, A. . . .. . h. .l ‘ . .. .. .3 a K _. n. . .. . “{5, LA L fig! ‘ $9 in. NE.» . .. . - .. u . .. t. ..\n4.r3.nuc. EU. . rl .l .n.¢.nb~. .$H%wugx..$.§ ‘7 .... ~ c a . ‘ . f . .. y .3. _. b5 419’ any. : 1. v. y 3.15:5”..4'. v .aclJo. n. . . . . . . .% J. .‘ o . n £1. . .3. ' .... .. v v. . . v. ‘ . . .p - 4 a . . -H..¢CA 1% u .c Ix. a .. y . y a . ‘ 1n 1 J30. a 'I 3 u .. .ouo. .o..rJ-.,1. hfiwru . . u i . 1 1 {so In... . . ..u . J4plm. v.“- d | I _ - . . L . n v I ¢ .. yo. lUfiJP. at. . ‘ n} . I... ; .f {V . .3.‘ .Nn . .3 .err 3.1,. . u I .2 \v . . .I K, . o L t... » v v a ~ . mm . x ‘u. ’1 c '0 v «t .1 kHzns 1... :uH HWY“... ...m. J). .. . . H.3fi‘dlazflfvp. L r1“u..n)e.~uh‘ v, . Mcgflxmgv \O\ , . .H. I .qdbfllfiuL khan»)... clbmfinhu In... . vH\ ; ) leiukil . .v 1 .. Hunk. :. 1R1 khannmm-.. 39.3.. . 2., .. . - Iv {rt \{4 11‘ . “‘31.: Q a« . 1“ V. . 5:}..NfiNflJWVVI.)U.A n . . o . a 2 » .n . v \«U‘f ‘I‘lln. Fri lQIMMb’HHH‘ .| ,l .v. . .- u flux“ 1.3. TnN‘ 33:3! . . . . narTIqulml fink l y 31 r 2 I y .. . . -. . “gm. 1.1.»! 1%” txlpb.~WU~. a. . v. in L“! l ‘ [inhhwhuui r .. V a»? . . o J ‘ .mb Hump“. Sum. w??? $.ch . Slums—3.4 w? I.‘.... kmllJNfl‘ . . ' .1 .f 115”“)? dfiw” . . all! if? a dHuhrrvrlv 311“. ( . . {Nab} u Wat. m 1.”an I | ,i r} ‘ (All- . Anglia. ‘ ‘U(.1f£," - rdr} T a: ' b1" ' .5513 .~. 2 Il'x it!" I all v ‘I 0 vi...“ 1 F 76) I”! 3.1.32! 0'. .\0u6L¢. 1. ‘ 2:. 7.95 v I 41ft]. 3.0.0 “that? L. u I o‘: ' "1 fl “NIH . - :1. o to u I! I A 14 v‘l ' . Ilium-.11.! tutti; . r in. 1.2.-. (in.-. . ins . 1!. NH”. Ill: .5 . . ‘A 5‘... .' a’ u :11“? . .V 2.. c huh- . ..v.... . .. . .. .Nu. .. fly..n.4 ‘ .. . .. :2. .\ . ”an . 2.. r. . ..JE ft... .. . u.‘ n v . . :10. A u ,q .. .31.]. Ellbtv‘j .vz!‘ . . l . A‘v I D I. o I. . I. II } ‘. ‘ .J . 4 . «at. I... .1 A as: 0‘. lnf- J. 14. .IHJ) .v .nv . ‘ D .09 n .. v. o . WW. 1 gulflto'ImMuAl‘lnlerv- v . . . .. . ‘ 3.. . .3195“): unufirnhhmhfimn . to . u . v . ll ’0. . 24.6. t .1” ..uuzinflu........ ufltdf V l I 7" I.- '5- . .l ' 1" D~ I: 't - ‘ (1 ‘..' J L__..__ ...- ._-Zml -. - n - - .- . . ’ ~ ' ._ ALLA l' .A .. a. -,_.-_..__. _.-_d as..-” t- r .-= -13 1 I —--———b—--v-" THESIS This is to certify that the dissertation entitled Factors Perceived by Teachers and Administrators as Stimulative and Supportive of Professional Growth: An Exploratory Study of Sixteen School Environments presented by Norma Louise Hungerford has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for PhD degree in Curr. and Inst. Cami“) 0.824% Major professor Date October 14, 1986 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771 MSU LIBRARIES m V RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. FACTORS PERCEIVED BY TEACHERS AND ADMINISTRATORS AS STIMULATIVE AND SUPPORTIVE OF PROFESSIONAL GROWTH: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF SIXTEEN SCHOOL ENVIRONMENTS By Norma Louise Hungerford A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1986 497 ’ 20435 Copyright by Norma Louise Hungerford 1986 Cl: (0 tr ”1: int! ABSTRACT FACTORS PERCEIVED BY TEACHERS AND AOMINISTRATORS As STIMULATIVE AND SUPPORTIVE or PROFESSIONAL GRowTR: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY or SIXTEEN SCROOL ENVIRONMENTS By Norma Louise Hungerford The purpose of the study was to identify factors perceived to influence the professional growth of teachers. The identifi- cation of factors which would tend to stimulate and support grow- th, if added to school environments was also included in the study. Four types of elementary schools in Southwestern Michigan were sampled randomly. These were: urban-metro core, urban- fringe, city/town, and rural. Pour schools in each type of district and three teachers in each school were also randomly selected. The teachers and the principal of each school were interviewed. Eight questions were used to probe four areas pertaining to professional growth. The four areas included personal per- ceptions of: 1) what is meant by "growing professionally"; 2) growth-stimulating and supporting factors; 3) desired stimula- tive and supportive factors; and h) professional growth experi- ences attributed to environmental influences. An analytic procedure was used to assign points to deter- mine the cummulative scores which indicated the ranking of the stimulators and support factors. The maJor influences of pro- fessional growth were people and curriculum factors. The principal and other teachers were perceived as major stimu- lators along with students and their needs and curriculum in- novation. The differences in perception between principals and teachers pertained to which people were most important. The principals perceived it to be the principal while the teachers perceived it to be other teachers. Physical factors, curriculum factors, and interaction factors were identified as the desired stimulative and supportive factors. Growth experiences describ- ed pertained basically to curriculum innovation as a major source of learning. The conclusions were: 1) that professional growth was per- ceived as related to situational needs; 2) agreement exists per- taining to perceived growth-influencing factors; 3) differences in perception are only in degree of influence; and h) desired influences are basically budget items, which if provided might stimulate more teachers to grow and to feel supported in their growth. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document could not have been completed without the assistance Of many peOple. Among those who provided encourage- ment and guidance are the members of the doctoral advisory com- mittee: Dr. Charles A. Blackman, Chairperson; Dr. Keith Anderson; Dr. Ben Bonhorst; and Dr. Robert C. Hatfield. Their helpful suggestions are much appreciated. Appreciation is also extended to the study participants who gave time from their busy schedules to be interviewed and who provided much insight into the perceptions of per- sons in school environments pertaining to the professional- growth of teachers. Finally, a special thank-you is extended to my husband, John, to daughter Laura, and to son John IV for their under- standing, assistance, and loving support throughout the entire endeavor. Their concern and their thoughtful regard for my professional growth, as well as their Own, will always be ap- preciated. Norma L. Hungerford ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS O O O O O O O C O O O 0 LIST OF TABLES O O I O O O O O O O O O 0 CHAPTER II I THE PROBLEM O O O O O O O O O 0 Introduction to the Research Problem. A Concern for the Stimulation and Support of Teacher Growth The Purpose of the Study. . . Background Information . The Challenge. . . . . . Assumptions Underlying the Study Questions to Guide the Study Definitions. . . . . . . . . Limitations of the Study . . CHAPTER SUMMARY . . . . . . . . PRECEDENTS IN THE LITERATURE. . Professional Growth As It Pertains to Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . Professional Growth As a Process. Adult Learners in General. Teachers as Adult Learners Definitions of Professional Growth Pertaining to the Professional Growth of Teachers . . . . . . . . . Motivation and Stimulation Toward Professional Growth . The School as the workplace of Teachers iii iii 11 ll 13 15 16 17 19 20 The Influence of the School Environment on Teachers as Practitioners. . . . . . The Influence of the School Environment on the Professional Growth of Teachers. CHAPTER SUMMARY 0 O O O O O O O O O O O C III OVERVIEV OF THE RESEARCH PROCEDURES . . . The tudy Purpose as a Guide. . . . . . The Guiding Questions . . . . . . . . . The Study Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . The Interview Schedule. . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER SUMMARY 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 IV. THE STUDY FINDINGS. . . . . . . . . . . . Definitions of "Growing Professionally" Types of Definitions Provided by the Sources of Information . . Definitions Pertaining to Growing Through Self-Dir- ected Efforts . . . . . . . . Definitions Pertaining to Growing Through Teaching . . Definitions Pertaining to Growing Through Involvement in Curriculum Innovation. . . Definitions Pertaining to Growing Through Interaction with Colleagues . . . . . . . summary 0 O O I O O O O I O O O O O O 0 Professional Growth Periods in the Lives of Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . iv 21 22 23 25 25 26 26 27 28 33 3h 3h 35 37 38 hO hO bl Types of Professional Growth Periods Perceived by the Sources of Information (the Interveiwees). . . Professional Growth Periods Related to Years in Teaching. . . Professional Growth Periods Related to Situations . . . . . . Professional-Life Situations Perceived to Affect the Growth of Teachers . . . . . Personal-Life Situations Perceived to Affect the Growth of Teachers . . . . . Professional Growth Periods Perceived as Continuous . . . . . summary 0 O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O The Duration of Professional Growth in the Lives of Teachers. . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Environmental Factors Perceived as Present In the School Environment . . . . . . . . . Physical Factors . . . . . . . . . . . People Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . Atmosphere Factors . . . . . . . . . . Interaction/Involvement Factors . . . Curriculum Factors . . . . . . . . . . Time/Scheduling Factors . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Identification and Ranking of Environmental Factors Perceived as Growth-Stimulating Factors. . . . . . . . . L2 Lb L6 h? LB LB 149 50 52 53 55 56 S6 57 58 60 60 62 The Identifacation and Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Interviewees as a Total Group The Influence of the Princial as an Influential Stimulator . . The Influence of Other Teachers as an Influential Stimulator . . Participation in Curriculum Innovation as an Influential StifllUlltor . . . . . . . . . . . Responding to Students' Needs as an Influential Stimulator . . The Teachers' Own Desire to Grow As an Influential Stimulator . . The Availability of Meaningful Inservice as an Influential Stimulator . . . . . . . . . . . summary. . O . O O O O O O O O O O O The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by The Principals . . . . . . . . . . . summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by The TC‘Cher‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . The Opportunity for Salary Increase as an Influential Stimulator. . Summary. 0 o a o a o o a o o o o o 0 Comparisons of Principal and Teacher Perceptions of Growth-Stimulating Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparisons of Total Group Per- ceptions with Principal and Tea- cher Group Perceptions . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi 6b 67 71 73 75 77 78 80 81 83 8h 87 88 88 9h 95 96 The Identification and Ranking of Environmental Factors Perceived as Growth-Supporting Factors. . . . . . The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Supporting Factors by the Interviewees as a Group . Encouragement by the Prin- cipal as an Influential Sup— port Factor. . . . . . . . . Encouragement by Other Tea- chers as an Influential Sup- port Factor. . . . . . . . . Seeing Results in the Class- room as an Influential Sup- port Factor . . . . . . . . summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Supporting Factors by the Principals. . . . . . . . summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Supporting Factors by the Teachers. . . . . . . . . summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparisons of Principal and Teacher Perceptions on Growth-Supporting Factors. . . . Comparisons of Total Group Per- ceptions with Principal Group and Teacher Group Perceptions. . Summary. The Identification of Environmental Factors Perceived as Desired Growth Supporting Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . The Identification of Desired Growth—Stimulating Factors by the Interviewees as a Total Group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii 98 100 103 105 106 106 107 111 111 115 115 117 118 120 121 The Availability of Materi- als/Equipment/Space as a De- sired Stimulator . . . . . . . The Availablity of Meaning- ful and Frequent Inservice as a Desired Stimulator. . . . Involvement in More Shared Problem-Solving as a Desired Stifl‘llator . . . . . . . . . . The Availability of Release Time/Sabbaticals as a Desired Stimulator . . . . . . . . . . The Hiring of More Building Staff as a Desired Stimulator. Involvement by the Principal as a Desired Stimulator. . . . summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . O The Identification of Desired Growth-Stimulating Factors by by the Principals. . . . . . . . . summary . . . . . . . . O . . O . . The Identification of Desired Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . summary. . . . . . . O O O O O O 0 Comparisons of Principal and Tea- cher Perceptions on Desired Growth Still-llatorIo I O . . . I I . I . 0 Comparisons of Total Group Per- ceptions with Principal Group and Teacher Group Perceptions. . . summary. . O O . . O I O . O . O O O O The Identification of Environmental Factors Perceived as Desired Growth- Supporting Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . viii 12b 125 127 127 128 130 130 131 133 133 135 136 137 138 139 The Identification of Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the Interviewees as a Total Group. . The Availability of Materi- als/Equipment/Space as a Desired Support Factor . . . . . The Hiring of More Building Staff as a Desired Support Factor 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 O Grants/Funds as a Desired Support Factor 0 O O C O I O O O summary. 0 O Q C O O O O O O O O I O The Identification of Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the Principals. . . . . . . . . . Participation in Curriculum Innovation as a Desired Growth- Support Factor. 0 o o o o o a 0 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Identification of Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the Teachers. . . . . . . . . . . summary. 0 O O O O O 0 O O O I O O 0 Comparisons of Total Group Per- ceptions with Principal Group and Teacher Group Perceptions. . . . summary 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Growt Parti ences h Experiences Related to cular Environmental Influ- Types of Learning Perceived as Part of Growth Experiences Encountered by by Building Teachers . . . . . . . . Learning Through Developing an Awareness as a Growth Experience. . . . . . . . ix 139 lh2 1&3 1&5 1&5 1&6 1&9 1&9 150 152 153 15h 155 156 156 Learning Through Discovering More About a Need or a Problem as a Growth Experience . . 158 Learning Through Searching for Possible Solutions as a Growth Experience . . . . . . . 158 Learning Through Planning and Implementation as a Growth Experience. . . . . . . . . 158 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 CHAPTER SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . 16h Summary of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . 16h The Study Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . 16b The Guiding Questions. . . . . . . . . . 16b The Study Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 The Study Findings . . . . . . . . . . . 165 Relationship to Other Studies. . . . . . 168 Conclusions Based on the Study Findings . . . 170 The Concept of Growing Professionally. . 172 The Identified Factors in School Environments . . . . . . . . . 173 The Effect of Curriculum Innovation and School Im- provement Efforts on Pro— fessional Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . 17h The Limitations of the Study. . . . . . . . . 17h General Recommendations for Further Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 Specific Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . 177 Personal Reflections on the Study . . . . . . 178 CHAPTER SUMMARY . . . . . . APPENDICES A1 A2 E1 E2 E3 Eh ES E6 Interview Schedule for Use in Principal Interview . . . . Interview Schedule for Use in Teacher Interview . . . . . Letter to Confirm Interview . Demographic Information. . . . Thank-You Letter to Sources of Information . . . . Weighted and Cumulative Scores Used to Analyze the Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Interviewees. . . . . . Weighted and Cumulative Scores Used to Analyze the Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Principals. . . . . . . Weighted and Cumulative Scores Used to Analyze the Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Teachers. . . . . . . . Weighted and Cumulative Scores Used to Analyze the Ranking of Growth-Supporting Factors by the Interviewees. . . . . . Weighted and Cumulative Scores Used to Analyze the Ranking of Growth-Supporting Factors by the Principals. . . . . . . Weighted and Cumulative Scores Used to Analyze the Ranking of Growth-Supporting Factors by the Teachers. . . . . . . . LIST OF REFERENCES List of References . . . . . . . xi 183 18h 185 186 188 189 191 192 196 198 200 TABLE 10 11 12 13 1h LIST OF TABLES Definitions of "Growing Professionally" According to Fmerged Category . . . . . . . Types of Growth Periods in Teachers' Lives Identified as Professional Growth Periods by the Interviewees . . . . . . . . . . . . Teachers' Professional Growth Periods as Identified by the Interviewees . . . . . Types of Situations Perceived by the Interviewees Which Influenced Teachers' Decisions to Pursue Profes- sional Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Length of Professional Growth Periods in Teachers' Lives as Identified by the Interviewees . . . . . . . . . . . . Types if Factors Identified as Part of the School Environment by the Interviewees. Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth- Stimulating Factors by the Total Group of Interviewees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth- Stimulating Factors by the Principals . . . Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth- Stimulating Factors by the Teachers . . . . Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth- Supporting Factors by the Total Group of Interviewees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth- Supporting Factors by the Principals . . . . Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth- Supporting Factors by the Teachers . . . . . Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth- Stimulating Factors by the Interviewees. . . Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth- Stimulating Factors by the Principals. . . . xii PAGE 36 L2 ’45 L6 51 5h 6h 81 8b 100 108 112 121 131 15 16 17 18 Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth- Stimulating Factors by the Teachers. Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth- Supporting Factors by the Interviewees Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth- Supporting Factors by the Principals Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth- Supporting Factors by the Teachers . ‘ xiii 133 1ho 12:7 150 CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM The focus of the study was on the school environment. Since the teacher's workplace -- the school -- is where teachers func- tion in their many roles, a study of the school environment as a source of stimulation and support is essential in the field of professional development. Although enormous differences exist in the extent to which teachers pull growth-producing experiences from their invironments (Joyce and McKibbin, 1982), there is gen- eral agreement that teachers who are stimulated toward growth, and who are supported in their growth efforts, have greater potential for growth than those who are not stimulated, and who are not sup- ported. Introduction to the Research Problem Traditionally, teachers, once certified, have earned gradu- ate-level credits toward maintaining and/or adding to their certification. District salary-increment policies, which call for documented study toward new knowledge and skills valued by the school district, have also encouraged advanced study by teachers. In addition, teachers have responded to state mandates which re- quire specialization and/or skills—remediation in order to meet student needs. These mandates have, primarily, been due to the identification of special needs of students which have led to new programs and to a broadening of the school-clientele base. Some of the areas included are: programs for the learning disabled; bilingual education; gifted education; and special (I; education serving people ages 0—26 years of age. During the past ten years, research on teacher effective- ness and school climate as crucial elements affecting student growth, has underscored the need for professional growth on the part of teachers. Upgrading levels of teacher competence and/or providing specialization toward the meeting of district and state mandates no longer stand as sufficient according to recent theories of teacher development (Combs, 1981). A Concern for the Stimulation and Support of Teacher Growth Teacher growth has come to the fore, in recent years, as a concern which has prompted volumes of writings and unlimited dis- cussions regarding how best the issue might be addressed. Of con— cern is not only what programs lead to growth, but also what in- fluences teachers to grow as professionals. Growth toward becom- ing a more mature, informed person and a more effective teacher involves both personal and professional growth. What then stimulates teachers to grow and supports their growth? Growth, ordinarily, requires stimulation which occurs at the appropriate time and under the right conditions. Growth also requires nourishment or support. The identification of what stimulates the growth of teachers and what supports their growth may be helpful to teacher educators and others who are concerned with the growth of teachers at the preservice and inservice levels. The Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study was to investigate the workplace environments of teachers in order to identify factors within those environments which have tended to stimulate and support the professional growth of the teachers who work there. The purpose was also to investigate representative school environ- ments to identify factors which were not perceived as cur- rently present but which were deemed desirable by persons in those schools. In addition, the purpose included the identification of types of growth experiences attributed by persons to environmental influences in the schools. The identification of such influences perceived as pres- ent and desirable may have significance in the extension of the body of knowledge on the professional growth of teachers. In addition, curriculum planners, teacher educators, and others involved with the growth of teachers as professionals may bene- fit from the results of this and similar studies. Background Information In the past few years, a growing awareness of profess- ional growth has emerged as more has become known about adult learning, and about the interest of adults in learning new things which would be helpful to them in their life's work. Persons who are interested in teachers as professionals and who are concerned about their growth have begun to view professional growth as a area which warrants the attention of all within the profession. Much has been written about factors within the school envi- ronment which serve as barriers to teacher growth (bureaucratic structures, the centralization of authority, and rigid social structures). Research findings by Weick (1982) tend to indi- cate, however, that some of the "supposedly" hierarchial structures in schools are in reality "loosely-coupled" systems which allow more flexibility than previously thought to be present in schools. In other studies (Brookover and Lezotte, 1979; and Edmonds, 1977), schools labelled as "effective schools" were schools which included "shared decision-making" as a primary characteristic associated with effectively meeting organizational goals. The Challenge Studies (Brookover and Lezotte, 1979; and Edmonds, 1977) in the area of effective schools also point to the need for stimulative and supportive factors, if progress is to be made toward growth in students and teachers. These studies indicate that the question of "what 553 the factors which stimulate and support growth" is at the fore, whether it pertains to students, to teachers, or to both. In the area of teacher growth, the challenge is in the identification and description of factors which stimulate and support the professional growth of tea- chers. Since it is the perceptions of people which in- fluence their behaviors (Combs, 1965, p. 13), the challenge of determining which factors impact teacher growth in a positive way, involves looking at what is perceived, by persons in the school environment, to have that effect. If teachers are to become more mature and more informed as persons and more effec- tive as teachers, the challenge of identifying what things in the school environment influence teacher growth takes on significant meaning. Assumptions Underlying the Study The assumptions underlying the study pertain to what is currently known about teacher growth and about the character- istics of teachers related to their involvement in profess- ional growth activities. The study is based on the researcher's assumptions: 1. Professional growth (which includes personal growth) is desirable in teachers. 2. Teachers and others in school settings have per- ceptions of school environments which may in— dicate the influence of environmental factors on the growth of teachers in those schools. 3. Stimulation and support of growth in the school environment (which serves as the work- place of the teachers in any particular school) enhances the probability that the teachers there will begin to grow and will continue their growth. h. The identification of factors which are present or those which if present would influence growth and the identification types of growth experiences which have been a result of environmental influences, may contribute to a further understanding of the school environment as it pertains to the professional growth of teachers. Questions to Guide the Study The questions which guided the study were based on the above assumptions. These questions were designed to lead toward an identification of factors in the school environment which stimulate and support teacher growth. The development of the guiding questions involved first, the defining of areas to be probed and then the development of a set of questions to focus the study and to be used as a guide in the investi- gation. The areas and the questions are presented below. The Guiding Questions I. Personal Perceptions of the Meaning of "Growing Professionally" A. What does "growing professionally" mean to persons in the school environment? B. What do principals and teachers identify as growth periods, in the careers of teachers? C. What do principals and teachers specify as the length of the growth periods: II. Perceived School Environment Influences on Pro- fessional Growth A. What factors in school environments stimulate teachers to pursue professional growth and which of these are more influential than others as stimu- lators? B. What factors in school environments support teachers in their growth efforts and which of these are more influential than others as sup— port factors? III. Perceived Environmental Influences Which are Desired A. What factors (currently not present or not sufficiently present) are perceived as desirable in a growth-stimulating/growth-supporting envir- ment for teachers? B. Which of these factors would tend to stimulate growth, and which would tend to support growth? IV. Professional Growth Experiences Perceived to be Attrib- uted to Environmental Influences What growth experiences have been attributed to something in the school environment which stimu- lated and/or supported growth? These questions provided a focus for the study which would hopefully lead to knowledge pertaining to the types of influ- ences in school environments which currently impact the stimu- lation and support of teacher growth. Focusing on school envi- ronments facilitated an investigation of the school as the work- place of teachers. It also facilitated the investigation of the school as a contributor to the learning of teachers. Definitions The following definitions are used throughout the study report. They are: Content Analysis - a process for identifying and listing in- formation categorically and than examining the information as presented (Joint Committee on Standards for Education, 1981, p- 150) Factor - a defined element or part of a school environment Loosely-Coupled Systems - organizational systems which operate independently of each other even though they may be part of a larger system (Weick, 1982) Inservice - a type of planned program for the purpose of teacher development, usually topical in nature. Professional Growth - growth which is positive in direction and pertains to the functioning of a person in his or her career. School Environment - the ambience surrounding those in the school which includes all factors which impact those in the schools. Limitations of the Study The study focused on school environments in four differ- ent sized districts in Southwestern Michigan. Therefore, the results may not be generalizable to districts in other localles. In addition the methodology utilized personal interviews with open-ended questions. The time involved in interviewing sixty- four interviewees restricted the size of the sample. For the purposes of this study these limitations did not inhibit the gathering of the information which was sought. Since the lim- itations were recognized and accepted before the study was begun, they are mentioned here. They are described in more detail in Chapter V. CHAPTER SUMMARY Much has been written about the schools as facilatating environments for student growth. In recent years there has been a focus in the literature on the prevailing climate and factors within that climate which promote and/or prohibit student achiev- ment. As more has become known about teachers' and their needs and about adult learning, in general, a concern for teacher de- lopment has emerged which focuses on the professional growth of teachers. Persons in higher education and others have become increasingly aware that the school environment impacts the development of teachers as well as students. This awareness has begun to prompt investigations of school environments and the relationship of those environments to teacher growth. The purpose of this study was to investigate school envi- ronments to identify factors which stimulate teachers to grow and which support their growth once begun. Four assumptions pertaining to the professional growth of teachers served as a base for the study. Eight questions pertaining to four areas were developed to guide and to focus the study. These questions also served the study by providing a base for the development of eight questions (presented in Chapters III and IV) which were used in the interviewing of sources of information on the school environments studied. The following chapters contain the results 10 of the search of the literature, the procedures followed in the conducting of the study research, the findings related to growth— stimulators and growth-support factors and conclusions based on the study findings. A section on reflections on the study is also included. CHAPTER II: PRECEDENTS IN THE LITERATURE The identification of factors in the school environment which are perceived as contributors to the stimulation and support of professional growth in teachers required an inves- tigation into what is currently known about several different areas. These areas are: 1) professional growth as it pertains to teachers; 2) the school as the workplace of teachers; and 3) the influence of the school environment on the professional growth of teachers. A review of related literature is presented in this chapter. Professional Growth As It Pertains to Teachers Traditionally, teachers have been viewed as persons who im- pact the learning which occurs in the school. With the demise of the one-room school (where the teacher served as the principal, the curriculum director, the counselor, the physical education, the art and music teacher, as well as the cook and the custodian) the role of the teacher has evolved into a more specialized role referred to by Tough (1978) as that of a facilitator of student learning in a complex organizational system of many specialists. In some schools, however, teachers still fill some of the roles mentioned above, despite claims that the school organization pro- vides for specialists to fulfill these various roles. In order to improve the skills of teachers, as facilitators of student 11 12 learning, efforts have been employed in the past twenty years toward teacher development in order to update and refine skills already possessed by teachers. In addition many of the efforts have been in the area of remediation. Remediation toward im- proved teacher performance has been a central focus. Workshops, seminars, and inservice programs (some with multiple-topics) based on teacher needs identified by administrators, state department of education members, and others external to teachers themselves, are reported throughout the literature. In most of the cases reported in the literature, the major efforts of teacher development have occurred as remediation strategies toward improving student achievement. Here, teachers are viewed as deficient in the skills necessary to promote effec- tive growth in all or some of the students and remediation ef- forts are made in an attempt to change teacher behavior. A focus on continuous professional growth or on building on existing strengths is lacking. Observations by Perry (1980) indicate that even when teachers do grow professionally, externally imposed mandates and guidelines tend to limit the extent to which teachers are able to apply the new strategies and knowledge. The restrictions which accompany the mandates deprive (in many cases) deprive the the teachers of the freedom to make important professional decis- ions. In addition when mandates and strict guidelines (which dictate how the development will occur and exactly how the learnings will be applied) are present, teachers tend to resist 13 development efforts. This challenges commonly held beliefs that because of an "enlightened purpose" on the part of teachers they will persevere and will not be diminished by groups external to the situation (Perry, 1980, p. 258; and Corwin and Edelfelt, 1978, p. 5). It also challenges the assumption that teachers can or will implement new learnings and skills or that they will pursue growth when growth activities are offered. Repeatedly, the professional growth of teachers emerges in current literature as the "missing link" in discussions of tea- cher development and improved student education in the schools. When the focus is on remediation, the experiences which are plan- ned lack the deeper meaning associated with continuous growth and renewal. In order for teachers to be constantly renewed and revitalized, there must be a conscious and intended ”bringing out of the capabilities and possibilities within the teacher" (Holly, 1977, p.29). When the focus is on the professional growth of teachers, understandings may emerge which will provide teachers and the field of teacher education a broader knowledge base which may be useful in the many decisions yet to be made pertaining to teachers, their needs and their growth. Professional Growth As a Process Studies by Allport (1955, 1961, and 197h) underscore defin- itions by Maslow and Rogers which present "growth" as a "process of becoming." When growth is viewed as a process then people 1h who are growing become persons 32 process rather than persons who are a result of something applied to them. Rogers (1971) extends the definitions (referred to above) by saying that the person who "strives to become" is one who views himself or herself as 2223 of the process of becoming. Numerous models which classify factors which pertain to "growing" or "becoming" have been developed and may be found in the literature. One such model was proposed by Macagnoni (1979). It was based on six perceived "potentials" of a growing human being. These These were: 1) a physical potential; 2) an emotional poten- tial; 3) a social potential; h) an intellectual potential; 5) an aesthetic potential; and 6) a spiritual potential. Macagnoni identifies the sixth potential -- a spiritual po- tential -- as the one which involves a person's overall aware- ness of the self as a holistic form in the continuous process of becoming. Little attention has been given by educational theorists or researchers to the extent to which teachers have given con- scious thought to the importance of personal growth as it relates to professional growth. Most authorities admit, how- ever that the two are entwined. Gardner's (l96h) observations indicate that as people pass through life they become less and less willing to take risks. Gardner theorizes that persons who seek growth or renewal must understand themselves, have the courage to risk failure, and must be motivated toward growing on a continuing basis throughout their lives. Boy and Pine (1971) l5 contend that there is a relationship between the teachers' per- sonal and professional lives which, if there is a variety of enriching experiences in their personal lives, makes them more human and better able to facilitate the growth and deveIOpment of students in their charge. In recent years age-theories and stage-theories have come to the fore as means for classifying levels of development in both personal and professional growth. Research which tests these theories has received a large amount of attention in the liter- ature. This is partly due to an escalating interest in the nature of adult learners, increased availability of studies of adult continuing education, and efforts to determine the impact of various environments on learning (Joyce and Showers, 1983). Adult Learners in General Studies by Tough (1978) and others indicate that persons in all segments of any population undertake some type of learning efforts on a regular basis. Tough (1978, p. 252) reports that seventy to eighty percent of all people conduct at least one major learning endeavor each year. A l97h study by Peters and Gordon of L66 adults in Tennessee revealed that most learning efforts were Job-related or recreational. A few involved personal improvement, religious study, or family-relations matters. An- other study (Penland, 1976) of 1500 adults across America identi- fied and rank—ordered the areas of life in which people reported 16 that they applied learnings acquired during their conscious learn- ing efforts. These were: 1) personal development; 2) home and famiIY; 3) hobbies and recreation; h) general education; 5) Job; 6) religion; 7) voluntary activities; 8) public affairs; and 9) agriculture and technology. Since these are areas for en- deavor by the general populace, more is presented below which pertains to teachers as adult learners. Teachers As Adult Learners Several studies in the literature emerged as those which pertained to teachers, in particular, and their efforts to learn. These were studies by Fair (1975); Miller, (1977); Kelly (1976); and McCatty (1976) which indicate that like the general papulace, teachers also exert conscious growth efforts on a regular basis. They report that teachers indicated that the learning efforts which are most meaningful to them are those which are self-planned rather than those undertaken in response to educational requirements imposed on them. In studies reported by Tough (1978) most of the adults studied "desired" the support and assistance of others in the planning and the guiding of their learning. With teachers, however, no clear-cut pattern emerged as to whether teachers wanted assistance or how much assis- tance they preferred. Rubin (1978) contends that most adults prefer control over their own learning and growth. Rolly's (1977) study indicates that teachers do want this control. 17 Motivation, as well as stimulation toward growth, is impor- tant if effective growth is to occur. The personal motives of l) curiousity; 2) a striving for competence; 3) the urge to make order out of incongruities; h) a wish to be considered mature by others; 5) the desire for authenticity in personal relationships; and 6) the need to develop and affirm an identity are mentioned by Perry (1980). These apply to professional growth as well as to personal growth. The source of the motiva— tion or stimulation, whether internal or external, is of primary importance if the learning efforts of teachers are to result in professional growth. Definitions of Professional Growth Pertaining to the Professional Growth of Teachers Professional growth as it pertains to teachers has been defined in numerous ways. Some researchers and theorists define professional growth as "a developmental process which occurs due to the personal initiative of teachers at both the preservice and inservice levels." These authorities con- tend that such growth utilizes both formal and informal growth- producing experiences which contribute to teachers becoming "more fully-functioning professionals.” Other authorities define professional growth as "growth which occurs when persons move to higher stages of development and functioning." Both of these definitions involve stage theories of development. l8 Hatfield and Ralston (1978) describe professional growth as "personal growth, through internal and external assessment for the lifelong pursuit of excellence in a given field of expertise as reflected in the achievement of personal, client, and institutional goals." Holly and Blackman (1981) describe growth as "moving toward progressively higher levels of thinking which brings the individual (or persons) to more adequate and complex ways of processing information and more sophisticated ways of acting." Blatt (1980) adds that growth involves "the drawing out, encouraging, and nurturing of people's inner resources." Burden's (1980) study of environmental influences on the professional growth (including personal growth) of teachers indicates that four steps are involved as changes which teachers go through as they grow. These are: "1) an increase in knowledge, leading to 2) a change in attitude, which 3) increased ability, leading to h) changes in Job performance." In addition Newman, Burden, and Applegate (1980) maintain that teachers' understandings and interpre- tations of their own growth influence further development and can be positive influences on further development. In a review of position papers by Edelfelt and Johnson (1975) they report that little evidence exists which indicates that programs designed for teachers (inservice programs) have ad- dressed renewal of spirit, morale, or commitment even though these areas have been identified in the literature as areas 19 which need attention and which are important if teachers are to grow professionally. Motivation and Stimulation Toward Professional Growth There is agreement among authorities in the field of professional development that both the rate and the extent of professional growth are determined to a large extent by personal motivation toward "growing." Studies by Burden (1980), Newman (1979) and Fuller (1969) indicate that tea- chers have different needs and concerns at different points in their careers. Although these studies identify needs which tend to emerge in relation to particular periods in teachers' careers, the relevant contribution which they make pertaining to the stimulation of teachers toward growth is in their support of teacher growth as something which will occur naturally when teachers are stimulated unless teachers feel threatened and therefore choose not to grow. Mai (1981) says that motive toward professional growth is extremely complicated. The factors which he identifies which underly teachers' quests for new knowledge are: l) cur- iousity; 2) the need to deal with particular problems; 3) Job security; A) advance salary and status; 5) peer or superordinate pressure, and 6) dissatisfaction with current practices. Shaw (197h) indicates, however, that some teachers appear to be con- tent with "apathy" (their own) and do not pursue growth beyond 20 that needed for survival. Gardner (196h) contends that those persons who do seek growth and renewal at some point in their careers often discover that "the development of their potentiali- ties and the process of self-discovery are never ending entities." While Rubin (1971) says that the desire to change must come from within, Maslow (l97h) says that although internal impetus is primary, external situational factors also play a part. Maslow says further that a focus on moti- vation as an internal stiving does not negate nor deny an investigation of situational factors as determinants. Vroom (l96h) theorizes, too, that the nature of motivation is such that consideration must be given to the arousal and ener- gizing effects of external stimuli (as well as to peoples' desires to change). The School As the Workplace Of Teachers Traditionally, and rightly so, the school has been viewed as the place where students learn. Until recently little atten- tion has been given to the school as it impacts the lives of those who serve society as the educators of students. "Con- ditions for teaching" has recently become a focus with the advent of the "master contract." However, other than studies of teacher motivation based on previous studies pertaining to working conditions identified by Herzberg (1966) which identi— fy "motivation factors" (growth-enhancing facets) and "hygiene 21 factors" (pain-avoidance facets), little has been written on the school as the workplace of teachers. Since the school, like other places of employment serves as the place where teachers make decisions on a daily basis which confirm their decisions to continue in and to make that place a better place, the mileau surrounding the school deserves illumination. As teachers contribute to the environment of the school they are also influenced by that environment. Factors within that environment impinge on their daily lives. If the workplace environment is to be better understood, it deserves further study. The Influence of the School Environment On Teachers as Practitioners Studies by Joyce and McKibbin (1982) involving more than two hundred teachers indicate that a substantial number of teachers are heavily influenced by factors in the school environment. They reported that when an active and energizing climate is part of the school environment, and when the staff in that environment is excited about a common vision of what should go on there, the number of teachers actively involved in the processes of the school increases. They say, however, that in more reticent school environments teachers are less likely to be actively involved in what goes on in the school. Studies also indicate that although the organizational pattern in most schools follows a "line-staff" system of 22 organization, which is hierarchical in nature, the reality lies in "loosely-coupled" systems (Weick, 1982; Scott, Meyer, and Deal, 1980; and Cohen and March, 197k). In loosely-coup— led systems decisions are made which do not necessarily fol- low the prescribed "top-to—bottom" or "bottom-to-top" route of a hiearchical structure. Instead, sometimes the systems within the structure Operate independently of each other and with little coordination. In cases where a close coordination is intended, it is sometimes difficult to establish and main- tain close coordination. Teachers working within these sys- tems sometimes experience isolation and yet in others there is a "common vision" about the purposes of the school which serves as a unifying factor. The Influence of the School Environment On the Professional Growth of Teachers The influence of the school environment on teacher growth is seldom mentioned in the literature. However, the influence of environments in general is commonly mentioned. Gardner (196A) indicates that the development of new skills is due, at least in part, to a "dialogue" between individuals and their perceived environments. Howsam (1963); Combs, Soper, Gooding, Benton, Dickman, and Usher (1969); and Combs and Soper (1957) further emphasize that it is people's perceptions which determine their actions. In the case of teachers, their environments 23 play an important part in how they perceive themselves, others and situations which they face. Whether or not they grow may depend to a large extent on their perceptions of their school environments. CHAPTER SUMMARY A review of the literature reveals that as the roles of teachers have changed and as their roles have become more spec- ialized, new knowledge and skills have been needed. The liter- ature also shows that most of the efforts to assist teachers in these areas has been based on a deficit model of remedi- ation and little has been gained through organized remediation efforts. In recent years a focus has shifted to a need for positive professional growth on the part of teachers. Studies in adult learning and in teacher learning traits have indi- cated that motivation and stimulation toward growth are nec- cessary if meaningful growth is to occur. Since studies sup- port personal growth as part of professional growth, and since teachers spend most of their waking hours in schools on a daily basis as they pursue their work there, the school environment as it impacts teachers' lives has become important to those concerned with the professional growth of teachers. The influence of the school environment on the lives of teachers and its relationship to the professional growth of teachers is due primarily to the perceptions of teachers of factors in the school environment. A review of the literature 2h revealed that these perceptions were cited as determinants in not only how teachers responded to school environments but also in whether teachers decide to pursue professional growth. CHAPTER III: OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PROCEDURES The purpose of this Chapter is to present the procedures followed in the study. The identification of factors which were commonly perceived, as well as those perceived as influ- ential required the gathering of information which permitted groups of factors to emerge for further study. The perceptions of the interviewees as a whole, and those of persons in particu- lar groups (principal and teacher groups) were crucial to the study. The Study Purpose as a Guide The purpose of the study was to investigate school environments to identify factors which had contributed or might contribute to the professional growth of teachers. The purpose also included a focus on the growth experiences of teachers. Because of the nature of the study, and because of the large amount of information provided by the study sour- ces (the interviewees) the purpose aided in delimiting the study by focusing the researcher on emergent groupings as well as on individual factors. Questions were also developed to guide the study. The guiding questions are discussed in the following section. 25 Se To 26 The Guiding Questions A set of questions was developed to guide the study. These questions which are listed in Chapter I (pp. 7 and 8) were devel- oped to define the areas of interest for the study. They also served as a basis for the questions to be asked of persons in the school environments who were to serve as sources of information on the school environments studied. The questions pertained to 1) personal perceptions of the meaning of growing profession- ally; 2) perceived school environment influences on professional growth; 3) factors perceived as desired in ideal growth environ- ments; and h) professional growth experiences perceived to be at- -tributed to environmental influences. The Study Sample The sample chosen to represent a population of South- western Michigan elementary school environments consisted of sixteen randomly chosen elementary schools from four school districts representing: 1) an urban-metropolitan core district; 2) an urban-fringe district; 3) a city/town district; and h) a rural district. Elementary schools were chosen as the tar- get schools because related studies on school environments focused on the elementary level and because the absence of a departmental organization at the elementary level presented a more homogeneous sample for study. Four schools were randomly selected within each district. One principal and three randomly-selected teachers from each of __,7 _MA—W corre 27 the sixteen schools were chosen as the sources of information. Because principals and teachers function in school environments on a daily basis, their perceptions of school environments and things within those environments were important to the study. The interview process was chosen as the methodolOgy for probing these perceptions. The interview schedule utilized open-ended questions to encourage comprehensive responses on the part of the inter- viewees. The Interview Schedule The interview schedule consisted of eight questions which corresponded to the guiding questions. A set of questions dir- ected to principals and a corresponding set directed to teachers were developed (See Appendix Al - A2). The questions were open- ended. They were designed to permit the interviewees to respond freely without the constraints of already-developed lists from which to select responses. The questions were also designed so that multiple-responses were as possible as single responses and so that the emergence of various types of responses would 22: be prohibited. It was the premise of the researcher that among the multiple responses commonalities would emerge which would serve as organizers for the responses. The interviewees were asked to rank the growth-stimulators and growth-support factors. They were 221 asked to rank the desired growth stimu- lators and desired growth-support factors because these were not the primary stimulators sought. They could be more realistically 28 ranked if they had been perceived as in evidence. Methodology The study of school environments toward the identification of factors perceived to stimulate and support the growth of tea- chers who were perceived as having grown professionally re- quired a focus on selected school environments which would serve as a sample of a papulation of school environments in Southwes- tern Michigan. Districts within a radius of fifty miles from Kalamazoo, Michigan were selected as eligible for inclusion in the study since all four sizes of districts required by the study were present within that area. This area also provided accessa- bility to indepth probing utilizing personal interviews. In addition, the site-distance limit provided opportunity for the interviewer to return to the sites beyond the interviews to verify the accuracy of particular perceptions which emerged in the interviews. The criteria for selection as a participating district were: 1) the district was required to be within the fifty mile radius (or within a one-hundred mile diameter circle circumscribed on a map of Michigan with Kalamazoo at the center); 2) the district was required to be listed as: an Urban Metropolitan Core, an Urban-Fringe, a City or Town, or a Rural District by the Mich- igan Department of Education; 3) the district was required to have a minimum of four elementary schools (which were listed as elementary schools in the Michigan Education Directory and lm I“: 04 View h telChe} ‘bove. Ar. 9:: princip VA. Peq‘ 29 Buyer's Guide); h) the district was required to grant permission (through its central administrative officers) for the conducting of the study, and S) the district was required to permit a ran- dom-selection of schools within the district and a random-samp- ling of teachers within the district schools. Random sampling was the method used for selecting the particular districts, schools, and the sources of information for the study. The districts were selected through the assigning of a number to each qualifying school district within each category of district (Urban Metro Core, Urban Fringe, City/Town, and Rural) and then using a random selection method for ranking the numbers in each category. The same method was used in the selection of individual schools once the school districts had been selected and confirmed as participating districts. In the random-selection of buildings, the buildings which were drawn as possible sites were confimed as partipating sites when the principal and three teachers in each building had agreed to be a part of the study. The principal was contacted first and when the principal agreed to participation and an inter- view had been arranged, the teachers were contacted. The teachers were randomly selected using the method described above. Approval was granted by the first four districts contacted. Fifteen of the sixteen schools contacted granted approval. One principal declined participaton. Since principal participation was required, that school was drapped and the next-ranked school 30 in that district was selected. The principal of the new school agreed to participation. This was the only instance when participation was declined by.a principal. Most teachers were very willing to participate. Only two teachers declined. One, because of surgery, and the other because of a change in a sum— mer schedule. One teacher failed to appear at two scheduled interviews and therefore, was dropped from the study. A re- placement from the rank-ordered list was found immediately. The interviews were arranged by telephone and a letter (See Appendix B) confirmed the interviews. The letter pro- vided the prospective interviewee with general information on the study and guarenteed 32 penalty for withdrawal from plan- ned participation on the part of the participant. Anonymity in all study reports was also guaranteed. The letter was approved by the Vice President for Research of the sponsoring University. The interview appointments were held in a variety of loca- tions. Since the research project was approved during the last week and a half of school on the public school calendar, a decis- ion was made to conduct the interviews during the months of June- August at the convenience of the interviewees as to time and site. As a result, the interviews were held at schools, at peOple's homes and cottages, and in coffee shops or restaurants. (Several peOple remarked that being away from distractions in the school helped them to respond more thoughtfully to the questions asked.) At the beginning of the interview some demographic information was collected (See Appendix C). The 31 purpose in doing so was to provide contextual background for the persons who served as sources of information. As soon as the demographic information was recorded, the interviewee was given a set of laminated cards which contained the interview questions apprOpriate for either principal or teacher response. Cards were used to provide the interviewees with the opportunity to address the questions in the order with which they felt most comfortable. Most of the interviewees proceded through the questions sequentially. Several, however, stated that they wanted to address particular questions first so put others aside until they had responded to the questions ”which had caught their eye.” Since the interviewees perused all of the cards before beginning to answer any of the questions, this opportunity was open to all. The interviews were approximately forty-five minutes in length. At the conclusion of each interview, the interviewee was asked to review his or her responses and to verify that the information was accurately transcribed. It was at this point that several interviewees remarked that they were relieved that the researcher ”hadn't shown up with a tape recorder” and that they felt much more at ease being able to respond without the interference of the presence of the tape recorder. Only one person said that he was surprised that the researcher had decided to transcribe manually rather than to use a tape recorder. .5 ’h 32 At the end of the interview, each interviewee was thanked verbally. This was followed by a thank-you letter (See Appendix D) which contained a slip which could be returned if the inter- viewee was interested in a summary of the study at the conclu- sion of the study. All but two persons requested a summary. Following the interviews the information gathered in the interviews was coded according to particular interview question and by district, building, and position (eg. principal or tea- cher a, teacher b, or teacher c) within the building. The pur- pose of the coding was to allow the grouping of responses by interview schedule item without losing the contextual infor- mation which accompanied the responses. The response infor- mation was later coded again according to the type of response which emerged so that specific responses could be studied and presented as material provided by the interviewees which would illuminate their perceptions. A series of Tables was developed to aid in analyzing the information which was gathered. The use of the tables allowed visual examination of the information so that groupings and single elements which emerged were discernable and so that they could be described in the body of this report (See Chapter IV) with reference to those tables. A decision was made to present as much information as possible in the tables within the body of the report so that the groupings would be obvious and so that individual factors could be presented in proper perspective to other factors. "\ (f °Pe int. arm 33 Appendices were developed which contain supporting material for the Tables. They also display examples of materials per- taining to other portions of the study report. CHAPTER SUMMARY The study purpose and the guiding questions served as guides in the planning and carrying out of the study. The questions asked of persons who served as sources of infor- mation on the school environments studied were based on the guiding questions. The schools chosen for the study were randomly selected from within a designated geographic area in Southwestern Michigan. They represented four types of districts. Four schools in each type of district served as the participating sites. These were randomly selected from among the schools in the districts chosen. The sources of information for the study of school environments consisted of the principal and three randomly-selected teacher in each of the buildings studied. The sources were interviewed using Open-ended interview questions during a forty-five minute interview. The information provided by the interviewees was arranged into tabluar form and was visually analyzed for factors and grouping-of factors pertaining to the school environment which were sought in answering the study questions. The findings which emerged are presented in Chapter IV. Bu .5 Que: CHAPTER IV: THE STUDY FINDINGS The purpose of this chapter is to present the study findings pertaining to four general areas of professional growth that were probed. The areas were: personal perceptions of the meaning of "growing professionally"; perceived school environmental influ- ences on professional growth; perceived environmental influences which are desired; and professional growth experiences perceived to be attributed to environmental influences. The study findings reported in this chapter include: 1) definitions of professional growth; 2) descriptions of professional growth periods in the lives of teachers; 3) factors perceived to be a part of the tea- chers' work environments; h) perceived growth-stimulating factors in school environments; 5) perceived growth-supporting factors; 6) desired growth-stimulating factors; 7) desired growth-supporting factors; 8) growth experiences perceived as the result of some- thing developed in the school or introduced there; and 10) com- parisons which indicate the match between factors identified as growth-stimulating, growth-supporting, desired stimulators and support factors and factors identified as "environmental factors" reported as part of the work environment of teachers. Definitions of "Growing Professionally" The findings in this section are based on responses to Question Number One: "As an administrator/teacher what does 3h via w». a: 35 °growing professionally' mean to you as it refers to teachers and their growth?". In answering the question the inter- viewees provided information which established a contextual background for their responses to ensuing questions and which provided the interviewer with information related to how they personally defined "professional growth" as a process of "growing professionally." The resulting responses were defin- itions which, in some cases, implied several different per- spectives within one definition. Types of Definitions Provided by the Sources of Information The information provided by the interviewees clustered around four types of definitions. These are presented in Table 1. Analysis of the information in Table 1 indicates that definitions emerged which pertained to: 1) "growing through classroom teaching"; 2) "growing through interaction with col- leagues"; 3) "growing through self-directed efforts"; and h) "growing through involvement in curriculum innovation.” Further analysis of the information indicates that the definitions which emerged most frequently were those which pertained to "growing through self-directed efforts." The ones mentioned second-most frequently pertained to "growing through teaching". "Growing through involvement in curric- ulum innovation" emerged as third, and "growing through interaction with colleagues" was fourth. 36 Further analysis indicates that the definitions provided by the principals emerged according to the following frequencies: rune: Definitions of 'Growing Professionallv' According to Emerged Category Definition Number of Percentage of Number of Percentage of Number of Category Interviewees Interviewees Principals Principals Buildings Hho Mentioned Hho Mentioned and Teachers and Teachers Hhere Hho Mentiongg Hho Mentiongg Mentioned Principals Teachers Principals Teachers Growing Through Self-Directed Efforts 53 83% 14 39 88% 81% 16 Growing Through Teaching 32 50% 6 26 38% 54% 15 Growing Through Involvement in Curriculum Innovation 10 16% 4 6 25% 12% 9 Growing Through Interaction with Colleagues 8 12% 2 6 12:: 12% 5 1) "growing through self-directed efforts" (supported by lb, or 88% of the principals; 2) "growing through teaching" (supported by 6 or 38%); 3) "growing through involvement in curriculum in- novation" (by h, or 25%); and h) ”growing through interaction with colleagues" (by 2, or 12%). H- b I 01.- 37 Analysis of the information also indicates that the defin- itions provided by the teachers emerged according to the follow- ing categories (also frequency ordered): 1) "growing through self-directed efforts" (supported by 39,or 81% of the teachers); 2) "growing through teaching" (supported by 26, or Ski); 3) "growing through interaction with colleagues" and "growing through involvement in curriculum innovation" (both by 6, or 12%). Comparison of the categories presented in Table 1 also indicates that more principals and teachers provided definitions which pertained to "growing through self-directed efforts" than any other type of definition. The second-most frequently mentioned type of definition which emerged was "growing through classroom teaching." The third and fourth types of definitions were men- tioned a minimal number of times. The types of definitions which emerged in the responses of the principals and the teachers are the result of the visual analyzation of sixty-four responses to the first question in the interviewee seried (as mentioned previously). The types of def- initions which emerged serve as organizers for the material pro- provided by the interviewees. This information is presented below. Definitions Pertaining to Growing Through Self-Directed Efforts. The definitions which contained reference to self-directed efforts initiated by teachers, included a focus on "seeking out" on the part of teachers as they attempted to learn new 38 things and to improve skills needed for teaching. "Workshops," "classes,' "inservice presentations," and "individual reading" were mentioned as activities which contributed to the learning involved in professional growth. "Striving to keep abreast of what's happening in education," and "grasping any opportunity to grow" were cited as part of "growing professionally" in tea- chers' press toward growth. (One teacher in particular explained that "growing professionally" meant "continually putting ones- self in learning situations." This teacher added that when tea- chers did this, intentionally, optimal growth occurred. "Grow- ing through self-directed efforts" was mentioned by lb of the 16 principals and 39 of the hB teachers. It was mentioned by in- terviewees representing all sixteen buildings studied. Definitions Pertaininggto Growing ThroughiTeaching. The definitions which pertained to "growing through class- room teaching" included: 1) "using professional skills in the classroom and learning through doing"; 2) "responding to the needs and concerns of students"; 3) "trying new things"; and h) "adjusting to a grade level or a teaching area change." Also included in the definitions were growing through: a) "engaging in teaching which adds to knowledge, experience, and expertise"; b) "learning on the Job"; c) "reflecting and evaluating as one solves educational problems”; d) "seeing new ways to do things"; and e) "learning with students as they learn." 39 "Growing through responding to particular student needs and concerns" was expressed as "growing as a result of helping students with both their school problems and with their personal needs and concerns." One teacher, in particular, described this process as "stretching to meet the needs of the whole child." "Growth which occurs when the teacher tries new things" was de- scribed as: a) "finding new ways to help children learn," b) "being better able to accomplish one's goals for one's stu- dents,’ and c) "becoming more competent in teaching." One tea- cher identified an end-result which was "feeling more confident in what one is doing." The definitions relating to classroom teaching as a part of professional growth emerged in the respon- ses of 6 principals and 26 teachers representing 15 buildings. Definitions Pertaining to Growing Through Involvement in Curriculum Innovation. The definitions which emerged pertaining to "growing through involvement in curriculum" focused, primarily, on: a) learning about new programs and models, and b) learning through in- volvement in the implementation of those programs or models. The principals and teachers who viewed these types of activities as growth-producing experiences were employees of school districts involved in the implementation of particular programs and models. These programs and models are discussed in the section "Findings Pertaining to Growth Experiences Related to Particular Environ— mental Influences" near the end of this chapter. to The definitions which pertained to "involvement in cur- riculum innovation" as a part of "growing professionally" were contributed by four principals and six teachers. These repres— ented nine buildings. Definitions Pertaining to Growing Through Interation with Colleagues. "Interaction with colleagues (in the school setting)" was also included in the definitions of "growing professionally." Col- legial sharing of "thoughts, ideas, and methods," and interact— ing both formally ("in meetings and workshops") and informally (in teachers' lounges and in hallways") were examples of inter- action which emerged in the definitions of "growing profession- ally" which pertained to the professional growth of teachers in the buildings studied. Two principals and six teachers men- tioned "growing through interaction with colleagues" in their interview responses. Summary Four categories of definitions emerged in the repsonses of the study interviewees. The categories encompassed definitions which pertained to 1) "growing through self-directed efforts"; 2) "growing through teaching"; 3) "growing through involvement in curriculum innovation"; and h) "growing through interaction with colleagues." The categories which emerged served to organ- organize the responses of the interviewees. bl The types of definitions which were mentioned most fre- quently were those in which "growing professionally" was defined as "growing through self—directed efforts." Definitions which included "growing through teaching" emerged as those mentioned next most frequently. These were followed by "growing through involvement in curriculum innovation" and "growing through interaction with colleagues." The definitions of professional growth as they pertain to teachers "growing professionally" provided a contextual background for the ensuing responses provided by the inter- viewees. The Operational definitions also served to focus the study on "professional growth" as interpreted by the sources of information (the principals and teachers) on the school environments studied. Professional Growth Periods In the Lives of Teachers The findings in this section are based on responses to Question Number Two: "At what critical period(s) in a teacher's life do teachers seem to exhibit professional growth efforts?". In answering this question the interviewees identified times within the lives of teachers when teachers had been observed to grow as perceived by the interviewees. Analysis of the re- sponses of the interviewees indicated, first of all, that the interviewees looked at "growth periods" from various points of view. L2 Types of Professional Growth Periods Perceived by the Sources of Information Preliminary examination of the information provided by the interviewees on perceived growth periods in the lives of teachers indicated that three different viewpoints were presented. As a result, the categories which emerged ap- TflfleZ TYPes of Growth Periods in Teachers' Lives Identified as Professional Growth Periods by the lnrgfvj.u.e‘ Types of Number of Percentage of Number of Percentage of Growth Periods Interviewees Interviewees Principals Principals lino Mentioned mo Mentioned and Teachers and Teachers Hho Mentigm Lin renting Principals Teachers Principals Teachers one Specific Period Corresponding to Years of Teaching 36 56% 12 24 75% 50% One Indefinite Period Related to Situations 16 25% 0 16 0% 33% A One Continuous Career-Long Period 12 19% 4 8 25% 17% peared to be overlapping and not clear-cut in their boun- daries. Further study, however, indicated that the types of growth periods which emerged were related to the manner L3 in which each interviewee perceived the growth of teachers in his or her own building. Given the freedom to describe the observed periods unhampered by pre-set categories, the principals and teachers presented information which other- wise might not have been gained. Three types of growth periods were identified by the interviewees (Table 2). The type of growth period which was most frequently mentioned was: "one specific period corres- ponding to years of teaching." This was mentioned by 36 or 56% of the interviewees. This type of period was perceived to occur at some point in the teachers' careers and was described as a time when teachers, due to circumstances related to their num- ber of years in teaching, sought growth. The second-most frequently mentioned type of growth period was: "one definite period related to situations" This type of period was one where particular situations in- fluenced teachers to grow or to continue to grow, or both. This type of period was mentioned by 16 or 25% of the interviewees. This period was characterized in the des- criptions of the interviewees by teachers responding to particular professional-life or personal-life situations and it involved the feelings of teachers in response to those situations. It also involved the teachers' per- ceptions of which situations in their lives permitted them the "freedom" to pursue professional growth. The third type of growth period was "one continuous hh career-long period" described as "when teachers grew and growth was continuous" even though it was characterized by "ups and downs," and "highs and lows." It was generally perceived to extend throughout the teachers' careers. It was generally perceived to be career-long. Since the types of definitions were based on information provided by the interviewees, comments of the interviewees are pre- sented below. Each emerged type of growth period serves as a heading for the material contributed by the intervieweees. In the case of "professional growth periods related to years in teaching" and "one definite period related to situations" more tabular information is also presented. Professional Growth Periods Related to Years in Teaching. The first set of descriptions involved periods within teachers' careers which were identified by the inter- viewees as times of "deciding to grow" and times of ”action toward growth". These periods were perceived to be related to the number of years which teachers had been in teaching. Infor- mation pertaining to periods which emerged related to "years in teaching" is presented in Table 3. The analysis of the infor- mation in Table 3 indicates that the most frequently mentioned growth period perceived to occur in the careers of teachers was the Early-Career Post-Adjustment Period. This period was men- tioned by 19 or 30% of the interviewees. The other three career periods which emerged were: "the Early-Career Adjustment Period" h5 mentioned by 12 (or 19%) of the interviewees; "the Middle-Career Table 3 Teethers Professional Breath Perioos Inerti‘: ec bv the Interviewees Specific Number of Percentage of Nunzer of Growth Periods Intertiewees TFTE'UIGWPEE Principals who Mentionec H50 HEWIIGAGC and Teachers use Merfionej Princzpals Teachers Percentage of Principals and Teacners kht Hertione: Principals TEGCWPYE Early-Career Ad;gs:menr Period ll" - 3 leer) 12 g... e ;‘I '\ Earle-Career Poet AoipstmerrrPerind . I I4 - 10 ' Year] 1 0" 'J.’ ’1': §~ \l Hzofie-Carggr Perioo m - 20 “rear; 5 6’. 3 Latgg-Career Periodi (2t 'Year - ) a or. o t Univ teachers observed to be continuously growing throughout their careers were mentions: as growing during this period. 10 hi (I a p éS/e 3"" Period" mentioned by 5 (or 8%); and "the Later-Career Period" only mentioned by interviewees who said that teachers who are continu- ously growing tend to still be growing during this period. b6 Growth Periods Related to Situations. The growth period or periods which emerged which per- tained to "situatons" involved professional-life and personal- life situations which influenced teachers' decisions to pur- sue growth and their efforts toward growth once growth efforts had begun. Information pertaining to the interviewees per- ceptions of the two types of situations which influence tea— chers decisions to grow and their growth are presented in Table h. Visual inspection of the information in Table h Tdfle4 Types of Situations Perceived by Interviewees Hhich Influenced Teachers’ Decisions to Pursue Professional Growth Situation Number of Percentage of Number of Percentage of Number of Type Interviewees Interviewees Principals Principals Buildings Tho Mentioned Nho Mentioned and Teachers and Teachers there fl Mentigngg fl figntigngg Mention Principals Teachers Principals Teachers Professional-Life Situations 26 41% 5 21 31% 44% 14 Personal-Life Situations 13 20% 1 12 6% 25% 10 indicates that professional-life situations were mentioned more frequently than personal-life situations. Five (31%) of the LT principals and 21 (hb1) of the teachers mentioned professional- life situations, while only one (6%) of the principals and 12 (25%) of the teachers mentioned personal-life situations. Descriptions by principals and teachers of types of situations which influenced teachers' decisions to begin and to continue to grow are presented below. Each of the types of situations serves as a heading for the material gathered in the principal and teacher interviews. Professional-Life Situations Perceived to Affect the Growth of Teachers Professional life situations which were perceived to affect teachers' decisions to grow and "when" in their lives that growth took place were: a) situations pertaining to classroom teach- ing, itself (when teachers were secure enough, in their teaching, "to be open to the ideas of others"; when the tea- chers realized that the students "were not growing as they might (be growing)"; and when "what was happening in the class- room wasn't working"); b) situations pertaining to status with- in the school district organization (when teachers were "threatened by pink-slipping," when evaluations by the principal "indicated a need for growth in some area," when teachers de- cided to go into administration 2: they needed "to meet district contract requirements for course credits"); and c) situ- ations pertaining to the offering of new opportunities which challenged the teacher professionally (when workshops or sem- inars of interest were offered, and when teachers decided to :g Q» hB change grade-level or teaching area). Personal-Life Situations Perceived to Affect the Growth of Teachers Personal life situations which were perceived to influence teachers' decisions to grow and "when" they exerted effort toward "growing professionally" included: a) situations which were stressful in such a way that the teacher wanted to be "out of the situation" and, therefore, sought growth as a means of over- coming the pain of the situation; b) situations where personal circumstances allowed time for involvement in growth-activities (eg. before becoming a parent, or "after one's own children were in school, or had left home"; after the resolution of marital difficulties; or after "a physically-exhausting preg- nancy"), and c) situations where personal friends were involved in growth-activities and teachers aspired to grow along with those whom they observed to be growing. Thirteen of the sources (one principal and twelve teachers) mentioned personal situations which influenced when growth efforts were attempted dur- ing teachers' lives. Professional Growth Periods Perceived as Continuous. The type of growth periods which were perceived as continuous throughout the teachers' careers involved growth which had no definite parameters in terms of evolving around a situation or a specific number of years. This type of growth period was perceived as one of continuous growth kg with "spurts" and "leveling-off" times. Continuous growth periods were generally perceived as career-long. One teacher said that this period was observed in the lives of people who "seemed to be always growing." Another teacher said, however, that even teachers who have seemed to be "growing continously" have been observed to "back down" (meaning that they have shown diminished effort) when they have experienced "burn-out." Other teachers said that they have known teachers who "just seem to keep on growing." Summary The periods in the teachers' lives when they were perceived to be "growing professionally" were described as: growth periods characterized by 1) one specific period which occurred in relation to number of years taught; 2) one indef- inate period related to professional-life and personal-life situations; and 3) one continuous career-long period of growth. The type of growth period identified as most commonly observed was number 1 (above) which was "one specfic period related to number of years taught." Within that type of period three periods (the Early-Career Adjustment Period; the Early-Career Post-Adjustment Period; and the Middle Career Period) emerged as periods when growth was perceived to tend to occur. Of these, the Early-Career Post-Adjustment Period emerged as the period when teachers were percieved to pursue growth. 50 The Duration of Professional Growth Periods In the Lives of Teachers The findings in this section are based on responses to Question Number Three: "What, in your estimation, is the approximate duration of a teacher's growth (in years or in particular periods during the teacher's career)?". In answer- ing this question the interviewees identified the length of time, within the lives of teachers, that the periods of growth (based on what they had observed) had lasted. Information pertaining to the length of the growth periods in the lives of teachers is presented in Table 5. The information indicates that the most-frequently mentioned length of the growth period (which was perceived to have occurred in the lives of teachers) was "of 23 specific duration." Eighty per cent of the interviewees' responses reflected this per- ception. This was mentioned by 12 (or 75%) of the principals and 39 (or 81%) of the teachers. The other growth-period lengths which emerged were: one - three years 222 five - seven years (each mentioned by one or 6% of the principals 222 three or 6% of the teachers); ten years (mentioned by two or 12% of the principals and two or b! of the teachers); and twenty years (mentioned by one teacher -- 2% of the teachers). Le Grow' N0 SDI Du'at 0)! It: Tears Flue r Year; 70“ Tea (99:: IV 51 tunes The Length of Professional Growth Periods In Teachers’ Lives as Identified by the Interviewees Length of Number of Percentage of Number of Percentage of Number of Growth Period Interviewees Interviewees Principals Principals Buildings Nho Mentioned Hho Mentioned and Teachers and Teachers Hhere Hho Mentioned Nho Mentioned Mentioned Principals Teachers Principals Teachers No Specific Duration 51 80% 12 39 75% 81% 16 mutonwe Years 4 6% 1 3 6% 6% 4 Five to Seven Years 4 6% 1 3 6% 6% 2 Tmflhms 4 6% 2 2 us 4% 4 Twenty Years 1 1% 0 1 0% 2% 1 The perception that 23 specific length could be identified was supported by the following comments: "The duration varies" - "There's no length of time associated with growth efforts; it depends on the individual" —"continuous; never—ending; no duration in terms of years" 52 -"Some teachers grow in response to a need and until the need is met" -"until a particular goal is ac- complished" -"an individual thing" In contrast, other sources identified growth periods lasting from one to three years; five to seven years; about 10 years; and approximately 20 years. The principals and teachers who reported a 1-3 year growth period, said that this growth period usually occurred sometime during the teachers' first ten years of teaching. Those that said that the duration of the growth period was 5.7 years, simply stated that the growth period tended to occur "early in the teachers' careers." Two of these sources, however, said that similar periods of growth sometimes reappeared later in the teachers' careers. The sources who mentioned a ten year growth period duration said that this ten-year period occupied the first ten years of the teachers' career-lives. One principal, however, said that the ten-year growth period extended between the fifth and the fifteenth year of teaching. The one person who supported a twenty-year growth period simply stated that teachers were generally more eager to attempt new things during their first twenty years of teaching. Summary The length of the growth period in the lives of teachers which was most frequently mentioned by the interviewees was "of no specific duration." This was followed by several durations m alsc 53 which were observed to last 1-3 years, 5-7 years, 10 years or 20 years. The period described as "of no specific duration" was perceived to vary in length or to be continuous. Fifty-one of the sixty-four persons who were interviewed perceived the duration of the teachers' periods to vary accord- ing to particular circumstances, and, therefore, not to be lim— ited to a particular number of years. The remaining interviewees specified growth-period durations of one to three years; five to to seven years; approximately ten years; and approximately twenty years. Those who identified a specific number of years also specified when those years were perceived to occur. Environmental Factors Perceived as Present In the School Environment The findings in this section are based on responses to Question Number Four: "What in the work environment of the tea- chers in your building could be classified as part of their work environment?". The responses of the interviewees included des- criptions which, when analyzed, indicate that six categories emerged which encompassed the individual factors perceived as part of the teachers' work environment. The categories or types of factors are listed in Table 6. Analysis of the information in Table 6. indicates that of the six types of factors identified by the Enw Fa Ice ”WM Factc Fecal rscto AIlosc Factor ("Tera (ktwi curry“ Fitters TIM/SC? (itlors the Prir "Ptople sentiene 51: TuneG Types of factors Identified as Part of the School Environment by the Interviewees Types of Number of Percentage of Number of Percentage of Number of Environmental Interviewees Interviewees Principals Principals Buildings Factors Hho Mentioned Nho Mentioned and Teachers and Teachers Hhere Identified Hho_ggntioned Nho Mentioned Mentioned Principals Teachers Principals Teachers Hwflcd factors 38 60% 8 30 50% 62% 15 People factors 38 60% 8 30 50% 62% 14 Atmosphere factors 26 41% 5 21 31% 44% 14 Interaction/ Involvement factors 19 30% 5 I4 31% 23% 9 Curriculum factors 11 17% 6 5 38% 10% 10 Time/Scheduling factors 4 6% 3 1 13% 2% 4 the principals and the teachers, the "physical factors" and the "people factors" were mentioned the most frequently. Each type was mentioned by 38 interviewees. The "atmosphere factors” comprised the second-most frequently mentioned type of factor. Although the "atmosphere" (the feeling) which was perceived to prevail in 55 the buildings studied, depended to a large extent on the "people" in the buildings, this factor emerged as a separate category because, as several sources indicated, "it was something that one could ’just feel' when going into a building before one even saw anyone." The third-most frequently mentioned factors were the "interaction/involvement factors." These factors were identified by 19 of the study sources. The "interaction/involvement factors" involved peOple but they also involved things (inanimate objects found in the workplace environment). The fourth most-frequently mentioned type of factors which emerged were labelled "curric- ulum factors." The final category included "time/scheduling fac- tors." These factors were mentioned by four interviewees. The six types of factors mentioned as part of the workplace environment are discussed below. Each factor type is used as a heading for the material contributed by the interviewees. Physical Factors One-half of the principals and more than one-half (62%) of the teachers identified "physical factors" (eg. the building it- self, the individual classrooms, the office, other rooms, the arrangement of the building with specific grade-levels in par- ticular wings of the building, the outdoor areas adjacent to the building, and materials and equipment used within the building or in conjunction with building programs in the outdoor areas). One teacher painted a particularly vivid picture when she stated, "It (the building environment) contains, among other things, physical things like desks, chalk, chalkdust, smelly tennis M 56 shoes, papers, pencils, crayons, paste, paint, Band-Aids, bells ringing, interruptions, and the noisy lunchroom." People Factors People Factors were mentioned by thirty-eight inter- viewees in the identification of factors perceived as part of the workplace environments of the teachers in the build- ings studied. The "people factors" included: a) the prin- cipal; b) the teachers; c) the students; d) the school sec- retary; e) the special teachers and consultants; f) the teacher aides; g) volunteers; h) the kitchen workers; 1) the school nurse; j) the custodian; and k) the students' parents ("those who involved themselves in the programs of the school"). Atmosphere Factors The third environmental component, the "atmosphere factors", like the "peOple factors", were contributed by sources in 88% of the schools. However, in this case, only 26 sources mentioned this factor. The factors which were identified as "atmosphere factors" were those which were perceived to have contributed to "a general feeling" that permeated the school environment.. These were described as feelings of friendliness, supportive- ness, trust, openness to creativity, and a positiveness toward education. They were also typified by a feeling of "up-beatness" in particular buildings. One source referred to "the listening, the sharing, and the 'goodness' between co-workers" that was a 57 part of the work environment in her building. The study sources also mentioned: feelings of frustration and unhappiness (in some cases, without action toward resolution); and lack of support (particularly, on the part of parents). One teacher described the "atmosphere" of the school as "the toga set by the principal." Another said that the "atmosphere" of the building depended on the "morale, the enthusiasm, and the helpfulness of everyone in the building." And still another said that it was the relationship between the teachers and the students that set the tone of the atmosphere. Interaction/Involvement Factors The "interaction/involvement factors" which were identi- fied by five principals and twenty-one teachers were of two sub-types: a) factors denoting interaction between people; and b) factors indicative of people's involvement with things. The study findings indicate that the interaction process involving peOple with other peOple fell into the following categories: 1) interaction between the principal and the teachers; 2) in- teraction between individual teachers and other teachers; 3) interaction between the school secretary and the staff, the the parents, and the students; h) interaction between the teacher/other teachers and the students; 5) interaction be- tween the parents and the building staff; 6) interaction between the parents and the students; and 7) interaction between the students and the principal. r0 58 The study sources indentified a number of environmental factors which included "inanimate objects" (eg. computers, text- books and other materials and equipment used in teaching -- physical factors in the school environment), as well as, "sched- uled events" (eg. planning periods, meetings, and blocks of teaching time). These were described as "things" with which teachers were involved in the work environment. The type of involvement which was generally perceived as part of the work environment of the teacher was involvement ascribed to the particular roles of the persons in those envi- ronments. Analysis of the responses of the interviewees in- dicates that "interaction between" people varied from building to building according to situations faced by the people there. Further analysis indicates that "involvement with" things in the building environment varied in the types of things avail- able in the buildings, or at least in the things perceived to be there. Curriculum Factors The "curriculum factors" which were mentioned by the sour- ces of information included factors associated with the school curriculum. For the purpose of being able to accept a wide range of responses, a broad definition of curriculum was used by the investigator. The definition, here, viewed curriculum as "components of educational programs which pertained to what was taught, to whom, when, and under what circumstances and to the goals and objectives of such programs." 59 The factors which emerged, pertaining to "what was taught", were: a) the particular subject matter which was taught, and b) the types of materials which were available for use in instruct- ion. The factors which were mentioned, which pertained to "when something was taught," were: a) the district policies "adhered to" in the building which regulated the number of minutes per week which were allotted per subject, and b) the freedom of teachers to decide when to teach particular subjects or subject content. The factors which emerged pertaining to "the recipients of the teaching (the students)" were summarized in the descript- ion of one teacher who stated that it was the students and the relationship between the students and the teacher which were im— portant. Several teachers indicated that the students in their buildings were more transcient than in years past and that the socio-economic backgrounds of the student populations in those schools were in flux. The "conditions under which student learn- ing was perceived to have taken place depended on whether the school was perceived to be "a safe and orderly place"; whether or not there was apprOpriate space for particular kinds of learn- ning to take place, and on whether the premises were "attractive and clean." Materials and equipment to facilitate learning were also mentioned. In addition, the goals and objectives associated with the curriculum were described in such statements as a) "There is one purpose—-educating children"; b) "All kids gag learn and are expected (here) to learn"; and c) "Students are the most 6O important thing in our school and all (here) aim toward best equipping them for success in life." Time/Scheduling Factors The "time/scheduling factors" which emerged were: a) time spent in the building (by the teachers) on a daily basis; b) time segments when instruction took place; c) time before, during, and after school for planning and preparation; and, d) time set aside for regularly-scheduled meetings and special events. Although the time/scheduling factors also fit other categories (eg. the interaction/involvement and the curriculum classifications), the context in which they were mentioned -- that of time being important in the school environment if a clear picture were to be presented -- warranted the recognition of time and scheduling as a category which could not be subsumed under another. Summary The findings which pertained to the school environment as the teachers' workplace indicate that six types of factors were perceived as attributes in the school environments studied. These were: 1) physical factors; 2) people factors; 3) atmos- phere factors; A) interaction/involvement factors; 5) curric- ulum factors; and 6) time/scheduling factors. The "people fac- tors" and "the physical factors" emerged as the two most fre- quently mentioned types of factors. Each was identified by 38 interviewees. The atmosphere factors were the second-most P. r . the w' e: wt. 0v .n. P. r a D. O 61 frequently mentioned group; the curriculum factors, the third; and the time/scheduling factors, the fourth (with four interviewees mentioning this factor). Each classification of factors which emerged had within it specific factors that were perceived to be a part of the school environments studied. These factors were features which the principals and teachers identified, based on their perceptions of their own school environments. Quest: 4 LE ’01 profes Viewee 62 The Identification and Ranking Of Environmental Factors Perceived as Growth-Stimulating Factors The findings in this section are based on the responses to Question Number Five: "What in the work environment of teachers in your building might motivate a teacher to actively pursue professional growth?". In answering the question, the inter- viewees first identified factors which they perceived to be im- portant in stimulating the growth of teachers in their buildings. They then ranked those factors in perceived influence. Results from the identification and the ranking are presented first for the total group (in Table 7). They are then presented for the princials alone (in Table 8), and then for the teachers alone (in Table 9). The responses of the three groups were the focus in order to note similarities and differences in the perceptions of principals and teachers which might emerge pertaining to factors in teachers' work environments which stimulate teachers to grow professionally. The responses of the total group of interviewees provided information across buildings and across districts which indicated the status of factors perceived to be present and their per- ceived influence. For each of the three groups, the most frequently identi- fied factors and the most highly ranked factors were selected for further study. Any factor which was ranked in the top three by an interviewee was included in a table. This gave all of the Vere drowt 'iewe Vere :’°Qu 63 factors presented in the tables a degree of support. When dis- played in a table, it could be easily noted that a pattern of natural groups was evident. The top group of three to six factors was further analyzed. Each factor was assigned a cumulative score through an analytic procedure used to assign points based on the rank given to the factor by the person who had identified it. A factor received three points when it was ranked as "most important" by an interviewee, two Points when it was ranked as "second-most important," and one point when ranked third. If an interviewee identified a factor as a stimulator and then ranked it as hth, 5th, or 6th, rather than as 1st, 2nd, or 3rd, or did 323 rank it at all, the factor received 22 points. (See Appendix D1). These factors were 221 included in the study report. Although they were important enough to have been mentioned by at least one interviewee, they were considered incidental information for the purposes of the study. There were also a few interviewees who identified only one or two growth-stimulating factors. These persons could only rank one or two factors. The group of factors with the highest cumulative scores were those perceived as most influential in stimulating teacher growth. The factors identified by the total group of inter- viewees and by each subgroup (eg. principals and teachers) were analyzed and compared. Some factors were mentioned more frequently while others were ranked higher by the interviewees. 6h The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Interviewees as a Total Group Sixteen factors were identified as stimulators of tea- cher growth by the interviewees in the buildings studied. Some factors were contributed by both principals and teachers and others by principals only or teachers only. The pluses (+, ++, or +++) in Table 7 denote the group which mentioned each factor. Analysis of the frequency scores in Table 7 indicates that six factors emerged as the most frequently mentioned fac- tors. These were: l) "the influence of the principal"; 2) "the influence of other teachers”; 3) "participation in curriculum Tide? factors Iantified md lated as tenth-Stunting factors by the Total Group of Interviewees Iantifisd “or of ber of Percenta, of Percentage of Mari” Ann iuth-Stianlating Intervimrnes Intervimmes Intorvimmes Intervimmes Score factors Ilia Identified Its raked Ilia Iantifiod The Add 1. The Inflnuce of the Principal He 39 39 61% 61% 76 2. The Influence of 0mm“hmmns+M’ 36 36 5! 83 13 3. Participation in unusual Innovation PM 26 22 41% 34% 46 4. Aospondiog to Students’ Theda 44+ 5. The Teachers’ Om Desire to Grow Ht 6. The Auailflility of Meaningful Inservice H» 7. uportunity for Salary Increase H 6. Meeting District Credit Renoir-ants +++ 9. Mortality for Professional Advuconent H 16. The Avoilnility of a Professional Library M 11. The Interest of Parents 4+ 12. Positiooness in the School Atmosphere H 13. The Influence of Control Ministrators ++ 14. Visitatioos to Other Classrooms! hildings f 15. The Poplicmiility of Inservice to Classroom line if 16. The Toodmrs’ Om htsitk Inter- ests 4+ 19 12 1 17 Table 7 (con’t) 1! 17% 1C 13 1 10 10 10 10 11 12 + Itatioaod by Principals only *5" Mendix n for indioimal memo scores H Ikntionod by Tenders only MIT motioned by both Principals ad Toachns tI cl th cu 01’ IO: ing Bee in . 1:1“ "The 66 innovation"; h) "responding to students' needs"; 5) "the teachers' own desire to grow"; and 6) "the availability of meaningful inservice." The same six factors emerged as the factors ranked as "most influential." "The influence of the principal" was ranked by 39 (or 61%) of the interviewees; "the influence of other teachers" by 36 (or 56%); "participation in curriculum innovation” by 22 (30%); "responding to PPUGGDPO' needs" by 20 (31%); "the teachers' own desire to grow”, also by 20 or 3l% and "the availability of meaningful inservice" by 17 (27%). Analysis indicates that the remaining 10 stimulators were ranked by 2% - 15% of the interviewees. Comparison of the number of interviewees who identified each factor and the number who ranked indicates that some interviewees identified stimu- lators and then did 223 rank them as influential. Therefore, they perceived them as present in the school environment but chose other factors as those which were more influential in the stimulation of teacher growth. Analysis of the cumulative scores (See Appendix El for cumulative score computation) indicates that "the influence of the principal" was perceived by the interviewees as the most influential stimulator of teacher growth in the build- ings studied. "The influence of other teachers" ranked second. "Responding to students' needs" amd "participation in curriculum innovation" ranked third and fourth, respec- tively. "The teachers' own desire to grow” ranked fifth. "The availability of meaningful inservice" ranked sixth as a as for Of er: fnc. by Ct p°°p1 67 factor which was perceived to stimulate teachers to grow. Comparison of the ordered ranking of the identified stim- ulators with the frequency ordered listing of the stimulators in Table 7 indicates that four of the factors occupied the same position in both the frequency order and the ranked order. These were: "the influence of the principal"; the "influence of other teachers"; "the teachers' own desire to grow"; and "the availability of meaningful inservice." "Par- ticipation in curriculum innovation" and "responding to stu- dents' needs" held reversed positions in the ordered ranking. This finding indicates that although "participation in curricu- lum innovation" was perceived more frequently than "responding to students' needs" as a stimulator, "responding to students' needs" was perceived as a more influential stimulator. The perceived presence of the six factors which emerged as growth-stimulating factors was supported by comments set forth during the interview. These are presented below. Each of the six major stimulators serves as a heading for the mat- erial contributed by the interviewees which supports that factor as a stimulator of growth. The Influence of the Principal as an Influential Stimulator. "The influence of the principal" was identified as a factor by some people who said, "It is the influence of the principal -- the interest that he shows in the staff that stimulates people to grow" and by people who gave specific references pre the Vhe max the lent lute Prim Pa; a °’ cc t°&:h. Of the 68 to types of behaviors by principals which indicated to per- sons in the school environment that the principal had influ- enced teachers to pursue professional growth. Several of the teachers mentioned that the principal's interest in the staff as professionals, and as persons, had stimulated teachers in their buildings to grow. One of the behaviors which one of the teachers mentioned was: "the principal shows interest by listening to the concerns of teachers and acts on their sug- gestions." In one instance, even when the principal and the central administrators prOposed something new which the tea- chers did not want to implement. In this case, the teachers felt that the principal showed interest in them and in their preferences and they interpreted this action as support for them as persons and as professionals. One teacher said that when the principal encouraged but didn't insist on teachers making changes or pursuing growth in some particular area, the teachers were more likely to grow, and did grow. Several teachers mentioned their principal's encourage- ment for teachers to attend workshops that he thought might interest them. They mentioned efforts on the part of the principal to make workshop attendance possible. One princi- pal also mentioned encouraging teachers to take university or college classes in their areas of interest. Several principals and teachers mentioned the use of a teacher evaluation process which included "professional Srowth of the teacher" as one of the evaluation criteria. The 1'). Co: hi, in VI}: 69 particular district where this was in evidence used an evaluation form on which the principal rated the teachers on "Professional Characteristics." The first of the 17 items in this category was "Shows professional growth through participation in work- shops, conferences, professional reading, and professional com- mittees." Two principals in another district commented on the use of teacher evaluations to stimulate teacher growth. One of the principals did not elaborate; the other said that growth was stimulated because of the effect of a focus on meeting stu-. dents' needs (or "on the best way to serve the students"). One principal said that the supervisory philosophy of the princi- pal motivates teachers toward pursuing growth. He stated that when the principal is concerned with the concerns of teachers as well as with organizational concerns, and when both are addressed, the organizational goals also become the personal goals of the teachers. He said that it was when this happened in his school that teachers began to care about the success of the school and when they cared about this, they began to look at what they were doing, evaluate, and make decisions to grow. A teacher in another district commented about the helpfulness of the principal's providing feedback as part of the evaluation process. She said that the principal's comments, along with his presence in the classrooms during his observations of the teaching, and his evident interest in the professional Browth of the teachers were the things which stimulated some people to grow. She added that his '9 est at: 0:1; to in TO frequent "stopping in" in classrooms during his observations also indicated that the principal cared. She said that this had influenced persons to pursue growth. Only one teacher mentioned that some teachers pursued growth out of fear that they might be considered, by the principal, "not to be doing well." Several other indications of the influence of the prin- cipal as a stimulator which were mentioned by teachers were: the support of the principal for teachers who wanted to try new things; the principal providing information about specific inservice programs; the principal arranging for teachers to be able to attend inservice programs; and the principal in- volving some or all of the building staff in curriculum innovation. Three teachers and one principal mentioned the instructional leadership of the principal where the principal "shared" new things which he or she had learned. The teachers said that the sharing stimulated some teachers in their build- ings to find out more about some of the things which had been presented. One principal and one teacher said that the prin- cipal's sharing of research findings and simply being inter- ested himself (male principals in both cases) in new things stimulated teachers to grow. One principal said that he often encouraged teachers who seemed to be growing, to try to interest others in growing. The principal's participation in growth activities, along with teachers, was cited by one teacher as something which influenced teachers to grow. "The sti it Vhi: of c ant cite Vhic Brow: ence, °ther inclu "hich the P’OV Vbo . 71 influence of the principal" emerged as an influential stimu- lator of teacher growth which was identified and ranked in all 16 of the buildings in the study. Special significance is attached to the wide-spread perceptions of persons in the schools of the influence of the principal in the stimulation of teacher growth. The Influence of Other Teachers as an Influential Stimulator. "The influence of other teachers" was identified by some principals and teachers who simply stated that it was the in- terest of other teachers in teachers who pursued growth which stimulated them to grow. One teacher stated, however, that it was "the interest of other teachers, themselves, in growing which inspired teachers to seek growth." The "general attitude" of colleagues was mentioned by one principal as a determin- ant in whether or not teachers sought growth. Other teachers cited sharing, personally and professionally, as something which encouraged teachers to become involved in efforts toward growth. The sharing included the sharing of personal experi- ences as well as professional "problems" and "successes" which other teachers had experienced in their classrooms. It also included other teachers complimenting a teacher on something which they had noticed -- this was perceived to have stimulated the teachers who were complimented to try even harder to im- prove. The sharing also included conversations with others who had good ideas and who had pursued professional growth. 3d to th wg, an egg 72 It was the "closeness" among the staff which one teacher said led to the sharing that, in turn, led to teachers being stimu- lated to grow. She said that sharing occurred when teachers interacted formally and when they worked together toward com- mon goals." Seeing other teachers who appeared to be doing well was also cited by several teachers as something which influenced teachers in their buildings to seek improvement which in- volved growing. One teacher said, "It was when teachers saw other teachers doing well that some wanted to do well them- selves. Stated another way, one teacher said, "It"s peer pressure -- when others are doing well, others feel the pinch to do well too." The principal in the same building agreed that it was the pressure of the teachers' peers which influ- enced them to pursue growth. One teacher stated that this type of pressure was exerted when the other teachers told about things they had learned at workshops. Another said that it was when teachers described interesting classes which they were taking. "It is observing and knowing that others are growing that stimulates," said one teacher. Still others said that seeing other teachers use new things which appeared to be effective stimulated growth. Four teachers mentioned this as an influence. One of those teachers said that it was when teachers transferred into the building and brought new ideas that other teachers took notice and became inter- ested in the new and began to work toward growth. Another in t: ti ’1; 8 an ‘\~ by law Chgne pQPCE 73 teacher who taught in the same district, but in another building, said that it was "the challenge" from new teachers who came in that inspired teachers to grow. One principal said that there had, sometimes, seemed to have been a degree of competitiveness (as well as sharing) that influenced tea— chers to pursue growth "even though it (the competitiveness) may have been subconscious." One teacher referred to com- petitiveness among teachers "to prepare children well." She said that this influenced teachers to grow. In this case, the children to whom she referred as "well prepared" were those who performed well on standardized tests. As a stimulator, "the influence of other teachers" was mentioned one less time, by the study sources as a whole, than the influence of the principal. Both factors were perceived as influential in the school environments studied. The influence of other teachers was mentioned in 15 of the 16 buildings. The significance is in wide-spread emergence of this factor and the meaning associated with this factor as it pertains to the stimulation of professional growth in teachers. Participation in Curriculum Innovation as an Influential Stimulator. "Participation in curriculum innovation" was identified by interviewees who viewed curriculum innovation as "any change in how things have previously been done" to those who perceived curriculum as "the implementation of already 10: hit is the Dre: Vgnt were Anotj 7h developed models adopted by individual teachers, small groups of teachers, or adopted on a building-wide or district-wide basis." Two principals identified teachers working on curricu- lum committees as an example of curriculum innovation. Re- sponding to the implementation of computer education in the school was mentioned by two teachers. Another teacher men- tioned curriculum changes pertaining to parallel scheduling which affected when and where particular things in the cur- riculum were taught. Two teachers mentioned teachers who had to become familiar with new areas of curriculum due to a change in grade level. One teacher said that teachers who transferred into other buildings had to prepare for differences in curriculum in the new buildings. The most frequently mentioned type of curriculum innovation was the implementation of adopted programs and models. This was mentioned as a stimulator by two principals and nine tea- chers. One principal simply said that "new curriculum adopt- ions" stimulated teachers to grow. The other principal cited his system's adaption of the Effective Schools Movement. The Effective Schools Movement was also mentioned by one teacher as a stimulator of growth. Another teacher said that when the Workshop Way model was intoduced into the school, teachers previously unfamiliar with the model became interested and wanted to be a part of the implementation. These teachers were stimulated to learn about how to implement the model. Another teacher mentioned the district-wide implementation fink the at: to law tea in 1 WI tier than teach 75 of the Madeline Hunter Model as something which stimulated teachers to learn about the model in order to be able to be involved in the implementation. Still another teacher ident- ified the implementation of the Gessell Testing Program as a stimulator of teacher growth. Another teacher in the same building identified the introduction of a developmental kin- dergarten into the building as something which stimulated tea- chers to learn more about the developmental needs of young children. Only one teacher mentioned that some teachers who had declined to be involved in particular programs (in this case, the Hunter Model and the "Dyslexia" Program) were informed that they "222 to be involved" which made them view the situ- ation as a threatening one. The same teacher mentioned that to most of the teachers in his building, the opportunity for involvement had been a welcomed challenge. He stated that those teachers who saw this as a challenge had been very interested in the implementation and in growing. Some aspect of curriculum innovation was mentioned and ranked by interviewees in lb of the 16 buildings studied. Although "par- ticipation in curriculum innovation" was mentioned less frequently than "the influence of the principal" and "the influence of other teachers," it was identified by 26 (hli) of the interviewees. Responding_to Students' Needs as an Influential Stimulator. "Responding to students' needs" was identified and ranked by persons who mentioned several types of student needs. 76 Although some of the interviewees mentioned students' needs in general, others specified particular needs which they indicated required response on the part of teachers. In order to respond to the needs, the teachers were stimulated to pursue growth. "Academic needs" were mentioned as needs which caught the attention of the teachers and prompted teachers to grow in order to meet students' needs. Several teachers mentioned the special help which many students needed and which required special skills on the part of regular classroom teachers. One teacher remarked that children's having special needs did not negate their "eagerness to learn." She said that tea- chers realized that they had to grow in order to serve these students to the best of their (the teachers') abilities. Another teacher mentioned that it was "recognition on the part of teachers that students did have special needs" which stimu- lated some teachers to find out more about the needs and then to pursue growth in order to be able to respond to those needs. "Responding to Students' needs in areas of student dis- cipline" was mentioned by two principals. One simply stated that responding to problems related to student behavior along with those associated with students' academic needs stimulated teachers to grow. The other principal mentioned "students' needs toward developing self-discipline"; "students' need based on parental divorce"; and "students' needs based on drug problems." One principal remarked that he felt that students' needs included tio: stud View lat Pets Vere ‘0 c: Cher. 103 Q cher; a 80c chers to be to do Anoth Hohet 77 a set of "spiritual needs" along with students' "academic and and social needs." "Responding to students' needs" was mentioned with less frequency by the total sources than "the influence of the principal"; "the influence of other teachers"; and "partici- pation in curriculum innovation." The 2h interviewees who men- tioned this factor, however, still represented 38% of the study sources. In addition, 31$ of the interviewees ranked this factor as influential. The Teachers' Own Desire to Grow as an Influential Stimulator. "The teachers' own desire to grow" was identified by inter- viewees who said that this desire to grow resulted from a "natural curiosity" and that some teachers were "growth-oriented" persons. They said that teachers who were "growth-oriented" were self—motivated and that they "Just wanted to grow and to continue to improve." They indicated that it was the tea- chers' own desire which stimulated their growth. This percept- ion emerged in the responses of one principal and four tea- chers. Teacher-desire based on "a personal desire to do a good Job" was mentioned by two teachers. One said that tea- chers who wanted to do a good Job also wanted to grow in order to be able to do a good Job. The other said that personal desire to do a good Job also included wanting to do better each year. Another teacher said that the teachers' desire to grow was sometimes based on "feeling that they could do better." One thi twc V5.3 ran .m‘l MOs *3 .I‘ ‘I Int! say- 81mm. 78 principal and two teachers mentioned that in some teachers the teachers' desire "to learn something new in their own areas of instruction" prompted their desire to grow. Two principals mentioned a needs-based desire to grow. One said that some teachers perceived "a need on their own part" and a desire to grow resulted. The other called the need "a sense of creative discontinuity" which, he said, con— sisted of "gaps that needed filling-in" in what the teacher or teachers needed to be able to do. He said that when this occurred, the teacher or teachers began to want to grow. "The teachers' own desire to grow" was identified by two fewer persons than "responding to students' needs." It was ranked, however, by the same number of interviewees who ranked "responding to students' needs" as a growth-stimulator. "The teachers' own desire to grow" was ranked by 20 (or 31$) of the interviewees as influential. It emerged as the fifth most influential stimulator of teacher growth. The Availability of Meaningful Inservice as an Influential Stimulator. "The availability of meaningful inservice" was identified by study interviewees who mentioned several types of inservice. These were: building-level inservice; district-wide inservice; inter-district inservice, and intermediate district sponsored inservice. Pour principals and fifteen teachers, in particu- lar, mentioned the importance of "meaningful inservice" above simply "inservice." The inservice which was perceived as '30: re: had PPO the 79 currently present and which served as a growth-stimulating factor varied from sessions lasting a few hours to those which lasted several days. One teacher mentioned half-day sessions with multiple-topic offerings. Three teachers mentioned work- shops at the district level with required attendance for all teachers in the district. Another teacher said, however, that only about half of the staff in her district attended the workshops even when attendance was required. Several interviewees mentioned "accessibility to inservice programs" as a key factor in the stimulation of growth in tea- chers. Two principals and one teacher emphasized this point. One principal also mentioned that the inservice which was the most inspiring to teachers was that which provided 5221 resource people. Another principal mentioned that teachers had been stimulated to grow as a result of a school assembly program. In this case, he said that the teachers, along with the students, wanted to know more about the topic which was presented. One teacher mentioned that the principal conducted building-level inservice and served as the instructional leader for the Effective Schools Movement. She said that the inservice stimulated teachers to "want to know more." Meaningful inservice was ranked sixth as an influential stimulator. This factor and the five preceeding ones comprise the environmental factors which emerged as those perceived to be the most influential ones in the stimulation of teacher growth. 80 Summary The information provided by the interviewees supported the perceived presence of growth-stimulating factors in the school environments studied. Sixteen growth-stimulating factors emerged as the most-frequently mentioned factors. Six of these were selected by the interviewees as influen- tial in the stimulation of teacher growth. The most-frequently mentioned factors (in the order of declining frequency) were: 1) "the influence of the principal"; 2) "the influence of other teachers"; 3) "participation in cur- riculum innovation"; h) "responding to students' needs"; 5) "the teachers' own desire to grow"; and 6) "the availability of meaningful inservice." These same six factors emerged as the ones ranked as influential in stimulating growth in the build- ings studied. The ranked order of these factors as influential stimulators was: #1 "the influence of the principal"; '2 "the influence of other teachers"; I3 "responding to students' needs"; Ih "participation in curriculum innovation"; IS "the teachers' own desire to grow"; and #6 "the availability of meaningful inservice." The comments of the interviewees supported their per- ceptions of the six influential growth-stimulating factors in their school environments. An analysis of the identifi- cation and ranking of these stimulators by principal group and by teacher group is presented in the following sections. to 531 The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Principals Information pertaining to environmental factors perceived as stimulators by the principals is presented in Table 8. An- alysis of the information in Table 8 indicates that thirteen of the sixteen factors mentioned by the interviewees as a group were identified by principals. Of these thirteen factors, six Table 8 Factors Ident1iled and Renae: as Gvcutn-Stimuiatzng Factor; an the Princzaais identz‘zcc hunne' c? Numaer of Percentage of Percentage of Cumulstzve Rani S'autfi-Etimuliting Pr:nczaals Przncxpals Prxncxoais Prxnczaais Score F stors Nno Iden::fxed Hno Ranked Nae identified who Ranked Th5 Influence of t"! Pr:ncxoal 13 13 81% 31% 2: 1 . The Influence of Other Teachers 9 6 50% 38% 9 4 The Teache's’ Own . Desire to Bros 7 7 44% 44% 1: a . Particxoatxon 1n Curriculum ‘ . Innovatzon 6 S 38% 31% ii 5 Resoondzng to ‘ Students’ Needs 6 4 38% 25% 8 a The Aoaiiahiiltv of Meaningful Inservice 4 4 25% 25% 9 4 82 Table 0 (cent’d) 7. Meeting District Credit Requirements 3 2 13% 121 6 6 8. Positiveness in the amudAmmuhne i l G! G! 3 7 9. Opportunity for Professional damn-mu i 1 a: a; 2 8 in. Visitstions to lhhnCMnuumu Buildings 1 l G! G! 2 8 ii. The Applicability of inservice to Chmuumihe l l i! G! 2 8 unsumvlumnu~ l 0 a; m: - - 13. interest of Parents 1 0 G3 I! - - emerged as those most-frequently mentioned. The six factors, (according to frequency mentioned and the percentage of princi- pals who mentioned) were: 1) "the influence of the principal" by 13 (or 81$) of the principals; 2) "the influence of other teachers" by 8 (or 50$); 3) "the teachers' own desire to grow" by T (or hh$); "participation in curriculum innovation" 23$ "respond- ing to students' needs" (by 6 or 38$); and 5) "the availability of meaningful inservice" (by h or 25$). The remaining five growth-stimulating factors were mentioned by only 6$ - 19$ of the principals. Information pertaining to the principals‘ perceptions of the extent.of the influence of the eleven growth-stimulators 83 was gained by having them rank the factors (See Table 8). Examination of this information indicates that the principals ranked eleven of the thirteen factors. Of those eleven, the six factors which emerged as the most highly-ranked or most influential were the same factors which emerged as the most- frequently mentioned. Ordered according to their perceived influence on the growth of teachers, these were: #1 "the in- fluence of the principal" (28 cumulative points); !2 "the tea- chers' own desire to grow" (13 points); #3 "participation in curriculum innovation" (11 points); lh "the influence of other teachers" (9 points) and "the availability of mean- ingful inservice" (also 9 points); and IS "responding to students' needs" (8 points). The cumulative score computation is presented in Appendix E2). Two factors which did 223 emerge as influential factors but which were mentioned by principals in the interview (See Table 7 on page 6b) were: "opportunity for salary increase" and "the interest of parents." These were identified by one princi- cipal each. Summary Thirteen of the sixteen factors identified by the interview— ees as growth-simulating factors were mentioned by principals. Of these, eleven were ranked by the principals as influential in the professional growth of teachers. Six of the eleven emerged as those perceived as the most influential. These were: the in- fluence of the principal; the teachers' own desired to grow; participation in curriculum innovation; the influence of other teachers; the availablity of meaningful inservice; and respond- ing to students' needs. Environmental factors which emerged in the perceptions of the group of interviewees as a whole which were not mentioned by the principals were: the opportunity for salary increase, and the interest of parents. The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Teachers Analysis of the interview information on the identifi- cation and ranking of growth-stimulating factors by the teachers indicates that the teachers identified 1h factors which were perceived as stimulators of growth (See Table 9) Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth-Stimulating Factors to the Teachers Identified Number of Number of Percentage of Percentage of Cumulative Rant Growth-Stimulating Teachers Teachers Teachers Score Factors Hho Identified Hho Ranked Hto Identified Hho Ranked 1. The Influence of Other Teachers 30 30 62% 56 1 2. The Influence of the Principal 26 26 M1 48 855 Table 9 (cont’d) 3. Participation in Curriculum Innovation 20 17 41% 35% 37 4 Responding to Students’ Needs 18 16 38% 33% 41 5. The Teachers’ Own Desire to Grow 15 13 31% 27% 28 6. The Availability of Meaningful Inseryice 15 13 31% 27% 28 \l Opportunity for Salary Increase 11 9 23% 19% 21 on fleeting District Credit ' Reouirements 8 6 17% 12% 13 9. The Interest of Parents 3 93 it 10. Opportunity for Professional Advancement 2 2 4% 4% 5 11. The Availability of a Professional Library 2 2 4% 4% 3 12 The Influence of Central hinistrators 1 1 2% 2% 3 13. The Teachers’ Own Outside Interests 1 1 2% 2% 1 14 Positiueness in the School Atmosphere 1 O 2% 0% - The most frequently identified factors (listed in the order of declining frequency) were: 1) "the influence of other teachers" (mentioned by 30 or 62$ of the teachers);2) "the influence of the 86 principal" by 26 (or 5h$); 3) "participation in curriculum inno- vation" by 20 (h1$); h) "responding to students' needs" by 18 (or 38$); 5) "the teachers' own desire to grow" 222 "the avail- ability of meaningful inservice" (both by 15 or 31$). Further analysis of the information in Table 9 indicates that six factors emerged as the factors perceived to be most influential in stimulating growth. Listed in the order of their perceived influence (in ranked-positions), they were: #1 "the influence of other teachers" (ranked by 30 or 62$ of the teachers); #2 "the influence of the principal" (by 26 or 5h$ of the teachers); #3 "responding to students' needs" (by 16 or 33$); lb "participation in curriculum innovation" by 17 (or 35$); and and #5 "the teachers' own desire to grow" =22_"the availability of meaningful inservice" (both by 13 or 27$). (The computations for the cumulative scores are presented in Appendix E3). Al- though "participation in curriculum innovation" was ranked by a greater number of teachers than "responding to students' needs," the rank assigned by the teachers was higher in the case of "re- sponding to students' needs." In the case of "the teachers' own desire to grow" and "the availability of meaningful inservice," both factors were ranked by the same number of teachers. However, in this instance, "the teachers' own desire to grow" received a higher ranking. One factor was ranked as one of two sixth ranked influ- ential stimulators along with "the availability of meaning- ful inservice." This factor was: "the opportunity for 87 salary increase." Although this factor was perceived as influ— ential by the teachers, it was not widely perceived as a stimulating factor when compared with the six factors pre- ceding it in the listing. Because it emerged, however, as a sixth-ranked stimulator, comments by the interviewees support for it as a "semi-influential" stimulator are presented in the next section. One factor ("positiveness in the school atmosphere") which was mentioned by only one teacher as a stimulator, was not ranked at all by that teacher. Therefore, it is displayed in Table 7 (on page 65) but it does not appear in Table 9. The Opportunity for Salary Increase as an Influential Stimulator "The opportunity for salary increase" was identified by teachers who mentioned the impact of salary scale on teachers' decisions to pursue growth (in this case, usually coursework). One teacher simply said "knowing that schooling will bring higher pay motivates." Another said that taking classes "makes one's base-level pay higher." Two said that it was "the requirements of the salary-scale advancements" that stimulated teachers to grow. Similarly, another said that motivaton to grow was based on "money scale advancement due to going on....." One teacher, when asked what in the school environment motivated teachers to grow said, "Not a whole lot -- except pay incre- ments." This same teacher, however went on to mention two more things and ranked all three as influential. She indi- vidually ranked "the opportunity for a salary increase" as #1. 88 Summary The teachers mentioned fourteen of the sixteen factors iden- tified by the interviewees as growth-stimulating factors. Of these fourteen, they ranked thirteen. Six of these thirteen energed as influential. These were: the influence of other teachers, the influence of the principal, responding to students' needs, participation in curriculum innovation, the teachers' own desire to grow, and the availability of meaningful inservice. The opportunity for salary increase was included as a sixth- ranked factor along with the availability of meaningful inservice. Visitations to other classrooms and buildings, and the applica- bility of inservice to classroom use were not mentioned by tea- chers as factors perceived as present and stimulative to the growth of teachers. Comparisons of Principal and Teacher Perceptions on Growth-Stimulating Factors Since the responses of the total group of interviewees were influenced both by the principal responses and the teacher responses, comparison of the principal and teacher responses are presented in this section. Analysis of information which pertains to either the principal or the teacher group 222 the total group which required further discussion is presented at the end of this section. "The influence of the principal" was the factor most fre- quently mentioned by the study principals. It was the one mentioned second-most frequently by the teachers. The factor 89 mentioned most frequently by the teachers was "the influence of other teachers." The principals mentioned "the influence of other teachers" second. Anlaysis of this information indicates that a larger number of the principals (who identified "the in- fluence of the principal") perceived it as a stimulator than per- ceived "the influence of other teachers" as one. Correspoad- ingly, a larger number of the teachers who identified it, per- ceived it as a stimulator than perceived "the influence of the principal" as one. All of the principals who identified "the influence of the principal" ranked it as the most-influential stimulator. This factor was ranked second in influence by all of the teachers who identified it. "The influence of other teachers" was ranked most influential by all of the teachers who identified it. All of the teachers who identified "the influence of the principal" ranked it as second in influence. Although "the influence of other teachers" was selected as influential by the second larg- est number of principals, the principals who selected it ranked it as fourth in influence. Analysis indicates that since all of the principals who perceived "the influence of the principal" as influ- ential and ranked it higher than "the influence of other teachers," "the influence of the principal," emerged as the factor perceived as more influential than "the influence of other teachers," as perceived by principals. Correspond- ingly, since all of the teachers who identified and ranked 90 "the influence of other teachers" as a stimulator gave it high rankings, it emerged as the most important stimulator perceived by teachers to stimulate growth. Analysis also indicates that although almost as many principals ranked "the influence of other teachers" as identified it, they did 223 perceive it to be as influential as perceived by the teachers. The analysis basically points to each group (the principal group and the teacher group) perceiving the influence of members of its own group as the most influential stimulators of teacher growth. Since "the influence of other teachers" which was the factor mentioned second-most frequently by the principals and most fre- quently by the teachers is discussed above, "the teachers' own desire to grow" will be discussed next in this report. This factor was mentioned third—most frequently by the principals and fifth-most (along with the availability of meaningful inservice) by the teachers. "The factor mentioned third-most frequently by the teachers was "participation in curriculum innovation." Analysis of this information indicates that "the teachers' own desire to grow" was perceived more frequently as a stimu- lator by the principals than by the teachers. The teachers perceived "participation in curriculum innovation" as a stimulator more frequently than they perceived "the teachers' own desire to grow" as a stimulator. "The teachers' own desire to grow" was mentioned as influ- ential in stimulating growth second-most frequently by the 91 principals and fifth-most frequently by the teachers. The fac- tor mentioned second-most frequently by the teachers was "the influence of the principal" (which is discussed above). "The teachers' own desire to grow" was ranked as the second- most influential stimulator by the principals, as well as having been selected as an influential stimulator by the second-largest number of principals. "The teachers' own desire to grow" was ranked as the fifth-most influential stimulator by the teachers as well as having been selected as influential by the fifth largest number of teachers. Analysis of this information indicates that "the tea- chers' own desire to grow" was mentioned more often as an influential stimulator by the principals than by the teachers who identified it. The principals who identified "the tea- ‘chers' own desire to grow" as an influential stimulator ranked it as the second-most influential stimulator. The teachers who identified it as influential only selected it as fifth most influential. The principals, therefore, perceived "the teachers' own desire to grow" as much more influential than the teachers perceived it to be. "Participation in curriculum innovation" was the factor (along with "responding to students' needs") which was mentioned fourth-most frequently by the principals. It was mentioned third most frequently by the teachers. The factor mentioned fourth most frequently by the teachers was "responding to students' needs." The factor mentioned third most frequently by the 92 principals was "the teachers' own desire to grow." Analysis of this information indicates that although "par- ticipation in curriculum innovation" was mentioned more frequently by teachers than principals, "the teachers' own desire to grow" was perceived as a stimulator more frequently by principals than by teachers. The teachers, however, perceived "participation in curriculum innovation" and "responding to students' needs" more frequently as stimulators than "the teachers' own desire to grow." "Participation in curriculum innovation" was mentioned as influential in stimulating growth fourth most frequently by the principals and third most frequently by the teachers. The factor mentioned fourth most frequently by the teachers was "responding to students' needs." The one mentioned third most frequently by the principals was "the influence of other tea- chers." The fourth largest number of principals selected "par- ticipation in curriculum" as influential while it was selected as influential by the third largest number of teachers. The principals, however, ranked "participation in curriculum inno- vation" as the third most influential stimulator while the tea- chers ranked it as the fourth most influential stimulator. Analysis of this information indicates that although the teachers mentioned "participation in curriculum innovation" more frequently than the principals, it was perceived as influential more often by the principals than by the teachers. The analysis also indicates that it was perceived as more influential by the principals than by the teachers. 93 "The availability of meaningful inservice" (along with "responding to students' needs") was the fifth most frequently mentioned stimulator by the principals, and also, the fifth most frequently mentioned factor (along with "the teachers' own desire to grow") by the teachers. Analysis of this information indicates that both principals and teachers perceived this factor as a stim- ulator of growth. Those who mentioned it, however, were among a lower number in each of their respective groups. Out of the six major factors identified as stimulators by the principals and the teachers, this factor was fifth. "The availability of meaningful inservice" was the factor mentioned fifth most frequently by the principals :32 the teachers as an influential stimualtor. "Responding to students' needs" was also fifth most frequently mentioned by the princi- pals. "The teachers' own desire to grow" was also the fifth most frequently mentioned by the teachers. The principals, however, ranked "the availability of meaningful inservice" as the fourth-most influential simutlator (along with "the influence of other teachers") while the teachers ranked it as sixth most influential (along with "the opportunity for salary increase"). Analysis of this information indicates that although "the availability of meaningful inservice" was supported as an influential stimulator by approximately the same amount of support by both the principals and the teachers, it was perceived as more influential by the principals 9h than by the teachers. Summary Comparison of the analyzed responses of the principals and teachers indicates that some environmental factors are perceived similarily while others are perceived differently as stimulators of teacher growth. The comparison of the six most frequently mentioned and ranked factors indicates that members of the principal group and the teacher group most frequently identified and then ranked as most-influ- ential the influence of members of their own group. The principals indentified "the influence of the principal" most frequently as a stimulator and chose it as the most-influ- ential stimulator. The teachers identified "the influence of other teachers" most frequently as a stimulator and chose it .. the most-influential stimulator. Comparison of the responses of the two groups also indi- cates that in some cases, the perceptions of the two groups were the same, or at least similar. Por example, in the the identification of growth stimulators both the principals and the teachers identified "responding to students' needs" as the fourth most frequently perceived stimulator. Both groups also identified "the availability of meaningful in- service" as the fifth most frequently perceived stimulator (however, each group ranked it differently). "The avail- ability of meaningful inservice" was identified as the fifth most frequently perceived influential stimulator by both 95 the principals and the teachers. In other instances the principals and teachers identified factors where there was no common perception as to their pres- ence or rank. The factors which emerged where this was the case were: "the influence of the principal" and "the influence of the teachers" (as previously mentioned); "the teachers' own desire to grow"; and "participation in curriculum innova— tion." Comparisons of Total Group Perceptions with Principal Group and Teacher Group Perceptions The responses of the total group (which includes the prin- cipals and the teachers and considers them together) when ana- lyzed, indicate that some factors were mentioned as stimulators which were mentioned only by the principals. These were: "visi- tations in other classrooms/other schools" and "the applicability of inservice to classroom use." Others were mentioned by only the teachers. These were: "a professional library (or at least materials) in the building"; "the influence of central admini- strators"; and "the teachers' own outside interests." Since the factors mentioned by only the principal members of the total group were 221 mentioned by any teachers, they could 221 be selected as influential or ranked by any teachers. Correspond- ingly, those mentioned only by the teachers could 22£.b° sel- ected as influential nor could they be ranked by any principals. The perceptions of the principals and the teachers within the total group, however, serve as an indicator of what was perceived 96 as present and influential within particular building environ- ments. Summary The findings which pertained to the identification and ranking of growth-stimulating factors indicate that sixteen environmental factors emerged as factors perceived as present in the school environments studied. Of these sixteen factors, six were perceived by the sources of information on the school environments (the interviewees) as the factors which were most widely-perceived and most-influential in the stimulation of teacher growth. These were: the influence of the principal; the influence of other teachers; responding to students' needs; participation in curriculum innovation; the teachers' own desire to grow; and the availability of meaningful inservice. Although the influence of other teachers was identified more frequently by teachers as present and influential, than the influence of the principal, the influence of the principal emerged as the most-frequently mentioned and the most-influ- ential factor in the perceptions of the total group of inter- viewees as a whole. This was due to the low ranking awarded to the influence of other teachers as a growth-stimulator by the principals in the study. This indicates that a large enough number of principals perceived themselves as a source of stimulation for teachers toward growth efforts and per- ceived the other teachers as much less of a source of 97 stimulation to affect the study results. Correspondingly, indications are that a large enough number of teachers per- ceived the principal as a source of stimulation toward growth that even though more teachers perceived other teachers to stim- ulate toward growth, the ranking by the teachers of the influ- ence of other teachers did not off-set the low ranking of that factor by the prinicipals. The findings pertaining to the perceptions of the groups within the total group provide illumination of the perceptions of persons within the school in their particular roles in the school environment. whether or not their roles influenced their perceptions or whether their perceptions were influenced by other factors was not investigated in the study. 98 The Identification and Ranking Of Environmental Factors Perceived as Growth-Supporting Factors The findings in this section are based on the responses to Question Number Six: "What in the work environment of your school tend to support a teacher's efforts to grow profession- ally?" on the interview schedule. In answering the question the interviewees first identified those factors which they perceived to be important in supporting teacher growth, and then ranked these factors in importance. Results from the identification and the ranking are presented first for the total group (in Table 10), then for the principals alone (in Table 11), and then for the teachers alone (in Table 12). The responses of these three groups were the focus in order to note similarities and differences which might emerge per- taining to perceptions of factors which support teacher growth in the schools studied. As in the case of the growth-stimulators, the most fre- quently identified factors and the most highly ranked factors were selected for further study. Any factor which was ranked in the top-three by an interviewee was included in a table. This gave all of the factors presented in the tables a degree of support. From the factors noted in the tables, the factors commonly mentioned were chosen based on the frequency with which a factor was mentioned by persons in a group. These frequencies emerged in a pattern of natural groups. The top 99 group of factors which emerged was studied further. The pur- pose was to focus the study on the factors which were the most strongly perceived by each group as a whole. As in the case of the stimulating factors, each factor was assigned a cumulative score through an analytic procedure used to assign points based on the way in which the inter- viewees ranked a factor. A factor received three points when it was ranked as "most important" by an interviewee, two points when it was ranked as "second-most important," and one point when ranked third. If a factor was identified by an interviewee as a stimulator and then ranked as a hth, 5th, or 6th choice, or was not ranked at all, it received 22 points. Again, as in the case of the stimulators, each interviewee was asked to rank all of the factors which he or she had contributed. Therefore, a few factors surfaced which did 223 become a part of the study report. In cases where the interviewees identified only one or two factors, there were only one or two to rank by the interviewee. The natural group of factors with the highest cumulative scores which emerged and are displayed in each table represent the factors which were perceived as significant as growth-support factors in the schools studied. In each case, as with the stim- ulators, these factors were analyzed and compared with the group of factors which are presented in each table. The results were also compared for groups of factors of both types across the table. 100 The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Supporting Factors by the Interviewees as a Total Group Twenty-one factors were mentioned as factors perceived to support the growth of teachers once growth had begun. Analysis of the information in Table 10 indicates that only Table 10 Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth-Supporting Factors by the Total Group of Interviewees Identified Number of Number of Percentage of Percentage of Cumulatige Rank Growth-Supporting Interviewees Intervieemes Interviewees Interviewees Score Factors Hho Identified Hho Ranked Hho Identified Hho Ranked 1. Encourog-ont by umannud+fi 7“ 44 us an 34 1 2. Encourag-oot by Other Toodters H 39 35 61% 53 75 2 3. Seeing Results in the Classroom ++e 27 27 42% on 66 3 4. Positive lhnbuafnm Parents +++ 15 i4 23% 22% 20 4 5. The Availability of Brants/Fonds for Use in Growing +++ 11 9 17% 14% 18 6 6. A Professional Growth Orientation by the District +++ 9 3 17% 3% 4 11 7. The Availdiility of Neuingfel Inservice 4++ G. The tacit-ent of Students Over New Things Tried +++ 9. mortenity to Share with Colleagues +++ 10. The Teachers’ M Satisfaction Nith Their Grenvth 4+ 11. meortunity for Salary Increase +++ 12. The Availliility of Release Tine +++ 13. Th Nailtllity of Netsrials/Eeeieeent to Try lhw Things +++ 14. Recognition of a Continued bed to Grow +++ 15. tuned Oeyoes/ Credits +++ 16. Puticieatien in Wricelu Innovation +++ 17. Media Cave", of New Things Tried + 18. The Availdiility of a Professional Library 4+ 19. The fieortenity for Professional Rand-ent ++ 101 Tile 10 («MW e 121 1 12: 2 12% 7 us 5 s: 2 a 4 a 4 a 3 s a a 1 2e 1 a 1 a 11% 13 1O 12 12 12 1. 10 14 13 14 102 Table 10 (cont d) 20. Positive Feedback From the School Secretary ++ 1 1 2% 2% 1 14 21. Recognition by Central Adninistrators H 1 1 2% 2‘ 1 14 + Mentioned by Principals only ++ Mentioned by Teacners only +++ Mentioned by both Principals and Teachers r See Aopendix £4 for individual weighted scores --_- .._ -—-- o _ . c..‘-—. o n o - - - c . three factors emerged as the factors most frequently mentioned by the interviewees. These were: l)"encouragement by the prin- cipal"; 2)"encouragement by other teachers”; and 3) "seeing re- sults in the classroom.” "Encouragement by the principal" was mentioned by h6 interviewees (72% of the group); ”encourage- ment by other teachers" by 39 (61% of the group); and "seeing results in the classroom" by 27 (hzi). The remaining factors were mentioned by 2% - 23%. Analysis of the frequency scores which pertained to the factors as identified support factors and as ranked support factors indicates that some interviewees identified stimulators and then did 223_rank them as influ- ential. Analysis of the cumulative scores indicates that "en- couragement by the principal" was perceived as the most in- fluential growth-supporting factor in the buildings studied. ”Encouragement by other teachers” ranked second. "Seeing results in the classroom" ranked third. 103 Comparison of the ordered-ranking of the identified growth- supporting factors with the frequency ordered listing of the stimulators in Table 10 indicates that the top-three factors in the frequency-ordering occupied the same positions in the ranked-ordering. The perceived presence of the three factors which emerged as both the most-frequently mentioned and the most-influential growth-supporting factors was supported by comments gathered during the interview process. The comments are presented below. Each of the three major growth-support- ing factors serves as a heading for the material contributed by the interviewees. Encouragement by the Principal as an Influential Support Factor. ”Encouragement by the principal" was identified as a growth- support factor by people who simply said that encouragement by the principal supported teachers in their growth. Others pro- vided examples of the types of encouragement which were per- ceived to have given the teachers support in their growth efforts. "Verbal encouragement," "recognition", ”participation in the tea- chers' efforts to grow," and the application of a ”supervisory philosophy by the principal” were mentioned as the types of encouragement which were provided to teachers in the buildings studied. General and continuing support from the principal was mentioned by seven study sources. Encouragement to "keep growing” was mentioned by seven others. Valuing of profess- ional growth by the principal was mentioned as important by 10% one principal who said that be valued professional growth, himself, and therefore supported professional growth in the teachers. Verbal encouragement by the principal was mentioned by four teachers. One stated that the principal complimented teachers on new ideas which they contributed. Another said that the principal provided positive feedback on " new things being tried." The third said that the principal mentioned (in building meetings) various things which teachers were trying in the building. The fourth, said that the principal told par— ents and others outside the school about the new things which the teachers were trying which were a result of new things learned by the teachers. Several people mentioned recognition by the principal which was written or communicated by non-verbal means. One teacher said that the principal in her building wrote an ar- ticle in the school newspaper about the new things which the teachers had tried or were trying. Another said that the principal ”took over teachers' classrooms and taught for teachers who had shown evidence of growth as a reward for their growth efforts and for applying what they had learned." One principal reported that he delegated special responsi- bilities in decision-making in the building to teachers who had grown and who were ”competent teachers." Several other peeple mentioned assistance by the prin- cipal which provided encouragement to ”growing" teachers. 105 One teacher mentioned that the principal sometimes had given helpful suggestions or new ideas to the teachers which assist— ed in their growth. Another said that the principal confer- erenced with teachers who were trying new things and helped them set goals and evaluate their growth. Still another tea- cher said that the principal taught for teachers so that they could visit other classrooms. One principal stated that he arranged for "release time" so that the teachers could attend workshops and seminars. Encouragement by Other Teachers as an Influential Support Factor. "Encouragement by other teachers" was mentioned as a growth- supporting factor by interviewees who simply said that it was the encouragement of peers, colleagues, other staff members, or ”cohorts" who supported the growth of teachers in their buildings. Still others were quite specific in their detailing of types of encouragement provided to teachers during their growth. Although some sources simply said that it was the ”encouragement" of others or ”the support" of other teachers, one principal and one teacher said that it was "other teachers' interest in the teachers who were growing" which supported their growth. Three teachers stated that ”being noticed by other teachers” and ”receiving feedback" from other teachers made teachers ”feel supported” and encour- ed them to continue to pursue growth. One principal said that she encouraged the teachers to encourage each other. One teacher said that "teachers learning together” provided 106 encouragement to teachers. She also said that sharing "what was learned” was helpful to the teachers in her building. Another teacher mentioned that when teachers shared what they were trying and the resulting progress of their students other teachers were helped. One teacher said that when other teachers were "excited about new things,” this encouraged "growing teachers" to continue with their growth efforts. Seeing Results in the Classroom as an Influential Support Factor. "Seeing results in the classsroom” was identified as hav- ing supported the growth of teachers in the buildings studied. The comments which were mentioned ranged from general comments ("classroom results supported growth") to more specific ones ("students learned more and their test scores went up"). Two teachers said that classroom results included teachers seeing what they were trying (based on the new things they had learned) work in the classroom. They said that this encouraged teachers ”to keep trying new things” and ”to keep on growing." One teacher said that ”seeing things work in the classroom” pro- vided positive reinforcement which was needed if teachers were to continue to grow. Summary The information provided by the interviewees supported the perceived presence of growth-supporting factors in the 107 schools studied. Three growth-supporting factors emerged as those most frequently mentioned. These same three factors were selected by the interviewees as influential in the support of teacher growth. The first two factors which emerged as the most- frequently mentioned and most-influential were basically the same ones which emerged as the most-frequently mentioned and the most influential in the stimulation of teacher growth. As support fac- tors they were: "encouragement by the principal" and "encourage- ment by other teachers" while the two most frequently mentioned stimulators were: "the influence of the principal" and "the in- fluence of other teachers." The third most frequently mentioned and the third most influential growth-supporting factor was "see- ing results in the classroom.” In the case of the stimulators they were ”responding to students' needs" (third most influen- tial) and "participation in curriculum innovation” (fourth most frequently mentioned). The comments by the interviewees supported the three most- influential environmental factors which were perceived to have supported teachers in their growth. An analysis of the identi- fication and ranking of these growth-supporting factors by the principal and teacher groups is presented in the follwing sections. The Identification and Ranking of Growth-Supporting Factors by the Principals Information pertaining to environmental factors perceived as growth-support factors by the principals is presented in Table 108 11. Analysis of the information in Table 11 indicates that Tdole 11 Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth-Supporting Factors by the Principals Identified Number of Number of Percentage of Percentage of Cumulative Rank Growth-Supporting Principals Principals Principals Principals Score Factors the Identified tho Ranked tho Identified lilo Ranked 1. Encouragement by the Principal 14 14 88% 36 35 1 2. Encouragement by Other Teachers 8 6 50% 38 9 2 3. The Availtiility of Grants/Funds for Use in Growing 6 4 38 25 9 2 4. Seeing Results in the Classroom 3 2 19% 12% 4 4 5. A Professional Growth Orientation by the District 3 2 13% 12% 3 5 6. The Availwility of Meaningful Inservice 3 2 19% 12% 5 3 7. The Availdoility of Release Time 3 1 19% 6% 2 6 3. Positive Feetback from Parents 2 1 12% 6% 2 6 9. The Excit-ent of Students Over New Things Tried 2 O 12% 0% - - fie gs It Taaie 1; icnnt'o; 10. Opportunzt. It Share witn Colleagues 2 1 12: 63. a ll. Donortunitu for Salary Increase 2 1 1-. 6% l '1 ? . .l."|l . .2. he eva1.e:...tc or Haterza:s.::cznnent - O O . ., 2.. ....7.. , ,1 1?. eta ..- 7- «n- 3.11:: '. a 14:0 .‘uo . 'eazae'S’ iezcanztzor of 5 Continued Nee: 9.0 BYOB 2 a 12’s M." - 14. Earnec Decrees, Ereczts 1 1 6% 6% if. ‘a't;c;:atzor 2r Curriculum innovation 1 1 63 £1 2 26. Media Coverage of New Things Tried l 0 6% t - 16 of the 21 factors mentioned by the interviewees as a whole were identified by the principals. Of these factors three fac- tors emerged as those most-frequently mentioned. These (accord- to the number of principals who mentioned) were: 1) "encourag- ment by the principal" by lb (or 88%) of the principals; 2) "encouragement by other teachers" by 8 (or 50%); and 3) "the availablity of grants/funds for use in growing" by 6 (or 38%). The remaining 13 factors were mentioned by 6% to 19$ of the principals. Two of the three most-frequently mentioned growth- supporting factors were basically the same as two of the growth- 110 stimulating factors mentioned most-frequently by the principals. These were: "encouragement by the principal" and "encourage- ment by other teachers." These, as stimulators, were: "the interest of the principal" and "the interest of other teachers." The third growth-supporting factor "the availability of grants/ funds for use in growing" or a similar derivative was not men- tioned as a growth-stimulator by the principals. Further analysis of the information in Table 11 indicates that all three of the most-frequently mentioned growth-support- ing factors emerged as influential growth-supporting factors. Ordered according to their rank as influential factors, they were: #1 "encouragement by the principal” (3S cumulative points); and #2 "encouragement by other teachers" :21 ”the availability of grants/funds for use in growing” (each with 9 cumulative points). The computation for the cumulative scores are pre- sented in Appendix E5. All of the principals who identified "encouragement by the principal" ranked it as influential. Two fewer principals ranked "encouragement by other teachers" and ”the availability of grants/funds..." as influential than identified them. One factor which was mentioned by one principal in the interview (See Table 10, on page 100) was 321 ranked by that principal. This was "media coverage of new things being tried in the building." Five factors (which were also listed in Table 10 as factors mentioned by the interviewees) were 221 identi- fied by principals. These were: "the teachers' own satisfaction 111 with their growth"; "the availability of a professional library"; "the opportunity for professional advancement”; ”positive feedback from the school secretary"; and "recognition by central adminis- strators." Since these factors were not mentioned, they were not available for ranking. Summary The principals identified 16 of the 21 factors identified as growth-supporting factors by the study interviewees. The three which emerged as most-frequently mentioned were: encour- agement by the principal; encouragement by other teachers; and the availability of grants and other funds for use in pursuing professional growth. In a ranking of all 16 factors, the fac- tors which emerged as the most influential factors in the sup- port of teacher growth were the same ones which emerged as those mentioned most often. Environmental factors as: mentioned by the principals but which emerged in the responses of the total group of interviewees were: the teachers' satisfaction with their own growth; the availability of a professional library; the oppor- tunity for professional advancement; positive feedback from the school secretary; and recognition by central administrators. The Identification and Ranking of Growth~Supporting Factors by the Teachers Analysis of the interview information on the identification and ranking of growth-supporting factors by the teachers 112 indicates that the teachers identified 20 factors which were per- ceived as growth-supporting factors (See Table 12). The most Table 12 Factors Identified and Ranked as Growth-Supporting Factors by the Teachers Identified m of Nimber of Percentage of Percentage of Cumulative Rank Breath-Supporting Teachers Teachers Teachers Teachers Score Factors the Identified tho Ranked Idle Identified the linked 1. Encouragement by the Principal 32 so 67% 62% 6O 3 2. Encourag-ent by Other Teachers 31 29 6! 60% 66 1 3. Seeing Results in the Classreen 27 25 36 52% 62 2 4. Positive Feeback from Parents 13 13 27% 27% 18 5 5. The Teachers’ Om Satisfacton with Their Breath 7 7 13 13 19 4 6. A Professional Growth Orientation by the District 6 1 12% 2% 1 12 7. The Excituent of Students over New Things Tried 6 1 12% 2% 3 1O 3 Mortunity to Share with Colleagues 6 1 12% 2% 1 12 9. The Mailwility of Grants/Feeds to Ilse to Grow 5 5 10% ' 10% 9 6 10. The Availability of Meaningful Inservice 5 11. (hoortunity for Salary Increase 4 12. The Availability of Release Time 2 13. The Availmuility of Materials/Equipment to Try New Things 2 14. Earned Degrees/ Credi ts 2 15. Participation in Curriculum Innovation 2 16. The Teachers’ Recoguized Continued Need to Grow 2 17. Availwility of a Professional Library 1 18. Mntunity for Professional Advmuc-ent 1 13. Positive Feedoack from the School Secretory 1 20. Roceguition by Central Ministrators 1 113 Table 12 (cont’d) 4 10% as 8 4 as m 8 1 4% a 1 2 4% 4% 3 2 4% 4% 4 2 a 4% 5 2 4% 4% 2 1 a a 2 1 2% 2% 1 1 a a 1 l 2: 2s 1 12 10 11 11 12 12 12 frequently identified factors (listed in the order of declin- frequency) were: 1) "encouragement by the principal” by 32 (or 67%) of the teachers; 2) ”encouragement by other teachers" by 31 11h (or 65%); and 3) "seeing results in the classroom” by 27 (or 56%). One factor which is listed as #17 in Table 10 on page 101, (of factors identified by the interviewees) was 22: identified by teachers. This was "media coverage of new things tried." Therefore, it was not available for ranking. The three factors identified by the teachers as the most-frequently perceived factors also emerged as the growth- supporting factors perceived to be most-influential in supporting growth. Listed in the order of their perceived influence (in ranked-positions), they were: ll "encouragement by the principal" by 30 (or 62% of the teachers); '2 ”encouragement by other teachers” by 29 (or 60%); and I3 ”seeing results in the classroom" by 25 (or 52%). The computations for the cumulative scores are presented in Appendix E6. The first two influential growth- supporting factors mentioned above correspond to two of the most influential stimulators which were "the influence of the other teachers” and ”the influence of the principal." However, as a growth-support factor ”encouragement by the principal" was ranked as first in importance while ”the influence of other tea- chers" was ranked first as a growth-stimulating factor. Corres- pondingly, "encouragement by other teachers” was ranked second second as a growth-support while "the influence of the principal” was ranked second as a stimulator of growth. These results in- dicate that the interviewees perceived teachers to be more stimu lated to grow by the influence of other teachers than by the in- fluence of the principal, while they are supported more in their 115 growth efforts by the encouragement of the principal than by the than by the encouragement of other teachers. The differences, however, are slight. Summary The teachers identified 20 of the 21 factors mentioned by the interviewees. Three emerged as the factors mentioned most often. These were: encouragement by the principal; encourage- ment by other teachers; and seeing results in the classroom based on trying new things learned.‘ In a ranking of all 20 factors, the three mentioned above emerged as those perceived by the teachers as most influential in the support of teacher growth. One environmental factor 22: mentioned by teachers but which emerged in the responses of the interviewees as a total group was media coverage of new things tried in the school. Comparisons of Principal and Teacher Perceptions on Growth-Supporting Factors As was mentioned in the section which compared the the principal and teacher perceptions on growth-stimulators, the responses of the total group of interviewees were influ- enced by both the principal and the teacher responses. There- fore, only comparisons of the principal and teacher per- ceptions are presented here. Analysis of information which pertained to either the principal or the teacher group an the total group which required further discussion is presented 116 at the end of this section. ”Encouragement by the principal” was the factor mentioned most-frequently by both the principals and the teachers as a growth-support factor. "Encouragement by other teachers" was mentioned second-most frequently by both groups. "The availability of grant/funds for use in growing" was mentioned third-most frequently by the principals. This factor was the seventh-most frequently mentioned factor by teachers. The tea- chers mentioned "seeing results in the classroom" third-most frequently. Analysis of this information indicates that both the principals and the teachers perceived "encouragement by the principal" and ”encouragement by other teachers" as factors commonly perceived to support teacher growth. Further analysis indicates that a larger number of the principals than of the teachers perceived monetary assistance as a factor which sustained growth while a larger number of the teachers than of the principals perceived ”seeing results in the classroom” as something which sustained growth. All of the principals who identified "encouragement by the principal" supported it as an influential growth-supporting factor. Two fewer teachers ranked it than identified it as influential. ”Encouragement by the principal" was ranked third in influence by the teachers. The teachers ranked ' encourage- ment by other teachers" and ”seeing results in the classroom" above "encouragement by the principal.” 117 Comparison of the perceptions of the principals per- taining to what influences the support of teacher growth with the teachers' perceptions based on analysis of the interview information indicates that both groups perceived the encouragement of the principal to be most influential and the encouragement of other teachers to be second-most important. The principals then perceived financial assist- ance to be next most important while the teachers perceived it to be seeing results in the classroom which are based on new things learned. Comparisons of Total Group Perceptions with Principal Group and Teacher Group Perceptions As was the case in comparing the total group and each of the sub-groups in the identification and ranking of the stim- ulators, some growth-supporting factors were only mentioned by principals. One factor emerged, for example, in the re- sponses of the total group which was mentioned only by prin- cipals (one principal). This was: "media coverage of new things being tried in the school.” Five factors, however, in the responses of the total group were mentioned only by teachers. These were: ”the teachers' own satisfaction with their growth"; "a professional library in the building”; "pro- fessional advancement”; "recognition by central administrators"; and "positive feedback from the school secretary.” As previously mentioned in the case of the growth-stimulating factors, the factors which were mentioned by the principals could not be 118 ranked by the teachers unless also mentioned by the teachers. The same situation applied to the factors mentioned by the teachers. The responses of the principals and the teachers, present perceptions 22: clearly evident in the responses of the total group. The responses of the total group, however, present perceptions across buildings which add dimension to the perceptions of both the principal and the teacher group. Summary The findings which pertained to the identification and ranking of growth-supporting factors indicate that twenty-one environmental factors emerged as factors perceived as present in the buildings studied. Of these twenty-one factors three were perceived as growth-supporting factors which were present and influential. These were: encouragement by the principal; encouragement by other teachers; and teachers seeing results in the classroom (due to the application of new things learned during their growth efforts). Although there was agreement between the first two factors as most and second most influ- ential, the principals ranked the availability of grants and other funds to support growth over the seeing of classroom results as the third most-influential growth-supporting fac- tor. The weight of the teacher ranking in this case influ- enced the ranking by the total group so that seeing results in the classroom still emerged as the third-most influential factor identified by the total group. 119 As in the case of the identification and ranking of growth-stimulating factors, the responses of the principals and the teachers, when analyzed separately, present percep- tions 333 clearly visable in the analysis of the responses of the total group (of interviewees). The total group re- sponses, when analyzed, present an overview of the school situation and the perceived influence of particular environ- mental factors across groups. 120 The Identification Of Environmental Factors Perceived as Desired Growth-Stimulating Factors The findings in this section are based on the responses to Part A. of Question Number Seven: "If you could add to your school environment particular factors that you think would be effective as motivators (stimulators) in promoting teacher growth, what factors would you add?". In answering the ques- tion the interviewees identified factors which they perceived to be desired in order to stimulate (231 which were 221 pres- ent or at least 321 prevalent to the extent of being con- sidered sufficient). As in the identification and ranking of perceived growth-stimulating and growth-supporting factors, results gathered from the responses of the study interviewees are presented in a series of tables. The results from the responses of the total groups are presented in Table 13. Those from the principals and teachers are presented in Tables 1h and 15, respectively. Since the interviewees were get asked to rank the factors which they identified but to merely identify factors perceived as "desired” stimulating factors, the in- formation presented in the tables does 22: contain reference to factors ranked as influential. As in the case of the growth- stimulating factors and the growth-supporting factors, however, those factors which were identified as desired stimulating factors are ordered according to the frequency with which they emerged. 121 The Identification of Desired Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Interviewees as a Total Group Twenty factors were identified as desired growth-stimu- lating factors by the interviewees. A listing of these 20 factors is presented in Table 13. Analysis of the information Tdfle13 Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Interviewees Factors Mentioned Nunber of Percentage of as Desired Interviewees Interviewees Growth-Stinulating Hho Mentioned Hho Mentioned Factors 1. The Availability of MateriaIs/Equipnent/Space +++ 12 19% 2. The Availability of More Meaningful and Frequent Inservice +++ 11 17% 3 More Shared Problem- Solving +++ 9 14% 4. The Availability of Release Time/Sabbaticals +++ 9 14% 5. The Hiring of More Building Staff +++ 9 14% 6. More Involvement by the Principal +++ 8 12% N Participation in Curriculum Innovation +++ 6 9% 122 Twin 13 (cont’d) 8. The Availmiility of a Professional Library 44 5 u 9. thinness/Sharing Among the Staff 44 5 8% 10. Grants/Funds for Use in Growing 4+ 5 a 11. Uisitations to Other Classrooms/Districts 4+4 4 6 12. More Scheduled Planing Time 44+ 4 6% 13. More Actual Teaching Time 444 4 6 14. Mortunity for Grade Level/Area Chmuge 4 2 3 15. The Professional Growth Orientation of District 44 2 3 16. Availduility of Compensatory Time 4 1 2% 17. More Involv-ent by Ca-unity Agencies 4+ 1 a 18. The Interest of Parents 44 1 a 19. Ihportunity for Salary Increase 44 1 a 20. Availwility of a Reglar School Library 44 1 a 4 Mentioned by Principals only 44 Mentioned by Teachers only 444 motioned by both Principals md Teachers Since the interviewees were not asked to rank these factors (as explained in Chapter III. on page 27), the information based on the responses of the interviewees includes only the identifi- cation of the factors. Analysis of Table 13. indicates that 123 20 factors were mentioned by the interviewees as desired growth- stimulating factors (also referred to as "desired stimulators"). Further analysis of the information in Table 13 indicates that the natural break in the emergence of the desired stimula- tors appeared after the first two factors 25 after the first six factors depending on whether the difference of two persons mentioning the factors sufficed early in the table to limit to the first two or if further factors also warranted consider- ation as those most frequently mentioned. Since three factors beyond the first two were mentioned by only two fewer peOple than the second-most frequently mentioned factor, and since a fourth factor was mentioned only one less time than those three, a decision was made to further study all six factors as factors identified as ”desired growth-stimulating factors.” These factors were: 1) ”the availability of materials/equip- ment/space;" 2) "the availability of more meaningful and fre- quent inservice;" 3) "more shared problem-solving;” h) "the availability of release time/sabbabicals;' 5) ”the hiring of more staff;” and ”more involvement by the principal.” Examination of the frequency with which the six above men- tioned desired stimulators emerged indicates that each of the six factors was identified by less than 13 or one-fifth of the inter- viewees. Contrasted with the frequency with which the growth- stimulating factors were mentioned (reported earlier in this chapter), implications are that fewer environmental factors were commonly perceived as "desired" than the number perceived 12h as already present in the buildings studied. Also, in the case of the stimulators perceived as present, the "natural breaks" in the frequencies emerged more distinctly. The perceived presence of the six factors which were ident- ified as "desired” stimulators was reflected in comments gathered during the interview process. The comments are presented below. Each of the six most-frequently mentioned serves as a heading for the material contributed by the interviewees. The Availability of Materials/Equipment[Space as a Desired Stimulator. "The availability of material/equipment/space" was identi- fied by people who said "more resources to try new things" and by people who mentioned specific kinds of things which they perceived would stimulate teachers to grow, if available in the building or if 2233 available there. Among the things mentioned was: "more computer equipment so that teachers would be able to work with the equipment and could grow in expertise in that area." One teacher mentioned the advantage to teachers of having "several computers in the classroom" so that each teacher (along with students) would be able to util- ize them in learning. Several teachers mentioned "more materials to use in try- ing new things in the classroom." While one principal said that teachers should have ”more resources to try new things," one teacher said that "money to try 'whatever one wants to try in the classroom' -- money to try out one's own ideas” would 125 be something which would stimulate teachers to grow. Another teacher said that she (”if wishes were granted”) would ask for "unlimited" money to meet supply needs. She said that not hav- enough supplies now kept teachers from considering trying new things and therefore, kept them from learning about new things to try. More space in the building was mentioned by four teachers and one principal. The principal remarked that his building was over-crowded and that more space was needed in order for teachers to be able to do more things with their students. A teacher in another building (in a different district) said that more space was needed in his building. He said, ”There are no spare rooms at present.” Another teacher in another building said that an art room was needed and still another teacher in the same building said that ”a place to do dramat- ics" would appeal to the teachers and would give the teachers a place to do activities unable to be carried out in the regular classroom. The Availability of Meaningful and Frequent Inservice as a Desired Stimulator. ”The availability of meaningful and frequent insevice" was mentioned by persons who cited examples of what would be meaningful (in a general way); and how regularly scheduled insevice (rather than once or twice a year) would stimulate teachers to pursue growth. One principal mentioned that in- service based on ”needs" rather on "topics chosen because funds 126 were available to districts which provided inservice on those topics" would stimulate teachers to grow. Another principal mentioned the desirablitiy of inservice "which would help the teachers to become more effective as teachers.” He said that this type of inservice would appeal to teachers. He also stated that teacher-input into what was offered would be helpful in planning the inservice. One teacher mentioned the exploration of types of inservice which would utilize local talent in the schools and in the community. This same teacher indicated that "mandated" inservice did 223 stimulate teachers to grow. One teacher stated that more focus on curricular matters including sessions which would ”allow people to interact on common problems having to do with the curriculum" would motivate toward growth. More frequent inservice was mentioned by six people. Some people simply said that inservice needed to be more frequent. Others said that insevice needed to be "ongoing" (rather than sporadic or regularly scheduled meetings held a particular number of times each year). One teacher said, "It needs to be ongoing and needs to involve gll_of the teachers in the building." Another teacher said that is was ”quality inservice" which needed to be more frequent. He said that teacher-input into what was offered would be helpful. Several teachers mentioned that teachers needed to know ”what really was available in inservice.” One suggested that 127 someone in the building be designated to research what was available and to describe what is offered to the other tea- chers rather than the teachers hearing or reading an announce- ment about something which is available. One teacher mentioned the need for "options for ways to grow” as part of inservice. Another teacher said that the number of topics available in inservice programs was improving but that there was still need need for "a wider range of topics." Involvement in More Shared Problem-Solving as a Desired Stimulator. "Involvement in more shared problem-solving" was mentioned by persons who said that working together on problems rather than having decisions handed down or not addressing them at all would make teachers feel motivated. One principal remarked that in- volvement by all of the building staff in solving problems would unify the people in the building and would stimulate teachers to grow in order to be able to solve the problems. One teacher suggested "building 'rap sessions' where teachers could feel free to talk about problems and could do some problem-solving." The Availability of Release Time/Sabbaticals as a Desired Stimulator. ”The availability of release time/sabbaticals” was mentioned by persons who said that release time and sabbaticals would stim- ulate teachers to grow by providing time apart from the teaching situation during which teachers could pursue growth. Several 128 principals mentioned the need for time away from busy schedules and one teacher said release time (with a subsitute in the classroom) would provide Opportunity for teachers to ”visit in other classrooms (in the building) and in other districts." One teacher said that release time would make it possible for teachers to attend workshops and inservice programs. She said that although twelve inservice credits were required per year by the district, meeting those requirements ”had to be done on the teachers' own time." She added that if workshop or inservice attendance involved teachers being out of the build- ing during the day, the teachers "had to take personal leave days in order to attend." One of the teachers who mentioned sabbatical leaves said that the leave should be for ”studying educational things" and for "doing research." He said that the availability of sabbaticals would motivate teachers to use that time for growth. The Hiringgof More Building Staff as a Desired Stimulator. "The hiring of more staff in the building" was mentioned .by people who simply said that more teachers and other staff members were needed to alleviate heavy classloads so that teachers could do more things with students. It was also mentioned by people who cited particular contributions by new people in the building which would create interest in new things among people already there. 129 Several teachers said that "having fewer students to teach would mean opportunities to try more new things." One said that more staff would result in smaller classes which would make teachers "feel like they were able to do a better Job" and therefore, teachers "would be more enthused" and would be motivated to grow. One said,”It is having outside people come into the building. They bring in new ideas and concepts." Some of the teachers mentioned that having more staff to provide instruction in art, music, physical education, and remedial math would help the teachers as well as students to learn new things in those areas. One said that this would al- so release the classroom teacher from having to teach in those areas and would give the teacher more time to concentrate on areas where he or she should be teaching. One principal stated that he would like to be able to hire more teachers to reduce class size. He said that it would give teachers more time to try new things and therefore would motivate them to learn new things to try. Another principal stated could hire new tea- chers he would look for teachers who were "naturals" at teach- ing and who were ”growth-oriented.” One teacher said, "We need as: staff members. The youngest one here has been here elev- ven years." She said that new staff bring in new ideas and that and that older teachers learn from them. Some of the other staff that were desired were elementary counsellors and a librarian. Several teachers said that such staff would be helpful to them and they would learn from them at the same time. 130 Involvement by the Principal as a Desired Stimulator. "Involvement by the principal” was mentioned by people who simply said that more involvement on the part of the prin- cipal would be "nice." Others were more specific when they said that teachers would be more encouraged to grow if the principal had a more positive attitude, counseled them, and functioned as part of the ”building team." One teacher mentioned teachers being motivated by a principal "who would serve as an educational leader himself.” Another teacher mentioned the importance of the principal "keeping current with research." And another said that the principal taking an active part by teaching for teachers so that they could observe each other would stimulate teachers to grow. Summary Analysis of the information provided by the interviwees indicated that twenty environmental factors were perceived as desired in school environments toward furthering the stimulation of teacher growth. Six of these factors emerged as ”desired stimulators." These included two primary desired stimulators and four lesser ones. The six factors were: 1) ”the availability of materials/equipment/space"; 2) ”the avail- ablity of meaningful and frequent insevice"; 3) ”more shared shared problem-solving"; h) "the availability of release time/ sabbaticals”; 5) "the hiring of more building staff"; and 6) "more involvement by the principal." 131 All six of the above factors emerged with less frequency than the ”growth-stimulators" discussed earlier in this chapter. Only one of these factors was identified as both a "stimulator" and a "desired stimulator." This was ”the availability of mean- ingful 222 freguent inservice.” The "and frequent” was 323 mentioned by the interviewees in the identification of the fac- tor as a "stimulator." The Identification of Desired Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Principals Twelve factors were mentioned by the principals as desired growth-stimulating factors. These are presented in Table 1h. Analysis of the information in Table 14 Tune14 Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Principals Factors Mentioned Her Percentage of as Desired of Principals Principals Growth-Stimulating iluo Mentioned Iluo Mentioned Factors 1. The Availability of Release Tise/Sabbaticals 4 23% 2. The Availability of More Meaningful and Frequent Inservice 3 19% 3. The Hiring of More Building Staff 3 - 19% 132 Table 14 (cont’d) 4. More Shared Probles-Soluing 2 12% 5. Participation in Curriculua Innovation 2 12% 6. The Availability of Materials/ EouipsentlSpace l s: 7. Grants/Funds for Use in Growing l 6% 8. Visitations to Other Classroom/Districts l G! 9. More Scheduled Planning Tine l 63 10. More Actual Teaching Tine 1 6% ii. Opportunity for Grade anUMwaunmp l 13 12. Opportunity for Earning Conpensatory Tine l 63 indicates that twelve of the desired stimulators of the twenty identified by the interviewees were mentioned by the prin- cipals. Three of these emerged as the most frequently men- tioned factors. These (according to frequency mentioned), and the percentage of principals who mentioned, are: l) ”the availability of release time/sabbaticals" (mentioned by four principals or 25% of the principals) and 2) "the availability of more meaningful and frequent inservice" 223 "the hiring of more building staff" (each mentioned by three or 19$). The re- maining factors were mentioned by 61 - 19% of the principals. 133 Summary The principals identified 12 of the 20 desired growth stimulators mentioned by the interviewees. Three emerged as those mentioned most often. These were: the availability of release time and sabbaticals; the availability of more meaningful and frequent inservice; and the hiring of more building staff. Since the interviewees were not asked to rank the desired stimulators no factors were ranked according to their influence as desired stimulators. The Identification of Desired Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Teachers Eighteen of the twenty factors identified by the inter- viewees as desired growth-stimulators were mentioned by the teachers. These factors are presented in Table 15. Analysis TIflefS Factors Mentioned as Desired Drowth-Stinlating Factors by the Toasters Factors Mentioned Her Percentage of asunflul “”humns nude" Drowth-Stisulating tho Mentioned Hie Mentioned Factors l. The Availdoility of Materials/Equipment/Soace ii 23 2. The Availwility of Meaningful and Frequent inservice 3. More involv-ent by the Principal 4. More Shared Problee-Solving 5. The Hiring of More Building Staff 6. The Availwility of Release Tine/Sabbaticals 7. The Availability of a Professional Library 8. (holiness/Sharing Among the Staff 9. Participation in Curricula innovation 10. Grants/Funds for Use in Growing ll. Uisitatioos to Other Classrooms/Districts 12. More Scrdelod Planing Tine 13. More Actual Teaching Ties 14. The Professional Growth Orientation of the District 15. More involo-ont by Co-unity Agencies 16. The interests of Parents 17. Mortunity for Salary increase 18. The Availdiility of a Regular School Library 134 Twle 15 (cont’d) 8 17X 8 17! 7 i! 6 12% 5 10% 5 10% 5 101 4 3 4 as 3 B 3 B 3 B 2 4K 1 2% 1 2! 1 23 1 a of the information in Table 15. indicates that one factor emerged above others as the most frequently mentioned "desired 135 stimulator." This was "the availability of materials/equip- ment/space." It was mentioned by 11 or 23% of the teachers. The second-most frequently mentioned factors were: ”the avail- ability of meaningful and frequent inservice" 221 "more in- volvement on the part of the principal." These were mentioned by eight or 17% of the teachers. Although "the availability of materials......" was mentioned most frequently, the two which emerged as "second" warrant consideration if more thab one fac- tor is sought as an indicator of what might be desired by tea- chers as "desired stimulators." For the purposes of this study, no set number was set. Therefore one factor sufficed as well as more than one. Since the ”natural break" clearly occurred after the first factor that factor emerged as the single most frequently mentioned desired stimulator. Summary The teachers identified 18 of the 20 factors mentioned by the interviewees. One factor emerged above the 17 others as the desired growth stimulator mentioned most often by the teachers. This was: the availability of materials, equip- ment, and space for use in trying out new things in the build- ings. Since the interviewees were not asked to rank the desired growth stimulators, no factors were ranked according to perceived influence. The identification of factors which were desired as professional growth stimulators was sufficient in itself toward discerning what principals and teachers perceiv- ed as factors which, if present, would stimulate teacher growth. 136 Comparisons of Principal and Teacher Perceptions on Desired Growth—Stimulators The factors mentioned by the principals and by the teachers, and indicated by analysis of the information in Tables lb and 15 show similarities which emerged in the second-most frequently and one of the third most- most frequently mentioned "desired stimulators." ”The availability of meaningful and frequent inservice” was mentioned second-most frequently by the principals (along with "the hiring of more building staff") and second-most frequently by the teachers (along with "more involvement by the principal"). "More shared problem-solving" was mentioned third most frequently by the principals (along with "participation in curriculum”) and mentioned third- most frequently by the teachers. Further examination of Tables lb and 15 indicates that differences occurred in the perceptions pertaining to "the availablity of release time/sabbaticals” (which was the factor mentioned most-frequently by principals) and "the availability of materials/equipment[space (which was mentioned most frequently by the teachers). The teachers mentioned "the availability of release time...” fifth-most frequently while the principals mentioned "the availability of materials...." fourth most frequently (along with six other factors). The "availability of materials...” was mentioned by 11 or 23% of the teachers compared to one or 6f of the 137 principals. Comparisons of the Total Group Perceptions with Principal Group and Teacher Group Perceptions Comparison of the factors mentioned by members of the total group with both of the sub-groups within the total group indicates that among the factors some were mentioned by both principals and teachers; some were men- tioned by principals alone; and some were mentioned by teachers alone. Ten desired stimulators were identified by principals and teachers together. These were: "the availability of release time/sabbaticals”; ”the availability of meaningful and frequent inservice"; "the hiring of more staff;" ”more shared problem-solving”; "participation in curriculum innovation"; "the availability of materials/equip- ment/space"; "grants/funds for use in growing”; 'visitations to other classrooms/districts"; "more scheduled planning time"; and "more actual teaching time.” Two desired stimu- emerged as those mentioned by principals only. These were: "the opportunity for a grade level/area change” and "the op- portunity for earning compensatory time." Eight factors were mentioned by the teachers which were 223 mentioned by the principals. These were: "more involvement by the principal (as part of the school team);" ”the availability of a pro- fessional library”; ”openness/sharing among the staff"; "the professional growth orientation of the district"; "more involvement by community agencies"; ”the interest of parents"- 138 "the opportunity for salary increase"; and ”the availability of a regular school library." Some of the factors mentioned by the principals alone and by the teachers alone were men- tioned by only one principal or one teacher. Others were men- tioned by 12% - 251 of the principals (31 - 6; of the total interviewees) and hi - 23% of the teachers (35 - 17% of the total interviewees). Summary The findings which pertained to the identification of "desired" growth-stimulating factors indicate that twenty fac- tors were perceived as factors which, when added to present en- vironments in some schools, would tend to stimulate teacher growth beyond the extent to which it is currently. In some cases the factors identified were perceived to be present already. In these cases, those factors were desired in more quantity. Of the twenty factors which were mentioned, two to six were mentioned frequently enough to warrant consider- ation as those ”desired" by at least 12$ to 191 of the per- sons interviewed. Since there was some lack of clarity as to whether the natural break occurred after the first two or after the first six factors, six were studied further to avoid neglec- ting the inclusion of results which might be helpful in under- standing the perceptions of those interviewed. The six factors which emerged, therefore, as the identified ”desired growth-stimulating factors” were: materials, equipment 139 and space to try new things; more meaningful and frequent inser- vice; more shared problem-solving in the building; release time and sabbaticals; more building staff hired; and more involvement by the principal as part of the building team. Of the six factors Only materials, equipment, and space emerged as the factor most com- monly perceived as desired by the teacher interviewees. The factors perceived most commonly as desired by principals were: release time/ sabbaticals, more meaningful inservice and more building staff. The Identification Of Environmental Factors Perceived as Desired Growth-Supporting Factors The findings in this section were based on the responses to Part B. of Question Number Seven which asked the interview- ees to identify environmental factors which were perceived as desired growth-supporting factors. As in the case of Part A. which asked them to identify desired stimulators, the interview- ees identified factors perceived as desired but 321 present. They also identified factors present but not considered suf- ficient in supporting the growth of teachers in their buildings. The Identification of Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the Interviewees as a Total Group Twenty-one factors were identified by the interviewees as desired growth-supporting factors. A listing of these 1&0 21 factors is presented in Table 16. Since the interviewees Title 16 Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the interviewees Factors Mentioned timber Percentage of as Desired of interviewees interviewees Growth-Supporting tho Mentioned In Mentioned Factors 1. The Availdiility of Materials/Eeuipment/Space +++ 15 23 2. The Hiring of More Building Staff +++ 14 22! 3. Grants/Fonds for Use in Growing H 11 171 4. A Positive, Supportive Attitude bong Staff H S 14% 5. The Availdiility of a Professional Library 4+ 6 1 6. Participation in Curricula innovation +++ 5 I 7. fire lovely-ent by the Principal H 5 6 B. More Meaningful ad Frequent inservice H 5 a 9. Support of the Parents i-H 4 6 10. Availmoiiity of Release Time/Sabbaticals H 4 B 11. More Shared Probln-Solving H 3 3 141 Table 16 (cont’d) 12. Openness/Sharing Anong Staff +++ 3 5% 13. Availability of inservice Follow-Up +++ 3 5! 14. Uisitations to Other Classroons/Districts +++ 3 SI 15. More Actual Teaching Tine ++ 3 5% 16. Evaluation Based on Growth +++ 2 3% 17. Availability of a Regular School Library ++ 2 3% 18. Opportunity for a Brads/Level Area Change +++ 2 3% 19. More involvement by Conunity lhmmus+ ' 2 :3 20. Conpensatory Tine +++ l 23 a.TumtoRdm»t+ _ 1 :3 + Mentioned by Principals only ++ Mentioned by Teachers only +++ Mentioned by both Principals and Teachers were 223 asked to rank the factors, as in the case of the desired stimulators, only those mentioned and the frequency as well as the percentage of the interviewees who mentioned is included in Table 16. Analysis of the information in Table 16 indicates that 21 fac- tors were mentioned by the interviewees as "desired growth—support- ing (or growth-support) factors." Further analysis indicates that three factors emerged as the most frequently mentioned factors. These were: 1) "the availability of materials/equipment/space”; lh2 2) ”the hiring of more building staff"; and 3) ”granta/funds for use in growing." These three factors emerged before the ”natural break" which emerged to separate them from the remain- ing 18 factors. The perceived presence of the perception that these factors were "desired" as growth-supporting factors was reflected in the comments of the interviewees. These comments are presented below. As in previous comments pertaining to growth stimulating and supporting factors, the most frequently mentioned factors serve as headings for the comments presented. The Availability of MaterialslEquipment/Space as a Desired Support Factor. "The availability of Materials/Equipment/Space” was mentioned by teachers who simply said that more money in the school or room budget was needed so that more materials and equipment could be purchased. These teachers said that having more materials and equipment would mean that things which had been learned could then be applied. Four teachers mentioned the importance of having materials and equipment if new things were applied. Other teachers mentioned specific pieces of equipment to support teachers in their growth. Two teachers mentioned computer equipment in particular. One additional one said that if more computers were available, the teachers would put "more effort into their learning how to use computers." One teacher said that unlimited use of the copying machine and the laminating machine would support the teachers' growth. She said that teachers would be able to produce more copies and more durable copies of materials to try new things in “lei. classrooms. She said that the use )f both machines by teachers was very restricted. The need for more space to support the teachers efforts to grow was mentioned in comments by three principals and one teacher. The principals said that additional space in the building would provide more space for teachers to be e to try more things. One prinCipal mentioned that 1' toe special teachers had rooms of their own, this would affect the attitudes of the building teachers and they would r"eee more supported. As a result they would also feel sup- portei in their growth efforts. The teacher who mentioned more space commented that simply having a teachers' room where all of the building staff could sit down together to share ideas would support growth. The Hiring of More Building Staff as a Desired Support Factor. "The hiring of more building staff" was mentioned by per- sons who said either that more regular staff or that more sup- port staff was needed. In the case of "more regular staff" the need was expressed for more regular classroom teachers to alleviate crowded classrooms and/or "split-grades" in classrooms. Five teachers and two principals mentioned this as "desired." we All 3 x contended that smaller class size would permit teachers I q to try more new things in their classrooms. One of those prin- cipals said that elimination of "split—grade' teaching would lhh "make tenchera feel supported and not thwarted in their attempts to grow." A third principal didn't mention "hiring" new staff. Instead, in regard to current staff, he mentioned wishing that current staff "could be insulated against some of the political influences that work against growth" (he did not elaborate ex- cept to say that sometimes things were changed which were work- ing well -- simply for ”political reasons”). Two principals and five teachers mentioned ”hiring support or additional support staff." Some of the support staff men- tioned were: music, physical education, ert, remedial math, remedial reading, and speech therapy teachers. One of the principals acid that having full time support staff in the building would provide "learning resources" for teachers and would give teachers more time to "better implement whmt they learn during their growth efforts.” One principal and one teacher mentioned hiring an elementary counselor. The teacher said that the counselor "would deal with things teachers now have to deal with and teacher: would have time to keep growing." Teacher-aides were also mentioned as needed in the support of teachers' growth. Two teachers amid that the assistance of teacher-aides would support teachers because the teacher-aides could help prepare materials for the classroom. Two other kinds of support were mentioned. These were volunteers and resource peOple. One of the teachers who had mentioned teacher aides said that volunteers could also 1145 help to prepare materials. A third teacher mentioned resource people to assist teachers in their growth. Grants/Funds as a Desired Support Factor. The types of financial assistance which were mentioned by the interviewees were: funds from the district to support coursework; and grants to support half-days of teaching and half-days of research. Some people said that full support for growth activities ”would be nice”; others said that tea- chers would benefit from "at least partial support.” Two prin- cipals said that "reimbursement for classes taken" would be helpful to teachers. One teacher said that teachers should be paid ”directly" with money to attend ”growth activities of their own choice." Another teacher stated that financial help of any kind would encourage teachers to "continue their growth toward expertise.” Summary Analysis of the information provided by the interviewees concerning the identification of "desired growth-supporting factors" indicates that twenty-one factors were perceived as desired toward supporting the growth of teachers in the buildings studied. Three factors emerged as those most frequently mentioned. These were: 1) "the availability of materialsleguipment/space"; 2) "the hiring of more building 1&6 staff"; and 3) "grants/funds for use in growing.” These factors were mentioned by 17% - 23% of the interviewees. None of the three had been previously mentioned in the top-three factors which had been mentioned as "growth- supporting factors already present in the schools." ”The availablity of materials....”, however, had been mentioned as the thirteenth most frequently mentioned growth support factor (perceived as presently in the schools studied). ”Grants/funds...." had been identified as the fifth most fre- quently mentioned growth support factor by the interviewees. In the identification of ”desired growth-supporting factors” the interviewees mentioned "space to try new things learned." This was 22£_mentioned in the case of the "growth-supporting factors" perceived as already present. The Identification of Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the Principals Sixteen factors were mentioned by the principals as desired growth-supporting factors. These are presented in Table 17. Analysis of the information in Table 17 in- dicates that sixteen of the twenty-one factors identified by the interviewees were mentioned by principals. Of the six- teen desired growth-supporting factors three factors emerged 1&7 Tale 17 Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the Principals Factors Identified “or of Percentage of as Desired Principals Principals Growth-Supporting H's Identified H's Identified Factors 1. The Hiring of here Building Staff 4 25 2. Brats/Fonds for Use in Growing 4 25 3. Participation in Curricula Innovation 3 1! 4. The Availbilitp of Haterials/iouipaeet/Space 2 121 5. A Positive, Supportive Attitude bong Staff 1 B 6. here Insole-ent by the Principal 1 a 7. Here haingful nd Frequent Inservice 1 G 0. Support of the Parents 1 B 9. holiness/Sharing bong Staff 1 6 10. Availtility of Inservice Follow-lb 1 B 11. Visitations to Other Classroom/Districts 1 C 12. Evaluation Based on Breath 1 B 148 Table 17 (cont’d) 13. Opportunity for a Erode/Level MTOUWHQ 1 a 14. More Involvement by Col-unity Mmmns 1 a 15. Cdepensatory Tine 1 6! 16. More Tine to Reflect 1 6% as those most-frequently mentioned. These were: 1) "hiring more building staff"; 2) "grants/funds for use in growth"; and 3) "participation in curriculum innovation.” These were mentioned by 19% - 25% of the principals. The 13 remaining factors perceived by principals as "desired" toward the sup- port of the growth of teachers were mentioned by 6$ - 12% of the principals. One factor which was mentioned by principals among the three most-frequently mentioned factors did 221 appear among the top three mentioned by the interviewees as a whole. This was "participation in curriculum innovation.” Therefore, comments provided by the interviewees were not presented pertaining to this factor. Because it emerged among the three most-frequently mentioned factors by prin- cipals, comments by the interviewees which pertain to its identification as a "desired growth-supporting factor" are presented on the folowing page. 1h? Participation in Curriculum Innovation as a Desired Growth-Supporting Factor. "Participation in curriculum innovation" was mentioned by interviewees who said that this type of experience would support the growth of teachers in their buildings. Some people mentioned the need for more planning time in the area of curriculum planning. Others mentioned adding to the curriculum such things as a fine arts program, a foreign language, and field trips. They said that these things would support the interests and learning which develop as people grow and would enhance the curriculum. One teacher said that more grade-group involvement in curriculum change would support the growth of the teachers. Another said that implementing commonly agreed upon systems (eg. a building-wide system of handling stu- dent behavior) would be supportive because it would in- volve the total staff working together. Summary The principals identified sixteen desired growth-supporting factors. Of these sixteen factors, three emerged as factors which were the most-frequently mentioned. These were: hiring more build- ing staff; grants and funds for use in growth; and participation in curriculum innovation. One factor which was not mentioned among the three-most frequently mentioned factors by the inter- viewees as a whole emerged. This was participation in curriculum innovation. 150 The Identification of Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the Teachers Nineteen of the twenty-one factors mentioned by the inter- viewees were identified by teachers as desired growth-supporting factors. The information pertaining to the factors mentioned by teachers is presented in Table 18. Analysis of the information Tide“! Factors Mentioned as Desired Growth-Supporting Factors by the Teachers Factors Identified Hunter of Percentage of as Desired Teachers Toadiers Growth-Supporting Hho Identified Hhe Identified Factors 1. The Availability of Materials/Equipaent/Space 13 27% 2. The Hiring of More Building Staff 1D 21! 3. A Positive, Supportive Attitude Anmgmflw D N! 4. Grants/Fonds for Use fllmumn 7 fl! 5. Availability of a Professional Library 1 6 12% 6. More Involv-ent by the Principal 4 ll 7. More Meaningful and Frequent inservice 4 I! 151 Table 18 (Cont’d) 8. Availability of Release Time/Sabbaticals 4 ex 9. Support of the Parents 3 10. More Shared Problem Solving 3 6% 11. More Actual Teaching Time 3 62 12. Participation in Curriculum Innovation 2 4% 13. Openness/Sharing Among Staff 2 14. Availability of Inservice Follow-Up 2 4% 15. Uisitations to Other Classrouns/Districts 2 4% 16. Availability of a Regular School Library 2 4% 17. Evaluation Based on Growth 1 2% 18. Opportunity for a Grade/Level moonwwe 1 :3 19. More Involvement by Community Mmmfls 1 a in Table 18. indicates that one factor emerged above the rest as the factor most-frequently mentioned as a ”desired growth-supporting factor” by the teachers. This was: "the availability of materials[equipment/space." This factor was mentioned by 27% of the teachers interviewed. The 18 remaining factors were mentioned by 21 - 21$ of the teachers. 152 Summary The teachers identified nineteen "desired" growth- supporting factors. Of these 19 factors, however, only one emerged as the factor commonly perceived as desired in school environments which would, if present or in more abundance, support the growth of teachers who pursue professional growth. This factor was the availability of materials, equipment, and space in the school that would facilitate the trying out of new things learned through professional growth. Comparison of Principal and Teacher Perceptions on Desired Growth-Supporting Factors The factors mentioned by the principals and the teachers included three factors mentioned most-frequently by the prin- cipals and one mentioned most-frequently by the teachers. The factor which was mentioned most-frequently by the principals was "the hiring of more building staff.” The one mentioned most-frequently by the teachers was ”the availability of materials/equipment/space." The "hiring of more building staff" was mentioned second-most frequently by the teachers, however. "Grants/funds for use in growing” was mentioned second-most frequently by the principals and fourth by the teachers. ”Participation in curriculum innovation” was mentioned third-most frequently by the principals and twelfth by the teachers. ”The availability of materials/equip- ment/space” (which was mentioned most-frequently by teachers) 153 was mentioned fourth-most frequently by the principals. The frequency with which the above factors were mentioned indicates that teachers perceived having materials, equipment and space to try new things (which are learned during teachers' efforts to grow) 1s the most widely-percieved need if teachers are to feel sufficiently supported. The principals and the teachers both perceived more staff as supportive. The need for "materials..." was perceived more widely by the teachers as something which, if added to the school environments where it was mentioned, would support growth. The principals per- ceived financial assistance and involvement in curriculum more widely than materials, equipment and space as things which would support growth. Comparisons of Total Group Perceptions with Principal Group and Teacher Group Perceptions In comparing the responses of the total group of inter- viewees and principal and teacher groups within that group (See Tables 17 and 18 on pages it? and 150), analysis indicates that the three most-frequently mentioned factors were mentioned by both principals and teachers. Further analysis, however, indicates that two factors in the factors mentioned by the total group of interviewees were mentioned only by principals. These were: ”more involvement by community agencies" and ”time to reflect.” Analysis of the information in Table 16 also indicates that five factors were mentioned only 15h by teachers. These were: 1) "the availability of a pro- fessional library"; 2) "the availability of release time/ sabbaticals"; 3) "more shared problem-solving"; h) "more actual teaching time”; and 5) "the availability of a regular school library.” Analysis of the information provided by the interviewees as a total group and the information provided by the principal and teacher groups separately indicates that most of the fac- tors perceived as "desired" were factors mentioned by some persons in the principal group and some in the teacher group. Examination of the responses of the two sub-groups individually enhances the perceptions of the group as a whole by permitting similar and differing perceptions to emerge. Summary The findings which pertained to the identification of environmental factors perceived as desired in school environ- ments (if the growth of teachers is to be further supported), indicate that twenty-one factors emerged as desired in the buildings studied. As in the case of the desired stimulating factors, some factors were perceived to be already present but 22: sufficiently so to further support the growth of teachers in the buildings. Others were perceived as 22: currently present.. Of the twenty-one factors identified three emerged as those commonly perceived as ”desired.” These were: materials, equipment, and space to try new things learned; more 155 building staff; and grants and other funds to use in the support of growth. The three factors which emerged included two which were commonly perceived to be desired by the principals (more staff; and grants, funds for growth) and the one commonly perceived to be desired which was mentioned by the teachers. The other factor commonly mentioned by the principals was participation in curriculum innovation. Growth Experiences Related to Particular Environmental Influences The findings in this section are based on the responses to Question Number Eight which was stated: ”Please give one example of a growth experience that was a result of something in the school environment that stimulated professional growth or that supported such growth once begun.” The interviewees identified growth experiences which they perceived to have occurred among teachers in their buildings. Included with the various types of growth experiences were descriptions of things which were developed in the buildings or were in- troduced into buildings which were perceived to have resulted in the experiences of growth. The growth experiences which were identified involved four types of learning. These were: 1) learning which began with an awareness of a need or-a problem; 2) learning which proceeded with discovering more about the need or problem; 156 3) learning which continued with the seeking out of one or more possibilities for meeting the need or addressing the prob- lem, and h) learning which resulted in the teachers learning as they employed various resources to meet the need or to solve the problem. A fifth type of learning was learning through the implementation of a district-adopted innovation which may or may not have been adopted to meet needs or problems identified by teachers. Types of Learning Perceived as Part of Growth Experiences Encountered by Building Teachers The types of learning mentioned above are described in the comments of the interviewees which are presented below. Each type of growth experience serves as a heading for the material contributed by the interviewees. gearning_Through Developing an Awareness gg_a~qrowth Experience. The development of an awareness of a need or problem situ- ation was reported to have occurred in one or more of the follow- ing ways: 1) when teachers saw something in their classrooms which they felt warranted their attention; 2) when teachers felt a sense of frustration and attempted to determine what tended to produce that effect; 3) when teachers saw, read, or heard about something which appeared to be working for others; h) when something was introduced into the building (eg. a curriculum innovation or 157 a new policy) which was mandatory in requiring teachers' re- sponse. In buildings where needs and problems required attention, there tended to be situations which brought a particular need or problem to the teachers' attention. Test scores interpreted as an indication of poor or declining student achievement (in reading) was cited as part of one of these situations. For example, in one school declining reading scores caught the at- tention of the principal and the teachers and signaled the presence of a problen. Further examination indicated that test scores plummeted because some students had great difficulty in responding to the test itself rather than to the content being tested. As one teacher remarked, "Some children wouldn't even try." In another school, teachers noticed that many of the young children had great difficulty in organizing their learning tasks when working individually, or in groups. In still another school some teachers were observed by others to assume little respon- sibility for their own students outside of their classrooms, and would not become involved with students "belonging to other teachers." There was no sense of unity in the way which discip- line was handled building-wide. In yet another building, the teachers became aware that one of their colleagues had become critically ill during the last few weeks of the schoolyear. This awareness prompted them to think through the gravity of the situ- ation both for the teacher and for the teacher's students. 158 Learning Through Discovering More About a Need or a Problem As a Growth Experience. Learning more about a particular need or problem was identi- fied in fifteen buildings as a growth experience. Once, teachers were aware of a need or a problem, they sought to learn more about the need or problem by thinking through the circumstances of the problem; using resource tapes (eg. a tape on child abuse); discuss- ing with colleagues; or looking to research findings. Learning Through Searching for Possible Solutions as a Growth Experience. The search for possible ways to improve discipline; to re- pond to child abuse situations; to utilize computers in the class- room; to teach in, and to coordinate a K-12 creative writing pro- gram; to teach students with particular learning problems; and ”to plan and teach more lessons more effectively”) was a step which, reportedly, increased the teachers' awareness and helped them to discover possible solutions. Both of these experiences were perceived as growth experiences for the teacher. Learning Through Planning and Implementation as a Growth Experience. Awareness of a need or a problem, understanding the need or problem, and identifying possible solutions were followed, 159 in most cases, by planning and/or implementing a strategy, pro- gram, or model designed to meet the need or to address the problem. Developing new strategies to meet teacher, student, building, or district needs was mentioned in buildings where teachers, individually, in small groups, or en mass, were said to have made decisions about how best, in the opinions, of those involved, to meet particular needs. In the case of the criticallly ill teacher, the teachers decided to ”pull together" and to assume the extra responsibilities of that teacher, and to "try their best to help out in any way that they could." In the two buildings where student reading test scores declined, the teachers devised strategies to help students become more comfortable with test-taking situations, in feeling more confident about themselves and their own abil- ities. This was in deference to ”teaching the test” 235,15. In some cases, teachers sought out a particular program that they had heard about or that had been brought to their attention by other teachers, administrators, persons in higher education, or resource people, who had come to their building or to their district. The implementation of programs, such as those previously mentioned, was perceived as a growth experience for teachers involved in their implementation. Learning through involvement in the implementation of already-developed models and programs was mentioned as a growth experience by a number of interviewees. Although in most cases, the decision to adopt and implement a formal 160 program or model was made at the administrative level (either in the building or at the central administrative level), some of the programs were chosen by the teacher in the classroom. or the programs and models most in evidence in the schools studied, three emerged as models or programs which had been or were in the process of being quite widely implemented. These were: l) the Madeline Hunter Model (used in eight schools in three districts); 2) the Assertive Discipline Model (used in seven schools in four districts; 3) the Effective Schools Move- ment (used in five schools in two districts). The implementation of these models/programs was perceived as acceptable because they were perceived as: l) "non-threatening (they did not focus on blame or remediation)"; 2) "having prac- tical application"; and, 3) "being research-based”; One principal remarked that one of the models ”built on things that some tea- chers already did well.” Several sources of information mentioned the perceived importance of a research-based approach to solving problems and meeting needs. One said that a research-based approach had more credibility and was less likely to be viewed as a ”passing fad." A few teachers reported, however, that in their buildings, some teachers chose non-involvement in any- thing new, using the excuse, ”It's Just one more fad.” The comments which emerged pertaining to the models and programs were both positive and negative. The negative com- ments were: - ”not enough time to discuss and plan" 161 - "lack of appropriate materials and equip- ment to use to implement" - "funding guidelines too stringent" - ”lack of support by some in the building” - ”classes too large to implement effectively" - "students gone too much" - "too many class interruptions" - "lack of information about other things that might work" The negative comments were outnumbered by the positive com- ments, however. The positive comments were: - "People were excited about being involved in a needed educational change." - "More growth came out of the implementation than (from) anything else.” - "The sharing and working together that was pos- sible was helpful to the staff." - "The staff found new ways to approach a problem.” - ”It stimulated people to learn more about it so they could implement it.” - "Teachers had to learn to document.” - ”Teachers grew in understanding child develop- ment." - "It stimulated growth through involvement.” - ”It forced teachers to sit down and think about kids." - "It had a real impact...(it) pulled together so many different elements that people had learned about, in previous work -- only in a practical way. It provided structure for using those elements." 162 - "It initiated, in teachers, a desire to move toward the improvement of teaching -- thus, professional growth.” Summary The findings which pertained to growth experiences related to particular factors perceived to influence the professional growth of teachers indicate that the growth experiences depended on the type of learning involved. In some cases, the learning was incurred in the development of an awareness of a particular problem or need. In others it was in discovering more about a problem or a need. In still others it was in looking for solutions or in planning and implementing something to address the problem or to meet the need. The study sources of information on the school environments studied indicated that growth experiences had resulted from the implementation of individual strategies in classrooms, and from the implementation of building-wide and district-wide curriculum innovations. Some of the educational programs and models pres- ently being implemented in schools were mentioned as sources of teacher growth. Positive and negative aspects of these models were cited. CHAPTER SUMMARY The findings reported in this chapter include four oper- ational categories of definitions of "growing professionally" which were provided by the interviewees and provided a 163 contextual background for the other findings. The findings al- so included descriptions of three types of growth periods and indicated that growth is most commonly perceived early in tea chers' careers after adjustment to teaching has occurred. The length of the growth period was perceived to vary. The findings which pertained to descriptions of the school environment as workplace of teachers indicated that six types of factors are perceived as part of that workplace environment. Of these factors the factors which tended to growth-stimulating and growth-supporting were people and curriculum factors. Those which were "desired" as growth-stimulating and supporting were physical factors, curriculum factors and interaction factors. The findings pertaining to professional growth experiences indi- cated that teachers were perceived to grow as they learned and as they responded to needs and problems. Teacher-, school- and district-adopted educational programs and models played a large part in the perceived growth experiences of teachers. Analysis of the differences in perceptions of the total group of interviewees (the principals and teachers combined) and prin- cipals alone and teachers alone indicated some differences in perception which add dimension to the study findings as a whole. CHAPTER V. : CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMMENDATIONS A summary of the study, conclusions based on the study findings, limitations of the study, recommendations for fur- ther study, and personal reflections on the study are includ- ed in this chapter. Summary of the Study The study contains information pertaining to identifi- cation of factors which are perceived to stimulate and support the professional growth of teachers. The Study Purpose The major purpose of the study was to identify factors in school environments perceived to stimulate and support the professional growth of teachers in their workplace en- vironments. Also included was the identification of environ- mental factors which would stimulate and support growth, if added to school environments. Still another intent of the study was to identify particular growth experiences which were perceived to have contributed to the professional growth of teachers in the school environments studied. Definitions of professional growth as a process served the study by pro- viding a contextual background for the information and the categories which were used to classify the responses. 16h The Guiding Questions The study was guided by eight questions pertaining to the areas of: 1) personal perceptions of the meaning of "grow- ing professionally"; 2) perceived school environment influences on professional growth; 3) perceived environmental influences which were desired: and h) professional growth experiences per- ceived to be attributed to environmental influences. Eight questions based on the guiding questions were asked of persons in the school environments studied. The Study Sample Sixteen school environments in four school districts were studied. Principals and teachers were interviewed and their responses were analyzed for factors and groupings of factors which were perceived as influential in the stimulation and support of teacher growth. The Study Findings The study findings consisted of perceptions of school personnel pertaining to definitions of "growing profession- ally." They also contained factors identified as growth— stimulators, growth-support factors, and desired stimulators and support factors. The teachers' own desire to grow was identified as the primary motivator. Professional growth was most commonly perceived as occurring during the years which extended from once teachers had adjusted to teaching until they had been in the profession long enough to feel content in 166 their roles or to feel "apathy" in general toward growth. The observed length of periods of growth were perceived as varied, with the length dependent on particular situations. Perceptions of the school environment as the workplace of teachers reflected six types of environmental components or factors. Of these, people factors and physical factors were the most commmonly perceived as factors identified with the school environment. In the stimulation of professional growth among teachers, the most commonly perceived types of factors were: people factors, and curriculum factors (with inservice considered here as a curriculum factor). There were differences in perceptions between principals and teachers per- taining to which people were most important in stimulating the growth of teachers. The principals perceived it to be the prin- cipal while the teachers percived it to be other teachers. The commonly perceived growth-supporting factors were people and curriculum factors. Here the principals again reported the principal to be most important while the tea- chers reported it to be other teachers. This was followed by principals identifying other teachers as second while the teachers selected seeing results in the classroom as second. The teachers identified encouragement by the principal as third. The factors perceived as pp: currently in school en- vironments, or £23 sufficiently so, but which if present in sufficient quantity might further stimulate teachers to 167 grow were basically physical factors, curriculum factors, and interaction factors which pertained to materials, equip- ment, space, inservice, and more shared-problem solving. The differences in the perceptions of principals and teachers were in the principals perceiving that release time/sabbaticals, in- service and more staff would be important stimulators while the teachers perceived that more materials, equipment, and space would stimulate if these were available. The desired growth-supporting factors most commonly per- ceived as desired were physical factors (materials, equipment, and space; and grants or other funds for growth) and people factors (more staff). Principals perceived the need for more staff, financial support for growth, and participation in cur- riculum as needed while the teachers perceived the need for materials, equipment and space as desired support factors. Growth experiences pertaining to steps in meeting needs were commonly perceived as the types of growth experiences which occurred in school environments. These experiences were per- ceived as experiences which were the result of particular things which originated in or were introduced into the school environments. Overall, the environmental factors which emerged as ones which were perceived to influence the stimulation and support of teacher growth were the peOple and physical factors found in the school environment. As desired stimulators and support factors, the principals identified people and physical factors while the teachers identified physical factors. The definitions which served as contextual background for the fac= tors which emerged served to provide added significance to the factors which were identified. The growth experiences described indicated that curriculum innovation (in the broad interpre- tation utilized in this study) was a major source of learning in the growth experiences described. Relationships to Other Studies The study findings concur with findings in previous research (reported in Chapter II) that teachers are influenced by the ambiance which surrounds them. Studies by Joyce and McKibbin (1982) indicated that teachers were "heavily influenced" by the school environment. The study findings also indicated that particular factors within school environments are perceived to peak teachers' interest in growing, and situations in which they find themselves prompt growth. The findings also indi- cated that teachers are aware of those around them and the interest and encouragement of others tend to make them strive to improve. These findings correspond to Perry's (1980) find- ings that "curiosity, a striving for competence, an urge to make order out of incongruities, a wish to be considered ma- ture......." are motives which prompt people to grow. Wonder- ing why things are not going well, or wanting to do as well as others, as well as wanting the respect and support of others were elements which prompted teachers to be stimulated toward growth. 169 The investigation approached the study of the influence of the school environment from a different perspective than that used by Burden (1980). Although both studies focused on perceptions, this study included the perceptions of prin- cipals as well as teachers and more narrowly focused on the school environment itself and factors within it which were perceived as influences. This study also included the ranking of the perceived influences. Burden's study focused on changes which occur in teachers during their career years while this study did not address those changes. Burden's study also focused on teachers' perceptions of their 212 personal and professional development and factors (inside and outside of school and prior to and after entering teaching) which were perceived to influence that development. This study focused on teachers' career years only. The study reported here involved sixty-four sources of information compared to Burden's sample of fifteen teachers. Four types of school districts were sampled in this study while Burden sampled seven suburban districts. Burden's find- ings were that teachers had grown in particular ways (both per- sonally and professionally), that they were influenced by ten categories of factors (including some outside the school, and some prior to entering teaching), and that the presence and influence of a administrator was an influence. Although the study reported in the five chapters of this report included environmental influences, the focus was narrower, the sample 170 was larger, and the span over types of school districts was wider. The perceived influence of the identified factors was also a part of this study while Burden did not ask the respon- dees to rank the identified factors according to their influ— ence as stimulators. The study findings also extend beyond studies of environ- mental factors which stimulate growth. The identification of fac- tors which support the growth efforts once begun (and for which no studies which addressed that aspect of growth could be located), may be helpful in providing knowledge about the types of factors which appear to have value to teachers who have begun to grow. Factors which support teachers in their growth efforts warrant further study. The effect of perceptions of teachers (which pertain to how they view their situations in school environments and in their personal and professional lives) is in line with find- ings by Combs (1965) that persons act based on their perceptions of situations and factors within the school environment. Conclusions Based on the Study Findings The conclusions, which are based on the study findings, in- clude conclusions formulated as a result of a study of the find- ings to ascertain what ”growing professionally" means to those working in schools as it pertains to teachers. They also in- clude conclusions formulated through a study of areas of agree- ment and differences existing in the perceptions of persons 171 pertaining to what tends to stimulate and support growth if pres- ent. Finally, they include conclusions formulated through a study of perceived growth experiences and an examination of the types of educational programs and models which were men- tioned as influential in promoting professional growth in the schools. The study conclusions are: 1) that professional growth is perceived in schools 2) 3) I.) as related more to a response to situational de- determinants than to growth as an evolving profes- sional even though it is perceived as a process rather than as an end result; that homogeneity among persons in school environ- ronments exists pertaining to the types of factors which are perceived as present which tend to stimu- late and support the growth of teachers; that differences exist in the perceptions of prin- cipals and teachers but these differences are more in degree of influence than in whether or not some- thing is an influence. that environmental factors which are perceived to be needed if growth is to be further stimulated and supported are ”budget" items which if provided might stimulate more teachers to grow and to feel supported in their growth. 5) that the panacea of models, programs and movements 172 in education today is viewed as the "solution" for involving teachers in professional growth. These conclusions relate to the review of the literature in the following ways: The Concept of Growing Professionally The definitions which emerged bear out previous definitions evident in the literature of professional growth as a process rather than as a result. This is further borne out in study findings (about growth experiences) which emerged to enhance a conceptualization of growth as a process. The types of growth experiences which were described were mainly those currently in process. Although some descriptions centered on ways that tea- chers had addressed problems and met needs, individually, many of the descriptions pertained to the implementation of programs and models which were presently in various stages of implemen- tation. The conclusion presented above which states that pro- fessional growth is perceived as a response to situational de- terminants rather than to growth as an evolving professional, does not appear as frequently in the literature as writings which indicate that teachers embark on career-long professional growth programs. Some writings in the literature do admit, how- ever, that the growth is sometimes not a conscious effort on the part of the teachers and that the growth does occur in response to meeting a need or addressing a problem. 173 The Identified Factors in School Environments The people and curriculum factors, which were mentioned as part of the teachers' workplace, were identified as the major stimulators of teacher growth. In their order of perceived influ- ence according to the principals interviewed, they were: #1 the principal; #2 other teachers; #3 the teacher and his/her own des- ire to grow; #h participation in curriculum innovation; and #5 students and their needs. Those identified by the teachers were: #1 other teachers; #2 the principal: #3 participation in curricu- lum innovation; #h the students and their needs; and #5 the tea- chers' own desire to grow. These factors are somewhat different than those commonly found in the literature with the exception of studies by Holly and Burden. A common focus in the litera- ture is the stimulation of teacher growth as the local district, intermediate district, and state levels rather than at the build- level. The people and curriculum factors were also identified as the primary growth-supporting factors. The principals per- ceived them as #1 the principal; and #2 other teachers. The tea- chers identified these factors as #1 other teachers; #2 classroom results due to change; and #3 the principal. The things cited com- monly in the literature as growth-support factors were release time and money for district-wide and state programs designed to "deve10p teachers professionally" by bringing in already develop- ed programs to bring about educational change in the district in order to meet district goals pertaining to student achievement. 1714 The Effect of Curriculum Innovation and School Improvement Efforts on Professional Growth Sources in the literature support curriculum innovation and school improvement efforts as means for improving schools. The findings associated with this study indicate that persons in the schools tend to view curriculum innovation as a means for addressing problems or meeting specific needs and that the learning involved in problem-solving is in itself growth. The study conclusion which pertains to models and programs and move- ments as "solutions" for involving teachers in growth appears to be supported to some degree in the literature. However, an underlying current tends to prevail which says that ”chang- ing teachers" toward improving student performance is the goal rather than facilitating the growth of teachers as mature in- formed professionals. The Limitations of the Study Since the focus of the study was on sixteen school environ- ments, even though four different-sized districts were studied, the findings may not be generalizable to all school situations. For example, the implementation of educational programs or models was evident in most schools. In some areas of Michigan or the country as a whole, however, this may not hold true. The status of particular situations which were reported were also based on reporting at one point in time. This does not negate the impor- tance of the study findings but may have implications for further studies. 175 The number of people interviewed was ample for the type of probing which was carried out in this exploratory study. A larger sample of schools and people in those schools, however, would provide a broader picture of school environments. This would pro- vide wider opportunities for the identification of additional growth-stimulating and supporting factors to emerge. Since school environments were the focus, one principal per building was all that was available. Three teachers per building were interviewed in order to provide a more representative teacher viewpoint than if only one teacher per building had been inter- viewed. This caused, however, unequal subgroups within the total group of interviewees. Another limitation existed in the multi-level findings which were the result of the use of open-ended questions. The cate- gories used to classify the responses posed a problem for the researcher in displaying the interview information for analysis. Careful attention was required in order to preserve the person- ally relevant meanings of the interviewees by not imposing strict controls over the levels of response. To impose rigid controls over the levels for the sake of presenting "neat and easy to man- age" categories would have restricted the openness of the study to emergent groupings of factors. The study limitations, as well as the conclusions, were utilized in the formulation of recommendations for further study. General and Specific recommendations are presented in the following sections. 176 General Recommendations for Further Study Based on the study findings and conclusions, the follow- ing general recommendations are made. 1. That conceptual frameworks be developed which specify a process for enhancing school environments as growth- promoting environments for teachers as well as for students. Among the elements of such frameworks might be the following: a. elements which present a conceptualization of specific attitudes on the part of persons in school environments which tend to stimulate and support professional growth (eg. excite- ment about learning, interest in professional problem-solving, and enthusiasm about working together toward a common vision of "growing professionally" in the school setting. elements which involve a conceptualization of specific actions on the part of persons in the schools exhibited in their comments, suggestions and other feedback to each other; and in a proactive seeking out and manipula— tion of growth facilitating factors to pro- vide continuous growth experiences. elements which present professional growth as a desired goal though a conceptualization of the school environment itself as an important 177 source of ongoing growth activities. that the area of professional growth as a life-long, hence a career-long, focus be studied from the aspect of informing and convincing persons in the field that growth in itself is worthy of their attention. that more study be devoted to ways to promote pro- fessional growth as a proactive process rather than something which is "done to” people. Frequently, the term "professional develOpment" is used in place of "professional growth." Unfortunately, "develop- ment" is sometimes perceived as "developing others" rather than "freeing others to grow” and "facilitating that growth." Specific Recommendations Based on the exploratory study presented here specific areas recommended for study are: 1. environmental influences which might be identified that are similar to or different than those reported here and could be compared to those identified in this study. school environments where professional growth "above and beyond problem-solving" appears to be a focus and could be studied and compared toward discerning what factors are perceived in those environments are like or different from those identified in this study. 178 3. situations where efforts are made to intervene in an effort to alter the nature of particular environ- mental factors and the impact of the intervention is studied. h. specific environmental factors identified in this and other studies and identification of the extent to which particular factors tend to influence profession- al growth. 5. the "professional growth orientation" of various school districts as compared with the districts' focus on "student growth only." 6. the influence of various governmental units on growth- facilitating resources available to teachers, schools, and districts. Personal Reflections of the Study Personal reflections on the study provide the opportunity for one to reflect back over the original decision to study school environments. They also allow for reflection on the study and its findings and an assessment of the extent to which what was intended was accomplished. Personal experience in working in schools over a period of sixteen years and a realization that most teachers in Michigan 1) are at the Master's Degree level, 2) have been working in the same school district for all or most of their careers, and 3) currently have little Opportunity for mobility seemed to verify 170 the need for looking at school environments for sources of stimu- lation and support for teacher growth. Reflecting on the study itself brings a feeling of ex- citement in thinking about the schools visited, the new people met (although the encounters were brief and focused) and the new things learned about schools in general and about school environments in particular. The challenge was in maintaining neutrality and "apartness" while striving to make interviewees feel at ease during the questionning. The interview schedule (on cards), the preliminary letter, and the direct transcription of the responses were helpful in this respect. The study findings show that there were, as expected, some commonly perceived factors which stimulated and supported the professional growth of teachers. It was also expected that some differences would emerge. The finding that principals ranked themselves as the most influential growth-stimulating and growth-supporting factor was, however, unexpected. This finding brought to mind the questions of 1) whether particu- lar studies in school effectiveness which report the importance of the principal influenced the principals in their responses pertaining to professional growth as well; 2) whether topics pertaining to the role of the principal in courses in educa- tional leadership influenced principals; or 3) whether princi- pals based their responses solely on what they had done to try to stimulate and support the growth of teachers. 180 The finding that teachers relied on each other for stimulation and support was not too surprising. The en- couragement of the principal as one of the support factors identified by teachers was not surprising either since tea- chers rely on principals for the management of school con- ditions which affect their professional lives, and support for what they try in their classrooms on a daily basis. The finding that principals desired more release time, sabbaticals, inservice and more staff while teachers wanted materials, equipment and space to try new things prompted the notion that teachers might consider growing if they were pro- vided with the means for implementing what they learn. Another thought was that perhaps principals are not aware of the impor- tance of those resources to teachers. Other findings reflected on were particular comments which emerged during the interviewing. Several teachers, for example, when asked what they thought should be added to the school envi- ronment expressed surprise and delight in "being asked.". The question seemed to facilitate a type of "brainstorming" which was welcomed by all of the interviewees. It could be compared to being allowed to make a "wish list.” Another comment voiced several people was that teachers wanted professional growth to be modeled by the principal rather than just to be arranged by the principal. In schools where the teachers and the principal shared responsibilities for learning and learned together this was not mentioned. 181 If there are regrets about the study, it is in the diffi- culty in trying to identify single-level groupings (which are easier to discuss). Knowing that the nature of the study (that of using open-ended questions and allowing categories to emerge) contributes to a more meaningful set of findings is at least rec- onciling to one who likes clarity and organization and at the same time perfers openness and authenticity. The process of planning, conducting, and reporting on the study stimulated some new ways of thinking about school environ- ments. The aspects of the school environment which are perceived as important to those working there do not usually emerge in everyday contacts with persons in those environments. It is when there is a systematic probing that the things perceived as impor- tant and influential emerge. CHAPTER SUMMARY The study summary served as a review in preparation for writing the conclusions. Five conclusions based on the findings were presented. These were: 1) that professional growth is per- ceived as a process in schools rather than a result; 2) that there is agreement in schools pertaining to factors which support tea- cher growth; 3) that differences exist in the degree of influence of the stimulators and support factors; b) that some factors not in evidence are desired; and 5) that growth in schools often is attributed to the adoption of models and programs. 192 The study limitations include inability to generalize the findings to all schools. They also include an adequate but small sample-group of schools and sources of information; and multi-level findings. The general recommendations for further study are: the development of conceptual frameworks; the study of ways to dis— seminate materials pertaining to professional growth as an ongoing process; and more study toward discovering ways to illuminate professional growth as a proactive process. The specific recommendations include: studies of other types of school environments; intervention studies to provide "desired" factors and to assess differences; studies of the eXtent of en- vironmental influence; studies of the growth-orientation of school districts; and studies of the influence of governmental units on resources for growth. The personal reflections on the study include reflections on: decisions to study school environments; the study itself and and the study findings; the accomplishments of the study; and the growth of the researcher. APPFNDICES 18h APPENDIX A2 Interview Schedule Used in Teacher Interviews As a teacher, what does "growing professionally" mean to you? At what critical periods in a teacher's life would you say teachers tend to grow professionally? What would you say in terms of years or particular periods in a teacher's life is the duration of a teacher's growth efforts? what in your work environment -- your building environment -- can be classified as part of that environment? what in the school environment in your building would tend to motivate a teacher to actively pursue professional growth? (After listing these, please rank from most influential to least influential using '1” to designate most influential, ”2” to designate less influential . . .) What in the work environment of your school tend to support a teacher's efforts to growt professionally? (Please rank using "1” for most influential, ”2” to designate less influential . . .) If you could add to your school environment particular factors that you think would be effective in promoting effective teacher growth what factors would you label as motivators toward growth (M)? which would you label as supporters of growth (8)? (Please list and label.) Please give at least one example of a growth experience that was a result of something in the school environment that stimulated professional growth or that supported such growth once begun. 185 APPENDIX B Letter to Confirm Interview Dear (Principal's Name or Teacher's Name), The interview that you have granted to me on (daz) (date) at (place) will relate to a study of school environments and the professional growth of the teacher. At the scheduled appointment you will be asked to respond to eight questions about the work environ- ment of teachers in your building. The interview will last approximately forty-five minutes. The questions that will be asked are non-threatening in nature and are designed to facilitate your feedback by providing the opportunity for you to respond to open-ended questions. Sixteen Southwestern Michigan schools are participating in the study. These schools were selected in a random drawing. The principals of the selected schools and three randomly-selected teachers within each of those buildings serve as sources of information on the particular school environments in this non-evaluative study. Agreement to be interviewed serves as implied consent on the part of each interviewee. Only persons who freely consent to be inter- viewed will be interviewed since voluntary participation is important in a study of this nature. At any time a study participant may withdraw from the study. In this case, it is important that I am notified immediately so that arrange- ments can be made for another person to be interviewed. It is understandable that withdrawal from planned participation is sometimes necessary. There is no penalty when this occurs. The information obtained in this study will be treated with the utmost confidentiality. Only the interviewer will have access to the information that is collected as it rel- ates to particular buildings by name. The names of schools and persons are of no significance in the study and will re- remain anonymous in all study reports. Upon request and with- in the above restrictions the results of the study will be made available to all participants. Thank you for your willingness to participate in this important study of school environments. In advance prepara- tion for the interview is necessary. I look forward to meeting with you at the arranged time. Sincerely, Norma Hungerford - Doctoral Candidate, M.8.U. Telephone: (616) 375-0073 186 APPIIDIX C Demographic Information Age of Respondee 21-30 31-h0 hl-SO Above 50 Sex: Female Male — H Position in School Principal Teacher ‘F_-_" ____. L__ L. Formal Education Bachelors Bachelors Masters Masters + Degree + 18 Sen. Degree 30 Sen. Hrs. Hrs. or or AS Term 27 Term Hrs. Hrs. Specialist EdD PhD Degree [I : | Years in Present Position (Principal 2: Teacher) 0-3 h-lo ll-lS 16-20 21 or more '__ 'r—‘ ‘—' '—'-1 T'— 10. 11. 187 Years in Current School Building 0-3 h-lO 11-15 16-20 21 or more 7-. l: *“" "“ '— Years in Another School(s) (Previous School) 0-3 h-lO ll-lS l6-20 21 or more If worked in previous school(s), transferal to this building was: a. Requested by you , .F.__— b. Requested by administrator J____J Grade Level Currently Teaching (if a Teacher) K-3 h-6 7.....7 .... .4. Approximate Enrollment of Your School Less than 101 101-200 201-300 301-h00 ____ _.... 7.... 7.... ,—_. ._._7 7—, —— hOl-SOO 501-600 Over 600 C E C Classification of School District Urban- Urban-Fringe City/Town Rural Metropolital Core 188 APPENDIX D Letter to Sources of Information (Principals and Teachers) Following Interview Dear (Principal's Name or Teacher's lame), Thank you for your involvement in the study of the school environment as it relates to professional growth factors. The questions that you answered at the interview session were designed to get feedback about your particular school environment and influences there that you perceived as contributors to teacher growth. Thank you for your will- ingness to be a part of this study. If you are interested in the results of the study, please tear off the slip at the bottom of the page and a summary will be sent to you as requested. Sincerely, Norma L. Hungerford NLH/maf Yes, I am interested in receiving a summary of the School Environment Study. dd 1.5:? Table [1 weighted and Cummulatiue Stores Used to Analvze the Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Interviewees Times Mentioned as He ghted Scores Growth-Stimulating 1:: = X times 3 tumuletiue ractors Host Secono-Host Third-Host 2:0 e X times 2 Scores Influegiial Influepgial Influenéial 3 e X times 1 s - ,1' - (1 I (z “i (3 I The Influence of tne Principal 13 11 15 33 22 15 76 Tne Influence of Other Teacners 9 11 16 27 22 16 GS Responding to Students’ heed: 10 3 1 30 18 1 43 Fart;c;oation in Curriculum Innovation 9 8 5 27 16 5 4E The Teazhere’ Own Desire to Grow 7 7 6 21 14 6 41 The Availability 07 Meaningful Inservice 4 5 8 12 10 8 30 Opportunity for Salarv Increase 4 4 1 12 8 1 21 Meeting District Credit Renoirements 4 3 1 12 6 1 9 Opportunity for Professional Advancement 1 2 0 3 4 0 7 The Availability of a Professional Library 0 1 1 0 2 1 3 The Interest 0 Parents Positiueness i the School atmosphere The Influence central Administrators Viettations to C! 1 hf' School ss’ Buildings T Antlicabzl service I he i in lassroon Use 0 E Toe Teachers’ interest; f fa of ”3’ (r 043 ‘5 ya Table El icont'di 0 0 (A, 0 Pa' 0 0 p; P-3 Table E2 Neig-te: and Cumntlatiue Scores Use: to Analyze the Ranking of Growth~$timulating Factors be the Princioals Times Mentioned as Hg‘ghteo Scores Growth-Stimulating 1&6 : k times 3 .Jn.:et: Factors Host Second-Host Third-Host 2 = x times 2 Scores . . , . .Vfi Influential Influengial Influential : = x times 1 , S .. ,va , (a | (Z i (3 l The Influence of the Printioal E 3 4 18 6 4 23 The Teacners' Own Eesire to Bros 2 2 3 6 4 3 13 =a'tzcitatzon in Curriculum innovation 2 3 1 6 4 1 ‘1 The .nfluence o‘ Btner Teachers h 5 3 0 6 3 9 The Gaazlabilztr Heatingful Inseruice 2 1 1 6 2 l 3 Resoond:ng to Students‘ Needs 1 2 1 3 4 1 8 Meeting District {redit Requirements 2 0 0 6 0 0 E ‘oeztiueness in The School Atmosohe'e l 0 0 3 0 D 3 ODDortunito for Professxonal Advancement 0 l 0 0 2 0 2 Uisitations to Other Schools/ Buildings 0 1 0 0 2 0 2 The Aooiicabilito of Inseruice to Classroom Use 0 1 0 0 2 0 2 Table [3 Heighted and Cummulative Scores Used to Analyze the Ranking of Growth-Stimulating Factors by the Teachers vé Times Hentioned as weighted Scores ETOJID’SZlmulatlhg 100 = X times 3 {u3415t3" Factors host Second~hoet Third-host 2 . = 1 times 2 Scores :1 . .-‘ ' 1 t ..I ‘70 - 4 In .uegtiai Influegéia. In.luegé... o — X times i (1‘ I (2' ) (3 l The In‘luence of other TeaChere 9 5 13 27 16 13 SE The Influence of the Princzoal ’ 3 11 21 16 11 43 Respnn33ng to Students Needs 3 7 0 27 14 3 41 Particzcetion in Curriculum Innovation ‘ 6 4 21 12 4 37 The Teacnere own Desire to Grow 5 5 3 15 10 3 25 The avazlaoilitv of heaningful Inservice 2 4 T 6 8 7 21 Oooortunitv for Salary Increase 4 4 1 12 E 1 21 Meeting District Credit Requirements 2 3 1 f 6 1 13 Opportunity for Professional Advancement 1 1 0 3 2 0 S The Availability of a Professional Library 0 1 1 0 2 1 3 T she Intere=‘ arents -‘ a T Ehe influe" rentra‘ .q‘e A & eta"? ‘ .fllEt'EtO r: 7 v he: . TEBCW Y: Q iflté79:° .\E o; ‘ our 0 .) pa Ia" la! Tabl " e L5 icont'd i 0 [i '4‘ .“n Hezgntec an: Cummcletzvs .-c ' able E4 of Broutn-Suooo'ting Factors bv tne Interviewees es Used to analvze the Ranking Times Mentioned as N ‘gnted Scores Growth-Stimulating 1r 8 x times 3 Esm:;et: 6 Factors Vest Second-fies: Third-Most 2', 8 X times 2 Scores r'Lus£;;a. Influegé;a1 Intlue;éial 3 ‘ = 1 times 1 (1") i2 , i3 ) Encouragement by the Frzczioai 13 14 12 54 26 12 94 Encouragement b. Ctner Teacners 14 12 9 42 24 9 7S See.n; Results ir tne c.assrcoe 14 11 2 42 22 2 66 Recezvin; =cs:t;-e Feecaaci from Parents 1 4 9 3 8 9 is The Teachers’ Own iatisfaCtion with Tnezr G'outh S 2 0 15 4 0 1? The Availabzlitv of Grants/Funds for Use in Brouing 3 3 3 9 6 3 19 The Availaailitv of Meaningful Inservice 2 3 1 6 6 1 13 Opportunity for Salary Increase 1 3 1 3 6 1 10 Participation in Curriculum Innovation 1 2 0 3 4 0 7 Earned Degrees/ Credits 2 0 1 6 0 1 F The Availabilitv of Materials/Eouioment to Try New Things Recognition of a Continued Need to Brow A Professzonal Groutn Orientation bv the Eistrict The Excitement of Students Over Nee Things Tried Oocortunitv to 55379 H) Th Colleagues The Availabilitv of Release Time The Availabilitv of a Professional Library The Donortunitv for Professional Adv BFIC‘HM'FI T Positive Feedback From the School Secretarv Media Coverage of New Things Tried Recognition by Central Ministrators [i [i (i 0 [i 0 Table E4 (cont’d) pa '4’ h.‘ C3 to '4.) h. h) .,. 0' e_ n '_l‘ (a) La] pa p:- Heighted and Cummulative Scores Used to An Table E5 of Growth-Suooorting Factors hv tne Princioals 0‘... Gav; e the Ranking Times Mentioned as weighted Scores Growth-Stimulating 1;; z 1 time; 3 c-r,,gg Factors Most Second-Most Third-Most 2:6 8 X times 2 Score: Influegtial Influenézal Influential 3' = X times 1 . -\ P A i1 3 (c’ ) (a I Encouragement b: the Drincioal 10 1 3 31 2 3 E Encouragement be Other Teachers 1 1 4 3 2 4 9 The Availabilitv oi Grants/Fence for Use in Growing 1 I 0 3 6 0 3 The evailaailitu of Meaningful IOSPTVICE 1 1 0 3 2 O 5 Seeing Results in the Classroom 1 0 1 3 0 1 4 A ProfesSional Brouth Orientation D? the District 0 1 1 0 2 1 3 Tne Availabilitv of Materialstouipment to Twila.- Things 0 1 1 0 2 1 3 Recognition of a Continued Need to Crow 0 1 1 0 2 1 3 Earned Degrees! Credits 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 Receiving positive Feedback from Parents 0 1 0 0 2 0 2 Opportunitv to Share with Colleagues (.2 _;' Sal 1' A. -.‘ ‘ ' .ne ~ao.1afilsITL or neiease Time Farttcitatior in Curriculum Innovation (i a.‘ *a Ie' ‘C C.‘ [i B) h! [i [i (i "j to en *5 Table E6 Reignteo and Cummclative Scores Used to Analvze the Ranking o‘ Eroutn-Suooc'ting Factors b» the Teachers Tznes Mentionec as He;gtted Scores firgat‘-Eilf.litlfig 1;; = x times 3 tut.;s.i Fsztrrs Most Second-Most Third-Most 2', = A times 2 Ecrtes . . . .. . .. . - u , .. influential intiuestzai ln°;ceté:a. : = > times 1 St ,.nu ,.r _ (l 1 i2 J [5 , E'coursoeo'ert :-. Other Teachers 13 11 S 39 22 E 65 Seein: Results it the Classrtnn 13 11 1 39 2; 1 Enthragemett or tne Rrincioal 9 12 3 2? £4 * The Teacr-e's' 04' Satisfaction with Their Growth 5 2 C 15 4 0 Positive Feedbazt from Parents 1 3 9 3 6 9 The Availabilitu of Grants/Funds for Use in Growing 2 0 3 6 o 5 The hcailability 0T HGifllhgful Inservice 1 2 1 3 4 1 3 Opportunity for Salary Increase 1 2 1 3 4 1 Participation in Curriculum Innovation 1 1 0 3 2 0 Earned Degrees/ Credits 1 0 1 3 0 1 'J! The Excitement of Students Over New Things Tried The Availabilitt o‘ Materialstcuipment to Try New Things Teachers Recognizec Continued need to Grou Availabilitv of a Professional leYiTV Oooortunitv to Share Ulth Colleagues A Professional Gtouth Orientation be the District The Availability of Release Tine Oooortunitv for Professional Advancement Feedback from the School Secretary Recognition by CQFTTYIT‘L Administrators [i [i [i 0 Table E6 (cont’di .) 0 pa (.0 [i [i [i (i [‘0 M [i pa 5) ..‘ ya .u. LIST 01" REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES Allport, C. v. (1955) Becoming. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. . (1961) Patterns and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. . (l97h) "Personality and social encounter.” In S. B. Anderson, et al. Encyclopedia of educational evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Blatt, B. (1980). "The emperor would rather get it over with." In Professional development: Providing leadership for staff development and inservice education. (No Editor listed). Syracuse, New York: NCSSIE, 15-20. Boy, A. V. 5 Pine, G. J. (1971). Expanding the self -- Personal growth for teachers. Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown Company, Publishers. Brookover, V. a Lezotte, L. V. (1979). Changes in school charac- teristics coincident with changes in student achievement. East Lansing, Michigan: Institute for Research on Teaching. M. 8. U. Burden, P. R. (1980). Teachers' perceptions of the characteris- tics and influences on their personal and professional de- velopment. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: lo. ED 198 08?) Cohen, H. D. 5 March, J. G. (l9Th). Leadership and ambiguitz. New York: McGraw Hill. Combs, A. W. (1965). The professional education 2f teachers -- a perceptual view of teacher preparation. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. . (1981) what the future demands of education. Phi Delta Kappan fig, 369-372. . a Soper, D. W. (1957). The self, its derivative terms and research. Journal of Individual Psycologz lg, lBh-lhs Combs, A. U.; Soper, D. U.; Gooding, C. T.; Benton, J. A.; Dick- man, J. r. s Usher, 3. a. (1969). Florida studies in the helping professions. Gainesville, Florida: University of Florida Press. University of Florida Social Science Mono- graph No. 37. 200 201 Corwin, R. G. a Edelfelt, R. A. (1978). The limits of local control over education, Section 1: Citizen participation at the local level. In T. E. Andrews and B. L. Bryant (Eds.) Perspectives on organisations -- Schools in the larger social order. Washington, D. C.: AACTE. 3-2h. Edelfelt, R. A. a Johnson, M. (Eds.). (1975) Rethinking in- service education. Vashington, D. C.: Rational Education Association. Edmonds, R. R. (1977). Search for effective schools; The iden- tification and analysis of city schools that are instruc- tionally effective for poor children. (ERIC Document Re- production Service: Ro. ED 1&2 610). Fair, J. V. (1975). Teachers as learners: The learning projects of beginning elementary school teachers. Doctoral disser- tation. University of Toronto, (From Dissertation Abstracts International 1975 32. Abstract No. 5759A). Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental con- ceptualization. American Educational Research Journal §. 207.226. Gardner, J. W. (196k). Self—renewal: The individual and the in- novative society. New York: Harper and Row. Hatfield, R. C. a Ralston, S. (1978). Professional sssessment and development. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Teacher Educators. Las Vegas, levada. Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. lew fork: world Publishers. 3011!. M. L. (1977). A conceptual framework for personal-pro- fessional growth; Implications for inservice education. A Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University. . a Blackman, C. A. (1981). Building a conceptual frame- work for professional development. Action in Teacher Edu- cation 3 (1). 1-10. Howsam, R. B. (1963). Teacher evaluation: Facts and folklore. The Rational Elementary School Principal g; (2). 7-17. Joyce, B. a Mcxibbin, M. (1982). Teacher growth states and school environments. Educational Leadership 22 (2), 36-h1. Joyce, B. a Showers, B. (1983). Power in staf£ development through research on trainigg. Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. 202 Kelley, R. E. (1976). A comparative study of professionally re- lated learning projects of secondary school teachers. Unpub- lished master's thesis. Cornell University. 1976 (cited in Tough, 1978, 256). Macagnoni, V. M. (1979). Coming to terms with curriculum as a human agenda. In R. V. Overly (Ed.) Lifelon learnin : A human agenda. Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. 155-151. Mai, R. P. (1981). The advisory approach as a form of profes— sional growth. In K. R. Howey, R. Bents, a D. Corrigan (Eds.) School-focused inservice: Descriptions and discussions. Res- ton, Virginia: ATE. 123-1h2. Maslow, A. H. (197k). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row. McCatty, C. (1976). Patterns of learning proJects among physical and health education teachers. Reporting classroom research 2 (2). Toronto: Ontario Educational Research Council. 7-3. Miller, Nancy L. (1977). Teachers and non-teaching professionals as self-directed learners. Unpublished master's thesis. Cor- nell University, 1977 (cited in Tough, 1978, p. 256). Newman, K. K. (1979). Middle-aged experienced teachers' percep- tions of their career development (A Study). Houston, Texas. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: lo. ED 171-697) ; Burden, P. R. I Applegate, J. H. (1980). Helping teachers examine their long-range development. Paper presented at the annual meeting of ATE. Washington, D. C. (ERIC Document Repro- duction Service: lo. ED 20h 321). Penland, P. R. (1976). Learning patterns of librarian clients. Unpublished manuscript. University of Pittsburg. (ERIC Doc- ument Reproduction Service: Ho. ED 128 016). Perry, R. H. (1980). The organinational/environmental variables in staff development. Theory Into Practice i2. 256-261. Peters, J. M. a Gordon, S. (1973). Adult learning proJects: A study of adult learning in urban and rural Tennessee. (A study). Knoxville, Tennessee. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: lo. ED 102 331). Rogers, C. R. (1971). What it means to become a person. In L. F. 8. latalicio e C. F. Hereford (Eds.) The teacher as a person (2nd Ed.) Dubuque, Iowa: Um. C. Brown Company. 59-Th. 203 Rubin, L. J. (1978). Some postulations and principles on the continuing professional development of teachers. The inserv- ice education of teachers;;- Trends, processes and prescrip— tions. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 293-303. . (1971). Teacher growth in perspective. Improving in- service education -- Proposals and procedures for chang_. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 2F5-261. Scott, w. p.; Meyer, J. w.; a Deal, T. (1980). Technical and institutional orgpnizations. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univer- sity. Shaw,, S. M. (197h). Teachers in transition: The need for free- dom within. Education 22 (2). lho-lhh. Tough, Allen (1978). Major learning efforts: Recent research and future directions. Adult Education gg. 250-263. Vroom, V. H. (196h). work and motivation. New York: Wiley. weick, K. E. (1982). Administrating education in loosely-coupled schools. Phi Delta Kappan 6;. 673-676. -------‘