AN ANALYSES (2F SELECTED. COST-QUALITY FACTORS IN EDUCATLGN AS RELATED TO SELECTED SCHOOL DESTRIC’E’S IN MICMGAN Thesis for The Degree of Ed. D. MICHWAN STATE UNWERSITY Norman P. Weinheimer 1964 11-1135 This is to certify that the thesis entitled AN ANALYSIS OF SELECTED COST-QUALITY FACTORS IN EDUCATION AS RELATED TO SELECTED SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN MICHIGAN presented by NORMAN P. WEINHE IMER has been accepted towards fulfillment ..;, of the requirements for w; 44‘, 24. 42 -4, Major professor »——.—— ih..— 4 Due MAY 28, 1964 0.169 LIBRARY Michigan State University AN ANALYSIS OF SELECTED COST-QUALITY FACTORS IN EDUCATION.AS RELATED TO SELECTED SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN MICHIGAN by Norman P. weinheimer AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Administration and Higher Education 1964 ," 7 ' 4 / / :Z/ / Approved: A/Lzé;1éa fl£l2£i ; ABSTRACT AI ANALYSIS OF SELECTED COST-QUALITY FACTORS INZEDUCATION'AS RELATED TO SELECTED SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN.MICHIGAN by NOrman P. weinheimer PURPOSE OF STUDY The major purpose of this study was to compare high and low expenditure K-12 school districts with selected quality-related factors which had heen used in previous studies or generally assumed to have a direct or indirect effect on the quality of education in public schools. DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY The study was limited in scope and was confined to six selected x-iz school districts found in oakland, .nacoib, and wayne Counties of the State of Michigan. These counties represented seventy-nine school districts and almost onedhalf of the student population (824,112) in the state. The three highest expenditure per pupil school districts and three lowest expenditure per pupil (3) Norman P. weinheimer school districts fulfilling comparable community and school characteristics were chosen. Thirty-one of the more promising quality- related factors for education were used. PIDCEDURE l. The basic data for the study were deriied from the annual statistical reports to the Michigan Department of Public Instruction for 1962-1963, answers to a questionnaire returned to the writer from three hundred four teachers, the United States census report of 1960, and the 1962-63 reports filed with the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. 2. The statistical method deemed appropriate for examining the differences of the selected factors among the six selected school districts varied according to the data. The chi-square (or x2) method of analysis was used for the data related to teacher and community characteristics. The T-test was used to compare the high and low expenditure per pupil districts. (4) Norman P. Weinheimer The Mann~Whitney U test and the Kolomorov- Smirnov two-sample test were used to compare per pupil cost factors. 3. All chiusquare, T-test, and the Mann-Whitney U test scores were assumed to have a significant difference if they were in the .05 level of significance. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The following general conclusions were reached; A 1. This study of selected Michigan schools agrees only inpart with the earlier studies which had located possible cost-quality related education factors. 2. A school district's level of support to education does not always assure that all of the presently accepted quality-related factors in education 'will be attained. 3. The factors of quality in education need to be more refined for better identification. From an analysis of the results of the present (5) Norman P. weinheimer study, the following several more specific conclusions resulted: l. The factors pertaining to personnel including such items as length of teaching experience, level of training, areas of teaching competence and salaries paid show a positive sensitivity to level of expenditure for education in the selected Michigan schools studied. This compared favorably with A previous studies. C l 2. The class size criteria and level of support which were used extensively in previous studies were feund to be measures with considerable sensitivity in the.Michigan schools studied. 3. Although previous studies pertaining to the staff indicated that the amount of domestic and foreign travel, literary and professional interest.-and the origin of the staff were positively related to quality and the expenditure level, there were no significant differences between the high and low expenditure Michigan districts studied. 4. The study of the community characteristics of income level. education level, school age children not in school. mobility of population, and percentage of (6) Norman P. weinheimer native - foreign born population when compared with the level of support for education showed a notable reversal from previous studies. 5. The budgetary areas of dollar expenditure, for. the most part, supported the previously identified patterns in earlier studies. The trend was that, as the dollar costs are increased in the high expenditure districts, the percents of the budgeting item. as compared with the total budget, did not necessarily increase proportionately. AI'AIABYSIS OP SELECTED COST-QUALITY FACTORS IN EDUCATION AS RELATED TO SELECTED SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN MICHIGAN by 63 Norman Pi‘weinheimer A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Administration and Higher Education 1964 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This page is more difficult to write than any other in the dissertation. It is impossible to name the many friends and colleagues who have helped, encouraged and made contributions to this study. Certainly specific mention at this time should be given to the doctoral advisory committee composed of Dr. Stanley Hacker, Chairman, Dr. Fred Vescolani, the man responsible for my enrolling at Michigan State University, Dr. Carl Gross, and Dr. John Useem, all who gave unstintingly of their time to inspire and guide this dissertation. Grateful appreciation is also extended: to Dr. Nilber B. Brookover, Dr. J. F. Thaden, and Mr. William Darnell for their suggestions and guidance concerning the theoretical framework. data treatment and statistical analysis of the study, to Dr. Lynn Bartlett, State Superintendent of Public Instruction and members of his staff for their help and interest: ii to Mr. and Mrs. George Weinheimer, parents, Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth Knott, friends, members of the Highland Park Board of Education, the administrative staff of the Highland Park Schools, and Mrs. Evelyn Burger who gave the needed encouragement, to the secretaries and typists who labored carefully and diligently with the various correspondence and manuscript. Finally, the writer is deeply indebted to his ‘wife, Joyce, and our children, Kathy, Diane, and Pam. Without their inspiration, sympathetic understanding and constant encouragement this study would not have been completed. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page AWNTS e e e o o e e e e e 11 Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . 1 Need for the Study . . . . . 1 Statement of the Prdblem . . . 5 Definition of Terms . . . . . 5 Procedures . . . . . . . . 9 Delimitation of Study . . . . 11 Organization of the Study . . . 12 Summary . . . . . . . . . 13 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . 15 Delimiting the References . . . 15 Early Studies of Cost-Quality Factors . . . . . . y. . 16 Implications of Later Cost-Quality Studies of Education . . . 23 Later Studies Pertaining to’ Expenditure Level . . . . 34 Summary of Related Literature . . 50 III. PLANNING AND CONDUCTING THE STUDY . . 53 Determining the School Diétricts to be Studied . . . . . . 53 Preliminary and School District Determination . . . . . . 55 The School District . . . 55 The schools . . . . . 57 The Community . . . . . 64 Other Determinant Factors of Social and Economic Characteristics of Selected Districts . . . . . . . 66 iv Chapter Defining the Criteria to be Measured and Conducting the Research . . . . . . The Teacher . . . . . The Student . . . . . The Community . . . . . Analysis of School Budgets. Summary . . . . . . . . . IV. ANALYSIS OF SELECTED CRITERIA . . e la The Staff 0 e e e e e e A. Length of Experience of ' Teaching Staff . . . B. Teaching Experience Prior to Present Employment. C. Level of Education of Professional Staff . D. Recency of Receiving Bachelor's Degree . . E. Recency of Receiving Master's Degree . . F. Number of Areas of Professional Competence to Teach 7-12 Grade Staff . . G. Experienced Teachers vs. Recency of Additional Education . . . . H. Origin of Staff . . . . 1. Domestic and Foreign Travel . . . . . J. Literary Interests . . . Ki Age of Staff . . . . . L. Salary of High school Staff . . . . . . Page 68 71 75 76 77 78 79 81 82 86 87 92 95 97 99 101 106 110 120 122 Chapter 2. Selected Pupil-Staff and . . Physical Plant Characteristics . . . . . Pupil-Teacher Ratio (Grades K-6) . . . Pupil-Teacher Ratio (Grades 7-12) . . . Pupil-Teacher Ratio (Grades K‘g) e e e PupildTeacher Ratio (Grades 10-12) . . . High-School Pupils per High School Counselor. Library Books per Pupil (Grades 10-12) . . . High-School Membership Seated-Not Seated in Library . . . . . High School Library , Facilities . .. . . 3. Selected Quantitative A. C. Community Characteristics. Family Income (Above-Below $3000) . Pimi ly Income (Above-Below $10,000). Educational Level (Above- Below Seventh Grade) 25 Years and Older, All Residents _. . . Educational Level-uMales, 25 Years and Older (Above-Below Seventh ere) e e e _e e Educational Level-Pemalea 25 Years and Older (Above-Below Seventh Grade) e e e e 0 vi Pig. 123 125 126 127 127 128 129 130 130 131 132 133 135 136 136 Chapter Page F. .Educational Level, 25 Years and Older (Above-Below‘Twelfth Grade) - . . . . . 137 G. 14-17 Year Olds . (In-Not In) School . 139 H. .Mdbility of Population . 140 I. Native-Foreign Born 141 4. Analysis of Budgetary Areas of Expenditure . .‘ . . . 142 Administration . . . 145 Instruction . . . . 146 Operation .’ . . . 147 Maintenance Costs . . .148 Fixed Charges . . . 149 Auxiliary Services . 150 Summary . . . . . . . . . 151 ‘V. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND . RECOMMENDATIONS A. . . . . . 153 I. Statement of Prdblem . . . 153 II. Evaluation of Relationship . 153 The Staff--In Summary . . 154 Pupil Ratio Characteristics . . . 166 Community Characteristics. '170 Budgetary Areas of Expenditure .. .. . . 177 III. Conclusions and Implications . 182 IV. Recommendations and Suggestions for Future Research . . . . . . 184 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPH! . . . . . . . . 187 vii Chapter Page ”Pme A o O o 0 0 O 0 0 O O O O 198 Related Data n’.“ B O O O O O O o O o o O O 206 Copies of Correspondence and Questionnaire Forms viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Need For The Study Statements such as "School Districts are spending more in 1962-63 to educate a single child than ever before in their history . . . how much to educational betterment?"l have become commonplace. Over the past few years the public has often been reminded that adequate finances must accompany demands for better education. But, as West2 has said, it is becoming more and more difficult to sustain interest in the school "emergency" of ill-equipped classrooms and underpaid teachers. It appears that school authorities need to have a more clearly developed concept of the communities' environmental expectations as well as the quality of the educational offering of their schools' programs. lThe National Cost of Education Index 1962-1963, 333% Management, Vol. 7, No. 1, January 1963, p. 98. 2Allen M. West. "Paying for Schools is Everybody's Business." Research Bulletin 38, p. 4. Washington: NBA, December 1960, p. 109. 2 In the face of recent resistance on the part of the purchaser of education, namely the taxpayer, as noted by an increasing number of newspaper stories indicating failure of extradmillage elections for additional school monies, the old cliche that ”more money means better education“ may have to be proven in more detail and to the greater satisfaction of the taxpayer. Research conducted by the National Education Association indicates that ”The achievement of ndnimum standards of quality in public education will cost $720 per pupil for current expense by l970-at present we are spending less than $400 per pupil."1 Educators are constantly searching for something called “quality" in school programs. With the complexity of expectations the role the schools are called upon to play in a dynamic society, there seems to be considerable agree- ‘ment among lay persons and professionals that there is no one kind of educational program Which is the panacea of all programs. Since ours is a changing society, there also is considerable agreement that no school program can or should be viewed as a constant but rather a changing phenomena. 1 NBA Research Bulletin, A Minimum Standard of Quality Education, Vol. 40, No. 4, December 1962, p. 99. 3 Since the days of the first launching of an outer space probe by a foreign power, there has been much concern regarding the adequacy and effectiveness of American education. There are great numbers of people Who are askingg "Are we getting our monies' worth?"3 "Is the educational program a quality program?”3 “Is there room for improvement?“. Because of the very nature of the educational function as a public enterprise in the United States, it is a very complex undertaking. Due to this complexity, some have accepted this as a rationale to provide little effort to scientifically improve education, basing decisions solely upon opinion. There are others who believe education to be too complex to permit measurement or too subjective to have the consideration of quality to be of any practical value. There appears to be some truth in all the views. Over the past fifty years there have been many persons who have attempted scientifically to develop concepts of educational quality. It also appears that at this point in the scientif- ic analysis of the education function, the perfect workable concept of educational quality cannot be defined in one simple effort or by one simple formula. In Michigan, as in other states, there is much concern 4 over the equality of educational opportunity available to all the children of the state. Yet there are differential levels of support for education in the many school districts which, on the surface, would appear to place limitations on the educational opportunities afforded youngsters of those school districts. There are also many instances of utterances on public record which have directly claimed, or implied that districts with low expenditures per pupil are able to provide as good or better educational programs as the high expenditure per pupil districts. Since there has_boen little or no scientific research pertaining directly to the validity of statements such as these as they apply to llichigan, the writer cannot refute nor accept them as fact. In essence, this brings us to search for facets of possible quality as related to cost factors in education. Although this study will be limited to selected school districts in Hidhigan,.it may be of such a nature as to set the pattern for like studies in other school districts having similar interests. Because of the scape and varied expectations of public education, the complexity, subjectivity, and variety of educational quality factors, there is little opportunity for one study such as this to identify all the factors which may S or may not have an observable effect on the quality of educa- tion. It is heped that this study may advance some small part of the search. Obvious limitations must be set as to the parts of the total educational function studied, the geographical universe used in the research, and the period of time for which data are gathered. Statement of the Problem 0n the basis of an exhaustive search of the available research and allied literature, the investigator found that there had been much effort expended on behalf of researchers and recognized authorities to locate possible quality- related factors for education, yet no study had been made which compared some of these assumed factors of quality to .Michigan school systems, especially in districts of high and low levels of financial support. More specifically, this study seeks to make a statistical comparison of selected quantitative characteristics related to quality in selected school districts of historically consistent differential expenditures per pupil. Definition of Terms There are many terms used in education which through 6 common usage have several meanings and interpretations, some of which may be peculiar to a locale, a county, or a state. .In order to clarify pertinent terms for the reader and limit their interpretation to this study, the following defini= tions are presented. Public Schools: Public schools refer to the Michigan public elementary and secondary schools in school districts maintaining grades kindergarten through twelfth financed by local, state, and federal monies under the direction of a locally-elected board of education. School Districts: A school district is a quasi- municipal corporation created by the state legislature for the purpose of operating public schools. The boundaries of school districts are not necessarily co-terminus with other governmental unit boundaries. Board of education or school boards A group of seven or more persons elected for a specified term of office, usually four years, by the qualified electors of a school district. The board of education is delegated by the state legislature and state statute the responsibility of operating the educational program in the school district. Public school finance systems The total revenue and disbursement system utilized by the local district to support its kindergarten through twelfth grade educational program. sat. in or. ‘8 The di stributiom of state monies by state agencies for the support of public schools. gigancial abi it 2 The state equalized valuation of a school district (SEV) expressed in dollars divided by the total resident membership. Resident membership: Those students attending school in the district in which they reside. Ion-resident memberships Those students attending public school in districts other than those in which they reside. In some areas of.flichigan this practice prevails when the local school district does not offer a high school program. The potential high school student must then attend a high school in a neighboring district on a tuition basis. gigancial ggpenditure: The per-pupil expenditure for the operation of the schools, excluding nonies spent for debt retirement funds, building and site funds: and capital outlay. revolving funds, and transportation costs disbursed from the general fund. State eggalized valuations The final appraisal of the worth of the real and personal property in the school district for tax purposes as determined by the State Tax Commission. Administrator, school administrator, or superintendent of schools: Chief executive officer in a school district elected by a board of education to carry out the policies and provide leadership for the educational function of the school district. Quality: This is discussed at length elsewhere. Simply, it means the degree of excellence achieved by a specific variable on a specific scale. Class size or pgpil-teacher ratio: Generally, this is the total membership of a district divided by the number of certified employees of the district. The two teams are used interchangeably in related literature but often refer to different data.1 Staffing adgggggz: .neasures the same factor as class size. usually expressed in literature as number of teacher certified employees per 1000 pupils. In most research the pupil count is weighted into staffing units. Staffing units: This is the formula for weighting ‘— 1Williams. Vincent, Bernard H. chenna, and Austin D. Swanson. “The Question of Class Size." m Escarch Bulletin, I, 1, October 1960, pp. 1-4. 9 membership to determine staff adequacy. Secondary membership is multiplied by 1.3.1 I Procedures The following are the main points and steps of the procedures of this study. 2g;;; .Most of the basic data of this study are derived from the annual reports for the 1961-62 school year as submitted to the nichigan Department of Public Instruction. Other pertinent information not available by present known reporting practices has been obtained by personal interview or by means of questionnaires submitted directly to school districts and the personnel involved. ggyiew’of Ligergpgge: Following wide reading in the field of educational edninistration and school finance, pertaining to quality factors in education, the basic problem*was determined and then refined in the study design. Although there has literally been thousands of pages written abeet‘quality education, the presentation of the review'of the literature was confined to thoseareas which appeared to be nest pertinent in.developing the thesis of this study. In other words, the writer found there was an abundance of insurice A. Lehman. “The Fortunes oflducational 8nppert.‘ ;An Research Bulletin, v01. 2, so. 3. Teachers College, Columbia University, April 1962, pp. 507. 10 material written about ”quality in education,“ but usually of so generalized a nature that there was a limited approach to specific measurements of quality. Selection of the school districts: This study will concern itself with six school districts of different per- pupil expenditure levels. It was the major purpose of this study to make a statistical comparison of possible selected quantitative characteristics usually related to quality in school districts having a history of high or low perupupil expenditure. An extensive study of the differential expendi- ture per pupil as found in.nichigan school districts was made. Since the known variable is difference in expenditure per pupil, great care was taken to assure consistency within acceptable limits, relative to enrollments, growth trends, location. level of income of constituents, ethnic background. and kinds and amounts of community services and facilities available. .A more comprehensive development of the criteria used is given in Chapter III. Selection of financial and educational factors related to Quality: 43fter considerable reading. and several consultations with finance experts and professors of educational administration and school finance at Michigan State university, a rather comprehensive list of criteria n pertaining to financial factors and educational factors was developed. These have been refnned and are also submitted in later chapters. gnalysiss The purpose of this thesis was to make a statistical comparison of certain selected quantitative characteristics which appeared to be related to quality. Due to the great variety of factors involved, it is with apology that the writer asks the reader to forego an explanation until Chapter 3 where mmch time is spent in developing and justifying the procedures used. However, it will suffice to say that in addition to those criteria suggested by consultants at Michigan State University, some of the criteria which showed greatest promise as a measure of quality in previous studies were also used in this study. Delimitation of Study This study is delimited in the following wayss 1. Because the universe of approximately 532 twelve- grade school districts in.Michigan with many known differences would make a comprehensive study in depth impractical, this study was limited to six selected Michigan school districts which may or may not reflect any great number of similar characteristics to be found in the other districts not studied. 12 2. This study treats only selected financial and educational factors: thus it is intended to be comprehensive only as it relates to these selected factors. 3. Some of the statistical information is based on what is happening at a given point on the continuum of time. In a dynamic society such as ours, projections of current statistics and findings today may or may not be relevant in the future. School programs are continually changing from year to year: there is diversity among districts, and varying influences found among different communities tend to cloud an objective analysis of any one facet affecting quality. Research should be objective to meet its definition, while the term ”educational quality" carries a subjective connotation. Further, it is guite Obvious to educators, as the committee on Tax Education and School Finance has stated, that I'except for knowledge and skills, instruments for measuring the outcomes of education are either nonexistent or are far from refined.'1 Organization of the Study This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter II. presents a review of the literature relating to this study. 1Committee on Tax Education and School Finance, "The Prdblem of Cost-Quality Relationship in Public Education.” (washingtons National Education Association, 1956) p. 8. 13 The chapter alludes to some of the basic concepts deve10ped by other researchers which appear to have a measurable bearing on quality education. For the most part, the survey of related material will be limited to the aspect of quality education. Chapter III deals with the questionnaires, procedures, nd methods used to develop the statistics and the study design. Chapter IV presents and interprets the data. Chapter V provides the summary and conclusions of this study. Certain implications as they relate to previous studies and future studies are also mentioned. The writer has also taken the liberty to express some subjective impressions of his own. Summary The presentation, as a whole, reflects an attempt on the part of the writer to submit some of the facets Which might be conducive to the future improvement of the educa- tional function of the public schools. Objective and un- biased examination of the many facets of education and finance must be pursued in order that goals and ideals of education may be achieved. Though there have been a number 14 of studios in this direction, the answers are not all in. Consequently, the present study attenpts to contribute a little more knowledge on the subject. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Delimiting the References A description of all the studies pertaining to expend- iture and quality education would be tiring to the reader, as well as unnecessary to the understanding of the concepts developed and used herein to pursue this study. Over 350 references were investigated: many reviewed previous research. others were ef such limitation that possible implication in other situations was nearly impossible while still others dealt with considered opinion of the "experts.“ And finally, there was a great amount of material written which used education and cost-quality factors in broad general terms, picturing educational quality as being too complex and subjective to warrant the task, Judging it hope- less for an objective analysis. As stated previously, books, periodicals, and pamphlets discussed here have been purposely limited to those relevant to the present study. For the most part, only those studies that indicate a significant scientific contribution and 15 16 appear to be directly related to the factors of quality and cost as they pertain to this study will be reviewed. Often a reference mentioned will have reviewed several studies to synthesise data on a specific aspect of a school program. In these cases. only the findings will be noted. In those areas where acceptable standards of reference or procedure pertaining to an identification or evaluation of certain facets of this study have not previously been scientifically determined, only those standards of references and procedures which have been carefully established by recognized, responsible educational agencies and institutions will be used. A.partial list includes lichigan State University; Huchigan Bducation Association, letropolitan.Detroit Bureau of school Studies. nichigan Departnent of Public instruction, north central‘Association of Colleges and Secondary schools, the University of the State of new'York, Institute of Administrative Research of Colunbia‘University. and the National Bducatien.hssociation. Early Studies of Cost-Quality Factors In order that the reader may better understand the origin-anddevelopment of the great body of information and statistics currently availableon cost-quality factors of education, a brief historical overview is given. One of the first scientific inquiries into the inter- 1? relationship of expenditure level and quality of schools was 1 He ranked each state reported in 1920 by Leonard P. Ayres. according to expenditure level for education between the years 1896 and 1920. He reported a high positive correla- tion between the rank of the state on expenditure level and the percentage of school age children in school, percentage of high school age children attending high school, average length of school year, average length of school day, and the percentage of average daily attendance is of membership. Although George‘l; Frasier2 in 1922 was interested in determining the merit of fiscal financial dependence or independence of school districts in cities that have cotermin- us school district and municipal boundaries, the thesis of his study compared six factors that he believed to be ”necessary corollaries of efficient education,"3 namely: '1. The percent of sixteen and seventeen year old children in school. 2. The per cent of elementary classes having less than forty students. 1Leonard P. Ayres. An Index number for State School §xg§§!§,(lew'YOrk: Russell Sage Foundation, 1920). p. 54. ZGeorge‘w. Frasier. The Control of City School m1 (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Company. 1922), pp. 21-85. , 3Ibid.. p. 84. 18 3. The per cent of children who have sixty square feet or more playground space. 4. The per cent of teachers who have six or more years training above 8th grade. 5. The per cent of children enrolled who attend school all day in adeq: ate buildings. 6. The per cent of increased cost of living from l9l3=14 to 1919-20 that was met by increased salaries for elementary women teachers.“ According to his conclusions, a fiscally independent school system had a better chance to achieve success than one in which the finances are in the hands of the city government. However, the importance of Frasier's findings for this study is not the conclusions he drew'but rather the assumptions he made in4drnwing his conclusions. one assumed that greater expenditure per pupil proved greater school efficiency and a better chance to achieve success by assuming that the six factors were measures of success. Both assumptions, although greatly refined, are still used as some of the basic elements of study.for cost-quality factors. Paul Rt Mort, who was later to become one of the out- standing authorities en cost quality education, as early as 19 19241 defined a foundation program under a state and local cost-sharing plan which developed the concept of adaptability for (unlity in education. His concept of ”adaptability,"* which he defined ”as one definition of quality“2 and its measurement became one of the major items of Dr. Mort's life- time work, as evidenced by the more than twenty articles under his own authorship, his contributing articles to other studies and reports, and his influence on the.Metropolitan School Study Council of Teachers College, Columbia university. 2 Another authority in the area of school finance, John K. Norton, studied state expenditure patterns for educa- tion. He found that states with higher expenditures per pupil had higher teachers' salaries, better trained teachers, more adequate school buildings, more instructional resources, more school time and fewer dropouts.3 g tAdaptability also was defined as ”the capacity of an institution to take on better practices and discard outmoded ones. . 1Paul R. Mort. Measurement of Educational Need (new York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1924), p. 254.‘ 2Donald H. Ross. Administration for Adaptability (lew”Yorks Metropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958), po 24. 2John K. Norton. The Ability of the States to Suppgrt £§2§2§;9n_ (Washington: National Education Association. 1926), pp. l=136o 20 In 1933, two significant studies appeared in print, one by Orrin Powell.l the other by Paul Mort.2 Powell's study sampled one-teacher schools in New'YOrk State. Using standardized achievement tests and factoring out mental ability, he found that high expenditure sdhools fifth grade students scored 18 years ahead of their peers in the low expenditure schools. The greatest measurable difference was noted in the areas of spelling, arithmetic, histcry, and civics. At the same time, a New Jersey Governor's Commission under the directorship of Mort was conducting a similar study in selected New'Jersey schools of high, medium, and low expenditure levels per pupil. This study found that as the level of support increased, the staff quality, administrative and supervisory services, school buildings, instructional techniques, variety of course offerings and provisions for special services were increased. In 1934, Mort reported on another similarly structured 1Orrin 3. Powell. Educational Returns at Varying Expanditure Levels (lew'IOrks Teachers College, Columbia University. 1933). 2Paul R..Hort (Director). Reconstgggtig; 9f the §ystem of Public Support in the State of new'Jersey, Report of the Governor's Sohool Survey Commission, 11, (Trenton: The Commission, 1933) pp. 26-28. sample of schools inMaine.l He found a positive correla= tion between school plant adequacy, teachers' instructional practices and techniques, scope of school program, extent of student health services available, and level of support. Two hundred forty-nine Kentucky schools were analyzed by Thomas Ferrell,2 who used six quality-related items to gain a composite score for each school district. He found a .92 correlation between staff qualifications, holding power of pupils, staff adequacy, length of school term, and level of support for county schools, and .77 for graded schools. In 1938, Grace and Moe,3 in a sample study of fortya three schools in New York, refined the cost-quality relationships by compensating for the factor of variable population density. They also found in their study that 1Paul R. Mort. “The Financing of the Public Schools of Maine.“ Rersrt_o£.a Surve o£.8tete.an§.noealm$u~s It of Public Schools (Augusta, Maine: School Finance Commission, 1934), pp. 64-97. 2Thomas Ferrell. ”Relation Between Current Expendi- tures and Certain Measures of Educational Efficiency in Kentucky County and Graded School Systems,” George Peabody College for Teachers, Contributions to Education #216 (Richmond, Kentucky: The Author, Eastern State Teachers College, 1937), pp. l-ll4. 3A. G. Grace and G. A. Moe. State Aid and School ggggg‘,Repgrt of the Regents Inggigy (Hew'Yorkz McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1938), pp. 327-29. 22 ”no lowuexpenditure districts achieved superior educational results." In the same year, Mort and Cornell also reported on a study of educational cost and quality, based on thirty-six Pennsylvania communities2 which was later incorporated with another Pennsylvania sample consisting of three hundred forty-four communities. The primary concern of these studies‘was to determine the relationship of educational cost and the ease with which a school system takes on new practices and techniques: hence the concept of adaptability. He found a critical point of expenditure per pupil above which figure “one could expect to find nsw'educational ideas being evolved and tried out. This was deemed the critical point of educationalinvention.“3 1A. G. Grace and G. A. Moe. State Aid and School 9253;, Report of the Regents Inquiry (new York: McGraw— Hill Book Company, 1938), p. 329. 2Paul R. Mort and Francis G. Cornell. 4kmerican Schools in Transitigp (The Pennsylvania Study), (new York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1941) pp. 167-195. 3Dsnald H. Ross, Administration fa; Adapgability (lew“!ork: Metropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958), p. 368. 23 At the same time, Grimml studied educational opportunities in relation to their cost in twenty=four elementary-school districts in Illinois. He found that high expenditure schools offered more and better physio ‘cal and health education, more extra-curricular activities, smaller classes, more opportunities in music, more books and better libraries, better trained teachers, more specialists, and better buildings. On tests of achievement, the high-expenditure schools generally exceeded the middle and lowbexpenditure schools. Implications of Later Cost-Quality Studies of Education As noted in the first chapter, during the years to come, greater demands will be made of education which will undoubtedly reflect the need for greater expenditure for it. One of the factors will be increased enrollments due to increased population and increased number of years of pupil attendance in school, while another will result from a greater demand for more services from the schools. Ifllliamin. Firman, consultant for the University of 1 Lester R. Grimm. Our Children's Qppgrtunities in Relation to School Costs (Springfield, Illinois: Illinois Education Association, Department of Research and Statistics, 1938), pp. 1—46. 24 the State of New York, in reporting for the Quality Heasurement Project has said that "one of the major prob» lens in sdhool-quality research is that of discovering community-accepted definitions of quality.'1 He further states that some people are satisfied with a school that “doesn't cost too much,"x others want a school which gives a great deal of attention to social and emotional as well as intellectual develoPmentx while still others are satis- fied when the schools' activities are limited to the basic skills or academic training for college, or technical training for a vocation.2 He uses three educational student-centered criteria for school-quality measurement, namely: (1) Basic Skills: Dominant public opinion seems to continue in the belief that the development of basic skills, the ”3 R's" must be a primary_0bjective of public school education. .(2) Individualization: Schools should offer to each student the Opportunity to develOp his own unique abilities and talents. (3) Functional Skills: Schools have a responsibility for the development of certain types of rather complex skills such as library f 1 . William D. Firman, et a1. Procedures in School finality Evaluation, Mimeographed First Draft, 1961, p. l. 21bid. p. 67. 25 research, problem solving, communication, development of personal and social value systems, and citizenship. The preliminary results of the study1 (1) indicate a relationship exists between academic gain and the socio= economic background of the community. (2) There is a strong relationship between expenditure level and the adaptability criterion. (3) Certain acquired staff characteristics are closely related to the quality criterion. (4) Community characteristics both past and present have significant effects upon quality. Yet the still unanswered questions posed by Pirman are thesez2 “Ihy are some schools better than others? Does money make a difference? How do better-trained teachers improve school quality? How do length of the school day and teaching method effect results? ‘Which of the quality- affecting variables are controllable?" It is imperative that the quest for cost-quality factors must be pushed forward. If it is possible to identify and measure factors of quality which affect educational output, it may be possible to control them to assure the taxpayer greater educational efficiency. 11bid. p. 67. ZFirman, et g, ibid. p. 67. 26 The problems mentioned above were not new. The need for a further identification of the facets of quality as a guide for expenditure for education appeared to be quite apparent when the best-financed schools twenty-two years ago (1939-40) expended six times as mmch per class~ room unit as those districts at the other end of the expenditure scale.1 Ten years later (1949-50), the highest two per cent of the nation's schools spent over $8,120 per classroom while the lowest two per cent fell below $1,470.2 It appears there may be a variance in the kind of educational programs offered in schools of such varying expenditure. Another factor of quality may be dependent upon environment or the cultural level of the community. Mort in his earlier studies recognized the need for greater depth research in this area when he commented: ' . . . adaptability is conditioned by factors in the environment which at any given time must be thought of as more or less permanent because of the inability of the 1:. K. lorton, Eugene s. Lawler. U fin Shed ggpiness in American Education (washingtonx American council on Education, 1946), p. 34. 2Clayton D. Hutchins and Albert R. Hunse. Egpgggitures for Education at the Mid-Century (washington: Cool Printing Office, 1953). 27 educational system itself to modify them.'1 Mort also indicated a need for further research on the factors of population density, average age of adults in the community as well as their racial backgrounds, attitudes toward self-government, and rate of population growth of the community. Although, in 1941, he found the most important single factor of adaptability (quality) was 2 only two current expense per weighted membership unit, other variables of the sixty-seven used approached financial support in significance: proportion of business and professional workers in the community indicated a high positive correlation to the adaptability of schools (.59) and cultural level of the community, a correlation of .59. However, the correlation between quality and the chltural level factor dropped to .22 when tax leeway and district size were removed as influences.3 _He concludes 1Paul R..uort and Francis G. Cornell. paggptgbilisx of ggblic School Systems (new'YOrks Bureau of Publica- , tions, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1938), x~x1. 2Paul R. Mort and Francis G. Cornell. American Schools in Transition (new York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1941). ”Instrument to Determine Cultural Level" as developed by: ‘William.Ai McCall and John P. Herring. McCall Educational Background Questionnaire (new’York: Laidlaw Brothers, 1936). 28 that, “it would seem that the cultural level is an accidental concomitant of size, while, on the other hand, tax leeway and cultural level are probably causally interrelated.'l Hort also found that larger school districts offered many more services with slightly higher tax rates. Expenditures correlated .536 with percentage of the community having above eighth grade education. Adaptability correlated .511 with proportion of college graduates in district.3 The program.score correlated .59 with the percentage of labor force that was involved in white collar Jobs.‘ An interesting sidelight in the Pennsylvania report showed that there was no significant correlation between staff turnover and quality.5 The average preparation of staff correlated .376 with the adaptability criterion.6 Ross, in analyzing further the Pennsylvania data, Enort and Cornell. American SChools in Transition, p. 89. 2;;id,, pp. 134-135. 3M" pp. 93-94. 4M" pp. 99-100. 5233., pp. 89. GM" pp. 163. 29 found that adaptability was closely tied to the tax- 1eeway factor.1 Districts that had greater tax leeway (and tax base) paid higher salaries and employed better qualified personnel. The tax leeway formula used by'Mort2 and developed by Knott3 projected the actual tax rate on assessed valuation to a hypothetical tax rate on true property valuation which was compared with an arbitrarily established maximum. In this manner the margin for improvement of support still left untapped was measured. Ross also found size of district and population density strongly affected quality measures. There was a negative correlation for those districts under 50 pupils in high school or in cities over 100,000 population, but between these points he felt the Mort-Cornell data supported largeness.4 1 Donald H. Ross. Administration for Adaptgbility (Hew'YOrk: Metropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958), p. 351. 21bid., pp. 152-66. 3Widnell D. Knott. "The Influence of TaxeLeeway on Educational Adaptability”(New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1939), pp. 65-66. 4 Ibid 0 ' pp 0 182-88 0 30 Hicks found a high positive relationship between quality and the schools' use of community resources.1 He also analyzed the obstacles to communication in large cities. Newell studied class size in New York City area schools. He found evidence that money spent for a combination of well-qualified staff and small-class size was more important than spending money for small class size only.2 However, Goodlad found no significant correlation between class size and pupil achievement when he made a comprehensive review of the related literature.3 The work of Pertsch supported Newell in his findings that good teachers and smaller classes tend to assure better understanding of the needs of the students.4 1Alvin‘w. Hicks. A Plan to Accelerate the Process of Adaptation in,a New Yerk City SchoolfCommunity (New'York: Ed.D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1942), pp. 74-75. 2Clarence A. Newell. Class Size and Educational Adaptability (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1943). 3John I. Goodlad.. ”Room to Live and Learn: Class Size and Room Space as Factors in the Learning-Teaching Process.“ Childhoog_Education, 30,(1954) pp. 355-61. 4Frederick Pertsch. "Some Effects of Class Size on The Educational Program in New York City Elementary Schools." The Advancing Front of Education, Eighth Yearbook (Hew'York: New’York Society for the Experimental Study of Education, 1943). 31 Strayer sampled west Virginia districts. His find- ings supported previous studieso He also found that the 138 large elementary districts studied showed that guid= ance related items were sensitive to the three expenditure levels of high, medium, and low.1 Buley2 in his study of staff characteristics of a district and their relationships to other quality related factors made some very significant contributions pertinent to this study. He found that the percentage of staff with five or more years of training correlated .58 in elementary and .39in the secondary schools.. He opined that high school teachers should continue their education every two years, elementary teachers every four years.3 He found a significant relationship between twenty-four to forty semester hours of education courses and quality at the elementary levels, with a negative relationship when the total amount of educational courses exceeded forty-one 1George-D. Strayer. A Report of a Survey of Public £§2§§§igg_in§he State of west Virginia (Charlestown, west Virginia, Legislative Interim Committee, 1945). zflilton C. Buley. ”Personnel Characteristics and Staff Patterns Associated with the Quality of Education." (new York: Ed.D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1947) p. 13. 3&0, pp. 18-22. 32 hours, while a positive relationship was found to exist only when the high school staff exceeded forty semester hours of professional courses. Teacher participation in college athletics bears a negative relationship with presumed quality of school staff.1 There was a positive relationship to quality when a high percentage of staff was employed from outstate sources.2 His study showed that staff stability was one of the greatest assets to quality when two-thirds of personnel had eight years or more tenure in the system. Other quality- related items showed a high percentage of staff who had recently traveled 1200 miles or more: the number of staff who had 300 volumes in their own professional libraries and who read professional magazines regularly.3 Boyer concluded from his study that an adequate, competitive salary schedule was necessary for quality education.‘ 11bid., pp. 27-30. 2gpid., p. 13 3&0, pp. 48-61. 4E. Gilbert Boyer. "Trends in staff Characteristics” (new Terk: Ed.D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1954), pp. 38-39. 33 The most comprehensive studies of other pertinent facets of staff adequacy were pursued by McKenna and Ross.1 They used the total numerical staff adequacy instead of the traditional pupil-teacher ratio. They believe that the researchers cannot mix elementary and secondary class size statistics safely. Ross, in his Administration for Adaptability,2 lists nineteen findings of class size research. Those which -appear pertinent to this study are herein included: 1. Size of system is no predictor of size of elementary school classes, but size of system in the smaller schools does directly predict size of high school classes and number of subject offerings in the smaller schools. 4. The correlation between average class size and a measure of general numerical staff adequacy, such as pupil staff ratio, is .60. 5. Evidence would indicate that a general measure 'of numerical staff adequacy is a better predictor of school quality than average class size. lDonald H. Ross and Bernard McKenna. Class Size: The Hultienillion Dollar Question (New Yerk: Metropolitan school Study Council, 1955). 2Ross. Administration for Adaptability. pp. 495~496. 11. 16. 34 Almost every system or community has some kind of written or tacit understanding of class size policy . . . written class size policies that state the maximum.permitted in one class are more stringently Observed than those that specify a median or average figure. Small classes tend to have more variety in instructional methods used than do large classes. lon-classroom.personnel-are at least as important as classroom teachers. Later Studies Pertaining to Expenditure Level .A review of the more current literature is now shall be: presented. The three limdting factors of presentation (1) Does the literature accept, modify, or reject previous concepts develOped? (2) Does it provide more insight.or refinement to previous conclusions and findings?“ (3) Does it make a significant contribution to the thesis of this study? The Committee on Tax Education and School Finance 35 of the national Education Association has this to say about illiteracy and holding power or schools.1 l.* The per cent of the population twenty-five years of age and older with at least four years of high school in 1950‘was 38.0 for the twelve tap- expenditure states, and was 24.1 for the twelve bottom states in expenditure, a ratio of 1.6 to l. 2. The per cent of the population with a.high-school education is doubtless related to the ”holding power“ of the schools. In the twelve top expenditure states, the number of high-school graduates in 1955-56 as a per cent of eighth-grade enrollment in 1951-52 was 72.7: the per cent was 53.1 for the twelve bottom states in expenditures: a ratio of 1.4 to l in favor of the high-expenditure states. 3. The per cent of the population twenty-five years of age and older with four or more years of college in 1950, in the top twelve states in school expenditures, lArvid J. Burke, Chairman, et a1. D vs ter Eggggtion Cost More? (washington: Comndttee on Tax Educa- tion and School Finance, national Education.Association, 1959), pp. 35-36. *In order to more easily enumerate the issues, the topic numbers are the writer's and are not those of the original authors. 36 'was 7.1 compared with 4.8 in the bottom twelve states in expenditure: a ratio of 1.4 to 1 in favor of the high-expenditure states. 4. In 1950 the per cent of the papulation twenty-five . years of age and older with less than five years of . schooling, which may be rated as functional illiteracy, was 8.2 in the high-expenditure states and 20.3 in the twelve loweexpenditure states: a ratio or 1 to 2.5. In Bowyer's study,1 he found that school support had definitely begun to affect economic progress of the community within ten or twelve years after the date of the school expenditures and had continued this positive influence for several years thereafter. He concluded that after about twenty years, the influence of school support upon economic progress begins to wane or perhaps becomes submerged by the influence and effects of more recent school support. Purno was interested in the effect of high and low expenditure over a period of years.‘ He found that over a lvernon Bowyer. .Measuring the Economic value of Education to the States, Improving Educational Research, 1948 Official Report (flashington D.C.: American Education Research Association, National Education Association), p.178. 37 twenty-five year period the cost-quality relationship was cumulative. Continued high—expenditure level over a period of years has "powerful influence upon the type and quality of education the children will receive in a school district for the subsequent decade."1 “If the expenditure level is high, chances are good that superior teachers will be employed and retained for a number of years. On the other hand, if the expenditure level is low, the chances of employing and retaining superior qualified teachers are diminished."2 Burke in pursuing the thesis of the level of expenditure over a period of years says, ”Apparently, drastic increases or decreases in level of expenditure in particular years are less influential in advancing quality than a long range program of school support which is discriminating as to items and adequate in amount. One ingredient in developing quality schools is 10. Frederick Furno. The Projection of School Quality From Expenditure Level. Unpublished doctor's thesis (Hew’YOrk: Teachers College, Columbia University (1956), pp. 47-48. 21bid., p. 48. 38 an intelligent long range policy for their adequate financial support.'1 Bloom and Statlerz of the University of Chicago in 1957 reported an extensive study concerned with the factors associated with educational achievement as measured by Tests of General Educational Development in English composition, the social studies, the natural 3 compared sciences, literature, and mathematics. Bloom the results_of tests given by Professor P. P. Lindquest of the State University of Iowa, to 35,330 seniors in 814 high schools in forty-eight statespin 1943, and to 38,773 seniors in.834 high sdhools in forty-eight states in 1955. He lists the following major conclusions: a. The difference among the states om.the tests of General Educational Development are as great in 1955 as they were in 1943. Although they had the 1Arvid J. Burke, et. a1. Does Be ter cat o as 2922.7 (Washington: Committee on Tax Education and School Finance, national Education Association, 1959), p. '33. 2Benjamin S. Bloom and Charles'R. Statler. "Changes in the States on the Tests of General Educational Development from 1943 to 1955." School Rezig 65, Sue: 1957, pp. 204-21. ' ‘ * 3Benjamin S. Bloom. "The 1955 Normative Study of the Tests of the General Education Development.” m m 64, March 1956, pp. 110524. 39 same amount of formal education, the high school seniors in the low expenditure states are at a great disadvantage when contrasted with the seniors in the high expenditure states. The differences among the states on the GED tests were highly related to differences among the states in financial support for education and in level of formal education in the adult population. The relationships which were clearly present in the 1955 study, were also evident in the 1943 study. High school seniors from the great majority of states had improved on the GED tests from 1943 to 1955. Although the amount of improvement varied from state to state, Bloom working with Statler found that the relative shifts in the ranks of the states on the GED tests were related to the relative increases both in financial support for education and in level of 1 education among adult population. They also concluded that the level of educational ”outcome” of the public schools as measured by the GED tests, is related to the level of ”input“ of financial 1Benjamin S. Bloom and Charles R. Statler, op cit. p. 220. 40 support for education and the value placed upon education as reflected by the educational status of the adult population.1 Although not pertinent to this study by perhaps interesting to the reader, Bloom and Statler also found that the performance of the high schoolxseniors was consistently higher on the tests in 1955 than in 1943. Only one study was found by the writer which reported little relationship between pupil achievement as measured by tests and per-pupil expenditure. This was the study made in Connecticut in 1956 that made this conclusion: “The finding that more dollars, per so, do not necessarily provide better education, may after further thought, be very profitable to those coping with school problems. There are other factors than just more dollars needed and more study is necessary to isolate these controlling factors and determine A 2 the wisest expenditure of money.” lIbid. , pp. 220-21. 2Connecticut Citizens for the Public Schools Commiuue on Financing Education, A Study of Factors Related to Academic Achievement in the Public Schools, Hartford, Connecticut Citizens for the Public Schools (120 Gillett Street)‘ June, 1957, p. 7. 41 Although it is very dangerous to editorialize on the findings of another person's study, it appears that perhaps the Connecticut group's greatest concern was that too much confidence was placed on the ”amounts” of money which are spent for education and not enough on ”where” and ”why" it is spent. At any rate, this writer found no other known study whidh claimed so little relationship between per-pupil expenditures and pupil achievement on standard tests. In 1938, Grace andnoel found some school districts of high costs with inferior results, especially in rural areas. This study revealed considerable correspondence between.ccst and quality when the factor of sparsity of population was eliminated. However, it was found that no lowbcost district got observable superior educational returns, and that high educational efficiency is not achieved without high expenditure. The Commission on the Legal Structure of Rhode Island 1 A. G. Grace and G. A. Moe. State Aid and School Costs, Report of the Regents Inquiry (lew'YOrk: ncGrawfifiill Book Company, 1938), pp. 324-29. 42 Public Education1 in 1941 studied the educational returns for money spent in Rhode Island using the Mort¥Cornell "Guide for Self Appraisal of School Systems.” The Commission found the high expenditure per pupil districts had larger numbers of improved teaching practices, more attention given to individual guidance, and a greater use of the community resources as an educational setting. In concluding, the commission stated that ”whatever the other conditions may be, they are not sufficiently strong to. offset the lifting effect of expenditure.” The IEA Committee on Tax Education and school Finance concludes with these statements: ”Apparently, the most important of these is that the high-expenditure districts have the money with which to employ more and better-prepared teachers. This conclusion is based on the fact that there is a closer relationship between expenditure level and amount of preparation of teaching staff than between expenditure level and any other 1Commission on the Legal Structure of Rhode Island Public Education, School for our Children--Report of‘a Survey of the Structure and Operation of the Rhode Island Public School System, Vbl. I (Providence, Rhode Island, 1941). pp. 58-98. _ 43 1 single measure of school quality." In the Regents of the University of New YOrk Quality Measurement Project studying quality and costs in New York State school systems, Samuel M. Goodman reported that the percentage of teachers on the staff who had five or more years of training correlated with pupils' achievement .36 which was the highest correlation of the factors measured in that project.2 Other studies have been concerned with relationships between quality and level of expenditures for certain small expense items in school budgets. Brickell3 studied small expenditure items in the budgets of thirty-one communities. His findings suggest that ”small expenditures” had inaggregate a considerable relationship to quality and that good schools do not spend 1Arvid J. Burke, Chairman. Does Better Education Cost.nore? (washington, D.C.: Committee on Tax Education and School Finance, national Education Association, 1959) p. 28. 2Samuel Mt Goodman, Director. The Assessment of Bohool Quality. (Research Offices, the.University of the State of new'YOrk, The State Education Department, Albany, lew York, March 1959) pp. 45-46. 3HenrynM. Brickell. An Analysis of Certain Non- Igstructional Staff Expenditures. (Doctor's Thesis, lew'Iork: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958) p. 41. 44 more money on everything. He found quality of teaching is improved by expenditure for supplies and equipment, but it is still further improved by providing personnel who help the teacher to make effective instructional use of these teaching aids. Bothwell conducted a study in seventy-one school systems representing all sections of the United States to deal with the gains in quality education derived from increasing some small expense items in school budgets. He found that overnemphasis in any one area of spending is bad. High quality is advanced when all items of expendi- ture are carefully discriminated and kept in careful balance. He further reported that as districts raised current expenditure outlay per pupil, they didn't continue to expeni more and more money into textbooks, paper, stencils, roll beaks, chalks, and basic materials. Instead they began spending more for such items as audio» visual materials, physical education and health supplies, professional staff travel, public relations activities, 1 science supplies and similar materials. 1Bruce K. Bothwell. Creative Expenditures for Quality Education (New York: Associated Public School Systems, 525 west 120th Street, 1958) p. 8. 45 In 1949, a study of fifty high-expenditure school systems in the metrOpolitan area of New'York City by Lorne W’oollett1 and a group of trained observers was made to determine if there was a point of diminishing returns in educational expenditure. At the time of the study, at all of the expenditure levels, there was no measurable taper- ing off of educational returns as_expenditure levels increased. As Burke has stated,2 ”The ultimate, or point of diminishing returns, in educational quality has apparently not been reached in even the highest- expenditure school districts." They also state that, ”it is important to take account of certain small items of expenditures, as well as those of larger amount, if a community would achieve maximum expenditure effect on school quality. The effect of an intelligent long-range program of adequate financial support in a school system is cumulative and therefore especially powerful in its effect on quality. Also, low expenditure, if continued, will greatly reduce quality.” 1Lorne H. woollett. The Cost-Quality_Relationship on the Growing Edge. Metropolitan School Study Council Research Studies, No. 4 (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1949), p. 65. 2Arvid J. Burke, op. cit., p. 37. 46 Goodman, in his “Assessment of Quality" conducted for the New’York Department of Education, collected descriptive data on school and community factors.1 He found definite positive relationships between expenditure level of the district and achievement of pupils at all grade levels measured. The socio-economic character of the community correlated .50 with expenditure.2 He observed that districts with desire and capacity to have good educational programs usually have higher quality scores than the objective data would tend to indicate, while rural systems tended not to achieve expectancy whether expectancy was predicted from socioeeconomic index alone, 1.0. alone, or a socio-economic index.and I.Q. combined. Pupil achievement compared with staff preparation showed a correlation of .36 in high expenditure schools: .07 in the average expenditure, and -.18 in the low group which seemed to indicate that increased resources for education- al training of teachers may benefit those systems of higher socio-economic status more than for lower socio- 1Samuel M. Goodman, Director. The Assessment of School Quality. Report No. 1 of the Quality Measurement Project (Albany 1, Hew'YOrk: The State Education Department, March 1959), p. 1-25 3mm” pp. 27. 47 economic status, while money spent for lower socio-economic groups could be used elsewhere.1 Other findings showed a correlation of .85 for level of staff preparation and support level.2 Expenditure was .46 with the number of special service personnel per 1000 students.3 A recent survey4 conducted on class size found that adequate salaries and reasonable class loads nest go together to gain higher quality. Of~the two factors, higher salaries is the greater determinant. Simpson5 in studying quality factors in lichigan schools found that cost or expenditure per pupil was the single nost.important influence on educational quality. He concluded that the most important measure of expendi- ture level was net instructional expenses per pupil,.91, 12m" pp. 26. 2SamuelxM. Goodman, Director.l The Asggssment of ggoo; Quality. Report lo. 1 of the Quality Heasurement Project (Albany 1, lew“York: The State Education Department, larch 1959), pp. 1-25. 331nm" .p. 34. 4Alilliam S. Vincent, Bernard H. Hoxenna, and Austin D. Swanson.* “The Question of C1ass81ze." W §2lL£ELB.1 (October 1960), pp. 1-4. 5Robert J. Simpson. Selected Relationships Among Reported Expenditures and Programs in Metropolitan School Districts (Detroit: unpublished Thesis, Ed.D..‘Nayne State University, 1961), pp. 188. 48 followed by the cost variables of per-pupil expenditures for teachers' salaries, .89, per pupil disbursements for net operation of school program, .87, maintenance and operating expenses per pupil, .79, per pupil expenditures for small items in the Operational budget, .73.1 He also found that the dropout rate is a good quality indicator. Percentage of graduates continuing their education was a poor measure of quality.2 Administrative tenure of superintendent of schools and the high school principal have little significant correlation with quality and expenditure per pupil.3 Swanson4 used the Associated Public School Systems time scale5 to analyze the relationship between population and quality over the whole spectrum of district census populations from 1000 to 1 million. His analysis showed a strong positive relationship up to 28,000 population. This relationship diminishes 11bid o a PP e 188’189 e 21m” p-494. 3Ibid., p. 195 4Austin D. Swanson. ”Relations Between Community Size and School Quality.“ IAR Research Bulletin, V01. 2, so. 1 (October 1961), p. l. 58ee IAR Research Bulletin, Vol. 1, Ho. 2, for description of Time Scale. 49 until at 67,000 population, further increase in population is not likely to reflect an increase in school quality. In reviewing previous literature he indicated there was agreement among researchers that the chief detriment to quality was small enrollments in the high schools. His conclusion is ”Three decades of Institute research indicate that the most favorable conditions for achieving good school quality exist in communities from 20,000 to 50,000 in population. Below and above this range, special arrange- ments are necessary in order to achieve the best possible quality in education."1 McKenna2 in his latest analysis of professional staff characteristics and quality concludes that research over the past twenty-five years has identified seven sound predictors, namely, (1) origin of staff (2) foreign travel (3) domestic travel (4) literary interests (5) amount of training (6) breadth of training (7) and professional interests. Promising factors are (1) age 'W' T r r 11bid., p. 3. 28ernard.ucxenna. “Characteristics of Quality in Professional Staff.“ 355 Research Bulletin, V01. 2, No. l (lew'York: Teachers College, Columbia'University, October 1961), p. 8. 50 (2) sex (3) recency of training (4) training for administration (5) practice teaching (6) length of experience (7) experience in other school systems (8) professional participation (9) home visitation (l0) parent-teacher conferences (11) and use of community resource people. - I In the final analysis, in reviewing the literature and studies regarding quality presented here, it shouldxbe recognized that much work still must be done to develop adequate criteria to determine what quality is and how it can.be measured. Vincent1 in his latest article, “Criteria of Quality," which reviews past studies and current studies underway, alludes to the fact that, to date, an acceptable battery of quality measures has not been devised. It.is his hepe that eventually such a battery, analogous to the battery of tests by which a pupil is_profiled, will be forthcoming. Summary of Related Literature To assure an orderly approach and for clarification of direction of this study, a categorical summary of the review of related literature is herewith presented. The liilliam S. Vincent. "Criteria of Quality.“ IAR Research Bulletin, Vol. 2, No. 3 (New'Yorkz Teachers College, Columbia University, April 1962), pp. i=4. 51 general categories that appear to have an impact on this study and quality education as evidenced by the studies presented are: (1) (2) (3) Level of support - Although it is common knowledge that levels of support vary from district to district, past research has proven that there is a great variance in the expenditures per pupil for education among school districts of the same size and different sizes, similar and different locations. Socio-economic community factors - Although these factors will be explored in greater detail in Chapter III, it is important to note from the studies presented that factors of size, community expectancy, cultural, economic, educational, and ethnic background, do have a recognizable impact on educational quality. Staff characteristics - Previous studies indicated that the most significant staff characteristics pointing to a quality program include: (a) origin of staff, (b) foreign travel, (c) domestic travel, (d) literary interests, (e) amount of training, (4) (5) 52 (f) breadth of training, and (9) professional interests. Recipient student - Quality in education is aimed at the student. How’well he partakes, how'well he assimilates, how successful his present and future needs are met, indicates the degree of experience and quality of the educational program. Those devices recognized in previous studies as possible measurements which appear to be indicative of possible quality criterion were (a) class size (b).pupil teacher ratio (c) availability of specialized services (d) achievement test results (e) dropout rates (f) availability of guidance and other extra school services. School plant adequacy - Studies seem to indicate adequate facilities with ample equipment and supplies tend to provide an atmosphere for quality education but do not assure that such is the case. An electorate willing to give adequate support after the initial investment of new buildings as well as a properly oriented staff and community to take the necessary advantage of the new facilities are both important factors . CHAPTER III PLANNIIG AND CONDUCTIIIG THE STUDY Determining the school Districts to be Studied One of the important concerns of this investigation was to ascertain possible relationships that may or may not exist between facets of commonly accepted factors usually associated with quality in education and the level of support for education in selected school comnities. . At the time of this study, Aniehigan had 532 high school districts with extremely varying enrollments. Preliminary investigation indicated ,A.that there was a very high concentration of school population in the south- eastern part of the State, namely, Oakland, liacomb, and Iayne Counties, which accounted for 824,112 students of the total state school population of 1,794,045. (Detroit with an enrellment of 291, 988 was excluded for purposes of study at this point because of its size.)* *All 1962-63 student enrollment and school district data for this part of the study was obtained from the lichigan Department of Public Instruction. 53 54 A preliminary investigation of the variance of level of financial support for education in the 532 scheol districts in the state indicated that the three counties of Oakland, Macomb, and‘layne had 79 high school districts representing the 824,112 children. These three counties also had school.districts in all quartiles of level of support as established by Rhee.1 It‘was also found that certain school districts in the three counties were among the very lowest and highest level of support when studied on a statewide‘basis.2 These three counties also formed the complex for a highly urbanized, metropolitan community with one of the nation's larger cities, Detroit, as the central city. The other cities in the three county area formed the nucleus.for metropolitan Detroit. This criterion of being metropolitan, in addition to others which will be developed later in this chapter, formed the basis for limiting this study to selected school districts of the three counties of oakland, Macomb, and‘layne. 1Jeung Rhee. ”An Analysis of Selected Aspects of Public School rina'ce Systems in.uichigan' (unpublished doctoral dissertation,.nichigan State University, 1961). 2Statistical Report published by Stanley Becker,~ lichigan Bducation Association, 1960-1961. 55 At the outset, the level of support was one of the major considerations for determining those school districts which would be utilized in this study. It was also determined that an analysis of certain other observable or statistical differences in size and community characteristics would be made prior to the final choice of the districts. After consultation with authorities in educational research on school finance at Michigan State University,1 it was agreed that the three districts with the highest expenditure per pupil and the three‘with lowest expenditure per pupil would be used. Preliminary Community and School District Determination THE SCHOOL DISTRICT An analysis of several previous studies revealed mmny variables could be found in the schools and communities of the three counties. In order to eliminate as many of these as possible among the school districts studied, an attempt was made to locate those districts with similar community characteristics. 1 Dr. Stanley Hecker, Dr. Fred vescolani, Dr.‘lilbur Brookover, Staff, College of Education, lichigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 56 The City of Detroit and its environs make up the major complex of approximately seventy cities in the metropolitan suburbia which includes the area encompassed by‘layne, Oakland, and Macomb counties. In most instances a visitor passing through the area would have difficulty knowing where the boundary of one city stapped and another started except for identifying city signs on the streets where civil boundaries change. By limiting the geographical area to school districts found in these three counties, the scope of this study showed a potential of ninety-three school districts including those offering less than a K-lZ program. Thaden, in his study, described a community school district as ”a K-lz district in which less than 10 per cent of the pupils in grades 9 through 12 are non- resident . . . ”1 Since Thaden's study dealt primarily with Michigan schools and Michigan communities, it appeared that most of his criteria pertaining to school districts and communities would be acceptable to 1J. F. Thaden. Equaliging Educational Qppgrtunity Through Community School_pistrict§. Michigan State University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Departmnt of Sociology and Anthropology, Bulletin No. 410 (East Lansing, Michigan, January 1957), p. 7. 57 establish the community concept for this study. However, it must be noted that certain other criteria as established by other accepted authorities were included to assure proper delineation of the school districts to be studied. Being more specific, in the procedures used in selecting the school districts for this study, the following screening criteria were established. m SCHOOLS To negate as much as possible the influence of rapid change or fluctuation of practices within school districts as alluded to by Bowyer,1 they had to fulfill all of the following criteria for five or more years. 1. The educational offering in the school district included grades kindergarten through twelfth (Thaden). - 2. Fewer than ten per cent of pupils in grades nine through-twelve were non-resident students (Thaden). 3. Secondary school was accredited by the north central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools and the lichigan Secondary School-College Agreement program. fl 1Vernon Bowyer. as r n I V ue o Egggtig in the Stateg. p. 178. 58 4. There was a graduating class of 100 or more students.1 5. There was only one high school in the district. . 6. District'was located in Oakland, lacomb or layne County. Preliminary research was conducted to determine the characteristics of the ninety-three school districts found in the three counties of oakland, lacomb, and ' Imyne. Those districts that did not satisfy all of the criteria listed abeve were eliminated. Information pertainingto the five-year offering of a (1) complete kindergarten through high school educa- tional program in the district, (2) fewer thaa.ten per cent non-resident students in grades nine through twelve was taken from the official records as submitted by boards cf education to the State Department of Public Instruction. Data regarding north central and university of.nichigaa accreditation and size of graduat- ing classes over the past five years were teken from the 1.1a.“ a. Conant. 113:: American gig-h Schggl Today. (low York: McCraw-nill Book Company, 1957) p. 3.8 and Appendix G, pp. 132-3. 59 University of Michigan Services Bureau Bulletin, FMidhigan Accredited Schools,” which is published each year. To ascertain the number of high schools in each district, a survey was conducted by contacting the county board of education offices for each of the three counties. The results of these studies showed forty-two school districts satisfied all the above six preliminary screening criteria. Since this study concerned itself with the different levels of support and commonly accepted factors usually associated with quality, a further evaluation of the districts had to be made to determine the level of support each district expended for the education of its pupils. However, a recent report1 had already established the level of support of all the school districts in the State of Michigan. From this 1961 study which also established quartile limits for level of support as these limits applied to all of the districts in the state, it lJeung Rhee - unpublished thesis, "An Analysis of Selected Aspects of Public School Finance Systems in Michigan.” Michigan State University, 1961. 60 was found by preliminary investigation that some of the forty-two districts fell within each quartile level of support with a large number falling among both the very highest expenditure level and the very lowest expenditure level of support in the state. It must be mentioned here also that during the time the expenditure level per pupil was being established, there was considerable consultation with the chairman and other members of the advisory committee as well as other authorities in educational administra- tion and research design regarding the method of final selection of the sample districts to be studied. Since the preliminary investigation pertaining to level of support had shown a normal distribution for the fortybtwo districts among the four previous established quartiles, it was decided to use a limited group of the very highest and.very lowest expenditure districts for this study. It was hoped that by using the extremes, the highest and lowest, the measurable differences between the two groups of districts would be more pronounced and easily identified. 61 It had also been establishedl that prolonged periods of time with high or low level of support reflec- ted greater impact upon the level of the. Quality of the educational program than when level of supports are inconsistent, vacillating from high to low and vice versa, year after year. For this reason, a historical study of each of the forty-two school district expendi- ture patterns for the past five years- was made. To determine the expenditure level per pupil, conenly accepted practices as established by the Hiehigan Education Association and the Metropelitan Detroit Bureau of Ieheel Studies were used: namely, using total operating monies less transportation, auxiliary services, and capital outlay items which were divided by the number of students in school on the fourth Friday after Labor Day, the determining data used by the Department of Public Instruction for official statistical gemtations. where cemputations had previously been made by these agencies, they were used in the compila- tion. However, there were several school districts TV lArvid J. Burke, e5 31. “Does letter Education Cost More?” Committee on Tax Education and School Finance (Washingten: national Education Association, 1959) , p. 35. 62 which were not affiliated with the above agencies: consequently, there were no statistics available for these districts. Further, at the outset ef this study the 1961-62 statistics had not been completely compiled by these agencies. Ibere such informatiem.wus not available, the writer compiled the statistics from the Annual Report of the Board of Education of each school district as submitted. to the Department of Public Instruction. Procedures as outlined above were used in order that there would be assurance of consistency in the statistics computed. In this manner, the computed statistics could be used in conjunction with those obtained from the.licnigan Education Association and the Metropolitan Detroit Bureau of School Studies. In the interest of eliminating.those districts that would not be potential candidates for study due to the previously established level-of-support criteria, the following procedure was used: The forty-two school districts were listed according to.rank, one through forty-two, the highest expenditure per pupil being number one and the lowest expenditure per pupil being forty-two, for the school year 1961-62. From this list were taken the top ten expenditure districts and bottom 63 ten, making a total of twenty districts. The expenditure per pupil for the past five years for each of the ten top expenditure as well as the ten bottom expenditure districts was tabulated. It should be noted that the districts did not rank in the same order each year of the tabulation. Yet, no school district changes its total ranking more than two points over the five-year period. This indicated a consistent level of support. In order that a ranking could be established which reflected the total five-year expenditure of each district, the ranking of from 1 to 10 was made for each year of the highest ten expenditure-districts each year, starting with highest expenditure district as one and . progressively down the list to rank of ten for the lowest expenditure district of the high-expenditure districts. An additive accumulation was made of the rankings of each of the ten districts for the five years. The lowest sumetotal, in this manner, became, historically, the highest expenditure district over the five-year period. In this manner, the three highest-expenditure districts could be established. In like manner, in inverse order the rankings of the lowbexpenditure school districts were 64 determined and the three lowest-expenditure districts were established. An interesting sidelight of these studies indicates that in 1961-62 the lowest expenditure per pupil of the districts studied was $279.28, while the district with the highest expenditure per pupil was $599.33, or 2.1+ times as much as the lowest expendi- tures. THE COMMUNITY Thadenl established five basic services necessary to establish a community in addition to being a center for trade.. The first criteria are his: the remainder are those of the writer or taken from other sources. These were minimum requirements to establish the basic community. Concurrently with the study of the forty-two school districts as defined earlier, their community services were evaluated by means of the following criteria to assure that the school district was an integral part of the community in which it served. The lThaden, op, cit., p. 41. 65 community (and scheol district) were to have: 1. A bank 2. A daily or weekly newspaper 3. A movie 4. A medical doctor 5.. A dentist 6. Forty or more businesses 7. An observable population center which forms a part of a.major political subdivision. 8. A portion not commonly referred to as a "resort“ or ”harvest labor” community.’ Ananalysis of the community characteristics showed that the forty-two communities also_fulfilled these criteria. The data collected for this portion of the study were from.personal Observation and informa- tion available from local chambers of commerce or other comparable sources. When a district satisfied the eight minimal conunity requirements, no further analysis was made to denote the exact number found in each category. rrom.these data and previous delimiting criteria, the three highest expenditure-per-pupil districts and the three lowest expenditure-per-pupil districts were established. 66 Due to the confidential nature of many of the future statistics to be interpreted in this study, and since it would not enhance the purpose of this study to publicly identify the school districts chosen, here- after the districts shall be identified A, 3, c, start- ing with .the highestranking district as A, and x, Y, 2 as the lowest ranking districts, 2 being the lowest. Other, Determinant Factors of Social and lconomic Characteristics of Selected Districts Concurrently with the preceding criteria, care was taken to comply with community-size criteria. Rossl and Swanson2 found a strong positive relationship+between quality and community sizes, the greatest relationship being in cities of lower population limits of 15,000 and upper limits ,. varying frm 67,000 to 100, 000. After consultation with the advisory committee for this study, the decision was made te eliminateschool districts having populations of under 15,000 and over 70,000 persons. J‘Donald a. Boss. Administratigg to; mains: (low Iork: Retropelitan School Study Council, 1958) , Pp e 182-88 e 2Austin 1). Swanson. “Relations Between conuunity Size and School Quality“ (IAR Research Bulletin, Vol. 2, lo. 1, October 1961) p.~l.- 67 It must be understood that most school districts in this area of study, namely, the Metropolitan Detroit area, are comparatively large and have city and school district cotermineus boundaries except for small seg- ments of the boundaries in a few of the districts and cities. Thaden in his writings,1 as well as in consultao tion with him, agreed that the small discrepancies between the boundaries of cities and school districts in thisistudy were inconsequential. By keeping the size of the school districts within these limits, there was indication from previous studies that other differences might be more easily Observed and identified. Thus, a hoped-for possible elimination of differences caused by school district size: or inversely, as noted in previous studies, a heretofore varinble could be partially controlled by design. v la. P. Thaden. EggalizingEducational Qppgrtunity Igggggh Community School Districts. Michigan State university Agricultural Experiment Station, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Bulletin No. 410 (Bast Lansing, Michigan, January 1957), pp. 1-41. 68 Using the United States Census figures of 19601 as the authority, it was determined that 23 school districts (of the forty-two defined previously) in the metropolitan area met the population requirements as did the three highest and three lowest-expenditure districts heretofore established. Herewith is presented census figures of the six districts:2 High Law School District Expand ture School District Expenditure A 38063 X 53933 B 18147 Y ’38017 C 17328 2 50195 Defining the Criteria to be Measured and Conducting the Research Most of the criteria used in this study were taken from those previous studies which had shown significant relationShip between expenditures and possible measures of quality. The major hypothesis was to determine whether such 1United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. ”united States Census of Population: 1960 nichigan." Final Report PC. (1) 24C, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1962. 21bido, pp. 24-222 to 24-292 69 measurable criteria were significant in an evaluation of the selected districts with the highest per capita costs as compared with the districts of lowest per capita cost. There have been many general statements)"2 as :mentiened in Chapter 11, indicating that the level of expenditure per pupil for education is the best “one" indication.for quality. The fact still remains that the facets of possible quality within the framework of what education buys have not been clearly defined. As described in Chapter 11, there are many hundreds of criteria on cost-quality whichwhave been studied by students who are searching for a possible means to identify quality factors related to per-pupil expenditure. Per the purpose of this study, one of the maJer interests was in the area of the staff and what the teachers brought with them to the classroom. Several studies3 had previously pointed to this area as holding great promise. Previous studies had also indicated that certain criteria of staff characteristics showed greater promise than others. Previous studies had also indicated communities IBloom and Statler, op cit., pp. 220-21. 2Arvid Burke, op cit., p. 33. 3Bernard McKenna, 22 cit., p. 8. 70 with varying sociological and economical characteristics had a measurable impact on the expectation of education, level of support, hence the level of possible quality being very closely related to these community characteristics.1 In addition to these criteria, other promising measurable criteria.were included. One of these criteria was.the age of school build- ings. Previous research indicated that the age of buildings had little or no significant relationship to level of support and quality. Yet it was thought at the outset of this study that this criteria might have value in this study. However, a brief overview of the facilities of the districts found in this report showed that the age of the schools in the majority of the districts varied from one year to seventy with no discernable pattern which would indicate any level of significance. Consequently, this was not pursued. To simplify and assure an orderly approach to this 1Samuel H. Goodman, Director. “The Assessment of School.0uality.' Report No. 1 of Quality Measurement Project (Albany 1, lew'IOrkx State Education Department, march 1959), pp. 1-27. 71 study, the criteria were broken down into four areas. The first included those relating to the teacher, the second, to the student, and the third, to the community. The fourth area includes an analysis of the budgets of the school districts under study. I. THE TEACHER Previous studies that had divided the staff into R-6 grade teachers and 7-12 grade teachers indicated that there were significant staff characteristics which point to quality programs and high expenditure levels. Some of these were measured according to the following criteria: 1. Teachers' years of experience. 2. Teachers who had previous teaching experience prior to present employment. 3. Teachers with over fifteen years of experience. 1 4. Date of master's degree. 5. Date of bachelor's degree. 6. Age of teaching staff. 72 7. Teachers who had previously lived:* out-of-state, outstate, or in the metropolitan area. 8. Teachers who had traveled 500, 1000, or 2500 miles or had traveled in a foreign country in the last three years. 9. Teachers who had taken four or more trips of 500, 1000, or as much as 2500 miles. 10. number of non-professional books owned by teacher. 11. number of non-professional books purchased by teaChers in last three years. 1 12. number of non-professional books read by teachers in last three years. 13. number of non-professional magazines subscribed to by teacher. 1 14. . number of professional books purchased by teacher in last three years. 15. _ number of professional magazines currently subscribed to by teacher. 16. .Areas of study teacher is certified to teach. 17. Median salary of total staff. *"Out-of-state" is self-explanatory: 'outstate" is to mean the total state of Michigan excluding'wayne, Oakland, and Macomb Counties. 73 A teacher-characteristics questionnaire* was developed to provide data for the above criteria. Although a preliminary sampling of ten teachers was used to determine the adequacy of the wording and intent of the instrument, there were data from two questions which later proved of no use. In this part of the study dealing with the results of the questionnaire, no attempt was made to keep teachers separated by school, only by level of support, i.e., high-expenditure districts and low—expenditure districts. Upon consultation with staff members of the Bureau of Research and Publications at Michigan State *A copy of the questionnaire used may be found in the Appendix. ' 1The data from question #14 [humber of credits in education courses, semester hours or term hours (estimate){] *was not definitive since a large number of teachers indicated over 100 hours in "education courses“ which seemed to be a highly improbable answer. Question #16 [I have attended , different professional conferences of half-day or more. Total days of conference .:] because of a clerical error, the time limitation of “last three years” had been omitted, making this question ambiguous. Previous studies had shown a relationship to quality and recency of profes- sional conferences and further training. 74 University, it was agreed that a sampling of approximately 250 teachers in the high-expenditure school districts and a similar amount in the lowbexpenditure ones should be made. Since there were more teachers in the low-expenditure school districts than the high, the technique to choose the teachers who would assure similar numbers of statistics for analysis was as follows: A list of the staffs of each district was obtained from each school district superintendent's office. These lists were broken down into two alphabetical groups-- kindergarten through sixth grade, and seventh grade through twelfth. In the high-expenditure district, teachers were chosen by starting with the first teacher and then every third teacher thereafter: teachers of the low group were chosen by starting with the first and checking every fifth teacher thereafter. Then to those teachers chosen for the study a letter of transmittal, the “teacher characteristics questionnaire," and a self- addressed envelope were sent. There were 244 letters sent to teachers of high-expenditure districts and 257 letters sent to low-expenditure ones, making a total of 501 letters. 75 It should also be noted that prior to the mailing, a personal explanation of the purpose of the study as well as the content of the letters was given to each of the six superintendents whose teachers were to receive the questionnaire. Due to the size of the original nailing, no plans were made to send followbup letters to those persons failing to answer the first nailing. leturns came from 151 teachers of the high- enpenditure districts and 153 teachers of low-expenditure districts for a total of 304 or a 60.7 per cent return. There were three letters returned fron low-expenditure districts unopened because of wrong address. 11. THE 8mm The second cencern was to establish criteria of a subjective, measurable nature that would give a possible indication of what was happening to the pupils who attended these schools. The criteria used in this part of the study were theses, l. The pupil-teacher ratio in the elementary grades. . 2. The pupil-teacher ratio in the high school. 76 3. Availability of guidance and counseling in the high school (pupil-counselors). 4. Number of library books and facilities per high school pupil. (Most of the above data for the high school were available from the original reports filed by the respective schools with the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. All of the other data were obtained from the business offices of the school districts studied.) III. THE COMMUNITY As was mentioned earlier, the committee on Tax Education and School Finance1 and Goodman2 indicated that the level of income was an Observable, positive determinant for the level of support the schools received in a community. Since these two studies also found that the education level of the adult population of a community was a positive determinant of the kind of support the schools of a community received, it appeared _ 1Arvid J. Burke, 22 cit., pp. 35-36. 2Samuel Me Goodman, Director, pp cit., pp. l-27. 77 necessary to include this aspect in studying these selected districts. Other factors which showed promise are also listed. 1. Level of family income. 2. Education level, male and female population. 3. Proportion of 14-17 year olds still in 4. Mobility of population. 5. Pr0portion of native and foreign born. IV. ANALYSIS OF SCHOOL BUDGETS From the reports of Bothwell1 it was found that quality was generally improved when all items of instruc- tional expenditures in the budget were advanced, and that over-emphasis in any one area of spending was “bad.“ He2 3 4 concurred with Brickell, Teresa and Furno5 who found lBruce K. Bothwell, Op cit., p. 8. 2Donald H. Ross, 92 cit., p. 397. 3HenryM. Brickell, op cit., p. 41. 4Anthony J. Teresa. “An Analysis of the Effect of various Specific Items in School Accounts,“ (new Yerk: unpublished Ed.D. project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1955) pp. 35-38. 50. F. Furno. “The Projection of School Quality Pron.nxpenditure Level.“ (New York: Unpublished Ed.D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1956) 78 school districts have a definable central tendency on expenditures by major and minor accounting categories, but considerable individual variation among school districts exists, not only in total amounts but in anounts and proportions for individual categories. The fourth area of study was to analyse the budgets of the six schools to deternine actual and proportional ._ difference in expenditure level patterns. My In.,this chapter, the general,,nethods used in the study have been presented, including, the procedures for choosing the ischoel districts andtethe criteria to be used inthe evaluation. A description of the sources, steps, methods, and sampling techniques was given. All the criteria established above have been preliminary to the next step which deals with the actual tabulation and statistical analysis of the study. The results of these data have been collected, computated, and appear in Chapter IV. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF SELECTED CRITERIA In this chapter selected criteria are analysed. The first section deals with possible measurable differences between staffs of districts having high and low expenditure per pupil. The reader is reminded that those teachers from the low expenditure districts were treated as one group and the teachers from the high expenditure schools as another. For the purpose of this study, no attempt was made to identify the teachers by specific districts. It should also be noted that not all questions were answered by all recipients: hence there are varying totals. For purposes of analysis of statistics obtained in this first portion, the chi-square (or x?) method of analysis was used. For a more thorough explanation of this technique the reader is referred to Helen.n. walker and Jesep‘hLev's1 book, Statistical Igference. It will 1Helen.u..'walker, Joseph Lev. Stgtigticgl \l;£g;gpgg_ (new York: Henry Holt & Company, 1953), pp. 81-108.- - 79 80 suffice to explain here that chi-square is the computation of a statistic which measures the discrepancy between observed and hypothetical expectancy frequencies (and te study the sampling distribution_of that statistic). The level of significance of all statistical computations in this study was set at .95: those above this level were considered to be significantly different and are so noted. The second part of the data analysis deals with possible measurable differences between selected staff- pupil relationships and pupil-selected portions of physical plant relationships. Since these statistics appear to violate assumptions of binomial populations (P or P2) which is fundamental to chisquare, it is inpossible (not acceptable) to analyze the above using x2. However, the data is analyzable through the use of a T-test comparing high and low expenditure districts. .With samples this small there exists some theoretical.prob1ens which need to be considered only if T statistic is near the border line of significance. In such cases we must accept or reject with reservation. 81 The third part deals with selected community characteristics of the school districts studied.‘ In this section, the chi-square method of analysis was used. The fourth part deals with the per-pupil cost factors. Since by inspection the data are not normally distributed, a parametric T test is not appropriate. For this data the Manndflhitney1 U test appears to be best suited. The Mann-Whitney U test was chosen because this study employs two independent samples, uses small samples, and uses measurements which are at most in our ordinal scale. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov two-sample test was also used which gave the identical results.2 1- w This part of the chapter is devoted to Objective measurements of the teaching staffs of the selected group of school districts. McKenna, in summarizing his 1Sidney Siegel. gonparametric Statistics (New York: .ncGrawhnill, 1956), pp. 116-136. 2Helenn.‘wal‘ker and Joseph Lev. Statistical ference (new York: Henry Holt and Company, 1953), Pp. 426' 440, 443. 82 own studies and nine other previous studies, had stated that “it is now possible to describe a high calibre teaching staff by using groups of objective measures that have been found to bear high relationships to several criteria of school quality.“l Most of the “objective measures" used by McKenna and others to describe the staff have been incorporated as "measures“ in thiststudy. However, some of the data will be treated statistically in a different manner. As was . stated previously, the purpose for which the data on staff characteristics will be used herein is to determine possible significant differences between staffs of high and low expenditure school districts. A few of the questionnaires were not completely filled out: hence the varying data in a few of the categories. The following pages then identify and analyze the data. A. LENGTH OF EXPERIENCE OF TEACHIEG_SIABF- The first criterion used was the total years of teaching experience the teacher had at the time of the 1Bernard McKenna. Characteristics of Quality in the Professional Staff, IAR Research Bulletin, Institute of Admdnistrative Research (New York: Teachers College. Columbia University, Vol.2, No.1, October 1961). p. 4. 83 survey. As was done in previous studies, the teachers were placed into two groups, the first group being those who taught in kindergarten through sixth grade and the other in grades seven through twelve. This same group- ing was used for all subsequent criteria unless otherwise noted. . (l) ‘ Years of Teaching Experience of x-e Teachers Tears of. Experience High* Low. 1-435 12 (18.87)** 26 (l9.l3)** 1.991435 12 (8. (4) 5 (8.56) 15+ L (25. 33) a (25.67) 2 74 - 75 - 12 II 9.0189 x .05 . 7.815 There was a significant difference at the .05 level. High expenditure districts employed n—s teachers having longer teaching experience. Since this mgested further analysis of the data, they were collapsed into two experience levels. less than five years and five years or more. . Xv *Here and in future tabulations, nigh shall mean nigh lxpenditure Districts and Low shall mean Low Expenditure Districts. “were and in future data, the expected theoretical frequency is included. 84 (1) (continued) Collapsing the above data Experience High Low Less than 5 years 12 (18.87) 26 (19.13) 5 or more years 62 (55.13) 49 (55.87) X: . 6.6692 X .05 I 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level noted when years of experience was broken into groupings of “less than.5' and '5 or more years.” By inspection it was observed that the High expenditure districts had the greater number of‘R—G teachers with five or more years of experience. (2) Years of Teaching Experience of 7-12 Teachers Tears of Experience High Low 1-48 17 (26.83) ' 37 (27.17) 5-9# 14 (17.88) 22 (13.12) 10-148 16 (11.92) 8 (12.08) 15+ _3_0_ (20.37) _§ (20.63) .2 77 78 12.05 a 7.815 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low expenditure districts when measured in teams of teaching experience of the 7-12 grade staff. By inspection, there were more 7-12 grade teachers in the high expenditure districts with more years of experience than was expected. 85 Further study of the data was done by using ”less than five years of experience" and "five or more years." (2) (continued) Collapsing the above data Experience High Low Less than 5 years 17 (26.83) 37 (27.17) 5 or more years .69 (50.17) g; (50.83) 2 77 78 X2 = 10.9850 X..05 8 3.84 This, too, showed a significant difference at the .05 level between the groups with the high expenditure districts having a greater number of teachers with five or more years of experience. Further analysis of these data was done by collapsing and categorizing the experience data into groupings of ”less than 15” and '15 or more years of experience.” i (2) (continued) Experience High Low Less than 15 years 47 (56.63) 67 (57.37) 15 or more years .39 (20.37) 1;,(20.63) 2 77 78 x = 12.3019 x2.05 a 3.34 This, too, showed significant difference at the .05 level with fewer teachers than expected in the high 86 expenditure districts having less than fifteen years' experience and more teachers than expected having fifteen or more years' experience. 3. TEACHING EXPERIENCE PRIOR TO P333313}; 3142mm Previous studies had indicated that high expenditure districts usually employed teachers with previous teaching experience, while low expenditure districts were the training ground for the inexperienced teacher. An analysis was made of this criterion. (3) Teachers with previous experience vs. No previous experience - KPG High Low Experience 50 (47.18) 45 (47.82) No Experience gg_(26.92) §Q,(27.18) 2 75 75 X2 3 .9239 X .05 = 3.84 There appeared to be no significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low expenditure schools when comparing the number of elementary teachers who did or did not have previous experience. 87 (4) Teachers with Previous Experience - grades 7-12 High Low Experience 48 (41.73) 36 (42.27) No Experience 32 (35.27) 11 (35.73) 77 78 x: - 4.0870 x .05 - 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of secondary teachers who did or did not have previous teaching experience, with the high expenditure districts having more teachers with previous experience, and less teachers with no previous experience than expected. C. LEVEL OF EDQCATION OF PROFESSIQEAL fizézz There had been numerous studies indicating a positive relationship existed between the level of education of teachers, the expenditure level, and quality. Mort and Cornell1 very adequately sum up the major conclusions of most of the studies referred to earlier in this study when they say: “It must be emphasized that the level of training of teachers is the only personnel factor, wdth the exception of the question of outside experience, great enough in its relationship with lPaul R. Hort and Francis G. Cornell. American Schools in Transitigg (The Pennsylvania Study) (new”York: Bureau of Publications Teachers College, Columbia University, 1941). p. 5 88 adaptability (quality)* and finance resources to offer statistically, to a considerable degree,an explanation for that part of the relationship of adaptability (quality)* to finance groupings which might not be attributable to chance.“ 80 that data might be obtained of the level of training of the staffs of the six school districts, the teachers were divided into three groups. The first included all those teachers who had fewer than thirty semester hours beyond a bachelor's degree. (It should be noted here that of all of the elementary and secondary teachers of districts studied only one elementary teacher did not have a.bachelor's degree, and that in the low-expenditure group. ”Master's degree" was the second group which included teachers with a master's degree but with fewer than thirty semester hours beyond it. The third group included those teachers who had more than thirty semester hours beyond the master's degree designated as “Master's plus 30.” ”Adaptability and quality are used synonymously by Hort. .He defines and uses the terms interchangeably. The word 'quality"was inserted by this writer to better orient the reader who may not be familiar with Mort's definition of adaptability as was previously presented in Chapter I. 89 (1) Elementary Teachers' Education Level (K-6 grades staff) High Low Bachelor's degree 35 (46.19) 58 (46.81) .naster's degree 31 (23.34) 16 (23.66) Master's plus 30 _§,(4.47) _l,(4.53) 2 74 75 X I 15.913 18.05 - 5.99 There was a significant difference at the .05 level in the level of training between the elementary staffs of the high and low-expenditure districts. The data showed that there were more elementary teachers with advanced training in the high-expenditure districts and fewer than expected with a bachelor's degree only. The reverse was true in the low-expenditure districts. (1) (continued) Collapsing the above data High Low Bachelor's degree 35 (46.19) 58 (46.81) ‘naster's and above .32 (27.81) 11,(28.l9) 2 74 75 12 I 11.383 x .05 I (ldf) I 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level in the level of training of the elomentary staffs of the high and low-expenditure districts. A positive relationship existed between the level of support and the level of training of the elementary staff with the 9O high-expenditure district having more elementary teachers than expected with advanced training and fewer with bachelor's training only. The low-expenditure districts had more teachers than, expected with bachelor's training and fewer with master's degrees or above._ I Arithmetical conputation reveals that in high- expenditure districts the ratio of elementary teachers holding a bachelor's degree to those with a master's degree or above is .9 to 1. In the low-expenditure districts the ratio was 3.4 to l. (2) Secondary Teachers' Education Level (Grades 7-12 staff) (High - 110 for each 9th Low - 1 M for each 3.4 BA) High, Low Bachelor's degree 24 (35.77) 48 (26.23) Master's degree 40 (33.78) 28 (34.22) master's plus 30 1; (7.45) _2_ (7.55) 2 77 78 X I 18.183 13.05 - (2:115) - 5.99 There was a significant difference at the .05 level in the level of training of the secondary staffs of the high and low-expenditure districts. A positive relationship existed between the high expenditure districts and the amount of (advanced training the 91 secondary staff had. The reverse was true for the low expenditure districts. By inspection there were more secondary teachers in the high expenditure districts with advanced training and fewer with a bachelor's degree only than expected with the reverse being true in the low- expenditure districts. I (2) (continued) Collapsing the above data High Low Bachelor's degree 24 (35.77) 48 (36.23) .Master's and above 5; (41.23) §Q,(41.77) 77 78 x2 =- 18.243 x2.os - (ldf) - 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level in the level of training of the secondary staffs of the high and low-expenditure districts. (A.positive relation- ship existed between the level of support and the level of training of the secondary staff, with the high- expenditure districts having more secondary teaChers with advanced training and fewer with only a bachelor's training than expected. The lowhexpenditure districts had more secondary teachers with only a.bachelor's training and fewer than expected with a naster's degree or above. By inspection and arithmetical computation. in the high-expenditure district the ratio of 92 bachelor's degree secondary teachers to those with master's degree or above was .45 to 1. In the low- expenditure district the ratio of bachelor's degree secondary teachers to those holding master's degrees or above was 1.6 to l. ' D. REGENCY OF RECEIVING BACHELOR'S DEGREE (1) K-6 Staff High Low Bachelor's degree 36 (31.60) 29 (33.40) before 1952 Bachelor's degree 22 (18.96) 17 (20.04) 1952-1957 Bachelor's degree ;g_(19.44) g§,(20.56) 1958-1963 70 74 x: =- 7 .6803 x .05 = 5.99 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and lowbexpenditure districts with the high-expenditure district K~6 grade staff having a larger number of elementary teachers with bachelor's degrees for a longer period of time than expected and vice versa for the lowbexpenditure districts. 93 (1) (continued) Collapsing the above data High Low Bachelor's degree 36 (31.59) 29 (33.41) before 1952 Bachelor's degree §g_(38.41) §§,(40.59) 1952-1963 70 74 I: I 2.1831 X .05 I 3.84 There was no significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts K-6 grade staff when comparing the number of teachers who had received their bachelor's degrees on or before 1952 and after 1952. (1) (continued) Collapsing original data to (a) prior to 1958 and (b) 1958 and since High Low Bachelor's degree 58 (50.55) 46 (53.45) prior to 1958 Bachelor's degree ;g_(19.45) g§,(20.55) 1958 and since 70 74 xi - 7.6906 x .05 - 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts wdth the high—expenditure districts having fewer R-6 teachers who received their bachelor's degrees within the last six years. 94 (2) Grades 7-12 Staff High Low Bachelor's degree 46 (34.00) 22 (34.00) before 1952 — - Bachelor's degree 14 (15.50) 17 (15.50) 1952-1957 Bachelor's degree .15 (25.50) §§,(25.50) 1958-1963 75 75 2 X2 I 17.4076 X .05 .I 5.99 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and lowbexpenditure districts with the high-expenditure districts high school staffs having a greater number of high school teachers with bachelor's degrees for a longer period of time than expected. (2) (continued) Collapsing the above data High Low Bachelor's degree 46 (34) 22 (34) before 1952 Bachelor's degree g_9_ (41) g; (41) 1952-1963 75 75 2 x2 = 15.4946 x .05 =- 3.84 There*was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts with the high-expenditure districts 7-12 grade staff having a greater number of teachers receiving their bachelor's 95 degrees prior to 1952 and vice versa for the low- expenditure districts. (2) (continued) Collapsing further High Low Bachelor's degree 60 (49.50) 39 (49.50) prior to 1958 - Bachelor's degree .1; (25.50) §§,(25.50) 1958 to 1963 75 » 75 2 X I 13.104 ‘X2.05 3 3°84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between_the high and low-expenditure districts with a larger.proportion of the high-expenditure districts' high school staffs receiving their bachelor's degrees prior to .1958 and vice versa for the low expenditure district ., staffs. , J l I. REGENCY OF RECEIVING MASTER'S DEG§§§ (1) Grades RIG Staff High Low Master's degree 10 (8.18) 2 (3.82) before 1951 Haster's degree 11 (8.86) 2 (4.14) 1952-1957 ~ Master's degree __2 (12.96) .12 (6.04) 1958-1963 30 14 X2 I 6.7011 x2.05 - 5.99 96 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts. A larger preportion than expected of the high-expenditure K-6 staff received more of their master's degrees prior to the last five years than the low expenditure K-6 staff. (2) Grades 7-12 Staff High Low Master's degree 23 (19.23) 8 (11.77) prior to 1952 - - . . Master's degree 12 (9.92) 4 (6.08) 1952-1957 ~ - - - Master's degree 14 (19.85) 3.9, (12.15) 1957-1963 49 . . 30 - 2 x - 7.6348 x2.05 =- 5.99 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts. A higher preportion than expected of the high-expenditure 7-12 grade staff received more of their master's degrees prior to 1957. (2) (continued) Collapsing data to (a) prior to 1952 and (b) 1952 to 1963 High Low Master's degree 23 (19.23) 8 (16.77) prior to 1952 Master's degree 26 (29.77) 23_(18.23) 1952-1963 49 30 x2 a 3.204 28.05 -= 3.84 97 There was no significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts 7-12 grade staffs when comparing proportionate numbers of A teachers who received their master's degrees prior to 1952 and those who received them.between 1952 and 1963. (2) (continued) Collapsing original data to (a) prior to 1958 and (b) 1958 to 1963 High Low .Haster's degree 35 (29.15) 12 (17.85) prior to 1958 Master's degree 14_(19.85) .18 (12.15) 1958-1963 49 3O 2 x2 - 7.632 x .05 - 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts with a greater number of the high-expenditure districts 7-12 grade staffs than expected receiving their master's degrees prior to 1958 than the lowbexpenditure districts. I. NUMBER OF AREAS OF PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE TO TRACK 7-12 GRADE STAFF The areas were defined as those in which the teacher had attained at least 16 semester hours of formal college education. Only those statistics obtained from the seventh through twelfth grade staff were usable. .Altheugh all teachers from the kindergarten through the 98 sixth grade attempted to answer this question on the questionnaire, there was considerable confusion as to its meaning. A large number answered ”elementary education" instead of making the traditional interpretation of subject area which is apparently more readily understood by the seventh through twelfth grade teacher. No attempt was made to define the areas but rather the number of areas. Due to the Michigan Teachers' Certification Code most lichigan teachers are required to have three teaching areas, usually a major teaching area and two minor ones. Therefore, the 7-12 grade teadhers were divided into two groups, those who were qualified to teaCh (1) three or fewer areas and (2) more than 3 areas. a. High Low Three or less areas 45 (52) 59 (52) .Hore than three areas 31 (24) ‘11 (24) 2 76 76 X = 5.9678 x2.05 = 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level ‘with the high expenditure districts employing more high school teachers with a.greater number of qualified teaching areas. 99 G. EXPERIENCED TEACHERS vs, REGENCY OF ADDITIOIAL EDUCATION Recent studies1 have indicated that quality factors pertaining to classroom teaching could be measured in terms of the experienced teacher and the recency with which he or she has had additional training. Persons with fifteen or more years of experience were selected for this section of the study. The basis for the selection of fifteen or more years' experience was due in part to the peculiarity of the Michigan Teacher Certification Code which requires a.teacher to obtain ten additional semester hours of training within the first five years of teaching in order that he may have his teaching certificate renewed. In viewing the data of this study, it was also observed that most of the teachers new to the profession had had a considerable amount of additional study since graduation. It was also observed that this pace on the part of all of the) Younger} teachers seemed to continue through the first ten 0:: twelve years but that after 15. years experience there was a'noticeable drop in additional course work. There are two factors which may have sue bearing hlBernard McKenna. op cit., p. 4. 100 on this phenomenon. One factor is that since teachers are compelled to Obtain ten semester hours in their first five years of teaching which is usually one third of the requirement for a master's degree, they may be electing to continue work toward that degree. Some colleges have also put limits on the length of time allowed to complete advanced degrees.1 The second factor may be due to the large attrition.rate of the younger teachers. .It is common knowledge that a large percentage of eligible teachers leave the profession between their fifth and tenth year of teaching. This leaves primarily career teachers who are continuing their education toward the next degree level ordinarily Obtained prior to their twelfth year level of experience. Because of this, the career teacher of fifteen or more years experience was chosen for study. (1) ‘ Persons with fifteen or more years of experience and recency of education, K-6 grades staff High Low Credit in last 11 (9.67) 6 (7.33) . three years no credit last l§,(19.33) ;§_(14.67) three years 29 22 x2 - .6362 x2.05 = 3.84 101 There was no significant difference at the .05 level between the K-6 teachers in these selected school districts of high and low-expenditure when comparing recency of training. (2) Persons with fifteen or more years of experience and recency of education, 7-12 grade staff High Low Credit in last 15 (14.63) 5 (5.37) three years - no credit last .;§ (15.37) _§,(5.63) three years 30 ll 2 x2 .0681 x .05 - 3.84 There were no significant differences at the .05 level between the 7-12 teachers in these selected school districts of high and low-expenditure levels when comparing recency of training. H. ORIGIN OF SEAFF MoKenna and others1 believe that a wide variety of geographical backgrounds in the teaching staff is favorable to a school system as it reflects a quality educational program. Their studies showed highest correlations with the quality criteria for the elementary __‘ 1Bernard McKenna, OE cit., p. 6. 102 staffs when the per cent of staff residing outside the state prior to present employment was large. In the case of the secondary staffs, highest correlations with quality were found when a larger per cent of staff resided outside the district but in the state prior to present employment. Though it is not intended to rationalize on his findings, one may surmise that the elementary teacher who comes from outside the state brings to her classroom. usually a self-contained one, her past sociological and geographical experiences which are easily adapted into the format of the elementary curriculum, especially reading. communication, and social studies. While currently, the secondary level of instruction in schools is much more structured and institutionalized, usually being taught on a subject basis, which affords few opportunities in limited subject areas for the instructor of varied geographical and sociological background to make a classroom impact. In view of this a study of the origin of the staff for the selected school districts was done. 103 (1) Previous to present employment address of teachers of grades K-6 Origin High Low Out-of-state 17 (16.28) 16 (16.72) Outstate* 8 (13.81) 20 (14.19) .uetropolitan** 1§,(42.9l) }2_(44.09) 2 73 75 12 I 6.078 x .05 - 5.99 This statistic shows a significant difference at the .05 level in the previous addresses of the K-6 staff which is Observable in that the high expenditure districts have a larger proportion of its teachers coming from the ”metropolitan” and fewer than expected from outstate or out-of-state. (1) (continued) Collapsing the above data (combining ”outstate" and 'metropolitan”) Origin High Low Out-of-state 17 (16.28) 16 (16.72) In-state g9 (56.72 g2,(58.28) 73 75 x2 - .081 x3.os - 3.84 There was no significant difference at the .05 level in the K-6 staffs of the high and lowbexpenditure *Outstate to mean coming from all counties in Muchigan except Hayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties. **Metropolitan to mean‘wayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties . 104 districts when compared on the basis of 'out-of-state“ and 'in state.“ (1) (continued). Collapsing again High Low Out-of-state 17 (13.52) 16 (19.48) 25 36 . . x2 - 3.306 x’.05 - 3.84 This‘was not significant at the .05 level when the origin of the x96 staff was broken into two parts, 'out-of-state' and 'outstate' for the high and lowh expenditure districts. 4 (1) (continued) Collapsing again High Low Outstate 8 (13.63) 20 (14.37) metropolitan §§,(42.37) 12,(44.50) 56 59 - x3 ' - 5.990 x3.os - 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level with the high-expenditure districts having sore teachers whose previous residence was in the :netropolitan area than was expected. 105 (2) Previous to present employment address of teachers of grades 7-12 staff High Low Out-of-state 9 (14.40) 20 (14.60) Outstate 27 (23.35) 20 (23.65) Metropolitan 19 (38.25) 31 (38.75) 76 77 x: - 5.3152 x .05 - 5.99 There appears to be no significant difference at the .05 level in origin of grades 7-12 staff characteristics between the high and low-expenditure districts. The data were collapsed into two categories-- Out-of-state and In-state. (2) (continued) Previous to present employment address of.teachers of grades 7-12 High Low Out-of-state 9 (14.40) 20 (14.60) In-state §J,(61.60) §1_(62.40) 76 77 2 X2 I 4.9628 x .05 I 3.84 There was significant difference at the .05 level in these data. It was observed that greater numbers of high school teachers in the lowbexpenditure districts came from "out-of-state' while a larger number of high 106 school teachers in the high-expenditure districts “came from within the state” than expected. I. EQMESTIC AND FOREIGN TRAVEL In the studies reported by McKenna,1 it*was found that highest correlations with quality criterion for the elementary staff were Obtained when a greater per cent of the staff had traveled 500 miles in the previous eight years than had nOt. After consultation with the adviser of this study, it was decided to limit the time to last three years. The question was so constructed that it was also possible to obtain data regarding the number of trips each teacher took in the several categories of distance. In the category of foreign travel, Canadian travel under 150 miles was excluded because of the proximity of Canada to lflchigan and the Metropolitan Detroit area. Although data were obtained indicating the number of foreign countries visited by the teacher, it was felt that this criterion could not be used in this [form due to the varying length of time the teachers may or may not have spent in each country. It was surmised that some ‘ 1Bernard McKenna, op cit., p.6. 107 foreign travel was done by airplane or pleasure cruise with the stopovers in foreign countries varying from ninutes to weeks or months. Such experiences would have varying degrees of impact on the teacher which undoubtedly would.have been directly related to the mount of time spent in the country and the variety of experiences. However, the fact that the teacher had visited foreign countries was recorded separately in this study because it seemed to be. apneasure of the teacher's global interests. (1) Travel of staff of grades R-6 High , Low At least one trip of 43 (44.92) 43 (41.08) 500 miles At least one trip of 36 (36.04) 33 (32.96) ' 1000 miles At least one trip of 34 (36.04) 35 (32.96) 2500 miles Foreign travel _§_2 (35.00) _3§_ (32.00) 152 139 at: - 1.3707 x .05 - 7.815 (3df) There was no significant difference at the .05 level in anount and kind of travel of the £96 staffs of the high and low-expenditure districts. 108 (2) Travel of staff of grades 7-12 High Low At least one trip of 44 (49.56) 46 (40.44) 500 miles At least one trip of 43 (44.60) 38 (36.40) 1000 miles At least one trip of 33 (32.49) 26 (26.51) 2500 miles Foreign travel _§g (47.35) _33,(28.65) 174 142 x2 - 3.6118 x2.os - 7.815 There was no significant difference at the .05 level in amount and kind of travel of the 7-12 grade staffs of the high and low-expenditure districts. Collapsing the above data into two categories of travel---non-foreign and foreign. (2) (continued) Grades 7-12 staff High Low Non-foreign travel 120 (126.65) 110 (103.35) Foreign travel 54 (47.35) 32 (38.65) 174 142 x2 w - 2.8549 x?.05 - 3.84 There was no significant difference at the .05 .1evel when comparing the seventh through twelfth grade Itaffs' foreign and non-foreign travel of the high and low-expenditure districts . 109 Since there was a sizeable group of teachers who had taken four or more trips of varying lengths in the last three measurable (3) years an attempt was made to determine any significant difference. Travel of staff of grades R-6--Pour or more trips High Low Four or more trips 16 (16.49) 15 (14.51) of 500 miles ‘ _ Four or more trips _2_(8.51) _1,(7.49) of over 500 miles 25 22 x2 I .0912 x2.05 - 3.84 There was no significant difference at the .05 level in comparing the high and low-expenditure districts' kindergarten through sixth grade staffs and the number of teachers who had taken four or more trips of 500 miles and those who had taken four or more trips of over 500 miles. (4) Travel of staff of grades 7-12--- Four or more trips High Low Four or more trips 16 (16.96) 14 (13.04) of 500 miles Four or more trips .19 (9.04) ‘_§ (6.96) of over 500 miles 26 20 - ‘ x2 . .3592 x2.05 =- 3.84 110 There appears to be no significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts and the number of teachers who took four or more trips of 500 miles and those who took four or more trips of over 500 miles. J. ITERARY INTERESTS Previous studies1 of staff characteristics indicated the importance of the teacher being a reader outside the area of his profession which would be reflected in the quality of his teaching. Highest correlation obtained in the criteria used was found in the per cent of elementary and secondary staff who owned 150 or more non-professional books. Host of the more promising criteria used in previous studies‘was used here. 1Bernard McKenna, op cit., p. 6. 111 (l) Non-professional books owned by grades K-6 staff High Low Under 50 books owned 16 (16.65) 18 (17.35) 50-99 books owned 10 (12.24) 15 (12.76) 100-149 books owned 10 (11.26) 13 (11.74) 150+ books owned .35 (30.85) 2§,(32.15) 2 71 74 x - 2.2230 x2.05 - 7.815 There was no significant difference at the .05 level in the number of non-professional books owned by the K-6 grade staffs of the high and lowéexpenditure districts studied. (1) (continued) Collapsing the above data High Low Under 150 books owned 36 (40.15) 46 (41.85) 150 and over books 3;,(30.85) 3§,(32.15) owned 71 74 X2 I 1.9342 x2.05 - 3.84 There was no significant difference at the .05 level in the number of kindergarten through sixth grade *teachers in the high and low-expenditure districts who owned under 150 non-professional books and those who Gained 150 or over. 112 (2) Non-professional books owned by 7-12 grade staff - High Low Under 50 books owned 9 (12.17) 16 (12.83) 50-99 books owned 16 (15.58) 16 (16.42) 100-149 books owned 10 (10.71) 12 (11.29) 150 and over books 32 (35.54) 31 (37.46) owned 74 78 2 X2 I 2.3791 X .05 a 7.815 There was no significant difference at the .05 level in comparing the number of seventh through twelfth grade teachers of the high and low-expenditure districts and the number of non-professional books owned by each group. (2) (continued) Collapsing the above data High Low Under 150 books owned 35 (38.46) 44 (40.54) 150 and over books .32 (35.54) 33,(37.46) owned 74 78 X2 I 1.2628 12.05 - 3.84 There was no significant difference at the .05 level in comparing the number of seventh through twelfth grade teachers of high and low-expenditure districts who owned under 150 non-professional books and 150 and over. 113 (3) Non-professional books gugghaseg in last three years by K-6 grades staff High Under 10 books 14 (16.77) purchased 10-19 books purchased 15 (16.67) 20-29 books purchased 15 (16.27) 30 and over books .18 (22.19) purchased 72 x2 - 4.4681 33.05 - 7.81s Low 20 (17.23) 19 (17.23) 18 (16.73) 11 (22.81) 74 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of kindergarten through sixth grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who purchased under 10. 10-19. 20-29, and 30 and over non-professional books in the last three years. (3) (continued) Non-professional books pursuing: in last three years by R-6 grades staff. High Under 30 books 44 (49.81) purchased 30 and over books .38 (22.19) purchased 72 2 x I 4.3380 X2.05 I 3.84 Low 57 (51.19) 3.1 (22.81) 74 . There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts with a greater number of K-6 teachers than expected in the high- 114 expenditure districts purchasing more than thirty bOOks in the last three years. (4) Non-professional books purchased in last three years by grades 7-12 staff High Under 10 books 15 (13.23) purchased 10-19 books 16 (17.15) purchased 20-29 books 13 (12.25) purchased 30 and over books .30 (31.37) purchased 74 x2 = .8229 x2.05 = 7.815 Low 12 (13.77) 19 (17.85) 12 (12.75) 22.(32.63) 77 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of seventh through twelfth grade staff of the high and low-expenditure school districts who purchased under 10. 10-19, 20-29, and 30 and over non-professional books in last three years. (5) Non-professional books read during the last 115 three years by the grades K-6 staff Under 10 books read 10-19 books read 20-29 books read 30 and over books read x2 a 1.0377 x2.05 - 7.815 High 13 (15.29) 14 (12.82) 11 (11.35) .3; (33.54) 73 Low 18 (15.71) 12 (13.18) 12 (11.65) .11 (34.46) 75 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of K-6 staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who read under 10. 20-29, and 30 and over non-professional books in the last three years. (6) Non-professional books rggg,during the last three years by the grades 7-12 staff Under 10 books read 10-19 books read 20-29 books read 30 and over books read x: I 4.4528 X .05 I 7.815 High 7 (8.05) 19 (16.61) 10 (14.59) gg,(36.75) 76 Low 9 (7.95) 14 (16.39) 19 (14.41) .3; (36.25) 75 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of 7-12 grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who read under 10. 10-19. 116 10-19, 20-29, and 30 and over non-professional books during last three years. (7) Subscribe to non-professional magazines, K-6 grade staff High Low 0-2 20 (22.19) 25 (22.81) 3-4 25 (24.67) 25 (25.33) 5 or more .28 (26.14 ‘25 (26.86) 2 73 ‘ 75 X2 = .6952 X .05 = 5.99 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of K-6 grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who subscribed to 0-2, 3-4, 5 or more non-professional magazines. (8) Subscribe to non-professional magazines, 7-12 grade staff High Low 2 and under 14 (21.36) 29 (21.64) 3-4 34 (24.84) 16 (25.16) 5 and over 2§.(29.80) .3; (30.20) 2. 76 77 X2 = 11.9679 x .05 a 5.99 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts with the low expenditure districts 7-12 grade staff subscribing to two or fewer and five or more magazines than expected. 117 (9) Purchase of professional books during last three years by K-6 grades staff 0-9 books 10-19 books 20 and over books 2 X I 4.0384 x2.05 a 5.99 High 42 21 .1. 70 (46.35) (15.93). (7.72) Low 54 (49.65) 12 (17.07) ._2 (8.28) 75 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of K-6 grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who purchased 0-9, 10-19, and 20 and over professional bodks during the last three years. (10) Purchase of professional books during last three years by 7-12 grade staff 0-9 10-19 20 and over 2 x = 3.3219 x2.05 = 5.99 High 43 19 ‘1; 73 (39.91) (17.52) (15.57) LOW 39 (42.09) 17 (18.48) 21.(16.43) 77 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of 7-12 grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who purchased 0-9, 10-19, and 20 and over professional bodks during the last three years. 118 (10) (continued) Collapsing the above data High Low Under 20 62 (57.43) 56 (60.57) 20 and over .1; (15.57) '11 (16.43) 2 73 77 X2 I 3.3208 X .05 I 3.84 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of 7-12 grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who purchased under 20 and 20 and over professional books during the last three years. A preliminary inspection of the statistics had suspicioned a significant difference in favor of the low-expenditure districts in the 20 or over category. (11) Annual professional magazines ggpgggipgg,to by K-6 grades staff High Low O-l magazines ’ 33 (33.50) 34 (33.50) 2-3 magazines 35 (36.50) 38 (36.50) 4-5 magazines _§_(4.00) _g,(4.00) 74 74 ‘ xi - 2.1380 x .05 =- 5.99 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of K-6 grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who subscribed to 0-1, 2-3, 4-5 professional magazines annually. 119 (12) Annual professional magazines gpbscgipeg to by 7-12 grades staff High O-l magazines 19 (23 64) 2-3 magazines 44 (42.71) 4-5 magazines ,1; (8.43) 75 x: I 4.9948 X .05 I 5.99 LOW 29 (24.16) 42 (43.29) _§,(8.55) 76 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of 7—12 grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who subscribed to 0-1, 2-3, 4-5 professional magazines annually. (12) (continued) Collapsing data - 2 categories 0-1 and 2-5 High 0-1 magazines 19 (23°84). 2-5 magazines .56 (51.16) 2 75 X I 2.8618 x2.05 - 3.84 Low 29 (24.16) 41_(51.84) 76 There was no significant difference at the .05 level when comparing the number of 7~12 grade staff of the high and low-expenditure districts who subscribed to 0-1, and 2-5 professional magazines annually. 120 K. AGE OF STAFF (l) Chronological age of K-6 grades staff High Low 20-29 years old 19 (22.69) 27 (23.31) 30-39 years Old 19 (17.26) 16 (17.74) 40+ years old .3; (33.;5) ‘3; (33.95) 2 73 75 X2 I 1.7571 x .05 I 5.99 There was no significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts K-6 grade staff when comparing the chronological age of staffs in the groupings of 20-29 years old, 30-39 years old, and 40 years and older. (2) Chronological age of 7-12 grades staff High Low 20-29 years old 18 (32) 46 (32) 30-39 years old 21 (18) 15 (18) 40+ years old .38 (27) ‘16 (27) 77 77 x3 - 22.2128 x .05 I 5.99 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low~expenditure districts, with a greater proportionate number than expected of the high-expenditure 7-12 grade staff being “40 + years old." 121 (2) (continued) Collapsing the absve data to (a) 20-29 years old and (b) 30 years and older High Low 20-29 years old 18 (32) 46 (32) 30 years and older §g_(45) .3; (45) 2 77 77 x = 20.9610 X2.05 = 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts with more of the high-expenditure district 7—12 grade staff than expected being 30 or more years old while more of the low- expenditure district 7-12 grade staff was under 30 years old. (2) (continued) Collapsing the original data to (a) under age 40 and (b) age 40 and older High Low Teachers under age 40 39 (50) 61 (50) Teachers age 40 _3_8_ (27) 3:3; (27) and over 77 77 Xi = 13.8028 x .05 a 3.84 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts with more of the low-expenditure district 7-12 grade staff than expected being under 40 years old. By inspection it was 122 also noted that the high-expenditure district 7-12 grade staff were quite evenly divided between the two age levels, "under 40" and “40 and over." L. SALARY OF HIGH SCHOOL STAFF The data used in this study are the same as reported to the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools for the 1962-1963 school year by the participating school districts. Salaries included here are for total staff including teachers, librarians, guidance and counseling personnel. (1) Instructional staff salaries, 7-12 grades High Low $8000 and over 114 (56.23) 6 (63.77) $6500 - $7999 55 (78.72) 113 (89.28) $5000 - $6499 47 (81.05) 126 (91.95) 216 - 245 . x3 - 152.0495 1: .05 - 5.99 There was a significant difference at the 005 level ‘between the high and low-expenditure districts‘with over onedhalf the 7412 grade staffs of the high-expenditure districts receiving salaries of ”$8000 or more” which was more than expected. On the other hand, the low- ‘ expenditure districts' staffs had only six of a total of 123 245 persons receiving $8000 or more salary. Over onemhalf of the low-expenditure group received salaries of less than $6500. 2. SELECTED PUPILmSTAFF AND PHYSICAL T. “at. ‘- PLANT CHARACTERISTIfl}, In Chapter II several studies vere referred to which had to do with class size and staff adequacy.la2 There appeared to be considerable agreement that money spent for a combination of "well—qualified staff and small class size was more important than spending money for a small class size only." .cKenna and Ross used the pupil-total teaching staff ratio instead of the pupil- classroom teacher ratio. They also felt there was sufficient evidence indicating that the elementary and secondary class size statistics should be handled separately.3 Because most studies reviewed indicated there is a wide range of ways to determine pupilnteacher ratios, the 1DonaldH. Ross and Bernard McKenna. gl§§§_§;§gs The Multi-Million Dollar Question_(New York: Metropolitan School Study Council, 1955) Columbia, New York. 2C1arence A. Newall. glass Size and Educational Adaptability (See Page 15, Chapter II). 3Donald H. Ross and Bernard McKenna, op cit. 124 statistics given here used the total membership on the schools' rolls on the fourth Friday after Labor Day divided by the total professional staff. Since there appeared to be some question in previous studies regard- ing using the total K-12 student body as one unit, for purposes of this study, students and staffs of grades K~6 and grades 7 through 12 were treated separately. As another possibility, the same data were divided into grades K-9 and grades 10 through 12. The latter grouping was done because it has been suspicioned by many educators in Michigan that, since the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools encourages lower high school pupil-teacher ratios, there is a tendency for school districts to lower the high school (grades 10-12 or 9-12) ratios at the expense of the elementary schools' pupil-teacher ratios. (Elementary schools are not presently accredited by any similar agency.), Strayer1 found guidance-related items were sensitive to levels of support of the total educational program in school districts, with more services going to the high-expenditure districts. Library services and 1Stayer, page 16, Chapter II. plant adequacy also appeared to be sensitive to the quality criterion. In the data presented herein, two items were used for study of the high school libraries, books available per pupil and size of library. The source of data was from the 1961-62 North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools reports and the 1961-62 Annual Statistical Reports of each school district, as submitted to the Michigan Department of Public Instruction. Pupil-Teacher Ratio (Grades K-6) Pupils per Teacher Pupils per teacher High Low X Y A 27.3 x 28.9 B 19.0 Y 30.5 C 25.5 Z 31.0 E 23.9 52 31.6 52 19.57 s 1.21 x x t* = 2.96 t.05 = 2.35 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts studied in *Formula as developed by Wilfred J. Dixon and Frank. J. Massey, Jr. Introduction to Statistical Analysis (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1957) p. 123. Same used throughout study for "t" test. 126 pupil-teacher ratios in grades Kae, with the high- expenditure districts having the lower pupil-teacher ratio. Pupil-Teacher Ratio (Grades 7-12) Pupils per teacher High 7 . x a . 20.4 c 20.5 'x'2 20.5 3x .16 t t. Pupils per teacher NI<>< m|<| X 2.95 2.35 26.1 23.1 30.8 .26.9 13.05 There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts studied in pupil-teacher ratios in grades 7412 with the high- expenditure districts having the lower pupil-teacher ratio. Pupils per teacher 0U, mm There was a significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts studied in High 127 Pupil Teacher Ratio (Grades K-9) Pupils per teacher 2‘ 27.5 x 21.5 r 24.1 2 24.3 3?: 9.1 s y t.05 - 2.35 LOW 03”” ”00% e_e O0“ ND NO I 00 pupil—teacher ratios in grades x-9 with the high- expenditure districts having the lower pupil-teacher ratio. Pupils per teacher at" 99.» High X 15.5 19.5 21.9 18.9 10.4 t PupildTeacher Ratio (Grades 10-12) Pupils per teacher N0uom humaaaxsfl Ho.om mo.m¢~ mo.nm h~.oo~ mm.mh om.hmu Hm.mo mv.hmm Ho.Hh om.~mo mo.oe mm.omo mumaaon X umoo moduosnumsH mo.a mm.m Ho.H mN.m so. mm.m om.H mm.m on. oH.N Ho.a ov.m mundaon we soon momusnu token em.m md.oa mH.m «H.0H o~.m Hm.oa mm.m om.mn m~.m mo.mm mo.m hm.ha numaaon x. umoo soausuumasasod momalaoma sodumuwommsmnu mseosaoxo nonsuaosooxo soeumnomo usouuso mo menmwonsos Hmuou Human Hem anon emofiezmoxm mo «some Eamon—om mo masseuse 24 GIHCJ>¢>1N HOOSUm mmUNHN Hoonom uOfiHumdQ unseeded 145 ADMINISTRATION A. Costs per pupi1--dollar value u - o u.05 - o - significant difference (any other value of u than 0 indicates no significant difference. There was a significant difference at the .05 level with the high-expenditure districts Spending more money per pupil for the administrative function than the low-expenditure districts. 81 Costs per pupil-~percentage value u I 3 u.05 I o - significant difference (any other value of u than o indicates no significant difference). There was no significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts when comparing the percentage costs of the administrative function to the total costs. The high-expenditure districts spent more per pupil for the administrative function but not a greater proportion of total budget. .This would tend - to indicate that as the total budgets of the schools 146 increase. the administrative category of the budgets increase proportionately. IISTIUCTIOI a. cost per pupil--dollar value u - o u.05 - o - significant difference (any other value of u than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was a significant difference at the .05 level with the high-expenditure districts spending more money per pupil for the instruction category of the "budget than the lowbexpenditure districts. s. Cost per pupil-spercentage value u - o s ' u.05 - o - significant difference (any other value of u than c indicates no significant difference). There was a significant difference at the .09 level'with high-expenditure districts spending a mmaller percentage of the total‘budget for the instruction category of the budget. tossible conclusions: Although the high- expenditure districts spent more money per pupil for 147 instructional purposes than the low-expenditure districts, they spent at lower proportionate rate of the total budget than the low-expenditure districts. OPERATION A. Cost per pupil--dollar value u e o u.05 - o - significant difference (any other value than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was a significant difference at the .05 level with the high-expenditure districts spending more money per pupil for the operation category than the‘ low-expenditure districts. B. Cost per pupil-~percentage value u ,- 4 u.05 - o - significant difference (any other value of u than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was no significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts when the percentage costs of operation to total costs were compared. 148 Possible conclusions: The high~expenditure districts spent more per pupil for the operation of the school plant but the percentage of total expenditure was proportionately similar. This would tend to indicate that, as the total budgets of schools increase, the cost of operation increases proportionately. MAINTENANCE 008! A. Cost per pupil--dollar value u - o u.05 - o - significant difference (any other value of u than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was a significant difference at the .05 level with the high expenditure districts spending more money per pupil for maintenance costs than the low- expenditure districts. 3. Cost per pupil-~percentage value u - o u.05 - o - significant difference (any other value of u than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was a significant difference at the .05 level with the high-expenditure districts spending a 149 larger percentage of their total budgets for mainten- ance costs than the low-expenditure districts. Possible conclusions: The highwexpenditure districts spent more as well as a larger proportionate amount of their total budgets for maintenance costs than the low-expenditure districts. FIXED CHARGES A. Costs per pupil-~dollar value u - 3 u.05 - o - significant difference (any other value than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was no significant difference at the .05 level between the high and low-expenditure districts when comparing the dollars spent per pupil for fixed charges in the school budgets. 8. Costs per pupil--percentage value u - 3 u.05 a o - significant difference (any other value than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was no significant difference between the high and low-expenditure districts when comparing the per cent of total budget spent for fixed charges. 150 Possible conclusions: There were no measurable patterns when analyzing the category of fixed charges as compared to the total budget in dollars or per cents. The needs of each district appeared to be peculiar unto itself with no observable relationship with other budgetary items nor between districts of high or low-expenditure. AUXILIARY SERVICES A. Costs per pupil--dollar value u a o u.05 = o a significant difference (any other value than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was a significant difference at the .05 level with the high-expenditure districts spending more money per pupil for auxiliary services than_the low- expenditure districts. B. Costs per pupil--percentage value u a o u.05 = o a significant difference (any other value than 0 indicates no significant difference). There was a significant difference at the .05 level with the high-expenditure districts spending a 151 larger percentage of their total budgets for auxiliary services than the low-expenditure districts. Possible conclusions: The high-expenditure districts spend more money as well as a higher' percentage of total budget per pupil for auxiliary Services. This area of the budget may have more import for the high-expenditure districts than the low- expenditure.districts or it may be that after an adequate.level of support for the other areas of the budget is accomplished more money and percent of total budget is allocated to auxiliary services. Summary This chapter began with a presentation of the methods and techniques of analysis used in the conduct and method of the study. The techniques used to analyze the different kinds of data were the chi-square, the t-test. the Mann.Whitney, and the Kolmogorov- Smirnev two-sample test. An analysis of the data followed which was arranged by sections into the follow- ing areas: (1) the Teacher, (2) the Student, 152 (3) the Community, and (4) Analysis of the Budget. Por each section, tables graphically explained the data studied as well as designated the results of the statistical techniques used and the level of significance with a reliability figure. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS I. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM The major purpose of this study was to analyze data from selected Michigan school districts for the purpose of making comparisons of a selected group of previously identified possible quality related factors. It was hOped that in this manner, our quest for criteria to measure quality in education in Michigan schools might be advanced. II. EVALUATION OF RELATIONSHIP During the previous chapters, promising criteria which indicated a relationship to quality education were identified. From selected Michigan school districts, seleCted data which pertained to these criteria were presented. These data have been statistically treated. Following is an interpretation, discussion, and qualification of the findings. Speculative observations by the writer of possible uncontrollable variables will 153 154 be so noted. Since this study used many of the previously established more promising quality related criteria in education, an attempt will be made to speculate on how well the selected schools fit into the general pattern of findings of previous studies. This is recognized by the writer to be generally dangerous procedure since the techniques, design, and statistics of other studies varied so widely in form, method, and design. Although many of the criteria used in this study have been previously established, some question of the validity of the criteria is raised by the findings of this study. In those instances, an attempt to compare the general direction of sensitivity of this and previous studies will be made. This also may point up areas for further research. TBB STAFF - IN SUMMARY A simplified chart of the major results of the staff characteristics part of this study is presented. The chart summaries are brief in order that the reader may get an overview'of this part of the study. A more complete analysis and interpretation follows the chart. 155 433 no. as encasement unanswered: s.mmsue Mom hoops mo Icons: hmausovd ou >H Houmssu as con: no case one sanded can» nu cons unsaved HayfianH hduseoen once summon cosacuno moa>cn awesome» once .ooumen :umuoauumao suspensomxe son now new m.uoHo£Dsm mo honouom Auv.v moeumoc Rooms: nua3.nnonomou duos .unuuurfl mac senescence. seam no» new conundrum we :53 E. .m unmeaodmeo ucomoum ou uaOBMOHQBo oocoauemxe msoa>oum once unomehm 0» Hanna Ilmuoauuman onsuancmmxo swam new. 02 ooneauomxo mnwnosou escaeowm A¢V.N ousoauomxo duos Ilmuouuumao onsuaosomxe.nmam no» new. musedueme madnuoou HMUOB HA¢~.H mHMmZOHfidqum Bc£ muonocou duos lumuoauumdo ousuaonomxo 30A mHmeOHsflflflm 8‘33 02 new 02 02 mm.” mm» Ndlh oMHnome suspense .m> oucum oz :moauaouummmum mo cameuo ensue sq .n> ousunlmoluso oz .memum mo cemeuo scuaaomonuos .mumumuso .ounum new amouusonummmum mo cemsuo scaumusno descauannc mo Museums 02 .m> muosomou coucoauomxm 3:: consummaoo moanomeu mo_mmou¢ new seamen m.uoummz mo monsoon mix flHmmBHmu .th.on Amv.oa Amv.m Amv.m Anion on.o on.m 157 manageausaou manmsowusaou manhoodusaou manmsoHumHoH mfinmsoHumHoH scauoommsa an scuaaomouuofi oneness» shoe 02 02 Oz 02 Oz :Imuuauuman emanacsomxo swam QHMQZOHfiflfluN Bo .oma Hens: .oonso 02 oz exoon descaemomowmrsoz +ena .mvauooa..mmacm ..om Moons .00:30 02 oz exoon ascOAmmomoumrsoz w 8... Ho>o.c..e> nodes can oz oz emauu vaummsun mo Ho>cua Asouuoommsa may smooHOMIdo: oz 02 .smaeHOMIlmmcum mo Ho>sua smooHOM no sodas coma on on .oooa .oomaummuem «0 ao>uua ssuaaomouuea .en . on new ousunusonummsue «0 confine «Hun .oIM.. «HMHHHMU. .hHopme .mHa.OHm Anv.efl Amv.ma no..es AoV.MH on.ma Amv.HH 158 «noduoomesa may 02 on 02 oz 02 oz exoon duos no on madmcnousm newness» uuauumao «Goduoomnsa km. suspensomxo omen duos. on no» ascendausaon on on on mHmszHHGAMM BENB. Ndlh. -OIM ue>o one ca .mlo .eusoh n need axoon descameououm mo announce Ho>o one on .maIOd .mlc .eusoa n vase exoon assoaenomoum mo onnnonsm He>o one an .m~:o~ .mauoa..oa Hons: .euso» n used ones exoon Hoseammomoumrsoz Ho>o one on .om Hons: .mHsoh m used couscousm exoon Hoseamnomoumrcoz ue>o one on .mulou .mdloa .oa Hens: .nnsom n need neesnousm exoon Hecownnomoanrson GHMMHHMU othouHu. .hHflewHfl 3.1. Amv.om .mv.md Amv.ma A5 . SH 159 neuoomxe ssnu.auocao Ho mucosa ova mason. muoauuman ousudcsomxe munch +o¢ .mmlom swan so newness» .euooz mNIoN .mmsum «an» we choose: sousouw no» oz mo ems HsoamoHononno Acosuommuce an. mrm .76 633033 oz oz assoHnnomoum wanes» mlv .mtm .HIO cenauomnsm nesfiummcs oz oz accedmnomonm zaumoz Ho>o can on .ou Hoods Adequoommcd any .musez m umca mxoon oz oz Moccammomoum mo unmanned once so on exoon maloa cemccousm one mno .exoon maloa muoauumuc ousuancemxe Asoauoomnsa may .nucoz m puma «#003 new: so newcomeu mum ouoz oz new Hoseammomonm no nonsense mHMmZOHadamm 8(33 .NHIN. -mrM (HKMBHNU ohHQ.OHm othoaHu AHv.o~ Amv.mN $3 .3. Anv.mm Amv.- . 160 nauseous secs meaucacn uo>o one ooomw,msa>aouou muonosou uoauunac eunuaccomxe can: «one «a sense: seasons muouuueac ousuacdomxo 30H GA A on e one) nuoauunac one» Iaosomxe Ami: so H on a umOEas ms3 =uo>o new ova cos goo Hoods: no cause one .couoooxo can» Honda cos muse» co nuances» consumes ensusecmmxe nman «Alb mo Hones: Houmeuw nouummxm scan muse» om Ho>o oneness“ uoauumac ousuacsomxo nmnc «Has no sense: Housman .fiHflMZOHB‘AflM BCMB ameowaooom» .mmmswuoomo» .ue>o one scene meson accrue new III smug mo emcee zumacm Abv.m~ ago new on Acoauoommsd hay .oo Hons: .mmmum no» oz mo ems Hmoamoaocouco Anvomm HonHo can an Asosnooducs any .mmuow .momum new oz we ems HmowmoHocouco AHv.h~ NHIB .otz «HmnBHmu .hHo.on .mHn.0Hm 161 All of the criteria of the cost-quality factors listed in the preceding chart had been established by earlier studies. Some of the data in this study were grouped differently from the groupings used in the previous studies. Hewever, the general pattern and results of the findings in this research allowed for some general observations concerning the direction of sensitivity to compare with previous studies. An wanalysis was made to determine whether the selected high and low expenditure district staffs fit these criteria of expectations. It was found that the K-12 staff of the high expenditure districts had more teachers with: (l) a longer teaching experience (2) a higher level of training (3) bachelor's and master's degrees for longer periods of time than their counterparts in the low expenditure districts It was also found that the K-6 staff of the high expenditure districts had: (1) more of its staff recruited from the metropolitan Detroit area (2) 162 had purchased more non-professional books in the last three years The 7-12 staff of the high expenditure districts was found to have: (1) (2) (3) There low and high comparing: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) more teachers with previous teaching experience prior to present employment a larger proportion of teachers over 30 years of age and 40 years of age a higher salary range than their counter- parts in the low expenditure districts was no significant difference between the expenditure districts x-12 staffs when the experienced teachers and recency of training origin of staff--out-of-state vs. outstate foreign and domestic travel of staff by distance and number of trips non-professional books owned, non-professional books read in last three years professional books purchased in last three years 163 (6) yearly subscription to professional ~ magazines" There also was no significant difference in the x-s staffs of the high and low expenditure districts when comparing: (1) previous experience prior to present employment (2) origin of staff (out-of-state vs. instate) (3) number of non-professional magazines subscribed (4) the chronological age of staff The 7-12 groups had no significant difference when comparing: (1) origin of staff--out-of-state or outstate vs. metropolitan . (2) non-professional books purchased in last three years The writer would like to speculate on some of the uncontrolled variables that may have affected certain of the findings. It is common knowledge that there has been a critical shortage of teachers for the past several years. The results of this study showed that 164 there was no significant difference in the number of teachers who had previous experience prior to present employment in the elementary staffs of either group of schools studied. However, it was noted that there was a difference in the high school staffs of the two groups. The high expenditure districts high school staffs had-had more previous experience, older in age, more teaching experience, and older degrees. This mdght indicate that at the time of the study all school districts were competing for the newly trained elementary teachers because the population ”explosion“ has hit the elementary grades while the high school staffs of the high expenditure districts were either holding or having more of the older, experienced ”career" teachers gravitating to the higher salaries. This point is also borne out by the data which indicates the chronological ages of the elementary teachers in both types of districts are similar. Yet the higher expenditure districts have more elementary teachers with more experience. The "age“ criteria may indicate a greater number of the “trousseau teachers” have returned to their own neighborhood low expenditure districts 165 after their families have grown hence the chronological age similarity, while the high expenditure districts have had the longer experienced “career” teachers. There was also an indication of this in the criteria of "origin of staff” with more high expenditure districts elementary teachers than expected coming from the metropolitan area, while the low expenditure districts had more elementary teachers coming from 'outstate“ and “out-of-state” than expected. Also, more of the low expenditure districts high school teachers came from "out-of-state“ which may be an indication of salary factors and the recruiting procedures required of the low expenditure districts to fill their staffs since certain neighboring states are known to have lower salaries. (Inspection of the returned questionnaires indicated a large number of these teachers originated in these low salaried neighboring states.) It would appear that there is a possibility that once a teacher has been recruited to the metropolitan area from out-of-state, he or she may then move to the high expenditure district. As a statistic for this study, such a teacher would have been 166 tabulated as an “in state" or “metropolitan” transfer depending upon the breakdown of the data. Drevious studies had indicated 'out-of-state' origin a criteria of quality. Due to the limitations of the definitions of ”origin" in this study it can neither add nor detract from.previous findings because of the difficulty of ascertaining the true origin of the teachers. There appeared to be no significant differences in the amount of travel and the “literary interest“ of the high and low expenditure district staffs. Perhaps both groups of teachers may be caught up in the American avocation of vacation travel as well as a literary interest in the mass media. Mention should also be made that the proportionate number of teachers in both groups were found to be keeping up equally well in the "recency of training“ category. "I‘ll‘lcio CHIRACT81189133 There are many studies which have claimed a relationship between pupil-teacher ratio and Quality education.1_ ‘ 1c1arence a. lewall. w. p. 111. 167 It was found that the average teacher's salary in.Muchigan had amounted to over 60%.(62.9% for l9Gl-62) of the total school operating budget for the past ten years.1 A statistical analysis of the pupileteacher ratio data showed there was a significant difference between the high and low expenditure districts, with the high expenditure districts having the lower pupil- teacher ratio. Further arithmetical analysis also showed that the faverage" teacher of the low expenditure district was teaching approximately l/3 nore elementary students than the “average” teacher in the high expenditure districts. This coupled with the previous teacher salary data would give indication that the lower pupil-teacher ratios nay influence the increased cost per pupil of the high expenditure districts. The same observation can be made for the high school teachers of the two kinds of districts. They too 1Michigan Bducation.hssociation Bulletin-ahn Analysis of Trends in Revenue Receipts and Expenditures of Michigan School Districts during the period 1951-52 through 1961-62. Research Division, Michigan Education Association, Lansing, Michigan. March 1963, p. 12. 168 are teaching 1/3 more students in the low'expenditure districts than the high. It was also noted by inspection of the data that, whichever combination of grades included the data from the Junior high staffs (K-6 and 7-9 vs. x-9 vs. lO-lZ), the pupil-teacher ratio of both types of districts was increased considerably. This would indicate that the pupil-teacher ratio in the junior high schools (grades 7-9) was higher than either the elementary (K-S) or the high school (lo-12) because the teacher pupil ratio was lowered for the high schools when the ratio was figured for grades lO-12 only. The Junior high pupil-teacher ratio appears to be an area which may prove fruitful for further study since it may be that many educators attempt to keep class sizes smaller in the lower grades in order that the very young student may get a “good start" in school while at the same time the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools accreditation requires lower pupil-teacher ratios in the high school. This may tend to leave the Junior high pupil-teacher ratio as a matter of budgetary convenience. 169 As was mentioned earlier, there was no significant difference between the student counselor ratio and library books per high school pupil ratios of the two types of schools studied. In both instances, this, too, may be attributed to the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools high school accreditation requirements. The criteria of proportionate seating space available in the high school libraries as compared to the total high school student body indicated a significant difference, the high expenditure districts having a higher proportionate amount of space available. Although this criteria has not been well established in previous cost-quality studies, the North Central‘ Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools does have minimal library size requirements for accreditation. The physical size of the library is a minimal operational budget cost item because, at most, the additional size would slightly increase costs for heat, light, maintenance and upkeepo However, the initial investment for the cost of construction of a larger than minimum library facility may be an indication of the direction and intent the Board of Education, the staff 170 and community wanted the future educational program to take. Consequently this criteria of size of libraries may be very difficult to measure in terms of quality except by intent. COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS A simplified chart of the major findings of this part of the study was made which will facilitate an orderly discussion and interpretation. Community Criteria 1. Family income--above- below $3000 2. Family income--above- below $10,000 3. Education levels-- 25 years and older, 7th grade and above, below 7th grade Finding Significant difference* with more families "above $3000 income in low expenditure districts than expected. Significant difference* with more families above $10,000 income in low expenditure districts than expected. Significant difference* with more of the 25 years or older population in the low expendi- ture districts having 7th ‘ grade and above education than expected. This was also true when categorized by sex. *"Significant difference at the .05 level.“ 5. 6. 171 Community Criteria Education levels- 25 years and older, 12 grade and above, below 12th grade l4-l7 year olds in-not in school Mobility of popula- tion, moved into house 1958 or before, since 1958 Native vs. foreignéborn Finding Significant difference* with more of the 25 years and older population in the high expenditure districts having a 'thh grade and above” education than expected. Significant difference* with more of the l4-l7 year-olds not in school in the high expenditure districts than expected and vice versa for the low expenditure districts. Significant difference* with all of the high expenditure districts having more persons moving into house since 1958 than expected. Vice versa for low expenditure districts. There was a significant* difference statistically established with more of the lowwexpenditure communities having more foreign born residents. *"Significant difference at the .05 level." 172 The preceding summary of the statistical interpretation of the community characteristics data creates confusing results when compared with previous studies. Goodman1 found that the socio-economic community factors listed had a positive relationship to quality education and level of support. In this study, it was found that (l) the number of families with incomes above the $3000 and the $10,000 levels, (2) the proportionate number of persons 25 or older having a 7th grade or above education, and (3) the pr0portionate number of 14-17 year olds still in the schools of the low expenditure districts exceeded the expected. while the reverse was true in the high expenditure districts. While the high expenditure districts had a proportionately larger number of persons who had a 12th grade or above as well as more people "moving into present house since 1958" than was statistically expected. 1 Although the writer has reservations there was no significant difference when comparing the 1960 census figures the foreignéborn and the native-born in the two lGoodman. op. cit. pp. 1-25. 173 kinds of communities. As a matter of speculation. it might be interesting to study the community characteristics of these districts 20 or 30 years previous. Further, the data pertaining to mObility of population, one notes that there is considerable mObility in the high expenditure districts. It might be suspicioned that this moving.is causing a major change in socio-economic structure of the districts. This latter observation is given some support when it is noted that both the proportionate number of persons “below a 7th grade education” and ”above a 12th grade education" in the high expenditure districts is hrger than expected. It is suspicioned that the education level may have been lowered in recent years but hadn't reached the critical stage by the 1960 census. This suspicion is given some support by the writer's personal observation and inspection of the six communities. The reported previous studies which established the community characteristics criteria did not attempt to weight one criteria over another or determine the more dominant factor. There may be one basic or “combinations of these kinds of criteria or still others 174 which tend to influence the level of support. It could be argued from the results of this study that the higher proportionate number of persons in the community who have a 12th grade or above education may be the more dominant factor influencing the level of support since the other measured factors of income and the number of 14-17 year olds in school seem to be to the advantage of the low expenditure districts. Since the establishing of these criteria was not the purpose of this study, this limited study would be inconclusive except to point up a possible area for future study. The concern and design of this report did not include a study of the factors affecting the level of support for education:.but rather an analysis of selected socio-economic community characteristics of the selected communities which had been Observed in previous studies to correlate quality programs and expenditure levels. However, there are facets which may.more directly affect the level of support of 1 schools. There is evidence in other studies that the expenditure levels of Michigan school districts has a lJeung Rhee. op.cit. pp. 154-155. 175 direct relationship to the taxable wealth. Because of its possible importance for further study, a brief resume of school support, hence level of expenditure in Michigan schools is given. Excluding money from state sources, since the actual expenditure per pupil in most districts in the state exceeds the state's basic allowance of $224.00 per Child, all districts levy additional taxes above the specified minimum to participate in the state aid formula. This tax is levied on the local property to reach the actual total level of support in each community. Since the state equalized valuation per pupil has an approximate variance from $6000 to $27,000 between the low and high expenditure districts studied, it is apparent that a 1 mill levy in the two kinds of districts would bring $6.00 per pupil in the low expenditure districts and $27.00 in the high expenditure districts: or approximately 4% times as much for the same 1 mill effort. This would suggest the evaluation of the factor of tax effort as it affects quality education as a possible area for future study. There is a possibility that the high expenditure districts may 176 have put forth little tax effort of their total local potential to receive high per pupil expenditure. 177 .usoo Men as sauqusmsoo umooxo .o as case assess .museo Hem as ea consummaoo umooxo .Q os~s> usaaoo mm 05mm seamen .msosm He>oa ousuaosomxo Henna ass» seams: Ho Hosea segues ms3 macho asap ems» same on a.sonmans Ho amazed: segues .Euou.osocom on» uoauumao susuaosomxo amen How games: so possumao unevenness» 30H Mom =3OH: caused me coHuooHHo amoeba .Ho>oa mm on» us no: so unmosmasmae segues? ooumaa ma osam> Hmaaoo wooden .soss awesomosn ooumaa ma sous Hoodoo Haeman1nmas nonmenunman magmas 30H «soduoosao .me@ .man .mae .msu on .ma@ .mam .eac .man on .esa .mem .meo .meu on season on nonmsnunmes Harmssunman nosmsnunmsn nonmanunman nonmarunman Oscauuosao .mas .mam .mae .mam on .msa .mnm .mae .msm .mee .msm .mae .mam Assas> HsAHoo newsman assaaaxs< newness mosam sosssoussmz casumuomo soHuosuumsH sceumuumecesee MOHM M .soHusuonumusH one soaeesonuo no case How oousoeoum ea assassm poamaHmEAm e HMDBHQZMMNM mo manna Mudfinonbm 178 Comparing the dollar amounts in all of the accounting categories under the "dollar value” column it was found that all dollar expenditure levels of the high expenditure districts were significantly higher than the low expenditure districts except the category of ”fixed charges” where there was no significant difference between the-high and low expenditure districts. A different pattern developed in the percent column. This seems to concur with the findings of previous studies.1 Speculatively the writer will attempt to interpret the varying pattern of results in the percent columns as they might compare'with the dollar values. It was noted that although there was a significant difference in the dollar value spent for administrative services, there was no significant difference in the percent of the total budget used in the high and low expenditure districts which might indicate that as the salaries of personnel and the services in the other categories increase, the 1Donald H. Ross. op.cit. p. 397. 179 administrative expenses and salaries to adequately supervise and conduct the progran.have increased proportionately. I In the area of (1) Instruction. (2) lbdntenance, and (3) Auxiliary Services there was a significant difference in both dollars and percentages. The low expenditure districts spent a higher percentage of their:noney for instruction while the high expenditure districts spent a higher percentage for naintenance and auxiliary services. Although this study furnished no data to support the suspicions of the writer, the above phenomenon may have been caused by , low expenditure districts having been faced with a very inadequate budget which necessitated spending a greater percent' (but considerably less dollars) of its total‘budget for instruction at the expense of some of the auxiliary services, while the high expenditure districts with more total dollars were able to spend a larger percent for maintenance items and auxiliary services. It should be noted, however, that a personal inspection of nest of the physical plants in the districts studied found buildings 35 to 50 years old in the high expenditure 180 districts while the low'expenditure districts had more buildings in the 20 year range. This may account for both the high per cent and high expenditure level in the high expenditure districts for maintenance. The item of auxiliary services, which included such items as health services and recreation, could have been higher both in percentage and in dollars in the high expenditure districts because they had more money ‘with which to work. Limited budgets could have made these kinds of expenditures more difficult in the low expenditure districts. The operations item showed a significant difference in dollars spent with the high expenditure districts spending more but the percentage figures showed no significant difference. This may be attributed to the possibility that the housekeeping expectations are increased proportionately to other expenditures in the high expenditure districts. . Another alternative is that the efficiency of newer buildings in the low expenditure districts may require less proportionate operation monies. 181 Fixed charges showed no significant differences . in dollars spent nor percent of total budget between the high and low expenditure districts. The four kinds of expenditures listed under fixed charges were “rent,“ ”insurance,” ”interest on short term loans” and ”other." The amount of dollars spent varied from.a low of $2.16.per pupil in District B to a high of $9.46 in District A while the percent of expenditure varied from .34! in District B to 1.79% in system.z. . 7 By the very nature of the fixed charges, it is usually conceded that boards of education must expend these minimal amounts for the items listed without having a great deal of power of decision over the amounts. This can be noted by the character of such items as insurance, rent. and interest on short term loans. Therefore an analysis of fixed charges as an item which might have a relationship to quality education appears to have meagre potential, at best, when considering other budgetary.items of greater potentiality. 2. 182 III. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The following general conclusions were reached: This study of selected.nichigan schools agrees only in part with the earlier studies which had located possible quality related education factors that were also related to level of support. The factors of quality in education need to be more refined for better identification. The level of support in.education does not assure that all of the presently accepted factors related to quality education will be attained in the same proportionate degree in all districts. From an analysis of the results of the present study, the following several more specific conclusions resulted: 1. The criteria of persomel status factors including such items as length of teaching experience, level of training, areas of teaching. competence and salaries paid show a positive 4. 183 sensitivity to level of expenditure for education in the selected Michigan schools studied which compared favorably with previous studies. In the area of staff origin, domestic and foreign travel, and literary and professional interest. the relationship of the previously established factors related to quality and the expenditure level was not sensitive in the Mdchigan schools studied. The class size criteria and level of support which had been used extensively in previous studies was found to be a measure with considerable sensitivity in the Michigan schools studied. The community characteristics of income level, education level, school age not in school, ,\/' mObility of population, and native - foreign born population and the level of support comparisons were inconclusive or for the most part showed a notable reversal from previous studies. IV. 1. 184 The budgetary areas of dollar expenditure, for the most part, supported the previously identified patterns in earlier studies. The trend being that as the costs increased, all areas of the dollar budget are increased but the percents of the total expenditure per pupil in some areas were different when comparing the high and low expenditure districts indicating that as the total expenditures increase, more and more money was not spent proportionately in each of the categories. RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH A series of related studies including the total state should follow this research which could validate, expand and go into depth on the variables used here. Future research should attempt to develop uniform instruments applicable to all parts of the country which will assure a consistency of the kinds of data collected for statistical interpretation. 5. 185 The implications of this limited study suggest that there is a critical need for a.more comprehensive depth study or studies of staff characteristics and adequacy, including class loads, physical plant facilities, community characteristics, and level of support as they relate to the overall requirements for the education of the youth of the state of Michigan. There are further implications in this study to indicate a need for further study of cost-quality factors as they affect the Junior high or middle schools. Recruiting practices of personnel directors determine the kind of teachers a school employs. The characteristics of the kinds of teachers they prefer is relevant to the kind of teachers hired. A study of recruiting practices may throw further light in the area of personnel and cost—quality factors. 186 6. A great amount of time, effort and money is still needed to assure a more refined approach to solving the problem of defining quality education and relating it to costs. This study will add one more small facet in our quest for knowledge which may help clear the horizon a small bit for future researchers.‘ This contribution may chart a path for others to follow, detail and describe. Short cuts will eventually be found which will lead to the ultimate objective of educational quality. This study does not prove by its complexity of approach and conclusions that quality is not just a thing--yet we know quality is not an absolute as we define it today--but many different things to many different people. BIBLIOGRAPHY 187 BIBLIOGRAPHY Ayer, Frederick L. ”An Analysis of Controllable Community Factors Related to Quality of Education." UnfiniShed doctoral thesis, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1950. Ayres, Leonard P. An Index Number for State_§chool Systems. (New‘York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1920) po 54. Bertocci, Peter A. Education and the Vision of Excellence. Boston: Boston University Press, 1960. Bloom, Benjamin S. "The 1955 Normative Study of the Rests of the General Education Development," School Review 64, March 1956, pp. 110-24. Bloom, Benjamin S. and Statler, Charles R. "Changes in the States on the Tests of General Educational Development from 1943 to 1955.” School Review 65, Summer 1957, pp. 204-21. Bothwell, Bruce R. Creatiye Expenditures f9; Quality Education. (New‘York: Associated Public School Systems, 525‘West 120th Street, 1958) p. 8. Bowyer, Vernon. Measuring the Economic Value of Education to the States. Improving Educational Research, 1948 Official Report. (washington, D.C., American Education Research Association, National Education Association) p. 178. Boyer, E. Gilbert. "Trends in Staff Characteristics." (New York: Ed. D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1954) pp. 38-39. 188 189 Bradfield, James M., and Moredock, H. Stewart. Measurement and Evaluation in Education. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1957. Brickell, Henry M. An Analysis of Certain Non-Instructional Staff Expenditures. (Doctor's Thesis, New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958) p. 41. Buley, Hilton C. "Personnel Characteristics and Staff Patterns Associated with the Quality of Education.” (New York: Ed. D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1947) pp. 13, 18-22, 27-30, 48-61. Burke, Arvid J., Chairman et a1. Does Better Education ‘Qgst More? (washington: Committee on Tax Education and School Finance, National Education Association, 1959) pp. 28, 33, 35-36, 37. Clark, Harold F. Cost and Qualigy in Public Education. Syracuse University Press, 1963. Commission on Current Curriculum.Deve10pments, Robert S. Gilchrist, Chairman. A Report of ASCD's, Using Current Curriculum Developments. Association for Supervision and Curriculum DevelOpment, National Education Association, 1201 Sixteenth Street, N.W;, washington 36, D. C., 1963. Commission on the Legal Structure of Rhode Island Public Education. School for our Children-- Report of a Survey of the Structure and Operation of the Rhode Island Public School System, velume I (Providence, Rhode Island, 1941), pp. 58-98.- Committee on Educational Finance. Financipg the Changing School Prggram- National Education Association, 1962. 190 Committee on Tax Education and School Finance. ”The Problem of Cost-Quality Relationship in Public Education." (Washington: National Education Association, 1956) p. 8. Conant, James B. The American High School Tod y. (New York: McGraweHill Book Company, 1957) pp. 38 and Appendix G, pp. 132-3. Connecticut Citizens for the Public Schools Committee on Financing Education. A Study of Factor; ‘Rgiated to Academic Achievement in the Public Schools. Hartford, Connecticut Citizens for the Public Schools (120 Gillett Street), June 1957, p. 7. Council of State Governments, Francis S. Chase, Director. ‘The Forty-Eight State School Systggg, A Study of the Organization, Administration, and Financing of Pubiic Elementary and Secondary Education. Chicago: The Council, 1949. DiCarlo, Louis M. Our Educational Dilemma_(The 1959 J. Richard Street_iecture). Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1959. Dixon, Wilfred J., and Massey, Frank J., Jr. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. (MmGraw- Hill, New York, 1957) p. 123. - Education, U.S.A. The Shape of Education for 1963. Volume 2,.A Handbook on Current Educational Affairs. National School Public Relations Association, National Education Association, waShington, D.C., 1963. Education, U.S.A. The Shape of Education for 1964, Volume 4, A Handbook on Current Educational Affairs. National School Public Relations Association, National Education Association, washington, D. C., 1964. Edwards, Allen L. Experimental Designiig Psychological Research. (New Yerk: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1962) p. 108. 191 Eurich, Alvin C. "Money Isn't Everything," in Cruc a1 Issues in Education. Henry Ehlers and Gordon C. Lee, Editors. New'York: Henry Holt and Company, 1959. Ferrell, Thomas. ”Relation Between Current Expenditures and Certain Measures of Educational Efficiency in Kentucky County and Graded School Systems," George Peabody College for Teachers. Contributions to Educatigp_#216 (Richmond, Kentucky: The Author, Eastern State Teachers College, 1937), pp. 1-114. Firman, William D. et a1. Procedures in School Quality Evaluation. Mimeographed First Draft, 1961, pp. 1, 1-10, 67. Ford Foundation. The New Teacher. Office of Reports, 477 Madison Avenue, New Yerk 22, New'York, 1962. Frasier, George W. The Control of City School ginggces. (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Company, 1922) pp. 21-85. Furno, 0. Frederick. The Pro action 0 Schoo ua t gigm Expenditurefievei. Unpublished doctor's thesis (New’YOrk: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1956), pp. 47-48. Goodlad, John S. ”Room to Live and Learn: Class Size and Room Space as Factors in the Learning- Teaching Process."- Childhood Education, 30 (1954) pp. 355-61. Goodman, Samuel M., Director. The Assessment of School Quality. Research Offices, The University of the State of New York, The State Education Department, Albany, Hew'YOrk, March 1959, pp. 1-25, 26, 27, 34, 45-46. Grace, A. G., and Moe, G. A. ‘State Aid and schooi Costs, Report of the Rggents Inguigy. (New Yerk: .McGrawHHill Book Company, 1938) pp. 324-329. - 192 ‘ Grimm, Lester R. Our Children's Opportunities in, Relation to School Costs.. (Springfield, Illinois: Illinois Education Association, Department of Research and Statistics, 1938) pp. 1-46. Grogan, Rdbert S. "Determination of Staff Characteristics That Should Be Assessed In Future Studies.” Doctoral Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1961. Hecker, Stanley. Statistical Report published by Michigan Education Association, 1960-61. Hicks, Alvin W. A Plan to Accelerate the Procggs g; Adaptation in a New'YOrk City school Communigy. (New York: Ed. D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1942) pp. 74-75. Huebner, Dwayne, Editor. A Reassessment of the Curriculum. Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, NeinOrk, 1964. Hutchins, Clayton 13., and Manse, Albert R. Egpgnditures for Education at the Mid-Centugy. (Washington: Cool Printing Office, 1953) HE gegearch Bulletin, Volume 1, No. 2, for Description of Time Scales. "Instrument.to Determine Cultural Level" as - developed by: ‘William.A. McCall and John P. Herring, McCall Educational Background Questionnaires (New“YOrk: Laidlaw Brothers, 1936). . Jehns, R. s., and Morphet, Edgar L. Financigg the . Pubiic Schools. Englewood—Cliffs, New’Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc., 1960. Knott, Widnell D. ”The Influence of Tax-Leeway on Educational Adaptability." New'York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1939. 193 Kochnower, William. "The Case for Centralization,“ in Phi Delta Kappan. XV:9, Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa, January, 1961. Lohman, Maurice A. "The Fortunes of Educational Support," IAR Research Bulletin. Vol. 2, No. 3, Teachers College, Columbia University, April 1962, pp. 5-7. McKenna, Bernard. ”Characteristics of Quality in the Professional Staff,” IAR Research Bulletin. Institute of Administrative Research (New’YOrk: Teachers College, Columbia University, Vol. 2, No. 1, October 1961) p. 4. Mallory, David. New Approaches in Education. National Council of Independent Schools, Boston,_ Massachusetts, 1961. Michigan Education Association Bulletin, An.Analysis of Trends in Revenue Receipts and Expenditures of Michigan School Districts during the Period 1951-52 through 1961-62, Research Division, Michigan Education Association, Lansing, .Michigan, March 1963, p. 12. Miner, Jerry. Social and Economic Factors in Spgnding for Public Education. Syracuse University Press, 1963. Mort, Paul R. "Cost-Quality Relationship in Education," in JOhns and Morphet (Eds.). Prdblems and issues in Public Finance. -New“York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1952. Mort, Paul R. ”The Financing of the Public Schools of Maine." .Repoit of a Survey of State and Local Support of Pubiic Schools (Augusta, Maine: School Finance Commission, 1934), pp. 64-97. Mort, Paul R. Measurement of Educational Need. (New Yerk: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia, 1924) p. 254.‘ 194 Mort, Paul R. (Director). Reconstppction of the System of PublicSupport in the State of New Jersey, Report of the Governor's School Survey Commission, II (Trenton: The Commission, 1933), pp. 26-28. Mort, Paul R. "School and Community Relationships to School Quality," Teachers Coliege Recopg, IV, No. 4 (January, 1954), pp. 201-14. Mort, Paul R., and Cornell, Francis G. Adaptability p§:Public Schooi78ystems. (New'York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1938), x-XI. Mort, Paul R., and Cornell, Francis G. American Schools in Transition. (The Pennsylvania Study) (New Yerk: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1941) pp. 89, 93-94, 99-100, 134-135, 163, 167-195, 297. Mort, Paul R., and Pierce, Truman. A Time Scale For Measuring the Adaptabilityof School Systems. New'York: Metropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1947. Mort, Paul R., and Vincent, William S., and Nowell, Clarence A. The Growing Edge. New York: Metropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1945. The National Cost of Education Index 1962-1963. School Manpgement. Vol. 7, No. 1, January 1963, p. 98. National Education Association, Policies Commission. An Essay on Qpalipy in Public Education. washington: National Education Association, 1959. National Education Association, Project on Instruction. Schools for the 60'p, McGraw-Hill, 1963. 195 National Education Association Research Bulletin, A Minimum Standard of Quality Education. . Vol. 40, No. 4, December 1962, p. 99. Nowell, Clarence A. Class Size and Educational Adaptability. (New'York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1943) Norton, John K. The Ability of the States to Suppprt Education. (Washington: National Education Association, 1926) pp. 1-136. Merton, John K., and Lawler, Eugene S. Unfinished pusiness‘in American Education. (WaShington: American Council on Education, 1946) p. 34. Pertsch, Frederick. "Some Effects of Class Size on the Educational Program in New'York City Elementary Schools," The Advancing Front of Education, Eighth Yearbook. (New“YOrk: New Yerk Society for the Experimental Study of Education, 1943) Powell, Orrin E. gducatignaigReturns at Vapying Expenditure povels. (New YOrk: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1933) Rhee, Jeung. "An Analysis of Selected Aspects of -Public School Finance Systems in.Muchigan." (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Midhigan State University, 1961) Ross, Donald H. Administration for Adaptability. New'York: Metropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958, pp. 24, 152-166, 182-188, 352, 368, 495-496. Ross, Donald K., and McKenna, Bernard. Class Size: The Multi-Million Dollar Question. (New'York: Metropolitan School Study Council, 1955) Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956) pp. 116-136. 196 Simpson, Robert J. Selected Relationships Among Reported Expenditures and Programs in Metropolitan school Districts (Detroit: Unpublished Thesis, Ed. D. Mayne State University, 1961) pp. 188-189, 1947 195. Strayer, George D. A Repprt of a Survey of Pupiic Education in the State of west Virginia. (Charlestown, west Virginia, Legislative Interim Committee, 1945) Swanson, Austin D. "An Analysis of Factors Related to school System Quality in the Associated Public School Systems." Doctoral Project, Teachers College,.Columbia‘University, 1960. Swanson, Austin D. "Relations Between.Community Size and School Quality,” IAR Research Builetin. Vol. 2, no. 1 (October 1961), pp. 1-3. Teresa, Anthony J. “An Analysis of the Effect of ‘Various Specific Items in school Accounts." (Hew'York: unpublished Ed. D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1955) pp. 35-38. Thaden. J. r. Egpalizipg Educatipnal Oppprtupity gpggggp Community School Districts. Michigan State University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Department of So: iology and Anthropology, Bulletin No. 410, (East.Lansing, Michigan, January 1957) pp. 1-41. United States Bureau of Commerce, “United States Census of Population l960--General Social and Economic Characteristics, Michigan." Final Report P.C. (1) 24C (washington, D.C.: 1962, united States Government Printing Office). united States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. ”United States Census of Population: 1960 Michigan." Final Report P.C. (1) 24C, united States Government Printing Office, washington, D.C., 1962, PP. 24-292. 197 The United States Office of Education. Prpgress of Public Education in the United States of America, i962-l963. United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, United States Government Printing Office, washington, 1963. Vincent, William S. "Criteria of Quality." 'ipg Research Bulletin. Vol. 2, No. 3 (New'YOrk: Teachers College, Columbia University, April 1962), pp. 1-4. Vincent, William 8. “Quality Control: A Rationale For Analysis of a School System." iAR Research Bulletin, I (January 1961), pp. 1-7. Vincent, William S., McKenna, Bernard H., and Swanson, Austin D. "The Question of Class Size," IAR Research Buiietin, I, 1, October 1960, pp. 1-4. walker, Helen M., and Lev, Joseph. Statistical inference. (NeW’York: Henry Holt and Company, 1953) PP. 81-108, 426, 440-443. west, Allen M. "Paying for Schools is Everybody's Business." Research Bulletin 38. p. 4. washington: National Education Association, December 1960, p. 109. woollett, Lorne H. gpe.Cost:Quaiity Relationship on the Growing Edge. Metropolitan School Study Council Research Studies, No. 4. (New'YOrk: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1949) p. 65. APPENDIX A RELATED DATA 198 199 TABLE A-I NAMES OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN WAYNE, OAKLAND, AND MACOMB COUNTIES Wayne County One2 High North3 K-12 School Central 1. Allen Park Yes Yes Yes 2. Brownstown #1 No 3. Carson No 4. Cherry Hill Yes Yes No 5. Dearborn City Yes No Yes 6. Dearborn #3 No 7. Dearborn #4 No 8 . De arborn #7 No 9. Dearborn #8 Yes Yes No 10. Detroit Yes No Yes 11. Ecorse Yes Yes Yes 12. Fairlane No 13. Garden City Yes Yes Yes 14. Gibraltar No 15. Grosse Ile Yes No Yes 16. Grosse Pointe Yes Yes Yes 17. Hamtramck Yes Yes Yes 1 Districts offering total kindergarten through 12th grade education program including a high school within the district and less than 10%.non-resident students. 2One high school in the district instead of several. 3Schools accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools for at least the last five years. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 2‘. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33, 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 200 Hand Harper Woods Heintzen Highland Park Huron Inkster Lincoln Park Livonia Maple Grove Melvindale lankin Mills lerthville Plymouth ) Redford Union River Rouge Riverview Romulus Southgate South Redford Snnpter Taylor Trenton Van Buren Wayne Wyandotte One High North K-12 School Central lo Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Ho No Yes , Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes '0 Yes He Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lo 'Yes Yes Yes Yes lo . Yes Yes Yes No . Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ‘ Yes Yes Yes Yes — Yes Yes Yes Yes 201 TABLE A-II THE FORTY‘TWO SCHOOL DISTRICTS BY COST PER PUPIL RANK 1960-61 Expenditure Expenditure Per Pupil' Per Pupil 1. 622.48 22. 386.61 2. 561.31 23. 384.63 3. 555.49 24. 384.35 4. 521.59 25. 371.82 5. 518.28 26. 370.70 6. 507.63 27. 368.54 7. 486.35 28. 366.70 8. 468.50 29. 365.22 9. 467.89 30. 359.18 10. 460.78 31. 357.84 11. 453.33 32. 357.59 12. 452.99 33. 355.74 13. 448.12 34. 354.25 14. 436.44 35. 348.73 15. 435.29 36. 346.99 16. 427.13 37. 338.54 17. 411.95 38. 335.17 18. 408.13 39. 329.07 19. 394.74 40. 323.18 20. 393.50 41. 301.69 202 Macomb County One High North K-12 School. Central 1. Anchor Bay Yes No Yes 2. Armada Area Yes No 3. Center Line Yes Yes Yes 4. Chesterfield No 5. Chippewa Valley No 6. Clintondale Yes Yes No 7. East Detroit Yes Yes Yes 8. Fitzgerald Yes Yes Yes 9. Fraser Yes No Yes 10. Lake Shore Yes Yes Yes 11. Lakeview' Yes Yes Yes 12. L'Anse Creuse Yes No Yes 13. Memphis Yes No No 14. Mount Clemens Yes Yes Yes 15. New Haven Yes No No 16. Richmond Yes No No 17. Romeo Yes Yes Yes 18. Roseville Yes Yes Yes 19. South Lake Yes Yes Yes 20. Utica Yes Yes “Yes 21. Utica Yes Yes Yes 22. warren Yes Yes Yes 23. warren woods No. 303 Oakland County One High North K-12 School Central 1. Avondale Yes No Yes 2. Berkley Yes Yes Yes 3. Birmingham Yes No Yes 4. Bloomfield Hills Yes Yes Yes 5. Brandon Yes Yes No 6. Clarenceville Yes me Yes 7. Clarkston Yes Yes No 8. Clawson Yes No Yes 9. Dublin No 10. Farmington Yes No Yes 11. Ferndale Yes Yes Yes 12. Hazel Park Yes Yes ‘Yes 13. Holly Yes no Yes 14. Huron Valley Yes Yes No 15. Lake Orion Yes Yes Yes 16. Lamphere Yes no Yes 1?. Lyon Township Yes no No 18. .Madison Township Yes No Yes 19. Hovi No 20. Oak Park Yes Yes Yes 21. Oxford Yes no Yes 22. Pontiac Yes No Yes 23. Rochester Yes Yes Yes 24. Royal Oak Yes no Yes 25. Southfield Yes Yes Yes 26. Troy Yes Yes Yes 27. ‘Walled Lake Yes Yes Yes 28. waterford Yes me Yes' 29. ‘West Bloomfield Yes no Yes 204 OH ow m mm.Ho¢ oH ms.om¢ a mH.mm¢ a mm.mHv m sm.vo¢ 0H s mm o om.com m mm.so¢ m em.mme o HH.m~v a oo.mo¢ m m mv oH mv.mme m om.mov m oo.mm¢ m mo.mH¢ m mm.mmm m m as m om.mm¢ a mm.mmv oH ~m.m~¢ oH mm.mmm oH em.osm a o om m o~.mom o me.som m mm.om¢ m mm.mH¢ o mm.mov o m mH m mH.~sm m m~.mHm m Hm.Hmm m nm.aom e mm.vm¢ m e mm a mH.mmm e mm.H~m e oo.mm¢ m mH.os¢ .m mm.Hm¢ a m mm a om.oms m m¢.mmm o m~.mmv v eo.vom m ~¢.mHm m H a m mm.mom m Hm.Hom H em.soo H vo.sHo H ma.~oo m N m H mm.mmm H m¢.-m a ma.mmm m mm.va m a~.mmm H wmmuw m swam xnmm mmeHoMflxcmm Hmaommm gems omuammH some mmnmmmm seam mmsawmmnnmwm ROM xsmm Hosea .mxm .mxm .mxm .mxm .mxm Nmnaomd mvbomma mmnhmmd mfidmfi AOOEUm NEE mom mafim QZ¢AAHmDm mmm mMMDBHQmeNM EBHK .Hmlowma ZH mBUHMBmHQ AOOZUm AHmDm mam MMDBHszmXN ZHB mOB HHHI‘ flAmdfl 205 Nondoma mwbommfi mmflhmmfl mfidmfl HoomUm mmB mom K24m 924 HHADA “Hm mmmDBHDzumNm EBH3 .HoloomH 2H mBUHmBMHQ AOOEUm AHADN mum NMDBHQZNMNN ZN? ZOBBOQ >Hl4 3:9 m we 0H m~.mom 0H on.mmm m mm.omm m mm.mmm m um.omm 0H 0H no m H¢.mmm m, mu.vmm 0H 5H.mom 0H mm.mmm 0H hm.mmm m 5 on n oc.mmm m mm.mvm h vb.on n mo.hom n hm.mm~ .m h on o Hm.mmm h mm.mvm m mo.¢mm m mm.mmm m mo.mHm h m mm m mw.mmm m vmommm m om.mmm m o>.Hm~ m mm.mmm o m an m mo.vom m 5H.mmm m mH.NNm m mo.Hom m m~.vmm m o pH m mm.vmm o no.mmm m mm.Hh~ m mo.vmm m mv.mn~ o N MH m OH.mom m+ mH.mNm o Nm.mm~ m om.om~ N mm.mnw m m mH m. mH.mHm m mm.Hom m oo.vm~ v m>.mmm w mH.~m~ m H m H mw.mhm H m¢.o>m H mm.om~ H om.mvm H mm.>mw H aflfimfiflfim same mwaHeoH xmimfimymwwmwmumawflmm. mmammmH 3% How xsmm Haney .mxm .mxm .mxm .mxm .mxm APPENDIX B COPIES OF CORRESPONDENCE AND QUESTIONNAIRE FORM 206 207 SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK 12541 Second Avenue Highland Park,3, Michigan Dear Fellow'Bducators At one time or another, each of us in education has found it necessary to conduct studies to partially fulfill requirements for a degree. I find myself in this spot in making the following request. (A.MSU requirement for Ed.D.) we are studying the role expectations of selected successful teachers to determine the amount of con- commital learning and experience beyond the formal “college” training teachers take with them to teach children. It is hoped that, as a result of this research, we may disclose other usable criteria in our quest to measure quality in education. Although we are approaching the end of the school year, it is my hope you will take 5 to 10 minutes of your busy day to complete the enclosed questionnaire. A stamped self-addressed envelope is enclosed for your convenience. Should you want a tabulation of the results of this portion of the total study for your own files, please give your name and address indicating your request on the questionnaire. Thank you for a reply at your earliest convenience. very truly yours, NORMAN P. nxmmn /s/ Norman P. weinheimer Superintendent of schools Enclosures 208 May-June, 1963 TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS QUESTIONNAIRE Please insert word or check appropriate answers. 1. I have been employed in present system years.. Previous experience years. 2. Prior to my present employment, I was considered a resident of the state of in the City Of 0 3. I have made round trips during the past 3 years, excluding visits to immediate family and foreign travel, as follows: a. ___(number) round trips of 500 miles or more. b. ___(number) round trips of 1000 miles or more. c. ___jnumber) round trips of 2500 miles or more. 4. I have visited (number) foreign countries (excluding "local trips" under 150 miles in Canada). 5. I own apprximately (number) non-professional books (including paper backs). 6. I have purchased (number) non-professional bodks during the last 3 years. 7. I have read approximately (number) non- professional books during the last 3 years. 8. I subscribe to noneprofessional magazines. 9. I purchased professional books during the past 3 years. 10. I subscribe to professional magazines. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 299 I am.qualified to teach in l 2 3 4 5 areas of study (usually major and minors). R:.Master's degree when completed : Specialist when completed : Doctor's degree when completed 2 number of hours beyond last degree Bachelor's degree when completed I have completed semester or term hours of credit in the last 3 years or since graduation if less than 3 years. number of credits in education courses, semester hours or terms hours (estimate). My major area of teaching is within K—G 7-12 0 I have attended different professional conferences of 1/2 day or more. Total days of conference . My age group 20-30 30-40 over 40.