students drop out or remain in college. Environmental effects apparently predispose students to view their college experiences as either satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Social interaction, academic achievement, and acceptance by faculty and student personnel workers are factors that influence how students perceive their environments. The literature suggests that interaction between students and their institutions affects satisfaction and dropout rates. Thus, the degree to which a college environment corresponds to the needs of the students is also the degree to which students will persist in that institution.



Purpose of the Study


The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with the various aspects of their university environments and their level of involvement in






-5-


their environments. Specifically, the study determined if differences exist in the degree of satisfaction among black and white students in the following areas: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire was used to measure the students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their environments. The University Involvement Questionnaire was used to measure the students' level of involvement within their institutions.



Need for the Study


There are numerous interacting factors that cause

students to drop out of colleges and universities. Most studies on dropouts have attempted to only correlate such variables as Scholastic Aptitude Test scores, Grade Point Average, and Socio-Economic Status with dropout rates in colleges and universities. Tinto (1975), however, stresses the importance of a more comprehensive study that includes social integration as a part of dropout behaviors. Student satisfaction and involvement are two variables frequently overlooked as possible dropout factors in retention studies.

Astin (1977) states that the specific characteristics of a college environment should be considered when studying satisfaction with the college environment. In studies of higher educational institutions and students' perceptions, Astin found a significant interplay between a college's






-6-


specific environmental characteristics and students' experiences in colleges and universities. The "intensity of exposure" (degree of involvement, interaction with faculty, athletics, student government, and academic activity) influences persistence as well as student satisfaction with the institution. A theme throughout the literature on student satisfaction suggests that researchers should continue to investigate more carefully the "nonintellective" factors related to student satisfaction. Does involvement in the institution result in greater satisfaction or do satisfied students become more involved in the institution? Does dissatisfaction with the university environment cause students to become more involved? Through studies on satisfaction, colleges will be able to provide more meaningful experiences and opportunities for students.



Significance of the Study


According to Betz et al. (1971), student satisfaction is probably one of the least investigated variables in the college community, but one of the most meaningful indicators of students' attitudes toward their educational experiences. Therefore, data obtained from this study can provide university administrators with information about some of the differences in black and white students' perceptions of university environments and whether these differences relate to






-7-


student satisfaction. Information gathered from this study also may be of assistance to student personnel workers who are concerned about the relative effectiveness of their own college environments. Student personnel workers at each institution could share insights with colleagues at other institutions.

Results obtained from this study could prove especially helpful to high school students when choosing a college. If information describing the environmental characteristics of universities in Florida was available, students would be better equipped to select a college with an environment more compatible with their needs. Admissions counselors would have information on college environmental conditions that could prove helpful to the adjustment of different types of students.

The study will provide specific information concerning students' perceptions of satisfactory and unsatisfactory aspects of the college environment. It also will show the degree to which involvement within the institution is related to satisfaction. The results could assist administrators to understand how their university environments can provide programs that elicit involvement on the part of the students, and perhaps increase the number of students who graduate from their institutions.






-8-


Definition of Terms


The terms below were defined in this study as follows:

Alien environment -- An environment in which students believe they are not included in the mainstream of events. Compensation -- The amount of input (e.g., study) required relative to academic outcomes (e.g., grades), and the effect of input demands on students' fulfilling their other needs and goals (Starr, Betz, & Menne, 1971, 4-5). Congruence -- The relationship between students' environments and their personalities.

Dropouts -- Students who leave college before graduating. Environment -- The intellectual-social-cultural climate of the university that influences how students work, socialize, live, and develop.

Involvement -- The level of participation in a variety of activities within the university environment during students' undergraduate years.

Quality of Education -- The various academic conditions related to the individual's intellectual and vocational development (e.g., the competence and helpfulness of faculty, staff, advisors, and counselors), and the adequacy of curriculum requirements, teaching methods, and assignments (Starr et al., 1971).

Recognition -- Attitudes and behaviors of faculty and students indicating acceptances of students as worthwhile individuals (Starr et al., 1971).






-9-


Satisfaction -- The extent to which individuals feel the environment is meeting their needs (Starr, et al., 1971). Social Life -- Opportunities to meet socially relevant goals (such as dating, meeting compatible or interesting people, making friends, and participating in campus events and informal social activities) (Starr et al., 1971). Working Conditions -- The physical conditions of the students' college life (such as the cleanliness and comfort of his place of residence, adequacy of study areas on campus, quality of meals, and facilities for lounging between classes (Starr et al., 1971).



Organization of the Study


The remainder of the study is organized into four

chapters. A review of related literature on measuring and defining college student satisfaction, measuring the college environment, satisfaction; congruence and environment, variables related to satisfaction, and problems of black students attending predominantly white public universities is presented in Chapter Two. The hypotheses, instruments, population and sample, procedures, and analysis of data are described in Chapter Three. The results and a discussion of the results are presented in Chapter Four. A summary of the research, implications, and recommendations for further research are presented in Chapter Five.














CHAPTER TWO


REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE



Introduction


A review of the literature on college student

satisfaction reveals a lack of identifiable variables that have contributed to students' degree of satisfaction with their experiences. Among the wide variety of studies on college students, relatively few have investigated college students' satisfaction and their attitudes toward their environments (Morstain, 1977). To identify some of the areas related to college student satisfaction, the literature was reviewed in five areas. These areas were measuring and defining student satisfaction, measuring the college environment, satisfaction: congruence and environment, variables related to university student satisfaction, and problems encountered by black students attending predominantly white educational institutions.



Measuring and Defining Student Satisfaction


Much of the research involving student satisfaction has been conducted on "academic" related topics, such as different teaching techniques, study skills practices, student needs,


-10-






-11-


and achievement. There has been a scarcity of systematic research focusing on the elements of college student satisfaction. Therefore, relatively little progress has been made toward developing and evaluating measures of student satisfaction, or attempting to understand the nature, causes, correlates or effects of this campus phenomenon (Betz, et al., 1970).

Berdie (1944) published one of the earliest and most

well known studies of college student satisfaction. He investigated engineering students' satisfaction with the curricula as they related to academic achievements. He used first-year honor points, high school grades, and scores on a series of ability tests as performance measures. Of the eight performance measures used, Berdie found that only high school rank had a significant relationship with curricular satisfaction.

Morstain (1977) attempted to assess students'

satisfaction with aspects of their academic programs in relation to their attitudes and preferences regarding the "purpose and process" of a college education. The results indicated that students who were dissatisfied with their academic programs had noticeably different educational orientation profiles when compared to peers who were relatively satisfied. Second, dissatisfied students had an orientation profile incongruent with faculty educational orientations, while highly satisfied students were less incongruent with faculty orientations. This research suggests that there is a need for a






-12-


relative "fit" of student and faculty orientations in order to develop effective programs for both faculty and students to be satisfied with the academic environment (Pervin, 1967).

In the research on college student satisfaction that has been reported in the literature to date, the selection of satisfaction dimensions has been based on "logical" considerations rather than research evidence. Betz, Klingensmith, and Menne (1970) attempted to provide further information regarding the components of college student satisfaction through a factor analysis study of the dimensions of satisfaction for two samples of undergraduate students. They applied the principles developed from years of research on the satisfaction of employees in business and industry (Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, & Capwell, 1957; Hoppock, 1935; Vroom, 1964). The results of the study supported the potential usefulness of the College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) as a device for measuring college student satisfaction. The analysis of data indicated that the CSSQ had high internal consistency and construct validity. Overall, there was considerable support for using quality of education, recognition, working conditions, compensation, and social life as important dimensions of college student satisfaction, which are the present components of the CSSQ.






-13-


Measuring the College Environment


Pace and Stern (1958) developed the first systematic approach to measuring the college environment. They developed the College Characteristics Index (CCI), in part from Murray's (1938) need-press theory, and from the later work of Stern, Stein, and Bloom (1956) on personality assessment. The theory is based on the assumption that the college environment or "press" can be characterized in terms of its potential for reinforcing certain personality needs. The CCI is, therefore, designed to measure 30 different environmental presses, each of which corresponds to a parallel personality need. For example, a college's "press for achievement" indicates that college's capacity for satisfying the student's "need for achievement." An environment with a relatively high achievement press would be more likely to satisfy the student's need for achievement than one with a relatively low achievement press. The CCI consists of 300 items describing different impressions of the college environment. Most of the items are concerned with the students' impressions of the total institutional climate.

Pace (1965) revised the CCI by a factor analysis and an item analysis of institutional means on scores derived from the parent instrument. These analyses resulted in the development of the College and University Environmental Scales (CUES). One of the major purposes of this revision was to identify CCI items that actually differentiate among






-14-


college environments. Most of the items retained in the revised CCI still measure students' perceptions of their college environments.

Another approach to assessing the college environment

was developed by Astin and Holland (1961). The Environmental Assessment Technique (EAT) is based on the assumption that environments are transmitted by people and that the college environment depends on the personal characteristics of students, faculty, and administration. Because much of the students' personal contacts are with fellow students, it was assumed that a large portion of the students' environment was determined by the characteristics of fellow students. Therefore, the environment was defined in terms of eight characteristics of the student body: average intelligence, size, and six personal orientations: realistic, scientific, conventional, enterprising, social, and artistic. Major field choices were based on Holland's (1966) theory of personality types. The three instruments above have been used to measure and describe some of the differences among the environments of undergraduate institutions.



Satisfaction: Congruence and Environment


Pervin (1967a, b) and Pervin and Rubin (1967) assessed students' perceived congruence with their environment as a predictor of college student satisfaction. The study supported the research hypothesis that discrepancies between






-15-


students' perceptions of themselves and their colleges are related to college dissatisfaction. The better the "fit" between students and their college environments the more satisfied they will be with their college experience. This perceived dissatisfaction has caused students to consider dropping out when they otherwise could have been successful in college.

Nafziger et al. (1975) tested some hypotheses regarding

person-environment congruency consistency and differentiation as predictors of satisfaction using Holland's theory of careers (Holland, 1973). One research question was Are college students in congruent college environments more satisfied than students in incongruent college environments? This study was guided by an explicit typology of persons and environments (Holland, 1973) rather than by statistical procedure. Theoretically, student satisfaction was thought to be the result of congruency between the students' personality types and their college environment. For example, satisfied students would be expected to resemble typical students at their college and have a personality pattern which was well defined and consistent; dissatisfied students would be expected to be less like typical students and have poorly defined personality patterns.

The results of this study supported the hypotheses about person-environment interactions as predictors of satisfaction. Based on Holland's research, there is a strong suggestion that






-16-


congruence with one's major field is a good indication of satisfaction with one's environment. The results also suggest that congruence with one's subenvironment (students, teachers, and activities in major field) is a good predictor of satisfaction with that environment. These findings do not, however, suggest satisfaction with all aspects of the total college environment.

These findings are consistent with former studies testing congruence with environment and major fields of study. For example, Marrow (1971) found in a study matching personality types (Vocational Preference Inventory) with major field that there was congruence for mathematics majors, but not for sociology majors. In the research on congruence and roommate satisfaction, Williams (1967) reported that congruency between roommates led to satisfaction between them and incongruency led to dissatisfaction and conflict between roommates.

Rand (1968) investigated the relationship between

satisfaction and student environment congruency. He measured scholastic potential, personality, interests, and subculture orientation of freshmen at 28 colleges. His results cast serious doubt on the simplistic notion of "goodness of fit" in relationship to satisfaction. The idea that students most similar or dissimilar to students in the same major field are more satisfied or dissatisfied was not supported. Even though some studies found a positive but weak relationship, Rand concludes that the evidence for a direct relationship






-17-


between satisfaction and congruency is at best tentative and quite complex, and that further study is needed.



Variables Related to Student Satisfaction


In the past several years, due to changes in admissions policies, the overall complexion of the college community has changed, and it is no longer possible to generalize the needs of the college population to that of the 19 year old white middle class male (Maw, 1971). The enrolling of a more diversified student population has prompted increased research on the college students' academic success, skills, and perceptions. There is still, however, no definite answer to the question: How satisfied are students with their colleges? If an answer is to be found a number of variables must be considered.

Martin (1968) attempted to evaluate freshman students' perception and their degree of satisfaction with college along the pattern of self-theory using a modified Q-sort composed of college-oriented items. Students' perceptions of college were interpreted in terms of satisfaction with college as shown between the correlation of their real and ideal Q-sort description of college. Students were assumed to be satisfied with college if their real and ideal Q-sorts were similar. If Q-sorts were dissimilar students were assumed to be dissatisfied with college.






-18-


The study attempted to answer the following questions:

(1) Initially, how satisfied with college are freshmen? (2) How does this initial satisfaction compare with satisfaction at the end of the first year? (3) What is the relationship between initial freshman satisfaction and faculty-graduate satisfaction? (4) What is the relationship between initial freshman satisfaction with college and final achievement?

The results showed that initially freshmen are relatively satisfied with college but that their satisfaction decreases by the end of the first year, moving from an initial average r of .41 to a final average r of .27. Further, graduate students and faculty members were similar in their overall satisfaction with college; both groups were less satisfied with college than freshmen at either the first or last part of the year. The implication is that an inverse relationship exists between college experience and familiarity with the college environment and satisfaction with college. There was also no significant relationship between initial freshman satisfaction with college and academic achievement at the end of the year. Both satisfied and dissatisfied students achieve at various academic levels.

Betz et al. (1972) investigated the differences,

attitudes, and satisfaction of students attending private and public colleges and universities. The results indicate that students in the public institutions were more satisfied with the actual or perceived working conditions and social






-19-


life. Students in the private institutions were more satisfied with their recognition as students, and felt they received a greater degree of positive feedback (e.g., grades) for the amount of work they did. In general, both groups of students were satisfied with various aspects of their experience as measured by the CSSQ.

Because older students are attending institutions of

higher education in increasing numbers and bringing different experiences and needs, it is important for researchers and student personnel staff members to examine the impact of age on satisfaction. Sturtz (1971) investigated differences in satisfaction between two groups of women 25 years old and above and the other was the more typical college female between 18 and 21 years of age. The results indicated that the two student groups had different needs and expectations. Both groups generally were more satisfied with the quality of education than with procedures and regulations. Overall, older women were generally more satisfied with their experiences than were younger women.

Even though Berdie's study is a bit dated, it has some significance today in that it supports the contention that there is a need for a more complete measure when investigating student satisfaction. Berdie (1944) sought to determine if tests of vocational interests could be used to predict students' satisfaction with their curricula. Previous predictions of academic achievement and success at the college level






-20-


had been based on grades or achievement test scores. As expected, previous school achievement most accurately predicted college grades; interest and personality test scores least accurately predicted college grades. Although these interest test scores do not predict how well students achieve, they have been used by counselors to aid students in choosing a field compatible with their abilities and interests.

The results indicated that there was no single factor

reporting a high relationship between curriculum and student satisfaction. There is evidence that students with less defined primary interest patterns will be least satisfied with their courses and those who are extremely satisfied or dissatisfied may be differentiated by an interest inventory. These results do not demonstrate whether interests will or will not predict satisfaction. They do suggest that a more complete measure of satisfaction could provide more conclusive results.



Problems of Black Students Attending
Predominantly White Educational Institutions


Black students attending predominantly white educational institutions differ significantly from white middle class students (Staples, 1972). These black students are part of a growing minority group interested in establishing and maintaining a sense of idealism and racial pride (Joseph, 1969).






-21-


They are interested in relevant curricula that includes aspects of black contributions and black culture (Harper, 1969). Black students wish to retain their own identities and to see a significant number of black students, personnel workers, faculty, counselors, and administrators in predominantly white institutions (Harper, 1969). These requests may be an attempt to reduce the feelings of isolation in both social and academic situations. These feelings of isolation create a state of anxiety, frustration, and helplessness.

Aside from the problems of environmental isolation as reported by (Gibbs, 1973), black students experience some specific difficulties that relate to their degree of satisfaction with their college experiences. One such conflict has to do with the incongruence between the expectations that black students and administrators have about each other. Black students are expected to assimilate into the mainstream of the college life without any significant changes in the environment. Hattenshwiller (1971) used the term "anticipatory socialization" to describe these students as probably the first in their generation to attend a large university, and had not been exposed to the necessary experiences to prepare them for college life. These black students expected that the university would be flexible and aware of their needs. They were unaware that they had been hindered by ignorance about, or fear of a college education (Vontress, 1968). These students would like to see black studies and black cultural






-22-


affairs become a part of the college curriculum. Moreover, they would like to feel that universities are committed to their total development.

Another major problem for black students is that of

finances. In a sample compiled by the Educational Testing Service in 1966-67, it was reported that 62 percent of students receive financial support from their parents. However, only 29 percent of the minority students in the sample received support from their families. Many of these students had to seek employment in order to remain in college. Several researchers have reported that financial problems may be one of the important factors contributing to the high dropout rates for black students. For example, Astin (1964) surveyed 6,000 National Merit Scholars of 1957 and found that the "dropouts" came from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and applied for fewer scholarships in college. Further, Meeth (1966) concluded that there were many programs to encourage black students to attend college, but not enough programs to help students persist once they were admitted. The small number of support programs affected their academic performance, which caused some difficulties with their financial aid.

The quality of the relationship between black students and their professors and the grades they receive are of critical importance in determining satisfaction with the institution. A positive relationship facilitates healthy attitudes toward learning and toward the environment (Feldman,






-23-


1969). In a study on black college student satisfaction in the deep south, Robertson (1980) found that black students were as satisfied as white students except in the university's system of rewards. That is, black students felt they had to work too hard to make satisfactory grades. These attitudes held by black students further demonstrate the need for a positive relationship between professors and students in their institutions.



Summary


The review of the literature supports the contention that satisfaction is an important indicator of students' attitudes toward their educational experiences. It also shows that academic involvement has a strong partial correlation with satisfaction of the intellectual environment. In the past, researchers have attempted to measure student satisfaction based on "academic" related topics. In fact, "non-academic" student satisfaction is one of the least investigated variables in the college environment. This information on student satisfaction could be one of the many ways of providing more meaningful experiences for students.














CHAPTER THREE


METHODOLOGY



Introduction


The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments and their levels of involvement in those environments. Specifically, the study determined if differences exist in the degree of satisfaction among black and white students in the following areas: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) was administered to black and white undergraduate students registered during the 1981 spring quarter in three Florida public universities. The hypotheses, population and sample, instruments, data collection procedures, and analysis of data are described in this chapter.



Hypotheses


1. There are no differences between black and white

undergraduate university students' degree of satisfaction with their university environment.


-24-






-25-


2. There are no differences between black and white

undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments on the basis of their

academic levels.

3. There are no relationships between black and white

undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with

their university environments and their level of

involvement in their environments.

4. There are no differences between black and white

undergraduate university students' level of involvement within their environments.

5. There are no differences between the degree of

satisfaction of black undergraduate students

attending predominantly white universities and

those attending a predominantly black university.

6. There are no differences between the degree of

satisfaction of white undergraduate students

attending a predominantly black university and

those attending predominantly white universities.



Population and Sample


The population for this study consisted of black and

white undergraduate students attending three public universities in the state of Florida. They were the University of Florida and Florida State University, the two largest






-26-


predominantly white universities, and Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, the one predominantly black university in Florida. According to the demographic data obtained from the questionnaires, the two groups of undergraduate students were similar in age and majors. Most of them were between the ages of 18 and 25. There were a few students older than 25. There were 399 males and 401 females. There were 201 freshmen, 201 sophomores, 190 juniors, and 208 seniors. White students chose to attend college with the expectation that it would be demanding scholastically. Black students as described by Hattenshwiller (1971) were probably the first in their generation to attend a large university, and had not been exposed to the necessary experiences to prepare them for college life.

The sample for this study included 800 undergraduate

students. Of this 800, 373 were black students and 427 were white students. One hundred fourteen black students and 185 white students were selected from the University of Florida and 123 black students and 200 white students were selected from Florida State University. One hundred thirty-six black students and 42 white students were selected from Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University.

A letter was sent to each of the three universities requesting access to the classes (Appendix A). The 800 students were drawn from a stratified random sample of classes at the three universities. There were at least 27






-27-


students representing each academic classification level. These classes were located primarily in the colleges of Liberal Arts & Sciences, Business Administration, Journalism, Education, and Engineering. These colleges were selected because of their large undergraduate enrollments.

Information regarding the 1981 spring quarter courses and academic classification levels at the universities was obtained from their registrars' spring quarter schedules of courses. The classes from each of the colleges, as represented by academic levels, were randomly selected by counting every 10th class. The researcher contacted the instructors of those classes by phone. The purposes and procedures of the study were explained and a time was established for administration of the instruments. The selection procedures were continued until 800 students were in the sample.



Instruments


The two instruments used in this study were the

College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) and the University Involvement Questionnaire (UIQ). The CSSQ was used to measure the degree of satisfaction undergraduate students have with various aspects of their environments. The UIQ was used to determine the degree of involvement students have within their universities (i.e., sororities, fraternities, student government, athletics).






-28-


The CSSQ was developed by Betz, Menne, Starr, and

Klingensmith (1971) to measure college student satisfaction. The initial CSSQ Form A was a 130-item instrument which contained representative items for six satisfaction dimensions: policies and procedures, working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life and recognition. A revised Form B was developed in 1969 which contained 92 of the original 130 items (Betz, Klingensmith, & Menne, 1970).

The more recent research on college student satisfaction, however, has been conducted with Form C of the CSSQ (Betz, Menne, Starr, & Klingensmith, 1971). Form C consists of 70 items from previous forms of the CSSQ arranged in five scales: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. Respondents are asked to indicate their degree of satisfaction with these five aspects of the college environment. A Likert-type scale is provided, with responses ranging from "Very Dissatisfied" (one point) to "Very Satisfied" (five points).

As a part of the development of the CSSQ, several studies were conducted to determine the validity of the instrument. Additional criterion validity was determined by Starr, Betz, and Menne (1972) in a study where retention was considered as an external criterion measure of satisfaction. Further validity of the instrument was determined in a follow-up study which measured student satisfaction of dropouts and non-dropouts. The results






-29-


showed the non-dropouts were the most satisfied, followed by the non-academic dropouts, and the academic dropouts were at the lowest satisfaction level. Content validity was determined by statistically testing the scales of the CSSQ. Betz, Menne, Starr, and Klingensmith (1971) conducted a factor analysis for each of the five scales and the results supported the use of the scales as originally presented in an earlier study.

Equivalence reliability of the instrument has been

determined by using alternate forms of the same instrument with over 1,000 students. These students were from five public and five private institutions. Reliability coefficients have been reported for each of the five scales on the CSSQ within these two normative groups. Correlation coefficients representing the expected relationship between responses on a given CSSQ scale and responses on the alternative form of the CSSQ for public universities scales ranged from .78 on the quality of education to .84 on compensation, with .80 on social life, .82 on working conditions, and .82 on recognition. Stability over time for the CSSQ is not considered crucial since satisfaction may be affected by changes in the environment as well as by changes in the students' perceptions of that environment.

Betz et al. (1971) developed norms for the CSSQ based on the administration of the CSSQ in the spring of 1970 to 31,121 students attending 10 colleges and universities.






-30-


These 10 schools represented a variety of geographic areas and a variety of educational institutions. The data were divided into separate normative groups by type of institution, and by sex within each type of institution.

The University Involvement Questionnaire was developed by the researcher. The purpose of this instrument was to determine the degree of involvement students have with their universities. The questionnaire contains 20 items that ask students questions regarding their personal involvement within their universities. Respondents answer "yes" or "no" to each of the questions. Each of the "yes" responses was assigned one point. The "yes" responses were totaled for each student. This individual total score was compared with the mean "yes" scores for the group. If the individual score was above the mean score, the student was considered to be "involved" with the university. If the individual score was below the mean score, the student was considered "not involved" with the university.

To determine the content validity of the instrument, a panel of four experts was asked to evaluate the items to determine if they reflected students' university involvement. If three of the four experts agreed that a question should remain in the instrument, the question was retained. They also were asked to make comments regarding the feasibility of the instrument.






-31-


A test-retest procedure was used to estimate the reliability of the instrument. The instrument was administered to 15 black students and 15 white students who were using the services of the Teaching Center at the University of Florida. All 30 students completed the UIQ during the second week of the 1981 spring quarter. Six weeks later the same students were contacted to complete a second questionnaire. A Product-Moment correlation was computed for the two sets of scores. The correlational coefficient was .71.



Procedures


After the classes included in the study were selected, the researcher contacted the class instructors and explained the purposes of the research, the amounts of time needed for data collection, and requested access to their classes (Appendix C). The researcher and instructors then scheduled a time to administer the instruments. Approximately 30 minutes was needed to complete the process each time. On the scheduled day for the questionnaires to be completed, the instructor introduced the researcher, who explained the purposes of the research and assured the students of the annonymity of their participation.

The students were given a number two pencil, a NCS

Trans Optic Scan Answer Sheet, and the two questionnaires.






-32-


The researcher then gave instructions for coding the demographic information on the answer sheets and for responding to the questionnaires. The students were also given opportunities to ask questions related to the questionnaires. After the questionnaires were collected in each class, the researcher expressed sincere appreciation to the instructor and students for their cooperation and participation.



Analyses of Data


A t-test was used to determine if differences existed

among mean scores of groups of black and white undergraduate students' responses for each CSSQ item. An analysis of variance was used to determine if degree of satisfaction was a function of academic level classification. Point bi-serial correlation coefficient was used to determine relationships between students' responses to CSSQ items and responses to the University Involvement Questionnaire.

A t-test was used to determine if differences existed among mean scores of black and white students' responses on the UIQ items. A t-test was also used to determine if differences among mean scores of black students on the CSSQ were a function of attending a predominantly black university. A t-test was used to determine if differences among mean scores of white students on the CSSQ were a function of






-33



attending a predominantly white university. The level of significance for all analyses was p > .05.














CHAPTER FOUR


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION



Results


The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments and their level of involvement within their environments. Eight hundred students participated in the study. Of that number, 373 were black and 427 were white undergraduate students from the University of Florida, Florida State University, and Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University. The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) and the University Involvement Questionnaire (UIQ) were administered to these students during the 1981 spring quarter. Data analyses were conducted as outlined in Chapter Three.


Hypothesis 1

There are no differences between black and white

undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments. A t-test was used to determine the differences between black and white students' mean scores on the scales of the CSSQ and their total CSSQ scores. The results in Table 1 indicate that there were no significant


-34-






-35-


differences between black and white students' total scores on the CSSQ (p > .05). This result means that both black and white students were equally satisfied with their college environments. Therefore, the first hypothesis was not rejected.



Table 1

Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for Black and White Students' Scores on CSSQ Scales and Total
CSSQ


Blacks (N=373) Whites (N=427)
Scales Mean SD Mean SD t-value

Working
Conditions 40.87 9.30 42.17 8.63 -2.03 Compensation 42.65 9.68 45.08 10.25 -3.43 Quality of
Education 37.72 9.37 39.44 9.01 -2.63 Social Life 40.32 9.44 39.83 8.94 0.76 Recognition 42.64 9.55 41.77 9.57 1.28 Total 204.22 40.35 208.29 38.72 -1.45


Hypothesis 2

There are no differences between black and white

undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments on the basis of academic levels. An analysis of variance was used to test this hypothesis. The results in Table 2 indicate that there were no






-36-


significant differences between black and white undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments based on their academic levels (p > .05). This result shows that the degree of satisfaction for black and white undergraduate students with their university environments was not influenced by academic levels. Therefore, the second hypothesis was not rejected.



Table 2

Analysis of Variance of Black and White Students'
Mean Scores on the CSSQ by Academic Levels Source of Sum of Mean Variation Squares DF Square F-Ratio Main Effects

Class 4962.863 6 827.144 0.529 Race 779.555 3 259.852 0.166 Sex 3171.925 2 1585.962 1.015 788.555 1 788.555 0.505 Explained 4963.000 6 827.167 0.529 Residual 1239318.000 793 1562.822 Total 1244281.000 799 1557.298


Hypothesis 3

There are no relationships between black and white

undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments and their level of involvement in their environments. Point bi-serial correlations were






-37-


used to determine the relationship between black and white

students' mean scores on the CSSQ and the UIQ. The results

in Table 3 indicate that there were no significant relationships between black and white students' scores on the CSSQ

and their scores on the UIQ (p > .05). This result means

that black and white students' degree of satisfaction with

their college environments was not affected by their level

of involvement with activities at their universities. Therefore, the third hypothesis was not rejected.



Table 3

Point Bi-Serial Correlations Between Black and White
Students' Mean Scores on the CSSQ and their Mean
Scores on the UIQ


Blacks Whites
UIQ Total Item UF FSU FAMU UF FSU FAMU Scores

1 .3279 -.2689 .1972 .0315 .1405 -.2211 .0141 2 .1180 .1767 .1002 -.0299 .0225 -.1408 .0401 3 .1332 -.1985 .4883 .0118 .1534 -.2243 -.0079 4 -.0668 -.0460 .4658 .0026 .3781 -.2166 .0319 5 .1619 .3651 .1144 -.0155 .0946 -.2316 -.0552 6 .1394 .3850 .1820 .0202 .0635 -.1943 -.0419 7 -.2330 .2854 -.0653 .0153 -.1030 -.2157 .0275
8 -.4805 .1774 -.4560 -.0830 -.4310 .1238 -.0458
9 -.0566 -.1449 -.4880 .0188 .2925 -.0908 -.0229
10 -.0626 -.1659 .3027 .0506 .0738 -.2062 .0526 11 .3741 -.2702 -.0583 .1264 .1504 -.0676 -.0882
12 -.3437 -.3199 -.1383 -.0645 -.2708 -.1464 -.0315
13 .3886 .2807 .1133 -.1723 -.3077 .2010 -.0806 14 -.3420 .2795 -.1061 -.1341 -.2268 -.1178 -.0460
15 -.1079 -.0954 -.4734 .1236 .2265 -.1856 -.0086
16 .1328 .1741 .0437 -.0308 .0079 -.1859 .0283 17 .2098 .2480 .1127 -.0163 .0754 -.2183 .0125 18 .1636 .2455 .2252 -.0330 .0537 -.2407 .0105 19 .2351 .2324 .0861 .0180 .0453 -.2107 .0592






-38-


Hypothesis 4

There are no differences between black and white

undergraduate students' level of involvement within their environments. At-test was used to determine the differences between black and white students' mean scores on the UIQ. The results in Tables 5, 6 and 7 indicate that there were significant differences between black and white undergraduate students' level of involvement within their environments. The mean scores for black students are higher than the mean scores for white students in Tables 4, 5, 6, and 7. These results mean that black and white students were not equal in their level of involvement within their university environments. Therefore, hypothesis four was rejected.


Table 4

Means, Standard Deviations, Students' Scores on the UIQ


and t-values for UF


Group N Mean SD t-value Blacks 141 8.0877 8.197 0.85 Whites 181 7.2707 7.989



Table 5

Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for FSU
Students' Scores on the UIQ

Group N Mean SD t-value Blacks 123 7.6179 3.042 3.12* Whites 200 6.5700 2.863

*p < .05






-39-


Table 6

Means, Standard Deviations and t-values for FAMU
Students' Scores on the UIQ


Group N Mean SD t-value Blacks 136 8.1912 3.405 4.83* Whites 41 5.2927 3.277

*p < .05


Table 7

Means, Standard Deviations and t-values for All Students' Scores on the UIQ


Group N Mean SD t-value Blacks 373 7.9705 5.265 3.13* Whites 427 6.7464 5.700

*p < .05


Hypothesis 5

There are no differences between the degree of

satisfaction of black undergraduate students attending a predominantly white university and those attending a predominantly black university A t-test was used to examine the differences between the degree of satisfaction for black students attending a predominantly black university and those attending a predominantly white university. The results in Table 8 indicate that there were no significant differences between the degree of satisfaction for blacks






-40-


attending a predominantly black university and those attending a predominantly white university (p > .05). This result means that black undergraduate students attending predominantly white universities were as satisfied with their university environments as black students attending a predominantly black university. Therefore, hypothesis five was not rejected.



Table 8

Means, Standard Deviations and t-values for Black
Undergraduate Students Attending Predominantly
Black or White Universities


Group N Mean SD t-value FAMU 136 207.8088 43.075 1.35 UF 114 200.9474 37.065 FAMU 136 207.8088 43.075 .89 FSU 123 203.3008 38.094




Hypothesis 6

There are no differences between the degree of

satisfaction of white undergraduate students attending a predominantly black university and those attending a predominantly white university. A t-test was used to examine the differences between the degree of satisfaction for white students attending a predominantly white university and those attending a predominantly black university. The results in Table 9 indicate that there were no significant






-41-


differences between the degree of satisfaction for white students attending predominantly white universities and those attending a predominantly black university (p > .05). This result means that white undergraduate students attending predominantly white universities were as satisfied with their university environments as white students attending a predominantly black university. Therefore, hypothesis six was not rejected.



Table 9

Means, Standard Deviations and t-values for White
Undergraduate Students Attending Predominantly
Black or White Universities


Group N Mean SD t-value FAMU 41 208.439 45.663 .50 UF 185 212.232 37.065 FAMU 41 208.439 45.663 .49 UF 200 204.710 38.529


Discussion


The results from this study indicate that black and white students were not significantly different in their degree of satisfaction with their university environments. These results support the findings of Robertson (1980), who reported that black students are just as satisfied as white students at universities in the deep south. The results do,






-42-


however, contradict much of the literature that purports that black students attending predominantly white universities are in "an alien environment" (Joseph, 1969). Black and white students in this study were equally satisfied with the recognition and social life aspects of their college environments. Black students, however, were less satisfied with the working conditions, compensation, and quality of education aspects in their college environments.

It was rather surprising that black students are as satisfied as white students with their universities. One plausible explanation for their satisfaction could be that black students consider attending college a privilege rather than an obligation; therefore, they would be more likely to find less dissatisfaction with some aspects of the college environment. Another reason might be that black students form subgroups within the student population and these groups provide opportunities for them to maintain their identities, to find support and encouragement, and to decrease their sense of social isolation. These students probably attended integrated high schools and have been assimilated into the mainstream university environments.

Academic levels had no significant impact on either black or white students' satisfaction with their university environments. Seniors, however, tended to be slightly more satisfied with their environments than sophomore students. These findings are somewhat supportive of Martin






-43-


(1968), who reported that initially freshmen are relatively satisfied with their college experiences, but their satisfaction level decreases by the end of the first year. New college students perceive their universities as having ideal environments, but as they become more aware of their real university environments, they lose some of that initial idealism and optimism. One could speculate further that as students continue to matriculate and set definite career goals they become more motivated. These factors could result in seniors expressing higher overall satisfaction with their college experiences.

In previous studies (Astin, 1977), involvement within

the university showed the strongest partial correlation with satisfaction of the intellectual environment. The results of this study show that there were no significant relationships between black and white students' satisfaction and involvement. Students, however, who were involved in sororities and fraternities, student government, intramurals, athletic events, student newspaper, religious activities, or were employed by the universities, were more satisfied with their university environments than other students.

Black students were more involved in campus-related

activities than white students. This may be due to the fact that in a "minority-majority" relationship, minority students may feel the need to become more visible and to have a more concomitant impact on their environments. On the other hand,






-44-


majority students may not feel the need to "struggle" for visibility within their environments. Economics may have been another reason that explains why black students were more involved in their universities' activities. Attending off-campus activities is more expensive and may require some form of transportation. This situation would probably affect black students more severely. Therefore, black students would be more likely to become involved in on-campus activities.

Another interesting finding was that black and white students' satisfaction with their university environments was not based on whether they chose to attend predominantly white universities or the predominantly black university. Black students attending the University of Florida and Florida State University were just as satisfied as the black students attending Florida A & M University. White students attending Florida A & M University were just as satisfied as white students attending the University of Florida and Florida State University. It appears, therefore, that one factor that influences students' satisfaction with their university environments may be their selection of a university to attend.

The findings of this study appear to support the

contention that black and white students, in general, are satisfied with their university environments. The findings also indicate that students' satisfaction with their






-45



university environments is not necessarily related to their involvement in campus activities. The results further indicate that race, academic levels, and involvement have little or no influence on students' satisfaction with their university environments.















CHAPTER FIVE


CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, SUMMARY, AND RECOMMENDATIONS



Conclusions


Based on the results of this study, the following conclusions were made:

1. Black students are as satisfied as white students

with their university environments.

2. Black students are less satisfied than white students

with the working conditions, compensation, and

quality of education in their university environments.

3. Black and white students' academic levels do not

affect their degree of satisfaction with their

university environments.

4. Black and white students' degree of satisfaction

does not affect their levels of university involvement.

5. Black students are more involved in their

universities than white students.

6. Black students attending a predominantly black

university are as satisfied as black students

attending predominantly white universities.


- Ar, -






-47-


7. White students attending a predominantly black

university are as satisfied as white students

attending predominantly white universities.



Implications


One implication of this study is that the more students

are involved in activities or organizations on their campuses, the more likely they are to be satisfied with their environments. Because black students probably have a greater need to feel a part of the university community, they were more involved in campus related activities. Student personnel workers should encourage all students to become involved in at least one activity or organization sponsored by the university. The student affairs staff also should attempt to provide some programs and activities that appeal to the interest of nontraditional students.

A second implication is that administrators and student personnel staff should evaluate those aspects of their university environments which students were satisfied with and then make decisions as to whether those aspects should be maintained or improved. These student personnel workers and administrators also can use the results of this study to improve the aspects of the university environment that students find dissatisfying. If university officials are aware of the problem areas on their campuses, steps can be






-48-


taken to make the necessary changes. Knowledge of this type of information can serve as a useful measuring device to administrators to understand the strengths and weaknesses of their universities.

A third implication of this study is that there seems to be evidence to support the continued development and improvement of predominantly black universities. There are those who believe that black institutions should be abolished. Those black and white students who chose to attend a predominantly black university, however, expressed the same degree of satisfaction with their university environments as black and white students who chose to attend predominantly white universities. Therefore, it appears that black universities have as much to offer black and white students as predominantly white universities.

A fourth implication is that sophomore students should be encouraged to become more involved in activities or organizations on their campuses. Out of the four academic levels, they were the least satisfied with their university environments. Therefore, it would suggest that administrators, student affairs, faculty, and counselors should be aware that these students have lost their "freshman" optimism and need special help and consideration. As a result of this special interest, sophomores may persist through this year and move into their junior year with definite career goals.






-49-


The last implication is that there is a need to conduct more college student satisfaction studies. College student satisfaction is one of the least investigated variables in the college community, but one of the best indicators of how students perceive the environments of their universities. Studies concerning students' satisfactions and dissatisfactions with their university environments can provide administrators and student personnel workers with a better understanding of the changes that should be made with their universities. These changes would help students complete their college educations and realize their career goals.



Summary


College student satisfaction, especially black college student satisfaction, is one of the least investigated variables in the university community. The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments, and their level of involvement within their environments. More specifically, this study determined if differences exist in the degree of satisfaction among black and white undergraduate students in the following areas: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. The statement of the problem, purpose of the study, need for the study, significance of the study, definition of terms, and organization of the study were presented in Chapter One.






-50-


Chapter Two contained a review of some of the literature related to college student satisfaction. The areas included in Chapter Two were defining and measuring student satisfaction, measuring the college environment, satisfaction: congruence and environment, variables related to university students' satisfaction, and problems encountered by black students attending predominantly white educational institutions.

Chapter Three described the hypotheses, population and sample, instruments, procedures, and analyses of data. Several statistical analyses were performed to determine if significance existed between and among groups. An alpha level of .05 was set as the basis for testing the hypotheses.

Chapter Four presented the results and a discussion of those results. The findings of this study indicate that race, academic levels, and attendance at either predominantly white universities or a predominantly black university did not significantly affect students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments. There was a difference, however, in the levels of involvement between black and white university students.



Recommendations for Further Research


Based on the results of this study, the following research studies are suggested:






-51-


1. A study to assess how black and white students in

northern universities perceive their university

environments. When black and white student satisfaction has been assessed in a significant number

of universities, meaningful generalizations and

predictions can be made.

2. A four year satisfaction study designed to follow

freshman students from admission to graduation.

This study would reflect any changes in students' perceptions of their college environments as they

matriculated from one academic level to another.

3. A correlational study between students' degree of

satisfaction and students' grade point averages.

This study would show if students' satisfaction affects their grade point averages. The results also would indicate the areas in the university

environment that may need to be changed.

4. A study comparing student personnel staff and

students' perceptions of their university environments. A study of this nature also would provide

useful information for making changes in the university environment.






































APPENDICES








APPENDIX A

LETTER TO INSTRUCTORS



Dear Instructors:


As a part of my dissertation research for spring

quarter I would like access to your class(es) for approximately 30 minutes to administer two questionnaires. The purpose of this study will be to determine the degree of satisfaction and university involvement among black and white undergraduate students in public universities in Florida.

I assure you that participation on the part of your students will be completely voluntary and all scores will be kept annonymous.

Thank you very much for your cooperation.


Sincerely,



Mary Lindsey
Doctoral Candidate, Dept. of Counselor Education University of Florida


- 53 -







APPENDIX B


RESEARCH AND ADMINISTRATION INSTRUCTIONS


Each student will be provided with a General Purpose Trans-Optic Scan Answer Sheet, a copy of the CSSQ and University Involvement Questionnaire, and a number two soft lead pencil.
The following information will be coded for the purpose
of reporting the results.

1. Sex - darken circle, male or female.

2. Birthday - darken appropriate year and month.

3. Academic level classification - darken appropriate circle:

13 - freshman 14 - sophomore
15 - junior 16 - senior

4. Special Codes

A. Column one is to identify your college

1 - Arts and Sciences
2 - Business Administration
3 - Journalism
4 - Education
5 - Engineering
6 - Other

B. The last column is for your ethnic background

1 - black 2 - white 3 - other

You are to record all your responses to the CSSQ on this answer sheet. Please do not write on the booklets as they will be used by other students participating in the study. It is extremely important that you respond to each item. Further directions are at the top of the booklet. Are there any questions? Thank you for your participation.


-54-






-55-


DIRECTIONS FOR GROUP ADMINISTRATION


Before Beginning:

1. See that everyone is seated and has something to
write on (a book or magazine will do, if tables
are not available for everyone).
2. See that everyone has a No. 2 pencil; do not use
pens.
3. Give everyone a test booklet in which an answer
sheet has been inserted just inside the front cover. When everyone is ready, read the following in an informal manner:

You should all have a No. 2 pencil...please use ONLY a No. 2 pencil in filling out the questionnaire. No pens.

The booklet you have been given is a questionnaire about your satisfaction as a college student. The purpose of the questionnaire is to provide a means by which all students -both those who are satisfied with college and those who are not -- can express their feelings about it. This will help our college find out more about what students here want and need in their college.






-56-


1 means: 2 means: 3 means: 4 means: 5 means:


I am VERY DISSATISFIED I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED I am SATISFIED, no more, no less I am QUITE SATISFIED I am VERY SATISFIED


INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH:

1. The opportunity to make close friends here. 2. The amount of work required in most classes.

3. The way teachers talk to you when you ask for help.

4. The competence of most of the teachers in their own fields.

5. The amount of study it takes to get a passing grade.

6. The chances of getting a comfortable place to live. 7. The chance you have of doing well if you work hard. 8. The amount of personal attention students get from
teachers.

9. The chance "to be heard" when you have a complaint about a grade.

10. The friendliness of most students. 11. The help that you can get when you have personal problems. 12. The availability of good places to live near the campus. 13. The ability of most advisors in helping students develop
their course plans.

14. The cleanliness of the housing that is available for students here.
15. The chance to take courses that fulfill your goals for
personal growth.

16. The kinds of things that determine your grade. 17. The preparation students are getting for their future
careers.

18. The chance to have privacy when you want it.


Key






-57-


Key: 1 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED
2 means: I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED
3 means: I am SATISFIED, no more, no less
4 means: I am QUITE SATISFIED 5 means: I am VERY SATISFIED



INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH:

19. The chance to work on projects with members of the
opposite sex.

20. Teachers' expectations as to the amount that students
should study.

21. The availability of good places to study. 22. The fairness of most teachers in assigning grades. 23. The interest that advisors take in the progress of
their students.

24. The places provided for students to relax between classes. 25. The social events that are provided for students here. 26. Teachers' concern for students' needs and interests. 27. The chance to get scheduled into the courses of your
choice.

28. The activities and clubs you can join. 29. The difficulty of most courses. 30. The chance to get help in deciding what your major
should be.

31. The chance to get acquainted with other students outside
of class.

32. The availability of your advisor when you need him. 33. The chances to go out and have a good time. 34. The pressure to study. 35. The chance of getting a grade which reflects the effort
you put into studying.

36. The quality of the education students get here.






-58-


Key: 1 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED
2 means: I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED
3 means: I am SATISFIED, no more, no less
4 means: I am QUITE SATISFIED 5 means: I am VERY SATISFIED



INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH:

37. The number of D's and F's that are given to students. 38. The concern here for the comfort of students outside
of classes.

39. The things you can do to have fun here. 40. The chance for a student to develop his best abilities. 41. The chance of having a date here. 42. The chances of getting acquainted with the teachers in
your major area.

43. The chance to explore important ideas. 44. The quality of the material emphasized in the courses. 45. The chance of getting into the courses you want to take. 46. The noise level at home when you are trying to study. 47. The amount of time you must spend studying. 48. The availability of comfortable places to lounge. 49. The chances for men and women to get acquainted. 50. The counseling that is provided for students here. 51. The chance to prepare well for your vocation. 52. The chance to live where you want to. 53. The chance you have for a "fair break" here if you work
hard.

54. The friendliness of most faculty members. 55. The chances to meet people with the same interests as
you have.






-59-


Key: 1 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED
2 means: I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED
3 means: I am SATISFIED, no more, no less
4 means: I am QUITE SATISFIED
5 means: I am VERY SATISFIED



INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH:
56. What you learn in relation to the amount of time you
spend in school.

57. The choice of dates you have here. 58. The amount of study you have to do in order to qualify
someday for a job you want.

59. The kinds of things you can do for fun without a lot
of planning ahead.

60. The willingness of teachers to talk with students outside of class time.

61. The places where you can go just to rest during the day. 62. The campus events that are provided for students here. 63. The practice you get in thinking and reasoning. 64. Your opportunity here to determine your own pattern of
intellectual development.

64. The chance to participate in class discussions about the
course material.

66. The activities that are provided to help you meet someone
you might like to date.

67. The sequence of courses and prerequisites for your major. 68. The availability of quiet study areas for students. 69. The chance you have to substitute courses in your major
when you think it is advisable.

70. The appropriateness of the requirements for your major.






-60-


UNIVERSITY INVOLVEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE


University Age Classification Race Sex Directions: Please circle YES or NO to answer the following questions.


1. Are you a member of a sorority or fraternity

2. Have you ever held an office in student government?

3. Do you belong to one or more campus social clubs?

4. Have you participated in one or more intramural games?

5. Are you a member of one or more intercollegiate athletic teams?

6. Are you a member of any honorary society?

7. Do you attend athletic events at your university?

8. Have you ever spent one or more hours with a counselor at your university?

9. Are you a member of any student organization? 10. Are you employed by your university? 11. Have you ever been on the Dean's List? 12. Have you ever attended one or more cultural
programs presented by your university?

13. Have you ever discussed your academic program
with your academic advisor?

14. Do you attend social activities sponsored by
your university?

15. Have you visited your career planning office
one or more times?


YES NO YES NO YES NO


YES NO


YES YES


YES NO


YES YES YES YES


YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO






-61



16. Have you ever worked for your school's newspaper? YES NO 17. Have you ever performed in a recital or
dramatic presentation through the university? YES NO 18. Have you ever been a member of a debating
team? YES NO 19. Do you belong to a university-associated
religious organization? YES NO 20. Have you attended one or all lecture programs
presented by your university? YES NO








APPENDIX C


LETTERS TO INSTITUTIONS



2911-49 S.W. 13th Street
Gainesville, Florida 32608 March 31, 1981






Dr. Timothy Langford
Vice President of Student Affairs Florida A & M University
Tallahassee, Florida 32307

Dear Dr. Langford:

I am a Doctoral Candidate in the Counselor Education Department at the University of Florida. I am interested in assessing the degree of Undergraduate College Student Satisfaction and Involvement with their College Environments at Public Universities in the state of Florida. I would appreciate your assistance in the research by permitting me to randomly select 12 classes at FAMU and to administer two questionnaires. It will require approximately 30 minutes to complete both questionnaires. The information asked for on the questionnaires will not require a human subjects' review form. It is survey type and complete anonymity is guaranteed.

Thank you for your consideration and if you have any questions regarding this request please let me know. I would appreciate a prompt reply, for I would like to gather this information during Spring Quarter.


Sincerely,



Mary Lindsey


-62-






-63-


2911-49 S.W. 13th Street
Gainesville, Florida 32608
March 31, 1981




Dr. Bob E. Leach
Vice President of Student Affairs Florida State University
Tallahassee, Florida 32306

Dear Dr. Leach:

I am, Mary Lindsey, a Doctoral Candidate in the
Counselor Education Department at the University of Florida. You have already received a request from me through Mr. Jack Kinzer asking for a print-out of Black Undergraduate Students registered for Spring Quarter at Florida State University. But, due to a change in the focus of my research, I would like for you to cancel the request for the print-out and consider allowing me to administer two questionnaires to 12 classes (randomly) during Spring Quarter. It will require approximately 30 minutes to complete both questionnaires. The information requested on the questionnaires will by survey type and will not require a human subjects' review form. Also, complete anonymity is guaranteed.

I am still interested in assessing the degree of Undergraduate College Student Satisfaction. I have just decided to look at both Black and White Undergraduate Students in Public Universities in Florida.

Thank you for your consideration and if you have any
questions regarding this request please let me know. Thanks for your interest and I would appreciate a prompt reply.


Sincerely,


Mary Lindsey














BIBLIOGRAPHY


Astin, A. Personal and environmental factors associated with
college dropouts among high-aptitude students. Journal
of Education Psychology, 1964, 55(4), 219-227.

Astin, A. Preventing Students from Dropping Out. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1975.

Astin, A. Four Critical Years. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers, 1977.

Bachrach, A. Psychological Research (3rd edition). New York:
Random House, 1972.

Baird, L. Assessing Students' Academic and Social Progress.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977.

Banks, W. The changing attitude of black students. Personnel
& Guidance Journal, 1970, 48(9), 739-745.

Bayer, A., & Boruch, A. Black and white freshmen entering
four-year colleges. Educational Records, 1969, 50(4),
371-386.

Berdie, R. The prediction of college achievement and
satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1944,
28(1), 239-245.

Berdie, R., Pilapie, B., & Im, I. Graduating Seniors
Satisfaction with the University. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota, Bureau of Institutional
Research, 1968.

Betz, E., Klingensmith, J., & Menne, J. The measurement and
analysis of college students' satisfaction. Measurement
and Evaluation in Guidance, 1970, 3(2), 110-118.

Betz, E., Menne, J., Starr, A., & Klingensmith, J. A
dimensional analysis of college student satisfaction.
Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 1971, 4(2),
99-106.

Betz, E., Starr, A., & Menne, J. College student satisfaction
in ten public and private colleges and universities.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 1972, 13(,Z?, 456461.


-64-






-65-


Boyd, W., II. Black undergraduates succeed in white
colleges. Educational Record, 1977, 58(3), 309-315.

Campbell, D., & Stanley, C. Experimental and QuasiExperimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand
McNally College Publishing Company, 1966.

Chickering, A. Commuting Versus Resident Students:
Overcoming the Educational Inequities of Living Off
Campus. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1974.

Eckland, B. College dropouts who came back. Harvard
Educational Review, 1964, 34(3), 402-420(a).

Erwin, J. The attitude of black new students and
administrative response. Journal of Negro Education,
1976, 45(2), 161-165.

Feldman, K., & Newcomb, T. The Impact of College on
Students (vol. 1). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1969.

Ferguson, J. Adult students in an undergraduate university.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 1966, 7, 345-348.

Freeman, R., & Hollomon, J. The declining value of college
going. Change, 1975, 7(7), 15-18.

Gibbs, J. Black students/white university: Different
expectations. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1973,
51(7), 463-469.

Goldman, R. Toward more meaningful research. Personnel
and Guidance Journal, 1977, 55(6), 363-368.

Hattenschwiller, G. Counseling black students in special
programs. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1971, 50(1),
29-35.

Hardy, C. A committee-resident profile: College
satisfaction liberalism, and social class as variables. Southern Journal of Educational Research,
1973, 7(2), 61-65.

Harper, F. Black student revolt on the white campus.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 1969a, 10(5),
291-295.

Harper, F. Media for change: Black students in the white
university. Journal of Negro Education, 1969b, 37(2),
255-265.






-66-


Hauser, S. Black and White Identity Formation. New York:
Wiley Interscience, 1971.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R., & Capwell, D.
Job Attitudes: Review of Research and Opinion.
Pittsburgh: Psychological Services, 1957.

Holland, J. Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Careers.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973.

Hoppock, R. Job Satisfaction. New York: Harper & Row,
1935.

Huck, S., Cormier, W., & Bounds, W. Reading Statistics and
Research. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.

Iffert, R. Retention and Withdrawal of College Students.
Washington, D.C., U.S. Dept. of NEW, Bulletin No. 1,
1957.

Issac, S., & Michaels, W. Handbook in Research and Evaluation
(10th ed.). San Diego: Edits Publishers, 1978.

Joseph, G. Black students on the predominantly white campus.
Journal of the National Association of Women Deans and
Counselors, 1969, 32(2), 63-66.

Kerlinger, F. Foundation of Behavioral Research (2nd ed.).
New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1973.

King, H., & Walsh, B. Change in environmental expectation
and perceptions. Journal of College Student Personnel,
1972, 13(4), 331-336.

Kramer, H., Berger, F., & Miller, G. Student concerns and
sources of assistance. Journal of College Student
Personnel, 1974, 15, 389-393.

Madraza-Peterson, R., & Rodriguez, M. Minority students'
perceptions of a university environment. Journal of
College Student Personnel, 1978, 19(3), 259-263.

Martin, R. Freshman satisfaction with college. Journal
of College Student Personnel, 1968, 9, 382-383.

Marrow, J. A test of Holland's theory. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1971, 18(5), 422-425.

Maw, I. Student subcultures and activity involvement.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 1971, 12(6),
62-66.






-67-


Meeth, R. Breaking racial barriers, part III: Scholarships
for negro students in predominantly white colleges and
universities. Journal of Higher Education, 1966, 37(3),
137-143.

Morstain, B. An analysis of students' satisfaction with
their academic program. Journal of Higher Education,
1977, 48(1), 1-15.

Murray, H. Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1938.

Nafziger, H., Holland, J., & Gottfridson, G. Student-college
congruence as a predictor of satisfaction. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1975, 22(2), 132-139.

Ott, L., Mendenhall, W., & Larson, R. Statistics: A Tool
for the Social Science. Belmont, California: Duxbury
Press, 1978.

Pace, C. College and University Environment Scales:
Technical Manual (2nd ed.). Princeton, N.J.:
Educational Testing Service, 1965.

Pace, C., & Stern, G. An approach to the measurement of
psychological characteristics of college environment.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 1958, 49(5), 269277.

Pantages, T. Studies of college attraction: 1950-1975.
Review of Educational Research, 1978, 48(1), 49-101.

Passons, W. Student satisfaction as perceived by three
groups of university personnel. Journal of College
Student Personnel, 1971, 12(2), 126-129.

Pervin, L. Satisfaction and perceived self-environment
similarity. Journal of Personality, 1967, 35(4),
623-634.

Pervin, L., & Rubin, D. Student dissatisfaction with
college and the college dropout: A transactional approach. Journal of Social Psychology, 1967, 72,
285-295.

Rand, L. Effect on college choice satisfaction of
matching students and colleges. Personnel and
Guidance Journal, 1968, 47(3), 34-39.






-68-


Rich, H. A comparison of college structure and college
environment variables as predictors of student
orientation. Journal of College Student Personnel,
1979, 20(3), 216-223.

Robertson, J. Black student satisfaction in the deep south.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 1980, 21(6), 510513.

Roscoe, J. Fundamental Research Statistics. New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1969.

Sax, G. Principles of Education Measurement and Evaluation.
Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc.,
1974.

Sedlacek, W., & Horowitz, J. Changing perceptions: An
individual or environment approach. Journal of the
National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, 1974, 11, 48-51.

Sedlacek, W., & Webster, D. Admission and retention of
minority students in large universities. Journal of
College Student Personnel, 1978, 19(3), 242-248.

Spurlock, L. Still struggling: Minorities and white
colleges in the mid-seventies. Educational Record,
1976, 57(3), 186-193.

Staples, R. The black scholar in academe. Change, 1972,
4(9), 42-48.

Starr, A., Betz, E., & Menne, J. Manual: The College
Student Satisfaction Questionnaire. Ames, Iowa:
Central Iowa Associates, 1971.

Starr, A., Betz, E., & Menne, J. Differences in college
student satisfaction: Academic dropouts, nonacademic
dropouts, and nondropouts. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1972, 19(4), 318-322.

Statistical Abstract of the United States. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1974.

Steel, R., & Torrie, J. Principles and Procedures of
Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.

Stern, G. People in Context: Measuring Person-Environment
Congruence in Education and Industry. New York: John
Wiley, 1970.






-69-


Sturtz, S. Age differences in college student satisfaction.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 1971, 12(3), 220222.

Tinto, V. Dropout from higher education: A theoretical
synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational
Research, 1975, 45, 89-125.

Vontress, C. Counseling negro students for college.
Journal of Negro Education, 1968, 37, 37-44.

Vroom, V. Work and Motivation. New York: John Wiley,
1964.

Walsh, W. Theories of Person-Environment Interaction:
Implications for the College Student. Iowa City,
Iowa: American College Testing Program, 1973.

Warren, J. Student perception of college subcultures.
American Educational Research Journal, 1968, 5(3),
212-232.

Webster, D., & Fretz, B. Asian American, black, and white
college students' preferences for help-giving sources.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1978, 25(2), 165170.

Wharton, C. Reflection on black intellectual power.
Educational Record, 1972, 53(4), 281-287.

Williams, J. Conflict Between Freshman Male Roommates
(Research Rep. 10-67). College Park, Maryland: University of Maryland Counseling Center, 1967.

Wright, M. Problems of black female students at a
predominantly white university. Journal of NonWhite Concerns, 1978, 7(1), 3-8.














BIOGRAPHICAL DATA


Mary Jane Davis Lindsey was born in Aiken, South

Carolina, on May 24, 1944, to Lawton and Evelean Davis. She attended public school in Aiken County, graduating from high school with an athletic scholarship and service to the school award. She then attended South Carolina State College at Orangeburg, South Carolina, and received a B.S. in physical education. After graduation she returned to her high school and taught physical education and coached a championship basketball team. In 1966, she moved to Spring Valley, New York, and taught physical education for five years.

There she married Ted Lindsey and traveled to Okinawa, Japan, where she taught for the Department of Defense (DOD) for one year.

In 1972, she arrived in Florida, where her two children were born, David Lindsey, 1973, and April Lindsey, 1975. In 1980 she received a Master of Education and Educational Specialist degree from the University of Florida, and became a candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy program in 1980.

Mary has been employed by the office of Instructional Resources as Tutor Supervisor for the Teaching Center for the past two years.


-70-










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.






R61ericDcavis, Chairman
Associate 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.


Larry7iLoesch Prof ssor 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.










This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of Counselor Education in the College of Education and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.


August 1981


Dean, Graduate School




Full Text

PAGE 1

SATISFACTION AND UNIVERSITY INVOLVEMENT AMONG BLACK AND WHITE UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS BY MARY DAVIS LINDSEY DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1981

PAGE 2

Copyright 1981 by Mary Davis Lindsey

PAGE 3

DEDICATED 1 ! I ! .' I TO MY MOTHER EVE LEAN DAVIS & MY CHILDREN DAVID & APRIL *THE MOST IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN MY LIFE WHO MADE COUNTLESS SACRIFICES FOR ME TO COMPLETE THIS PROJECT .... **

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was made possible through the support, guidance, love and patience of many individuals. Neither time nor space would permit me to list each by name. However, there are a few individuals without whose faith and support I would not be at this point in my life. First, to Dr. Woodrow M. Parker, thank you for recruiting me from a laundry mat and for helping me "clean up my act." To Dr. Roderick McDavis, my chairman, I am sincerely grateful for your continuous encouragement and faith in my ability to complete this task. You gave freely of your time and energies. For all of this I thank and respect you for your professionalism and friendship. Sincere appreciation is also extended to my other committee members. Dr. Larry Loesch and Dr. Joseph Vandiver. Dr. Loesch, your insightful suggestions and wisdom were especially helpful during my sampling procedures. Dr. Vandiver, I am especially appreciative for your objectivity and understanding support of my wanting to conduct this particular study. Of the many friends to whom I owe thanks, I am indebted to Margaret Anderson (my typist) , David Williams and Amos Tayo Qlagunju (my computer analysts) for persevering with me at all kinds of odd hours day or night. To Dr. Gail Miles, I appreciate your suggestions in the discussion and -iv-

PAGE 5

refinement of this study. To Johnny, Ted, Dontry, John, Sandra, Ida, Minerva, Ike, Sonia, Rhonne, Marvin, and Lynne, thank you one and all for your moral support and encouragement. Dr. Earl Gordon, Florida State University; Dr. James Beck, Dr. Gertrude Simmons, and Dr. Joshua Williams of Florida A & M University; and Mr. Jack Kinzer, University of Florida, thanks to each of you and your institutions for the time, patience, assistance, and encouragement you gave me with coordinating the necessary activities to enable this project to be a success. Instructors and students, one and all, I thank you too, for without your cooperation none of this would have been possible. In conclusion, I would like to thank my mother for her supportive patience, understanding, and love. Most of all, a special expression of love to my research assistants, my children, David and April, for their sacrifices, patience, and love throughout my educational adventure.

PAGE 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv LIST OF TABLES viii ABSTRACT ix CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem 1 Purpose of the Study 4 Need for the Study 5 Significance of the Study 6 Definition of Terms 8 Organization of the Study 9 TWO REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 10 Introduction 10 Measuring and Defining Student Satisfaction . . 10 Measuring the College Environment 13 Congruence and Environment 14 Variables Related to Student Satisfaction ... 17 Problems of Black Students Attending Predominantly White Educational Institutions. . 20 Summary 23 THREE METHODOLOGY 24 Introduction 24 Hypotheses 24 Population and Sample 25 Instriiments 27 Procedures 31 Analyses of Data 32 FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 34 Hypothesis 1 34 Hypothesis 2 35 Hypothesis 3 36 Hypothesis 4 38 -vi-

PAGE 7

Hypothesis 5 39 Hypothesis 6 4 0 Discussion 41 FIVE CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 6 Conclusions 4 6 Implications 47 Summary 49 Recommendations for Further Research 50 APPENDICES A LETTER TO INSTRUCTORS 53 B RESEARCH AND ADMINISTRATION INSTRUCTIONS 54 C LETTERS TO INSTITUTIONS 62 BIBLIOGRAPHY 64 BIOGRAPHICAL DATA 7 0 -vii-

PAGE 8

LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for Black and White Students ' Scores on CSSQ Scales and Total CSSQ 35 2. Analysis of Variance of Black and White Students' Mean Scores on the CSSQ by Academic Levels 36 3. Point Bi-Serial Correlations Between Black and White Students' Mean Scores on the CSSQ and their Mean Scores on the UIQ 37 4. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for UF Students' Scores on the UIQ 38 5. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for FSU Students' Scores on the UIQ 386. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for FAMU Students' Scores on the UIQ 39 7. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for All Students' Scores on the UIQ 39 8. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for Black Undergraduate Students Attending Predominantly Black or White Universities 40 : 9. Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for White Undergraduate Students Attending Pre' dominant ly Black or White Universities 41 -viii-

PAGE 9

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy SATISFACTION AND UNIVERSITY INVOLVEMENT AMONG BLACK AND WHITE UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS By Mary Davis Lindsey August 1981 Chairman: Dr. Roderick McDavis Major Department: Counselor Education The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments and their level of involvement in their environments. Specifically, the study examined differences in degrees of satisfaction among black and white students in the following university environment areas: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. A total of 800 undergraduate students participated in the study. Of that number, 373 were black students and 427 were white students. The students were selected from stratified random samples of classes from the University of Florida, Florida State University, and Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University. The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) and the University Involvement -ix-

PAGE 10

Questionnaire (UIQ) were administered to these students at the beginning of Spring quarter 1981. A t-test indicated that there were no significant differences between black and white undergraduate students* total scores on the CSSQ. Black students were less satisfied than white students on working conditions, compensation, and quality of education on the scale scores of the CSSQ. An analysis of variance showed no significant differences between black and white undergraduate students ' degree of satisfaction with their university environments based on their academic levels. Point bi-serial correlation coefficients indicated there were no significant relationships between black and white students' mean scores on the CSSQ and the UIQ. A ttest indicated that black students were more involved in organizations and activities within their university environments. A t-test indicated that there were no significant differences between the degree of satisfaction for blacks attending a predominantly black university and those attending predominantly white universities. A t-test indicated that there were no significant differences between the degree of satisfaction for white students attending predominantly white universities and those attending a predominantly black university. Based on the results of this study, race, academic level, level of involvement, and attendance in predominantly white -X-

PAGE 11

universities or a black university did not affect students' degree of satisfaction with --heir university environments. -xi-

PAGE 12

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Statement of the Problem Educators are seriously concerned about the fact that only 4 0 percent of the students who enter college in the United States will graduate four years later (Freeman & Hollomon, 1975) . Statistics indicate that of the estimated 7.6 million undergraduate students enrolled in colleges and universities in 1971, approximately 2.3 million will drop out of higher education completely (Eckland, 1964; Iffert, 1957; Statistical Abstracts, 1974). In the past 15 years, researchers have studied the effects of the college environment on students to determine if it is one of the variables that might influence the degree of satisfaction students find with their institutions. Prior to this time, the college environment has been treated as a constant for all students, and satisfaction had no role in retention studies (Pantages, 1978) . Pace and Stern (1958) urge that the college environment be given more emphasis in retention studies. Astin (1977) states that satisfaction with the college environment may have a substantial impact on how students perceive their -1-

PAGE 13

-2college experiences. Astin correlated students' overall satisfaction with specific aspects of the undergraduate experience (such as quality of instruction, curriculum, administration, contacts with faculty and fellow students, and intellectual environment) . Of all the factors that correlated with satisfaction, involvement within the institution showed the strongest partial correlation with satisfaction of the intellectual environment. Unlike most other student characteristics, satisfaction depended less on the characteristics of the individual student and more on those of the institution. Thus, if students are to remain in the college environment, they should feel that they are a part of the institution (Astin, 1977) . The challenge of developing programs and maintaining activities that students find satisfying is much more complex today than it was 2 0 years ago. Then, it was possible to generalize the needs of the college population to an average 18 year old white male (Maw, 1971). Recent efforts, however, to recruit black students into previously all white institutions provide challenges for which few people, either black or white, are fully prepared to handle. Some researchers argue that black students attending predominantly white institutions are in an "alien environment" (Joseph, 1969) . These institutions, for the most part, have continued to provide traditional student services programs designed

PAGE 14

-3to meet the needs of the majority population (MadrazaPeterson & Rodriguez, 1978) . If black students perceive that their concerns are not a part of the mainstream of activities, they tend to withdraw from the institution, by dropping out or associating primarily with other black students. Thus, the notion is perpetuated that black students are not interested in activities sponsored by the university community. Aside from the problem of identification with the predominantly white university, Gibbs (1973) reports conflicts between the expectations of black students and the expectations of white staff and administrators. Gibbs states that predominantly white universities expect black students to assimilate into the system without substantial alteration of the academic environment. These students are expected to compete academically with the white students and to be "grateful" for having the opportunity to obtain a quality education. On the other hand, black students expect predominantly white universities to be flexible in responding to their needs. They envision college as being a continuation of high school and expect a greater diversity of cultural and social activities (Gibbs, 1973). In addition to the differences between the levels of expectations between students and administrators, personal and social barriers exist between black and white students. Cultural values and lifestyles are significantly different.

PAGE 15

-4especially between black students from the inner city and white students from the suburbs. There are difficulties for both in dormitories when neither group has had any prior contact or exposure to the other (Wharton, 1972) . As a result of these social and cultural barriers, there is less interaction between black and white students. Lack of interaction sometimes leads to lack of involvement and alienation of black students toward the university. The articles reviewed above suggest that interaction between students and their environments may have a significant effect on whether students drop out or remain in college. Environmental effects apparently predispose students to view their college experiences as either satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Social interaction, academic achievement, and acceptance by faculty and student personnel workers are factors that influence how students perceive their environments. The literature suggests that interaction between students and their institutions affects satisfaction and dropout rates. Thus, the degree to which a college environment corresponds to the needs of the students is also the degree to which students will persist in that institution. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with the various aspects of their university environments and their level of involvement in

PAGE 16

-5their environments. Specifically, the study determined if differences exist in the degree of satisfaction among black and white students in the following areas: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire was used to measure the students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their environments. The University Involvement Questionnaire was used to measure the students' level of involvement within their institutions. Need for the Study There are numerous interacting factors that cause students to drop out of colleges and universities. Most studies on dropouts have attempted to only correlate such variables as Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. Grade Point Average, and Socio-Economic Status with dropout rates in colleges and universities. Tinto (1975) , however, stresses the importance of a more comprehensive study that includes social integration as a part of dropout behaviors. Student satisfaction and involvement are two variables frequently overlooked as possible dropout factors in retention studies. Astin (1977) states that the specific characteristics of a college environment should be considered when studying satisfaction with the college environment. In studies of higher educational institutions and students' perceptions, Astin found a significant interplay between a college's

PAGE 17

-6specific environmental characteristics and students' experiences in colleges and universities. The "intensity of exposure" (degree of involvement, interaction with faculty, athletics, student government, and academic activity) influences persistence as well as student satisfaction with the institution. A theme throughout the literature on student satisfaction suggests that researchers should continue to investigate more carefully the "nonintellective" factors related to student satisfaction. Does involvement in the institution result in greater satisfaction or do satisfied students become more involved . in the institution? Does dissatisfaction with the university environment cause students to become more involved? Through studies on satisfaction, colleges will be able to provide more meaningful experiences and opportunities for students. Significance of the Study According to Betz et al. (1971) , student satisfaction is probably one of the least investigated variables in the college community, but one of the most meaningful indicators of students' attitudes toward their educational experiences. Therefore, data obtained from this study can provide university administrators with information about some of the differences in black and white students ' perceptions of university environments and whether these differences relate to

PAGE 18

-7student satisfaction. Information gathered from this study also may be of assistance to student personnel workers who are concerned about the relative effectiveness of their own college environments. Student personnel workers at each institution could share insights with colleagues at other institutions.' Results obtained from this study could prove especially helpful to high school students when choosing a college. If information describing the environmental characteristics of universities in Florida was available, students would be better equipped to select a college with an environment more compatible with their needs. Admissions counselors would have information on college environmental conditions that could prove helpful to the adjustment of different types of students . The study will provide specific information concerning students' perceptions of satisfactory and unsatisfactory aspects of the college environment. It also will show the degree to which involvement within the institution is related to satisfaction. The results could assist administrators to understand how their university environments can provide programs that elicit involvement on the part of the students, and perhaps increase the number of students who graduate from their institutions.

PAGE 19

-8Definition of Terms The terms below were defined in this study as follows: Alien environment — An environment in which students believe they are not included in the mainstream of events. Compensation — The amount of input (e.g., study) required relative to academic outcomes (e.g. , grades) , and the effect of input demands on students' fulfilling their other needs and goals (Starr, Betz, & Menne, 1971, 4-5). Congruence — The relationship between students ' environments and their personalities. Dropouts — Students who leave college before graduating. Environment — The intellectual-social-cultural climate of the university that influences how students work, socialize, live, and develop. Involvement — The level of participation in a variety of activities within the university environment during students ' undergraduate years. Quality of Education — The various academic conditions related to the individual's intellectual and vocational development (e.g., the competence and helpfulness of faculty, staff, advisors, and counselors) , and the adequacy of curriculum requirements, teaching methods, and assignments (Starr et al., 1971). Recognition — Attitudes and behaviors of faculty and students indicating acceptances of students as worthwhile individuals (Starr et al., 1971).

PAGE 20

-9Satisf action — The extent to which individuals feel the environment is meeting their needs (Starr, et al., 1971). Social Life — Opportunities to meet socially relevant goals (such as dating, meeting compatible or interesting people, making friends, and participating in campus events and informal social activities) (Starr et al., 1971). Working Conditions — The physical conditions of the students' college life (such as the cleanliness and comfort of his place of residence, adequacy of study areas on campus, quality of meals, and facilities for lounging between classes (Starr et al., 1971). Organization of the Study The remainder of the study is organized into four chapters. A review of related literature on measuring and defining college student satisfaction, measuring the college environment, satisfaction; congruence and environment, variables related to satisfaction, and problems of black students attending predominantly white public universities is presented in Chapter Two. The hypotheses, instruments, population and sample, procedures, and analysis of data are described in Chapter Three. The results and a discussion of the results are presented in Chapter Four. A summary of the research, implications, and recommendations for further research are presented in Chapter Five.

PAGE 21

CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE Introduction A review of the literature on college student satisfaction reveals a lack of identifiable variables that have contributed to students' degree of satisfaction with their experiences. Among the wide variety of studies on college students, relatively few have investigated college students' satisfaction and their attitudes toward their environments (Morstain, 1977) . To identify some of the areas related to college student satisfaction, the literature was reviewed in five areas. These areas were measuring and defining student satisfaction, measuring the college environment, satisfaction: congruence and environment, variables related to university student satisfaction, and problems encountered by black students attending predominantly white educational institutions. Measuring and Defining Student Satisfaction Much of the research involving student satisfaction has been conducted on "academic" related topics, such as different teaching techniques, study skills practices, student needs. -10-

PAGE 22

-11and achievement. There has been a scarcity of systematic research focusing on the elements of college student satisfaction. Therefore, relatively little progress has been made toward developing and evaluating measures of student satisfaction, or attempting to understand the nature, causes, correlates or effects of this campus phenomenon (Betz, et al. , 1970) . Berdie (1944) published one of the earliest and most well known studies of college student satisfaction. He investigated engineering students' satisfaction with the curricula as they related to academic achievements. He used first-year honor points, high school grades, and scores on a series of ability tests as performance measures. Of the eight performance measures used, Berdie found that only high school rank had a significant relationship with curricular satisfaction. Morstain (1977) attempted to assess students' satisfaction with aspects of their academic programs in relation to their attitudes and preferences regarding the "purpose and process" of a college education. The results indicated that students who were dissatisfied with their academic programs had noticeably different educational orientation profiles when compared to peers who were relatively satisfied. Second, dissatisfied students had an orientation profile in• congruent with faculty educational orientations, while highly satisfied students were less incongruent with faculty orientations. This research suggests that there is a need for a

PAGE 23

-12relative "fit" of student and faculty orientations in order to develop effective programs for both faculty and students to be satisfied with the academic environment (Pervin, 1967) . In the research on college student satisfaction that has been reported in the literature to date, the selection of satisfaction dimensions has been based on "logical" considerations rather than research evidence. Betz, Klingensmith, and Menne (1970) attempted to provide further information regarding the components of college student satisfaction through a factor analysis study of the dimensions of satisfaction for two samples of undergraduate students. They applied the principles developed from years of research on the satisfaction of employees in business and industry '* . (Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, & Capwell, 1957; Hoppock, 193 5; Vroom, 1964). The results of the study supported the potential usefulness of the College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) as a device for measuring college student satisfaction. The analysis of data indicated that the CSSQ had high internal consistency and construct validity. Overall, there was considerable support for using quality of education, recognition, working conditions, compensation, and social life as important dimensions of college student satisfaction, which are the present components of the CSSQ.

PAGE 24

-13Measuring the College Environment Pace and Stern (1958) developed the first systematic approach to measuring the college environment. They developed the College Characteristics Index (CCI) , in part from Murray's (1938) need-press theory, and from the later work of Stern, Stein, and Bloom (1956) on personality assessment. The theory is based on the assumption that the college environment or "press" can be characterized in terms of its potential for reinforcing certain personality needs. The CCI is, therefore, designed to measure 30 different environmental presses, each of which corresponds to a parallel personality need. For example, a college's "press for achievement" indicates that college's capacity for satisfying the student's "need for achievement." An environment with a relatively high achievement press would be more likely to satisfy the student's need for achievement than one with a relatively low achievement press. The CCI consists of 300 items describing different impressions of the college environment. Most of the items are concerned with the students' impressions of the total institutional climate. Pace (1965) revised the CCI by a factor analysis and an item analysis of institutional means on scores derived from the parent instrument. These analyses resulted in the development of the College and University Environmental Scales (CUES) . One of the major purposes of this revision was to identify CCI items that actually differentiate among

PAGE 25

-14college environments. Most of the items retained in the revised CCI still measure students' perceptions of their college environments. Another approach to assessing the college environment was developed by Astin and Holland (1961) . The Environmental Assessment Technique (EAT) is based on the assumption that environments are transmitted by people and that the college environment depends on the personal characteristics of students, faculty, and administration. Because much of the students' personal contacts are with fellow students, it was assumed that a large portion of the students ' environment was determined by the characteristics of fellow students. Therefore, the environment was defined in terms of eight characteristics of the student body: average intelligence, size, and six personal orientations: realistic, scientific, conventional, enterprising, social, and artistic. Major field choices were based on Holland's (1966) theory of personality types. The three instruments above have been used to measure and describe some of the differences among the environments of undergraduate institutions. Satisfaction; Congruence and Environment Pervin (1967a, b) and Pervin and Rubin (1967) assessed students ' perceived congruence with their environment as a predictor of college student satisfaction. The study supported the research hypothesis that discrepancies between

PAGE 26

students' perceptions of themselves and their colleges are related to college dissatisfaction. The better the "fit" between students and their college environments the more satisfied they will be with their college experience. This perceived dissatisfaction has caused students to consider dropping out when they otherwise could have been successful in college. Nafziger et al. (1975) tested some hypotheses regarding person-environment congruency consistency and differentiation as predictors of satisfaction using Holland's theory of careers (Holland, 1973) . One research question was Are college students in congruent college environments more satisfied than students in incongruent college environments? This study was guided by an explicit typology of persons and environments (Holland, 1973) rather than by statistical procedure. Theoretically, student satisfaction was thought to be the result of congruency between the students' personality types and their college environment. For example, satisfied students would be expected to resemble typical students at their college and have a personality pattern which was well defined and consistent; dissatisfied students would be expected to be less like typical students and have poorly defined personality patterns. The results of this study supported the hypotheses about person-environment interactions as predictors of satisfaction. Based on Holland's research, there is a strong suggestion that

PAGE 27

-16congruence with one's major field is a good indication of satisfaction with one's environment. The results also suggest that congruence with one's subenvironment (students, teachers, and activities in major field) is a good predictor of satisfaction with that environment. These findings do not, however, suggest satisfaction with all aspects of the total college environment. These findings are consistent with former studies testing congruence with environment and major fields of study. For example. Marrow (1971) found in a study matching personality types (Vocational Preference Inventory) with major field that there was congruence for mathematics majors, but not for sociology majors. In the research on congruence and roommate satisfaction, Williams (1967) reported that congruency between roommates led to satisfaction between them and incongruency led to dissatisfaction and conflict between roommates. Rand (1968) investigated the relationship between satisfaction and student environment congruency. He measured scholastic potential, personality, interests, and subculture orientation of freshmen at 28 colleges. His results cast serious doubt on the simplistic notion of "goodness of fit" in relationship to satisfaction. The idea that students most similar or dissimilar to students in the same major field are more satisfied or dissatisfied was not supported. Even though some studies found a positive but weak relationship. Rand concludes that the evidence for a direct relationship \

PAGE 28

-17between satisfaction and congruency is at best tentative and quite complex, and that further study is needed. Variables Related to Student Satisfaction In the past several years, due to changes in admissions policies, the overall complexion of the college community has changed, and it is no longer possible to generalize the needs of the college population to that of the 19 year old white middle class male (Maw, 1971) . The enrolling of a more diversified student population has prompted increased research on the college students' academic success, skills, and perceptions. There is still, however, no definite answer to the question: How satisfied are students with their colleges? If an answer is to be found a number of variables must be considered. Martin (1968) attempted to evaluate freshman students' perception and their degree of satisfaction with college along the pattern of self-theory using a modified Q-sort composed of college-oriented items. Students' perceptions of college were interpreted in terms of satisfaction with college as shown between the correlation of their real and ideal Q-sort description of college. Students were assumed to be satisfied with college if their real and ideal Q-sorts were similar. If Q-sorts were dissimilar students were assumed to be dissatisfied with college.

PAGE 29

-18The study attempted to answer the following questions: (1) Initially, how satisfied with college are freshmen? (2) How does this initial satisfaction compare with satisfaction at the end of the first year? (3) What is the relationship between initial freshman satisfaction and faculty-graduate satisfaction? (4) What is the relationship between initial freshman satisfaction with college and final achievement? The results showed that initially freshmen are relatively satisfied with college but that their satisfaction decreases by the end of the first year, moving from an initial average r of .41 to a final average r of .27. Further, graduate students and faculty members were similar in their overall satisfaction with college; both groups v/ere less satisfied with college than freshmen at either the first or last part of the year. The implication is that an inverse relationship exists between college experience and familiarity with the college environment and satisfaction with college. There was also no significant relationship between initial freshman satisfaction with college and academic achievement at the end of the year. Both satisfied and dissatisfied students achieve at various academic levels. Betz et al. (1972) investigated the differences, attitudes, and satisfaction of students attending private and public colleges and universities. The results indicate that students in the public institutions were more satisfied with the actual or perceived working conditions and social

PAGE 30

-19life. Students in the private institutions were more satisfied with their recognition as students, and felt they received a greater degree of positive feedback (e.g., grades) for the amount of work they did. In general, both groups of students were satisfied with various aspects of their experience as measured by the CSSQ. Because older students are attending institutions of higher education in increasing numbers and bringing different experiences and needs, it is important for researchers and student personnel staff members to examine the impact of age on satisfaction. Sturtz (1971) investigated differences in satisfaction between two groups of women 25 years old and above and the other was the more typical college female between 18 and 21 years of age. The results indicated that the two student groups had different needs and expectations. Both groups generally were more satisfied with the quality of education than with procedures and regulations. Overall, older women were generally more satisfied with their experiences than were younger women. Even though Berdie's study is a bit dated, it has some significance today in that it supports the contention that there is a need for a more complete measure when investigating student satisfaction. Berdie (1944) sought to determine if tests of vocational interests could be used to predict students' satisfaction with their curricula. Previous predictions of academic achievement and success at the college level

PAGE 31

-20had been based on grades or achievement test scores. As expected, previous school achievement most accurately predicted college grades; interest and personality test scores least accurately predicted college grades. Although these interest test scores do not predict how well students achieve, they have been used by counselors to aid students in choosing a field compatible with their abilities and interests . The results indicated that there was no single factor reporting a high relationship between curriculum and student satisfaction. There is evidence that students with less defined primary interest patterns will be least satisfied with their courses and those who are extremely satisfied or dissatisfied may be differentiated by an interest inventory. These results do not demonstrate whether interests will or will not predict satisfaction. They do suggest that a more complete measure of satisfaction could provide more conclusive results. Problems of Black Students Attending Predominantly White Educational Institutions Black students attending predominantly white educational institutions differ significantly from white middle class students (Staples, 1972). These black students are part of a growing minority group interested in establishing and maintaining a sense of idealism and racial pride (Joseph, 1969) .

PAGE 32

-21They are interested in relevant curricula that includes aspects of black contributions and black culture (Harper, 1969) . Black students wish to retain their own identities and to see a significant number of black students, personnel workers, faculty, counselors, and administrators in predominantly white institutions (Harper, 1969) . These requests may be an attempt to reduce the feelings of isolation in both social and academic situations. These feelings of isolation create a state of anxiety, frustration, and helplessness. Aside from the problems of environmental isolation as reported by (Gibbs, 1973), black students experience some specific difficulties that relate to their degree of satisfaction with their college experiences. One such conflict has to do with the incongruence between the expectations that black students and administrators have about each other. Black students are expected to assimilate into the mainstream of the college life without any significant changes in the environment. Hattenshwiller (1971) used the term "anticipatory socialization" to describe these students as probably the first in their generation to attend a large university, and had not been exposed to the necessary experiences to prepare them for college life. These black students expected that the university would be flexible and aware of their needs. They were unaware that they had been hindered by ignorance about, or fear of a college education (Vontress, 1968). These students would like to see black studies and black cultural

PAGE 33

-22affairs become a part of the college curriculiora. Moreover, they would like to feel that universities are committed to their total development. Another major problem for black students is that of finances. In a sample compiled by the Educational Testing Service in 1966-67, it was reported that 62 percent of students receive financial support from their parents. However, only 2 9 percent of the minority students in the sample received support from their families. Many of these students had to seek employment in order to remain in college. Several researchers have reported that financial problems may be one of the important factors contributing to the high dropout rates for black students. For example, Astin (1964) surveyed 6,000 National Merit Scholars of 1957 and found that the "dropouts" came from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and applied for fewer scholarships in college. Further, Meeth (1966) concluded that there were many programs to encourage black students to attend college, but not enough programs to help students persist once they were admitted. The small number of support programs affected their academic performance, which caused some difficulties with their financial aid. The quality of the relationship between black students and their professors and the grades they receive are of critical importance in determining satisfaction with the institution. A positive relationship facilitates healthy attitudes toward learning and toward the environment (Feldman,

PAGE 34

-231969) . In a study on black college student satisfaction in the deep south, Robertson (1980) found that black students were as satisfied as white students except in the university's system of rewards. That is, black students felt they had to work too hard to make satisfactory grades. These attitudes held by black students further demonstrate the need for a positive relationship between professors and students in their institutions. Summary The review of the literature supports the contention that satisfaction is an important indicator of students' attitudes toward their educational experiences. It also shows that academic involvement has a strong partial correlation with satisfaction of the intellectual environment. In the past, researchers have attempted to measure student satisfaction based on "academic" related topics. In fact, "non-academic" student satisfaction is one of the least investigated variables in the college environment. This information on student satisfaction could be one of the many ways of providing more meaningful experiences for students .

PAGE 35

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this study was to investigate students ' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments and their levels of involvement in those environments. Specifically, the study determined if differences exist in the degree of satisfaction among black and white students in the following areas: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) was administered to black and white undergraduate students registered during the 1981 spring quarter in three Florida public universities. The hypotheses, population and sample, instruments, data collection procedures, and analysis of data are described in this chapter. Hypotheses 1. There are no differences between black and white undergraduate university students' degree of satisfaction with their university environment. -24-

PAGE 36

-252. There are no differences between black and white undergraduate students ' degree of satisfaction with their university environments on the basis of their academic levels. 3. There are no relationships between black and white undergraduate students ' degree of satisfaction with their university environments and their level of involvement in their environments. 4. There are no differences between black and white undergraduate university students' level of involvement within their environments. 5. There are no differences between the degree of satisfaction of black undergraduate students attending predominantly white universities and those attending a predominantly black university. 6. There are no differences between the degree of satisfaction of white undergraduate students attending a predominantly black university and those attending predominantly white universities. Population and Sample The population for this study consisted of black and white undergraduate students attending three public universities in the state of Florida. They were the University of Florida and Florida State University, the two largest

PAGE 37

-26predominantly white universities, and Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, the one predominantly black university in Florida. According to the demographic data obtained from the questionnaires, the two groups of undergraduate students were similar in age and majors. Most of them were between the ages of 18 and 25. There were a few students older than 25. There were 399 males and 401 females. There were 201 freshmen, 201 sophomores, 190 juniors, and 2 08 seniors. White students chose to attend college with the expectation that it would be demanding scholastically. Black students as described by Hattenshwiller (1971) were probably the first in their generation to attend a large university, and had not been exposed to the necessary experiences to prepare them for college life. The sample for this study included 800 undergraduate students. Of this 800, 373 were black students and 427 were white students. One hundred fourteen black students and 185 white students were selected from the University of Florida and 123 black students and 200 white students were selected from Florida State University. One hundred thirty-six black students and 42 white students were selected from Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University. A letter was sent to each of the three universities requesting access to the classes (Appendix A) . The 800 students were drawn from a stratified random sample of classes at the three universities. There were at least 27

PAGE 38

-27students representing each academic classification level. These classes were located primarily in the colleges of Liberal Arts & Sciences, Business Administration, Journalism, Education, and Engineering. These colleges were selected because of their large undergraduate enrollments. Information regarding the 1981 spring quarter courses and academic classification levels at the universities was obtained from their registrars' spring quarter schedules of courses. The classes from each of the colleges, as represented by academic levels, were randomly selected by counting every 10th class. The researcher contacted the instructors of those classes by phone. The purposes and procedures of the study were explained and a time was established for administration of the instruments. The selection procedures were continued until 8 00 students were in the sample. Instrioments The two instruments used in this study were the College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) and the University Involvement Questionnaire (UIQ) . The CSSQ was used to measure the degree of satisfaction undergraduate students have with various aspects of their environments. The UIQ was used to determine the degree of involvement students have within their universities (i.e., sororities, fraternities, student government, athletics) .

PAGE 39

-28The CSSQ was developed by Betz, Menne, Starr, and Klingensmith (1971) to measure college student satisfaction. The initial CSSQ Form A was a 13 0-item instrument which contained representative items for six satisfaction dimensions: policies and procedures, working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life and recognition. A revised Form B was developed in 1969 which contained 92 of the original 130 items (Betz, Klingensmith, & Menne, 1970). The more recent research on college student satisfaction however, has been conducted with Form C of the CSSQ (Betz, Menne, Starr, & Klingensmith, 1971) . Form C consists of 70 items from previous forms of the CSSQ arranged in five scales working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. Respondents are asked to indicate their degree of satisfaction with these five aspects of the college environment. A Likert-type scale is provided, with responses ranging from "Very Dissatisfied" (one point) to "Very Satisfied" (five points) . As a part of the development of the CSSQ, several studies were conducted to determine the validity of the instrument. Additional criterion validity was determined by Starr, Betz, and Menne (1972) in a study where retention was considered as an external criterion measure of satisfaction. Further validity of the instrument was determined in a follow-up study which measured student satisfaction of dropouts and non-dropouts. The results

PAGE 40

-29showed the non-dropouts were the most satisfied, followed by the non-academic dropouts, and the academic dropouts were at the lowest satisfaction level. Content validity was determined by statistically testing the scales of the CSSQ. Betz, Menne, Starr, and Klingensmith (1971) conducted a factor analysis for each of the five scales and the results supported the use of the scales as originally presented in an earlier study. Equivalence reliability of the instrument has been determined by using alternate forms of the same instrviment with over 1,000 students. These students were from five public and five private institutions. Reliability coefficients have been reported for each of the five scales on the CSSQ within these two normative groups. Correlation coefficients representing the expected relationship between responses on a given CSSQ scale and responses on the alternative form of the CSSQ for public universities scales ranged from .78 on the quality of education to .84 on compensation, with .80 on social life, .82 on working conditions, and .82 on recognition. Stability over time for the CSSQ is not considered crucial since satisfaction may be affected by changes in the environment as well as by changes in the students' perceptions of that environment. Betz et al. (1971) developed norms for the CSSQ based on the administration of the CSSQ in the spring of 1970 to 31,121 students attending 10 colleges and universities.

PAGE 41

-30These 10 schools represented a variety of geographic areas and a variety of educational institutions. The data were divided into separate normative groups by type of institution, and by sex within each type of institution. The University Involvement Questionnaire was developed by the researcher. The purpose of this instrument was to determine the degree of involvement students have with their universities. The questionnaire contains 20 items that ask students questions regarding their personal involvement within their universities. Respondents answer "yes" or "no" to each of the questions. Each of the "yes" responses was assigned one point. The "yes" responses were totaled for each student. This individual total score was compared with the mean "yes" scores for the group. If the individual score was above the mean score, the student was considered to be "involved" with the university. If the individual score was below the mean score, the student was considered "not involved" with the university. To determine the content validity of the instrument, a panel of four experts was asked to evaluate the items to determine if they reflected students' university involvement. If three of the four experts agreed that a question should remain in the instrument, the question was retained. They also were asked to make comments regarding the feasibility of the instrument.

PAGE 42

-31A test-retest procedure was used to estimate the reliability of the instrument. The instrument was administered to 15 black students and 15 white students who were using the services of the Teaching Center at the University of Florida. All 30 students completed the UIQ during the second week of the 1981 spring quarter. Six weeks later the same students were contacted to complete a second questionnaire. A Product-Moment correlation was computed for the two sets of scores. The correlational coefficient was .71. Procedures After the classes included in the study were selected, the researcher contacted the class instructors and explained the purposes of the research, the amounts of time needed for data collection, and requested access to their classes (Appendix C) • The researcher and instructors then scheduled a time to administer the instruments. Approximately 30 minutes was needed to complete the process each time. On the scheduled day for the questionnaires to be completed, the instructor introduced the researcher, who explained the purposes of the research and assured the students of the annonymity of their participation. The students were given a number two pencil, a NCS Trans Optic Scan Answer Sheet, and the two questionnaires.

PAGE 43

-32The researcher then gave instructions for coding the demographic information on the answer sheets and for responding to the questionnaires. The students were also given opportunities to ask questions related to the question' naires. After the questionnaires were collected in each class, the researcher expressed sincere appreciation to the instructor and students for their cooperation and participation. Analyses of Data A t-test was used to determine if differences existed among mean scores of groups of black and white undergraduate students' responses for each CSSQ item. An analysis of vari ance was used to determine if degree of satisfaction was a function of academic level classification. Point bi-serial correlation coefficient was used to determine relationships between students' responses to CSSQ items and responses to the University Involvement Questionnaire. A t-test was used to determine if differences existed among mean scores of black and white students' responses on the UIQ items. A t-test was also used to determine if differences among mean scores of black students on the CSSQ were a function of attending a predominantly black university. A t-test was used to determine if differences among mean scores of white students on the CSSQ were a function of

PAGE 44

-33attending a predominantly white university. The level of significance for all analyses was p > .05.

PAGE 45

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Results The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments and their level of involvement within their environments. Eight hundred students participated in the study. Of that number, 373 were black and 427 were white undergraduate students from the University of Florida, Florida State University, and Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University. The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSSQ) and the University Involvement Questionnaire (UIQ) were administered to these students during the 1981 spring quarter. Data analyses were conducted as outlined in Chapter Three. Hypothesis 1 There are no differences between black and white undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments. A t-test was used to determine the differences between black and white students' mean scores on the scales of the CSSQ and their total CSSQ scores. The results in Table 1 indicate that there were no significant -34-

PAGE 46

-35differences between black and white students' total scores on the CSSQ (p > .05). This result means that both black and white students were equally satisfied with their college environments. Therefore, the first hypothesis was not rejected. Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for Black and White Students' Scores on CSSQ Scales and Total CSSQ Scales Blacks Mean (N=373) SD Whites Mean (N=427) SD t-value Working Conditions 40.87 9.30 42.17 8. 63 -2.03 Compensation 42. 65 9. 68 45. 08 10. 25 -3.43 Quality of Education 37.72 9.37 39.44 9.01 -2. 63 Social Life 40. 32 9.44 39.83 8.94 0.76 Recognition 42. 64 9.55 41.77 9.57 1.28 Total 204. 22 40.35 208.29 38.72 -1.45 Hypothesis 2 There are no differences between black and white undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments on the basis of academic levels. An analysis of variance was used to test this hypothesis. The results in Table 2 indicate that there were no

PAGE 47

-36significant differences between black and white undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments based on their academic levels (p > .05). This result shows that the degree of satisfaction for black and white undergraduate students with their university environments was not influenced by academic levels. Therefore, the second hypothesis was not rejected. Table 2 Analysis of Variance of Black and White Students' Mean Scores on the CSSQ by Academic Levels Source of Sum of Mean Variation Squares DF Square F-Ratio Main Effects Class 4962. 863 6 827. .144 0. ,529 Race 779. ,555 3 259. , 852 0. ,166 Sex 3171. , 925 2 1585. ,962 1. , 015 788. ,555 1 788. . 555 0. , 505 Explained 4963. , 000 6 827. ,167 0. .529 Residual 1239318. , 000 793 1562. .822 Total 1244281. . 000 799 1557. .298 Hypothesis 3 There are no relationships between black and white undergraduate students' degree of satisfaction with their university environments and their level of involvement in their environments. Point bi-serial correlations were

PAGE 48

-37used to determine the relationship between black and white students' mean scores on the CSSQ and the UIQ. The results in Table 3 indicate that there were no significant relationships between black and white students ' scores on the CSSQ and their scores on the UIQ (p > .05). This result means that black and white students' degree of satisfaction with their college environments was not affected by their level of involvement with activities at their universities. Therefore, the third hypothesis was not rejected. Table 3 Point Bi-Serial Correlations Between Black and White Students' Mean Scores on the CSSQ and their Mean Scores on the UIQ UIQ Item Blacks Whites Total Scores UF FSU FAMU UF FSU FAMU 1 .3279 -.2689 .1972 . 0315 .1405 .2211 .0141 2 .1180 .1767 .1002 -.0299 . 0225 .1408 . 0401 3 . 1332 -.1985 .4883 . 0118 . 1534 .2243 -.0079 4 . 0668 -.0460 .4658 . 0026 . 3781 .2166 . 0319 5 .1619 .3651 .1144 -.0155 . 0946 .2316 -.0552 6 .1394 . 3850 .1820 . 0202 . 0635 .1943 -.0419 7 . 2330 .2854 -.0653 . 0153 -.1030 .2157 . 0275 8 . 4805 .1774 -.4560 -.0830 -.4310 .1238 -.0458 9 . 0566 -.1449 -.4880 . 0188 . 2925 . 0908 -.0229 10 . 0626 -.1659 . 3027 . 0506 . 0738 .2062 . 0526 11 . 3741 -.2702 -.0583 .1264 .1504 . 0676 -.0882 12 .3437 -.3199 -.1383 -.0645 -.2708 .1464 -.0315 13 . 3886 .2807 . 1133 -.1723 -.3077 .2010 -.0806 14 . 3420 .2795 -.1061 -.1341 -.2268 . 1178 -.0460 15 . 1079 -.0954 -.4734 .1236 .2265 . 1856 -.0086 16 .1328 .1741 . 0437 -.0308 . 0079 .1859 . 0283 17 . 2098 .2480 .1127 -.0163 . 0754 . 2183 . 0125 18 .1636 .2455 . 2252 -.0330 . 0537 .2407 . 0105 19 . 2351 . 2324 . 0861 . 0180 . 0453 .2107 . 0592

PAGE 49

-38Hypothesis 4 There are no differences between black and white undergraduate students' level of involvement within their environments. Attest was used to determine the differences between black and white students' mean scores on the UIQ. The results in Tables 5, 6 and 7 indicate that there were significant differences between black and white undergraduate students' level of involvement within their environments. The mean scores for black students are higher than the mean scores for white students in Tables 4, 5, 6, and 7. These results mean that black and white students were not equal in their level of involvement within their university environments. Therefore, hypothesis four was rejected. Table 4 Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for UF Students' Scores on the UIQ Group N Mean SD t-value Blacks 141 8. 0877 8.197 0.85 Whites 181 7. 2707 7. 989 Table 5 Means, Standard Students' Scores Deviations, and on the UIQ t-values for FSU Group N Mean SD t-value Blacks 123 7. 6179 3. 042 3.12* Whites 200 6. 5700 2. 863 *p < .05

PAGE 50

-39Table 6 Means, Standard Deviations and t-values for FAMU Students' Scores on the UIQ Group N Mean SD t-value Blacks 136 8.1912 3.405 4.83* Whites 41 5. 2927 3 . 277 *p < .05 Table 7 Means, Standard Students' Scores Deviations and on the UIQ t-values for All Group N Mean SD t-value Blacks 373 7. 9705 5.265 3.13* Whites 427 6. 7464 5.700 *p < .05 Hypothesis 5 There are no differences between the degree of satisfaction of black undergraduate students attending a predominantly white university and those attending a predominantly black university., A t-test was used to examine the differences between the degree of satisfaction for black students attending a predominantly black university and those attending a predominantly white university. The results in Table 8 indicate that there were no significant differences between the degree of satisfaction for blacks

PAGE 51

-40attending a predominantly black university and those attending a predominantly white university (p > .05). This result means that black undergraduate students attending predominantly white universities were as satisfied with their university environments as black students attending a predominantly black university. Therefore, hypothesis five was not rejected. Table 8 Means, Standard Deviations and t-values for Black Undergraduate Students Attending Predominantly Black or White Universities Group N Mean SD t-value FAMU 136 207.8088 43.075 1.35 UF 114 200.9474 37.065 FAMU 136 207.8088 43.075 .89 FSU 123 203.3008 38.094 Hypothesis 6 There are no differences between the degree of satisfaction of white undergraduate students attending a predominantly black university and those attending a predominantly white university. A t-test was used to examine the differences between the degree of satisfaction for white students attending a predominantly white university and those attending a predominantly black university. The results in Table 9 indicate that there were no significant

PAGE 52

-41differences between the degree of satisfaction for white students attending predominantly white universities and those attending a predominantly black university (p > .05). This result means that white undergraduate students attending predominantly white universities were as satisfied with their university environments as white students attending a predominantly black university. Therefore, hypothesis six was not rejected. Table 9 Means, Standard Deviations and t-values for White Undergraduate Students Attending Predominantly Black or White Universities Group N Mean SD t-value FAMU 41 208.439 45.663 .50 UF 185 212.232 37.065 FAMU 41 208.439 45.663 .49 UF 200 204.710 38.529 Discussion The results from this study indicate that black and white students were not significantly different in their degree of satisfaction with their university environments. These results support the findings of Robertson (1980) , who reported that black students are just as satisfied as white students at universities in the deep south. The results do.

PAGE 53

-42however, contradict much of the literature that purports that black students attending predominantly white universities are in "an alien environment" (Joseph, 1969) . Black and white students in this study were equally satisfied with the recognition and social life aspects of their • college environments. Black students, however, were less satisfied with the working conditions, compensation, and quality of education aspects in their college environments. It was rather surprising that black students are as satisfied as white students with their universities. One plausible explanation for their satisfaction could be that black students consider attending college a privilege rather than an obligation; therefore, they would be more likely to find less dissatisfaction with some aspects of the college environment. Another reason might be that black students form subgroups within the student population and these groups provide opportunities for them to maintain their identities, to find support and encouragement, and to decrease their sense of social isolation. These students probably attended integrated high schools and have been assimilated into the mainstream university environments. Academic levels had no significant impact on either black or white students' satisfaction with their university environments. Seniors, however, tended to be slightly more satisfied with their environments than sophomore students. These findings are somewhat supportive of Martin

PAGE 54

-43(1968) , who reported that initially freshmen are relatively satisfied with their college experiences, but their satisfaction level decreases by the end of the first year. New college students perceive their universities as having ideal environments , but as they become more aware of their real university environments, they lose some of that initial idealism and optimism. One could speculate further that as students continue to matriculate and set definite career goals they become more motivated. These factors could result in seniors expressing higher overall satisfaction with their college experiences. In previous studies (Astin, 1977) , involvement within the university showed the strongest partial correlation with satisfaction of the intellectual environment. The results of this study show that there were no significant relationships between black and white students' satisfaction and involvement. Students, however, who were involved in sororities and fraternities, student government, intramurals, athletic events, student newspaper, religious activities, or were employed by the universities, were more satisfied with their university environments than other students. Black students were more involved in campus-related activities than white students. This may be due to the fact that in a "minority-majority" relationship, minority students may feel the need to become more visible and to have a more concomitant impact on their environments. On the other hand.

PAGE 55

-44majority students may not feel the need to "struggle" for visibility within their environments. Economics may have been another reason that explains why black students were more involved in their universities' activities. Attending off-campus activities is more expensive and may require some form of transportation. This situation would probably affect black students more severely. Therefore, black students would be more likely to become involved in on-campus activities. Another interesting finding was that black and white students' satisfaction with their university environments was not based on whether they chose to attend predominantly white universities or the predominantly black university. Black students attending the University of Florida and Florida State University were just as satisfied as the black students attending Florida A & M University. White students attending Florida A & M University were just as satisfied as white students attending the University of Florida and Florida State University. It appears, therefore, that one factor that influences students' satisfaction with their university environments may be their selection of a university to attend. The findings of this study appear to support the contention that black and white students, in general, are satisfied with their university environments. The findings also indicate that students' satisfaction with their

PAGE 56

-45university environments is not necessarily related to their involvement in campus activities. The results further indicate that race, academic levels, and involvement have little or no influence on students' satisfaction with their university environments.

PAGE 57

CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, SUMMARY, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions Based on the results of this study, the following conclusions were made: 1. Black students are as satisfied as white students with their university environments. 2. Black students are less satisfied than white students with the working conditions, compensation, and quality of education in their university environments . 3. Black and white students' academic levels do not affect their degree of satisfaction with their university environments. 4. Black and white students' degree of satisfaction does not affect their levels of university involvement. 5. Black students are more involved in their universities than white students. 6. Black students attending a predominantly black university are as satisfied as black students attending predominantly white universities.

PAGE 58

-477. White students attending a predominantly black university are as satisfied as white students attending predominantly white universities. Implications One implication of this study is that the more students are involved in activities or organizations on their campuses the more likely they are to be satisfied with their environments. Because black students probably have a greater need to feel a part of the university community, they were more involved in campus related activities. Student personnel workers should encourage all students to become involved in at least one activity or organization sponsored by the univer sity. The student affairs staff also should attempt to provide some programs and activities that appeal to the interest of nontraditional students. A second implication is that administrators and student personnel staff should evaluate those aspects of their university environments which students were satisfied with and then make decisions as to whether those aspects should be maintained or improved. These student personnel workers and administrators also can use the results of this study to improve the aspects of the university environment that students find dissatisfying. If university officials are aware of the problem areas on their campuses, steps can be

PAGE 59

-48taken to make the necessary changes. Knowledge of this type of information can serve as a useful measuring device to administrators to understand the strengths and weaknesses of their universities. A third implication of this study is that there seems to be evidence to support the continued development and improvement of predominantly black universities. There are those who believe that black institutions should be abolished. Those black and white students who chose to attend a predominantly black university, however, expressed the same degree of satisfaction with their university environments as black and white students who chose to attend predominantly white universities. Therefore, it appears that black universities have as much to offer black and white students as predominantly white universities. A fourth implication is that sophomore students should be encouraged to become more involved in activities or organizations on their campuses. Out of the four academic levels, they were the least satisfied with their university environments. Therefore, it would suggest that administrators, student affairs, faculty, and counselors should be aware that these students have lost their "freshman" optimism and need special help and consideration. As a result of this special interest, sophomores may persist through this year and move into their junior year with definite career goals.

PAGE 60

-49The last implication is that there is a need to conduct more college student satisfaction studies. College student satisfaction is one of the least investigated variables in the college community, but one of the best indicators of how students perceive the environments of their universities. Studies concerning students' satisfactions and dissatisfactions with their university environments can provide administrators and student personnel workers with a better understanding of the changes that should be made with their universities. These changes would help students complete their college educations and realize their career goals. Summary College student satisfaction, especially black college student satisfaction, is one of the least investigated variables in the university community. The purpose of this study was to investigate students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments, and their level of involvement within their environments. More specifically, this study determined if differences exist in the degree of satisfaction among black and white undergraduate students in the following areas: working conditions, compensation, quality of education, social life, and recognition. The statement of the problem, purpose of the study, need for the study, significance of the study, definition of terms, and organization of the study were presented in Chapter One.

PAGE 61

-50Chapter Two contained a review of some of the literature related to college student satisfaction. The areas included in Chapter Two were defining and measuring student satisfaction, measuring the college environment, satisfaction: congruence and environment, variables related to university students' satisfaction, and problems encountered by black students attending predominantly white educational institutions . Chapter Three described the hypotheses, population and sample, instruments, procedures, and analyses of data. Several statistical analyses were performed to determine if significance existed between and among groups. An alpha level of .05 was set as the basis for testing the hypotheses. Chapter Four presented the results and a discussion of those results. The findings of this study indicate that race, academic levels, and attendance at either predominantly white universities or a predominantly black university did not significantly affect students' degree of satisfaction with various aspects of their university environments. There was a difference, however, in the levels of involvement between black and white university students. Recommendations for Further Research Based on the results of this study, the following research studies are suggested:

PAGE 62

A study to assess how black and white students in northern universities perceive their university environments. When black and white student satisfaction has been assessed in a significant number of universities, meaningful generalizations and predictions can be made. A four year satisfaction study designed to follow freshman students from admission to graduation. This study would reflect any changes in students' perceptions of their college environments as they matriculated from one academic level to another. A correlational study between students' degree of satisfaction and students' grade point averages. This study would show if students' satisfaction affects their grade point averages. The results also would indicate the areas in the university environment that may need to be changed. A study comparing student personnel staff and students' perceptions of their university environments. A study of this nature also would provide useful information for making changes in the university environment.

PAGE 63

APPENDICES

PAGE 64

APPENDIX A LETTER TO INSTRUCTORS Dear Instructors: As a part of my dissertation research for spring quarter I would like access to your class (es) for approximately 30 minutes to administer two questionnaires. The purpose of this study will be to determine the degree of satisfaction and university involvement among black and white undergraduate students in public universities in Florida. I assure you that participation on the part of your students will be completely voluntary and all scores will be kept annonymous. Thank you very much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Mary Lindsey Doctoral Candidate, Dept. of Counselor Education University of Florida 53 -

PAGE 65

APPENDIX B RESEARCH AND ADMINISTRATION INSTRUCTIONS Each student will be provided with a General Purpose Trans-Optic Scan Answer Sheet, a copy of the CSSQ and Uni• versity Involvement Questionnaire, and a number two soft lead pencil. The following information will be coded for the purpose of reporting the results. 1. Sex darken circle, male or female. 2. Birthday darken appropriate year and month. 3. Academic level classification darken appropriate circle 13 freshman 14 sophomore 15 junior 16 senior 4. Special Codes A. Column one is to identify your college 1 Arts and Sciences 2 Business Administration 3 Journalism 4 Education 5 Engineering 6 Other B. The last column is for your ethnic background 1 black 2 white 3 other You are to record all your responses to the CSSQ answer sheet. Please do not write on the booklets as they will be used by other students participating in the study. It is extremely important that you respond to each item. Further directions are at the top of the booklet. Are there any questions? Thank you for your participation. -54-

PAGE 66

DIRECTIONS FOR GROUP ADMINISTRATION Before Beginning ; 1. See that everyone is seated and has something to write on (a book or magazine will do, if tables are not available for everyone) . 2. See that everyone has a No. 2 pencil; do not use pens . 3. Give everyone a test booklet in which an answer sheet has been inserted just inside the front cover. When everyone is ready, read the following in an informal manner : You should all have a No. 2 pencil ... please use ONLY a No. 2 pencil in filling out the questionnaire. No pens. The booklet you have been given is a questionnaire about your satisfaction as a college student. The purpose of the questionnaire is to provide a means by which all students — both those who are satisfied with college and those who are not — can express their feelings about it. This will help our college find out more about what students here want and need in their college.

PAGE 67

Key 1 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED 2 means: I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED 3 means: I am SATISFIED, no more, no less 4 means: I am QUITE SATISFIED 5 means: I am VERY SATISFIED INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH: 1. The opportunity to make close friends here. 2. The amount of work required in most classes. 3. The way teachers talk to you when you ask for help. 4. The competence of most of the teachers in their own field 5. The amount of study it takes to get a passing grade. 6. The chances of getting a comfortable place to live. 7. The chance you have of doing well if you work hard. 8. The amount of personal attention students get from teachers . 9. The chance "to be heard" when you have a complaint about a grade. 10. The friendliness of most students. 11. The help that you can get when you have personal problems 12. The availability of good places to live near the campus. 13. The ability of most advisors in helping students develop their course plans. 14. The cleanliness of the housing that is available for students here. 15. The chance to take courses that fulfill your goals for personal growth. 16. The kinds of things that determine your grade. 17. The preparation students are getting for their future careers . 18. The chance to have privacy when you want it.

PAGE 68

-57Key: 1 means: 2 means : 3 means : 4 means: 5 means : I am VERY DISSATISFIED I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED I am SATISFIED, no more, no less I am QUITE SATISFIED I am VERY SATISFIED INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH : 19. The chance to work on projects with members of the opposite sex. 20. Teachers' expectations as to the amount that students should study. 21. The availability of good places to study. 22. The fairness of most teachers in assigning grades. 23. The interest that advisors take in the progress of their students. 24. The places provided for students to relax between classes. 25. The social events that are provided for students here. 26. Teachers' concern for students' needs and interests. 27. The chance to get scheduled into the courses of your choice . 28. The activities and clubs you can join. 29. The difficulty of most courses. 30. The chance to get help in deciding what your major should be. 31. The chance to get acquainted with other students outside of class. 32. The availability of your advisor when you need him. 33. The chances to go out and have a good time. 34. The pressure to study. 35. The chance of getting a grade which reflects the effort you put into studying. 36. The quality of the education students get here.

PAGE 69

-58Key: 1 means : 2 means: 3 means : 4 means : 5 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED I am SATISFIED, no more, no less I am QUITE SATISFIED I am VERY SATISFIED I NDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH : 37. The number of D's and F's that are given to students. 38. The concern here for the comfort of students outside of classes. 39. The things you can do to have fun here. 40. The chance for a student to develop his best abilities. 41. The chance of having a date here. 42. The chances of getting acquainted with the teachers in your major area. 43. The chance to explore important ideas. 44. The quality of the material emphasized in the courses. • 45. The chance of getting into the courses you want to take. 46. The noise level at home when you are trying to study. 47. The amount of time you must spend studying. 48. The availability of comfortable places to lounge. 49. The chances for men and women to get acquainted. 50. The counseling that is provided for students here. 51. The chance to prepare well for your vocation. 52. The chance to live where you want to. 53. The chance you have for a "fair break" here if you work hard. 54. The friendliness of most faculty members. 55. The chances to meet people with the same interests as you have.

PAGE 70

Key ; 1 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED 2 means: I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED 3 means: I am SATISFIED, no more, no less 4 means: I am QUITE SATISFIED 5 means: I am VERY SATISFIED IN DICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH : 56. What you learn in relation to the amount of time you spend in school. 57. The choice of dates you have here. 58. The amount of study you have to do in order to qualify someday for a job you want. 59. The kinds of things you can do for fun without a lot of planning ahead. 60. The willingness of teachers to talk with students outside of class time. 61. The places where you can go just to rest during the day. 62. The campus events that are provided for students here. 63. The practice you get in thinking and reasoning. 64. Your opportunity here to determine your own pattern of intellectual development. 64. The chance to participate in class discussions about the course material. 66. The activities that are provided to help you meet someone you might like to date. 67. The sequence of courses and prerequisites for your major. 68. The availability of quiet study areas for students. 69. The chance you have to substitute courses in your major when you think it is advisable. 70. The appropriateness of the requirements for your major.

PAGE 71

-60UNIVERSITY INVOLVEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE University Age Classification Race Sex Directions: Please circle YES or NO to answer the following questions. 1. Are you a member of a sorority or fraternity YES NO 2. Have you ever held an office in student government? YES NO 3. Do you belong to one or more campus social clubs? YES NO 4. Have you participated in one or more intramural games? YES NO 5. Are you a member of one or more intercollegiate athletic teams? YES NO 6. Are you a member of any honorary society? YES NO 7. Do you attend athletic events at your university? YES NO 8. Have you ever spent one or more hours with a counselor at your university? YES NO 9. Are you a member of any student organization? YES NO 10. Are you employed by your university? YES NO 11. Have you ever been on the Dean's List? YES NO 12. Have you ever attended one or more cultural programs presented by your university? YES NO 13. Have you ever discussed your academic program with your academic advisor? YES NO 14. Do you attend social activities sponsored by your university? YES NO 15. Have you visited your career planning office one or more times? YES NO

PAGE 72

-6116. Have you ever worked for your school's newspaper? YES NO 17. Have you ever performed in a recital or dramatic presentation through the university? YES NO 18. Have you ever been a member of a debating team? YES NO 19. Do you belong to a university-associated religious organization? YES NO 20. Have you attended one or all lecture programs presented by your university? YES NO

PAGE 73

APPENDIX C LETTERS TO INSTITUTIONS 2911-49 S.W. 13th Street Gainesville, Florida 32608 March 31, 1981 Dr. Timothy Langford Vice President of Student Affairs Florida A & M University Tallahassee, Florida 32307 Dear Dr. Langford: I am a Doctoral Candidate in the Counselor Education Department at the University of Florida. I am interested in assessing the degree of Undergraduate College Student Satisfaction and Involvement with their College Environments at Public Universities in the state of Florida. I would appreciate your assistance in the research by permitting me to randomly select 12 classes at FAMU and to administer two questionnaires. It will require approximately 30 minutes to complete both questionnaires. The information asked for on the questionnaires will not require a human subjects' review form. It is survey type and complete anonymity is guaranteed. Thank you for your consideration and if you have any questions regarding this request please let me know. I would appreciate a prompt reply, for I would like to gather this information during Spring Quarter. Sincerely, Mary Lindsey

PAGE 74

-632911-49 S.W. 13th Street Gainesville, Florida 32608 March 31, 1981 Dr. Bob E. Leach Vice President of Student Affairs Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Dr. Leach: I am, Mary Lindsey, a Doctoral Candidate in the Counselor Education Department at the University of Florida. You have already received a request from me through Mr. Jack Kinzer asking for a print-out of Black Undergraduate Students registered for Spring Quarter at Florida State Univer• sity. But, due to a change in the focus of my research, I would like for you to cancel the request for the print-out and consider allowing me to administer two questionnaires to 12 classes (randomly) during Spring Quarter. It will require approximately 30 minutes to complete both questionnaires. The information requested on the questionnaires will by survey type and will not require a human subjects' review form. Also, complete anonymity is guaranteed. I am still interested in assessing the degree of Undergraduate College Student Satisfaction. I have just decided to look at both Black and White Undergraduate Students in Public Universities in Florida. Thank you for your consideration and if you have any questions regarding this request please let me know. Thanks for your interest and I would appreciate a prompt reply. Sincerely, Mary Lindsey

PAGE 75

BIBLIOGRAPHY Astin, A. Personal and environmental factors associated with college dropouts among high-aptitude students. Journal of Education Psychology , 1964, 55_(4) , 219-227. Astin, A. Preventing Students from Dropping Out . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1975. Astin, A. Four Critical Years . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1977. Bachrach, A. Psychological Research (3rd edition) . New York: Random House, 1972. Baird, L. Assessing Students' Academic and Social Progress . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977. Banks, W. The changing attitude of black students. Personnel & Guidance Journal , 1970, 4_8 (9) , 739-745. Bayer, A., & Boruch, A. Black and white freshmen entering four-year colleges. Educational Records , 1969, 50(4), 371-386. Berdie, R. The prediction of college achievement and satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology , 1944, 28(1), 239-245. Berdie, R. , Pilapie, B. , & Im, I. Graduating Seniors Satisfaction with the University . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Bureau of Institutional Research, 1968. Betz, E., Klingensmith, J., & Menne, J. The measurement and analysis of college students' satisfaction. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance , 1970, 3 (2) , 110-118. Betz, E., Menne, J., Starr, A., & Klingensmith, J. A dimensional analysis of college student satisfaction. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidanc e, 1971, 4(2), 99-106. " Betz, E., Starr, A., & Menne, J. College student satisfaction in ten public and private colleges and universities. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1972, 13 (/)^ 456-64-

PAGE 76

-65Boyd, W. , II. Black undergraduates succeed in white colleges. Educational Record , 1977, 58_(3) , 309-315. Campbell, D. , & Stanley, C. Experimental and QuasiExperimental Designs for Research . Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company, 1966. Chickering, A. Commuting Versus Resident Students; Overcoming the Educational Inequities of Living Off Campus . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1974. Eckland, B. College dropouts who came back. Harvard Educational Review , 1964, 3±{3) , 402-420(a). Erwin, J. The attitude of black new students and administrative response. Journal of Negro Education , 1976, 45(2) , 161-165. Feldman, K. , & Newcomb, T. The Impact of College on Students (vol. 1) . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1969. Ferguson, J. Adult students in an undergraduate university. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1966, 7, 345-348. Freeman, R. , & Hollomon, J. The declining value of college • going. Change , 1975, 7(7), 15-18. Gibbs, J. Black students/white university: Different expectations. Personnel and Guidance Journal , 1973, 51 (7) , 463-469. Goldman, R. Toward more meaningful research. Personnel and Guidance Journal , 1977, 55^(6), 363-368. Hattenschwiller, G. Counseling black students in special programs. Personnel and Guidance Journal , 1971, 50(1), 29-35. Hardy, C. A committee-resident profile: College satisfaction liberalism, and social class as variables. Southern Journal of Educational Research , 1973, 7(2), 61-65. Harper, F. Black student revolt on the white campus. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1969a, 10(5), 291-295. ~ — Harper, F. Media for change: Black students in the white university. Journal of Negro Educa tion, 1969b, 37(2), 255-265. ' — i

PAGE 77

-66Hauser, S. Black and White Identity Formation . New York: Wiley Interscience, 1971. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. , Peterson, R. , & Capwell, D. Job Attitudes; Review of Research and Opinion . Pittsburgh: Psychological Services, 1957. Holland, J. Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Careers . Englewood Cliffs, N. J. : Prentice-Hall, 1973. Hoppock, R. Job Satisfaction . New York: Harper & Row, 1935. Huck, S., Cormier, W. , & Bounds, W. Reading Statistics and Research . New York: Harper & Row, 1974. Iffert, R. Retention and Withdrawal of College Students. Washington, D.C., U.S. Dept. of NEW, Bulletin No. 1, 1957. Issac, S., & Michaels, W. Handbook in Research and Evaluation (10th ed.). San Diego: Edits Publishers, 1978. Joseph, G. Black students on the predominantly white campus. Journal of the National Association of Women Deans and Counselors , 1969, 32^(2), 63-66. Kerlinger, F. Foundation of Behavioral Research (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1973. King, H. , & Walsh, B. Change in environmental expectation and perceptions. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1972 , 13 (4) , 331-336. Kramer, H. , Berger, F., & Miller, G. Student concerns and sources of assistance. Journal of College Student Personnel, 1974, 15, 389-393. Madraza-Peterson, R. , & Rodriguez, M. Minority students' perceptions of a university environment. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1978, 19(3), 259-263. Martin, R. Freshman satisfaction with college. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1968, 9, 382-383. Marrow, J. A test of Holland's theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 1971, 18^(5), 422-425. Maw, I. Student subcultures and activity involvement. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1971, 12(6), 62-66.

PAGE 78

-67Meeth, R. Breaking racial barriers, part III: Scholarships for negro students in predominantly white colleges and universities. Journal of Higher Education , 1966, 3_Z(-^) ' 137-143. Morstain, B. An analysis of students' satisfaction with their academic program. Journal of Higher Education , 1977, 48 (1) , 1-15. Murray, H. Explorations in Personality . New York: Oxford University Press, 1938. Nafziger, H. , Holland, J., & Gottfridson, G. Student-college congruence as a predictor of satisfaction. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 1975, 22^(2), 132-139. Ott, L. , Mendenhall, VJ. , & Larson, R. Statistics: A Tool for the Social Science . Belmont, California: Duxbury Press, 1978. Pace, C. College and University Environment Scales: Technical Manual (2nd ed.). Princeton, N.J. : Educational Testing Service, 1965. Pace, C. , & Stern, G. An approach to the measurement of psychological characteristics of college environment. Journal of Educational Psychology , 1958, 4_9 (5) , 269277. Pantages, T. Studies of college attraction: 1950-1975. Review of Educational Research , 1978, 4_8 (1) , 49-101. Passons, W. Student satisfaction as perceived by three groups of university personnel. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1971, 12(2), 126-129. Pervin, L. Satisfaction and perceived self -environment similarity. Journal of Personality , 1967, 35(4) , 623-634. Pervin, L. , & Rubin, D. Student dissatisfaction with college and the college dropout: A transactional approach. Journal of Social Psychology , 1967, 72, 285-295. Rand, L. Effect on college choice satisfaction of matching students and colleges. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1968, 47(3), 34-39.

PAGE 79

-68" Rich, H. A comparison "of college structure and college environment variables as predictors of student orientation. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1979, 2^(3) , 216-223. Robertson, J. Black student satisfaction in the deep south. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1980, Zl (6) , 510513. Roscoe, J. Fundamental Research Statistics . New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1969. Sax, G. Principles of Education Measurement and Evaluation . Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc. 1974. Sedlacek, W. , & Horowitz, J. Changing perceptions: An individual or environment approach. Journal of the National Association of Student Personnel Administra tors , 1974, 11, 48-51. Sedlacek, W. , & Webster, D. Admission and retention of minority students in large universities. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1978, 19(3), 242-248. Spurlock, L. Still struggling: Minorities and white colleges in the mid-seventies. Educational Record , 1976, 57 (3) , 186-193. Staples, R. The black scholar in academe. Change , 1972, 4(9), 42-48. Starr, A., Betz , E., & Menne, J. Manual: The College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire . Ames, Iowa: Central Iowa Associates, 1971. Starr, A., Betz, E., & Menne, J. Differences in college student satisfaction: Academic dropouts, nonacademic dropouts, and nondropouts. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 1972, 19(4), 318-322. Statistical Abstract of the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1974. Steel, R. , & Torrie, J. Principles and Procedures of Statistics . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980. Stern, G. People in Context: Measuring Person-Environment Congruence in Education and Industry . New York: John Wiley, 1970.

PAGE 80

-69Sturtz, S. Age differences in college student satisfaction. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1971, 12(3), 220222. Tinto, V. Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research , 1975, 45, 89-125. Vontress, C. Counseling negro students for college. Journal of Negro Education , 1968, 32' 37-44. Vroom, V. Work and Motivation . New York: John Wiley, 1964. Walsh, W. Theories of Person-Environment Interaction: Implications for the College Student . Iowa City, Iowa: American College Testing Program, 1973. Warren, J. Student perception of college subcultures. American Educational Research Journal , 1968, _5 (3) , 212-232. Webster, D. , & Fretz , B. Asian American, black, and white college students' preferences for help-giving sources. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 1978, 25^(2), 165170. Wharton, C. Reflection on black intellectual power. Educational Record , 1972, 52(4), 281-287. Williams, J. Conflict Between Freshman Male Roommates (Research Rep. 10-67). College Park, Maryland: University of Maryland Counseling Center, 1967. Wright, M. Problems of black female students at a predominantly white university. Journal of NonWhite Concerns, 1978, 7(1), 3-8.

PAGE 81

BIOGRAPHICAL DATA Mary Jane Davis Lindsey was born in Aiken, South Carolina, on May 24, 1944, to Lawton and Evelean Davis. She attended public school in Aiken County, graduating from high school with an athletic scholarship and service to the school award. She then attended South Carolina State College at Orangeburg, South Carolina, and received a B.S. in physical education. After graduation she returned to her high school and taught physical education and coached a championship basketball team. In 1966, she moved to Spring Valley, New York, and taught physical education for five years. There she married Ted Lindsey and traveled to Okinawa, Japan, where she taught for the Department of Defense (DOD) for one year. In 1972, she arrived in Florida, where her two children were born, David Lindsey, 1973, and April Lindsey, 1975. In 198 0 she received a Master of Education and Educational Specialist degree from the University of Florida, and became a candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy program in 1980. Mary has been employed by the office of Instructional Resources as Tutor Supervisor for the Teaching Center for the past two years. -70-

PAGE 82

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. ^ . Jd^/(d Rdflerick' MciDavis, Chairman Associate 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. Larry/Loesch 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.

PAGE 83

This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of Counselor Education in the College of Education and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. August 1981 Dean, Graduate School