DOCUMENT RESUME

ID 097 934 JC 740 428

TITLE The Academic Performance of Missouri Junior CollegeTransfer Students at the University ofHissouri-Columbia.

INSTITUTION Missouri Univ., Columbia.NOTE 18p.

EDRS PRICE MF-$0.75 HC-S1.50 PLUS POSTAGEDESCRIPTORS *Academic Achievement; College Students; *Comparatite

Analysis; Dropout Rate; *Grade Point Average; HigherEducation; Junior College Students; Persistence; PostSecondary Education; Statistical Data; *StudentEvaluation; Tables (Data); Technical Reports;*Transfer Students; Universities

IDENTIFIERS Missouri; *University of Missouri Columbia

ABSTRACTTo ascertain the academic performance of Missouri

junior college transfer students at the University ofMissouri-Columbia, two student populations were compared. The firstpopulation was 383 junior-college students who transferred to theUniversity of Missouri-Coluabia for the fall 1971 semester. Students(278) who transferred to the university from Missouri four-yearcolleges for the fall 1971 semester comprised the second population.The two populations were compared on academic entry patterns,persistence, and academic performance (GPA and attrition) from thetime of the students' enrollment through the 1973 winter semester.The data were analyzed by statistical techniques. The study data,which are tabulated, show: (1) 80.68 percent of the junior collegesample enrolled in the College of Administration and Public Affairs,College of Agriculture, College of Arts and Science, and College ofEducation; 85.24 percent of the four-year sample entolled in theCollege of Arts and Science, College of Education, College ofAgriculture, and College of Home Economics; (2) 40.20 percent of thejunior-college sample failed to continue their enrollment even thoughthey were academically eligible; (3) 24.02 percent of thejunior-college sample were suspended or dismissed for academicreasons; (4) on honor-roll eligibility, there were significantdifferences between the two samples for the 1971 fall and 1972 wintersemesters; there were no significant differences between the twosamples for the 1972 fall and 1973 winter semesters; (5) a higherpercentage of the junior-college sample completed graduationrequirements than the four-year sample did; and (6) there was asignificant difference between the 1971-72 cumulative grade pointaverages of the two groups, but there was no significant differencebetween the 1972-73 cumulative grade point averages. (DB)

. ;,f P.A4 **A1.11if Oh ME Ad TMg' r foto a stm.All

tAstortat OFI oiA.4,10*

t sr of Piti11.

,Se.,; `, f

' t 04.

5:51°1Ulm

The Academic Performance of. Missouri Junior CollTransfer Students at the University o Missouri-CO umhia

et"

The University of Missouri-ColumbiaAdmissions Staff

TITLE:

rt7rr r11:11:MIE

The Academic Performance of Missouri Junior CollegeTransfer students at the University of Missouri-Columbia.

RESEARCHERS: The University of Missouri-Columbia Admissions Staff.

PURPOSE: To ascertain the academic performance of Missouri juniorcollege transfer students at the University of Missouri-Columbia.

POPULATIONS: The first population of this study was composed ofjunior college students who transfer to the University ofMissouri-Columbia. The sample of this population wasjunior college students who transferred to the Universityof Missouri-Columbia and enrolled for the 1971 Fall Semester.The students in this sample were assigned to one of fourgroups, based on the number of semester hours transferredto the University of. Missouri-Columbia. (Group one wascomposed of students with fifteen to thirty semesterhours; group two was composed or students who haft

earned between thirty-ono and fiLLy-four semesteit hour::;

group three was composed of students who had earnedfifty-five or more semester hours; and group four wascomposed of students who had earned the Associate of ArtsDegree).

METHOD:

The second population of this study was composed ofstudents who transfer to the University of Missouri-Columbia from Missouri four-year colleges. The sample ofthis population was Missouri four-year college transferstudents who transferred to the University of Missouri-Columbia and enrolled for the 1971 Fall Semester. Thestudents in this sample were assigned to one of fourgroups, based on the number of semester hours transferredto the University of Missouri-Columbia. (Group one wascomposed of students with fifteen to thirty semesterhours; group two was composed of students who hadearned between thirty-one and fifty-four semester hours;group three was composed of students who had earnedbetween fifty-five and fifty-nine semester hours; and groupfour was composed of students who had earned between sixtyand seventy semester hours).

The two populations were compared on academic entrypatterns, persistence, and academic performance (G.P.A.and attrition) from the time of the student's enrollmentat the University of Missouri-Columbia for the 1971 FallSemester through the 1973 Winter Semester.

The data pertaining to attrition and persistence wereanalyzed by use of the chi-square statistic. The datapertaining to grade point averages were analyzed by use

of the t statistic. The data pertaining to academic

entry and completion of graduation requirements werereported in percentages. The Statistical hypotheseswere tested using a .05 level of confidence.

2

ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Semester grades obtained from the students',1officialtranscript are a valid indicator ot the students'college academic accomplishment.

LIMITATIONS

2. Students chosen as subjects earned at least a gradepoint average of "C" prior to transferring to theUniversity of Missouri-Columbia.

This study was limited to students who were admittedand who subsequently enrolled at the University otMissouri-Columbia.

2. This study was limited to the investigation and com-parison of Missouri junior college and four-yearcollege transfer students who enrolled at theUniversity of Missouri-Columbia for the 1971 FallSemester.

3. This study does not include transfer students fromthe other campuses of the University of Missouri.

DEFINITIONOF TERMS: 1. Academic dismissal and suspension. Depending on

the Academic Division in which they are enrolled,students are dismissed or suspended if their semestergrade point averages are 1.0 or below or if they fail

half or more of their programs. When dismissed,students are generally eligible to re-enroll in thatAcademic Division after two semesters. Suspensionis of a permanent nature and students are noteligible to re-enroll in the Academic Divisionfrom which they were suspended.

2. Academic Performance. A student's achievement, asdefined herein, includes only his scholastic recordin terms of grades recorded upon his official reportcard.1

3. Admissions Policy. The establiped procedurefollowed in admitting students.4

4. Attrition. Term used to note students who aresuspended or dismissed from the University ofMissouri-Columbia for academic reasons.

1Gary L. Smith, "A Comparison of Undergraduate Veterans and Non-Veterans at the University of Missouri-Columbia" (unpublished Doctor'sdissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, June, 1971), p. 8.

2Handbook of Data and Definitions in Higaer Education (Washington,D. C.: The American Association of Collegiate Registrars and AdmissionsOfficers, 1962), p. 36.

ISTI.TUTIONSSTUDIED:

3

Committee on Entrance and Revision of Records. ThisCommittee acts aP an agent of the Faculty on easesof admission referred by the director of Admissions andreceives and acts upon petitions by students for re-visions in entries concerning grades and creditsentered upon the official record card.3

6. Grade. A rating or evaluation of a student'slariVement.4

7. Grade Point Average (GPA). A measure of averagescholastic success obtained by dividing the totalnumber of grade points earned by the total number ofhours of course work attempted.5

8, Persistence. Continuous registration beginning withthe 1971 Fall Semester through the 1973 WinterSemester.

The data used in this study were .Aimpiled on studentstransferring from thirty-two Mis::-:114-i colleges and uni-versities (fourteen junior college:.; and eighteen four-year institutions). Students incl led in this studywere required to be within the minimum and maximum hourlimitation; and Missouri college- .Ind universities wereincluded if at least five of their students transferredto and enrolled at the University of Missouri-Columbiafor the 1971 Fall Semester. The junior colleges repre-sented in this study were East Central Junior College,Florissant Valley Community College, Forest Park Com-munity College, Jefferson College, Longview CommunityCollege, Maplewood Community College, Meramec CommunityCollege, Mineral Area Junior College, Moberly JuniorCollege, Penn Valley Community College, St. Marys JuniorCollege, Three Rivers Junior College, Trenton JuniorCollege, and Wentworth Military Academy. The four-yearinstitutions represented in this study were CentralMethodist College, Central Missouri State University,Columbia College, Lincoln University, The Lindenwood CollegesMissouri Baptist College, Missouri Southern College,Missouri Valley College, Missouri Western College, North-east Missouri State University, Northwest Missouri StateUniversity, Rockhurst College, St. Louis University,Southeast Missouri State University, Southwest MissouriState University, Stephens College, Westminster College,and William Woods College.

3Committees, Councils, Boards 1971-72 (Columbia: University ofMissouri-Columbia, 1971), p. 5.

4Handbook of Data and Definitions in Higher Education, op. cit., p. 38.

5Ibid., p. 39.

FINDINGS:

ACADEMICENTRY.PATTERNS: The data in Table I represent the academic divisions

in which students in the samples enrolled' for the 1971Fall Semester. The results are reported in percentages.The junior college sample was composed of 383 studentsand the four-year college sample was composed of 278students. It should be noted. that 80.68 percent of thejunior college sample enrolled in the following academicdivisions: College of Administration and Public Affairs,College of Agriculture, College of Arts and Science,and College of Education; and 85.24 percent of the four-year sample enrolled in the following academic divisions:College,pf Arts and Science, College of Education, College.of Agriculture, and CGliege of Home Economics.

PERSISTENCE: Persistence, in this study was defined as continuousregistration beginning with the 1971 Fall Semester throughthe 1973 Winter Semester. The data presented in Tables IIand III reflect the comparison of the two samples. Thedata in Table II report the total persistence of thesamples and the data in Table III reflect voIuntarir with-drawal by academic division. It should be noted that whenpersistence was tested for total persistence and voluntarywithdrawal by academic division for the 1972 and 1973 WinterSemesters and. the 1973 Fall Semester, there were no sig-nificant differences between the two samples. When cumulativepersistence was tested, the difference between the twosamples was highly significant. It should be further notedthat 40.20 percent of the junior college sample failed tocontinue their enrollment even though they were academicallyeligible.

ATTRITION: Attrition was measured by the number of students dismissedor suspended for academic reasons at the end of the 1971Fall, 1972 Winter, or 1973 Fall Semester. Tables IV andV reflect the results of the comparison on attrition byacademic divisions and for tote41 academic ineligibility.It should be noted that the teats of significance for the1972 Fall Semester and cumulative academic ineligibilitywere significant at the .05 level of confidence. It

should be further noted that 24.02 percent (almost one-fourth) of the junior college sample were suspended ordismissed for academic reasons during the two academicyears covered by this study.

HONOR ROLLACHIEVEMENT: The data in Table VI report the academic performance of

the two samples as they were compared on eligibility forthe honor roll. To be eligible for the honor roll,students must attempt at least twelve hours (academic

TABLE I. ACADEMIC ENTRY PATTERNS

Academic Division Number

Junior CollegeStudents.

Number WithPercentage AA Degree

Four YearCollege. Students

Number Percentage

College of Adm. andPublic Affairs 42 10.97 18 9 3.24

College of Agriculture 38 9.92 16 23 8.27

College of Arts andScience 159 41.51 18 129 46.40

College of Education 70 18.28 14 67 24.10

College ofEngineering 23 6.01 5 16 5.76

School of Forestry,Fisheries, andWildlife 17 4.44 2 6 2.16

College ofHome Economics 14 3.66 2 18 6.47

School of Journalism 11 2.87 4 5 1.80

School of Nursing 4 1.04 0 2 .72

School of Social andCommunity Services 5 1.31 1 3 1.08

TOTAL 383 100.00 80 278 100.00

TABLE II.

TOTAL PERSISTENCE

.441

11.0

1111

000.

1011

11.1

St

Students eligible,

however, did not

re-enroll

Students eligible

to re-enroll

for the

semester

indicated

TO

TA

L

d

Winter, 1972

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

udents

Students

Fall, 1972

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Winter, 1973

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Cumulative

Persistence

Jr.

Four-Ye

Col.

Col.

Students

Studen

37

23

65

43

52

29

154

95

305

237

236

191

223

180

127

141

342

260

301

234

275

209

281

236

X2= 0.640

(ns)

X2= 0.846

(ns)

X2

= 2.159

(ns)

X2

= 10.87

f =1

df

= 1

df =1

df

=1

P> .05

P> .05

P> .05

P< .001

ts.

TABLE III.

VOLUNTARY WITHDRAWAL BY ACADEMIC DIVISION

Academic Divisions

Winter, 19'2

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Fall, 1972

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

College of Administration

and Public Affairs

College of Agriculture

College of Arts and

5 2

0 0

5 11

Science

19

14

39

22

College of Education

65

14

10

College of Engineering

12

42

School of Forestry,

Fisheries & Wildlife

3.

0

College of Home Economics

22

23

School of Journalism

School of Nursing

10

01

School of Social and

Community Services

.A

IM0

1M

IMIO

NW

M/W

O

TOTAL

37

23

65

43

X2

=7.313

(ns)

X2=4.475

(ns)

df

=7

df

= 7

P>

.05

P> .05

Winter, 1973

Jr.

'Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

5 3

26 10

2 2

15 6

32

32

10

10

52

AP

INIM

M.

29

X2

1.237 (ns)

df P

> .05

a)

TABLE IV.

ACADEMIC INELIGIBILITY

Winter, 1972

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Fall, 1972

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Winter, 1973

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Cumulative Academic

Ineligibility

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Students on

Academic Suspen-

sion or

Dismissal

41

18

45

21

63

92

42

Students Eligible

to Continue

.

Enrollment

342

260

297

239

291

236

291

236

TOTAL

383

278

342

260

297

239

383

278

X2

=3.545

(ns)

X2=

3.906

(S)

X2

=0.469. (no)

X2

=5.318

df

=1

df

=1

df

=1

df

=1

P>

.05

P<

.05

P>

.05

P<

.05

TABLE V.

ACADEMIC INELIGIBILITY ACADEMIC DIVISION

Academic Division

Winter,

Jr.

Col.

Students

1972

Four-Year

Col.

Students

Fall, 1972

Jr.

Col.

Students

Four-Year

Col.

Students

winter,

Jr.

Col.

Students

1973*

Four-Year

col.

Students

College of Administration

and Public Affairs

College of Agriculture

College of Arts and

Science

College of Education

College of Engineering

School of Forestry,

Fisheries & Wildlife

College of Some Economics

School of Journalism

School of Nursing

TOTAL

6 1

24 5 3 1 1 "M

O

41

3 1 8 5 0 0 IMO

18

X2

= 4.756 (us)

df

= 6

P> .05

6 3

19

10 1 1 3 1 1

45

2 1

11 6 0 0 0 0

21

X2= 3.925 ins)

df

= 8

P> .05

2 0

IMO

NI&

OW

.

011.

11.1

M

*Cells too small

for a test of

significance.

TABLE VI.

HONOR ROLL ACHIEVEMENT

Fall, 1971

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Winter, 1972

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Fall, 197".!

Jr.

Col.

Students

Four-Year

Col.

Students

Winter* 1973

Jr.

Col,

Students

Four-Year

Col.

Students

Students Eligible

for Membership

54

Students Not

Eligible for

Membership

TOTAL

329

383

68

210

278

X2= 11.489 (S)

df

= 1

P< .001

58

65

284

195

342

260

X2

= 5.874 (5)

df

1P

< .02

80

217

297

65

174

239

X2

= 0.004 (na)

df

= 1

P= >.05

85

206

291

78

158

236

X= 0.900 (ns)

df

= 1

P> .05

11

division regulations on Physical Education and ROTC havevaried since the 1972 Fall Semester) and earn at least a3.000 grade point average. It should be noted that therewere significant differences (beyond the .05 level ofconfidence) between the two samples for the 1971 Fall and1972 Winter Semesters. It should be further noted thatthere were no significant differences between the twosamples for the 1972 Fall and 1973 Winter Semester.

The honor roll eligibility pattern might suggest that"transfer shock" was working and that the junior collegetransfer student recovered during the 1972-73 academicyear.

GRADUATION: The data in Table VII represent the number of studentsin the two samples who transferred at least fiftysemester hours to the University of Missouri-Columbiaand completed the requirements for graduation by theend of the 1973 Fall Semester. It should be noted thata higher percentage of junior college transfer studentscompleted graduation requirements than four-year collegestudents. This might be indicative of two things:(1) junior college students plan their programs so thattheir transfer facilitates completion of degree require-ments and (2) closer coordination exists between thejunior colleges and the University of Missouri-Columbiathan is generally recognized.

GRADE POINTAVERAGE: Tables VIII, IX, X and XI report the comparisons of the

two samples on grade point averages. Table VIII reflectsthe comparison of cumulative grade point averages of thetwo samples which were compiled at the end of the 1972and 1973 Winter Semesters. It should be noted that therewas a significant difference (beyond the .001 level ofconfidence) between the 1971-72 cumulative grade point

averages. It should be further noted that there were nosignificant differences between the 1972-73 cumulativegrade point averages.

Table IX shows the comparison of grade point averages bygroups between the two samples. Group one for juniorcollege students was composed of students with fifteento thirty semester hours; group two was composed ofstudents who had earned between thirty-one and fifty-foursemester hours; group three was composed of studentswho had earned fifty-five or more semester hours; and

group four was composed of students who had earned theAssociate of Arts Degree. It was interesting to notethat only eighty (20.88%) of the junior college studentshad earned the A.A. Degree. Group one of the four-year college students was composed of students withfifteen to thirty semester hours; group two was composed

12.

TABLE VII. STUDENTS COMPLETING REQUIREMENTSFOR GRADUATION

JuniorCollegeStudents

Four-YearCollegeStudents

Number of Students with Fiftyor more Transfer Hours 197 118

Number of Students CompletingGraduation Requirements 117 65

Percentage of Students CompletingGraduation Requirements withinFive Semesters 59.39% 55.08%

C;1

~4

TABLE VIII.

COMPARISON OF CUMULATIVE GRADE POINT AVERAGES

Winter, 1972

(Collected at end of Semester)

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Winter, 1973

(Collected at end of Semester)

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

Mean

2.300

Standard Deviation

0.646

Number of Students

307

t = 4.2595

= 545

P < .001

UMC CLASS AVERAGE

CUM GPA

12

34

2.533

0.627

240 TOTAL

CUM GPA

2.691

2.742

0.654

0.656

222

179

t = 0.776

dl = 399

P > .05

UMC CLASS AVERAGE

12

34

TOTAL

2.5044

2.5997

2.7137

2.7074

2.6617

2.5384

2.6370

27015

2.7670

2.6972

0-0.4999

52

70-0.4999

10

212

.5-1.4999

266

58

36

5365

.5-1.4999

256

63

41

6366

1.5-2.4999

1556

1444

1293

1174

5467

1.5-2.4999

1355

1335:

1405

1173

5268

2.5-3.4999

1435

1483

1698

1821

6437

2.5-3.4999

1406

1488

1870

2062

6826

3.5-4.0000

316

245

323

268

1152

3.5-4.0000

316

282

.

335

372

1305

TOTAL

3578

3232

3350

3268

13428

TOTAL

334 3

3170

3651

3613

13777

14

of students who had earned between thirty-one andfifty-four semester hours; group three was composedof students who had earned between fifty-five andfifty-nine semester hours; and group four was composedof students who earned between sixty and seventysemester hours.

The data were not subjected to a statistical treatmentbecause: (1) a prior agreement was made with the ResearchCommittee and (2) the chi square statistic, tstatistic, and percentage were not appropriate to treatthe data.

Table X shows the comparisons of junior college cumu-lative grade point averages with the 1971 and 1972 FallSemesters, the 1972 and 1973 Winter. Semesters, and theUniversity of Missouri-Columbia cumulative grade pointaverages. It should be noted that the number of ttests which were significant decreased each semester afterthe 1971 Fall Semester. The decrease in the number ofsignificant tests of significance might be attributed totwo factors: (1) the transfer shock and/or (2) thelonger students remain in college, the more like theirfellow students they become.

Table XI shows the comparisons of four-year collegecumulative grade point averages with the 1971 and 1972Fall Semesters, the 1972 and 1973 Winter Semesters andthe University of Missouri-Columbia cumulative gradepoint averages. It should be noted that the four-yearcolleges had fewer significant t tests than the juniorcolleges. It was not possible Eo further test the datain Tables X and XI because of the limitation on statis-tical treatments.

TABLE IX.

COMPARISONS OF GRADE POINT AVERAGES BY GROUPS

Groups

Transfer Mean GPA

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Co.L.

Students

Students

1971-72 Cumulative GPA

Jr.

Four -Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

1972-'73 Cumulative GPA

Jr.

Four-Year

Col.

Col.

Students

Students

1 (15-30 hours)

2.773

2.730

2.219

2.516

2.462

2.678

2 (31-54 hours)

2.706

2.725

2.190

.2.645

2.652

2.845

3 (55 or acre- -

Jr. Co].)

(55-59--4 yr.

Co].)

2.776

2.678

2.451

2.495

2.851

2.802

4 (AA--Jr. Co].)

(60-70-4 yr.

Col.)

2.953

2.773

2.453

2.556

2.799

2.813

TOTAL

2.808

2.740

2.328

2.554

2.711

2.773

:AE4

,N

;...11%-tE71.611.XRAN4

UMLIA110 T-rA

reppl

:.

Prtt

Irargsfer 4PA

A 2.96613.545i- 302.2543 0.9681

9 2.771.Q.5gAi 192.3:1 0,657 !

35

3.002,0.7011 15;.2.7 0.7:7

23

O 2,9980.43bl i2.049

3.105:0.504

142.612

F 2.722!0.513

Aa2.656!0.654

J1:1 2.82710.433

1.0361

Q.845 ,

1.-5:

5e '.012 0.801

6'1.899

42,301 0.8971

t1.1-,'1

!:

3. -* i 2.5961J.413

1441.753 0.617i 1.4 3.iet-

43 2.609 0.476 1W2.128 0.790 J.78.4..4**

c1

,.

1

r

K 2.514,I 0.493

19r 2.3b1 0,729 i

192..11".*

L 2.441; 0.648

14,2.132 0.6,42 1

1-.

2...,,t-,

;

.i2.803

1

0.481

12.397i0.b7d i

13; 1..,

,1

N 2.75.7 0.363

171, Z.U1J1 0.648 I

17; 1.:).1*

* = 41

L

k1

A

P-.05

.

4 m

,1

AZ4

.vo.

b 2...A.

10!'14:4

'1 ..-77,

-.7.35

.4).7

12

221' 1-:$....!.

-.5.,ta.

.

.,.13

....7,....

38 349;t3*

754t4)2.,:..,

LI.

..1,-1

.-..:5

C1.172

7 1.595

1)

..1"

.3.-e.,,

I,..1.11,

1...1-14.

.

:.5.,:t,

1..)22

A. 0.592

!10::. 3.441:

1

13 2.41:!*

1.09;,H,

11b 64369*;2311.--

13 0.806

29k

0.80;

Ibi -

1'

1.750

122

.::

3 4.,..-X7

)*ii,t.

...

;-,;334;b.,94

7',11,:71,

.,

:.i...3.1.:.

.34910..vW 7r1.b..,

.1z-,,:.

i.

:.743i.5,6*5

.7."5 40t,T -.°2.56,2 11,,S4

8.5.1.85.7.*.168.,-f

1

.I

v.74ir3,b1133 10.1.-...4,7...i19 -1.2.431 0..3P.4111C,..

1

!:

1

w.

;--.91341j.444

b?). It:.

i, 0 ,-) ,..1.14.3.41',

b° 1.1T;

I.67/!11.531 12-1 1).

1.95: %k.44)81

61.4,.-,,J.-

1

-.!.

4;-1.Q2:10.;405

6 --!0.1.41

.

.....Z.339 .).564::i.

i..I

11

i

1:

r

6161

.yr,

1

.744/15,

1

Li

*0!..14.4;.1%0.

.1.'1.4701N:16

0 t.."1i.431:14

.Z.56503.596 27

1.5.h .t53

!Z.425ci.431

5-

4P/0.72d

34 )1«..0,

26614

:64'1-2.5b?1 t.i.t.-3'

0.741

3

5Trf

"". t

*""

EJ-

.:LL :

2s.1414f.r ,PA

!lean

S.D.

N Neat%

-t

A 3.11.9 3333 9-2.524

t.17.

6...$79

1..

:.

3._'a

.:..9:

"..7

UN

IVE

RSI

TY

Of

CA

141.

LO

S N

4GE

LE

S

s.,r

..2,0

1's

1-47

4

CLE

MIN

GH

OU

SE

FO

RJU

NIO

R M

IME

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N

df P

4? P

. :e

at

a -935 0.509 3..; 2.326 4.602 33 ,4r9

..

.71

5:

:.2n.* t.4

' 2.615 t:.%.2 -23

".,

.C-.

,.6.9. ,:.

:Al:

41 A-,2.5-,,z .:.:7,..

.14.97

.

C 2.444 0 .507 1.1 2.117 1.1.9Ut

4 ).:!.0i.*

.,..5.

,..71:

.::.

+A

.395 U.S25 1`)

...2.53 " ....al

..:.:-,4 Is

2.-37:

2.6.3 ;...-19-.

it--.

Z.633 ,..t..2'1-:

1..34

L...1_. ...4.5

4 .-U.45i

1.

-2.456 5.330

i1.7...4

17Z .455 0 .551

9! 2.192 4.649

9 1. 1.:1

1v

2.30"

2.61 U..:36

:-.

4.029

12.-2-:

L..4e.:-.

a -1..1::

,, ;1.445- t.:-.45:

t:-02:73"

4.'40:,

I.F 2 .617 1.295

612.335 .842

fl

-!.;.7.5

I..

I...5i .......

. -:. 419

t..

.3.5:1..3.176

3 '2 .;,51*

".

4.t1-.. ..I.4

3 -,32193s,

..i.266,4.. .

.1 -1,697

': 4

G : .479 0 .292

5),2.146 4.467

5 1. Iv --:

.695,

61.940

54!)

11.21.

1..13::

'.4

1.ct'i

1 .10.10 .;...i-..

:1,369 -: .4

"..":.'7'

..1.:

9 2 .749 0.434 1L 2.421 U.7,6 16 1.15"

3.

.1.:69 ...t:79

It,

:4332:

14

2.650, 9.:^,./-.1..

4.3!::).,

..-

:..:4; .-4,68

ii --:;.t44I

..r

239 :-....3t :5

.:.461

4 :-

I : .698 .., .479

6 i2.734 i..5.0

b 1.4.1.'...

.....L

...3 ...

31.352

6 ' 2.441 ;....20

A.

i2..:79 ...:.613 ',-3.

'52.51,.

:' '2,323 4.31:

J.54.,

1,1E.

t2.9.3_ L.14.

. 4 -U.Iii -

....'..4;°1

:3 2 .6% 0.542

7 2.152 U.993

7 1.1"

12

i.050 1.v7:

2.24* "

2.513 U.2211

K 2 .644 0 .4a:: 15 2.629 0.579 1.-: 4.2"t

2...';3-v

,.

..46.

21:

...3; 4.bil 13 ---:.

.....

:...:-7:..

.,.:565 12

..,..4.45.:

ZA:6

.......

I. 2 .S.6! 5 .4&4 22

2.66

1 ii.

763

2.ia.9.:.:.

1. .5

.8..;; Z2

....569

2.993 :..-3316 1-.:252

3:,

3..-5 3.514: 1:-.

.-.0.44.

Zz.,

A2.94.7. ....e, ,

-r4.26t.

..

'2 .76(.0.4.6 21 2.429 !.1.694 27 :.42.3* .:2

:,.v_» ....1-t 22

.325 42 - 1.51.,5.51!4 I''

4.971.

33

2.E.:74 ::.I4L 17

-.14.391

3: -...'2.;%579 L,391 17.

.1123 :31

. .739 0 .936 37

t

2.716 !...i.919 37 0.120

:...".%1i2:s.t29 32 -9.42e

.,-..:

2.9$3 3.659

.i.:7

.2.acia ,....-5E' 2.1 -,,k./..7::.:7

2.9-t6- ...6;.0 11 -4.t41

9.t:i 2 0211,, 497 1912.557.4.667.17

..).33.

33

..-5r1

.3.

13 "4,352

25

2..:36 U.65711

71.ii.7.

-2:

2.733. :...

S" 1...,

.19.:

-. 2.677, :.3;:t_k.:

..!1-2

la_,

P ..:

.5aa

-;.116

5:3.-J96 73,66t

.. -1.6-::

1.2;."

.3.;4;5's

t:.9:n .,;I:

I -:..w:

.;:.i:,-.1

.,-,::

a -;.:1t,

....-

4.194 ....;,;

J.....

Q2

.72-

4 0

.39

9!2.177 -U.32Y

-4 3.331* It

.....-: J.523

70

2.2"V

1.t!

2.646 U..94

:.,7,. -1:

2.'11- :.542

-0.564-

1.:

,,..»54-:4..37.

1.749 :12 ',

R 2.7060 .593 102.061 4.736 10 2.428

16

2..-9 ....:-.3.

14

4.665

10

2.470 ...149

.4.%O. 2:, - 2,.-9I..

,...-..ii

7 .41,67,5

1-:;

-i2-..:926'::,.i:

,;,-..5-Zt:

i

Z; 2

dati

.39a 10:2.12U 4.597 1'4

3.2:i.)*

a P

r03

Pc.05

..1