AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EXPECTATIONS or scNooL ADMINISTRATORS CONCERNING TIIE INVOLVEMENT or SCHOOL- COMMUNITY ADVISORY couNcILs IN THE - j giggiz? EDUCATIONAL DECISION MAILING V PROCESS .. . --:- a :1::':::<:7.1:1'_': I‘hesis for the Buegre—e of Ph. D. MICHEGAN SIATE UNIVERSITY GERALD N. TIROZZI 1973. IIIIIII'IIIIIIII III"III'”“I‘“III ‘ , LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the thesis entitled _ An Assessment of the Expectations (E Scfiol Administrators Concerning the Involvement of School Community Advisory Councils In the Educational Decision Making Process presented by Gerald N. Tirozzi has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D degreein Administration and Higher Education Major professor iv t”‘ 12.! r..:;| i" V. ruIPJAA.‘ n: I v. ABSTRACT AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EXPECTATIONS OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS CONCERNING THE INVOLVEMENT OF SCHOOL-COMMUNITY ADVISORY COUNCILS IN THE EDUCATIONAL DECISION-MAKING PROCESS BY Gerald N. Tirozzi Permeating education today is an intense feeling of concern and despair generated by the urban citizenry as they interpret and evaluate the quality of education ‘which their children are receiving. This concern is reflected in a growing suspicion and distrust of school administrators responsible for formulating educational policies. As a result community residents are deter- mined to have a more active and meaningful involvement in their schools--and to have it now. This new concept of a partnership in education, one that incorporates com- munity investment, is rapidly emerging in the educational circles of our country. There is an urgency for school administrators to grasp the implications associated with.community involve- ment in school governance and the resultant ramifications Iwhich.are necessitated by its genesis. The involvement .: :Ltaze”s ‘ I . A o 9" 2:: teen ‘ .I' at ..Ue -" «hue “ u-» C The ? ‘I'R. .LJPZLC-"os C- I 5 .fi...‘ .-..'~.....s Of i I.:e."-;" . ' w.'.'-a.s a. ;::;R. ‘L‘ M.“ b bode CO‘ :ELatiorships: - 6;." ‘V‘Ah 1 'h- uHhab‘h-r 0 .d. :ffve ..i'.'er.es s .3 .38 S' ”In ‘ "“Vet :ALQQ’; a: ‘1‘.- :‘I n‘ ' ‘ prlnClcz ‘ NI! Gerald N. Tirozzi of citizens in the educational decision-making process has been referred to by many educational authorities as being one of the most pressing issues facing educators today. The Purpose The main purpose of the study is to assess the perceptions of school administrators concerning: the functions of school-community advisory councils; which individuals and groups would support the councils; the effect the councils would have on school-community relationships; and the effect the councils would have on educational decision making and administrative effectiveness. The study is also intended to provide insight concerning administrative perceptions of the effect the school-community advisory councils would have on improving the schools' educational program, whether or not the councils are viewed as being important and necessary com- ponents of the school system, and the major advantages and disadvantages of councils. Methodology The sample population for the study consisted of all principals (59), all community school directors (56), and a selected group of central office administrators (39) of the Flint, Michigan public school system. A structured questionnaire developed by the researcher a: :seI‘l :0 93 . A: oi- C x355 Vb Lu ~ 0 152. f the s: sire. .:.e :L; E25553}. Cuts. . uh ..¢~u.u Ga. I J. ‘ ' s v ‘e: ”In n4 0 " euysnu . esters and t. Conn: Gerald N. Tirozzi was used to gather the data necessary to fulfill the pur- poses of the study. A total of 86 per cent (129 out of 150) of the sample population responded to the question- naire. The data were analyzed with the assistance of the Research Consultation Office in the College of Education at Michigan State University. The statistical techniques used include the multivariate test of equality of mean vectors and the univariate analysis of variance. Major Findings All findings are based on a careful analysis of the perceptions of the three sample groups for each of the areas examined. gerceived Functions_of School- Community Advisory Councils 1. Significant differences exist on five of the twenty-three functions related to potential school-community advisory council involvement. 2. Councils should have their greatest involvement in those functions relating to: neighborhood oriented problems; human relations projects; com- munity use of school facilities; fund-raising activities; and planning activities for adults and children. Gerald N. Tirozzi 3. Councils should have the least amount of involve- ment in those functions relating to: planning the school budget; in-service training of staff; selection of staff; and evaluation of staff. Perceived Support for School- Community Advisory Councils 1. Significant differences exist concerning three of the eighteen groups listed as potential supporters of school-community advisory councils. 2. The highest degree of support for councils comes from the Mott Foundation, the school board, com- munity school directors, principals and central office administrators. 3. The lowest degree of support for councils comes from the United Teachers of Flint (UTF), the city administration, higher income groups, students, and school custodians. Perceived Effect of School-Community advisory Céuncils on School- Ccmmunity RelatiOnSHips 1. Significant differences exist on two of the twelve variables which relate to the effect of school-community advisory councils on school- community relationships. 2. The formation of councils will result in increased communication and understanding between the . . AhPR Swot-iv. 30 ”.re 5 cor-:3; : Gerald N. Tirozzi schools and the community; the community developing a more positive attitude toward the administrative staff and the board of education; and administrators and teachers becoming more aware of community problems. The formation of councils will not result in the community having less confidence in the schools' educational program and a less positive attitude toward teachers and administrators. Perceived Effect of School-Community advisoryCounciIs onTiducational Decision Making 1. Significant differences exist on two of the five variables relating to the effect of school-com- munity advisory councils on educational decision making. The formation of councils will result in the board of education becoming more responsive to the com- munity, and the community and teaching staff having greater involvement in educational decision,making. The formation of councils will not result in a decrease in the authority of principals and central office administrators in making edu- cational decisions. “F It. . bvk0I~ ‘ 307.5“. - Gerald N. Tirozzi Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisor Councils on Administra- tive Effectiveness 1. Significant differences exist on the five variables relating to the effect of school-community advisory councils on administrative effectiveness--when considered as a total set rather than as individual variables. 2. Councils have the potential to improve the ability of community school directors and central office administrators in carrying out their respective duties and responsibilities, and are necessary for the effective administration of schools in the district. 3. Councils will not hinder the board of education in developing school policies and will not impair the effectiveness of principals in administering their school program. Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Caunci1§_on—Tmproving the Educational Program 1. No significant differences were noted on the one question relating to the effect of councils on improving the schools' total educational program. 2. The formation of councils will result in an improvement in the schools' total educational program. Gerald N. Tirozzi Perceived Value and Importance ngchool-Community Advisory Councils 1. No significant differences were noted on the one item relating to the value and importance of school-community advisory councils. 2. Councils will prove to be valuable and important components of the school district. Ma'or Advantages and Disadvantages giScHSoI-Community Advisory Councils l. The major advantages of school-community advisory councils will be: more communication between the schools and the community; the community having a better understanding of the schools' programs; improved home-school relationships; and the school becoming more responsive to community needs. 2. The major disadvantages of school-community advisory councils will be: the councils develOp- ing into "power groups" and ultimately becoming vehicles for community control of schools; the councils not being truly representative of the communities they serve; and being dominated by self-interest groups desirous of "doing their own thing"; and the difficulty involved in interpret- ing and maintaining the advisory role of councils. Inc 5: ix-z-ctcrs sc:. 0).. ;Q;:e'ep ”In. IA. 0 I - a 1.. 313112.65 The s 33:;5 of :2: “Jestee of Statement i z-o.’ "T‘- ‘ ....IIL.es III: In.“ ' M'We-‘tent 1 '3 the 'trad; Fetter 111 the Stud}. I We 4 . In"‘9 t: acups Gerald N. Tirozzi The study also reveals that community school directors score highest on all variables where signifi- cant differences are noted and also on the majority of all variables tested. Interpretations The study clearly points out that the three sample groups of school administrators perceive the highest degree of involvement for school-community advisory coun- cils in nonacademic related functions--those which connote involvement in concerns "outside" of the school and activities which take place "after" school. Minimal involvement is perceived for councils in matters relating to the "traditional" school program--namely personnel, curriculum, budget, and in-service training. This find- ing represents a significant aspect of the study which should be taken into consideration when assessing the perceptions of the three sample groups for each of the other areas investigated. The perceived advantages and disadvantages, cited in the study, provide additional insight and understanding concerning the attitudinal mindset of the three sample groups. it AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EXPECTATIONS OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS CONCERNING THE INVOLVEMENT OF SCHOOL~COMMUNITY ADVISORY COUNCILS IN THE EDUCATIONAL DECISION-MAKING PROCESS BY 1.“ ‘ a , 9. Gerald waTirozzi A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1973 - .TAE E: V—Ig§ I." * uv-hohfiee ..V i .45 mierstar. “‘1 3r. c1" .' fie r"0‘4’=‘1“~<>ut t‘: s~ltceeq‘ . AC khc lat Foundatj (duty, tilde' lOCtOral aSpj This we Cooperatj ‘ 5.,“ ‘r‘eciaticn l W {4‘4 3,“? x)’ I . f \ {/2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author is deeply indebted to a guidance committee who provided support and encouragement during the many phases of the doctoral program. Sincere grati- tude is offered to Dr. Howard W. Hickey, Chairman, for his understanding, insightful guidance, and direction; Dr. Albert E. Levak for his concern and valuable assistance; Dr. Richard L. Featherstone for his interest and counsel; and Dr. Clyde M. Campbell whose leadership and inspiration throughout the intern year provided the incentive to succeed. Acknowledgment is also given to the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation for providing the author with the oppor- tunity, time, and financial support necessary to see his doctoral aspirations through to fruition. This study could not have been undertaken without the cooperation of the Flint community schools. Grateful appreciation is extended to Dr. Peter L. Clancy, Superin-‘ tendent; Dr. Richard K. McMillan, Administrative Assistant; Anne N. Gregory, Director of Elementary Community Edu- cation; Kenneth Green, Director of Secondary Education ii o . ' ' .‘ ‘ can " ' 3.1. rag-'00 It. ’.'AA."V F: .1 duvvvb. vb V‘AI-ey .‘fl‘- icy: . 6‘-.. ;.:S'.';tS. C— a u: b . " .0 ‘ 5-“?- xI'. I. A; :21..- 5 v. 9.5559. 51:: ..5 RA! and Pupil Personnel Services; and Joseph B. Wargo, Director of Community Education Services, for their cooperation and assistance in the author's doctoral pursuits. Special thanks are extended to Mary Kennedy, con- sultant in the Research Consultation Office in the College of Education at Michigan State University, for the time and considerable assistance she rendered to the author in writing appropriate computer programs and advising on the analysis of the data. The author feels extremely fortunate to have been associated with his fellow Michigan State Mott Interns: Donald Butler, Gerald DeFries, John Fallon, Douglas God- win, Donald Graham, Dr. Bobby Mitchell, David Morton, Alma Seniors, John Thiel, and Don Tobias, who provided friendship, companionship, and intellectual stimulation throughout the intern year. Finally, the author expresses sincere gratitude to his wife, Jean, and sons, Jeff and Todd, whose encour- agement, understanding, patience, sacrifice, and love made it possible to successfully complete the doctoral program. To my wonderful family-vwith.love and appreci— ation--the study and the degree are dedicated. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 1 Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . 9 Significance of the Study. . . . . . l4 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . 18 Definition of Terms. . . . . . . . 20 Research Hypotheses. . . . . . . . 22 Design of the Study. . . . . . . . 23 Population . . . . . . . . . 23 Sample . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . 24 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . 24 Summary and Overview . . . . . . . 25 II. SELECTED REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . 27 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 27 A Historical Perspective of Citizen Involvement in American Public Education . . . . . . . . . . 28 Colonial Influences. . . . . . . 28 Jeffersonian Influences . . . . 32 Development of State Systems of Education . . . . . . . 34 The Development of Organized Citizens Groups . o o o e o C o e o 37 The Emerging Concept of Community Par— ticipation in American Institutions . 40 The Effect on Urban America . . . 40 The Development of Neighborhood Cor- porations . . . . . . . . . 43 The Concept of Power . . . . . . 45 The Concept of Selvaetermination in American Life. . . . . . . . 47 iv 61' ‘n'. IA“. 0 "5 get . Per m Q d. Chapter Emerging Concept of Citizen Involvement in American Education . . . . Need for Citizen Involvement. . Directions of Citizen Involvement Lay Advisory Councils as Vehicles for Citizen Involvement . . . . Background. . . . . . . . Purposes and Functions. . . . Organization and Development. . Wbrcester Massachusett's Plan for Advisory Councils . . . . New Haven, Connecticut's Plan for Advisory Councils . . . . Selected Review of Decentralization Models as Vehicles for Citizen Involvement . . . . . . . New York City's Plan . . . . Detroit's Plan . . . . . . Louisville's Plan . . . . . Perceptual Theory . . . . . . Defining Perception . . . . Perception and Behavior . . . Perception and Administrative Behavior . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY. . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . Type of Study. . . . . . Population and Sampling Metho The setting 0 I O O O Q Instrumentation . . . Collection of Data . . Treatment of the Data . Testable Hypotheses. . Statistical Procedures. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Summary. . . . . . . . . . I O O O O O O O Page 49 49 58 65 65 67 72 76 79 81 81 85 89 92 92 96 97 101 103 103 103 105 106 108 112 113 114 116 117 .8! to.-. :- b-.' O O» p“ Y. r. 9’ Per y ‘ Pe ) « Pe Chapter IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . Perceived Functions of School-Community Advisory Councils. . . . . . . Variables Relating to Perceived Functions of School-Community Advisory Councils. . . . Variable 2 (Selection of Staff) . Variable 3 (School Facilities) . Variable 6 (Evaluation of Staff). Grand Mean Scores (Functions). . Perceived Support for School-Community Advisory Councils . . . . . . Variables Relating to Perceived Support for School-Community Advisory Councils . . . . . Variable 1 (School Staff) . . . . Grand Mean Scores (Support) . . . Perceived Effect of School Community Advisory Councils on School- Community Relationships . . . . Variables Relating to the Perceived Effects of School-Community Advisory Councils on School- Community Relationships. . . . Grand Mean Scores (School-Community Relationships). . . . . . . Perceived Effects of School-Community Advisory Councils on Educational Decision Making . . . . . . . Variables Relating to the Perceived Effect of School—Community Advisory Councils on Educational Decision Making . . . . Grand Mean Scores (Educational Decision Making) . . . . . . . . . Perceived Effects of School-Community Advisory Councils on Administrative Effectiveness . . . . . . . . vi Page 118 118 119 120 121 123 126 127 130 131 131 134 136 137 139 143 144 146 148 Ira \ r5111- .ur-I-I- .r . ‘_ . E‘ -A-¢0" 5409:. a "1 m '1 Per. PEI SL177 Rig" 511:: CO r Chapter Page Variables Relating to the Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Adminis— trative Effectiveness . . . . . 149 Grand Mean Scores (Administrative Effectiveness) . . . . . . . 153 Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Improving the Educational Program. . . . . . . 156 Related Item . . . . . . . . . 156 Perceived Value and Importance of School-Community Advisory Councils . 157 Related Item . . . . . . . . . 157 Perceived Advantages of School-Community Advisory Councils . . . . . . . 158 Related Question . . . . . . . 158 Community School Directors' Responses. 158 Principals' Responses . . . . . . 159 Central Office Administrators‘ Responses . . . . . . . . . 159 Perceived Disadvantages of School- Community Advisory Councils . . . . 160 Related Question. . . . . . . . 160 Community School Directors' Responses. 160 Principals' Responses . . . . . . 161 Central Office Administrators‘ Responses . . . . . . . . . 162 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . 162 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, INTERPRETATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . 173 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . 175 Perceived Functions of Schoolv Community Advisory Councils . . . 176 Perceived Support for School- Community Advisory Councils . . . 177 vii - . r "3.8. 5... Ir: Re: 5152730 815: ’.‘:\"’fi: M:~.\gl"~s Wadi); Chapter Page Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on School- Community Relationships . . . . . 178 Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Educational Decision Making . . . . . . . 180 Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Administrative Effectiveness . . . . . . . . 181 Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Improving the Educational Program . . . . . . 182 Perceived Value and Importance of School-Community Advisory Councils . 183 Perceived Advantages of School- Community Advisory Councils . . . 183 Perceived Disadvantages of School- Community Advisory Councils . . . 184 Interpretations. . . . . . . . . . 185 Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . 193 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . 196 APPENDICES Appendix A. Facts and Figures About Flint, 1972 - 1973 . 205 B. Letters to Principals, Community School Directors and Central Office Adminis- trators I O O O C I O Q I O O O 206 C. School-Community Advisory Council Question- naire . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 viii r“ Table 3-1. 4-10 4-2 0 4-4. 4-6. 4-70 LIST OF TABLES Page Record of Response . . . . . . . . . . 113 Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors for Differences in Perceptions of the Three Sample Groups Concerning the Functions of School-Community Advisory Councils . . . . . . . . . 120 Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors for the Three Sample Groups on the Six Dependent Variables Concerning the Functions of School-Community Advisory Councils . . 121 Univariate Comparison of the Three Sample Groups on the Four Items Relating to the Selection of Staff Variable . . . . . . 122 Comparison of the Mean Differences in the Per- ceptions of the Three Sample Groups on the Four Significant Items Relating to the Selection of Staff Variable . . . . . . 122 Univariate Comparison of the Three Sample Groups on the Four Items Relating to the School Facilities Variable . . . . . . 124 Comparison of the Mean Differences in the Per- ceptions of the Three Sample Groups on the Three Items Relating to the School Facilities Variable . . . . . . . . 125 Univariate Comparison of the Three Sample Groups on the Four Items Relating to the Evaluation of Staff Variable . . . . . 126 Comparison of the Mean Differences in the Per- ceptions of the Three Sample Groups on the One Significant Item Relating to the Evaluation of Staff Variable . . . . . 127 ix I-;:. .v.--~~ " o-‘ a P or: Cau- ”be. CORI Rel. L 16' UniVa Table Page 4-9. A Rank Order Listing of the Grand Mean Scores for the Three Sample Groups on Each of the Twenty-Three Items Related to the Functions of School-Community Advisory Councils . . . 128 4-10. Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors for Differences in Perceptions of the Three Sample Groups Concerning Support for School-Community Advisory Councils . . . . 131 4-11. Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors for the Three Sample Groups on the Four Dependent Variables Concerning Support for School-Community Advisory Councils . . . . 132 4-12. Univariate Comparison of the Three Sample Groups on the Seven Items Relating to the School Staff Variable . . . . . . . . 132 4-13. Comparison of the Mean Differences in the Per- ceptions of the Three Sample Groups on the Three Significant Items Relating to the School Staff Variable . . . . . . . . 133 4-14. A Rank Order Listing of the Grand Mean Scores for the Three Sample Groups on Each of the Eighteen Items Relating to Perceived Support for School-Community Advisory Councils . . 135 4-15. Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors for Differences of the Three Sample Groups Concerning the Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on School-Community Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . 137 4-16. Univariate Comparison of the Three Sample Groups on the Twelve Items Relating to the Effect of School-Community Advisory Coun- cils on School-Community Relationships. . . 138 4-17. Comparison of the Mean Differences in the Perceptions of the Three Sample Groups on the Two Significant Items Relating to the Effect of School-Community Advisory Coun- cils on School-Community Relationships . . 140 I-zg, i-23 '1 l O [11 C) m t e I": O (I) (I; ’5. CCZ; a I I Per: the tzf. fl‘ap V... A Lis' may ‘IR‘ Ite: MultiI Table 4-18 0 4—19 0 4-20. 4-22. 4'23 0 4-25. Page A Listing of the Grand Mean Scores for the Three Sample Groups on Each of the Twelve Items Relating to the Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on School-Community Relationships . . . . . 141 Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors for Differences in Perceptions of the Three Sample Groups Concerning the Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Educational Decision Making . . . . . . 144 Univariate Comparison of the Three Sample Groups on the Five Items Relating to the Effect of School-Community Advisory Coun- cils on Educational Decision Making . . . 145 Comparison of the Mean Differences in the Perceptions of the Three Sample Groups on the Two Significant Items Relating to the Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Educational Decision Making . . 145 A Listing of the Grand Mean Scores for the Three Sample Groups on Each of the Five Items Relating to the Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Educational Decision Making . . . . . . 147 Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors for Differences in Perceptions of the Three Sample Groups Concerning the Extent to Which School-Community Advisory Councils Will Effect Administrative Effectiveness. . 149 Univariate Comparison of the Three Sample Groups on the Five Items Relating to the Effect of School-Community Advisory Coun- cils on Administrative Effectiveness . . . 150 Comparison of the Mean Differences in the Perceptions of the Three Sample Groups on the Five Items Relating to the Effect of School—Community Advisory Councils on Administrative Effectiveness . . . . . 152 xi Table Page 4-26. A Listing of the Grand Mean Scores for the Three Sample Groups on Each of the Five Items Relating to the Perceived Effect of School-Community Advisory Councils on Administrative Effectiveness . . . . . 154 xii CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Introduction There exists in this country today a driving force, if not an obsession, for personal autonomy. Or, more specifically stated, a desire for human freedom. This need must be interpreted against a background of what has gone "wrong" in America—-or stated in a more succinct manner--the betrayal and loss of the American dream. The rapid growth of technology, the rise of the cOrporate state, the social inequities, and the manner in which the state dominates, exploits, and ultimately destroys both nature and man are the primary factors which have given genesis to the newgeneration.l People are beginning to question rather than accept, look rather than ignore, and ask rather than be quiet. It is an underlying desire of man to regain his dignity, remake the technological society which.threatens to enslave him, and to right the social injustices that 1Charles A. Reich, The Greening of America (New York: Random.House, 1970), p. 2. Q I ’o"."" ’ 3......“ “un- I I ' . - 56.27. 5 {11's. .3 _. . .28:8 15 veqor.‘ n6 4 r o Undo-05$ . ' Q I 'DH"y\~-- $0041! .mu 3 ”P.396A 'I yU.&-¢va- as: regs; successf- i3; With I insures CCSSque: .' -- F 15 CC! I . _ -'- =€'-’c.‘.'ticr. ~-,' I. "ment of c surround him. All these give added credence to Charles Reich's dramatic warning: There is a revolution coming. It will not be like revolutions of the past. It will originate with the individual and with culture, and it will change the political structure only as its final act. It will not require violence to succeed, and it cannot be successfully resisted by violence. It is now spread- ing with amazing rapidity, and already our laws, institutions and social structure are changing in consequence. It promises a higher reason, a more 2 human community and a new and liberated individual. A revolution of this type will be accompanied by a roaring current of change--so powerful that it will overturn institutions, shift our values, and shrivel our roots.3 It can be predicted that one of the social institutions which will be most affected by Reich's conceptual revo- lution will be education. It is undoubtedly the most visible and most vulnerable of all the social insti- tutions. Education is the only institution which serves all of the children of all of the people. It ranks at the very top of our societal value system, or as Peter Drucker has pointed out: Education has become the key to opportunity and advancement all over the modern world replacing birth, wealth, and perhaps even talent. Education has become the first value choice of modern man.4 21bid. 3Alvin Toffler, Future Shock (New York: Random House, 1970): p. 1. 4Peter R. Drucker, The Age of Discontinuity: Guidelines to Our Changing Seciety (New York: Harper 5 Row, 1968), p. 311. . . p ,I 31:31:32“. 15 m' l ‘ VI 1 .L-un LLEE UbJ:e“rE!s o ;: asserted in O;. ‘ . kflcatbcn . ‘ v- 0. State a. '6 ’ ‘ ..'. '- 15 63..-: BI;- “tea t ZEPCIIURL‘.‘ 2.35.210; has "-45 . "‘"Y €X;enc; "‘-o . :r"~~ On eC'JCE; SES'iCes tC-g e: 8._- _‘ . ‘. H‘s.“ s‘bslcle .. k n Education is highly esteemed because of what is regarded as its profound and measurable impact on an individual's life chances. In Brown v. Board of Education this point is asserted in a most positive manner: Education is perhaps the most important function of state and local government. . . . In these days it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of education.5 Education has also become the largest nation-wide com- munity expenditure in the American economy. More is spent on education than all of the nondefensive community services together--including health care, welfare, and farm subsidies.6 It is this high degree of exposure, spiraling expenditures, and societal expectations which have marked education as a prime target of the new consciousness of America. Adding to this susceptibility is the suspicion that all is not well with.education. Critics attack from both the philosophical right and left, citing the fail— ings, inadequacies, and shortcomings of our system of public education. While these criticisms are directed at both suburban and urban schools, the major outcries of despair, anger, and indignation are directed at the central city schools. To be more specific, a major 5Brown v. Board of Education, 347 0.8. 483, 493, Sup. Ct. (1954). 6Drucker, gp. cit., p. 311. i;ssa:;s:'acticr. _:L;:‘.ated rain; 72‘ general feL ' ' , seem in s; ;: S‘xt'vivES a 512’. the (1;? sense; dif stead he ‘ . . v is me ir. dissatisfaction is reserved for the ghetto schools, populated mainly by blacks, Puerto Ricans, and Chicanos. The general feeling is that the suburban child will succeed in spite of our educational system. Melby writes: When homes and communities are disadvantaged the school also tends to be disadvantaged; but even when it is not, the school program alone appears ineffec- tive. The next outcome is that the middle-class child survives academically in poor as well as good schools, but the disadvantaged child cannot survive without a school different from what we have now. Finally, it should be kept in mind that the weaknesses of the education program injure all children but that the injury is critical for the disadvantaged. The inequities of urban education are most evi- dent. In New York City, one out of three pupils is a year or more behind the national norm in reading; in washington D.C., pupils in four out of five schools per- form below national norms. In the black ghetto the figures are even more stark--nearly 85 per cent of Harlem school children are more than two years behind the national norm in reading. The tragedy of the situation is that the racial gap increases the longer the black student remains in school. By the last year of high school, the black child is, on the average, educationally three and one-half years behind his white counterpart.8 The bleak record of 7Ernest O. Melby, "The Community Centered School," Childhood Education, XLIII, No. 6 (February, 1967), 316. 8Maurice R. Berube and Marilyn Gittell, Confron- tation at Ocean Hill-Brownsville (New York: Praeger Pfiblishers,1969), PP. 3-4; .2: :zeqselitie: .5 Ember min 52:21 and West 5:131 as white ‘ I “"' F . Ew:5.310a. gu; 35,:2blic scho: 1.22:1 uses the i2: is happen the inequalities of public education for ghetto children is further reinforced by the fact that in the metropolitan North and west three times as many blacks drop out of school as whites.9 Much.of the present rhetoric used in educational publications refers to the inadequacies of urban education. Charles Silberman refers to the failures of public schools as "killers of the dream."10 11 Jonathan Kozol uses the term "educational genocide" to describe what is happening to urban children in the schools. Maurice Berube and Marilyn Gittell refer to the failure of city schools to educate children as "a national dis- grace."12 It is against this backdrop of failure and despair that the residents of the urban centers of America have awakened--especially those representing the minority groups. They are beginning to hold the public schools accountable for their children‘s educational failure and have begun to demand the right to participate in the 9Report of the_NationaI Advisory Committee on Civil Disorders, Otto Kerner, Chairman (New York: INew 10Charles E. Silberman, Crisis in the Classroom, The Remaking of American Education INew York: Rafidom House, 1970). 11Jonathan Kozol, Death at an Early Age (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1967). 12Berube and Gittell, 92. cit., p. 3. . ‘ . AIAA 'u . Q a... $w'ut rCL.GJ , ov-u nos a . Dov evbfing a c o i ‘ ‘ 9 n“ ‘ A! - s g y. 'IW‘SOV“--u;’:-4o ”PR-I... ‘ '- I’vubtu. C. a k ' a . "b R c- . ,f..:.es .C...:.':, aratzcnar c; F'un. ‘ e ““3; *0 {lave ‘5 the realize 3330 reside: 11. education operation of the public schools. This demand far tran— scends the right to elect school boards that fashion school policy; it reaches into the democratic ethic, projecting a communal involvement in the ultimate decision-making process in public education. This new concept of a partnership in education, one that incor- porates community investment, is rapidly emerging in the educational circles of our country. Parents are deter- mined to have a permanent voice in matters pertaining to their schools and to have it now. Underlying this desire is the realization that education is most crucial to the ghetto resident because as the American dream would have it, education can operate as a social equalizer. There is full recognizance that failure in education is terribly final and, ultimately, spells the end of the American dream of progress througheducation.13 A statement by Rhoddy McCoy, the controversial ex-administrator of the Ocean Hill-Brownsville experimental school district, probably best sums up the attitude of inner-city resi- dents toward the educational system: “Everyone else has failed, we now want the right to fail for ourselves."14 13David R. Hunter, The Slums (New York: Free Press, Macmillan, 1964). p. 0 . 14Albert A. Briggs, "Educational Decision Making," National Association of Secondary School Principals, LIII, No. 337 IMay, 1969), I79. Crban : reusing this 1; """-'= ‘ectcz' 90.5.de . The. have _ fICI: f-:ss;.' :c-...‘nity. I =5 .59 we ”i. . . result f r g Bertbe and (3' so ‘5 Plantar. citie «8 r: ‘ST‘MCRalS, re “21C. .16 Urban residents, in increasing numbers, are per- ceiving this lack of involvement--or control--as the critical factor negating their potential to affect mean- ingful changes within school systems. Passow writes: They have called for a transfer of policy control from fossil like school administrative units to the community. They have demanded key roles in decision ‘making over all aspects of the educational process. Their argument is that increased accountability will result from such involvement and control.15 Berube and Gittell reinforce this contention: "In most American cities the public has little say about how their schools are run; urban school systems, dominated by pro- fessionals, remain isolated and unaccountable to their .16 public. In a cogent fashion Lopate relates the dilemma confronting urban school systems: Although the democratic tradition of this nation pre- supposes that citizens will actively participate in political decisionemaking, political and administra- tive momentum has often led to increased centrali- zation of power, varying degrees of representation rather than participation, and often the alienation of citizens from decisions which affect their lives. In education, the rise of big city school systems has widened the gulf between decision-makers and those affected by the decisions, and many school systems are now too large to sensitively administer to the needs of their clients.17 15A. Harry Passow, ed., Reaching the Disadvantaged Learner (New York: Teachers Collége PresE), p. x. 16Berube and Gittell, 9p. cit., p. 4. 17Carol LOpate, et a1., "Some Effects of Parent and Community Participation on Public Education," ERIC-- IRCD Urban Disadvantaged Series, No. 3 (February, 1969), p- 33- .fo- --r’ f I‘- on: site-0&5 ’4. .. g . lv". R :79’.,. -.:;- Ubfib‘b: - d I” v- .0. .g A I‘C‘” Pr ~Qa-. r. -.f‘f‘ s ‘V Vary. s- lug.. ‘v~ :"ueo. .' -. Isle of tr. the ssh; ; SCLOCI ::_ 1.25 Lees: e g Expans Eaten: l 1 €5582t1a1 inner-c 11'. . Petite: CI despair an”. 7". 5: “W as the y “as taxifiaste s \4001 Cf‘ catifin U.‘ “‘1 on 3.1.13 The Kerner Commission Report states the problem with great clarity: In an atmosphere of hostility between the com- munity and the schools, education cannot flourish. A basic problem stems from the isolation of the schools from the other social forces influencing youth. Changes in society—-mass media, family structure, religion--have radically altered the role of the school. New links must be built between the schools and the communities they serve. The schools must be related to the broader system which influences and educates ghetto youth. Expansion of Opportunities for community and parental participation in the school system is essential to the successful functioning of the inner-city schools.18 Permeating education today is an intense feeling of despair and hopelessness generated by the urban citi- zenry as they interpret and evaluate the quality of edu- cation their children are receiving. This dissatisfaction has manifested itself and surfaced in the form of distrust of school officials responsible for formulating edu- cational policy. The ultimate results being that com- munity residents are desirous of, and in many cases com- mitted to, having an active, meaningful involvement in educational decision making. This involvement can take several directions: school policy-making bodies can remain highly bureaucratic and further polarize and alienate the community; the advocates of community control of schools can prevail and completely take over the school system; or the educational hierarchy can 18Report of the National Advisory Committee, pp, cit., p.440. 501%" W‘ cm ' .10.“ be“ ' . l u:ybuey q '- § 7 . in. '0 o '0‘. b e L - awaken and open the doors to citizens, accepting them as partners in the educational decision—making process. The road that educators choose to travel, regarding community involvement, will have far-reaching implications for the future of public education. Administrators involved in the process of develop- ing viable means of community involvement in educational decision making face many difficult and frustrating tasks in the days that lie ahead. However, as Drucker notes: "They are tasks of today and not of the year 2000. B227- thgy are the tasks to which we have to address ourselves 19 to deserve tomorrow." (Emphasis added.) Purpose of the Study It would seem logical to assume that there is little to be gained from arguing the merits of who should be involved in matters relating to educational decision making. Harris, in a recent study of citizen participation, writes: It should be quite apparent that both lay citizens and professional educators must contribute to the educative process if it is to be successful. Further, the choice of who should determine should be more or less based upon the nature of the problem, rather than the position one occupies in the community.20 19Drucker, 9p. cit., p. 382. 20George D. Harris, Jr., "A Study of Citizen Par- ticipation in the Educational Decision—Making Process as Perceived by Parents from a Lower Socio-Economic Neighbor- hood” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970), p. 140. I72 v - .0: "Jm 2:1». meg: iKCaC t 339391}, 117: j 5.: Q ‘“' k ' w V..1Ch' ad." . PCiIzt - CECE: ‘ea‘iers I . u. r? , , . . so nab. .’ I. n 3....EIlug -- I .38 USA C. grams, e. P ""“v ‘ so“: . tun-en 15 | Y‘ 8. nCt Cd: tne part‘x " . t .' .21: mg” re.at;or.s':. 9. - . us against I 2"‘v ' \ . -.~.-.aise.s tr... Tile Cl,- mal decis National r: 18: In... 1. NI shes his act to gain 10 In a concluding statement Harris speaks of the difficulty of achieving this desired result: The task of bringing people of varying cultural back- grounds, experiences, and abilities together as a smoothly functioning adjunct to the educational insti- tution is an extremely delicate and difficult process. If not carried out with a minimum of friction between the parties involved, irreparable harm can be done that would tend to exacerbate an already tenuous relationship.21 It is against the backdrop of these realistic and pragmatic appraisals that the purposes for this study have evolved. The concept of citizen involvement in the edu- cational decision-making process will obviously have a direct impact on school administrators and their ultimate role in school management. It would appear that it is extremely important to have a more insightful under- standing concerning the manner by which, and the extent to which, administrators perceive citizen involvement in educational matters. An observation germane to this point is: "The way a leader perceives his role deter— 22 It should then follow that in mines his actions." order to gain a greater understanding of how school leaders (administrators) will react to citizen involvev ment, it becomes necessary to analyze their perceptions of this emerging concept. In essence, the overall 211bid., p. 153. 22Edgar L. Morphet, Roe L. Johns, and Theodore L. Reller, Educational Organization and Administration (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1967T, p. 133. II! ‘ fi I'E‘CIL-e C. . ADA». P-\"‘ : Sn-w'v. .15.... tie; related 1 on» n 'R‘.;f\" Lula: fiubds‘v. 'IF ”- 0‘ \v. I ‘ . .. "f‘,‘\[ “'3“ SC. \v. .. ‘ u .A nefle nu.,.~ w u I .‘Vr.an~< . I ‘ . Y .6 ‘ 0a.; C; ulzer‘s ‘ .,'. ‘ v it“: be aces: A5...u“~ ‘ ‘ I I, n. “can-“AL g: a“ '7 -' .nE Ccm.lt‘~ne:“q a, ‘ its recent;y ll objective of this study was to assess the expectations of school administrators--in an urban school district--as they related to the involvement of the lay citizenry in the educational decision-making process. The city of Flint, Michigan was chosen as the urban school district in which to conduct this study. Flint had recently taken the initiative to commit itself to developing a more direct meaningful partnership with lay citizens in educational matters. This hOpefully would be accomplished through the development of school- community advisory councils in each of the Flint schools. The commitment of the Flint Board of Education to achieve greater community involvement was implicitly noted in its recently adopted goals: Qitizenship in a Democracy---—The Flint Community Séhodls must present a program of instruction and an internal climate which will incubate and exemplify the values of democracy in action, and which will be conducive to the development of responsive and responsible citizenship and the potential for leadership. Parental and Community Involvement----It is essential that individual parents, parents as organized groups, and other community organizations and agencies be involved in a meaningful way in the planning and implementation of school programs at all levels. Mechanisms which now exist for such involvement and other means and mechanisms should be supported and further refined. Not only is it desirable that parents, students, and other lay citizens be involved in the activities of the schools, but that educators be meaningfully involved in community affairs.23 23Goals of The FlinEBoard of Education, Ad0pted at a public meeting, March 8, 1§7§. -- irb r- 71: 5.;er....e... reaffizea tne A--IUF ‘ I {:0:L.CV..- ”A.“ 1.256 aeszrea 1 .1 ‘ - we are 68:: l::’:.‘.'€:€ r. ' a SE'Jtic: a A», ||||| ‘ “Vugv‘.. an: gettzr. if. oraer t "H l ' ":I. part Of 0_ '° 4 i. . " :5 a.so 1:: " 9.‘ Vet‘s: kid 5 re; 12 The Superintendent of the Flint School System strongly reaffirmed the Board's commitment to the development of school-community advisory councils as vehicles to achieve these desired goals: We are deeply committed to the notion of community involvement and we have charged every principal to develop a meaningful effective community advisory council. Our board is serious about listening to, and getting feedback from, the community it serves in order to better serve that community. So the com- munity advisory councils will be a very important part of our total operation.24 It is also important to note that the Flint Board of Edu- cation had recently appointed a Task Force, whose specific designated purpose was to deve10p guidelines for the impending development of the school-community advisory councils. The willineness and urgency which characterized the Flint school system's attempt to plan and implement an appropriate vehicle for citizen participation, pro- vided a climate of interest which was highly conducive to the purpose of conducting a study of the type described herein. The initial purpose of the study was to determine the functions and responsibilities of school-community advisory councils and the extent to which this involvement should take place--as perceived by school administrators. 24Peter L. Clancy, Address to Total Staff of glint Community Schools, September 6, 1972. A 5831 . g . ' .‘f‘ .1! 'fl“' ' ll:.r:‘a aué'Lu-l r "' were Fem"? U I . M or F" er in bo£ HV“" :— ~ I I I 13.16: 15 ”:7: I effect of SC?- | attain: re; | A f0; | time-r in uh; I cf school-cor . . , | :eczsmn nak; I A f if tear-ceptions 2| , | ef:ect of sc: istra‘tive ef:| The I, «'11 the s I 13 A second purpose of the study was to determine which individuals and groups, in the Flint community, were perceived by school administrators to be supportive of the concept of school-community advisory councils. A third purpose of the study was to assess the manner in which school administrators perceived the effect of school-community advisory councils on school“ community relationships. A fourth purpose of the study was to assess the manner in which school administrators perceived the effect of school-community advisory councils on educational decision making. A fifth purpose of the study was to examine the perceptions of school administrators concerning the effect of school-community advisory councils on admin- istrative effectiveness. The objectives of the study stated herein were investigated by examining the perceived differences among the three administrative groups surveyed--school princi~ pals, community school directors, and central office administrators. A careful analysis of the degree to which the three groups differed in their perceptions, and the specific areas in which these differences occurred, constituted an additional purpose of the study. I“. A.Ae ".53 5.23:; r 5". -. hoax. I"... : "'. I .°=;‘I Os '4‘- ; ‘ . ‘“ ‘r‘ .5 .C'C‘x..g ‘ud ,: i . | “V" n q” _ V. “Va“ e“..- . . ‘ I .wlv‘ ' “ I ‘- ‘.“A.~} 1‘.“O. I I. ' We one of n.“‘ rumerstcne 14 Significance of the Study "The axe," Sir Walter Raleigh told his executioner, "is a sharp medicine, but a sure cure of all ills." One may admit that the schools are sick and still doubt the wisdom of this particular treatment.25 However, everyone is looking for the cure that will eliminate the maladies of urban education--of all the formulas presented, com- munity involvement in educational decision making seems 26 Richard to be one of the most potent at present. Featherstone reiterates this position: "Increased citi- zen participation is not only essential, it is inevit- able."27 There is an urgency for administrators to grasp the implications associated with community involvement in school governance, the background which nurtured it, and the resultant ramifications which are necessitated by its genesis. The involvement of citizens has been referred to by many educational authorities as being 25Maurice J. Goldbloom, "The New York School Crisis," Commentary, XLVII, No. 1 (January, 1969), 43. 26Paul Lauter, "The Short Happy Life of the Adams- Morgan Community School Project," Harvard Educational Review, XXXVIII, No. 2 (Spring, 1968), 2362 27Richard L. Featherstone, "Urban Schooling," in Reor anizin the Control Patterns in Urban Schools, ed. by HerEert C. Rudman and fiichard L.’Featherstone (New York: Harcourt Brace and world, Inc., 1968), pp. 73-74. :I J .5.‘ ally” - - I--:~. "A V. i '- b...“ In, ,a‘“ ‘ ‘ :a:;:r.a. re. a‘ ‘ s A-:e:° C) 0 Teachers ‘ . p; v. Camur‘itk' 15 one of the most pressing problems facing administrators today.28 Carmichael and Nardo confirm this position: "Among all the current demands for new educational skills and the techniques, none seems more urgent than those which pertain to the development of positive socio-edu- cational relationships."29 Albert Shanker, President of the United Federation of Teachers in New York, has also expressed the importance of community involvement: we should support increased local participation. We should support it because it is an administrative necessity and it enhances the dignity of the par- ticipants to be democratically involved in doing for themselves instead of having something done to. or for them.30 (Emphasis added.) Robert Frossard has stated: "Boards of Education in this country cannot make wise decisions unless they have a regular systematic input from the great divergen— n31 cies that exist in their communities. An interesting insight concerning citizen involvement is offered by Clyde Campbell: 28Harris, op. cit., p. 14. 29Benjamin Carmichael and Nita Nardo, "Emerging Patterns in Community Centered Schools," Childhood Edu— cation, XLIII, No. 6 (February, 1967), 323. 30Albert Shanker, "What's Wrong With Compensatory Education," Saturday Review, LII, No. 2 (January 11, 1969), 61. 31Robert Frossard, Address Given to Mott Interns at a Colloquium Session, Flint, Michigan, September 27, 1972. V Cithens r: caticr. is of educat; a 32.11ch not the w: 1 . one: 1.15: fi'h k Ir ' “5-: El. :: t:.e 932.6: .- , I . . .scrsc. 3.122;: A”; i... Operate :. ’ A_ ' h l ‘C anaeve t: Rg“. . . \u-‘u&nlcat“c: Fy~ . ‘ 16 Citizens have significant decisions to make. Edu- cation is not the sole responsibility of the board of education, not a program to be handed down from a national capitol, not a classroom operation alone, not the work of the institution separate from all other institutions.32 Another perspective dealing with the significance of the problem refers to the fact that bureaucracies (school administration) and primary units (communities) both operate in most areas of life and they bring dif- ferent attributes to the achievement of a given end. To achieve this given end it is essential that close communication be maintained between the two forms of organizations.33 It should then follow that social con- trol and goal achievement are accomplished through the joint contribution of both types of social forms and that optimal control and achievement will only be obtained when these forms are in balance.34 Verba, in citing a number of studies, places the importance of citizen involvement in a sociological con- text. It is his conjecture that under situations of participatory decision making, members of the group 32Clyde M. Campbell, The CommunityASchool and Its Administration, III, No. 2 (October, I961), I. 33Eugene Litwak and Henry J. Meyer, "A Balance Theory of Communications Between Bureaucratic Organi- zations and Community Primary Groups," Administrative Science Quarterly, II, No. 1 (June, 1966), 36. 34Ibid. fl . . n c . .. 10 ‘f‘ '. oz'tao‘m Lug..- «u: t' 9"" in. the reg... :es'aris come i 2.22 task as I.- If tr... s; 5035 ‘rv- :t I 6.. 3:5 :p;are:.t Lia: smimize t':, “as: current, 95:12:: by the is a desirat‘. 5:301 Pqura A Sig ~28 PremiSe t $50013 and :reater Cog-“.1 LUIS Sta ff CC It was anticj 17 involved identify more closely with the task involved and are reinforced directly by accomplishing it--their rewards come from rational decision making in approaching the task as well as in greater productivity.35 If the above references are accepted as valid observations concerning public education, it then becomes apparent that administrators must closely analyze and scrutinize their relationships with the lay citizenry. Most current literature suggests that an active partici- pation by the community in educational decision making is a desirable and necessary ingredient for a successful school program. A significant aspect of this study was based on the premise that it would assist the Superintendent of Schools and the Board of Education, in Flint, to gain a greater cognizance of the "mindset" of their administra- tive staff concerning citizen involvement in the schools. It was anticipated that this information would be most valuable to Flint, as it prepared to implement school- community advisory councils in each of its schools. The study takes on an even larger significance when it is considered that the findings have implications for other school systems--especially those in urban settingSv—contemplating the development of appropriate 35Sidney Verba, Small Groups and Political Behavior: AStudy of Leadershi *TNew Jersey: Princeton University Press, I961), p. 22 . :aieLs of cit; f:.iir.;s prov; relating to s- '*;An ‘1 ubov rvx'v..s a. . “~‘ The s .h~"' ‘ . 3.:50‘5 1c ant 51am UK; I CC .gtlZen 1T0}: 18 models of citizen involvement for their districts. The findings provide relevant and pertinent information relating to some of the major concerns underlying the perceptions and expectations of school administrators relating to citizen involvement in the educational decision-making process. The study is also significant in that the findings have definite implications for appropriate in-service training programs for school administrators. The selected review of the literature provides a significant resource for background, insight, and under- standing, concerning the past and present directions of citizen involvement in school-related matters. Assumptions Inherent to this study were certain assumptions which were important and necessary to accept, in relation to analyzing the scope and magnitude of the community involvement issue. The major areas investigated in this study were based on the following Specific assumptions: 1. Citizen dissatisfaction with education lies in the isolation image which the schools project. Poor communication practices have caused increased activism by communities toward their schools. 2. There is a great need for planned community involvement in the educational decision—making CIOCE- 6 d851ft Iwill SCho< inure P011 la: 805m tai; Wit 19 process. It can no longer be construed as a desired consequence, rather it must be accepted as a necessity. Community involvement must also include teachers, administrators, agency representatives, and other concerned groups in the ultimate discussion and decision-making process. Community involvement must insure that due process will be observed in making decisions and capricious and arbitrary actions by the administrative staff will be avoided.36 School administrators are amenable to community involvement only in certain areas of school policy matters (i.e. nonacademic, extra curricu— lar, community oriented). School administrators must spell out with cer— tainty what they mean by community involvement-- with clearly defined goals and carefully delineated powers for local groups.37 The development of school community advisory councils must be predicated on the understanding 36Nicholas Goble, "Planning Community Involve- ment in School Decision Making," Pennsylvania Education, III, No. 6 (July-August, 1972), 5. 37Ibid. 20 that councils will gain a thorough understanding and recognition of the functions performed by the administrative hierarchy in carrying out the responsibilities of the educational decision- making process. The baSlS for this assumption is reflected in the following theorem: "To seek social change without due recognition of the mani- fest and latent functions performed by the social organization undergoing change, is to indulge in social ritual rather than social engineering."38 Finally, and probably most important, failure to provide the right for community involvement in school matters is likely to cpen the door to attack and destructive behavior on the part of special interest groups and self-interested indi- viduals.39 Definition of Terms School Community.--Identifies the geographical area which is limited by the residences of school enrol- 1ees within the designated school system boundaries.40 38Robert K. Merton, "The Latent Functions of the Machine,” in UrbanIBosses, Machines, and Progressive Reformers, ed. by Bruce M. Stave (fexington: D. C. Heath and Company, 1972), p. 36. 39Goble, op, cit., p. 4. 40Harris, 92, cit., p. 11. m ' r li‘ . l "Maw—5'“ ARA? 'v.~- ;::';;s can" “ 1:31P?» 1cm c ficiSiCI‘rEfiak COT": \ SYStem ‘0 t" .ocal resid. :c' nklon of t‘h -4 a“: are reS 3d" ‘ JO! p0i 1c 21 School-Community Advisory Council.--Advisory groups composed of representatives of those segments of the school community (i.e. teachers, parents, adminis- trators, residents, civil service employees, et al.) who have an interest in the functioning of the schools in a particular community.41 Community Involvement.--Refers to the active par— ticipation of parents and residents in the educational decision-making process of a given school system. Community Control.--Delegates the responsibility and decision-making authority concerning the educational system to the constituent citizenry--the grass roots local residents. Lay citizens totally control the oper- ation of the school and the education of their children, and are responsible for all decisions from trivia to major policy determinations.42 Decentralization.--The dispersion or distribution of functions and powers from a central board of education to smaller local regional units. 41New Haven Public Schools, "School Community Councils," Phamphlet (New Haven, 1970), p. 2. 42Jack Minzey and Clyde Letarte, Community Edu- gation: From Pro ram to Process (Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 197 , p. 7. Lav C *— :::al knowlei 3.3:: 5'30 15 n: 51322 01' as E To a: . “nu ‘.~ .; on: u: :5 “‘ES( 43 22 Langitizen.--A person not possessing the tech- nical knowledge or skills of the professional educator and who is not serving as a member of the public school staff or as a school board member.43 Research Hypotheses To achieve the purposes of this study the follow- ing hypotheses were examined: Hypothesis 1: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions of school principals, community school directors, and central office administrators con- cerning the functions of school-community advisory councils. Hypothesis 2: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions of school principals, community school directors, and central office administrators con- cerning which individuals and groups are supportive of school-community advisory councils. Hypothesis 3: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions of school principals, community school directors, and central office administrators con- cerning the extent to which school-community advisory councils will effect school-community relationships. 43Harris, pp, cit., p. 11. CLIECICI 36:31:13 ‘ ' Q Pfi"fir\\ vvduyg‘s 23 Hypothesis 4: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions of school principals, community school directors, and central office administrators con- cerning the extent to which school-community advisory councils will effect educational decision making. Hypothesis 5: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions of school principals, community school directors, and central office administrators con- cerning the extent to which school-community advisory councils will effect administrative effectiveness. Design of the Study ngulation The population used for the study consisted of principals, community school directors, and central office administrators of the Flint, Michigan public school sys- tem. Sample All principals (55), all community school directors (56), and a selected group of central office administrators (39) comprised the sample population of the study. The selected sample of central office admin— istrators was confined to include all those with the rank of: division chief, department head, or assistant department head. 24 Procedure The study was descriptive in nature. A structured questionnaire was deve10ped based on the following: a review of the pertinent literature pertaining to citizen involvement in the educational decision—making process; consultation with selected individuals who had background and experience in this area; and the advisement of the Research Consultation Office in The School of Education at Michigan State University. The questionnaire was designed to determine the manner in which principals, community school directors, and central office administrators perceived: the functions of school-community advisory councils; which individuals and groups supported the councils; the effect of the councils on school-community relationships; and the effect of the councils on educational decision making and administrative effectiveness. The questionnaire was sent to all principals, all community school directors, and selected central office administrators in the Flint public school system, along with an appropriate letter of explanation and a self- addressed, stamped return envelope. Limitations of the Study_ 1. The data collected were based on only one specific geographical location-—Flint, Michigan. 2. The 1 25 2. The long-time commitment to, and program of, com- munity education in Flint. 3. The population was highly selective. Each respondent to the questionnaire was a school administrator. 4. The study dealt primarily with school-community advisory councils as the basic vehicle for lay participation in the educational decision—making process. 5. The descriptive nature of the study represented a limitation in as much as it only described what is perceived to be true—~not what ought to be true. 6. The biases of the researcher and participating respondents must be taken into consideration. 7. Perceptions of a situation are subjective, and do not always describe accurately the real situation. Summary and Overview Many prominent educators consider the need to involve the lay citizenry in the educational decision— making process to be one of the major issues facing school administrators today. The specific purpose of this study was to analyze the perceptions of school administrators concerning: the functions of school- community advisory councils: which individuals and grips will :szncils or. effect of ti. Li aiminis: The relevant an; aiditiCn tc 3f tI‘. lite reseamh he ie"limped . IQEStlonnai ”Mary C interpreta: 26 groups will support the councils; the effect of the councils on school-community relationships; and the effect of the councils on educational decision making and administrative effectiveness. The conclusions and findings of the study provide relevant and pertinent information relating to some of the major issues concerning administrators' perceptions of citizen involvement in school-related matters. The study is presented in four chapters in addition to Chapter I. In Chapter II, a selected review of the literature is presented. In Chapter III, the research methodology and design are outlined and developed. In Chapter IV, the data obtained from the questionnaire are reported and analyzed. And in Chapter V, a summary of the study is presented, conclusions drawn, interpretations made, and recommendations for future research are cited. Sion‘ma c i 1' fil wh; CHAPTER II SELECTED REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction Citizen involvement in American public education must be considered from several perspectives in order to gain a greater insight of this continually emerging con- cept. The review of the literature presented herein is divided into six specific sections--the collectivity of which provides the reader with the background and infor- mation necessary to develop a more comprehensive under- standing of citizen involvement in the educational decision-making process. The six sections are: 1. Section one traces the development of citizen involvement from colonial beginnings to twentieth century influences. Section two is intended to emphasize that the concept of community participation manifests itself in the majority of American institutions, and in effect has provided the backdrop against which citizen involvement in schools has emerged. 27 28 3. Section three is concerned with the emerging con- cept of citizen involvement in education, with the major emphasis placed on the need for this involvement. 4. Section four examines lay advisory councils as vehicles for citizen involvement in education. Special emphasis is given to purposes, functions, and organizations. 5. Section five reviews decentralization models as vehicles for citizen involvement in education. 6. Section six is concerned with perceptual theory and its resultant effect on behavior. A Historical PerSpective of Citizen InvoIvement in American Rublic Edfication Colonial Influences The earliest beginnings of education in America are to be found in New England, where there was a definite commitment to mental and moral training--which had its source in the religious ideals which the governing class espoused. The typical attitude of the New England colonist was that educational goals had to subverse superior interests; the most superior of all interests .. h was {8.19“ I: was re‘. 1 ~ A a- fioen F {csyr'evv \d O! b I. ‘Ifl‘p’. ’ #:“H ‘05»: 5 I A“"" .1!“ 5.. UV 'Urbu.‘lb" :clcnists s believed :5 Early Princ Effecti Organiz School ine genesis £00: in thi tu“tie-s . It not Prom: .~ we affair Only quali ‘2. ~. 29 was religion. Education then was set in this context. It was religious in context and purpose--it was practical.1 It was precisely because the ideals that they respected necessitated education that the colonists set about making provisions for schooling. Almost from the beginning there was sentiment in favoring educational opportunity rather generously. A majority of the colonists supported a collectivism in education and believed that the community had some responsibility for the instruction of its members. The importance of this early principle cannot be minimized. As Power writes: Although this principle may not have been especially effective in providing widespread opportunity we must not forget that it was responsible for town organization for education. The foundation of school organization was the town.2 The genesis of citizen involvement appear to have taken root in this early attempt to provide educational oppor— tunities. It was in New England that the town meeting came inot prominence. The town meeting was a forum in which the affairs of the community were conducted. However, only qualified members of the town could participate in the discussions of the town meeting and vote on issues. Usually the qualifications for membership were stated in 1Edward J. Power, Main Currents in the History of Education (New York: McGraw-Hill‘Co. Inc., 1962), p. . 21bid., p. 428. texts of a: 3'. :3 tom 30 teams of an individual's status in the town. In effect, the town was governed by an oligarchy. However, as religion became weaker, authoritarianism in government tended to become weaker too. The man who was coming into the picture, not yet to be given control in any democratic sense, but a man to be reckoned with, nevertheless, was the common man.3 This shift in the colonial power structure had definite implications for the development of public education in America.4 The first advance of public education in the colonies was made by the Massachu- setts Act of 1642. This represented the first general law requiring town officials to compel parents to pro- vide elementary instruction for their children. In this law the state assumed the authority to tell town officials that they had the power over the family in regard to edu- cation.5 The Massachusetts Law of 1647 also represents an important step in the evolution of citizen involvement in public education. This law made the maintenance of a school in each town mandatory and imposed a fine for failure to do so. The important implications of this act are noted by Goldhammer: "The entire responsibility 3 4 Ibid., p. 428. Ibid., p. 429. 5Max S. Smith and W. Ray Smittle, The Board of Education and Educatignal Policy Development (Michigan: OaEIand Educational Press, 1956), p. 11. f: the est: left to the esatlished, by the citi: 2e ensuing re;reser.:e:l :3; and pc‘ 3: the pol; the levy of 31 for the establishment and operation of such schools was left to the people of the towns and the early schools so established, were administered, maintained, and controlled by the citizens of the town through their townmeeting."6 The ensuing town meetings, following the Act of 1647, represented: " . . . the early beginning of local con- trol and policy making for education in America."7 Some of the policies dealt with at the town meetings included: the levy of town taxes; the length of school terms; the selection of teachers, and determination of wages; the provision of one or more school buildings; and other matters relating to the public schools.8 The important implications of the Massachusetts Laws of 1642 and 1647 are summarized by Pounds: “It can be seen that the two laws together established the authority of the state by requiring towns to establish schools and gave to the civil authorities the right to 9 manage, supervise and control schools." The colonial 6Keith Goldhammer, The School Board (New York: Center for Applied Research in EducatiOn, Inc., 1964), p. 2. 7Smith and Smittle, pp. cit., p. 12. 8Charles E. Reeves, School Boards: Their Status, Functions, and Activities (New York: Prentice Hall, 1954), p. 17. 9Ralph L. Pounds, The Develgpment of Education in western Culture (New York: Appleton-Century-Croft, I968), p. I22. 7: a press in :zblic '22: of lo ‘ ‘ F ‘V— S:;.‘ re- 0.. .‘::gv:nv- Q 4:.-50 uuau‘ \ n” ‘l‘- 21512:? we .D‘F‘ ‘ .“ooox‘r‘g O the Preser‘ Faxed. ,, ”‘4 "P‘ ‘ "“5 fOllc CC‘I‘ViHCEd ' 3&5 Seen a: ofdenocrac Je can“ is BeCaus isS‘dEs Jeffe: SChOo; Farah; are CC I \ lC Emilie, : ll 1: (New York I 32 period of American history left a heritage characterized by a predominance of local control and citizen involvement in public education, mainly through the town meeting con- cept of local government. Many of these early influences still permeate the education systems of today.10 Jeffersonian Influences The early years of the National Period of colonial history were greatly influenced by the philosophical thinking of Thomas Jefferson. His major interest was the preservation of the democratic experiment-~which he wanted perpetuated for the generations of Americans who would follow. This Could best be done, Jefferson was convinced, by a system of public education. Education was seen as the chief guardian and the principal lifeline of democracy; without education, democracy would perish.11 Jefferson's commitment to local control of edu- cation is noted by Good: Because "the people are the best judges of local issues" and "the safest depositories of freedom,” Jefferson favored local control of the public schools. The people themselves, he said, do incom- parably better than a central government what they are competent to understand.12 10Herbert M. Hamlin, The Public and Its Education (Danville, 111.: The Interstate, I955 , p. 38. 11Power, pp, cit., p. 446. 12 H. G. Good, A Histor of American Education (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1962), p. 91. Jefferscn :5 Strong chili: r. c be locall's ELS positi . . ‘v~eu,:. I 50‘ oh. "1‘ ‘ ‘c.& be be 33 Jefferson throughout his political lifetime reiterated his strong feeling that public schools should be free for children of the rich and poor alike, and that they should be locally controlled and locally financed as well.13 His position is well stated in a personal letter to a friend: "If it is believed that the elementary schools will be better managed by the Governor and Council, the Commissioners of the Literary Fund, or any other general authority of the government, than by parents in each ward, 14 Jefferson's it is a belief against all experience." strong belief in citizen involvement is further noted by Beck: Jefferson never deviated from his espousal of decen- tralization. In the matter of school control he Specifically stated that the control of schools should be lodged in the "ward"--an area some five or Six miles square but smaller than a country.15 The impact of Jeffersonian influence on present school governance is summarized by Conant: ”Not that the characteristically American system of local control of public schools (today there are some 40,000 independent 13James B. Conant, Thomas Jefferson and the Develop- ment of American Public Education (Los Angeles: UniverSity of California Press, I962), p. 41. 14Thomas Jefferson Papers of the Librar of Con- ress From a Manuscript Letter to Joseph CaEeII, Feb. 2, 9816, Library of Congress, Vol. 206, pp. 53-56. 15Robert H. Beck, A Social History of Education (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., I965), pp. 84l85. sire". bear 0“ xlitzca. s O ' o :e 11:93:. are deletzat Handed: b'." the C021: are {Eserv :3 Effect, TharefOre’ allocated St and much 0 geilfirally COIQnieS 34 school boards) can be attributed to Jefferson, but the political success of Jeffersonian democracy was surely one important factor in the development."16 ppvelopment of State Systems of Education The powers of the government of the United States are delegated rather than inherited. The Tenth.Amendment provided: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectively or to the people."17 In effect, the Constitution makes no reference to education. Therefore, under the Tenth Amendment, the states were allocated the main responsibility for schools. State systems evolved slowly and experimentally and much of the early related legislative provisions were generally "piecemeal" in nature. From the first the colonies and later the states were independent, and as a result so were their educational systems. This is a note- worthy feature of American educational organization-~the ”reserved powers" clause of the Constitution preserved this independence . 18 16Conant, pp, cit., p. 10. l7U.S. Constitution, Amendment x. 18Good, pp, cit., p. 143. m'v'ET ext E. States had C138: Stat 30 50 um; :‘~f~ ' .7 n V jnltlo Cat ' 35 The first state board of education was established in New York in 1784, but was given responsibility only for colleges and academies authorized during colonial days. Not until 1904 was the state of New York made responsible for the public schools. It was only after Massachusetts established a state board of education in 1837 that the movement made any Significant headway. By 1870 most states had established boards of education. But the older states, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Maine did not do so until after the beginning of the present century. Recognition of the responsibility of the people of the state for education developed Slowly in most states, but much.more Slowly in some than in others. The people in each state had to develop their own plans and policies in that there were no specific patterns to follow and no general design had been agreed upon. AS one author has noted: "It seems evident that state systems of edu- cation in this country are still in the process of evolution.“19 The basic provisions for education in each state are found in their respective constitutions. Although the phraseology varies considerably, the constitution in most states includes a mandate or directive requiring the legislature to provide an effective system of public instruction, free of tuition charges, and legally open 19Morphet, Johns, and Reller, pp, cit., p. 235. . . . 'on‘ b vans.l ttle OO’Val ma? ’:“ wt to kn: 10Ca1 aUtC: schools be by legiSlaI Why I to ContrOl I “ y “me flHal Ilthin the of Pilblic I H Ho ff k: "h Y i 36 to all. In essence, the people of each state determine the basic policies relating to the plan of organization within the state.20 It is important to understand that local school boards are ultimately responsible to the states and if the state legislatures so desire, they can control the local boards. In essence, all local school boards are responsible to their respective states and all of their powers are derived from this source. An insightful observation is offered by Harris: "It is equally impor- tant to know that when individuals or groups argue for local autonomy in school matters and demand that the schools be returned to the peOple, it can only be done by legislation passed by the state legislature or authority delegated by it to the local school district to control its own affairs."21 Although the states have the final authority for the development of education within their respective borders, the direct management of public school systems has developed to the extent that local school districts have assumed the major responsi- bility for administering the schools. To achieve these ends, legislation has been passed in most states to 201bid., p. 236. 21Harris, pp, cit., p. 27. . S ‘A r a . arc‘llue ‘Lv. O in a giver. n.“ 7 O CEZLCB l S I Since tfi SEC; CS; datio: a"‘-~' insiSZj To the boards for de' 0f the 37 provide for more direct participation of the residents in a given district in school district matters.22 The importance of state systems of public edu- cation is noted by Morphet, Johns, and Reller: Since education is concerned with the development and capabilities of each citizen and is the foun- dation for many of the beliefs, inspirations, and actions of the people, American citizens have always insisted that the control be kept in their hands. To that end they have established state and local boards of education that are responsible to them for determining policies subject to the provisions of the constitution and laws of the state.23 The Development of Organized Citizens Groups Our state and national histories are replete with accounts of ways hundreds of local, state, and national groups have contributed to public education through the process of citizen involvement. Karl Hereford has reported: Lay participation in and for the public schools is as old as the schools themselves. Early school trustees, the lyceums of the early nineteenth century, parent-teacher organizations, numerous and varied peculiarly local organizations, such as band boosters, clubs, athletic alumni associations, as well as certain anti-public education groups, are merely manifestations of this interest and partici- pation. Boards of education and school administrators have grown accustomed to working in the company of such groups.24 22George M. Johnson, Education Law (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, I969), pp. 13-14. 23Morphet, Johns, and Reller, pp, cit., p. 237. 24Karl Thomas Hereford, "Citizens Committee for Public Schools," Bulletin, Bureau of School Service, Uni- versity of Kentucky, XXVII, No. 1 (September, 1954), 9. . q fir semen in ll‘ '3 .‘7' D ~ - ‘fi..' . ‘ ”iced ‘ 'N In :CSQIess c hi’le had a CLOSEIY wi parents a in the col. '7", l. hove a PM 38 Notable contributors to the development of lay partici- pation in school matters were: The National Congress of Mothers, which later became the National Congress of Parents and Teachers; the Pennsylvania Society for the Promotion of Public Schools; the American Institute of Instruction, and the Public Education Association of New York. The Parent-Teachers Associations (P.T.A.'s) founded in 1897 and united nationally in the National Congress of Parents and Teachers--in and of themselves-- have had a significant impact on citizen involvement. There are approximately 28,000 local units working closely with school administrators in trying to give parents a clearer conception of what the schools are trying to do and to promote the welfare of the children in the community.25 The feeling that organized citizen groups could have a profound effect on public education became so widespread that in 1949 the National Citizen's Commission for the Public Schools was organized to stimulate public interest in schooling and to develOp local study and action groups. As a means of doing this it stimulated the creation of citizen's advisory groups throughout the United States. 25Irwin T. Sanders, The Community (New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1966), p. 268. ' I":‘ I - “In" Schools we. fa: Better 1.1;: are-tern i;s olved ;lan when for better out the no '7‘). *o '0' or the S: CitiZen CC comittee ties invol ties Were I . I ‘0 “We t3 estmated *«ect in- existenCe I T. \= A) 39 The National Citizen's Commission for the Public Schools was superceded by the National Citizen's Council for Better Schools in 1955. The council promoted the improvement of both public and private schools. It dissolved itself in 1959, in accordance with the original plan when it appeared that lay-professional cooperation for better schools had become firmly established through- out the nation.26 The Year-Book Committee of the National Society for the Study of Education made a national survey of citizen c00peration for better schools in 1954. The committee found a great increase in educational activi- ties involving the coOperation of citizens. These activi- ties were of many types and were being carried out at all levels of school government.27 It is interesting to note that at the time of the Committee's study an estimated 10,000 local citizens committees-~with a direct involvement in public schools--had come into existence Since World War 11.28 The involvement of organized citizens groups appears to have definitely had an important influence 26Morphet, Johns, and Reller, pp, cit., p. 15. 27Ibid. 28Hereford, pp, cit., p. 9. Taken tOgE cbaracteri grcin'th O f Peep;e fc I 40 on the development of citizen participation in school- related matters. More than a century ago De Tocqueville was amazed by the number and variety of volunteer groups in American society. A half century ago another foreign observer, Lord Bryce, noticed what he called an almost religious faith of the American peOple in education. Taken together we have perhaps the most Significant characteristic that has evolved in the deve10pment and growth of the American public schools system.29 Mort and Reusser conclude: "It is a school system molded by people for the most part not officially responsible; brought into existence through their influence on local, state, and Federal government agencies; expressing the belief that education is a powerful instrument in such a society as ours or can become a powerful instrument.30 The Emerging Concept of Community PartiCipation in American InstitutiOns The Effect on Urban America Professionalism and the tenets of the municipal reform movement are under attack in large American cities by citizens who contend that institutional arrangements 29Paul R. Mort and Walter C. Reusser, Public School Finance (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1951), p. 368. 3oIbid. -.__4_ e::i*as*.s u: :erio. cf -. smeaess 1 3231108 a:. SP‘C‘Cifical Kctler has are 50‘. s; but are p: Commit), We: and The at. fOI'CegI witho; VhEn E life a dent q insis. This Strit CommunitI Irnvolvehe1 (XaY‘JUne p, 175. (u 41 have maximized the wrong values by placing too much emphasis upon centralization of power in city hall--and paying too little attention to responsiveness as a cri- 31 terion of democratic government. This lack of respon- siveness is most prevalent in the urban centers of America and has had its greatest effect on the poor-- Specifically the blacks, Chicanos, and Puerto Ricans. Kotler has noted that the riots in black neighborhoods are not Simply the result of a breakdown of law and order but are political events reflecting the establishment of community power in conflict with the established city 32 He adds: power and carrying a message-~"self rule." The absolute rule of Negro communities by outside forces has reached the highest degree possible without precipitating rebellion. At the point when practically all decisions affecting public life are made on the outside, a politically confi- dent and conscious people aspiring to be free must insist upon a share in local rule.33 This striving for involvement has a rhetoric of its own with shouts of "power to the people,“ "black power," and "community control" permeating the urban scene.34 31Joseph F. Zimmerman, "Neighborhood and Citizen Involvement," Public Administration Review, XXXII, No. 3 32Milton Kotler, "Two Essays on the Neighborhood Corporation," in Urban Amprica: Goals and Problems (wash- ington D.C.: Government Printing Office, August, 1967), p. 176. 33Ibid. 34Zimmerman, Joseph, pp. cit., p. 210. 'selfirule for its cle areas. T- ! c . :CHONS: 42 There is definitely more pressure for self- ersonnel selection. The neighborhood boards have been allowed to élevelop according tO their reSpective needs and concerns. 1421bid., p. 6. 143Linda Raymond, "Power to the People," The Louisville Times, October 3, 1972. 1441bid. 90 However, it is important tO note the following "limi- tations” which have been imposed by the central board: NO action Of the neighborhood board must violate any existing state or federal law or "negotiated agreements that govern the action Of the Louisville Board Of Education (i.e. union agreements)." The neighborhood boards Of education are to be composed of an elected majority Of parents and an elected minority Of staff at the elementary school and an elected majority Of parents and an elected minority Of staff and students at the secondary level. ‘ The neighborhood boards will function similar to the parent Board Of Education with the boards establishing policy through accepting or rejecting the principals' recommendations. 45 The Louisville Board Of Education has been com- Initted to the neighborhood board concept for several years. This commitment has been based on educational Imesearch showing that positive attitudes Of involved Parents directly affect the attitudes Of their children.]'46 Tame philosophic base Of Louisville's attempt at decen- tralization is cogently reflected in a recent statement: It is axiomatic in the social sciences that the fun- damental drive Of all mankind is the drive for power or status. For it is power alone that can guarantee freedom and justice for the holder thereof. Power- lessness not only leads to frustration and self- debasement, but it is the fountainhead Of extremism and madness. The rational acceptance Of the realities Of one's position and the calm preparation for the struggle thus defined is the normal procedure for a healthy existence. Therefore, a community coming 145Louisville Public Schools, "Thirty City SChOOlS Setting Up Neighborhood School Boards ," Daybreak, II, NO. 4 (June, 1972), pp. 1, 15. 146Ibid., p. 15. 91 together in terms Of a realistic approach to its problems must see early in its investigation that the schools are of fundamental importance.147 (The following statements implicitly express the desire of the Louisville Public School System to share ‘their ”power" with the community: Power is the name of the game. Power vested in the people whereby they have a voice in the Operation Of their schools, this is the burning issue of our time. This is a restatement of the faith Of our forefathers. Decentralization Of power is merely the pro- gressive attempt to combine the principles Of democracy with the complexities and realities Of urbanization. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 TO argue against th decentralization Of power to the community is to argue against the fundamental concepts Of democracy.14 Thus far the formation of the neighborhood school kXDards in Louisville has been free Of the conflict and \Kiolence that have doomed other decentralization projects-- the most notable being the now famous Ocean Hill-Browns- ville experiment in New York City."L49 This early success 143 largely attributed to the fact that teachers, parents, 14‘7Department Of Community Development, Louisville Public Schools, "A Point Of View: Decentralization; Com- 3"“1nity Control; Parent Involvement; Accountability; Com- rmAnity Education; Community Involvement; and Community schools," Position Paper, 1972. 1481bid. 149Louisville Public Schools, op, cit., p. 15. 92 residents, and administrators have cooperated in imple- menting the decentralization plan.150 A recent staff memo from the Louisville Department of Community Relations spells out the dilemma that has Ibeen-staring into the face Of public institutions for years: ”we've got tO decide how we view the community-~as an asset or as a liability." The Louisville Board of Education has clearly decided it thinks the com- munity is an asset, and the dream while a little battered and bruised for the wear, may yet come true.151 Perceptual Theory Since this study is primarily concerned with the perceptions Of the individuals who are participating, it kmecomes necessary tO provide a brief review of the under- lying concepts Of perceptual theory and its resultant effect upon behavior. Defining Perception In current psychology the role Of perception has achieved such a pivotal position that one might well describe our present era as the "age Of perception."]'52 Perception has come to be recognized as a focal point 111 the hwman person--a vital process which penetrates \. lsoIbid. lSlIbid.p pp. 15-16. 152William C. Bier, S. J., ed., Perception in EEEesent Day PsychOlOgy: A Symposium (New York: American C:atholic Psychological Association, 1956), p. 3. 93 and demands investigation on all levels--psychological, PhYSiological, and philOSOphical.153 Recent theories, research, and investigations 'which relate and integrate perception with personality, learning, motivation, and other factors, negate the potential to Offer a narrow and concise definition Of perception. One researcher has noted that in Floyd All- port's comprehensive study Of perceptual theory, Theories O_f Perception and the Concept Of Structure, the problem (bf arriving at an appropriate definition is discussed at length in three different chapters-~without arriving at a: conclusive definition which would apply to the variety (Df'developments in modern perceptual research.154 Kai Von Fieandt had defined perception as: An experienced sensation, i.e. a phenomena impression resulting functionally from certain inputs. Sensations are initiated by changes in the environmental conditions Of our receptors. Actually perception cannot be regarde as a matter Of merely recording and coding stimuli: It is in part an autonomous creative process within the organism. Everybody creates a perceptual role Of his own, a kind Of behavioral environment built upon percepts.155 1531bid. 154Ibid. , 155Kai von Fieandt, The WOrld Of Perception (Illr 1nois: The Dorsey Press, 1966), p. 4. 94 Another definition Of perception simply refers to it as "the awareness that a living thing has Of its environ- 156 An interesting perspective Of perception is ment." Offered by Getzels, Lipham, and Campbell: Involved in the act of perceiving are our beliefs, attitudes, values, and dispositions. In a sense these are the prisms through which reality is filtered into experience through the mechanisms Of assimilation, rationalization, simplification, and accentuation.157 In developing any definition Of perception, Ittelson and Cantril have stressed the importance Of incorporating the three major characteristics Of perception. They summarize these as follows: "Perceiving is that part Of the process Of liVing by which each one Of us, from his particular point Of view, creates for himself the world within which he has his life's experiences and through which he strives to gain his satisfactions."158 The manner in which an individual perceives is unique to the individual and his own situation. Adelbert Ames has written: 156Henry H. Albers, Principles Of Or anizations iand Management (New York: JOhn Wiley and Sons Inc., I966), p. 415. 157Jacob W. Getzels, James M. Lipham, Roald F. (2ampbell, Educationa1_Administration a§ a Social Process (New York: Harper & Row PfiBliShers, 1968), p. 315. 158William H. Ittelson and Hadley Cantril, Per- ception (New York: Random House, 1954), p. 5. 95 Every individual Operates in the now Of his own unique situation. Every individual perceives from his particular unique point Of view in time and space. He does this on the basis Of the significance to him Of his unique situation as interpreted and foreseen in terms of his stored significances derived from his prior experience both inherited and personal. In effect, individuals perceive in a selective manner. The concept Of selective perception implies that people perceive what they think will help satisfy needs, ignore what is disturbing, and again perceive disturbances that persist and increase.160 Stated in a Sinnilar manner, selective perception connotes that: "Each role incumbent selectively perceives and organizes the relationship in terms Of his own goals, experiences, and information . "161 Henry Albers has developed a list Of the factors that lead tO perceptual differences in individuals. These are: sensory factors, age, sex, educational levels, economic levels, regional differences, religious and other loyalties, organizational interests, and per- 162 8Quality factors . ‘ 159Hadley Cantril, ed., The Morning Notes Of Adelbert Ames (New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, I930) , p. 81. 160Harold J. Leavitt, Managerial Psychol (Chicago: The University Of Chicago Press,j , p. 25. 161 . . Getzels, Lipham, Campbell, op. c1t., p. 286. 162 Albers, op. cit., pp. 415-16. 96 Perception and Behavior Perceptual psychologists have stated, as a basic axiom, that all behavior is a product Of the perceptual field Of the behaver at the moment Of action. That is to say, how any person behaves will be a direct out- growth Of the ways things seem to him at the moment of 163 his behaving. The perceptual view Of human behavior hold that: "The behavior Of an individual is a function 164 Of his ways of perceiving." An insightful Observation Of the importance Of this concept is Offered: A person's behavior is, indeed, a result Of his past experience, his life history. How he behaves right now, however, results from his ways of seeing, learned from his past experience to be sure, but existing in his present perception at this time. If human behavior is a function Of perception and if perception exists in the present then it should be possible to change behavior if we can change present perceptions. This Opens vast new possibilities for education.155 Arthur Combs reinforces this contention: "TO predict and change behavior requires that we understand the nature Of 166 the individual's perceptual field." Combs also notes: 163Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Perceiving, Behavin Becoming--Yearbook 1962 (washington, D.C.: Nationa Education AssociatiOn), p. 50. 164 165 Ibid., p. 67. Ibid. 1651bid., p. 76. 97 The degree to which any perception will affect behavior depends upon its personal meaning for the individual. . . . The deeper more personally sig- nificant the perception, moreover, the more likely it is to affect behavior.1 A pertinent supplement to this point follows: What a person does, what a person learns, is thus a product Of what is going on in his unique and personal field Of awareness. People behave in terms Of the personal meanings (perceptions exist- ing for them at the moment of action).168 In effect, "Like the mirrors at amusement parks, we dis- tort the world in relation to our own tensions."169 It appears that the major determining factor in behavior is the need Of the behaver. Combs and Syngg confirm this Observation: It is the need Of the behaver which gives meaning, direction, and consistency to behavior, and the failure Of the external approach to find consis- tency to and predictability in individual human behavior is, in a large degree the result Of the failure Of the external frame Of reference tO supply an adequate answer to the ouestion Of what people need and why they behave.1 0 Perception and Administrative Behavior Research conducted at the University Of Kentucky, concerning school administrators, has concluded that indi- vidual behavior is strongly associated with the perceptions 167 168 Ibid., p. 61. Ibid., p. 69. 169Leavitt, op. cit., p. 24. 170Arthur Combs and Donald Syngg, Individual Behavior (New York: Harper & Brothers PubliShers, 1949), p. 51. 98 an individual holds. According tO this theory, behavior grows out Of perception. Consequently, if knowledge Of a person's perceptions is available, it is possible to predict his behavior. Conversely when the individual behaves, and this behavior is studied, it is possible to infer certain Of his perceptions. This theory holds that it is not possible for a person to perform in a manner inconsistent with his perceptions--or stated more suc- cinctly: "An individual is what he performs and what he performs is what he is."171 The research report con- cludes: The starting point in analyzing and describing the behavior of an administrator is the determination Of his perceptions as related to himself and tO his job. It follows that changing perceptions would be expected to change behav1ors.17 Andrew Halpin has presented a theory Of adminis- trative behavior based on the premise that an adminis- trator's perception Of a given task will result in the perception defining the problem involved, and his behavior both as a decision maker and as a group leader is 173 ”inexorable mediated through this perception." Leavitt 17J'Truman M. Pierce and E. C. Merrill Jr., "The Individual and Administrator Behavior," in Administrative Behavior in Education, ed. by Roald R. Campbell and Russell T. Gregg (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1957), p. 345. 1721bid. 173Andrew W. Halpin, "A Paradigm for Research on Administrator Behavior,” in Campbell and Gregg, op. cit., p. 178. 99 reinforces this contention by stressing that for admin- istrative and managerial purposes, the importance Of the perceptual world is clear. He concludes that if the present behavior Of administrators is determined largely by their perceptions Of their environments, then it becomes critical for one to understand these per- ceptions, if one is to understand the circumstances under which administrative behavior might be changed.174 Morphet, Johns, and Reller have contended that the manner in which an administrator perceives his role in an organizational structure ultimately effects his behavior in that role. An added dimension which should be con- sidered within this context is: "The administrator's perception Of the school system's task may be different than the perceptions Of other members Of the organization. This is a potential source of conflict."175 Alexander Kloster had advanced the idea that in making administrative decisions it is imperative that attempts be made to predict the ultimate outcomes Of these decisions. He contends that this can best be accomplished by gaining a greater awareness and under- standing Of the perceptions Of the subordinates who will be effected by the decisions rendered. Kloster concludes —__ 174Leavitt, op, cit., p. 27. 175Morphet, Johns, and Reller, op. cit., p. 138. 100 that ”understanding the perceptions Of others" is a needed vehicle in long-range administrative planning.176 Administrative management science in recent years has become more aware Of the importance and necessity Of assessing the perceptions Of administrators in terms Of understanding their behavioral patterns. The tech- niques used most Often tO measure administrative per- ceptions have been the interview procedures and the 177 structured questionnaire. The important position that perceptual theory has achieved in management science is reported by Griffiths: Organizations are more and more building into them- selves "scanning" devices which make it possible to perceive problems even before they occur. This practice ranges, for example, from the use Of economic analysis to foretell the state Of the economy tO the employment Of consulting psycholo- gists to fathom the mental attitudes Of employees before trouble breaks out. These reports are the stimuli fed into the decision process of an organi- zation. One measure Of the success Of an organi- zation is the extent to which the decisionemakers PeI'CEive the right problems. define, and limit them.l78 176Alexander Kloster, Administrative Seminar with .Mott Interns at Michigan State University, February 7, 1973. 177Halpin, 92: cit., p. 177. 178Daniel E. Griffiths, Admipistrative Theory (New York: Appleton-Century-Croft, Inc., 1959f, p. 97. 101 Summary An attempt has been made in this chapter to present a multi-dimensional view Of citizen involvement in American public education. It was noted that citizen involvement had its genesis in colonial times and evolved as an integral component Of the democratic tradition. The town meeting form Of government in colonial America, Thomas Jefferson's; influence, the development of state systems Of education, and the impact of organized citizens' groups were cited as important contributors to the evolving process Of citizen involvement. Attention was given to the growing national con- cern for greater participation by citizens in the policy- making structure Of American societal institutions. This emerging concept Of self-determination in American life has provided the backdrop against which citizen involve— ment in public education has emerged. The concept Of lay advisory councils as vehicles for citizen involvement was examined and the myriad Of purposes, functions, and organizational patterns, which have characterized the development Of these councils was presented. The development Of lay advisory councils in WOrcester, Massachusetts, and New Haven, Connecticut were also presented as specific examples Of this type Of citizen involvement. 102 Decentralization models developed in New York City; Detroit, Michigan; and Louisville, Kentucky were reviewed as alternate means Of providing lay participation in public education. Since the theoretical base Of this study was predicated on the perceptions Of the individuals who participated, an attempt was made to briefly analyze the underlying concepts Of perceptual theory. Particular emphasis was given tO the relationship Of perceptions to individual behavior-~with special attention devoted to the relationship Of perceptions to administrative behavior. The importance and necessity Of involving citizens in American public education is probably best epitomized in the summary statement Of the 1956 White House Con- ference on Education: In the final analysis, it is only the public which /’ can create gOOd schools and nurture them. In the long run schools must do what the public wants, and if no strong public will be made known, schools falter. Public interest in education is aroused only by knowledge Of problems and intentions, and can continue only if the public can play an active role in school affairs.17 179McCloskey, op. cit., p. 17. CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY Introduction This chapter provides a description Of the survey procedures and research methods used in conducting the study. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Type Of The following specific areas are described: Type Of study; Population and sampling method; Setting for the study; Instrumentation; Collection Of Data; Treatment Of Data; Testable Hypotheses; Statistical procedures. Study The purpose Of this study was to assess the per- ceptions Of school administrators concerning citizen involvement in the educational decision—making process. As Van Dalen states: "Factual information about the existing status enables members of the profession tO 103 104 make more intelligent plans about future courses Of action and helps them interpret educational problems more effectively to the public."1 The study utilized both comparative and descrip— tive techniques Of research. Comparisons were made among the three administrative groups surveyed—~principals, community school directors, and central Office adminis- trators. The importance Of descriptive studies is well stated by Borg: Descriptive studies serve several very important functions in education. First in new science, the body of knowledge is relatively small, and we are often confused with conflicting claims and theories. Under these conditions it is Often Of great value merely to know the current state Of the science. Descriptive research provides us with a starting point, and therefore, is Often carried out as a pre- liminary step to be followed by research using more rigorous control and more Objective methods.2 GOOd writes: Descriptive studies may include present facts or current conditions concerning the nature Of a group Of persons, a number Of Objects or a class Of events, and may involve the procedures Of induction, analysis, classification, enumeration, or measurement. The terms survey and status suggest the gathering Of ev1dence relaEihE‘Eb current conditions. Analytical school surveys Of recent years tel us not only where we are in a particular school system but also recommends next steps by way of progress and suggests the methods Of reaching the 1DiebOld B. Van Dalen, Understanding Educational Research (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962), p. 184. 2Walter R. Borg, Educational Research (New York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1963)) p._202. 105 goal Of an improved instructional program. . . . Certainly adequate survey data in the hands Of an investigator Of insight can be used for forward looking purposes.3 Population and Sampling Method The population used for the study consisted Of principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators Of the Flint, Michigan public school sys- tem. The sample population Of these three categories Of school administrators consisted of: a) all principals N = 55 b) all community school directors N = 56 c) selected central Office administrators N = 39 Total sample population N = 150 The selected sample Of central Office administrators was confined to those with the rank Of division chief, department head, or assistant department head. This select sample represented those administrators who worked most closely with principals and community school directors and who were involved, on a regular basis, in the educational decisiondmaking process Of the school system. A careful review Of the administrative organi- zational charts Of the Flint school system, and discussion 3Carter V. Good, Introduction togducational Besearch (New York: Meridith Publishing Co., 1963), pp. 244-450 106 with several Of the central Office administrators in the Flint school system, were very helpful in developing the criteria for this selected sample Of central Office administrators. The Setting The city Of Flint, Michigan served as the setting for the study. The population Of Flint according to the 1970 census was 193,574 and the Standard MetrOpOlitan Statistical Area (including Lapeer and Genesee Counties) totalled 493,378. This urban industrial community is spread over 32.9 square miles Of area and has similar racial and ethnic characteristics as other northern industrial urban centers. The primary industry in Flint is automobile manu- facturing. The city has commonly been referred to as the birthplace Of our "world on wheels." At the turn Of the century Flint had already received the title Of "The Vehicle City." The main manufacturing plant Of the Buick Motor Division is located in Flint, and also large plants Of Chevrolet Motors Division, A. C. Sparkplug, and Fisher Body Divisions are located within the immev diate city. It is easy to understand why Flint has come to be known as the "General Motors City"--most Of the work force in Flint is employed by General Motors or a related business. 107 There are parks and playgrounds Spread throughout the city--a total Of 1,600 acres. In addition there is a liberal arts college, a respected technical institute and a business university. A recently develOped cultural arts area encompasses a museum, a planetarium, a library, a center for science, and a spacious auditorium. The Flint public school district is Michigan's second largest district--second only to Detroit. It had a student population in September, 1972, of 43,500. The system is composed Of 4 senior high schools, 8 junior high schools, and 43 elementary schools. Flint is considered to be the birthplace Of com- munity school education-~a concept that Opens the schools to the total public for countless activities and education beyond the traditional school day and year. All_of Flint's schools Operate on this concept and in effect are serving the citizenry Of Flint as community centers with large numbers Of participants and a wide diversity Of programs and services. The basic underlying concept Of the Flint com- munity school commitment has been stated in a specific goal adopted by the Flint Board Of Education: The Community School Concopp and Continuing Edu- cation--The Flint system of Community Education, WhiEh—uses the schools as resources, strives to serve the Flint community on an around-the—clock and year-around basis. Areas of service range all the way from classes for preschoolers tO activities for married couples and senior citizens, and embrace, among other things, continuing education, cultural 108 enrichment, recreation, health and social services, supplementary to those which can be provided in the regular school programs. Also, the community schools serve as catalytic agents by providing leadership to mobilize local resources for community improvement. The Flint public schools will continue to seek ways to be increasingly responsive to the needs Of the total community through innovative and exemplary community programs. The unique working partnership that has existed since 1935 between the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation and the Flint Board Of Education has been a prime catalytic agent in fostering the genesis and evolution Of the community school concept in Flint. The continued assistance Of the Foundation, through allocations of extensive funding and resources, has provided the Flint board of education with an important, necessary, and committed "partner" in the development Of its total educational program. "The Lighted School"--a symbol Of the Flint schools in action has become known nationwide. Flint's pioneering effort and continued commitment to the com— munity school philosophy has significantly contributed to the rapidly growing national community education movement . Instrumentation The Specific instrument used to gather the data necessary to fulfill the purposes of the study was a 4Goals Of the Flint Board Of Education, op, cit. 109 structured questionnaire developed by the researcher. It has been reported that more studies in the field Of social investigation have been made with questionnaires than with any other type of survey instrument.5 In edu— cation the questionnaire survey has been the most widely used because it has been a valuable technique in helping to understand the current situation in some particular educational area.6 Claire Selltiz lists several factors which improve the potential for response: 1) The questionnaire length 2) The attractiveness Of the questionnaire 3) The ease with which the questionnaire can be completed and returned 4) Color coding and quality printing 5) Offering the sample pooulation results Of an abstract Of the study. All Of these factors were taken into consideration when the questionnaire, used in this study, was being developed and the final form reflected several Of these consider- ations. The questionnaire was based on topic areas con— sidered to be important tO citizen involvement in the educational decision—making process. A review Of the 61bid. 7Claire Selltiz, et a1., Research Methods in Social Relations (New YorE: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1967), pp. 237-41. 110 literature pertaining to citizen participation in schools, and interviews with selected individuals, who had experience in this area, was undertaken prior to the development Of the instrument. Suggested topic areas Obtained from these sources were then compiled and cate- gorized. The questionnaire was field tested on ten Mott Interns who were studying community education in Flint, and several members Of the central Office administrative staff Of the Flint school system who were pop_participants in the study. The results Of the field test were care- fully reviewed and analyzed. As'a consequence Of the pre-test, several questions were added, several were deleted, and several sentences were rephrased and ambigious words were replaced. The revised instrument was reviewed with the Michigan State University Research Consultation Office—— it was decided that no major changes would be necessary and that the questionnaire could be developed into its final form. The only changes in the format Of the final instrument consisted Of minor rewording. An appropriate letter Of explanation was developed to accompany each questionnaire. Each sample population-- principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators--received the same questionnaire, however a color-coding technique was used to insure identification Of the three groups. 111 The questionnaire was developed in four distinct parts: Part I contained twenty-three items and was devoted to determining the functions Of school- community advisory councils--as perceived by school administrators. Part II was intended to rank eighteen individuals and groups concerning their support for school- community advisory councils--as perceived by school administrators. Part III contained twenty-four items and was developed to assess administrative perceptions con- cerning the effect that school-community advisory councils would have on school-community relations, the effect that the councils would have on educational decision making, and the effect that the councils would have on administrative effectiveness. Two Of the questions in this section (1m, 7) did not deal directly with the specific hypotheses being tested but rather were included to provide general infor— mation. The questions were intended to provide insight concerning administrative perceptions Of the effect the councils would have on improving the schools' total educational program and whether or not the councils were viewed as being necessary and important components Of the school system. 112 Part IV of the questionnaire consisted Of two short fill—in questions designed to assess adminis- trative perceptions concerning the major advantages and disadvantages Of school-community advisory coun- cils. These two questions were also not directly related to the specific hypotheses being tested but rather were added to provide additional general information. Collection Of Data The questionnaires were mailed to oll_members Of the sample pOpulation--principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators-~on February 7, 1973, along with an appropriate letter and a self-addressed stamped envelope (see Appendix B). On March 2, 1973, after a 76 per cent (114 out of 150) response had been received, a follow-up letter (see Appendix B) and another copy Of the instrument, along with a self—addressed return envelope, were mailed to those members Of the sample population who had not responded tO the original request. A total Of 86 per cent (129 out Of 150) of the questionnaires were received by the cut-Off date Of March 12. A table listing the responses Of each Of the groups surveyed and the final total for the collectivity Of the sample follows. 113 TABLE 3.l.--Record Of response gr~ =- Number Number Group Sent Returned N % Principals 55 49 89 Community School Directors 56 47 84 Central Office Administrators 39 33 85 Total 150 129 86 Treatment Of the Data The responses tO the questionnaires were appro- priately coded and then key punched and verified by the Michigan State University Computer Center. Number values were assigned to all items in Parts I, II, and III Of the questionnaire. Responses tO Parts I and II were assigned number values in a similar way with the number 5 assigned tO the highest positive response and the number 1 assigned to the lowest negative response. The scoring design was structured as follows: Part I Part II Response Value Response Value Very Extensively 5 Very High 5 Extensively 4 High 4 Moderately 3 Moderate 3 Minimally 2 Low 2 Not At All 1 Very Low 1 114 Part III was designed with an agreement scale allowing for five degrees Of response. Questions were worded so that both positive and negative responses were required. This technique was most applicable tO the use Of an agreement scale in that it forced the respondents into a closer analysis Of each statement and in turn alleviated the built-in bias of positive responses. Of the twenty-four items in Part III, seventeen were stated in a positive form and seven in a negative form. The scoring design was structured as follows: Positive Items Negative Items Response Value Repponse Value Strongly Agree 5 Strongly Agree 1 Agree 4 Agree 2 Undecided 3 Undecided 3 Disagree 2 Disagree 4 Strongly Disagree 1 Strongly Disagree 5 The conversion noted herein was necessary to have the positive and negative responses correspond in scoring. Part IV consisted Of short-answer questions and is reported in Chapter IV in narrative form. Testable Hypotheses In order tO ascertain whether significant dif— ferences existed among the perceptions Of principals, community school directors, and central Office adminis- trators, concerning the involvement of school-community 115 advisory councils in the educational decision—making process it was necessary to test the following null hypotheses: Hypothesis 1: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions Of school principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators con- cerning the functions Of school-community advisory councils. ' HO 1: ml = m2 = m3 Hypothesis 2: There are nO significant differences among the per- ceptions of school principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators con- cerning which individuals and groups are supportive Of school-community advisory councils. HO 2: ml = m2 = m3 Hypothesis 3: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions Of school principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators con— cerning the extent tO which school-community advisory councils will effect school-community relationships. H03: ml=m2=m3 Hypothesis 4: There are nO significant differences among the per- ceptions Of school principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators con— cerning the extent to which school-community advisory councils will effect educational decision making. Ho 4: ml = m2 = m3 116 Hypothesis 5: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions Of school principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators con- cerning the extent tO which school-community advisory councils will effect administrative effectiveness. HO 5: m1 = m = m Statistical Procedures The Research Consultation Office in the College Of Education at Michigan State University assisted in recommending appropriate statistical techniques for data analysis. Staff members Of the Research Office assisted in writing all computer programs for the data analysis. The computer programs and facilities Of the Michigan State University Computer Center were used. The statistical procedures used in the analysis of data are: (l) Finn's Multivariate Test Of Equality Of Mean Vectors8 to determine if significant differences existed among the three groups surveyed. This test was used for each Of the hypotheses tested. (2) Univariate Analysis Of Variance to determine where the specific differences, when noted, 8Jeremy D. Finn, Multivariance, Univariate and Eglfiiivariate Analysis Of VafianceapdCOvariance: A Ewan Program, modified by David J. Wright for Michigan State University C.D.C. 3600 computer. 117 existed among the three groups surveyed. This technique was used for each Of the hypotheses tested. The level Of significance was set at the .01 level for each Of the five hypotheses tested, thus setting the total experiment error rate at the .05 level. Summary This chapter has attempted to provide a description Of the planning and implementation Of the study. Specific attention was given to describing the type Of study, dis- cussing the pOpulation and sampling methods used, and presenting the setting where the study took place. The development and pre-test Of the instrument were traced, along with a description Of the various parts which com- prised the format Of the final instrument. The procedures used to collect the data and the treatment Of the data were presented. The five testable hypotheses were reviewed and the statistical procedures used in the analysis Of the data were discussed. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA Introduction The main purpose Of this study was to determine the expectations Of school administrators concerning the involvement of school-community advisory councils in the educational decision-making process. This was done by examining and comparing the differences in perceptions Of the three sample groups Of administrators--principa1s, community school directors, and central Office adminis- trators-~concerning: the functions Of school-community advisory councils; which individuals and groups would support the councils; the effect the councils would have on school—community relationships; and the effect the councils would have on educational decision making and adminiStrative effectiveness. The analysis Of data is presented in the follow- ing manner: (1) Restates each Of the original hypotheses Of the study and provides appropriate data and expla— nation for each; 118 119 (2) Restates--and analyzes the results Of-—the two items designed tO provide insight concerning administrative perceptions Of the effect the councils would have on improving the schools' total educational program, and the value and importance Of councils; (3) Restates-~and analyzes the results Of--the two short-answer questions designed to assess administrative perceptions concerning the major advantages and disadvantages Of school-community advisory councils. The chapter concludes with a summary of the findings. Perceived Functions OfSchool- Community Advisory Councils The null hypothesis tested for the difference among the perceptions Of the three sample groups Of school administrators concerning the functions Of school- community advisory councils was: Hypothesis 1: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions of school principals, community school directors and central Office administrators con- cerning the functions of school-community advisory councils. H01: ’11 = ‘32 = 1‘13 120 In Table 4.1 the F ratio for all three sample groups indicates the significance probability to be .0008 which exceeds the established .01 level Of significance. It is concluded that there is a statistically significant difference in the perceptions of the three sample groups. Therefore, null hypothesis H01 is rejected. TABLE 4.1.--Multivariate test Of equality Of mean vectors for differences in perceptions Of the three sample groups concerning the functions Of school-community advisory councils F df P Three Sample Groups 1.96 46 & 208 .0008 Variables Relatingpo Perceived Functions Of School-Community Advisory Councils The twenty-three items relating to the perceived functions Of school-community advisory councils are divided into six dependent variables. As seen in Table 4.2 the F ratio for variables 2 and 3 indicate the significance probabilities exceed the established .01 level Of signifi- cance. It is also important tO note that the significance probability Of variable 6 is extremely close to the estab- lished level Of significance. Therefore it is concluded that the perceptions Of the three sample groups do differ significantly on two of the six variables tested relating 121 to the functions Of school-community advisory councils, and that one additional variable can be classified as approaching significance. TABLE 4.2.--Mu1tivariate test Of equality Of mean vectors for the three sample groups on the six dependent variables concerning the functions Of school-community advisory councils Variablea V F df p 1. Community Oriented 1.49 12 & 242 .1276 2. Selection Of Staff 5.64 8 & 246 .0001 3. School Facilities 3.20 6 & 248 .0048 4. In-Service Training 0.86 4 & 250 .4945 5. School Policies 1.40 8 & 246 .1931 6. Evaluation Of Staff 2.37 8 & 246 .0178 aEach variable is related tO specific items on the questionnaire as follows: Community Oriented (1-3, 5-7), Selection Of Staff (8-11), School Facilities (4, l2, l3), In-service Training (14, 15), School Policies (16—19), Evaluation Of Staff (20-23). Variable 2 (Selection Of Staff) As seen in Table 4.3 the F ratio for items 8, 9, 10, and 11 indicates the significance probabilities for all four items exceed the established .01 level Of sig- nificance. Therefore it is concluded that the perceptions Of the three sample groups do differ significantly on all four items relating to the selection Of staff. Table 4.4 illustrates that community school directors had the highest mean score on each Of the four items. Central Office administrators had the 122 TABLE 4.3. -—Univariate comparison Of the three sample groups on the four items relating tO the selection of staff variable Item F df p 8. Selection Of Parapro- fessionals 14.66 2 & 126 .0001 9. Selection Of Teachers 13.93 2 & 126 .0001 10. Selection Of Adminis- trators 7.96 2 & 126 .0006 11. Selection Of Community School Directors 8.36 2 & 126 .0004 TABLE 4.4.--Comparison Of the mean differences in the per- ceptions Of the three sample groups on the four signifi- cant items relating tO the selection of staff variable . Central Community Princi- Office chOOl . . Item Directors pals Adminis- trators Mean Mean Mean 8. Selection Of Parapro- fessionals 2.85 1.89 2.03 9. Selection Of Teachers 2.48 1.69 1.48 10. Selection Of Adminis- trators 2.55 1.81 1.78 11. Selection of Community School Directors 2.78 1.89 2.24 123 lowest mean scores on two Of the items, selection Of teachers and selection Of administrators. Principals had the lowest mean score on the remaining two items, selection Of paraprofessionals and selection Of community school directors. The greatest difference in mean scores (1.0) occurred between community school directors and central Office administrators concerning the selection Of teachers. Other notable significant differences (.96) occurred between community school directors and principals con— cerning the selection of paraprofessionals, between com— munity school directors and principals (.89) concerning the selection Of community school directors, and between community school directors and central Office adminis- trators (.77) relating to the selection of administrators. Variable 3 (School Facilities) As seen in Table 4.5 the F ratio does not exceed the established .01 level Of significance for any Of the items listed. In that the school facilities variable shows significant differences, it becomes necessary to attribute this significance tO the items within the variable considered as a total set rather than as indi- vidual items. It is important to point out, however, that the significance probability Of item 12 is extremely close to the established level Of significance. There- fore it is concluded that although the perceptions Of the three sample groups do not differ significantly on 124 any Of the items listed, item 12 can be classified as approaching significance and would appear tO be the main item responsible for the significant differences noted in the school facilities variable. TABLE 4.5.--Univariate comparison Of the three sample groups on the four items relating to the school facilities variable Item F df p 4. Community Use Of School Facilities 2.55 2 & 126 .0816 12. Planning School Renovation Projects 4.67 2 & 126 .0111 13. Planning New School Facilities 2.46 2 & 126 .0891 Table 4.6 illustrates that community school directors had the highest mean score on the one item which approaches significance, planning school renovation projects. Central Office administratOrs had the lowest mean score on this item. The difference in the mean scores between the two groups on this item was .60. In that none Of the three items listed shows a significant difference it becomes necessary to take a look at the average mean scores Of the three groups on the total set of items. It is noted that community school directors achieved the highest average mean score for the three items with central Office administrators achieving the lowest average mean score. The difference 125 in the average mean score between the two groups was .32. It is also noted that small differences occurred on each item between each Of the three groups. Therefore it is concluded that one item, 12, approaches significance and appears to be the individual item responsible for effect- ing the multivariate significance Of the variable. It is further concluded that, while the smaller differences noted throughout the set Of items were not large enough individually to be significant, the consistency Of these differences throughout the set appear tO have been an additional important factor in causing the multivariate significance Of the variable. TABLE 4.6.--Comparison Of the mean differences in the per- ceptions Of the three sample groups on the three items relating to the school facilities variable . Central ngfiggity Princi- Office Item Directors pals Adminis- trators Mean Mean Mean 4. Community Use Of School Facilities 4.34 4.10 4.45 12. Planning School Renovation Projects 3.78 3.40 3.18 13. Planning New School Facilities 3.80 3.69 3.33 Average Mean Scores 3.97 3.73 3.65 126 Variable 6 (Evaluation of Staff) The multivariate F ratio for Variable 6 was extremely close to the established level Of significance. As seen in Table 4.7 the F ratio for item 20 indicated the significance probability exceeds the established .01 level Of significance. Therefore it is concluded that the perceptions of the three sample groups differ signifi- cantly on one Of the four items relating to the evalu- ation Of staff variable. It is further concluded that item 20, evaluation Of teachers, appears responsible for the multivariate F ratio significance as related tO the variable. TABLE 4.7.--Univariate comparison of the groups on the four items relating tO the staff variable to be the item approaching three sample evaluation Of Item F df p 20. Evaluation Of Teachers 4.91 2 & 126 .0089 21. Evaluation Of School Administrators 1.97 2 & 126 .1432 22. Evaluation of the Instruc— tional Program 0.64 2 & 126 .5283 23. Evaluation Of the Com- munity School Program 0.14 2 & 126 .8662 Table 4.8 illustrates that community school directors had the higher mean score for the item listed, evaluation Of teachers, while central Office adminis- trators achieved the lowest mean score. difference in mean scores between the two groups (.55) The significant 127 appears to be the main reason for the multivariate sig- nificance Of the variable. TABLE 4.8.--Comparison Of the mean differences in the per- ceptions Of the three sample groups on the one significant item relating to the evaluation Of staff variable Communit Central School y Princi- Office Item Directors pals Adminis- trators Mean Mean Mean 20. Evaluation Of Teachers 2.06 1.65 1.51 Grand Mean Scores (Functions) After having looked at the differences, the grand mean scores for each of the twenty-three items is provided to present an overall picture Of the perceived functions of school-community advisory councils. These are listed in rank order in Table 4.9 with the item having the highest grand mean score (4.5) listed first and the item having the lowest grand mean score (1.8) listed last. The standard deviations listed for each item range from a high Of 1.071 to a low Of .716. It is noted that only eleven Of the twenty—three items exceed a grand mean score of 3.0, which places these items on the positive side Of the rating scale.1 Included within these eleven 1Rating Scale: Very Extensively - 5, Extensively - 4, Moderately - 3, Minimally - 2, Not at all - 1. 128 TABLE 4.9.--A rank order listing Of the grand mean scores for the three sample groups on each Of the twenty-three items related to the functions Of school—community advisory councils . a Grand Variable Item Mean S.D. CO Neighborhood Oriented Problems 4.5 .716 CO Human Relations Projects 4.4 .718 SF Community Use Of School Facili- ties 4.3 .730 CO Fund Raising Activities 4.2 .997 CO Planning Activities for Adults 4.1 .724 CO Planning Activities for Children 3.8 .780 CO WOrking with Social Agencies 3.7 .936 ES Evaluation Of the Community School Program 3.7 .935 SF Planning New School Facilities 3.6 .964 SF Planning School Renovation Projects 3.5 .903 SP Developing School Policies 3.1 .904 SP Curriculum DevelOpment 2.9 .812 ES Evaluation Of the Instructional Program 2.8 1.057 SP Selection Of Textbooks 2.6 .905 SS Selection of Community School Directors 2.3 1.071 SS Selection of Paraprofessionals 2.3 .917 SP Planning the School Budget 2.2 .918 IT In—Service Training Of Adminis- trators 2.2 .801 IT In-Service Training Of Teachers 2.2 .821 SS Selection Of Administrators 2.1 1.025 SS Selection Of Teachers 2.0 .928 ES Evaluation Of School Adminis— trators 2.0 .973 ES Evaluation Of Teachers 1.8 .836 aVariable Abbreviations: CO - Community Oriented SF - School Facilities SP - School Policies IT - In-Service Training SS - Selection of Staff ES - Evaluation of Staff 129 items are: all items relating to the community—oriented variable; all items relating tO the school—facilities variable; one item relating to the evaluation Of staff variable; and one item relating to the school-policies variable. Twelve items fall below a grand mean score Of 3.0, which places these items on the negative side Of the rating scale. Included within these twelve items are: all items relating to the selection Of staff variable; all items relating tO the in-service training variable; three Of the four items relating to the evalu— ation of staff variable; and three of the four items relating to the school-policies variable. A further analysis Of the data reveals that six Of the first seven items are related tO the community-oriented variable and the last four items are related to the selection Of staff, and evaluation Of staff variables. Therefore, it is concluded that the three sample groups perceive that the school-community advisory councils should have from moderate to very extensive involvement in those functions which are community oriented and which relate to com- munity use of school facilities. A moderate to extensive degree Of involvement is perceived for schoolvcommunity advisory councils in developing school policies, evaluat- ing the community school program, and planning new school facilities and school renovation projects. It is further concluded that the three sample groups perceive 130 that the councils should have from moderate tO no involve- ment in those functions which relate to the selection Of staff and in-service training. A moderate to minimal degree Of involvement is perceived for councils in cur- riculum develOpment, selecting textbooks, and planning the school budget. Perceived Support for School-Community Advisory Councils The null hypothesis tested for the difference among the perceptions Of the three sample groups Of school administrators concerning which individuals and groups are supportive Of school-community advisory councils was: Hypothesis 2: There are no significant differences among the per- ceptions Of school principals, community school directors, and central Office administrators con- cerning which individuals and groups are supportive Of school-community advisory councils. H02: ml = m = m In Table 4.10 the F ratio for all three sample groups indicate the significance probability to be .0002 which exceeds the established .01 level Of significance. It is concluded that there is a statistically significant difference in the perceptions Of the three sample groups. Therefore, null hypothesis H02 is rejected. 131 TABLE 4.10.-