DESCRIBING AND EXPLAINING THE PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL
MORAL CODES CONSIDERED BY ADMINISTRATORS
AS THEY MAKE DECISIONS
BY
DAVID E. PHILLIPS

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements of
for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
K-12 Educational Administration
2011

ABSTRACT
DESCRIBING AND EXPLAINING THE PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL
MORAL CODES CONSIDERED BY ADMINISTRATORS
AS THEY MAKE DECISIONS
BY
DAVID E. PHILLIPS

Every administrative action a principal will take is reduced to a decision. These
decisions are made in an arena of overlapping moralities stemming from the organizational
morality in concert with his/her personal morality. As Barnard stated, it is impossible to divorce
one from the other. The purpose of this study was to attempt to describe and explain the
personal and professional moral codes considered by a set of school administrators as they make
decisions.
This descriptive study examines the contributing experiences of 25 principals‘
backgrounds influencing the development and establishment of their personal moral code. The
study also considers the role professional codes contribute to principal decisions. To establish a
theoretical foundation for the project, the study explores the views of Hebert Simon, Immanuel
Kant and Henri Bergson. . The three views describe morality from differing perspectives: Simon
from an organization view, Kant‘s perspective duty-based morality, and Bergson‘s description of
Open and Closed morality. Correlations are drawn from scenarios shared by principals as to
which theory decisions represented.
The majority of the principals in this study came from hard working, modest
backgrounds, where upward mobility and a ferocious belief in the power of education are
common themes in their upbringing. Principals consider themselves an important piece of the

school organization. In reality, they are a good ―fit‖ for leading the institution of schooling. The
study concludes that in most circumstances, principals‘ personal morality and organizational
morality mesh to support safety, learning and efficiency in managing schools.

DEDICATION
I dedicate this project to my parents,
Thomas (deceased) and Florence Phillips. For your
commitment, sacrifice and perseverance
to raise my brothers and myself to
appreciate life, our talents, and our values.
I also dedicate this project to my four brothers,
Larry (deceased), Frank, Tom Jr., and Dennis.
With pride we represent our parents‘ dedication.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study would not have been possible without the support, encouragement and
assistance of many individuals.
First, I would like to extend my gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Philip Cusick. As he often
spoke of other intelligent individuals he studied, I will do the same. Dr. Cusick is a ―really smart
guy‖. I enjoyed our conversations and especially his wisdom. Thankfully, he stayed on one
more term. I wish him well in his retirement.
I would also like to extend my appreciation to the rest of my committee. Thanks go to
Dr. David Arson for providing me valuable guidance in preparing my proposal and ongoing
support. Thanks also to Dr. Susan Printy, for her willingness to provide guidance, direction and
encouragement throughout the program. Finally, to Dr. Suzanne Wilson, my ―go-to‖ person
when I needed to make a significant decision on my study. Suzanne‘s assistance elevated my
confidence when it was most needed.
To my sons, Bryan and Brad, and other members of my immediate and extended family, so
many times they heard, ―I have to read‖…‖I have to write‖…‖I have to go to the library.‖ Their
support in my absences is acknowledged and appreciated.
Thank you to my cohort group with who I remained in contact throughout the program.
Particular thanks go to Herve, Karin, Keri, Mike, John, Nomalinga, Melissa and others who at
one time or many provided assistance, tutoring, and encouragement.
To my editors, Maureen Altermatt and Dawn Sprinkles, thank you for dedicating your
time and expertise to my dissertation. Thanks to Derrek Ross who draw the short straw by being

v

my Assistant Principal for most of the program. He listened to every one of my stories and
ideas. Finally, I extend my gratitude to Janet Alcini, who while in the process of managing her
own doctoral studies, would always pick up the phone to help with statistics and interpreting
quantitative research. Numerous others have lent an ear or assistance. Your contributions are
appreciated as well.
I believe leaders are made. I have had a few solid role models to hone my skills as
principal. These are same skills I hand down to all my understudies. Thanks to my coaching
friends Jack Crabtree and Ed Gall who taught me the essence of leadership. They put me on the
track. Thanks to administrators in my early years, who would always have time to build my
credibility as an administrator. These early mentors include, Paul Thibault, Clem Corona, David
Mieras, Clarence Lacny, Jerry Pound, and Ellen Ewing. They established my foundation and
gave me a chance to lead.
I turn to my South Lyon colleagues who have supported me and made this effort possible.
Superintendent Bill Pearson and Assistant Superintendent Jean Schmeichel have provided me
with an informed perspective of the key pieces to lead a successful school district. I learn
something from each of them in every conversation we have. Their patience and strong
leadership has served my own career well.
Finally, there is one more acknowledgement. It is to Larry Jackson. Mr. Jackson has
been my mentor since I first came to South Lyon in 1997. As it was then and continues today,
Larry always has time for a question. Larry is not only a professional colleague but a friend as
well.

Thank you to all.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………. v
LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………vi
CHAPTER I
BACKGROUND………………………………………………………………………… 1
Introduction and Purpose of the Study……………………………………………...1
Conceptual Framework…………………………………………………………….. 5
Theoretical Framework…………………………………………………………….. 7
Initial Exploratory Questions………………………………………………………. 10
Methodology……………………………………………………………………….. 10
Significance of the Study…………………………………………………………... 12
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………………………………………… 14
Introduction………………………………………………………………………… 14
Decision Theory…………………………………………………………………… 15
Influence of Values on Rationality…….……………………………………………18
Securing the Unitarian Perspective………………………………………………… 18
Morals and Moral Development………………………………………….…………19
Defining Morality………………………………………………………….. 19
Immanuel Kant-Categorical Imperative…………………………………… 20
Bergson‘s Theory on Moral Obligation……………………………………. 23
Bergson – Closed Morality …………………………………………………24
Bergson – Open Morality………………………………………………..….25
Moral Development……………………………………………………..…. 26
Kohlberg‘s Theory of Moral Development…………………………………28
Social/Cognitive Learning Theory…………………………………………. 31
Moral Decision Making……………………………………………………. 31
Moral Decision Making Models…………………………………………… 32
Alternative Decision Theory Models………………………………………………. 33
Utility – The Rules of Maximization………………………………………. 34
Contingency Theory/Leader Match………………………………………... 35
Extensions of the Contingency Model…………………………………….. 36
Unitary vs. Shared Decision Making………………………………………. 39
Data Driven Decision Making……………………………………………... 41
Emerging Models: Adaptive and Distributive Leadership…………………………41
vii

Competing Values Framework…………………………………………….. 42
Principal Development……………………………………………………………...43
Professional Pathways and Principal Learning…………………………………….. 44
Role of the Principal……………………………………………………………….. 45
Technical Skills……………………………………………………………………. 46
Non-Technical (Soft Skills)………………………………………………... 46
Ethical Decisions in the Principalship……………………………………………... 48
Learning the Craft…………………………………………………………………. 49
Mentoring…………………………………………………………………. 49
Principal Schools – Internships/Academies……………………………..…. 50
Personal Development ……………………….………………………………….… 51
Personal Background/Structures…………………………………………………… 52
Role of the Family…………………………………………………………. 52
Demographic Considerations………………………………………………. 52
External Influences and Policy…………………………………………………...…53
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001………………………………………… 56
Internal Influences…………………………………………………………………. 57
Principal Stories……………………………………………………………. 58
Values……………………………………………………………………… 59
On –the-Job Training/Professional Development………………………….. 60
Personal Development – Profound Experiences…………………………….60
Summary…………………………………………………………………………….61
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………. 62
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………………………… 64
Introduction………………………………………………………………………… 64
Theoretical Framework…………………………………………………………….. 64
Initial Exploratory Questions………………………………………………………. 67
Sampling Strategies…………………………………………………………………67
Research Procedures……………………………………………………………….. 68
Subject –Selection Considerations………………………………………….68
Mid Course Adjustments……………………………………………………69
Demographics……………………………………………………………… 69
Revised Interview Protocol………………………………………………… 71
Data Collection…………………………………………………………………… 72
Interview…………………………………………………………………… 72
Interview Process…………………………………………………………... 74
Backward Mapping………………………………………………………….75
Interview Protocol………………………………………………………….. 76
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA…………………………………… 78
Research Procedures………………………………………...…………………….. 78
Subject – Selection Procedures……………………………………..……………… 78
Sorting the Data…………………………………………………………… 80
viii

Prominent Themes…………………………………………………………. 81
Data Analysis………………………………………………………………………. 81
Theme #1: Principals as Moral Individuals……………………………………….. 81
Giving Care for Students……………………………………………………88
Working with Families…………………………………………………….. 90
Giving Care – Taking Care of Staff……………………………………….. 91
Safe School Buildings……………………………………………………… 93
Theme #2: Personal/Professional Moral Development as Influenced by Famil,
Religion, and Education………………………….………………………… 95
Translation of Moral Obligation – Family, Religion, Education and Work...97
Translated Family Values/Religion………………………………………... 97
Education………………………………………………………………..… 101
Principal Modeling – Work Ethic………………………………………….. 103
Theme #3: Organizational/Professional Morality – Simon……………………….. 105
Theme #4: Kant – Duty/Moral Imperative………………………………………... 118
Morality of the Act…Not the Result…………………………………….… 119
Good Will……………………………………………………………….… 125
Summary of Kant‘s Philosophy………………………………………….… 126
Theme #5: Personal and Professional Morality – Bergson………………………... 126
Decisions - Closed Morality…………………………………………….…. 129
Decisions – Open Morality………………………………………………... 135
Going Against the Grain………………………………………………….... 138
Academic Achievement……………………………………………………. 140
Theme #6: Overlapping Moralities – Areas of Shades of Gray……………………145
Personal Morality vs. Organization Morality…………………………….…146
Additional Consideration on Describing and Explaining Decisions…………….… 156
Shared Decision Making………………………………………………….…157
Mentors………………………………………………………………….…..160
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS……………………………………………………… 164
Revisiting the Research Questions………………………………………………….165
Research Question #1……………………………………………………… 165
Research Question #2……………………………………………………… 166
Research Question #3……………………………………………………… 167
Research Question #4……………………………………………………… 173
Simon and Educational Decisions……………………………………………….… 174
Kant and Educational Decisions…………………………………………………… 174
Bergson and Educational Decisions………………………………………………...176
CONCLUSIONS…………………………………………………………………………... 178
Decisions Focused on the Organization – Simon…………………………………...182
Decisions: Good Will and Duty – Kant……………………………………………. 183
Decisions: Closed and Open Morality – Bergson………………………………….. 184
Decisions in the Areas of Shades of Gray…………………………………………. 187
Principal Reflection……………………………………………………………...… 187
ix

The Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….. 195
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………. 198

x

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1

Principals Experience in Education……………………………………….. 78

Table2

Principal Experience as Building Administrators………………………..… 79

Table 3

Breakdown of Administrative Positions in the Study……………………… 79

Table 4

Principals‘ Education – Highest Degree Held…………………………..… 80

Table 5

School Demographics………………………………………………………80

Table 6

Gender Breakdown……………………………………………………..… 90

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1

Conceptual Model of the Study…………….......................................................5

Figure 2

Principal Background- Social Class………………………………………….178

Figure 3

Principal Background – Critical Influences………………………………….179

Figure 4

Relationship of Principal Experience and Alignment with Theorist…………185

Figure 5

Relationship of Principal Highest Degree and Theorist……………………...186

Figure 6

Overlapping Moralities in an Organization…………………………………..187

Figure 7

Principal Decision Chart……………………………………………………..190

xii

CHAPTER I
Introduction and Purpose of the Study

Background:
In his Functions of an Executive, Chester Barnard (1937) wrote: "the chief difference
between the lower and the higher ranks is not in the capacity of responsibility, but in the
condition of moral complexity. (p 275) By moral complexity, Barnard meant --(roughly
paraphrased) – that, as one assumes a high rank in an organization, one takes on as set of moral
codes in addition to personal moral codes. That is, as he explains, one takes on…
―government codes as applying to his company", . . the ..."system of objective
authority", the . . . "general moral standards of his subordinates", the. . ." technical
situation as a whole", . . . the "codes of official conduct", and the "good of the
organization". (p. 273).
Again quoting Barnard, while many of these moral codes such as the "government codes
that apply to his company" are, in most cases, a ―non-personal‖ set of moral codes that overlap
with one another. As in,
. . . one cannot divorce his professional conduct from his private
morals. When such issues occur, the alternatives presented are either
to violate one's personal morality or to fail in an official or
professional obligation" (p. 274)
Barnard, who in his time had served as Board Chairman for AT&T, combined codes of
personal morality with codes of professional behavior. He argued that in order to exercise
administrative office, one had to combine personal morality with several professional codes. He
added a warning of the consequences of moral failings:
Resignation or withdrawal is often a solution which circumstances legitimately permit.
Then the result is maintenance of personal integrity. When resignation or withdrawal it
itself highly immoral, as is sometimes the case, there is potential tragedy". (p. 274)

1

Addressing the duality of moral obligations, Crawford (2009) cites Robert Jackell‘s
reflection on middle managers,
… and the moral maze they feel trapped in… the manager faces possibility of disaster at
any time. But in his case, these disasters are arbitrary. They are result of corporate
restructuring, not physics…unlike the entrepreneur, decisions can be reversed by
someone higher up…and there is always someone higher up. It‘s important that reversals
not look like defeats…you spend a lot of time managing what others think of you.
Survival depends on crucial insight…with moral conviction, without losing your
integrity… (p. 40)
The integration of personal morality into administration and organizational success also
shows up in Cusick's Passion for Learning" (2005), in which he argues that seven eminent
Americans who administered large and successful endeavors combine strong moral codes with
their administrative obligations. They…
…understood that the goal was responsibility, not riches, none suffered from or even
entertained notions of unenlightened self interest. Doing the right thing was a social and
utilitarian as well as a personal and moral duty. They took for granted that one's self and
the world would be better off if one did the right, the ethical and moral thing (p. 157)
The starting point of this study is that a set of school administrators, like everyone else,
has a set of personal moral codes. And when one attains one or other school-administrative
positions, then one enters into a place where there are several overlapping, possibly competing,
moral codes. Principals attend to the business of school through decision making. The range of
decisions encompasses situations that may be considered routine to those that may have long
term implications. Concurrently, principals assume roles that define the types of decisions that
become the principal‘s responsibility. For instance, there are state and federal guidelines
extending to curriculum, tests, and achievements; there are employee bargaining units, discipline
codes, and special education rules about students who suffer from one or another impairment,
etc. And, in time, an administrator‘s professional "codes" may conflict not only with other
professional codes but with the administrator‘s personal moral code. To give one example,
2

NCLB demands that children designated as "special" in any form are obligated to take the state's
annual achievement tests. These codes that accompany the position may sometimes conflict with
what the administrator personally believes …of what he/she does not believe and does not want
to believe in. As one administrator recounted after having to enforce NCLB requirements which
demand that impaired students take the state achievement test…
―…the teacher calls me, the kid's crying, he can't even read the test;
she has to make him sit there and it's been two hours, so she's
crying, and I have to tell her that he has to take the test. It's awful.‖
The administrator is making a moral choice. In this case his obligation to enforce federal
guidelines over the possibility of acting compassionately in favor of the frustrated teacher and
crying student. The argument is that instances of overlapping and conflicting moral codes are -if not frequent -- worthy of further study, particularly in a time and in a state where the rules
continue to change. The taking over of school operational funding as Michigan did in 1994; the
increased scrutiny of test results, and the parallel increase of the state‘s curricular guidelines, and
less-than predictable enrollments occasioned by choice, charter, home schooling, and Michigan‘s
employment downturn make administrative decision-making more complex or, if not more
complex then at least changing in complexity. In terms of change, it may be similar to the time
beginning in the mid 1960s with Civil Rights and ensuing ―rights‖ movements that brought in
levels of moral considerations to which administrators at the time were not accustomed. And
such changes are likely to be reflected in administrative decisions and in potential conflicts with
administrators‘ moral standards. There is also the matter of social class interests which may
underlie any decision. As critical theorists note, ―Any endeavor to apply social coercion in the
interest of any given decision may be done to solidifying ideals that are sure to be intricately
bound up with special class interests (Morals in review. (p. 309) (Rogers, A.K. Macmillan, 1927)

3

Again referring to Barnard (1937) quoted above, administrators are being asked to take
on additional sets of moral codes. And, therefore, the purpose of this study is to attempt to
describe and explain the personal and professional moral codes considered by a set of school
administrators as they make decisions.

Conceptual Framework
The purpose of this study is to attempt to describe and explain the personal and
professional moral codes of a set of school administrators as they make decisions. To develop an
understanding of dilemmas, challenges and choices principals must consider in making
decisions, the conceptual model for this study will focus on the following sources of influence:
A. Decision making models, theory, principal preparation and practice.
B. Internal Influences including personal moral growth and resulting
moral codes and the sources of influence.
C. Personal and Professional morals principals bring to their roles as
decision makers.
D. External factors relative to policy decisions and to policy constraints.
Every principal choice is reduced to a decision. School settings, complete with innate
issues; provide endless opportunities for principals to make decisions. Many are instantaneous,
drawing from experience as to what is the appropriate direction. Others are complex, take time
and provide conflicting options. Still a principal finds his/herself in the midst of various
overlapping interest and needs (Cusick, 1973). The setting supports a confounding array of
choices, responsibility and human needs. As this study will attempt to explain the personal and
professional moral codes a set of school administrators consider as they make decisions, it is
necessary for this study to examine the array of influences that surround a principal making

4

decisions. This project will elicit these factors as influencing decisions and as they support or
confound the principals‘ own morality.
Figure 1: Conceptual Model of the Study
Personal Background
Family
Religion
Gender
Training

Moral Development
Moral Development
Organization MoralityDuty
Personal Morality

External Influence
Educational Policy
Decisions
Educational Policy
Constraints /
Organizational
Expectations.

Roles
Instructional Leader
Technician (School
Business)
Caretaker

Principal Decision
Making
Daily
Operations/Safety
Discipline-Staff and
Student
Instructional
Improvement

Principal decisions are value laden. More than a player in bureaucratic master game plan,
principals struggle daily with tensions and ethical dilemmas that position one value against
another. The argument of this study will challenge the research to include another view of
principal decision making. How does one‘s background, particularly the internal and external
influences, develop the filters (values) from which principals make their decisions? The internal
structures of family, social class and religion were set as the historical platforms to development
personal stories of principals. The external influences or the ―forces of the ages‖ (Cusick, 2005)
are also critical contributors to the personal education of principals.
To provide a comprehensive understanding of the practice of decision making, it was
necessary to tap into existing research relative to the process. My research discovers that the
literature is replete with scientific and qualitative contributions to the study of decision making.

5

My research also presents a myriad of models, studies, training, and practices, as well as
theoretical elucidation of executive choices. The settings for the studies (both scientific and
descriptive) vary from private sector, to military as well as education. Each of the studies and
models, however, assumes a position from a manager‘s perspective where quantitative measures
provide assigned values to the results.
School management is a significant responsibility for principals. The application to
several of the models (to be reviewed in Chapter 2) is limited to management-related decisions.
Although the school setting and interests are not extrapolated in these studies, it is appropriate to
include this research as a backdrop to previous efforts in the study of decision making.
However, the unique demands a school setting places on principal decision makers calls for an
extended study beyond existing research.
The second key area of influence focuses on the interior factors weighing on principal
decision making. A prominent hypothesis to this study is that personal background and its
contribution to the development of individual principal‘s moral code is a critical consideration in
the decision making process or principals. In the midst of other influences, to what degree does
a principal‘s personal morality support or conflict with expectations?
Policy decision and constraints over the past two decades enhance the role of the
principal. School improvement legislation, particularly the No Child Left Behind Act of 1995,
shifts the accountability lens to the school setting. Notwithstanding, the effectiveness of the
principal is identified as a key contributor to a school‘s success. Expectations placed on
principals are clear…achievement is a non-negotiable. Most recently, Race to the Top
legislation extends the NCLB act by mandating principal practice. In the coming years, a
common curriculum will be in place to measure students‘ performance based on aligned and

6

common assessment. The literature is replete with descriptive reports on the intentions of
NCLB. The goal of assuring all children will be proficient by 2014 has been determined to be
an unrealistic goal. Yet the accountability of school buildings and in particular the principal is
ratcheted up significantly. Have policy and policy constraints limited principal decisions
making? Or does personal and professional morality hold up to policy in deciding what are the
best courses of action for students? Are principal choices being limited or even eliminated?
This study will provide a snapshot of a set of principals as to how they negotiate the external
factors influencing their decisions.
Theoretical Framework
Studies on executive decision making have attempted to explain the process in relation to
an external set of circumstances, conditions, or environment. Studies of this nature fail to
consider individual human moral choices as a mitigating variable in the process of making
decisions. The purpose of this study is to attempt to describe and explain the personal and
professional moral codes considered by a set of school administrators as they make decisions.
The process is viewed as a personal endeavor, influenced by one‘s own history and background
in the midst of circumstance, conditions, or environments.
To study the implications of organizational morality, the researcher has chosen the work
of Hebert Simon who provides a theoretical lens into the underpinnings of organizational
behavior. Simon‘s work speaks to organizational expectations and efficiencies relative to
decision making in support of the organization‘s goals. Simon isolates decisions in terms what is
good for the organization. Simon‘s theory provides a relative framework to research studying
principal decisions:
The human being striving for rationality and restricted within the limits of his knowledge
has developed some working procedures that partially overcome these difficulties. These
7

procedures consist in assuming that he can isolate from the rest of the world a closed
system containing a limited number of variables and a limited range of consequences.
(Simon, 1976, p.82)
Chester Barnard, cited earlier in providing perspective organizational morality, supports
Simon‘s bounded rationality by separating personal needs from organizational needs:
…the decisions that an individual makes as a member of an organization are quite distinct
from his personal decisions. Personal choices may determine whether an individual joins
a particular organization, and continue to be made in his or her extra–organizational
private life. But, as a member of an organization, that individual makes decisions not in
relationship to personal needs and results, but in an impersonal sense as part of the
organizational intent, purpose, and effect…(Barnard 1938), p. 77 cited by Simon 1976,
pp. 202–203).
Alternatively, two prominent theorists provide another critical link to the researcher‘s
attempt to describe and explain the personal and professional moral codes of a set of school
administrators as they make decisions. 18th century German philosopher, Immanuel Kant and
French philosopher, Henri Bergson, influential especially in the first half of the 20th century, also
support the intellectual foundation of the study.
Immanuel Kant‘s theory of the Categorical Imperative and Deontological Ethics
establishes the moral obligation of performing one‘s duty. Kant‘s theory focuses on
deontological or duty-based ethics. It judges the nature of actions and the will of agents rather
than goals achieved. The inputs and intentions are critical, not the result. Deontological ethics
are concerned with what people do, not with the consequences of their actions. It is from the
Categorical Imperative that all other moral obligations are generated and by which all moral
obligations can be tested. Kant (1959) also states that the moral means and ends can be applied
to the categorical imperative…that the rational beings can pursue certain ―ends‖ using the
appropriate ―means‖. Ends that are based on physical needs or wants always provide for mere
hypothetical imperatives. The categorical imperative, however, may be based only on something

8

that is an ―end to itself‖. That is, an end that means only to itself and not to some other need,
desire or purpose. (Kant, p. 421) Kant believes that the moral law is a principle of reason itself
and is not based on contingent facts about the world, such what would make us happy.
Accordingly, Kant submits that moral obligation applies to all, but only rational agents (p.408).
A third theorist extends Kant‘s theory. Henri Bergson‘s theory of Moral Obligation
acknowledges, but also broadens, Kant‘s structured reasoning to explain ―exceptional‖ occasions
where the lines of duty and obligation cannot be followed to meet moral obligations. Bergson
convinced many thinkers that immediate experience and intuition are more significant than
rationalism and science for understanding reality. Bergson considers the appearance of novelty
as a result of pure undetermined creation, instead of as the predetermined result of mechanistic
forces. His philosophy emphasizes pure mobility, unforeseeable novelty, creativity and freedom;
thus, one can characterize his system as a process philosophy. Bergson touches upon such topics
as time and identity, free will, perception, change, memory, consciousness, language, the
foundation of mathematics and the limits of reason. For Bergson, Kant fell short in his rational
principles relative to the Categorical Imperative. Human emotions, intuition, wisdom and
creativity provide an alternative view of duty.
It is between and within the deliberations of Simon, Kant and Bergson‘s analysis that the
foundation for this study is established. It is not the researcher‘s purpose to explain in great
depth Simon, Kant and Bergson‘s theories. The underlying principles of their work will be
utilized to explain and describe the moral codes of principals as they make decisions in their
roles.

9

Initial Exploratory Questions

As the purpose of this study is to attempt to describe and explain the moral codes of a set
of school administrators as they make decisions, four sets of questions will be addressed in the
course of the pending research. The four questions are as follows:
1. What does research reveal about theories on morality and decision making? Related
questions address conceptual models for decision making and to what degree these
theories and models apply to principal decision making.
2. What are the skill sets that define the context of principal decision making? Specific
additional questions dealt with the common pathways to the principalship, university
preparation programs, formal experiences and mentoring.
3. How do principals‘ personal morals and moral development influence principal decision
making? Considering particular dilemmas, specific additional questions focused on how
family structures and religion impact a principal on resolving those dilemmas.
4. How have recent policy decisions, specifically The No Child Left Behind Act, made an
impacted on principal decision making? To what extent does policy conflict with one‘s
moral code?

Methodology
To extend current knowledge of what influences principal decision making, open
interviewing has been chosen as the method of research. The research design enables the
proposed study to elicit personally- constructed perspectives of decision making from practicing
administrators. The ethnographic approach is also an appropriate means of dissecting the
complexities of decision making. The qualitative approach provides a platform to understand
behavior (decisions) of individual school principals as they are placed in the context of their
lives. Variables of interest to which the questions are posed, focus on each person‘s experiences
and background and the decisions they make in their role as principal. A critical consideration
with the use of an open interview is that answers will not be standardized. The merit of utilizing

10

qualitative approaches such as interviews and observations will be expounded upon in greater
detail in Chapter 3. It is important to note that a potential bias does exist in that the researcher is
a practicing principal. Although every effort is made to present objective questions and
responses, the opportunity to influence responses through cues and unintended affirmations does
exist in human interaction and should be taken into consideration by the reader of this study.
To conduct this inductive study, the researcher utilizes the process of theoretical
sampling. Glasser and Strauss (1967) describe the practice as:
―…a process of data collection for generating theory whereby the analyst jointly
collects, codes and analyzes this data and decides what data to collect next and
where to find them, in order to develop his theory as it emerges. This process of
data collection is controlled by the emerging theory whether substantive or formal
(p.105).‖
Theoretical sampling posits that the research may anticipate a patterns to emerge.
Personal notes will accompany interview transcriptions as primary data. Themes and categories
become products of the research and were not predetermined prior to the study.
The study is primarily limited to administrators at the middle and high school level.
Although a few elementary principals have been interviewed, they make up a minority of the
subjects included in the study. At the onset of the sampling process, an initial conversation with
each principal disclosed the purpose and nature of the study. A formal consent form will be
presented and reviewed, assuring confidentiality. Each interview will be audio- taped. The
interviews were transcribed by the researcher and reviewed on numerous occasions. With the
exception of three meetings, the interviews will be conducted in each subject‘s office. The
settings provided an opportunity to make observations and collect artifact information. These
observations serve to enhance the meaning and understanding of each of the interviews. These
artifacts include:

11

Awards, trophies
Family Pictures
Individual family pictures
Banners
Photographs of events
Newspaper clippings
Accreditation (NCA) certificates
Personal library
Religious symbols
School event posters

Student Art
Diplomas
Ball caps
Gifts from staff/students
Motivational posters
Greeting cards
Class photographs
Door open/closed
Personal interest artifacts/collections
Stuffed animals/Other collections

Significance of the Study
The essence of principals‘ work is making decisions. Weighing in on these decisions is
the increasing level of scrutiny on the principal‘s role in leading instructional programs to affect
student achievement. Notwithstanding is specific language in the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001 which speaks to the building principal as a primary contributor to a school‘s success or
failure measured by State assessment programs. To the individual principal, making Adequate
Yearly Process becomes a benchmark for effectiveness. Provisions of NCLB have not only
increased the expectations for student achievement but have also creates an environment where
instructional decisions become paramount in the role of the principal.
Never the less, the instructional day brings a myriad of decisions the principal must make
in the midst of policy requirements. The interrelation of Federal, State and local policy with the
responsibility of maintaining support and an environment conducive to learning, creates also
overlapping interests (Cusick, 1992) and needs which results in a myriad of decision options and
priorities in overseeing a school. Within this mix of circumstance, personalities and needs, the
principal alone must sort what is of value and decide the course of action. The significance of
this study places the attention on the variable of personal morals, unique to each administrator, as

12

a contributing influence on principal decision making. The absence of significant research on
principal morality has created space to add to the body of knowledge on decision making as well
as to extend the discourse on this significant aspect of the principalship.

13

CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH
Introduction
As the purpose of this study is to describe and explain the personal and professional
moral codes that are considered by principals as they make decisions, the following review of
literature is presented in a tiered hierarchy of relevant research. The review supports the
conceptual model of the study. The tiered progression of research will also serve to address the
research questions posed for this study.
To describe and explain the personal and professional moral codes that are considered by
principals as they make decisions, it necessary to survey existing research on the two variables
identified in the study, morals and decision making. While there is little research speaking to the
relationship of morals and principal decision making, a compilation of studies exist that
examines each variable.
To describe and explain the personal and professional moral codes that are considered by
principals as they make decisions, it is appropriate to review the current literature dedicated to
the study of morality and the sources from which it originates. A review of the primary theorists
relative to organizational behavior, morals, moral development and moral decision making
provides an initial tier of research supporting this project.
An abundance of research has also been conducted on executive decision making. Cited
frameworks such as contingency theory, organizational theory, and leader-trait, as well unitary
versus shared decision making models have provided contemporary guides toward understanding
how decisions are made. While the researcher‘s purpose of this study is to attempt to describe
and explain the personal and professional moral codes of a set of school administrators as they

14

make decisions, and study the influences on (principal) decision making, these existing models
provide a second tier of research that represent studies conducted on decision making.
A third tier to this literature review presents studies relative to how principals are
prepared to become decision makers. The review indicates a variety sources, programs,
experiences and options typically available to aspiring administrators. Suitably, mainstream
literature is cited relative to principal development. In these studies, relationships and
extraordinary experiences contribute to the unique tracks principals follow to their positions.
The final tier of the review provides space to the various external influences on decision
making. In particular, educational policy and policy decisions are identified as having a
significant influence on principals‘ decisions. Considerable focus is provided to current policy
structures, processes and expectations. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 sets the stage and
environment in which current decisions are made.

Decision Theory
Decision theory assumes that a standard is at hand, and proceeds to express this standard
in a precise and useful way. Decision means that someone makes a choice. Decision theory is
theory about decisions. The subject is not a unified one as there a multitude of ways to theorize
about decisions, represented by many research traditions. Decision theory is an interdisciplinary
area of study that concerns mathematicians, statisticians, economists, managers, politicians,
psychologists and social scientists who are interested in the analyses of decisions and their
consequences (Hansson, 1994). How each of these disciplines pursues decision theory may vary
greatly. However, each of these areas can benefit from the variety of methods researchers have
utilized in the same or similar problems. The basic representation of decision theory is the payoff

15

table which maps mutually exclusive decisions to mutually exclusive states of nature. Simply
stated, ―Decision X leads to Outcome Y‖ and ―Decision Y leads to Outcome Z‖.
Decision theory can be normative or descriptive. Normative decision theory refers to
theories about how we should make decisions in order to be rational. What ―should‖ means is
there are prerequisites for rational decision making (see Kant). Descriptive decision theory
refers to theory about how decisions are actually made-a perspective this project will undertake.
Descriptive decision theories are complex. It teaches us the about the variability of human
decision making. Since the normative decisions create hypotheses for testing against observed
behavior, the normative and descriptive fields are closely linked. Hansson continues,
…Although the scope of the normative is very limited in decision theory, the distinction
between normative and descriptive interpretations of decision theories is often blurred.
(p.7)
Condorcet (1793) provided the first general theory of the decision process. He divided
the decision process into three stages. The initial stage includes the discussion of the principles
that will serve as the basis of an issue. At this time an examination of the various aspects of the
issues are identified and the consequences of different ways to make decisions are weighed.
Most of the input at this point is personal. The second phase calls for a formal clarification of
the question. Opinions approach and combine with each other form to a smaller number of
general opinions. This allows for a reduced choice between a manageable set of the alternatives.
The final stage consists of the actual choice of alternatives. Condorcet‘s distinction between the
first and second discussions was meaningful but not referenced in modern decision theory
(Hansson, 1994).

Herbert Simon
To Simon (1955), decision making is at the heart of the organization.
16

A general theory of administration must include principles of organization that will
ensure correct decision making, must as it much include principles that will ensure
effective action…a theory of administration considers not only the process of the decision
but the process of the action it creates. (p. 1)
Simon argues for assigned roles for individuals and limitations imposed on decision
making. The roles define structure and create efficiency within an organization. As roles and
functions are defined, insight into the structures and functions of the organization can be attained
by analyzing the manner in which decisions and behavior of employees are influenced within the
organization. (p.1)
…the organization thus, takes from the individual some of his decision autonomy. The
decision with the organization makes for the individual ordinarily 1) specifies his
functions, that is, the general scope and nature of its duties; 2) Allocates authority, that is
who in the organization is to have power to make decisions for the individual; 3)sets
limits on choices. (p.8)
Specialization of responsibilities takes the form of ―vertical‖ division of labor...Simon
states:
…(vertical division of labor)…is absolutely essential to a achieve coordination
among cooperative employees. Vertical specialization permits greater expertise
in making decisions.
With decision making responsibilities and parameters strictly defined, variance is
minimized within the assigned divisions. Rationality is the goal. According to Simon, if
decisions are evaluated through entire ranges of human value, rationality in administration
cannot be attained. (p.13) Training supports the processes that lead to attainment of organization
goals. Training influences organizational members to reach satisfactory decisions themselves.
(p.15)
A primary premise of Simon‘s vertical hierarchy of roles is the creation of tiers of
responsibility layered to receive direction from the authority above. A system of hierarchy is

17

created where decisions reached in the high ranks of the organization will have no effect on
employees at each level unless there are means to communicate the decision downward.
Vertical alignment creates a unified structure supporting the ideals and goals developed at
the top of the organization. As goals are identified and roles are defined throughout the
hierarchy, Simon defines a ―unity of command‖ that keeps unnecessary layers within the
organization to a minimum. (p.22) Unity of command limits the layers through which a decision
must pass through before being acted upon.

Influence of Values on Rationality
Simon states that every decision involves elements of two kinds, ―factual‖ and ―valued‖.
Factual propositions are statements about the observable world and the way it operates tested to
be true and false whether what they say about the world actually occurs or whether it does not
(p.45). The propositions can be a description of the future state of affairs and then descriptions
can be true or false in an empirical sense...addition to an imperative quality they select one future
state of affairs in preference to one another and direct behavior toward the chosen alternative. In
short, they have an ethical as well as good intent. (p.46)

Securing the Unitarian Perspective
Critical to the Simon unitary perspective is loyalty to the organization. Relative to
Barnard‘s assertions regarding an organizational morality, individual values should have
minimal impact of efficiency. Yet, rationality is often challenged with conflicting values.
Simon states,
…the individual is limited by his values and those conceptions of purpose which
influence him in making decisions. If his loyalty to his organization is high, his
decisions may reflect high acceptance of the objectives set. If his loyalty is
lacking, personal motives may interfere with efficiency. (p.40)
18

To ensure loyalty and limit personal values, Simon states there must be purposeful action
to limit individual judgment.
One function that (the) organization performs is to place organization members
in a psychological environment that will adapt their decisions to the organization
objectives and will provide them with the information needed to make decisions
correctly. (p.78)
Simon answers the utility question of ―happiness‖ and well-being by limiting the decision
maker to the bounds of the organization. In other words, the wellbeing of the organization, not
the well-being of the individual members of the organization, is of prime importance.
To influence organizational decisions, Simon provides mechanisms for the organization
to apply:
Division of Labor – tasks are assigned, limiting attention to that task.
Standard practices-how particular tasks should be done in a prescribed manner.
Systems of authority, where decisions transmitted downward.
Channels of communication running in all directions through which information and
decision flows.
5) Internalization of influence, where the organizations trains and indoctrinates its
members. ― (p.104)
1)
2)
3)
4)

Morals and Moral Development
As the purpose of this study is to attempt to describe and explain the personal and
professional moral codes of a set of school administrators as they make decisions, a brief review
of moral development and decision theory will provide an intellectual basis for the study.
Defining Morality
Rogers (1927) cites Fichte who derives moral duties from two premises . . . one‘s
obligation to respect one‘s own dignity as a free being and one‘s obligation always so to act as
not to violate the equal freedom of other men… (p. 360) Fichte believes that, ― the kind of
philosophy which one adopts depends on the sort of man one is … for a philosophical system is

19

not a lifeless piece of human nature that one might take or discard… but it is animated by the
soul of the man who has it. (Fichte, p.434) Such notions of self and other run throughout the
literature on morality. As MacDonald (2002) explains, morality is a system of rules that modifies
our behavior in a social situation. It is doing well instead of harm and sets some virtuous
standards of conduct or moral codes. It is a set of ethics that guides one‘s behavior.
Immanuel Kant – Categorical Imperative and Deontological Ethics
The Categorical Imperative is the ultimate norm for morality. All moral laws appear to
us as an imperative. (Sullivan, 1994, p.28)
Harnack (1974), citing Kant:
It is necessary to distinguish between a person‘s moralities, a moral system
and ethics. To talk about a person‘s morality is talk about his acts and
his behavior…it is talk about the moral righteousness and wrongness.
To talk about moral systems is to talk about the principles according to
which one judges whether a person‘s act or behavior is right or wrong.
To talk about ethics is to talk about the validity and justification of
these principles. (p.70)
Kant‘s Categorical Imperative and sense of duty is grounded in association with the
concepts of good will and maxims. Again Harnack quoting Kant:
―Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world or even out of it, which
can be called good without qualification, except a good will. A good will
is good not because of what is performed or effects, not by its aptness or
the attainment of some of some proposed acts but simply by virtue of the
volition… even if the act achieves nothing, there remains good will.‖ (p.76)
In essence, Kant derives the good being in the effort, even if the results were not the
intention (Sullivan, p.29)
To support reasoning making a particular act, Kant points to the principle of a maxim…a
subjective principle of one‘s act, the principle by which a person, in fact, acts. Moral law can
only be universal if the act is based a maxim which you can at the same time will that should
20

become a universal law. (Harnack, p.80) Our duty commands us to act in a law abiding fashion,
first by adopting maxims or policies that can serve as moral rules for everyone and to act on
those maxims ourselves. Kant often described the formulation and adoption of moral maxims as
a kind of legislation, not unlike the enactment of public laws. (Sullivan, p.33)
Kant attempted to discover the rational principle that would stand as a categorical
imperative to ground all other ethical judgment. The imperative would have to be categorical
versus hypothetical or conditional, since true morality should not depend on individual likes and
dislikes. Among the various formulations of the categorical imperative, two are separately worth
noting:
Always act in such a way that you can also will that the maxim of your action
becomes a universal law; or…
Act so that you treat humanity, both in your own person and in that of
another, always as an end and not as a means. (Uleman, p. 171)
Although these are formally equivalent, the first illustrates the need for moral principles
to be universalizable. Paton(1971) extends the formulation by positing, ―To judge our own
actions by the same universal standards which apply to the actions of others is an essential
condition of morality.‖(p. 73) The second formulation points to the radical distinction between
things and persons.
Kant‘s theory is an example of deontological or duty-based ethics. It judges the nature of
actions and the will of agents rather than goals achieved. The inputs and intentions are critical,
not the result. Deontological ethics are concerned what people do, not with the consequences of
their actions. Duty is characterized by: Doing the right thing; do it because it is the right thing
to; a demand that one should act out of respect for moral law, a demand that one should or ought

21

to act in this or that way. The morally good intention is always to do one‘s duty. (Sullivan p.31
Harnack p.83) It is the foundation for the categorical imperative.
People have the duty to do the right thing, even if it produces a bad result. Here lie the
claims of Kant‘s critics. In consideration of war, preservation of self and others is one‘s duty (to
kill is wrong). Yet in a war- like situation, killing is accepted. Kant would argue it is the good
will, protecting the greater good that justifies the action. Stratton (2000) states that in defense of
Kant‘s claims, only actions done solely from duty can have moral worth. Kant maintains this
strong view because he held that moral good actions acquire their value from the moral worth of
motives from which they are done. A morally worthy motive is one that is a) non-accidental
related to the rightness of the actions done from it, when is it right; and b) subject to symmetry
thesis-where the reasons a good willed person does an action and reasons why the action is right,
are the same (p.16). A further examination of duty- based ethics would:
Emphasize the value of every human being.
Accept acts are always wrong (no matter what good comes of them).
Provide certainty (prediction-good in schools).
Deal with intentions and motives.
Duty - based ethics:
Supports absolute rules…causes exceptions.
Allows acts that make the world less a good place.
The Categorical Imperative is a purely formal and therefore universal norm for the moral
acceptability of possible policies. Such policies, like the laws of natural justice in the public
forum, have substantive content, for they refer to general kinds of actions that any agent,
including those with generally described positions or roles, may or may not do or must or must
not do in certain general described kinds of situations. (Sullivan, p.32) They are the sort of
policies or principles that underlie our most immediate and particular surface intentions.

22

In summary, Kant argues it is that person‘s intentions, those ―inner actions‖ that precede
and cause our physical movements as their effects. To act in an ethically worthy fashion, we
must have what Kant described as ―submissive disposition‖ and a ―moral attitude that motivates
us to act from duty‖, ―out of respect for‖ and ―for the sake of‖ moral law. Relative to the
relationship with religion, Byrne (2007) quotes Kant,
It is not merely religion which according to Kant is subordinate to morality. Morality is
autonomous, it is self-sufficient and with respect to existence and validity, it is
independent of everything else but everything else which in one sense or another which
in a sense or another connected with morality, is subordinate to it. (p. 100)
Bergson‘s Theory on Moral Obligation
Henri Bergson (1935) speaks to the variance that occurs in ―dutiful‖ situations. Bergson‘s
work often references (and extends) Kant‘s perspective. His arguments relative to the limitations
of Kant‘s narrow view of duty provided an alternative lens to moral decisions. His explanation
of morality and moral obligation posits:
―Later we would say it was society…we would compare it to an organism whose cells,
united by imperceptible links, fall into their respective places in a highly developed
hierarchy and for the greatest good of the whole, naturally submit to discipline that may
demand sacrifice on the part. This however can only be a comparison for an organism
subject to inexorable laws is one thing and a society composed of free wills is another…‖
(p.9)
Bergson continues,
―From this first standpoint social life appears to us a system of more or less deeply rooted
habits corresponding to the needs for the community. Some of the habits of command,
most of them are habits of obedience, whether to obey a person commanding by virtue of
a mandate from society or from the society itself, vaguely perceived or felt, there
emanates an impersonal imperative. Each one of these habits of obedience exerts
pressure on our will…As with all habits we have a sense of obligation.‖ (p.10)
Bergson shows that there are two sources from which morality evolves, closed and open.
Bergson‘s argument extends Kant‘s structured reasoning to explain ―exceptional‖ occasions

23

where the lines of duty and obligation cannot be followed to meet moral obligations. Bergson
postulates:
―Between the closed and open soul there is the soul that is in the process of
opening. In a word, between the static and dynamic, there is to be observed
in morality too, a time of transition…We have the purely static morality
that might be called infra-intellectual and the purely dynamic, supraintellectual. Nature intended the one and the other is a product of
man‘s genius. The former constitutes a conglomeration of habits which
are in man…The latter is inspiration, intuition, emotion, susceptible of
analysis and ideas the furnish intellectual notations of it and branch out
in infinite details. Stopping in between to consider contemplation.‖ (64)

Bergson - Closed Morality
Nature has made certain species evolve in such a way that the individuals in these species
cannot exist on their own. They are fragile and require a community for support. Bergson uses
the analogy of a community of bees, where roles are defined to create, support and defend the
hive. In society, the forces of these same needs, passed on through the generations, are the
source of closed morality.
―However, the radical difference may be between primitive and civilized
man, is due to almost solely to what the child has massed since the first
awakening of its conscientiousness. All acquisitions of humanity during
centuries of civilization are there, at his elbow, deposited in the
knowledge imparted to him in traditions, institutions, the customs, the
syntax and vocabulary of language he learns to speak. In short, the obligation we find in the depths of our consciousness and which as the
etymology of the word implies, binds us to the other members of society.‖(p.83)
In alignment with Kant‘s moral imperative, Bergson closed theory reinforces rigidity to
the rules. The survival of the community requires that there be strict obedience, strict cohesion,
and the categorical imperative. Bergson submits:
All moral ideas interpenetrate each other, but none is more instructive than that of
justice…it includes most of the others…Justice has always evoked ideas of equality, of
proportion, of compensation… justice has been represented as holding the scales. Equity

24

signifies equality…Rules and regulations, right and righteousness are words that suggest
a straight line. (p.69)
Bergson argues, however, that Kant‘s universal application of categorical imperative is
not appropriate in all circumstances. He posits that closed morality really concerns the survival
of a society, ―my‖ society. Therefore it excludes ―other‖ societies. Bergson uses war as an
illustration to his argument.
Bergson - Open Morality
As open morality is concerned with creativity and progress (resulting from moral
dilemma), it is not concerned with obedience and cohesion. Bergson refers to the morality as
open because it includes everyone, universal and with a focus of peace. The source of open
morality according to Bergson is creative emotions. The difference between creative emotions
and normal feelings, is that with normal emotions we have a representation which causes feeling,
(I see my friend, and then I feel happy); with creative emotion, we first have the emotion which
then creates the representation. Bergson provides the example of the joy of a musician who, on
the basis of emotion, creates a symphony, and who then produces representations of the music, in
the score. Bergson in this example explains how the ―leap of an intuition‖ happens,
differentiating from the rigidity of closed morality. The creative emotion makes one unstable
and one out of the habitual mode of intelligence which is directed at needs.
Bergson‘s extension of Kant‘s moral philosophy stems from the fact that in society there
are many and unique obligations. Individuals in society deviate from particular obligations.
When this illicit desire occurs, there becomes a resistance or deviance to society and acclaimed
habits. If the same individual resists these resistances, a psychological state of tension occurs,
experiencing the rigidity of obligations. According to Bergson, when philosophers such as Kant
attribute a severe aspect to duty, they have externalized this experience of obligation‘s
25

inflexibility. For Bergson, if we ignore the multiplicity of particular obligations in any given
society, and instead look at what he calls, ―whole of obligation, (p.25) then we see that obedience
to obligation is almost natural. According to Bergson, obligations rise from the natural need an
individual has for the stability that a society can give. As a result of this natural need, society
inculcates habits of obedience in the individual.
Yet, Bergson brings to bear another force. The second force is what Bergson calls
―impetus of love.‖(p. 96) The impetus of love, like joy but also like sympathy, is a creative
emotion. The emotion must be explicated into actions and representations. The representation
of the mystics explicates can be further explicated into formulas, for example, the formula of
each person deserving respect and dignity. The formulas, which are expressions of creation and
love, are now being mixed with the formulas that aim solely to ensure the stability of any given
society; the two forces are mixed together in reason. Whereas the rational method used
experience of resistance to the resistance to explain the force of obedience, in the mystical
experience of the impetus of love the formula explains the force of creation. A reversal has
taken place. The same forces that have generated the formulas are instead now being explained
by those very formulas. How could some representation of intelligence have the power to train
the will? How could an idea categorically demand its own realization? Bergson says this… ―Reestablishes the duality (of forces), the difficulties vanish. (p.96). The two forces are
complimentary manifestations of life.

Moral Development
As the purpose of this study is to describe and explain the personal and professional
morals of principals as they make decisions, central to the discussion of morals is the
development of morals.

In an attempt to synthesize the essential findings relative to moral
26

development theories, this review continues with Piaget‘s (1965) moral phases and moves
toward Kohlberg‘s (1975) extensions of that model. The cognitive approach taken by these
models in concert with Bandura‘s (2001) research on social learning/ cognitive theory will
support the intellectual foundation of this study.
Piaget (1965) identified two concepts of morality, heteronymous and autonomous, in his
classic study on children‘s developing moral judgment. Piaget posits that when asked the reason
for the moral decisions on transgressions (misbehavior), children process differently according to
their cognitive developmental differences. According to Piaget, heteronymous morality of
thinking is commonly utilized by younger children. In these instances, younger children are
inclined to judge the behavior using rules handed down by authority figures. The heteronymous
term is used to refer to the rules of ―others.‖ Characteristics such as egocentrism, rigidity of
rules and objective responsibility mark this type of reasoning (Ruffy, 1981).
Egocentrism refers to children being caught up in their own point of view and not able to
see an issue from other people‘s perspective. In this view, right and wrong are considered from
the child‘s perspective rather other people‘s perspective (Yang, 2006). Heteronymous morality
also views rules given by adults as something that cannot be changed.(Ruffy, 1981) Everything
is totally right or totally wrong. From this moral position, children when asked why a behavior
is wrong, children would respond because their teacher or parents say so.
Children making moral judgments using heteronymous morality also process through
objective responsibility which leads them to judge an action according to its consequences
(Piaget, 1965; Ruffy, 1981). Piaget states that, with increased interactions with peers (school
age), heteronymous moral reasoning gives way to autonomous moral reasoning. At this stage of
development, children begin to take other people‘s circumstances into account. With

27

autonomous morality, children gradually develop the concepts of fairness and justice. Piaget
submits that children construct a sense of fairness through a ―tit-for-tat‖ morality. Yet, he argues
that children have not reached a mature form of morality until a more mature notion of justice
emerges. This is what Piaget refers to ―reciprocity as a fact‖ and ―reciprocity as an ideal.‖
Developing heteronymous morality, older children have the ability to take other people‘s
perspectives and judge right and wrong by taking other people‘s perspectives and intentions into
consideration. Piaget was hesitant to refer to moral development as ―stages‖ as there is
overlapping progression of reasoning in moving from heteronymous to autonomous.
Kohlberg‘s Theory of Moral Development.
Opposed to Piaget‘s conservative approach to developmental stages, Kohlberg
established moral development stages that he identified as invariant in sequence and qualitatively
different by stage (Yang, 2006). He argued that children go through stages of development that
move them to ―moral adequacy‖ (Kohlberg, 1975) or moral maturity. While Piaget used stories
(behavior) to depict moral development, Kohlberg used moral dilemmas as a means for studying
moral development.
Through longitudinal and cross-sectional data, Kohlberg (1984) found that individuals‘
moral reasoning tend to pass through several stages in a specific order. In his focus on moral
reasoning, circumstances (other than transgressions), also are aligned with similar age trends.
Kohlberg‘s stage theory was strongly influenced by Piaget‘s research. Consequently, they share
many common perspectives. Three moral levels are featured in Kohlberg‘s moral development
theory: pre-conventional, conventional and post conventional. Six stages of moral development
are grouped into these three levels (two distinct stages in each level). According to Kohlberg
(1984), the term ―conventional‖ means conforming to and upholding the rules and conventions
28

of society. For children at the pre-conventional level, they are not ready to understand and
uphold these conventions and rules. Yang (2006) clarifiesthat individuals at the post conventional level understand and accept the conventions and rules but acceptance is based on
accepting the underlying moral principle of the convention and rules. More specifically,
principles are judged by the underlying moral principle as opposed to the convention.
The pre-conventional level consists of Stage 1 and Stage 2 of moral development. Stage 1
is labeled as ―punishment‖ and obedience (Kohlberg, 1984) or something that is given down by
an external authority. Children see rules and conventions as something external to themselves.
When asked to make moral evaluations, right is obedience to rules and authority and avoiding
punishment. Kohlberg‘s stage 1 of moral reasoning resembles Piaget‘s (1965) heteronymous
morality.
Stage 2 is the awareness of fairness by a child. As stage 1 defines rules in terms of
authority status, stage 2 defines by equality and reciprocity. Similar to Piaget‘s ―reciprocity by
fact,‖ Kohlberg‘s stage 2 describes how children reason fairness. By stage 3, children enter to
the conventional stages that allow them to take the perspective of others. Reciprocity, concern
for others and understanding mutual roles characterize this stage of development. Kohhberg
(1984) clarifies that, at stage 3 a child practices ideal reciprocity with close interpersonal
contexts such as family or close friends. Similar to stage 3, stage 4 also recognizes and uses
social conventions. Law and order are taken into consideration as opposed to interpersonal
relationships. Perspective taking goes from an interpersonal level to a larger societal level.
Individuals at the post- conventional level understand and accept conventions but the
acceptance is based on higher level of understanding of moral principles. Similar to the complex
issues principals face daily, people at stage 5 view law as a flexible instrument and have the

29

ability to create alternatives. Stage 6 regards what is right according to their individually chosen
principles. Kohlberg (1975) labeled this stage as ―universal ethical principles‖. The rationale is
that the law and order rests upon these self-chosen principles and when laws violate these
principles, each individual would act in accordance with chosen principles. Kohlberg (1984)
conceived these principles as 1) principle of justice, 2) principle of role taking, or 3) principle of
respect for personality (Yang, 2006).
According to Kohlberg‘s (1975) six stages, moral maturity is not achieved until the postconventional level. Kohlberg found that only 13% of his longitudinal subjects reach level 5 and
all of these adults have obtained some type of graduate education. Early conclusions on levels
of moral development for practicing principals suggest, actualized stage 6 development. The
consideration of graduate work as the essential means for training administrators supports this
argument.

Social Learning/Cognitive Theory
According to Bandura (2001), environmental factors influence behaviors through
personal factors such as cognitive processes. He contends that observational learning is
motivated and regulated by two cognitive processes. One process focuses on the response
outcome expectation that says observational learning is more likely when the consequences of an
observed behavior are rewarded rather than punished. Another process focuses on the how
moral standards regulate which observationally-learned activities to pursue. That is,
observational learning is governed by moral standards (Yang, 2006); within the Bandura model,
behaviors can be regulated through the activation of moral standards. Included in this process
are important concepts such as moral justification, social sanctions, disengagement mechanism
and moral justification. It is Bandura‘s argument, however, that without activation, moral
30

standards would not function to motivate or regulate behaviors. That is, moral standards are
used as guides for behaviors but do not function as fixed regulators of behavior.

Moral Decision Making
There is no formula or algorithm for moral decision making, except as might be
suggested by Jeremy Benthan‘s (1948) principle of utility.
… the principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever according to
the tendency which it appears to have to argument or diminish the happiness of the party
whose interest is in question. (p. 2)
Plamenatz citing Benthan‘s (1948) utility principle is not a process that can be driven by
a set of rules. It is more a personal assessment of every situation and puts the decision making,
not the rules, at the center of the decision. Good moral decision making involves (a) knowing the
facts of the situation, and (b) careful consideration of or the moral values that are relevant to the
given situation. It is important to make the distinction that this discussion is not only about
making moral decisions but how moral issues, notably those of the decision maker, impact those
on the end of the decision. Benthan (1948) would have the decision maker consider their
happiness. Hence the problem: bound in by overlapping sets of rules and regulations and
sometimes a conflicting set of constituents, a decision maker has to ask whose well-being and
happiness is important, or the most important, or of relatively less or no importance. Expected
utility is more precisely called ―probability-weighted utility theory.‖ In expected utility theory,
to each alternative is assigned a weighted average of its utility values under different states of
nature, and the probabilities of these states are used as weights. An extension of utility theory is
the notion of subjective utility which considers the growth of utility not on a linear fashion,
more, less, better, or worse, but increase at a decreasing rate, or the more common objective
utility where the emphasis is on probability of risk.
31

Moral Decision Making Models
Rest (1986) proposed a four-component model for individual ethical decision making and
behavior, whereby the moral agent (person making the decision) must a) recognize the moral
issue, b) make a moral judgment, c) resolve to place moral concerns ahead of other concerns, and
d) act on moral concerns. Rest argues each component in the process is conceptually distinct and
success in one stage does not imply success in any other stage (Jones, 1991).
Trevino (1986) offered a competing model which builds on the Rest model. Trevino‘s
person-situation inter-actionable model begins with an ethical dilemma and proceeds to cognitive
stages, wherein Kohlberg‘s (1975) cognitive moral development model becomes operative.
Moral judgments made in the cognitive stage are then moderated by individual and situational
factors. Ferrel and Gresham (1985) proposed a contingency framework for ethical decision
making in marketing. In this model, an ethical issue or dilemma emerges from the social or
cultural environment. The contingent factors that are considered by the decision maker are
individual (knowledge, values, attitude, and intentions) as well as organizational (significant
others and opportunity). Also considered in this model are related professional codes (Barnard,
1937), corporate policy, and rewards and punishment. The decision that emerges from this
process leads first to behavior and next to evaluation of behavior, a starting point for a feedback
loop.
An ethical decision making model presented by Dubinsky and Loken (1989) is based on
theory of reasoned action. The model begins with behavioral beliefs, outcomes and evaluations,
normative beliefs, and motivation to comply. The first two of these variables affect attitude
toward ethical or unethical behavior. The latter two variables affect subjective norms toward
ethical and unethical behavior. Attitude and subjective norms lead to intentions to engage in
32

ethical or unethical behavior which in turn affect actual behavior, ethical or unethical. Although
these models reflect the moral considerations of decisions, they are mostly considering the
morals of the workplace (cite Barnard) which may be different from the morals of the decision
maker. However the considerations of attitudes and beliefs are relevant to the moral choices
inherent in decision making.

Alternative Decision Theory Models
The discussion of modern decision making models generally begins with John Dewey‘s
(1910) stages of problem solving. The Dewey model consisted of five consecutive stages: 1) felt
difficulty, 2) the definition of the character of that difficulty, 3) suggested possible outcomes, 4)
evaluation of the suggestions, and 5) further observation and experimentation leading to the
acceptance or rejections of the suggestion. The model is still held popular regard as a scientific
model for problem solving and decision making. Herbert Simon (1976) modified Dewey‘s five
stages to make the model more suitable for the context of decisions in organizations. Simon
posited that decision making consists of three principle phases: ―Finding occasions for making a
decision; finding possible courses of action; and choosing among the courses of action. ― The
first of these phases he called ―intelligence‖ similar to the military use of the term intelligence;
the second ―design‖ and the third ―choice‖.
Brim et al (1962) proposed an influential decision making process divided into five steps:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Identification of the problem.
Obtaining necessary information.
Production of possible solutions.
Evaluation of solutions.
5. Selection of strategy for performance.

33

The models offered by Dewey, Simon and Brim et al. (1962) are sequential in nature by
dividing the decision making process into parts that follow a prescribed order. Witte (1972) was
critical of division or stages and submitted that problem solving stages are performed in parallel
as opposed to sequence.
Mintzberg, Raisinghani and Theoret‘s (1976) model agreed with the decision process
consisting of distinct phases but not in sequential relationship. The argument here is that the
relationship between the phases is circular rather than linear. The model is similar to the
continuous improvement process introduced by E.W. Deming (1982) in as a foundation process
of the Total Quality movement. Abram Wald‘s (1939) paper provided much of the modern
landscape of modern decision theory. His work expounded on concepts utilized in present day
processes including, loss functions, risk functions, admissible decision rules and mini-max
decision rules.
Utility – The Rule of Maximization
Outcomes in decision theory are usually assigned values. These values are reduced as
they are with Bentham, to a single entity, utility. The entity may or may not be identified with
units of human satisfaction. Hansson (1994) posits that all moral decisions should, at least in
principle, consist of attempts to maximize the total amount of utility. He continues that
economic theory supports decision theory based on numerical representation of the values
(degree of utility) although the units used may have different representations. In decision theory,
the maximizing approach is almost universally employed.
Alternative are courses of action available at the time to the decision maker. These
options may be considered open or closed. In an open situation, new alternatives can be
discovered or invented by the decision maker. An example would be a building administrator‘s
34

use of discretion by developing policies and procedures unique to his building. In other
circumstances, the set of alternatives can be viewed as closed where no alternatives can be
added. Or, as in the case of the building administrator, course of action and procedures is outline
by district policy. In actual life, open alternatives are common but do not support permanent
solutions. In decision theory alternative sets are assumed to be closed. Closed decisions are
more accessible to theoretical treatment and elements are mutually exclusive.

Contingency Theory/Leader Match
A review of existing relevant research finds Frederick Fielder‘s contingency model for
leadership as a common reference in the study of organizational performance. In its time,
Fiedler‘s work changed the way people studied leadership. An excerpt of Fiedler‘s (1971)
research postulates that group performance depends on the match of situation favorableness. In
other words, leadership decisions adapt to a specific environment.
Fiedler (1964) culminated 15 years of leadership study by developing the Contingency
Theory as a conceptual model. His contributions were a departure from trait and behavioral
models by asserting that group performance is contingent on the leader‘s psychological
orientations and on three contextual variables: group atmosphere, task structure and leader‘s
power position.

Leader Match
Fiedler‘s contingency theory was built on numerous studies with conditions,
environment, task and dispositions of ―workers‖ as variables toward effective performance.
Relationships and variable roles include:

35

Leader-Member Relations: The extent to which a leader has the support and
loyalty of followers and relations with them are friendly and cooperative.
Task structure: The extent, to which tasks are standardized, documented and
controlled.
Leader’s Position-power: The extent to which the leader has authority to assess
follower performance and give reward or punishment. (Chemer, 1997)
Four important ideas are posited from contingency theory:
1. There is no universal or one best way to manage.
2. The design of an organization and its subsystems must ―fit―with the environment.
3. Effective decisions not only need to have proper ―fit‖ with the environment by
also between subsystems.
4. The needs of an organization are better satisfied when it is properly designed and
the management style is appropriate both to the tasks undertaken and the nature of
the work group.
Fiedler (1971) asserts that managers with proper training can learn to match
various environments. His work has been applied as well as contested in subsequent
studies.

Extensions of the Contingency Model
Contingency theory has been applied in various forms, including models directly related
to decision making. The Vroom - Yetton (1973) Decision Participation Contingency Theory
(also called Normative Decision Theory) is based on contingency factors. The model is
represented as a linear process or decision tree. Vroom-Yetton asserts that effectiveness of a
decision procedure depends on a number of aspects of the situation:
1. The importance of the decision quality and acceptance.
2. The amount of relevant information possessed by the leader and subordinates.
3. The likelihood that subordinates will accept an autocratic decision, or the
likelihood that subordinates will cooperate to make a good decision if they
participate.
4. The amount of disagreement among subordinates with respect to alternatives.
(Jago, 1982)

36

The Vroom-Yetton model posits that, with appropriate training, managers can adapt
leadership choices to varying environments and improve in performance.
In support of the Vroom-Yetton model, Leister et al. (1977) cites studies in which the
results of the control and trained group leaders (armed forces) were compared. The results
reflected a highly significant change in performance as a result of the ―treatment–induced‖
trained groups versus the officers who comprised the control group. The results of this study
also showed substantial improvement in performance occurred when leaders receive training
with Leader Match.
Fiedler (1971) reviewed the effects of leadership training as an interpretation of the
contingency model in succeeding studies. Of particular interest is the McNamara‘s (1968)
comparison study of directive-permissive variation in the leader‘s behavior of elementary and
secondary school principals. The correlations between measurement of worker disposition and
performance were positive for newly appointed elementary principals and established secondary
principals. Conversely measurement of worker disposition was negative for established
elementary principals and new secondary schools principals. The interpretation of the data and
analysis of two levels suggested the correlates of the contingency model were at play. The
structures and processes that differed at each level (work) environment called for differing
leadership (decision making) styles. Fiedler‘s theory and its extensions were not without
detractors.
Tjosvold & Wedley (1985) questioned the efficacy of the Vroom-Yetton model as a
reliable predictor of managerial decision making. Tjosvold‘s & Wedley‘s findings suggest that
no one method of decision making is effective under all conditions. The authors posit that social
interactions (constructive controversy) can substantially affect the dynamics and outcomes of

37

decision making. Tjosvold posits only autocratic decisions involve no social interaction that
typically undercuts decision making. The researchers hypothesized that constructive controversy
accounts for a significant portion of the variance in successful decision making in addition to the
variance attributable to the Vroom-Yetton model.
To test their hypothesis, Tjoswold & Wedley studied 58 middle level (experienced)
managers enrolled in MBA programs in Canada. The participants were provided writing prompt
regarding two recent decisions, one that was successful and the other unsuccessful. A choice of
one of the recent decisions was considered in relation to a set of scaled questions constructed
from the Vroom Yetton Model. The participants translated their thoughts via computer terminal.
Data analysis provided six different dependent variables for measuring the efficacy of
Vroom-Yetton model. Compliance with the Vroom-Yetton model and the degree of constructive
controversy was the independent variables which are capable of causing variances on the
dependent variables. Relationships between the independent and dependent variables were
analyzed using chi square tests, analysis of variance and regression technique.
The researchers found that constructive controversy was strongly correlated with the
success of decision making. Managers reported that when controversy (discussion) was present,
the decision makers were affirmed. The results from the study challenged the assumption that
social interaction generally impedes decision making, a factor the Vroom-Yetton model did not
consider. Decision making is at the core of the principal‘s role. From a practitioner‘s view, the
contingency model aligns with many of the principal‘s daily decision making scenarios.

38

Unitary versus Shared Decision Making
Most studies of leadership and decision making focus on a central authority figure. Over
time, leadership has been defined in terms of personal traits and situations (contingencies)
(Fiedler, Leister et. al 1977), charisma (Vroom, 2003), and transactional, transitional and
transformational leadership (Marks & Printy, 2003), Even in participatory leadership
arrangements, the argument generally begins with the relationship the authority figure holds
within the context of decision making and responsibility (Hite et. al, 2006). Each discussion
reflects how the leader (person in authority) responds to or behaves in relation to subordinates.
At one end of the continuum, autocratic leadership is characterized by highly centralized
decision making and completely concentrated power. Conger (2000) argues top led organizations
have a greater chance of achieving success than decisions driven by lower levels of management.
Simon (1976) states that the task of administration is to establish the desired structure encourage
certain behaviors and integrate activities to achieve organizational not individual ends. Deference
to authority is not a choice, the hierarchy demands it. (Presthus, 1958) The other end of the
continuum is characterized by highly participative decision making power equalization (Jago)
and learning. (Senge, 2000)
The literature provides ample attention to both unitary (centralized) and shared decision
making models. Studies of reform initiatives have provided alternative attempts to improve
teaching and learning. Classic studies of the decision making models in Chicago (neighborhood
councils) (Byrk et al 1998) and San Diego‘s Blueprint for Student Success (singular focus,
theory E. top-down) (Bennis, 2000) reform initiatives bring to light the pros and cons each
district model experienced. The participative nature of the Chicago reform broadened the
decision making process. While innovation and ownership increased, principal decision making

39

latitude decreased. A vertically integrated featured in the San Diego reform effort create a closed
system supported by a singular focus. The result was limited shared decision making,
particularly in the areas of curriculum and instruction. Principals were viewed as field
supervisors charged with the implementation of the district plan.
Society is too enamored with triumphant individuals. Systems that
call for collaborative and cooperation make systems that make change not
only effective but possible. (Bennis)
A shared decision making approach became more popular in the shadow of the private
sector‘s quality circle movement (Langford, 1995). The essence of shared decision making is to
include the stakeholders who will be most impacted by decisions as contributors to the decision
to be made (Mitchell, 1990), as a means to increase human capital (Vroom, 2003), and as a
means of improving achievement (Weiss & Cambone, 1994). The State of Michigan‘s P.A. 25 of
1990 required the shared decision making process in the development of district and building
school improvement plans.
The variability of site-based decision making processes is evident. The degree of staff
contribution is defined at the onset of the shared decision making process whereas the parameters
of responsibility are identified and assigned to the contributors. Hanson (1990) divides the
parameters into four levels: de-concentration, participation, delegation, and devolution. Other
models identify five levels of decision making: decide, consult individuals, consult groups,
facilitate and delegate (Vroom, 2003). Mitchell (1994) clarifies an oft-spoken misnomer,
arguing that site-based, shared decision-making is not site-based management. Shared decision
making does not lead change by itself. It can become a system to vent grievances and minor
annoyances (Weiss & Cambone). Principals must be taught the skills of leading decisions that
are a result of collaboration (Bradshaw & Buckner, 1994) Teachers resisted change and conflicts

40

resulted when principals utilized shared decision making as vehicles to foster large changes
(Weiss & Cambone, 1994). The effects of shared decision making on student achievement are
limited (Rice & Schneider, 1994).

Data- Driven Decision Making
Data-driven decision making in the field of education is modeled after the Total Quality
movement in the private sector. The public sector adoption of data-driven decision making
rejects tacit knowledge as justification for decisions. The continuous improvement process was
introduced to Japan by W. Edwards Deming (1982) and later translated to an educational
application by David Langford (1993). The well cited model calls for data collection to be
comprised of discrete measurements of outcomes of a given process. In education, the measured
outcome is typically student achievement data. ―Data-driven decision making tells one what to
do next. ― (Langford, 1999) As school improvement and accountability became part of the
discourse in school legislation, the value of data driven decision making also became evident.
(Michigan Public Act 25 of 1990) Principal development models emphasize data driven
decision making professional development as a priority for aspiring and practicing principals
(Petzko, 2008).

Emerging Models: Adaptive and Distributive Leadership
More recent studies have extended decentralized decision making as a means to allow
decisions to be made at an organization‘s staff level. Distributive leadership expands the
decision making and responsibility for the outcomes of the decisions to various functions or
departments in an organization. Elmore (1996) posits distributive decision making as a means to
counteract teacher isolation, often referenced as ―loose coupling,‖ and being resistant to change
41

(Zimmerman, 2006). The unintended effects of isolation cause uncertainty surrounding
decisions to be carried out. By creating ownership and delegating authority and responsibility
for results, distributive leadership extensions are designed to pick up where traditional shared
decision making models often fall short (Elmore). No change can occur without willing and
committed leaders (Bennis, 2000).
Adaptive leadership, as defined by Heifitz (1994) consists of the learning required to
address issues people face to diminish the gap between values and reality. Adaptive decision
making provides guidance while the leader assumes a position to view progress from the
―balcony‖.
Adaptive decision making is a result of changes in values, beliefs and behavior. In this
expanded view of a participative model, there is a sense of reciprocity in which decisions are
influenced by the environment. Implications for adaptive principal decision making could result
from location, size and demographics of a particular school setting or dilemma (Koberg, 1986,
Marshall, 1992).
To affect adaptive work requires decentralized thinking. It calls for the decision to be
deflected to the stakeholders, to be allowed to ―ripen‖ (Heifitz, 1994) and take an adaptive
shape, resulting in broad thinking and resolution of emerging realities.

Competing Values Framework
The argument driving the proposed study asserts that principal decision making is
influenced by one‘s personal beliefs and values. In the theoretical models which are being
discussed, the Competing Values framework offers a kindred relationship to the argument in the
proposed study.

42

There is a growing recognition of the influence of values on school leaders.
Administrators are not merely technical bureaucrats; they are politicians mediating among
conflicting values (Marshall, 1992). What principals do (decide) falls outside the bounds of
technical rationality and there are important dimensions to their work which cannot be reduced to
technique. At times a principal‘s decision must choose between competing values of goodness
(Greenfield, 1985). A viable argument is that one system of thinking (rational) is needed in one
circumstance versus another (Leader Match), however, at times; two systems (rational and
human relations) may be needed coincidently to make a decision. In the mid 1990‘s, an
integrated model represented a yet larger framework referred to as the competing values
framework.
The relationship in the model delineates the tensions between controlling versus
flexibility as well as internal versus external processes. The model presents a compelling
viewpoint on the various roles and the varying degrees of leadership and levels of decision
making each one supports. Quinn argues that the roles can change at any moment. A viable
organization moves between roles as the task demands. On a daily basis, principals make
decisions that often conflict with existing conditions and considerations. The challenge of
principal decision making rests on understanding and acting within these competing values.

Principal Development
Instances of decision making define each role assumed by a principal. How does one
prepare for these roles, develop the craft and hone the skills of a decision maker? What are the
specific skills principals need to possess in order to affect decisions? Certainly formal university
training provides the necessary credentials. Emerging from the studies of principal development
is the notion of personal experiences and influences on developing and practicing principals.
43

Professional Pathways and Principal Learning
A variety of tracks, experiences, training, education, and support lead toward securing a
principal‘s position. Career pathways to the principalship include: the direct routes (teacher to
principal), the classic route (teacher to assistant principal to principal), the teacher leader route,
and the school leader route (previously held leadership positions) (McGough, 2003). In the midst
of these chosen pathways lies formal and informal sources of learning how to become an
effective decision maker while acquiring the craft of a principal (Mertz,2004)
McGough‘s research study explored the manner in which 23 school principals became
aware and committed to new perspectives and practice. Each principal‘s story cites the
formative and transformative changes that took place in their careers; these were collected and
analyzed. To gain this perspective, McGough used four tools specifically designed for studying
principals‘ stories. The findings indicated that the 23 principals‘ professional learning was
influenced by their: 1) impressions of school and teacher in early childhood, 2) progression
through a common perspective development sequence with patterned influences, 3) personal
orientation to learning, and 4) a story about oneself as learner.
McGough‘s study offers valuable insights for the proposed study. The study explores
pathways to the principalship, patterns of perspective development, and patterns of influence that
affect principals‘ practice. Of particular interest is thatvthe study places the principals‘ family at
the center of influential factors. Three approaches situated in adult learning theory were posited
as a foundation for analyzing the formation and transformation of principalship perspectives.
According to McGough, the theoretical position an educator may take are attributive (learner as
choice maker), representative (learner as meaning-maker) and situational (guided by sociocultural determinants).
44

The discourse of principal development includes Mertz, (2004) who, in developing a
conceptual model for aspiring principals, refers to the process as a ―continuum of relationships‖
that reflect an evolving degree of competency and involvement in the role. Weiss & Cambone
(1994) argue that some principals learn the craft to simply maintaining the status quo, while
others are more innovative in their decision making. Principals must develop a specific set of
skills in an era of constant change and increased accountability (Bradshaw et al., 1994).
Practicing principals are implored to hone their skills in a time of changing policy. Internships,
mentoring, degree programs and principal academies are the most common means for principal
development.

Role of the Principal
Current models of training at the university level suggest there is movement away from
top down leadership styles associated with the science of administration. For the past two
decades, there has been a shift away from ―being in control‖ (Leithwood and Duke) and a
transition to collegial and empowering forms of leadership. Yet, recent policy decisions call for
a return to a scientific model of running a school, where the principal spends more time in
classroom supervision, conducting evaluations and using test data. This model is designed to
recapture efficiency in an era of principal accountability (Brubaker & Simon, 1987 Hargreaves,
2008).
The literature can be conflicting and indicates a misalignment in presentation of technical
aspects of the principal‘s role. Principals‘ work has been defined by patterns of practice that
guide the role, including: systematic problem solving, managing school curriculum, nurturing
interpersonal relationships and monitoring policies and procedures. (Trider and Leithwood,
1988) Varying schools of thought place the principal as sole decision maker while others call for
45

a skill set that requires a collaborative approach. Pezko‘s (2008) extensive study acknowledges
the knowledge and skills necessary for administrative success, particularly noting the importance
of rigorous instruction and standards- based position for improving student achievement.
However, the outcomes of her study relate a human relations priority as a priority for success. Of
the 18 different roles and responsibilities considered, human relations, personnel, and site-based
leadership ranked in the top five.
As this review sought to identify what successful principals do and the decisions that
comprise their work. The review also sought to identify of foundational knowledge and skills as
they are debated in the literature.

―Hard‖ or technical skills accompany non-technical or ―soft

skills‖ are identified in the literature as contributors to principals fulfilling their roles.

Technical Skills
To understand the scope of principal decision making, it is necessary to understand the
scope of principal responsibility. What are the essential skills or expectations of competence for
a principal? The Interstate Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) produced the ISLLC
Standards for Schools Leaders which have been adopted by 35 states as well as integrated into
the accreditation process for the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education
(Petzko, 2008). The standards focus on developing school leaders whose priorities are
improving teaching and learning and sustaining learning environments that allow success for all
students (CCSSO, 1996).
The ―hard‖, or technical, core of leadership would include the management
responsibilities of the leader. Doing the ―business of school‖ falls into this area. Evaluation,
hiring, finance and scheduling are defined and responsibilities are implicitly undertaken by the
principal (Leithwood and Duke).
46

McGough (2003) summarizes the technical aspect of a building leader:
a. The principal as technician emphasizing the standards- based technical preparation for
beginning principals.
b. The principal as expert notion seeking to identify and disseminate problem solving
skills used by successful, effective and/or expert principals.
c. The principal as craftsperson notion phenomenally describing the pragmatic craft of
the principalship toward reality- based understanding of the role.
d. A fourth, newly emerging notion of the principal-as-partner advocating a philosophy
of caring as the foundation for a new means of undertaking the role.
Non-technical (soft) Skills
Principals are managers of school curricula. As instructional leaders, principals need
knowledge of curriculum processes to respond effectively to change. An ongoing debate centers
on the degree of breadth and depth of any one subject area that principals should bring to the
position. Are leaders most effective when they bring expertise in one area (Behar – Horenstein,
1995)? Stein & Nelson‘s (2003) case study argues that administrators need to have some degree
of understanding of the various subject areas. There are distinctions between pedagogical content
knowledge and leadership content knowledge. It is plausible to suggest it is more desirable for a
principal to possess an understanding of the macro-curriculum (Trider & Leithwood, 1988). The
view would be from a holistic standpoint versus a depth of understanding of each subject area
(Behar-Horenstein). The management of curriculum involves principals in decisions on
curriculum objectives and the learning strategies that should be in place for students to learn. At
this juncture, principals may introduce changes or improvement to the curriculum (Blasé &
Blasé, 1999). In the development of principals, the training opportunities could include fieldbased experiences, observations or engage in teacher evaluation (Behar-Horenstein, 1995).
To demonstrate expertise in instructional practices, effective principals exercise both
instructional and transformational leadership to facilitate change. Marks & Printy (2003)
employed qualitative and quantitative instruments as part of a school restructuring study. Their
47

findings posit that strong transformational leadership by the principal is essential in supporting
the commitment of teachers. Coupled with instructional leadership, the principal will be able to
make decisions that will promote change through improved relationships and instructional
practice.

Ethical Decisions in the Principalship
The role of the principal requires ethical commitments in order to advocate for the
principles of democracy, respect, social justice and equity. Administrator values come into
conflict almost every day. They are to consider the ethical dilemmas and then identifying the
principles that guide them (Marshall, 1992). Ethical decision making is a dimension of
principals‘ work that cannot be reduced to technique (Greenwood, 1985). Teachers reported that
principals who practiced effective instructional leadership worked to create cultures of
collaboration, inquiry, lifelong learning, experimentation, reflection (Blasé & Blasé, 1999) and
trust. Many principal decisions are value laden. The meaning people give to events is shaped by
their goals, values, feelings, existing knowledge and past experiences (Leithwood & Duke).
Moral leadership practice has been defined as stimulating and encouraging the democratic
process in which multiple participants, including children, have a real voice in schools (Bogotch
et al.). Within an organization‘s beliefs and ideals are competing values. These values represent
the organization culture, the basic assumptions that are made about such things as the means to
compliance, motives, leadership, decision making, effective values and organizational forms
(Kalliath et al.1999, Greenfield, 1985).

48

Learning the Craft
Mentoring
Mentoring is common practice in professional circles. Daresh & Playko (1990) describes
mentoring as,
“…a continuing process wherein individuals within an organization provide
support and guidance to others so that it may be possible for these individuals
become more effective contributors (decision makers) to the goals of the
organization.‖ (p.71)
While Mertz adds,
―Not only does everyone need a mentor, almost every supportive relationship
is mentoring.” (p.548)
Principals learn from principals. New principals rely on field experiences that are well
planned and support from highly qualified mentors (Petzko, 2004). Behar-Howenstein‘s (1995)
study further expounds on principal (adult) learning as a synthesis of experiences through
mentoring, personal reflection, development of a personal educational platform, understanding
interpersonal styles and personal professional development. The argument is extended to
include a principal‘s environmental and personal factors as the most important in influencing
learning. Mentoring can help leaders become more creative, think more critically, perceive
solutions to problems, and analyze situations from different perspectives (Shaughnessy, 1995). A
concentrated effort is evident to highlight leadership preparation programs that have resulted in
formal collaborative efforts between school districts and universities (Daresh, Sherman, 2005).
Mentors must be selected and trained in the art of developing the protégé. The induction and
continued mentoring provided by a school district can prove to be the factor that makes or breaks
the mentor‘s success (Petzko).

49

The scope of principal decision making is so extensive that anything less than a formal
mentoring plan usually comes up short in preparing the mentee. The research addresses shortfalls
in mentoring programs and practices. Mentoring in the informal, traditional sense has existed for
centuries and promotes the status quo (Darwin, 2000). Mentoring is typically a relationship
between a veteran who acts as a guide (Samier, 2000) and a subject who shares characteristics
similar to the seasoned mentor (Gradiner, et al., 2000). Stand alone mentoring programs in
districts typically include workshops in leadership skills and content area training, informal
mentoring, internships and shadowing experiences.

Principal Schools - Internships/Academies
Formal principal training is, by and large, located at the university level and focuses
primarily on administration (hard/technical). Most education administration training programs in
the United States are characterized as hybrid/pre-paradigm departments, unlikely to undertake
fundamental changes (Bjork & Ginsbert, 1995). The programs are typically comprised of
courses that incorporate educational leadership, administration, organization, supervision,
systems personnel or management, school law and finance, communications or community
relations, contemporary issues, human resources and human resource development (BeharHorenstein). As highlighted earlier, 35 states have adopted the ISLLC Standards for School
Leaders (Petzko, 2004)) which have been regarded as the impetus to a groundswell of reform in
the principal preparation programs. The revised standards (2008) are a result of new information
and lessons learned about educational leadership in the previous ten years. Variations of like
programs include additional experiences such as internships and selected courses that qualify
principals for state certification. Course work must be interrelated and tied to problems of
practice. Internships must be substantive and extend over time, requiring aspiring principals to
50

engage in the actual work of leadership (Petzko). Building leadership must be adaptive to
change and circumstance (Fiedler, 1996).
Daresh‘s study (1988) submits that extending formal learning with the integration of
field–based programs through internships, mentoring, personal reflection, and development of
one‘s personal platform, as exemplified professional preparation, provides an optimum
experience for aspiring principals. These activities according to Darish, are best situated in
collaborations between universities and local schools. Principal academies permit current or
aspiring principals to acquire skills that will allow them to address emergent changes in teaching,
learning, instruction, curriculum, staff development (Behar-Horenstein, 1995)). Academies
present an opportunity for adult learning that is contextual in nature that is life/task/problem
solving centered (Boulton-Lewis et al., 1996). McGough (2003) submits the discipline of adult
learning provides a substantive body of work that can be employed as a foundation for analyzing
the formation and transformation of principal‘s perspective. McGough‘s study contributes with
a broadened view of principal training by suggesting a three step approach to development:
attributive, representative and situational approaches. Learning is also influenced mostly by
attitude, life experiences and people influenced them. (Boulton-Lewis et al.)

Personal Development and External Influences
At this juncture, the review addresses a third and fourth tier of research affecting
principal decisions. To support a challenge to the existing research, critical areas of principal
personal development are identified. The influence of personal development on building leaders
as a result of their own life experiences will be the variables for scrutiny. Because internal
influences are personal in nature, relevant research is limited. External experiences and events
are also posited as potential influences on principal choices. Relative policy decisions, training,
51

and profound personal experiences are identified as themes central to a principal‘s career
experience.

Personal Background Structures
Role of the Family
Parenting styles can be classified in four categories which include authoritative,
authoritarian, indulgent and neglecting (Lee, 1999). Studies distinguish between parenting style
as a composite set of beliefs and attitudes that provide a context for parent behavior. Parenting
practices include specific goal-directed behavior through which parents perform their parental
duties (Darling and Steinberg, 1993). The results of the study are used as predictors of self
concept, locus of control, test scores, self-reliance and maturity.

Demographic Considerations
Basic demographic data regarding the number of practicing (male and female) principals
provides a few insights into the principalship. Most notable are few teachers entering the position
early in their career as opposed to the number of principals who come into the position with
more teaching experience. This could reflect the need for more experience in times increased
accountability and reform. A second, more prominent trend is the rising proportion of principals
who are women.
1993-94
Male/Female

1999-2000

2003-04

86/14

78/22

74/26

(U.S. Department of Education, 2004).
This trend is also observed in Canada. The proportion of eligible candidates who are
women has increased from less than one tenth in the early 1970‘s to between the one third and

52

one-half (1990). Clearly, fundamental and far reaching social change is affecting aspirations,
expectations and qualifications for educational leadership (Smith, 1991).
Historically, the image of the principal has been predominantly male. Studying male
behavior and, more particularly, white male behavior is not in and of itself a problem. It becomes
more problematic when inferences obtained in the study of male principals are extended
uncritically to account for women principals‘ (Mertz & McNeely, 1998).
Religion
Research suggests that religion has traditionally been a vital source of norms and beliefs,
an influence on family solidarity. In many cases, religion is how many families define
themselves (D‘Antonio, 1985). Bailyn (1960) refers to religion as an integrating function.

Are

there differences (achievement, predictors) in public and religious affiliated education (Marsh &
Grayson, 1990)? Understanding the impact of religion in relation to gender differences is a
starting point to personality development for men and women (Suziedelis & Potvin, 1981). How
does the experience of religion span the lifetime (Paloutzian & Park, 2005)?

External Influences and Constraints
In the course a of principal‘s personal and professional growth there are policies, reforms,

mandates, events, experiences, and training. What is the collective impact of these experiences
and constraints on principal decision making? Cusick‘s (2005) citation of Henry Adams is an
appropriate precursor to this section of the review, ―Where external experience… allowed the
forces of the ages to educate.‖ (p.1)
Policy Development in an age of reform (1960-present). Taylor et. al (1997) posits,
“The way we think about educational policy making, is linked to the
ideological or philosophical positions we hold, not only in relation to
education, but also to the nature of civil society.‖(p.175)
53

The implication of Taylor‘s statement is that policy development and relative educational
reform shapes principals‘ perspectives and decision making. Policy decisions and mandates
leave little interpretation as to desired outcomes. What is usually left up for interpretation and
individual discretion is ―how‖ school officials decide to implement new policy. Many reforms
were initiated after a major event such as the launching of Sputnik in the late 50‘s. The space
race had begun and had not only caught the nation‘s attention from a national security standpoint
but also caused fervor over the need for more math and science in school curriculum. In a
broader sense, the historic event launched a significant age of reform in American schools
The list of legislative decisions related to education (law, amendments, and reauthorizations) is extensive. Congress has passed 75 bills alone from 1965 to 1988 (First, 1992).
Following is a brief accounting of the significant policy decisions which emerged as examples of
educational reform in response to the prominent values of their era.
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act is aligned with the Civil Rights
movement in the mid 1960s and the War on Poverty. ESEA passed in 1965 and provided major
federal aid to schools (Title I) to assist them in providing remedial opportunities for students
from disadvantaged homes. The Head Start program, designed help underprivileged preschool
children, prefaced the act as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Re-authorization of ESEA
through the next several decades provides credence to the value of the intended benefit of the
policy. (In time, No Child Left Behind would expand on the original ESEA legislation.)
In 1975 the federal government expanded further into the field of education with the
passage of Public Law 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. The law was
eventually replaced in 1991 as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (Hayes,

54

2004). Suddenly school principals were faced with the inclusion of handicapped students in
general education classrooms.
After a major stall in the formation and passing of educational policy in the Reagan
administration, the Bush and Clinton years (Goals 2000) witnessed a re-focus on the educational
needs of the country. Catapulted again to the forefront of the American consciousness, education
received scrutiny supported by global comparisons of achievement (Hayes).
However, the literature is fairly consistent in identifying the National Commission‘s
release of the A Nation at Risk report as a significant call for change in American Schools. Greg
Toppo, in an USA Today (April, 2008) article quotes education historian, Dianne Ravitch
(2000),
―A Nation at Risk was a landmark of education reform literature.
Countless previous reports by prestigious national commission have
been ignored by the national press and general public. A Nation at
Risk was different. Written in stirring language that the general public
could understand, the report warned that schools had not kept pace with
the changes in society and the economy and that the nation would suffer
if education were not dramatically improved for all children. It is also
asserted that lax academic standards were correlated with lax behavior
standards and that neither should be ignored. A Nation at Risk was a
call to action.‖
The 1983 publication of A Nation at Risk was the catalyst for today‘s standards-based
reform movement. The report made a strong case for the urgency of reform if the nation was to
retain its place in the modern world. It was followed by a myriad of other studies and reports:
National Assessment of Education Progress (The Nation‘s Report Card -NAEP), International
Science Studies, the International Assessment of Educational Progress I and II, IEA Study of
Reading Literacy (1991), the Third International Math and Science Study (TIMMS, 1994-1995)
(Cuban, 1990), and the most recent No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Each one of these policy

55

decisions or studies raised awareness of the necessary improvements American schools were
facing.
The Nation at Risk is one of the most influential reports to affect the education field. In
the book School, the authors wrote that the Nation at Risk report ―crystallized the growing sense
of unease with public schooling in the business community by tightly coupling mediocre
economic performance in the global marketplace.‖ (Mondale & Patton, 2001). In 1983 we were
in two wars: The Cold War with the Soviet Union and an economic war with Japan. The report
implies our national security was at stake, and poor student performance was putting the nation
at risk (Sadker & Sadker, 2000). Certainly the Commission‘s report was not only unforgiving
regarding the shortfalls of American public schools, but it also initiated much debate on the
schools should be fixed.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
In my current position as a public school principal, I believe that the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001 has had the most significant impact on the decisions I make in my role as a
building principal.
Coincidentally, the intentions of the law are not only consistent with the
recommendations of the Nation at Risk Report (Hayes), but beyond it as well. The executive
summary of the law lists the following aspects of the law:
Increased accountability (AYP) for states, individual schools and principals..
Expand choice options for parents whose students attend low performing schools.
Flexibility for local educational agencies in use of federal dollars to obtain results.
A stronger emphasis on reading, especially for young children.
High Qualified Teachers-criteria.
Assistance for state and local districts in providing drug free schools.
(No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (H.R.1)

56

Taylor‘s asserts that how we think about policy decisions is linked to the ideological and
philosophical positions we hold. What bearing does this consideration have principal decisions?
The proposed study will explore the impact policy decisions have on individual principal
choices.
Internal Influences
In his most recent book, A Passion for Learning, Philip Cusick (2005) speaks to the
significance one‘s personal education has on shaping an individual,
It is not school but life where the knowledge one learns in youth is
turned into action, and knowledge and action combine into the person
one is. (p.163)
The proposed study develops an alternative conceptual framework for principal decision
making. In essence, the study does not reject the models for decision making and discourse on
how principals are developed. My argument is that there is another lens to consider.
To be able to describe and explain the personal and professional morals of principals as
they make decisions, the study addresses principals‘ personal development as an influence on
their decision making. Cusick‘s work posits that education is not an institutional undertaking
but in more of a personal manner, an interior affair, something one does for oneself. With the
exception of a few cited studies on ethics development and principal values, few studies examine
at the personal development years of principals. How have youth, family and colloquial
experiences played a role in the developing the morals and values of today‘s principals? Hayek
(1988) submits,
―Learning how to behave is more the source than the result of insight,
reason and understanding. Man is not born wise, rational and good
but taught to become so. It is not our intellect that created our morals,
rather human interactions governed by my reason and those capacities
associated with it.‖ (p.21)

57

Administrative experience can be reflected in organizational tenure or the number of
years that an administrator has served in an organization (Hite et al., 2006) ―Experience‖ denotes
value of life stories or reflections of prior events and decisions. ―Tacit‖ knowledge is
information gleaned from experiences (Petzko,2008). There are things they just don‘t teach you
in schools of educational administration (Wilmore, 1995). The informal education of Cusick‘s
seven subjects extended beyond the requirements, diplomas and degrees of formal schooling…
In his book, Passion for Learning, Cusick summarizes the intellectual and moral
development of the noted subjects:
…Education began with the early encouragement, early reading
and writing and early interest in and personal identification with,
ethical and moral issues and with large events and transcendental
ideals. From there, and almost simultaneously, each inferred the
power of intelligence and the power of intelligent expression…and
more important, extra-institutional and informal associations
wherein knowledge about events and ideas were and exchanged.(p.161 )
Informal associations or ―like-minded‖ individual provided life mentors for the seven
subjects in Cusick‘s work. In the contextual model for this study, personal stories as told by
principals regarding their development as decision makers will coincidentally reflect their
―personal identification with ethical and moral issues‖, as in the case of Cusick‘s subjects. This
unique perspective enables the researcher to act on the purpose of the study, that is, is describe
and explain the personal and professional moral codes that are considered by principals as they
make decisions.
Principal Stories
In the daily, minute to minute moral decisions a principal makes, how does experience or
training guide his or her actions? The answer may lie in the principal‘s personal learning.
Trider and Leithwood (1988)submit,

58

Clearly the interior lives of principals have an enormous bearing
on how principals go about implementing policy; we should be
surprised was it otherwise. Yet, we know very little about the
personal beliefs and values that principals consider relevant
in their professional decision making…(p.305).
Greenfield (1985) adds,
Principals act largely on the basis of a learned and internalized
understanding of what is right and good – an understanding of
one‘s own experience and personal background; one‘s belief,
knowledge and personal values.‖ (p.139)
In the landscape of private inner dialogue within the constructs of meaning one‘s lifetime
lays the foundation of a learning story (McGough, 2003). Many principal stories begin in their
youth. Patterns of influence include family situations as cornerstones in their development.
Considering these experiences provides a starting point for inquiry in determining the storyline
for principals. McGough designates this period the pre-principalship phase. Here considerations
regarding schooling are formed along with family influences, school influences, and activity
influences. The catalyst stage follows along the choices, questions and considerations toward
teaching as a profession. Special interests would propel the individual to consider the big picture
and administration, while in the stage of teaching. The administration phase considers the initial
experiences of positional authority and relative events such as training, immersion, achievement.
The steps leading into the principalship are propelled by internal and external forces with which
one eventually complies with. Finally an established principal is when conviction, style,
nurturance and enrichment manifest into a philosophy of leadership.

Values
A central argument to the proposed study is that principal values influenced by one‘s
personal experiences provide validation in resolving and making decisions and resolving

59

dilemmas. An earlier citation of Quinn‘s contribution of the Competing Values Framework
specifically addresses the tensions of conflicting values present in day to day decisions.
Principals possess power to shape their schools to work toward a plan that fulfills their goals and
enacts their values. (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). Schools administration values, expectations and
activities are based on the assumption that its members will be male, and organizations seek
managers with ―traits assumed to belong to men with a tough minded approach to problems,
ability to abstract and plan and to set aside emotions in the interests of task accomplishment
(Kanter 1975).‖ Intriguing research has indicated that a women‘s value, way of knowing and
moral decision making are guided by the ethic of caring (Gilligan, 1982). Chodorow (1974)
posits that women‘s moral judgments are closely tied to feelings of empathy and compassions for
others.
There are internal tensions balancing the human side with the more autocratic and
manipulative aspects of leadership (Marshall, 1992). How do principals mediate the requisites of
bureaucratic demands, politics, and policy constraints in concert with the selected values of
stability/control, student growth and empathy/caring? The proposed study intends to utilize these
values as variables of influence in principal decision making.

On the Job Training/Professional Development
Principals who join staff in learning are respected and deemed effective (Blasé & Blasé,
1999, Marks and Printy, 2003). School leadership must change because society constantly
changes Bogotch et al 1998). Practicing and prospective principals must consider the domain of
staff development for themselves not as a means of providing clinical forms of supervision, but
also as opportunities to raise the level of human conduct and ethical aspirations of both the leader

60

and the led, thus having a ―transforming‖ effect on both (Leithwood & Duke, 1988). Expedient
changes in policy require ongoing principal learning.

Personal Development - Profound Experiences
McGough (2003) dedicated a portion of the study to the patterns of influence affecting
principals‘ perspectives. These influences were charted against the route maps resulting in the
ability to construct perspective storylines. The results of comparing the stages (youth to career),
and the relative perspective increments and influence cluster changes over the stages revealed an
evolution of purpose and thought on the way to the principal position.
Finally, McGough considered how the identified patterns of influence manifested in
principals‘ practice. Discrete patterns are indentified in relative stages of life and education as
influences as becoming a principal. Within these stages, learning also influences, mostly by
attitude, life experiences and people. (Boulton-Lewis, et. al, 1996) The study presents common
professional tracks of adult learners‘ progression to the principalship.
Summary
The essence of this review has positioned morals and moral development as precursors to
individual principal‘s decision making. The platform for the study is established by Barnard in
his citing the tensions between personal and professional morality. The works of Immanuel
Kant, Henri Bergson and Herbert Simon have emerged as the theoretical foundation for the study
to explain the motivations behind principal decisions.
The review also presents the theories, roles, contingencies, traits and data, as explained
in the literature as models for executive decision making. Coincidently decisions are influenced
by external factors such as federal and state policy aimed at mandating desired educational
outcomes. Lastly, the review examines principal development as decision makers. Preparation
61

for the role is explored and reveals a variety of pathways to the principalship. Formal education
comprised of university training, internships and academies are further supported by both formal
and informal mentor relationships. The knowledge and skills fostered in these arrangements
provide a formal recipe for making decisions.
Can each of these variables provide a degree of insight on how decisions are made? The
literature specific to identified processes or external factors provide a positive correlation
between variables and decision making outcomes. However, the research is absent when
considering the unique perspective of the decision maker as a determinant of decisions. Herein
lays the purpose of this study: to describe and explain the personal and profession moral codes
that are considered by principals as they make decisions.

Conclusion
To be able to describe and explain the personal and profession moral codes that are
considered by principals as they make decisions, a comprehensive review of theory relative to
morality and decision making substantiates the intellectual basis for this study. The perspectives
of Simon, Kant, and Bergson serve as the lens by which data is sorted and provide a degree of
―sense-making‖ (Segall, 2006).
The tiered of research as it is presented provides a review of the literature on morality and
moral development. It also presents a secondary array of influences on administrative decision
making. Within each model presented, an intellectual argument can be established as to its
relationship to decision making and has some its relevance to principal decisions. Yet, the
purpose of this study called for a more personal inquiry of practicing principals. To mobilize a
study of this nature, the literature review presented two congruent studies which spoke to the
personal stories as told by the identified individuals of interest. Through the work of Cusick
62

(2005) and McGough (2003) a conceptual model was developed for the study. The study let
principals tell their story as prompted by selected questions. The questions are designed to
inquire about the principals‘ personal stories in relation to developed and acquired morals, both
personal and professional. McGough substantiates the framework:
The stories of principals are ―grounded in a childhood exposures that were
affected by a set of influences through specific phases of a professional
development sequence, and to have been shaped by an underlying story
about oneself as a learner that thread through one‘s experiences and
provides as sense of coherence over time. (p.450)

63

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to attempt to describe and explain the personal and
professional moral codes of a set of school principals as they make decisions. In this chapter, I
explain the theoretical framework and the methods used in the study as well as identifying the
exploratory questions that serve as a guide for my research. This chapter will link the
appropriate methodology and the theory chosen as the intellectual basis for this study.
In this section, the methods of data collection, including the processes used in
interviewing are presented as well as the considerations of sampling strategies. I explain the
strategies for data analysis, including the process for generating tentative conclusions. The
interview protocol utilized in the research is also presented.

Theoretical Framework
Research progresses logically when the theory which provides its conceptual framework
is closely and naturally related to the purpose and assumptions of the study (Cusick). To be able
to describe and explain the moral codes considered by principal, the researcher must align with a
theory. Cusick citing Weber (1942), who states, ―…you can‘t study reality without some
presuppositions.‖ To study reality, the researcher must have some ideas about reality that will be
studied. The method used has to reflect the researcher‘s ideas.
Two assumptions are critical to achieving this purpose. It was assumed that the personal
and professional morals were best understood by studying the personal background of principals.
A second assumption is that principals are a critical resource in understanding the impact of the
moral development and values which they bring to the decision making table. The study has
64

chosen the theoretical perspectives of Simon, Kant, and Bergson as the intellectual basis and
support for the study.
Along with the suppositions of the study, a theory of research must also be identified. To
serve this requirement, a qualitative approach was chosen as means to address the research
questions presented in the first chapter. A qualitative study provides for a deeper understanding
of human behavior. The study will take on an inductive approach for generating relative data
(Goldstone):
…(para-phrased) to accumulate and organize facts and evidence and you will be able to
come up with explanations for all manner of specific phenomena and events (p.42).
In the case of this study, the primary instrument for data collection is the researcher. The
primary method selected for this study is interviewing. Coincidentally observational notes are
also made, identifying cultural artifacts. To describe and explain the personal and professional
morals considered by a principal while making decisions provides a challenge to work beyond
complex issues. To address the questions guiding the research, a method of inquiry is chosen to
enable a deep understanding of dilemmas that surface in the research process. A qualitative
approach enables the researcher to get underneath surface features and to probe for meaning and
finally understanding. The qualitative approach is concerned with processes as opposed to
cataloguing (Cook, p. 46). Qualitative researchers are interested in how people make sense of
their lives and experiences. (Cresswell, 1994) The qualitative researcher physically goes to the
people involved and collects, absorbs, analyzes and sorts information…and ultimately derives
meaning and understanding from a process that builds theories from countless details that have
been absorbed by observing and listening (Cook, p. 46). Data is sorted, recorded, interpreted and
conceptualized. Out of data, theory emerges. Glasser and Strauss (1967)
process as theoretical sampling:
65

referred to this

Theoretical sampling is the process of data collection for generating theory
whereby the analyst jointly collects, codes and analyzes this data and decides
what to collect next and where to find them, in order to develop his theory
as it emerges. The process of data collection is controlled by the emerging
theory whether substantive or formal. (p.105)
The initial interviews are approached from a broader perspective. As the study
progresses, the researcher finds the general perspective limiting in terms of relative data
collection. Creswell (1994) posits…perspectives are altered, with the possibility of seeing
alternative explanations for findings. (p.153)
From the findings, it is anticipated the identified suppositions will be affirmed.
Accumulations of data will support new classifications of findings…from data the new theory
will emerge.
The challenge then becomes presenting the data in a convincing fashion. Here the
researcher considers the generalization, reliability and validity. Generalization of qualitative
results is possible when the reader is convinced that the qualitative account is authentic and the
reader feels he or she also has ―been there.‖ Cook quoting Gertz (1988) (Segal, 2006) on the
difficulties facing the ethnographer, both in ―being there‖ and then writing about ―being there‖:
…to persuade readers…that what they are reading is an authentic account by
someone personally acquainted with how life proceeds in some place, at
some time, among some group, is the basis upon which anything else
ethnography seeks to do—analyze, explain, amuse, disconcert, celebrate,
edify, excuse, subvert---finally rests. (pp.143-144)
Generalization means that a relationship that holds for one group under certain
conditions will probably hold true for other groups and the same conditions. Generalization of
qualitative results is possible when the reader is convinced (see Gertz) the qualitative account is
authentic and the reader feels that he or she has ―been there‖. (Cook, p.47)

66

The consideration of reliability is concerned with the consistency or repeatability of the
study. Would another researcher find the same results while conducting the same research and
using the same methods? Validity answers the question, ―Is the explanation plausible?

Initial Exploratory Questions
As the purpose of this study is to attempt to describe and explain the moral codes of a set
of school administrators as they make decisions, four sets of questions will be addressed in the
course of the pending research.
1 What does research reveal about theories on morality and decision making? Related
questions address conceptual models for decision making and to what degree these
theories and models apply to principal decision making.
2 What are the skill sets that define the context of principal decision making? Specific
additional questions dealt with the common pathways to the principalship, university
preparation programs, formal experiences and mentoring.
3 How do principals‘ personal morals and moral development influence principal decision
making? Considering particular dilemmas, specific additional questions focused on how
family structures and religion impact a principal on resolving those dilemmas.
4 How have recent policy decisions, specifically The No Child Left Behind Act, made an
impact on principal decision making? To what extent does policy conflict with one‘s
moral code?

Sampling Strategies
Theory emerges from data. To select participants in a grounded theory approach, the
researcher become more selective in collecting a sample by focusing on the core variables that
emerge as important to the theoretical understanding of the of the phenomenon under study
(Creswell, J., 1998; Rudestram & Newton, 2007). The trick to choosing participants who can
contribute to an evolving theory, is to select participants whose main credential is experiential
relevance (Rudestram & Newton).

67

Research Procedures
Subjects-Selection Considerations
IRB review and approval (#i032388) for the project took place in April 2009. The
project‘s continuance was approved for a second year in April, 2010. The interviews spanned a
15 month period beginning in September 2009 through December 2010. As discussed in
Chapter III, one of the primary tasks in initiating the study was to determine a representative
sample that would be interviewed. For practical reasons, it was decided to contact potential
subjects through local, regional and state principal associations to enlist principal interest in the
study. Principals responding favorably to the initial inquiry were contacted by email to confirm
their participation. A copy of the project information and consent form was forwarded to each
principal to provide further details relative to the study. Each email was followed by a phone
conversation to set the date, time and location of the interview. Upon arriving at the site of the
interview, the consent form was presented to each subject for their permission to participate.
From this point, an audio-taped semi-structured interview generated data for the succeeding
analysis. I also made notes on my observations at each setting. All the interviews, with
exception of two, took place in the office of each principal. These notes are included in the
succeeding analysis as related to the purpose of the study.
The majority of the individuals interviewed for this study were a representative sample of
suburban school district administrators similar to the community in which I (researcher) am
employed as a practicing principal. At the onset of the recruitment process, it was desired to
select principals based on similarity to me in years of my experience in education as well as their
chronological age. The data indicate that the majority of the principals did fall in within five to
ten years of my tenure in education. Although principals‘ ages were not sought in the study,
68

anecdotal data placed many of the principals close the researcher‘s chronological age. The
alignment of experience and age would provide a common frame of references for principals in
terms of lifetime events and experiences in which they developed their personal and professional
moral codes.
The majority of the principals selected can be considered to be middle to late ―baby
boomers.‖ In their lifetime, significant world and national events have shaped educational policy
decisions. These policy decisions were also accompanied by shifting social attitudes, economic
growth and decline, civil rights, government mistrust, waves of educational reform, private and
public scandal, and accelerated technological advances, along with daily news events that
challenged the moral fabric of a nation. The ―forces of the ages‖ (Cusick, 2005) shaped the
principals‘ morals and outlook on life. As a collective group, the principals participating in this
study shared heroes, family memories, as well as life‘s inevitable disappointments. It is the ―era‖
by which the principals developed their personal moral code as well developing a professional
code in their chosen career as educators.
It was interesting to note, even as products of when social change was on the agenda,
how traditional values maintained their place in each of the principals‘ lives. Principals were
gracious and honest when discussing their personal morals as well as how they translated into
their professional beliefs. The dialogues with the principals were intense at times. Referring
back to family efforts, struggles and life experiences created unexpected emotional responses to
the questions. My transcription of these instances could not completely capture the entire
essence of these responses. However, it is fair to submit the principals were honest, forthright
and authentic in their comments. Their candidness is considered a valued contribution to this
study.

69

Demographics
For purposes of confidentiality, the names of the principals, their schools, districts and
communities will be substituted with pseudonyms. The names of individuals (teachers, students,
parents, administrators, others) are also pseudonyms to protect their identities as well.
As mentioned previously, the principals invited in the study held positions in schools that
were similar in several categories. With the majority of the schools situated on the outside
boundaries of a major metropolitan area, each ―new suburban‖ school held over 2000 high
school students (exception where two high schools exist), and approximately 800 students in the
middle schools. The size of the high school administrations vary by size and district. Large
high schools staff two or three assistant principals. The districts with two high schools staff one
or two assistant principals. At the middle school level, there is primarily one assistant principal
at each building. Student achievement scores for the schools of principals in the study, as
indicated by district state assessments results, are similar. In each of the buildings, an assistant
principal is primarily responsible for discipline. All principals confide that they support and
contribute to the handling of discipline issues, particularly the significant offenses. Assistant
principals also contribute to curriculum and school improvement initiatives.

Mid-Course Adjustments
At the midpoint of the study a suggestion was made to consider contacting principals
whose buildings fell outside demographic characteristics earlier described. As a result, several
principals in alternative setting were approached to participate in the study. Four principals
responded to the invitation. Aside to the size of the schools, all are characterized by significantly
different demographics. Two high schools are considered to be situated in urban locals; one rural

70

high school in a town that borders the United States and Mexico; and one is an inner city school.
None of the principals and schools was identified in the original design of the study. Yet, I was
curious as to how the principals‘ responses would align or differ from the more heterogeneous
sample. I was particularly interested in which of their personal and professional moral codes
influenced their decision relative to their student populations. As the data will indicate, the
focus at these sites is different than the suburban schools.

Revised Interview Protocol
After 10 interviews, I realized that the responses I was obtaining were only as good as the
questions I was asking. Principals, like most individuals, keep their cards close to their vests
when answering questions relative to their personal morals and beliefs. This was true in several
interviews. Consequently, I submitted a revised interview protocol to IRB with additional
questions to seek specific information from principals.
Interviews were conducted with 25 individual principals from 23 individual districts.
Participants in the first set of data gathering activities will be selected from a homogenous
sample of Michigan secondary school principals who possess the ―phenomena of interest‖
(Glaser & Strauss, 1967) in the study. Interest is defined as seeking participants whose
generational (age) experiences are similar to the researcher‘s background. The stratified sample
would include secondary building administrators whose careers in education span at least two of
the three previous decades. Gender representation will also serve as a point of study in the data
collection. Variables for interest to which the questions will be developed will focus on each
person‘s experiences and background and the decisions they make in their role as principals.
The pool of candidates was generated from a membership list of the Michigan
Association of Secondary Schools. It is important to divulge the membership of the researcher in
71

this association. The selection may be representative of a convenience sample that may belong
to MASSP and /or the Kensington Lakes Activities Association. Letters were sent to selected
candidates meeting the sample criteria, inviting their participation.
To determine the efficacy of the interview process, a pilot or trial of the interviews is
proposed. Initial interviews (2-3) were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the researcher
in leading the interviews as well as the quality of the response the questions generated.
Assessing the initial interviews allows the researcher to make necessary adjustments prior to
making a final determination on the number of participants to utilize in the sample.
Data Collection
Interview
The interview is the most widely applied technique for conducting systematic research
(Hyman et. al, 1975). Guides to interviewing, especially those oriented to standardized survey,
are primarily concerned with maximizing the flow of valid reliable information while
minimizing distortion of what respondents know. The manner by which a question is asked can
greatly affect the results of research (American Statistical Association, ASA). Careful phrasing
as to generate the data is critical to effective research.
Despite the passive approach on gathering information, it is not to say the interview is so
technical and the procedures so standardized that interviewers can ignore contextual, societal and
interpersonal elements (Fontana & Frey. 2000). Interviews are interactional encounters and the
nature of the social dynamic of the interview can shape the nature of the knowledge generated.
Inexperienced interviewers may not recognize that interview participants are ―actively‖
constructing knowledge around questions and responses (Holstein & Bubrium, 1995). Active or

72

unstructured (Fontana & Frey) interviewing attends more to the ways in which knowledge is
assembled than is usually the case in traditional approaches.
Active interviewing redefines the role of the interview. Both parties to the interview are
necessarily active. Postmodernist ethnographers have concerned themselves with some
assumptions present in interviewing and with the traditional, controlling roll of the
interviewer.(Fontana & Frey ) These concerns have led to new directions in qualitative
interviewing focusing on increased attention to the voices of the respondents (Marcus & Fischer,
1986) and the interviewer – respondent relationship (Crapanzano, 1980). Meaning is not merely
elicited by apt questioning, nor simply transported through respondent replies; it is actively and
communicatively assembled in the interview encounter. Respondents are not so much
repositories of knowledge, treasures of information awaiting excavation, as they are constructors
of knowledge in collaboration with the interviewers. Participation in an interview involves
meaning-making work (Holstein & Gubrium).
The purpose of the study is to describe and explain the personal and professional moral
codes of principal as they make decisions. The position of the proposed study is to attempt to
translate personal background and experience to moral development and the resulting influence
of principal decision making. Active interviewing provides for opportunities to shape the form
and content of what is said and create meaning that ostensibly resides with the respondent
(Manning, 1967; Mishner 1986). The trick is to formulate questions and provide an atmosphere
conducive to open and undistorted communication between the interviewer and respondent. In
the translating experience of values, the interview needs to take on a dynamic, meaning-making
process. One cannot expect to generate answers on one occasion to replicate those on another
because they emerge from different circumstance of production. The validity of answers derives

73

not from their correspondence to meaning held within the respondent, but from their ability to
convey situated experiential realities (Holstein & Gubrium). The proposed study will include
active interviewing as a form of interpretive practice involving respondent and interviewer as the
articulate ongoing interpretive structures, resources and orientations with ―practical reasoning‖
(Grafinkel, 1967). The active interview serves those being studies as it transforms the subject
behind the respondent from a repository of opinions and reasons or a ―wellspring‖ of emotions
into a productive source of knowledge. It is the internal translation of knowledge and emotions
that develop the values that guide decision making.

Interview Process
Individual subjects are personally contacted to set up a one-hour session to conduct the
interview. The necessity of continuing, follow-up and additional sessions is determined at the
close of each interview. Desirably, the interview takes place at the principal‘s school as to avail
the study of artifacts in proximity of the interview. In deference to informed consent, a brief
overview of the interview and a general description of the purpose of the study are presented.
The subject is advised of topics and assured of how the research will take in account all ethical
considerations including the privacy and sharing of the data (Fontana & Frey). During this time,
the relative theories, hypothesis and arguments are not to be discussed as to avoid leading the
respondent in a certain direction. Each interview is audio- taped to capture the participant‘s
response and dialogue. As a participant-observer in the respondent‘s place of work, a separate
set of notes will be constructed by me as to capture the setting, gestures, and other empirical
materials (Fontana & Frey) that will not be evident on the recording. To realize an efficient
relationship during the interview, establishing a rapport with the respondent is important.
Oakley (1981) points out that in interviewing there is no intimacy without reciprocity. Shifting
74

positions without influencing answers allows for the development of a closer relationship. Hertz
(1997) states that interviewers must be reflexive where the interviewer needs to have an ongoing
(active) conversation about experience while simultaneously living in the moment.
The proposed study requires an in depth understanding of each respondent‘s background.
Understanding the mechanics of interviewing is not the only consideration; the research must
also understand the respondent‘s world and forces that might stimulate or retard responses (Kahn
& Cannel, 1957). It is necessary to initiate each interview with a structured approach, asking
prepared questions to provide detail of each principal‘s background. The information is critical
to the study as it may be referenced later as a clarifying position to discussions. In addition to
the audio record, a prepared personal information sheet is utilized to serve not only as a prompt
but also as a record of the respondents‘ background and credentials.

Backward Mapping
The choice to utilize a more semi-structured technique for interviews will invite the
respondent to participate in a dialogue by answering open-end questions regarding their
decisions. The three types of decisions outlined earlier (student growth, safety and personnel
issues) align with common principal experiences and practices. Hypothetical scenarios are
presented to the respondents as to how they decided to address the dilemma. After the scenarios
are presented, the principal participant provides an initial response. My role in the interview is to
encourage the principal to work back through their rationale and push for the detail that
ultimately motivated the principal to decide in the manner he or she chose.
To prompt the principal to be reflective, statements will be followed with comments,
such as:
―Can you tell me a little more about your decision?‖
75

―What were the critical considerations in making this decision?‖
―Why did you choose this direction?‖
―What motivated you to make this decision?‖
―How do you know it was a good decision?‖
By providing additional prompts, in the role of the researcher, I will press for ―hidden‖
data to reveal the root causes and influencers that motivate principals making decision and why
they did so.
As a means for checking accuracy and seeking clarity, a member check is suggested
(Segall, 2002). Participating principals will be offered copies of the transcript of their interview
to edit inaccuracies, delete information, or make clarifying points. Following the completion of
the member checks, the data will be assembled and ready for analysis.
Initial Interview Protocol
Part A-Demographics
IA.

How many years have you been employed in the public school setting?

2A.

How many years of experience do you have as a school administrator? Please
provide a breakdown of each position held and the number of years in that
position.
Part B- Background

IB.

Could you provide for me information regarding your background?
Please include details particular to your education and training?

2B.

Of these, does any experience stand out as being more influential or
profound than the others? Please discuss.

3B

Did any of your background experiences influence your decision to become a
principal? If so, how? If not, what did?

I am now going to ask you some questions that are related to your role as a principal.

76

Part C – Seminal Incident
1D.

Reflect on a situation or incident which is unique to your role as a principal. Your
choices could be, but are not limited to: teacher discipline, student expulsion, principled
value-based decision, taking an unpopular stand with the staff, a parent, or central office.
Tell me about the decision and why you chose the direction you took.

This concludes the interview. Is there anything you would like to add that you believe would be
helpful to my research?
At a future date, you will have an opportunity to review the transcription of this interview. At
that time you will also have the opportunity to make any corrections.
Finally, I will share with you my analysis of data I have collected. You will have an opportunity
to make comments on my analysis.
Thank you for taking the time to participate in this interview.

77

CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Introduction

In this chapter, I present the data collected to describe and explain the personal and
professional moral codes by a set of administrators as they make decisions. Following a
presentation of the demographic background of the principal subjects, I will address the
prominent themes that emerged in the study. The third section will present and analyze data on
additional influences on principal decision making, answering the remaining research questions
posed for this project.
Research Procedures
Subjects-Selection Considerations
Interviews were conducted with 25 individual principals from 23 individual districts.
Demographic data acquired in the interviews is shown in Tables 1 – 5:
The original conceptual framework of the study, decided to invite principal-subjects to
participate in the study, with similar years of experience in public school education (See Table 1)
with the researcher, also a practicing principal (18 years). The individual and collective
experiences would provide a framed backdrop of experience as principal background data was
collected.
Table 1. Experience in Education
Range of Experience
35-44 Years
30-34 Years
25-29 Years
15-24 Years
8-14 Years
Less than 8 Years

Number in Category
2
4
1
12
6
-

78

Similar reasoning was considered and applied in relation the number of years principal
subjects had as practicing principals. (See Table 2) It was also anticipated that the data analysis
could reveal a correlation between experience as a building principal and the moral choices
he/she exercised in making decisions.
Table 2. Experience as a Building Administrator
Range of Experience
25-30 Years
20-24 Years
15-19 Years
10-14 Years
5-9 Years
Less than 9 Years

Number in Category
2
2
4
8
7
2

The original conceptual framework of the study called for inviting primarily secondary
principals (high school and middle school) to participate in the project. Although there are a
number of common decision opportunities, there are decisions made at the secondary level that
are rarely considered in elementary buildings. A breakdown of specific building assignment of
the subjects interviewed is found in Table 3.

Table 3. Breakdown of Administrators Participating in the Study
Administrative Position
Total Number of Administrators Interviewed
High School Principals Interviewed
Middle School Principals Interviewed
Central Office Administrators (former MS Principal)
Assistant Middle School Principals Interviewed
Retired Elementary Principals Interviewed
Assistant High School Principals Interviewed

Number Participating
25
12
8
1
2
1
1

Each of the principal-subjects interviewed had completed advanced degrees beyond a
Bachelors Degree (See Table 4). The study considers this data as possibly contributing to the
moral considerations principal draw from while making decisions.
79

Table 4. Principal Education
Graduate Degree
Masters Level
Ed. Specialist
Ph.D

Number in Category
18
5
2

This descriptive study‘s design primarily focused on suburban secondary schools as the
setting where the research would be based. 80% of the total number of settings was in suburban
secondary schools. (See Table 5) The conceptual framework considered like decisions in like
locations. Near the end of the data collection, it was decided to include alternative demographic
settings. The choice would provide evidence of the exclusiveness of the nature and degree of
principals‘ decisions in relation to the differing demographic settings.
Table 5. School Demographics
School Location
Suburban School
Rural High School (U.S. – Mexican Border)
Urban High School
Inner City High School

Number in Category
21
1
2
1

Sorting the Data
With the transcriptions in hand, I dedicated a significant amount of time to rereading the
interviews. The initial review of the transcripts were dedicated to identifying statements which
were selected and highlighted that may have relevance to defining and describing principals‘
moral codes. As with the succeeding reviews, a separate note page was attached to each
interview transcription to capture ideas, alignments or new perspectives. Subsequent readings
identified statements relating to the theoretical framework established for the study. Additional
highlights were made and notes attached to statements made in the interviews which align with
other studies regarding principals‘ training, roles, background and decision making.
80

The highlighted statements in the interviews began to reveal a frequency of responses.
After several readings, the following emerged that would capture and classify the responses of
the principals.
Prominent Themes
I.

Principals as Moral Individuals/Caretakers

II.

Family Background and Influence/ Religion (as part of the family experiences)

III.

Personal and Professional Morality-Herbert Simon

IV.

Personal and Professional Morality – Immanuel Kant

V.

Personal and Professional Morality – Henri Bergson

VI.

Overlapping Moralities

VII.

Mentors, Shared Decision Making

A final step was needed to organize the data collected in the interviews. Following the
steps outlined in Chapter III, I coded each highlighted statement within each interview. The
codes reflect the specific interview and the particular statement made during the interview. With
the codes in place, I chose to align each statement under the heading of the emergent themes
already identified. A spreadsheet was constructed placing all relevant codes under each theme.
The spreadsheet provided a guide for retrieving statements. Separate documents were created to
collect each of the actual (highlighted) statements from each interview. The statements were
organized in a manner that would allow me to present cogent data to support additional analysis.

Data Analysis
Theme #1: Principals as Moral Individuals/Caretakers
As the purpose of this study is to describe and explain the personal and professional
moral codes by a set of administrators as they make decisions, it is appropriate to define the
81

environment in which the decisions are made. The work of a principal is complex, characterized
by ongoing moral dilemmas, tragic events and challenges that often fall outside the scope of
academics. Christa, a high school principal characterized her first year:
My first year was a doozy. We had three bomb threats, two intruders and different
lockdowns…significant medical situations, two sexual predators…Channel 4 teacher
investigations… one from a previous principal, one a current teacher. A lot… all in my
first year. .. If I can make it through this I can make it through anything.
Aside to the technical processes the principal oversees, the position calls for instances of
judgment, where favorable paths of action are reasoned beyond the less favorable. MacDonald
(2002) explains morality… as a personal set of rules that modifies our behavior. It is doing
good instead of harm and sets some virtuous standards of conduct or moral codes (Barnard,
1937).
What principals do (decide) falls outside the bounds of technical rationality, and there are
important dimensions to their work which cannot be reduced to technique. At times a principal‘s
decision must choose between competing values of goodness (Greenfield, 1985). Many principal
decisions are value laden. The meaning people give to events is shaped by their goals, values,
feelings, existing knowledge and past experiences (Leithwood & Duke). To be successful in
his/her craft, principals make priorities, choices and decisions that are based their own moral
fiber. Audrey, a former middle and elementary principal posits, ―…in order to be a good leader,
you must know yourself…you must be grounded in your own morality because the shoe doesn‘t
fit everyone the same way.‖
In the course of this study, principals responded to their calling to education and
leadership positions as a means to support the lives of the students and staff they encountered.
They are moral individuals. Principal translate their morality through the role of caretaker and
judicious decision makers. In short, principal are purveyors of what is right, just and good for
82

humanity. It is through their actions that they demonstrate their personal morality in a
professional setting. Al is a principal at Jenison Middle School. Several principals‘ responses
were similar to Al‘s to the question …how did you end up an educator?
A:

Yes…I wanted to help kids. And to me getting my degree at Albion and social
studies teaching…when I got out, I couldn‘t necessarily find a social studies job
… I wanted to help kids. I was inspired by professor at Albion, to work with
kids…

D:

Were there certain things of value you wanted to pass along to the kids from
your own personal experience? When you talked to kids what were some of
things you wanted to share with them?

A:

Certainly…I think treating each other with respect, caring about others, looking
out for kids that are less fortunate. Stick up for kids that are bullied or picked on.
Not so much those were my experiences, but as I went through high school, I was
often in that role as a peace maker. I hung with all kinds of student… the troubled
kids…the athletes…the musicians…and obvious through my degrees and the
therapy I had to go through to get my degrees that was often the role in my own
family. By going to school I wanted to do something that would help humanity or
society, so teaching and counseling seemed like a good fit.

Principals have their own insights into parameters and will weigh many decisions
accordingly. Jerry, a long time middle school principal shares his experience with proposals that
are ―…what is best for kids‖:
A lot times when we make decisions are we making it for administrative
convenience…Lots of decisions we make is for our convenience or the teachers.…Still,
95-99% of these teachers are caring professionals and they do it for kids…and when I can
get it down to a kid level the sacrifice and the give and take is most effective. The
teachers work in teams. If the teachers cannot make a decision, I will make it and tell
them why. …
My folks had a belief that if given the chance the person will do the right thing. I have
been taught, people will do the right thing if given the opportunity… and that means to
me…given more information…more opportunity…and they will do the right thing. Most
of the time.…
For the most part, the principals in this study spoke to the efficacy of public education.
Frequently they would comment on how it provided the principals the opportunity to fulfill the

83

expectation of attending college and eventually succeeding in life. They spoke of the sense of
giving back and providing the same experiences to the students they encounter each day. Yet a
few of the principals traveled the parochial trail to college. And how did this experience
translate into moral development? Frank, a principal in a large school summed it up best by
stating, ―It was a world of compliance…you did because…that was kind of what we lived with.
Frank‘s morality emerged in a radical dimension, he reflects,
A lot of kids in my generation boomeranged off of that and enjoyed not being under
someone‘s thumb in my early 20‘s… It was a pretty interesting time for me at that age. I
earned money for myself and supported myself…it has something to do with who I am as
an educator today. I was a solid student… I had a high grade point . But today, I can
picture these kids…I cannot remember all their names but the faces remain…and they
were not like me. What happened to those kids? I don‘t know…. a lot of them went to
the automobile factories. Those kids are still in our halls today. We cannot do what we
used to do because we will leave them out of a productive society. So I guess those kind
of reflections has raised my sensitivity to what we do and how we do it.
On doing what is right….
For Clarence, his personal morality was instilled when he was young:
From my mother‘s point of view…you always do what is right. And she is the one that
ultimately pushed me in terms of an education…I had an opportunity… my mother told
me to do what is right… and doing the right thing is not always expedient. It takes effort
and time.
There are occasions when the principal and staff do not agree with what is best for kids.
As there are principals, there are staff members who believe morality is based strictly on set rules
which determine rightness or wrongness of a circumstance. In other words, ―It is right here in
black and white.‖ There are also occasions, however, where one could make a case for both
sides as presented. Here is where principals often find themselves in an area they define as, ―The
world of shades of gray.‖ Tim, a high school principal was negotiating a case that he believes
was an example of working in the gray area. He was having a difficult time imposing his
personal and professional morality upon a decision that was not supported by a staff member.

84

―How am I going to get the teacher to do the right thing who did not want to do the right thing?
Can I bring her to the water and make her drink?‖ Tim tells the story,
We have a policy that if a student is sick and miss a class; he/she have a certain amount
of time to make up the work. Something like two days for every day they
miss…something like that….it is more complicated but that is the general rule...a student
had an illness that gave him temporary paralysis...out of school for two weeks...intensive
care. He had two days to make up for every day he missed but did not get his work in
Spanish class completed (in the allotted time). So (the teacher) refused to let him take one
of the tests he missed.(She stuck to her guns and continues to do so.) I say to her, you are
a parent too. This could happen to you and to me. You have to realize, the right thing to
do is let him take the test. You have to allow this to happen. This is wrong to punish this
kid who had temporary paralysis… She says, ―Rules are rules…it‘s in black and white.
And if you talk to me about this one more time, I am bringing a union rep in.‖ I told her
I would encourage her to do that as I would be interested to see what opinion the union
has on the situation....
Tim believes in what is right and best for this student is to provide more time. He
acknowledges the policy but finds the other remedies to the circumstance. In his view, the policy
does not support the student‘s circumstance.
As a practicing principal, I was not surprised that compensation was not a motivator for
entering the principalship. Many spoke of investing in human capital whether it was in their
staff and students or themselves. Reasoning for career choices reflect their personal morality
and as a means to make a difference.
Kathleen: (leaving the business world)…I decided I wasn‘t making enough of a
difference in the world and so I decided to be a teacher. It was frustrating to me…this
was before the days of ENRON…and if I was one of the accountants on the ENRON case
and broken the case and it would have been different, …did not believe what I did in my
job was meaningful enough in my job like I could find a magnitude…enough errors… in
the grand scheme of things, companies make millions of dollars and you find a thousand
dollar error…no one cares. I didn‘t think what I did made any difference and so I wanted
to make more of a difference in the world and so teaching helped the next generation.
When asked, ―What does a difference mean?‖ Her response was typical of most
principals, ―I guess I wanted to feel like I was helping to shape the future…I wasn‘t doing this in
my first career. It is a personal aspiration that I have.‖
85

To Christa, becoming a principal was an inevitable choice, ―…it‘s not about the
money…it should be a about your inner calling.‖
It is apparent in these principals‘ words; they acknowledge an intrinsic motivation that seeks
to enrich students‘ lives. A principal relates to a need to balance the playing field for the
students who may come from troubled backgrounds or have various disabilities. Courtney,
another middle school principal speaks to her need to ―champion‖ special education students.
Courtney in fact, turned away from opportunities to move into central office, with her reasoning,
―There are bunch of kids that are getting kicked out this district because they won‘t go to
Harvard. A couple of jobs (central office) have come up and …I don‘t want it…it‘s too far away
from the kids.‖
In the course of the interviews, the principals were asked how they communicate their
personal and professional morality. Also, how do they accomplish this without offending or
being cited for imposing their beliefs upon the people that work for them? A common response
was through modeling. Coincidentally, professional expectations may be translated in more of an
overt means. Ben, a high school principal, responds to a question that inquires if any of his
values are brought into how he manages his staff:
I think I probably do, subconsciously, in terms of what I see as good
outcomes…expectations for the staff… that I would like to see how teachers carry
themselves… how they dress and how is their work ethic…. I am somewhat…I get to be
a little bit more dismayed as the younger teachers come into school dressed less
professionally and don‘t quite have that work ethic or the appreciation for the job they
have. I sometimes struggle with that based on my upbringing work.
Even though it is a part of the evaluation process, I don‘t try to force my values on
anybody… I try to model that part of me more than anything else…my style is not be
confrontational or anything like that. I am more of a person that would like to show you
why something would be good for you or for the school or for your kids instead of
walking up and telling you, ―You need to dress differently‖.

86

Kathleen consistently models her professional morals. One could say she wears them on
her sleeve, as many principals do.

The professional (moral) expectations for her staff are clear

Kathleen speaking to her ―true colors‖:
I come out on a strong ―gold‖ so part of my personality is this there is this right and
this wrong…but I don‘t know what came first if I was raised that way or born
hat way …that
is definitely part of my personality.
Regarding application to school issues…
Well I think at a couple of levels, I think in terms of expecting on a basic level. People
need to make deadlines, work hard…I guess be like me. I expect my teachers to be
competent and be able to do their job and meet the standards I have set for them. But on
a bigger level I try to keep in my mind what is best for kids, I know we say that all the
time, but I do use it as a filter for the decisions we are going to make. And it may make
people unhappy but is it best for kids? …even if creates an uncomfortable situation….,
in terms of my integrity…I am not going to lie about things, I am going be open and
honest in my building. It is the way I run things in my relationships…I wouldn‘t do
anything unethical in this district but I would have to quit if I got forced in the corner
where I thought my boss expected me to do something totally unethical.
Mary, middle school principal, considers her role as not the only person they could turn
to when issues are apparent….it does not have to be her. She confides,
I don‘t accept the status quo…that how it is, is not necessarily how it should be or how it
would have to be…definitely when posed with a problem that is personal or professional,
to look outward…to pattern behavior on. I believe in modeling and to seek appropriate
modeling. And that is what I try to instill upon my staff.
Middle school principal Ken speaks directly to the role his personal and professional
moralities play in leading his building…establishing expectations and having a shared
morality…what is good for kids,
…life is about being a quality person…it is not about how much money you
make…
You have rules to follow because it is the right thing to do… religious or not, you have
that real intrinsic feeling that you do is what is right and there are things you cannot do
either. It doesn‘t matter if anyone is watching or anyone is going to find out it is driven
into you especially from different priests (laughs) YOU OBEY. I think that the lighter

87

side of all that is you feel rewarded when you can model that behavior for others and
have to start to emulate that.
One thing that I want to them to know that is important; I am an ethical and a moral
person. I am here to do what is best for kids…that will always be my primary goal.
Principals hold themselves accountable for the decisions they make. It is an ongoing
reflection on whether they made the right decision. Collective responsibility, ―where the buck
stops‖…―it‘s often a lonely position‖…is statements of insight how principals mediate. But to
remain moral personally and professionally the questions are…‖should I have done this or
should I have done that?‖ Principal Tim states, ―It does not matter how moral you are…or how
secure you place yourself in this world…How many times have you laid in bed at night and
thought why you chose or decided to do things in a certain way.‖ Doubts linger. Principal Tom
remembers decisions that he reversed because the original one wasn‘t right…he states, ―I could
live with the bad decision…I‘d call the parents, apologize and change it. If I suspended their
kids…I can un-suspend them too.‖
Principals see themselves as moral individuals. From their personal and professional
morals, principals project expectations on their staff and students. Morals are the filter by which
principals assess behavior and performance as well as the attitudes that drives these actions.
Tom aligns desired educational outcomes with a value system. ―I don‘t think you can be
concerned with education unless you have a set of values. I think of right and wrong, what‘s
gray and where you need to be.‖

Giving Care for Students
Virtually every principal submitted that taking care of staff is a primary duty of a
principal. Their care giving extends to the children they welcome each day. Supporting
Gilligan‘s (1974) assertion that a woman‘s value, way of knowing and moral decision making
88

are guided by the ethic of caring. An interesting outcome of the selection process of subjects to
be interviewed, the principals of the most at-risk (poverty, inner city or urban schools) schools in
the study were female principals. (See Table 6 for Gender Break down) Each one of these
principals referred to themselves as surrogate mothers. Catherine relates:
They are my kids from 7:00 a.m. to 2:10 p.m. I have to think about it that way. I do our
orientations, I tell the parents, ―They are mine.‖…we must come to our buildings with
this conviction, the service and how we treat people…drives our decisions.
Christa was raised in a dysfunctional home (alcohol abuse). As the oldest of five
children in her family, she assumed the role as parent in absence of her own mother:
I think I have always had that mothering instinct for younger siblings knowing that I was
the only one that was going to take care of them. I think it shaped me…through my
upbringing that I feel I need to take care of other people…that
led me to become a
teacher…I could never put myself first… I take care of my teachers, I take care of my
kids, and I take care of the needs of anyone that walks into this office…
Christa learned however, that caring is only one part of the equation. There was a time
where she felt that if took care of the physical and emotional needs, everything else would take
care of itself,
…the culture of the building is really good. This high school is a warm friendly place to
be…a sense of caring. But we are a failing school…our scores are not where they should
be…achievement wise, it is awful…I cared about the warm-fuzzy kind of stuff like that
but it has become very crystal clear to me the last few years, about the scores…and the
significance of students leaving without the aptitude of not being able to make it in the
world…if you interviewed them, I would say about 50-50 percent of the kids say she
really cares about them…there is another 50% that would probably say, ―She is a hardass….she doesn‘t let us do anything!‖
Here we see a shift or extension of morality. It is of good morals to be concerned with
how students perform is a reflection of their learning as preparation for the next step in their
lives. For principals like Christa, education policy and the resulting accountability has to be
acknowledged sooner or later. Similar circumstances will be revisited later in the chapter.

89

Table 6. Principal Gender Breakdown
Gender
Male Principals
Female Principals

Number in Category
16
9

Working with Families
Parents send their best kids to school. Yet the families cannot always provide the support
for the children. At times, schools lend a hand for basic necessities through drives and fund
raisers. Permission for these initiatives needs to pass across the principal‘s desk and receive the
necessary blessing. Holiday drives often adopt families and provide clothing, food and
sometimes arrange shelter. But outside those more visible events, principals meet with parents
and their children to help overcome some of the challenges families face. Mary, a middle
school principal, dedicated meetings with a mom once a month to help her understand the
difficulty her boy was experiencing in a change of lifestyles due to a recent divorce.
I will take you back to a situation with a boy and his mom. Newly divorced mother who
had just moved into our neighborhood from a more affluent neighborhood in Canton and
brought her son with her…she felt she was doing absolutely the best she could but all this
boy saw was that he was going from a 3000 square foot home to a 1000 square foot
ranch… he was very disturbed …acting out because of the situation…he was used to a
life that provided for travel hockey, nice new homes and vacations…he was angry.. And
she said I have put a roof over his head and food on the table and he has medical
insurance and yet he felt his life was so much inferior .I did find the family a good
counselor to continue on. But to understand she was doing all those things for him but in
his age group that is so narcissistic and tried to help her understand his perspective and
where he was coming from.
The study paid a visit to an inner city high school. At Dennison High, students came to
school with all the social issues a school could experience. Poverty surrounds the school. The
neighborhood, once characteristic of a prestigious middle class location in the city, now is
represented by vacant buildings and lots. The high school building itself is an architectural gem
with ornate carvings and figures along the pillars of the school. Yet the building sits in the midst
90

of what the principal calls ―huge hypocrisy. She states, ―Take a look when you leave…there is
church on all these corners and a bar on the other corner. The challenges of the neighborhood
find their way to my door each day.‖ When asked what a goal for the school is, she relates to the
neighborhood a vision of village,
I want it to be like an African village…a village with values… I want children to be safe
here. I want them to know their roles here and grow here. So they can take the love and
safety they get here…the self-efficacy they get here and take out into their community.
So it is no longer ok to walk down the streets and take a piece of paper and throw it on
the ground. So it‘s not that it ok, and it‘s not normal to have a church on every corner and
a liquor store right across the street. I want them to know that here is a village and
everyone has a role and everybody
A kindred perspective of giving care was important to establishing relationships with
those the principals encountered in their role. Principals believe it is within these relationships
that the environment of safety and authentic concern is translated to the stakeholders.
Giving Care – Taking Care of the Staff
Classroom walls don‘t insulate principals and teachers from life‘s perils, disappointments
and tragedies. Offensive statements made by parents, students or even staff members can
terrorize a teacher to the point of not being effective in the class room or possibly leaving the
profession.

Principal Courtney recalls the graffiti on the wall outside of school, ―we had to

clean it up…the teacher never saw the language. I remember seeing a teacher sitting down and
crying one time, a guy, after some kids wrote that about him outside. He was so destroyed
because of all the energy he puts into the kids. And thinking until this point he didn‘t ever have
to hear from me, ―I see you made the wall…. I have to protect the people who work here.‖
In addition to the economy that caused hardships on staff families, students and their
families, health concerns of staff and their families are evident all school year. The principal
states, ―Each year presents concerns for the physical and emotional needs for the people in the
91

building. One school year, I had a death of a popular student, a son of a teacher taking his own
life and a teacher diagnosed with cancer…we have plans for these moments but they are difficult
even though you think you are prepared.‖ But what can you do when central office does not
acknowledge the principal‘s sense that a teacher is not doing well, health-wise? Principal
Charles related a situation where a senior teacher‘s performance was suspect. He went to bat for
the teacher but the district had other ideas.
Next thing you know… I had spent over a year compiling a file that is full of
reprimands only to put him on disability. And then last year, this was two years
ago…he died. Many strokes, diabetes, and when the notice came out from HR, I was
livid. Because they had me go through all that pain and sorrow … I could hardly look at
his wife in her face at the funeral…it was so sad. Because I had been this bad person,
you know. Reprimanding him, riding his ass, you know how awful he was, and how bad
for kids. Making it all about discipline, incorrigibility, Insubordination…and it wasn‘t
that…he was sick.
As Charles presented the sad story, he became emotional at times. It was apparent he
felt deeply about compromising his own values. The wrongness of the decision did not permit
Charles to support his staff member as he thought he needed. The worst moment was facing the
teacher‘s family. Charles had known the teacher‘s spouse through most his career. He knew he
could not change the circumstance, but his moral platform caved to the district‘s careless
decision. He continued to write reprimands.
As moral individuals, the principals are clear about their concern for their staff. ―They
are…my professional family…my team…one of us‖…is how principals refer to their staff.
What purpose in the education of young people does this concern play? The notion is not too
far from a rational view as the principals believe a healthy and at least content staff is a
productive staff. Protecting teachers from harm or at least staving off the distraction is an
assumed role of principals. As principal Jeff remarks, ―And I think there is no substitute for
credibility with the teachers and those knowing you are there, you know what is going on.‖
92

Inner City schools have their own challenges and tensions. Sharon is a principal of large
high school, with a population of predominantly African American students. She had to a
situation as quickly as it happened.
I had a teacher (Caucasian) who allegedly pushed and shoved a student. This teacher had
a baby on the way… The race card was dealt… The police had come to arrest him. I had
to truly use common sense to make sure it was not something that was cultural because
with the children that look just like me… And so I had to make sure it was not a matter of
culture because sometimes our biases and prejudices come up. And the police wanted to
take him to jail… he was a white male who had pushed a black child…..who was being
bad… But to me that was a decision and a test of integrity for my staff. I tried to be fair.
Sharon was at risk. Yet her morality (being fair) in the midst of significant tensions
pushed her decisions through the situation to support her staff member. She knew she could lose
credibility with all the staff if she did not support the teacher. Her decision was not supported by
the police officers. The students gathered and watched her carefully. But Sharon felt the
students knew what she was about and continued to handle the situation.

Safe School Buildings
―Before we even consider curriculum, attendance policies, Friday night‘s game or MEAP
scores, it upon principals to provide a safe secure environment for students to learn.‖
Paraphrased from the responses of several principals, the statement represents their number one
priority in overseeing their schools. The vulnerability of public places, accentuated by the
Columbine High School shooting and the attacks on 9-11, has heightened the attention to
security in and around schools. Terms that were not even part the education discourse 15 years
ago have now been included as standard operating procedures for schools. Lockdown and
intruder drills are mandated and practiced throughout the school year. Several principals in this
study have acknowledged conducting a lockdown for a security reason.

93

Yet the principals spoke to safety in broader, caring terms. Principal Carl clarifies how
he sees the larger landscape of safety, ―Safety…as far ss not only the safety of our students not
only in a physical way but more importantly in a emotional way…‖ Principal Jeff reflects what
the parent of his students expect from him in terms of safety,
What I think what every parent wants is…you know I have never had one parent come in
and ask about MEAP scores… are ours are good, they can look them up. But parents
want to know when they send their children to school they are being cared for.
Principals feel the weight of the responsibility for safety. Central office has the same
expectations but is also sensitive to overreact during events. Somewhere in the midst of the
decisions made during a crisis, principals know that the fallout from too many drills sends a
message to parents that schools are not safe places. Such a situation faced Principal Christa in
her first year as a principal. It was reported to her that a gunman was across the street from her
high school. The information given to her was not accurate. Central office received a more
accurate accounting of where the gunman was located. The information was not what Christa
had been told. Her hand was slapped…
…and without thinking or acting, I ran for the P.A. …I didn‘t even know if our principal
was in the building or not…I just knew that I had information…the kids were in
danger…I ran to the P.A…. I locked the building down….the staff was happy….central
office was not. I didn‘t have good information…
Principals often begin with a worst case scenario in crisis situation. It is exactly how
Christa reacted. She had poor information but it wasn‘t a time to ―check it out.‖ To fulfill her
duty to protect the students and staff in her building, she reacted accordingly. Christa‘s number
one priority became a political hot potato for the district. Still she reflects, ―I would do it
again…‖
Principal Ben‘s intuition and experience provided him guidance in recommending
school would go on as usual despite a threat that a bomb would go off the next morning.
94

Although he said he would take the Superintendent‘s lead on the decision, Ben‘s judgment call
was put in place. After several searches and reviewing possible suspects, the students came to
school the next day subject to searches of all bags, backpacks and purses. It wasn‘t until the
students began arriving that Ben realized he would have a unique challenge…the students were
bringing bags of food in for a holiday food drive.

Theme #2: Personal/Professional Moral Development as Influenced by Family, Religion and
Education
The development of principals‘ personal and professional morality is influenced by life‘s
experiences and relevant professional development. To support the overarching purpose this
study which is to attempt to describe, and explain the personal and professional moral codes of a
set of school administrators as they make decisions, it is appropriate to examine specific and
collective influential aspects of principals‘ background(s). Without exception, the principals
participating in this study believe, in varying degrees, that their personal morality is attributed to
influence of family experiences and expectations. The implications of family values and how
they play out in the real world is addressed by Bergson,
…domestic virtues (in considering one’s own moral development)are indeed bound with
civic virtues, for the simple reason that family and society, originally undifferentiated,
have remained closely connected. (p.33)

In the course of this study, half of the principals identified a belief in God or a superior
being as a guide to becoming a moral person. In the sorting of the influential aspects of their
lives, however religion was not placed in the center of their moral core. Principals saw religion
as supporting the core, not as a source from which moral codes originate. The study reveals that
principals attribute much of their personal moral growth to family influence. To be clear, the

95

principal stories as transcribed are accountings of typical and atypical family dynamics. The
data collection reveals a personal reconnaissance of how each principal saw his or her moral
codes develop in their own circumstance, not in relation to others‘ experience.
Principals see themselves as moral individuals. Principals speak of their family and
background as if telling a good story. Some of the stories are reflective of stereotypical images
of a happy and productive family. Other recollections speak of crisis, tragedy, and dysfunction.
No matter the history, principals recant the details of their upbringing with sincerity and
candidness. Through their collective insistence, the experiences were critical to the shaping of
their moral codes.
Principals see themselves as moral individuals acting on a system of rules that modifies
their behavior in social situations. It is doing well instead of harm and sets some virtuous
standards of conduct or moral codes. It is a set of ethics or that guides one‘s behavior
(MacDonald, 2002).
Principals also see a direct correlation between of their experiences as defining
themselves as individuals of dignity and having compassion for mankind. It‘s the essence of who
they are. In the literature we find two pieces that affirm their personal development. Fiche which
verifies the context of this discussion…
Fiche who derives moral duties from two premises. . . one‘s obligation to respect one‘s
own dignity as a free being and one‘s obligation always so to act as not to violate the
equal freedom of other men, (p. 360). Fichte states that, ―the kind of philosophy which
one adopts depends on the sort of man one is … for a philosophical system is not a
lifeless piece of human nature that one might take or discard… but it is animated by the
soul of the man who has it.‖(Fichte, p.434).
Secondly, I cite the Cusick‘s assertion from his study on the education of seven eminent
Americans, a collective study in a Passion for Learning. (2005). Acknowledging the

96

contributions of Fichte, Cusick states, ―It is not school but life where the knowledge one learns
in youth is turned into action, and knowledge and action combine into the person one is.‖
In contemplating Fiche and Cusicks‘s premises, this chapter will continue with a
collection of reflections by practicing principals regarding the origination of the values they
bring to their roles.

Translation of Moral Obligation - Family, Religion, Education and Work
The development of personal morality passes through several stages as outlined in the
chapter presentation of Piaget and Kohlberg‘s work. The center of moral development originates
in the family. Parenting practices include specific goal-directed behavior through which parents
perform their parental duties (Darling and Steinberg, 1993). Hayek‘s assertion situates moral
development, ―Learning how to behave is more the source than the result of insight, reason and
understanding. Man is not born wise, rational and good but taught to become so. It is not our
intellect that created our morals, rather human interactions governed by reason and those
capacities associated with it.‖ (1988)

Translated Family Values/Religion
Principals identify family as the source of their moral development. In many stories,
recollection of family experiences is how principals define themselves. Expectations were clear.
Authority and rules were defined. Principal Jerry paints the broad picture of his upbringing.
My grandparents lived with us. At the time that was an accepted…they raised a family
and the son, my dad, was supposed to take care of them so my dad had them stay with us.
I had a grandmother there, she was influential when I was young… …so all the things
were tied in, you know, being honest, doing the right thing and treating others like you
would have yourself and being truthful, helping other people less fortunate than you. My
mom was always helping out somebody…she was doing whatever she could. That was
big focus.

97

Kathleen‘s background mirrors Jerry‘s experience but also acknowledges how she
believes others see her.
You know…I was always (laughing) had a bossy personality…I follow the rules…I
expect others to do the same…I guess I have a strong sense of right and wrong because
morals and ethics is the way I was raised and the Church falls along the lines with all of
that. But maybe it is part of my own personal sense of what is right and wrong...which I
am sure it was shaped by my family.
Principal Carl recalls influence from each of his parents. Each had their own distinct
approach in providing him guidance:
My dad was a huge influence on my life…both positive and negative. Working for him, I
saw a side of him that was absolutely amazing. His ease with people, his focus, his
energy, his drive was absolutely incredible. The cost for that unfortunately was the fact
that he was often at work, so the home side was that it was that was that we did not get to
spend a whole lot of time together… My mom…very traditional, very supportive.
Helped my dad, made the coffee, started the car in the wintertime for him.
Principal Clarence‘s interview was perplexing at times. Stories were not always
consistent, yet were interesting nevertheless. In the end discussion of a particular topic, Clarence
summarizes by sharing a bit of wisdom. In the following exchange, Clarence speaks to the
transference of his own family values to his building and staff.
D: If you reflect back on your family… was religion a part of your family at
all?
C: Yeah.
D: Can you speak to that little bit…if you feel comfortable…what faith you
practiced?
C: I was Episcopal. I attended the Episcopal Church.
D: What was important to your family… was there any connection in terms of
what the church taught and what your parents wanted.
C: Nope.
D: So what was important to your parents?

98

C:

I think from my mother‘s point of view…you always do what is right. And
she is the one that ultimately pushed me in terms of an education… Ah, what I
said, my mother told to us do what is right not always what is expedient….

Regarding how these family values transfer to his professional life, Clarence was
emphatic:
C:

One piece of a good school is that you create a family with your teachers. You
have a feeling for the people you work with…Your business is
people…that
is your first job….the second job is curriculum.

Mary reflects on her upbringing as an only child. She was raised in a family with a
history of devout Catholic teachings. Raised in Detroit, she witnessed and listened to adult
discussions of tension of the late 60‘s into the early 70‘s. Family, religion and stewardship are
highlights of her youth that shaped Ann as a future teacher and administrator:
My parents were both born and raised Catholic and so religion was an important part of
our lives. My father‘s oldest brother was a priest… My father‘s side has definitely that
Catholic religion bent. There is also that heavy educational component to it, so…any
gathering usually had discussion along those lines… I was born in 1965, growing up in
Detroit with my parents until 1971-72 …all the racial violence, there has always been a
lot of discussion about…I don‘t want to say politics in terms of republican versus
democrat, but ultimately the humanitarian side…race relations and topics of that nature.
Definitely going back to the city doing volunteer work, going down to the Capuchin Soup
Kitchen…definitely shaped my childhood.
Principal Ben‘s nuclear family was close. Born and raised in the north, his parents set the
expectations. Like with other principals‘ upbringing, responsibility was accompanied by
expectations.
I probably acted more of fear of not wanting to disappoint my parents. We were expected
to be honest, respectful of adults and other people and there was a sense of doing the right
thing in terms of not lying … just like that normal…we weren‘t overly religious but we
attended church in a lot of those help other people, be a good person were the
expectations …

99

Frank recalls a strict household; expectations were clear. His parent chose to send him to
a parochial school for his elementary education. Combining the family rules and Catholic
education experience made a profound impression on Frank.
I was the oldest of four brothers…raised in a Polish-Catholic family. …my mother‘s
parent were a part of our family, they lived three blocks from us for most of my youth.
So there was eight of us…knowing my parents and background that it was judgment of
parochial versus a public school. I think it was the attachment to the religion. That was
an integral part of our upbringing. My parents were very devout and I think the fact that
there was a Catholic school available…I was sure to attend… That is real sound
grounding you got through the nuns through eighth grade…That was a world of
compliance. You did, because…because I said, because he said. That was kind of what
we lived with…
Principal Tim was raised in a close; professional family…‖intact‖ was how he summed it
up. He remembers the life lessons which he transfers to his role as a principal today.
I grew up in a relatively small town, not so small any more… My mom was a professor,
my dad, an auto executive. One of things I saw as a kid growing up, my parents were
always there for me…no matter what. Intact family. They were always at my events.
They found a way to be there. A lot of structure…they made make priorities…carries
over to how I work today. I am an independent thinker…not doing what the group tells
you what to do…I trusted my parents judgment…, even I knew what they thought…my
dad would say, ―Nothing good happens after midnight.‖ He was totally correct…the key
here was that family time is important…. Even today, my wife and I vacation with her
parents and my parents with the kids. The family was always at the center of what we
did and continues to be.
Principal Tom‘s childhood was also structured, based on values like character and
respect.
D:

Where did this come from, Tom?

T:

I think that came from my dad. We worked in the inner city of Detroit and I
think the belief of goodness in all people irrespective of race, gender and I
think when I watched my dad work it was a common courtesy to all
people…not to form opinions not forming judgments…as I worked with my dad I
saw some of the same things. Really I kind of inherited it…

Principal Ken remembers a larger scope of expectations that originates from his family.

100

The thing I remember most about my parents is that is very important to be a quality
person …life is about being a quality person…it is not about how much money you
make…which I think what influenced me going to work in a school system because you
don‘t make any money doing this. Also that you should always be pushing yourself (to
improve) and that is why I have always taken classes…because I feel like I am
floundering if I am not learning something…
You have rules to follow because it is the right thing to do. Whether they are religious or
not, you have that real intrinsic feeling that you do is what is right and there are things
you cannot do either. Doesn‘t matter if anyone is watching or anyone is going to find out
it is driven into you especially from different priests (laughs) YOU OBEY…
An atypical story comes from Principal Marty. As an adult he reflects on what his
parents were trying to teach him but realizes it was his own resistance that would cause him to
re-evaluate his approach to life.
They were strict but part if was me…I am the one that messed up…I didn‘t have
discipline in high school to be successful…I became more engaged in things I shouldn‘t
have got into at the time… My dad was strict…but again this is my fault not his…I wish
he was more strict. I wish he would have said, ―you don‘t have a choice…you are going
to play.‖ The overall expectation was be a good person, follow the rules, get an
education, and be able to support you and leave…

Education
Principals‘ family values of education are not unique. Most principals‘ parents did not
attend college. The majority of these parents were middle, working class, many in the skilled
trades and determined to send their children to school. College was a non-negotiable.
Principal Jeff recalls the need to continue onto college was not made in overt statements
by his parents but from those around him that valued education, ―…So I decided to go into
education. So, I had some real good teachers… my parents stressed education a lot.
A few of the principals interviewed were raised among a family of educators. Charles‘
extended family always spoke of issues in education,
My family is a family of educators, my grandpa was a Superintendent, my grandma was a
principal…my father was a principal…my mother was a teacher. My uncle was the
101

Superintendent of Saginaw. I have had a lot of educators in my family … so I went to
Central Michigan to become a teacher,.. you know the one phone you have in your
house…in the kitchen and people call and you hear about issues and heard my mom and
dad talking about school related things quite often so…I was pretty much raised with the
ideals of public education.
Mary‘s parents, too, were school teachers. Like Charles she grew up becoming familiar
with the timeless issues that teachers and administrators face each day. Her orientation took
place long before she went to college. Ann tells an interesting story of switching schools when
she was young.
I am an only child of two school teachers. Both of my parents came out of the parochial
school system. My mother took the route of a high school and ultimately became a
college teacher. My father worked in the parochial school setting at DeLasalle… First
grade, for about a half a year. It was not a very good experience…I started at parochial
schools…at St. Joan of Arc on the east side. …I was a very eager learner, wanting to go
to school everyday… and I started telling stories how the nuns locked a kid in the
closet…they pulled me at half break…The educational aspect certainly leads itself
toward the community service aspect of how view my role in my adult life.
Principal Audrey‘s parents, like most of the principals‘ fathers and mother, did not attend
college. She did, however, make it clear her father valued learning and found alternative means
for himself,
But father was a real self learner….World War II vet…kind of guy that was always
reading National Geographic, amateur archeologist, had a lot of interest in learning. My
parents were very selective on the TV we watched. Some years we did not have a TV,
instead they valued education. All five of us went on and got a college education which
made them very proud. But when I went to college, I went to Calvin.
An exception to the typical family background was that of Janie, the high school
principal in a Texas town just north of the Mexican border. Although raised in a migrant family,
moving from state to state, there was one constant in their mobile life. Janie‘s parents knew
education would free their children from the cycle of migrant children becoming migrant parents.
Yes…I was actually born and partially raised in my early years in California, I was born
there but my parents were originally from here (Texas) but I was a product of migrants…
I got my early years…as a migrant I was getting education in California and Texas at the
102

same time…So a little bit of both…because my parents have instilled in us… that
education is the way to go…because what else are you going to have? … that because of
the economic situation they were in with their family, they did not have the opportunity
to graduate from high school, much less going to college, and they definitely wanted to
make sure their children were not going to be in the same shoes of living day-to-day,
paycheck to paycheck.
Securing a solid education definitely was part of my personal initiatives… my parents
sacrificed so much… did so much to make sure education was a priority… I have to be a
good statistic.
During the interview with Principal Carl, he related several times to the unique
impressions he had of his father. The expectation to attend college was an assumption although
he cannot recall the reasoning of his parents:
My dad wanted me to go into business with them. I chose not to which caused some
friction there…however every day I think I use the things I learned from him. So
education…it was odd…it was something although my parent did not have it…they
always said I was going to go to college. And as early as I remember, I don‘t know why
they said that… I don‘t know where it came from. But that became ingrained in my head
to go to school.
In his discussion regarding his Polish Catholic upbringing, Principal Frank applies his
description of K-8 education ―world of compliance‖ to another significant expectation…‖thou
shall attend college.‖
Of course,…talking about education…my father did not have a high school diploma, my
mother did. But college was this ill-defined sort of Holy Grail…
Knowing my parents and background that it was judgment of parochial versus a public
school. I think it was the attachment to the religion. That was an integral part of our
upbringing. My parents were very devout and I think the fact that there was a Catholic
school available…sealed my fate.
Parent Modeling-Work Ethic
Principals also consider themselves to be hard workers. Work ethic in relation to
reaching of personal and professional goals is a primary disposition principals owe to their

103

parents. Principal Henry recalls, My parents instilled a real work ethic in us and of course…my
mother‘s favorite saying was, ―First things, first….‖
Principals put in long hours. High school principals lace many, 12 hour days together
with evening events to affect a comprehensive program. To be able meet demands, Principal
Mike concludes, ―You cannot be afraid to work…‖ Principal Jerry recalls what made the biggest
impression on him from his parents:
I think the work ethic…they had…my folks expected us to do our chores and be…you
had everything from paperboy delivery to working with the neighbors and so on. Even
when I got home from school….you had to get done what you got done. There was a
time to work and a time to play. Work was certainly a priority…
The bar was high in Kathleen‘s house as she was growing. School, work ethic, high
expectations respect and religion joined in contributing to her personal development,
I came from a middle class, well-off enough, socio-economic family. Good work ethic.
My family expected me to work hard … We were always taught to do our best…there
was no doubt about that and we were…good work ethic…treated each other well and
again if I got in trouble at school and would get in more trouble at home….respect the
teachers, the classic good kid.
Principal Courtney recalls the expectation to work. Her father made it clear,
I remember being told, ―OK, 16th birthday is coming up…you can have your cake when
you tell me where you work…so it was expected that we would get a job…it wasn‘t
harsh, it just was what it was…and one the other things Dad was…
Principal Carl‘s work ethic was modeled by his father,Work ethic…so I think what
was…most profound was working for him on the loading docks…watching that servant
leadership style, high accountability, high expectations, work hard, play hard…my dad
was a snowmobiler, a hunter, a fisherman…all these different eclectic things and my
mom never to held me back when I would say I would like to do this….
Principal Tom is known to burn he midnight oil…in his office. His responsibilities as
high school principal do not end when everyone has made it home. He stays late, covers the
details, returns calls, answers email, meets with parents, finishes evaluations, plans graduation,
works on the master schedule, rarely taking time for lunch during the day and managing a quick

104

dinner at night. Secondary principals are not unlike Tom. It is virtually a 24/7 job with finding
time to sleep as the only necessity. How does Tom see his work ethic?
The value of working… I began to work when I was 12 years old. Spent my summer
working… earning. My mom and dad both grew up in the depression, so not having
things was something they experienced…quite honestly, my dad was a workaholic…I
think I have inherited that. He worked seven days a week probably a good 60-80 hours
per week…And when I was working with him, we would get up at three or four in the
morning to go to work, get home at 9:30 at night. So I think those values carried over,
working hard to achieve. And you get what you put in.
Bergson‘s statement frames the relationship between work, society and the individual
seemingly captures principals‘ commitment and work ethic:
It is society (school community) that draws up for the individual (principal) the program
of his daily routine. It is impossible to live a family life, follow a profession, attend to
the thousand and one cares of the day, do one‘s shopping, go for a stroll, or even stay at
home without obeying rules and submitting to obligations. A road has been marked out
by society (school community). It lies before us and always done automatically
(organizational moral code), obedience to duty. (p. 19)
Theme #3 Organizational/Professional Morality – Simon
To describe and explain the personal and professional moral codes considered by
principals as they make decisions, it is appropriate to consider the organizational environment
where decisions are made. In the midst of this environment, expectations and parameters are laid
out often with a limited range of choice available to make decisions.
Reflecting on principals‘ personal and professional morality provides cause to revisit
Chester Barnard‘s (1937) assertion …that as one assumes a high rank in an organization, one
takes on a set of moral codes in addition to personal moral codes….and that one cannot divorce
his professional conduct from his private morals. Barnard further argued that in order to exercise
administrative office, one has dad to combine personal morality with several professional codes.
How does one satisfy his/her own integrity when the organization imposes its own morality?

105

The work of Herbert Simon (1957) brings to the study a perspective on efficient organizations.
For the purposes of this study, Simon defines principals‘ place in the organization as well the
overarching responsibilities to the organization. In Simon‘s view, principals would be
considered middle-managers, situated in the hierarch of authority to support the goals of the
district.
Before one can understand (principal) decision making, one might conceptualize the
relationship of Simon‘s view relative to schools structure. Organizational hierarchy of school
systems establishes districts‘ chain of command as presented by Simon. In effect, Simon‘s
assertions on executive decision making are relevant to school settings. The specific influence
on decision making according to Simon is relative to how:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Labor is divided into tasks.
The organization establishes standard practices.
The organization transmits decisions downward, establish system of authority.
The organization provides channels of communication running in all
directions through which information for decision making flows.
5. The organizations trains and indoctrinates its members. (p.104)
Principals‘ placement in the organizational structures of schools finds them at the
crossroads of district policies and codes and the settings and people that are impacted by the
organization codes. The codes are established with little room for interpretation in what Simon
would refer to as ―Bounded Rationality‖. In his book, Simon (1957) describes the characteristics
of a closed system that rationalizes the establishment of discrete procedures to achieve
organizational goals. In the purest sense, Simon defines organizational morality. In particular,
Simon states that the decision the organization makes for the individual ordinarily:
1. Specifies his functions, that is, the general scope and nature of its duties (see Kant);
2. Allocates authority, that is, who in the organization is to have the power to make
decisions for individuals;
106

3. Sets the limits on choices. (Simon, p.8)
In the purest sense in an educational organization, Simon‘s three criteria are characteristic
of American schools and school districts. Principals are middle managers. Their position is
specialized, taking the form of a vertical division of labor (p.9), absolutely essential to achieve
coordination of their cooperating staff. Centralizing the authority (in school buildings) governs
activities for all members (teachers) of the organization (school district).
In this view, Charles, middle school principal, reflects on process, procedures, and
support of organizational morality by adhering to the established district code:
It was funny, he slammed his hand down on the table …, ―no, we are not going the
medical route…it is not a disability, we have to go to the discipline route.‖ And I
thought, ok, I know how to do that I have done it before and they want me to do it again.
We will start documenting everything…writing reprimands, put on a plan of
improvement and put timeline in place and when those aren‘t met we will put down more
discipline and that is plan and eventually we will go to the board…
Barnard (1937) points out that ―the decisions that an individual makes as a member of an
organization are quite distinct from his personal decisions.‖ Personal choices may determine
whether an individual joins a particular organization, and continue to be made in his or her
extra–organizational private life. But, as a member of an organization, that individual makes
decisions not in relationship to personal needs and results, but in an impersonal sense as part of
the organizational intent, purpose, and effect. Organizational inducements, rewards, and
sanctions are all designed to form, strengthen, and maintain the identification of the organization.
To Principal Ben, complying with the organizational code is accepting the position as it is
designed…expectations must be met:

What you have to understand that we have, as educators, responsibilities and this is part
of your job. That is why every other week when you get that paycheck; responsibility
is reflected in the pay you get. And if you are not performing your responsibility then
you are not doing your job.
107

Lines of communication are set in the organization for deployment of goals. There is a
system of hierarchy – decisions reached in the high ranks of the organization will have no effect
upon operative employees unless they are communicated downward as with all the decisions in
the organization (Simon, p.10)
Administrator efficiency is achieved by members of the organization in determined
hierarchy of authority to preserve unity of command. Administrative efficiency is achieved by
keeping to a minimum the layers of the organization through which a decision must pass before
being acted upon. (Simon p.40)
Principal Kathleen shares how she imposes the code on her staff. Although she models
the behavior, the results have to match the expectations of the district:
Well I think at a couple of levels, I think in terms of expecting on a basic level. People
need to make deadlines, work hard…I guess be like me. I expect my teachers to be
competent and be able to do their job and meet the standards I have set for them…we are
all aware of what rolls down from above. Our administrators is expected to meet the bar
that is set high…our staff needs to reach that high as well…
Ultimately it is the principal who must communicate the ideals of the district. In several
cases it is how principals see their professional morality aligned with the district. Principal Al
comments on setting building parameters:
…what I found in my eleven years…and watching others like you…I feel the building
administrator sets the norms about what is acceptable in the school. If principals are lax
about certain things…the staff will be lax about things….
Decisions can be complex mixtures of facts and values. Information about facts,
especially empirically proven facts or facts derived from specialized experience, is more easily
transmitted in the exercise of authority than are the expressions of values. Given the inevitable
limits on rational decision making, what other techniques or behavioral processes can a person or
organization bring to bear to achieve approximately the best result? Simon writes:

108

The human being striving for rationality and restricted within the limits of his knowledge
has developed some working procedures that partially overcome these difficulties. These
procedures consist in assuming that he can isolate from the rest of the world a closed
system containing a limited number of variables and a limited range of consequences.
Simon is primarily interested in seeking identification of the individual employee with
the organizational goals, much less with personal values. …
The individual is limited by his values and those conceptions of purpose which influence
him in making decisions. If his loyalty to the organization is high – his decisions may
reflect high acceptance of the objectives set (buy-in to the organizational morality). If his
loyalty is lacking, personal motives may interfere with efficiency. (p.40)
Mike, high school principal supports the edicts of the district as means for fulfilling his
role in the chain of command from central office to the buildings. But Mike extends the
organization to include the community:
…I feel felt very strongly that this is what it said in our handbook, it called for in black
and white that this is the rule…that handbook is thought out and there are rules there.
And provide a sense of what is acceptable and not acceptable, and tries to fill the kind of
atmosphere in the school approved by the majority…staff, students, and parents and the
community… Whether it is a right or wrong decision, or whether that is in the best the
interest of the …if it helping the kid….helping the organization…it is a priority…
Principals speak in terms of loyalty to their district, a critical element to a bounded
rationality. Generally these statements were made with a sense of pride, particularly when
results match the district goals. Principals rely on central office and the foundation that it holds,
for support in difficult decisions.
Principal Carl, recalls a situation where a student protest (result of a central office
decision) rippled back to central office. High level administrators not only re-established the
parameters but met with the students as well:
Ultimately I was helped along in that decision …. Looking back the central office
decision was appropriate…. Looking back it set a very good tone… everyone was
satisfied… it was clear to the kids, if you want to do this…fine… we gave them room to
be out of their classes first and second hour to do their thing… but as soon as third hour
popped…it was our choice not to… consequences would be handed out.
109

Principals are often faced with complex decisions. In the situation described by Carl,
there were further implications. The protest was a significant event. Carl realized the issue the
students were protesting was secondary to a bigger issue. As an organization, how was the
district going to respond to students‘ choice to turn their backs on the code of conduct set forth
and approved by the Board. The real issue is if the protest was not dealt with in an authoritative
fashion, the students would not consider the tactic as a high risk. Policy needed to be upheld. In
this case, the organizational structures and protocols kept the district in charge.
Principal Mike related a similar story which had political implications. It was a case
where the starting quarterback which was the son of the Transportation Director; got into a fight
off campus. The back-up quarterback was the son of a school board member. The school
decision, according to code of conduct, could not be made until the court process was complete.
As athletic director and assistant principal, Mike was not receiving much guidance from his
principal who was influenced by the Superintendent‘s desire to get back at the Transportation
Director with whom he was feuding with at the time. The popular stand from the central office
was to remove the student from his position on the team and turn over the reins to the back-up
Mike was faced with a political dilemma.
…so it was a very complex, difficult situation. I think deep down you got to follow the
rules…along with the Superintendent members of the community were out to get the
Transportation Director. To me they were getting to him through his kid…and I felt that
was troublesome…and the Superintendent wanted to take away his letter…he cannot
wear his varsity jacket…my argument was then we should change the rule…my
position…. follow the policies that are written…not interpreted different because
personal vendettas…the more you allow politics or something to weigh into the decision
the more uncomfortable and dirty it feels.
The complex nature of school decisions bring elements to the table that Simon
recognizes: personal values. As was asserted earlier, Simon sees personal agendas as

110

contaminating the decision making process. Simon concedes, ―Unfortunately problems do not
come to administrators carefully wrapped in bundles with value elements and the factual
elements neatly sorted….‖ (p.5). Every decision involves element of two kinds, ―factual‖ and
―value.‖ Factual propositions are statements about the observable world and the way it operates –
tested by true and false—whether what they say about the world actually occurs or whether it
does not. Simon adds
…decisions are sometimes more than factual propositions. To be sure they are
descriptive of a future state of affairs…and this description can be true or false in strictly
empirical sense…in addition there is a imperative quality…where future state of fairs is
selected in preference to another and direct behavior toward the chosen alternative…they
have a an ethical (value added) as well as factual content. (p.46)
Simon asserts that decisions that can be correct or incorrect are able to resolves itself. He
questions of what is ethical terms such as, ―ought‖, ―good‖ and ―preferable‖ have purely
empirical meaning. Simon states that a critical premise of his work is that ethical terms are not
completely reducible to factual terms. (p.46) A phrase that is repeated by those who claim to
have a stake in student outcomes is, ―…if it is good for kids.‖ It is the rally call and filter that
receives more attention than a district‘s mission statement. Yet, when asked to define, ―what is
good for kids‖, the answer varies in each setting and in each individual‘s set of values.
Principals will voice similar claims that their actions are to the good of students. It is up to the
principal however to filter through adult requests as being good for the students, or good for the
adults making the request.
Applying Simon‘s assertion, an ethical statement regarding what is best for kids is not
easily reduced to empirical terms. Pressing further, principals ultimately judge the goodness or
badness of the proposal based on their own values. At times it is the principal‘s role to interpret
and extend the organizational code where it leaves off and enters into the community. Principal

111

Sharon relates her support for what is good for students as it relates to their particular community
and the challenge spring break brings to the ethical influences on the students.
And some of those lessons we try target and tie it with their values (discipline) code and
that we know about trust, loyalty and respect and build on those principles we have. We
are getting ready now…we tie it in with …well spring break is coming and South Padre
is an hour away … you know the influences that come from our community…drugs, sex
you know the things that are out there …the issues that in our community that come into
our school. We try to educate the students about making the right choices.
Principals position themselves to always consider the right thing to do. At times it is
reactive and other times it is proactive. The intertwining of the principals‘ personal and
professional morals and the deliberate nature of organization goals creates space for this study.
The study positions itself between the factual tensions and ethical decisions. As seen in the
complex situation in which Mike found himself, although the facts eventually pointed him in the
right direction, his personal ethics came into play when the organization decided to change the
rules to suit individual preferences. The Superintendent reduced his compliance with the
organizational code and told Dan what he ―ought to‖ do…remove the starting quarterback and
place the School Board member‘s son in his place. In the end, Mike stayed with the policy as
written and remained loyal to the organizational code. The starting quarterback was determined
innocent until proven guilty of a crime. He kept his starting role.
Mike‘s acceptance and enforcement of the organization‘s code was second nature for
him. In reference to comments during the interview Mike emphatically states, ―The Marine
Corps taught me a lot about rules.‖ Armed forces have known to rebuild individuals to the
prescription of what a good soldier can predictably do and accomplish. Simon‘s view of an
efficient organization does not vary to any significant degree from the armed services code. It is
what Simon calls Organization Identification.

112

Organization Identification is the process whereby the individual substitutes
organizational objectives for his own aims. The value – indices determine his organizational
decisions. Through identification, organized society imposes upon the individual the scheme of
social values in place of his personal motives. (Simon, p.218)
To compromise one‘s personal code to align with the organization can take a personal toll
on principals. Principals contributing to this study related their family values often took a
second seat to the organizational goals. Principal Carl states the job can consume your life.
Dedication to the organization means diverting personal time, attention and priorities to school
and not family. It is a moral dilemma for principals. It is not spoken but a reality of replacing
personal moral codes with the expectations of the organizational code.
Let‘s talk non-instructional leadership things… at the high school as opposed to the
middle school level…you having done all three, you know that… I mean so much of
your day…I have a Board hearing tonight…Saturday I did a homecoming dance until
midnight… Friday homecoming game, homecoming parade… five Fridays in a row I was
at football games…I do not want a tissue… I don‘t want to start crying here. But it wears
away at you... It slowly wears you down and your ability to be as creative and dynamic as
you want to be an instructional leader.
An anecdotal situation found an Athletic Director having to choose between attending a
community meeting to discuss the new athletic field or attend his first child‘s kindergarten
meeting. The message was clear he was to be at the meeting; the goals of the district won out.
Catherine is a principal at an inner city high school. She has also been an administrator at
different levels and emphatically compares her position as to other principal positions:
And I am not saying anything about elementary principals or middle school principals….
but senior high principals have a different beast that they are carrying around. You have
so many after school activities, so many other things that send you in so many different
directions. And you know weekends and things of that nature… so it then you have the
sports thing… So you know it is interesting in of itself. But a supportive husband and
really supportive family is critical…I have even suggested that secondary principals be
afforded counseling to sort out the work load and conflicting school and personal
responsibilities.
113

Tim, principal of a large high school (2000+), acknowledges organization codes and his
own that conflict at times. He also acknowledged that he is comforted by its detail. He related a
situation where a student missed a considerable amount of school and a teacher‘s insistence the
student completely the missed assignments within the allotted time frame.
This wasn‘t someone who was out with the flu. There were significant injuries that
occurred here…the teacher was calling on the make-up policy that outlines the limits of
when make-up work can be accepted. The situation did not fit the policy…I asked her to
do the right thing…she refused…. I was asking the teacher to overlook the policy…it
didn‘t make sense…she refused…. I eventually turned to ―parent appeal‖ process that
will bring this teacher face to face with the student‘s parent. In essence I used another
policy to counteract another…
Tim weighs the decisions he makes very seriously. There are non-negotiable policy in
terms of weapons that are, ―…Cut and dried for me…you have know it is for the greater good…I
have no problem going to the wall…and an expulsion takes place.‖
Similar to Carl‘s story, Tim feels the high school principal job can ―box you in.‖ You
have to remain loyal to the organization and that inherently has issues, particularly on a personal
side.
The loneliness…. When you have to make so many difficult decisions… it come back to
you only. Not that I cannot consult others like my assistants, but it is my name that I sign
…where the buck stops. Levels stress has changed me in a negative way. There is a
personal cost. I am quieter…more reflective… my wife has noticed. Give you an
example. I am at my son‘s 5th grade moving up ceremony and I get a call from the
Superintendent. I wanted to kick myself. I took it. She said, certain things are sacred…I
said I know but I couldn‘t tell my boss that is how I feel. It angers me that I did that …I
let my job get in the way of my family.
And you know what…if I called the Superintendent at any time…he would pick up the
call…a tough position to be in.
Tim is speaking to the compromising of his personal morality for the organizational
morality. Like many principals faced with similar dilemmas, there is no easy answer…duty to
what or whom. Tim‘s story brings credence to Barnard‘s earlier assertion:
114

Resignation or withdrawal is often a solution which circumstances legitimately permit.
Then the result is maintenance of personal integrity. When resignation or withdrawal is
itself highly immoral, as is sometimes the case, there is potential tragedy". (p. 274)
Principals speak to the organization code as if to say, ―You can‘t be with them and you
can‘t live without them.‖ Organizational structures set policy, devises the hierarchy, and
establishes authority and the lines of communication. Efficiency and compliance make it work.
To repeat Mike‘s assertion, if you invite politics in…it gets messy.
The principals, along with Simon, acknowledge that ethics find their way into many
decisions. At times the organization‘s code will align and support the values considered in a
circumstance. At times they are at odds. The interpretation of goals in the organization is
limited. An efficient organization will demand unity of command. A central office does as well.
Yet, as principals waiver at times from the expectations of district, there are times they do not.
These instances, though referenced here, will be addressed in a succeeding narrative in this
chapter.
What became evident in the interviews is that, in assuming their role as middle managers
in a district, many principals support and develops their own organizational morality in their
buildings. This often translated as the environment or culture of the building. Essentially the
principal integrates the expectations of the district with his/her own set of expectations and ways
of doing business. At times there is conflict with another faction, such as the teacher‘s union that
monitors the structures and processes put in place. As mentioned earlier in the chapter,
principals consider themselves as the overseer of their team sometimes referred to as their family
at school.
Principal Carl speaks to two levels of comfort, one with himself, one with the overall
safety and security of the building:

115

And there is also building an overarching culture within your school. So when I say
benefit, I am saying that does it help teachers teach and kids learn? And are the kids safe?
I mean those are the big overarching things we have.
I would hope you would see people that are comfortable working with me…assistant
principals, teachers, secretaries, custodians, building engineer. I worked hard at building
those relationships. It is basically the only thing I know how to do. So I wouldn‘t call it
work …it is part of something…part of who I think I am and that‘s it.
Emotional safety and risk-taking by both my staff and my kids because innovation is
really where it is going to be at.
Principals bring their own morality to the surface in several ways. The most common is
through their Assistant Principals, staff meetings, individual conversations, email, school
activities (assemblies) and events…even professional development can be a part of instilling
values. Principals utilize PTO/PTA meetings, athletic events, websites, email, newsletters,
parent teacher conference and open house as vehicles for sharing the expectations of staff and
students. The selection of professional development activities provides insight to where the
principal would like take the staff.
Principal Ben extends the district expectations to include various standards of
professionalism. These expectations are facilitated frequently at staff meetings, Ben believes he
is commuting the moral code for the building
What you have to understand that we have educators, responsibilities and what is part of
your job……hold people accountable if they aren‘t doing what they should be doing…
outcomes…expectations for kids and staff that I would like to see how they carry
themselves…how they dress and how is their work ethic in terms of tardiness and some of
those things. I get to be a little bit more dismayed as the younger teachers come into
dressed, less professionally and don‘t quite have that work ethic or the appreciation for the
job they have.
As principal of an inner city school, Sharon accepts students from the neighborhood which
she believes lacks the structure and discipline to be a safe and nurturing place for students. It

116

bears repeating her vision as it is an appropriate example of a principal creating the moral fabric
of her building.
I want to be a village. I want it to be like an African village (reference to a community
with specific values). I want children to be safe here. I want them to know their roles
here and grow here. So they can take the love and safety they get here…the self-efficacy
they get here and take out into their community. In this environment I can create the
access the resources they need to learn. It was my first step in my plan.
Fred, who was a principal of 34 years, see establishing an environment as primary
responsibility, ―But you as principal create that school…you create the atmosphere, the
trust…those things that allow teachers to be creative and do good things for kids.‖
In her opening comments to her staff each year, Catherine sets the tone and the
expectations for the building. Catherine is not unlike many principals who consider the first staff
meeting the most important for the entire school year.
… I start out every school year, like we all do, with our first staff meeting…before I get
into all the rules, the protocols, the housekeeping stuff…I have a conversation with staff
about what my thoughts are about the coming year…what we need to celebrate from the
previous year…what our challenges are from the previous year…I am constantly trying to
get them to understand we have to develop relationships. I am 100% behind, rigor,
relevance and relationships…more relevance and relationships.
Where deficiencies in decision making processes are identified, Simon emphasized the
importance of training. The training is designed to influence decisions from the inside out. The
purpose is for the organization‘s members to reach satisfactory decisions themselves. Simon
credits training procedures as an alternative to the exercise of authority or advice as means of
control over subordinate‘s decisions. (Simon, p. 15) Principals find themselves on both ends of
training. One of course is the organization‘s investment in them as effective managers and
instructional leaders. The principal also extends his/her knowledge by providing training to staff
to assist in meeting the goals in the building. Principal Ken connects his college internship and
first position with his training goals:
117

But I thought I could run the building…setting the culture, expectations and processes as a
team. They (district) actually led me to think that way… And the district tapped me and
started to train me as a principal at Otis. They also sent me to emerging leaders at
Michigan State University.
Theme #4 Kant- Duty/Moral Imperative
To define and describe the personal and profession morals of principals as they make
decisions it becomes necessary to understand alignment of organizational code. Kindred to
Simon‘s ―bounded rationality‖ it is the principals‘ interpretation of what is expected of them that
defines their compliance. The ―interpretation‖ is the distinction between adhering to the
organization morality and what Immanuel Kant refers to as one‘s ―duty‖. For some, the
alignment is natural … central office speaks, I listen, I do what I am told to do…it my duty as
administrator to support the mission statement of the school district.‖ Yet the actual decision to
comply and be dutiful must be substantiated by an individual, in this case a principal.
It is necessary to distinguish between a person‘s morality, a moral system and ethics. To
talk about a person‘s morality to talk about his acts and his behavior…it is talk about the
moral righteousness and wrongness. To talk about moral systems is to talk about the
principles according to which one judges whether a person‘s act or behavior is right or
wrong. To talk about ethics is to talk about the validity and justification of these
principles.‖ (Hartnick, p.70)
The second theoretical relationship that helps describe and explain personal and
professional moral codes examines the postulates established by Kant and his discourse on
―Duty‖ and the Moral Imperative (Sullivan, 1994). The context of each of these terms help us
better understand the morality behind principal decisions. The following data acquired through
the interviews, will provide alignment with duty and the moral imperative.
To Kant, morality is not something subjective but determined by reason (logic)…
Motives of act – decision for the moral value of the act. (p.71) It is essential to understand that

118

the motives, rationalization, the intellectual process preceding the act, becomes the moral
decision … regardless of the results.
Morality of the Act…Not the Result.
The application of Kant‘s morality surfaces on a daily basis for principals. Mike, a high
school principal of a large suburban high school speaks to the ultimate resolve when making a
decision that may align with the organization but more so for the student:,
Sometimes I feel trapped by a policy that says five days suspension for fighting… you
investigate the case, you also look sometimes, case by case…So we make a decision that
they are only going to get three days. And that is going against the policy but it seems
appropriate and it is certainly something I can live with… Whether it is a right or wrong
decision, or whether that is in the best the interest of the…if it is helping the
kid….helping the organization in the long run…is it a priority…
Mike accepts the outcome of the decision…even if he has doubts whether it was a good
decision or not as it did not align with the policy. But he feels good about the process and logic
he used to make the decision. In accordance with Kant, Mike has done his duty. There is a hard
and fast rule that helps administrators at times when deciding discipline; you have to be fair and
consistent. At face value, this practice promotes uniformity, logic and doing one‘s duty. Yet it
is also a rule that can defy logic as all the circumstances do not match with every offense.
Fairness and consistency assume like cases handled in like manners. From their experience,
principals state that every situation is not that clean and there is always a different ―spin‖ on each
case. These circumstances call for an alternative view to be presented in relation to the works
of Henri Bergson.
The events at Columbine High School remains at the forefront and has substantiated
principals‘ daily check lists regarding school safety. A principal can argue that a situation had
safety implications and feel confident he/she will have support. In fact, it is risky to publicly

119

downplay instances that may have had safety implications. Principals are cautious since the
moral thing to do is always take the safe route and stand their ground. There have been
instances when students are known to have a weapon in their possession. State law is very
specific on how Boards of Education are to respond to the type and size of weapons in
possession as well the local Board policy that specifies how principals will respond to each
situation. Fred, a principal for 34 years, observed a situation that did not involve one his
students but involved how school personnel respond inappropriately to situations. ―Here… I
watched the situation…K or first grade…a small kid…had a bullet on a keychain and zero
tolerance weapons policy and was handed a significant suspension.‖
Principals Fred and Mike were compelled by duty to follow policy. The rightness or the
wrongness of these proceedings did not matter, keeping with prescribed processes and
procedures (fair and consistent) did. The act of treating like situations in the same way,
according to Kant‘s philosophy defines a moral principal. A morally good character still must
depend on intentions regarding what one SHOULD do …The only morally good intention is
always to do one‘s duty. (Sullivan, p.31) Fred‘s experience also acknowledges the situations like
the one described above that fall under the ―shades of gray‖,
It is not right for a five year old. He doesn‘t even understand what is happening to him
and that to me is a wrong. … And that is an example… of a small example…of what was
wrong. It was in the days when Cubs Scouts would come and check in their knives
before school and come after school to pick them up. I used to have a whole drawer full
of knives. Today , there is a good chance these Cub Scouts would receive significant
discipline…It‘s a matter of timing. I could get away with that (in my time)…you can‘t
get away with that…So you have to put the timing in there, the timing is something that
says to you…you know what you have to do ―at the time‖ is not always right. Good
decisions may be made in the circumstance at the time and may not be appropriate at
another.
By and large, most principals are not loose cannons. Their nature is to comply, to do
their duty. Principals understand the importance of policy and procedures as designed to respond
120

to the operations of a school district. Principals consider the overarching policies as guides to
their own decisions and the corresponding duty that follows. Principal Jeff shares how he
extends duty beyond the policy manual to his role in hiring teaching staff:
I think we owe it to the kids. Administrators must secure the best teachers we can hire. I
think probably the most important things I can do are getting and keep the best teachers
possible… And I will say I have several mediocre teachers here that were here when I got
here and that weighs heavy on me sometimes... But I made a decision… I take the duty to
heart…I am hiring the best person to teach in this position. It comes down to the kids
about integrity and doing the right thing even when it is not easy.
Ben takes on a broader obligation to his community:
…to think that the decisions that I end up making are made so students can have a safe,
nurturing and productive environment where teachers feel supported, they have the
materials they need and that they are entering the classroom to do their job and help the
kids with what they need to do. And for me to do…make the decisions regarding what
type of classes or programs will give kids that comprehensive experience.
Extending the responsibility of hiring qualified staff, Principal Charles states it is
important to hire effective teachers but it is often a challenge to a meet one‘s duty to create
master schedule that places teachers in courses that are good for students. It can be difficult:
Duty to do what is told even though the outcome was not good….The standard and the
norm and the expectations are so much more today… I felt like I really needed to have
this teacher to move on… but my hands were tied… I was moving him into an elective
teaching area from social studies because I didn‘t feel he was giving the kids what the
needed in social studies.
In the same vein, Principal Christa relates to duty in terms of how students view her:
I know I have a big impact on kids‘ lives…I think I have always had that mothering
instinct for younger siblings knowing that I was the only one that was going to take care
of them. I think it shaped me…through my upbringing, I feel I am obligated take care of
other people.
For several principals, it was important to share (model) how they complied with duty
with their assistant principals, staff and students as well. At times the proclamation is implied.
At other times it is more direct. Principals respect the diverse perspectives their assistant

121

principals bring to office. Principals extend their professional and personal moralities in the
form of expectations to their assistant principals. It becomes the duty of the assistant principal.
Principal Kathleen provides an example on how she imposes duty based on her own duty to be
the instructional leaders of the building:
It is my job to be a coach and give evaluations…and to share that duty. One of the
principal assumed roles is the duty of providing for an education for students…I feel one
of my responsibilities to help my assistant principal to be a strong instructional
leader…it is important we are on the same page so we have done joint observations
together…and giving feedback. I guess that is first and foremost that we agree what a
vision of good instruction looks like. It only makes sense for us to be consistent.
Sullivan (1994) support‘s Kathleen‘s assertion that duty is a matter of acting out of
reason and not desire. (p.32) Reason infers ―sense making‖ or logic. To Kant, morality is not
something subjective but determined by reason (Hartnick, p. 71) Reason is best actualized when
using empirical support. Value statements do not support logical conclusions. Decision-based
emotion, tradition and popular choice, are not a response to duty. Logic is. Audrey who spent
most of her career as a middle and elementary principal relates to her use of logic as a family
trait:
Because my dad was Dutch, he always spoke his mind… quietly, matter of
fact…logically…I think that combination of having that Dutch background and four
brothers…everything in my house was based on logic. And it is the mental exercise I
use when making decisions… In my first year as a principal, a teacher came up to me and
challenged my thinking when I suggesting changes in the way business was done for
years. She said, ―you have to honor our history…you have to honor stuff…‖ I asked.
―What did that have to do with data and logic???‖

A former Principal and central office administrator, Audrey adds, that her thinking did
not always fit with her co-workers. She was leading a team of female teachers in Westwood,
…they were a bit on the emotional side. , I asked myself…‖what are you doing with all
these women? They were driving me nuts…trying to rationalize decision without a trace
of logic…but … although we are in the people business…I feel bad…because when you

122

try run an organization…and if it comes down to being nice and like or take the logical
route…you have to go with the logic
Henry, high school principal states that there are circumstances and expectations that
translate into duty for staff:
…for kids. That is why we are here. So when you don‘t come in on conference period
until 7:45 and there is a parent that wanted to meet with you…you are not here to meet
with her…that is a problem.
Henry also imposes some of his own morality on this staff. He believes when he and his
staff walk into school, they are prepared to provide a solid effort for the students.
I guess my mantra is I treat people the way they would want to be treated…For me
family comes first and they know that. And they come in with a family issue…‖I got to
go home… this or that…‖ I tell them, ―Go.‖ …my philosophy if you are not whole,
physically, mentally or spiritually, you cannot do your job here. You have to take care of
those matters in your life in order to do the best job here. Because when people come in
here,…I need them to be 100%, their best game all the time…and they know that…
Janie is a principal of a rural high school, situated less than a few miles north of the
Mexican border. For Janie, her duty is not only tied to district policy, but she also feels akin to
the students that attend her school. She emphatically states, ―I was one of them.‖ One of them
refers to the migrant population that comprises a large percentage of the student population.
The families are poor and mobile. The nature of the migratory experience only prepares the
next generation to emulate their parents‘ livelihood. Still Janie relates that her duty translates to
the students in her building that they need to be aware of the needs of others, to extend aide and
assistance to others. She was quite proud of sharing how her students lead a shoe drive for the
victims in Haiti.
I have some the articles here on what the students do here (Janie produces several
examples of students‘ projects, posters, newspaper clippings are referencing the ―Shoes
of Haiti‖ project led by her and the staff.) The idea was to help less fortunate.

123

It was interesting as Janie acknowledges the economic challenges of her own students but
also pressed her students to become involved in even more deprived situations. Her duty was to
model for her students that their world is an extended community beyond La Hosa‘s boundaries,
―I think beyond the walls of their education and community…they have to be citizens of the
world….and civic values have to come in to play.‖
Immanuel Kant‘s Deontological Ethics establishes the moral obligation of performing
one‘s duty. Supporting duty as a universal norm for moral acceptability is what Kant refers to
as the Categorical Imperative, or simply acting as moral law demands… a demand that one
should act out of respect for moral law…a demand that one should or ought to act in this or that
way. (Hartnick, p.84) The operative term in these definitions is ―ought‖ or obligation to respond
to one‘s duty. The desire to respect moral law requires adhering to what is imperative. There
are absolutes, a duty to comply. There is no gray area under the categorical imperative.
Because what is moral or follows moral law, it ought to be done or regarded as such.

Audrey

offers an example of moral law in her upbringing:
…my dad ran a store…to him, stealing is stealing. You are stealing a penny…you stole
and you are to make that right, restitution... It did not matter if you were hungry or
needed warm clothes…stealing is not right.
Marty, a middle school assistant principal learned the ropes as a disciplinarian while
deliberating decisions based on moral law and thinking. As with most new administrators, to be
fair and consistent and follow the policy, whether it is appropriate or not, is at times the only
option:
…I remember having a conversation with the other AP that was here at the time. We
have been given…Jim the principal here sat down with the rule book and said, ―when
kids do these things, these are consequences….if they do this, they get this…if they do
that…they get that…‖ The AP was already a year here before me…this was her second
year, my first. She was an administrator a long time before that but her second year here.

124

And she pretty much went by what was given that day before school started. It
was imperative that I do the same.
Marty‘s story describes the expectation for most administrator is in relation to supporting
the code of conduct. Paton makes the connection between this essential school process to the
categorical imperative, ―…to judge… actions by the same universal standards which apply to the
actions of others is an essential condition of morality. ― (Hartnick p.73)

Good Will
A central theme of Kant‘s theory is the recognition of good will. Good will reflects
intentions or the motivation behind a response or an action. Hartnick, again, quoting Kant,
Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world or even out of it, which can be called
good without qualification, except a good will. A good will is good not because of what
is performed or effects, not by its aptness or the attainment of some proposed acts but
simply by virtue of the volition… even if the act achieves nothing, there remains good
willt is not the consequence of the act that has moral values but answers the question
what it was that was willed and why one willed it.
The essence of Kant‘s remarks regarding good will is one that some principals assume is
the intention of their staff in regard to compliance with administrative decisions. The
assumption that staff demonstrates their intention to do what is morally correct, is the basis of
productive principal/staff relationships. To assume otherwise creates tension.
Dennis, a principal of a large school, assumes good will when staff approaches him. The
stance was essential when he assumed the principalship of the building. He feels that it was
critical for establishing workable relationships and aligning their intentions with his.
I say to my staff…let me communicate my expectations…I know this pattern exists and
you want me to jump it…it is hard for me to jump on the history when I haven‘t had a
chance to understand it… I am not familiar with your expectations (organization codestaff code). Instead of taking their route, I ask them that if I can do things a little
differently…I would like to assume GOODWILL … that is how I operate, as I assume
goodwill. It is tough for me to assume good will when my first or second interactions
with folks have is to jump on them about something. I want to establish that GOOD
WILL in these relationships.
125

Good will is part of Dennis‘ belief system. He states, ―I feel is that I always assume good
intentions from the beginning (Kant).‖
Summary of Kant‘s Philosophy
Kant argues that person‘s intentions, those ―inner actions‖ that precede and cause our
physical movements as their effects. To act in an ethically worth fashion, we must have what
Kant described as ―submissive disposition‖ and a ―moral attitude that motivates us to act ―from
duty‖… ―out of respect for‖… and ―for the sake of‖ moral law.
For the purposes of this study, the application of Kant‘s argument places the ―principal‖
as the independent agent in the above statement; one could define and describe school
administrator morality as it relates to duty. In fact, several principals refer to their chosen
vocation as a ―calling to duty‖ in their educator role. The good principal must have the moral
strength and courage to constrain himself to act dutifully. Principals comply with what the job
demands.

Theme #5 Personal and Professional Morality-Bergson
To describe and explain the personal and professional morality of principals, the theories
of four scholars are referenced to create a grounded understanding on how decisions are made.
Barnard set the context of the study by stating that one cannot divorce his/her personal morality
within the expectations of an organization code. Simon tells us that administrative behavior
(decisions) should be made in the context of what is good for the organization. To a degree,
Kant aligns with Simon as he speaks to an individual making choices to fulfill one‘s duty to an
organization‘s greater good. Kant defines one‘s duty to that of having good intentions even if
the result from acting on one‘s duty has undesirable results. The connection with Simon portrays
126

an individual supporting the organization from a duty standpoint, where the desire to conform
originates from an individual, not by authority. To serve the organization, Kant seemingly
would endorse a ―blind duty‖, where good will and loyalty are the primary motivation of
individual decisions.
In schools we see where Simon‘s perspective has been influential. Simon‘s description
of an effective organization relies primarily on it structures, processes, levels of authority and
communication. All of these features are present in school districts. Simon‘s perspective defines
efficiency with the goals of the organization originating from the top and deployed through the
ranks. In this vein, Barnard‘s argument of an organizational morality is cultivated and its
purpose is solely to guide the organization in achieving its goals. In schools, Simon‘s argument
for efficiency makes sense. Policies are clear, authority is defined and decisions are deployed
through an administrative chain of command. School district structures as aligned with Simon‘s
efficiencies present limited decision choices for school administrators. Earlier in this chapter,
several scenarios were presented to describe and explain principal decisions in the view of
Simon.
Chapter V continues with an alternate yet similar perspective for describing and
explaining principals‘ decision. Kant‘s view turns the focus away from the top of the
organization (workplace, religion, schools) to the individual executive. The response in a
professional sense, by the individual, is how one complies with his or her duty in the workplace.
As loyalty to organization denotes a Simon perspective, the intentions or duty defines what the
individual ―ought to do.‖ Kant‘s perspective aligns with Simon as one‘s duty is to adhere to the
organization‘s direction albeit with limited choices and personal preference. Where it differs, in
the Kant‘s view, is when the decision to honor his or her duty becomes a moral (imperative)

127

choice. It is the right thing to do because the organization says, ―I should…‖ In essence, it is
how administrators exercise their professional morality. Kant‘s perspective helps us align the
professional morality principals bring to place in the organization. A third theoretical
perspective offered by Henri Bergson completes the framework on which this study is based.
Henri Bergson discussions on the differences between Closed and Open Morality
provides the theoretical backdrop to describe and explain the professional and the personal
morality of school principals as they make decisions. Bergson‘s argument extends the
impersonal and obligatory duties defined by Simon and Kant. Yet Bergson finds these
contributing arguments fall short in understanding the scope of closed versus open morality.
One could assert, as he develops the rationale for defining morality, Bergson assimilates
his argument into one that aligns to Simon. He argues that nature has made species to evolve in
such a way that the individuals cannot exist on the their own and must rely on the community for
its support…‖the obligation we find in the depths of our consciousness and which as etymology
of the word binds us to the other members of society.‖ (Bergson, p. 83) Bergson is identifying
the survival of the ―community‖ as the primary motivation for individual choices (decisions). It
can be asserted that Bergson is submitting that the community in this respect aligns with Simon‘s
later emphasis on the organization. Bergson applies his argument in a social sense, providing an
analogy in relating community to the roles assumed by bees in the construction, maintenance and
defense of a hive. From a social perspective, the foundation of Bergson‘s argument is supported
by Simon. In this view, social organizations adopt the goals of the hive. From this point,
Bergson established his argument.
From Simon‘s foundation, Bergson‘s Theory of Moral Obligation extends the
development of human behavior by defining ―closed‖ morality as the acquisition of knowledge

128

that results in traditions, institutions and customs. These are precepts which are supported by
rules, regulations, right and wrong (Simon, p.69). Closed morality aligns with Kant‘s definition
of moral imperative, to do ones‘ duty to support what is identified as moral law (customs,
traditions). It is at this juncture Bergson finds the application of the ―imperative‖ not applicable
to all circumstances. Closed morality identifies the duties one must exercise to support one‘s
own community, without regard for other communities.
Bergson submits an extended view of morality which includes more than the greater good
of the organization or one‘s obligation to the community. Bergson argues that Open Morality is
not based on compliance or cohesion but more so on the personal, creative and emotional states
of mind that concerns humans with a deeper, more personal morality.
This chapter continues with describing and explaining personal and professional morals
through the theoretical assertions established by Bergson as an extension of the Simon and Kant
perspective. As part of their contribution to this study, principals represent their organizational
and professional morality (duty) in their recollections. A third theme has emerged from the
study that places Bergson‘s argument in the center of principal decisions. In the end, Barnard‘s
assertions resurfaces in regards to his assertion that personal and professional morals are
mitigating considerations when decisions are made.
Decisions-Closed Morality
Consideration of ―closed morality‖ establishes Bergson‘s acknowledgement of Kant‘s
argument. Principals perform their responsibilities and duties as expectations that contribute to a
broad moral perspective of providing an equitable and sound education to the children in the
district. From a closed morality stance, it is suggested that principals perform their duties not
only because there is an assumption of efficiency (Simon) but also because it brings the choice

129

back to what is best for the student. In short, principals project (and believe)that they are doing
their job. They also believe that in the process they are doing something good for society.
Simon‘s structures and protocols and Kant‘s assertions on duty, provide a linear
understanding of to whom one reports for guidance and direction. School districts represent
their own morality. Principals certainly can align their responsibilities with their place in an
authoritative pyramid and the duties they are inclined or ―ought‖ to do. In reality, principals see
their place in a school as much larger. Tom, a long time principal of a large suburban high
school, provides his perspective on who he is accountable to on a daily basis:
…administration is one the most difficult jobs I have ever done…it is a tough job…you
have so many groups that you are accountable to. It is not just your Superintendent…it‘s
your teachers… students…support staff…the community…the BOE… and in a sense you
are accountable to yourself…
Tom‘s comments are a direct example of Bergson‘s description of moral obligation to the
greater community. In schools, the lines of communication and authority are defined. But in a
larger perspective, the system includes many subsystems and cultures. These independent yet
overlapping interests (Cusick, 1983) have to be massaged with leadership to not only appear in
support of the district‘s goals but also maintain the morality of the school community without
compromising the principal‘s morality.
Although the influence of politics in maintaining a closed morality of a district is not a
variable of study in this project, it is an inevitable factor in decision making. Bergson may
consider the factions to be the inflexible order of the phenomena of life (p.12). When principals
speak to these situations, it is often with an exhaustive tone. Working the politics and, at times,
conflicting moralities wear on principals. The time dedicated to extraordinary problems come in
the midst of sustaining the operations of a school and the morality it represents. Earlier in the
chapter, Principal Mike spoke to one of his most difficult times as an administrator and the
130

politics of negotiating the pressure from the community, the school board and even his own
superintendent. He eventually left the district.
As in Mike‘s circumstance, Mary‘s experiences as a principal illustrates a situation where
different levels of decision makers were of different opinion on how a serious student discipline
situation should be resolved.
We had a situation where…last week of school…eighth grade science…we have lab
table, two student tables. I have two students, male and female sitting next to each other
who intimately explore each other during the final exam underneath the table…
You have to realize this is the end of the year…the teacher hearing the rumors finally
reports the situation to be true 48 hours after the offense…at the end of the school day.
…terrible timing. At first I thought it was farfetched…I was not going to investigate
it…but I did.
Mary, an experienced middle school principal, was made aware of a possible serious
student issue. The offense took place during the last week in a classroom with a teacher present.
The teacher, however, did not witness the overt familiarity between the two students were
involved. Rumors eventually became more aligned.

A sense of obligation led Mary to take the

next difficult course of action. ―Waiting…‖ Mary stated, ―…would contaminate the facts.‖ She
quickly mobilized her staff and began to interview students.
So I quickly got the police liaison officer in there, got the kids down there within the nth
degree before the bell…course this is one of those you don‘t end your day at four
o‘clock…you are there to five or six o‘clock…it turned out to be true.
Mary‘s reflection on the events substantiated her professional morality to persevere and
bring the issue to justice. She wrote the case up (expulsion procedures) and sent it on to central
office. Despite a Board that could not immediately come to consensus, justice eventually
prevailed and the students were expelled. The hearing featured conflicting personal morals on
the Board, one who was a representative of another school district.

131

Mary‘s personal and professional morality came to bear in this circumstance. She
maintained a firm stands on the district‘s policy despite challenges from the Board that ironically
interpreted the policy as if it didn‘t exist. Bergson would consider Mary‘s commitment as a
verdict of her conscience, one that is given by her social self…acting in the respect and well
being of her students. (p.17)
Teacher evaluation is an example of a process where morality (closed) is measured as a
support to district values as well as the achievement of individual students. Assessing a teacher‘s
performance is a role principals consider one their most important responsibilities. The
implications of how teachers interact with students have a direct impact on district goals and
individual aspirations. Principal Jeff speaks to his duty to assess teacher effectiveness:
I have not renewed five probationary teachers. And that is tough part of the role. These
were good people…they weren‘t evil. They weren‘t purposely trying to hurt anybody
that kind of situation… they weren‘t at a level that I wanted here… I based that decision
on would I want my son to have that teacher.
Jeff buys into the (closed) organizational code to serve the community. To do so, he
makes decisions that fulfill his duty to bring the best to his students. Jeff also bring to bear a
consideration that principals will often reference in making a decision on whether to keep a
teacher: would they want this person teaching their children? In essence, he considers this aspect
of his position a moral imperative from a district stand point but also from a personal set of
standards as well. The example provided by Jeff illuminates Barnard‘s view that one cannot
divorce his/her professional morality from his/her personal judgment.
I think we owe to the kids. We owe it to them we have the best teachers we can get. I
think probably the most important thing I can do is to get and keep the best teachers
possible … I take the duty to heart…I am hiring the best person to teach in this
position...it comes down to the kids... about integrity and doing the right thing even when
it is not easy.

132

In the near future teachers will be evaluated every year. The thinking behind the
legislation is not a concern for principals. It is the time to set aside to make it happen. Most
principals find it difficult now (demands of the role) to get into classrooms as often as they
would like. But the recent Race to the Top legislation has principals questioning the quality they
can dedicate to each evaluation. Principal Tim is now facing evaluating 135 teachers each year.
―There is no way. I don‘t know what system we will come up with. I am just completing one
for this year (last week of school).
D: What do you see that new policy threaten in what you want to get done?
T: Maybe the creativity in teachers. Who is choosing the material to cover? It will be
hard to be accessible to students, parents. I had 23 evaluations this year. I am finishing
up my last one today. Funding will lead to cutting back on an administrator….more to
evaluate; less people to do it. I am worrying about my effectiveness…
Principal Charles assumes a similar stance. Even if other circumstances play into a
situation, he starts with the student perspective. For him it is what kids deserve in terms of
effective instruction.
D: So, if I could speculate here…you initially have a concern about a teacher‘s
performance.... And so you are thinking at that point in time about the kids and what
they are not getting…
C: The average…a lot of worksheets…a lot of sit and get…not acceptable…
School principals are responsible for the effectiveness efficiency of school building.
Accomplished through a sense of duty, principals make decisions that result in the alignment of
their professional morality with district goals.
Professional morality is also represented in tangible forms. Customs, traditions, rite of
passage, and symbols are a reflection of what a community (school system) has chosen to
represent their local morality. These symbols are often tangible objects represented in pictures,
proclamations, banners, newspaper articles, flags, events, fight songs and mascots. Many of
133

these symbols were referenced in the lobbies of school buildings or in the principal‘s office.
Individuals who have displayed extraordinary achievement are honored as heroes or role models
for the community. What is important to a community can be qualified by what community
embraces as valuable. Athletics and music programs are prominent in most suburban districts.
Having a safe place for students go to school is common as well. Recall Principal Jeff‘s
comment,: ―Parents don‘t ask me about MEAP scores, they just want me to take care of their
kids.‖
Principals exercise their professional morality by leading programs and drives that not
only support the community‘s ideals but promote healthy social lives for children. The outreach
can extend to needs on a local or even on a global scale. Principal Janie‘s school is situated close
to the Mexican border. As established earlier, the students of her high school are predominantly
from migrant families, are poor and must contend with the negative influence the region brings.
Janie speaks proudly of her students‘ charitable efforts including a shoe drive for the victims of
earthquake in Haiti. To support a community endorsement for character education, she has
instituted a 30 minute advisory time in their daily school schedule. When asked whether the
program was a state initiative, Janie clarifies,
That is a local program…but the program that the district has adopted is the safe and drug
free program… counselors have come in and have worked out for us calendars and
lessons.
Back in the days we just tried to make students make proper choices. Today we are more
to the point ...trying to also help them understand how the brain functions and how we do
the things…. we do and RIGHT and WRONG…some of those lessons we try target and
tie it with their values (discipline) code … that we know about trust, loyalty and respect
and build on those principles we have.
We are getting ready now…and we tie it in with as part of community morality…values
to blend with educational goals …well spring break is coming and South Padre is an hour
away and you know the influences that come from our community…drugs, sex you know

134

the things that are out there that …these are issues that in our community that come into
our school. We try to build community morality.
Closed morality represents the means by how one supports the organization, or, in the
case of schools, the greater community. Commitment to district goals and processes is
represented in following one‘s duty or professional morality. Open morality provides another
focus that is on the individual (student).

Decisions- Open Morality
To be able to describe and explain the personal and professional morality of principals as
they make decisions, it is essential to consider Bergson‘s description and application of Open
Morality. An open morality is concerned with situations where compliance, logic and duty do
not satisfy principals‘ professional and personal morality. Open morality calls for other
considerations than the policy book or code of conduct. In other words, a moral dilemma is
created. Open morality generates contemplation involving creativity and progress (resulting
from moral dilemma). It is not concerned with obedience and cohesion. Bergson refers to the
morality as open because it includes everyone, universal and with a focus of peace. The source
of open morality, according to Bergson, is creative emotions.
Bergson‘s extension of Kant‘s moral philosophy stems from the fact that in society there
are many and unique obligations. A day in the life of a principal would affirm this statement.
Recalling Principal Al‘s reflection,
…you know as well as I do the decision we face every day, you never, you know… we
have assistant principals mull them over with and Superintendents we can check and
central office in terms of policy but quite often you are making it on the fly…it‘s the
nature of the position… it boils down to good judgment…
What is it that makes principal decisions difficult and complex at times? The answer is a
good number of these decisions are not defined in the policy manual, handbook or aligned to

135

district goals. Where does the principal turn to when the rule book is silent on a circumstance is
not evident? If the answers were always evident, Principal Frank states, ―We wouldn‘t need
administrators.‖ Marty, an assistant high school principal rebuked a colleague who insisted on
following the student code of conduct for every offense. ―Monkeys can do that…where is the
value in my contributions to discipline cases‖. In Frank and Marty‘s words there is a suggestion
that another dimension of decision making comes to bear in the role. (The) difference lies in
social vs. human implications. (Bergson, p.35) Social issues are considered in black and white,
while human implications take on a more personal perspective. For some principals, it is the
challenge, the problem solving and puzzles to resolve, that attracted them to the position.
Whereas natural obligation is a pressure or propulsive force, complete and perfect morality has
an appeal. (p. 34) When principals work from an open morality standpoint, it positions them to
consider by choice or circumstance to go beyond obligation or duty to the district. Many
principal decisions are cut and dried. When all is running well for the district, the building,
staff, the students, decisions are easy. The challenge surfaces when there is a conflict between
professional obligations and personal morality. It can be a time when principals take a unique
stand and often feel alone in their position. Bergson recognizes these circumstances,
Between the closed and open soul there is the soul that is in the process of opening. In a
word, between the static and dynamic, there is to be observed in morality too, a time of
transition…
We have the purely static morality that might be called infra-intellectual and the purely
dynamic, supra-intellectual. Nature intended the one and the other is a product of man‘s
genius. The former constitutes a conglomeration of habits which are in man…The latter
is inspiration, intuition, emotion, susceptible of analysis and ideas that furnish intellectual
notations of it and branch out in infinite details. Stopping in between is considered
contemplation. (p.64)
Contemplation is a term that captures the difference between duty and personal morality.
At times they align. When they do not, principals rely on their wisdom, creativity and
136

intelligence to make the decisions. Bergson summarizes the assertion, ―What is simple for our
understanding is not necessarily so for our will. What logic might suggest, experience may
override.‖ (p.53)
Principal Mary considers her cognitive abilities her best asset, ―I would have to say the
biggest thing I probably bring to my job is that I bring a creative background of problem solving.
The other is the number of resources I can bring to the district. Principals need to extend into
the community. We have explored the works of Ruby Payne (researcher on developing middle
class values and teaching strategies for students of poverty) and addressing the differences
between generational poverty and ―new-found‖ or circumstantial poverty?
There are districts that recognize and value principal intuition and experience. Central
office in Principal Jeff‘s district writes the flexibility into their code,
Because when it gets to discipline, you have a relationship and if they know you are there
for kids, we can be compassionate but firm. We are going to follow…we have a lot
discretion in our discipline book. It is not black and white that says, ―If you do this it will
be one day…this shall be three days.‖ There are some guidelines in what we use but we
have a lot discretion.
Principal Ben‘s handling of the bomb scare was discussed earlier in relation to how the
decisions were made during the crisis. Ben explained his knowledge of which students would
make the threat and which ones would not,
If for a minute I felt that there was someone out there…we didn‘t have incidents or
people who had any…even are short list of pranksters or people that were suspended.
There wasn‘t anyone that we thought were near that level. I would have thought that if
somebody had truly planted explosives in the building…
Ben was certain the threat was not real.
Ben‘s familiarity with his students (statistics of threats versus carrying them out was
minimal), provided insight to where the risks were and the students that may have been upset
with the school did not have these tendencies. An experienced administrator thinking beyond

137

the rule book, Ben was grateful his superintendent gave him the latitude. But, he did confide, his
wife was not as supportive.
D: There had to be a few conflicting ideas is your head though???
B: There was you know. My wife was on the other side of the fence, you know and
normally she did not involved in school things and try not to come home and complain
about all things that go in school during the day but she saw the email, she knew what
was going on and she had two kids going to that building everyday…she has a lot life
insurance on me but the kids…she believed we shouldn‘t have had school tomorrow.
Principal Frank is emphatic about the how the role of the principal extends beyond the
organization, a set of responsibilities and dutiful expectations. He sees those in the position as
smart, insightful and compassionate, a characteristic Bergson recognizes. Frank explains his
understanding of his role with students.
Why do we get paid what we get paid? We get paid for our intelligence and our
empathy. I hope intelligence yes … empathy not so often. Gee whiz! Troubled kids
come to us not because they signed up at nine years old… they didn‘t sign up a card that
says ―I want to be a troublemaker.‖ …They come from chaotic circumstances and
environments that are not of their making. Some of them are going to be non-productive
citizens…A whole lot of them (will be productive) if we use the things we know
(intelligence) that are out there…the research, the methods, the strategies, the experience,
we can turn kids around…sure we can.

Going Against the Grain
Concern for the individual places many principals in the Bergson camp of Open Morality.
Principals generally have more information on situations than anyone else close to a situation.
An ongoing challenge for principals is that they cannot always explain their unique perspective
on various cases for confidentiality reasons. Often the result is an assumption that the principal
is incompetent, narrow minded and/or playing favorites. (To have personal morals means you
eventually take it on the chin from the outside.) In conducting the study, Principals cite several
instances when they showed resistance to policy because of their concern for the developmental

138

considerations of students.

As Frank states, ―One size does not fit all.‖ Policy relative to strict

consequences in discipline decisions are prime examples where principals assign consequences
that make sense given other considerations about the child. Principal Charles was most
concerned with permanent assignments of discipline,
C: Expulsion hearings are the epitome of that dilemma. Because when I have taken a
student…and I have taken over the 11 years I have been a principal…5 or 6 kids for
expulsion. When you take a kid for expulsion…that just flies in the face of what we are
all about. I feel like every time I have not felt like…I want to get this kid but yet the
circumstance always, sometime serious circumstances dictate the necessity for expulsion.
I can think of a 6th grade girl we had who lit our bathroom on fire.
D: Sixth grader?
C: Yea, put a fire in the bathroom…you know the law. Anything dealing with weapons,
arson, rape…180 days mandatory expulsion. We took her to the Board, one of the Board
member is an attorney and heard our case and agreed to expel her and the Superintendent
said we are expelling her for 90 days. The Assistant Superintendent and I looked at each
other and …OK… that is what they are going to do.
A real struggle though … an interesting case I had was I had taken a kid for expulsion
and I felt like I was on trial with the Board. They had given me a pretty rough go because
they wanted more evidence of the intervention. We hadn‘t done enough to try to help the
kid…
Charles was angry over the decision. He didn‘t believe there was malicious intent on the
student‘s part. He felt he needed to be an advocate for a child that made a poor choice.
I know that when the Board puts that kid out of school that it is more than likely, not a
death sentence, but that kid‘s education is going to be severely, severely impacted. And
she may never recover from that.
Several principals speak to working in areas that are shades of gray. Situations where
black and white don‘t work; different situations call for different contemplation. Principal Jeff
recounts circumstances that conflicted with his personal morality as a long-time principal,
I read in the paper from time to time as we all do….Kindergartener suspended for
bringing in a bread knife…all these extreme examples. And I think it comes down to
people afraid of making decisions or being disempowered to having any authority to

139

make decisions by some hierarchal chain where they‘re are always worried that their
immediate boss or the Superintendent is not going to cut them off at the knees…
Fred is a retired principal after 34 years working with young students, mainly elementary.
He says he has a pretty good handle on what is developmentally appropriate for students
for learning and discipline. Intuitively, Fred offers a countering view on discipline codes,
It is a matter of timing too….I could get away with things you couldn‘t possibly choose
to do now….I used to have a drawer full of knives. Cub Scouts would
forget they left them
in their pocket and show up at school with them. I would keep them until I saw the parent.
Today, I would be sending each one of them to
the Board.
For Principal Catherine, the decisions she finds most difficult fall in the gray area.
…for me it is discipline…because there are shades of gray… The code of student
conduct, can point out theory, but practice is different… And I found that in discipline
there truly is no…it is rare when it… ―boom‖ (slaps the desk), right on. There is always
some kind of factor, or some kind of element that enters in that makes you say,
―Hmmmm‖.
…we practice progressive discipline… we understand that we are dealing with young
people who are in the growth process. There are some things that you shouldn‘t do.
…cut and dry…kids bring a gun or knife to school…and you know the history of that
young person… and when you talk about rules and laws, hey, I know that …for example
I had a young man bring a knife to school and he literally did not bring it to school for
any harm or purpose. But the law says it is automatic. Those are tough. But we must
remember, some of children all over this nation have tremendous challenges to get to our
buildings in the morning…challenges that some of us could not endure.
Marty is a high school administrator who reflects on circumstance that he dealt with
under the attendance policy. His wisdom aligns with other principals that look below the surface
on issues and a standard response is not always appropriate.
…we changed the attendance policy…we felt it was just punitive and needed more
flexibility to help students. So when the student missed more than 10 days and he didn‘t
have any medical reason to cover that, then they wouldn‘t get credit for the class. I
understood the need for the policy. The school that I came from before did not have a
policy….they missed school all the time. I understood the need for it. But while the
policy existed, I will go back to that gray area…there were certain circumstances for
certain kids that I hated looking at them and go, I understand your circumstances but
there is nothing I can do…of course, there is something I can do…I am human being, you
are a human being, I have the structure…can I do something to help the kid…

140

Academic Achievement
It would be a safe assumption that principals would provide some degree of instructional
leadership if they ascribed to Simon‘s, Kant‘s or Bergson‘s teaching. From a Simon perspective
the curriculum and corresponding assessments would be mandated. There would be little room
for interpretation on how to deliver instruction. Those viewing curriculum and assessment as a
given in the K-12 continuum would comply with mandates as a form of doing their duty, no
matter the cost. Principals with a student‘s views on curriculum and instruction would seek the
best outcomes that schools can support for students to achieve. Generally, principals have
accepted state testing as a necessary evil. In the beginning ages of accountability, principals had
another view.

Principal Fred‘s recollection and assessment of the MEAP:

MEAP is not designed for instructional purposes… It may be today, but….let give you an
example. When I was president of MEMPSA…at that time, we had a MEAP test in
reading that was ultimately called the Roman Empire. And the Roman Empire was
totally inappropriate for our fourth grade students. We did readability (study)...principals
were incensed. Our study concluded it was a test that was at a 7-8th grade level, for
fourth graders…content was irrelevant…when the test came back it wasn‘t a good test.
We raised the issue with the State…no remedy…that is a disservice to the kids in
Michigan.
Fred considers the MEAP to be not always in the best interests of students. Principal
Mike, however accepts the MEAP and the MME as,‖…any number of obligations…it is a matter
of habit to obey them. The comments by Fred and Mike reflect a Kant postulate: the duty is
perform your job, the results are not as important.
State testing for all its original intentions of accountability, how would the principals
assess its impact and value? As the topic was presented to the principals for their personal
assessment, I anticipated negative responses. Their responses indicated a deeper obligation to
students. Principals endorsed the MEAP as a means for improvement, and meeting higher

141

standards even in the areas where their students are proficient. Principal Ken states his thoughts
on accountability,
The intent of NCLB… I would be doing even if it didn‘t exist. It is why we want them to
get an education…we want them to be succeeding in getting a job someday. That is what
it really boils down to… Yes, there are some days when the State has messed up and you
have to do something (like yesterday-retest an entire grade) and you have to spend that
time. And I feel that in a way that is a disservice to the students and a there‘s not many
ways around it though. It is the realities of the job.
Most principals consider themselves innovators as opposed to reactors. Their
professional morality concentrates on improving systems and processes that fosters student
achievement, safety and an overall healthy school experience. A. principal with personal
morality believes students deserve nothing less.
Earlier in the chapter Principal Audrey shared a position that is endorsed by principals;
they generally do not accept the status quo. Principals exercise their personal and professional
obligation by maintaining standards, leading change and staying active in professional
organizations. Staying active also means principals not supporting changes that they see as not
being to their students‘ advantage. In 2004, the Michigan Association of High School Principals
under the directorship of Jim Ballard, supported a change in the high stakes test given annually
to high school juniors. The proposal eventually passed to substitute the Michigan Merit Exam
(MME) and ACT for the existing test. Ballard‘s efforts were not overwhelmingly supported by
the state‘s principals. Their argument was that the curriculum to which their schools aligned
their instruction was the Michigan Core Curriculum Frameworks. The proposed ACT is not
aligned. The lack of alignment laid issues for the principals. Districts had dedicated extensive
work to align the core benchmarks to the state assessment. The contesting principals
demonstrated their obligation to the students by supporting previous work to align curriculum
and instruction and to provide students a better opportunity to succeed on the test. In the end,
142

Lansing made the change. High schools were challenged with making adjustments in their
curriculum to align with the assessment to give their students a fair chance of succeeding on the
MME/ACT.
After the switch to the MME/ACT, most principals worked with their curriculum offices
to re-align curriculum with the test. Sharon, principal of an inner city high school, took personal
stand on the issue. Her district required the Michigan Framework. Sharon insisted on alignment
for no other reason than to have her students have a better chance to succeed on MME/ACT.
D:

You have this curriculum and it is not aligned with how the students are assessed.
Is that a central office decision or something that you inherited because it has
been in place a long time?

S:

It has been a central office decision, but as of September, I want to go record and
say it will be my decision…because at the end of the day, as long as I can show
growth then I am willing to put everything on the line to educate these children…

D:

So what I am hearing you say, correct me if I am wrong…you have a better
handle on what you need than central office? So you will not adhere to the edicts
or the directives because that is not going to get them where they need to go?

S:

I will adhere to the policy…as it relates to scheduling… things of nature.
However, when it comes down to saving my own behind….we will build our
curriculum based on those ACT college readiness standards. And there will be
stronger accountability from this chair with the teachers in the classroom.

D:

What I am hearing you say is that you are putting your career on the line by doing
something that you feel as building principal, you are taking the building in a
direction that is better for the kids.

S:

Yes.

Sharon admits to a bit of self-preservation but it is not the issue. She is damning her duty
for the sake of student achievement. Sharon‘s stance would align with Bergson‘s argument that
when… duties that society defines, in principle, are duties toward humanity but under
exceptional circumstances, regrettably unavoidable, they are for the time being inapplicable
(Bergson, p.32). Sharon resists her obligations and moves in another direction. Her professional
143

morality, like other principals, is supported by a courageous decision to contest the misalignment
of curriculum. In this case, one could assert that personal morality enabled the application of
Sharon‘s professional morality.
Bergson‘s argument that acknowledges Kant‘s claims toward duty by using the
illustration of maintaining and defending one‘s society is actualized in the roles principals
assume. Principals are the ―headmasters‖ of their buildings. Through them, policy is
interpreted and deployed among the staff and students. The familiar adage, ―the buck stop here‖
provides principals leverage to protect their building from outside interference. But within the
confines of his/her domain, a myriad of choices are made to keep moving ahead. Institutional
goals are acknowledged and the principals‘ duty is to support those goals. At this time,
interpersonal relationships call on the principals‘ knowledge and wisdom to solve issues. It is at
this juncture principals extend their Kant-like perspective, duty, to an Open Morality that
considers individuals before policy.
Principals see themselves as moral individuals. Their role includes instructional
leadership, caretaker, and at times, as paternal/maternal substitutes. It is what Bergson would
refer to as the differences between social and human implications. (p.35) It is not unlike
principals to extend their compassion and concern for education beyond their building. Principal
Tom, a long time high school principal provides a perspective where preservation of society does
not only apply to his building, his students and community.
I think we can look at in isolation as my building, my school, my kids but I think NCLB
it has put an expectation on education everywhere. To me it is important, that my
building is doing well but all buildings need to do well. Whether is a classroom in South
Lyon or a classroom in Benton Harbor, there is an expectation that kids need to perform
at a certain level anywhere.
And how has No Child Left Behind caused principals anxiety? Tom responds,

144

… a lot of people are critical of NCLB…I am not one of them. To me it sets an
expectation that all kids are going to learn regardless the name of the school, the
community, the resources…you know sometimes we make it a little easier depending on
resources. As administrators we need to be thoughtful and caring for all kids‘ not just
ones in our building.
Throughout the dialogue with principals, rarely did they refer to students as ―my
kids‖…what I heard were statements that included what best for ―all kids.‖ Principals appear to
be proud individuals. They are not only committed to the ―cause‖ or doing the things they
―ought‖ to do, but also direct their attention to the betterment of all societies, many times when
others are not watching.
Theme #6 – Overlapping Moralities – Areas of Shades of Gray
This study‘s construct is situated in the midst of a social environment where behaviors
are as predictable as they are unpredictable, as complex as they are simple, and occasionally
directed as they are afforded personal discretion. To describe and explain the personal and
professional morals of principals while making decisions in these complex settings, we must
acknowledge the varying levels of influence, perspective and authority. In the midst of these
decisions are overlapping moralities. Within any of the theoretical perspectives discussed in this
chapter, the principal finds him/herself immersed in a social kaleidoscope comprised of varying
priorities, politics, personal agendas and local traditions.
To some extent, principals welcome the ―non-negotiable‖ that flow down from central
office. These decisions would include calendar, testing, snow days and budget. Directives free
principals from personal choice. When the organization defines authority and parameters
(Simon), conflict within the system is negligible. As one principal states, ―Rules are rules and
we need to follow them...‖ Although many decisions are automatic, the majority of principals‘
time is dedicated to negotiating ―areas of shades of gray.‖
145

Areas of shades of gray fall between policy and principals‘ personal and professional
morals. Bergson considers this situation thinking as contemplation. The following scenarios
reflect situations when principals contemplate difficult decisions. As Barnard (1957) has stated,
the circumstances are examples of conflicting moralities, pulling the principal in different
directions. In the end, principals stay true to their own professional and personal codes, at times
with considerable risk.

Personal Morality vs. Organizational Morality
Principals new to a district or building usually have on their short list the need to
understand the priorities, the decision making expectations and overall culture of their new
surroundings. School issues happen regardless of a principal‘s tenure. Principals stepping into
a new position will face the same decisions a senior principal has for many years. The first few
years provides a learning curve for new principals. Their first task is to become familiar with the
expectations of the district (morality). In order for novice principals to succeed, they need to be
grounded in policy. The development of individual personal and professional morality is
contingent on many fluid factors. Experience, in and out of the district, the formality of district
structures and processes, autonomy, experience and personal make up are variables of influence.
The majority of principal subjects in this study are established administrators in their districts.
Most consider themselves independent thinkers and rely on their intelligence, creativity and
experience to make decisions.

Instances that challenge one‘s personal morality with the

organization‘s morality were most commonly discussed by the principals.

The circumstances

are generally unique but involve similar thinking to resolve issues.
To challenge central office, a principal must be grounded in his/her own beliefs. It is also
to the advantage of the principal to have demonstrated the ability to solve previous concerns.
146

Otherwise, the decision becomes a directive. Principals tend to look at decisions from a ―what‘s
right‖ for their students, staff and buildings. The following reflections illustrate the point.
Principal Jeff contests the formality of ―Simon-like‖ decisions in the defense of what he
sees is as a young student‘s choice:
Well, I read in the paper from time to time as we all do….Kindergartener suspended for
bringing in a bread knife…all these extreme examples. And I think it comes down to
people afraid of making decisions or being disempowered to having any authority to
make decisions by some hierarchal chain where
they are always worried that their
immediate boss or Superintendent is going to cut them off at the knees…
Jeff, like several principals in this study, has established himself in the community as
successful and respected. He worked his way through the system and enjoys a good relationship
with his Superintendent. When Jeff argues cases for students, he is acting from his personal and
professional morals. He can make statements regarding superintendents as he also possesses a
bit of political clout and the risk of being ―called out‖ is less. A principal new to a district may
not be as vocal as Jeff.
Conversely, we take a look at Principal Mike‘s ordeal in his early years (conflict between
the Superintendent and Transportation Director whose son was the starting quarterback) when he
was the assistant principal/athletic director and football coach in a small district. His story
relates a dilemma, caught between the undefined morality of his district and personal agendas by
members of the Board of Education and the Superintendent. The small district has
administrative staff holding multiple positions. In Mike‘s case, he was also the athletic director
at the time and head football coach.
…there was a school board (member) whose son was the second quarterback to the son
of the Transportation Director. The starting quarterback got into a fight off campus. The
board member felt the starting quarterback should not play which did not align with our
policy. It was handled by law enforcement and the court system. Our handbook was
clear. In a situation like this, administration must wait until the court makes a decision
before we move forward with a school decision. I intended to follow the policy. The
147

principal at that time didn‘t take a strong position one way or the other. My position was
to follow what the rules are and my immediate supervisor was caught as well but decided
not to decide. There were many people including the Superintendent who felt we got to
get this kid out…I sure his motivation was to get back at the Transportation Director who
he was having a feud with. So it was a very complex, difficult situation…I think
everybody thought deep down you got to follow your own rules. At the same time if the
envelope was pushed I know would have been supported by the Superintendent…It was
very complex situation…personality…politics…history that was all in that one case…
In the end, Mike believed the long standing policy was his best argument, one with which
he could live. The pressure exerted on him by others was for personal reasons.
Following his recollection in the story, Mike confides he eventually left the school
district. ―It was a terrible time in my career…the most difficult decision I had to face…but I
stayed with the policy in the midst of all the personal agendas.‖
The difficulty of Mike‘s experience was not only a case of conflicting moralities, but,
moralities that were ignored or shifted to meet one‘s personal benefit. The added dimension of
his principal remaining neutral illuminates how situations can paralyze individuals due to their
confusion or the desire to save their position. Mike‘s principal at the time was doing his duty by
remaining loyal to the Superintendent despite the wrongness of the situation. From a Simon and
Kant view, his principal took the correct stand. In the scope of a Bergson view, justice and
fairness looks beyond the ―rules‖ and calls for an intelligent decision, one could defend in a
moral sense. Mike‘s expected story is not unique.
Earlier in the chapter, the scenario of Principal Charles was discussed; he was expected to
continuously reprimand an employee for poor performance when, in reality, the employee was
challenged by experiencing mini strokes. ―And the employee‘s medical condition got worse; it
became hard from a personal, humanistic stand point to keep badgering this person, this teacher.
I must have written 15 reprimands in a two year period.‖

148

In Charles‘s own reflection, the district came to its sense too late as the teacher eventually
passed away due to the illness. Duty called and Charles answered under protest. He was the
point person in upholding the organization‘s expectations. Still he had to fulfill one other
expectation that principals usually take when a teacher passes away. It was Charles who had to
extend condolences to the family he had known for years.
A situation that has similar implication is offered by Principal Kathleen. She had become
aware of a teacher who violated a standard of the moral code of conduct. Within the
expectations of the district and her own personal and professional code, Kathleen felt not only
obligated to investigate on behalf of the district but from her sense of what is right and wrong. In
Kathleen‘s book the teacher‘s behavior was wrong. The complicating factor is she felt central
office was ―pooh-poohing‖ the situation, ―I thought I was the only one who was taking this
seriously…and it was frustrating.‖ Kathleen felt some of her superiors we not willing to have a
conflict and to look the other way on something that was not only against policy but illegal and
morally and ethically a problem.
Elected members of a Board of Education are sworn into office to uphold the policies of
the school district. Yet local boards will change as different attitudes emerge. The change in
perspective creates inconsistent interpretation of policy. Principals working from the policies
prefer a consistent adherence and interpretation of policy as they are written. When there is
change on the Board, there are no guarantees.
Principal Mary recalls a serious student matter that called for a referral to the Board for
further consideration. She recalls the make-up of the Board:
We have some extremely conservative people as well as some extremely liberal people.
At that point of time, there was only 6 of them present, the 7th had not been sworn and
appointed to the Board (yet) there was a locked vote 3 – 3. So ultimately, they sworn the
seventh person and that‘s swung where they gave a modified vote where it became a 180
149

day suspension with possible appeal for reinstatement at 90 days. That was a lengthy
process…especially where there are two Board members who felt that the students
needed at most a five, maybe a 10 day suspension. That is a tremendous difference in
terms of a consequence…
One Board member, an assistant principal in another district, offered his opinion on the
appropriate consequence that caused a greater concern for Mary. She was shocked at the defense
to his opinion:
―Kids that have sexual intercourse in the hallways in my high school are not
expelled.‖ And I explained to him, that may be the case in his district but I didn‘t want to
work in a district and hold that standard to (this district).
These are uncomfortable circumstances for principals. It is a challenge to maintain and
represent the school district‘s morality as represented in policy and procedures as it is challenged
by personal agendas of individuals outside the district. It is even more difficult when the
individuals whose responsibility is to uphold policy, interpret or ignore policy all together.
There are times, however, principals challenge policy. Many times it is within the
interpretation of policy that causes issues. It would be a principal‘s argument that policy does
(not) address every circumstance and that central office uses policy to support as Principal Tim
would say, ―A bad argument.‖ The objections generally fall within two areas, building and
personnel.
Principal Tom offers this advice to his assistant principals, ―You need to pick your
battles. I don‘t always agree with central office…but I try to enlighten them about all the
outcomes of their decision. Principal Courtney says experience will tell when there are times to
fight and there are times so let it go. Courtney offers a perspective that other have as well:
I think there comes a point where principals have to decide where they are standing, the
building or central office. And I think that is hard. And may change because some of the
stuff is situational but there comes a time especially when you are dealing with what we
dealing with the union. But there comes a time when a decision what is more
important…your building or central office. And at the same…you need to get that across
150

to central office. These are the people you live with every day…You are between a rock
and a hard place. The buck stops with you in the building but rolls downhill from
central office (laugh).
Tim refers to the instances when you take issues on the behalf of your staff as ―defining
moments.‖ These are critical junctures in terms of establishing leadership and a culture in a
building. However, it can be tenuous as principals may be asked to back down and support
central office. It is a lose-lose situation for the principal. Push the issue at central office, a
reprimand is likely. Support central office and the staff will not trust the leadership of the
principal.
Principal Dennis reflects on going against the morality of the district, sometimes you
have to take the route a principal believes is the right road:
There has been a time or two…I have ignored that and gone another way knowing
full well I have to go back and re-do it, but I was willing to take that on because at the
time it was in the best interest to do something different and not follow the rule book. I
think individual situations warrant doing something different.
A principal recalls a meeting of all administration at the start of the school year when
new cuts at the elementary level would result in fewer art, physical education and music classes.
A new elementary principal took a stand on behalf of her staff and parents and said she could not
support the newly established cuts. Her own child was in her school and as a mother she could
not support the decision.. A look of disbelief came over the rest of the principals as this young
person was contesting a district decision. As the central office administrators discretely tried to
communicate that they were counting on her support, she dug in more. After the meeting, the
collective principals agreed that was not a battle that should have been taken on at that time, if
ever. Apparently the outspoken principal felt this was way beyond her first week on the job.
She resigned after her first year.

151

Principals will stand on cases that they believe they can make in regards to what is good
for kids. According to Simon, what is ―good‖ cannot be assigned an empirical value so a debate
on the topic is natural. Principals, however, have this debate frequently with central office.
Some principals such as Principal Mike feel ―they are trapped by policy,‖ whereas it is difficult
to exercise leadership in a building when the parameters are narrow. Another principal spoke of
grants that he applied for that would bring innovative technology and serve as a model for other
buildings. The grants were not supported by central office for reasons of ―equity.‖ The
principal‘s conclusion is that if the grant resulted in success, other buildings would seek the same
technology. Equity, in this case, may have masked a financial decision.
Principal Fred feels we are in it for kids and they deserve our best argument. At the same
time, Fred also believes it takes courage as well:
Sometimes you have to take a stand. We have a Superintendent who does not follow
the crowd…someone who is willing to work against the popular vote. The person has to
have the strength to represent the kids in their building and what they need instructionally
…is not always easy.
Principals acknowledge that circumstances exist where policy supports principals‘
judgment in hiring. Policy, at time, conflicts with who they would like on their staff. Mike
remembers early in his career when one his best teachers had to be let go:
Very early on in my first year as a principal, we had a teacher who was excellent,
awesome. Turned out on his background check he was involved in some sort of
trouble…when he was about 19…it was supposed to be expunged ...it was out of state.
When the issue turned up the district said he has to go. I wanted to keep him. It was
devastating to me. They let him go.
Reflecting on a long career, Principal Jerry felt the pressure of dismissing a teacher not
only from central office but having to face the community and the political influence the teacher
had established.

152

…there was a teacher… a good teacher…excellent teacher; outstanding…her classroom
management was just deplorable. And it happened to be in the band program. And of
course you have a lot of kids…and you have a lot of parents… and so parents are not
happy…gets back to the Superintendent and so…the easiest thing…you know we
evaluate them and help them improve to a point. But in the end I couldn‘t save her.
Local politics become a mitigating factor in principal‘s decisions.
Despite having an advantage of leaning on district policy, outside groups exempt
themselves from school rules and regulations because they have no stake in the morality of a
district or school building. For example similar to Mike‘s scenario of being caught between the
Board and central office, Principal Jeff shares a story where community initiatives conflicted
with specific school policies. The policy that was challenged is the dress code for Jeff‘s school.
In Harbortown, there are pom pon and cheerleading squads as part of the school team as well as
a community team. As with the school-based squads, the coach of the community team told the
girls to wear their uniforms on game day. It happens that many of the girls violated the school
dress code. Steve met with the coaches:
We made an agreement that the following year they were going to wear sweat pants to
school (instead of the short skirts). Well everyone followed it except for one of the
community teams went out and bought new uniforms … Well it got very political
because the pompon coach that happened to be my PTO president. The head of the
community group was very influential…
A similar scenario took place in another district where it was established that the dress
code would remain in place for the end of the year dance. As the tickets were sold by volunteer
parents, a couple of the mothers decided to encourage students to wear what would be considered
inappropriate dress. The principal got wind of the ploy and made a general announcement the
day of the dance that despite what they may have heard, the dress code would be in place. The
principal recalls, ―The mother thought she could undermine the policy with strength in
numbers…I did not want to send a bunch student home to change…but I would.‖

153

The presence of organized labor naturally increases the opportunity for moral conflict.
Unions have their own interests. Whereas a school district will place value on what is best for
students, members of an association will but not at the sake of contract language.

Within the

context of any contract, language may be interpreted differently depending upon perceived
utility. In certain situations, ―entitlements‖ become a moral issue. In a principal‘s view,
entitlement may be a teacher keeping his/her job despite poor performance by his/her students.
The tenure law has protected less than effective teachers. The amount of time a principal
dedicates to attempt to remove a poor teacher becomes a moral issue with principal. It is time
that could be dedicated to something more beneficial to the students and staff.
As a group, most principals acknowledged the presence of a union morality in their
buildings. A few principals cited some decisions that impacted working conditions or a
teacher‘s status as examples when the moralities are at odds. In making decisions, these
principals referred to the union as a passing consideration. As Mike states, ―…and then there is
the union…generally decisions do not come close to violating the contract… we deal with it
(union claims) and move on.‖
Principals in this study do not see contract issues as something on which they would like
to spend. A strategy is to be proactive, have open communication and ―head them off at the
pass.‖ Principal Al recalls an event that had an impact on his staff. A theft had occurred, one
staff member from another, and he felt getting the word the staff would save a degree of anxiety
that would spread through the building.
Unions…I called a staff meeting for the next day, which was smart because before the
union could get a hold of it and spin it, I was able to get my staff…I basically told them a
theft had occurred…

154

The union had its own predicament. They needed to represent the offender and Al knew
he needed to represent the victim. The teacher eventually resigned and faced legal issues
regarding the theft.
I decided to be very transparent what had happened, very open. It is very consistent with
my style. A couple days of pain…it was worth it. It was interesting the union doing their
job, the job is represent the person (offender). The victim was pretty animate, ―You
know, he went in my purse and stole my stuff. It is what is…of course I am going to
press charges against him…‖ She needed to go no further, I supported her. I think that
people looked at that and saw that was the right thing to do.
The irony of the union supporting a person that offended another member of the staff
with Al made decisions in a strange and morally complex situation. For Al, his personal
morality to do the right thing for the victim is another example of a defining moment when staff
measure a principal‘s fortitude and priorities.
Other principal stories referencing union presence were set in the context of a decisionmaking circumstance. Principals cited a recollection of scenarios as having contract
implications from the union standpoint.
Unions provide principals a filter in terms of ―picking one‘s battle.‖ The question
becomes, is the fight that goes along with the issue worth the time and effort? What is the
principal sacrificing when he/she jumps head first into a problem that will certainly get the
union‘s attention? Principal Kathleen considers it an ethical dilemma.
I was taking an inordinate amount of time and it is getting to the point this year where
I almost have an ethical dilemma where it is now starting (from this person) to take away
from other things I should be giving time to. And that is becoming spending too much
time with this teacher and I am going to have to spend more time reflecting on this going
into next year,
One could argue Principal Mike has a similar dilemma in deciding how much time he
should invest in the dismissal of a teacher. Considering the union role and tenure law, the
process may consume too much time and energy that can be spent elsewhere:
155

…there are some teachers that I have to work with that I much rather say, ―You are out of
here…this isn‘t working out.‖ But it is also a decision that I have to make that I am going
to invest that time…that effort to get them out. So how work through the union? What
are …these make for especially tough decisions…
Principals Clarence and Jerry were both active in the union in their careers. Jerry used
his perspective as building representative to help him understand union priorities. Clarence was
the president of his district‘s administrator association. The position was not something his
central office had come to appreciate. Clarence was also active in the state‘s principal
association. In the case cited below, Clarence was asked to testify in Lansing for due process
law. He sent two administrators in his place. Following the testimony, Clarence walked into his
director‘s office to discuss curriculum:
I walked into my director‘s office…we were going to teach outer space through the arts
(proposal for Houston). My director looked at it and said, ―You are not a popular person in this
district today. (Why?) You guys went up and testified about due process. I said he was correct.
He responded that I was not going to get anything out of there (central office). I said this is a
proposal for kids and you are going to take away a proposal for kids? He took it down to the
Superintendent and got the signature.
Wherever there is a shared interest of school decision, conflicting moralities are most
likely to surface. Principals often find themselves in the middle of several conflicting moralities,
mediating perspectives while maintaining a sense of control. These competing moralities are
found within and outside the school walls. Among these competing entities are teacher and
support staff associations. Dealing with unions is viewed by principals as ―what comes with the
territory.‖ Although many decisions are guided by a principal‘s personal and professional
morals, principals fall back to policy when conflicts are difficult to resolve.

Additional Considerations on Describing and Explaining Principal Decisions
Chapter IV has provided a summary of the major themes that became evident during the
course of this study. The data presented in this chapter can be considered the most relevant
156

indicants that support the purpose of the study which is to describe and explain the personal and
professional morals of principals as they make decisions. The preceding analysis aligned
principal decisions with the view of Simon, Kant and Bergson. Each theorist has provided a lens
to morality-based decision making. From these perspectives, principal decisions from the field
were aligned with one or more of the arguments.
In completing the discussion on decision making, it would be appropriate to revisit the
review of literature and acknowledge two areas of research that were references by the principals
in the study. 1) The second area cited in the literature was that of shared decision making. Each
of these topics is represented by the principals‘ acknowledgment of the influence each plays on
decisions. 2) Mentors or identified persons who were influential to the principals in the study
surfaced on several occasions. The discussion developed in relation to principals‘ choice to
aspire to the role

1) Shared Decision Making
As a counter to organizational structures that resemble the shape of a pyramid, shared
decision making is viewed as the reciprocal to the traditional top down management philosophy
promoted by the likes of Hebert Simon. Shared decision making brought the line workers to the
forefront in designing tasks and making decisions that impacted the work they performed. A
stepsister of the Quality movement in Japan, the concept of team decisions made it across the
ocean to American businesses. In the late 80‘s and early 90‘s, the practice was mandated for
Michigan Schools and remains an expectation today.
There are varying degrees of shared decision making. In one extreme, teams not only
make decisions on processes, they also taking responsibility for deployment and results of given

157

task or procedure. At the other end, the parameter only allows for input into the decision but the
responsibility for the decision remains in the organization‘s hands.
Michigan schools have site-based teams. Some teams are represented by staff and
administration, while others districts also invite members of the community, parent and business
leaders to the decision table. There is variance in each district as to the level of decision making
that takes place considering the authority of the principal. There are principals that enjoy the
collaboration with their staff. There are others that lead or make the decisions to their liking.
Principal Charles has experienced success in sharing decisions in his building. He cites
the last NCA visit to his building.
I am very collaborative with my staff. The last NCA go around with my staff, some of
the Oakland County people said it was one of the most collaborative buildings they had
ever seen.
So a lot of our decision making is group decision making. I am not afraid to make a
decision. I find that when teachers feel empowered and they feel like their opinion
matters the decision are more likely to be…if it is a new plan we are implementing more
people are more likely to implement it and follow through on it or acceptance is the norm
rather than the exception. It is interesting because at some meetings over the years, the
staff will say, ―you just need to make the decision.‖ And I am fine with that. I am very
good with that. And sometimes when I am out in left field not thinking straight and make
a decision and I will get five emails that say this should be a little more collaborative.
Shared decision making models that are defined well result in fewer issues. If the
parameters are not clear, participants not knowing if they are being asked for input or sharing the
decision, individuals will voice objection, ―I thought this was a shared decision…they didn‘t go
with what I suggested…different model, same result.‖ Charles‘s district developed a five step
decision making model..
We were going to try to be more collaborative. I may be to one of the few people that
refer to it anymore. There was the level one decision which is the principal‘s decision,
there is not going to be any discussion, we need to do this. To a level five, I am out of
this; I am no different than anyone else. It is a totally collaborative decision. I will have
teachers say at a meeting,‖ …where are we on this in terms of decision making?‖ I might
158

say, ―It is about a two…‖ A response might be, ―We think it should be a four.‖ I would
invite the staff to have a discussion with me. So is that framework to guide people‘s
thinking.
Principal Carl also prefers a collaborative model to make decisions. In order to be an
effective instructional leader, Carl realizes he must be transformational in his leadership as well.
(Marks & Printy)
.…now that ―right‖ decision may have to be changed after a week or two but you know
this idea of making….I think it is important to get buy-in from the people I work with.
You know there are people that I really value their opinion and their ideas... It is the right
decision for the people that it affects will benefit and that will not undermine the overall
culture of program or school by the decision making.
Principal Tim calls this ―leading them to the water‖. In each case, staff is encouraged to
share the decisions and come along for the ride.
Teams may be at the administrative level as well. Principal Henry utilizes his assistant
principals as his team in handling major discipline decisions.
When it comes to discipline or expulsion, we do a very team-focused process… we go
through a pretty thorough (investigation)… putting our heads together and make a joint
decision on what we are going to do.
Henry adds a second decision scenario when the suggestions to change the high school
schedule from the current block schedule. Henry supports the principles of shared decision
making to invite to the table the individuals who will be most impacted by the decision:
So decision wise…another thing you want to consider is involve all the stakeholders.
You have to listen and get their feedback. And I think we have done a good job with
that. And I will use the scheduling as a model. We did have the community forum and
we listened and we listened to kids…
Was there a downside in the plan? Henry‘s candid answer speaks to the overlapping
moralities that cause a difficult time with some shared decisions.
And we talked to the School Board and got everyone‘s feedback on that. But there comes
a point too where everybody wants something just for them… But you know in our
position we have to meet everyone‘s‘ needs and be everyone‘s‘ caretaker. So, collecting
and listening (to gather data) is very important.
159

Principal Jerry‘s school is comprised of teams of teachers. The teams have extensive
latitude to set schedules and plan learning projects for students. The format is characteristic of a
Middle School Model that is designed to meet the needs of that particular age group. Jerry also
uses teams in the hiring process. Most of the team‘s hiring decisions are good ones. When the
decision resulted the hiring of a poor candidate, he returns to the team.
We have a team… what always bothered me is that it someone I hired in an interview
with a team of people. ..and anytime we had someone that struggled or did not succeed, I
go back to the team and ask what did we miss. What did we miss? We go over our
evaluation questions, their answers, the process. We went back on this one case, and
there were red flags all over the place. We overlooked it…
Principals may be reluctant to share the playing field or extend the sharing part to a small
degree. Kathleen is aware of her need to extend her decision making responsibilities…to a point.
I think something else that I have become aware of … is that even though I take a lot of
input from people in my building in making decision, I still make most of the
decisions…I try to share and have some distributive leadership…I think at times and I do
process this… I think I come across as I am making this decision because it is my
decision and so I want to be careful about that so don‘t give the wrong message…
Site- based shared decision making models have been required in Michigan for over two
decades. Principals have experienced varied degrees of success with teams. In the age of
accountability, do site-based decisions make a positive difference? Certainly the generation of
ideas and group buy-in is a plus. However, when more people are brought to the table to make
decisions, the process slows down. In the hectic world of principals, time is a valued
commodity. Are these teams a support or an anchor? Principals more familiar with a top-down
authority structure may find the process inefficient. Principals that value people for their
intellect and creativity would support Bergson‘s focus on the human element as well as the
survival of the community. Certainly this discussion could be expanded in further research.

160

2) Mentors
The literature is fairly generous in offering studies on mentors and mentors programs.
The review accompanying this project highlights a few. In the context of this study, mentors are
referenced as individuals that support the personal and professional morality of individual
principals. Principal mentors are discussed by those participating in the study from two
perspectives. The most common reference is to the one or two individuals in their upbringing,
training or personal life who contributed to the decision to pursue the principal role. Besides the
career guidance, principals consider their mentors as a contributing source to their personal
morality. Principal Al, while reflecting on his road to being a principal, connected with an
individual that cultivated Al‘s desire to help people.
I wanted to something that would help humanity or society, so teaching and counseling
seemed like a good fit. At ____________, I connect with a guy by name of Bob G, who
was very much a humanist, he is a doctor of psychology and I really learned and trained
under him and my beliefs came about through working with my direct supervisor, so I
credit him, so he was my first professional mentor, kind of looked out for me. Thinking
about high school, as I look back, I had a couple of mentors... Jim really challenged me to
be my best in terms of helping others and being in a helping profession…and there was
Tom H I was working with at-risk kids, Joe N who was the principal…took notice of me.
Joe was a mentor and really liked working for him and I really respected him. I have had
some outstanding mentors…people that have guided me along the way.
Assistant Principal Keith began his career in the business world. Before earning a
degree, Keith was a guest teacher at a private school and come to enjoy students and teaching.
Securing a teaching certificate, Keith worked as a core subject teacher. In his own word, ―I was
impressed with the way principals went about leading the building‖. He pursued his
administration degree, and selected two principals to serve under as an intern. Within six years,
Keith was appointed assistant principal. He attributes his growth as an administrator to his
current principal. ―I have been fortunate to have the mentors I have had…I really appreciate
when they share their experiences with me.‖ Keith reflects, ―As a kid, I learned to be
161

responsible, to have character, and work hard. It is ironic; my mentors told me those attributes
are inclusive of a successful principal.‖
At an early stage in his career, Principal Dennis was comfortable taking the lead in
groups, projects, and his fraternity. He did not shy away from those challenges. In fact, he
enjoyed them.
…probably the principal and AD I had at Chesterton had a good influence on seeing what
the leadership entailed and helping find out what I wanted to do. If I didn‘t have a good
experience with those two, it may not have been so clear, so early.
A second conception of mentors offered by the principals is not inspiring or leading but
as ―someone I can pick up the phone and call…when decisions get difficult.‖ Principals value the
opportunity to seek advice from other principals. Jeff submits, ―…and if I wavered a little bit I
would call one of my colleagues, it would usually be J_________and would say what do you
think here?‖ Principal Charles provides insight into why it is necessary to have a valued few you
principals can consult.
You have to have people around you that you can call when you need to make a tough
decision. You call and say, ―Hey, I got this situation, what do you think?‖ Often times
you cannot do that with your AP...you cannot do it with your teachers. You don‘t want to
talk it over with your wife!! So you got to have that colleague out to talk about what you
are dealing with. Luckily, I have three really solid and stable middle school principals
…we are as close as close can be in making decisions and policy. I mean our buildings
are pretty damn similar. Our philosophies are similar. We are not the same people,
obviously. The way we think is very similar. That helps each of our organizations.
Principal Mary references a Gallup Survey and the question that was asked, ―Do you
have a best friend at work?
Mine is D________ who is our Director of Secondary Education. call him up and say,
―D_________ I made this decision.‖ I also asked, ―Did I blow this?‖ He would give me
honest feedback. It doesn‘t necessarily end up on your performance review. I have a
very strong social network with the other principals. I have been in the district now 21
years, I know the people who are there, I know who I can talk to, and I know who I can
trust to have some very deep down nitty-gritty, nasty discussions with about and who you
could go out with and have a drink with. I wonder how much that helps people out.
162

Principal Frank turns to his ―cabinet‖ when difficult decisions are on the table. The
cabinet is comprised of his assistant principals, each offering diverse ideas and perspectives.
I value those people…a very important sounding board…I rely on their advice. It is just
a great diverse group, it is a wonderful sound board, cabinet. People that I can turn to and
close the door and say stupid things and never say again because although it was good in
my brain, when it was out loud…I get ideas from them and to rely on them. ―It‘s lonely.‖
When all is said and done in a building, the principal stands alone in making the
decisions that drive the educational process. To counter the isolation, principals turn to their
contemporary mentors for advice. In his study on the education of seven eminent Americans,
Cusick (2005) concluded one attribute of these successful individuals, in that they surround
themselves with ―like-mind‖ people. Principals consider themselves to be moral individuals.
Still they seek affirmation when moralities overlap and exceptional factors regarding a decision
are present. Principals consider these affiliations as their version of shared decision making.

163

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary
The purpose of this study is to attempt to describe and explain the personal and
professional moral codes of a set of school administrators as they make decisions. To
understand the scope of personal and professional morality and decision making, I turned to the
literature to identify the theories which would serve as the intellectual foundation of the study.
In Chapter II, I summarized the relevant works of Herbert Simon‘s Organizational Behavior;
Immanuel Kant‘s Categorical Imperative and Deontological Ethics; Henri Bergson‘s extension
of Kant‘s work, specifically, Open and Closed Morality. The works of these three scholars
served as the primary lenses to the study. Alignment of these theories provided an intellectual
guide to the research that followed. The premises of the study called for a second tier of relevant
research regarding moral development and decision making models. This second tier extended
the discussion to moral development in individuals and moral decision making. A third tier of
the review of literature focusing on principal training, roles, family structures and educational
policy to support the suppositions as relative topics to the purpose of the study. Chapter four
presented how I gathered, sorted, presented and examined the data from interviews. In this
chapter, I summarize where tendencies, patterns and conflicts that emerged in the study. I
formed conclusions on which theoretical foundation aligned with the assumed roles of the
principal subjects selected for the study.

164

Revisiting the Research Questions
Reflections on Research Question #1
What does research reveal about theories on morality and decision making? Related
questions addressed conceptual models for decision making, and to what degree do
these theories and models apply to principal decision making?
To study the implications of organizational morality, the researcher has chosen the work
of a Hebert Simon (1957). Simon provides a theoretical lens into the underpinnings of
organizational behavior. Simon‘s work speaks to organizational expectations and efficiencies
relative to how decision making supports the organization‘s goals. Simon isolates decisions in
terms what is good for the organization. Organizational theory provides a relative framework to
research studying principal decisions.
Two additional theorists provide another critical link to the researcher‘s attempt to
describe, and explain the personal and professional moral codes of a set of school administrators
as they make decisions. Eighteenth century German philosopher, Immanuel Kant, and French
philosopher, Henri Bergson, the latter who was influential especially in the first half of the 20th
century, provide differentiated approaches to morality. It is from these works, along with Simon,
I align my collective research.
Immanuel Kant‘s theory of the Categorical Imperative and Deontological Ethics
establishes the moral obligation of performing one‘s duty. Kant‘s theory focuses on
deontological or duty-based ethics. It judges the nature of actions and the will of agents rather
than goals achieved. The inputs and intentions are critical, not the result. Deontological ethics
are concerned with what people do, not with the consequences of their actions. It is from the
Categorical Imperative that all other moral obligations are generated and by which all moral
obligations can be tested. Kant also stated that the moral means and ends can be applied to the

165

categorical imperative; that rational beings can pursue certain ―ends‘ (results) by using the
appropriate ―means‖ (actions).
A second theorist extends Kant‘s theory. Henri Bergson‘s theory of Moral Obligation
acknowledges but also extends Kant‘s structured reasoning to explain ―exceptional‖ occasions
where the lines of duty and obligation cannot be followed to meet moral obligations. Bergson
convinced many thinkers that immediate experience and intuition are more significant than
rationalism and science for understanding reality. Bergson considers the appearance of novelty
as a result of pure undetermined creation, instead of as the predetermined result of mechanistic
forces. His philosophy emphasizes pure mobility, unforeseeable novelty, creativity and freedom;
thus, one can characterize his system as a process philosophy.
Reflections on Research Question #2
What are the skill sets that define the context of principal decision making?
Additional questions dealt with the common pathways to the principalship,
university preparation programs, formal experiences and mentoring.
Aligned with the literature, the data gathered from principals regarding roles and
responsibilities cited skills such as organization, problem solving, prioritizing tasks, the ability
to manage stress an outcome overlapping moralities), being open-minded and be able to
communicate their vision as critical. McGough (2003) characterized principals skill sets as
either ―technical skills‖ or ―soft skills‖. Affective characteristics deemed by principals as
essential include, passion, ethical thinking and practice, as well as possessing a strong work
ethic.

Professional morality was an outcome of accepting various roles within the school

districts. Principals spoke to the organizational expectations and the ―non-negotiable‖ as guides
in their decision making. The data also suggests that principals set the tone and culture for their
building, in other words, a professional morality that spans the operation of the school.

166

The literature speaks to multiple pathways for aspiring administrators. Each of the
principals progressed in their formal training through universities. 18 earned Masters level
degrees, five principals earned an Ed.S while two subjects earned their PhD in Educational
Administration.
With the exception of a small minority, principals participating in this study followed a
more traditional pathway to the position. Typical to the sample, principals were generally
successful teachers, assumed leadership roles as members of the faculty (department, school
improvement, North Central chairs) and broke into the secondary administration ranks as
assistant principals. More prevalent at the secondary level, assistant principals honed their skills
in generally brief terms (less than five years) as disciplinarians or curriculum leaders in the
building.
Approximately half of the principals interviewed considered mentors as being a key
influence in their aspirations to become a principal. Nearly the same number of principals stated
they retained these relationships or make connections with ―like-minded‖ (Cusick, 2005)
individuals who shared the same values and approaches to problem solving.
Reflecting on Research Question #3
How do principals’ personal and professional morals influence principal decision
making? Considering particular dilemmas, specific additional questions focused on
family structures and impact of religion principals resolving those dilemmas.
Following an inductive approach toward understanding the personal and professional
moral codes influencing principal decisions, principal responses in this study and rationale for
making decisions were aligned with the three theoretical models substantiated by Simon, Kant,
and Bergson. An alternative conception developed in the course of analyzing the research. As
the principals described their thinking (moral representations), the difference between Simon‘s

167

conception of bounded rationality and Kant‘s conception of the use of logic in performing one‘s
duty (moral imperative) was not always apparent. One could make a case for principal decisions
as aligned with each of the theoretical positions of Simon and or aligned to both Simon and Kant.
As chapter four illustrates, there are decisions that principals make that are relative to the good of
the organization (Simon). The research also reflects principal decisions directly attributed to
duty, good will, and moral imperatives (Kant). Yet the data also indicates an alignment of
purpose (Simon) and logic (Kant). Principal responses such as, ―It was the only thing….‖It was
the right thing‖…‖it made sense….a logical thing to do‖…‖it was good for the district….‖I am
loyal to the district…it is my duty to follow the expectations of central office…― signify
cohesion as well as tension between the two perspectives.
In assessing Kant‘s assertions regarding duty, a similarity with Simon‘s ―bounded
rationality‖ provided for some contemplation. Loyalty and duty are complementary concepts
found in each theory. Focusing on what is good for the organization absent of personal
aspirations generally pointed in the same direction the goals of the organization.
But there is a conflict as well. Kant establishes that good intentions (of NCLB) are a
product of ―good will‖ (Hartnick, p. 76) Considering Kant‘s assertion (good will), Simon on the
other hand argue the points citing two kinds of decisions one having ―factual‖ elements and
another ―value‖ elements. Factual elements may be judged to be ―true‖ or ―false‖ in an
empirical sense. Yet decisions are often made in terms of preferences. This begs the question,
―What is good will? Other Kant phrases that conflict with Simon‘s view are phrases such
as...‖ought to behave...‖ and ―should behave.‖ These phrases are value judgments not
completely reducible to factual terms (Simon, p. 46). In considering the complexity of school
problems facing the principal, there are always the moral questions, is it ―good enough‖ or the

168

more frequent phrase, ―what‘s good for kids‖.

The gaps between Simon‘s and Kant‘s

alignment cause internal conflicts with principals‘ personal and professional moralities. The gap
is the first degree of working between policy intentions and the gray areas that are uncovered as
decisions are made.
Bergson in one respect is also in agreement with Kant. Many principal decisions are
Kant-like as they imply ―duty‖. Here and with the data gathered, Bergson‘s description of
―Closed‖ morality aligns with Kant. It is Bergson‘s presentation of ―Open‖ morality that, when
applied, distinguishes an individual‘s personal morality formed by intelligence, creativity,
intuition, and in some case, love. In reflecting on the data, Bergson‘s discussion of ―Open‖
morality illuminates the decisions that challenge dutiful thinking by bringing human emotions
into the process. The data suggests that the nature of principals‘ roles and decisions related to
an ―Open‖ morality approach is common in making many decisions.
In each interview, principals clearly speak to their obligations to and expectations of their
district (Simon/Barnard). Concurrently principals spoke to the roles that define their duties
(Kant). However, to varying degrees, principals reflected on their personal morality when
obligations and decision fell between the moralities. Principals often referred to this as decision
areas in ―shades of gray‖ when principals utilize a ―supra-intellectual‖ (Bergson, p.64) approach
for making decisions.
To a significant degree, the data indicates that principals attest to their upbringing as
influencing the acquisition of these skills. Each of the principals attributed their parents and
family expectations as characteristics of their approach to their roles. The data indicates that the
development of personal morality in principals is also attributed to family and community
values. Just over half of the principals in the study aligned religion with their family values. Of

169

these principals, only one subject aligned a direct relationship with God to decisions made on a
daily basis.

Summary of Considerations for Research Question #3
It is necessary to restate that the research conducted in this study, was conducted by a
practicing school principal. Considering this potentially mitigating factor, an opportunity for
bias exists in conducting the interviews and the analysis that followed. It should also be noted
that every effort was made to remain objective in the collection and analysis of the data.
Another important consideration is that the analysis afforded in this report on the study is
based on the interpretation of principals‘ statements as to the tendency to with which theorists
their thinking aligns. Certainly principals are faced with situational dilemmas that may require a
spontaneous decision that may be along the lines of Simon, or a contemplated exercise utilizing
Kant or Bergson. There are times when principals may make decisions that are in alignment
with a combination of theoretical rationales.
Over half (13) of the principals interviewed represented an alliance with Bergson‘s
discussion on Moral Obligation - Open and Closed theory. The responses of these 13 principals
were presented with reflection and justification. In nearly every seminal event, principals
expressed a moral obligation to do what was best in the situation, even to the point of not
following policy protocols.
The remaining principals were divided between Simon and Kant. Despite aforementioned
relationship between the two theories that emerged in the course of the study, I determined which
principals primarily align their decisions from a Simon perspective. Responses in this vein
spoke to the good of the district (organizational morality) and community as well as the need to

170

adhere to all policies and rules. There was deviation with each principal, but the descriptions
offered were more concrete and reflected a focus on following the rules.
Principals adopting a responsibility to the duties of the position were categorized as
aligned with Kant‘s theory. Principals who frequently spoke of moral imperatives, duty to
students‘ community, and the acknowledgment of good intentions and good will were aligned
with this theory. The duty to support the policies and procedures of the organization (district)
provided for a dual alignment with Simon as well. Experience may be a factor in this category;
three of the five principals had a combined total of 84 years experience.
Finally, in each of the situations that fell in between policy (gray areas) or had unique
considerations, the principals provided rationale although no principal ascribed to one theorist
exclusively.
With a degree of confidence, the data provided by the principal-subjects provided insight
to describe and explain principals‘ personal and profession morals. The study also provides
insight as to how principals negotiate personal beliefs around district expectations. The dynamic
tension is evident within each of the encounters with the principal-subjects.
As the research continued, it became apparent that the sampling choices were a factor in
the data that materialized. With a few exceptions, the sampling strategy resulted in the selection
of suburban principals as subjects for the research. Original thinking was to select a
homogeneous set of principals, leading buildings with similar demographics and similar
achievement scores.
Midway through the research, it was decided to differentiate the sampling by including
urban, if not inner city, principals and/or principals that lead buildings with a high instance of

171

poverty. The number of such principals interviewed was not significant. Only four of the
twenty-five subjects met these sampling criteria. Yet the responses were significantly different.
The following considerations are offered as a result of differentiating the research:
A. The personal and professional moralities are consistent in high poverty schools but
significantly different from suburban schools. The needs, the setting, and brutal
realities facing the students in these schools cause their principals to tend to morality
that reflect caring, structure, safety and establishing relationships prior to
achievement goals.
B. Sampling strategies affected the data.
C. The conclusion of this study is limited to the ―set‖ of principals selected for the
research.

Autonomy
Autonomy surfaced as a significant consideration by principals as to degree they would
need to negotiate between their personal and professional morality and the district morality.
Varying degrees of ―freedom‖ to choose a course of action were unique to each principal. For
some, high a degree of autonomy allowed for personal morality to guide their work. On the
other end of the spectrum, principals were subject to formal structures of communication and
decision making parameters. Marty confides, ―My principal has a definite view on
discipline…Whatever the code says, that is what they got. For a while I did just that…but a
monkey can do (read and follow the handbook).
Principals extended the discussion of organizational morality by relating how they would
extend this concept to their own buildings. Despite having a desire for autonomy, principals
apply ―Simon‖-like structures and processes in relation to their own staff. Often referring to ―the
culture of the building,‖ principals reflected that it was their role to set the tone and provide a
structure for decision making. A topic for additional research extends the implication of how

172

principals‘ personal and professional morality is imposed upon the rank and file and what are the
outcomes as a result.
Reflections on Research Question #4
How have recent policy decisions, specifically The No Child Left Behind Act, made
an impacted on principal decision making? To what extent does policy conflict
with one’s moral code?
Education policy decisions in the end become principal decisions. Principals look no
further than the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 to find the measures of success against which
their performance will be weighed. The performance is not only considered at a local level. The
threads of NCLB extend to State level policy which holds the principal responsible for Adequate
Yearly Progress. Cited in the law, progressions of corrective measures which include up to
removing the principal from his/her role. To be fair, only a minority face such consequences as
being removed. Yet, principals fully understand and experience the weight of this responsibility.
As the accountability rules have changed, the unity of analysis of State testing has been reduced
to the measure of the growth of individual students (Cusick, 2004). Principals of highachieving, not so high achieving schools and everywhere in between are accountable to their
communities and central office for the improvement rates of their students.
An argument can be made that policy such as NCLB and subsequent State level policies
shape organizational morality for a school district. Achievement scores are a measure of success
and a report card for districts‘ viability and buildings‘ effectiveness. A corresponding argument
can be made that policy has a bearing on the personal morality of principals. The question that
remains is how? The question may be appropriately considered using the theoretical framework
of Simon, Kant, and Bergson to applying principal response to policy.

173

Simon and Educational Decisions
Schools and school districts are inherently aligned in hierarchical structures that are by
design, meant to support policy. Policy decisions filter down through the State, to the
Intermediate District and finally to the local level. The hierarchy supports the allocation of
authority, specifically to the individuals (Superintendents and Principals) who in the organization
have the power to make decisions to guide the actions of others (Simon, p. 8). Local school
districts, with guidance of elected boards of education centralize the functions of decisions so
that a general plan of operation will govern the activities. (p.10)

Principals find themselves as middle managers in the school hierarchy. They are part of
the communication chain charged with deploying policy and contributing to district goals. From
their place in the organization, principals become pivotal in supporting the organizational
morality. The exception is when a principal substitute the organizational objectives for his/her
own values which may or may not confuse the organizational goals (p.218). A general
conclusion from the study is that principals do not exercise much latitude (goal setting) in this
vein rather they follow the lead of the district. The consequences of non-compliance are
specific.
Kant and Educational Decisions
The tenets of No Child Left Behind are apparent by virtue of its title. The alignment of
NCLB reflects Kant‘s assertions emphasizing the importance of every human being (Sullivan,
p.32). Although revisions are currently proposed, reacting to what has been determined to be an
unrealistic goal for every child proficient to be by the year 2014, the policy maintains its original
purpose. An extension of Elementary and Secondary Education Act of the mid 60‘s, NCLB is
billed as necessary when considering the future welfare of education.
174

Hartnick offers that the imposition of policy is set in place as a means of working toward
the common good (of the country). (p.71) What NCLB also imposes is stated in Kant‘s terms as
a duty on the entire educational system to provide rigorous learning for all students. NCLB
becomes, for principals, what Kant calls the ―Categorical Imperative…a demand that one should
act in this way or that way… (Kant, p. 84) Paton extends the understanding of the Categorical
Imperative in terms of accountability ―…to judge our own actions by the same universal
standards which apply to the actions of there are an essential condition of morality.‖ (p. 73)
Sullivan‘s definition of Kant‘s Categorical Imperative aligns with NCLB‘s imposition on school
organizations:
The Categorical Imperative is a purely formal and therefore universal norm for
the moral acceptability of possible policies. Such policies, like the laws of natural justice
is the public forum, have substantive content, for they refer to general kinds of actions
that any agent (school districts), including those with generally described positions or
roles (principals) (p.32)
One could align Kant‘s assertions on duty with the implementation of NCLB. But Kant
makes it clear, duty is about intentions or good will, not necessarily the results. (Sullivan, p.31).
In a relative sense, NCLB does not always resulted having the best interest of every human
being. These circumstances are what generate criticism for Kant‘s assertions. As referenced in
Chapter 1‘s Introduction, and by the testimony of principals, accountability testing can be
problematic. The stresses on children can be dramatic at times. Kant would argue that the intent
was good; therefore duty was achieved. For principals that ascribe to dutiful practice therein lies
a conflict of purpose between NCLB and the emotional well-being of a child.

175

Bergson and Educational Decisions
Within the virtues of the Bergson theory is the axiom of moral obligation. Moral
obligation places the individual at the center of life‘s experiences, episodes and challenges. But
to understand the seed of moral obligation, Bergson submits an analogy.
Why did we obey….in our eyes, their (parents and teachers) authority came from them
than from their status in relation to us. They occupied a certain station; that was the
source of the command, which had it issued from some other quarter, would not have
possessed the same weight. In other words parent and teachers seemed to act by proxy.
We did not fully realize this, but behind our parents and our teachers we had an inkling of
some enormous or rather some shadowy thing (moral obligation) that exerted pressure on
us through them. Later we would say it was society…we would compare it to an
organism whose cells, united by imperceptible links, fall into their respective places in a
highly developed hierarchy (bureaucracy) and for the greatest good of the whole,
naturally submit to discipline that may demand sacrifice on their part. This however can
only be a comparison for an organism subject to inexorable laws (educational policies) is
one thing and a society composed of free wills is another. (Bergson, p. 9).
Bergson utilizes the reference to society, much like a colony of bees, to illustrate his
assertions. In essence, it is one‘s relationship with society and his/her obligation to maintain
society that is the moral basis in Bergson‘s theory.
Society also guides the daily routines of the individual. It is impossible to live a family
life, follow a profession, attend to the thousand and one cares of the day, do one‘s
shopping, go for a stroll or even stay at home without obeying rules and submitting to
obligations. A road has been marked out by society. It lies before us and always done
automatically, obedience to duty. (p. 19)
Applying Bergson‘s statement of societies to school settings and administrators, schools
provides a pattern of expectations, responsibilities, and policies that carry a myriad of
obligations. Structures and processes outlined by the policies guide the principal‘s day. The
automatic response to the daily routines and expectations are how Bergson aligns his work with
Kant‘s obedience to duty. This is what Bergson referred to as closed morality or moral
obligation.

176

Yet, in the midst of the conversations, principals often spoke of deviations from
prescribed morality while making decisions. It is also where the principal subjects considered
this working between obligations or working between policy. The area of dissonance has no
guide, a rule book or protocol when principals find themselves in situations they refer to as
―working in the many shades of gray‖. Bergson reflects on these authentic moments or what he
calls the inflexible order of the phenomena of life. (p. 12)
For the principals that find themselves working between the policies and following their
own personal and professional morality, Bergson advances the discussion of duty and closed
mindedness:
Between the closed and open soul there is the soul that is in the process of opening. In a
word, between the static and dynamic, there is to be observed in morality too, a time of
transition.
We have the purely static morality that might be called infra-intellectual and the purely
dynamic, supra-intellectual. Nature intended the one and the other is a product of man‘s
genius. The former constitutes a conglomeration of habits which are in man…The latter
is inspiration, intuition, emotion, susceptible of analysis and ideas that furnish intellectual
notations of it and branch out in infinite details. Stopping in between is to consider
contemplation. (p. 64)
Principals are at the center of the decision making process in schools. Prescribed
responses to organizational morality places principals in position of duty, or a static, unwavering
means of approaching decisions. The dynamic, supra-intellectual considerations occur when
there is mismatch between the organization‘s morality and the personal and professional morality
of the principal. Dynamic contemplation is practiced to negotiate the inevitable shades of gray.
The study has revealed that principals practice dynamic contemplation with policies related to ,
personnel matters, testing, attendance, grading, and student discipline. Static decision models
exist, but, in reality, these issues are resolved by principals with a supra-intellectual approach;
experienced principals comprehend these policies from a humanist view in addition to supporting
177

the mission of the organization view. Generally speaking, principals will challenge policy when
they believe more harm than good will result from a decision.

CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this study is to describe and explain the personal and professional
morality of principals as they make decisions. Data collection allows for a conclusion that
affirms how principals see themselves as moral individuals. Principals bring to their role a
personal moral compass that in the course of their responsibility aligns with not only supports
but also rationalizes their professional morality.
Principal moral codes are representations of their personal development. Experiences
include family background, social class, religion, and a history of an inherited belief in the value
and virtue of schooling, school rules, school processes and school structures.
Figure 2- Social class breakdown. For interpretation of the references to color in this
and all other figures, the reader is referred to the electronic version of this dissertation.

Upper Class

Middle-Working
Class

Low-Middle Class

0

5

10

15

20

25

With the exception of three principals, principals contributing to this study come from
modest, working class families. They personally identify with the institution of schooling.
178

Individual stories as told by the principals speak to the influences of a principal‘s background to
the roles they play and the decisions they make.
Figure 3 - Frequency of principal responses as the critical influences in their personal
background.

25
20
15
10
5
0
Religion

Mentors

Family

Strong W.
Ethic

Value
Education

Military

Principal comments reflect the middle class values (work hard, value of education,
fairness) they bring to their roles. An example is offered in recalling Principal Ben‘s comments
regarding his parents‘ desire to provide a well-rounded experience for him and his siblings as
they grew up, which mirrors his own desire for his students at his high school to receive a
comprehensive experience. Background influence is found in Tom‘s, Jeff‘s, Kathleen‘s and
Jerry‘s assumption of a tremendous work ethic attributable to their family expectations. An
unrelenting value of education within the family unit translates well to the roles principals
assume. In the case of this study, virtually all principals reflect on their families‘ value of
education. The data indicates that principals chose to aspire to administrative positions to ―make
a difference‖ (to students). As they reflect on their background, principal stories emerge from
settings that are the same as much they are different. Each background brings forward the
179

morality of righteousness, concern for humanity and society (Bergson) and a desire to affect the
future (make a difference).
Although they are reflective in their work, principals generally do not have second
thoughts while making decisions. In their role, they belief that it is important to be fair. This
causes them to consider every angle and every consideration a decision may need. As moral
individuals, principals want to always make the ―right‖ decision. Working within a
complementary personal and professional morality allows principals to sustain the organization,
serve the community, and appreciate the results of their labors.
The study indicates that the inherent make-up of principal morality is a personal
identification with the institution of school. The study concludes that principal personal and
professional morality mesh to bring consistency and predictability. Principals rely and thrive on
consistency. Their relationship with the school organization supports consistency and
predictability. The data also suggests that, even when principals consider unique circumstances
regarding student situations, they come down on the side of the organization. As a result, their
personal morality maintains its place alongside their professional morality.
The study implies principal commitment and endurance. Principals are unwavering in
their complex roles (Greenfield 1985), accountable to their institutions as well being accountable
to themselves. None of the principal-subjects relate distaste for the position or wanting to leave.
It can be concluded that they believe their role is difficult and they are the best person at the time
to fulfill it. Principals find themselves operating in the midst of increasing rules, regulations and
overlapping interests and moralities Barnard (1937), causing them to contemplate (Bergson)
options and outcomes for and of their decisions. Principal Tom responds to the questions
regarding how his responsibilities have changed dramatically over the years.

180

D:

Let‘s go back to the beginning of your career. Both you and I know what is
expected of us as administrators. But from your own experience as a teacher, can
you tell about the expectations as compared to now. How have things changed?

T:

Dramatically….180 degrees. Back then, you were given your text book, your
room, you closed the door and you determined what you felt the content should.
When I first taught, I tried to supplement it to apply, to enrich, to enhance. But it
was pretty much the norm, the author dictated the curriculum. Over the years that
has changed with the expectations from the state. The textbook becomes a tool as
opposed to being the bible of the course. And I think kids today are getting a
much better education than ever before. I think the expectations that are place on
not only administrators, the teachers…have raised the bar and education is far
better than we have ever seen before.

D:

So what were you evaluated on back then?

T:

How well you kept the rules, how well you kept the students in order and when an
administrator came in, you were teaching. The quality of teaching wasn‘t as
important as the fact that you were teaching. What kids learned and what they
didn‘t learn wasn‘t part of the evaluation. The fact that you were busy and
instructing kids was what mattered.
It is safe to say that the expectations on administrators were different then they are
today.

D:

T:

Yep, a whole lot different. But I also think there were a bunch of conscientious
teachers who thought they were doing their best and in considerations of the
norms of that time period, many did wonderful jobs. In terms of what was
presented to them and their interpretations what the expectations were.

The principal-subjects participating in this study realize the unique position they hold in
their schools. The position is supported by a good salary although at no point where wages
discussed or offered as a point of comparison or measure of worth. Honest and forthright in their
responses, principals‘ confidence in their decision making skills are tied to their own personal
security (personal morality) and their ability to work within the system. The match of personal
and professional morality is an effective relationship. Most of the principals reflected a good
relationship with their Superintendents and central office administrators. As field administrators,
the principals also reflect their superiors‘ value of their judgment and wisdom (Bergson).

181

One of the concluding statements for this study affirms principals as moral individuals.
Each bring to his/her role a personal morality, fostered and shaped in background experiences
with family, religion, social class, work ethic and an appreciation for education. As they
considered their careers, principals noted that the influence of their background led them to the
institution of schooling which provided a synchronicity of personal and profession values.
As the study progressed from gathering to analysis of data, theoretical perspectives were
selected to make sense of principals‘ relationships with the organization. As these perspectives
have been described to help explain principal decisions, the data provided patterns of association
by the principals with the theorists based on their description of their rationale for making
decisions. As referenced previously, the principals‘ reasoning align with all three theorists.
This data substantiates Bernard‘s view of the existence of overlapping personal and professional
morality. The succeeding part of this conclusion restates each of the theorists‘ perspectives and
provides examples of how some of the principals aligned their thinking.

Decisions Focused on Organization-Simon
Simon provides a conception of an organizational model as a ―bounded rationality‖ of
how decisions are made. In review, Simon argues that all decisions flow through formal
structures of authority and communication. The classic top-down model aligns with most
hierarchical structure of most organizations, including schools. Within these structures, rules
and roles are specifically assigned and organizational goals are supported. The context of this
model denotes an organizational morality that calls for strict compliance. According to Marty:
Our curriculum is aligned, K-12…there is a binder for each grade level and a passing
guide for the staff. We have common assessments…the expectation is that all core
classes administer these exams…we use data to pinpoint weak areas. We have calendar
when all is to be done…Central office makes expectations clear.

182

Principal Courtney clarifies: ―Weapons…there isn‘t a choice.‖
Principal Keith agrees:
I know my place (in the organization). The principal sets the tone for the building…he
must translate the high expectations of the district to the staff.
While Simon‘s depiction of formal process and structures creates an organizational
morality that originates at the top of organization, the remaining two theorists‘ moral perspective
originates from individuals within the organization. According to Kant and Bergson, morality is
defined in the response to organization expectations.

Decisions: Good Will and Duty-Kant
Kant argues the adherence to the moral imperative or strict duty to comply with societal
(and organization) expectations. It is also conferred within this argument that good intentions or
good will is more important that the outcomes of fulfilling one‘s duty. Henry clarifies what his
role was in terms of duty to the district:
I am the principal here. And these are my responsibilities and what I have to do. You are
a teacher, you are a custodian, you are a food service worker, you are a paraeducator…you all have responsibilities that what put together in a whole is what makes
this operation run. And what everybody does and handles the responsibilities as they
should make the operation much more effective…and effective for what? For kids…that
is why we are here. So when you don‘t come in on conference period until 7:45 and
there is a parent that wanted to meet with you…you are not here to meet with them…that
is a problem.
Principal Kathleen on duty and bringing her assistant principal along to her way of
evaluating instruction:
It is my job to be a coach and give evaluations…and to share that duty with my assistant
principal and get him to be a strong instructional leader…it is important we are on the
same page so we have done joint observations together…and giving feedback there. I
guess that is first and foremost that we agree what a vision of good instruction looks like.
He gets a sense that I am stickler for following the rules, sure….I am sure I made it a
point to stress that…
183

There are times duty calls for administrative action including the duty of reporting and
processing discipline. Principal Catherine reflects when her duty compelled her to work through
a policy but her knowledge regarding her student created a conflict to her sense of duty.
And so when you run into those situations when you are dealing with discipline, you
know background, you know the history of the child, you know that the child just came
from a different lifestyle, you know that child had ―this‖ type of guidance and I am not
saying kids are not responsible for making decisions but the context about how they
learn, has a lot to do with the decisions. And so you know we have a behavior specialist
working with the kids and you just about get over that hump….and something
happens…Yeow!! And so those are the most difficult for me.
Decisions: Closed and Open Morality - Bergson
Bergson, in his discussion of closed morality, aligns with Kant on the point that duty is
often necessary to sustain the society. Bergson, however, is critical of Kant as morality is not
only doing one‘s duty but also involves considering other possibilities and choices for making
moral decisions. In discussing Open Morality, Bergson enters the argument that contemplation,
characterized by human creativity, wisdom, intelligence and love provide a broader context to
moral decisions. Here is where Bergson separates himself from the linear top-down (directives)
and the automatic bottom-up compliance (duty) with society‘s (organizational) expectations.
The following principals are examples of Bergson decisions:
Principal Christa:
I was second guessed by central office,…I just knew that I had information…the kids
were in danger… They can throw me under the (bridge) river but I stuck by my guns and
yeah, in my heart I believe I did the right thing. And I would do it again. The kids
mattered most.
Principal Frank discussing the role of the principal as not being what it used to be:
We cannot do what we used to do because…we leave them out of productive society. So
I guess those kind of reflections has raised my sensitivity to what we do and how we do
it.

184

Principal Marty on extending himself beyond the handbook:
I try to have a conversation with students. I try to build relationships with kids because I
may not make a difference that time but I may make a difference down the road with
them because I built that relationship with them…I want to have that foundation. I think
dealing with discipline as long as I have…two years there and four here, I can make
better inroads with kids by doing it that way. I wanted to be able to build relationships
with kids and cannot do that by going with the handbook.
The data suggest that principals tend to predominantly align their decision making to one
of the three theorists. How do years of experience influence this alignment? Figure 4, shown on
the following page illustrates the findings:
30
25
20
Simon
15

Kant
Bergson

10
5
0
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

Figure 4 – Relationship between years of experience and practice relative to
Simon, Kant or Bergson.
The results indicate a correlation between years of experience and particular theorists.
From the posted data, one could conclude that there is a slight relationship with few than s than
10 years experience aligns with Simon. The chart also suggests that principals with ten years or
greater experience are in alignment with Bergson (contemplating decisions). It is also
appropriate to note that 20% of the principals aligned with Bergson have six year of experience
or less. Intuitively, the data makes sense. Principals with less experience will tend to follow the
procedural guide more frequently. As the principal gains experience (10 years) there is less

185

dependency on the rule book and more personal contemplation on decisions. Principals are more
skilled at this point and have more resources to solve issues.
An alternative measure to determine correlations examined the relationship between
highest degree obtained and alignment with a particular theorist. Figure 5 displays the findings.

10
9
8
7
6

Simon

5

Kant

4

Bergson

3
2
1
0
Ph.D

Ed. Sp.

Masters

Figure 5- Advanced Degrees and Theorist Alignment

At the masters level we see a correlation that aligns with the entire sample where the
majority of the principals align their thinking with the Bergson perspective. The tendency is
maintained for those who have an Ed. Specialist degree, with no alignment with Kant. The two
principals with Ph.d‘s are split between Simon and Bergson. Extending the sample may provide
additional data at the PhD. level.

186

Decision in the Areas of Shades of Gray
Each of the three perspectives and accompanying examples provide a basis for describing
and explaining morals as principals make decisions. See Figure 6 on the following page. Setting:
Overlapping Moralities.
Simon
Organizational
Morality

Moral Imperative

Open Morality

Universal norms.
What one ―ought
to do.‖
School example:
NCLB

Good for society
Supra Intellect:
Wisdom
Creativity/Emotion
Simon
Creates an opening for
Organizatio
contemplation.
nal
Morality

Bergson
Effec
tiven
Considers the
ess
individual not

Kant—Duty

only the
organization.
Speaks to
variance that
occurs in dutiful
situations.

Good Will
―Means‖ is more
important than
results.
Intention and Motives
Provides Certainty

Structures and Process

Figure 6 – Overlapping Moralities; Organization, Personal and Professional

187

In the first set of situations we see decisions that are made for the principal. Guidelines
and administrative manuals (Simon) direct principals‘ decisions. In the second set of decision we
see Henry, Kathleen, and Catherine acting on behalf of their duty to the organization. Bergson,
however, assumes an alternative view. Decision made by principals Christa, Frank, and Marty
place students at the center of moral decision. Bergson acknowledges the human element not
only as a focus in the decision but the thinking that is behind the decision making. In essence,
Bergson extends the consideration of the individual not only the organization as a reason for
making a moral decision.
Principals concede that there are times in wise to fall back on district expectations
(Simon) as well as ―doing their duty‖ (Kant) in response to district policy and formal processes.
It is decisions that fall in between these lines where principals spend most of their time
(Bergson).
Principals speak of ―areas of shades of gray‖ reflecting a larger space in which to
consider decision options. Shades of gray occur when a single, right answer is difficult to
identify. A principal with over three decades of making decisions provides the insight to times
where there are ―shades of gray.‖
…we as principals are politicians…we have to play the groups too. There are certain
times you know what is right and you cannot deviate from and at times you might say
there are some gray areas to be considered…. And when you have gray areas, that is the
time where you sit back…you say what is your filter…and you observe…or you sit back
and say you don‘t have enough information to know what is right…and you go out and
find it.
For many principals, jumping over the hurdles and new targets has become an annual
challenge. Yet, principals understand that what they do sets them apart from any

188

Figure 7- Principal Decision Chart
other role in a school. The progression of decisions through the overlapping moralities is
illustrated on Figure 7. Yet, principal decisions support and codify the districts morality. The
origination of a local district‘s community‘ values are translated to an elected Board of
Education. The local Board develops policy representing morals of the district residents which
in turn is given to the central office who translates policy to administrative guideline supporting
district morality. Various codes (conduct, behavior, protocols, communication and authority)
are assigned by central office administrators to the building level, to affect upholding the
organizational goals. Ultimately, principals perform duties that support district policy while
mitigating his/her own personal morality. The graphic illustrates the contained alignment of
district and principal morality. For the principals this accomplished by the sorting, balancing,
problem solving, defending, and reporting of issues. The practice brings principals personal

189

satisfaction and a sense of autonomy. Principal Ken provides a snapshot of how his work is
assigned by the district.
I would say 75% of it is articulated by what I want. And 25% what the district wants. I
am in a district where the Superintendent expects the principals to run the building. And
we call the shots…. But having that kind of lee-way, anything that I want to do, I can do
it. I just have to find the money for it. That has been the real positive notion of the job.
You have a lot pride when the program you implement works.
Principals understand the significance of the role they play in their schools. They are
looked upon in their school community as leaders and a source for guidance and authority.
Principals represent what the ―ideal‖ should be in a school. Principals will state that their status
is based on as to how they represent themselves in the course of their position. The origination
of this profile is attributed to the values they learned at home. The majority of the principals in
this study came from hard working, modest backgrounds, where upward mobility and a ferocious
belief in the power of education are common themes in their upbringing. From these experiences,
principals‘ moralities are established, with each possessing a foundation upon which
administrative (moral) decisions are made.
At the same time, principals realize they are in a position to wield influence on their
constituents and communities. Valuing their history as a means toward achieving their own
success, principals speak to their stories as a formula for personal success. From their singular
position in a school, principals model the moral behavior they expect from their staff and
students.
In direct contrast to Simon‘s critical arguments, we revisit Greenfield‘s (1985)
assessment of the role of the principal.
What principals do (decide) falls outside the bounds of technical rationality and there are
important dimensions to their work which cannot be reduced to technique. At times a
principal‘s decision must choose between competing values of goodness.

190

―A principal‘s job is one the hardest ones I know…‖ states long time Principal Tom. A
principal‘s work stretches beyond the structures and processes of a school district. The variance
that lies in the human condition creates endless issues and circumstances. Despite a consistent
argument for form and structure, Simon acknowledges the difficulties social phenomena
presents.
Social phenomena are probably more complex that the data with which natural sciences
are concerned. Consequently the task of discovering regularities underlying social
phenomena might be expected to be more difficult. (p. 250)
Principals‘ jobs are difficult and complex. There is no schedule, timetable, or formula for
principal decisions. Decisions are automatic (defined). Duty defines decisions in alignment with
the organization. When circumstances are not defined, a principal contemplates a decision
through the screens of their personal morality. (See Chart 10)
As the principals related their personal stories, there needs to be an acknowledgement
that these events did not occur in isolation from the other events of the school day. This study
did not set out to measure frequency of moral decisions. Nor did the study consider the frequent
occasions when several complex issues are calling for attention. The magnitude of individual
issues can consume large amounts of principals‘ energy and time. Poor decisions even about a
small matter can flow over into other areas. Schools are dense and busy. Perceived
administrative ineptness spreads fast among staff and parents. The equation becomes more
complex when overlapping interests weigh in on the decision or force the issue of another
decision on another set of considerations.

It is principals‘ personal morality that sustains them

in difficult times. Principal Dennis has several years as an assistant principal before becoming a
building principal. He is discovering the demands of the principal position explain how his
personal moral fabric guides him in complex issues.

191

Let‘s be honest, I haven‘t had much to fall back on. Either I make it for myself or
someone will make it for me. I try to keep a perspective on what we are doing here and
who our customers are. And it‘s these kids. And having that focus helps with the
conflicting perspectives. A big piece of it is working with kids. They make it so that I
can enjoy my role. That is how I manage it. If I get bogged down, I go walk in the
hallway or down to lunch.
Like other administrators, Dennis falls back on personal moral fiber to negotiate issues.
His unwavering commitment is to the students. In difficult times, Dennis purposely seeks their
company to recharge his batteries. Having refocused his day, he returns to his office to manage
the next set of overlapping interests.
Within principal stories, the study finds individuals that are not enamored with
themselves their role to guide students and staffs solve problems and preserve the mission of
their buildings. There is little complaining, mostly because there is no one who will listen.
Principal Tim spoke of the isolation and loneliness of the position.
Principals appreciate but do not seek recognition or ranking among their peers. There is
no institutional advantage in doing so. Principals rely on their peers. Al, Courtney, Charles,
Christa, Kathleen, Henry, Ken and Jerry spoke of the importance of mentors or the people they
call on when they want to verify their moral stand on an issue. Most principals do not seek a big
payoff, care about merit pay or ascension into heaven (central office). As representatives of their
personal morality principals consider themselves straight shooters. It speaks to their efficiency
and that they have little time to play games. At the end of the day, they generally are satisfied if
they gave a good effort and did the right thing for kids.
The ever-present vale of accountability hangs over the principal as being responsible for
the performance of his/her staff and students. One of the study‘s questions was do policy
(NCLB) and state testing (MME/MEAP) and the accompanying rules and regulations complicate
the position? In essence, the response from principals is that they support accountability. All
192

will agree that administration processes are cumbersome and can cause disruption to school days
and unnerve students. Yet, principals are generally in favor of improvement as it relates to what
is good for students. As principals and teachers regard state testing an organizational expectation
(from the State to the schools) and under the watchful eye of regulators, the duty is fulfilled. In
many instances, principals see accountability as support to students, to bring the ―best education
we can give the kids.‖ Principals acknowledge accountability brings their own morality to the
forefront.
Principal Reflection
A collective assessment of the discussions with principals concludes that they relate their
stories from a reflective posture. It was not only the recanting of episodes; their recollections
contained a measure of justification. In other words, their reflection takes on a personal
dimension. Principals are accountable to many constituents; it is also clear they are accountable
to themselves. Principal Tom provides an example.
There are times where I have suspended students and I don‘t sleep well at night. It tells
me that something is wrong and didn‘t make a good decision. I remember when I was
an AP…I knew I didn‘t make a good decision and told the principal I don‘t feel good
about it. And he said to me, ― if you can suspend a kid, you can un-suspend him too... I
do the same thing now…‖ I suspend a kid and I think about it at night. And when I know
I am uneasy, I know it was not a good decision. I call them back and reduce the number
of days based on that I know I did not make a good decision. I do think you are
accountable to yourself.

Like Tom, Mike realizes the implications of every decision he makes. The implications
can extend into the school, the district and the community. Online communication provides
instantaneous response to any decision. Accordingly, each decision has to be a good decision.
Mike reflects:
I have to look at myself in the mirror every morning and you know, feel that I am doing
the right thing or I can‘t live with myself…I agonize over decisions more than
193

others…So I torture myself that way. There are some principals are better at
saying…‖Case closed and that is what we are doing.‖ I am reflective.
Principals can ill-afford to be inefficient. The breadth of the number and types of
decisions they make in a day leaves little time for reflection. Principals will say they have to
make time to reflect on decisions. Al has been a principal for 12 years. Reflection is a critical
part of maintaining accountability for himself.
It boils down to good judgment, being consistent with previous calls. ….I keep alog. I
started being trained in residential where we have daily log. Since I have been principal,
I keep it on the computer, to write my thoughts basically, a footprint of what I did today,
this will be on it…and it is not for…basically it is for remembering…also for reflecting
that keeps being consistent.
This study set out to describe and explain the personal and professional morals by
principals as they make decisions. To meet this purpose, it was necessary to delve into the
personal and professional dimensions of a set of principals. It can be asserted that principals
perform in a world of complex issues, priorities, conflict, varied interests and unforeseen
circumstances.
To a significant degree, district structures and processes define principals‘ roles.
Principals often rely on the support of the organization in making decisions. In response to
expectations, principals are compliant by performing in a dutiful fashion in their role.
But principals‘ decisions are not always predictable, in black and white, or always fall
in‖according to the rules.‖ As Simon stated, social phenomena can be problematic. Managing
schools also equates to managing social phenomena or the human elements that influence
principals‘ decisions.
Principals apply their personal and professional morality when events, issues and policies
are considered from the human perspective. In the principals‘ world these are decisions
regarding staff and students. Successful principals utilize what Bergson calls the ―Supra
194

Intellectual‖ cognitive abilities where intelligence, wisdom, creativity, and emotion are vital in
decisions concerning an individual.

The Conclusion
The purpose of this study is to describe and explain the personal and professional
morality of principals as they make decisions. The study takes a close look at principals as
products of their background. With a few exceptions, these subjects came from working class
backgrounds. Their modest upbringings led to a belief in the power of education to improve
one‘s fiscal and social status. Principals believe they have a responsibility to be exemplary role
models. They have committed their personal and professional morality to ensure what is ―right‖
for students in the midst of complex and overlapping moralities. Principals believe it is the
schools‘ role to do the ―right thing.‖ Adherence to school procedures places the principals in a
unique position of believing in, personally benefiting from, and then exemplifying the institution
that they lead. In effect, school morals (organization) and the principals‘ personal morals are in
sync.
Although their job is complex, principals generally come down on the side of the district.
What conflicts they cite relative to students, are not all that wrenching. The study does indicate
that trying decision often involve adults, within and outside the institution. On side of the
organization, districts respect principals‘ field knowledge and expertise. Principals are rewarded
with autonomy which they enjoy and are with which they are productive.
In reality, principals and the organization they support are on the same page. In the
analysis of the data generated by this study, principals routinely make decisions to support
district codes.

195

To conclude the study, it would be appropriate to return to the initial premise from where
the study was initiated: that is, reflecting on the assertions of Chester Barnard (1936). Barnard
speaks to placement of an executive from the lower to higher rank not as a measure of
responsibility but one by the condition of moral complexity. Moral complexity mean as one
assumes higher ranks; one also takes on the moral codes of the organization. These codes are set
as systems of objective authority, codes of official conduct or for the good of the organization.
(p.273) As one takes on organizational codes it is difficult to separate from one‘s private morals.
Herein lays the focus for this study as school principals negotiate the demands of their position
and the personal moral codes they bring to the building each day. For principals, it is not a
matter of responsibility as much as it is a matter of moral complexity.
Barnard‘s assertions were relative to the choices principals face. The district code,
situated in the midst of policy and guidelines, provides direction for principals who are expected
to uphold expectations. The study refers to the works of Herbert Simon‘s Administrative
Behavior as a source of reason to understand organizational structures. The study reveals that
principals accept their role in the organization and often depend on its structures to manage
moral complexities.
The principals participating in this study consider themselves to be moral individuals.
Their professional lives are complete with decisions that frequently cause rendering responses
filtered through a personal morality established early on in family background. He/she wades
through options, at times through a closed, limiting choice morality. At other times, moral
decisions have space which Bergson calls contemplation. Yet Barnard posits the reality of
overlapping moralities, personal and professional. An overarching view of this study supports

196

Barnard‘s view. In reality, the principals combine the ideas of Bergson and the ideas of Simon
as they make decisions. Every decision affects the big picture, the district and its own morality.
Principals are proud individuals. They speak of this pride in their comments regarding
their personal history and life successes. Principals see themselves as models for students, staff,
and colleagues, thus affecting a successful organization. They enjoy their status in the
community as principals and see themselves as an important piece. Their work is one of service.
Principals want the students in their schools to enjoy the same rewards schooling provided for
them. In actuality, there is little difference between personal elements raised by Bergson and the
professional elements raised by Simon. They both seek efficiency and positive outcomes. In
fact, principals often respond to issues when forces attempt to alienate the association. The
strength of the combined Simon/Bergson approach provides principals the rationale to maintain
consistency.
The principals in this study spoke of issues that are problematic. At these times,
contemplation provides space for an administrator to seek appropriate outcomes that considers an
individual‘s needs. The occasion is just that, where policy and rules have not considered each
circumstance. It is the principals‘ charge to resolve all issues, common and the uncommon.
Even when contemplation is exercised, the decision supports the mission of the district.
Principals consider themselves moral individuals. This personal assessment is
substantiated from an inner confidence backed by a personal set of moral codes. A set of codes,
as Barnard states, ―…cannot be divorced from the organization codes‖ when fulfilling the role.
In fact, a principal that is effective in his/her decision making provides reason to believe there is
no division between the two.

197

REFERENCES

198

REFERENCES
American Statistical Association. www.amstat.org. R. L. & Longnecker
(2001).Statistical Methods and Data Analysis. Pacific Grove, CA:
Wadsworth Group.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media
Psychology, 3, 265-299
Barnard, C.I. (1937). Functions of an Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
pp. 273-274.
Bennis, W. (2000). Leadership Change. In Beer, M. & Nohria, N. (Eds.), Breaking the
code of change (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. pp. 99-111.
Bentham, Jeremy (1948) An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.
New York. Hafner Publishing Company.
Bergson, H. (1935). The Two Sources of Morality and Religion. New York: H. Holt and
company.
Behar-Horenstein, L.S. (1995) Promoting Effective School Leadership: A change
oriented model for the preparation of principals. Peabody Journal of Education.
Curriculum Issues and the Postsecondary Preparation of Educators. pp. 18-40.
Bjork, L. G. & Ginsberg, R. (1995). Principles of Reform and Reforming Principal
Training:A Theoretical Perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly.
Vol. 31 (1) pp. 11-37.
Blasé, J & Blasé J. (1999) Principals‘ Instructional Leadership and Teacher
evelopment: Teachers‘ Perspective. Educational Administrative Quarterly.
Vol. 35 (3) pp. 349-378.
Bogotch, I. Miron, L.F., & Murray, J.Jr. (1998) Moral Leadership Discourses in
Urban School Settings. The Multiple Influences of Social Context. Urban
Education. Vol. 33 (3) pp. 303-330.
Boulton-Lewis, G.M., Wilss, L. & Mutch, S. (1996) Teachers as Adult Learners:
Their Knowledge of Their Own Learning and Implications for Teaching.
Higher Education. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 32 (1)
pp. 89-106.
Bradshaw, L.K. & Buckner, K.G. (1994) Changing Times, Changing Schools, Changing
Leadership. NASSP Bulletin. Vol. 78 (78).

199

Brubaker D. L. & Simon, H. S. (1987) How Do Principals View Themselves, Others?
NASSP Bulletin. pp. 72-78.
Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B, Kerbow, D. Rollow, S. & Easton, J.Q. (1998) Charting
Chicago School Reform – Democratic Localism as a Level for Change.
Bryk, A.S. & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement.
New York , NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Byrne, P. (2007). Kant on God. Ashgate studies in the history of philosophical theology.
Aldershot: Ashgate
Buchanan, L. & O‘Connell, A. (2006). A Brief History of Decision Making. Harvard
Business Review. pp. 33-41.
Chemer, M. M. (1997). An Integrated Theory of Leadership. Mawah, NJ: Lawrence
Erbaum Associates.
Chodorow, N. (1974). Family structure and feminine personality. In M. Rosaldo &
Lamphere (Eds.), Women, culture and society. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Clune, W.H. (1993). The best path to systemic educational policy
Standardized/centralized or Differentiated/decentralized? Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 15, 233-254.
Cohen, D. K. (1982). Policy and organization: The impact of state and federal
Educational policy on school governance. Harvard Education Review. Vol. 52
(4), pp. 474-499.
Coleman, J.S., Hoffer, T. & Kilgore, S. (1982). High School Achievement:
Public,Catholic,and Private Schools Compared. New York, NY: Basic Books
Inc.
Conger, J. A. (2000) Effective change begins at the top. In Beer, M. & Nohria, N. Eds.),
Breaking the code of change (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press
Condorcet ([1793] 1847), ―Plan de Constitution, presente al la convention nationale
Lese 15 et 16 fevrier 1793‖, Oeuvres, vol. 12, pp. 333-415.
Cook, John. What is Alternative about Alternative Schools? A Comparison of Alternative High
Schools to Traditional American High Schools. Ed. Philip Cusick. United States -Michigan: Michigan State University, 2003. ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses
(PQDT). Web. 2 May 2011.

200

Council of Chief State School Officers. (1996). ISLLC Standards: Interstate school
leaders Licensure Consortium. Washington D.C.
Crapanzano, V. (1980). Tuhami: Portrait of a Moraccan. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y.
(2000). Handbook of qualitative research. (2nd.Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crawford, M. B. (2009). MNY Times. pp 36-41.
Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
traditions (chapter 4). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Crotty, M.(1998). The foundations of social research. In Rudestram K.E.& Newton
R.R.2007). Surviving Your Dissertation. A Comprehensive Guide to
Content and Process. (3rd. Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cuban, L. (1990) Reforming Again, Again, and Again. Educational Researcher.
Vol. 19 (1) pp. 3-13.
Cusick, P.A. ( 1992). The educational system: Its nature and logic. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Cusick, P.A. (2005) A Passion for Learning: The Education of Seven Eminent
Americans. New York, NY: Teachers College Press
D‘Antonio, W.V. (1985) The American Catholic Family: Signs of Cohesion and
Polarization. The Journal of Marriage and Family. pp. 395-402.
Daresh, J.C. & Playko, M.A. (1990). Preservice administrative mentoring: Reflections
for mentors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Research
Association. Boston pp. 16-20.
Darling, N., Steinberg, L. (1993) Psychological Bulletin. Washington: Vol. 113.
Darwin, A. (2000). Critical reflections on mentoring in work settings. Adult Education
Quarterly, Vol. 50 (3), 197-211.
Dayton, J. (1995). Democracy, Public Schools, and the Politics of Education. Review of
Journal of Philosophy and Social Science. New York, NY: The Falmer Press.
pp.135-156.
Deming, W. Edwards. A System of Profound Knowledge. Washington. D.C.
Deming, W. Edwards. Out of the Crisis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center
for Advanced Engineering Study. 1982.

201

Denzin N. & Lincoln Y. (1998). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. In
Rudestram K.E.& Newton R.R.2007). Surviving Your Dissertation. A
Comprehensive Guide to Content and Process. (3rd. Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Derrida, J. (1976) Of grammatology. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Handbook of
qualitative research. (2nd.Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Dewey, J. ([1910] 1978), How We Think, pp. 177-356. in Middle Works. vol. 6. (Ove)
Dubinsky, A. J. & Loken B. (1989). Analyzing ethical decision making in marketing.
Journal of Business Research, 19(2): 83-107
Eckman, E. W. ( 2004). Similarities and Differences in Role Conflict, Role Commitment
and Job Satisfaction for Female and Male High School Principals. Educational
Administration Quarterly. Vo. 40 (3) pp. 366-377.
Elmore, R. (1996) Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Education
Review, Vol. 66 (1) pp. 1-24.
Ferrel , O. C., Gresham, L. G. & Fraedrich, J. 1989. A synthesis of ethical decisionmaking models for marketing. Journal of Macromarketing, 9(2): 55-64
Fiedler, F.E. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz
(ed), Advances in experimental social psychology, NY: Academic press.
Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Fiedler, F.E. (1996) Research on Leadership Selection and Training: One View of the
Future. Administrative Science Quarterly. Cornell University: Johnson Graduate
School of Management. Vol. 41 (2). pp. 241-250.
Fiedler, F.E. (1972) The Effects of Leadership Training and Experience: A
Contingency Model Interpretation. Administrative Science Quarterly.
pp.453-469.
First, P.F. (1992). Educational Policy for School Administrators. Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon., a division of Simon and Schuster.
Fontana A.& Frey J.H., (2000). The Interviw. From Structured Questions to Negotiated
Text. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research.
(2nd.Ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fuhrman, S. (1993). Designing coherent educational policy. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
202

Fuhrman, S. (1999). The new accountability. (RB-27 January). Philadelphia, PA:
Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Gardiner, J. www.thinkexist.com/English?Author/x/Author_48171.htm. from Hayes, W.
(2004). Are we still a nation at risk two decades later? Lanham, MD.:
Scarecrow Education. Honig, M.I. & Hatch, T.C. (2204) Crafting Coherence:
How Schools Strategically Manage Multiple External Demands. Educational
Researcher. Vol. 33 (8) pp. 16-30.
Garfinkel H. (1967). In Weinberg, D. (2002). Qualitative Research Methods.
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Gilligan, C. (1979). Women’s Place in Man’s Life Cycle. Portland: Book News Inc.
Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
Qualitative Research. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Handbook of
qualitative research. (2nd.Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Greenfield, W.D. (1985) Moral, Social and Technical Dimensions of the Principalship.
Peabody Journal of Education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Vol. 63 (1)
pp. 130-149.
Hansson, Sven Ove (1994). Decision Theory – A Brief Introduction. Department of
Philosophy and the History of Technology, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
Stockhom.
Hargreaves, Andy. (2008) We need a new age of inspiration. The Times Educational
Supplement. No. 4774.
Hartnack, J. (1974). Immanuel Kant: An explanation of his theory of knowledge and
philosophy. Atlantic Highlands, N.J: Humanities Press
Hatch, T. (2002). When Improvement Programs Collide. Phi Delta Kappan,. Vol. 83(8),
pp. 626-639.
Hayek, F.A. (1988) The Fatal Conceit: Errors of Socialism. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press. P.21.
Hayes, W. (2004). Are we still a nation at risk two decades later? Lanham, MD.:
Scarecrow Education. Honig, M.I. & Hatch, T.C. (2204) Crafting Coherence:
How Schools Strategically Manage Multiple External Demands. Educational
Researcher. Vol. 33 (8) pp. 16-30.
Heifitz, R. A. (1994) Leadership without Easy Answers. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap
Press of Harvard University Press.
203

moral

Hertz, R. (Ed.).(1997). Reflexivity and Voice. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2000).
Handbook of qualitative research. (2nd.Ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hite J. M., Williams, E. J., Hilton, S. C. & Baugh, S. C. (2006) The Role of
Administrator Characteristics on Perceptions of Innovativeness Among Public
School Administrators. Education and Urban Society. Vol. 38 (22) pp. 160-187.
Holstein J.A. & Bubrium J.F. (1995). The Active Interview. In Weinberg, D. (2002).
Qualitative Research Methods. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Hyman, H. H., Cobb, W.J., Feldman, J.J., Hart, C.W., and Stember, C.H., (1975). In
Weinberg, D. (2002). Qualitative Research Methods. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Jennings, P. & Brewster, T. (1998) The Century. New York: Doubleday.
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in Theory and Research. Management
Science. Vol. 28 (3) pp. 315-333.
Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An
Issue – Contingent Model. The Academy of Management Review. Vol. 16.
pp. 366-395.
Kahn, R. & Cannel, C.F. (1957). The Dynamics of Interviewing. In Denzin,
N. & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. (2nd.Ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kalliath, T.J., Bludorn, A.C. & Strube, M.J ( 1999). A test of value congruence effects.
Journal of Organizational Behavior. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 20 pp.1175-1198.
Kant, I. (1959). Foundations of the metaphysics of morals: And What is enlightenment?
Kanter, R. (1975) Women and structuring of organizations. In M. Milliman and
R. Kanter (Eds), Another Voice. New York: Anchor.
Koberg, C.S. (1986) Adaptive Organizational Behavior of School Organizations: An
Exploratory Study. Evaluation and Policy Analysis. American Educational
Research Association Vol. 8 (2) pp. 139-146.
Knapp, M.S., Bamburg, J. D., Ferguson, M.C., & Hill, P.T. (1998). Converging reforms
And the working lives of frontline professionals in schools. Educational Policy.
Vol. 12 (4) pp. 397-418.
Langford, D. (1999) Quality Learning Training Guide. Langford International, Molt,
MA.

204

Langford, D & Cleary, B.A. (1995). Orchestrating Learning with Quality. Milwaukee:
ASQC Quality Press.
Lee Shumow. (1999). Parenting and Child Development in "Nontraditional"
Families Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61(4), 1085.
Retrieved October 11, 2008, from Research Library Core
Leithwood, K. & Duke, D.L. Chapter 3: A Century‘s Quest to Understand School
Leadership.
Leister, A., Boden, D. & Fiedler, F. (1977) Validation of Contingency Model
Leadership Training: Leader Match. The Academy of Management Journal.
Academy of Management. Vol. 20 (3)pp. 464-470.
MacDonald, Chris (2002). Moral Decision Making – An Analysis.
Manning, P.L., (1967) The problems in interpreting interview data. In Weinberg, D.
(2002). Qualitative Research Methods. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Handbook of qualitative research. (2nd.Ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Marks, H.M. & Printy, S.M. (2003). Principal Leadership and school performance:
An integration oftransformational and instructional leadership. Educational
Administration Quarterly. University Council for Educational Administration.
Vol. 39 (3) pp. 370-397.
Marsh, H.W. & Grayson, D. (1990). Public/Catholic Differences in the High School
And Beyond Data: A Multigroup Structural Equation Modeling Approach to
Testing Mean Differences. Journal of Educational Statistics, 15(3), pp. 199-235.
Marshal, C. (1992). School Administrators‘ Value: A Focus on Atypicals. Educational
Administration Quarterly. Vol. 28, (3) pp. 368-386.
McGough, D. J. (2003) Leaders as Learners.: An Inquiry into the Formation and
Transformation of Principals‘ Professional Perspectives. Educational Evaluation
and Policy Analysis. 25 (4) American Educational Research Association.
pp. 449-471.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structures as
myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology. 83.
Mertz, N. T. & McNeely, S.R. (1998). Women on the Job: A Study of Female High
School Principals. Educational Administration Quarterly. Vol. 34 (2)
pp196-222.
Mertz, N. T. (2004) What‘s a Mentor, Anyway? Educational Administration Quarterly.
Vol. 50 (4) pp. 541-560.
205

Mintzberg, H., Rasinghani, D. and Theoret (1976). The Structure of ‗Unstructured
Decision Processes‖, Administrative Sciences Quarterly 21: 246-275.
Mischner, E.G. (1986) Research Interviewing. In Weinberg, D. (2002). Qualitative
Research Methods. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Mondale, S. & Patton, S.B. (2001). School. Boston: Beacon Press.
Nelson, J. (1996). Positive Discipline. New York: Ballantine.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (H.R. 1), 107 Cong. 110 (2002) (enacted).
Oakley, A. (1981). Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. Holstein & Bubrium
(1995). The Active Interview. In Weinberg, D. (2002). Qualitative Research
Methods. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Okey, T.N. (1990). The family’s perspective on the individual’s decision to drop out of
high school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University.
Paloutzian, R.F. & Park, C.L. (2005) Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and
Spiritualiy. New York: Guilford Press.
Paton, H. J. (1971). The categorical imperative: A study in Kant's moral philosophy.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Petzko, V.N. (2004). Finds and Implications of the NASSP National Study of Leadership
I
n Middle Level Schools, Volumes I and II: Teachers in Middle Level Schools.
NASSP Bulletin. 88(638), pp. 69-88.
Petzko, V. (2008). The Perception of New Principals Regarding the Knowledge and
Important to Their Success. NASSP Bulletin. Vol. 92 (3). Pp. 224-250.
Piaget. J. (1965). The moral judgment of the child. New York: Free Press.
Plamenatz, J. (1949). The English Utilitarians. Oxford.
Presthus, R. (1958). Toward a theory of organizational behavior. Administrative Science
Quarterly.
Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral development; Advances in research and theory. New York:
Praeger. In Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in
Organizations: An Issue – Contingent Model. The Academy of Management
Review. Vol. 16. pp. 366-395.
Roger, A. K. (1927) Morals in Review. New York. The MacMillan Company.
206

Skills

Rudestram K.E.& Newton R.R. (2007). Surviving Your Dissertation. A Comprehensive
Guide toContent and Process. (3rd. Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ruffy, M (1981). Influence of social factors in the development of the young child‘s
moral development. European Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 61-75.
Sadker and Sadker, Teachers, Schools, and Society.
Samier, E. (2000). Public administration mentorship: Conceptual and pragmatic
considerations. Journal of Educational Administration. Vol. 38, 83-101.
Schmeier, A.A. (1975) Ten Critical Issues in Educational Reform. Journal of Teacher
Education. Vol. 26 (1) pp. 18-23.
Schwartz, J.P., Thigpen, S.E. & Montgomery, J. K. ( 2006). Examination of Parenting
Styles of Processing Emotions and Differentiation of Self. The Family Journal
14 (1), pp. 41-48.
Segall, A. (2002). Disturbing Practice. Reading Teacher Education as Text. New
York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
Senge, P.M. (2000). The puzzles and paradoxes of how living companies create wealth.
In Beer, M. & Nohria, N. (Eds.), Breaking the code of change (Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School Press.
Shaughnessy, M.F. (1995). Creativity in Mentoring. ERIC, ED 38778.
Sherman, W. (2005). Preserving the Status Quo or Renogotiating Leadership: Women‘s
Experience With a District Based Aspiring Leaders Program. Educational
Administration Quarterly. Vol. 41 (5) pp. 707-740.
Shulman, L.S. (1983). Autonomy and obligation: The remote control of teaching. In
L.S.Shulman & G. Sykes (Eds), Handbook of teaching and policy. (484-504)
.New York, NY: Longman.
Simon, H.S. (1976). Administrative behavior: A study of decision –making process in
administrative organization. (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press
Smith, L. (1991). The Gender Composition of the Pool of Prospective School Principals.
Canadian Journal of Education. 16(2) p.203.
Stedman, L.C. (1997). International Achievement Differences: An Assessment of a New
Perspective. Educational Researcher Vol. 26 (3) pp. 4-15.
Stratton-Lake, P. (2000). Kant, duty, and moral worth. Routledge studies in ethics and
moral theory. London: Routledge.
207

Sullivan, R.J. (1989) Immanuel Kant’s Moral Theory. (1st ed.). Cambridge: University
Press.
Sullivan, R. J. (1994). An introduction to Kant’s Ethics. (1 ed.). Cambridge: University
Press.
Suziedelis, A. & Potvin, R.H. (1981) Sex Differences in Factors Affecting Religiousness
among Catholic Adolescents. Journal of Scientific Study of Religion, 20 (1).
pp. 38-51.
Taylor, S., Rizvi, F., Lingard, B. & Henry, M. (1997) Educational Policy and the Politics
of Change. London: Routledge.
Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation
interactionist model. Academy of Management Review. 11: 601-617.
Tjosvold, D., Wedley, W.C., Richard, H.G. (1986). Constructive Controversy, the
Vroom-Yetton Model, and Managerial Decision Making. Journal of
Occupational Behaviour.Vol. 7 (2).
Trider, D. M. & Leithwood, K. A. (1988). Exploring the Influences on Principal
Behavior. Curriculum Inquiry. Ontario, CA: The Ontario Institute for Studies in
Education Vol.18 (3) pp. 289-311.
Uleman, J.K. (2010). Kant’s Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: University Press.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics, School and
Staff-ing Survey (SASS), ―Public School Principal Data File. 1993-94,
1999-2000 and 2003-04.
Utecht, R.E. & Heier, W.D. (1976) The Contingency Model and Successful Military
Leadership. The Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Vol. 19
(4) pp. 606-618.
Vroom, V. H. (2003) Educating managers for decision making and leadership.
Management Decision. 968. Retrieved: April 9, 2006.
Vroom, V.H. and Yetton, P.T. (1973). Leadership and Decision Making.
Wald A. (1950), Statistical Decision Functions.
Weber, Mo. (1949). Methodology of the Social Sciences. Glencoe: Free Press.
Weiss, C. & Cambone. (1994). Principals, Shared Decision Making, and School Reform.
Educationa Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Vol 16 (3) pp. 287-301.
208

Wilmore, E. L. (1995). It‘s Not Easy Being Green: Mentoring the First Year Principal.
NASSP Bulletin. Vol. 79 pp. 91-96.
Yang, M. and Nathanson, A. (2005). Reconceptualizing coviewing as a kind of mediation. A paper presented at the annual meetin of the International Communication Association, New York.
Zimmerman, J. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and what can principals do
about it? NASSP Bulletin, 90 (3) pp. 238-249.

209