Master's Theses

Date of Award

Spring 1996

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department

Social Work

Advisor

Bill Daley

Abstract

The purpose of the researcher was to investigate the concerns of middle school students in urban and rural school settings. The independent variables investigated were residential background, ethnic background, gender, grade placement, age, and family structure. The dependent variable was scores from the Concerns Inventory. The sample consisted of 158 middle school students from two Kansas public school districts. Five composite null hypotheses were tested employing three-way analysis of variance (general linear model). A total of 140 comparisons were made plus 105 recurring. Of the 140 comparisons 42 were for main effects and 98 for interactions. Of the 42 main effects 22 were statistically significant al the .05 level. Of the 98 interactions, 16 were statistically significant at the .05 level. The results of the present study appeared to support the following generalizations: 1. rural students have greater Personal Concerns than urban students, 2. girls have greater Personal Concerns than boys, 3. girls have greater Social Concerns than boys, 4. girls have greater Peer Concerns than boys, 5. girls have greater Future Concerns than boys, 6. girls have greater Total Concerns than boys, 7. residential and ethnic background should be interpreted concurrently for Family Concerns, 8. residential and ethnic background should be interpreted concurrently for Social Concerns, 9. residential and ethnic background should be interpreted concurrently for School Concerns, 10. residential and ethnic background should be interpreted concurrently for Total Concerns, 11. grade placement and ethnic background should be interpreted concurrently for Personal Concerns, 12. ethnic background and grade placement should be interpreted concurrently for Family Concerns, 13. ethnic background and grade placement should be interpreted concurrently for Social Concerns, 14. ethnic background and grade placement should be interpreted concurrently for School Concerns, 15. ethnic background and grade placement should be interpreted concurrently for Peer Concerns, 16. residential and ethnic background should be interpreted concurrently for Future Concerns, 17. residential background, ethnic background and grade placement should be interpreted concurrently for Future Concerns, 18. ethnic background and grade placement should be interpreted concurrently for Total Concerns, 19. residential background and grade placement should be interpreted concurrently for School Concerns, 20. ethnic background, gender, and grade placement should be interpreted concurrently for School Concerns, 21. residential background and age should be interpreted concurrently for Personal Concerns, and 22. age and family structure should be interpreted concurrently for Family Concerns.

Rights

Copyright 1996 Deidria Waldschmidt

Comments

Notice: This material may be protected by copyright law (Title 17 U.S. Code).

Off Campus FHSU Users Click Here

Share

COinS