raw“? ' ~ ~

 

A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF ACTIVITIES V
m EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIPZAND '
OF APPELLATE PROBLEMS OF .
ELEMENTARY swam PRINCIPALSIN '
THE SAG-MW PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM *
mo THEIR VARIABILITY WITH THE
SGHOGL’S soczomommc SETTING .

Dissertation for the Degree of Ph.- D.
VMTCHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
ALBERT ZACKRIE, JR.
T 1974 '

V

 

SW“

 
  

  

5
I.
“f

L I B R A R
Mir‘Tigan S . :. g.
University

  

  

{-
LIBRARY SHEAR-S—

 

 

14

ABSTRACT

A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF ACTIVITIES IN EDUCATIONAL
LEADERSHIP AND OF APPELLATE PROBLEMS OF ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL PRINCIPALS IN THE SAGINAW PUBLIC SCHOOL
SYSTEM AND THEIR VARIABILITY WITH THE
SCHOOL'S SOCIOECONOMIC SETTING

BY

Albert Zackrie, Jr.

The Purpose of the Study

 

The purpose of this study was to explore, investi-
gate, identify, and describe the activities in educational
leadership and of appellate problems of elementary school
principals in the Saginaw Public School System and their

variability with the school's socioeconomic setting.

Statement of the Problem

A certain amount of appellate problems is inherent
in the principal's role. He cannot retreat to an ivory
tower, refusing to deal with less glamorous problems of
everyday school life. Too many principals have the opposite
problem: They become so enmeshed in the day-to-day problems
that they are unable to perform the critical tasks of
leadership. A principal severely afflicted with appellate

problems is dealing almost entirely with issues raised by

Albert Zackrie, Jr.

others, each of whom is concerned with only part of the
school operation or with his own personal interests. When
a principal responds only to issues raised by others, his
actions become random movements in terms of the school

program as a whole.

Design of the Study

 

The direct observation method was utilized in ascer-
taining the data. The researcher went into the ten (10)
schools, five (5) in the high socioeconomic setting and
five (5) in the low socioeconomic setting, and observed
each principal for three full days.

The stratified sampling method was employed in this
study. The stratification was done on a socioeconomic
basis. The stratification of the high and low socioeconomic
groups was not done from a national perspective because
schools classified in a high socioeconomic setting and a
low socioeconomic setting could conceivably receive a

different classification based on national norms.

Findings
1. There is no significant difference between princi-
pals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
execution of overall educational leadership
activities during a normal workday.
2. There is no significant difference between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socio-

economic settings in the overall frequency of

Albert Zackrie, Jr.

educational leadership activities during a normal
workday.

There is a significant difference between principals
in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
frequency and time utilized in working with
miscellaneous appellate problems during a normal
workday. Elementary school principals in the low
socioeconomic setting have a higher frequency and
utilized more time in working with miscellaneous
appellate problems during a normal workday.

There is a significant difference in the frequency
of overall appellate problems but not in the time

of overall appellate problems. Elementary school
principals in the low socioeconomic setting have a
higher frequency of appellate problems.

There is a significant difference between principals
in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
frequency of classroom supervision but not in the
time for classroom supervision. Elementary school
principals in the high socioeconomic setting have

a higher frequency of classroom supervision.

There is a significant difference between principals
in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
frequency of breach in policy (all of which included
student discipline only) but not in the time for
breach in policy. Elementary school principals in

the low socioeconomic setting have a higher

Albert Zackrie, Jra

frequency of breach in policy (student disciplinary
problems).

There are no significant differences between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socio-
economic settings in the kinds of educational
leadership activities.

There are no significant differences between elemen-
tary school principals in high and low socioeconomic

settings in the kinds of appellate problems.

Conclusions

Based on the results of the study, the researcher

made the following conclusions:

1.

Legal fiat, changes in theory, child growth and
development, the socioeconomic and environmental con-
ditions of the school, and the principal's philOSOphy
have some influences upon his educational leadership.
Appellate problems are inherent in the principalship
but the amount of appellate problems, to some

degree, is dependent upon the principal's edu—
cational leadership.

The organization and discharge of the duties of the
principal are dependent upon his understanding of

the job, his administrative preparation and experi-

ence, and the demands of his time from all levels.

A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF ACTIVITIES IN EDUCATIONAL
LEADERSHIP AND OF APPELLATE PROBLEMS OF ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL PRINCIPALS IN THE SAGINAW PUBLIC SCHOOL
SYSTEM AND THEIR VARIABILITY WITH THE

SCHOOL'S SOCIOECONOMIC SETTING

BY

Albert Zackrie, Jr.

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Elementary Education

1974

Dedicated to:
My wife, Carrie,
whose love, understanding, helpfulness and

cooperation made this study possible.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my deepest appreciation to
the many people who have assisted me in the successful
completion of my doctoral program.

I am most grateful to my lovely wife, Carrie, and
our two children, Quince and Stephanie. Their love,
inspiration and understanding have made the completion of
this endeavor possible. In my absence from home during the
1973-74 academic year they have been very strong and
efficient in taking care of family business and my
designated household chores. Quince took care of his mother
and sister just like he said he would. "Right on,"

Quince!

To Donald Nickerson, chairman of my doctoral
committee, and Louis Romano, Joseph McMillan, and Howard
Hickey, the other members of my committee, I am grateful
for their patience, understanding, guidance, interest,
concern, and support throughout my graduate studies, but
more specifically during the writing of my dissertation.

I could not have had a better committee to work with. I

like each of them because they are great educators and

iii

they have been very kind to me. I shall forever remember
them and forever consider them friends.

To my mother and father who first inspired me to
pursue a college education. They have assisted me in so
many ways throughout my career. I am very fond and proud
of them. I love them very much.

I am grateful to Robert Carr, a research con-
sultant, who willingly assisted me in the statistics
portion of my dissertation and showed interest in the work
I was doing.

To Wilson Celestine ("Uncle Wil") and Alice
Celestine ("Aunt Alice") who inspired and encouraged me.
They abundantly displayed their interest in my educational

endeavors.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES o o o o o o o o o o o o o Viii

LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . .

o Xiii
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Significance and Background of the Study . 4
Importance of the Study . . . . . . 4
Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . 6
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . 11
Limitations of the Study . . . . . . 12
Definitions of Terms . . . . . . . . 14
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . 23
What Is Leadership? . . . . . . . . 23
Process Leadership. . . . . . . . . 27
The Principal's Role as an Executive and
Educational Leader . . . . . . . . 28
What Is the Nature of Leadership? . . . 28
What Are the Duties and Scope of the
Principalship? . . . . . . . . 32
Attitude of Elementary School Principals
Toward Major Functions. . . . . . . 34
Leadership Functions in the Management of
Elementary Schools . . . . . . . . 36
Principles of Leadership. . . . . . . 45
What Are the Areas of Administrative
BehaVior? O O O O O O O O O O O 48

Chapter Page

What Are the Influences Which Affect

Educational Leadership? . . . . . . 54
A Principal's Philosophy . . . . . . 55
The Principal and the Curriculum. . . . 57
Two Basic Concepts. . . . . . . . 57

Leadership in Administering the
Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . 58

What Does an Administrator Know and Do

About Curriculum Improvement? . . . 60

An Approach to Curriculum Change. . . . 6S

In-service Education. . . . . . . . 66
Democratic Administration Is Basic to the

Principalship . . . . . . . . . 69

The Principal and Staff. . . . . . . 73

Developing Leadership to Its Fullest. . 73

Staff Utilization . . . . . . . . 76

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

I I I O METHODOLOGY I O O I O I O O O O O 8 0

Statement of Research Questions . . . . 80

Assumptions Underlying the Study. . . . 82

Design of the Study . . . . . . . . 83

Selection of Research Method . . . . 83

Sampling and Data Collection . . . . 84

IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . . 87

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 87

Question 1 . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Ques tion 2 O O O O O O O O I O O 9 4

Question 3 . . . . . . . . . . . 99

ones tion 4 O O O O O O O O O O O 119

Question 5 . . . . . . . . . . . 128

Question 6 . . . . . . . . . . . 129

V . SUMMARY , FINDINGS , AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . 132

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

Question 1 . . . . . . . . . . . 137

Question 2 . . . . . . . . . . . 139

vi

Chapter Page

Question 3 . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Question 4 . . . . . . . . . . 142
Question 5 o o o o o o o o o o o 144
Question 6 o o o o o o o o o o o 145
Findings 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 14 8
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . 152
Implications and Recommendations. . . . 152
Reflections. . . . . . . . . . . 155
BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1 5 8
APPENDICES
Appendix
A. Letters to the Superintendent of the Saginaw
Public School System. . . . . . . . 164
B. Letters to the Assistant Superintendent of
Elementary Education of the Saginaw
Public School System. . . . . . . . 166
C. Letters to the Participants . . . . . . 168
D. Data Instrument . . . . . . . . . . 170

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1.1. Origins of Principals' Problems in High and

Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . . 8
1.2. Principal's Attitude Toward His Major

Functions. . . . . . . . . . . . 35
1.3. Computation of Raw Frequency, Mean Fre-

quency, Raw Minutes, Mean Minutes and

Percent of Time Utilized in Activities

Listed and their Frequency for Principals

in a High Socioeconomic Setting . . . . 91

1.4. Computation of Raw Frequency, Mean Fre-
quency, Raw Minutes, Mean Minutes and
Percent of Time Utilized in Activities
Listed and their Frequency for Principals
in a Low Socioeconomic Setting. . . . . 92

1.5. Anova Table for Frequency of Overall Edu-
cational Leadership Activities for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

settings 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 9 3
1.6. Anova Table for Time of Overall Educational

Leadership Activities for Principals in

High and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . 93
1.7. Computation of Raw Frequency, Mean Fre-

quency, Raw Minutes, Mean Minutes and

Percent of Time Utilized in Activities

Listed and their Frequency for Principals

in a High Socioeconomic Setting . . . . 95

viii

Table

1.8.

1.9.

1.0.

1.1.1.

1.1.2.

1.1.3.

1.1.4.

1.1.5.

1.1.7.

1.1.3.

Page

Computation of Raw Frequency, Mean Frequency,
Raw Minutes, Mean Minutes and Percent of
Time Utilized in Activities Listed and
their Frequency for Principals in a Low
Socioeconomic Setting . . . . . . . 96

Anova Table for Frequency of Miscellaneous
Appellate Problems for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . 97

Anova Table for Time of Miscellaneous
Appellate Problems for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . 97

Anova Table for Frequency of Appellate
Problems for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings. . . . . . . 98

Anova Table for Time of Appellate Problems
for Principals in High and Low Socio-
economic Settings . . . . . . . . 99

Anova Table for Frequency of Curriculum
Organization for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . 101

Anova Table for Time of Curriculum
Organization for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . 101

Anova Table for Frequency of Instructional
Improvement for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . 102

Anova Table for Time of Instructional
Improvement for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . 103

Anova Table for Frequency of Classroom
Supervision for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . 104

Anova Table for Time of Classroom Super-

vision for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings. . . . . . . 105

ix

Table
1.1.9.

1.2.0.

1.2.2.

1.2.3.

1.2.4.

1.2.7.

1.2.9.

Page

Anova Table for Frequency of Examination and
Study of Printed Materials to Improve
Professionally for Self and Staff for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic
Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Anova Table for Time of Examination and
Study of Printed Materials to Improve
Professionally for Self and Staff for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic
Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Anova Table for Frequency of Maintaining
Order and Discipline for Principals in
High and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . 107

Anova Table for Time of Maintaining Order
and Discipline for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings. . . . . 108

Anova Table for Frequency of Providing
Adequate Facilities for Students, Staff
and Community for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . . 108

Anova Table for Time of Providing Adequate
Facilities for Students, Staff and
Community for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . . 109

Anova Table for Frequency of Coordinating
for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . . . 110

Anova Table for Time of Coordinating for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic
Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

Anova Table for Frequency of Reporting to
Superordinates for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings. . . . . 111

Anova Table for Time of Reporting to
Superordinates for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . . 112

Anova Table for Frequency of Reporting to
Subordinates for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . . 113

Table
1.3.0.

1.3.1.

1.3.2.

1.3.3.

1.3.4.

1.3.5.

1.3.6.

1.3.7.

1.3.9.

1.4.0.

Anova Table for Time of Reporting to
Subordinates for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . .

Anova Table for Frequency of Utilization
of Educational Resources of the Community
for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . . .

Anova Table for Time of Utilization of
Educational Resources of the Community
for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . . .

Anova Table for Frequency of Planning in
Advance for Staff Assignments for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic
Settings . . . . . . . . . . . .

Anova Table for Time of Planning in Advance
for Staff Assignments for Principals in
High and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . .

Anova Table for Frequency of Curriculum
Change and Improvement for Principals
in High and Low Socioeconomic Settings . .

Anova Table for Time of Curriculum Change
and Improvement for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings. . . . .

Anova Table for Frequency of Novel Conditions
for Principals in High and Low Socio-
economic Settings . . . . . . . . .

Anova Table for Time of Novel Conditions
for Principals in High and Low Socio-
economic Settings . . . . . . . . .

Anova Table for Frequency of Conflict of
Jurisdiction for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . .

Anova Table for Time of Conflict of

Jurisdiction for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . . .

xi

Page

113

114

115

116

116

117

118

120

121

121

122

Table Page

1.4.1. Anova Table for Frequency of Lack of
Clarity in Policy for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . 123

1.4.2. Anova Table for Time of Lack of Clarity in
Policy for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings. . . . . . . 123

1.4.3. Anova Table for Frequency of Breach in
Policy for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings. . . . . . . 124

1.4.4. Anova Table for Time of Breach in Policy
for Principals in High and Low Socio-
economic Settings . . . . . . . . 125

1.4.5. Anova Table for Frequency of Requests from
Superordinates for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . 125

1.4.6. Anova Table for Time of Requests from
Superordinates for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . . . 126

1.4.7. Anova Table for Frequency of Miscellaneous
Appellate Problems for Principals in
High and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . 127

1.4.8. Anova Table for Time of Miscellaneous

Appellate Problems for Principals in
High and Low Socioeconomic Settings . . 127

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
1. The Flow of Communication in the Psychological
Form of School Management . . . . . . . 71
2. The Flow of Communication in the Autocratic
. 71

Form of School Management . . . . . .

xiii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The elementary school principalship is by far the
most numerous of all posts in educational administration.
Many regard it as one of the most important. Whatever the
importance of the school superintendent, the high school
principal, or other administrators, it is no distortion to
assert that the elementary school principal holds a crucial
position in school organization. The quality of his
leadership influences in large measure the effectiveness of
the school environment in shaping the growth and develop-
ment of children during their formative years.1

The importance of the principal's leadership can
hardly be overstated. His position in the educational
system is uniquely strategic. He is the administrative
agent closest to the teachers and pupils in the school.

He is the educational agent in the position to be in

closest contact with the school community.‘ Consequently,

 

1Williard s. Elsbree, Harold J. McNally, and

Richard Wynn, Elementa Administration and Su ervision
(New York: American Boo? Company, Inc., I967}, p. 3.

’t.

1?-

he is the educational leader in the best position to exert
personal influence on the local school and its program.2

One of the most important tasks of the elementary
school principal is to provide leadership in curriculum
organization and instructional improvement.3 The elementary
school principal is thus faced with the primary task of
developing an organization in his school that will produce
better teaching. It should be pointed out that the
principal must lead his staff democratically for this
purpose among others, and he must help his teachers to
recognize their definite responsibilities for the education
of children.4

He must be truly an educator, seeing the great
needs which schools must meet in society, the purposes to
be served, the ways by which the school may accomplish its
functions. The unique needs of each child are his concern
and he must lead in the effort to adjust the school
activities to those needs. He must be able to work with
children, teachers, parents, and others, leading them,
teaching them, learning from them. But in all undertakings
to which he lends his efforts he must keep the primary

goals of education in View and suffer no school activity

 

2 3

Ibid., p. 57. Ibid., p. 71.

4Albert H. Shuster and Wilson F. Wetzler, Leader-

shi in Elementary School Administration and Su ervision
(Boston: Houghton MiffIin Company, I958}, p. 35.

 

 

to lack direction in terms of the proper ends for a school
to seek.5

Until the principal goes beyond the performance of
his routine duties he may not achieve that level of pro-
fessional greatness which is characterized by constant
thought and attention to everyday work coupled with an
ability to move his educational program forward by solving
problems in an ever-changing society. The principal must
admittedly be concerned with doing his job, but he should
also seek to understand certain basic considerations of his
position in order to set educational goals for an ever-
improved school situation.6

It has been stated that the organization and dis-
charge of the duties of the principal will depend upon his
understanding of the job, his administrative preparation
and experience, and the demands of his time from all levels.
An unfavorable combination of these factors may cause him
to spend his school day in a rather routine, slave-like
fashion. As an office manager he may (or may not) receive
high commendation, while his educational efforts and

leadership may leave much to be desired.7

 

5Harlan L. Hagman, Administration of Elementary
Schools (New York: McGraw-HiII Book Company, Inc., 1956),

p. 3.

 

6Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., p. 2.

71bid., p. 54.

It is a myth that there is one right way to lead.
The kind of leadership that is necessary will vary with the
time, the personalities involved, and the tasks to be

accomplished.8
Significance and Background of the Study

Importance of the Study

 

Counterpunching for the elementary school principal
consists of responding to requests, appeals, demands, and
complaints of the many people who look to him as the
school's ultimate decision maker. Counterpunching suggests
reaction rather than action, and struggle for survival
rather than growth.

A certain amount of counterpunching is inherent in
the principal's role. He cannot retreat to an ivory tower,
refusing to deal with the less glamorous problems of
everday school life. Too many principals have the opposite
problem: They become so enmeshed in the day-to-day problems
that they are unable to perform the critical tasks of
leadership. A principal severely afflicted by the counter-
punching syndrome is dealing almost entirely with issues
raised by others, each of whom is concerned with only a
part of the school operation or with his own personal

interests. When a principal responds only to issues raised

 

8Emery Stoops and Russell E. Johnson, Elementary
School Administration (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1967),
Po 28.

 

by others, his actions become random movements in terms of

the school program as a whole.9

The primary responsibility of the elementary
principal in the 19705 must be one of an educational

10

leader. If he is to survive in the next decade, he must

reject the concept that his primary role is one of "keeping

11

school." The "manager-housekeeper" concept of the role

of the principalship must give way to that of the "edu-

cational leader and statesman."12 He must become the edu-

cational leader of his faculty and staff.13
This study has procured information regarding the
activities in educational leadership and non-educational
leadership of elementary school principals in the Saginaw
Public Schools. A study of this nature had not been done

in that particular school system. It should be of monumental

importance to the total school system; more specifically to

 

9Ray Cross, "The Principal As a Counterpuncher,"
The National Elementary Principal, Vol. LI, No. 2 (Washing-
ton, D.5.: The National Association of Elementary School
Principals, October, 1971), p. 27.

10Raloy E. Brown, "Humanizing the Role of the Ele-
mentary School Principal," The National Elementary Principal,
Vol. XLIX, No. 5 (Washington, D.C.: The National AssocI2
ation of Elementary School Principals, April, 1970), p. 24.

111bid., p. 25.

12James B. Burr, William H. Coffield, T. J. Johnson,
and Ross L. Neagley, Elementar School Administration
(Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., I, p. vii.

13Cross, op. cit., p. 25.

the superintendent of schools, the assistant superintendent
of elementary schools and the principals themselves in view
of the fact that elementary school principals who are
counterpunching most of the time are not exercising their
educational leadership abilities to their fullest and in
view of the impact effective educational leadership on the
part of elementary school principals has on the educational
process. This study will serve as an indicator of the
state of affairs which should create some interest in the
improvement of educational leadership of elementary school
principals and hopefully it will yield more insight into the

process of educational leadership.

Purpose of the Stugy
The results of two recent studies on the problems
of elementary school principals suggest that many principals

14'15 Both studies

may be counterpunching most of the time.
viewed elementary school principals within a problem/
decision framework. These studies had several foci, but

each documented the origins of principals' problems

 

14The National Elementarngrincipal, Vol. LI,
No. 2, October I971, p. 27, quoted in (orgwcited by") Ray
Cross and Vernon Bennett, "Problem Situations Encountered
by School Principals in Different Socio-Economic Settings
(a paper presented at the American Educational Research
Association, February 8, 1969, Los Angeles, California).

15The National Elementary Principal, Vol. LI,
No. 2, OctoBer I97I, p. 27, quoted in Tar cited by") Ray
Cross, "A Description of Decision Making Patterns of Ele-
mentary School Principals” (in process).

according to three categories for executive decision
discussed by Chester I. Barnard in his classic book on
administration. Barnard suggests that administrative
problems can be classified in terms of three distinct
origins.

One occasion for administrative decision is upon
receipt of instructions from, or general requirements of,
superior authority. Administrative problems of this type
are classified as intermediary problems.

A second occasion for decision is when a case is
referred to the administrator by subordinates in the
organization. Such occasions may arise from the inability
or unwillingness of the subordinate to make a decision,
from novel conditions, conflict of jurisdication, or lack
of clarity in policy. Such issues referred to principals
by teachers, pupils, and parents, are classified as appellate
problems.

The third and final occasion for decision originates
with the administrator. His own understanding of a situ-
ation leads him to decide whether something ought to be
done or corrected. According to Barnard, such occasions
are the most significant indicators of administrative
effectiveness, since it is the administrator's most

important obligation to raise those issues that no one can

cu'will. When such activities are initiated by the
principal, they are classified as creative problems.16

In one of the two studies mentioned earlier, Cross
and Bennett explored the nature of the elementary school
principals' problems and their variability with the
school's socioeconomic setting:

Table l.l.--Origins of Principals' Problems in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

High Socioeconomic Low Socioeconomic
Problem Setting % Setting %
Origin of Problems of Problems
Appellate 41 61
Intermediary 6 7
Creative 53 32

‘

These data indicate that, taken as a whole,
Principals of schools in low socioeconomic communities are
Particularly burdened with appellate problems. As one might
exPect, it appears that appellate problems "drive out"
Creative problems, since principals in "high" settings had
53 Percent creative problems and principals in "low"
settings had only 32 percent creative problems. Neither
groUmbwas often confronted with intermediary problems--

6 Percent for principals in "high" settings and 7 percent
\_

N 16The National Elementarerrincipal, Vol. LI,

Co. 2, OctoBer I97I, p. 27, quoted in (or—“cited by”)
heSter I. Barnard, TheFunctions of the Executive
(Cambridge: Harvard University ress, .

for principals in "low" settings. Thus, if we accept
intermediary and appellate problems as instances of counter-
punching, principals of schools in low socioeconomic
settings were counterpunching on 68 percent of their
problems, and principals of schools in high socioeconomic
settings on only 47 percent of theirs.

An interesting sidelight of this study is the large
volume of problems that confronted the principals each day.
Principals in both high and low socioeconomic settings
worked with an average of approximately 100 problems a day.
Thus, the percentages mentioned above are fairly accurate
indicators of problems frequently in raw numbers.17

A study still in progress has reinforced the above
findings. In this study, it was found that a group of
principals in inner-city elementary schools had a problem
origin distribution of 68 percent appellate, 12 percent
intermediary, and 20 percent creative. This very closely
parallels the percentage distribution for principals in
"low" settings in the first study mentioned. It should not
be assumed that the socioeconomic level of the school's
community completely controls the origins of the principal's
problems. It is neither possible nor desirable for
principals to avoid appellate and intermediary problems

completely.18

 

17Cross and Bennett, op. cit., p. 27.

18Cross, op. cit., p. 28.

10

According to the aforementioned studies made in
regard to elementary school principals within a problem/
decision framework and the nature of the elementary school
principals' problems and their variability with the
school's socioeconomic setting, principals of schools in
low socioeconomic communities are particularly burdened with
appellate problems. Educational leadership is the princi-
pal's greatest responsibility and if he desires an effective
educational program, he must exhibit effective educational
leadership.

The purpose of this study was to explore, investi-
gate, identify and describe the following: (1) the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in the
execution of educational leadership activities, (2) the
amount of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30
p.m.) that elementary school principals in high and low
socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School System
utilize in working with appellate problems, (3) the differ-
ences, if any, between elementary school principals in
high and low socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public
School System in the amount of time utilized during a
normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) per educational
leadership activity, (4) the differences, if any, between
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic

settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount

11

of time utilized during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--
4:30 p.m.) per appellate problem, (5) the differences, if
any, between elementary school principals in high and low
socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School System
in the kinds of activities in educational leadership
executed by them, and (6) the differences, if any, between
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of appellate problems experienced by them.

In this study, the intermediary problems are con-
sidered appeallate problems and creative problems are

synonymous to educational leadership activities.

Statement of the Problem

A certain amount of counterpunching is inherent in
the principal's role. He cannot retreat to an ivory tower,
refusing to deal with the less glamorous problems of every-
day school 1ife. Too many principals have the opposite
problem: They become so enmeshed in the day-to-day
problems that they are unable to perform the critical tasks
of leadership. A principal severely afflicted by the
counterpunching syndrome is dealing almost entirely with
issues raised by others, each of whom is concerned with
only part of the school operation or with his own personal

interests. When a principal responds only to issues

12

raised by others, his actions become random movements in

terms of the school program as a whole.19

The primary responsibility of the elementary
principal in the 19703 must be one of an educational
leader.20 If he is to survive in the next decade, he must

reject the concept that his primary role is one of "keeping

21

school." The "manager-housekeeper" concept of the

principalship must give way to that of the "educational

"22 He must become the educational

23

leader and statesman.

leader of his faculty and staff.

Limitations of the Study

This study included ten (10) of the twenty-nine
(29) elementary principals in the Saginaw Public School
System in high and low socioeconomic settings. Direct
observation of the participants was the method used in
ascertaining the state of affairs or "What exists?" with
regard to the proportion of activities in educational
leadership and noneducational leadership (appellate

problems) of elementary school principals in high and low

 

19Cross, op. cit., p. 27.

20Brown, op. cit., p. 24.

211bid., p. 25.

22Burr, op. cit., p. vii.

23Brown, op. cit., p. 25.

13

socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School System
during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.). This study
did not seek to account for the occurrence of the state of
affairs. This study is essentially descriptive in nature
since the objective is to describe rather than to explain a
phenomenon. This study is predicated on the fact that it is
essentialto know "where we are and what we have done" in
order to know "where we desire to go and what we want to
accomplish." Describing the current status is a kind of
inventory and assessment which seems to be the basic,
preliminary step to the solution of many educational
problems.

Being an observer added a limitation to the study.
A very small number of the ten (10) principals appeared to
be a little apprehensive about engaging in or performing
certain activities during the initial stage (first few
minutes) of the first observation, even after the nature
and mechanics of the study were unequivocally stated by the
researcher. However, after a few minutes of the first day
each principal relaxed and proceeded to take care of the
school business at hand. This apprehensive, minority group
of principals was curious as to what specifically was the
researcher looking for. This was not revealed because of
its possible effect (bias) on the data. The researcher
carefully guarded against the data being skewed in any
direction, positively or negatively. The fact that the

researcher was specifically investigating their activities

14

in educational leadership and experiences with appellate
problems was not shared with them. However, they were
informed that the researcher would document all activities
in which they engaged themselves and the amount of time
spent in each activity. As far as the researcher could
tell, the apprehension on the part of this small group of
principals had no negative effect on the study. Not being
able to reveal the scope of the study to the participants
was a limitation but it was certainly advantageous to the
purpose of the study.

Each participant was called at least twenty-four
(24) hours in advance to confirm his presence in the building
for the scheduled observation. This added another limita-
tion. If a principal was scheduled to be out of his
building to attend an administrative council meeting, ele-
mentary principals meeting, or any other meeting that
necessitated his absence from the building for two (2) or
three (3) hours, no observation was scheduled. This was an
important factor considered and given significant attention
for fear, again, that bias would be introduced and in-

evitably enter the data.

Definition of Terms
a. Appellate Problems--An occasion for decision is
when a case referred to the administrator by sub-
ordinates in the organization. Such occasions may

arise from the inability or unwillingness of the

15

subordinate to make a decision, from novel con-
ditions, conflict of jurisdiction, or lack of
clarity in policy. Such issues referred to
principals by teachers, pupils, and parents, are

classified as appellate problems.24

b. Countegpunching--Counterpunching for the elementary
principal consists of responding to requests,
appeals, demands and complaints of the many people
who look to him as the school's ultimate decision
maker. Counterpunching suggests reaction rather
than action, and struggle for survival rather than

growth.25

c. Creative Problemgé—An occasion for decision origi-
nates with the administrator. His own under-
standing of a situation leads him to decide whether
something ought to be done or corrected. Such
occasions are the most significant indicators of
administrative effectiveness, since it is the
administrator's most important obligation to raise

those issues that no one can or will. When such

 

24Barnard, op. cit., p. 27.

25Ray Cross, "The Principal As a Counterpuncher,"
The National Elementary Principal, Vol. II, No. 2 (Washing-
ton, D.C.: The National Association of Elementary School
Principals, October 1971), p. 27.

16

activities are initiated by the principal, they are

classified as creative problems.26

d. Curriculum--The curriculum is a selection of
experiences which the school as a social system
influences significantly and which learners enact
and undergo in the process of their deliberate
induction into the culture.27 Curriculum today
is viewed as extending far beyond the confines of a
comprehensive body of subject matter to be mastered.
Curriculum involves all of youth's activities within

28 The

the school and in the community as well.
design of the curriculum must be a function of the
entire environment of the child, not just that of
the school and the generalized aspects of culture.
It must include out-of-school activities. Recre-
ation, health, creative activities, home and
adjustment, and the like, should be taken into
account quite as much as problem-solving and work

situations in the classroom.29

 

26Barnard, op. cit., p. 27.

27Kenneth D. Benne and Bozidar Muntyan, Human
Relations in Curriculum Change (New York: The Dryaen
Press, Inc., I951), p.'5.

28Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., p. 38.

29Leadershipgin Elementary School Administration
and Supervision, quoted in (orfi cited by“) Harold Rugge, e.,
Democracy and the Curriculum, Third Yearbook of the John
Dewey Society (New Yofk: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.,
1939)! p0 418.

17

e. Educational Program--The educational program is
taken to mean educational experiences organized by
the school administrative unit for the purpose of

attaining specified educational objectives.30

f. Elementary School Administrator--Elementary school
administrator denotes the person who stimulates,
maintains, and unifies the energies within the
elementary school in order to realize predetermined
objectives. Administrators fulfill such roles by
executing policies related to the organization,
allocation, and coordination of human and material
resources. In this context, the term administrator
includes all specific titles of administrative
positions, such as headmaster, supervisor, coordi-

nator, assistant principal, or principal.31

g. Functional Leaders--Functional leaders are oper-
ational. Functional leaders are those who are
acknowledged and accepted by a group whether or not

he holds a status position.32

 

30William B. Castetter and Helen R. Burchell, Edu-
cational Administration and the Improvement of Instruction
TDanville: Tfie Interstate Printers and Publishers, Inc.,
1967), p. 1.

31Fred A. Snyder and Duane R. Peterson, D namics of
Elementa School Administration (Boston: Houghton MiffIin

Company, I970), p. ix.

32Vivienne Anderson and Daniel R. Davis, Patterns
of Educational Leadership (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,
Inc., I956), p. 19.

18

In-Service Education--In-service education for

 

teachers refers to those activities which are
carried on within a school, a school district, or
which are provided by other agencies which help
teachers improve their teaching-learning compe-

tencies while on the job.33

Instruction--Instruction is best described as the

 

activity which takes place primarily in the class-
room or some other suitable place under the guidance

of someone called a teacher.34

Intermediary Problems-~An occasion for adminis-

 

trative decision is upon receipt of instructions
from, or general requirements of, superior authority.
Administrative problems of this type are classified

as intermediary problems.3S

Leadershipr-Leadership for the principal of the

 

elementary school may be stated as follows: edu-
cational leadership focuses attention on the
advancement of the group toward more insight, better
understanding, and clearer definitions of edu-
cational goals, plus the initiating of action-

activities that promise reasonable achievement of

 

h.
i.
j.
k.
33
34
(Canada:

Stoops and Johnson, op. cit., p. 386.

Elliot W. Eisner, Confrontin Curriculum Reform
Little, Brown and Company, Inc., I97I), p. I26.

35Barnard, op. cit., p. 37.

19

these goals.36

Leadership is a quality of group
activity; it is the contribution that an individual
makes in a group situation. A group and leadership
are mutually dependent: A person cannot be a leader
apart from the group, and a group must have leader-
ship. Unity must be established, otherwise the

group remains a chaotic collection of individuals.37

1. Roles--Roles are the dynamic aspects of the
positions, offices and statuses within an insti-
tution.38 Roles have certain obligations and
responsibilities which may be termed role expecta-
tions, and when the role incumbent puts these
obligations and responsibilities into effect he is

said to be performing his role.39

m. Status Leaders--Status leaders occupy positions of
authority. Status leaders have titles such as
chairman, mayor, president, superintendent, or

principal. It is possible that such persons may be

36Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., p. 6.

37Stoops and Johnson, op. cit., p. 29.

38The School Principal, quoted in (or "cited by")
Ralph Linton, The Study of Man (New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts, Inc.,—1936). p. 14.

 

39The School Principal, quoted in (or "cited by")
Jacob W. GetzeIs, Administrative Theory in Education
(Chicago: Midwest AdministratiOn Center, The University of
Chicago, 1958), p. 153.

20

accepted as leaders by the group only by virtue of
the position which they hold. In other words,
fellowship may result only or largely because of
fear of the authority which is vested in the

nominal leader.4O

Smpervision--The Dictionary of Education defines
supervision as all efforts of designated school
officials directed toward providing leadership to
teachers and other educational workers in the

improvement of instruction.41

Higm Socioeconomic Settinge-High socioeconomic

setting is characterized by socioeconomic factors

that are above the median. All factors that fall

above the median are considered high socioeconomic

factors. These factors are as follows:

1. average family income

2. percent of families with incomes below the
poverty level

3. average value of houses

4. percent of housing units occupied by renters

5. average number of persons in occupied housing

units

 

4oStoops and Johnson, op. cit., p. 29.

41Elsbree, op. cit., p. 139.

21

6. child (under 18 years old):

a.

9.

child of head of household
family

child of head of household
male head

child of head of household
female head

child is other relative of
wife-family

child is other relative of
with female head

child is other relative of
with male head

other

in husband-wife

in family with

in family with

head in husband-

head in family

head in family

7. population 25 years old and over:

a.

b.

that have completed high school

that have completed college

8. percentile score--attitude toward school

p. Low Socioeconomic Settinge-Low socioeconomic

setting is characterized by socioeconomic factors

that are below the median.

All factors that fall

below the median are considered low socioeconomic

factors.

Summary

The importance of the school principalship cannot

be overstated.

The principal is in a strategic position to

22

effect many positive changes in the school and community.
He is in close contact with children and adults and his
leadership can have overwhelming influence on them. This
is one of the reasons why his educational leadership is so
important. His educational leadership in curriculum
organization and instructional improvement is important.

"It is good to know the state of affairs." The
importance of the study is the achievement of an assessment
of the present activities of the administrators selected to
participate in the study. For it is wise to know what we
have done and what we are doing and let this serve as a
basis for planning improvements.

The purpose of the study was to explore and investi-
gate the activities of elementary school principals in
educational leadership and their eXperiences with appellate
problems. If principals cannot exercise their educational
leadership to its fullest because they are "counterpunching"
too much, then they have a problem. The problem is insuffi-

cient educational leadership.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

What Is Leadership?

"Leadership" does not result because a person
possesses a magical combination of traits or character-
istics. For a number of years, efforts were made to
describe leaders by saying that they were resourceful,
forthright, energetic, dependable, clear-eyed, and physi-
cally attractive. So far as can be determined by research,
there is little relationship between such traits and
leadership ability.

It is important to distinguish between those who
occupy positions of authority and those who are "oper-
ational” leaders. It is customary to speak of the former
as "status” leaders and the latter as "functional" leaders.
Status leaders have titles such as chairman, mayor,
president, superintendent, or principal. It is possible
that such persons may be accepted as leaders by the group
only by virtue of the position which they hold. In other
words, fellowship may result only or largely because of
fear of the authority which is vested in the nominal

leader.

23

24

A "functional" leader is one who is acknowledged and
accepted by a group whether or not he holds a status
position. A status leader may become a functional leader,
but not necessarily so. When a person acquires a status
position, he does not automatically gain functional leader-
ship. Some status leaders never achieve it. Some acquire
it with great difficulty. In all cases it must be earned
and deserved. Thus the administrator who is seeking to
develop leadership within his staff must first win genuine
respect for his own leadership abilities and his leadership
must be derived from function rather than status alone.

Research shows that functional leaders have several
capacities which distinguish them from others. Adminis-
trators who are attempting to build responsible leadership
within their staffs can benefit by develOping these
capacities in themselves and in staff members to the maximum
degree:

1. Functional leaders know how to work cooperatively

with otherg. They think unselfishly of the "team" of

 

people with whom they are working. They do not monopolize
the limelight, for this is unfair and detrimental to others
in the group.

2. They know how to keep the gropp's effort pointed
toward a mutually acceptedrgogl. They take pains to point
out the progress being made so that the members of the
group have a sense of accomplishment rather than frustra-

tion. They tactfully indicate the efforts of various

25

individuals and the cooperation of the staff which have
brought about this progress.

3. They appear to have a higmly developed sense of
integriry. One study made at Stanford University went even
further and showed that a group of leaders ranked high in
terms of moral values. In any event, the functional
leader's behavior is guided by a clear set of ethical and
moral values which agree closely with those of his co-
workers.

4. Functional leaders are not conservative "stuff
shirts." They have ideas. They rank high in creativity.
They are quick to sense the ever-changing ebb and flow of
forces and needs within the group and are flexible to those
changes.

5. They_know how to listen and interpret the wishes
and the needs of the group they serve. They keep in close
touch with group members. Their thinking and speaking
reflect the group's thoughts and feelings. Hence, they
come to be recognized as spokesmen for the group.

6. They symbolize the group's appirations as to cem-
ductL_dress bearing, and general behavior.

Leadership behavior is not a single, unitary
phenomenon. Its manisfestations vary with the demands of
the moment and of the setting. It is now known, for
example, that the kind of leadership shown by a functional

leader may be determined in no small part by the expectancy

26

and concepts of leadership held by the group which he
serves.1

Current and traditional studies of leadership
propose models of leadership which fall into three general
categories: (1) leadership as a unitary personality
trait, (2) leadership as comprised of a constellation of
personality traits, and (3) interaction theories where
variables of personality, group, and situation are held to
account for the kind of leadership needed and/or exer-
cised.2

Fundamental to functional leadership is an attitude
which sees leadership as existing primarily to serve the
purpose of the organization and group with whom the leader
is working. School administrators with this attitude do
not seek their own aggrandizement. Instead they exhibit
self-sacrifice and devoted service to education and to the
staff members with whom they work. This attitude contin-
ually focuses attention upon the achievements of those who
expend productive effort and upon the goals of good edu-

cation.3

 

1Vivienne Anderson and DanielR. Davies, Patterns of
Educational Leadershi§_(Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,
Inc. ' I556Y' pp.*19_7 o

2Aase Eriksen and Judith Messina, "The Dynamics of
Leadership in an Informal School," Journal of Research and
Development in Education, Vol. V, No. 3 (ColIege ofiEdu-
cation, Uhiversity of Georgia, Spring 1972), 30.

 

3Anderson and Davies, op. cit., p. 23.

27

Process Leadership

Process leadership is not totally unlike some of
the current leadership models. It has particular relevance
for those theories which cite the need to look to group
composition and situational and task components to find the
kind of leadership necessary. Interaction theory, for
example, deals with the variables of the personality of the
leader and of group members, situational components, and
the structure of interpersonal relations within the
group, all of which process leadership takes into account.
And yet, it is more than this, for the concept of process
leadership is an attempt to deal with the subject in a
holistic fashion, rather than break it down into specific
elements of personality and/or group characteristics, the
idea being that the whole is more than the sum of its
parts. Such a holistic approach is necessary to account
for the functions of leadership in a school which views its
prime responsibility the development of complete and capable
human beings and a concern with the total quality of the

school community.4

 

4Eriksen, op. cit., p. 31.

28

The Principal's Role astan Executive
gmd EducationaI’Leader

What Is the Nature
33-55adershiET_-_—

There should be no line of separation between the
terms "executive" and "educational" leader.5 He does not
acquire his leadership by virtue of his title; he gains his
status by positive achievement. His leadership abilities
are recognized through what he has done in the past, what
he is doing for his school now, and how he plans and moves
forward toward future educational goals.6

Apparently the principal gains leadership status by
being able to make a contribution to his school in these
positive and definite ways, as the goals of the school are
being met. The principal is an active member of his group,
willing to take his place among his fellow group partici-
pants.7

The continuing central purpose of the supervisory

role in the educational organization has been the improvement

 

sLeadershipin Elementary School Administration and
Sufiervision, quoted in (or "citedBy‘T Vivienne Anderson

an Danie R. Davies, Patterns of Educational Leadershi
(Englewood Cliffs: Prentice—Hall, Inc., I956), p. 25.

6Leadershipin Elementa School Administration and
Su ervision, quoted in (or "citeH By") W. J. Tfiompson, "The
rincipal as an Executive," The School Executive, Vol. 72
(September 1952), p. 95.

 

 

 

7Leadershrpin Elementary School Administration and
Supervision, quoted by (or'citedby‘) Howard Lane and Mary
BeauChamp, Human Relations in Teachin (Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-HaII, Inc., 1955), p. 25I.

29

of the teaching-learning process. The popular professional
ideology characterizes the supervisor as helper and facili-
tator, and stresses activities manifestly performed to
coordinate human and material resources and to foster a
favorable teaching-learning process. Not the least among
these manifest supervisory functions is the nurturance of
goal-oriented teacher behavior in a social mileau of
mutually supportive relationships.8 He may understand more
about the mechanics of administering his school and have
superior training in classroom supervision, enabling him

to appraise teaching performance for improving skills, but
unless he knows how to work with his staff and keep his
educational program moving forward he is not a true leader.
The meaning of the leadership role as it may be played by
the modern elementary school principal unfolds in wider and
deeper ways as he approaches his job with more under-
standings as to why the school exists and in what ways he
may specifically coordinate efforts toward group goals.

The point here is that effective principals are
leaders who are sensitive to the changing conditions of
their groups and flexible in adapting their behavior to new
requirements. Therefore, procedures for selecting and

preparing principals should take into consideration such

 

8Donald J. Willower, "Some Functions of the Super-
visory Role in Educational Organizations," Education
(Appleton: Van Rooy Printing Company, February I972),
p. 67.

30

characteristics in sensitivity and readiness to take on or
give up responsibilities in response to changing con-
ditions.9

Certain ways of thinking about educational adminis-
tration in the elementary school may improve administrative
behavior. That is, the principal is better equipped to lead
his staff when he can actually draw from these areas of
administrative behavior ideas and suggestions to be
translated into positive, dynamic leadership skills or
action.

If personal qualities of leadership take on meaning
largely in terms of a given situation, the principal knows
the true nature of leadership as he becomes sensitive to
and ready for certain techniques and devices for producing
results. In addition, he is also sensitive and ready to
develop and use the leadership abilities of other personnel
when he realizes that their personal qualities can contri-
bute more than his own in a given situation. Real leader-
ship comes about as the principal is able to recognize when
to exert personal leadership in the overall educational

program of his school.10

 

9Leadership in Elementary School Administration and
Supervision, quotediin (or—“cited 5y") Dorwin Cartwright
and Alvin fender (eds.), Grou Dynamics Research and Theory
(Evanston: Row Peterson and Company, 1953), p. 538.

 

loAlbert H. Shuster and Wilson F. Wetzler, Leadership
in Elemenrgry School Adminierration and Supervision
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1959), p. 6.

31

Davis11 summarizes the nature of leadership by
asserting that three major factors must be considered in
the study of leadership: (1) the situation, (2) the people
that are involved in the situation, and (3) the character-
istics of personal qualities of the leader. To be effective
the principal's leadership depends upon his ability and
courage to face the facts in the situation, interpret the
facts properly in light of the situation's requirements and
follow the course of action they dictate.

Effective leadership by the modern elementary

school principal demands the following:

1. An acceptance of the concept that education is for
all the people. Active cooperation by school staff
and community people, led by the principal, is
needed to keep the emphasis on the community
school.

2. More emphasis upon social education. The elementary
school should provide some reference values leading
to a fuller development of a philosophy of life
for all children. The principal will emphasize
pupil participation in solving problems as the
optimum means of developing proper behavior

patterns.

11Leadershrprin ElementaryrSchool Administration and
W' q‘mtea in T” fci—ted bY 5 RaIPH C- Davis. Tfie

un amenta s of Top Management (New York: Harper and
BrOt era, 3 pp. - o

32

3. A kind of education of people to accept the in-
evitability of change. As the principal under-
stands and accepts this obligation, he must help
his community to depend on tradition for going
beyond into new areas of challenge. His most
difficult leadership task will be to get people to
take these steps which are already at the core of

democracy and are the goals of a free society.12

What Are the Duties and Scope
Wrincipaiship? “

Only a few brief references are made here to suggest
the scope of his administrative responsibilities.

First a description of typical activities in a
principal's workday will furnish some concept of his total
job.

1. Held conference with a teacher who is involved in a
system—wide study of curriculum problems for the
elementary schools.

2. Conferred with the supervisor of music who is
planning a music festival for the school.

3. Wrote the chairman of the Board of Education in
response to his request to student and faculty
policies in regard to use of playground equipment

after school hours.

 

12Leadership in Elementary School Administration and
Su ervision, quoted in (or "cited by“)~Clyde M. CampbeII,
racticil Application of Democratic Administration (New
YorE: Harper andifirothers, 1952). PP. 19:26.

 

33

4. Analyzed an article sent in by a teacher requesting
evaluative comments.

5. Had a meeting with the student government concerning
policies of conduct on school buses.

6. Met with the chairman of the guidance program to
work out schedules for testing for various grades
during the semester.

This list of daily activities engaged in by the
principal will indicate a great extension. It would be
impossible to describe here the range of duties and tasks
followed daily by the majority of principals. However, an
analysis of the typical day in the office of the principal
will reveal that in addition to certain routine clerical
tasks, he is dealing primarily with problems concerning
persons.

Second, the listing of the leadership duties of the
principal will indicate more specifically the range of
educational activities included in the role of the ele-
mentary school principal.13 According to a recent study,
these leadership duties are:

1. To improve professionally for self and staff.

2. To improve classroom instruction.

3. To build and improve the program of studies.
4. To maintain order and discipline.

5. To grow on the job.

 

l3Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., pp. 10-11.

34

6. To maintain strong community relations.
7. To provide adequate facilities.

8. To develop professional ethics and strong relations
with staff and supervisors. 4

The principal can make a list of duties and tasks
required for the effective management of his school;
research studies will assist him in understanding what he
should expect to do as principal for efficient control.
Until he has acquired effective leadership skills, however,
his position may be only that of a highly paid clerical
person who demonstrates good organization in conducting
certain school tasks. Leadership is the key to successful

school administration.15

Attitude 9f Elementary_School Principals
Toward Major Functions

The following summarizes the opinions of Michigan
principals about what they believed to be their most
rewarding duty, the area in which they spend the greatest
amount of time, and the area in which they would most like
to spend more time.

Most principals, 59.33 percent, are spending a

majority of time organizing and managing their schools. No

 

14Leadershipin Elementary School Administration and

Supervision, quoted in (or “cited by") A. Granger, "Wfiat is

t e Ro e o the Principal as Faculty Leader?" National

Association of Secondar School Principals BulIetin, Vol.
38 (ApriI, I954), p. I59.

15

 

 

Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., p. 11.

35

Table l.2.--Principal's Attitude Toward His Major Functions.

 

 

 

 

 

Most Most Desire to
Rewarding Time Spend More
Area Spent Time
N % N % N %
Organization and
management 195 20.70 569 59.33 28 2.87
Periodic classroom
teaching 37 3.93 6 .63 44 4.50
Working with the
teaching staff 247 26.22 124 12.93 242 24.77
Pupil adjustment
and guidance 197 20.91 118 12.30 94 9.62
Program development
and curriculum 169 17.94 59 6.15 392 40.12
Public relations 97 10.30 83 8.65 41 4.20

Present time

Allotment
Satisfactory 136 13.92

 

36

one area was found to be overwhelmingly the most personally
rewarding duty, although one in four reporting indicated his
work with the teaching staff as rewarding. Forty percent,
or 392 principals, reported a desire to spend more time in
program development and curriculum, while only 14 percent
indicated that they were satisfied with their present time
allotment.

Michigan principals aspire to activities more
directly connected with the improvement of instruction.
Polled principals reported that they would prefer to give

more time to program development and curriculum.16

peadership_Functions in the Management of
Elementaryfschools

Fred A. Snyder and Duane R. Peterson describe the
leadership functions of principals in the management of
elementary schools as follows:

pirectimg--Directing is a leadership function and
is related to the school's organizational structure. In
the final analysis, directing means accountability for the
human element in the organization. In any formal organi-
zation of human effort, there are both leaders and followers.
Without the directing functions of the leadership role, the

organization cannot achieve its objectives.

 

16James M. Jennings, The Elementary Principal in
Michi an (Lansing: Michigan Association of Elementary
Sc 00 Principals, March 1, 1972), pp. 32-33.

37

To understand the leadership role, one must be able
to distinguish among directorship, dictatorship, and
manipulatorship in the management of elementary schools.
There are behavioral as well as perceptual differences
among these types of leadership roles. Consider first, how
differently the director, dictator, and manipulator perceive
their respective functions. It becomes immediately apparent
that the distinctions lie in the decision-making process.
The director implements the decisions made through inter-
action of the organization's members; the dictator imple-
ments the decisions which he has made himself; and the
manipulator implements the decisions which the group has
selected, but only those decisions for which he has
previously planted the seeds.

In terms of behavior, the director might be
described as democratic, idiographic, and nondirective,
because he includes others in important decisions and shows
concern for the people in his organization. He appears to
be nondirective primarily because of the support his sub-
ordinates offer. The dictator, on the other hand, usually
lacks the support of his followers, since they are not
invited to express their opinions in the decision-making
process, and so is forced into a behavior pattern which is
autocratic, nomothetic, and very directive. The manipu-
lator's behavior indicates that he would like to be per-
ceived by others as being democratic, idiographic, and

nondirective, but in circumstances where he is not

38

successful in manipulating his decisions, he will often
resort to dictatorial behavior to obtain his goals. It is
readily apparent that the director would be the most
acceptable leader in our American culture and society.

Coordinatimg--The function of coordinating in the
elementary school is a process of synchronizing and unifying
human resources for the purpose of attaining common
objectives. Obviously coordinating overlaps all of the
other functions. Coordination is perhaps the best single
word to describe the function of an elementary school
administrator. The following list summarizes the coordi-
nating functions:

1. Working with line officers in the school system.

2. Acting as an interpreter of district policies
and procedures.

3. Working with resource representatives and agencies.

4. Participating in district level meetings.

5. Using district resources.

6. Using legal information.

7. Working with commercial organizations, parents,
professional associations, governmental agencies,
institutions of higher education, book companies,
and other organizations which maintain interests in
the school.

8. Developing and utilizing local policies.

9. Devising organizational planning.

10. Using forms and records.

11.
12.
l3.
14.

15.

16.

17.

18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

39

Using human-relations techniques.

Using committees.

Using community material and human resources.
Serving as an agent of change in the school system.
Using the office as an informational and dispatching
center.

Assembling and organizing information.

Organizing the evaluation of the instructional
program.

Using standard measures of pupil achievement.
Arranging working schedules of staff.

Assisting with staff selection.

Orienting staff members.

Arranging programs of in-service education.
Organizing staff meetings.

Organizing for the identification and referral of
students with special needs.

Organizing pupil counseling services.

Developing and utilizing curriculum procedures.
Using curriculum consultant services.

Organizing the staff for study of curriculum
content and experience.

Organizing and evaluating the school's safety
program.

Evaluating the school's system of coordination.

Organizingr-A major portion of planning in the

management of elementary schools is devoted to creating and

fir.

L14

‘1')

9'”

4O

maintaining organizational structures designed to accomplish
objectives important to child growth and development. The
dimensions of organizing, which change with the organi-
zational situation, include: (1) purpose, (2) setting, (3)
communication, and (4) the human element.

Even though organizing in elementary schools is
generally concerned with the growth and development of boys
and girls, the specific objectives vary considerably. Just
to say that organizing is an important part of the manage-
ment program in elementary schools is not enough. One
needs to know what the goal of the organizing is. In the
final analysis, this important BREE determines who is to be
involved, what materials and equipment are to be utilized,
and how the organizational structure will be composed.

The EREEE.°£ organizing has to do with the physical
surroundings in which it takes place. This includes the
physical plant structure and the general location of the
organizational setting. It also is related to all other
physical factors, such as the available materials and
equipment.

A third dimension of organizing involves communi-
cation. In essence, communication is the basis of all
functions which we call social. There are at least four
elements in functional communication: (1) the communicator,
(2) the communicant, (3) the content, and (4) the effect.
In the case of organizing elementary schools, the adminis-

trator frequently is the communicator, the one who initiates

41

communication. For effective communication, the content must
explicitly or implicitly reflect the intent of the
administrator-communicator.

A second aspect of communication is the communi-
cator's image and understanding of the communicant. The
administrator-communicator must be able to predict how the
communicant will respond to his message. This knowledge
is his primary guide in framing the message.

The third dimension is the "set" or self-interest
of the communicant. Various factors may influence the
"set" of the communicant. One factor is his cultural
background, another is his particular emotional make-up,
and a third might be his familiarity with the situation.
The "set" of the communicant is important if the
administrator-communicator is to know whether he is likely
to be understood.

The fourth factor pertaining to the administrator-
communicator role involves the perception of his communi-
cations by the communicant. The meaning of any communique
depends on how it is perceived by the communicant. The
communicant's personal needs and past experiences largely
determine his perception of the communique.

Finally it is important for the administrator-
communicator to take into account the skills and sophisti-
cation of the communicant. The administrator must be
careful not to communicate ideas which are too complex or

too simple. In either case, he would fail to gain the

42

interest of the communicant, thus impeding effective
communication.

Reportingé—Within the hierarchy of line and staff
positions in the school system, the elementary school
administrator maintains a middle position. This means that
his role is very much involved with the communication
process of the school organization. Much of this communi-
cation relates to the necessary reporting, which is directed
toward three distinct levels in the hierarchy of the
organization: (1) reports upward to line officers in the
hierarchy; (2) reports to subordinates in the staff organi-
zation, and (3) reports to colleagues functioning at the
same level of authority as the elementary school adminis-
trator.

Reporting to line officers in the higher echelon of
authority is directly related to the overall control of the
total school system. In general, this type of reporting
involves the establishment of standards and criteria for
describing and evaluating learning opportunities at the
local level. There are, however, certain items which
generally are included in the reports for which the ele-
mentary school administrator is responsible. Among these
common items are:

1. Budget requests for supplies, equipment, and plant
maintenance.
2. Requests for staff allocation, including both

professional and auxiliary staff, with projected

10.

11.

12.

43

enrollment figures and other supporting evidence

of need.

Personnel reports, including assignments, college
preparation, and evaluations of performance.

Pupil accounting reports, including the number of
pupils assigned to each instructional section, and
attendance records.

Inventory records, covering supplies, equipment,
and district-owned textbooks and library books.
Physical plant utilization reports, with indi-
cations of extra available space and projected
needed space.

Physical plant maintenance reports, with requests
for particular maintenance projects to be completed.
Reports of innovative practices, with corresponding
evaluation and related recommendations.

Pupil personnel reports, with recommendations for
pupils who have special educational needs.
Financial reports for all activities in which money
is collected, such as lunch programs, student
activities, and textbook rental.

Reports of special problems in which the policy may
be in question or suggestions for constructive
changes in policy.

Health and safety reports, including records of
fire drills and any unusual conditions related to

sound health practices.

44

Elementary school administrators cannot be any more
successful than their supporting staff. Staff members who
are not informed not only will be less successful than they
might be if informed of all matters related to their roles,
but over a period of time they will be confused and display
a low morale. It is highly important that the elementary
school administrator not only report matters pertaining to
policy, but make an effort to explain the related rationale.
The reports to subordinates should not only explain factors
that might have a bearing on the subordinates' roles, but
they also should respond to the opinions and perceptions.
The reports to subordinates should relay all formal and
informal policy decision made by the hierarchy of adminis-
trative staff or elected officials. They range from
informal oral policy decisions to the establishment or
change of written policy.

The professional elementary school administrator
has responsibilities outside the realm of his assigned
role. He is responsible to the profession of elementary
school administration. Certainly elementary school
administrators are not required to report to their col-
leagues, but from the professional point of view, such
reporting to personnel in the organization which one is
serving can be helpful to the total group. Reports to
colleagues pertain to the functional aspects of adminis-
tration, the unsolved problems, the problems that were

solved, and new ideas in education. In some cases, it is

45

the reporting of applied research; in others it may be the
presentation of pertinent problems which need to be

researched.17

Principles of Leadership

 

There are certain principles relating to leadership
that should be second nature to the chief administrator of
the school. These principles must be manifested in the
actions of the principal if he expects to obtain the maximum
effectiveness from his faculty.

The principal must learn to be sensitive to the
needs of individuals. As a principal learns to be sensitive
to people, he is in effect becoming aware of their needs
and differences. He begins to recognize what potentialities
exist and is able to call upon each staff person to make
his unique contribution.

The principal must help staff members become
sensitive to one another and become aware of their responsi-
bilities to one another. Specifically, the group develops
a setting for leadership in helping members develop
initiative and creativity. The principal fosters the
growth of group member maturity and encourages group
endorsement of individual differences.

The principal should strive to make each member of

his staff successful. Successful teachers are the hallmark

 

17Fred A. Synder and Duane R. Peterson, D namics of
Elementary School Administration (Boston: Houghton MiffIin

Campany, 1970), pp. - .

46

of an effective principal. The principal should attempt to
utilize the strengths of his staff and help them to over-
come their weaknesses.

The principal should be objective. Objectivity is
a characteristic of good leadership. The act rather than
the person is the important thing. Leadership that is
based on subjectivity is usually ineffective.

The principal should have imagination and be willing
to promote experimentation. Conditions are constantly
changing. The principal should encourage his teachers to
experiment with sound educational theories, materials, and
methods.

The principal should work toward defensible goals.
He must coordinate the tasks of formulating, defining and
evaluating the goals toward which his staff is striving.
Leadership in any other direction is a waste of time and an
interference with good instruction for pupils.

The principal should encourage individual expressions
of opinion in a permissive, informal atmosphere. This type
of social climate is necessary before any staff member
will feel free to speak out honestly and frankly. Differ-
encies of opinion must be brought out into the open if
varying interpretations and perceptions are to be resolved.

The principal must have the quality of action. He
must make decisions and carry them out. If he discovers

that this plan of action is faulty, he must have the

47

courage to check his motion, reassess the problem, and then
proceed in a new direction.

The principal must know whom he is leading and have
the loyalty of his followers. He knows more about his
teachers by observing them in the classroom and on the
grounds. He can assign them curricular and co-curricular
activities which fit their skills.

The principal must "see and be seen." To be
effective, he must be somewhat of a ubiquitous individual.
Obviously the principal cannot be personally present at all
times, but he should be there when he is needed.

The principal should possess energy, intelligence,
and character. The most common eXpression of human energy
is work. It is not easy to develop work habits that are
essential for dependable leadership. Energy alone, however,
does not guarantee leadership.

The principal should think of his staff as co-
workers rather than followers. If the staff were required
to "follow" at all times, he would not have the benefit of
their thinking. Little enthusiasm would be shown, and
dynamic, creative teachers would migrate to a school where
the principal would use their professional talents.

The principal must develop a sense of timing. If
the principal attempts to generate interest in a project
which is new or different, his ideas must be broached at

a time when they are most likely to be acceptable.

48

The principal must be able to evaluate himself as
an educational leader. This is difficult, and most
principals do not have or take the time to evaluate their
own leadership. Failure to do so will limit their ability
to improve and expand their influence as school adminis-

trators.18

What Are the Areas of
Administrative BehaV1or3

 

It has been stated that the organization and dis-
charge of the duties of the principal will depend upon his
understanding of the job, his administrative preparation
and experience, and the demands on his time from all levels.
An unfavorable combination of these factors may cause him
to spend his school day in a rather routine, slave-like
fashion. As an office manager he may (or may not) receive
high commendation, while his educational efforts and leader-
ship may leave much to be desired. Therefore, an under-
standing of the vital areas of administrative behavior will
assist the principal in taking stock of his functions in
such a way that he can set up guides for broadening his
professional vision.

1. Leadership Through Setting Goals. Whether he
realizes it or not, the principal is responsible for the

objectives of the school's educational program. In

 

18Emery Stoops and Russell E. Johnson, Elementar
School Administration (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., I967),

pp. 3I-34.

 

49

addition, there must be agreement on these goals if people
are to work effectively together toward common ends. While
people may accept goals, there is often distinct dis-
approval of the methods employed to achieve them. The
principal is faced, therefore, with two basic tasks: to
lead in defining the goals, and to get the staff to take
part in setting and accepting the goals.

2. Leadership Through PolicyéMaking. School personnel

 

expect to follow the administrator and work within a given
framework of established policy. They are aware that final
authority rests with the administration. Nevertheless, the
effective principal tries to bring school policies before
his staff. He becomes a more efficient executive when he
knows how to secure staff cooperation for the establishment
and recognition of any particular policy. As he moves
forward with the educational program, the principal insists
on making very vital decision on the basis of clearly
defined policy.

3. Leadership Through Determining Roles. The roles of
principal, staff members, and even community citizens should
be clearly defined and understood in the educational
program. The principal advances the over-all effectiveness
of learning by helping his staff to see how their roles fit
into a functional pattern in the administrative structure,
and how each person's assignment affects the total organi-

zation.

50

4. Leadership Thromgh Coordination and Consultation.
The elementary school principal is faced with the responsi-
bility of getting his staff to see the need for pulling
together as a team. Thus the principal becomes the
responsible leader in providing the kind of structure that
will lead to a coordination of effort. The principal has
the responsibility for taking the initiative in purposefully
leading his staff toward better coordination of educational
efforts.

5. Leadership Through AppraisingrStaff Performance.
The problems of evaluation are not confined to any particular
person or group of persons or to certain processes. Evalu-
~ation is a continuous process involving all pupils and most
staff members. Increased emphasis on this leadership role
by the principal should take into account three areas: (1)
the effectiveness of classroom teaching, (2) the over-all
effectiveness of the administration, and (3) the state and
community efforts toward providing significant opportunities
for the pupil. When the principal assumes leadership in
getting facts about the effectiveness of his school program
and can be objective and decisive in leading the way toward
improvement, the educational program can be interpreted
more intelligently to the community.

6. Leadership Through Workimg With Community Personnel
and Resources. The principal is concerned with two other
areas of administrative behavior: working with community

leadership to promote certain educational improvements, and

51

using the educational resources of the community as widely
as he can in his school program.

The principal recognizes that one of his most
difficult tasks is that of translating his educational
program to his community through identifying, explaining,
or interpreting in numerous ways the issues and facts
pertaining to his school. This leadership skill is necessary
for good public relations. In addition, the alert principal
is aware of values that will accrue to the total educational
program when intelligent leadership is demonstrated in these
two areas of administrative behavior.

7. Leadership Through the Process of Involving People.
Since, by and large, his acts of administrative behavior
involve many persons, this fact points up the need for his
employing a leadership skill in the application of group
procedures. Probably principals, among other adminis-
trators, are less skillful in this function than they are
in any other administrative activity.

His task is to get people involved in the affairs
of the school to the extent that apathy will turn to active
interest and support. The principal knows that there will
then be more understandings and stronger beliefs in what
is being accomplished. Equally important, he will learn
what else is being done to improve the present practices.

He must furnish the leadership to point out and to devise
ways for getting involvement-support for the educational

enterprise.

52

The principal has, then, the responsibility of
interesting many persons in the tasks of the school. The
more skillful he is in maintaining working contacts with
all groups, the more effective he will be in clarifying
educational goals, planning for their achievement, and
making important decisions affecting school affairs. With
positive and sustained effort toward developed staff and
lay ability through participation, the principal actually
practices leadership skills in getting group consensus in
solving problems and in placing responsibility for action
upon the proper persons.l

Research by N. Gross and R. Herriott (1965) indi-
cates leadership is more effective when staff are involved
in decision-making. One hundred and seventy—five schools
in cities with populations over 50,000 took part in the
National Principal Study. A high score reflected a quality
the researchers call executive professional leadership (EPL)
score of the principal.20

8. Leadership Through the Process of Communication.

Many principals may believe that communication is simply

 

19Leadership in Elementary School Administration
and Supervision, Factors Affecting:EducaEional Adminis-
tration: Guideposts for Research and Action, No. 2 of the
College of Education Monography Series on The School-
Community Development Study (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State
University, 1955), p. 20.

 

20Margaret Yonemura, "Research on Aspects of
Leadership Roles in Early and Elementary Education,"
Childhood Education, Vol. 48, No. 3 (International,
December I97I), p. 165.

 

53

projecting ideas through the channels of speaking, writing,
hearing, and reading. These tools are basic, of course,

in any act of communication, but the feelings and concerns
of involved persons must also be considered.

Communication becomes most effective, whether formal
or informal devices are used, when the principal shows
genuine concern as to how well persons are receiving them.
If using a particular device will bring out his ideas and
achieve the desired end, then the administrator considers
using it. However, if during the process of communication
he discerns an unhealthy climate or individuals working at
cross purposes, he may wish to re-examine his way of
communicating. Perhaps communicating can be said to gain
optimum results when the person who is communicating and
those who are receiving feel that there is freedom for
exchanging ideas, criticizing, suggesting, or offering
proposals that may alter behavior.21

9. Leadership Through Plannrmg. The principal assumes
the role of the personnel administrator by planning largely
in terms of the human element. That is to say, he con-
siders in advance the persons to be used in his organi-

zational plan. This kind of effective personnel planning

 

21Leadershipin Elementgry School Administration and
Su ervision, Factors Affecting Educational Administration:
uideposts for Research and Action, No. 2 of the College of
Education Monography Series on The School-Community
Development Study (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University,
1955), p. 20.

 

54

initiated by the principal will result in better procure-
ment of teachers and optimum use of their services in

reaching the objectives of the school.22

What Are the Influences Which Affegr
Educational Leadership?

The principal is generally designated the chief
executive officer in his school. Although his powers and
duties are determined by local and state conditions and
requirements, socioeconomics and legal aspects do influence
the ways in which he may demonstrate leadership. Certain
blueprints of administrative behavior will be inherent in
the job itself, but many variable factors exert a positive
or negative influence upon the educational leadership
functions. These influences may be devided roughly into at
least five categories: (1) The demands and requirements
made upon the principalship are stated by legal fiat. Local
and state laws of many kinds shape and define the powers
and duties of the elementary principal. (2) Certain socio-
economic conditions and needs of the locale give direction
to educational leadership for the principal. In addition,
the educational personnel will directly influence a
particular principal's type of leadership. (3) The nature
of a given elementary school in terms of its staff, pupils,
and even location present a framework within which the

chief executive must work as its leader. (4) Changes in

 

22Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., p. 67.

55

theory of child growth and of learning activities, plus
other related factors, keep the leadership-minded principal
alert for ways of improving instructional programs. (5)
The principal's contribution of his own personality to his
position is last but not least. Leadership is definite and
sure, or it may be signally lacking because the principal
is poorly prepared or has little desire to know how to give
proper direction to school affairs.

These five categories are suggested as influences
which will determine the extent and kind of educational
leadership exhibited by the modern elementary school

principal.

A_Principal's Philosophy

A principal must have a philosophy in order to give
direction to administrative behavior which is inevitably
subject to many influences and forces. He must be quick
to recognize that:

While it is admittedly a practical problem for
philosophy to decide what is feasible to do, it is not
proper for philosophy to decide what to do in any particular
case. Since philosophy deals with knowledge rather than
mere opinion, philosophy must limit itself to general

principles of practice.23

 

23Leadership in Elementary School Administration and

Su ervision, quoted in (or "cited by") John S. BrubaCher,
Mofiern PhiIosgphies of Education (New York: McGraw-Hill

Book Company, Inc., 1959), p.714.

 

56

A philosophy for the elementary school principal
may be stated in terms of leadership functions. These
leadership functions are:

l. The principal as the chief executive officer. He
should accept the philosophical viewpoint that is grounded
in the concept of working with staff members in all areas
of mutual concern. This kind of philosophy serves to orient
the principal toward the human factor as he administers the
total educational program.

2. The principal as a community leader. The princi-
pal's philosophy shores up in his planning and gives
direction for improved community schools and better com-
munities, yet that philosophy reflects a contemplation
upon the needs of society in general and our total way of
life.

3. The prinerpal as the smpervisor of instruction.
Probably the most important aspect of the educational
philosophy is centered in the activities of learning. The
principal's guiding philosophy should emerge from child-
centered experiences.

4. The principal as the guidance counselor. This
philosophy that will best serve the elementary school
principal considers the total growth of the child, and is
fostered in a setting that respects the dignity of the
individual and encourages personal growth, together with-
the development of the ability to participate as a useful

member of the group.

57

5. The principal as the general staff leader. The
principal's philoSOphy as a leader in administering office
procedures and auxiliary school affairs prompts him to
accept and adopt certain principles of administration which
function as a segment in relation to the total school

24
program.

The Principal and the Curriculum

Two Basic Concepts

In planning an enriched course of study, there are
two fundamental concepts that can greatly influence the
administrator's approach.

The first concept deals with the scope of curriculum
involvement; the second, with the nature of the individual
growth that takes place in staff members who are consciously
working to improve the school program.

Curriculum today is viewed as extending far beyond
the confines of a comprehensive body of subject matter to

be mastered. Curriculum involves all of youth's activities

 

within the school and in the community as well.25 Caswell
states:26
24Shuster and Wetzler, 0p. cit., pp. 41-42.
25lbid., p. 33.
26

 

 

Leadership in Elementa School Administration and
§gpervision, quotedIorIcited by“) HaroId Rugg, ed., Demo-
gragy and the Curriculum, Third Yearbook of the John Dewey
Society (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1939),

p. 418.

58

The design of the curriculum--must be a function of
the entire environment of the child, not just that of the
school and the generalized aspects of culture. It must
include out-of-school activities. Recreation, health,
creative activities, home and adjustment, and the like,
should be taken into account quite as much as problem-
solving and work situations in the classroom.

The administrator, through his own leadership and
through the utilization of faculty leadership, should
organize a continuing program of co-operative group planning
and activity focused on improving the curriculum. At the
same time, he should make the concrete provisions needed
by faculty members to experiment with new ideas and new

projects in their classrooms.27

Leadership in Administerimg the Curriculum
Most authorities agree that the principal is the
key to curriculum building. Burton and his co-author state
that "curriculum can be developed only in individual schools

28

and classrooms." Otto reminds us, "It is within the power

of the principal to control the kind of curriculum which it

 

27Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., p. 39.

28Leadership__in Elementary School Administration and
Supervision, quoted in (or “citedby*) William H. Burton and

Leo J. rueckner, Su ervision: A Social Process (New York:
Appleton-Century-Crogts, Inc., I955), p. 369.

 

59

will be possible for teachers to provide.29 Reavis and his
collaborators state, "The leadership in improving the

30 This

curriculum rests chiefly with the principal."
responsibility mut be accepted by the leaders of modern
elementary educational program.

The autonomy of the individual school in matters of
curriculum improvement is rapidly being recognized. Although
there are many advantages which will accrue from recognizing
the local school unit as the source for initiating instruc-
tional growth, the basic advantage appears to be the fact
that it is easier to achieve full participation and move
toward group consensus in a smaller organization than in a
larger one.31

How does the principal control the curriculum
through administration? The principal as the educational
leader of the school is responsible for many administrative

tasks. These tasks eventually become policy in one form

or another. The personnel oriented leader will initiate

 

29Leadership in Elementary School Administration and

Supervision, quoted in (or “cited by") Henry J. tto, E e-
mentary Sc ool Organization and Administration, Third

Edition (New Ybrk: Appleton-Century-Crofts Inc., 1954),
p. 124.

30Leadership in Elementary School Administration and
Supervision, quotediin Tor 1rcitedby") William i Reavis,
et a1., Administering the Elementary School (New York:
Prentice-HaII, Inc., 1953), p.7127.

31Leadership in Elementary School Administration and
Su ervision, quoted in Tor 1‘icited hy9)7William B. Ragan,
Organizing for Effective Instruction," Educational Leader-
ship, Vol. 12 (February 1955), p. 278.

 

 

60

the desirable practice of sharing these administrative
tasks with his staff for enactment into policy. However,
regardless of his pattern of administrative behavior, he
must be aware that he controls the structure of the
curriculum by the ways in which he administers the school.
For example the time schedules, the instructional program,
the use of resources, the classification of pupils, the
development and selection of materials, the marking, and
the promotional policies are positive influences on the

curriculum.32

What Does anAdministrator Know
and Do Ahbut Curricqum
Improvement?

 

One view holds that the administrator, in filling
his role as master teacher, must be an expert in all of the
subjects included in the curriculum and in methods of
teaching appropriate to the various grade levels. According
to this view, he should be able to enter any classroom and
demonstrate a superior brand of teaching.

An opposing view is that an administrator need know
relatively little about the specifics of school subjects or
methods of teaching at the various grade levels, and of
classroom management. It is argued that he need be skilled
chiefly in group processes, in human relations, in leader-

ship techniques, and in organizational theory and practice.

 

32Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., p. 239.

61

His primary responsibility is to "set the climate" for good
teaching. Accordingly, all aspects of his job contribute
to curriculum improvement, whether he be developing better
buildings and facilities, improved personnel policies, a
more adequate school budget, or favorable community
attitudes. Proper preparation for the administrative job
leaves little time or reason for a prolonged period of
classroom teaching. Experience in the classroom, however,
enables the administrator to develop a personal, first-hand
understanding of the kinds of problems and situations that
will confront the members of his staff.

In an effort to clarify this problem and discover
some answers related to this dual concept, an inter-
university team two years ago set forth eighteen hunches
and hypotheses to be tested, ranked according to importance,
and combined into four major categories. The team studied
school systems in cities, in suburbia, in small towns, and
in rural areas. They portray, as you will see, a much
broader concept of the role of the school administrator in
educational program improvement than is usually heard in
the debate.

a. Administrative Process. The key importance of
process knowledge and skills stood out in sharp relief.
Five of the seven hypotheses dealing with some phase of
administrative process occupy positions 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6

in the rank order:

62

l. "The administrator needs to be highly skilled
in human relations and in using group process effectively."
On a scale of 1-100, this item ranked at the top with a
value of 95. The administrator himself needs all of the
process skills of a master teacher in dealing with faculty,
student body, parents, and others with whom he comes into
contact in the quest for an improved curriculum. The
evidence is clear that in the processes of administration he
must be a student and an expert.

3. "The administrator needs to know and use
democratic procedure in administration and supervision"

(85 on the 100 point scale).

In the schools visited the teams found ample
evidence that the administrator both understood democratic
theory and knew how to practice it. They found adminis—
trators demonstrating functional leadership, as well as
status leadership. They sensed a climate in the school
system which encouraged teachers to try to do a better job
without coercion.

4. "The administrator needs to be skilled in inter-
preting the schools to the staff and to the community. This
interpretation should include achievement and weaknesses,
problems and needs" (80 on the 100 point scale).

This result focuses attention on the administrator's
need for expertness in communication. The point here is
that communication means far more than making announce-

ments in assemblies or at faculty meetings. Issuing

63

releases to the press and producing school newspapers for
distribution in the community calls for high technical and
professional competence. And, even more, the adminis-
trator's relationships with staff and community groups and
individuals demand a high level of competence with respect
to how good communication is encouraged to inter-personal
and inter-group relations.

5. "The administrator needs to be adept in decision-
making and expert in selecting personnel and in delegating
responsibility for curriculum development and program
improvement" (78 on the 100 point scale). A number of
studies have appeared recently pointing to the sequential
relationship in problem-solving of such common adminis-
trative activities as sensing and defining problems,
collecting relevant information, setting up alternative
probabilities, establishing communication with persons
involved, reducing probabilities to the point of decision—
making, securing action through delegation and appropriate
follow-up, and, finally, reviewing the appraising the whole
process involved in moving toward a goal.

6. "The administrator needs to know how to work
effectively with the board of education for program improve-
ment" (78 on the 100 point scale).

10. "The administrator needs to know how to recognize
and to deal effectively with unwarranted attacks on and
constructive criticism of the public schools" (72 on the

100 point scale).

64

17. "The administrator needs to be skilled in
evaluating the educational program and in research pro-
cedures on improving educational practices" (40 on the 100
point scale).

It can be argued that all of the above process
items are common to administrative and executive leadership
in program improvement no matter what the nature or purpose
of the organization is.

b. Personal_gualitie§.

2. "The administrator needs to have certain
desirable personal abilities: warmth of personality,
friendliness, generosity, considerateness, integrity,
patience towards others" (86 on the 100 point scale).

7. "The administrator needs to have concern for
moral, spiritual, and citizenship values and gives leader-
ship in developing them through the educational program"
(74 on the 100 point scale).

8. "The administrator needs to know how to study
the community and to use its resources for the two-fold
purpose of improving the educational program and serving.
the community" (74 on the 100 point scale).

12. "The administrator needs to understand the
changing nature of the world in which we live and its
relationship to the educational program" (68 on the 100

point scale).

65

13. "The administrator needs to be curious and
open-minded about new educational practices, better ways of
teaching and learning and promising procedures in adminis-
tration and supervision" (66 on the 100 point scale).

c. Curriculum Know-How and Insight. The other six
items on the list ranked from 9 to l8--the bottom half of
the list. They stressed the more familiar elements of:

Clear insight and understanding of the teaching-
learning process.

Recognition that the key relationship is that
between teachers and students, whether in classrooms or on
field trips.

In-service teacher growth as the chief avenue for
improvement of the educational program.

The influence of school buildings, facilities, and
business arrangements on sound educational programs.

From this one study we have strong evidence that
what the administrator needs to know, do, and be in order
to exert functional leadership in curriculum improvement is
much more comprehensive and extensive than was implied by a

number of former theories.33

An Approach to Curriculum Change
This approach makes the principal responsible for

improved learning experiences for boys and girls.

 

33Anderson and Davies, op. cit., pp. 46-54.

66

Specifically, he leads his staff and community in the
following activities:
1. An analysis of pupil successes and failures.
2. A study of the characteristics and resources of the
immediate community or neighborhood.
3. A study of methods and materials being used.
4. A study of the continuity of the total school
program.
5. A study of research findings.

This kind of approach to curriculum procedures and
processes permits teachers and parents alike to work on
problems which are close to them and about which they are
concerned. Under this plan the principal needs to know the
scope of the curriculum which best serves the needs of the

school.34

In-service Education

Inspirational leadership and the ability to stimu-
late activity are basic requirements of the administrator
in marshaling the energies of his staff. While these
qualities are indispensable and should be operative at all
times, the administrator should crystallize his efforts to
train the staff by developing an organized program of in-
service education. This program can be built around

special interests of teachers as they relate to the

 

34Shuster and Wetzler, op. cit., pp. 230-31.

67

school's curriculum. In-service activities should involve
the professional study of problems that face the staff and
the student body. Group workshOps and conferences should
be built upon techniques of research and planning with the
direct purpose of applying newly acquired ideas to the
school program.

In this way, the administrator, through the in-
service program, provides a workshop-type laboratory for
experimentation by individuals and groups. He provides an
organized means through which staff members acquire
knowledge of educational research that will help them to
understand better the problems of individual development
among professional educators and students.

An in-service program built upon these principles
is actually a training ground in which the professional
staff puts into practice the techniques it must experience
and the scientific knowledge it must gain to successfully
reshape the school's educational program.

The in-service program should include the active
participation of staff members, students, and representa-
tives and community groups.) In this way, all elements
involved in creating a comprehensive program of education
for youth share in the co-ordinated planning and imple-
mentation of community-wide program.

Students frequently have realistic views on the
values of school activities in the light of their needs and

interests. Community representatives can bring to

68

educational planning a direct knowledge of what the com-
munity needs and seeks in its youth. They can also discover
concrete ways in which community agencies can contribute to
the total educational program for boys and girls.

Contacts established through these school—community
programs lead to wider participation and understanding of
educational problems by the layman. They also result in
increased contributions to community groups by professional
educators as they are called upon to take part in the
planning of outside agencies.

This closely knit relationship and the mutual under-
standing that develops from it are among the school's
strongest guarantees that of the community will whole-
heartedly support a growing program of educational oppor-
tunity.

The administrator should be fully aware of the fact
that creating a widespread in—service program of education
for his staff, student body, and community is a complex
task and an exacting challenge to his leadership. He
should be willing to take every logical chance to move
ahead in this professional maneuver. But he should be
careful of advancing too far or too fast, thereby losing
the indispensable support of the school and community.
Instructing people in the methods of their own self-
education must be a gradual process of building interest,
participation, and responsible leadership. This major task

reaffirms the fact that the administrator has by no means

69

left the teaching field; indeed, he must be one of the most

skilled teachers in the educational system!35

Democratic Admrmistration Is Basic
to Ehe Principalship_

One primary task of the principal is to motivate his
staff to move in a desired direction. To get people to do
things, and especially to perform at high levels that bring
greater efficiency and personal satisfactions, requires a
definite kind of leadership. Yet many principals believe
that charting the educational course and directing staff
personnel are processes reserved solely for the adminis-
trator's office. To the democratic administrator, working
with people means arranging the situation in such a way that

36 The school principal is practicing

they want to do it.
the democratic approach in his administrative affairs by
recognizing his role as an organizer of those natural
situations which provide motivation in such a way that all
participants do not feel they are being told or ordered as
to what to do and how. Thus the entire school personnel

will be participating in all areas affecting them, even in

forming certain decisions.

35Anderson and Davies, op. cit., pp. 42-44.

36Leadershipin Elementary School Adminierration and
Su ervision, quoted in (Sr—“cited by“) Roger M. Bellows,
"Emponee Dynamics and Engineering Technology," Advanced
Management, Vol. 22 (November 1952), p. 11.

70

The psychological or democratic approach to adminis-
tration may be contrasted with autocratic administration at

the following points:

 

 

The Psychological Approach The Autocratic Approach
1. Staff participation and 1. Little or no partici-
concurrence on decisions. pation by the staff and

concurrence practically

unknown or disregarded.

2. Recognition of the pro- 2. Feelings and problems of
blem and feelings of the the staff are unknown or
staff as they partici- disregarded.
pate.

3. A pleasant social climate 3. Social climate of the

is attained. group is ignored.

4. Stress on cooperative 4. Orders are handed down
methods in problem and understandings
solving. disregarded.

The principal's leadership role is ultimately
determined by the kind of membership he holds in his
school's group. If he gains prestige through psychological
principles of leadership and is an "expert" in his own
name, as it were, he may be pictured in Figure l.

The principal is oriented towards his teachers.
There is no difference in "level," since he is a leader

who has gained status by virtue of his abilities. He

71

 

Figure l. The Flow of Communication in the Psychological
Form of School Management.

p--Principal

s--Staff

encourages a free exchange of ideas and participation by
his teachers.

In contrast to this kind of leadership there is

found a disregard for having membership in the in group
or "we" group. In fact, the principal may take special
efforts to remain on the "outside" of his staff. This

position is pictured in Figure 2.

 

 

 

llILllsllLLi

Figure 2. The Flow of Communication in the Autocratic Form
of School Management.

p--Principal
s--Staff

72

The principal using the autocratic approach will
insist upon some kind of professional and social distance
in this kind of staff relationship. Generally speaking, he
maintains his prestige by title and designated authority.
He is also more concerned with identifying himself with the
higher levels of administration. Frequently, he may have
goals, desires, and wishes that are entirely different from
those of his staff, since communication may be practically
nonexistent.

The principal should consider every problem under-
lying behavior if he wishes to be engaged in administrative
behavior leading to greater staff satisfactions and improved
performance. When there are mutual feelings of responsi-
bilities in administering a program, there will be deepened
feelings and interest in achieving success on the part of
all participants. If the principal is the sole leader, he
deprives the staff of sharing in successful projects and
removes incentives for increased faculty effort and

development of leadership.37

 

37Leadership in Elementary School Administration and
Su ervision, quoted in (or 1Fcitedby") Leland P. Bradford
ans Gordon L. Lippett, "The Individual Counts in Effective
Group Relations," N.E.A. Journal, Vol. 13 (November 1954),
485-87.

 

 

73

The Principal and Staff

Developimg Leadership to
Its ullest

Saluting work well done is a stimulus to increased
leadership. But the forward-looking administrator has a
responsibility that extends beyond approval and encourage-
ment. One of the functions of the leader is to discover
potential leadership in his staff and to groom that leader-
ship for the fullest responsibility it is capable of
assuming. This may mean the ultimate loss of an active
staff personality. But, at the same time, it may mean a
definite gain for the entire school system or for education-
at-large as the faculty leader moves into a broader sphere
of responsibility.

Through this "spotting,' grooming, and advancing of
faculty members with real qualities of leadership, the edu-
cational administrator does his part to insure the forward
march of education.

Following the leader. This term takes on a new
meaning for the administrator who makes it a primary
function to discover, encourage, and train leadership in
his staff. It means drawing leaders and potential leaders
into all phases of school planning--giving each staff
member the opportunity of assuming the fullest responsibi-
lity he is capable of handling successfully.

It means utilizing the mentalities and the vision

of faculty leaders in the planning of workshops and

74

meetings for the staff and arranging for staff members to
conduct meetings which they have planned.

It is the comprehensive task of the administrator
to know his staff members, to work closely with them, and
to provide the kind of leadership that will evoke maximum
staff effort and participation in behalf of the educational
program.38

Building faculty leadership is a fundamental
responsibility of the administrator in that it is synonymous
with widespread assumption of responsibility.39

Building faculty leadership constitutes a major
challenge to the administrator because of the numerous
pressures and the variety of personalities and purposes that
characterize the working staff of the school.

To build co-operative effort from this complex
diversity of personalities and pressures, it is necessary
for the administrator to develop an understanding of each
individual in the staff. He should attempt to comprehend
the bases for personal, social, and professional needs of
faculty members so that he can understand their motives and
their reactions in situations that arise in the daily
operation of the school.

This understanding makes it possible to work more

closely, and therefore more effectively, with staff

 

38Anderson and Davies, op. cit., pp. 17-18.

391bid., p. 1.

75

members. It makes it possible to study their potentialities
and to draw them into channels of the on-going program that
will challenge their abilities and evoke their maximum
efforts.

As the administrator creates an atmosphere in which
faculty members assume increasing responsibility, he should
share with them the feeling of pride and satisfaction that
results from their personal accomplishments and their
contributions to the school.

He should also provide an opportunity for the kind
of co-operative group planning that multiplies and enhances
individual effort through the stimulation resulting from
the interplay of people and ideas.

In this way, varying purposes and types of per-
sonalities merge into a unified, creative effort to improve
the educational program. A wholesome growth takes place in
the individual, the group, and the program; and inevitably,
qualities of faculty leadership begin to develop and
crystallize.4O

In developing responsible participation and leader-
ship within the staff, it is normal, fair, and psychologi-
cally sound to extend commendation when warranted. This can
be done with a personal word of praise or the allocation of

appropriate kinds of additional responsibility.

 

4°Ib1d., p. 12.

76

It is important that praise be given carefully to
avoid arousing antagonism among staff members. If the
commendation of one or more particular staff members is
overdone, it may result in alienating the co-operation of
the rest of the staff and making their active leadership
virtually impossible to enlist. Recognition of achievement

should be tactfully and appropriately rendered.41

Staff Utilization

Staff utilization is many things. It is devising
ways whereby the ablest teachers can be made available to
more students. It is making the ablest teachers available
at the level of pupil development that they are most
needed. It is assessing staff competencies and maximizing
them for instructional purposes. It is conserving the
energies and talents of the staff for genuine educational
tasks. It is recognizing staff differences and making
teaching assignments accordingly. It is relieving the
instructional staff of routine work which can be performed
effectively by personnel employed for this purpose, such as
clerical and instructional assistants. It is supporting
the professional functioning of teachers through greater
and more imaginative use of modern technological aids to
instruction. Staff utilization involves all of these things

and, at its best, represents a systematic effort to utilize

41Ibid., p. 16.

77

fully and economically the competencies, time, and energies

of personnel to utmost instructional advantage.42

Summary

In the review of the literature leadership is
defined in a manner which encompasses many factors that are
significant in formulating a perspective of leadership as
well as serving as guidelines for the principalship. There
are two types of leaders, the functional leader and the
status leader. The functional leader or operational leader
is regarded by many authors as the better type of leader for
our schools. However, leadership behavior is not a single,
unitary phenomenon. Its manifestations vary with the
demands of the moment and the setting and the kind of
leadership shown by a functional leader may be determined by
the expectancy and concepts of leadership held by the group
which he serves.

The scope of the principalship includes various and
significant leadership functions in the management of the
elementary school. Some of these functions are directing,
coordinating, organizing, reporting, setting goals, making
policies, determining roles, consulting, administering the

curriculum, evaluating the educational program, providing

 

42William B. Castetter and Helen R. Burchell, Edu-
getional Administration and the Improvement of Instruction
DanvilIe: The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Inc.,
1967), p. 52.

78

for in-service education and working with community per-
sonnel as well as involving school personnel.

A principal must have a philosophy to give him
direction to administrative behavior. In addition to his
philosophy that gives him direction, there are forces con-
fronting him that also give him direction. They are: (1)
Local and state laws of many kinds shape and define the
powers and duties of the elementary principal. (2) Certain
socioeconomic conditions and needs of the locale give
direction to educational leadership for the principal. (3)
The nature of a given elementary school in terms of its
staff, pupils, and even location present a framework within
which the principal must work as its leader. (4) Changes
in theory of child growth and of learning activities. (5)
The principal's contribution of his own personality to his
position.

Good communication and human relations with everyone
involved in the programs of the school is a predication of
good educational leadership. With the establishment of
good communication and human relations the principal has
the opportunity to develop and utilize his staff to its
fullest.

In the study done by Cross and Bennett, it appears
that principals of schools in a low socioeconomic setting
are particular burdened with appellate problems. Cross and
Bennett's study indicated the following: Principals in

high settings had 53 percent creative problems, 6 percent

79

intermediary problems and 41 percent appellate problems.
Principals in low socioeconomic settings had 32 percent
creative problems, 7 percent intermediary problems, and 61
percent appellate problems. In Cross's study it was found
that a group of inner-city principals had 20 percent
creative problems, 12 percent intermediary problems, and
68 percent appellate problems. Thus, it is apparent that
each study supports the other. Another study that is
related to the above two studies is the one done by Jennings
in which he set out to find from Michigan principals what
they believe to be the most rewarding duty, the area in
which they spend the greatest amount of time, and the area
in which they would most like to spend more time. He dis-
covered that Michigan principals are spending a majority of
time organizing and managing their schools but aspire to
activities more directly connected with the improvement of
instruction. They reported that they would prefer to give
more time to proper program development and curriculum.
Thus, we see that in those studies there are strong
similarities in what some principals are doing and what
some principals wish to do. It appears that the principals
studied need to spend more time in educational leadership
activities; particularly in program development, curriculum

and instructional improvement.

to seek

CHAPTER I I I
METHODOLOGY

Statement of Research Questions
This study was planned and organized in an effort

answers to specific questions the researcher wished

to raise in regard to activities of elementary school

principals in educational leadership and their experiences

with appellate problems and their variability with the

school's socioeconomic setting. The questions are as

follows:

a.

What amount of time during a normal workday (8:00
a.m.--4:30 p.m.) do elementary school principals in
high and low socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw
Public School System utilize in the execution of
educational leadership activities? What is the
frequency of educational leadership activities?

The educational leadership activities are: (1)
curriculum organization, (2) instructional improve—
ment, (3) establishment of mutually accepted

goals, (5) classroom supervision, (6) communication

with staff members, colleagues, superordinates,

80

81

parents, and community representatives concerning
school matters, (7) examination and study of printed
materials to improve professionally for self and
staff, (8) maintaining order and discipline, (9)
providing adequate facilities for staff, students
and community representatives, (10) coordinating,
(11) reporting to superordinates, colleagues, and
subordinates, (12) policy making, (13) determining
roles, (14) working with community representatives
to increase their involvement and improve the
school's programs, (15) utilization of educational
resources of the community, (16) planning in

advance for staff assignment(s), (17) developing
and improving student promotional policies, (18)
curriculum change (improvement), and (19) inter-
preting school policies.

What amount of time during a normal workday (8:00
a.m.--4:30 p.m.) do elementary school principals

in high.and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System utilize in working with
appellate problems? What is the frequency of
appellate problems? The appellate problems that
were studied are those accruing from the following:
(1) novel conditions, (2) conflict of jurisdication,
(3) lack of clarity in policy, (4) breach in

policy, and (5) requests from superordinates.

82

c. Is there a difference between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings
in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time utilized per educational leadership
activity during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30
p.m.)? Is there a difference in frequency per edu-
cational leadership activity?

d. Is there a difference between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings
in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time utilized per appellate problem during a
normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)? Is there a
difference in frequency per appellate problem?

e. Are there differences between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings
in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds of
activities in educational leadership executed by
them during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)?

f. Are there differences between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings
in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of appellate problems experienced by them during

a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)?

eesumptions Underlying the Study
In view of the research questions, purpose of the

study, selection of research method and the review of past

83

studies which support the feasibility of the current study,

the following assumptions underly the study:

1. The behavior of the participants (principals) in

the presence or absence of the researcher will be

the same.

2. The selection of the direct observation method is

the most feasible method of gathering data for this

study; considering the researcher's knowledge of the

feelings and attitudes of the participants toward

participating in research for Ph.D. candidates.

Design of the Study

Selection of Research Method

The direct observation method was utilized in

ascertaining the data in lieu of the survey research method

which was first contemplated by the researcher, but the

method was not used because of the apprehensiveness of his

fellow colleagues, the participants, concerning their

involvement in the gathering of data for Ph.D. students.

Several studies have been done in the Saginaw Public School

System in the past which
forms on the part of the
a result, they developed
feeling of unwillingness
Being cognizant of this,

the ten (10) schools and

necessitated filling out many

elementary school principals. As
a negative attitude toward and a
in participating in such studies.
the researcher elected to go into

make personal observations. This,

to the researcher, avoided possible contamination of the

84

data that may have resulted from the reluctancy of the
participants.

Another reason for the selection of this particular
method is the advantages it presented. The method yielded
greater insight into the various behaviors and their under-
lying motives and insight into the perception of activities
was strengthened by their underlying rationale. This method
strengthened the validity and assured accuracy in the
reporting of the data. The direct observation gave the
researcher some confidence in getting the principals to
participate and firsthand information was considered far
better than second-hand information. On-site observation,
it was thought, would assist the researcher in making a

thorough descriptive analysis of the data collected.

Sampling and Data Collectiom

The stratified sampling method was employed in this
study. The stratification was done on a socioeconomic
basis. The data used to arrive at an equitable stratifi-
cation came from the Saginaw Public School Profile composed
of information from the 1970 census data which was the most
recent data that the researcher could secure. The stratifi-
cation of the high and low socioeconomic groups was not
done from a national perspective because schools classified
in a low socioeconomic setting and a high socioeconomic

setting based on the criteria used for stratification at

85

the local level could conceiveably receive a different
classification based on national norms.

In this study a school in a high socioeconomic
setting is a school that is characterized by socioeconomic
factors that are above the median. All factors that fall
above the median are considered high socioeconomic factors.
A school in a low socioeconomic setting is a school that is
characterized by socioeconomic factors that are below the
median. All factors that fall below the median are con-
sidered low socioeconomic factors. These factors are as
follows:

1. average family income

2. percent of families with incomes below the poverty
level

3. average value of houses

4. percent of housing units occupied by renters

5. average number of persons in occupied housing units

6. child (under 18 years old):

a. child of head of household in husband-wife

family

b. child of head of household in family with male

head

c. child of head of household in family with

female head

d. child is other relative of head in husband—wife

family

86

e. child is other relative of head in family with

female head

f. child is other relative of head in family with

male head

9. other

7. population 25 years old and over:
a. that have completed high school
b. that have completed college
8. percentile score--attitude toward school

The data was collected during the months of January,
February, March, and April, 1974. Ten (10) of the twenty-
nine (29) elementary school principals, five in a high
socioeconomic setting and five in a low socioeconomic
setting, were observed three (3) days each for a total of
thirty (30) days.

The instrument used to collect the data was an auto-
genous instrument. It was piloted in the Buena Vista
School District, a neighboring school district of the
Saginaw Public School System, prior to its actual use in
the study. The instrument consisted of several pages which
necessitated a lot of time in making documentations. As a
result, the researcher decided during the piloting that the
documentation during the study would simply be written on
separate paper and then transferred to the data instrument.

This procedure proved itself to be a good one.

CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Introduction

The researcher felt it feasible at this point to
restate the research questions in an attempt to set the stage
for and promote a clear understanding of the data to follow
in this chapter. The research questions are as follows:

(1) What amount of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--

4:30 p.m.) do elementary school principals in high and low
socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School System
utilize in the execution of educational leadership activi—
ites? What is the frequency of educational leadership
activities? The educational leadership activities are
stated in Chapter III. (2) What amount of time during a
normal workday (8:00 a.m.-—4:30 p.m.) do elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System utilize in working with
appellate problems? What is the frequency of appellate
problems? The appellate problems are also stated in
Chapter III. (3) Is there a difference between elementary

school principals in high and low socioeconomic settings

87

88

in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount of time
utilized per educational leadership activity during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)? Is there a difference in
frequency per educational leadership activity? (4) Is there
a difference between elementary school principals in high
and low socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School
System in the amount of time utilized per appellate problem
during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)? Is there a
difference in frequency per appellate problem? (5) Are
there differences between elementary school principals in
high and low socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public
School System in the kinds of activities in educational
leadership executed by them during a normal workday (8:00
a.m.--4:30 p.m.)? (6) Are there differences between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds of
appellate problems experienced by them during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)?

The order of the analysis of the data will be the
same as the research questions. Raw frequency, mean (i)
frequency, raw minutes, mean (i) minutes, and percent (%) of
time utilized per activity are the variables used to answer
Questions 1 and 2 with specific reference to the percent
of time utilized by principals in the execution of edu-
cational leadership activities and working with appellate
problems. However, there are additional data in the dis-

tribution that will assist the reader in acquiring a

89

broader perspective of the distribution of time. Anova
tables for each educational leadership activity and appellate
problem will be used to answer Questions 3 and 4. Separate
tables are used for each activity. Each table includes the
degrees of freedom (df) and the mean square for between
groups (M88) and the mean square for within groups (MSW).
Also included are the F ratio and the P value. The writer
perused the data to answer Questions 5 and 6. No calcu-
lations and tests for significance were necessary in
answering the questions. It was a matter of determining
whether one group of principals (high or low S.E.S.)
executed a particular activity and the other group did not.
A One-way Analysis of Variance is the method used

in the analysis of the data. The formula is as follows:

‘f- - 2
MS = MS = 5 (x. -x..)
B 1:13
H *2

MS = MS = 1/8 (X..-X. )

W j=l i=1 1] 3
F = MSB

Msw

The hypothesis tested is the null hypothesis. It
is stated as follows: HO:uHi = uLo. The alternate hypothe-
sis is: Hl:uHi # uLo. In cases where the hypothesis
tested is true, the mean square between (M53) and the mean

square within (MSW) are nearly the same size, and the P

90

value gives the probability of finding an F ratio, which is
calculated from the division of the mean square within
(MSW) into the mean square between (MSB), as large or
larger than the calculated F ratio. Therefore, when the P
value is greater than the selected alpha level (d.05), the
level of significance, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected.
When the F ratio is too large and the P value is less than
or equal to the selected alpha level (a.05), the level of
significance, the researcher takes this as evidence that
the hypothesis (H0) is not true and, therefore, rejects the

hypothesis (HO) and accepts the alternate hypothesis (H1).

geestion 1

What amount of time during a normal workday (8:00
a.m.--4:30 p.m.) do elementary school principals in high
and low socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School
System utilize in the execution of educational leadership
activities? What is the frequency of educational leader-T
ship activities?

H :uHi = uLo. There is no difference in the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in the
execution of educational leadership activities. There is

no difference in frequency for educational leadership

activities?

91

H1:uHi # uLo. There is a difference in the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in the
execution of educational leadership activities. There is a
differerence in frequency of educational leadership activi-
ties.

Tables 1.3 and 1.4 describe several variables but
for the purpose of answering Question 1, specific attention
is given to the percent of time spent by the principals in
educational leadership activities and the frequency of
these activities.

Table l.3.--Computation of Raw Frequency, Mean Frequency,
Raw Minutes, Mean Minutes and Percent of Time

Utilized in Activities Listed and Their
Frequency for Principals in a High Socioeconomic

 

 

Setting.
Raw __ Raw 2 % of
Activities fi Xfi Minutes Minutes Time
Educational
Leadership 173 34.60 2585 517.00 40.74
Miscellaneous 240 48.00 2705 541.00 42.63
Personal 22 4.40 125 25.00 1.97
Appellate 23 4.60 160 32.00 2.52
Miscellaneous
Appellate 100 20.00 770 154.00 12.14

Total 558 111.60 6345 1269.00 100.00

 

92

Table l.4.--Computation of Raw Frequency, Mean Frequency,
Raw Minutes, Mean Minutes and Percent of Time

Utilized in Activities Listed and Their

Frequency for Principals in a Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Setting.
Raw _ Raw 2 % of
Activities fi Xfi Minutes Minutes Time
Educational
Leadership 111 22.20 1513 302.60 24.02
Miscellaneous 234 46.80 2250 450.00 35.71
Personal 47 9.40 277 55.40 4.40
Appellate 96 19.20 635 127.00 10.08
Miscellaneous
Appellate 316 63.20 1625 325.00 25.79
Total 804 160.80 6300 1260.00 100.00

 

In Tables 1.3 and 1.4 the reader notes that

principals in the high socioeconomic setting spent more

time in educational leadership activities than principals

in the low socioeconomic setting on a percentage basis and

the frequency is greater but the test procedure did not

reject the hypothesis (Ho) as you will note in Tables 1.5

and 1.6.

93

Table l.5.--Anova Table for Frequency of Overall Educational
Leadership Activities for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 384.40 3.4787 .0992
Within Groups 8 110.50

Total 9

 

Table 1.5 indicates a mean square of 384.00 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 110.50 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 3.4787 and a P value of .0992.
Not included in the table is a standard deviation (8) of
10.5119. Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected.
The researcher takes this as evidence that there is no
significant difference between the principals in the high
socioeconomic setting and the principals in the low socio-
economic setting in the frequency of overall educational
leadership activities.

Table l.6.--Anova Table for Time of Overall Educational

Leadership Activities for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 114918.40 3.2392 .1096
Within Groups 8 35477.90

Total 9

 

94

Table 1.6 indicates a mean square of 114918.40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 35477.90 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 3.2392 and a P value of .1096.
Not included in the table is a standard deviation (S) of
188.3558. Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected.
The researcher takes this as evidence that there is no
significant difference between the principals in the high
socioeconomic setting and the principals in the low socio-
economic setting in the time spent in overall educational

leadership activities.

Question 2

What amount of time during a normal workday (8:00
a.m.--4:30 p.m.) do elementary school principals in high
and low socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School
System utilize in working with appellate problems? What is
the frequency of appellate problems?

Ho:uHi = uLo. There is no difference in the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in
working with appellate problems. There is no difference in

frequency of appellate problems.

leHi ¢ uLo. There is a difference in the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic

settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in

95

working with appellate problems. There is a difference in
frequency of appellate problems.

Tables 1.7 and 1.8 describe several variables but
for the purpose of answering Question 2, specific attention
is given to the percent of time spent by the principals in
working with appellate problems and the frequency of these
problems.

Table l.7.--Computation of Raw Frequency, Mean Frequency,
Raw Minutes, Mean Minutes and Percent of Time

Utilized in Activities Listed and Their Frequency
for Principals in a High Socioeconomic Setting.

 

 

Raw _ Raw X % of
Activities fi Xfi Minutes Minutes Time
Educational
Leadership 173 34.60 2585 517.00 40.74
Miscellaneous 240 48.00 2705 541.00 42.63
Personal 22 4.40 125 25.00 1.97
Appellate 23 4.60 160 32.00 2.52
Miscellaneous
Appellate 100 20.00 770 154.00 12.14
Total 558 111.60 6345 1269.00 100.00

 

In Tables 1.7 and 1.8 the reader notes that
principals in the low socioeconomic setting spent more time
in working with appellate problems and miscellaneous
appellate problems than principals in the high socioeconomic
setting on a percentage basis and the frequency is greater.

The test procedure led to the rejection of the hypothesis

96

Table l.8.--Computation of Raw Frequency, Mean Frequency,
Raw Minutes, Mean Minutes and Percent of Time
Utilized in Activities Listed and Their
Frequency for Principals in a Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Setting.
Raw _ Raw i % of
Activities fi Xfi Minutes Minutes Time
Educational
Leadership 111 22.20 1513 302.60 24.02
Miscellaneous 234 46.80 2250 450.00 35.71
Personal 47 9.40 277 55.40 4.40
Appellate 96 19.20 635 127.00 10.08
Miscellaneous
Appellate 316 63.20 1625 325.00 25.79
Total 804 160.80 6300 1260.00 100.00

 

(Ho) for the frequency and time of miscellaneous appellate
problems. Therefore, the alternate hypothesis (H1) is
accepted. The test procedure led to the rejection of the
hypothesis (HO) for the frequency of appellate problems but
did not reject the hypothesis for the time of appellate
problems. The reader will note this in Tables 1.9, 1.0,

1.1, and 1.1.2.

97

Table 1.9.--Anova Table for Frequency of Miscellaneous
Appellate Problems for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 4665.60 73.3585 .0001
Within Groups 8 63.60

Total 9

 

Table 1.9 indicates a mean square of 4665.60 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 63.60 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 73.3585, and a P value of
.0001. The variable has a standard deviation (8) of
7.9750. Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the
alternate hypothesis (H1) is accepted. The significant
difference is that the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting had a greater frequency of miscellaneous appellate
problems than the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting.

Table l.O.--Anova Table for Time of Miscellaneous Appellate

Problems for Principals in High and Low Socio-
economic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 73102.50 13.2552 .0066
Within Groups 8 5515.00

Total 9

 

98

Table 1.0 indicates a mean square of 73102.50 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 5515.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 13.2552 and a P value of .0066.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 74.2630.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternate
hypothesis (H1) is accepted. The significant difference is
that the principals in the low socioeconomic setting spent
more time in working with miscellaneous appellate problems
than the principals in the high socioeconomic setting.

Table l.l.l.--Anova Table for Frequency of Appellate

Problems for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 532.90 15.2257 .0046
Within Groups 8 35.00

Total 9

 

Table 1.1.1 indicates a mean square of 532.90 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 35.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 15.2257 and a P value of .0046.
The variable has a standard deviation of 5.9161. Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternate hypothe-
sis (H1) is accepted. The significant difference is that
the principals in the low socioeconomic setting had a
greater frequency of appellate problems than the principals

in the high socioeconomic setting.

99

Table l.l.2.--Anova Table for Time of Appellate Problems for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 22562.50 4.2876 .0722
Within Groups 8 5262.25

Total 9

 

Table 1.1.2 indicates a mean square of 22562.50 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 5262.25 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 4.2876 and a P value of .0722.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 72.5414.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic

setting in the time spent in working with appellate problems.

Question 3

Is there a difference between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System in the amount of time utilized
per educational leadership activity during a normal workday
(8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)? Is there a difference in frequency
per educational leadership activity?

H :uHi = uLo. There is no difference between ele-

O

mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic

100

settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount

of time utilized per educational leadership activity during

a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)? There is no differ-
ence in frequency per educational leadership activity.

Hl:uHi # uLo. There is a difference between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time utilized per educational leadership activity during
a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.). There is a differ-
ence in frequency per educational leadership activity.

The educational leadership activities tested are
Curriculum Organization, Instructional Improvement,
Establishment of Mutually Accepted Goals, Classroom Super-
vision, Examination and Study of Printed Materials to
Improve Professionally for Self and Staff, Maintaining
Order and Discipline, Providing Adequate Facilities for
Students, Staff and Community, Coordinating, Reporting to
Superordinates, Reporting to Colleagues, Reporting to Sub-
ordinates, Determining Roles, Utilization of Educational
Resources of the Community, Planning in Advance for Staff
Assignments, Developing and Improving Student Promotional
Policies, Curriculum Change and Improvement and Interpreting
School Policies. The following Anova tables describe the

results of the data for each educational leadership activity.

101

Table 1.1.3.--Anova Table for Frequency of Curriculum
Organization for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 .09 .7826 .4022
Within Groups 8 1.15

Total 9

 

Table 1.1.3 indicates a mean square of .09 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 1.15 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of .7826 and a P value of .4022.
The variable has a standard deviation (8) of 1.0724.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the frequency of activities in curriculum organi-
zation.

Table l.l.4.--Anova Table for Time of Curriculum Organi-

zation for Principals in High and Low Socio-
Economic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 3802.50 1.3631 .2767
Within Groups 8 2789.55

Total 9

 

102

Table 1.1.4 indicates a mean square of 3802.50 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 2789.55 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 1,3631 and a P value of .2767.
The variable has a standard deviation (8) of 52.8162.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in curriculum organization
activities.

Table 1.1.5.--Anova Table for Frequency of Instructional

Improvement for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 6.40 1.6410 .2361
Within Groups 8 3.90

Total 9

 

Table 1.1.5 indicates a mean square of 6.40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 3.90 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 1.6410 and a P value of .2361.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 1.9748.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-

economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic

103

setting in the frequency of activities in instructional
improvement.
Table 1.1.6.--Anova Table for Time of Instructional Improve-

ment for Principals in High and Low Socio-
economic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 1464.10 1.6235 .2384
Within Groups 8 901.80

Total 9

 

Table 1.1.6 indicates a mean square of 1464.10 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 901.80 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 1.6235 and a P value of .2384.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 30.0300.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in instructional improvement
activities.

Establishment of Mutually Accepted Goals, another
educational leadership activity, had no frequency in either
group, high or low socioeconomic setting, and as a result
it had no time reported. Therefore, the hypothesis (H0)
is not rejected. The researcher takes this as evidence

that there is no significant difference between the

104

principals in the high socioeconomic setting and the
principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the fre-
quency of and time spent in the establishment of mutually
accepted goals.

Table 1.1.7.-—Anova Table for Frequency of Classroom

Supervision for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 36.10 8.0222 .0221
Within Groups 8 4.50

Total 9

 

Table 1.1.7 indicates a mean square of 36.10 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 4.50 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 8.0222 and a P value of .0221.
The variable has a standard devision (S) of 2.1213. There—
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternate
hypothesis (H1) is accepted. The significant difference is
that the principals in the high socioeconomic setting had

a greater frequency of activities in classroom supervision

than the principals in the low socioeconomic setting.

105

Table l.1.8.--Anova Table for Time of Classroom Supervision
for Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 15366.40 2.5261 .1507
Within Groups 8 6083.00

Total 9

 

Table 1.1.8 indicates a mean square of 15366.40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 6083.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.5261 and a P value of .1507.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 77.9936.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in classroom supervision.

Table l.l.9.--Anova Table for Frequency of Examination and
Study of Printed Materials to Improve

Professionally for Self and Staff for
’Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.
Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 4.90 1.4412 .2643
Within Groups 8 3.40

Total 9

 

106

Table 1.1.9 indicates a mean square of 4.90 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 3.40 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 1.4412 and a P value of .2643.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 1.8439. The
variable has a standard deviation (S) of 1.8439. Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher takes
this as evidence that there is no significant difference
between the principals in the high socioeconomic setting
and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the
frequency of activities in the examination and study of
printed materials to improve professionally for self and
staff.

Table 1.2.0.--Anova Table for Time of Examination and Study
of Printed Materials to Improve Professionally

for Self and Staff for Principals in High and
Low Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 2433.60 2.2228 .1744
Within Groups 8 1094.85

Total 9

 

Table 1.2.0 indicates a mean square of 2433.60 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 1094.85 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.2228 and a P value of .1744.
The variable has a standard deviation (8) of 33.0885.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The

researcher takes this as evidence that there is no

107

significant difference between the principals in the high
socioeconomic setting and the principals in the low socio-
economic setting in the time spent in the examination and
study of printed materials to improve for self and staff.
Table 1.2.1.--Anova Table for Frequency of Maintaining Order

and Discipline for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 .10 .0220 .8859
Within Groups 8 4.55

Total 9

 

Table 1.2.1 indicates a mean square of .10 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 4.55 for within
groups (MSW), an F Ratio of .0220 and a P value of .8859.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 2.1331. There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher
takes this as evidence that there is no significant differ-
ence between the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting
in the frequency of activities in maintaining order and

discipline.

108

Table l.2.2.--Anova Table for Time of Maintaining Order and
Discipline for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 270.40 .6482 .4441
Within Groups 8 417.15

Total 9

 

Table 1.2.2 indicates a mean square of 270.40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 417.15 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of .6482 and a P value of .4441.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 20.4243.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in maintaining order and dis-
cipline.

Table 1.2.3.--Anova Table for Frequency of Providing
Adequate Facilities for Students, Staff and

Community for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 16.90 2.2838 .1692
Within Groups 8 7.40

Total 9

 

109

Table 1.2.3 indicates a mean square of 16.90 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 7.40 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.2838 and a P value of .1692.
The variable has a standard deviation (8) of 2.7203. There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher
takes this as evidence that there is no significant differ-
ence between the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic in the
frequency of activities in providing adequate facilities
for students, staff and community.

Table l.2.4.--Anova Table for Time of Providing Adequate

Facilities for Students, Staff and Community
for Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 4.90 .0031 .9571
Within Groups 8 1588.75

Total 9

 

Table 1.2.4 indicates a mean square of 4.90 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 1588.75 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of .0031 and a P value of .9571.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 39.8591.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-

economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic

110

setting in the time spent in providing adequate facilities

for students, staff and community.

Table l.2.5.--Anova Table for Frequency of Coordinating
for Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 48.40 2.2000 .1763
Within Groups 8 22.00

Total 9

 

Table 1.2.5 indicates a mean square of 48.40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 22.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.2000 and a P value of .1763.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 4.6904.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the frequency of activities in coordinating.

Table 1.2.6.--Anova Table for Time of Coordinating for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.
Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 12960.00 2.9124 .1263
Within Groups 8 4450.00

Total 9

 

111

Table 1.2.6 indicates a mean square of 12960.00 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 4450.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.9124 and a P value of .1263.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 66.7083.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in coordinating.

Table l.2.7.--Anova Table for Frequency of Reporting to

Superordinates for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 2.50 2.0833 .1870
Within Groups 8 1.20

Total 9

 

Table 1.2.7 indicates a mean square of 2.50 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 1.20 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.0833 and a P value of .1870.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 1.0954. There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher
takes this as evidence that there is no significant differ-
ence between principals in the high socioeconomic setting
and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the

frequency of activities in reporting to superordinates.

112

Table 1.2.8.--Anova Table for Time of Reporting to Super-
ordinates for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 3385.60 2.1249 .1831
Within Groups 8 1593.30

Total 9

 

Table 1.2.8 indicates a mean square of 3385.60 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 1593.30 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.1249 and a P value of .1831.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 39.9162.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in reporting to superordinates.

Reporting to Colleagues, another educational leader-
ship activity, had no frequency in either groups, high or
low socioeconomic setting, and as a result it had no time
reported. Therefore the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected.
The researcher takes this as evidence that there is no
significance difference between the principals in the high
socioeconomic setting and the principals in the low socio-
economic in the frequency of and time spent in reporting to

colleagues.

113

Table 1.2.9.--Anova Table for Frequency of Reporting to
Subordinates for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 .40 .8000 .3973
Within Groups 8 .50

Total 9

 

Table 1.2.9 indicates a mean square of .40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of .50 for within groups
(MSW), an F ratio of .8000 and a P value of .3973. The
variable has a standard deviation (S) of .7071. Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher takes
this as evidence that there is no significant difference
between the principals in the high socioeconomic setting and
the principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the
frequency of reporting to subordinates.

Table l.3.0.--Anova Table for Time of Reporting to Sub-

ordinates for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 435.60 1.5178 .2530
Within Groups 8 287.00

Total 9

 

114

Table 1.3.0 indicates a mean square of 435.60 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 287.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 1.5178 and a P value of .2530.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 16.9411.
Therefore the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in reporting to subordinates:

Determining Roles, another educational leadership
activity, had no frequency in either group, high or low
socioeconomic setting, and as a result it had no time
reported. Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected.
The researcher takes this as evidence that there is no
significant difference between the principals in the high
socioeconomic setting and the principals in the low socio-
economic setting in the frequency of and time spent in
determining roles.

Table 1.3.1.--Anova Table for Frequency of Utilization of

Educational Resources of the Community for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.
Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 0.00 0.00 1.0000
Within Groups 8 3.00

Total 9

 

115

Table 1.3.1 indicates a mean square of 0.00 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 3.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 0.00 and a P value of 1.0000.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 1.7321. There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher
takes this as evidence that there is no significant differ-
ence between the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting
in the frequency of utilization of educational resources of
the community.

Table l.3.2.--Anova Table for Time of Utilization of Edu-

cational Resources of the Community for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 102.40 .3022 .5976
Within Groups 8 338.90

Total 9

 

Table 1.3.2 indicates a mean square of 102.40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 338.90 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of .3022 and a P value of .5976.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 18.4092.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-

economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic

116

setting in the time spent in the utilization of educational
resources of the community.
Table 1.3.3.-—Anova Table for Frequency of Planning in

Advance for Staff Assignments for Principals
in High and Low Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 0.00 0.0000 1.0000
Within Groups 8 .20

Total 9

 

Table 1.3.3 indicates a mean square of 0.00 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of .20 for within groups
(MSW), an F ratio of 0.0000 and a P value of 1.0000. The
variable has a standard deviation (8) of .4472. Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher takes
this as evidence that there is no significant difference
between the principals in the high socioeconomic setting
and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the
frequency of planning in advance for staff assignments.
Table l.3.4.--Anova Table for Time of Planning in Advance

for Staff Assignments for Principals in High
and Low Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 32.40 .6480 .4441
Within Groups 8 50.00

Total 9

 

117

Table 1.3.4 indicates a mean square of 32.40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 50.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of .6480 and a P value of .4441.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 7.0711. There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher
takes this as evidence that there is no significant differ-
ence between the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting
in the time spent in planning in advance for staff assign-
ments.

Developing and Improving Student Promotional
Policies, another educational leadership activity, had no
frequency in either group, high or low socioeconomic setting,
and as a result, it had no time reported. Therefore, the
hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher takes this
as evidence that there is no significant difference between
the principals in the high socioeconomic setting and the
principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the fre-
quency of and time spent in developing and improving

student promotional policies.

Table l.3.5.--Anova Table for Frequency of Curriculum Change
and Improvement for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 3.60 .2250 .6480
Within Groups 8 16.00

Total 9

 

118

Table 1.3.5 indicates a mean square of 3.60 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 16.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of .2250 and a P value of .6480.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 4.000. There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher
takes this as evidence that there is no significant differ-
ence between the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting
in the frequency of curriculum change and improvement.
Table l.3.6.--Anova Table for Time of Curriculum Change and

Improvement for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 1464.10 .3277 .5828
Within Groups 8 4467.25

Total 9

 

Table 1.3.6 indicates a mean square of 1464.10 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 4467.25 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of .3277 and a P value of .5828.

The variable has a standard deviation (8) of 66.8375. There-
fore the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher
takes this as evidence that there is no significant differ—
ence between the principals in the high socioeconomic

setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting

in the time spent in curriculum change and improvement.

119

Interpreting School Policies, another educational
leadership activity, had no frequency in either group, high
or low socioeconomic setting, and as a result it had no time
reported. Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected.
The researcher takes this as evidence that there is no
significant difference between principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the frequency of and time spent in interpreting

school policies.

Question 4

 

Is there a difference between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System in the amount of time utilized
per appellate problem during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--
4:30 p.m.)? Is there a difference in frequency per
appellate problem?

H :uHi = uLo. There is no difference between ele-
mentary school principals in the high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time utilized per appellate problem during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.). There is no difference in
frequency per appellate problem?

HozuHi # uLo. There is a difference between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount

of time utilized per appellate problem during a normal

120

workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.). There is a difference in
frequency per appellate problem.

The appellate problems tested are Novel Conditions,
Conflict of Jurisdiction, Lack of Clarity in Policy, Breach
.in Policy, Requests From Superordinates, and Miscellaneous
Appellate. The following Anova tables describe the results
of the data for each appellate problem:

Table 1.3.7.--Anova Table for Frequency of Novel Conditions
for Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 .90 2.2500 .1721
Within Groups 8 .40

Total 9

 

Table 1.3.7 indicates a mean square of .90 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of .40 for within groups
(MSW), an F ratio of 2.2500 and a P value of .1721. The
variable has a standard deviation (S) of .6325. Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher takes
this as evidence that there is no significant difference
between the principals in the high socioeconomic setting
and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the

frequency of novel conditions.

121

Table l.3.8.--Anova Table for Time of Novel Conditions for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 16.90 1.2158 .3023
Within Groups 8 13.90

Total 9

 

Table 1.3.8 indicates a mean square of 16.90 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 13.90 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 1.2158 and a P value of .3023.
The variable has a standard deviation (8) of 3.7283.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in novel conditions.

Table l.3.9.--Anova Table for Frequency of Conflict of

Jurisdiction for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 .10 1.0000 .3466
Within Groups 8 .10

Total 9

 

122

Table 1.3.9 indicates a mean square of .10 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of .10 for within groups
(MSW), an F ratio of 1.0000 and a P value of .3466. The
variable has a standard deviation (S) of .3162. Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher takes
this as evidence that there is no significant difference
between the principals in the high socioeconomic setting
and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the
frequency of conflict of jurisdication.

Table l.4.0.-—Anova Table for Time of Conflict of Juris-

diction for Principals in High and Low Socio-
economic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 1.60 1.0000 .3466
Within Groups 8 1.60

Total 9

 

Table 1.4.0 indicates a mean square of 1.60 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 1.60 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 1.0000 and a P value of .3466.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 1.2649.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between principals in the high socioeconomic
setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting

in the time spent in conflict of jurisdiction.

123

Table l.4.l.--Anova Table for Frequency of Lack of Clarity
in Policy for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 .40 2.6667 .1412
Within Groups 8 .15

Total 9

 

Table 1.4.1 indicates a mean square of .40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of .15 for within groups
(MSW), an F ratio of 2.6667 and a P value of .1412. The
variable has a standard deviation (S) of .3873. Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher takes
this as evidence that there is no significant difference
between the principals in the high socioeconomic setting
and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the
frequency of lack of clarity in policy.

Table l.4.2.--Anova Table for Time of Lack of Clarity in

Policy for Principals in High and Low Socio-
economic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 8.10 2.6129 .1477
Within Groups 3.10

Total 9

 

124

Table 1.4.2 indicates a mean square of 8.10 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 3.10 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.6129 and a P value of .1477.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 1.7607.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no differ-
ence between the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting
in the time spent in lack of clarity in policy.

Table 1.4.3.--Anova Table for Frequency of Breach in Policy
for Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 532.90 15.9075 .0041
Within Groups 8

Total 9

 

Table 1.4.3 indicates a mean square of 532.90 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 33.50 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 15.9075 and a P value of .0041.
The variable has a standard deviation (8) of 5.7879.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alter-
nate hypothesis (H1) is accepted. The significant differ-
ence is that the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting had a greater frequency of breach in policy than

the principals in the high socioeconomic setting.

125

Table 1.4.4.-‘Anova Table for Time of Breach in Policy for
Principals in High and Low Socioeconomic

 

 

Settings.

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 22278.40 4.0591 .0787
Within Groups 8 5488.50

Total 9

 

Table 1.4.4 indicates a mean square of 22278.40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of $488.50 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 4.0591 and a P value of .0787.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 74.0844.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between the principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the time spent in breach in policy.

Table l.4.5.--Anova Table for Frequency of Requests From

Superordinates for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 .40 2.6667 .1412
Within Groups 8 .15

Total 9

 

126

Table 1.4.5 indicates a mean square of .40 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of .15 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.6667 and a P value of .1412.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of .3873. There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher
takes this as evidence that there is no significant differ-
ence between the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting
in the frequency of requests from superordinates.

Table 1.4.6.--Anova Table for Time of Requests From Super-

ordinates for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 2.50 2.5000 .1526
Within Groups 8 1.00

Total 9

 

Table 1.4.6 indicates a mean square of 2.50 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 1.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 2.5000 and a P value of .1526.
The variable has a standard deviation of 1.0000. Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The researcher takes
this as evidence that there is no significant difference
between the principals in the high socioeconomic setting
and the principals in the low socioeconomic setting in the

time spent in requests from superordinates.

127

Table 1.4.7.--Anova Table for Frequency of Miscellaneous
Appellate for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 4665.60 73.3585 .0001
Within Groups 8 63.60

Total 9

 

Table 1.4.7 indicates a mean square of 4665.60 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 63.60 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 73.3585 and a P value of .0001.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 7.9750.
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternate
hypothesis (H1) is accepted. The significant difference is
that the principals in the low socioeconomic setting had a
greater frequency of miscellaneous appellate problems than
the principals in the high socioeconomic setting.

Table 1.4.8.-~Anova Table for Time of Miscellaneous

Appellate for Principals in High and Low
Socioeconomic Settings.

 

 

Source df Mean Square F Ratio P Value
Between Groups 1 73102.50 13.2552 .0066
Within Groups 8 5515.00

Total 9

 

128

Table 1.4.8 indicates a mean square of 73102.50 for
between groups (MSB), a mean square of 5515.00 for within
groups (MSW), an F ratio of 13.2552 and a P value of .0066.
The variable has a standard deviation (S) of 74.2630. There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternate
hypothesis (H1) is accepted. The significant difference
is that the principals in the low socioeconomic setting
spent more time working with miscellaneous appellate
problems than the principals in the high socioeconomic

setting.

Question 5

Are there differences between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System in the kinds of activities in
educational leadership executed by them during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)?

H :uHi = uLo. There are no differences between
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of activities in educational leadership executed by them
during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.).

HozuHi # uLo. There are differences between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of activities in educational leadership executed by them

during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.).

129

In perusing the data, the researcher noted a differ-
ence between principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings. The researcher selected, for the purpose of this
analysis, to view the presence of frequency and time for one
group, principals in a high or low socioeconomic setting,
and the absence of frequency and time for the other groups,
as the determinant of the differences in the kinds of edu-
cational leadership activities. It is interesting to note
that there is only one difference between the two groups in
educational leadership activities. The difference is the
principals in the high socioeconomic setting had a frequency
of seven (7) for a total time of one hundred fifty-six (156)
minutes and no frequency and time for principals in the low

socioeconomic setting in the educational leadership activity,

Examination and Study of Printed Materials to Improve for
Self and Staff. However, the reader will recall that the
hypothesis (HO) for this particular activity is not
rejected. The difference in frequency and time was not
significant. However, the hypothesis (Ho) was not tested

for differences in kinds.

Question 6

 

Are there differences between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System in the kinds of appellate
problems experienced by them during a normal workday

(8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)?

130

HO:uHi = uLo. There are no differences between
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of appellate problems experienced by them during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.).

HozuHi # uLo. There are differences between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of appellate problems experienced by them during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.).

Again, the researcher opted to view the presence of
frequency and time for one group, principals in a high or
low socioeconomic setting, and the absence of frequency and
time for the other group, as the determinant of the differ-
ences in the kinds of appellate problems. There are four
appellate problems that produced differences in kinds.

They are Novel Conditions, Conflict of Jurisdiction, Lack
of Clarity in Policy, and Requests from Superordinates.
Principals in the low socioeconomic setting had a frequency
of three (3) and a total time of thirteen (13) minutes for
Novel Conditions and a frequency of one (1) and a total
time of four (4) minutes for Conflict of Jurisdiction.
Principals in the high socioeconomic setting had no fre-
quency and time in these two activities. Principals in the
high socioeconomic setting had a frequency of two (2) and

a total time of nine (9) minutes for Lack of Clarity in

Policy and a frequency of two (2) and a total time of

131

five (5) minutes for Requests from Superordinates. Princi-
pals in the low socioeconomic setting had no frequency and
time in these two activities. However, the reader will
note that the hypothesis (HO) for these activities is not
rejected. The differences in frequencies and time were
not significant. However, the hypothesis (HO) was not

tested for differences in kinds.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary
As stated in Chapter I, the purpose of this study

was to explore, investigate, identify, and describe differ-
ences between principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time spent in and frequency of certain leadership
activities and appellate problems. The study also investi-
gated differences in the kinds of educational leadership
activities and appellate problems between principals in
high and low socioeconomic settings. Also stated in
Chapter I is that this is a descriptive analysis of the
aforementioned activities in educational leadership and
appellate problems. With this in mind, the study is
predicated upon the philosophy that it is important to know
"the state of affairs" in our organization; "the state of
affairs" is, "what we have done in the past," and ”what

we are doing now." This gives us information and a basis
upon which to plan for educational improvement and effective

programming.

132

133

As indicated by the studies done by Cross and
Bennett, it appears that principals of schools in a low
socioeconomic setting are particularly burdened with
appellate problems. A study by Cross still in progress has
reinforced the above. Cross and Bennett's study indicated
the following: Principals in high settings had 53 percent
creative problems, 6 percent intermediary problems, and 41
percent appellate problems. Principals in low socioeconomic
settings had 32 percent creative problems, 7 percent inter-
mediary problems, and 61 percent appellate problems. In
Cross's study it was found that a group of inner-city
principals had 20 percent creative problems 12 percent
intermediary problems, and 68 percent appellate problems.
Thus, it is apparent that each study supports the other.
Another study that is related to the above studies is the
one done by Jennings in which he set out to find from
Michigan principals what they believe to be the most
rewarding duty, the area in which they spend the greatest
amount of time, and the area in which they would most like
to Spend more time. He discovered that Michigan principals
are spending a majority of time organizing and managing
their schools but aspire to activities more directly
connected with the improvement of instruction. They
reported that they would prefer to give more time to proper
program and curriculum.

Thus, we see that in those studies there are strong

similarities in what some principals are doing and what

134

some principals wish to do. It is apparent that the
principals studied by these authors need to spend more time
in educational leadership activities: particularly in
program development, curriculum, and instructional improve—
ment.
Willard S. Elsbree, Harold J. McNally and Richard
Wynn, in their book, Elementary Administration and Super-
vision, state:
One of the most important tasks of the elementary
school principal is to provide leadership in curriculum
organization and instructional improvement.1

Albert Shuster and Wilson F. Wetzler, in their

book, Leadership in Elementary School Administration and

 

Supervision, state:

 

The elementary school principal is thus faced with
the primary task of developing an organization in his
school that will produce better teaching. It should be
pointed out that the principal must lead his staff
democratically for this purpose among others, and he
must help his teachers to recognize their responsibili-
ties for the education of children.2

Raloy E. Brown, in his article in an issue of The
National Elementary Principal, states:

The primary responsibility of the elementary school
principal in the 1970's must be one of an educational

 

lWillard S. Elsbree, Harold J. McNally, and Richard
Wynn, Elementary Administration and Su ervision (New York:
American Book Company, Inc., I967), p. VI.

2Albert H. Shuster and Wilson F. Wetzler, Leader-
ship in Elementary School Administration and Su erviSion
TBoston: Houghton Mifflin Company, I958), p. 3%.

 

135

leader.3 If he is to survive in the next decade, he
must reject the concept that his primary role is one of
"keeping school."4

James B. Burr, et al., in their book, Elementary

 

School Administration, state: "The 'manager housekeeper'
concept of the role of the principalship must give way to
that of the 'educational leader and statesman.”S

Ray Cross, in his article in an issue of The National

 

Elementarerrincipal, states: "He must become the edu-
cational leader of his faculty and staff."6
In Chapter II leadership is defined in a manner
which encompasses many factors that are significant in
formulating a perspective of leadership as well as serving

as guidelines for the principalship. There are two types

of leaders, the functional leader and the status leader.

The functional leader or operational leader is regarded by
many authors as the better type of leader for our schools.
However, leadership is not a single unitary phenomenon.

Its manifestations vary with the demands of the moment and

 

3Raloy E. Brown, "Humanizing the Role of the Ele-
mentary School Principal," The National Elementa Princi-
al, The National Association of EIementary SchooI Princi-
pa 5, Vol. XLIX, No. 5 (Washington, D.C., April, 1970),
p. 24.

41bid., p. 25.

5James B. Burr, et al., Elementary School Adminis-
tration (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1963), p. vii.

6Ray Cross. "The Principal As a Counterpuncher,"
The National Elementary Principal, The National Association
of Elementary School Principals, Vol. LI, No. 2 (Washing-
ton, D.C., October, 1971), p. 27.

136

the setting and the kinds of leadership shown by a functional
leader may be determined by the expectancy and concepts of
leadership held by the group which he serves.

The scope of the principalship includes varied and
significant leadership functions in the management of the
elementary school. Some of these functions are directing,
coordinating, organizing, reporting, setting goals, making
policies, determining roles, consulting, administering the
curriculum, evaluating the educational program, providing
for in-service education and working with community per-
sonnel as well as involving school personnel.

It is quite clear, as supported by the studies
mentioned in Chapters I and II, that principals who are
"counterpunching" or working with appellate problems for a
substantial proportion of their time are not exercising
their educational leadership abilities to their fullest.
Thus, it becomes crucial that principals in this category
make positive revisions in their activities (exercise more
leadership).

Having given statistical analyses in Chapter IV of
the data collected, it remains the purpose of the first
section of this chapter to summarize the findings. For the
purpose of simplification and clarification, the summary
will describe each question or hypothesis (Ho) separately.

The null hypothesis was used to test the questions.
As indicated in Chapter IV, in cases where the hypothesis

tested is true, the mean square between (M83) and the mean

137

square within (MSW) are nearly the same size, and the P value
gives the probability of finding an F ratio, which is
calculated by the division of the mean square within (MSW)
into the mean square between (M88), as large or larger than
the calculated F ratio. Therefore, when the P value is
greater than the selected alpha level (a.05), the level of
significant, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. When the

F ratio is too large and the P value is less than or equal

 

to the selected alpha level (a.05), the level of signifi-

cance, the researcher takes this as evidence that the

 

hypothesis (H0) is not true, and therefore, rejects the

hypothesis (HO) and accepts the alternate hypothesis (H1).

Question 1

What amount of time during a normal workday (8:00
a.m.--4:30 p.m.) do elementary school principals in high
and low socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School
System utilize in the execution of educational leadership
activities? What is the frequency of educational leadership
activities?

H :uHi = uLo. There is no difference in the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in the
execution of educational leadership activities. There is
no difference in the frequency of educational leadership

activities.

138

Hl:uHi # uLo. There is a difference in the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in the
execution of educational leadership activities. There is a
difference in the frequency of educational leadership
activities.

As indicated in tables 1.3 and 1.4 in Chapter IV,
principals in the high socioeconomic setting spent more
time in educational leadership activities than principals
in the low socioeconomic setting on a percentage basis and
the frequency is greater but the test procedure did not
reject the hypothesis (HO) as you noted in tables 1.5 and
1.6 in Chapter IV. In table 1.5 the P value of .0992 for
frequency exceeded the selected alpha level (a.05). There-
fore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. In table 1.6
the P value of .1096 for time exceeded the selected alpha
level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not
rejected. The researcher takes this as evidence that there
is no significant difference between the principals in the
high socioeconomic setting and the principals in the low
socioeconomic setting in the frequency of and time for
overall educational leadership activities. It is important
to note, however, that there is a significant difference in
frequency only in classroom supervision, an educational
leadership activity, but placing all of the educational

leadership activities in one category yield no significance

139

difference in frequency and time between principals in the
high socioeconomic setting and the low socioeconomic
setting. The difference in the frequency of classroom

supervision is pointed out in the answer to Question 3.

Question 2

What amount of time during a normal workday (8:00
a.m.--4:30 p.m.) do elementary school principals in high
and low socioeconomic settings in the Saginaw Public School
System utilize in working with appellate problems? What is
the frequency of appellate problems?

Ho:uHi = uLo. There is no difference in the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in
working with appellate problems. There is a difference in
the frequency of appellate problems.

Ho:uHi # uLo. There is a difference in the amount
of time during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.) that
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System utilize in
working with appellate problems. There is a difference in
the frequency of appellate problems.

Tables 1.9 and 1.0 in Chapter IV indicate a signi-
ficant difference in frequency and time for miscellaneous
appellate problems. In table 1.9 the P value of .0001 was

less than the alpha level (a.05). Therefore, the

140

hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternate hypothesis
(H1) is accepted. In table 1.0 the P value of .0066 was
less than the alpha level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothe-
sis (H0) is rejected and the alternate hypothesis (H1) is
accepted. The significant difference in the principals is
the low socioeconomic setting have a higher frequency of
and more time spent in miscellaneous appellate problems
than the principals in the high socioeconomic setting.
Table 1.1.1 in Chapter IV indicates a significant
difference in the frequency of appellate problems. In
table 1.1.1 the P value of .0046 is less than the alpha
level (a.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is rejected
and the alternate hypothesis (H1) is accepted. The signi-
ficant difference is the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting had a higher frequency of overall appellate
problems than the principals in the high socioeconomic
setting. Table 1.1.2 in Chapter IV indicates no significant
difference in the time of appellate problems. In table
1.1.2 the P value of .0722 is greater than the selected
alpha level (a.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not
rejected. The researcher takes this as evidence that there
is no significant difference between the principals in the
high socioeconomic setting and the principals in the low
socioeconomic setting in the time for overall appellate

problems.

141

Question 3

Is there a difference between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System in the amount of time utilized
per educational leadership activity during a normal workday
(8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)? Is there a difference in frequency
per educational leadership activity?

HO:qu = uLo. There is no difference between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time utilized per educational leadership activity during
a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.). There is no
difference in frequency per educational leadership activity.

Ho:uHi # uLo. There is a difference between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time utilized per educational leadership activity during
a normal workday (8:00 a.m.-—4:30 p.m.). There is a
difference in frequency per educational leadership activity.

There is no significant difference in each of the
educational leadership activity in frequency and time with
the exception of and the significant difference in the
frequency of classroom supervision. Table 1.1.7 in
Chapter IV indicates a P value of .0221 which is less than
the selected alpha level (a.05). Therefore, the hypothesis
(H0) is rejected and the alternate hypothesis (H1) is

accepted. Table 1.1.8 indicates a P value of .1507 which

142

exceeds the selected alpha level (a.05). Therefore, the
hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. There is no significant
difference in time for classroom supervision. The researcher
takes this as evidence that the principals in the high
socioeconomic setting had a higher frequency in classroom
supervision than the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting and there is no significant difference between the

groups in the time spent in classroom supervision.

Question 4

Is there a difference between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System in the amount of time utilized
per appellate problem? Is there a difference in frequency
per appellate problem?

HO:uHi = uLo. There is no difference between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time utilized per appellate problem. There is no
difference in frequency per appellate problem.

Ho:uHi # uLo. There is a difference between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the amount
of time utilized per appellate problem. There is a differ-
ence in frequency per appellate problem.

There are significant differences in breach in

policy and miscellaneous appellate. No differences were

143

found in the other appellate problems. Student discipline
accounted for the significant difference in the frequency
of Breach in Policy. Table 1.4.3 in Chapter IV indicates a
P value of .0041 for frequency which is less than the
selected alpha level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis
(H0) is rejected and the alternate hypothesis (H1) is
accepted. The significant difference is the principals in
the low socioeconomic setting had a higher frequency of
Breach in Policy than the principals in the high socio-
economic setting. There is a significant difference in the
frequency of Breach in Policy. Table 1.4.4 indicates a P
value of .0787 for time which is greater than the selected
alpha leval (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not
rejected. There is no difference in time for Breach in
Policy. There is a significant difference in the frequency
and time of miscellaneous appellate problems. Table 1.4.7
indicates a P value of .0001 which is less than the selected
alpha level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is
rejected and the alternate hypothesis (H1) is accepted.
There is a significant difference in the frequency of
miscellaneous appellate problems. Table 1.4.8 indicates a
P value of .0066 which is less than the selected alpha
level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is rejected
and the alternate hypothesis (H1) is accepted. There is a
significant difference in time for miscellaneous appellate
problems. The significant difference is that the principals

in the low socioeconomic setting had a higher frequency of

144

and spent more time in miscellaneous appellate problems

than the principals in the high socioeconomic setting.

Question 5

Are there differences between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
Saginaw Public School System in the kinds of activities in
educational leadership executed by them during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)?

Ho:uHi = uLo. There are no differences between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of activities in educational leadership executed by them
during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)?

H1:uHi # uLo. There are differences between ele—
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of activities in educational leadership executed by them
during a normal workday (8:00 a.m.-—4:30 p.m.).

As indicated in Chapter IV, the determinant of a

difference is the presence of frequency and time for one

group of principals, high or low socioeconomic setting, and

the absence of frequency and time for the other. This

occurred only in the Examination and Study of Printed

145

Materials to Improve for Self and Staff. Principals in the
high socioeconomic setting had a frequency of seven (7) and
one hundred fifty-six (156) minutes for time. Principals

in the low socioeconomic setting had no frequency and as a
result had no time reported. Table 1.1.9 indicates a P
value of .2643 which is greater than the alpha level (0.05).
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. The
researcher takes this as evidence that there is no signifi-
cant difference between principals in the high socio-
economic setting and the principals in the low socioeconomic
setting in the frequency of Examination and Study of Printed
Materials to Improve for Self and Staff. Table 1.2.0
indicates a P value of .1744 which exceeds the selected
alpha level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not
rejected. The researcher takes this as evidence that there
is no significant difference between the principals in the
high socioeconomic setting and the principals in the low
socioeconomic setting in the time for Examination and Study

of Printed Materials to Improve for Self and Staff.

Question 6
Are there differences between elementary school
principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the

Saginaw Public School System in the kinds of appellate

problems experienced by them during a normal workday

(8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.)?

146

H :uHi = pLo. There are no differences between
elementary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of appellate problems experienced by them during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.--4:30 p.m.).

Hl:uHi # uLo. There are differences between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socioeconomic
settings in the Saginaw Public School System in the kinds
of appellate problems experienced by them during a normal
workday (8:00 a.m.~-4:30 p.m.).

Again, the determinant of a difference is the
presence of frequency and time for one group of principals,
high or low socioeconomic setting, and the absence of
frequency and time for the other. The differences are found
in Novel Conditions, Conflict of Jurisdiction, Lack of
Clarity in Policy, and Requests from Superordinates.
Principals in the low socioeconomic setting had a frequency
of three (3) and thirteen (13) minutes for time for Novel
Conditions. They also had a frequency of one (1) and four
(4) minutes for time for Conflict of Jursidiction. Princi-
pals in the high socioeconomic setting had no frequency and
as a result had no time for Novel Conditions and Conflict
of Jurisdiction. Table 1.3.7 indicates a P value of .1721
which is greater than the selected alpha level (0.05).

Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. There is

147

no significant difference in the frequency of Novel Condi-
tions. Table 1.3.8 indicates a P value of .3023 which is
greater than the selected alpha level (0.05). Therefore,
the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. There is no signifi-
cant difference in time for Novel Conditions. Table 1.3.9
indicates a P value of .3466 which is greater than the
selected alpha level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0)
is not rejected. There is no significant difference in the
frequency of Conflict of Jurisdiction. Table 1.4.0 indi-
cates a P value of .3466 which is greater than the selected
alpha level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not
rejected. There is no significant difference in the time
for Conflict of Jurisdiction. Principals in the high
socioeconomic setting had a frequency of two (2) and nine
(9) minutes for time for Lack of Clarity in Policy. They
also had a frequency of two (2) and five (5) minutes for
time for Requests from Superordinates. Principals in the
low socioeconomic setting had no frequency and as a result
had no time for Lack of Clarity in Policy and Requests from
Superordinates. Table 1.4.1 indicates a P value of .1412
which is greater than the selected alpha level (0.05).
Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected. There is
no significant difference in the frequency of Lack of
Clarity in Policy. Table 1.4.2 indicates a P value of
.1447 which is greater than the selected alpha level
(0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected.

There is no significant difference in the time for Lack of

148

Clarity in Policy. Table 1.4.5 indicates a P value of
.1412 which is greater than the selected alpha level
(0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not rejected.
There is no significant difference in the frequency of
Requests from Superordinates. Table 1.4.6 indicates a P
value of .1526 which is greater than the selected alpha
level (0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis (H0) is not
rejected. There is no significant difference in time for
Requests from Superordinates. The researcher takes this as
evidence that there is no significant difference between
the principals in the high socioeconomic setting and the
principals in the low socioeconomic in the kinds of appellate

problems.

Findings

 

The results of the study led to the following
findings relative to the questions the researcher sought
answers to:

1. Elementary school principals in the high socio-
economic setting spent 40.74 percent of their time

in the execution of educational leadership activities

during a normal workday.

2. Elementary school principals in the low socio-
economic setting spent 24.02 percent of their time

in the execution of educational leadership activi-

ties during a normal workday.

149

There is no significant difference between princi-
pals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
amount of time utilized in the execution of overall
educational leadership activities during a normal
workday.

Elementary school principals in the high socio-
economic setting had a mean frequency (Xfi) of

34.60 for overall educational leadership activities.
Elementary school principals in the low socio-
economic setting had a mean frequency (ifi) of

22.20 for overall educational leadership activities.
There is no significant difference between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socio-
economic settings in the overall frequency of edu-
cational leadership activities during a normal
workday.

Elementary school principals in the high socio-
economic setting spent 14.66 percent of their time
working with appellate problems during a normal
workday.

Elementary school principals in the low socio-
economic setting spent 35.87 percent of their time
working with appellate problems during a normal
workday.

There is a significant difference between principals
in high and low socioeconomic settings in the

frequency and time utilized in working with

10.

11.

12.

13.

150

miscellaneous appellate problems during a normal
workday. Elementary school principals in the low
socioeconomic setting had a higher frequency and
utilized more time in working with miscellaneous
appellate problems during a normal workday.

There is a significant difference in the frequency
of overall appellate problems but not in time of
overall appellate problems. Elementary school
principals in the low socioeconomic setting had a
higher frequency of appellate problems.

There is a significant difference between principals
in high and low socioeconomic settings in the fre—
quency of classroom supervision but not in the time
for classroom supervision. Elementary school
principals in the high socioeconomic setting had a
higher frequency of classroom supervision.

There is a significant difference between princi-
pals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the
frequency of breach in policy (all of which included
student discipline only) but not in time for

breach in policy. Elementary school principals

in the low socioeconomic setting had a higher
frequency of breach in policy (student disciplinary
problems).

There are no significant differences between ele-

mentary school principals in high and low

151

socioeconomic settings in the kinds of educational

leadership activities.

14. There are no significant differences between ele-
mentary school principals in high and low socio-
economic settings in the kinds of appellate
problems.

In the analysis of variance between the principals
in the high socioeconomic setting and the principals in the
low socioeconomic setting relative to the frequency of
activities and the time utilized in the activities in
educational leadership and appellate problems; differ-
ences were found, however, there were instances where
the differences were not considered significant according
to test procedures. In reviewing the results, the
researcher observed that for the principals in the low
socioeconomic setting the data are skewed toward a higher
frequency and a greater amount of time for appellate
problems and the reverse for educational leadership activi-
ties. It is important and interesting to note that though
some differences were not considered significant, there was
a trend of a higher frequency and a greater amount of time
for appellate problems and the reverse for educational
leadership activities for principals in the low socio-
economic setting.

The researcher plans to pursue this problem further

and on a larger scale. It is hoped that the findings and

152

the trend that exists in the study will interest other

researchers in the same direction.

Qonclusions

 

Based on the results of the study, the researcher

made the following conclusions:

1.

Legal fiat, changes in theory, child growth and
development, the socioeconomic and environmental
conditions of the school, and the principal's
philOSOphy have some influences upon his educational
leadership.

Appellate problems are inherent in the principal-
ship but the amount of appellate problems, to some
degree, is dependent upon the principal's edu-
cational leadership.

The organization and discharge of the duties of the
principal are dependent upon his understanding of
the job, his administrative preparation and experi-

ence, and the demands of his time from all levels.

Implications and Recommendations

Having examined the activities of elementary school

principals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the

execution of educational leadership activities and their

experiences with appellate problems and how one affects the

other, it remains the implications of the study and recom-

mendations for improvement based on the results of the

study.

This research proposed to give a descriptive

153

analysis of activities in educational leadership and of
appellate problems and their variability with the school's
socioeconomic setting and did not seek to account for the
differences that exist. The researcher will not abandon the
objectivity of the first chapters to make unreliable
recommendations for the improvement of the activities of
elementary school principals. It is important for the
reader to note that implications and recommendations made
are drawn from the results of the sample but include the
total pOpulation (all of the elementary school principals
in the Saginaw Public School System) from which the sample
was taken.

It appears that appellate problems drive out edu-
cational leadership activities of elementary school princi-
pals in the low socioeconomic setting. They spent 35.87
percent of their time with appellate problems and 24.02
percent of their time in the execution of educational
leadership activities. It is recommended that they make
plans and follow through with these plans to spend less
time with appellate problems and more time in executing
educational leadership activities.

There are significant differences between princi-
pals in high and low socioeconomic settings in the fre-
quency of breach in policy (student discipline), the
frequency of and time for miscellaneous appellate problems
and the frequency of appellate problems. The following are

recommended in an attempt to decrease the time spent with

154

appellate problems and increase the time spent in educational

leadership activities:

1.

The development and implementation of written dis-
cipline policies for students by parents, teachers,
and principals.

A clear understanding on the part of students,
teachers, parents, and principals of the discipline
policies developed and implemented.

Firmness on the part of the teachers, parents, and
principal in regard to the discipline policies.
Increased delegation of teacher responsibility in
student discipline.

More teaching and supervision of the classroom and
less unnecessary visits to the office on the part
of teachers during teaching hours.

The development and implementation of written
policies concerning the acquisition of teaching
materials and the delegation of the responsibility
of issuing teaching materials to a staff member.
More supervision of students going to and from
school on the part of the total staff.

Increased communication and the development of a
good rapport between patrol boys, squad girls, and
the student body.

It appears that principals in high and low socio-

economic settings spend a substantial amount of time in

miscellaneous activities: 42.63 percent for the principals

155

in the high socioeconomic setting and 35.71 percent for
principals in the low socioeconomic setting. If less time
is spent in miscellaneous activities, more time can be
spent in educational leadership activities. The following
recommendations are made in an attempt to decrease time
spent in miscellaneous activities and increase the time
spent in educational leadership activities:

1. Plan and structure the workday to include less time
for miscellaneous activities and more time for edu-
cational leadership activities.

2. Opt to participate in educational leadership
activities rather than participate in meaningless
activities.

3. Delegate miscellaneous activities to other staff

members whenever possible.

Reflections

It was not the intent of this research to critically
analyze the activities in educational leadership and
appellate problems of principals in the low socioeconomic
setting. Nor was it the aim to make public the inadequacies
of building administration. The researcher was objective
in observing and describing all of the activities in edu-
cational leadership and appellate problems and how one has
some influence, to some degree, upon the other.

The administration was very cooperative in allowing

the researcher complete access to the schools for

156

observations. The participants were very cooperative also.
Many expressed interest in the study and requested a copy
of the results upon its completion.

It took the researcher longer than anticipated to
collect the data. There were administrative meetings held
during the scheduled observation period that were not anti-

cipated by the researcher, therefore, more time was neces-

sary to complete the gathering of data. The researcher

did not really mind putting in the extra time because he
felt strongly that this was the best way for him to collect
the data. Some principals at the beginning, did not under-
stand what was meant by a normal day. As a result, the
researcher found himself going to buildings in the morning
and having to return home because they had scheduled
parent-teacher conferences, they forgot to inform me that
they would be out of their building for three (3) of four
(4) hours, they were very late getting to work because of
personal reasons, etc.

The researcher feels that the writing of his
dissertation is an educational experience that added
tremendously to his knowledge of the behaviors of elementary
school principals and research knowledge and procedures.

He feels that this portion of a doctoral program makes a
tremendous contribution to a student's total education.
The researcher is very happy that he pursued the writing

of this dissertation and feels very strongly that the

157

writing of a dissertation should never be eliminated from
the doctoral program.

The researcher has received excellent guidance from
the chairman of his doctoral committee and the other members
of the committee in the writing and completion of his
dissertation. Without their eXpertise and guidance, it

could not have been done.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, Vivienne and Davies, Daniel R. Patterns of Edu-
cational Leadership. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-
HaII, Inc., I956.

Basil, Douglas C. Leadership Skills for Executive Action.
New York: American Management Association, 197I.

Bass, Bernard M. Administrative Training and Research
Qsing Small Groups. Pittsburg: Managment Research
Center, University of Pittsburgh, 1967.

Beal, George M. Leadership and Dynamic Grou Action.
Ames: Iowa State University Press, I962.

Beer, Michael. LeadershipL_Employee Needs and Motivation.
Columbus: Bureau ofiBusiness Research, Ohio State
University, 1966.

 

Belknap, Robert. Readings in Leadershipin Administration.
New York: Selected Academic Readings, 19 .

Benne, Kenneth D. and Muntyan, Bozidar. Human Relations in
Qurriculum Change. New York: The Dryden'Press,
Inc.,GI951.

 

 

Berman, Louise M. Supervision, Staff Development and
Leadership. Columbus: MerrilI Publishing Co.,

Blackie, John H. Inside the Primary School. New York:
Schocken Books, Inc., I97I.

Boden, P. "Primary School Management." Trends in Edu-
cation. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office,
VoI. 26, April, 1972.

Bowles, Richard D. Effective Elementary School Adminis-
tration. West NyaEk: Parker Publishing Co., I968.

158

159

Bradfield, Luther E. and Kraft, Leonard E. The Elementary
School Principal in Action. Scranton: Inter-
national Textbobk Co., 1976.

 

Brain, George. Increasing Your Administrative Skills in
Dealing with the Instructional Program. EngIewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966.

Brown, Raloy E. "Humanizing the Role of the Elementary
School Principal." The National Elementary Princi-
al. The National Association of Elementary SchooI
Principals, Washington, D.C., Vol. XLIX, No. 5,
April, 1970.

Brown, M. A. "What Kind of Leaders Do Faculty Members
Want?" Qpllege Management. Greenwich: Professional
Magazines, Inc., January, 1973.

Burr, James B., et a1. Elementary School Administration.
Boston: Allyn and'Bacon, Inc., I963.

Campbell, John P., et a1. Managerial Behavior, Performance
and Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-HiII, Inc.,
1970.

Cartwright, Dorwin and Zander, Alvin. Groupprnamics:
Research and Theory, New York: Harper and Row
Publishing Co., 1968.

 

Castetter, William B. and Burchell, Helen R. Egucational
Administration and the Improvement of Instruction.
Danville: The Interstate Printers and Publishers,
Inc., 1967.

 

Christine, Charles T. and Christine, Dorothy W. Practical
guide to Curriculum and Instruction. West Nyack:
Parker Publishing Co., 1971.

 

COOper, John Ellsworth. Elementary School Principalship.
Columbus: C. E. Merrill Books C., 1967.

Cooper, Joseph D. The Art of Decision Makipg. Garden City:
Doubleday Co., I961. ‘

Cribbin, James J. Effective Managerial Leadershi . New
York: American Management Association, 1 72.

Cross, Ray. "The Principal As a Counterpuncher." 232
National Elementary_Principal. Washington: The
National Associatibn of Elementary School Princi-
pals, Vol. LI, No. 2, October, 1971.

160

Doll, Ronald C. Curriculum Improvement: Decision Making
anfi_§rggg§§, Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1970.

Doll, Ronald C. Leadership to Improve Schools. Washington:
C. A. Jones Publishing Co., 1972.

Eisner, Elliot W. Confronting Curriculum Reform. Canada:
Little, Brown and Company, Inc., 197i.

Elsbree, Willard S. and McNally, Harold J. Elementary
School Administration apd Supervision. —New York:
Amefican Book Company, Inc., 1967.

Eriksen, Aase and Messina, Judith. "The Dynamics of Leader-
ship in an Informal School." gpurnal of Research
and Development in Education. COIlege of Education,
University of Georgia, Vol. V, No. 3, Spring, 1972.

 

Faber, Charles F. Elementary School Administration. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Co., I975.

Fessler, Donald R. How to Be A Leader. Washington: Com-
munity Leader Training Associates, 1970.

Fessler, Donald R. Leadership and the_§ffective Group.
Washington: Community Leader Training nstitute,
1969. '

Fiedler, Fred Edward. A Theory of Leaderhip Effectiveness.
New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., 1967.

Goble, Grank G. Excellence in Leadership. New York:
American Management Association, 1972.

Gross, Neal and Herriott, Robert E. Staff Leadership in
Public Schools. New York: Wiley Publishing Co.,
EFF

 

Gross, Neal and Herriott, Robert E. The Professional
gradership of Elementary School_§rincipals.
Cambridge: Harvard University Graduate SEhool of
Education, 1964.

 

Grub, Phillip D. and Loeser, Norman M. Executive Leader-
ship. Wayne: Management Development Institute,

and Social Trends. New York: MacMillan

Gwynn, John M. and Chase, John B. Curriculum Princi 1es
‘_ Pfiinshing
Co., 1969.

 

Hagman, Harlan L. Administration of Elementary Schools.
New York: McGraw-HiIl Book Company, Inc., I956}

161

Harrison, Raymond H. Supervisor Leadership in Education.
New York: AmeriCan Book 0., I968.

Hencley, Stephen P., et al. The Elementary School Principal.
New York: Dodd and Mead Co., I970.

Heyel, Carl. Sharper Skills fprAdministrators and Managers.
Stanford: Motivation, Inc., 1969.

Humbert, Harold F. Creative Leadership, New York: Vantage
Press, Inc., 1967.

Iannone, R. "What Motivates Principals?" gournal of Edu-
cational Research. Madison: Dembar Educational
ResearCh SerVices, Inc., Vol. 66, February, 1973.

 

 

Isherwood, Geoffrey B. "The Principal and His Authority:
An Empirical Study." High School Jourpal, Chapel
Hill: The University ofINorth Carolina Press,
March, 1973.

Jarvis, Oscar T. Cases in Elementar School Administration.
Dubuque: W. C. Brown Co.,‘l 7I.

Jarvis, Oscar T. Elementary School Administration.
Dubuque: W. C. Brown Co.,Il969.

Jennings, James M. The Elementary Principal in Michi an.
Lansing: MiCbigan AssOEiation of Elementary c 001
Principals, March 1, 1972.

Jenson, Theodore J. Elementary School Administration.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.,I967.

Keith, Lowell G. Guide for Elementary School Administra-
tion. Belmont: Wadsworth Puinshing Co., I965.

Kimbrough, Ralph B. Administering Elementary Schools.
New York: MacMilIan Publishing Co., .

Klopf, Gordon J. "The Principal As an Educational Leader
in the Elementary School." Journal of Research and.
Development in Education. CoIlege of EdECation,
University of Georgia, Vol. V, No. 3, Spring, 1972.

 

Knowles, Henry P. and Saxberg, Borje 0. Personality and

LeadershipBehavior. Reading: AddisonJWesley
PubliSbing Co., I971.

Koopman, George R. Curriculum Develgpment. New York:
Center for AppIied Researcb’in Education, 1966.

162

Krug, Edward A. Administering Curriculum Planning. New
York: Harper PEblishing Co., 1956.

Mott, Paul E. The Characteristics of Effective Organi-
zations. New York: Harper and Row Publishing Co.,

Neagley, Ross L. and Evans, Dean. Handbook of Effective
Curriculum Development. Englewood CIiffs: Prentice-
Hall Publishing Co., 1967.

 

 

Nicholas, Lynn N. Effect of Socioeconomic Setting and
Organizational Climate on ProbIems Brought to the
Office. Detroit College of Education, Wayne State
_I—-' .
Univer51ty, 1965.

Otto, Henry J. and Sanders, David C. Elementary School
Organization and Administration. New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts Puinshing Co., 1964.

 

 

Ranniger, Bill J., et a1. Elementary School Administration.
Scranton: InternationaI Textbodk’Co.,I1969.

 

Shuster, Albert H. and Wetzler, Wilson F. Leadership in
Elementary School Administration. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Co., I958.

 

Shuster, Albert H. The Principal and the Agronomous E137
mentary School. Cqumbus: MerriIl Pfiinshing Co.,

Smith, James A. Settin Conditions for Creative Tegching in
rhe Elementary SchooI. *Boston: Allyn and Bacon,
Inc., 1966}

 

Smith, Louis M. and Keith, Patricia M. Anatomy of Edu-
gational Innovation. New York: Wiley Publishing
Co.,41971.

Snyder, Fred A. and Peterson, Duane R. Qynamics of E1e-
mentary School Administration. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 1970.

Stoops, Emergy, et a1. Elementary School Administration.
New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., I967.

Vavaddaman, George T. Eynamics of Managerial Leadership.
Philadelphia: Auerbach Publishing Co., 1973.

Vroom, Victor H. Leadership and Decision-Making. Pitts-
burg: University of PittsburgHHPress, 1973.

 

163

 

 

Wiggins, Thomas W. "A Comparative Investigation of Princi-
pal Behavior and School Climate." The Journal of
Educational Research, Vol. 66, No. ihiNovember,
I972).

Wiggins, Thomas W. "Behavioral Characteristics of School

Principals." Education, Vol. 93 (September, 1972).

Willower, Donald J. "Some Functions of the Supervisory Role
in Educational Organizations." Education. Appleton:
Van Rooy Printing Co., February, 1972.

 

Yonemura, Margaret. "Research on Aspects of Leadership
Roles in Early and Elementary Education." Child-

hood Education International, Vol. 48, No. 3
Tbecember, 1991).

Zalenik, Abraham. Euman Dilemmas of Leadership. New York:
Harper and Row Puinshing Co., 19661

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

LETTERS TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE

SAGINAW PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM

APPENDIX B
LETTERS TO THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OF THE SAGINAW

PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM

3216 Burlington Drive
Saginaw, Michigan
January 11, 1974

Mr. Donald Steele
550 Millard Street
Saginaw, Michigan

Dear Mr. Steele:

This letter comes to you to eXpress my sincere appre-
ciation for permitting me to do a study on ten (10) of your
elementary school administrators. The general topic of my
dissertation concerns itself with the administrative
behaviors of the elementary school principal and their
variability with the school's socioeconomic setting.

The data will be collected over an eight week period of
time, January 21, 1974 through March 15, 1974. Ten (10) of
your elementary school administrators have already agreed to
participate. To observe each of the ten (10) principals for
three days will take a total of thirty (30) days, but forty
(40) days are being scheduled for the collection of the data
to allow for flexibility for the participants and the
observer. The data collection will require no effort on
the part of the participants except to allow me to observe
them. All data collected, as well as all schools and
individuals involved, will be held in strictist of con-
fidence. In the writing of the dissertation no mention will
be made of names of schools or individuals.

When the study is completed, a copy of the results will
be given to you if you desire a copy.

Educationally yours,

Albert Zackrie, Jr.

166

165

3216 Burlington Drive
Saginaw, Michigan
March 5, 1974

Dr. Jack P. Taylor
550 Millard Street
Saginaw, Michigan

Dear Dr. Taylor:

Due to some administrative meetings held that were not
anticipated in scheduling my observations of elementary
school principals, it has become necessary for me to extend
the termination date of my observations from March 15, 1974
to April 15, 1974. With your permission, I would like to
continue my observations through April 15, 1974. Please
let me know by March 11, 1974 if I am permitted to continue
my observations beyond the presently scheduled termination
date.

Sincerely yours,

Albert Zackrie, Jr.

APPENDIX B

LETTERS TO THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF

ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OF THE SAGINAW

PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM

APPENDIX C

LETTERS TO THE PARTICIPANTS

APPENDIX D

DATA INSTRUMENT

 

 

 

I! IIIII fi IIIIIIIIII fiIW<nnfiwdvumn-Nm-Wfl-nn-aanNth-VN macaw Mawsmwunmumm
-mN--aHMMMMmH-MH-Ha-omhMm-m-H

 

 

mv-nv-Hv-mn-hn-mn-nn-Hm-mN-hN-mN “wflwhhomnou
-MN-mN-OH-bH-mH-mHhHH-m-s-m-m-H I
mv-mv-Hv-mn-hn-mm-nm-Hm-aN-h-m~ wwmccsnu hamum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-mN-Hw-oH-BH-mH-nH-HH-o-hhm-M-H-
Hzm2m>ommZH A<ZOHHU=¢hmzH

 

 

mv-nv-mv-mm-nm-mn-mn-Hn-m-n-m~ wwfiuusasww

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..... --------hmmuom-aH-kH-mu-mH-Hu-o-k-m-m-H - - ---- ----
ma-ma-aa-am-kn-mm-nn-am-oN-k~-m~ waaomamm<
-- -MN-HN-oH-kH-mH-ma-~a-aha-m-m-a - - --
ma-n.-aa-an-kn-mm-nn-an-a~-k~-m~ monsoouoam waaxwaom
«mm-mwhoathHMHMMHhHHhohhhmnm-H --I- nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
ma-ms-ae-om-km-mm-mm-am-a~-kN-m~ . mooaooooum-waagmaaoaomm
..... +-- -MN-HN-ou-ku-mo-mu-uu-a-k-m-m-H -1--a--;-1------------- ---
ma-m.-aa-an-kn-mm-nn-an-a~-k~-m~ -w=aoooz
------ LII-un-unun-I-nmmhpwhowhsmnMHhhmhhhhbhshuhmnmua- -:-:-:------------------ -
ma-na-av-om-kn-mm-mm-an-a~-k~-m~ xaozuomma

---ns ---------- -I-“mmumwhomuhhhmmhmm“whnonhum-m-~ -;-.-t- - --
ma-ne-ae-om-kn-mm-mm-an-a~-ka-m~ a maaow wannaaaaaomm
- - - - -m~-a~-aa-ka-ma-ma-Ha-o-k-m-m-a -u------- ------
ma-ma-av-an-5m-mn-mn.an-a~-a~-m~ waaaaouaoo

----- ------- -h-uMhnH~-oH-kH-mH-MH-HH-o-knm-m-u --.-s- -

ms-m.-av-am-kn-mm- mn-am-a~-k~-m~ waaaaaam-aoaua

-MN-HN-sunku-mu-mu-ppno-k-m-m-u- ---

mass wwcoawoaaa- hmoo==a2u m < om u we om o zo <a a moaoa>aou<

-Hmmmpr:- ------ ,- camp, oo>.o>tH w:.m- -nmz ------------------

 

 

ZOHH<NHz<umO Zaqbummmbu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

------------- masomzom ego: ----- ---mozmammaxm m>Hs<¢pmaszo< mo mm<ms
--- - ------ --szmzsaomzm -------------------- soomow
---------------------- one<oeunm<ao -- 4<a~oz~ma

HszDMszH <H<Q

Q xHozmmm<

170

------ ------ -unhnumnbpuhuhmuhhhnuunanMMhhnH-

-I"'I.l-l| ‘6'.

 

I-"|'l-‘ Ill'-

uuwwwwmdouu

 

--|I---".l-

 

mamas”saammasmdwwuawaamaaN-aa-mN
ohmmnwwhbuhhuhumhmuhmw-bns-m-m-H
mv-me-Hv-mn-nm-mm-nm-Hn-oN-s-mw

H- L-gfln-nu uni-L-u- - Inn-n-unuwmwwwmww-wwmwmwwwmww

zo~mH>mmADm ZOCMmm<AU

 

 

-u-u-mwmmwwwmwmwwwmmwmmmmmwm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-w«umw-aa-am-km-mm-nn-an-aN-k~-m~ waaoaaaa>m
r-umwumwhom“mgnmmnmmhmmnmhsnmnmnmu 4- -; --- ------
ma-ma-aa-am-km-mn-mm-Hm-a~-k~-m~ waauoo:
-unhhahnbahhwhmahhhhuhhbnsnunnuu-11-1- -- -------------------------- -
ma-ms-aa-am-km-mn-mm-Hm-o~-a~-mN xaozaomma
-ummupwnomuemhmmhmmumm-o-e-m-mhm - -- - --------------------------
ma-ma-aa-an-kn-mm-mm-an-a~-5~-mN wcaaoomcoo
-uhhhhHmnbuheuhmuuMHLHHHGLALMLMMH -- - ---------------- --- uuuuu
ma-ma-aa-am-km-mm-mm-Hn-oN-k~-m~ wcaaaaamoaoaua
-nmwnmwusgusunmwnmmnmmhuhmnmnmnm-Lr-L- ur -----------------------------
ms<oo omsamoo< >44<=e=2 ao ezmzzmaam<smm
-mwuwmummuamnwwnwwummnmmuwm-kmnww- - - wcauaaao>m
-nmwna~-om-sa-mH-MHum0hbhmhmumn ----------------------------
mv-mv-Hv-omhnm-mn-nn-Hn-mN-e~-m~ wcmumwmm<
nmwnuhhbwnbmnmanmghgghbnenmu MH- ------------

fiwa-ma-aa-am-am-mm-nm-Hm-a~-k~-m~ mummw-mwm-wmmwmmmaw
-“mm“HWhGMLMMnmmhmmummuehmhmnmnm-

mv-ne-Hv-mm-nm-mn-mm-Hm-o-nN-mm
-nnmwnumubhuhmnmmnmmnmmhoh -m-m-

-----wwmmwwwwmm-wmwwwwww
mv-mv-Hv-mm-un-mm-mm-Hm-m-n-m~
r-hmwnHuhloBHLMHLMHMHHnohehmnnua-
mv-mv-He-mm-um-mm-mm-Hm-mN-nm-mm
-“mm“mwuomnhmhmmnmmummuohmnmnmnm-
mv-mv-Hv-mm-5m-mm-mm-Hm-mm-AN-mm
r-hmunwuneauhunmmhmuuauhuueumumnuu

-Inn-uwwwwwwwmmm-wwmmwwmmmwww
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu wwmwwwz

ununununnunnuun-wmwauwmwo one
ulmwmasoume u:HKMmou mcauowmb

 

 

I..a==lzo a a a -----womma>amwa----
It II wmmh - III- I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

 

cuSZHHZOUIHzm2m>OmQZ~ A<ZC~HUDmHmz~

I-"'|-""|-|'-'l'|'l' -'|'|"' '9""|"l-"""""|-"|"l"'l"|-'|-""III|I""III"'|'

172

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ma-mv-~v-am-an-mm-mm-Hm-a~-k~-mN A 1 Haaaooae coaoaoaoo “opaque

- -MN-HN-mH-AH-mmnmunghhonshmumnu ---- n- I - ------------------ -- --

mv-nv-He-mn-nm-mn-nn-Hm-mN-nN-mN meow>hom noncomuo Hamsm

- ------ -usmmnmmnbmhmmnmghmmnmmnonmum-m-H -L--s- -1-:--- -----------------------------

mv-nv-Hv-mn-sm-mm-nm-Hm-o-u-m~ 4 ouM>homcu

IIIII 1-101-I- -n-HN-ow-hHhMHhMHhHthuhuuumnH an-nrnue ---------I- I

ms-na-aa-am-km-mm-mm-Hm-aN-AN-m~ coauaafia>o oaa coama>aoqmm

nun-11IthhhhumhbuhhuhMHnmunHHnbhhhmum-H -1----s--- ----------------------------

ma-ms-a¢-an-kn-mm-nm-an-a~-5~-m~ kwosoooaoos.waaaoaoe

IIIUII11III-III -mN-HN-bH-nH-mH-mH-HH-m-n-mthml nil ell-I-II: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

ma-ma-aa-am-am-mm-mm-am-a~-k~-m~ mo>auoowmo oaa

- I- -mw-Hwhohheunmunmmhmwhohhum“mum -:----s-1--|--I--u-mummMIHmmmmmmmwwm

mv-mv-Hv-mm-hm-mn-mm-Hm-m-NN-mm =0wuu=humcm

------ 11------T-nm~-fim-ofl-AH-mgummnmwhbnmumuMhm--u r- --4---------------------

mv-nv-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-mn-QN-nm-mN 4 EDHDUMHHDU

------ L------r-nmwnmwnomnhmummnmmnmmubhALMLMhH-g--uurn---e----s- ---------------

aa<em oz< 04mm «on >ss<zc~mmmaoma m>oea2~ op m4<amme<z amaziea no snaem az< one<zH2<xm

L ma-na-av-am-am-mm-mm-an-aN-kN-m~ waaoooz

----- -------nhmwhpwhbwuhmhmwhmmuhmuoneumumn - - ---------- --I--

L ma-mv-aa-am-km-mm-nm.am-m~-a~-m~ washrooaoo

------ 1-------uhnwumwuomnsunumumwhpmnbhhnmumnmu ----------- ---

mv-mv-Hv-mm-sm-mm-mm-fim-mm-s-mN :OMum3Hw>o opwm wCMHmhz

uuuuuuu ------L-nmwnawnbwhsphmmhhhhhwubwhthmnH- ----------- ---

ma-ma-aa-an-am-mm-mm-am-a~-k~-mN ooaoaaaa>o aoaoaoo woaoarz

---1- ---------- - uhmmnHMhomummhmmhmmumHnonmhmnmu ------------------------

ma-ma-a.-am-kn-mm-mm-an-a~-kN-m~ aosoaaaa>o oaooaom waaoauz

u-uuu-l- ---------- 1T1“MNMHthHhhuhmuhhwnwhhbnhhmthH- - ------------------------- I

ma-ms-aa-am-am-mn-mm-am-aN-A~-m~ moons waama>uomwm

nu ----- - ----------- InhMwnmmnomhsmhmmhmmhmmnbnmhmuMhm- - - --------- uuun-uu -

ma-ms-_e-am-km-mn-mm-sm-a~-kN-mN maogoaoo woama>aou=m

------- +-----1Tuhmwhuwhbwhemumwumwhwhnouehmumup - uu - - ---------------
oEwh zucozoouu Amouscwzv < o mofiuw>muo<

HEEL ...... ,--- ---------oe-€---- ------- - --L-mmm-m-maLm-.me- -----------------------------

amazaezoo-zomma>mma:m zoommw<qo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

------------------ n-wwnwwumwuwm-kn-mn-nm-Hm-aN-AN-mN g-#fi----wmmwmwwm-mmmmwawmmwww
------- 1----I--1r-nmmhHwhbhnhHhMHhMHhHthhhthhhH -:- ulrI------I I-ummmurmmmwmmw
ma-ma-ae-om-km-mm-nm-am-o~-kN-m~ 4 mcoauauacowao Hocowmmowou
---s ---------- 111-hmwhmmnbmummhma-MH-HH-o-s-m-m-H - I- - mummrmmmumma
mv-me-He-om-Am-mm-mm-Hm-oN-NN-mN mucoumm-Auw3_wcwxhoz
-- ----ILMWLHwhthhHhMm-mH-HH-m-s-m-M-H urn -:-- -------------------
me-me-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-n-m~ T mco«umnwcmwuo ammquEEou
------- i-LmhhuEhflhme-s -0 -m 0.. -0 ----- Emu-weaken
me-ma-aa-om-km-mm-mm-am-a~-k~-m~ mooaaomoa possumuo wean:
---e ----------- - mwmmwmmwmmummnmmummuwmhmummmumum-a w -

on em mm mm Hm om AN mN m canoes Ho>o~ uuwuumwv

....... r ------.---m.mm....mafia.Ema-mm... .- a
re o pouou was momuwao

------------------ --..m-N-.-a-..-. Ha - a H - m a -m - a a -H-fi-H-mh-C-i- .-L-..-- ------amum-om-€-m5 smut-ammo

ozHe<anxooo

------------------ -ma-ms-Ha-om-km-wm-mmn4mnwmu~wnww-a- - -:-%-A ---wmmwmwmwmww-wmm-wmmwmwwmm
----------------- 1rn“MNhHmnoMusphuhhmunmgnbnhnmuhuuu.u - -:-:-.-:-s-a------------- -----
ms-ma-aa-cm-km-mm-mm-Hm-o~-k~-m~A L waaauoucoo

------------------ v-ummummnbmnmmummummnmmhoumnmnmnm-s- - -:-:-a-¢-.-:----------- - - ---
me-mv-Hv-am-em-mm-mm-Hm-a~-n~-m~ ucoemwawo‘wcwuopuo

----------------- ;-hma-amhbuhuuhuuhmuhaa-a-u-u-m-s - - ----------l-------------------

seazazzoo :z< ua<em .mezmoaem mod mmapasao<a me<somo< ozHoH>oea
------ A-------wwnwwnwwndemwuwmuwmnwwnmwnwwdwmw-a--:--%-a-H-e-------------wmwmwwwwo
------------------- 1thMNMHNLbHMhphMphMHMFHLGLRLMMMhH-a-:--¢-+-;-e-.u-a-n-----------------
ma-ms-sa-om-km-mm-mm-am-om-k~-mm mcauooy
------ ------1-hanmmnomuspnuuhmmnmmubusuuhmum-4-- 1-1-1-a-:-i-:-L----------- -----
ma-ms-av-om-km-mm-mm-~m-oN-k~-m~ 1 h wowuaomcoo
------ r----- -m~---oa-kH-mH-mH-Hmnonmumumue -a----+-+-.-a-L---------- -- --
mv-ms-av-om-km-mm-mm-Hm-o~-km-mm moauaaom-ooaamwumao
------------------ -“Nuthatch-HEMthe... “Hm-.0111}? -1 L: --------- mfitfimmm-mfi-GEE
n na-ma-sa-om-km-mm-mm-am-o~-km-mn e moaoaao
------- 1---- ---ummuHMhemthHMMhmm-mmhonmumumnm-.-a- --+-a-s-e- -r--- ----mmmmmmmmwm-mmmmmmmmmmmm
azae aocoaworu Amooaaazq am < om u we om oazor<a a1 mowoa>floo<

Hmwme- ----------------- - osmp ----------------- mmwmmmmm-mmmmmmm-mm-hmmr- ------------------------------

 

 

 

 

m2—gghummc az< amaze oz~2~<ez~<fi

 

 

'l"" {:1

IIhMNhHthHhhHhhHhhHhHthhhhthhHI
mv-mv-Hv-om-nm-mm-mm-Hm-oN-BN-mN
IIhhuhhhhbwhhhhmwhMhhwuhbhshuthHI
mv-mv-Hv-mm-bm-mm-nm-Hm-mN-nN-mw
IMMNhHthHhhHhMHhhHhHHh h h thHI

 

'I'-'A

mv-nv-Hv-mm-nn-mm-mm-Hm-mN-nn-mu
-mn-HN-oa-suhuuhhhhkmh hhhmthHI

 

 

muh<zmamommms

 

- sways-0.1%

mv-mv-Hv-am-nm-mm-mm-Hm-ao-nN-mm
IIhuhnhhnbpthLMHhMHhuphbhhhhhhhpl,
mv-mv-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-Hm-oN-nN-m~
,IIhhuhuhhbuheuhuuhmuuuahbh thMhH

 

'1'I'J

all

 

ll|'l

1""1

 

7'1

'9‘

 

-- .o-a-o a oawawwmwwm-Jmfiw
-couue uwcaucsouum Human

IIIIIIIuquwIaIE-ow pm ammeoIa m use:
I-mmemm ”muuoaou Hoccomuoa

---wwm.mm-omH-am-ww.aw
tom-.6093».

III-Jewafimfl-Em 32%?
80 a moewwm- Home

 

 

m CH uznhmommm

9"|"||'-" " "#l-' II" 'I' I-

 

 

Lv" 9'II'I1'I' Full 1'

 

mv-mv-He-om-nm-mm-mm-Hm-aN-n-mm
,IIthhHwhloehh hhwhwmhbuehmnhhHI.
mv-mv-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-nm-mw
IIhuhnuhhbuhhHLMHhMthuhenk-m-M-H

 

TIr'lf" .lll :.T' r-

 

mv-mv-Hv-om-nm-mm-mm-m-o-n-m~

 

IIhhhhpwhbahegumaumwhhwhohmum“m-H
mv-mv-Hv-om-nm-mm-mm-Hm-oN-nm-mN
_IIhMthhhthephmuhhahpwuohehuhm-H

II .I'EYII'Lr":IIIIT'

 

me-me-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-Hm-cN-AN-mm
I-nmwhmmnbwhhphmwhmmn whohe-m-mnw

fil"$lll|.".fill

 

 

 

ITIII
IIIIJ

4:1

'99;

2--.

 

W'I‘
.-a
1']
1-1
It".

.14

".l

IIIEmM mwm-wmmwmewnmwwmwwIwmw
-- m ab Sums-o- Em- mmumummmmh
I IA.mWo was acoucou .AMSU
--m.o-%Bm-tm-om- mmuflemmmo
moow>uom ucmufismcou
E:a:uhpmeImMMMh

I I III-mwmwwwwme wwI IH mm: mm ow p cm
--mB-omm-au-Gmeb - ammummm-ah
moofi>uom wcflaomcsou
IIIHaqsm so wcauacmmuh

IIII'||' II 'II'L'I

iIIIIwwcfluooE wwmum :fiumcman
IIIIIIIIIIImwmmmwwwwIwwwwwwmmw
Lo memmmmmm-mfiaafi:

III"---

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

msouume Hoonum ou
III-IPGEWF bosom-mammoth
cowuooaom mmmum
.IIIIIIIIIIIIIII!mmH3 wcaumammw

muonmbwmIm&mwmm0m

to: sum ammo
IIIIIIIII-IIwwwmmwwmm-wmssm one
Madhouse SaucSEEoo weam:

ll." ll'lI"

lIIIIwwwufiHomwmwwmuwIwmmmmflo>oo

IIIIIIIIIIIII wmmmmmwm-mwmwwmImm
mcoMMSHHumca twaz scammMB

moaoa>aoo<

 

 

 

 

muzzmhzou-UZHH<ZHQaOOU

 

ms-ms-aa-am-am-mm-mm-am-aN-k~-mN -- -a--
IIhMNh-HNLGEHMMHRMHI-CI-ohhm -M LI II.-I:I!-II.-I.-I1rIIr-I-
ma-na-~a-am-km-mm-mm-~m-a~-km-m~
IIunhhuwhbuhhuhmuhhuhHunbhhhm-n-H III.
ma-na-Ha-am-em-mm-mm-am-om-a~-mu
IInmmuhwuomhsphmpuMHLHHuohsumnmnmI--IaI-;Ia-I-II- Ii
ma-ma-ae-am-km-mm-mm-am-o~-k~-mm
IIhMNthhththmwhhphuuh MenuthHI-I-IeII-I-I I-II-II-I.
ma-ma-aa-an-am-mm-mm-am-om-km-mN A
IIhmwnuwhomhhmnmwhhuhmm“MWRumnhhmI s-I-I-II:I-IITIIII-
ma-mv-aa-am-km-mm-mm-am-oN-kN-m~
-huh-r...aukhuhbhhsku-fi-W-rT 1-1L?- Ié- T- Til
Hmooacazo . < o o m om 2o <a.a
III-IIIIIIIIIwEth IIIIIIIIIIIIIII -mmbumbmHImmwmmmuImqub.

 

z- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

175

I.--" J

mmh<zmamombw Oh quhmommm

 

moHuHH

uuwuunwa

 

 

19"-

Il-9"'-l

rl

mv-mv-Hv-mm-hn-mn-nn-Hm-mN-uN-mN
-mN-HN-mH-nH-mH-ma-AH-a-h-m-n-H

vonuuuomou on on one: gown:

 

- ---------- I-wsuwauAdudwuk uwdnww-an-aN-k~-m~

-n-aw-mH-hH-mH-MH-HH-m-n-m-m-m

meowmmum «coceammn
Announce coma <

 

wands-as-aw-kw-mn-wm-am-mmuwmnwww

-mN-HN-mH-NH-mfi-na-Ha-mMm-m-m-H

 

v.--"

ma-nv-aa-amnkn-mm-mm-am-a~-kN-m~
-m~-a~-aa-ka-ma-na-aa-a-k-m-m-a

segueusvo cw meow“ :wz

 

 

mEoHnoumIvo>nom

 

 

 

wd-ddMAd-mm-um-mm-mm-Hn-mN-hN-mw

 

 

lth-H-m~-ma-mH-nH-HH-m-s-M-n-H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I"'

9.9:!

mmao<mqaou

Oh oznhmommm

 

-m~---oa-ka-ma-m~-Ha-a-k-m-mhm-
-waugandwukw-mn-ww-am-a~-k~-m~
-nN-HN-aH-kH-mH-ma-aa-a-k-m-n-a

'J

 

IIIIwmmvawmwwmemMflw

 

 

9"""|"l"'|'|"-'--'l'l'

 

mamewoumIawwuomw

 

1'.

WI

 

 

 

 

IIIIIIIIIIIL

ma-ma-aa-an-km-mm-nm-Hn-aN-AN-mN
-hmmummuoa-kmummnmmnmmhoumuMhmnm-
ma-na-aa-mmukm-mn-nm-an-am-k~-mN
-n~-HN-aH-Am-mman-HaumnmuMLMLHI
w«-wa-ge-aw-kwnmmuwmumm-o~-k~-m~

 

 

 

7"1

 

 

-n~-amnoa-ka-ma-nahmmua-a-m-nna

wa-ma-av-am-km-mm-mm-Hm-a~-k~um~
-n~-a~-aa-ks-ma-ma-aa-a-k-m-m-a

 

wweuwauaauaw-kwumw-wm-Aw-a~-k~-m~
-n~-a~-aa-ka-ma-ma-Ha-a-k-m-mua

9.1

v'

v-9]

aaaauo only wdmwmmmmm
mwmmmm- mm. sumo
as on as uwuo
----- -umemhmmmmrumumwmm
.uuo smowuw>wuou ueovsum
.eeumopa.mwcmw "Hemomwcn

I---

 

cowumo:

'9'

 

vl'l

 

 

 

mv-mv-Hv-on-nm-mm-nn-Hm-mN-n-mm
-mN-HN-oH-nH-mH-ma--mhn-m-n-H

 

ohm

r I-
Icho:

 

 

Ammoacazo

 

IIIIIwmme

 

 

-1

m

 

K

 

l1

"1

W'I'L

7.1

r,

moon: Hmfiuo m
-muoaaaauom-Humma
mcomumvcoEEouou one cowua:
-Hm>o .moumuunme o>aum>ocfih

IBI'-

:ofiueumawu: ucmmmIHaufiwde

IIIImemIamxoonuuou wwwmmmsmo
.moMHgmsm uxuouco>cu

 

[‘9'

 

I-

ll

 

 

v'

U

 

 

 

 

J

Luv

 

hr

 

 

may

 

- new. ,
lmweumemu magmoaa to “menu

 

amazmhzouthH<zHQmommmam OH Dzmhmomum

 

[99"

moaaa>auo< --

 

 

176

 

 

me-nv-Hv-mn-nn-mn-mm-Hn-mN->N-mN
-MN-HN-uH-sH-mH-MH-HH-o-h-MhM-H

cuavounsu.
-30." news—much.

 

m.-n¢-~.-am-km-mn-mn-~n-a~-k~-m~
IhnN-HN-nH-BHAMHnmu-HH-a-k-m-m-a

come
back mama—Lemon

 

 

mv-mv-Hv-mn-hn-mn-mm-Hn-m-NN-m~
-m-HN-bH-nm-mH-nH-HH-b-h-m-h-H

snake: Hewuon
-oHou unwcmmon

 

 

-MN-HN-bH-hhhMH-MH-HH-u-h-m-M-H

ma-na-Ha-om-kn-mn-nn-an-a~-k~-mN aoaomosoo
-mm-HN-aa-kH-mH-«H-HH-a-k.m-m-u -ouou ”cocoons
ma-na-aa-an-km-mm-nn-am-a~-kN-m~ aogoao»

-0Hou mcacam

LIL

 

 

 

me-mv-Hv-mm-nm-mm-nn-Hm-mN-nN-m~
IMN-HN-bH-ha-MH-MH-HHHu-h-m-n-H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

umMHawoo m

 

 

mmaom ozmzuzmmbmo

 

'9'l||| 1"-

 

me-me-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-Hm-o-n-m~
-MN-HN-oH-hH-ma-MH-HH-m-h-m-M-H

- a 8 “Eat-6

jscum awoumcwvuouummm mucohew
scum mcomuummgsaou

 

 

mv-mv-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-fim-mN-nm-m~
IhhhhHhhthhHhMHhhHhHHhuhhhhhm-H

oozuumomou on on too: sows:
mEmHmbun mmocmsho

 

 

mv-mv-Hv-mm-nn-mm-nm-Hn-mN-n~-mN
-m-HN-mH-hH-mH-MH-HH-m-n-m-m-u

 

 

couscous vow“ <

 

 

 

 

 

me-me-He-mn-em-mm-nm-Hn-mN-AN-mN mEoHnoumIpo>~om
IIIIII 4 IIII I -mw-HNMmH-hH-mu-ma-HH-e-R-m-m-HI I
a m¢-na-aa-an-km-mn-nn-an-aN-k~-m~ msoHooum-oo>aomos.
III -mw-HN-oH-eH-mm-mH-HH-o-n-m-m-H
mv-me-Hv-mm-em-mm-mm-Hm-mN-e-m~ :oMueusvo cw meow“ zoz
IIIIIII- IIIIIIIIII IthMMhmwhbmhhmhMMhMH-HH-o-u-mnm-HI I
mv-nv-av-mm-hm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-nw-mN anewueuuomxo can
IIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIhhmhuwhbghhhhmuhhhhhuhbhhthhhuII mucoEusmscouIHmmOnmmmmwm
an moo ens-mmaoaaam

mv-mv-Hv-am-nm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-NN-m~
-MN-HN-aH-SH-m-ma-HH-m-h-m-m-H

 

-w@wmw41INwmwmdeMI

 

-HmmmhII IIIII

mv-me-Hv-mm-nm-mm-nm-Hm-a-BN-m~

 

l 'I'lv'

mu=o>o aoozuw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IIthhHwhthhuumunth - - -MLM-H II
amouscwz -m < om u m mm o :0 <0 0
oemhI mo>Ho>cp mcomuwnlmthmZI

moaoa>aoo<

 

 

QmDZHHZOUImmH<an¢OmDm OH ozmhmommd

 

mv-ne-av-am-sn-mn-nn-Hm-m-hN-m~
-mw-HN-uH-hH-MHHMH-HHhm-n-m-M-H

moaaawoaa oaaoaa

 

mv-mv-Hv-mn-un-mn-nn-Hn-m-hN-m~
InN-H-ma-hH-MH-MH-HH-b-b-m-M-H

moum>uom Hawuom

 

mv-nv-Hv-an-um-mn-nn-Hn-mN-hN-mN
IMN-HN-mH-hH-mHIMHMHH-b-h-mIM-H

ouwmmo ohaMaOI

 

 

mv-nv-Hv-mn-sn-mn-nm-un-a-hN-mw
-Mw-HN-oH-hH-mH-n-HH-m-h-m-m-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uaaaao ooaaeaao sauna”

 

 

>HHZDZZOU mzh mo wmumaommd A<zomh<uanm mo ZOHH<NHAHHD

 

 

 

m<-mv-aa-am-5n-mn-nn-am-aN-kn-m~ :oaooumau
-mN-HN-ma-kH-maan-Hp-o-k-m-n-n -oHou momuoaauouau
ma-nc-av-an-nn-mn-nm-Hm-a~-ku-m~ moan

-mw-mN-mH-sH-MH-mH-HH-bnb-m-M-H

-oHo.~ ucmmunuoufi

 

mv-nv-Hv-mn-5n-mn-nn-Hn-mN-NN-mw
-MN-HNIOH-hh-MH-MHHHH-o-h-m-M-H

umxnoz Hmwuom
show acmuusnuouwfl

 

mv-nv-av-mn-nm-mm-mn-Hn-mN-n-mm
-Mw-HN-oh-hH-mH-MH-HH-mhhhM-m-H

uoHomcsou
-0HIom acmuoumm 35

 

 

mv-nQ-av-mm-hm-mm-nn-Hm-mN-sN-mN

-mm-HN-oHnhHhMHhMHhHthuhthMhHII

 

177

ma-na-aa-an-km-mn-mn-am-a~-kN-m~
-MN-HN-aH-ko-MH-nuuupuo-h-m-m-0

 

uocuuou
-0Hou wcauouauop:

99"."9I'l"

 

umwflmwuo m
IMMHOH unauoseuoucu

""'L" 'l' l"l

 

 

mv-mv-Hv-mm-sm-mn-nn-an-m-NN-m~
-MN-H-aH-uH-mH-MH-~Im-u-m-n-H

 

|"-"III'"

mQ-nv-Hv-mm-sn-mm-nm-Hn-aN-nN-mm
-MNnHwhbubsuhmwnmuhpmhbhhhmhmnHII

 

 

Y

 

cwwvoumsu
-0Hou «cacaauouoo

'IP'I- """

 

 

 

moan

IrIIIIIIIIIIIthou madcae~ouwn

I'IIIII'IP'IU"I"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mv-me-uv-mm-hmImm-nm-Hm-mthNomN hoHomcsou
IlhmwhmmhbmhhH-mH-MH-HH-b-h-m-n- -0Hou wcmcmeuowmn
vamv-Hvam-hmImm-nmIHnImN-hN-mN hogumou
IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIILrIthhHhhbmhmmhMH-MH-H-m-h-m-m-H -I- IsIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIthmmImmwmwfimmm
mv-mc-Hv-mm-hm-mm-nn-Hn-mN-hN-m~ umwaflwuo M
IIIII IfIIIIII IInhththHthhmwh HhhhhbhhthM-H IILI IhmfimmImmmefimmmwb
asap koaoamoaa “mousse: m < om o mwrom o 2u1<a a moaua>auo<

 

 

 

 

 

 

2: ----Efim»E-mmmm..akm:wan ----------

QQDZHHZOUIwmqom uzuzuzmmhma

rill"-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ma-ne-aa-mn-um-mm-nn-an-ou-k~-m~ moaoaaom-Haooaooanm
-nw-a~-aa-ka-ma-na-aa-a-k-m-m-H womaoaomu
ma-n¢-ae-an-pn-mn-mn-~m-a~-a~-n~ moaUAHom-aaaoaooeoum
- -mN-H~-opnku-mH-mH-HH-a-k-m-»nu mamaouoame
ma-ma-a¢-on-km-mn-nn-an-o~-kN-m~ noaaouowoo ecu
-MN-HN-oH-kman-mHnHHnshknmhmnp mason uamnmmwmmmmm
mmaoaaoa s<zoaeozoaa ezmosem ozH>omazH oz< ozHaoam>mo
I- ma-ma-aa-an-an-mn-mm-~n-a~-k~-m~ moauaaauou was ucoemmamm
-nu-HN-aH-AH-mu-nH-HH-a-k-m-n-H .mHamaouon cummuma>u mamaoowm
ma-na-aa-am-km-mm-nn-an-oN-kN-mN wowwas Hoauaaaamlwcazoa>oa
- -nm-HN-aH-aH-mH-mH-HH-a-knm-m-H I

mv-me-He-on-em-mm-mn-Hn-mN-BN-mN mouwcwvceu ucwzow>uoucm

-I- -IIIIIIInmnnumuloeHumpumpuup-a-k-m-m-u
mv-mv-He-mm-em-mm-mm-Hm-m-n-m~ upon: Ho::0muum4w:M:HEuouon

-- -mw-HN-aa-kp-mH-mH-HH-o-k-m-n-H
mv-me-He-mm-um-mm-nm-Hm-mN-s-m~ mo>wu00nno can
III-I--- -MN-H~-aa-ka-ma-ma-aa-a-k-m-m-a ounce uemmmmemmumm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m92m220~mm< mm<Hw mom muz<>a< 2H oz~zz<qm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

me-mv-aa-am-am-mm-nn-am-o~-s~-m~ guano
IIIIII LfIIIIIIII -MN-HN-mH-5Han-MHMHH-0-5-m-MHHI II-I I II III
ma-na-~v-an-am-mn-nn-Hm-oN-kN-m~ «woos mzoz
------ II-I-I- -mN-H~-aHmmm-ma-mH-HH-o-k-m-m-H - --I- I
ma-mc-~a-an-km-mn-mn-am-oN-BN-mN , ooN
IIIIIII IIIIII -m-HN-oH-hH-mH-MH-HH-b-h-m-n-H I IIIIIII
ma-mv-aa-on-kn-mn-mm-an-aN-A~-mN masons:
--III- -------- -mN-am-mH-eH-mH-mH-HH-o-k-m-n-H
ma-ma-aa-am-an-mm-nn-Hn-a~-k~-mN maoucoonwwmmoam
IIII-I-m~-a~-aa-kfl-ma-mH-HH-a-A-m-m-H
mv-me-Hv-mm-Am-mm-mm-Hm-mN-AN-mm ouuoaeou mo sonaegu
II II- -III-nmmnmmuomhhhhmmhmmnmmhouehmnmum -I .I II - IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
asap chosdoua Amooaaazv m < om o my um murknLuL moaoa>auo<
IHIMMWFI llllll UEHLF L-lbwewHOern—H mfiomhkmc .Oz

 

 

osz~HZOUI»HHz:2200 NIH no mmumbommm A<onH<UDQm mo ZOHH<NHAHHD

 

 

179

 

mc-nv-He-mm-um-mn-mn-Hn-mN-sN-mN
-nN-HN-mH-BHHmH-MHIHH-bnbhm-m-H

mIoHQOHm-ocm mommocxuok
- mucowsum ch

 

 

'Ill‘lrl

me-nv-Hv-mn-bn-mn-nm-Hn-m-hN-mN mucoEo>ow£uu
-m-HN-oH-hH-mH-mm-HH-m-h-m-M-H - mucowSHm Oh
me-mv-He-mn-sn-mm-nn-m-m-u-m~ mvuoc

-n-Hm-mH-bw-ma-m-~H-onu-m-n-H

- aumcsssou oh

 

mv-mv-Hv-mm-hn-mm-nm-m-mN-hN-m~
IMN-HN-mHhhH-mH-MHMHH-m-hhm-MIHI

mEOHnOHm-pne mommocxmoz
- xvmcaseou oh

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

me-ne-fie-mn-em-mm-nn-fin-mN-AN-m~ mucoEo>owgua

II -nw-N-0H-5H-Mfi-MH-H-m-s-m-m-H IIII - humc35600 mp
me-mv-He-mm-nm-mn-nn-Hm-mN-RN-mw moon:
-mn-HNMoH-anmH-MH-HH-m-bnm-n-H - mmeumImF
mv-ne-He-mn-sn-mn-nn-Hn-mn-5N-mN nIoHnoum-vco mummocxwoz

I nhhhuhhbH-AH-mH-MHMHH-m-n-m-MnH - mmmmm wk
mv-mv-He-mn-5n-mn-nn-am-aN-AN-mw mucoso>omnum

IIIIII ngI -mN-HN-mH-sH-mH-nH-HH-m-n-m-n-H - mmeum oh

 

wmmquoa Aoozum ozmhmmmmmhzu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I ma-ma-aa-am-km-mm-nn-~n-aN-kN-mN moauaaauam oasaaaa>a
IIIIII II---IIIIIIII IhmwnwhhbuhhhhmunMHhHthhhthmnH I-II-III II IIIIImmmm mmm
ma-m¢-aa-am-km-mn-mn-Hm-a~-h~-m~ mooaaomoa Haaooaoam was oaum
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII thmw-EN-mH-AH-mHthhhhhoumhmnmnH-e- I I- I .

ma-ma-as-an-km-mm-mm-am-aN-AN-m~ mwaaoaam guaaomou waaxwaom
-IIIII-III-IIIIIIILIIhmwhuwhbhhhwhmuhmmuHmnohhum-m-u I II
ma-ma-aa-om-5m-mm-mm-Hm-a~-kN-m~ sapwood-Hoosom snoop or»
----------- -MN-HmhsmthhMHHMHhHHhehkh um-a mo sumaomoaoo any ”awkoaom
a ma-ms-aa-mm-km-mm-mn-an-aN-A~-mN «couscous saaoaasou waawoaum
-- - -mN-HN-oH-kH-mu-MH-Hu-o-k-m-m-a ------ II
me-ne-He-mm-nn-mm-nm-m-o~-5N-mN nohsawmm was mommouu:m
IIIIIIth-HN-oH-5H-mw-mw-wH-m-e-m-m-a Immmum mcmuxaent
ma-nv-~¢-an-km-mn-nm-an-aN-AN-mN «opossum ecu mommoouam
IIIIII III I -mu-HN-oH-ha-mH-mH-HH-m-s-m-m-a I amaze «swuhwmc<

cane Nwaoamwaa Amooaoazo m < omrw.m om o 2o <apn- moaum>auu<
.HMM-muFllll-ull QEIHLI bmw> O>QH mflcmh 0am mo . OF llltllll

ezm2m>omaza oz< moz<=o :saauamaeo

 

 

180

 

mv-mv-Hv-mn-nn-mn-mm-Hm-mN-hN-mN

“wwaoaaao ca «ammawam

 

-MN-HNMbM-hH-MHHMHIHH-u-h-m-M-H
mv-nv-Hv-mn-sn-mm-nn-Hn-mw-BNImN
-M-H-oH-hH-mH-mH-HH-o-B-m-M-H

uwaoaaas ca
accused-wouuumxowcu

 

mv-nv-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-h-m~
omwIHN-0H-MHIma-mH-Hm-m-h-m-m-H

waaoaaao as asap

 

 

 

 

mv-nv-fiv-mm-nm-mn-mm-Hn-mN-hN-m~
-MN-HN-mH-hH-mm-MH-HH-b-B-m-m-H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

waaoaaaa ca massamo

 

mzomhmnzou am>oz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-Mw-Hm-mH-sH-MH-mm-HH-m-u-m-M-H

mv-mv-Hv-mm-hm-mm-mm-fin-aw-AN-mw _ FIfi Hacomuom
II -mN-HN-oH-hH-mH-MH-HH-u-h-m-n-HI - I . III
4<zommmm
me-me-He-mn-nm-mn-nm-m-m-n-m~ nonuo

 

9-9-1

mv-mq-Hv-mm-sn-mm-mm-Hm-mN-hN-mN
-m-HN-mH-MH-mH-n-HH-m-n-m-n-H

oucmvcouun unopsumecmxuono

 

 

 

mv-mv-He-mn-nm-mm-mm-Hm-oN-uN-mu
IMN-HN-bHIsa-mH-MH-HH-b-hHm-M-H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oucmcoucwma
Museum was mcHmemm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

msomz<aamomH2
-II ms-na-aa-am-km-mn-mm-am-a~-a~-m~ mecca
-mN-HN-aa-ka-ma-na-ua-a-km-n-a n-MooammmmmmmmGMIme
me-mv-Hv-mm-5m-mn-mm-Hm-mN-eN-mm mEoHnoumlwcm mommocxmoz
-MN-HN-aH-ks-MHhMH-HH-¢-k-m-m-H I- - amusemeaouoaam op
mv-mv-He-mn-nm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-eN-mu mucoEo>owgua
-mwuunusuneenmpumo-aa-o-k-m-m-H - momaaweooaoaam we
ma-ma-aa-an-km-mm-nm-am-a~-a~-m~ moo»:
-mN-HN-aH-AH-mH-mH-HH-a-A-m-m-a :- - muoowaum oh
asap soaoamoua Amooaaazo .m < om o mm om o zo mm.a_ moaua>aou<
I m maflII oEmPI wo>.o>:HImccwuonImo .ozI

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

QszHHZOUImmHUqum 400:0m uzmhmmmmmhzu

 

 

 

mv-nv-Hv-mn-sm-mn-nn-Hm-mN-hN-m~
IMN-HNIoa-hH-mH-MH-HH-o-h-m-M-H

- spam Eooummmaw

 

mv-mv-Hv-an-hn-mn-nn-Hn-mN-sN-mu
-MN-HN-oH-nH-mn-nH-HH-a-h-m-MIH

- bonuses

 

me-nv-Hv-mm-5n-mnunn-HMImN-5N-mN
-nN-H-mH-hH-MHIMH-HH-h-bhm-MIH

- «owe Mao: Hmwuom

 

mv-nv-gc-mn-hn-mn-nn-Hn-mN-h-m~
-n-HmIna-hmImw-MH-HHIm-h-m-M-H

- uoxpoz Hmwuom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

thhHthHhhHhMHhMhnmhhohsumum-H

ma-ne-ae-an-kn-mn-nn-~n-a~-k~-m~ - aoaomoaoo

I -mu-u~-au-ku-mH-MH-HH-o-k-m-n-H -:- -------------------
onsoHomaaso mo suHaazoo

----------------- mv-m¢-aa-an-am-mm-mn-an-a~-k~-mN aoaoo

 

 

mv-mv-Hv-mn-5n-mm-nn-Hn-m-NN-m~
-MN-HN-OH-nH-mH-MH-HH-o-h-m-m-H

macaw umog

 

mv-mv-Hv-mm-sm-mm-nn-Hn-wN-nN-mN
-mmhnhhbwhhhhmuhhhhhthhhthMhH

wmmmmoz mo.NMo>oumwn

 

 

 

mv-nv-Hv-mm-nn-mn-mm-Hm-¢N-BN-m~
IMN-HN-0H-hH-MH-MH-HH-u-h-m-M-a

acowsum xn hocuumw co xucuu<

 

 

 

mv-me-Hv-mm-sm-mn-mn-Hm-m-n-mN
EEHI-BI-EHEI-bI-hn-m -M Q

 

 

mv-nv-Hv-mm-bn-mn-nn-Hm-mn-hN-mm
-MN-HN-bH-thm-nH-AH-mIB-m-n-H
mv-nv-ac-mm-nm-mm-nm-Hn-mN-AN-m~

-mn-mwuownsmhuHMMHhuphonhhmumuHI

vocabusumwp ucopaum

 

mowuouua: mo Nwo>oummm

 

 

9999 9‘

 

suede ouww omamm

 

 

mv-mv-av-mm-nm-mm-nm-Hm-mN-h-mw

IIthhHmhthbuhupuMHuHmnbnsthMnHIIII

mv-nv-Hv-mm-nm-mm-mm-Hm-m-h-m~

 

WHOOSUW hvfiuo EOHM WUCOUSHm
oaaaa-emm-mmmmmummme
myopEoE mmmum

99999999999999t

-e

W9lv9l [91:99 991 99Ifi9l 99lv9999L9

coo3uosIconowmmu

lull-'9

------ Lr-----L--na-HN-aa-ks-mu-mH-Ha-a-khMHMNH-I ---- -----
mv-mv-Hv-om-nm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-NN-mN mucvhmmWOHMHw wad machowmuo>
--I-hhhhuhhsuukuhmunhuhuuh n “unenu-¢-----a--- --m-- -----------------------------
asap wwooawoaa Amooacazo m < om u we om o :o <a a moaoaaaoo<

4i

Hmme-LrIIII II IIIIIImfimprIIIIIIIII mugmmmuImmmmmmnImqumgfII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

QmDZHHZOUImzonhmnzou Am>oz

9'99999'9'99'919999999999999999999'999'999999999999999999'9999999'9'999999'99'999999999999'9999999'9999:9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

182

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IImm”mmummnwmummnmwumwumwnwmnmmuwmIaInIIII .IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII coamasuwo
----- -mm-am-aa-ks-ma-ma-aa-a-k-m-m-a L - oaaaoaomMo ooooawm

------- III- II ma-ms-aa-am-km-mm-nn-am-am-k~-m~ aooummoao
------------------ I-InnawenupsurswmwwmewwwunubnmumwwI- I - I - ammummmmu Immmmemm
I ms-ma-av-am-5m-mnInm-an-oN-k~-mN Hoonum scum one on

- - SPomeEFF-Suofiufim. w - - I- a an as -.- memo-am m-e-mmmeemm
ms-mv-aa-on-km-mm-mm-Hm-o~-k~-mN L woaoaaas on» wou>aoa ooa

III I-I-unwrapuowpownmwwmwuwwnnnbumpnwwIII II-LI-I-II-I- mamaoaao “Immmumummmm-mmm sum
ma-ma-aa-am-km-mm-nm-am-oN-a~-mN aoamco mam
----- IV II-III-I-I-AFFEPKFEIRFEELM- we II. - “Hummus-Emmi
ma-ma-aa-mm-km-mm-mm-sm-o~-k~-m~ “moan a

I I- I-I-Iumnwhowowuowwmwumwwwwuppoomnmns. IP-II-II- - ammumummmm-mmmemmm

soaaoa zH >eam<ao ao xo<a

IIIIIII IIII- I ma-mv-aa-am-km-mm-mm-~m-m~-a~-m~ a - uoauooo :uoomw
----- IIII-III-II-I-I-uawunwwpawrwwmwwnrwhrueunuwuwurIIa-IIII r-III-I-I-IIIIII-I-I-I-I----III-I
ma-ma-aa-am-km-mm-mm-sm-a~-km-mN - aogoaoo uu<

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII LII-wmwumvaNUPwuwwuwhwwwHWUPwMuPHWII IIIIIII I II
ma-ma-aa-am-km-mm-mm-Hm-a~-km-mN honoaoo oamaz

II IIIIIIIIIIIIII Inn»HmhmwwrhwwhwmwvwhvabHMn -H, I IIIIiI IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II
ma-ms-aa-am-km-mm-mm-am-a~-kN-m~ - aoaoaou .m.a
- - .Ihhhhsnnoawbwwmwumruernear. - -w, I II -LII- ----- I --

ma-ma-aa-am-km-mm-nn-sm-a~-kN-mN - umaaaaummw
III-I-II-I-I-II-IIIuMN-a~-aa-kH-ma-ma-aa-a-k-mwww.III--I-III-I IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
a ma-ma-aa-am-Am-mn-mn-an-aN-k~-m~ - emmwooaaa

IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIumPnwWupfichfluflfiuflrnfiruwufiuwuwufi+III- III-III IIIIIIIIIIIIIII-III

me-vaHv-mm-nm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-nN-mm

 

 

l

- ma-ms-as-om-km-mm-mm-am-om-k~-mN
-MN-HmnbmnmwwmwwmwwwwwouwnMum-aI

-mN-HmIoHubhhMHhMHhHthhththH:{I

 

rI-

 

 

 

ma-ma-av-am-km-mm-mm-am-a~-km-mm
Im~-a~-aa-AHIma-mH-aa-aubnm-m-a

 

.14

.III

999

moan Haoaaoao

 

- xmmwwmwww

 

me-mv-Hv-om-um-mmImmIHmImNInm-mN
ImN-HN-mHINH-mH-nHIHa-m-n-mIm-H

 

99999

 

chwwwwum

 

mv-ma-aa-am-km-mm-mm-am-amn~m-mm
-m~-a~-aa-ka-ma-ma-aa-a-k-m-m-H
Amoosca:

l

'

a

IL

IliIIJ

I1

IIII

VII

999999999999 99 99999

 

.Il

 

j

w < om

 

U we

 

ow

o

 

:0

 

#991

<0

 

'91

m

 

 

 

mEmF

 

 

 

mo>.

 

o>aH acomhomImo

 

QMDZHHZOUIZOHHUHQmHKDfi mo HUHAmzou

 

.0

VI

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A J ma-ma-aa-an-km.mn-nm-an-a~-a~-mm a aI I a e eaamaasxm.oaa
-I-I-I- -m~-a~-aa-aa-ma-mH-HH-o-k-m-n-H scamm»aHaIMm-mmmmmmmwmme
- mv-na-aa-an-kn-mm-mn-an-aN-k~-m~ oooamwawo sea maaauouae
I ------- -mw-a~-aa-aa-ma-ma-aa-a-k-m-muw - -II I-Imm-mommmmmHHMb
mauwa-aa-an-km-mm-mm-an-am-k~-m~ waaoaaao on» wafiooouaou
FI- -:-2-2-:-.-m-w.-ma-.Ia-w.-o.-o.-m.-m.-w III-III- - 809:8 tame-mo
ma-me-aa-om-kn-mn-nm-an-aN-k~-mN moaaoosom
rIIII-I-I- -mN-H~-aa-ka-ma-na-Ha-o-k.m-m-w III-L- -IIII-I -- --------
ms-ma-aa-am-km-mnumn-am-aN-kN-m~ mwaaooos now
I IIIIIII - n N I H N - m H - meMW-IMHIHHIHI-Io-IIAI-Iwwm I H LII-L III I- IIII I - III-ImmmwummmtwmruImemmmm «mm-Ema
ma-ma-aa-am-km-mm-mm-am-a~-k~-mN casuaa
IIIIIIIII III-Iwmwwwmme-k~-mHIMHIHH-m-k-m-Mww-III I IIIIII-IeIII II III--
I ma-ma-aa-am-kn-mm-nm-an-aN-kN-mN LI oaaoosom goo: n.00aom
- ------- III-00-3-2-:-a-m-.-a-7a-a-.-m-..m.-w - I I- .. T .. I I II-
ma-ma-ae-am-km-mm-nn-am-m~-~N-m~Ia L a nooaauou oaa crumb AMomam
II-I-III-I “MN-kumw-ka-ma-mH-HH-a-k-m-muH II-IIII- - Ifi-I- - IIIIIIIIIIII
ma-ma-aa-am-km-mm-mn-am-aN-kN-mN 4 ooafimmomao oaooaom
- IIIIIIIIIII -mN-HN-aH-ka-ma-ma-HH-a-k-Mumww - LI-I-II- -- IIIIIIII
soaaoa zH :o<uam
------------ mauna-aa-anpnn-mw-nnnen-me-m~-w~ I-I- I - awoapooz
II IIIIII -n~-H~-aH-AH-ma-ma-aa-a-k-wuwuw-I --II
me-me-Hv-mm-nnImm-mm-HmImN-AN-mN mwcwuooe how
--------- -2-:-2-:-2-2-:-a-7m.-m.-a- I- I-.I-fifibePWE-mm-mmbmmbbo
I mv-flv-Wv-mfl-Nfl-Wfl-mW-Hm-mN-\.-mN mowaneomvé
-n~-H~-aa-kH-Ma-ma-wa-a-k-m»n-a -- II IIIIII I
I IIIIIIIII lIn-mI-InIWHH-Wum-n-Hm-n.-m-nIum.n-Ifin-IoN-s-m~ 4 5335;.» can tESHwNMAN
T-I -21TS-:-m-a-.Ima-.-a-H-.-a-.-a-.-m-.-m.-HII- III --I- -------- mo Shag-abs
ma-ma-as-om-km-mm-mm-am-a~-km-m~ wosxpaa
I IImN-IHN-mH-nfl-mH-nH-HIH-ol-ml-IMIHmIHH II TIII I
l- IIIIIIIII IIWeHn-deWWm-n-Hawm-n-Hn-W-fin-I m-AN-mN-LII .4 I cusvonum sue: a.mumum
”Wm-INN .IQ - wwwmewm-Ffl-wfik-wwvm-ww I II III I IIIII I
e-mv-fie-me-émASH-3-3-3-5-: 33.5 oven-3» was up:
-I-I -nN-H~-aH-kwwmwwmw-HH-o-k-m-m-H -I-II-.-Ie- II- - - koouam
koaoaaooa Amooaaazq om u we om oezu <a a moaua>aoo<
rIIII I UEHF || IIIII Imle0>CH WCCWRWQ MO .0? llll
amazaezooIsoHaoa za seam<so mo xu<a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

Wv- -Wv- wlrmm- sn-mn- nn-Hm-mN-NN-mN
IMN- HN- mHI NH- mH- nH- HHI mwbwmnmnfl

:OHwH>Humwm EooummuHu

 

  

 

 

 

 

moHUHHom-Hoonum

 

mHaow HacoHueusvo
.H o a: oEKm-HHInfiw-Hmm

 

:oHuuuavo ouH>HomcH

 

 

 

GOHHGDHM>O hufiuwmh

 

-L-quwwI«wImeNn- wn,-nn- Hw-aN- AN- mN
- swat-Ham- may mama-H
ma-nw-ev-mn- -Nmy -Hn-oNWImwawI-
4.2} a- I I. In
in» m- mamImHEn-f- N mam-m

ImN-HN-mH-bH-mH-MH-HH-owbnmIMIW

coHuusHm>o uneven-m

 

mv-Ndqu-mmuunwmm-mn-mw-oN-nN-mN
ImNIHN-mHHhHHMHnMHHNHwmwbmeMwfi

 

v- neufle- mm- mm- mw-WH:AW.IQNI NNI mN
mN-DH- PHI mH- mHIWWNILPuWuWHfi
Imw- mm- law- Hm- cN- NNI mN

ImN- HN- mH- hH- mHI-MHHHH- mhbwmw

ucoeo>ohme HecoHuusuumcm

 

999999999

:oHumNHcsNHOI 55H30Huusu

 

 

99.99 99

we-nvufie-mm-NWrmm-nm-fiw-mN-NN-mN
imm- --

IMNIHNIDHHPHHmHWWHIHHWDHFHWWMNH

 

 

 

mewsmemIHmHuumw

 

mmwum-oaowa

 

mounwude-mm-NnuwwuwnuHm-aN-NN-HN
-mN-HN- mH-hTHHIMHPH-b- Tn .b-

HocconeImImweum

 

 

mv- weudeI an- hmI mnnflwan- mN- NNI mN
IMNIHNHDHHFHHMHHMHHHHHth-WJMHH-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H 053 m." 0N H Ham

 

 

mmp<zaoaomma=m zoaa wemmsomm

 

 

999999

vufifiufifinmfiuhflumnumm-HnImNuNNHwN.

Imus-$1

In

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ifi -IIII IIIIII wwmmwmw:

II I SHIN-HP me- HRH-RH. FREE-b- III-II :- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

meuweudv- mfiwmfiumnunn- Hm- mN- 5N- mN- moHHnEomm<

I-I -- III ,HNnHN-aHukH”MHHMHIHH-o->-mum-- -I -I-I-I-;-Ifi -----------------------------
Nwoomwooa Hmooaauzq < om-u we om o 2o <a a moauH>Hoo<

r-IIII-III-ILfiI- mews --III mbumeme-moomuoa-mo . er IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

 

DszHHZOU ruHHOA 2H :U<mmm

 

185

HHHHHHI

|""'III||I"-'

qunwuflfiumnufifluwnnnmuHmImNuNNdmN

- IMNIHNImHINHImHInHIHHImINImImIH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

msoocmHHoumHz

 

mDomz<AHmUmHz

 

 

mm-nq-Hv-om-Hm-mm-mmuHm-mN-H-m~
-mN-HNIQH-HH-mH-mH-HH-a-H-m-m-H

ucoso>mwmmH van
«unamm asHaumuHmu

 

 

 

l"|

vavaHvanInmImmImmIHmImNIhNImN
ImNIHNImHINHImHIMHIHHImINImImIH

muHuHHomIchoHuoaoum

 

 

vavaHwImmInmImmImmIHmImNINNImN
IMNIHNIoHINHImHImHIHHIaINImImIH

'lr"4"

muaoanuHmma wmmum

 

vavaHvamInmImmImmIHmImNINNImN

-m-H~-oH-HH-mH-mHwwwwmwmum-mIH-

7
JL

mauHuuuumIo>Huu>occH

 

 

 

 

ImNIHNIaHINHImHImHIHHImInImImIH

mv-mv-Hv-on-Hm-mm-mm-fim-o~-HN-mN-

III!-

muHUHHomIocHHmwummm

 

 

IMNIHNIaHINHImHImHIHHImINImImIH

mv-mv-Hv-om-Hm-mm-mm-flmumN-HN-mMI

moHOH-wcHuohmwoucH vca
m:H:HEuouow .wnanfimwb

t'l

 

 

vavaHvamINmImmImmIHmImNINNImN
ImNIHNImHINHImHImHIHHImINImImIH

 

 

 

 

 

 

l'l"

MHHHO>0 H GOA-Um

 

mHHHHu ohfim wcwmafiuaH
.Auomumecu-WMHumm

 

 

:oHumonw :H on Nws NwHqu
"msvamua HmHuymm

I."

 

.uuo dmoHuH>Huuw unavaum

 

 

 

 

 

]'

.Eanmoum mmczw "HumwMWMMu
:oHumNHHHu: quHmIHmuHm an

IIIImwmmmmmwwIwmmIwwmmmmmw

”>H0u=v>fiu

 

 

 

 

ucummwswo vcw moHHmmwm
uuowmmm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

moHuH>Huu<

 

 

IIIIIII HIIIIIIIIIII mHIme-He-mmummwmm-mm-Hm-mN-HM-m~ I
IIIII -thH~IOH-HH-mHIHHIHHHWIH-m-m-H III I
IIIIII mv-mv-H¢-om-Hm-mm-mm-flm-mN-HN-mN
IIIIIIIII IIIIIme-HN-mH-HH-mH-mH-HH-m-H-mumuwI IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIII me-mv-fiv-mm-Hm-mm-mm-Hm-m-HN-m~
-mN-HNIaH-HHMMH-mH-HH-m-H-m-m-H II-II
II I w¢-mv-fiq-am-Hm-mm-mm-flm-o-Hm-mN A
IIIIIIII IIIIIIIII HHN-HN-m~-Hfi-mH-MH-HH-@wH-m-m-~ I-II IIIIHIIIII
mq-m¢-Hv-mm-Hm-mm-mm-Hm-mN-HN-m~
-mN-Hmumfi-HH-mwwmwwwwumwmwmwm-H I I III II
IIIIIII II I mv-mc-Hv-om-Hm-mm-mm-Hm-aN-HN-m~
IIIIIIIIIIIII III-I -mm-HN-mHIHH-mH-mH-HHwH-H-m-mufi III
came I Noam: ohm Hmouscsz m < cm 0 mH um o 2u <m m
IumwthIIIIIIIIIIIII II mEMFI II mm> obcp mmmmmmntmtho

QmDZHHzou mmh<zHQmommmzm 20mm wthDOma

 

   
  

AAAAA

“'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII’“’