260
(SD=13.20, n=112). This compares to being 20.80 points lower than the test sample
reported by Gadzella and Baloglu (2001). However, the total motivation mean (M=31.25,
SD=3.71, n= 115) for Class F was 0.79 points higher to the reported norm mean of 30.46
(Pintrich et al., 1991). Class F respondents' total student engagement mean of 47.87
(SD=7.81, n=115) was 15.87 points lower than the national mean for college seniors
(Kuh et al., 2001).
Class G
For Class G (N=110, n=85), the total cognitive style mean was 93.42 (SD=15.04,
n=65) indicating a slightly more adaptive group; the mean score was 1.58 points lower
than the general population mean determined by Kirton (1999). The student total stress
mean of Class G was 51.54 (SD=13.72, n=84), 18.55 points lower than the results
published by Gadzella and Baloglu (2001). The Class G total student motivation mean
score was 30.01 (SD 4.27, n=85). That is 0.45 points lower than the total motivation
norm provided by Pintrich et al. (1991) indicating a slightly lower level of motivation in
this class. Considering total student engagement for Class G respondents, the mean was
50.05 (SD=7.80, n=85), 13.69 points lower than the national average of 63.74 for college
seniors (Kuh et al., 2001).
Class H
For Class H (N=122, n=70), the total cognitive style mean of Class H was 95.30
(SD=15.01, n=50), only 0.30 points higher than the general population cognitive style of
95 (Kirton, 1999). Student total stress mean (M=50.73, SD=11.54, n=70) in Class H was
approximately 19.36 points lower than the reported normalized mean (Gadzella &
Baloglu, 2001) indicating lower levels of stress. Considering student motivation in Class
H, the total motivation mean score was 31.05 (SD=4.60, n=70) which was 0.59 points