Volume 11 Number 2
January 1972

John M. Antes

The attitude with which a child enters a learning situation is dependent, among other things, on his previous success and failure experiences in similar situations. The level of aspiration, which is a measure of the level of performance an individual sets for himself, is based on these success and failure experiences. Sears (see Note 1) found that children who have consistently experienced success--subjectively in their day-to-day schoolwork and objectively in tests and school marks--continue to set aspiration levels just beyond their past achievements. However, when children have been consistently frustrated in their day-to-day learning efforts and disappointed in their marks, they set unrealistic aspiration levels; either too high or too low.

It is widely accepted that because of prejudice, negative stereotypes, social denigration, and generally lower class membership, economically and socially disadvantaged children have less opportunity to develop feelings of worth and dignity. This lack of self-esteem is carried into the classroom, resulting in negative experiences and consequently a low level of aspiration.

Franciscan (see Note 2) states that, "Inasmuch as success or failure affect so significantly an individual’s learning efficiency, interests and aspirations, it is obvious that every child and youth needs a curriculum in which he can succeed. He needs to succeed with sufficient frequency to reinforce his feelings of self-esteem, confidence, and pleasure in learning."

Parents also have an effect on their children’s levels of aspirations. Weiner and Murray (see Note 3) contend that lower socioeconomic parents have high levels of aspiration for their children’s education just as middle class parents do. The real problems, as Weiner and Murray state, are (1) the difference in the willingness to preserve goals while encountering obstacles, and (2) the difference between the reality and the ideal of these goals.

This study is an attempt to investigate the hypothesis that the educational and occupational aspirations of children can be raised by exposure to an educational and social learning environment which is more stimulating, more accepting, and more rewarding than the environment in which they live. The study was conducted at a Summer Laboratory School for Culturally Diverse Children sponsored by the School of Education at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and the Rockefeller Foundation in the summer of 1968.

The Summer Laboratory School was designed for two groups of people: Fifth- and sixth-grade children from culturally diverse backgrounds and graduate interns preparing to teach these youngsters.

As far as the children were concerned the purposes of the program were to create a learning environment which would encourage a positive self-concept and a feeling of individual success, expose the child to a rich and varied educational experience, provide the chance to investigate in as much depth as possible personal interests and abilities; and, generally to establish a learning and living environment which would respect the individual, allowing him to express himself creatively and intellectually and to learn to live and work cooperatively with others. In this atmosphere it was hoped to develop in the children interest in the subjects they studied; and an attitude towards learning and education which would enable them to successfully participate in the elementary school program in their own community; to develop ideas which would help him see possibilities and opportunities for himself in society and the world around him; and finally, to develop an appreciation of his own cultural heritage and the cultural values of others with differing backgrounds. It was hoped to achieve these goals through a program stressing an analytical approach to learning, an inquiring attitude, and individual tutorial help to practice and develop basic skills needed to make an educational experience meaningful. Because of this type of educational experience, it was hoped to raise the aspirational levels of these youngsters from disadvantaged backgrounds commensurate with their abilities.

The graduate interns, on the other band, were to have the opportunity to work with and observe experienced teachers, and also to observe, teach and work with children from culturally diverse backgrounds and thereby gain a better understanding of and sensitivity to children’s interests, abilities and values from this type of background. In the course of the Laboratory School the graduate interns were to become acquainted and to experiment with teaching methods which would encourage children to develop a positive attitude toward themselves and education; and also, to develop a sensitivity to individual differences of children, their differing learning styles and interests. Finally, the graduate interns were to become cognizant of the need for creating a learning environment which would allow children to express themselves and develop positive attitudes towards themselves, their peers and the learning process.

The Laboratory School schedule of events was programmed to encompass student exposure to a variety of cultural, educational, aesthetic and recreational experiences. Besides a more traditionally oriented morning of classes, art, recreation and outdoor education programs were included. Numerous field trips and special events such as a weekend of camping were also an integral part of the entire program.

The student body was an integrated one from both rural and urban areas. Twenty-three American Indian children from the Menominee, Oneida, Stockbridge-Munsee, and Winnebago tribes were enrolled. White children were selected from rural or small town areas where Indian children attended. Afro-American and white students from urban areas in Wisconsin and Illinois were also chosen.

To gain a better understanding of the student population in this study, data on parent’s occupational and educational level is presented. Students were housed for the six weeks residential program in a University dormitory. University student counselors and graduate interns also resided in the dorm. The staff itself was an integrated one similar to the student population.

Two instruments were employed to measure the aspirational level of the students. The first was a questionnaire asking what level of education and occupation the pupils desired to attain and what level they expected to attain (see Figure 1). The questionnaire was administered four times to each student: once prior to their participation in the Laboratory School; twice while the school was in session; and once 14 months after the school ended. At the initial time of administration, in May 1968, the students were not aware of their being selected for attendance at the summer Laboratory School. During the Laboratory School session, the questionnaire was given in the first and last weeks of the six weeks session (July and August 1968). The final testing was done during a follow-up get-together on the University campus in October 1969. Each child’s answer was categorized according to the Revised Warner Scale of Status Characteristics.

Figure 1

Level of Aspiration Questionnaire

How far do you want to go in school?

How far do you think you will go in school?

What kind of job would you like to have when you finish school?

What kind of job do you think you will really get?

The second instrument used was an Achievement Aspiration Test which is an academic exercise consisting of a series of arithmetic problems divided into 11 sections. After completing each section, the child is asked how many problems he thinks he will complete on the next section. The difference between his predicted score and his actual score yields a measure of the child’s ability to make a realistic prediction based on past performance. The test contains two incidents of an induced failure situation in which the amount of time allowed to complete a section is reduced. The child’s performance on that section will be depressed and his estimate for the next section may or may not reflect this poorer performance.

The questionnaire was administered to each child four times: in May, July, August 1968, and in October, 1969. Scores were obtained by use of the Revised Warner Scale of Status Characteristics (see Note 4). The scale provides a rank of from 1 to 7 where 1 is the highest status rank. For example, level 7 would represent such occupations as janitor, migrant laborer, or miner. Whereas, the other end of the range (level 1) would be represented by the professions--medicine, law--or managers of large (75,000+) businesses.

Table 2 presents mean scores on educational aspiration for the subgroups, Indian, Afro-American, and white at each testing session.

Table 3 contains the mean scores on occupational aspiration for the subgroups at each testing session.

As can be seen in Table 2, in all cases the expected educational level was lower than the desired level. In all but one case, the desired and expected educational level went up the status scale over time (from May to October). The white "Expected" score remained constant from May to October.

The expected occupational level was, in all cases, lower than the desired level, as was true for the educational level (see Table 3). Both the Indian and the white "Expected" and "Desired" levels were raised from the May to the October testing. However, the Afro-American "Occupational Aspiration" level decreased over time.

The discrepancy between the mean scores of desired educational and occupational levels and expected educational and occupational levels gives some indication of the realistic view the students had of their future.

In general, students seemed to have a fairly realistic view of themselves. Their desires did not greatly outweigh what they expected. The trend over time (with the exception of the white educational aspiration) seemed to be towards less discrepancy between the mean scores, indicating a more realistic view of what they desired and what they expected.

The Achievement Aspiration test was administered to all students twice during the Laboratory School session. The first testing was in July, the second in August. The obtained scores presented in Table 6 indicate the mean difference for each group between predicted and actual scores in the test, i.e., the first score reported is the difference between the prediction made of performance on the second section and actual performance on the second.

A mean score of 0 on this test would indicate that the subjects had estimated their performance correctly on each of the subtests. In order to allow for slight errors in prediction not truly indicative of unrealistic behavior, any score falling between ± 1 is considered to be realistic.

The mean scores for all groups at both administrations of the Achievement Aspiration test are between these realistic limits, as seen in Table 6.

The results of the Level of Aspiration Questionnaire indicate a rise in the educational aspirations of all subjects during the course of the Laboratory School, which persisted in all cases 14 months later in the follow-up questionnaire. Though the rise is small, it points to the positive effects a stimulating, accepting, rewarding environment can have on the aspirational level of disadvantaged children in only a six-week period.

The occupational aspirations of Indian and white children followed the same pattern as that discussed above and also indicate the positive effects of the Laboratory School experience. The Afro-American children, though their aspirations appear to have been raised during the course of the Laboratory School, yielded a lower average aspiration score at the 14 month follow-up. A possible explanation for this phenomenon is that the Afro-Americans alone, of the three groups, came from an urban area. Their return to that area may have re-impressed upon them the limitations placed on their eventual occupational achievement by their color and their ghetto background.

The results of the Achievement Aspiration measure indicate that the children entered the Laboratory School with the ability to be realistic about their performance, to the extent measured by this test. Results were consistent over a second testing. This may lend some validity to the Level of Aspiration Measure in which the children were asked to predict future educational and occupational performance and also provides an explanation for a phenomenon found in the results of that measure.

On both the educational and occupational aspiration measures for all three racial groups the expected levels were below the desired levels. In all except the white, expected educational level, for which there is no immediate explanation, the expected level varied directly with the desired level. This is perhaps a healthy, high goal-setting attitude combined with realistic self-appraisal which appeared in the Achievement Aspiration results.

In summary, the study reported here lends support to the hypothesis that educational and occupational aspirations of disadvantaged children can be raised by an enriched, accepting total environment. Raising aspirations involved a raise in self-esteem, which will allow these children to experience success and pleasure in learning so necessary to their present and future performance.

1. Pauline S. Sears, "Levels of Aspiration in Academically Successful and Unsuccessful Children," Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 35:498-536, 1940.

2. Arden N. Frandsen, How Children Learn. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1957.

3 Max Weiner and Walter Murray, "Another Look at the Culturally Deprived and Their Levels of Aspiration," Journal of Educational Sociology, March 1963, pp. 319-321.

4. William L. Warner, Social Class in America: A Manual of Procedure for the Measurement of Social Status, Harper-Row, New York, 1960.