OCR Text |
Show s Clustering shows results sometimes showed less concern for greater student freedom and participation in cirriculum and academic policy decisions. The students who came from ' the single high school did not enjoy the program as much as those from the 16 different schools. They felt the system was limiting and would not allow them to break from the social roles carried over from high school. Both clustered and non-cluster students showed an increased committment toJudaeo-Christian beliefs. They felt a closely knit college community was important and that the number of pass-fail courses should be increased. i BY GAYEN BENNETT j:' Staff Writer t What would happen if we put 1 all tne incoming freshmen l; together in classes and kept them !; together so they would get to imow a certain group of students i; very well? This question was asked by Charles Monson Jr., a philosophy professor and the 't Social Academic vice president of f- the University. He, along with the director of Institutional Studies, ,!: Claude Grant, Prof. Sydney si Angleman, Dean of Students F Virginia Frobes, Dean Oakley K Gordon and others undertook an :- experiment to discover what the t. results of such a program would k be. iv The "Cluster Program" as it.' was called. began in Fall quarter, 1967. Two groups of freshmen who were non-committed as to major were selected without their knowledge to be the guinea pigs. There were seven sections of students. Each section went through three general education classes together. A control group was matched by projected grade point average with the Cluster group but took classes at random. The purpose of the study was to see how this clustering of students would effect their grades, their perception of University life, and their ability to make friends. The results seemed discouraging. From tests given before and after the program it was found that the clustered students got lower grades in comparison with their non-clustered counterparts. They found the University community less friendly, congenial and cohesive. The reason given for the unexpected results were that the time was too short to gain new friends and that old friends who had registered together had been separated into different sections.. Going on the fact that similar programs had succeeded at other colleges, the organizers were encouraged to try again. This time they would invite freshmen to join the program and it would last for two quarters instead of one. They took the experiment a step further by inviting 20 students from a single high school, Olympus, and 20 more students from sixteen different high schools within the state. This would show whether a common school background would have any bearing on the success of the Cluster program. For a control group they asked twenty students from Skyline and Highland, schools similar to Olympus, and twenty students from sixteen different high schools. The results of this experiment were very encouraging. It was found that the clustered students saw the University as a more personal, warm, and congenial place. They were also more aware of the cultural aspect and the principle of education for education's sake. The non-clustered students saw the University merely as an instrument for getting a job after graduation. The clustered Students were more concerned with scholarship than the non-clustered students although no difference in grades was noticed. An open-mindedness and tolerance of ambiguity was noticed to develop among the clustered students. It was found that the clustered group became less autonomous and more conforming. They |