A: 3...... fit... a” . i : .: f .5... 3%... .34. .m E... 4. f! v.35 a: .3. .56.:- . 25.1 .. .2 . 5:... : .37 (i... . 11......” :: .... s: fimwumngI” . . .1! . , , F}... . , . A , n .....z.u._... 3. . cu . . 1... § . 5:13.... 3.“. F. 13.3. 21.... .7: 733.5. 31..- .2...) 4:» . £32... I... 1.. :c. A ? 3’1... if. 1:1.iyfia...” 0*. J"! .. . . «.1. ’A .I . n a I‘.’\ . , 2 um! I... , 53...? . . fl. 1. 2 1.: .1..,.. JO. .4... E35 .5. ..I.. :03! :0 WM. 3.\ . ~ 5.1. :1: a .. . is a." 11...? ”U .. . Z a! . LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS: LINKAGES TO PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES AND STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS presented by LINDA SUE HAVEMAN has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD. degree in Human Ecologx u/éM/fi W1 - fo Major Professot's Signature Date MSU is an Affirmative ActiorVEqual Opportunity Institution PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 2/05 p:lC|RC/DateDue.indd-p.1 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AF F ILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS: LINKAGES TO PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES AND EDUCATIONAL LEVELS By Linda Sue Haveman A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Human Ecology 2006 ABSTRACT ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS: LINKAGES TO PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES AND EDUCATIONAL LEVELS By Linda Sue Haveman Church affiliated childcare programs are the fastest growing type of childcare program, and, yet, very little is known about organizational climate within this context. This study extended current work in the area Of organization climate (Bloom, 19963) by examining organizational climates within church affiliated programs and examining how organizational climate varied according to program instability rates and staff educational levels. A cross sectional, national sample Of 53 church-affiliated child care centers (413 employees) comprised this study which utilized a descriptive, non-experimental research design. The study utilized secondary data analysis of an existing data set compiled by Paula Jorde-Bloom from 1985-2003. Results indicated that the organizational climate Of church-affiliated child care programs varied as a function Of and were negatively related to program instability rates. When controlling for childcare program size, however, only the organizational climate dimension of professional development varied as a function Of program instability rate. Organizational climate Of church affiliated child care programs varied as a function Of and are positively related to staff educational levels. However, when controlling for program size, only the organizational climate dimension Of innovation varied as a function of staff educational level. Implications for program administration are discussed. DEDICATION First, it is with great joy that I dedicate this dissertation to the man who is my best friend and husband, Terry Haveman. Without his continued encouragement and support, I would never have attended college, let alone continued into graduate school. I want to thank him for his willingness to listen and empathize through out the process. I thank God that He gave my such a wonderful husband, who was willing to put his interest aside in order to allow me tO begin my long journey from Reformed Bible College, to Grand Valley State University, and finally to Michigan State University. I love you Terry. Secondly, I want to dedicate this work to my parents, Gil and Marge Schepers, who provided me with a wonderful, Christ-centered home life. I could not have asked for better parents. They have given me SO much encouragement. I want tO thank my mother for riding with me to Michigan State University and praying for me through out my proposal defense and dissertation defense. I thank both Of them for helping and encouraging me, even when times were tough, to not give up on higher education. My only regret is that my father is no longer alive on this earth; if he were, I would tell him how much he impacted my life. While often I knew how proud he was Of me, I do not think he ever knew how proud I was Of him. Finally, I want to dedicate this dissertation tO all Of my children and grandchild: Eric & Torie (Natalie), Kerri and Aaron, and Todd. Thank you for putting up with a mother who went to school through out most Of your lives. I know it has not always been easy for you. Not one Of you complained, and I could not have done it without you. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I also want to acknowledge those that impacted me as I entered into higher education. The beginning of my long journey began at Reformed Bible College (now known as Kuyper College) with my mentor and encourager, Dr. Burt Braunius. Burt saw something in me that I did not know that I had, and therefore, gave me Opportunities that I had never anticipated. I would have never have gone any further in my education without your encouragement and support. The next stage of my journey brought me tO Grand Valley State University (GVSU) and a wonderful mentor, Dr. Julie Chlebo. Julie saw my love for administration in early childhood program, gave me the opportunity to teach for GVSU, and encouraged me to go on to Obtain my doctorate. Thank you for your inspiration. I also want to acknowledge my committee chair at Michigan State University, Dr. Holly Brophy—Herb, who read numerous revisions and continued to be kind and supportive. Thank you for your patience. Finally, I could never have accomplished this task without my heavenly Father. With Him, all things are possible! iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ....................................................................................... viii ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS: ........ l LINKAGES TO PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES AND EDUCATIONAL LEVELS I CHAPTER ONE I INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... I . PURPOSE STATEMENT ................................................................................................................................. 6 IMPORTANCE OF THE PROBLEM ................................................................................................................... 9 CUNCl-fl’l UAI. MUDlil. ............................................................................................................................... I l CONCEPTUAL AND OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................ I3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESIS ................................................................................................. l5 ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................................................................... I6 CHAPTER TWO 17 REVIEW OF LITERATURE I7 Nlilil) l‘OR CHILI) CARI; TODAY ................................................................................................................ I7 CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE ....................................................... 20 ADMINISTRATION: CHILD CARE QUALITY INDICATORS AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE ....................... 24 INTENT OF THIS RESEARCH ........................................................................................................................ 35 CHAPTER THREE 37 M ETHOD _ 37 RESEARCH DESIGN .................................................................................................................................... 37 SAMPLING PROCEDURES AND DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................... 37 SAMPLING ................................................................................................................................................. 38 EARLY CHILDHOOD WORK ENVIRONMENT SCALE INSTRUMENTATION .................................................... 39 DATA ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................................... 42 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES ................................................................................................. 43 V LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH ............................................................................................................... 49 CHAPTER FOUR 50 RESU LTS 50 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 50 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS SI PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS ................................... 5 I STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS .................................... SI ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS ....................................... SI QUANTITATIVE ANALYSES IN RESPONSE TO RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHES ES 55 RELIABILITY COEFFICIENTS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE MEASURES AND ITS SUBSCALES ............... 55 RELIABILITY COEFFICIENTS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE MEASURES AND ITS SUBSCALES ............... 56 CORRELATIONS OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES, STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS, AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS .................................................................... 57 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CIIILD CARF. PROGRAMS AS A FUNCTION OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATE WITII 'l‘l IE INDIVIDUAL AS THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS .................................... 58 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS As A FUNCTION OF STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVEL WITH THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS AS THE INDIVIDUAL ................................................ 63 WITH THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS AS THE INDIVIDUAL, ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS AS A FUNCTION OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATE AND STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS, CONTROLLING FOR PROGRAM SIZE ............................................................................................. 66 CHAPTER FIVE 74 DISCUSSION 74 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 74 DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS 74 Vi PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS ................................... 74 STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS .................................... 75 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS ....................................... 76 ASSOCIATIONS OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES, STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS WITH ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS .................................................................... 76 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE VARYING AS A FUNCTION OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES, STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVI-2L5 CONTROLLING FOR PROGRAM SIZE ...................................................................... 82 FINAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS 84 PROGRAM SIZE .......................................................................................................................................... 86 PROGRAM INSTABILITY ............................................................................................................................. 87 EDUCATIONAL LEVELS ............................................................................................................................. 89 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 9I LIMITATIONS 92 SUGGESTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL RESEARCH 92 APPENDIX A 94 REFERENCES IOI Vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Conceptual and Operation Definitions ............................................. 12-13 Table 2 Means and Standard Deviations of Overall Organizational Climate Scores and Subscale Scores in Church-Affiliated Child Care Programs with Program as the Unit of Analysis ............................................................................................. 51 Table 3 Means and Standard Deviations of Overall Organizational Climate Scores and Subscale Scores in Church-Affiliated Child Care Programs with the Individual as the Unit of Analysis .................................................................................... 52 Table 4 Frequency and Percentage of Staff Educational Levels ............................. 53 Table 5 Inter Item Correlation Matrix ............................................................ 56 Table 6 One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effects of Program instability Rates on Organizational Climate with the Individual Staff Member as the Unit of Analysis ....... 60 Table 7 Bonferroni Procedures on Program instability Rates and organizational Climate Scores of Church-Affiliated Child Care Programs ............................................. 62 Table 8 One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effects of Staff Educational Levels on Organizational Climate ............................................................................ 65 Table 9 Intercorrelations for Program instability Rates, Program Size, Staff Educational levels, and Organizational Climate .............................................................. 67 Table 10 ANCOVA for Organizational Climate Varying as a Function of Program instability Rate Controlling for Program Size .................................................. 69 Table 11 ANCOVA for Organizational Climate Varying as a Function of Staff Educational Levels Controlling for Program Size ............................................. 71 viii Organizational Climate Of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs: Linkages to Program Instability Rates and Educational Levels Chapter One Introduction Child care is a growing industry, with church sponsorship programs, those that are housed within and/or administered by churches, growing at a faster rate than other types of programs (Bogle, 2001; Neugebauer, 2000). For instance, in California, 25% of all child care centers are faith-based (Orr & F ilback, 2004), a significant increase from years past. Although child care is a growing industry, the quality of child care is largely poor to mediocre (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995). This is certainly problematic given the importance of child care quality to child outcomes. Studies indicate that quality child care contributes to positive cognitive development (Peisner-Feinberg et a1., 1998), is predictive of children’s social skills (N ICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2001), readiness for school (N ICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1999b), and pre-academic and language skills (N ICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2002). A number of experts have identified the components that constitute high quality child care. For instance, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) accreditation standards (1998) identify 10 indicators of quality child care which include such things as the quality of interactions among teachers and between parents and teachers, the quality of the curriculum, staff qualifications and professional development, the quality of administration and staffing, aspects of the physical l environment, health and safety standards, nutrition and food services, and evaluation practices. In addition, Fiene (2002) outlined l3 indicators for quality child care, which include, in addition to those noted by NAEYC, adequate staff child ratio and group Size. Feine (2002) notes, as well, the importance of quality program administration to child care quality. Most studies of child care quality involve ratings of the classroom environment including elements such as the quality of teacher-child interactions (Blau, 2001; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 199%; Saluja, Early, & Clifford, 2002), teacher-child ratios (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995), or staff demographics (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995; Neugebauer, l999c; Saluja, Early, & Clifford, 2002; Whitebook, Sakai, Gerber, & Howes, 2001). Very little attention has been given to child care administration as a key component of quality child care (Muijs, Aubrey, Harris, & Briggs, 2004). In particular, there is a lack of research on administration in church-affiliated child care programs, as the vast majority of studies examine child care programs that are not affiliated with churches (Bogle et al., 2001; S. W. Helbum & Bergmann, 2002). The administrative component of a child care program involves a wide range of activities, such as hiring and supervising staff, ensuring opportunities for continued staff development, establishing program curriculum and goals, and overseeing the financial operations of the program. While some researchers have examined particular administrative activities, such as staff-child ratios and cost of child care relative to child care quality (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995), others, such as Bloom (1996a), have examined the larger “climate” attributed to the administrative activities of a child care program. Bloom, a leading researcher in the area of child care administration, identifies this general ambience of the program as the organizational climate, which is “the collective perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and values of the individuals in a particular work setting. It is a composite of the personalities that come together and the leadership that guides them” (Bloom, 1996a, p. 2). In operationalizing organizational climate, Bloom identifies practices such as the degree to which the administration facilitates quality leadership, joint decision making, quality interactions among staff, and others which will be described shortly. Those elements define organizational climate, as articulated by Bloom (l996a), and are reflected as quality indicators in the applied literature as well. For example, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Code of Ethical Conduct (Feeney & Freeman, 1999) states that In a caring, cooperative workplace, human dignity is respected, professional satisfaction is promoted, and positive relationships are modeled. Based upon our core values, our primary responsibility in this arena is to establish and maintain settings and relationships that support productive work and meet professional needs. (p. 61) The NAEYC Code of Ethics further lists ideas that are the aspirations of practitioners. These include establishing and maintaining positive relationships, helping meet the needs of professional development, promoting policies, and creating a climate of trust (Feeney & Freeman, 1999). Bloom has examined the relationships of organizational climate and characteristics such as accreditation, professional development, program size, staff commitment, and Staff roles across all types of child care (l996a). However, she has not examined the organizational climate of child care programs depending on sponsorship, such as church-affiliated child care programs. Moreover, the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels has not been examined in relationship to organizational climates of church-affiliated child care programs. Because so little research has been conducted on administration in child care, particularly the organizational climate, there is much to be learned about what kinds of child care program characteristics may influence organizational climate. Characteristics such as program instability rates and staff education are of particular interest. In the child care research literature, program instability rate and staff education levels are two key characteristics that have been linked with the quality care (e. g. teacher-child interactions and child development outcomes). For instance, high turnover rates are related to less optimal teacher-child interactions and less secure attachments between teachers and children (N ICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1999a; Saluja et al., 2002). Teachers with less education are less likely to work in an accredited child care center as compared to teachers with higher levels of education (Whitebook, 1996). Researchers have not yet examined the ways in which these two characteristics may also impact the organizational climate of the program. Further, the study of church-affiliated child care programs is an important area of research given the fact that these programs have been known to differ from non-church Sponsored programs in a number of ways. For instance, church-affiliated child care programs have lower program instability than other center-based child care programs (Saluja, Early, & Clifford, 2002). Church-affiliated child care programs have educational goals that differ from other types of care programs (Holloway, I999). The legal status of church-affiliated programs also differs from other types of child care programs with the majority of church-affiliated child care programs being non-profit programs (Bloom, 1998). Moreover, many non-profit child care programs provide greater opportunities for professional development for staff members (Bloom, 1998), and so church-affiliated programs, which are oflen non-profit, may provide more opportunities for staff development. Church-affiliated child care programs also differ from other types of child care programs according to programming quality. While church-affiliated child care programs were among the first to embrace NAEYC accreditation (Accreditation status from the National Association for the Education of Young Children) (N eugebauer, 1999), church- affiliated child care programs have been shown to be lower in quality than other types of child care programs (Bogle, 2001). One final difference between church-affiliated child care programs and other types of center-based care involves how the programs are administered. Church-affiliated programs, compared to other types of child care programs, often do not network with other child care programs and are considered poorly administered (Bogle, 2001). Because church-affiliated child care programs differ from other types of child care programs in so many ways, it stands to reason that its organizational climate may differ as well. New information describing organizational climates of church-affiliated programs and identifying the influences of program instability rate and staff educational levels will increase our current understanding of church-affiliated child care programs. For instance, if lower program instability rates are related to higher ratings of organizational climate, then strategies to lower program instability are important to identify. Likewise, employing more highly educated employees might positively impact organizational climate. Purpose Statement The proposed work addresses two current gaps in the literature. First, very little is known about the quality of organizational climate in church-affiliated child care programs. Second, very little is known about the influences of program instability rates and staff educational levels on the quality of organizational climate. This lack of knowledge is problematic in three ways. First, higher organizational climate is associated with higher quality child care programs (Bloom, 1996b, 1997b; Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). So, identifying those characteristics that impact organizational climate is one step in devising strategies to improve organizational climate. Improvements in organizational climate should result in higher quality child care. Second, church-affiliated child care programs are among the fastest growing child care programs (Neugebauer, 2000). Church-affiliated programs also differ from non church-affiliated programs in several ways, including staff and program demographics, program goals, and management style (Bogle, 2001; Bogle et al., 2001; Holloway, 1999; Lindner, Mattis, & Rogers, 1983; Mocan, 1995, 1997; Morris & Helbum, 2000; Saluja et al., 2002); thus, findings from samples of non church-affiliated child care centers may not be generalizable to church-affiliated child care centers. Understanding the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels on the organizational climates of church-affiliated programs is needed knowledge, vital to improving quality child care. As previously stated, minimal research examining the linkages between organizational climate and both program instability rates and staff educational levels has been conducted; in fact, no research has been done examining these variables among church-affiliated child care programs. Therefore, the purposes of this study are to extend the work of Bloom (l996a) by I) describing the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs and, 2) examining the influences of program instability rates and staff educational level on organizational climate in church- affiliated child care programs, utilizing the data compiled by Bloom between 1985-2003. As measured by Bloom (1996a), organizational climate is a composite score and is made up of ten dimensions: collegiality, professional growth, supervisor support, clarity, reward system, decision-making system, goal consensus, task orientation, physical setting, and innovativeness. In her work, Bloom has examined organizational climate across all combined types of child care programs, including church and non- church-affiliated. Specifically, she has examined the relationship of program characteristics including accreditation status, staff roles, program size, and staff commitment to organizational climate (Bloom, 1996a). Organizational climate scores are higher in accredited programs. Organizational climate is viewed more positively by administrators of child care programs than other employees. Administrators differ from teachers and assistants in their perception of teacher/assistant input on decision making. Collegial differences, a dimension of organizational climate, are found depending on program size, with higher collegiality in smaller centers; and differences were found between for-profit and nonprofit programs in professional growth, with nonprofits providing more opportunities for professional growth (Bloom, 1998). Areas lacking in the research on organizational climate include describing the organizational climates of child care centers according to sponsorship, for example, church-affiliated child care program. A second area lacking is research is an examination of any influence of program instability levels and staff educational levels on organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs. As noted, church-affiliated child care programs differ from non—church-affiliated child care programs. In contrast to center-based child care programs, for example, church-affiliated child care programs have a greater percentage of white/Caucasian workers and fewer minority workers, smaller class sizes, and less educated staff (Saluja et al., 2002). Church-affiliated child care centers’ goals, such as child care program’s curricular philosophy, differ from other child care sponsorship (Bogle, 2001; Holloway, I999; Lindner et al., 1983). Program instability rates and staff educational levels are indicators of quality in child care programs (Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young ‘ Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Educated staff with opportunities for continued professional development are essential to quality child care (Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). More highly trained staff interact with children in stimulating and positive ways which contribute to children’s school readiness (e. g. language comprehension skills) and their positive social development (e.g. fewer behavioral problems) (N ICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1999a). Minimally, a higher quality child care center, as defined by the NAEYC, will have teacher assistants who have a GED or high school diploma and have had some training in child deveIOpment. Teachers should at least have an associate’s degree in early childhood (or similar) and/or a Child Development Associate Credential (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Administrators or directors should have a bachelor’s degree in early childhood, three years of teaching and/or a graduate degree in early childhood/child development (F iene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Higher educational levels and years of teaching experience results in better monitoring of staff (Howes, 1997). Bloom and Sheerer (1992) noted that continued professional development of administrators improved organizational climate scores; however, they have not specifically examined whether higher staff educational levels of church-affiliated child care program resulted in higher organizational climate scores. The study of organizational climate in church-affiliated child care programs is important given the fact that over one million children are cared for within church-affiliated programs each year and that these programs are the fastest growing centers (Neugebauer, 2000). Moreover, within church- affiliated child care programs, the relationship of program instability and staff educational level on organizational climate is an unexarnined area. Importance of the Problem This research is important along two primary fronts: l) organizational climate is a key contributor to the quality of child care, and so, understanding the organizational climate and its relationship to program characteristics is important; and, 2) church- affiliated child care centers are among the fast growing types of child care programs, but there is little research on the organizational climate of church-affiliated programs. Generally, 86% of center-based care across the country is poor to mediocre (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995). Indicators of the quality of center-based child care have been researched widely. Two of the critical components of higher quality child care is program instability rate and the administrative function of the program (Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1998), which includes the organizational climate of the program (Brainard & Fox, 1974; Munton & Mooney, 1999). Limited research suggests that organizational climate (Bloom, 1996) and lower program instability (High Scope, 2003) are related to higher quality care. Still, little research has examined the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels on the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs. Child care is a growing industry within the United States. The need for child care has risen because more women continue to enter the workforce than in previous years. From 1995 to 2001, sole parental care of children not yet in kindergarten decreased from 40% to 39%. The greatest decrease in parental care occurred among children ages 0-2, declining from 51% to 48% (Day, 1996). During this time, the use of center-based programs increased from 31% to 33% (Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, 2004). Although church-affiliated child care programs make up only 9% of all center-based child care programs (Neugebauer, 1999c), this represents nearly 1.5 million children (Neugebauer, 1999a). Clearly, the large number of children in church-affiliated programs warrants the study of their child care environments. One of the challenges in researching organizational climate is the paucity of measures that have been designed to assess organizational climate (Muijs et al., 2004). Bloom (1990) has developed the only tool for examining organizational climate in child 10 care programs that is currently in use. Bloom’s (1990) instrument will be used in the proposed research. Additionally, most child care providers in the United States have limited training on ways to decrease program instability rates and employ staff with higher educational levels; this is problematic for child care quality. We know it means trouble in terms of quality of interactions; we do not know exactly what it means for organizational climate. Answers to these questions will have implications for policy decisions as well as practices. Conceptual Model Bloom (1992) built her model of organizational climate on a social systems approach. The model includes the external environment (e. g. sponsoring agency; the local community; the professional community; legislative bodies and regulatory agencies; the economic, social and political climate; the business community; and the technological environment), people (e.g. characteristics of the individual, such as gender, age, ethnicity, socio-economic group, family history, educational level, training, work experience, interest/Skills/talents, personal traits, needs and expectations, adult development, career stage, commitment, motivation, professional orientation, beliefs and values, roles, and groups), structure (e. g. legal governing structure), processes (e.g. leadership style, decision-making, problem-solving, communication networks, planning and goal setting, group meetings, interpersonal relations, conflict management, supervision and training, performance appraisals, center evaluations, socialization practices, child assessment practices, teaching practices, and rate of program instability), culture (e.g. organizational climate), and outcomes (e.g. quality of child care provided). 11 Tait Q00} LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS: LINKAGES TO PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES AND STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS presented by LINDA SUE HAVEMAN has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD. degree in Human EcologL JAM/C W1 — {EEG Kllajor Profes'sol's Signature Date MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution u I PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 2/05 p:/ClRC/DateDue.indd-p.1 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS: LINKAGES TO PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES AND EDUCATIONAL LEVELS By Linda Sue Haveman A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Human Ecology 2006 ABSTRACT ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS: LINKAGES To PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES AND EDUCATIONAL LEVELS By Linda Sue Haveman Church affiliated childcare programs are the fastest growing type of childcare program, and, yet, very little is known about organizational climate within this context. This study extended current work in the area of organization climate (Bloom, l996a) by examining organizational climates within church affiliated programs and examining how organizational climate varied according to program instability rates and staff educational levels. A cross sectional, national sample of 53 church-affiliated child care centers (413 employees) comprised this study which utilized a descriptive, non-experimental research design. The study utilized secondary data analysis of an existing data set compiled by Paula Jorde-Bloom from 1985-2003. Results indicated that the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs varied as a function of and were negatively related to program instability rates. When controlling for childcare program size, however, only the organizational climate dimension of professional development varied as a function of program instability rate. Organizational climate of church affiliated child care programs varied as a function of and are positively related to staff educational levels. However, when controlling for program size, only the organizational climate dimension of innovation varied as a function of staff educational level. Implications for program administration are discussed. DEDICATION First, it is with great joy that I dedicate this dissertation to the man who is my best friend and husband, Terry Haveman. Without his continued encouragement and support, I would never have attended college, let alone continued into graduate school. I want to thank him for his willingness to listen and empathize through out the process. I thank God that He gave my such a wonderful husband, who was willing to put his interest aside in order to allow me to begin my long journey from Reformed Bible College, to Grand Valley State University, and finally to Michigan State University. I love you Terry. Secondly, I want to dedicate this work to my parents, Gil and Marge Schepers, who provided me with a wonderful, Christ-centered home life. I could not have asked for better parents. They have given me so much encouragement. I want to thank my mother for riding with me to Michigan State University and praying for me through out my proposal defense and dissertation defense. I thank both of them for helping and encouraging me, even when times were tough, to not give up on higher education. My only regret is that my father is no longer alive on this earth; if he were, I would tell him how much he impacted my life. While often I knew how proud he was of me, I do not think he ever knew how proud I was of him. Finally, I want to dedicate this dissertation to all of my children and grandchild: Eric & Torie (Natalie), Kerri and Aaron, and Todd. Thank you for putting up with a mother who went to school through out most of your lives. I know it has not always been easy for you. Not one of you complained, and I could not have done it without you. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I also want to acknowledge those that impacted me as I entered into higher education. The beginning of my long journey began at Reformed Bible College (now known as Kuyper College) with my mentor and encourager, Dr. Burt Braunius. Burt saw something in me that I did not know that I had, and therefore, gave me opportunities that I had never anticipated. I would have never have gone any further in my education without your encouragement and support. The next stage of my journey brought me to Grand Valley State University (GVSU) and a wonderful mentor, Dr. Julie Chlebo. Julie saw my love for administration in early childhood program, gave me the opportunity to teach for GVSU, and encouraged me to go on to obtain my doctorate. Thank you for your inspiration. I also want to acknowledge my committee chair at Michigan State University, Dr. Holly Brophy-Herb, who read numerous revisions and continued to be kind and supportive. Thank you for your patience. Finally, I could never have accomplished this task without my heavenly Father. With Him, all things are possible! iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ....................................................................................... viii ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS: ........l LINKAGES TO PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES AND EDUCATIONAL LEVELS I CHAPTER ONE I INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... I . PURPOSE STATEMENT ................................................................................................................................. 6 IMPORTANCE OF THE PROBLEM ................................................................................................................... 9 CUNCFI’I'UAI. MUDH. ............................................................................................................................... I I CONCEPTUAL AND OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................ I3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESIS ................................................................................................. I5 ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................................................................... I6 CHAPTER TWO I7 REVIEW OF LITERATURE l7 NI-gi-LD I-‘OR CHILD CARI; TODAY ................................................................................................................ I7 CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE ....................................................... 20 ADMINISTRATION: CHILD CARE QUALITY INDICATORS AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE ....................... 24 INTENT OF THIS RESEARCH ........................................................................................................................ 35 CHAPTER THREE 37 M ETHOD - - 37 RESEARCH DIiSIGN .................................................................................................................................... 37 SAMPLING PROCEDURES AND DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................... 37 SAMPLING ................................................................................................................................................. 38 EARLY CHILDHOOD WORK ENVIRONMENT SCALE INSTRUMENTATION .................................................... 39 DATA ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................................... 42 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES ................................................................................................. 43 LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH ............................................................................................................... 49 CHAPTER FOUR 50 RESU LTS 50 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 50 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS 5| PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS ................................... SI STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS .................................... 5 I ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS ....................................... 5 I QUANTITATIVE ANALYSES IN RESPONSE TO RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTH ES ES 55 RELIABILITY COEFFICIENTS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE MEASURES AND ITS SUBSCALES ............... 55 RELIABILITY COEFFICIENTS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE MEASURES AND ITS SUBSCALES ............... 56 CORRELATIONS OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES, STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS, AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS .................................................................... 57 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS AS A FUNCTION OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATE WITH TI IE INDIVIDUAL As THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS .................................... 58 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS AS A FUNCTION OF STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVEL WITH THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS AS THE INDIVIDUAL ................................................ 63 WITH THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS As THE INDIVIDUAL, ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS As A FUNCTION OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATE AND STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS, CONTROLLING FOR PROGRAM SIZE ............................................................................................. 66 CHAPTER FIVE 74 DISCUSSION 74 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 74 DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS 74 vi PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS ................................... 74 STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS .................................... 75 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS ....................................... 76 ASSOCIATIONS OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES, STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS WITH ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE OF CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS .................................................................... 76 ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE VARYING As A FUNCTION OF PROGRAM INSTABILITY RATES, STAFF EDUCATIONAL LEVELS CONTROLLING FOR PROGRAM SIZE ...................................................................... 82 FINAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHURCH-AFFILIATED CHILD CARE PROGRAMS 84 PROGRAM SIZE .......................................................................................................................................... 86 PROGRAM INSTABILITY ............................................................................................................................. 87 EDUCATIONAL LEVELS ............................................................................................................................. 89 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 9| LIMITATIONS 92 SUGGESTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL RESEARCH 92 APPENDIX A 94 REFERENCES 101 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Conceptual and Operation Definitions ............................................. 12-13 Table 2 Means and Standard Deviations of Overall Organizational Climate Scores and Subscale Scores in Church-Affiliated Child Care Programs with Program as the Unit of Analysis ............................................................................................. 51 Table 3 Means and Standard Deviations of Overall Organizational Climate Scores and Subscale Scores in Church-Affiliated Child Care Programs with the Individual as the Unit of Analysis .................................................................................... 52 Table 4 Frequency and Percentage of Staff Educational Levels ............................. 53 Table 5 Inter Item Correlation Matrix ............................................................ 56 Table 6 One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effects of Program instability Rates on Organizational Climate with the Individual Staff Member as the Unit of Analysis ....... 60 Table 7 Bonferroni Procedures on Program instability Rates and organizational Climate Scores of Church-Affiliated Child Care Programs ............................................. 62 Table 8 One-Way Analysis of Variance for Effects of Staff Educational Levels on Organizational Climate ............................................................................ 65 Table 9 Intercorrelations for Program instability Rates, Program Size, Staff Educational levels, and Organizational Climate .............................................................. 67 Table 10 ANCOVA for Organizational Climate Varying as a Function of Program instability Rate Controlling for Program Size .................................................. 69 Table 11 ANCOVA for Organizational Climate Varying as a Function of Staff Educational Levels Controlling for Program Size ............................................. 71 viii Organizational Climate Of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs: Linkages to Program Instability Rates and Educational Levels Chapter One Introduction Child care is a growing industry, with church sponsorship programs, those that are housed within and/or administered by churches, growing at a faster rate than other types of programs (Bogle, 2001; Neugebauer, 2000). For instance, in California, 25% of all child care centers are faith-based (Orr & F ilback, 2004), a significant increase from years past. Although child care is a growing industry, the quality of child care is largely poor to mediocre (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995). This is certainly problematic given the importance of child care quality to child outcomes. Studies indicate that quality child care contributes to positive cognitive development (Peisner-Feinberg et al., 1998), is predictive of children’s social skills (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2001), readiness for school (N ICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 199%), and pre-academic and language skills (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2002). A number of experts have identified the components that constitute high quality child care. For instance, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) accreditation standards (1998) identify 10 indicators of quality child care which include such things as the quality of interactions among teachers and between parents and teachers, the quality of the curriculum, staff qualifications and professional development, the quality of administration and staffing, aspects of the physical I environment, health and safety standards, nutrition and food services, and evaluation practices. In addition, Fiene (2002) outlined l3 indicators for quality child care, which include, in addition to those noted by NAEYC, adequate staff child ratio and group size. Feine (2002) notes, as well, the importance of quality program administration to child care quality. Most studies of child care quality involve ratings of the classroom environment including elements such as the quality of teacher-child interactions (Blau, 2001; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 199%; Saluja, Early, & Clifford, 2002), teacher-child ratios (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995), or staff demographics (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995; Neugebauer, 1999c; Saluja, Early, & Clifford, 2002; Whitebook, Sakai, Gerber, & Howes, 2001). Very little attention has been given to child care administration as a key component of quality child care (Muijs, Aubrey, Harris, & Briggs, 2004). In particular, there is a lack of research on administration in church-affiliated child care programs, as the vast majority of studies examine child care programs that are not affiliated with churches (Bogle et al., 2001; S. W. Helburn & Bergmann, 2002). The administrative component of a child care program involves a wide range of activities, such as hiring and supervising staff, ensuring opportunities for continued staff development, establishing program curriculum and goals, and overseeing the financial operations of the program. While some researchers have examined particular administrative activities, such as staff-child ratios and cost of child care relative to child care quality (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995), others, such as Bloom (1996a), have examined the larger “climate” attributed to the administrative activities of a child care program. Bloom, a leading researcher in the area of child care administration, identifies this general ambience of the program as the organizational climate, which is “the collective perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and values of the individuals in a particular work setting. It is a composite of the personalities that come together and the leadership that guides them” (Bloom, l996a, p. 2). In operationalizing organizational climate, Bloom identifies practices such as the degree to which the administration facilitates quality leadership, joint decision making, quality interactions among staff, and others which will be described Shortly. Those elementsdefine organizational climate, as articulated by Bloom (l996a), and are reflected as quality indicators in the applied literature as well. For example, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Code of Ethical Conduct (Feeney & Freeman, 1999) states that In a caring, cooperative workplace, human dignity is respected, professional satisfaction is promoted, and positive relationships are modeled. Based upon our core values, our primary responsibility in this arena is to establish and maintain settings and relationships that support productive work and meet professional needs. (p. 61) The NAEYC Code of Ethics further lists ideas that are the aspirations of practitioners. These include establishing and maintaining positive relationships, helping meet the needs of professional development, promoting policies, and creating a climate of trust (Feeney & Freeman, 1999). Bloom has examined the relationships of organizational climate and characteristics such as accreditation, professional development, program Size, staff commitment, and staff roles across all types of child care (l996a). However, she has not examined the organizational climate of child care programs depending on sponsorship, such as church-affiliated child care programs. Moreover, the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels has not been examined in relationship to organizational climates of church-affiliated child care programs. Because so little research has been conducted on administration in child care, particularly the organizational climate, there is much to be learned about what kinds of child care program characteristics may influence organizational climate. Characteristics such as program instability rates and staff education are of particular interest. In the child care research literature, program instability rate and staff education levels are two key characteristics that have been linked with the quality care (e. g. teacher-child interactions and child development outcomes). For instance, high turnover rates are related to less optimal teacher-child interactions and less secure attachments between teachers and children (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 199%; Saluja et al., 2002). Teachers with less education are less likely to work in an accredited child care center as compared to teachers with higher levels of education (Whitebook, 1996). Researchers have not yet examined the ways in which these two characteristics may also impact the organizational climate of the program. Further, the study of church-affiliated child care programs is an important area of research given the fact that these programs have been known to differ from non-church Sponsored programs in a number of ways. For instance, church-affiliated child care programs have lower program instability than other center-based child care programs (Saluja, Early, & Clifford, 2002). Church-affiliated child care programs have educational goals that differ from other types of care programs (Holloway, I999). The legal status of church-affiliated programs also differs from other types of child care programs with the majority of church-affiliated child care programs being non-profit programs (Bloom, I998). Moreover, many non-profit child care programs provide greater opportunities for professional development for staff members (Bloom, 1998), and so church-affiliated programs, which are ofien non-profit, may provide more opportunities for staff development. Church-affiliated child care programs also differ from other types of child care programs according to programming quality. While church-affiliated child care programs were among the first to embrace NAEYC accreditation (Accreditation status from the National Association for the Education of Young Children) (Neugebauer, 1999), church- affiliated child care programs have been shown to be lower in quality than other types of child care programs (Bogle, 2001). One final difference between church-affiliated child care programs and other types of center-based care involves how the programs are administered. Church-affiliated programs, compared to other types of child care programs, often do not network with other child care programs and are considered poorly administered (Bogle, 2001). Because church-affiliated child care programs differ from other types of child care programs in so many ways, it stands to reason that its organizational climate may differ as well. New information describing organizational climates of church-affiliated programs and identifying the influences of program instability rate and staff educational levels will increase our current understanding of church-affiliated child care programs. For instance, if lower program instability rates are related to higher ratings of organizational climate, then strategies to lower program instability are important to identify. Likewise, employing more highly educated employees might positively impact organizational climate. Purpose Statement The proposed work addresses two current gaps in the literature. First, very little is known about the quality of organizational climate in church-affiliated child care programs. Second, very little is known about the influences of program instability rates and staff educational levels on the quality of organizational climate. This lack of knowledge is problematic in three ways. First, higher organizational climate is associated with higher quality child care programs (Bloom, l996b, 1997b; Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). So, identifying those characteristics that impact organizational climate is one step in devising strategies to improve organizational climate. Improvements in organizational climate should result in higher quality child care. Second, church-affiliated child care programs are among the fastest growing child care programs (Neugebauer, 2000). Church-affiliated programs also differ from non church-affiliated programs in several ways, including staff and program demographics, program goals, and management style (Bogle, 2001; Bogle et al., 2001; Holloway, I999; Lindner, Mattis, & Rogers, 1983; Mocan, 1995, 1997; Morris & Helbum, 2000; Saluja et al., 2002); thus, findings from samples of non church-affiliated child care centers may not be generalizable to church-affiliated child care centers. Understanding the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels on the organizational climates of church-affiliated programs is needed knowledge, vital to improving quality child care. As previously stated, minimal research examining the linkages between organizational climate and both program instability rates and staff educational levels has been conducted; in fact, no research has been done examining these variables among church-affiliated child care programs. Therefore, the purposes of this study are to extend the work of Bloom (1996a) by l) describing the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs and, 2) examining the influences of program instability rates and staff educational level on organizational climate in church- affiliated child care programs, utilizing the data compiled by Bloom between 1985-2003. As measured by Bloom (l996a), organizational climate is a composite score and is made up of ten dimensions: collegiality, professional growth, supervisor support, clarity, reward system, decision—making system, goal consensus, task orientation, physical setting, and innovativeness. In her work, Bloom has examined organizational climate across all combined types of child care programs, including church and non- church-affiliated. Specifically, she has examined the relationship of program characteristics including accreditation status, staff roles, program size, and staff commitment to organizational climate (Bloom, l996a). Organizational climate scores are higher in accredited programs. Organizational climate is viewed more positively by administrators of child care programs than other employees. Administrators differ from teachers and assistants in their perception of teacher/assistant input on decision making. Collegial differences, a dimension of organizational climate, are found depending on program size, with higher collegiality in smaller centers; and differences were found between for-profit and nonprofit programs in professional growth, with nonprofits providing more opportunities for professional grth (Bloom, 1998). Areas lacking in the research on organizational climate include describing the organizational climates of child care centers according to sponsorship, for example, church-affiliated child care program. A second area lacking is research is an examination of any influence of program instability levels and staff educational levels on organizational climate of church—affiliated child care programs. As noted, church-affiliated child care programs differ from non-church-afliliated child care programs. In contrast to center-based child care programs, for example, church-affiliated child care programs have a greater percentage of white/Caucasian workers and fewer minority workers, smaller class sizes, and less educated staff (Saluja et al., 2002). Church-affiliated child care centers’ goals, such as child care program’s curricular philosophy, differ from other child care sponsorship (Bogle, 2001; Holloway, I999; Lindner et al., 1983). Program instability rates and staff educational levels are indicators of quality in child care programs (Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young ‘ Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Educated staff with opportunities for continued professional development are essential to quality child care (Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). More highly trained staff interact with children in stimulating and positive ways which contribute to children’s school readiness (e. g. language comprehension skills) and their positive social development (e.g. fewer behavioral problems) (N ICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1999a). Minimally, a higher quality child care center, as defined by the NAEYC, will have teacher assistants who have a GED or high school diploma and have had some training in child development. Teachers should at least have an associate’s degree in early childhood (or similar) and/or a Child Development Associate Credential (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Administrators or directors should have a bachelor’s degree in early childhood, three years of teaching and/or a graduate degree in early childhood/child development (F iene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Higher educational levels and years of teaching experience results in better monitoring of staff (Howes, 1997). Bloom and Sheerer (1992) noted that continued professional development of administrators improved organizational climate scores; however, they have not specifically examined whether higher staff educational levels of church-affiliated child care program resulted in higher organizational climate scores. The study of organizational climate in church-affiliated child care programs is important given the fact that over one million children are cared for within church-affiliated programs each year and that these programs are the fastest growing centers (Neugebauer, 2000). Moreover, within church- affiliated child care programs, the relationship of program instability and staff educational level on organizational climate is an unexamined area. Importance of the Problem This research is important along two primary fronts: 1) organizational climate is a key contributor to the quality of child care, and so, understanding the organizational climate and its relationship to program characteristics is important; and, 2) church- affiliated child care centers are among the fast growing types of child care programs, but there is little research on the organizational climate of church-affiliated programs. Generally, 86% of center-based care across the country is poor to mediocre (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995). Indicators of the quality of center-based child care have been researched widely. Two of the critical components of higher quality child care is program instability rate and the administrative function of the program (Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1998), which includes the organizational climate of the program (Brainard & Fox, 1974; Munton & Mooney, 1999). Limited research suggests that organizational climate (Bloom, 1996) and lower program instability (High Scope, 2003) are related to higher quality care. Still, little research has examined the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels on the organizational climate of church—affiliated child care programs. Child care is a growing industry within the United States. The need for child care has risen because more women continue to enter the workforce than in previous years. From 1995 to 2001 , sole parental care of children not yet in kindergarten decreased from 40% to 39%. The greatest decrease in parental care occurred among children ages 0-2, declining from 51% to 48% (Day, 1996). During this time, the use of center-based programs increased from 31% to 33% (Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, 2004). Although church-affiliated child care programs make up only 9% of all center-based child care programs (N eugebauer, 1999c), this represents nearly 1.5 million children (N eugebauer, 1999a). Clearly, the large number of children in church-affiliated programs warrants the study of their child care environments. One of the challenges in researching organizational climate is the paucity of measures that have been designed to assess organizational climate (Muijs et al., 2004). Bloom (1990) has developed the only tool for examining organizational climate in child 10 care programs that is currently in use. Bloom’s (I990) instrument will be used in the proposed research. Additionally, most child care providers in the United States have limited training on ways to decrease program instability rates and employ staff with higher educational levels; this is problematic for child care quality. We know it means trouble in terms of quality of interactions; we do not know exactly what it means for organizational climate. Answers to these questions will have implications for policy decisions as well as practices. Conceptual Model Bloom (1992) built her model of organizational climate on a social systems approach. The model includes the external environment (e. g. sponsoring agency; the local community; the professional community; legislative bodies and regulatory agencies; the economic, social and political climate; the business community; and the technological environment), people (e. g. characteristics of the individual, such as gender, age, ethnicity, socio—economic group, family history, educational level, training, work experience, interest/skills/talents, personal traits, needs and expectations, adult development, career stage, commitment, motivation, professional orientation, beliefs and values, roles, and groups), structure (e. g. legal governing structure), processes (e.g. leadership style, decision-making, problem-solving, communication networks, planning and goal setting, group meetings, interpersonal relations, conflict management, supervision and training, performance appraisals, center evaluations, socialization practices, child assessment practices, teaching practices, and rate of program instability), culture (e. g. organizational climate), and outcomes (e. g. quality of child care provided). 11 For this research, the researcher will examine people (staff educational levels) and processes (program instability rates) and the influence of these on the culture (organizational climate) of the child care program. In the current study, the primary purpose is to better understand the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels on the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs. The current investigation will examine the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels on the organizational climate, along with the dimensions of organizational climate defined by Bloom (1996a), which include professional growth opportunities, supervisor support, clarity, reward system, decision-making system, goal consensus, task orientation, physical setting, and innovativeness, of church-affiliated child care programs. 12 Conceptual and Operational Definitions Table 1 Conceptual and Operational Definitions Conceptual Definition Operational Definition Child Care Church-affiliated Child Care Organizational Climate Child Care is conceptually defined as caring for the needs of children outside of the home and by someone other than the parent or guardian. Church-affiliated child care will be conceptually defined as child care that occurs within a faith- based building. It includes both church sponsored programs and those programs housed within, but not sponsored by a church facility. From the Quality of Work Life in the Early Childhood Setting ( I 996): “the collective perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and values of the individuals in a particular work setting. It is a composite of the personalities that come together and the leadership that guides them” (p. 2). The instrument is composed of the following 10 dimensions. Collegiality: extent to which staff is friendly, supportive, and trusts one another Professional growth opportunities: the extent to which opportunities are available to increase professional competence Supervisor support: the degree of facilitative leadership that provides encouragement, support, and clear expectations 13 Child care will be operationalized as a program’s description that it cares for the needs of children outside of the home by someone other than the parent or guardian. Church-affiliated child care will be operationalized by a check that the child care center sponsorship church-affiliated rather than private proprietary/partnership, corporation/fianchise, private nonprofit, public school affiliated, military, Head Start, or university affiliated. Organizational climate will be operationalized as the total mean score across the 10 subscales. The mean scale score of collegiality items. The mean scale score of professional growth items. The mean scale score of supervisor support items. Table 1 Continued Program Instability Rate Staff Educational Level (‘Iuritys the extent to which policies, procedures, and responsibilities are clearly defined and communicated Reward system: the degree of fairness and equity in the distribution of pay, fringe benefits, and opportunities for advancement Decision-making system: the degree of autonomy given to staff and the extent to which they are involved in making center wide decisions Goal consensus the degree to which staff agree on the philosophy, goals, and objectives of the center Task orientation: the degree of emphasis placed on good planning, efficiency, and getting the job done Physical setting: the extent to which the spatial arrangement of the center helps or hinders staff in canying out their responsibilities Innovativeness: the extent to which the center adapts to change and encourages staff to find creative ways to solve problems Percentage of teaching staff who have left employment during the past twelve months The highest education level of staff. 14 The mean scale score of clarity items. The mean scale score of reward system items. The mean scale score of decision-making system items. The mean scale score of goal consensus items. The mean scale score of task orientation items. The mean scale score of physical setting items. The mean scale score of innovativeness items. The percentage of teaching staff, who have left employment during the past twelve months as reported by the program director. The percentages provided will be grouped according to levels of program instability such as ten percent or lower will be coded 1 (low staff turnover), I 1-39% will be coded 2 (moderate staff turnover), 40% or more will be coded 3 (high staff turnover). The highest educational level category checked by the staff on the EC WES with choices of high school or GED equivalent (coded a 1), some college (coded a 2), associates degree (coded a 3), bachelor’s degree (coded a 4), some graduate work (coded a 5), master’s degree (coded a 6), post mater’s work (coded a 7), or doctorate (coded an 8). Research Questions and Hypothesis The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of program instability rates and staff educational levels on organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs. I. 2. What are the program instability rates of church-affiliated child care programs? What are the staff educational levels of church-affiliated child care programs? What is the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs with the unit of analysis as the church program? What is the organizational climate of the church-affiliated child care programs with the unit of analysis as the individual staff member? With the unit of analysis as the church program. is organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs associated with program instability rates? Ho]; There is no association between program instability rates and organizational climate scores. HA1; Program instability rates are negatively associated with organizational climate scores. With the unit of analysis as the program, is organizational climate of church- affiliated child care programs associated with program instability rates? H01; There is no association between program instability rates and organizational climate scores. HA1; Program instability rates are negatively associated with organizational climate scores. 15 7. With the unit of analysis as the individual, is organizational climate of church- affiliated child care programs associated with staff educational level? H02; There is no association between staff educational levels and organizational climate scores. HA2; Staff educational levels are positively related organizational climate scores. *An alpha probability of .05 or less (p < .05) will be required to reject the null hypotheses. Assumptions The current research hinges on three assumptions. First, it is assumed that all participants have answered the questions on the ECWERS instrument honestly. Second, it is assumed that participants understood the questions on the instrument. Third, it is assumed that National Louis University staff has entered the data accurately into EXCEL 16 Chapter Two Review of Literature This literature review will address the need for examining organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs and its relationship to program instability rates and staff educational levels. The literature review is organized into three sections. First, the need for quality child care is examined, and the effects of child care quality on child outcomes are summarized. A review of the current needs for child care and a brief overview of the impacts of child care on child development outcomes provide the reader with the necessary context from which to consider the current study. Second, the administrative component, particularly the organizational climate, relative to quality child care will be discussed. The literature review addresses empirical support of the defined components of the organizational climate. Third, empirical support for examining the organizational climate of church—affiliated child care programs as well as examining lower program instability rates and higher staff educational levels as it relates to the quality of the organizational climate will be discussed. Need for Child Care Today Quality child care is a growing need; 13 million children under the age of six are cared for by someone other than a parent (Children's Defense Fund, 2001). When parents or guardians place their children in care outside of the home (including school-age children and younger) they make use of many types of care, including family child care, in-home child care providers, for-profit chain centers, independent for-profit centers, independent non-profit centers, and church-housed centers (N eugebauer, 1999b). l7 Child Care Quality and Child Outcomes. The quality of child care centers is poor to mediocre in 86% of programs (Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995). For instance, 85% to 90% of out-of-home child care is not considered high quality (Behrrnan, 1996; Greenspan, 2003; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network, 2003). While most parents desire high quality care for their children, they may not know how to define and identify elements of quality in a program (Helbum & Bergmann, 2002). Likewise, the high cost of quality care is prohibitive to many families (Schulman, 2000). Extensive research has shown that child care can impact child development outcomes, although results and interpretations vary. For instance, some researchers who have examined child care believe that it negatively impacts children. In fact, some results do indicate that the more hours that children are in non-matemal care, including care by fathers, relatives, nannies, family day care, and center child care, prior to kindergarten, the more socio-emotional problems are exhibited at age 43 months (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network, 2003). Some infants and toddlers exhibit higher cortisol levels while in full time center-based child care (Watamura, Donzella, Alwin, & Gunnar, 2003).Others interpret the findings differently and say that it is not just long hours, but rather a combination of variables that cause problems. For example, the interaction of a child’s temperament and gender combined with the type, quality, and amount of care impacts socio-emotional development (Crockenberg, 2003). Other studies have shown the quality child care aids a child’s development. For example, the NICHD Child Care Research Network’s longitudinal study using a 18 conditionally random sampling plan was conducted including 1,364 families who had just given birth found that in Phase 1, the time spent in quality child care for children 27 to 54 months yielded positive cognitive development (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network & Duncan, 2003). Furthermore, these benefits continued through the early school years (Peisner—Feinberg et aL,l998) Research in center-based programs with 840 children ages 10 to 70 months showed that classrooms with better trained and educated teachers noted higher scores on the Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale and Infant/Toddler Rating Scale (Howes, 1988) than other classrooms. However, within that research, quality was minimally adequate (Howes, 1988). In research conducted in nine centers with 166 children ages 3 to 5 1/2, children in higher quality centers were rated more intelligent and more task oriented, yet more anxious, by their teachers than children in lower quality centers. Later on quality child care was predictive of higher verbal intellectual functions (Phillips, Scarr, & McCartney, 1987). Another study of 150 infants in child care centers and home settings showed that children in child care centers were more advanced in their development (Clark-Steward, Gruber, & Fitzgerald, 1994). In addition to academic development, children’s social development is also impacted by out-of-home child care. Two studies (Phillips, et al., 1987; Field, 1991) with middle social economic status (SES) children showed that the amount of time spent in full-time center care was positively correlated to the number of friends and extracurricular activities in which the children engage. Parents’ ratings for children’s emotional, leadership, popularity, attractiveness, and assertiveness were also positively 19 correlated (Phillips et al., 1987). Moreover, time spent in child care was negatively related to aggression (Field, 1991). The second study showed that teachers rated these items similarly, including that such children were more often assigned to gifted programs and receive higher math grades (Field, 1991). Church-affiliated Child Care and Organizational Climate Child care programs can be Sponsored by a number of different organizations, such as public school, private school, for profit, community, chains, church-affiliated, etc. One type of sponsorship, church-affiliated child care programs, is that which is either sponsored by or housed within a church. Minimal research has been done specifically on church-affiliated child care programs. Some of the difficulty lies in the fact that there is no national data base or state listing that lists all of the church-affiliated child care programs (Bogle et al., 2001). Some research refers to the Ecumenical Child Care Network, but the web site and phone number are no longer working. Church-housed or church-affiliated child care centers care for nearly 1.5 million children. The average Size of a church-affiliated child care center is 65 children (Neugebauer, 1999c). From 1997 to 1999, church-affiliated child care programs grew 26% compared to 19% of overall child care programs (Neugebauer, 2000). Church- affiliated child care differs from other types of sponsorship in demographics, goals, quality, and challenges. Below, differences in sponsorship will be briefly explained. Saluja, Early, and Clifford (2002) extensively examined demographic characteristics of child care programs according to program type; however, these demographics were not statistically examined for significant differences against by type of programs. In their study, 22% of the centers were affiliated with a religious 20 organization. Of these centers, 17.1% operated half days, 35.1% operated 5.1-8 hours per day, 47.6% operated more than eight hours per day, and .3% had nontraditional hours. Teachers within these programs were predominately white (85.7%) and had a bachelor’s degree or higher (45.8%). Most church-affiliated child care programs are non-profit organizations and so most had fewer program instabilitys than for-profit centers (7.1 years compared to 5.6 years respectively) (Saluja et al., 2002). Bloom (1996a) found that program instability rates in all types of programs were at 22.80% per year with staff member’s years in current position of 4.94. In examining a sample of 1,902 programs of which 317 (22%) were church- affiliated child care programs and for programs of ages 3 and 4-year-olds, the demographics of church-affiliated and non-church-affiliated are provided with church- affiliated percentages listed first and overall percentages second: operating hours (17.1/1 1.6 less than 5 hours/day, 33.1/30 5.1-8 hours/day, 47.6/57.8 greater than 8 hours/day, and .3/ .7 having non-traditional hours), ethnicity of staff percentages (white: 85.7, 78.4; African American: 5.5, 10.2; Hispanic or Latino: 2.9, 5.7; other: 5.9, 5.8) and ethnicity of children (white: 77.8/65.8; African American: 6.8/15. 1; Hispanic or Latino: 5.5/8.7; other: 10.2/7); program instability (7.8/6.8 years), class size (15/ 16.4 per group), and staff-to-child ratios (1 :9.7/1 .9); and educational level (high school or less: 7.7/8.6; vocational school or some college: 28.6/26.8; associates degree: 17.9/ 14.7; bachelors degree or higher: 45.8/49.9). Church/synagogue programs have a mean class or group enrollment of 15 children, compared to overall program’s mean group size of 16.4 per classroom. Staff-to-child ratio is 1:9.7 for church/synagogues compared to overall programs of 1:9 (Saluja et al., 2002). 21 Goals of programs can differ between the types of program. For instance, a comparison of Christian and Buddhist child care programs in Japan indicated that Christian programs provided a play-oriented program, guided by the philosophy the children are a gift from God. Buddhist’s programs, on the other hand, aimed at strengthening the virtue intellect, and physical well-being of the child (Holloway, 1999). Data collected twenty years ago from the National’s Congregation-based Child Care When Churches Mind the Children: A Study of Day Care in Local Parishes (Lindner et al., 1983) state the three main tenets guide church-affiliated programs: pastoral care (caring for the needs of the congregation’s children), community service (the church is to care for the needs of the families around them), and stewardship (making the best use of resources that the church has been given). Even more recently, the goals of church- affiliated child care programs are shifting toward education and evangelism (Bogle, 2001; Bogle et al., 2001). To date, studies have revealed few differences between for-profit and non-profit programs in the quality of care. One difference is the amount of money spent on non- labor costs. Morris and Helbum (1996) found that higher quality, non profit, church- affiliated child care centers spent more on non-labor costs than lower quality church- affiliated child care centers. Moreover, Neugebauer (1999) states The quality of congregation-based facilities varies dramatically. Many of these [church-affiliated] centers are among the highest quality centers in the nation. Congregation-based centers were among the first to embrace NAEYC accreditation. (p. 24) 22 Yet some have noted that a 20-year-old study by the National Council of Churches showed that church-affiliated programs were lower in quality (Bogle et al., 2001; Morris & Helbum, 2000). Lower quality may be the result of church-affiliated child care programs charging lower fees for child care, depending on parents for the majority of the revenue (85% and 86% respectively) (Morris & Helbum, 2000). Still, non-profits use the funds given to them as efficiently as for-profit child care centers (Mocan, 1995, 1997). Poor quality can be the result of lower licensing regulations. A few states, such as Arkansas, Missouri, and North Carolina, do not require church-affiliated child care programs to be licensed but only follow the guidelines of the affiliated church (National Resource Center for Health and Safety in Child Care, 2000). Quality scores by type of child care center show public and private school were having the highest quality scores; church-independent and non-profit independent having average quality scores; and chains, for-profit independent, and community agencies having the lowest scores. Deborah Hampton (2001), Executive Director of the now defunct Ecumenical Child Care Network, states the church-affiliated child care programs have some unique challenges. Many church-affiliated child care programs are poorly administered, with many separating themselves from other non-church-affiliated child care programs (Bogle et al., 2001). Church-affiliated child care programs are so busy meeting the needs of the congregation of the church in which the child care program is housed, that little time is allowed for networking outside of the program, resulting in perhaps lower quality programming. High Scope (2003) defines a high quality child care program as being involved with the community; involved in professional organizations within their 23 community such as NAEYC; and have staff as members of a professional organization who regularly attend the meetings, being reimbursed for membership fees. Administration: Child Care Quality Indicators and Organizational Climate Clearly, the need for quality child care is warranted. Quality can differ according to sponsorship as is seen in church-affiliated child care programs. While the area of administration is a component of quality child care, an aspect of administration, the organizational climate of child care programs is an understudied area. Furthermore, no instrument had been created to specifically measure the organizational climate of child care programs. The following covers how an instrument was created to measure the organizational climate of child care programs, research support for organizational climate domains, and research making use of that instrument. Bloom (1996a) conducted extensive research to develop a tool to measure organizational climate in child care programs. Bloom examined organizational climate instruments and evaluated components that apply to child care programs. Input from program directors refined the instrument. The result is the Early Childhood Work Environment Scale (ECWES) (1985), rating the organizational climate of a child care center. Ten dimensions are examined: collegiality, professional growth, supervisor support, clarity, reward system, decision making, goal consensus, task orientation, physical setting, and innovativeness (Bloom, 1985). The survey was first field-tested in 1985, with revisions made in 1996. Over 1,400 early child care programs have used the ECWES. The survey is not designed to be a comprehensive evaluation of the program, rather one that focuses on the organizational 24 climate and improvement. Research supports many of the dimensions of the ECWES as key issues in organizational climate. Research Support for Organizational Climate Domains. A variety of existing instruments include some of the dimensions of the instrument, but no other instrument addresses all ten dimensions. Current literature employs multiple terms for organizational climate, such as organization culture, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship, organizational health, and organization stress (Klingele, Lynden, & Vaughan, 2001). Characteristics of positive organizational climate include managers and employees who are able to describe the purpose, values, and importance of customers, clarity of jobs, and support of each other. Moreover, leaders work on mentoring others, promotions are given because of work and not political connections, and rewards and recognition for contributions (Klingele et al., 2001). These types of characteristics are reflected in ECWES subscale items. The director of the child care program should work toward improving the ten dimensions, or subscales, of organizational climate: goal consensus, supervisor support, collegiality, decision-making, professional growth opportunities, physical setting, innovativeness, reward system, clarity, and task orientation (Bloom, 1997a). Goal consensus is about agreement on the philosophy of the center. Research conducted by Koch, Cairns, and Brunk (2000) provide empirical support for the relevance of the subscale/dimension goal consensus in organizations. They note that it is important to have the staff and all of those impacted in the change to have consensus on the type of management and/or changes that need to occur within a work setting. By achieving goal 25 consensus, the changes, such as a new assessment design, will be more easily implemented Supervisor support refers to how much help in lesson planning, classroom management, and emotional support the director gives to the staff. Allen and Kilmann (2001) report that supervisor support is important and is given through cross-functional planning when developing strategic plans. Developing strategic plans should include all managers in the chain of command, not just the supervisor, otherwise cooperation may not come. Throughout goal planning, supervisors should provide time for goal setting and a check on internal employee satisfaction (Allen & Kilmann, 2001). Collegiality measures the extent to which staff are friendly, and supports and trusts one another. A reward system relates to pay and fi'inge benefits. Decision making has to do with the autonomy of the staff. Studies by Massy, Wilger, and Colbeck (1994) found that poor organizational climate, including poor collegiality and reward systems, can inhibit good teaching. Three characteristics related to poor organizational climate were found: poor communication patterns, resources that limit collaboration, and poor methods of evaluation and reward. Collegiality has been researched in many ways outside of the child care industry (Begiane, 2001; Conley & Bacharach, 1990). First, collegiality can only be accomplished when administration makes use of a participatory managerial philosophy (Conley & Bacharach, 1990). In the previous study by Modigliani (1993), job satisfaction improved the relationships with children, families, and colleagues. Decision making and collegiality are components of organizational climate and their relevance are also supported in literature. Decision making is the degree of 26 autonomy given to staff, the extent to which they are involved in making center-wide decisions. Beachum and Dentith (2004) found collegiality in making use of shared leadership among teachers, resulting in school improvement and strong relationships. Making use of teacher interviews, collegiality was important when trying to make changes in instruction (Ellis, 1993). Collegiality and decision making is supported by Hellawell and Hancock (2001) who found that in order for the educational systems to flourish, collegiality was the most important factor in decision making (Hellawell & Hancock, 2001). Decision making, professional growth, physical setting and innovativeness are supported in literature as important elements in quality child care programming (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Professional growth has to do with the opportunities in which staff can obtain fiirther training. Physical setting refers to how the center is arranged, organized, and supported. Innovativeness is how the director encourages staff to be creative and innovative in their work (Bloom, l996a). Teachers wish to be treated as professionals, to work in non-threatening environments, to hold primary responsibility for curriculum analysis, to be comfortable with change, and to experience camaraderie (Sahakian & Stockton, 1996). Rewards affect organizational climate. For instance, low wages without satisfactory wage increases over time result in deteriorating morale (Huseman, McHone, & Rungeling, 1996). Similarly, a study found that that caregivers did not stay in the field due to below poverty wages and because they believed that the work did not have respect from others (Modigliani, 1993). In addition to the subscale reward, subseales clarity and 27 commitment are supported for relevance by research conducted by Grover and Cooker (1995). Clarity is assessed by how policies, procedures and responsibilities are explained and carried out. Clarity of company policies and rewards for work accomplished showed less turnover and higher commitment to the company. Stremmel (1989) found that “commitment, satisfaction with pay and opportunities for promotion, perceived job alternatives, and congruence with the ideal for the work itself contributed significantly to the variance in intention to leave” (p. 1) the child care profession. These findings support the inclusion of the subscales commitment and reward in Bloom’s instrument. However, commitment was the main factor in those who specifically intended to leave (Stremmel, 1989). These findings suggest that commitment to the child care organization is an important factor in continuing with employment. Finally, task orientation has to do with the balance between hard work and time for relaxation. The relevance of task orientation is supported by the work of Beachum and Dentith (2004) in which they found that work in a school can be improved by sharing the work among teachers and administrators, allowing time for hard work and relaxation. Bloom found support for ECWES’S subscales by comparing them with the Work Environment Scale (Moos, 1995), Hay Group Organization Survey and CFK, Ltd. Climate Audit. The Work Environment Scale helps one to “evaluate productivity, assess employee satisfaction, and clarify employee work expectations to ensure a healthy work environment” (Insel & Moos, 2003). The instrument is divided into ten subscales: involvement, peer cohesion, supervisor support, autonomy, task orientation, work pressure, clarity, control, innovation, and system change (Work Environmental Scale). 28 The Hay Group Organizational Survey is a researched-based assessment consisting of six dimensions: flexibility, responsibility, standards, rewards, clarity, and team commitment. It is also used to discover the environment in which employees are experiencing and its impact on productivity (Gordon & Cummins, I979). The CF K, Ltd. Climate Audit (Howard, Howell, & Brainard, 1987) is an instrument that measures middle school climate, specifically measuring what it is and what it should be according to what students desire. It covers dimensions such as trust, high morale, caring, cohesiveness, continuous academic and social growth, caring, school renewal, opportunity for input, improvement of school goal, cohesiveness, suitability of school plant, and support and efficient logistical system. As Bloom (1996) has stated, many areas can continue to be studied utilizing the data from the ECWES. The purpose of this research focuses on specifically examining differences sponsorships, such as church-affiliated verses non-church-affiliated child care programs. Research Utilizing the ECWES. Bloom’s ECWES has been used to examine the relationships between organizational climate and characteristics such as accreditation, professional development, and program size, staff commitment, and staff roles (1997). The following summarizes her findings: Bloom (1997) has made use of the ECWES and compared the organizational climate to a number of areas. First of all, she compared organizational climate and accreditation status. Accredited centers have been found to provide higher quality care (Whitebook, 1996). Bloom found that accredited child care programs had higher organizational scores (1997). 29 The organizational climate of child care centers was also examined to see if professional development of the administrator made an impact on its climate. In Illinois, child care directors are not required to take any courses in administration (Morgan et al., 1994). Bloom created a leadership training program for Head Start in Chicago. Through the model, grounded in adult learning theory, a positive affect on leadership was noted. Furthermore, Bloom and Sheerer (1992) showed that their model for leadership training of Head Start workers in Chicago resulted in a higher organizational climate. Professional growth opportunities provide tools that enable child care administrators to carry out their job. An increase in perceived confidence, quality in teaching practice, and efficacy, were noted in the results (Bloom & Sheerer, 1992). Organizational climate is associated with program size, staff commitment, and staff roles. Regarding program size, Bloom (l996a) found, in a sample of 65 centers, including both church-affiliated and non-ehurch-affiliated, that the larger the center, the lower its score on collegiality, thereby affecting the overall organizational climate score. Staff commitment is related to job satisfaction, which also impacts the employee’s perception of current work environment. Perception of organizational climate is affected by staff role. In a study with 94 child care administrators and 535 teachers, including both church-affiliated and non- church-affiliated centers, Bloom (l996a) noted a significant discrepancy between perceptions of organizational climate. Administrators tended to rate organizational climate more favorably than teachers. Additionally, staff roles also affect the perception on how decisions are made. Bloom found, in research with 2,709 early childhood workers in 315 centers, covering for profit and non profit, church-affiliated and non-church- 30 affiliated, that directors and teachers do not agree on how decisions are made. While 70% of directors value the input from workers, only 50% of workers agreed (Bloom, 1995). Program instability Rates and Staff Educational Levels and Relations to Organizational Climate of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs. The previous research provided empirical support for the study of organizational climate, and the uniqueness of church-affiliated child care programs. Little research has been conducted to examine the relationship between variables, such as program instability rates, staff educational levels, and the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs. Because program instability rates, staff educational levels, and organizational climate are indicators of high quality programming, the relationship between turnover rates, staff education levels and subsequent organizational climate need to be investigated. Moreover, church-affiliated child care programs are one of the fastest growing type programs, caring for the needs of many children, and differing from other non-church-affiliated child care programs; consequently, it needs to be investigated. The following sections provide literature support for the relationship of program instability rates and staff educational levels to organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs. Program instability rates and its association to organizational climate. Organizational climate is an understudied area (Brazier, 2005). When Brazier compiled a list of general theories in business through searches of seven data bases from 1999 to 2004, a few themes emerged: turnover rates affect organizational climate, and the relationship between the two is a neglected area of study. Program instability rates and its 31 relationship to organizational climate have not been studied in the child care industry, only in business literature. There are contradictory results in the literature regarding the relationship between program instability rates and organizational climate. Compton (1983) examined Certified Public Accountants’ job satisfaction and found that employees reported high satisfaction, resulting in longer tenure within a job, when supervisors created an organizational climate that evoked positive feelings about the organization (Compton, 1983). Other studies support the conclusion that higher program instability rates result in lower organizational climate. For instance, DeCotiis and Summers (1987) found in a study of salespeople that even employees' suggestions that they might quit their positions negatively influenced the quality of the business' organizational climate. Program instability rates are an area of concern in all types of child care programs. This is because continuity of care is a strong predictor of quality (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Reasons for program instability are varied. The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Accreditation (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998) and the work of Richard F iene from Pennsylvania State University (F iene, 2002) emphasizes the need for staff to develop close relationship with children. Close relationship between caregiver and child can only occur when there is continuity of care and low program instability (F enichel, Lurie-Hurvitz, & Griffin, 1999). Lower program instability rates have been found in accredited child care centers, which are higher in quality (Bloom, l996b). While National Association for the Education of 32 Young Children (N AECY) accreditation does indicate higher quality in care and program, accredited centers are not immune to program instability rates (Whitebook, Sakai, Gerber, & Howes, 2001). The above research emphasizes the need for lower program instability rates in order to have high quality programming. Yet, minimal research has been conducted, and that research is not in the child care industry, to see if there is a relationship of program instability and organizational climate. According to High Scope (2003), high quality child care program will have a 10 percent or lower program instability rate per year. A medium quality program will have 11 percent-39 percent turnover rate, and a low quality program will have greater than 40 percent program instability rate. Helbum and Howes (1996) found that program instability rate for child care center workers was at 37 percent per year. In a longitudinal study, Whitebrook (Whitebrook, etal., 2001) found that 76% to 82% of employees working in child care centers in 1994 and 1996 were no longer working in a child care center in 2000. The average program instability rate in that study was 30 percent. Furthermore, more than half of the centers studied were unable to replace workers they had lost. Other centers often had to replace staff with less qualified personnel (Whitebook et al., 2001). Other findings state that over 50% of teachers and one third of directors leave within four years of employment (Whitebook & Sakai, 2003). Both low program instability rates and high organizational climate are indicators of high quality child care programming. Utilizing a systemic approach to understanding quality child care, it is understandable that one characteristic, such as program instability rates, will have a relationship with organizational climate. Furthermore, research in the business industry has shown that there is a relationship between the two variables. The 33 problem lies in that no research has been conducted to examine program instability rates and organizational climate in child care. Stafl educational levels and its relationship to organizational climate. Even fewer studies have been conducted on the relationship of staff educational levels and organizational climate. One research conducted in the technology industry, found the ability to implement a new product or way of Operating, depended on the employees’ educational levels and organizational climate (Smith, Collins, & Clark, 2005). Hiring qualified staff and then providing opportunities for their continued professional development is an indicator of quality programming (Fiene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Trained staff is more able to impact positively children’s school readiness and language comprehension scores. Staff training is also related to fewer behavioral problems among children (N ICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1999a), more compliant, and score higher on the Preschool Inventory (Fiene, 2002). Staff should be educated in an understanding of children and family development. Minimally, a quality child care center will have teacher assistants who have a GED or high school diploma, are 18 years or older, have had some training in child development, and continue to receive professional development. Furthermore, teachers should at least have an associate’s degree in early childhood (or similar) and/or a Child Development Associate Credential (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). There is a strong rationale for including staff education as an important variable in the current study. While Bloom and Sheerer (1992) examined professional development 34 (thereby increasing educational levels) of administrators and an improvement in higher organizational climate scores, she has not specifically examined the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs and its relationship to educational level to all staff. Church-affiliated programs are an important area of study because they differ from other non church sponsored child care programs, and that they are the fastest growing type of program caring for the needs of over one million children daily. These previously mentioned few studies show that high program instability rates and low staff educational levels are related to lower organizational climate scores; however, it is an understudied area. Furthermore, the relationship of high program instability rates and low staff educational levels to organizational climate of church- affiliated child care programs. Intent of this research This chapter has summarized the need for examining the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs and its relationship to program instability rates and staff educational levels. Specifically, this was accomplished by examining the need for quality child care and identifying components of quality child care, summarizing the effects of child care quality on child outcomes. Empirical support for specific dimensions of organizational climate was provided. Program instability, including reasons for turnover and the relevance of staff educational levels were summarized. Support for higher educational levels of staff for child care programs was provided. The uniqueness of church-affiliated child care programs from other non-church sponsored programs was provided. In light of this, the literature review addresses support for concern of 35 organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs and how variables such as program instability rates and staff educational levels are related. Organizational climate, program instability rates, and staff educational levels are indicators of quality. In a systemic approach to improving quality, one would want to look at all the variables and the relationships between them. Furthermore, church- affiliated child care program are one of the fastest sponsorship type of child care programs, caring for the needs of many children. This study will extend the work of Bloom by examining a subset of her data set, specifically data on church-affiliated child care programs. Furthermore, it will extend Bloom’s work by examining lower program instability rates and higher staff educational levels and their relationship to organizational climate scores within church-affiliated child care programs. Answers to these questions will have implications for public policy, such as staff educational level requirements and program policies and practices, such as diverting time and energy into creating a healthier organizational climate. 36 Chapter Three Method Research Design In order to carry out the objectives of this research most effectively a descriptive, non-experimental, research design was utilized with a cross sectional, national sample of 53 child care centers, identified as church-affiliated, with a total of 413 employees participating in a natural setting. The unit of analysis was the church-affiliated child care center for questions one, three, five, and six; and staff for questions one, two, four, six, and seven. Sampling Procedures and Data Collection This was a secondary analysis of existing data. Support for secondary analysis has been noted as national survey data bases are widely available and have gained acceptance (Kneipp & Yarandi, 2002). The use of secondary analysis has many positive aspects. Secondary analysis allows the researcher access to data sets that have taken years and large sums of money to accomplish (Babble, I998; Moriarty et al., 1999). Secondary analysis allows for fewer impositions on participants. It also allows for the inclusion of more variables than in a smaller study and the ability to study sub samples (Moriarty et al., 1999). Limitations of secondary analysis and corresponding solutions. A drawback in using secondary analysis is making use of variables within the data set that the original researcher had not intended, thereby causing a problem with validity (Babbie, 1998). This 37 concern was avoided in the current study by reading the background on the ECWES from Jorde-Bloom, in order to fully understanding the intent of the variables within the data set. A limitation experienced while using the secondary analysis was not being able to ask any further questions, such as whether the child care center is church sponsored or merely housed within a church building. However, once the data set was analyzed, it provided support for future research, specifically at disseminating the whether it is church Sponsored or merely housed within a church building (Babble, 1998; Moriarty et al., 1999). Other limitations include limited information on source of data, documentation. instruments, and procedures and timeliness of data (Moriarty et al., 1999). These limitations were accepted and acknowledged as a limitation. A limitation that Bloom also addressed was that the data was not gathered by a randomly selected sample. The sample has been generated by those who volunteered to take the survey. Consequently, findings are not able to be generalized to all church-affiliated child care programs. Sampling The sampling frame that was used is from all church-affiliated child care programs that have opted to use the ECWES. National Louis University collected the surveys. analyzed them, and then sent a report back to each center. National Louis University categorized all centers that have taken the EC WES and identified themselves aS being church-affiliated. All 53 church-affiliated child care centers’ identities were not disclosed to this researcher. Data was provided via EXCEL spreadsheets, one file per church-affiliated child care program. Data at the program level as well as data at the individual level (individual staff responses) were provided. Thus, analyses were performed using the program and then the individual as the unit of analysis. 38 When Bloom first generated norms for the ECWES, Bloom obtained approximately 5-10 (Bloom did not know the specific number initially obtained) of the church-affiliated child care centers data at that time. The remainder of the church- affiliated child care centers was sampled more recently from church-affiliated child care programs that initiated making use of the ECWES (personal communication, Sept. 10, 2004). Early Childhood Work Environment Scale Instrumentation Bloom (1985) created an instrument called the Early Childhood Work Environment Scale (ECWES), which is designed specifically for assessing the organization climate of child care programs. In creating the instrument, organizational climate subscales, or dimensions, were created from established organizational climate scales and by input from early childhood teachers and directors. Only items that received 80% agreement from early childhood professionals were included in the instrument. The length of the scale was designed to take a short period of time to complete. Reliability and Validity. Reliability and validity of the instrument were evaluated and reported by Bloom (1996). The purpose was to make sure that the dimensions discriminate between child care settings, items should cohere as a dimension, dimensions should be related yet distinct, and it should measure change when it occurs (Bloom, 1996a) For internal consistency, use of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used. Alpha coefficients for collegiality, professional growth, supervisor support, clarity, reward system, decision making, goal consensus, task orientation, physical setting, 39 innovativeness, total climate scale ranged from .64 to .84 for sample 1 and .69 to .83 for sample 2. The alpha coefficients for total organizational climate were .93 and .95, respectively. Alpha coefficients for the congruence with ideal and decision-making subscales were .92 and .66 (Bloom, l996a). In order to determine if the ten dimensions of the organizational climate measure were significantly associated with each other, bivariate correlations between each sub- scale were computed. Results (Bloom, l996a) indicated that the measure had adequate discriminate validity. Test-retest reliability analysis suggested that measures are fairly stable over a two-month period. Furthermore, a pretest and posttest comparison was done in order to see if change in the center impacts organizational climate. Results indicated that results of the instrument is sensitive to change after professional development and other changes within the administrative component, but additional research should be done to support its findings (Bloom, l996a). Finally, concurrent validity was used to compare the ECWES with other scales. Comparisons were made with the Work Environment Scale (Moos, 1995), Hay Group Organization Survey and CFK, Ltd. Climate Audit. The Work Environment Scale helps one to “evaluate productivity, assess employee satisfaction, and clarify employee work expectations to ensure a healthy work environment” (Insel & Moos, 2003). The instrument is divided into ten subscales: involvement, peer cohesion, supervisor support, autonomy, task orientation, work pressure, clarity, control, innovation, and system change (Work Environmental Scale). The scale consists of 90 true/false items and is self- administered. 40 Ten Subscales of Organizational Climate. Ten subscales, or dimensions, for organizational climate were created: collegiality, professional growth opportunities, supervisor support, clarity, reward system, decision-making, goal consensus, task orientation, physical setting, and innovativeness. Each subscale had ten questions, five positively and five negatively worded. Those completing the scale checked those that were believed to represent the condition of the center “most of the time.” In measuring “collegiality,” for example, one can choose from the following: cooperative and friendly, competitive, people are reluctant to express their feelings, teachers are very helpful to new staff, good team spirit, staff is generally frank and candid, morale is low, people socialize outside of work, people feel isolated, and people complain a lot. Scores were created by adding a score of five to the sum of number positive items checked and then subtracting the sum of negative items checked for each dimension/subscale. Each subscale/dimension is calculated and given a range of zero to ten with zero being low and ten being high. Program Information Provided by the Director. Finally, the program director was given a separate sheet asking for additional program details. These additional demographics included the following: type of program (e. g. part-day or full-day), ages served, hours of operation, legal structure (nonprofit/for-profit), sponsorship, total enrollment, licensed capacity, total number of staff working full-time and part-time, number of teaching staff who have left employment during the past twelve months, and whether or not the center is accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). From demographics provided by the program director, all child care programs that checked a sponsorship as “church-affiliated” were used for 41 analysis. Additionally, total number of teaching staff and number of teaching staff who left employment during the past twelve months were used to create a percentage of teaching program instability. Data Analysis The purposes of this study were to I) examine the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs 2) to examine the association between program instability rates and staff educational levels related to organizational climate of church— affiliated child care programs. To begin, data from the 53 church-affiliated child care centers, sent from National Louis University, were entered into SPSS. Techniques for handling missing data. Missing data can be problematic in data analysis and can occur due to data entry errors or the omission from respondents. Consequently, the researcher determined the underlying reason for the missing data and eliminated the variables and/or cases. While the data set provided to this researcher was missing some data from church-affiliated child care centers across the United States, the missingness of data is attributed to random sampling and will be ignored (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998) and the sample size was still large enough to represent the population (Salkind, 2004). Missing data can also occur due to procedural factors, such as invalid codes and failure to complete the entire questionnaire is prevalent in this data set. The data were cleaned through the simplest means and by the following procedures: 1) all centers that were not sponsored by a church, were filtered through case selection from any analysis. These were deleted due to an entry error in the pulling of church-affiliated child care 42 centers from the larger data set; 2) All centers with missing data on turnover rate were filtered through case selection from any analysis for questions two and four; 3) All staff with missing data on educational level were filtered and deleted through case selection from any analysis for questions three and five. Case selection allows the researcher to restrict analysis to a specific group of cases, those meeting certain criteria. It is important that only church-affiliated child care programs and those with complete data were analyzed; 4) The SPSS default, list wise deletion, was used to handle missing data within organizational climate scores 5) After the data were cleaned, remaining data were analyzed in order to answer the following questions. Research questions and hypotheses I. What are the program instability rates of church-affiliated child care programs? 2. What are the staff educational levels of church-affiliated child care programs? 3. What is the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs with the unit of analysis as the church program? 4. What is the organizational climate of the church-affiliated child care programs with the unit of analysis as the individual staff member? First, descriptive analyses was used to examine data before moving on to more complicated analysis (Norusis, 2000). For questions one and two, the program instability rates (percentage of program instability) and staff educational levels (percentage of each level) were to be calculated. Program instability rates were accomplished by taking the number of teaching staff who have left during the pervious twelve months (as provided by the program director) and dividing it by the number total teaching staff (as provided by the program director), resulting in the percentage of turnover (turnover rate). The staff 43 educational level was simply computed according to the percentage of each educational level (levels 1-8, with 1 = high school or GED and 8 = doctorate). For questions three and four, the mean, standard deviation, and range of organizational level for each individual and church-affiliated child care program were computed. 5. With the unit of analysis as the church program, is organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs associated with program instability rates? H01; There is no association between program instability rates and organizational climate scores. HM; Program instability rates are negatively associated with organizational climate scores. 6. With the unit of analysis as the program, is organizational climate of church- affiliated child care programs associated with program instability rates? Hol; There is no association between program instability rates and organizational climate scores. HM; Program instability rates are negatively associated with organizational climate scores. 7. With the unit of analysis as the individual, is organizational climate of church- affiliated child care programs associated with staff educational level? H02; There is no association between staff educational levels and organizational climate scores. HA2; Staff educational levels are positively related organizational climate scores. Questions five and six hypothesize similar questions but use different units of analysis. Initially, using the unit of analysis as the child care program for program 44 instability seemed a logical choice because program instability is a composite score of the entire instability of the program. However, after consideration of the possible impact that program instability could have on an individual’s perception of organizational climate, analyses were also run using the individual as the unit of analysis with program instability. That is, for these particular analyses, each staff member from a particular program received the same program instability score. Program instability rates were coded along 3 categories, as how program instability is reported in literature. Lower program instability rates of 10% or lower, moderate program instability rates of 11-39%, and high program instability rates of 40% or more (High Scope, 2003). Questions seven addresses whether organizational climate is associated with staff educational levels, using the individual as the unit of analysis. Staff educational levels were in eight categories. After examining the data, categorizing levels of education into all eight categories resulted in very small cell sizes for some education levels, and violated the assumption of homogeneity of variance, as indicated by Levene's test. Consequently, staff educational levels were coded in 2 categories. Staff stating the educational level of high school, GED equivalent, or some college was given a 1. Staff with an associate’s degree or higher were coded 2. Descriptive statistics were once again provided, including mean (average organizational climate score and of each dimension), standard deviation (smallest variability in score), standard error (how much sample means vary in repeated samples from the same population), 95% confidence interval for mean, and minimum and maximum scores. 45 In order to see if overall organizational climate scores and for each organizational climate dimension varied as a function of program instability rates, and within staff educational levels, the following assumptions were needed for an ANOVA procedure: 0 Independent random samples have been taken from each population 0 The populations are normal 0 The pOpulation variances are all equal (Norusis, 2000, p. 263). A check on assumptions was complete through the following means. Independent random samples were checked by making sure that no church-affiliated child care sample is listed more than once. Even though ANOVA does not rely heavily on normality of populations, it was checked by making a histogram to be sure that the means were not extremely non-normal. Equal population variances were checked by running a Levene test for equality of variance and by checking to make sure that the number of cases in each group is similar (Norusis, 2000). In examining organizational climate as a function of program instability rates, organizational climate and all of its dimensions met assumptions for multivariate analysis except the dimension of collegiality. On variables that met all assumptions, 3 series of ANOVA procedures were performed, using organizational climate and its dimensions as the dependent variables. According to Norusis (2000), the analysis is called AN OVA because it examines the variability of the sample values. In examining organizational climate varying as a function of program instability rates and staff educational levels, some variables violated assumptions, namely collegiality in the analysis with program instability rates, and professional development and goal consensus in the analysis with staff educational levels. Therefore, nonparametric 46 tests were used for analyses with these dimensions. The disadvantage of nonparametric tests is that they have somewhat less power than parametric tests (Leech, Barrett, & Morgan, 2005), and (Norisis, 2000) “they are likely to find a true difference when it exists than the tests based on the assumption of normality" (p. 325). The Kruskal-Wallis was chosen for program instability rates, because it is an alternative to the ANOVA and it allows for analysis among more than 2 groups. The Mann-Whitney was an appropriate non parametric test since the staff educational variable was categorized into 2 groups (Leech et al., 2005). Because statistical significance only states there is a difference in the means, post hoc analyses were employed on program instability rates variables that met all assumptions to determine significant differences between the groups (high, moderate, and low program instability levels). Staff educational levels only had 2 categories, so a post hoc was not needed. A post hoc test is necessary as one group may accentuate difference and another group may actually not be significant (Hair et al., 1998). While multiple t- tests could be run in order to compare the means, the risk of having a Type I error is greater. A post hoc test compares each mean with each other mean, but unlike a t-test, controls for Type 1 error because the alpha level is adjusted for the number of tests being made. Examples of multiple comparison post hoc tests available to use are Bonferroni, Dunnet, Sidak, Scheffe and LSD (least significant difference). Bonferroni should not be used with 5 or more groups; Dunnet compares a control group to other groups without comparing the other groups to each other; Sidak, a variant of Bonferroni, has slightly more power than Bonferroni when the alpha is .05, but nearly identical when alpha is .01; Scheffe is not suggested to use if you intend on testing all possible means; LSD is 47 equivalent to running multiple t tests for each pair of means, yet without the alpha level controlled (Becker, 1999; Garson, 2006; Harrisonburg Public School). For the purposes of this research, the Bonferroni was the most suitable post hoc test for variables that met assumption and were Significant with the ANOVA procedure. Bonferroni is also considered quite conservative, but its power decreases as the number of groups increase. Three groups did not present problems with the issue of decreased power. In Bonferroni, the alpha level is divided by the number of tests. In comparing three different group levels (high, moderate, and low), alpha .05 is divided by 3 equaling .016, thereby reducing the change of Type 1 error (Salkind, 2004). After considering the results of all the analyses, a difference was noticed between organizational climate scores with the individual as the unit of analysis and the organizational climate scores with the program as the unit of analysis. The reason for the differences between unit of analysis may be because the unit of analysis of church weighs each church equally, not looking at the number of people that created the composite score. The unit of analysis as the individual gives way for each person to have an equal weight. For instance, a small child care center may have only four employees and a large center may have 30. The smaller center may have a mean organizational climate score of 7.5. The larger center may have a mean organizational climate score of 6. Averaging the two, the mean score is 6.75. However, if you average each individual’s score, the average would drop as low as 6.18. Size of a child care program may be a contributing factor in organizational climate score. Consequently, an ANCOVA procedure (Analysis of Covariance) was employed to examine differences in organizational climate as a function of program instability rates 48 or staff educational levels, controlling for program size. Variables available to use as program size included child enrollment, total staff employed, and staff fulltime equivalents. Because enrollment and total staff do not necessarily imply licensing capacity or number of full time workers, staff fulltime equivalents were used to control for program size. Limitations of the Research The data collected from the 53 church-affiliated child care programs included data from 413 employees, and these may not accurately reflect the employees of all church- affiliated child care programs. This is due to the fact that the church-affiliated child care programs that are included voluntarily used the ECWES. Consequently, data were not representative of all church-affiliated child care programs. All findings have come from input of staff, and therefore were subjective. 49 Chapter Four Results Introduction The purposes of this study were to describe organizational climate in church- affiliated child care programs and to examine if organizational climate is associated with program instability rates and staff educational levels. The sampling frame used was church-affiliated child care programs that have epted to use the ECWES (Early Childhood Work Environment Scale). National Louis University identified 53 centers as church-afliliated. All church-affiliated child care programs and their employees identities were not disclosed to this researcher. Data were provided via EXCEL spreadsheets, one file per were church-affiliated child care program, and then exported into SPSS for data analysis. This chapter is organized according to the seven specific research questions posed in Chapter 1. First, analyses regarding program instability rates, staff educational levels are summarized. Second, descriptive statistics relative to the organizational climate of church-affiliated programs are presented Third, data concerning the relationship between organizational climate, program instability rates, and staff education levels are reported. Finally, data examining the relationship between organizational climate, program instability rates, and staff educational levels controlling for program size are reported. 50 Descriptive Statistics Program Instability Rates of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs The first purpose of this research was to examine the program instability rates of church-affiliated child care programs, using the child care program as its unit of analysis. Average program instability rate per year was 25% (range = 0%-100%, SD = .23). Staff Educational Levels of C hurch-affiliated Child Care Programs The second purpose of this research was to examine the educational levels of staff employed in church-affiliated child care programs, using the individual as the unit of analysis. Forty-two percent of child care staff primarily had some college (n = 174), and 19% had earned only a high school diploma (n = 80). For a detailed View of staff educational levels, frequency and percentages see Table 2. Organizational Climate of C hurch-affiliated Child Care Programs The third purpose of this research was to examine organizational climate. Organizational climate was analyzed in two ways, first, with church program as the unit of analysis, and second, with individual staff members as the unit of analysis. A mean organizational climate score, and for each organizational climate dimension, was calculated. Mean organizational climate for church-affiliated programs was 6.96 (SD = 1.24) while mean scores for organizational climate as reported by staff members was 6.75 (SD = 1.88). anges, means, and standard deviations for total organizational climate and for climate dimension subscales with the church program and individual staff member as units of analyses are reported in Tables 3 and 34, respectively. 51 Table 2 Frequency and Percentage of Staff Educational Levels Stalf Educational Levels Frequency Percent 1.00 80 19.4 2.00 174 42.1 3.00 53 12.8 4.00 68 16.5 5.00 . 19 4.6 6.00 15 3.6 7.00 4 1.0 Total 413 100.0 Note. Staff educational levels coded as 1=High School Diploma or GED, 2=Some College. 3=Associate’s Degree, 4=Baehelor’s Degree, 5=Some Graduate Classes, 6-Master's Degree. 7-‘Post Master's Courses, 8=Doetorate 52 Table 3 Means and Standard Deviations of Overall Organizational Climate Scores and Subscale Scores in Church-Affiliated Child Care Programs with Program as the Unit of Analysis Organizational Climate Scale and Subscales (n=42) Minimum Maximum M SD Overall organizational climate 4.46 9.10 6.96 1.24 Organizational climate subscales Clarity 3.29 10.00 6.37 1.86 Collegiality 3.36 8.90 7.12 1.29 Decision 4.91 9.60 6.99 1.38 Innovativeness 4.61 10.00 6.74 1.43 Physical 4.74 9.64 7.54 1.37 Professional growth 1 .40 9.00 4.54 1.68 Reward 4.42 8.40 6.50 1.01 Supervisor support 3.60 9.60 7.38 1.43 Task 3.91 10.00 7.35 1.41 Goal consensus 3.00 10.00 7.03 1.59 53 Table 4 Means and Standard Deviations of Overall Organizational Climate Scores and Subscale Scores in C hurch-Affiliated Child care Programs with the Individual as the Unit of A null ‘sis Organizational Climate Scale and Minimum Maximum M SD Subscales (n=397) Overall 1.50 10.00 6.75 1.88 Organizational Climate Organizational climate subscales Collegiality .00 10.00 6.83 2.32 Professional growth .00 10.00 4.60 2.54 Supervisor support .00 10.00 7.23 2.33 Clarity 06 10.00 6.18 2.66 Reward .00 10.00 6.37 2.03 Decision making .00 10.00 6.78 2.22 Goal V .00 10.00 6.73 2.54 Task .00 10.00 7.07 2.28 Physical .00 10.00 7.35 2.26 Innovativeness .00 10.00 6.50 2.26 54 Quantitative Analyses in Response to Research Questions and Hypotheses Reliability Coeflicients for Organizational Climate Measures and Its Subscales Bloom’s work (1996a) showed Cronbach’s alpha coefficient .93 for the total scale. In the current study, reliabilities analysis indicated an alpha coefficient of .91 for overall organization climate. Item level data for subscales were not provided, and, therefore, reliability analyses on subscales were not possible. As a point of information, intercorrelations among subscales are reported in Table 5. 55 Table 5 Intercorrelations Among Organizational Climate Subscales 10 11 Mean 0C Collegiality Professional Dev. Super. Support Job Clarity Reward System Decision Making Goal Consensus Task Orientation Physical Environ Innovation 0.73 0.55 0.77 0.71 0.71 0.76 0.75 0.81 0.69 0.74 0.28 0.53 0.47 0.47 0.53 0.56 0.63 0.45 0.52 0.38 0.51 0.41 0.44 0.33 0.34 0.36 0.39 0.54 0.56 0.60 0.52 0.62 0.48 0.56 0.45 0.51 0.49 0.54 0.43 0.52 0.53 0.44 0.56 0.50 0.50 0.55 0.54 0.44 0.63 8 9 10 0.67 0.53 0.57 0.52 0.56 0.47 56 Correlations of Program instability Rates, Stafl Educational Levels, and Organizational Climate of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs The fourth, fifth, and sixth purposes of this research were to determine if organizational climate was associated with and varied as a function of program instability and staff education levels. First, variables were examined via correlational analyses. Pearson’s correlation was used in analysis with program instability rates, with program instability left as a continuous variable. Spearman’s correlation was used for educational level, a categorical (ordinal) variable. With the individual staff member as the unit of analysis, program instability rate and overall organizational climate were negatively correlated (r = -.23, p < .01). Staff educational level and overall organizational climate were positively correlated (r, = .10, p < .04). Program instability and staff educational level were not significantly correlated (r, = -.15, p = .76). With the unit of analysis as the church, there were no significant correlations between the three variables: program instability rate and overall organizational climate (rs = .20, p = .21), staff educational levels and organizational climate (r, = -.22, p = .17), and staff educational levels and program instability rate (r, = -.O6, p = .72). No further analysis was done with the program as the unit of analysis. 57 Organizational Climate of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs as a Function of Program Instability Rate with the Individual as the Unit of Analysis First examination of assumptions for the AN OVA was completed. All samples were independent and the populations were normal. However, not all population variances were equal. Therefore, two different procedures were carried out: Analysis of Variance and Kruskal-Wallis. Results from the Kruskal-Wallis test are reported afier the results from the ANOVA and its post hoc analyses are presented. On variables that met all assumptions, Analysis of Variance (AN OVA) was used to determine if organizational climate score differed as a function of program instability rate. Mean organizational climate and organizational climate dimensions of professional development, supervisor support, job clarity, reward, decision making, goal consensus, task orientation, physical environment, and innovation met assumptions necessary for inclusion in the multivariate analysis. ANOVA was completed by entering organizational climate and nine organizational subscales as the dependent variables and teaching program instability rate as the independent grouping variable. Program instability rates were categorized into three groups, because this is how program instability is commonly studied and reported in the literature. These categories provides for a more meaningful way of looking at and understanding the data. The following turnover categories are found in the current research literature (High Scope, 2003): lower program instability rates of 10% or lower, moderate program instability rates, 1 l-3 9%, and high program instability rates of 40% and more. 58 Reports of organizational climate were significantly higher when program instability rates in the child care center were lower. Specifically, scores were significantly higher when program instability rate was lower on measures of overall organizational climate, F (2, 379) = 3.57, p < .03, and on the following three subscales: professional development F (2, 375) = 3.04, p < .05; task orientation, F (2, 372) = 6.14, p < .01; and innovation, F (2, 377) = 3.63, p < .03. Program instability rates did not significantly differentiate organizational climate dimensions of supervisor support, (2, 376) = 1.21, p > .05; job clarity, F (2, 377) = 1.35, p > .05; reward system, F (2, 377) = .39, p > .05; decision making, F (2, 377) = 1.03, p > .05; goal consensus, F (2, 372) = 2.52, p > .05; and physical environment, F (2, 377) = 1.76, p > .05. Results from the ANOVA are found in Table 5. 59 Table 6 One- Way Analysis of Variance for Eflects of Program instability Rates on Organizational Climate with the Individual Stafl Member as the Unit of Analysis Variable and source df SS MS F Mean organization climate Between groups 2 23.69 11.85 3.57* Within groups 379 1259.26 3.32 Professional development Between groups 2 39.14 19.57 3.04* Within groups 375 2414.24 6.44 Supervisor support Between groups 2 12.65 6.32 1.21 Within groups 376 1972.61 5.25 Job clarity Between groups 2 19.42 9.71 1.35 Within groups 377 2711.33 7.19 Reward system Between groups 2 3.23 1.62 0.39 Within groups 377 1550.73 4.11 Decision making V Between groups 2 9.94 4.97 1.03 Within groups 377 1821.21 4.83 Goal consensus Between groups 2 30.63 15.31 2.52 Within groups 372 2257.44 6.07 Task orientation Between groups 2 59.03 29.52 6.14“ Within groups 372 1788.36 4.81 Physical environment Between groups 2 16.60 8.30 1.76 Within groups 377 1779.13 4.72 Innovation Between groups 2 34.83 17.42 3.63* Within groups 377 1810.94 4.80 *p < .05. **p < .001 60 Post Hoe Bonferroni Tests indicated that on measures of mean organizational climate and organizational climate dimension of task orientation, lower program instability scores differed significantly from moderate and higher program instability rates. Staff with the lower turnover rates reported higher means organizational scores than did staff with moderate or higher program instability rates. Neither mean organizational climate scores nor task orientation scores differed significantly for staff with either moderate or high turnover rates. On measures of professional development, staff from programs with highest turnover rates reported scores that were significantly lower than staff from programs with moderate program instability rates. Interestingly, while mean scores in the highest and moderate turnover rate groups were significantly different from each other, mean scores in the high and moderate turnover rates groups were not significantly different from means in the lowest turnover rate group. On organizational dimension of innovation, staff from programs with moderate turnover rates differed significantly from staff from programs with low turnover rates. Staff from programs with higher turnover rates did not differ significantly from staff from programs with lower or moderate turnover rate. Scores were not significantly different among the three groups on the remaining dimensions of organizational climate: supervisor support, job clarity, reward system, decision making, goal consensus, and physical environment. Results from the Bonferroni procedure are found in Table 7. 61 Table 7 Bonferroni Procedure on Program Instability Rates and Organizational Climate Scores of Church-Afliliated Child Care Program Moderate Low Turnover High Turnover Turnover ( 1) £21 1.3.) Turnover rate meas. M SD M SD M SD Mean Organ. Climate 7.5231, 1.78 6.82a 1.87 6.681, 1.72 Prof. Development 4.76 4.76 4.82, 2.56 4.098' 2.45 Supervisor Support 7.74 1.95 7.32 2.32 7.11 2.36 Job Clarity 6.78 2.56 6.25 2.60 6.00 2.90 Reward System 6.65 1.73 6.36 2.09 6.41 2.01 Decision Making 7.28 2.46 6.79 2.18 6.77 2.12 Goal Consensus 7.20 2.78 7.03 2.47 6.42 2.30 Task Orientation 8.173., 1.80 7.17a 2.31 6.81., 2.08 Physical Environ. 7.65 2.60 7.55 2.10 7.10 2.13 Innovation 7.37a 2.04 6.42a 2.25 6.63 2.1 1 Note. Means in rows sharing subscripts are significantly different. Note. Program instability rates are categorized as follows: 1 = lower program instability rates of 10% or lower; 2 = moderate program instability rates, 11-39%; 3 = higher program instability rates of 40% and more. 62 The organizational climate dimension of collegiality did not meet all assumptions, specifically, population variances, so a Kruskal-Wallis test was used in this case. With the individual staff member as the unit of analysis, responses from 413 employees were available for analysis. Kruskal-Wallis procedure was carried out by entering organizational climate dimension collegiality as the dependent variable and program instability rates as the independent grouping variable. Program instability rates were categorized as previously mentioned. Results failed to find a statistically significant relationship among the three program instability rates and collegiality x2 (2, n = 380) = 5.79, p = .06. Organizational Climate of Church-afliliated Child Care Programs as a Function of Staff Educational Level with the Unit of Analysis as the Individual The fifth purpose of this research was to determine if organizational climate scores of church-affiliated child care centers differed as a function of staff educational level with the unit of analysis as the individual staff member. Dependent variables were overall organizational climate score and scores of each dimension and independent variables were staff educational levels. In order to make more meaningful categories and avoid small cell size, staff educational levels were coded along 2 categories. Staff stating the educational level of high school, GED equivalent, or some college was given a 1. Staff indicating an associate’s degree or higher were coded 2. All variables except organizational climate dimensions of professional development and goal consensus met all assumptions for the ANOVA. ANOVA results indicated statistically differences in the means of organizational climate dimension of clarity, F (1, 408) = 4.18, p < .05; rewards, F (1, 408) = 4.34,p < .05, and innovation F 63 (1, 407) = 11.63, p < .01. ANOVA failed to find statistically significant differences in mean organizational climate F (1, 410) = 2.34, p > .05, and organizational climate dimensions of collegiality, F (l, 408) = 1.50, p > .05; decision making, F (1, 408) = .81, p > .05; task orientation F (l, 403) = .04, p > .05; and physical environment, F (1, 40) = .28, p > .05. Results from the ANOVA are reported in Tables 8. The non-parametric Mann-Whitney procedure was executed using the organizational climate dimensions of professional development and goal consensus because they did not meet all assumptions for the AN OVA procedure. Mann-Whitney results indicated statistically differences in the means of professional development 352 (1 , n = 408) = 16809.5,p = .01, but not goal consensus x2 (l, n = 405) = 18490.5,p = .37. 64 Table 8 One- Way Analysis of Variance for Effects of Staff Educational Levels on Organizational Climate with the Individual as the Unit of Analysis Variable and source Elf SS MS F Mean organization climate Between groups 1 8.24 8.24 2.34 Within groups 4410 1146.01 3.53 Collegiality Between groups 1 8.06 8.06 1.5 Within groups 408 2189.99 5.37 Supervisor support Between groups 1 0.009 0.009 0.002 Within groups 407 2215.39 55.45 Job clarity Between groups 1 29.46 29.46 4.18* Within groups 408 2875.19 7.05 Reward system Between groups 1 17.67 417.67 434* Within groups 408 1661.98 4.07 Decision making Between groups 1 3.99 3.99 0.806 Within groups 408 2018.26 4.95 Task orientation Between groups 1 0.2 0.2 0.037 Within groups 403 2097.59 5.21 Physical environment Between groups 1 1.43 1.43 0.28 Within groups 407 2.91.58 5.14 Innovation Between groups 1 58.07 58.07 11.63*** Within groups 407 2032.17 4.99 *p < .05. ***p < .001 65 With the Unit of Analysis as the Individual, Organizational Climate of Church-afliliated Child Care Programs as a Function of Program Instability Rate and Staff Educational Levels, Controlling for Program Size After considering the results, a difference was noticed between organizational climate scores with the individual as the unit of analysis and the organizational climate scores with the program as the unit of analysis. Therefore, the individual as the unit of analysis was chosen because of its larger sample size. The data set provided a few options to determine program size: enrollment, total staff, and fulltime equivalent (FTE) employees. F ulltime equivalent employees were chosen for program size, because enrollment and total staff cannot be compared from one program to another due to not all enrolled and who work are considered fulltime. First, a Spearman’s correlation was calculated between F TEs and program instability rates and staff educational levels. Mean organizational climate and all of its dimensions were significantly correlated. Correlation coefficients ranged from -.08 to - .24. The strongest negative correlation was between FTE and organizational climate of innovation, r = -.24, p < .01 , n = 413. This means that as FTEs increase, organizational climate decreases. Table 9 provides the correlations for organizational climate dimensions with program instability rates, program size and staff education level. 66 Table 9 Intercorrelations for Program Instability Rates, Program Size, Sta/f7 Educational Levels, and Organizational Climate Measure 1 2 3 1. Program Instability 2.Program Size 0.05 3. Education Level -0.02 -0.31** 4. Mean Organizational Climate -0.19** -0.23* 0.10" 5. Collegiality -0.20* * -0.18** 0.06 6. Professional Development -0.07 -0.08 0.17** 7. Supervisor Support -0.08 -0.21"‘* 0.02 8. Job Clarity -0.06 -0.28** 0.13** 9. Reward System -0.04 -O.21** 0.13** 10. Decision Making -0.04 -0.17** 0.09 1 1. Goal Consensus -0.11** -0.1 1** -0.05 12. Task Orientation —0.23** -0.21** -0.01 13, Physical Environment -0.18* -O.11* 0.03 14. Innovation -0.07 -O.24** 0.23** *p<.01. **p<.05. 67 An AN COVA procedure was used to see if organizational climate varied as a fimction of program instability rate or staff educational levels when controlling for program size. ANCOVA requires one additional assumption than the ANOVA: there needs to be a linear relationship between covariates and the dependent variable. All assumptions were checked. Mean organizational climate and organizational climate dimensions of professional development, and innovation were run to see if they varied as a function of program instability rate, controlling for FTE. These variables were chosen because in the earlier analysis they were the only significant variables in the ANOVA procedure and met all assumptions for multivariate analysis. Task orientation was not included in the analysis because it violated the assumption of homogeneity of variance. Results indicated that after controlling for the number of F TEs, there was not a significant difference in mean organizational climate as a function of program instability rate, F (2, 378) = .38, p = .69 nor of the organizational climate dimensions of innovation, F (2, 376) = .80, p = .45. The organizational climate dimension of professional development continued to be significant when controlling for program size, F (2, 374) = .295, p = .05; Table 10 presents the means and standard deviations before and after controlling for FTEs. 68 Table 10 ANCO VA for Organizational Climate Varying as a Function of Program Instability Rates Controlling for Program Size Unadjusted Adjusted N M SD M SE Mean Organizational Climate Level 1 46 7.53 1.78 7.01 .26 Level 2 234 6.82 1.87 6.89 .11 Level 3 102 6.68 1.72 6.76 .17 Professional Development Level 1 45 4.76 2.62 4.59* .39 Level 2 231 4.82 2.56 4.84* .17 Level 3 102 4.09 2.34 4.11* .25 Innovation Level 1 46 7.37 2.04 6.86 .32 Level 2 233 6.42 2.25 6.49 .14 Level 3 101 6.63 2.21 6.71 .21 *p < .05 Note. Program instability rates are categorized as follows: 1 = lower program instability rates of 10% or lower, 2 = moderate program instability rates, 3 = 11-39%, and high program instability rates of 40% and more. 69 An ANCOVA procedure was run to see if organizational climate dimensions of job clarity, reward, and innovation varied as a function of staff educational levels, controlling for FTEs. Once again these variables were chosen because they were significant with the previous ANOVA procedure examining whether they varied as a function of staff educational levels and met all assumptions of ANCOVA. Professional development, while significant with the Mann-Whitney, violated assumptions of the ANCOVA and was not included in the analysis. Results indicated that after controlling for the number of FT Es, there was not a significant difference in organizational climate dimensions of clarity, F (1, 407) = .34, p = .56; rewards, F (1, 407) = ..41, p = .52 as a function of staff education levels. Differences in means for organizational climate dimensions of innovation continued to be significantly different according to staff educational levels when controlling for FTEs, F (1, 406) = 5.04, p = .03. Table 11 presents the means and standard deviations before and after controlling for FTEs. 70 Table 11 ANCO VA for Organizational Climate Varying as a Function of Stafl Educational Levels Controlling for Program Size Unadjusted Adjusted M SD M Job Clarity Level 1 252 5.97 2.70 6.12 .16 Level 2 158 6.53 2.57 6.28 .21 Reward Level 1 252 6.21 2.12 6.32 .12 Level 2 158 6.63 1.85 6.45 .16 Innovation Level 1 251 6.21 2.18 6.31* .14 Level 2 158 6.98 2.32 6.82“ .18 *p < .05 Note. Staff educational levels are categorized as follows: 1 = staff stating educational level of high school diploma, GED equivalent, or some college credits: 2 = staff stating educational level of an associate’s degree or higher. 71 Summary of Results The results presented above indicate clearly that with the unit of analysis as the church program, organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs is not associated with program instability rates. With the individual as the unit of analysis, however, organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs varied according to program instability rates and staff education level. In short, more highly educated staff reported higher organizational climate in their church-affiliated child care programs. Staff from programs experiencing higher program instability rates reported lower organization climate. Specifically, mean organizational climate and organizational climate dimensions of professional development, task orientation, and innovation varied as a function of program instability rates. Staff from programs with lower turnover rates reported lower mean organizational climate scores and organizational climate dimension of task orientation than staff from programs with moderate or high turnover rates. Also, staff from programs with lower turnover rates reported significantly innovation scores than staff from programs with moderate turnover rates. Staff from programs with moderate turnover rates reported significantly higher professional development than staff from program with high program instability rates. Organizational climate and its dimensions of professional development. job clarity. reward system, and innovation varied as a function of staff educational levels, as well, with staff with associate’s degrees and higher reporting higher organizational climate scores than those with high school diplomas, GED equivalent, or some college credits. When controlling for program size, however, only the organizational climate dimension of professional development varied as a function of program instability rates. 72 Likewise, when controlling for program size, only the organizational climate dimension of innovation varied as a function of staff educational levels. A more detailed summary and a discussion of the findings are presented in the next chapter. 73 Chapter Five Discussion Introduction The purposes of this study were to describe organizational climate in church- affiliated child care programs and to examine the association of program instability rates and staff educational levels with organizational climate. The study constituted a secondary analysis of existing data. This final chapter of the dissertation includes a discussion of results for each research question and hypotheses. As noted, additional analyses controlling for program size were carried out afier initial results raised questions about why results with the program as the unit of analysis were not significant while results with the individual as the unit of analysis were significant. The additional analyses in which program size was controlled yielded far fewer significant results in examining how organizational climate varied as a function of program instability rates and staff education. Still, given the nature of the study, discussion for the planned analyses and results as well as for the additional analyses with program size controlled is included in this chapter. Following the discussion section, implications for practitioners, limitations of the research, and direction for future research are provided. Discussion of the Results Program instability Rates of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs The first purpose of this research was to examine the program instability rates of church-affiliated child care programs. Average program instability rate per year for 74 church-affiliated child care programs was 25%. The rate of church-affiliated child care programs for this research was lower than Helbum and Howes (1996) findings of 37% program instability and Whitebook et al., (2001) of 30% program instability. It is possible that findings from this study show lower turnover rates because church-affiliated and other types of sponsored child care programs participating in the ECWES, choose to participate, and may be of higher quality programming. A program instability rate of 25% places church-affiliated child care programs in this study in the medium quality range (High Scope, 2003). Staff Educational Levels of C hurch-affiliated Child Care Programs The second purpose of this research was to examine the educational levels of staff employed in church-affiliated child care programs. Thirty-nine percent (n=159) had two years of college or more. Twenty-six percent (n= 106) had a bachelors degree or higher. F orty-two percent (n = 174) were pursuing higher education. Currently, in research in the US. examining all types of sponsorship, 68% of child care providers have two years of college or more, 45% completed a bachelor’s degree or higher, and 28% are pursuing higher education (Whitebook et al., 2001). Sixty-eight percent with an educational level of two years of college or more is an improvement from the Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers study (1993-94) showing that teaching staff consisted of 28% with college degrees, 46% with some college, and 26% had a high school degree or less (S. Helbum & Howes, 1996). Other research (Saluja et al., 2002) comparing church- affiliated child care staff to non-church-affiliated, showed church programs had fewer employees with either high school or bachelor’s degrees, but more employees with some college or associate‘s degree. 75 Organizational Climate of Church-afliliated Child Care Programs The third purpose of this research was to examine organizational climate. Organizational climate was analyzed in two ways, first, with church program as the unit of analysis and. and second. with individual staff members as unit of analysis. Scores were in the moderate range for both types of analyses. Organizational climate was slightly higher when the unit of analysis was church-affiliated child care programs rather than when the unit of analysis was at the individual staff member level. According to Bloom’s (1996a) findings, organizational climate scores also varied depending on the unit of analysis, with the unit of analysis of church slightly higher than the unit of analysis as the individual person. Minimal empirical data supports differences in organizational climate, dependent on its unit of analysis, except research in higher education where the educational level of staff impacted organizational climate (Alavi, 2005). Associations of Program instability Rates, Staff Educational Levels with Organizational Climate of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs The fourth and fifth purposes of this research were to determine if program instability rates, staff educational levels, and organizational climate were associated. With the individual staff member as the unit of analysis, program instability rates and overall organizational climate were negatively correlated, staff educational level and overall organizational climate were positively correlated, and turnover and staff educational level were not significantly correlated. With the unit of analysis as the 76 church, there were no significant correlations between the three variables: program instability rate and overall organizational climate, staff educational levels and organizational climate, and staff educational levels and program instability rate. Therefore, no further analysis was carried out using the church as the unit of analysis. While no empirical data explains the differences in the unit of analysis, one possible reason for not finding a significant correlation was the small sample size (n = 53) thereby having less power (and potentially a Type 2 error). A second reason may be similar to what was stated in the first question, examining organizational climate using two different units of analysis. With the church as the unit of analysis, a small church has equal weight as a larger church; however, the larger church-affiliated child care program has more employees. When using the individual as the unit of analysis, each individual has equal weight in the composite score. Organizational Climate of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs as a Function of Program instability Rate. Organizational climate score differed as a fimction of program instability rates. With the individual staff member as the unit of analysis, reports of organizational climate were significantly higher when program instability was low. Specifically, scores were significantly higher on measures of overall organizational climate, and on the following three subscales: professional development, task orientation, and innovation. Lower program instability rate was a predictor of quality child care programming in previous studies as well (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Higher program instability rates negatively influence a business’ organizational climate (DeCotiis & Summers, 1987; Klinkner, Riley, & Roach, 2005). Other studies have shown 77 that organizational climate is related to lower program instability rates (Barker, Monks, & Buckley, 1999; Brazier, 2005). In the K-12 system, as well as other business organization, there is a relationship between teachers leaving the school system and organizational culture (Biersdorr, 2000; Ingersoll, 2001). Program instability is a concern because it can take up to one year or more for a new employee to get to the same level of experience as the employee who left (Staff Development Services, 2006). As literature supports the finding that programiquality is influenced by high program instability rates (Albrecht, 2002), and high quality programs have higher organizational climate scores (Bloom, 1996a), its stands to reason that organizational climate would also be influenced by program instability. One interesting finding was that even staff in programs with moderate turnover rates reported significantly lower organization climate, task orientation, and innovation than did staff in programs with lower turnover rates. While there is a wealth of literature suggesting the high turnover rates are problematic to child care quality (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998), these results suggest that even moderate turnover rates may be problematic. Far less attention is given to moderate rates of turnover in programs and potential effects on the quality of the climate. The organizational climate dimension of professional development also varied as a function of program instability rate. When a center has people leaving frequently, it may be difficult to invest money and time into teaching staff in order to allow for professional development. Yet, professional development is a component of quality child care programming (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998) and is associated with overall 78 improved organizational climate (Dutka, 2002). It stands to reason that professional developed varies as a function of program instability rates. The organizational climate dimension of task orientation varied as a function of program instability rate. Task orientation refers to staff being able to plan efficiently their work and complete the tasks assigned. Task orientation can be improved when teachers are able to share with one another, allowing time for hard work and relaxation (Beachum & Dentith, 2004). When program instability is at a high rate, it produces a hardship in developing the relationships needed with one another to work and relax with each other. Once again, with teaching staff leaving, much time and energy are spent in orienting new staff against allowing little time to efficiently plan work and complete it. The organizational climate dimension of innovation also varied as a function of program instability rate. Innovation is about making changes within an organization. Change in any business is never easy but is inevitable (Schwahn & Spady, 1998). When teaching staff continue to have frequent turnover, it is difficult to do anything innovative, because much attention and energy are spent in orienting people to the program (Brazier, 2005). While organizational climate dimension innovation differed as a function of program instability rates, Post hoc analysis failed to find significance within the categories of program instability rates. Organizational Climate of Church-affiliated Child Care Programs as a Function of Staff Educational Level. The fifth purpose of this research was to determine if organizational climate scores of church-affiliated child care centers differed as a function of staff educational level with the unit of analysis as the individual staff member. Organizational climate dimension of professional development, clarity, reward system, 79 and innovation differed as a function of staff educational levels. Staff members with an associate’s degree or higher reported higher organizational climate scores in dimension of professional development, job clarity, reward system and innovation than those with a high school diploma, GED equivalent, or some college credits. Staff educational levels are indicators of high quality programming (Fiene, 2002; Howes, 1997; Methane & Mooney, 1998; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1999b), such as accreditation (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998), and accreditation requires higher staff educational levels. The same pattern seems to be true for organizational climate, whereas those with higher education credits and/or degrees have higher organizational climate scores than those with less education (Smith et al., 2005). It stands to reason that organizational climate would differ as a function of staff educational levels. Dimensions of organizational climate that differed as a function of staff educational levels included professional development, job clarity, reward system, and innovation (Biersdorr, 2000; Dutka, 2002). Professional development varied as a function of staff educational levels. Tichy (1997) states that “To be an effective teacher, one need to be a world-class learner” (p. 3). It is through experiences and other overt professional development opportunities that staff can grow and learn (Covey, 1991). While no other empirical research to date has examined the relationship of staff educational levels to organizational climate dimension of professional development, it stands to reason that one with a higher level of education, and consequently a higher organizational climate score, would be more interested in pursuing even higher educational opportunities through professional development. Likewise, more highly educated staff may be more 80 likely to view their work in child care as a profession (Desirnone, Smith, & Ueno, in press; Whitebook & Sakai, 2003) rather than simply as a job. Those who see themselves in an established profession tend to value and seek continued professional development. Clarity of one’s job varies as a function of staff educational levels. Bloom (1996a) defines job clarity as staffs knowledge and understanding of the scope and expectations of the job . Job clarity should result in staff feeling more secure in their work and more able to perform more efficiently. More highly educated staff may be better able to appreciate and understand the nuances of their profession, and, they may be more motivated to seek clarification on their work. As noted earlier, more highly educated staff may view their work as their profession, and subsequently, be more invested in seeking additional information about their work than staff with less education (and perhaps less commitment). Reward varies as a function of staff educational levels. Reward system is the degree of fairness and equity of distribution of pay, fiinge benefits, and opportunities for advancement (Bloom, 1996a). Staff with higher educational degrees are paid more highly (Hungerford & Solon, 1987), and, therefore may be more likely to perceive greater rewards in their work places. Innovation varies as a function of program instability rates and staff educational levels. Innovativeness can be accomplished by allowing staff the opportunity to try new techniques and approaches (Bloom, 1996a), thereby causing change within the program. Regardless of degree, all staff should be informed of new research and improvements in practice (Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005). Those with a higher degree may have had more exposure to new strategies and recommendations made in the field of child care 81 administration, and, therefore, may be more willing to try new techniques and approaches. It stands to reason that a staff member with a higher educational level would better be able to be innovative within the program. There is evidence in the literature that educational levels of teaching staff impact program quality, such that higher levels of education are predictive of better programming (F iene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). The same pattern seems to be true for organizational climate, whereas staff with higher education credits and/or degrees report higher organizational climate than those with less education (Smith et al., 2005). Organizational Climate Varying as a Function of Program instability Rates, Stafl Educational Levels Controlling for Program Size As previously shown, it would seem logical that organizational climate would vary as a function of program instability rates and staff educational levels. However, after noticing a difference in organizational climate scores between using the individual as the unit of analysis and the program as the unit of analysis, an ANCOVA procedure was run controlling for program size. Program size, utilizing variable fulltime equivalent, was negatively correlated to organizational climate. Previous literature showed organizational climate dimension of collegiality varied as a function of program size (Bloom, 1996a), and that when a program lowered its enrollment size, organizational climate, by way of relationships between staff improved (Baker & Manfredi-Pettit, 2004). Currently, no other research in child care has addressed the relationship of these two variables. In research in K-12 education and in business organizations, the size of the school or 82 business is negatively related to organizational climate (Jackson, 1997; The Education Digest, 2002), supporting the findings from the current research. The only organizational climate dimensions that still continued to be significant when controlling for program size were professional development , which differed significantly according to program instability rates, and innovation, which varied significantly among staff educational levels As noted earlier, both professional development and opportunities for innovation are importance elements in high quality child care programs. These results indicate that these dimensions are particularly sensitive to program instability rates and staff education, respectively, above and beyond the size of the child care program. Lower turnover rates are likely to result in increased professional development simply because professional development opportunities require the continued employment of staff. When programs have a high program instability rate, it is difficult to move beyond orientation procedures and into professional development. Furthermore, when staff members do not stay for a long period of time, they may not be aware of opportunities to add to their skills and knowledge through professional development. Consequently, when filling in the ECWERS, newer employee may not have had time to realize professional development opportunities that are in place, and consequently may rate it lower than the program actually provides. A more compelling question may be why professional development, and not the other dimensions of organizational climate, was sensitive to turnover rates. One answer may be that the other dimensions of organizational climate, namely task orientation and innovation, are dependent on professional development opportunities. So, for example, perhaps staff must have access to and participate in 83 professional development opportunities before they can appreciate and identify their program's emphasis on task orientation (e. g. an appreciation for efficiency in work) or innovation (where staff are encouraged to be creative). The finding that innovation varied as a function of staff education, even after controlling for program size, is understandable. First, more highly educated staff may simply be more open to trying new strategies or new curricular approaches and appreciating innovative approaches to challenging issues. There are several possible explanations for this. Through their training, more highly educated staff may have more experience in using the critical thinking and inductive and deductive reasoning skills that are imbedded in innovativeness. They may be more open to recognizing and engaging in innovative practices in their work. Second, more highly educated staff may be more likely to be aware of current research driving innovative practices. Third, more highly educated staff may have a greater appreciation for and openness to change and to innovation in their work. Such experience might be a driving force for all educated staff regardless of the size of their programs. Again, an interesting question is why innovation remained impacted by staff education level when controlling for program size while job clarity and rewards did not. Larger programs may simply have less time to devote to job clarification and the development of rewards and incentives. Presumably, more highly educated staff will value the chance to be creative and innovative in their profession. Final Conclusions and Recommendations for Church-affiliated Child Care Programs Organizational climate scores within an organization are important to improve. Organizational climate influences staff member’s energy levels and efforts (Stringer, 84 2001). Organizational climate scores provide a snapshot of how the organization is performing, providing insight on dimensions to build on and find aspects that are blocking opportunities for success (Institute for Organizational Performance). The person in charge of the administrative aspects of a child care center is called a program director, and it is the program director that can truly impact the organizational climate of the program. The emotions of an organization’s leader are contagious, which impact its organizational climate (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002). It is the responsibility of the director to lead the team of child care workers and staff (Hackman, 2002; Institute for Organizational Performance; Stringer, 2001). In interviews with Klinker et all (2005), a director of a high quality program described organizational climate as “all about respect and relationships” (p. 93). Others state that the characteristics of positive health, or positive organizational climate, include managers and employees who are able to describe the purpose, values, and importance of customers; clarify jobs; provide support and clear mission and goals; mentor others; and give promotions because of work and not political connection (Klingele et al., 2001; Marzano etal., 2005). Therefore, the program director should have training in not only program quality, meaning staff/child interactions and child outcomes, but also in ways to improve organizational climate within their programs. This research has shown that organizational climate differs as a function of program instability rates and staff educational levels. However, when controlling for program size, only the organizational climate dimension of professional development varied as a function of program instability rates, and only the organizational climate dimension of innovation varied as a function of staff educational levels. Program size was 85 negatively correlated to organizational climate. In this concluding section, first program size will be addressed in order to improve organizational climate. Second, recommendations to lower program instability rates in order to increase organizational climate dimension of professional development. Third, recommendations to increase educational levels thereby increasing organizational climate dimension of innovation. Program Size Program size is negatively correlated to organizational climate and its dimensions. Ways to understand the connection of appropriate program size and organizational climate are presented. Organizational climate is affected in non-child care businesses by a large workforce (Dekker, 1996; Jackson, 1997). In the K-12 system, smaller schools have improved organizational climate (Baker & Manfredi-Pettit, 2004; Lee, 2003; The Education Digest, 2002) as well as lower violence (Klonslcy, 2002). In child care, standards are available for quality child care programs with group sizes and child to teacher ratios (F iene, 2002; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998), but there are no standards or recommendations for overall program size. Even when licensing provides maximum group sizes and child teacher ratios, many programs do not abide by them (Blau, 2001; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1999b). In one recent example (Baker & Manfredi-Pettit, 2004), child care administrators chose to lower their program enrollment from 120 to 70, reducing the number of staff members as well, in an effort to improvement relationships among staff, children and families. The result was improved relationships (Baker & Manfredi-Pettit, 2004). In another study, examining quality of child care provided dependent on program size, size 86 did not affect anything except profitability (S. Helbum & Morris, 2000). In that study, looking at California, Colorado, Connecticut, and North Carolina, a small center has less than 40 FTE, a medium center has 41-80, and a large center has more than 80 FT E. That places church-affiliated child care programs in the medium size range. In 1999, the average size of church-affiliated child care programs was 65 (Neugebauer). Consequently, in order to improve organizational climate in church-affiliated child care programs, large programs and medium programs should consider reducing its size, perhaps to a program size of 40 or less. While the Helbum and Morris (2000) study did not find differences in program size against quality, church-affiliated child care programs have an average program size of 65. Within the current study, church-affiliated child care programs size is negatively correlated to organizational climate. While reducing program size may impact profitability, it will also improve organizational climate score. Higher organizational climate scores are associated with higher quality programming which results in better outcomes for children. In order to help large programs continue to operate, large programs could be operated as two or three separate smaller programs. By doing so, organizational climate may improve and profitability may not be affected as programs can still continue to share resources with each other. Program Instability Organizational climate dimension of professional development varied as a function of program instability rates, controlling for program size. Ways to decrease program instability rates is provided. Program instability can be reduced by providing higher wages and by employing the right person. One reason for program instability is due to the earnings for child care workers being quite low. On a scale of l to 427, with 1 87 being higher pay and 427 as the lowest hourly wage across the employment spectrums, the US. Department of Labor lists child care workers at 401 and early childhood teacher assistants at 419 (US. Department of Labor, 2000). It is apparent that those who care for the needs of our children are paid a low wage and may be impacting program instability rates. Centers that paid higher salaries had fewer turnovers. In order for church-affiliated child care programs to retain mature teachers, Berl (2005) suggests the following: appreciate a mature employee’s experience and frame of reference, encouraging experienced employees to share their knowledge. It is helpful to look to the experienced employee as one who not only has experience in child care, but also knowledge about the organizational history and culture. Additionally, experienced employees are tending to work later in life, resulting in the need to provide some flexibility in scheduling. Program instability is an area of concern in the quality of child care provided (Klinkner et al., 2005). As Albrecht (2002) writes: Direct replacement costs to fill positions, lost enrollment due to inadequate staffing, declining staff morale, family dissatisfaction, and negative outcomes for children’s growth and development are a few of the consequences. (p. 5) Consequently, recruitment of highly qualified people has been shown to keep an organization competitive in other industries (Schwahn & Spady, 1998). Often it is the program director’s responsibility to hire staff (Cascio, 1986). To hire the right person a church-affiliated child care program must (1) clarify its objectives of what kind of person that it want to hire, (2) abide by what is said in the job advertisement, (3) look at applicants and prioritize job qualifications needed for the position, (4) use evaluation tools such as a screening process that includes conducting a 45 minute interview, and 88 checking references, and (5) orienting on topics such as mission of the center, policies, child development, health concerns, discipline, child abuse detection, etc. new hires right from the start (Albrecht, 2002; Fiene, 2002; High Scope, 2003; Staley, Runnels Rack, Perreault, & Neugebauer, 1986). Within the hiring process, the director should clearly explain the job description and the mission of the program. By doing so, both the director and potential employee will be better able to determine whether the position is suitable to the prospective employee (Branharn, 2005). By hiring the right staff and communicating effectively about the organization, the center may not have to deal with higher program instability. When qualified staff members are hired, retained, and paid an appropriate wage, opportunities for professional deveIOpment will increase. It is logical that program instability rates would contribute to organizational climate dimension of professional development. When program instability is high, it is difficult to spend time in professional development, but rather in the constant cycle of orientation of new employees. The previous section provided ways to improve organizational climate dimension of professional development by improving program instability rates. The following section addresses the need to improve staff educational levels in order to improve organizational climate dimension of innovation. Educational Levels Organizational climate dimension of innovation varied as a function of staff education levels, controlling for program size. From the Florida Child Care Study (1996), “Increased teacher education and ratio requirements significantly contributed to the number of positive outcomes in children’s development” (p. 2). As previously stated, 89 higher organizational climate scores are associated with higher quality child care program. Consequently, staff education is an important component of quality church- affiliated child care. Minimum quality standards call for a certain level of education in child care. A quality child care center will have teacher assistants who have a GED or high school diploma, are 18 years or older, and some training in child development. F urtherrnore, teachers should at least have an associate’s degree in early childhood (or similar) and/or a Child Development Associate Credential (National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). The administrator/director should have expertise in administration, be at least 21 years of age, have a bachelor’s degree in early childhood (High Scope recommends a high quality center will have a director with a graduate degree in early childhood or child development), three years of teaching and/or a graduate degree in early childhood/child development (Fiene, 2002; High Scope, 2003; National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs, 1998). Research has shown that centers with better educated directors are more likely to better monitor their staff (Howes, 1997). The above educational levels for staff provided only the minimum required for high quality programming. As the current research shows, even what NAEYC accreditation recommends for high quality programming is not enough. The organizational climate dimension of innovation varied as a function of staff educational levels, specifically those with associates degrees and higher over those with no college 90 degrees. Therefore, in order to improve organizational climate dimension of innovation, higher educational levels should be in place of all teaching staff, not just lead teachers. Employing and maintaining higher educated teaching staff come with a cost. Many programs are struggling to make ends meet, let alone help current staff members to seek higher educational opportunities. One way to improve educational levels is for church affiliated child care programs to be aware of programs, such as T.E.A.C.H., that help child care workers continue their education in early childhood. T.E.A.C.H. pays for most of the cost of tuition as well as paid time release (http://www.mi4c.org/teach/). T.E.A.C.H. was designed to improve child care outcomes, but as the current research showed, higher educational levels also improve organizational climate scores. Other states than Michigan may also have similar programs. Conclusions The above research found that program size and organizational climate were negatively correlated. Furthermore, organizational climate dimensions of professional development varied as a function of program instability rates controlling for program size, and organizational climate dimension of innovation varied as a function of staff educational levels, controlling for program size. Ways to improve these elements were provided. Church affiliated child care programs are a complex system to study. In order to find ways to improve organizational climate, in a systemic approach, one needs to look at many parts of the church affiliated child care program’s system. Initially, organizational climate was examined to see if it varied as a function of program instability and/or staff educational levels. Within mean organizational climate and some of organizational 91 of organizational climate’s dimensions, organizational climate scores did vary as a function of these two variables. However, by adding one variable, program size, significant organizational climate scores differed. Findings from this research raise additional questions for future studies. The following lists limitations to the previous research and suggestions for future research. Limitations In some respects, this research was limited by its use of secondary analysis of existing data. The researcher was unable to go back to the individual centers to ask other questions. Moreover, with how the sample was provided, the researcher could not separate child care centers that were only housed in a church rather than being sponsored by a church. Suggestions for Additional Research With the research being limited by use of secondary analysis of existing data, future research could include a randomly assigned sample of church-affiliated child care programs across the nation. By doing so, findings would be able to be generalized to the broader public. Currently, only centers that have volunteered to take the ECWES are part of the norms. Therefore, generalization is limited. Additional study might focus specifically on how elements of supervision and program administration vary among smaller and larger child care programs with regard to these dimensions, and the effects of turnover rates and staff educational levels in these varying contexts. 92 Finally, a full data set should be obtained in order to actually compare church- affiliated child care programs from the larger set, without violating assumptions of independence, that there is not relationship between observations in both data sets (Norusis, 2000). Church-affiliated child care programs can be examined to see how they differ from other types of non-church sponsored programs, including examining variables such as program instability rate and staff educational levels. As previously stated, child care is a growing need across the nation. Church- affiliated child care programs are some of the fastest growing programs. Church-affiliated child care programs should seek to provide quality to the families that they care for, because quality child care impacts children’s future development. Organizational climate is associated with quality programming. Research on the organizational climate of church-affiliated child care programs should continue. 93 Appendix A Early Childhood Work Environment Scale The Early Childhood Work Environment Scale created by Paula Jorde Bloom (1988) was used for this research. Permission for its inclusion in the dissertation is granted by the author. 94 Background Information Sex: E] Male B Female Age: Years What is the highest educational level you have completed? 1:] Some high school 1:] Some graduate work [:1 High School or GED equivalent E] Master's Degree lMA/MSl 1:] Some college D Post Master's work 0 Associate Degree (AA) 1:] Doctorate lEd.D/Ph.Dl C] Bachelor's Degree (BA/BS) How long have you worked in the field of early childhood? Years Months How long have you worked for your present employer? Years Months How long have you worked in your present position? Years Months Indicate the category that most nearly describes your present employment? 1:] employed full—time 135 hours per week or moral D employed part-time 110 to 34 hours per weekl How many months of the year are you employed in your position? D year around 112 monthsl 1:] school year only 19 or 10 months) E] fewer than 9 months Check the job title that most nearly describes your role in your organization. If you have a dual role, what position do you spend more time doing? I] classroom teacher, assistant teacher, or caregiver D home educator D central administration support staff [:1 center manager, director, or coordinator E] central office coordinator or manager D Head Start director C] non-classroom employees (family service worker, cook, driverl 95 Work Attitudes Check a! that" describe how you feel about your organization: U I intend to work here at least two more years E] l often think of quitting D I'm just putting in time D I take pride in my program U I put a lot of extra effort into my work D I feel very'committed to this program 1:] I don't care what happens to this place after I leave [:1 It would be difficult for me to find another job as good as this one C] It's hard to feel committed to this place D I sometimes feel trapped in this job If you could design the ideal job, how close would your present position resemble this ideal position with respect to the following? (check I-St a- 3 not attemy somewhat the idealetel myideat relationship with your co-workers opportunities to learn and grow relationship with your supervisor clarity in roles and responsibilities fairness of pay and promotion opportunities decisionemaking structure of the center agreement among staff on program goals task orientation, program efficiency equipment, materials, and the physical setting innovativeness and creative problem solving 0000000000“ 0000000000” aamuaaunuau DDDDDDDDDD‘ 0000000000“: Different people want and expect different things from their work. Check the 3 aspects of your work that are most important to you: D collegiality, co-worker relations opportunities for professional growth support and feedback from supervisor clarity in policies and procedures fairness in pay, benefits, and promotions involvement in decision making consensus on program goals and objectives accomplishing work in an efficient manner physical setting, sufficient materials innovativeness and creative expression DDUDDDUDD 96 Organizational Climate . Please answer the questions in this section with respect to the overall conditions in your center as they are most of the (line: Check all that describe the staff relations in your program/center most of the time: DDDDDDDDDD cooperative and friendly competitive people are reluctant to express their feelings teachers are very helpful to new staff good team spirit staff are generally frank and candid morale is low people socialize outside of work people feel isolated people complain a lot Check al that apply. Does your program/center... DDDDDDDDDD provide on-site staff development workshops? encourage staff to share resources with one another? provide released time to attend conferences? provide released time to visit other programs? provide tuition reimbursement to take college courses? provide guidance for professional advancement? have a library of professional books for staff to use? subscribe to several educational ioumals and magazines? implement a career ladder for professional advancement? encourage staff to learn new skills and competencies? Check al that characterize the staff supervision provided at your program or center most of the time: DDDDDDDDDD provides support and helpful feedback hard to please unavailable conducts fair evaluations of staff too critical sets high but realistic standards delegates too much compliments and praises staff talks down to staff very knowledgeable 97 Check a! that apply. Does your program/center... U distribute a parents' handbook detailing policies and procedures? C] have a staff manual outlining staff policies? D D U provide written contracts for employees? have written job descriptions for each position? distribute a newsletter to parents at least 4 times a year? Check al that characterize your program/center most of the time: DUDDD written communication is clear there are seldom conflicting demands made on staff policies and procedures are well-defined rules are consistent staff are well-informed Check a! that describe the pay and promotion system of your program: DUDDDDDDDD salaries are fair considering the center's funding promotions are not handled fairly pay and benefits are equitably distributed some people are paid more than they are worth raises are based on favoritism steps are being taken to increase pay and benefits pay is fair compared to what other centers pay this place is a revolving door, high turnover people are taken advantage of chances for promotion are good Check a! that describe how decisions are made at your program/center most of the time: DDDDUDDDDD people are encouraged to be self~sufficient in making decisions management likes to make most of the decisions people don't feel free to express their opinions everyone provides input on the content of staff meetings conformity is the name of the game here there are scheduled staff meetings at least twice a month people provide input but decisions have already been made staff make decisions about things that directly affect them staff are seldom asked their opinion on issues management values everyone's input for major decisions 98 Listed below are some common organizational decisions and actions. How much influence does the teaching staff crurendy have in each of the areas below: very into some considerable hm hm hftuence Ordering materials/supplies Cl 1:] Cl Interviewing/hiring new staff 1:] E] El Determining program objectives [3 D D Training new aides/teachers 1:1 [:1 El Planning daily schedule of activities [:1 ‘ U D How much influence do you think the teaching staff would [Ire to have in each of these areas: verye'rtle some midweek hfluence httuence hfluence Ordering materials/supplies 1:] D D Interviewing/hiring new staff E] Cl [:1 Determining program objectives U D D Training new aides/teachers D D 1:1 Planning daily schedule of activities [:1 Cl C] Check ed that apply with respect to the goals of your program: goals are left vague everyone agrees on program goals people know how to compromise program does not have a written philosophy staff share a common vision of what the program should be like the staff seldom talk about program objectives staff are committed to program goals staff are not unified in their philosophy people disagree on what program services should be provided program has well-defined educational objectives DDDDDDDDDD Check a! that describe the way things get done at your program/center most of the time: D meetings are a waste of time this place is run very efficiently people get the job done time is wasted deadlines are missed regularly things rarely get put off employees work hard people come to work late peeple procrastinate often meetings are productive DDDDDUDDD 99 Check al that apply to the physical environment of your work setting. DDUDDDDDDD efficient use of space cramped and crowded conditions seems either too hot or too cold neat, tidy, and safe decorations are drab staff have a place to store personal belongings classroom or other noise disrupts office business there are sufficient supplies and materials the building needs major repairs storage space is well-organized Check el that describe your program as a whole: DDDDDDDDDD emphasizes creativity not very innovative quite traditional implements needed changes encourages diverse opinions regularly looks at new educational approaches things stay pretty much the same new ideas are tried out people avoid taking risks at all costs problems are not addressed Rank order the following educational objectives for children according to their importance in your program during the next year. Put a '1' by the most important, a '2' by the next most important and so on until you get to '6' for the least important. Each objective must have only one number next to it. In our program, it is important... to help children develop language and problem-solving skills to help children build strong friendships and learn to share to help children master concepts needed for reading and arithmetic to help children develop skill and independence in caring for themselves to help children develop physical coordination to help children develop a healthy self-esteem and positive self-concept 100 References Alavi, H. (2005). Organizational climate of Kerman Shahid Bahonar University: Its comparison with the desired organizational climate fiom the viewpoints of the personnel of the university. Retrieved February 21, 2006, from http://www.fmdarticles.com Albrecht, K. (2002). The right fit: Recruiting, selecting, and orienting stafi‘I Lake Forest, IL: New Horizons. Allen, R. S., & Kilmann, R. H. (2001). Aligning reward practices in support of total quality management. Business Horizons, 77-84. Babble, E. (1998). The practice of social research. Detroit: Wadsworth. Baker, A. C., & Manfredi-Pettit, L. A. (2004). Relationships, the heart of quality care. Washington DC: NAEYC. Barker, P., Monks, K., & Buckley, F. (1999). The role of mentoring in the career progression of chartered accountants. The British Accounting Review, 31(3), 297- 313. Begiane, E. T. (2001). Principals who faced obstacles to learning styles instruction. NASSP Bulletin, 85(627). Behrrnan, R. E. (1996). Statement of purpose. The Future of Children, 6(2). Biersdorr, K. K. (2000). Keeping excellent staff. Rehabilitation Review, 11(8). Blau, D. M. (2001). The child care problem: an economic analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Bloom, P. J. (1985). Early childhood work environment survey. Illinois: The Center for Early Childhood Leadership, National Louis University. Bloom, P. J. (1995). Shared decision making: The centerpiece of participatory management. Young Children(May), 55-60. 101 Bloom, P. J. (1996a). Improving the quality of work life in the early childhood setting. Wheeling: National-Louis University. Bloom, P. J. (1 996b). The quality of work life in NAEYC accredited and non accredited early childhood programs. Early Education and Development, 7(4), 301-307. Bloom, P. J. (1997a). A great place to work: Improving conditions for staff in young children 's programs (Revised ed.). Washington DC: NAEYC. Bloom, P. J. (1997b). Navigating the rapids: Directors reflect on their careers and professional development. Young Children, 32-3 8. Bloom, P. J ., & Sheerer, M. (1992). Changing organizations by changing individuals: A model of leadership training. The Urban Review, 24(4), 263-285. Bogle, M. (2001). A survey of congregation-based child care in the United States. In E. J. J. Dionne & Y. C. Chen (Eds), Sacred places, civic purposes (pp. 216-234). Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press. Bogle, M., Dionne, E. J. J., Appelbaum, J ., Burnett, C., Flake, F ., Hampton, D., et al. (2001). Morning Discussion, Sacred Places, Civic Purposes: The Role of F aith- Based Organizations in Child Care: Brookings Institution. Brainard, E., & Fox, R. S. (1974). The climate of the school. Thrust for Education Leadership(3). Branham, L. (2005). The 7 hidden reasons employees leave. Executive Book Summaries, 27(2). Brazier, D. K. (2005). Influence of contextual factors on health-care leadership. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 26(1/2), 128-141. Children's Defense Fund. (2001). 2001 The state of America 's children. Washington DC: Children's Defense Fund. Clark-Steward, K. A., Gruber, C. P., & Fitzgerald, L. M. (1994). Children at home and in day care. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 102 Compton, T. R. (1983). Ohio CPAs and job satisfaction. Ohio CPA Journal, 42(4), 173. Conley, S., & Bacharach, S. B. (1990). From school-site management to participatory school-site management. Phi Delta Kappan, 71(7), 539-544. Cost Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team. (1995). Cost, quality, and child outcomes in child care centers, technical report. Denver: Department of Economics, Center for Research in Economics and Social Policy, University of Colorado. Covey, S. R. (1991). Principal-centered leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster. Crockenberg, S. C. (2003). Rescuing the baby from the bath water: How gender and temperament (may) influence how child care affects child development. Child Development, 74(4), 1034-1038. Day, J. C. (1996). Population projections of the United States by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin, [995-2050. Retrieved August 17, 2004, from http://wwwcensusgov/prod/ 1 lpop/p25-l 130/ DeCotiis, T. A., & Summers, T. P. (1987). A path of analysis of a model of antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment. Human Relations, 40(7), 445- 471. Dekker, I. (1996). Workforce size and multifaceted job satisfaction: A cross-national study. The Journal of Social Psychology, 1 3 6, 201-208. Desimone, L. M., Smith, T. M., & Ueno, K. (in press). Are teachers who need sustained, content-focused professional development getting it? An administrator's dilemma. Educational Administration Quarterly. Dutka, M. (2002). The relationship between job satisfaction and the organizational climate for women in higher education administrators at five institutions. Boston College, Boston. Ellis, N. E. (1993). Collegiality from the teacher's perspective: social contexts for professional development. Action in teacher education, 15(1), 42-48. 103 Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics. (2004). Table POP8.A Child care: Percentage of children from birth thorough age 6, not yet in kindergarten, by type of care arrangement for child and family characteristics, 1 995 and 2001). Retrieved October 23, 2004, from http://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/index.asp Fenichel, E., Lurie-Hurvitz, E., & Griffin, A. (1999). Seizing the moment to build momentum for quality infant/toddler child care: Highlights of the Child Bureau and Head Start Bureau's National Leadership Forum on Quality Care for Infants and Toddlers. Zero to Three, 19(6), 3-17. Field, T. (1991). Quality infant day-care and grade school behavior and performance. Child Development, 62(4), 863-870. F iene, R. (2002). 13 indicators of quality child care (Research update): Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning Health Resources and Services Administration/Maternal and Child Health Bureau US. Department of Health and Human Services. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Gordon, G. G., & Cummins, W. (1979). Managing management climate. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books/Health. Greenspan, S. I. (2003). Child care research: A clinical perspective. Child Development, 74(4), 1064-1068. Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Hair, J. F. J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Singapore: Pearson Education. Helbum, S., & Howes, C. (1996). Child care cost and quality. The Future of Children, 6(2), 62-82. Helbum, S., & Morris, J. R. (2000). Center size and center performance. In Inside child care: Trend report 2000. Redmond: Child Care Information Exchange. 104 Helbum, S. W., & Bergmann, B. R. (2002). America's child care problem. New York: Palgrave. Hellawell, D., & Hancock, N. (2001). A case study of the changing roles of the academic middle manager in higher education: Between hierarchical control and collegiality? Research Papers in Education, 16(2), 183-197. High Scope. (2003). Preschool program quality assessment (second ed.). Ypsilanti: High Scope Press. Holloway, S. D. (1999, Fall). The role of religious beliefs in early childhood education: Christian and Buddhist preschools in Japan. Retrieved January 30, 2005, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/vl .n2/print/hollowgvhtml Howard, E., Howell, B., & Brainard, E. (1987): Ham)“ for conducting school climate improvement projects. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa. Howes, C. (1988). Relations between early child care and schooling. Developmental Psychology, 24(1), 53-57. , Howes, C. (1997). Children's experience in center based child care as a function of teacher background and adult child ratio. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43(3), 404- 425. Hungerford, T., & Solon, G. (1987). Sheepskin effects in the returns to education. Review of Economics and Statistics, 69(1), 175-177. Huseman, R., McHone, W. W., & Rungeling, B. (1996). Academic salary compression: A productivity model as a remedy. Public Personnel Management, 25, 453-465. Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499-534. Insel, P. M., & Moos, R., H. (2003). Work environment scale. Retrieved September 14, 2004, from http://www.career- lifeskil1s.com/productSfiservices/atpr/corpcultdev/cpp-S9000.htm 105 Institute for Organizational Performance. Organizational vital signs. Retrieved February 21, 2006, from http://www.eq_performance.com Jackson, B. G. (1997). Leader behaviors, school climate, school size and out-of-school suspensions in selected public senior high schools. University of Southern Mississippi. Klingele, W. E., Lynden, J. A., & Vaughan, B. J. (2001). Organizational health and higher education: Concept and measurement scale development. Delta Pi Epsilon, 43(2). Klinkner, J ., Riley, D., & Roach, M. (2005). Organizational climate as a tool for child care staff retention. Young Children, 60(6), 90-95. Klonsky, M. (2002). How smaller schools prevent violence. Educational Leadership, 59(5), 65-69. Kneipp, S. M., & Yarandi, H. N. (2002). Complex sampling designs and statistical issues in secondary analysis. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 24(5), 552-566. Lee, V. (2003). Dropping out of high school: The role of school organization and structure. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 353-393. Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and interpretation (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lindner, E. W., Mattis, M. C., & Rogers, J. R. (1983). When churches mind the children: A study in day care in local parishes. New York: National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA. Marzano, R., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria: ASCD. Methane, A., & Mooney, A. (1998). Improving the quality of childcare provision through self-assessment: Organizational characteristics of nurseries as a predictors of the ability to plan and implement change. Early Child Development and Care, I 48, 21. 106 Mocan, H. N. (1995). The child care industry: Cost functions, efiiciency, and quality (Working Paper Series). Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research. Mocan, H. N. (1997). Cost functions, efficiency, and quality in day care centers. The Journal of Human Resources, 32, 861-891. Modigliani, K. (1993). Child care as an occupation in culture of indifiierence. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Michigan. Moos, R., H. (1995). Manual for the work environment scale (revised ed.). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. Morgan, G., Azer, S., Costley, J. B., Genser, A., Goddman, I. F ., Lombardi, J., et a1. (1994). Making a career of it: The state of the states report on career development in early care and education. Boston: Center for Career Development in Early Care and Education. Moriarty, H. J ., Detrick, J. A., Mahon, M. M., Feetham, S. L., Carroll, R. M., Shepard, M. P., et a1. (1999). Issues to consider when choosing and using large national databases for research of families. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 21(2), 143-153. Morris, J. R., & Helbum, S. (2000). Child care center quality differences: The role of profit status, client preferences, and trust. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29(3), 377-399. Muijs, lD., Aubrey, C., Harris, A., & Briggs, M. (2004). How they manage? A review of the research on leadership in early childhood. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2(2), 157-169. Munton, A. G., & Mooney, A. (1999). Improving the quality of childcare provision through self-assessment: Organizational characteristics of nurseries as predictors of the ability to plan and implement change. Early Child Development and Care, 148, 21-34. National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1998). Accreditation Criteria and Procedures of the National Association for the Education of Young Children. Washington, D. C.: NAEYC. 107 National Association for the Education of Young Children, & National Academy of Early Childhood Programs. (1998). Accreditation Criteria & Procedures of the National Association for the Education of Young Children. Washington DC. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network. (2003). Does the amount of time spent in child care predict socio- emotional adjustment during the transition to kindergarten? Child Development, 74(4), 976-1005. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network, & Duncan, G. (2003). Modeling the impacts of child care quality on children's preschool cognitive development. Child Development, 74(5), 1454- 1475. National Resource Center for Health and Safety in Child Care. (2000). Individual states' child care licensure regulations. Retrieved January 31, 2005, from http://nrc.uchsc.edu/STATES/states.htm Neugebauer, R. (1999a). Congregations that care: Child care in religious institutions. In Inside child care: Trend report 2000 (pp. 69-74). Redmond: Child Care Information Exchange. Neugebauer, R. (1999b). The cost of center-based child care. In Inside child care: Trend Report 2000. Redmond: Child Care Information Exchange. Neugebauer, R. (1999c). Who provides child care in the USA? In Inside child care: Trend Report 2000. Redmond: Child Care Information Exchange. Neugebauer, R. (2000). Religious organizations taking proactive role in child car -- Trends in church-housed child care. Child Care Information Exchange(l33), 18- 20. NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (1999a). Child outcomes when child care center classes meet recommended standards for quality. American Journal of Public Health, 89(7), 10721-11077. NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (1999b). Child outcomes when child care center classes meet recommended standards for quality. American Journal of Public Health, 89, 1072-1077. 108 NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (2001). Early child care and children's peer interaction at 24 and 36 months. Child Development, 72, 1478-1500. NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (2002). Early child care and children's development prior to school entry. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 133-164. Norusis, M. J. (2000). SPSS 10.0 guide to data analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice- Hall. Orr, J ., & Filback, R. (2004). The changing face of faith-based child care in Los Angeles County. Retrieved March 24, 2006 Peisner-Feinberg, Clifford, R. M., Yazejean, N., Culken, M., Howes, C., & Kagan, S. (1998). The longitudinal effects of child care quality: Implications for kindergarten success. San Diego: Presentation at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. Phillips, D., Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1987). Dimensions and effects of child care quality: The Bermuda study. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Quality in child care: What does research tell us? Washington DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Sahakian, P., & Stockton, J. (1996). Opening doors: Teacher-guided observations. Educational Leadership, 53, 50-53. Salkind, N. J. (2004). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Saluja, G., Early, D. M., & Clifford, R. M. (2002, Spring). Demographic characteristics of early childhood teachers and structural elements of early care and education in the United States. Retrieved January 30, 2005, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v4nlIsalujghtml Schwahn, C. J ., & Spady, W. G. (1998). Total leaders. Lanham: Scarecrow Education. Smith, K. G., Collins, C. J., & Clark, K. D. (2005). Existing knowledge, knowledge creation capability, and the rate of new product introduction in high-technology firms. Academy of Management Journal, 48(2), 346. 109 Staff Development Services. (2006). Matching the right person to the right job. Retrieved February 21 , 2006, from http://www.staffdevelopmentservicescom Staley, C. C. J ., Runnels Rack, E., Perreault, J ., & Neugebauer, R. (1986). Guidelines for effective staff selection. In R. Neugebauer (Ed.), Stafl challenges. Redmond: Child Care Information Exchange. Stremmel, A. J. (1989). A multivariate analysis of the predictors of intention to leave child care work. Unpublished Dissertation, Purdue University. Stringer, R (2001). Leadership and organizational climate. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. The Education Digest. (2002). Still stumped over school size. The Education Digest, 67(5), 31-33. US. Department of Labor. (2000). Ranking of full-time occupations, by wages. Retrieved May 26, 2004, from http://stats.bls.gov/bls/wages.htm Watamura, S. E., Donzella, B., Alwin, J ., & Gunnar, M. R. (2003). Morning-to-afiernoon increases in cortisol concentrations for infants and toddlers at child care: Age differences and behavioral correlates. Child Development, 74(4), 1006-1020. Whitebook, M. (1996). NAEYC accreditation as an indicator of program quality: what research tells us. In S. Bredekamp & B. Willer (Eds), NAEYC accreditation: A decade of learning and the years ahead. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Whitebook, M., & Sakai, L. (2003). Turnover begets turnover: An examination of job and occupational instability among child care center staff. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18(3), 273-293. Whitebook, M., Sakai, L., Gerber, E., & Howes, C. (2001). Then and now: Changes in child care staffing, 1994-2000 (Technical Report). Washington DC: Center for the Child Care Workforce, Washington, DC and Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California, Berkeley. Work Environmental Scale. Retrieved September 14, 2004, from http://wwwmeasurementexperts.org/instrument/instrument_reviews.asp?detail=3 0 110