How selected groups evaluated the student personnel services at a public community college Public Deposited

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/g158bn056

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract or Summary
  • The purpose of this study was to evaluate the student personnel services rendered at a public two-year community college. The institution chosen for the study was Lethbridge Community College, located in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. Six hundred and one people, representing seven population groups, were randomly selected for participation in this study. Two hundred and seventy-one respondents (45.1%) completed and returned the questionnaire. The groups selected, and the percentage of return are as follows: present college students (45.5%); Lethbridge Community College graduates (May, 1975) (59%); full-time faculty members (59%); all surviving members of the board of governors, 1968 - 1975 (68%); parents of present students (26%); members of the student personnel staff (100%); and officers of Lethbridge Community College (70%). The responses of this population to a 30 item questionnaire provided the basic data for the study. Additional demographic data collected from the two student groups were also considered in the study. An analysis of variance design was used to determine the significance of the differences in the evaluation of the 30 student personnel service statements by the seven groups selected for the study. A similar procedure was employed in assessing the differences that might occur as a result of age, sex, educational background, financial aid or sponsorship, and use of selected student services. Within the limitations of this study, the following major conclusions were drawn. 1. There were significant differences in the evaluation of 18 of the 30 statements, by the seven groups selected for this study. Of the differences that occurred, most appeared in the responses given by parents and faculty members. 2. Significant differences were found between the evaluation of the student personnel services staff and the remaining six groups, on 16 of the 30 statements. There was a high degree of congruency in the evaluations assigned by the student personnel services group, students, board members, and officers of the college. 3. No significant differences were found between the evaluation of the 30 statements by males and females. 4. There was no significant difference in the evaluation of the 30 statements by 97% of the respondents represented by three age groups. The remaining 3%, represented by two groups, under 18 and over 45, accounted for the only significant differences according to age. A larger sample of respondents would be required before a reliable conclusion could be drawn regarding the presence of significant differences in the evaluations assigned by the latter groups. 5. The results provided by the question regarding educational background indicated that only two statements were evaluated significantly different by the various groups. Thus, there was essentially little difference in the way that students from varying educational backgrounds evaluated the 30 statements. 6. Students receiving financial aid or sponsorship did not differ widely in their assessment of the 30 student personnel services statements. Significant differences were present in the evaluation of only two of the statements. The two statements represented "basic skill development" and "applicant consulting." 7. There was no significant difference in the evaluation of the 30 statements by students who used the selected student services and those who had not. 8. The reliability study, conducted as part of this project, resulted in a reliability coefficient of .97. 9. Ranking of the 30 statements by each of the seven groups on the basis of means provided favorable evidence to support the premise that a high degree of similarity exists between the evaluations assigned by the student personnel services group and the other college population groups.
Resource Type
Date Available
Date Copyright
Date Issued
Degree Level
Degree Name
Degree Field
Degree Grantor
Commencement Year
Advisor
Committee Member
Academic Affiliation
Non-Academic Affiliation
Subject
Rights Statement
Peer Reviewed
Language
Digitization Specifications
  • File scanned at 300 ppi (Monochrome) using Capture Perfect 3.0 on a Canon DR-9050C in PDF format. CVista PdfCompressor 4.0 was used for pdf compression and textual OCR.
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Patricia Black(patricia.black@oregonstate.edu) on 2013-05-06T21:17:17Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 MacNeilJamesL1976.pdf: 1716628 bytes, checksum: fd0d4baaccd6b05b3ecd9023f64aaa8c (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Patricia Black(patricia.black@oregonstate.edu) on 2013-05-06T21:18:34Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 MacNeilJamesL1976.pdf: 1716628 bytes, checksum: fd0d4baaccd6b05b3ecd9023f64aaa8c (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2013-05-06T21:18:35Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 MacNeilJamesL1976.pdf: 1716628 bytes, checksum: fd0d4baaccd6b05b3ecd9023f64aaa8c (MD5) Previous issue date: 1976-04-21
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Kirsten Clark (kcscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2013-04-30T18:26:54Z No. of bitstreams: 1 MacNeilJamesL1976.pdf: 1716628 bytes, checksum: fd0d4baaccd6b05b3ecd9023f64aaa8c (MD5)

Relationships

In Administrative Set:
Last modified: 08/22/2017

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Citations:

EndNote | Zotero | Mendeley

Items