"I LIVE IN MY OWN BUBBLE":

The Rokeach Values Survey (RVS) has been in use for over 30 years. It consists of two scales of 18 values, one an instrumental value list, and one a terminal value list. People move stickers to rank order the items on the list. Directions are these: "rank each value in its order of importance to you. Study the list and think of how much each value may act as a guiding principle in your life" (Rokeach, 1983).

Validity studies have been done. Johnston (1995) showed that "individualism-achievement and collectivism-affiliation are the underlying dimensions of the RVS for both the terminal and instrumental values" (p. 583). Miethe (1985) said that the Rokeach Values survey exhibited less measurement error than a 100-point rating, magnitude estimation, and the handgrip scaling procedure; thus, "rank order scaling is shown to be the best technique for measuring human values even though it achieves only an ordinal level of measurement" (p. 441). Attempts have been made to use the instrument to predict college academic achievement (Coyne, 1988), but no relationship was found. Multi-year studies have been done to compare the influence of college instruction on values and students were found to retain the values they espoused in younger years (Buier, Butman, Burwell, & Van Wicklin, 1989). Comparisons of values among and between grade levels in concert with stages of moral reasoning have been done (Glover, 1991). These showed no difference between 6^th graders, 9^th graders, 12^th graders, and university students. Family members, friends, and church were most important to these students. A relationship between attainment of formal reasoning in adolescents and value changes was found (Darmody, 1991). A study of adults in their twenties showed that the Rokeach seems to measure fundamental values rather than the desirability of values (Gibbins & Walker, 1993).

The issue of commensurability between the Rokeach and other instruments has been studied. One study looked at personality and values (Bilskyk & Schwartz, 1994) and found "similar motivational dynamics" underlying the Rokeach Value Survey and the Frieberg Personality Inventory in German undergraduates (p. 181). Johnston's (1995) study compared the results of college students with the Maslowian Assessment Survey (MAS) and showed that level of development is a great influence on the perception of the inner and outer world.

Some researchers have combined values instruments to arrive at a composite picture of liberalism and conservatism (Brasthwaite, 1998). The Rokeach Value Survey and three others were used with undergraduate psychology students, showing that security and harmony, personal accomplishment, and religiosity were related to liberalism and conservatism.

Studies using gender as a variable showed that in adults, stereotypes of the "typical man" and the "typical woman" were upheld as women chose values that were related to communal values and men chose values that were related to agentic values (DiDio, Saragovi, Koestner, & Aube, 1996).

One cross cultural study was reported that used high achievement as a variable (Feather, 1998). The Rokeach Value Survey, the Tall Poppy Scale, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and the Equalitarianism Scale were used to compare college students in Australia, the U.S., and Canada. American students valued high achievement, competence and conformity; Australian students emphasized prosocial values and egalitarianism, and Canadian students gave less emphasis to affiliative contentment.

This is a quantitative first, qualitative second study of the responses of 283 ninth and tenth graders to the Rokeach Values Survey (Males = 96 Females = 183). In completing the Rokeach Values Survey, 18 Terminal Values and 18 Instrumental Values are rank ordered by moving stickers from one column to another. Ninth and tenth graders from most of the 88 counties in Ohio were administered the Rokeach Values Survey during Ohio Summer Honors Institute held at a small north central Ohio university. These students were identified by the Ohio Rule for the Identification of Gifted Students. Ohio identifies gifted students in four areas: Superior Cognitive; Specific Academic; Creativity; and Visual and Performing Arts. ⁽²⁾ Students also completed an open-ended essay question on why they chose their top ranked and the bottom ranked values. Follow-up interviews about their answers were conducted. Data sources were the Rokeach Value Survey and open-ended essays discussing why the students ranked the values the way they ranked them.

Ohio is a state with 11,373,541 people, the 7^th largest populated in the U.S., located in the Great Lakes Area, with its center 500 miles from New York City and 400 miles from Washington, DC, where on September 11, 2001, many people were killed by airplanes crashing into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Eighty-five percent of Ohioans are white, 11.5 percent are black, 1.9 percent are Latino, and 1.5 percent are Asian. The Ohio Legislature has, for the past 13 years, funded the Ohio Summer Honors Institutes through a competitive grant process with a one million dollar per year line item expenditure to the Ohio Department of Education. The small north central private college campus where the study was conducted has received grants from the Ohio Department of Education for 13 years. The students represented most of the 88 counties of Ohio.

Two samples were analyzed. The first was of surveys completed in the years 1999, 2000, and 2001 (N=191)(Piirto, 2002). The second was of surveys completed in the summer of 2002 (N=96). The students in both samples ranked their values similarly, indicating that the population attending the Ohio Summer Honors Institute at this small private college is homogeneous. Students came from rural, suburban, and urban high schools throughout the state. Two-thirds of the 283 students were female (N=187), and one-third were male (N=96). This is typical of the 16 Ohio Summer Honors Institutes held throughout the state.

Four years of data were collected, in 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002. These were divided into two groups: Pre-September 11, 2001 and After September 11, 2001.

Sample I consisted of data collected in 1999, 2000, and 2001. The Terminal Value of National Security received no first choices from the students in the first sample. This group's terminal values in rank order by first choice were Salvation, Freedom, Self-respect, Wisdom, Exciting Life, Family Security, Inner Harmony, Comfortable Life, True Friendship, Sense of Accomplishment, World At Peace, Equality, Health, Mature Love, Pleasure, World of Beauty, Social Recognition, and National Security. See Table 1.

The 1999, 2000, and 2001 group Instrumental Values in rank order by first choice were Loving, Honest, Imaginative, Independent, Broad-Minded, Courageous, Intellectual, Ambitious, Self-Controlled, Loyal, Responsible, Forgiving, Capable, Logical, Obedient, Polite, Clean, and Helpful. See Table 1. For the terminal values, Salvation received 33 % of first choices and 13% of last choices. Freedom received 11% of first choices. National Security received 31% of last choices. For the instrumental values, Loving received 18% of first choices, and Honest received 16%. Clean received 33% of last choices, and Obedient received 20% (Cawley, Fauser, Jones, Kerns, & Knapp, 2000; Fairbairn & James, 2001).

Gender differences were studied. T-tests were conducted to test means to indicate amplitude of choices on both scales. The alpha level was set at .01 because of the number of t-tests necessary, one for each of the 18 values on each scale, the terminal and the instrumental. Males thought that these terminal values were most important, in descending order: Freedom, True Friendship, Wisdom, Family Security, Health, Self-Respect, Salvation, Equality, A Sense of Accomplishment, Inner Harmony, An Exciting Life, Pleasure, Mature Love, A Comfortable Life, A World at Peace, Social Recognition, A World of Beauty, and National Security. Preferred terminal values for females were Self-Respect, True Friendship, Freedom, Wisdom, Family Security, Equality, Health, Inner Harmony, Salvation, Mature Love, An Exciting Life, A Sense of Accomplishment, A World At Peace, Pleasure, A Comfortable Life, A World of Beauty, Social Recognition, and National Security. Only one difference below the .01 level was found. Significant differences were found for females on Self-Respect (Mean=6.095, SD=4.720, P=0.001). Near significant differences were these: Males for Freedom (Mean=5.067, SD=3.727, P=0.023); Males for Pleasure (Mean=9.966, SD=4.824, P=0.021). Note: the lower the mean, the more important the value. See Table 2.

On the Instrumental Value scale, mean rankings were these, in descending order, for males: Honest, Intellectual, Imaginative, Loving, Ambitious, Independent, Courageous, Loyal, Broad-Minded, Responsible, Forgiving, Helpful, Capable, Logical, Self-Controlled, Polite, Obedient, and Clean. For females, in descending order, these were the values: Honest, Loving, Courageous, Independent, Responsible, Broad-Minded, Loyal, Ambitious, Imaginative, Intellectual, Forgiving, Helpful, Self-Controlled, Polite, Capable, Logical, Obedient, and Clean. Significant differences were found, for females, on Courageous (Mean= 6.953, SD=4.25, P = 0.01), and Honest (Mean=5.531, SD=4.071, SD = 0.01). For males, significance on the instrumental values scale were in the area of Capable (Mean=9.746. SD=4.908, P=0.004, and in Intellectual (Mean 7.203, SD=5.348, P=0.01). See Table 3.

National Security received no first choices from the students in the second sample (N=96). This group's terminal values in rank order by first choice were Salvation-21%; Freedom-12%; Broad-Minded-9%; A World At Peace-8%; Family Security-- 7%; True Friendship--7%; Inner Harmony-7 %; Wisdom-7 %; Self-Respect-5%; Health--3%; Pleasure--3 %; Mature Love--2 %;

An Exciting Life--1%; Equality--1 %; World of Beauty--1%; Social Recognition--0%; National Security - 0%. See Table 1.

The 2002 group Instrumental Values in rank order by first choice were Honest--19%; Loving--15%; Loyal-9 %; Independent--9 %; Imaginative - 8%; Broad-Minded--7%; Intellectual--7%; Ambitious--4 %; Capable- 4 %; Courageous--3 %; Helpful--3 %; Responsible--3 %; Forgiving-1 %; Logical-1 %; Obedient--1%; Self-Controlled-1 %; Polite--0 %; Clean--0 %.

Gender differences were studied. T-tests were conducted to test means to indicate amplitude of choices on both scales. The alpha level was set at .01 because of the number of t-tests necessary, one for each of the 18 values on each scale, the terminal and the instrumental. Males thought that these terminal values were most important, in descending order: True Friendship, Wisdom, Freedom, Health, Family Security, Salvation, Equality, Mature Love, Self-Respect, Inner Harmony, A Sense of Accomplishment, A World at Peace, A Comfortable Life, Pleasure, An Exciting Life, A World of Beauty, National Security, Social Recognition. See Table 2. Significant differences were found for the Terminal Value of National Security (Mean=12.694, SD=4.603, P=0.005**). That is, the 2002 males ranked National Security significantly higher than did the females. This ranking brought significance to the Full Group calculations as well (N=283; SD=14.151, SD=4.095, P=0.005**).

Preferred terminal values for females in the second group were Freedom, True Friendship, Self-Respect, Wisdom, Family Security, Inner Harmony, Health, Equality, A Sense of Accomplishment, Salvation, An Exciting Life, Mature Love, A Comfortable Life, Pleasure, A World At Peace, A World of Beauty, Social Recognition, and National Security. Only one gender difference below the .01 level was found. No significant differences were found for females. See Table 2.

Two qualitative methods were used to add to the interpretation of what these rankings mean. Students wrote essays and these essays were analyzed. Interviews were also conducted. Student evinced the difficulty of ranking values. One young man compared the task to that Walt Whitman must have endured:

Walt Whitman, one of the greatest contemporary poets of all time , wrote a book. This book, called Leaves of Grass, was always being revised, and changed .. . . as he aged, Whitman began to re-evaluate his ideas, and priorities changed. I experienced a similar altering of priorities as I placed the idea-bearing stickers in their ranks. Many times I changed my mind, but am fully satisfied, and prepared to justify, their final placement. (2000M16)

Buckalew (2001) conducted interviews with 14 of the students, asking them to elaborate on their choices and essays. Miller, McClair, Prusha, and Roberts (2002) also interviewed some of the students about their answers.

Many students chose Salvation as the number one terminal value because salvation was emphasized in the students' homes and schools. One sixteen-year old female stated, "Salvation is very important to me. I have attended Catholic school all my life, so I have Catholic ideals and values firmly ingrained within me. I believe that all life with God in heaven is far more important than anything on earth." Salvation responses varied. Buckalew (2001) said, in her analysis, "Was Salvation viewed uniformly? Was the choice indicative of upbringing, or was it cerebral in disposition?" (p. 14). Some responses could be viewed as proselytizing or justifications for their own religious views:

2001M08: Salvation, and the eternal life that goes with it, are the most important to me because I will only be here for a short time, and I want to be in a good place when I am no longer here.

2000F03: Salvation should be most important goal in everyone's life. People are always setting goals and buying things without remembering where it all came from. The world is filled with materialistic things that have caused many deaths, but what some people fail to realize is that after physical death, there is the option of eternal life. That is if you fulfilled your Christian duties while living. Being humble and in touch with God gives everyone a sense of stability and security, that cannot be found in earthly things. Salvation should be an important factor in everyone's life.

2000F12: My choice for my highest ranking is salvation. I chose salvation because I am a saved Christian who believes in God. Therefore, I believe that Jesus Christ died for my sins and that through him I have eternal life and all things are possible. If it were not for salvation none of these other things would be possible.

2000F27: I chose salvation as the highest value, because I am a Christian, and as a Christian, I believe that Jesus Christ died to cleanse me of my sins so that I could have eternal life with him in heaven, if I accepted him as Lord of my life. Because Jesus forgave me, I have salvation in him.

2000M14: I chose Salvation (saved; eternal life) because I am a Christian who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ. I believe in salvation and eternal life with God in his Kingdom..

Other students put Salvation last. This made the group mean ranking for Salvation go as high as Number 6 and as low as Number 10 (See Table 2), because of the strong feelings about this value:

2000M07: Salvation is not very important in life. Salvation requires a specific belief in a religion. I have always found organized religion "helta-skelta." There isn't anything wrong with it , because there are so many religions. Salvation, in my opinion, is not highly required to lead a good life.

2000M04: I rated salvation lowest on my list for one simple reason, I am an atheist. I find the idea of a perfect heaven created by an omnipotent deity to be too perfect, so much so that I think the concept is ludicrous, offensive or not, I feel that all religion, and therefore salvation is a primitive and ineffective way of explaining our surroundings and should have died out long ago.

2000F39: Lowest - I'm an existentialistic atheist and believe in reincarnation, so I don't really believe in salvation and I don't think I would really want eternal life in that form anyway - too boring.

2000F26: Lowest: Salvation- it's a bunch of bull. Be happy and do the right thing for the right reasons, not so you can have a happy afterlife. For all I know, there is no afterlife. So why should salvation influence me?

Why Were National Security and A World At Peace Ranked So Low?

National Security was ranked lowest in the first group for both males and females. For the males it rose slightly in the second group while it remained lowest for the females. However, the fact that the males lifted National Security up a tad raised it to significance (See Table 3).

Before 2002, students did not think that National Security was important enough to worry about, perhaps because the country had not been in any wars recently. One student stated that why should she value it, since she was a baby when the Gulf War was fought, and that was our last war? Social recognition was not important to the students because they feel they are already viewed as being different.

National Security was not valued because the nation was at peace, according to the students. One fifteen year old female wrote this:

National Security is a 'least" because my government does not define who and where I have developed as a person. I don't like war, I don't believe in it, but I'm sixteen and this is the time in my life when I'm supposed to feel invincible. The only war I have seen is the Gulf, and that war was far away from me. I see values as a personal standing, and a personal road to take, not how well armed my country is or isn't.

Other responses were similar:

2001M06: I ranked National Security last because I personally do not fear attack on the greatest country in the world, The United States of America.

2001F1: I honestly don't care about National Security and would much rather an exciting, challenging and helpful future for myself.

2001F50: National Security is not really needed if the world is at peace.

2000F05: My last/least value was/is National Security. Sure I'd like to be protected, but compared to the other values, this is my least. To me, National Security will eventually die out; as will everything else in this world.

2000F18: Out of all 18 of these things, I viewed "National Security" as the least to consume my thoughts with. This is not to say that protection from attack is not important but I would not stress about it. There are officials that we voted in to protect us that we have put our trust into. They will put our safety at the top of their priority list.

2000M11: I chose National Security last because this is not of great importance to me. Sure, I love the U.S. and what is stands for but every government has its faults. A world without government to both insure and trample people's rights may be just as good.

2000M13: If we lived in a world with these types at people [ambitious people] there would be no need for National Security because everyone would solve their (problems) without having to threaten some one. Also independence couldn't exist in such a world as it would cause countries to think lower of other countries because they have more or less natural resources, we must all learn to share in my perfect world.

After September 11, 2001

The second group, who took the Rokeach Value Survey in 2002, 9 months after the attack on September 11, 2001, surprised. Essays and follow-up interviews indicated that the gifted and talented students still did not consider National Security and A World At Peace as important a value as Salvation, Freedom, or Broad-Mindedness. (See Table 2.)

2002F60: National security... will probably be on the bottom of my list. Why? Because national security is the last thing on my mind, I can protect myself, they have enough on their hands (meaning) the FBI and the CIA.

Personal interviews elaborated on their low ranking of National Security: One girl said, "I rated national security low because I feel that I could just move to another country and it's not really a threat to my personal life." Another girl said, "I rated national security low. I didn't feel it was as important as the other things." Still another said she ranked it "Just kind of below and above. It's not so much national security itself that ranks where it is, it's the things that I know rank above it and the things that I know rank below it that put it in its place." Another girl said:

National Security was somewhat important not so much because of 9-1-1 but because we live in a country where we're used to not having bombs exploding around us, and stuff, randomly. It's an important thing. I think it probably would be a lot more important if we lived in another country and saw what we were comparing it to if there wasn't any national security. Like, if we lived in the Middle East, we'd have people running around in the streets with guns all the time.

2002F52: As far as life & the world go, even after 911, 1 still feel safe, I'm still in the "safe bubble" and I don't worry about it.

Males agreed. One thought that his religious belief would protect him. He wrote, "I don't think National Security is greatly important, because if you have faith in the lord , he is the only one that can protect you." Another also reflected on the difference between his beliefs and national defense: On the first side, I ranked salvation first because that is how I was brought up and this is what I believe in. National Security and Freedom are next because without a safe country and the ability to voice what you believe in it is not worth living in" (2002M3).

Another male referred to the Star Trek character Mr. Spock. 2002M17: I ranked "National Security" second and "Equality" third. I realize that our nation is bigger than any one group. . . . . It is as Spock would say, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few." Another stated that National Security falls into the middle of the rankings: "National security is important, but it's 12th, because ups and downs help to build a person or a community of people (2002M3). Another showed a global perspective over a nationalistic perspective: "I put National Security last, because even though I want our nation to be safe, I want just as much for Sierra Leone, China, and India to be safe. That is why World Peace is number 7 (2002M35).

Proximity to the events was another excuse the students used for their lack of concern. A common sentiment heard was that the events of September 11 "did not affect me", and "it will not happen to me." One student said her small town protected her:

Nothing really happened to me in my personal life. I didn't know who had anybody that was affected by it. We live nowhere near New York. I just thought that it probably won't happen again, well, it could happen again but to a big city, and I don't live in a big city. I'm 30 miles away from the biggest city, so I don't see how I could be affected by a terrorist attack in a town of only 30,000 people in it.

Another reason given by the students for their low ranking of National Security and A World At Peace displayed their feelings of powerlessness and of cynicism. Here is what some said in their essays:

2002M34: A World at Peace is not important because someone will always hate

someone else and start a war. It is inevitable.

2002M19: Last was World Peace and Inner Harmony, because these things will

not occur and are too imaginative.

2002M31: Some things, like World Peace seemed impossible. World Peace is not attainable and stops all change. Good or bad.

2002M33: World Peace and equality, 1 think are more abstract than the other

values, and not as important.

2002F53: "A World at Peace," "National Security," and "Equality" are ideas that I believe will never be achieved, especially equality. I would like for it to be achieved some day, but I believe it will never happen let it be racial, religious, intelligence, financially, or based on sexual preferences.

2002F54: There's always war in the world, there always will be as long as religion exists for them to fight about. But as long as the fighting is somewhere else it really doesn't bother me.

The follow-up interviews also displayed the cynicism of these gifted and talented Ohioans: "I ranked world peace pretty low because I thought that it was not really an obtainable goal. I thought that there would always be conflict anywhere and I would probably not be involved in the conflict personally." Another student said, "I rated A World at Peace low because there could be peace everywhere else, but, say, the Middle East. There's been war in there for the past few centuries, so I don't think it's possible for world peace. That's why I ranked it so low."

Another student said, "It's a little idealistic to put that (world peace) on a list like this with things like pleasure and health, things like that because even if it's not something you hear about on the news, there's still wars all over like Africa, South America that are still going on but they're out of the news." He continued: "It's not like, "well, this is just going on here'. You can go ahead and stop that. It's a basic human thing and it's probably always (going to) happen until one of the sides finally completely destroys the other and then they'll just start infighting, so that's why I ranked it low."

Only a few others were more hopeful. One student in an interview said that she had ranked A World At Peace in the top half. "I thought it was a good thing, a good value. I know it's not possible to obtain world peace. But like if everyone... (will) try to obtain world peace, it will be better than if you don't try to obtain world peace." Essays also contained some hope:

2002M27: To me, to change the world to make it better is the most important

goal in my life. My own accomplishments are not very important to me, but to

help to reach a better future to all is number one.

2002F49: I ranked a world at peace number one on my list because if we don't

have a world at peace we can't (sic) be able to have pleasure, family security,

national security, or any of these other values, most likely.

2002M28: Values that pertained more to large groups were not as essential in my

mind--if everyone is singularly happy, then the world in general should at least be

tolerable.

2002M32: I ranked A World at Peace first because I believe that many of the other ideals on the scale are not ends in themselves, but rather are means by which to obtain "A World at Peace".

Freedom was the first terminal value for the group on the statistical comparison of means. Students spoke of freedom as being necessary and as being taken for granted; some seemed to indicate that personal freedom of choice was most important, while others defined freedom as political freedom:

2001 M05: I always want freedom. I don't like people making choices for me.

2001 M21: A good majority of the topics should have been at the number one spot. I value my freedom and opportunities in this country. I wish to live a good prosperous life with all the freedom which I am entitled to.

2001 M28: Freedom is why we live in America today. We fought for our land of freedom and opportunity.

2001 M35: On the first scale I had Freedom and having an enjoyable, exciting life at the top because I believe that you have to have freedom in order to be happy. I think that living a good life and helping others do the same is everything.

2001M38: I put Freedom first because I believe that we aren't really alive unless we are making our own decisions.

2000 M06: Freedom. Without freedom to choose and follow one's path, what path one would follow is a rather moot point.

2000 M10: On the first page, I worked from a pragmatic viewpoint. Freedom is number one because every person in between me and my goal is a nail in my coffin. I'd choose to die rather than live without choice.

2001 F21: On the first scale I placed Freedom at the top of the list because I feel it is essential to happiness. National Security and World Peace are both connected to freedom obviously; however, they are twelfth and thirteenth on my list because I don't think about them on a daily basis.

2001 F46: On the first page, I held freedom and equality and peace very high because I believe those are necessary for anything else to thrive.

2001 F60: I ranked my values the way I did based on how I felt about the word. One of the important values was equality and freedom that's why they're ranked #1 and #2.

2000 F07: In the first set of words, I ranked "Freedom" as number one and "A World of Beauty" as number eighteen. I feel that I need freedom just as much as air or water. Although rules can sometimes be useful, I tend not to like them. Most likely this is because I am my own person, and I am independent. At my age, I am not very concerned with the world; I do not care whether or not it is beautiful. It is possible to say that I live in my own bubble filled with joy, happiness, and friends. I know of current events and world news; however, these do not really affect me.

Females in the first group valued self-respect to a significantly greater extent than did males, though this washed out when the second group was added to the number. Here are some of their thoughts on the topic. Some seemed to feel that self-respect comes before everything, and the rest of the values fall in, in sort of a domino effect:

2001 F10

The reason I ranked Self Respect as number one is because that's the first step of getting somewhere in life. You have to believe in yourself in all your entirety. With self respect you gain wisdom. There's this quote I like, "Know thyself." Well after you really know yourself you have to be one of the wisest people in the world. Since you're wise you will respect all around you and know right from wrong which will let you meet new people to bond with and befriend. After all the wisdom of life and closeness to other people I feel that is where the inner harmony plays apart which will then lead to salvation. Next thing you know is that you are finally really happy in life, so happy you 're at the point where you finally notice the little things . I read in a book somewhere happiness is good on your health and studies have shown you live longer. Once you master the art of being able to take care of yourself, you can help those around you like family for instance. If you get your family to see what you see then they will want to help the people in the world too. That's how you can come about world peace. It may take awhile but in the end it's smooth sailing because then you get freedom, your respect from other people. This knowledge will help you find your soul mate. In your eyes the world is beautiful. A sense of accomplishment overwhelms you. Therefore just from a little self respect that is how people can accomplish so much which is very exciting and rewarding. Note*: Since you have world peace you will have national security.2001 F14: On the first ranking it was tough to choose, all of these things were important to me in a different way. I put self-respect first because you have to respect yourself before others can respect you. When you have the respect of everyone around you, the world is in the palm of your hand.

2001 F16: For instance I put self-respect as number one. That is because it's my opinion that you have to believe in yourself before anything else. Once you believe in yourself you can then believe in everything else, including the rest of your values. . . What I'd like to sum up here is that for me to say one value holds more importance than another is impossible. But by holding one value first, the rest can be obtained!

2001 F31: I think that you always put yourself down sometime or another on the stupid things that you have done in the past or you want to do something and I always wish that I would give myself more credit than I do. Then with Self-Respect everything else falls into place.

2001 F52: On the first page of values a trend I saw was me being happy with myself first. Inner harmony and self-respect were my two top ranked values. I believe to be happy with the world or life that you are living you must first be happy with one's self - if not the rest does not truly mean anything.

2000 F01: My highest choice [for Terminal Values] is self-respect. I believe that before you can respect anyone or do anything, you must respect yourself. By having a high self-esteem you will be more inclined to stand up for yourself and trust what you're doing is right. A lot of teenagers don't have self-respect and are swayed by others (peer pressure), many of them to do the wrong things and make the wrong decisions. By having self-respect you can do anything you want with your life because you will know inside that you can do it.

2000 F04: My highest ranking values are self respect, and ambition. My thinking behind these choices is that really as long as you have self respect and ambition, you can pretty much accomplish anything. Nobody can respect somebody who doesn't respect themselves. And nothing can be achieved without ambition.

2000 F09: For my number one choice on the first page I chose self-respect. I chose this because to me , the whole point of life and the measure of whether or not you live a good one is what you yourself think about what you have done. It doesn't matter what other people think of you and what you've accomplished. The only thing that counts in the end is your opinion of yourself and what you have done. Without self-respect none of the other things on the list mean any thing.

On the other hand, the males valued Intellectual significantly greater than did the females. Here are some of their comments: "I feel that intellect is very important in order to help solve universal enigma that can be overcome with reason. It isn't the perfect quality, but at least intellect tries to solve problems" (2000M04); "I placed intellectual first because to enjoy life, you have to understand it."(2000M10). While the mean for Intellectual for males was lower (thus higher in ranking), the gifted and talented females seemed to speak more eloquently about the value of the intellect (which is the reason for the Summer Institute, a series of intensive intellectual classes taught on the college level, with subjects such as "What is Truth?" "The American Political Idea," and "Gene Cloning.") One of the females said, about the value, Intellectual: "I listed Imaginative, Intellectual, and Independent as the three most important values . . . because living is about exploring, creating, and wandering as well as making choices" (2001F27). However, anti-intellectualism was also present. One male said, "At the bottom was Intellectual. If I spent my entire life gathering facts, what would I have to reflect on?" (2000M16).

Students overwhelmingly put Clean on the bottom of the rankings. Perhaps this is because Clean just doesn't seem to fit in with the other values and they didn't know where to put it. One young woman commented, "The last choice was clean, and that is only because it seemed less important than the others - not because it's not important at all" (2000F43). Another said, "I chose clean as my lowest choice because cleanliness has little to do with intelligence. Some of the most brilliant and creative people I know are very messy, but that does not affect how smart and capable they are." She thought being neat and clean might hinder creativity: "When things are spotless and neat, I often feel restrained because everything is so perfect. I find a messy or cluttered room easier to relax in" (2000F36). The males also spoke disparagingly about the value Clean: "I put "Polite" and "Clean" at the bottom, not because I am mean or have bad hygiene, but because I feel a contribution to yourself or society is more important than a "thank you" or a tidy floor in your room." He concluded, "As I have heard it stated, "the floor is, in reality, the biggest shelf in your house" (2001M13).

A gender-related side-note might be appropriate here. The females also spoke of "cleanING," as part of their duty, but none of the males did. "You don't always have to be tidy. Sometimes it is better to do the other things than worry about when you are going to clean" (2001F50)"; " Disorganization increases memory, you have to remember what you did with everything. I just don't care to clean (with exceptions in personal hygiene of course)" (2000F12); "Clean for me is hard to do. Things that need to be tidy can be, but others I just don't want to take the time like my room. Maybe when I get older I will clean more, but for now it's just a bother. When I do clean I clean real good" (2000F15).

Students debated inwardly about the meanings of the values. One female about the term Intellectual, "I would rather be perceived as someone intellectual with a passion for learning than someone intellectual for the sake of logic" (2001 F12). Students were quite particular in deciding which values they placed at the top and the bottom; they seemed more vague about the middle ones, indicating strong feelings of positive or negative relationship to the implications and connotations of the words listed. As I entered the data, I understood the students' frustration, as I mentally put the values in rank order for my own self, changed them, and then changed them again.

Interviews were also conducted with the 2001 students (Buckalew, 2001). Buckalew asked students how responsive their schools were in the development of their values. Students spoke with candor and frankness: "Responsive? [Laugh] Not at all." "I have choices in two areas - few or none." A young woman who went to a Christian school noted that her peer group is religious also, so she holds the same values as they do.

Besides family, school, and community influencing the values, students also pointed to characters in books (e.g.: The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupery), to "my grade school principal - he was a very moral person."

Although students chose Broad-Minded as one of the top values, when questioned, they indicated they would not be so broad-minded if their own top values were challenged. One said, "I feel okay with it so long as I keep my top two or three." Some wanted to influence others through debate and discussion: "I try to talk to them;"; "It can get heated if they're vastly different." Most were also open to the possibility that their values would change (Buckalew, 2001).

Three themes emerged from the interviews (Buckalew, 2001). The first concerned the influence of their families on the development of their values: "It takes a village to raise a child and it begins with Mom and Dad"; "Parents have all the responsibility." Mothers were specifically mentioned more often than fathers. The second theme was the lack of responsiveness of their schools to what they valued. "It is not responsive. Period"; "I don't like going to school at all"; "It's boring and unresponsive"; "I have absolutely no decent choices." Students seemed to feel that their values were not being considered because schools couldn't bridge the gap between emphasis on teaching to low/middle students and to those like themselves, who needed intellectual challenges. Perhaps this disdain for the efforts their schools put in to shape their values counted for the relatively low place of Intellectual on their scales (See Tables 1 & 2). A third theme in the interviews (Buckalew, 2001) was that the students felt they had a personal responsibility to develop their values, and to match their college choices with the values that they held.

Values form beliefs and may predict actions. Few studies have been done on the values of the gifted and talented, but much is said of these students' roles in the meritocratic society. "These are our future leaders," say some. In 1988, the Congress of the U.S. passed the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act of 1988, under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title IV. This act noted that gifted and talented students were a "natural resource vital to the future of the Nation and its security and well-being." This view of certain human beings as a "natural resource" implies that other humans are not. Critical theorists criticize the idea of the meritocracy, but for educators in the field of the education of the gifted and talented, this idea is seldom questioned. If these are to be our future leaders and if these students are a prime natural resource, the values they hold are important as values influence decisions and actions.

Adolescents in the early high school years often hold onto the values that have been instilled into them at home, school, and church. Students may go into depression as they become relativists; that is, when they grow and develop into considering other points of view as having value, and when their own family-based values are in question. The present study showed that gifted and talented adolescents seem to have few doubts as to what values are important. That over half of them uphold the value of Salvation as being the primary terminal value is surprising as most of these students attend public high schools where the separation of the teaching of religion and teaching about religion is strenuously held. A study of self concept and personality attributes of students in a similar midwestern state who were upperclassman attending a residential high school for the humanities, sciences, and mathematics (Adams, Dixon, and Cross, 2001) showed that these students devalued religiosity and spirituality. What do these differences between students at a residential high school and students at a one-week summer program show?

The four graduate students who analyzed the 2002 data for their M.Ed. in Curriculum and Instruction With Emphasis in Talent Development Education Inquiry Seminar study wrote an interesting conclusion to their study and I quote it here:

The subjects used for this research were removed, both physically and emotionally from the events of September 11. None had a loved one killed or injured in the attacks. None had a person close to them involved in the aftermath clean-up. None had even gone to "Ground Zero" to visit the wreckage. While there were some who placed a World at Peace high on their list, most did not. Nobody placed National Security high. These finding are somewhat surprising as world peace has been disrupted, the security of our nation has broken down, and yet the youth at a Middle Western Honor's Institute feel little threat, find minimal intimidation from these catastrophic events. THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR SOME FINE MATHEMATICAL INFORMATION BY JO SUE TO SUPPORT THAT THESE KIDS JUST DON'T CARE (Miller, McClair, Prusha, & Roberts, 2002).

I would concur and state that the findings are not merely surprising, but perfidious. In discussions with colleagues about this study, we find ourselves conjecturing why the talented high school students of Ohio would feel so invulnerable. Is it their developmental age, where the feeling of invincibility leads some to drive drunk, to take physical risks, and to think that nothing will ever happen to them? Is it some kind of politically correct education, perhaps a result of having parents who grew up in the 1960s where it is not cool to be patriotic? Is it in their lack of global awareness? Is it in growing up in a materialistic, "me" culture, where youthful altruism and sacrifice is not emphasized? I leave you, the readers, to have your own discussions.

References

Adams, C., Dixon, C., Cross, T. (2001). Psychological, social, and emotional development of academically gifted adolescents in a residential setting. Paper presented at the 82^nd AERA Annual Meeting, 2001, Seattle, Washington.

Bilsky, W., & Schwartz, S. (1994). Values and personality. European Journal of Personality, 8 (3), 163-181.

Brathswaite, V. (1998). The value orientations underlying liberalism-conservatism. Personality & Individual Differences, 25 (3), 575-589.

Buckalew, S. (2001). Factors that influence the values of gifted high school students. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Ashland University.

Buier, R.M., Butman, R.E., Burwell, R., & Van Wicklin, J. (1989). The critical years: Changes in moral and ethical decision-making in young adults at three Christian liberal arts colleges. Journal of Psychology & Christianity, 8 (3), 69-78.

Cawley, P., Fauser, K., Jones, C., Kerns, K., & Knapp, L. (2000). What values do gifted high school students hold important? Six studies on talented adolescents from the Ohio Summer Honors Institutes at Ashland University. Unpublished master theses. Ashland University, Ashland, Ohio.

Coyne, B. J. (1988). The predictive validity of the Rokeach Value Survey for college academic achievement. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 48 (1), 165-173.

Cross, T., et al. (2001). A study of talented teenagers at a school for math and science.

Darmody, J. P. (1991). The adolescent personality, formal reasoning, and values. Adolescence, 26 (103), 731-742.

DiDio, L., Sarabovi, C., Koestner, R., & Aube, J. (1996). Liking personal values to gender. Sex Roles, 34 (9-10), 621-636.

Fairbairn, R., & James, J. (2001). What values do gifted and talented adolescents hold? Unpublished Master's Thesis. Ashland University.

Feather, N.T. (1998). Attitudes toward high achievers, self-esteem, and value priorities for Australian, American, and Canadian students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29 (6), 749-759.

Fernald, L.W., & Solomon, G. T. (1987). Value profiles of male and female entrepreneurs. Journal of Creative Behavior, 21 (3), 234-247.

Gibbins, K., & Walker, I. (1993). Multiple interpretations of the Rokeach Value Survey. Journal of Social Psychology, 133 (6), 797-805.

Glover, R.J. (1991). Value selection in relation to grade in school and stage of moral reasoning. Psychological Reports, 68 (3, Pt 1), 931-937.

Johnston, C. S. (1995). The Rokeach Value Survey: Underlying structure and multidimensional scaling. Journal of Psychology, 129 (5), 583-597.

Miethe, T.D. (1985). The validity and reliability of value measurements. Journal of Psychology, 119 (5), 441-453.

Miller, J.S., McClair, R., Prusha, J., & Roberts, C. (2002). The values of talent adolescents: Summer 2002. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Ashland University.

Piirto, J. (2002, April). The values of talented adolescents. Paper Presented at the 83^rd American Educational Research Association Meeting, New Orleans, LA.

Rokeach, M. (1983). Rokeach values survey-Form G. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.