A Comparative Study of Dropout at an Integrated University: The 16 Personality Factor Test

Abstract

The dropout problem is an old one, and so is its study (Schreiber, 1968). Many researchers (e.g., Ayers, Bashaw, and Wash, 1969; Brown, 1960; Centi, 1962; Cronbach, 1950; Grace, 1957; Johnson, 1954; Russell, 1968; Summerskill, 1962) have explored several aspects of this problem including the intellectual, emotional, motivational, interpersonal, and attitudinal characteristics of dropout and nondropout students. The plethora of studies leads one to ask why continued investigation into the area of dropout is necessary when there are already more than a thousand references available. Various individuals would answer this question differently, but certainly there would be agreement that continued research would serve at least four important purposes: (1) it would give additional reliability to the dominant factors found to cause dropout across geographical and social conditions; (2) it would improve the effectiveness of psychological measurements by removing sampling error, faulty items, incorrect inferences, and over-generalizations; (3) it would reveal the relationship between old and new findings; and (4) it would provide educators and counselors with up-to-date information about the retention and withdrawal of students. Numerous studies using personality traits, age, sex, race, health, parental occupations, geographical area, and so forth, as independent variables are necessary until complete understanding is achieved. If research is limited, conclusions must be also, and the application of such conclusions potentially dangerous in some situations considering the changing environment of the schools and the students themselves. The purpose of this study was to compare the scores obtained on the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) by students constituting three academic categories: good, dropout, and probationary.