A study of the relationship of the Kuder Reference Record—Personal and certain sociometric ratings

Citation preview

stob* or f m

w m im i n

K tm m . m M r m m r n

m t

o m t i m m m m r m t c M?rm b

if if o n #

Butm ttl^d in f ul f i l l ment of the require wnfct for the $ m tm Bootor of ^ seat to* ?a the Sehool of g&ueettoa, In $ term ®nlr®r$%tf9 Ju o e*

M !5 0

ProQuest Number: 10295222

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality o f this rep ro d u ctio n is d e p e n d e n t u p o n th e quality o f th e c o p y subm itted. In th e unlikely e v e n t th a t th e a u th o r did n o t sen d a c o m p le te m anuscript a n d th e re a re missing p a g e s , th e s e will b e n o te d . Also, if m aterial h a d to b e rem o v ed , a n o te will in d icate th e deletion.

uest ProQ uest 10295222 Published by ProQ uest LLC (2016). Copyright o f th e Dissertation is held by th e Author. All rights reserved. This work is p ro te c te d a g a in st unauthorized copying u n d er Title 17, United States C o d e Microform Edition © ProQ uest LLC. ProQ uest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 - 1346

Accepted W th t fn m tt ? o f th t goh&ol of EdoootIon of Indiana th&ivarsity a.» f u lf illin g the thcci* rccttlrafor the degree o f Doctor of Evocation*

5 l ? i f e t o r 'o F f h o s t s ' v

D o c to ra te C o m ! tto o t

ii

1 wists to m & k n & w a p p r e c i a t i o n to the associate mmtMm of my doctoral committee fo r their in terest t» the study during the forasiivp stages of th e m rit*

fo 0r# X*ewts# my wsjor adviser and m z m tttm tih%lrmmp t m profoundly grateful to r the rtirivtleg* of m Joying m 4.m h it friendly and natfent guidance an experience in educational research which has bem m inspiration to mo*

1 urn eso eeia lly indebted to

him for the benefit of hi a untiring assistance in counsel m i In c r itic a l ew luatloru I extend my gratitude to the s ta ff sse&bera of the Laboratory and Qersteeyer Sigh Schools who assisted In securing the data used in the study* to the of fie® s ta ff for their generotia cooperation, and to those friends and swashers of my family nho len t tbelr aid vhenever possible* Si .near® fch&n&s for constant understanding ®nd assistance are expressed to ay mother ®nd the on# rho has been my mainstay of Inspiration m f fKieourage&ent without which th is study could never have been completed* W* M. C . H i

ta »

« o r c o m rm ts Page

T -k «

XfffWOCTtOtf

» # #

#

1

Im tTO toetlof* m fi B t n t m m t o f

II,

IV .

« *

1

* * • » * • * « « * * * • •

4

m& Ft*rp«n5« o f the Btutfj * * * * * *

IB

S ow ett o f Beit * * » * * » , * » * * * »

£1

S ifn lflcrn e# o f tb* ittidy

?!

*******

f? m ® Of fcTTTOAITO* m m m rf

III,

m

w s e ix m c m

BB

• * • « » « i » « • « • • • • «

S!

* * * ...................

m

o f t h s s tu b *

Coaetansefclon o f ih# s t i n g s * * * * * * *

B8

v a lid ity «»* a * iu M iity

********

ax

BetreXof&manl o f the Biudy

» • * • • « « *

6S

AmVSIi Of t m DATA MO BfmVS ft*11a b ility of S e o le ^ tr le Bstittgjs Correlation ftftaulta iuaHBiary

* * * *

VS

# * *

01

» * * « * * « * * ,

100

* * • » « * » # » * * * • « * *

TIB

SOVBAK* MB ^>Ta00IOg0 *

* ,

Of4

ft«eoQMndati:.VXVII.

XXXVIII, XXXIX.

?sge BIVARIATE DISTRIBUTION OF CTf-FB THEO­ RETICAL SCORES AND SELF SOCIAL DIS­ TANCE RATINGS ...................................................

144

BXVARXATE DISTRIBUTION OP NOPER TBBORRTICAL SCOBBS MP CHOSEN 8CCIOHSTRIC RATINGS .................................................................

146

BXVARXATE OISTRIBOTION OP NODES TSBORBTICAL SCORES AND RECIPROCAL SOCIOaRTBIC RATINGS

148

b i v a e i a t e d is t r ib u t io n op NODES THEO­ RETICAL SCORES AND SCHOOL GRADES . . .

I SO

BXVARIATB DISTRISOTIOB OP KODFR THEO­ RETICAL SCORES AXD INTELLIGENCE ............................................

I BS

BXVARIATB DISTRIBUTION OP KODER. THEO­ RETICAL SCORES ML TRACKER THEORETICAL RATINGS

154

BXVARXATE DISTRIBUTION Of KUDER AGREE­ ABLE SCORES A»D GROUP SOCIAL DISTANCE RATINGS .....................................

156

RTVAMATE DISTRIBUTION 0?' KDDFR AGREE­ ABLE SCOPES AND S E P SOCIAL DISTANCE RATINGS « . . . . # • « * , . * » «

158

BtVARIATI DISTRISOTIOB OP K80S® AGREE­ ABLE 3CGBES MB CBCSPN 80CI0VVTRTC RATINGS » ............................... . . . .

160

BXVARIATB DI8TRIBOTION OP KODER AOREBABLE SCOPES MB RECIPROCAL SOCIDBPTRIC R ATIN OS

168

BXVARIATB DISTRIBUTION OP NUDER aqrbb able scores « t> school shades . . . .

164

c o o n w r s

XL,

XLI.

X L II.

30.111.

XLXV,

XL?,

ix

LIST OF TABLES (C o n tin u e d ) Tabl® XLVI. XLVI I .

XLVIII*

XLIX*

L« L I.

L IT . L IU . LTV, I.V,

L V I.

L V II.

O ar©

RIVASIATB DISTRIBUTION OF KOjv?R AGREE­ ABLE SCOERE ARE INTSLLICBRCF. fOOTT^TS , .

138

BIVARIATE CISTBIBOTIOB Or KOriB AGREEAH.8 SCORES AND TFACREB AGREEABLE *■ AIXNOS

188

BIVARIATE DISTRIBOTICW Of KOLHt r O S m S T SCORES AFI) OHOnp SOCIAL DISTANCE RATINGS .................................................. . .

171

BIVARIATE BISTRIBOTIOM OF XBpBR POVXBART SCORES ABB 8 RLE 80CTAL DISTANCE RATINGS . . . . . . . . . . ............................

173

BIVARIATE BISTBlB'J'HOH OF TDBTR WHIN ANT SCORES AND CBOSSR SOCtONPTHIC LATIS08 , .

175

BIT ARTATE DISTftlBOTIOS OF KOF'R. BOBIB AST SCORES ASR EBCIPRj CAL EOCIOM"TEIC RATINGS . . . . . ...................................................

177

0 IVARI6TB d t s t r i b o t i o n o f jto d s r d o j o t a b t ................... SCORES ATIB SCHOOL GBftDSS

17S

BIVARIATS DISTRIBUTION o r KORBR DOMINANT SCORES AND INTELLIGENCE 0OOTIERTS . . . .

181

BIVARIAT8 DTSTBIBDTXON OF TTOBP. DOMINANT SCORES JL’!D TFAC*! 3ft I>-'«IR.»JIT PATT"OS , . .

183

BIVAPIATE DISTRIBOTICN op 0803° SOCIAL BTST ABC8 RATINGS AND ? 5 ,p SOCIAL P I8 TA.BCF R A T IN G S .......................................................................

187

SIVARTATS DISTRIBUTION 0- ^POrra SOCIAL DISTANCE PATINOS ABB CGOSWf SOCTOSETRIC RATINGS .................................... , . .

190

BIVARIATE niRTRIBOTION O'- SROOP BOCtAL DISTANCE PATINOS AHX -SOIPROCAX SOCIORBTRIC PATTVOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

193

x

LIST OF TABLES (C ontinued) T a b le

L m t.

°a g e BIBARIATS DIBTniDOTION O'- OROtJB SOCIAL DISTANCE RATINGS AND SCHOOL GRADES . . .

194

BIVAfiTATE DISTRIBUTION OF CROC? SOCIAL DISTANCE PATINOS AND U Jf ILLTn«fC8 ............................ CBOTIFNTS

196

BIVARIATF DISTRIBUTION OF SELF SOCIAL DISTANCE PATINOS AND CFOSB* ROOIOWFTRIC RATINGS ........................................ .

DOO

SIVAHIATS DISTRIBUTION OF SELF SOCIAL DISTANCE RATINGS A?D RECIPROCAL SOCIO' METRIC RATINGS .......................................................

SOS

BIVARtATB DISTRIBUTION OF SELF SOCIAL SISTANCE RATINGS AND SCHOOL GRADES . . .

504

SIVARIATE DISTRIBUTION 0-~ CSI-F SOCIAL ASD INTELLIGENCE COOTI S T S ....................... .... ....................................

505

BIFARIATB DI8TBIB0TI0S OF CffOSSS SOCIQKPTRIC RATINGS AND RECIPROCAL SOCIOurTBXC RATINGS . .

SOS

0 1 ,

BXVARIATB DISTRIBUTION OF CBOPBS 80CXOSFTRIC RATINGS AND SCHOOL GRADES . . . .

aio

I, XVI.

8IVABXATB DISTRIBUTION OF CHOSEN 50C I0¥TTRTC RATINGS AND IS'r"L L IC rNCR CSOOTIENTS.................................................................

s is

BIVARTATE DISTRIBUTION 0«- RECIPROCAL SOCtOAS.BTRIC R'■TING;'! s»D SCHOOL C-:'*DE8

.

214

BIVf-RIATF DISTRIBUTION Of tNT'LLIGFNCB COOTIENTS AND RECIPROCAL SOCIOSETRIC RATINGS .............................................. .... . . .

HIS

BXVARIATB DISTRIBUTION OF INTELLIGENCE COOTIESTS f-XD i.-CHOOL GLADES . . . . . .

S17

Ij T X ,

LX.

LXI.

L X II.

M ill.

d ist a n c e ratings

LXIV.

l.XVTI. M V III.

LXIX.

xl

4l*£-*u

««*

W Hoti-

jii1 -X? f»}»

■*■

t,.j!t

P lg W 9

1*

-e g #

t i n m gbcwring the t» t er~«orrelatIon a to be m&fle bettfe-on th e a e$ stows in fh® a tu $ j

s# 3S*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Bmpt® m t4 tow recording the tetn * * of t a l l y f b « t f o r eoeicK s i i t r t e choice® b o th ch o sen *nd ^ecfpyoosl

* * * * * * * * * * *

x ii

* *

30

$0

CHAPTER 1

XWB00U€Tf0f l& tr o d u e ilo n and Statement o f ProbXssa ® m m r e l a t i o n s h i p s w ith in & g ro u p haw© b e ta d ie * cow ered to be- d y n a m ic a lly im p o rta n t*

S o c ia l i n t e r a c t i o n

ie comple* In a wide reage o f wariattone*

laeh internet*

Ing i m p o f in tiw ld m ls h m it s own sphere o f operating In a elassrocsi at w ell as in any group situation certain patterns o f so cia l relationship a mm® into exis­ tence#

!he need i s strong to got an increasingly cloarer

view o f the factors that so w to bring $w tb together or to 'mmp thea apart*

I t i s necessary to taow o f the m la e s

they look: for in one another* o f the bases noon which they eith er cu ltiv a te contacts or Xe&irs youth m t m woot in m ir crowd**

In working with froth i t is no longer su ffic ie n t to have only the imce&edgo o f the sp e c ific capacities and difference* o f the indlwldixal#

Teaching is done in a. grotip*

the i&cMitres o f recreation ora ©smerlmeed in warious grocps and friarulSblpa are constancy being b u ilt on the basis o f the individual** own. standard* and moon* o f evalua­ tion#

Youth a ffect each other In their peer groups*

The

mores o f those groups sro established by their actions and

in te ra c tio n s *

Itie h in f o r m a tio n and d i r e c t i o n i s n e e d ed i n o r d e r t o b e mbX# t o s e c u r e s a t i s f a c t o r y r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n g ro u p proM tfti*M +

I t i t p o s s i b l e t o l o a m much a b o u t g ro u p s t r u c ­

t u r e from X lsis m io g t o om tW M tlm s and from o b s e rv in g a c t i v i t i e s o f v a r io u s g ro u p s* Uto p la y s w ith Whosf

flho i s alw a y s in. o v a ry s o c i a l

aotiw ltyf Hio never i s Included in invited groups?

Who

s a y s h o l l o t o .Whom* m i w hich s t u d e n t s n e i t h e r sa y h o l l o

th w se lv ss nor are g r e e t e d by others?

Who a r t the Individ­

uals who rtcoiv# help in an emsrgancy and who are those who s tru g g le

alone? V ary i s 111 and & h a l f doson g ir ls w ish

t o h e l p h e r homo*

Jam a i s i l l b u t h e r illn e s s i s not n o tic e d *

Who are the emerging landers wtieaewar leadership i s needed? Sow does the group react to various tyros o f leader­ ship? Sow ar# intragroup and inter-group lo y a ltie s and anim osities ©rested? What e r e th e s t r u c t u r e s o f th o s e dynam ic i n t e r a c t i o n s which haw su c h controlling in f l u e n c e s o v e r i n d i v i d u a l s and g r o u p in g s o f I n d i v i d u a l s ? F o r gome y e a r s g u id a n c e s p e c i a l i s t s i n e d u c a tio n * p s y o h o lo g ls ts * s o c i o l o g i s t s and s o e i o m e t r t s t s h a v e endea­ v o re d t o r e a c h a h i g h e r l e v e l o f p e r f e c t i o n in m e etin g th e c h a lle n g e o f g ro u p dynam ics# k n m em p h asis i n m odem e d u c a tio n a l th e o r y i s p la c e d

tm the so©lo-e»oti«mal aspects -of hxmm. growth m& developta t#

She n ecessity has sirIsom for the development of tech­

niques for evaluating the dogros and character o f social development*

f h is probles has been eoaplloatsd by the fa s t

that the evaluation mist b® coaaorned not with the Individur*X alone bat also with tho g m i p structure in tshich ha oper­ ates#

Both variEblas most be considered for -an tinderstand­

ing o f social dovs&opsant# She d ev elo p m en t m i im provem ent o f g ro u p p r o c e s s e s

and th tlr diagnostic in*trm m t» hcv® consumed such in research#

®vgy

I t would sts® that educator* srald be eager

to u t i l i s e so valuable a technique as the study of so cia l ohenmsiia#

fvon so* there i t arid once to Indict to that

classroom ssrowlwmss for learning and for democratic U fa v%r# frsqw sn ily void o f uny recognition of rot terns o f accep­ tance and rejection* tlumcrous records and seal os t e w h-®m designed to m easure p referen ces* I n t e r e s t s and c o n tr o llin g f a c to r s

which may h&v® an in flu one; a on grow;} interactions*

"on-

iid a r & h l# r e s e a r c h i s n e c e s s a r y to p ro v e t h e v a lu e o f any seal© * and su ch s t u d i o s a r e c o n s t a n t l y i n p r o g r e s s i n o r d e r t h a t © s la tin g d i a g n o s t i c and ov& Iuallv® devices can bn g iv e n a sound p r a c tic a l

a p p lic a tio n *

to# o f th e d svlcos for the ©tody o f s o c i a l structure and so cia l s t a t u s I s th e s o e i o a a t r l c te a t *

T h is te c h n iq u e

m a te s p o s s i b l e t h e analysis o f th e student1s position mi thin

4 h i s group*

I t a l s o males# p o s s i b l e m a n a l y s i s o f [email protected] fram e­

work o f t h e group o r g a n t m t t m

— th e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f

le a d e r # * o f o l i v e s mml o l m m g m ? o f d o m in an t g ro u p s , end o f p a t t e r n s o f a M * p t# n e * and r e j e c t i o n o f v a r io u s I n d i v l d -

onl# within the group# •

I t makes possible a storing

evaluating o f the stttd#nt*g rank in respect to other member# o f M s group*

I t ###68# important th an * to discover relationship# b-ctsmsu t b s u s e # o f t h e m-otam®t r i o d e v io * # and o t h e r r a t -

Infs that h&m b##n devised for the e v a lu a t io n o f social p u f ilit i^ s and o b a r o e t s r l s t i e s # f h # pro b lem u n d e r ta k e n h e r o may be s t a t e d a s f o llo w s ! flA S tu d y o f t h e R e la tio n s h ip # b-ofmiom th e Ktoder P r e f e r e n c e

Hecoro-Hsrson&X end Certain S o c i« # tr le Hstings*#

The soclo-

metric ratings may further [email protected] s s e e tfi ed a.# Orono Social B isto n e # B a tln g s * S o l f S o c ia l D is ta n c e H a tin g s , Chosen S o c lo -

metric B&timg# .and Bseiproc&l S o ei ©metric H a tin g # * D e li m i t a t i o n

In order to indict* to clearly the score o f th e study, several statement# clarifyin g and delim iting th e problem may be o f v a lu e * t h e s tu d y i s lim it e d to f in d in g th e in t e r r e l a t !.o n -

shins bctsrosn th n #o o lo m e tr tc r a t i n g s snd the scores fomd on one scale o f social c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , th e Kmdor ^ r ^ f^ v ^ n . co

5

I t i s reeognlr&d that there are othor scalcs to r such diagnosis*

Th® ftudor Pmf®tenet* Beoord*

Personal i s now in th© field *

The sirp^flts ^hich arc eon-*

sidcred in the record are described as sociable* practi* ©•&!* thcorstlc& l*. a g r e e a b le and dom inant#

kn attempt i s

toeing made to discover the valuta o f the record in resnaet to a possible pattern o f ® mrm ishieh are ©h«i racier! s t ie Of StUd«tS Who toCCCaC w ell Isnovrx and wall lilted as con­ trasted uritlx the m itM rm m m-d rejected students* Thera i s need at t h i s tim e f o r a more so eel ft© under­ standing o f th e moaning of socionotrio ratings*

The general

area of SMlomctrtcs may ho described as the s c ie n tific seam r m m t o t s o c i a l structures*

S o c ia l structure i s a ‘v i t -

tom o f group r e l a t i o n ships as defined by i t s gangs, i t s c liq u e s * i t s ©Xaavmgos* mad i t s i s o l a t e d I n d iv id u a ls *

S o c io -

meiry i s concern ad n o t o n ly with t h e Individual pad h is d if­ ferences# b u t also w ith th e group i n which ho f i n d s himself# and w ith th e lat**»r s la t Ions o f th e I n d i v i d u a l s w ith in th e

group*

A s o e l M o t r l e r a t i n g must ta k a i n t o consideration

n o t o n ly the motivation and d r i v e o f an individual In h is s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s * b u t p r o v is io n m a t

made f o r e v a lu a tin g

■the e f f e c t t h a t i n d i v i d u a l h a s noon o t h e r s o b e r s o f h i s

group* and What reaction other group aeatoars o f that parti­ cular social sphere have concerning him. S e v e r a l te c h n i q u e s h a v e b o o n d e v e lo n o d

s a tis fa c to r ily to measure group structure*

*nd u se d

Whoever socio*

m e tr i c m & m r m m t i t a t t m p t e d , i t o u s t be a ced u re #

p ro ­

T h e re l a th e In -co m in g and th® o u t- g o in g o f s o c i a l

c u r r e n t*

The i n d i v i d u a l t e a a d e f i n i t e f u e l i n g a b o u t o t h e r s

I n h i b group $ a t th e sa n e h i m thor© a r y bo e i t h e r p o w e rfu l o r » & k r e t u r n c u r r e n t s w hich a r e r a d i a t i n g dynandealX y t o ­ w ard th e I n d i v i d u a l from. h i e o s s o e i a t e i *

MX o f t h e 00 f o r c e s

com bine to d e s c r ib e th e f o r c e and M g n e tia m o f th e h n m n I n 't e r - r o la t io n 1 • I t I f th e p u rp o s e o f so e lo m e tri-e r a t i n g to n e a s » r * and e v a lu a t e th o s e f a r m s no t h a t th e tn o w lo d fa o f th e de­ g r e e o f t h e i r « g i s to n e s m y be a f a c t o r in th e im p r o ir a m t o f th e s o c i a l s t a t u s o t b o th th e i n d i v i d u a l and th e group* S o c ia l D io tu n e e Be tin g e s a y be c o n s id e r e d s p e c i f i c a l l y s i a a o e io m o trie t e c h n i c s 0 em ployed t o mm w ire th e s o c i a l d i s t a n c e f e a t s i g h t be fo u n d f o r any one in d iv i d u a l betw een t h e p o in t o f h i e own f u e l i n g end th e n o i n t o f th e c e n t e r o f th e g ro u p fo a lin g *

The in c o m in g c u r r e n t ssoy bo

d e s c r ib e d a s th e c o m p o site r a tin g o f th e g ro u p f o o lin g f o r th e I n d i v i d u a l i n te rm s o 1' a c c e p ta n c e o r r e j o e i 'o n o f h i s s in is te r s h ip *

T h is m e a su re m e n t f e e

G ro u p S o c i a l |}1. s t a n c e

B atin g *

Hie o u t-g o in g c u rre n t m a t t e manner f o r th e su ccess o f th e group,

00

nsid^r-^d in s i x t i e r

Tte SM f S o cial

t a s f B a tin g i s b a s e d upon how th e In d iv id u a l H its s o lf m y

f o c i ©boot in c e p tin g o r ro je c ttn -r ih~ o th e rs v~ fe vrhon ho

I s a s s o c ia te d * B i t h e r b eca u se o f M s o m e l e c t io n s or b e eatas® ho was p la ced in th e group by f o r c e s o u ts id e o ' h i s

control,* .M other to c h n ic u e o f s o e io m o tr lc rsn&suramnt i s to o b ta in a c tu a l c h o ic e s o f in d iv id u a ls fo r f r ie n d s h ip s .

Th® 'particular reason for desiring to be with son eon® my bo a determining factor in that particular choice*

I f the

sought far best friends are honestly naned, group patterns of friendships can ea sily be constructed, to r tiisgneniic pur noses*

fhe out-going and In-corning current is observed

In t h i s iedmipuo as w ell as in tho Social 3)I.sin ce Rating* The Chosen Boelosotrie Bating aecauros these 1n~coming forces*

Hot aany times have other students chosen th is in -

dividual for a best friend, or has ho not teen chosen by ®ny«m©f Th® choice® o f the group arc tubulated for a Chosen H e e to m tr l© R a tin g *

I f an individual m&Ves h is o n choices for friend®, haw a n a y time® a r e th o s e f r i e n d s h i p s returned?

Arc h i s

friendships received iM reciprocated, or are they rejected? Th© out-going ©orrant o f th© individual choices is termed the B*o1p*m®1 Soctomoiric Bating* Th® m m s u r t n e n t s

j u s t d e s c rib e d

n orm

*-o c o v e r a n

© v a lu a tio n o f b o th in -co m in g end. o u * -g o in g s o c ! M c u r r e n t s f o r b o th frm ip m6. i n d i v i d u a l r e a c tio n s *

Those a r c th e

f o u r s o c io m o tr ic r a t i n g s t h a t a r c u se d in t h i s study*

e A n o th er te c h n iq u e i n s o c i o ^ ^ t r l c

has

r e c e iv e d some exovviift&xit o t i o n &nd r e s - a r c h , h u A i s n o t o f s p e c i f i c v a lu e f o r t h i s s fcudy#

A s h o r t e x p la n a tio n

w i l l bo made o f i t sin.ee i t r i l l In o e o t'to n o f Ir-n x - 'in t h i s d is c u s s io n # o f th e

A q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s - i m ^ r - d on th -■ h e a ls o f th e group*

th e

os?,Ions r ^ y ss> f o r

such In fo rm atics* a s : nWho I s th e m ost p o p u la r g i r l in th e room?15

fr$ho l a th e .a s s t s i n c e r e stu d o n t? * 1

th® h & rd aat?*

*Wfto w orks

o r **Who i s th e m ost l o y a l ? 1* An e v a lu a tio n

o f anaw ors to su ch q u e s tio n s w i l l g iv e no i n s i g h t in to g ro u p s t r u c t u r e *

t h i s p ro c e d u re i s known a s a "C hasa fh a*

ttie h n im m in s o o io m o trie m easurem ent* t h e a o c io m c ttric m easu rem en ts to fen u sed in t h i s s tu d y a r # Group S o c ia l D is ta n c e R e tin g s , S e l f S o c ia l B ie~ tsaae® E a t i n g s , Chosen S o c l o a s t r i e he t i n g s , m 6. 'R e c ip ro c a l & > e im « tr lc Ratings#

The sp ecific development of these

r a t i n g s w i l l b# d e s c r ib e d in C h a n te r I I I # A eoroX l& ry s tu d y t f l l l a tte w n t to d is c o v e r th e rein-*

ttoashlps between -the Ku&er Preference R e c o rd -0 ~r$onel EetIn g a and Tea ©her E a tin g s o f s tu d e n ts on s o c i a b l e , p r a c t i c a l , t h s o r w tle s l* a g r e e a b le and dom inant c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s *

An**

o t h e r c o r o l l a r y i s d e v e lo p e d i n th e a t tests t to i n j e c t th e o t i n t e l l i g e n c e s c o r e s and s c h o o l g r a d e s i n i n t a r - o o r r e l a t i o n to d is c o v e r p o s s i b l e m i t t e r n s o f r a l a *

tio n s h ip s *

9

the l« it« lltc m m te s t used here is the Otis S elf Administering t e s t — f o m A* l i t selection in th is study Is made by 'virtue o f the fa ct that i t Is & te s t normally used in the schools because o f i t s langth, construction, end s u ita b ility for group testing# fe e oases

in the entire study are

in tli# c ity o f ferre Haute* Indiana#

students

fe e students are «m~

rolled In th# ten schools in the c ity feioh h ew grades nine through twelve in th# high school organisation#

the

too schools are the laboratory School o f Indiana State Teachers Soilage m i Cerafeeyev Technical High gchool# fe e m m comprehensive portion o f the study uses a ll S&8 oases frm . fee two schools named above# i s a member o f the laboratory School staff*

fe e writer

It ts fe a sib le

to approach a study such as th is with a clearer understandin f o f th# ram ifications o f the social d e t a i l i f the eases studied actu ally have been known by fee observer for a per­ iod o f time*

I t Is also recognised tb it the su b jectivity

o f personal knowledge m n fee uted only to substantiate and strengthen ob jective fasts# f t i s recognised feat there are numerous lim itation s to the c r ite r ia selected*

there are other ratings and re­

cords e m lm tin f additional aspects of so cia l Interaction and personal character!sties#

io attempt Is made to ex­

haust fee f e a s ib il it ie s for analysis of factors that might

i n f lu o n e # fftmxp V h n v iO T n a* ta m e *

Certain o th er d o ltm ltin r factory ro ta tiv e to hh© general n*t»r* nod ra rio n a nrcoa of greem V hnvior m-1to m o vm ttin to ho mor^isnc!*,

Cne e f *V?".o ^e,•>**,..£ rn._

T o lir ts s t h e e r n e i a l

m l ?y ?1a yn -.«

Thor** i s no

t i c theory eMoh n decmiho tha

1;r*.g--*

f» *

*•.^ '$• ;-H.;"’#0

•‘O#

fn n d a m M ^ l dime&fctons o f s o d 1 hnfc*: v i or m l th e r e ere

f**w standard!£©$ and re tl.fi able -i" •v O*V - •-; * ••> •’ n (./’ ivT ■ty'W f» !,r-f fy, S *.-iil IS sS m s s M ” • 175' 6u % or& cs M atm -M neoln I n s t i t u t e o f S chool Pxveri mm t& t io n * rf-*S*1***■
hcr'^ptly «h#n resu lts o f the testing w ill *mk® si d iffer* to the T.ibjoot, ' Tosti-op should h* «rot no in «vt^h e as to &&jglml&e the r&pnort with the «®»eriwimt«* and th e m o tiv n tio n f o r t-tv* su b je c ts * Thor pro *Y?>XAd* .in th e eon or tp-.et. if--a** •■re

subjectively honest* Tt should he fa aeh er st-:-1nd th a t o sn eio ’-r’t r i c study

i s oouy th •»