DOCUMENT RESUME ED 132 992 95 · 2014-01-27 · DOCUMENT RESUME. 95. JC 770 029. Fall 1975 Entering Students Not Continuing in the same Community College in Fall 1976. Student Flow

ED 132 992

TITLE

INSTITUTIONSPONS AGENCYPUB DATE'NOTE

DOCUMENT RESUME

95 JC 770 029

Fall 1975 Entering Students Not Continuing in thesame Community College in Fall 1976. Student FlowProject, Report No. 17.Hawaii Univ., Honolulu. Community Coll. System.Office of Education (DREW), Washington, D.C.Dec 7683p.; Best copy available

EDRS PRICE MF-$0.83 HC-$4.67 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS community Colleges; Demography; Dropout Attitudes;

Dropout Characteristics; *Dropout Research;*Dropouts; Employment Patterns; *Followup Studies;*Junior Colleges; Longitudinal Studies; ParticipantSatisfaction; Questionnaires; *State Surveys;Transfer Students

IDENTIFIERS *Hawaii

ABSTRACT-A questionnaire was sent to 2,045 students who had

entered Hawaii community colleges in fall 1975, continued theirenrollment in spring 1976, but who did not enroll in fall 1976 for athird semester. The purpose of the questionnaire was to obtain dataon reasons for non-continuance, to obtain information on the fall1976 activities of non-continuing students and on their futureeducational plans, and to provide non-continuing students with anopportunity to evaluate their community college experience. A totalresponse rate of 43% was achieved. Results of data analysisindicated: (1) major reasons for non-continuance were transfer toanother college (24%), work preference (15%), and desired classesunavailable (15%) ; (2) 56% of the respondents were working in fall1976 while 27% were attending another school; (2) 50% indicated plansto continue their-education in spring 1977 and 13% planned tocontinue at a later time; and (4) the best average ratings ofcharacteristics of the college experience were for friendship withother students and for instruction, while the lowest rating was forthe variety of courses available. Tabular data are presentedthroughout the report. Additionally, data are analyzed according toinstitution, non-continuing student demographic characteristics, andtype of educational program. (JDS)

* Documents acquired by ERIC include many informal unpublished *

* materials not available from other sources. ERIC makes every effort ** to obtain the best copy available. Nevertheless, items of marginal ** reproducibility are often encountered and this affects the quality *

* of the microfiche and hardcopy reproductions ERIC makes available* via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS). EDRS is not *

* responsible for the quality of the original document. Reproductions ** supplied by EPRS are the best that can be made from the original. ** *********************************************************************

FALL 1975

DI ME SAME

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OFEDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO-DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN.ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONSSTATED OD NOT NECESSARILY REPRE-$ENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OFEDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY

COLLEGE FALL 1976

BEST C' Y AVAILABLE

17

Student Fl_ Project

DeoeMber 1976

Office of the Chancellor for Community CollegesEducational Services Division

University of Bauaii

The activity which is the subject of this report was supported in partby the U.S. Office of Education, Department of Health, Education, andWelfare. However, the opinions expressed herein do not necessarilyreflect the position or policy of the U.S. Office of Education, and noofficial endorsement by the U.S. Office of Education should be inferred.

A. Introdu

1. Purposes and Analysis of the Survey2. AcImini = ation of the Questionnaire

B. The Returns

C.

*

1 Rate of Return2. Representativeness of Returns

anization of This

D. Findings: Community College TOtal

6 6 000 o ..

9

1. Main Reasons for Not Continuing in Fall 1976 .2. Spring 1976 Work Status of Re ts .

3. CUrrent (Fall 1976) Activities of Res dents4. FUture Educational Plans . . .

5. EValuation of Compunity College Expeience

E. Findin Highligh

6 * 0

* @ 0

6 0 6 @

* * 0

* 0 0 0

1. Hawaii Coxnunity College . . .

2. Honolulu Community College . A 4

3. Xapiolani Community College . .

4. Kauai Camunity College . . ....5. Leeward Community College . . . .

6. Meui Community College . 6060 60.06000667. Windward Community College . 4 0 6 4 4 4 4 0

1

12

2

2

4

4

8

9

1618

20

2122242829

3234

F. Summary and Conclusion 35

APPENDIX AA-1 to8-1 to B,7C-1 to C-7D-1 to D-7E-1 to E-7F-1 to F-7G-1 to G-7B-1 to H-7

The4606 In olio@Data for C mnnity College Tbtal .

Data for Hawaii Community CollegeData for Honolulu Cbmmunity College .Data for Kapiolani Community CollegeData for Kauai Community College . .

Data for Leeward Community College .

Data for Maui Community College . .

Data for Windward Community College .

394050535659626568

1

2

3.

4.

5

6.

7.

LIST OF TABLES

Pa9e

Retns, bycaspus*

000 2

Representativeness Data: Catpaxison of RespQ ts and Non-Raspents, by Campus and Characteristics 00 09009

Reasons for Not C-tim.iing Enrolhrent by Program 4

Top Two Reasons for Non-Continuance Char istics 7

Spring 1976 Work of rogram 8

Spring 1976 Work cperienoes of Respondents, by Selected _ac -

teristics, Group with the Highest Percenta . . 9

Current Activities of ts by 9

8. Two CurrentAclAmities of Respondents, by Selected Charac-teristics . .......... 11

9. -ts Who Are Wbr

10. Respondents Who Are zrid

-tions, by Progr 12

Occupations, byCharacteristics 13

11. Respondents Who Are Wbrking: Full-/Part-Time, by Program 13

12.

13.

Who Are Working: Wbrk/Study Relationships, by* 000900 6000 00000 990 . 14

Who Are Attending Another School: School Selected,. 15O 9 99006600960064 90

14. Repthnts Mo Are Attending Another School: Transfer ofCiadits, by Program . . 00999 909969 90009 16

15. Future Educational Plans, by Program . ''' . 17

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Tbp asons for Not Continuing in Fall 1976, by ProTr

2. Current Activities of

A Evaluaticn Ra

, by

Our quest! rriaiie for non-continuing students in Fall 1976 was sent to

2,045 students. These are students who entered in Fall 1975,who continuedenrollment in Spring 1976,but who did not enroll in Fall 1976 for their third

semestPr (These 2,045 ,y1:.t-continiang students were a part of the 8,979 who

tered in Fall 1975 and the 5,503 who continued in Spring 1976.)

1 Purposes and Ana1s of the Su_Icza

We had several purposes for surveying the 2,045 students who did not

continue their education in Fall 1976 although they had been in attendance

the previcus semester:

a. to obtain data on reasons for non-continuance during the third

semester;

to get in±oniation on the Fall 1976 activities of non-continuing

students and on their future educational plans;

c. to provide nan-continuing students with an o rthnity to evaluate

their community oollege experience and to ofimproving their colleges.

er suggestions for

We realize that non-cantiming students generally have low rates of

returns on questionnaires (of.:entimes below 30 percent, according to the

professional literature). We hoped to attain at least a 30 percent return

for the community college total. We know that the seven community collegeswill vary in their 1.turn rates, but a 25 percent rate was set as the

minimum level for analysis.

Our analysis for this report will include:

a. data on represents tiveness for eadh campus by compar. ng respondents

and non-respcents, by sex, age, marital status, high sdhool

background, entry status, educational Objective, program, cumv1Ptive

grade point average and cumulative credits earned.

b. summaries of responses to eadh question for the total and eadh of

the seven community colleges.

c. statistical tests of significance to indicate characteristics onwhich respondents differ significantly in their responses. (SPSS

will be used.) Analysis will be conducted only of those characteristics

on which respondents are representative of the non-continuing population.

Computer reports for each of the community colleges and for the total will

be prepared, by characteristics where there is representativeness. The

complete set of computer reports for a campus will be sent to its Dean of Students.

1Fall 1976 etirollimnt figures are based on the first registra

ember 24, 1976).

-2-

2. Administrati Questi

Questionnaires were mailed, first class, to 2,045 non-continuing students

on September 27, 1976. (See Appendix A for a copy of the questionnaire.) Alsoincluded were stamped return envelopes and individual campus letters, signedby the Provost, urging the student to respond.

After a two-week period, a list of non-so telephone follow-up calls could be ma__

B . The

ts was sent to eai

1. te f turn

The data in Table I indicate that during the twoweek per cd after mailing,

614 questionnaires were received, representing a 30 percent return. fter

campus follow-up phone calls, an additional 267 questionnaires were completed,

for a totaL return of 881 students or 43 percent.2 Undeliverable questionnaires

totaled 87 or 4 percent.

TWEE 1

rerums, BY CAMPOSaFALL 1976 SURVEY CF - TTINrJD slumns

Caspi Non-Cont.Students

Sept. 27 - Oct. 11 Oct. 12 - Ott. 29 Tbtal.

tuirn ReL.. Is

2 045 614 0% 267 881 43% 87 4%.

149 28 19% 14 9% -42 28% 15 10%

HOnolulu CC 350 119 34% 63 18% 182 52% 13 4%

Kapiblani CC 500 164 33% 78 IS% 242 48% 22 4%

Kauai CC 93 28 30% 9 10% 37 40% 1 1%

Leeward CC 612 178 29% 65 11% 243 40% 20 3%

Maui CC 185 45 24% 25 14% 70 38% 5 3%

Windward CC 156 52 33% 13 8% 65 42% 11 7%

aAfter the deadline for receipt of goes icnnsires

bincludes four students who were deceased.

75 forse

2 .

-The Lg. 1976 /lon-Continuing Survey had a return of 36 percent.

(Student Flow Projeck Report Nb.

6

-3-

The telephene follow-up calls by each of the community colleges wereresponsible for raising the rate of return from 30 to 43 percent. Honolulu,

iolani and Maui were especially successful in their follow-up efforts.

teworthy are the differences airrng campuses in their rates of return:Honolulu Community College had 52 percent of its non-continuing studentsresponding while Hawaii had 28 percent. The remaining colleges had ratesthese two extremes. Neighbor Island colleges had lower rates than those on Oahuexcept for Kauai and Leeward which had identical rates (40 percent).

2. tiveness of Returns

ts and non-respondents wererepresentativeness data. The results are surrrnarized in Table 2

indicates

on various characteristics

a. respondents for the total and for each of the seven community collegeswere representative of the non-continuing population, by age, entrytatus, educational objective and program.

b. respondents for Hawaii and Maui community colleges were representativeof their non-continuing groups on all characteristics.

MI,E 2cavmusou OF RFCMAIWS

__ CAMPUS ND 0-MWCrEIUM7C3FALL 1976 SURVEY cr Nai-cacuiarc

significance are denoted thus: .051 ** .01 level, .00l lava.

aOrcterittc Tutdl ILdi CC FioJJ11U cc : Kemi_pC leeward

SexAgeMarital StatusHigh School Backgr.Entvy Statut___aducatirrol ab3.

ProgrtmGrade Point A.Create Warned

*

***ort.*

C. 0m2Dization of This ReRREt

We will focus primarily on the community college total since theof Students on each campus will be sent its detailed computer reports summarizingthe responses of its non-continuing students, by various characteristics. However,we will include a brief summary of campus highlights and present seven tablesfor each campus in the appendix section.

7

-4--

Since respondents were iepresentative of the non-continuing population,by program, on each campus and for the total, we will summarize the responsesto each item, hy program. This will also enable us to nake comparisons, whenfeasible, with the results of the 4ing 1976 NOn-Ciontinuing Survey (StudentFlow Project, Report No. 9).

Included in 1ppendices Al through Al2 are tables summarizing rEch question, by campus. These aid the reader to perceive quickly

range of reactions among non-continuing students from the seven colleges.

D. Findings: Carrnunity College Total

Data in Table 2 show that respondents were representative of the totalnon-continuing population, by age, marital status, entry status, educationalobjective and program. We analyzed responses to the various questions in termsof these characteristics. This summary, however, will highlight the responsesof students, by program.

1. Main Reasons for Not Continuing in Fall 1976

Students were asked to select one of ten reasons for not continuingenrollment in Fall 1976. The data, hy program, in Table 3 indicate that:

a. the most commonly-selected reasons were: '(1) transfer to an:)thercollege (206 students; 24 percent), (2) work preference (132 students;15 percent) and (.:,) desired classes unavailable (130 students; 15percent).

b. the chief reasons were different for students in the various programs.For example, 152 (34 percent) liberal arts majors chose "transferredto another college" while only 1 student in hotel/food services didPreference for work appealed to students especially in hotel/foodservices, technology and business. The unavailability of desiredclasses was the top reason for technology and unclassified students.It is interesting to note that 24 students (57 percent) in healthservices had "achieved their goal" at the end of two semesters.(See Figure 1.)

99A9_CDUNI

IACH vEDCt1AMGEDTRAH5P tit CL A 5555.____PPEFER NCti-GL CALl Xf-RACNALAattiERV_1 GOAL OCAL 90 uoAvAIL ro vowK 1,900LEA Exm4usrp PRooLems REASONS TOTAL

I I 2 1 I 1 4 1 9 1 tO 1 11 1 12 1 13 1 14 1

VELE 3

REASONS FOR NOT CONTINUING ENROLLMENT, wt, PCaliJNITY COLLEGE TOTAL

0 1 0-1 A k__ __FL I 0 _1- 0 1 L_ L_ 0 1- 0 1 0__-1----_0__INO DAT A I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 6.0 I 0.0 I 100,0 t 0.0 I 0.0 I 0 o0 I 0.0 I=I- -s sg ___s_l_ ..1 _ 1.. _ 1_ _ c t I _ ,1=,, 1 t

_l_____t 7 _1 24 1 152 1_ _ _67 _1 :66_ ,L, _23 1_ =33____1 -17* =1 i6 1--- -64 1 462,-----1_099AL_ARI_S 1 __La 0_ 1 5 . 4 1 -34..4_ L. 12.0 I_ 13.3 1 *4.3_1 7_4 4 1 -A. 4_1 5 ...43_ 1 .14_._4 ___L 5_06 t

2 I 3 1 11 I 2 3 I IA I 34 I 9 1 19 1 4 I 20 I 24 t 165----131131P1E-33 6.7_ J _20.6=1_5 5 _ __1 i-AE=1 =2.-4=A I __LB IS

3 I 24 I I I 3 I 3 I I I I I 0 I 1 I 4 I I*19041114 SERVI0E51_257114-a2:41____7.1 I._ 7.1 _1 2.4 _11_ 2.4 ti___..0.10--1-=2.4_1__ 905 1.,. g.;_ 1

41_ 2.1 11 11 IC- 71 1_1_ --2:11 1L11.---;--1- I_----k0/61-1-P000 svs 1 t.5 1 4.9 ' 4.9 1 g.5 I 33.5 I 4*.t t 3.5 1 4.5 I 4.5 1 14" 12-.1

1= 1__ i ___ _t __.:.___t_ r___-__ t__ _ =__ t=

c 1 1 c c 1

0- -1 A___. 4-1.- 10 _1 5- I 7 1 4 X _1- _1b _t. 0 1 111-=-51----==e1411-ITC775PW-RL9 I- 90 1 -- 91 ---I- 213- 1 -10.2- I- 3,1- -1, 1-2*77. -1 -7-....1.. 1--44 -I 14* 5.-- I-a0.-0-----1-- 6 01_nI --n- =1-- :1- I-- 1- -I 1- -I- -I-- =1

6 1 3 I 6 t 15 I 21 c 20 1 5 1 4 1 3 1 3 1 6 1 90TX_VIAOLQU._ _l_3.._4 .1 _6.01_ l _IT . 0_ r ._ _ 23. 2, _, t ._32..7_ 1 __St 7_ - I__ 4* 5 - --I- ---24-9.-1 --*S-11.==t h'L 5 r,=-1.42*-.6- -=

0 -1-----;--1-----7-*- -5--1- =14-11--- -i-1- --;'- 1 1---7----1---------J-------1-1 1 1 I I 0 1 61OTPER 1 9*0 1 1.0 1 131.1 1 3101- 1 06Z I 0.0 1 3.3 1 1.6 t *4.4 t 16.4 t 6.9

3o 1 z3.9 145 15.0 7.16 I. 0.3 12.9 leo.*4_9 106 130_ 151 _ 4__ ir4 - ..--1-3 -=..=.-----L-.3 122 ___3Z3____

AL

ITOP

FIGURE 1

FOR WIT I+ITEIJING IN FALL 1976, BY PROGRAM

-5-

Trannfer to anotber school 24%

(878) Prefer to work 15%

Desired classesunavailable

15%

rsnsfer to another_ _ -1 34%

(445) Other 14% .

Prefer to work 14%

21%

(165) Other 15%

Transfer toamather schcol

14%

Achieved goal 57%

Health Sevice (42) reasons

Otr 10%

Prefer ha work

s 2

14%

Other 20%

Pdb1ic Services_ (55)Desired classes i

unavailable 18%

Personal reasons 15%

Desired classesunavailable 24%

Prefer to work 23%

ther : chco117%

_Desired classes unavailable 31%

Other (62) Other 16%

r---[ Personal reasons 15%

-6-

We also analyzed the specifics for "unavailability of desired classes."Of the 127 students who selected this reason, the following details provideelaboration:

Percent

39 31%56 44%3 2%

29 23%

Lisclass closedclass hour conflicted with work hoursclass hour conflicted with another classcollege doesn't offer course

We studied the reasons for not continuing enrollment in Fall 1976 by othercharacteristics. A summary of the top two reasons, by these characteristics,is found in Table 4:

a. respondents differed in their reasons, by educational objective3age, marital status, entry status and current activity.

b. ths main reason for students, by educational objective was: (1) A.A.degrees, transfer to another college; (2) A.S. degrees, work pre erence;(c) certificates, goal achievement and (4 ) unclassified students,unavailability of desired classes.

c. younger respondents, especially those below 22 years at entry, selectedtransfer as the most common reason, while those between 25-29 choseunavailability of desired classes and those over 29, "unable to attend;G.I. Bill exhausted."

d. a greater proportion of transfer students than new students selectedtransfer as their reason for non-continuance, and more new studentspreferred to go to work.

e. respondents who are currently employed selected Work preferenceand unavailability of desired classes as their top reasons fornon-continuance.

TT

uci

am110 ZZ suOseaa Tau0saad ST

uwaIqx-Id IPTE'aq E paqsnElixa TXTU 1D ET

:smorrog gegupdsza puooes go_

. Wk4 smaTqqad TuTOuvuu OT

aouaaagaad Naom LT 44TTPluvreauun ssup 8

. aageu2a1 E Twob PoWEND I

oma. Paoro-Wo slTzePrqs

%82

Wg %69 %fg %0Z

We

%T9

%sr TZ ZEZ IS

06V LL

IL8

au410 Tooirog 5uTpu91

rucusuocisaa amori 5,434.2014

_

Naqm aoa E(Ipp ***A4. TWV lualiRD

wr TSZ

LZ9 81.8

aegumAL mati

%- %61 %Of

V

98Z 885 8L8

=MO __ =241

aTfluTS

&4S Tu4TaeR

..

%

%Se %Zi: ZR1

zr Z

8ZZ 96 L9

OET

LSE 81.8

6Z =AO 6Z-SZ VZ-ZZ TZ-6T

61 PoTaG ***a0V

z9r

%pr

6

%9I %

19 06

08Z 4VV 8L8

10440 a4v,JIJT4300 'SW "IV"V

*WPC TvuoTluonEla

---7;;;5EM1a 2_ 8L8

%Pr ZZI

%9 Et

za ET

z

V9 zs VT

ZET T

OET %Pe 90Z

%9

6 SP

%COE

8L8

a6u4uaoaaa Tu4q1.

Z1N Te44Z

a o a a U a 'ON

"TelioT TOO *** qmeT TO" * go* :oomairramo-uou D suoseaa bucum huTauTquexe.73Tp UT

_ gTubTu 4LLuoT4sTlulu aaam LIPT4,4 50T1sTauqouaolD asolp ao; ATuo pequasaad eau ulua :OWN

U101 =MOD MW 11331,0212S AS 'aDNWINIMOD-NON HO L MI V TIMM,

-L-

-8-

2. _Spring 1976 Wprk Sta

Students were asked what their work status in Spring 1976 had(a ) 300 students (35 percent) had worked All-time; (b) 316 students 37 percent)had worked part-time and (c) 249 students (29 percent) had not wc.rked.

Data in Table 5 Show that students, by program, differed in their Spring1976 work experiences. An extremely high proportion of students in pUblioservices (39 students, 71 percent) worked full-time. The range of studentswho wor --time was 52 percent in hotel/food services to 18 percent inhealth services and public services.

TABLE 5-

SPRING 1976 EXPERIENCES OF RESPUIDENTs, BY PCOMMUNITY COLLEGE TOTAL

576WORK_mum- A _

R W PCT YES =-- YE5 --rIFULLTIME PARTTIME TOTAL

1 I 2 I 3

OATA0 / 0

t 0.0 t 0.0 1 100.0 I 0.1

1_125 I 185 ._1_30

-- _11§1_cPAL ARTS _1_211_0_4 __ I __42_.- I- --- -- 1 -

2 I 64 I 57 1 40 1 161J311151_14K55 L 39.5_ I____.1-,.4 1 _2.4_,B____1I,6

_t- --- t----3 I 12 I 7 I 21 AO

HEALTH SERVICES I 30.0 I 17.5 I 52.5 1 4.6

4 I A I _ _ L-----0---1-----21HOTEt FOOD 5V5 I 19.0 I 52.4 I 28.6 1 2.4

-I- -I 1-------°I5 1 39 1 ___ID__L et_ I__55

P 0 C ERVICES 1 70_09 F 10.2 I LA-9I_ /6 I 28 I 34 1 24

TECHNOLOGY I 32.6_I9AE :17.

1 12OTHER 1 45.9 1 19.7

I--'COLUMN .346TOTAL 34. 3608

1 21 F 61I 141.4 I 7.1

--I -1----,_249 stss

28.8 100.0

__RAW CHI SQUARE 60.2,6073 WITH J DEGRAE5 F FREE N F C a_a._000_0

The results of further analysis, by chara istics, are sutmarized in

Table 6. We found high proportions of the following groups of non-continuingstudents had worked full-time in Spring 1976: students seeking A.S. degreesand unclassified students, students over 29 years at entry, married students,transfer students and students currently (Fel 1976) employed. Among thegroup who did not work were students in health services, students seekingcertificates and students 19-21 years of age at entry.

-9-

IZ 6SPRING 1976 AERIE EXWMERICES cr RESPONDENTS, Br scum7rEp CHA-RALTERES=3

MTH THE HIGHEST PERZENDNMCEMMUSITY COLLEGE TOM

Note: Data are presented only for those chardifferentiating amOng Spring 1976 wrrk

istics which were statistically aignificant inirieHi .05 level, ** .01 level, 5** .001

7ni "77. -..,, In '17 "77

Group IGr

Total Neater 300 316 249

TOW Percentacsa 5$ 37% 89%

Aok 72% Pda_ 581 Hotel/Food Services Neath ServicesEducational ChM** 46 A.S., Other 42% A.A. 49% CertificateA.0444 Over 29 Years 55% Delco 19 Years JOS 19-21 Years

Marital Status*** Married 49% Single 30% Single

Entry Statue*** 4 Transfer 20% NeW 31$ NewCurrent Activity*** 3 itodting 51% Atbeni Other Soh001 73% Other

CUrrent Mall 1976) Activities of Responden

Over our-fifths of the respondents are either working (492 students;

56 percent) or attending another school (232 students; 27 percent). Respondents

by program, differ in their current activities as indicated in Table 7 and

illustrated in Figure 2:

a. great prcortons of students in public serviand health services (70 percent) are wor

s (73

b. many students in the liberal-arts are working (221; 50 percent) or

are attending another college (167; 38 percent).

c. 77 students (9 percent of ts) are looking for vitirk.

TABLE 7

cuIRENT AT IVITIES OF RESPONDENTS, BY PROGRN1OXFLNITY COLLEGE TOTAL

Cess4crcoutur__L

!Foe wesK RONSIOIL SCHOOL1 1 21 3 1 4

144.10 RP_

NO DATA

5TOTAL

----0_1, _0 1 1 _

I 100.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0=1-- =1- 1 .. = 1 t /

1=1 2g 1-___ 22 L _L9 ,7_ -/ 9 1

_L-1101.1441 -1- 6_05 149._? _,I _4.._,L_L____3/ i_5_,I=.2.01 a g

2 1

11

3 IHCALTH SERVICES

NortL. FOOD 5VS I

.P.t./.21._LC_SERV_LCES_ 117_

18 1 101 1 14 1 32 I/1.0.--4.-,62.0-.1-.6-19..6,---1...0,_-1-121.5

I

5 1 28 1 3 1 4 1 0 1 4012.5 1 70.0 1 7.5 1 10.0 1 0.0 1 4.6

. _/__I____1L--1 J ,t _.3

26.0 1 52.4 I 4.0 1 14:3 1

v: -1 -1-

LA,o,5 --A-Z.1a 1173.41

6 1 11 1 57 1 4 1 12 1

...-EChNOLOGY I17,6 1 J18._$ .La b __I

6 1 % 1 34 1 1 Q 1

1 3.1 1 54.8 1 12.9 1 14.5 1onlen

1 2.4

L _I 55-

-6 1 629.7 1 7.1

-,C.OLUPIN 7T 493 51 ØJTOTAL 0.8 56* Kee a.5 100.0

FIGURE 2

CURRENT ACTIVITIES OF RESPONDENTS, BY PROGRAM

-10-

Students differ in their current activities, by educational objective,age, maTital status and entry status. Data in Table 8 show that the top twocurrent activities are generally "work" and "transfer" but the proportions ofstudents engaged in these activities differ, by characteristics. For example,the range of students who are working in Fall 1976, by age, is 75 percent ofthose over 29 years of age to 43 percent of those below 19.

Tx= 8

RESPCKENTS, BY ITh ammennwnpe(3:24tIRTY MIL= TOTAL

Vistas Data are pommeTbad only for those charactexistics whichstatiatically significant in differentiating =Ong currentactivities; * .05 level, ** .01 level, ** .001 level.

Cameutistica Ha. I.

874 77 492 51 232 22

100% n en e% 27% n

* 874 T la 7

Indocatiimal Obj.*** 874

A.A. 447 SO 272

A.S. 276 en 161

Certificate 89 171 65%

otJ 62 SS% In

87419 355 43% '

130 in22-24 87 en In25-29 95 00%

Over 29 227

Malta' Sliatua*** 874

angle 586 en inMarried 284 79% InCther 4

tntry Statue° 874

Nele 626 25%

Transfer 248 20%

aScae shaleats checked two cOrrent ectivitfollows: 3 wmk_ing'

35 having ham responsibilities58 attending school8 other

bacludes slip-cute (16).

es; a of

Additional questions were answered by stud ts who are working or.are attending another institution in Fall 1976. Their responses are summarizedbelow.

a. Respondents Who Are Employed (492 students; 56 percent)

Employed students were asked to indicate (1) their title or position,(2) their work status (full- or part-time) and (3) the relationshipbetween their work and community college studies.

-12-

Data in Table 9 show that employed students were concentrated in

two types of work: service occupations (155; 36 percent) and

clerical/sales occupations (137; 31 percent).3 Students, by program,

differed in their occupations. For example, clerical/sales work was

the top occupation for students who majored in business and liberal

arts, while service occupations led among students in health services

arx çublic services.

AMY !TLCCflLIT I

IPREEITEC__C,LEFtICAL- SERVICE-F_ARMING--__PROCC5s- pinto NE_AILNUI_ _VIIK'tI 4 NM% 4 SALIES OCCUP f tspiGrao (NG acct. Tivas3 wctitx ace OCCLP TQTAL

I 1 1 2 1 3 t 4 1 5 t 6 I 7 1 a I 9 1

---111LJORP, _ , - 1 , _ L 2 2 - 1 - , _ T L :45 1 2 _i_ L .L__ 4 1 771 I -i Lf: fill I. 721F0777L1FIERAL ARTS I 11.5 t 35.11 I 2.7.s : t .1j I 0.5 1 4.5 1 1.et I 3.5 1 15.0 1 44.a

I-- --- f.- I- -I-=--= I ==-- = I-=, ... I -= -I - -I I-7 I 11. 1 55 / al. 1_ 0 ,-1.-- I i_- 1. _I. -0 1 .3._- I 11 -1-_,-..1.1

-611-1 iitf39 L _11.11---1- - 4 a -A. 1-zz.6_- _L R .0_ -L___,1.1-__L___A.L I 0 .0_,-1--L-3AZ- IA --- -I - --- -T 1==- 1=

RE

TABLE 9

E OCCLPATICIS, BYCat/LNITY COUXGE TOTAL

1- ---- I - -_-I3 I 2 I I 1 24 1 0 I 0 1 0 1 C I 0 3 0 I V7

11.0-41.TIERV-LC 63-1 2' 4 --L_.-- -31-1-5134 a - 1 _ _ A ,,a_ 1 /3,0_--1 -,*1-*-0 I _-.12 .0- .f_- -0 & ; . t.t_. ..C...A._ 1..-1.=_L- -- I 77 l 77- -1- = _.i 7 7- =- -= 7 771. - =... -L- = -I--

4 1 f) I i 1 7 I 0 1 1 I 0 I 0 1 0 1 1 I 19

HOTEL V F000 SV5 1 0*0 1 20.0 I 70.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 / 0.0 I 0.0 I 10.0 I 2.2

3 1 4 L=.1c!L I_ b r 0-1-_-_--0-1--_--1----1---1-----0--1.--3-0-=EUOLIC SERVICES I 6.0 I 6.4 I 79.4 I n.o t 0.0 t 040 I 2*9 I 0.0 1 9.0 I 7.6

I I I --.- -= -I- -16 L 4 1 I I -1 A.1- 1. 2_ 1 1 1 7 1 ---4 1 aL_-- 9 L

--Mt 1_.____L-2i..7=2.kas2--.1 -1-d IL---L-1--.-9--- 1.--t_aa

a i 4 1 5 I i0 1 I I 0 t 2 t I t 0 1 2 1 3 0

.Otte-R----. L.-mu o_.._ t 16.2 -1=25a 3 3. 5_1_0 o__. i 6 .:7_ 1 _ff,.. iii_ _ 0 .,0_u_os k-t____ ..1_15,2_

cOLLMN t 57 155 6 5 I 9 a 14 33 444

TOTAL 30.7 34.6 1.1 0.7 4.3 loa 3e1 11.4 $00.0

_RAN_CH.L_Sauelge_l_LAR 3__Aciati_:*fra 12_6/t 22-3- _a_f__Eitagb_914_ __61WILIgANs... 1:10.0CTIM___

lysis of the occupations of rking respondents

istics, is shown in Table 10 which summarizes thetwo occupations for each group. In most instances, service andclerical/sales occupations predominated, although some unclassifiedstudents and students over 29 years of age at entry were engaged

in professional/technical/managerial work.

Of employed students, 70 percent were working pal-time. This wasespecially true of students who majored in health services and

business. Many students who majored in public services workedpart-time. (Table 11)

ed on U.S.third edition (1965

16

Di,

Note: Data areeignificant*** .001 level.

15.02 10

TAU =ORATIONS. BYCatITNIT-1 CCILUZE 3=1.

only for those dracteriBtica which were atatiocellyemit-toting among occupations; *.05 level, ** .01 level,

tharactexis

r -----f

H. I

TOW Number 446 52 137 155 5 3 19 8 14 53

'fetal Prnth 100% 1E% 31% 55% 4% 3% la

446 Se Thble 91 _11

Educaticrial C133.° 446A.A. 201 36% 27%

A.S. , 161 27% 39%

Certificate 54 35% 52%

Other 30 30% 33%

--,

446138 462 30%

19-21 61 36% 34%

22=24 39 21% 51%

25=29 59 20% 44%

Over 29 149 22% 22% 52%

Marital Ste 446'

Single 272 35% 36%

Perried 173 22% 34%

OtI 1

TABLE 11

RESPONDENTS *HOARE VEERING;

_COUNT1113aP_CFAILLTIAT-___EARTfl148 R Ow

TOTAL1 1 1 2 1

1121.1Gr1P = -L1 64.3 1 33.5 1 45.2

/

2=1 77 1==i7-

3 t 21 T 4 I 25

01141.117Y MEE= TY3ITIL

WORKSTAT

BY

,

1.16211.41. APTS

A / 7 1 4 t

Haul. 6 FOOD sys I 03. 1 36.4 1 2.4-1-

11

Pia-LK seRv1cEs

6

1 533 1 46.LtL---21 6o71' === 1 1

1 _65N L 341 _I- .21__I: ___= ,1 25 1 a 1 3 3j_ i3te_i_2,492,14_7ei

Ltd 100.0C OL LAM

TOTAL.

17

-14-

EMployed students indicated the following regarding work/studyrelationships: (1) closely related (109; 25 percent), (2) somewhatrelated (113; 20 percent), and (3) not related (219; 50 percent).Students, by program, differed in their responses to this item. Forexample, the groups with the highest tett -e for each Choice were:

96% health services35% business65% liberal arts

See Table 12 for further details.

closely relatedsatLt relatednct related

TABLE 12

RE S K KIRK/STM RosriaisaCOLIECE TOTAL

woRAREL

11-0.9-POM CLOSELIOMEWMA t- MOt- -MOIPELATED MATEO RELATED TOTAL

1 I 2 I 3 1

! T 51 1,21LIBERAL ARTS T 6.4 I 26.7 I 61..9 I 43.3

-It

__BUS_LHEA9g_ 1_ __

3 1 25 1 0 I 1 I 26__&MALimi__sERv_grF2_1___26.2_ I a.a_

4 I 6 1 2 I

HOTEL i A000 5V5 I 54.5 I 14.:e g 27.3 1

s_l_za=_I 2 g -PuBLIC sERVIcES I 54.1 I 24.3 1 21.6 I

1... -/ --

A , 9 I- -11 g 29_1TErMNOLOGY L__Ia.41 L_22..A-1aU2-1-11_,4--1- 1

a 1 A I 7 t_OYaER Li____24.2___1_ _2_,...W*,

-215.^

COLUMN 109 113 219 441TOTAL 24.7 25.6 49.7 100.0

_LIMILE-5---1-33._42.39.02...111.1.1L-- -1 OF rwEEzirim

Students differed in work/study re ationships, by educationalobjective, age and marital status. The groups who especiallyfound a close relationshiv between their work and community collegestudies were students seeking certificates and students 22-24 yearsold at entry. High proportion cf students in business, studentsseekirg A.S. degrees and students over 29 years of age felt workarid study were "somewhat related." Respondents who found norelationship included many students seeking A.A. degrees, studentsbelow 19 years of age at entry and single students.

8

b.

-15-

At (232 students; 27 percent)

These students uere asked to : (1) the institution they areattending in Fall 1976, (2) their major field of study, (3) their study

status: full- or part-time and (4) the transferability of theircommunity college credits in courses numbered 100 or above if they areattending a four-year college.

Of the 216 students who responded to the question on current institution,84 (39 percent) are at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, 62 (29 per-cent) at other community colleges, 44 (20 percent) at Mainland institu-tions and the remaining in other public and private institutions in theState. As expected, many (186) liberal arts majors are attending anothercollege, chiefly Manoa (73) and Mainland institutions (28). (Table 13)

fkrill 33RESPCINDENTS WHO ARE ATTENDING ANOTHER SCHOOL: SCHOOL SELECTEDJ BY PROGRAM

COMMUNITY COLLEGE TOTAL

SCH---- - CUUN- -PDT 1 HAIBAIL - HONOLULU K AP 101-A = 4ALIAI CC LEEWARD MAUL C C 4 /HOWARD HIL0=7.7 -14ANITA -7161-till1=t=

ICC C C NI C C C C C C CCLLEGE CAMPOS 4 YEAR1 1 1 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 1 1 1 I

0 1---CliEHAL iRT 5 1 193 1 7.1 1 10.3 1 0.0 1 2.6 1 2 .6 1 (3.6 I 3.8 1 746. 6 1 jag I

1========1 I2 .. 1 . 0 I . 7 . 1 6 1 . 0 1 1 I

......BUSINESS, = _ . _. _I _0.0 I 25.0 I 21 .4 1 . 0.0 1 3.6 I . 0 .43 I . - 3. 4_ 1 .386 1_ _ Y. 1 L. _ .0.0. . I,II= = = 1- = =- -1 1========1.--..--I..,. 1.-1-- 1 =13 1 0 1 0 I 0 I 0 1 0 1 0 I 0 1 0 1 2 I 0 I

-HEAL 714 __szavICES I_ _.a.a I. =13.0 1 0. 0 1. .. 0.0 1 O. 0 1 . 0 .0 _ 1 . 0.0 = I- ..0.0 1_5E40 _ 1 _ .11.0. -I.=1= == 1 1=== 1=

4 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 a t a 1 a 1 o iHOTEL I. F000 3115 1 O 0 1 33.3 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 O. 0 1 0 o0 1 0.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1

.... - = ==1 == I = = ===I= --r - -T_-I.- ---- 1-m _I_5 _I 0 1 0 1 0 1 . 0 . 1

-POOL IC spill/Ices i 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 a 0.0 I 0.0 1 oo t ze.o 1 0.0 1 20.0 1 0.0 i-/ - ----- --/ -- --I. --- -- -1 1- -/--- ---.! _ -1_ -I ---...-1--------/._ .. 6. 1 . 0 1 0 1

- -70CHNOLOG4 . 1 . 0.0 I a..o g 27.3 1 961 1.2

'.16.z _a_ _ii.o . g... ii.a_ g__.0.0 a, le.z _a ... 0.0..1._-1------- -1-- -_ / 1 ---1- _- .1 / -I----- --/ 1 1

5 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 d 1 0 1 a 1 4 1 0 1

_ . .- OTHER -- - I. LIal- 1 0.0 1 . .0.0 1 - -0.0-1 ... .0.0 1---0.0-. I -.. 0. 0 - - 0.0 - 1_...40. 4 -.1---.0.0 ...1-.- .- . . _. _=1.=========L======1========1 JL.,,,,,, 1......,. ,,,L., m./-_ = -- / .___= = ...1.r..?rr_l_

COLUMN 3 19 25 1 7 4 a T a+ 3TOTAL 1.4 6.49 11.6 0.5 3.2 109 1.4 5.2 36.9 1.4

-.1,CELILTIPLIEELL_

SCH- COUNT I- ROW FACT 10TH 111== MA PILAW RI34[PRIVATE INST. TOTAL

12 1 13 1

_ 1 a I za .1 110L IDERAL APT S 1 5.11 1 17.9 1 72.2

__ _2 1 6 1 4.. i ._ ,_zei-.:00$53___ I 21.4 1 14.33 1 0 1 2 1 a

.. HEALTH . SERVICES . I . 0.0 .1_ 50.4 __ 1- _ 1 01,-

4 1 1 1 i A 1MOTEL C FOOD SYS 1 33.3 g 33.3 1 1.4

5 1 0 1 3 IROM_ IC SERVICES 1 0.0 1 60.0 1 2.3

-1 1 -1_ ___ , . 6 1 1 1 2.1._____11--

_ __TECHNOLOGY _ ___ 1 9 1 I _ Ili 2 1 B. 1= l=======I = =----I .

a t e 1 4 1 9OTHER I 0.0

CGLUMN 4 4 216: 4:,

TOTAL 7.4 20.4 100.0ra

19

-16-

Students :_ho are attending another college have a variety of majorfieldsof study. The following fields attracted at least 10 studentsamong the 197 students who re _ed to this item:

26 in social sciences, 17 in humaniti11 in physical sciences

lzmarixistons: 33 in business, 27 in liberal arts,17 in technoloqy, 10 in health services.

Moat percent) are pill-tune students. High prcçiorticris ofstidents below 19 years of age at entry and single students are

full

Data in Table 14 dhow that many students who are attendingr four-year colleges were able to transfer their community college credits:94 (81 percent) Were able to transfer all or most credits; 18 (16percent), some credits; 4 (3 percent), few credits. Asliberal arts majors caiprise the great najority (85 percent) ostudents attending four-year institutions.

TAME 1.4

DC AMMER SCHI=4:BY PRCGRAM

ITS

anuirrY rrr:r wog,TRAMSCR

COUNT --I-1A11. OP- 60J1 RCI--- -- ROW PCT -- -1E22IPIFIST

TOTIIL

1 1 1 2 1 3 1

.Y.4.11Cv.RP--_,-1=._=_,,itN1.-1.-----.....,1_..-...-........1-.I 116 L_ 13- 96 ---1 - _ - -LIBERAL ARTS I 134.7 I 1343 I -2.0 1 04.5

. . --- 3 I. --- 0 -1 - 2 - 1"MU= PiLl3 . --_-_-1- 60.0 / - 0412 1 .. 4T0 .0 . 1 403

1 - --- ..=1--=,=-- t..----,.-,.13 C 0 I 2 1 0 1 2____HCAJZIK_ sficni1C23 1 , 0.0 1 100.0 1 o .0 1 . is? __ - , _

0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1

PUBLIC SERVICES 1 0.0 I 100.0 I 0.0 I 0.9

_-____ _ _._

-1 - 2 I 1 ITECNNCLOGT I 66.7 1 33.3 1 0.0 1 2.6.1=.......,../ ........ g=.=,... /

6 1 1 1 0 1 -Z4- 00.7 1 14.3 1 0.0 1 6.43---13111.0B. _.-i--------1------1----.- I

COLUMN - VA 18 a 116OTAL---21...0.___1.5.3 _-3.IL_ _-1...00.0.

0.00430RAW CH/ S0UAr.6 4 30.06037 MI TN 10 DEGREES OF FREEDOM. SIGNIFICANCE

4. FUture Educa lanai Plans

Many students had plans for further education: 437 (50 percent) indicatedthey planned to continue their education in Spring 197? and 110 (13 percent) atsome time after that. Only 1/8 of the students said that they had no furthereducational plans and 1/4 was uncertain. There were differences among programs(Table 15):

2 0

-17-

60 percE=t of liberal arts majors had educational plans fSpring 1977

- -32 percent of health najors had no further educational plans

- -48 percent of public services and 37 percent of technologymajors were uncertain.

High rcortions of students below 22 years at entry and single students hadfuture ucational plans.

MULE 15

FU/UHE EvicAMONAL PLANS, UY PPCGRA14

CaVIINITY OXLEGE TEMIL

UNTI_---11111311--ECT--LY=E 04.-AE1--D0 NIT

I NEXT 5EN KNCI. TOT44I I I 2 I 3 I 4 I

ALAJO112

NO OATAa t LL0jL1_j_7=EL I ti_tI jj

1 0.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 I 100.0 1 0.1

I I ,4_ A _AA f " 1 -7--1114,_1iMili59.7 I Q.L.J41..61---1---1-7-

21---1 54

1

II

= ===1--= ----1-26 1 22-L-1-1.A 1 50

=I1

-L.I __L5

HEALTH3

SERVIOE5I

I

153666

1 13I 3167

1

1

512.2

1

1

$19.5

I

t416.7

I

1757.1 1 1663 I

41960

r

I 9.5OTEL 5V5 2.

I

6-

1 34 I a0=1

t11

.9.1

1 21

1 66

OT6 I 29

66.3I1

1016.7

1

I

56.3

1

1

1626.7

Students with Spring 1977 educational plans were asked to specify theirinstitution. Of the 378 who responded to this item, 89 students (24 percent)chose Manoa; 74 (20 percent), Kapiolani; 54 (14 percent), Leeward; 51 (14 per-cent, AUinland institutions; and the remaining, other public and privateinstitutions in the State. Both Iganoa and Kapiolani were chosen most often byliberal arts students, students below 19 years at entry, single students andnew students. Table A-11 indicates that 145 out of the 378 students intendto return to the campus of entry.

21

of CaTrreinity College

Students evaluated eiit items on a five-poin scale: "1, very satisfied"

to "5, not satisfied." The results are summarized in Figure 3 which presentsthe average rating far each item, by program:

a. for the total, the best average ratings were for "friendship wvth

other students" (2.2), "instruction" (2.3) and "faculty/studentrelations" (2.3). The average rating for "total experience at college"was 2.4. The poorest average rating (2.9) was for "variety of courses

you could take."

there Were sinificcmt differences in average ratings, by progon five items:

(1) instruction: the range in averag ratings wag 1. 8 (health

services) to 2.5 (business).

(2) faculty/student relations: the range was 1.7 (health) to

2.5 (business).

(3) course variety: the range was 2.2 (healt -ces) to

3.0 (liberal arts).

(4) counseling services: the rzge was 2. 1 (health se *ces) to

2.8 (business).

(5) student riendghips: the range was 1.8 (health services andhotel/food services) to 2.3 (business and public services).

Analysi8 oraverage ratings fbr each item, by characteristics showed

som stati icany significant diffgrences. These_are summarized below and

the range in average ratings given for eadh gro- 4

Item

Isttion

Fa ty/StudentRelation's

Course Varie_

Caaracteristics

Age***Marital StatusEntry Status*Campus*

Educational ebj.Age***Marital Status***Fmtry Status*Campus*

Educ. Obj. ***Canp **

_ 9g

2.1 (aver 29) to 2.4 (below 19)2.1 (nmirried) and 2.4 (single)2.2 (transfer) and 2.3 (ne)2.1 (Windward & Honolulu) to 2.5

2.0 (unclassified) to 2.4 (A.S.)2.0 (over 29) to 2.4 (below 19)2.1 (married) and 2.3 (single)2.1 (trans and 2.3 01(3.62.0 (Windward) to 2.4 (Maui)

2.5 (certificate) to 3.0 (LA )2.7 (Honolulu) to 3. 4 (maul)

Levels of significance, based on analysis of vari

.05 level ** .01 level *** .001 level.22

this:

(Maui)

-19-

FIGURE 3

AVERAGE EVALDATICIN RATIMS, EY PROGRAMFALL 1976 Nial-CCMINUMIG STUDENTS

Mote: Students rated each iten on a five-point scale, with "1" representing the most favorable rating. The threeitems receiving the best evaluaticn are circled for each program.

Code: 1. Instruction2. Faculty/Student relations3. Variety of courses you could take4. Intellectual environment

5. Qxmseling services6. Friendship with other students7. Facilities/equipment8. Tbtal experience at colleqe

2.

2.92.7

6

2.2

2.62.4

4 8

Fbtel

2.3

2.0

2.5

2.2

2.6

1.8

2.2

2 4 5 7

ribral Arta

2.2

2.7 2.7

2,2

2.6

4 5 7

Public Services

2.8

2.2

2.6 2.6 2.5 2.52.3

4 7

2.5 2.5

2.92.7

2.3

2.6 2.5

5 7

2.2 2.3

2.7 2.6

5

Health Se

1.81.7

2.2

2.5

2.1

1.8

2.8

2.0

7

2.12.0

2.92.6

2.1

2.4 2.3

7

2.7

2.3

4 7 8

In

iendshi

Facilities/Eqt.

Total

-20-

istic

2.4 (over 29) to 2.9 19-21 and 22-24)

Marital Status * 2.5 (married) and 2. (single)

2.4 (aver 29) ta 2.7 (DIB1OW 19,19-21, 22-24)

Narital Stat * 2.5 (rmirried) and 2.7 (single)2.3 (Windward) to 2.8 (Kauai and filui)Canpus*

2.2 (Leeward) to 2.9 (Hawaii iolani,

Kauai)

2.2 (over 29) to 2.5 (below 19,19-21, 22-24)

Marital Status*** 2.2 (married)and 2.5 (single)2.1 (Windward) ta 2.6 (Rapiolani)canpus***

Generally, average ratings were favorable among studni-5 over 29 years

of age at entry, married students and students at Windward Community College.

In view of campus interest in the evaluations of their non-continuing

students, we summarized responses on the five-point scale,by characteristics.

The evaluations on each item, by campus, are included in Appendix A-12 which

also provides the results of chi-square analysis.

E. Findin Hi li

in endices B throngh H are the responses of students, by progrxn, for

each campus. The same format is kept for all tables so when many cells have

numbers below 5, chi-square analysis is not meaningful and has been deleted .

lie include these tables, however, because campus personnel are interested in

the responses of their students even though their totals nay be small. Canpu

personnel interested in more details should consult with the Dean of Students

to whom will be sent the complete set of campu re

Since several campuses had small numbers of respcentS, their summaries

below will be in terms of numbers (not percentages) of students.

1. jlege (42

a.

b.

s; 28 percent return)

sentativeness Data: The respondents There representativeof e non-oontimaing population on all characteristics.

in Fall 1976: The top three reasonsllege 11 work preference

6 (rable 8-1)

c 1.. 1976 Work . The majority of respondents workedlast srester 17, full-time; 9,part-time. There were 16students who did not work. (rable B-2) Of the 17 who worked full-time, 13 are currently world

Current Activities: Slightly over 3/4 of the students are eitherrking (19) or attending another college (14). The remaining

have home responsibilities (4), are looking for Todlork (2)

are engaged'in other activities (3). (nable B-3)

e. ts: Of the 16 who responded to this item, the topthree occtipatiais are: 5, cleriral/sales; 5, service; 3, professionaltechni.cal/managerial work. (Table B-4) The majority of students(10 out of 18) work full-time. The majority of students found arelationship between their work and community college studies: 3,

closely related; 10, somewhat related; 5, not related. (rable B-5)

f. Students Attending Another School: Of thel3 students who indicatedtransfer, 5 are at Hilo College, 4 at other community colleges, 1at Mance, 2 at Mainland institutions and 1 at other Hawaii foucollege. Nbst (11) are full-time students. Six students anthe question on transferability of credits; 2, all or most; 3, some;1, few.

g. FUture Educational Plans: Close to half of the respondents (19)had paans to continue their education in Spring 1977; 7, sometimelater; 11, not certain. There were 5 students who imdicated nofurther educational plans. (Table B-6) Of the 16 with plans for

ing 1977, 4 intend to return to Hawaii Community College, 3 toto Hilo College, 5 to other camuinity colleges, 1 to Nhnoa, 2Mainland institutions and 1 to cAlx! r Hawaii four-year college.

h. Evaluation of Qnmuiit College EXp_e_rience: The best average ratingswere found for: faculty/Staff relations (2.3), student friendships(2.3), instruction (2.5) and total experience (2.5). The poorestaverage rating was for course variety (3.1). (Tible B-7) On faculty/student relations, there were significant differences, by grade point

average: 3.5 and above (1.8) to below 2.0 (2.8). On course variety,grade point average was a significant factor also: those with 3.5and above had an average rating of 3.6. On evaluation of the totalcollege experience, average ratings were 2.2 for business (13 students)and 2.8 for liberal arts (18).

Honolulu Gramm! College (182

a.

b.

-22

retunl)

iveness s ve of theta. _

uing population on all characteristics but sex, maritalstatus and grade point average.

F 1 1976: The top three reasons were:other college 0 percent desired classes unavailable

(18 percent) and work preference (16 percent). (Table C-1) Of the32 students who found desired classes unavailable, 20 indicated aconflict betWeen class and work hours.

Students dif ered significantly in their reasons for non-continuance,by program, educational objective, age, high school background, creditsearned and current activity. In general:

--"transfer to anOther college" was an important reasen for studenwho were liberal arts majors, were young goelow 22 years at entrand were able to earn over 24 community college credits.

--"desired classes unavailable" was hortarjt for stud- ts 25-29years at en_ and students currently employed.

--"work preference" was important for students 19-21 years Oldentry, graduates of Hawaii's private high sdhools and studentscurrently working.

c. ppring 1976 Wbrk gmE2.riences: 3/4 of the students worked lastsemestPr: 75, full-time; 60, part-time. (Table C-2) There werestatistically significant differences in Spring 1976 work status,by program, educational objective, age, credits earned and currentactivity. High proportions of the following groups worked full-timein ppring 1976:

d.

--students in public serv- -students seeking A.S. degrees-students over 25 years of age at en

--students who had earned fewer than 13--students who are currently wor

liege credi

t Activities: 4/5 of the respondents are either working (105;58 percent) or attending another school (40; 22 percent). (Table C-3)There were statistically significant differences in current activities,by program, educational objective, high school background and creditsearned. High proportions of the following are currently wortudents who majored in public services or technol

degrees, who were able to complete under 24 xnnun±ty college credits.

-23-

e. Employed Students: The tcç two occupations of the 95 students who

responded 1b this item are: service (41 percent) and clerical/sales

work (20 percent). (Table C-4) There were statistically significant

differences in occupation, by program, educational objective, age

and high school background. High proportions of the following are in

service occupations: students who majored in public services, soughtA.S. degrees, entered the community colleges at age 22 or olaRr, and

graduated from foreign or U.S. Mainland high schools. High proportions

of the following are in clerical/sales work: students who majored

in liberal arts, sought A.A. degrees,entPred at 21 or younger, and

graduated from public high schools on the Neighbor Islands.

The majority of employed students (63 percent) work full-time.

A bare majority (51 percent) felt there was no relationship-

their work and community college studies. (ble C-5) This was

especially true of liberal arts students.

f. Students Attenthig Of the 39 students who indicated

transfer, 17 are at Mance, 10 at other community colleges, 9 at

Mainland institutions and 3 at other Hawaii institutions. Most (68

percent) are full-time students. 23 students answered the question

on transferability of community college credits: 17, all or moat;

5, some; 1 f.

g. Fixture Educational Plans: About half of the respondents had further

educational plans: 76 for Spring 1977 and 17 for same time later.

were 69 who were uncertain and 15 who had no further educational

plans. (Table C-6) A high proportion of students who sought A.A.

had plans for Spring 1977. Of the 67 who indicated theirring 1977 institution, 25 intend to return to Honolulu Community

Cbllege, 15 to go to Manoa, 15 to other community colleges, 10 to

Mainland institutions and 2 to other Hawaii institutions.

h. E v a l u a t i o n of _c_sntruniV.C: The best average ratings

were for instruction, student friendship (each 2.1) and facultY/

student relations (2.2). The average rating for totAl college experience

was 2.3. The poorest average rating Las for course variety (2.7).

(Table C-7) On several itemsinstruction, faculty/student relations,

Course variety and intellectual environmentthere were statistically

significant differences in evaluation,/iry age. Generally, the older

group ((war 29 years at entry) rated th -e items more favorably than

the younger students. In addition, aniculty/student relations,there were significant differences in evaluation by high school

background: araduates of Hawaii's public and private high schoolsrated this item less favorably than graduates of U.S. Mainland and

foreign high schools and GED students.

-24-

Eapiolani Cammunity Callpge (242 - 48 percent return)

a. ziresentativeness Data: The respondents were representative of thenon-continuing population on all characteristics but grade pointavers e.

b. Peasons far Not Continuing in Fall 1976: The top three reasons were:"other" (20 percent), work preference and transfer to another college

(each 19 percent). (Table D-1) Only 21 students (9 percent) indicatedunavailability of desired classes because: 4, class closed; 6, =inflictwith work hours; 2, conflict with another class; 9, course not offered.There were statistically significant differences in reasons, by program,educational objective, sex, age, marital status, entry status, creditsearned and current activity. Same of these differences are shownbelow by indicating the top reasons:

Prcjram

liberal arts 33% transfer ta another college

health serNices 57% achieved goalbusiness 25% work preference

femalemale

re

below 19aver 29

dits Earned

beloW 13over 24

24%, transfer and 23%, work preference24%, other and 15%, G.I. Bill exhaustec

2 , transfer and 26%, wOrk preferenceG.I. Bill_exhausted and 16%, other

25%, work preference and 24%, other35%, achieved goal and 26%, transfer

faijaln_14c"rk s: Close to 3/4 of the students workeds:cent), full-time and 91 (39 percent),

part-_ (Table D-2) There were statistically significantdifferences in Spring 1976 work status, by program, educationalobjective, sex, age, marital status, high school background, entrystatus, credits earned and current activity. Same of these differences

are shown below:

last semester: 77

,E=Lnliberalbusiness

Educational Obi.

certificateA. S.

Spring 1976FU Part-Time DWbrk Wbrk Wbrk

21% 52% 27%

41% 33% 27%

19% 3% 48%

51% 30% 19%

femalemale

below 19over 29

Marital Statua

singlemarried

-_Intry Status

newtransfer

High Sdhool BaCkgr.

pthlic, Oaiipib1ic, Neighbor Is.U.S. POSS.

Credits Earned

below 13over 24

transferlooking for work

-25--

Sprin 1976

PartTime Did NotUbrk Work Mork

22% 38% 40%47% 39% 15%

11% 64% 31%

79% 4% 17%

23% 48% 29%64% 9% 27%

24% 45% 32%

54% 24% 22%

28% 42% 30%55% 25% 20%48% 12% 40%

63% 24% 13%13% 44% 44%

49% 34% 17%7% 54% 39%9% 26% 65%

ties, 85 percent of the responden are either(144; 60 or attending another school (59, 25%). (Table D-3) Therewere statistically stgnfwozt differences in current activities,program, educatwnal objective, sex, age, marital status, high schoolbackground, entry status and credits earned. Same of these differencesare illustrated below by the proportions of selected groups woror attending another school:

e.

-26-

Atted_i_n 1

44%69%

41%16%

lihpral artsbusiness

Bducational

certificate 70% 12%69% 16%

female 53% 28%male 70% 21%

below 19 46% 36%over 29 83% 10%

Marital Status

53% 30%singlemarried 84% . 9%

High School Backgr

60% 27%public, Oahupublic, Nei Is. 80% 15%

Entry Status

56% 26%newtransfer

ts Ear

71%

84%

22%

6%below 13over 24 51% 38%

dents: Among the 133 1oyed students who indicated,iatii, the top two are: service (54; 41 percent) and

clerical -sales work (51; 38 percent). (Table D-4) There werestatistical-1y significant differences in occupation, by program,educationa objective, sex and credits earned. High proportions ofstudents in the following groups were in service occupations:students who majored in health services, who sought certificates andwho earned over 24 community college credits. High proportions ofthe following groups were in clerical/sales work: students whomajored in business, students who sought A.A. degrees and studentswho earned between 13-24 munxty college

Ebst (78 percent) of the Lçioyed students are working full-time.This is especially true of students who sought certificates andwho re 22-24 years cad at entry.

-27--

About 2/3 of the students felt that there was a relationship betweentheir work and community college studies: 50 (37 percent), closelyrelated; 36 (27 percent), somewhat related. (rable D-5) All 23employed students who majored in health services felt there was a closerelationship as did high proportions of the following groups: females,students who sought certificates, who were 22-24 years old atio were transfer students, who were married and who earned over 24

community college credits.

f. Students Attending Another S- 1: Cf the 57 students who areattending another school, 20 are at Mums, 13 at Honolulu CommuniCollege, 11 at Mainland institutions, 7 at other community collegesin Hawaii, and 6 at other Hawaii institutions. Most of the students(77 percent) are studying full-time. The 26 students attending fouryear institutions responded to the item on transferability of communitycollege credits as follows: 20, all or most; 5, same; 1, few. Thegreat majority of liberal arts students transferred all or most oftheir credits.

g. Future Educational Plans: Close to 2/3 of the-students had furtheronal plans: 124 for Spring 1977 and 30, sometime after that.

There were 51 students who were uncertain and 33 with no further plans.(Table p-6) High proportions of the following groups had plans toenroll in college in Spring 1977: students who sought A.A. degrees,who were below 19 years at entry'and who were single students.

Of the 102 who indicated their Spring 1977 institution, 44 intendto return to Kapiolani Community College; 20 to attend Manoa; 18,other community col es; 10, to Mainland institutions and 10, otherHawaii institutions.

Evaluation of Carminity College ce: The best average rating

was for student fri 'ps (2.2). The average rating for total collegeexperience was 2.6, and the poorest (2.9) was for facilities/equipment.(rable D-7) There were statistically significant differences on alleight items, by various characteristics: 8 items, by program; 4 items,by age, high school background, entry status and credits earned; 3items, by educational objective; 2 items, by marital status; 1 item,by sex. Since program was a "significant" item, the range in averageratings for programs enrolling at least 10 students is indicated foreach item:

InstructionFaculty/Stud. Rels.Course VarietyIntellectual Envir.

lingStudent FriendshipsFacilities/Equip.TOtal EXperience

Best Ave.

1.7 health services1.6 health services2.1 health services2.3 hotel/food services1.9 health services1.7 health services2.3 hotel/food services2.0 health services

31

Poorest Ave. Ratim,

2.6 business2.7 business3.0 liberal arts2.9 business & liberalarts2.9 ihPral arts &business2.4 business3.2 liberal arts2.8 liberal arts &business

4.

-28-

College (37 respondents; 40 prcent return)

a. presentativeness pata: The respondents were representative ofthe non-continuing population on all characteristics except highschool background.

Reasons for NOt Continuing in Fall 1976: The two top reasOns were:transfer to another college (7)anunavailability of desired classes(7). There were 4 health services students who achieved their goals.(Table E-1)

ppring 1976 Work iences: The majority of students worked lastsemester: 14, full-t1557 part-time. There were 13 who did notwork. (Table E-2) Cf the 14 who worked full-time, 13 are currentlywor1dnq and are males.

d. CUrrent Activities: Over 4/5 of the respondents are either working(22) or attending'another school (8). There are 3 looking for work,3 with home responsibilities. (rable E-3) Of the 22 employed students12 entered the commdnity colleges when there were over 29 years ofageand 14 were married.

e. Employed Students: 16 students provided information on thek ocaVpations:9, service; 3, clerical/Sales; 2, professional/technical/manageofial;1 each in farming/fishing/forestry and miscellaneous. (Table E-4)

The majority of students (13 out of 21) indicated they are workingfull-timr. The majority (13 out of 19) said there was no relationshiptween their work and community college studies. (Table E-5)

f. Students Attending Another School: Cray 5 students indicated theinstitution they axe now attending, and fewerrespmded to the itemon full-/ _-tire status and transferability of credits.

g. Future Educational Plans: Over a third of the res ents (14)plan to continue their education in Spring 1977; 6, sometimethat; 7, uncertain. 9 indicated they had no further educationalplans. (Table E-6) Of the 14 with educational plans in Spring1977, 8 intend to return to Kauai Comunity Cbllege.

h. Evaluation of Community C011ege ience: The best average ratingswere for student friendthips (2.2 ) and faculty/student relations (2.3).The average rating for total college experience was 2.5, and the poorestaverage was for course variety (3.2). (rable E-7) There were statis-tically significant differences on several items:

--faculty/student relations, by educational obj-1.7 (A.A.) to 2.8 (A.S,)

-course variety, by credits eaito 3.6 (below 13 credits)

- -intellectual environment, by prc3.7 (other)

by--intellectual envirczuretO 3.7 (other).

-e

range was 2.6 24

range was 1.0

-tional objective: range

Q 9

2.5 (A.S.)

-29-

5. Leeward_Co (243 respondents; 40 percent return)

a. -sresetavenessD: The respondents were representative of thenon-continuing pcculaticn on all characteristics but narital statusand credits earned.

'cnz for Nbrt Continuiog in Fall 1976: The top three reasons were:transfer to another college (68; 28 percent), desired classes unavailable(42; 17 percent) and work preference (31; 13 percent). (Table F-1)The 42 students who found desired classes unavailable had the followingexplanations: 21, class closed; 17, conflict with work hours; 1, conflictwith another class; 3, course not offered. There were statisticallysignificant differencels in .74easons, by program, educational objective,age and current activity. High proportions of liberal arts majors,females and students below 19 years at entry transferred to anothercollege. High proportions of the following groups found desired classesunavailable: unclassified students, students 25-29 years at entry andstudents looking for work.

c. Spring 1976 Wbrk 7 _iences: Close to 3/4 of the respondents workedlast semester: 80, full-time and 93, part-time. (rable F-2) Therewere statistically significant differences in Spring 1976 work status,by program, educational objective, sex, age, high school backgroundand current activity. Same of these differences are shown below:

ram

liberal artsbusiness

Educational Obie

Full-TimeWork

PartTimeWbrk

Did NotWork

26%59%

42%32%

32%10%

A.A. 27% 42% 32%A.S. 50% 33% 17%

female 17% 50% 33%nale 46% 29% 25%

below 19 10% 56% 34%over 29 78% 0% 22%

Hi h School Background

26% 45% 29%poblic, Oahuprivate, Hawaii State

urrent

35% 45%

31%

20%

19%workingattAncliinn

-30-

d. Current Activities: 85 percent of the stiñents are either wor(133; 55 percent) or attending another school (72; 30 pPrcent)(Table F-3) There were statistically significant differences incurrent activities, by program, sex and age. High proportions ofthe following groups are wor technology majors, males andstudents 22-24 yeArs at entry. High proportions of the followingare attending another school: liberal arts majors, females andstudents below 19 years at en

Employed Student the 123 employed students who indicated theiroccupations, the tc t are: clerical/sales (46; 37 percent) andservice occupations 25 percent). (Table F-4) There werestatistically signifwant differences in occupation, by sex. Femalesare concentrated in clerical/sales occupations (70 percent), andvales in service (28 percent) and clerical/sales work (20 percent).

Nicre than a majori (69 percent) work fall-time, especially employedstudents who majored in business. More than a majority of students(62 percent) felt there was no relationship between their work andcommunity college studies; 25 percent felt there was same relationship;and 14 percent felt there was a close relationship. (Table F-5)

f. Students Attending Another School: Of the 64 students attending anotherschool, 27 are at Manoa, 14 at Mainland institutions, 10 at Kapiolani,8 at other Hawaii institutions and 5 at other community colleges. Thegreat majority (91 percent) are fall-time students. A high proportionof younger students (below 19 years at entry) carried fall-time loads.The 36 students who are attending four-year colleges responded to theitem on transferability of community college credits as follows.33, all or most; 2, some; 1, few.

ture Educational Plans: About 70 percent of the students had farthereducational plans: 136 for Spring 1977 and 32, sometime after that.There were 48 students who were uncertain and 26 who had no further

plans. (Table F-6) High proportions of the following groups hadSpring 1977 educational plans: technology students, students who werebelow 19 years or 22-24 years at entry and graduates of Hawaii's privatehigh schools.

g

Of the 119 who indicated their Spring 1977 institution, 46 intend toreturn to Leeward Community College, 33 to go to Nbnoa, 17 to Nbiniandinstitutions, 11 to Kapiolani, 7 to other Hawaii institutions and 5to other caarn.inity colleges.

h. EValuation of The best average ratings17:) were for instruction, faculty student relations and studentfriendships. The average rating _or total college experience was 2.3,and the poorest (2.9) was for course variety. (rable F-7) There werestatistically significant differences on six items, by various charac-teristics: 5 items, by entry status; 3 items, by grade point average;2 items, by high school background. differences are shown belowby the range in average ratings:

Instruction

-31-

Best Average Batir

2.0 GPA 3.5 and above1.6 U.S. Mainland high s

Faculty/Student 1.9 GPA 3.0-3.4Relations 2.1 new

1.4 U.S. Mainland high

Course Varie

Counseling

2.5 GPA 0-3.42.8 new

2.5 'new

Student Friendships 2.1

Facilities P- 2.2 new

Poorest Average Rating

2.4 GRA below 2.0 and2.0-2.9

2.4 GED students

2.4 GPA below 2.02.4 transfer2.6 foreign high ech

3.1 GPA 3.5 and above;2.0-2.9

3.2 transfer

2.8 transfer

2.5 transfer

2.6 transfer

-3-

6. Maui. Community College (70 re ts; 38 percent return)

sentativeness-Data: The respondents were representati

b.

-continuing population on all characteristics.

Not Continuii Fall 1976: The top three reasons

er to an er co ege; 13, unavailability of

desired clasqes; 10, personal reasons. Mble G-1) Details follow

on the 13 who indicated class unavailability: 2, class closed; 5,

class and work hours in conflict; 6, course not offered. Cf the

14 students who transferred to another college, 13 were below 22

years at entry, 13 were single and 9 had earned over 24 community

college credits.

c. Spring 1976 Wbrk iences: About 4/5 of-the students worked

last sekester: 21, fiallEISS; 32, part-time. There were 15 students

who did not work. (Table G,2) Cf the 21 who worked full-time,

17 were males, 14 were over 29 years at entry, 14 were narri

12 had earned below 13 community college credits and 18 are

currently working.

d. Ciarrent Activities: 3/4 of the respcnidents are either working (37)

or attending another school (16 ). There are 8 looking for work,

7 with home responsibilities and 5 are engaged in other activities.

(Sable G-3) Cf the 37 who are working 25 are roles and 34 earned

below 25 credits.

e. Enpl10, professional/technical/nanagerial; 7, clerical/

6 each in service and in udscellaneous categories; 2, machine

trades; 1 each in farming/fishing/forestry and in bench mirk.

(Table G-4) The great majority of students (24 out of 33) are wor

full-time. The najority (18 out of 32) felt there was no relationship

between their work and canmunity college studies. (Thabi57G5)

yed Its: The 33 who indicated their occupations are

f. Students Attendin nother School: 10 students are at the Manoa

Cairus, 2 at Mainland instituiions and 1 each at Napiolani, Hilo

College and other Hawaii private college. All 10 students now at

Mance majored in liberal arts at Maui COmmunity College, 9 of them

had grade point averages of 3.0 and above, 8 had over 24 community

college credits. 13 out of 14 are full-time students. Cut of the

12 attending four-year institutions, 10 were able to transfer all

or most of their community college credits, and 9 of these students

had grade point averages of 3.0 and above.

g. Eture Educational Plans: About 2/5 of the respczidents (27) had

ccntrnue education in Spring 1977; 10, sometime

later; 20, not certain. There were 12 students with no further

educational plans. (Table G-6) Of the 27 with Spring 1977 plans,

23 were below 30 years at entry and 21 had over 13 cammunity college

credits. Of the 22 who indicated their Spring 1977 institutions,

6 intend to return to Maui Community College, 8 to go to Manoa,

4 to Mainland institutions, 2 to other community colleges and 2

3 6

-33-

to other Hawaii institutions. Of the 8 planning to go to Manoa,7.had grade point averages of 3.0 and above and 6 had over 24community college credits.

h. EValuation of Communit College Eqerence: The best averageatings and faculty/student

relations (2.4). The average rating far total collegewas 2.5. The poorest ratings (2.8) were for intellectual environment,counseling services and facilities/equipment. (Table G-7) Therewere statistically significant differences on several items, and therange for each is presented below:

'on, by program: 1.5 (headth services) to

faculty/student relations, by program: 1.5 (health servi3.0 (business)

--faculty/student relations, by age: 1.7 (19-21 ypArs) to 2.8(below 19)

--faculty/student relations, by entry status: 1.9 (transfer) and2.6 (new).

7. WindwarColliannuni (65 sponden 42 percent return)

a. sentativeness respondents were representative ofnon-continuing population except on sex and credits

b. Reasons for Not Continuins in Fall 1976: The top threewere: tra sferto ano co ege 23 desired classes unavai le(10) and work preference (9). (Table H-1)

C. The majority of respondents worked, ful1-tin, 22, part-time. Mere were 25 who

did not wnrk. (Table H-2) Of the 16 who wurked full-time, 12were over 29 years of age at entry, 11 were narried, and all 16are currently wor

d. Current Activities: 85 percent of the students are either working1T2T-or aft,EaEgi-amather college (23). The remaining studentsare looking for work (6), having hone responsibilities (3) or areengaged in other activity (1). (Table 11-3)

e.

f.

Students: Of the 30 who indicated their occupations, the. service (11), clerical/sales (6) and professional/

technical/hanagerial work (6). Of employed students, 27 wereliberal arts najors. (Tble 11-4) The majority of students (20 outof 28) work full-time. The majority of students found no relationshipbetween their *mark and conmunity college studies. (TabaH-5)

A 1: Of the 23 students who transferred1 at Manoa, 6 at Kapiolani, 4 at Mainland

institutions and 4 at other community colleges. Mbst (18) are full-timestudents, and all 11 who are at four-year institutions indicatLdwere able to transfer all or most of their community college

Diture Eduti

later date.eelucational plans.institution for

3/4 of the respondents had further()continue in Spring 1977 and 8 at sone7 who were uncertain and 7 with no

Table 11-6) Of the 39 who indicated theirg 1977, 12 plan to return to Windward Cc

College, 11 to Manoa, 6 each to Kapiolani and to Mainland institutionsand 4 to other canrnrnity colleges.

h. EValuation of Catimui Coil-S - The best averaratin were found far - faculty tudent relations (2.0): instn'icticistudent friendships and total experience (each 2.1)-. The poorestaverage rat-frig was for course variety (3.1). (Table 11-7) Therewere no statistically significant differences, by cFiaracteristics,an any of the eight items.

3 8

-35-

F. and Conclusion

This section compares the responses of our non-continuing students to

questionnaires administered in Spring 1976 and Pall 1976. Since identical

questionnaires were not used, this discussion generally deals with responsesto comparable questions. FOrtunately, both groups (one-semester and two,semester students) mere representative of their respective non-continuing

populations on an inporant characteristia--p

The summary which follows is for the cammuni ty college total:

1. tuxns: Non-continuing students who completed two semesters of community

college work (a) had higher rates of return (43_percent) than those who

completed only one semester (36 percent) and (b) were representative of

the non-continuing population on more oharacteristics--age, entry Status

and educational objective in acUltion to program.

tinsanrbit

shown below. For example, themas umavailability of desired classes;

other college.

t- The top five reasons for'fferences in incidence and

top reason for one-semester studentsfor two-semester students, transfer

Five

Mortal

_s_

StudentsNO.

Sowters

NoStuden

877 878

Transfer to another school 134 15% 206 24%

Prefer to work 157 18% 132 15%

Have financial problems 148 17% 108 12i0

Desired classes unavailable 202 23% 130 15%

Other 184 21% 122 14%

Activities= The top two current activities mere the same for--work and transfer to another college. Compared to one-

semester students, there mere higher proportions of two-semester students

marking (56 percent) and attending another school (27 percent). FUrther

details on current activities are given below:

One-SemesStudents

No.

T-SenesStudents

No.

Tbtal 859 874

librking 463 54% 492 56%

Transfer to another school 185 22% 232 27%

Lokii for work 83 10% 77 9%

Having home responsibiliti 71 8% 51 ' 6%

Other 57 7% 22 3%

5CoMbines "financial "G.I. Bill eml-

3 9

-36-

It is not surprising to find that there wexe statistically significantdifferences in current activities, by program, for both groups. While"work" was the top activity for all programs, liberal arts majors inboth semesters had the lowest proportion working and public servicesmajors, the highest. The range in proportion of students working isgiven below:

Semester Students (463 students working)Highest proporta public services, 24 (83 cent)Lowest propo on: liberal arts, 172 (46 percent)

TwO-Semester Stud_ ts (492 students working)Highest proportion: pUblic services, 40 (73 _ -cent)Lowest proportion: liberal arts, 221 (50 percent)

4. EMployed Students: FOr both groups, thestudents were clerical/sales and service jobs:

ti

On -ter ThSarStudents

No.

Total Employed 428 446Clerical/Sales 159 37% 137 31%Service 142 33% 155 35%

As expected, there were statistically significant differences in oocupation,by program, for both groups.

EMployed students in Fall 1976 had a higher proportion (70full-time than in Spring 1976 (63 percent).

EMployed students in both sstrs had similar responses rcrelationshi nd community collecla studies:

cent) wor

e-Semester Two-SemesterStudents Students

Closely related 26% 25%Somewhat related 26% 26%Not related 47% 50%

the

were statistically significant differences in work/study relationships,=gram, in both semesters. High proportions of students in health

services, hotel/food services and public services selected "closely related",while high proportions of those in liberal arts and technology chose "notrelated."

4 0

s -of

1 ware the sameof two-semester students wen

Mainland institutions than did one-semester students:

One-gEffiaStudents

No. %

TWo-SemesterStudents

No;

Tbtal 176 216UH Manoa 62 35% 84 39%Other Hawaii Communi ofleges 65 37% 62 29%Mainland Institutions 19 11% 44 20%

Three-fourths of the students attending another school wv-re studyingfull-time in Spring 1976 as were 82 percent in Fall 1976.

The great majority of students atteuding f -year institutians wereable to transfer all or ftret. cd' their Communi college cr .ts--82 per

in Spring Ig76-and-8I percent in Fall 1976.

6. Fluture Educatianal Plans: In both semesters, about one-half of therèpondnts had-plans to continue their education in'the following

The choices an future educational plans were not identi1na

guesticnnaires as indicatedbelow:

One-Semester Two-SemesterStudents Students

No. No. %

Tbtal 851 867Have plans, next sess 430 51% 437 50%

Have plans, latex 110 13%No plans 133 16% 107 12%

Uncertain 288 34% 213 25%

Evaluation of Canmrni±y C1le The items on which students77ailliEEKICERFir community coilege experience were not identical inuestionnaires . sam similarities in the responses

of both ciruop s :

student friendships received the best average rating (2.2) in FallThere Tias no comparable item in Spring 1976.

b. instructors' helpfulness received one of the best average ratings(2;0)--in Spring 1976 ab did facul student relations (2.2) inFall 1976.

c. instructors'

d.

ived a favorable rating (2.0) in Spring2.3) in Fall 1976.

-,a11 evaluation received the same average rating (2.4) in bothserristers

41

e. course avaiirmg 1976

Concluding

-38-

s avers. rating (32.9) in Fall 1976.

urged to compare the responses of theirncn-cthtlnuir4dtbdents in both semestprs by referring to Student PlowProject Report NO. 9 for Spring 1976 data.

4 2

- 9-, APPENDIX A

CF NCN-CONI`INGINGFALL 1976

What is the main reason why you did not register this sxeaterP

01. achieved my goal----02. changed my educational/vocational goals----03. transferred to another college

04. fot desired classes unavailable; specify by05. class closed06. class hour conflicted with work hour07. class hour conflicted with another class08. college doesn't offer course

09. preferred to work----10. have financial problems; check if conference with edvisor is desired :

----11. unable to attend; GI Bill exhausted----12. have health problems----13. have personal reasons (marriage, children)

14. other; please speci

II. During the Spring 1976 semester1. yes--full-time2. yes--part-tims3. no

?

III. Wbat are you doing now? (check the one which

1. lao fEli-iturk

2. rking a. give title or positionb. check one: 1.

c. Is your womk related toheck one: 1. closely related

2. somewhat related3. not related

having home responsibilitiErattending another schoola. specify school:b. major field of study:c. check one: 1. fuli-Eime; part tine

d. If attending a tour-year college, were you able to transfer

credits for consunity college courses nunbered 100 or above:

1. all or most cases

t a 'Vity)

2. some cases-----3. few cases

5. other; please specify:

IV. Do you plan to continue your schoo1. Yes; specify institution:

-ing 1977? (dhedk one).

your evaluation of your

satisfied Sati.sfied2 3

2 3

,2. 3

2 3_

carnunity

Not satisfied4

4

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

2. No3. No, but to soretirre after

4. Don't know

V. Please circle the milker whi cates

college experience:Very

1. Instruction 1

2. Faculty/student relations 1

3. Variety of courses you wild take 1

4._ mte1iecAtipi erwilserEzt i5.-Counseling services 1

6. Friendship with other studemts 1

7. Facilities/equiprent 1

8. Tote/ experience at college 1

2

2-2

. 2

3

3

3

What are your suggestions for iitçroving this college?(Use other side if necessary)

43

=WM&

02AS1.

REAsS FC41 NOT MIMING DIRCWENT, BY CNN

COMITY COLLECi TOTAL

GOAL GOAL REO UNAVA1L TO wuk PROBLEM EXHAU570 PROBLEMS REASONS, TOTAL1 1 1 2 1 3 1 ,4 1 9 1 10 1 11 I 12 1. 13 1 ,

---- ------ ---.....

HONOLULU C C 1 2.8 1 7.2 I 20.4 1 16.2 I 1565 1 5.5 464 1 2.3 1 969 1 13.3 1 2006

-

.10.......i.... - - I..._--- - ... .1 i*"1 - - - 142 1 4 1 13 1 68 1 _42 1 31 1 17 1 22 1 31 1, 1 27 1 243t

KAUAI C C

MAUI C C

43 1 4 1 4 1 7 1 7 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 0 1 4 1 4 1 371 1066 1 10,8 1 18,9 1 18.9 1 001 1 20? 1 861 1 '000 1 10.1 I 1000 1 412=17=I ------1 5.7 1 161 1 20.0 1, 14.6 1 144 I 219 1 1060 1, 060 1 14,3 1 1060 1 0,0

- - -- -- .../........1......1.....7../

46 1 1 I 0 1 23 1 10 9 3 I 4 1 0 1 7 1 7164--"------- -- - -----------------

COLUMN 45 49 206 130 132 44 64 13 71TOTAL Sol 5.6 23,5 14.8 ISO 5.0 763 165 8a3

---R8114111.10L01,..L_101619iSLALTI_AWREELOLAMIIIIA_LLGInCANC.011_

CAHILL

R84540%

0.32-LICLASAL0NEL=CONELICI_Sig,NOL.ICLO5E0 0 WORK 0' CLA5 OFFERED TOTAL1 5 I 6 1 7 1 8

HONOLULU C C 1 21,9 1 62,5 1 0.0 1 15.6 1 255211*...°1°°*..1

i........T...42 1 21 I 17 L 1 1 3 1 42:

.1........ ........ T.......

122 878

13.9 100.0

43 I 3 4 1 0. 1 0 1 7KAUAI C C 1 420 1 5761 0.0 I 000 1 505

--

MAUI C C 1 15.4 1 3805 1 060 1 46.2 1 10.2

4 6 1 I I 3 I 0 1 61 10

11_11011_1 IlaiLLAUO I 7.i-

COLUMN 39 56 3 29 127TOTAL 3067 4411 2,4 22.8 100,0

1111CSILLSNAOL_I_L_41-4=1-0,1111---

44

firM113111M

IFFEMIX A-2

SPRING'1975 WORK EXPERIENCES, BY CAMScontori =LEGE TOTAL

. 276WORK

IFULLT1MPARTTt---CAKPALS =-

LULU C C

-V43 1 14

1 30.9 1 25.0 1 36.1 1 4.2

MA1,11._C C

16 1 22 1 25

300 316 Z49 86834.7 36.5 26.6 100.0 . -

AFIETIX A-3

CURRENT ACTIVITIES OF NON-CCNTINUING STUDENTS, BY CAMUSciortuNIrr COLIXGE TOTAL -

CURRACTrouNT t

PCTFOR K ON5113121 3

10.6 1 58.3,-

KAUAI C C

SCHOOL TOT44 1 . 5 1-

22.2

1

43 1 3 1 221303 I 611 I 0.3 1 22.2

1 11.4 1 029 I IC.0 1 22.9 1 209 1 8.0-- --- -- ---146 1 .61 32 1 3 1

4 6

8742.5 100.0

,z1zri

xxxvi!Z

E

jOITITL!

POP-

I

; ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,smema,.. i ii, iiii,,i 4...4

',. 'fir:. , ::z ,.:=. a3c :.,z, :HTW.f.e.i...g*=.1..=' ===.,,..'..,..........i..

OXIPATIMS CF mos BY ZS 1

lS :31,i1,71E1L 77: ! !

: !=E .% F1E,

ii A

1 & MGR SMA OCCUP 5m6F08 MG 0- P MOB II K IC- 0- UP 0TAL

1 1 i g 1 3 1 4 1 , 5 1 6 I 7 ,I 1 ;,.1 ,. i 1

Ism,. _:- L-_-:r.:_-..!..4.**..._

*Oi* .44.40000 P.M . R

. 4,:

_ 6 1

----TRH ULU I 64 1 2040 I 414 1 010 1 III 1 1 113 I 5 i 317 I 21-4

./U&UR, 1604****Pitio*iig4010V.114!*014 11WIWOOP 1 01,0000e1404"."1'1.4"11 1 "616 0 " 1 4

iU.J.I---ij.-J---L--=Q-1---1-1---IUUL1

fJj 0 6 1 1 i 8 i 1 VI.

---.I.

A

P -.1

42/15 1 46131 1 111181117 1 131121itaoj j__Li2.t2_1__o_tu_JAWL5...Liti....1_511.10_16-1-212-

___ , ._4.. _..Lp.,..r..F...,..../.t...-_.....j.".!@*410017_0§,OASOOgig.01 ,

_ .

411' 2 1 31 91 11 01 01 01 01 11 16

1 84U41 ( ( 1 : 1218 1 168 1 5643 1 : 6] 1 040 1 040 1, 010 1 040 1 60 1 1164, __AL___.-Ii_______,Lj=1-- -- --- * * ..:_,..,.._.,

ID

1-1043 1 2112 1 1042 1 1 010 11 1 340 1 Di I 1812 1 714

algNog"g+00iiiii0100..1100WOO*111***400110*41WW0iigg1111!" . "11!rn."°1

0A0.0mium+=0,,wEl iIiI!IIIiI46 I 6 1 6 1 II I I

,itIPAROU_ 20 0 1......i.

04Ur

TOTAL 1107 3907 .3406

EEEE:Z

. 2 1 I. 0 I 4 I 35, 4', 0' .

I 0

0iiidii#10001 .. +A ====0 4 4

Q07 403 Id 311 II 9 10010,:

..Fi. .zm,,E : E,Ei i==.

-4

'AFFENDIX A-5

RILL-/PART-TIM kORK OF EMPLOYED RESPCMENTS, BY CAMPUS0:14.thITY (Data TarAL

imORK5TATCOUNT

1 TOTALI 1 I 2

40 I 57 _ 1 34HONOLULU C C 1 62.6 1 3104I _ /

-1-- 1 -- 11 86 1 33 1 124. .

.1:

. ,8,1321 C C

pawl C C

43 1 13 16169 L 3861

I 72.75_ J_ JO

27.3

48 1 20I ti

5TOTAL 70.2

23 -36_62

,

WaTh ---IE:01 WV TER" ."IM .=s7-RrOa--

APPENDIX A-6

STUDY RELATIONSHIPS OF EMPLOYED RESPONDENTS, BY CAMPUSCOMMUNITY COLLEGE TOTAL

f tV"

UL U C C

'KIMMEL - RUI-01W7UZzir.e.V7Z-V

F _S13211_RELATED RELATEC RELATED TOTALI I I 2 3 1 - . 3 z;...,_.:::tuwir....tnt-Y6::rn.a_...--_-_-- -------

42 1 16 1 29 1 12 I . 112

COLUMN 109 113 219TOTAL 24.7 25.6 49.7 100.0

SCHCOUHT-1

PNEIX A-7

RENEWS AMON MODER SCID1: XOLS SELECTED

BY CNN'S

OMMY COLLEg Turk

_ XL.R_CLINAWAII_MINULLI.,KAPIOLA- KAUAI CC LEEWARD MAUL CA w11IDWAA.0 11140... OTNICC C C NI C C C C C C COLLEGE CAsPuS 4 YrAw1 1 1 21 3 I 4 1 5 I 6 1 7 1 6 1 9111

LAM -,_0_ I 5 1 0 1 3 I .1, 1_ 0 I 17

N0NoLuL0 C C 1 ONO 1 0.0 1 12.6 1 0.0 1 70 1 2.8 2.6 f GiT-rTIJ.6 ----- _1ra___13...1__ 1 . .1 3 I_ 1 1 LL II 2,0_1_

I 0.0 . 1 ...5.3 .1_,..1,0_,.[+2A 1 0

42 1 0 1 3 1 10' 1 0 1 0 I 1 1 1 1 0 1 27_it 0 go_ _ 4W1t,:t1"=.7. "oroo.

43 1 1 1 01 01 01 01 11 01. 0KAUAI C C 1 204 I GO_ I 0.01 0.01 NO 1 20.0 1 Oto 000 1 040 1 900 1

.1 _1 _1._0 J Q I Li _L_L_MAUI C C I 010 1 080 1 887 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 060 1 0.0 I 17.1 1 66e7 I .0*

"'

_4s_ _1_0 _1_ LA _2 _i___i _L. .0 1 .0L1 _0_3 _5_ ,...A_I L....I_, toomiusc_c_ali 1 I 2.7_1 10,4_1 _70___I_Os 0 .1 ..._ 000_1 ...j i0_1_10.4.,J _it 'Li_ to

-1- : J. I I -- -- 7"1 '-4'..°1" - """"""I".."rnil""""". -.1'"""""--1-----1--------401 1 1 2 1 6 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 4 t 0 1

.._ _21102AULES__. . _I. 44 I j0L__I AG 1____ ii_l 4a LFAtLJ_QA__LAti...1_19_%LUNN 3 19 26 1 7 4 3 7 p8

TOTAL 1.4 ' 6.5 1106 5.5 '- 312 .'',' lig 1.4 3.2 : 3$19

5CH

L. :.--ROKFICT-10/N H1MA INLAND 1101

PRIVATE INST. TOTAL

I 12 i 13 I

CAMPUS

HONOLULU C C 1 5.1 I gm I 1501

_ 5. I_4(APIOLANI.ii_ 1 6.6 1 19,3. 1 26.4

42 1 7 1 14 1 64_LEEKARELL.C........_i_itat 1 21.2 1_19.4

- -1- 1-------I43 I 1 1 2 1 5

KAUAI C C 1 204 1 40.0 1 2113VII!:

ALLA 1 1, . 2 1 15 _

MAUI C C I 6*7 1 13.3 1 6.901.0. . ..0010...0.001

43_ t____.0 2. I 13-A&

./......../......0-1

46 1 0 1 4 I 23

COLUMN 16 AA 216TOTAL 714 0044 150.0

.=

50..W I .h.: i :

*TEM A-8RESPCMENTS ATTENDING ANOTHER SCHOOL:

BY CAPPLISODttiLNITY COLLEGE TOTAL

SCHSTA7COUNT _1

-FW lei P C T 1FULLY ISE PARTTA IC_ Fi QV_I --TOTAL1 1 I 2 1i,..._

40__I 2-3L-1- ___11,=1.______a_HO OLULU C C I . 67.6 1 -32.4 I 16.7

-1--- ----1- .4 L 1--=._ I-2 I -07 -_-_-11LAELLT.__---L./. 4 L__ 2105- 1_ zet_s_L-I 1======== I

42 1 57 I 6 1 03---ilLIII-ARD------1---51-0_.W.&5--1-01.LAIL-.._1===-....* =.....-.=,

TIME

KAUAI C C0

100.0 1 0.0

MAUI C C 92* 1 7.1=I======== I======== 1_..4_5-1.--- Al_ 1.------a-L-----1-3---4.15_1 11_.11._

--'=` i -----'-=- -46 I 1 e 1 4 1 22

1ARILs.C__I_eutill--1-1.4DIAMIN 167TOTAL e2.3 17..7 100.0

4200

PcR 1 crill5 7

-APPENIX A-9 .

RESPONDENTS ATTENDING ANoTEER StaloOL: TRAISFER oF CREDITSBY CN1Pos

OZIMMUNITY COI_LEGE TOTAL

TRAA3CRCOUNT_ I _

--RCM PC.3 JALL OR ZOME FEW ROWIMOST TOTALI I I 2 T 3 1

- c..614M .._.-'.77_.1.r..-?.., -- I ..'=.= I I,4_C I a_ _u_..... 5 A, . 1 I 23

HONOLULU C C I 73.9 I 21 a 7 1 4.3 I 19.641_-_--1-. 20--- I 5 1 1 1 26

_ ISARLQ1N1 c__C _I 701,9 L. 194a I a 4 0 I 22.442 1 33 I 2 I 1 I 56

1-9.1.7 L =5.6 ___I, EJ*11 1 2 LAI 0-I =-=--- I

43 I 1 / 1 1 0 1 . 2K MTh / C C I 00.0 1 '00.0 1 0.0 I 1.7

!-- 1 0 1_ _.2 1 0 1 LL_3* 3 I 16.7 I 0*0 1 1003-P----I- -1.,- I_ -, ....,A I 6

.----111AWALI_C C -1.--_33 . 3 I 50 * 0 1 . 110 * 7 1.- 1 : - 1- 1 -: -1

46 I 11 1 0 1 0 t 11===-ILINI)-W.AELQ.C...C........----1I00 .0 . _1 ._ . . 0.0 _1 _0,0- 1_9.5

z.-=t-1 -`-`:= I '''"=" ''''' i --=.1COLUMN 94 la 4 1 46

TOTAL 01.0 15.5 3 4 100 *0 .

_ RAw_cti. ocoRE_E5 or ii_REKooMP-1

,

46

PITEMIX A-I0FUTURE EDUCATNNAL PLANS OF RESPONDENTS, BY CAMPUS

COMMUNITY COLAEGE TOTAL

21 3 1 4 1

HONOLULU C C_ I 42.9.....M.....W...1.......1..3.3,0 V.

3

.

a..

36 1 20 1 32.,._--.1-1-2...P

1'T

. 40-1 a - A

1 34 . . .=

4::,- r7KAUilli C C,

I at;6

1 254m 16.7 .1 _7 1 3

q '';7'L .1-1,- . .

. . -

S. ... ......**,...,....1

1 17.4 1 14.5=..........-. I ..I ................,...29* _

li'',G::-*:;1. . 'P. ..41.7, . -

46i .......w..-....1

_ ,,------(----.----7 1

..

----

_

- ---- _

P

COLUMNTOTAL

43730.4 12.3

SCHOOLS SO ELIE) BY

21. 12.7 24.0

APPENDM Aiis WITH SPRING 1977 MCAT!CO4411ITY COLLEGE TOTAL

100.0

PLANS, BY CAtiptiS

Lb. A

47

B C

.

G--------

378 145 64 4 89 5 6 14 51

Boon Ozaamity ()allege 16 4 3 2 1 3 1 2

litinalubi 0200-01.1tP College 67 25 14 1 15 1 1 10

Upiolarli Commity College 102 44 18 20 1 2 7 10

Eauai Comaunity College 13 a 1 1 1 2

Leeward Community College 119 46 16 33 2 5 17

Maui Community College 22 6 2 0 1 1 4

Windward Cmmunity. College 39 12 10 11 6

5 3

*MIX A-12ALLATI OF COMMITY c0LLEGE Ex:PERM/1a

BY CAMPuS01441IIITY COLLEGE TOTAL

ramp

t.

isFteo, 1EO ISFIEU TOTAL1 1 1 3 1

HONOLULU C C 1 33.3 24.1 39.7 1 2.9 1 0.0 / 20.0_

747 .14141JAI C C

42========I=======

56 1

PAUl C C

i==21.2 1

2 1,, 2 31 6.1 1 : mkt 1 3 9-==== =======

1 20.6 I 20.0 .1 50.0 1 7.4 1 1. I 601. . I

I I46 1 11 . t la t

COLUMN 209TOTAL 2402

,

336 38 11 8354.5 103 . 100.0

,s 1 1 1 2 1 3 / 4 1 5 1

HON&ULUi.

=-gAP--1-aLM4e C I

1

42 1

25.2

66

1 30.6 1 35.3 1 3.5 2.4 1 2

41 67 1 82 131 1 1 229 , 5.

k KAUAI C C43 1

I=

623.5========

-

1 9 11 26.5========

a

161 4701=======.: 2

0 40.02a A4_1_._-___2_1_-_613---=5.9 / 2.9 1 6.2

k.%.23.5 26.5 41.2 1

UK NOIMIMML-1-111F1111111M.

2235

22_5_

.O_L-__.L.Mi-q-1-4-i-L--------.-=..-1-..-17 1 17 4

-..-.---../0 1 62 .

=

TOTAL 27.3 37.0 1.4 29100.0

I r

5.1

-48-

AFFEMIX A-12

EWAL3 OIMSENPARMY

NCLULU C C

F I EDLI5.0 I 22*

FlED *SPIED TOTAL31 41 5

2 1 2 00 1 2.5 1 1.233333333

KAUAI C C

46 1 20 1 232

4 7 1 3 1 333.0 I 15.2 1 40.5 1 21.2 1 9.1. I 4.0

MAUI C C

COLUMTOTA

7.6 I 10.6 1 1.8 1 37.9 1 12.13 33333333 3 33.333

3 1 _ 33 I

===101

12.3

9 I 25

3 _3158 327 171 55 816

6.719.3 40.0 2

5F160 F TOTAL1 2 I 3 1 4 4 IJ'

=-

0 ULU C

KAUAI C C

7 1 23*9 1 49.1 397 1 2002- 33 33 3333 3 3 33333

42 1 30 1 8 1 107

7 =4 1 5 1 1 I 191 6

.2 1 3.0 1 07.6 1 15.2.1.=!..-

.2 1 59.1 1 12.1 _ 05=

COLUMN 90 182 421 75 29 805TOTAL 12.2 22.6 52.3 9.3 306 100.0

EVAL5 warn=_r_clubar_____ROW Per _t_VERYS_A-T---------5-5-T-

I I5F IED FleD ISFIEDI 1 I 2 1 3 I 1 5

_ i f _-_- - ut_,=__

23.0 I 24.3 I 40.5 r

TOTAL

333 .... 33 333342 1 46 1 46 1 98 I . 22 1 9. I 223

41,01 I-- 9.9_1 --400_

2011.8 1 14.7 1 8808 1 6.8 1 5.9KAUAI C C

__----tA_--I---MAUI C C 1 9.2 1 2 _ I 16.9 I 4.6== I __==--=/=::======r

-----=0-5 1_ __Z__ ----1--19--*--KMA-1-1----C----1-12.= I5 ==-Z.-6-. I- 0

--/ z i= _ _ -- __== : -I

C AMPUS

VIAL8

-49-

ARMEMIX A712 (coNT.)

115FIE0 F

1 I 2 I

AIAL I 5I 31.9 I 34.4 1 3.7 1 0.0

..1 / =. -v=-= I

AL1, I 5 B... I

I __3C.7 I

42 1 65 t 66 I 82 I 1329.7

MON LULU C

KAELEX,1

Lfv_4400 C

a

KAUA 1 C C

_ _

1420.6 I 30.2 I 41.2

229

0 . 0 0 1

44 23 I 27u 22.4 I 34., I 40.3

AWAi

35.0 5-:_t____-?-aJ___-14-14-0_ 1

29 I 20 ,,1 .0.: -p--, 0 1 8346 0 3-I-0 I__ _ .0-0 t '! ' (1.---1------7-Ltv---

_i_--:-----1--22 I 27.3 _9 27 n

26.0 3341 3549 303: I e 0

KL_kgyAn0

COLUMN--TOTAL

RAY CR SQUARE P-2-0.6 9 115 IOLLTN 24 06G_1EE1 CF

mg Al/ FACIIIITESrEgiumENT

I 5F EO1 I

fAMPlic

NONOLULU C C

Al

I/

I

22.0 I

ln/

t

_KAP TOL AN C C I 9.8 I

42 I T

43KAUA I C C

I 26.1 I

I

MAUI C C 9.1 I

MI NO MARD _C_ C9

14.+1I

1

COLUMNTOTAL

13216.3

FIED

0 21 0 0 0 0 .

2 I 31 45F LEP TOTAL

5 I

29.6 I 41.5 1 5.7 I I .3 I 19.7_ _ _ .ft 1 ft=-ft. = ft-ft. ftft 1.ft ft ft ft=ft= I.,. = ft= ...... 1

*A t 107 I 1.1 I 14 I 227_19.5_ _I 404_ I_ 1449 i 13_. I U 77.1

1 I-. 1 1

70 I 66 14 I 21 2

10 I 13 I 6 I 230.3 I 39.4 I 18.2 I 6.1 1

L- j _

_._L9 I 6 f 6628.5 t 39.6 I 15.2 1 7.6 I 0.2

51 30 7 t 0 .1

==1210

26.0353 56 30

43.6 10.4 3.7004

100.0__Amt.stu_siluARE

EMAL8 Tum DEPERIENCECOMM.:

ROM PC/ LV_FP _54T_ ___I ISFIED/ 11 2

F I E ISFIED31 4 . I 5T

1 .

TA.

_________..

HONOLULU C C

41.

421

I 21.* I 32.5

1L_ _L_

1 394 5.6 I-- /.......ft-----

9

--rld14QLAt-LI-C--C-1---Ll5 I __21L. 7 /

57 I 71I 841

./14 1 31

A _ _hi _ _ 1 1 I

22927.9

KAUAI C C43 I 4 1 12

I 12.1 i 36 . 4

LI 2_1

1

1

1

1545.5

31___5=-1144.1

n1910

I 1 I 1

I 3.0 I 3.0

I 7.4 1 1.5

j 1 1_

I

1

33.0

4-4-1---MAUI C C I

45 I

16.2 30.9_ _ _ _

___ _ 7 _ _I_ 7

I

iI

643

MA KATI C C i 1tE9 -1_110- 1 2.9 1 2.61

I 627_0!_1±42_MAPO C C

46 tft

_

20 I 17_32473_ _ _17* 4

-_ __ _ _ _-_ ...... ft

i1

_

2*35.7--

_ _ _ i __ _I 0 I 1t_a_o_t_i_.sc_i

.-- .--;../. --r-5

; 1 IX B-1

-REA9X FOR NOT CCONLIIM ENROWERT) BY PROM

R4WAII CAIIIII1( COLLEGE

PEAS

_C_CLNT _1_

Paw PCT !CAN0D TRANER CLASSFL PPEt iNANCli BILL R N LRdak EO UNiKKIL TO 00AX PROBLEM-Dim usTFROOLems Afkal TairAt

I 2 1 3 I 4 1 9 1 10 1 11 1 12 1 131 14 1

MAJOR!) ......../........ I ........ ........ .. .. ......../

1 I 2 1 2 2 t-100-1-- IGO i6T1T5O -1-0.0 -m-r6im-n: -I :--1.,Ier....1..*****1

2 1 0 I 3 1 0 1 4 1 1 1 1_ 1 3 I t__ f____14PU 6RE-61 1 ea f 761 f---741 1 141 I 1144 E /-4I 1 3343F _

4 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 010 1 0111 01011HOTkl_kfpg_LSVS I 019 1_110 1 ONO 1 0.0 1 010 1 J0q0 1 111010 1 0.0 1 0.0

1_ t _

s 0 6-1----Frr-r 0 0 1-6--F 2PUBLIC SEMMES I 060 1 060 1 5060 1 SOO 1 Oa 1 000 1 04 1 0.0 1 0.0 I CO

_

--TECNNOLOGY

TME-o 8 1 0:0 [ IA 1 06°0--i---14--1 06°0 1 06°0 1 4011 -1 100j j 4

----m az az

COLUMN 2 11 3 a 2 4 2 6 4

TOTAL 4#0 26 2 _71] 19,0 4 8 1,6 466 _L4t1 w

I

IXB-2

ING 1976 KIRK wERIENCEG oF NEspcNreffs, BY PRocto

KAMM MINTY CkLEGE

. 676WORXCOUNT 1

pow-oerlyes YOri... NO- _

I 1 I 2 1 3.... .. . . .q..0.

17MAJG P --mil

1

- ___

11 6 r 4 I

5 1

2 1 3 I 3 1 e

7-111-STRF3T2E4-1-11W71-67;1-1-13.31 14

:4 1 0 1 0 1 1 1

HOTEL 6 FOOD SVS 1 060 1 010 1 10080 1

1

-2------4#6

4 -I

0.5

r-----1 I-- --1- -I- 0 i

PUBLIC SERVICES 1 5040 I 5040 I 040 1

1---T-1-3711---rummv-------T-167-0-1 5ir-1 754-1

-OTHER

1

a 1 I 0 1 0 1 1

[r0ra-Traro-.0ITT;r--

COLUNN 17

TOTAL _4041_9

21#4

16

3861

42

10060

MAJG PP

-a

WWI X B-3ClARDIT ACTIVITIES OF RESPONOENTS, BY PROGRAM

HAWAII COMMUNITY COLLEGE_

. CLEIRACTCOUNT 1

P. PCT ILOcKINGN-0-1W.4 1.4-2-5-41r113-61r0 aThitt-11-F-511VORK- P 0-1VSYS-11--- S C-P4-0-01- -ar ALI I I 1 3 1 4 / 5 1

-true-ow-x-4T S2 1 2 1 5 1 21 4 1 I I 14

357T-1-1-47.1--1-2-5-0-rn:i1--3-3-a-----4 I 01 01

TE FOOD SVS I Oa 0 1 01 z

_I00,0

11

00 a 0

1t

12 4/ .a .../ ...M

PuoLIc SERVTcts I 000 I 100000.1.......-../..-..-== - - 000 060 1 448

0 I

9 a 5

3303a

-a

42COLUMN 2TOTAL

AITEMIX B-4

FESPONCENTS WkU ARE WORKING: OMPATIONS/ BY PRCOAMHAWAII COMMUNITY COLLEGE

JO8TITLECJ1WT 1

PC T I PR1 9 1

------ -----

TECHNOLOGY

IC;

a -0 1 , 0 I 0 1 2

a

I. 0.=0., ..§0=..==.a.

0,0 1- 900 1 50.0 1 50,0 I 0.0 1 12.50EEI

C

X B-5

RESPCNDENTS MO ARE WORKING: WORKISTUDY RELATIONSHIPS, BY PROGRAMFIAWAII COPMLNITY COLLEGE

=

SUAJGRP -=_

5 1 1 1 0 1 1 1

PUBLIC SERV ICES I 5000 1 0 0 1 50.0 1 1

1 0 50.0 1 50.0 1-1----- 11 0 1 1 1 -0IITHETI-0-0-1-T0-0;0- -1----0.0 -1-5W----7 .

-I--------I-----==.1.---. I

TECHNOLOGY

----------

RAJGRP

-52-

AfWNDIXR .

FUTURE EDUCATIONAL PLANS OF RESPONDENTS, BY PROGRAMHAWAII 01,1414ITY COLLEGE

377PLANCOUNT I--nil-PO.- E13--- -14EXT-WIC 11 TO7A---

1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I0- -1---27-T--4-71 4 I- 20

dar-1-1-03-1"----215-613-1---7070-1-41 - I -------1....^---- I

2 I 1

2------ffErr314E-34

HOTEL it F000 SVS

PUBL IC SERV ICES

-1:1THLwri-

EVALLATI

8 I 0 I 0 1 0 I i I I

--Ir-InIT-T-70;70-11-7-1:r-0 tr-ITIVIITOT771:

19 6 7 11 42562 11.9 1667 2662_ 10060COLUMN

TOTAL

APPENDIX B,7

COU,EGE EXPERIENCES, BY PROGRAM: AVERAGE T_HAWAII COMPLNITY COLLEGE

a

Ib

40 14 (1 ) (2 4

Inatuctii 2.5 2.4 2.3 3.0 3.0 2.3 4.0

Faculty/Sbilent 1atiaa 2.3 2.1 2.2 3.0 3.5 3.0

03.1rse Variety 3.1 3.2 2.8 3.0 4.0 2.8 3.0

2.9 2.9 2.6 2.0 4.0 3.3

2.7 3.0 2.2 3.0 3.5 2.3

Fri dship 2.3 2.2 2.2 3.0 4.0 1.8 2.0

FAcilities/Fguipment 2.9 3.1 2.7 3.0 3.5 2.8

Tta1perice 2.5 2.8 2.2 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0

aA students rated each item en a five-point scale with "1"le rating.

'etir!ally signif_cant differencestem: total 1leqe p5j*

far

IIX C4.'

EASM FER WINING MUM BY RUNCattlITY MUSE-,

- t

UNA.AIL TO WO K PROBLEM EXHAUSTO PROBLEMS REASONS TOTAL

/ 4 I 9 I 10 I 11 1 12 I 13 1 14 1

LIBERAL ART

;

TECHNOLOGY

-----OTHER

1 0 3 1 3

1 6 1 11 1 12 1

1 10,2 I 18.0 1 263 1

1 11.1 1 5.6 1 5.6 I 22.2 1

449 CHI SQUARE

4 I 6 1 11 1 1 7 1 el 41r.-----1----444-4-344-4---2441=-4945.-4 ,-224--

12 t

20.3

2

3,4

5.6 1 0.0m . m

1 4 I '2 1 4 1 4 t 59

I 6.4 I 1A I 666 I 0.4 1 32.6

I 04 1 54 I 11.1 1 33,3 i 9,

68 6 A WITH 36 OEGREEI OF FREE0O00 SIGNIFICANCE 0.0000

IX C-2

PRI% 1976 WE DTERIENAriillEcSoar BY 1E04

$76WORK

MOINE PARTTIMEI I I 2 I

W

270 I 44.3 1 27.9 I 3

----- .1

1 41

1 19 1 24 1 14 I 57

TECHNOLOGY I 1303 I 42.1 1 24.6 1 32.2

= MIER I 4701 1 114 I 41:2 1 9.6

RA9 CHI 506ARE * 29.71126 WITH 8 OEGOEES C, FREE0004, SIGNIFICANCE 4 000002

APPENDIX C-3

CIRRENT ACTIVITIES OF RESPCMOITS, BY PROGRAMHONOLOW COVMUNITY COLLEGE

URRACT

_

LIBERAL ARTS I 645 I 4640 I 1.8 I 43.5 1.6

41

TEtHNOLOGY

OTHER

a0.3 1 67.

-

- RAW CHI SOUARr

.jdot IT LE

20876 WITH 16 ':oeGnees OF

_ _APPENDIX C-4

_Me SIGNIFICANCE

SPONDENTS WHO ARE WORKING: OCCUPATIONS, BY PROGRAMHONOLULU COMMUNITY COLLEGE

s aL es OCCUF ING GCCP TRADES RORK OCC OCCUP21 3 5 I 81 7 1 a gTOT

6 I 0.0 I 0.0

*

ais*.immenem._

TECHNOLOGY

OTHER

444 1742 1 549 I 1146 I 2046

4244 1 0.0 I 14.3 1 1443 _ 040

Willt'aii-,oftsauane 84494225 WITH ea DEGREES OP FREEDOM.

28

343546

ICANCE * 040017

-APPENDIX C-5

RESPMIDENTS WHO ARE WORKING: WORK/STUDY RELATIONSHIPS, BY MGM- HONOLULU COMUNITY COLLEGE

I 440 I 2040 I

6 I

PUULrZC VICE=

6 I ? I

YECHROLOGY 1 20.6 1

-55-

APPRCIX

FUTURE EDUCATIONAL PLANS OF RESPONDENTS, BY PROGRAM

HONOLULU COMMUNITY COLLEGE

---t4A Pig°

NEXT M KNOW TOTALii I 1 r

_

5 15 I--------F-11131...1r------SERM-LCES 1

,5CHNOLOGY6 I 16

T 27.6

A CHI SOUAME m GitrE5 OF Faernosi. SIGNIFICANCr m CP .0262

EVALLLITIONS OF

APPENDIX C-7

COLLEGE EXPERIENCES, BY FR

HINDLILIJ COMMIITY COLLEGE

AVERAGERATINGa

A B C D B F

Itn 174 6 1 (41) 5 (

Irtucii 2.1 2.2 3.0 2.0 2.1

Faculty/Student 1atiris 2.2 2.3 3.0 2.1 2.2 1.9

Cburse Variety 2.7 2.9 2.9 2.7 2.5

Intollectual Environment 2.6 2.8 2.5 2.5 2.5

CCunseling Services 2.5 2.7 2.6 2.3 1.

Student Friendships 2.1 2.3 2.3 1.9 1.9

FacilitiesiEqui-PrEnt 2.3 2.4 -- 2.4 2.3 2.2

Teta' Experience 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.1

a Students rated each i _ a fivumost favorable ra

Le with "1"

MEM

_

IX 11-1 ..

SOS RR NOT °AMONG ENROWENT) BY PRON1

3

k

REEER 1-DIAL-OUER.----1141.-------1 GOAL GOld. RED UNA VA IL TO WOK PROBLEM EXHAOSTD PROBLEMS REASONS TOTAL --1 1 I 2 1 3 1 4 1 9 1 10 1 11 1 12 1 13 1 14 1

.______HASM----.4............1....48-**.....1.."*.w../AulammiL.4mows...3.a.........88..ml.wimum.4.,..,5 I ___.314_ 74.6___4..._-..3_1._ 0---1 0 i -_-74---ir----20-4 - 90 .

LIBERAL ARTS I 1.1 1 5.6 1 3343 1 7.8 I 17.5 1 3,3 I 5.6 1 080 I 3.3 1 2262 1 37.3 .-.. -.1........../-,......-.1..--.... /........;400= . 0 . T..... ...1.,..... -1. . 1 -.. .1 -1

-2 1 ---3.-1 ------i--A----11-1 -4_ 1 ---22--4---. -...11U_WIES.L-- Im_34118 __1-1,-6-1-11,4-1,--(1.4-1- -IA. 7 I 4.5_, 1 11,1 f

.1 ....-:.1 1 1--. -4-1 I -...- -- 1.- . I / .- 4-1_ _ , -.

3 1 20 I 1 1 . 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 I 3 1 3 1 35

_ - HEALTN-SERVICES- 1---5141--1---2,9-4-5,2--1--84-1 1.9-1-24 -I 0.0- 1-24 1- -4.6-1-4 A 1 0,5 ,

_.,1-.&.......MINsy_s_iff_14r-l=t-611.W.L'A---x-r-xx2-AlMte-11.-....11-T.Inaleffilbanlumftsiierluglisms-ingm-77=114------4 1 2 1 1 I 1 f II 6 I II 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 1 /7- _ P - ..

HOTEL 8 FOOD SYS I 114 1 5.9 I 5.9 1 5,9 1 35.3 I 5.9 1 5.9 1 040 1 5.9 I 17,6 I 7,1

tll--IM-X.W..MtgtL.w/Ia.MMIS.N.A.KILIAAM.O.Vli.4.--....i.o.u.aatutxml6_ t __O A.---0-1------1-J,,---(1=1,--0-1 0---I 0-4=-0-- 1 0-4-----2----L--,----81-----,.,

PUBLIC SERVICES I 0,0 1 0.0 1 00 I 0.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 1 040 1 080 1 NO 1 100,0 1 0.5 .....m

.

--L424----1-.4.0-1--28,0----4--3-145=-1---4-D-1----(1.-0.-1----0-,0-4---0,4-4---12,41-

.COLUMN 27 12 44 22 , 45 9 16 3 12 49 241

.. 182-----544-44

RAM CHI SQUARE A 131-21416 WITH 45 DEGREES OF FREEDOM, SIGNIFICANCE 0,0000

IX D-2_ .

SFRiht 1216 EgSIENCS OF RE§Paten BY PROW

KAMM COMITY COLLEGE

1;11

,m 576WORk

----DOLACT-IVI5=m2A-YE4-K.A -NO RO-MILLTI NE PARTTIME TOTAL

I I I 2 1 3

LIBERAL ARTS I 2143 / OliT 1 240 1 37IF

----BILEENE55

3 1 12 1 6 1 15 1 33 7 .

...._HEALT5E-PACES4-3834418-4-444 _ 1 450 1 14,0

. 6.;

cm

4 1 3 1 9 I I 1 17

HOTEL 8 FOOD SV5 1 17.6 1 5219 1 29,4 1 7.2

pow SERVICES 1 100.0 1 090 1 010 1 Oa

_ . 4-41.41-4. ...1........1........1

coLumm 77 91 E8 236

_66RAW CHI SQUARE A 20.07761 WITN IQ DEGREES OF FRLINNi 510IFICANCII 000011

-

APPENDIX D-3

CURRENT ACTIVITIES OF RESPONDENTS) BY PROGRAMKAPIOLANI COMPLNITY COLLEGE

CURRACTC OVN-awpcir /1-DaKING WORICItt1-0341E

1FOR woRK PONS- I 1 2

La 2_ 40 L

I 69 I 4464 I .3

MAI.AFF

LISERAL ARTS

,

=Res JLT2I3= aTH_JatHea_ ROWI IL SCHOOL TOTAL3 I 4 1 5 1

3 T 90_3 1 41.1 I 2.2 - I 37.7

s I_.2 1 9_ 2 61 _1,--

__EMS INES& I__ I 0 2 . 1 .69 a I_ 1 4.5 __I_ _11.11_11.6.0___1-1a....a- -13 I 2 I 25 I 3 1 3 1 0 1 33

--W-EA-L-TM WW3. 1 116_1_1 258. L- 9.-1-1 S16-1-160_1=1-3,66.-4 1 4

TEL & FOOD 895 1 23.5

PUOL IC-5

SERVICES' I 0.01

_0.0

CoLumN 23

1 9 1 0 1 3 1 t t

1 52.9 1 0.0 1 17.6 1 5.9 1 7.1

2 1 0 1 011 1000 1 000 I 0*0 1 0.0 1

.

1 L 0 f

I

1- -1-144 10 59 3 239

_An.1

0 a

RAW CH1 _ UARE 37.54810 WITH

APPENDIX D-4

RESPONDENTS W40 ARE WORKING: OCCUPATIONS, BY PROGRAM- KAPIOLANI COMMUNITY COLLEGE

400TITLE

GNIFICANCE * 0.0101

1 I MGR 6 SALES OCCUR ING ()CCP OCCUR1 1 1 2 1 3 I 5 1 8 1 9 1

L...--.3.- P% I-142.9 g 14.7 1 25.4I- --.:r -11_1----111-- -_se

47.1 I 26.5 I--- 1

--= --I1 0 I 22 1 0

1.-7--------

'ROTEL.4 I

C FOOD syS 1

TAL

2---11

0 1 24

0 I 2 I 7 1 0 1 0 r 0 1 90.0 1 22.2 1 77.8 I 0.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 I 6.8

PUBLIC SERVICES 1=I

a I ft

1 50.0 1 50.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 1.51 I 1 1

.41_1-

_ _a . ika.COLUMN 10 51

TnTAJ 7_6_5 ill. ft15 133

RAW CHI SQUARE 69.74429 WI TH 25 DEGREES OF FREE

AMINDIX

RESPONDENTS WHD ARE WORKING'. WORK/STLOY RELATIONSHIPS, BY PROGRAM

KAPIOLANI CDMMUNITY COLLEGE

SIGN

WORKRELCotour

Row _12.C.7_10- CLSEL Y -SOME WfriAT-N07- _ _

IRELATED RELATED RELATED TOTAL1 1 2 T 3

1_ I . 1. 1 _

LI Heim. ARTS 2.0 I 36.1 1 611 I 26.9---- t- -t_17_1-4 9 1 2-1_____21L0$214.033_1-20,...0 a 05-I -1 -1 -- -1

3 1 23 I 0 I 0 1 23MEALTH-SERVICES-1-1006&-L--0.0--1 6.0-4-436'I 5 1 2 1 2 I 9

HOTEL g roan SY5 I 55.6 I 72.2 I 22.2 1 6.7

ANCE 0*

-5 / _I 1 I- 0 1 .2-IX IC SERVICES i 50.0 I 5000 1 0.0 1 1.5

.*I I = = = s- I -*-= -I/

14E 1 A2.9 L 14.1 1 42.9-*.1 -1 1

coLumN so 36 40 g 34 64--------1-0TAL--- 37,_-26-. 15 8 -_-_-1130 0-

62456865 WITH 10 OEGReEs eF FREE IFICANCE * 43.0000

: !IMMIX D-6

FuTuRE muuTioNAL PLANS OF RESPONDENTSA SY PROGRAMKAPPOLANI COMMUNITY COLLEGE

577PLAN

1144k4G5Le._,,,,,,,,,I_-_NEXT 5Et4

1 iI. /

KNOW6 I

Ir_

1

I

ToTaL

6T---1

.... I -

_5 _-]1_._5.7 1

--I

12- _t4213.0 1

I

14.13LuleRAL ARTS 1 65.9.../ ,..-...---

37010

, 1_ _;3SL_I_____L4_AUAINFSS 1__JUL.1__-1-__-

.1 - ../.....==-.-1........12 1 10 1 5 t 7

4C FOOD SVS I 62.9 I 17.6 I 17.6 I 11.6 I 7.1---------------

AV CHI SQUARE w DECREES CF FREE DM. SIG FICANCE 040602

PPFENDIXD-7

EVALUATIONS OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE EXPERIENCES, BY PROGRAM: AVERAGE RATINGa

KAPIOLANI CCVMMITY COLLEGE

A.

Bif

C,

0.

E 1" GM oja (231) (85) (84) 34) (17) (2) (8)

Instruction 2.4 2.5 2.6 1.7 2.0 1.5 2.7

Faculty/Student 1atis 2.4 2.5 2.7 1.6 2.3 2.0 2.4

Cuuree Variety 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.1 2.8 2.5 3.0

intelleobial Environment 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.5 2.3 2.0 3.0

Counseling Sm-vices 2.8 2.9 2.9 1.9 2.7 3.0 2.6

StudEmt Friendships 2.2 2.3 2.4 1.7 1 2.5 2.4

Facilities/Eguipnent 2.9 3.2 2.8 2.,8 $.3 3.0 3.3

Total Experience 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.0 2.1 2.5 2.9

a:Average Ra

=et favorable

were statistically signilicarit differences in average ratings, by progrn, for thelowing ibsms: imuLruct_icth***

faculty/student relations***coarse variety**intellectual ernrirmalment*ccunseling services***student friendships**facilities* 6 8

tem a fi- point scale with "1" representing

MAJOPP

couNtROW

PEAS

========t

ses PR EPE11FiNAFICTAL OCTSLPEO--1314AVVIC-113-1/C1EK---PP0BLE

I I 2 3 1. 41 P 1 10... Ieuv-AL ART5 Ø /-0T

2 I 0 1 3 1 I 1 3 IBUSINESS- 0.O I1 I 7.7T ---2.1

3 1 4 I 0 1 0 1 0 1.HEALTH SERV CES 1 80E0 1 0E0 1 0E0 1 0E0 I -=

5 I-- 0 I I- -1-0-1-0-1-0-1-0-SERVICES I 0.0 1 50.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0

a I 0 1 0 1 2 1 3OT HER -0-.-0- 1 0.0 1 42-69 -0.°2r 040

_t-

COLUMN 4 4 1 7TOTAL 10.8 10.8 18.9 111.9

0 I 0

3Se t 2.7

376WORK:OUNT

-RtT-rvh-s--=-YESFUELT IRE PARTTTNE

1 1 I 21 3JGRP ---1-0I 2L IREITARTS 1 5;11-- 1=1.-* I ....= - I -....

I - 1- 1 6 1 58-.:3-7-1-110-0:1 I 4 I .7-r--------r-- ----- - r-------,

3 I 0 1 0 1 5HEALTH SERV ICES 1 060 1 0.0 I 100.0

I- 2: 1 0 1-0-PUBL IC SERV ICES I 100.0 I 0.0 I 0. a

I 1ECHMICO-GT I 0 V-5 at a

CI 5 1 2 1 0I- 0-00

COLUPS 1 9 13TOTAL_ 30.9 2500 38.1

NTENDIX E-3

ciARENT ACTIVITIES OF REsPoRDENTsj BY PRoGRAaiKAUAI CaitiMITY COLLEC

Tr-DR-WORK FCNSTUIL --SCHOVE---TOTAC--I -- 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I

MAJORP

3 I 12

PUBLIC SERVICES I 0.0 I 10000

8 I 1

COLUMN.TOTAL:

-------- ------ --------3 22 3 a

803 6141 843 2202

E-4

RESPOMBAFFS ,ARE teRKING: OCCUPATIONS4 BY PROGRAM

36

KAUAI COMMITY COU_EGE

.*---- --

3 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 1

LTALIB5gynitcaa_ 1_ 0.0 3343 6607 000 1 0.0 _i_is,

----.47;=1====q7.--------

PUBLIC SERVICES I 000

1717141105 1 --17711---1 -100 , 0,0 100 I 0-

0TRE,r- a

COLUMN 2TuAL _1245

9566

1=-7-

AFFENDIX E-5. .

RESPONDENTS MD ARE WoRKING: WORK/STUDY RELATIMSIA PS, DY PROGRAM.KAUAI Mil_INITY COLLEGE

MAJGRP

VORKRELCOUNT I

FIVW-PC1-1CLOWCY--509EWHAllan- -1101r-TRECATEOPECATED-RECKTEDTDTAL-1 1 I 2 I 3 I

------....g.. - ,=- - .0q------...g..-......---11 I i----r---T-----r----g _1 4

-----CTMERW-MT1 I 25;17-1-75.0 I 50-00 I 2101

2 I 1 0 1 4 1 50. 0-1EtTle I 26 43-31 2 1 0 1 1 I 3

HEALTH SERVICES I 0.7 I 0.0 1 3303 I 1808-

PUBLIC SERVICES I 003 I 000 I 10000 I 5*3

------1 r o --r1--1-677-T--MT-0-3 1- Jr.6-

,.

C 2

00.0

MEW E-6FUTURE EDUCATIONAL PLANS OF RESPONDENTS, BY PROGRAM

- KAUAI COPMLNITY COLLEGE

377PLANCOUNT IPM-PM-F-117E3-RD RIT.-KFT-TICArTT-MTV-ITE31-SER-KRUTIT-AE--

NAJGRFA

3 I 3HEALTH _SERVICES I 20.0 1 60.0

PLIOL IC SERVICES I 50*0

0 0 0_

5000 1 0 00 1 0.0I I

7 362300 16.7 10.4 100.0

EVALUATIoNS OF

APPENDIX E-7

E EXPERIENCES, EY PROGRAM: AVERAGE RATINGaCOPPWITY COLLEGE

G(6) 11) 2 (2) 7

livstruction 3.5 2.3 2.8 2.0 3.0 1.5 2.4

Faculty/Student Relations 2.3 1.7 1.7 2.0 3.0 1.5 2.4

Course' 3.2 3.4 2.9 2.6 3.5 3.5 3.5

intelUctuallmvircst 3.0 3.5 2.8 2.4 3.0 1.0 3.7

COxse1ingSczvLB 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.0 3.0 3.1

Student Friendahipe 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.2 3.0 2.0 2.3

Faailitiesisquiprrent 2.9 2.8 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.3

Fotal Experience 2.5 2.8 2.5 2.2 3.0 1.5 2.6

merage Bating: Studentsthe met favorable rating.

blame uere statistically signi icant differences in average ratings, by program, fortbe follcudng item: intellectual enviroramt**

item en a fivepoint scale with "1" re

2

PECOOT 1

---1113O-RT-TATHIEVED CHANGED rRAN6FER CLASSES PR_UNAVAIL TtriaMC---PRDBLE4 EAHAOSTD

1 I I 2 1 3 4 1 9 I 10 1 11 1

,GRP ""-00474- I 0 T

1 1 2 23 2ar7RAL-ARW-----1

-T--2 1

31.15134E5S_ 1

-1- -

10TEL & FOOD SVS 1- 1-

OLTC- -SERVICES r-- / - -

6 1

CH La

POULEM$12

ReAsLiN5 .101'AL13 1 14 1

- 1

.....747.. -- .........I. _... - I........ .... .. -..: ...._ .0 1 2 1 7 1 6 1 3 1 2 I a 1 1 1 9 41

0.0 1 - 4.9 1 17.1 1 14.6 I 7.3 1 4.9 1 190 1 ' 2.14 1 22.0 7.3 16.9.......r......1___ _ p.--77 -------__A- ,,,- f-

-13--1-11 t T0.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 1 50.0 1 50.0 1 0.0 1

.. -1-=------I---- 1 A I-- I

ci--1 1--1 1 1 1 1 o 1

ria i--14wa--1---1-71 --14.-3--r 0-01--1 1-4e3 1--280a t 0.8--1-....---.1.----...1.-----1..._-_...1.-..-...1.......--1----....

0 1 0 1 21 at 4 1 2 I 0 1

0i0-1-W1-0_-M11--t 4701 1 23.5 1- 11-.B--

0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 I 0.0

0.0 1

I3 I 2 1 0 1 2 I 3 't 2 1 0 1 0 1 . 0 1 0 1 2

37HER I 18.2 I 0.0 I 16.2 1 27.3 1 16.2 1 0.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 16.2,..------1m....... r.T --- 17-. .as....

..----- --1-.------_

cULLIAIR-4-----1-3- ob 42-31 1 =2 3 16 27TOTAL 1.6 5.3 2600 17.3 12.8 7.0 9.1 1.2 6.6 . 11.1

SQUARE - 1 CO011TWITN 54 UEGREES UF FREEOOWI S1GNIFTCA1CRI

SPRING

MAJORFO 1 ----Orn1 1

T r7-0.0-1-10070-1-11W-7I 43 1 69 1 52

------ ..1-2 1 24 1 13 4 1 41

1 58.5 1 31.7 1 9.8 1 18.9-

APPENDIX F-2

-K SHRIKES OVRESPONDENTS, BYLEEWARD COMINITY COLLEGE

876VORKCOUNT I

-IFULL7131E-DARTTTN6

405

Z4S00.0

NO DATA

OUSINESS

r-7-2=-1-11-61-2.----MOTEL FOOD 6V6 1 0.0 I 100.0 1 0.0 1 0.8

S I-PUOLTE-SEPVICES-57.1 T--T4.3 r--2ff6--1-/----- -

6 I 6 7 1 4 1

77-TEEPWOUTOY- -I 15.3 41.g--r 17-

OTHER

7

a t 3 I 1 1 7 1 I I1 1 4#1 1 6386 1 AO

-t- --rL7-7-- -1--------7conm------- o 91 --70 2fT--------

TOTAL 32.9 30.3 200 100.0PAt H WARE 040 31711-77-T2 0E0E- 74

APPENDIX F-3

cuRRENT ACTIVITIES OF RESPONDENTS, BYLEEWARD CatilMITY COLLEGE

mmjcmm

CURPACTI

ICITORTNo- w-0-r-IKT146- H mE AF6- ATTO-0110-1ErIFOW wow mONsIBIL SCHOOL TOTAI ' I 1 2 1 3 I. 4 I 5

---==i=1-----771-- -:-0-: 1------6-6 1-- --1----tiO--DA-'rA--I 1 Or. 6 r W6-1-0 .6-1- -0.0 1 0.0 -1-0-A-

1-----__I z-- 1-----__/_____-/-----.-/0 1 UlLMI

de 01 r 34.4 I

- - _7.7==T-..----I--------I 1 i as 1 4 I 10 1

51,Ng_ss LZA0 / ellO_J-1-tio..o---=.--1---

I t 1 1 1 0 1

MOTEL G F000 5VS I 50.0 I 50.0 i 0.0 1 0-- I- -I--

I 1 I 5 0PVEILIc stAWCEs I -14'.5 1--71.0 1

..I..... 1--- ----- /-----__/_____I----mg4 s______±1___i.1_1____z _

-RRODAgy i 23.5 [ 64.7 T-7-0.0 1 Ito& 4_0(1_.._____----.1-.. ---- -_/_- "I__-____- -

6 1 1 I 5 I 2 I 3 1 0 I 11I _4.1_ T 41.5 1 te.2 1_ 17.3 1_0_4___

---71111V-4fr-- t 6 133-- 16 -72--5---2-4-2--7-TOTAL 6.6 55.0 6.6 29.8 2.1 100.0

THE

JOISTITLECOUNT I

RDW-PCT-TPROFT

_MueLtc

APPENDIX F4

RESPCNDENTS 1440 ARE WORKING: OCCLPATI S.. BY P

LEEWARD COMMLNITY COLLEGE

MI Egefl----6TRUCWI-C- MGR= SACES-UCC_ ISHCFOTI-INO-UCCP-TRAOCT---woluir-ort--6CrUMI 1 1 2 g 3 I 4 I 5 1 6 I 7 s 8t - -I 1------- I---- --t-- - I-- -1 I I I

r r -5---r_ 20 T r- --0--1--- 6 1-- 1 ---Tir-lr----WTs- --1---572--T-

_ 14-.15 1--65.-99

Rawrrna7

9 I

2 i 7 I 7 1 5 1

T-'70.4--- i -3-0.5 r 77172---7----cf.07 1-- --i -= ---1-7--:---=-I-

5 I I 1 I I 2 I 0 1 0SERV [cos I 25.0_ 1 25.0 I 50.0_ 1 0.0 I 0

0 I 23

4

6 -1r-- 4- -6 1-----TECNNOLOOv I 9.1 1 36.4 I 27.3 1 0.0 1 0.0

/ _ _

-711--1-7. I---1---23.0- -r-st.Gis----r----257ir I a./-_-- ---1--- _/------./

COLUMN 15 46 31 17701AL .1 374--25.1 ---07

--------

OTHER-

00.0

901 I 0.9

kW GNI SOUARE m 3o79762 W1TN 32 DEGREES OF FREEDOM. SIGNIFICANCE

APPENDIX F-5

S 410 ARE WORKING: WORK/STUDY RELATIONSHIPS, BY PR-LEVARD COMMLNITY COLLEGE

REREL

üw PlRLATED RELATEO POCCITtr---r ..L

1 1 2 I 3 IAkAGPPL0L 6E I__-WO ARTS I .5 I 10.9 I

rfaSS-

4 I 1 1 0 0 I 2oTEL G FQDD_

t2 2PUBLIC sfolvIces I 20.0 1 40.0 4 40.0 1 4.2

----vre A NOL OOV-1--------1--------1--- --- - /

A_ 1 1 I 2 _L. 4Ll=tieit0 I___R$4 I 1,0,9_1___----- ---/COLUMN 16 29 12 7 5IQ TAAL MAD__

WAVE CH f Wftff WM. t WW1 YR-WU (0113-CrVirMrEN

-64-

WPM:11X F-6-

MEE EDUCATIONAL PLANS OF RESPONDENTS, BY PROGRAMLZEWARD COMMUNITY COI_LEGE

COUNT IOft1W-PCT-1-

57791.AN

A

aatataa,

2 1 16 1 7 I 5 I 12BUS INES5 1 40.0 1_ 1751 12. 1 30.0

MOM -6 FOOO SVS I 50.0 I 000

FL! 111..----STRVTCES-

EVALUATIONS

APPENDIX F-7

COLUGE EXPERIENCES/ BY PROGRAM: AVERAGE RATING&

LEEWARD COMMITY COLLECZ

E F GI 229 156 (35) (2 ) (7 ) (15)_ (10)

8.2 8.3 2.1 1.5 8.6 2.5 1.6

Faculty/Sthientnalaticals 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.5 2._ 2.8 1.6

Course Variety 2.9 2.9 2.6 1.5 3.1 2.6 3.0

Intellectual Envircareat 2.8 8.0 2.5 1.5 2.7 2.7 2.7

011,18a11ng Services 8.8 2.5 2.7 1.0 2.7 2.4 8'7

Student Friendships 2.2 2.2 8.3 1.0 2.1 2.2 2.1

Facilities/Figuipuent 2.3 2.3 2.1 1.0 2.9 8.6 2.5

'Mita/Experience 2.3 2.3 2.2 1.0 2.6 2.4 1.9

Stu&nt8 rated eachrable r ting.

in th "1"

77

'

ReAS

COUNT

_erGtrr--gEtrUHAVMTO-VRKFHUBEEtUrAfTiUSTirREMNb TWA1 1 t .21 31 41 :91. 10 1 II I. , 13 1 14 1

mAjop ......../_

12 1 9

AR1S-1-474--1-1irr760-7-21M21 0 1 11 11 11 31 Of 0.1 If Of 1

IX

Plite COITINUING DELLPEfri-BY PORM

Mit COLA

3 1 Q f 0 I 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 01 II 0 I 2

HEALTH BERVICES 1 00 I gig I sea I goo I NO I oio t 0.0 I 500 I 000 1 2097- 127---77.

771Vi-4 1#.4-1- 4F. 4

u u

PUBLIC SERVICES I 010 I 009 1 gag I 000 1 900 I 000 I, 000 1 100.0 I 000 1 1.4

-1 !t. :1-

urri it trT 2 11-1-Mr-1-1-1-1-67TECNNOLTAT-1-1877--r-OA-1-71/7rna'r-m-T

TM 8 1 l i 0 1 0 I 2 I I I 0 I II 31 110---7-1-1-orT-170-7- 007-1--2242- F-161 1 ---0-x-rmi1 r gir"TIT;FT-TGfsr'

... _TV477;z.-74.....WWT7 - --771-77------1.- ..;;77----oi.._ _.-_LT --I-

COLUMN 4 5 14 13 0 2

TOTAL 5,7 701 2040 Ida 1144

'SPRING 1976 KERIS CIF rept:tors, BY

NI mum cotia

SPAWNvriT L

7 IQ 7 70 .'

1040 1443 100 100.0

11 Kr1Faurifro AR

1 1 2 1 31mAgnp ...f....1.."..=21.... 04mmm

EEiHE-ii

--alErricAP41301 1 Os-midoelM1

2 1 I. 1 _ 0

14-3- 1- 440---1----470

HEALTH

ass -----11 0 I 1 I 1 1 2

SERV C No 4 10 +0. 1 _0040 ._219O5UMWO4410RIMO5!,1M4.

1 . 0.0

I

- O*4k.1--

f rTT1 1000 I Oa 1 1o5

---1-FOLIC

fSERV=

- -2 _1 2

.1

,

3

r 3 r . r T a1 2 L 4

OTHER 33.3 I 22.2 I

m 4.404044M104M000Mmimm444404

COLUMN 21 32 18 683b9 ____47a ___12.1

78

6-CURRENT ACTIVITIE OF RESPONDENTS1 BY PROGRAM

MAUI COMMUNITY COLLEGEli_

CURRAC7

Rg i4F-irdift-IVIS K NO H a ' -s F.

7 _t_4oi:.--?=_=j--PT-11 40 OK PON 510 1t.

1 1 I 2--,t,tx------- -----1t.

-------- I 5 1---,--24 14 _

--7-CI1FEIWr-AWT1 7

IiTliiiiill 0 0

23AL741 JEPVICE5 50 0 ,---- -- -

pueLic SERVICES0

I 0.0 1 0 0. 1 _100.0 I----- -- - - ==i=====0.0,

e= - . 1=

000 1=,====i

tWeli :NNM'tHICY1 ._!

A 'OICI-ULINIMINWINIIIIIMErillinW- irtmm

__APPENDIX G,4 ,

RESPONDENTS h1.0 ARE hORKING! CCCLPATIC$S, BY PROGRAM

MAUI catILNITY CoLLICZ

J00TITLER W PC-1" IPRQF.,1

& MGRPIf

AL -5 GCLIP2 I 3

_

.

*MIX G-3

240.0 1 1717.0-1-2-ffa- I..

2 0 0.0- ------- i-- -- 1-- I---- .. --e_F____

OTHER

TO A

I 1I 2000 I 000 I 2000 1 1502

-APPENDIX G-5

RESPOMENTS WO PRE WORKING: WORK/STUDY RELATIONSHIPS, BY PRoGRAM0:1101ITY COLLEGE

. __

WORKRELCOUNT I

-WO* Per-1Zrn-tri.y Sog VETWA-T-ROT W

Tri ECA Y-40 'An:A-TE0-1Q ELTAYEli--YDTALI 1 T 2 I 3 I

MAJGRR 4- ... ... 1-r-r-------z-Tlr-T---,zr-1.-TBECI AL ARTS --1%-74-i3F--T-T576--rirr;-tT---Evs-a_-----1-------- r-------rBrTfrge-ff

2 I .g _I 2 1 1

6 I I I 1 I I I 3TF,CHT.40440GY 4.7. 331.... f_zz;.242,Azzi

0- r----tr 4 1 507t4Cti I 040 I 2000 I 6000 t 16.6

In"TOTAL 12-.5-313 5601 10 0 7 9

-67-

11FIANIX G-6

FUTURE EDUCATIONAL_PLANS OF RESPONDENTS, BY PROGRAMMAUI COMMUNITY COLUGE

4 I

3 1 2 I 0HEALTH SE i411_10ES 1 100.0 1 000

PUOL.ZC 5ERVICE$ 1 00-I

or 0000 1 0.0

0.0 10000

Iei.waii=1

COLUMNTOTAL

27 12 10 20 694 14.5 2900-

EVALUATIONS OF

APPENDIX G,7

COLLEGE ENPERIENCES, BY PROGINI: AWRAGE RATINGSMAUI COMMU4ITY COLUGE

ItetribA(68)

8(43)

D(21)

E(1) (6)

-f _ _

3.5 2.5 3.o 1.5 2.0 3.3 1.9

Faculty/Studant %labials 2.4 2.3 3.0 1.5 5.0 2.7

Comae Variety 3.4 3.5 3.2 2.5 4.0 3.3 3.0

Intellecbial Env-Irma-lent 2.8 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.7 2.3

Corneelkbg Services 2.8 2.8 3.2 2.5 1.0 2.8 2.9

Sbadent Friendship] 2.3 2.3 2.5 1.5 1.0 2.7 2.1

Facilities/Equiprent 2.8 2.9 5.2 2.0 2.0 3.3 2.4

11'ota1Exparience 2.5 2.4 2.8 2.0 2.0 3.2 2.1

Image Rating: St_the met favorable ra

There were statistically significant differences inthe following items: inebruction*

faculty/etudent relations**

each item on a five-point scale with "1" representing

.4! a

bY Pro Trail, for

AMEX H-1REASONS FOR NOT CONTINUING ENROLLMENT, BY PROGRAM

WINDWARD COMMUNITY COLLEGE

_ C-TO-ITCIAX--13A0OCE S 11)-ItEA1 9 1 10 I 1 1

RPENM H72

SPRING -1976 WORK EYPERIMCES OP RESPCNDENTS, BY PROGRAMWINDWARD COMMUNITY COLLEGE

e I 228.6

8 1

-69-

IMMIX H-3.

ACTIVITIES OF RESPONDENTS., BY PROMM4WINDWARD COMMUNITY MLLE

TOTAL 9.2

AFFENDIX HL-4 _-- ----

.. . . . .

RESPONDENTS WHO ARE WORKING: .00CUPATIONS, BY PROGRN4

--- .- - WINDWARD COMJNITY COLLEGE

ctiou5Ec()LLEGE,:,

_IMMIX H-5RESPONDENTS hHO ARE WORKING: WORK/STUDY RELATIONSHIPS, BY PROGRAM

WINDWARD CCMMUNITY COLLEGE_

C MOAT--WOW P W

--111ECA-TE Dr-P EL AY EDWECATEot 1 1 2 1 3 1

M A4ORP = = ----- =1 = =_I -- -: 1 u = = -- 1

6 1--7774-71 21'iratiVATC ART1--T----111-0-0 1- --25-.-1-1-15-0;13-1 85-.2_.T.........-.. i ..-........- /-....-...--1 .

2.8_1_6_0 1 _ 1_11_34_

. 0 ---tram-0 _9_- -----

ORKREL

0 1 2 I 1 1 0 ITIFIER ObA2..-L-A7 _ 9.49 I II 1

-Tr-MU 7 27--TOTAL 15.5 25. 9 55.6 100 03

-70-

H-6 -

FUTURE EDUCATIONAL PLANS OF RESPOMENTS, BY PROG014WINDWARD COLLEGE

COVNT140W P W----IvirFiCiii- TITT117-

2 1 31 4 1

MAJGRP ----- - --M---nriliTEIT4C-100TS- I 67-._. ..

577PLAN

OLTOTAL 100.0

11 01 71

Ism

EVALUATIONS OF _

APPEMIX H-7

GE EXPERIENCES, BYW NDWARD COMMLNITY COLLIGE

Itn 6

g cD7

2.1 1.0 2.0

FacUity/Stildiant 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.9

Cturse Variety 3.7 3.2 3.0 2.6

Intellectual anrircirnent 2.6 2.6 2.0 2.6

OmnseLthg Servdres 2.3 2.3 2.0 2.4

Student Friendships 2.1 2.2 2.0 2.0

FnrilitieS/EWilanent 2.6 2.5 3.0 2.7

'Dotal EXpexi 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.3

each item on a five-pointmost favorable rating.