Arts, Faculty of
Psychology, Department of
DSpace
UBCV
Hayes, Herbert Orville
Master of Arts - MA
University of British Columbia
The study was instituted in an attempt to find any factors that might have contributed to the rather unexpected success of the veterans as university students. A secondary aim was to seek evidence bearing on the contention that veterans are superior students to the non-veterans. In order to compare the veterans and non-veterans, a questionnaire was devised by members of the psychology department. It covered a range of topics including vital statistics, motives for university attendance, interest in courses, and attitudes to study, to extra-curricular and outside activities, and to factors considered as aids or; barriers to university success. The questionnaire was given to 1600 students taking the introductory course in psychology. From their papers, three hundred were selected at random from the ex-service group and three hundred from the civilian group. Their answers were tabulated, changed into percentages and compared for significant differences. In addition, the service experiences of the veteran group were evaluated for their bearing on university success or failure. The academic records of both groups were then examined for two consecutive years and compared for significant differences. The veterans were found to have attributed their success to a variety of factors. Chief among these were the financial support afforded under the government plan, the helpful quality of the instruction, the widened experience gained in the services, the salutary effects of service discipline, increased age, university counselling, and married status. Statistically significant differences favouring the veteran group were found in their attitudes toward extra-curricular and outside activities, interest in course and in the importance attached to the vocational aspects of university training. Married veterans were found to show significant differences from both single veterans and civilians with regard to housing and financial problems. A pronounced tendency toward greater self reliance was also found among the ex-service group. In academic achievement, no significant differences were found between veterans and non-veterans, as such. However, a difference of high statistical reliability favouring the married veterans was found when their accomplishments were compared with those of the single veterans and the civilians.
A COMPARATIVE STUDY . OF THREE HUNDRED NON- VETERAN STUDENTS AND THREE HUNDRED STUDENT VETERANS IN THE FACULTY OF ARTS AT -THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA by -Herbert Orville Hayes A Thesis submitted in Partial Fulfilment of The Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Department • of PSYCHOLOGY The University of British Columbia SEPTEMBER, 1949 A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF 300 STUDENT-VETERANS AND 300 NON-VETERAN! STUDENTS IN THE FACULTY OF ARTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA. A b s t r a c t . The study was i n s t i t u t e d i n an attempt t o f i n d any f a c t o r s t h a t might have c o n t r i b u t e d t o the r a t h e r unexpected success o f the veterans as u n i v e r s i t y s tudents. A secondary aim was to seek evidence b e a r i n g on the c o n t e n t i o n t h a t v e t e r a n s a re sup-e r i o r students t o the non-veterans. I n o r d e r t o compare the vete r a n s and non-veterans, a q u e s t i o n n a i r e was d e v i s e d by members of the psychology d e p a r t -ment. I t covered a range of t o p i c s i n c l u d i n g v i t a l s t a t i s t i c s , motives f o r u n i v e r s i t y attendance, i n t e r e s t i n courses, and a t t i t u d e s t o study, t o e x t r a - c u r r i c u l a r and o u t s i d e a c t i v i t i e s , and to f a c t o r s c o n s i d e r e d as a i d s or; b a r r i e r s t o u n i v e r s i t y s uccess. The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was g i v e n to 1600 students t a k i n g the i n t r o d u c t o r y course i n psychology. From t h e i r papers, t h r e e hundred were s e l e c t e d a t random from the e x - s e r v i c e group and t h r e e hundred from the c i v i l i a n group. T h e i r answers were t a b u l a t e d , changed i n t o percentages and compared f o r s i g n i f i -cant d i f f e r e n c e s . In a d d i t i o n , the s e r v i c e experiences o f the v e t e r a n group were e v a l u a t e d f o r t h e i r b e a r i n g on u n i v e r s i t y success or f a i l u r e . The academic r e c o r d s of both groups were then examined f o r two c o n s e c u t i v e years and compared f o r s i g -n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s . The veterans were found t o have a t t r i b u t e d t h e i r success to a v a r i e t y of f a c t o r s . C h i e f among these were the f i n a n c i a l support a f f o r d e d under the government p l a n , the h e l p f u l q u a l i t y of the i n s t r u c t i o n , the widened experience g a i n e d i n the s e r v i c e s , the s a l u t a r y e f f e c t s of s e r v i c e d i s c i p l i n e , i n c r e a s e d age, u n i -v e r s i t y c o u n s e l l i n g , and m a r r i e d s t a t u s . S t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f a v o u r i n g the v e t -eran group were found i n t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward e x t r a - c u r r i c -u l a r and o u t s i d e a c t i v i t i e s , i n t e r e s t i n course and i n the importance a t t a c h e d t o the v o c a t i o n a l aspects of u n i v e r s i t y t r a i n i n g . M a r r i e d v e t e r a n s were found to show s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s from both s i n g l e v e t e r a n s and c i v i l i a n s w i t h r e -gard t o housing and f i n a n c i a l problems. A pronounced tendency toward g r e a t e r s e l f r e l i a n c e was a l s o found among the e x - s e r v i c e group. In academic achievement, no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found between v e t e r a n s and non-veterans, as such. However, a d i f f e r e n c e o f h i g h s t a t i s t i c a l r e l i a b i l i t y f a v o u r i n g the marr-i e d v e t e r a n s was found when t h e i r accomplishments were compared w i t h those of the s i n g l e veterans and the c i v i l i a n s . A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S T H E WRITER WISHES TO E X T E N D HIS SINCERE THANKS TO D E A N S.N.F. C H A N T , D E P A R T M E N T OF P S Y C H O L O G Y , UNDER WHOSE DISCERNING GUIDANCE THIS STUDY WAS C A R R I E D OUT; TO DR. W. G. B L A C K , D E P A R T M E N T OF PSYCHOLOGY, FOR HIS H E L P , E N C O U R A G E M E N T AND V A L U A B L E SUGGESTIONS; TO M R . C . B . WOOD, REGISTRAR A N D MISS M . K I E V E L L , ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, FOR GRANTING PERMISSION TO E X A M I N E T H E A C A D E M I C RECORDS OF T H E STUDENTS IN THIS STUDY AND TO THOSE KIND FRIENDS WHO AIDED SO G E N E R O U S L Y IN T H E RECORDING OF T H E D A T A . T A B L E O F CONTENTS i i C H A P T E R PAGE I INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1 1. Legislation Regarding Veterans 1 2. Definition of a Veteran 3 3. Effects of this legislation on Canadian Universities 4 4. Effects on the University of Br i t i s h Columbia 6 5. Considerations A r i s i n g from the Government University Program 7 II S T A T E M E N T OF T H E PROBLEM, METHODS E M P L O Y E D AND LIMITATIONS OF T H E STUDY 11 1. Statement of the problem 11 2. Methods Employed 11 3. Limitations of the Study 13 III OTHER SIMILAR STUDIES 15 IV DESCRIPTION AND COMPARISON OF T H E GROUPS 20 1. Description of the Non-Service Group 20 2. Description of the Veteran Group 21 3. The Veterans' Evaluation of their Service Training and its Bearing on University Success 25 4. Comparison between the groups 27 (a) Age 27 (b) Maturity 27 (c) Marital Status 30 (d) Educational Background 31 (e) Summary 3 3 V A COMPARISON OF G E N E R A L A T T I T U D E S TO UNIVERSITY L I F E 34 1. Students' objectives in Attending University 34 2. Students' Evaluation of their Interest in their Courses 35 3. Students' Overall Evaluation of their Course 36 4. Attitudes to Study as Indicated by Time Spent on Study and Assignments 36 5. Attitudes towards Extra Curricular Activities 38 6. Summary 41 CHAPTER iii PAGE VI FACTORS CONSIDERED BY THE STUDENTS AS DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR UNIVERSITY SUCCESS 42 1. Poor Study Methods 44 2. Inability to Concentrate 44 3. Crowded Classrooms 45 4. Financial Difficulties 45 5. Type of Living Accommodation 46 6. Lack of textbooks 47 7. Poor Academic Preparation 48 8. Uninteresting University Courses 49 9. Poor University Instruction 49 10. Poor Library Facilities 50 11. Lack of Ability 50 12. Too Much Time Spent on Entertainment 50 13. Too Many Extra-Curricular Activities 51 14. Poor Health 51 15. Homesickness 52 16. Summary 52 VII FACTORS CONSIDERED BY A L L STUDENTS AS CONTRIBUTING TO THEIR UNIVERSITY SUCCESS 54 1. Good University Instruction 56 2. Having a Definite Vocational Goal 56 3. Associating with Others Having a Common Interest 57 4. Good Classroom Facilities 57 5. Special Assistance by Professors 57 6. Summary 57 VHI ACADEMIC SUCCESS 59 1. Overall Comparison 61 2. Comparison by years 61 3. Married Veteran Standing 66 4. Standing of Veterans with Children 67 5. Record of Students with Shortened Matriculation 68 6. Academic Achievement by Rank 70 7. Standing in the 1947 - 48 Examinations 72 8. Relationship between Age and Academic Achievement 77 9. Summary 79 CHAPTER iv PAGE X SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 80 1. Factors Contributing to the Success of all the veterans 80 2. Factors Contributing to theSuccess of Part of the Veteran Group, 84 3. Differences in Attitude 86 4. Comparison of Academic Achievements of the Groups 86 5. Conclusions 87 6. Some Implications of the Veteran Programme for Canadian Higher Education 88 7. Suggestions for Further Study 89 REFERENCES 91 LIST OF T A B L E S AND GRAPHS v T A B L E P A G E I Composition of the Canadian Forces Compared with the Composition of the Veteran Group 22 II Ranks by Service of the Veteran Group 23 III Benefits Expected from a University Education 34 IV Estimate of Interest in Course 36 V Hours per week Spent Outside of Class on Study and Assignments 37 VI Participation in Student Organizations 38 VII Participation in Off-Campus Organizations 39 VIII Participation in Organized Sports 40 IX Number of Recreational Activities 40 X Rating of Handicaps to University Success 43 XI Percentages Finding Housing Detrimental to Effective Study 47 XII Effective of Poor High-School Preparation on University Success 48 XIII Poor Health as a Handicap to University Success 51 XIV Influences Considered Helpful to Success at University 55 X V Examination Results for a l l years - 1946 - 47 60 XVI F i r s t Year Averages - 1946 - 47 63 XVII Second Year Averages - 1946 - 47 64 XVLU Th i r d and Fourth Year Averages - 1946 - 47 65 XIX Academic Achievement of Married Veterans 66 X X Standing of Veterans with Children 67 XXI Comparison of Veterans with Shortened Matriculation and those with regular Matriculation 69 XXII Record of Veteran Group According to Service Rank 71 XXIII Composition of the Civilian Group over a Two Year Period 73 XXIV Composition of the Veteran Group over a Two Year Period 73 X X V Overall Comparison for 1947 - 48 74 XXVI Second Year Comparisons i947 - 48 75 X X V H Third and Fourth Year Comparisons 1947 - 48 76 GRAPHS FIGURE P A G E 1. 1. Distribution of the Veteran and Non-Veteran Groups by Age 28 2. Ogives Representing final Examination Averages, A p r i l 1947 62 3. Scattergram Showing Paired Ages and Academic Averages of 291 Veteran Students 78 A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THREE HUNDRED NON VETERAN STUDENTS AND THREE HUNDRED STUDENT VETERANS IN THE FACULTY OF ARTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA CHAPTER I I N T R O D U C T I O N A N D B A C K G R O U N D 1. Legislation Regarding Veterans Almost one million citizens of Canada served in the armed forces during the recent war. The responsibility for the rehabilitation of these people was clearly accepted by the Dominion Government, when, in December, 1939, a cabinet committee on Demobilization and Re-establish-ment was formed (8,p.72). Fortunately, Canada entered the War of 1939-45 with a department well trained in the administration of veterans' af-fairs and the problem of rehabilitating these veterans was managed by expanding and improving existing services and existing legislation. On July 13, 1944, the Post Discharge Re-Establishment Order, known as P.C. 5210 was passed by Order-in-Council. It provided for five main avenues of rehabilitation, namely: 1. Out of Work Benefits. 2. Vocational and technical training. 3. Benefits while "awaiting returns" from private enterprises. 4. Benefits for those temporarily incapacitated. 5. University training. At the 1945 session of Parliament, this order was incorporated into the 2 larger legislation known as the Veterans' Rehabilitation Act (32,p.296). It is not the intention in this study to elaborate on all the rehabili-tation measures of this Act, but rather to indicate the main provisions with respect to university education: Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Minister may promote the rehabilitation of veterans by paying the costs of university courses of training. Subject to the provisions of this section, where a veteran (a) resumes or commences within one year and three months after discharge a course for the purpose of qualifying for admission to a university or (b) resumes or commences within one year and three months after discharge, a university course, aca-demic or professional to which he is regularly ad-mitted, the Minister may pay an allowance for the period during which he takes the said course. The Minister may, in accordance with regulations pay to any school, university or similar institution, tuition fees or other necessary charges and costs of courses of training. The total period for which allowances may be paid to a veteran shall not exceed his period of service, except that, if the Minister is of the opinion that a veteran's progress and achievements in the course he is taking are such that it is in the interest of the veteran and in the public interest that pay-ment of the allowance be continued during a longer period, the Minister may, pursuant to regulations made in that behalf, ex-tend the period during which it may be paid (32, pp.18 - 20). The monthly allowances to be paid were specified as follows: single, $60; married, $80; first and second child, $12; third child, $10; fourth, fifth and sixth, $8; dependent parent, $15. Since 1945, three major amendments have been made to the legisla-tion: (a) A supplementary grant not exceeding $ 150 is now paid to the universities for each student-veteran under allowances for the purpose of helping the universities to cover the costs 3 entailed in teaching the large number of veterans. (b) A veterans' loan fund has been set up to help deserving veterans through financial emergencies. (c) The allowances have been raised for married men. 2. Definition of a Veteran It will be noted that these benefits are available to veterans. Ac-cording to the Veterans Charter, a veteran means a person who has been on active service in the Canadian forces or in receipt of active service rates of pay from such forces during the war, including a person who has served in the Canadian Women's Army Corps since the thir-teenth day of August, 1941, and who has been honourably dis-charged from such forces. War means war which commenced on the tenth of September, 1939 (32, p.18). Thus we see that honourable discharge from His Majesty's Forces is the sine qua non for receipt of these benefits. There is no mention in the legislation that service in a theatre of war is a prerequisite. Nor has the element of risk to life and limb in the service of our country been a qualifying criterion. Many a merchant seaman, for example, convoying supplies to Murmansk, saw front line service amid ever-present dangers. Many a worker in a munitions factory, fire fighter or experimental scien-tist carried on highly dangerous work which was vital to the war effort. None of the latter, however, qualify for benefits. Eligibility, according to law, involved taking an oath of allegiance to serve in His Majesty's Forces for the duration of hostilities or longer, if required. In other words, it meant a deprivation of civilian privileges and civilian opportunities, a 4 signing over of oneself, for an indefinite period, for whatever s e r v i c e might be demanded. It meant much more than a loss of p r i v i l e g e s . It entailed being attested, being medically examined, being given a number, being d r i l l e d , being under di s c i p l i n e and being forced to work and to l i v e with a group, not one of one's own choosing. It meant further, that on the cessation of h o s t i l i t i e s , there would be a release f r o m r e s t r i c t i o n s and the necessity for c i v i l i a n re-establishment. F o r many, the latter p r e -sented no serious problem; for others, it was a problem fraught with the utmost complexity. Large numbers of our veterans have elected to r e -establish themselves i n c i v i l i a n l i f e by planning professional t r a i n i n g at our u n i v e r s i t i e s under the generous provisions of the Veterans Re-hab-i l i t a t i o n Act. 2. Effects of this L e g i s l a t i o n on Canadian U n i v e r s i t i e s The effects of the government order respecting university education were immediate, enormous and far-reaching. A n emergency conference of Canadian uni v e r s i t i e s was c a l l e d and four decisions were reached to fac i l i t a t e the flow of veterans to the u n i v e r s i t i e s (20, p. 482). 1. The university admission requirements were shortened for veterans. Some of the so-called " c u l t u r a l subjects" were dropped. C e r -tain non-essential courses could be omitted, but there was to be no lower-ing of uni v e r s i t y standards. 2. The admission times were increased to permit discharged 5 veterans to enter university at several times during the year instead of waiting for the usual session in September. 3. It was agreed that there would be no blanket credit toward uni-versity degrees for was s e r v i c e — a practice that was common following World War I.* Whereas the federal committee on rehabilitation ex-pressed the hope that the financial provisions contained in PC 5210 would enable the universities to maintain their academic standards in dealing with the returned men and women and whereas the experience of conditions following the last war might show that it is not wholly in the best interests of discharged men to grant them academic credit for military experiences; therefore, the conference is of the opinion that departures from normal under-graduate requirements should be granted only in exceptional cases, but credit should be given for such courses taken on active service as might be considered equivalent to undergrad-uate courses. 4. It was recommended that a counselling service be established on each campus to give advice and help to returned men and women, and that the counsellors be veterans of World War II (20, p. 485). One almost immediate effect in the universities themselves was that enrollments doubled, and in some cases, trebled. The questions of teaching staff, housing, classroom accommodation, etc. had to be settled in a hurry. One gains some idea of the magnitude of the problem when told that in November, 1947, there was a total of 30,426 veterans attend-ing classes in Canadian universities. This is over and above the number of civilian students (23). To help the universities cope with these gigantic problems, the De-partment of Veterans' Affairs provided the supplementary grant (of $150 *A11 agreed to this but the University of Toronto 6 per veteran student) previously mentioned. This financial assistance, over and above the fees, has aided materially in providing additional ac-commodation, equipment, library facilities and in the establishment of counselling bureaus on the various campuses. 4. Effects on the University of B r i t i s h Columbia The University of B r i t i s h Columbia was influenced perhaps to a proportionally greater extent than any other university, as a dispropor-tionate number of service men elected to take their university studies in this province. In the 1946-47 session, there were 4,113 veteran students enrolled—in a university intended for a maximum of 2,500. This may have been due largely to the university's generous policy of not refusing admission to any qualified student,.veteran or non-veteran, and partly to the fact that many veterans, attracted by the beauty and climate of B r i t i s h Columbia, elected to be discharged here. One veteran student in five at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia took his high school studies in another province, as compared with one in ten among the civilians. The most pressing problem facing the university was that of accom-modation—space for living quarters, lecture rooms and laboratories. This problem was solved by the acquistion of army and air force huts—from twenty-two different localities. Sixteen complete army and anti-aircraft camps were taken over. Twelve were moved in their entirety to the campus, while the other four, at Acadia, the Fort, Little Mountain and Lulu Island were converted into living quarters for the veterans, on their 7 original sites. In October, 1945, a veterans' counselling bureau was established on the campus. Every veteran was interviewed shortly after his arrival and was given guidance and assistance, whenever necessary. Tests of aca-demic aptitude, intelligence and interest were given to those needing or desiring their help. The veterans' loan fund was made available to those whose university attendance was threatened by financial troubles. Later, in the academic year, an employment bureau was started, to provide part-time and vacation employment for the undergraduates and permanent em-poyment for the graduates. Free medical care was provided throughout the training period (and later, during vacations) for all veteran students on allowances. In short, every possible assistance was given to them to facilitate the transition from service to university life (22, pp. 5 - 6). 5. Considerations Arising From the Government University Programme The long-term ramifications of the government veteran programme for universities will probably not be fully known for several years. Cer-tainly, it is an experiment of the first magnitude, as never before in the history of our country has any government underwritten such a widespread educational programme at the university level. As of August, 1948, 48,000 veterans had taken training in Canadian universities at a cost of eighty-five million dollars to the country (11, pp. 1 - 3). It is unique, too, in that it is a government-sponsored programme on a national scale in a country where education is traditionally a jealously guarded provincial 8 right. However, there has been no infringement upon provincial rights as only the financial aspects are federally controlled and the students are free to follow the provincial educational system of their own choosing. One so often heard, during the war, that young veterans, fresh from the stimulation and excitement of combat duty and travel, would never be able to settle down to the more pedestrian academic life. But when 81% of the veterans enrolled in Canadian universities during the 1 9 4 7 - 4 8 ses-sion were able to pass their examinations without conditions and another 10% were able to pass with only one condition, the reverse seems to be true (23, p. 74) . Furthermore, with the advent of the veterans to the campus, many of the professors expressed the belief that veterans were better students than those in attendance prior to the war. It is one of the aims of this study to find out whether this latter claim is true. Certainly, conditions for effective learning and study have not been of the best. Classrooms have been badly overcrowded, allowing little of the traditional personal contact between instructor and pupil; textbooks have been in short supply and often unavailable until well on into the term; inexperienced instructors have been teaching vital courses; library faci-lities have been strained; assignments have had to be curtailed and lab-oratories have been taxedtto the limit of their capacity. Many of the stu-dents have been living under most unfavorable conditions in crowded quarters, trailer camps, et cetera, and most have found the government grants inadequate during this era of spiraling prices. The universities have not lowered their high standards of scholar-9 ship to accommodate the veterans. Certain entrance requirements have been waived in the case of ex-service students, but each veteran is r e -quired to carry a full academic load to be eligible for government allow-ances. Examinations are as difficult and searching as they ever were, although it might be argued that the objective, short answer type of ex-amination, generally used with the large classes, is easier for some stu-dents to pass than the traditional essay type of paper. How then, can we account for the unexpected success of the student-veterans? The answer lies, perhaps, within the veterans themselves. Our universities have had mementous changes forced upon them. Is there any-thing of lasting value to be learned from these experiences which might alter our ideas about higher education in Canada? One prominent Ameri-can educator (4), speaking at a recent convention in Vancouver about the overcrowded conditions in American universities stated, "Our universities are bulging at the seams—often revealing what might be termed 'indecent exposure' ". Have some of our hallowed traditions been "exposed" by this recent upheaval as merely hollow traditions? Have we been overlooking a large potential university population by limiting our scholarships to those of exceptionally high intellectual c a l i -bre? Have we been right in our insistence on small classes, good class-room facilities, et cetera? Have we learned anything about admission requirements from our veteran experience? Do service training and ex-perience have any bearing on university success? 10 With two separate and distinct groups on the campus, the student veterans and the non-veterans, there i s a f r u i t f u l f i e l d for research. In an attempt to identify and evaluate any of the personal factors that have contributed to veteran success, this study was undertaken. It i s to be viewed as part of the l a r g e r study of the effects on Canadian higher edu-cation of the Government Rehabilitation Plan. 11 C H A P T E R II S T A T E M E N T OF T H E PROBLEM, METHODS E M P L O Y E D AND LIMITATIONS OF T H E STUDY 1. Statement of the Problem As stated in Chapter I, there have been two common but divergent views held about the ex-service men who elected to re-establish them-selves through university training. The original contention was that the stimulation and excitement engendered by war and travel would prevent the veterans from adjusting to the slower tempo of academic life. Con-versely, when most of the veterans did very well in their examinations, the theory was advanced that veterans, because of their widened exper-ience and maturity, were superior to the civilians as students. It is the primary aim of this study to investigate and identify any factors that may have contributed to the success of the veterans. This will be attempted by means of a comparison of their attitudes to univer-sity studies with those of the non-veterans and by an evaluation of the service experiences of the veteran group. A secondary aim is to investigate and compare the academic records of the two groups in an attempt to find grounds for the expressed belief of veteran superiority. A third aim is to discuss some of the implications of the Veteran Programme for higher education in Canada. .2. Methods Employed In order to compare the two groups, a questionnaire was devised by 12 the Department of Psychology, covering a range of topics, vital statistics, interest in course, reasons for attending university, study habits, extra-curricular activities, factors considered as contributory to academic success or failure and information about the service life of the veteran r group. (Appendix A). The questionnaire was given to more than 1,600 students taking the course Psychology 100, at the University of Br i t i s h Columbia on January 27, 1947. The papers were divided into two groups—veteran and non-veteran, and three hundred papers were chosen from each group. In point of pro-cedure, the papers were collected in random order and every third paper was chosen with this exception, that an attempt was made to keep the pro-portion of men's and women's papers the same as their proportion in the university enrollment. The university enrollment figures for 1946-47 were men, 7,386; women, 1,847; roughly four men to one woman.. In this study, 240 men's papers, and 60 women's papers were selected from the civilian pile. While no deliberate attempt was made to arrive at a definite pro-portion for the ex-service groups, 25 women's papers were found in the veteran sample. This is 4.16% of the six hundred in the study, and since women veterans counted for 4.2% of the university enrollment, the pro-portion is approximately correct. A further check with the registrar's records indicated that 7.9% of the veterans enrolled were women. The twenty-five papers of the women veterans form 8.32% of the three hundred veterans under study, so the error here is only slight. 13 The papers were numbered and the answers tabulated on graph paper, according to a code—e.g., in questions involving degrees of dif-ference, the answers, "No," Li t t l e " , "Some", "Much", and "Great", were tabulated as a, b, c, d, and e, respectively. The numbers answering in the various ways were totaled and changed into a percentage of the. whole. The differences in percentage were calculated and tested for significance by using the table of probability found in Garrett (12, p. 213). In the treatment of answers to questions involving degrees of dif-ference—e.g. no effect, little effect, some effect, much effect and great effect, the former two categories were grouped together, unless other-wise stated, and were interpreted as meaning of virtually no effect. Some, much and great were also grouped together and were interpreted as mean-ing of appreciable effect. The academic records of the students were checked from the reg i -strar's files, and their academic averages were entered on the master sheets. The means, standard deviations and standard errors of the means were calculated for the two groups and the differences between the means were tested for probability of statistical significance. 3. Limitations of the Study i Only students in the faculty of Arts were given the questionnaire. i i The questionnaire was given only once, so the reliability of the answers could not be checked. i i i The validity of the answers depended solely on the respondents' own estimates and only in a few cases could the answers be checked by reference to outside criteria. iv The questionnaire was given only to those students enrolled in the course Psychology 100, in 1946-47. The class was composed of stu-dents in all the four years, of the Arts course; thus the opinions of any graduate students were excluded. C H A P T E R HI O T H E R S I M I L A R S T U D I E S 15 The literature abounds in studies of veteran and non-veteran comp-arisons. Most of them have been on the subject of academic achievement; very few have dealt with such psychological phenomena as motivation, attitudes, mental ability and the like. The former studies are substantially in agreement on at least one point: the veteran student is doing good work, and early misgivings about his ability to adjust himself to academic life seem to have been unwar-ranted. Whether he is a better student than the civilian is a moot point. Clark (5, pp. 205 -7) conducted a study on 562 veterans and 272 civilians at Northwestern University. His cases were equated in terms of background, high school standing and general ability and their aca-demic standing was compared after one university quarter. He found a statistically significant difference between the groups, favouring the veterans, the c r i t i c a l ratio of the difference being 3.4. Kvarceus and Baker (15, pp. 384-5) analyzed the examination r e -sults of 117 veterans and 92 civilians in one required course at Boston University. Among the graduate students, there was no significant dif-ference in achievement; among the undergraduates, the difference favour-ing the veterans approached the 5% level of confidence. Another one-course study was undertaken for freshmen results in English at the University of Southern California (26). To get uniformity of marking, each professor in the department taught a veteran group 16 first year English, and was cautioned against showing any favouritism toward the ex.-service students. The numbers involved were 744 veterans and 623 civilians. The results indicated a significantly higher proportion of failing grades among the civilians. In a study at Vanport Extension Centre (10), the progress of 100 veteran and 64 civilian students was followed through three academic quarters. At the end of the first quarter, the veterans were slightly be-hind, but they surpassed the civilians in the second and third quarters. Tibbetts and Hunter (30, p. 350) found substantially no difference in academic achievement between non-veterans and veterans, as such. They indicated that the factors which might have been expected to operate for or against veteran success, such as increased age, time since leaving high school, etc., had operated in their favour. Shaffer's (25) data seem to imply that the "alleged" superiority of the veterans may be due to their increased age. When he compared the academic records of a group of 10,000 veterans and 4,000 non-veterans who were equated for age, he found the veteran average to be slight lower than the civilian ayerage. He admits that the veterans may have been superior students initially but claims that any differences between them are now levelling off as the two groups more nearly approximate an equal age. This latter view is shared by Bennett (2, p. 315) who suggests that loss of initial enthusiasm and fatigue may be responsible for the decline. Welbourne (33) compared the pre-war and post-war college achieve-ments of a group of veterans attending a teachers' college. He found an 17 improvement in scholarship after service in 80% of the cases, the aver-age improvement being .75 of a letter grade. Riemer (24) made a rather interesting breakdown of the 5,315 cases in his study at the University of Wisconsin. Highest in grade-point average with 1.90 points were married veterans with children who were living in trailers. Married veterans, as a group rated second with an average of 1.80 points. Married veterans, without children, living in trailers rated third with 1.73 points. Single veterans averaged 1.62. The overall veteran and civlian averages were 1.66 and 1.57 points respectively. At a conference of the Canadian University Advisors u\1947, the University of Saskatchewan published the standing of the entire student body of 4,000 students for the 1946-47 session. The veteran average was slightly higher in Arts, Agriculture, Education and Law arid slightly lower in Commerce, Engineering and Household Science. The overall average of ex-service and non-service groups was almost identical. At the same conference, Professor West, of Mount Allison University, reported on the academic achievement of student-veterans at that university. The failure rate among the veterans was lower and their average marks were slightly higher but neither of these differences was statistically significant (31). Perhaps the most thorough studies, to date, have been done at Ohio State University. In a preliminary study, Thompson and Flesher (28) ex-amined the records of 2,000 veteran, and 6,000 civilian undergraduates attending the Winter Quarter, 1946. They found the veterans slightly 18 ahead, but taking lighter academic loads. In a more detailed study with Pressey, Thompson (29) compared the pre-war and post-war college records of 1,035 veterans and found a marked improvement in their grades after service. Moreover, the record of these veterans was sup-erior in their senior years to that of a group of civilians whose university training was uninterrupted but who were paired with them as to age and ability at entrance, and academic record in the freshman year. A second part of this study showed that "new" veterans were doing slightly super-ior work to the civilians of equal age and equal ability. A third section of the study indicated that among the veterans, the poorest work was be-ing done by the single veterans, next, by those married, and best, by those married with children. As noted previously, there have been relatively fewer veteran-non-veteran comparisons done on purely psychological topics. Perhaps too much stress has been placed on the differences between veterans and non-veterans, and not enough on their similarities. As Tenney suggests, "It is well to state here that our boys are not coming back with 'warped and twisted minds', as it is sometimes rumoured. The normal lad will return a pretty normal adult... .In general, he will be healthier, physi-cally and mentally and infinitely wiser in the ways of mankind than if he had not enlisted." (27, p. 443) Nicholas Knight, of Columbia University, claims that veterans wish to be treated in the same way as other students and ask recognition only for their age, experience and desire to make up for lost time (14, p.449). 19 Moore (19) found few college adjustment problems peculiar to the veteran group exclusively. In measuring certain personality characteris-tics, he found the veterans to be more tolerant toward certain ethnic and religious groups and more antagonistic toward labour unions. Feeling that the adjustment problems would be greatest for the handicapped, Atkinson and Webb (1) compared the academic results of a group of handicapped veterans with those of a group of civilians taking the same course at the University of California. The veterans outstripped the civilians and the writers hint that many of the veterans' problems are "imagined". They suggest three reasons for the fact that 23% of these handicapped veterans earned "B" grades or better: i Greater determination to succeed. i i "Behind the scenes" supervision. i i i Better selection on entrance. With regard to selection, placement and counselling, Donahue (7) suggests that the facilities developed for helping veterans to adjust to university life be made available to all students. McDonagh (16) questioned university veterans about their motives for attending university. Over 90% believed they were enhancing their economic security by college attendance. Further findings from this study and others will be discussed incidentally in later chapters. C H A P T E R IV DESCRIPTION AND COMPARISON OF T H E GROUPS 1. Description of the Non-Service Group By and large, this group is the traditional type that advances directly from high school to university. It is presumed that they have had the regular high school training and background with the usual pre-requisites for university entrance. Their mean age is 19.8 years -- sigma 2.59. The average length of time since leaving high school is 2.75 years. This may be somewhat higher than one might expect, but possible explanations are: second, third, and fourth years. i i A number of young people worked in war industries during the war. i i i Some of the older students in this group may have had the courage to undertake university training at this time because of the presence at university of the older veteran group. iv The favorable economic situation in the years 1946-47 may have allowed some people to finance a university education for the firs t time. l Some of the students are taking Psychology 100 in their The actual year placement of this group is as follows: F i r s t year Arts 27% Second year A r t s 47% T h i r s year Arts 22.6% Fourth year Arts 3.3% . 21 Only six of the three hundred are married, and two of these six have children. The vast majority - 90% - obtained their high school training in B r i t i s h Columbia. 2. Description of the Veteran Group Most of the veteran group have not advanced directly from high school to university. Eighteen percent had obtained their senior matric-ulation, 58.6% their junior matriculation, and 23.3% less than their junior matriculation prior to enlistment. Of the last-mentioned group, most have qualified for their university entrance by attendance, for a few months, at special matriculation schools organized under the government plan. The mean age of this group is 24.39 years -- Sigma 3.39. The average length of time since leaving high school is 7.39 years. The placement-year for this group is as follows: F i r s t year Arts 36.3% Second year A r t s 49.6% Third year A r t s 11.6% Fourth year Arts 2.3% Twenty-six percent ;of the veteran group are married, and 39% of the married group ( or 10.3% of the total ) are parents. Of this group, 19.8% took their high school training outside the province of B r i t i s h Columbia. Their representation in the various branches of the armed 22 services is not proportionate to the Canada-wide representation. Both are shown in Table I. TABLE I COMPOSITION OF THE CANADIAN FORCES COMPARED WITH THE COMPOSITION OF THE VETERAN GROUP Service Canadian Proportion Proportion this Study Navy 11.8% 15% Army 60.9% 28% Air Force 27.3% 57% TOTAL 100% 100% It will be noted that a disproportionate number of this group were in the Air Force. This is not too surprising, as many of them were in air crew categories where educational requirements were very high. The original requirement for aircrew was university graduation, w as7 impossibly high standard which was progressively lowered to high school entrance, as the war continued and casualties mounted. However, all candidates were rigourously screened by classification test which proved to be highly effective, and many were given courses in the Air Force in mathematics, physics and English at the matriculation level to bring their educational standard up to requirements. After enlistment, these air crew trainees attended service training schools for varying periods, usually well over six months. Here, competition was so keen 23 that pickets had to be employed at night to prevent the young men from studying in the lavatories--the only lighted places after "Lights Out". P r i o r to their operational flights over enemy territory, there was further training for several months either in Canada or in the United Kingdom. In other words, these men were "at school" while they were in the service and it is not surprising that so many of them elected university training as their rehabilitation benefit. Table II gives the distribution of ranks by service, in this group. T A B L E II RANKS BY SERVICE OF T H E V E T E R A N GROUP . Service Commissioned Officers Non-Comm. Officers Other Ranks Navy 8.8% 22.2% 68.9% Army 16.8% 39.7% 43.5% A i r F o r c e 35.0% 34.4% 30.6% T O T A L % 26.0% 34.0% 40.0% It has been noted that the R.C.A.F. was highly selective in its air crew categories. It would appear from the above that the Navy and Army were more selective with regard to officer candidates or had a lesser pro-portion in the officer group,''-1. * In the latter stages of the war, it was government policy to grant comm-issions to almost all R.C.A.F. air crew engaged in flying over enemy t e r r -itory, to ensure better treatment in the event of capture. 24 Since 26% of the veteran group were commissioned officers and another 34% were non-commissioned officers, it would not appear extra-vagrant to state that a majority held responsible positions during their period of service. Thirteen of the three hundred considered in this study were decorated for meritorious service. The length of time in the armed forces averaged forty months - - a relatively long time in the life of a young man or young woman. Even those who engaged in interesting and stimulating courses encountered long periods of waiting -- "the curse of war" -- when there was time for introspection and planning for the future. Professor Bennett (2,p. 313) compares these times of waiting to a compressed spring, waiting to be released. Upon discharge, these men and women were keen to make up for lost time, keen to repair the loss to their own lives and to do some-thing extra to compensate for the irreparable loss to others. Sixty percent of the service men and women in this study saw overseas service and returned home with a widened experience and know-ledge of other lands. Others travelled widely in Canada. It is doubtful whether any of this experience had any academic value as such. Eighty-seven percent of all the veterans however, reported that this widened ex-perience was of benefit to them in their university courses, and it probably enabled this group to approach their studies with a maturity, zest, appreciation and outlook, not to be found amongst the civilian group. 25 3. The Veterans' Evaluation of their Service Training and its Bearing on University Success. When asked to estimate what benefit service training courses had been to them in their university work, 34% of all the veterans reported that they had been of appreciable value. In response to a question about the effect of service discipline, 45.6% indicated that it had been a help to them in their university work. This is not a majority opinion, but its importance should not be overlooked During the war, service personnel had the opportunity of taking correspondence courses, usually at the matriculation level. Very few in this study--only nine percent--availed themselves of the opportunity. It is not difficult to find reasons why this percentage is so low. Several of them were engaged in other courses. Some were constantly on the move. Others were not interested in doing so, and preferred to relax in their off-duty hours. Of those who took these courses, 63% found them helpful in their university studies. Before discharge from the forces, a l l were given the opportunity for counselling. Thirty percent of the veterans regarded this counselling as beneficial to them. At university, the services of the counselling bureau were available to all veteran students. Forty-five percent of this group considered this counselling a definite asset to them in the pursuance of their studies. It may be that with the classes being so large and the professors so busy, the students appreciated the personal interest taken by the counsellors in their welfare. 26 When asked whether they had intended going to university before the outbreak of war, 28% of the veterans answered "no" and another 28% answered "undecided". Since 59% of the veterans in this group were out of school on an average of 3.14 years prior to enlistment and 23.3% of the total did not have their university entrance requirements, the indications are that the majority in this study did not intend going to university, war or no war. When asked whether they could have financed a university ed-ucation without "D.V.A." benefits, 23% replied "Yes"; 37% replied "No" and 39% replied "Might have". In a similar American study (17,p.121) 55% of the single veterans and 73% of the married, indicated they would have been unable to attend university without "G.I." Benefits. .When asked to indicate to what extent they were trying to make good to justify the government's faith and expenditure in their behalf, 56% indicated that this was a strong motivating force. Some of these veterans seem to feel that since they are, in effect, being paid to go to university, they should do all in their power to make good. In other words, they r e -gard going to school and doing their best as their job. With many, a feel-ing of gratitude runs high. A student of the writer's acquaintance was heard to remark, "Imagine me studying Shakespeare and getting paid for i t . " The negative aspect of the above question was also asked, namely to what extent the fear of losing government allowances had been an i n -fluential force in their university life. Almost one half --48%-- indicated it to be a factor of some importance. F r o m the above, it will be seen that the veteran student is 27 different from his civilian counterpart on many counts. It may be of value to take time to compare the groups on the basis of the data given above. 4. Comparison between the Groups (a) Age The most striking difference between the veteran and non-veteran group is in age, the mean of the former group being 24.39 (sigma 3.39) and of the latter, 19.8 (sigma 2.59). The actual difference in age is 4.49, the standard error of the difference is .231. Therefore, the difference in age is statistically significant. A glance at Figure 1 will reveal that even in the non-service group there are a few students over 25 years of age (actually 3%). In the ex-service group, on the other hand, 19.3%, or roughly one fifth, are over 25. At the other end of the scale, none of the veterans is under 20, whereas over half--56.3%--fall within this range. When asked to comment on their age as a help or handicap to university success, 34% of the veteran group rated their increased age as definitely helpful/ Contrary to the general opinion, only 11% rated it as an appreciable handicap. (b) Maturity Maturity is usually a function of age or experience or both. Normally, a person is more mature than one four or five years his junior. When the older person has been on active service in time of war, the possibility of his greater maturity is thereby enhanced. With the service Fig. 1. Distribution of the Veteran and Non-Veteran Groups by Age ro co group the war years were not idle years, but years filled with training, both physical and mental. A l l were subject to periods of discipline and self restraint, which might be considered aspects of maturity. Despite its publicized unpopularity, service discipline seems to have had a mat-uring effect on at least some of the veterans in this study. Ability to accept responsibility might be considered another facet of maturity. Many of the service group had responsibilities thrust upon them at a rather early age. One can imagine, for example, the awesome responsibility of a young bomber pilot when one false move on his part might endanger the lives of his crew, and the sobering effect of this r e a l -ization. While it is undoubtedly true that the war experiences of perhaps half (3,p321) of the veterans involved none other than the usually-encountered dangers, it is equally true that others lived for long periods under tension in the face of grave peril. These latter experiences probably contributed to the maturation of some of the veterans in this study. Commander L. H. Tenney (27,p.446) of the U. S. Navy has this to say about the effects of service life: It is a fair simile to liken the time compression and life acc-eleration of military training and service, that war necessarily produces, to the closing accordion with its tensions and vibra-tions. Life in one year runs emotional gamuts that are normally encountered in ten years. Normal drives for promotion and ascendancy are accelerated. Anxieties over failing in these are, in the same degree, increased; behaviour patterns are heightened. Lastly, the majority of the veterans in this group saw service overseas and returned home with a broadened vision and a different per-:,30 spective. Even those who stayed in Canada gained a widened experience through travel and extensive contact with others. It seems reasonable to conclude that there is a greater degree of maturity among the veterans group than among the civilians, (c) Marital Status The difference in maturity between the two groups has already been noted. The third great difference according to the above data is in marital status. Only 2% of the civilian students are married, in con-trast to 26% of the veterans. With marriage comes added responsibility, and often a seriousness previously unknown. Moreover, 39% of the married veterans are parents. The consequences of failure are much graver as a result of these additional responsibilities. Despite the widespread belief that the veterans would be unable to settle down to serious university study, the very fact of being married has been responsible for many of them being able to do so. The wives have aided materially toward making the home situation one of comfort and ease, and many of them are working to lessen the financial burdens. There is little temptation for the veteran to want to go out at nights if he is happy with his wife. As one anonymous veteran stated to his wife, "Now that we're married, I won't have to worry about you and I'll be able to settle I down to my studies". When asked about the effect of being married as a factor in university success, 60% of the veterans declared it to be helpful to them. On the other hand, 26% indicated that being married was an appreciable handicap. 31 The wives have had by far the more difficult role in these marriages, and tribute should be given, if only in passing, to their valuable contribution to their husbands' success, under very trying circumstances. Being married, then, may be considered as an important factor in the academic success of many veterans. The academic performance of the married veterans will be discussed in detail in Chapter VIII. (d) Educational Background A l l but a few of the civilian group progressed directly from high school to university without a break, whereas the average time between high school and university for the veterans was 7.39 years. Despite the fact that many of the latter took technical service--training courses, and, studied intently during their time in uniform, there was very little c a r r y -over of content from these courses to later university work. The veteran group, as a whole, suffered from two types of "rusting" -- rusting of study habits and rusting of content. When asked about the factors which militated against their success at university, more veterans selected the factor -- "The Break Between High School and University Training" --than any other difficulty. Over half of the group (55%)' considered it a noticeable handicap. There is a marked difference, too, in the educational background of the two groups. Almost one - fourth — 23.3% --of the veterans had only partial matriculation before enlistment. Government regulations required that they be prepared to enter university within fifteen months of dis-charge and many of them obtained their university entrance --even their 32 entire high school training -- within a few months. Unless we assume that our high schools are wasting a great deal of time, these students must have missed something. With the veterans, there was an urgency to make up for lost time and over one-third -- 35.6% — in the group under study, attended the special university sessions inaugurated at the request of the Conference of Canadian Universities. Of those who attended only one of these sessions, 59% reported no adverse effects of this speeding up. Of the group attending two special sessions, the percentage was less — 44%. Over one-fourth -- 27% — of the one-session group and 38% of the two session group reported noticeable adverse after effects from these special intensive sessions. This is interpreted as meaning that only a limited amount of speeding up is advisable - - a fact that is borne out by the experiences of the writer and the other counsellors at the University of Brit i s h Columbia Veterans' Bureau. A last, and perhaps small difference in educational background be-tween the groups should be noted. Almost 20% of the veterans in this study came from outside the province of B r i t i s h Columbia. This placed them at a further disadvantage since they had to adjust to a new educational system. Furthermore, almost a l l the other provinces required eleven years' pre-paration for matriculation; B r i t i s h Columbia requires twelve. Some of the group suffered the double handicap of one year less schooling and unfam-iliarity with the Bri t i s h Columbia system. Of those coming from other provinces, 33% reported appreciable difficulty in making progress be-cause of their weak background. Many who reported no difficulty were in firs t year at the time and experienced difficulties at a later date, (e) Summary To summarize, there are pronounced differences in age, marital status and educational background between the groups under study. It would appear that there are also motivating forces, such as pressure of age, family responsibilities, gratitude and fear of losing government grants that are unique to the ex-service group. It is suggested that these latter forces may have been effective factors in veteran success. We now turn to a consideration of the attitudes of the two groups. •34 CHAPTER V A COMPARISON OF GENERAL ATTITUDES TO UNIVERSITY LIFE. 1. Students' Objectives in Attending University The students in this study were asked to select from nine choices . the one they expected to be the most important benefit to be derived from their university education. Their answers are summarized in TABLE III. TABLE III BENEFITS EXPECTED FROM A UNIVERSITY EDUCATION Factor Veteran Rating Civilian Rating Veteran % Choosing Civilian % Choosing Better chance of a good job 1 2 25.3 22.3 Improved ability to think 2 1 25.0 28.6 Better chance to be of service to one's fellow man 3 3 18.3 20.0 Good occupational training 4 5 13.6 6.6 Increased general knowledge 5 4 12.0 13.6 Development of worth-while interests 6 6 2.3 5.6 Improved position in the community 7 9 1.6 .6 A degree 8 7 1.3 , 1.3 Opportunity to make worthwhile friends 9 8 .3 1.0 There is a marked degree of similarity in the order of choices of the two groups. Approximately half of both groups choose "Better Chance of a Good Job with a University Education" and "Improved Ability to Think" as the two most important benefits expected from their education. The veterans show themselves to be slightly more vocationally-minded than the other group by their first choice and by placing "Good Occupational Training" higher on the scale than the civilian group. This contention is further borne out when we consider the actual difference in per centages on this latter item. The critical ratio of the difference is 3.04 and the difference is statistically significant. If we add the numbers choosing "Better Chance of a Good Job" to those choose-ing "Good Vocational Training" which are similar items the difference is significant at the 1% level of confidence. Throughout there are small differences, insignificant statistically, which reflect a slight tendency on the part of the veteran to make more practical choices. 2. Students' Evaluation of Their Interest in Their Courses. The students were asked to indicate their interest in their courses on the following scale: "not interested", "somewhat interested" and '•keenly interested".. The results are summarized in TABLE IV. 36 TABLE IV. ESTIMATE OF INTEREST IN COURSE Degree of interest Civilian Responses Veteran Responses Critical Chances in 100 of a Sig-Ratio nificant Difference Not interested 1.3 % .33 % Not enough cases Somewhat 48.6 % 39.0 % 3.1 99.9 interested Keenly-interested 50.0 % 60.6 % 2.65 99.5 The answers given are purely subjective evaluations, but if "Interest is where you put it'Vthe veterans seem to have a higher degree of application. 3. Students' Overall Evaluation of their Courses. o When asked to indicate whether they were deriving as much benefit as expected from their courses, 16% of the civilians, and 15% of the veterans reported "No". The remaining 84% and 85% respectively reported they were satisfied or more than satisfied with their courses. 4. Attitudes to Study as Indicated by Time Spent on Study and Assignments Frequency distribution of the hours per week spent on study and assignments outside of classes, is shown in TABLE V. 37 T A B L E V HOURS PER WEEK SPENT OUTSIDE OF CLASS ON STUDY AND ASSIGNMENTS Hours per week spent in study and assignments Civ i l i a n Veteran outside of class frequency frequency 1-5 12 4 6-10 35 23 11-15 70 58 16-20 77 83 21-25 47 72 26-30 34 39 31-35 14 10 36-40 6 9 41 -45 2 2 46-50 3 0 Mean of the civilians 18.55 hours sigma 8.40 Mean of the veterans 19.81 hours sigma 7.40 Difference of the means 1.26 hours The difference between the means of the two groups is statistic-ally significant at the 5% level of confidence. The difference is small but it is important on a cumulative basis.. In a thirty week term members of the veteran group would study about thirty-seven hours more than members of the civilian group. It seems highly improbable that any student studies, on an average more than five hours per day, yet eleven people in each group report thirty-five hours or more per week spent on study and assignments. 38 5. Attitudes Towards Extra-Curricular Activities as Evidenced by Reports on Campus and off-Campus Activities. The students were asked to list the campus organizations to which they belonged. Membership in the Canadian Legion presented a problem, as it is not, strictly speaking, a student organization. However, since all its meetings are held on the Campus, it was decided to classify it as a student activity. The results are tabulated in TABLE VI. TABLE VI. PARTICIPATION IN STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS Civilians Veterans % Participating in no student organization 40.6% 4. 64.3% % Participating in 1 student organization 36.3% 25.0% % Participating in 2 student organizations 18.0% 9.3% % Participating in 3 student organizations 3.3% 1.0% % Participating in 4 student organizations 1.6% .3% The differences on this question are statistically significant and are interpreted as showing very clearly that veterans take less part in Campus activities that the civilians. When queried about membership in off-campus organizations, the results were as shown in TABLE VII. 39 TABLE VII PARTICIPATION IN OFF-CAMPUS ORGANIZATIONS CIVILIANS VETERANS % belonging to no off-campus organizations 56.3% 74.3% % belonging to 1 off-campus organization 31.0% 8.6% % belonging to 2 off-campus organizations 9.6% , 13.3% % belonging to 3 off-campus organizations 2.0% 3.3% % belonging to 4 off-campus organizations 1.0% .3% The differences here are also significant statistically and demon-strate clearly that veterans belong to very few outside organizations. This would seem to indicate that the veterans are even more determined than the non-veterans to make good in their university studies. It would be difficult to explain this difference on any other grounds since veterans probably are as fond of amusements as non-veterans. The results of the poll on participation in organized university sports reveal similar statistically significant differences. These results are summarized in TABLE VIII. 40 TABLE VIII PARTICIPATION IN ORGANIZED SPORTS Civilians Veterans % participating in no organized sport 50.6% 80.0% % participating in 1 organized sport 25.0% 10.3% % participating in 2 organized sports 17.6% 7.0% % participating in 3 organized sports 5.3% 1.6% % participating in 4 organized sports 1.3% 10% The matter of other recreational activities was rather difficult to assess, but it was decided to allow the following: cycling, hiking, camping gymnastics, fishing, golfing, reading, attending motion pictures , playing cards, bowling, listening to the radio, and even flying. The percentages having outside recreations are listed in TABLE IX TABLE IX NUMBER OF RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES No. of recreational activities Civilians Veterans None 10.0% 16.0% One 14.3% 14.0% Two 30.0% 26.0% Three ' 23?6% 20.0% Four 13.0% 15.3% Five 9/0% 8.6% 41 It is rather surprising, in view of the range of activities listed above, that 16% of the veteran group, and 10% of the civilians indicated no participation whatsoever in recreational activities. This may have been due to a lack of understanding of what constitutes recreational activities, or to the dismissal of the question as being unimportant The percentages in each of the groups are so close that no significant differences are in evidence. SUMMARY It would appear that the veteran tends to be slightly more vocationally-minded in his reasons for university attendance, and tends to be more interested in his courses than his civilian brother. He studies slightly more than the civilian student and takes less part in social act-ivities on and off the campus. 42 CHAPTER VI FACTORS CONSIDERED BY THE STUDENTS AS DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR UNIVERSITY SUCCESS Certain factors are always in operation at a university to cause difficulty to the students in their academic progress. Financial difficultie extra-curricular activities and poor study methods are problems of this sort. As was mentioned in Chapter I, the advent of the veterans to the university campuses introduced a host of new problems. Some of the latter, such as time since leaving high school, or being responsible for looking after a wife and children, are peculiar to the ex-service group and have been dealt with in an earlier chapter. Others, such as over-crowding of classrooms and library facilities, inability to concentrate etc. are common to all students. It was considered worthwhile to get an appraisal from the students of their attitudes to these common difficulties and torfind to what extent they were considered detrimental. Although the students were not asked to rate these difficulties in order of importance, the percentages answering each item provided this information. Their ratings are summarized in TABLE X. 43 T A B L E X RATING OF HANDICAPS TO UNIVERSITY SUCCESS Handicaps Veteran Rating Civili a n Rating Poor study methods 1 1 Inability to concentrate 2 2 Crowded classrooms 3 3 Financial difficulties 4 8 Type of living accommodation 5 11 Lack of textbooks 6 5 F>oor academic preparation 7 6 Uninteresting university courses 8 4 Poor university instruction 9 9 Poor library facilities 10 12 Lack of the ability necessary for university work 11 13 Too much time spent on entertainment 12 7 Too many extra-curricular interests 13 10 Poor health 14 14 Homesickness 15 15 It will be noted that poor study methods, inability to concentrate, and crowded classrooms are the three difficulties with the highest frequency in each group, and that -poor health and homesickness are at the bottom of each list. The intermediate ten have quite different ratings. Financial difficulties and housing troubles are evidently more 44 prevalent among the veteran group, whereas extra-curricular activities and outside entertainment seem to be of greater concern to the civilian group. In order to investigate these questions more fully, we shall now deal with each factor separately and consider the similarities and differences in attitude. 1. Peor Study Methods . As was indicated in Chapter III, the greates difficulty in veteran adjustment has been in bridging the gap between their pre-service and post-service education. The greatest deterrent to progress common to both groups is found in poor study habits, as 51% in each group express difficulty on this point. If this percentage is representative of university students as a whole, it would seem to indicate a need for good counselling or specific instruction on the art of effective studying. Professor West's (34) comments on this point seem to be very apt: "The entire matter of study habits has, in the past, been more or less taken for granted by university authorities. It is felt that something constructive along these lines should be undertaken". 2. Inability to Concentrate. In both groups, 49.3% rated this factor as of "some", "much" or "great" significance as an obstacle to progress at university. This equality of response is unexpected in view of the fact that the veteran group had been uprooted by a* war, with a l l its attendant exciting and disturbing experiences. It may be that the veterans have been able to adjust to studying as effectively as the other students precisely because 45 of the many adjustments they were required to make during their service careers. It may also be, that war is not quite as powerful a disruptive force as is commonly believed and that most normal healthy youth can cope with the exigencies of war service without too much i l l effect. Perhaps, the rather dramatic maladjustments of a few have caused people to lose sight of the many whose re-adjustment has been successful The whole matter of psychological changes during military life should be an interesting field for study. Hildreth (13) made a beginning in this realm of research by devising a scale to measure changes in the attitudes of service men during military service He studied 349 cases of veterans who had returned from front line duty and asked them whether they believed they had changed with regard to certain characteristics. However, his work was with battle casualties exclusively and his findings do not have a general application. 3. Crowded Classrooms Thirty-eight percent of the non-veterans and 31.6% of the veterans found crowded classroom? conditions a deterrent of some consequence to them, academically. The difference here is not significant statistically, but there is a slight tendency for veterans to mind the overcrowding less--possibly because they were accustomed to crowded'conditions in the service. 4. Financial difficulties. Despite the government grants, more veterans than civilians indicated financial worries. This handicap was rated in fourth place by 46 the veterans and in eighth place by the civilians. Thirty and three-tenths percent of the veterans as compared with 25% of the non-veterans expressed appreciable difficulties with regard to lack of money. A further breakdown revealed that 43% of the married veterans admitted to financial worries. There is statistically significant difference between the married veterans and the single veterans and between married veterans and the civilians in this regard. This is interpreted as indicating that the allowances have been adequate for the single veterans, but rather meagre for those who are married. It must be emphasized that this questionnaire was given in 1947, when price controls were in effect, and when many of the veterans were sti l l in receipt of gratuity payments. When the price ceilings were removed, there were many cases of financial distress. Recognizing this, the Federal Government passed legislation raising the allowances for married men and for dependent children, effective January 1, 1948. There have been, and still are, many cases of serious financial embarrassment. As of October 31, 1948, a total of $ 34,755 had been loaned to needy veteran students at U. B. C. (23, p. 74). 5. Type of Living Accommodation. An attempt was made to find out whether there was a difference be-tween the groups on the matter of housing and to what extent type of living accommodation had been a handicap to effective study. The results are given in T A B L E XI. 47* TABLE XI PERCENTAGES FINDING TYPE OF HOUSING DETRIMENTAL TO EFFECTIVE STUDY. Civilian Group Veteran Group No handicap 63.6% 57.0% Little handicap 16.3% 13.3% Some handicap 13.6% 17.6% Much handicap 3.3% 5.6% Great handicap 3.0% 6.3% Twenty percent of the non-service group and 29,6% of the veteran group indicate that type of housing is an appreciable difficulty with them. The critical ratio of the difference is 2.7 and the difference is significant at the 1% level of confidence. Among the married veterans specifically, 41% indicated difficulty with accommodation. These figures are to be expected among young married couples with a small income. The relatively high percentage of difficulty among single veterans may be attributable, in part at least, to the fact that so many of them came from other provinces. This difficulty rated fifth on the veteran list, and eleventh on the civilian list. 6. Lack of Textbooks. This factor rated sixth in order of difficulty with the veteran group, and fifth with the civilians. There was only 4% of a difference in attitude on this point. This difficulty was one that affected both groups in the same way, and the fact that the responses are so similar is a check on the validity of the questionnaire. 7. Poor Academic Preparation. University students sometimes feel that their high school train-' ing was inadequate, and excuse their failure at university by this. The groups in this study were asked to indicate to what extent poor academic preparation had had a detrimental effect on their university progress. The results are summarized in T A B L E XII. T A B L E XII E F F E C T OF POOR HIGH SCHOOL PREPARATION ON UNIVERSITY SUCCESS Effect Civilian Responses Veteran Responses Little or none 71.6% . 72.3% Some, much or great 28.3% 27.6% These results are more than a little surprising in view of the fact that 23% of the veteran group took "speed-up" Matriculation courses at so-called "cram schools". A further breakdown of the figures seemed necessary. It revealed that over half (54%) of the veteran students who indicated little or no difficulty in this regard, were freshmen who had yet to pass the hurdle of the firs t year examinations. Of those who actually took the shortened courses, 42% felt their relatively poorer academic background was a handicap, Of the veterans who had the usual high school preparation, 17% felt their academic background to be rather weak. With 49 these figures, the percentages expressing difficulty on this point are, civilians -- 28.3%, veterans with normal preparation -- 17.6% and veterans with "speed-up" matriculation, 42%. The cr i t i c a l ratio of the difference in attitude between the civilians and the veterans with the usual high school preparation is 3.1. The c r i t -ical ratio of the difference between the civilians and the veterans with the speed-up Matriculation is 3.6. Both differences are statistically sig-nificant and show that despite the apparent equality in attitude towards high school preparation, the chances are 99.9 in 100 that a real difference exists. 8. Uninteresting University Courses. . The civilians apparently attach more importance to uninteresting University Courses as a deterrent to progress, than do the veterans. This difficulty rates fourth with the former group and eighth with the latter. Forty-six percent of the veterans express no difficulty whatever with uninteresting courses as compared with 33% of the civilians. The difference is 13% and the cri t i c a l ratio of the difference is 3.3. The difference is therefore statistically significant and is interpreted as in-dicating a higher degree of application to studies among the veteran group generally. The finding on this question check closely with the responses given in Chapter V concerning the students' own estimates of the interest in their courses. 9. Poor University Instruction. There was no difference in attitude or rating on this point, with 50 approximately 25% of each group reporting appreciable difficulty with the quality of instruction, given. 10. Poor L i b r a r y Facilities. Having poor library facilities rated tenth among the veterans' difficulties with 20.3% attaching importance to it. It ranked twelfth among the civilians with 19.6% considering it of importance. There was no difference in attitude on a percentage basis. 11. Lack of the Ability to do University Work. Lack of the requisite ability for university success is a difficult matter for students to assess because of their difficulty in evaluating their abilities objectively. However, both groups were asked to indicate to what extent lack of necessary ability had been a drawback. Only 15% of the civilians, and 15.3% of the veterans expressed themselves as having difficulty on this point. In other words, both groups seemed about equally sure of their ability to handle university work. 12. Too Much Time Spent on Entertainment. This factor rated seventh in order of difficulty with the civilian students, and twelfth with the veterans. Twenty-five and three-tenths percent of; the non-service group and 15.3% of the service group rated it as a detriment of appreciable proportion. The difference is 10% and the cri t i c a l ratio of the differenee is 3.1. The difference is significant statistically, and bears out the earlier established contention that veterans tend to be less concerned about social life than the younger civilians. 51 13. Too Many Extra-Curricular Activities. This item is very closely related to the previous one and the results of the attitude poll are likewise similar. Twenty-three and three-tenths percent of the non-service students rated extra-curricular interests as interfering in some degree with their university progress. The difference is 8.3%, the standard error of the difference is 2.4 and the difference is significant statistically. 14. Poor Health. The question of poor health as a handicap to university study was assessed by the following question, "To what extent has poor health been a drawback to you in your university work"? The answers are shown in T A B L E XIII T A B L E XIII POOR H E A L T H AS A HANDICAP TO UNIVERSITY SUCCESS Civilians Veterans No handicap 79.00% 80.6% Little handicap 11.00% 10.0% Some handicap 7.6% 5.3% Much handicap . 6% 2.6% Great handicap 1.6% 1.3% 53 The answers of both groups on this question are practically identical, and both rated this difficulty in fourteenth place. Possible explanations of this virtual equality between the two groups, despite the fact that one group had been subject to war conditions, may be found in the fact that the health ofi many improved because of the regularity and medical control in the services, and secondly, that some of the non-service group may have been unable to meet the medical standards of the services. The four veterans who reported i l l health as a great handi-cap had all been wounded in the service of their country. 15. Homesickness. This handicap to effective study rated last among the difficulties of both groups. It was dismissed completely as a difficulty by 97% of the veterans and by 85.6% of thecivilians. The difference is 11.4%; the cri t i c a l ratio of the difference is 5.06 indicating high statistical significance. The greater age and number of married among the veteran group, plus the fact that all of them had been away from home before going to university probably accounts for the large difference on this point. Summary.,. Some marked similarities and differences exist between the two groups in their attitude to present day university difficulties. Student veterans and civilians react in much the same way to problems of crowded classrooms, strained library facilities, poor study methods, inability to concentrate, lack of text books, i l l health and poor university 53' instruction. There are, however, statistically significant differences between the two groups in their attitudes to social life, extra-curricular interests, uninteresting courses and to the difficulty involved because of inadequate high school background. Married veterans show statistically significant differences in attitude when compared with both single civilians, and single veterans on the relative importance of financial and housing difficulties. CHAPTER VII FACTORS CONSIDERED BY A L L STUDENTS AS CONTRIBUTING TO THEIR UNIVERSITY SUCCESS Just as certain influences are always present in any university to interfere with student progress, so are there influences which are traditionally considered to contribute to university success. It is these latter factors with which we are concerned in this chapter and an attempt was made to evaluate the attitudes of both groups to five of these influences: 1. Having a definite vocational plan 2. Having good university instructors 3. Having good classroom facilities 4. Special assistance from members of the staff 5. Associating with others having a common interest. Specifically, the students were asked to evaluate these factors on the following scale: no (help), little (help), some(help), much (help), great (help) . While no mention was made of the most important in-fluence, this information was inferred from the percentages answering i each question. The ratings of each factor and the percentages of both groups that attached importance to them are listed in TABLE XIV. TABLE XIV. INFLUENCES CONSIDERED BY THE STUDENTS AS MAKING APPRECIABLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THEIR SUCCESS AT UNIVERSITY Veteran Rating % Answering Influence Civilian Rating % Answering 1 88.3% Having good university instruction 1 94.3% 2 84.0% Having a definite vocational plan 3 79.6% - 3 81.0% Associating with others having a common interest 2 82.6% 4 64.3% Having good classroom facilities 4 67.6% 5 37.0% Special assistance from members of the staff 5 44.0% 56 1. Having Good University Instruction. The matter of good university instruction placed firs t in importance on both lists, with 94.3% of the civilians and 88.3% of the veterans con-sidering it of some, much or great importance in university success. The cr i t i c a l ratio of the difference in percentage here is 2.72, and the difference is significant at the 1% level of confidence. Although an over-whelming majority of each group seem to realize the importance of good university instruction, there is a marked tendency for the veteran group to depend less on the instructors and more on their own resources. 2. Having a Definite Vocational Plan. Eighty-four percent of the veterans, and 79.6% of the civilians con-sider this influence of some, much or great importance. The difference is not statistically significant unless we consider only those rating this factor as of much or great importance. With this interpretation the per-centages are: veteran--62% and civilian--52.6%, and the difference is statistically significant at the 1% level of confidence. The matter of deciding on a vocational goal is often acdifficult problem for students in Arts. A l l of the students on government allow-ances were urged to make a decision, when applying for the D. V. A. grants. A survey of 900 cases undertaken in 1948 by John F. McLean, Director of the University of Br i t i s h Columbia Veterans' Bureau showed that 85.2% of the veterans had stayed with their original choices. This "prodding" seems to have helped a good many veterans with this difficult problem. 57 3. Associating With Others Having a Common Interest. This item was second in importance with both groups, 81% of the veterans, and 82.6% of the non-veterans rating it as being of palpable importance. A good deal of college life is patterned on "what the others do", and with so many veterans being earnest serious students, their effect seems to have been one of raising the entire level of academic serious-ness. Much of the "rah rah" spirit has left the Campus and the accent is now on honest hard work. Robert England, ( 9 ) writing for the•.,magazine "Veterans Affairs", states, "No one who has visited our universities can fail to be impressed by the extraordinary and unprecedented upsurge of the human will to higher learning. These tens of thousands of veterans are mature, earnest students, and they have changed perceptibly the whole tone of our universities." Reports from other universities seem to confirm this impression. ( 2, 18, 24, 29 ). 4. Good Classroom Facilities. Both groups seem to have much the same attitude about the extent of the contribution that good classroom facilities can make to university success. Both placed this factor in the fourth position, and 67.6% of the civilians, as compared with 64.3% of the veterans classified it as of some degree of importance. 5. Special Assistance by Members of the Teaching Staff. Special assistance from the instructors has often been the means whereby students were able to pass their examinations. However, less 5 8 than half in each group (44% non-veterans, and 37% veterans) regarded this factor of appreciable importance. In these days of large classes and overworked professors, it often requires great patience to get this assistance and the low figures may indicate merely a lack of perseverance. There is a slight tendency for the veteran group to attach less importance to special instruction, but the.difference is not significant statistically. Summary.' There are similarities and differences in veteran and non-veteran attitudes toward the important; factors in university success. Increased age and being married for example have been helpful to many, but these factors are unique to the veteran group. Of the influences common to both groups, there is a tendency for veterans to give greater stress to the importance of a definite vocational goal, and to rely more on their own efforts than on the efforts of the instructors. C H A P T E R VIII ACADEMIC SUCCESS 59 Definitions of university success are many and varied. In the final analysis, it is almost invariably taken to mean the results of examinations. Such a meaning is obviously not wholly desirable but any other method of evaluation is too unwieldy in these days of large enroll-ments. In Chapter 1, it was mentioned that veterans had been more successful than was expected. How do their examination results compare with those of the civilians? Do married students do as well, or better than the single ones? How do the results of those who attended the special matriculation schools compare with those who had "normal" matriculation?; In an attempt to answer these questions, the final exam-ination results of the students in this study were investigated for the 1946 - 47 session. To avoid any possible confusion regarding terminology, it should be noted that at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, examination results are classified as follows: 1st Class Standing 80% and above 2nd Class Standing 65% - 79% Pass Standing § 0 % - 64% Supplemental Standing Below 50% In the tables to follow, these divisions are shown. T A B L E X V 60 FINAL EXAMINATION AVERAGES IN P E R C E N T A G E S FOR T H E 1946 - 47 SESSION Averages Civilians Veterans 9 0 - 9 4 1 0 8 5 - 8 9 8 2 8 0 - 8 4 11 6 75 - 79 19 ' 26 70 - 74 37 V 53 6 5 - 6 9 58 51 60 - 64 50 '. 51 5 5 - 5 9 37 32 50 - 54 36 28 45 - 49 15 26 40 - 44 18 6 35 - 39 4 10 30 - 34 2 0 N 296 N 291 Withdrawals 4 9 Total 300 300 Mean 62.35 62.5 Sigma 11.45 10.5 S.E. Mean .67 .62 Median 63.1 63.8 S.E. Median .84 .77 61 1. Overall Comparison. No evidence can be found from T A B L E XV to support the view that veterans, as a group, are superior students to civilians; none of the differences between them are statistically significant. Figure 2 illustrates graphically the margin of veteran superiority in the range between 50% and 79% but this difference is cancelled out by the larger number of civilians with firs t class averages. Investigation into the first class group showed that a majority of them were in the upper years. Feeling that year-placement might have some bearing on the r e -sults, the writer decided to compare the students on that basis, since gen-erally speaking, the civilians were further advanced in their courses than the veterans. 2. Comparison on a Year-Placement Basis. Results on a year-by-year comparison are shown in T A B L E S XVI, XVII and XVIII. These tables seem to indicate a slight superiority in the veteran means and medians for the firs t two years but this difference dis-appears in the third and fourth years. Unfortunately, the years are not evenly balanced numerically. The second year results probably give the most valid comparison as the numbers are larger and approximately equal. The c r i t i c a l ration of the difference in means in this instance indicates that there are about 96 chances in 100 that a true difference, favouring the veterans, exists, but this ratio is not large enough to ensure that the true difference is greater than zero. 62 Percentile Scale Figure 2--Ogives representing final examination averages (as per-centages) for 296 civilian students and 291 veteran students--April, 1947. T A B L E XVI FIRST Y E A R AVERAGES AS PERCENTAGES--1946-47 63 Averages Civilians Veterans 85 - 89 80 - 84 1 5 0 1 75 - 79 70 - 74 65 - 70 4 4 10 6 14 20 60 - 64 55 - 59 50 - 54 12 9 14 20 13 8 45 - 49 40 - 44 35 - 39 30 - 34 5 10 3 1 12 3 7 0 N 78 Mean 58.28 Sigma 12.7 Median 57.8 S. E. Mean 1.77 S. E. Median 1.77 C. R. --Difference in Means 1.37 C. R. --Difference in Medians 1.77 N 104 60.75 11.1 61.75 1.08 1.36 T A B L E XVII SECOND YEAR AVERAGES AS P E R C E N T A G E S - 1946 - 47 64 Averages Civilians Veterans 85 - 89 2 2 80 - 84 2 5 75 - 79 10 12 70 - 74 18 30 65 - 69 27 26 60 - 64 24 26 55 - 59 24 15 50 - 54 17 15 45 - 49 9 11 40 - 44 6 3 35 - 39 0 1 30 - 34 1 0 N 140 N 146 Mean 61.85 63.95 Sigma 10.15 10.1 Median , 62.21 64.8 S.E.Mean .86 .84 S.E.Median 1.09 1.05 -CR. difference in Means 1.75 C R . difference in Medians 1.78 T A B L E XVIII 65 COMBINED THIRD AND F O U R T H Y E A R AVERAGES AS P E R C E N T A G E S 1946 - 47 Averages Civilians Veterans 90 - 94 1 0 85 - 89 4 0 80 - 84 5 0 75 - 79 ' 6 7 70 - 74 15 10 65 - 69 21 5 6 0 - 6 4 13 7 55 - 59 4 4 50 - 54 5 4 45 - 49 1 3 40 - 44 2 0 35-39 1 1 N 78 N 41 Mean 67.45 64.45 Sigma 10.35 10.2 Median 67.6 66.0 S. E. Mean 1.17 1.59 S. E. Median 1.47 2.00 C. R. - Difference in means 1.59 C^R. - Difference in Medians 66 3. Married Veteran Standing Standing for the married veterans is given in Table XIX T A B L E XIX ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF MARRIED VETERANS Scores Frequency 8 5 - 8 9 1 8 0 - 8 4 4 75 - 79 9 7 0 - 7 4 16 65 - 69 17 6 0 - 6 4 13 5 5 - 5 9 7 50 - 54 5 45 - 49 Mean - 67.75 Sigma - 9.0 S.E.Mean - 1.05 N 77 The mean score of the married veterans is in the second class range, 5.4 points in excess of the civilian average and 5.25 points above the single veteran average. Both of these differences are statistically significant. The extra responsibilites of the married veterans seem to have increased their motivation for success. 67 4. Standing of Veterans with Children. In an attempt to find whether having additional responsibilities would affect academic standing, the results of the veterans who are parents was investigated. T A B L E X X ACADEMIC STANDING OF VETERANS WITH CHILDREN Scores Frequency 80 - 85 2 75 -• 79 2 70 -• 74 9 65 - 69 4 * 60 - 64 7 55 - 59 3 50 - 54 1 45 -• 49 2 N 30 Mean of the group - 66.1 The mean of this group is slightly less than the mean of the married group of which it forms a part, but the number of cases is small. Studies conducted in other universities seem to indicate that married veterans with children excel all other groups. ( 24, 29 ). 68 5. Academic Record of Veterans with Shortened Matriculation. As mentioned in Chapter IV, many veterans obtained at least part of their matriculation through speeded-up courses. The results for these veterans are compared in Table XXI with those of veterans who had the usual high school preparation. The average of this group is only slightly below that of the people with regular high school preparation, and the differences are not statistically significant. This excellent showing is indicative of a great devotion to studies as many veterans crammed four years of high school into 12 months or less. By and large, the government plan in this regard seems to have been a success. The 70 students in this sample seem to have done sur-prisingly well. While none of them achieved firs t class standing, 42.8% of them had marks in the second class range. There was one student in the group who had no high school training whatever when he was dis-charged from the services. He finished his first year with an average of 67%. Of the eight veterans with only Grade 9 standing prior to enlist-ment one failed and the average of the other seven was 66.7%. i TABLE XXI 69 COMPARATIVE RESULTS OF VETERANS WITH MATRICULATION BEFORE ENLISTMENT AND THOSE, WITH SHORTENED MATRICULATION Averages in Normal Shortened Percentage Matriculation Matriculation 8 5 - 8 9 2 0 80 - 84 6 0 75 - 79 22 4 70 - 74 42 . 11 65 - 69 ^ 36 15 6 0 - 6 4 36 15 55 - 59 24 8 50 - 54 24 4 45 - 49 23 3 40 - 44 5 1 35 - 39 4 6 N 224 N 67 Withdrawals 6 3 Total 230 70 Mean 62.87 61.25 Sigma 10.9 10.2 Median 63.94 • 63.3 S. E. Mean .79 1.25 S. E. Median .90 1.57 70 6. Academic Achievement by Rank. It was believed to be of at least passing interest if not of importance to examine the academic standing according to rank in the service. This information is found in Table XXIII. Statistically significant differences were found between those classified as other ranks and those who had officer status both commissioned and non-commissioned. Service selection may have played a part here. It is suggested too that perhaps habits of responsibility learned in the service may have been transferred to the university setting. % 71 T A B L E X X I I A C A D E M I C A C H I E V E M E N T O F T H E V E T E R A N G R O U P A C C O R D I N G T O R A N K A v e r a g e s i n O t h e r N o n - C o m m i s s i o n e d C o m m i s s i o n e d P e r c e n t a g e s R a n k s O f f i c e r s O f f i c e r s 85 - 89 1 1 0 80 - 84 1 3 2 75 - 79 10 5 6 70 - 74 16 22 16 65 - 69 13 20 16 60 - 64 18 18 17 55 - 59 17 10 7 50 - 54 14 10 4 4 5 - 4 9 13 9 5 40 - 44 3 2 1 35 - 39 7 1 2 N 113 N 101 N 76 M e a n 59.2 63 .75 63.9 S i g m a 11,5 10.2 9.7 M e d i a n 60.2 65.62 65.28 S . E . M e a n 1.08 1.01 . 1.10 S . E . M e d i a n 1.36 1.28 1.39 72 7. Standing in the 1947 - 48 examinations. Since the results for 1946 - 47 showed no statistically significant differences in achievement between the groups, it was decided to examine the standings of these same people for the following year. One rather startling feature was noted at once - - a large proportion of each group - 33% of the civilians and 31% of the veterans - had not returned to this university. Tables XXIII and XXIV show the comparisons between the numbers in each group for each of the two years. Although the numbers were considerably smaller in 1947 - 48, the overall comparison was made again and also the comparisons by year-placement. Third and fourth year results were combined, as the numbers in each year were relatively small. These standings are given in Tables XXV, XXVI and XXVII. As in the 1946 - 47 results, there are no statistically reliable differences in academic achievement between the groups for the following year. Again, there is a tendency for more veterans to score in the second class range -- but the difference is not statistically significant. In the 2nd year a difference in achievement favouring the veterans approaches the 1% level of confidence, but this difference is not in evidence in the senior years. 73 TABLE XXIII COMPOSITION OF THE CIVILIAN GROUP FOR TWO CONCURRENT SESSIONS Year Placement 1946-47 Year Placement 1947-48 1 st year 81 2nd year 44 2nd year 1 141 3rd year 104 3rd year 68 4th year 49 4th year 10 , 5th year 3 N 300 N 200 TABLE XXIV COMPOSITION OF THE VETERAN GROUP FOR TWO CONCURRENT SESSIONS Year Placement 1946-47 Year Placement 1947-48 1 st year 109 2nd year 70 2nd year 149 3rd year 112 3rd year 35 4th year 23 4th year 7 5th year 0 N 300 N 205 o 74 T A B L E XXV FINAL EXAMINATION AVERAGES AS P E R C E N T A G E S FOR T H E 1947 - 48 SESSION Averages Civilians Veterans 90 - 94 2 0 85 - 89 6 5 80 - 84 5 6 75 - 79 19 21 70 - 74 26 23 65 - 69 32 44 60 - 64 39 31 55 - 59 31 32 50 - 54 19 20 45 - 49 12 15 40 - 44 5 6 35 - 39 3 2 30 - 34 0 0 25 - 29 1 0 N 200 N -205 Mean 63.37 63.25 , Sigma 11.3 10.6 Median 63.2 63.8 S. E. Mean .8 .74 S. E. Median 1.0 .93 C. R. - Difference in means .25 C. R. - Difference in Medians .5 TABLE XXVI 75 COMPARATIVE SECOND YEAR AVERAGES AS PERCENTAGES FOR THE 1947 - 48 SESSION Averages Civilians Veterans 85 - 89 1 2 80 - 84 1 3 75 - 79 4 4 70 - 74 0 7 65 - . 69 4 12 60 - 64 5 14 55 - 59 9 11 50 - 54 10 6 45/ -49 3 7 40 - 44 4 3 35 - 39 2- 1 30 - 34 0 i o 25 - 29 0 0 20 - 24 1 0 .N 44 N 70 Mean 56.65 61.93 Sigma 12.7 11.0 Median 55.5 62.0 S. E . Mean 1.91 1.31 S. E. Median 2.40 1.65 C. R. Difference in means 2.53 C. R. Difference in medians 2.91 7.6i T A B L E XXVII COMBINED THIRD AND FOURTH Y E A R AVERAGES AS P E R C E N T A G E S 1947 - 48 Averages Civilians Veterans 9 0 - 9 4 2 0 8 5 - 8 9 5 3 8 0 - 8 4 4 4 75 - 79 15 15 70 - 74 26 , 17 65 - 69 28 32 60 - 64 34 17 55 - 59 23 20 50 - 54 8 14 45 - 49 8 9 40 - 44 2 3 35 - 39 1 1 N 156 N 135 Mean 65.2 63.9 Sigma 10.3 10.4 Median 64.8 65.4 S. E. Mean .825 .89 S. E. Median 1.03 1.12 C. R. Difference in Means 1.07 C. R. Difference in Medians 1.52 77 8. Relationship Between Age and Academic Achievement. Shaffer (25) is of the opinion that the "alleged" superiority of the student veterans is due to their increased age. In other words, he be-lieves that older students do better than younger ones at university. To test this thesis, the c.correlation between age and academic achievement was calculated for the veteran group, using the 1946 - 47 results. Figure 3 shows the paired ages and averages for this group and demonstrates quite clearly that the correlation is very small (.0159). However, averages often cloak any differences that might be present. If we consider separately only those people who fall above the superimposed lines A B and CD, i.e. those 28 years of age and older and those with passing grades, we do find a relationship. Although the correlation would . still be rather low, it is worthy of note that only two cases of the 40 who are 28 years of age or older had averages below 50%. Expressed in another way, the failure rate for these people is 5% as compared with 15;5% for those under 28. The percentage of those with first class-averages in the older group is seven; in the younger group it is two. In the second class range the percentages are 47.5 for the older and 42.2 for the younger group respectively. F r o m these data it would appear that age does have a bearing on academic success but only above a certain age. 78 A \verages > 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 Ag^ I 58-39 - 1 1 36-37 ; 1 34-35 1 1 32-33 2 1 2 1 30-31 2 1 1 2 2 28-29 7 5 3 3 3 26-27 2 3 6 5 10 9 10 2 1 24-25 1 3 7 9 11 12 15 6 22-23 4 2 7 6 11 13 15 14 9 1 1 20-21 4 3 10 6 7 10 4 7 3 2 Fig. 3. Scattergram showing the Paired ages and academic averages as percentages for 291 student veterans in the 1946 - 47 session. 79 9. Summary. The average standings just presented show no statistically significant differences between non-veterans and veterans, as such. However, the married veterans outrank all other groups. Their accomplishments are significantly better than those of the civilians and the single veterans, indicating perhaps the pressure of responsibility as a favourable motivating force. There is a tendency for the veterans as a group to surpass the civilians as a group in the junior years, but the differences are not statistically reliable beyond the 5% level of confidence. In reality, the veterans may be accomplishing relatively more than the civilians because of the handicaps the former have had to sur-mount. Chief among these is the longer break between high school and university training and the relatively poorer preparation of almost one-fourth of the veteran group. The correlation between age and academic achievement among the ex-service group was found to be negligible. This is in.accord with the findings of Clark (5), but our data seem to indicate that the probability of failure at university is significantly less for those aged 28 and above than for those below this age. 80 C H A P T E R IX SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS As stated in Chapter II, the primary aim of this study is to find any factors that may have influenced the performance of the veterans at university. It would appear that a variety of factors must be taken into account, and that they have affected various members of the group in different ways. Certain considerations such as like attitude toward financial support apply to the entire veteran group,' others, such as attitude to matriculation courses taken in the service, apply to only a few. F o r purposes of clarity, the factors affecting the success of the veterans will be dealt with under two headings - those applicable to the entire veteran group and those applicable to only some of the group. In both cases, the factors are dealt with in descending order of im-portance according to the veterans.' responses. 1. Factors Contributing to the Success of the Entire Veteran Group, (a) Financial Support. The veterans were not asked to what extent they had found the financial provisions of the government plan helpful to them. However, they were asked whether they were in serious financial difficulties. As 89.7% of the ex-service group reported "no" to this question, it is i n -ferred that the majority were relatively free from serious financial worries. Furthermore, since only 23% of all the veterans in the sample stated definitely that they could have financed a university career with-out D. V. A. benefits, this financial support seems to have been very important and probably contributed as much to veteran success as any other single factor. 81 (b) Good University Instruction. As 88.3% of the veteran group regarded the good quality of the instruction at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia as an important factor, its relevance cannot be overlooked. (c) Widened Experience in the Service. This factor was indicated as important by 87.7% of the entire group. It probably enabled some of the veterans, at least, to bridge the gap between their high school and university training. It is difficult to know just how "widened experience" helps other than in terms of learning to apply oneself, or "seeing how other people do things", or in improved "incentive to learn". However, it does seem reasonable to suggest that the experiences of the service had a maturing effect on young veterans and probably enabled them to see themselves in a better perspective than if they had not enlisted. (d) Having a Definite Vocational Goal. An overwhelming majority of the veterans - 84% - are agreed that having a definite vocational goal is important. Most of them appear to know what they want and concentrate on their objective with a r e -markable singleness of purpose. Other considerations such as extra-curricular activities have gone by the board for most of them, and pre-occupation with their work seemsto be their main consideration. (e) Associating with Others Having Common Interests. There is agreement among 81% of the veterans that this factor makes an important contribution to success at university. 82 (f) Having Good Classroom Facilities The facilities offered for instruction during these crowded times have not always been what the professors have desired, but nevertheless, 64.3% of the veteran group rate this factor of importance in their success. (g) Keen Interest in Courses Over 60% of the ex-service group express* •< keen interest in their courses, and the testimony of the professors on this point seems to bear them out (14, 18). (ti) Trying to Make Good to Justify D.V.A. Grants Since 56% of the veterans indicate that this factor is important, it is presumed that gratitude may be an important motivating force in vet-eran success. (i) F e a r of Losing D.V.A. Grants This is a factor of importance to almost half--48% --of the group, and tends to support the contention made above, that the financial support given to the veterans has been of major importance to their success. (j) Service Discipline Habits of discipline developed in the service seem to have been carried over to university with a salutary effect for some, since 45.6% of the group rated it as of importance, (k) University Counselling The services of the counselling bureau appear to have been important, since 45% of the veterans reported this counselling as con-83 tributory to their success. As suggested previously, this counselling may have to some extent replaced the traditional instructor-pupil relationship lost with large classes. (1) Special Assistance by Members of the Staff This item was important to 37% of the group, and is interpreted as showing that despite the many demands made on their time, the prof-essors are still giving individual attention to many of their students, (m) Increased Age It was believed by some that the veterans' increased age would, be a detriment to them at university, possibly because of their time away from studies. Actually, 34% of this group considered their age a definite asset and only 11% reported it as an appreciable handicap. The difference in age probably contributes to maturity and application, but veterans are still young enough to learn with facility, (n) Service Training Courses Although there is probably little transfer of knowledge from a war setting to a university setting, 34% of the veteran group found their service training courses of benefit to them when they came to university. It is suggested that habits of study learned or practiced during service may have been carried over to university, (o) In-Service Counselling The counselling received prior to discharge seems to have been helpful to some, as 30% of the group reported it as such. It may have been that this counselling served to clarify the student' objectives, and it may at ( 84 least have given them an acquaintance with the benefits available to them on discharge. A l l of the above-mentioned factors were covered in the questionnaire, and an attempt was made to measure them. In addition, there were other factors at work which are difficult, if not impossible, to measure. Chief among these is maturity, which is usually a function of age and experience, or both. The veterans have a greater age and wider experience than the civilians and it is suggested that their (presumed) greater maturity has been a major factor in their success. Moreover, all of the veterans devoted a part of their lives to the service of their country, and whatever goals or ambitions they had prior to or during their time in the service were probably clarified and intensified during their war period. They had the opportunity to view their lives "back home" far more objectively than they had before and had more time to plan their careers. Professor Bennet's (2) analogy of the spring under tension seems to be especially apt for this type of motivation. When released, there is a tremendous reserve of energy expended. Thi.s> appears to have been the case with many of the veterans. 2. Factors Important to Only a Part of the Veteran Group (a) Special University Sessions The veterans under study were not asked specifically to what extent the special university sessions had contributed to their success, but they were asked to what extent the acceleration thus provided had been det-rimental to their progress. Since only 32% noted any adverse effects from 85 this acceleration, it is presumed that this special provision proved help-ful to the majority of the students who took advantage of the opportunity to start on their university careers without waiting for the opening of the regular sessions. Furthermore, it is suggested that the institution- of these special sessions was a very wise move on the part of the universi-ties, since it allowed students to enter while they were sti l l eager to get started on their post-war preparations. (b) Matriculation Courses Taken in the Services Although this matter was of concern to only a small minority (9%) of the students in this study, 63% of those who took these courses found them of appreciable benefit. F o r these, the transition to university life was probably made easier than for those who did not avail themselves of the opportunity provided. (c) Being Married This factor is the last to be considered, but its importance seems fundamental. It is true that some of the veterans have been greatly upset by marital troubles and a small number by divorce or separation pro-ceedings, but the majority seem to have been helped because of their marriages. As stated previously, 60% of the married veterans in this study reported that being married was a definite asset to them at the university. Judging by the superior showing of the married veterans in their examinations, it would seem that the wives had been of more help to the study programme than realized. 86 3. Differences Between the Groups in Attitudes to University It is a well known fact that attitude is a very important considera-tion in academic success. The statistics reveal significant differences in attitude between non-veterans and veterans with regard to: i . interest in courses. i i . time spent on extra-curricular activities, organized sports, recreations and entertainment. i i i . the importance attached to the vocational aspects of university training. In addition, there are other differences, which, while not meeting the usually accepted standards for statistical significance, are important because they, too, are consistently in favour of the veterans. Chief among these are: i . the tendency for the student-veteran to study more than the civilian student. i i . the tendency for the veterans to be more self-reliant than the civilians. The evidence seems to present the average veteran as a mature, well motivated and serious student who has little time for anything but his work. 4. Comparison of Academic Achievements of the Two Groups The study has revealed no statistically reliable difference in academic attainments between veterans and non-veterans, as such. However, married veterans are doing particularly well and the difference between 87 their achievement and that of the single veterans and of the civilians shows a high degree of statistical significance. There is a tendency for the veterans in the junior years to excel the civilians in the junior years, this tendency being more marked in the second year than in the first. There are some grounds, therefore, for the belief that veterans are doing somewhat better work than the civilians as university students. It is at least worthy of note that in spite of all their handicaps, they are not showing any lower performance. 5. Conclusions This study was instituted in an attempt to find out what factors have been responsible for the unexpected success of the veterans at university. These factors are many and varied and have been summarized in section 1, above. A secondary aim was to find whether there were any grounds for the belief that veterans are superior to civilians as university students. A l l available evidence seems to indicate that the average veteran is more mature, more serious, more self-reliant and better motivated than the average civilian in his attitudes to university life generally. These attitudes, in themselves, make for superior students. In the examinations, the veterans have held their own with the civilians and the married veterans have excelled all other groups. There are some reasons then, for regarding veterans as rather superior students. 88 6. Some Implications of the Veteran Programme for Higher Education In Canada To date, the federal government has given a considerable amount of aid in one way and another to further the cause of education in Canada. In co-operation with the provinces, it has helped in the building of technical schools, in the operation of vocational training courses and in providing bursaries and loans to university students. The D.V.A. plan has been one of assistance on a scale hitherto unprecedented. It is, by its nature, necessarily self-terminating, but there are indications that the principle of federal aid to higher education has taken hold. Already, certain students are working on research projects with financial backing from the National Research Council and the Defence Research Board and others are being subsidized in their final year by the army, navy and air force. However, this assistance is limited and many deserving students are being deprived of the benefits of higher education for want of funds. Since the D.V.A. plan has demonstrated that higher education for vast numbers is within the bounds of practicality, it is suggested that consideration might well be given to the extension of government support to include all those high school graduates who have the ability to profit from a university education but lack the ability to pay for it. This subvention could be carried on from year to year and made dependent on the student's progress as under the plan for veterans. The machinery set up for the counselling of the veterans seems to have been worthwhile to many students. The encouragement to the students 89 to select an occupational goal at the outset of their university studies has also been found to be helpful. The rather limited experience of the writer, as a university counsellor for incoming civilian students has already given him the impression that these students are in far greater need of good counselling than the veterans. The former group seems so immature and uninformed by comparison. It is suggested that the facilities for counselling already available be used to test and guide the incoming students in order to encourage them, at the outset, to think along practical lines of endeavour. Most authorities seem to be agreed that the influence of the veterans on the campuses has been a salutary one. Perhaps their greates con-tribution has been in their example of what can be achieved with a high-minded devotion to duty. While it is too much to expect that freshmen, direct from high schools, will show the mature approach to university study that the veterans have shown, anything that tends to foster a serious attitude toward higher education should be encouraged. 7. Suggestions for Further Study. As was noted in Chapter II, the majority of the veterans in this study were in their junior years when they answered the questionnaire. •Many of the questions, particularly those that had reference to university success, had only a limited application to them as they had hardly settled in their university careers. Perhaps the questions should be asked again in an attempt to discover whether any attitudes have changed in the inter-vening two years. The study revealed that the greatest difficulty common to all 90 students was with study habits. A start has been made toward remedying this situation by the distribution through the Counselling Bureau of a "Manual of Study Hints", and by discussions with the students about their own specific study weaknesses. It is suggested that further research and experimentation be carried on in this field. A short course in the art of studying might be given by members of the university staff, preferably from the department of psychology. To date, approximately 10,000 veterans and 1,500 civilian students have been interviewed at the U. B. C. Counselling Bureau. Scores on intelligence tests, interest inventories and tests of academic aptitude are in many of the students/files. Much valuable research could be carried on with this material as a basis for study. During the course of this study it came as a distinct shock to the writer to learn, when attempting to follow the progress of an unselected group of students over a two-year period, that approximately one-third pf the group did not return to this university for the second year. Graduation and failures would account for some; transfers to other universities, normal schools etc. for a few more. What happened to the rest? Lack of money is not the entire answer, as one half of the students were subsidized rather generously. Investigations into the reasons why students leave university would carry us beyond the bounds of this brief study, but it should prove to be an interesting and valuable field for research. R E F E R E N C E S 91 1. ATKINSON, B.H. and WEBB,R.W. Academic success of the rehab-ilitation veteran. School and Society, 1946, 64, 87 - 88. 2. BENNET, C.L. What the veteran student is teaching the universities. Dalhousie Review, 1947, 27, 311 - 322. 3. BROWN F.J. Veterans are persons. Educational Record, Oct. 1945, 321 - 322. 4. BRUMBAUGH,A.J. Bursting at the seams- address given to the Eleventh Pacific Northwest Conference on Higher Education, University of Br i t i s h Columbia, Nov. 11, 1948. 5. CLARK, E.L. The veteran as a college freshman. School and Society, 1947, 66, 205 - 207. 6. Does it pay to be a barbarian? - editorial - School and Society, 1947, 66, 500. 7. DONAHUE, W.T. College and university proceedures in the re-orientation of veterans. Journal of Clinical,Psychology, 1946, 2, 131 - 139. 8. ENGLAND, R. Discharged. The Macmillan Co. of Canada Ltd., 1943. 9. ENGLAND R. Student vets are mature, earnest. Veterans Af f a i r s , 1947, 1, no. 9. 10. EPLER, S.E. Do vets make better grades? School and Society, 1947, 68, 270. 11. Financial paper analyzes cost of veteran program. Veterans Affairs 1948, no. 13, 1 - 3. 12. G A R R E TT H.E. Statistics in psychology and education. Longmans, Green and Co. , 1946'.'1 13. HILDRETH H.M. A scale for measuring psychological changes during military service. Education and Psychological Measurement, 1946, 6, 391 - 399. 14. KNIGHT N.M. They know what they want. School and Society, 1946, 63, 449 - 452. 92 15. KVARCUS W.C. and BAKER, J. The achievement of the veterans and non-veterans in one required course at Boston University. School and Society, 1946, 64, 384 - 385. 16. MCDONAGH E.G., Adjustment problems and characteristics of university veterans. Sociology and Social Research, 1947, 31, 220 - 225. 17. MILLER, J.H. and A L L E N , J.S. Veterans Challenge the colleges. King's Crown Press, Columbia University, 1947. 18. MINER,R.J. How fares the veteran? College and University, 1947, 22, 159. 19. MOORE, H.E. Characteristics of student veterans. Sociology and Social Research, 1948, 32, 711 - 717. 20. N E V I L L E , K.P.R. Higher education in Canada. College and University, 1945, 20, 468 - 488. 21. PEATMAN, J.G. Descriptive and sampling statistics. Harper Brothers, 1947. 22. President's report, 1945 - 46, University of Br i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. 23. Report of the ninth meeting of the advisory committee on university training for veterans, 1948. Department of Veterans' Affairs. 24. REIMER, S. Married vets are good students. Marriage and Family Living, 1947, 9, 11 - 12. 25. SHAFFER, R.H. A note on the alleged superiority of veterans. School and Society, 1948, 67, 205. 26. TAYLOR; E.A. How well are veterans doing? School and Society, 1947, 65, 210 - 213. 27. T E N N E Y Commander L.H. Psychological problems of the discharged veteran. College and University, 1945, 20, 443 - 457. 28. THOMPSON, R.B. and FLESHER, MARIE. Comparative academic records of veterans and civilian students. College and University 1947, 22, 176 - 187. 93 29. THOMPSON R.B. and PRESSEY S.E. An analysis of the academic record of 2,144 veterans. College and University, 1948, 23, 242 - 252. 30. TIBBETTS, C and HUNTER,W.H. Vets and non-vets at the University of Michigan. School and -Society, 1947, 65, 347 - 350. 31. University of Saskatchewan. Comparison between veteran and civilian students for the: 1946 - 47 session. 32. Veterans Charter, Acts of the Canadian Parliament to assist Canadian Veterans. King's Printer, Ottawa, 1947. 33. WELBORNE, E.L.. The scholarship of veterans attending a teachers college. Journal of Educational Research, 1946, 40, 209 - 214. 34. WEST, F. L. Academic achievement of veterans. The University Services Conference, 1947. Dept. of Veterans'Affairs. APPENDIX A "^tf-Ex«&©rrlo«.f mark •"X* here.. Date.. Maine Age Male nv Female Married or Single......Number of Children,..Country of your b i r t h , Parent's Home Address Father's Occupation Faculty . , .Course. Expected Graduation Year , , . , • Year started high school ' Year le f t high school, In what Province did you get your university entrance?.... , Month and year you started university course What Junior Matriculation subjects did you pass? , What Senior Matriculation subjects did you pass?, What subjects are you taking this year? (Give subject & number) How interested are you in your course? Underline the statement that • appl ies : - (not interested) (somewhat interested) (keenly Interested) Lis t the two of your courses which you f ind most interesting and the one you find least interesting, 1. (most) 2. (most) 3 • ( l e a s t ) . , , . . What three of the items l i s t ed below do you consider to be the most valu-able contributions your university education w i l l give you. Place "X" be-fore the three items you choose. Read a l l the items before marking any, 'then mark only, three, Place an additional UX" before1 the one you consider to be the most valuable of a l l . Opportunity to make worthwhile friends, Good occupational t ra ining. Increased general knowledge. Improved a b i l i t y to think. A degree. Improved position in the community. The development of worthwhile interests. Better chance for a good job by having a university education. Better preparation to be of service to one's fellow men. Are you getting as much out of your university course as you expected? Underline:- (no) (as much as expected) (more than expected) How many hours a week do you spend ( l ) i n l ec tures . . , (2 ) in l a b s . . . ( 3 ) t o t a l . , , About how many hours a week on the average do you spend.out of class on assignments and study? Of what student organizations are you an active member? • * • . APPENDIX A -2-Of whp.t o r g a n i z a t i o n s o u t s i d e of the u n i v e r s i t y are you an a c t i v e member?.. What s p o r t s do you p l a y at u n i v e r s i t y ? What other r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s have you? Have you serious f i n a n c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s ? . . , . . . I f i n debt, how much? How much money d i d you earn (not i n c l u d i n g D.V.A. b e n e f i t s ) d u r i n g summer v a c a t i o n .Christmas v a c a t i o n ..during term. U n d e r l i n e the one a p p r o p r i a t e word a f t e r each item below to I n d i c a t e to what extent you c o n s i d e r i t has been of h e l p i n your u n i v e r s i t y work. • I f items 1 or 2 are not a p p l i c a b l e to you, w r i t e NA b e f o r e the item and omit the answer. 1. Being o l d e r than many other students. (no ) ( l i t t l e ) ( some )(• much)(great) 2. Being married, (no) ( l i t t l e ) ( some)(much) ( g r e a t ) 3 . Having a d e f i n i t e v o c a t i o n a l . p l a n . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) ^.Having good u n i v e r s i t y i n s t r u c t o r s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 5 .Having good classroom f a c i l i t i e s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 6 . S p e c i a l a s s i s t a n c e by members of t e a c h i n g s t a f f . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) . 7 . A s s o c i a t i n g w i t h others h a v i n g a common i n t e r e s t . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e M m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) U n d e r l i n e the one a p p r o p r i a t e word a f t e r each'item below to i n d i c a t e to what extent you c o n s i d e r i t to have been a handicap i n your u n i v e r s i t y work. I f items 1, 2, 3, or k are not a p p l i c a b l e to you w r i t e NA b e f o r e the item and omit the answer. 1 .-Being o l d e r than many other students, ( n o ) . ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 2-.Being m a r r i e d . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 3 . Nervous e f f e c t s of war s e r v i c e . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m U c h ) ( g r e a t ) 4. -Speeding up of e x t r a s e s s i o n s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 5 . F i n a n c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s . (no) ( l i t t l e ) ( some ) (much) ( g r e a t ) 6 .Type of l i v i n g accommodation.(noM l i t t l e ) (some)(much)(great) 7 . I l l h e a l t h . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 8. Lack of necessary a b i l i t y . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( some)(much 1)(great) 9. Poor academic p r e p a r a t i o n b e f o r e e n t e r i n g u n i v e r s i t y , ( n o ) ( l i t t l e )( some) (much)(great) 1 0 . I n a b i l i t y to concentrate on s t u d i e s , ( n o ) ( l i t t l e )( some )(much) (gre£*.t) 11. Home s i c k n e s s , (no.) ( l i t t l e ) ( some) (much) ( g r e a t ) 12. Courses u n i n t e r e s t i n g . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 13. Crowded classroom f a c i l i t i e s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) l ^ . P o o r l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 15. Lack of t e x t - b o o k s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 16. Poor u n i v e r s i t y i n s t r u c t i o n . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 17. Too many e x t r a - c u r r i c u l a r . I n t e r e s t s . ( n o ) ( l l t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 1 8 . I n t e r r u p t i o n of education between h i g h s c h o o l and u n i v e r s i t y . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) (some)(much)(great) 19. Poor study m e t h o d s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 20. Too much time spent on entertainment.(no)(little)(someMmuch)(great) - - . A P P E N D I X A -3-EX-SERVICE STUDENTS WILL.PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION S e r v i c e n u m b e r . . . . . . . . . M i l i t a r y awards..... Branch of S e r v i c e . , &/or rank........ Date of enlistment P l a c e of enlistment Date of di s c h a r g e Theatres of s e r v i c e w i t h p e r i o d s ;. . S e r v i c e - d i s a b i l i t y , i f any Pr e - e n l i s t m e n t e d u c a t i o n : Grade a t t a i n e d before e n l i s t m e n t . L a s t school or c o l l e g e attended before enlistment Years out of sch o o l b e f o r e enlistment M a t r i c . courses taken w h i l e i n s e r v i c e M a t r i c . courses taken a f t e r d i s charge and.where,. P r e - e n l i s t m e n t employment or other experience Before enlistment d i d you p l a n to atte n d u n i v e r s i t y ? U n d e r l i n e : - (yes) (undecided)(no) Could you have f i n a n c e d or had f i n a n c e d f o r you a u n i v e r s i t y e d u c a t i o n without B.V.A. b e n e f i t s ? (yes)(might have)(no) L i s t any e d u c a t i o n a l courses, d i s c u s s i o n groups, hobby groups, e d u c a t i o n a l t o u r s , e t c . , i n which you p a r t i c i p a t e d w h i l e i n the s e r v i c e L i s t the s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g courses ( t e c h n i c a l , s t a f f , s p e c i a l , e t c . , ) which you took while i n the s e r v i c e . , .• ., L i s t any courses and where taken at any u n i v e r s i t y ( i n c l u d e Khaki) you attended while .in the s e r v i c e ., What s p e c i a l s e s s i o n s (winter, s p r i n g , summer) have you taken at u n i v e r ~ . s i t y ? U n d e r l i n e the one appropriate, word a f t e r each item below to indicat-e t o what extent you c o n s i d e r i t has been of h e l p i n your u n i v e r s i t y work. 1.Service t r a i n i n g c o u r s e s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 2. E d u c a t i o n a l courses while i n s e r v i c e , ( n o ) ( l i t t l e )( some) (mucTi) ( g r e a t ) 3. E f f e c t of d i s c i p l i n e while i n s e r v i c e . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( some) (mu*ch)( g r e a t ) k.Pre-discharge & D.V.A. c o u n s e l l i n g . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( some) (much))(great) 5. U n i v e r s i t y c o u n s e l l i n g f o r v e t e r a n s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e " ) (.some ) (mucin) ( g r e a t ) 6. Widened experience through s e r v i c e . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e ) ( s o m e ) ( m u c h ) ( g r e a t ) 7 . T r y i n g to make good to j u s t i f y D.V.A. g r a n t s . ( n o ) ( l i t t l e )(,some )(much) ( g r e a t ) 8. T r y i n g to make good so as not to l o s e D.V.A. g r a n t s . (no)(1 l t t l e ) ( some) fmnp.h ) ( ere a t )
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Psychology
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use.
Graduate
A comparative study of three hundred non-veteran students and three hundred student veterans in the Faculty of Arts at the University of British Columbia
Text