Citation
Political socialization and resocialization of American youth and young adults

Material Information

Title:
Political socialization and resocialization of American youth and young adults the process of learning, unlearning, and relearning political norms, values, attitudes, and behaviors
Creator:
Kannenberg, Rand Leslie
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
97 leaves : chart, forms ; 29 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Political socialization -- United States ( lcsh )
Political socialization ( fast )
United States ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 68-72).
Thesis:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Arts, Department of Sociology
General Note:
Typescript.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Rand Leslie Kannenberg.

Record Information

Source Institution:
|University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
|Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
10836667 ( OCLC )
ocm10836667
Classification:
LD1190.L66 1984m .K36 ( lcc )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
LITICAL SOCIALIZATION AND RESOCIALIZATION
OF AMERICAN YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS: THE PROCESS
OF LEARNING, UNLEARNING, AND RELEARNING
POLITICAL NORMS, VALUES, ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIORS
B.A. Unive >enver, 19 82
A thesis submitted to the
Faculty of the Graduate School of the
University of Colorado in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts
Department of Sociology
by
1984
Copyright (c^l984 by Rand Leslie Kannenberg'
All rights reserved.


This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by-
Rand Leslie Kannenberg
has been approved for the
Department of
Sociology
by
Richard H. Ogles
Michael S. Cummings
Date


Kannenberg, Rand Leslie (M.A., Sociology)
Political Socialization and Resocialization of American
Youth and Young Adults: The Process of Learning,
Unlearning, and Relearning Political Norms, Values,
Attitudes, and Behaviors
Thesis directed by Professor Richard H. Ogles
One of the major aspects of the research was to
investigate the relationship between school or level of
education (i.e., formal institutions of instruction) and
the source of influence on one's political attitudes and
behaviors. A basic assumption of the study was that
college/university students may be "liberated" from what
was previously taught and learned in the family and
school as a result of consciousness raising (by way of
both theory and practice). Accordingly, a. general
hypothesis was that college/university students are more
likely than high school students to have lower degrees
of support for, or conformity to, conventional norms and
values as transmitted by parents and teachers. The
paper introduces an alternative approach to the topics
of political socialization and resocialization the
"interaction" model, which takes into consideration not
only environmental circumstances such as new events or
experiences, but also character structure (e.g.,
dogmatism or closed-mindedness). Data was collected


IV
from Wheat Ridge High School, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, and
the University of Colorado at Denver.


DEDICATION
To Mom, Dad, and Tricia.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Most of all, I am very grateful for having had the
unconditional support of Tricia, my loving wife and
partner. She made it possible to continue when it
seemed out of the question. In addition, I am indebted
to both Dick Ogles and Mike Cummings, who as chair and
member of my committee respectively, guided me with
great insight as well as patience and trust. Dick,
especially has become much more than simply a faculty
advisor. He is now a special friend, and stands far
above the rest. Finally, I appreciate the cooperation
of the students at Wheat Ridge High School and the
University of Colorado at Denver who allowed me to study
their thoughts and actions about politics and society.


CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION.................., .... 1
Review of the Literature................ 5
Persistence-Beyond-Childhood.Model. ... 5
Constant Change Model ........... ... 6
Generations Model ............. 7
Statement of the Problem. . ...........15
II. GATHERING OF THE DATA ................24
The Instrument......................... .24
The Pretest . ; .............. . 27
The Sample........... ..................2 8
University of Colorado at Denver. . . 28
Wheat Ridge High School ......... 31
Collection of the Data. .................33
III. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA. . ............ 35
Presentation of the Findings. ....... 35
Interpretation of the Findings. ........5 3
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RE-
SEARCH. ......................................... 55
BIBLIOGRAPHY..................... ...............68


Vlll
APPENDIX
A. PERSONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION . . . 7 3
B. QUESTIONNAIRE...............................8 4
C. . LETTER FROM CAROLYN H. SIMMONS................90
D. . HUMAN RESEARCH COMMITTEE REVIEW ............. 91
E. LETTER TO CAROL A. WILSON...................93
F. MEMO REGARDING KANNENBERG 'S SURVEY..........94
G. LETTER TO UCD INSTRUCTORS...................9 5
H. SCHEDULING FORM.............................9 6
I. THANK YOU LETTER TO WRHS AND UCD FACULTY. . . 97


ix
TABLES
TABLE
3-1 Source of greatest influence on present
political attitudes and behaviors by school
(condensed)................................3 7
3-2 Source of greatest influence on present political
attitudes and behaviors by school ................ 38
3-3 Degree of change in personal political attitudes
and behaviors by school (condensed) ............. 40
3-4 Degree of change in personal political attitudes
and behaviors by school..........................41
3-5 Answer to question, "Does college provide more or
less than the family and secondary schools in
terms of different perspectives about government
and politics?" by school (condensed)..............43
3-6 Answer to question, "Does college provide more or
less than the family and secondary schools in
terms of different perspectives about government
and politics?" by school ..................... ..... 44
3-7 Respondent's and parent(s)' political affiliation,
political label and strength, political position,
and desired form of societal or political-economic
organization by school ................................. 45
3-8 Degree of dogmatism (or closed-mindedness) by
school............................................4 9
3-9 Measure of dogmatism by school...................... 50
3-10 Political direction of support for person/issue
concepts by school.............................. .51
3-11 Measure of political direction of support for
person/issue concepts ............................ 52


X
FIGURES
*
FIGURE
1-1 Basic Theoretical Schematic Analysis of the
Problem...........................................2 3
3-1 C Scale (Closed-Mindedness) ......................... 46
3-2
Semantic Differential Scales
47


CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This study concerns itself with the field of
political sociology, especially the area of political
socialization and, in particular, the phenomenon of
political resocialization. Other topics of discussion
include the teaching and learning of rules; the politi-
cal economy of schooling; schooling as cultural trans-
mission; education, law, and politics; and the contra-
dictions in higher education. Political sociology may
be defined as ". . the examination of the links be-
tween politics and society, between social structures
and political structures, and between social behaviour
and political behaviour" (Rush and Althoff, 1971:3).
This ". . definition of political sociology suggests
its principal roTe to explain the connection between-
social and political phenomena" (Ibid., 189). Classical
"social theorists such as Marx, Weber, and Durkheim, all
of whom were diversely interested in the questions of


2
power and authority, heavily influenced the subject.
Nonetheless, contemporary political sociology is not
necessarily a subfield of either sociology or political
science. "A genuine political sociology would be an
interdisciplinary hybrid that would 'combine social and
political explanatory variables, i.e., the inputs sug-
gested by the sociologist with the inputs suggested by
the political scientists'" (Wasburn, 1982:123). As
compared to 'the sociology of politics' which is a
distinct subfield of sociology alone .^political sociolo-
gy receives contributions of a wide variety from anthro-
pology, economics, history, political science, and so-
ciology .
An alternative "definition," however, might be
the political economy of state and society. This would
allow for greater discussion of exploitation and class
struggle, both of which were emphasized by Marx and
others from the conflict perspective. Such a charac-
terization would also provide for an easier analysis of
%
the basic contradictions in our political-economic
system.
Scholarly work in the scientific study of po-
litical socialization, notably within the discipline of
sociology (but in the other social sciences as well),
emphasizes . how group standards are passed on to


3
individual members" (Dawson and Prewitt, 1969:10). Es-
sentially, "political socialization is a special form of
the more general phenomenon of socialization" (Ibid.,
15). Stated in more precise terms,
Political socialization refers to the process by
Which peo^e ~Ie^nm;tb^Ja^apt^t"ITe^^rms~7~rvaiue1s,
attitudes, and behaviors accepted and practiced by
he ongoing system. Such learning., however, in-
volves much more than the acquisition of the appro-
priate knowledge of a society's political norms and
more than the blind performance of appropriate
political acts; it also assumes that the individual
so makes these norms and behaviors his [or her] own
-jLntprn3.il /ps thpm --rha'f "toT hiiq Tor her) they
pppppr to hp. right, just and moral. (Sigel and
Hoskin, 1977:191)
Social role analysis, as well as the writings
of both Cooley and Mead, are prominent in this area.
A more inclusive definition should also
address the issue of "consciousness raising." In addi-
tion, emphasis must be placed on how and why norms and
values change, as well as the forces which underlie this
process.
Political resocialization takes place when
individuals (children, adolescents, and adults),, volun-
tarily or involuntarily unlearn (i.e., are 'deso-
cialized' by others or themselves) and relearn political

norms, values, attitudes, and behaviors in accordance
with newly assigned or acquired^statuses and roles.
Members of particular social groups or society at large


4
modify their attitudes and behaviors to fit those of
their reference groups (both in and out-groups), in some
cases for the simple reason of wanting to be accepted by
peers and others (Federico and Schwartz, 1983:335).
In a study that spanned over 20 years, psychologist
T. M. Newcomb found that reference groups can have
a lasting effect on attitudes and beliefs (Newcomb,
1943, 1963). In 1935, Newcomb sent questionnaires
to students at Bennington College who at that time
were typically young.women from wealthy north-
eastern families. He found that while first-year
students tended to reflect their families' conser-
vative political views, juniors and seniors were
much.closer in attitudes to their liberal profes-
sors. When Newcomb followed the 1935 students
through their college careers, he found that with
each year their attitudes moved a little further to
the political left. He concluded that conservatism
was 'out' at Bennington in that, period: the woman
who expressed liberal ideas was applauded by both
faculty and prestigious older women, so' many did.
Interestingly, these women did not revert to their
former views after they graduated. Even after 20
years, their attitudes and beliefs remained the
same. (Ibid.)
One might also conjecture that such changes are
due hot only to conformity to a new "reference group"
but that these young women at Bennington probably also
developed some independence of thought and conviction.
That is to say, this kind of process reflects the inter-
action of an individual's personal orientation with new
ideas, values, etc. such that they are not only more
independent from their "families of orientation," but
are also less dependent on the liberal professors for
the further development of their beliefs and values than


they were initially on their parents.
Review of the Literature
With the exception of Newcomb's investigation
of reference groups and their influence at the col-
lege/university level and a select few other "rare pro-
jects, research in the field of political socialization
is, for the most part, limited to the study of young
children and adolescents (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:259).
"Political socialization during adult life has not been
the subject of much study. . (Rush and Althoff,
1971:45). Consequently, "there does not exist as yet a
theory of adult political socialization, although three
different approaches to the topic three models can
be detected" (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:261). At extreme
ends of the theoretical spectrum are the "persistence-
beyond-childhood" and the "constant change" models. An
intermediate theoretical position is the "generations"
model.
Persistence-Beyond-Childhood Model. The most
common assumption stresses the importance of early pat-
terns (Dawson and Prewitt, 1969; Easton and Dennis,
1969; Davies, 1965; Adorno et al., 1950; Stagner, 1954)
and suggests ". . that attitudes learned early are the
most enduring and hence are fair predictors of adult


6
stances" (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:262). This approach
accentuates the role of parents as political socializing
agents. As put forth by Langton (1969:21), the nuclear
family in Western society is the first social group to
which an individual belongs as well as the first so-
cializing agency in his or her life. Hess and Torney
(1967:95-97), state positively that parents participate
in the process of political socialization in three ways:
first of all, by transmitting political attitudes of the
family as well as some differences of opinion to be
found about the community in which they live; secondly,
by presenting political examples that children may emu-
late (e.g., party affiliation, voting patterns, etc.);
and thirdly, by providing experience in a hierarchic
social system (i.e., these familial relationships are
later generalized to political objects).
Constant Change Model. "This model . while
not excluding childhood socialization, argues that
^adulthood brings the organism into contact with new
experiences (new settings, novel events, new respon-
sibilities, changes in biological and social status)
which have a powerful socializing impact on the indi-
^ 1
vidual" (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:262). In other words,
The knowledge, values and attitudes acquired during
childhood and adolescence will be measured against
the experience of adult life: they may be rein-


7
forced, undermined or modified by that experience;
to suggest otherwise is to suggest a static politi-
cal behaviour. If the processes of adult social-
ization tend to reinforce those of childhood and
adolescence, the degree of change may be limited to
that of increasing conservatism with age, but where
conflict occurs, then radical changes in political
behaviour may result: such conflict may have its
roots in early political socialization, but it may
also be attributable to the experiences of later
socialization. (Rush and Althoff, 1917:47)
The family is in no way the sole agent of
political socialization. Almond and Verba (1963) found
that an important relationship exists between level of
education and political attitudes and behaviors. In
essence, an increase in the former makes more likely a
higher level of awareness regarding, and involvement in,
politics and government. A large number of other
studies orTeducation and electoral patterns specifical-
ly, have found a correlation between these two variables
as well. Basically, a college/university graduate is
more inclined to vote than someone who terminated
schooling at or before the high school level (see Verba,
Nie & Kim,1978).
Generations Model. The generations model
stresses external stimuli as the determining factor of
influence.
Such an approach accords events and changed set-
tings a significant role in shaping attitudes by
specifying that events and experiences will be
interpreted differentially among age cohorts who
share internal consistency in terms of educational


8
trends, age at which political events took place,
and subsequent peer influence in response to those
events (Lane and Sears, 1964; Carlsson and
Karlsson, 1970; Inglehart, 1971). (Sigel and Hos-
kin, 1977:262)
Actually, the generations model appears to be
no more than a "specification" of the constant change
model. For this reason, a fourth theme should be intro-
duced at this point. It combines both the generations
and constant change models and explicitly invokes the
----- :----- 1 : J
phenomenon of interaction between internal and external
processes in contrast to simply calling attention to
experiences. It must be recognized that people are not
automatically _______ mil iri their envi-
ronment. Instead, it is the manner in which the in-
dividual interacts with his or her social and physical
space that determines how he or she will interpret the
various political events and thus, why attitudes and
behaviors may or may not be changed in respect to both
direction and content.
pages to follow, American families and schools teach
children to respect the President, the Presidency, po-
lice officers, and other such symbols or objects of
authority. Furthermore, Easton and Dennis (1969) ex-
plain the processes of informal or primary political
socialization (which takes place in the family and peer
As will be discussed at greater length in the


9
groups without the subject being aware of it) and formal
or secondary political socialization (which takes place
in school and is obvious to the subject) and the intend-
ed outcome of support for the U.S. political system.
For the most part, children are successfully trained to
be dogmatic or closed-minded if and when a person or
issue could in any way be seen as a threat against the
political stability of their society.
In order to investigate the influence of
closed-mindedness in this study a shortened version of
the C Scale for Closed-Mindedness (Cummings, 1974; Uni-
versity of Colorado Attitude Survey, 1976) is used as a
"generic" measure of dogmatism. Whereas the F Scale
tends to measure right-wing closure and the D Scale
tends to measure unconventional closure (both right and
left), the C Scale was designed to serve as a reliable
and. valid measure of the generic phenomenon. Conse-
quently, the C Scale is the first measure of generic
dogmatism that is not biased in a particular "political"
direction (e.g., in the direction of fascism as is the F
Scale, or like the D Scale, towards communism) (Ibid.,
44-54). It was also desired to obtain a measure of
conservatism as distinct from dogmatism in the above
sense. Therefore, the semantic differential (Osgood, et
al., 1957) is used in this study as an instrument to


10
measure conservatism (i.e., support for conventional
person and issue concepts). "Because socialization
processes favor system-maintaining beliefs and atti-
tudes, the unquestioning citizen is more likely to be
dogmatically conservative than dogmatically progressive"
(Cummings, 1974:77). However, the relationship between
dogmatism and conservatism is not perfect (see Cummings,
1974:7 7 ff).
In addition to the family and school, peer
groups play a significant role in socialization. Dawson
and Prewitt (1969:130-131), indicate that late adoles-
cent and adult peer group political socialization usual-
ly supplements previously formed political orientations
for changes in social position. Nevertheless, they also
point out that new peer groups (fellow students, work-
ers, and/or neighbors, etc.) may be capable of altering
earlier political learning (especially if it was inade-
quate). However, most of the literature on desocializa-
tion and resocialization focuses on youth who grew up in
subcultures (or even foreign societies) and as adults
had to adapt to the mainstream (see Riley, Foner, Hess &
Toby, 1969). Further, the majority of the research in
this area concentrates on the negative experiences in-
volved in group-induced desocialization and resocializa-
tion (e.g., POW's and "brainwashing;" Schein, 1956; Se-


11
gal, 1957). Discussion of formal organizations and
socialization in the literature is restricted to total
institutions such as prisons, mental hospitals, and the
military, all of which exercise full control over their
members, and is confined to the process of involuntary
resocialization (the means of which.often involve
force).
Carnoy (1974:321), suggests that "formal school-
ing is part and parcel of the characteristics of cap-
italist growth." As defined by Dawson and Prewitt
(1969:144), "we reserve the word 'schooling' for the
more or less conscious attempt by an older generation to
instruct the young specifically through a set of insti-
tutions set aside for that purpose." The educational
system of twentieth-century America is an instrument of
the state, designed to. maintain and reproduce the dom-
inant norms, values, and social relations Clearly re-
flected by the needs and wants of the owners and man-
agers of capital. Schools perpetuate inequality and
injustice amongst workers and poor people. Goffman
(1963) talked about how so-called "normals" stigmatize
poor individuals and-families as "not quite human."
Those poverty children who are constantly being labeled
as "different" or even "worse" by both peers and
teachers (as well as other school officials), are likely


12
to accept such roles. Moreover, certain children are
encouraged to achieve while others are left to fail.
"Marxist historians and sociologists today interpret
mass schooling (including the early Sunday schools) as
an ideological assault on the working class: a massive
act of cultural aggression by the capitalist bourgeoi-
sie" (Musgrove, 1979:76).
With few exceptions, all children must attend
formal institutions of instruction until a certain age
or point in time. In most cases, private schools dis-
criminate against those families which cannot afford the
high costs of tuition and fees. Likewise, "at-home"
training is reserved for the few parents who have the
necessary funds and the required credentials or equiva-
lent coursework completed.' Also, the curriculum is
usually as restrictive as what is used in the public
schools and any alternatives must be approved by at
least one bureaucratic agent or agency. Essentially
then,
There is only one way to grow up in America if one
wants to eat regularly, to be warm, and not to be
harassed by the police. For the vast majority
there is only one place to go to school, and that
place is the same nearly everywhere. There is one
city, one mode of production, one road to power.
And there is little freedom. (Katz, 1975:3)
Already mentioned was the fact that like the
family, the school plays an important role in the pro-


13
cess of socialization. It is not this function that is
being questioned. Instead, the greatest fault of these
institutions is that they do not allow a variety of
attitudes regarding behavior, and the strict rules of
conduct to be found in both the family and school only
inhibit the human experience. "As soon as we bring
children together in large groups, rules become necessa-
ry. . And, as we enforce these rules, we are
bringing home the messages, 'You should do what I tell
you,' or, more generally, 'You should do what people in
authority tell you to do'" (Webb, 1981 :94). "The begin-
ning school child learns that obedience to authority is
as necessary for success as is conquering the new math"
(Dawson and Prewitt, 1969:143-144). This plain fact has
serious implications. For example, there is evidence
that school teachers punish (and reward) their students
by improper use of grades. "Some research data indicate
that grades are often more closely correlated with stu-
dents' conformity to classroom behavior standards than
to their academic competency" (Boocock, 1980:161).
Because schools promote compliance to rules,
creative intelligence and analytical ability, or criti-
cal study in general, is seldom encouraged. Even those
students who receive high scores on the assessment de-
vices meant to measure both creativity and intelligence


14
are given little opportunity to develop proficiency in
analytical skills. Written and oral expression at the
primary/secondary level is almost always censored. Or-
dinarily, it is not until a bright student enters col-
lege that he or she1 is given at least some freedom to
investigate subject matter that may very well deviate
from the status quo. Rational thought beyond simple
means-end planning or organizational competence is for
the most part a newly gained experience for incoming
college students, especially those in the arts and hu-
manities and the social sciences. A portrait of a war-
torn village or a detailed essay about a revolutionary
soldier is rarely observed in the traditional high
school classroom where teachers fear being suspended or
fired for any controversy whatsoever. A term project in
favor of communism is unlikely to be prepared by a
student who does not have access to different ideas
(e.g., the reading and. viewing of certain books and
movies is simply prohibited).
The Intended structures and. functions of educa-
tional systems are heavily influenced by the dominant
theory of human nature. Hobbes, like many of his fellow
political philosophers of early time, felt strongly that
without rigorous regulations there would result a so-
called "war of all against all." Durkheim, too, had a


15
"negative" view of human nature. His ". . school of
thought is suspicious of human freedom, believing that
human beings must be protected from their own capacity
for evil. . This is a popular belief in America,
and it holds that only the restraints of civil society
cause bad people to behave like good ones" (Webb,
1981:35-47). However, most if not all social behavior
is learned. With this in mind, it is difficult to
imagine what would cause a person to be born with either
"good" or "bad" behavioral traits. What must be fully
realized is that teachers (and parents also) "teach by
example," and their behaviors (as well as attitudes, if
expressed) are imitated by surrounding children.
Accordingly, obedient teachers and obedient parents are
more likely to have law-abiding students and children
respectively. Likewise, children can be taught how and
why to question authority. School boards are well aware
of this possibility. Radical teachers at the primary/
secondary level are forced to suppress their ideologies,
while conventional teachers are. encouraged to indoc-
trinate students into conformist ideologies.
Statement of the Problem
It has already been made clear that liberal
arts schooling at the majority of American colleges and
universities somewhat promotes free inquiry and indepen-


16
dent judgment which to some extent delegitimatizes the
conventional ideologies previously taught and learned in
the family and school (primary/secondary level). Simple
exposure to U.S. social problems and the many possibili-
ties for social change (reform or revolution) by way of
social science coursework taken, attendance at a variety
of radical speaker forums and/or campus held rallies,
and so forth, is capable in part of destroying the
American "mythology" (Bowles and Gintis, 1976). "Aca-
demic emancipation" or freedom from the "mainstream
ideology" is an indication of a major contradiction (and
one that is inherent) in our system of higher education
(see Eriksson, 1983). "Durkheim saw education as a
social creation, as the means by which a society assured
its own continuity by socializing the young in its own
image" (Boocock, 1980:279). However, the college/
university is far less successful than the primary
and secondary schools in reproducing and maintaining
conventional norms, values, attitudes and behaviors.
In fact, Bowles and Gintis suggest three goals
of schools which go far beyond reproduction of the
present system:
1. ) the fostering of social equality;
2. ) the promotion of the full development of
creative potentials in youth; and


17
3.) the integration of new generations into the
social order.1
They believe that the present system of doing
things (i.e., with "class rule" and "material dependen-
cy") should be eliminated and replaced by social demo-
cracy, a form of societal organization that they feel
will fulfill the goals listed above. As expressed by
Bowles and Gintis, the weaknesses of capitalism as they
apply to education (and vice versa) make evident the
importance of immediate reform or revolution in these
areas.
It is hoped that sometime in the near future
the individual will become the central concern of our
schools and educators. Accordingly, instead of modern
day preoccupation with coercive cultural transmission,
we should dedicate ourselves to freeing children from
the rigid norms and values that prohibit them from
recognizing their full potential as human beings as well
as participating members of social groups and society
(i.e., we should be concerned with meeting both the
"personalistic" and "colle*ctive" needs of human beings;
see Ogles, 1982).
^Bowles and Gintis recognize the importance of
noncoercive "cultural transmission" in any society.


18
American schools are unable to fully encourage
creativity, cooperation, and an understanding and appre-
ciation for self and others due to the political-econ-
omic system of which they are now a part. However, at
the same time, our system of education is unable to
completely stifle American youth and young adults be-
cause, in part, of our cultural tradition.
State and corporate elites have expressed con-
' siderable alarm over the political implications of
the growing number of overeducated workers. Jud-
ging from the existing literature, overeducated
workers can be expected to exhibit higher levels of
job dissatisfaction, increased tendencies toward
political leftism, greater political alienation,
and a weaker allegiance to the dominant achievement
ideology than workers with comparable occupations
or level of education. (Burris, 1983:454-67)
This is the second part of the contradiction,
and it is just the presence of such incongruities which
will dialectically lead to social democracy. The teach-
ing and learning of.laws and custom will only become a
truly democratic process if and when we replace cap-
italism with social democracy (or socialism).
A basic assumption of this study is that col-
lege/university students (in the liberal arts especial-
ly) may be "liberated" from what was previously taught
and learned in the family and school (i.e., from the
ideology in society as transmitted through most families
and primary and secondary schools). The area of focus
I
is primarily on the process of unlearning and relearning


19
political norms, values, attitudes and behaviors with
respect to the status and role of college/university
student.
A general hypothesis is that high school stu-
dents are less likely than college/university students
to have political attitudes and behaviors different from
parent(s). Alternately, college/university students are
politically desocialized and resocialized, therefore
making them more likely than high school students to
have lower degrees of support for, or conformity to,
conventional norms and values. It is precisely this
phenomenon that indicates a major contradiction in our
system of higher education. Whereas the college/uni-
versity level is meant to reinforce the existing politi-
cal/economic system, it also encourages independent
judgments regarding alternative forms of societal or
political-economic organization as well as differing
institutions which are more organized to meet human
needs and wants than to profit making. In addition, it
is assumed that college/university students become more
analytical toward the subject matter they study. Re-
lated to this conjecture is the possibility of their
becoming more progressive, open to or even supportive of
radical change (reform or revolution) in society.
The problem also has to do with character


20
structure (internal composition) and environmental cir-
cumstances (external stimuli) related to change (or not)
in political attitudes and behaviors. That is, it is
assumed that those students who change their political
attitudes and behaviors are not as dogmatic as those who
do not change, and, furthermore, that those students who
do change have a number of outside influences while at
the college/university level. Nonetheless, it is hypo-
thesized that the political events and experiences do
not influence these students as much as the further
development of an ability to analyze those things around
them.
Specifically, the six hypotheses of the
research are as follows:
1. ) The predominant influence on the present
political attitudes and behaviors of high school
students is from their parents rather than
friends, high school teachers, mass media or
other influences; in comparison with college
students whose parents will have lost their
major influence in favor of college teachers and
r
other factors.
2. ) The personal political attitudes and beha-
viors of high school students have changed
little or not at all; whereas, college students


21
have personal political attitudes and behaviors
which have already changed* (mostly in the lib-"
era!/radical, direction) somewhat, if not con-
siderably.
3. ) High school students are uncertain as to
whether college provides more, less, or as much
as the family and secondary schools in terms of
different perspectives about government and
politics; whereas, college students are con-
fident in their opinion that college provides
more than the family and secondary schools in
terms of "different" (i.e., a wider range of)
perspectives about government and politics.
4. ) The political affiliations, political
labels and strength, political positions, and
desired forms of societal or political-economic
organization of high school students are much
the same as their parents'; however, college
students have political affiliations, political
labels and strength, political positions, and
desired forms of societal or political-economic
organization different from (and mostly to the
left of) their parents'.
5. ) In general, high school students possess
higher degrees of dogmatism (or closed-minded-


22
ness) than do college students, and such dog-
matism tends to reinforce conservatism.
6.) High school students regard with favor such
conventional person/issue concepts as the FBI,
Nuclear Weaponry, and President Reagan, and
object to Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., Social-
ism, and Karl Marx; while on the contrary, col-
lege students regard with favor more liberal or
radical person/issue concepts such as Rev. Mar-
tin Luther King, Jr., Socialism, and Karl Marx,
and object to the FBI, Nuclear Weaponry, and
President Reagan.


Figure 1-1
Basic Theoretical Schematic Analysis of the Problem
A. Causes B. Effects
a
1 -) High School
Students
experiences and events
not "different" from ----------
family and school
I
ideology in society
maintained and ana-
lytical ability not
wel1-developed
. political attitudes and
-^behaviors similar to par-
' ent(s) reproduced
^ not "liberated"
b.) not politically resocialized a high degree of support
\for or conformity to con-
' " /ventional norms and val-
ues reproduced
a. )
2.) College/
University
Students
experiences and events "dif-
ferent" from family and school---
ideology in society
not maintained and
analytical ability
significantly further
developed
political attitudes and
behaviors similar to
parent(s) not reproduced
"liberated"
*
b
politically resocialized a high degree of support
\ for or conformity to
/ conventional norms and
values not reproduced*
N>
LO
*(indicators of the contradiction)


CHAPTER II
GATHERING OF THE DATA
The Instrument
It was decided during the earliest stages of
the project development that survey research of some
type was the appropriate method of data collection.
Eventually, this general strategy matured into a speci-
fic tactic. A sixty-five item questionnaire, designed
uniquely for the particular field study, became the
single mechanism for the gathering of the data (see
Appendix B ) -
The instrument was revised a total of three
times. The major complaint from thesis committee mem-
bers around the first draft was length. Therefore,
unnecessary or redundant items were either deleted or
combined with others of similar intent. Nonetheless,
sophisticated techniques such as the C Scale on closed-
mindedness, and an evaluative dimension of the semantic
differential were considered useful for substantive


25
reasons and, therefore,.were added. It was the second
version of the questionnaire which was used for the
pretest. Ultimately, wording of specific questions and
response categories was improved for the distinct pur-
pose of clarity. In addition, space provided for res-
ponses to open-ended questions was increased where
needed (see The Pretest).
In accordance with the rules and regulations of
the United States Department of Health and Human Ser-
vices (HHS), the Human Rights Research Committee,
Graduate School, University of Colorado at Denver, ap-
proved the questionnaire under expedited research re-
view. It was subject to the condition that only the
"Instructions" be revised. While an informed consent
was not required, anonymity was requested by the inves-

tigator in order to protect the respondent's right to
privacy.
The final version consisted of three parts:
"Personal Background Information;" "Personal Political
Information;" and "Parent(s)' Political Information."
Located between the second and third divisions were the
C Scale and semantic differential sections. The purpose
of the latter was to measure the meanings that certain

ideas had to different people. Respondents were asked


26
to rate six person/issue concepts (FBI, Martin Luther
King, Socialism, Karl Marx, Nuclear Weaponry, and Presi-
dent Reagan) in terms of five seven point descriptive
scales with ends of adjectives and their respective
antonyms (right-wrong; bad-good; fair-unfair; unjust-
just; and positive-negative) (see Appendix B). This one
subdivision was discovered to be less difficult for
students to comprehend and respond to than originally
expected. It is immediately obvious when a respondent
misunderstands the written instructions of this section.
The answers are either missing altogether or consis-
tently contradictory.
However, an item which called for sexual pre-
ference, a topic that is inevitably problematic and was
expected to be somewhat sensitive, resulted in an even
higher degree of controversy than was predicted. The
question, which included the responses of homosexual and
bisexual, was not allowed by the principal to appear on
the questionnaire distributed to the Wheat Ridge High
School students. Despite the fact that it received
limited criticism from the respondents during the pre-
test, the objection on the part of the high school
teachers and administration was not anticipated.
Nevertheless, at least two of the three thesis committee
members were prepared for this kind of objection.


27
The Pretest
It was desired that the pretest sample be as
similar as possible to at least one of the intended
final sub-samples. The group involved students from a
sociology course at,the University of Colorado at Den-
ver. The six participants who volunteered were reques-
ted to do so by the instructor (foreign students were
excluded) and the administration of the questionnaire
was conducted in the same classroom, but in the absence
of the instructor. In attendance were three males and
three females; three undergraduates and three graduates;
three Whites, one Black, and two Hispanic/Chicanos. The
mean age was thirty-three-years-old.
The purpose of the single pretest was ", . to
time the interview, to check the wording and ease of
understanding the questions, to spot possible problems
_of spillover, and to correct these problems at the
outset" (Zisk, 1981:104-105). Other objectives included
eliminating some questions that simply did not ". .
discriminate between respondents or, as an alternative,
to change the categories. ." (Ibid.).
Upon completion of the questionnaire, the pre-
test respondents were asked if they enjoyed or disliked
the experience and if they had any specific questions or
comments (Zisk, 1981). The semantic differential sec-


28
tion was reconstructed (i.e.f instructions revised and
concepts changed) to a great degree on the basis of
input from these participants. It was requested by the
participants that an example be given and the too gen-
eral concepts (business, education, family, government
and religion) be replaced with more specific persons and
issues.
The Sample
Both Wheat Ridge High School (WRHS) and the
University of Colorado at Denver (UCD) were chosen first
and foremost for the purpose of convenience. The re-
searcher was a graduate of the former five years pre-
viously, and presently is in attendance at the latter.
Therefore, the necessary contacts had already been es-
tablished. Moreover, the primary goal was to minimize
all related costs and expenses. Accordingly, the two
schools were also selected because they were easily
accessible, located within six to eight miles of one
another.
University of Colorado at Denver
UCD is one of four campuses in the University
of Colorado system. It is an urban, non-residential
institution of higher learning, in the downtown area.
UCD is one of three institutions on the Auraria Higher


29
, o,
Education Center (AHEC) campus (along with Metropolitan
State College of Denver, and Community College of Den-
ver). Students,, faculty, and staff commute from the five
counties in the greater metropolitan area and elsewhere.
In past years, UCD has maintained the im-
portance of classroom instruction in front of service
and research. In addition, it has generally attracted
non-traditional students (e.g., older professionals in
search of advanced degrees for promotion in rank).
However, more emphasis is now being placed on scholarly
work, and recent trends (which are reflected in the
sample) indicate a greater number of younger students,
especially those just graduated from high school.
According to the administration over the past
several semesters the age of students at UCD has ranged
from sixteen to eighty with the mean being approximately
twenty-eight. Fifty-one percent were men and 49.0%
women. Thirteen percent were minorities and 1.0% or
more were foreign born.
Out of a total number of 10,848 students, and
5,385 full-time equivalent students (FTES), there were
1,513.9 FTES in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
(CLAS), and 351.3 FTES in the Division of Social Scien-
ces (SS). The simple random sample at UCD was drawn
from the population of all SS undergraduate courses


30
taught on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (stratified by
time slot with the only restriction being one from each
period no matter how few or many). It included 182
students from four lower and five upper division day and
evening courses representing six different academic
departments (Anthropology> Economics, Social Sciences,
History, Political Science, and Sociology). Seventy-
four percent of the respondents reported that they were
full-time students. Thirty percent were business ma-
jors, 14%. were political science majors, and 13% listed
something other than the twenty-three major options in
the codebook. In addition, 21.4% were employed full-
time; 42.9% part-time; 29.1% unemployed; and 6.6% other.
The mean age was 24.967 (median = 23.300; mode
= 19.000; range = 41.000). The breakdown in sex was:
44.5% male; and 55.5% female. There were 83.9% Whites;
2.2% Blacks; 3.3% Hispanic/Chicanos; and 10.6% other.
From the same sample, 13.9% described themselves as
Christian; 43,6% Catholic; 26.7% Protestant; 2.0%
Jewish; 1.0% Mormon; and 12.9% other. In addition, 9.6
considered themselves strongly religious; 46.9% re-
ligious; 33.9% neutral or undecided; 7.3% anti-re-
ligious; and 2.3% other.
In regards to housing arrangements, 38.1%
stated that they lived at home with parent(s); 25.4%
ov


31
alone or with friend(s); 32.6% with spouse or mate; and
3.9% other. Also, 2.2% reported their SES as lower
class; 16.7% working; 70.5% middle (2.2% middle by it-
self, .10.0% lower middle, 32.2% middle middle, and 26.1%
upper middle); 2.8% upper; 3.9% no class; and 3.9%
other. Eighty-three percent made it known that.they
liked school; 2.2% disliked school; 12.1% were neutral
on the subject; and 2.7% were conflicted.
Wheat Ridge High School
Wheat Ridge, Colorado, has some features char-
acteristic of a rural community, yet the majority of WRHS
students live in areas of Wheat Ridge (as well as the
adjacent cities of Lakewood and Golden) which consist of
predominantly white, affluent, suburban neighborhoods.
Ninety-six percent of the students at WRHS are White.
Fifty-one percent are male and 49.0% female.
WRHS (grades ten through twelve) is part of the
Jefferson County Public Schools which is. considered by
many to.be one of the finest public school systems in
the state and region. The district places great em-
phasis on academics as well as athletic achievement. It
has received nation-wide recognition for its students'
performance on the ACT, SAT and other such standardized
tests and college entrance exams (WRHS and other Jeffer-


32
son County students have scored consistently above the
national norm). The district has also been ranked
nationally in individual and team sports competitions.
Ironically, the WRHS Student Seriate had ar-
ranged a "Political Awareness Week" to. be held during the
period of the research. It was organized because, as
their elected leaders expressed it, "intelligent voters
are the key to the survival of our system of govern-
ment." Though many of them cancelled at the last
minute, invited speakers included the Libertarian candi-
date for Governor, a Republican State Senator, and an
anonymous member of the Democratic Worker's Party^ Stu-
dent attendance at the different sessions was extremely
poor, most likely due to the possibility that they did
not want to miss out on homework assigned during classes
which were still being held.
Out of a total number of 1,393 students, the
sample from WRHS included 114 students from six classes
- one each of the following fields: business, english,
history, humanities, sociology, and Spanish. The sample
frame consisted of students of faculty members who
taught throughout the entire school day. The teachers
were chosen on the basis of availability. The principal
assisted in the scheduling process.
The mean age of respondents was 16.605 years


33
(median = 16.571; mode = 16.000; range = 4.000). There
were 43.9% males and 56.1% females. The break down by
race was 93.0% White; 0.9% Black; 2.6% Hispanic/Chicano;
0.9% Native American; and 2.6% other. In terms of
religious preference, 16.9% considered themselves Chris-
tian; 38.2% Catholic; 34.8% Protestant; 3.4% Mormon; and
6.7% other. Also, 8.8% described their position as
strongly religious; 54.0% religious; 35.4% neutral or
undecided; and 1.8% anti-religious. In addition, 1.8%
reported their SES as lower class; 3.5% working; 87.6%
middle (1.8% middle by itself, 4.4% lower middle, 35.4%
middle middle, 46.0% upper middle); 4.4%-upper; and 2.7%
no class. From the same sample 55.3% made it known that
they liked school; 7.9% disliked it; 31.6% were neutral
on the subject; and 5.3% conflicted.
Although the two samples are not meant to be
generalized to any particular population (e.g., Colorado
or U.S. high school or college/university students), at
the very least they are clearly representative of their
respective institutions.
Collection of the Data
The 296 questionnaires were collected from the
two samples within the same week. Distribution at WRHS
was completed in one day, whereas the process at UCD
required twice that time. The widely used Statistical


34
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) allowed for com-
puter processing once the codebook and data file were
created. Simple frequency distributions and cross tab-
luations (i.e., the usual descriptive statistics) were
generated for analysis upon completion of the respective
programs.


CHAPTER III
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
Presentation of the Findings
One of the major aspects of the study was to
investigate the association between high school or col-
lege and the source of influence on one's political
attitudes and behaviors. It was found that a systematic
relationship, statistically significant at the 0.0001
level, does exist between the variables school or level
of education and source of influence on the subjects in
terms of present political attitudes and behav.iors. In
other words, the probability of obtaining chi-square
values of 43.637 and 66.283 or larger with one and five
degrees of freedom respectively, is less than one chance
in 10,000. With notably larger than the critical
region in both cases, the "null hypothesis" of no dif-
ference between the two samples was easily rejected.
Furthermore, phi and Cramer's V (measures of association
for 2x2 and 2 x k crosstabulation tables in that


36
order) indicate a significant strength of relationship.
With values of #=0.395 and V=0.477, the variables (school
and influence) are neither independent (i.e., statistics
equal to zero), nor perfectly related (i.e., statistics at
the upper limit of unity). Instead, a high degree of
association does exist. (It should be noted at this point
that 2x2 tables will always have lower values than 2 x k
tables because the differences between observed and ex-
pected frequencies are larger in the latter.)
As predicted, the WRHS students reported that
parent(s) have been the greatest influence on them in
terms of their present political attitudes and behaviors,
whereas the UCD students stated that other factors have
had a greater affect on them politically. Respondents
from both samples ranked friend(s) and media similarly.
However, no more than 2.7% of the WRHS students (and a
slightly higher 4.4% of the UCD sample) selected secondary
teacher(s) as the greatest influence, in comparison, with a
much larger 20.6% amongst the UCD students who chose
college teachers(s) and another 12.8% of the same sample
who combined college teacher(s) with a wide variety of
other responses (only 1.7% of which included parents).
It was expected that the high school students
would report their political attitudes and behaviors as
having changed little or not at all, whereas the college


37
Table 3-1
Source of greatest influence on present political
attitudes and behaviors by school (condensed)
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
University
Wheat Ridge of Colorado
High School at Denver
GREATEST INFLUENCE (N=111) (N=18 0)
Parent(s) 62.2 22.8
College teacher(s) and/or other(s) 37.8 77.2
P=0.0001


38
Table 3-2
Source of greatest influence on present political
attitudes and behaviors by school
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
University
Wheat Ridge of Colorado
High School at Denver
GREATEST INFLUENCE (N=111) (N=180)
Parent(s) 62.2 22.8
Friend(s) 9.0 8.3
Secondary teacher(s) 2.7 4.4
College teacher(s) 0.0 20.6
Media 16.2 12.2
Other(s) 9.9 31.7
P=0.0001


39
students would suggest that theirs have changed (mostly
in the liberal/radical direction) somewhat, if not con-
siderably. This second hypothesis was also supported.
The relationship between the variables school or/level
of education and change in personal political attitudes
and behaviors is statistically significant (see Tables
3-3 and 3-4).
Sixty-seven percent of the WRHS students revealed
that their personal political attitudes and behaviors have
changed little or not at all, while 63.3% of the UCD
students disclosed that theirs have changed somewhat, or
considerably, over the years. Further, 13.6% of the UCD
students expressed the difference in their political atti-
tudes and behaviors as being more liberal or radical
(while only 3.6% of the WRHS students used such termin-
ology in the open-ended question to describe themselves.)
In contrast, exactly half as many (or 6.8%) of the UCD
students specified an increase in conservatism.
In support of the third hypothesis a strong rela-
tionship was also found to exist between school or level
of education and opinion regarding college. (On the 2x4
table, = 99.863, V = 0.587, and level of significance =
0.0001.) Amongst the WRHS students, 74.8% noted uncer-
tainty as to whether college provides more, less, or as
much as the family and secondary schools in terms of


40
Table 3-3
Degree of change in personal political attitudes and
behaviors by school (condensed)
(Reported in Percentages)

SCHOOL
University
Wheat Ridge of Colorado
High School at Denver
DEGREE OF CHANGE (N=112 ) (N=177)
Little or not at all 67.0 36.7
Somewhat or considerably 33.0 63.3
P=0.0001


41
Table 3-4
Degree of change in personal political
attitudes and behaviors by school
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
University
DEGREE OF CHANGE Wheat Ridge High School (N=112) of Colorado at Denver (N=l7 7)
Little 67.0 36.7
Somewhat more con- servative 0.9 5.1
Somewhat more liberal 0.9 4.0
Somewhat more radical 0.9 1.7
Somewhat better under- standing. of politics and government 9.8 10.7
Somewhat other 11.6 15.3
Considerably more conservative 0.0 1.7
Considerably more liberal 1.8 3.4
Considerably more radical 0.0 4.5
Considerably better under' standing of politics and government -6.3 3.4
Considerably other 0.9 13.6
P=0.0001


42
different perspectives about government and politics.
Nonetheless, a surprising 25.2% of the high school stu-
dents suggested that college provides more than does
their own level of education (and/or parents). As was
expected from the UCD sample, an overwhelming majority
of the students (73.2%) reported that college provides
more in terms of different (i.e., a wider range of)
perspectives about government and politics than any
other factor or influence.
To test hypotheses numbers four through six, the
respondents were asked a series of questions, and were
expected to react to numerous statements or scales, the
scores of which were combined. Students were then grouped
according to the different characteristics (see Figures
3-1 and 3-2).
As predicted, 60.2% of the respondents from WRHS
stated political affiliations, political labels and strength,
political positions, and desired forms of societal or pol-
itical-economic organization that were identical to their
parent(s)' (as the respondents reported them to be). On
the other hand, 57.8% of the UCD students surveyed re-
corded affiliations, labels and strength, positions, and
desired forms of organization different than their par-
ent^)'. The relationship between these two variables
is significant at the 0.010 level (see Table 3-7).


4 3
Table 3-5
Answer to question, "Does college provide more or less
than the family and secondary schools in terms of
different perspectives about government and politics?"
by school (condensed)
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
ANSWER
Wheat Ridge
High School
(N=111)
University
of Colorado
at Denver
(N=17 9)
More 25.2 73.-2
Don't know or other 74.8 26.8
P=0.0001


44
Table 3-6
Answer to question, "Does college provide more or less
than the family and secondary schools in terms of
different perspectives about government and politics?"
by school
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
University
ANSWER Wheat Ridge High School (N=111) of Colorado at Denver (N=17 9)
More 25.2- 73.2
Less 3.6 7.3
Same 6.3 10.1
Don't know 64.9 9.5
P=0.0001


45
Table 3-7
Respondent's and parent(s)' political affiliation,
political label and strength, political position, and
desired form of societal or political-economic
organization by school
(Reported in Percentages)
]
SCHOOL
POLITICAL AFFILIATION, etc. Wheat Ridge High School (N=10 8) University of Colorado at Denver (N=16 6 )
Same 60.2 42.2
Different 39.8 57.8
P=0.010


46
Figure 3-1
C Scale (Closed-Mindedness)
Looking back over my life, I find that I still have the
same basic beliefs I grew up with.
You've pretty much got to go along with the ideas and
policies of those who are more knowledgeable than
yourself.
I think it's frequently good to change your opinions
about things. (Reverse Scored)
It is important for children to learn when to disobey
authority. (Reverse Scored)
There is hardly a single important issue on which my
beliefs are the only valid ones. (Reverse Scored)
It is best to be wary of an individual who often changes
his/her beliefs.
I think it best to maintain my own opinions even though
many other people may have a different point of view.
It is necessary to reserve judgment about what is going
on until one has had a chance to hear the opinions of
those one respects.


Figure 3-2
Semantic Differential Scales
Conservative person/issue concepts
FBI
Nuclear Weaponry
President Reagan
Liberal or Radical person/issue concepts
Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Socialism
Karl Marx


48
It was expected that the WRHS students would
report high degrees;of dogmatism (or closed-mindedness)
and regard with favor the conservative person/issue
concepts,, as compared to the UCD students who would
indicate lower degrees of dogmatism and higher degrees
of support for the liberal or radical persons and is-
sues. However, the relationship between the variables
school or level of education and dogmatism or closed-
mindedness is not significant. Nonetheless, the UCD
sample is almost evenly distributed amongst the high and
low dogmatism categories (43.5% and 42.9% respectively),
while 52.2% of the WRHS students could be classified as
closed-minded and only 30.1% open-minded.
The final assumption of the study was that high
school students are significantly more conservative than
college/university students. In support of the FBI,
nuclear weaponry, and President Reagan (i.e.,
conventional concepts) were 36.9% of the WRHS students
as compared to 26.3% of those from the UCD sample.. An
additional 39.6% of those from,the WRHS sample and 52.6%
of the UCD students indicated favoritism towards Martin
Luther King, Socialism, and Karl:Marx (i.e., liberal or
radical concepts). Exactly half as many (or 26.3%) of
the UCD students supported the conservative person/issue
concepts or opposed the liberal or radical person/issue


49
Table 3-8
Degree of dogmatism (or closed-mindedness) by school
(Reported in Percentages)

SCHOOL
DEGREE OF DOGMATISM Wheat Ridge High School (N=113 ) University of Colorado at Denver (N=17 7)
High *52.2 .43.5
Neutral 17.7 13.6
Low 3 0.1 42.9
P=0.10


50
Table 3-9
Measure of dogmatism by school
(Reported as a quantitative score:
1 = open-minded; 4 = closed-minded)
SCHOOL
University
Wheat Ridge of Colorado
High School at Denver
MEASURE OF DOGMATISM (Nall3) (N=17 7)
Mean to 00 2.5
Median 2.9 2.5
Mode 3.5 3.5
P=0.10


51
Table 3-10
Political direction of support for person/issue concepts
by school
(Reported in Percentages)
POLITICAL DIRECTION SCHOOL
Wheat Ridge High School (N=111) University of Colorado at Denver (N=171)
Conservative 36,9 26.3
Neutral 23.4 21.1
Liberal/Radica1 39.6 52.6
P=0.10


52
Table 3-11
Measure of political direction of support for
person/issue concepts
(Reported as a quantitative score: 1 = Liberal/Radical;
6 = Conservative)

SCHOOL
MEASURE OF POLITICAL DIRECTION Wheat Ridge High School (N=111) University of Colorado at Denver (N=171)
Mean 3.5 3.0
Median 3.4 2.75
Mode 2.0 2.0
P=0.10


53
concepts. An almost equal number of students fall
within the conservative and liberal or radical
categories from the WRHS sample. Nevertheless, the
differences are not statistically significant.
\
Interpretation of the Findings
The findings presented above tend to prove the
suppositions that the predominant influence on
college/university students in terms of political
attitudes and behaviors is from college teachers and
other factors (rather than parents); college students
have personal political attitudes and behaviors which
have already changed (mostly in the liberal/radical
direction) somewhat or considerably; and college
students have political affiliations, political labels
and strength, political positions, and desired forms of
societal or political-economic organization different
than (and mostly to the left of) their parents'.
Nonetheless, other results tend to only weakly support
the hypotheses of a positive association between the
variables school or level of education and dogmatism or
closed-mindedness as well as between school or level of
education and support for the different person/issue
concepts. The data suggest that the change amongst the
college/university students may be due to external
stimuli instead of internal disposition such as


54
dogmatism or closed-mindedness, or any permanent element
of personality structure. Further, it can be discounted
that support for person/issue concepts is a responsible
outside factor. This suggests that there may be other
environmental causes of the so-called "liberating ex-
perience." One possibility is 'analytical orientation,'
or more simply, the ability to, do analysis (see Ogles,
1983). As was stated earlier, college/university stu-
dents are encouraged to develop such intellectual skills
as empirical inquiry and rational discussion. ". .
[W]hat liberal education does is to liberate us from
prejudice and superstition and teach us to think for
ourselves" (Fallon, 1983:2). Furthermore, not only are
college students taught how to think but they are also
directed towards full comprehension. The power to un-
derstand social problems, for example, is a major aspect
of creative and intellectual liberation (as will be
discussed in the following chapter).


CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
It is a common assumption in our country that
education is meant to meet the needs and wants of stu-
dents, their families, and the community at large.
However, first and foremost, schooling in the U.S. must
reinforce support for or conformity to (i.e., "inter-
nalization of") conventional norms and values. "The
education we provide for our children reflects the kind
of society in which we want to live. If we fail to
understand that connection, we fail to appreciate the
moral purpose of education" (Webb, 1981:8).
"In a sense, what children learn in a tradi-
tional school is political. Submission to authority,
abhorrence of deviance, and the like are political"
(Carnoy, 1972:226). However, "without experiencing
politics, reading about politics does not open up vis-
tas; it merely continues children's old experiences with
words, or with other nonreal world experiences" (Ibid.,
227). At the primary/secondary level, students are ex-


56
posed to the theory of democracy by way of textbooks,
lectures, and discussion, but they are seldom if ever
allowed to put it to practice by having an active role
in the decision-making process both in and out of
school. Locke would agree that a true understanding of
politics requires experience, ". . but law is a useful
subject to study through reading (Sahakian and Sahakian,
1975:102).
College/university students, especially those
who assume full financial responsibility for their own
costs and expenses (e.g., room and board, tuition and
fees, etc.), gain practical experience by working (for
pay) or through an internship (often for academic credit
and little if any pay) in an area of special interest.
Not only do most college students meet the minimum age
requirement for voting and (if male) registration for
conscription to military service, but they also have an
opportunity to view from a distance, or be a firsthand
witness of poverty, discrimination, and other such so-
cial problems. No doubt, a residential campus can be-
come a so-called "Ivory Tower," but UCD has a high
percentage of its student population which is employed
in the community, and of course, everyone lives away
from school.
According to Durkheim (1956:79), "It is . .


57
up to the State to remind the teacher consistently,of
the ideas, the sentiments that must be impressed upon
the child to adjust him [or her] to the milieu in which
he [or she] must live." Marx, on the other hand, felt
that "'Public education by the state' is altogether
objectionable. . Government and church should
rather be equally excluded from any influence on the
school" (Cosin 1972:171). Nonetheless, the primary
objective of American schooling is to successfully
transmit culture to the younger members of our society.
This is one of the initial ways in which the process of
socialization (coercive and noncoercive) takes place.
Among other things, culture supplies us with
both written and unwritten rules of conduct. These laws
or customs are first introduced to children by parents
but also in formal education as early as their first
year in school (i.e., in kindergarten, or maybe even in
preschool). Before anything else, schools promote con-
formity to rules and obedience to authority (as well as
competition amongst peers). "Their main purpose is to
make these children orderly, industrious, law-abiding
and respectful of authority" (Katz, 1975:xvi).
It can be said that,
Most citizens acquire their notions of rules, laws,
and obedience, and develop strategies for utilizing
the law through, an interaction between natural
cognitive structures and a host of 'legal' environ-


58
ments such as the home, school, friendship circle,
or court. (Evan, 1980:122)
"Law-studies," "law-focused education," or
"law-related education" are different names for the same
movement, one which . emphasizes both the need for
and the obligation of American schools to promote law
literacy among the nation's school-age youth" (Naylor,
1976:5). Law studies are more commonly known as "citi-
zenship education" and are examples of formal political
socialization found in most if not all junior and senior
high school social studies courses. Such programs are
designed to:
acquaint students with our present legal system;
show that the law is a dynamic and changing
institution;
help students realize that they have a role in
shaping tomorrow's laws; and
encourage students to develop positive attitudes
toward law and the future. (Franks, 1979:12-13)
It is believed by supporters of this curricu-
lum, that law and future studies provide skills that can
be applied to a variety of social, political and econ-
omic issues. The American Bar Association's Special
Committee on Youth Education for Citizenship and similar
groups, provide teacher-training sessions held at local,
state, regional and national meetings of their profes-
sional organizations. Information about the legal and


59
political systems is taught to teachers by lawyers,
business and government officials, and other individuals
who believe that "'those concerned with education must
place as much emphasis oh teaching legal and moral
reasoning skills through law-related education as they
currently place on teaching reading, writing, and arith-
metic'" (Naylor, 1976:25).
Law-related education introduces students to
the police, courts, state legislatures, Congress, the
executive and judicial branches, as well as the popular
subject of "street crime;" however, nothing is done with
"white collar crime" (or illegal and immoral activities
of business or government). Neither is law (and politi-
cal-economic power in general) presented as a form of
social control over the "lower class."
Unfortunately, there is no discussion of the
following hypothesis: Only those people
(and segments of society) with political-
economic power are represented in the
formulation and application of criminal law; and
only those people whose interests conflict with the
law are likely to be defined as "criminals."
(Quinney, 1970:16-19),
No doubt, law is unfairly presented as a common
good and service for all. Likewise, politics are said
to be fair for everyone. There is little if any oppor-
tunity for children to question authority and the system
of laws (or the state and government) that they are


60
taught to obey. Children may only talk of law as it is
confined to the present system. Again, one of the
primary goals is to .. encourage students to develop
positive attitudes toward law and the future."
Under capitalism as we know it today, students
at the primary and secondary level will never read more
than the simple cases of criminal and civil law. If
they were allowed the privilege of free inquiry in this
and other areas, then the capitalist ideology in society
might not be maintained. Accordingly, it would be vir-
tually impossible to reproduce the political attitudes,
behaviors, and social relations similar to parent(s)
and/or primary/secondary teacher(s), as well as a high
degree of support for or conformity to capitalist norms
and values, with an educational system that promoted
independent judgment regarding law, politics, and other
such societal issues. Finally, it can be said that,
"law emerges not only to codify existing customs,
morals, or mores, but also to modify the behavior and
values presently existing in a particular society"
(Evan, 1980:555).
The so-called "process of liberation" that
exists at the college/university level in the U.S. is
not well understood. Scientific studies in this area
are much needed to supplement the literature already in


61
the fields of political socialization and resocializa-
tion (which, as was pointed out earlier, tends to focus
on young children).
What else besides freedom from the norms and
values of the family and previous education and school-
ing is there about the college/university experience
that is liberating? To begin with, the liberating ex-
periences take place both in and outside of the class-
room, and in some cases, off-campus. In general, col-
lege students are given greater independence; they are
exposed to a wide variety of cultural happenings; and
they are inspired to experiment with new ideas and
certain activities. More specifically, college students
undergo consciousness raising. Real or hypothetical
laws are explained to them (i.e., "theory"), and in some
cases acted upon (i.e., "practice").
No matter if a student lives at or away from
home while attending college, he or she will definitely
be expected to assume additional responsibilities. To
name a few: registering for classes, buying books, get-
ting to lectures or labs on time. In addition, the
majority of college students who in their freshmen and
sophomore years occupy dorms or other on-campus residen-
ces, have no choice but to rely on themselves for
cleaning (and. in some cases cooking) as well as doing


62
the laundry, and so forth. Once these self-maintenance
skills become better developed, the student will probab-
ly appreciate the independence that comes along with
college. But at first it can be a painful transition to
make.
Another important aspect of liberation is
financial self-ruling or independence of material condi-
tions. Even though most undergraduate students receive
some monetary assistance from parents, at the very least
they must assume the responsibility of managing what may
be limited funds. This by itself can be difficult. In
the beginning it is too tempting to do more spending
than saving. So-called luxury items far above and be-
yond those basic or subsistence level goods and services
often take precedence over school related needs and
wants.
Most youth have well-formulated moral values by
the time they begin their college careers. Nonetheless,
many are still searching for some kind of truth. For
these individuals, conflict with an organized church or
religious denomination of earlier affiliation, may arise
as a result of being exposed to the discrimination on
behalf of society against homosexuals, racial and ethnic
minorities, and other populations that are not only
"disadvantaged" but also very much'exploited. Certain


63
sects and cults often seem attractive to college stu-
dents because they claim to offer a real life answer to
the problem of alienation from self and others, a common
(but usually temporary) result of separation from family
and friends.
Colleges and universities are often viewed as
havens for unconventional people, both students and
faculty alike. Instructors and professors sometimes
admit to being gay or lesbian and even encourage stu-
dents to examine their own innermost feelings. Others
talk about the use of drugs and different illicit acti-
vities. Casual sex and experimentation with drugs and
alcohol are commonplace at some schools.
The college subculture can almost be seen as a
simple extension of the more general adolescent subcul-
ture. Attitudes and behaviors reflect anti-establish-
ment ideologies and vary from styles of dress and hair,
use of language, and music listening habits to large-
scale social movements concerned with such issues as
nuclear weaponry and equal rights for women and other
minorities.
Faculty and students often join efforts and
stand side by side at rallies or protests (sometimes
against the same college or university at which they
teach or attend respectively). However, student govern-


64
merits or special interest groups do not hesitate to take
advantage of grievance procedures and file charges
against administrators, faculty, or staff who violate
institutional rules or regulations. Therefore, it can
be said that confrontation as well as cooperation takes
place between these constituencies. The influence of
faculty on the political attitudes and behaviors of
college students is important as the findings of this
study suggest. Nonetheless, Newcomb's longitudinal
research data indicate that students may develop an
eventual independence from their professors.
Ultimately, the college/university experience
may teach students to freely think about and understand
the concept of class struggle as well as the theory of
fundamental social change. They are also introduced in
many courses to some of the basic contradictions to be
found in society. All of this constitutes the process
of consciousness raising which takes place in the
classroom. It is important indeed, but not sufficient
for much radical change unless combined with practice.
College students are more likely to support
reform or revolution to better meet the needs and wants
of their fellow human beings because of what they have
done and seen during the four or more years of matricu-
lation. College students have a unique opportunity to


65
be a part of a mixture of different sexes, ages, races,
and to hear people speak about the world in which they
live from their own experiences. Furthermore, college
students adjust to the norms and values of this, their
new social surroundings the school community.
There are several things that would have made
this study stronger. At first it was thought that the
college/university sample should have been a more
traditional institution of higher learning (e.g.,
younger Students located on a residential campus with
dormitories, fraternities, and sororities, or other
housing arrangements away from parents), preferably a
medium-sized public school with a high rate of out-of-
state residents in attendance. However, UCD was
actually an advantageous sample after all. It proved to
be an interesting choice because of its unique blend of
students from diverse social backgrounds. The Universi-
ty of Colorado at Boulder, for example, is more likely
to have a higher percentage of both students and faculty
from the middle class and far fewer people from the
lower class (e.g., divorced, separated, or widowed women
with children, who receive state or federal government
aid; and other workers and poor people dependent on
income maintenance programs). Nonetheless, the high
school studied could have easily been more typical


66
(i.e., chosen from a less affluent neighborhood with
some racial variety). In addition, a larger sample
could have been designed, possibly with two or more high
schools and the same number of colleges and/or universi-
ties in order to make the findings of the research more
representative of the general population. Finally, a
more ideal situation would be to follow the same group
of students as they graduate from high school and enter
college or graduate from college and enter the work
force and take notice of any further changes or to
simply compare the differences between college freshmen
and seniors. Something else that this writer would
definitely do differently if given the opportunity would
be to develop instruments that would accurately measure
a student's analytical ability, and independent judgment
specific to alternative forms of societal or political-
economic organization and add them to the questionnaire.
Other measures that are needed include support for con-
ventional norms and values and parent(s)' political
affiliations, political labels arid strength, etc. (as
opposed to students simply stating their own opinions as
to what their parents' political attitudes and behaviors
might be).
This study which has invoked the "interaction
model," in part, confirms that most children are sue-


67
cessfully trained to be dogmatic or closed-minded. Re-
lated to this finding, students from WRHS were found to
be only somewhat more conservative than the UCD stu-
dents. One possible subject for further research might
be how to free children from the rigid norms and values
that prohibit them from recognizing their full potential
as human beings. Another suggestion is to investigate
whether or not the improper use of grades as punishment
for "bad" behavior and rewards for "good" behavior is as
common in college as it is in high school (or at the
primary/secondary level in general).
In addition to learning that college/university
students do experience changes but are not necessarily
more open-minded and/or progressive than high school
students, one other thought about the phenomenon has
come to mind. It is the opinion of this writer that
change does not have to be in the liberal or radical
direction to be considered "liberating." A college
student may very well be liberated from what was pre-
viously taught in the family and school and become even
more conservative than his or her parents and teachers.
This is a very real possibility in the fields of busi-
ness, engineering, or other areas.


BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adorno, T. W., E. Frenkel-Brunswik, D. J. Levinson and
R. N. Sanford
1950 The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper
and Row.
Almond, Gabriel A. and Sidney Verba
1963 The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Demo-
cracy in Five Nations. Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press.
Bendix, Reinhard (ed.)
1968 State and Society: A Reader in Comparative Poli-
tical Sociology. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.,
Inc.
Blalock, Hubert M., Jr.
1979 Social Statistics. Second Edition. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Boocock, Sarane Spence
1980 Sociology of Education: An Introduction. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Co.
Bowles, Samuel and Herbert Gintis
1976 Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational
Reform and the Contradictions in Economic Life.
New York: Basic Books, Inc.
Burris, Val
1983 "The Social and Political Consequences of
Overeducation." American Sociological Review
48:454-67.
Carnoy, Martin
1972 Schooling in a Corporate Society: The political
economy of education in America. New York: David
McKay Co., Inc.


69
Carnoy, Martin
1974 Education as Cultural Imperialism. New York:
David McKay CO., Inc.
Cosin, B. R.
1972. Education: Structure and Society. England:
Penguin Books, Ltd.
Cummings, Michael Stuart
1974 "Dogmatism, Ideology, and Political Behavior."
(Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University.)
Davis, James A. and Ann M. Jacobs
1965 "Conventions and Strategies for the Presentation
. of Percentage Tables." University of Chicago.
Dawson, Richard E. and Kenneth Prewitt
1969 Political Socialization. Boston: Little, Brown
and Co., Inc.
Durkheim, Emile
1956 Education and Sociology. Illinois: The Free
Press.
Easton, David and Jack Dennis
1969 Children in the Political System: Origins of
Political Legitimacy. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Co.
Eriksson, Steven B.
1983 "Studying Marx in 1983." Paper presented at
Pacific Sociological Association Conference
meeting, San Jose, CA.
Evan, William M.
1980 The Sociology of Law: A Social-Structural
Perspective. New York: The Free Press.
Fallon, Daniel
1983 "Modernizing the arts and sciences: Recovering
the heart of the baccalaureate." Silver and Gold
Record 14:2. University of Colorado.
Federico, Ronald C. and Janet S. Schwartz
1983 Sociology. Third Edition. USA: Addison-Wesley
Publishing Company, Inc.


70
Fishbein, Martin (ed.)
1967 Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement. New
York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Franks, Betty Barclay and Mary Kay Howard
1979 People, Law, and the Futures Perspective.
Washington, D.C.: National Education Assoc.
Goffman, Erving
1963 Stigma. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall,
Inc.
Hess, Robert D. and Judith V. Torney
1967 The Development of Political Attitudes in
Children. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.
Horowitz, Irving Louis
1972 Foundations of Political Sociology. New York:
Harper and Row, Publishers.
Horwitz, Lucy and Lou Ferleger
1980 Statistics for Social Change. Boston: South End
Press.
Katz, Michael B.
1975 Class, Bureaucracy and Schools. New York:
Praeger Publishers.
Langton, Kenneth P.
1969 Political Socialization. New York: Oxford
University Press, Inc.
Maguire, Kevin
1969 "Political Resocialization:
Empirical Analysis. (Ph.D.
University of Colorado.)
Mead, George Herbert
1959 The Philosophy of the Present. Edited by Arthur
E. Murphy, with prefatory remarks by John Dewey.
Illinois: The Open Court Publishing Company.
Musgrove, Frank
1979 School and the Social Order. New York: John
Wiley and Sons.
Naylor, David T.
1976 VALUES: Law-Related Education and the Elementary
School Teacher. Washington, D.C.: National
Education Assoc.
m
A Theoretical and
dissertation,


71
Nie, Norman H., C. Hadlai Hull, Jean G. Jenkins, Karin
Steinbrenner and Dale H. Bent
1975 Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
(SPSS). Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company.
Ogles, Richard H.
1982 "Notes Toward a Socialist Conception of Human
Needs and the Good Society." Human Affairs 2:75-
81.
Ogles, Richard H.
1983 Methodological Issues in the Social Sciences. Littleton, CO. : Dialogue Press.
Osgood, 1957 Charles E., George J. Suci and Percy H. Tannenbaum The Measurement of Meaning. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Quinney, Richard
1970 The Social Reality of Crime. Boston: Little,
Brown and Co.,Inc.
Riley, M. W. A. Foner, B.. Hess, and M. L. Toby
1969 "Socialization for the middle and later years." Pp. 951-982 in D. A. Goslin (ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Rush, Michael and Philip Althoff
1971 An Introduction to Political Sociology. Great
Britain: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd.
Sahakian, William S. and Mabel Lewis Sahakian
1975 John Locke. Boston: Twayne Publishers.
Sanford, Nevitt (ed.)
1964 The American College: A Psychological and Social
Schein, 1956 Interpretation of the Higher Learning. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Edgar H. "The Chinese Indoctrination Program for Prisoners of War: A Study of Attempted 'Brainwashing.' "Psychiatry 19: 149-72.


72
Segal, Julius
1957 "Correlates of Collaboration and Resistance
Behavior Among U.S. Army POWs in Korea." The
Journal of Social Issues 13:31-40.
Sigel, Roberta S. and Marilyn Brookes Hoskin
1977 "Perspectives on Adult Political Socialization Areas of Research." Pp. 259-293 in Stanley Allen Renshon (ed.), Handbook of Political Socialization: Theory and Research. New York: The Free Press.
Verba, Sidney, Norman H. Nie and Jae-on Kim
1978 Participation and Political Equality: A Seven-
Nation Comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Wasburn, Philo C.
1982 Political Sociology: Approaches, Concepts,
Hypotheses. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Webb, Rodman B.
1981 Schooling and Society. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.,,Inc.
Zeisel, 1968 Hans Say it with figures. Fifth Edition. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc.
Zisk, Betty H.
1981 Political Research: A Methodological Sampler.
Lexington, MA.: D.C. Heath and Company.
%


APPENDIX A
PERSONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION


Table 2-1
Age of respondents by school
(Reported in years)
AGE SCHOOL
Wheat Ridge High School. (N=ll4) University of Colorado at Denver (N=18 2)
Mean 16.605 24.967
Median 16.571 23.300
Mode 16.000 19.000
Range 4.000 41.000


Table 2-2
Sex of respondents by school
(Reported in Percentages)
i
>

SCHOOL
SEX Wheat Ridge High School (N=11 4 ) University of Colorado at Denver (N=182)
Male 43.9 44.5
Female
56.1
55.5


76
Table 2-3
Race of respondents by school
(Reported in Percentages)

SCHOOL
RACE Wheat Ridge High School (N=ll 4) University of Colorado at Denver (N=180)
White 93.0 83.9
Black 0.9 2.2
Hispanic/Chicano 2.6 3.3
Native American 0.9 o o
Other 2.6 10.6


Table 2-4
Religious preference of respondents by school
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE Wheat Ridge High School (N=89 ) University of Colorado at Denver (N=101)
Christian 16.9 13.9
Catholic 38.2 43.6
Protestant 34.8 26.7
Jewish 0.0 2.0
Mormon 3.4 1.0
Other 6.7 12.9


78
Table 2-5
Religious position of respondents by school
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
RELIGIOUS POSITION . Wheat Ridge High School (N=113) University of Colorado at Denver (N=17 7)
Strongly Religious 8.8 9.5
Religious 54.0 46.9
Neutral/Undecided 35.4 33.9
Anti-religious 1.8 7.3
Other 0.0 2.3


79
Table 2-6
Living arrangement of respondents by school
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
University
LIVING ARRANGEMENT Wheat Ridge High School (N=ll4) of Colorado at Denver (N=181)
At home 98.2 38.1
Alone or with friend(s) 0.0 25.4
With spouse or mate 0.0 32.6
Other 1.8 3.9


80
Table 2-7
G.P.A. of respondents by school
(Reported on a 4.0 scale)

SCHOOL
G.P.A. Wheat Ridge High School (N=10 9) University of Colorado at Denver (N=166)
Mean 3.26 3.34
Median 3.27 3.40
Mode 3.00 3.00
9


81
Table 2-8
Educational goal of respondents by school
(Reported in Percentages)

SCHOOL
EDUCATIONAL GOAL Wheat Ridge High School (N=112 ) University of Colorado at Denver (N=181)
B. A. 34.8 42.5
M.A. 23.2 28.2
Ph.D., M.D. etc. 28.6 26.5
None 13.4 2.2
Other
0.0
0.6


82
Table 2-9
Feeling about school by school
(Reported in Percentages)

SCHOOL
FEELING ABOUT SCHOOL Wheat Ridge High School (N=11 4 ) University of Colorado at Denver (N=182)
Like 55.3 83.0
Dislike 7.9 2.2
Neutral 31.6 12.1
Conflicted
5.3
2.7


83
Table 2-10
Self-stated S.E.S. of respondents by school
(Reported in Percentages)
SCHOOL
CLASS Wheat Ridge High School (N=113 ) University of Colorado at Denver (N=18 0)
Lower 1.8 2.2
Working 3.5 16.7
Middle (combined) 87.6 70.5
Upper 4.4 2.8
None 2.7 3.9
Other
0.0
3.9


84
APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE
QUESTIONNAIRE
A. ) TODAYS DATE: / /
B. ) SCHOOL ATTENDING! __________
C. ) COURSE NUMBER AND TITLEi _
PLEASE NOTEi DO.NOT include
name, address and/or telephone
number here or anywhere else
on this questionnaire (ano-
nymity requested in order to
protect your own right to
privacy!) __________________
INSTRUCTIONS! The following questionnaire is designed to study the process
of political resocialization. Student participation is voluntary and the
student is free, to discontinue participation at any time. Questions may be
asked by the student both during and after the research is completed. Upon
request, information will be provided regarding group responses only.
Questions concerning rights as a subject should be directed to the Human
Rights Research Committee, Graduate School, University of Colorado at Denver
8020 2^___________?22£-222EfE25i22_i2_§£2$i)L5EEE22i§5f!?.:__________________
PART ONEs PERSONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1. ), YOUR AGE;
2. ) YOUR SEX:
30 YOUR RACE:
ai) White
>.) Black
c.) Hispanic/Chicano
d.) Native American
e.) other; please specify.
4.) YOUR U.S. CITIZENSHIP STATUS!
a71 U.S. Citizen, National or
related status
_____b.) Permanent resident or
eligible alien
_____c.) neither a.) nor b.)
50 YOUR STATE OF RESIDENCY!
6.) NUMBER OF YEARS YOU HAVE LIVED
IN EACH OF THE FOLLOWING!
a.) rural community
to*) large city ______
c. ) suburban neighborhood _____
d. ) small city or town
e0 military base ________
f.) total overseas ______
70 YOUR RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE. IF
ANY; ________________;____________.
8 .) YOUR RELIGIOUS POSITION;
_____aTl strongly religious
_____b.) religious
_____cO neutral or undecided
_____d.) anti-religious
90 YOUR MARITAL STATUS:
a.) single
b.) married
c.) separated divorced
d.)
e.) widowed
fO living with someone but
not legally married
10.) YOUR SEXUAL PREFERENCE;
a.) heterosexual
b.) homosexual
c.) bisexual
d.) non-sexual
no YOUR LIVING ARRANGEMENTS;
a.) at home with parent(s)
*0 on campus
_c.) off campus alone or with
dO friend(s) off campus with spouse
or mate
e.) other; please specify!

12.) YOUR EMPLOYMENT STATUS;
a.) full-time
to.) part-time
e.) unemployed, by choice unable to find suitable
d.)
_e.) employment other; please specify;

130 YOUR PRESENT OCCUPATION!

Page 1.


Page 2.
1M YOUR ATTITUDE ABOUT JOB: 23.) YOUR FEELINGS ABOUT SCHOOL:
a.) extremely satisfied a.) mostly like
b.) satisfied b.) mostly dislike
c.) not satisfied c.) neutral
d.) extremely dissatisfied d.) conflicted
e.) not applicable
150 YOUR PERSONAL INCOME (OR 2k.) HAVE YOU EVER BEEN IN THE
MILITARY?
FAMILY INCOME IF MARRIED) a.) no
(LAST YEAR): . b.) yes (please specify
16.) WHAT SOCIOECONOMIC CLASS when and where served):
DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A MIM'RPR OF?
a.) lower PART TWO i 1 PERSONAL POLITICAL INFO.
b.) working
c.) middles please specify. 250 YOUR POLITICAL AFFILIATION:
(lower middle, middle middle, upper middle)s a.) Republican
b.) Democrat
C.)- Independent no affiliation
d.) upper d.)
e.) no class e.) other; please specify:
f.) other; please specify: m
170 HOW MANY YEARS OF FORMAL 26.) YOUR POLITICAL LABEL AND
STRENGTH: .
EDUCATION HAVE YOU COMPLETED? a.) always radical
. b.) mostly radical
18,) YOUR STUDENT STATUS: C.) always liberal
d.) mostly liberal
aTT full-time e.) always conservative
b.) part-time f.) mostly conservative apolitical
190 YOUR COLLEGE MAJOR: )
h.) other; please specify:
a75 i
b.) not applicable
20.) YOUR EDUCATIONAL GOALS: 27.) YOUR POLITICAL POSITION:
a.) far righx right
a.) completion of B.A. b.)
b.) completion of M.A. C.) middle
c.) completion of Ph.D., d.) left
M.D., law or other advanced degree(s) d.) none of the above e.) far left
f.) other; please specify:

21.) YOUR HIGH SCHOOL G.P.A. 28.) YOUR DESIRED FORM OF SOCIETAL
CON A 4.0 SCALE): . OR POLITICAL ECONOMIC
22.) YOUR COLLEGE (WHERE PRESENTLY ATTENDING) G.P.A. (ON A ^.0 ORGANIZATION: (You may answer more than once.) a.) capitalism
SCALE): b.) socialism
_& ) c ) communism
_b.) not applicable d.) anarchism
e.) pluralism authoritarianism
f.)
S-) other; please specify:


86
Page 3.
290 ID YOU VOTE IN THE LAST 38.) HOW OFTEN DO YOU WATCH
U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION? . THE NATIONAL TELEVISION
a.) yes NEWS AND/OR LISTEN TO THE
b.) no NATIONAL RADIO NEWS?
c.) not applicable a.) every day
b.) often
30.) DID YOU VOTE IN THE LAST c.) seldom
U.S. CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION? d.) never
a7) yes
b.) no 39.) DO YOU TALK POLITICS WITH
c.) not applicable FRIENDS?
a.) often
31.) DID YOU VOTE IN THE LAST b.) sometimes
STATE ELECTION? o.) seldom
aT) yes d.) never
b.) no bo.)
c.) not applicable DO YOU TALK POLITICS WITH
32.) DID YOU VOTE IN THE LAST FAMILY? a.) often
LOCAL ELECTION? b.) sometimes
a.) yes c.) seldom
b.) no d.) never
c.) not applicable
33.) bi.) IN YOUR OPINION. WHO HAS BEEN
HAVE YOU EVER HELPED WITH THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON YOU
A POLITICAL CAMRAIGN AT IN TERMS OF YOUR PRESENT
ANY LEVEL? POLITICAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS
a.) yes a.) parent(s)
b.) no b.) friend(s)
31*.) c.) secondary school.teacher(s)
HAVE YOU EVER BELONGED TO d.) college teacher(s)
A POLITICAL CLUB OR ORGANI- e.) media
ZATION OF ANY KIND? f.) other(s); please specify:
aT) yes
b.) no
35.) b2.) HAVE YOUR PERSONAL POLITICAL
HAVE YOU EVER ATTENDED A ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS CHANGED
POLITICAL PROTEST OR RALLY- OVER THE YEARS?
OF ANY 1011? _a.) little or not at all
a.) yes b.) somewhat (in what ways?):
b.) no
36.) HOW OFTEN DO YOU READ THE LOCAL
NEWSPAPER? c.) considerably (in what ways?)
a.)' every, day
% b.) often
c.) seldom
d.) never
37.) HOW OFTEN DO YOU WATCH THE b3.) IN YOUR OPINION. DOES COLLEGE
PROVIDE MORE OR LESS THAN THE
LOCAL TELEVISION NEWS AND/OR FAMILY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS
LISTEN TO THE LOCAL RADIO IN TERMS OF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE
NEWS? ABOUT GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS?
aT) every day a.) more
b.) often b.) less
c.} seldom c.) same
d.) never d.) don't know



87
Page 4.
44.) to 51.) INSTRUCTIONSi The purpose of this section is to get
your honest opinions regarding the next 8 statements.
There are no "right" or "wrong answers. Simply
indicate your degree of agreement or disagreement
in the following manner':
strongly agree =SA
agree more than disagree =A
unsure =U
disagree more than agree =D
strongly disagree =SD
44.) LOOKING BACK OVER MY LIFE, I FIND THAT I STILL HAVE THE SAME BASIC
BELIEFS I GREW UP WITH. _________________
45. ) YOU'VE PRETTY MUCH GOT TO GO ALONG WITH THE IDEAS AND POLICIES OF -
THOSE WHO ARE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN YOURSELF. ____________
46. ) I THINK IT'S FREQUENTLY GOOD TO CHANGE YOUR OPINIONS ABOUT THINGS.
47.) IT IS IMPORTANT FOR CHILDREN TO LEARN WHEN TO DISOBEY AUTHORITY.
48.) THERE IS HARDLY A SINGLE IMPORTANT ISSUE ON WHICH MY BELIEFS ARE
THE ONLY VALID ONES. __________________
49.) IT IS BEST TO BE WARY OF AN INDIVIDUAL WHO OFTEN CHANGES HIS/HER
BELIEFS. ____________
50. ) I THINK IT'BEST TO MAINTAIN MY OWN OPINIONS EVEN THOUGH MANY OTHER
PEOPLE MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW. ________
51. ) IT IS NECESSARY TO RESERVE JUDGEMENT ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON UNTIL
ONE HAS HAD A CHANCE TO HEAR THE OPINIONS OF THOSE ONE RESPECTS.
52.) to 57.) INSTRUCTIONS: The purpose of this section is to measure
the meanings of certain things to different people by having
them use a series of descriptive scales. Again, please give
honest opinions as to what these person and issue concepts
mean to you* There are no "right" or "wrong" answers.
For each underlined concept that you feel is very closely relate
to one end of the scale, you should circle 1 or 7.
right, g). - 2 3 4 5-6 7 wrong
right 1 Z > __2 . OR 4 5 6 (?) wrong
2 or 6 should be circled if you feel the underlined concept is
auite closely related to one end of the scale.
bad 1 <2> 3 4 ? 6 7 good
bad 1 2 3 oft 4 5 CD 7 good


88
Page 5

INSTRUCTIONS, Continued. , ^ J ^
If the underlined concept seems only slightly related to one
end of the scale, then circle 3 or 5-
fair 1_______2 (T) 4 5 6_______funfair
fair __1_____2______3________4__ <£> 6 7 unfair
The number you circle, of course, depends upon which of the
two ends of the scale seem most characteristic of the thing
youre judging. Accordingly* 4 should be circled if you are
undecided, consider the underlined concept to be neutral on
the scale, or feel the scale is completely irrelevant or
unrelated to the underlined concept.
unjust 123 5 6 7 just
Please circle one and only one number on all five (5) scales
below every underlined concept. Don't look back and forth
through the items. Make each item a separate and independent
judgement. Your true impression is important.
EXAMPLE:
(underlined concept)
right bad 1 2 3 5 . . 6
1 2 3 4 . fjp
fair 1 ft. 3 4 0
unjust positi\ 1 3 - 5 .
reCD 2 3 4 5 6
52.) right 1 2 3 F.B.I. ZT 3 6 7
bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
fair l 2 1 4 5 6 ?
unjust i 2 3 . 4 3 0 7
positive. 1 . 2 3 4 *5 6 7
53.) MARTIN LUTHER KING
right 1 2 . 4 - 6 7
bad 1 £ 4 6 7
fair 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
unjust . l £ . 4 .. . 3 6 7
positive. -1 - 2 3 4 5 6 7
5^0 right 1 2 SOCIALISM 4 5 6 ' 7
bad l £ S 4 D to £
fair i 2 ? 4 3 & 7
unjust . 1 2 3 4 6 £ 7
positive. 1 2 1 4 5 6 7
550 right. 1 2 ? KARL MARX 4 5 6 7
bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
fair l 2 3 4 5 6 7
unjust 1 2 3 4 ...5 6 7
positive 1 2 3 4 5 6- 2
£ wrong
7 good
2. unfair
2. just
7 negative
wrong
good
unfair
just
negative
wrong
good
unfair
just
negative
wrong
good
unfair
just
negative
wrong
good
unfair
just
negative


89
Page 6
56.)
NUCLEAR WEAPONRY
right 1 2 3 k' 5 6 7 wrong
bad 1 2 3 k 5 6 7 good
fair i 2 3 k 5 6 . 7 unfair
unjust i 2 3 k 5 6 7 just
positive i 2. 2 k 3 0 ') negative
570 PRESIDENT REAGAN
right i 2 3 4 5 6 7 wrong
bad 1 2 3 k 5 6 1 good
fair i 2 ? k 3 . 6 7 unfair
unjust i Z 3 k 5 b 7 . just
positive l 2 3 k 5 6 7 negative
58.) IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT ARE SOME 62.) PARENT(S)' DESIRED FORM OF
MAJOR i u.s. SOCIAL PROBLEMS AT SOCIETAL OR POLITICAL ECONOMIC
1.)
2.)
30
^0
5.)
in order of importance.)
.PART THREE:
PARENT(S)' POLITICAL
INFORMATION
ORGANIZATION: _______ _
more than once.)
a.) capitalism
socialism
communism
anarchism
pluralism
authoritarianism
other; please specify:
_b.)
_c.)
_d.)
_e.)
J-)
S-)
59.) PARENT(S)' POLITICAL AFFILIATION:
_____aTJ Republican
_____b.) Democrat
_____c.) Independent
d.) no affiliation
_____e.) : other; please specify:
PARENT(S)' POLITICAL LABEL
AND STRENGTH:
.a.) always radical
b.) mostly radical
_c.) always liberal
d.) mostly liberal
_e.) always conservative
f.) mostly conservative
.g.) apolitical
h.) other; please specify:
6l.) PARENT(S)' POLITICAL POSITION:
_____aT) far right
b. ) right
c. ) middle
_____;d.) left
e.) far left
_____f.) -other; please specify:
630 HOW CLOSELY DO YOU AGREE WITH
YOUR PARENT(S)' GENERAL POLITIC,
BELIEFS?;
a~H very closely
_____b.) closely with one but not
the other
_____c.) in some ways closely, in
other ways not closely
_____d.) mostly disagree with them
e.) other; please specify:
6^.) HOW POLITICALLY ORIENTED ARE
YOUR PARENT(S)? :
_____aT) highly political
_____b.) somewhat political -
_____c.) not very political
65-) HAVE YOUR PARENT(S)* POLITICAL
ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS CHANGED
OVER THE YEARS? - ' -..
_____aT) little ornot at all
_____b.) somewhat (in what ways?)-: -
e.) considerably (in what ways?)
rlk 83


appendix c
LETTER FROM CAROLYN H. SIMMONS
UNIVERSITY OF COLORAOO AT DENVER
1100 Fourteenth Street
Denver, Colorado 60202
(303) 629-2646
x *
V
Division of Natural and Physical Sciences
February 17, 1983
Rand Leslie Kannenberg
165 S. Wright St. Apt. #110
Lakewood, Colorado 80228
Dear Mr. Kannenberg:
The enclosed research prospectus has been approved by the Human Research
Committee of the University of Colorado at Denver, under the rules for
expedited research review and subject to the conditions in the
following paragraph of this letter.
While a formal consent form is not needed for survey research of this
nature, you should include in your "INSTRUCTIONS" to students:
--a few words about the nature of the research and its purpose.
(e.g. "The following questionaire is designed to study the
socialization of American youth and young adults" or a like
statement.
--an offer to answer any questions regarding the research, bath
during and after the research is completed. This includes an
offer to release information about group responses, not individual
responses.
--an instruction that the student is free to discontinue participation
in the research at any time. This statement should be added to
your statement that participation is voluntary.
--an instruction that questions concerning rights as a subject should
be directed to the Human Rights Research Committee, Graduate
School, University of Colorado at Denver, 80202.
Please send me a copy of your final questionaire with the above instructions
included on it. Students do not need to sign the statement, since it is
printed on the questionaire.
Chair, Human Research Committee
University of Colorado at Denver


Full Text

PAGE 1

SOCIALIZATION AND RESOCIALIZATION OF AMERICAN YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS: THE PROCESS OF LEARNING, UNLEARNING, AND RELEARNING POLITICAL NORMS, VALUES, ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIORS B. A., by .Rand University of at Denver, A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the 1982 University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Sociology 1984 Copyright @)19 84 by Rand Leslie Kannenberg'------, -..........._ All rights reserved.

PAGE 2

This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Rand Leslie Kannenberg has been approved for the Department of Sociology by Richard H. Ogles Michael S. Cummings Date ------------------------

PAGE 3

Kannenberg, Rand Leslie Sociology) Political Socialization and Resocialization of American Youth and Young Adults: The Process of Learning, Unlearning, and Relearning Political Norms, Values, Attitudes, and Behaviors Thesis directed by Professor Richard H. Ogles One of the major aspects of the research was to investigate the relationship between school or level of education (i.e., formal institutions of instruction) and the source of influence on political attitudes and behaviors. A basic assumption of the study was that college/university students may be "liberated" from what was previously taught and learned in the family and school as a result of consciousness raising (by way of both theory and practice). Accordingly, a general hypothesis was that college/university students are more likely than high school students to have lower degrees of support for, or conformity to, conventional norms and values as transmitted by parents and teachers. The paper introduces an alternative approach to the topics of political socialization and resocialization -the "interaction" model, which takes into consideration not only environmental circumstances such as new events or experiences, but also character structure (e.g., dogmatism or closed-mindedness). Data was collected

PAGE 4

iv from Wheat Ridge High School, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, and the University of Colorado at Denver.

PAGE 5

DEDICATION To Mom, Dad, and Tricia.

PAGE 6

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Most of all, I am very grateful for having had the unconditional support of Tricia, my loving wife and partner. She made it possible to continue when it seemed out of the question. In addition, I am indebted to both Dick Ogles and Mike Cummings, who as chair and member of my committee respectively, guided me with great insight as well as patience and trust. Dick, especially has become much more than simply a advisor. He is now a special friend, and stands far above the rest. I appreciate the cooperation of the students at Wheat Ridge High School and the University of Colorado at Denver who allowed me to study their thoughts and actions about politics and society ...

PAGE 7

CHAPTER I. II. III. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. . . . Review of the Literature. . Persistence-Beyond-Childhood Model. Constant Change Mode 1 . . Generations Model ... Statement of the Problem. GATHERING OF THE DATA The Instrument . The Pretest .; The Sample .. .. 1 5 5 6 7 15 24 2 4 27 2 8 University of Colorado at Denver. . 28 Wheat Ridge High School Collection of the Data. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA .... Presentation of the Finding& Interpretation of the Findings. . 31 33 3 5 3 5 53 IV. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RE-SEARCH. . . . . . . 55 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 68 ,,

PAGE 8

APPENDIX A. B. c. D. E. F. G. H. I. PERSONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . LETTER FROM CAROLYN H. SIMMONS. HUMAN RESEARCH COMMITTEE REVIEW LETTER TO CAROL A.WILSON .. MEMO REGARDING KANNENBERG'S SURVEY. LETTER TO UCD INSTRUCTORS. SCHEDULING FORM . viii 7 3 84 90 91 93 9 4 9 5 9 6 THANK YOU LETTER TO WRHS AND UCD FACULTY ... 97

PAGE 9

TABLE 3-l ix TABLES Source of greatest influence on present political attitudes and behaviors by school (condensed) ............... 37 3-2 Source of greatest influence on present political attitudes and behaviors by school . . . . 38 3-3 Degree of change in persorial political attitudes and behaviors by school (condensed) ....... 40 3-4 Degree of change in personal political attitudes and behaviors by school . . . . . . 41 3-5 Answer to question, "Does college provide more or less than family and secondary schools in terms of different perspectives about government and politics?" by school (condensed) ....... 43 3-6 Answer to question, "Does college provide more or less than the family and secondary schools-in terms of different perspectives about government and politics?" by school ............ 44 3-7 Respondent's and parent(s)' political affiliation, political label and strength, political position, and desired form of societal or political-economic organization by school . . . . . . 45 3-8 Degree of dogmatism (or closed-mindedness) by 3-9 3-10 3-11 school. . . . . . .... 49 Measure of dogmatism by school .. 50 Political direction of support for person/issue concepts by school. . . . . . . 51 Measure of political direction of support for person/issue concepts . . . . . . 52

PAGE 10

X FIGURES FIGURE 1-1 Basic Theoretical Schematic Analysis of the Problem . . . . . . 2 3 3-1 C Scale (Closed-Mindedness) 46 3-2 Semantic Differential Scales .. 4 7

PAGE 11

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This study concerns itself with the field of political sociology, especially the area of political socialization and, in particular, the phenomenon of political resocialization. Other topics of discussion include the teaching and learning of rules; the political economy of schooling; schooling as cultural transmission; education, law, politics; and the contradictions in higher education. Political sociology may be defined as .. the examination of the 1 inks between politics and society, beiween social structures and political structures, and between social behaviour and political behaviour" (Rush and Althoff, 1971:3). This ". . definition of political sociology suggests principal role-to explain the connection between-social and political phenomena" (Ibid., 189). Classical social theorists such as Marx, Weber, and Durkheim, all of whom were diversely interested in the questions of

PAGE 12

2 power and authority, heavily influenced the subject. Nonetheless, c6ntemporary political sociology is not ne6essarily a subfield of either sociology or political science. "A genuine political sociology would be an interdisciplinary hybrid that would 'combine social and political explanatory variables, i.e., the inputs sug-gested by the sociologist with the inputs suggested by the political scientists'" (Wasburn, 1982:123). As compared to 'the sociology of politics' which is a distinct subfield of sociology alone, political sociolo--gy receives contributions of a wide variety from anthro-pology, economics, history, political science, and so-ciology. An alternative "definition," however, might be the political economy of state and society. This would allow for greater discussion of exploitation and class struggle, both of which were emphasized by Marx and others from the. conflict perspe6tive. Such a charac-terization would also provide for an easier analysis of ... the basic contradictions in our political-economic system. Scholarly work in the scientific study of po-litical socialization, notably within the discipline of sociology (but in the other social sciences as well), emphasizes ". . how group standards are passed on to

PAGE 13

3 individual members" (Dawson and Prewitt, 1969:10). Es-sentially, "political socialization is a special form of the more general phenomenon of socialization" (Ibid., 15). Stated in more precise terms, Political socialization refers to the process by by e ongoing system. Such learn1ng, however, 1nmore than the acquisition of the appropriate knowledge of a society's political norms and more than the blind performance of appropriate political acts; it also assumes that the individual so makes these norms and behaviors his [or her] own .:. internali zes f bern t.:hat to biro [or her] t.hey appear to he right. just and moral. (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:191) Social role analysis, as well as the writings of both Cooley and Mead, are prominent in this area. A more inclusive definition should also address the issue of "consciousness raising." In addi-tion, emphasis must be placed on how and why norms .and values change, as well as the forces which underlie this process. Political resocialization takes place when individuals (children, adolescents, and adults), volun-tarily or involuntarily unlearn (i.e., are 'deso-cialized' by others or themselves) and relearn political norms, values, attitudes, and behaviors in accordance with newly assigned or acquiied,statuses and roles. Members of particular social groups or society at large

PAGE 14

4 modify their attitudes and behaviors to fit those of their reference groups (both in and in some cases for the simple reason of wanting to be accepted by peers and others (Federico and Schwartz, 1983:335). In a study that spanned over 20 years, T. M. Newcomb found that reference can have a lasting effect on attitudes and beliefs (Newcomb, 1963). In 1935, sent questionnaires to students at .Bennington College who at that time were typically young women from wealthy northeastern families. He found that while first-year students tended to reflect their famil.ies' conservative political views, juniors and seniors were much in attitudes to their liberal professors. When Newcomb followed the 1935 students through their college careers, he found that with each year their attitudes moved a little further to the political left. He concluded that conservatism was 'out' at Bennington in that. period: the woman who expressed liberal ideas was applauded by both. faculty and prestigious older women, so many did. Interestingly, these women did riot revert to their former views after they graduated. Even after 20 their attitudes and beliefs remained the same. (Ibid.) One might also conjecture that such changes are due not only to conformity to a new "reference group" but that these young women at Bennington probably also developed some independence of thought and conviction. That is to say, this kind of process reflects the interaction of an personal with new ideas, values, etc. such that they are not only more independent from their "families of orientation," but are also less dependent on the liberal professors for the further development of their beliefs and values than

PAGE 15

they were initially on their parents. Review of the Literature With the exception of Newcomb's investigation of reference groups and their influence at the col lege/university level and a select few pro-jects, research in the field of political aocialization is, for the most limited to the study of young children and adolescents (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:259). "Political socialization during adult life has not been the subject of much study ... (Rush and Althoff, 1971:45}. Consequently, "there does not exist as yet a theory of adult political socialization, although three different approaches to the topic -three models -can be detected" (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:261). At extreme ends of the theoretical spectrum are the "persistence., beyond-childhood" and the "constant change" An intermediate position is the "generations" model. Persistence-Beyond-Childhood Model. The most common assumption stresses the importance of early patterns (Dawson and Prewitt, 1969; Easton and 1969; Davies, 1965; Adorno et al., '1950; Stagner, 1954) and suggests that attitudes learned early are the most enduring and hence are fair predictors of adult

PAGE 16

6 stances" (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:262). This approach accentuates the role of parents as political socializing agents. As put forth by Langton (1969:21), the nuclear family in Western society the first social group to whichan individual belongs as well as first so-cializing agency in his or her life. Hess and Torney (1967:95-97), state positively that parents participate .in the process of political socialization in three ways: first of all, by transmitting political attitudes of the family as well as some differences of opinion to be found about the community in which they live; secondly, by presenting political examples that children may emu-late (e.g., party affiliation, voting patterns, etc.); and thirdly, by providing experience in a hierarchic social system (i.e., these familial relationships are later generalized to political objects). Constant Change Model. "This model . while not excluding childhood socialization, argues that adulthood brings the organism into contact with new experiences (new settings, novel events, new respon-sibilities, changes in biological and social status) which have a powerful socializing impact on the vidual" (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:262). In other words, The knowledge, values and attitudes acquired during childhood and adolescence will be measured against the experience of adult life: they may be rein-

PAGE 17

7 forced, undermined or modified by that experience; to suggest otherwise to suggest a static political behaviour. If the processes of adult socialization tend to reinforce those of childhood and adolescence, degree of change may be limited to that of increasing conservatism with age, but where conflict occurs, then radical changes in political behaviour may result: such conflict may have its roots in early political socialization, but it may also be attributable to the experiences of later socialization. (Rush and Althoff, 1917:47) The family is in no way the sole agent of political socialization. Almond and Verba (1963) found that animportant relationship exists between level of education and political attitudes and behaviors. In essence, an increase in the former makes more likely a higher level of awareness regarding, and involvement in, politics and government. A large number of other studies ore-education and electoral patterns specifically, have found a correlation betweeri these.two variables as well. Basically, a college/university graduate is more inclined to vote than someone who terminated schooling at or before the high school level (see Verba, Nie & Kim, 1978). Generations Model. The generations model stresses external stimuli as the determining factor of influence. Such an approach accords events arid changed settings a significant role in shaping attitudes by specifying events and experiences will be interpreted differentially among age cohorts who share internal consistency in terms of educational

PAGE 18

8 trends, age at which political events took place, and subsequent peer influence in response to those events (Lane and Sears, 1964; Carlsson and Karlsson, 1970; Inglehart, 1971). (Sigel and Hoskin, 1977:262) Actually, the generations model appears to be rio more than a "specification" of the constant change model. For this reason, a fourth theme should be intra-duced at this point. It combines both the generations and constant change models and invokes the . phenomenon of interaction between internal and external processes in contrast to simply calling attention to experiences. It must be recognized that people are not automatically influenced by the ronment. Instead, it is the mariner in which the in-dividual interacts with his or her social and phy9ical space that determines how he or she will interpret the various political events and thus, why attitudes and behaviors may or may not be changed in respect to both direction and content. As will be at greater length in the pages to follow, American families arid schools teach children to respect the President, the Presidency, po-lice officers, and other such symbols or objects of authority. Furthermore, East6n and Dennis 11969) ex-plain the processes of informal or primary political socialization (which takes place in the family and.peer

PAGE 19

groups without the subject being of it) and formal or secondary political (which takes place in school and is obvious to the subject) and the intended outcome of support for the U.S. political system. For the part, childien are successfullj trained to be dogmafic or closed-minded if and when a person or issue could in any way be as a threat against the political stability of their In order to investigate the influence of closed-mindedness in this study a shortened version of the C Scale for Closed-Mindedness (Cummings, 1974; Uni versity of Colorado Attitude Survey, 1976) is used as a "generic" measure of dogmatism. Whereas the F Scale tends to measure right-wing closure and the D Scale tends to measure unconventional closure (both right and the C Scale was designed to serve as a reliable valid measure of the generic phenomenon. Cortsequently, the C Scale is the first measure of generic dogmatism that is not biased in a particular "political" (e.g., in the direction of fascism as is the F Scale, or like the D Scale, towards communism) (Ibid., 44-54). It was also desired to obtain a measure of conservatism as distinct from dogmatism in the above sense. Therefore, the semantic differential (Osgood, et al., 1957) is used in this study as an instrument to

PAGE 20

10 cohservatism support for conventional person and issue concepts). "Because socialization processes favor system-maintaining beliefs and attitudes, the tiriquestioning citizen is more likely to dogmatically conservative than progressive" (Cummings, 1974:77). However, the relationship between dogmatism and conservatism is not perfect (see Cummings, 1974:77ff). In additiQn to the family and school, peer groups play a significant role in socialization. Dawson and Prewitt (1969:130-131), indicate that late adolescent and adult peer group_ political socialization usually supplements formed political orientations for changes in social position. Nevertheless, they also point out that new peer groups (fellow students, ers, and/or neighbors, may be capable of altering earlier political learning (especially if it was inadequate). However, most of the literature on desocialization and resocialization focuses on youth who giew up in subcultures (or everi foreign societies) and as adults had to adapt to the mainstream (see Riley, Foner, Hess & Toby, Further, the majority bf the research in this area concentrates on the negative experiences in volveq in group-induced desocialization and resocialization (e.g., POW's and "brainwashing;" Schein, 1956; Se-

PAGE 21

ll .gal, 1957); of formal and . . . . the is to total ins-titutions 'such as prisons, mental hospitals, and the. .. mii;Ltary, of w .hich control over their iothe . . . res6cialization (the means of whicih force}. Carney suggests that "formal school-. irig 1s part and parcel of the of. cap. . As by Dawson and Prewitt (1969:144), "we reserve the word 'schooling' .for the more or 6onscious by an.older generation to instruct th. e young specifically through a set of i :nsti tutions set aside for that 1he educational system of" Affierica is an instrument of . the state, designed tomaintain and reproduce the dominant norms, values, and iocial relations re... fleeted by the needs. and wants of the. owners and man. . and injustice amongst workers and poor .. Goffman (1963) talked. about how so:called "normals" stigmatize poor individuals and families as "not quite human." Th6se poverty children who are constantly being labeled : as "different" oreven "worse" by both peers and well as other school are likely

PAGE 22

12 to accept such roles. Moreover, certain children are encouraged to achieve while others are left to fail. "Marxist historians and sociologists today interpret mass schooling (including the early Sunday schools) as an ideological assault on the working class: a massive act of cultural aggression by the capitalist bourgeoisie" (Musgrove, 1979:76). With few exceptions, all children must attend formal institution& of instruction until a certain age or point in time. In most cases, private schools dis-criminate against those families which cannot afford the high costs of tuition and fees. Likewise, training is tor the few parents who have necessary funds and the required ciredentials or equiva-lent coursework completed. Also, the curriculum is usually as restrictive as what is used in the schools 'and any alternatives must be approved by at least one agent or agency._ Essentially then, There is only one way to grow up in America if one wants to eat regularly, to be warm, and not to be harassed by the For the vast majority there is only one place to go to school, that place is the same nearly everywhere. There is one city, one mode of production, one road to power. And there is little freedom. (Katz, 1975:3) Already mentioned was the fact that like the family, the school plays an important role in the pro-

PAGE 23

13 cess of socialization. It is not this function that is being questioned. Instead, the greatest fault of these institutions is that they do not allow a variety of regarding behavior, and the strict rules of conduct to be found in both the family and school only inhibit the human experience. "As soon as we bring children together in large groups, rules become necessa ... And, as we enforce these rules, we are bringing home the messages, 'You should do what I tell you, or, more generally, do what people in authority tell you to do'". {Webb, .1981 :94). "The beginning school child learns that obedience to authority is necessary for success as is conquering the new math" {Dawson and Prewitt, 1969!143-144). This plain fact has serious implications . For example, there is evidence that school teachers punish {and reward) their students by improper use of grades. "Some research data indicate that grades are often more closely correlated with stu dents' conformity to classroom behavior standards than to their academic competency" {Boocock, 1980:161). Because schools promote compliance to rules, creative intelligence and analytical ability, or critical study in general, is seldom encouraged. Even those students who receive high scores ori the assessment vices meant to measure both creativity arid intelligence

PAGE 24

14 are given little opportunity to proficiehcy in . skills. wiitten and oral expression at .the primary/secondary level is almost always censored. Ordinarily; 'it is not until a bright student enters.col-lege that he or is given at least some freedom to investigate subject matter that may very well deviate from quo. Rational thought beyond simple means-end planning or organizational competence is for the most part a newly gained experience for incoming college students, .especially those in the arts and hu and the social sciences. A portrait of a wartorn or a detaiied essay about a revolutionary soldier rarely observed in the traditional high school classroom.where teachers fear beingstispended or fired for any controversy whatsoevei. A term project in favor of communism unlikely to be prepared by a student who does not have access to different ideas (e.g., the reading and. viewing of certain books and movies is simply prohibited). The intended structures functions of educa-tional systems are heavily influenced by the dominant theory of nature. Hobbes, like many 6f his fellow political phildsophers of early time# felt strongly that without rigorous regulations there would result a socalied "war of all against all." Durkheim, too, had a

PAGE 25

15 "negative" view of human nature. His ... schoo 1 of thought is suspicious of human freedom, believing that. human beings must be protected from their own capacity for evil. ... This is a popular belief in America, and it hoids that only the restraints of civil.society cause bad people to like g6od ones" (Webb, 1981:35-47). However, most if not all social behavior learned. With this in mind, it is difficult to imagine what would cause a person to be born with either "good'' or "bad" behavioral traits. What must be fully realized is that teachers (and parents also) "teach by example," and their behaviors (as well as if expressed) are imitated by surrounding children. Accordingly, obedient teachers and obedient parents are more likely. to have law-abiding students and children respectively. Likewise, children can be taught how and why to question authority. School boards are well aware of this possibility. Radical teachers at the primary/ secondary level are forced to suppress their ideologies, while conventional teachers are encouraged to indoctrinate students into conformist ideologies. Statement of the Problem It has already been made clear that liberal arts schooling at the majority of American colleges and universities somewhat promotes free inquiry and indepen-

PAGE 26

16 dent judgment which to some extent delegitimatizes the conventional ideologies previously taught and learned in the family and school (primary/secondary level). Simple exposure to U.S. social problems and the many p_ossibili-ties for social change (reform or revolution) by way of social science coursework taken, attendance at a variety of radical speaker forums and/or campus held rallies, and so forth, is capable in part of destroying the American "mythology" (Bowles and Gintis, 1976). "Aca-demic emancipation" or freedom from the "mainstream ideology" is an indication of a major contradiction (and one that is inherent) in our system of higher education (see Eriksson, 1983). "Durkheim saw education as a social creation, as the means by which a society assured its own continuity by socializing the young in its own image" (Boocock, 1980:279). However, the college/ university is far less successful than the primary and secondary schools in reproducing and maintaining conventional norms, values, attitudes and behaviors. In fact, Bowles and Gintis suggest three goals of schools which go far beyond reproduction of the present system: l.Y the fostering of social equality; 2.) the promotion of the full development of creative potentials in youth; and

PAGE 27

17 3.) the integration of new generations into the social order.l They believe that the present system of doing things (i.e., with "class rule" and "material dependen-cy") should be eliminated and replaced by demo-cracy, a form of societal organization that they feel will fulfill the goals listed above. As expressed by Bowles and Gintis, the weaknesses of capitalism as they apply to education (and vice versa) make evident the importance of immediate reform or revolution in these areas. It is hoped that sometime in the near future the individual will become the central concern of our schools and educators. Accordingly, instead of modern day preoccupation with coercive cultural transmission,. we should deditate ourselves to freeing children from the rigid norms and values that prohibit them from recognizing their full potential as human beings as well as participating members of social groups and society (i.e., we should be concerned with meeting both the "personalistic" and "collective" needs of human beings; see Ogles, 1982). 1Bowles and Gintis recognize the importance of noncoercive "cultural in any society.

PAGE 28

18 American schools are unable to fully encourage creativity, cooperation, and an and appre-ciation for self and others due to the political-econ-omic system of which they are now a part. However, at the same time, our system of education is unable to completely stifle American youth and young adults be-cause, in part, of our cultural tradition. State and corporate elites have expressed considerable alarm over the political implications of the growing number of overeducated workers. Judging from the existing literature, overeducated workers can be expected to exhibit higher levels of job dissatisfaction, increased tendencies toward political leftism, greater political alienation, and a weaker allegiance to the dominant achievement ideology than workers with comparable oc;:cupations or level of education. (Burris, 1983:454-67) This is the second part of the contradiction, and it is just the presence of such incongruities which will dialectically lead to social democracy. The teach-ing and learning of .laws and custom will only become a truly democratic process if and when we replace cap-italism with social democracy (or socialism). A basic assumption of this study is that col-lege/university students (in the liberal arts especial-ly) may be "liberated" from what was previously taught and learned in the family and school (i.e., from the ideology in society as transmitted through most families and primary and secondary schools). The area of focus I is primarily on the process of unlearning and relearning

PAGE 29

19 political norms, values, attitudes and behaviors with respect to the status and role of college/university student. A general hypothesis is that high school students are less likely than students to have political attitudes and behaviors different from parent (s). Alternately, students are politically desocialized and resocialized, therefore making them more likely than high school students to have lower degrees of support for, or conformity to, conventional norms and values. It is precisely phenomenon that indicates a major cohtradiction in our system cif higher education.. Whereas the college/university level is meant to reinforce the existing political/economic system, it also encourages independent judgments regarding alternative forms of societal or political-economic organization as well as differing institutions which are more organized to meet human needs and wants than to profit making. In addition, it is assumed that college/university students become more analytical toward the subject matter they study. Related to this conjecture is the possibility of their becoming more progressive, open to or even supportive of radical change (reform or revolution) in society. The problem also has to do with character

PAGE 30

20 structure (internal composition) and environmental cir-cumstances (external stimuli) related to change (or not) in political attitudes and behaviors. That is, it is assumed that those students who change their political attitudes and behaviors are not as dogmatic as those who do not change, and, furthermore, that those students who do change have a number of outside influences while at the college/university level. Nonetheless, it is hypothesized that the political events and experiences do not influence these students as much as the further development of an ability to analyze those things around them. Specifically, the six hypotheses of the research are as follows: 1.) The predominant influence on the present political attitudes and behaviors of high school students is from their parents rather than friends, high school teachers, mass media or other influences; in comparison with college students whose parents will have lost their major influence in favor of college teachers and other factors. 2.) The personal political attitudes and beha-viors of high school students have changed little or not at all; whereas, college students

PAGE 31

21 personal political attitudes and behaviors have (mostly in the eral/radical. direction) somewhat, ifnot COIJ.siderably. 3.) High school students are as to whether c6llege provides more, or as much as the family and iri terms of different perspectives about gqvernrnent and pblitics;whereas, college con. fident in their opinion that college more than the family and secondary schools in terms of "different" (i.e., a wider range of) perspectives about government and politics. 4.) The political affiliations, political' labels and strength, political positions, and desired forms of societal or political-economic organization of high school $tudents are much the same as their parents'; college students political affiliations, political labels and political and desiied .forms of or political-economic organization d{fferent froci (and mostly to the left of) their parents'. 5.) In general, high school students possess degrees 6f dogmatiSm (or c16sed-minded

PAGE 32

22 . ness) than do students, and such dog-matism tends to reinforce conservatism. 6.) High school students regard with favor such conventional person/issue concepts as the FBI, Nuclear Weaponry, and President Reagan, and object to Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., Social-ism, and Karl Marx; on the contrary, col-lege students regard with favor more liberal or radical person/issue concepts such as Rev. Mar-tin Luther King, Jr., Socialism, and Karl Marx, and object to the FBI, Nuclear Weaponry, and President Reagan.

PAGE 33

1 ) 2 ) High School Students College/ University Students Figure 1-1 Basic Theoretical Schematic Analysis of the Problem A. Causes B. Effects a. ) b. ) a. ) b. ) experiences and events not "different" from family and school I political attitudes and similar to parent(s) reproduced ideology in society maintained and analytical ability not well-developed "liberated" I not politically resocialized a high degree of support or conformity to con norms and values reproduced experiences and events "dif' political ferent" from family and behaviors I /parent(s) ideology in society attitudes and similar to not reproduced* not maintained and analytical ability significantly further developed I politically resocialized *(indicators of the contradiction) a high degree of support or conformity to norms and values not N w

PAGE 34

CHAPTER II GATHERING OF THE DATA The Instrument It was decided during the earliest stages of the project development that survey research of some type was the appropriate method of data collection. Eventually, this general strategy matured into a specific tactic. A sixty-five item questionnaire, designed uniquely for the particular field study, became the single mechanism for the gathering of the data (see Appendix B ) The was revised a total of three times. The major complaint from thesis committee members around the first draft was length. Therefore, unnecessary or redundant items .were either deleted or combined others of similar intent. Nonetheless, sophisticated techniques such as the C Scale on closedmindedness, and an evaluative dimension of the semantic differential were considered useful for substantive

PAGE 35

25 reasons and, therefore, were added. It was the second version of the questionnaire which was used for the pretest. Ultimately, wording of specific questions and response categories was improved for the distinct pur-pose of clarity. In addition, space piovided for res-ponses to open-ended questions was increased where needed (see The Pretest). In accordance with the rules and regulations of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Human Rights Research Committee, Graduate School, University of Colorado at Denver, ap-proved the questionnaire under expedited research re-view. It was subject to the condition that only the "Instructions" be revised; While informed consent was not required, anonymity was requested by the inves-tigator in order to protect the respondent's right to privacy. The final version consisted of three parts: "Personal Background Information;" "Personal Political Information;" and "Parent(s)' Political Information." Located between the second and third divisions were the C Scale and semantic differential sections. The purpose of the latter was to measure the meanings that certain ideas had to different people. Respondents were asked

PAGE 36

26 to rate six person/issue concepts (FBI, Martin Luther King, Socialism, Karl Marx, Nuclear Weaponry, and President Reagan) in terms of five seven point descriptive scales with ends of adjectives and their respective antonyms (right-wrong; bad-good; fair-unfair; unjustjust; and positive:-negative) (see Appendix B). This one subdivision was discovered to be less difficult for students to comprehend and respond to than originally expected. It is immediately obvious when a respondent misunderstands written instructions of this section. The answers are either missing altogether or consistently contradictory. However, an item which called for sexual preference, a topic that is inevitably problematic and was expected to be somewhat sensitive, resulted in an.even higher degree of controversy than was predicted. The question, which included the responses of homosexual and bisexual, was not allowed by the principal to appear on the questionnaire distributed to the Wheat Ridge High School students. Despite the fact that it received limited criticism from the respondents during the pretest, the objection on the part of the high school teachers and administration was not anticipated. Nevertheless, at least two of the three thesis committee members were prepared for this kind of objection.

PAGE 37

27 The Pretest It was desired that the pretest sample be as similar as possible to at least one of the intended final sub-samples. The group students from a sociology course at.the University of Colorado at Denver. The six participants who volunteered were requested to do so by the instructor (foreign students were excluded) and the administration of the questionnaire was conducted in the same classroom, but in the absence of the instructor. In attendance were three males and three females; three. undergraduates and three graduates; three Whites, one Black, and two Hispanic/Chicanes. The mean age was thirty-three-years-old. The purpose of the single pretest was to time the interview, to check the wording and ease of understanding the questions, to spot possible problems _of spillover, and to correct these problems at the outset" (Zisk, 1981:104-105). Other objectives included eliminating some questions that simply did not between respondents or, as an alternative, to change the categories. (Ibid.). Upon completion of the questionnaire, the pretest respondents were asked if they enjoyed or disliked the experience and if they had any specific questions or comments (Zisk, 1981). The semantic differential sec-

PAGE 38

28 tion was (i.e., instructions revised and concepts changed) toa great degree on the basis of input from these participants. It was requested by the participants that an example be given and the too general concepts (business, education, family, government and religion) be replaced with more specific persons and issues. The Sample Both Wheat Ridge High School (WRHS) and the University of Colorado at Denver (UCD) were chosen first and foremost for-the _purpose of convenience. Theresearcher was a graduate of the former five years previously, and presently is in attendance the latter. Therefore, the necessary contacts had already been established. Moreover, the primary goal was to minimize all related costs and expenses. Accordingly, the two schools were also selected because tney were easily accessible, located within six to eight miles of one another. University of Colorado at Denver UCD ii one of four campuses in the University of Colorado system. It is an urban, non-residential institution of higher learning, in the downtown area. UCD is one of three institutions on the Auraria Higher

PAGE 39

29Education Center (AHEC) campus (along with ' State College of and Community College of ver). Students,. faculty, and staff commute from the five in the area arid elsewhere. In pas tyears; UCD has maintained the im-portance. of classroom instruction. i n front of service . and.research. In .it has attracted . non-traditional students._ (e.g., older professionals in search of advanced degrees for promotion in . How .ever, more emphasi? is now being placed On scholarly work, and recent (which are reflected in the indicate a greater number of younqer students,. especially those just graduated from high _school. According to.the administration over the past several semesters the age of students at UCD has ranged from sixteefi to eighty with the mean being approximately twenty-eight. Fifty-one percent were men and 49.0% w.omen. Thirteen percent were miriori ties and. 1.0% or more were foreign born. Out of a total riumber of 10,848 and 5,385 equivalent students (FTES), there were 1;513.9 FTES in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (CLAS), and 351'.3 FTES in the Division of Social Scien' .. ces (SS). _The simple random sample at UCD was drawn from the populatiC>!l of all SS undergraduate courses

PAGE 40

30 taught on Monday, 'wednesday, and Friday (stratified by ti.me slot. with the only restriction being one from each no matter how few or many}. It ipcluded 1B2 students from four lower and five upper division. day and . . evening courses representing sixdifferent academic departments (Anthropology; Economics, Social Sciences, . .. History, Political and four percent of the respondents reported that they were students. Thirty percent were rna-jors, 14%. were politicai major:s, and 13% listed something other than the twenty-three major options in the In addition, 21.4% employed fulltime; part-time; 29.1% unemployed; and 6.6% other. The meari age was (median = 23.300; = 19.000; range = 41.000). The breakdown in sex was: 44.5% male; and 55.5% female. There were 83.9% Whites; 2.2% Blacks; 3.3% ,Hispanic/Chicanes;. and 10.6% other. From tbe same sample, 13.9% .described as . . Christian; 43.6% Catholic; 26.7% Protestant; 2.0% Jewish;. 1.0% Mormon; and 12.9% 'other. In additibn, 9.6% considered themselves strongly religious; 46.9% re...: ligious; 33.9% neutral or undecided;. 7 . 3% anti-re. ligious; and 2.1% otber. In regardsto housing 38.1% stated that they lived at home with parent(s); 25.4%

PAGE 41

31 alone or with friend(S); 32.6% with spouse or mate; and 3.9% other. Also, 2.2% reported their SES as lower class; working; 70.5% middle (2.2% middle by it-self, 10.0% lower middle, 32.2% middle middle, and 26.1% upper middle); 2.8% upper; 3.9% no class; and 3.9%' percent made it known that.they school; 2.2% disliked school; 12.1% were neutral on the subject; and 2.7% were conflicted. Wheat Ridge High School Wheat Ridge, Colorado, has some features char-acteristic of a rural community, yet the majority of WRHS students live in areas of Wheat Ridge (as well as the adjacent cities of Lakewood and Golden) which consist of white, affluent, suburban neighborhoods. Ninety-six percent of the students at WRHS are White. Fifty-one percent are male and 49.0% female. WRHS (grades ten through twelve) is of the Jefferson County Public Schools which is considered by many to.be one of the finest public school systems in the state and region. The district places great em-phasis on academics as well as athletic achievement. It has received nation-wide recognition for its students' petformance on the AC1, SAT and other such standardized tests and college entrance exams (WRHS and other Jeffer-

PAGE 42

32 son Couriiy students scored consistently above the national norm). district has also .been ranked nationally in individual and team sports competitions. 'the WRHS Student Senate had ar-ranged a "Political Awarenes. s Week" to_ be held duriJ1g the of the research. It because, as elected leaders expressed it, voters are key to the of 6ur system of govern-ment." Though many of them cancelled at the last minute, invited speakers included the Libertarian candidate for Governor, a Republican State Senator, and an member of the Worker's Stu dent at the different extremely poor, most likely to the possibility that they did not want to miss out on homework assigned during classes which were still being held. Out of a total ririmber of 1,393 students, the from WRHS included 114 from six classes one of the' following fields: english, history, humanities, sociology, and spanish. The sample consisted of students of faculty m&mbers who the entiie school -The teachers -were chosen on the basis of. The principal----assisted in the scheduling process. The mean age of was 16.605 years

PAGE 43

33 (median= 16.571; mode= 16.000; range= 4.000). There were 43.9% males and 56.1% females. The break down by race was 93.0% White; 0.9% Black; 2.6% Hispanic/Chicano; 0.9% Native American; and 2.6% other. In terms of religious preference, 16.9% considered themselves Christian; 38.2% Catholic; 34.8% Protestant; 3.4% Mormon; and 6.7% other. Also, 8.8% described their position as strongly religious; 54.0% religious; 35.4% neutral or undecided; and 1.8% anti-religious. In addition, 1.8% reported their SES as lower class; 3.5% working; 87.6% middle (1.8% middle by itself, 4.4% lower middle, 35.4% middle middle, 46.0% upper middle); 4.4% upper; and 2.7% no class. From the same sample 55.3% made it known that they liked school; 7.9% disliked it; 31.6% were neutral on the subject; and 5.3% conflicted. Although the two samples are not meant to be generalized to any paiticular population (e.g., Colorado or U.S. high school or college/university students), at the very least they are clearly representative of their respective institutions. Collection of the Data The 296 questionnaires were collected from the two samples within the same week. Distribution at WRHS was completed in one day, whereas the process at UCD required twice that time. The widely used Statistical

PAGE 44

34 Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) allowed for computer processing once the codebook and data were created. Simple frequency distributions and crosstabluations the usual descriptive statistics} were generated for analysis upon completion of the respective programs.

PAGE 45

CHAPTER III ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Presentationof the Findings One of the major aspects of the study was to investigate the association between high school or college and the source of influence on one's political attitudes and behaviors. It was found that a systematic relationship, statistically significant at the 0.0001 level, does exist between the variables school or level of education and source of influence on the subjects in terms of present political attitudes and In other words, the probability of obtaining chi-square values of 43.637 and 66.283 or larger with one and five degrees of freedom respectively, is less than one chance in 10,000. With x2 notably larger than the critical region in both cases, the "null hypothesis" of no difference between the two samples was easily rejected. Furthermore, phi and Cramer's V (measures of association for 2 x 2 and 2 x k crosstabulation tables in that

PAGE 46

36 order) indicate a significant strength of relationship. With values of Xl'=0.395 and V=0.477, the variables (school and influence) neither independent (i.e., statistics equal to zero), nor perfectly related (i.e., statistics at the upper limit of unity). Instead, a high degree of association does exist. (It should be noted at point that 2 x 2 tables will always have lower val.ues than 2 x k tables the differences between observed and expected frequencies are larger in the latter.) As predicted, WRHS students reported that parent(s) have been the greatest influence on them in terms of their present political attitudes and behaviors, whereas the UCD students stated that other factors have had a greater on them politically. Respondents from both samples ranked friend(s) and media similarly. However, no more than 2.7% of the WRHS students (and a slightly higher 4.4% of the UCD sample) selected secondary teacher(s) as the greatest influence, in comparison. with a much larger 20.6% amongst the UCD students who chose college teachers(s) and another 12.8% of the same sample who combined college teacher(s) with a wide variety of other responses (only 1.7% of which included parents). It was expected that the high school students would report their political attitudes and behaviors as having changed little or not at all, whereas the college

PAGE 47

37 Table 3-1 Source of greatest influence on present political attitudes and behaviors by school (condensed) (Reported in Percentages) GREATEST INFLUENCE Parent(s) College teacher(s) and/or other(s) P=O. 0001 .. Wheat Ridge High School ( N=lll) 62.2 37.8 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=l80) 22.8 77.2

PAGE 48

38 Table 3-2 Source of greatest influence on present political attitudes and behaviors by school (Reported in Percentages) GREATEST INFLUENCE Parent(s) Friend(s) Secondary teacher(s) College teacher(s) Media Other(s) P=0.0001 Wheat Ridge High School (N=lll) 62.2 9.0 2.7 0.0 16.2 9.9 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=l80) 22.8 8.3 4.4 20.6 12.2 31.7

PAGE 49

39 students would suggest that theirs have changed (mostly in the liberal/radical direction) somewhat, if not considerably; This second hypothesis was supported. The relationship between the variables school or level I of education and change in personal political attitudes and behaviors is statistically significant (see Tables 3-3 and 3-4). Sixty-seven percent of the WRHS students revealed that their personal political attitudes and behaviors have changed little or not at all, while 63.3% of the UCD students disclosed that theirs have changed somewhat, or considerably, over the years. Further, 13.6% of the UCD students expressed the difference in their political atti-tudes and behaviors as being more liberal or radical (while only 3.6% of the WRHS students used such termin-ology in open-ended question to describe themselves.) In contrast, exactly half as many (or 6.8%) of the UCD students specified an increase in conservatism. In support of the third hypothesis a strong rela-tionship was also found to exist between school or level of education and opinion regarding college. (On the 2 x 4 table, x2 = 99.863, V = 0.587, and level of significance= 0.0001.) Amongst the WRHS students, 74.8% noted uncer-tainty as to whether college provides more, less, or as much as the family and secondary schools in terms of

PAGE 50

40 Table 3-3 Degree of change in personal political attitudes and behaviors by school (condensed) (Reported in Percentages) DEGREE OF CHANGE Little or not at all Somewhat or considerably P=O.OOOl / Wheat Ridge High School (N=ll2) 67.0 33.0 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=l77) .36.7 63.3

PAGE 51

41 . Table 3-4 Degree change in personal political attitudeS by school (Reported in Percentages) Wheat Ridge High School DEGREE OF CHANGE (N=ll2) Little 67.0 Somewhat more D.9 servative Somewhat more l1beral 0.9 Somewhat more radical 0.9 Somewhat better under-9.8 standing. of politics and government Somewhat other 11.6 Considerably more 0.0 conservative Considerably more liberal 1.8 more radical 0. 0 Considerably better urider6.3 standingof politics and.government Considerably other 0.9 P=O. 0 001 SCHOOL university of Colorado at Denver (N::l77) 36.7 5.1 4.0 1.7 10.7 15.3 1.7 3.4 4. 5 .. 3.4 l3.6

PAGE 52

42 different perspectives about government and politics. Nonetheless, a surprising 25.2% of the high school students suggested thatcollege provides more than does their own level of education (and/or parents). As was expected from the UCD sample, an overwhelming majority of the students (73.2%) reported that college provides more in terms of different (i.e., a wider range of) perspectives about government and politics than any other factor or influence. To test hypotheses numbers four through six, the respondents were asked a series of questions, and were expected to react to numerous statements or scales, the scores of which were combined. Students were then grouped according to the different characteristics (see Figures 3-1 and 3-2). As predicted, 60.2% of the respondents from WRHS stated political affiliations, political labels and strength, political positions, and desired forms of societal or,political-economic organization that were identical to their parent(s)' (as the respondents reported them to be). On the other hand, 57.8% of the ucb students SQrveyed re-corded affiliations, labels and strength, positions, and desired forms of organization different than their parent(s)'. The relationship between these two variables is significant at the 0.010 level (see Table 3-7).

PAGE 53

,43 Table 3-5 Answer to question, "Does college provide more or less than the family and secondary s6hools in terms of different ,perspectives about government and politics?" by school (condensed) (Reported in Percentages) ANSWER More Don't know or other P=O.OOOl Wheat Ridge High School ( N=lll) 25.2 74.8 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=l79) 73 2 26.8

PAGE 54

. 44 Table 3:-6 to question,"Does college more or less than the family ano secondary schoo1 s in terms of different perspectives ab6u,tgoverninent and politics?" .ANSWER. More Less .Same Don't know P=O.OOOl by school in Percentages) Wheat Ridge High School (N=ll1) 3.6 6.3 64.9 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver ( N=l7 9) 73.2 .7. 3. 10.1 9.5

PAGE 55

.45 Table 3-7 Respondent's and parent(s)' political affiliation, political label and strength, political position, and desired form of societal or political-economic organization by school (Reported. iri Percentages) POLITICAL AFFILIATION, etc. Same Different P=O.OlO Wheat Ridge High School (N=l08) 60.2 39.8 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=l66) 42.2 57.8

PAGE 56

. 46. Figure 3-1 C Scale (Closed-Mindedness) : Looking .back over my I find that. I still have the same basic beliefs I grew up with . You've pretty much got .to go along with the .ideas and policies of those are more knowledgeable than yourself. I think it's frequently good to change your opinions. abou' t things. (Reverse Scored) It is .important for to learn when to disobey authority. (Reverse Scored) is hardly issue on which my are the only valid ones. Scoied) It is best' to be wary of an individual who often changes his/her beliefs. I 'think it best to. maintain my own .opinions even though many other people rniy have ft different point of . . It, is heces.sary to.reserve. judgment about what is going. on until one has. had a chance. to hear' the opinions of those orie tespects.

PAGE 57

Figure 3-2 Semantic Differential Scales Conservative person/issue concepts FBI Nuclear Weaponry President Liberal or Radical toncepts Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Socialism Karl Marx 47

PAGE 58

48 It was expected that the WRHS student' s wouhi . report high of dogmatism (or close_d-mindedness) and. regard. with favor the conservative person/issue concepts, as compared to the students who would . . indicate lower degrees of dogmatism and higher degiees of support for the liberal or radical persons is sties. Howevet, the relationship between the school or level of education and dogmatism or closedmindedness not significant. the UCD . sample almost evenly distributed amongst the high and low categories (43.5% and 42.9% respectively), while 52.2% of the WRHS students could as closed--minded and. only 30.1%. operi.;..minded. The final assumption of the study was that high school sttidenfs are significaritly more .conservative college/un-iversity students. Iri support of the FBI, nuclear weaponry, arid President Reagan conventional were 36.9% of the WRHS students . as to 26.3% of those from UCD sample. An additional 39.6% of those from.the. WRHS sample and 52.6% of the UCD students fivoritism towards Martin Luther. King, Socialism, and Karl. Marx (i.e., .liberal or radical Exactly half as many (or 26.3%) o the UCD supported the conservative person/issue concepts or the liberal or radical person/issue

PAGE 59

49 Table 3-8 Degree of dogmatism {or closed-mindedness) by school {Reported in Percentages) DEGREE OF DOGMATISM High Neutral Low P=O .1 0 Wheat Ridge High School {N=ll3) 52. 2 17.7 30.1 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver {N=l77) 43.5 13.6 42.9

PAGE 60

Table 3-9 Measure of dogmatism by school (Reported as a quantitative score: 1 = open-minded; 4 = closed-minded) SCHOOL 50 MEASURE OF DOGMATISM Wheat Ridge High School ( N.:ll3) University of Colorado at Denver (N=l77} Mean Median Mode P=O.lO 2.8 2.9 3.5 2.5 2.5 3.5

PAGE 61

51 Table 3-10 Political direction of supp6rt for concepts by school (Reported in Percentages) POLITICAL DIRECTION Conservative Neutral Liberal/Radical P=O .10 Wheat Ridge High School (N,;,Lll) 36.9 23.4 39.6 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver ( N=l71) 26.3 21.1 52.6

PAGE 62

52 Table 3-11 Measure df political direction of support for person/issue concepts (Reported as a quantitative score: l = Liberal/Radical; 6 = Conservative) MEASURE OF POLITICAL DIRECTION Mean Median Mode P=O.lO Wheat Ridge High School (N=lll) 3.5 3.4 2.0 ... SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=l71) 3.0 2.75 2.0

PAGE 63

concepts. An almost equal number of students fall within the conservative and liberal or radical categores from the WRHS sample. Nevertheless, the are not statistically significant. Interpretation of the Findings 53 The findings presented above tend to prove the suppositions that the predominant influence on college/university students in terms of political attitudes and behaviors is from college teachers and other factors (rather than parents); college students have personal political attitudes and behaviors which have already changed (mostly in the.liberal/radical direction) somewhat or considerably; and college students have political affiliations, political labels and strength, political positions, and desired forms of societal or political-economic organization different than (and mostly to the left of) their parents'. Nonetheless, other results tend to only weakly support the hypotheses of a positive association between the variables school or level of education and dogmatism or closed-mindedness as well as between school or level of education and support for the different person/issue concepts. The data suggest that the change amongst the college/university students may be due to external stimuli instead of internal disposition such as

PAGE 64

54 dogmatism or closed-mindedness, or any permanent element of personality structure. Further, it can be discounted that support for person/issue concepts is a responsible outside factor. This suggests that there may be other environmental causes of the so-called "liberating experience." One possibility is orientation, or more simply, the ability to. do analyiis (see Ogles, 1983). As was stated earlier, college/university students are encouraged to develop intellectual skills as empirical inquiry and rational discussion. [W]hat liberal education does is to us from prejudiqe and superstition and teach us to think for ourselves" (Fallon, 1983:2). Furthermore, not only are college students taught how to think but they are also directed towards full comprehension. The power to understand social problems, for example, is a major aspect of creative and intellectual liberatioh (as will be discussed in the following chapter).

PAGE 65

CHAPTER IV CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH It is a common assumption in our country that education is meant to meet the needs and wants of students, their families, and the community at large. However, first and foremost, schooling in the U.S. must reinforce support for or conformity to (i.e.,. "internalization of") conventional norms and values. "The education we provide for our children reflects the kind of society in which we want to live. If we fail to understand that .connection, we fail to appreciate the moral purpose of education" (Webb, 1981:8). "In a sense, what children learn in a traditional school is political. Submission to authority, abhorrence of deviance, and the like are political" (Carney, 1972:226). However, "without experiencing politics, about politics does not open up vistas; it merely continues children's old experiences with words, or with other nonreal world experiences" (Ibid., 227). At the primary/secondary students are ex-

PAGE 66

56 posed to the theory of democracy by way of textbooks, lectures, and discussion, but they are seldom if ever allowed to put it to practice by having an active role in the decision-making both in and out of school. Locke would agree that a true understanding of politics requires experience, ... but law is a useful subject to study through reading (Sahakian and Sahakian, 1975:102). College/university students, especially who assume full financial responsibility for their own costs and expenses (e.g., room and board, tuition and fees, gain practical by woiking (for pay) or through an internship (often for credit and little if any pay) in an area of special interest. Not only do most college students meet the minimum age requirement for votirig and (if male) registration for conscription to military service, but they have an opportunity to view from a distance, or be a firsthand witness of poverty, discrimination, and other such social problems. No doubt, a residential campus can become a so-called "Ivory Tower," but UCD has a high percentage of its student population which is employed in the community, and of course, everyone lives away from school. According to D u r k he i m ( I 9 5 6 : 7 9 ) It i s

PAGE 67

... 57 up to the State to remind the teacher consistently of the.ideas, the sentiments that must be impressed upon the child to him [or her] to the in which he [or she] must,iive." Marx, on the other hand, felt that by the is altogether objectionable. . Government and church should rather be equally excluded from any influence on the school" (Cosin 1972:171).-Nonetheless, the primary objective of American schooling is to successfully transmit culture to the younger members of our society. . This is one of the initial ways in which the process of socialization (coercive and noncoercive) takes place. Among other things, culture supplies us with both written and unwritten rules bf These laws or customs are first introduced to by parents but also in formal education as early as their first year_ in school (i.e., in kindergarten, or maybe even in preschool). Before else, schools promote conformity to rules and obedience to authority (as well as competition amongst peers). "Their main purpose is to these children orderly, industrious, law-abiding and respec.tful of authority" (Katz, 1975:xvi). It can be said that, Most citizens acquire their notions of rules, laws, and obedience, and develop strategies for utilizing the law through, an interaction between natural cognitive structures and a host of 'legal'

PAGE 68

58 ments srich as the home, school, friendship circle, or court. (Evan, 1980:122) "Law-studies," "law-focused education," or "law-related education" are different names for the same movement, one which ". . emphasizes both the need for and the obligation of American schools to promote law literacy among the nation's school-age youth" (Naylor, 1976:5). Law studies are more commonly known as "citi-zenship education" and are examples of formal political found in most if not all junior and senior high school social studies courses. Such programs are designed to: acquaint students with our present legal system; show that the law is a dynamic and changing institution; help students realize that they have a role in shaping tomorrow's laws; and encourage students to develop positive attitudes toward law and the future. (Franks, 1979:12-13) It is believed by supporters of this curricu-lum, that law and future studies provide skills that can be applied to a variety of social, and econ-ernie issues. The American Bar Association's Special Committee -on Youth Education for Citizenship and similar groups, provide teacher-training sessions held at local, state, regional and national meetings of their profes-sional organizations. Information about the legal and

PAGE 69

59 political systems is taught to teachers by lawyers, business and government officials, and other individuals who believe that concerned with education must place as much emphasis on teaching legal and moral reasoning skills through law-related education as they currently place on teaching reading, writing, and arith (Naylor, 1976:25). Law-related education introduces students to the police, courts, state legislatures, Congress, the executive and judicial branches, as well as the popular subject of "street crime;" however, nothing is done with "white collar crime" (or illegal and immoral activities of business or government). Neither is law (and politi-cal-economic power in general) presented as a form of social control over the "lower class." Unfortunately, there is no discussion of the following hypothesis: Only those people (and segments of society) with political-economic power are represented in the formulation and application of criminal law; and only those people whose interests conflict with the law are likely to be defined as "criminals." (Quinney, 1970:16-19). N6 doubt, law is unfairly presented as a common good and service for all. Likewise, politics are said to be fair for eveiyone. There is little if any opportunity for children to question authority and the system of laws (or the state and government) that they are

PAGE 70

60 taught to obey. Children may only talk of law as it is confined to the present system. Again, one of the primary goals is to ... encourage students t6 develop positive attitudes toward law and the future." Under capitalism as we know it today, students at the primary and secondary level will never read more than the simple cases of criminal and civil law. If they were allowed the privilege of free inquiry in this and other areas, then the capitalist ideology in society might not be maintained. Accordingly, it would be tually impossible to reproduce the political attitudes, behaviors, and social relations similar to parent(s) and/or primary/secondary teacher(s), as well a high degree of support for or conformity to capitalist norms and values, with an educational system that promoted independent judgment law, politics, and other such societal issues. Finally, it can be said that, "law emerges not only to codify existing customs, morals, or mores, but also to modify the behavior and values presently existing in a particular society" (Evan, 1980:555). The so-called "process of liberation" that exists at the college/university level in the U.S. is not well understood. Scientific studies in this area are much needed to the literature already in

PAGE 71

61 the fields of political socialization resocializa tion {which, as was pointed out earlier, tends to focus on young children). What else besides freedom from the norms and values of the family and previous education and schooling is there about the college/university experience that is liberating? To begin with, the liberating experiences take both in and outside of the classroom, in some cases, off-campus. In general, college students are given greater independence; they are exposed to a wide variety of cultural happenings; and they are inspired to experiment with new ideas and certain activities. More specifically, college students undergo consciousness raising. Real or hypothetical laws are explained to them {i.e., "theory"), and in some cases acted upon {i.e., "practice"). No matter if a student lives at or away from home while attending college, he or she will definitely be expected to assume additional responsibilities. To name a few: registering for classes, buying books, getting to lectures or labs on time. In addition, the majority of college students who in their freshmen and sophomore years occupy dorms or other on-campus residences, have no choice but to rely on themselves for cleaning {and_ in some cases cooking) as well as doing

PAGE 72

62 the laundry, and so forth. Once these self-maintenance skills become better developed, the student will ly appreciate the independence that comes along with college. But at-first it can be a painful transition to Another important aspect of liberation is finandial self-ruling or independence of condi-tions. Even though most undergraduate students receive some monetary assistance from parents, at the very least they must assume the responsibility of managing whatmay be limited This by itself can be difficult. In the beginning it is too tempting to do more spending than saving. So-called luxury items far above and beyond basic or subsistence level and services often take precedence over school related needs and wants. Most youth have well-formulated moral values by the time they begin their college careers. Nonetheless, many are still searching for some kind of truth. For these individuals, conflict with an organized church or denomination of earlier affiliation, may arise as a result of being exposed to the discrimination on behalf of society against homosexuals, racial and ethnic minorities, and other populations that are not only "disadvantaged" but also very muchexploited. Certain

PAGE 73

63 sects and cuits often seem attractive to college students be'cause they claim to offer a real life answer to the problem of alienation from self and 6thers, a common (but usually temporary) result of separation from family and friends. Colleges and universities are often viewed as havens for unconventional people, both students and faculty alike. Instructors and professors sometimes admit to being gay or lesbian and even encourage students to examine their own innermost eelings. Others talk about the use of drugs and different illicit activities. Casual sex and experimentation with drugs and alcohol are commonplace at some schools. The college subculture can almost be seen as a simple extension of the more general adolescent subculture. Attitudes and behaviors reflect anti-establishment ideologies vary from styles of dress and hair, u se of language, and music listening habits to largescale social movements concerned with su6h issues as nuclear weaponry and equal rights for women and other minorities. Faculty and students often join efforts and stand side by side at rallies or protests (sometimes against the same college or university at which they teach or attend respectively). HoWever, student govern-

PAGE 74

64 ments'or special interest groups do not hesitate to take advantage of grievance procedures and file against administrators, faculty, or staff who violate instituti6nal or Therefore, it can be said that confrontation as well as cooperation takes place between these constituencies. The influence of faculty on the political attitudes and behaviors of college students is important as the findings of this study suggest. Nonetheless, longitudinal research data indicate that students may develop an eventual indeperiderice from their professors. Ultimately, the college/university experience may teach sttidents to freely think about and understand the concept of class struggle as well as the theory of fundamental social change. They are also introduced in many courses to some of the basic contradictions to be found in society. All of this constitutes the process of consciousness raising which takes place in the classroom. it is important indeed, but not sufficient for much radical change unless combined with practice. College students are more likely to support reform or revolution to better meet the needs and wants of their fellow human beings because of what they have done and duririg the four or more years of matriculation. College.students have a unique opportunity to

PAGE 75

65 be a part of a mixture of different sexes, ages, races, and to hear people speak about the world in which they live from their own experiences. Furthermore, college students adjust to the norms and values of this, their new social surroundings -the school community. There are several things that would have made this study stronger. At first it was thought that the college/university sample should have been a more traditional institution of higher learning (e.g., younger students located on a residential campus with dormitories, fraternities, and sororities, or other housing arrangements away from parents), preferably a medium-sized public school with a high rate of out-ofstate residents in attendance. However, UCD was actually an advantageous sample after all. It proved to be an interesting choice because of its unique blend of students from diverse social backgrounds. The University of Colorado at Boulder, for example, is more likely to have higher of both students and faculty from the middle class and far fewer people from the lower class (e.g., divorced,separated, or widowed women with children, whci receive state or federal. government aid; and other workers and poor people dependent on income maintenance programs). Nonetheless, the high school studied could have easily been more typical

PAGE 76

66 (i.e., chosen from a less affluent neighborhood with some racial variety). In addition, a larger sample could have been designed, possibly with two or more high schools and the number of colleges and/or universities in order to make the findings of the research more representative of the general population. Finally, a more ideal situation would be to follow thesame group of students as they graduate from high school and enter college or graduate from college and enter the work force and take notice of any further changes or to simply compare the differences college freshmen and seniors. Something else that this writer would definitely do differently if given the opportunity would be to develop instruments that would accurately measure a student's analytical ability, and independent judgment specific to alternative forms of societal or politicaleconomic organization and add them to the questionnaire. Other measures that are needed include support for conventional norms and values and parent(s)' political affiliations, political labels artd strength, etc. (as opposed to students simply stating their own opinions as to what their parents' political attitudes and behaviors might be). This study which.has invoked the "interaction model," in part, confirms that most children are sue-

PAGE 77

67 cessfully trained to be dogmatic or closed-minded. Related to this finding, students from WRHS were found to be only somewhat more conservative than the UCD stu-dents. One possible subject for further research might be how to free children from the rigid norms and values that prohibit them from recognizing their full potential as human beings. Another suggestion is to investigate whether or not the improper use of grades as punishment for "bad" behavior and rewards for "good" behavior is as common in college as it is in high school (or at the primary/secondary level in general). In addition to learriing that students do experience changes but are not necessarily more open-minded and/or progressive than high school students, one other thought about the phenomenon has come to mind. It is the opinion of this writer that change does not have to be in the liberal or radical --. direction to be considered "liberating." A college student may very well be liberated fxom what was pre-viously taught in the family and school and become even more conservative than his or her parents and teachers. This is a very real possibility in the fields of busi-ness, engineering, or other areas.

PAGE 78

Adorno, R. 1950 Almond, 1963 BIBLIOGRAPHY T. W., E. Frenke 1-Brunswi k, D. J. Levinson and N. Sanford The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper and Row. Gabriel A. and Sidney Verba The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Bendix, Reinhard (ed.) 1968 State and Society: A Reader in Comparative Political Sociology. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., Inc. Blalock, Hubert M., Jr. 1979 Social Statistics. Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Boocock, Sarane Spence 1980 Sociology of Education: An Introduction. Bost6n: Bowles, 1976 Houghton Mifflin Co. Samuel and Herbert Gintis Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform-and Contradictions in Economic Life. New York: Basic B6oks, Inc. Burris, Val 1983 "The Social and Political Consequences of Overeducation." American Sociological Review 48:454-67. Carnoy, Martin 1972 Schooling in a Corporate The political economy of education in America. New York: David McKay Co., Inc.

PAGE 79

69 Carnoy, Martin 1974 Education as Cultural Imperialism. New York: David McKay C6., Inc. Cosin, B. R. 1972 Education: Structure and Society. England: Penguin Books, Ltd. Cummings, Michael Stuart 1974 "Dogmatism, Ideblogy, and Political Behavior." (Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University.) Davis, James A. and Ann M. Jacobs 1965 "Conventions and Strategies fbr the Presentation of Percentage Tables." University of Chicago. Dawson, Richard E. and Kenneth Prewitt 1969 Political Socialization. Boston: Little, Brown and Co. Inc. Durkheim, Emile 1956 Education and Sociology. Illinois: The Free Press. Easton, 1969 David and Jack Dennis in the Political System: Origins of Political Legitimacy. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Eriksson, Steven B. 1983 "Studying Marx in 1983." Paper presented at Paci-fic Sociological Association Conference meeting, San Jose, CA. Evan, William M. 1980 The Sociology of Law: A Social-Structural Perspective. New York: The Free Press. Fallon, Daniel 1983 "Modernizing arts and sciences: Recovering the heart of the baccalaureate." Silver and Gold Record 14:2. University of Colorado. Federico, Ronald c. and Janet S. Schwartz 1983 Sociology. Third Edition. USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.

PAGE 80

70 Fishbein, Martin (ed.) 1967 Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Franks, Betty Barclay and Mary Kay Howard 1979 People, Law, and the Futures Perspective. Washington, D.C.: National Education Assoc. Goffman, Erving 1963 Stigma. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Hess, Robert D. and Judith V. Torney 1967 The of Political Attitudes in Children. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. Horowitz, Irving Louis 1972 Foundations of Political Sociology. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers. Horwitz, Lucy and Lou Ferleger 1980 Statistics for Social Change. Boston: South End Press. Katz, Michael B. 1975 Class, Bureaucracy and Schools. New York: Praeger Publishers. Langton, Kenneth P. 1969 Political Socialization. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. Maguire, Kevin 1969 "Political Resocialization: Empirical Analysis. (Ph.D. University of Colorado.) Mead, George .Herbert A Theoretical and dissertation, 1959 The Philosophy of the Present. Edited by Arthur E. Murphy with prefatory remarks by John Dewey. Illinois: The Open Court Publishing Company. Musgrove, Frank 1979 School and the Social Order. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Naylor, 1976 David T. VALUES: Law-Related Education and the Elementary School Teacher. Washington, D.C.: National Education Assoc.

PAGE 81

71 Nie, Norman H., c. Hadlai Hull, Jean G. Jenkins, Karin Steinbrenner Dale H. Bent 1975 Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Second Edition. New York: Book Company. Ogles, Richard H. 1982 "Notes Toward a Socialist Conception of Human Needs and Good Sdciety." Human Affairs 2:7581. Ogles, Richard H. 1983 Methodological Issues in the Social Sciences. Littleton, CO.:Dialogue Press. Osgood, Charles E., George J. Suci and Percy H. Tannenbaum 1957 The Measurement of Meaning. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Quinney, Richard 1970 The Social Reality of Crime. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.,Inc. Riley, M. W., A. Foner, Hess, and M. L. Toby 1969 "Socialization for the middle and later years P p. 9 5 1 -9 8 2 in D. A. Go s 1 in ( e d. ) Handbook of socialization theory and research. Chicago: Rand McNally. Rush, Michael and Philip Althoff 1971 An Introduction to Political Sociology. Great Britain: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd. Sahakian, .William S. and Mabel Lewis Sahakian 1975 John Locke. Boston: TWayne Publishers. Sanford, Nevitt (ed.) 1964 The American College: A Psychological and Social Interpretation of the Higher Learning. New York: Schein, 1956 John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Edgar H. "The Chinese IndoctrinatiQn Program for Prisoners of War: A Study of Attempted 'Brainwashing.' l l Psychiatry 19:149-72. /

PAGE 82

72 Segal, Julius 1957 "Correlates of collaboration and Resistance Behavior Among U.S. Army POWs in The Journal of Social Issues 13:31-40. Sigel, 1977 Verba, 1978 Roberta S. and Marilyn Brookes Hoskin "Perspectives on Adult-Political Socialization -Areas of Research." Pp. 259-293 in Stanley Allen Renshon (ed.), Handbook of Political Socialization: Theory and Research. New York: The Free Sidney, Norman H. Nie and Jae-on Kim Participation and Political Equality: A Seven Nation Comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wasburn, Philo C. 1982 Political Sociology: Approaches, Concepts, Hypotheses. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Webb, Rodman B. 1981. Schooling and Society. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., .Inc. Zeisel, Hans 1968 Say it with figures. Fifth Edition. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc. Zisk, BettyH. 1981 Political Research: A Methodological Sampler. Lexington, MA.: D.C. Heath and Company ..

PAGE 83

. APPENDIX A PERSONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION

PAGE 84

AGE Mean Median Mode Range 74 Table 2-1 Age of by school (Reported in years) Wheat Ridge High School. (N=ll4) 16.605 16.571 16.000 4.000 SCHOOL ,University of Colorado at Denver (N=l82) 23.300 19.000 41.000

PAGE 85

SEX Male Female 75 Table 2-2 Sex of respondents by school in Percentages) SCHOOL . Wheat Ridge High School (N=ll4) 43.9 56.1 University of Colorado at Denver (N=l82) 44.5 55.5

PAGE 86

76 Table 2-3 Race of respondents by school (Reported in Percentages) SCHOOL RACE White Black Hispanic/Chicano Native American Other Wheat Ridge High School ( N=ll4) 93.0 0.9 2.6 0.9 2.6 University of Colorado at Denver (N=l80) 83.9 2.2 3.3 0.0 10.6

PAGE 87

. 77 Table 2-4 Religious preference of respondents by school RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE Christian Catholic Protestant Jewish Mormon Other (Reported in Percentages) Wheat Ridge High School (N=89) 16.9 38.2 34.8 0.0 3.4 6.7 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=lOl) 13.9 43.6 26.7 2.0 1.0 12.9

PAGE 88

78 Table 2-5. Religious position of res-pondents by school (Reported in Percentages) RELIGIOUS POSITION Strongly Religious Religious Neutral/Undecided Anti-religious Other .Wheat Ridge High School ( N=ll3) 8.8 54.0 35.4 1.8 0.0 SCHOOL Un.l. versity of Colorado at Denver ( N=l.7 7) 9.6 46.9 33.9 7.3 2.3

PAGE 89

79 Table 2-6 Living arrangement of iespondents by school (Reported in Percentages) Wheat Ridge LIVING High School ARRANGEMENT (N=ll4) At home 98.2 Alone or with friend(s) 0.0 With spouse or mate 0.0 Other 1.8 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=l81) 38.1 25.4 32.6 3.9

PAGE 90

G.P.A. Mean Median Mo(le 80 Table 2-7 of by school (Reported on a 4.0 scile) SCHOOL Wheat Ridge High School (N=l09) 3.27 3.00 University of Colorado at Denver .(N=l66) 3.34 3.40 3.00

PAGE 91

81 Table 2-8 Educational goal of respondents by school (Reported in Percentages) EDUCATIO.NAL GOAL B.A. M.A. Ph.D., M.D., etc. None Other Wheat Ridge High School (N=ll2) 34.8 23.2 28.6 13.4 0.0 SCHOOL University of Colorado at Denver (N=l8l) 42.5 28.2 26.5 2.2 0.6

PAGE 92

FEELING .ABOUT SCHOOL Like Dislike Neutral Conflicted 82 Table 2-9 Feeling about school by school (Reported in Percentages) SCHOOL Wheat Ridge High School (N::;;ll4) 55.3 7.9 31.6 5.3 University of Colorado at Denver (N=l82) 83.0 2.2 12.1 2.7

PAGE 93

83 Table 2-10 Self-stated S .E.S. of respondents by school (Reported in Percentages) SCHOOL University Wheat Ridge of colorado High School at Denver CLASS ( N=ll3) (N=180) Lower 1.8 2.2 Working 3.5 16.7 Middle (combined) 87.6 70.5 Upper 4.4 2.8 None 2.7 3.9 Other 0.0 3.9

PAGE 94

84 APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE gUESTI 0 NNAIRE A.) TODAY'S DATE: PLEASE NOTE: DO NOT include name, address andler telephone number here or anywhere else on this questionnaire (anonymity requested in order to protect yoUr own right to privacy!). B.) SCHOOL ATTENDING: C.) COURSE NUMBER AND TITLE: INSTRUCTIONS: The following questionnaire is designed to study the process of resocialization. Student participation.is voluntary and the student is free. to discontinue participation at. any time. Questions may be asked by the student both during and after the. research is completed. Upon request, inf))rmation will be provided regarding group responses only. Questions concerning rights as a subject.should be directed to the Human Rights Rese.arqh Committee, Graduate School, Uniyersity of Colorado at Denver, PART ONE: PERSONAL .BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1.) YOUR AGE: 2.) YOUR SEX: ).) YOUR RACE: a.) White -b.) Black --.-c.) Hispanic/Chicano --d.) Native American :::::e.) other; please specify: 4.) YOUR U.S. CITIZENSHIP STATUS: _a.) U.S. Citizen, National .or related status. __ b.) Permanent resident or eligible alien _c.) neither a.) nor b.) s.) YOUR STATE 0 F RESIDENCY a 6.) NUMBER OF YEARS YOU HAVE LIVED IN EACH OF THE FOLLOWING: a.) rural ty h.) large city -c.) suburban neighborhood d.): small city or town -e.) military base f,) total overseas __ 7 .) YOUR RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE, IF ANY: 8,) YOUR RELIGIOUS POSITIONa a.) rehgl.ous ==b.) c.) neutral or undecided ==d.). anti-religious 9. ) YOUR MARITAL STATUS: a.) single --b.) ma,rried --c.) separated --d.) divorced --e.) widowed :::::f.) living with someone but not legally married 10.) YOUR SEXUAL PREFERENCE: a.) heterosexual --b.) homosexual --c.) bisexual :::::d.) non-sexual 11 ) YOUR LIVING ARRANGEMENTS a a.) at home with parent(s) -b.) on campus -c.) off campus alone or with friend(s) __ d:) off campus with spouse or mate _e.) other; please specify: 12.) YOUR EMPLOYMENT STATUS I a.) full-time -b.) part-time -c.) unemployed by choice d.) unable to find sui table employment _e.) other; please specify: 1J.) YOUR PRESENT OCCUPATION: Page 1.

PAGE 95

Page 2. 14.) YOUR ATTITUDE ABOUT JOBr a.) extremely satisfied satisfied not satisfied --d.) extremely dissatisfied e.) not applicable 15.) YOUR PERSONAL INCOME (OR FAMILY INCOME IF MARRIED) (LAST YEAR) r 16 .) WHAT SOCIOECONOMIC CLASS DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A MEMBER OF'? a.) lower -----b.) working middle; please specify. -(lower middle, middle d.) --e.) ==f',) middle, upper middle): upper no class either; please specify: HOW 1'/.ANY YEARS OF FORMAL EDUCAT!ON HAVE YOU COMPLETED? 18.) YOUR STUDENT. STATUS 1 a.) full-time b.) part-time 19.) YOUR COLLEGE MAJOR: a. _b.) not appll.cable 20 ;) YOUR EDUCATIONAL GOALS 1 a.) completion of B.A. -b.) completion ofM.A. ==c.) completion of' Ph;D., M.D., law or other advanced degree( s) none of' the above 21 ) 22.) YOUR HIGH SCHOOL G.P.A. IQN'""A 4.0 SCALE) I a. . b.) 85 2J.) YOUR FEELINGS ABOUT SCHOOLr a.) mos"tly like -b.) mostly dislike --:--c.) neutral :::::d.) conflicted 24.) HAYE YOU EVER BEEN IN THE MILITARY? a.) no b.) yes (please specify when and where served)r PART PERSONAL POLITICAL INFO. 25.) YOUR POLITICAL AFFILIATION: a.) Republican -b.) Democrat -c.). Independent --d.) no affiliation other; please specif'yr 26.) YOUR POLITICAL LABEL AND sTRENGTH: a.) always radical -b.) mostly radical -c.) always liberal -d.) mostly liberal -e.) always conservative -f.) mostly conservative -g.) apolitical h.) other; pleasespecif'y: ______ ..... 21.) YOUR POLITICAL POSITION 1 a ) far righ,; -b.) right -----c.) middle -----d.) left -e.) far left :=::r.) other; please specify: 28.) YOUR DESIRED FORM OF SOCIETAL OR POLITICAL ECONOMIC ORGANIZATIONr (You may answer more than once.) a.) capital ism -.....-b.) socialism -c.) -d.) -e.) -f'.) _-g.) communism anarchism pluralism authoritarianism other; please specif'yr

PAGE 96

Page J; 29.) DID YOU VOTE IN THE LAST U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION? a.) yes -b.). no -c.) not applicable JO.) DID YOU VOTE IN THE LAST U.S. CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION? a.) yes -b.) no -c.) not applicable .31 ) DID YOU VOTE IN THE. LAST STATE ELECTION? a.) yes -b.) no :::::c.) not applicable J2.) DID YOU VOTE. IN THE LAST LOCAL ELECTION? a.) yes -b.) no :::::c.) not applicable .3.3.) HAVE YOU EVER HELPED WITH A POLITICAL CAMPAIGN AT ANY LEVEL? a.} yes b.) no .34.) HAVE YOU EVER TO A POLITICAL CLUB OR ORGANI ZATION OF ANY KIND? a.) yes _b.) no JS.) HAVE YOU EVER ATTENDED A POLITICAL PROTEST OR RALLY OF ANY KIND? a.) yes b.) no .36 HOW OFTEN DO YOU READ THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER? _a.) every. day b.) often -c.) seldom :::::d.) never 37.) HOW OFTEN DO YOU WATCH THE TELEVISION .NEWS AND/OR LISTEN TO THE LOCAL RADIO NEWS? _afevery day b. often -c. seldom ==d never .38,) HOW OFTEN DO YOU WATCH THE NATIONAL TELEVISION NEWS AND/OR LISTEN TO THE NATIONAL RADIO NEWS? a.) every day -b.) often -c.) seldom ==d.) never .39.) DO YOU TALK POLITICS WITH FRIENDS? a.) often --b.) sometimes -c.) seldom -d.) never 4o.) DO YOU TALK POLITICS WITH FAMILY? a.) often -b.) sometimes -c.) seldom. :::::d. ) never 86 41.) IN YOUR OPINION, WHO HAS BEEN THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON YOU IN TERMS OF YOUR PRESENT ATTITUD.t:.S AND _a.) Pl:!rent(s). b.) friend(s) :::::c.) secondary school.teacher(s) d ) cell ege teacher ( s) -e.) media ==f.) other( s) i please specify: 42.) HAVE YOUR.PERSONAL POLITICAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS OVER THE YEARS? a.) li t"tle or not at all ==b. ) somewhat (in what ways?) : _c.) considerably (in what 4J.) IN YOUR OPINION, DOES COLLEGE PROVIDE MORE OR LESS THAN THE FAMILY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN TERMS OF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ABOUT GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS? a.} '"more --b.) less -c.) same :::::d.) don't know

PAGE 97

Page 4. 44.) to 51.) INSTRUCTIONS: The purpose of this section is to get your honest opinions regarding the next 8 statements. There areno "right" or "wrong" answers. Simply indicate your degree of agreement or disagreement in the following manner: strongly agree =SA. agree more than disagree =A unsure =U disagree more than agree =D strongly disagree =SD 87 LOOKING BACK OVER MY LIFE, I FIND THAT I STILL HAVE THE SAME BASIC BELIEFS I GREW UP WITH. 45.) YOU'VE PRETTY MUCH GOT TO GO ALONG WITH THE IDEAS 'AND POLICIES OF THOSE WHO ARE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN YOURSELF. 46.) I THINK IT'S FREQUENTLY GOOD TO CHANGE YOUR OPINIONS ABOUT THINGS. 47 .) IT IS IMPORTANT FOR CHILDREN TO LEARN WHEN TO DISOBEY AUTHORITY. 48.) THERE IS HARJ.JL.Y A SINGLE IMPORTANT ISSUE ON WHICH MY BELIEFS ARE THE ONLY VALID ONES. 49 ) IT IS BEST TO BE WARY OF AN INDIVIDUAL WHO OFTEN CHANGES HIS/HER BELIEFS 50.) I THINK IT BEST TO MAINTAIN MY OWN OPINIONS EVEN THOUGH MANY OTHER PEOPLE MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW 51.) IT !S NECESSARY TO RESERVE JUDGEMENT ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON UNTit ONE HAS HAD A CHANGE TO HEAR THE OPINIONS OF THOSE ONE RESPECTS. 52.) to 57.) INSTRUCTIONS: The purpose.of this section is to measure the meanings of certain things to different people by having them use a series of descriptive scales. Again, please give honest opinions as t o what these person and issue concepts mean to you; There are no "right" or "wrong" answers. For each underlined concept that you feel is very closely relate to one end of the scale, you should circle 1 or z, right G) z 3 4 5 .. 6 7 wro11g OR __ _. ___ 2 or 6 should be circled if you feel the underlined concept is gu1.te closely related to one end of the scale, bad 1 CD 4 2 6 7 good OR G2 bad 1 2 J 4 5 7 good

PAGE 98

88 Page 5 INSTRUCTIONS, Continued. If the underlined concept seems onlv related to one end of the sc::al e, then circle 3 or .s. ___ OR fair _;;,1 ___ 2;;_ __ ..;;:3;._ __ ..;.4 ___ ___ .-.7_. unfair The number you circle; of course, depends upon which of the two ends of the scale seem most characteristic. of the thing you're judging. Accordingly; 4. should be circled if you are consider the concept to be neutral on the scale, or feel the scale is completely irrelevant or unrelated to the underlined concept. unjust_1;... ____ .-;;.2 _____ ____ ____ ..;6..;._ ___ Please circle one and onlyone number on all five (5) scales below every underlined concept. Don't look back and forth through the .items. Make each item a separate and independent judgement. Your tz-ue impression is important. EXAMPLE: (underlined concept) %[. 2 _j 7 negative 52.) F.B.I. right ____ bad l 2 3 4 5 6 z fair unjust _____ 5.3) MARTIN LUTHER KING fair unjust positive_1 ______ _..2_.. _____ ____ .54.) SOCIALISM --416 _ __,2(,_. positive_. _______ .2 ______ ____ 5.5) KARL MARX right. __ __ bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 z fair unj11st 1 i 4 6 z wrong good unfair just negative wrong good w:U'air just negative wrong good unfair jU$t negative. wrong good unfair just negative

PAGE 99

89 Page 6 . 56.). NUCLEAR WEAPONRY right 1 2 6 z wrong bad 1 2 3 b 2 good fair g 0 unfair 1 2 6 7 -just positive 1 2 Zj: 0 ? negative 57.) PRESIDENT REAGAN right 1 2 j 6 ? wrong bad 1 2 i b good fair i 2 i I unfair unjust 2 just positive 1 2 J z negative --------------58.) 1.) 2.) 3.) 4.) 5.) IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT ARE SOME. MAJOR U.S. SOCIAL PROBLEMS AT PRESENT? (Please list five (5) in order cf .PART THREE: PARENT(S)' POLITICAL INFORMATION 62.) PARENT(S)' DESIRED OF SOCIETAL OR POLITICAL ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION: (You may answer more than once,) _a.) capi taliSlll ..:..__b.) socialism c.) communism -d.) anarchism -e.) pluralism -f.) authoritarianism ==g.) other; please specify: 59.) PARENT(S)' POLITICAL AFFILIATION: 6),) _a.} Republican HOW CLOSELY DO YOU AGREE WITH YOUR PARENT(S)' GENERAL POLITIC, b.) Democrat --c.) Independent -d.) no affiliation -e.) other; please specifya 60.) PARENT(S)' POLITICAL LABEL AND STRENGTH a.} always radical -b.) mostly radical =:::c.) always liberal d.) mostly liberal -e.) always conservative ==f.) mostly conservative _g.) apolitical __ h.) other; please specify: 61.) PARENT(S)' POLITICAL POSITION: a.) far right ---o.) right -c.) middle left -e.) far left ==f.) other; please specify: rlk 83 BELIEFS? __ a.} very closely __ b.) .closely with one but not _c.) d.) ==e.) the other in some ways closely, in other ways not closely mostly disagree with them other; Please specify: 64.) HOW POLITICALLY ORIENTED ARE YOUR PARENT(S)? _a.} highly political _b.) somewhat political __ c.). not very political 65.) HAVE YOUR PARENT(S)' POLITICAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS CHANGED OVER THE YEARS? _a.) little or not at all _b.) somewhat (in what ways?h .... __ c.) considerably (1n what ways?)

PAGE 100

APPENDIX C LETTER FROM CAROLYN H. S IM!-10NS ... UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER 1100 Fcurloenlh Slrael ... Division of Natural and Physical Sciences Rand Leslie Kannenberg 465 S. Wright St. Apt. #110 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 Dear Mr. Kannenberg: Denver Colorado 80202 (303J February 17, 1983 The enclosed research prospectus has been approved by the Human Research Committee of the University of Colorado at Denver, under the rules for expedited research review and subject to the conditioms in the following paragraph of this letter. While a formal consent form is not needed for survey research of this nature, you should include in your "INSTRUCTIONS" to students: ---a few words about the nature of the research and its purpose. (e.g. "The following questionaire is designed to study the socialization of American youth and young adults" or a like statement. ---an offer to answer any questions regarding the research, bnth during and after the research is completed. This includes an offer to release information about groun responses, not individual responses. ---an instru.ction that the student is free to discontinue participation in the research at any time. This statement should be added to your statement that participation is voluntary. --an instruction that questions concerning rights as a subject should be directed to the Human Rights Research Committee, Graduate School, University of Colorado at Denver, 80202. Please send me a copy of your final questionaire with the above included on it. Students do not need to sign the statement, since it is printed on the questionaire. t <. Carolyn H. Simmons, Chair, Human Research Committee University of Colorado at Denver 90

PAGE 101

APPENDIX D HUMAN RESEARCH REVIEW 8/10/82 HUMAN RESEARCH COMMITTEE REVIEW (NOTE: If exenption or expedited review is requested, please enclose one copy of this fonn and supporting data. If full co11111ittee .review is requested, please enclose six copies of thisfonn. Forms should be sent to to: Carolyn Si11111ons, Box 102, Department of Psychology, UCD.) 1//.' , 1 1. Principal In-vestigator /(/(;.-... 1-'';' Dept. -----r J Extension Home Phone---------(If the principal investigator is a student, please name: Faculty Advisor-------Extension---------TITlE OF RESEARCH PROJECT: 2. Research description. Please provide a brief suimlary of the project, including subject population and recruitment and procedures to be used. Attach questionnaires, interview questions or test copies if appropriate. 91

PAGE 102

3. Consent Forms: you wish to omit a consent form (under conditions specified in C. of attached memo) attach a copy of the consent form you wi.11 be using. The following points must be included in a consent form: a) A clear explanation of the procedures to be followed and their purposes; including identification of any experimental procedures. b) A.clear description of any discomfort or reasonably to be expected. c) An offer to answer any questions regarding the research, both during and after the research is completed. d) An instruction that the person is free to withdraw. his/her consent and discontinue participation at any time without prejudice. . e) An instruction that questions concerning rights as a subject may be directed to the Human Rights Research Committee, Graduate School, University of Colorado at Denver, 80202. f) Signature of subject. (For subjects below the age of 18, or for mentally ill or retarded persons, signature of parents or guardian is required. For children between 12 and 18, both parent and child should sign the consent form.) You are reminded that consent forms are privileged records and must be protected for confidentiality. 4. Signature of Principal Investigator ----------------Action of Human Research Committee, UCD: ___ .:;.v_ _""'_ Approved as exempt or expedited research. Approved as fully reviewed research. Approved with conditions; see appended letter. Disapproved; see appended letter. tt ltill)J(t/7i) I I ) '-0 UCD Research Committee Date 92

PAGE 103

93 APPENDIX E LETTER TO CAROL A. WILSON COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND SCIENCES Division of Social Sciences 1100 Fourteenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202 Anthropology Economics Ethnic Studies History Political SCience Sociology Phone: (303) 629 Urban Studies Master of Social UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER Program in Sociology Rand L. Kannenberg 465 S. 'l'lright St., Apt. #110 Lakewood, CO. 80228 ()0:3) 989-6109 March 24, 198) Dr. Carol A. \'lilson, Principal Wheat Ridge School 9505 \'1. )2nd. Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO. 80033 Dear Dr. Wilson Science I am presently in the process of collecting. data for.my graduate thesis. The subject of my research is the political resocialization of American youth and young adults. Specifically, I am interested in the process of and relearning political norms, values, attitudes and behaviors. I have designed a questionnaire (please find a single copy enclosed) which has been approved by the Human Research Committee of the University of r.olorado at Denver in compliance with the rules and regulations of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. If possible, I would like to administer the questionnaire at my alma mater on some Monday, Wednesday or Friday during the month of.April. I have chosen at random the following teachers Debralee Bowland, William Determan, Jerry J. Hamill, Donald Headlee, Rita A. Klemm, :{enneth T. Larson, La vern Thomas and Joseph Truglio. I am hoping that you and/or the eight teachers named above can arrange a schedule allowing me to go from one class during first period, to. another during second period, and so on, all in same day. I will assist the consenting teachers in passing out and collecting the questionnaires, as well as any questions that their students might have. Eased on an informal pretest, the questionnaire takes approximately fifteen to thirty minutes to complete. ThanK you kindly for your time. I will call your office sometime soon. Until then, I am sincerely, Rand L. cc1 teachers files

PAGE 104

94 APPENDIX p tr.IEMO REGARDING KANNENBERG'S SURVEY MEMO TO: Apr'' 11 J9BJ FROM: Carol TOPIC: Band Kamlenberg 's Survey Ql Apdl 20, Wednesday, land will aee Verne Thmau. let period (2-7) .rerry Hamill 2nd period 051, Deb Bovlmd 3rd. per:I.Oel (29). Biu n-. 4th period G!5.) .roe Truglio 5th period a. 6) md KeD larson 6th period ( Jefferson County Public Schools Form 98B/Rev.Mar.67 \

PAGE 105

APPENDIX G LETTER TO UCD_ INSTRUCTORS COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND SCIENCES Division of Social Sciences 1100 Fourteenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202 Phone: (303) 629-2616 .. UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER 95 Anthropology Economics Ethnic Studies History Political Science Sociology Urban Studies Master of Social Science D. Quiatt, Anth. 201; N. Langland, Econ. 201; F.H. Dow, ETST/S Sc. 329; F.s. Allen, Hist.102: G.rt.. tv;cCarthy, Hist; 201; P.J. !Vieranto, PSC. 110; 'l.L. Golich, FSC. J04; J.M. Davis, Soc. 302; R.H. Anderson, Soc. 421/521: il. I. Griffith, Soc. 4? 5. Rand L. "\annenberg, Graduate Program in Sociology !'/.arch 28, 1983 Project at UCD I am presently in the process of collecting data formy graduate thesis. The subject of my research is the political. resocial.ization of American arid young adults. Specifically, I am interested in the process of unlearning and relearning political. noms, values, attitudes and behaviors in higher education. I have designed a questionnaire (please find a single copy attached) which has been approved by the Human Research Committee of UCD in compliance with the rules and regulations of the t]. S. Department of Health and Human Services ( HHS) The ten (10) instructors and courses named above have been chosen at random. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to administer the questionnaire to your classes during thei:;regular scheduled times on Monday, April 25th. If necessary, I will be able to do this on Wednesday, April 27th. and Friday, April 29th. I will assist you in passing out and collecting the questionnaires, as well as answering any questions that your students might have. Based on an informal pretest, the questionnaire takes approximately fifteen (15) minutes to complete Thank you kindly for your time and cooperation. I will be in touch with each of you individually sometime soon to confirm a date and time. cc: Richard H. Ogles, Faculty Advisor M. Jay Crowe, Assistant Dean, Division of Social Sciences rlk

PAGE 106

1'\ APPENDIX H SCHEDULING FORM [ (\. N -. l f 0 lu .. 3 Vl N 1 l'lt c-_!!'-a" ">0 0\: J: ii .,JQ '\I tiJ lU tk e.,. e\ .... <) .... .. t-f\ CW\ -l --..... \ ' .. -. q.. t1. .. 0 .. .l'f\ -----96 -l ')... "' 1 t'-'!.! 0 W4 ,.N 't. \oi" ... I :i, :-"7-Q V\ 2 ''I z Qoe: 0 "' "" ;. -.. . -. -. & \n b-\ -\ -\ \ \ e t\ . ...a ' . .. "-. 0 -""" .... -C'\

PAGE 107

APPENDIX I THANK YOU LETTER TO WRHS AND UCD FACULTY .. _,.. Thomas, J. Har.1.ill, D. Bowl and, R. ernm, J. Tru;1 io, :{. Larson, D. :iuiatt, !L Langland, F. Dow, F. Allen,_ F. !;ieranto, V. Gol.; ;.: Davis, R. Anderson, L. .Jriffi th R. :cannenoerf :'hesis Research July 5. 1983 First of all, thanlc you for allowing me to distribute questionnaires to the students in your this last April. Secondly, due to cost and other considerations, I am unable to provide each of you with copies of the findings. However, please encourage all students ::i th an interest in the research to contact !:'.e. Again, I very much appreciate your cooperation. Rand c/o Prograo in Sociology University of Colorado at Den,rer Campus :aox 105 1100-14-th. St. Denver, CO. 80202 629-8306 rllt 97