ATTEEJDANCE ATID PRWREE9 F'ACTgIIS IN TEST NORMS

Approved z ATTENDANCE AND PROGRESS l1AOTORS IN TEST NORMS

TlillSIS

Px-es&ntedtoi the Faculty of the Graduate School of

Southwest TexaG State Teachers College in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

MASTERIBASTER OFOP ARTS LIB~R-Y · Southwest Texas State Teachers Collem~ SUIl "forl'IIS. T ",:'118 ~

Rosa Commander~ B~ A.

B~ad'Y "TaXf:\S . San Ma~eos" T&xaa August" 1937 ACKNOViLEDGMENTS

TheThe writerwZCer gratefullyg~atefn%J=yacknowledgesacknowledges theasaistanee.the at~sfseancs andand cooperationco5p~srallEanofsf? the manym~ypersonaparsons whowho havebve mademade thiskPn3.s studys$udy possiblepossfble byby theirthe2r &ncouragementa~tandand criticismorftt;fc;iaa,.. ToTo Dr.Drc, DavldF.David F. VotawTotaw ofof SouthwestSauP.hwast TexasTerns stateSkate TeachersTeearthers

College~CoTSege, Sa.nSari Marcos,Marooa, TexasTexas,~ whosewlloae 'suggestionaug@;ssEitonledXed to%a theths selectionaalaotiun ofof' thethe problamandgz~abZemrm and whosewho~eguidancegnidanaa andandi untiringufitfrhg ass1gta.nc$aasZ@tm~.eeasraa ChairmanChaLrn~;t;laof'UP thetlzs CommitteeCodt;i;ae was'moatwas moat helpful,Wlpful* the writer :tsespeaially indebted. Speoial a.cl!nowledgrnent is raade of the generous eoBperaaodparaQlontlon and and aId~'$4ofof Dr.Dr+ J..Jr L10ydLloyd RogersRogers ofof' thetk@ Edu'­Mu* cationaatPun departmantanddega~trnenkand of'a2 P:rofessorPrafefmx?Gataa Gates TllOll1nS,'P~IOII~~S,DirectorP$rsctor" oraF the%her EnglishEhgl%skidepartment.,d@p~a~?W@n%, who"wh~, asas membersnernber~of09 thethe Com'"Corn- mittee"mlZ;%ee, spentspa% valuablevaLmibl@t:tmearld .t;%azs and en$~gy-8D49Pg3 inf n the%he eons1dera.t1onn ofof eacheach (letailcletal2 of'of this%hds ma.nuscp1pt.~~lamacrdpt~

Fina11y,PinaXJy, the&he wr1ta~wpf tar wls116Sw2911e9 toto expressaxgrass app~eelationapp~acfa.t;%~ton fopror herher siate1?~s%stsr, MissP~Tlss ValareeTa3area COl'l'l11Jaooer,C'ommaMer, andalzd forPOT Mrs.TO&

DixieD2JeS.e BarberBa~beranda& Mr. KennethH6meth A.A* Miller,BITU~P~two%WO fellowf @Plotmembersn%mbers 01'a% thethe gradua.tesehool,a8s school, £orfor theirtheir aidaid in3n checkingchacklt.n@the %he statisticalsta%2sbTcaJ.results r.eaul%sofaf th1satudy.%his fstuay* ToTo these%hestsrpersonspe~son~l and.ad toto Mrs.E@s. MargaretZlaPgareG W~lker~W&3ksr, the%I18 writerYBJP~~~Pis%EIindebted fnd~bted fOirfor enoouragement@noou~pagemeJR~ andad friel1d.ly- friem3.3y-interest.%~fi*ex~~fsL

Sa.n :Mar-eos" Texas August, 1937 1v

CONTENTS

Chapter Page I. TEE PROELEr~ OF THE SURVIVAL RATE FACTOR .. .. 1

1.1, BasisBasisofof I,rhisYMEI Study-St2;1dyi .. .., '"'. .., .., •. 1X ~

II. TIrE lllETHOD OF THE INVESTIGATION

XI SourcesSatllascas ofof the%he DataData*.. ... II. .., ... .. •. 1616 2+ ProoedUJ!lePsooadlure ..* ...... II' • ...... 185% B. Results and , , 22 Results and InterpretationsIntsrp~~tations...... '", 82 III.. THE AT~Pl~Nl)AHClg PACTOR AND ANEW-'J:'.lPE NORM.. 37 Method Employed in the Construction of a Series of Norms .. ... II 37 Interpretation of the Scale...... 42

IV..TV SUMMARY"STTWRP* OONCLUSIONS"C OI4CLUSIQTG3 ANDA~~ HECOMNJEl'JDATIONS..KEC OFfif;ETEIAT3:01JS a 4949

I 1",%I5l.itm111ary.9-ry* ..0 .-* ..s ..* .-C ..P •+ ..* ..* ..* 49 s.8+ ConelusionsGaaakuaLonts andand Recommendations.Racom~ndatiana. .. .' 50 APPENDIX ...... ,...... iii .. .. 52

BIB!,IOmtAPHY 'II, l' ......

I' LIST OF TABLES

1. Resu.l.ts of' the Oomputation of' a Series o£ Coe.ff1elents of Corralat:1on~ • '. .. 2. Correlation Between the Test 1iIeane a.nd the Attendanoe Pactor...... " .. .. ' ...... 24 4.4% CorrelationCo~rsZatiionBetweenMLw~sn theLhe Test MeansNprm# andaazd theths RegressionE~~PEIPIEIZQIICoefficients.CoeFL"%aSen%~ a .. • ..r .. to .. .., :3525 5. Cor3:':ela'tion Between the Teat ]J0ans a:nd the· Percentages of OverngeuGss. .. • .. 11> .. III 26 6.. CorreIat10n Betw'een the Attendance F'actor and the Coefficients of' Variation...... ~

CRAPTER I

TEE PROBLEN: OF THE SURVIVAL RATE PACTOH

1. Basis of This study

TheThe ma1:n.mln problemprobPp5m otof this%113.# 1nvest.lga:f;lonSnvesP;3ga%Esn1s5s tota make a c~itlea.l@~itPcaSstudyaP;ixly ofa% thethe influence1nf2usnrse onan educationaleduca.E%omltesttest normsnama ofof the importanthp~~Lan%variablesv&r?%at~X89 of02' (:l)(31) thethe peroentagegercenkags of'of sohol.asulesscWlastz3Lcs inZa averageaveragp,a dailydat9.3 attendanc.ea-htendanae,.., orUP the$31~ratio~a%2a betweenbe%weeathethe llu.mberXIIXP~~~TOof02 scholasticE*S~Q~B#%~CSs onon thethe censusCBDBIIB roll~091 andttna the*t;[email protected];uaZ :r.rumbettnumber whowho arears infn averageaverage dal1:yda%Xy a.ttendance,.attendanale, I I schoo1~. 1 andanti (2)(2) thethe age-grade~s-fl;raaestatus&atus of'aF aa s~hoo2,oror thethe amountamount j of02 [email protected] acceleratIon.accsleratf~n~ 1, AA prom.1nontp;rominekn@pl(u~e gEwe is1;4 btllngbaftng glvEfJn@van to.t;a standardizedstandazdizsd testateats inin ou~OUP educationalsr3tuoatlamX system"syatan, amam3 the'the gene-raJ.gene3raZ feelingfeeXing 182a tha.t%hattha:t:J.'l klle33t~pla.ce pplaco isis seeureliiascw8, InXn the2;he pastpa&$ twentytwenty yearsgears there%hershavehave beenbsslr greatgZ?eaP;developments Bevalagmen%a inItn thel21e 1m.provementkprov@m@nP, a.ndand popu1.a,.,.iza.tlonp#pxClst~i%a.tltonof'of measurementIlaeasu~@n@n%inin education,.educa'i;ion, andand onon

thethe wholewhale the.t-;hs progressp~og;e,easinIn the%126 fieldftrsld ha.shas beanbsen substantialaubelan6iaS a.ndanti ;rca.l.real+ However)'haw eve^, therekEss~eaream many many problemsp3?ob3tsm related~ePatedtoto tasting%eat%ngwhioh aream stillakt;%klunaolved,.unsolved, Oneone of02 thek318 out.s'tamingau%s%ardl~problemsp~ublens inin educationalelgtsoa%%o;na% lneaawem.&:nts~waswramsntais:Xs thetihs useus~aandlntex>p:pet-atlQnand Znt;a~prestatiunofof teattese norms.Mmsa AnAn ana.lys1sanaxysL8 01'of most-most edu.catiorm'leduca%5ordtteat test normanoms reveals~~vealc4thatthat

-2. * 2:

they are influenced by many uncontrolled factors. Grade normsnoma andand ageage, normsnams havehave forfor somesum timetlms beenhen consideredoan~idared ae~:t.oulJly unreliable. Harry A. Greene, in his intro­ duction to the U:n:1veX'sl ty of Iowa Studies In Education. Research Bulletin nu:mbe):'l 1. states thai; Grad$G~ntienormanom~ aream generallyg.esneralXy consideredcunsidarsd s$~loualyssrloua3.y unreliable.~.~ms~ta'b~e,AgeAge no~nanom'pta mayma$ improve%raprovethe the situation~ti+kuaE%osz somewhat~OHIIBW~~~butbut thekhe analysleawLysli_aot'typ1en1 of typical practicespracEScg~j inin the*he de:Vlvatlondrs~8anClormofof suohstmh normSnorm 1nd:tcates2M.4ca%et3thatth~t therethe~eareare stills%flJlnany1~~x19 v~"1ablasvwiab165 which38ikf0h are-a notmt controlled.coilt~olXed, .AgeAga nomsmms basedbased uponupon thethe [email protected]... lng.Zng ofof' tl1.6GI@ sam.es8m~studentstgf;ud@ntf4 whoal'ewho usedZISB~Infn thethe d.erivationdtmlvakf on ofaf agesga norrtls:raomh~introduce fn%saduoemanyman7 unus1Ullwlusl;taX conditions.oondf %iom* S1U'~lya.ge9weXy aga 1s38 nQtnot the-63 onlyon;ty faeto~f aekt;ls~ wh1.chwl~lehmustmuse beeontrolled~1,s aaszL~oll&ed~DoesBoaa the.1;Xm menta1mentax ab111a'tsZltLyty at:of thet31a incHIndLvla~nlvidual orQF thethe educationalsduca.tPom5. prog:t~esspz7agpL'oss 12S.'76?I~TTOanya1q- il1i'luonca 91zr"X?~@nceon0x1 expectodexpectad ageage orOP gradegrade seores?scores? IsIs the%be abl15.abiX3-kzrt1T ofof theIth%twelve'" fmcLve- yearyear oldold l:ndn the%JIG i'ifthIfbffkil'rgrade pad@the%31s SOf,1Ssm3e asa8 thatLImt ofsf the&ha twelve~aQrtwelve -year oldold ~n9n thet51e sev$nthsattan%hgrade?g~5&3? TheTho answeraanswer 1s111 obviously~~abviansbyin%aa the%ha nega.:tive.lne~a%iae*z J.J. RR... Crawfo:rd~rarrford~2 hasllas mademade aa comprehensIveoomp~@hemsivestudystudy ofof the influence otteducat1onal test norms of three :tmportan-t var:tables:vapiab3te~: na.melynai~42y,I chronological ~Izvo?~olaglaakageage, ~ l'll$ntalmntal age,age, andand the%.e schoolschsaJ progressprogmms ofsf thethe 1ndivld1?a.la%n&ivid~xalsuseduaad in3.n thethe derivat:ton of the norms. He haa also suggested that similar studies should be ma.de for -the pl.W'poa.e of 1nvestlgat1tlgall phases of' the eff'ents of these and. othel? possible factors on t$st. norms ..

1..5, UniversityUxxive~s92;yof02 Iowa.Iowa, 8tud1t:H~, in$nEducation. &luca.t;Scln, ..LI Resear~R&so,ar~~S,tuaies&$udiies .!n&~ducat1ol,t$' Educam, !, P".-:-:"57"'"e 2. Cvaw:rord,.J. R., liSt and .f..ro~~HJ.a Pactors :1.n Test, 110:t"l.'nS~ Doetor's disseraifOn, 13'4,. Un1v$:t"s!ty of :rowalJ {AEstract 111: University of Iowa. Bttld1es ln Educat~~n... Resea:r(}l1~tud!t?~lnJi:dtlcation,· I.r .. - Thisfph3e studysbxdy introdu.cesZntroducas whatwb-l; maybenay be termedtemed the1tsurvlva~.t;W *sum5vd ratepats faetor~r. bybr whichwh%ch1.8is meantmemt the naturenaixra and extentaxtePrtr to

whiohwhf ch the%I143 pr~antagep:61"'oenta.ge of seBalasS5csseho~ast1es in avel"'ageaverage dail.ydtz91y attendanoeottswlance and thetibe ag&-gradeatatu5%a-pade sGa%us of a schoolschool, system.syskem affectafiact testBes-l; nQrma.Thenoxma* T& p~oblemp~obJemwagwas suggestedsugg~atsaby an articlea~tictXawhltihwh%& appea~ed1napp&x?eB2x3 _.~e .TexasTbx&b4 OutlookOutT~okforPox December~December, 19363936,~ writtenm%%en by theWe3 aut-horsau2;hbrs of'of the$ha :New-SouthNswuSout& AchievementAcMevem~tnt Tf>ststi Rather than malta comparisons by the use of means oPQvarages.or averageis, whichwMeh wouldwowJld meanman that%bat mostmat pup2Xspupils in9x1 the%he grade would have to be eons1dexaed either above-..grade or

belo\'V-grade~ba9ow-grade, the autho1."sauthors establishede stabl2s'hsd seore-zonesscore-zones :rot'fOF the)chs

various grades within which tit child 1sconsidered at-grade. EaohZaclh. zone :tsabont2.a aba1a.t; oneam andam5 one "'half'-11~3.1 gradesbvsd~rawidew5da and.am3 overlapsOVOPZ~~Bnbollt~Bou* a 11&.11'haLf gl"adeg~qadsupon the%h@l :n.ext1xx.t; [email protected]~6a FoX' a givenggP~8;"1.grade.grade, thekhi3 normalMQ'E?~W~ scoresoom f()rfop the tbwGbw o:f'scb.oo1.QS aclhoo3 yeQryea2 dete;rmil1esdetermillea the$h# center63@XI?5@~ofsf the%[email protected]'IBr ••cr+,.

TheseT~Bs$zonesP~B~GS pem2tpermit thetb~c~a.e.sifica.tiollclassff5.ea.t;Zuu ot'all02 all pup33.spupils as (;1e:f.th~ra.bove"'grade,%l~ar aT).r>ve*;~a&e, at-gradeat -grada a.p,Ol" 016 beJaw-g~ado,below-srad(}. NumbersN~zmlssrs fal1:i.ngfaJl3.ng into5nto thesekheae olassificationsalasaif%cal%ons may be convertedcoxiver2rad 'to%o pezlcsxlkagespercentages, andeompa.rfs.onsand compaHsarrs may b~rbamademd@ ba%menbetween schoolsachoa2~c or02 wiwT%hth normtllnoma expecaxpeetationsi;ations. *35

Whe,ncomparisona of potaceni:;ages of above-grade li' a:t"'grade # and [email protected] pupifspupils we:r$wers made~md8on the b~3a~iabasis of threeWmee

kgqaat~rpe$ of schoo1sse3clooXs (namely.(naxneSy, smallsmaLl inde.pendentJndspeMent districts,&Pa L~3.ats

\ largeIa~ge01e$ty t.y aehools.sohauZa, andancl x"UralxwaX orOP county schools),a~haa3.a)~15%t wagwas fou.nd.that th~ following eond1tionsex:1sted:4

*,.It

3. Gray, Hob t and VQtaw,. David F., nrJ.a.king Reports lt or Test Results ].lIeaninstu., 'l. .. ,t.rh.6Texas Outlook, Vol. SO,. no. 12 (December, 1936) t p. BY;- ,

4. Ibid. j. 'p.. ,. 21. A .. 4

Pe:rcantages Above....grade At-grade Below-grade Small Independent 3~.2 35.4 ~3.4 Large Independent 15.9 31.3 52.8 Rural or County 11.5 27.9 60.6

The authors of this artiole do not fa.il to emphasize thattb% theset;h@sedatada%a should nevtlrnzsver be takent&@n as an absoluteab8011zPla3 criterioncrZte~ionfor ;Judging~'uag9n.gthe%he ef'f':lciencysffricisacy ofaof a schoolseh~orsystem1l"s?p..e;em, for this would mean that the small independent districts are more efficient than the large city 8chool.s J an inference that the writer agrees would be highly doubtful upon such little evidenoe. SuchSueh datadaCa shonlderkzs12261 nevel"navsr be takenk&h;~snaaanabsolnte ss an a%scrXa%e oI'ltarlon~x~f.t~rs~Sonof'02 theafflc1aneythe aff 9cPemy of a schoolschoo3. 8ystem.~~lyatern~ ThereThsra arsara othel"o%e;h@rmaaSU1"esmeaarares of'of ef'f:leiency.sf: -3.c%enay* For exampleaxampke,_ the%he la;rgeciJakga c2.i;~ty schoolssclsoaZs :maymay havelx~v-ea very high 8urvivt:tl@~llrviual!laterate in9n thetks grades;g~adssg1.3.. s,,€I .. , theyt3zeg m8Y'k$epm;g.kffep allaJ3. their%h&i~childrench2Xdrsln inrLn school.BG~OQ~~SurelySu261y ah1gha h9& su~v$valsu~vlval ratarake 1ala a ma.rkmrk of'eftleienoy,of ef%$sfsnuy,but1.711% itIt invariably2nva;riabXy redllceaPed~lcesa echoollsschanX*s averageave~aga testtesC scoresscurea beZowbelow thethla averageavopage gosall31ltepossl1)le 1'01'60;~-it-5% toko maintain1mLnta2n by f·orcin.gI'arcZrz~; children0hfXd~9nof'of lowabil1ties%OW ahPlb9;fe~ outo.fschool011% af scl1os3. by meansmearia of0% hil3hhi@ aeholaetiesaholsakjee presswepressure and.and retardation.ret;a~dat2on~WhereNhe~4 PCZBS%~X~~possible, teattss-2; reau:trasuX%sts shouldoh0~2dbe coupled@oupled. withw%Eh ageage-grade"'grade studiessk~xdlltss,'" gradegrwds*p~opesa....progress studies,..stt1~3ltx.t~ orar surv1.valswvivaX rate studies~k;radies to givag9va f''tllJ.erfiXl8r. mean1ng.5rnaaning,s The dlf'teranoe in the perfol"mance of the three types of" saho()ls :1s pe:r.~haps largely attributable to factors not considered in the nOl"'ming 0:1' the test,. If 'there are faeto-rs. QpeJnlting to cause the d:tf.terences among the thraetypes or sehools. it seems reasonable to bel:teve

that%ha% somesom ofsf these tactorsfaotora operate to eaUSfJcaws differs-noaad32Xarenees .-. 5

among#utmng thekkm variousvarious schoolsscI?..ooXs wiw3khfnthin eacheach type..-t;yp~+This'F3z5.s study~e3.tu3~ willwflZ bebe 11w..1ted.Zfmfted toto; onlyonly oneone ofsf the%ha f'orementlonedfo~sl;aentfan$&t-ypas B ofof sehools,schoa2s, thato:fthe* of the%he SJ,lal1s~:aaXlindependent 5szdepe.esl.fsn"i;districts.dfs%rietsb .

2. Other Investigations in the Same Field

Oth$rO-kl~e~thanthan CraW£ordfsCrawf~x~l8 d1sse~tat1ond%s~a~tatZ~a?ent1t1edenLSt;Xed Aae ~-anti ProLW..!..~ r,9.(ti?2r$~lT~f{lx l!2...rm.s,. the writar was unable to­ findf$nd anyany manllscriptsman~zscs~%ptaorox- ~tlletlngslmilarXxr%le5%nas%m.tllar to%a theLhe pre8en~p~essnL study.-skudye AA careful~arecf.tx3studyrpk'tzdy of'of the*he literaturelitae(a%t.~ein$rs thef1eld%ha Pfeld andanti ofof publishedpublished. listslfata ofof theses%hesa;sand and b~uletlnsbtfiSe%%ssarevealedxevgalaa thatthat onlyonly ara sma.llama11 peraentagepeTcenttyp ofof allall. investigationsinvesGigat%ons1n %n the%he field$leJd of'of teststesta andand [email protected];sconductedcaniluctead 1n%nthe t;ha lastlaat fivefflve

yearsyears dealscl~alain9n any8117wayway withwtf .E;h test%st nOI'!asmmsrG.. 6 Man;lT+hn:j= stTl.d1esst-lldiss havehave

-' '*CUpuU1pe.,- "

1. Bergrna:'1,. uvaltel" G.. $I Influence of 'lJariolls Sta11dards 01' Attainment on ee~aTn""StancliiFdrz'eaIl'ests. 1§2E:3. universIty ""Or UrchIga,ri',-' Ann A:r>bor;-- --

2. Bobbitt, Joseph I.!atthew, II~ Pi, Oorilpils;t,:1.on of No1:"mS on Several Testa o.f. Learn1m.MaS't.erfs £hests" 1933,. 'fTn:tvers!ty 7ir' southern'C's.!I?orn1a« 3. Culver'J!! ]Ks,ry Mar.1orie,I:rekle.1"ttj1ion 9! a Norm :r,or litho JU1'l1,or¥:tEl! .§.e!!0o,*, ~re{{i~t1rSJ9.I ~.ptlt'U.Cf(f":.t:eptU 19..r. Qrali,q !1..::.... .h!astor, fa thearg,p Ib35, syracuse ... 59 p. ms .. 4. Edson,. Robart Clay" ':£he Inflilenc~ of Varla~ions of Ad.m1Jd$t~ation Upon iE.!., Norms .or tEi seaaIiore. Pi't~~ piscrimination Test,. Manter's thesis,. 1934, Uh.\versit'Y or c'o:torado.. (Abstl"'aet lnt Vniv~:t"s.1tz of Colorado studies. Abstraots of Theses £01" Hrsne.E.pesr~as; !~·~h 19 "20~ )--.- 6

been ma(le l'ecently o:n the uses of teats. A few oi: these

studies deal witil trte use of' teats f'or making comparisons of some t~ype... It 1e evident that there is still a need for ra~ea2'ch thatw111 investigate the 1n£1uence of varIous possible uncontrolled factors upon test norms..

3. Uses of Teats.

AlthoughAZ.I;IIQ?~~$I-LteachersL%~cI?~Fs have'nave alwaysa9ma,~sendeavoredent3eavsred toto measuremaasups

theif;fx~progressppagresa ofsf their%lwfl^pupilspulpills, ·fl· 15%t waswas notmPt untiluntiJ. aboutabout 1908l988

that%hat aniTany nt0thodaathud otheroUaer thantllan the43x3 tef1.cooI"Bencb~tet s .judgmentsfubpenks ofsf allalL tra1.tstraits andand a.bilitiesabi5iti~swaswas er.lployec1.s~~pIo;red+

Thera931ero areare severalasvaral impol"'tnn't&aportan-8;reasonsreaaona whywhy the'1;b vastvast;

cha.xlge@hangsinfn educatj.onaleduoen$;lowal measurementsmeascPe~~ernts oecocc-srred* 1.lrred. POII'FOP oneam thing,thPnglS,the the usause ofa% teststeats in3x1 thef;lm armyaarmg duringdll~hg191VandX9E' and 19181918

gavegave lita mwmzv impetus~ap~~~toto thethe tJ:lOvement,;n~zvemntjthe2;ho usegas of09 thethe testLest;

resttlts :tn plaeJ.ng r;lon Vi/here tb.e~! were of greatest sewiee

demoY'.i.St:t'sted JiJhe usefulness of tho new test method.s It

Educa'l;ol'8 then hage11 to 1"efl11ze that these new ...typetests

couldcoxaXd bebe 0'£of greatgreat valuevalue inSn the%'ns classroo!.1cZaaaraors to estimateo~L5natsthe%he quality-andq~nnlltiymd e:rffiH~t1vencss@fPect3ven3asof' of claasroome2a~1~croomworlt..w0~1i.~ InvestigationsP~vestigatSona werewere mademda thatthaf; revealedrevealad that%'hat- teaohers'fiaachera* marksmarks andand ratingsslatfngs

couldcould not!aoC lH}be relied el led 1::.11(.)11.1;pon asas beingbaPl?r; accu:rate.ucc17.rate~r1 Ll:ncolnandLZz~coLna&

... ~, - 7•7* For'FOP asU!I'll'l18.I'Ya s-ry ofaf theseth.aset ea;t!'lyeamr%y studIes~L~~fnasofof mlu"ka.maz13Ea, consult~~nsulGStarch"Staroh, Daniel,Dan%&, }§d:~lcat1qtJ!.:l: Ps:t:cholo8l, chap.rshap. 22.22# NewNew YorkTCOPZK ..* TheDm J'3'laemtttmemillan 9Xara Compa.n7. 1924.. 7

'WotJkma.n su.mma.riz6 the reasons for suoh s. vast change by saying

WithWZth thekhe- unrelia.bilityume13iaPzirity. o:fteaehe:rsof tsao.&ra f marksmhs andand. judgmentsJudgmetnks clearlycLfsmXy indicatedSndicaZsd byby theChe resultsresuX%s of'of manymny investigations,.InveskSgatlfrfz~3~andzLnd the9;he needneed :forfor reliableseltable measuringm%aswing instruments%~stw~xlY;skeenlykaanzy f'61t~fazt, it?It 1s3s notno5 surprls1ngthat~qrXs%qgfWt the$he growthg~ow+bho:faf the&he teatingtsatitng move­move- mentmnsnt hashas beenbeen veryvery rapld.raysltd+88 The testing Movement, althoughcomparatively new,. has made the use of' educational tests :for the general purpose o:r improving 1nstX'Uot1onalmostaa conmronplaoe asas theths useuse otaf textbooks.t@%t;baokssMill10na M533.f ons attestsof hs%ahave have beenbeen gtvan throughout the country"a.:nd students of eduoation haveXiam becomebecome extremelysxt~e.me;lyconsciousaonscf&a~.as ot:af the+he importancekmpo~L%m@eanda& extentextent of' this rela.tively new devi.ce. Of what value are these teststeats initn thet11a solvingsoltvf ofsf teachingteaem= andatld administrativeadmln%strative problems?p~ablarna?

IfTf thethe teststeaks are6~~118merelyme~eZy givengtvsn beoauseIseoause :19%t seemsseems thethe popularpop112ar thingthing 'boda.,ka do, thent&e?n the%haproceduregracedt~m isits exceedinglyexct3adtwly unwiseutr~wlssa.ndam3 expans1ve.. Presse:v and Pr-e.saey state that manyt1mesit appearsapp~m~asas thOUghtkhcsragh testatests werevsm g1vengiven forfor nonu otheruf;k1es? reasonrsfrason thanthan becau.se'beowuse everyoneaveE'-JPcrne elseeksa waswas doingdofa; soso,..

~hewr:tte~BTha mB%t;ez~shavehave knownkaown several9eveflaJ schoollgchaok superin'tendents~'~.tpe~%n.l;ea~13.t;8 whowhp bought--e.tbau&%--&% oonsiderableac30nsLdeESBbXd expenae--blal'ursexpsnas--blsudca .f'Ol"Qfop a surveysumey of.of their%help system,sysf;am, mademade thethe surveysurvey atat thethe costooat; of'of muchmuah tll1W&fmendand effortsfPOI?% on on thekk@ partpart&of a.llaXX ooncerned"oamarnad, andand then--.f11edth~n-4iTedthe paperspaper8 and.el& mademade nona usau~bwha.teverwhat eve^ ofof thethe re::mltsreaulta,g.. 9 Tb.&re &hould a,2ways bea def1nitepurpose baok or ever"J testing program.·

8a ZSacofn, 33, A,, aM Workmant L, L,, 8d the Usss of Ta8L RsbuXts - - * - ...@ n'w 8

TheraThere areara manyaany wayswars to%a c:Lasslf'ycJnssifg thethe usesussa ofof testatestae.. ForFor example"example, L1nco:LnEivleoZn andand workmanQltilsaif'yWorkman cXa%af%$thethe useus0 of'of standardstandm teatstests underuMer thethe followingPollowing head.ingg.:l0headlws:10 1. Survey 2" Experiment 3. 1001vidual diagnosis 4. D1"11.1 The Review ot Eduoational Researoh mentions the following ...... J" F'. ... uses of tasts::11 1. Detarminingand evaluatIng administrative pol~c1es" 1ne1.uding the elassif'1eation of pupils. provision for ind.ividual d1f.ferances" atandardlzat10n ot teaehe:l?5 f marks" curriculum co-nst:ruct1on,and. supervisory a.et1v:tti~s.. 2. Setting up objectives and evaluating the products of theeducatlonal program. 3. Evaluating me thoda o:r teaching.. 4. Improving learning through a dIscovery of learning dit'f'ieulty." the Bourcesoi' motivation~ and the uses of self''''''t.ea.ehing teat materlals

""",,.' J 10..L1neoln,20. LlncoZn, E.E. A.A., ~ a.ndand Workman.Workman, L.L. L.,.L., .9J2.e.£.ti..1:s. a., pPI.. 'Z727*.. .11. Review of' Educational Rese-arc..h .... Vol. 3 (December,.· 1933), p. 5l5.~ ...... ".... , ~ .. this would be known as the S1.U'V6il use. The purpose of' the slwvey is to study groups rathe:r than individuals; that 1s, to decide Whether or' not the classes. grades", and schools of a co:mmun:tty are atta!n1ngtha levels of'acoompl1shmenti establishedaerlahlf shed bybgf the%he norm.$noma oJ:a$' the&be tests,It;ss%t;s+ Comparisol'.lsCamparisorra maymay beba mademda betweenhetwaea oneomgrad$ made andasld a.notherano%t;hter'Within%LWEI the&he sameamB sehoo'l,rscho.c;r%, b$tweenbs.l;w@snaa gradeg~radaandam3 th&k2-m normsmmse g:i.~9vsnvan forPQT thatt1w.t; grade"grade, betweenberkwaen

indiViduals;Xnd9vidtza3a andadthe no:rms"~QXSIIZS)betweenones:choolB8tt;ween an% aehoojl andand a.nother~anaeher,

andadSo 80 011.on, ThusThzts it.3% 1a2~ evidentsvldisne that%kt&& teststsst~oanpran 1>E;I)$ made:made valuableu&Z~ab%eandand practicalp~aa$i~aJtinstrumentsinatwlmmrr+s torfop useuse in5x1 the%he schools.BC~OUX~~ It%t should~hotaldbebe remembered.~csmembcared,however1 however, thatt11aL ina:ny9n any typetype ofof

comparisonco~w5130ntheretbax~ is%S alwaysa9,wa.y~anoppor1mnlan 0ppor3un9tyty !'oX'enorfor smo~ unlesatheun3cess 43x8 normanam ise2early9s cZeetr3.y defined.deffned*

8tandaJ?d:i.~ed tests are distinguished by the fa.ot. that they are a.ccOlupa11.S.ed by norms; many 1ni'ormal objective tests rneetall other requirements of a sta.ndardized teat

except this one. Norms a.t~e defined in VIl'1':lous ways. Greene· and Jo:rgen$en say that unarms ~epreaent the actua.l ~evela of achlevemellt of typical sehool ohildren under controlled c0l1c1:ttioua. H12

'.fhere are va1i'1oua k.·11108 of norms I, 811M as age norn'!S,

gra.de norms" pereentl1e nO:t'ms:t and tentative norms.

h 1 • -" we 10

Previously tests have bElen aecorl1pan1ed by '01ther grade norms or age nor.rna, and in a few instances by both types.

'rha ma.nner of grouping the pupils U86d in de:rlv1ng the norms. will determine the kind of' norm provided. VVhen pupils B:r~ grouped by agee, without rega.x'd to grades" the resulting norms ara af£~ :r:or:tn.l:!,. If' pupilsaragrouped by school grades without regard to ages or the leneth of time they have attended school, the resulting norms are

~adenp.rm~., 'Nox-rns aI'e obtained hy giving the tests to alsvge sample of 1nd:i..viduals representing the population for which 'the norm is intended. If tho norms wee.stabl1ahed by controll1:rl.[; a sil1gle faetor"such as age or gradE). and eJ..1 other faetol?.e·are: e:1ther :tgnox'ed or considered to be distrlbntedao that their influences are counterbalanoed, then any comparison with the norm will be in er-J.:'or 1f those same f'actol'l's are not present in the group being compared justa-a they were in the original group. The l'eal:i.zation that such conditiona do l)ot operate il'1 exactly the aaIllellu:u'm01~ haacaused wrlter8 ill the :field ofedu.... oat:tonsJ. nteasuremE,H".tts to :tnteX"pret the results of testing veryc.nrefuJ.ly and cautiously. Th$ raat that test norms should not be used as an absolute ba.sis for claasiTylng pupils has been :recognized :for many years,. Ase,arly as J..922, the statement wa.s nutde that The educ~t1onal tests8..tldmental teats are perhaps the moat :palishle means of classifying pu.pil$ 1:mt they should never be aona:tde:red 11

alone.alone* ...... Theme norlllSnomm orUP standardsatasxlards usedused inIn theset1msa teststests !i!Ustmslhe be studiedstrldied ve'Jrlvsxy carefullyca.mxfWlg inIn arrivingmfv5ng atat pes111ts.rasnl.t;s+ •••., . We78~1Sh01J~d.sh073Xi alsoR~SQknowknaw theth~amonntamo:xn% ofof retardationrsta~daf20a in$n thethe gI'OUpglpaup fromfrom whichwhich standardsskarndards areare c1er1ved.13CIOFZTB~ZJ3

Another early \vr.o1ter makes the followinG state!UEmt:

TestsTeats areare valuableval~ruablo,t thonthon,s In2-n that"that; theytEmg he~pfm,o'tp tokta lnterpre2ntsrpratt thethe pupilpupiXtat a sohoolsahool re~ocort2,cord,. OnOn thethe other0the3~ha.nd,klanEt, thet11~school3~?1053 recordFBCOT~ anclant1 teachers'taachors! judgmentsjM@enta areweotten ogtsn valuablevaJuabSe asas meansmcsans ofQP interpretingSn~erg~st3ngthethe result3restCL6s of'of tests..tests, TheThe tests.tests do notglst furnishfzr~flahaa completecompXe.te measuremoasum ofof the.&ha capac:1.capac3tyt~ whtchwh9ch nndorliesum2orl3.a~ach:tevema:nt ach"r~ernenl;~~$'..1.4 Yet many administra.tors of' testn still persist in using the scores made on a ata-'I1.cln:rd:tz0d t.o~t as the sole 'basia for classifying and. promoti1ne studeni.;s # withOl:t seemint";

to%s real:T.zeretalf-zs thethe valuet7ti3%~@ofof man~rmany elementss~emantsnotna'l; measuredsntsas;azacl byby tests or the influence of' still other factors not ope:ra.ting in the same manner as they were opera.ting on the orlgil1al group. Another impo:rtant pha.se of the use of test norms is

their "l.lSe for measnring teachl11g ability lHisecl upon the measurement of pupil achievement. ~~e!["he [email protected]=ging this%hPs rnetl10dmLEmd ofsf measuringz*t?anwrfrig teachinf~teac3.~fngabilitya'In359t;y is28 that;that; the%he pupilspupf3.s of:of' good~_;nad teachel"steachers will,well, llnd{~rII~~Wcertain~e~kaln conditions,couletieisna, achieveaola%e-ve mOl'temore f:U1aa measuredmaaeurtsd byb standa.rdizeda~t3~sMax~~eedteststesta ofof pupilpu-p$.l aohi.evementaoh$evawn% thantbcbn thetb pup:i.lspup3.2a taughtta~xghl;b;! poorpoor teachers.P;c4acflerss AccordingAaotsrding to.i;o thisth5s rnethodm"zliod ofai menauringmesstt~L~;i;teaching%@aching abilit-y,ab132LyY oha.nges~h~ageain912 the't;beducationa.l esdul=a%Znnalstatuss.f;ak~;zlrs ofof pupilsp?~pTln fromfrom thetill@1Jegi1U~ingbeg2lulf n,g ofof thf)$118 schoolscl~ookyearysw to*t;o thethe e:ndsnd :maymy bebe useduasd to&Q meas-uremeasure theWe e1'f:tc1ene"1oSficiency ofof t~a.eherstea~hsrs~le..1.5

13. Armentrout" W. D•• uClas-s:if'lcation and Promotion of Pupils," .!Cl'llc.at.~.9.ni Vol. 42 (April. 1922) I P. 509. 14.5$* Freeman,I?wemnl. li'rankFrank NN,,•• "Bases"~aaasonon WhichWhich StudentsSZ.*ud@n%aCanCm BeBB Class1f1edEf.feetlvely."Classif lea 33ffectfvely," School-School Review"-@ Review Vol.Vol. 2928 (December,(Dsoambtm, 1921),19231)0 p.p* '144.T44r 15. Walker, Helen 17f.,. ad., The ly!eQ,f!ur~ment of' T~ach1~ p1"t:t1e lennz, p.74. • 12

SurelySwe3y if' schoolssch~oleare conductedcormduc%ed for 431.0the aa;kesake of the ela51W%nychildren, then teachingteach9~:should bebrs 311dgedjudged by itse.fi'eoti%~;s efPact on the cklld~en*children. DrJSsw.. Wall~er161a~~orXBsta.tesst;ate?s though2;huugb tha.t%hat %hethe nseuse ofo.f -betstestes-a as a sole er1miter2antarian of:of pupilpup51 changechange,l' andmb therefore of' %aaaMngteaohing ef.f1e1ency,sf3'lcZena~, is5s J.1ab:teX3.aIXi.s to&o crl%%citsmc:r1t1clem beoa~~aebecause the re8~2Jt~e:mlt is1s ltkely to be the selection ,of good dr111 masters with no otherdesirah1equalif1eation.csthea~das3.~a't:~Se ql~aS%f 9catfonr ExperimentE3t;Fsrhen+ has shown that a child fa sclliever1ent acore is more closely related to

1:.da own abil1t'Y than to B..."lY help a. teacher ann give him; pupil. change on achievement tests l.umal1y show.s a low correlationcvsrrzsZaCZon with any directdfract measuremeaswe of %aaclaa~teacha~ CPB~GE~~traits. AnotherAnokhor dislJouragingdisczowagLng aspectaapaat ofof' the attempt %oto find a measureneasum whichwhioh willwlZX show hSghhigh cfr~ralal;ioncorrelation tvlfhwith pupilpape3 ehangeehaq;e Is the apparentappaxer~ttsndsne;~~tendency rsTof pup%Jpupil chrxschange to be conditioned by'by a.crt very largefarg~nwi~be~nUll1bs;tJ ofoil other variables.varlablers. TheseThelae majrmay includeZnslacla such ~0'0emh.ggoverning f'aetoraFacCora aa.aa intelligence,Sn%elXSg@~zee,the2;'he pupilla1 a own Babitahabits of.'etudYt-af ~5kudy 1nterost;and%11%@3?93f; and physical.pl~ytyaicaloond%.f;ion,oondition. Pup33Pupil change maymag alao&XBO be .a1'.factedaff-acted by faator~tf'aetarsasaoeiateda~r~oa9att;sd withdth the%ha teacher"taaohar* hishi8 ps~aonality,personality., vofce,voice,. dress,dress., alari~Xaritytoy of tho'lJ.ghtthaugbt and expressionexp~@sslon,.. B~~XIQS0118e 02of Pawo~,htu'llo:r" andas& so on.an. InadclitionIn sEdcZ%Qfunto30 kl~ethe forogaiigforegoing are a largelap@? :rm:rnbermher 01'nf i·o.ctm:>s2actu;t;is such asaaa khsthe s9zss1~G of the classcX;tass,f thet110 physic-alpI-~yaic~alem:ldi~o'ndik%~n tion 0fof %hath$ buf2d2ngI.bu:tldiIlih anda& sono onDM and.a& on.,on*. LetLsP; usua say tjherethere apea.re flffyi':ti'ty such factora~.iac%ora,, thot1Jjhkhozv3h ofcou)?se02 ooupsa nonoons om knaowsknows how many~mnytherethem are"are* UnlesserMZssls these ff1ft-:r tfti$r a858a.re themselves.eJ.oselytharnrselw s cXosg5y related,roeZatsd tlt~anthen ptipPJpupil chansschange taU.atmuat inevitablyf~rtsvltab5yshow a lowSaw r~sJationcrHprelationship Loto ma%moat of 'them.$t;bsmuxr1?

Certa,1.nlyC~rtst3.n&yno oneans has yetye% i'oundPound zta dexCfnft;E,defin.ite fo~>lprooffoolproof' method for the measurement of teaching eff'1c.iency. The

RlI_ _ 1" , iJ

17.. ·_1Ibid.,"' __ p.. xiii .. studys'krdy ofor6 thiskhLs problemproblem isis oneone ofof the%he moatmast challengingch~Xl~sng"rginfn thethe fieldfL'Eebd ofoi' educational.~sducatfosla3resea1.~h.rassa.sw'rr* OnceOrice it2%is TS possiblep08sibZe to$a measuremsaowo theWhe successsuccega 01'ai teachersj'atoacl~@r~~,a cr1te::r1oncrftarlon byby whichwhich to evaluate all phases of the present educational system oan be established. YJhan one recognizes the valid!ty of tIle .foregoing statements about the measul"eraent of teachi.ng e1'fic:!.enc;7, he will :not insis'i; on 'Using the soores made by pupils on 3tanda1~d1zed tests to nreasu~a tlleefflc1ency of teachers. J.J, n~92, orawford~Grav&rrrd, in%n hishis investigation9nvastTga-b2;3tonof of the naturenature and extent to which the tl~ee £actorsl (1) chronological ar:;e,.aga, (2)4 2) mental.n~1tzta.1!1l~elfni;ct, andand (5)(5) schoolac1zo~Xprogress,.progress, opel'ateaperate toto lnf~uellce test norms" found tlmt these f'actot.. s affected testteak norms3tzrsr)ns to%s suchsuah ua degreeQegkea that thethe useuse ofa$ normaxmms ba.sedbasad onom groupsgroups inwh1chtfi wP-~lchthesethese areaxe notnot controlledaankroZJad areares9 of'of doubtfuldoubt$ zrX value;value; inen othel·u.t-h@x*wordswasrcla, ~ indii3.1dZviihdalvidu~l pupilpupil a.chieve­ach.ieve- mentn~srx$ carmotecarmot beba evaluatedevaJuatgeZ udequateJ:yadsqua~trtlyandand solel;]'aaS@sPg,inin relation~ePa.t;ion

I toLa anyunr singlealngSe typeb-y-ps ofof tEH3t%t;a:36; 1l01-m.slor*m,+ IfXf theSChe normsnam~ofof testa$681;~ asars theytlmy areare usuallyuszaXXy S1$.venvan earrnotcurmaS, be1.m usedlxned toto jlldc;e311d;';e thethe aOhievementaab&ev@n~ankQf'af im!$ndi%?Sd~~aL~*vldl...lalslil thentkk8n shouldshcouXd theoeLh~aasarDasmm noX'l11Snorms bebe taken%&en asas .anan absolutea'ksaa2,u.t;~or!aritarfovl terion forfop judging3udgLw~thethe etf'ieieneyaPf9~%en~y ofQP aa schoolsclxau3. system,system, eitherait;har 1ncomparlson9n eaiizpaz*:.lson ofOF thethe systemrtiysst;am wiwithth the%Em nomasnomm ora.~?in5x1 compa:fllsoncozp;&alsonofof oneone school.ac3rtuo3, SystEmlaya'cml withwLth anoth$r~~ Certain po11e1es of the various sahool systems m~l.Y af:eect the no.l'llls. MatlY schools haV& a genera.l poliey against double promot.ions .ann d.o not hesitate to fail 14

students,studen2;s, whilewP1S;Ze othero*l~tc~systemssystem failfa5l, f'ewfev andand give$Lye extraextra promotions.promof2&0ns* }Ta.tural~yITaks~aZZyaa schoolscheaX withwl%t;l.~aa eomparatlve1.yG high pereentage of averageness will seore hlghe1'" on a standardized test than 'will a school with a lovi vercentage of overageness-, simply;simpXy becausebecause 1Qtsts pupilsyzapS3.a havebv8been been :1nschoolirn schosX ~ongeral1d%onge~r&9zd arema older,..older, gradegx&e forf029 grad~,g~ade,thanL'han azr normalnoma%situation af.%ua$fon wouldwuu261 perm!psmxltt .18 .lg otherOther polic1espoLlcie@such suah asas thsat.:ethe w:c atat wLLtchwh-cl; childrenchildran enterontor schoo].,sc_h,ao?L, thet110 grade:;ree&a in3-13 'liJ'ltlchv~128chvariousVE~E~~OIJ~B subBZI~$~C~Sj ects al~81%

1ntI'odueed",Sntr~otiursd,and and theL11.c lIkeXf.1~64have have theirtlleir effectoffect onon norms.p,crm+

Theref'ore the a,fl'e""7rndEt,.~ 0 s1ttmtlon of' a school s"tTstem.; should be investigated before important conc~laione regarding the eompara.tive standing of a school system cancan beBe definitely&s%i.saEtelyandrand. sa.f.elyaafa%~stated.stat@&9 Another .factor tha.t Imlst not be overlooked in establish­ ing criteria :ror jt1dg~.ng the ef'f':tcienc;r o·fn schoolaystem is$8 thatf2ha.l; ofof' thetha percentagew~aantageofof studentsst11dent8 indn averageavarnge dailydnf2g attendance.aktendancss AlthonghA12;'k.Lo11.ghTexas T~wshasbas aa Ccompulaory oqm3tsorgr attendanoea.Eta~=dame law~ up to the present time it has n.ot been very effective. This ia pe'l'"haps due ... more U1an to any otl1.rer one thing, to the faot that nearlyaJ..l of the money appo:rtioned by the State to the s.epa:rate sehool distriefis 1$ distributed on a pereap!ta 1)a81s....that i.s:I the numberof' scholastics 01' na:mea on the census roll...... l"ather thal10nsmne basis of attendarlOe..attandanca tr ItIG ca.ncan easil;laaakZy bebe understoodztndaratod whywhy some~3amschoolsa~hooll

.r. Pl '",\P", .. 18. 1~1or an elabol"ationot: t11.is polntsee Pressey. 8. L., and Pre$$$Y, Luella. ,22_p,1;t." pp. 65-6. 15

a1~eazasnot ~mtconcer:nedeoules~r~ed when~11~22 at?l ~argeZa~ge percentage9er09~lt~e~ of'of trte.trkk~eI7-r scholasticssclaalaatice a.reare notattand1rliSnee ake;teMfre school.school, 'TheseE~%~sechildrenchiPdren areWB l">orfor thetilt3 IrlOf;d~zifr9-k partpart, thetile uUlldesil"'able"q1~a'ide8%pabLfr1Felemente2ea~n.t; ofof thet*ixe co:mmu:n:tty;eummrllty; therefore,%lm~ef:'s>ra,somess~ae schoolschuo2 8~latems.sgslcma much~1i3.c3rpreferprefer that%hatthe:;:r el183 dodo notr~utattend.att~~~d* On911 thetf?8 othel" okhel?hand, l-mldSa a schoolschos2 s:~1'stemsga$erfi thatthat desl1"esdssir~stoto serveserve iPtst8 cOnlmu..n:1coamw~i%pty toto thekke :fullestP~~Xleat willwEX111 er~cmlI'ageai-icouzaa;e ifff :notnot requirersqzl~aallaZZ childrenchlldresl in9n thethe districtdfs%~Zc8 totos.'ttend akto:~dSChooJ.l"ee.1..1.1aI~1·.r..school rc~C~2ar;l.re~rhls171%~ 11W.y~ZWJ redu.cep~Zluce theWxe school'sachoal*s a.vera.gea"Vk3FwC3 testk0s%Bcore BQoPE%butbut should~~102t3.dnotll~b ea.useCtkL188 aW school~s.c~~.cIo~S:\1'SB~~.S~OXQtem of this.r;ll%stypek~po totw beba judgedgud;;.sd lessleas efficient.ofrEZoEanE, CHAPTER II

THE }.[ETHOD OF TEE INVESTIGATION

1. Sources of th$ Data

InIn orderorda~to%Q study&udy thethe effectseff'ee%8o:f.' 02 thesurv1val"f;@ SUXV~ZFB~ra.terate factorfac;Eo~onsn testtest norms, itLL waswas necessary-tonercaaaaq- to havehave annes$.aaoesa toto a.ge"'gradeage--gratis distributions,c%%str%bu%9ons,the%he numbeI'o!' mmibe~sf scholasticsscholastfcs inSn averageevepage da.ilydally attendance,a~t;sndaneepandand the%he mea.nmean scoresscorea asas wallwKLl asaa th& standard deviations on ~naohlevement test administered toto thethe variousva~fo'rasschoolssohuaZs usedus@& 1nth1san %h$s study-study-. ItIt was.ram esse:t'ltia.lossezi.1;2a;l that%ha$ these%hesascores scores bebe onan theaa.:methe awe achievementacE~iavcan@nt teat_test. SinceSTnue thethe New-southB@w*S~uqjEhAchievementA~h$@v~m@nE TeatsTed3a areare no~adnomsd forfop schoolsaalzocl3.s otof sovenaoven ratherrathas81 thanthan eightsight elementaryalamanPlm gradesgracles andadin fn ma.nymagways vaya arer-19~paxaticularlysu1tablepa~Giau1a~Jy suitaB2e forPOP USGus* inXn Texas,Texas, theythey havehave beenbeen usedusad extensivelyeatens2vaZy throufJhout%hrou@su%the%he State.Skater TheTh8 TexasTexas Commission@a sshnon an CoordinationCtsapdlZ~t;ioninIn Educat:ton,.19~d-~xca.t;isn,19 anan organizationiaraaniza.t;lanfor fan the%hs purpose-gmxpo~@ofof furthering$urther$ng thethe develop­develop- ment of educationa.l opportun:l:ties, recommendsrids a.ss.as a partgap% otof itsPt8 programp~agrmthethe useus8 of02 theN&welm @@w*S~uth....South AchievementA~hSevem$n% Tef.~ts TQBGPJ infn thetbseventh [email protected]* BecaUSE)Becaust? oJ.'o;C the%he St-at6""W1de:SLats-w?ld@testing tesf;in.g

""'... Ii...... IV 19..X9. ForFor aa .fullerfi518r discussiondise.l;asaianof of thethe organizationa~ganbzstlam andandl activitiesactZv%t2ssof of thethe TexasTexas Co:mndss:tonU aaion onan CoordinationCoopdSna%tlon lnEducatlon_$n EducaCSun, consultco~su2Gita5 tas ReBe~ehEe~lewahBu~lat1nBnX241r%ftn* .. numbers numbera threetbasand and foul"_four* UniversityU~%V~.PI%~Station,.StatXon, Austin,Austin, T:exas.Paxaer. TheT~LOcommission.CQI~IY~~ BS~O~L* 1937.L93T o

-16- 17

programppai;rm anda& the%he almostexclus1ve~Pmaate:ccXusive ubtjause of +hethe New-SozrWzNew-South

Testa~Testa, itfP; was notnok a d1ff1cu~tddffflou3,t matterrazkatter $0to obLafnobtain teat $CoressooPea for thIs%this study.@%t;ddy. ItXt was notnae necessal."yImcessayg for %bthe wri%6rwriter $8to admin:ta'tc&rnistx+a?thet21c tests#testis$ neithernei%&r wasxaa itft mcessargneeeess.:ry 4;ato ob.t;otinobtain theklia l"'esultson~t88uEt8on theP;h@teststx35%8 .from~FOM~thet218 sohoolsBQPIQOXS f&@%il~eXVB~rthemselv-€H:l... @anyHany of the't;he data.data could.could be obtainedobta911eiC fromirom the @Cammi.ssion,,20 as9on,20 sirmasince snhoolseo8paratlngsahools eo6p~~aLirgwithwl%h the%he Contrr1isslon@om&aaionsub&% submit aB. copy of the 3?esultsxssuXts to thetho CentralC$n%ral Bt1.;l?eau'8tareau forf EXPstudy-a%udy. BIBBBThese dat~data ar&are preferablepretferal32.e in soaa far as accuracyaccupacy auld.and seZ3.brel1ab111t~ axeare eonaerned,aonaaecllad, but emp1..oy1ngsnplogteqg them.'them nscasaieakadnecessitated %hethe US#use 02of' 1.9551995-S6--36 resulref~u3.L~~tat as the%la 19361836-;ST-37 material had no%not ye%yet been compiled.rrornp5llsrjt, SinceSSnce 50hoo).sachcsala eo8pezratingco6para%%ngw$khwith tht3the (Sam2s~fonOommission arewa likeJ:yltekeXy to%t;o b&be a compa.raoorqparativsFjtl"ITaly homogel1eoushomogal~eoasg~oup,gt-oup., cLasParG&re

:wa.s 'Used to select fOJ:> th1as.tudy only those schools which :rspreaente.d a wid$ ranGe on the seale, in order that one type would not have tootaa mn.c.hmlaPI. weightwetl<;PI.k 2nin theth~ resuX.t;s.+results.• A part of the scores was obtained through The E. L.

Steck Compal1y~publ1she~s of the New-South Achievement Tests. The results \V6re on the 1936'-57 administration ofof? the%hs tests""Z;ast;s, The dlf't.'e·renoedtff~ranaa1n223 the dates of %liethe scorea scores on the taa,ts w111 ba 01' no consequenoe provided the other materia.l used in ma.klngoomparieon:s corresponds 'PO the dat&$ of the teat .ms.ter:tal..

20. TheTho TexasTexena Gomra1as.ionComal.aaf.0~1,on CoordinationCaa~dtnakScrsnbnin Eduaat$onrEduca.tion, 9.Sas wellwe3.S asaa The E.E4 L.LI;*St(;)(~kS$eek Gcunpan-yCS~np~ny~J wepawere gladgZad koto ao8gsrakerco6perate withwfkh the write~arn?lCs~of this$his thesistheate .!thwZ%h Lhe3.the defin-ltedefinite undars%aad*und$rstand­ lngIng that.e;lrmt nona puh11eitygvib2ic%t;ywouldwou3.d beeba givengieven tato %hethe standing of thesepa.rate$he, ssparater schools.achoslrj* eithereikhea? to individualsZml.Zviduals or 9nin 8h8the pUbl1pub2iah@dshedJ:'eaul ~esu3Z;sr.n8 .., 18

The numbe~ of scholastics 1naveraga daily attendanoe and the aga"'grade distributions :tor the variou$. schools were obta.ined trom the Superintendents" Annual Report5 sUbmitted to the State Department of EducatIon. Material on thlrty-th1'"ee small lndependentschaol diat:r-lots scattered tllt'Qughout the State of Te.xa.swasobtdned from theaesouraela.

2.2r ProcedureProoeda;trer

In submimb&%%%ngtt1ng thethe test%BPIZ;Bcores 8~031788.usedused infn this%hf a a'tudY!Jstudy, e~cheach of'thesehoolsof the sal1os2s waswas providedpfowlded wi.withth aa formfom thatthat calledt;&Z3,ed forFor distributionsd%aP;r%hutZo;tl8ofa$ thethe seDX'esacoPaa l11adeclsdca byby ita5-k~studentsatuder?t;s one:a¢hon each 0:£of the$11~ninenLn@ divisionsaivf .slaas ofof the%ha New"'SouthHelw-Sou%hAchieve­ Aehfev0- mentm@n%TasteRSTostis as wellwe3.3, asas asr distributiondfal~91'1.rztlbenof'of theth~totaltotal average&verage

Bloorss.,~4;~t0~~3~lt*The total tf;ot&r averageauepage scoresourB forfor eachemh ohildaW2d waswae determineddetemlncsd byby adding&din$ his hi^ score.sS~P;GT~Bol'lea.ch012 #&~hof02 thethe ninenlns divisionsdivSafons andancl dividingdlvidins thethe sumsum byby nine..nEm. TheThe i'lrststapfirs& atsp in231 thetI~e:actualact1xa3 treatment%r.ert%mantotsf the%ha datadaka waswas tota determinede.l;csm%ne the%he meanmean andarid s'bandard~+l;an&twddeviationdisvta.t;ian forf a3~$acheach ofof the%a thi.rty'"e4.rZrty- threaschools.tIwete sabnjt~* Thisfmz5.s il'l'volved9iavoXved the$ha useof'uEte o-f the.I;lm frequencyfrequency d:tstJ?ibut1onsd,Zat;~ibz;~.1;Zonsbasedbasts& onon the%he totalli;otal ave~ageavaPwg8 scoreaacoPe8 ratherret.i;her thanthoae%Imn.t;hoeie basedbagad onon eacheach ofof the%he separatediv1s1ons.sapWa.C;@diaiaf~lasr Three?%I)B@ schoolsac2looIs failedfa%ladtoGs submitaubm1%distributions d9str2But2ons basedbaaad onon thetls~tota.ltoLw% averageaverage SCOI'fj;sJizroortssp therefore~therefo~a~it5% was was necessaryneaeaaary to$0 computecompute their%heir standardslWarcl deviationsitevia%tonsb;rinfarence.by infs~enea~li'orPar thiseka5s purposepurpose aa ratio"*aE,Xo, bas0dhassd onon thethe normsnorm given~SVB~forfor thethe seventhsewnth grad$grad@ 19

onan the%he Ne'W·SouthNew-South AchievementAchievfitxn~ntTests. Tsa@s,was was establishedestabSi&@dbe-tween between thethe standardstandard deviationsdeviations ofof eacheach otof thethe sepax-ateseparate divisions.21

TheT~EIstandards%&w6 deviationsdevla'S;T~n~forfor thesethea~three%FBI easescaaas wS',t"&wsges interredIdarrsd

onon thethe assumptionassumptioa that%ha% thisfifs Bam$'amratiorat2a wouldwould exis.texiat betweenbebean thethe s.vsrageo:f.'average of theirC21aZr standardaGanc3ard deviationsdevPaP;ians t"orfor the:%ha sepa.rateseparate ninenfne divisionsav5slkona anden& thethe standardstandard deviationdeviation! forfop the.tha totalta%t;aP averageaverage score..score* The-standardZ?h8 stwd@rddeviationsdeviatSana forfor thethe ninentna diVisionsd?ivPsions werewere easilyeaei3.y determineddatermSmd fromfaun thethe distributionsdlskrfbut2one given.gLwsa, $'heThe nextnexf a.tapntap waswaer toto dividedrvitde thethe sumssum of.'of thesethem s~andaJ:'dstanda~ddeviations8avTations byby 1.42461.4246 (the('%he ratio~a%Br>foundfaunti tota existexist

underundsr thetha normm11?;~1.oQl1.ditlons)oax~ditt;icms toLa determinedekemtene whatwhat wouldwould probablyprobably haveham beenbean the%hastandard stancZa~ddev1.ationde-vftation for for theWle distributiondfatrlbut3,sn

ofof' totaltoWl averageaverage scores.scoarsac TheThe testtea& meanmean 1'01'fur eaeheach otaf thea€)tbsa three-t2wee easescams waswas obtainedobtaitned byby computingcsrcipu2;fng the%fiemeans means forfar thethe sQp~atesagwata d1divlslonev:ts1ona andand didi-widfngvid1ng theirthai~totalLo%al byby nine.nine, InIn aa studystlxay dealingdealing withwlt11 aga""gradeage-grade data"daea, itIt: 1sLa l1ecessaryxmcessaqy toto definedef %ne thethe normaln0ma3, ageags forFar eachaach grnde.g~ade, Cuoberl~ubberle~22ey22 allowaatlows forfor eachsack gradegrade aa norrrl8.1normal a.geage zonezone otof eignteena2ght;aen months.marntl~s. This37hrfs [email protected]%ha% onon SeptemberSeptembw 11 thethe - normalnorma'l. ageraga :for-for grade&r@a 1I wouldwouXL bebe f"romfrom fiv~Elsa yearsysars andand. nlnen2ne monthsmonths toto sevenseven years·yaaps a.ndand three.I;Ieats months;montba; the%he normalao1Trn&l,

rr*, 21. The noX'ms are given in the Manual of' D1ttections and rnter~:J:-etat!()ns foX' l rorma AI- 13 .. 0, ana D. of the Naw-' Soutn Ach=evement Tests, '"p'. !~'; Tabf; 1:---

22. Cubberley,. Ellwood P.,. Public Sohool Administration.III 4 #: 20

age foxtor grade,grade 2 wmldwould be froafrom sizsix years an&a.nd dmnine mnlihsmonths to eightei&& years and three months,months., anda.nd sosoon. on, hioe~mn~1Ioehlman23 usesuse@ a t;w~ypartwo~ear span, whifcwhile othas~other wltesawriterBhave lhava usgldused a on$-yea.roneyen2 span.apan, To tkiathe wr%ta~writer the e%gh%ean=m~~khse:tghteen"'"'.tnQnths t span would seem 'preferable'p~sferab3.a %nin aoabmost ilns2;stncea;instances; however, s;lsncesince theth8 age~gradeag63-yyad~distrirn1tionsd%strflJr~.xt&sns w@P@wer$ ~vallable available ort2gonly fin n 'b%nasterras of wholeobha$~yearsyaa~s Iill the oneone-yeax!-year span waa'Was use&used in1n %h%sth1asstuItyctudy .. ThisTkia meansmaam a childchlld is2s a::lsumedaas'txnac3d to be aL-agea.t-age for grad@grade 91 it$2 on Septemb$rSaptembfsz 13t ofof." klmtlw schoolachaal year 13.8he hshas ~%a~!~edreaohed his a11tthaPxth yearyaap onbu2;t not seventhseventhll..To Ta b~be at-agea. t-age for g3)adeg~ade7 7 a.a child8holl~dchild ~110t11il. bebo twelvetwalve yea28years old but nutnot Gh%r%sen,thirteen.

The"f'3.1~perc$nto.e;€lSgsracjntagps of averageness,ovsragrsnasa, nom~3,normal aaemas,ageneas, and under.ageness7;lndera~;snoaa .fox'forb ea.ch@each of'ai theaaven.tho seven alswntavyelementar;r a~*adssgl"a.des as wellweXk as for the.$ha t()taltatax werewsro deter:mined&e~Esmin&3.on this basis fovOur each%tit& ot:05 tho%la.@ th:!ltl~X~%:,r--t;lw~e.. t",'T...three scIlools.s~3ioa1s B%@a'118@Baeallse QSof the use.tase of'of the2;11.~narrowmsrsw ljlo:rm.alpamaJ age span;"span, the pcr~csntagaspercentages ofor ovaragenesaQseraGsnean wareawre co:mparat1coan'parat%ve2yvaly k~fgh,high.

ItX"i;saswas pex>t1nentper'tlnent to th1ost1.Jkhirr ~f;'t:dy..dy to determinef3?0tem5r1e! fopfor eomparaticomparativeva pm"posespwpuses tho fractionalfract9anaX !)artpark of a grade mdemade byby the'Che studentsstuctlantn ofaf ea.cheac11 ofat the schools~lehook?in oneom ehranoXog;Ttoa9,chronological

:rear.yeaf* ,In, Sn otherather wordswords,.. the%lz@ relationshipre2atton~shlpbetween chrona20~2cetlchronological a.geage .andand grade~radsplacementglncement wasestabl:tahedwas es@a?sl%ahedto show tketIle rata ofof progresspPOgY&Bs ofsf .thetfl~stlldel1.ts8%lldl@n.'b$$ tbrough%~P~u&I the'kt16 grades.GT&%S~ Thism?t%W88was sho\'m by the .eomputation of' the regression eoeff':tcientsof

$13. Moehlman, Arthur B•.• Ch11df\coountl:q~;) 11. 97 ft 21

gra.degrade on age. Tht)Tile Ayres mathodmethodg424 forfOF c.omput1ngcornputin& the re6ress1ol1regsess%on coafi'icients~oefff-sientswaa.employed.was anpXoyadw

An importantIInpa~tmdP1factor f EL&.IF usedUBQ~in9n thistlils studyatud$r waswaa foundfuu@ by determ.ining the ra.tio bet\to'an the nut.1ber of nhiJ.dren in average da.ily attendance and tIle number of scholastics on the oenSUB roll. This rJeans. that the rnxmber of pupils illb.1 [email protected] at"cende..lloeatt~rad~hnoeas2-33 shownsPio=? in the~EXB

Superintendents'Zfuyerim~%%~enWAnnua.lAlz3:luaZ Reportsli@par%swasaaa divid.edd9vi4ei9. by the%he numberrmmber of whlwh3..f;r3te soho1.astlesaaIxolas%ica011 on 'the%he censuscrrrlsus roll.ylolZ* ThisTZlf13t ratioratZo willaiZX bebbs referredrefamed to tllr'oughout~I~uzzg~~rsu%the discussiondiscuse%on asaa the.f;;I~el1natLardtmcoa tte:rJdance facto!'fat-tor,".. ft Certain'Geytaixi limitationsl~2ta.t;Loasof'of

this%Iris .faotot'1facta'j? ll!Ustrims% not~mtbe overlooked.overlooked. SinceSlncs thekhs .A.mm.alAmab ReportsRsports mnl:::e&re no distinction&istL;t?clfon between"uts.t;waen An.glo-Anw:r:1.eanAnglo*hm;rf oan chi.ldrenchfld~enandanit MexicanE\lezScan children"ch%Jd~cn,thistlzis factorfactor doeadosa notr-ok take intointo €;l.ccountaccount theLbs proportionp~~pcprtianoruf Mex1ean*&xf~nnchildren;ahildzlen) neitlu:n.r>n~itllez?isSts itEI; affectedaffec%edby5y thethe lengthleqtk ofof thebhe schoolschool. term"term* AllAX1 thesetlxsss datatiat@arecomp11edarc ~oap%Je-din9n TableTnbls A ofof the%ha Appendix.A33;pondLx, WithtT$th thesethose data4ata atat hand,hand, thetl~aactualactual studystuay ofof theirrelat10nahip1;heSr reXatiaash5.g toto each.each othera.t;lxm.?was begun.be~i;u~rThisThts calledcar2lml forfor thethe oomputationcromp.eatatfaaa. ofof aa seriesssrisls ofof ooefi""'1c1entscosS2itc9csnts 01'09:

cO!'J:>elst1oncorxaelatlon :InZn orderDT&@T toto determ:tnecIete3er3Txls whetherwh~thsroro~ not anyany twotwa of'of theQip: setssets orof dataddah underulxlcler considerationconsLdwatilon werewetre reJ.a.ted,andrezatiad, and

to$0 whatvha2; extentextent thethe relationshipre2atf enafllp existed.axPatoil. TheThe scatte:rgrama~epr%%ergrams fromfrom whichinr1aSch the%be oor:t"elatlonsoa~~alat.loulaweremre computedc(~mput;etkarearlrs glvengLvera in5.n - 24. This method i$ dIscussed in Odell. Charles W.,

4$te.t1stioalMathod.iii! .... r_ · ...... in Eduoation,.0 -- • p. 24" 22

TablesTables 2"'11.,2-23, andand thetile resultsresults ar6ape oompiledcompiibd in9n Tab~eTabXs 1. SectionSec.l;ion 3,.3# of:02 this%his chap'ter.chapter* TheThe l'ormulaformula useduaed :1.n%n thethe computation or all cOI"'I'ela.tions given in th:Ls study is

as followg~

3. Results and. Interpreta'tions

TABLE 1 RESlJLTS OF TIm 0 OMPUTATI ON OF A SERIES OF COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION

.... 5~le - •. G~64 - .. 1~67 +.lgS2 +"0992 ± .. 0581 ±.1182 +.1129 2.2* AttendanceALtendnncs FactorFactar +.6730-t- .6730 +.2185+ ,2385 nonenone +4.0643 9 0643 1:? .10BS* 3.088

3.S I CoefficIentsCoaff lcrsnta of'OF VariationVariation +.1203+ .1208 "',.1406-,I408 +?,J3124.1124 ±:fI.1398.. 1118

4. liegreas10n Coefficients - .. 6383 :± ..0673 5. OVerageness

It will be observed from Table 1. that the correlation between the attendanca f'a.cto1" and the test means made on the%haNew-SouthNew-South TeatsTeertrs is%s notno%a a highh9gb cox-relation.corr@lkltion* VJ.henl%?&ten, however"~~~OBBE~VBF~dueconaiderat1011dus conslas~alborr is98 mademads ofof the%he limitatIonsllrnCt%atPons TABLE 2

CORHELATIOlJ BETWEEN THE ~E$TMEANS Alm THE ATTENDANCE FACTOR Test Means 48- 50- 5B.... 54- 56- 58- 60- 62.... 64- 65- A.F. . 49.99 51.99 53.99 55.99 57.99 59.99 61.99 63.99 65.99 66.99 f y f'ydy f3~~ '175-.?99 1 1 2 <1 8 .70-.749 :3 .65-.699 1. 2 5 2 'S 12 .60.....649 1 1. 1 2 1 2 11 1 11 11 .55-.599 1 J. 2 ]. 5 0 .50- ..549 1 1 1 1 1 5 -1 -5 5 .45-.499 1 ]. ]. 3 -2 -6 12 .40-.449 1 1 2 -3 --8 18 .35-.399 1 1 -4 -4 16 .30-.349 -5 .25 .....299 1 ~ . .. -6 36 t x 1 3 J. 4- :5 7 5 3 5 1 33 -2 142

dx ...5 -4 -3 -2 -1 o 1 2 :3 4: txdx ""5 -12 -3 -8 -3 5 6 15 4 -1 fxf1x2 25 48 9 16 3 5 12 45 15 179 fxydy 4 0 1 2 1. 7 -9 -3 -5 -2

fxydxdy-20 -3 -4 -1 "'9 -6 ....15 -58

My:: .572 Oy:: .104 r : -.3716 t.0992 TABLE .3

CORRELATION' BETWEEN THE TEST l¥iEANS AND TIlE COEF1'1ICIENTS OF VARIATION

Te at Mea.-'!1.S 48· 50- 52.... 54"'!' 56....· 58... 60~ 62- 64. 66- 2 C~.V•.. '. 49~9951.99 53.9955.99 57.99 59.99 61.99 63.99 65.99 67.99 fzd~.fsd z fr,dz 24-25..99 1 1 4: 4 16 2Z~.99 1 . 1 3 3 9 2:0-21..99 1 1 2 2 -4 8 18"'19~99 1 1 2 4: 1 4: 4 16';~llJ.99 2 4: 1 1 II 0 14~15.99 12 1 1 5 1 2 8 -1 -e 8 ia-:L3~99 1 1 1 3 -2 -6 12 lO~lJ..99 1 1 -3 -3 9 s- 9~99 11 -4 -4 16 6-7~99 1 ~1=--.5~~_-~5~2~5~ .. 1__ • . 33 ~ 1. 3 1 4 3 1 5 3 5 1 ~ -ll 107

dx -5 -4 -3 '''''2 -1 o 1 2 3 4:

fxdx ""'5 -1.2 -3 -8 -3 5 6 15 4: -1

fxd~25 48 9 16 3 5 12 45 1.8 179

.t'xzdz 3 :5 -1 3 4: 1 -5 -3 ...l2 -4 -11

fnd.zdx -15 -12 4: -5 -4 -5 ~ '-36 -15 ..95 .- ... llx - 58.94

CORHELATIONG WriPSUTIOR BET\l'f"~NB22'bsf'aZT TImT?:Z TEST MEAnsW?JS AIIDATXI TImTZB REGRESSIONREGRESSTUX COEl-"rpICIENTS@ OE33TC ZZ?.dT$

48.... 50- 52- a.• o. 49~99 51.99 53.99 fwdw :twdwS ...... 80....849 6 18 .•7v""'.V99 14 28 .• 70...... '149 1 , 7 .65-.699 1 1 .00'-.649 2 1 ""'4 4 .55.-,.599 1 2 -a 16 •• 50...... 549 .4S""'". 499- 1 -4 16 .40..... 449 1 -5 25, rx 1 g 1 4: 3 5 3 5 1 33 6 114

dx -5 -4 -3 -2 .....1. o l. 2 3 4: fA -5 ...12 -3 -8 -3 5 6 15 4 -1 f xdx2 25 48 9 16 :3 5 12 45 1S 179 txwdw -1 5- 1. 4: a -4 ...p -1 txwdxGw 4 -:to -1 8 -8 -1,B .-4 Mx :: 58.94 t1:: 4.64 Mw :.684 6w ~ .093 r ~-.195'7 ± .1182 TABLE5 -'"', CORRELAT!Ol~BETWEKN THE TEST MEANS AND TEE Pl'ffi.GEHTACmS OF iJvEtiACH51ffiSS

Test IjeaZJ8 48. 50... 52"" 54'" 56- 58... 60" 62.... 84- 66- o'J.... 49 ..99 51.Sf) 53~9955.99 57.99 59.99 61.99 63.99 65.99 6'1.99 I'm dm 6S~O.9t 1 1 ~ ~5~~.99 a g 6 62~4.99 1 1 5 59~1.99 1 1 2 4 5G-58,.,99 1. ]. 2 5 sa:...t>5.,99 1 1 ]. 3 2 50-62~99 1], 2 1 5 1 47~9.99 1 1. 2 1. 1 6 0 44~6.99 1 1 1 1 4 -1 ...... "4 41-45.99 1 1 2 -2 -4 s 38..:40.99 1 ' 1 1 3 -3 -9 '2l7 35~37.99 -4 U~4d9 1 1 ~ -5 25 29-51.99 1 .1-.,'_-8...... _...... ,;;._.:;..:;;.._--6 36 f_ ..... 1 3 1- 4 =; 7 5 3 6 1. 33 21 313

'Ox "'5 -4- ...3 -+2 ....1 o 1 2 3 4 fxdx -5 ...12 -3 -s -3 5 6 15 4: -1 t xdx2 25 48 9 16 3 5 12 45 16 179

f"xm.dni ~. 5 -6 -13 -~ 13 1 -12' f':xmdmdx 10 -20 6 ""13 -2 59 4 24 to 0') Mx:; 58. 940"x '.:: 4.64

M m=: 49.91 "~:8.94

r ;: ...~1022t.1129 TABLE 6

CORRELATIONBETWEENTEE ATTENDANCEFACTOR AIID TEE COEFFICIENTS OF VARIATION Coef.f1elents of Variat10n 6"" 8... 10"- 12- 14- 3.£5... 18- 20-22-' 24... d~ A.•.F...•. . '1.99 0.99 11.99 13.99 15.99 17.•.•.99 19.99 21.99 2599.925.99 i ..x·· ,~"t5~.VOO· '11: .70-:_74:9 3; .65....699 1 1 1 3 2 6 12 .80-.$49 4lIz 3 3 1 11 11 .56-.599 1 l. 1 1 1111 5 0 .50 ...549 1 ]. 5 5 -1' -5 5 .45·.499 1 1 1 3-e -6 12 .~~.449 1 1 g -3 -6 18 .$S~.IQ9 1 3. -4 ..-.4 16 .3(l}-'.349 -5 .25-.299 1 1 -6. -6 36 .....:;:;.--;....-.------'~- t z 1 1 1 3" 8 U 4: 2' 1 1 33 -a 142

d$ -5 -.4 -3 -2 -1 0 1. 2 3 4 £zdz -5 ....4 "'3 -a """S. 4 4 3 4·11 2 t g dZ 25 16 9 12 8 4 8 9 16 10'l

Z-yzdy -J. -4 ~3 2 1 5 1 -4

;fy~¥z5 12 48 -16 20 4 11 -8 80

... :My• .5'12 C$y ... .104

lit ..... Mg 16.34 O"z ....2.54- r =+.6730 i.0643 j,lABLE7

CORRELATION BE~~ THE ATTEiIDANCE FACTOR AM) THE REGRESSION COEFFICIEN!'S

.40- .45- .50~ .55­ .80- A..P. .449 .499 .549 .599 .B49 f ty~ f if:y! .75-.799 2 ~ 8 32 .'0"".749 3 .65·:*6~9 2 1 :; 2 6 12 .60"-.649 2 3 2 3 1 11 1 11 11 .55.....5.9 1 1 ]. 2 5 0 .50""'.549 1 1 3 5 -.1 "'"5. 5 .4S·.49i 2 1. :3 -2 -6 12 .4Q.... 449 1. 1. 2 -3 ""'6 18 .3~"".399 1 1 .-4 -4 16 .30 349 -5 .2$ 299 1 -,1:;;... -6 -.e se...... _ q._4, l. 1 4 4 7 '1 7 2 33 -2 142 dw -5 -4 -3 --2 -1 0 1 2 3 fwd. -5 -4 ...e ...4 ~ 14 6 6 fwdtt­ 25 16 16 4: .., 28 18 114 fwydy -4 -8 1 9 J. 4 -5 --2 t~ydw 20 16 ...1 2. 8 -15 28

Mw :: .684 ~ 111' .095 ~ = .572 try. .104 r • +.2185 ±.1085 TABLE S

CORRELATIONBET\VEEli THE COEFFICIENTS OF VARIATION AND THE PEHCENTAGESOF O\.'ERAGENESS

CQett1ei$~tsof Variation O.A. 6.... 8-10- 12-14-' 16.... lB- 20- 22'" 24.... •. . .. 7.,~99.99 U.99 1'3.99 15.99 1"1.t!J9 19.9921.99 23.99 2S.99til am 62-70.99 1 J. 7 65~8'.99 1 1 ! a 8~--64.99 5 59-.al.99 1 4: 66~.~ 1 ]. 2 3 51~5~99 11 1 1 1 3 2 56~a~9~ 212 1 1 1 6 1 47*49"..99 1 3: 3. 1 6 0 4:4"'!'"4Eh99 2 1 1 4 -1 41~.99 1 1 2 -a 38-40.99 ). 2 3 -5 55~37.99 -4 32-54 ..99 ]. 1 -5 -5 25 29-31.99 1...... ,:1....· _-6.;::;...... _-5,;,.. 3.....5_·_,

t"z 1 1 1 3 a n 4: S 1 1 33 d z .s -4 -3 -fa -1 o 1 2 3- 4 t"zdg -5 -4 -3 -0 -a 4 4 3 " -11 2 f'zdz 25 16 9 12 a 4: 8 9 16 lfI1 t~ 7 2 6 6 4 -15 8 4- -1 21

;f~m¥s-35 .-8 ....16 -12 -4 32 16 -3 ""'31 Mm:: 49.93­ din -8.94 liz ; ).6.34 6'a. =2.54­

:ra; -.1406 ±.1118 TABLE 9

Ooefficients of Varia.tion ~ 8- ~- ~- u- u- w- OO·~- 24- Ii.0,. 1( .99 9.99 ll.99 13.99 15 ..99 1' ..99 19.99 21.99 23.99 25.99 i. dw t1w:r~2 .00 .....849 1 1 S ;; ~75-.7109 .~'r-'r-." 2 5 '1 2 14 28 2 4: 3- ~ J. 7 "1 .65a.1~699 3 1 2 1 tot o .60-.649 J. .1 1 1 4: -1 -4 4- .55-,,599 1 1 1 1 4- -2 -a 16 .E"'C"'.549 -3 .45-.490 1 1 -4 ....J! is .~C ...... 449 1 1 -5 ""':; 25 ....

4} "114 rz 1 1 1 :; 8 11 4 fa 1 1 35 ~ -5 -4 -3 -e ..1 0 1 2 3 4: :rsdz -5 -..4 -3 .;.E) -a 4: 4 3 4 -11

fzdz~l25 16 9 12 8 4 8 9 16 107 f'zwd. -2 -1 -5 -3 4 2 -3. *2 6 fNz . z 10 4 15 18 -32 8 ~ 15 ,,,;. ~ ...- .684 Ow.... .093 Hz -...16.34 0$ -....2.54 ~ -_.+.}203 ±..1J.24 fjl,ftBLE 10

COfu'lEt.ATION BE'.:.Iwmsn TB::E REGF.E3SION COEFFIOIENTS A!ID THE PERCm~AGESOF OVERAGENESS RegP6ssion Coefficients .. ..45'" .60- .$5.... .70- .'15- .80'" 40- .50-.55· 2 O.A. ..449 .499 .549 .599 ..649 .699 .749 .l799 .849 f m .tmdm, fmdm 1 1 . 68""10.99 'i1 "I 49 65-67.99 1 1 2 6 1ft 1 69-64.99 1 5 5 '225 59-61.99 1 1 2 -4 a 56-58.99 1 1 2 32 3 a- la 55..£5.99 1 2 3 2 6 1 g 1 5 J.2 50-52 ..99 1 1 5 5 4"1-49.99 1 1 g 1 1 6 0 1 4 ~ 44'"'46.99 2 1 -1 4: 41-43.99" 1 1 2 ""2 -4 ;5 a 38-4(l.99 2 1 -3 -·..C P11 55 ....$l}1.99 ...4 1 32-34.99 1 -5 -5 25 29-31 ..99 1 1 -6 -6 . -36 315 1'". J.. 1 4 4 7 7 '7 2 33 21

dw -5 --4 -$ ...2 ~1 0 1 2 :3 .fA -5 -4 -8 -4 '7 14 6 6 fwd,,?' 25 ~6 16 7 28 18 114 rwmdm 6 3 19 8" 5 -17 -5 21 ~d.w -30 -12 ""34 -8 5 -9 -121 f:1 Mw: .684 Ow: .093

~. 49.91 .~.a 8.94

][t : .....6383 "t.0673 TABLE n

COREELATIO!J BETWEE.'NTHE ATTEND2UJOE FACTOR lum THE PERCEliTAGES Ob""OVL"'RA,GKNESS Attendance Factor .25· .30'" .35'" .40- .45'" .50- .55'" .60- .60'" O.A. ~299 .349 .399 .449 .499.549. 1 .599 .649 .69' . 68"'"'7(I. gg _·--····65~7~99 1 1 6$3~4.99 1 59-61.99 1 1 56--58.99 a 53-55,99 1 1 1. 5m...[j2

f y ~ .1 2: 3- 5 5 II 3 fa 33 21 313 dy ....a -4 ...3 -2 -1 0 1 2 4 t:-/J-y ~ -4 -0 .-6 .-5 11 e B ...e E fd7ly 36 16 18 12 5 11 12 32 142 -2. fm:yGy -3 6 4: 11 3 5 1 21 """' tBVdydm 18 -24 6 -a -n II Z4 -16 a My =.572 .~~~lO~ 1m =49.92 ~ : 8.94 ~ -- 0 33

ofor thisthis 1nv$s3n~estlgal;iontlgatlon. a.,'1d and of'of thethe many:mny factiorsrat-bors whichd:ich :mayrnay inin 80100solne "rayway affectaffect thetlle ef'ficieneyefficiency ofaof a school.sckaol systein.system, itit seemsseems [email protected]??Xetoto stateat&%a that%hat thIs2h99 wmountar%t~ur?%ofof correlationcsx3roXat50~ :152s significant.sigdflaant. RuggRUG; regardsregards correlati,"!1cor~elationasss b$:tngbeXz-+g nPf tnmrltedlyP~%~l~sdlypresent'~ptaantr wh;enwl~ela 1."zq rangesraqgaa rro'mS~u:s..A535 orar .40SO to$0 -b If>*St350 orjbor ,(i.O.tt2:5*60+fiZ@ The negativemgative e()rrela:t10l1com~latSon185s inin 1.itsalft$oll' ana!l 1ndlcat:tonij~d-%~afLctj%ofaf the8ile exiate:n.ceexla.E;e~lc~of'of a.a def'initedersnito l~elationshlpFsXatianshig

1)etweenY,e%wasu thetTm attendance.aat%ex~dar~ce:factorf aceo~ anda:x% the~'SIQ test.t;est means.fi1enr1~* Negative1la~t"ivcscorrelH.tiol1 corroXti'1;'90.*1herehokd indicates~~3fZ5b~htB8aa tendencytsndomy forfor highh9gb att:enrlallcea%'k;aladn~xcefactorsfetckor8 toto beba associatedaaaaclatod withalYn lowLOWtestteat meant!malw al1d~136viceV~QB versa.V82S8c 3;t110&S$ms nothtl1gno%lr3.tq~hashas beenbeen aa:tdsa3.8 i.nEn thetha prev:Lollsp~eu?-o~~,:lsdis'"dTs-

CU,sS:tOlla7r#aton abontaf3s11.t;theWm coeff~1.c:!entcnef%%cZsrltof02 'lra::r.:tution,.wi~lation,01:"o? coe£fielentcuaf fic%enk of'cjf v$;~iahl11v~rla't-11Ld%yty asaa it5% 1,'3ip, {~ome.t:i.mes.som.t;f.~+lsacalled, alll led, it92 m.i.ghtmtgl-rt; bebe wollwoll to$0 l'ece.l1re3ioa21 to*a tharEHl.dcu?ttho 3psodargss l.l'J1ndthereasor.a xn%~bthe reasara i'orTor usingus$-u~g; thecoe.t'f1cients of variation rathe:t:' than the standard d.ev:I.at1.011S.'l\d.~~%s%f.~nsa. £1.'1:1.e[BIB coefficient~oeT?:f c%er~.T; ofof val':1at·:1.onvaaxlutionmayznq be be defineddefined as :r.'ollow$~.

••r ' .8.1'1W~IT a.bsolute~l'br9oX~Z;~num.ber~~IIBT thattlzr% mea.~,n..t!'es3II@B8'LtPUS the:.1;'I~erelati ra3.at;iveva andarX3 notaxat the1;13~3 a.bsoluteal~suX~~l;sv9.T1a.bil1tyrra~kubiX3..l;y of of thet1-m measuresamaaures in$n 1:1a d:i.s'GJ?ibution....~Ts*l;;r5BuL%an, ItXt: isf s onlyon3,y byby thetksa useusa of'af Buchasuch a measurePne~ametil.. .. that&ha% distrlbutions0;{presseddist~5bu.%&ormo:cp~a~a@d :11'1fn dlffe~entB3ff@pan% un!unf ts ts o!'"as, having21avtl%:avera.ges av@P&ga~that-t;lmL areare matertallyma%~j.amlrtydifferent tt%ff@ren-tcancan beba aatiafactorlJ:yssatisfaotor5ly comparedcoapa~ed withwtth I'egardre[~a~dtota theft' tBe*ir va.r!ab11ity_2Gu&~iab9%9t:;*26 The amount of cOJ:>l?ela.t:ton eXisting between the attendanas factor and the ooef'f':tcien'ts of varia.tion is

26 lt Odell.. Cha.rles tv .. ,. ..9It- ill.,> pill:' 140", marltedmarltad. evidenceevidanca thattI-1&4; schoolstschaals withw2.t-b nss highT.S@ attanrl.al1cers%[email protected] fa.crtorPaeto~tendtoM to haveZZEive a highh2gh coef'fic:tentCOO~?%CZ%G~~of:O? vlll:>lati.o:n.V~BY~LEA~;~O~I..

Th1.sTh5.s :mealln:c;lazxnr~ thattF,tx"r, schoolssahoo3fi vilrRRthtIl aa. large-larp gorco~tageporcentage of sehola.s'h:tcs.achofwsCice in9n ava~9.geavePaGa dallycI.a!-Xy attelidnnC:6n'ctesdanss are l:UtelyIBcefg~to have15w,*ve Ua c0111paratlvelyoa~1pa~a2;2.ueXh5.gh dispera1o:tlr3.fLsps~s2anoX"o~ aeatteration..osca%'r,~rat2on*On theo1;herkila 6?;%ts@rbJl~1ClitQb=xl+ P eorrelat1.o11correle%thnof ....-,GBS46964 baWee:lbetween the%ha coe.fricicmtscnaf ficTcnes ofof' var1at5.onua~ia%f.on(UKla~ntl th$-tho test rnea:namealin snggestss-rr~g~a%a thatt11aE BchoolsHCI~UOXS with~~5th11t3. largeZnrp acnlteya?Zon,scatt:el~a-tiontor or Goa highh9&.

~oe,ff?.oiendcoefi'~.c.:tent of'of variation.,va~(%at9niz,tend to$0 l':w.e:erace eomparaticomparaf;lve1yvely low

:mea:rU:lY;zon?ls anon an acllievementsaclzTe~emon2;test..tost:* ThisT11%3 rlE1'Yrxtxy be takG!l.vtdz~f:~~wi.w~.%~;'Hsth c.el'ta:tnce.l;l*t;af n l1m:ll$r~lttxtilsrm,i;at1,ons, a.sas ara fu,rth.erS.rli;r%l~aindicationZlad9crztiun of thet11e ex:tstenceaxttstanca of02 l1cgat1.ve~acmt%varola.t,1onsh1p~03ak$o~a?19g orOP CO:M.'olationcnmala%lonhekwearnbetween tho=&o attends-nnea"cenda5~3.r~~fac-torfac%or andar& the%EIO test&sat :nennsmnns: made~mdeon annn aohievementr1al15sver.1~nt test%t;cs s t ... The tendencyt6ndancy torfop a.a 10\"1Inm attendanceatto~-rdancofacto:!?fac?;ar to*u be asaa.jaonia.t;eds ord.a. ted withwZkh aw low20w coef'f'ielentccooff't~ienkof'of variationvarlatfon and a highIlt~& teatZ;ast meanRean indicatosiinci$cai;az the.t13xt t;h.olil-~ech:tldrencldLX&refi of 1mV'low ahilitiesahfEfCAW o:reaTEpa not.tznt attendingattond5~;the schoolsxc3tzaola wl~arawha-l~e theset3aase conditionsoond9tiouls exist.~a~f~tr ItJt seams8aema evident~vldsntthattMt thet3.a goovferpoo:t'er typo%yp@ ofstuden't02 ~tuden'khas11a3 ai6~kh.e~tOOl'"

?>senbee-n f.orced$'orc@c?. OU.to1x-t of Bcb.oolacllou% 'byby h1gh_h%gh-soholasticsalala~Esjcic pE*sasumpressure or­or hasllas notno% heen'll.)."gedbeen 21~;~gec:to'ba atteJ1d..8t%833dt The :factfat% that%ha% asasa the attendanceatkcsndazrce f'ttctox'factox* bacnmosbeeo!nos h:'l.(£'h.erhl:$:o~ the%IIQ ee)%ff~c:I~n%coe:rf~.c:tent of

varlationvarj.at3;on andE~II~thetlw testtes$ r.leanmaran $seambecome lowerZavorer" showsshot!v~furth€l1"furkl'l~~

that.i;ha.PI itPt 113fler theklxo POOJ.'l61"gooZper stud.ents~tuden'b~'\Nllov1.1~ tendtanti to4;0 rerr..a.lnrs~ainout028% ofsohoolof achoo2,.. 55

The &g&..-g1?a.degtatussi.;e-gr~cXss.f;etas andand its9ts infl.uencefnf'lusnca onan test%eat normsnorms should&auU nownow 'bebe considered.cons2deredlv WhenViLhsn thekhe cQrrelationcome3&ati~nbetween'betiveen thethe t.-egx'ess1oneot:Ji"i'icientsandrtsgpraarsiczn co&'fJ-aZ~n"cs6 the:f;hs percentagespesrcen%wasofof over­aver- age:nessageamas waawars computed):compuEed, itit was%as round,.i?dru~xI,asas wouldr-easona.blywnx~lfin+msombky , b0bb expected,~q613t8d~that%b&L a.& highb5gh reg3?0ss1onrsgmaa%oncoefficientcoaf f$~sfsntis$a usuAllyzaslslEy accompaniedacoompaniefi byby aa low5m percentse;6prc~ntagt3ofof ove-rae;eneas.QV~~~G~~BSEJIThismfa meanasim:pl:vman53 ~3~mpX.ythat%hak aa BYdall~ma3l'a.peJ:'centageo1~pe~aentage of overagenesBOV~P~~B~IBBS1s18 usu.ally.i;rsuaZJ.y causedoauaad by'Qga a lowLow amountwunk ofof petardat10nratstzrdatitl_n,and andd e.er generalsanaretl po1icyp~1T"~agfavoringfavn~5ng ClO'llblec7.o77aSh7,a plJomotlons;p~onotI~m8; t;herefor6;k;he~ef0~13~ underude~theseeond:t.t'h~srs ~0nd3. tiona.%IOW chi1.drenp:rogrf)ssohlBXd~8n progress throu€,.)l~-Fou~~thethe grades~radasat8% an comparativelysonqas+at;"l%rsLyrapid.rapid rute.rat@. WhenV&e,n :'ttX% was .found+?ou& thatthk a. oorrelation6.0~~62~tionofof +.2:1.85+*2185 ex:l.stedex?.ated betweenFs-bwesn theLf!e regression~&s~~sSOM coef:f:to.:i.entncoef :; lcisntn andanti thethe a,tteJldgl1ceattexd~~ncafa,ctor,f'uct~r, the%he concluslon conoXns3tan was thattllat sohoolssohool~with aa h:t/?;'hattandanoefacto!'hl~;hatte??danoe factor ar.eare thethe schoolsschools inin whlchwhich thethe rs6neralgelmsal policy'.gcrll&cg!-E B t.o't,~fatlFaf.3. &5as fewfew eh~:ld.rencb$.Xd~enelspossiblerzs posafb%s andend g:tveh?.Tve extraejxtra promottonspramf;fona liberally.lfbarally*

TheThe statemen.tst;a%amttla.;t:ha.sbaa 1:'>eol1,beon madelmds 1nAn nR, previous~PBV~OEISchapterchapter tha.t-khaG

80hoo:l.stsol1o01T.s in2x1 whichwhsch theretb~e,18-3-8 a.a geneJ?ul~5ez7t3~9:'nXpolicypoEScy favGJ:>:tnef ava~?dng

:retardatton~stardn%fi.on, andana fewf em dOl'!.bledn%>+bXep:rmnot:'l.onsprn3lst inns w'.11~9.13,natu.rallynat;'~~rally makemke h1_~:herh'J.~:hepsoot-sa acorea on artRn, achievementacthPevament test than w111vvllj. schools~l;ck.aa;lowIwlth th 1lXZt%Settlo retnrdaret~rdaf:%out,t:1.on.,. a.ndand thereforebt;harefn~osme.l1sma.Xl percentagespa~rrentagew of'of oveX'agen.e·ss,;nvemgenose ,* the%he ch:tldrena~aolde:rafa:f.XcIr@nare olcle~,.. grnd$grade .forfor grade;,[y*z.ada, and. have4!.6ve attendeclatk~~idsBschoolachntd. for s.a lo!'!ger20a,?sr partod.par'l.ad

oft:l:m.e..of %%ma, Th~:reS1.l1%I@ [email protected]~~%Bts of'09 th:ts%l?Xce~study sLzzdy seemseen 'l:;oc!)!'I.f~.rrncor12f-r~mthist3:15~

statement.a tatamen%, ThesehoolsTha ach.oaJs wlthwi%h theZ;lz~,highIr~.lch. regrsas:to!lP~~P$&~~-OTI coe-tf'i­co@ff 2-

c!entsaPentn arE:)ELTB theklxe ones~neswhiehW~~CXZ tendLend to lnakePW~Blow%ow scoresSCO~BEIon0632 the achievementa~hievemen%testtiest 'Useduaed inZn this%h9s study.study,, ThedatfilTha d~tapreaentedpre)aanted thusthurs fa.r-rap ,[email protected] t thfb'Lhe

Qge"'Gl~adersrgs*gr&e statussLatua ofof Soti schoolech~sll.arelatedi.s related poait.iv~lypoaikivs2gr toto th.eella attendaneelrsltZ;aslQa11aatQutOl'I~rta%sr with~9% r-(:)gardtoragapd the-the am01'tllt~OXTP~~;ofOF norma.lno-2 ageneas,aganesa, and.a11tZ thatthat the%hs :menl'l3191@azn testbaa%score ccaPa to-$0 'beber expectedsxpacted of'of fil.a so.hoo1ae2:loul is$8 :NJlat~dmXu4;ad nege.t1no~aEivoLyvoly toto both. both CHAPTER III

THE ATTEnDANCE FACTOR AND A l~EW-TYPE NORM

1. Method Employed in the Construction of e. Series of' N'omns

AccordingAa~ort3b.gtoto theLPla datadata presentedp~@8eaLsdinin thethe precedingpreceding ehapter#ehapLa@# thethe survivalawv%valratera3e factorFae,ta~doesdoes affectaSTsct testtest normsmma a.nd.and should&ould therei:o:r-e.t,hamSox+ebeb~3 takent&~.n into2.m.t;~ considerationcanrrid@rai2lion inien theChe establishment ot norms which w:111 be used as a basis fox- judging th~ ef'flelency of'a school system. No single normnom willw5ll bebe sufficientlysdflcian.I;Xy comprehensiveca~prehamlvceto$0 meetmeet- thethe neednear3 forafor a new-typeww-type normnoma inIn wh:lch~113.~11theth8 survivalSU~VIV~JratePBL*~;~factor ~~FICS~~T Is%8 considered; a. series of norms should be provided. In order to estimate the mQ8,sures In one series when thos$ in another aX-e known, use is made of:tbe

~$gre$s1on equations.

TheTha regressionrsgrssajton aquaeqw.f;f"hi onaana are.ape thethe aquaequations,tiona " twotwo inin number.rmmbes~, thatthat bestb83C f:tt~fLt, that%ha& is,is, cornecum nea~estnsavoeat to,ka, thetPm meansmean@of' OF thethe columl1sanclcnlmaa axic2 ofaf thetihe rowarows res:pect1valY;trs~peotPvsXy~inin aa correlationco~~e2a.t;iorntable..i;ableiq TheThe oneam thatthat; comesaoones nearestnsarsst tokt;o the%he meansmeanIs ofof the%he rowarows isis calledcalleta thet;kre 1"egrEH~a1onrag~esa%ulalineZSna ofof X36 onan Y,3?, or,or, inIn otherathex worda,wo~ds, thecorrespondlngths ao~~eapanbingequationaquation is$8 that%Emat byby whichpsrhSlaXrr :x.X valuesvaXue35 maymay bebe foundPound whenwhen thosekhoae of04: YY areaape alreadyalready known.Eulcrwn, OOJ:lJ?6sponel1nglyGor~eapant1lrq;Xytheth@s 1"egress1onPegmes%on line.kin@thatkh&'t bestbeak £1 sit^ts: the%ha meansmema ofof thekh8 eolum:nscolumns 1aZa theregreaaionthe reg~eeaicln1.1neXIne ofof YonY on XXI*... .,. UnlesetheUrC!.@asr Ithe ooefficientssselFPZrtZsnt s ofuf correlationcorre~a.tionequaleqwax ±,+ 1.001 *00,1 neither~.leith~~ regreas1on11nez(aarea sdon 22ne norno2 its2ta eorreapond:tngequationoorsespsn&&ng ~qnation yieldsy%aXda the~xaetZhs axaae valuesvalnaa orof oneone variableoa~iahXeasso­asaa- ciatedc2ated wiwit&thvaluesof va3~~3soP thebhs othe~,othe~,butbut onlyody thethe mostmoak p1"obablep~obablev$luea.valuea,27 27

-. '- 2L ad412, CE~~EPZ~BWe, 2~ cc&*I pa 238.

-57- 38

TheThe XX ractorfaobor 1n3.n thisMaease ease is9s thethe meanman sooressooras mademde onon the New....-southWewtESoum Ach!ev&1l1entAehkevemn-G TestsTBS%EIandand the%be YY .factorfactor isZs the%fie, attenCta.nc.EIatkemlan~t~faetor"SaoLsp* TheThe informationZnfoma.ltSan needed~aaBedtoto findf4id theequa:tionsthe .quationasBS ofof theths l1nt)slines 01'of! regressionregression ofof thesetheas twohro series~~r3saofof me.aSUl'"6Smamas lsasis as .follow$:::%oXSo~as x y Mean 58.94 .572 Standard Deviation 4:.64 .104 1:%:1 ·.3716

WhenWhen thethe properp~apa~valuesvalues we'veBb8t)o snbstitutedeljibstT'hx%eb forfop thethe Mfa,;'Bus, 0'8$bra, anda& rP inSn thE)Lh% equationssquatfona fo'¥!foa XX andand Y.Y, respectively"mspscitEvsly, thethe tollowingequationsPoSlaw$ng equalions resulted:reswXCsd;

...

These reduce to

'1Ii:iaIA:f x= -16.5791 Y + 68.4232

y = -.0083 X + 1.0612

In the ~qu9.t1on in which X appears alon6 on the left",any known value of Y n~y be substituted in ord~r to estimate thethe valuevaJtua 01.'of X..XI whereasOII~BTB~BBifif one one kn011sknmm the%he valuevaluesa ofof thethe XX

as.29* TheTbe formulaePamlaa fo~Bop thesethese twotwo regression~egresatonequationseq~tatlons :maymybe be .foundfomd lnOdellJ'in OdsZX., CharlesCharles WW*,.. , o;e.ci,t.,.Bra. ppa .. 241.243, 39

mea13"Ur&$meaetweer andandt wishesnllshss toto estimateest;fmate thethe YP va.1ues;.zrauea* the secondtre~~nd equationaq.aa.F;%oxz1s2s uS$d.laad* The9316 Y-acoresS-scoras, cannotcarnot be foundfoulad .fromPrm the'ths XaQuatlon;X equation) 1'16ineitl~@rth$r cancan thethe X-sco!'esX--scoms be obtainedobtained byBy what1tut1ngmbrslf%ut2nginin themet Yequation~Y eqzaakl9on,

UnlessUw13.eas4 the%Pre QQe.ffic1entsof"caef ffciee~%s of cor-relationcomelation fU'&wet ±l.-CO,4 X*00+ it1% isis notnot, e~:rta1noelrcain tha.teitherChat althsr regressionregrossiun lineline w111sill yieldyield the+&.@ actualWG acor~"s60~~+.'but1~u-b onlysnzy the%he most p?obablep~abab3.svalue"ualuae, The%a 1l'ea.k$X'aa&%r the.*hs correlation~orreilat90nthetlfis greaterp;~eatsrthethe chancecE7nn~sthatthat thethe actualseoreactual acoxs willwfX1 d~viatedevtata ,Widelywarr9desjbg. from.from the%he estima.tedasthat6tI score.score.

Tbi$This meananreana the.tthcat thethe pl~ohablepxpobab2.e 61"'1'01'"BPFOP otQP the=theestimate ~B~&B*Bshouldsh0~3d bebe determ:1ned.d%k@mfnsdw'WhenWen subat:ta~xbabSL%p;ztion~tutlons W&I'emzts mademade in$n the@he formula,PoF~WXB~ FEast ::.67456 -fi .... ]?2 theLbprobable px~b&bl@erro~array ofof theths estimateeatimraals £orfop the%he XX equationequakian [email protected] wasf:oundwas fau;nd to%Q he'be 2.8643Et8843 andand forfor thethe YequationP equa$flon

.065l.cQ65Sr ThisTh.%~4:means that%IN% tIlereth~3?8isaf B 8 probabilityprobabZlik$ ofof one­one- half'half thattWC anan actnalact11a1measuremsasupe willw511 bebe withinwSZ;hXn oneon0 probableprobable error@Trap ofest1171ateof'of sskSmaL4 of theLfis predictedp~odfctadsc"re.score, ForFor example,empas, ifPi a pred.:totedp~@dt~t@dscore,sco~~). is38 foundfaum?d to$0 'bebe .715,715 fromFrom thetk8 YY equation,a.quatZton* thenthan there%herefafa none-halfa one-hali probabilityprobabSXt%ythat%ha% thethe actualaco:t?ewouldactun2 more raraulcl beba withinwitlhfn ...OG590651 of'of ..,PTX5,715. WhenKhen thesethese probablegrobabXs e:rrorasPmra a.ream interpretedi1rk@rprt?1;@d1nterrnsin dca~rnsof aP (5,br it$* is5s roundFound thatthak thaprobable%be pra'balXL@eX'X"oX' BPPO~ o:f0% eaoheaah equationsquatZan 113.6260is *6260 standardata13lad deviations.dsvZ&%PcSons* InTn otheroZ;Pler~words,words, the:t"eklwra is5s aa oneone-.... halfkssaZE probs,b:tl1typrobabi J4lt,.fr thattlxat thethe actualac.E;uaX scoreaaops wouldw~ttJabebs withinwf thin .,6260.6268 standardabamdard deviationsBevSations ofo$ the pre-dietedpxedZc'%edscoresaors, .. 40

InestimatlngXR arabhk3nf.; thetl1s va.lues~~ZuasforFar the%he scaleeonstruetedscab comtruatsd inin this%h9sstudy,study, neithermithar+ot of thet;ke equationssquations givenp1"'eviousl'Ygivan p~eviouPr%g wasvat used..uaede ItIt waswas desirabledesf~ab3atoto constructCOP~S~~PUC~a.4 singleainngb scalescale trom2?rm anan equationea~uatSomfromSPOB whichw%kZah bothba%h XX anda& YvaluesSF v~~1.u.s~could@add ~be dete1"m1ood when a1thaI' of the ae:l~ies of' measures was w3$dvsad as%a thethe knO'flnknown values.vaSLusa, ForFBI= th1spurPO$6Ghts gmgoae theequatlonthe equa61on was-8 dete:rm:tnedfordek@rsn%w& fa^ theZhs line5Zne that%ha% wouldvoza3td. bisectbisode thethe smallsn819, angleaxale mademade bybgr theeke linesAlnes of'of thethe fHiuationssqzlak9ons torforX X andmd YYI.. fJ.~h1sTh%snecessitatedmcesait$r%ad theth@ changingc1:angZng ofof' thetlze Xequat10nX eguatinn to%athe the

YP i'omi'om l:lBaJsr f'ollowtUfoXJow&l

or,.OF, d.ivid.ing&ivJtd%qthro'u.ghthrrnq73 byby the:the coefficientcoaff Tobent of'01 YYs¥

y: -.0605 X + 3.7652

In ot'der to determine the !le1l7 equa.t:ton. brle.flythe

prooedt~eprooard~mawa4 was 8-$88 follows:fa9Xrrws 3 ~e sizeaimof of eaoheach. ofof the%hatwo f;wo ang~esWXesformed Somdby by thethe XX axisaxla andmd the%he ~eape,otive~et3psotiveregressionregreaslon lines",ZZnea,, onean0 withwl%h a.a tt:'.ngenttangen%of of .0083.OQ33 and.and thethe other~%I~z"Iwith~5th a.a tangent'cangent otof .0603,.0803,

wasVBS dete:rm1nediZB&@mnfn@dandand theirk11e2r sumsuns div'ldedBiu.Hdl%dbyby two.t;m, FromFrom thethe resultingremZLfng angle~angle, the newnew tangent.t;ani,ger~kwasms determined de%emE124oc3.toto givegive thethe slopeslop@ ofof thetihe biaect:tne~bf sect.9trq l1nEhSZnot* WithYJl%h thethe slopesJopr~ofuf thethe newa~awline line andand withgflkh oneone point;;pain%, whlchwhhh IIIIn thtsChts caseaass waswas l"'eprasentedrepr"epaan2;sdbyby the%he teettaaQmeans. means, the%ha lineZinc waswas determined.de"i;m8nsd* 41

SUbstitutionsSubstitutions wa:t>e*@re mademaaat inLn theWe equation.,eq~lation,

.0343 wh10h a1mpli1':1ea to the .fo):'m

Thisllhlts isSs thethe equationaquaklon forfor thethe lineline thatthat wouldworr$a bisectbfs~a-~thethe anglean@ formedf onned by toobht3 twotwo regression~agresssXonlines.Zines, InIn this.Lhf s equationsquatian anyarq knownknown valueulaJ.u@forTOP itX lMymybe be substitutedsubskitutad toto findfZsld thethEs

C01":r:?6flP0Xld.1ngcorrrespaWxq value forPOP Y.Y4 InIn the%he constructioncomtmxc%ion of:of 'the scale8oaXe that%hat accompaniesaccsmpan5as thiskhls stUdy8LucIy as'1'ab1eaas TnbZea 12X2 andand 13.23,

valuesvaX.uas forPop Y were determinedBekmPnesJ. :for~'DP X values rangingr,mgZng from.Tma

49.049,Q toto 69.069,Q a.tok interva.lsInkarval~ofof' .5,,$, Buchass?xcX~as 49.0,49.0, 49.5~49*5,

50.0,SQaQJ,anda& 80aa toto 6968,0*•.0. InXwa orderor&e~tos.voidto avoid. havinghavzng con'"coyst

venientaoalevsxriolll; aoa;Le va.luesvalues onan one0x18 side8Tde ofOF th&scala%I16 scaXt3 olUy"0n3.y~ itLt waswag neoessaryneaessaw tol;o determinedakamine the valuesvsrXues of'a2 X whenwhexi YT va.luesssfuea werewepa known.knownl This sronoamao equationrsqua%fon in$n termsterns of'OF Y would read

a$tkrs follows;~QZZQWB~

Valuesflaxuas 1'01' 'Y'Y 1"a:ngingt:[email protected] i'romfrom .230*28Q tokt;o .920,920 we~·we- SUbstitutedr~ub~kitu-ked

o$.;~ atbtdi intervalsin%e~rra?lnof ..,05OS,010, suchauah as .230,.240*230+ 4240,7 andhnd so on, to determinedlstem%rx~the oorrfHlpondlng~orresp0llC29~values of'of X.Xj SinceSZncs the actualactxal :x;angemm(-;e of thetlle X datal'data, or the test means,nenna, ofJT thistl1I.s study was .fromfrm 48.0 to*a 68.068J and the%he Y9 data wasw8a .t":r>omfnom .250,256 to

.800.80Qi,1 somesarm of'af the%he valuesvalusa inIn the42110 scale [email protected]%t;sd, Tl15'S'Ele extentsx%enk to whichwI-if& th@%h% scale was projeetedgroJacted beyond the actunl.actual rangersUqge of'02 the data ofOE thist;3.Se~ studyshdy waawas determinedaete-md b)"by tl'leprao%I.IB p~aot%cabiIll%yticability of09 19tst6 use.lase, NoMo schoolsci~caXwouldxwaX& very likelyX%koXg havelwve anm attendance~%T;%rtdlancefactorf aoto~ of'of more than .920,920 nor

1aaslass than.2:2?i;Z~an,227, TheThe scales0~3.ewasW~S extendedextended in9n bothho%h directionsdilrtsotians an equal distance from the mean of' the X datal' which was 58.94..

2. Interpretation of the Seale

TheThe question~usaf;ion.mightaiL@ht well'1;J&w8XL 1.m raisedraZsed asaa toto whyvhy thethe attel1dal1ceat;kcs~Icl.a~zcef'actorPacto~ waswas ueeduaesd asas thethe variablevw&ablewithwZt3-1 whichwh5ch toto associateassaoiata eo'l:tt'"'EH\lpo:nd1ngcamaapamlbg testtest !fleans.ra9ms1~ Accord1ngAccondSw toto thethe results of the study as presented in the preeed1no ehapteX", the atteinance factor seemed the most tmportant index to the eondit:tons ora s.chool system. The age-grade­ pl"ogressproamso statusstatus ofof tl1ethe schoolschoo3 systemsystem waawas largeJ.y~wgel$con­coon- ditioned by1te attitude towar.d the attendance ratio. Vihen~ there.fore. it was des1.rac1 toa-elect a m.easure for thethe pUl'posepu~ppossof'of establishingoakabkfshtng na seriesse~T;-osofof normsn0m thatthat wouldw0111d bebe 1nelus~.vaSnclus3.va enouehenozr,~krtoto provideprovZds forfop the%he basicbaste factorsfactors whichvdldch ndc;htmXcb't; affectnfPe@t thekh@ ef.'f1.c1encyo£efficfsncy sf aa schoolschool gygtemsys%ent.. thethe attendancerc8t-t;andanu~faetorseemedfactrrr seemed thethe mostnos-t likelyb%keXyoneone toha !!teet2est this requ1r'eraentraquirarnsnt 8.5aa wel~w~l1asna otherot'itaria.6tMr erft;sria forfor aa usefuluseful testeast norm. Crawford29 gives the following criteria for a new type of nOr:!ru

1.. It shou.ld 'be based on a wall..;,it)flne.d group..

2.2a ItXPr should~h~1Cr.be%8 :tnelusiveWZUSSLTPBenough@~QIL& to%O providep~~vld6for20f the%ha baste.basfs factorsfaato~sand.and combinationseonb.tb9nations ofof f'actorsTactom wh:1.ehmayaffe'ctwhPch may affect aehieVS1'l10nt.stc'k-i;tavenonte 3.3* ItTd should.shou%d beba basedbased onon measuresmaawwea whichqh9ch are obtainableobta2mble infn art]!any $choolecho01 system.sys.t;~a, 4. It should he readil-y interpreted by all teat users, The Gt:ticiencry of a school systfiml should be judged on the basis of its service to th.e community and state. In using the attendance factor aa the variable with wll1ch to associate corresponding test means, the assumption was made tlmt the attemdance factor 1s the best single index to the service render$d by the school. The public school sY$tam is maintain.ed ;ror the adi.leation of the ma.ssesa.nd. is Su.ppor-ted by the general and direct taxation of a.ll prope~ty. Eapeeially in a democraey 1s it important to maintain a good standard of public educatiolh It is the1"ef'ore the duty of the school system to see that all itsZLs childrenchl1Bran arewet educatedeclleatsd forf OF citizenshipaftizanship byby attendingattending; the pUblic sohools".,either byencotlragement or by com'" pulE.liol'l» if necassar(,r.. TheThe attendanceat%en8etfaaa factoriwtar seemsmsms to@abe aa good.;sod indexIndex toto the%haservice ssrvicai ofaof a schoolsafiaa%aystant eystem notnab onlyonly beoausebaaa'txrre 1.$2;t signifiesaftgn5fiea

" '± an, .,

BE.>, Cz*awfsrd, 5r R+, z*Grs P* 26+ what perc~ntagap'peaentage ofof itaita schoolsehoo2 populationpopalation 1sfe inin actualrsakaaz attendancea&tadanae butbu* also~JSDbeOaUlJ6beaaus~ itfk indieatesSnd%catezsthethe naturanab~ea.nda& cha3:ltlctercSlaj~acGe~otof the%210 schoolechml system.srg~.t;em* AachoolA schuol. systemsystem thatthat 1Bis interested%n%er@aeesainIn the-tihe entiresnti2rs communitycom11Stty will~23%attemptattemp% to.t;o main­n,aEn- tain"Eain aa variedvavisd curriculumcmr3,cuX~l~~thatthat willwIX3 meetmeat thethe needsneeds ofof allalX g~oupsgroupa ofof studentsertudents andand willWGLX not-rliot attemptaC.tap.f; to4;~establish@~%abIf~h scholasticacholrrst;50 standardsstand&z?dsthat %ha% areare toofou highh%ghforfor thetha pupilspup138 of0% lowerJamr abilitiesabi55tiaa toto meet.rase%, Thismawillwf9X mea.nmean lessleas retardat1Gnrel~t~dat9on and.and lessless stresssfreas onon theacadera1c%fieacader9fc aideafde ofoP educatIon.eduaat5on.

TheThe scalsaasrraZe as givengkvm 1nTablesfn Tabhs 1212 andand 1313 isfs easilyeasily used.ursed, -TheThe Y'Y values~oalnes(attend.ance (a.f;%en&ancefactor)faakor) have been placedplaoed in9n thethe firBtcolumn.firaG calm, sineesfnee itit seemedseemed reasonableresaombXe toto assumeassume thatthat thethe attendancea't;k@adaszcef'aetorf tact09 will68it3tl be obtainablesbkaf nable easilyeasily forfor aEL sehQol.soh~aZ* WithtY18B thetl~~attenda.ncea.t;Cendance factorfaator ofof a.a sehoolschaoX known,.known, one nQedssleds merelynmam%y to refer toEio the%he compal."Qt1vecarqparelfv@Bcales soales totb find the test.%es%meanman nomnal1ynsma3tXy expectedexpecked forfop the%be sehool.school.

OfcoursElJ'Of comaa, ifif the testt%s$ mean isZs known,knownf the correspondingaorre~pond~~ attel1danoea~t;;.t;e~lrXnnrsefactorSac%or expectedexpoar%srS, forfar thetho schoolacknooZ may be found from the oompa.rativeooapas?al[;five scales.scalos. One of'of the mea-auras;messwes, eithereStLhes?i thek11a taErt%tsaL n:t.eanman mademag by'by 8.s6ho01a aolzoal or"or' the$he attendanceatf;endezr~eafactor.factor, must be known to find the correspondingcorrespoMi~value.val=tzec ForFur example;e-pxe, if2f a.a schoolsoh003 systemsysil;m 1sIzr known toko have an attendanceati;8sndanca factorfaeta? 01:08'820,a$ ,820, then"t;l@ni%$ tshould should be expectedrjxpe@t;ed to.t;s make&s a mean scoresooPe of onlyofiy 51.85X+8 forf OF theChe seventhseuenth gradel;rade on the New-SouthWew-SoaW Aeh:tevementA@hitsuexanZ;TestsTents .atat the end.and ofa$ thetlm schoolsoh002 yeaT#yeax* not­notP withsta.ndingvolkbhs.t;~ndSt~the fact that%ha% 58.958,9 isirs the normnmm establishedeerkab2JisPlerd byby thethe ,authorsaufhors ot:of the%heteat. teat. FromFrom thisEhls expectedexpected mean"man, aa $ehool~cbooJ.systems;$stem me.y wiy beba .foundfa& toto bebe a.bove.above, below,bttXow, oror at&t thetM meanmean oror norm.rrom* Eduoa.t1ona~Edaoatlona2 a.chievementacrhfsvment in9n ara sschooloho01. havinghetvlng

$D..an attendanceatil;a&was factorfactus or.820andof ,820 and a8s meanman test-t:est scorescare orot 5~.,a53,8 l~e.qu1va.lentrsq&asl@n%tota educationJllsduaat8onaX achievementachfeusmnt infn anotherano%br sohoola093boZ having%lavS~anan attendanceattsndanaa factorfac-bor+o£ of .343,543 anda& aa meanrrsan testtarst scoresaom ot'of 66.5.86r5- InIa bothboth oftheseeBJI$Sof thestz ca&eB M1"!:mal~10-l $d.u"QSU* oation$..l~a%Iana2aehievementhas&cMevment 358s beenbeen accomplishedaasuw3.l~hed.forfor thetho typestypes ofsehoolof' rschoo2. populationpopuXksf5on beingkre9~gministeredwfnlstLexllad to.to* AA schoolschool with anan attendanoeaktsadanaet faetorS'aetur of·& .370,378: andand a8 teafestt meanmean of'of 64.,7 wouldw0d.d be'be ra'tedlower'foa%ed30wer thanthan oneone withwi%hanattendanee an al%snBarLeefacto]?Facbr ot:of .587$587 andBXld a8 testt613'e;mas.n El@= ofof GOGO*03..OJ whi'lewM%@anan attendancea.L;P;and~a~~d raotor~WG~QPofof .518 rB38 andand n8 test%satmean man ofof 60.56U18deserves d%samesaa bett$rbefter rating~at%ngthan%h.~%;nz anan attendancew%%i;.sMmcaf'actorfaeta2 ofaoi .483a.nd.483 and aa testtea%mean man of'of 60.5. IfXf thes;he :m.eanSCOI'amean aoope fot'Par thea4venth&he s@vsn%hgradegrade of09 asehoola sehooX systemagrst;em isf s known"known, theoorrespo:nd.1ngattendancethe aa~mapondtlngat:i;endanss faotor factu~mB:ymy hebs foundfctuuzd onan thethe seale·.s~.al~c*IfXf aa sa,venth@eventhgrademade hashas mademeaa meanmaan Beare.scorn of'of' 58.5"58&8#then then the%13e attendanceaQ;tanaancsf'ac.torfac%o~ Torfor theitb school~al~oodsystemsys%em shouldahouJdt be.,587.bs c58Y. If'fS theactnalthis actu~Zattendanceat-tendance factol'Pactax? waswaa late31lXate~foundf toto he"n~lower90werr.l: thankhan .587.587,lethe the eon'"eonc

elusionsluplion wouldwouX6 bebet thatthat theth~schoolschool hadhad notmtmade m&eso ero highhe& aa testtest meanmean asma 1itttshould. csJlaul& TheThe testtss% meanmmastn normallynoml%yto to bebe expectedaxpec'l;ai!i could.cowZa thentJwn hebs locatedXoaa4xd onon thethe comparativeuomparwtive sca.lesscalss... TheThe eowreapondingrso@rasjpsnd$n@attendanceattendanea factorfactor ofof aa schoolschool systemsgsf;@m 1T.I.Qkingmak2rzg aa testkast meanmean ofof 61.7GXmPT maymay bebe .foundfoWby by interpolationSntsrpoZa%t;fan t'rom.Prom theGhe scala.scab, The writerw~Z$f;as~Manotha not of'feredof%fa~edthis%EZ.$EI ~ICalescale as onerrne thatSlat;

should&1~t23dbe used~sa6withdth aa highB3& degreed~graee£of faith3%8h inIn itsft s accuracy.acctwaey. In.Tn,the %he f'irat%%pa%place.place, it;Zt Is5s recogn1~ed~eacognf.zad that-i;l~aCtheG11~ data on whiehthewX19oh the scalescar@ waswas ba.sedbased werewesa not obtainedob.l;ained :Cramfroma a t:mllytmXg representat1rep~esontatfveva sQ..11lplesa.np%a of" af ther;he sehoolaelloal aitua.ti-on.aihakion, SecondlySecondly,~ theretbrs areasre doubtlessiaozabtlesa manynany influences%MZIZ@TI@BEIthat%hat havekmve not been

controlleo.a3.8n%roXJertorQ.T mea.suredzmraa~il~edhere. ItJt is1,s :rn.ere~ymere13 hopedhopad thatPrBrtll a suggestionsaggastian hashabeenbeen giveng%ortn thatthat willswf Xl lead to the study

ofof the%ha effectseffeats ofa%various varilaus fe.C'bOl'SPae%o~:a on0x1 teatEesL norra.smms a.ndand. tot;a thethe eatal11ishmant8staXCL%sXlxlent of of :rel~.ablemJi&%s normsmma i'm'for a.chievementachievement testatests thatLhtwill wf.11 attemptattempt tota measu!'~mcasura the influencefdluence of thesetleae i'actorsfaators onon aohievementaahtsvemenk testteat norms.noma, By-By- use orof the tachniqueemployedtechn-fqna omp3loysd here"herie~.,the the wriwrZLertar believeshelisvss that%3:latthistI-13-8 studyatx~dynayrnny betse greatl:yg~eat9y

extended%X%~XJABCItoko produce~PO~LICBvar:'t~lbleUE+ELXL~E: testtf;~~t no:rnlSP~OZEIS dependent~BPOII~~XI~ u.ponIXPOD the"r;ia compos:!.zmmpaslrtet$ influencefrJSJ;uance of'of' s6veralfaoto:r'sseveraZ faaS;orja,__ UntilUntil, such addlaei,cJ,3.tionalt2omb investigationsi-rrues%t;ii;~a.t;l~naat'awe matle,mde, however,PnowevsrF the%he scale

of'or test%@sf; norri1SmmnS glven33.~6~hereln3h.~~)a?-n to$0 correspondeomespo.& to the attendancea.t;.tentianae factor.factor (the(%harat100f kaeio of the%he ntu:lbe:t~nw-ibexaof' of pupilspupX1~in131 average

dailydatly attenda.n<~eaktsndssnce toto theWID mUl1berof'~u~IBEEof' scholastics),.8~k10~88it;tFc~is5s a

safet"S~BPguidegukd,~ tota expectedexpected e.chievementachlev~xn~ntonan thetax@ NewEew*Suuth....South Acli..1.evementAclQlavement TestsT~stsfGrPo@ a.a seventhseventh gradepads of an independentindape2fisnt

dlstl'lotdf.stx3io%ofsf TexasTexas thantlmn is3.8 anyarly absoluteabs0211ts seventhseventh grade normnom whichvh.Sch disregardsflf n~~gardsthe%h@ attendanceatkenaance factor.·PaoZ;or. 47

TABLP; 12 [email protected] SCALES FOR TEST 1EEXNSlJIEANS AUDAIm ATY!ENDA?TCEATTENDA}fGE FACTORS

When the The Corresponding When the The corx-6spondlng Attendanoe Mean Is Attendance Mean Is FacwI'Ie FaotOl' Is .9aO 48.8 .560 59.S' .91.3 49.0 .553 59.5 .. 910 ·49.1 . .. 550 59.6 .900,908 49..4 .540 59.9 ..*096896 49 .. 5 .536 60.0 .890*S90 ·49.7 ..530 60.2 .8790 870 50.0 .500 60 .. 4 ..s870870 50 .. 3 .. 51B 60.. 5 .861,869 50.5 .. 510 eo.? .350850 50..8 .501 61.0 .844­a 844 51.0 .490 61.3 .840r B4O 51.1 .. 484 6lt~5 ..* 830890 51.4 .480 61.6 .827* 827 51.5 .470 61 .. 9 .8204 820 51.7 .467 62.0 .a~Q.aao 52.0 .460 62.2 1'.$00+.&CHI 52.3 .450 62.5 ..*7f13 783 52.. 5 v440 62.8 ..s790790 52.. 6 .. 435 63 ..0 .780,780 52.9 .430 63.1 .776*77 6 ·53.0 ..420 62;'.4 .770are 53.2 .416 63.5 .759*T69 5,3.5 .. 410 63.7 ...VSO750 . . 55..8 .398 64.0 .741.*'743, 54.0 ..$90 64.2 .730*?3Q 54.3 .. 381 84.5 .724,724 ·54.5 .370 64.8 ..a720720 54.. 6 .364 65.0 .'710 54.9 ..360 66.1 .'70'7 . 55 .. 0 ..350 65.4 .700 55 .. 2 .. 347 65.. 5 .690 55.5 .340 65 .. 7 .680 ·55.8 .530 66.0 .673 56.0 .320 66.3 .. 670 56.1 ..313 66.5 .660 56.4 .310 66.6 .656 56.5 .. 300 66",9 .. 650 56.7 .296 67 .. 0 .639 57.0 .290 67.2 .621 57.5 .278 6145 .610 57,,8 ,.~/O 67.7 .604 58.0 ...261 68.0 .600 58.1 +.. 250 68",3­ .590 58.4 .244 68.5 .. 58? 58.5 .. 240 68.6 .580 58.7 .230 68.9 .570 59.0 .227 69.0 ... i fAll&XX aboveabove areare extrapola.ted.sxC~apo1att;eb. tAll%A11 belowbelow are.~tl'apolated.are @Z~x*apoLatea, 48

TABLE 13

GRAPmo PRESENTATION OF THE COf/lPiffiA!LilVE SCALES

When the ~he Conesponding When the Att~ndane$ The CorrespQnding 1tes,n ra Attendance Mean Is Factor Is FactoX' Is

60.0

61.0

66.0

59.0 CHAPTER IV

SUMMARY. C01TCLUSIOnS, AND RECQl;ITtlE1IDATIONS

1. Summa.ry

The problemprobXern of06 thTsthis atudvwas~bxdy.- was to datcsmxtnedetermine .thethe rsakrcanatura

Qndad extentexken* of the Infl~zenceinfluence of the attendanceattondanea am3and pPo,TessprO,jr6S8 fa~torsractors ODon test ao~ns,norl1ls.. IfIS thsethese factors?actors aamwers found to affectaffoct nomanorms %oto t11~the extentaxtent %ha%that errors in9x1 interpretation%nb~.p?rsta%f.un mZ@tmight ~e;4u2%,result" itf 't; was haadhoped to suggestsug:;es% a a~s.t;hoamethod .forfar establishingestab29sking norms which would atnt least in2n part controlc~ntrol thlathis ef'feot.effect,

The data ueedused were the test sooresSOC~PCS mado on the !{ew­YBW-

South AckievmontAchlevement To3-f;~Tests ada:!ld the age-gradea~e-graae distributions~%B~P&~I~%~oDs as wnZlwoll as the pragor.PI20nproport1on of'of scholastics8ohaSastScs infln average daily attenda.nceattsl-dame forPar thZstg4hreothlrty-three smallwna23 Pndapsldsnkindependent districtsd$stric%s

%2lzSaugho?~*throughont the stateStat63 of Sexas.Texas.. F~omFrom thesathese data the followingfo230whg lnf"orrnat:ton armat at ion was ~?3'cn.lnodobtainod for each of the schools:sohoo2a: the manmean scoresscares,41 thetho sta.ndarda%nndn~ddeviai;tons,Cievia%~uns, and tllatheeoeff1c1ents coaFfTcfends of vnrlna3fvariability If tgy onan the aeh:i..evEtmentacblevexent tests; the a-ht~nc'lancen.ttemlance factor; %he'hhepereontafjeS pe~~~cnta;;~~of averageness,0~eTa&8:leBs, no~rn~lnormal azenaageness~ a a, axx39.1'1d uulc1ez"a;undera;;enesa;;enoss; and the regr~ssionregression coet:eic.ientsccrsfllcien$,s for gradesrads ailon cbonologicalchronologica~ n;;atn{~e. The coe.ffic!.ents of correlation for the different com'" bi~'1$.tions of these factors were computed.. 50

The'62.18resu.lts ~eaa3..$sof'oE this%Ms procedurepxocatt~zraindicatedIndPrtated the%he needneed

fo~QQF aa newma type%y-p~ofof no~Damwhich wMch would.r~so~LLdmake possible more

validt7a3Zd oo:rnparisons..trcrmpariaor~a~A:n An att~.mpta'l;'t;emp.a; tota establishaatablTsh suchanoh ala norm.norn showed.ehwed thatthat the$he attendance~ttendance.fa.ctor-factos? cou2d.caul&be be useduasd asas aa basisbas58 forfar dete~11n1ngde%amzira$ngthe the testtest meansflea= tllatthat shouldahcmEd beb~ expectedexpootxdi onan thethe New-SouthHew-Soa,2CIl AchievementA~bJTe~emnf;Te.~ft3.Tegtsl AA scal.escale W8.seonstructedwas constm~ctedlbybg whichwhich the correspondingo0rmsgo&1~valueua1us of'of eithet'@2theP thet5e attendanceaLt@rtda~~~factorf8cGo~ oror thetire test%@st rlean;?@an couldcsrald bebe

.foundfound whenwhen th~%he memeasupea.sure inin theeke otherother series~e~le9wasWBS known.kasvn*

2.ZI ConclusionsGsnclusSana andand. ReoommendationsReoommndationa

OnOn thethe basisbasis of09 thethe findingsI%ndi?~;;lsspresentedproaet~~ted inin this tlxls study,study,

thetho .follow1n;?;concll1sionsf'o9l~wfn,zacrnclns-tona andand roeommo:n.darooom~1aldat80;1stiona appearapliaw va.lid;.rrrsIfd: 1.a, Attendsnceand.Att;sncla?lcnnxzd p:r.ogresspr..ot.;Pssa fa.ctorsSactars affectaf:P@cttest tssk normsnoms toto thethe extentex-tent that-kkat they%hayshould ahauld lJebe consideredcanstde~edinf n norrlrl..l1J~nom&xw;

testa.tetst~, NormsEarns establishedsat,ablished onan groups.:;TOU~S inIn whichv~135ch theset2xeao factorsSactors arewe notno% controlled.cont~o?.lefiareare ofoS d01'lbtfu.ldoz%hGf~~IJIvalueva21xe inEln jUdginc;3uiz,[email protected] efficiencyeff.b3-ieancg. of'of fleb.oolsaF.onS S;Tstems.syste~xs. Ach:i.evamentAch%o%pemctntteststos2;s sho'llld::llutild beaeco:mpaniedbe ascamp~tntoclb~rhg variahlevap5ab).,2a teetZ;@a%!J.orInsrsomxn thatthak tak{)talco into?.31%0

considerationconsj-doration thethe lnfl1~enceinfl~xenceof.or these.t;lir3ss andand otherothep factorsinc"e;ofn onon testtea* norms.a3.0mss 2. AA h:lghhigh attendancea%ts1?c7,n~7cnf"actorfactor tendsGenda toto beba accor.1paniedneconpaa%et3. by n h1.ghbI$a coe.f'.fielentc,aafflcie~tofor varlationva~fak"lon_andand aa lowlow :meanrrean scorescor~ onon anan achievementaah%svo~enttest"test, Thts is2s anan indication9~~d5cwttontlw.tt8mt aa

school~tcb.csct1systemay8tf;~n in2n whichthkh thethe oppositeappostte ofof thesethese condi.tionscondik%ons existsexiaks has onlyodly thethe mostnos$ capablecapable andand moatmost desirabledas3rabI~ 51

elementelement ofof itsSts schoolschool populationgapulation inTn attendance..attendance. ~eseThese latterhtter eonditlonscondltiona shouldshould notnot bebe encouragedencouraged byhy judgingjudgiw this%his typekype o:fachoolaP sahaal, systemsyaCem moremss efficientefficient; onon thethe basisbases of'0% 1tsseore5%~sa03?8 onon anan achievementachievement test.taat. a.TheSa The schoolacploo3L systemssyst~mswithwLth the%he :Lowlow ~agressegreasSonsion coef'.f1clentsca-efP%cfsn%s,t whichficb a.re 8~63ind:tcatlveo:f SndEcativo of slow&low progresspropeas throW)!tWoup3x thetbgradesjt gracles, tendt~mu3.toto makee higherMghsr meanmean scoresacores onon anan achievementachieveltrant test%oat thanthan dodo the%heschools schoo2s withwith low3aw amountsmsun%s ofof retardation.rstwdatfon, ItJt seamsseema evidentevfdent that%ha% thet;he ef'ficiencyeff %ciency ofof these'bIzesc3r schoolsachoaXs should.should bebs judgedju&gad onon theGIhe ba.sisbasis ofof variableva~labb normslW+TBlB,.. 4. TheF~Bschoolsaha~2 systemsayatems withwSth thekbe h1[J';hh9& attendancewttenhncs factorsfaakora ha.vehave comparativelyeompa~e~aliveJlglowXow amountsmr~~untsofof retardation.~%ea~daeion-

Thi%fas seemsseems to%aindica.. indtlcat8te that%ha% thesethese Bsclzao3.s011001s arems notno% onJ.yl;ag interested.%n%ereat;e&in2x1 havinglxaving childrenchf lwen attendattand schoolschool butbut areape alsoalso encou:ragingencou~agin~gthemthen% to ts staystay inZn schoolschool :foX'for aa longerEo-er period.pe~iodof0% timetern@'by Bg refusingx%S'11shgto disoouraged%~o~was%themthem throughthx?oq$h retardation.re%a~dat%on,EvenEven infn tl~8etlmae schools_scbuo2a, howeverhowever,v thethe per·par- eentagescan%agea ofof averagenessovasageness areare muchmxch tookoo high.ktlgh, AnAn attemptaktleqt tots red.uceretdzxea the%he amountawnaunt ofof retardationrstasdat2on shouldshould bebe madeWerII 5.5, InTn sosa farFar asBS the+he datadata ofof thethe studystudy maymybe be con­con- sideredsbdered typioal,typtsaX, mostmast schoolsstll~oolishavehave as muchmlch lowerlower peroentagepsrasntaga of'of scholasticsscholastic6 inin averageavsrage dailyIla23-y attendanoeattermdanoe, than.than aa systemsystem basedbasad Onsn thethe ideafdea otof un!ualversalversa.1. educaeducationt:ton shouldshould allow",aXloa. AA greater~reaterefforteffort shouldshould bebs mademade toto strengthens'crsrgthen andard enforeeenforce the.tho compUlsoryconpuJtsaPy attendanoeattevldnncs law.law, 52

APPENDIX

8.tuJr 4.64 ,095 .. .l~

.6M 57! • 49.91 58.94

.8"

53

19 sot • 59.9 12.61 0.9 '1.'15 3 .. 49

~J..47

32 25 .$64 67.5 419 .. 51.9 10.67 7.00 85.60 0.6 S'BIP BB

31 .435 35 30.0 ."798 10.12* 4.8 65.2 60.62 16.69 8'TG ZQ

30 .444 52 598 .. S .. 59 1 .. 38 15.26 2.1 63.38 $*$I9

9",67 TE

29 .467 12 48.9 595 .. 13.95 42.1 57.61 9.0 24.21 ZWEB 06

.469 37 .561 a9 67.2 30.S 64.03

13.53 8.66 2.0 TMZP $8

49 .489 42.5 2'1 .676 eo

10.45 52.9 59.35 .. 1'7

4_6 8'0G 88

'0.7

26 .521 8 .555 'l.eo 37.1

4.95 .13 • 65 8*8Q &Z 2.~

17 U

.525 .'10"? 33.8 59.4 9.05 7.0 16.30 ... 55

53 rqllrZ 03

24 .532 18 49.'1

50.3 .645 0.0 51.44 95 .. 8

17.40 9'rn rn

25 .539 4S 45.5 50.4 .746 4.1. 9.33 60.48

15.43 seal; "6tZ

.545 103 22 70a .. 50.2 42.9 6.9 59.05 11.'t.65 g.?,,! 9"W

.76' 21. 50 4 .. 48 14.94 9.22 61.72 4.6 47,,.0 0"?* .,565 ZZ

.64d 55.9 .56e 41.4 20 6 2.8

67.83 6.70

9.8S 9'89 Zz.

40 .570 56.6 .700 19 3.a 59.6 1.0.37 20.51

50.54 9"t"B 02

1.e 56.1 .593 54

.459 37.& 6.3 8.5$

13.67

62.M 9'$!2 err

l'

34.& .?to .599 60.7 'oM 10.15 4.'1 33 .. 62 8"AG

1'1.24­ 0T

1:& 43.5 SO.? 68

.66& .60'1 58.60 5.9 '18* .. 10

18.39 1'09 &T

15 19 .f3OI7 S5.2 .699 411>7 3.1 60.95

15.lS

Q.25 I;'* %t

~'"

50.3 .800

56.9 .&.26 54.86 89 .. 11 &*T3 L2.9 21.67

~3 ?4T

13 .e09 46.4 21 7 .. 49 .826 3.9 55.91 10.56 6*

18.88 @G 3%

35.& .611 51.."5 1 .. 65 .621 1.3 12 20 9.40 %*I)%

18.1.6 QE

45'.'

61.9 .615 U 2.4 a9 .'166 65.10 15.28 43'3s

9",95 2'I:

.61a 37 10 '.55 SO.(} 650 .. 6.1 43.9 53.08

14.22 t"* Tf

49.8 44.9 .61a 51 5.3 9

.'122 18 .. 58 6'EP

6'1 .. 16

~h70 OT

42.8 61 5.1 52.1 .619 64.94 743 .. 8

9·.46*

14.5'1 8"W 6

'.5

eo M.S 38.1 .632 , 765 .. 5th49 9.05

16.02 f "89 8

44.'

42.a .644 6 .773 !l3.1 54.($4 62 41 .. 1'1 51 ..

9 9'W d

.e54 48.1 5'.6:1. 48.'1 41 5 .916 3.2 65 .. 9

16.'15 Z9Z* Q

..

64.2 .662

41.4 64 4.4 4

U.$6 47 .. 19 f =sv

e.,~ p~h8'1 B

.ael 4a.a 51.3 1.9 :5 .671 29 58.72 8.85

15.0'1 V'C* f

.'85

'.2

a .755 38.8 53.9

J.8O 59.72 16.49

0.85 S*'fS; E

44:.8 .665 49.5 14 1 5.7 .'1e"l 49.29 1l.06 6"sG 22..43 8

Q"6P • a

Coefficient ragemss U&an ot Dev1at1oJ1 standard V.ar1at1cm Ooe·fflc1ent

•• Percent Begr$sa1oa Test Test ~st

Status Age-Grade

DATA RAW

'lULEA 53 BIBLIOGRAPHYBIBLX IXiRRPrn

Book!.Books

Crawford. J .. R., tg~and PrOisreSS Faotors in Teat Norms, University 0 owa, Iowa drty, 1?5!4. T!n ita S£Udiea 1nEdttcation. Resea.rch Studies in Educational'"ieaaure- !iintg~ I. pp. !'''39.1 ... -. Cubberley,Cxbberfsy, EllwoodE9~wo~P.P *,~ Public. Sohoo! AdministI'ation, Revised andand enlargedenla~gededtedit tion, Houghton MifflIn Oompany, New York,.YoP~,1929.X929 w Greene,Greens, HarryWryA. A. andand Jorgensen.;.Jor~anaen,Albert8Zbar.t; IIMcrIJ, ~~eaUse and& Interpretation of Eduoationa~ Tests,T~+sts,LongmiiiS",­ LD~@A~P~s, (}reenam Company, Me'w !Or-'fi,d ·1~2§ .. Hollingshead, Arthur Dack •. An Evaluation ot' the Use of Certain Educational ann-Mental Measurem~s-ror-­ Purposes or elassitlC9:tlon, Tea.cners College;-· ColumbIa liiiiversltYlt New York, 1928. (Contributions to Education. number 302.)

Lincoln,LinaoXn, Edwa!'dEdward .AndrewsAdr-sws andand Workman;Wo~bm,LinwoodLinw~od L.E., 1 Testing andan& theUs~s of ~estL--.-iTest Reaults#ResuXt5, TheThe MacmillanMacmlLZan Oompany, New!ork-;-I§'35:"Tii% . Moehlman.Xoshhmn, ArthurULlmr BS,.. " ,Child AeOollntiEjh,Courtia Cawtis StandardStandard . TeSoatis,eta, DeDet~o%G,tro1t,. 1924. l~onroe. Walter Boott,An Introduction to the Theorx of Educatio:q.a.l Measurements, lIciUghtonftrn'l!n Compart.v,. New Yortt .. !923. .. Mort,34ort, PaulPaul R.andR* an& Gates,Gates ArthurRPthu~I.S., , TheThs AocelZtable Uses ofof Achievement Testa. TeachersTeachers CO!lege, Co!rimbrn-­ U'i:i:J:l1erslty,-Un :New' 'York', 1932"1932+ Odell,OdelL, CharlesCh&rXes wW.#.. , statistical Method inin Education,Education, D.D1Appleton-Gentury App1eton-G Company, New YOrk. !9'3s. otis,.O%its,.1U7thur &tlh;ur Sinton,.Sizlt;onl Stat1E':tticalSta.f;itlst;fcnJ Method1Jeeh.ed in%r? Ee;tuoationalEducational, Mea.surement, wor!alV0 BOOK Company, !anKarao%Ee ...on....Rudson,# New York,. 1925.25 e Pressey,. Sidney L. and Pr&ssey, Luella, Introduction to the Use of Standard Tests, Hevlsed edition, \~orla t300kCOmpany 11 !'oMers'-'on...Hudson, New York, 1931", 55

Rugg, Harold 0., StJ3.tistica1 Methods A~Plled to Education, Houghton lJIiff'!ln Company ~ New Yor , 191'77'"

Walker, Helen 11[ •• ed. ,.The :fI,teaaux-ement of' Teach1!lS EfficlencI" The MaC'iiiI'!!an Oompany,'e,., York 1 1935 ..

Periodicals ...... pM ill

Armentrout, W. D., IfClass:tfication and Promotion of Pupl1s,u p:p:u9atlon" Vol. 42jc Ap:t'11, 1922, pp. 505-512. Coy,Coy, GenevieveGenevisve La,L., ttl\. StudyStu4y of'of VariousVELP~QUBFactorsFaotors Which~WCLI. InfluenceIa33E"luance thetitle UseUs@ otsf' thethe AccomplishmentAccompXPakmen&Quotient Quotilant asas aa MeasureNeasure ofaf TeachingYsachf ng Efficiency;"lTf9c5ency Journa~ 2! ~q,1:I.catl0.n;aEd~xcatSoS..:I: !t..~search,Resc~rch~, Vol.Val* 21,EX3 J'anual"Y,.Jam- ;{g36, p .. 29.

IfuEduc&kdona3.Educatl0nal TestsTests andand Theirmlr Uses,Uaes,"rr Rev1ewRevTew ofof EducationalEducatSoml .LI-. Resear,ch,=pa~.,ch, Vol.Val, 3,5, February,Zsbmraw, 1933,193 :niii1ibirQP 1. .. , Freeman, Prank N.. , UBases on 1;111110h Students Can Be Cl.a.ssli'ied Effect:tvely,U School Review, Vol. 29, December, 1921, PP. 735-745. ..

Gray,Gray* HobBob andand Votaw,Ve)taw3 DavidDavid F.,.P*, "Making'%Iakring ReportsRepopts at'of r.J.lastTest ReaulResultsts Meanil1gful,XdeanLngful, rt'! 1'he??he r!'exasTexa~Outlook, Vol. 20, numbermber 12j12, December;Deo~mber,'ms,. m6- pp. ,§6-22. . Jenkins,. A. U«, tlMeasurement of Teaching Eff'1ciency by }i(eQ.11s of Standardized Testa,fI' National Education Association, De~e.rtm.ent.of ElementapxScnooI ~,rln~.!Ralst' !fu,;[e1Hn, Vo!:" S., Apr!!, J.~2~. pp. 373­ 382.

Lewis,Lewfa, A.ii*B•B., .; r'Practical"Preicticnl UseUso forf UP IJlestTest Scores.S~orezl,~~tt Edu­Edu- cational Record. Vol.VoJ. 171'7,A January,January, 19362956,, -­ Supp!ement~ pp. 130-132.130-132 e Shannon,.Shannon, J.J'. R .. ) ffcomparisonm~~mpwisonotof Three TWee Means14eans torPOP MeasuringIvleasurflng Eff'1cieooyBfOicieney inin Teaeh1ng,".;rournai:,Y~ach$ng," Journal S?!of EducationalBducatloml -r Researcl},-r Vol.Val, 29,29, March,Uareh, !936, pp.501·508~ '1'71619,!Tyler, RRm.. W.,W* ,frAppraislng "Appraf sf q; ProgressiveProgressive Schools,n~chaoats," Educa­Educa- tionaltZonaJ. Method,&thodl Vol.VoJ* 15,15, May,&kyc1936~ 1996, pp.ppl 412422... ==r~ 415. --I 1 t ,"I • ., __ 1 II - g