College and Research Libraries MARY Y. PARR Whatever Happened to the Class of 1962? A study was made of the present whereabouts of the 214 applicants accepted for admission to graduate school of library science of Drexel Institute of Technology, and the 164 admitted to the graduate library school of Pratt Institute in 1961. Statistics are developed on their subsequent experience, including graduation or nongraduation ( 42 per cent of the former and 51 per cent of the latter have taken degrees), the kinds of positions they now occupy, and the numbers who are inactive. Implications of these statistics to admissions practices are proposed. LITTLE IS KNOWN about the kinds of stu- dents who fail to earn the graduate de- grees to which they have aspired and on which they have spent at least a se- mester of time and energy. The questions of what kinds of graduate students suc- ceed or fail and why they do so remain largely unexplored subjects. Most re- search on the performance of graduate students has been concerned with the prediction of success in terms of gradu- ate course grades. The final act which far more signifies success or failure in gradu- ate work, the success or failure to receive a degree, has been neglected as a re- search criterion of success."1 The idea of following an entering group of students through their graduate school careers to graduation or another end has seldom been carried out for any field. But that is what this study attempts to do and in so doing reveals some of the causes for frustration connected with 1 Charles R. Wright, "Success or Failure in Earning Graduate Degrees," Sociology of Education, XXXVIII (Fall 1964), 73-97. Miss Parr is Associate Professor in the Graduate Library School of Pratt Institute. 208/ the provision of graduates for the librar- ian's profession. By waiting five years after the class en- tered before studying them presumably the authors allowed most of the class members enough time to complete the one-year master's degree curriculum and whatever was going to happen to them academically had happened by that time. Berelson found that the average elapsed time from bachelor's to doctor's degree in professional fields was ten years, but in addition to a three-year curriculum and a dissertation such programs usually in- cluded periods of time when the individ- ual was taking no courses. 2 The Class of 1962. This study exam- ines student characteristics and history in two separate schools. According to available statistics the graduate school of library science of Drexel Institute of Technology in Philadelphia accepted for admission 214 applicants in 1961. They were selected from approximately two hundred and seventy original applicants (79 per cent accepted) plus many others 2 Bernard Berelson, Graduate Education in the United States (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960), p. 160. Whatever Happened to the Class of 1962? I 209 who failed to send all admissions blanks, college transcripts, and recommenda- tions, or else dropped out before an ad- mission decision could be made. Several comparisons have established the repre- sentativeness of this entering group of students. Table 1 shows what happened to the Drexel group in terms of their pursuit of the master's degree. Two hundred and sixty-eight students applied for admission to the graduate li- brary school of Pratt Institute in Brook- lyn in 1961. Of this total 164 were ad- mitted ( 61 per cent and are comparable for representativeness and other charac- teristics with the 214 admitted to Drexel. For Pratt 11 per cent already held ad- vanced degrees while only 2 per cent of the Drexel group held such degrees. Table 2 shows what happened to the Pratt group in terms of their pursuit of master's degrees. A first consideration would logically seem to be the number of students who received a library school degree from the admitting institution. To date 42 per cent of the accepted Drexel students and 51 per cent of the Pratt students have re- ceived such degrees. For Pratt the great- est number, 18 per cent received the de- gree in 1963 with declining proportions graduating in succeeding years. In addi- tion, 3 per cent left early in their Pratt careers and subsequently graduated from other library schools, perhaps near- er home or offering scholarships. For Drexel, Table 1 shows the pattern to have been much the same. Therefore, with the addition of stu- dents graduating from other schools, the total number who have completed work for the degree is 87, or 54 per cent of the accepted students for Pratt and 92, or 44 per cent of the accepted students for Drexel. Wright's group of 189 grad- uate students in a large university showed 60 per cent to have graduated eleven years later.3 In two separate studies Lowen and Berry found gradua- tion among undergraduates to range from 50 per cent to 67 per cent and Berelson quoted 60 per cent as an aver- age graduation figure for both doctoral and law school students.4 On the other hand, Rosenhaupt found department ranges from 13 per cent to 38 per cent a Wright, op. cit., p. 90. 4 Louis Lowen, and James Berry, "Mortality Study of College Students," School and Society, LXXVII (February 14, 1953 ), 103-105; Berelson, op. cit., p. 168. TABLE 1 DREXEL CLAss oF 1962 PROGRESS TowARD GRADUATION Per Cent, Students Number Per Cent Cumulative Graduated-1962 . 39 18 18 1963 . 26 12 30 1964 . 11 5 35 1965. 10 5 40 1966 . 3 2 42 Graduated from another iibr~ry ~ch~ol . 3 2 44 Currently enrolled . . . . . 8 3 47 Currently enrolled in summer only . 7 3 50 Admitted as non-degree students 6 3 53 Never registered for courses 22 10 63 Currently inactive 39 18 81 Student formally withdrew 29 14 95 Dropped for poor scholarship 11 5 100 Deceased . 1 0 100 Total . 214 100 100 210 I College & Research Libraries • May, 1967 TABLE 2 PRATT CLASS OF 1962 PROGRESS TOWARD GRADUATION Students Graduated-1962 . 1963 . 1964 . 1965 . 1966 . Transferred to another library school Currently enrolled . . . Currently enrolled in summer only Admitted as non-degree students Never registered for courses Currently inactive . . . Student formally withdrew . Dropped for poor scholarship Deceased Total . for humanities and 28 per cent to 49 per cent for science in obtaining master's degrees from Columbia. 5 Before leaving graduation figures , it might be well to point out several other factors related to graduation, some of them disappointing. In recent years it has been the experience of the schools that 2 to 10 per cent of the students graduating do not take full-time profes- sional library positions but instead re- main in the role of housewife or mother, continue working in another occupation, begin graduate work in another field, or take part-time professional positions. A 1966 check showed 10 per cent of the Drexel 1962 class graduates not to be working as full-time librarians. So even among graduating students not all have entered active, full-time service in the profession. And in yet another interesting side- light of the graduation picture, again dis- appointing to some, the home and job picture of these and other Drexel stu- dents was analyzed. Where did these students come from and where did they go in terms of town versus city if- 5 Hans Rosenhaupt, Graduate Student E x perience at Columbia University, 1940-56 (New Yo\"k: Columbia University Press, 1958), p. 36. Number P e r Cent Per Cent, Cumulative 20 12 12 30 18 30 15 10 40 14 9 49 3 2 51 5 3 54 0 0 54 0 0 54 1 0 54 40 24 78 0 0 78 27 17 95 8 5 100 1 0 100 164 100 100 (a) .. Hometown" was where the stu- dent spent the largest number of years in high school. (b) A town was one with a popula- tion under 100,000. (c) Large city suburbs were classified as city. The conclusions were: The per cent who came from a town and went after graduation to a town was 30 per cent The per cent who came from a town and went to .a city was 39 per cent The per cent who came from a city and went to a city was 23 per cent The per cent who came from a city and went to a town was 8 per cent This gave the following totals: Per cent moving from town to either city or town was 69 per cent Per cent moving from city to either city or town was 31 per cent Per cent moving from either town or city to town was 38 per cent Per cent moving from either town or city to city was 62 per cent Briefly, the modal Drexel student came from a town and went after graduation to a city. A further study was made of first pro- fessional job location and its distance Whatever Happened to the Class of 1962? I 211 from the library school. The majority of recent Drexel graduates moved less than two hundred miles from Philadelphia to their first jobs. A student body compris- ing for the most part "thirty five year old married women," and the fact that most Drexel students call the Middle Atlantic area "home," plus the many job oppor- tunities in the area help to explain the situation.6 For the vast majority of Pratt students - the mode was clearly that of city to ,. city, with New York City being both hometown and location of the first pro- fessional position. Finally, the relationships between sex and marital status and graduation are curious and can be seen for Pratt and Drexel in Tables 3 and 4. At the time of admission, 20 per cent of the class was male, but by graduation males had in- creased their representation to 25 per cent ( Drexel). Pratt's male percentage dropped somewhat by graduation, how- ever. Single males made up three-quar- ters of all males at admission for both Pratt and Drexel even though age at this point was 30 to 35; they declined slightly at graduation for Drexel but in- creased to five-sixths for Pratt. For fe- males there was no trend by marital status at either Drexel or Pratt. At Drex- el for both sexes only 38 per cent of those admitted were married but by graduation 45 per cent were married; this slight shift was caused primarily by the loss of single people, not by the marriage of students while enrolled. Drexel's shifts were apparently related to the fact that between admission and graduation married and single males and married females increased their per- centages while single females dropped sharply. Married females, for instance, made up only one-third at admission, s Kenna Forsyth, and John Harvey, "Drexel Li- brary School Students: Where Do They Come From and Where Do They Go?," CRL, XXIV (March 1965), 138-44. TABLE 3 SEX OF STUDENTS IN PRATT AND DREXEL CLASSES OF 1962 Drexel: Admitted . . . Inactive or Withdrawn Graduated Pratt: Admitted . . . Inactive or Withdrawn Graduated . Per Cent Per Cent Male Female 20 23 25 31 22 29 80 77 75 69 78 71 and single females almost half, but by commencement married exceeded single females. Now, to return to the analysis of Ta- bles 1 and 2, graduation is the obvious termination, but viewing the percentage, the obvious question is what happened to the other half, the other 46 per cent (Pratt) or 56 per cent (Drexel) of those entering library school groups? Twenty-four per cent (Pratt) and 10 per cent ( Drexel) can be accounted for readily. Though admitted, a total of 62 students for the two schools never regis- tered for course work. They took the trouble to complete forms, pay for the transcripts mailed, and pay non-return- able admissions fees, but never took classes, thereby wasting their time and money and that of the admissions offi- cers. It is hard to say why they did not follow through. Probably the following TABLE 4 MARITAL STATUS OF PRATT AND DREXEL STUDENTS IN CLASSES OF 1962 Drexel: Admitted . . Inactive or Withdrawn Graduated . Pratt: Admitted . . Inactive or Withdrawn Graduated . P er Cent Per Cent Married Single 38 41 45 54 52 51 62 59 55 46 48 49 212 I College & Research Libraries • May, 1967 list of reasons covers most of these cases. Ill health Pregnancy Financial reasons Transfer to another subject field Husband transferred to another posi- tion Moved to another city Loss of interest Illness at home Course scheduling problems Took a position in another field It is possible to say for those who actual- ly enrolled in degree programs however- obviously a smaller group than the num- ber admitted-67 per cent for Pratt and 49 per cent for Drexel went on to re- ceive their degrees. Certain other groups of 1962 students can be accounted for almost as readily. Fourteen percent of the Drexel class and 17 per cent of the Pratt class withdrew formally for a variety of reasons, pri- marily those listed above plus the dis- heartening experience of going on pro- bation. Obviously, it was hazardous to admit certain kinds of students, those with limited finances, for instance, since fi- nance was often given as a reason for dropping out. Increased financial aid in both schools would have saved some of these cases. Regrettably, married women were hazardous to admit, since they were subject to pregnancy, illness within the family, reduced financial resources, and husbands being transferred. Age may have affected class attendance, also; Rosenhaupt found the age group most often successful in earning master's de- gree to be quite young, in the lower twenties. 7 Even having a previous de- gree was no guarantee of success since a fourth of that group withdrew, became inactive, or was dropped. Still left for accounting is one-third of the initial Drexel group and 5 per cent of 7 Rosenhaupt, op. cit., p. 37. the Pratt group. Practically all of this Pratt group were in the category, Dropped for Scholastic Reasons; there- fore, they left involuntarily because their grades were low. But this category also included 5 per cent of the Drexel class, the same percentage as that of Pratt and also suggesting the classic bell-shaped curve calling for a flunking group of 5 per cent. Probably most of these flunking students were sufficiently intelligent to do the course work successfully but failed for other reasons. And finally, it ·, should be observed that this student group was the only one whose eventual return to the school was impossible. Two groups of students are still en- rolled at Drexel. Three per cent attend only in the summer and 3 per cent are currently enrolled during the winter, pursuing the degree on a part-time basis, apparently with interruptions. This brings to a total of 6 per cent those whose files are currently active. It also points up the fact that probably less than half of the accepted Drexel group will ever graduate. Upon careful examination of the groups remaining it becomes apparent that six of the Drexel students and the remaining Pratt student were not ad- mitted as degree students but auditors, technicians, or post MS in LS students. They were nondegree students partici- pating in post graduate programs or non- college graduate library technicians ad- TABLE 5 WHAT HAPPENED TO DREXEL STUDENTS WHO WERE ON PROBATION? (Random Sample 1959-1964) Students P er Cent Dropped by the school 11 12 Currently inactive 34 39 Still on probation and enrolled 13 15 Got off probation . 26 30 Graduated 4 4 Total 88 100 Whatever Happened to the Class of 1962? I 213 ~ mitted to a limited number of introduc- tory courses. The Drexel group now remaining, thir- ty-nine students or eighteen per cent of ~ those initially admitted, is known as the Inactives, apparently without definite plans to continue work toward the de- gree and professional status yet not formally withdrawn. The relationship in each institution between those who with- drew formally and the Inactives who .- merely stopped coming is undoubtedly ~- close but is poorly understood. 8 Prob- ably the same list of reasons applies to both groups, with the Withdrawals in- cluding more cases of moving to another city and changing subject fields and the ~ Inactives including more indecisive and temporary reasons such as illness, finan- cial, and scholastic probation problems. ' The Drexel Inactive and the Pratt Withdrawal groups form two of the larg- est and most intriguing in the study. In each case they constitute about a sixth of the total and a third of those not graduating. They deserve further analy- sis and discussion because of their am- bivalent nature and because they are a sizable group of promising students lost to the profession. The Inactives (Withdrawals) vs. the Graduates and the Probationers. What ~ comparisons can be made between the ~ Inactive and Withdrawal groups and those who have received the degree? A common assumption about students who become derailed along the way suggests that they are academically less successful than graduating fellow students. Investi- gation shows the Drexel grade average for the graduate group to have been 85.9 per cent and for the Inactives to have been 84.1 per cent. The under- graduate grade average presents almost -1 the same pattern; the graduates have an 8 At Pratt a concerted effort is made to clear up Inactives and turn them into Withdrawals with a formal exit statement or a statement giving a readmit date. average a little above B- while the In- actives fall only slightly below that fig- ure. In both cases the differences were slight and not statistically significant. Substantiating this view for Pratt is the finding that only 7 per cent of their Withdrawals were on scholastic proba- tion. Other evidence seems to present a closer relationship between grades and graduation. Of the group initially ad- mitted to Drexel, twenty-one, or 10 per cent were on academic probation for one or more quarters. From another set of statistics, nine of the thirty-nine Inactive students, or 23 per cent, were on aca- demic probation. Obviously, the nine are included in the twenty-one above. This leads to the conclusion that almost half ( 9 of 21) or 43 per cent of the probation- ary students became Inactive whereas only 16 per cent of those never on proba- tion ( 31 of 193) became Inactive and only 7 per cent ( 12 of 17 4) of those who did not become Inactive were on proba- tion. The conclusion is suggested that the Inactives were more likely to have had scholastic difficulties than other students, 23 per cent to 7 per cent, and conversely that the probationary student was more likely to become Inactive than his non- probationary counterpart ( 43 per cent to 16 per cent). In this vein, Ecklund found that the ratio of dropouts who were potential graduates to dropouts whose graduation appeared unlikely was approximately one to five, based on a study of under- graduate students at Vanderbilt and Illi- nois.9 Tables 5 and 6 summarize the fate of Drexel probation students. A third got off probation and some graduated. One in seven was still on probation and also still active. However, half had either be- come Inactive or been dropped from the 9 Bruce Ecklund, "A Source of Error in College Attrition Studies,'' Sociology of Education, XXXVIII (Fall 1964), 60-72. 214 I College & Research Libraries • May, 1967 TABLE 6 NuMBER OF QuARTERS DREXEL STUDENTS WERE ON PROBATION, 1959-64 Number of Per Cent, Quarters Students Per Cent Cumulative 1 18 20 20 2 25 28 48 3 16 18 66 4 12 14 80 5 6 6.5 87 6 3 3 90 7 6 6.5 96 No record 4 4 100 Total 88 100 100 NoTE: Table 6 does not include students admitted on probation unless they made low grades in courses. school. The average probation student remained on probation for two or three quarters before dropping out, being dropped, or getting off probation. After the third probationary quarter, under the rules being followed in 1961-62, most of the probationary students no longer list- ed on probation had dropped out, and some had fallen victim to the school's withdrawal rules. Another popular belief about the In- active and the Withdrawal student is that he takes one or two courses and quits. The data from the Drexel group suggest this to be fallacious, but the data from Pratt suggest it to be true. The av- erage number of quarter hours com- pleted by the Drexel Inactive was eigh- teen hours-somewhat greater certainly than a course or two, in fact equalling five or six courses. The range of hours completed was from three to fifty-four (with sixty hours for graduation) before becoming Inactive. But for Pratt students withdrawal came typically after only one course. Obviously, Drexel students typically left slowly, a few at a time, after several courses, while Pratt stu- dents left abruptly after only one course. Another and perhaps related finding was that the number of course work hours taken was not related to scholastic av- erage, nor was scholastic average de- pendent upon the number of course work hours taken. Perhaps a portion of the Drexel group became Inactive after completing school library certification requirements. How- ever, the minimum requirements forcer- tification in the Drexel area were twenty- seven quarter hours in New Jersey and thirty-six hours in Pennsylvania, so only a small minority could have carried out this procedure. One other interesting and curious comparison can be made. The thirty-nine - 1961 Drexel students presently Inactive attained this status at approximately a two-to-one ratio with the students who were earning their degrees. In 1962 when 18 per cent of the total number of grad- uates of the 1961 group received their degrees, 38 per cent of the total now Inactive joined the Inactive group, while in 1963 12 per cent received degrees and 17 per cent became Inactive, and in 1964 5 per cent graduated as opposed to 12 per cent becoming Inactive. For Pratt half withdrew in 1961 and half in 1962. Grades and Graduation. A special study was made of the grades of the Drexel class of 1962 on the undergradu- ate level and at Drexel, and these grades are shown in Tables 7 and 8. An 80 per cent average was required for gradua- tion. The four groups of Drexel extremes studied included: ( 1 ) the Low Under- graduate group of forty-four students ( 20 per cent) whose undergraduate grade average was lowest in the class, TABLE 7 DREXEL GRADE AvERAGES FOR CLASS OF 1962 Grades Students Per Cent 95-100 0 0 90-95 20 12 85-89 65 38 80-84 60 35 75-79 13 7.5 70-74 13 9.5 Total 77 100 Whatever Happened to the Cla.ss of 1962? I 215 ( 2) the Low Graduate group of twenty- seven students ( 13 per cent) whose Drexel average was lowest at the time of the study, ( 3) the High Undergradu- ate group of thirty-five students ( 16 per cent) whose undergraduate average was highest and ( 4) the High Graduate group of thirty-three students ( 15 per cent) whose Drexel average was highest in the study. The first finding was that 40 per cent of the High Undergraduate group stu- - dents were also in the High Graduate group. The corresponding generalization also held true that 40 per cent of the Low Undergraduate group were in the Low Graduate group, and this suggested that undergraduate grade average was a good predictor of graduate grade av- erage. Nevertheless, there were a few cases where the student jumped from low to high group or fell from high to low group. At the time of the study 25 per cent of those in the Low Undergraduate group had already graduated, while 43 per cent of those in the High Under- graduate group had graduated, the chances for graduation for the first group being somewhat poorer than those for the second group, one in four to three in seven. Of the students in the High Graduate group, half had already graduated and half were Inactive or had withdrawn, a consistent but discouraging percentage. This means that half of the scholastically most promising group of graduate stu- dents had dropped out of the program within five years of their admittance. Of the students in the Low Graduate group, all were inactive, had withdrawn or been dropped by the school, a complete loss, but not so surprising or disappointing. For those in the Low Undergraduate group, the Drexel grade average was 81.4 per cent and for those in the High Undergraduate group, the Drexel aver- age was 87.0 per cent, suggesting that undergraduate average was a good pre- dictor of library school grade average in this instance. Other studies have some times confirmed this finding and other times refuted it.1 o Table 8 shows the undergraduate av- erages for Pratt students. Obviously, their grades were somewhat higher than those of Drexel students, which tends to support the previous finding that Pratt was somewhat more selective in admis- sions than Drexel. Pratt undergraduate averages were analyzed for their Withdrawals, Dis- missed, and Graduate groups. Both the Graduated and the Withdrawals aver- aged B, though the former was a some- 10 Janet Weber, "Success in Graduate School," Journal of Higher Education, XIII (January 1942 ), 19-24; Wright, op. cit., p. 79; Paul Munger, "Can We Really Predict Who Will Graduate from College?" College and University, XXXII (Winter 1957), 218-21. TABLE 8 UNDERGRADUATE GRADE AvERAGEs FOR PRATT AND DREXEL CLASSES OF 1962 DREXEL PRATT GRADES Students Per Cent Students Per Cent A and A- 6 4 9 8 Bt 28 17 23 20 B 46 28 32 27 B- 19 11 15 13 Ct 26 15 22 19 c 24 14 14 12 C- 19 11 2 1 Total 168 100 117 100 216 I College & Research Libraries • May, 1967 what stronger B than the latter. The Dismissed averaged C+, confirming the above findings for Drexel. For both the Pratt and Drexel gradu- ating groups, three-fifths finished within two years of their admission, so they must have been taking at least a half course load each quarter. Since only fourteen Drexel students are still en- rolled, this suggests that only a few members of the class have attended Drexel at the rate of only one course at a time and still have a chance to gradu- ate. No Pratt student is still struggling toward the degree. Because the number of Drexel students actually taking only one course at a time during the period was relatively large, however, perhaps one-fourth to one-half of the student body each quarter, the Inactive group apparently included a significant per- centage of one-course-at-a-time students. Or, apparently the chances of graduating instead of becoming inactive were much higher if you were a full-time or at least a half-time student than if you took a smaller course load each quarter. In sup- International Library (Continued f1'om page 207) volved. It is after all not enough merely to offer good library services. They must be presented to the user in such a way that he c.an understand their value to him and, furthermore, be able to use them himself. Teaching the reader to use the collection and to take full ad- vantage of the services offered is one of the most important tasks currently facing the special library for, as emphasis is porting this conclusion Rosenhaupt found part-time graduate students at Columbia to have completed fewer course hours and to have had poorer chances of earning degrees than full- ~ time students, 75 per cent of those earn- / ing degrees doing so within two years of entrance, and 90 per cent after three years. 11 Admissions Problems. A conclusion to be drawn from this study is that admis- ,. sions procedures for selecting students who would eventually graduate needed -~ improvement in both schools in 1961. With only · 44 per cent graduated from Drexel and 54 per cent from Pratt, the dropout rate was high. While a certain percentage of these dropouts were be- _. cause of low grades, apparently many were not. The schools needed not only to improve techniques of selecting per- sons qualified to carry out graduate course work successfully but also to choose students who would stay with the program until graduation. •• 11 Rosenhaupt, op . cit. , p. 37. placed increasingly upon the new infor- mation systems, the reader must not be forgotten. Regardless of nationality, the needs of individuals are best satisfied when they can help themselves, for they ~" alone know what they really want. The • successful library is still the one in which the reader can do this as much as pos- sible. ••