ABSTRACT THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE IN A MIDDLE-SIZED CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT by Stuart L. Openlander It is the purpose of this study to determine the need for a change in the administrative structure of a middle- sized city school system. Specifically this study will attempt to find answers to the following questions. A. Would a change in the administrative organizational structure: 1. lead to more effective communication between superintendent and staff? lead to more effective communication between the school system and the community? provide the opportunity to better meet the needs of the students? encourage and permit flexibility in curriculum planning for individual school units within the system? Stuart L. Openlander 5. develop more realistic and effective supervision of the school program? 6. lead to better implementation of the philosophy, goals, and objectives of the school system? 7. facilitate greater vertical articulation in the educational process? 8. encourage and permit emphasis on community- school concepts? 9. promote educational professional leadership and responsibility on the school unit level? 10. lead to more efficient use of central office personnel? B. Can professional and lay persons work together on a study of educational significance pertaining to a school system? Method of Investigation The data for this study were gathered from the whole population of the administrative staff. Participants were asked to indicate their perceptions of the existing patterns of the administrative structure as they pertained to the following six areas: authority levels; degree of autonomy; responsibilities of administrators; function of specialists; Stuart L. Openlander relationship to students; and degree of responsibility of line officers. To gain further insight into situations which stimulate or impede services of an administrator, these respondents were asked to assess themselves on a continuum as to such facets of duty as authority, responsibility, communication, and staff rapport. Respondents in each level of administration were surveyed as to their perception of the authority which accompanied this position. In addition to the collection of data which could be statistically analyzed reactions from sixteen study groups were gathered. Significant Findings There is a need for an administrative structure which will encourage more adequate communication and perhaps through fewer persons. Though there was evidence that the needs of the pupils could be better met by a more well defined area of respon- sibility, this does not necessarily imply the need for a change in the organizational structure. Any change in the administrative organizational structure Stuart L. Openlander would have to be such that both line and staff officers would feel that they had autonomy and flexibility in curriculum planning. In order to develOp a more realistic and effective net- work, roles have to be spelled out and the relationships between line and staff have to be better understood. A change in the organizational structure would lead to better implementation of the philosophy, goals, and objectives of the school system. Administrators overwhelmingly desire a flat type of administrative structure. It was reasonable to assume that if reorganization was to take place, a flatter type of structure would provide the administrators with the autonomy and responsibility they would like and would make the com— munity school more a reality than it is at present. The preference of administrators for a flatter type of organization would seem to indicate that a change in the administrative organizational structure would promote educational professional leadership and responsibility on the individual school levels. The best combination for an educational team would be unit control with principal leadership and effective use of consultants. Stuart L. Openlander There is little doubt that professional lay people can work together on a study of educational significance. THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE IN‘A MIDDLE-SIZED CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BY I 11.x“ Stuart L: Openlander A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of Education 1968 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research for this dissertation has been done at a time in which the functions of school administration are under severe scrutiny and evaluation and a period in which the scope of administrative responsibilities are rapidly increasing. The author hopes that the design and process involved in this dissertation may not only be helpful to others but may encourage new efforts in this field-~all of which must point toward the goal of improving the teaching-learning process. Probably the most important person to the author is the Chairman of his graduate committee--his advisor. Generous appreciation goes to Dr. Clyde M. Campbell whose guidance, encouragement and patience have been constant through the entire time. A measure of gratitude is also due to the other members of the graduate committee: Dr. Stanley Hecker, Dr. Orden Smucker and Dr. Troy Stearns. The author owes special appreciation to his colleagues in both the Dearborn Public Schools and the Parma City ii Schools for constant support, encouragement and suggestions. A debt of gratitude is due the consultants: Dr. Clyde M. Campbell, Dr. Howard Jones, Dr. W. Ray Smittle and Dr. G. Robert Koopman who assisted in setting up the design for the study, made presentations during the meetings and helped evaluate the final results. To Dr. Bert I. Greene goes a special note of thanks for taking time from his busy schedule to read the manu- script and offer suggestions as needed. The final debt of appreciation goes to the author's family. To my Dad and Mother, my heartfelt thanks for their many years of sacrifice that I might have an educa- tion. And to my wife, Jean, whose constant faith and encouragement have helped me reach this goal. iii CHAPTER I. II. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH ............. Statement of the Problem ........ ...... Educational Administration--A Challenge . ..................... .... Background of the Study ............... Purposes of the Study ................. Significance of the Study ............. Importance of the Self-Study ....... Importance of Community Partici- pation 00.0.00........OOOOOOOOOOO Importance of Resources ............ Operational Definitions ........ ....... Limitations of the Study .............. Analysis of the Data ......... ...... ... Organization of the Dissertation ...... REVIEW OF LITERATURE ..................... Importance of Administrative Organiza- iv PAGE 10 11 12 12 13 13 15 17 17 18 20 CHAPTER PAGE Elements in Administration ....... ..... 26 Unit Type of Control .................. 26 Communication ...... ................... 27 Span of Control ...... ....... .. ..... ... 28 Size ..................... ............. 3O Supervision .................. ........ . 33 Line and Staff Concept .......... ...... 37 Centralization and Decentralization ... 39 The Pyramidal Organization ............ 40 The Decentralized System .............. 44 III. METHODOLOGY ............... . .............. 53 Research Site ................ ...... ... 53 The Administrative Organization of the Dearborn Public Schools ............ 56 The Initiation and Methodology of the Self-Study .................... ..... 60 Summary ...... ........ . .......... ...... 73 IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA ... ..... 75 The Administrative Patterns Under Study .. ...... ...... ...... ..... ..... 76 Analysis of Data ..... ................. 77 Administrative Pattern ....... ..... .... 8O CHAPTER PAGE Summary . .......... ........ ........ .... 92 Analysis of Responses to Characteristics of the Organizational Pattern Preferred by Administrators ........ 95 Summary ...... ......................... 104 Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to Own Line Function ........ 108 Summary ..... . ....... .... ...... . ....... 116 Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to Own Staff Function ..... .. 116 Summary ......... ..... ................. 125 The Role of Principals ................ 126 The Role of Assistant Principals ...... 128 The Role of Directors ................. 131 The Role of Coordinators .............. 135 V. REACTIONS OF STUDY GROUPS .. .......... .... 140 Issues for Discussion ..... ..... ....... 142 Instructional Program .............. 143 Staff Specialists .................. 146 Principle, Research, and Practice .. 149 Philosophy and Objectives ..... ..... 152 vi CHAPTER VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .... Problems of Administrative Organization ..... Request for Further Suggestions .... Summary . Purpose Procedure 0 O O ........................... Summary and Conclusions Recommendations to the Board of Education . Recommendations for Further Study BIBLIOGRAPHY ....... APPENDIX vii PAGE 154 157 158 161 161 162 166 180 181 184 190 TABLE LIST OF TABLES Perceptions of Administrators Regarding Authority Levels ....................... Perceptions of Administrators Regarding the Degree of Autonomy Given to Schools ................................ Perceptions of Administrators Regarding the Relationship of Administrators to Students ............................ Perceptions of Administrators Regarding Responsibilities of Administrators ..... Perceptions of Administrators Regarding the Function of Specialists ............ Responses of Administrators Regarding the Degree of Responsibility of Line Officers ............................... Preferences of Administrators Regarding Authority Llevels 00...... ....... .0000... viii PAGE 81 83 85 87 89 91 96 TABLE 10 11 12 13 14 15 Preferences of Administrators Regarding the Degree of Autonomy Given to Schools .................. . ............. Preferences of Administrators Regarding the Relationship of Administrators to Students ............... . ............ Preferences of Administrators Regarding Responsibility of Administrators ....... Preferences of Administrators Regarding the Function of Specialists ............ Preferences of Administrators Regarding the Degree of Responsibility of Line Officers .................... ........ . Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Line Function as It Relates to Authority ..... .............. Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Line Function as It Relates to Responsibility .............. Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Line Function as It Relates to Communication ........ ...... ix PAGE 98 100 102 103 105 109 111 113 TABLE PAGE 16 Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Line Function as It Relates to Rapport ................ ..... 114 17 Self—Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Line Function as It Relates to Pupil Needs ................. 115 18 Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Staff Function as It Relates to Authority ........ ..... ...... 118 19 Self—Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Staff Function as It Relates to Responsibility .............. 120 20 Self—Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Staff Function as It Relates to Communication ............... 122 21 Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Staff Function as It Relates to Rapport .. ...... ........ ..... 123 22 Self-Evaluation of Administrators in Regard to the Staff Function as It Relates to Pupil Needs ...... ....... .... 124 TABLE 23 24 25 26 27 28 PAGE Perceptions of Actual and Desired Functions of Principals as Viewed by Administrators . ............... . ..... 127 An Evaluation of Actual and Desired Responsibilities of Assistant Principals ............................. 129 An Evaluation of Responsibility and of Authority of Directors as Viewed by Administrators ......... ........ ........ 132 Perceptions of Authority of Directors as Viewed by Administrators ... ..... ....... 134 Perceptions of Responsibility of Coordina- tors as Viewed by Administrators ....... 137 Perceptions of Authority of Coordinators as Viewed by Administrators ......... ... 138 xi LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1 Location of Schools -- Dearborn ........... 54 2 Administrative Organization - Dearborn Public Schools ..... .................... 58 xii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH Statement of the Problem This is a study of the process of the development of a new administrative structure in a middle-sized city. The administrative staff needed to be organized in such a way as to permit democratic partiC1pation in the formation of policies, an Opportunity for the deve10pment of creative ideas and, above all, making the teacher a creative profes- sional worker free to Operate within a framework which would permit best possible instruction. It was felt that such changes could be made through a self-study which would involve a representative group of citizens, a representative group of teachers, a repre- sentative group of non-instructional employees, the board of education, and all administrative and central staff officers. Four selected consultants from outside of the school system were used during the complete process. It was felt that the process of evolving a plan cooperatively was a sound basis for any changes which might l 2 take place. It was also felt that utilizing staff repre- sentatives from all parts of the school system would facilitate communication and interpretation. It was felt that this method would assure teamwork through which the best possible gains would be made. Educational Administration--A_Challenge The rapid growth of cities in the United States has created the need for the development of new organizational patterns of administration. This need has not only been manifested in school systems, but also in city government, in business, and in industry. School administration as a profession is still in its infancy as Wendell M. Hough noted in his unpublished doctoral dissertation: The professional educational administrator was non-existent in the early days of public educa- tion. Local boards of education, or comparable groups, assumed the responsibility of "unlocking the school door" in those towns and villages fortunate enough to have a school building. Gradu- ally, however, as communities began to feel a greater need for public education and express a willingness to support the schools through taxation, the school as a public institution assumed a considerably dif- ferent status. With increasing prestige and growing enrollments, the school no longer could be satis- factorily administered by lay persons whose election to a position responsible for coordinating school activities was no guarantee of professional competence in school administration. The need for full-time professional administrators became obvious; there— '1- -. A”: o -A‘ .5. ‘A 5» IA“ -.J‘ K. 3 after the positions of superintendent of schools, principal, and assistant superintendent and assistant principal became common referents of the citizenry. The evolution of the supertendency has brought about new patterns of relationships between the public and the con- trolling board as well as between the controlling board and the employees. Because of the continued growth of cities due to both the population explosion and the movement from rural to urban living, school systems are becoming larger and more complex. Mort2 reported that in 1880 there were only nineteen cities with a population of more than 100,000 people. By 1900, this number had increased to thirty-eight cities, and by 1940 the number of cities with a population of more than 100,000 people had increased to ninety-two. It is now estimated that there are over 140 cities and counties in the United States having pOpulations of over 100,000 people, and it is predicted that this number will 1Wendell M. Hough, Jr., A Documentary Study of Research on the Criteria of Educational Administrative Success (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1960), p. 1. 2Paul R. Mort, Principles of School Administration, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1946). 4 double within the next generation and a half.3 This develop- ment will be accompanied by the continued growth of larger school systems. Any growth in pupil enrollment can be expected to result in the enlargement of the administra- tive staff. A study of the current practices in adminis— trative staffing in New York State reveals that on the average there is one administrative staff member for each two hundred pupils. Thus, any growth in pupil enrollment can be expected to result in the enlargement of the adminis- trative staff.4 While it is recognized that the optimum size of the administrative staff in a local school district is deter- mined by the size of the district and the wealth of the community, this concept must also relate to the objectives of the school system. In order to carry out these objectives it is necessary to have a functioning administrative organi- 3John W. Polley, Strengthening Structural and Opera- tional Patterns, (New York City: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958), p. 28. (Mimeographed) 4New York State Department of Education, "COOperative DeveIOpment of Public School Administration," Current Practices in Administrative Staffing in New York State (Albany, New York: State Department of Education, 1955). 5 zation of adequate size. Adequate administrative staffing allows for more effective Operation Of a growing school system. There is general agreement on the need for basic pur- poses in educational administration--purposes which must include the solving of both Old and new problems. The following statement clearly points out these purposes: Educational administration can have but One basic purpose. That purpose is to facilitate teaching and learning. This easy generalization becomes more complex.upon examination. Educa- tional administration occurs in the school com- munity and consists of facilitating the develop- ment Of goals and policies basic to teaching and learning, stimulating the development of appropri- ate programs for teaching and learning, and procuring and.managing personnel and material to implement teach- ing and learning. In meeting these and other purposes it becomes neces- sary to work through an administrative structure--a formal organization. This organizational pattern consists of a set of relationships which will best permit the purposes to be fulfilled. The administrative structure is designed to spell out responsibilities and privileges, relationships and functions of all participants. The importance of an organizational structure cannot be minimized. It is needed 5Roald F. Campbell, John E. Corbally, Jr., and John A. Ramseyer, Introduction to Educational Administration (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, Inc., 1960) p. 67. txil 6 when many people work together in the common task toward the achievement of educational Objectives. Even when our society was less complex.and our population was sparse, there was a recognized need for a definite plan of organiza— tion as Morphet, Johns, and Reller have pointed out: In any society the establishment of an educa- tional program calls for a plan and an organization for carrying out the program. In primitive groups the organization was usually relatively simple; but as society became more complex and schools were developed, the need for appropriate organization to carry out the accepted purposes became apparent. Just as the purposes of education evolved from the customs, beliefs, and value systems of the leaders or of the people, so the structure grew out of, and was directly related to, the social, religious, and governmental organization accepted by, or imposed on, the people. The development Of a workable democratic pattern of educational administration becomes a challenge at a time when school systems are growing and when two ideologies-- authoritarian and democratic--are in a final race for a test by mankind. Small school systems can be controlled and directed by one individual. Large school systems require the services Of specialists in curriculum, facilities, 6 Edgar Morphet, Roe L. Johns, and Theodore L. Reller, Educational Administration Concepts,_Practices,and Issues (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1959). 7 finance, school law, and many other related areas. It is virtually impossible for an administrator to possess all segments Of knowledge relating tO the total school function and by necessity must develOp a system where these may be handled by colleagues--coordinated into a solid pattern Of democratic administration. His skill in allowing his associates to reach their potential will, in a measure, determine the level of performance Of the administrative family. The contrast to this pattern of Operation (authori— tarian) would be the administrator who fails to recognize his inability to understand the many facets of his adminis- trative job and tends to give orders. Though democratic principles seem to be much more difficult to use, how great is the challenge to seek ways of applying their use in the administration of a system of public education. Background of the Study In August, 1956, the Board of Education in Dearborn, Michigan, charged the superintendent of schools with the responsibility of appraising the present administrative structure. The Board Of Education recognized that, with the tremendous growth in school enrollment, buildings, and staff, this job of appraisal should be somewhat continuous. n ‘I’, ‘L\ . f- h“ 8 The rapid growth of the Dearborn community made it difficult to maintain an effective administrative organiza- tion. New school sites had to be located, new schools built, equipped, and staffed. Determinations included questions related to the administrative pattern. Should elementary schools be built as K-3, K-6, or K-9 as already Operating in the older part of Dearborn? Students were arriving from new homes much more rapidly than schoolrooms could be completed. All of these problems focused on the need for a larger administrative staff almost overnight. The school district, after the formation of the present city district of Dearborn, Operated under a dual administra- tive system in which both the superintendent Of schools and the business administrator reported directly to the board Of education. Special areas Of the curriculum such as music, vocational education, and gardening were headed by directors who Operated with little regard to the other central Office administrators. In the early 1950's the pattern of organization was changed to that Of unit control in which the superintendent Of schools was in charge of the complete program assisted by a deputy superintendent in charge of instruction and a deputy superintendent in charge of business and finance. 9 These two positions were considered equal in rank and status and the persons holding these positions reported directly to the superintendent. Working in the central Office with these line Officers were many staff persons who were specialists in their respective fields. Changes of superintendents with different philosophies Of administration created an organizational pattern which was highly centralized, one in which the lines of communi- cation were somewhat mixed. Within a period Of ten years there were four superintendents of schools. Each had his own concept of educational administration. Each had added some staff members in the central office. Little wonder that the central office staff had become highly centralized, and one in which the lines of communication were somewhat mixed. This was inevitable as the administrative patchwork continued. Because of this ineffectiveness staff members came to recognize the need for a study of administrative procedures. Following board direction, a committee Of staff members, after reviewing problems confronting the Dearborn Public Schools, suggested that a self-study be made of the adminis- trative structure and recommended the involvement of con- 10 sultants from the three major state universities in Michigan and the Michigan Department Of Public Instruction. Purposes 2£.the Study The purpose of this study is to determine the need for a change in the administrative structure of a middle- sized city school system. Specifically, this study will attempt to find answers to the following questions: 1. Would a change in the administrative organiza— tional structure lead to more effective com- munication between superintendent and staff? 2. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure lead to more effective com- munication between the school system and the community? 3. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure provide the Opportunity to better meet the needs of the students? 4. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure encourage and permit flexibility in curriculum planning for individual school units within the system? 5. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure develop more realistic and effective supervision Of the school program? 6. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure lead to better implementation Of the philosophy, goals, and objectives of the school system? 7. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure facilitate greater vertical articulation in the educational process? 11 8. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure encourage and permit emphasis on community-school concepts? 9. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure promote educational professional leadership and responsibility on the school unit level? 10. Would a change in the administrative organiza- tional structure lead to more efficient use of central office personnel? 11. Can professional and lay persons work together on a study of educational significance pertain- ing to a school system? Significance of the Study Over the years the need for efficiency has been emphasized through increased technology to the detriment Of democratic human interaction. In recent years it has been recognized that efficiency cannot be maintained without effective human interaction. There is a need for efficiency in the educational structure as there is a need for effi- ciency in corporate enterprise. But efficiency must not be pushed aside by ignoring the element of cooperation. Steps must be taken to set up an administrative pattern that will encourage understanding and effectiveness in the organization by making participation and democratic decision- making an integral part Of the structure. 12 The main function of educational administration is that of facilitating instruction. Thus, any change in the administrative structure will have a direct effect on all who work in the system. Not only would it affect school employees, but also the youngsters attending the schools. In fact, it is in order to provide a better education that changes in our schools are proposed. This study utilizes procedures which could lead to effective change. Importance of the Self-Study The democratic process, under which our country operates, implies that when changes are to be made, those who will be affected by the changes should be involved in the process and the decision. A process which could enlist the best thinking of the lay and professional peOple is bound to result in decisions and patterns to which these people have, or develop, a high degree of commitment. This matter of involvement makes the implementation of a new plan much easier and more effective. Importance of Community Participation The schools should both reflect and strive to improve the values of the community and theories of education. These theories and values should be reflected in the instructional 13 program and the Objectives Of this program. Implicit in this statement is the feeling that there must be close cooperation between the school and the community. This close cooperation becomes more imperative when one considers that the schools are mostly dependent on the community for financial support. Thus, when a major organizational change is contemplated, community involvement in the democratic tradition is the best way to maintain community support. An added advantage of community involvement is the develOp- ment Of closer working relationships between the school and the taxpayers. Importance of Resources The need to explore the literature is essential to any study. The literature can provide a wealth of background information which is related to the study. For example, a search of the literature provides some of the best thinking in educational administration today. In addition, the literature provides a wide and multi point of view. Operational Definitions Many of the terms used in this dissertation are commonly used in education and are generally understood. However, for purposes of clarification, the following terms are defined as they pertain to this study: 14 Administrative Structure or 0rganization--The scheme or plan used in the assignment of duties and responsibilities and the determination of staff relationships so that all the phases of operating a school system may be efficiently managed.7 Pyramidal Administrative Structure-qA highly central- ized administrative structure in which all line administrators report to the chief school adminis— trator through a clearly established chain of command. Flat Administrative Structure-qA decentralized admin- istrative structure which narrows the span of control of the superintendent and gives the inter- mediate administrator more defined responsibilities. Centralized.Administration-~A system in which authority for direction, control, and management rests pri- marily, if not exclusively, with the superintendent of schools. Decentralized Administration-~A system in which significant authority for direction, control, and management is delegated to subordinates. Line Administrator-~A person who is in the chain of command in a school system. Staff Administrator--A person not in the chain of command in a school system whose major function is primarily one of service. Consultant-~An expert not permanently employed by the local school district. The Staff-~As used representative of all professional employees. 7Carter V. Good, Editor, Dictionary of Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book CO., Inc., 1945) p. 12. 15 To increase the depth of any study outside personnel, who are experts in their field, can be effectively used. These outside consultants bring with them a degree of Objectivity that is probably not found in the local district. New ideas and a variety of experiences can also be provided by outside sources. Thus, the major significance of this study is not only the outcome of the study, but the process by which the study is accomplished. To change an administrative structure in a school district is not a difficult task and can be done through the single efforts of a board Of education. However, to design a study that will provide the Opportunity to use all available resources, professional staff, lay citizens, and outside consultants is a true expression of the American democratic process. Limitations of the Study There are certain limitations of this study. First, while the general principles underlying this study might be universally applicable, the specific findings will per- tain only to the Dearborn Public Schools. Another limitation is that of representativeness of the participants in this study. It is difficult to say to 16 what extent the participants represent the professional staff and the community. Strictly speaking, to be a repre- sentative sample, the participants should have been sta- tistically selected at random. A further limitation is that the participants represent- ing the community are probably those individuals who are interested in school affairs. These people were nominated by the officers of the many civic clubs in Dearborn. When names from all these civic groups were submitted, a selection was made of those peOple whose names appeared most frequently on these lists. Respondent error is another limitation. Whenever opinionaires are used, there is a danger that the respond- ents may give answers that reflect professional concepts and accepted practices in education rather than their own opinions. However, this is common to any study of this type. Since there is no way Of checking the veracity of the responses elicited, the responses given were accepted as true. An additional limitation is in the structure Of the opinionaire. While every effort was made to build an instru- ment that would encompass the many dimensions necessary for a study such as this, there were practical limitations as to 17 size and scope of the Opinionaire. Thus, the extent of this study is limited to the available data. Analysis 2£_the Data The data used in this study were collected from the entire administrative staff through the use of an Opinion- aire. Since the data were collected from the whole popula— tion of the administrative staff, the analysis of these data will be handled by the use of descriptive statistics. This method was chosen because the use of statistical inference is not necessary when an entire population is utilized in the study. Organization of the Dissertation This dissertation is organized in the following manner: Following this introductory chapter, Chapter II will present a review of the literature. Chapter III will be concerned with the methodology of this study. Chapter IV will present an analysis of the data. Chapter V contains the reactions of study groups. Chapter VI will deal with the summary, conclusions and recommendations. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The purpose of this chapter is to establish the context of ideas in which this research was undertaken. Part of this context is the history of research in the author's field and the reports of other researchers who have proposed explanations and perhaps tested their theories. Published material on educational administration is voluminous. The author will not attempt to provide a com- prehensive review Of all related literature. Rather, a number of studies which seem to be central to the disserta- tion will be discussed. Many studies in educational administration can be characterized largely as status studies.1 That is, much of the research is an attempt to find out whether certain con- ditions exist, to determine the average size of the adminis— trative staff, or the relationship between finances and providing for instructional purposes. While it is necessary 1Russell P. Gregg, "Administration," Encyclopedia Of Educational Research, Ed. Chester w. Harris (New York: MCMillan Company, 1960), p. 20. 18 19 to have status studies, it is equally important to have empirical studies which test various theories Of educational administration. It is only recently that studies of this nature have been undertaken. Cooper's statement is an indication of the extent Of concentration and research in the area of administrative organization and.management: Studies of hierarchical organization have dealt intensively with the top of the administra- tive hierarchy in such investigations as Count's examination of school board Opposition, Smittle's Research on Boards of Control for Higher Educa- tional Institutions, and Smith's Study of Unit vs. Multi-Administrative Organization. Numerous studies have been reported on the city superintendent of schools, especially in relation to the board of education, and on the principalship. Studies of middle-management in school systems have been numerous only in recent years; reports on business and government organizations in this area remaining more pertinent than reports on education.2 The importance of empirical studies in school adminis- tration has been recognized; and, in recent years we have seen the rapid growth of such studies. In fact, several regional organizations such as Midwest Administration (Chicago) and COOperative Program in Educational Administra- tion have been established to meet this need. 2 Dan H. COOper, "School Administration," Review of Educational Research, XXVI (June 1956), pp. 214—215. 20 Importance 2£_Administrative Organization Even in primitive society organizational structure has been an important factor as the survival of that society. As societies became more complex, it was imperative that the organizational structure be flexibly patterned to adapt to the human and environmental needs and limitations. Thus, history has demonstrated that one essential characteristic Of good organization is the ability to change the structure to fit new demands. Before reviewing the literature, it might be well to begin with the definition of the term "organization." Sears' definition is brief but comprehensive: An organization is a collection of persons, materials, procedures, ideas, and facts so arranged so as to make a meaningful unit, and at the same time designed to function so that the combined effort of all the components may be directed to the accom- plishment of a specific Objective. This means that administrative organization is a means to an end, rather than an end unto itself. It further implies that the objectives are known, and this administrative organi- zation facilitates the attainment of those objectives. Another implication of administrative organization is efficiency. The existence of an administrative structure 3Jesse B. Sears, Nature of the Administrative Process, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1950), p. 33. 21 should make the attainment Of the objectives more efficient than would be possible without such a structure. Some of the concerns of administrative organization are planning, evaluation, and reorganization. Dale4 discusses organization planning as the process Of defining activities, grouping activities, assigning activities logically, and effectively executing the activities. More specifically, the assignment of functions, the assignment of responsibili- ties, the delegation Of authority, and the allotment of per- sonnel within an organization are referred to as components to the structure of an organization. Moehlman5 ascribes four functional activities to administration. One of these functional activities is planning. He says: Lack of emphasis on planning may omit or underemphasize fundamental needs, produce slovenly execution, and make appraisal difficult.6 Continuous organizational evaluation and reorganization is a necessary part of administration. Several authorities 4Ernest Dale, Planning and Developing the Company Organization Structure, (New York: American Management Assn., 1952), p. 14. 5Arthur B. Moehlman, School Administration, (New York: Houghton Mifflin CO., 1959). 6 Moehlman, op. cit., p. 73. 22 recognize that continuous organizational evaluation and reorganization is an intricate part of the administrative function. Dale sees it as a process of growth: Organization must be studied as a process of growth. Since companies' size and their problems are continuously changing, we must learn.how to adapt the organization to these changes. This may be done by analyzing the organization problems that arise at various stages of company growth-~problems having to do with formulation of basic Objectives, the delegation of responsibility, the span of control, the role Of the staff assistant and specialist, com- mittee work and coordination, decentralization and reorganization. TO underscore the importance Of evaluation, Holden, Fish, and Smith, drawing from industry, recommend complete organizational evaluation for the purpose of attaining greater effectiveness. They say: Every phase of a company's organization plan should be questioned and tested from a wholly Objective viewpoint, without being influenced by present pattern or personnel, precedent or tradi- tion. From such an analysis a plan of organization can be developed which will best meet the current and future requirements of the business. One implication of evaluation is the possibility of reorganization. In essence what Dale, and others are 7Dale, op. cit., p. 165. 8 Paul E. Holden, Lounsbury S. Fish, and Hubert L. Smith, TOp Management Organization and Control, (Palo Alto, Calif- ornia: Stanford university Press, 1941), p. 5. 23 indicating is that evaluation must be a continuous process in the administrative function. This process can reveal the need for a change in the organizational structure. However, in order to insure successful organizational changes certain factors should be given consideration. Dale lists these factors as A. B. H. I. Active participation of all concerned at all stages of change. Utilization of talent competent in the various engineering and human relations aspects of organization planning. Thorough analysis of the functions and relation- ships of significant jobs. Study of the existing organization structure. Construction of the ideal organization on the basis of specific organization criteria. Modification of the ideal structure in the light of personality influences, existing structural needs and individual economic circumstances. Setting up the basic functions and matching of incumbents against job requirements. Winning acceptance of the plan. Constant review and modification to make the organization structure more closely conformed to the ideal plan.9 In education the problem of organizational administration has been a tremendous one. Rapid growth of communities and consequently school districts have in many cases caused edu— cators to work with an administrative organization that was 9 Dale, .02. Cit.’ p. 168. 24 not fully efficient. LepawskylO maintains that it is essential for administrators to eXperiment with tools of modern organization if the ultimate in efficiency is to be achieved. John Guy Fowlkes stated: While the tasks assumed by public education have multiplied in number and.magnified in social significance in our time, the provisions for their achievement have not been enlarged or improved in like degree. It may be observed that the school organization itself has not been modified basically toward more efficient and effective accomplishment of its reason for its existence. Instead, school organization has been altered by the addition of patch upon patch on a structure designed more for a program of limited education in a few academic areas than for a program of broad fields of activity in a modern school.l Recognizing the marked similarity between educational administration and other forms of administration, some educators have begun to look at other disciplines for ideas which might be applied to education. Fowlkes, in his introduction to Administration in Profile for School Executives, said: lOAlbert Lepawski, Administration, (New York: Alfred A. KnOpf, Inc., 1949), p. 321. 11John Guy Fowlkes, Introduction to Harlan L. Hagman and Alfred Schwartz, Administration in Profile for School Executives, (New York: Harper & Bros., 1955), pp. 1-2. 25 The administrator of public schools may learn from his counterparts and activities far removed in nature from public education. There is a kinship between the tasks of education and the tasks of related fields, though the problems of the former may seem Often to be peculiar to it and answerable only in the language of the professional educator.12 Fowlkes reveals the need to examine administrative con- cepts, policies, and practices in areas other than education. He implies that administrative practices in education can be improved by examining administrative practices in other situations. . 13 A book by L1kert reveals that some management prac- tices (administration) in industry and business are under- going radical changes. These changes are constantly being evaluated for their effects on the industry or business. Some of these changes that are new to industry have existed, at least in principf{£/in education for some time. This is not to imply that people in education have nothing to learn from industry. Rather, it implies that people in education should not accept a practice simply because it exists in industry. 12 Ibid. 3 . . Rens1s L1kert, New Patterns of Management, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1961). 26 Elements in Administration The previous portion of this chapter examined the importance and need for an administrative organization. This portion will examine the components of administration. The elements discussed below can be found, in some form, in every administrative structure. Unit Type of Control The relationship of the administrative organization to the board of education is extremely important. Thus, one of the first considerations in an administrative structure is to determine whether a unit type, or a multiple type of control is to be adopted. The unit type of organization places the authority and responsibility for the operation of the school system in the hands of the superintendent Of schools. The multiple type places responsibility for the Operation of certain aspects of the school system in the hands of departmental heads who report directly to the board of education. (On this subject, Sears14 considers that prin- ciple by which authority exists and operates within an 14 Sears, op. cit., p. 120. 27 organization as a major segment of the force that unifies . 15 . . the system.) Simon maintains that the strength of the school system lies in its unity and the speed and consistency with which it Operates. On the question of the effectiveness of unit control or multiple control, Hunt and Pierce state: On the whole, the unit type is regarded as more effective and coordinating control, eliminating frictions, and preventing waste. The trend is, there- fore, definitely toward change from multiple to unit control as a means of improving administration. This type of unity of control, or command, according to Chruden and Sherman requires that each subordinate be respon- sible directly to only one superior and each superior has 17 undivided authority over the persons reporting to him. Communication Communication is essential to the functioning of any organization, and it is widely held as the most important single process in management. Yet communication, as it 5Herbert A. Simon, Administrative Behavior, (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1947). 6 Herold C. Hunt and Paul R. Pierce, The Practice of School Administration, (Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company, 1958), p. 334. 17 Herbert A. Chruden and Arthur W. Sherman, Jr., Peg- sonnel Management, (Cincinnati: Southwestern Publishing Company, 1959), p. 46. 28 exists in many organizations, places primary emphasis on control, chain of command, and the downward flow Of orders. There is no corresponding emphasis placed On more adequate and accurate communication flowing upward. Likert18 reports on a survey by the New York State Department of Labor which was interested in finding out about the communication process. This study found that the companies surveyed were interested in getting management's viewpoints across to the workers, but all companies were less interested in discovering the worker's viewpoints. Likert states: Upward communication, therefore, is at least as inadequate as downward communication and probably is less accurate because of the selective filtering of information which subordinates feed to their superiors. In view of the influence of upward com— munication on management's awareness of problems existing in the organization and on the information or misinformation used in making decisions, the inadequacy in upward communication is probably more serious than the deficiencies in downward communica- tion. Span of Control Span of control refers to the number of people who can be effectively supervised by one person. This concept 8 . . Likert, Op. Cit. l9 . Ibid., p. 47. 29 reCOgnizes that there is a limit to the number Of subordi- nates. There is no general agreement as to what this number is or should be. There appears to be consensus that the number is dependent on the role of the supervisor and his place in the organizational structure. Chruden and Sherman say: Three or four vice-presidents, for example, might constitute a maximum span of control for a chief executive, whereas twenty or thirty laborers on a road gang might be managed effectively by one foreman. Generally the more specific the task the greater the span of control. 21 . . Campbell, Corbally, and Ramseyer maintain that a superintendent should not delegate authority to more than three to six subordinates. The rationale to this restriction is to allow the superintendent to be effective in his rela— tionships with his subordinates. In other words, a complicated chain of command may over-tax the tOp executive's mental and physical capacities in such a manner as to reduce his effi- ciency. Thus, the disadvantages of an increased span Of 20 Herbert J. Chruden and Arthur W. Sherman, Jr., Per- sonnel Management, (Cincinnati: Southwestern Publishing Company, 1959), p. 46. 21 Campbell, et al., 22' cit., p. 122. 30 control must be viewed in terms Of the disadvantages of increased delegation of responsibility. Dale22 notes this and feels that it might be possible to strike a satisfactory balance between these two. NO clear-cut answer can be given to the question of span Of control and it is Obvious that this question must be answered by the situation existing in each school district. Size One of the factors that must be considered when dis- cussing the administrative unit is size. Terrien and Mills, in a study of 264 school districts of various sizes in California, found that the larger the school district, the greater the number of administrators. This finding held for elementary, high school, unified, and city school dis- tricts. Although it is not a new concept that the administrative unit increases as the school district increases, it is implied that an Optimum size for an administrative unit exists. Per- 22 Dale, pp. 331', p. 166. 23 Frederick w. Terrien and Donald L. Mills, "The Effect of Changing Size Upon the Internal Structure of Organizations," American Sociological Review, (February, 1955). 31 haps it is at this point that span of control becomes important. That size is an important factor cannot be denied. Talacchi24 conducted a research project relating to this factor. He attempted to investigate the impact of organi- zational size on employee attitudes, behaviors, and levels of satisfaction. He assumed that organizational size affects employee modes Of interaction. He assumed, in turn, that these modes Of interaction affect attitudes and, consequently, behavior at work. Furthermore, he theorized that the larger the organization, the greater the division of labor. The greater the division Of labor, the greater the competition and conflict of interests. Thus, he theorized that there would be a reduction in informal interaction and communica- tion which would increase the potential for personal and group conflict and, thus, lead to a lower level of satis- faction. The hypotheses for this study were: The general level of employee satisfaction is inversely related to the size 24 Sergio Talacchi, "Organization Size, Individual Attitudes, and Behavior: An Empirical Study," Administrative Science Quarterly, (December, 1960), p. 398-420. 32 of the organization; as the size of the organization increases, the level of satisfaction in areas of inter-personal relation between employee and management, employee and supervisor, and employee and employee decreases; and, as the size of the organization increases, the level of satisfaction in the area Of non-material rewards on the job decreases. The procedure used to test these hypotheses was an instrument which would provide a general index of employee satisfactions. This instrument was then used in ninety- three selected industrial organizations of various sizes from all regions of the United States. The findings by Talacchi as previously cited indicated that a significant negative relationship existed between the size of the organizations and the level of satisfaction. The larger the organization the lower the level of employee satis- faction. As the size Of the organization increased, the level of satisfaction in each area of inter-personal relations decreased. As the size of the organization increased, satis- faction in non-material rewards on the job decreased. Thus, the size Of the organization had a definite impact on the level of employee satisfaction. 33 Supervision An important factor in administration is that Of supervision. The research evidence25 suggests that super- vision is a relative process. In order to be effective, a leader must adapt his behavior to those with whom he is working. There can be no "cookbook" methods Of supervision. Rather, general principles of supervision must be applied as they fit the situation. Implications from research which indicate that super— vision is a relative process have relevance for the problem of decentralization. The argument that a line and staff organization, because of its inherent delegation of respon- sibility, as an effective mode Of operation leaves much to be desired when supervision is recognized as a relative process. The strength Of this form of organization rests with the individual supervisor. Thus, the strength of a line and staff organized unit is solely dependent upon the abilities of each supervisor to adjust his behavior to a specified group. The most difficult factor to explain, and 25 Rensis Likert, "Effective Supervision: An Adaptive and Relative Process," Personnel Psychology, (Autumn, 1958). 34 what often confuses the situation, is that supervisors who threaten and bring pressure on their subordinates can achieve impressive short-run results, particularly when this super- vision is coupled with high technical competence. There is some evidence, as pointed out in the following reference, however, that supervision which decreases direct pressure can achieve significant increases in production. Likert26 describes an experiment in which the effects of increased supervisory pressures were studied. This study covered five hundred clerical employees in four parallel divisions. Each division was organized in the same way, used the same technology, did exactly the same kind of work, and had employees of comparable aptitudes. The experiment with these clerical divisions lasted for one year. Before the experiment started, several months were devoted to planning. There was also a training period of supervisory and managerial staffs lasting approximately six months. Productivity was measured continuously and computed weekly throughout the year. Employee and super- visory attitudes, perceptions, motivations, and related variables were measured just before and just after the 2 6Likert, pp. cit., p. 62. 35 experimental year. Observations of supervisory behavior and employee responses were also made throughout the experi- ment. In two of the four divisions, an attempt was made to change the supervision so that Opportunities for decision- making were allowed to the lower levels of the hierarchy. At each hierarchical level supervisors had freedom of action within stated policy. In addition, the managers, assistant managers, supervisors, and assistant supervisors Of these two divisions were given training in leadership and membership skills, group processes, and also partici- pation in experiences designed to increase their sensitivity to the reaction of others. During the experimental year, the managers and supervisors endeavored to involve sub- ordinates in decisions related to the work and to achieve a relatively high level of participation in all activities and decisions except those having to do with compensation and matters related to it. Experimental changes in these two divisions were labeled "the participative program." In the other two divisions, by contrast, an increase in the closeness of supervision was made. For example, one of the major changes was to have the jobs timed by the methods department and to have the standard times computed. 36 This showed that these divisions were overstaffed, except for peak loads, by about 30 per cent. The general manager then ordered the managers of these two divisions to cut staff by 25 per cent. As a check on how effectively the experimental changes were carried out in the two programs, measurements were obtained for each division as to where decisions were made. In this experiment, the levels at which decisions were made were manipulated. With the control groups all decisions were made at the highest supervisory level. In the experi- mental group, decisions were made by cooperative effort of all supervisory levels. Also, in the experimental groups there was an increase in the extent to which the employees were involved in decisions affecting them. The results of this experiment revealed that although productivity was high in both the experimental and control groups, the attitudes, loyalties, and motivations were greatly improved in the experimental groups and had deteri- orated in the control groups. Implied in the findings was an assumption that if the experiment were to be continued, the production of the control group would decrease. 37 Line and Staff Concept Many school districts have an organizational structure which sometimes appears to be authoritarian. This is due to the fact that school organization tends to emulate the military structure. Under this type of structure, the line of authority is very clear. It extends from the board of education to the superintendent, to the assistant superin- tendent, to the principals, to each teacher, and therefore, to each pupil. If there are any supervisors, they are likely to be known as staff. This is because they can advise, and do not have any authority to enforce. This type of organiza- tion is known as a pyramidal administrative structure. Some theorists in educational administration have pointed out some of the weaknesses of the line and staff organization. These theorists note that some other organi- zational structure can accomplish the school Objectives more effectively. Among the critics of the line and staff organi- zation are Barr, Burton, and Brueckner who note these weak- nesses of line and staff organization: we have already noted: first, that adminis- trative and supervisory functions cannot actually be separated; second, we believe as the result 38 of evidence that the imposition of authority will not accomplish as much or as well as the exercise Of leadership; third, truly demo— cratic cooperation is likely to be more efficient in the long run than contact through strictly defined channels; and fourth, machinery and rules made on the spot, by those intimately concerned and who will have to operate within the given situations, are superior to rules and machinery made by a central staff further removed from the leagging situation which the machinery is to serve. Moehlman28 implies that the change from an authoritarian administrative structure to one that is more democratic is coming. He indicates that the superintendent determines if the office will be democratic or autocratic. Thus, some educational theorists feel the line and staff structure to be autocratic. This line of thought is mislead- ing because it attributes the weakness to organizational structure rather than to the personalities involved. The direction of change is as important as the rate of change. Koopman, Miel, and Misner say: ...aspect of the process is to discover a demo- cratic form of organization for the school that will promote the efficient solution Of educational 27 . . A. S. Barr, William H. Burton, and Leo J. Brueckner, Supervision, (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1947), p. 85. 8 Moehlman, 9p. cit., p. 161. 39 problems. It is essential that the organization provide for the most effective pgssible partici- pation of all persons concerned. 9 Centralization and Decentralization One value of the local school district is that it attempts to provide a satisfactory administrative unit. It renders the schools quickly responsive to sudden changes of the citizenry who support them. It identifies the schools closely with the community. By placing control in the hands of lay boards, the local district system theoretically insures immediate and lasting interest in school affairs on the part of the general public from whose ranks board members are selected. NO one principle Of organization or administration can be set down as a hard and fast rule. Within our country there are many patterns and many systems. In several cases these various patterns are working effectively. Such factors as money, size, and personnel are important variables in the administrative structure. G. Robert Koopman, Alice Miel, and Paul J. Misner, Democracy in School Administration, (New York: D. Appleton- Century Company, Inc., 1943), FL 318. 40 In order to clarify the situation with which this study is concerned, it is necessary to describe the centralized and decentralized mode of operation as it pertains to a middle-sized school district. This is not to imply that the following description describes the Dearborn Operation. However, it is probably not atypical in a middle-sized school district. The Pyramidal Organization One pattern Of school organization is known as pyramidal. Likert30 explains how this organizational structure functions. The assistant superintendent in charge of curriculum, for example, may go to the superintendent with a problem and a recommendation. Because it involves an expenditure of money, the assistant superintendent for business is called in. On the basis of the discussion with two assistant super- intendents and the recommendations they make, the superin- tendent arrives at a decision. However, in any organization larger than a few hundred employees, that decision will usually effect subordinates whose interests were not repre- sented. Under the circumstances, they are not likely to 30 Likert, pp. cit., p. 97-118. 41 accept this decision wholeheartedly nor strive hard to implement it. What happened to the communication process? The superintendent, it will be recalled, holds meetings for the primary purpose of sharing information. If the assistant superintendent for curriculum has some important facts bear- ing on the action which he wants the superintendent to approve, he does not reveal them at these meetings. He waits until he is alone with the superintendent and can use the information to obtain the decision he seeks. Each assistant superintendent is careful to share in these communication meetings only trivial information. The motivational pressures are against sharing anything Of importance. The man to man pattern Of operation enables an assistant superintendent, or a principal, to bene- fit by keeping as much information as possible to himself. Not only can he obtain decisions from his superior beneficial to himself, but he can use his knowledge secretly to connive with peers or subordinates, or to pit one peer or subordinate against the other. In these ways he is often able to increase his own power and influence. He does this, however, at the expense of the total organization. The distress and fear created by his behavior adversely affect the amount of influence which the organization can exert in coordinating the activities of its members. Measures Of the amount of 42 influence an organization can exert on its members show that distrust of superiors, colleagues, and subordinates adversely affect the amount of influence that can be exercised. Another serious weakness in the communication process in the man to man method of Operation is that communications upward are highly filtered and correspondingly inaccurate. Orders and instructions float down through the organization, at times, with some distortion. When the superintendent asks for information on the execution of orders and on difficul- ties encountered, incomplete and partially inaccurate informa- tion is often forthcoming. Mfith these items and other kinds of communication as well, those below the boss study them carefully and discover what he is interested in, what he approves and disapproves Of, and what he wants to hear and what he does not want to hear. Then they tend to feed him the material he wants. It is difficult and Often hazardous for an individual subordinate, in man to man discussion, to tell the boss something which he needs to know, but which runs counter to the boss's desires, convictions, or preju- dices. A subordinate's future in an organization is often influenced appreciably by how well he senses and communicates to his boss material which fits the latter's orientation. 43 Another characteristic of the man to man pattern con- cerns the point Of view from which problems are solved. When a problem is brought to the superintendent, each assist- ant superintendent usually states and discusses the problem from a departmental orientation, deSpite efforts by the superintendent to deal with it from a system-wide point of view. This operates to the disadvantage of the entire school system. Problems tend to be solved in terms of what is best for a department, not of what is best for the school district as a whole. In the man to man situation it is clear that sharply defined lines of responsibility are necessary because of the nature of the promotion process and because the men involved are able people who want promotion. What are the chances of having one's competence so visible that one moves up in a school system or receives Offers elsewhere? Two factors are important: The magnitude of one's responsibility and the definition of one's functions so as to assure successful performance. There is often tremendous competition between the subordinates at the top level, and each man is trying to enlarge his area of responsibility, thereby encroaching on the other's territory. He is also trying to get decisions 44 from the superintendent which set easily attained goals for him and enable him to achieve excellent performance. One consequence of this struggle for power is that each department has to have job responsibilities and boundaries precisely defined. No one dares let anyone else take over any part of his activity, even temporarily, for fear that the line Of responsibility will be moved over permanently. The tighter the hierarchical control in an organization, in the sense that the decisions are made at the top and orders flow down, the greater tends to be the hostility among subordinates. In this situation, subordinates bow down to superiors and fight among themselves for power and status. Consequently, the greater the extent which the super— intendent makes the decisions, the greater is the probability that the competition, hostility, and conflict will exist between his assistant superintendents and staff members. The Decentralized System A decentralized organization with an effective super— visory council can solve many problems found in the pyramidal structure. Here the superintendent holds meetings with his top staff regularly to solve problems and make decisions. Any member of his staff can propose problems for considera- 45 tion, but each problem is viewed from a district-wide point of view. It is virtually impossible for one depart- ment to force a decision beneficial to it, but detrimental to other departments if the group as a whole makes the decision. An effectively functioning work group pressing for solutions in the best interests of all the members and refusing to accept solutions which unduly favor a particular member or segment of the group is an important characteristic of the group pattern of organization. It also provides the superintendent with a powerful managerial tool for dealing with specific requests or favors from subordinates. Often the subordinates may feel that their request is legitimate even though it may not be in the best interest of the organi- zation. In the man to man operation, the superintendent some- times finds it difficult to turn down such requests. With the group pattern of operation, however, the superintendent can suggest that the subordinate submit his proposal to the group at the next staff meeting. If the request is legitimate and in the best interests Of the organization, the group will grant the request. If the request is unreasonable, an effectively functioning group can skillfully turn it down by analyzing it in relation to what is best for the entire 46 organization. Subordinates in this situation soon find they cannot get special favors or preferred treatment from the superintendent. This leads to a tradition that one does not ask for any treatment or decision which is recognized as unfair to his colleagues. There are other advantages to this kind of group action. The motivation is high to communicate accurately all relevant and important information. If any one of these men holds back importantflfacts affecting the school district so that he can take it to the superintendent later, the superintendent is likely to ask him why he withheld the information and request him to report it to the group at the next session. The group also is apt to be hard on any member who withholds important information from them. Moreover, the group can get ideas across to the superintendent that no subordinate dares tell him. As a consequence, there is better communica- tion which brings a better awareness of the problem and better decision-making than with the man-to-man system. Another important advantage of effective group action is the high degree of motivation on the part of each member to do his best to implement decisions and to achieve group goals. Since the goals of the group are arrived through group decision, each individual member tends to have a high 47 level of equal identification with goals because of his involvement in the decisions. The superintendent in a school system must be fully aware Of the situational requirements which apply to the operation of his system. In making decisions, he and his organization should never lose sight of them. If the group is so divided in opinion that there is no time to reach decisions by consensus which adequately meets these require- ments, the superintendent has the responsibility of making a decision which does meet them. In this event, the super- intendent may be wise to accept the solution preferred by the individuals in the organization who will have the major responsibility for implementing the decision, provided, Of course, that the superintendent himself feels that the solu- tion is reasonably sound. Sometimes differences of opinion exist not between members of the organization but between the superintendent and his subordinates. In this event, the superintendent should fully participate in the discussion and present clearly the evidence which makes him hold another point of view. If, after further discussion, the organization still prefers another course of action, the superintendent faces a tough decision. He can overrule his subordinates and take the 48 action he favors. This is likely to have some effect on group loyalties. However, the superintendent may feel that he has no choice but to do what his own experience indicates is best, but whatever course of action is taken, he is respon- sible and must accept full responsibility for what occurs. Comparing the pyramidal with the decentralized adminis- trative structure several differences can be noted. Under the pyramidal structure the authority and responsibility for the Operation Of the school system are lodged in the super- intendent. He delegates to his immediate subordinates some of his responsibility and authority and holds them accountable for specific performance. They, in turn, delegate part of their authority and responsibility to their immediate sub— ordinates and so the delegation proceeds down through the organization. All the authority or influence is seen as coming from the top downward. Under the decentralized administrative structure, influ- ences upward and sideward are as much a part of the organiza- tional processes as influence downward. Consequently, differ- ent levels in the organization should not be thought of in terms of more or less authority, but rather as coordinating or linking larger or smaller staff numbers. 49 What does this concept of structure in authority imply for line-staff relationships in schools operating under present theories Of administration? The traditional concept that the line has authority and the staff is only advisory is breaking down increasingly as technical instructional processes and other problems become more complex. In some schools today, parts of the staff are exercising more influ- ence than the line because of the great complexity of the technical instructional processes and of the expertness of the staff. This often can cause serious friction and con- c_. flict. The decentralized or unit structure would provide the mechanism to enable the school district to arrive at sound decisions by allowing all members to contribute their specialized knowledge and skills. The contributions of line and staff would vary with the problems and with the resources each possess. Under this concept Of line-staff relationships, the line would not have sole responsibility and authority to make decisions without staff advice. The line would have authority and responsibility for building a highly effective system through which the best decisions would be made with both line and staff contributing:////g That there are various forms of administration and that these forms can function effectively in certain situations 50 cannot be denied. However, the functioning Of the organiza- tion and the form that it takes is dependent upon many factors in the school and in the community. In middle-sized and large city school districts the type of organization needed varies considerably from the kind of structure found in a small school district. Mort says: Studies Of the relation of adaptability... to local Operating units began early to raise questions concerning the adequacy of the organi- zation of large city school districts. It is now apparent that large city school districts are not highly adaptable. They were built upon the pattern of the small school district on which America has operated schools for three hundred years. The evidence is cumulative that this pattern, with all its modifications tosdate, is not adequate to cope with the situation. What Mort is saying is simply that the city school or large school district demands a different administrative structure than the small school district. Mort emphasizes this in his foreward to the Metropolitan School Study Council's Publica- tion: A new period in the history of school adminis- tration is ahead. The duties, functions, and op- portunities Of educational leadership have been Paul R. Mort, Administrative Operational Patterns, Metropolitan School Study Council, (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1950), p. 5V. 51 widened by greater technical knowledge and a much more enlightened view of the power Of education. Schools can no longer be administered in toto by a single person, regardless Of his ability or devotion. There is merging now a pattern Of operation drawing upon all involved as contributors to the performance of the adminis- trative function. This is in keeping with the idea of democratic adminis- tration. However good these theories may be, there are many Obstacles to be overcome before they can be instituted McGregor says: Before we are overwhelmed by the obstacles, let us remember hat the application of theory is always slow. Thus, change in educational administration should not be expected to occur rapidly. That change is inevitable is an accepted assumption. It is the rate of change that should be considered. This chapter has attempted to provide a brief review of the literature related to the administrative function. In addition, theoretical models of centralized and decentral- ized administrative patterns were presented. Throughout the 32 , Ibid., p. 5. 33 Douglas McGregor, The Human Side of Enterprise, (New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1960). 52 literature it is difficult to ignore the emphasis attached to evaluation. The role of evaluation, as indicated by so many educational theorists, can most effectively be used to assess existing practices and to pave the way for changes. Where these changes have occurred, they have generally resulted in more democratic organizational patterns. Thus, these changes, as a result of the evaluative process, may be leading toward a more effective system of supervision. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY This chapter will be concerned with two integral parts Of the research. The first portion of this chapter will describe the community setting in which the research took place. The second portion will deal with the early developments leading up to the initiation of the project and the methodology used in the study project. Research Site The city of Dearborn is adjacent to the city of Detroit. It has a population of 112,0071 and encompasses an area Of 25.3 square miles. Located within the city limits are 200 industries, three newspapers, one radio station, three hospitals, and five public libraries. Essentially the city of Dearborn is physically divided into two communities.2 The section known as "West Dearborn" is largely residential with few businesses and industrial 11960 Federal Census. 2 See Figure l, p. 54. 53 54 5.593.... a... .3; 28.6.. - ...oorom :9: mezum 240210;. zmommdmo A ‘ 30:3 :9: 3.22. on .85 :2. .... m n m :5. <._ 3 N V I uoozom Efizuzmd muoorom 2.53.". aw. u .5. v 3.33... n u L85: r]. a 4 .... n . ucoztxs... z 5302 >wv. 30... econ. e96 . H. as 2.32.8... 0 .32 a ..u u. so [\i .. ...—ado; a mam 0 0 2.2.8 .. FDOFw .55: hm? hit 904.... Ouxo m M m 2‘0 ‘0 0 I4 .1 H n a n 900 Db H 0 YA ltvo 39 AM. .1 H m 9 9 0 J‘> I. \ a a a“ w. are u..- 0 i D. \G. to c 9 s be 4.. «er «a... 142.5. m m o. e255. .. m o ...o 0 O :9: A 0...... :8. m .. a a 9. momma—a n 1 r.- N 8 D I m m fl .... v¢ 010 Pu Ii m i=5... w. ....» ... um .23. £889 a _. a... ‘ u n an} ~33 10.5.. m w. M >¢zwz a 5.3.8 2&5er \ A a! 3 l O 1 .12.... m. m .... ufiflmhmoo u n I ionic... 381:9 I d e u v m a so: 0 I u m 5.6.38; . r- 35.5 ...: o. g . _ . N i i u i F zomOKOK adoz atom m. o<°¢ 020.. A woqm .z. < I v mum-v.1 ¢\ AI 3 m .33 m m . \n _ _ o “museum .u. 3 X1 mien O . w u m» u m m m3 I. n 22.5.) 3.20039. H z229. 23.2.... 12.5323. - 33.3: 2.2.3! 3.2.5.. I in 3.5.5.. 951 43.; 3:33 a 5.5.2.. xo>m 2w... :3: o .55.... wmumcx .823 a 33...: tom—am 3.5.3.. 1 232.3 .505 «on... o 52.2.... ...—«zone: .53. a 52:... ...—<25 .6... .32. ..3 55° :2: E0933 :53 a so... 302m :53: o 32:38.. 3:30.. snug-55 - 23; E65 - n .5238 u 23.. 2:2. . 1.52m noon...»- a .85..- @204 23 a ...u... mifiwmwuumari 2. 5.5... .3 >583... 90.3 uo.>¢mm :52... c 2.3 use... :ozwooz... maniac Iago 2.58: n =4on >¢=om3553 - mucus-1. 2:; 5.33 a 2.52.. «233.. 32.253 ...... 82:3 use: ......3: n .3... 2.5.5 :25! 35:3 a ......» 9330: so... .385. .o .22. 8.3 .2322 9.338 a 52:30 9358 2:3 .53.. a 2.5.3 195.. 353: - >38: 20¢ wJOOIom no zo_._.¢um 10> m1 05:: «835.... «Sauna “mm? 983 {an muhzwo oz_o¢ut 9:221... wzi: ¢0how¢a mJ¢:Zmzw4u m4h3awo ....msm rhnmuo % € € f’hzgzmwzimgw 22532:. .3 amOA zpfiuonps< mafipummwm wuowdupmfiCHEO< mo mCOHPQOOHOa H mqm<fi 82 Another area of examination, in order to determine whether the administrators perceive the organization as being flat or pyramidal, had to do with the degree of autonomy given to schools. Thus, administrators were asked to indicate whether they perceived the school units as hav- ing greater or lesser autonomy. Table 2 presents the data on this factor. The overwhelming majority of administrators (81 per cent) saw the structure as being more flat than pyramidal. That is they perceived the school principals to have almost complete autonomy over their buildings. It is interesting to note the relatively large proportion of administrators who perceived the structure to be largely flat rather than selecting the intermediate category of "more flat than pyramidal." Perhaps one reason for this can be related to the data in Table 1. Table 1 revealed a relatively large proportion of administrators who perceived the administra- tive structure to be flat. Thus, it is not unusual that they would also perceive the schools as having a great deal of autonomy. In fact, a comparison of Tables 1 and 2 reveals that 70 per cent of the administrators saw the levels of authority as being more flat than pyramidal, 83 Hm>mH mo. pm Peacemacmaw** HO>OH HO. HO unmowmficmwm* H.00H mm Afl0 >EOCOPs¢ one mcwpndmwm mHOpmvaflcwEO< mo mCOHHQOOHmm N mqmm * cane pmHm Ono: v.vH HH pdam saga HOOHEMHzm muoz 5 8 m.m v Haveemusm AHOUHMA mocmumwwwo mocwummwfim P mo Houum mo OOchwOHmm kocwsvwnm OHNbcmwm mmwwcmoumm mvcwpsww Op muowdupmficaEO< mo mangOHHmaom Orv mafipnmmmm mHOedHPOMCfiefim mo mCOfiwmwoumm m mqm<fi 86 Another dimension of this problem revolves around the perceptions of administrators regarding the distribution of responsibilities. Table 4 contains information on this factor. In the three areas previously examined, it was noted that over 50 per cent of the administrators perceived the structure to be more flat than pyramidal or largely flat. For the first time, this table reveals that administrators perceive the structure to be more pyramidal than flat on this dimension. Although the reasons for this are not readily apparent, it is probable that building principals perceive themselves as having a great degree of autonomy when this autonomy pertains to the administration of their individual schools and to their responsibilities to the students. This was demonstrated by Tables 2 and 3. However, it is possible that when decision-making relates to the higher school system, the building principal does not per- ceive himself as having the same degree of responsibility for school-wide decisions. Another possible explanation for the data in this table may be related to the perceptions of assistant principals. When there is a principal and an assistant principal, the assistant principal may perceive himself as having less responsibility for decision-making. 87 0.00H on Am AHOOHOA wocmumwwfia wocwummmfio 9 HO HOHHm mo mowecwouwm >Ocmsqmnm pumpcdpm madecmomwml mHOpmupwwcwEO< mo mmfivfiaflnwmcomwmm mcwpumowm wHOpmemfl2fiep< mo mcowwmmouwm w mum<fi 88 Note might be taken at this point of the four areas that have been analyzed. The first area, regarding the levels of authority, and the fourth area, regarding adminis- trative responsibilities, seem to be related to school-wide decision-making. Whereas areas two and three, autonomy within the school building and responsibility Of the prin- cipal for the educational program, relate almost entirely to individual school buildings. Thus, when principals and assistant principals discuss their perceptions of individual schools, they perceive themselves as having great autonomy and responsibility; but, when they discuss system-wide decisions, they do not perceive themselves in a similar position. When administrators were asked to discuss the function of central office personnel (curriculum specialists), they overwhelmingly perceived these people as performing a service function rather than an administrative function. Table 5 clearly indicates this. In analyzing the table, it can be seen that 84 per cent Of'the administrators indicated that the function of special- :ists was more flat than pyramidal or largely flat. There is; little reason to be surprised at this response since it 89 0.00H on Am muoz m.m w Hapwsduzm hawmudq mocwumwmflm wocmuommfla 9 mo Honum mo manpcmoumm Aocmskum Undpcdpw manpcmoumm mpmfifimaommm HO coaaocsm one mafipudmmm mHOpmuprCHSO< HO maoawflmoumm m mdm<fi 90 is generally agreed that function of the specialist is in the area of service. The final area for analysis of the perceptions of administrators about the existing administrative pattern deals with the line administrative officers. Table 6 con- tains these data. Almost 75 per cent of the administrators perceived line officers as being generalists with broad responsibilities rather than having narrow spheres of responsibility. It is not improbable that this result is related to the perceptions and concepts of building administrators regarding their own functions. That is building principals, as line administra- tive officers, conceive themselves to be generalists rather than Specialists. The building principals recognize their function as the administrative officer of an individual building. In addition to their administrative function, they would like to perceive themselves as having the ability to provide leadership in other educational areas, such as curriculum development, evaluation, handling of discipline, teaching methods, and in-service training. 91 mo. pm pcmofimacmam** 0.00 on AHO0HMA mocwummwfio mocwummmfia P mo HOHHm mo O0MFCOOme hocmsvmum pudficmpm wmmPchHmm mumufimmo OCH: MO kpwafinfimcoawmm mo wmumwo one 0Cflpummwm mqumHPmficaap< mo mwmcomwmm o mqm<fi 92 Summary Of the six related areas of administration analyzed as to pyramidal or flat dominance in the present administrative pattern, significant differences were found in five of the six comparisons. A differential of 25 per cent identified the present structure as being characterized by a minimum of line officers and of authority levels. The t value of 2.84 in this instance placed the differential even beyond the 1 per cent level of confidence. Hence, null hypothesis must be rejected and the difference of 25 per cent in the replies accepted as being significant in the identity of this trait, namely, minimum line-authority. In this respect, the organization was perceived as being more flat than pyramidal. An unusually high number of responses, 38.7 per cent, identified school autonomy as a practice under the existing administrative pattern. This percentage set the pattern as more flat rather than pyramidal in this respect. The t value for the differences among the percentages was 5.60 which is highly significant in the acceptance of the more flat over the more pyramidal structure. The definite- ness of the more flat type of pattern is also asserted over the largely flat counterpart with a t value of 2.56, which 93 bordered On a confidence limit of l per cent. The responses, also significantly identified the prin- cipal as the person in direct charge of carrying out the educational prOgram at the building level as contrasted to a pattern where numerous individuals might carry out the educational program under a largely pyramidal plan. The t value in the latter comparison was 4.01 for a more flat rather than for a more pyramidal practice. The t value of 4.01 places the significance well beyond the l per cent level of confidence. In reply to a related question bear- ing upon the function of specialists, a significant differ- ence among the percentages defined the role of the special— ist as a service function rather than as a line officer administering and executing fixed administrative functions. The t value between these variables was 3.85 or well beyond the one per cent level for critical acceptance of the differ- ence. The t of 3.85 placed the difference as flat rather than pyramidal. The percentage of replies to the question of respon- sibility of line Officers indicates a predominately flat type of administrative procedure. Administrators perceive themselves as generalists who can offer educational leader- 94 ship in other areas than the narrow administrative function. The t value for these variables was 2.38 or beyond the 2 per cent level of significance. Only in one comparison (Table 4) did the percentage difference favor a pyramidal over a flat practice. The respondents felt that responsibilities were centered in the hands of a few rather than being diffused among many individu- als. The difference, 13.2 per cent, was on the side of the pyramidal type of organization. However, the t ratio of 1.65 designated the difference as one of chance and thereby forced an acceptance of the no difference tenet. The present administrative structure, as documented in Tables 1 through 6, indicate that administrators perceive the existing administrative pattern to be flat. These per- ceptions do not coincide with the theoretical administrative structure of the Dearborn schools, which is pyramidal. The significance of the differences between the percentages indicates the perceptions that the total structure is more flat than pyramidal rather than as being largely flat. In addition, these perceptions veer away from the pyramidal effect where in central office personnel and line deputies limit the functions of the principals and teachers. In general, the function of staff people is projected upon the 95 autonomy and the need of the classrooms through a broad diffusion of specialist services and a minimum of line authority. Analysis of Responses :2 Characteristics of the Organizational Pattern Preferred by —_ Administrators In a consecutive question, administrators were asked to identify those pyramidal or flat characteristics which they preferred for local administrative practice. These characteristics are presented in Tables 7 through 12 and are identical to those compiled in Tables 1 through 6. A standard error of percentage was also applied to the null hypothesis to determine the significance of difference for the traits under consideration. Administrators were asked to indicate their choice for flat or pyramidal pattern as it related to authority levels. Table 7 contains this information. If the number of line officers is to be kept at a mini- mum, a preference exists for a largely flat over a more flat type of administrative model. The definiteness of choice is shown by the large proportion of administrators who preferred the structure to be more flat than pyramidal or largely flat. 96 Ho. pa pcmoamacmam* o.ooH mu am Aflwmudq OOCOHOHMwQ mocmummmao P MO HOHHm HO OOMwCOOHmm zocwsvmum pudpcmvw mowecwoumm mam>mq APHHO£95< mafipummmm muowmupmHCfiEU¢ mo mmocmumwwum h mqmOCODUOH0 Oudpcmpm 00mpcmonwm Mo mmummo waoozom Op cw>fi0 >EOCOPO< one mafipnmmmm wHoPdemHCAEO< mo mwocwuwwwum w m4m0 cane pmHm Ono: h.m m pmHm GOSH HMOHewumm Ono: v.H H HMOHEduzm szmudq OOCOHOMMHQ OOCOHOMHHQ 9 mo Houum Mo moducwouwm mocwsqmum OHMOgMpm mmd~cwoumm mumoemmo mean no spHHHnHmcoamwm mo mmumma may OCHOHmmwm mHoPdemHCHEU< Mo mmocmnmwmnm NH mqm