M13. “Jul-MEIR». '33‘5 "WI an, \ luf'. £313 #3.? '1' .- ‘ffi 3'.‘ ‘5‘” aI . \ n '3 L'. . :l ‘3 ,. I «.43 - . 3 - ‘ “1 .3 5:3: h: . . 3 3' 2‘3"‘v-:3§".'L{.3 . .' 3. - 32.3.3 2. 3 v: ts. ..u,~. \ .4’ . . 3.3m): ' ~ “3 “‘3'. i’) f: ' 3 ' t:-. . 3’ 3 “3.1)? T.‘...l:\ N31 ‘1 3"":55‘? 1:13-5- .5" 3., 1| 3 . .‘ ‘ y .a A “1 IN”_"“;.‘ ? _* - » ’ w'. 3- .- v .3~3¢.‘3‘3$3«':3.tf:3‘ ,2:- (531‘ . . . ,3 . v . 3 ' - “3"“; ‘I’: - ‘A 5. ‘1. ~. _ c , p: (IAINI I .a., u 3. 3:“: 9 " . ‘.‘ ‘ . . .L O l 0.. .l ”a”; h ." 3 33- I Nwwu~. II ‘I‘h3f"w, M333333333333, 3 - -m.«qum« w~W¢wamvnwg13 I. ’H ’1‘3'5'¥£ ‘3 4 oi\"3‘ J '.'33.I“b’ A V '3'} "\ 3 I" 3‘ I“ -\ LI} 3 I 3'- ‘3 33. 3 q ‘d‘vI 4'1" V») 0‘ 3 3 ' . H ‘3 "‘3‘3'..‘-4 ..:t 'I’ q: i—V‘ 0 “3‘ 6 ' . J; 1‘ ‘ . 3' OI . 7—5123; 3. 3 VI. 7:“ I. . '.‘ . . \I.L 3 ‘ 3“- A f ' ,I _ '3I.I I III . 4‘ Sr .AI‘J-‘v'fl ‘3 3‘3 WWI . ., 3y ' "'E't“ o , 3'3'Wfi‘k“ . _ '3 .t‘.3 ' 9‘7... ., ' IIIII 73,, ‘1’ .. “‘ O 3' 3 .‘3 I '. n- ‘3‘ II ‘I‘I ‘l I 3+ '- 3‘3 . "I 3 ' I. 3 3 T'"'h 3 I IIIII c'.‘ ‘ I -II V l , 3 . 3' |I . ' . 3 3 733‘ I . I 3. ‘ '3‘ 3 3 J '3 3 3"! I . 3 3 I ' 3. L1. 3 "- 3 :‘j I“ , ‘51'. 3 3 _ " 3 3 3 -’. - "3‘ I '.~ - . . 3' .z‘. I I. ‘r I 3- I a, 3 7" I. 3‘ I "..3' .; 0 33 I n n. I ‘3 3:3 ‘ 3‘ .3 A . v 3 33 3‘! I V 3 3 3 I I . ,3 ‘ 3 . _ 333.. [II ('3 3" I . 3I . . 3 3 . 3' ,. I 3 3 3 3 ,. 3 I I- IIII ' 3' Ll ‘ ‘ ’ 4‘1“; 3 ‘l 3': ‘3. .r.I. 3‘.3 3 3 a, , - . v ' 3 “3 . 3 . . I ‘ I 3 “'3. 3. . I 3.. 3b. 3 . 3 ‘ " 3 3 3 33 3 3 3 ‘ . ‘3 I . I 3 3 .. . 'I‘3 I33 3. 3 .‘ ., ,3 I3 3 , . ‘ “ 3 3 3. 3 3 ‘ "3 1" ' I 3 3 33 U - ‘ . I I _ ‘ 33 ’ _ .' .3 3 ' . " 3 I .3 . ' _.'3 3 3‘; '3 3 3 3 3 3 III]: ‘33 '0‘ 3 ‘ 33 3 3 33. 3 3 Ila. ' 33.; 3 3 3 I 33 "I I 3 3 3 3 3 ' . .33" 3' I3 3 3333‘ ”ul‘ 3 33.1 "333533 3 jI. 333‘3-3 s 3' 3 ' ‘ “ ‘33 1 3' 'IIIII '3'! '. 3333.133“ ‘ ‘ V I 3 ’3 3' ‘ c 3 3 :3 “3.3333"; 3 It: | 3 43333:“? I333: Rig 3 ‘Ifl',‘I [13,, I "I?“ 3' I ’3 HII 3 3 - 3. 3 33 . II . rIII \ I, III I ‘ " 3 " 3 33 333333 3 3 .3 3‘32. '3 3.3 33.3-33.3,» 33:33.. I I333!” "'3H'l“:.||3"3|‘n'3 :13 33):“; e..:..l;‘-'.'-$;.‘J:3\33Lf‘l3lu. 3" I32.?% 31:: ‘21. £2351” 3I‘II Z" 33333333 33 333 33333333 333333333 . 3 123 301745 5290 .' LIB}? 353 RY W33 fitiichiz fin sum l}n&vcrsu3! rant. This is to certify that the thesis entitled PRINCIPALS' CONCEPTIONS OF READING AS THEY INFLUENCE DECISIONS MADE ABOUT THE READING PROGRAM presented by Barbara Jacoby-High has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Elementarx Education Ph ' D degree in )fiwwmmhumr fi;‘9é32<§;’ Date 8/8/80 0-7639 uvtuuut HNES: 25¢ per day per item RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS: ——.______. Place in book return to remove charge from circulation records 832108 was PRINCIPALS' CONCEPTIONS OF READING AS THEY INFLUENCE DECISIONS MADE ABOUT THE READING PROGRAM By Barbara Jacoby-High A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Elementary and Special Education 1980 ABSTRACT PRINCIPALS' CONCEPTIONS OF READING AS THEY INFLUENCE DECISIONS MADE ABOUT THE READING PROGRAM By Barbara Jacoby-High Past research indicates that teachers are important to instructional success. The decisions they make are the "right" ones. Research also suggests that one key to these "right decisions" may be that teachers have conceptions of reading and that these conceptions influence the instructional decisions made. Evidence also serves to indicate that principals are important to the success of the reading program. They, too, make the "right" kinds of decisions that positively affect the reading program. But we do not know what guides or influences the decisions made by the principal. Therefore, this study had two functions: (1) identify, describe, and classify principals' conceptions of reading and (2) identify and describe how principals' conceptions of reading influence decisions made about their reading program. Four principals involved in the study were selected on the basis of scores obtained on the grade four Michigan Educational Assessment Program which identified them as principals of buildings with effective reading programs. The data were obtained through the use of a structured interview guide, field observations, and Barbara Jacoby-High teacher interviews. Finally, the findings were presented in the form of case studies. This study was guided by research questions separated into two categories: principals' reading conceptions and decisions principals make about their reading program. The research questions about principals' conceptions of reading are: 1. Do elementary principals have conceptions of reading? 2. What is the nature of these conceptions? 3. Do the teachers and principals have similar concep- tions of reading? 4. How are the conceptions of the teacher and the principal the same and how do they differ? 5. Do the teachers accurately predict how the principals will conceptualize their beliefs about reading? The research questions about the influence that reading conceptions have on decisions principals make about their reading program are: 6. What kinds of instructional decisions does the principal make? 7. Do the principals' conceptions of reading seem to be the primary influence in the decisions he/she makes about the reading program? 8. Do principals with different conceptions of reading have different kinds of reading programs in their buildings? The findings pertaining to principals' conceptions indicate that these four effective elementary principals did have conceptions of reading. These conceptions tended to cluster in the skills area rather than in a pupil-centered approach to teaching reading. Furthermore, the evidence is clear that principals and teachers with effective reading programs have conceptions that are more Barbara Jacoby-High alike than different and, also, that teachers are highly perceptive of their principal's reading conceptions. The principals who participated in this study made instruc- tional decisions that directly or indirectly affected their reading program. These decisions were classified into ten categories and tended to reflect an internally consistent system that varied from principal to principal. The decisions these principals made were based on their unique reading conceptions. Furthermore, principals' building reading programs reflected their reading conceptions. Several implications were suggested. First, one of the ingredients of an effective elementary reading program may be the leadership of the principal. While the nature of the leadership style may vary, there was an internal consistency for each princi- pal which appeared to be significant. Second, effective principals may be those who make decisions based on a plan which reflects a certain conception about reading and which is communicated to class- room teachers. To Ted R. High my husband and in memory of John W. Corman my father ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The completion of this research study represents the understanding, patience, assistance and encouragement of many people who gave professional advice throughout the duration of the study. I wish to express much gratitude to Dr. Gerald G. Duffy, chairman of the Guidance Committee. Our numerous automobile trips to board meetings of the Michigan Reading Association were filled with his advice, suggestions, encouragement, and infectious laughter. Because of his persistence and concern I have become more skillful in the craft of writing. To Dr. William K. Durr, Dr. George Myers and Dr. James Snoddy, members of the Guidance Committee, acknowledgements are given for their valuable suggestions which contributed to the successful fulfillment of the doctoral requirements. In addition, I extend deep appreciation and love to my husband, Ted, for being patient and understanding throughout the entire doctoral program. iii LIST OF CHAPTER I. II. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLES . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION . . . . . Background of the Problem Teacher Conceptions . . . . Importance of the Principal . . Principal and the Teacher . The Problem . . . . . . . Research Questions . . . . . . Significance of the Study . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . Assumptions and Limitations . Assumptions . . . . Limitations . . Design of the Study . . . Sample Selection . . . . . . . Principals . . . . . . Teachers . . . . . . . Data Collection . . . . Principals' Interview . Field Observation of the Principal Teachers' Interviews . . . Data Analysis . Organization of the Remainder of the Study. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . Introduction . . Teacher Influence on the Elementary Reading Program : Principal Influence on the Elementary Reading Program . . . . . Leadership in the Reading Program . Teachers' and Principals' Conceptions of Reading. Teachers' Conceptions of Teaching Teachers' Conceptions of Reading Principals' Conceptions of Reading . Summary . . . . . . . . . iv Page vii —l \OLDCDCDNmmN—J-H Chapter III. METHOD . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . Procedures . . . . Population and Samples . . Principals . . . . . . Teachers . . Principal and Teacher Identity Data Collection . . . . . . . Proposition Inventory . . Pr0position Inventory Application Principals' Interview . . . . Teachers' Interview . . . Field Observations of the Principal . Data Collection Period . . . Data Analysis . . . . Proposition Inventory Results . . Principals' Interview . . . . Principals Observations . . . . . Teachers' Interview . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . IV. FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . Principal A . . . . . . . . Background . . . . . Conceptions . Teacher A's Perceptions of Principal A' 5 Reading. Conceptions . Comparison of Teacher and Principal Reading Conceptions . . . . . . . . . °Decisions . . . . . . . Summary of Data . . . . . . . Principal B . . . . . . . . Background . . . . . . . Conceptions . . . . . Proposition Inventory Teacher 8' s Perceptions of Principal B's Reading. Conceptions . . . Comparison of Teacher and Principal Reading Conceptions . Decisions . Summary of Data . . Principal C .. . . . . Background . . . . . . . Conceptions . . . . . Chapter Teacher C' s Perceptions of Principal C's Reading Conceptions . . . Comparison of Teacher and Principal Reader Conceptions . . . . . Decisions . . . Summary of Data . . . . . . Principal D . . . . . Background . Conceptions . . Teacher 0' s Perceptions of Principal D' 5 Reading. Conceptions . . Comparison of Teacher and Principal Reading Conceptions . . . . . . . . Decisions . . . . . . . . . . Summary of Data . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . Major Findings and Conclusions . Answers to the Research questions About Principals' Conceptions . . Answers to Research Questions About Principals' Decisions . . . . . . . . . Implications . . . Relationship Between Conceptions and School Effectiveness . Principals' Conceptions of Reading. Decisions Made by Principals . . Relationship Between the Findings of this Study and Those of Other Studies . . . . Recommendations for Research and Practice Summary . . . . . . . . . REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES A. PROPOSITION INVENTORY . B. PRINCIPALS' DECISIONS AFFECTING READING PROGRAMS . C. COMPOSITION OF PRINCIPALS' ELEMENTARY BUILDINGS vi Page 98 101 102 104 105 105 106 113 117 118 120 121 123 123 124 128 131 132 133 135 136 137 139 141 149 150 155 157 Table #00“) 01 LIST OF TABLES MEAP, Grade 4 Reading Test Results, l978-l979 . Professional Experience of Principals Professional Experience of COR Teachers . Principal Interview and Observation Hours with Resulting Number of Pages of Notes . Observations of Reading Activities Proposition Inventory Conceptual Categories with Item Numbers . . . . . . Point Value of Conceptual Categories . Proposition Inventory Responses, Principal A Interview Statements, Principal A Comparison of Data, Principal A Proposition Inventory Responses, Principal B Interview Statements, Principal B . Comparison of Data, Principal B Proposition Inventory Responses, Principal C Interview Statements, Principal C . Comparison of Data, Principal C Proposition Inventory Responses, Principal D Interview Statements, Principal D . Comparison of Data, Principal D Principals' Decisions Affecting Reading Programs . vii Page 36 37 39 42 46 49 so 56 6O 64 74 78 82 91 94 99 107 112 ll6 l56 Table Page Cl. Composition of Principals' Elementary Buildings . l58 viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background of the Problem Among the elements that seem to make a difference in the relative effectiveness of reading instructional practices are two which have relevance to this study. The first pertains to how teachers think about reading and reading instruction. Such thinking or beliefs, referred to as conceptions of reading (Barr and Duffy, l978), appear to effect what a teacher does in the classroom. The second influence involves the strength and quality of administrative leadership. Recent evidence (Carlson, 1972; Weber, l97l; Love, l978; Stanchfield, 1980) consistently shows that a principal who is knowledgeable and strongly supportive of reading will have an effective reading program. Teacher Conceptions "The teacher makes the difference" is an educational cliche but research studies have repeatedly shown that teachers rather than reading methods or materials account for the differences in instruc- tional effectiveness (Early, l976; Bond and Dykstra, l967). An additional study of the reading progress of disadvantaged urban children confirmed that the teacher is far more important than the method (Harris and Morrison, 1969). The idea that differences in 1 instructional effectiveness are due to variables other than materials or approaches is given further credence as a result of a study by Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel (1976). They state, "The most significant educational variation exists at the level of the individual practitioner . . . not at the level of instructional materials, packaged programs or the like" (1). Several researchers suggest that a teacher's effectiveness is controlled by his/her conceptualizations. For example, Br0phy and Good (1974: 262) state that it is the "teacher's belief system or conceptional base" which makes the difference. Combs, Blume and Newman (1974) support the idea that a teacher's conceptions are important by stating, "Whether a teacher will be an effective teacher depends fundamentally on the nature of his private world of perceptions" (21). Reading educators suggest a similar hypothesis which is more narrow than the general concept of conceptions and focuses on conceptions as they relate to reading. For instance, after review- ing the first grade studies of 19605, Carroll and Chall (1975: 6) concluded that an important segment of the teaching process was the teacher's "system of beliefs about how different children learn to read." Similarly, Cunningham (1977: 53) reports that an important factor is "the teacher's beliefs about the reading process," Johnston (1978: 113) declared that her research indicated "teachers had conceptions since they conveyed a great deal of information about reading and about how they organized reading information," and a report from the University of Wisconsin (1967: 3) states that it is "the teacher's own thoughts and conceptualization of the instructional process" which make the difference. To test these hypotheses, the Institute for Research on Teaching at Michigan State University is conducting a study to determine whether teachers possess beliefs or conceptions about reading and, if they do, whether they influence instructional practices and pupil outcomes (Barr and Duffy, 1978). This study is currently in its second year of implementation and two major findings have been reported (Buike and Duffy, 1979). First, the classroom teachers studied do have conceptions of reading and these conceptions can be categorized. Second, most teachers studied were not primarily influenced by theoretical considerations but they did tend to "practice what they preach," in other words, their conceptions appear to influence instructional practice. Importance of the Principal The importance of the principal was noted in a recent article in the Right to Read publication Reporting on Reading_(1978): Leadership and authority frequently go hand-in-hand. In schools throughout the country, boards of education and school administrators at all levels are demonstrating instructional and administrative leadership by using their authority to make decisions that affect the quality of reading programs (1). Educational researchers repeatedly emphasize the necessity for a strong and knowledgeable principal if a reading program is to be successful (Brookover and Lezotte, 1977; Weber, 1971). They go on to report that in schools where principals have some basic knowledge of reading and are familiar with how to plan a reading program, the reading programs have an excellent chance of succeeding. Or, as Henry Brickeel, Dean of Education at Indiana University (1964) stated: He (principal) is powerful not because he has a monopoly on imagination, creativity, or interest in change--the opposite is common--but simply because he has the authority to precipitate a decision (503). Principals are important to instructional effectiveness (Foster, 1968; Harris, 1970). Several studies have shown the validity of this statement by noting that the soundness of decisions made is largely determined by the extent of the principal's knowledge of the reading process. Otto and Erickson (1973: 19), for instance, state that in most school systems the principal is responsible for the reading program of a given school building and that this respon- sibility "implies that the principal has more than a superficial_ knowledge of the skills to be taught." Rauch (1974: 298) reinforces the comments of Otto and Erickson by stating that the principal sets the tone for the reading program. He emphasizes that there are certain expectations of a principal as he guides the reading program. The first expectation is that the principal “should be knowledgeable about the reading process.“ However, it is apparently not enough for the administrator just to have the knowledge of reading. What is equally important is how the principal utilizes this knowledge. For instance, educational researchers have been studying the instructional programs of successful schools in order to isolate ingredients of excellence. George Weber, associate director of the Council for Basic Education (1971: 26), was one of the first to examine the characteristics of inner-city schools that had demonstrated high student achievement in reading. In addition to finding that all the schools had a principal who "specifically led the reading program and was regarded as a leader by the school staff," he particularly noted that the principal had a definite point of view about what kind of instruc- tional procedures led to high achievement and was able to communi- cate these expectations to classroom teachers. A similar study was undertaken several years later by the New York State Office of Education Performance Review (1974). Again, they found that the principal and other administrative staff seem to make a difference and that they had developed a plan fer dealing with the reading problem and had implemented the plan throughout the school. Two years ago, a large and comprehensive study that looked at how school characteristics related to reading and mathematics was published. Researchers Wilbur Brookover and Lawrence Lezotte (1977), using data collected by the Michigan Department of Education, studied factors in schools in which student achievement had been steadily declining and factors in schools in which student achieve— ment was progressively improving. Again, the picture was the same. Principals in the improving schools acted differently than those in the declining ones. Among other factors, the principals in the improving schools assumed the roles of instructional leaders, were more likely to share the belief with the teachers that all students could learn and worked with the teachers in teaching the basic reading and math skills. In short, it appears that successful programs are guided by principals who have a plan, or a conception, of what to do. Principal and the Teacher Evidence seems to indicate that teachers are important to instructional success. The decisions they make are the "right" ones. Research also seems to indicate that one key to these "right deci- sions" may be that teachers have conceptions of reading and these conceptions influence the instructional decisions made. Evidence also indicates that principals are important to the success of the reading program. They also are making the "right" kinds of decisions that positively affect the reading program. But we do not know what guides or influences the decisions made by the principal. Do principals have conceptions of reading much like teachers appear to do? If so, what is the relationship between the_ principals' conceptions and the teachers' conceptions? The Problem Since we do not know what it is about the principals' mental life which influences the decisions he/she makes about the reading program, the purpose of this study was to investigate the ways in which principals conceptualize reading. Specifically, the study had two functions: (1) identify, describe and classify principals' conceptions of reading and (2) identify and describe how principals' conceptions of reading influence decisions made about their reading program. Research Questions The problem is to identify principals' conceptions of read- ing and to describe how these conceptions influence decisions principals make about their reading program. Therefore, the research questions are separated into two categories: principals' reading conceptions and decisions principals make about their reading program. The research questions about principals' conceptions of reading are: 1. Do elementary principals have conceptions of reading? 2. What is the nature of these conceptions? 3. Do the teachers and principals have similar conceptions of reading? 4. How are the conceptions of the teacher and principals the same and how do they differ? 5. Do the teachers accurately predict how the principals will conceptualize their beliefs about reading? The research questions about the influence that reading conceptions have on decisions principals make about their reading program are: 6. What kinds of instructional decisions does the princi- pal make? 7. Do the principals' conceptions of reading seem to be the primary influence in the decisions he/she makes about the reading program? 8. Do principals with different conceptions of reading have different kinds of reading programs in their buildings? Significance of the Study The identification of principals' conceptions of reading and the nature of the influence of these conceptions on decisions made about reading programs contributes to educational research in five ways: 1. The study provides researchers of principal effective- ness with useful information regarding how principals think about reading. Such information gives researchers clues as to the reasons certain principals are seemingly more influential than others. 2. The identification of principals' conceptions of reading may aid teacher educators in planning instructional improvement programs and in evaluating the relevancy of the content of courses in reading and administration. 3. The identification of principals' conceptions of read- ing may aid educators of teachers and administrations in planning pre-service and in-service instruction. 4. The study has significance for research on teaching because of its focus on how principals make decisions about reading. 5. The study is of value to reading researchers because of the insights it might provide about how principals use reading theories and models in making decisions about reading. Definition of Terms The following definitions of terms are specifically relevant for the study: Conception: The definition developed by the Conceptions of Reading Project (Buike and Duffy, 1979) was: . . . the sum of the statements which the teacher offers as explanation for the decisions he/she makes about teaching (particularly in reading). The definition was modified for this study in the following way: . . . the sum of the statements which the principal offers as explanation for the decisions he/she makes about the school's curricular program (particularly in reading). Decision: From a number of alternatives, a selection made by a princi- pal that directly or indirectly affects the reading program in his/ her building. Triangulation: A principle of ethnography in which three sources of data are analyzed to understand a particular phenomena. Assumptions and Limitations There are several assumptions and limitations which will infuence the study. Assumptions A In attempting to identify and describe principals' concep- tions of reading, the assumption is that principals do have certain beliefs that influence leadership decisions made about the reading program. Weber (1971) gives credence to this assumption by suggest- ing that certain principals have a definite point of view about what kinds of instructional procedures lead to high student achieve- ment. 10 Furthermore, the assumption is made that principals' concep- tions of reading were being identified by the use of a structured interview and direct observations utilizing informal interviewing techniques. This assumption is supported by researchers such as Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel (1976: 15) who state that "the strength of the interview lies in its ability to elicit personal opinions, knowledge, understandings, attitudes, and the like." The assumption is also supported by the Conceptions of Reading Project (Barr and Duffy, 1978) which has effectively used these data collecting techniques in its research. Limitations As is the case with most descriptive studies, the qualita- tive data obtained do not lend themselves to the kind of statistical treatment that can be readily used with quantitative data. However, this limitation will be minimized through the use of a classifying procedure similar to that developed and used by the Conceptions of Reading Project. In addition, generalizability is a concern for the researcher since the findings of the study must be limited to the principals and teachers interviewed. However, the nature of a descriptive study indicates that it will differ from a statistical study that produces quantitative data. Specifically, a descriptive study is a hypothesis generating study which will then be used by researchers conducting experimental research. 11 Design of Study This is a descriptive study which makes use of ethnographic techniques. In other words, the study will attempt to describe a "picture of the way of life of some group of people" (Wolcott, 1975: 112). The group that will be involved in this study consists of elementary principals. Sample Selection The sample used in this study included principals and teachers. Principals The principals involved in this study were the elementary building principals who were associated with the teachers studied in the Conceptions of Reading Research Project (COR) and who agreed to be studied. An additional criterion for principal involvement in this study was the need for each principal to have had adminis- trative responsibilities for at least three years and been responsi- ble for his/her current building administrative duties for the past two consecutive years. These criteria established for principal selection were arbitrary but seemingly reasonable. The twelve schools used in the Conceptions of Reading Project were placed in rank order based on the percentage of students who, according to the Michigan Education Assessment Program (MEAP) scores, obtained an average of 75% or more of the grade four reading objectives over the past three years. Principals of the four buildings showing the most growth in reading were selected. While it is not known what it 12 is that principals are doing in the schools having successful reading programs, evidence has indicated that principals are important to instructional effectiveness. Therefore, the principals selected were from buildings where student growth in reading was high. If any of the four principals preferred not to be involved in the study, the next name on the list was to be selected. However, each princi- pal who was asked agreed to be part of the study. Teachers The elementary teachers who had been previously selected for the Conceptions in Reading Research Project and who agreed to be studied were involved in this study. After the principals agreed to be part of the study, the research project teachers from each principal's building were asked to participate. If the teacher preferred not to be involved, another principal was to be selected. However, each teacher who was asked agreed to be part of the study. The principal selection procedure continued until four principals and their four COR research project teachers agreed to participate. Data Collection To gather the data for the case studies, three procedures were utilized involving the "triangulation" principle (Buike and Duffy, 1979). During the spring, summer, and fall of 1979, data were collected from the principal interviews, field observations of principals, and teacher interviews. 13 Principals' Interview Each principal was interviewed using an adaptation of the Proposition Inventory (Duffy and Metheny, 1979), an instrument developed by the Conceptions of Reading Research Project staff to identify teachers possessing various reading conceptions. This structured interview was used to determine if the principals had conceptions of reading and, if so, the nature of these conceptions. In order to make this determination, the same criteria were used as for teachers' conceptions (Buike and Duffy, 1979). The statements obtained from each principal were classified into categories. If a category contained six or more statements about reading and/or the teaching of reading in a variety of situations, in sufficient num- bers and consistently over time, it was considered to be a "strong" part of that principal's conception. If a category contained three to five statements it was considered "moderate." However, if a category had fewer than three statements it was labeled "weak." Field Observation of the Principal The field techniques of the ethnographer were adopted during principal observations in the spring and fall of 1979. Times selected for observations were chosen by the researcher and the principal as potentially productive; for example, when a staff meeting was used for a discussion of reading materials or when the principal planned to participate in a reading in-service. The researcher looked for instances in which the principals' conceptions of reading played a role in a decision made regarding the reading 14 program. If six decisions were observed that reflected a particular conception and occurred in a variety of situations, in sufficient numbers, and consistently over time, then it was said that the principals' conceptions had been instrumental in a decision made. Teachers' Interviews Each COR classroom teacher was interviewed as a third source of how the principal utilized his/her conceptions. If the teacher made six statements which contradicted or supported the principals' conceptions, then it was determined to what extent the principals' decisions were influenced by reading conceptions. Data Analysis The information obtained from the principal and teacher interviews and the principal observations were qualitatively analyzed. For example, illustrative anecdotes were drawn from the field notes and catalogued in a retrieval system in order to note qualitative differences from principal to principal. The cataloguing procedures used by Johnston (1978) as well as the procedures currently being used by the Conceptions of Reading Research Project (Buike and Duffy, 1979) were adapted for use in this study. Finally, the information was organized into case studies and the case studies were then analyzed. Organization of the Remainder of the Study_ Chapter II will include a review of related research regard- ing the beliefs of teachers and administrators and the influence 15 teachers and administrators have on the elementary reading program. The procedures for data collection and analysis will be described in Chapter III. In Chapter IV, findings of the study will be reported and discussed. Conclusions, results, and recommendations for future study will be presented in Chapter V. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction This study was conducted to investigate and describe the ways in which principals conceptualize reading. Specifically, the study had two functions: (1) identify, describe and classify principals' conceptions of reading and (2) identify and describe how princpals' conceptions of reading influence decisions they make about the reading programs in their building. The materials in the review of the literature were, therefore, selected to provide back- ground in three areas: (1) influence of the teacher on the elemen- tary reading program; (2) influence of the building principal on the elementary reading program; and (3) the nature of the concep- tions of reading of teachers and principals. Teacher Influence on the Elementary Reading Program During the past decade, the importance of the teacher in the education process of children has been repeatedly proclaimed. Evidence of teacher influence is drawn from numerous comparative studies of different methods and materials, classroom organization, years of teacher experience, or extent of teacher effort. The conclusions of all these studies point directly at the teacher as the significant factor in the education of children (Durrell, 1956; 16 17 Gates, 1967; Robinson, 1968; Artley, 1969; Harris, 1969; Blair, 1975). Warren J. Cutts (1975), a former Specialist for Reading from the United States Office of Education, summarized these conclusions when he stated: "A poor teacher will get poor results with the very best methods and materials, while a good teacher will get good results with comparatively poor ones" (449-450). He goes on to comment that it is shamefully wasteful that the USOE spent over two million dollars on research just to prove that "it is the individual teacher that makes the difference--not the materials, not even the method of reading instruction" (1975: 450). One of the federally funded research projects to which Cutts alluded was an intensive study of first grade classes. Chall and Feldman (1966) report that the teacher made a difference in the reading achievement of socially-disadvantaged first-grade children. Among the factors which related significantly to high achievement were general excellence in teaching, a thinking approach to learning, a code emphasis on reading, and instruction on an appropriate level of difficulty. Additional research studies supported by the USOE have again identified the teacher as the crucial variable in the success or failure of the reading progam. Blismer and Yarborough (1965) and Fry (1967) concluded in their studies that the teacher is more important than the approach or materials used. In evaluating three grouping procedures for teaching reading, Ramsey (1962) declared: 18 The thing that the study probably illustrates most clearly is that the influence of the teacher is greater than that of a particular method, a certain variety of materials, or a specific plan of organization. Given a good teacher other factors in teaching reading tend to pale to insigni- ficance (153). The final report of the Cooperative Research Program in First Grade Reading (Bond and Dykstra, 1967) for the USOE brought further credence to the importance of the teacher. The authors stated: Further research might well center on teacher and learning situation characteristics rather than the method and materials. The tremendous range among classrooms within any method points out the importance of elements in the learning situation over and above the methods employed. To improve reading instruction it is necessary to train better teachers rather than to expect a panacea in the form of materials (123). Current research repeatedly validates the assertion made by Gray (l931)over 40 years ago that the skill of the teacher and the capacity of pupils to learn were more important than the method. Agin (1975), in her overview of recent research, states that teachers are the main difference in the reading process and that their commitment to their classes is paramount. The effects of teacher responsibility and commitment are emphasized in a recent study by Brookover and Lazotte (1977). They conclude that in schools in which children are succeeding in reading and math, the teachers believe they have much influence in the achievement of their students. These teachers assume the responsibility for teaching skills and feel strongly committed to do so. The Bullock Report (1975) serves as additional evidence that research continues to emphasize the role of the teacher: 19 There is no method, medium, approach, device, or phi1050phy that holds the key to the process of learning to read . . . the quality of learning is fashioned in the day-to-day atmosphere of the classroom through the knowledge, intui- tions and skill of individual teachers (521). In conclusion, there seems to be little doubt that the teacher plays a major role in the success or failure of a reading program. The teacher is seen as an essential part of successful student learning or, as so aptly stated by Herrick (1965): "The most important education experience happening to a student is his teacher" (68). Principal Influence on the 'Elementary Reading Program The literature on the influence of the principal on the elementary reading program was reviewed in three ways: (1) leader— ship in the reading program; (2) knowledge of the reading process; and (3) utilization of reading knowledge. Leadership in the Reading Program Individual teachers who consistently do an outstanding job in teaching reading are certainly needed. Bayne (1978: 3) refers to these teachers as "small pockets of excellence," but emphasizes that administrative leadership is necessary "if you're ever going to spread those pockets of excellence." Sweeney (1969), in an article in The Reading Teacher, states: The key person in the operation of any elementary school is the supervising principal. He is generally described as being the "educational leader" of the school. He is conceived to be a well-trained generalist ready to c0pe with the realities to be found in the Operation of a 20 complex institution (504) . . . . As primarily a general- ist, he is in a position to bring unique insights to problems associated with reading instruction, provided he is conversant with the field (506). Rausch (1974) concurs with Sweeney when he declares: An administrator who knows about the reading process, who takes advantage of the training and expertise of reading personnel, and who recognizes the many factors that determine reading progress can mean the difference between the success or failure of a school reading program (300). The impact of positive leadership on reading instruction is again emphasized by Sanacore (1977: 312) when he says "the building administrator is undoubtedly one of the most important factors affecting the success of reading programs." Carlson (1972: 1) also states that "instructional excellence is dependent upon admini- strative leadership and expertise in curriculum and teaching." In addition, research studies have repeatedly shown the value of leadership effectiveness if reading programs are to be successful (Weber, 1971; Rand Corporation, 1975; Stanfield, 1977). Austin and Morrison (1963), in their massive study of reading in the elementary schools, found that the central office often expects the school principal to assume major responsibility for the improve- ment of the instructional program. They go on to report: Generally, in those school systems where the principal was knowledgeable about the reading program, where he was aware of the strengths and weaknesses of teachers, where he devoted a major portion of his time to the improvement of the reading program, instruction was good. 0n the other hand, where principals admitted their lack of understanding of reading, where no effort was made to help beginning teachers or those suffering from professional atrophy, and/ or when the principal devoted his time almost exclusively to office details, the teaching methods and techniques used by most teachers were inferior (205). 21 The necessity for administrative leadership is reinforced by a recent study done by the Rand Corporation (1975: 20-21). In their investigation of the factors that contribute to the success of federally funded programs, it was found that "an enthusiastic principal can marshall support even from reluctant teachers and a negative principal can discourage supportive teachers." The report labeled the principal "the gatekeeper of change." While research studies repeatedly point out the value of the principal in any effective reading program, it is interesting to note that the professional journals have been negligent in reporting these conclusions. According to Rausch (1974), a survey of the contents of reading journals of the 19605 and 19705 will find a preponderance of topics devoted to methods, materials, and descriptions of various programs. However, little is said about the "roles and responsibilities of the person who has primary responsibility for the school reading program--the principal." Rausch goes on to declare: Writing primarily about reading content while ignoring the person who determines the content can be compared to a description of a football game that omits any reference to the coach who sends in the plays (298). The studies in this section presented findings which emphasize the impact of the principal as an instructional leader of the elementary reading program. However, it must be assumed that knowlege of the reading process will accompany leadership effectiveness. 22 Knowledge of the Reading Process Even though studies have shown that principals rather than teachers are the major agents of instructional change (Brickell, 1961; Steinhoff, 1965), it is apparently not enough just to be placed in the role of change agent. If effective changes in the reading program are to occur, the principal must have some knowledge of the reading process. For example, Otto and Erickson (1973) state: In most school systems the principal is responsible for the reading program in a given school building. This responsibility entails knowledge of what constitutes an effective reading program; it includes the ability to provide competent supervision; and it implies that the principal has more than a superficial knowlege of the skills to be taught, the sequence from level to level, the ways which teachers can diagnose and adjust individual differences,and the effectiveness of the total program (19). The School District of Philadelphia has released the results of a study of 1976 reading achievement among fourth graders in 25 schools in that city. Among the factors that were apparently related to student reading achievement was the extent of experience the principal had in the field of reading (School District of Philadelphia, 1979). The second Harvard-Carnegie study, The First R (1963), looks at the value of principal knowledge in reading from another angle. Austin and Morrison examine one of the questions raised in Torchlighters (1961) which was concerned with the role principals play in improving reading instruction in their schools. They concluded: 23 There is evidence that some principals are reluctant to accept major responsibility for instructional improvement because they are unfamiliar with curricu- lar matters, particularly those relating to the read- ing program (204). Carlson (1972: 4) concurs with Austin and Morrison when he points out that "mediocre teaching can be attributed, at least in part, to administrators' lack of background in the teaching of reading." The doctoral studies of Zinski (1975) and Wurtz (1975) reinforced the statements of Austin and Morrison and Carlson. They concluded that the involvement of elementary principals in reading programs is limited. They suggest that one reason for this lack of involvement is insufficient knowledge of the reading process. Zinski goes on to report that the principals who had taken graduate classes in reading tended to be more involved in the planning, coordinating, and evaluating of their school reading program than those principals who had not taken such classes. To illustrate the effects of principal knowledge of reading, the editors of Reporting on Reading (1978) report some conclusions about the value of in-service programs for principals. They state: In schools where principals have some basic knowledge of reading and are familiar with how to plan a reading program, the reading programs have a chance of succeed- ing. In schools in which principals lack content and planning skills in reading, the program is likely to flounder or to require considerable technical support to keep it from collapsing (5). Finally, Rausch (1974) offers some advice to principals: The administrator should be knowledgeable about the reading process. His own experience as a classroom teacher, his observation of extremely competent teachers, enrollment in graduate courses in reading, attendance at conferences, or extensive reading in the field may contribute to his know- ledge (298). 24 This section presented the findings of studies dealing with principal knowledge of the reading process. It appears evident that a building principal as an instructional leader with a knowledge of reading is essential to the quality of the reading program. However, knowledge alone seems not to be enough. Utilization of Principal Knowledge What a principal does with the knowledge of the reading process is apparently as important as the acquisition of this knowledge. For instance, education researchers have been examining successful schools to determine those factors that lead to effective schooling. Weber (1971), in his extensive study of inner-city schools that have high levels of reading achievement, found: . . . it was striking that all schools have clearly identifiable individuals who would be regarded as out- standing leaders . . . in all instances these persons have not only been the leaders of the overall school activity, but have specifically led the beginning reading program (26). He went on to report that each principal had a definite viewpoint about what kind of school climate and instructional procedures led to high achievement and was able to communicate this informatiOn to classroom teachers. Similar studies have shown that in buildings with success- ful reading programs there was a plan or a definite point of view which was expressed in the leadership capabilities of the principal. Brookover and Lezotte (1977), in their extensive study of Michigan schools, found that principals in schools with improving reading achievement test scores acted differently than principals in schools 25 with declining scores. The principals in the improving schools assumed the responsibility of instructional leader, were assertive in this role, shared with the teachers the belief that all children can learn, and worked with the teachers to impart this expectation to the students. Additionally, five years ago the New York State Office of Education Performance Review (1974) published a study that had similar findings: The more effective inner-city school was led by an admini- strative team which provided a good balance between both management and instructional skills . . . they had developed a plan for dealing with the reading problem and had imple- mented the plan throughout the school (vi). The recent Rand Corporation (1975) study also pointed out the necessity for principals to have a plan or some reading concep- tions in order to be effective instructional leaders. In addition to reporting that significant reading progress is linked to leader- ship from a school administrator, the study found that effective principals showed "a definite ability to recognize successful learning approaches by classroom teachers in their schools and encourage those in the reading program." Therefore, it appears evident that while principal knowledge of reading is important, the more effective reading programs are guided by those who use this knowledge to form a plan or have a conception of what to do. The preceding studies focused on the principals' use of the knowledge of reading. Education researchers have found that the 26 formulation of knowledge into a reading plan is one of the major contributors towards successful reading programs. Teachers' and Principals' Conceptions of Readj§g_ The literature on conceptions of reading was reviewed in three areas: (1) teachers' conceptions of teaching; (2) teachers' conceptions of reading; and (3) principals' conceptions of reading. Teachers' Conceptions of Teaching There appears to be general agreement that the teacher is the key to pupil success in reading. Likewise, the value of the principal as an instructional leader in effective reading programs is seemingly undisputed. Teachers and principals are consistently making reading decisions that affect children in a positive way. Combs, Blume, Newman, and Wass (1974: 100) point out that "profes- sional teachers are not mindless; haphazardly trying out what 'might' work. They are responsible persons who do whatever they do for good and defensible reasons. Their actions are guided by purpose and goal." In addition, the principal is also a responsible individual who makes decisions based on certain beliefs or conceptions. Cruickshank (1965: 17) has noted that "if administrators operate with decision making as their major task, there must be some guiding principles that ensure effectiveness.“ Therefore, if some teachers and some principals seem to make a difference in pupil success in reading, what is it that 27 accounts for this difference? Some educational researchers hypothe- size about the broader aspect of teaching and report that the beliefs or concepts of a teacher are a crucial variable in effective teaching. Washburn and Heil (1960: 420) suggested almost twenty years ago that teachers' personalities, including their beliefs, had a "definite and determinable influence on the intellectual, social, and emotional growth of children." In later research, Combs, Blume, Newman, and Wass (1974) concurred with Washburn and Heil. They state: . . . good teaching is an intensely personal matter. It is dependent upon how well an individual has learned to use his/her self effectively and effi- ciently (29). They go on to report that whether this can be done will be dependent on the belief system that the teacher has develOped. As a result of their extensive review of the research, Br0phy and Good (1978) agree with the conclusions of Combs, Blume, Newman, and Wass about teachers and teaching. They declare: A teacher individual difference variable that appears to be especially important for the classroom is the teacher's belief system or conceptual level (262). Additional research studies have attempted to learn more about the mental life of teachers. Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel (1976) used in-depth interviews to discover and describe teacher conceptions of teaching in light of their developmental, interactive, and person-oriented view of the teaching process. The researchers were looking for practical information concerning teachers' conceptions that went beyond surface understanding. They concluded: 28 It is sufficient to say that this position assumes that internal mental processes (such as understandings, beliefs, and values) are major underlying determinants of behavior and of the environments that people create. Translated to teaching, this means that the most signi- ficant educational variation exists at the level of the individual practitioner--not at the level of instruc- tional materials, packaged programs, or the like (1). Further, Combs, Blume, Newman, and Wass (1974: 100) indicate that "the beliefs teachers hold about what is important determine what they respond to and what methods they choose to deal with matters." Additional credence is brought to the hypothesis that teachers' beliefs influence instructional practices through research conducted on teacher viewpoints at the University of Wisconsin. In an intensive study (1976: 3), the researchers attempted to learn about the "substance and structure of teacher viewpoints." The rationale for the research project is significant: (1) . . . the perceptions and discriminations of a teacher exert critical influence on the stimulation and direction of pupil learning. It is a teacher's own thoughts and conceptualizations of the instruc- tional process which mold and control the learning climate. (2) . . . to improve the performance of teachers, and to accumulate a body of knowledge relevant to facilitating learning, information is needed which describes views and perceptions of teachers. A program for increasing effectiveness must take into account their existin perceptions concerning teach- ing and learning (3-43. The studies in this section presented findings concerning teacher beliefs or conceptions. Each researcher concluded that the classroom behavior of teachers is influenced by their individu- ally conceived set of beliefs. 29 Teachers' Conceptions of Reading There is very little research that focuses specifically on teachers' conceptions of reading. The majority of the research on teachers' conceptions must be drawn from outside the reading area, such as instructional practices, in-service programs, and grouping (Belli, Blom, Reiser; 1977: 9). For example, Cadenhead (1976) attempted to discover teachers' conceptions of reading by using an in-service technique in which the teachers sorted cards to identify their beliefs about reading. The sorting process consisted of accepting or rejecting assumptions the author presented. There were no attempts made to classify the assumptions or generate any hypothesis since the purpose of the study was simply to illustrate an in-service technique. Additionally, Mayes (1974: 27) attempted to measure the beliefs of teachers using the DISTAR program as compared to the beliefs of teachers using basal readers. She found no significant differences between the two groups of teachers. Mayes attributed this lack of difference to the similarity of values on which the basal materials and the DISTAR materials were developed and to the similarity of values of the teachers. She concluded that "changes in instructional practices cannot occur until teachers change their values." One of the few research studies with the expressed purpose of investigating teachers' conceptions of reading concluded that teachers do have such reading conceptions. Johnston (1978), in her study of teachers in several schools districts, found: 3O (1) teachers' reading conceptions are personal and complex, (2) teachers' reading conceptions appear to influence their teaching behaviors, (3) teachers' reading conceptions are practical and based on teaching goals rather than knowledge of the reading process or theory. Another study of teachers' reading conceptions is currently ongoing at Michigan State University. The Institute for Research on Teaching is involved in a study which focuses on "identifying teachers' conceptions of reading, how these conceptions influence instructional practices, and how they develop over time" (Communica- tion Quarterly, 1979: 3). The Conceptions of Reading Research (COR) Project which has been in progress since 1977, utilizes teacher interview and observational techniques. So far, research has indicated a number of findings: (1) . . . teachers' conceptions seem to be associated with experience, (2) . . . teacher beliefs about reading and the teaching of reading are seldom influenced by reading methods courses, (3) the complexity and number of conceptions varies con- siderably across individuals, (4) most of the teachers practice the conceptions they espoused, (5) . . . reading conceptions are not solely responsible for teacher decision making and practice in reading instruction (Communication Quarterly, 1979: 3). The study goes on to indicate that teachers' reading concep- tions may not be as influential as non-reading conceptions in the decisions they make about reading instruction. Also, teachers appear to have "contextual conceptions," that is, they "enact 31 different conceptions and practices depending upon such factors as pupil grade level, ability level, and the socio-economic status of their students" (3). The research in this section focused on conclusions about teachers' conceptions of reading. However, the earlier studies had to be drawn from outside reading and transformed to meet reading needs. Yet, ongoing research in the reading area promises to provide additional pertinent data. Principals' Conceptions of Reading Just as there has been very little research done on teachers' conceptions of reading, there have been even fewer studies of principals' reading conceptions (Belli, Blom, Reiser, 1977; Johnston,l978). It seems unfortunate that more research has not been undertaken that would attempt to determine the variables that account for principal effectiveness. One researcher suggests a reason as to why it may be difficult to isolate these variables. Sarason (1971: 111) points out that it could be difficult to draw conclusions from the data obtained because it is not easy to separate the "role of the individual as the principal from the role imposed by the characteristics and traditions of a larger system of which a school is just a small segment." However, he goes on to suggest that if educational changes are to occur, it is the principal who will be put in the position of implementing the change. He reports: 32 I have yet to see any pr0posal for system change that did not assume the presence of a principal in a school. I have yet to see in any of those proposals the slightest recognition of the possibility that the principal, by virtue of role, preparation, and tradition, may not be a good implementer of change (111-112). One current study takes a look at principals and their beliefs (Ray, 1978). The researcher hypothesizes that it is a difference in the belief systems that account for conflicts between teachers and administrators. Ray analyzed data on three different groups; principals and other administrative personnel who were engaged in attempts to implement classroom models, elementary teachers, and elementary principals not involved with classroom models. He found that there were significant differences in the beliefs and values of the three groups: Teachers' beliefs about teaching, learning and classroom processes did indeed differ significantly from those of administrators who wish to implement classroom models. Interestingly, the third group--the elementary principals-- demonstrated beliefs very similar to those of the teachers (126-127). Overall, the data revealed that teachers are distinguished by their humanistic approaches in the classroom, while administrators involved with attempts to implement management models,are concerned primarily with learning procedures and outcomes. A more recent study by Ignatovich, Cusick, and Ray (1978), which expanded on Ray's earlier research, reported that elementary classroom teachers and elementary principals were similar in their beliefs about teaching. However, the beliefs of central office personnel tended to be more abstract and idealized. 33 From the studies reported in the review of the teachers' and principals' conceptions of reading, only the Institute for Research on Teaching's COR Project focuses specifically on beliefs about reading. However, the COR Project is primarily interested in teachers' conceptions and how they influence instructional practice. Yet, principals' conceptions of reading need to be identified because, according to the literature, principals are making decisions that affect the reading programs which, in turn, affect the instructional practices of teachers. Summary The Review of the Literature provided a framework for the procedures used in this study. Numerous studies indicate that the teacher is an essential part of a student's successful learning experience. In addition, studies have also shown that the principal can make a major difference in a building reading program if he/she is an instructional leader who is knowledgeable about reading. Finally, researchers have concluded that teachers' classroom behavior is influenced by their set of beliefs. However, little research has been done to identify principals'.reading conceptions and the influence these conceptions may have on principals' decisions made about their building reading program. CHAPTER III METHOD Introduction The purpose of this study was to investigate the ways in which principals conceptualize reading. Specifically, the study had two functions: (1) identify, describe and classify principals' conceptions of reading and (2) identify and describe how principals' conceptions of reading influence decisions they make about the reading program in their building. To accomplish these tasks, a descriptive study was designed utilizing in-depth interviews, participant observations, and content analysis techniques to analyze and describe the interview data. Procedures P0pulation and Samples To answer the research questions, four elementary principals and four elementary teachers were selected for the study. Principals The principals in the study were the elementary building principals of the teachers associated with the Conceptions of Reading Research Project (COR), an ongoing project which is affiliated with the Institute for Research on Teaching at Michigan 34 35 State University. The principals were not selected randomly. Instead,they were chosen on the basis of student growth in reading in their individual buildings. Specifically, the twelve schools used in the COR Project were placed in rank order based on the percentage of students who, according to the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP)* grade four reading test, obtained an average of 75% or more of the reading objectives over the past three years (see Table 1). Principals of the four buildings show- ing the most growth in reading were selected as possible participants in the study. Next, it was determined if each principal met the research criteria. The principals were selected on the basis of the follow- ing criteria: 1. Each principal must have had administrative responsi- bilities for a minimum of three years. 2. Each principal must have been responsible for their current administrative reSponsibilities for the past two consecutive years. 3. Each principal must have agreed to be a part of the study. Of the four principals whose buildings ranked at the tap of the list, three met the criteria and one had to be rejected because of not having had administrative duties for the minimum time designated (Table 2). Therefore, the next principal on the rank ordered list *MEAP: Michigan Educational Assessment Program is a State Department of Education testing program in which students in grades 4, 7, and 10 are assessed yearly in reading and mathematics. 36 TABLE l.--MEAP, Grade 4 Reading Test Results, 1978-1976. Percentage of Students Obtaining_An Averagetyf75% COR School Average 1978 1977 1976 1978 - 1976 *A 1 92.3% 86.2% 83.7% 89.3% *A 2 80.6% 90.6% 85.3% 85.6% *A 3 71.8% 81.1% 77.3% 76.5% * 4 82.4% 67.6% 82.8% 75.0% A 5 82.1% 65.6% 76.8% 74.8% 6 69.6% 64.0% 58.2% 66.8% 7 59.6% 71.7% 52.1% 65.7% 8 72.6% 58.4% 60.0% 65.5% 9 61.4% 60.3% 56.5% 60.9% 10 65.4% 59.5% 61.1% 62.5% 11 58.1% 61.7% 51.7% 60.0% 12 29.5% 34.0% 23.7% 31.8% * - original selection for the study A - final selection for the study 37 AEmPchcaon .emw_m=mv Np-op .Ammwuzum Papoom .smp_m=mv a-“ .m m_ e_ o copmcpmwcwEum \cmsummu mm Agmwpmcmv m-~ .m e mae=.u=. .m LN ~_ Acme—mam coumcumwcwsum cams .xcpmsowmv \cmgommp mm op .oum .g m mmuzpucw .op mp m Apmwpmwooam mcwccmmpv mup elm .e .mux o m m peasac sow__nwm=oammm coppcmoa maowwnam m.mwfimmmw m>wumgme:PEu< pcmcczu new mmumcu > mo mcmm> Papa» cw mcmm> .mpmawucwca co mucwwcmaxm Pocowmmwwocanu.m m4mcmmno 3mw>cmpcw chowum>cmmno mo Pmawucmcn co JmMWMWLwMJmquwo Pmawocwca momma co consaz mesa; mo conszz e 2 mo spasm; .mmpoz mo momma mo cmnEzz mcprzmmm sue: mczo: cowpm>cmmno ucm zmw>cmucfi Pmawucwcm11.¢ m4m

wuca PPMEm wom>mecm .mgmsuwmk .mmwuw>wuo< mcwumwm we mcowum>smm2011.m m4mcH r353: 3:8 3:23:38 33:35 55389:. .< $385 .38 .6 538281.23; 65 It is interesting to note that after he changed these statements, they corresponded to his teacher's perception of how he would have responded to the statements. Consequently, a final analysis of the Proposition Inventory results indicated that Teacher A had described Principal A's reaction to the 45 statements with 75% accuracy, agreeing with 34 out of 45. Interviews with Teacher A further verified her perceptions of Principal A and served to confirm the beliefs that he had expressed. Several examples of this confirmation are noted in such remarks as, "I don't believe Mr. A is an advocate of the use of basal readers," and "I also think he feels that the basic skills are important as opposed to maybe just a language experience type of teaching of reading" and "I don't think he agrees that a basal textbook is the approach he would use." Throughout 15 pages of typed transcripts, Teacher A mentions an additional eight times that Principal A is not an advocate of basal textbooks. She would like to obtain the revised edition of a basal text she is currently using but Principal A would prefer that she use a less structured program currently on the market. When asked who would ultimately make the final decisions, she said, "I believe he would make the decision." However, she went on to say that she believes he 'respects my judgment.'" Furthermore, Teacher A reports that her principal believes in a "step-by-step" sequence approach to reading. However, she points out that "he's quick to recognize that some children don't need to go through all that." This belief in a skills approach was 66 mentioned a total of six times during the interviews which consisted of a total of approximately two hours. When Teacher A was asked, toward the conclusion of one interview, if she believed that Principal A was a strong influence on the reading program in her building she replied, "Yes, but it's hard to think of him as a principal separate from a reading consul- tant. This situation is kind of unique. I think he has a strong influence." An additional question, "Who makes the major decisions about the reading program in this building?" stimulated the follow- ing response from Teacher A: I think he does, but not without consulting staff. I think he respects our Opinions. I think the final decision boils down to being his, but I know he wouldn't do it without first consulting us. This positive professional relationship confirms data obtained by the COR Project researchers. They reported that Teacher A and Principal A have an excellent relationship and that he values her critical appraisal of materials and situations. In this earlier report,it was observed that Principal A often asks for her insights on a matter before making a decision (COR Case Study #12, p. 2). Comparison of Teacher and Principal Readipg Conceptions Teacher A and Principal A appear to have reading conceptions that are similar in several areas. For example, according to the COR researchers, Teacher A had a "strong orientation toward a structured eclectic approach . . . agreed more often in the basal 67 and linear categories . . . had a strong agreement pattern with items classified as integrated whole, interest, and natural language (COR Case Study #12, p. 12). In actual practice, Principal A also has strong beliefs in linear skills and a weak belief in basal text. The results of the analysis of his interview and observational data indicate that he, too, has a strong orientation toward a structured approach to teach- ing reading. However, it should be noted that the interview with Teacher A revealed that where she and her principal disagreed about reading techniques, it was almost always regarding her preference for a selection of a new basal text series as opposed to his desire for her to use a less structured language arts program. Teacher A and Principal A have quite similar conceptions in the areas of interest, natural language and integrated whole. These similar beliefs were exhibited on the Proposition Inventory and became apparent during the interviews with Teacher A and Principal A and the observations of Principal A. The only category in which Teacher A and Principal A appear to slightly disagree, that is, regarding the use of a basal text, may have been temporarily resolved by a decision made by Principal A. This school year, Teacher A is no longer assigned to his build- ing. Instead. she has been selected to be one of four teachers in her district to be relieved of classroom teaching responsibilities in order to be trained in reading diagnosis and interpretation of the reading management system. She will then be called upon to help other teachers in these areas. This move could be interpreted 68 was a promotion for Teacher A or as a method by which Principal A has removed a teacher who disagrees with him. Decisions Introduction.--An analysis was made of interview and observational data in order to identify and describe how Principal A's reading conceptions influenced decisions be made about the read— ing program in his building. It has been determined that Principal A has a strong belief in linear skills and a strong negative belief about the teachers' use of basal texts, a moderately strong belief in the use of interest, and weak beliefs in natural language and integrated whole. Interviews.--Principal A was directly responsible for bring- ing a reading management system into his district. He was the one who conceived the idea and had it accepted by central administration. This management system affected the existing reading programs in grades K through 8 throughout the district. Furthermore, the management system was viewed as a mandate by teachers and other principals in the district. Because of this mandate, an assistant reading coordinator was hired, and seven teachers were reassigned. Also, Principal A and another elementary principal were appointed co-coordinators of the reading program in addition to their assign— ments as building principals. According to Principal A, the reading management system is a "support system of skill development." He went on to say that 69 "this management system is not a new system. It's a better road map to get kids where they're going." Interviews with Principal A were filled with such statements as, "children with similar skill deficiencies should be grouped together for instruction . . ."; ". . . pull these three kids who need this skill and work with them on that skill;" "there's not a whole lot of correlation in some of those programs in terms of where they gain skills." These statements appear to reflect Principal A's belief in linear skills. Furthermore, the introduc- tion of a reading management system that has skills listed by grade level gives more evidence that Principal A's actions and decisions are being guided by his belief in structured sequential linear skills. Finally, when Principal A was asked how he viewed his role as principal in the reading program, he replied, "Helping teachers become aware of where more new and different kinds of materials are that would teach those different kinds of skills." Observations.--Because of the nature of the reading manage- ment system, it was necessary for the district to purchase addi- tional materials. Principal A was strongly influential in the selection of these materials. Evidence of this influence was observed as he repeatedly made remarks to teachers about his opinion of the effectiveness of certain kits and other reading materials. Furthermore, it is noted with much interest that the teacher in his building with whom he had several disagreements 7O regarding the use of a basal textbook is no longer assigned to teach in his building. Teacher A has been "selected" to be one of four teachers in the district to receive training from the new assistant reading coordinator to diagnose reading problems and also to help others implement the new management system. Further examples of decisions made by Principal A involved types of activities and events he decided the researcher should observe. The researcher was told to "observe at anytime in my building" and was invited to teachers' meetings that dealt with reading, in-service meetings, small group teacher gatherings to discuss the management system and to events at which Principal A was the main speaker. The only time a decision was made by Principal A that an observation would not be apprOpriate was when he and others were interviewing candidates for the assistant reading coordinator position. Summary.--Principal A can be seen as an educational leader in his district who has been responsible for some major decisions that caused changes to occur in the reading curriculum. Furthermore, these changes reflect decisions he made that were based on his reading belief that linear skills are important to the teaching of reading. Principal A's ideas are listened to and acted upon by those in positions to make final decisions that affect the children and teachers in his district. Perhaps his influence was best summarized by a teacher in another elementary building who said, "Principal A 71 is the fair-haired boy in this district. He certainly gets those in the central office to do what he wants." Summary of Data An analysis of the data obtained from the Proposition Inventory, the interviews and the observations resulted in certain conclusions about Principal A's reading conceptions. These conclu- sions are reported in such a way that they serve to answer the research questions generated for the study. The data analysis shows that Principal A has two sets of reading conceptions, one set for show and the other for practice. His reading conceptions for practice indicate a strong belief in the use of linear skills, a moderate belief in the use of interest and weak beliefs in basal text, natural language and an integrated approach. Overall, Principal A's strongest beliefs are in the content-centered rather than the pupil-centered category. Furthermore, Principal A makes decisions based on these beliefs that affect the reading program in his building as well as his district. He exerts much influence in his district and is regarded as a major decision-maker. Apparently, Teacher A and Principal A both prefer a structured approach to teaching reading. However, they disagree regarding the use of a basal reader since Teacher A prefers to focus on the use of a basal while Principal A is somewhat opposed to this method. 72 Principal B Background Of all the principals involved in this study, Principal B had the most obvious "peOple-centered" behavior and made the most obvious "people-centered" remarks. Furthermore, in his district he is regarded as a humanist who always has the interests of the students and teachers foremost in his mind. Principal B is the kind of individual about whom such phrases as "a truly loveable person" and "a real sweetheart" were made. The district in which Principal 8 works is in a high socio- economic suburb of a large mid-western city. Specifically, it is the same district in which Principal A is also an elementary principal. Principal B's building is located in a part of the district which is rapidly growing due to locally changing socio- economic patterns as well as a change in school district boundary lines. Principal B has been employed by this district for nine years and has been principal of his present building for five. His prior experience included teaching grades 5 and 6, and geometry, mathematics and English in grade 10 fer a total of 10 years. He is currently responsible for nine teachers and 226 students from grades K-5. Conceptions Introduction.--In order to identify and classify the reading conceptions of Principal B, an analysis was made of three sources 73 of data: (1) Proposition Inventory, (2) interviews, and (3) observations. Using the principle of "triangulation," these data sources were the basis of hypotheses made about the reading concep- tions of Principal B. In addition, information was obtained from the COR teacher in order to confirm or reject these hypotheses regarding Principal B's reading conceptions. Proposition Inventory According to the results of the Proposition Inventory, Principal B had a moderately strong belief in the use of basal texts in the reading program. For example, out of a total of nine statements, Principal B indicated that he agreed with three. In addition, beliefs in the use of natural language and an integrated approach to teaching reading also appeared to be moderately strong in Principal B's value system. Evidence of these beliefs is suggested by the fact that Principal B marked four out of nine statements in each of the two categories as ones with which he agreed without reservation. However, Principal B seems to have a weak orientation toward the use of linear skills and interest in the teaching of reading. Out of nine statements on the Pr0position Inventory, he marked only one in the linear skills category and two in the interest category as statements with which he agreed. Apparently, those two categories of beliefs are not as strong as basal text, natural language and integrated whole. Furthermore, Principal B seems to have no strong beliefs about any of the five reading conceptual 74 categories. Table 11 shows how Principal B responded to the Pr0position Inventory. TABLE ll.--Pr0position Inventory Responses, Principal B. Weak Moderate Strong 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Basal Text Linear Skills Interest Natural Language Integrated Whole Interview.--Several comments made by Principal B at the beginning of an initial interview seemed to sum up his beliefs about reading. For example, while discussing the problems he had in completing the Proposition Inventory,he stated,"Let me make a general statement first. I might basically believe what you've said, except that like all generalizations, some of them tend to be dangerous when you're looking at all kids. For 50% of them it would be true but I have seen too many kids who learned more from another kid than directly from us." These comments about exceptions to the statements in the Proposition Inventory appear to be reflected in the results of the Proposition Inventory. Specifically, the analysis showed that Principal B was able to mark just half of the statements as ones 75 about which he had an opinion. The others he did not mark thus indicating "those statements you feel completely neutral about." Furthermore, the interview was full of examples from Principal B's teaching experiences which indicated his beliefs in making changes in the curriculum to meet the individual needs of the children. In 43 pages of transcribed tapes, Principal B cites eleven examples of experiences he has had with children which made it "necessary to change something I believed about reading." For example, after dis- cussing his belief in the importance of teaching phonics "to kids who need it," he told of this teaching experience: But when I've got little Jacob like I had last year who is in first grade. He was sitting in front of a TV special about a year ago on Kennedy and the Kennedy family and turned around to his Dad and said, "If I memorize all the Presidents of the U.S., will you check me out?" His dad said "Yeah." So he toddled off, and he was a toddler; very small for his age group. Came back and said, "Dad, I looked in about twenty books." And he proceeded to give him the President, Vice- President, Secretary of War and about two or three other positions fbr every single President. To teach that kid systematically, are you kidding me? However, interviews with Principal B and the results of the Pr0position Inventory did reveal an apparent inconsistent segment of his belief system. The Proposition Inventory results showed that he had marked only one statement in the area of linear skills with which he agreed without reservation. Yet, discussions were full of such comments as, ". . . for 80% of the kids we definitely need to be teaching basic skills," and "I'm a firm believer that reading is one of those skills that can be taught and should be taught sequen- tially;" followed by "I don't believe, in fact, that there's too 76 much emphasis being put on skills in the classrooms." Specifically, Principal B mentioned eight times during 2% hours of interview that he was a believer in a skills approach to teaching reading. Further evidence that Principal B says he believes in the teaching of linear skills for some children is reflected in his answer to the direct question, "How do you feel about the teaching of basic skills?" He answered, "Oh, very strong. Again, specifi- cally for the kids who need those skills." He went on later in the interview to discuss the reasons he believes children in his district score well on the state assessment test in reading and children in other similar districts do not. "If there was one reason, they're (other districts) just not teaching basic skills in some kind of sequential order." In addition, the analysis of the Pr0position Inventory indicated that Principal B did not show a strong belief in the use of a basal textbook. However, interview data appeared to again confirm his reluctance to make specific statements about reading yet indicated a stronger belief in the use of basal texts than the Proposition Inventory had suggested. For example, the following responses were made to questions about the use of basal textbooks: "I guess I would say that a basal text can be used to teach reading along with supplemental materials. But I would be very hesitant to say that it should be used." And "I think a teacher ought to use anything in the classroom and if it happens to be a basal text, that's OK." Furthermore, during 43 pages of transcription, Principal B spoke positively about the use of basal texts seven times. 77 Also, Principal B discussed at length his displeasure with the tendency to teach reading in "self-contained classes." As he said, "it's reading time, it's math time. It's convenient to teach and it's an easy way to organize but it makes absolutely no sense in terms of teaching and learning load. It's very complex for a teacher to totally integrate what used to be called the core cur- riculum. It's easier to do when you're on a team and should be done. In our middle school, where you specifically set up teams for that purpose, I question whether or not it's being done." Six additional comments by Principal B emphasized his belief in the desirability of integrating reading, as well as other subject areas, into the school curriculum. Although the Specific use of interest and natural language were mentioned infrequently in the interview with Principal B, he did discuss his belief in teaching children so that they can "utilize" the language. He mentioned much concern about the inability of children to read their language well enough to "be able to write or read something from another kid." In conclusion, the results of the interview with Principal B show a somewhat different value system than had previously been depicted in the analysis of the Proposition Inventory. Specifically, Principal B seemed to have strong beliefs in basal text, linear skills, and integrated whole; a moderately strong belief in the use of natural language and a weak belief in using interest in a reading program. 78 Table 12 shows the number of statements made by Principal B about the five reading conceptual categories: TABLE 12.--Interview Statements, Principal B. Weak Moderate Strong 0 «- 2 3 - 5 6 - Basal Text (7) Linear Skills (8) Interest (2) Natural Language —i4) Integrated Whole (7) Observations.--Principal B spends very little time at his desk and can be found most frequently in the teachers' rooms or talk- ing with children in the hall. In addition, he is difficult to observe because of his high speed movement from one school activity to another and his informal way of dealing with situations. However, approximately eight hours of observation did reinforce one conclusion made about Principal B during the interviews. Seldom was he observed to make a direct statement to a teacher which was not followed by "if that fits into your plan" or "if you want to use that, OK." The observational data and interview data were similar in that Principal B revealed himself to be reluctant to deal with firm comnittments or generalities but preferred to always '1eave the door open for alternatives.' 79 A nondirective, informal approach is the way Principal B obviously prefers to work with his teachers. His teachers' meetings are loosely structured and convened only when necessary. This informality is not only reflected in manner but also in the way Principal B speaks and 'deals with life.‘ For example, he was the only principal to suggest we "get away from the school setting" for one interview and "go to the park where we can talk about what you want to learn from me." Principal B is a principal in the same district in which Principal A had such an influence in the implementation of a manage- ment system. However, the difference hithe approaches of these principals is notable regarding the promotion of the use of the management system. While Principal A goes about the district advocating its use, Principal B has exerted his nondirective style by telling his teachers "you don't have to use the _____if you don't consider it appr0priate." As reported earlier in the study, the Proposition Inventory results and the interview data analysis pointed to an inconsistency in Principal B's beliefs about linear skills. However, observations of Principal B reveal that his actions are more closely aligned to the belief professed during the interviews. Specifically, Principal B's Proposition Inventory results show a weak belief in linear skills. However, during the interview he claimed that he was a strong advocate of a sequential skills program. He appears to expect his teachers to teach skills in the way that best fits their teaching styles. However, he is opposed to the rigid skills 80 management system that has been implemented in his district. Principal B's way of accommodating his belief in the teaching of skills and the existence of the management system is to expect his teachers to teach skills but to use the management system only if they choose. One of his teachers expressed it best when she declared, "He's caught between a rock and hard place, the poor guy." Finally, it seems apprOpriate that of all the principals involved in this study, Principal B was the only one with a teaching assignment. Each afternoon he taught a fifth grade in his building so that the teacher could participate in a university research project. This teaching assignment gave Principal B much pleasure because he stated that he "doesn't like to get away from teaching kids." However, he was aware that some of his teachers wanted him to "be a principal" full time so they would have access to him if needed. Therefore, the plan is to change his role for next year so he will have full day administrative duties and no teaching assignment. Summary of prinojpal's conoaptions.--The reading beliefs that Principal B discusses and the practice that he maintains in his building appear to be relatively consistent. Specifically, Principal B lets his teaChers use a basal text if they choose but he is also willing to let them examine, fOr possible adaption, a language arts program that has a language-centered philoSOphy but also contains a sequential skills component. 81 Also, Principal B is a firm believer in the teaching of sequential skills and seems to "expect" that the skills will be taught by whatever methods each teacher will "feel comfortable" using. However, he appears to not be an advocate of the district skills management system because of its rigidity. This rigidty goes against his belief in making accommodations for students' learning needs. In addition, Principal B believes in integrating reading into the curriculum. However, the use of natural language is moderately strong and interest is weak. Principal B has several strong reading beliefs but they are not as strong as his belief that there are always exceptions to any reading belief. For this reason, hewas reluctant to make many specific statements about reading without some qualifier. For example, in 43 pages of interview notes, Principal B cited nine examples in which he would agree with a statement about reading but tempered this agreement with such remarks as, "I really believe that statement for only 90% of the kids" or "for 50% of the kids, number two could be true" and ". . . for me to teach that child basic skills would be ludicrous." His comment, "I think for the majority of the kids, that's true. But I would never make that as a blanket statement" appeared to be the general theme of the interview. Table 13 shows the comparison of data obtained from the Proposition Inventory, interviews, and observations and indicates the conclusions about Principal B's reading conceptions. 82 x x x x open: umpmcmmch x x x x mamamcmb Focaumz x x x x ummcmch x x x x mp_wxm cause; x x x x uxmp memm .cum .coz xmmz .cum .uoz gum: .cpm .uoz xmmz .cpm .uoz gum: sumo mama Acoucm>cH :owmzpocou chowum>cmmao 3ww>cwucH cowawmoaoca .m $385.; .38 .8 53.28581“, 39: 83 Teacher B's Perceptions of Principal B's Reading Conceptions The results of the Proposition Inventory card analysis of Teacher B's responses seem to reveal that she knows her principal's reading beliefs very well. For example, the initial data showed that Principal B had been extremely noncommittal when he took the Pr0position Inventory. Out of 45 statements he revealed that he might agree with 24 of them if the wording could be changed. During subsequent interviews, Principal B changed some words and then indicated that he agreed with an additional 15. However, of the 15 additional statements that Principal B now declared he believed in, Teacher B accurately marked 35 out of 45 statements, or 77%, as being statements revealing Principal B's reading conceptions. One statement made by Teacher B during the interviews seemed to capsulize her perception of Principal B's reading beliefs. About one hour into the interview she explained, "Principal B is pretty good at saying, 'What are you comfortable using, teacher.'" This belief in "doing what is comfortable" was exemplified time after time by Teacher B. For example, when confronted by a statement on the Proposition Inventory card that involved the use of a basal text, Teacher B declared that her principal would agree to the use of a basal "if we said we needed it. He trusts us enough and our opinions enough to go and argue for them even though they weren't necessarily ones he'd come with." Later in the interview she said, "We went and previewed (a new reading program) and he just went 84 totally on whether we like it. If we thought we could use it, then we get it." Out of 21 pages of transcription, Teacher B declared five times that Principal B is a proponent of teaching basic skills. For example, "Principal B would say, 'if it's not a basal, OK, as long as you're getting the skills across'" and "I think he agrees that the teachers need to have a skills guide to help them if they need it" and "I think he sees a need for building one skill on top of another, but he's not so locked into the system that if it came to the point where the kid was stumbling and having difficulty but could still go on and do some other things without that, the kid wouldn't have to stop there." These statements about skill development led to a further explanation by Teacher B about Principal B's belief regarding the district reading management system. Apparently,his belief has again reflected the "If you're comfortable with it"approach. Teacher B stated, "this year I just decided not to even bother with it because I was doing some of the things in my room and Principal B said that if I didn't feel the need to do that I really didn't have to." Later in the interview,she again declared "Well, I didn't want to use it and he didn't make me." Toward the end of the interview, Teacher B was asked if she believed Principal B was a strong influence on the reading program. She replied, "Strong influence? I don't think so. He's never tried to influence me one way or the other." 85 Comparison of Teacher and Principal Readipg Conceptions According to the COR researchers, Teacher B has strong beliefs in the basal text and linear skills categories with weaker beliefs in the pupil-centered areas; interest, natural language and integrated whole (COR Case Study #3, p. 18). Similarly, Principal B has strong reading beliefs in the categories of basal text and linear skills. The only area in which Principal B and Teacher B appear to differ is in the integrated approach to teaching reading. Perhaps this is true because Teacher B has always been a first grade teacher and views herself as being mainly responsible for teaching children how to start to learn to read. Decisions Introduction.--An analysis was made of the interview data and observational data in order to describe how Principal B's read- ing conceptions influenced decisions he made about the reading program in his building. It has been determined that Principal B has strong beliefs in the use of a basal text and a linear skills approach to teaching reading. In addition, he has a moderately strong belief in natural language, and an integrated approach and a weaker belief in interest. Interviews.--A different example of decision making with regard to the reading program was exhibited by Principal B. His major influence was seen as a decision not to make many decisions. Principal B appeared to believe that his teachers had sufficient 86 skills to make the necessary decisions about reading for their students. If he asked them and they could tell him what they were doing in their classroom, he did not interfere. Throughout the interviews with Principal B, he stressed the importance of a principal "knowing where the students are in the area of skill development." In fact, the mandated skills management system in his district would be one step toward accomplishing this goal. However, Principal B has made the decision not to require each teacher in this building to use this management system. Again, his decision was to let each teacher decide if s/he wanted to use the system. However, Principal B apparently made a decision several years ago regarding Teacher B. During the interviews with her, she commented that she had taught for Principal B in another building and when he was transferred to his present assignment, he asked that Teacher B be reassigned to his building. She believes that he has confidence in her teaching abilities and, therefore, wanted her a part of his staff. However, the majority of the teachers were teaching in the building when Principal B became their principal. Although it appears that Principal B makes few overt decisions that affect the building reading program, he does, neverthe- less, quietly influence the decisions made by the teachers. For example, he was the one who decided that a particular reading program should be considered for adoption and arranged for the 87 presentation to the teachers. However, he stated, "I want them (teachers) to decide if this is right for them." Also, he does not demand that the skills management system be used,yet his teachers know they must "teach the skills." Observations.--As might be expected, Principal B maintained an Open door policy regarding observations. The researcher was invited to Observe at any time; furthermore, it was not even neces- sary to call ahead of time. Consequently, it was the researcher who made the decisions as to the type of activities that should be Observed. As a result, it was possible to Observe Principal B at teachers' meetings and in small group interactions with teachers. During these events, Principal B was quite nondirective and, except for one instance in which he decided to change the lunch period for some students, the teachers were responsible for deciding the out- comes Of reading questions that were raised. Summary.--It could be said that Principal B does not seem to be a major decision maker in reading for his building. He allows the teachers to decide what is best for their teaching style and for the specific reading needs of the students in their class. On the other hand, Principal B's belief in not making these kinds Of decisions could be seen as a major decision in itself. Furthermore, while it seems that Principal B makes few obvious decisions he is an influence behind the decisions the teachers make. The teachers in his building are teaching skills and are not only using basal readers but are considering another for adoption. Therefore, it 88 could be concluded that, while Principal B has a nondirective leader- ship style, he is able tO convey his reading beliefs to his teachers. Summary of Data Principal B does have beliefs about reading. These beliefs tend tO be primarily content-centered since his strongest beliefs are in the use Of a basal text and the teaching of linear skills. However, the decisions that Principal B makes about his building reading program appear tO be affected by his nondirective leader- ship style which allows teachers to "make their own decisions." It could be hypothesized that even though Principal B's strongest read- ing beliefs are in the content-centered category, the decisions he makes that affect his life and the lives of his teachers and students are overridden by his stronger "people-centered" beliefs. Specifically, even though his reading beliefs are primarily "content- centered," he believes in making whatever instructional changes are necessary to meet individual student learning needs. Teacher B and Principal B have similar reading conceptions. For example both believe in the use Of a basal text and linear skills, which are in the "content-centered" category. Furthermore, Teacher B has a clear picture Of her principal's reading beliefs. Principal C Background Principal C is a middle-aged woman who is responsible for 16 classroom teachers, most all of whom are several years younger. 89 She has been the principal in her building for the past 17 years. However, prior to becoming principal, she taught nine years in the elementary grades. During Principal C's years as principal Of her building, she has developed certain strict procedures that she wants followed which sometimes cause conflicts with a number Of the younger teachers. Principal C's school has a student enrollment Of 397 children from grades K-5. Most of these children come from blue- collar homes that are located in a suburb of a large mid-western city. For a number Of years, the district in which Principal C is employed has had experiences with parental and teacher unrest. For example, there was a recent teacher strike that lasted a number Of weeks as well as a school board recall election. In addition, the dis- trict is known for its turnover of superintendents as four have changed jobs during the past 11 years. Conceptions , Introduction.--In order to identify and classify the reading conceptions of Principal C, an analysis was made of three sources Of data: (1) Proposition Inventory, (2) interviews, and (3) observations. Using the principle of "triangulation," these data sources were the basis Of hypotheses made about the reading conceptions Of Principal C. In addition, information was obtained from the COR teacher in order to confirm or reject these hypotheses regarding Principal C's reading conceptions. 90 Preposition Inventory.--Principal C marked the Proposition Inventory in such a way that her strong beliefs in two areas were quite evident. For instance, out of nine statements in the linear skills category, Principal C indicated that she agreed with seven. Also, she marked that she agreed with five out Of nine Of the statements regarding the use Of basal texts in teaching reading. Therefore, linear skills appeared to be the strongest Of Principal C's beliefs and basal text was next strongest. In addition, the use Of natural language and interest in teaching reading appeared to be moderately strong in Principal C's belief system. Out of nine statements, she marked three in each of these categories. However, an integrated approach seemed to be a weak belief of Principal C. Only twO statements in this cate- gory were those with which she would agree without reservation. Principal C's responses tended to cluster in such a way that the categories with which she indicated the strongest beliefs were "content-centered" rather than "pupil-centered." Table 14 shows how Principal C reSponded to the Proposition Inventory. Interviews.--Based on the content analysis Of the Proposition Inventory, several patterns appeared to emerge which reflected the reading beliefs Of Principal C. Principal C revealed a strong belief in the use of linear skills and a moderately strong belief in the use Of a basal text in the teaching Of reading. Her belief in a "content-centered" or "structured" approach was strong enough 91 TABLE 14.--Proposition Inventory Responses, Principal C. Weak Moderate Strong O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Basal Text Linear Skills Interest Natural Language Integrated Whole to overshawdow her moderate beliefs in the use of interest and natural language and her weak belief in an integrated approach. Interviews with Principal C served to validate the results of the PrOposition Inventory. For example, in 21 pages of tran- scribed tapes, Principal C mentioned her belief in the use of a basal text 17 times and the necessity for a skills program 14 times. Her interviews were punctuated with such comments as, "I really think that a basal program is very important;'and "I really think that there should bea basal text adopted in each school," and "I'm still saying you use the comprehension skillsin the basal reader." Furthermore, Principal C went on to report that she was instrumental in having her school district adopt the basal reading series. When asked if she was originally involved in the selection of the series, she replied: . . . not formally, but I guess on an informal basis I really got pretty involved before it was done and especially when I saw it moving in a direction that I wasn't particularly interested in. The series that seemed to be gaining a lot 92 Of momentum that I felt like, maybe wasn't what I wanted for _____ school . . . I certainly wanted to have some influence since it was adopted by school district. Before it was through they were caTTTfig me to sit on the committee that I ended up on. I guess because I called and talked to Or. _____that he finally started involving me in it. Also, Principal C seemed to use the terms "basal series" and'tkills"almost interchangeably. Whenever she made a comment about basals, it was quickly followed by an additional remark that incorporated the usecmmno .Lom .uoz cam: mama zmw>cmch .Lom .88: com: xcoucm>=H :owpwmoaoca .u Paawuccca .aoao co eomwcaasoosuo_ usmcopcfiuu.mp u4mcmmno .888 .88: 8882 upon 3mw>cmucH .888 .882 8883 Acopco>cfi cowuwmoaocm .8 P8awoecaa .8888 co 8883;88288--.8_ msmmo mo ucosnopm>mo mo mmaxh covauo—om .msmgmosm mcvummm mcpuuomm< mcowmwumo .mpmawucwgmu-.pm m4m