© 1978 BARBARA ANN FERGUSON ALL RI GHTS RESERVED STATE VOCATIONAL ADMINISTRATORS' OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT IN STATE DEPARTMENTS OF EDUCATION By Barbara A. Ferguson A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum 1978 ABSTRACT STATE VOCATIONAL ADMINISTRATORS' OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT IN STATE DEPARTMENTS OF EDUCATION By Barbara A. Ferguson Purpose The purposes of this study were (1) to describe state voca- tional administrators' opportunities to experience and their desire to experience professional and management development in state depart- ments of education; (2) to identify the variable or combination of variables (state size, sex, age, level of administration, under- graduate vocational-specialty area, and number of years in the state department) that influence the degree of opportunity a state voca- tional administrator experiences and/or has the desire to experience; and (3) to describe a profile of a state vocational administrator who has the maximum opportunity to experience professional growth and development. Eight exploratory questions, developed from the principal problem, set the boundaries of the research study. The growth areas tested included a planned in-service program, varied on-the-job assignments, development of communication skills, visibility and exposure with high state and government officials, outside training Barbara A. Ferguson and development, professional association activities, and mobility and job advancement. Research Methodology The survey questionnaire was sent to 38l state vocational administrators in the vocational divisions of 20 state departments of education. A response rate of 72.2 percent (275 respondents) was realized. Responses were analyzed as a group and individually to deter- mine the opportunity to experience and the desire to experience pro— fessional management development. The analysis of variance was used as the statistical technique to measure significant differences between the independent variables and the opportunity to experience and the desire to experience each of the developmental areas. Alpha was set at .05 as the critical value for all statistical tests. The Least Significant Differences post-hoc test was used as the follow-up procedure. Conclusions State departments of education appear not to provide outside management training and development for their state vocational admin- istrative staffs. Opportunity for professional growth tends to be limited to the range of administrative responsibilities an adminis- trator is assigned on the job. State departments do not provide added opportunities for professional and management growth. Opportunities to participate in all of the developmental areas are restricted to a small group of individuals. Although lower-level Barbara A. Ferguson administrators desire the same opportunities as do upper-level administrators, they have not had the opportunity for such development. Administrators who hold top-level positions have had no aca- demic preparation in administration or management. The demands of the job require generalist-type capabilities, whereas the adminis- trators' advanced degree work is in a vocational specialty area. It appears that the qualifications for the positions are not related to the duties performed. A wide gap exists between what administrators would like to have the opportunity to experience and what the state departments provide. Administrators are ready and committed to be involved in professional development programs. Females are not provided much opportunity for pro- fessional growth and development, as they are hired for traditionally female jobs and perform in areas that are narrower in scope than male positions. Female job designs do not provide equal employment oppor- tunity, which, in turn, blocks opportunity for mobility and job advancement. Most state agencies have made some attempt to provide an in-service program; few state agencies can be credited with effective in-service programs, as most administrators feel the quality of the programs could be improved. Five independent variables were directly related to the opportunities state administrators have experienced. High-opportunity administrators are Caucasian males, between 40 and 49 years of age, from the vocational-specialty areas of Barbara A. Ferguson Agricultural and Industrial Education; they have worked 8 to ll years in the state department. If professional and management development activities are to be extended to all administrators, l. Jobs need to be redesigned to encourage broader staff participation. 2. Top-level administrators need to adopt a participative management style. 3. State and/or federal agencies will need to provide funds for professional and management development. To my son, Fritz, the light of my life, and To my mother,.winnie, and dad, John, whose love, support, and encouragement have been my constant companions in every major endeavor. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Every major undertaking requires a team of talented and capable people, and this research study benefited from many of them. I would like to thank those who have left their unique mark and have helped me to move in the direction of self-fulfillment and profes- sional growth: Dr. Lawrence Borosage, for being the educator he is, an avid reader with a willingness to share, a lover of learning with an openness to change. Dr. Mildred Erickson, for being the epitome of professional- ism, dedicated to providing guidance to those who desire a higher education, a facilitator and spokesperson for women at Michigan State University, and a proponent of continuing personal and profes- sional growth. Dr. Philip Cusick, a creative individual, with a dedication to quality in teaching and excellence in research. A special thanks for his contributions toward the creation and development of the design of this study and the evaluation of the final product. Dr. Robert Poland, chairman of my doctoral guidance committee, for being the humanist he is; for believing, trusting, and having faith in me; for acting as counselor and friend; and for providing opportunities for challenging, rewarding professional experiences. iv Dr. L. Eudora Pettigrew, chairman of my dissertation commit- tee, a dynamic, competent person, for directing and guiding me in writing each phase of this dissertation and for being a role model and a special confidante. Dr. John Sweitzer and the research consultants in Urban and Metropolitan Studies, for providing direction and assistance with the statistical design of the study and with the analysis of the data. The Washington Coordinating Council for Vocational Education, for providing me the opportunity to attend Michigan State University by awarding me the Education Professions Development Fellowship for a two-year period so I could devote my full time to graduate study. To the state vocational administrators who are dedicated to improving the quality of education, a special thanks for caring enough about their own professional growth and development that they participated in this research study and thus made the dissertation a reality. Finally, to my friends, Margaret Longthorne, Kathy Farr, and Loretta Grobe, for all the mental, physical, and emotional support they have provided over these past three years at Michigan State University, a special thanks. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ........................ ix LIST OF FIGURES ........................ xvi Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ..................... 1 Statement of the Problem .............. 1 Purpose of the Study ................ 2 Background ..................... 3 Conceptual Framework ................ 5 Management Training and Special Assignments ..... 6 Visibility and Exposure ............... 7 Significance of the Problem ............. B Delimitation of the Problem ............. l2 Limitations of the Study .............. 12 Basic Assumptions .................. 13 Definition of Terms ................. 14 Overview of the Study ................ 17 11. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ............. l9 The Meaning of Professional and Management Development .................... 19 Factors That Contribute to the Need for Development . 22 Changing Environments ............... 22 Changing Social Values .............. 24 Theories on Management Development ......... 28 Basic Issues to Be Addressed ........... 32 Methods or Approaches to Development ....... 36 Summary ....................... 39 III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN OF THE STUDY ..... 40 The Survey Instrument ................ 42 Population ..................... 43 Sample ....................... 43 Data Collection ................... 44 Data Analysis .................... 48 Instrument Reliability ............... 50 Chapter IV. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS .................. State Department Planned In-Service Program ..... On-the-Job Assignment ................ State Size .................... Sex ........................ Age ........................ Administrative Level ............... Undergraduate Vocational-Specialty Area ...... State Department Experience ............ Development of Communication Skills ......... State Size .................... Sex ........................ Age ........................ Administrative Level ............... Undergraduate Vocational-Specialty Area ...... State Department Experience ............ Visibility and Exposure ............... State Size .................... Sex ........................ Age ........................ Administrative Level ............... Undergraduate Vocational-Specialty Area ...... State Department Experience ............ Outside Development Training ............ State Size .................... Sex ........................ Age ........................ Administrative Level ............... Undergraduate Vocational-Specialty Area ...... State Department Experience ............ Professional Association Activities ......... State Size .................... Administrative Level ............... Undergraduate Vocational-Specialty Area ...... State Department Experience ............ Mobility and Job Advancement ............ State Size .................... Sex ........................ Age . . . . . ........ . .......... Administrative Level ............... Undergraduate Vocational- -Specialty Area ...... State Department Experience . . . ....... Desire for Greater Opportunity to Experience Professional and Management Development Activities vii lOl Chapter Females ...................... Age Groups .................... Second-Level Administrators ............ Vocational-Specialty Areas ............ State Department Experience ............ Profile of a State Vocational Administrator ..... Profile Summary .................. V. DISCUSSION, SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . Summary of Findings ................. Profile of a State Vocational Administrator ..... Conclusions ..................... Recommendations ................... APPENDICES A. SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ................. B. LETTERS TO SAMPLE ................... C. TABULAR PRESENTATION OF RESPONSES IN EXPERIENCE AND DESIRE CATEGORIES, ACCORDING TO DEVELOPMENTAL AREAS ........................ D. PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES. ACCORDING TO EXPERIENCE AND DESIRE ......... BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................... viii Page 121 122 123 123 124 125 146 147 148 161 162 168 170 176 178 180 185 Table 10. 11. 12. 13. LIST OF TABLES Population and Sample Distribution of Vocational Divisions in State Departments of Education by U.S. Office of Education Region ............ Responses by United States Office of Education Region . . ReSponses by State Size by Student Enrollment of l4-l7 Year Olds .................... Participation in Planned In-Service Programs by State Size ...................... State Administrators Who Feel the Need of an Extensive In-Service Program for State Staff Administrators by the Respondents Who Are Currently Participating in an In-Service Program ............... State Vocational Administrators' Evaluation of Planned In-Service Programs by Administrative Level ...... Relationships Between State Size and Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments by Experience and Desire . Relationships Between Sex and the Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments by Experience ......... Relationships Between Sex and Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments by Desire ........... Relationships Between Age and Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments by Experience ......... Relationships Between Age and Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments by Desire ........... Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments by Experience Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments by Desire ix Page 45 46 47 53 53 54 59 60 61 62 63 63 64 Table 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. Relationships Between Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area and Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments Relationships Opportunity Relationships Opportunity Relationships Development Relationships Development Relationships Development and Desire Relationships Development Relationships Development Relationships Opportunity Skills by Experience Relationships Opportunity Ski11s by Desire Relationships by Experience and Desire Between State Department Experience and for On-the-Job Assignments by Experience Between State Department Experience and for On-the-Job Assignments by Desire Between State Size and Opportunity for of Communication Skills by Experience . . . Between State Size and Opportunity for of Communication Skills by Desire ..... Between Sex and Opportunity for of Communication Skills by Experience Between Age and Opportunity for of Communication Skills by Experience . . . Between Age and Opportunity for of Communication Skills by Desire ..... Between Administrative Level and for Development of Communication Between Administrative Level and for Development of Communication Between Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area and Opportunity for Development of Communication Skills by Experience and Desire ..... Relationships Opportunity by Experience ..................... Relationships Opportunity by Desire ....................... Relationships Between State Department Experience and for Development of Communication Skills Between State Department Experience and for Development of Communication Skills Between State Size and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Experience and Desire Page 66 67 7O 71 72 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 81 Table 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. Relationships Between Sex and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Experience ......... Relationships Between Sex and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Desire ........... Relationships Between Age and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Experience ......... Relationships Between Age and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Desire ........... Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Experience . Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Desire . . . Relationships Between Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Experience .............. Relationships Between Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area and Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Desire ................ Relationships Between State Department Experience and the Opportunity to Experience Visibility and Exposure by Experience ................ Relationships Between State Department Experience and the Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Desire . Relationships Between State Size and Opportunity for Outside Professional and Management Training by Experience and Desire ................. Relationships Between Sex and Opportunity for Outside Development Training by Experience and Desire ..... Relationships Between Age and Opportunity for Outside Development Training by Experience .......... Relationships Between Age and Opportunity for Outside Development Training by Experience and Desire ..... Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity for Outside Development Training by Experience ...................... Page 82 83 84 85 86 86 87 88 89 9O 93 95 95 96 97 Tab1e 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity for Outside Development Training by Experience and Desire ................. Relationships Between Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area and Opportunity for Outside Development Training by Experience and Desire ..... Relationships Between State Department Experience and Opportunity for Outside Development Training by Experience ...................... Relationships Between State Department Experience and Outside Development Training by Desire ....................... Relationships Between State Size and Opportunity to Participate in Professional Association Activities by Experience and Desire ............... Relationships Between Sex and Opportunity to Participate in Professional Association Activities by Experience and Desire ............... Relationships Between Age and Opportunity to Participate in Professional Association Activities by Experience and Desire ............... Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity to Participate in Professional Association Activities by Experience and Desire . . . . Relationships Between Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area and Opportunity to Participate in Professional Association Activities by Experience . . . Relationships Between Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area and the Opportunity to Participate in Professional Association Activities by Experience and Desire ................. Relationships Between State Department Experience and the Opportunity to Participate in Professional Association Activities by Experience ......... Relationships Between State Department Experience and the Opportunity to Participate in Professional Association Activities by Desire ........... xii Page 98 98 100 103 104 106 107 108 108 110 110 Table Page 55. Relationships Between State Size and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Experience and Desire ...................... 113 56. Relationships Between Sex and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Experience and Desire ..... 114 57. Relationships Between Age and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Experience ........... 115 58. Relationships Between Age and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Desire ............. 116 59. Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Experience ...................... 117 60. Relationships Between Administrative Level and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Experience and Desire ................. 117 61. Relationships Between Vocational-Specialty Area and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Experience and Desire ................. 118 62. Relationships Between State Department Experience and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Experience ...................... 119 63. Relationships Between State Department Experience and Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Desire . . 120 64. Females' Desire for Change, According to Professional and Management Development Areas ' ........... 122 65. Desire for Change According to Age Level and Professional and Management Development Areas ..... 122 66. Second-Level Administrators' Desire for Change, According to Development Areas ............ 123 67. Desire for Change According to Vocational-Specialty Area and Development Area ............... 123 68. Desire for Change According to State Department Experience and Development Area ............ 124 69. State Vocational Administrators by Sex and Race ..... 125 xiii Table Page 70. Administrative Level by Age: Male Respondents ...... 126 71. Administrative Level by Age: Female Respondents ..... 127 72. Administrative Level by Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area .................... 129 73. Educational Level by Advanced Degree Major ....... 131 74. Administrative Level by Advanced Degree Major ...... 132 75. Sex by Education Level: First-Level Administrators . . . 133 76. Sex by Education Level: Second-Level Administrators . . . 134 77. Sex by Salary Range: First-Level Administrators ..... 136 78. Sex by Salary Range: Second-Level Administrators . . . . 137 79. Administrative Level by State Department Experience: Males ......................... 138 80. Administrative Level by State Department Experience: Females ........................ 139 81. Sex by Years in Present Position: First-Level Administrators .................... 139 82. Sex by Years in Present Position: Second-Level Administrators .................... 140 83. Professional Experience in Education Before Being Employed in the State Department ........... 141 84. Academic Background in Administration or Management . . . 142 85. Academic Preparation in Administration or Management by Administrative Level: Yes Respondents ....... 142 86. Promotion From Within or Outside the State Department by Academic Preparation in Administration: First- Level Administrators ................. 143 87. Promotion From Within or Outside the State Department by Academic Preparation in Administration: Second- Level Administrators ................. 144 88. Promotion to Present Position Before or After Completion of the Advanced Degree ........... 145 xiv Table Page 89. Opportunities for Professional and Management Development, According to Desire and Experience Categories (in Percentages) .............. 178 90. Professional and Management Development Activities, According to Experience and Desire .......... 180 XV LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Opportunity for On-the-Job Assignments by Experience and Desire ...................... 57 2. Development of Communication Skills by Experience and Desire ...................... 69 3. Opportunity for Visibility and Exposure by Experience and Desire ...................... 80 4. Opportunity for Outside Management Training by Experience and Desire ................ 91 5. Opportunity for Professional Association Activities by Experience and Desire ............... 102 6. Opportunity for Mobility and Job Advancement by Experience and Desire ................ 112 xvi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement of the Problem The problem of this study was to determine state vocational administrators' opportunities for professional and management development and to ascertain administrators' desire to experience the following professional and management development activities: Varied On-the-Job Assignments Development of Communication Skills Visibility and Exposure with High State and Government Officials Outside Management Training and Development Professional Association Activities Mobility and Job Advancement The following questions were examined to determine the extent to which opportunities for growth are provided and also to explore whether state administrators' perceptions of "opportunity" are differentially related to (a) state size; (b) sex and age; and (c) level of administration, undergraduate vocational specialty area, and number of years in the state department. The exploratory questions to be addressed were: 1. Is a planned in-service training program provided for state administrators? 2. Are opportunities for professional and managerial development built into the job assignment? 3. Are there opportunities for development of communi- cation skills? 4. Are there opportunities for visibility and exposure working with high state and government officials? 5. Does the state department support development in the form of outside professional and managerial training? 6. Have opportunities been extended to participate in pro- fessional association activities? 7. Is mobility encouraged and are promotions extant? 8. Which groups (sex, age, administrative level, vocational specialty area, state department experience) have the greatest desire for change--for more opportunity to experi- ence professional and management development activities? Purpose of the Study The primary purpose of this study was to describe state voca- tional administrators' opportunities to experience and the desire to experience professional and management development in state depart- ments of education throughout the United States. The second purpose was to identify the variables or the com- bination of variables that influence the degree of opportunity a state vocational administrator experiences and/or has the desire to experience. The final purpose was to desCribe a profile of a state voca- tional administrator who has had the maximum opportunity to experi- ence professional growth and development. The present research will provide information useful to those concerned with the development of effective planned profes- sional and management development programs for state vocational administrators employed in vocational divisions of state depart- ments of education. Background The enactment of the vocational legislation of 1976 (P.L. 94-482, 1976) has vastly broadened the scope and expanded the role of vocational education in the states; hence highly educated, well-trained state vocational education administrators are needed to act as catalysts in meeting the challenge of implementing this new legislation. Mandates require that states develop more comprehensive state- wide planning and evaluation systems for vocational education. To meet that charge, state vocational administrators must have not only a thorough knowledge of the concepts, principles, and practices of planning and evaluation, but also must possess good interpersonal skills to enable them to work with individuals from a wide range of agencies and different educational levels. State administrators must understand and respect other professionals' expertise, whether they represent a state agency, a particular level of education, or business and industry. They need to work to build supportive rela- tionships with the bureaucracy and the political community and at the same time function comfortably from a knowledge base of theory and research in all areas affecting vocational education. The function of the state vocational agency is to provide technical assistance to local agencies in assessing their local needs, to aid in planning and evaluating their educational programs, to work toward compliance with legislative enactments, and to coordinate the independent or cooperative in-service programs for professional staff development. The general public and the federal and state legislatures are requiring accountability for increased expenditure of funds on voca- tional education programs, for improved quality of occupational pro- grams and supportive services for all students, and for expanding services to meet the needs of handicapped, disadvantaged, minority, and female students. To enforce the educational laws of this country and at the same time avoid legal problems, state administrators must be knowledge- able about current legislation. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 requires equal educational opportunities and employment in student programs and policies in educational institutions, regardless of sex. The Special Needs Law of 1975, Public Law 94-142, which becomes effective in September, 1978, requires a public education for all handicapped children. However, it is not enough to be knowledgeable of the laws, for if state administrators want to have credibility with educators in the state they must help devise methods to provide a data base for implementing new educational legislation that requires some Operational changes. State vocational administrators, although they possess advanced degrees, must continue to grow in their professional and managerial development if they are to help education adapt to chang- ing societal and educational demands. They must up-date their com- petencies and retrain during their professional careers, as they are in a strategic position within education to provide the initial thrust of leadership--to be the advocatory group in effecting a meaningful change. The present study was designed to investigate the professional and managerial development activities of state administrators who are establishing educational policies; setting priorities; directing, coordinating, and designing in-service activities; giving technical assistance to local educational agencies; and in general taking actions that have a profound effect on vocational-technical education in the states. Conceptual Framework Opportunity is a dynamic concept built into the structure of an organization. It refers to the expectations of present and future growth and mobility of the organization's members. The higher the opportunity factors, the more options for growth and mobility. Mem- bers who are high in opportunity factors have jobs with great variety and a meaningful range of activities, including various administrative functions. At the same time, employees use their creative talents and capabilities for self-direction and self-control, and jointly plan work objectives and schedules; they have opportunities to work in teams and project-management groups (Miles, 1975). They also have greater resources at their disposal than people who don't have opportunity, and are able to show enterprise and creativity (Jennings, 1967). Saline (1977) theorized that assignments which are important to professional development are those that "stretch your mind, that make you move out just a little farther in the acquisition and appli- cation of new knowledge, skills, and attitudes" (p. 5). Thompson (1967) proposed that performance requiring discretion is likely to be noticeable; noticeability increases power, which in turn increases opportunity. Kanter and Jennings (1977, 1967) purported that members have to be extraordinary by being the first in a new position, by making organizational changes, or by taking major risks and succeed- ing. Rewards go to the innovators. Management Training and Special Assignments High opportunity factors go to members who are given many varieties of special attention, one of which is special professional or management-development training. Approaches vary from on-the-job in-service programs to off-site educational programs developed by or in conjunction with a prominent college or university and/or private business consultants. The substance of training includes supervisory methods, leadership styles, sensitivity training, or interpersonal interaction (Miles, 1975; McGregor, 1966; Leavitt, 1958; Argyris, 1964). Special assignments or pet projects that focus on important issues and have department-wide significance are essential, according to Jennings (1967). Working on project teams as a member or manager, one gains a high degree of visibility and exposure of the lateral and vertical types. Jennings stated, "Today the greater part of mana- gerial development is found in project performance rather than in position managing" (p. 57). Sayles and Strauss' (1977) view of special assignments is that if they are to be successful as development tools, the problems assigned must cut across departmental lines and involve long-range planning; the person must Operate under the direct observation Of top superiors who evaluate his/her performance; problems must be tough, challenging ones (p. 303). Visibility and Exposure Visibility and exposure are considered to be key elements in growth and mobility. Rosenberg (1977) described visibility as the need for members to be seen--to establish and expand visibility "(1) around the organization and the environment in which it operates, (2) within the organization itself, and (3) within the specific area of your assigned job" (p. 56). Visibility in the environment means holding office in a pro- fessional organization, making speeches to community groups or outside organizations, and attending conferences and seminars. Upward visi- bility within the organization affords one the opportunity to see superiors at many levels, both vertically and laterally, whereas exposure provides the Opportunity to be seen by superiors. The subjects' behaviors and the results Of their performance are open to evaluation (Jennings, 1967). Kanter (1977) suggested that the concept of visibility means: For activities to enhance power, they have to be visible, to attract the notice of other people. Jobs that straddle the boundaries between organizational units or between the organization and its environment tend to have more noticeable activities . . . than those that are well within a unit. . . It [is] also possible to gain visibility through participation on task forces or committees (p. 179). Hennig and Jardim (1977) also addressed the idea of visibility in their book, The Managerial Woman. They stated: Learn and move on. Act so that people will see you as having the ability to move on. Try to influence the people who can help you move on. Be needed by those people, become necessary to them. Try to identify what they want and don't want. Broaden your information base from what you need to do the job to include the people who can help you leave it (p. 41). Management theorists are adamant that visibility and exposure are essential in the mobility and managerial development of an organization's members. Significance of the Problem Literature related to the professional and managerial develop- ment of state department of education administrators is limited. To date, the focus and concern have primarily been with the professional development of public school teachers. Since the roles of the two groups are very different, the literature could not be used in the current study. Therefore, it was necessary to take the issue to the field for further study and investigation. This research topic was inspired by a study recently completed in the vocational division of a state department of education (Ferguson, 1977). More than half of the professional state staff personnel interviewed for that study mentioned the need for state administra- tors to be better trained in good managerial practices. In general, the group felt the human resources Of the state staff were not being adequately used. Their staffs possessed a great deal of talent and professional experience that could be directed toward attaining the goals and objectives of the state department of education. However, because individuals were placed in administrative and supervisory positions for which they had had no academic preparation, and once on the job received little in-service training, there was a lack of leadership at all levels. This situation resulted in a lack of staff commitment and wasted human resources. The staff members reported that a continuous in-service program is vital to maintain an effec- tive organization. State staff members appeared to be concerned not only about their superiors' in-service training, but their own as well. The general consensus of the group was a strong request for a planned in-service training program, which included the use of outside con- sulting firms that could help them solve some of their problems and also bring about better communication between and among groups. In summary, it appears that the general feeling expressed is that there is a critical need in two areas: (1) state administrators need in-service training for management development capability and (2) all state staff members, including state administrators, need in-service training for professional development. To be sure that the perceived need for in-service training was not an isolated issue, the researcher interviewed state depart- ment administrators at the 1977 national Association of Vocational Administrators (AVA) convention to determine whether they, too, felt there was a need in the aforementioned training areas, and if so, what their state leadership was doing about the problem. An interview with the deputy director of field services in the Occupational Division of the Colorado State Department revealed they had a planned in-service program that included national speakers 10 and consultants in such areas as collective bargaining, management of conflict, and management by objectives. The Colorado state agency has instituted a program of state certification for state agency staff. As the deputy stated (December 1977), They [state staff] need to understand that to maintain respect at the local levels, they must know the administra- tive system. Vocational education has lost credibility as it provides no ways to solve complex problems. The state staff needs to analyze the problems and then do something about them. Leadership has to set the stage for the rest of the staff. The manager of special programs in the Illinois Vocational Division stated that his division has gone through an extensive external and internal management evaluation, which has resulted in a complete reorganization of the division. All units are now divided into management teams and function as consultants rather than as supervisors (AVA Convention, 1977). According to the deputy director of the Vocational Division of the Indiana State Department, her agency has gone through a realignment of staff that has brought about new functions for staff members, who are organized into working teams. Task forces have been set up to improve program planning and evaluation (AVA Convention, 1977). The program administrator for the Nebraska State Department, Vocational Division, stated that the state administrators in her division have attended Cleaver Institute in Princeton, New Jersey, for management training, to learn how to prepare profiles of staff 11 members so they can be placed in the right job to get maximum effec- tiveness from the management teams. According to the program admin- istrator, the state leaders want to develop an organizational chart to help identify the individuals who can best do certain kinds of assignments and then build teams to carry out the functions of the division (AVA Convention, 1977). In conclusion, some state vocational administrators have recognized and admitted there is a need for improved management prac- tices, better use of human resources, and continuous in-service training for state staff. The present study examines these areas of concern. Included in the sample were administrative representa- tives from different geographical regions of the United States and from states of all sizes. The study describes the opportunities that are available for state department administrators' professional and managerial development. The descriptive research sheds light on the different aspects of the job in which Opportunities might be experi- enced and the characteristics of the group receiving such opportu- nities. The findings of the study will be made available to all who wish to provide professional and managerial development opportuni— ties to their state administrative staffs. Study findings will provide information that can also be used to develop a model of a planned professional and management in-service program for state vocational administrators employed in the vocational division of state departments of education. 12 Delimitation of the Problem The study examined the professional and management develOp- ment opportunities that have existed for vocational state adminis- trators the past two years. The review of literature focuses on current management theories concerning professional and executive development. No attempt is made to present the historical back- ground Of the establishment of state vocational administrative offices in state departments of education, nor will civil service or public administration be included in the review of literature. Only individuals who are currently employed as first- or second-level administrators in the vocational division of state departments of education were included in the survey. The develop— ment opportunities included in the survey instrument were primarily high visibility-exposure items. No attempt was made to identify all possible Opportunities for professional and managerial development. Limitations Of the Study Survey research permits only the indirect measurement of behavior by examining either past or prospective behavior. Measures of prospective behavior can be either real or hypothetical and are considered to be somewhat less reliable than measures of past beha- vior. Nevertheless, measuring prospective behavior is still regarded as useful in the assessment of behavior (Babbie, 1973). Because the study includes both past and prospective behavior, the survey research method is somewhat of a limitation; however, Babbie considers it to be the best technique available. 13 State departments of education serve many of the same functions, are governed by the same federal legislation, and all U.S. Office of Education regions and state sizes are represented in the sample. Therefore, the results of the study are generaliz- able to the 50 state departments of education included on the U.S. Office of Education list of states and state vocational direc- tors. The District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific were not included in the study; hence the findings cannot be applied to those areas. Basic Assumptions The following assumptions underlie this study: 1. The Opportunities made available to state vocational administrators can be ascertained through the percep- tions of state administrators included in the sample. 2. Past and prospective behavior can be determined by a survey questionnaire instrument rather than by interview or other means of data collection. 3. All answers to survey instrument questions were accu- rately reported and substantially true. Validity depends on the extent to which the respondents pro- vided honest, impartial, unbiased reactions to the survey. 14 Definition of Terms The following terms are defined in the context in which they are used in the study. Opportunityr-The concept of an individual's amount of move- ment potential in terms of present and future prospects for growth and reward. In part, people relate to the present in terms of their expectations and prospects for the future. The structure of opportunity--of mobility and growth--is determined by such matters as access to challenge in the job position, visibility and exposure of the function, relevance of the function to current organizational problems, approval by high-status people, and increase in the develop- ment of skills and in rewards accrued. Other variables include the promotion rate from a particular job and the career paths Opening from it, and the individual's prospects relative to others of his/her age and seniority (Kanter, 1977, p. 246). Utilization of human resources--Using the full set of mental and physical resources available to the organization. The Human Resources Model (Miles, 1975) emphasizes the development and use of the full range of capabilities of organizational members. Outstand— ing performance is encouraged, rather than the control of substandard effort. The primary concern is to use effectively the full range of rewards for high levels of commitment and innovative contribution (Miles, 1975, p. 148). Project teams-~Staff members who work in various specialty areas and coordinate their skills to work on a particular project or 15 problem. Members are given the opportunity to use their full range of capabilities, including those outside their functional areas, in accomplishing the team's goals (Miles, 1975, p. 88). Managerial development--The process of integrating organiza- tional and human variables into an effective and efficient management system to achieve improved organizational performance. To achieve the goals of the state department, managerial-development activities must be provided to those who serve in administrative positions within the organization. These types of activities include: training pro- grams conducted at various points in the administrator's career; systematic job rotation (or enlargement), involving changes in the nature of the functions performed; performance-appraisal programs, including various amounts of testing, general personality assess- ment, and counseling both within the organization and using outside consultants; special projects to facilitate growth; participation in special conferences and training programs, including professional association meetings, human relations workshops, dynamics of change and intervention strategies seminars, and advanced management programs conducted in university institutes (Schein, 1961). Professional develgpment--A continual process by which an administrator has the opportunity to participate in renewal and updating activities to increase knowledge, improve skills, or change attitudes in the field of education. Such areas of concern might include, but not be limited to, current developments in state-wide planning and evaluation methods, changes in curriculum strategies 16 and guidance and counseling focuses, meeting the needs of disadvan- taged and handicapped students, increased options in delivery systems, elimination of sex-biased and discriminatory vocational programs, and state and federal legislation. State staff in-service program--An organized effort on the part of the state department to provide state administrators and staff with updating and renewal activities to increase knowledge, improve skills, and change attitudes so that the goals and objectives of the annual and long-range state plan might be achieved. State administrators--An all-inclusive term designating both first- and second-level administrators. A first-level administrator is likely to have one of the following titles: assistant, associate, or deputy director or commissioner; assistant or associate superin- tendent; chief or assistant chief; or manager. This individual reports directly to the state director, assistant superintendent, or similar individual. A second-level administrator is likely to be a supervisor, director, or coordinator in charge of a program area, a supportive service area, cn~ a planning and development area. This individual officially reports to an administrator who, in turn, reports to the state director, assistant superintendent, or similar individual. ViSibIIItXf‘A factor identified by management authorities as contributing to administrators' professional and managerial develop- ment. Visibility may be defined as the frequency with which a sub- ordinate administrator, because of certain assignments or tasks, special projects or committees, can view superior administrators, both laterally and vertically. 17 Exposure--The frequency with which the subordinate adminis- trator, because of demonstrated behavior and performance on assigned tasks, committees, or special projects, is viewed by superior adminis- trators. The terms exposure and visibility can also be applied to contacts outside the state department and to any administrator who is in a position to hire, promote, or act as a sponsor or mentor to the subordinate administrator. Geographic regions--The ten areas in the United States estab- lished as regions by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education. Overview of the Study The study is presented in five chapters. Chapter I includes the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, and the research questions. Following these are the background of the problem and the conceptual framework. A section is included on the problem significance, limitations, and key terms. Chapter II is a survey of the literature on professional and management development, including meaning of terms, the need for professional and management development, and theories and methods Of executive and management development. In Chapter III the research methodology and the design of the study are explained. Included are an explanation of the sample selection techniques, a description of the survey instrument used for data gathering, and a discussion of the statistical analyses used in the study. 18 Chapter IV contains the results of the data collected from the survey instruments. Presented in Chapter V are the findings, conclusions, and implications of the study, and suggestions for future research. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Presented in this chapter is a synthesis Of the literature and research considered related and relevant to theories on profes— sional and management development. The selected tOpics considered to be important in the development Of this study are: (l) the mean- ing of professional and management development, (2) factors that contribute to the need for professional and management development, and (3) theories and methods of executive and management development. The Meaning of Professional and Management Development A review of the literature revealed that professional and management development has various meanings. Many management theorists view the term broadly as a process that determines one's state of readiness to be and to become, or "to be everything that one is capable Of becoming" (Maslow, 1954, p. 46). Saline (1977) defined the concept as the capability of an individual to perform socially, academically and professionally; to develop high self-esteem; and to prepare for future growth by increasing knowledge, skills, and attitudes (p. 3). The theory emphasizes that growth comes primarily from within the individual if real opportunity is 19 20 presented, and takes place both within and outside the confines Of the job. Other scholars and practitioners have defined management in more systematic terms as a "planned effort on the part of the organi- zation to improve managerial performance by imparting information, increasing skills, conditioning attitudes, and broadening perspec- tives" (Pomerleau, 1974, p. 23). The present study is concerned primarily with the Opportunities that management provides, both in and outside the job assignment, in the way of a planned professional and management development program. The terms "training," "education," and "development" are Often confused in management literature. Yoder (1970) stated that business firms and public service agencies tend to use the terms as though they were synonymous, offering training opportunities for all types of personnel and including all levels of management. Yoder, like most of the management theorists, tended to distinguish between the terms. He traced the earlier practices of training and develop- ment programs to help explain how the meanings came into existence. The initial training programs emphasized learning knowledges and skills required for lower-level employees to perform satisfactorily on a specific job. As the need increased for managers to develop more supervisory training abilities, special training programs came into existence. Eventually, special development programs were extended to top executives. Then university management programs sprang into existence, Offering summer-on-campus management development 21 programs. Thus, the concept "development" came into being, which was meant to provide a more in-depth learning experience, to increase capabilities, to enlarge understanding, and to modify behavior. The objective Of training and development programs today includes not only an opportunity to learn skills, but also the opportunity to discover and cultivate basic aptitudes and to facili- tate personal growth. The emphasis is on development as a process; training and education become a part of this process. Training helps one acquire specific skills and techniques that are directly related to work performance, whereas education "seeks to prepare individuals for a future, but identifiable, career position within an agency" (Pomerleau, 1974, p. 24). Others view the difference between development and training as being the subject matter. Development focuses on the improvement of decision-making and human relations skills of middle and upper levels of management; training involves lower-level employees and the presentation of more factual, narrow subject matter (Wexley & Yukl, 1977). In general, theorists view management development as encom- passing formal schooling, On-the-job training, or promotions; it may be as remote as theoretical psychology. Management development may cover all of the managerial functions, some of them, or only certain aspects of them; it may be given to individuals or groups within or outside Of the firm. 22 Factors That Contribute to the Need for Development The increased importance of effective professional and management development has arisen from some basic assumptions about today's environment, organizations, and the professionals who work in organizations. The overall concern is to achieve maximum organi- zational effectiveness and at the same time a humanized work envi- ronment with an improved quality of work life (McGregor, 1960; Bennis, 1966; Bailyn & Schein, 1976; Katz, 1977). Changing Environments A central assumption about today's organizations is that administrators must function in a turbulent environment and have the necessary skills to cope constructively with and adapt to change, for that is a part of our future. Factors that add to the problem of management development are multiplied, because of environmental uncertainty. Rapid change causes learned knowledges and skills quickly to become obsolete; thus administrators must continue to grow and to develop as the nature of their jobs changes (Beatty & Morgan, 1975; Schein, 1977). The management development process needs to foster in admin- istrators a receptiveness to change so as to accommodate the changing laws, policies, and technologies, and to cope more effectively within the unpredictable environment (Pigors, Myers, & Malm, 1964; Pomerleau, 1974). Managers need to broaden their perspectives, to study the interrelationships between an organization and its environments, and to develop a better understanding of the political, economic, and 23 social circumstances affecting each individual and consequently all organizations. This part of the developmental process attempts to expand the manager's views, attitudes, and understandings beyond the functional and organizational limits (Odiorne, 1965; Pigors et al., 1974; Sayles & Strauss, 1977). As organizations must function in more complex political, economic, and social environments, they are forced to depend more and more upon the competency of their human resources (Yoder, 1970; Miles, 1975; Schein, 1977). No longer can decisions be made by just one individual, for that one individual cannot digest enough infor- mation to be the "integrator and decision maker" (Schein, 1977, p. 2). Instead, the individual must . manage the process of decision making, bringing the right people together around the right questions or problems, stimulating Open discussion, insuring that all relevant infor- mation surfaces and is critically assessed, managing the ups and downs . . . and insuring that out of all this human and interpersonal process, a good decision will result (Schein, 1977, pp. 3-4). Managers Of the future will have to become much more skilled in training subordinates, running meetings and groups of all sorts, dealing with conflict, influencing and negotiating from a low power base, and integrating efforts of very diverse technical specialists (Miles, 1975; Schein, 1977; Maccoby, 1976). Gellerman (1968) agreed that the manager's job must be changed drastically. He concluded that in many organizations today there is a lack of sufficient decision-making authority and respon- sibilities in jobs held by people who could respond to such powers 24 with much energy and commitment. Upper management unnecessarily monopolizes decision-making power. Changing_$ocia1 Values The second central assumption about today's organizations is that the changing social values of people in general, because of the increased educational level of a large segment of the population and changed attitudes and aspirations toward the work role, will have a profound effect on the management of human resources (Gellerman, 1968; Odiorne, 1965; Swope, 1970). Silverman and Heming (1975) theorized that the "organization man" of the 1950's, who sold his mind and soul to the organization, is a thing of the past. The replacement is a “professional person," who is the best prepared, most highly educated individual any society has produced. The authors described the professional person as being motivated by competency and personal growth. Commitment and loyalty belong first to the profession and second to the organization. The professional person needs achievement, recognition, and responsi- bility, and desires work that is decentralized in organizational units, such as temporary task teams (which cut across functional and departmental lines), temporary work assignments, and other ad hoc groups. This professional person believes all organizational members have something to contribute and that they should have a voice in decision making and in planning and carrying out policies and plans. This professional wants to be involved in the establishment of creative objectives. The work environment must provide the 25 opportunity to determine one's own work effectiveness areas and standards. Silverman and Heming (1975) made the following statement about the professional person: The Professional Person has launched a quiet revolution to gradually change the face of organizations. When armed with sensitivity, management skills and style flexibility, the Professional Person fulfills the measurable time-found output requirements of his position without relinquishing his personality. And that has made all the difference (p. 148). Maccoby (1976) described the new executive as a "gamesman" in his book, The Gamesman: The New Corporate Leaders. His research findings were a result of intensive interviews conducted over a six- year period with 250 business managers from 12 major American com- panies involved in high technology. He wrote that the gamesman is the most successful of the executives at making the organization function effectively. Maccoby described the gamesman as thriving on innovation, seeing his work as a challenging game, and working best on highly interdependent teams that make up the organization. The individual possesses the flexibility and daring to take big risks at the right times. He believes everyone should be allowed to play the game; therefore neither race, sex, religion, nor any other per- sonal characteristic has a bearing on team membership. A recent national survey, directed by Yankelovich and Clark (1974), reported that students and women have changed their defini- tions Of success. The researchers concluded that the focus of suc- cess is on self-fulfillment, for "the emphasis is on the self that cries out for expression and demands satisfaction" (p. 31). Data collected in the study, which was conducted among a national 26 cross-section of college students between 1967 and 1973, suggested that college students are searching for new work values and they desire a career that provides challenge and self-fulfillment. The researchers noted that cultural change has, perhaps, had the greatest impact on women. The idea of women working, not only for economic reasons but for self-fulfillment as well, has gained acceptance, and women's attitudes toward work are demonstrat- ing a "new faith" toward employment and careers. The social move- ments of the 1960's pushed the enactment Of new regulations and laws-- most notably Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The passage of these laws has encouraged women to enter or return to the work force. Yankelovich and Clark (1974) proposed that: The values that young people and women take to work with them will eventually spread to the rest Of the work force. . . . There will be far more stress on the quality Of working life (p. 87). Young and old, women and men, blacks and whites will all demand the right to independence and autonomy; more stress will be placed on work that is meaningful and psychologically fulfilling. As women and minorities are demanding their rights for equal employment opportunities, management officials, according to Burack (1975), are faced with new kinds of manpower problems. In his book on changing values, Burack stated that these social changes will have the following effects: seniority will come to mean less, the locus of decision making will be altered, and relationships among 27 workers and supervisors will become more collegial. Managers at all support levels will need increased training, education, and skills. However, increased academic preparation will bring about improved management capabilities and a movement toward more professional standards (Yoder, 1970; McGregor, 1967; Swope, 1970; Burack, 1975; Schein, 1977). Hennig and Jardim (1977) viewed the implementation of equal opportunity to be a line management issue. Implementation requires that top management create and institute a corporate policy, for whose successful implementation all managers will be held respon- sible. At the present time, middle managers are undertrained for these new responsibilities. They need professional and management development in this area. Kanter (1977) stated that public policy has a legitimate interest in the inner order of the organization, particularly when the operation of power and authority determines who has access to opportunity. She continued: Employment practices that enhance individual welfare and the quality of work life should not be private decisions based on the voluntary goodwill or noblesse oblige of employ- ers but rather a question of vital social concern to those outside the enterprise. Such issues move far beyond the existing body of labor law (which tends to treat individual "corporate citizens" only in their capacity as group members) to a radically different view of the purposes and practices of organizations and the role of legal intervention in internal affairs (p. 10). Schein (1965) presented the results of a longitudinal research study he conducted on Sloan School graduates of the 1960's. He concluded that organizations must develop multiple career ladders and 28 multiple reward systems to accommodate and motivate peOple who hold different value systems. He suggested that the traditional success syndrome of "climbing the corporate ladder" will no longer be applicable to all people. Schein stated that people see more options open for themselves and demonstrate a desire for more balanced lives of work, family, and self-development. Theories on Management Development The difficulty in surveying the literature stems from the fact that there are so many approaches and methodologies concerning how best to develop managers. The theories range from placing an individual in the organization and leaving the rest to chance, to a well-designed management program that provides for planned develop- mental experiences (McGregor, 1960; Swope, 1970). At one time it was thought that "the cream will rise to the top" in an organization, if left to the everyday course of events. Management theorists today agree that no organization can afford to leave the professional and management development of its adminis- trative talent to chance. Operating an organization in today's environment is much too complex for that. Increased knowledge about organizations and the psychology of human behavior has contributed tremendously to the development of managerial competency and to the ultimate effectiveness of the organization (Swope, 1970). McGregor (1960) designed some alternative approaches to management development in the early 1960's, on which Gellerman later enlarged. McGregor introduced what were termed (1) the manufacturing 29 approach and (2) the agricultural approach. Under the manufactur— ing philosophy of management development, the organization is directed and controlled by top management, with little or no career goal input from the individual. According to this view, whatever is good for the organization is good for the individual. The second approach is concerned with nurturing talent rather than "fabricating it." The basis of the agricultural approach is that the individual will grow to what he/she is capable of becoming if the environment is conducive to learning and growing. Gellerman (1968) introduced three management theories: (1) the jungle theory, (2) the education theory, and (3) the agri- cultural theory. When organizational requirements were modest, the jungle theory sufficed. Today, however, it is not an adequate method for training managers. The economics of the situation have changed, and the demand for talent has become greater. To wait for talent to emerge is a waste of precious resources. The education theory has become recognized as a means to overcome the inadequacies of the jungle theory. This approach is based on the view that all management development consists of skills that can be taught, or encouraged to surface, through an educational program. The educational program should be repeated on a regular basis and the course content should continually change. The training should take place away from the job and be devoted exclusively to enlarging competence. The agricultural theory, as explained by both Gellerman (1968) and McGregor (1960), supports the approach that the major 30 growth factor takes place in the job environment; therefore, the job should be so structured as to include the four crucial factors Of stretching, feedback, coaching, and career management. A growth-inducing job environment should include responsi- bilities in the job assignment that are sufficiently challenging to cause mind stretching; such an environment would include feedback on performance appraisal, information on career prospects, and coach- ing or counseling (McGregor, 1960; Gellerman, 1968; Schein, 1965). Management theorists tend to agree that opportunity for pro- fessional and management development takes place primarily on the job (McGregor, 1960; Bennis, 1966; Schein, 1965; Kirkpatrick, 1971). As McGregor (1960) stated, Managerial competence is created on the job, not in the class- room. However, classroom education can be used as a powerful aid to the process of management development, providing there is sufficient understanding of the different kinds of learning which are involved and of the different methods and strategies that are appropriate to these (p. 225). Saline (1977) suggested that the work assignment should con- stitute 80 percent of the professional and management development process. Work assignments must challenge, stretch the mind, and make the individual move out a little further to acquire and apply new knowledge, skills, and attitudes. A good work climate facili- tates and encourages learning and results in professional and manage- ment development. The basic factors include the kind of work an individual is assigned or not assigned, the kinds of rewards an individual is given or not given, the kind of information shared or 31 not shared with the individual, and how the manager distributes compensation. Miles (1975) and other supporters of the human resource theory have claimed that management must not only provide fair pay and treatment but must go a step further: In the interest of organizational performance, management must design jobs, structures, and processes in which individ- uals can fulfill their needs to develop and expand their abilities. Thus, they argue that work is not inherently dis- tasteful; what is distasteful is a set of tasks so limited as to inhibit growth and development (p. 42). Today's highly educated work force has put increased stress and demands on organizations to design jobs that allow for full use of organizational members' creative talents and capabilities. The premise of the human resources theory is that members have great potential for growth and that they are important untapped resources; therefore, the role of top management, rather than to control its members, is to develop and facilitate their growth and performance (Miles, 1975). Insufficient challenge is a major problem affecting develop- ment and growth. The individual must learn as much as possible from the on-the-job experience. The job must have challenge built into it, by extending the range Of responsibility--a form of growth and enrichment. Gellerman (1968) recommended the following: Technological change, organizational growth and normal promotions absorb some volume of changes and are a source Of new assignments. However, it may be necessary to move people about just for the sake of moving them so as to provide challenge in their work and keep them productive and growing (p. 270). 32 To experience more challenge in the job, organizational mem- bers should participate in decisions related to their work, exercise self-direction and self-control, and be involved in important issues concerning how and by whom departmental tasks would be done. Upper management would provide a substantial amount of training and develop- ment covering a wide range of tasks and activities. The individual would have the opportunity continually to upgrade and expand compe- tencies in planning, scheduling, and directing departmental activi- ties and to pursue a course of constant growth and development (Miles, 1975). Basic Issues to Be Addressed Before moving to the discussion of methods or approaches to professional and management development, certain basic controversial questions should be addressed. First is the question of whether to develop generalists, with broad points of view, or specialists, who have a functional orientation. A dilemma exists when specialists are hired at the lower organizational levels and are rewarded for good performance by advancement, whereas generalists are required at the higher levels. What should be done with the overabundance of specialists, and where do the generalists come from (Sayles & Strauss, 1977)? According to Swope (1970), the anomaly of overspecialization is that specialization does not constitute proper training for administrative responsibilities. "A system that develops Specialists while demanding more highly skilled generalists is inadequate" 33 (p. 311). A balance between generalization and specialization is needed. Swope's position is that an administrator needs managerial ability, with a broadened experience to administer complex organi- zations, and training in "multifunctional develOpment as opposed to single-functional specialization" (p. 311). Odiorne (1965) took the position that the modern manager must be more of a generalist than in the past, because the problems that are faced go beyond any specialty. The individual who manages needs to be adaptable, flexible, and able to solve complex problems. The trend is toward a SOphisticated manager, one who is highly knowledgeable and professional. Managers and administrators of the future will be required to have the minimum Of a master's degree; in some instances a Ph.D. will be necessary. Not only will more educa- tional degrees be specified, but a combination of educational dis- ciplines will become essential to the development of executive com- competence (Odiorne, 1965). Is the system open or closed? What kind of a choice does an individual have in regard to job placement or the kinds of train- ing or developmental opportunities? What options does an individual have when caught in an unrewarding, dead-end job? An open system publicizes job openings and training opportunities and allows indi- viduals to compete for them (Kanter, 1977; Sayles & Strauss, 1977). This Option provides everyone an opportunity for both lateral and vertical movement. Who should be developed--just those with so-called special promise, or everyone? In earlier years, those who were thought to 34 be capable of moving to tap-management jobs were singled out, given Special training away from the job, often at universities, and marked for rapid promotion. This type of practiceled to much resent- ment among those not selected, as the promotions were based on "vague character traits instead of on proven performance" (Sayles & Strauss, 1977, p. 290). The recent trend has been to provide a wide range of pro- grams for all managers, not just selected individuals, to encourage better job performance and at the same time to provide special train- ing for individuals who show promise for advancement. The trend has been to provide an open system to allow individuals to design their own "custom-made developmental program" (Sayles & Strauss, 1977, p. 290). Another successful tool has been performance evalua- tion involving the superior and the subordinate. The evaluation is used to plan the individual's development program. Organizational success is based on a continued in-flow of highly talented new managers. Yet experience shows that 50 percent of new hirees leave their jobs in their first five years, and the ones who leave are, on the average, as valuable as those who stay (Sayles & Strauss, 1977). When the turnover rate exceeds 50 percent, initiation is ineffective and is most likely to produce conformists, as innovators move on (Sayles & Strauss, 1977). The turnover results from the clash between what new hirees expect and the actual opportunities the job offers them for challenging, meaningful assign- ments. Some organizations have devised methods for making the initial period smoother, such as executive training programs that 35 include a general orientation to the organization, its policies, and frequent performance evaluations (Sayles & Strauss, 1977). Other initiation devices are on-the-job training, interspersed with classes, seminars, and discussion groups. Evidence has shown that when an organization sets high levels of expectations for its new managers, the managers tend to meet them. Likewise, when low expectation levels are set, these expectations are also met (Sayles & Strauss, 1977). A self-fulfilling prophecy is at work! At approximately 45 years of age, a large proportion of managers reach their peak. Sayles and Strauss (1977) termed this period "peaking out" and defined it as a time when one merely stays on his/her present job indefinitely, moves laterally to a lesser position, is demoted, fired, or retires. Jennings (1971) called this period shelf-sitting and the person who does the sitting a shelf-sitter. Managers who fit this description respond to the con- dition in one of two ways. They are dissatisfied with being placed in this position and are prone to be "overly aggressive to get off the shelf." They become active in negative, unconstructive ways; eventually they are labeled antagonists. Others never really give up. They have experienced visibility and never given up their hope of moving higher in the organization. Some refuse to accept the messages that mean a "loss of mobility, namely the decreasing amount of exposure, visibility, challenging assignments, and opportunities to evaluate and nominate" (Jennings, 1971, p. 286). These people are rarely forced to take a promotion or to extend themselves. The 36 shelf-sitter can become marginally effective, but it's up to the superior to encourage the individual to do good work. As Jennings stated, "The motivation to do a good job is related to the motiva- tion to go higher. It is difficult to increase one without the other" (p. 291). These individuals, even though they will not be promoted, should also have broadening assignments and training pro- grams so as to prevent obsolescence and to help improve their per- formance on the job (Sayles & Strauss, 1977). Methods or Approaches to Development Job rotation is a system by which administrators are rotated periodically from one assignment to another and across functional lines, both to provide competence demanded by the assignment and to prepare for the future. This experience provides an opportunity to broaden perspectives and to learn where the individual's talents and interests lie (Koontz & O'Donnell, 1964; Bass & Vaughan, 1965; Swope, 1970; Sayles & Strauss, 1977). Rotation of assignments also reduces the Opportunity gap between high-mobility and low-mobility jobs (Kanter, 1977). Job rotation is an excellent way to develop a strong, flexible management group. It is most effective in large organizations and only when long-range planning takes place (Swope, 1970; Sayles & Strauss, 1977). Using project management teams is a strategy that involves creating temporary teams to perform certain tasks. These teams cut across functional and departmental lines, and tend to exist for short-term periods. The experience gives individuals an opportunity 37 to make lateral moves and to be involved in challenging projects with new fields to master. Project management is a major trend today, as most executives have had such experience some time in their careers. Performing on a project team gives high visibility and exposure and high status to one's position (Kanter, 1977; Jennings, 1971). Special project assignments, like the others, are made on an individual basis. Another term used is "task force."’ This method is usually a crash program method of solving a current problem and developing management in the process. The assignment is usually full time, and during that time the individual is relieved of regu- lar responsibilities. The special project team customarily is given authority to cut across organizational lines, and administrators in other departments or units are usually instructed to cooperate in this special project, which has top priority. Individuals who have the opportunity to participate in special projects come away from the experience with a broad knowledge of the organization's activi- ties. This type of experience entails high opportunity for visibility and exposure and brings about maximum development in managers. Special assignments are similar to special projects, except that the assignment is extended for a longer period of time. It provides an Opportunity to serve on a committee investigating an issue or a current problem, and to develop some appreciation of higher—level management's attitudes and aims, as well as to be appraised by upper management. The individual may be promoted at 38 the conclusion of that special assignment and never return to his/ her former responsibilities (Bass & Vaughan, 1965; Swope, 1970). The committee system provides an opportunity for adminis- trators to serve on committees that consider broader questions than their everyday routine would provide. Such experience provides indi- viduals an opportunity to solve problems of a general nature and of a higher level than those with which they are ordinarily involved in their regular jobs. Used properly, committee experience can con- tribute greatly to the development of management growth. The use of project teams, special projects, special assign- ments, and committees has given executives at all levels greater Opportunity to "express themselves, engage in the influence processes, defend and advance their projects and performance" (Jennings, 1971, p. 168). The opportunity to communicate enhances learning and development and greatly increases the chances of being sponsored. Internships are formalized coaching circumstances in which an individual is assigned a clearly designated set of duties and objectives. The superior works with the individual to improve per- formance, reviewing shortcomings and strong points (Bass & Vaughan, 1965). Management educational programs may be carried on by the organization itself in the form of schools, seminars, conferences, and meetings. Opportunities may be provided outside the organiza- tion for consultants and facilities, or a combination of the two (Swope, 1970). Universities offer organized management development 39 conferences and programs. Such programs provide exposure to manage- ment principles, recent developments in management information sys- tems and analytical models, new theories including contributions in the behavioral sciences, and the influence of continuing changes in the environment. Consultants are available to assist organizations with current problems (Yoder, 1970). Private consultant firms also provide educational opportunities through workshops, seminars, and special consultations. Conferences provide an opportunity to acquire understanding of conceptual data and to develop or modify attitudes. This method of development should involve a carefully planned meeting with spe- cific purposes and goals. Summary The strength of any organization depends largely on its management; to remain strong it must work to develop its human resources. The present thinking is that top management must provide an orderly system of professional and management development, one that gives everyone an equal opportunity for training experience and job advancement. To prosper and grow, talented individuals need tough challenges. They need custom-made development programs planned cooperatively with top management, which take into consideration the individual's needs and aspirations as well as those of the organi- zation (Sayles & Strauss, 1977). CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN OF THE STUDY The intent of the study was to describe state administrators' opportunities for professional and managerial development. The abstract concept of opportunity had to be reduced to specific, understandable terms. Exploratory questions were devised to put the concept into operational terms, to support the question of whether opportunities for professional and managerial development do indeed exist. Babbie (1973) supported this approach: Whether working from a rigorously deduced theory or from a set of tentative suspicions or curiosities, the researcher at some point is faced with a set of unspecified, abstract concepts that he believes will assist his understanding of the world around him. In survey research, these concepts must be converted into questions in a questionnaire, thus permitting the collection of empirical data relevant to analysis (p. 131). Behavioral indicants were then specified to support each of the exploratory questions. Determining the behavioral indicants required a total immersion in the day-to-day experience of state administrators as they function in their job assignments and an examination of the growth opportunities they experience indirectly as a result Of the position they hold. As a standard with which to measure the quantity and quality of the opportunities experienced, a complete list of activities was 40 41 developed: those that take place in the job assignment or are directly related to the position and are development in nature and those that take place outside the job experience but are supported in some way by the state department. Once an extensive list of oppor- tunities was developed, it was necessary to focus on key items of the study--those opportunities that have high visibility and exposure and/ or are developmental in nature. Further delineation and categoriza- tion of the items provided a more manageable list with which to work. Behavioral indicants were selected for each of the seven exploratory questions. The sources used to gather information and gain knowledge to develop the survey instrument were personal experience, a previous research study experience, personal interviews, and a review of' literature, which included a Datrix search, two ERIC searches, and a hand search. The research study was developed as a result of a four-month internship in the vocational division of a state department of edu- cation. That period of observation and work experience provided an opportunity to learn the internal workings of a state department organization and to view administrators of different levels as they functioned in their job assignments. At the same time, involvement in a research study provided an Opportunity to interview one-third of the staff members about their perceptions of state department work. These personal experiences provided the framework for the design of a comprehensive list that would be used as a standard by 42 which to appraise the state administrators' opportunities for profes- sional and managerial develOpment. Literature reviewed dealt with state department administra- tors' responsibilities and duties, management theories, and empirical research on executive development. These materials contributed to the design of the instrument and the conceptual framework of the study. The Survey Instrument The survey instrument was divided into three major parts. Part I was intended to elicit information pertaining to state-staff- planned in-service programs and the respondent's demographic data. Part II listed possible professional and managerial development activities--opportunities for professional growth--falling into six categories: 1. On-the-Job Assignment 2. Development of Communication Skills 3. Visibility and Exposure 4. Outside Development Training 5. Professional Association Activities 6. Mobility and Job Promotions Respondents were requested to answer each question in two ways: (1) whether they had had the opportunity to experience the activity and (2) whether they had a desire to have this experience. A two-pronged scale was decided on after much study and consultation. To answer the question "I have had the opportunity to . . . ," the respondent was to answer with one Of three options-- several times, once, or never--under the heading Experience. Then 43 the respondent was to reread the question as "I would like to have the Opportunity to." The heading for the second part of the question was "Desire," and the respondent was to check yes, uncertain, or pp, Respondents were reminded that they should have two checks for each item. Part III contained four open-ended questions requesting: (1) state department experience that had greatly contributed to pro- fessional and managerial growth, (2) innovative steps taken by the state department to improve management practices, (3) suggestions for the improvement of professional and managerial growth opportu- nities, and (4) an evaluation of the areas in which the respondent felt a need for more adequate preparation so as to carry out the goals of the annual and long-range state plan. Population The study population included administrators in vocational divisions of state departments of education throughout the United States. A U.S. Office of Education list of the 50 states and state directors' names was used to request from the state departments a professional state staff personnel roster and an organizational chart. The staff roster and organizational chart facilitated iden- tification of the sample of state administrators to be included in the research. Sample A stratified random sample of states was selected from each Of the ten U.S. Office of Education regions. Forty percent of the 44 total number Of states in each region were randomly selected for inclusion in the study. All state administrators from the vocational division of the state departments of those randomly selected states were included in the research. State administrators included in the survey sample were identified according to their hierarchical place- ment on the organizational chart and/or their administrative title. Table 1 identifies the 'H) USOE regions, the states included in each region, the 20 states randomly selected from a stratified sample, and the number of state administrators from each state department who were included in the survey. Table 2 exhibits the responses by United States Office of Education region. Responses were received from all 20 of the states randomly selected from the stratified sample; however, the rates varied from a low of 51.4 percent to a high of 90.9 percent and 100 percent, with an overall return of 72.2 percent. The total number of questionnaires returned was 275; 17 were not usable because fOur administrators had worked less than one year, two had retired, one had resigned, and ten questionnaires were either incomplete or incorrectly filled out. Table 3 (page 47) sunmarizes the administrators' responses by state size according to student enrollment figures of 14 to 17 year Olds. Data Collection A mail survey was selected as the best data-collection approach for this study because it allows for a sizable number to be included in the sample, to generalize to a large population, and at Tab1e l.--Popu1ation and sample distribution of vocational divisions in state departments of education, by U.S. Office of Education region. Region Population States Sample REGION I--Connecticut, Maine, - Massachusetts, New Hampshire, 6 $22333§1CUt 2; Vermont, Rhode Island REGION II--New York, New Jersey 2 New Jersey 35 REGION III--De1aware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, 5 eglagzgg }? West Virginia 9 REGION IV--Alabama, Florida, . . . Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, 8 ¥;::;::;gp1 3% North Carolina, South Carolina, Geor ia 20 Tennessee 9 REGION V--Illinois, Indiana, . 111m, Minnesota, Ohio, 5 (11:35:33 $3 Wisconsin REGION VI--Arkansas, Louisiana, 5 Arkansas 19 New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas New Mexico 14 REGION VII--Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, 4 Iowa 20 Nebraska Nebraska 13 REGION VIII--Colorado, Montana, Utah 19 North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, 6 Colorado 22 Wyoming REGION IX--Arizona, California, 4 Arizona 11 Hawaii, Nevada California 17 REGION X--A1aska, Idaho, Oregon, 4 Idaho 14 Washington Washington 17 Total 50 381 Table 2.--Responses by United States Office of Education region. 46 Not No Region Responses Usable Percent Response Percent Total REGION I a Connecticut 19 1 65.5 10 34.4 29 Vermont 6 66.6 3 33.3 9 BEEIQ!_II. a New Jersey 29 2 82.9 6 17.1 35 BEEIQ!_III b Delaware 6 l b 60.0 4 40.0 10 Virginia 10 13/1 90.9 1 9.1 11 REGION IV "TfiEEiEEippi 15 id/zC 52.5 9 37.5 24 Tennessee 15 1a/1b 65.2 8 34.8 23 Georgia 13 65.0 7 35.0 20 REGION V “'fiififiEEBta 18 13/1b 51.4 17 48.6 35 Illinois 14 73.7 5 26.3 19 REGION VI Arkansas 16 a 84.2 3 15.8 19 New Mexico 12 2 85.7 2 14.3 14 REGION VII a owa l4 1 70.0 6 30.0 20 Nebraska 13 100.0 0 -- 13 REGION VIII a Utah 14 1 73.7 5 26.3 19 Colorado 14 63.6 8 36.4 22 REGION IX Arizona 9 81.8 2 18.2 11 California 15 88.2 2 11.8 17 REGION X aho 9 64.3 5 35.7 14 Washington 14 82.4 3 17.6 17 Total 275 17 106 381 (72.2%) (4.5%) (27.8%) (100%) aQuestionnaire incomplete. bNew employee. CRetired. dResigned. 47 .Amam_ .aUPeeo me_eeeea geeseee>oo ”.u.o .eoemewemezv ¢~-mem~14858pmam Fooeem macaw eo muepmmpeem .mu_pmeeeum Fecowumuaum go; cmucmo Pecopuez .mgowpwz use :owumosum .gu—em: ea ucmsugmamo .m.= "mugacm Aeoo_v Aew.ewv ANN.~NV pwm mop mum Peach awesom_pmu mwo=FPF~ ammgma 302 pk m.w_ m_ N.Fm mm Awgos Lo cacaoomv uwa<41<¢hxu coumcpgmmz .mwcpagw> .mmmmmccmh .wuommccmz,.~wmsooo ©o_ o.em om o.eo ON «amm.ame-ooo,aomV mu¢<4 waawmmwmmrz .mzo~ .u=Uvuum::oo onegopou .mmmcexe< .m=o~»e< mm. e.om mm o.me Am awmmqwm~-ooaqova zanomz acoELm> .seu: .ouwxmz :mz .mxmegnmz .ozmu~1.mgmzepma me o.e~ me m.ma om Naoo.omp eeee mmmev Se< mucmwemaxm 3o; monomemaxm oz o .Iop .Iom .Iom mewmmo cow: o.m . o.~ .ioe memmmo esom m.~ . P.N mewmmo 3o; .Iom o.m . o.F mgwmwo oz moF Ice—y Tom 3 Se 58 vocational area. Management authorities recognize budgeting as. a key administrative function, yet few respondents were involved in budgeting, nor did they indicate a desire to be involved. The administrators who have no desire to engage actively in On—the-job assignments appear to be those who have had the greatest Opportunity to experience such assignments. 54a te Size Of the 258 state vocational administrators participating in th-i 5 study, 31.8 percent or 82 represented medium-sized states; 21.7 percent or 56 respondents represented small and extra-large states, large states were represented by 24.8 percent or 64 respondents. and analysis of variance was used to determine the significant rela- The ti onships between state size groups and the opportunities for profes- Si onal and managerial development in the on-the-job assignment. The alpha was set at 0.05 level. The results show that there is no Si 9h ifi cant difference between the state groups in the opportunities to participate in administrative functions of planning, evaluation, bLi'dget management, staff selection, decision making, and leadership. As can be seen in Table 7, in the comparison of experience "'33 n with desire mean,the greater differences appear to exist within the states; i.e., small states, experience mean, 2.314, desire mean 2 ‘ 595; large states, experience mean 2.469, desire mean 2.777. More (to . h Qruence 15 found in experience and desire mean scores of the 'ed ‘i um-sized and the large-sized states. 59 Table 7.—-Relationships between state size and opportunity for on-the- job assignments by experience and desire. State Sizea Exper1ence Des1re _ Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Small 2.314 .4923 2.595 .5065 Medium 2.471 .4105 2.646 .4638 Large 2.469 .4642 2.777 .3260 Extra large 2.471 .3888 2.654 .3936 df‘ = 3 Experience F=l.849 Desire F =2.002 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS aStates are grouped according to state student enrollment of Figures are taken from U.S. Department of Health, 14 to 17 year Olds. Ed ucation, and Welfare, National Center for Educational Statistics, Govern- Ltatistics of State School Systems 1973-74 (Washington, D.C.: ment Printing Office, 1976: small states (less than 150,000), medium- 51 zed states (150,000-299,999), large states (300,000-499,999), extra la rge states (500,000 or more). Sex State vocational administrators in the present study are 76 - 4 percent male or 197 in number, and 23.7 percent female or 61 Of the total administrators. Table 8 illustrates the relationship be tween sex and the opportunity to experience professional and mana- 9e Y‘ial development in the on—the-job assignment, which includes pa Y‘ticipating in a variety of administrative tasks as well as working on project or management teams and serving as a liaison to outside a Qencies. 60 Table 8.--Relationships between sex and the opportunity for on-the- job assignments by experience. e Sex Exper1ence Mean 8.0. Male 2.476 .4228 Female 2.302 .4717 (If 1 7.439 F 51 gnificance = .0068 The relationship between sex and opportunity for on-the-job assignments shows that a significant difference exists at less than . 01 level of confidence. Males are apparently provided more oppor- tunity for professional and managerial growth in their job assignment th an are females. As indicated by the two groups' standard deviation 5 Cores, females show more variability in mean scores than males their Opportunities for on-the-job assignment experience. The desire to have more Opportunity for on-the-job experiences ‘3 S significantly different between males and females at less than .05 1 evel of confidence. (See Table 9.) Females demonstrate with a mean of 2.789 that they have more desire for varied administrative assignments than do males; h obvever, both groups signify a high mean score Of at least 2.6 for more variety in the job assignments. Females tend to be more in aQi'zeement than males for greater on-the-job experiences, as evidenced by the standard deviation scores. 61 Table 9.--Relationships between sex and Opportunity for on-the-job assignments by desire. Desire Sex ___ Mean 5.0. Male 2.640 .4359 Female 2.789 .3411 df’ == 1 F == 5.919 Significance = .0157 Aqua: 0f the 247 administrators who responded, 35.4 percent 0!" 87 were most likely to be in the 50-59 age group, 32.9 percent 81 are in the 40-49 age group, 2.8 percent or 7 are in the or- 1&8 s than 30 years group, 6.5 percent or 16 represent the 60 and Over group, and 22.4 percent or 35 respondents represent the 30-39 age group. The relationship of age to on-the-job assignment experience 31 S 0 demonstrates a significant difference at less than the .05 level °F confidence (Table 10, page 62). The Least Significant Difference (L SD) post-hoc test was given to determine the pairwise comparisons. Gho up 40-49 years has more opportunity to experience varied on-the- Job assignments than Group 30-39 years, and Group less than 30 has 1es s opportunity than all other groups except the Group 30-39 years 62 Table lO.--Re1ationships between age and Opportunity for on-the-job assignments by experience. e Experience Age _¥ Mean S.D. Less than 30 2.050 .4342 30-39 years 2.355 .4658 40-49 years 2.525 .4060 50-59 years 2.426 .4504 Over 60 2.482 .3925 d-f= = 4 F=' = 2.986 S ‘i gnificance = .0197 Conversely, the desire for on-the-job experience did not demonstrate a significant difference between groups, for each Of the groups had a high desire score for greater opportunity in their 3' 0b assignment (Table 11). The less than 30 age group indicates mere consistency in the amount of opportunity desired than do the other age groups (5.0. .1753). Administrative Level Of the 258 respondents, 76.4 percent or 197 are second-level administrators, while 23.6 percent or 61 are first-level adminis- trators. Table 12 illustrates the effect administrative level has on the opportunities to experience professional and managerial develop- ‘T'eht in the on-the-job assignment. 63 liable ll.--Relationships between age and opportunity for on-the-job assignments by desire. e Age Desire Mean S.D. Less than 30 2.775 .1753 30-39 years 2.724 .3174 40-49 years 2.687 .4408 50-59 years 2.653 .4519 60 and over 2.588 .5667 d-f= = 4 l=‘ = .534 S'i ggnificance = NS e Table 12.--Re1ationships between administrative level and opportunity for on-the-job assignments by experience. e Administrative Experience _ Level Mean 5.0. First level 2.700 .3347 Second level 2.357 .4330 F? = 32.184 3" Qnificance < .0001 \ As shown in Table 12, the significance level between first- ‘ e\Iel and second-level administrators is less than .0001. First-level administrators have high opportunity to experience a variety of administrative assignments, while second-level administrators have 3 Ti Qnificantly less Opportunity° 64 Table 13 indicates that the relationship between first- and second-level administrators on the variable of desire for on-the-job assignment is not significantly different. high desire for increased experience. Both groups have a The standard deviation for First-level administrators (.5799) shows a greater range within the mean score than for second-level administrators (.3550). First- ] evel administrators have less agreement within the group than do second-level administrators regarding the amount of increased experience in on-the-job assignments they desire. Table 13.--Relationships between administrative level and Opportunity for on-the-job assignments by desire. Administrative Desire Level Mean 5.0. First level 2.590 .5799 Second level 2.701 .3550 df = 'I If: = 3.198 S 1 gnificance = NS U n dergraduate Vocational- §$cial ty Area Table 14 indicates that the vocational-specialty area groups do not demonstrate a significant difference in either their experi- eh ce mean scores or their desire mean scores in opportunity to pa rticipate in professional development activities in the on-the-job a S signment. 65 Table l4.--Relationships between undergraduate vocational-specialty area and opportunity for on-the-job assignments by experience and desire. Vocational- Experience Desire Specialty Area Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Agriculture 2.508 .3931 2.563 .4861 Business & office 2.413 .4068 2.730 .3457 Distributive ed. 2.233 .5158 2.792 .2193 Health occ. 2.390 .5065 2.610 .6045 Home economics 2.320 .4627 2.813 .2403 Industrial ed. 2.529 .4764 2.650 .5185 Technical ed. 2.392 .3919 2.667 .3447 Other 2.413 .4256 2.606 .4608 df = 7 Experience F=l.233 Desire F=l.279 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS Of greatest interest in examining the scores tabulated in Table 14 is the comparison of experience mean scores with desire mean scores. Agriculture and Industrial Education have few differences, whereas all the other groups demonstrate wide variance in experience and desire scores. The Distributive Education group shows the greatest variance between Opportunity to experience on-the-job assign- ments and the desire to experience variety in administrative respon- sibility. State Department Experience The largest percentage of state administrators currently employed have worked 8 to 11 years in the state department of education by a count of 76 respondents or 30.2 percent of the sample population. The next most frequently checked group of years is the 4-7 years category, with 65 administrators for a total 66 of 25.8 percent. Least number of responses fall in the 3 or less years category with 9.9 percent; 21 percent have worked at the state department 12-15 years; 13.1 percent have been there over 15 years. Table 15.--Relationships between state department experience and opportunity for on-the-job assignments by experience. Number of Years Experience in State Department Mean 5.0. Less than 3 2.146 .4492 4-7 years 2.351 .4434 8-11 years 2.545 .3873 12-15 years 2.485 .4159 Over 15 2.533 .4256 df = 4 F = 5.706 Significance = .0002 It appears from Table 15 that greater Opportunity for growth in the on-the-job assignment is affected by the years of state depart- ment experience up through 11 years; then a slight decrease takes place in the 12-15 years group, while the over 15 years group experiences a slight increase and then a leveling off effect. With the exception of the 12-15 years group, the greater the years the more opportunity to experience a variety of administrative responsi- bilities in the assigned position. The number of years in the state department and the opportu- nity for professional and managerial development in the on-the-job assignments are significantly related at less than the .01 level of 67 confidence. The Least Significant Difference post-hoc test was administered to check for differences in the pairwise comparisons and to determine which ones are different. The 8-11 years group and the over 15 years group are significantly different in experi- ence than the 4-7 years group and the less than 3 years group. The less than 3 years group has less opportunity to experience a variety of on-the-job assignments than all other groups. The 8-11 years group comes closest to recording high opportunity (2.6-3.0) on the experience scale of all the groups. As shown in Table 16, the desire scores for these groups do not demonstrate a significant difference; but each group, with the exception of the 12-15 years group, has high desire scores falling at least at the mean level of 2.6. The standard deviation scores show more agreement with the less than 3 years group and the 4-7 years group, whereas the 12-15 years group demonstrates less agree- ment within the group. Table l6.--Relationships between state department experience and Opportunity for on-the-job assignments by desire. Number of Years Desire in State Department Mean 5.0. Less than 3 2.800 .3098 4-7 years 2.728 .3214 8-11 years 2.649 .4222 12-15 years 2.552 .5466 Over 15 2.683 .4831 df = 4 F = 1.970 Significance = NS 68 Development of Communication Skills Are there opportunities for development Of communica- tion skills? State administrators have been afforded great opportunity to improve their communication skills of speaking, writing, and inter- acting, as illustrated in Figure 2. Approximately 80 percent of the administrators have had at least average or high experience in this developmental area, and less than 2 percent have had no experi- ence. Most administrators have had the opportunity to participate in the following activities: making presentations at state voca- tional teacher workshops and conferences; giving technical assistance to vocational directors, administrators, deans, and teachers; making presentations to outside agencies; and writing state plans, reports, and position papers. The developmental activities administrators are least likely to perform are publishing articles in professional journals, conducting regional public meetings and hearings, and chairing vocational administrators' in-service workshops or con- ferences. More administrators have had the opportunity to develop their communication competencies than any of the other five develop- mental areas. It appears that administrators rank the desire to partici- pate in communicative activities less than the desire to perform a variety of administrative tasks in their on-the-job assignments. Approximately 65 percent desire the opportunity to develop commu- nication skills, whereas around 73 percent would prefer more variety in their on-the-job assignments. Again, the respondents who have 69 .memmwu ecu muemwequm >5 mppvxm copumu_caeeou mo u=m2ao~m>moui.~ essay; mmeoom geese o.m 1 m.~ m.~ . F.~ o.~ 1 m.~ «m.F 1 o.F mucmeequm cow: mucmwengu wmeem>< mucmwequm 3o; mucmwequm oz Ell/o .uo_ .uom .uom oewmmo sow: o.m - m.~ lice mewmmo meow m.N . F.N me_mwo 304 110m o.~ 1 o.~ mermmn oz m.P 1 o.p hion Apcmuemmv 70 had the greatest experience have the least desire to engage in com- municative activities. State Size There is a relationship between state size and the administra- tor's Opportunity for development of Communication skills. The analy- sis Of variance demonstrates, as shown in Table 17, that there is a significant difference at less than the .05 level of confidence between or among the state size groups. Table 17.--Relationships between state size and opportunity for development of communication skills by experience. St t 5' Experience a e 1ze Mean 5.0. Small 2.252 .4521 Medium 2.376 .3589 Large 2.450 .3246 Extra large 2.454 .3712 df = 3 F = 3.620 Significance = .0137 The Least Significant Difference test determined that adminis- trators who work in large states and extra-large states as a group tend to have more opportunity to develop communication skills than administrators as a group who work in states that are small in size. .Administrators who have the opportunity to develop these skills are speaking at conferences, workshops, and meetings to such groups as 71 vocational teachers, directors, administrators, deans, and to out- side agencies. They are also writing state plans, reports, position papers, and grant proposals. As indicated in Table 18, the desire mean scores of these four groups show no significant difference. However, the large and extra large states have high desire for more Opportunity to develop commu- nication skills, whereas the small and medium states record average desire for the experience. Table 18.--Relationships between state size and opportunity for development of comnunication skills by desire. State Si Desjre ze Mean 5.0. Small 2.579 .4658 Medium 2.578 .4738 Large 2.681 .3935 Extra large 2.609 .4594 df = 3 F = .763 Significance = NS Table 19 indicates that no significant difference exists between males and females in the opportunity to develop their commu- nication skills, but both groups seek greater opportunity to use these skills. The spread between the mean scores forexperience and desire tends to be greater for females than for males. 72 Table l9.--Relationships between sex and opportunity for development of communication skills by experience and desire. Experience Desire 59" Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Male 2.401 .3785 2.591 .4568 Female 2.321 .3835 2.698 .3676 df = 1 Experience F=2.025 Desire F=l.279 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS A92 Table 20 illustrates that there is a significant relation- ship between age and the opportunity to develop a state vocational administrator's communication skills. Table 20.--Relationships between age and Opportunity for development of communication skills by experience. Experience Age Mean S.D. Less than 30 2.088 .4549 30-39 years 2.300 .3949 40-49 years 2.463 .3744 50-59 years 2.385 .3637 Over 60 2.365 .3316 df = 4 F = 2.856 Significance = .0043 73 The analysis of variance records that the groups are signifi- cantly related at less than the .05 level of confidence. The post hoc test verifies that the less than 30 age group has less Opportunity to develop communication skills than the 40-49 years group and the 50-59 years group; the 30-39 years group has less opportunity for the experience than the 40-49 years age group. Table 21 indicates that no significant differences exist between the groups who desire increased opportunity to utilize com- munication skills. Table 21.--Relationships between age and opportunity for development of communication skills by desire. Desire Age Mean S.D. Less than 30 2.663 .2615 30-39 years 2.687 .2835 40-49 years 2.663 .4352 50-59 years 2.579 .4899 Over 60 2.500 .5408 df = 4 F = 1.057 Significance = NS The three younger age groups register a high desire to experience speaking and writing developmental activities, whereas the two Older age groups demonstrate some desire for increased opportu- rrity. The standard deviation scores show the less than 30 group 74 and the 30-39 years group is more in agreement with the group mean than is the over 60 years group. Administrative Level As shown in Table 22, the relationship between administrative level and the opportunity to experience the development of communi- cation skills is significantly related at less than .0001 level of significance. Table 22.--Relationships between administrative level and opportunity for development of communication skills by experience. . . . Experience Adm1n1strat1ve Level Mean 5.0. First level 2.566 .3265 Second level 2.320 .3802 df = 1 F = 20.552 Significance = .0001 The first-level administrators' mean score of 2.566 is sig- nificantly greater than the second-level administrators' mean score of 2.320. More opportunities are extended to first-level than second-level administrators to develop in the communicative areas of speaking to various groups and writing reports, position papers, plans, and proposals. Table 23 indicates the desire to experience greater oppor- tunities in the communicative areas did not differ significantly 75 between first-level and second-level administrators. Second-level administrators mark a high desire in this developmental area, whereas first-level administrators record some desire on the experience scale. More second-level administrators are in agreement with the mean than are first-level administrators, .3833 as opposed to .5883. Table 23.--Relationships between administrative level and Opportunity for development of communication skills by desire. Administrative Level Desire Mean 5.0. First level 2.562 .5883 Second level 2.629 .3833 df = 1 F = 1.064 Significance = NS Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area The relationships between undergraduate vocational-specialty area and development of communication skills by both experience and desire do not demonstrate a significant difference between groups. Table 24 does show the differences between the experience of the particular vocational-specialty area groups and their desire for experience in the development of communication skills. 76 Table 24.--Relationships between undergraduate vocational-specialty area and opportunity for development of communication skills by experience and desire. Vocational- Experience Desire Specialty Area Mean S.D. Mean 5.0. Agriculture 2.423 .3125 2.518 .4466 Business & office 2.381 .4277 2.732 .3330 Distributive ed. 2.425 .4413 2.717 .3186 Health occ. 2.420 .3676 2.430 .5832 Home economics 2.313 .3848 2.697 .3358 Industrial ed. 2.447 .4045 2.544 .5456 Technical ed. 2.375 .3049 2.633 .3257 Other 2.289 .3726 2.575 .5028 df = 7 Experience F=.854 Desire F=l.445 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS The groups which show the greatest congruence between actual experience and desire for experience are Agriculture, experience mean score of 2.423 and desire mean of 2.518; Health Occupations, experi- ence mean score Of 2.420 and desire mean of 2.430; Industrial Educa- tion, experience mean score of 2.447 and desire mean of 2.544. Four groups have a high desire to be more active in communicative endeavors: Business and Office, 2.732; Distributive Education, 2.717; Home Economics, 2.697; and Technical Education, 2.633. Health has the least desire of all the groups (2.430). Of those who fall in the high desire range, the greatest differences between experience mean scores and desire mean scores belong to Business and Office, experience 2.381 and desire 2.732; Distributive Education, experience 2.425 and desire 2.717; Home 77 Economics, experience 2.313 and desire 2.697; Technical Education, experience 2.375 and desire 2.633. The Other group (not in vocational- specialty area), tends to have less experience (2.289) but only some desire (2.575). State Department Experience The relationships between the state department experience and development of communication skills is shown in Table 25. Table 25.--Relationships between state department experience and Opportunity for development of communication skills by experience. Number of Years Experience in State Department Mean 5.0. Less than 3 2.331 .4913 4-7 years 2.280 .3658 8-11 years 2.426 .3372 12-15 years 2.428 .3488 Over 15 2.494 .3577 df = 4 F = 2.678 Significance = .0324 ‘There is a significant difference at below the .05 level of confi- dence. Using the Least Significant Difference post-hoc test to analyze the pairwise comparisons demonstrates that the 4-7 years group is significantly different from the 8-11 years group, the 12-15 years 1group, and the over 15 years group. The 4-7 years group has less 78 opportunity than the other three groups to give presentations, to be involved in writing, or to interact with professionals in the field. The state department experience groups demonstrate no sig- nificant difference in desire for more development of communication skills (Table 26). Table 26.--Relationships between state department experience and opportunity for development of communication skills by desire. Number of Years Experience Desire in State Department Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Less than 3 2.331 .4913 2.789 .2613 4-7 years 2.280 .3658 2.659 .3588 8-11 years 2.426 .3372 2.600 .4268 12-15 years 2.428 .3488 2.543 .5427 Over 15 2.494 .3577 2.528 .5645 df = 4 Experience F==2.678 Desire F = 1.847 Sig. = .0324 Sig. = NS All groups who have worked less than 11 years in the state department have a high desire to participate in communicative activi- ties. The groups with 12 or more years in the state department appear to register some desire on the desire scale. The greatest differences tend to be between the mean experience scores and the Inean desire scores of the group with less than 3 years in the state department (experience 2.331, desire 2.789) and the 4-7 years group 79 (experience 2.280, desire 2.659). It appears that the range of scores is somewhat related to the number of years in the state department--the more years the wider the range among the mean scores. Visibility and Exposure Are there gpportunities for visibility and exposure in working with high state and government officials? Of the six professional development areas, opportunity to experience visibility and exposure shows the percentages to be more evenly distributed among experience levels than they are in any of the other five growth areas, as illustrated in Figure 3. The four experience levels are no experience (1.0-l.5) 20.9 percent; low experience (1.6-2.0) 33.3 percent; average experience (2.1-2.5) 26.4 percent; and high experience (2.6-3.0) 19.4 percent. Less than 46 percent of the total group has had average to high experience mean scores, the third lowest of the growth areas. In general, administrators are likely to have had the opportunity to work on special projects or task forces with the superintendent of education; to prepare plans, policies, issue and position papers, and reports for presentation to the state board and/or superin- tendent; or to serve in a leadership capacity on a state task force. However, few administrators have had an Opportunity to act as con- sultants to the state legislature for purposes of writing or analyz- ing legislation, to work on Special assignments to the state legislature, to serve on national or regional task forces or ad hoc committees, or to make presentations to the state board. 80 .0e_000 00m 00=0_000x0 >5 mezmoaxm 00m zup_wnwmm> 00$ xuwczugonaoii.m we=m_u mmeoum cmmzr 0.m . o.~ m.~ 1 P.N o.~ - 0.F am.F . o.F mucmwemaxm saw: 00:0we0axu mmmem>< mucmwemaxm 304 00:0we00x4 oz aeemao ewe: 9m - 0.N mewmmo 050m m.m 1 F.N meemmo 304 . o.~ - e.e .nom mewmmn 02 m.F 1 o.P 1\¥Iom Apcwuemev 81 Approximately 63 percent of the administrators have a high desire to experience visibility and exposure, which places this area fifth among the six developmental areas. Only the desire to participate in professional association activities shows less desire. AS a group, administrators seem to demonstrate less desire for the opportunity to experience visibility and exposure; an exception is the high experience administrators, who tend to seek more of this type of growth experience, with only 1.9 percent indicating no desire. State Size Table 27 illustrates that there is no significant difference between state sizes as to the degree of visibility and exposure administrators experience in their administrative positions. All mean scores tend to be considerably lower than the on-the-job assign- ment Opportunities or the opportunities to develop communication skills. Table 27.--Relationships between state size and opportunity for visibility and exposure by experience and desire. . Experience Desire State S1ze Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Small 1.925 .5488 2.530 .5205 Medium 1.979 .5413 2.506 .5518 Large 1.981 .5707 2.580 .6634 Extra large 2.027 .5469 2.552 .5271 df = 31 Experience F=.319 Desire F=.213 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS 82 The high standard deviation scores tend to demonstrate that there is disagreement within all four of the groups as to the amount of experience administrators do have within each of the four groups. It appears that administrators as a group in all states have not been provided the opportunity to work on special task forces or ad hoc committees at the local, state, regional, or national levels. The mean score for desire also shows no significance; however, the mean score differences between experience and desire for all groups demonstrate considerable variation in what is actually experi- enced and what administrators would like to have the opportunity to experience. Again, individual administrators' mean scores within the group Show a degree of variance from the mean score of the group. S92: AS illustrated in Table 28, sex is related at below the .05 level of confidence with opportunities for visibility and exposure in the job assignment. Table 28.--Re1ationships between sex and Opportunity for visibility and exposure by experience. Experience Sex Mean 5.0. Male 2.015 .5389 Female 1.844 .5584 df = 1 F = 4.606 Significance = .0328 83 Males show a mean experience score of 2.015, while the females' mean score is 1.844; both scores are considerably less than the opportunities experienced in the on-the-job assignment or in the development of communication skills. The standard deviations of .5389 and .5584 demonstrate a wide range of scores within each of the two groups. Both groups desire greater opportunity for visibility and exposure working with high state and government officials, but there is no significant difference between the groups (Table 29). On the desire scale, females scored in the high desire range, whereas males scored in the average desire area. Table 29.--Relationships between sex and opportunity for visibility and exposure by desire. Desire Sex Mean 5.0. Male 2.520 .5406 Female 2.626 .6215 df = 1 F = 1.673 Significance = NS Age The relationship of age to Opportunities for visibility and exposure Shows no significance, as illustrated by Table 30. All group scores are low in comparison to the previous professional and 84 managerial development opportunities discussed. All groups fall in the low experience range of below 2.1 mean. Tab1e 30.--Re1ationships between age and opportunity for visibility and exposure by experience. Age Exper1ence Mean S.D. Less than 30 1.600 .5880 30-39 years 1.876 .5474 40-49 years 2.023 .4920 50-59 years 2.026 .5693 Over 60 1.982 .5961 df = 4 F = 1.764 Significance = NS As illustrated in Table 31, there is a significant relation- ship between age and visibility and exposure by desire at below the .05 critical value somewhere within the design. Using the Least Significant Difference post-hoc test of multiple comparisons, none of the groups were significant in themselves. While the means of some complex combinations of groups were different from the mean of some other group or combination of groups, it was something other than pairwise comparisons. Three of the groupS--less than 30 years, 30-39 years, and 40-49 years--had at least a mean score of 2.6, which measures a high desire score for the opportunity to experience visibility and exposure 85 working on special task forces and ad hoc committees at the local, state, regional, and national levels. Table 31.--Re1ationships between age and opportunity for visibility and exposure by desire. Desire Age Mean 5.0. Less than 30 2.775 .3059 30-39 years 2.607 .4337 40-49 years 2.649 .4897 50-59 years 2.445 .6616 Over 60 2.318 .6541 df = 4 F = 2.677 Significance = .0325 Administrative Level Table 32 illustrates that there is a significant relationship between administrative level and opportunity for visibility and expo- sure working with high government and state officials. The first- 1evel administrators' mean experience score of 2.167, in comparison to the second-level administrators' mean experience score of 1.910, shows a significance level of below .01. First-level administrators have more opportunity than second-level administrators to work on national, regional, or state task forces or special projects with the superintendent of education; to serve in a special assignment capacity to the state legislature; and to make presentations to the state board. 86 Table 32.--Re1ationships between administrative level and opportunity for visibility and exposure by experience. Administrative Level Experience Mean 5.0. First level 2.167 .5492 Second level 1.910 .5373 df = 1 F = 10.507 Significance = .0013 No significance exists between administrative level and the desire for visibility and exposure. Both groups demonstrate some desire for increased opportunity in this professional area. (See Table 33.) Table 33.--Relationships between administrative level and opportunity for visibility and exposure by desire. Administrative Level Desire Mean 5.0. First level 2.536 .6116 Second level 2.551 .5454 df = 1 F = .031 Significance = NS 87 Undergraduate Vocational- §pecialty Area Table 34 indicates that some relationship exists between the undergraduate vocational-specialty area and opportunity to experience visibility and exposure. The significance level shows an association at below the .01 critical value. The Least Significant Difference post-hoc test determined that the vocational-specialty areas of Agriculture, Distributive Education, and Industrial Education all have significantly more opportunity to experience visibility and exposure with high state and government officials than do the Tech- nical Education or the Other group. Table 34.--Re1ationships between undergraduate vocational-specialty area and opportunity for visibility and exposure by experience. Vocational- Experience Specialty Area Mean 5,0. Agriculture 2.070 .4513 Business & office 2.009 .5465 Distributive ed. 2.133 .6541 Health occ. 2.030 .6701 Home economics 1.863 .5586 Industrial ed. 2.098 .5655 Technical ed. 1.683 .4239 Other 1.747 .4722 df = 7 F = 2.733 Significance = .0095 As shown in Table 35, the desire mean scores for the vocational-specialty area groups do not indicate a significant 88 difference between groups. Three groups designate a high desire to experience visibility and exposure activities: Distributive Educa- tion, mean 2.675; Home Economics, mean 2.643; and Business and Office, mean 2.619. Distributive Education appears to be among the groups that have the most experience but also score a high desire to par- ticipate in this management development activity. Table 35.--Re1ationships between undergraduate vocational-specialty area and opportunity for visibility and exposure by desire. Vocational- Desire Specialty Area Mean S.D. Agriculture 2.468 .5924 Business & office 2.619 .5148 Distributive ed. 2.675 .3545 Health occ. 2.280 .7657 Home economics 2.643 .6532 Industrial ed. 2.551 .5256 Technical ed. 2.275 .6312 Other 2.500 .5688 df = 7 F = 1.166 Significance = NS State Department Experience Presented in Table 36 is the relationship of years in the department to the opportunity to experience visibility and exposure with high government and state officials. There is a significant difference at below the .01 level within the design, and the post-hoc test proved that the 8-11 years group and the over 15 years group 89 have significantly more experience than the less than 3 years group and the 4-7 years group. Table 36.--Relationships between state department experience and the opportunity to experience visibility and exposure by experience. Number of Years Experience in State Department Mean 5,0, Less than 3 1.789 .5729 4-7 years 1.808 .5415 8-11 years 2.125 .5254 12-15 years 1.991 .5335 Over 15 2.122 .4963 df = 4 F = .0013 Significance = .0013 As illustrated in Table 37, there is no significant differ- ence between number of years in the state department and the desire for visibility and exposure. The less than 3 years group has a high desire to experience visibility and exposure with high government and state officials. 90 Table 37.--Relationships between state department experience and the Opportunity for visibility and exposure by desire. Number of Years Desire in State Department Mean S.D. Less than 3 2.723 .4430 4-7 years 2.585 .5224 8-11 years 2.575 .5329 12-15 years 2.435 .5581 Over 15 2.339 .7526 df = 4 F = 2.136 Significance = NS Outside Development Training Does the state department support development in the form of outside professional and management trajnjng? State department administrators, as a group, tend not to have an opportunity to participate in special training or management development programs sponsored by universities, private consultant firms, or USOE regional or national offices, or in special internships at the regional or national level. (See Figure 4.) A select few-- 4.7 percent of the administrators--fall in the high experience category; 65.1 percent have either no experience (l.O-l.5) or low experience (1.6-2.0). The opportunity to experience at least some outside management training has been extended to only 35.7 percent of the total group, the least-offered developmental area of the six. 91 fl! 1\»I¢w .mg_mmu ace oucmpgmaxm x5 newcwmgu pcmsmmmcas mc_mu:o sow xpwcaugoQQO11.¢ exampg mwcoom :mmze o.m 1 m.m m.~ 1 P.N o.~ 1 o._ «m.F 1 o.~ mucwwgqum saw: mucmwgmaxm mmwgm>< wucmwemaxm 3o; mucmmgmaxm oz 0 .Iop flow .1om mcwmmo saw: o.m 1 m.~ .Iov mcwmmo meow waxes m . N 1 _.. N mgwmmo 304 .uom o.~ 1 o._ mcwmmo oz m.P 1 o._ Aucmoemmv 92 It appears that nearly 65 percent of the administrators at all experience levels have a high desire for outside management training. The activities that seem to be high on the administra- tors' desire list are the opportunity to participate in specialized training programs at USOE regional or national seminars or meetings; to attend outside-agency-sponsored seminars, conferences, and meetings; and to participate in management training programs at university institutes or with private consultant firms in state or out-of-state. Administrators show some willingness to participate in special internships at USOE federal or regional offices, AVA headquarters, and U.S. Congress. The desire for outside training and development is third in administrator priorities, following the desire for mobility and job advancement and the desire for variety in administrative respon- sibilities in their on-the-job assignments. State vocational administrators evidently are required not only to perform expertly while executing administrative responsi- bilities in their on-the-job assignments, but also to function with a high degree of communication skill, serve the state in general, take risks, and cope in stressful, highly visible, exposed positions. Not only must state vocational administrators carry out these responsibilities, but they must also do so without special outside management training and development. 93 State Size As demonstrated in Table 38, there is no significant differ- ence among different state size groups in terms of opportunity for outside development training. The mean scores for all state size groups appear to be less than those for professional and management development opportunities provided in the on-the-job assignments, development of communication skills, and visibility and exposure with high government and state officials. Table 38.--Relationships between state size and opportunity for outside professional and management training by experience and desire. State Size Exper1ence 0e51re Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Small 1.773 .4982 2.720 .4818 Medium 1.863 .4404 2.584 .4862 Large 1.847 .5538 2.564 .6516 Extra large 1.843 .4377 2.643 .4592 df = 3 Experience F =.4l8 Desire F = 1.073 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS State vocational administrators evidently have low oppor- tunity to participate in off-site educational programs developed by or in conjunction with prominent colleges or universities and/or private consultant firms. It also appears that, as a group, admin- istrators have little opportunity to participate in specialized training programs in the form of seminars, conferences, and meetings 94 sponsored by regional or federal USOE agencies or outside govern- mental agencies. Participation in internships at the regional or federal level does not appear to be a frequently practiced profes- sional management development activity. A comparison of mean experience scores with desire mean scores does show the disparity between what administrators actually experience in management training and what they would like to experi- ence. The wide discrepancy in mean scores demonstrates that state administrators have low experience but would like to have high to average opportunity to experience outside development activities. The large state group indicates greatest disagreement within the sample regarding both the amount of experience and the desire for experience. ng_ Table 39 illustrates that there is no relationship between outside development training experience and sex, nor is there a significant relationship between the desire for outside development training and sex. Both groups have low experience scores, falling below the mean of 2.1, and high desire scores, with a mean of at least 2.6. Differences in experience mean and desire mean illustrate a wide gap between the training experience and the desire of both groups for training. Females, however, have the greatest diversity in mean scores. 95 Table 39.—-Relationships between sex and opportunity for outside development training by experience and desire. Sex Experience Desire Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Male 1.864 .4703 2.607 .4838 Female 1.734 .5063 2.695 .6125 df = 1 Experience F=3.4l9 Desire F=l.362 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS .892 As illustrated in Table 40, age is related to opportunities to experience outside development training, at less than the .01 level of confidence. Tab1e 40.--Relationships between age and opportunity for outside development training by experience. A Experience ge Mean S.D. Less than 30 1.238 .2387 30-39 years 1.733 .5654 40-49 years 1.864 .4679 50-59 years 1.877 .4369 Over 60 1.935 .3707 df = 4 F = 4.272 Significance = .0023 96 The post-hoc test revealed that the less than 30 group has had significantly less experience than all of the other groups. Again, when comparing experience and desire, large differ- ences in mean scores are evident. State administrators desire much more opportunity to experience outside development training than they are actually experiencing. (See Table 41.) Table 41.--Relationships between age and opportunity for outside develOpment training by experience and desire. Age Experience Desire Mean 5.0. Mean S.D. Less than 30 1.238 .2387 2.663 .5153 30-39 years 1.733 .5654 2.744 .4883 40-49 years 1.864 .4679 2.751 .3469 50-59 years 1.877 .4369 2.485 .6165 Over 60 1.935 .3707 2.429 .6430 df = 4 Experience F =4.272 Desire F =4.235 Sig. = .0023 Sig. = .0025 Desire to experience outside development training is sig- nificant at less than the .01 level of confidence. When the post- hoc test was administered, the 30-39 years group and the 40-49 years group had significantly more desire than the 50-59 years group and the over 60 group. Administrative Level The relationship between administrative level and outside development training is significant at less than the .0001 level of 97 confidence, as illustrated by Table 42. First-level administrators' mean score of 2.051, as compared to second-level administrators' mean score of 1.766, is significantly different at less than the .0001 level of confidence. First-level administrators have more oppor- tunity than do second-level administrators to participate in outside training and development. Both groups, however, fall in the low experience area, with mean scores below the mean level of 2.1, as neither group has had much opportunity to experience this type of activity. Table 42.--Relationships between administrative level and opportunity for outside development training by experience. Experience Administrative Level Mean S.D. First level 2.051 .3682 Second level 1.766 .4944 df = 1 F = 17.176 Significance = .0001 Table 43 illustrates the relationship between experience and desire. Both groups have a wide gap between experience and desire, but second-level administrators indicate a greater difference between opportunity to experience outside management training and the desire to have such an opportunity. 98 Table 43.--Relationships between administrative level and opportunity for outside development training by experience and desire. Administrative Level Exper1ence 0e51re Mean S.D. Mean S.D. First level 2.051 .3682 2.607 .4718 Second level 1.766 .4944 2.632 .5333 df II _.1 Experience F =17.176 Desire F = .109 Sig. = .0001 Sig. = NS Undergraduate Vocational- SpecialtyiArea Table 44 indicates that there is no relationship between the undergraduate vocational-specialty area and outside development training by experience or desire. Tab1e 44.--Relationships between undergraduate vocational—specialty area and opportunity for outside development training by experience and desire. Vocational- Experience Desire Specialty Area Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Agriculture 1.890 .3842 2.498 .4638 Business 8 office 1.864 .5546 2.709 .4903 Distributive ed. 1.917 .6206 2.750 .3477 Health occ. 2.030 .4715 2.490 .5646 Home economics 1.733 .5222 2.667 .7671 Industrial ed. 1.853 .4795 2.587 .5420 Technical ed. 1.625 .4093 2.525 .5659 Other 1.768 .4264 2.647 .4423 df = 7 Experience F=l.038 Desire F= .813 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS 99 All groups have had low opportunity to experience this type of development activity. The groups that have the highest desire scores and the greatest differences between experience and desire means are the following: Business and Office (experience 1.864, desire 2.709), Distributive Education (experience 1.917, desire 2.750), Home Economics (experience 1.733, desire 2.667), and Other (experience 1.768, desire 2.647). State Department Experience Presented in Table 45 is the relationship of state department experience to the opportunity to experience outside development training. Significance is less than .05 within the design. Table 45.--Relationships between state department experience and opportunity for outside development training by experience. . Number of Years Experience in State Department Mean S.D. Less than 3 1.762 .5123 4-7 years 1.679 .5493 8-11 years 1.918 .4483 12-15 years 1.870 .4187 Over 15 1.967 .4007 df = 4 F = 3.328 Significance = .0112 The post-hoc test indicated that the 4-7 years group has had significantly less experience than the 8-11 years group, the 100 12-15 years group, and the over 15 years group. All five groups have had low opportunity to experience this professional develop- ment activity, as the mean scores fall below the 2.1 mean of average opportunity for the experience. As shown in Table 46, the significance level between number of years in the state department and outside training is less than the .01 level of confidence. Table 46.-~Relationships between state department experience and outside development training by desire. Number of Years Desire in State Department Mean S.D. Less than 3 2.915 .1666 4-7 years 2.691 .5074 8-11 years 2.653 .4365 12-15 years 2.528 .5286 Over 15 2.347 .7354 df = 4 F = 5.617 Significance = .0002 The Least Significant Difference test determined that the less than 3 years group has a significantly higher desire score than the 8-11 years group, the 12-15 years group, or the over 15 years group. The 4-7 years group has a significantly higher desire score than the over 15 years group. The standard deviation scores indicate that the less than 3 years group is more consistent in its 101 desire for outside training than is the over 15 years group. State voca- tional administrators who have the fewest years of experience tend to have mean scores that are more in agreement with the group mean than administrators who have had over 15 years in the state depart- ment, as shown by their respective standard deviation scores of .1666 and .7354. Professional Association Activities Have opportunities been gxtgnggg tg partjgipatg jg professional associatign agtivities? Approximately 59 percent of the administrators have had either no opportunity or low opportunity to participate in profes- sional association activities, as shown in Figure 5. Even though state administrators attend national professional association con- ferences, the data indicate that few hold an executive office, serve as a national conference committee chairman, or make formal presentations at the conference meetings. Within the four experience levels, 56.5 percent of the respon- dents signify a high desire to become actively involved, which is the lowest percentage of high desire scores in any of the other developmental spheres. The findings denote a willingness of admin- istrators not only to attend the national conferences but to speak at the sessions, serve on the American Vocational Association con- ference committees, and preside at state professional conferences. Nearly 7 percent of the respondents indicated no desire in this area. Administrators showed less of a desire to participate in .mgwmmu use mocmpgmaxm an mmpaw>wgum cowumwoommm pmcommmmmoga Lo; xuwczugoagO11.m mgamwu o.m 1 m.m m.~ 1 ~.N mucmwgmaxm 5mm: mucmwgmgxu mmmgm>< mwcoum :mmze o.~ 1 o.P em.p 1 o.~ mucmwcmaxm :04 mocmwgmaxm oz 102 atemmo em.: 3 - 9N mgwmmo mEom . 1» m oN I .1 o N 7%... mewmmo 304 o.~ 1 o._ .Iom .Iov mcwmma oz m.P 1 o.~ L18 Augmugmav 103 professional association activities than in the other developmental spheres. Visibility and exposure is the only area in which adminis- trators recorded less desire. The question needs to be asked--Do state departments of education support or reward administrators for being involved in professional association activities or are the problems and needs of the state vocational administrators not being met by the profes- sional organizations? State Size Table 47 illustrates that opportunity to participate in pro- fessional association activities is not related to state size. Table 47.-—Relationships between state size and opportunity to participate in professional association activities by experience and desire. State Size Exper1ence 0e51re Mean S.D. Mean 5.0. Small 1.850 .5002 2.509 .5327 Medium 1.983 .4708 2.467 .5607 Large 2.048 .5099 2.511 .5680 Extra large 1.918 .5085 2.482 .4640 df = 3 Experience F==l.789 Desire F = .109 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS All four groups have low opportunity, as they fall below the 2.1 mean score. In general, state vocational administrators are not given the opportunity to participate in state, regional, or national professional 104 association activities. As a group, they tend not to hold executive office, serve on conference committees, or speak at national con- ferences, conventions, or meetings. The mean desire score, falling below the 2.6 mean score, demonstrates that state groups have an average desire to participate in these types of developmental activi- ties. In the comparison of state size groups' desire for professional and management development experiences, it appears that they have less desire for opportunities in the professional association area than in the other five growth areas of on-the-job assignment, develop- ment of communication skills, visibility and exposure, outside development training, and mobility and job advancement. §§x_ As shown in Table 48, the experience scores for male and female groups do not demonstrate a significant difference. Also, the mean experience scores indicate that state administrators, regardless of sex, have low opportunity to participate in profes- sional association activities. Tab1e 48.--Relationships between sex and opportunity to participate in professional association activities by experience and desire. Sex Experience Desire Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Male 1.933 .4868 2.461 .5181 Female 2.016 .5226 2.610 .5434 df = 1 Experience F==l.313 Desire F = 3.765 Sig. = NS Sig. = .0534 INN d 105 Of special interest is the fact that this is the one developmental area out of the six in which females scored higher than males. The desire for this type of professional development shows a significance level between males and females of .0534, slightly above the .05 confidence level. Females desire high opportunity for the experience, whereas males desire average oppor- tunity. Males not only experience less opportunity to participate in professional association activities but also desire less opportu- nity for such activity. On the other hand, females both experience and desire more activities of this nature. 592 Table 49 indicates the opportunity to experience profes— sional association activities did not differ significantly between the various age groups. All groups, with the exception of the over 60 group, have experienced low opportunity in this developmental area. The over 60 group has had average experience, with a mean score of at least 2.1. The relationship between age and desire for the opportunity to experience professional association activities is significant at the .0360 level of confidence. Using the post-hoc test to analyze the pairwise comparisons demonstrates that the means of some com- plex combination of experience groups were different from the mean of some other group or combinations of groups. However, it was something other than pairwise comparisons. The standard deviations of the five groups indicate greater agreement in the less than 30 106 age group regarding the desire to experience greater Opportunity in professional association activities. Table 49.-—Re1ationships between age and opportunity to participate in professional association activities by experience and desire. Age Experience 0e51re Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Less than 30 1.650 .4342 2.763 .2973 30-39 years 1.849 .4710 2.536 .5115 40-49 years 1.986 .4966 2.584 .4209 50-59 years 1.952 .4854 2.360 .6209 Over 60 2.112 .5159 2.512 .5754 df = 4 Experience F=1.912 Desire F=2.614 Sig. = NS Sig. = .0360 Administrative Level The relationship between administrative level and opportunity to participate in professional association activities is not signifi- cant, as shown in Table 50 under the experience column. Both first- and second-level administrators have had low experience in the opportunity to participate in professional association activities. Desire for such experience also demonstrates no significance. The mean desire scores indicate only an average desire for the experience, falling below the 2.6 mean score level. Second-level administrators exhibit a wider range of difference between the 107 experience mean score and the desire mean score than do first-level administrators. Table 50.--Relationships between administrative level and opportunity to participate in professional association activities by experience and desire. Administrative Level Exper1ence 0e51re Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. First level 2.048 .4911 2.408 .5435 Second level 1.922 .4987 2.519 .5230 df = 1 Experience F =2.961 Desire F =2.029 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS Undergraduate Vocational- Specialty Area Presented in Table 51 is the relationship between the under- graduate vocational-specialty area and the opportunity to experience professional association activities. Significance is less than the .01 level within the design, but the post-hoc test indicated that no pairwise groups were significant in themselves. Only the Agri- culture group has an average experience score; all others have low opportunity to experience development in professional association activities. As illustrated in Table 52, undergraduate vocational- specialty area is related at less than the .05 level of confidence with desire to participate in professional association activities. 108 Table 51.--Relationships between undergraduate vocational-specialty area and opportunity to participate in professional asso- ciation activities by experience. Vocational- EXperience Specialty Area Mean S.D. Agriculture 2.100 .4925 Business & office 1.989 .4724 Distributive ed. 2.075 .4393 Health occ. 1.960 .5522 Home economics 2.097 .5654 Industrial ed. 1.955 .5315 Technical ed. 1.675 .3841 Other 1.726 .3796 df = 7 F = 3.101 Significance = .0038 Table 52.--Relationships between undergraduate vocational-specialty area and the opportunity to participate in professional association activities by experience and desire. Vocational- Experience Desire Specialty Area Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Agriculture 2.100 .4925 2.508 .4698 Business & office 1.989 .4724 2.657 .3664 Distributive ed. 2.075 .4393 2.642 .5017 Health occ. 1.960 .5522 2.330 .6516 Home economics 2.097 .5654 2.613 .6050 Industrial ed. 1.955 .5315 2.384 .5646 Technical ed. 1.675 .3841 2.383 .6807 Other 1.726 .3796 2.349 .5500 df = 7 Experience F=3.101 Desire F=2.055 Sig. = .0038 Sig. = .0490 109 The post-hoc test demonstrated that the significance was something other than the pairwise comparisons. Of the specialty area groups that desire experience in this developmental area, only three groups desire high opportunity for the experience: Business and Office (2.657), Distributive Education (2.642), and Home Economics (2.613). All other groups have an average desire for the experience. There is greater desire within Business and Office than in the other five groups to participate in professional association activities (mean 2.657, standard deviation .3664). Health Occupations, Agri— culture, and Industrial Education have more congruence in experience and desire mean scores than do the other groups. The greatest dif- ferences between the experience and desire mean scores belong to the Technical Education and the Business and Office groups. State Department Experience As Table 53 illustrates, the number of years in the state department and the opportunity to participate in professional asso- ciation activities are related at less than the .05 level of confi- dence. The post-hoc test verified that the less than 3 years group and the 4-7 years group have had significantly less experience than the over 15 years group. Only the group with over 15 years in the state department demonstrates average experience in professional association activities, whereas the other four groups indicate low experience in the area. 5)). 81 la II 110 Tkable 53.-~Re1ationships between state department experience and the opportunity to participate in professional association activities by experience. Number of Years Experience in State Department Mean S.D. Less than 3 1.808 .4724 4-7 years 1.869 .4707 8-11 years 2.017 .4892 12-15 years 1.952 .4741 Over 15 2.125 .5536 (if = 4 F = 2.474 Significance = .0449 The relationships between state department experience and «desire to participate in professional association activities are shown in Table 54. 'Table 54.--Relationships between state department experience and the opportunity to participate in professional association activities by desire. Number of Years Desire in State Department Mean S.D. Less than 3 2.785 .2908 4-7 years 2.509 .5168 8—11 years 2.509 .4986 12-15 years 2.420 .4939 Over 15 2.322 .7314 (if = 4 F = 3.248 Significance = .0127 g 111 The Least Significant Difference post-hoc test determined tjiat the less than 3 years group has significantly more desire to participate in professional association activities than all of the (Ither groups. Only the less than 3 years group has a high desire 'for'professional development experience, with a mean score of at 'least 2.6. All other groups desire average opportunity for the experience. The less than 3 years group has the greatest within-group 1agreement regarding desire for the experience, whereas the over 15 years group shows the least agreement within the group. Mobility and Job Advancement Is mobility encouragedend are promotions extent? As indicated in Figure 6, 59.7 percent of the state voca- ‘tional administrators have average or high experience in mobility, vvhereas 40.3 percent of the group have had no or low experience. ()pportunity for mobility and job advancement is more evenly dis- ‘tributed among experience level groups than in any of the other five idevelopmental areas. Approximately the same percentage of adminis— ‘trators have low opportunity for mobility as have average experience-- 31 percent compared to 34.1 percent. Administrators who have had mobility experience have worked \with supervisors to set goals for improvement of work performance, have had regular appraisals to evaluate work performance, and have had their range of responsibilities expanded in the job assignment. 'There appears to be low opportunity in the state department for promotions, merit pay raises, lateral positional moves, and job 112 .ogwmoo ooo moco_gooxo an ucosooco>oo non ooo zuwpwoos Log xuwcapgoQQO11.o og=m_u mogoom cooze o.m 1 m.~ m.m 1 F.~ o.~ 1 m.F «m.~ 1 o.P mocowgooxm gum: oucowgooxm omoem>< moooweooxm 3oz oocowcooxu oz ,Iom 11cm mewmmo zoo: e OM1©N 10¢ ogwmoo osom m.N 1 F.~ ogwmoo 3oz ,Iom o.~ 1 o.F og_moo oz m P 1 o F loo 111 azzmoequ 113 1advancement. Administrators at all experience levels indicated a high desire to experience almost all of the mobility items, with ‘79.4 percent of the group indicating the high desire category. Administrators indicated somewhat less desire to move laterally into a position that provides a wider scope of responsibility. Desire for mobility ranked first among the six developmental areas. State Size As illustrated in Table 55, there is no relationship between state size and the opportunity to experience mobility and job advance- ment. All groups tend to rank toward the lower end of the average experience scale. All state size groups have a high desire for mobility and job advancement, as evidenced by the mean desire score of at least 2.6. Table 55.--Relationships between state size and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by experience and desire. State Size Exper1ence 0e51re Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Small 2.107 .4600 2.798 .4167 Medium 2.124 .4550 2.667 .4190 Large 2.228 .5054 2.709 .4435 Extra large 2.229 .5102 2.738 .3350 df = 3 Experience F=l.152 Desire F=l.192 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS 114 Sex The relationship of sex to opportunities for mobility and job advancement is significant at the .0548 level, just above the .05 critical value range. Desire for mobility and advancement demonstrates no significance, as both groups denote a high desire. (See Table 56.) Table 56.--Relationships between sex and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by experience and desire. Sex Experience Desire Mean 5.0. Mean 5.0. Male 2.200 .4749 2.735 .3384 Female 2.064 .4933 2.705 .5414 df = 1 Experience F = 3.722 Desire F = .273 Sig. = .0548 Sig. = NS There is a considerable spread in mean scores for both males and females, with females' scores demonstrating the wider range between experience and desire. This is the only instance in which males indicated a higher desire than females to experience greater opportunity in a particular developmental area. All other areas show males to have less desire than females. A92 There is a relationship between age and the administrator's opportunity for mobility and job advancement. The analysis of 115 variance proves, as shown in Table 57, that there is a significant difference at less than the .05 level of confidence between or among age groups. Table 57.--Relationships between age and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by experience. Age Experience Mean S.D. Less than 30 1.713 .3980 30-39 years 2.104 .5004 40-49 years 2.145 .4639 50-59 years 2.258 .4732 Over 60 2.159 .5001 df = 4 F = 2.875 Significance = .0236 The Least Significant Difference test determined that the less than 30 group has had significantly less opportunity than all the other groups to experience job advancements, lateral moves with increased responsibility, merit pay raises, and promotional title changes. All the other groups have had at least average experience in the developmental area of mobility and advancement, whereas the less than 30 group has had low experience. Somewhere within the design there is a significant relation- ship, at less than the .05 level of confidence, between age and the desire for mobility and advancement. (See Table 58.) However, 116 using the Least Significant Difference post-hoc multiple comparisons test, none of the groups were significant in themselves. Although the means of some complex combination of groups were different from the mean of some other group or combinations of groups, it was something other than pairwise comparisons. Table 58.--Relationships between age and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by desire. Desire Age Mean S.D. Less than 30 2.838 .3292 30-39 years 2.827 .2684 40-49 years 2.783 .2883 50—59 years 2.648 .4879 Over 60 2.594 .5309 df = 4 F = 2.908 Significance = .0223 Administrative Level As presented in Table 59, administrative level is related, at the .0001 level of confidence, to opportunities for mobility and job advancement. First-level administrators have had more opportu- nity than second-level administrators to experience mobility and job advancement. 117 Table 59.--Relationships between administrative level and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by experience. Administrative Level Exper1ence Mean S.D. First level 2.372 .4960 Second level 2.109 .4533 df = 1 F = 14.910 Significance = .0001 Table 60 illustrates that there is no relationship between administrative level and the desire for mobility and job advancement, as both groups seek more opportunity for mobility and job advancement. Tab1e 60.--Relationships between administrative level and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by experience and desire. Ad . . t t' L 1 Experience Desire m'"‘s ra ‘Ve eve Mean S.D. Mean S.D. First level 2.372 .4960 2.743 .3640 Second level 2.109 .4533 2.721 .4066 df = 1 Experience F=14.910 Desire F= .133 Sig. = .0001 Sig. = NS There appears to be a considerable spread in mean experience and desire scores for both groups. However, second-level adminis- trators tend to indicate greater diversity between what the group 118 has actually had the opportunity to experience and what it would like to experience. Undergraduate Vocational- SpecialtyiArea The relationships between undergraduate vocational-specialty area and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by both experi— ence and desire do not demonstrate a significant difference between groups. Table 61 illustrates the differences between the experience of a particular vocational-specialty area group and the desire of that group to have Opportunities for mobility and job advancement. Tab1e 6l.--Re1ationships between vocational-Specialty area and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by experience and desire. Vocational- Experience Desire Specialty Area Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Agriculture 2.293 .4693 2.678 .4365 Business & office 2.160 .4590 2.753 .3387 Distributive ed. 2.058 .5248 2.892 .1929 Health occ. 2.100 .4738 2.490 .6367 Home economics 2.137 .5082 2.660 .6251 Industrial ed. 2.164 .5352 2.711 .4067 Technical ed. 1.958 .3872 2.742 .3147 Other 2.204 .4530 2.757 .2676 df = 7 Experience F = .874 Desire F =1.005 Sig. = NS Sig. = NS 119 All groups except Technical Education have had at least an average amount of experience, as indicated by the mean experience scores. With the exception of the Health Occupations group, which desires an average amount of mobility, all groups indicate a high desire for mobility and job advancement. State Department Experience A significant relationship, at less than the .01 critical value, does exist between the number of years in the state department and the opportunity to experience mobility and job advancement. (See Table 62.) Table 62.--Relationships between state department experience and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by experience. Number of Years Experience in State Department Mean S.D. Less than 3 1.896 .5295 4-7 years 2.103 .4050 8-11 years 2.253 .4263 12-15 years .2.187 .4953 Over 15 2.314 .5499 df = 4 F = 4.050 Significance = .0034 The post-hoc test differentiated the groups that differed significantly in their opportunities to experience mobility and 120 advancement. The less than 3 years group has had less opportunity than the 8-11 years group, the 12-15 years group, and the over 15 years group. The 4-7 years group has had less opportunity than the over 15 years group. Presented in Table 63 is the relationship between the number of years in the state department and the opportunity for mobility and job advancement by desire. The analysis of variance verified that there is a significant difference, at less than the .01 level of confidence, somewhere within the design. The Least Significant Difference post-hoc test established that the over 15 years group has less desire for mobility and advancement than all other groups. Table 63.--Relationships between state department experience and opportunity for mobility and job advancement by desire. Number of Years Desire in State Department Mean S.D. Less than 3 2.831 .2346 4-7 years 2.783 .3267 8-11 years 2.779 .3515 12-15 years 2.680 .3212 Over 15 2.464 .6892 df = 4 F = 5.241 Significance = .0005 121 Desire for Greater Opportunity to Experience Professional and Management Development’Activities Which groups (sex, ege, administrative level, vocational §pecialty area, state department experience) have the greatest desire for change--for more gpportunity to experi- ence professional and management development activities? To determine which groups desired more opportunity to experi- ence professional and management development activities, a change score was computed to represent the desire for change in opportunity. This score was computed by finding the difference between the accu- mulated desire score and the accumulated experience score. The analysis of variance tested significant differences between groups, with alpha set at .05 as the critical value. A multiple comparisons procedure of the Least Significant Differences technique was used when the F-value was statistically significant and the independent variable contained three or more groups. In the following discussion the groups desiring change in opportunity are presented and the develop- mental activities are ranked, beginning with the group's highest priority. Females The female group has the greatest desire for change in four professional and management development areas, as shown in Table 64. Their highest priorities tend to be opportunities that would provide more varied administrative responsibilities and higher visibility and exposure. 122 Table 64.-~Females' desire for change, according to professional and management development areas. Development Area F-Value Significance On-the-job assignments 26.680 <.OOOl Visibility and exposure 8.266 .0044 Outside develOpment training 6.142 .0135 Professional Association activities 5.783 .0169 Age Groups Various age groups indicated a significant desire for change-- for more opportunity. (See Table 65.) The less than 30 years group tends to want more opportunity for visibility and exposure, whereas the 30-39 years group and the 40-49 years group desire more outside development training. 'Table 65.--Desire for change according to age level and professional and management development areas. Development Area F-Value Significance .tgess than 30 Years Visibility and Exposure 4.454 .0017 Outside Development Training 4.149 .0029 Mobility and Job Advancement 3.760 .0055 Professional Association Activities 2.575 .0383 30-39 Years Ogtside Development Training 4.149 .0029 V1sibility and Exposure 4.454 .0017 1151:49 Years ()Lrtside Development Training 4.149 .0029 rofessional Association Activities 2.575 .0383 \ 123 Second-Level Administrators Second-level administrators would like to have increased opportunity to grow in the three areas shown in Table 66. This group's highest priority tends to be more opportunity for mobility and job advancement. Tab1e 66.--Second-level administrators' desirefOr change, according to development areas. Development Area F-Value Significance Mobility and job advancement 7.807 .0056 On-the-job assignments 3.590 .0037 Professional association activities 4.683 .0314 Vocational-Specialty Areas Two groups in the vocational-specialty area group have a high desire for change. Their desires for growth are presented in Tab1e 67. Table 67.--Desire for change according to vocational-specialty area and development area. Development Area F-Value Significance Home Economics On-the-job assignment 3.977 .0004 Outside development training 2.241 .0317 Business and Office Outside Development training 2.241 .0317 124 State Department Experience Two groups have a strong desire for change in opportunity for developmental activities--the less than 3 years group and the 4—7 years group. (See Table 68.) Table 68.-—Desire for change according to state department experience and development area. Development Area F-Value Significance Less Than 3 Years Mobility and job advancement 7.263 <.0001 Outside development training 6.142 .0001 Professional association activities 4.693 .0011 Visibility and exposure 4.408 .0018 On-the-job assignment 3.717 .0058 Development of communication skills 2.414 .0495 4-7 Years Mobility and job advancement 7.263 <.0001 Outside development training 6.142 .0001 Professional association activities 4.693 .0011 Visibility and exposure 4.408 .0018 Development of communication skills 2.414 .0495 State administrators who have worked at the state department less than 3 years desire more change than any other group, as indicated by the six developmental areas listed in Table 68. They tend to have Inore desire for mobility and advancement and special outside develop- ment training than for the other four development areas. The 4-7 years group also wants change for increased opportunity to experience professional and management development activities, as evicjenced by the five areas that showed significance. 125 Profile of a State Vocational Administrator A profile of a state vocational administrator may be sketched by examining the groups that hold status and position relative to other groups within the formal organization. Then a descriptive analysis of the individuals who make up the group, in terms of physi— cal attributes, professional experiences, and educational background, will enable the researcher to formulate some generalizations about the norms of the group and to determine which groups are provided opportunities for growth and mobility. In reviewing the data collected, it appears that state voca- tional administrators are primarily Caucasian males (Table 69), between the ages of 40 and 59 (Table 70). Out of a total of 61 first-level administrators responding (Tables 70 and 71), 83.6 percent (51) are male, and mostly between 40 and 59 years of age. Table 69.-~State vocational administrators by sex and race. Cauca- Amer. Spanish . Row Sex sian Black Indian Surname Oriental Total Male Number 186 3 1 6 l 197 Row percent 94.4 1.5 .5 3.1 .5 76.4 Female Number 57 3 O O 1 61 Row percent 93.4 4.9 0 0 1.6 23.7 Column total Number 243 6 1 6 2 258 % of total 94.2 2.4 .4 2.3 .8 100.0 126 Table 70.--Administrative level by age: Male respondents. Administrative Less 60 and Row Level Than 30 30-39 40-49 50-59 Over Total First Level Number 0 6 22 19 4 51 Row percent 0 11.8 43.1 37.3 7.8 27.0 Second Level Number 3 34 43 47 11 138 Row percent 2.2 24.6 31.2 34.1 8.0 73.0 Column total Number 3 4O 65 66 15 189 % of total 1.6 21.2 34.4 34.9 7.9 100.0 Note: Eight second-level administrators did not respond. In the 40-49 age group, the proportion of male first-level to second-level administrators is 43.1 percent (22) to 31.2 percent (43), more first-level to second-level administrators than in any other age group. The fewest male first-level administrators are in the over 60 age group, with only 7.8 percent (4). Almost 75 percent (146) of all second—level administrators in the sample are male. Again, the 40-59 age group has the largest number of administrators--48 percent (90) of the total number of second-level administrators. Only 2.2 percent (3) are in the less- than-3O age group. The central tendency measures for the entire group of all state vocational administrators are as follows: The mean is 45.6 years, the mode is 37 years, and the median equals 46.5 years of age. 127 As shown in Table 71, 16 percent (10) of the female respon- dents are first-level administrators. The largest percentage in a single age group is 50 percent (5) in the 50-59 age category; the smallest percentage is in the 30-39 and 40-49 age groups, each rep- resenting 20 percent (2). Table 71.--Administrative level by age: Female respondents. Administrative Less 60 and Row Level Than 30 30'39 40'49 50'59 Over Total First Level Number 0 2 2 5 1 10 Row percent 0 20.0 20.0 50.0 10.0 16.0 Second Level Number 4 13 14 14 3 48 Row percent 8.3 27.1 29.2 29.2 6.3 84.0 Column total Number 4 15 l6 l9 4 58 % of total 6.9 25.9 27.6 32.8 6.9 100.0 Note: Three second-level administrators did not respond. There are 48 female second-level administrators, or 26 percent of the entire sample. The number of female first- and second-level administrators remains basically the same from 30 years of age through 59, whereas the number of male administrators at both the first and second levels drastically increases from 30 to 49 years of age. Referring back to Table 69, it can be seen that minority groups are represented by 15 administrators, 11 of whom are male and 4 female. Of the females, three are black and one is oriental. 128 Black and Spanish-surname respondents have the highest minority rep- resentation, with six members each or 2.3 percent of the total. In determining the vocational-specialty background of the individuals who become first- and second-level administrators, it appears that the largest percentage of administrators comes from Industrial Education, with a total of 21.3 percent (53) of the total group; however, they represent 31 percent (18) of the first-level administrators and 18.3 percent (35) of second-level administrators (see Table 72). Proportionately, there are more first-level adminis- trators to second-level administrators than any other vocational— specialty area, except for Agriculture, which has the same. The groups that have the second highest total numbers are Business and Office and the group labeled Other (not in a vocational-specialty area). Business and Office comprises 18.9 percent (47) of the over- £311 group--15.5 percent (9) of the first-level administrators and 19.9 percent of the second-level administrators. The ratio of first— 1tc> second-level administrators is one to four. The group named Other has 18.5 percent (46) of the state \I<>cational administrators--l9 percent (11) of the first-level admin- istrators and 18.3 percent (35) of the second-level administrators. Ni thin the Others group, the ratio of first-to second-level adminis- tr‘a‘ltors is one to three. Agriculture boasts 15.7 percent (39) of the total group, and ranks third in numbers of state vocational administrators. It is second highest in numbers of first- Ievel administrators, 22.4 percent (13) of that group. Within the 129 .ocoomog aoc owo mpoooF>Pocw oopz "ouoz o.oop m.o_ o.¢ m._~ o.N_ o.e o.¢ m.op “.mp .mp8» co & mom we NF mm on o_ NF No on eonsaz Pogo» oeapou _.¢_ o.¢ P.¢. ¢.o_ o.~ o.¢ m.mp o.op ocmocoa Peach _.o~ o.oo_ o.oo ~.oo o.o~ o.oo_ m.oo N.oo “amazon eszpoo 5.85 m.mp m.o m.op o.m. ~.m m.o o.mp o.mp “caugog sag _¢P mm N. mm ow N N. om om eonsaz Po>mz ocooom 4.4 o N.“ o.P N._ o o.m N.m oeouema .mHOF m.m~ o o.em m.m_ o.om o _.m_ m.mm “amazon csspoo m.m~ o.m_ o o.Fm m.o N.m o m.mp «.mm ocmocoa 38m om _F o o_ e m o m mp 289532 Pose; “were Pooo» Lozpo .ooom .ooom .coom .ozooo .oaom oopmwo a .opgm< pm>o4 3oz .zomh .omoooH oEoz zupooz .owgumwo mmocwmom . o>wposumw:_so< .oogo xppowooom1pooowuooo> opoooogmgoooo an Po>o~ o>wuogumwcw5o<11.mu opoop 130 Agriculture group, the ratio of first-level administrators to second- level administrators is one to two. The smallest number of administrators is in the Health Occu- pations area, with a total of 4 percent (10), 3 first level and 7 second level. Distributive Education and Technical Education have no first-level administrators, but each area claims 12 percent (12) second-level administrators each. Although Home Economics has the same number of second-level administrators as does Agriculture-- 13.6 percent (26)--as a group it can claim only 6.9 percent (4) of the first-level administrators. State vocational administrators as a group have an educa- tional background of at least a master's degree or higher (see Table 73). Only 8.1 percent (20) of the 248 respondents have only a bachelor's degree. Of those holding advanced degrees, 74.1 percent (169) have a master's degree, 16.2 percent (37) possess a doctorate degree, and 9.6 percent (22) have completed a Specialist degree. As illustrated in Table 74, the state administrators most often have master's degrees in their vocational specialty area-- 41 .4 percent (70) of the respondents--and least often have the degree in guidance and counseling--4.7 percent (8)--or curriculum and instruction—~55 percent (11). Almost 19 percent (32) of the respon- CiEErIts in the total master's degree group had majors in vocational- technical education and educational administration. The largest number of respondents have a Ph.D. major in educational administration--43.2 percent (16). A major in the voca- t ‘3 Onal specialty area tends to be the second highest degree major. .oooomog no: owo m—ooom>wocv m>wz "opoz 131 o.oop m.m m.mm ~.m~ u.m ¢.e «.mp Pouou wo n mmm om pm No mp o_ Ne gooszz Pouop =E:_ou N.op w.op o.- «.mo ¢.m o m.m~ Homogoo 3oz mm o op op N o m consoz .a.zo o.m o m.¢ o.mo o F.m N.~N acousoo 3oz mm o p op o m m L3:52 umwpowumom .uoom F.o~ m.m o._o m.w_ m.m ~.o m.mp ucoogoo 3oz mop op om mm PF m mm L3:52 mgopmoz pouoh go a oog< .ooom .cweo< .Lum:H a .mcoou a .om .cooh ~o>o4 3oz z o Pooowpooo> .ooou .o_ggou oocoowow 1.oo> Focowuoooou .Lonoe mogmoo omuoo>oo an ~o>op Fooowoouoou11.mu upon» 132 .zogoomog pocowuouooo cw mo: oogmoo oooco>oo m.gouoeumv:w5oo ~o>o~1umsw$ moo .ocoomog no: owo m—ozop>wocw o>wz "opoz o.oo— m.u 5.xm o.o~ N.m o.o o.o~ Fopop mo a NmN om mm mm mp op mm L.3532 Pogo» esopou N.on m.w o.wm o.o~ N.m o.m m.o~ ucmogoo 3oz mop oF mu we FF 5 mm L$55.5 ~o>oz ocoowm m.m~ N.o 5.9m m.o~ m.m o.m n.PN Homogoo 3oz oo o mm op N m m_ Loosoz po>oz umgpm ~opoh Logo ooe< .ooom .:PEo< .Lum:H w .mcoou a .om .zooh po>o4 3oz o Focowpooo> .ooom .owggoo oocoopow 1.oo> o>muogumwcweo< .Lonoe omgmoo oooco>oo an Po>op o>vpogumwcpeo<11.en mpooh 133 Guidance and Counseling and Curriculum and Instruction have the lowest numbers--O and 5.4 percent (2), respectively. First-level administrators obtained their advanced degrees in their vocational specialty area (36.7 percent [22]), educational administration (26.7 percent [16]), and vocational-technical educa- tion (21.7 percent [13]). Second-level administrators also earned advanced degrees in their vocational-specialty area (38 percent [73]), educational administration (24 percent [46]), and vocational- technical education (20.3 percent [39]). Table 75 indicates that 61 percent (36) of the first-level administrators have a master's degree and 16.9 percent (10) hold a doctorate degree. The smallest group (10.2 percent [6]) has the specialist degree. 'Table 75.-~Sex by education level: First-level administrators. Bachelor's Master's Specialist Doctorate Row Sex Degree Degree Degree Degree Total Dazzle Number 5 31 6 8 50 Row percent 10.0 62.0 12.0 16.0 84.7 Female Number 2 5 0 2 9 Row percent 22.2 55.6 0 22.2 15.3 C01 umn total Number 7 36 6 10 59 2; of total 11.9 61.0 g 10.2 16.9 100.0 K 134 As evidenced by Table 76, second-level administrators also predominantly possess master's degrees, with 70.4 percent (133). The second highest group holds doctorates, with 14.3 percent (27). Table 76.--Sex by education level: Second-level administrators. Bachelor's Master's Specialist Doctorate Row Sex Degree Degree Degree Degree Total Male Number 8 99 9 23 139 Row percent 5.8 71.2 6.5 16.5 73.5 Female Number 5 34 7 4 50 Row percent 10.0 68.0 14.0 8.0 26.5 Column total Number 13 133 16 27 189 % of total 6.9 70.4 8.5 14.3 100.0 Unlike the first-level administrators, the second-level admin- istrators' smallest group (6.9 percent [13])holds a bachelor's degree. In terms of percentages, more first-level administrators have bache- lor's degrees than do second-level administrators. There appear to be no significant differences between males and females in terms of educational background, other than the fact that no females in first- level positions have specialist degrees and the number of male second- 1evel administrators who hold doctorate degrees is 16.5 percent (23), compared to 8 percent (4) of the female second-level administrators who hold doctorates. 135 Most first-level administrators in the sample (21.7 percent [13])earnsalaries in the $28,000-$30,999 range. (See Table 77.) It appears that salaries are widely diverse, since as many first- level administrators earn $16,000-$18,999 as earn over $34,000. Numbers of responses in the other salary ranges are evenly distrib- uted. Females are not represented in three of the salary ranges-- the extreme low and high groups, and the middle group. The second-level administrators most frequently checked the $22,000-$24,999 salary range--30 percent [57] of the total. (See Table 78.) The second highest number was in the $19,000-$21,999 range, with 23.7 percent (45). The ratio of females to males drops in the 522,000-524,999 group; this trend continues throughout the higher salary ranges. The largest percentage of state administrators who are cur- rently employed have worked 8 to 11 years in the state department of education (30.2 percent [76] of the sample). (See Tables 79 and 80.) Next most frequently checked was the 4-7 years group (25.8 percent [65] of the sample). No first-level male administrator has worked at the state department for three years or less. It appears that it takes at least eight years to advance to a first-level position and the administrator stays in that position until some time in the 12-15 year period. The number of second-level adminis- trators in each experience group increases through the 11 years category; then a sharp decline in numbers is evident. , 136 .ocoomog no: owo _o=ow>wo=w moo "ouoz o.oop N.N o.m~ N._N N.op N.N_ N.o_ N.N papa» ea N om m m NF op o op m consaz Pepe» =s=_oo N.op o o.om o.o¢ o o.ON o.o_ o peougoa sou o, o N e o N _ o sagas: opoEmz N.NN o.op o.NF o.N_ o.ON o.N_ o.NF o._ ocauema 38m om m o m op o m m gangsz ape: Pepe» zm>o new mam.mmn mmm.om» mom.NNo mom.eN» mmm._N» mam.o_a xom 38¢ ooo.qmm -ooo.~mo -ooo.NNw -ooo.mNa -ooo.NN» 1ooo.mpz -ooo.opz .mgouospmwcmeoo Fo>o~1umgpm “omens zgopom an xmm11.~n wpooh 137 .oooomog poo owo mpooov>wocw co>om ”ouoz o.oo_ N.¢ N.N N.o. o.om N.NN N.e_ o.N Page» co N om. N m_ NN No me NN m Longs: Pepe“ =5=_oo N.mN o _.¢ N.¢F o.NN o.om ¢.NF _.¢ ocoueoa 30m me o N N e. m_ m N conga: oposom N.¢N N.m N.m N.NP m.om N.FN m.m_ P.N bemugoa 38¢ _¢F N N, mN Ne om m_ m Logosz o_oz Paooe mom.mmm mom.omm mam.NN» omm.eNN mom.FNm mmm.N_o ooo.o_a xom 30¢ -ooo._mo -ooo.NNa -ooo.mNN -ooo.NNN -ooo.mpw -ooo.opo cage ammo .mgouogumw:PEoo Pm>o~1ocooom ”moon; agopom zo xom11.w~ o—oo» 138 Table 79.-~Administrative level by state department experience: Males. Administrative 3 or Less 4-7 8-11 12-15 Over 15 Row Level Years Years Years Years Years Total First Level Number 0 8 19 19 5 51 Row percent 0 15.7 37.3 37.3 9.8 26.6 Second Level Number 13 38 45 27 18 141 Row percent 9.2 27.0 31.9 19.1 12.8 73.4 Column total Number 13 46 64 46 23 192 % of total 6.8 24.0 33.3 24.0 12.0 100.0 There appears to be no defined route for the female first- level administrator, as the 10 individuals holding such positions are spread throughout the five experience ranges in no particular pat- tern. (See Table 80.) There is a noticeable similarity in the number of female and male second-level administrators with less than three years experience, but as the next eight years demonstrate, the number of males holding second-level positions triples, whereas the number of females holding such positions remains substantially the same. State vocational administrators tend to stay in a position between seven and nine years. Male first-level administrators, after remaining contant in terms of numbers through nine years, exhibit the biggest drop in numbers during the 10-12 year period. (See Table 81.) 139 Table 80.--Administrative level by state department experience: Females. Administrative 3 or Less 4-7 8-11 12-15 Over 15 Row Level Years Years Years Years Years Total First Level Number 1 2 3 1 3 10 Row percent 10.0 20.0 30.0 10.0 30.0 16.7 Second Level Number 11 17 9 6 7 50 Row percent 22.0 34.0 18.0 12.0 14.0 83.3 Column total Number 12 19 12 7 10 60 % of total 20.0 31.7 20.0 11.7 16.7 100.0 Tab1e 81.--Sex by years in present position: First-level administrators. Sex 3 or Less 4-6 7-9 10-12 Over 13 Row Years Years Years Years Years Total Male Number 17 15 14 4 l 51 Row percent 33.3 29.4 27.5 7.8 2.0 83.6 Female Number 4 2 3 0 1 10 Row percent 40.0 20.0 30.0 0 10.0 16.4 Column total Number 21 17 17 4 2 61 % of total 34.4 27.9 27.9 6.6 3.3 100.0 140 Table 82 shows that between the seventh and ninth years of employment, male second-level administrators tend to leave that administrator grouping and either move into a first-level position or leave the state department. Between the tenth and twelfth years, a more drastic decrease in numbers is in evidence. Tab1e 82.--Sex by years in present position: Second-level administrators. 3 or Less 4-6 7-9 10-12 Over 13 Row Sex Years Years Years Years Years Total Male Number 42 42 31 18 11 142 Row percent 29.6 29.6 21.8 11.3 7.7 74.0 Female Number 26 13 6 2 3 50 Row percent 52.0 25.0 12.0 4.0 6.0 26.0 Column total Number 68 55 37 18 14 192 % of total 35.4 28.6 19.3 9.4 7.3 100.0 Female first-level administrators are sparse in number and are almost evenly dispersed in the three experience groups represent- ing up to nine years of employment. Most female second-level admin- istrators (52 percent [26]) are in the three or less years category. However, this group is the only one of the three administrator groups to lose 50 percent of its numbers in each succeeding three-year period. Most noticeable is the 50 percent decrease in numbers in the four to six year category. 141 State vocational administrators average 11 years of profes- sional employment before coming to work in the state department. The educational work years most frequently experienced is 7, while median educational experience is 10 years. Most respondents (35.6 percent [86]) had had four to eight years of previous educa— tion experience. (See Table 83.) The fewest administrators--8.3 percent (20)--were in the three or less years group. Table 83.--Professional experience in education before being employed in the state department. Years of Experience Number Percent 3 or less 20 8.3 4 to 8 years 86 35.6 9 to 13 years 45 18.6 14 to 18 years 52 21.5 19 years and over 39 16.1 Total 242 100.1 Note: Percentages do not total 100 because of rounding off figures. As shown in Table 84, almost 71 percent (83) of the respon- dents had an academic background in administration or management; 29.1 percent (75) did not have this background. 142 Table 84.--Academic background in administration or management. Academic Number of Preparation Respondents Percent Yes 183 70.9 "0 75 29.1 Total 258 100,0 Of the respondents who had an administrative or management background, a majority (33.9 percent [59]) had taken 6 to 12 credits in these fields. (See Table 85.) "Other" was the next most fre- quently mentioned level of preparation, indicated by 32.8 percent (57) of the total respondents. Table 85.--Academic preparation in administration or management by administrative level: Yes respondents. Administrative . 6-12 Degree Row Level 5 crad'ts Credits Minor Other Total First Level Number 5 16 10 14 45 Row percent 11.1 35.6 22.2 31.1 100.0 Second Level Number 10 43 33 43 129 Row percent 7.8 33.3 25.6 33.3 100.0 Column total Number 15 59 43 57 174 % of total 8.6 33.9 24.7 32.8 100.0 143 Ten administrators in the group labeled "Other" had had a major in administration, and five had a master's degree in business administration. Others had had such experiences as in-service courses, military service, seminars, accounting, and nursing. The majority, however, checked only “Other" and did not specify the type of experience. The least academic preparation mentioned was less than six credits (8.6 percent [15]); alarger percentage of first- than second-level administrators had taken only six credits in adminis- tration or management. As illustrated in Table 86, first-level state administrators are four times as likely to be promoted from within the state depart- ment as to be hired from outside the department. Tab1e 86.--Promotion from within or outside the state department by academic preparation in administration: First-level administrators. Academic Preparation Type of Promotion Yes No Row Total Within the department Number 35 12 47 Column percent 79.5 75.0 78.3 Outside the department Number 9 4 l3 Column percent 20.5 25.0 21.7 Column total Number 44 16 60 % of total 73.3 26.7 100.0 144 Administrators promoted from within the state department total 78.3 percent (47), whereas 21.7 percent (13) were hired from outside the department. 0f the first-level administrator group, 73.3 percent (44) stated they had had academic preparation in administration or management and 26.7 percent (16) said they had not. An administrator without training is three times as likely to be promoted from within the department as from outside, or 75 percent (12) of the respon- dents as opposed to 25 percent (4). Second-level administrators are also more apt to be promoted from within than from outside the department, but at a much lower rate than first-level administrators, as shown in Table 87. Table 87.--Promotion from within or outside the state department by academic preparation in administration: Second-level administrators. Academic Preparation Type of Promotion Yes No Row Total Within the department Number 76 36 112 Column percent 56.3 64.3 58.6 Outside the department Number 59 20 79 Column percent 43.7 35.7 41.4 Total Number 135 56 191 % of total 70.7 29.3 100.0 145 Administrators promoted from within the department total 58.6 percent (112) of the sample, whereas 41.4 percent (79) were hired from outside the department. Of those promoted from within the state department, 56.3 percent (76) had had academic preparation in administration, while 43.7 percent (20) of those hired from out- side the department had had such preparation. Administrators with no academic preparation in administration are more likely to be promoted from within than from outside the state department (64.3 percent [36] as opposed to 35.7 percent [20]); however, a sizable number are employed from outside the department. Promotion to the present position came after administrators had obtained their highest educational degree, according to 80.6 percent (208) of the total group; however, 19.4 percent (50) of the administrators had been promoted without the advanced degree, as shown in Table 88. Table 88.--Promotion to present position before or after completion of the advanced degree. Number When Promoted of Responses Percent Before degree completed 50 19.4 After degree completed 208 80.6 Total 258 100.0 146 Profile Sumary In summary, a state vocational administrator who has high opportunity for professional and management development and upward mobility is a Caucasian male, usually between 40 and 49 years of age. His vocational-specialty background is either Industrial Edu- cation or Agricultural Education, and his highest educational level i s a master's degree in his vocational-specialty area. Some aca- demic preparation in administration or management has been a part of his educational experience, but the most conmon experience is likely to have been the earning of 6 to 12 credits in administration or management. A first-level administrator is most likely to be in the $25,000-$31,000 income bracket, whereas the second-level adminis- trator is in the 522,000—525,000 range. This high-opportunity admin- ‘i strator has had approximately 11 years of professional employment 1' 11 education before coming to the state department, and has worked approximately 10 to 11 years in the state department. Some time ciuring the 8-to-11-year period he advanced to a first-level position, t>ut then only after having completed his advanced degree. It appears that some time between the twelfth and the fifteenth year of employ- mem he will leave the state department, most likely to seek greater Opportunity for professional growth and development and to achieve further upward mobility. CHAPTER V DISCUSSION, SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The primary purpose of this study was to describe state voca- tional administrators' opportunities to experience and the desire to experience professional and management development in state depart- ments of education throughout the United States. A secondary purpose was to identify the variables or the combination of variables that influence the degree of opportunity a state vocational administrator experiences and/or has the desire to experience. The final purpose was to describe a profile of a state vocational administrator who has the maximum opportunity to experience professional growth and development. Six growth areas were identified to represent opportunities for professional and management development; they included: varied on-the-job assignments, development of communication skills, visi- bility and exposure with high state and government officials, outside training and development, professional association activities, and mobility and job advancement. Eight exploratory questions, deduced from the principal problem, set the boundaries of the research study. The study population included state vocational administra- tors employed in vocational divisions of state departments of edu- cation throughout the United States. A stratified random sample of 147 148 20 states (40 percent) was selected from the 10 United States Office of Education regions. The survey sample included 381 state voca- tional administrators, the total state vocational administrative staff who met certain criteria, namely, administrative title and/or hierarchical placement on the organizational chart. A six-page survey questionnaire was used to gather the data for the study. A response rate of 72.2 percent, or 275 questionnaires, was realized. Summary of Findings The findings were summarized in two main parts. In the first part, the data were analyzed to answer the exploratory questions as to whether the state vocational administrators have had the oppor- tunity to experience and the desire to experience professional and management development (1) as a total group, (2) by the independent variables of (a) state size; (b) sex and age; (c) level of adminis- tration, vocational-Specialty area, and number of years in the state department. The second part contains a summary of the demographic data and a description of a profile of a state vocational adminis- trator who has had maximum opportunity to experience professional and management development. Although 275 administrators comprised the sample, 258 usable questionnaires provided the data for the study. Of the states that responded, more than half had a 70 percent or higher response rate; just less than half had a 60-69 percent response rate, and only one state scored below 60 percent on returns. In analyzing the returns according to state size, the percentages were fairly evenly 149 distributed with the highest returns from the extra-large states (82 percent return) and the lowest returns from the large states (66 percent). The small and medium-size states fall in the middle, with 76 percent and 70 percent, respectively. The reliability of the instrument used to collect the data demonstrates that all six subscales have a reliability coefficient above .70, with most of the subscales indicating a coefficient of .80 or higher. This questionnaire evidences internal consistency-- that state vocational administrators were consistent in their responses when questioned about their opportunities to experience and the desire to experience professional and management develop- ment activities. Therefore, conclusions drawn concerning the results of the study may be interpreted with confidence for all six sub- scales. A summary of findings relating to the exploratory research questions for this study is now presented. Is a planned in-service training program provided for state vocatibnal administrators? Participation in a state staff planned in-service program for professional and managerial deVelopment was affirmed by 80 per- cent of the group, whereas approximately 20 percent said they had not participated in such a program. State administrators employed in extra-large-sized states are more apt to have had the opportunity, so agreed 96 percent, while administrators from small states are least likely, as checked by 68 percent. A majority of state adminis- trators agreed to the need for such a program; it was rated important 150 to very important by approximately 90 percent of those who are cur- rently participating in an in-service program, and nearly 85 percent of those who are not. When the respondents were asked to evaluate their in-service program according to whether it was meeting their needs for professional and managerial development, approximately 58 percent rated the current in-service program as very good to excellent, while 43 percent felt the program rated fair to not meet- ing expectations. First-level administrators were more apt to rate the program fair, whereas a majority of the second-level administra- tors evaluated their program as very good. The respondents in general did not appear to know the amount of funds allocated for a planned in-service program, as 80 percent either didn't know, didn't have access to the information, left the question blank, or filled in a zero amount. The results of the study appear to indicate that a majority of the state vocational administrators do participate in an in-service program; however, a sizable number do not, and would like to have the benefits of such a program. It appears that the needs of second- level administrators are better being met than those of first-level administrators. Are opportunities for professional and managerial development built into the job assignment? State vocational administrators, as a group, have had more opportunity to experience professional and management development in their on-the-job assignments than in any one of the other five developmental areas, which tends to be in agreement with the theories 151 of McGregor, Miles, and other management theorists--that variety of opportunity to experience administrative functions in the job assign- ment is the basis for any professional and management development program. Slightly more than 50 percent of the administrators experi- enced a high degree of opportunity, while approximately 20 percent have had either no experience or low experience in their on-the-job assignments, a relatively low percentage compared to other develop- mental areas. Administrators tended to have responsibilities which included such developmental activities as: evaluating and screening project proposals, serving on management or project teams for pur- poses of planning and evaluation, and working on special assignments with at least three other units. Administrators as a group tended not to engage in budget allocation for all vocational areas, coordi- nate a planning or evaluation team for all vocational areas, or be involved in decision making in the executive council meetings. Administrators appear to recognize the importance of the job assign- ment, as 73 percent of the respondents had a high desire to partici- pate in such development activities, whereas only administrators who had the greatest opportunity marked no desire. High-priority items for growth are the desire to make recom- mendations about the hiring of professional staff, to have a voice in decision making at executive council meetings, to work on management or project teams for planning and evaluation for all vocational areas, to serve as a liaison to outside agencies, and to coordinate a plan- ning or evaluation team for one vocational area. Factors which 152 indicate a significant difference as to the degree of opportunity to experience a variety of on-the-job assignments are: FEMALES have LESS OPPORTUNITY than males. Administrators LESS THAN 39 years of age have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators 40-49 years of age. SECOND-LEVEL ADMINISTRATORS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than first-level administrators. Administrators who have undergraduate degrees in HOME ECONOMICS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators who have undergraduate degrees in the vocational-specialty areas of Agriculture and/or Industrial Education. Administrators who have worked in the state department of education LESS THAN 7 YEARS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators who have worked 8-11 years in the state department. Of the above groups, only females demonstrate a significant difference in the desire to have the Opportunity to experience more professional and management development in the on-the-job assign- ments. Administrators who are male, between the ages of 40 and 49, are first-level administrators, have an undergraduate degree in the vocational-specialty areas of Agriculture and/or Industrial Educa- tion, and have worked 8 to 11 years have high opportunity for on-the- job assignments. Are there opportunities for development of communication skills? State administrators have been afforded great opportunity to improve their communication skills of speaking, writing, and inter- acting. Approximately 80 percent of the administrators have had at least average or high experience in this developmental area, and 153 less than 2 percent have had no experience; only administrators with the greatest experience have the least desire to participate in com- munication activities. Most administrators have had the opportunity to participate in the following activities: making presentations at state vocational teacher workshops and conferences; giving technical assistance to vocational directors, administrators, deans, and teachers; making presentations to outside agencies; and writing ER state plans, reports, and position papers. The developmental activi- ties administrators are least likely to perform are publishing articles in professional journals, conducting regional public meet- é! ings and hearings, and chairing vocational administrators' in-service workshops or conferences. More administrators have had the oppor- tunity to develop their communication competencies than any of the other five developmental areas. As a result, administrators tend to demonstrate less desire for this activity than the developmental activities of mobility and job advancement, on-the-job assignments, and outside development training. Factors which indicate a significant difference as to the degree of opportunity to experience the development of communica- tion skills are as follows: SMALL and MEDIUM-SIZED STATES have LESS OPPORTUNITY than extra-large and large states. Administrators LESS THAN 39 years of age have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators 40-49 years of age. Administrators LESS THAN 30 years of age have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators 50-59 years of age. 154 SECOND-LEVEL ADMINISTRATORS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than first-level administrators. Administrators who have worked in the state department 4-7 YEARS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators who have worked 8 years or more in the state department. Administrators who are employed in extra-large or large states, who are 40-59 years of age, are first-level administrators, and have worked 8 or more years in the state department have high opportunity to develop communication skills. Are there opportunities for visibility and exposure in working with high state and government officials? State administrators have had less opportunity as a total group to experience high visibility and exposure working with state and government officials, as only 46 percent had average to high experience mean scores, the third lowest of the growth areas, sur- passing only outside training and development and participation in professional association activities. Administrators are most likely to have had the opportunity to work on special projects or task forces with the superintendent of education; to prepare plans, policies, issue and position papers, and reports for presentation to the state board and/or superintendent; or to serve in aleadership capacity on a state task force. However, few administrators have had an opportunity to act as consultants to the state legislature for purposes of writing or analyzing legislation, towork on special assignments to the state legislature, to serve on national or regional task forces or ad hoc committees, or to make presentations to the state board. In regard to the desire to have these experiences, 155 approximately 63 percent of the administrators have a high desire for visibility and exposure; but in priorities only the desire to participate in professional association activities rates lower. Factors that influence the degree of opportunity experienced, as indicated by the significant differences between variables, are: FEMALES have LESS OPPORTUNITY than males. SECOND—LEVEL ADMINISTRATORS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than first-level administrators. Administrators who have undergraduate degrees in TECHNICAL EDUCATION or NOT IN A VOCATIONAL-SPECIALTY AREA have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators who have an undergraduate degree in Agriculture, Distributive Education, and Industrial Education. Administrators who have worked LESS THAN 7 years in the state department have had LESS OPPORTUNITY than 8-11 years and over 15 years administrators. Administrators who tend to have the most opportunity for visi- bility and exposure are male, first-level administrators; have an undergraduate degree major in Agriculture, Distributive Education, or Industrial Education; and have worked in the state department 8 to 11 years or over 15 years. Does the state department support develppment in the form of outside professional and management training? The opportunity to participate in outside training and development tends not to be a frequently experienced professional and management development activity, as only 5 percent of the state vocational administrators have had a high degree of experience and 65 percent have had either no experience or low experience. This developmental area tends to be the least supported area of the six. 156 Nearly 65 percent seem to have a high desire for outside management training, and would particularly like to participate in specialized training programs at USOE regional or national seminars or meetings; to attend outside-agency-sponsored seminars, conferences, and meet- ings; and to participate in management training programs at univer- sity institutes or with private consultant firms in state or out-of— state. Administrators show a willingness to participate in special internships at USOE federal or regional offices, AVA headquarters, or U.S. Congress. State administrators, as a group, have placed outside train- ing and development as third in priorities following the desire for mobility and job advancement and the desire for variety in adminis— trative responsibilities in their on-the-job assignments. Significant differences were evidenced on the following independent variables: Administrators LESS THAN 30 have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators who are 30 years or older. SECOND-LEVEL ADMINISTRATORS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than first-level administrators. Administrators who have worked at the state department 4-7 YEARS have had LESS OPPORTUNITY than administra- tors who have worked 8 or more years. Of the above groups, the following have a significantly dif- ferent desire to experience outside development training: Administrators who are 30-49 YEARS of age DESIRE MORE OPPORTUNITY than administrators who are 50 years or over. Administrators who have been in the state department LESS THAN 3 YEARS DESIRE MORE OPPORTUNITY than admin- istrators who have worked in the state department 8 years or more. 157 Administrators who have worked in the state department 4-7 YEARS DESIRE MORE OPPORTUNITY than administrators who have worked in the state department over 15 years. A profile of an administrator who has more likely had the opportunity to participate in outside training and development is at least 30 years of age or older, is a first-level administrator, and has worked in the state department at least 8 years. Have opportunities been extended to participate in_professional association activities? As a group, state vocational administrators tend not to be actively involved in professional association activities, as indicated by 59 percent of the administrators who have had either no opportunity or low opportunity. Although state administrators attend national professional association conferences, the data indicate that few hold an executive office, serve as a national conference committee chairman, or make formal presentations at the conference meetings. Nearly 57 percent of the respondents signify a high desire to become actively involved. The findings denote a willingness of adminis- trators not only to attend the national conferences but to speak at the sessions, serve on the American Vocational Assocaition confer- ence committees, and preside at state professional conferences. Professional association activities do, however, have a low priority in comparison to the other developmental areas, as shown by the 56.5 percent signifying a high desire for such activities. Significant differences were found for the following inde- pendent variables: 158 Administrators who are LESS THAN 30 years of age have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators over 60 years. Administrators who have an undergraduate degree in TECHNICAL EDUCATION or NOT IN A VOCATIONAL-SPECIALTY AREA have LESS OPPORTUNITY than those with degrees in Agriculture, Business and Office, Distributive Educa- tion, and Home Economics. Administrators who have worked in the state department LESS THAN 7 YEARS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administra- tors who have been in the state department over 15 years. Only the group who has worked in the state department LESS THAN 3 YEARS demonstrates a significant difference in the desire to have the opportunity to participate in professional association activities. A profile of an administrator who has high opportunity to par- ticipate in professional association activities can be described as an individual who is over 60 years of age; who has an undergraduate degree major in Agriculture, Business and Office, Distributive Educa- tion, or Home Economics; and has worked in the state department over 15 years. Is mobility encouraged and are promotions extant? Approximately 60 percent of the state administrators have average or high experience in opportunity for mobility and job advance- ment, whereas 40 percent of the group have had no or low experience. Opportunity for mobility is more evenly distributed among experi- ence level groups than in any of the other five developmental areas. Administrators who have had mobility experience have worked with supervisors to set goals for improvement of work performance, have had regular appraisals to evaluate work performance, and have had their range of responsibilities expanded in the job assignment. 159 There appears to be low opportunity in the state department for promotions, merit pay raises, lateral positional moves, and job advancement. Administrators at all experience levels indicate a high desire to experience almost all of the mobility items, with 79 percent of the group indicating the high desire category. Adminis- trators indicate somewhat less desire to move laterally into a posi- tion that provides a wider scope of responsibility. Desire for mobility ranked first among the six developmental areas. Factors which influence the degree of mobility and job pro- motion experience are: Administrators who are LESS THAN 30 YEARS of age have LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators who are 30 or over. SECOND-LEVEL ADMINISTRATORS have LESS OPPORTUNITY than first-level administrators. Administrators with LESS THAN 3 YEARS of experience in the state department have LESS OPPORTUNITY than admin- istrators who have 8 or more years in the state depart- ment. Administrators who have worked in the state department 4—7 YEARS have had LESS OPPORTUNITY than administrators who have worked in the state department over 15 years. Of those who demonstrated a significant difference in desire, Administrators who have worked in the state department LESS THAN 15 YEARS have DESIRE FOR MORE OPPORTUNITY than administrators who have worked at the state depart- ment over 15 years. Administrators who have high opportunity to experience mobil- ity and job advancement are usually over 30 years of age, are first- level administrators, and have worked at least 8 years in the state department. 160 Which groups (sex, age, administrative level, vocational epecialty area, state department experiencé) have the greatest desire for change--formore_opportunity to experi- ence professional and management development activities? The groups desiring a change in opportunity are presented and the developmental activities are ranked, beginning with the group's highest priority. The female group has the greatest desire for change in four professional and management development areas, with the highest priority being opportunity for varied administrative responsibili- ties followed by visibility and exposure, outside development train- ing, and professional association activities. The less than 30 years group tends to want more opportunity for visibility and exposure, outside development training, mobility and job advancement, and professional association activities. The 30-39 years group prefers outside development training and visibility and exposure. The 40-49 years group would like more opportunity for outside training and development and participation in professional associa— tion activities. Second-level administrators would like to have increased opportunity to grow in three areas: mobility and job advancement, on-the-job assignments, and professional association activities. Home Economics undergraduate majors have a high desire for change in their on-the-job assignments and outside development train- ing, whereas Business and Office majors would like to have more oppor- tunity for outside development training. 161 State administrators who have worked at the state department less than 3 years desire more change than any other group, in all six developmental areas. Highest desire is in mobility and job advance- ment, outside development training, professional association activi- ties, visibility and exposure, on-the-job assignment, and development of communication skills. The 4-7 years group also wants increased opportunity to experience professional and management development activities, but in five areas. They desire opportunity in the same areas as the less than 3 years group, and in the same order with the exception of on-the-job assignments, which does not demonstrate a significant dif— ference. Profile of a State Vocational Administrator A state vocational administrator who has high opportunity for professional and management development and upward mobility is a Caucasian male, usually between 40 and 49 years of age. His vocational-specialty background is either Industrial Education or Agricultural Education, and his highest educational level is a master's degree in his vocational-specialty area. Some academic preparation in administration or management has been a part of his educational experience, but the most common experience is likely to have been the earning of 6 to 12 credits in administration or man- agement. A first-level administrator is most likely to be in the $25,000-$31,000 income bracket, whereas the second-level administrator 162 is in the $22,000-$25,000 range. This high-opportunity administra- tor has had approximately 11 years of professional employment in education before coming to the state department, and has worked approximately 10 to 11 years in the state department. Some time during the 8-11 period he advanced to a first-level position, but then only after having completed his advanced degree. It appears that some time between the twelfth and the fifteenth year of employment he will leave the state department, most likely to seek greater opportunity for professional growth and development and to achieve further upward mobility. Conclusions According to the findings of this study, state departments of education appear not to provide outside management training and development for their state vocational administrative staff. Oppor- tunity for professional growth tends to be limited to the range of administrative responsibilities an administrator is assigned on the job. Although the job design is considered a primary source for growth and development, according to management theorists McGregor, Miles, Sayles and Strauss, additional developmental activities are considered necessary to keep administrators current with the changing times and to reeducate administrators so that they may be instrumen- tal in implementing recent federal legislation that requires drastic changes in employment and educational programs. It appears that state departments are not providing added opportunities for profes- sional and management growth and although the federal government is 163 legislating change it is not providing assistance to the states in the form of funds or in-service programs to educate and train state vocational administrators. It seems tenable from the data that opportunities to partici- pate in developmental activities are restricted to a small group of individuals. These high-opportunity administrators not only have a wide range of administrative assignments but have access to other growth areas as well. They have had opportunity for visibility and exposure working with high state and government officials, which Kanter and Jennings consider to be key elements in the development of administrators and guarantees of future growth and advancement. These individuals also have some exposure to outside management training, they receive state department support to participate in professional association activities, and they are likely to have had job advancements and a degree of mobility. Individuals at the lower levels of administration require the same kinds of opportunities for growth and development as do higher level administrators. The results show that they have the desire but have not had the oppor- tunity for such development. The administrators who have had the most opportunity do not need it and in many instances do not desire it. Administrators who have had little opportunity for growth are forced to seek other kinds of developmental activities, such as participation in organizations, in order to grow professionally; or as the data indicate, a large number leave the state department and look elsewhere for professional growth. I!“ L! - I' 164 As stated previously, the opportunity for administrators to participate in outside training and development is nearly nonexis- tent, except for a select few. Yet findings show that many state vocational administrators who are hired for or are advanced to a top-level position have had no academic preparation in administra- tion or management. The incongruity of the situation is that although state vocational administrators possess advanced degrees in their vocational specialty areas, the positions for which they are hired require generalist-type capabilities; at the same time, state departments of education provide no outside training. This current condition is in confict with the views of theorists like Swope, Odiorne, and Sayles and Strauss--that specialization does not constitute proper training or education for the development of management capabilities. A generalist-type education is more apt to provide the tools necessary to utilize human resources effectively and to solve the complex problems that organizations are faced with today. If administrators are not selected for their administrative and management capabilities, what are they selected for? Should the top-level state vocational administrators be limited to individuals from only two specialty areas, and do the decisions made by this small group represent the entire field of vocational education? Are the power groups too small, and do they stifle creativity in solving complex problems? It appears that the qualifications required for state voca- tional administrator positions do not match the job descriptions. This may be because the characteristics and complexion of the role 165 of state department administrators have changed, away from the specialist to the generalist, and the job description does not reflect that change. Perhaps civil service and/or personnel depart- ments need to examine the criteria for hiring and promoting indi- viduals in state departments of education, and change these criteria so that qualifications for the position are directly related to the duties performed on the job. It may be concluded that a wide gap exists between what state vocational administrators would like to have the opportunity to experience in the way of professional and management development activities and what the state departments of education have provided them in these areas. State administrators are ready and committed to be involved in professional development programs, as they desire greater opportunity to participate in good-quality in-service pro- grams and outside training and management development. They desire more variety in administrative responsibilities and greater visi- bility and exposure on the job. Administrators are also willing to participate in professional association activities and are particu- larly interested in opportunities for mobility and job advancement. Of high priority to all administrators is the desire for mobility, for good quality in-service programs, and for outside training and development Opportunities. The opportunity for varied on-the-job assignments is a crucial factor in terms of the degree of professional growth a state voca- tional administrator experiences. As the study findings point out, females' job assignments are not presently designed to provide a 166 variety of administrative responsibilities, which male administrators automatically have the opportunity to experience. Without oppor- tunity in the job assignment, there is no opportunity for profes- sional growth and development. Females tend to be hired for traditionally female jobs, which are narrower in scope than male positions. It may be concluded that state departments of education currently operate under a system of designing jobs that do not pro- vide equal employment opportunities to females. Although females must possess the same qualifications as males, they do not have the same degree of opportunity in assignments; less opportunity for a variety of administrative responsibilities in the job assignment appears, in turn, to block opportunity for mobility and job advance- ment. It is apparent that most state agencies have made some attempt to provide an in-service program for their state vocational staffs, and the larger the state the more likely they are to have an on-going program. However, it seems that only a few state agencies are providing an effective in-service program, as most state admin- istrators feel the quality of the programs could be improved. Upper leVel administrators are particularly critical of the in-service programs as not meeting their particular needs. Five factors seem to make the difference between effective and ineffective state agency in-service programs: (1) whether the professional development activities are supported by the top admin- istrators; (2) whether state vocational staff are involved in the planning and evaluation of the in-service programs; (3) whether staff 167 provide input into the establishment of the budget and the allocation of the funds; (4) whether a line staff person has as one of his/her main functions the responsibility for surveying, directing, and coordinating the professional development of the state staff; and (5) whether the state administrator's professional development program is custom designed, based on performance appraisal, to meet the administrator's individual needs. It appears that some state agen- cies are achieving success in providing good quality in-service programs. The state vocational agencies in Colordao and Nebraska may be considered possible models for further inquiry into how to establish opportunities to meet the needs of the entire staff and to provide equal opportunity for professional and management growth. The variables of sex, age, administrative level, undergraduate vocational specialty area, and the number of years employed in the state department are all directly related to the opportunities state administrators have to experience professional and management develop- ment. Administrators who have a high opportunity for professional and management development are Caucasian males, between 40 and 49 years of age, from the vocational specialty areas of Agriculture and Industrial Education; they have worked 8 to 11 years in the state departments of education. If professional and management development activities are to be extended to all administrators rather than to a select few, state vocational divisions will need to implement more equal employment opportunities. Several factors will need to change. Jobs will need to be designed to encourage broader participation of more groups of 168 administrators who previously have been excluded, namely females and individuals under 39 years of age. Top-level state administrators will need to assume the role of administrators rather than special- ists and delegate more responsibility, involve more administrators in the decision making, and in general adopt a more participative management style. State and/or federal agencies will need to provide funds to support the professional and management development activi- ties for all the state staff. These funds would be used to provide more effective in-service programs and outside training and manage- ment with university consultants, private business firms, and other state and federal agencies. State administrators would also be encouraged to participate actively in professional association activities, with state departments supplying travel funds and provid- ing commitment. Recommendations This section provides recommendations to those concerned with the development of effective planned professional and management development programs for state vocational administrators, as well as suggestions for further research. One of the purposes of this research was to provide informa- tion that will be useful to those concerned with the design of effective planned professional and management development programs for state vocational administrators employed in vocational divisions of state departments of education. On the basis of the findings of this study, it is recommended that: 169 A study be conducted to determine the most effective learning methods and approaches to professional and management development so as to bring about increased knowledge and/or change attitudes and behaviors. A study be undertaken to determine the job assignments that provide the most growth and challenge. A study be undertaken to determine the environmental condi- tions that are supportive of equal opportunity for professional and management growth. A study be conducted to determine the specific subject area needs of state vocational administrators that should be included in the professional and management development program. A study be conducted to determine the role of top-level state vocational administrators according to first-level administrators and second-level administrators. APPENDICES APPENDIX A SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX A A SURVEY OF PROFESSIONAL GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES FOR VOCATIONAL STATE ADMINISTRATORS This survey is designed to describe the opportunities of vocational state administrators in state departments of education for professional and management development. This questionnaire is divided into three parts. Part I requests information about your state staff inservice program and demographic data about yourself. Part II lists specific experiences or events in which you may have had opportunities to participate. Part III requests your response to open ended questions. Please select the answer that comes closest to being true as you know it. The time frame should include only your eigeriences within the past two years . PART I--STATE DEPARTMENT STAFF INSERVICE PROGRAM 1. [SIT-lave you participated in a vocational state staff planned inservice program for your professional and management development? [ ] Yes [ ] No 2 . [611f yes, answer the following, otherwise, move to question 3. How would you evaluate your state department's planned inservice program in meeting your needs as a state administrator in terms of professional and management development? If 1 Excellent 2[ 1 Very Good 3[ 1 Fair 4[ ] Not meeting anticipated expectations 3. [71Do you feel the need of an extensive inservice program for state staff administrators in order to improve skills , increase knowledge and/or change attitudes? 1[ 1 Very Important 2[ 1 Important 3[ ] Somewhat Important 4[ ] Not important 4. [8-121What were the total federal and state funds expended for state administrators' professional and management development in the form of a planned inservice program for 1977-1978 Total Amount. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA 5. [l3]Sex: 1[] Male 6. [14]Race: 1[]White 3[]American Ind. 511 Oriental 2[] Female 2[] Black 4[] Spanish Surname 6[ 1 7. [15,161Age: 8 . [171Level of Administration: I[ ]Title is likely to be any one of the following: assistant, associate, or deputy director, or commissioner; assistant or associate superintendent; chief or assistant chief, or manager. Officially report directly to the state director, assistant super- intendent or similarly titled position. 2[ 1Title is like to be any one of the following: supervisor, director, or coordinator, who is in charge of a program area, a supportive service area, or a planning and development area . Officially report to an administrator who in turn reports to the state director, assistant superintendent or similarly titled position. 170 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. I71 [IBIWhat is yOur undergraduate vocational-specialty area? 1[ I Agricultural Education 4[ I Health Education 7[ I Technical Education 2[ I Business and Office Education 5[ I Home Economics 8[ I Not in a Vocational- 3[ I Distributive Education 6[ I Industrial Education Technical Area [ISIHighest Education Level: II] Baccalaureate 2[] Masters 3[I Specialist 4H Doctorate [2011f your advanced degree is the same as your undergraduate degree move to question 12, otherwise, what is your advanced degree major? I r: rt.” I l[ I Vocational-Technical Education 3[ I Curriculum and Instruction 5[ I Educational 2[ I Guidance and Counseling 4[ I Educational Administration Research and/or Higher Education 6[ ] Other [2 lIYour Salary Range: -1 it] Under $16,000 4[] 522,000-524,999 7i ] 531,000-533,999 _ 2[] 316,000-318,999 si] 525,000-527,999 8[ 1 Over $34,000 at] 519,000-521,999 6[I $28.000-$30.999 [22.23] What are your total years of professional work experience in the state department of education? (Years) [24,251What are your total years in your present position? (Years) [26,271What are your total years of professional work experience in education excluding state department work? (Years) IZBIDid you have academic preparation in administration or management before obtaining your present position? 1[ I Yes 2[ I No [2911f yes , which best describes your experience. otherwise, skip to question 18. ll I Less than 6 Credits 2[ I 6-12 Credits 3[ ] a Minor in a Formal 4[ I Other of Coursework of Coursework Degree Program I3OIWere you promoted to your present position from within or outside the state department? 1[ I Within the Department 2[ I Outside the Department [SlIDid you obtain your present position before or after obtaining your highest educational degree? 1[ I Before Obtaining Degree 2[ I After Obtaining Degree I72 PART II--OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT Below are listed possible professional and management development activities . Would you please respond to each of the statements in two ways. First, whether you have had the exper- ience of participating in the activity several times, once, or never; secondly, whether you desire the Opportunity to have this experience yes, uncertain, or no. Answer the questions within the time frame of the past two years. Example: If you have not had the experience, mark never, but if you would like to have the experience mark yes. Please be sure that you have two checks for each numbered item. THE STATEMENT SHOULD BE READ TWO TIMES: I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO. . . and then I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO. . EXPERIENCE DESIRE ON THE JOB ASSIGNMENT SEVERAL UNCER- TIMES ONCE NEVER YES TAIN NO l-l Work on management or project teams for planning and evaluation for all vocational areas................................ _ 1-2 Coordinate a planning or evaluation team :’ for all vocational areas................ 1-3 Budget for all vocational areas. . . . . . . . . . 1—4 Coordinate a project team to evaluate and screen project prOposals . . . . . . . . . . . . l-S Coordinate a planning or evaluation team forone vocational area................. 1-6 Budget for one vocational area . . . . . . . . . . . 1-7 Evaluate and screen project prOposals . . . . 1-8 Work on assignments with at least three other units, i.e. special needs, guidance and counseling, professional develOpment. 1-9 Participate in decision making in the executive council meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-10 Serve as liaison to outside agencies , i.e. SACVE, CETA, vocational administrators,etc l-ll Interview, screen employee applicants for the division........................... l-lZ Recommend the hiring of professional staff personneIOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNICATION SKILLS 2-1 2-2 Make presentations at state workshops, conferences for vocational teachers . . . . . Make presentations at state workshops conferences for VE directors, deans ,etc. Make presentations to outside agencies i.e. manpower groups , community groups . . Conduct regional public mtw. hearings . . . Give technical assistance to VE teachers . . Give technical assistance to VE directors , administrators, and deans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chair V}: teacher inservice workshOps/comets Chair VE administrators , directors or deans inservice workshops or conferences. . . . . . . I73 I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO. .and I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO. . EXPERIENCE DESIRE SEVERAL UNCER- DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNICATION SKILLS TIMES ONCE NEVER YES TAIN NO 2-9 Write state plans , reports, and position papers............................. Present the plans, reports , position papers to the staff or the exec council. . Write prOposals for federal funding. . . . . Publish articles in journals on topics relating to one vocational specialty area . Publish articles in journals on topics relating to broad area Of vocational ed . . VISIBILITY AND EXPOSURE 3-8 3-9 Work on special projects or task forces with the supt. of education or deputy asst. Prepare issue papers , position papers , reports for the state board and/or supt. Present the paper or report to the board Prepare plans or policies for presentation Work on Special assignments to the state legislature ........... . . . .......... . . . Act as consultant to the legislature for writing or analyzing legislation. . . . . . . . . Serve on a national task force or adhoc committee.......... ....... Serve on a regional task force or adhoc committee............................ Serve in a leadership capacity on a regional or state task force..................... OUTSIDE DEVELOPMENT TRAINING 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 Attend outside agency sponsored seminars , conferences, mtgs, i.e. manpower, AAUP,etc. Participate in specialized training programs at USOE regional or national seminars , mtgs. Participate in management training programs at university institutes or with private con- sulting firms out of state................ Participate in management training programs at the local university or with firms in state. Participate in special internships at the regional USOE office.................... Participate in special internships at Federal USOE Office, AVA Headquarters, U.S. Cong. PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ACTIVITIES 5-1 5-2 Serve in an executive position for a professional state organization. . . . . . . . . Preside at state professional conferences ormeetings.......................... I74 I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO. . .and I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO. . . EXPERIENCE DESIRE SEVERAL UNCER- PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ACTIVITIES TIMES ONCE NEVER YES TAIN NO 5-3 Attend national conferences which involve my job assignment, i.e. state directors, research and development, professional development, guidance and counseling. . . 5-4 Attend national conferences i.e. Business and Office Education, Agricultural Education, Industrial Education, etc.... .. 5-5 Speak at national or regional professional conferences, meetings.... .. ..... -6 Serve as national conference committee chair 7 Attend the American Vocational Association Convention............................. 5-8 Serve on a American Vocational Association Conference Committee................... 5-9 Serve in a national executive office for a professional organization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-10 Make a formal presentation at an AVA convention session..................... MOBILITY AND JOB PROMOTION 6-1 Ibrpand the range of responsibilities in my job assignment........................ 6-2 laterally move in position which provided a wider sc0pe of responsibilities . . . . . . . . 6-3 Have regular appraisals to evaluate my performance on the job 6-4 Work with my supervisor to set goals for my improved work performance. . . . . . . . . . 6-5 Receive merit pay as a result of improved work performance..................... 6-6 Receive promotional title changes other than the automatic civil service ratings required by law 6-7 Job advancements with increased salary other than the automatic cost of living increases civil service pays as required. . I75 If you have had some significant state department experiences which have contributed greatly to your professional and management growth, please list up to three and give reasons for doing so. Reason: Has the leadership in your state department taken innovative steps to improve its management practices in terms of better utilization of human resources? If yes, explain. What suggestions, if any, would you make to improve professional and management growth opportunities for vocational state administrators in your state department? In what areas do you feel the greatest need for more adequate preparation in the way of increased knowledge, improved skills , and/or changed attitudes in order to better carry out the goals of your vocational division? THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE AND PLEASE RETURN TO: Barbara A. Ferguson Graduate Assistant Occupational and Applied Arts Education 321 Erickson Hall Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 48824 APPENDIX B LETTERS TO SAMPLE APPENDIX B MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDI'CATION EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ' 4882‘ DEPARTMENT OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM ERICKSON HALL March 17, 1978 Dear Vocational State Administrator: Staff Development is a primary concern in vocational education today. The American Vocational Association at its 1977 convention resolved that high funding priority be given to vocational education staff development programs . AVA has also endorsed the development of standards and procedures for accreditation of vocational programs, institutions , and agencies. New federal education legis- lation has required changes in vocational state agency functions, procedures, and/or structure. The focus of the enclosed questionnaire is to explore the staff development activities of state vocational administrators throughout the United States. More specifically, this research study will examine the Oppor- tunities for professional and management develOpment of vocational state administrators in state departments of education. As little research has been done in this area, your participation in this nationwide study would be a valuable contribution to state staff development. Your state vocational agency, along with 20 others in the United States, has been selected randomly from the ten United States Office of Education regions. Would you please fill out the enclosed questionnaire within the week and return it in the stamped self-addressed envelope no later than Friday, March 31. Please feel free to answer all questions Openly as the information on this survey is con- fidential. All results will be summarized by groups and will not reflect individual responses. The number in the upper right margin on the first page of the question- naire is used only to classify responses and to assist in follow-up procedures. Thank you for your time and consideration in this research study. Sincerely yours , 5.4....0 Barbara A. Ferguson Graduate Assistant Occupational and Applied Arts 0% WW Dr. Robert Poland, Coordinator Dr. Eudora Pettigrew, Chairman Occupational and Applied Arts Education Urban and MetrOpolitan Studies I76 I77 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM ERICKSON HALL EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ' 48824 April 12, 1978 Dear Vocational State Administrator: Recently you received a survey questionnaire requesting information for a nationwide study on the professional and management growth opportunities that you have experienced as a vocational state administrator. The meaningfulness of this research depends upon accurate and complete responses from vocational state administrators like yourself, who are employed in one of the 20 state departments of education randomly selected for this study. Please participate in this research study by taking 15 to 20 minutes to answer the enclosed survey questionnaire. Your doing so will make a valuable contri- bution to state staff development. Your responses will be treated confidentially and all results will be summarized by groups and will not reflect individual responses. A stamped self-addressed envelope is enclosed. A response from you by April 21 would be greatly appreciated. 4. '7 " SSW-ha 5 / fi'wh‘- .. - - L . Barbara A. Ferguson Graduate Assistant Occupational and Applied Arts Education (MM: PM 4,. , é‘_ ! I » . , “I' I A ~ 1“- fl‘ :(‘.,/ l (”:7 :‘ --" Sincerely yours , Dr. Robert Poland, Coordinator Occupational and Applied Arts Education Dr. Eudora Pettigrewahairman Urban and Metropolitan Studies APPENDIX C TABULAR PRESENTATION OF RESPONSES IN EXPERIENCE AND DESIRE CATEGORIES, ACCORDING TO DEVELOPMENTAL AREAS V 01 P MNOOS tOr-Or- P Q‘ Q N etoxooo [\QF- F LO (D Q' Q'SOMN r-MNI— (Or-- I'— O N (xi—moo coco:— F N Or- OCDQ'O O _eoee ospmoo oz og_moo zoo ogvmoo meow seesaw gee: message“ see xseeeemmw> Peace ogwmoo oz oemmoo so; oepmoo meow menses sow: m__exm eewseaweeseeo mo Homeoopo>oo Peach ogpmoo oz oxymoo zoo ogwmoo meow «Lemme esp: wooscmwmm< ooouozuuoo _asee .axm ;o_z .oxm .o>< .oxm 3oz .oxu oz .Amooooooogoo spy mowgomoooo ooooweooxo ooo mnemoo op mcwogoooo .ocoEoopo>oo ocoEomocoE oco pocowmmomogo Low movovoooeoooo-u.mm opooh u x~ozmaa< I78 I79 .mosomwe moo mowocoog mo omooooo cop pouoo ozozpo oo: oo momouooogoo "opoz 0 FN Mkww N w r—Q' ooooom [x <- mooo ,— Q (‘0 Lnd'wfi‘ [\LD N ¢ 0 N \OQ‘QOQ aimi— F F P m mmNN GNP-F- N o._m m.m Pogo» o o ogwmoo oz o.o mnemoo zoo m oewmoo meow m m mnemoo sow: seeeeeee>o< nee see Aswp_eez m.om ¢.¢~ Pouch _ m seesaw ez N o seesaw 3e; o.“ ogwmoo meow _ m «Lemme new: mowuw>wuo< comoopoomm< pocopmmoeoga m.pm m.N pouch P ogpmoo oz N ogwmoo 3oz .m ogwmoo meow mm messes new: mcwcmogh ucosomocoz oopmuoo _eseh .axo ear: .oxu .o>< .eeeeeseeo--.mo e_eee APPENDIX D PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES, ACCORDING TO EXPERIENCE AND DESIRE . Z : NAN . NaN m.N_ :o N 3:523 ts: 3:238 F E N S 2 EN N E N N NN N: n as No 9.2:. 2: 22:82. NT. . Né NN o.NN . :N 3; so N 53;: 2: .5 3.523% m N: N N N 8N N e? N 3 R .3. a muse—a...» 59.3 .5233 Z; . . .ouo .mgouoeumvowsoo NoooNuooo> . mg Né NNN . 98 N e N a N . . .. . . e a: N e N: N «no 365 a. 335.3 o_ oN oNN Nm NF cop u oonuoo ou comNoN— mo o>gom op-— . so I: 98 . can 2 .28 N 3:33... :258 253$... 9: N E N 2 EN :N S RN N t t m: N 59.32. 533%.: $38.28 N-— o=o5oopo>oo pogo—mmowogo N SNN No. 52 NE N EN 2: 3: «.3 N 5:23:38 Ba 852% Jose: NN mm 3. on N 2: u. 38% to; .325 .55.. 2:5 “mom. No 5; mucgcmpmmo co fox w; . e.N_ NN NNN . a; to 98 N 28895 N as N .N NN N2 N 3: N 2 2 2N L Sane: 59.3 9; 32:3 N-— . N.: 3 NS . <8 .2 92 N - N o8 N em 2 SN S New N S N N: N 8.; 38:82 23 L8 :33 o N o a: N.N_ N.... 98 m NNNN Ni 9: 92 N E: 25:82 95 L8 .53 .55 mm 2 SN 8 8 NN. N .33: a 9:553 a 325.58 m.-. 2 «EN of «.2 o.NN N SNN EN 3: N? N £8895 Samoa 623 2; 32. mm 8 a: 8 N m: L -226 3 .53 Noumea e usefifeeo e-— . N.NN .1: Ne . NS NS 92.. N - __ mam N om Nm oo_ NP Now _ me. o— mo N women NaooNNNoo> _—e Low ooooom m N N NGN N.N_ m.N_ .9: : SN .9: N4: N5... N 39; $8382, :N L8 .58 8: NN NN o2 om on s: N $226 Le 3.2.5: a 32.225 N; . . . . . . memos Focovuooo> m _mN.~ N mw m WN memw m oNo.~ m WW N N. N MN N _po so» cowuoo—o>o oco maroon—o so» _ N N manna «omnoso Lo ucosoaucue co xgoz —u— 28... :2 835-5 ._ com: 53 :8: mos: xcoz oz I mo> x51 .65: 3:0 owa—BE: Loos: oouzawo: 3:28 3:52 ogwmoa oocovgooxm .oLNmoo one oocovgooxo ou ucpouoooo .moNuN>_uou acoEQoFo>oo «casemoooe oco —o:onnoNogguu.oo upon» a x32??? 180 18] . N..N ..NN NNN . NNN ..N. N.N. N .8 .8» N39; 2953 9:32: N. NNN N NN NN .N. N. NNN . NN. .N NN N 333 8 £2.53 5 3.9:: 5.2.... N.-N N.N. N.N. N.NN N.NN N..N N.NN N NwNN NN.N.NNNN .NNN.N . NN.. -Nuo> mco cu chuN.mN NNNNcu o. omc N an .m cm. N. N N.. mm cw N no N.N=N:on c. NNNuNNNN NNN.N:N NpuN . N.NN N.N. N.NN . N.NN N.N. N.NN N N=.N==N .. N.N N NN NN NN. N NN. N NN .N NN. N .NNNNNN NNN N.NNNNNNN NN.N= ..-N . NN. ..N. N..N . N.NN N. .. NNN N 2258 696.5 E: 3 :82. N NNN N NN NN NN. N NNN N 8 NN NN. N 83.8.. $252 $.53 2: 239;. SN . ..N. N.N N.NN . N.N N.N. N.NN N NNNNNN No.N.NoN N NnN N NN NN NN. N NNN N NN NN NNN N NNN .NNNNNNN .NNN.N NNNNN NN.N: N-N . . . . . . Noucflmmcou . ..N. N.N N.NN . N.N. N.N N.NN N NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N NNN N .N NN NNN N NNN N NN NN NN. N .Nu.>N~N=. NNNNNNN N> N.NNN N-N . NNN.N ..N N.N NNN N .NN.N N.N N.N NNN N 2.8.. £323.55. 589:... N. N NNN N. N. NNN N NN Nu NNNNNNNNNN .NN.NNNNN NN.N N-N . N.N N.N N.NN . N.N N.. N.NN N NNNNNNNN N NNN N NN N N.N N NNN N NN N NNN N N, o» NNNNNNNNNN .NNNNNNNN o>.N N-N . N..N N.N. N..N . N.NN N.N. ...N N NN=.NNNN N. NNN N NN NN NN. .. NNN . NN. NN NN. N .NN=.NoNa u..N=N .NNNNNNN NNNNNNN N-N . . . . . . Nanogu NN.:aseou . . . . . . .uum .Ncouu .mNcu N NNN.N N ”N N MN NNNN N .NN.N N N. N N N NN N -NNN.N N) NNN NNNNNNNNNNN .NNoNN .N .m a. ma. N -Ngc: munum no NcoNuNucoNuNa can: N-N N N .N.N N.N N.N NNN . NNN.N ..N .N.N N. .N N 22.83 $8.38, NNN 32.2889 N. N. NNN N N. NNN N 585.22. 33... NN 23:35th 9.... .-N Np—Nxm copumu.::esou Na peasaopu>uo .NN can: c_au cum: NmENN NNNN NNNNN.N; oz -NNNNN NNN NNNN NNNNN.NN NNN»: «NNN .NNNNNN NN.>.NNN «NNNoo uu:o.swaxw .vuac—ucouuu.om upon» 182 33.... No use «.5... .2328 32...... . N.N o... N..m . ..NN N.N. N.NN N . a N N . 5.... No NNNBBN... 3.... «N NE... 9. m .NN N m. NN moN N N .N. em N... N 3.59:. unusumocme... 32:3»..3 m4 . . . . . . .uum .ch.uwms .NNN:.smN .Nco.u~= N— OP mNN mm 0N NN.. m lab-.050 UUNw—flvuam Cr UHGQ'U—LLOA NI? .uuw .N=<< .Nozoacms ..u.. . N.N N.N N.NN . N.N. N.o. N.NN N . . . N NNN N . NNN N Na:.uwoe qucmgmmcou NNNNNENN N. oN N.N mm NN ca. N uoNoNNONN-»ucmoN-mv.N»=o ucouu< .nN .um.=.NNN acueao.a>oo «N.Nuac .>. N .NN.N N.N N.N. N.NN N mo..N N.NN o.N. N.NN N muse» xmou oumum No .Nco.mug N NN mm NN. NN on NN. N no Nu.uNNNu N.NNNNNNN. N :. N>Nmm N.N . ..N N.N. N.NN . N.N. N.N... N.NN N 33.5.8 8.. vs .8 N NNN N NN NN NN. N NNN . .N. NN NN N NNNNN NNNN .NNN.NNN N No «N.NN N.N N moN.N ..N. m... N.NN N NNN.. N..N N.N. N..n N uuuu.esou co: to No on NN .N. NN. NN .m N uuNoN NNN» .uco.uuc N :0 u>NNm N.N N NNN.N N.NN N.NN N.NN N NNN. N.NN N.N N.N. N SSSNBN. 9.2.22... .8 Nest... 3.. NN NN .N. .8 .N N... N 23238. N5 3 2.3.3.8 2. N2 N.N N NoN.N N..N N.N. ..NN m NNN.. N.NN N.N. N..N N NgauN.N.mo. NNNNN as» NN NN NN. NN. NN NN N 0. NNNNENN.NNN .N.NNNN co N.N: N.N . ..N N.N. N.NN . o.N. N... o.NN N co.umu:uNoNN . NNN N NN NN NN. N NNN N NN NN NN. N .NN NN.N..NN Na NNN.N N.NNNNN N-N . N.N. N.NN ..NN . N.NN N.N. ..Nm N uNNoN oz» on N NNN N NN NN NN. N NNN . NN. NN NN N N.NNN. No .NNNN NNN NNNNNNN N-N . . . . . . .ugam NoNNNN vNNoa N NNN.N N MM m w" memo m NNN.N m NW N a" o Nm N macaw as» Nam NuNonN .NNNNNN . N N . NN. N co.u.NcN .NNNNNN mamm. NNNNNNN Nun . . . . . . .NNNN Nuanou No co.uau=uo N NNN.N N mm . mm N.N” . NNN.N N MM . Mm N.N” “ No .NNNN NNN NN.: NNNNNN NNNN Na Nuuunosa .N.uoam co ago: ..n mgamoaxu use Nu...a.N.> .... NNN: N.NN NNN: Nme.h NNNN NNNNN.N= oz -NNNNN NN. NNNN NNNNN.N= NNNN: coco .N.N>NN N..>.Nu< NNNNwo oucm.gmnxm .uo:=.u:ou-n.om open» 183 . 0.x. m.NN N.Nm mNN.. o.mN N.N N.N. N mwuu.EEou wucwswmcou :o.uuwu0mm< N N: N 3 NN. NN.. N NN. N 3 N 2558.; 59:22 E S 2:3 N.N . m.m m.N o.mm N .mm.N N.N. m.ON m.co N :o.u=u>=ou co.uo.uamm< N NNN N N. 2 NNN NN NN E N 28:82, 5252 N5 232 N-N m o.N.N m.mN m.NN ..NN o mNm.. o.NN N.N m.N. N :NELNNNU owuupfieou me oN oN. No. NN Nm N wuconNcou .Nca.uac NN u>gom N-N N 0No.N ..o N.N. ..NN m N.N.N N.NN N.N. m.Nm N .N.N .Nu=.umoe .moucogmmcou .Nco.N NN NN NN. NN NN NN. N -NNNEN .2532 No .32 NN N83 N-N . . . . . . .uuw .co.umu:uu .umauc. .zopuuusuw N NNNN N m o NN: NNN—NW N N.N.N N w N MN NNmM m 53.32? 63:83 8:3 N NNu=.N=m ..o.. ..N=ou ..NN: vcouu< N-N m:..omc=ou ecu uncut—zm . NNw.N ..m m6 ado . Nmod N... m... o.NN N .52. £95 Tinazugmamwg .23 N o. ONN ON NN NN. N -NNN.NNNNNN..N...N=NENNNNNNnoNNg w>.o>:. :u.=3 moucwguucou ..u~= accuu< mum . N.N. m... N.No . m.om m.N. ..mm N mm:.uwws Lo mwucwgwu N 23 N 3 NN N: N 8N N 2 NN S. N .=8 35.389... 33m NN 023.5 N-N m m.m.N m.mN m.N. o.Nm e o.m.. w..m N.N. n.mm N co.un~.:umgo woman .uco.mmouogn a No NN NN. NN. mm mm N No» :o.».NoN o>.u=uuxo so a. u>Num .-m mw.u.>.au< co.um.UOmm< .wco.mmuwogN .> . . . . . . mumsocou .m.= .mgouguzc N NNNN N m o NH" Nmmw N. N8.— . WWN N w NN. N -N.N... 52 £qu 38 .238 NN N mn.=m:Nou=. .~.uonm :. mama.u.uLuN cuN m ONN.N N.NN N.N. N.oe m o.... N.NN ..m N.N N NUNNNo mom: .NcoNNNN use an mm NN mm. NNN w o. N mq.gchwu:. .m.uoam :. ouaamu.NLmN muN . . . . . . ouNuN g. mEL.N NN.: No m PQN.N N N 0 PF m _.w M F?@.-. M V? M NP 9 mm N .>_.C5 FUUOF USO HG WEMLUOLQ DC? m. aN NON m.. NN mm. N -:.NN» acmewmmcas :. oumn.u.ugoN N-N cum: N.NN new: mws.. xcmm oz I mo> Nam: Nw>wz coco uwuzo.m3 Noun: kuzm.w3 .NNw>wm Nu.>.uu< ag.mmn mucw.gmaxm .vu:=.a=ounu.oa ¢.nuh 1534 NNN.=amN NN NxNN mu.>NNN m N.N.N N.N N.N N.NN N on.. N.NN a..N ..Nm N ..>.u NNNNmNuc. m:.>.. No NNou N. NN N.N NN. NN NN N N.NNENNNN NNN NNNN NNNNN NNN.NN NNNNmNuc. NN.: NucmsaucN>NN new N-N . . . . . . 3N. an NNN.:N~N NNN.NNN mu.>NuN N NNN.N N Mm N MM NNMN N NNN.. N NN N N. N NN N ..>.N N.NNENNNN NNN NNNN .NNNN . NN. .N NN N NNNNNNN N.N.» .Nco.uosbga o>.uoo¢ N-N N NNN.N N.N N.N N..N N .NN.. N.NN N... N.NN N NNNNENNNNNN NNN: NN>NNNs. NN NN NNN NN. NN NN N No N.NNNN N NN NNN N.Nae N>.NNNN N-N . . . . . . ouchLoN . mmm.N N.N N.N N.NN . . N.N N.N N.NN N no“ as» no ouNNENoNNoN NE NNN N N NNN NNN N NN NN N.N N -N.N>N NN N.NN.NNNNN NN.:NNN NNN: N-N . . . . . . NN.»...N.N N NNN.N o NN N .. N no N Nom.. . NN N N. N NN N -coNNog No macaw NNN.3 N NNN.>NNN N N.N.N N.N. N.N N..N N NNN.N N.N. ..N. ...N N NNNENN.NNN Na. N: c. NN.N...N NN .N NNN NN NN NN. N -.N=oNNNg NN NNNNN NNN NNNNNN .-N co.uosoNN aou NNN Nu...no: ..> N NNN.N N.NN N.NN N.NN m NNN.. N.NN N... N.N. N co.NNNN :o.uco>=ou <>< :N NN oN oN. NN. NN. NN N «N co.uNu:oNuNN .NENNN N NNN: o.-N . . . . . . No.9NN.cNmNo o. .N..N N mm N Mm ..M“ N. N.N.. N mwN N ”N N.N. N .NNN.NNNNNNN N NNN NN.NNN N N>.N=uoxu .Nco.uN= N :. N>NoN N-N :Nwz N.NN NNN: 33... NNNN oz - NN. NNNN No>cz coco fiwusmwg .NwUCD twuzawg —QLQ>OM ha. v>ruu< N... .78.. 3.8.396 .NN==.NNNN--.NN N.NN. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Babbie, Earl R. Survey Research Methods. Belmont, Ca1if.: Wadsworth Pub1ishing Co., Inc., 1973. Bailyn, L., and Schein, E. H. "Life/Career Considerations as Indi- cators of Quality of Employment." In Measuring Work Quality for Social Reporting. Edited by A. D. Biderman and T. F. Drury. New York: Sage Publications, 1976. Bass, Bernard M., and Vaughan, James A. The Psychology of Learning for Managers. American Foundation for Management Research, 1965. Baumgarten, Howard; Bennis, Warren 6.; and De, Nitish R., eds. Readings in Group Develgpment for Managers and Trainers. New York: Asia Publishing House, 1967. Bennis, W. G. ChangingOrganizations. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966. Burack, E. Organization Analysis. Hinsdale, Ill.: Dryden Press, 1975. Crozier, Michel. The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964. Dalton, Gene; Lawrence, Paul; and Greiner, Larry. Organizational Change and Development. Homewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., and The Dorsey Press, 1970. Gellerman, Saul W. Management by Motivation. New York: American Management Association, Inc., 1968. Hennig, Margaret, and Jardim, Anne. The Managerial Woman. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1977. Jennings, Eugene E. The Mobile Manager. Ann Arbor: Bureau of Industrial Relations, University of Michigan, 1967. . Routes to the Executive Suite. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1971. 185 186 Kanter, Rosebeth Moss. Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books, Inc., PfibTishers, 1977. Katz, R. "Job Enrichment: Some Career Considerations." In Or ani- zational Careers: Some New Perspegtiyes. Edited by J. Van Mainen. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1977. Kirk, Roger E. Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences. Belmont, CaTifL: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., 1968. Kirkpatrick, Donald. A Practical Guide for Supervisory Training and Development. New York: *Addison-WesTEy Publishing Co., 1971. Koontz, Haro1d, and O'Donnell, Cyril. Principles of Management, An Analysis of Manageria1 Functions. NewTYork: McGraw-Hi11 Book Company, 1964. Leavitt, Harold J. Managerial Psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958. Maccoby, Michael. The Gamesman: The New Corporate Leaders. New York: Simon and SChuster,*1976. Maslow, Abraham H. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Brothers, Publishers,gl954. McGregor, Douglas. The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1960. . Leadership and Motivation. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 1966. Miles, Raymond E. Theories of Management: Implications for Organi- zational Behavior and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.,11975. Moore, William. The Conduct of the Corporation. New York: Random House, 1962. Odiorne, George S. Manggement byObjectives: A§y§tem of Manageria1 Leadership. New York: Pitman Publishing Co., 1965. Pigors, Paul; Myers, Charles A.; and Malm, F. T. Management of Human Resources. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1964. Sayles, Leonard R., and Strauss, George. Managing Human Resources. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,41977. Schein, Edgar H. 0r anizational Ps cholo . Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966. 187 Schneider, Benjamin. Staffing Organizations. Pacific Palisades, Ca1if.: Goodyear PUbTishing Cb., Inc., 1976. Swope, George S. Interpreting Executive Behavior. New York: American Management Association, Inc., 1968. Thompson, James D. Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1967. Warwick, Donald P., and Liniger, Donald. The Sample Survey: Theopy, and Practice. New York: McGraw-Hi1l Book Company, 1975. Wexley, Kenneth N., and Yukl, Gary. Organizational Behavior and Personnel Psychology. Homewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1977. Yankelovich, Daniel. The New Morality: A Profile of American Youth in the Seventies. New York: McGraw-Hi11 Book Company, 1974. » Yoder, Dale. Personnel Management and Industrial Relations. 6th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970. Periodicals Argyris, Chris. “T Groups for Organizational Effectiveness." Harvard Business Review (March-April 1964): 60-74. Bailyn, Lotte. "SMR Forum: A Comment on Men and Women of the Cor- poration." Sloan Management Review 19 (Fall 1977): 91-93. Beatty, Richard W., and Morgan, Cyril P. "Manageria1 Behavior: Deve1oping Skills for Management Effectiveness in Times of Econgmic Setbacks." Human Resource Management 14 (Winter 1975 : 1-4. Kirkpatrick, Donald. "How to Plan and Implement a Supervisory Train- ing Program." Trainingand Development Journal 32 (April 1978): 8—10. Muller, David G. ”A Model for Human Resources Development.” Personne1 Journal 55 (May 1976): 238-43. Pomerleau, Raymond. "The State of Management Development in the Federal Service." ‘Egblic Personnel Management 3 (January-February 1974): 23—28. 188 Rosenberg, Deanne. "The Invisible Manager." Society Advancement of Management Journal 42 (Spring 1977): 51-62. Saline, Lindon E. "Understanding and Doing Something About Profes- sional Development." Trainipg and Development Journal 31 (August 1977): 3-10. Schein, Edgar H. "Increasing Organizational Effectiveness Through Better Human Resource Planning and Development." Sloan Management Review 19 (Fall 1977): 1-19. Shaw, Malcolm E. "The Behavioral Sciences: A New Image." Training and Development Journal 31 (February 1977): 26-28. Silverman, Robert 5., and Heming, D. A. "Exit the Organizational Man: Enter the Professional Person." Personne1 Journal 54 (March 1975): 146-48. Yankelovich, Daniel. "Turbulence in the Working World, Angry Workers, Happy Grads." Psychology Today 8 (December 1974): 81-87. Unpublished Materials Ferguson, Barbara A. "Why the Lack of Women State Vocational Admin- istrators Employed in State Departments of Education and What Barriers, If Any, Exist.“ Research Project, Michigan State University, March 1977. Fletcher, Geneva, Deputy State Director of Vocational Education, Indiana State Board of Vocational-Technical Education. Personal interview at the American Vocational Association Convention, Atlantic City, New Jersey, December 2-7, 1977. Harouff, Marge, Program Administrator for Nebraska Department of Education Division of Vocational Education. Personal interview at the American Vocational Association Convention, Atlantic City, New Jersey, December 2-7, 1977. Lawrence, Dorothy, Deputy Director of Field Services, State Board for Community Colleges and Occupational Education, Colorado State Department of Education, Occupational Division. Personal interview at the American Vocational Association Convention, Atlantic City, New Jersey, December 2-7, 1977. Smith, James, Manager of Special Programs, Illinois Office of Edu- cation, Department of Adult, Vocational-Technical Education. Personal interview at the American Vocational Association Convention, Atlantic City, New Jersey, December 2-7, 1977. 189 Misce11aneous Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX). Educational Amendments of 1976 (Title II, Vocational Education). Public Law 94—482, October 12, 1976. Special Needs Law, Public Law 94-142, 1975. TAT ”ll'llllrlllli 1 93 0 LIBR ARIES 4102 1111111111111” 3056