Files in this item
|(no description provided)|
|Title:||A Comparison of Selected Effects of Student Activities Programs in A Small, Laboratory High School and A Small, Traditional High School|
|Author(s):||Davidian, Albert Donald|
|Department / Program:||Education|
|Degree Granting Institution:||University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign|
|Abstract:||The purpose of this study was to compare student activity programs in a university laboratory high school and a traditional high school, to report differences in selected areas of the student activity programs and student status systems, and to make recommendations for the laboratory high school student activity program. Areas of comparison included student activity programs, methods of financing, student rate of participation, selection of sponsors, and student satisfaction with student activity programs. These questions guided the research: (1) What are the similarities and differences between two different types of high schools in opportunities created for student activities and the participation/non-participation of staff and students? (2) What are the effects of these similarities and differences on student status systems in these high schools? (3) What recommendations about the student activity program at the laboratory high school can be made which may enhance both student development and school goals?
This study also examined the status system surrounding participation in student activities in these two different high schools. For the purpose of this study, status has been defined as "student perceptions of a value inherent to individuals for participating in or belonging to a particular student activity."
The laboratory high school in this study was the University High School which serves the College of Education of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign as the experimental school of the Curriculum Development Laboratory. The traditional high school selected was Mahomet-Seymour High School located in Mahomet, Illinois.
Data were generated at both schools about student activity programs and their attendant status system through the use of: (1) a review of school documents, (2) personal interviews, (3) observations, and (4) questionnaire instruments. The review of documents resulted in school literature and records on student activities being compiled and analyzed to determine programs, policies, and philosophy. Observations were completed in the schools to describe student activities and to interview student and faculty members. Finally, data were generated by a questionnaire developed and administered to students.
Analysis of data concerning the relationship between the students' perceived status and their involvement in student activities indicated there were significant differences between the traditional high school and the laboratory high school. The prestige of being from the right family held the highest status at the laboratory high school whereas the traditional high school perceived having high grades as the most important.
Analysis of data concerning the administrative structure, participation level of several student activities, the number of students who worked after school, and student planning of activities indicated significant differences between the two high schools.
The conclusions drawn from the findings were that: (1) the success of an activity usually is attributed to how well suited the faculty advisor is to the activity, (2) student planning of activities does contribute to the success of the activity, (3) social status systems do exist and are significantly different between these schools, and (4) formal and informal administrative structures for student activities do have major strengths individually but could be more effective overall when combined into a single organized structure.
These conclusions led to recommendations concerning: (1) administrative organization modification or development, (2) student activity program modification or development, (3) counseling services, and (4) future research on the relationship between social status and student activities.
Thesis (Educat.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1981.
|Date Available in IDEALS:||2014-12-12|