student types and the evaluation of the university
TRANSCRIPT
417
Higher Education 6 (1977) 417-436 �9 Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam - Printed in the Netherlands
STUDENT TYPES AND THE EVALUATION OF THE UNIVERSITY*
SAMUEL LONG
Political Psychology Program, Yale University, New Haven, Conn., U.S.A.
ABSTRACT
The relationship between student types and students' perceptions and evaluations of the university has been infrequently researched, particularly among the post-activist student generation. Using a random sample of 460 Southern Illinois University- Carbondale (SIU-C) students surveyed in 1973, the relationship between students' academic orientations and six academically-related sets of variables was investigated: (1) the students' adjectival descriptions of the university, (2) the students' evaluations of university goal implementation, (3) the students' attitudes about academic governance, (4) the students' evaluations of the academic environment, (5) the students' feelings of academic alienation, and (6) the students' preferences concerning academic reform. The results of this research indicate that students' self-descriptions on the Clark-Trow typology of academic orientations are moderately associated with their perceptions and evaluations of the university, with the nonconformist student type emerging as the most distinct academic orientation.
Efforts to account for the attitudes, values, and behavior of university students through the use of concepts such as student types, student sub- cultures, and student role orientations are quite common in the social science and education literature (Altbach and Kelly, 1973). In the early 1960's, work in this area seemed most concerned with descriptions of classroom types, frequently based on psychoanalytic theory (Katz, 1962; Bereiter and Freedman, 1962; Stem, 1962). Conversely, Keniston (1966), rather than relying on a psychological or pedagogic classification, proposed a historic typology of students. Finally, with the increase of student activism, more politically-oriented typologies began to emerge (Peterson, 1968; Keniston, 1973; Block et al., 1969; Kerpelman, 1969).
* The research reported here was partially supported by tne Illinois Public Interest Research Group. The assistance of IPIRG members and of Southern Illinois University- Carbondale (SIU-C) students on this project is gratefully acknowledged. Additional support was provided by the Political Science Department and Political Psychology Program, Yale University. Computer time was furnished by the Yale University Computer Center.
418
Al though even m o r e typo log ies o f univers i ty s tuden t s can be found in
the l i te ra ture , pa r t i cu la r ly re la t ing to s tuden t activists, u n d o u b t e d l y the m o s t f r equen t ly e n c o u n t e r e d t y p o l o g y is tha t p r o p o s e d by Clark and T r o w
(1966) . While Clark and T r o w argue tha t t hey are descr ibing s t uden t cul-
tures, n o t t ypes o f specif ic s tuden ts , cer ta in theore t ica l sho r t comings in this
pos i t ion have been ind ica ted (Bo l ton and K a m m e y e r , 1967). Thus , it m a y be
a p p r o p r i a t e to conce ive o f these classif icat ions as types to which an in-
dividual s tuden t migh t subscr ibe to a g rea te r or lesser ex ten t . The first o f these ca tegor ies is the col legiate:
� 9 this system of values and activities is not hostile to the college, to which in fact it generates strong loyalties and attachments. It is, however, indifferent and resistant to serious demands emanating from the faculty for an involvement with ideas and issues over and above that required to gain the diploma. This culture is characteristically middle- and upper-middle class, for it takes money and leisure to pursue the busy round of social activities, and it flourishes on, though is by no means confined to, the resident campuses of big state universities (Clark and Trow, 1966: pp. 20-21).
By way o f con t ras t , the voca t iona l t y p e o f s t uden t is typ ica l ly found in
u rban colleges, where the of fspr ing o f w o r k i n g - a n d lower -midd le class h o m e s lack the t i m e and m o n e y for i nvo lvemen t in the collegiate life.
F u r t h e r m o r e , this g roup o f s tuden t s is f r equen t ly work ing par t - or ful l - t ime,
mar r i ed , and enrol led in college fo r career- and s t a tu s - enhancemen t . As Clark
and T r o w no te :
These students have little attachment to the college, where they buy their educa- tion somewhat as one buys groceries. But like participants in the collegiate culture, these students are also resistant to intellectual demands on them beyond what is required to pass the courses. To many of these hard-driven students, ideas and scholarship are as much a luxury and distraction as are sports and fraternities. If the symbol of the collegiate culture is the football and fraternity weekend, the symbol of this vocationally oriented culture is the student placement office (pp. 21-22).
Accord ing to Clark and T r o w , the s y m b o l s o f the academic cul ture , in con t r a s t to the p reced ing s t uden t cul tures , are the l ibrary, l a b o r a t o r y , and seminar . These s tuden t s , in o t h e r words , are in te l l ec tua l ly -or ien ted :
The essence of this system of values is its identification with the intellectual concerns of the serious faculty members. The students involved work hard, get the best grades, talk about their coursework outside of class, and let the world of ideas and knowledge reach them in ways that neither of the foregoing types d o e s . . . For these students, the attachment to the college, often as strongly felt as that among the collegiate crowd, is to the institution which supports intellectual values and opportunities for learning; the emotional tie to the college is through the faculty and through campus friends of similar mind and temper (p. 22).
419
The fourth student culture forwarded by Clark and Trow is more residual in nature, embodying many different types of students, all of which,
however, possess two attributes, independence and a quest for personal identity. Clark and Trow write that
These students are often deeply involved with ideas, both the ideas they encounter in their classrooms and those that are current in the wider society of adult art, literature, and politics. To a much greater degree than their academically oriented classmates, these students use off-campus groups and currents of thought as points of reference, instead of the official campus culture, in their strategy of in- dependence and criticism.
The distinctive quality of this student style is a rather aggressive nonconformism, a critical detachment from the college they attend and from its faculty (though this often conceals a strong ambivalence), and a generalized hostility to the college administration... While the preceding three types of students pursue fun, a diploma, or knowledge, these students pursue an identity, not as a by-product, but as the primary and often self-conscious aim of their education. And their symbol is often a distinctive style - of dress, speech, attitude - that itself represents the identity they seek (pp. 23-24).
These four student cultures or types, as Clark and Trow indicate, are founded on a two-dimensional scheme, of which the first element concerns an identification with the college and the second element concerns an involvement with ideas. The collegiate type, then, is classified on the basis of
a high identification with the institution and a low involvement with ideas. Low identification with the college and low involvement with ideas char- acterize the vocational type, while the academic type ranks high on both
dimensions. Finally, the nonconformist , although low in institutional iden-
tification is highly involved with ideas (pp. 2 4 - 2 5 ) .
Problem
In this paper, the following question will be addressed: What is the relationship between students ' academic orientations and their perceptions and evaluations o f the university? In this regard, the relationship between students ' academic orientations and six university-relevant sets of measures will be investigated: (1)adjectival descriptions of the university, (2)evalua- tions of university goal implementations, (3)academic governance attitudes, (4) evaluations o f the academic environment, (5)feel ings of academic alienation, and (6) academic reform preferences.
420
Sample
The data for this study were collected by means of a written question- naire which was administered to a random sample of 460 students enrolled at Southern Illinois University-Carbondale in May 1973. Trained interviewers were used to collect the pertinent data from each of the respondents in the sample, to whom anonymity and confidentiality were guaranteed.
Forty-six percent of the students were male and 54 percent female. Ninety percent were white and 10 percent were black or of other racial- ethnic origin. In terms of class standing, 17 percent were freshmen, 16 percent were sophomores, 26 percent were juniors, 34 percent were seniors, and 6 percent were graduate students. Most students were self-identified members of the middle class (84%) and the modal education level of their parents was twelve years of formal instruction. Fifty-seven percent of the sample reported living in the suburbs, while 26 percent lived in urban areas, and 17 percent in rural localities; the population of their parental homes was typically between 10,000 and 50,000 people. Ideologically, 15 percent identified themselves as conservatives, 36 percent as moderates, and 49 percent as liberals; politically, there were more Democrats (37%) than Republicans (11%) and high percentages of independents (30%) and non- identifiers (22%).
Conceptual Indicators
Four measures were used in this study to gauge the degree to which the university students surveyed described themselves as typifying the four Clark-Trow student descriptions. Thus, rather than utilizing a forced choice procedure in which students were required to select the single type which best described them, these students were requested to rate each of the four types in this regard on a six-point scale ranging from "very accurate" to "very inaccurate." This approach is based on the assumption that the student type concept is multidimensional in nature, and that students can be better characterized with reference to their self-placement on all four Clark- Trow types.
The "vocational" student type, as it was described on the question- naire, appears below:
This type of student emphasizes education primarily as preparation for an occu- pational future. He is not particularly interested in the social or purely intellectual phases of campus life, although he might participate in these activities on some limited basis. Persons holding this philosophy are usually quite committed to particular fields of study and are in college primarily to obtain careers in their chosen fields.
421
The fo l lowing descr ip t ion was used to charac te r ize the "co l l eg ia te" type :
This type of student is very much concerned with the social and extracurricular phases of campus life. He identifies closely with the college and tries to attend as many campus and athletic events as possible. He is concerned about his education but he feels that the development of his social skills is vital to the cultivation of the well-rounded person. He attempts to "make grades" but will rarely go out of his way to do extra or non-assigned reading.
The " a c a d e m i c " t ype was descr ibed as fol lows:
This type of student, while he does not ignore career preparation, assigns greatest importance to the pursuit of knowledge and understanding, wherever the pursuit may lead. He is seriously involved in course work. He may be fairly active in student government and activities of this sort but, if he is, they have lower priority. He is the kind of person who feels that the social side of college life is not the most important but is certainly significant for his general development.
Final ly , the descr ip t ion o f the " n o n c o n f o r m i s t " s tuden t t y p e s ta ted tha t :
This type of student is interested in learning about life in general, but in a manner of his own choosing. He is very interested in the things which interest him. For the most part, he would consider himself to be someone who is primarily motivated by intellectual curiosity. Outside the classroom, he would attend lectures, concerts, foreign films, etc. Inside the classroom, when he is interested, he will do extra readings and pursue knowledge and understanding. He tends to reject most campus social events and other organized extracurricular activities, and to be resentful when he feels the school violates his and others' human rights.
In add i t ion to the t ou r s tuden t t ype indicators , six sets o f variables
were e m p l o y e d in this s tudy . T w o semant ic d i f ferent ia l scales, on which the
r e sponden t s descr ibed their concep t ions o f the i r univers i ty and o f thei r ideal
univers i ty , were used as a global measure o f the s tuden t s ' univers i ty evalua- t ions (Long, 1976g). In this instance, tile s t uden t s ' responses were f ac to r
analyzed, so tha t an evaluat ive d imens ion could be ex t r ac t ed f rom their real
and ideal univers i ty descr ipt ions. Then , on the basis o f these ex t r ac t ed real
and ideal eva lua t ion factors , a third measure was cons t ruc t ed by sub t rac t ing
s tuden t s ' real descr ip t ions f rom their ideal descr ip t ions; this t echn ique
p rov ided an ideal-real d i sc repancy measure . A mod i f i ed version o f the Western In te r s t a t e C o m m i s s i o n for Higher
E d u c a t i o n ' s univers i ty goal assessment inven to ry , which compr i ses f i f ty-s ix goal s t a t e m e n t s on seven d i f fe ren t d imens ions , was e m p l o y e d as an ind ica to r o f s t uden t s ' univers i ty goal pe rcep t ions (Long, 19760 . In this s tudy , s tuden t s were asked to prov ide two rat ings for each goal s t a t e m e n t , the first app ly ing to the ideal univers i ty , the second app ly ing to SIU-C. The dif fer-
422
ence between the ideal and real on each of the seven goal dimensions furnished the discrepancy indices used here.
Four scales were used to investigate students' participative or academic governance attitudes (Long, 1976e). The first of these was designed to assess the degree to which the governance process at the university was autocratic or dominated by the university administration. The second indicator served as a measure of students' desires for independence from the university administration in living their daily lives. A third scale ascertained the extent to which students wished to participate in university decision-making. The fourth measure provided information concerning students' desires for greater political activism in the community free from university interference.
Three indicators were used to establish the students' evaluations of the academic environment at the university (Long, 1976c). On the first measure students rated the degree of influence their courses were having on them. The general academic climate was assessed by a second scale. And the third scale provided an evaluation of the institution's academic quality from the students' perspective.
The academic alienation concept was operationalized through the use of three scales, measuring (1)students ' feelings of meaninglessness con- cerning the purposes and operation of the university, (2) students' feelings of cynicism regarding the basic academic values at the university and the means by which these values are achieved, and (3)students' feelings of power- lessness or inefficacy in attempting to participate in the university govern- ance process (Long, 1976d).
Students' attitudes and evaluations regarding academic reform at SIU-C were assessed through the use of five interrelated measures (Long, 1976j). First, levels of affect or liking for the university administration were measured. Second, students' ratings of administrative excellence were assessed. Third, the degree to which students felt the administration was committed to academic improvement in the university was determined. Fourth, students' perceptions of needed improvement in the university was ascertained. Last, students were asked to estimate the time required for the attainment of excellence at SIU-C.
Results
If the four Clark-Trow student types perceive different purposes for the university, while at the same time relating in different ways to the university, then they may tend to perceive and evaluate it in different ways as well. The data relating to the test of this hypothesis appear in Table I, where three indicators of students' global perceptions of the university are found to correlate moderately with the four student types. In this instance, the
TA
BL
E I
Can
onic
al C
orr
elat
ion
An
aly
sis
bet
wee
n S
tud
ent
Aca
dem
ic T
yp
e an
d P
erce
ived
Un
iver
sity
Att
rib
ute
s In
dic
ato
r S
ets
Can
onic
al c
orre
lati
ons
Can
on
ical
var
iate
E
igen
val
ues
C
ano
nic
al
Wil
ks'
Chi
D
F
Sig
nifi
canc
e se
ts
corr
elat
ion
s la
mb
da
squ
are
1 0
.07
0
.26
0
.90
4
0.5
2
12
0.00
01
2 0
.03
0.
17
0.97
13
.36
6 0
.03
8
Can
onic
al C
oef
fici
ents
C
an
on
ica
l C
anon
ical
va
riat
e 1
vari
ate
2
Vo
cati
on
al
0.7
2
0.32
C
olle
giat
e 0
.34
-0
.28
A
cad
emic
0
.30
-0
.86
N
on
con
form
ist
-0.3
2
-0.5
5
Per
cep
tio
ns-
Idea
l U
niv
ersi
ty
Per
cep
tio
ns-
Rea
l U
niv
ersi
ty
Idea
l-R
eal
Dis
crep
ancy
0.2
8
0.5
6
--0
.65
0.
71
--0
.54
--
0.5
4
4~
t,O
424
canonical coefficients on the initial canonical variate indicate that the nonconformist tends to have a higher evaluation of the ideal university and, at the same time, a more critical evaluation of SIU-C. Conversely, the other three student types, particularly the vocationalist, tend to exhibit a less sanguine view of the ideal university and a less critical stance regarding SIU-C, although these students also describe the university in negative terms.
Two explanations may apply in accounting for these results. First, the more critical position of the nonconformist vis-a-vis the university, noted by Clark and Trow, which is probably a function of both psychological and sociopolitical factors, certainly is pertinent here. More important, however, are the goals sought by each of these student types. Of the four types, the objective set by the nonconformist, namely, identity-formation, is not only a goal which is not easily attained, but there are no objective criteria that can be utilized to assess goal-attainment. Thus, the nonconformist has set very high, and ambiguous, demands on the university; the nature of these demands and the probability of their attainment, particularly at a university such as SIU-C, may be reflected in the evaluations offered by this student type.
If these student academic types are moderately related to such global evaluations of the university, then an even stronger relationship should exist between student types and more specific assessments of university perfor- mance. If this is correct, vocationalists and perhaps collegiates may be more oriented toward career-related educative outcomes, whereas academics and nonconformists may place greater importance on educative outcomes in the cognitive and affective realms. For the most part, the statistics in Table II support these hypotheses. It is of interest that the first two student types not only express greater approval of tangible outcomes, but public service outcomes as well. This may reflect the fact that, among these students, public service involvement is one more mode of career education.
On the other hand, the academics, and somewhat less so the noncon- formists, manifest greater concern and approval with regard to cognitive and affective educative outcomes, the social environment at the university, and research outcomes. These results, therefore, show that student types are related to students' evaluations of university performance, and that different student types tend to selectively evaluate the university's performance on the basis of their particular interests.
Of the four student types described by Clark and Trow, it is the nonconformist who should exhibit the greatest sensitivity to the actions of university administrators, especially if those administrative actions encroach on his life. Thus, if the typology is valid, nonconformists, relative to the other three student types, should evidence the greatest criticism of ad- ministrators' roles in the governance of the university and, at the same time, should demand the greatest independence from university administrators.
TA
BL
E I
I
Can
on
ical
C
orr
elat
ion
A
nal
ysi
s D
iscr
epan
cies
In
dic
ato
r S
ets
Can
onic
al c
orre
lati
ons
Can
on
ical
var
iate
se
ts
bet
wee
n
Stu
den
t
Eig
env
alu
es
Aca
dem
ic
Ty
pe
and
Idea
l-R
eal
Un
iver
sity
Can
on
ical
W
ilks
' C
hi
corr
elat
ion
s la
mb
da
squ
are
DF
Go
al
Imp
lem
enta
tio
n
Sig
nif
ican
ce
1 Can
onic
al c
oef
fici
ents
0.1
4
0.3
7
0.83
4
9.5
0
28
Can
onic
al V
aria
te
0.0
07
Vo
cati
on
al
Col
legi
ate
Aca
dem
ic
No
nco
nfo
rmis
t
Inst
ruct
ion
al o
utc
om
es:
cog
nit
ive
attr
ibu
tes
of
stu
den
ts
Inst
ruct
ion
al o
utc
om
es:
affe
ctiv
e at
trib
ute
s o
f st
ud
ents
In
stru
ctio
nal
ou
tco
mes
: ta
ng
ible
att
rib
ute
s o
f st
ud
ents
In
stru
ctio
nal
en
vir
on
men
t: a
cad
emic
en
vir
on
men
t at
trib
ute
s In
stru
ctio
nal
en
vir
on
men
t: s
oci
al e
nv
iro
nm
ent
attr
ibu
tes
Res
earc
h o
utc
om
es
Pub
lic
serv
ice
ou
tco
mes
0.7
0
0.7
2
-0.3
0
-0.1
9
0.3
6
0.28
-0
.66
0.
01
0.41
0.
69
-0.6
6
4~
I,o
426
The data in Table III, with one notable exception, show that this hypothesis is confirmed. Thus, while vocationalists, collegiates, and academics view the university decision-making process as somewhat less autocratic and demand fewer participative rights, the nonconformists perceive the governance process as being dominated by university administrators, demand greater independence of administrators in their daily lives, and demand greater freedom for extra-curricular political activity. Interestingly, the dimension concerning student participation in strictly academic decision-making is not a salient dimension in this analysis, perhaps due to the radical nature of these prescriptions. In any case, though, the Clark-Trow typology has been found to relate to students' participative beliefs, with the nonconformists, as predicted, claiming the greatest role for students in the university governance process.
The typology forwarded by Clark and Trow does not explicitly concern itself with students' sensitivities and reactions to the academic environment in the university, although, given the descriptions of the vocationalists and academics, it is possible that these particular student types might be most perceptive with regard to features such as curricular impact, the general learning climate, and the overall academic quality of the learning institution. The statistics in Table IV indicate that the students' typological selections and evaluations of the academic environment are moderately related. In- terestingly, both the academics and the collegiates, but not the voca- tionalists, perceive the instruction at SIU-C as having some impact on them, while, at the same time, they view the academic quality at SIU-C as being rather inferior. These results suggest that the vocationalists may be degree- oriented, in that they view the university degree as a prerequisite for a career, not as an indication of a particular subject matter or skill level. The collegiates' perspicacity in this regard is more of a mystery; perhaps their more positive reactions to the university in general are carrying over into the academic domain, while they are also aware of the pejorative evaluations of the university expressed both regionally and nationally.
It has been argued that the core of a student academic belief system is comprised of students' feelings of academic allegiance-alienation (Long, 1976a). From Clark and Trow's description of the four student types, it would appear that the collegiates may evince the greatest allegiance to the university and the nonconformists the greatest alienation from the univer- sity. It is noteworthy that while the student typology is moderately associated with the three dimensions of academic alienation listed in Table V, that it is the vocationalists and the nonconformists who manifest the greatest academic alienation, and only on the powerlessness dimension. Levels of alienation from the university are relatively high among SIU-C students (Long, 1976h). Thus, the lack of association between feelings of academic alienation and the collegiate type may reflect the mixed reactions
TA
BL
E I
II
Can
on
ical
C
orr
elat
ion
A
nal
ysi
s B
etw
een
S
tud
ent
Aca
dem
ic T
yp
e an
d A
cad
emic
Go
ver
nan
ce A
ttit
ud
e In
dic
ato
r S
ets
Can
onic
al c
orr
ela
tio
ns
Can
on
ical
var
iate
E
igen
val
ues
C
ano
nic
al
Wil
ks'
Chi
D
F
Sig
nif
ican
ce
sets
co
rrel
atio
ns
lam
bd
a sq
uar
e
1 0
.14
0.
37
0.82
8
2.5
8
16
0.0
00
1
2 0
.04
0
.20
0.
95
22
.03
9
0.0
09
Can
onic
al c
oef
fici
ents
C
an
on
ica
l C
an
on
ica
l va
riat
e 1
vari
ate
2
Vo
cati
on
al
0.6
0
-0.1
0
Col
legi
ate
0.53
0
.80
A
cad
emic
0.
28
-0.0
9
No
nco
nfo
rmis
t -0
.40
0
.50
Au
tocr
atic
go
ver
nan
ce
0.61
0
.77
S
tud
ent
ind
epen
den
ce
-0.4
2
0.2
4
Stu
den
t p
arti
cip
atio
n
-0.0
6
0.5
4
Stu
den
t ac
tiv
ism
-0
.25
0
.28
t-~
4~
bo
oo
TA
BL
E I
V
Can
on
ical
C
orr
elat
ion
A
nal
ysi
s b
etw
een
S
tud
ent
Aca
dem
ic T
yp
e an
d A
cad
emic
En
vir
on
men
t E
val
uat
ion
In
dic
ato
r S
ets
Can
onic
al c
orre
lati
ons
Can
on
ical
var
iate
E
igen
val
ues
C
ano
nic
al
Wil
ks'
Chi
D
F
Sig
nif
ican
ce
sets
co
rrel
atio
ns
lam
bd
a sq
uar
e
1 0
.06
0.
25
0.92
Can
onic
alco
effi
'cie
n~
Ca
no
nic
alv
ar~
te
33
.82
12
0.
001
Vo
cati
on
al
-0.1
0
Co
lleg
iate
-0
.80
A
cad
emic
-0
.64
N
on
con
form
ist
0.0
2
Aca
dem
ic i
mp
act
- 1.
02
Aca
dem
ic c
lim
ate
0.0
7
Aca
dem
ic q
ual
ity
0
.22
429
to the university felt by this particular student group. Similarly, the lower levels of powerlessness among the academics may be a function of their detachment from the more political aspects of student life at SIU-C. In any case, it is the vocationalists who experience the greatest feelings of power- lessness at SIU-C. This finding may result from the vocationalists' greater detachment from the traditional student role, which is typically both passive and indifferent concerning the workings of the university. Perhaps due to their more adult orientation, i.e., toward pursuing a career and making a living, the vocationalists feel a greater need for personal efficacy in affecting the university system, and, therefore, are more aware of their powerless position in it.
Feelings of academic alienation have been shown to affect students' beliefs about the need for and the nature of academic reform in the university (Long, 1976i). If Clark and Trow's characterization of the non- conformist is accurate and if the speculations in this context about the source of alienation for the vocationalist is valid, then these two student types should be most receptive to change in the university. According to the canonical correlation analysis in Table VI, the nonconformist is, indeed, more reform-oriented, in that he expresses the view that pervasive structural change is required at SIU-C if academic excellence is to be achieved, and that the best agency for university reform is the student-body, not the adminis- tration which is opposed to and incapable of effecting such widespread change. The prediction concerning the reform-orientation of the voca- tionalist, based on this type's feelings of powerlessness in the university governance process, is directly refuted by the canonical coefficients, how- ever. In this case, vocationalists see less need for major structural change in the university and perceive the university administration as being less un- willing to and less incapable of producing these changes. The vocationalists' failure to be more receptive to academic reform may result from their greater detachment from the university, their comparatively positive evalua- tions of the university, and, most importantly, their greater sociopolitical conservatism relative to the nonconformists. As to the weaker relationship between the collegiate and academic student types and a rejection of the reform orientation, it would appear that these groups are more affectively attached to the university, compared to the nonconformists, while, at the same time, they find demands for pervasive university reform less salient. In any case, as the discussion of Clark and Trow would suggest, it is the non- conformists who are most prone to support a student-based movement to change the university system at SIU-C.
TA
BL
E V
Can
on
ical
Co
rrel
atio
n A
nal
ysi
s b
etw
een
Stu
den
t A
cad
emic
Ty
pe
and
Fel
t A
cad
emic
Ali
enat
ion
In
dic
ato
r S
ets
Can
onic
al c
orre
lati
ons
Can
on
ical
var
iate
E
igen
valu
es
Can
on
ical
W
ilks
' C
hi
DF
S
igni
fica
nce
sets
co
rrel
atio
ns
lam
bd
a sq
uar
e
1 Can
onic
al c
oef
fici
ents
0.0
7
0.2
7
0.91
3
8.2
2
12
0.00
01
Can
onic
al v
aria
te
Vo
cati
on
al
0.91
C
olle
giat
e 0
.02
A
cad
emic
-0
.23
N
on
con
form
ist
0.3
2
Aca
dem
ic m
ean
ing
less
nes
s A
cad
emic
cy
nic
ism
A
cad
emic
pow
erle
ssne
ss
0.0
3
-0.0
3
1.00
TA
BL
E V
1
Can
on
ical
Co
rrel
atio
n A
nal
ysi
s b
etw
een
Stu
den
t A
cad
emic
Ty
pe
and
Aca
dem
ic R
efo
rm P
refe
ren
ce I
nd
icat
or
Set
s
Can
onic
al c
orre
lati
ons
Can
on
ical
var
iate
E
igen
val
ues
C
ano
nic
al
Wil
ks'
Chi
D
F
Sig
nif
ican
ce
sets
co
rrel
atio
ns
lam
bd
a sq
uare
1 0.
08
0.28
0.
90
Ca
no
nic
alc
oef
fici
ents
C
anon
icaI
vari
ate
44
.45
2
0
0.00
1
Vo
cati
on
al
0.65
C
olle
giat
e 0
.22
A
cad
emic
0.
23
No
nco
nfo
rmis
t -0
.57
Ad
min
istr
ativ
e af
fect
A
dm
inis
trat
ive
exce
llen
ce
Ad
min
istr
ativ
e co
mm
itm
ent
Des
ired
im
pro
vem
ent
Req
uir
ed t
ime
-0.1
5
-0.0
9
0.5
7
0.47
-0
.05
432
Discussion
In describing the various types, the vocationalists possessed a less idealized conception of the university and tended to hold a less critical conception of SIU-C. In evaluating SIU-C, the vocationalists expressed the most approval of the tangible benefits accruing to their education, as well as for the public service opportunities for students at SIU-C. The vocationalists perceived the university governance process as being less autocratic and demanded less independence from the university administration in their personal lives and in their political activities. These types did, however, express high levels of powerlessness with regard to their role in the decision- making process at SIU-C. Finally, the vocationalists saw somewhat less need for radical change at SIU-C and felt that the administration was a somewhat better agency for change at the university.
The collegiates, in many respects, were quite similar to the voca- tionalists in their attitudes. For instance, their descriptions of the ideal university were not greatly idealized and their descriptions of SIU-C were less negative. They also seemed most oriented toward the tangible benefits of a university education and to the advantages of public service activity by students, and, thus, approved of the university's efforts in these regards. According to the collegiates, the university was run less autocratically and students required less freedom in their personal lives or for political activity. In contrast to the vocationalists, however, the collegiates viewed their educational experiences at SIU-C as having an effect on them, although they did not view the educational quality at the university as being especially high; and, further, they did not manifest especially high levels of academic powerlessness. Finally, as with the vocationalists, the collegiates were less discontented with the structure of the university and felt that any changes which were necessary could probably be effected by the administration.
The academic types did not possess a distinct value configuration, as did the other student types. They did, however, exhibit a less idealized view of the university as it might be and, at the same time, described the real university in less critical terms. In evaluating the structure of university goals, the academics were most satisfied with the cognitive and affective aspects of their education, as well as with the social environment and the research facilities at SIU-C. As with the first two student types, the academics viewed the governance process at SIU-C as being less autocratic and felt less need for greater independence either personally or politically. Like the collegiates, the academics felt their education was having an effect on them, but that the educational quality at the university was wanting. They felt less academically alienated. Also they were less in favor of radical change in the university and they felt that such change could probably be handled by the administration.
As Clark and Trow suggest, the most distinctive student type at SIU-C
433
was the nonconformist. The nonconformists tended to exhibit a more idealized view of what the university might be and, concomitantly, mani- fested a more critical conception of SIU-C. As with the academics, the nonconformists placed greater emphasis and approval on the cognitive and affective benefits of their education, in addition to the social environment and research opportunities at the university. They viewed the governance process at SIU-C as being autocratic and dominated by the university administration; and they expressed a need for greater independence from the administration in their personal and political lives. Moreover, they felt powerless in making their demands known to the administration, much less in achieving their needs. The nonconformists were the only type which believed that radical structural reform was necessary at SIU-C to effect academic excell6nce; furthermore, they felt the administration was both opposed to and incapable of achieving such educational change at SIU-C, and, by inference, were suggesting that such reform should be conducted by the students themselves.
Two caveats apply to the research described here and the results reported. First, the findings cited have dealt with tendencies among the four academic types investigated. Thus, in order to maximally differentiate the student types, the results concerning the various perceptual and evaluative dimensions pertaining to the university have been treated in a manner which tends to obscure the overall distribution of student responses on these dimensions. For instance, references have been repeatedly made to certain types perceiving the university governance process as being less autocratic, as feeling more efficacious in the university decision-making process, or as being more content with the structure of the university. Although this phrasing has served to clarify the distinctions between the four student types, in actuality, the dissatisfaction among the vast majority of SIU-C students in 1973 was much greater than this analysis would suggest (Long, 1976b). For the purposes at hand, however, it seemed appropriate to state the differences between the types in more absolute terms. Whether the tendencies reported here truly discriminate between the four types to such an extent will require further research at less strife-torn universities than SIU-C.
The second caveat relates to the predictive power of the Clark-Trow student types. In this study, moderate correlations were found to occur between the four types and perceptions and evaluations of the university. Given the rather generic nature of this classification, it probably is asking too much to expect even greater predictability from such a scheme. As has been pointed out elsewhere, a number of factors tend to diminish the ability of such a categorization to better explain student attitudes and behavior, particularly when only four types are employed for this purpose (Bolton and Kammeyer, 1967). The first of these factors relates to the notion that
434
individuals do not act in a vacuum, but rather interact with others in the social context. Therefore, the actor's social behavior is at least partially a function of other actors' behaviors in the situation. Second, it is important to note that the students surveyed at SIU-C are not restricted in their role behavior to the four student role orientations investigated here. Students occupy many social positions and play many social roles, often simul- taneously; many of these roles are conflicting and produce ambiguous, inconsistent behaviors. Finally, as Bolton and Kammeyer (1967) point out, the student types discussed here offer only role prescriptions and do not serve as absolute determinants of social behavior:
. . . it is important to recognize that role orientation effects only a tendency in behavior. The social structure and the interaction process as well as personality factors will also shape the individual's behavior. Thus we should not expect to be able to predict behavior with a high degree of accuracy from a knowledge of the student's role orientation. But the role orientation does tend to point the holder's behavior in certain directions andprobably inclines him to associate predominantly with certain kinds of people, who will most likely be congenial to interactions consonant with his role orientation and reinforce that orientation (p. 139).
A final point should be stressed regarding the implications of the findings reported here to the academic governance process. Although these results suggest the notion of different, competing student constituencies in the university, all of whom are expressing conflicting demands, this is not necessarily the case, particularly regarding certain basic governmental pro- cedures. The pervasive alienation among all four student types in this study, for example, was generated by an academic culture, fostered by the admin- istration, which subscribed to the idea that students were not quasi-citizens in the university political system and that students were not quasi-consumers in the academic marketplace (Long, 1976i). It is beliefs such as these that were affecting all four student types at SIU-C, and all four types would have felt much less academically alienated had the administration publicly dia- vowed such a belief system and encouraged greater student participation and involvement in the university. Unfortunately, however, this was not the case.
435
References
Altbach, P. and D. Kelly (1973). American Students: A Selected Bibliography on Student Activism and Related Topics. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath.
Bereiter, C. and M. Freedman, (1962). "Fields of Study and the People in Them," pp. 563-596 in N. Sanford (ed.), The American College: A Psychological and Social Interpretation of the Higher Learning. New York: Wiley.
Block, J., N. Haan, and M. Smith (1969). "Socialization Correlates of Student Activism," Journal of Social Issues, 25 (November), 143-177.
Bolton, C. and K. Kammeyer (1967). The University Student: A Study of Student Behavior and Values. New Haven, Conn.: College and University Press.
Clark, B. and M. Trow (1966). "The Organizational Context," pp. 17-70 in T. Newcomb and E. Wilson (eds.), College Peer Groups: Problems and Prospects for Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Huff, R. (ed.) (1971). Inventory of Educational Outcomes and Activities, Technical Report 15. Boulder, Colo.: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education.
Katz, J. (1962). "Personality and Interpersonal Relations in the College Classroom," pp. 365-395 in N. Sanford (ed.), The American College: A Psychological and Social Interpretation of the Higher Learning. New York: Wiley.
Keniston, K. (1966). Radicals and Militants: An Annotated Bibliography of Empirical Research on Campus Unrest. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath.
Keniston, K. (1970). "What's Bugging the Students?" Educational Record, 51 (Spring), 116-129.
Keniston, K. (1973). "Faces in the Lecture Room," pp. 315-349 in R. Morison (ed.), The Contemporary University: U.S.A. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kerpelman, L. (1969). "Student Political Activism and Ideology: Comparative Character- istics of Activists and Nonactivists," Journal of Counseling Psychology, 16 (January), 8-13.
Long, S. (1976a). "Academic Alienation: Correlates of Students' Evaluations of the University." Yale University: Political Psychology Program.
Long, S. (1976b). "Academic Attachment: Predicting Students' Affective Reactions to the University," Research in Higher Education, 5:233-24 I.
Long, S. (1976c). "Academic Ideology and the Post-Activist Generation: Students: Reactions to the University." Paper read at the American Sociological Association, New York.
Long, S. (1976d). "Dimensions of Student Academic Alienation," Educational Adminis- tration Quarterly.
Long, S. (1976e). "Ideology and Academic Discontentment," Adolescence. Long, S. (1976f). "Ideology and Students' Perceptions of University Goals." Yale Univer-
sity: Political Psychology Program. Long, S. (1976g). "Sociopolitical Ideology as a Determinant of Students' Perceptions of
the University," Higher Education, 5:423-435. Long, S. (1976h). "Southern Illinois University-Carbondale: The Students' View." Yale
University: Political Psychology Program. Long, S. (1976i). The University as a Political System: Sources and Consequences of
Student Academic Alienation." Paper read at the Southern Political Science Associa- tion, Atlanta.
Long, S. (1976j). "University Excellence: Students' Academic Reform Beliefs," Research in Higher Education..
436
Peterson, R. (1968). "The Student Left in American Higher Education," Daedalus, 97 (Winter), 293-317.
Peterson, P., J. Centra, R. Hartnett and R. Linn (1970). Institutional Functioning Inven- tory: Preliminary Technical Manual. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service.
Spaeth, J. and A. Greeley (1970). Recent Alumni and Higher Education: A Survey of College Graduates. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Stern, G. (1962). "Environments for Learning," pp. 690-730 in N. Sanford (ed.), The American College: A Psychological and Social Interpretation of the Higher Learning. New York: Wiley.