WK ... 39...»... .. L: ... ... . . , . A .7. . I . ... .....u. . . . . . .. . . < . _ .. . ..r . . _ .... h , IV... «V VIE-W THE LEADER BEHAVIOR OF THE SECONDARY ... r 542W»? Wuhan“. if? ... ./..¢, , S. {”wa ...”, ' ...... gnaw»! fr. ... fr. ,, .W? a... ...... ...... ,J. m... armryww .. m4 .fléfifl . .. ’ er'off 'Ph, D TE UNIVERSITY, A are £4.10 4. Ari: SCHOOL PM (19le ER-C—EPTlONS AND ELECTED PROSPECTIVE. VT 1.4.“.le T s .LEONARD’L; MtTcHELmR. SSED P. MIC ‘IGAN NS OF S Thesis for the De THE EXPRE EXPECTATIO v..- E,. H T S R E H w... T IL 0 O H c S Y R A D N 0 C E S m .. r4. 4... r. L. flflfilb ‘ ‘3anxagfi' I. [3 R A R E" Michigan Slaw Univ ctsity This is to certify that the thesis entitled- THE EXPRESSED PERCEPTIONS AND EXPEC EATIOIJS OF SELECTED P. CSPECTIVE SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS AS TEIEY VIEW THE LEADER BEHAVIOR OF THE 'S‘f‘f‘“ SUVMNDAHY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL presented by p .5. Leonard L. Mitchell, Jr. "Juan - T has been accepted~tqwardsiftflfillment of the requirements for‘ " ~ T Ph.D degree“ Education Date fl 0-169 _ a \l 1‘: 1‘ . " " '«i _ T l . . 1 v I ‘ )‘5 5"" '0! J :v'srnwxa‘ ‘:'rx H .T‘ “s: ‘ V I“ . .7 .IV Kl. .. . my... . mom - “7 .u In” :E: “"7 3835710“ — 38;“(‘ P% ‘ .2» __ h?" IT: Iv'n ’ Y I . ..1 . 9‘...” t qr)": tnt¢ .,, r. u- ’ 3133‘; ‘ T T 7 l on- .L . ' I v T. r y—wv ABSTRACT THE EXPRESSED PERCEPTIONS AND EXPECTATIONS OF SELECTED PROSPECTIVE SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS AS THEY VIEW THE LEADER BEHAVIOR OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL By Leonard L. Mitchell, Jr. The present study determined the correlations that exist between the expressed perceptions, pre-conceptions, and expectations that selected prospective secondary school teachers have about the leader behavior of secondary school principals. The leader behavior of secondary school principals was measured on two dimen- sions: Initiating Structure and Consideration. The scores for these measures were obtained by using an instrument, the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire, developed and revised by the Personnel Research Board at Ohio State University. Scores for these measures were obtained twice; before student teaching and after student teaching. Also analyzed were changes that occurred in the prospective teachers expectations and perceptions from the time they were initially tested, at the beginning of student teaching, to the time they were last tested, at the end of their student teaching experience. .wuv—rvurvw ""‘T 3 1 Leonard L. Mitchell, Jr. The population used was undergraduate students planning to enter the teaching profession, and who were enrolled in full-time student teaching. All were within one year of graduation and had had no previous teaching experience. A random sample of 200 was taken from the entire student teaching population of 960. After both pre—test and post-test had been given, 90 useable instru- ments were left for scoring and analysis. Analysis was done by using the Pearson product-moment correlation coef— ficient statistic to obtain correlations, and differences or changes between pairs of correlations were analyzed for statistical significance by using the Fisher r to z transformation formula and the formula devised by Olkin. Results in both cases were deemed significant at the .05 level of confidence. Scores for which data were obtained to compute the correlation coefficients were derived from eight vari— ables which were used in this study. Four variables gave measures for the pre-test and four gave measures for the post-test. The following conclusions were made as a result of this study: (1) What the student teacher perceives as ideal behavior in the principal, and the realistic behavior that the student teacher actually expects in the principal are not the same. .vww vv‘vr Leonard L. Mitchell, Jr. (2) Structure behavior is significantly correlated with Consideration behavior. (3) Perceptions and expectations are significantly correlated. (A) Structure behavior cannot be used as a pre- dictor of Consideration behavior. The reverse is also true. (5) Perceptions cannot be used as predictors of expectations. The reverse is also true. (6) There is no significant difference in the student teachers' perceptions of the structure behavior of the principal before and after student teaching. (7) There is no significant difference in the student teachers' perceptions of the consideration behavior of the principal before and after student teaching. (8) There is no significant difference in the student teachers' expectations of the structure behavior of the principal before and after student teaching. (9) There is no significant difference in the student teachers' expectations of the consideration behavior of the principal before and after student teaching. (10) No significant change had occurred between the correlations before and after student teaching. Therefore, it would appear that the pre—service experience of prospective teachers had no significant impact on their ..-‘ "j , Leonard L. thhGJ-lg'igiq-Tr gt§m,_preeconceptione, and expectations of the q, were engaged in student teaching, apparently .: 'ffthing occurred which significantly changed their" fieported perceptions and expectations of the leader jfii-ehavior of the principal. a . a l ‘ .1 ' s. .I. .§ . o '5 ,. qr .THE EXPRESSED PERCEPTIONS AND EXPECTATIONS ,0? SELECTED PROSPECTIVE SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS AS THEY-VIEW THE LEADER BEHAVIOR OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL By ‘\b Leonard Lo” Mitchell, Jr. A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1969 Who—57‘s V3040 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Throughout any venture into major research, many significant others contribute unsparingly of their time, energy, and encouragement. The writer wishes to acknowledge the assistance which made this study possible. Thanks go to the student teachers who took time from their busy schedules to take part in this study, and to their coordinators who assisted in the data collection. Thanks go to Mr. William Loadman for his statistical advice and assistance. A special note of appreciation is extended to Dr. Samuel A. Moore, committee chairman, for his thoughtful guidance and counsel which proved to be of immeasurable value throughout this study and the total doctoral program. His unequivocal standard of personal excellence stood as a constant criterion for the present research effort. Above all, the writer offers his acknowledgment of the patience, support and constant understanding of his wife, Judith, and his son, Geoffrey. Their omnipresent faith and love made this task an especially rewarding one. 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . . . . . . . . LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . II. III. Statement of the Problem . Delimitation of the Problem Area Assumptions . . . Definition of Terms . . Purpose of the Research . Need for the Research . Methodology . . Description of Variables Hypotheses . . Overview of the Thesis . REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . Leaders and Leadership Defined . . The Trait Approach to Leadership . The Situational Approach to Leadership Leader Behavior . . and Leader Behavior, Leadership, and The. Group Leader Behavior and Leadership Studies The Dimensions of Initiating Structure Consideration . . Selection and Training of Leaders . PROCEDURES USED IN COLLECTION OF DATA The Sample . . . . . . Procedure . . . . . . The Instrument . . . . Personal Data Information . Scoring and Treatment of Data 111 and o o o o u o o o o o Page l-‘ Ir ‘ Page ANAPYSIS.0F DATA a q 0 Q: o 0‘ o a” c 7Q. 61‘ Pearson Product-moment Correlation CGEffICient o o o a s_ c o‘ I 9 a o' 60‘ Interpretation of r . . .. . .~ . . . .- 62_ Uses of r . . .. . 6 Presentation of Correlation Coefficients . . 6 - Hypotheses and Variables . . . . 65 .Analysis of Correlational Differences . . .7 66 Discussion . . . .- . . . .. . . . . 71, SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION . .. 7n .. Summary . . . .7 . '.. . . . . . . . 7A conclusions 0 a a a I o a o a o ‘ I a 78 Recommendations . . ._ . .> . . . . . 80 . — 83 gBIBLIoGRAPHY C O I I C O I I . O O D C C A ': APPENDICES - o u n o e g o a ' o a . o I o 88 iv —4 ...“ ....-.— -..1 1 1 ~ «:0. Table 3.3 3.14 3.5 LIST OF TABLES Compilation of data on sample tested, returned and useable instruments, and per cents . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled-~distribution by sex . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled—-distribution by age . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by socio- economic status of father (or head of house- hold) . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled—-distribution by socio— economic status: level of education attained by father . . . . . . . . . . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled——distribution by socio- economic status: level of education attained by mother . . . . . . . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled-—distribution by community size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled—-distribution by school size: graduating class . . . . . . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled—-distribution by class status in college . . . . . . . . . Compilation of personal data information on students sampled-—distribution by grade point average in college . . . . . . . . Page M 52 52 53 53 5M 54 55 55 56 .V‘,‘w—"V. Table 3.11 Page Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by credit hours completed in major . . . . . . 56 Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by credit hours completed in education . . . . 57 Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by term of anticipated graduation . . . . . 57 Compilation of personal data information on students sampled——distribution by teaching area specialization . . 58 Means and standard deviations of eight variables used. . . . . . . . . . 59 Correlation matrix for eight variables used. . 6A Hypotheses, variables, correlations, and levels of confidence. . . . . . . . . 66 Hypotheses, variables, correlations, and interpretations by Scales I and II . . . . 67 vi 1 2 i _ . -‘ . . , - 15%.. c - ‘ "ff-'1: 151.27. 1' ,- , .. , a, 1 fi” ‘ ‘- ' “ §=tjr f: '”j ‘7 . “I t :i " “ n" '1 A A J. "r- ‘ LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ' Q 1* . * . Page "* flParadigm for the study of leadership ., I, a .. .32} "A quadrant scheme for describing leader' 3 I behavior on the initiating structure and , ‘ ‘ A consideration dimensions . . . .« . . . A1 vii .LIST OF APPENDICES ‘ W yA. Monographs in th leadership series in Ohio ' studies in personnel . . . . . . . B.' Letters of introduction and explanation to student teacher coordinators, to student teachers, instructions for completion of ‘ pre-test and post-test questionnaires . ‘‘‘‘‘ viii 1,1nstrument, personal data sheet, and the‘ Page. .89 .' ‘92 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem The problem researched was to determine the correla- tions between the expressed perceptions, pre-conceptions, and expectations that selected prospective secondary school teachers at Michigan State University had about the leader behavior of the secondary school principal. It was assumed that most prospective teachers have formu- lated a set of expectations concerning the principal, whether from high school experience, from college experience in education courses, or from discussions with other teachers or prospective teachers. The study was designed to determine correlations that existed between the expressed expected and perceived leader behaVior of secondary school principals as viewed by prospective teachers before and after the student teach- ing experience. The expectations, pre-conceptions, and perceptions were each measured according to two dimensions; Initiating Structure, and Consideration. Also analyzed in the study were the changes that occurred in the prospective teachers expectations and perceptions from the time they were initially tested, at the beginning 1 of student teaching, to the time they were last tested at the end of their student teaching experience. Delimitation of the Problem Area The problem area was delimited in nature to the following extent: the population used for this study was those undergraduate students, planning to enter the teaching profession, who were full-time students enrolled in Education 436, Student Teaching, Winter Term, 1969, at Michigan State University. These students were all within one year (three terms) of graduation, and had no previous teaching experience. The problem dealt with specific behaviors of principals as listed under the two dimensions of leader behavior—-Initiating Structure and Consideration-- delineated by Halpin and Winerl from a factor analysis of responses to the Leader Behavior Description Question- naire (LBDQ) of Hemphill and Coons.2 Certain character- istics of the group of prospective teachers were obtained by use of a data sheet. These prospective teachers were then asked to respond to the thirty item 1Andrew W. Halpin and B. James Winer, "A Factorial Study of the Leader Behavior Description," in Ralph M. Stogdill and Alvin E. Coons (eds.) Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, 1957). 2John K. Hemphill and Alvin E. Coons, "Development of the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire," in Stogdill and Coons, ibid. questionnaire developed by Halpin and Winer, and the relationships between these responses were studied and analyzed. Assumptions In this study the researcher has made the following assumptibns: 1. It is assumed that secondary school principals are leaders. 2. It is assumed that by the time a student has done his student teaching or become a teacher, he has committed himself to teaching for a period of time, either brief or extended. 3. It is assumed that during the time a student . is student teaching he has formulated, or will , formulate, ideas about how he actually expects a principal to behave. A. It is assumed that in many cases the ideas a student teacher or teacher has about the leader . behavior of the principal are unfounded, false, or unnecessary. When these ideas are such, they may lead to displeasure, disharmony, and misunderstanding in the principal-teacher relationship. 5. It is assumed that a student going out to teach with false notions about the principal and his behavior is in as much danger as one who goes out to teach with false notions about teaching, about learning, about students, or ‘ about any other multifaceted aspect of the educative process. The teacher-principal relationship is important to teachers, principals, students, school, and to the community. _ ..-...Pi. _._- . ,- bur“ Definition of Terms Leadership As described by Hemphill, leadership (or leader behavior) is the initiation of a new structure or pro- cedure for accomplishing an organization's goals and objectives or for changing an organization‘s goals and objectives.3 This is in opposition to the term "administrator," which is interpreted to be the individ— ual who uses existing structures or procedures to achieve an organization's goal or objective.“ For purposes of this study, leader behavior was synonomous with leader- ship and was determined by the answers given by students to the thirty item questionnaire testing the two dimen- sions previously referred to as Initiating Structure and Consideration. Perceptions and Expectations The perceived and expected leader behavior was determined again by the answers the students gave to the items on the questionnaire. Their answers to the items contained in the questionnaire indicated how they 3John K. Hemphill, "Administration as Problem Solving," in Andrew W. Halpin, Administrative Theory in Education (Chicago: Midwest Administrative Center, University of Chicago, 1958), p. 107. “James M. Lipham, "Leadership and Administration," in Daniel E. Griffiths (ed.) Behavioral Science and Educa- tional Administration (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, National Society for the Study of Education Year- book, Part II, 196“). perceived that a leader should behave and how they actually expected a leader to behave. Since the student teachers have little other than pre—conceived ideas about the principal's leader behavior prior to their student teaching experience, their answers to the questionnaire before student teaching will be referred to as "pre-conceptions" and their answers after student teaching will be referred to as "perceptions." They scored the behavior of a leader on a scale of 1—5, with "l" referring to or meaning "Always," "2" meaning "Often," "3" meaning "Occasionally," "4" meaning "Rarely" and "5" meaning "Never." The scale for their answers had a possible range of fifteen to seventy-five, with a score of fifteen being high, and a score of seventy-five being low. Prospective Secondary School Teachers Prospective secondary school teachers are defined as those undergraduate students at Michigan State University planning to enter the teaching profession, who were full-time students enrolled in Education 436, Student Teaching, Winter Term, 1969. They were within one year (three terms) of graduation and had no pre- vious teaching experience. 'I—v—s .— ‘ a" “"“‘ Initiating Structure and Consideration Halpin defined these two dimensions as follows: "Initiating Structure refers to the leader's behavior in delineating the relationship between himself and members of the work group, and in endeavoring to establish well- defined patterns of organization, channels of communica- tion, and methods of procedure. Consideration refers to behavior indicative of friendship, mutual trust, respect, warmth in the relationship between the leader and members of his staff."5 Again, for the purposes of this study, these two dimensions were defined and measured by the students responses to the items on the question- naire. Fifteen items were used in measuring each dimension. Purpose of the Research The purposes of the research were to determine the correlations between perceived, pre-conceived, and expected leader behavior and between the dimensions of Initiating Structure and Consideration, to determine certain characteristics of the group of prospective secondary school teachers, and to determine the change in expectations, pre—conceptions, and perceptions of these prospective teachers as they were tested before and after the student teaching experience. 5Halpin and Winer, op. cit., p. 36. Need for the Research In reviewing the Dissertation Abstracts and the Education Index, extremely little was found that had been done with this topic vis-é—vis prOSpective teachers. Most research and writing was concerned with perceptions and expectations of supervising teachers, beginning teachers, certified teachers, and administrators at all levels. Therefore the researcher sees a need for this kind of study to be done in order to determine, before a student becomes a teacher, what are his expressed perceptions, pre—conceptions, and expectations of the principal's leader behavior. These expressed perceptions, pre—conceptions, and expectations may have an influence upon the way in which principals and student teachers or beginning teachers relate to each other. These percep- tions, pre—conceptions, and expectations also may influ- &‘ www-W ence the student‘s success or pleasure during and after ; the student teaching experience and perhaps even upon his anticipated happiness or unhappiness with future teaching assignments and future principals. Stogdill examined 124 leadership studies conducted in both ';, organizational and experimental environments. He con- cluded: "A person does not become a leader by virtue of some combination of traits but the pattern of the personal characteristics of the leader must bear some relationship i i to the characteristics, activities, and goals of the followers."6 I Methodology The literature pertinent to the problem area is reviewed in Chapter II. A data sheet was devised to obtain information relative to the characteristics of the selected group of prospective teachers. A thirty item questionnaire was used to obtain responses from students to certain behaviors of leaders. The original questionnaire, called the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ), was developed by the Personnel -.—~. ...-.— ....--__....-_‘_“_ - Research Board at Ohio State University, particularly ,_‘ by Hemphill and Coons.7 In the early stages of develop- '1} ment, it consisted of 150 items designed to measure nine dimensions of leader behavior. Subsequent use of the \‘x questionnaire, particularly by Halpin, restricted attention to thirty items which provided measures of Initiating Structure and Consideration.8 The 150 items in the original questionnaire were factor analyzed and 6Ralph M. Stogdill, "Personal Factors Associated 'u, with Leadership: A Survey of the Literature," Journal ‘. of Psychology, Vol. 25, No. l (1945), 35—71. , 7Hemphill and Coons, op. cit., p. 35. 8W. W. Charters, Jr. Teachers Perceptions of Administrative Behavior (Washington University, St. Louis, Mo.: Cooperative Research Project No. 929, . U.S.O.E., Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, ; 1964), p. 35. --._._~————y—. “1‘er the per cent of common variance was accounted for by four factors; (1) consideration--49.6 per cent, (2) Initiating Structure-~33.6 per cent, (3) Production Sensitivity-~9.8 per cent, and (A) Sensitivity--7.0 per cent. Factors I and II accounted for 83.2 per cent of the common factor variance.9 Thus the 150 item LBDQ was revised to thirty items measuring those two factors. In a study of high school principals, Evenson found that effective or desirable leadership behavior was character- ized by high scores for both Initiating Structure and Consideration.lo L The initial data sheet was used to obtain informa- tion about the characteristics of the group used for the study. The following normative information was collected; sex, age, socio-economic status of parents, level of education reached by parents, school and Hi‘ community size, class status, grade point average, credit hours completed, and teaching specialization. The normative data were not collected for the purpose of analysis or for correlation with the LBDQ responses. It was collected for the purpose of describing clearly the V‘i'm characteristics of the sample studied. It is intended 9Halpin and Winer, op. cit., p. 41. 10Warren L. Evenson, "Leadership Behavior of High School Principals," National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, Vol. 43, No. 248 (September, 1959), 95-101. hvfifi 10 as an aid for replication of this study so that other researchers will be aware of the characteristics and distribution of the sample population.11 The prospective teachers were given the LBDQ before they began their student teaching experience and were instructed to respond twice each time to the thirty item questionnaire. The first time, they were instructed to respond to the items on the basis of their pre- conceptions of how a secondary school principal should behave. The second time they were instructed to respond to the items on the basis of how they actually expected a secondary school principal to behave. Thus, the first set of responses were concerned with perceptions or pre- conceptions of idealistic behavior, and the second set of responses were concerned with actual expected behavior. The same LBDQ was given upon the students com- pletion of his student teaching experience, with the same instructions as described above. Relationships were 11Research has pointed out that variables of this kind do not significantly affect leadership. See for example: Charters, op. cit., and T. B. Greenfield, "Research on the Behavior of Educational Leaders: Critique of a Tradition," Alberta Journal of Educatiogal Research, Vol. 14, No. 1 (March, 1968), 55-76. See especially page 67 in Greenfield's article where he states, "the input variables analyzed in this way included size and type of school, tenure, sex, age and experience of staff and socio-economic status of the school community. These findings give confidence that many of the variables which affect leader behavior lie within the organization and are not input to the system arbitrarily from the environment." ll analyzed statistically by the use of correlation coeffi— cients and presented in matrix and tabular forms. Results were deemed significant at the .05 level of con- f fidence, but other confidence levels were also repre- sented. Description of Variables Scores from which data were obtained to compute cor- relation coefficients were derived from eight variables which were used in this study. Four variables gave scores for the pre-test, and four gave scores for the post test after student teaching. Correlation coefficients were then computed for these eight variables. The eight variables are as follows: Designated . 1 Pre-test (Time I)* As ‘ l. Prospective teachers pre-conceptions “, I of the Initiating Structure dimension of the secondary school principal‘s leader behavior. A 26 Prospective teachers pre—conception of the Consideration dimension of the secondary school principal's leader behavior. A ‘ 3. Prospective teachers expectation of the .“w Initiating Structure dimension of the "; secondary school principal's leader ' behavior. A A. Prospective teachers expectation of the Consideration dimension of the secondary school principal's leader behavior. Au * Time I refers to the pre-test given in January, at the beginning of student teaching. "‘ fire... .— -..-.._.. - 12 Designated Post—test (Time II)** As 5. Prospective teachers perception of the Initiating Structure dimens on of the secondary school principal's leader behavior. B1 6. Prospective teachers perception of the Consideration dimension of the secondary school principal‘s leader behavior. B2 7. Prospective teachers expectation of the Initiating Structure dimension of the secondary school principal's leader behavior. B3 8. Prospective teachers expectation of the Consideration dimension of the secondary school principal's leader behavior. Hypotheses Hypotheses were tested for acceptance or rejection at the .05 level of significance using correlation coefficients. The following hypotheses were tested in this study: Variables A. Pre—test Hypotheses Represented 1. There will be a significant correlation between the pre—conceived dimensions of A Initiating Structure and Consideration. 1’A 2 2. There will be a significant correlation between the expected dimensions of A A Initiating Structure and Consideration. A 3’ 3. There will be a significant correlation between the pre—conceived Initiating Structure dimension and the expected Initiating Structure dimension. Al, A3 ** Time II refers to the post-test given in March, at the conclusion of student teaching. Variables Represented A. There will be a singificant correla— tion between the pre-conceived Con- A sideration dimension and the expected Consideration dimension. 2’ Au B. Post-test Hypotheses 5. There will be a significant correlation between the perceived dimensions of B Initiating Structure and Consideration. 6. There will be a significant correlation .‘ between the expected dimensions of B3, Bu ! Initiating Structure and Consideration. t 7. There will be a significant correlation . between the perceived Initiating B 7 Structure dimension and the expected A Initiating Structure dimension. 1 l, 8. There will be a significant correlation between the perceived Consideration dimension and the expected Consideration dimension. B2, C. Pre-test to Post-test Hypotheses 9. There will be a significant correlation between the pre—conceived Initiating Structure dimension at Time I and the A , B perceived Initiating Structure dimension r at Time II. 10. There will be a significant correlation between the pre—conceived Consideration } dimension at Time I and the perceived Consideration dimension at Time II. 11. There will be a significant correlation between the expected Initiating Struc— ture dimension at Time I and the expected Initiating Structure dimension at Time II. . (pear- ‘ 1.: (jig: ~ ~ .15.“ _ 1h . ‘1 f L : ‘~. _ ., LL:’ 1‘ = ., fits-I ‘ - ‘ r ‘ "v -‘ ~ rt". .7.— ' Variahgies‘ I” ‘ I “,3 ' .. . _ Represented. '-' f; §:}‘,12. There will be a significant corre- » :2 .: lation between the ex ected Con- , » I .‘f Jg‘. . sideration dimension at Time I and AA’ BA»“ ‘7’ ' ' ”"? the expected Consideration dimension , “ ' at T me . Overview of the Thesis .In Chapter II, the pertinent literature and research in the problem area are reviewed. ' ; In Chapter III, the design and methodology of the ‘1, ~ ‘Eyéfp,research are described and discussed. 4,, I In Chapter IV, an analysis of the results of the _ research is given and discussed. ' In Chapter V, the research is summarized, and con- ,2; clusions and recommendations are made. -... *‘l. ; .k. A IL A». CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the intro- duction of a new order of things. ——Machiavelli, The Prince (A.D. 1513) The subject of leaders and leadership has been a perennial concern of man. Plato in his Republic, speculates about the proper education and training of political leaders, and most political philosophers since that time have made attempts to deal with this problem. In democracies, where there are no inherited leadership positions, leadership has been a particular concern because in those countries "each and every man is a potential leader, and society has to give some thought to the identification and proper training of men who will be able to guide its institutions."1 Advice on how to be a good leader has run the gamut from such homilies as ". . . being honest, loyal, good, and fair to the more cynical guidelines laid down by lFred E. Fiedler, A Theory of Leadership Effective- ness (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1967), p. 3. l5 ...-- -. 16 Nicole Machiavelli. The control of others for the pur- pose of accomplishing a common goal is a desirable and necessary skill, and it is highly likely to remain so as long as we must contend with tasks which cannot be accomplished by one man without the assistance of others."2 Innumerable volumes deal with leadership. Many however, have little organization; they offer little in the way of common assumptions and hypotheses; they vary widely in theoretical and methodological approaches.3 Prior to 19A5 most of the studies of leadership were devoted primarily to the identification of particular traits or qualities, or groups of traits or qualities possessed by leaders.“ These studies were based in part on the assumption that people could be put into two distinct groups--leaders and followers.5 Some people 2Ibid., p. 1. 3C. G. Browne and T. S. Cohen, The Study of Leader— shi (Dansville, 111.: Interstate Printers and Publishers, 195g), p. 5. “An excellent source dealing with the relationship between traits and competence in educational administra- tion is Orin B. Graff and Calvin M. Street, Improving Com- petence in Educational Administration (New York: Harper and Bros., 1956). See especially pp. 29-30 and 85-88. On page 29 for instance, they state that ". . . various traits appear to be qualities and therefore influenced by purposes, attitudes, and feelings; thus a trait must find its meaning in a context of relationships and may not be thought of as a constant factor at all." 5Edgar L. Morphet, Roe L. Johns, and Theodore L. Reller, Educational Organization and Administration, Con- cepts, Practices, and Issues, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967), p. 12“. 17 in each century and each generation have believed that "leaders are born, not made." It is the researcher's task, in the remainder of this chapter, to explore further the concept of leader behavior or leadership. Areas that are explored and discussed include leader and leadership definitions, the trait approach to the study of leadership, the situational approach to the study of leadership, leader— ship and its relationships with the group, leader behavior studies and conclusions, the dimensions of Initiating Structure and Consideration with respect to leader behavior, and the selection and training of leaders. Leaders and Leadership Defined No study of leaders or leadership would be complete without some attempt at arriving at definitions of those rather nebulous terms. For one to attempt a study of leader behavior or of leadership, he must develop a definition which will form the basis for their study. The various definitions and descriptions given herein will serve to provide an overview of how these terms were used in the past and how they relate to and deter- mine the information given in the remainder of this chapter. Leader behavior is defined by Charters as "directed behavior--directed toward a specific class of 18 other persons who constitute the followers."6 Another definition is given by Cowley when he refers to a leader as an "individual who is moving in a particular direction and who succeeds in inducing others to follow him."7 Pigors calls leadership a "process of mutual stimulation which, by successful interplay of relevant differences, controls human energy in the pursuit of a common cause.“8 Gibb refers to leadership in two ways; "Viewed in relation to the individual, leadership is not an attribute of the personality but a quality of his role within a particular or specified social system. Viewed in relation to his group, leadership is a quality of its structure."9 Hemphill suggests much the same type of definition when he concludes that a definition of leader- ship "must include the characteristics of a social situa- tion and the characteristics of an individual. If we approach the problem of leadership in an operational manner, leadership may be said to be the behavior of an 6Charters, op. cit., p. 183. 7William H. Cowley, "Three Distinctions in the Study of Leaders," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 23, No. 2 (1928), INA—157. 8Paul J. W. Pigors, Leadership or Domination (Boston: Houghton—Mifflin Co., 1935), p. 16. 9Cecil A. Gibb, "The Research Background of an Interaction Theory of Leadership," Australian Journal of Psychology, Vol. 28, No. l (1950 , 19— 2. 19 individual while he is involved in directing group activities."10 Hemphill delineates leadership further by adding that the group activities are directed toward a shared goal. Leadership behavior does not include behavior serving only the individual goal attainment. Stogdill, Wherry, and Jaynesll define leadership in terms of high status in the organization. They add that, in another sense, "leadership is judged in terms of its effect upon the organization. Since leadership is frequently evaluated in terms of organizational effective— ness, it would appear that all aspects of organizational operations involving communications, performance, and personal interactions might exert limiting or condition- ing effects upon leadership. If this is true, then it should be possible to measure leadership in terms of relevant dimensions of organization."12 Shartle developed five definitions of leaders which are, in most cases, interrelated: 10John K. Hemphill, Situatiompl Factors in Leader- ship (Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Educational Research Monograph No. 32, 1949), p. 5. 11Ralph M. Stogdill, Robert Wherry, and William Jaynes, "A Factorial Study of Administrative Performance," in Ralph M. Stogdill, Carroll Shartle, and Associates, Patterns of Administrative Performance (Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Business Research Monograph No. 81, 1956), p. 41. 12 Ibid. 20 1. An individual who exercises positive influence acts upon others. 2. An individual who exercises more important positive influence acts than any other member of the group or organization he is in. 3. An individual who exercises most influence in goal—setting or goal—achievement of the group or organization. 4. An individual elected by a group as a leader. 5. An individual in a given office or position of apparently high influence potential.l3 The last definition, and the one which is used in this study is that which was given in the first chapter of this dissertation. As described by Hemphill, leader- ship (or leader behavior) is the initiation of a new structure of procedure for accomplishing an organization's goals and objectives or for changing an organization's goals and objectives.lu As can be seen from the preceding discussion, leader behavior and leadership have, over the years, enjoyed a variety of definitions and descriptions. Each one was peculiar to a specific author or group and left its mark on their particular study or theory. In order to obtain a legitimate outlook on leaders and leadership, one should take into account aspects of all the definitions 13Carroll L. Shartle, "Studies in Naval Leadership: Part I," in Harold Geutzkow (ed.) Groups, Leadership, and Men (Pittsburgh: Carnegie Press, 1951), pp. 121—122.' l“Hemphill, Administrative Theory in Education, pp, cit., p. 107. 21 previously given, if one is to form valid assumptions of where, perhaps, leader and leadership studies may be heading in the future. The Trait Approach to Leadership Generally, research on leaders and leadership can be divided into two categories: (1) individual-centered, usually referred to as the "trait" approach, and, (2) group-centered, usually referred to as the "situational" approach. The trait approach emphasizes common person— ality traits possessed by all leaders, and the situational approach emphasizes the study of interactions between the leader's behavior and characteristics of situations in which leaders function. Early studies of leader behavior and leadership were predominantly of the trait approach variety, and this approach dominated research until relatively recent times. The most comprehensive and complete coverage of personal factors associated with leadership is based on an examination of 124 studies by Stogdill in 1948.15 He suggests that personal factors can be classified under five general headings: 1. 'Capacity (intelligence, alertness, verbal facility, originality, judgment). 2. Achievement (scholarship, knowledge, athletic accomplishments). 15Stogdill, op. cit., pp. 35-71. 22 3. Responsibility (dependability, initiative, aggressiveness, self-confidence, desire to excel). 4. Participation (activity, sociability, cooperation, adaptability, humor). asi. 5. Status (socio—economic status, popula iry). Some of the conclusions of Stogdill's study seem especially worthy of note. The following conclusions are supported by uniformly positive evidence from fifteen or more of the studies surveyed: The average person who occupies a position of leadership exceeds the average member of his group in the following respects; (1) intelligence, (2) scholarship, (3) dependability in exercising responsibilities, (4) activity and social partici- pation, and (5) socio-economic status. The qualities, characteristics, and skills required in a leader are determined to a large extent by the demands of the situation in which he is to function as a leader.l6 The following conclusions are supported by uniformly positive evidence from ten or more of the studies surveyed: The average person who occupies a position of leadership exceeds the average member of his group to some degree in the following respects; (1) sociability, (2) initiative, (3) persistence, (4) knowing how to get things done, (5) self- confidence, (6) alertness to and insight into situations, (7) cooperativeness, (8) popularity, (9) adaptability, and (10) verbal facility.l7 Stogdill however, after further study of the evidence, concluded that a person "does not become a leader by 16 17Ibid. Ibid., pp. 6u—65. 23 virtue of the possession of some combination of traits, but the pattern of personal characteristics of the leader must bear some relevant relationship to the characteristics, activities, and goals of the followers. Thus, leadership must be conceived in terms of the interactions of variables which are in constant flux and change."18 Pierce and Merrill19 state that traits and attributes which are considered as bearing positive relationships to leader behavior are popularity, originality, adaptability, judgment, ambition,persistence, emotional stability, social and economic status, and communicative skills. The highest correlations with leader behavior are, according to Pierce and Merrill, pOpularity, originality, and judgment. Traits and attributes that may be considered to be positively related to leader behavior are disposition, responsibility, integrity, self-confidence, social- activity and mobility, social skills, physical characteristics, and fluency of speech.21 18Ibid., p. 64. l9Truman M. Pierce and E. c. Merrill, Jr., "The Individual and Administrative Behavior," in Roald F. Campbell and Russell T. Gregg (eds.) Administrative Behavior in Education (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957), p- 331. 20Ibid. 2llbid. 24 In a synthesis of the literature to 1954, Gibb stated that "numerous studies of leaders have failed to find any consistent pattern of traits which characterize 22 The consistent failure to find a common leaders." prevalent personality trait of leaders may have been due to many factors, as for example these possibilities noted by Gibb: inadequate measurement, lack of comparability of data from different kinds of research, and the inability to describe leadership adequately.23 Sanford,2u after scrutiny of the leadership litera- ture, and as a result of his own studies on military leadership, concluded that: (a) there are either no general leadership traits or, if they do exist they are not to be discussed in any of the familiar psychological or common-sense terms, and (b) in a specific situation, leaders do have traits which set them apart from followers, but E222 traits set EEEE leaders apart from mm§p_followers will vary from situation to situation. Perhaps one of the salient results of the leader- ship research is the conclusion that the study of 22Cecil A. Gibb, "Leadership," in Gardner Lindzey (ed.) Handbook of Social Psychology (Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 195 ), p. 889. 23Ibid. 2”Fillmore H. Sanford, "Research on Military Leadership," in John C. Flanagan (ed.) Psychology in the World Emergency (Pittsburgh: University of Pitts- burgh Press, 1952), p. 51. 25 personal traits or attributes, ppm pg, is just one aspect of the study of leadership, for a leader's role must be considered in relation to the setting and situation in which the role is performed. The Situational Approach to Leadership and Leader Behavior There is almost total agreement among the authors of the trait approach studies that the behavior of leaders depends largely upon the situation in which they are to function as a leader, that the position occupied by the individual, and the circumstances surrounding that position, dictate how he will perform. Each situation within which a leader finds himself requires different skills and actions that, if used effectively, produce a desired otucome. Therefore, with the mere possession of particular traits or attributes one cannot conclude that a leader behaves effectively or efficiently. Each situa- tion requires something different from him. This has led to the almost overwhelming acceptance of the situa- tional approach to leadership study. This approach has been repeatedly stressed in the literature.25 Stogdill concluded that the "qualities, characteristics, and skills required in a leader are determined to a large extent by the demands of the situation in which he is to 25Gibb, Handbook of Social Psychology, op. cit., pp. 913-914. 26 function as a leader."26 Hemphill substantiated this further by adding that "what an individual actually does when acting as a leader is in large part dependent upon characteristics of the situation in which he functions."27 Pierce and Merrill28 added that a leader's behavior can be explained in terms of an individual conceptualization of his role and function in a given situation. Similarly, the performance of a leader when judged by others is in terms of their perceptions of the leader and his role. Therefore, from the preceding statements, it can be concluded that leadership performance depends as much on the organization and the individual's position in the organization as it does upon the leader's own traits or attributes. Except perhaps for the unusual case, it is not meaningful to speak of a leader who may be effective in one situation and ineffective in another.29 Leader Behavior, Leadership, and the Gropp There can be no adequate discussion of leader behavior and leadership without referring to the relation- ships between it and the group. Obviously, a leader 26Stogdill, Op. cit., p. 63. 27Hemphill, Situational Factors in Leadership, pp, cit., p. v. 28Pierce and Merrill, op. cit., p. 349. 29Fiedler, op. cit., p. 261. 27 'cannot emerge by himself. He only becomes a leader when he is so recognized by a group within which he functions as a leader. There is no such thing as a leader without a group to lead, whether it be appointed, assumed, or situational leadership. Therefore, a discussion of a leader and the group he leads must be given simultaneously. One cannot exist without the other, and the success or failure of one is dependent upon the success or failure of the other. Brown in 193630 postulated five general laws of leadership as it relates to a group of individuals whom the leader attempts to lead. They are as follows: 1. The successful leader must have membership- character in the group he is attempting to lead. Membership—character means that the3 individual is considered one of the group. 2. The leader must present a region of high potential in the social field. It appears that a leader must have prestige, namely, "represent a region of high potential" in the estimation of those he leads.32 3. The leader must realize the existing field structure. Only when his leadership falls in with this is he successful. Hence this law means that a leader must know what is going on in the group he attempts to lead.33 30J. F. Brown, Psychology and the Social Order: An Introduction to the Dynamic Study of Social Fields (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1936), pp. 342—345. 31Ibid., p. 342. 32Ibid., p. 344. 33Ibid. 28 4. The really successful leader realizes the long-term trends in field structure. A leader must be able to estimate what will be going on in the group in the future.34 5. Leadership increases in potency at the cost of decrease in freedom of leadership. . . . as the leader's activities become more important to the group, he has less choice in how he will go about being a leader.35 Hemphill identified fifteen measures of group characteristics or dimensions, and studied leadership in relation to these dimensions. Hemphill's dimensions are size, viscidity, homogeneity, flexibility, permeability, polarization, stability, participation, autonomy, control, position, potency, hedonic tone, participation, and 36 dependence. Hemphill found that only two of these group dimensions had a significant positive correlation with leadership behavior. Those dimensions were viscidity (the feeling of togetherness or cohesion of the group) and hedonic tone (the degree of satisfaction group members attain from group membership), and the correlations were .52 and .51 respectively.37 The interrelationships between hedonic tone, viscidity, and leadership adequacy and the leader's behavior seem to lead to certain implica- tions concerning the role and function of an individual 3“Ihid., p. 345. 351bid. 36Hemphill, Situational Factors in Leadership, pp. cit., pp. 31-33. 37Ibid., pp. 51-57. 29 who attempts to, or does, direct the activities of any group. It may be that the salient function of a leader in the dynamics of groups and group activity is that of preserving or maintaining group membership as a satisfy- ing experience for the group members and promoting their acting as a unit rather than as separate individuals. 38 As more supporting evidence, Myers analyzed studies of leadership and the relationship of leadership to the group. From this he proposed many generaliza- tions concerning leadership that seem to be supported by research, the following of which are supported by two or more studies: 1. Leadership is the product of interaction, not status or position. 2. Leadership cannot be structured in advance. The uniqueness of each combination of persons of varying interactional patterns, and of varying goals and means, and of varying forces within and without impinging upon the group will bring forth different leaders. 3. A leader in one situation will not automatically be a leader in another situation. 4. Leadership does not result from a status position, but rather how a person behaves in the organization. 5. Whether a person is a leader in a group depends upon the group's perception of him. 6. The way a leader perceives his role deter- mines his actions. 38Robert B. Myers, "A Synthesis of Research in Leadership" (an unpublished paper presented to the ASCD, March, 1957). 30 7. Most groups have more than one person occupying the leadership role. 8. Leadership fosters positive sentiment toward the group activity, and persons in the group. 9. Leadership may be democratic or autocratic but never laissez-faire. 10. Leadership protects the critical group norms. 11. Leadership is authority rendered to some who are perceived by others as the proper persons to carry out the particular leadership role of the group. 12. Program development that involves only persons of a single position (such as principals, or supervisors, or teachers) is not as compre- hensive or lasting as that which involves people of various positions in the organiza- tion.39 Thus far discussion has centered about individual leader behavior, leadership definitions, and about the interrelationships between these concepts and the group. To create some orderliness and to delineate the problem more clearly a paradigm was developed by the Ohio State Leadership Studies Group. This paradigm shows the inter- relationships between the leader, the group, and the individual group members. The paradigm not only serves as a summary of what has been said so far, but it also identifies some rather cloudy and indistinct relation- ships. This paradigm is shown on page 32. 391bid., pp. 4-9. 31 It should be noted that Leader Behavior is the central point. Leader Behavior may be concomitant with group factors and individual factors. Likewise, the relationships between leader behavior and these factors may be in terms of effects or determiners. Evaluation may be group-centered or individual-centered. Not only is research on evaluation required, but likewise research is needed on the individual and group factors that may help explain why an individual leads or attempts to lead the way he does. Leader Behavior and Leadership Studies Stogdill, Wherry, and Jaynes advanced three hypotheses which were a part of their study.“0 All three were verified as a result of the data they collected and analyzed. Those hypotheses were: 1. Leader behavior is multidimensional; these dimensions are finite in number and can be discovered by analysis of leader behavior. 2. The pattern of behavior along the different dimensions is affected in large part by the position or job to which the leader is assigned. 3. The pattern of behavior along the dimensions is affected as well by the type of organization to which the job holder is assigned.4l Referring to leader behavior in education, an investigation performed at the University of Kentucky 40 ullbid. Stogdill, Wherry, and Jaynes, Op. cit., p. 43. 32 GROUP FACTORS Group history Group composition GVOUP structure 6'01“) tasks md goals Group activities RESponse to environment GROUP-CENTERED EVALUATION Goal achievement Group morale Group integration Group efficiency . Groun survival Wang/fails DEFINITIONS OF * THE LEADER LEADER BEHAVIOR DEFINITIONS OF CONTENT a LEADER BEHAVIOR Office holder ——-—- «MP—7'93 Em“ . l m,” lnfluencer What he does By whom described influence acts Chosmperson ”Wham" Bywhatmethod .. . Initiation of effects EVALUATION Personal success pygmy-”,5 Votes for leader I , Merit ratings Job satisfaction Changes initiated INDIVIDUAL FACTORS Biographical data Personal characteristics Position in group Attitudes and values Identifications Responses to environment Fig. l.--Paradigm for the Study of Leadership. (From Ralph Stogdill and Alvin E. Coons, Leader Behavior: Its Descriptionipnd Measurement, Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Business Research Monograph No. 88, Ohio State University, 1957.) 33 disclosed that it is possible to classify practicing educational administrators into three broad personality groups according to behavior.142 This classification is in terms of attitudes which the administrator hold toward themselves and toward other people. The first group "accept their own worth and . . . believe that other people are equally or more accepting of their worth." The second group of administrators "reject themselves but believe that other people are more accepting of themselves." The third group is composed of individuals who "accept themselves and believe that other people are less accepting of themselves." According to the University of Kentucky study, members of the first group are judged to be the most successful administrators. Members of the second group are less desirable, and members of the third group are the least desirable of the three. The University of Kentucky study further states that probably the most fundamental concept held by an individual is the one which he holds about himself and other people. Thus, the University of Kentucky study moved strongly in the direction of the assumption that 43 behavior is a function of one's perception. u2Robert L. Hopper and Robert E. Bills, "What's A Good Administrator Made Of?" The School Executive, Vol. 74, No. 3 (March, 1955), 93-95. u3Ibid. 34 This assumption contends that the place at which to begin in the analysis and description of the behavior of an administrator is the determination of his perceptions as they are related to his Job and to himself. It follows that changing perceptions would be changing behavior.uu Gross and Herriott added to the knowledge and literature about leadership with their study of the leadership behavior of principals, published in 1965.“5 They were concerned with whether or not the leadership efforts of the principal had a significant effect on the functioning of the school. They measured the relevant behavior of a number of principals and assigned to this behavior the name of Executive Professional Leadership (EPL).u6 They then determined the basis of the assump— tion that EPL does influence the performance or morale of teachers and the behavior of pupils. Their study sought to substantiate twelve main hypotheses, and all of these hypotheses were substantiated. The twelve hypotheses are: uuPierce and Merrill, op. cit., p. 345. uSNeal Gross and Robert E. Herriott, Staff Leader— ship in Public Schools: A SociolOgical Inquiry (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1965). u6They described this (EPL), as the effort of an executive of a professionally staffed organization to conform to a definition of his role that stresses his obligation to improve the quality of staff performance. 35 l. The more a principal permits his teachers to share in his decisions, the greater his EPL; 2. The more egalitarian a principal's relation- ship with his teachers, the greater his EPL; 3. The more social support a principal offers to his teachers, the greater his EPL; A. The greater the managerial support a principal offers his teachers, the greater his EPL; 5. The greater the principal's support of his teachers in cases of conflict between teachers and pupils, the greater his EPL; 6. The higher a principal's evaluation of his ability to provide educational leadership to his staff, the greater his EPL; 7. The more off-duty time a principal devotes to his Job, the greater his EPL; 8. The more fully a principal internalizes the professional leadership definition of his role, the greater his EPL; 9. The greater importance a principal attaches to his routine administrative duties, the less his EPL; lO. Principals with a service motive for seeking their positions will provide greater EPL than those without it; 11. The greater the intellectual ability of the principal, the greater his EPL; and 12. The greater a principal's interpersonal skills, the greater his EPL.47 Among the more elaborate and extensive series of leadership studies were those undertaken by the Ohio u7The method and description by which hypotheses 1-5 were substantiated may be found in Gross and Herriott, op. cit., Chapter 7, pp. 121—13u, and those for hypotheses 6-12 in Chapter 8, pp. 135—1H9. 36 “8 Initiated in 1945 State Bureau of Business Research. by the Personnel Research Board, these studies were designed as a ten year program of basic research with the aims of developing research methods and of obtaining information which might lead to a better understanding of leadership.149 Practical aims were also kept in mind as secondary objectives. For example, it was hoped that the research might produce data which would eventually be of some value in the selection, training and assign- ment of persons for leadership roles. These studies suggested to this author the basic idea for the present study of prospective secondary school teachers perceptions and expectations of the leader behavior of the secondary school principal. The Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ), described in Chapter I, is being used to arrive at measure— ments of the dimensions of Initiating Structure and Con- sideration, also described in Chapter 1.50 The following section of this review presents previous studies and conclusions based on the use of the LBDQ and the two dimensions mentioned. u8For the complete list of the monographs in the Leadership series in Ohio Studies in Personnel, refer to Appendix A. ugRalph M. Stogdill and Carroll L. Shartle, Methods in the Study of Administrative Leadership (Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Business Research Monograph No. 80, 1955). 50The LBDQ, as it is being used in the present study, is presented in its entirety in Appendix B. 37 The Dimensions of Initiating Structure andPConsideration The LBDQ was originally a 150 item questionnaire, but was revised to thirty items by Halpin and Winer. The thirty items measure the two dimensions of leader behavior referred to as Initiating Structure and Con- sideration. The two dimensions account for over 83 per cent of the common factor variance in the original questionnaire. The revised LBDQ has been used extensively in leadership research studies in the military, in industry, in public schools, and in colleges and univer- sities.51 In all cases where the LBDQ was used the two dimensions measured were Judged as useful tools for the study of behavior and leadership. A listing of some of the leadership studies conducted by the Personnel Research Board of Ohio State University that used the LBDQ is given in Appendix A. Halpin conducted research dealing with the leader behavior and effectiveness of Aircraft Commanders, as seen by themselves, their superiors, and their 51See for example: Andrew Halpin, "The Leader Behavior and Effectiveness of Aircraft Commanders," in Stogdill and Coons, op. cit.; Halpin, "The Observed Leader Behavior and Ideal Leader Behavior of Aircraft Commanders and School Superintendents," in Stogdill and Coons, ibid.; Bernard M. Bass, "Leadership Opinion and Related Characteristics of Salesmen and Sales Managers," in Stogdill and Coons, ibid.; Charters, op. cit.; Evenson, op. cit.; John K. Hemphill, "Patterns of Leadership Behavior Associated with Administrative Reputa- tion of the Department of a College," Journal of Educa- Eional Psychology, Vol. “6, No. 7 (November, 1955), 385- 01. 38 crew.52 It was found that, in general, the ratings of the commanders by their superiors had a significant positive correlation with the Initiating Structure scores, and that the ratings of commanders by their crew members were positively correlated highest with the Consideration scores. Both the dimensions were seen as being integral parts of a leader's behavior. In evaluating the commander's behavior, superior's, and crew each perceived one dimension over the other as being more important. But the other dimension was not viewed unfavorably. It was also viewed as a significant aspect of a leader's behavior. Therefore, Halpin suggested, to select a leader likely to satisfy both his crew and his superiors, it is best to choose a commander who is above average on both Initiating Structure and Consideration. In another similar study, Halpin compared observed and ideal leader behavior of Aircraft Commanders with school superintendents.53 He found little relationship (r = .13) between the Consideration and Initiating Structure description of educational administrators. Commanders who were seen as high in Consideration were likewise seen as high in Initiating Structure. This 52Andrew Halpin, "The Leader Behavior and Effective- ness of Aircraft Commanders," in Stogdill and Coons, gp. cit., p. 6A. 53Andrew Halpin, "The Observed Leader Behavior and Ideal Leader Behavior of Aircraft Commanders and School Superintendents," in Stogdill and Coons, ibid., p. 67. 39 correlation was .U5. The mean scores of administrators exceeded the mean score of commanders for Consideration, but the reverse was true for Initiating Structure. These differences were significant at the .001 level of confidence for both "real" and "ideal" scores. Bass, in a study of leadership in-business,5Ll found that supervisors endorsed a higher degree of Con- sideration and Initiating Structure than did salesmen. Supervisors who were older and been longer with the company scored higher on Consideration. Evenson replicated Halpin's earlier study of leadership behavior, using secondary school principals 55 rather than superintendents. He reported that super- intendents, principals, and teachers agree in desiring behavior that is high in both Consideration and Initiat— ing Structure. These two behavior types are both impor- tant, relatively independent, and not incompatible.56 Hemphill came to similar conclusions from his study of the departmental administrator in a liberal arts college.57 5“Bernard M. Bass, "Leadership Opinion and Related Characteristics of Salesmen and Sales Managers," in Stogdill and Coons, ibid., p. 137. 55 56 Evenson, op. cit., pp. 96—101. Ibid. 57John K. Hemphill, Journal of Educational Psychology, op. cit., 385-H01. #0 The principal findings of this series of leader behavior ments: studies have been summarized into five state- The evidence indicates that Initiating Structure and Consideration are fundamental dimensions of leader behavior, and that the LBDQ provides a practical and useful technique for measuring the behavior of leaders on these two dimensions. Effective leader behavior is associated with high performance on both dimensions. There is some tendency for superiors and sub- ordinates to evaluate oppositely the contribu- tion of the leader behavior dimensions to the effectiveness of leadership. Superiors are more concerned with the Initiating Structure aspects of the leader's behavior, whereas subordinates are more concerned with the Consideration the leader extends to them as group members. High Initiating Structure combined with high Consideration is associated with favorable group attitudes and with favorable changes in group attitudes. There is only a slight positive relationship between the way leaders believe they should behave and the way in which their group members describe them as behaving. For this reason, those engaged in leadership training programs should be especially wary of accept- ing trainees' statements of how they should behave as evidence of parallel changes in their actual behavior.58 From the studies and summary statements cited, it has been found that the most effective leaders are those who score high on both the dimension of Initiating 58 Andrew Halpin, Theory and Research in Administra— tion (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1966), pp. 97-98. Al Structure and the dimension of Consideration. This is shown schematically in Figure 2. The ordinates are defined by the averages of the respective dimensions, and the four quadrants are designated by Roman numerals. CONSIDERATION C- 0+ 8+ 3+ MEANS OF INITIATING (IV) (I) INITIATING STRUCTURE 4—— STRUCTURE C— 0+ SCORES s- S- MEANSIDE (C=Consideration) CONSIDERATION (S=Initiating Structure) SCORES Fig. 2.--A quadrant scheme for describing Leader's behavior on the Initiating Structure and Consideration dimensions. (From Andrew w. Halpin, "The Superintendent's Effectiveness as a Leader," Administrator's Notebook, Vol. 7, No. 2, October, 1958). The leaders who fall into Quadrant I are evaluated as highly effective. Those in Quadrant III, whose behavior is usually accompanied by group chaos, are evaluated as most ineffective. The leaders in Quadrant IV are the disciplinarians and "cold fish" who are so intent upon getting a Job done that they forget they are dealing with human beings. The leaders in Quadrant II are also ineffective and may be exceedingly benevolent, friendly, and gentle. This behavior of the leaders in H2 Quadrant II contributes little to effective performance unless the behavior is accompanied by a required minimum of Initiating Structure behavior. Selection and Training of Leaders Acknowledging the various studies cited, certain suggestions seem to be implied for the selection and training of those individuals who will occupy positions involving directing and leading of groups and group activities. If, from previous and future studies, suffi- cient knowledge is gained about the relationship of leadership to dimensions of the group, selection of leaders can be made with reference to the demands of the situation in which they are to lead. Individual dif- ferences in personal characteristics might provide a basis for matching the individual to the Job he is to perform. Before real progress can be made in either selection or training of leaders, however, basic work must be done to specify more carefully and clearly how situational factors of the position create and affect the demands made on the leader's behavior.59 Willower suggests that the following steps seem to be indicated for the school administrator as a result 59John K. Hemphill, Situational Factors in Leader- ship, 9p. cit., p. 102. 43 of the leadership studies:60 that within the profession there should be a more specific identification of the traits of ideal school administrators. Then, if there were more meaningful preparation programs for educa- tional administrators, especially in the selection processes, those individuals who come close to the ideal should be recruited and encouraged, and those who are far from the ideal should be discouraged. Over a period of time, the likelihood of contact with desirable role models would increase. Also, administrator's presently in the field should be made to, or should themselves make a greater effort to, become more acutely aware of the impact they have on the group they lead. 60Donald J. Willower, "Education Students' Per- ceptions of School Administrators," School Review, Vol. 70, No.3 (Autumn, 1962), 332-344. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES USED IN COLLECTION OF DATA The Sample The random sample of prospective teachers used for this study was chosen from the population Of all students who had signed up for student teaching, Winter Term, 1969. A total of 960 college students had designated that they would be student teaching at that time, and their name, student number, address, etc., were recorded on IBM cards on file in the Student Teaching Office. They were filed according to the Student Teaching Center they had requested or were assigned to, and were alphabetically filed within those centers. It was determined that the appropriate size sample for a population of 960 would not be more than 200. A sample above 200 would become too large and would lower the correlation level to a point that relationships would be almost meaningless.1 A list of 200 random digits were drawn and ordered numerically for easier use. The IBM cards of all those students planning to student teach were drawn,_and, beginning with the first one in Center 01, 1Helen M. Walker and Joseph Lev, Elementary Statisti- cal Methods (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, I958), p. 272. uu “5 those cards, by number, that matched the list Of random digits chosen, were recorded by center, name, and student number on a separate list. This, then, was the random sample of 200 that would be asked to participate in and supply data for the study. Procedure The study was designed to test the student teachers at the beginning of their student teaching experience, and at the end of their student teaching experience. There are sixteen Student Teaching Centers, fifteen of them being scattered throughout the state, and the other one being the local center with five different coordinators. Since time was a crucial factor, and the centers were so widely dispersed, it was impossible for the researcher to deal with each center and each coordinator individually. For those centers that could not be dealt with personally, the following procedure was implemented: a letter was sent to the coordinator of these centers with an explana- tion and description of the study and a request for their assistance in gathering the necessary data from the student teachers under their charge. It was known that each coordinator met with the student teachers by way of a seminar at least once a week. A list of the student teachers in the respective centers along with the prOper number Of questionnaires were mailed to each coordinator. They were asked to give the A6 questionnaires to the named student teachers at the first seminar, ask the student teacher to fill them out and return them to the coordinator. Directions for the prOper completion of the questionnaire along with a cover letter were included in each package. The coordinator then Simply put the completed forms into a stamped, self- addressed envelope and sent them back to the researcher. The coordinators that could be reached personally were dealt with in much the same manner, except that directions, explanations, and materials were delivered and received personally. A list was made of those students who had completed the pre-test, and they were sent the post-test, to be completed at the last seminar meeting of the term. The procedure was identical to that used for the pre-test. The pre-test was administered the first week of January, 1969, and the post-test was administered the first week of March, 1969. Table 3.1 on page ”7 provides a breakdown of the centers, the number of students sampled in each center, the pre—test returns and per cents, and the post-test returns and per cents. It will be noted that of the original sample of 200, 13“ responded to the pre-test with 106 being useable giving a return of 53 per cent. Of the 13“, 116 responded to the post-test with 90 being useable giving a return of H5 per cent. The low number of useable returns was due to several factors. “7 OO OO OHH OO OOH OOH OOm OOOOOO H.mm O O O.OO O O OH OOOO OOHHOO OH OOH O O OOH O m m coasm OOOO OH N.Om O O OO OH OH Om OHoaOOO OH m.mm N O m.mm N O O = O OOIOH O.HO O O O.OO OH OH HH = = OOIOH m.mm N O m.mm N O O = O NOIOH OO O O OO O O O O = HOIOH OOH OH OH OOH OH OH OH OOOO Ocamcmq OOIOH OO O O OOH O O O OOHO OOCO>OOO OH O O O O O O OH Oeoomz HH 0.00 O O O.OO O O O OOHO OOO\3OOHOOO OH O O O O O O HH OmHOOOO OO O O O O O O O OOHHz OO O.OO O OH O.OO O OH OH OHcosHO OO- O O O H.OO O O O :oOOOOO OO m.OO O OH m.OO O HH OH OOHOOO OcmtO OO OO O. HH O.OO HH OH OH OOHHO OO OO O .O OO O O O OOOCO: coacmm OO OOH O O OOH O c O EOOOOHEOHO NO OO O O OO O OH OH OOOOO OHOOOO HO OHQEmm boadEwm maaemm mo mpchSOm mo pcwo pom manmmm: UOCLSumm pcmo pom mewmm: Omenspom mo pmoezz mmLHMCCOOOOOBG pmmplpmom mmpflmccoflummsa pmmpimhm @000 new mma< poucmo .wpcmo LOO new .mpCOESOOOCO manmmm: Ocm Umcpspmp .Umpmmp OHQEOO so mpmn mo COHOOHHQEOQII.H.M mqm¢e ’48 Included in the original sample of 200 were students who were student teaching in elementary schools, who were in Special Education, or some field other than secondary education. Since this study dealt with secondary teachers and secondary principals, these responses were cast out of the study population. Also discarded were those responses from students who indicated they had had pre- vious teaching experience, Since this study is based in part on students who had not had this experience. Another factor that led to the low number of useable returns was that some students had responded to only the pre-test or the post-test. These also were discarded, as the only useable questionnaires were those from students who had completed both the pre—test and the post-test. Three centers failed to respond to either pre-test or post-test. The coordinator of one of these centers contacted the researcher by mail to inform him that the original material sent in January was not received, but that the post—test was received. He could offer no explanation for this irregularity. The failure of these centers to respond resulted in the loss of a potential of 35 questionnaires or 17.5 per cent of the original sample. The other centers complied with a variable percentage of responses. One item of interest that presents itself from an investigation of Table 3.1 relates to the per— centage of responses encountered from those centers and "9 coordinators that were contacted personally as compared to those centers that were not. Those contacted personally resulted in a return of 68.3 per cent on the pre-test and 53.4 on both the pre-test and post-test, while those not contacted personally resulted in a return of 49.1 per cent on the pre-test and “0.2 per cent on both pre-test and post-test. The Instrument A 30 item questionnaire was used to obtain responses from students to certain behaviors Of leaders. The original questionnaire, called the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ), was developed by the Personnel Research Board at Ohio State University, particularly by Hemphill and Coons.2 In its early stages of development it consisted of 150 items designed to measure nine dimensions of leader behavior. Subsequent use of the questionnaire, particularly by Halpin, restricted attention to 30 items which provided measures of the dimensions referred to as Initiating Structure and Consideration.3 The reason for this was that the 150 items in the original questionnaire were factor analyzed and the per cent of common variance was accounted for by four factors; (1) Consideration--A9.6 per cent, (2) Initiating 2Hemphill and Coons, op. cit., p. 35. 3Charters, op. cit., p. 35. 50 Structure--33.6 per cent, (3) Production Sensitivity-- 9.8 per cent, and (H) Sensitivity-—7.0 per cent. Factors I and II accounted for 83.2 per cent of the common factor variance.“ Thus the 150 item LBDQ was revised to thirty items measuring those two factors. This is the instrument used in the present study, and it is presented in its complete form in Appendix B. The prospective teachers (SS), were given the 30 item LBDQ prior to the beginning of their student teaching experience, the first week of January, 1969. At that time SS were instructed to respond to the questionnaire twice. The first time SS were instructed to respond to the items on the basis of their pre-conceptions of how a secondary school principal should behave. The second time Ss were instructed to respond to the items on the basis of how they actually expected a secondary school principal to behave. Thus, the first set of responses are.concerned with pre-conceptions of idealistic behavior, and the second set of responses are concerned with actual expected behavior. The same LBDQ and the same procedures were used for the post-test upon the students completion of his student teaching experience, during the first week of March, 1969. Relationships were analyzed statistically by the use of correlation coefficients presented in matrix and tabular form. Results were deemed significant at the “Halpin and Winer, op. cit., p. Al. 51 .05 level of confidence, but other confidence levels were also represented. Personal Data Information The personal data Sheet, which made up the first two pages of the pre—test, was designed to collect certain normative data on the respondents related to their particular characteristics. The sheet was to yield data of the group distribution on the basis of sex, age, socio- economic status and education of parents, community size, school size, grade point average, credit hours completed, and teaching area specialization. Some of these areas were included simply to delineate between those students to be used in the study, and those who did not qualify to be included in the study in accordance with the criteria mentioned in the first chapter. A breakdown and compila— tion of this data on the basis of the number of respondents and the per cent this represents of the total are given in Tables 3.2 to 3.1m on pages 52 through 58. Scoring and Treatment of Data At the conclusion of student teaching in March, 1969, the pre—tests and post-test were matched and a total of 90 useable instruments were accumulated. The instruments were hand-scored, and scores for the eight ‘variables described in Chapter I on the two dimensions of‘Initiating Structure and Consideration both pre—test 52 and post—test were recorded. These eight measurements, plus a code number for identification, were entered on cards through the use of the IBM 29 Card Punch. These data were entered into the CDC Computing System and the means, standard deviations, and twenty-eight correlation coefficients were computed. The correlation coefficients are presented in matrix and tabular form in Chapter IV together with the analyses of the data. TABLE 3.2.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by sex. N=90 Per cent of Sex Number of Respondents Total Male 33 35-7 Female 57 63.3 TABLE 3.3.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by age. N=90 Age Number of Respondents Pegog:pt of Below 19 0 0 Between 19-22 73. 81.1 Between 23-26 9 10.0 Between 27—30 1 1.1 Above 30 7 7.8 Did not respond 0 0 Median Between 19-22 years 53 TABLE 3.4.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by socio-economic status of father (or head of household). N=90 What kind of work did your father (or head of Number Of Per Cent of household) do while you Respondents Total were growing up? Professional 13 14.4 Business, Managerial 32 35.6 Clerical or White Collar 11 12.2 Skilled Labor 19 21.2 Farm or other Labor 13 14.4 Did Not Respond 2 ' 2.2 TABLE 3.5.——Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by socio-economic status: level of education attained by father. N=90 What is the highest level Number of Per Cent of of education attained by your father? Respondents Total No Formal Education or Elementary School 4 4.4 Junior High School or High School Graduate 49 54.5 Some College or B.A. 27 30.0 M.A. or Doctorate 7 7.8 Father deceased or living with stepfather 2 2.2 Did Not Respond 1 1.1 Median: Junior High School or High School Graduatéf.3” 54 TABLE 3.6.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by socio-economic status: level of education attained by mother. N=90 What is the highest level Number of Per Cent of Of education attained by Respondents Total your mother? No Formal Education or Elementary School 3 3.3 Junior High School or High School Graduate 59 65.6 Some College or B.A. 23 25.6 M.A. or Doctorate 3 3.3 Mother Deceased or Living With Stepmother 1 1.1 Did Not Respond 1 1.1 Median: Junior High School or High School Graduate TABLE 3.7.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by community size. N=90. What was the size of the community in which you Number of Per Cent of lived during the high Respondents Total school years? Population over 250,000 13 14.4 Population between 50—250,000 24 26.7 Population between 10—50,000 20 22.2 Population between 1—10,000 24 26.7 Population less than 1,000 8 8.9 Did Not Respond 1 1.1 Median: Population between 10-50,000 55 TABLE 3.8.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled-—distribution by school size: graduating class. N=90 §?a§tfifiinfi29120§§$rnfiiifir Rggggggeggs Pernggg 0f school graduating class? Over 500 26 28.9 Between 300-500 19 21.2 Between 100—300 28 31.1 Less than 100 16 17.7 Did Not Respond 1 1.1 Median* Approximately: 300 1:..- u The number 300 did not appear in a class by itself but rather formed the boundary for 2 classes. Since there were as many respondents above 300 as below, approximately 300 seemed to be the appropriate median. TABLE 3.9.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled—-distribution by class status in college. N=90 What is your present Number of Per Cent of class status in college? Respondents Total Graduate 0 0 Senior 90 100 Junior 0 0 Sophomore 0 0 Did Not Respond 0 0 56 TABLE 3.10.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by grade point average in college. N=90 What is your cumulative Number of Per Cent of grade point average up Respondents Total to this term? Between 3.5 and 4.0 3 3.3 Between 3.0 and 3.5 15 16.7 Between 2.5 and 3.0 47 52.2 Between 2.0 and 2.5 24 26.7 Less than 2.0 0 0 Did Not Respond 1 1.1 Median: Between 2.5 and 3.0 TABLE 3.ll.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by credit hours completed in major. N = 90 What is the number of credit hours you have Number of Per Cent of completed in your Respondents Total major area? Above 36 hours 78 86.7 Between 30 and 36 hours 10 11.1 Between 24 and 30 hours 2 2.2 Between 18 and 24 hours 0 0 Less than 18 hours 0 0 Did Not Respond 0 0 Median: Above 36 hours 57 TABLE 3.12.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by credit hours completed in education. N=90 What is the number of Number of Per Cent of credit hours you have completed in education? Respondents Total Above 20 hours 13 14.4 Between 15 and 20 hours 25 27.8 Between 10 and 15 hours 42 46.7 Between 5 and 10 hours 10 11.1 Less than 5 hours 0 0 Did Not Respond 0 0 Median: Between 10 and 15 hours TABLE 3.13.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by term of anticipated graduation N=90 What is the term and year Number of per Cent of of your anticipated graduation? Respondents Total Winter or Spring, 1969 66 73.3 Summer or Fall, 1969 24 26.7 Winter or Spring, 1970 0 0 Summer or Fall, 1970 0 0 ‘Did.Not Respond 0 0 58 TABLE 3.14.--Compilation of personal data information on students sampled--distribution by teaching area specializa- tion. N=90 In which of the following areas will you be speciali- Number of Per Cent of zing following your Respondents Total graduation? Secondary English or Speech 13 14.4 Romance Languages or German and Russian 9 10.0 History or Social Science 32 35.6 Mathematics or Science 17 18.9 Physical Education or Health Education 5 5.6 Music or Art 9 10.0 Agriculture or Industrial Arts 3 3.3 Business and Distributive Education or Home Economics 2 2.2 Elementary or Special Education 0 0 Did Not Respond 0 0 CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA The variables used and referred to in this study were described on page 9 of Chapter I. Scores for those variables were obtained from the use of the LBDQ. Those scores were entered onto IBM cards and put into the CDC 1130 Computing System for analysis. Means, standard deviations, and 28 Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were computed. The means and standard deviations are given in Table 4.1 below. TABLE 4.l.--Means and standard deviations of eight variables used. Variable Mean Standard Deviation Al 36.22 4.84 A2 38.03 3.45 A3 38.96 5.70 A4 41.50 4.25 B1 36.84 5.37 82 38.20 3.79 B3 ' 38.94 5.20 Bu 41.62 4.09 59 60 Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient Correlation is concerned with the degree of corre- spondence between two sets of variables. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, r, may be defined as a mathematical measure of the degree of correspondence, or concomitant variation, between two 1 sets of variables. Stated mathematically, the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient may be defined as r - 2 g , where z = X X and z = l“ Y. 8x y Cy or zxy - ”Y - ——— ~ 2 2 2 —2 r = N , where O fi/éé— - X and 5 %/:1— - Y 6 s x N y N x y The latter formula permits use of raw scores in place of z scores so that there is no need, as in the former formula, to convert each raw score into a z score before computing r2. 1Edward B. Van 0rmer and Clarence 0. Williams, Elementary Statistics for Students of Educgtion and Psychology (Ann Arbor: Edwards Brothers, Inc., 1941), pp. - So 2Janet T. Spence, Benton J. Underwood, Carl P. Duncan,and John w. Cotton, Elementary Statistics (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1968), pp. 118-121. 61 The Pearson product-moment r expresses the direc- tion of and estimates the magnitude of, the relationship between the two variables. This means that once having been computed, the r between variables A and B expresses the relationship between A and B or between B and A. In short, an r is reversible and has no orientation in terms of the two variables being correlated. Also the r, being reversible, can never be interpreted as reflect- ing a causal relationship.3 Edwards states that "we must take care, in studying the association between two variables, that we do not confuse the concepts of 'association' and 'causation.‘ When two are associated, it does not necessarily follow that one is the cause of the other. We know only that in our sample the two variables are related."Ll Tate further states: . . . the fact of correlation does not demonstrate sequence, and therefore does not indicate which of two related variables is cause, which effect. When variable A is correlated with B, and the correlation is not accidental, there are three reasonable inter- pretations: (l) A is the cause or part of the cause of B, (2) B is the cause or part of the cause of A, and (3) A and B are caused or partially caused by some third variable or set of variables. Correla- tion does not indicate which one of the three interpretations is sound in a given situation; it demonstrates only that A and B are associated. Inferences regarding the direction and nature of 3David J. Fox, The Research Process in Education (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969), p. 225. “Allan L. Edwards, Statistical Analysis (New York: Rinehart and Co., Inc., 1946), pp. 66-681 62 causation can be made, if at all, only from informa- tion supplementary to the fact of correlation. In spite of this limitation, however, correla- tion is extremely useful in preliminary investigation of causal relationships. It is generally the case that variables which are causally related show correlation and that variables which do not show correlation are not related causally. Hence, the method of correlation serves both to single out variables which may be relevant to an observed effect and to eliminate variables which are irrelevent.5 Interpretation of r Two authors previously referred to6 have made scales for the interpretation or r scores, which are referred to when the r's for this study are given. For purposes of convenience these will be referred to as Scale I and Scale II. Scale I7 l. r from 0.00 to .15 or .20 represents negligible or if close to .20, very slight, relationship. 2. r from .20 to .40 represents a low correlation, present but slight. 3. r from .40 to .60 represents a moderate or fair correlation. 4. r from .60 to .80 represents a marked or somewhat high relationship. 5. r from .80 to 1.00 represents a high to very high relationship. 5Merle W. Tate, Statistics in Education and PS cholo (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1965), pp. "1 lo 6See footnotes 1 and 3 of this chapter. 7Van Ormer and Williams, op. cit., p. 65. Scale 11 8 l. 63 for r from .00 to .50, absolute value is low, at best only 25 per cent of variance is shared. for r from .50 to .70, absolute value is moderate, from 25 to 50 per cent of variance is Shared. for r from .70 to .86, absolute value is high, from 50 to 75 per cent of variance is shared. for r above .86, absolute value is very high, more than 75 per cent of variance is shared. Uses of r Tate9 has listed seven uses for the correlation coefficient, r: l. The estimation or prediction of values of one variable from given values of a related variable, or, simply, the prediction of B from A. The analysis of relationships between two or more variables. The investigation of causal relationships. The control of the effect of one variable on one or more others. The study of the statistical validity and reliability of psychological tests. The estimation of the coefficient of correla- tion in the population. The adjustment of experimental data from two or more groups for initial differences between the groups. 8Fox, op. cit., p. 224. 9 Tate, op. cit., p. 140. 64 Presentation of Correlation Coefficients In the previous pages (62 through 63), a description of the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, its interpretation, and its uses has been given. Keeping this information in mind, the correlation coefficients for this study are presented in a correlation matrix (Table 4.2). The eight variables were correlated, and a total of 28 correlation coefficients were computed. TABLE 4.2.-—Corre1ation matrix for eight variables used. Al A2 A3 A4 B1 B2 B3 B4 A1 1.000 A2 0.209 1.000 A3 0.511 0.280 1.000 A4 0.039 0.455 0.290 .000 B1 0.627 0.228 0.525 .200 1.000 B2 0.265 0.428 0.281 .413 0.429 1.000 B3 0.387 0.167 0.497 .198 0.629 0.211 1.000 ‘ B4 0.113 0.230 0.127 .581 0.230 0.292 0.260 1.000 The confidence levels for the correlation matrix are as follows: 65 £3131 Correspondingir .05 .183 .025 .217 .01 .256 .005 .283 Hypotheses and Variables The twelve hypotheses tested in this study were given in Chapter 1, pages 12 to 14. Combining the information from the previous sec- tions, it is now possible to present in Table 4.3, page 66, the hypotheses, the variables, the correlations, and the levels of confidence at which the hypotheses were accepted or rejected. In Table 4.4 the hypotheses, the variables, and the correlations are again given, but this time they are given in reference to the two scales presented previously in this chapter on pages 62-63. Therefore, this table serves as an interpretation of the correlation scores. In Table 4.4 on page 67, the per cent of varia- tion shared or explained describes how much knowledge of variable one will describe about variable two. It is an estimate of the predictive efficiency of the data, in the sense that the per cent of Shared variation does 66 TABLE 4.3.——Hypotheses, variables, correlations, and levels of confidence. Correla- Level of Hypothesis Hypotheses Variables tion Confidence Rejected between Represented or Variables Accepted 1 Al, A2 0.209 .05 accepted 2 A3, A4 0.290 .005 accepted 3 Al, A3 0.511 .005 accepted 4 A2, A4 0.455 .005 accepted 5 B1’ B2 0.429 .005 accepted B3, B4 0.260 .01 accepted 7 31’ B3 0.629 .005 accepted 8 82, B4 0.292 .005 accepted 9 A1, B1 0.627 .005 accepted 10 A2, B2 0.428 .005 accepted 11 A3, B3 0.497 .005 accepted 12 A”, ELl 0.581 .005 accepted give some basis for knowing how efficiently we can pre- dict one variable when we have information about the other.10 Analysis of Correlational Differences Since the correlations for the eight variables had been computed, and associations between them had been loFox, op. cit., p. 219. 67 coHpchLHoO noxame m.mm mumnmpoe Op oumnopoe Hmm.o Om .O< mH :oHpmHOLHOO nHmu m m 0.0m Opmnocoe Ho mumsmpoe NOO.o m . < HH manpmnoe COHumHOHLoo LHOO J c 0.0H or 30H so credence OOO.O cm .ca OH . QHcmcoHpmHmL anc or :er cmnsceom H H 0.00 ohmnouoe so ocxeme OO0.0 O . O O OcmHHn pan .uconmpu m.m 30H .coHpmHmHHoo 30H mOm.o Om .mm m QHCOCOHSMHOL OOH: op OOH: Omcz O H o.mm . Opmnmnos ImE0m Lo UOOLOE mmo.o m . m N OcmHHm pap .ucmmosd m m.w 30H .coHpmHmHLoo 30H oom.o Om .-m O Opmnoooe COHHOHOLLOO LHOO c H 0.0H o» 30H so chcsoeoe OOO.O .O . O O mpmnouoe coHumHopaoo . J 0.0m oh on chO to msmscece OOO.O OO .na O :oHpmHmauoo LHOO H.0m .mpmnmvoe no mpmnmpoe HHm.o m< .Hq m OOOHHO pan .pcmmmLQ O.m 30H COHHOHOLCOO 30H rmm.o O<.m< m QHcmcoHumHmL a H O.O I 30H hcmHHm Oec> OOm.O ca . a H a: m an mo Wowmnm mmHanpm> coHuaHpm> coapmuonapcch coHpmumsaamch comzpmm co>Ho>cH LOOESZ no unoo ham , HH OHwom H OHmOm COHumHOLLoo mmHanLm> memcpoamr .HH new H monom an mcoHpmuopapOch can .chHpmespoo .mOHanHm> .nmmOcOOOO:II.O.O mHm 38.03; for post—test, 36.84 > 38.30) (2) Student teachers expect slightly more struc- ture than consideration in the principal's behavior. (for pre-test, 38.96 > 41.50; for post-test 38.94 > 41.62) 79 (3) Student teachers perceive Slightly more structure than they actually expect in the principal's behavior. (for pre—test, 36.22 > 38.96; for post-test 36.84 > 38.94) (4) Student teachers perceive slightly more con- sideration than they actually expect in principal's behavior. (for pre-test, 38.03 > 41.50; for post-test 38.30 > 41.62) (5) Summarizing the above four statements, it can be stated that what the student teacher perceives as ideal behavior in the principal, and the realistic behavior that the student teacher actually expects in the principal are not equal. (6) Initiating Structure behavior is significantly correlated with Consideration behavior. (7) Perceptions and expectations are significaltly correlated. (8) Initiating Structure behavior cannot be used as a predictor of Consideration behavior. The reverse is also true. (9) Perceptions cannot be used as predictors of expectations. The reverse is also true. (10) There is no difference in the student teachers' perceptions of the structure behavior of the ;pr1ncipal before and after student teaching. 80 (11) There is no difference in the student teachers' perceptions of the consideration behavior of the principal before and after student teaching. (12) There is no difference in the student teachers' expectations of the structure behavior of the principal before and after student teaching. 5% (13) There is no difference in the student teachers' expectations of the consideration behavior of the principal before and after student teaching. Hg (14) No significant change had occurred between the correlations before and after student teaching. Therefore, it would seem that the pre-service experience of prospective teachers had no significant impact on their perceptions, pro-conceptions, and expectations of the leader behavior of the principal. (15) Summarizing the last four statements, it can be said that during the time in which the prospec- tive teachers were engaged in student teaching, apparently nothing occurred which significantly changed their reported perceptions, pre-conceptions, and expectations of the leader behavior of the principal. Recommendations (1) Teacher education Should receive more emphasis in college and university courses in administration, so that administrators become more aware of the attitudes 81 that teachers bring with them about administrators into a school Situation. (2) There should be an evaluation, upgrading, and extension of in—service programs designed to assist practicing administrators become more aware of teacher and prospective teacher attitudes toward administrators. ha (3) There Should be an improvement or extension of the personal and interpersonal relationships between principals and student teachers. J (4) Principals should be used as consultants, resource people, lecturers, and small and large group leaders in the teacher education program to promote more contact, more understanding, and more communication between principals and prospective teachers. (5) There should be an evaluation, upgrading, and extension of university courses Offered to undergraduate prospective teachers that will better orient them to the principal's responsibilities, roles, and functions in the school organization. (6) Principals should seek effective ways of helping prospective or student teachers better understand the management aspects of school operations and the responsibilities, roles and functions of the principal— ship. (7) There should be an evaluation, upgrading, and extension of the student teaching experience aimed at the 82 objective of assisting student teachers to come more into contact with, to better understand, and to com- municate more effectively with, their principals. BIBLIOGRAPHY 83 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Brown, J. F. Psychology and the Social Order: An Intro- duction to the Dynamic Study of Social Fields.) New York: McGraw—Hill Book Co., 1936. Brown, C. G. and Cohen, T. S. The Study of Leadership. Dansville, 111.: Interstate Printers and Publishers, 1958. Campbell, Roald F. and Gregg, Russell T., eds. Admin- istrative Behavior in Education. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957. Charters, W. W., Jr. Teachers Perceptions of Administra— tive Behavior. Washington University, St. Louis, Mo.: Cooperative Research Project No. 929, U.S.O.E., Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1964. Edwards, Allen L. Statistical Analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969. Fiedler, Fred E. A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1958. Flanagan, John 0. ed. Psychology in the World Emergency. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1952. Fox, David J. The Research Process in Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969. Graff, Orin B. and Street, Calvin M. Improvinngompetence in Educational Administration. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1956. Griffiths, Daniel E., ed. Behavioral Science and Educa- tional Administration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, Part II, 1964. Gross, Neal and Robert E. Herriott. Staff Leadership in Public Schools: A Sociological Inquiry. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1965. 84 85 Guetzkow, Harold, ed. Gropps,_Leadership and Men. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Press, 1951. Halpin, Andrew W. Administrative Theory in Education. Chicago: Midwest Administrative Center, University of Chicago Press, 1958. . Theory and Research in Administration. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1966. Hays, William L. Statistics. Chicago: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963. Hemphill, John K. Situational Factors in Leadership, Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, Bureau of Educational Research Monograph No. 32, 1949. Lindzey, Gardner, ed. Handbook of Social Psychology. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1954. Morphet, Edgar L., Johns, Roe L., and Reller, Theodore L. Educational Organization and Administration, Concepts, Practices, and Issues. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NfJ.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967. Pigors, Paul J. W. Leadership or Domination. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Co., 1935. Spence, Janet T.; Underwood Benton J.; Duncan, Carl P.; and Cotton, John W. Elementary Statistics. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1968. Stanley, Julian 0., ed. Improving Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1967. Stogdill, Ralph M. and Coons, Alvin E., eds. Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research Monograph No. 88, 1957. , Shartle, Carroll L, and Associates. Patterns of Administrative Performance. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research Monograph No. 81, 1956. , Shartle, Carroll L. Methods in the Study of Administrative Leadership. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research Monograph No. 80, 1955. 86 Tate, Merle W. Statistics in Education and Psychology. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1965. Van Ormer, Edward B., and Williams, Clarence O. Elementapy Statistics for Students of Education and Ppychology. Ann Arbor: Edwards Brothers, Inc., 1941. Walker, Helen M., and Lev, Joseph. Elementary Statistical 'MethOdS. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1958. Periodicals Cowley, William H. "Three Distinctions in the Study of Leaders." Journal Of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 23, NO. 2 (1928), 144-157. Evenson, Warren L. "Leadership Behavior of High School Principals." National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, Vol. 23, NO. 248 (September, 1959), 96-101. Gibb, Cecil A. "The Research Background Of an Inter- action Theory of Leadership." Australian Journal of Psychology, Vol. 2, No. 1 (1950), 19—423 Greenfield, T. B. "Research on the Behavior Of Educa- tional Leaders: Critique of a Tradition." Alberta Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 14, No. 1 (March, 1968), 55—76. Hemphill, John K. "Patterns of Leadership Behavior Associated With Administrative Reputation of the Department of a College." Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 46, No. 7 (November, 1955), 385-401. Hopper, Robert L. and Bills, Robert E. "What's a Good Administrator Made Of?" The School Executive, Vol. 74, No. 3 (March, 1955), 93-95- Stogdill, Ralph M. "Personal Factors Associated With Leadership: A Survey of the Literature." Journal Of Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 1 (1948), 35-71. Willower, Donald J. "Education Students' Perceptions of School Administrators." School Review, Vol. 70, No. 3 (Autumn, 1962), 332-344. 87 Unpublished Material Myers, Robert B. "A Synthesis of Research in Leadership." An unpublished paper presented to the ASCD, March, 1957. APPENDICES 88 APPENDIX A 89 APPENDIX A Monographs in the Leadership Series in Ohio Studies in Personnel Published in Cooperation with the Personnel Research Board Bureau of Business Research Monographs R-80 Methods in the Study of Administrative Leadership, by Ralph M. Stogdill and Carroll L. Shartle R—81 Patterns of Administrative Performance by Ralph M. Stogdill, Carroll L. Shartle, and Associates R-82 Leadership and Perceptions of Organization by Ellis L. Scott R-83 Leadership and Its Effects Upon the Group by Donald T. Campbell R-84 Leadership and Structures of Personnel Interaction by Ralph M. Stogdill R-85 A Predictive Study of Administrative Work Patterns by Ralph M. Stogdill, Carroll L. Shartle, Ellis L. Scott, Alvin E. Coons, and William E. Jaynes R-86 Leadership and Role Expectations by Ralph M. Stogdill, Ellis L. Scott, and William E. Jaynes R—87 Group Dimensions: A Manual for Their Measurement by John K. Hemphill R-88 Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement by Ralph M. Stogdill and Alvin E. Coons, Editors. 90 No. No. 91 Bureau of Educational Research Monographs 32 Situational Factors in Leadership by John K. Hemphill, 1949, 140 pp. 33 Leadership and Supervision in Industry: An Evaluation of a Supervisory Training Program by Edwin A. Fleishman, Edwin F. Harris, and Harold E. Burt, 1955, 110 pp. APPENDIX B 92 APPENDIX B January 16, 1969 Dear Student Teacher Coordinator, One of our doctoral students in the College of Education, Leonard L. Mitchell, is conducting research for his doctoral dissertation in the area of Teacher Education. He is interested in studying the expectations and perceptions that student teachers have in regard to the leader behavior of secondary school principals. This study has been approved by the Basic Program Council of the College of Education. He has asked for our and your assistance in making this research possible. It involves a pre—test now, at the beginning of student teaching, and a post-test at the conclusion of student teaching, using a brief questionnaire. Since the number of Student Teaching Centers is large and have a varied geographical distribution, it would be impossible for Mr. Mitchell to see each of you and your student teachers individually. He is asking, therefore, for your cooperation in obtaining data and information for his thesis. Particulars to that effect will be given in a letter which he will send to you. Mr. Mitchell would like very much to have your cooperation in this endeavor, as it will provide informa- tion which may be of value to the Teacher Education Program. We would certainly appreciate your taking a few minutes out of your busy schedule to assist him in this undertaking. Sincerely yours, Dr. Henry W. Kennedy Division of Teacher Education Michigan State University 93 94 January 16, 1969 Dear Student Teacher Coordinator, As you know from Dr. Kennedy's letter, I am conducting research for my doctoral thesis in the area of Teacher Education. I am interested in studying the expectations and perceptions that student teachers have in regard to the leader behavior of secondary school principals in general. I would like to secure your assistance in this endeavor to Obtain data and information relevant to this problem. It involves a pre-test before student teaching and a post—test at the conclusion Of student teaching. A random sample of those students doing their student teach- ing this term provided a number of students that are in your Center. Those students are listed on the accompanying page(s). I am enclosing the proper number of questionnaires with written directions as to their completion. I need your assistance in getting these questionnaires to these people. I understand that you meet regularly with your student teachers in a seminar, and I'd like to ask you to give the questionnaires to the students listed, ask them to fill them out and return to you as quickly as possible. I am enclosing a stamped envelope in which you may put the completed questionnaires and return to me. The same procedure will be followed at the end of the term. The questionnaire takes about 15-20 minutes to complete, or less. I would certainly appreciate your assistance in this project, as I hope it will provide pertinent information which may be of value to the Teacher Education Program here at Michigan State University. If there are any questions you may have pertaining to the study or my directions, please feel free to contact me at 3018, Erickson Hall, M.S.U., or call 353-3796. Sincerely yours, Leonard L. Mitchell Graduate Assistant Department Of Secondary Education and Curriculum P.S. I understand that some of you have assistants that coordinate the work of part of the total number of student teachers assigned to your Center. If that is the case, will you please pass this on to them, and I will enclose extra envelopes for them to return the questionnaires to me. Thanks. LLM 95 January 16, 1969 Dear Student Teacher, I am a doctoral candidate in the College of Education at Michigan State University and am conducting a research project leading to the completion of my doctoral disserta- tion. The study is concerned with the expectations and perceptions that student teachers have in regard to the leader behavior of secondary school principals. This study has been approved by the Division of Teacher Education at Michigan State University. I would like your assistance in providing relevant data so that the study may produce information valuable to the College of Education. Your coordinator will give you a questionnaire that will provide me with this data. It will take but a few minutes of your time, and I urge you to fill it out as quickly as possible. At the end of your student teaching you will be asked to fill out a second question- naire, similar to the first. In both cases, please complete the forms and return them to your coordinator as quickly as possible. Perhaps this could be done at your seminar sessions. The questionnaire is very brief and can be com- pleted in about 15-20 minutes or less. The information from these questionnaires in no way reflects upon the principal of your school, but is only intended to gather information on your attitudes about principals in general. Your name and your responses will be seen only by me and will be held in strictest confidence. I certainly appreciate your taking a few minutes out of your busy schedule to assist me in this undertaking and I wish you success in your student teaching program. Sincerely yours, Leonard L. Mitchell Graduate Assistant Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum 96 INSTRUCTIONS: The following 30 items describe particular behaviors on the part of the secondary school principal. Each item describes a specific kind of behavior without evoking any judgment regarding the desirability or un- desirability of that behavior. These Questions in no way constitute a "test" of the ability Of the person who answers the items; nor do they involve an evaluation of the effectiveness of the principal's performance. The questionnaire consists of 3 sections. The first simply supplys some information about you. The second and third consist of 30 items to be checked. Section 2 should be answered in light of how you ideally think a principal should behave. Section 3 Should be answered in light of how you realistically expect a principal to behave. The answer choices are "1" meaning "Always," "2" meaning "Often," "3" meaning "Occasionally," "4" meaning "Rarely," and "5" meaning "Never." In all 3 sections you simply supply your responses by circling the appropriate number. PLEASE RESPOND TO ALL THE ITEMS 97 SECTION 1 Personal Data Sheet Name Student Number DIRECTIONS: Circle the appropriate number. 1. 2. Sex: (1) male (2) female Age: (1) below 19 (2) between 19-22 (3) between 23—26 (4) between 27-30 (5) above 30 Socio-economic: What kind of work did your father (or head of household) do while you were growing up? (1) professional (2) business, managerial (3) clerical or white collar (4) skilled labor (5) farm or other labor SociO-economic: What is the highest level of education attained by your father? (1) no formal education or elementary school (2) junior high school or high school graduate (3) some college or bachelor's degree (4) master's or doctorate degree (5) father deceased or living with stepfather Socio-economic: What is the highest level of education attained by your mother? (1) no formal education or elementary school (2) junior high school or high school graduate (3) some college or bachelor's degree (4) master's or doctorate degree (5) mother deceased or living with stepmother Community Size: What was the size of the community in which you lived during the high school years? (1) pOpulation over 250,000 (2) population between 50,000 and 250,000 (3) population between 10,000 and 50,000 (4) population between 1,000 and 10,000 (5) population less than 1,000 10. ll. l2. 13. 14. 98 School Size: What was the total number of students in your high school graduating class? (1) over 500 (2) between 300 and 500 (3) between 100-300 (4) less than 100 Class Status: What is your present class status? (1) graduate (2) senior (3) junior (4) sophomore Grade Point Average: What is your cumulative grade point average up to this term? (1) between 3.5 and 4.0 (2 (3) between 2.5 and 3.0 (4 (5) less than 2.0 ) between 3.0 and 3.5 ) between 2.0 and 2.5 Credit Hours Completed-Major: What is the number of credit hours you have completed in your major area? (1) above 35 hours (2) between 30 and 36 hours (3) between 24 and 30 hours (4) between 18 and 24 hours (5) less than 18 hours Credit Hours Completed-Education: What is the number of credit hours you have com- pleted in education? (1) above 20 hours (2) between 15 and 20 hours (3) between 10 and 15 hours (4) between 5 and 10 hours (5) less than 5 hours Term Graduating: What is the term and year Of your anticipated gradua- tion? (1) Winter or Spring, 1969 (2) Summer or Fall, 1969 (3) Winter or Spring, 1970 (4) Summer or Fall, 1970 Teaching Area Specialization: In which of the following areas will you be specializing following your graduation? (1) Secondary English or Speech ) Romance Languages or German and Russian ) History or Social Sciences ) Mathematics or Science ) Physical Education or Health Education ) Music or Art ) Agriculture or Industrial Arts ) Business and Distributive Education or Home Economics CDN O\U"I JEUOIU ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Previous Teaching Experience: (1) I have had teaching experience. (2) I have had pp teaching experience. ANSWER CHOICES: 99 SECTION 2 (1) (4) Rarely and (5) Never The secondary school principal should . . . 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 390 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. Do personal favors for teachers. Make his attitudes clear to the teachers Do little things to make it pleasant to be a teacher Try out his new ideas with teachers Be easy for teachers to understand Rule teachers with an iron hand Find time to listen to teachers Criticize poor work by teachers Speak to teachers in a manner not to be questioned Keep to himself where teachers are concerned Look out for the personal welfare of individual teachers Assign teachers to particular tasks Work without a plan Maintain definite standards of per- formance for teachers Refuse to explain his actions to teachers Act without consulting his teachers Be Slow to accept new ideas from teachers Emphasize the meeting of deadlines for teachers Treat all teachers as his equal Encourage the use of uniform procedures Be willing to make changes concerning teachers Make sure that all teachers understand his part in the organization Be friendly and approachable for teachers Ask that teachers follow standard rules and regulations Make teachers feel at ease when talking with him Put suggestions made by teachers into operation Let teachers know what is expected of them See to it that teachers are working to capacity Get teacher approval on important matters before proceeding See to it that the work of teachers is coordinated FJH FJHFJ HiAFJH EJHiA F4 iAEJHIAFJH runom H NI'UN I\) NMNNI’UN [UN NNNN Always (2) Often (3) Occasionally LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA.) LAJLA)LA) LA)LA)LA)LA) LA)LA.)LA) LA) LA.) LA.)LA)LA)LA.)LA)LA) LA)LA) J: J: E J: J: J: I: .C.‘ J: J: St: th'Jr-D: JI’DJ: J: t 4274:5342": Jr-P: U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U‘l m U"! U'l U'IU'IU'I_U'IU'IU'1U'I U'IU'IU'I U‘l U1 UWU'IU‘IU'IU'IU‘I U'IU'I ANSWER CHOICES: (l (4 100 ) ) Rarely and (5) Never I expect the secondary school principal to . . . 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. Do personal favors for teachers Make his attitudes clear to the teachers Do little things to make it pleasant to be a teacher Try out his new ideas with teachers Be easy for teachers to understand Rule teachers with an iron hand Find time to listen to teachers Criticize poor work by teachers Speak to teachers in a manner not to be questioned Keep to himself where teachers are concerned Look out for the personal welfare of individual teachers Assign teachers to particular tasks Work without a plan Maintain definite standards of performance for teachers Refuse to explain his actions to teachers Act without consulting his teachers Be slow to accept new ideas from teachers Emphasize the meeting of deadlines for teachers Treat all teachers as his equal Encourage the use of uniform procedures Be willing to make changes concerning teachers Make sure that all teachers understand his part in the organization Be friendly and approachable for teachers Ask that teachers follow standard rules and regulations Make teachers feel at ease when talking with him Put suggestions made by teachers into Operation Let teachers know what is expected of them See to it that teachers are working to capacity Get teacher approval on important matters before proceeding See to it that the work of teachers is coordinated HIJFJ I4 HFAFHAEJH FJH HtAFJH HFJF‘ NNNN [\JI'UI'U |'\) l\)l\)l'\)l\)l\)l\) NR) NNIU Always (2) Often (3) Occasionally LA) LA) LA) LA)LA) LA.) LA) LA)LA) LA) LA)LA)LA) LA)LA)LA.)LA) LA)LA)LA) LA) LA.) LA)LA)LA)LA)LA)LA) LA)LA) J: J: 4:1: J: EJZ'J‘: 4:34:42 EEJ‘: J‘: J: 5:25-1:41— JET-E 4:34:42": U1 U1 U1 U1U1 U1 U1 U1U1 U1 U1U1U1 U1U1U1U1 U1U1U1 U1 U1 U1U1U1U1U1U1 U1U1 101 February 25, 1969 Dear Student Teacher Coordinator, Around the middle of January you were contacted by me either in person or by letter concerning a study being done by me concerning student teachers and their expectations and perceptions of the leader behavior of the principal. Your help and response in this undertaking are and were greatly appreciated and I'm sure the data will be highly useful. You were also informed at that time that the study involved a post-test at the conclusion of student teaching. This is almost identical to the first and it is imperative that all those students who completed the first question- naire also complete the second. This is necessary so that I may compare their responses before and after student teaching. This is a highly important aspect Of the study, so I again ask for your assistance. As before, the question- naire is very brief, requiring about 15-20 minutes or less for completion. I am enclosing a list of those students who completed the first questionnaire and the proper number of second questionnaires for their completion. In a number of cases very few questionnaires were returned so I am enclosing extra questionnaires in hopes that perhaps they filled them out in January but failed to return them to you. In that case, I ask that you have them complete the second questionnaire and return both of them to me. In order for the study to yield valid data, a large majority of both questionnaires must be completed and returned, so I urge you to help make the study a fruitful one. I am also enclosing a stamped, addressed folder for your convenience in returning the information to me. The questionnaire should be completed as near the end of student teaching as is feasible. Two possibilities present themselves. First, they could be given out at the last seminar and filled out and returned to you at that time. Second, they could be given out at the next to the last seminar and then collected at the last seminar. Either alternative is acceptable, whichever is best for you. I would ask that you return them immediately, as they must be analyzed by computer sometime in March. Again, I certainly appreciate your taking a few minutes out of your busy schedule to assist me in this study, and I hope this has not been too much Of an imposi- tion. I'm sure that the information this study will yield will prove useful to the Teacher Education Program here at M.S.U. If there are any questions you may have pertaining to the study or the directions, please feel free to contact me at 301B Erickson Hall, M.S.U., or call 353-3796. Sincerely yours, Leonard L. Mitchell Graduate Assistant, Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum 102 February 25, 1969 Dear Student Teacher, Around the middle of January you were aksed to com- plete a questionnaire I sent you pertaining to a study I am conducting on the expectations and perceptions that student teachers have in regard to the leader behavior of principals. Your assistance in this endeavor was greatly appreciated and I'm sure the data you provided will be of use. It was explained in the cover letter that the study also involved a second questionnaire to be completed at the termination of your student teaching experience. This is almost identical to the first and it is imperative that all of you that completed the first questionnaire also complete the second. This is necessary so that I may compare your responses before and after student teaching. This is an important aspect of the study, so I again ask for your assistance. As before, the questionnaire is very brief, taking about 15-20 minutes or less of your time. You will be given this questionnaire by your coordinator and he will supply you with information as to when to fill it out. Please do so as soon as possible and return it to your coordinator. This information is needed as soon as possible, so I would appreciate your assistance in making it available. The information from these question- naires in no way reflects upon the principal of your school, but is only intended to gather information on your attitudes about principals in general. Your name and your responses will be seen only by me and will be held in strictest confidence. Again, I certainly appreciate your taking a few minutes out of your busy schedule to assist me in this undertaking, and I certainly wish you continued success in your undergraduate program and in your future as a teacher. Sincerely yours, Leonard L. Mitchell Graduate Assistant, Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum 103 SECTION 1 INSTRUCTIONS: The following 30 items describe particular behaviors on the part of the secondary school principal. Each item describes a specific kind of behavior without evoking any judgment regarding the desirability or undesirability of that behavior. These questions in no way constitute a "test" Of the ability of the person who answers the items; nor do they involve an evaluation of the effective- ness of the principal's performance. The questionnaire consists of 3 sections. The first, this one, Simply supplies some instructions for you. The second and third consist of 30 items to be checked. Section 2 should be answered in light of how you ideally think a principal should behave. Section 3 should be answered in light of how you realistically expect a principal to behave. The answer choices are "1" meaning "Always," "2" meaning "Often," "3" meaning "Occasionally," "4" meaning 'Rarely," and "5" meaning "Never." In sections 2 and 3, Simply supply your responses by circling the appropriate number. PLEASE RESPOND TO ALL THE ITEMS NAME STUDENT NUMBER 104 SECTION 2 ANSWER CHOICES: (1) Always (2) Often (3) Occasionally (4) Rarely and (5) Never The secondary school principal Should 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. Do personal favors for teachers. Make his attitudes clear to the teachers DO little things to make it pleasant to be a teacher Try out his new ideas with teachers Be easy for teachers to understand Rule teachers with an iron hand Find time to listen to teachers Criticize poor work by teachers Speak to teachers in a manner not to be questioned Keep to himself where teachers are concerned Look out for the personal welfare Of individual teachers Assign teachers to particular tasks Work without a plan Maintain definite standards of per- formance for teachers Refuse to explain his actions to teachers Act without consulting his teachers Be Slow to accept new ideas from teachers Emphasize the meeting of deadlines for teachers Treat all teachers as his equal Encourage the use of uniform procedures Be willing to make changes concerning teachers Make sure that all teachers understand his part in the organization Be friendly and approachable for teachers Ask that teachers follow standard rules and regulations Make teachers feel at ease when talking with him Put suggestions made by teachers into operation Let teachers know what is expected of them See to it that teachers are working to capacity Get teacher approval on important matters before proceeding See to it that the work of teachers is coordinated HFAFJH FJHI4 r4 iAEJHFAEJH FJH HFJF’ NNN I'U IUIUIUNNN |\)I\) NNNN I'UIUM LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA) LA)LAJLA) LA)LA)LA)LA) LA)LA)LA) LA) LA) LA)LA)LA)LA)LA)LA) LA)LA) Ettb 21:1: 3 .1: 1:135:33 DJ: J: J: 1:41-1:- Ettttttt U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1U1U1 U1U1U1U1 U1U1U1 U1 U1 U1U1U1U1U1U1 U1U1