37? Ag/ei

Mo.lW?

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PERFORMANCE ON CERTAIN ADMISSIONS

MEASURES AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF MASTER'S

DEGREE MUSIC EDUCATION STUDENTS

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

North Texas State University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

By

Joe W. Figg, B.M,, M.S

Denton, Texas

December, 1980

c

Figg, Joe W., Relationships Between Performance on

Certain Admissions Measures and Academic Achievement of

Master's Degree Music Education Students. Doctor of Edu-

cation (College Teaching), December, 1980, 84 pp., 4 tables,

5 appendices, bibliography, 28 titles.

The problem of this study was an analysis of the

relationships between performance on certain admissions

measures and academic achievement of students in master's

degree programs in music education. These measures inclu-

ded The Seashore Measures of Music Talent: subtests for

the Sense of Pitch, the Sense of Rhythm, and Tonal Memory;

The Drake Musical Aptitude Test: subtests A and B for

Musical Memory and A and B for Rhythm; The Gordon Index of

Musical Insight; The Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests;

The Nelson-Denny Reading Test: subtests for Vocabulary,

Paragraph Comprehension and Reading Speed; The Guilford-

Zimmerman Temperament Survey; locally developed proficiency

examinations in theory fundamentals, aural perception,

sight-singing and English usage; and the final grades in

Admission Seminar, a course taken during a student's first

semester of graduate music education study.

The purposes of the study were (1) to determine the

strength of relationships between scores on each measure

included in an admission battery and the academic

achievement of master's degree music education students;

(2) to determine the strength of the relationship between

the final grades in Admission Seminar and the academic

achievement of master's degree music education students;

and (3) to determine which combination of admissions measures

best predict the academic achievement of master's degree

music education students.

The population consisted of 128 students who received

the degree Master of Music Education or Master of Music

in Music Education between May, 1968 and May, 1978, who had

no credits toward the master's degree transferred from

another institution.

The Pearson product-moment correlation method revealed

that scores and grades on the following measures correlated

significantly at the .05 level with the overall master's

degree grade point averages: final grades in Admission

Seminar; the subtest for rhythm of the Seashore Measures

of Music Talent; subtest A for Musical Memory of The

Drake Musical Aptitude Test; The Otis Quick-Scoring Mental

Ability Tests; subtests for Vocabulary, Paragraph Com-

prehension and Reading Speed of The Nelson-Denny Reading

Test; the Restraint factor of The Guilford-Zimmerman Tem-

perament Survey; and proficiency examinations in theory

fundamentals, aural perception, and sight-singing.

The multiple correlation derived from twenty-seven

admissions measures and the grade point averages was found

to be significant at better than the .001 level.

The stepwise multiple regression revealed no signifi-

cant increase in the size of the multiple R after Step One,

the final grades in Admission Seminar.

Conclusions drawn from the study were that (1) there

is a direct positive relationship between (a) the traits

and abilities measured by the ten tests that correlated

significantly with the grade point averages and (b) academic

achievement in a master's degree program in music education;

(2) the ability to meet successfully the requirements of

the Admission Seminar has a significant positive relationship

to academic achievement in a master's degree program in music

education; (3) there is a direct positive relationship between

(a) the traits and abilities as measured together in the

battery of admissions measures and (b) academic achievement

in a master's degree music education program; and (4) academic

achievement in a master's degree program in music education

may best be predicted by the ability to perform well in the

Admission Seminar, but the collective scores of the entire

battery of admissions measures do enhance predictability.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES v

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Hypotheses Definition of Terms Delimitations Basic Assumptions Significance of the Study

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 8

Studies Concerned with Predicting Undergraduate Academic Success in Music

Studies Concerned with Predicting Graduate Academic Success in Music

Studies Concerned with Predicting Academic Success in Non-Music Graduate Programs

Summary

III. PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY 19

Testing Procedures Admissions Measures Population Scoring of Tests Procedures for Collecting Data

IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA 31

Relationships Between Test Scores and the Grade Point Averages of Graduate Music Education Students

Relationships Between Final Grade in Music 528 and the Grade Point Averages of Gradu-ate Music Education Students

i n

Page Relationships Between Admissions Measures

and the Grade Point Averages of Graduate Music Education Students

Best Combinations for Predicting Academic Success

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . 44

Summary of Methods and Procedures Review of Findings Conclusions Recommendations

APPENDIX A - EVALUATION FORM 55

APPENDIX B - PROFICIENCY EXAMINATIONS 57

APPENDIX C - DATA COLLECTION FORM 64

APPENDIX D - RAW DATA 66

APPENDIX E - INTERCORRELATIONS 77

BIBLIOGRAPHY 82

IV

LIST OF TABLES

Table P aS e

I. Means, Standard Deviations and Correlation Co-efficients for the Several Obtained Test Scores and Grade Point Averages 33

II. Means, Standard Deviations and Correlation Co-efficient for Music 528 Final Grades and Grade Point Averages 37

III. Multiple Correlation Between Admission Measures and Grade Point Averages 38

IV. Summary Table Showing Stepwise Regression Data for Twenty-Seven Variables 39

v

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

One of the problems facing schools and departments of

music today is the counseling of students into or out of

graduate study. The magnitude of this problem is particu-

larly great in music education because of the large number

of students attempting graduate degrees in this area and

because of the diverse challenges of effective performance

in music education.

Goodman (3, p.99) has pointed out the importance of

making an accurate assessment of the student's abilities and

potentialities in order to be fair to the student, the

faculty and the school. In a larger sense, such an assess-

ment is important in order to be fair to the teaching pro-

fession and the public in general. As an aid in making this

assessment it has become common practice for schools and

departments of music to administer certain tests to entering

graduate music education students. In order for these tests

to be useful as guidance tools, however, it is necessary to

know what relationships exist between the tests and suc-

cessful participation in a graduate music education program.

It appears, then, that an understanding of such relation-

ships would be beneficial.

Statement of the Problem

The problem of this study was an analysis of the

relationships between performances on certain admissions

measures and academic achievement of students in master's

degree programs in music education.

Purposes of the Study

The purposes of this study were

1. To determine the strength of relationships between

scores on each measure included in an admission

battery and the academic achievement of master's

degree music education students.

2. To determine the strength of the relationship

between the final grades in a required course,

Admission Seminar, and the academic achievement of

master's degree music education students.

3. To determine which combination of admissions

measures best predict the academic achievement of

master's degree music education students.

Hypotheses

To carry out the purposes of this study, the following

hypotheses were formulated:

1. There will be a significant positive relationship

between scores on each test and the grade point

average of master's degree music education stu-

dents .

2. There will be a significant positive relationship

between the final grade in the Admission Seminar

and the grade point average of master's degree

music education students.

3. There will be a significant multiple correlation

between the combined admission measures and the

grade point average of master's degree music

education students.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this study the following definitions

have been formulated:

1. Academic achievement refers to the average of

grades earned in all courses taken while a student is en-

rolled in a program of studies leading to the degree of

Master of Music Education or Master of Music in Music Edu-

cation .

2. Aural perception refers to the recognition of the

rhythmic, melodic, and harmonic aspects of music presented

acoustically.

3. Theory fundamentals include music notation, meter

signatures, conducting patterns, enharmonic equivalents,

major and minor keys, and structure and use of chords.

4. Admissions measures: standardized tests include

The Seashore Measures of Musical Talent, Revised Edition

(6): subtests for the Sense of Pitch, the Sense of Rhythm,

and Tonal Memory; The Drake Musical Aptitude Test (2):

4

subtests A and B for musical Memory and A and B for Rhythm;

The Gordon Index of Musical Insight, Form Ba (4): The Otis

Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests, New Edition: Gamma Form

Em (7); The Nelson-Denny Reading Test: Form A (1): subtests

for Vocabulary, Paragraph Comprehension and Reading Speed;

and The Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey (5).

5. Admissions measures: non-standardized tests in-

clude locally developed proficiency examinations in theory

fundamentals, aural perception, sight-singing and English

usage.

6. Admission Seminar (Music 528, North Texas State

University), is usually taken during a student's first

semester of graduate music education study, and has two

major purposes: (1) to acquaint the student with the cur-

rent trends and problems of music education; (2) to assess

the student's potential success in the master's degree

program in music education.

L imitations

The study was limited to students at North Texas State

University who completed the Master of Music Education or

Master of Music in Music Education degree between May, 1968,

and May, 1978.

The scores and grades of those students who had taken

the entire set of admissions measures were the only ones

used. If, for some reason, a student omitted any portion of

the set, his scores and grades were not used.

If a student had credits toward the master's degree

transferred from another institution, the case was excluded

from the study.

Basic Assumptions

Although the admissions measures were administered over

a period of years, it was assumed that they were administered

under sufficiently similar conditions that reliability of

the scores and grades has not been substantially affected.

It was assumed that students who met the requirements

for this study did not differ significantly as a group from

all students receiving the degree of Master of Music Educa-

tion or Master of Music in Music Education from North Texas

State University.

It was assumed that the graduate music education program

at North Texas State University is sufficiently similar to

the graduate music education programs at a number of other

colleges and universities to permit the application of the

findings of this study to such programs.

Significance of the Study

Although scores on the battery of tests and proficiency

examinations given to entering graduate music education

students and grades in Music 528 have been recorded and

filed over the ten-year period of the proposed study, no

effort has yet been made to determine the relationship

between these measures and the levels of academic success of

6

the students tested. It is obvious that the continuation of

a rather expensive procedure such as this must be justified

in terms of its practical value in the academic and career

guidance of students beginning graduate study in this field.

To the extent that such value cannot be demonstrated, the

elements of this procedure should therefore be subject to

appropriate change. It was felt that this study would be

significant, then, in that it would help to determine which

of these measures, singly or in combination, should con-

tinue to be used in the counseling of graduate music

education students.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Denny, E. C. and M. J. Nelson, The Nelson-Denny Reading Test, Form A, revised by Jamis I. Brown, Boston, Hough-ton-Mifflin, Co., Boston, 1960.

2. Drake, R. M., The Drake Musical Aptitude Tests, Chi-cago, 111., Science Research Associates, 1954-57.

3. Goodman, A. H., Music Administration in Higher Learn-ing, Provo, Utah, Press Publishing LimitedT 1975~!

4. Gordon, Roderick D., The Gordon Index of Musical In-sight, Form Ba, Denton, Texas, North Texas State Uni-versity Press, 1960.

5. Guilford, J. P. and Wayne S. Zimmerman, The Guilford Zimmerman Temperament Survey, Beverly Hills, Cali-fornia, Sheridan Supply Co., 1945-55.

6. Lewis, D., Joseph G. Saetveit, and Carl E. Seashore, The Seashore Measures of Musical Talents, Revised Edition, New York, Psychological Corp., 1919-60.

7. Otis, Arthur S., The Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests, New Edition, Form Em, Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York, World Book Co., 1954.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A review of related literature reveals surprisingly few

studies dealing with the problem of predicting academic

success in a program leading to a degree in music. These

few studies may be divided into two general categories: (1)

studies which are concerned with predicting academic success

at the undergraduate level, and (2) studies which are con-

cerned with predicting academic success at the graduate

level.

Studies Concerned with Predicting Undergraduate Academic Success in Music

The larger number of studies dealing with predicting

academic success in music programs have been concerned with

undergraduate music students. Five such studies deal with

undergraduate music students in general, while two are

concerned specifically with undergraduate music education

majors.

Dudd (7) conducted a longtitudinal study using a sample

that included 134 freshman music majors enrolled in the

University of Michigan School of Music. Prediction equa-

tions were examined for graduation, grade point average at

time of graduation, and persistence in music as an occu-

pation. The predictors used were high school grades, high

8

school subjects taken, scores from academic and personality

measures, self-rating scales, biographic and demographic

information and ratings of school officials and music

teachers. The strongest prediction equation (R = .73) was

found for grade point average at time of graduation. The

variables selected in the equation were theory total scores,

high school principals' ratings and College Board English

Achievement Scores.

Using 245 freshmen enrolled in the University of

Michigan School of Music, Stone (11) investigated the

relationship between academic achievement and high school

percentile ranks, scores on the SAT, A Theory Placement

Survey, and six scales from Fricke's Opinion, Attitude and

Interest Survey. He found that aptitude scores, high school

percentile ranks, and scores on personality measures formed

the best multivariate equation for predicting the overall

grade point average. Scores on a locally developed Theory

Placement Survey represented the single best predictor of

achievement in musical performance, non-performance music

courses, and total course work.

An early study by Christy (1) involved 103 under-

graduate music students at Indiana University in an effort

to determine if significant relationships could be found

between measures of musicality and the variables of age,

sex, degree, performance medium, achievement and intelli-

gence. The results showed a positive correlation between

10

age and success on a music achievement battery which in-

cluded only standardized tests of musical ability. The

findings also indicated a moderate relationship between

musicality and achievement, with the relationship to

achievement in music theory ranking highest. It was also

found that musicality was only slightly related to measured

intelligence. It should be pointed out that no correlation

was high enough to be used for prediction, which emphasizes

the importance of additional research directed at finding

effective combinations of predictors.

Scimonelli (10) studied the relationship between the

achievement of music majors in the two-year community

colleges of Maryland and scores on the Otis-Lennon Quick-

Scoring Mental Ability Test, the Seashore Measures, the

Brown and Haltzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitude, the

Strong Vocational Interest Blanks (music) and the Iowa Test

of Musical Literacy. The results showed the best predictors

of success to be the Otis-Lennon Mental Ability Test and the

Seashore Measures: subtests for pitch and tonal memory.

These predictors are included in the battery investigated in

the present study.

Using a population of 833 students from twenty-one

different institutions of higher learning, Leblanc (6)

attempted to discover a relationship between scores on the

American College Testing Program Battery and completion of

an undergraduate degree in music performance or music edu-

11

cation. Unlike the studies using the GPA as the dependent

variable, Leblanc's study was concerned only with the

attainment or non-attainment of the baccalaureate degree.

The findings in the study revealed that those students who

completed the degree achieved higher grades in high school

and had a higher level of achievement on the ACT battery.

It is interesting to note that, in two of the studies

described above, scores on some type of music theory place-

ment test ranked at or near the top as strong predictors of

success. This suggests the value of including such a test

in an undergraduate entrance battery.

A study by George (5) is one of two concerned with the

academic success of undergraduate music education students.

Using a population of 304 freshman music education majors,

relationships were studied between scholastic and musical

aptitudes. The findings indicated that all of the diag-

nostic measures employed made a significant contribution to

the multiple regression equation, with the exception of the

Seashore Measures, Form A. This contrasts with the findings

of the first four studies described in this review of

related literature. It was found that the most important

predictors were high school achievement and achievement in

music theory and ear training.

Rohrs (9) used 168 students at Manchester College to

study the relationships between academic success in a

liberal arts college music education program and scores on a

12

battery of twenty-seven tests and subtests. The multiple

correlation technique identified the following collectively

as the best predictors of academic success in music: total

scores on the ACE Psychological Examination for College

Freshmen; performance on the "Persuasive" and "Music" scales

of the Kuder Preference Record; total scores on the Wash-

burne Social Adjustment Inventory and high school grade

point averages. Using scores on this reduced battery, high-

est multiple correlations were found between scores on the

battery and success in music theory, music grade point

average, and college grade point average.

Studies Concerned with Predicting Graduate Academic Success in Music

Only two studies concerned with predicting academic

success in a graduate music program have thus far been

reported. Neither study deals specifically with graduate

music education students.

Using 422 graduate music students at the University of

Cincinnati, Domb (3) studied the relationship between the

Verbal, Quantitative, and Advanced Musical scores on the

Graduate Record Examination and undergraduate grade point

average (predictors) and graduate grade point average (cri-

terion) . She found that no single predictor could account

for more than twenty-five percent of the variance, but that

the undergraduate grade point average was the best single

predictor of the cumulative graduate grade point average.

13

Using the same measures of musicality used by Christy

(1) in studying academic achievement at the undergraduate

level, Peterson (8) investigated the relationship between

musicality and the academic achievement of graduate music

students. Generally low to moderate coefficients of cor-

relation were found between elements of the test battery and

academic achievement. Those subtests using actual musical

stimuli produced the highest coefficients.

Studies Concerned with Predicting Academic Success in Non-Music Graduate Programs

A number of studies concerned with predicting academic

success in graduate programs other than music have been

reported. Two of these are of particular interest to the

present study because of the contradictory findings of the

studies.

DeBeruff (2) used 325 students who had received the

master's or doctoral degrees, or who were full time master's

or doctoral degree students at the University of Maryland,

to study the relationship between selected predictors and

academic success in master's or doctoral programs. The

battery of predictors included the Miller Analogies Test,

scores on the Quantitative subtest of the American Council

on Education Psychological Examination, undergraduate GPA,

and master's GPA for students in doctoral degree programs.

The results of the study indicated that for those who had

received the master's degree, the best predictor of academic

14

success was a combination of the MAT and the undergraduate

GPA. Multiple R was .5360, accounting for 28.7 per cent of

the variance. For those who had received doctoral degrees,

a combination of the MAT, Quantitative subtest scores, and

master's degree GPA was the most efficient predictor.

Multiple R was .79, accounting for 62.4 per cent of the

variance.

Using seventy-seven students enrolled in the doctoral

program in physical education at the University of Utah,

Muhic (7) studied the relationship between a battery of

predictive measures and success in a doctoral degree program

in physical education. The battery included the bachelor's

and master's degree GPA, but, unlike the study conducted by

DeBeruff (2), included no entrance examinations. Also, in

contrast to DeBeruff's study, Muhic (7) found that the

emphasis placed on the GPA, particularly the master's GPA,

did not appear to be justified. The multiple R using the

predictive battery was found to be insignificant.

Summary

The literature reviewed revealed relatively few studies

concerned with predicting academic success in a music degree

program. Those that have been reported fall into two cate-

gories: (1) studies which are concerned with predicting

academic success at the undergraduate level, and (2) studies

which are concerned with predicting academic success at the

15

graduate level.

Of the seven studies dealing with predicting the aca-

demic success of undergraduate music students, five are

concerned with the success of undergraduate music students

in general. The best predictors of academic success

reported in these five studies are scores on music theory

tests, scores on the Seashore and Drake standardized music

tests, scores on aptitude, mental ability and personality

measures, high school principal's ratings, and academic

achievement in high school. The two studies concerned with

predicting academic success of undergraduate music education

students reveal a relationship between success and achieve-

ment in music theory and ear training, academic achievement

in high school, and scores on personality and vocational

preference measures.

Neither of the two reported studies dealing with pre-

dicting academic success in a graduate music program is

concerned specificially with graduate music education stu-

dents. The best predictors found in the two studies were

undergraduate grade point average and scores on tests using

musical stimuli.

Two studies concerned with predicting academic success

in graduate programs other than music were included in the

review of literature. One study found the best predictors

of academic success to be a combination of scores on the

Miller Analogies Test and undergraduate GPA for master's

16

degree recipients and master's degree GPA for those who

received doctoral degrees. The second study, also making

use of the GPA, found no significant predictive battery.

It is interesting to note that all of the reported

research in the prediction of success in a graduate music

education program was done by doctoral students and that

none was reported by full time professional members in the

field of music education. This, perhaps, provides some in-

sight into the apparent perception of the importance of this

problem held by such professional music educators.

In summary, then, a general inconclusiveness was indi-

cated in the findings of the literature reviewed. This

inconclusiveness, coupled with the lack of reported studies

dealing with predicting the academic success of graduate

music education students, gave support to the need for a

study such as the present one.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Christy, Leo J., "A Study of the Relationships Between Musicality, Intelligence, and Achievement," unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Music, Indiana Univer-sity, Bloomington, Indiana, 1956.

2. DeBeruff, Ellen, "The Prediction of Success in Master's and Doctoral Programs," unpublished doctoral disserta-tion, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1969.

3. Domb, Jo Ann L., "Relationships Between Selected Pre-dictor Variables and Graduate Success Criteria at the University of Cincinnatti College Conservatory of Music," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnatti, Cincinnatti, Ohio, 1977.

4. Dudd, John E., "The Prediction of Success as Defined by Graduation Grade Point Averages, Graduation, and Music as an Occupation of Freshmen Enrolled in the University of Michigan School of Music in September, 1962: A Longitudinal Study in Admissions," unpublished doctoral dissertation, the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1978.

5. George, Warren E., "Significant Predictors for College Achievement in Specified Areas of Music Education and Identification of Potential Graduates," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, 1969.

6. Leblanc, John R., "The ACT Battery as a Predictor of Completion of a Baccalaureate Degree in Music or Music Education," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer-sity of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi, 1971.

7. Muhic, Thomas J., "Prediction of Success for Doctoral Degrees in Physical Education," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1971.

8. Peterson, Floyd M., "A Study of the Relationships Between Music Aptitude and Academic Achievement of Graduate Music Students," unpublished doctoral dis-sertation, School of Music, Indiana University,

17

18

Bloomington, Indiana, 1963.

9. Rohrs, D. K., "Predicting Academic Success in a Liberal Arts College Music Education Program," unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of Iowa, Ames, Iowa, 1962.

10. Scimonelli, Frank, J., "A Study of Selected Variables Related to the Achievement of Music Majors in Two-Year Community Colleges," unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Catholic University of America, 1975.

11. Stone, M. H., "A Study of the Relationships Between Selected Variables and the Differential Academic Achievement of Freshmen in the University of Michigan School of Music," unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1969.

CHAPTER III

PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY

This chapter is concerned with a description of the

admissions measures used in the present study and a dis-

cussion of the procedures used in administering and scoring

the tests included in these measures. Also included are

descriptions of the population used in the study and the

procedures used in collecting all pertinent data.

Testing Procedures

The entrance examinations used in the present study

were administered during the time a student was enrolled in

Music 528, Admission Seminar. Administration of the exami-

nations was under the direct supervision of the instructor

of Music 528.

Regular class time was used to administer The Seashore

Measures of Musical Talent, The Drake Musical Aptitude

Tests, The Gordon Index of Musical Insight, The Guilford-

Zimmerman Temperament Survey, The Otis Quick-Scoring Mental

Ability Tests, and the proficiency examination in English

Usage. The remaining entrance examinations were administered

in the afternoon on various days during the early part of

the semester. The students were informed that performance

on these examinations was not a factor in determining the

19

20

final grade in the course.

Admissions Measures

Six of the admissions measures used in the present

study are recognized standardized instruments. They have

been widely used, and only a brief description of each will

be included here.

The Seashore Measures of Musical Talent (6) was first

published in 1919. The battery was revised in 1939 and has

since undergone a number of additional alterations.

Seashore's test was conceived as measuring six distinct

factors which together presumably constitute "musical

talent". The six factors are perception of pitch, loudness,

timbre, rhythm, tonal memory, and time.

For the purposes of the present study, the Pitch,

Rhythm and Tonal Memory subtests of the Seashore battery

were used. Reliablities for these tests are reported by the

authors to be .78, .72, and .89 for pitch, rhythm, and tonal

memory, respectively.

The Drake Musical Aptitude Test (3) attempts to

measure, objectively, two fundamental components of musical

ability: musical memory and rhythm. In the subtest for

musical memory, melodies played on the piano are compared as

to sameness or change, in notation, key or tempo. In the

subtest for rhythm, a particular beat is given and the

listener counts to himself at the same rate. Following the

cessation of the presented beat, the listener continues to

21

count until told to stop. He then writes the number reached

at that point. In Form B, the subject is required to count

at the original rate, while a distracting beat is presented.

Coefficients of reliability for the subtests for musi-

cal memory and rhythm are reported to be in the .80's and

.90's respectively. Validity coefficients are reportd as

ranging from .31 to .91.

The Gordon Index of Musical Insight (4) was developed

for the purpose of aiding in the prediction of success in

the handling of the theoretical aspects of music. The tests

consists of visual excerpts of twenty-seven familiar melo-

dies. The first four to eight measures of each of these

melodies are presented in scrambled order. The subject is

asked to arrange the numbers of the measures in their cor-

rect order, after silently examining the music. The test is

timed and the subject is told that he is not expected to

finish the entire test.

The author of the test reports the reliability coeffi-

cient to be .90. The validity coefficients are reported as

ranging from .05 to .45, with .30 being the median coeffi-

cient .

The Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests (8) com-

prise three tests, each designed to be used at a specific

level of schooling. Alpha form is designed for use in

grades one through four, Beta form for use in grades four

through nine, and Gamma form for use in high schools and

22

colleges. The Gamma Form Em was used in the present study.

The stated purpose of the tests is to measure thinking

power. The author states that the aim in making the tests

has been to choose, mainly, the kind of questions that

depend as little as possible on specific schooling and as

much as possible on thinking.

The Gamma form yields a single score which summarizes

the eighty items on the test. The test items include word

meanings, verbal analogies, scrambled sentences, interpre-

tations of proverbs, logical reasoning, number series,

arithmetic reasoning, and design analogies.

The author reports a corrected split-half reliability

coefficient of .88 for Gamma Form Em. The mean validity

index of the test items was reported to be .50.

The Nelson-Denny Reading Test (2) is in two parts: (1)

a 100-item multiple-choice vocabulary test and (2) a thirty-

six item comprehension test. The comprehension test con-

sists of nine paragraphs, each of which contains about 200

words. Each paragraph is followed by four comprehension

questions with multiple-choice answers. All items in the

test are selected and scaled in terms of their difficulty.

Reading rate is determined by the number of words read at

the end of one minute of the comprehension test.

In scoring the test, each vocabulary test item is

allowed one point, and each comprehension item is allowed

two points. The maximum score possible is 172.

23

Reliability coefficients for reading rate and vocabu-

lary are reported by the authors to be in the low .90's.

The reported reliability coefficient for paragraph compre-

hension is .81.

The Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey (5) puts into

one schedule the ten major "traits" identified by Guilford,

and used in previous separate inventories, namely, The

Nebraska Personality Inventory, The Guilford-Martin Inven-

tory of Factors G A M I N , The Guilford-Martin Personnel

Inventory (0 Ag Co), and An Inventory of Factors S T D C R.

The identified traits are: (G) General Activity, (R) Re-

straint, (A) Ascendance, (S) Sociability, (E) Emotional

Stability, (0) Objectivity, (F) Friendliness, (T) Thought-

fulness, (P) Personal Relations, and (M) Masculinity.

The Survey consists of 300 items, 30 for each trait,

with each item responded to with yes, or no. A high

score is in the direction of the socially desirable trait.

The authors report the reliability coefficient of each trait

to be approximately .80. Intercorrelations are reported as

being low.

The four proficiency examinations used in the present

study are all non-standardized tests. Since they are lo-

cally developed instruments, some description of each would

appear to be in order.

The proficiency examination in Theory Fundamentals (see

Appendix B) was developed by the theory faculty of the

24

School of Music at North Texas State University. The pur-

pose of the examination is to assess knowledge of the funda-

mentals of music theory. The test was developed specifi-

cally for use with students entering the master's degree

program in music education at North Texas State University.

Areas covered in the examination include key and meter

signatures, clef signs, names of scale steps, intervals,

relative and parallel major and minor keys, and chord spell-

ings. In addition, the examination also attempts to assess

the student's knowledge of conducting patterns and chord

progressions and his ability to make a simple harmonic

analysis.

A proficiency examination in Aural Perception (see

Appendix B) is also given, the purpose of which is to assess

the student's ability to recognize the rhythmic, harmonic

and melodic aspects of music when presented acoustically.

Like the proficiency examination in Theory Fundamentals, the

proficiency examination in Aural Perception was developed by

the theory faculty at North Texas State University, to be

used specifically with students entering the master's degree

program in music education at that University.

In this examination the student is asked to indicate

the meter signatures of melodies played on the piano, and to

determine whether printed rhythmic exercises are the same as

those presented aurally. In addition, the student is asked

to identify notes played incorrectly from melodic and har-

25

monic printed scores.

The proficiency examination is Sight-Singing is de-

signed to assess the student's ability to vocalize, at first

sight, an unfamiliar musical selection. It involves the

correct translation, by the human voice, of the musical

symbolism into musical sound. The musical selection used in

the examination is selected or composed by members of the

theory faculty at North Texas State University.

The melodic selection used is sixteen measures in

length and is in either the major or minor mode. There are

no more than four sharps or four flats in the key signature,

and the selection contains one modulation. The melody begins

on something other than the tonic note, and the student is

given the choice of hearing either the starting pitch or

some pitch of his choice. The student sings the exercise

twice and a tape recording of his singing is made. This

allows the examination to be graded, first, by the person

administering the examination and, later, by one other

member of the theory faculty.

The proficiency examination in English usage is an

essay examination involving one extended response question.

The student is asked to write a short essay on a topic

assigned at the time of the examination. The student has no

prior knowledge of the topic to be assigned. The topic of

the essay deals with some current area of music education

with which the student is assumed to be familiar.

26

Although the essay allows the student to demonstrate

his knowledge of the assigned topic, the main purpose of the

examination is to evaluate the student's skill in expressing

ideas in written form. Specific skills to be evaluated

include correct sentence structure, correct paragraph struc-

ture, and knowledge and correct usage of vocabulary.

Although not a proficiency examination or standardized

test, the final grade in Music 528, Admission Seminar, was

selected as one of the admissions measures to be used in the

present study. Since one of the purposes of Music 528 is to

assess the student's potential in the master's degree pro-

gram in music education, it was felt that the final grade

would be relevant to the study.

Music 528, Admission Seminar, is usually taken during a

student's first semester of graduate music education study,

and has two major purposes. The first purpose is to acquaint

the student with the current trends and problems of music

education. An additional (and important) purpose is to

assess the student's potential success in the master's

degree program in music education.

To accomplish the first purpose, the students are

required to read and write reviews of materials from a

selected bibliography. Topics covered in the bibliography

include philosphy, supervision, and administration in music

education, elementary music education, secondary music

education, music in continuing education, conducting and

27

styles of music, music education in the college and univer-

sity, vocal-choral music education, and instrumental music

education. Class lectures and discussions are also utilized

in accomplishing this purpose.

One of the methods used to accomplish the second major

purpose of Music 528, stated above, is a written evaluation

of the student by every School of Music faculty member

teaching the student during the then current semester. An

example of the evaluation form used is shown in Appendix A.

Scores on the battery of proficiency examinations and stan-

dardized tests included in the present study are also used

in the assessment of the student's potential success.

The final grade in Music 528 is determined by the

weekly grades on reviews of assigned readings, the average

of all grades indicated on the written evaluation form

referred to above, and the grade on the final examination.

Each of these factors accounts for one-third of the final

grade. Performance on the several tests and proficiency

examinations described above is not a factor in determining

the final grade in this course.

Population

It was originally determined that the population for

the present study would consist of the students who received

the degree of Master of Music Education or Master of Music

in Music Education from North Texas State University between

28

May, 1968 and May, 1978. It was also determined that the

scores and grades only of those students who had taken the

entire set of admissions measures would be used. Also, if a

student had credits toward the master's degree transferred

from another institution, the case would be excluded from

the study.

Between May, 1968 and May, 1978, 306 students received

the degree of Master of Music Education and 16 students

received the degree of Master of Music in Music Education.

Of this total original population of 322 students, 167 were

excluded from the study because they had not taken the

entire set of admissions measures. Another 27 students were

deleted because they had credits toward the master's degree

transferred from other institutions. These deletions, then,

reduced the population used in the study to a total of 128.

Scoring of Tests

The tests used in the present study were scored by, or

under the direct supervision of, the instructor of Music

528, Admission Seminar. Scoring stencils provided by the

test suppliers were used to hand score the standardized

tests. The proficiency examination in English usage was

scored by the instructor of Music 528, while the examina-

tions in theory fundamentals, aural perception, and sight-

singing were scored by members of the theory faculty

of the North Texas State University School of Music.

29

Procedures for Collecting Data

An office form (see Appendix C) was designed for use in

collecting data pertinent to this study. On this form the

following information was recorded for each student used in

the study:

1. The scores on the entrance examination battery.

This information had been recorded and held in the School of

Music at North Texas State University.

2. The grades in Music 528, Admission Seminar. This

information had been recorded and held in the School of

Music at North Texas State University.

3. The grade point averages of the students involved.

This information was obtained from the permanent records of

the students in the office of Admissions and Records at

North Texas State University.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Bean, K. L., review of the Seashore Measures of Musical Talents, Revised Edition, in the Sixth Mental Measure-ments Yearbook, edited by O.K. Buros, Highland Park, N.J., The Gryphon Press, 1959.

2. Denny, E. C. and M. J. Nelson, The Nelson-Denny Reading Test, Form A, revised by James I. Brown, Boston, Hough-ton-Mifflin Co., Boston, 1960.

3. Drake, R. M., The Drake Musical Aptitude Tests, Chi-cago, 111., Science Research Associates, 1954-57.

4. Gordon, Roderick D., The Gordon Index of Musical In-sight, Form Ba, Denton, Texas, North- Texas State University Press, 1960.

5. Guilford, J. P., and Wayne S. Zimmerman, The Guilford Zimmerman Temperament Survey, Beverly HilTsT Cali-fornia, Sheridan Supply Co., 1945-55.

6. Lewis, D., Joseph G. Saetveit, and Carl E. Seashore, The Seashore Measures of Musical Talents, Revised Edition, New York, Psychological Corp.", 1919-60.

7. Lundin, Robert W., review of the Drake Musical Aptitude Tests, in Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by 0 ET1 Buros, Highland Park, N. J. , The Gryphon Press, 1959.

8. Otis, Arthur S., The Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests, New Edition, Form Ein Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York, World Book., 1954.

9. Saunders, D. R., review of the Gui1ford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey, in the Fifth Mental Measurements YearbooT^ edited by 0. K. Buros, Highland Park, N.J., The Gryphon Press, 1959.

30

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA

The data for this study consist of scores on six stan-

dardized tests and four proficiency examinations, the final

grades in one class and one set of grade point averages. In

all, twenty-eight variables were studied in this investi-

gation. These are identified as follows:

1. Scores on the subtests for the Sense of Pitch, the

Sense of Rhythm, and Tonal Memory of the Seashore Measures

of Musical Talent, Revised Edition.

2. Scores on Subtests A and B for Musical Memory and A

and B for Rhythm of the Drake Musical Aptitude Test.

3. Scores on the Gordon Index of Musical Insight, Form

Ba.

4. Scores on the Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability

Tests; New Edition: Gamma Form Em.

5. Scores on the subtests for Vocabulary, Paragraph

Comprehension, and Reading Speed of The Nelson-Denny Reading

Test: Form A.

6. Ten factor scores from The Guilford-Zimmerman

Temperament Survey designated as (G) General Activity, (R)

Restraint, (A) Ascendance, (S) Sociability, (E) Emotional

Stability, (0) Objectivity, (F) Friendliness, (T) Thought-

fulness, (P) Personal Relations, and (M) Masculinity.

31

32

7. Scores on the locally developed proficiency exami-

nation in theory fundamentals.

8. Scores on the locally developed proficiency exami-

nation in aural perception.

9. Scores on the locally developed proficiency exami-

nation in sight-singing.

10. Scores on the locally developed proficiency exami-

nation in English usage.

11. The final grade in Music 528 Admission Seminar.

12. The final cumulative graduate grade point average

at time of graduation of the master's degree music education

students used in the present study.

All pertinent data were entered on keypunch worksheets

and submitted to the North Texas State University Computing

Center for computer analysis.

Relationships Between Test Scores and the Grade Point Averages of Graduate

Musical Education Students

The first purpose of the study was to determine the

strength of relationships between scores on each measure

used in the study and the academic achievement of graduate

music education students at North Texas State University, as

measured by grade point average. Hypothesis One stated that

there would be a significant positive relationship between

scores on each measure and the grade point averages. The

Pearson product-moment method of correlation was used to

33

test this hypothesis. A level of .05 was set as the level

at which r would be considered significantly different from

zero.

In Table I the means, standard deviations, and cor-

relations for the grade point averages and the several

measures are presented. The grade point averages and scores

on The Seashore Measures of Musical Talent, The Drake Musi-

cal Aptitude Tests, The Gordon Index of Musical Insight, The

0 t i s Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests, Ilie Nelson-Denny

Reading Test, and the proficiency examinations in English

Usage, Theory Fundamentals and Aural Perception are percen-

tile conversions. Scores on the Gui1ford-Zimmerman

Temperament Survey are C-score conversions. Scores on the

proficiency examination in Sight-Singing are raw scores

based on a grading scale ranging from one to five.

Significant correlation for a sample of this size (N=128) at

the .05 level of significance would require a correlation

coefficient (r) of .1718.

TABLE I

MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR THE SEVERAL OBTAINED

SCORES AND GRADE POINT AVERAGES

Variable Mean Standard Deviation

r with GPA

GPA 3.5497 .2456

34

TABLE I • - Continued

Variable Mean Standard Deviation

r with GPA

Seashore P 84.6172 13.7978 .0420

Seashore R 76.1406 24.1252 . 1797*

Seashore TM 88.2734 15.3898 - . 0 2 0 5

Drake A MM 59.1406 24.1354 .2047*

Drake A R 52.1406 28.2605 .1338

Drake B MM 77.6719 18.7835 .1539

Drake B R 60.9375 26.4440 - . 0 7 8 8

GIMI 59.1328 27.5505 .1143

Otis 121.6878 9 .3175 . 2815*

Nel-Den Voc 66.9375 26.4217 . 2709*

Nel-Den Par 62.8438 26.2815 .2579*

Nel-Den Rdg Sp 69.8047 24.3902 .2640*

G-Z Gen Act 5.3125 2.3199 .1035

G-Z Restr 6.1953 1 .7705 .1718*

G-Z Asc 5.1094 2 .0743 .0169

G-Z Soc 4 .6641 1 .8751 - . 0 2 4 2

G-Z Emot Sta 5.1328 1 .8713 .0765

G-Z Obj 4.8672 1 .9496 .0509

G-Z Fr 5.4688 2 .1071 .0466

G-Z Thtflns 6.1875 1.9552 .0162

G-Z Per Rel 3.9766 1.9900 .1632

G-Z M-F 4.5000 1 .8486 .1691

TABLE I - Continued

'Significant at the .05 level

35

Variable Mean Standard Deviation

r with GPA

Engl Usage 76.4453 8.7459 -.1312

Theory Fund 85.5859 12.1568 .2044"

Aural Percp 75.5703 13.3668 .1753"

Sight-Sing 2.8109 1.7183 .2178*

As shown in Table I, the correlation coefficients of

the grade point averages with the scores on each measure

used in the present study range from .0160 to .2815. Ten of

the scores examined in Table I have positive coefficients

significant at the .05 level. These are Seashore R (r =

.1797), Drake A MM (r = .2047), Otis (r = .2815), Nel-Den

Voc (r = .2709), Nel-Den Par (r = .2579), Nel-Den Rdg Sp (r

= .2640), G-Z Restr (r = .1718), Theory Fund (r = .2044),

Aural Percp (r = .1753) and Sight-Sing (r = .2178). There-

fore, Hypotheses One, which stated that there would be a

significant positive relationship between scores on each

measure and the grade point averages, is partially supported

by the research data. It therefore appears that there is

some tendency for high scores on some of the tests listed

above to be accompanied by high grade point averages and low

scores on these tests to be accompanied by low grade point

36

averages.

Relationship Between Final Grades in Music 528 and the Grade Point Averages of Graduate

Music Education Students

The second purpose of the study was to determine the

strength of the relationship between the final grades in

Music 528, Admission Seminar, and the academic achievement

of master's degree music education students at North Texas

State University. For the purpose of this study the follow-

ing numerical values were assigned to letter grades used in

the course: F = 1, D- = 2 , D = 3 , D + = 4 , C- =5, C = 6, C+

7, B- = 8 , B = 9, B+ = 10, A- = 11, A = 12. Hypothesis

Two stated that there would be a significant positive re-

lationship between the final grades in Music 528 and the

grade point averages. The Pearson product-moment method of

correlation was used to test this hypothesis. A level of

.05 was set as the level at which r would be considered

significantly different from zero.

The means, standard deviations, and correlation co-

efficient for the grade point averages and the grades in

Music 528 are shown in Table II. A correlation coefficient

of .1718 would be required for significance at the .05

level.

TABLE II

MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND CORRELATION COEFFICIENT FOR MUSIC 528 FINAL GRADES

AND GRADE POINT AVERAGES

37

Variable Mean Standard Deviation

r with GPA

GPA 3, .5497 .2456 - -

Music 528 10, ,4141 1.4337 .5294

As shown in Table II, the computed correlation co-

efficient for the grade point averages and grades in Music

528 was .5294. Hypotheses Two, which stated that there would

be a significant positive relationship between these two

variables, is therefore accepted. Apparently there is a

strong tendency for students who make high grades in Music

528 to attain high grade point averages at the master's

degree level, and for students who make poorer grades in

Music 528 to attain lower grade point averages.

Relationships Between Admissions Measures and the Grade Point Averages of Graduate

Music Education Students

Hypothesis Three stated that a significant multiple

correlation could be derived from the several admissions

measures and the grade point averages of the students used

in the study. The multiple correlation technique was used

to test this hypothesis. A level of .05 was set as the

level at which R would be considered significantly different

38

from zero.

The multiple R between the twenty-seven admissions

measures and the grade point averages is shown in Table III.

Also shown are the multiple R square (variance) and the

significance level of the mutiple R.

TABLE III

MULTIPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN ADMISSION MEASURES AND GRADE POINT AVERAGES

Multiple R

Multiple R Square

Significance Level

.6463 .4177 .001

As shown in Table III, the computed multiple correla-

tion between the twenty-seven admissions measures and the

grade point averages was .6463. The multiple R square was

.4177.

An obtained multiple R of .6463 with the size of the

sample used in this study (128) is signifcant at better than

the .001 level. Since a level of .05 was set as the level

at which R would be considered significantly different from

zero, Hypothesis Three, which stated that there would be a

significant multiple correlation derived from the several

admissions measures and the grade point averages, is re-

tained. The multiple R square of .4177 indicates that

39

approximately forty-two percent of the variance in the grade

point averages can be accounted for by the combined admis-

sions measures used in this study.

Best Combinations for Predicting Academic Success

The third purpose of this study was to determine which

combinations of admissions measures best predict the aca-

demic achievement of master's degree music education

students at North Texas State University. No hypothesis was

stated. It was determined that a stepwise multiple re-

gression procedure would be used to determine the best

combinations of predictors. The summary of data produced

from these steps in the multiple regression procedure is

given in Table IV.

TABLE IV

SUMMARY TABLE SHOWING STEPWISE REGRESSION DATA FOR TWENTY

SEVEN VARIABLES

Step Variable Entered

Multiple R

Multiple R Square

P Multiple R

P Increase

1 Music 528 .5294 .2803 .001

2 G-Z M-F .5439 .2958 .001 N.S.

3 Nel-Den Rdg Sp .5560 .3091 .001 N.S.

4 G-Z Restr .5636 .3177 .001 N.S.

5 t

G-Z Thtflns .5760 .3318 .001 N.S.

TABLE IV - Continued

40

Step Variable Entered

Multiple R

Multiple R Square

P Multiple R

P Increase

6 Sight Sing .5839 .3410 .001 N.S.

7 Seashore TM .5922 .3507 .001 N.S.

8 Seashore R .6007 .3608 .001 N.S.

9 GIMI .6053 . 3664 .001 N.S.

10 Otis .6100 .3721 .001 N.S.

11 G-Z Obj .6149 .3781 .001 N.S.

12 Drake A R .6210 .3856 .001 N.S.

13 Nel-Den Par .6245 .3899 .001 N.S.

14 Aural Percp .6270 .3931 .001 N.S.

15 G-Z Emot Sta .6294 .3962 .001 N.S.

16 G-Z Soc .6329 .4006 .001 N.S.

17 Seashore P .6357 .4042 .001 N.S.

18 G-Z Gen Act .6379 .4070 .001 N.S.

19 Drake A MM .6409 .4107 .001 N.S.

20 Engl Usage .6423 .4126 .001 N.S.

21 G-Z Asc . 6431 .4136 .001 N.S.

22 G-Z Per Rel . 6440 .4147 .001 N.S.

23 Nel-Den Voc .6447 .4156 .001 N.S.

24 Drake B MM .6457 .4169 .001 N.S.

25 Theory Fund .6459 .4172 .001 N.S.

26 G-Z Fr .6461 .4175 .001 N.S.

27 j Drake B R .6463 .4177 .001 N.S.

"Cut-off line indicating in value of R.

limit of s ignificant i ncrease

41

As shown in Table IV grades in Music 528 were entered

as Step One in the multiple regression procedure. The

multiple R was found to be .5294. The multiple R Square was

.2803.

Step Two entered the Masculinity factor of the Guilford-

Zimmerman Temperament Scale in combination with grades in

Music 528. The multiple R increased to .5439 and the mul-

tiple R square to .2958. Each succeeding step introduced an

additional measure into the equation.

As indicated in Table IV the cut-off point for deter-

mining the best predictors of academic success was placed

after Step One, grades in Music 528. Although each suc-

ceeding obtained multiple R was by itself significant at the

.001 level, the degree of increase in the size of the mul-

tiple R was not significant at the .05 level after the first

step.

Apparently the addition of scores on other admissions

measures to the grades in Music 528 does not significantly

increase the value of the battery of admissions measures as

a predictor of grade point averages for the students used in

the present study.

It will be remembered that ten of the variables shown

in Table I correlated significantly with the grade point

averages of the students used in this study. Yet, as indi-

cated in Table IV, none of these variables made a signifi-

42

cant contribution to the multiple R. It seems apparent that

the grade in Music 528 had so heavy an influence that

the addition of the remaining measures did not, individually,

significantly improve the correlation already obtained from

the grades in Music 528.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Cohen, Jacob and Patricia Cohen, Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral ?a"»^nces' Hillsdale, N\J., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1975.

2. McNemar, Quinn, Psychological Statistics, New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1955.

43

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The problem of this study was an analysis of the

relationships between performances on certain admissions

measures and academic achievement of students in master's

degree programs in music education. The study was based on

an observed need to make an accurate early assessment of a

student's potential academic success in such a degree pro-

gram. As an aid in making this assessment it has become

common practice for schools and departments of music to

administer certain admissions measures to entering master's

degree music education students.

For a number of years at North Texas State University a

battery of admissions measures has been given to entering

master's degree music education students. Although grades

and scores for these admissions measures had been recorded

and filed, no effort had yet been made to determine the

relationships between these measures and the levels of

subsequent academic success of the students. It seemed

important, then, to undertake an analysis of such

relationships as an aid in determining which of the measures

should continue to be used in counseling graduate music

education students. It was felt that the results of such a

45

study could prove generally valuable to other graduate

schools and departments of music, since the nature of most

of the measures does not limit their use to North Texas

State University.

The stated purposes of this study were

1. To determine the strength of relationships between

scores on each measure and the academic achieve-

ment of master's degree music education students

at North Texas State University.

2. To determine the strength of the relationship

between the final grades in Music 528 and the

academic achievement of master's degree music

education students at North Texas State Univer-

sity.

3. To determine which combinations of admissions

measures best predict the academic achievement of

master's degree music education students at North

Texas State University.

Summary of Methods and Procedures

The standardized tests and proficiency examinations

used in this study were administered during the time a

student was enrolled in Music 528, Admission Seminar.

Administration of the measures was under the direct super-

vision of the instructor of Music 528. The population

consisted of 128 students who received all of their credit

46

toward the degree of Master of Music Education or Master of

Music in Music Education between May, 1968 and May, 1978 and

who had taken all admissions measures.

Three hypotheses were formulated to carry out the

purposes of the study. Two of the hypotheses were for-

mulated to predict the relationships between scores and

grades on individual admissions measures and the academic

achievement of the students involved. The third hypothesis

was formulated to predict the relationship between the

entire battery of admissions measures and the academic

achievement of the students.

The battery of admissions measures included the fol-

lowing standardized tests: The Seashore Measures of Musical

Talent, Revised Edition: subtests for the Sense of Pitch,

the Sense of Rhythm, and Tonal Memory; The Drake Musical

Aptitude Test: subtests A and B for Musical Memory and A and

B for Rhythm; The Gordon Index of Musical Insight, Form Ba;

Q t i s Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests, New Edition:

G a m m a Form Em; The Nelson-Denny Reading Test: Form A: sub-

tests for Vocabulary, Paragraph Comprehension, and Reading

Speed; and The Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey. Also

included in the battery were locally developed proficiency

examinations in theory fundamentals, aural perception,

sight-singing and English usage. One other measure, the

final grade in Music 528, Admission Seminar, was also a part

of the battery of admissions measures. The overall master's

47

degree grade point average was used as the measure of aca-

demic achievement.

Hypothesis One stated that there would be a significant

positive relationship between scores on each measure and the

grade point average of master's degree music education

students. Hypothesis Two stated that there would be a

significant positive relationship between the final grade in

Music 528 and the grade point average of master's degree

music education students. These hypotheses were tested by

obtaining Pearson product-moment coefficients between each

of the admissions measures and the grade point averages of

the students involved. The coefficients obtained were

checked for significance of the .05 level of significance.

The multiple correlation technique was used to test Hypothe-

sis Three, which stated that a significant multiple correla-

tion could be derived from the several admissions measures

and the grade point average of master's degree music educa-

tion students. The obtained multiple R was checked for

significance at the .05 level of significance.

Review of the Findings

Each purpose of the study, with its related hypothesis

was considered in Chapter IV. Correlation coefficients for

Hypotheses One and Two are presented in Tables I and II.

Acceptance or rejection of the hypotheses was determined by

the .05 level of significance for each correlation coef-

ficient .

48

The multiple R for Hypothesis Three is presented in

Table III. Acceptance or rejection of the hypothesis was

determined by the .05 level of significance.

The stepwise regression table for purpose three is

shown in Table IV. No hypothesis was stated. The cut-off

point for determining the best predictors of grade point

average was placed after Step One, involving the final

grades in Music 528, Admission Seminar. The rationale for

termination at that point was that after Step One the degree

of increase in the size of the multiple R was not signifi-

cantly affected by any of the additional single measures.

The results of the statistical analysis are summarized

as follows:

1. The scores on ten of the measures used in the

battery of admissions measures were found to correlate

significantly with the grade point averages of the students

involved. These measures were the Seashore Measures oj[

Musical Talent: subtest for Rhythm; The Drake Musical

Aptitude Test; subtest A for Musical Memory; The Otis Quick-

Scoring Mental Ability Tests; the subtests for Vocabulary,

Paragraph Comprehension and Reading Speed of The Nelson-

Denny Reading Test; the Restraint factor of the

Gui1ford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey: and locally developed

proficiency examinations in theory fundamentals, aural

perception and sight-singing.

49

2. The final grades in Music 528, Admission Seminar,

were found to correlate significantly with the grade point

averages of the students involved in the study.

3. The multiple correlation derived from the twenty-

seven admissions measures and the grade point averages of

the students involved was found to be significant at better

than the .001 level. The multiple R square (variance) was

found to be .4177.

4. The stepwise multiple regression revealed that no

significant increase in the size of the multiple R was found

after Step One, which involved the final grades in Music

528, Admission Seminar.

Conclusions

The following conclusions may be drawn from the find-

ings of this study:

1. Since scores on the ten tests cited in the Review

of the Findings were found to correlate significantly with

the grade point averages of the students involved, it may be

concluded that there is a direct positive relationship

between the traits and abilities measured by these tests and

academic achievement in a degree program leading to a

master's degree in music education at North Texas State

University.

2. The fact that a significant correlation was found

between final grades in Music 528, Admission Seminar, and

50

the grade point averages of the students involved indicates

that the ability to meet successfully the requirements of

this course has a significant positive relationship to

academic achievement in a degree program leading to a

master's degree in music education at North Texas State

University.

3. Since the multiple correlation between the twenty-

seven admissions measures and the grade point averages of

the students involved was found to be significant, it may be

concluded that there is a direct positive relationship

between the traits and abilities, as measured together in

this battery, and academic achievement in a degree program

leading to a master's degree in music education at North

Texas State University. However, it should be noted that

this correlation appears to have been influenced positively

by only ten of the measures.

4. The purpose of the stepwise multiple regression was

to determine which combinations of admissions measures best

predict the academic success of the master's degree music

education students at North Texas State University. Since

the stepwise multiple regression procedure revealed no

significant increase in the size of the multiple R after

Step One, final grades in Music 528, it may be concluded

that academic achievement in a degree program leading to a

master's degree in music education at North Texas State

University may best be predicted by the ability to perform

51

well in Music 528, Admission Seminar. It is obvious that

the final grade in Music 528 is the predominant factor in

predicting acadmemic success in a master's degree music

education program, and that no other single measure is as

efficient in such prediction. It should be noted, however,

that taken collectively, scores on the entire battery do

seem to improve predictability.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are derived from the

findings of this study:

1. It was found that a significant correlation

existed between final grades in Music 528, Admission Semi-

nar, and the grade point averages of the students involved

in the present study. The stepwise multiple regression

procedure also identified final grades in Music 528 as the

best predictor of academic success in a master's degree

music education program at North Texas State University.

There appears to be a parallel between the academic chal-

lenge of Music 528, Admission Seminar, and that of

subsequent courses in a program leading to a master's degree

in music education at North Texas State University, thus

accounting for the predictability of the final grades in

this course with respect to the grade point averages. It is

recommended, therefore, that the final grade in Music 528,

Admission Seminar, continued to be emphasized in attempting

52

to predict the academic success of students entering a degree

program leading to a master's degree in music education at

North Texas State University.

2. It is likely that each of the several measures

employed in the admissions battery is more closely related

to certain courses in the graduate music education program

than to other dissimilar courses. An investigation of

these differentiated relationships might provide a useful

basis for a more precise assessment and possible utlization

of the measures in the admissions battery.

3. The literature reviewed revealed some studies in

which significant positive relationships were reported

between undergraduate grade point averages and academic

success in a master's degree program. It is therefore

recommended that relationships be investigated between the

undergraduate grade point averages, either singly or in

combination with the present battery of admissions measures,

and academic success in a degree program leading to a

master's degree in music education at North Texas State

University.

4. The present study, along with others cited in the

review of related literature, has been concerned only with

statistical relationships between predictive measures and

grade point averages, with no assurance that the grade point

average itself is related to subsequent performance in the

field of music education. It is recommended, therefore,

53

that a study be conducted which investigates both the

admissions measures used in the present study and the

grade point averages as predictions of performance as

a practicing music educator.

5. The present study has been concerned only with

students who have received a master's degree in music

education at North Texas State University. Many students,

however, begin the program leading to this degree, but do

not complete it. It is therefore recommended that an

investigation of factors related to failure to complete such

a program be conducted.

6. The stepwise multiple correlation procedure re-

vealed that the addition of scores on other admissions

measures to the grades in Music 528, Admission Seminar, did

not significantly increase the size of the multiple cor-

relation. The cumulative effect of ten of the measures

which, singly, were significantly correlated with academic

achievement, however, could be found to provide some im-

proved predictability. In addition, the continued use of

several of these measures might be justified as a basis for

personal and academic counseling with particular respect to

specific courses or areas within the program.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Denny, E. C. and M. J. Nelson, The Nelson-Denny Reading Test, Form A, revised by James I. Brown, Boston, Houghton-MiTflin, Co., 1960.

2. Drake, R. M., The Drake Musical Aptitude Tests, Chicago, 111., Science Research Associates^ 1954-57^

3. Gordon, Roderick D., The Gordon Index of Musical In-sight, Form Ba, Denton, Texas, North Texas State University Press, 1960.

4. Guilford, J. P., and Wayne S. Zimmerman, The Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey, Beverly Hills, California, Sheridan Supply Co.194j-55.

5. Lewis, D., Joseph G. Saetveit, and Carl E. Seashore, The Seashore Measures of Musical Talents, Revised Edition, New York, Psychological Corp., 1919-60.

6. Otis, Arthur S., The Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests, New Edition, Form Em, Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York, World Book., 1954.

54

APPENDIX A

EVALUATION FORM

55

56

EVALUATION FORM

For Masters Degree Candidates in Music Education

Date

TO: (Faculty member)

RE# : ~ (Student)

—Who is enrolled this semester in your

FROM: Instructor, Music 528, Admissions Seminar

One of the objectives of Music 528 is to inform the new student, at the end of his first semester on campus, about his/her chances for success in a masters degree program in Music Education. A portion of this decision is based on how the student is faring in other work taken in the semester.

Will you; please give me your evaluation of the student named above.

Likely grade for the semester: A B C D (Circle one)

Comments:

N.B. If you would rather talk than write, please drop my office or call me. Please remit this form as soon as convenient after you have received it.

APPENDIX B

PROFICIENCY EXAMINATIONS

57

58

Date Master_of Music Education Proficiency Examination

Theory Fundamentals Ml-71

_1. Complete the statements

1. Five sharps is the major key signature of 2. Two sharps is the minor key signature of 3. Five flate is the minor key signature of

• The names of the scale steps are

Name

9, The relative minor key of A major is 10. The relative major key of E flat minor 11. The parallel key to 6 minor is 12. The II chord normally progresses to 13. The deceptive cadence has the chord

background 14. The Picardy third in A minor is 15. The V? chord in E major is spelled 16. The enharmonic of d# is 17. A perfect fifth above b flat is 18. A major sixth below f# is 19. A diminished fifth below g is 20. An augmented second above e is

is

TONIC SUPERTONIC

II. Draw conventional right hand diagrams of the following conductor1 s beats (the two-beat is shown as an illustration)

two-beat three-beat four-beat

59 TF-M1-71 Page 2

III. Write in the correct time signatures

1 y D * P f r i r > i j #

P I ~ ~ ~ f — -p—::j

t r I 1 4 = - t f 3 ^ — * —

ft £ 3 H ; r l q i r Ji

5-ft

I" f i 2-

IV. Rewrite this melody in either treble or "bass clef whichever \ is more logical

If & f r

V. Place on the piano staff the indicated key signatures

£ -

£ i & f* <

3 E 3:

TF-IQ-71 P&ge 3 60

VI, Identify the keys of the following phrases 1. Key of

X - t j \ t— I i r ? ""n—v r#

* 4 [j^J———J J J — i- m • bj- ^ •" ^

—

3 r r r Kr r £ 2. Key of £

£ z±:

VII. Analyse the harmony by Roman numerals

£

1 o:# ^ 3 S £

t r f f

- * —

» t

H T

» y = 4

t

r 1 r r r r

VII. Put in the needed accidentals for the following scales

oL D# minor, melodic form I- G flat major — ^

— » Q b » * 4L | l #M J —« • 0 —

. Write from memory"m treble clef the melody of in the key of IX

61

page 1.

Graduate Theory Examination (Education) Ml 72 Aural Perception

Name AURAL PERCEPTION

Date

.1. Rhythmic

, A. Indicate the time signatures, 2/4, 3/4, 4/4, or 6/8, whichever is appropriate for the following melodies:

1) 2) 3) 4) 5)

B. Is the rhythm played correctly or incorrectly? Encircle your answer.

1.4 > —p J -

> - JJ J J. j + y 1

2. 3 J J J J-

correct incorrect

_correct "incorrect

3. 4 J J J * • J 1 11

k 1" II correct incorrect

4.__ T f & j o J l U 11J _correct

"incorrect

f J * J | J > - V — t f ^correct "incorrect

name:

62

page 2

II. Harmonic In the following chords, one note will be played incorrectly. Underline soprano, alto, tenor, or bass, whichever voice contains the incorrect note,-

1. 2. 3. K. 5.

=fl -BOp< snp, sopi aop,

f -eL

altu D al U al to MMI

r alto

tenor

alto

teno tenor

tenor & tenor ii £ to

£ bass bast 7P bass f bass Jet tit

III. Melodic. Encircle the notes played incorrectly.

fczfa

2 J2Z 32

O- 2z:

b = t

H p s 3 £ )r~fr £

bJ 1*=

-*~D

£ .S_L_ P *=t

-€S*r- I

£ -£>-

- e -

name:

63

page 3

IV. Encircle the notes played incorrectly.

J J g J p [• r ?

J j j J I? m 5

yjRj, d i r

-0-

O

fck £ £ ri P r r i <S

f

APPENDIX C

DATA COLLECTION FORM

6

65

JNf AMiiJ ssF DEGREE DATE 528 (DATE)

GPA

Seashore Drake Form A Form B

P R TM .MM R MM ; R

Nel-Den Prof. Exam —. Rdg GI- Aur

Ot. Voe Par Sp. MI Eng:Th -..Per SS .528

Guilford-Zimmerman

Gen. Act.

Restr.

Asc.

Soc.

Emot. Sta.

Obj.

Fr.

Thtflns

Per. Rel.

M-F

APPENDIX D

RAW DATA

66

67

eSissfi xSua

IWIO

ds Spa uaa-I8M

•rea uaa-ISM

OOA uaa-ISN

sno

a a a reja

ww a a ^ a

a v e^ja

ww v a re-ia

WI 8J:oqsBes

a aaoqsBas

a aaoqseeg

0 0 0 0 0 ^ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ 0 0 0 0 0 0 VO ONVO O-COCOO-C O-COCOCOONCOC*- ON CO CO o-i>-cocovDr--o-coo-

0-00"- ON OMN CMA-d-CO hTN-d-ON-d-CO «-N CO 00 L oo-d-O -4-v£> I>lA >-vO O C -ONONONONONCMrAcOOONC -'-tA'-O ONKV£> t— CM o -J

4-MlSOOMAOM^'- C\JcOlAONN,I>-NcOVDCO-4-0O-d-I>--d--4--d-r •4-N">OJVOCV-ONOnoOONCOIACOONIAOOON«— OJON-4"[>-IAONCO-J -4" CO

r J-O-r- ON CO -4"ONOnv£> ca UMTNr- lf\ O-«- l>- IA«- lAC oO C>-cOO rA <— «— CVJ [>- ON OMD O O C'v-lAIAON•4~ONlAC\JU"-4~OJO -d"1^ -cf"V£> o- >—

ON-d-C\J'-0-C--4-ONON'-OtAt>-'r-[>-C.4-lAO -4--4-VX5 OJ -d-lA-d-00 r— K\r- ONONONtNONONtA X) OnCTnCVJ CO l>--4"VD tAK"\fAv£>VO lAC'-D-C

J-CUlAI>-cON>,ON'-I>-0[>-OI>-OOcOOOlACOOoOOlAlAINtA~t-Q,— OOJ<-C\JC\J(M(M<\JOJ<-C\JC\JIA.-'-C\JO<M'— CM «— CVI '— CXj CVI

OJ NMfNO fA CO IA OJ v£> OJ 00 -4"O C tAO O O OnIAOnOnO O-IAC-IA \D CO -4" KN <— IAIACO ONVO ON ON-4"VO CO IA fA CN -4" CO -4" -4-O-vO ON CO CO

c0tNC\)c0C0UMf\O-C\J CTNVD r-ONOOOJcOCOcOC -lAOJ LT\v£> O 0s- CO CO vx> IA OJ CO C- On On -d" On On 0s- -d" On CO On CO VO CO -4" On OnvO CO CO VO VO

tAONCO ON >- VO «— -4" ONCO *— K>IA0OON»- CO*- «— -4" C\J CO -4" lAcO «— t— o VD «- IAOnvjD 00 rAcO CJ -4"«— CO 'AlACM LTNOJ 00 *— C>-t>-ON«— vO

J-CO'- -d-co fAlC\-4-C0N-4"O «- lA-d"lN-d--4-cOI>-0 On -4" -4"VO D- O CIA(\1 t>- IAv£> On IAvD v£> t>- IA CVJ CO lAvO lAC «-COlAC IAlA-4*C\JLr\

ON"— ON IA CO ONOn ON LCN ON ONIA«— lALCNCVj LT\ON1AON1AONONONONC\J C\J ONVD OJ CO O- ON CN ON CO ONONCOVOCOCOIACO OncOONCO ONO OnONLTNIA

ONONrAOcOiAOONOLrNONGOONONOONONONONrAOfAONfAONCNON ONONCn-ONC\J1AONIAONIAONC\JK>ONONON'— ON*— C ONC -OND-ONfAON

CO -4"0 ONO-D VOVO OJ CO CVJ -4"V£> -d-CN-C - OOVO COC -IN MD-d-oOOJ IfNcOVO OnC -[>-OnOnOnOnOncO ON 00 O-O-OOMDOnOnC O-GnOncOVOOn

vas

q.oafqtiS

O «— I>- O-VO CO LT\LT\ OJ O-O- CVJ -4--LT\0-00 *— OJ O O O- -4" -4"00 K> t~ -4~0 f\j -4" CO 0O~vX)K>C-4"t>-lAC\ivD LTNVD CO -4" C\J tTNvD K>MD • • # • • # # • # • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••

- OJ N"> -4" LTNVD O- CO ON O OJ N"*\ LTNVO O- <X) ON O OJ K -IAVO O-t— t— i— *— r— r— r— *— OJOJOJOJOJOJOJOJ

68

_ I I A O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a S ' e s f l x S u g J c o o - C ^ - O - o c o c ^ O C ^ - C ^ C ^ O C O C ^ c o o o c o c n i n v d o o o o c o c ^ - o m ^ C ^

i -d"CO o c o o j i r s o O O N O ^ O J C ^ N > - d " - = t C N - d " ( \ J ONCO I A - 4 " I W I O I I A C N J - I N C ^ V X ) r ^ N ^ O N O N O M A [ > - C ^ K > * - c o c o O M ^ t > - C ^ C O N ^ I T W D M D

I LT\C\J O V D - d " < M O O t\J (\JVX3 CO » - C O C ^ - d ^ C ^ O O L T N V O - d " - d - K ^ 0 O U 5 O W d g S p a u e a ~ I 8 M 1 c o c o c o u M j r \ \ D o o v o v D o o v D f ^ o j i r \ ^ - i > - c o o N a N O N O N c o ' - f ^ O N c r N O -

r - J - J - J - V D V O O n C N O O c \ j D - - j - C O o IM T M A O O N 4 - ' - V I ) ( \ l -

IT\ ON J - O M N CM CO ON -4" CVI -d"VO O v£> 0 0 CO O ITS O - C M A » - U M > - ON

1 «— LTnOJ L f N - d " 0 l A v n C\j I A C 0 O N - 4 " « - 0 - C " - 0 0 - ^ O N C ^ O J - d " O J C ? \ | > - t r \ c O 0 0 A U e Q - T S N I v o o N C O v £ > < < 0 [ > - V O K > 0 ' N O N C M \ £ > C , - f A ' - U ' , \ c O C - % C M ^ a N O N l A U M r \ v £ ) C O

S T a b

a a I

W W g e ^ a a I

a V I

W W V s ^ t e - i a

W 1 8 J 0 q S B 8 S ' I

a e j o q s - e e g I

d e a o x i s ^ a s 1 I

V d O I

K > f N O j L r \ o ^ o u c o o N i r \ o j v o h ^ o o c o o n O J * » o o n - 4 * r A o n o j O I N T - r - p J C \ j ^ K > < \ J r - f - ^ < \ } O 0 J r - g t - r N r N K ^ K ^ C \ J 0 j N ^ r - - r - - < \ J ( \ ] 0 J

O J N ^ O O J O N r A * — O ^ ^ ^ ^ C T N O J O N O U O J f A QN V D K M A K M N ON EN 0 0 CN O n 0 0 O f A C N -4" -4" O n -4"VID *— CM O n 0 0 O n 0 0 I N t N OJ L f M f N c O CN

O D - O - K ^ O a D O N N ^ l T N f ^ C N C ^ K ^ O I N 0 0 O n <\j C\J O N K > C O CO O CO OJ C O G n L A C O C O C O O N O O O N O O Q N V D «— 0 0 -4"V£> C N C ^ O N O N Q N C O C O C U C O O O O N

ON*-" V D O - 4 " C N t - O - - 4 " N ^ 0 0 < - 0 0 0 0 K M A G N C O I ^ V O CN ON -4" -4" -4" I N ON O J i r N N ^ r - v D ^ t O ^ - V O ' - C V O t N f M r A l A C N C C ) - 4 " V O K > 0 0 O N V D « - KN,

C v - I N - 4 - l s r M N c O c O 4 * 0 0 O r ^ O O J C ^ ^ l N U " N r A O N K N \ C s \ O N - 4 ~ O J L r \ N ^ C N -v£> 0 0 L f \ C 0 V £ > L f \ ON LT\ O n LfNVD K > « 4 " 0 OJ K > 0 N C 0 C N O O C M N C V J - 4 " O n ON CO

IN- ON OJ ON ON L0\ ON ON Q n OJ ON OJ LT\ ON ON OJ OJ Q \ ON ON ON OJ L f \ LT\ ON ON ON L r \ O N l A O N O N C O O N O N O N ( N a N [ N C O O N O N l N [ N a N O N O N O N l N C O C O O N O N O N

' - o o L T N C O O N O t r N O O O N O ^ f ^ o o f A O O O N L r M r N K ^ o N N ^ r A KD O N O N L r N v O N O N O N O N l A O N O N O N O N L P s O O N O N I N O N O N O N L T M A I N O N I N I N

LT\VO OJ -4~ -4~ { N OJ v O - 4 " O J ^ D V D O N O OJ CO O N - 4 * 0 J L A O N - 4 " O N - 4 " - 4 ~ ON -4~ CO ON QNCO 0 0 I N ON ON 0 0 ON ON ON O N V D O N V O ON o o L f \ -4" ON CO ON CO 0 0 ON CO

O O T— K \ LfNVD L T N K ^ O O O V D « - O a N - 4 " - 4 " V D 0 < — O J O J O J O O J O O O N O O O O O I N V D LTMNVT) LTNCNVD - 4 " M 3 OJ LT\ OJ V D O M5 ON O C N t A O LT\

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

„ I c o a > 0 * - CM r A - d " L T N v D C ^ c o O N O ' Q - O S C q t l S 1 | OJ OJ f A K > K M ^ K M ^ N ^ K > N > K > - d "

OJ N > , - d - U A v £ > [ > - O O O N O ' - C \ J N ^ ^ t -- j - - 4 - j - J - - 4 - -4" i r \ i f \ t r \ i f \ m

69

I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U - N O O O O O O O O 83l2Sfl I CTnOCNO-C C co D-CO OM>- CTNVD COCO C^ooo CO I>-1>-0-00 OCO l>-

IWIQ I o CO U"\v£> 1— On VD LT\ ONV£> CTn <\J l>--d" <\! O <\J LT\VD CcO -d"£> OO OJ CO CM CO CT\N~NC0C0V£> 0s- ON CO - l lfN t-O-D-cO O-VO O ONCO

I J-VDcO-d"tNN>ON<\J CXJcOcOO-ONN oO-d-OfAINcOCOCM O O OVDO dc; Spa U9Q-X8N I D-v£> O-mo-NfA-d-MDOO OnC J-GnoOcO- -OncO OnoO IX\cO C^lAO-O

uea-ieM I hAOJ*—COONCOC\JV£>V£>COCMCMO -d~(\Jc0C cDI>-C\lCN-O-4"-ct-O,~-<^ r- 00 <\J LA On O IAoO Cv-LAcOLAKNi*-00-3-*-OONONOOcO[>-CNC CMON

OOA uea-I0M CO <— CO OnCMOOC CMN COCO -3" -3~LT\vO LA LA -4~ rA 00 LT\C *— -4-ON-4-rAONVX>VD ONVQ C\J ONO O CM C?\ -4" O- ON LA Q\KD VO O- LA ON

SJ10

•4" K>00 CM LT\ LfWD OO O (^O O 00 OJ O OOVD LAK><- K cO QK\r-(\!K\0JO^^fV.,r"r-O(>^^r-ir,'A^^fAOfVl(M,-fVJ

I [NONKNiC^O-ONONKN^CMCMOl'AOON-cfCMOONCVOOlA'-Ol'AONON JJ g 02[BJQ I ^CO'- OJ v/} oO ON LAMD CM O-LTNt— -ci" ON CM «—covdin-O-ONO^ ru ON CO

I VOcOcOC\JO-U^(\jt>-fAO^O<MO^ - 4 " t N V O hA LA LA Lf\ 00 CM hA WH 9 I O C O c O M O O n O n v £ > O n o O C O LAoovD 00 O-CN-d"-4-00 O n O n O n o O 00 CO LAoO

I I^o D-ONrA-4~cO CNCO^ONO^- ONONrA-4-ONrAoO £>-<— <\] - - ONON JJ Y 8 3 f e j [ Q I O - C O ^ - V D - 4 - v o o - K N t < — I > - V O * — L A L A V O C O O N T A E > - [ > - C M O - 4 - C ^ C O K > \ < - - -

1 [ N C O I N ^ I N O O - K A V D - 4 " K M > - O r - - 4 " [ > - O V D - 4 - C O O N - 4 - C M v r > O N £ N l s A Y 0 3 f 6 J [ Q 1 C O L A v X ) M O o O 1*A C M 00 -4" 1 > - M 0 O L A C \ J L A f A r A - 4 " [ N - 4 ~ O N [ N - - 4 " -4" O - K ^ \ V D

IO N O N L A O N O N O N Q N O N L A O N * — O N C M O N L A C M * — L A < — O N L A C M O O N O N O N

ON OnCO (^<^0(^000 ONVD ONCN ONOOVD INVO CO O ONOO ONO ONONON

I O O O I A O ^ I A O O ON rAONCOoO O LAcO ONOCMACN^O^OO 3 0«IOl[ST?0S I ONC ONLAONl>-LAaNONCM>-ONC\J CM CMACM K> O> CMA OM>-OM>-ON ON

I ON C M O N LA O N C M o O O n O N -4~0 C O D - M O ^ O OMNVOVDVOU) C M O C M O N O N O N C N C ^ O N O N M D V D O N On C N O O - 4 " M D t > - O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N U 3 O N O N

VdS

OODlAO'-OfMN^ON'-^M^OCv-LP\0-d-'0>-d"0'-ivfM^0JOVOlA K N C O C O K > C v - 0 - 0 - d " L f M ^ G M ^ \ - d - ' — O N l A L r N f M O - O " — N ^ M D V O 1>- K M > -• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • A *

KN1rAKN1fyA KNiKNlK>rA AKNli

srNfAN NrMAr-A - "tsr>rA ArAN ivAN

1 LAvD C CO ONO <- CM fA-4"LAvX) O-CO ON O *— <"M hA- LAvO [>-00 ON O q.0 0 L q.Ug | LTMA LA IALAVOVOVD VDVOVO VOVD MO VO O- O- O- O-O-O-C^C^OC^CO

00

70

aSiesn iSua

IWIQ

dg Spa uaa-T9M

j B d u a a - i e M

ooA uea-T8N

SJ10

a a

ww a B-^eaa

a v e ^ a

WW V a^ps-ia

WJi 0JOHSB0S

a ejcons^ag

a e«ioxis^esf

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o INOnCNININOnINoO (NCNINVOvD IN On (NcO D-v£> O-VD CO [NINONCO CO

"OnOJ rA -3~ -3~LT\cO OO -4~tN LA O tf\v£> -d"-d"N>VDVD -d"VO OJv£) IAOnOJ -JrO\CO OJ LT\l>--d-00 N iVD [NOD -N VJDOOVD KMNCNOJ

OOLT\oOGNOJ-j-CN'--^OJOO -4" 00 rAOOINC^OJONOvX>COlAOLf"N ONONON-4"VD O ONONlNcOlNlN-ct-ONKMNCNONf AvD -4"INVO ONCOtAON

OJ K> O IN OJ IN OJ IA O OJ OJ OJ -^-^INCO INCNJ IN -4-JNV£> «- C30 LAv£> O-^foO *— On 00 CM^INCN LT\cO rAcO On LA CO -4" IN CO On CN -4" On

K>0CTN-4"O^— I N O ^ M LTsrA- OO -3" OJ 00 JNKNVD 00 C rA-ct--d" ON ON LA CO LAONONONINCO OJ N oo N -4"COO>-3~00*-COVD ON CO K>00

qnC^t- K OJ K> ON ON -3-KD T-t-c^LrNfAr-ONOJOlA^O^ONOOCrN oj <- hAoj rA<\j c\j cnj cm rAOj n>oj oj oj t- k\<\j t - o j r - r - k^oj *- r- c\j

EN hAUD ONlAhAONOULAONONfAO^D ONV£> ON ON*- OJLAtNONOJLAOOJ CVJirNC^ONtAON foOlA-^-^rrAO-CN^-END-oOO O-LAvX) CNON-4~OJ EN

C\jmC\JvOrAO.oOK>OJC\l K N OO 0JOT~-^00JV0K>\C\JrAC\Jl>^ON^[>-OnOnOnINcO<—0000 ONONOO 00VO ON CO -3-C^ONlNoOONCOLf\*—cOoO-4"

00 NVX) -3" On OO On On Lf\ o *""" VD ON -4" -d~VO *— On IN O O -4~ On LA CN On KMNK CO O M A r - LAcO OV0 KYDVOVO OJ Qn OJ 00 00 VO VD ON- VOVX)

- INOO O -4" -4-K>K>lAtN-tf-O^MNlN-tf-N^OMNrAOcOvX) O MD LALAcO O ONOOOOOO«4-ONKMNtT\- hAoO K> LAvD CN OJ v£) K> LA -4"

ON ON ON LA ON*— LALAONONVsO ON Onv£> ONOnONOJOJONONONOJONONONOJ ON ON ON CO ON VO 00 00 ONONONONONONONONONLAENONONOMNONONONC-

hAONONrAOcOOONO^OOK>OOOoOOOOONOlAOOONLf\ O- ON ON CN ON OJ <y\r— ON[NONONCNONONON<\] ONONONONOMAONONONIA

OJ -4"VX)VX) INOJvD VD C\JvX> -4"VX> -d~- "OJ OONODOVDOJOOJINOJOOIN-OnoOONONC-ONONONONONCOONOOOO ONVO ONVJDVO ONONVD ON IN ON VD IN

VcK)

q.09pqn-'

*— OJ ONOO OJ vO O IN OJ LAOO O^OOJtN(NLT\OOONONOO r- '- IN VO CN C\J *-VD ONOJVDVO-^EN-^OO^ -3~(NOO VO LAVQ O ONLAVDMD • • • • • • • • • • • • • « • • • • • • • • • • • • •

OJ rA-4"lAvD cvoo ONO «- OJ hA-4"LAvO EN00 OnO *- OJ rA -d~ LAvjD IN00 OOOOOOOOOOOOoooOONONONONONONONONONONOOOOOOOOO

7 1

e S - e s f l i S u a

I M I D

d g S p a t t a a - l © N

j r e a u e a - i a M

O O A u e a - T 8 N

2 T 3 - 0

E g e^esa

W H a

a v

W N V a ^ J c a

W i e j o q s i g a s

a a a o n s e e g

a 9 J 0 i { S B 8 s

oooooo^ooooooooooooo O I > - O N C O D - O N C O C O O O C O O C ^ C O O O O - 0 0 O - C O C O £>-

K V X ) <\J K>VO L T \ 0 - 0 L T \ K N ^ - 4 - ^ O G N C \ J ' - I > - I A O vr> C30 -d" - 3 " \ D v£> -cf c\l -d~ - d - -4" ONVO O 0 0 t>- L f \ C ^ K>

0 0 - d ~ l A O O N O ONVO -3" O - m - j " -4" CO O 0 0 -d~ ONCO Gnv£> C N < \ l O N O N - 4 - O N O N O O O O O N L f N £ N c O D -

O - 3 - 0 n O C N < — C > < - - 0 0 C \ J - 4 - 0 - 0 0 ON C O * - O N O O I N - O C N K > 0 M > - - ^ - 4 - C 0 O J V O LT\V^> Q N C M A C N C ^ O O L T \ ^ M > -

J - O O O r " r - LAlfNcXD < \ J - 3 - O N O N O N O N O N N ~ \ L r \ O c O v l ) c O C ^ - 4 - L r \ l - r \ O N O O N ' - ' D - O N ON CO CO ON 0 0 CO 0 0

LT\ t— ^ f o o N ^ - d - - d - l f N C ^ < - ^ £ ) C O < \ J r - ITNOOVSD « - 0 0 ( \ J C \ J t ~ ( \ J C \ l C \ j f A O N O J K > y O O C \ j N ^ O J r - C \ i K > C \ J K ^ < \ J T^— *— t— *— x— r— r— r— Q t— r— r— t— t— t— r— r— i—

C N I > - N ^ C M A O N C \ i O C \ ] o O C \ j < \ l a N O N O N O J a N O M > - K > CM r ~ N ^ O M T N O N C ^ O O C N G M > - ! > - L r \ 0 - i r \ C \ j LTMNVD CM

C O N ^ O J O J v X J l T N C X l C M v ^ O V D C ^ C V i l N - C X J O J v D r v J O J O J o o o o l A O N D ^ O N C ^ - O M > - 0 O O - O M N O N O - O M N - V O V X ) O -

I A O N K W O ON CTN ON CO O N t T \ O N » - - c O c O - 4 " - 4 " < \ l o O O N - 4 -0 - K > * - K M f \ L f \ C \ J O - V O I A O O O ON CO ON O 0 0 N"\VO

^ t - ^ t c Q O N N M N N ^ O KNiCO CO O N l A C ^ K ^ ^ l - O - ^ - [ > - C O C N C ^ L A O - V O V O C O I A ' - i n L f \ O N ON COM2 O LAVD LT\

O N C V i O N O N O N C ^ O N l A O v J O N O N O N O N O N O N l A C V J l A O N C M C M > - O N ON ON ON ON CO IT\ ON ON ON ON ON ON CO EN CO O N I >

LT\C0 O N O N L r \ O N K M ^ O O l A L r \ O N O N O N O N O N L T N ^ O ON L r x c v J O N O N L T N O N C ^ o - c x j L f M r N O N a N O N a N a N i A C N O N O N

C ^ O M 3 I > - - d - t N . O J C ^ - d - ( \ l C \ i r U v O C \ J V O C O C \ J £ > - C \ l C \ j ONVO On D ^ o o ON 0 0 I A ON ON ON ON GN^D L T \ D - O N O N

L r s r - i f M A t ~ K > 0 J C V I l A - ^ 0 N - ^ L r \ O - ^ - ^ O n C \ J \D t -m a N ^ t - c ^ O N ( \ j L f M i M n o L T N r A L f w x * ONONVD KMTNMD

V c K )

«, I G N O « - CVJ K > - ^ L A V X ) l> -CO O N O O j N ^ - t f - l T W D CNCO q - o e C q n g I o « - » - ' - ' - ' - ' - ' - * - ' - ' - f U t v j o o c v j o j c \ j o j c v j a i

72

I I " " W Z - D

L A G Z ~ D

S T I U ^ Q I 2 - 0

Z ~ D

fqo Z-D

1 2 1 S ^ O R A A Z - D

O O S Z - D

O S V Z - D

A ^ S E A Z - D

W U 8 D Z - D

8 S £ O T S T I H

S I I T S - Q . Q S T S

D O J 0 < J T ^ J R I V

(\J K A O - - 4 " A D N"\CMLF\KNLFNI-D"N~\CO ITNVO N ^ O N - D - * — L A O N - D " K > C \ J U M A - D " O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

-4" K M T \ <\L -4" >— F ^ C O ( N 4 " 4 - L I " \ V £ > V £ > J " F ^ L A O O C M J " -CJ-F^CXJ N"MJ~\ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

V£> N ^ L A V D 0 - V X ) 0 0 C 0 I A 0 0 L A K N - D " C ^ V O C30 I T M A I A V X 5 TAVO VD O N ^ C O V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

K \ K M A . 4 - I R \ N > K > I R \ K V £ > I R N C O L A U M A O F M - D - ' - CO D - J - V £ > O O C - - F \ J V D O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C - O O O O O O O O O O O

J - K > K > N > V X ) N ^ N M N I A M D J - D W CO OJVD LTNO T N I A C N F M -D"VDVD CO K^NLTN O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

-D"V£> I T M A V T ) -J - -3"OO 0 - L F \ ^ I - V £ > I A - 3 " M D - D " « - V O K \ V O N"N -D"LA\X) ON FAVD O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

V £ » U ) V O L R \ K > - D - - 3 ' O O V O C O [ > - T R \ I R \ - D _ < \ ] -4"-D"VX> LPWJD OJ -4 * -3 *VO C^-VX) -CF O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

I A 0 O N"M>-TA KS U"N ON CO C \ C O LA CO -3-LALACMLF\LAC«».CM -4"K=CO I A C 0 O -O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

O - V O 0 0 VOV£> 0 0 I> - ON -D" -4"VD C*- -4" VO V£> O OOVD OOVO K>CO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' - O O O O O O

O - ON I A V D K > N " \ ! A C O D - V D O N U " \ I A I A C O - 4 " O C O -D~VO *— OJ VX> ON LA -D~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

O O O C O ' - ' - O F M ' - F \ J O ' - 0 < M O N F \ J O N O N O J O O ' R - Q O ' - ' - ' - ' - ' - ' - ' - ' - ' - ' - O ' - O O ' - ' - ' - '

'— f\J'— O On ON • r- T - T - r- O O

O O O O O O O O O O O O O U M N O O O O O O O 0 1 A O O O • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a

O I - O IFN«- K > I R \ I R \ « - I R \ O ' - L R \ O 0 J K M R \ I R \ I - C \ J T R \ ' - ' — - 3 - « - - D - R -

0 0 C N N ^ - C M > - C 0 L P \ O O O N N > I ^ M > - O N " M A - 3 " - 4 - [ N C 0 ONMDVD O O - O O KD -$• -3r 0 0 V£) !>- ONCO 0 M > - ^ 0 O-OO^VD AO O - C ^ O O ^ O I A ON I A I A ONVD C^V£>

. \£> 0OV£> O M A C \ J ONONVD C ^ - N V D C O V O O 00-D--D"VX> « - O LACO LA-D"VO I A P U T L ^ I C J O A Q J J I C O O I A O N O O O O O N O N O N C ^ C ^ O O O N C ^ O N O O O O O N V X J O - O N O O O - O N O - C O C O

„ I CM KN,-4-LAVOCN-CO O N O <\J F A - 4 - L A V O D - O O O N O N"N-4-TA\X> I N 3. O 0 L Q N . J | R - *— *— *— *— *— *— *— *— I— CM OJ CM CM CM C\J C\J CM

73

J-W z-o

z-d

s u u ^ q i Z-D

Z"D

pqo z-D

^oraa Z-D

oos z-0

osy Z-D

a^saa s-o

q.ov ueD z-D

8h£ oxsnn

Suxg-^qSTS

doae^ x"Bj:nv

pxxrvj Jtaoaqj,

^oapqng

VO<\JvX)lAN>- -(\JoO,sDVOLfM -d-N OJVDN COirNJ--d-lA-d-KNK>lACO o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

<\j LTS-d"-d"ir\-d"N>N~NVDVD N~N<— OJ lA-d"*— IAINIA'- fAtAiAoj -d"-d* CO o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

V D O O O N ^ O V O -d~v£> - d ~ 0 D - 1 > - - d - D - I A N"\ <— CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o

-d"\£> r A O J o - -d"VO O N C ^ C O - d - I A O J v O O - O J t>-CO O - ^ O -d - I A J - OJ I A -d" CO o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

-d"V£> -d-NMA-d--d_[NlACs-I>--d-«- •d--d-tAcOcOIA-d-fAKM>-d-vX> OJ O-o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

mc tA-d_-d-tAfAcOVDVI3vX>-d-tAfAOJlAcOCOV£) K> KN, -d"V£> VD O- tA IA O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

00 l A - d ' O - ' - [NfA-d"V£> I A I A I A C\J N"\ Q OJ -d"V£) K> OJ «vO, 00 I>- -d" I A -d" -4" O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o

V£> ONVO O-O -d-liMTMfM>-\r)v£) lACVI <-VD-d-ON<\jK~M>--d-!>-[>-tA[>-N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

O-oO INtNVOvX) LAO-VD 00 lAvO lAO^ OJ tAO-On-d"VDv£> IAVO lAtA O O O O O O O O O O O O O O * - O O O O O O O O O O O O * -

K>OVX> -d* CV -d"U3 KD v£> N O-d-LACNlA-d-O-C LfNONlAN lA O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

Ont-OJOOOON«-ONCN<\JOJO ON ON CO CTnOJOJI-CT\C\J«-CM-ONOJOJ O ' - ' — O ' - O ' - O O " - ' — ' - O O O O ' — O ' - ' - O ' — O ' - ' -

O O O O O O O O O I A O O O I A O O O O O O O O O O O O o • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • f t * * • LAJ-.d-iArAfA-d-fAiAJ-fA'-O'-'-'-iA'AiAfAfArA-d-LrN-d-LA-d-

-d-v£> O-oO VD ( ^ " - C 0 4 " ( ^ 0 ' A ( \ J t>- -d"tAv£) o c M A f A v D IAOn<- O On v£> CO O - D - O O V O CO VO On On CO t N ^ O 00 VD VD ONONONIAOOONCOC^-C^OO^D

O O N M 1 A < \ J l A O t A r A O N ' - C ^ K > O N O J f A a N D ^ c O ONCOCO IAOniAo -d" ONONONONONOOONOOCO ON ON ONVO ONOOCN-ONOONCN-ONONONC^IAONCO

CO O N O OJ r A - d " l A v O 0 - 0 0 O N O « - <M K > - d " l A v D 0 - 0 0 0 0 " — < M f A - d "

ojojN"\fAN~\tAiAN'MArAiAfA-d_-d--d_-d--d--d--d--d--d--d-iAtAiALAtA

74

i - K Z~D

W J9d Z~D

S U I J W I Z-D

•*5 Z-D

pqo z - d

^oraa z -D

oos Z-D

osv Z-D

j ^ s e g z - D .

10V ueo z -D

82^ otst iw

SuTS-q-iiSTS

d o a a j xejcnv

pur\£ ^ao8t [ s

^osCqn-^

tAvO fA-d"V£> *- -d-lAlA-d"C^fAtA[>-IAVO (AO lAvOvO -d"rAV£> lAlA-d" o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

fA-d**- ia«— (\jr\io-fAN'M^\-d"-d_<\J -d-tAvo rA-d-oovo o rAvo iaoj -d-o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

C^-fAvO rAOO OCO -d-O-VO O-VO U"\ LP\ O- li~\ G>VD CO VO LA O- CO CO LA LA 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

VD CO fAMD KMA[> -OC^tA-d 'CO ' - -d"LAV£> CMA -d" CO CO fA LT\ -d"VD lAoO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

-d"VD CM LT\-d-LA-d"CTnVD (M tA-d" l>A tAv£) ONCOfAtAlAI>-r_vX)vX)V£>N"M>-o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

K> On Oi -d" CVJ -d"VO o UMTS J - J " CO CO OMA fA IAV£> C\J VD VD IN <\J v£5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

I N f A O fAiAvovoiAiN-d--d--d-fA-d- iAv£>iA-d-K\v0v£) ' - -d"VD lAvoco o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

CO -d-fAlAIALAoO LAVD -d--d-lA\X> -d- lAIN VO Lf\V£> <\l -d-IAlA-d"lA O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

-d-\^> OMAvXicOVO I N U M A M N V C V D I A V D D-vnvO -d"LAlA IN -d"-d~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

oj o - d - o v D c o l s ' - 00 -d--d-cov£> oj o lavo rAco co-d-<\ lvoo-d"tA<\ l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ON<\JCTNC\J^cO<\lc^OC^<\JO'NCT-\C '-fAf\JcO'—*-<\]ONf\I O ' - O ' - O O ' - O ' - O ' - O O O ' - ' - ' - O ' - ' - ' - O ' -

O O O O O O O O O O O O O O L A O O O O L A I A O O I A O O O • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

C\J 4*0 LTNO LPs CO LAvO VO -4" O ^ O O CT\ VO CO VO VO IN- KVO D-CO CO CO CO CN IN CO CO IN CO LAlNvD CN D—COVD D^CMNLAcOcOvDtN

-4-VD i-0>OMAlAON4-(\IOM^«-lNfMOOO -^tNCOlAvO K>V£>v£) OJ 00 IN CTnCO CTnOO COO O OMN CTn CFn CO (NcO 0^ 0 cO CTn

ITWO I>-oO C^O OJ N -4"lAv£> O- CO ON O ^ D^OO QnO '~ LT\LT\ LT\ IT\ LTN KO M3 VO VD MD \ D v£> VO V£> VO I N CN CN CN IN- CN IN IN IN- CO CO

75

I ITNKMAITN -d" IAIA-d" tA lAvD CO l>-C\J CO LT\ OJ C\j ii~W Z~D I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I V£) LT\«- -4* LIMA LT\ CM OJ _d"-d" lf\-d" LT\ <\J V£> liMfNcO IAOJ i t \ o km^-4-

X9g ' I 8 d Z~D I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' - O O O

I C^OVOC -O OC^C VDOOUMAlfNC^O-VOOOIAON- CNC^OO-d'VUE -lA sxxxjq-qi z - 0 I o o o o ' - o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I O 00 «- vo -d"UMrVs£> CVOO UMAO-lfSOO Lf\-i-lf\00v£> O CM OnOVOVDVD Z~D I - o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o c - o o o o o o

1 VDCO ITS O ir\ lAliMA IT\ C\J UMAC -IAvD try- VD OJV01AOJ UMNCTnIAvD Cqo z - 9 I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I COVDVO ooo-d-lAvO J-v£>-d-l i-d--d-0OlA fvO CM>--4-0O ts%S q.otua z - s | o o o ' - o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I to,vO |>-lAO -d-CV-d-lAlA J-OJ 00 J"N>,VD-d"-d"-d-SOS Z-D I O O O O ' - O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

I <\J LfMNCOCOVOCOtfM K -d"*— ITMTMA -d" *— »— VD VD -4" LT\ lf\-d" 00 OSV Z~D I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

1 o -4"vO LT\O^Dt>-fA-d"COVD LTMAO-VX) v3 VO <J\\D 00 O- C tTMAvD On jq.ssa 2"D I • - o o o o ' - o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I i^k>o\ooo CM t --4-tf o lAu^^ -ooM^oo-d-l ^o^oo-d"< i X)Lr K lAvx> Q.0V U80 Z~D I O O O O ' - O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

^ w, r I ra OJ 0 OJ (\1 f\J ONOONOvOO'-«-CM OJ ONOJ oo 00 Q Z h 3 I s n H I ^ — o O ' - O ' - ' - ' - ' - ' - o o o o O ' - ' - ' - ' - O ' - O ' - ' - ' - o

IIAOOOOOOOOOIAOOOOOOIAOOOIAOOOOO • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o KM^v- CMlAr-lfNK^'-O'-tACMirNt-CM IT\<- fAOO K>K>LP\»—

^T V 1 T T | c\Jc>-'-ir\rv]Lr\o-;1-'-vooNO[>-oMi\ir\oirM:^<-cvJ<\Jcooa">Lr\^ ao J9J JVJ.XX\J I C-C^co O-CTnC-OOcO ONl>-VO O--d"OM>-Cv-C 0O C-OOOOVX) IT\D-MD CO

T r-mnr-r I vnco-d"0 OC -d-LfMAlAONON-d-OO-d"lT\OM^O-d"CM LT\tNMD CMvO OJ puiy; Aaoeqi | [>_cococ^cm^ocoon ctnmdonooom>-o 0"nv£>c oocooovo-4-

r, I OJ -4" Lf\VD [>-00 CTnO O-OO CTn O CV1 K -d*LT\\X) O-CO q.oeLqno' ] c o c o c o o o o o c o c o c o o M > O M > o a N ( > o ^ o o o o o o o o o o

7 6

IT\[>- -d*CM U"\ -d"00 CO VD <\Jlf\IAK>CO-d*IA<Mlf\-d"[>-i -H Z-Q I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I -d"«- -d"«- O lAJ-lTNJ-*- O lf\«- 00 (\J *- -d"V£> X 9 H J 8 d Z - 0 I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

1 UMfScOVO O I A - d - O V O OOVD OV-dr 2-0 I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I CO IAvD K t>-CO -d-LTWOVO -d" -d~U"\lAv£i VO -d-lT\LT\ Jii Z-D I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I VO CMv£> -d-VOVO NITWO CJNO -d"VOvO lALT\tAlA-4-(A Cqo z~£) I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I J-VD CO t>-lAV0 LfM>--d_-d"lfMr\LrN J--d"tAK>VX) •eqc; q.oui£ %-Q I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I -d* <\l VO O LT\ [>_ KNVO LT\ -d~ *- VD O- DVO O- CYJ C\J N"\ -d" 0 0S 2-D I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

I KN,CJ lf>OMA CO tACNVO LT\K> J-CO IAO f°*<M-d-K>iVD 3SV Z-D I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0

IIACO -d" -d" O VO CO -TV£> -d"VO CO -d-UTNO-cO 00 t NOVD O O O O ' - O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' - O

I CMvO IACPnOJ O Lf lA £) -d-vo N tfMAN C o -d"-d"VO

q.ov ue{) 2~0 I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

n-,r I oncm CM O\- *- O Ono CMOO CM OJ O CM CM OJ ONO «-W C b 3 T S n H I O ' - r - O ' —

I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a *

K>Lr\K>N-Mr\-d-t-oo cm lt\nak>*- t-T I *" - d - O i s - v o l A v r » o *- CO O L f M A o o C ^ O CO CM CT>vO aoaed I vocm o-coo>oo vo la - d ~ c o o o - d ~ v D c o o - v o c r > c o

„ I l A l A r A < \ l C M T \ « - V X > C ^ - O C O C O L A r A v O C ^ O CO - d " ON

p u n d A J 0 8 H I I O N O N C O O O O N O N C M A C O O O O N C M > - 0 [ > - O N O N C ^ O > C 7 N

„ „ „ I O n O * " CM - d - l A v O D - - C O CV\ O CM f A - d " L A v j D C ^ - c O q.0eLqng J 0 . ^^^^r_T_r_^_rMCM(\lcMc\jCMCMc\jcM

APPENDIX E

INTERCOERELATION S

77

78

WH vx>CTNfVJcO<MlAO'-"-< oOE>-(\l rADvX) CVJ O CM <- <M < 00 O tAcOcO O K\VD <- J-COINO < <\! CNIN CCMAcOVX) D» VOONOC W*- - OJ K"\D-0-V0 O «-' - O N M ^ - t o o o ^ ' - f A a i w o w i ^ a i ^ o o O ' - O ' - ' - O ' - ' -• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

i *— i i

a V e^-id

COlAOJoOVOO'A-4"l>-OMN--d-- l>-OMfMfMrN-d-N O OJ VO KLIA J-iAcO tf\O0 0 LI>iOI>-0JI>-<\JcOK>'— LT\r-OlAfMv£>N>OcMK>-d"«— CVDVD -d-OCM'-OU>tNO'N«-0<\Jv£>OOJ(MOJcOOCNK>cOCOCOOC Lr\U>>

' - O ' - O O O O O O O O ' - O O ' - O O O W O ' - O M M ' - O ' - O I - I I I I I

m V IQ

O-VD t—K>QVX)C\j C\j t— COVDVDCOVX)CO C O O VD -4* -4~ CN CO CVi CO LA IA ^O ' - I^O LA CO OJ r- i (\J C\J OM>-S>-lAcrxO KWCNlAt- INhAONOJ on O CO tN fA O LA O fAVO CO OM?rA<— <—V£> -4"0 K\D-0 LA LA-4" f>-CO fMO^K^oo4*r-i^(\j0JC\iaj'-'-rA(Mf\JO'"Or-OOOOOO *— | I I I I I I

Mi QjiQ-qs-eeS

trMTs- -Q K>i00C0 COJ K\fALT\0J CO CM(\i4-«-O^OOOfVlf-0JlA OVDOO K>LTN-4"LTNVJD IA0J LA LA O-O--4~ O C>.lf\r--C0lNJ,A-4~-4"-4"O>' (\JO(MO^(Vir- K -4"- C 00 Oj Cvo INlA^t-o 4-lA»- «— CTnOD-0 ^ < ^ i 0 N ^ 0 N ^ 0 0 0 0 0 ^ 0 0 T - 0 ' ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ' - ^ " 0 0 1 t ~ 1 I I I I

a aaoqsBeg

O-VDO -d- -C\lC\ivX)-4-OC0t- r~ CNO-CO <- -4' CVD CO VO *- VO OJ CT\C OnC^OO^ O'-^OfN-tiNOVDiA^OJINr-t-v^rAr-NAr-ON^^ MNO^JCNOO OVDVD'-INO ) hAO-VO O iX^LA^J-lAiNO tAO 0 0^1^ r"^ r"(\^0T~ 0 r " 0 0 0 0 ( M C \ J 0 < ~ r ' 0 0 0 r " 0 0 I I

O O VX> ITNVD LTvO-OM OO OtN-CMcO Lrx-d-o CMO 0> CTNVO CO -4"-4" OJ O GVO O CO lAVDvX) O KVX) KAOO r~ -4~cO 00 -4" LA LA00 KCO l>-0 O -4~ d 4"OiNOco4lN^ rAO-cO LT\j>-LAr-o*-O0U -4"VD CM r- CN-VO OJ LA*-_ TnnQ^aCf 0 0 0 - ~ 0 0 0 0 ^ - ' - T ~ 0 0 ' ~ 0 T - 0 0 C ) 0 * ~ - ' ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ^ -dau^otjo^ • # • • • • • • « • • • • • • • • • • « • * • • • • • •

<- I I ! I

VdQ

o O D-LTNO-COVQCOLAO O rAOJ -4~rAcO -4-lAcO COJ LAo vo OJ OJ t— O OJ C^o -4" K\ fA CO <— o C- -4" -4" *— -4" Lf \ O- CT\ rA VO -j-vO O MD VX> fA CTn O -4"£>-0J o rALAO-OO O-LAVD r- rAOO-<— OJ O !>-<— (\l [>-LT\-4~ VD VO OOr"O0Jf~O(M(Vi0j0Jr-r-(\]r-(\jlA'-OOOOOOOT"r"

s ft Ph Eh !

<3 ft

PIgffi <3 pq pq

0) 0) 0 £-* £-1 ?H <3 o o o ^ & & 0 0 <D 0 tQ tQ Q MM (Q I 0$ cd C$ Co Co CD CD *H I—I i—i (D0(l)^jH^}Li+>(D0

ft C O

ctf O Sh tio t J ft - P +> C Q H O CI$ 0 £ O h O O C O £ 0 > ft P h b Q p £-1 £ C O < J ?H H f t

05 fe 0 * H O J + > +> 3 £ £i CO ft C Q l f \ £ | C O o O O # r"3 • P ^ 0 0 0 t>> 0 0 CO O S P U x i 0 I P ft ft f n H - P O O K < ! C O K O ^ E H ^ S

| j | j | Q ,^_J H S to 0 U tiOCQCStS3tN3lS3lS3Es3CNjtS lS!tSj 0 H rC| 'H ? I I I I I I I I I I

CDCOtO^fifififiOlZi^SdJHEKilWgCDOOOCDCJJOOOO

79

e S h 2 S f i

i S u g

C\J t N r— CO VD t N N ^ i O M ^ C O £ N l ^ \ ( \ l O O N O C O V O LT\LT\VD CO r - LfN C\J Q (\J I N < ~ C X D V O t A [ N i r \ - 4 4 - - 4 [ N l A K \ l N O V D L r \ O N C O V D r A V O £ N - 4 On U M N KN K M A V D C M K ^ O O O ' - O O O - -4" O 0 0 CO LT\ -4" CO <M O O < ~ V D K \ * - c ^ O ^ - ^ - O O ' - O O O ^ O ^ O O O O O O ^ - O O O O O O O ' - O O

I i I i i I l l I I 1 I I I I

I W I D

K ^ o *— <\] CO - 4 < \ l K > C N <— VO 4 0 EN - 4 LT\ ~ j ~ r - K ^ f — v o *— 4 - K ^ O O ^ O ^ ' ~ - ^ a ^ t r ^ o l ^ - - 4 • 0 ^ > - 0 ^ < ^ J L ^ ^ - 4 - O C N • C \ j o O K , ^ O ^ O E ^ - a ^ a ^ « - ( N O * - ( N V O C ^ r A c\ i - j - O n N ^ O - 4 CO L f \ O - 4 On O CO <\l r - K ^ ^ o O L A C T n r - 0 r , r - < M 0 ^ « - ^ ^ M 0 0 - t l A ^ ( \ l 0 p - 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' - 0

I I I

a s S p a

x i e a - I S M

O t r \ r ~ I A V O - 4 i N i N C \ j c o o N O - 4 K ^ V D - 4 V D ( \ j t r \ O N O N t r \ - 4 < \ j c o < r - o o N - 4 V O O - I A O J K>C\J L A f A v o o n K > - 4 c o r A E N C O O - 4 < ~ C \ J C N - 4 VD I A I N C O OnCVi VO C\J CVJ *— !>- O ^ ENOO CN O CVi C\J ^ * " " • E N I A K ^ L f \ l T \ V D cm o o o cu *— f M c ^ - t - t o ^ J o ^ ^ ^ ^ o o o o o ^ o o o o

I I I

x e d

u e a - i e j t i

0 > 0 CO r A V O EN CO ( \ i <— cO O ONVO (NOO <\1 O - 4 V D CVI CO *"""" On J A -4~ CT\ 0 0 VO t N I A 4 " < \ J ITscO ON*~ 4 K ^ O f A ( N ^ O O - 4 CO O M N l N < \ J r - K ^ c \ J c O KNVO LACO < - ON CO O *""" VD - 4 V D 0 ( N 0 N 0 f - l M N 4 4 r A ( > - l A i r M N K M N ^ a } ( \ ! r - r - o ( \ i O ^ ^ I A VD O ^ ^ r - ^ f ^ i - t ^ t - O O ^ ' - ' - O O f V l O

I I

0 0 A

U 8 a - I 9 W

O n O C ^ K > C 0 ON f\J K > - d - O i ^ c O ' - c O V X > 0 ^ ' - C ^ f \ J O O O - C i - K " M > - 0 - C 0 On O O C ^ - ' A f A W O C ^ I N O O O V D O CNUA J - O - - d * O N O N V 0 O N « - O O N C ^ O « -O - D - v O -J-VO « - KAVO O n O VD - 4 ~ 0 -d -VDVD (\J O - O J o n v D - t O O ^ O l A 0 J r - o o W O ' - M 4 - O ^ K M A O K M A ' - 4 - O O O O " - ' - O ' - , - O • • • • • • • • • • • • * • + • • • • • • • • • • • • •

t I I

s i l O

l A C \ j - d - C \ J r - o . r - c O O - 4 ' - O J | > w C \ J O V D E N r A i r \ O N - 4 VO ON VO CN o CO r - V O O ^ O r " l N f M ^ 0 1 N 4 K M A 4 - C ^ o O - 4 V O CO t - i ^ r - j v ^ v D V D r - K > 0 0 N ^ V D - 4 K ^ O N C \ j o n O 0 ^ - 4 ~ C \ l 0\J r— q n C\i - 4 - 4 V 0 - 4 - 4 L T \ O J | > - ( \ j l > - K ^ c \ J <\j r— ( \ l 0 ^ 0 ^ r " 0 4 l A K M ^ t - ( \ j K > i r - f 0 \ r - 0 0 0 r " r ~ , ~ 0 c V ! 0

I I

a

a B - q e x a

CO N ^ V O I N CVJ - ^ r ~ o < — < M P U i N ^ C ^ c 0 O N C \ J ( \ l K \ O O - 4 C ) C 0 OnvD *— oO 0 0 VD LTN i f \ C\J C\J - 4 ~ O C U [ N . r - L f \ a \ - 4 - C \ J ( \ j LT\VD - 4 0 N t A C \ J LPs CO f A V D *— KN, N K A O ^ O N 4 0 C v i v O V O C V J f A O K > - 4 OnLT\*— <— -4"VD VD L fMT \K>«— vO 0 ^ ' - 0 ' - 0 0 0 i A f \ J ' - 0 ' - 0 0 0 0 0 f v i ^ a i r d r - 0 0 0 0 0

I I I i I I I I

P-. PH

< P-H

£ eh ;

CD ' fn <rj pq pq c , 3 CD CD CD CD V ) M M ^ CD CD CD C$ <D JH U JH U P

O 0 >

CD n

1 i—{ CD

PH OQ

Ih bO c6 T3

PH 03 CD £ hop c6 fa CQ

JZ>

PH - P O taO O $-i &cO< CD »H CVJ

Ph CO LTN d

0$ P CO

- P O t r~>

O p^

C J C O C O C Q Q p i P i p O ^ ^ I S i C ^

£-4 P CQ O

0) O CQ U rH +> O O PS <tj O Ctf ^ - H

fcO CD SH ^CQiS3 tS3 tS3 t>3 tS3bq tN l t>q tS3SS3 0 . H ^ I I I I I I I I I I

^ < J ^ ^ d ) C ! 5 d ) O C D O O O O c ! 5

o o S r Q ^ H O I ^ E h

CD I Ph S

M

80

o s y

Z - S

O N O i v O C N ^ - O f M O ^ r a o O G ^ ^ K D O \ i S \ o D i S \ ^ \ o a £><>{ KD IAVO r - 1 N O O - L A r A V D ^ ( ^ C M v j D V D C ^ C T N r A C M V O O -4~ C\j CO C^ CM LA LA <— v o IXNO ( N K ^ - t 4 - 4 - G N O M ^ i C O O M D r A ^ ^ C T \ r ' A O i > ~ « - - - v £ > K^LTNVD -4~ 0 r - r - 0 0 t - 0 ( ^ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' - l A ' - 0 W ^ ' - t - 0 0

I 1 I I I I I I

j q . e a a

Z ~ D

0 0 OnKNvO rA r - O C^CM CM C ^ r A t T \ 0 0 1 > - t > - C \ | OVDOUVOOO <M ^l-OJ ON r - L T N r - I A c t - K > C \ J a N ' - a N C N K M > - N ^ O ^ O - 4 - N ^ O V D 0 J 0 0 L A t A * - 0 0 0 0 C N ^ t 0 \ ^ - K M N < M * - " - 4 " 0 J r A C M O < V J O - 4 " - 4 " - 4 * O O K M > - 0 CM r A I N - K ^ l A - 0 0 0 ' " 0 0 ' - 0 0 0 0 ' - 0 ^ ^ 0 » - T - 0 ' ~ ^ ^ 0 f M f A ^ 0

I I I I

q . o y U 9 Q

Z ~ D

L A - 4 - - 4 " 0 C^-4-<M KNLT\[>~VD t n * - L A I A C O K M A O CM * - K ^ o - o CM l > C O ON K^-4~ r— O M ^ V D <J\-4- o o 0 ^ CO O VD -4" CO 0 0 O O ^ f \ J o O O LA CO O - I A v D Q ( \ J D - r ~ o O - ^ " ^ ^ O C > - ^ t < \ J C^OO 0\Q\'^r<D O O O N - t ^ O ' A - ^ ' - ^ r - O O i O O M O ^ ' - O - O O O - O O - O ' - hArACVj o o < - o

I I I

O T S T I M

-4" LA t— t— Q LP\ 0 CNJ hA *— -4~ C\J J - V D O V D O 0 l A t N t A C M M 3 0 V D * ~ * - £ > -a>CO { > - 0 O V D V D -4"CO .4--3*OO t - OOVD O O 4 " ^ * - CVi INCO ( N ^ 4 CM O O I A - 4 - 0 0 C\J IA-4~ CM -4" *— 4 " 4 " i A l A O J O O 4 " - 4 " K > 0 *"" K M > O - c 0 L A O ^ r ~ ° ^ O ^ O ^ - 4 - J s A r A 0 J r - K ^ K ^ a J O T ~ ' - " , ~ - r - " t - - c V l r ~ , ~ 0 ^ O

I I

9 U T S '

q . q s i s

C O ^ - C O - 4 - O M A < \ i C \ l o O C \ J C>\£) l A o O C T n - ^ O O KMNOOVO « - O E>CM CM £N O-CO CNJ 4 ( ^ l A O t A . 4 - 1 > - - 4 I A c v ^ o 0 0 VOOO O C h O ^ £ N 4 ( ^ C V 1 On r - VD O-VO CM CTN -4-VX) O - o O lA-4"VO O CM -4" -4" -4" O - C^VO r A « - O O M O O O C \ J O { M O r - r _ r " ^ K ^ O N ^ - 4 - O ( M O O O O ' - O O ^ - O O

I i i I t

d o a e j

X e a n v

Ox rAoO CNCVJ O -4-VO CTnVO 0 < M 4 4 G N ^ 0 -4"VOoO O ^ A C M v O - 4 " C M C M r - o O L A - 4 " ~ d " [ > - i A O C v - C v J c O ^ " O O N C M I A 0 0 O O - 0 0 CO LA O - -4"V£) cO OV^O K M ^ D - O O-VO r - CM CM -4~CM VO O - O - L A c O f A O V O L A C T s - 4 - K ^ O V £ ) l A N ^ - 4 " r A - 4 " r - r - 0 r - K > 0 K ^ 0 K \ l ^ f V j r - l A 0 l A 0 4 ^ 0 r - 0 # 0 0 0 ^ ^ 0

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • I * - I I I

p u r y ;

i C a o e q j j

-4" CM D-CM O-GNVDOO O VOOOV£) O-CTNO f A O N O U M N O N f M c O O N O N O N l A O J 4 t ~ l A l N i N t - l A C \ j ( N l A O ' - " C^MO O c O V D r - 4 0 ^ D C N ^ 0 f A * - 0 - - 4 " Q r - K ^ o _ r - (\J O-rACTN-4-^—COODCOO f A 4 " I A O^ O VD O CM VD CM LT\ CM < M 0 0 0 * - < - < M 0 < M K > \ r A * ~ . 4 - 0 O i A K M ^ r - ^ - O O O O O ^ ^ ^ -

i I I i !

S Q* K Eh

K § P h 0 0 U <35 PQ PQ O O

CQ CQ ctf 05 0 0

0 0 0 0

• s - s - s

PM CO

O u ho O CllTl

> 0-, PS

£ PS £ 0 0 0 P P P

<3 c\5 ctf cS 'erf erf erf "erf -H |H fH fH P - 4 0 0 0 ^ { h J H ^ H - P 0 0 0 o c o c o c o f i p p p o ^ ; ^ ^

T3 0 £

fciG j 3 ctf fe CQ

i=> J>>

Ph - P O hO O U & CO < 0 «H CM

pL, CQ LA £ | 0

- P CQ

0

C6 - P CO 0

Ph - p *H

O O O 'r~5 - P JH PH C Q O S ^ f n ^ O I

J n r H - P o O P S < s | C 0 W O P « 4 E H f l « S H O ctf , d *H tiO 0 U tiOCQtN]lN3ES3ENllS3lS3tNSts3lS]ES3 £ , 4 £ «H £ I I I I I I I I 1 I 3 E H < | W g C 5 C 5 c 5 C D C ! 3 0 C ! J C D 0 C 5

81

d-M. Z"D

*--4-0NtAir\c0O00C0 OnU? Onv£> l>-OJ cO D-CN ON On <\J -4 CO >~0^00

ON-cfOJ ON ONVO I>- *- v£> J-CM°>-d"K>ON-d-VD0OirNK>a\VD '-'-COO

vX)«-oM>-N*NiA'-vo(\lir\(\ivxic^o^- ; l"OcoLrMr\-d-of rN iN^0Ji^cr\0 ^-^O'-OO'-OOOOOOO^-OOOOOOOOOOO'-O

I I I I I I I

Tea Z-D

CM -d-ONCVJ ITSLfNcO <- O COCO O IA OJ lfN<— CM «- OnOJ I A - c K O OlAr-OO

KNlOKs(-4"OJvOV£>*-<— ON tN-ONC -CNI CM'— l ! " \ C O IAVO OJ «— O t>- O CO

VO LTMTNO CO LTNO r— O lALfND-lfNK>0 O - ^ v £ > C^O O OJ «- o On ' - 0 0 0 0 ' - ' - 0 W ' - ( \ l 0 ' - 0 ' - , - 0 M ' - < \ J 0 M 4 " 4 - - t O O »-

I I 1 I

s u u m i Z -D

C\J CO CM oo -3~COVD I>- l>- CTn CM O CM CM *— O- LfN CM CO VJD CO (\! O r~~ VD O O -3~ 0^ 0^ CO VO VD O-00 CM[>-Lr\*—v£)OM>-£N*— *— O IAO fNK^ r— CM O ^D-OnVD KM>- N £>- lT\cO CM -dr<— CN -4" O- ITNCO -4" O -4*0 *- *— 0 0 r ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ - 0 0 0 T ~ T ~ r ~ T ~ t " - 0 ^ ^ 0 ' ~ T ~ 0 0 0 0 • * # • • • • • • • § # • • • # • • • • • • • • • • • •

t i l l I I I I

J.£ Z-D

vovovo oj oj tr\moNVD o - - d - c o o j oj onoj c^vo oj ojvo«— 4 o o w i a o vo 1>- *- -4~ N~\lf\KY£> ONOJ -OONKNON-j-OOCOtAONOJ ON CO OLTNO «— J-VDC^-- -4"0 £>~lAOJ O N"> l^-4" N"\U5 I^KMAUMAK^«At- O O -401 OJ O O O ' - O ' - ' - O ' - O O O O O O O O ' - O O J ' - O -cf-LTNO O -d- o

I I I I I

pcio Z-D

ON ON'— OcOfAOCO-- K>-4-fAO U^ON-4-OOQCO-d-ONtAOOCOO'-O00H^N~M>--40NC0'— Ol^-3"ON-4~OCO£>-[Nir\ir\cOOM30cOOr--VD Lr\O.LT\<— lf\cO I>-LfM>- O t>-lT\K>v£> CM ITwjD r-o WU) 4K>0 O O O

O O O ' - O 0 J r - O ' - ' - ^ ' - O O O O O 0 J t ~ o 0 U N > i C ^ O l A ' - - 4 O • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I I I I I

T3q.g q-oraa Z-D

lT\ONVO O C v£>00 O ON -d~ ON -d"*— CO U3 «- VO D-VO V£> CNO U"\-d"VD V£> CO VO ' — t > - * — N> O n t A C ^ « - «- O NM>- CMC\JOCO(M-4"ODON-4"CMON

O-t- J-irsLT\cO K VO OJ -d"LT\ Cs-'— <-OVDI>O-d~O<-0JOK> i ' --4-OfA OOOOOWO'-'-'-'-OOOOO'-'-W'- KN,K>iO IN-d-*- 4"0

• • • i I I i

DOS Z~D

M 0 c 0 0 4 - f \ i 0-4~v0 ON<— IAVD CO CVJ CTNMD OOhf CVJK^OCNCrN -cO-4- -d~CO K\00 LTNCM [>-CM *- CTNCM COOOKM>-CM 0<~ GOCM-4~C>-:tOCM*--V£>K>\ CVl<M-d--d-OC0<\lvDtAVDlAr-CMOK^-^C>-fA^M>-O-OCM -tlAcOJNO O t - ' - ~ 0 ^ ~ 0 ' - C M O O t ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 * - I A O ^ ^ O O ^ O

I I i I I I

PH W

<n Ph

s s 0 U <rj <3 pQ pQ

O ^ 0 CD CD <D CO M M M M ctf TO w Co

Pi CO

O Jh tO O c6 >PL, K

3 g Q) CD ft ft I I M

H S

T3 a) a top CO t=> >5

Pi -p

o to o Jh r! co <% CD *H CM PH ^

CD

4- CQ u

43 -P CD O O O *t~5 CD CO O B

JHVH-P oc!5W<JcOl3oPi4E-ipHS . O .H tuO <D {H t CQbQ!S3I lS3lS3tN3tS]tS3CS3lS3

(Q H ch -P

CD

U CD I

0 jH^JHJLi+>CDCDCDMf l rC}0.H^! I I I I 1 i I I I Ocac0C0qqpqo^S l5C !3WEH<:^SCDOOC!5OOC!3OC!5O

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Cohen, Jacob and Patricia Cohen, Applied Multiple Regres-sion/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Hillsdale, N.J., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1975.

Cook, Stuart, Morton Deutsch, Marie Jahoda, and Claire Sellitz, Research Methods in Social Relations, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1962.

Goodman, A. H., Music Administration in Higher Learning, Provo, Utah, Press Publishing LimitedV 1975.

Huck, S. W., W. H. Cormier, and W. G. Bounds, Reading Statistics and Research, New York, Harper and Row, 197V.

Jones, Vincent, Music Education in the College, Boston, C. C. Birchard, 1949.

Lundin, Robert W., An Objective Psychology of Music, New York, The Ronald Press Co., 1953.

McNemar, Quinn, Psychological Statistics, 3rd ed., New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1969.

Articles

Bean, K. L., review of the Seashore Measures of Musical Talents, Revised Edition, in the Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by 0. K. Buros, Highland Park, N. J., The Gryphon Press, 1965, 627-628.

Lundin, Robert W., review of the Drake Musical Aptitude Tests, in the Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by 0. K. Buros, Highland Park, N. J., The Gryphon Press, 1959 , 379-380.

Saunders, D. R., review of the Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey, in the Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by 0. K. Buros, Highland Park, N. J., The Gryphon Press, 1959 , 133-134.

82

83

Unpublished Materials

Christy, Leo J., "A Study of the Relationships Between Musicality, Intelligence, and Achievement," unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Music, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1956.

DeBeruff, Ellen, "The Prediction of Success in Master's and Doctoral Programs," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1969.

Domb, Jo Ann L., "Relationships Between Selected Predictor Variables and Graduate Success Criteria at the University of Cincinnatti College Conservatory of Music,", unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnatti, Cincinnatti, Ohio, 1977.

Dudd, John E., "The Prediction of Success as Defined by Graduation Grade Point Averages, Graduation, and Music as an Occupation of Freshmen Enrolled in the University of Michigan School of Music in September, 1962: A Longitudinal Study in Admissions," unpublished doctoral dissertation, the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1978.

Gallagher, F. D., "A Study of the Relationships Between the Gordon Musical Aptitude Profile, the Colwell Music Achievement Tests, and the Indiana-Oregon Music Dis-crimination Test," unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Music, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1971.

George, Warren E., "Significant Predictors for College Achievement in Specified Areas of Music Education and Identification of Potential Graduates," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, 1969.

Leblanc, John R., "The ACT Battery as a predictor of Completion of a Baccalaureate Degree in Music or Music Education," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi, 1971.

Muhic, Thomas J., "Prediction of Success for Doctoral Degrees in Physical Education," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1971.

84

Peterson, Floyd H., "A Study of the Relationships Between Music Aptitude and Academic Achievement of Graduate Music Students," unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Music, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1963.

Rohrs, D. K., "Predicting Academic Success in a Liberal Arts College Music Education Program," unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of Iowa, Ames, Iowa, 1962.

Scimonelli, Frank J., "A Study of Selected Variables Related to the Achievement of Music Majors in Two-Year Community Colleges," unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Catholic University of America, 1975.

Stone, M. H., "A Study of the Relationships Between Selected Variables and the Differential Academic Achievement of Freshmen in the University of Michigan School of Music, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1969.

Tests

Denny, E. C. and M. J. Nelson, The Nelson-Denny Reading Test, Form A, revised by James I. Brown, Boston, Houghton-Mifflin Co., Boston, 1960.

Drake, R.M., The Drake Musical Aptitude Tests, Chicago, Illinois, Science Research Associates, 1954-57.

Gordon, Roderick D., The Gordon Index of Musical Insight, Form Ba, Denton, Texas, North Texas State University Press, 1960.

Guilford, J. P., and Wayne S. Zimmerman, The Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey, Beverly Hills, California, Sheridan Supply Co, 1945-55.

Lewis, D., Joseph G. Saetveit, and Carl E. Seashore, The Seashore Measures of Musical Talents, Revised Edition, New York, Psychological Corp., 1919-60.

Otis, Arthur S., The Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Tests, New Edition, Form Em, Yonkers-on Hudson, New York, World Book Co., 1954T