Skip to main content

Full text of "ERIC ED013615: SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF JUNIOR COLLEGE STUDENTS."

See other formats


4 



REPORT 



RESUMES 



EO 013 615 

SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF JUNIOR COLLEGE STUDENTS. 
BY- FAN<:>Sf ROBERT J. 



JC 670 293 



AMERICAN COUNCIL C»N EOUCATlOtNi WASHINGTCtJ, D.C. 

REPORT NUMBER ACE-RR-VC»L-N<:>-2-1966 PUB DATE 66 

EORS PRICE MF-iO.25 HC-iO.68 22P. 



DESCRIPTC*RS- ❖JUNIOR COLLEGES, ^STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS, 
❖ACADEMIC performance, ❖ACADEMIC ASPIRATION, ❖&:CIC€CCt>:»MIC 
BACKGROUND, OXLEGE FRESHMEN, FAMILY BACKGROUND, 

DESCRIPTIVE DATA WERE OXLECTEB BY QUESTIONNAIRE IN FALL 
1965 FRO»M 6,660 ENTERING FRESHMEN AT A SAMPLE Of ACCREDITED 
2-YEAR C0»LLEGES. BATA ARE PRESENTED TO SH<:W SEX, AGE, 

PARENTAL INODME AND EDUCATI«DNAL BACKGR*XNB, RACIAL 
BACKGRiXND, RELIGI«XIS BACKGR«XJND, TYPE Of HIGH SCHX-L, HIGH 
SCH«X>L GRADES, EBUCATIOWAL ASPIRATICWS, MAJ0*R FIELD, SPECIAL 
ACHIEVEMENTS, AND SELF-RATINGS C<N SELECTED PERS*:WALITY 
TRAITS. FOR SO*ME ITEMS, DATA ARE ALSO* PRESENTED FOR 4-VEAR 
COLLEGES AND FC»R UNIVERSITIES. (MD) 



O 

ERIC 



ED013615 



ERIC 



ACE 



RESEARCH 

RE^g^^ 

VOL. 1 • NO. a less 



SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF 
JUNIOR COLLEGE STUDENTS 



U.S. DEPAIIMENT OF HEUIH, EDOUIION i WEIFAIE 
OFFICE OF DUCAIIOH 



RoaeRT j. PANoa 



IMS DOCONENT NAS BEEN KnODUCED EXACIEY AS KCEIVD FBOM 1HE 
PERSON OR 0R6AMZAII0N 0RI6INAIIN6 II. POINIS OF VIEW OR OPIMONS 
snno DO NOI NECESSARIIV RB>RESENI OFFICIAE office of aiKAINM 
posniON OR poucr. 



OFFICE OF RESEARCH 

AMERICAN COUNCIL 
ON EOUCATION 



UNIVERSITY OF CALIF. 
LOS ANGELES 

APR 28 1967 

CLEARINGHOUSE FOR 
JUNIOR COLLEGE 

information 








Some Characteristics of Junior College Students 
Robert J. Fanos 
American Council on Education 

The purpose of this paper is to present some descriptive data collected 
in the fall of 1965 from 6,860 entering freshmen students at a sample of accredited 
two-year colleges. These data were collected by the American Council on Educa- 
tion as part of a pilot study designed to evaluate the feasibility of collecting 
such data on a continuing large scale basis from a representative sample of all 
institutions of higher education (Astin and Fanos, 1966).^ 

The representativeness of the sample of junior colleges included in 
the pilot study was evaluated in terms of six characteristics of junior colleges 
defined in a recent study by Richards, Rand, and Rand (1965): Cultural Affluence, 

Technological Sneclallzatlon . Size . Age . Transfer Emphasis . and Business, Orienta- 
tion . The sample of junior colleges, when compared with the population of ac- 
credited junior colleges (Gleazer, 1963), was found to be of significantly 
greater size. The sample colleges do not differ significantly from the popula- 
tion with regard to the five other categories. 

It should be noted, however, that because of the relatively small size 
of the sample of junior colleges, the data presented here are not completely 
representative of the entire spectrum of all accredited junior colleges. Further- 
more, sufficient information about junior colleges is not yet available to en- 
able one to define relatively independent variables which can be used to stratify 
junior colleges on those dimensions that control for variations within and among 
institutions. Nevertheless, the data presented here are adequate to document 
certain characteristics of entering junior college freshmen students, to demon- 
strate the variation among junior colleges with regard to a variety of student 

^The pilot study sample included 15 universities, 39 four-year colleges, and 7 
junior colleges. 



- 2 - 



characteristics, and, perhaps, to make a few qualified generalizations. 
Background Characteristics 

five percent of the students were menj 45 percent were women. 
About two-thirds of the males indicated their age (as of December 31, 1965) 
as eighteen or younger, and 78.7 percent of the women were eighteen or younger. 
A comparison of age distributions among junior college students and four-year 
college students is shown below. 





Junior Colleges 


Four-Year 


Institutions 


Percentage of Students 


(N » 
Male 


6,860) 

Female 


(N « 
Male 


35,200) 

Female 


18 or younger 


64.6 


78.7 


82.6 


90.6 


19 to 21 


28.8 


15.6 


16.0 


8.8 


22 or older 


6.6 


5.8 


1.4 


0.7 



The relatively larger percentages of older students of both sexes accommodated 
by junior colleges reflects one aspect of the unique opportunity for continuing 
higher education provided by two-year colleges. 

Almost five percent of the total sample reported an estimated annual 
family income (all sources before taxes) of less than $4,000. More than twice 
as many students reported family incomes of over $20,000. The modal (28.3 per- 
cent) estimated annual family income was in the interval $10,000-$14,999. Of 
the total sample, 44.9 percent reported that their fathers had received at least 
some college training, and 35.5 percent indicated that their mothers had con- 
tinued their formal education beyond the high school level. The distribution of 
responses with regard to parental income and parents* educational level is 
shown in Table 1. 

(Table 1 here) 

The data displayed in Table 1 document the diverse nature of educa- 
tional opportunity provided by junior colleges. As would be expected. 



-3- 



Table 1 

Parental Income and Parent's Educational Level of Junior College Freshmen 

(Percentages) 



Item Description 


All Colleges 
Male Female 


Range Among Colleges 
High Low Range 


Estimated Parental Income 


Less than $4,000 


4.9 


4.6 


7.7 


0.5 


7.2 


$4,000 - $5,999 


12.0 


12.4 


19.3 


0.5 


18.8 


$6,000 - $7,999 


17.7 


15.1 


23.4 


0.5 


22.9 


$8,000 - $9,999 


17.5 


14.2 


18.0 


1.0 


17.0 


$10,000 - $14,999 


28.3 


28.2 


32.7 


6.3 


26.4 


$15,000 - $19,999 


9.9 


10.5 


14.5 


6.9 


7.6 


$20,000 - $24,999 


3.8 


5.9 


16.9 


2.7 


14.2 


$25,000 - $29,999 


2.0 


3.3 


16.4 


1.0 


15.4 


$30,000 or more 


3.9 


5.8 


44.4 


1.6 


42.8 


Fathers Education 


Grammar School or less 


8.7 


8.1 


10.3 


0.3 


9.5 


Some High School 


19.0 


16.5 


20.5 


1.6 


18.9 


High School graduate 


30.1 


27.1 


32.1 


6.8 


25,3 


Some College 


22.5 


22.7 


26.6 


16.1 


10.5 


College degree 


14.3 


17.8 


40.7 


12.2 


28.5 


Postgraduate degree 


5.3 


7.7 


33.8 


3.9 


29.9 


Mothers Education 


Grammar School or less 


5.7 


5.2 


7.5 


0.0 


7.5 


Some High School 


17.2 


15.1 


19.9 


0.8 


19.1 


High School graduate 


45.5 


39.4 


44.4 


18.9 


25.5 


Some College 


19.8 


23.9 


29.4 


17.7 


11.7 


College degree 


10.1 


14.3 


43.5 


8.8 


34.7 


Postgraduate degree 


1.7 


2.1 


7.2 


1.2 


6.0 



-4- 



all economic levels are represented and most are from the middle Income 
groups. Nevertheless, students with less advantaged socioeconomic back- 
grounds are not denied the opportunity to pursue higher education. The 
variation among Individual junior colleges Is comparable to the diversity 
of similar college student characterlsltcs which has been consistently 
documented In studies of four-year Institutions (Panos and Astln, 1966). 

Almost 60 percent of the students Indicated Protestant religious 
family backgrounds and 26.5 percent reported they were reared In the Roman 
Catholic religion. Although less than four percent Indicated "none" for 
their formal religious background, over ten percent said they presently 



have no religious preference. 

Almost 93 percent Indicated their racial background as Caucauslan. 
Less than one percent Indicated Negro, 0.8 percent American Indian, 0.7 



percent Oriental, and 5.1 percent "other". 


The fact that 


only 2.8 percent 


of the students entering four-year Institutions Indicated 


"other" for racial 


background suggests that junior colleges may be providing greater opportunity 


for higher education to the nonwhite segment of the American population. 


The data on race and religious background 


are summarized below. 


Percentaee of Junior College Freshmen 


Male 


Female 


Racial Background 


Caucauslan 


92.0 




Negro 


0.8 


0.9 


American Indian 


1.0 


0.6 


Oriental 


0.8 


0.6 


Other 


5.4 


4.7 


Religious Background 


Protestant 


55.8 


b4.1 


Roman Catholic 


28.6 


24.0 


Jewish 


1.7 


2.4 


Other 


9.6 


6.6 


None 


4.2 


2.9 


Present Religious Preference 


Protestant 


47.4 


58.6 


Roman Catholic 


27.6 


24.5 


Jewish 


1.7 


2.1 


Other 


10.4 


7.9 


None 


13.0 


6.9 



-5- 



Elghty-nlne percent of the students graduated from public secondary 
schools. Six percent were graduated from Roman Catholic high schools, and 
4.6 percent came from other privately controlled secondary schools. Thirty- 
eight percent reported they had applied for admission to at least one other 
college. Of these, 44.3 percent Indicated they had received more than one 
acceptance. Only 26.2 percent of the students said they would have pre- 
ferred to attend some other Institution. 

The modal (26.4 percent) reported average grade In secondary school 
was "C". Slightly more than 24 percent had a "C+" average. The median 
average grade attained In secondary school for students entering four-year 
Institutions Is In the "B" to "B+" range. This difference In grade averages 
Is not surprising In view of the fact that junior colleges are relatively 
less selective with regard to their entering students' prior academic 
achievements. Table 2 displays the distribution of grades for junior col- 
lege students and four-year college students by age. 

(Table 2 here) 

The data In Table 2 clearly show the general tendency among four-year 
Institutions to accommodate only those students seeking higher education 
who have achieved academically In high school. Clearly, the two-year col- 
lege provides an educational opportunity for a great number of students who 
would probably not be acceptable to most four-year Institutions. This op- 
portunity Is particularly evident among the younger students, where the 
proportion of those with averages of less than "C+" entering junior colleges 
Is about five times greater than the proportion entering senior colleges. 
Nevertheless, It should be noted that there Is a wide range among four-year 
Institutions with regard to student academic achievements, and that this Is 




- 6 - 



Table 2 

Average Grade In Secondary School by Age 
(Percentages) 







Junior Colleges 


Four-vear 


Institutions 


Age 


Average Grade 


Male Female 


Male 


Female 



18 or Younger 



19 to 21 



or A+ 


0.8 


1.0 


7.8 


11.7 


A- 


0.9 


2.6 


12.2 


17.8 


B+ 


4.2 


10.8 


18.5 


24.7 


B 


11.7 


23.2 


21.5 


22.4 


B- 


21.6 


23.0 


18.0 


12.8 


C+ 


25.7 


22.1 


14.3 


7.5 


C 


31.8 


16.8 


7.5 


3.1 


D 


3.3 


0.5 


0.3 


0.1 



or A+ 


0.7 


1.9 


5.1 


8.3 


A- 


1.2 


3.3 


7.5 


15.6 


B+ 


5.6 


11.6 


13.6 


21.3 


B 


10.5 


21.4 


19.1 


23.0 


B- 


15.6 


17.7 


18.3 


13.2 


C+ 


24.2 


24.3 


19.8 


11.3 


C 


37.8 


18.5 


15.5 


6.8 


D 


4.3 


1.3 


1.1 


0.4 



or A+ 


1.2 


2.8 


2.2 


5.9 


A- 


2.0 


9.0 


3.9 


16.8 


B+ 


2.4 


20.2 


11.8 


19.8 


B 


16.5 


19.7 


16.5 


23.8 


B- 


14.9 


19.7 


20.1 


18.8 


C+ 


26.5 


16.8 


20.1 


8.9 


C 


33.3 


11.8 


23.3 


5.0 


D 


3.2 


0.0 


2.2 


1.0 



22 or Older 



-7- 



also true for junior colleges. The variation among junior colleges with 
regard to their entering students' high school grades is shown in Table 3. 



Table 3 

Average Grades Achieved In High School by Junior College Freshmen 

(Percentages) 



Average Grade 
in Secondary School 


All Colleses 
Male Female 


Ranee Amone Colleees 
Kleh Low Ranee 


A or A+ 


0.8 


1.3 


2.2 


0.5 


1.7 


A- 


1.1 


3.1 


3.5 


1.0 


2.5 


B+ 


4.5 


11.7 


12.3 


5.2 


7.1 


B 


11.8 


23.0 


20.6 


14.3 


6.3 


B- 


18.2 


20.9 


37.5 


12.8 


24.7 


C+ 


25.7 


22.4 


27.8 


18.2 


9.6 


C 


34.1 


17.0 


33.2 


7.2 


26.0 


D 


3.7 


0.6 


3.9 


0,0 


3.9 



Educational Aspirations 

One of the iundamental assumptions underlying the selection policies 
of four-year institutions is that If the student has not achieved satis- 
factorily in high school, he is not likely to do so in college. However, 
the expectations held by junior college students for continuing higher 
education beyond the two-year level are relatively high. Fully 74 per- 
cent of the students Indicated they hope to obtain at least the baccalaureate 
degree, and nearly half of these students reported they hope to extend their 
formal education beyond the bachelor's level. These data are summarized 
in Table 4. 

(Table 4 here) 

The data displayed in Table 4 suggest that the educational aspirations 
of many junior college students may be unrealistically high. Similarly 
optimistic expectations about the availability of higher educational oppor- 
tunities have been found for entering four-year college students (Panos 
and Astin, 1966), and for graduating college seniors (Davis, 1964). Even 



o 



- 8 - 



Table 4 

Educational Aspirations of Junior College Students 

(Percentages) 



Item Description 

Highest Academic Degree Planned 
None 

Associate or equivalent 
Bachelor's degree 
Master's degree 
Ph.D. or Ed.D. 

M.D., D.D.S., or D.V.M. 
L.L.D. or J.D. 

B.D. 

Other 



Male 


Female 


Total 


3.2 


5.2 


4.1 


14.1 


30.7 


21.6 


36.4 


37.5 


36.9 


28.8 


19.8 


24.8 


8.5 


2.7 


5.9 


6.0 


1.3 


3.9 


1.2 


0.1 


0.7 


0.4 


0.3 


0.3 


1.4 


2.4 


1.9 






-9- 

if the data displayed in Table 4 are tempered by a recognition of the un- 
reliability of students' reported goals, It Is apparent that to the extent 
the students' Intentions for continuing education are built upon real hope, 
to that extent we may expect many disappointed Individuals among Junior 
college graduates. It would seem that the articulation between Junior 
colleges and four-year Institutions (Knoell and Medsker, 1965) warrants 
even more careful and thorough evaluation and planning than has been 
suggested to date. 

The students Indicated their probable major field of study on an open- 
ended Item. A list of sixty major field categories was used to code the 
responses Into ten arbitrary classifications. The percentage distribution 
for probable major field Is shown In Table 5. 

(Table 5 here) 

As might be expected. Junior college students are most likely to be 
classified In the Business category. The relatively large percentage of 
students in "other" fields reflects the wide variety of special curricula 
offered by Junior colleges. Response alternatives likely to be coded as 
"Other Fields" In this analysis Included such choices as police science, 
forestry, food and hotel technology, and air conditioning technology. 
Whereas 13 percent of students entering four-year schools are undecided 
about their major field of study, only nine percent of Junior college 
freshmen students Indicated they were undecided. 



Other Background Characteristics 

Table 6 displays ten high-level secondary school achievements and 
the percentage of entering 1965 Junior college students who earned recog- 
nition for each achievement. These figures reflect the considerable talents 
of a large number of Junior college students. These data are all the more 
Impressive when one considers the drain on the available "pool" of talent 




- 10 - 



Table 5 

Probable Ma1or Field of Study 
(Percentages) 





Category 


Male 


Female 


Total 



Arts and Humanities 


10.4 


18.9 


14.2 


Biological Science 


6.9 


1.5 


4.5 


Business 


18.9 


22.9 


20.7 


Education 


3.9 


8.2 


5.8 


Engineering 


10.7 


0.2 


6.0 


Physical Science 


9.3 


3.7 


6.8 


Social Science 


5.6 


8.6 


6.9 


Technical 


5.0 


4.0 


4.5 


Other Fields 


20.0 


22.6 


21.1 


Undecided 


9.3 


9.4 


9.3 




- 11 - 






- v-s.#* 



occasioned by the selective admissions policies of most four-year Insti- 
tutions. It would seem that, perhaps, there are Indices of talent other 
than grades. 

(Table 6 about here) 

(Table 7 about here) 



Student Subtypes 

The students were asked to compare themselves with other students of 
their own age on 21 personal traits, using a 5-polnt self-rating scale. 
These data were then factored^ In order to determine whether there were 
Independent clusters of Items which could be used to characterize junior 
college students in terms of their own self* itlngs. Table 7 displays the 
Items with high loadings on each of four factors for females, and three 
factors for males. 

No attempt has been made to label the "factors" displayed In Table 7. 
Student typologies based on this kind of analysis are necessarily limited 
for at least two reasons. First, because the "factors" reflect a certain 
amount of semantic redundancy which Is the result of a particular set of 
Items selected. Secondly, because such typologies necessarily oversimplify 
the nature of the variability which must exist within types. That Is, 
typologies tend to obscure the multidimensional nature of human behavior. 
Nevertheless, "factors" are useful when they are adopted, not for their 
ultimate truth, but because they provide an organized framework to facili- 
tate communication. 



*The method of analysis used was that of principal components analysis 
(Hotelling, 1933) followed by varlmax rotation (Kaiser, 1938) of those 
principal components whose latent roots were greater than or equal to one. 



- 12 - 



Table 6 

High School Achievements of Junior College Students 

(Percentages) 





High School Achievements 


Male 


Female 


Total 



Elected President — Student Orgn. 


14.3 


18.8 


16.3 


High Rating State Music Contest 


4.0 


4.4 


4.2 


State/Regional Speech Contest 


4.0 


6.9 


5.3 


Major Part In a Play 


10.5 


16.9 


13.4 


Varsity Letter (Sports) 


42.3 


12.2 


28.7 


Award In Art Competition 


7.1 


7.6 


7.3 


Edited School Paper 


4.9 


9.9 


7.1 


Had Original Writing Published 


8.4 


15.7 


11.7 


Scholastic Honor Society 


6.7 


15.3 


10.6 


National Merit Recognition 


2.5 


2.9 


2.7 



o 

ERIC 






-13- 



Table 7 

Trait Self-Rating Factor Loadings^ 







Males 






Females 




Trait^ 


Factor 

1 


Factor 

2 


Factor 

3 


Factor 

1 


Factor Factor 
2 3 


Factor 

4 



Academic Ability 


58 


-- 


53 


-- 


— 


— 


54 


Athletic Ability 


— 


48 


— 


-- 


-- 


-- 


-- 


Artistic Ability 


— 


-- 


-- 


-- 


67 


-- 


— 


Cheerfulness 


— 


46 


-- 


53 


-- 


-- 


-- 


Drive to Achieve 


57 


-- 


— 


-- 


— 


-- 


59 


Leadership Ability 


58 


41 


— 


51 


-- 


— 


-- 


Mathematical Ability 


-- 


-- 


79 


-- 


— 


78 


— 


Mechanical Ability 


— 


— 


39 


— 


-- 


62 


-- 


Originality 


55 


-- 


-- 


-- 


60 


-- 


-- 


Political Liberalism 


-- 


-- 


— 


— 


41 


-- 


-- 


Popularity (General) 


— 


80 


-- 


71 


-- 


— 


-- 


Popularity 

(with Opposite Sex) 


- - 


75 


-- 


59 


-- 


-- 


-- 


Public Speaking Ability 


54 


— 


-- 


-- 


-- 


— 


41 


Self-Confidence 

(Intellectual) 


64 


-- 


-- 


-- 


-- 


— 


67 


Self-Confidence (Social) 


— 


62 


-- 


59 


-- 


-- 


-- 


Writing Ability 


52 


— 


— 


-- 


— 


-- 


44 


Percent of Variance: 


39.5 


10.0 


8.5 


34.4 


10.4 


9.3 


7.8 


®Only relatively high 


factor loadings are 


shown. 


Decimals 


have been 


omitted . 





^Five items did not yield relatively high loadings on any of the factors shown. 

These are: Defensiveness; Political Conservatism; Sensitivity to Criticism; Stub- 

borness; and Understanding of Others. 




-14- 



One such application, whic\ has become increasingly popular in irter- 
institutional research, is to attempt to classify students into student 
subtypes and to define college environments in terms of the interactions 
among student subcultures • Thus , the male Factor 1 and the female Factor 4 
seem to reflect an "academic" type among entering junior college students. 
Similarly, the male Factor 2 and the female Factor 1 suggest a "social" 
set. One might expect the academic type to emphasize intellectual skills 
to a somewhat greater degree than the social type, and the social type 
to be relatively more concerned with the "collegiate" pursuit of campus 
social activities. The male Factor 3 apparently identifies another 
"academic" type. However, as the pattern of loadings suggests, this type 
can probably be characterized as more "inner-directed" than the Factor 1 
academic type. The female Factor 2 appears to represent a nonacademic 
achievement pattern. Furthermore, the loading on the item "political 
liberalism" suggests a "nonconformist" type. Finally, the female Factor 3 
apparently reflects the female counterpart of the male Factor 3. 

These junior college student "types," identified from an analysis 
of their own self-ratings, are similar to student subtypes reported for 
students in four-year institutions. The male Factor 1 and Factor 2 and 
female Factor 4 and Factor 1 reflect, respectively, certain of the character 
istics of Trow*s (1960) "academic culture" and "collegiate culture." It is 
conceivable that the interactions among various student subtypes on the 
campus may determine the direction in which a particular college moves, 
and, to a large extent, define the college "image." Obviously, more and 
better rese #rch in this area is needed . The point to keep in mind is that 
these data demonstrate the existence of quite different student subtypes 
attending junior colleges. 



o 

ERIC 



-15- 



Summarv 

This report has presented some background characteristics and educa- 
tional aspirations of junior college freshmen. The data presented here 
have dociunented the relative gap that exists between two-year and four-year 
Institutions with regard to a variety of student Input characteristics 
and academic achievements. Table 8 displays the differences among insti- 
tution types for a number of items. The progression from "high" to "low" 
for universities, four-year colleges, and junior colleges on many of the 
items shown In Table 8 reflects the relative academic achievement selectivity 
among such institutions. Nevertheless, the data summarized here have also 
documented the diversity among junior colleges with regard to student back- 
ground characteristics. Table 9 shows the variation among junior colleges 
for a variety of student characteristics. Thus, even though most junior 
colleges can be characterized as "open-door" institutions, there still 
exists a diversity of student subtypes among them. 

(Table 8 about here) 

(Table 9 about here) 

In this paper some of the unique functions performed by American 
junior colleges have been indicated and the need for more thorough research 
of junior colleges and the students they serve has been suggested by the 
data. Certain implications of the data have been discussed, but the major 
purpose of the paper has been to make available a summary report of some 
characteristics of junior college students. It is our hope that with the 
recent emphasis on institutional research a much more comprehensive picture 
of the junior college student and his subsequent development In the junior 
college will be available. 




-16- 



Table 8 



Variation Amons; Institutions for Selected Items 

(Percentages) 



Junior Colleges Four Year Universities 

Item Description Colleges 

Male Female Male Female Male Female 



Fathers Education 

College degree 1^*3 

Postgraduate degree 5.3 

Mothers Education 

College degree 10.1 

Postgraduate degree 1*7 

Average Grade in Secondary School 

A or A+ 0.8 

A- 1.1 

B+ ^.5 

B 11.8 

Highest Academic Degree Planned 

None 3 . 2 

Associate (or equivalent) 14.1 

Bachelors (B.A., B.S.) 36.4 

Masters (M.A., M.S.) 28.8 

Ph.D. or Ed.D. 8.5 

M.D., D.D.S., or D.V.M. 6.0 

hL.B.or J.D. 1.2 

B.D. 0.4 

Other 1.4 

Secondary School Achievements 
Elected President Stdt. Orgnz. 14.3 
Major Part in a Play 10.5 

Scholastic Honor Society 6.7 

National Merit Recognition 2.5 

Trait Self-Ratings (Percentage 
of Self-Ratings Above Average) 

Academic Ability 37.8 

Drive to Achieve 39.7 

Mathematical Ability 31.8 

Mechanical Ability 40.7 

Writing Ability 20.7 



17.8 


19.9 


18.9 


21.7 


23.7 


7.7 


12.7 


13.7 


14.0 


16.9 


14.3 


20.1 


20.3 


20.0 


22.7 


2.1 


3.8 


4.2 


3.6 


4.3 


1.3 


4.1 


9.5 


8.4 


10.8 


3.1 


7.9 


15.5 


12.8 


18.4 


11.7 


15.4 


24.9 


18.3 


24.2 


23.0 


22.5 


24.9 


21.1 


22.1 


5.2 


0.9 


1.4 


0.6 


1.3 


30.7 


0.5 


0.8 


0.2 


0.8 


37.5 


26.4 


39.3 


26.4 


49.1 


19.8 


37.9 


47.9 


33.9 


36.5 


2.7 


17.3 


7.6 


21.5 


7.4 


1.3 


11.1 


2.1 


11.3 


3.0 


0.1 


4.1 


0.4 


4.5 


0.5 


0.3 


0.5 


t).l 


0.2 


0.0 


2.4 


1.5 


0.6 


1.5 


1.4 


18.8 


32.2 


29.3 


29.2 


28.2 


16.9 


24.7 


23.0 


18.7 


22.7 


15.3 


25.5 


43.7 


32.7 


43.3 


2.9 


10.0 


11.9 


15.2 


11.5 



36.9 


57.1 


58.9 


70.4 


69.5 


41.6 


55.0 


56.6 


62.4 


62.9 


16.7 


41.4 


29.6 


54.5 


32.0 


12.4 


30.3 


11.6 


37.8 


14.1 


25.5 


30.3 


32.3 


36.3 


38.0 










-rf’.t' ' 



-17- 



Table 9 

Variation Among Junior Colleges for Selected. Items 

(Percentages) 



Item Description 


High 


Low 


Range 


Highest Academic Degree Planned 


Bachelors Degree (B.A., L..".) 


58.5 


31.8 


26.7 


Masters Degree (M.A., M.J.) 


29.3 


12.8 


16.5 


Ph.D. or Ed.D. 


6.9 


0.9 


6.0 


No Formal Religious Background 


5.3 


0.0 


5.3 


No Present Religious Preference 


16.2 


1.6 


14.6 


Fathers Education 


College Degree 


40.7 


12.2 


28.5 


Postgraduate Degree 


33.8 


3.9 


29.9 


Students Reporting That They Frequently 
or Occasionally 


Gambled with cards or dice 


43.1 


12.1 


31.0 


Studied in the library 


43.0 


14.5 


28.5 


Attended a ballet performance 


46.5 


9.9 


36.6 


Attended a public recital or concert 


84.9 


42.6 


42.3 


Drank beer 


73.3 


38.9 


34.4 


Cribbed on an examination 


37.5 


9.3 


28.2 


Trait Self-Ratings Above Average 


Academic Ability 


46.3 


24.9 


21.4 


Drive to Achieve 


52.0 


35.6 


16.4 


Originality 


44.1 


23.7 


20.4 


Intellectual Self-confidence 


33.1 


12.3 


20.8 


Understanding of Others 


73.7 


51.7 


22.0 



ERIC 






-18- 



REFERENCES 



Astin, A.W. and Panes, R.J., "A National Research Data Bank for Higher 
Education," The Educational Record . Winter 1966, pp.5-17. 

Davis, J.A., Great Aspirations. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1964. 

Gleazer, E.J. Jr., American Junior Colleges . 6th Ed., Washington: 

American Council on Education, 1965. 

Hotelling, M. "Analysis of a Complex of Statistical Variables into 

Principal Components." ^ Educational Psychology , 1933, 417-41, 498-520. 

Kaiser, M.T., "The Varimax Criterion for Analytic Rotation in Factor 
Analysis." Psvchometrlka . 1958, 187-200. 

Panes, R.J. and Astin, A.W. , "A Profile of Entering 1965 College Fresh- 
men," College and University Journal , in press. 

Richards, J.M. Jr., Rand, Lorraine M., and Rand, L.P. , "A Description 
of Junior Colleges," American College Testing Research Reports. 

July, 1965, No. 5. 

Trow, Martin, "The Campus Viewed as a Culture." Research on ColJ.ege 
Students . (Edited by Hall J. Sprague.) Boulder, Colorado: 

Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, 1960. Chapter 5, 
pp. 105-23. 




Amerioan Council on Education 
Ix)gan Wilson, President 



The American Council on Education, founded in 1918, 
is a council educational organizations and institutions. Its 
purpose is to advance education and educational methods 
through comprehensive voluntary and cooperative action on 
the part of Amerioan educational associations, organizations, 
and institutions. 

The Council's Office of Research was established in 
1965 to assume responsibility for conducting research on 
questions of general oonoem to higher education. ACE 
Research Reports are designed to expedite communication of 
the Office's research findings to a limited number of educa- 
tional researchers and other interested persons.