AN INVENTORY 0F PERCEIVED MANAGEMENT SKILLS
0F PRACTICING SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS IN MICHIGAN

Dissertation for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
DONALI’S L ROBSON
1976

 

 

 

LIBRARY

9 I II III IIIIIIIIII II III III III III III I

NliCiiig: ."I :5 Late
UnIvchIL'y

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

AN INVENTORY OF PERCEIVED MANAGEMENT
SKILLS OF PRACTICING SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS
IN MICHIGAN

presented by

Donald L. Robson

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

 

Ph . D . degree in Educational
AdministrationI

 

Q” L//

ajor professor

Date 11/11176

0-7639

 

 

 

M m II

I77(\)cf’

STEM 5L ‘5' ,3 i

‘ -pur-
I”) Ju' [It , /
J’ h . “ff
~ “:3 ,. , If.

 

 

Illi{[.lllli‘fll 'l’lt’l‘!

ABSTRACT

AN INVENTORY OF PERCEIVED MANAGEMENT SKILLS 0F
PRACTICING SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS IN MICHIGAN

By
Donald L. Robson

Purpose of the Study

 

The purpose of this study was to assess the perceptions which
practicing superintendents have of their own management skills as a
vehicle to aid in the understanding of the practitioner's competen-
cies and needs. Such knowledge was conSidered important for plan-

ners of pre-service and in-service training programs.

Methodology

This study was undertaken in c00peration with the Michigan
Association of School Administrators. A survey instrument was
developed with the help of the Professional Practices Committee of
that organization. This instrument asked for data on the individual
characteristics of the superintendent, the characteristics of the
district, and 33 specific skills divided into five general areas.
All superintendent members of NASA were asked to respond, providing
a total population from which to collect data of 515. Question-
naires were mailed to superintendents in conjunction with their
bi-monthly newsletter, Fortnighter. Follow-up articles and appeals

for returns resulted in a total return of 285 usable responses.

 

 

("ll‘ll‘ III!"

III l'lllllll III I II II! I I

Donald L. Robson

Findings of the Study

 

Eight research questions were formulated prior to gathering
the data for this study. The results of data analysis regarding
these questions led to the following findings:

Research Question l: Which skills do practicing superintendents
perceive themselves to possess most frequently?

Research_Question 2: At what levels of competence do practic-
ing superintendents report that they possess various skills?

 

This was a sub-set of question 1, and the two are answered
together. Planning skills were reported as the skills which super-
intendents possess most and at highest levels. These were followed
by managing skills, communicating skills, decision-making skills,
and finally evaluating skills.

Research Question 3: Which skills are reported by top-level

managers to be of most importance in the performance of their
jobs? .

 

A similar pattern to current level of skill was reported in
relation to importance of skills. Thus, planning, managing, com-
municating, decision-making, and evaluating skills were rated in
that order.

Research Question 4: Will the pattern of skills reported to be

possessed by superintendents vary according to personal or organi-
zational characteristics of the superintendency?

 

Two demographic factors have an apparent effect on the pat-
tern of skills possessed by superintendents. Degree status and
political subdivision classifications show significant differences
among sub-groups.

Research Question 5: Will the skills reported to be most impor-

tant to superintendents vary according to environmental, per-
sonal, or organizational characteristics of the superintendent?

 

Donald L. Robson

Degree status of respondents produced the greatest sub-group
variation of any of the demographic variables employed.
Research Question 6: How important will top-level school

managers perceive their formal training to have been in the
acquisition of skills possessed?

 

The overall influence of formal training was rated as low.
The pattern of skills differed from level and importance patterns.
Evaluating, planning, decision-making, managing, and communicating
was the order of skills perceived to have been most to least
influenced by formal training.
Research Question 7: How important will top-level school

managers perceive their formal training to have been in the
acquisition of important skills?

 

Influence of formal training was perceived to be greatest in
relation to skills perceived to be of least importance.

Research Question 8: Will the perception of superintendents
with regard to the influence of formal training in acquiring
skills vary according to environmental, personal, or organi-
zational characteristics of the superintendency?

 

Only degree status appears to affect the perception of the

acquisition of skills through formal training.

General Conclusions
l. The skills which superintendents perceive themselves to
possess with the greatest degree of competence are
planning skills.
2. The skills perceived to be possessed least by practi-
tioners are evaluating skills and decision-making

skills.

Donald L. Robson

The superintendent's description of skills does not
differ according to situational characteristics except by
degree status categories.

Specific skill areas which the needs assessment shows to
be most problematic for superintendents are techno-
logically vague.

Program emphasis for training should be directed at
closing the gap between high-level skills with low
training influence.

Re-evaluation of training emphasis and practices may
need to be done in relation to areas of high training
influence but low skill competency.

Superintendents desire further training most in the

areas of managing and planning skills.

AN INVENTORY OF PERCEIVED MANAGEMENT SKILLS OF
PRACTICING SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS IN MICHIGAN

By

Donald L. Robson

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Administration and Higher Education

1976

To My Family:

This volume, as this life, is dedicated to the friendship
and love of Rosalie. By her sacrifice and for her approval this
work was begun, continued, and was completed.

Brad, Todd, and Sarah, of course, are never-ending sources
of joy and love. Their goodness and affection constantly replenish

and renew the spirit.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This project is the culmination of an effort which has been
supported in several ways by many peOple. My gratitude and appre-
ciation cannot be adequately expressed by the mere mention of their
names. Much more than that is owed.

There were those who provided encouragement, understanding,
and good wishes. Our families, the Robsons and the Hullas, were
always there to hear and approve our dreams and flights of fancy and
to provide the security of home when that was needed.

The Blomquists gave the tentativeness of our existence the
permanence of friendship which we shall treasure and protect. The
Mortons and the Martins, too, have been and will continue to be
valued friends.

Dr. Eugene N. Spencer has been an example and a mentor for
much of my professional life. His encouragement and confidence in
me are largely responsible for this venture. He will always be
remembered with affection and gratitude.

There were those who provided both encouragement and aca-
demic assistance. More than just teachers, more than just acquain-
tances, they were both professional and human in their approach to
'their responsibilities. Dr. Alexander Kloster, with good humor and

good advice, was a valued counselor.

iii

[I‘ll[I[lillllllllllllllllllll'llll'lll II...

Dr. Keith Anderson's thoughtful comments and warm humor
made him a valued member of the doctoral committee.

Dr. Phil Marcus, as a committee member, provided research
expertise and scholarship criteria which will serve as a model in
the future. His was a special kind of help which is held in a
special kind of esteem.

Members of the finest department of Educational Administra-
tion in existence who made my stay here a pleasant and intellectually
profitable one also include Dr. Sam Moore, Dr. Stan Hecker,

Dr. Lou Romano, Dr. Archibald Shaw, and Dr. Van Johnson.

Finally, there were those who went beyond the expectations
of professional responsibility, taking a personal interest and
investing themselves and their time in me.

Dr. Fred Ignatovich was more than a committee member; he
was a friend. His guidance provided much of the research direction
of this project. His willing presence, often late into the night, his
highly professional approach to his responsibilities, and his academic
scholarship make him an excellent model of the ideal professor. More
than this, his kindness and helpfulness will always be remembered.

Dr. Phil Cusick has been and will continue to be my intel-
lectual model. His_love of scholarship and his intellectual curiosity
will provide the scholarly example which I shall emulate to the best
of my ability. His role has been chairman of the doctoral committee
and major advisor, but just as frequently it has been friend and
colleague.

With such models as these, success in the academic world is assured.

iv

 

 

I'illlll ll

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES ................... ' ..... vii
Chapter

I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ............... l

Introduction .................... 1

Importance of the Study ............... 4

Purpose of the Study ................ 6

Research Questions to Be Analyzed .......... 6

Conceptual Framework and Delimitations ....... 7

Procedural Steps and Methods ............ lO

Definition of Important Terms ............ l3

Overview ...................... 15

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ............. 18

Introduction .................... 18

The Evolving Role of the Superintendency ...... l8

Environmental Influences ............. 22

Summary ...................... 27

Theories of Leadership and Management ........ 29

Management Ideologies ............... 30

Leadership Studies ................ 34

Summary . ..................... 38

Technical-Managerial Skills ............. 39

Classical Management Principles .......... 45

Summary ...................... 49

III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY .................. 58

Introduction ..... I ............... 58

Population ..................... 58

Instrumentation ................... 59

Demographic Data ................. 62

Skills Assessment Data .............. 68

Research Questions and Analysis of the Data ..... 72

Chapter Page

IV. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS .................. 77
Introduction .................... 77

The Population ................... 80

Age of Superintendents .............. 8l

Years in Current Position ............. 82

Degree Status of Superintendents ......... 83

Most Recent Previous Experience .......... 85

Total Years in Education ............. 86

Previous Superintendency ............. 87

Size of District ................. 87

District Wealth .................. 89

Political Subdivision of the District ....... 89

Political Orientation of the Board of Education . . 90

Educational Orientation of the Board ....... 9l

Other Organizational Data ............. 92

Summary ...................... 93

Skills Assessment Data ............... 93

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............ l23
APPENDIX: PEARSON CORRELATION MATRICES ............ l33
BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................... l4l

vi

Table

SOCDNON

10.

11.

12.

13.

T4.

15.

LIST OF TABLES

Twenty-Four New Variables: Summary Dimensions .....

Years in Current Position Compared With Degree Status

Years in Position Compared to Most Recent Previous

Experience ......................

Size of District: Total Population Compared to

Survey Respondents ..................

Summarized Rankings of Skills Statements by Perceived
Level of Competence, Importance of Skill, Desire
for Further Training, and Influence of Formal

Training on Skill Development ............

Spearman Rank Order Correlations for Summary Variables .

Level of Competence in Relation to Summary Skills
Importance of Skills by Percentage of Responses

Level of Skill Rankings Contrasted With Importance

of Skill Rankings ..................

Significant Differences Among Demographic Subgroups

With Respect to Reported Level of Competence .....

Percentage of Degree Status Respondents Rating Skill

Levels High to Very High ...............

Significant Differences Among Demographic Subgroups

With Respect to Reported Importance of Skill .....

Mean Scores of Summary Skills by Level of Skill,
Importance of Skill, Influence of Formal Training,

and Desire for Further Training ...........

Influence of Formal Training Compared to Current

Level of Skill Rankings ...............

Rankings of Skills' Importance Compared With

Rankings of Influence of Formal Training .......

vii

Page
79
83

86

88

95
99
100
101

105

107

110

117

Table Page

16. Influence of Formal Training Compared to
Importance of Skill Rankings ............. 119

17. Significant Differences Among Demographic Subgroups
With Respect to Influence of Formal Training ..... 121

viii

CHAPTER I

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Introduction

 

The public school superintendency has undergone a gradual
transformation which has accelerated in recent years. Community
expectations of the educational enterprise have increased to include
functions which once were reserved for the family, the church, and
other social units. The school itself has been transformed as it
sought to meet the ever-increasing diversity of expectations imposed
upon it by a rapidly changing and diverse society. Management of the
educational enterprise shifted from the board of education, made up
of citizens who were volunteering a part of their time for public
service, to a full-time, trained professional as small primary units
were reorganized and consolidated.1

The superintendency has changed as the needs of the commu-
nity and society have changed. Toffler refers to this alteration
in the role of education and educators as an alteration in "time-

"2 Where once knowledge was transmitted from one generation to

bias.
the next with a devotion to the past, the mechanical age made such a
system obsolete. It demanded skills that neither family nor church
could alone provide, and forced the development of a new time per-
spective. The new perspective, says Toffler, was the present.

Education took on a vocational flavor, serving in large measure the

‘ll‘ll‘l‘

llililllill i

function of producing people who could participate in an industrial
society.3 Accordingly, the administrative hierarchy of education
grew in the model of industrial bureaucracy. It became one function
of education to prepare young people for the society in which they
must perform. Thus, the focus of education shifted away from an
emphasis on the past and toward the present.

Where once boards of education employed individuals who were
frequently not trained educators to relieve them of minor clerical
details, more complex organization forced them to rely on their
superintendents for assistance with educational problems. The
superintendent became chiefly an educator, often a recognized scholar.
Continued growth and complexity plus the influence of the business
and industrial culture created the need for a superintendent who
could serve as a business manager.4 As the educational organization
continues to be defined, the superintendent has become not only the
chief executive for the board of education, but the chief profes-
sional advisor in the school system, giving professional advice
having to do with the purposes and procedures of education itself.
Futurists like Toffler predict coming trends in the modification of
the role of education and by implication in the role of the super-
intendent:

It is no longer sufficient for Johnny to understand the past.
It is not even enough for him to understand the present, for
the here-and-now environment will soon vanish. Johnny must
learn to anticipate the directions and rate of change. He
must, to put it technically, learn to make repeated, probabil-

istic, increasingly long-range assumptions about the future.
And so must Johnny's teachers.5

Educational institutions have attempted to prepare administrators to
assume the responsibilities imposed upon them. Graduate programs
in administration and supervision lead to master's degrees, specialist
degrees, and doctorates in colleges and universities across the nation.
Practicing superintendents are generally required to have attained at
least a master's degree and to have had some administrative training
or experience. In addition, the various professional associations
recognize the need for continuing development of skills and compe-
tencies, and accordingly offer recurrent in-service workshops for
administrators as well as members of boards of education.

Given a state system which has traditionally placed great
emphasis on local autonomy, the demands of individual communities
and specific interests within communities have shaped the modern
superintendent's role. The extent to which individuals are able to
apply general educational principles to specific local situations
is often determined, not by individual knowledge and expertise as
much as by the local pattern of expectations in a given community.
It is pertinent to inquire into the relevance of training and
preparation programs for such a task as this, since the average job
tenure of the school superintendent approaches less than five years
in any one position.6 Further, according to a Michigan Department
of Education report, nearly half of the more than 500 Michigan school
districts changed superintendents during the five-year span from
1969-1974, representing an average annual turnover rate of 9 percent.7
.According to the report, this trend is not limited to Michigan, but

is, in fact, nationwide.

Importance of the Study

The bureaucratic school organization has been most effec-
tive in training individuals for an agricultural economy and more
recently for a production economy. Recent trends, however, indicate
the emergence ofga service economy with more than half of the
employed population involved in service-oriented occupations. The
burden of socializing young people for such occupations will con-
tinue to be that of the schools. The function of managing such an
operation, including planning, organiZing, monitoring, and evaluat-
ing programs and processes ultimately rests with the superintendent.
To describe the skills which practicing superintendents perceive to
be most important in the performance of this task is one method by
which to gain a greater understanding of the position and its impact
on the educational process in a variety of situations.

The educational structure represents, perhaps uniquely, the
bureaucratic organization of professionals. It cannot be compared to
the medical or legal professions, which rarely Operate as large.
complex organizations and which are highly selective in terms of
entry into the profession. It cannot be compared to hospital admin-
istration in that hospital administration employs a differentiation
of function wherein professional medical specialists administer the
medical-technical delivery system while administrators manage only
the maintenance system. Management of the educational organization
requires a much greater diversity of skills than perhaps any other
comparable position. If we are to train individuals to occupy such

roles, we must be aware of their special problems and their particular

needs. In addition, we must develop an understanding from their
perspective of the variety of demands with which they are confronted.

Such input should be important to training institutions where
program planners must take into account the defined needs of those
who will ultimately apply the product of their efforts to some spe-
cific reality. Their failure to consider this perspective will
widen the gap between what practitioners now consider the meta-
physics of theory and the reality of practice.

Such information feedback is also essential to help supply
the training support required for skill upgrading of practicing
administrators. The Michigan Association of School Administrators
has recognized this need. The Educational Leadership Committee of
the NASA has commissioned this study in an attempt to determine
areas of interest and need among superintendents with a view toward
increased relevance of future in-service offerings to members.

It is important to understand not only which skills prac-
ticing administrators perceive to be most necessary in the perfor-
mance of their jobs, but also at what level of competence they cur-
rently possess those skills. Only then can pre-service and
in-service planners clearly define the present state of the art in
relation to perceived needs.

Finally, just as each community differs according to geo-
graphic and political consideration, school districts vary from
community to community. Such considerations as p0pu1ation size,
racial composition, political orientation, occupational emphasis, and

comparative wealth combine to define the services demanded of the

’-

{’1‘

I'll!Ilil‘lll‘l‘li‘Il‘(‘il{tlt[[[(IIIiI
I

school. It is important to understand the effects of such variation
on the functioning of the superintendent in order that such exigencies
as may be generalizable to various situations may be considered in

'training programs.

Purpose of the Study

It was the purpose of this study to assess the perceptions
which practicing superintendents have of their own management
skills. Specifically, the study attempted to determine those skills
which the superintendent currently possesses as well as those skills
which he perceived to be most important in the management of his
organization. In addition, this study attempted to discern the per-
ceived impact of formal training in the development of management
skills and the administrator's desire for further formal training in
important skill areas. Such information was solicited as a vehicle
to aid in the understanding of the practitioner's competencies and
needs in the technical-managerial skills of public school adminis-

tration.

Research Questions to Be Analyzed
The following questions represented the primary thrust of
this project. Given a range of specific technical-managerial
skills:
1. Which skills do practicing superintendents perceive
themselves to possess? That is, are some skills more
frequently possessed than others among superintendents,

and if so, which skills?

2. At what levels of competence do practicing superinten-
dents report that they possess various skills? Spe-
cifically, with which skills do superintendents report
the greatest to least competence?

3. Which skills will be reported by top-level managers to
be of most importance in the performance of their jobs?

4. Will the pattern of skills reported to be possessed by
superintendents vary according to environmental, personal,
or organizational characteristics of the superinten-
dency?

5. Will the skills reported to be most important to super-
intendents vary according to environmental, personal, or
organizational characteristics of the superintendency?

6. How important will top-level school managers perceive
their formal training to have been in the acquisition of
skills possessed?

7. 'How important will top-level school managers perceive
their formal training to have been in the acquisition of
important skills?

8. Will the perception of superintendents with regard to the
importance of formal training in acquiring important

. skills vary according to environmental, personal, or

organizational characteristics of the superintendency?

Conceptual Framework and Delimitations
The fact that programs purport to prepare individuals to

assume top-level positions in school management is prima facie

evidence of the general belief that there are discrete, generalizable,
and teachable skills available to aspiring school administrators.
What is problematic, however, is the order of importance or the
combination of such skills necessary to meet differing situational
demands.

Even more basic than the question of which skills are neces-
sary is the general topic of which kinds of skills to consider. It
is possible to study the management of educational organizations from
a number of perspectives. The organization may be viewed independent
of its environment to the extent that the management function is
perceived only as the internal structure and control for an
externally determined purpose. Management of the organization, thus,
focuses on internal consistency, orderliness, and hierarchical
coordination. Classical management techniques concerned with opti-/,,/s
mizing organization performance by optimizing structure or human

relations techniques which are concerned with decentralization of

 

“—0 s“...
' m’w*~ncoaw*o’

authority, socialengineering of work flow and job redesign, and

~— “" VA—o—W .,_.__._

 

 

 

communication network manipulationwgllmfocus on various structural

 

W‘H’ #4”

 

components of the organization as the means of maintaining control or
bringing about change.

Externally, organizations may be viewed relative to the
goals toward which they work, or more generally, organizational
interaction with the environment. In addition, social scientists and
psychologists view organizations from the social-psychological per-
spective of individuals or groups within the structural or environ-

mental milieu. Thus, one may be concerned with the structural

characteristics of the organization from either a classical manage-
ment or a human relations perspective. One may be primarily con-
cerned with the goals and purposes of the organization in society and
the influences of the environment on the organization. Or one may
seek to identify the impact of the organization on its members and
the social-psychological factors which enable or inhibit organiza-
tional functioning. ~
This study was limited to the view of the educational organi-

zation from the classical management perspective, which seeks to
optimize performance by optimizing structure. That is, for purposes
of this study, the management skills which were assessed were those
classical skills designed to faciliate planning, organizing, con-
trolling, decision making, and evaluating. Such skills are further
delineated in the literature of classical management found in
Chapter II of this study. Human relations and social-psychological
perspectives were not seen as offering any consistently identifiable
set of important skills which could be generalized empirically.
Indeed, Perrow, quoting Wilensky, who summarized the human relations
research through 1957, cites this conclusion:

All this suggests that, at minimum, the practitioner who wants

to apply the human relations research has no clear directive

as to what to do--and this is true not only of the findings on

size of immediate work group, the character of informal work

group solidarity, degree of identification with company goals,

and type of leadership style as related to productivity; it

applies also to the findings on the relation of "morale"

(i.e., satisfaction with job and company) to all of these vari-

ables. The evidence is typically inconclusive, the interpre-

tations sometimes contradictory.

It is recognized that there are many skills needed to

effectively manage the total educational enterprise and that not all

10

of these skills pertain directly to the optimizing of organizational
structure. It was the contention, however, of this researcher that
personal-social concerns, leadership and climate considerations, and
methods of psychological manipulation related to motivation of
employees and morale would be most accurately described as personal
characteristics rather than skills of managers. Such characteris-
tics may or may not accompany the development and use of technical-
managerial skills, so that management personnel are perceived to
possess varying degrees of "consideration" in their administrative
functioning. In any case, for purposes of this study, human inter-
action is considered to be a reciprocal function of personality and
role expectations, and as such, does not lend itself to isolation and
abstraction for purposes of generaliZed training. Indeed, to the
extent that such characteristics must be practiced and learned, they
may be represented as manipulative and dishonest. Valued for their
presence, abhorred for their absence, one is nevertheless not at
liberty to feign such characteristics lest he be found out and
branded a fraud.~ This is not to say that these factors are not
important (though the satisfaction-productivity issue is taken up

in Chapter II), but rather that for purposes of direct formal train-
ing, it is the task or production skills which will best answer the

community insistence on a return to efficiency in education.

Procedural Steps and Methods
This study was commissioned by the Professional Practices
Committee of the Michigan Association of School Administrators. The

association's primary interest was to gather information from its

11

membership which would improve the relevance of in-service programs
it offered. 'Up-grading skills is a vital concern among chief school
administrators, many of whom are under constant pressure to justify
programs and supply information to various groups.

The initial procedure in this study was to meet with the
committee of ten superintendents to clarify their needs and develop
an outline of expectations. During the preliminary phase of the
study, the researcher was present at each of the meetings of the
ProfeSsional Practices Committee.

From these gatherings and from meetings with individual
superintendents as well as with Dr. Alexander Kloster and other
professors of Educational Administration at Michigan State Univer-
sity, from the researcher's own personal and professional experience,
and from an examination of the professional literature, a tentative
list of skills was prepared. This list of skills was translated
into a series of statements which were intended to reflect a wide
range of technical-managerial activities. These statements were
then reviewed for clarity and content by the members of the Profes-
sional Practices Committee.

At the same time, Dr. Philip Marcus of the Department of
Sociology, Michigan State University, reviewed both the content and
format of the proposed instrument. After several revisions, a
l6-page instrument was developed which contained 33 statements to
which the respondent was asked to respond four separate times.

Members of the superintendent's committee were requested to

provide a cross-section of superintendents from their area of

12

representation to respond to the developed instrument in a field
test. Thirty-five names were provided from all areas of the state.
Questionnaires were mailed along with a general letter of instruc-
tions. In addition, each member of the committee provided a cover
letter to be used with the people from his area and several followed
up with personal calls to assure response. Twenty-one of the 35
test superintendents responded.

The superintendents participating in the field test were
requested to: (1) respond to the instrument completely in its
present form; (2) evaluate each individual item in terms of its
applicability to the superintendent's role; and (3) provide views,
concerns, questions, and criticisms.

From the field test and continued meetings with the commit-
tee, a final format change was effected whereby the instrument was
reduced in length and a more space-efficient, though abstract,
system was employed. Several specific skill items were either changed
or deleted and the instrument was again submitted to the superin-
tendent's committee.

After consultation with Dr. Donald Currie, Executive Secre-
tary, MASA, the completed instrument was submitted to the NASA
executive board for approval for use with the entire membership. In
addition, the board agreed to sponsor the cost of printing, mailing,
data processing, and analyzing. In exchange, the association would
receive the services of the researcher in collecting, analyzing, and

reporting the data as well as the developmental work done with the

instrument.

13

The completed instruments were then mailed to all members
of the Michigan Association of School Administrators while at the
same time notice was printed hiFortnighter, the MASA bi-monthly
newsletter. In addition, the two subsequent issues of Fortnighter
carried progress reports and reminders to members about the project.
Finally, a final appeal for returns was made through the newsletter
and responses were collected. All reSponses were anonymous and

‘were returned to the MASA office in Lansing, Michigan.

Definition of Important Terms

Superintendent of schools: One who is employed by a local
board of education as its chief executive officer.

Technical-managerial skills: The skills of management
identified from "classical management" literature, consultation with
practicing administrators, and the researcher's personal experience.
These are the skills which are also referred to in this study and in
the literature as task skills, initiating structure, or classical
management skills. The skills of interest for purposes of the study,
as grouped from the survey instrument, represent the areas of plan-
ning, organizing, decision making, controlling, evaluating, and
communicating. Such skills relate specifically to technical compe-
tence as opposed to personal-social competence.

Planning: The process of determining organizational goals
and how they are to be achieved.

Organizing: Those attempts by management to structure

 

activities and relationships which will realize optimum spans of

14

management. Thus, it involved grouping activities and individuals,
structuring the environment to achieve some desired result.

Decision making: Those activities directed at gathering
information and selecting alternative courses of action in relation
to progress (or lack thereof) toward goals.

Controlling: Frequently referred to as directing or managing,

 

this function has to do with monitoring activities and people in
pursuit of theorganization's goals. Within this definition, there is
room for motivational techniques, work-flow procedures, leadership
style, conflict resolution, and the influence process. The key
element in this definition is getting people to work toward the
organizational goal and monitoring their progress. These are main-
tenance activities.

Evaluating: The formalized and scientific process of assess-

 

ing progress toward stated goals.

Organizational characteristics: Organizational variables
included for purposes of this study are (1) size of student popu-
lation, (2) comparative wealth of district, (3) racial composition
of student body, and (4) bureaucratization of hierarchy.

Bureaucratization of hierarchy: A ratio of the number of
staff administrators employed by the system to the number of line
administrators employed by the system. Thus, bureaucratization =
staff % line. A measure of organizational complexity.

Environmental characteristics: District variables included
for purposes of this study are (1) political identification,

(2) political orientation, and (3) educational-philosophical orientation.

15

Political identification: Determined according to state
assessment criteria of c1assification--metropolitan core, city,
town, urban fringe, and rural designations.

Political orientation: A general classification of per-

 

ceptions according to whether the respondent viewed his board of
education as predominantly conservative on most issues or predomi-
nantly liberal on most issues.

Educational:philosophical orientation: A general classi-
fication of perceptions according to whether the respondent viewed
his board of education to be educationally traditional or educa-
tionally conservative on most issues.

Skills level: A measure of the perceived level of skill

 

possessed by the respondent in relation to a given specified task
requirement. Respondents were given a l to 5 scale ranging from
-l=very low to 5=very high.

Skill importance: A measure of the perceived level of
importance of a given skill in the performance of the respondent's
job. Respondents were given a l to 5 scale ranging from l=very low
to 5=very high.

Personal characteristics: Characteristics relative to the
respondent rather than to the organization or to the environment.
For purposes of this study, these include: age, longevity in posi-

tion, total years of experience, and highest degree attained.

Overview
The questionnaire will provide the reader with an overview

of the study as it relates to the variables and to the specific

 

|.|l.lllll"|l'||l|l|

16

skills inventoried. Chapter II reviews the related literature with
respect to the topic, while Chapter III spells out in detail the
essential elements of the research in a fashion which will allow for
maximum clarity and understanding of the analysis of results to be
found in Chapter IV. A summary with conclusions based upon the
results of the analysis will follow in Chapter V. In addition, it
is in Chapter V that hypotheses which suggest possible further

research may be found.

l7
Footnotes--Chapter I

1Thomas M. Gilland, The Origin and Development of the Powers
and Duties of the City Superintendent (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1935).

2Alvin Toffler, Future Shock (New York: Random House, Inc.,
1970), p. 399.

31bid., p. 400.

4Raymond E. Callahan, Education and the Cult of Efficiendy
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press:'l962).

5Toffler, Future Shock, p. 403.

6Laurence Innaccone, Politics in Education (New York: The
Center for Applied Research in Education, 1967).

7Michigan Department of Education, "Superintendent Turnover
Averages Nine Percent Annually" (January 1975), p. 1.

8Charles Perrow, Complex Organizations (Glenview, 111.:
Scott, Foresman and Company, 1972), p. 119, quoting Harold L.
Wilensky, "Human Relations in the Workplace," in Research in Indus-
trial Human Relations: A Critical Appraisal, ed. Conrad Arensberg
et al. (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1957), p. 34.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

The review of related literature is organized under three
major headings. The first section deals with the evolving role of
the superintendent. This section describes two historical influ-
ences (environmental change and management ideologies) which have had
important impact on the definition of the superintendent's role.
Important societal changes are described in terms of their influ-
ence on the superintendency. The second part of the review,
Theories of Leadership and Management, describes the influence of
the major theoretical concepts both in defining the superintendent's
role and in developing a basis for the study of task-oriented man-
agement. Finally, the third section, Technical-Managerial Skills,
defines the task-oriented skills of classical management literature
used in the development of the questionnaire employed in this study.

A summary of each section identifies in capsule form the major points

from research.

The EvolvingyRole of the Superintendengy
The role of the superintendent of schools is still in the
process of being defined. This definition is the product of at least
two major influences, environmental change and ideological conflict.
Environmental influences in this regard pertain to societal changes

18

19

and the impact of those changes on the educational organization in
general and the superintendency in particular. The chronicling of
such changes occurs in part in the historical developmental litera-
ture relative to schools and the superintendency (see Gilland [1935],
Reller [1935], Frost [1947], Butts and Cremin [1953], and Campbell
[1968]), andin general historical references. Ideological conflicts
have directly affected the Operational definition of management since
the early part of the century. A major dichotomy has evolved between
the scientific management philosophy of Frederick W. Taylor1 and the
philosophy which has evolved in response to the work of Elton Mayo
and the Harvard School of Business Group, commonly referred to as
human relations in management.2 At various periods in our history,
each ideological perspective has been adopted by management as the
predominant view, and today elements of each philoSOphy occur
together in most management processes.

As a result of these basic influences, the organization of
American education has not been static and inflexible, but rather
has been forced to adapt to changing conditions. John Gardner,
former U.S. Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, describes
the "self-renewing" organization as one that constantly changes its

3 He refers to a "crisis

structure in response to changing needs.
of organization" in government and suggests that, both in public and
private sectors, most organizations have a structure that was
designed to solve problems that no longer exist. That the educa-
tional enterprise has been subjected to constant pressures for

change is an unassailable proposition. From small, undifferentiated

20

units which reflected socially homogeneous rural-agricultural com-
munities, schools have emerged in less than 150 years as complex
bureaucratic organizations serving a complex, largely urban, highly
pluralistic society. The development of the educational organiza-
tion has responded to the same social forces which have shaped our
modern society in general. Schools came into being as a result of
the ideological and practical demands of the society and have con-
tinued to be influenced and altered by those demands over time.
Just as early colonial life was dominated by religion, so
too was colonial education. When Massachusetts created the first
American tax-supported schools in 1647, the Bible and Shorter's
Catechism served as the "core" curriculum.4 In 1800, Massachusetts
had only eight different religious sects, but by 1936, there were

5 Meiklejohn observes that the shift from church

56 denominations.
to state in the control of education was made with the consent,
even with the initiative, Of churches themselves, which were not
opposed to religious instruction but were Opposed to sectarian teach- .
ing.6 During our early history, school management was a function
performed by lay citizens. With the growth of cities and the merger
of schools within cities, the problems of school administration became
too demanding and time consuming for part-time, lay board members.
This led to the creation of the office of the superintendent of

7 Similarly, Gilland cites two movements which were respon-

8 The

schools.
sible for creating the need for a superintendent of schools.
first was the reorganization of school districts (consolidation),

and the second was the increasing urbanization of America (growth of

21

cities). According to Reller, the first superintendents were
appointed in Buffalo, New York, and Louisville, Kentucky, in 1837,
and by 1860, 27 cities had established the office.9 It was not
until the twentieth century, however, that the superintendency spread
to noncity areas. Most rural schools of the time were one-room
affairs run either after the fashion of earlier lay control or under
the minimal supervision of a county superintendent. Suburbanization
and the need for high school programs in the public schools were the
forces which Bateman identified as those responsible for establish-
ing the need for the superintendency outside the cities.10
With the acceptance of high school as a valid educational
responsibility, the one-room, eight-grade structure was no longer
viable. Thus, by the early 1900's, not only city but also rural
areas began to consider means by which high school Opportunities
could be made available to all youngsters. This need to proliferate
the organization, combined with the movement of population around
the central cities, increased the complexity of school district
organization, thereby creating greater demand for supervision and

1] As a consequence, then, in rural, consolidated

coordination.
school districts and in most of the newly formed suburban school
districts, the board of education found it desirable to employ a
local superintendent of schools. "The concept of the position in
these more recent organizations has undoubtedly been influenced by
the concepts which first developed in the city superintendency."12
Campbell et a1. identify four stages in the development of

the superintendency: the clerical phase, the educator phase, the

22

business manager phase, and, finally, the chief executive phase.13

Initially, the office was essentially a clerical one with the board
of education needing someone to relieve it of minor details. It was
not uncommon for superintendents to be untrained in the field of
education. The added complexity of the systems and programs forced
lay boards to rely more heavily on their superintendents for advice
and assistance with educational problems, and during this second
stage, the superintendent was expected to be chiefly an educator.
Because of the influence of the business culture in America, Callahan
points out the need for school managers to attend to budgets,

‘4 Thus, the super-

facilities, property tax levies and bond issues.
intendent in the third phase of development was expected to be a
business manager more than anything else. Ultimately, elements of
all three phases persist into the current stage of development.
Thus, the superintendent has become the chief executive and chief

professional advisor in the school system.

Environmental Influences

In addition to changing expectations in terms of the role of
the Superintendent, there were changing expectations with respect
to the role of the school. Whereas the socialization of youth was
once the primary responsibility of the family, that task has been
more recently assigned to the educational establishment. According
to Coleman, "When ours was still an agrarian society, . . . the task
of socialization was resolved by early and continual interaction

"15

with parents and near-by adults. In the modern era, however,

"the occupational structure became progressively more a matter of

23

movement into activities different from those of the parents."

It therefore became impossible for the old institutions to do the job
of socializing young people, and new institutions evolved. Spe-
cifically, schooling to an advanced age became compulsory, laws were
passed against child labor, and minimum wages were established. In
order to respond to these new demands, education became increasingly
systematized. Coleman cites three influences which contributed to
the systematization of education: (1) population concentration,

(2) industrialization, and (3) immigration.16

Immigration brought together a polyglot pOpulation of vary-
ing ethnic, cultural, and language characteristics, and it became the
job of the schools to “standardize" these people into Americans.

With industrialization, jobs became more and more specialized,

making it impossible for families to provide young people with career
information. At the same time, the nation was in transition from
rural to urban as great concentrations of population centered in the
cities, creating new ways of life.

The National Education Association and the American Associa-
tion of School Administrators have pointed out the changing role of
the superintendent by citing rapid changes in modern civilization.

The factors they describe are the knowledge explosion and its impact
on life, the population explosion, rural depopulation and urban
growth, technological progress, and widespread demands for equal
opportunity.17 Further, they name the five most important aspects

of the role of the superintendent as: (l) supervision of the instruc-

tional program, (2) school district management, (3) administration

24

of the budget, (4) the solution of day-to-day problems, and (5) the

‘8 Exactly how "management"

practice of the art of human relations.
and "solution of day-to-day problems" differ is not clear from this
report, but it is clear that the duties delineated are all-
encompassing.

In a 1969 issue of Nation's Schools, the managing editor,
Russell J. Huff, ranked five major problems as reported in a survey
of how superintendents see themselves. The problems reported were
school finance, curriculum develOpment, personnel management, school-
community relations, and provision of adequate facilities.19
Goldhammer et al. indicate five categories of responsibility reported

20 According to this study,

by superintendents from 42 states.
superintendents pointed to the necessity of dealing with the prob-
1ems of bringing about educational changes in their districts, deal-
ing with increasing teacher militancy, handling instructional and
curricular concerns, acting on and reacting to changing and critical
social issues, and securing and allocating financial resources for
their districts. Campbell proposes the following three major func-
tions of the superintendent: (1) to help define and clarify the
purpose and direction of the school, (2) to establish and maintain
the organization to work toward these purposes, and (3) to secure
and allocate resources needed for that organization.21
Burbank describes the modern superintendent as an individual

22 As districts increase in size,

whose personal influence is waning.
he has fewer personal relationships with employees. As board members

become more articulate and well-educated, his advice must be

25

legitimized by expertise rather than position and professional
degree status.

A recent University Council for Educational Administration
conference was held to honor Roald F. Campbell. The conference
included a consideration by scholars and practitioners of the past
development of educational administration and the direction for the
future. Major points were made by speakers in relation to environ-

23 David Tyack

mental factors affecting educational administration.
of Stanford University described the social environment prior to
1954 as one which permitted the depoliticization of the schools and
the development of the administrative role as a profession. He
characterized the 1954-1975 period as being dominated by a series

of social crises which impacted economic, political, and social
institutions. Bernard C. Watson, Department of Urban Education and
Professor of Social Foundations at Temple University, noted the
emergence of pluralism and a concurrent crisis of meaning and belief
that challenged basic assumptions about the worth of the American
experience. He pointed to the Vietnam War, the ensuing student
revolt, the civil rights movement, the press for equal opportunity,
and social mobility as variations in a social revolution which
politicized education. Keith Goldhammer of Michigan State Univer-
sity described the transformation of the school from a state of
equilibrium to one of turbulence. The factors which were instru-
mental in this transformation, according to Goldhammer, were: an
aggressively pluralistic society demanding diversified programs;

the school functioning as a frontline agency coping with conflict

26

generated by militant groups; legal restraints limiting the discre-
tionary power of administrators; professional associations assuming
unprecedented control in the decision-making process; local districts
increasingly relying on the largess of state and federal government
to bolster faltering financial structures; school board members
representing the interests of community factions to the disservice
.of the system as a whole; and litigation on the rights of teachers,
students, parents, and public absorbing institutional time and
energy. Virginia Davis Nordin, Professor of Law, University of
Wisconsin, spoke on the relation between the court and educational
administration during this period. She characterized the interac-
tion of the law and the schools as one of systematic conflict. The
courts' concern for the Constitutional rights of individuals was
reflected in decisions in cases of desegregation, academic freedom,
exercise of religion, and the civil rights of students and teachers.
Thus, the court exercises its power to design solutions tailored
to specific circumstances and reluctantly got into the business of
educational administration. School governance, financing, personnel
practices, school-community relations, and policy making were tar-
geted by the court for change while the burden of implementing
effective programs in response to these challenges is left to the
school administrator.
The conference report concludes:

Scarcity of resources, multiple demands by a multitude of

interest groups, conflict between boards of education and pro-

fessional associations, internal politics of boards of educa-

tion, declining enrollments, pressure for accountability will

condition the environment and make courage and fortitude the
sine qua non for would-be masters of the system.

27

Pressures on the institution will persist. The school will survive,

resist, and accommodate the demands of a changing environment.

Summary

It seems clear that as schools are influenced by changes
in the greater society, so too is the role of the superintendent who
must help provide direction, establish and maintain the organization,
and labor to gather resources from the environment to support the
organization. In general, then, his role is to be responsible for
everything connected with the educational enterprise within his com-
munity. It is also clear that the demands of society on school
superintendents are increasing. Schools have become instruments of
social policy as in the civil rights movement of recent years.
Social scientists, such as Coleman, Jencks, and others, have adopted
advocacy positions relative to various issues, and these positions
have frequently been translated into governmental policy or judicial
dictum. Tenure laws, collective bargaining laws, increasing mili-
tancy among teachers' unions, increasing population, decreasing
population, accountability emphasis, vocational education emphasis,
inflation, recession, unemployment, teacher surplus, post-Watergate
disillusionment, decline in respect for authority, the Vietnam
involvement, and a myriad of other environmental influences have
impacted and continue to impact the superintendency.

Because of the susceptibility of the superintendent to such
transitory influences, the role must continue to shift and change
with the times. The traditional differentiation of function between

the board and the superintendent was a simple one: The board was to

28

formulate policy while the superintendent was to administer it. It
is apparent from the literature, however, that most superintendents
influence policy and that most boards take some hand in administra-
tion. In a study of why Michigan superintendents were fired or
encouraged to leave their positions from 1965 to 1975, Fultz con-
cluded that while the general reason given most by board members was
"poor community relations," superintendents were actually dismissed
for reasons having to do with board-superintendent relationships.24
Thus, this basic dichotomy of policy maker-administrator was not
sacred nor practical. The three specific reasons given most for
releasing the superintendent were: (1) refusal to seek and accept
criticism, (2) lack of harmonious working relationships with the
board, and (3) failure to support board policy and follow the instruc-
tions of the board.

It is apparent that the environmental influences have a
significant impact on the direction and goal-setting activities of
the educational enterprise. The purposes of education are con-
tinually juxtaposed to the current needs and wants of the society
which it serves. It is in the area of organizing and maintaining
the organization that other influences become felt. The most impor-
tant of these influences to be dealt with in this review have to
do with theories of leadership and management ideologies which have
impacted the role of the school manager in the past and which con-
tinue to do so today. Essentially, management ideologies have been
formulated as rationale for strategies designed to increase produc-

tivity. The literature is permeated with adherents of one

29

philosophical position or another regarding the nature of man and

the system of management necessary to control him in order to achieve
the goals of the organization. As new and more pOpular managerial
philosophies arose to replace the old ones, the nature and mode of
organizational leadership was altered. School managers were as
susceptible to these influences as were the managers of other organi-
zations. Indeed, Callahan suggests the inability of school managers
to resist such movements, proposing a thesis of school administrator

vulnerability.25

Theories of Leadership and Management

Campbell, Cunningham, and McPhee describe three historic
movements which have had major influences on the concept of the
superintendency. These movements, which have been indicative of
attempts to professionalize the position, include: (1) the
"scientific management" movement, (2) the "human relations" movement,
and (3) the "social science" movement.26

That the principles of scientific management formulated by
Frederick W. Taylor had an influence on the superintendency was first
evidenced by Franklin Bobbitt in 1913 in a yearbook of the National
Society for the Study of Education. Bobbitt attempted to apply
Taylor's principles directly to public school administration.27
Callahan's analysis is the most directly relevant discussion of the
impact of Taylorism on the theory and practice of educational
administration. He points out that the efficiency ideology was
adopted wholeheartedly by school boards, the press, and the public

in general between 1910 and 1929.28

30

In addition, for many years organizational analysts were
guided by the set of assumptions laid down by Weber in his discus-
sion of bureaucracy.29 These assumptions postulate a rational
organization with a primary purpose (objective, task, goal, function,
or mission). To reach this purpose, according to Cook, subgoals
must be established and specific means chosen for their attain-
ment.30 This, in turn, requires a differentiation of such sub-
functions which must be carried out individually, but as a coordi-
nated whole. Along with officially assigned duties and written
rules and regulations, a control system is established whereby the
various positions are linked together by a chain of command so that
authority and responsibility of each position is unambiguous.
Because of the increasing complexity of the educational system and

because of the influence on that system of the efficiency philosophy,

these assumptions had an important impact on the management of the

enterprise.

Management Ideologies

A major historical controversy has raged around the theoreti-
cal foundations of control. Whereas classical theorists adOpted the
position that organizational control is a function of asymmetric,
one-way control from a single source at the top of the organization,
there are those who espouse a philOSOphy of management which empha-
sizes individual needs, informal groups, and social relationships
as the bases of control. Haire traces the origin of this human
relations philosophy of organizational management to the work of

Elton Mayo3] in 1927 and to the interpretations of that work by

31

32 Further systematic extensions of this

33 34

Roethlisberger and Dickson.

position have been offered by Argyris, March and Simon,

36 and others. It is perhaps understandable

McGregor,35 Likert,
that such loyalty to democratic principles and the importance of
the individual should be so prominently expressed and espoused in
this political system and during the period from 1930 to 1950.
“Indeed, the influence of the human relations philosophy has been so
pervasive as to assume predominance even despite Wilensky's conclu-

37 Perrow outlines the progression of the human relations

sions.
model as foTlows: High morale leads to high productivity; good
leadership (democratic leadership, good human relations, considera-
tion, etc.) leads to high morale (and thus, to high productivity);
effective leadership (combining a concern for people with a concern
for task effectiveness) leads to high morale and/or high produc-
tivity; effective leadership has to be tailored to the group situa-
tion (e.g., group tasks, structure, member relationship, timing,
stress, etc.).38 i p

The most voluminous and substantial part of the literature
on organizations is concerned with this attempt to link morale and

leadership to productivity. No other school of organizational

thought has been so well critiqued and so thoroughly studied as

 

this social-psychological approach over the past 40 years. Though
~—-~_.‘_z___“*_ yy_ _M,

 

 

the claims of the human relations advocates have been widely dis-
puted (see Wilensky [1957],39 Korman [1966],40 Perrow [l972]4]),
there can be no doubt that this philosophy has greatly affected the

management of all types of organizations. That this philosophy was

32

incorporated into the system of thinking of educators is evidence

of the vulnerability noted by Callahan42 and is typified by the basic

 

principles of democratic administration spelled_out in 1943 inwa

“an...

volume titled Democragyyin School Administration. According to the

"M
_—--- H

authors of this work, those basic principles were:

1. To facilitate the continuous growth of individual and-social
personalities by providing all persons with opportunities to
participate actively in all enterprises that concern them.

2. To recognize that leadership is a function of every indi-
vidual, and to encourage the exercise of leadership by each
person in accordance with his interests, needs, and abili-
ties.

3. To provide means by which persons can plan together, share
their experiences, and cooperatively evaluate their achieve-
ments.

Following the growth of these two major schools of thought,

and incorporating elements of each, has come the systematic study of

 

organizations typified by the SQEIEI,SCIE”CE attempts to build

Inna“- 4mni-pmaoua- :ntu—o tun-II.- -'—'-"* ‘

theories relative to organizational behavior. Beginning with Barnard

.. 1.. Judo-h.

w . nun..-» .n .u ”I

as early as 1938, stress began to be placed upon the need for theories

44 Combining both the influences of scientific

of administration.
management and human relations, Barnard wrote in terms of effec-
tiveness and efficiency. He viewed effectiveness as pertaining to
organizational goals and their achievement (organization oriented),
while he saw efficiency as having to do with worker satisfaction
(person oriented). Thus, the dialectic is completed as Barnard
recognizes the interrelationship between the two foregoing dimen-
sions. Other social scientists have attempted to extend and expand
this field of endeavor. Simon, in 1945, recognized the need to

develop greater understanding of the underlying principles of

administration.45 In his book, Administrative Behavior, he contended

33

that the way to improve administration was to increase the ration-
ality of decision making. He set about the analysis of the adminis-
trative process through the study of decisions made by administra-
tors. Other social scientists have developed theoretical models
which have been applied to the practice of educational administra-
tion. In 1955, Coladarci and Getzels attempted to point out

46

instances of the use of theory in educational administration. In

1957, Campbell and Gregg, writing for the National Conference of
Professors of Educational Administration, synthesized the research

findings to that date relative to theory in educational administra-

47

tion. In 1958, Halpin edited Administrative Theory in Education

for the newly formed University Council for Educational Administra-

48 Griffiths identified and described eight theories of admin-

49

tion.
istration in 1959. A 1964 yearbook of the National Society for
the Study of Education updated a similar publication in 1946. This
work is indicative of the impact of social science on administration.
Most recently, Halpin and Hayes cited five studies as substantial
products of the new partnership between the social sciences and

administration: Halpin's The Leadership Behavior of School Super-

intendents; Getzels and Guba's analysis of the nomothetic and ideo-

 

graphic dimensions of administrative behavior; Hemphill, Griffiths,
and Frederickson's Administrative Performance and Personality:
Carlson's study, Executive Succession and Organizational Change: and
Halpin and Croft's work, The Organizational Climate of Schools.50
To what extent these theoretical formulations are known and used by

superintendents in analyzing their own situations can only be

34

guessed; however, it is clear that increasing knowledge about
schools and their relationship with the larger society is constantly

being accumulated.

Leadership Studies

 

Research concerned with the study of leadership is indicative
of the dialectic development discussed earlier. Studies of leader-
ship had their beginning at the Ohio State University in the late
1940's and early 1950's under the direction of Dr. Carroll Shartle.5]
This work resulted in a series of studies and monographs, the purpose
of which was to describe the characteristics of leadership in various
organizations and situations. The primary conclusion of these
studies was that leadership is composed of two independent factors
called initiating structure and consideration.52 Leader behavior
has been studied by the Ohio State group in order to describe rather
than evaluate it. The emphasis, therefore, of most of these studies
has been the relationship between leadership behavior and situational
factors internal to the organization under study, and though there
have been no elaborate claims of causality made between these intra-
organizational factors and any particular leadership style, the clear
implication is that leader behavior is a function of the demands
placed upon the leader within the organization. According to
Stogdill and Coons, Halpin, Rush, Hemphill, Seeman, Fleishman, Bass,
and Stogdill et al. have extended and developed the concepts of
leader behavior and have tested these concepts in a wide variety of
organizational settings ranging from military organizations to

religious, educational, industrial, business, and sales organizations.

53

35

Initiating structure and consideration, the central dimen-
sions coming out of the Ohio State studies, are considered to be
independent factors. That is, leaders could exhibit one character-
istic more predominantly than the other, or they could possess both
leadership characteristics. Thus, each factor is considered to be
free to vary and the extent to which a leader uses one of them does
not help to predict the amount of the other he is using. In these
studies, initiating structure was considered to be planning as well
as organizing work and tasks. In literature not associated with
the Ohio State studies, initiating structure is sometimes equated
with autocratic, restrictive, and directive patterns of behavior.
Stogdill, however, defines initiating structure as behavior which
lets followers knowwhat is expected of them and what they can expect
of the leader. He states that such behaviors are "neither auto-
cratic, restrictive, directive, nor task pressure oriented."54
Similarly, in Halpin's study of the leadership behavior of combat
air-crew commanders, initiating structure is characterized as organ-
izing the job prOperly. He describes the behavior of the leader who
scores high in initiating structure as one who:

. . . organizes and defines the relationship between himself
and the members of his crew. He tends to define the role
which he expects each member of the crew to assume, and
endeavors to establish well-defined patterns of organization,
channels of communication, and ways of getting jobs done.

Blake and Mouton, using similar factors, dichotomize the
major dimensions of leadership as "concern for people" and "concern

for production."56 These factors are also considered to be indepen-

dent and free to vary from leader to leader. Thus, when represented

36

on a grid, Blake and Mouton's leader who is high (9) in concern for
production and low (1) in concern for people (9,1) produces effi-
ciency in Operations as a result of arranging the conditions of work
in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree.

57

Reddin summarizes other studies which have resulted in

similar dichotomies, namely those of the University of Michigan

58

Survey Research Center typified by Katz and Kahn and the small

d.59 The University of

group studies of Bales and others at Harvar
Michigan studies result in a continuum with the polar leadership
dimensions labeled as "employee centered" and "production centered,"
while the Harvard small group studies define the two group leader
styles as "socio-emotional leader" versus "task leader." Reddin
then adds his own dichotomy, naming the basic dimensions of leader-

"60 »His task

ship "relationship orientation" and "task orientation.
orientation recognizes the implicit importance of job knowledge and
technical skill. Thus, he defines task orientation as: "The extent
to which a manager directs his own and his subordinates' efforts;
characterized by initiating, organizing, and directing." "It is
difficult," says Reddin, "to imagine a manager lacking such skill
[technical skill] and being able to make any kind of attempt at
initiating, organizing, and directing his own work, let alone that
of others."

Benne and Sheats described the two basic types of leader
roles as task roles and as group building and maintenance roles.6]

Task roles, they say, are related to the direct accomplishment of

group purpose. In addition, Homan's concept of the leader "originating

37

62 Per-

interaction" corresponds to that of initiating structure.
haps it is because the initiation of structure dimension (task
orientation, production emphasis) has typically been juxtaposed to
consideration (relationship orientation, people emphasis) that the
former has been so roundly denounced as autocratic, authoritarian,
and restrictive.
Consideration is described by Halpin as being associated

with behavior indicative of friendship, mutual trust, respect, and

63 It should be noted that

a certain warmth in the relationship.
those leaders who were rated low in consideration were not neces-
sarily rated high in initiating structure. It was low considera-
tion which characterized commanders who were authoritarian and
impersonal, not necessarily high structure. Consideration, then,
referred to the extent to which the leader, while carrying out his
leadership functions, was considerate of his followers. 0n the
managerial grid, a leader described as low in concern for people (1)
and high in concern for production (9) would pay thoughtful atten-
tion to the needs of people in order to develOp satisfying relation-
ships and a comfortable, friendly organization atmosphere and work
tempo.64 Such an individual would be (1,9) manager.

Bales' socio-emotional leader was represented as one who
makes it easier for others to talk and who offers psychological
support, while the opposite extreme of the production-centered leader
for the University of Michigan group is the employee-centered leader.66

Similarly, Reddin's relationship-oriented leader promotes personal

job relationships characterized by listening, trusting, and

38

67 68

encouraging, and Benne and Sheats' group building and mainten-
Q ance roles are concerned with integration and solidarity through

encouraging, harmonizing, compromising, and reducing conflict.

Summary

In addition to environmental influences, theories of man-
agement and leadership have impacted the role of the superintendent.
Scientific management, human relations, and social science theory
have been of major importance historically, with elements of the two
former movements being often used as the theoretical foundation of
studies of the administrative process. The studies most directly
relevant to this review are those concerned with leadership. Like
managerial philosophy, which dichotomized the available choices
(scientific management and human relations), leadership studies have
paralleled those concepts with those of initiating structure and
consideration. Pervading the research literature is a basic dis-
tinction between group activities directed to one or the other of
these two types of roles performed by leaders. There can be no
doubt that the extent to which the superintendent adheres to one
management philOSOphy or the other will affect his leadership style
accordingly, or conversely, the extent to which he practices one
basic style of leadership or the other may play a significant part
in determining which management ideology he adopts.

This study has placed major emphasis on those elements of
leadership herein described as initiating structure, task emphasis,
production orientation, or that which Barnard spoke of as effective-

ness.69 The following section will detail the rationale for this

39

limitation and will explicate the classical foundations upon which

much of this study rests.

Technical-Managerial Skills

This study is built on the premise that the stimulus pro-
vided by the leader structures the group behavior. Stogdill refers
to a number of theorists who have defined leadership in a similar
fashion, viewing it as the chief variable which gives rise to dif-
ferentiation and maintenance of role structures in groups.70
Smith (1934),71 La Piere and Farnsworth (1936),72 Gouldner (1950),73
Homans (1950),74 Hemphill (1954),75 Stogdill (1959),76 and Bavelas
(1960)77 all define leadership in terms which predicate the group
structure on the influence of the leader. Thus, leadership is
defined as originating interaction, or "engaging in actions which
initiate a structure in the interaction as part of the process of
solving a mutual problem."78

This view of leadership, while it recognizes the existence
of both formal and informal leaders and while it acknowledges the
importance of the informal group_structure, places the responsi-
bility for structuring all the organization's resources, both human
and capital, in such a way as to achieve the organization's goals.
As we have seen, a number of studies, particularly in the area of
leadership, lead to the general conclusion that there is no one
optimum type of management system. Such theorists advocate a con-
tingency approach to management. This approach would attempt to

alter the behavior of the leader to match the changing task require-

ments of the situation.79 These theoretical formulations, like the

40

human relations ideology which came before, are based on the general
notion that improved morale will lead to improved productivity and
that effective leadership is considerate leadership. There is,
however, a considerable disparity of agreement on this point.

Edwin M. Bridges, professor of education at Stanford Uni-
versity, criticizes the design and content of training programs for

80 Bridges claims that "trained incapacity"

school administrators.
is an accidental product of attitudinal and socio-technical socializa-
tion inherent in training programs. While formal training prepares
the leader for brave deeds, real administrative power is limited by
diminished authority to select or deselect personnel, to grant or
withhold monetary rewards, to assign or alter work schedules. The
style of conflict management, communication, and interpersonal
relationships of the successful student, says Bridges, are incom-
patible with administrative functioning.

In order to guard against such a contingency, an interest
group of the National Council of Professors of Educational Adminis-
tration has formed a Competency-Based Curriculum Group which commu-
nicates program, practice, and research information via the CC§§_

Notebook.81

A number of university programs function on the
competency-based model. Patterned after the American Association
of Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE) Performance-Based Teacher
Education Project, the central premise of this group is that the
competencies necessary for successful school administration may be

generalized to the variety of administrator situations. Training

is then planned in these functional areas or any combination of areas

41

with stress dependent upon the individual administrative situation.
Elements of task emphasis as well as relationship emphasis occur in
these models also.

This study has de-emphasized the stress which most programs
place on the group building and maintenance activities commonly
referred to as consideration, relationshiporientation, concern for
PEOP193 etc. This de-emphasis is not intended to infer that carry-
ing out the functions of administration should or can be accomplished
without regard to the interactions, feelings, and needs of the people
involved. Simple humanity and common sense dictate such basic con-
sideration. Indeed, much of the research in this area concludes
that paying attention to such concerns results in increased satis-
faction, improved morale, or happier workers. Our concern, however,
is with what is usually referred to as productivity.

Basic human relations ideology, growing out of the Hawthorne
studies referred to earlier, was grounded on the premise of making
effective use of the informal group structure and the informal
group leader as alternatives to the use of classical management
techniques. This approach was viewed as a more effective method of
achieving management goals in terms of productivity. Widely adOpted
by management and implemented in organizations of all types, the
human relations research has not been successful at demonstrating
empirically the efficacy of its claims of improved productivity.
Stogdill summarized a number of studies which used the two-factor
analysis of leadership (consideration and initiating structure). He

concludes that group productivity is more highly related to structure

42

than to consideration. Member satisfaction, on the other hand, was
somewhat more highly related to consideration than to structure.
Indeed, a further conclusion of his review is that person-oriented

behaviors, more often than work-related behaviors, were negatively

82

associated with productivity. Perrow draws upon a number of

reviews of various aspects of the human relations model in his

scathing critique of that managerial philosophy.83 He cites the

84

re-examination of the Hawthorne data by Michael Argyle and later

85

by Alex Carey as descriptive of a discrepancy between the evidence

and the conclusions contained in Mayo's seminal work. Brayfield

and Crockett's survey of 50 studies in 1954 failed to uncover any
evidence of a relationship between workers' attitudes and perfor-
mance.86 Similarly, Lawler and Porter (in a survey of 30 studies)
conclude that if there is a relationship between satisfaction and
performance, it is that high performance yields satisfaction, not

87 Citing Korman's review of a large number of studies

88

vice versa.

and Hulin and Blood's analysis
89

relating leadership to performance,
of a large number of studies concerned with job enlargement,
Perrow ultimately is led to agree with the conclusion reached by
Wilensky almost 20 years ago: "The evidence is typically incon-
clusive, the interpretations sometimes contradictory."90
Having decided, however, that such factors as morale,
satisfaction, and consideration in leadership would improve per-
formance and therefore productivity, the advocates of this managerial

philOSOphy have espoused attempts to train leaders to exhibit these

qualities. Among the most prevalent of such attempts has been the

43

general movement known as sensitivity training. Kurt Back des-
cribes the history and workings of this social movement and assessed
the results of such training in terms of empirical evidence.91
His searching inventory of the movement traces a gradual change in
emphasis from a scientifically based, empirically verified study of
leadership in small groups to a popular movement of immediate and
intense sensation with fewer and fewer claims of long-range effect
or lasting benefit beyond personal benefit to participants. Richard
Farson, former director of Western Behavioral Sciences Institute and
an activist in the encounter movement in industry, says:
The whole notion of sensitivity training, the whole concept
of training, period, which has been with this thing from the
start, has unfortunately been hooked up with change. I think
that's been a big bugaboo. It does not change peOple.92
The research of Lieberman, Yalom, and Miles suggests that the overall
effect of sensitivity training compared with control groups was not
significant.93 What was found was that the leader and his person-

ality were more significant than the particular brand of sensi-

tivity training used. Odiorne analyzed 51 books and 68 journal

94

articles published between 1948 and 1961. He found no evidence

that laboratory training changes behavior back on the job. A simi-

1ar conclusion was reached by Dorothy Stock, who reviewed the research

95

on sensitivity training in 1964. Stogdill's review of studies of

this method led him to the following conclusion: "Considering the
research that used adequate controls, it is to be concluded that the

sensitivity training of leaders is associated with decreased group

96

productivity and increased cohesiveness." Further, he concluded

44

that the research on leadership training is generally inadequate in
both design and execution. Says Stogdill:
Perhaps the finding that sensitivity trained leadership tends
to be associated with depressed group productivity explains the
unwillingness of researchers to use legitimate criteria of the
results of training and their reluctance to report the results
when such data are collected.97

While attention to the feelings of employees, their needs
for recognition, autonomy, belongingness, independence, etc.
may or may not result in improved group cohesiveness, higher morale,
or greater satisfaction, it seems clear that such attention will
not necessarily result in improved group performance or increased
group productivity. Further, efforts to train leaders in humanis-
tic or sensitivity techniques do not appear to have any effect
beyond a personal one. Thus, our discussion of training skills
needed by top-level school managers, while it recognizes the advan-
tages of maintaining group cohesiveness and happy employees, does
not confuse these advantages with influences on performance. This
study, therefore, emphasizes the technical-managerial skills found
in the classical management literature.

In order to discover which technical skills practicing
superintendents possessed and which ones are most important in the
performance of their jobs, a questionnaire (Appendix A) was devel-
oped. This instrument was based on the skills delineated in the
classical literature as well as those proposed by the researcher's
own experience as an administrator. In addition, and perhaps more

-hnportantly, consultations with a committee of practicing super-

intendents and with professors of educational administration at

45

Michigan State University extended and refined this basic

list.

Bennis has predicted the demise of bureaucratic organi-

98 Pointing out that bureaucratic organiza-

zation as we know it.
tion is most suited to a highly competitive, undifferentiated, and
stable environment such as that during the time of the Industrial
Revolution, he bases his prediction on the notion that the environ-
ment has changed in just those ways that make the bureaucratic
mechanism the most problematic. Stability has vanished. The new
organizational structure envisioned by Bennis will be a temporary
one. This will be its main characteristic. Thus it will be adap-
tive, rapidly changing, and easily dismantled or modified. Man-
agement in such an organization, it would seem, would take on the
characteristics of what we now think of as project management.

Much of the classical management literature coincides with the
skills described in writings in project management. Both sources
were used in the compilation of the skills surveyed. Finally,
Halpin, in speaking about "initiating structure," says, "This factor
probably represents a basic and unique function of leadership. It
is possible that other factors, including consideration, primarily

represent facilitating means for accomplishing this end."99

Classical Management Principles
The literature of management theory is rife with assertions
of specific management skills. Fayol is considered a pioneer in

administrative theory by most writers in the classical literature.

46

His five elements of administration are: (l) planning (prevoyance),
(2) organization, (3) corrmand, (4) coordination, and (5) control .100
Other writers have added to or modified this basic list,
but current classical theory still universally recognizes planning,
organization, and control as useful classifications for studying
management. Gulick's POSDCORB is an acronym for planning, organiz-

ing, staffing, directing, coordinating, reporting, and budgeting”)1 h

102 103in England

Mooney and Reily in this country and Oliver Sheldon
added to and extended the basic foundations of management theory.
Operations research and information-processing techniques (MIS) have
many parallels to these classical approaches. Further, heuristic
methods of problem solving involving computer-based technology for
the purpose of simulation represent another of the technical
approaches to management. Virtually all writing on the management
or administrative process is organized to some extent around similar
managerial skills.

Newman, writing in 1950 on the principles and techniques of
administration, divides his volume into the following sections:
(1) Planning, (2) Organizing, (3) Assembling Resources, (4) Direct-
ing, and (5) Controlling.104 A 1955 Yearbook of the American Asso-
<:iation of School Administrators (AASA) lists five crucial activi-
'ties of the administrative process:

1. Planning or the attempt to control the future in the

direction of the desired goals through decisions made on

the basis of careful estimates of the probable conse-

quences of possible courses of action.

47

2. Allocation or the procurement and allotment of human and

 

material resources in accordance with the Operating plan.

3. Stimulation or motivation of behavior in terms of the

 

desired outcomes.

4. Coordination or the process of fitting together the var-

 

ious groups and Operations into an integrated pattern of
purpose—achieving work.

5. Evaluation or the continuous examination of the effects

 

produced by the ways in which the other functions listed
here are performed.105
Their use of the term "stimulating" rather than Fayol's "commanding"
or Gulick's "directing" reflects the more recent concern with human
relations in management.

Litchfield, in 1956, pointed out the importance of the evalu-

106 It was his thesis

ation process in the administrative function.
that the administrative process is cyclical, and that "reappraising"
as the end of the process brings the sequence substantially back to
the starting point. He includes the following activities in the
process: decision making, programming, communicating, controlling,
and reappraising. Further, Litchfield proposes that each of the
activities in the administrative process is independent and may be
applied heuristically to an individual problem or to the activity of
the entire organization.

Gregg, in applying classical management theory to educa-

107

tional administration, lists seven components. They are:

decision making, planning, organizing, communicating, influencing,

48

coordinating, and evaluating. According to Sears, the process
includes planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, and con-
trolling.108
Griffiths, following the earlier work of Simon, asserted
that decision making is the central component of the administration
process and that the function of administration is directing and

109 His list of activities

controlling the decision-making process.
is more prescriptive and detailed than those previously cited. The
process calls for the administrator to:

1. Recognize, define, and limit the problem.

2. Analyze and evaluate the problem.

3. Establish criteria and standards by which the solution
will be evaluated or judged as acceptable and adequate
to the need.

4. Collect data.

5. Formulate and select the preferred solution.

6. Put into effect the preferred solution.

a. Program the solution.
b. Control the activities in the program.
c. Evaluate the results and the process.”0

Campbell et a1. define the administrative process as "the way

by “NHch an organization makes decisions and takes action to achieve

"111 Their selection of terms to delineate the adminis-

its goals.
'trative process is eclectic, drawing from the literature Of classi-
cal Inanagement. The major activities named are: decision making,

programing, stimulating, coordinating, and appraising.

49

Summary
This study has incorporated the concern for human needs

into the process of management as a part of all activities rather

than attempting to treat it as though these were independent factors.
Thus, this consideration of the elements of the administrative process
deals with the classical principles of administration, leaving aside
separate consideration of the human interaction process. Indeed,
studies of leadership and programs which attempt to train leaders

from the social-psychological perspective have been unable to demon-
strate empirically the advantages of such training in terms of organi-
zational productivity, though such claims have been widely made.

A review of major writers in the classical mold reveals con-
siderable agreement regarding the principal elements of the adminis-
trative process. Though there is a good deal of semantic interplay,
with each researcher selecting his own terminology, there is even
more conceptual overlap between these authors. It is because of the
clarity with which the process elements emerge that the present
study is organized around the following elements of the technical-
managerial process:

1. Definition and clarification of the direction and purpose

of the organization.
a. Analysis of needs
b. Consideration of alternatives

c. Setting of goals

50

2. Establishment and maintenance of the organization to

work toward defined purposes.

a.
b.
C.

d.

Decision-making activities
Organizing activities
Controlling activities

Coordinating activities

3. Restructuring and redefining organizational needs,

direction, process.

a.
b.

C.

Evaluation activities (appraising, assessment)
Decision-making activities

Planning

For purposes of the present study, planning, decision making,

managing, evaluating, and communicating are the terms utilized to

include these activities. The following chapter will define these

terms and will detail the items in the questionnaire which were

designed to apply to each component.

51

Footnotes--Chapter II

1Frederick W. Taylor, "The Principles of Scientific Mana e-
ment," in Scientific Management (New York: Harper and Row, 1947]

2F. J. Roethlisberger and William J. Dickson, Management
and the Worker (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1941).

3

 

 

John Gardner, Self Renewal (Evanston, 111.: Harper, 1963).

 

4Henry Suzzallo, The Rise of Local Supervision in Massa-
chusetts (New York: Columbia University, 1906), in Christian Weber,
Basic Philosophies of Education (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston, 1960).

5Ciyde L. Hay, The Blind Spot in American Public Education
(New York: Macmillan and Co., 1950), p. 18.

6Alexander Meiklejohn, Education Between Two Worlds (New
York: Harper, 1942), p. 7.

7Paul R. Pierce, The Origin and Development of the Public
School Principalshjp (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934).

8Thomas M. Gilland, The Origin and Development of the Powers
and Duties of the City-School Superintenaent (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1935).

9Theodore L. Reller, The Development of the City Superin-
tendengy of Schools in the United States (Philadelphia: published
by the author, 1935), in Roald F. Campbell, Lavern L. Cunningham,
and Roderick F. McPhee, The Organization and Control of American
Schools (Columbus, Ohio: Merrill, 1965).

10E. A. Bateman, Development of the County-Unit School
District in Utah (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College,
Columbia University, 1940), in Campbell, Cunningham and McPhee, The.
Organization and Control of American Schools.

nRoald F. Campbell, Superintendency of Schools (Danville:
Interstate Printers, 1968).

12

13RoaldF. Campbell, Lavern L. Cunningham, and Roderick F.
McPhee, The Organization and Control of American Schools (Columbus,
Ohio: Merrill, 1965), p. 191.

 

 

 

Ibid.

14Raymond E. Callahan, Education and the Cult of Efficiendy
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962).

52

15James Coleman et al., Youth: Transition to Adulthood,
Report of the Panel on Youth of the President's Science Advisory
Committee (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), p. 1.

16Ibid., p. 20.

17Educational Policies Commission of the National Education
Association and the American Association of School Administrators,
"The Unique Role of the Superintendent of Schools" (Washington,
D.C.: 1965), p. 1.

18Ibid., p. 3.

19Russell J. Huff, "How Superintendents See Themselves,"
Nation's Schools 84 (November 1969): 35.

20Keith Goldhammer, William Aldridge, John Suttle, and Gerald
Becker, Issues and Problems in Contemporary Educational Administra-
tion (Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon Press, 1967), p. 10.

2IRoald F. Campbell, “The Changing Role of the Superintendent,"
Contemporary Education 39 (May 1968): 249.

22Natt B. Burbank, Sgperintendent of Schools (Danville, 111.:
Interstate Printers, Inc., 1968), p. 25.

23Deborah Hart, "Conference Report," UCEA Review (Columbus,
Ohio; University Council for Educational Administration) 17 (October
1975 : 1-4.

24David A. Fultz, "A Study of the Reasons Why Michigan School
Superintendents Were Dismissed or Encouraged to Leave Their Positions
Between 1965 and 1975 (Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University,

1975), p. 132.
250a11ahan, Education and the Cult of Efficiengy.

26Campbell, Cunningham and McPhee, The Organization and
Control of American Schools.

27Ibid., p. 200.
28Callahan, Education and the Cult of Efficiency,

29Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization,
'translated by A. M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons (Oxford University

Press, 1947).

30Desmond L. Cook, Educational Prgject Management (Columbus,
(Hiio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., 197111

53

31M. Haire, "Industrial and Social Psychology," in Handbook
of Social ngchology, ed. G. Lindzey (Cambridge: Addison—Wesley,
1954), pp. 1104-23.

32Roethlisberger and Dickson, Management and the Worker.

 

33C. Argyris, Personality and Organization (New York:
Harper, 1957).

34J. G. March and H. A. Simon, Organizations (New York:
Wiley, 1958).

35Douglas M. McGregor, The Human Side of Enterprise (New
York: Wiley, 1958).

36Rensis Likert, New Patterns of Management (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1961).

37Perrow, Complex Organizations, p. 119.

38Ibid., p. 118.

39Harold L. Wilensky, "Human Relations in the Workplace,"
in Research in Industrial Human Relations: A Critical Appraisal,
ed. Conrad Arensberg et alTTTNew York: Harper & Brothers, 1957).

40Abraham K. Korman, "Consideration, 'Initiating Structure,’
and Organizational Criteria--A Review," Personal Psychology 19,4
(1966): 349-61.

4IPerrow, Complex Organizations.

42Callahan, Education and the Cult of Efficiency,

43G. Robert Koopman, Alice Miel, and Paul J. Misner, Democracy
in School Administration (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.,

19437, P. 107.

44Chester I. Barnard, The Functions of the Executive
(Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1938).

45Herbert A. Simon, Administrative Behavior (New York:
The Macmillan Co., 1945).

‘w/ 46A. P. Coladarci and J. u. Getzels, The Use of Theory in
Educational Administration (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University

Press, 1955).

47R. F. Campbell and R. I. Gregg, eds., Administrative Beha-
vior in Education (New York: Harper 8 Row, 195711

54

48Andrew W. Halpin, ed., Administrative Theory in Education
(Chicago: Midwest Administration Center, University of Chicago
Press, 1958).

49Daniel E. Griffiths, Administrative Theory_(New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1959).

50Hart, "Conference Report."

51C. L. Shartle, Executive Performance and Leadership
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1956).

52R. M. Stogdill and A. E. Coons, eds., Leader Behavior: Its
Description and Measurement (Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State Univer-
sity, Bureau of Business Research, 1957).

53Ibid.

54R. M. Stogdill, Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory
and Research (New York: The Free Press, 1974).

 

55Andrew W. Halpin, "The Leadership Behavior and Combat Per-
formance of Airplane Commanders," Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psyghology_49 (1954): 19-22.

56R. R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton, The Managerial Grid
(Houston: Gulf Publishing Co., 1964), p. 10.

 

57William J. Reddin, Managerial Effectiveness (New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970), p. 23.

58R. L. Kahn and D. Katz, "Leadership Practices in Relation
to Productivity and Morale," in Group Dynamics, ed. D. Cartwright and
A. Zander (New York: Harper and Row, 1960), pp. 612-28.

59R. F. Bales, "The Equilibrium Problem in Small Groups,"
in Working Papers in the TheOry of Action, ed. T. Parsons, R. F.
Bales, and E. A. Shills"TNew York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1933).

60Reddin, Managerial Effectiveness.

61K. D. Benne and P. Sheats, "Functional Roles of Group
Members," Journal of Social Issues 4 (Spring 1948): 41-49.

62G. C. Homans, The Human Group_(New York: Harcourt, Brace,

 

1950).

63Halpin, "The Leadership Behavior and Combat Performance of
.Airplane Commanders."

64Blake and Mouton, The Managerial Grid.

55
65

66Kahn and Katz, "Leadership Practices in Relation to
Productivity and Morale."

67
68

Bales, "The Equilibrium Problem in Small Groups."

Reddin, Managerial Effectiveness.

Benne and Sheats, "Functional Roles of Group Members."

69Barnard, The Functions of the Executive.

 

70
Research.

71 . .
M. Smith, "Personality Dominance and Leadership," Sociology
and Social Research 19 (1934): 18-25.

72R. LaPiere and P. R. Farnsworth, Social Psychology (New
York: Harper and Row, 1950).

73A. W. Goudner, Studies in Leadership (New York: Harper
and Row, 1950).

74

Stogdill, Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and

 

Homans, The Human Group,

75J. K. Hemphill, A Proposed Theory of Leadership in Small
Groups (Columbus: The Ohio State University, Personnel Research
Board Technical Report, 1954), unpublished, in Ralph M. Stogdill,
Handbook of Leadership_(New York: The Free Press, 1974).

76Ralph M. Stogdill, Individual Behavior and GroupyAchieve-
ment (New York: Oxford University Press, 1959).

77A. Bavelas, "Leadership: Man and Function," Administrative
Science Quarterly 4 (1960): 491-98.

78Hemphill, A PrOposed Theory of Leadership in Small Groups.

79Reddin, Managerial Effectiveness.

80Hart, "Conference Report."

81The CCBC Notebook is a quarterly newsletter publication of
the Committee for Competency-Based Curriculum in Educational Adminis-
tration of the National Council of Professors of Educational Adminis-
tration. This interest group began in 1972. Notebook publishes an
editorial comment, original papers and reports, commentary on experi-
ences, references and sources, and notes of interest.

 

82Stogdill, Handbook of Leadership, pp. 403-404.
83Perrow, Complex Organizations, pp. 97-143.

56

84Michael Argyle, "The Relay Assembly Test Room in Retro-
spect," Occupational Psychology 27 (1953): 98-103.

85Alex Carey, "The Hawthorne Studies: A Radical Criticism,"
American Sociological Review 32 (June 1967): 416.

86Arthur H. Brayfield and Walter H. Crockett, "Employee
Attitudes and Employee Performance," Psychological Bulletin 52,5
(1955): 396-424.

 

87Edward E. Lawler III and Lyman w. Porter, "The Effect of
Performance on Job Satisfaction," Industrial Relations 7 (October
1967): 20-28.

88Korman, "Consideration, 'Initiating Structure,’ and Organi-
zational Criteria--A Review."

89Charles L. Hulin and Milton R. Blood, "Job Enlargement,
Individual Differences, and Worker Responses," Psychological Bulletin
69,1 (1968): 41-55.

 

90Wilensky, "Human Relations in the Workplace."

9(Kurt W. Back, Beyond Words (New York: Russell Sage Founda-
tion, 1972).

92

Ibid., p. 194.

93M. Lieberman, I. Yalom, and M. Miles, "The Group Experi-
ence Project: A Comparison of Ten Encounter Technologies," in
Encounter: Confrontations in Self and Interpersonal Awareness,
ed. 3. Blank, G. Gottsegen, and M. Gottsegen (New York: Macmillan,
1971 .

94c. s. Odiorne, "The Trouble With Sensitivity Training,"
Training_Director's Journal 17,10 (1963): 9-20.

95Dorothy Stock, "A Survey of Research on T-Groups," in
T-Group Theory and Laboratory Method, ed. L. P. Bradford, J. R. Gibb,
and K. D. Benne (New York: Wiley, 1964).

96Stogdi11, Handbook of Leadership, p. 192.

97Ibid., p. 199.

98Warren G. Bennis, Chaggjgg Organizations (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1966).

99Halpin, "The Leadership Behavior and Combat Performance of
Airplane Commanders."

57

100Henri Fayol, General and Industrial Management, trans.
from Frenth edition (Durod) by Constance Stours (London: Pittman
Co., 1949 .

101L. Gulick and L. Urwick, eds., Papers on the Science of
Administration (New York: Columbia University, Institute of Public
Administration, 1937).

102J. D. Mooney and A. C. Reily, The Principles of Organiza-
tion (New York: Harper, 1939).

103Oliver Sheldon, The Philosophy of Management (London:
Pittman Co., 1923).

104William H. Newman, Administrative Action (Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1950).

105American Association of School Administrators, Staff
Relations in School Administration (Washington, D.C.: AASA,1955),
Chapter 1.

106Edward H. Litchfield, "Notes on a General Theory of Admin-
istration," Administrative Science Quarterly_(June 1956): 3-29.

107Russell T. Gregg, "The Administrative Process," in
Administrative Behavior in Education, ed. Roald F. Campbell and
Russell T. Gregg (New York: Haper 8 Brothers, 1957), Chapter 8.

108Jesse B. Sears, The Nature of the Administrative Process
(New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950).

109Daniel E. Griffiths, "Administration as Decision-Making,"
in Administrative Theory in Education, ed. Andrew W. Halpin
(Chicago: Midwest Administration Center, The University of Chicago,
1958), Chapter 6.

110

mRoa1d F. Campbell, Edwin M. Bridges, John E. Corbally, Jr.,
Raphael O. Nystrand, and John A. Ramseyer, Introduction to Educational
Administration (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1971), p.189.

 

 

 

 

Griffiths, Administrative Theory, p. 94.

 

 

CHAPTER III

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

Introduction

 

This study is organized around four basic questions with
regard to management skills of school superintendents. Those ques-
tions are: (1) How much of a certain skill do superintendents
perceive themselves to possess? (2) How important are these skills
in the performance of the job? (3) What impact or influence did
formal education have in the development of these skills? and
(4) How much interest or desire does the superintendent have in
further formal training in these skills?

This chapter will describe the organizational format used
to gather, process, and analyze the data which support the answers
to these questions. The major divisions of this description are:
pOpulation, instrumentation, research questions, and analysis of

data.

Egpulation
The Michigan Association of School Administrators is a state-
wide subgroup of the American Association of School Administrators.
The state organization is comprised of top-level school management
personnel, including local superintendents of schools, intermediate
school superintendents, and associate, deputy or assistant super-

intendents. Included in the membership of MASA are approximately

58

59

515 local school superintendents. In addition, the Association has
nearly 230 deputy, assistant, or associate superintendents on its
rolls. Finally, 58 county or intermediate superintendents account
for the remainder of the nearly 800 MASA membership.

There are in Michigan approximately 530 local school dis-
tricts. The universe of interest for purposes of this study included
only the superintendents of these units. Because MASA expressed an
interest in surveying its membership regarding management skills and
because the local superintendent component of that membership com-
prises nearly 97 percent of the total universe of interest, it was
decided to utilize this group as the population for this study.
Thus, the total 515 local superintendent members of the Michigan
Association of School Administrators (97 percent of the total popu-
lation of superintendents in Michigan) served as the population

considered in this study.

Instrumentation

Due to the large number of superintendents in the population
and the decision to compare their responses in relation to a large
number of variables of interest, a mailed questionnaire was chosen
as the most effective and efficient means of gathering the desired
data. It was necessary, therefore, to select an instrument which
would accomplish this purpose, or to develop one. After carefully
considering several existing instruments, used in program and staff
development projects, it was decided that none of these directly
answered the needs of the proposed research without significant

Inodification. It was, therefore, necessary to develop an instrument

60

which both dealt with the technical-managerial skills of interest and
asked the specific questions desired regarding those skills. The
instrument finally developed (Appendix A) represents an eclectic
product of a general survey of several instruments which addressed
certain aspects of the tOpic.

In addition to this input, the development of the instrument
represents the convergence of a number of other sources. As pre-
viously stated, this study was commissioned by the Michigan Associa-
tion of School Administrators. Specifically, the MASA committee on
Educational Leadership had adopted as one of its goals an inventory
of the training needs of school superintendents to be used in plan-
ning and presenting projected in-service programs for members. The
Educational Leadership Committee is composed of ten superintendent
representatives (one from each MASA region in the state) and an
ex-officio Executive Board member representative. The experience
and expertise of this ll-member committee of practitioner-scholars
was a major source of information input for the design and construc-
tion of the questionnaire. Initial categories and specific skills
statements grew out of individual and group contacts with this body.
In addition, the committee served to review and critique the instru-
ment as development proceeded.

Conceptually, the survey instrument is an attempt to span a
wide variety of administrative skills necessary to the internal
administration of the educational enterprise. In all, there are 33
skill statements, each of which is examined in the context of the

four different questions.

61

The questions to which superintendents were asked to respond
were:

1. What is your current level of skill in this area?

 

This question was intended to assess the individual's perception of
his own ability in relationship to each of the 33 skill statements.
Thus, it represents a statement of the superintendent's current
level of skill. It is a basic assumption of this study that given
the opportunity, superintendents will objectively and accurately
assess and report their real capabilities.

N 2. What has been the influence of formal training in the

development of this skill? This question was intended to determine

 

those skills, reported to be possessed by administrators, which had
been most directly the product of formal training. Thus, pre-service
and in-service program planners might assess the kinds of experi-
ences which they provide to the individuals with whom they deal in
light of the impact those experiences appear to have on the develop-
ment of various skills.

3. How important is this skill in the performance ofgyour
jgp? Superintendents were asked to evaluate the relative importance
of each of the 33 skills in terms of their own unique circumstances.
This question is distinct from question 1, in that the object of
this query is to determine what skills are most needed, regardless
of which ones are actually possessed. Thus, a discrepancy analysis
between the actual state and the desired state becomes possible.

4. What isgyour desire for further training in this skill

area? This question, perhaps most closely related to question 3, is

62

an attempt to discern the level of commitment to further formal
training by practitioners. It was pointed out most emphatically by
the members of the Educational Leadership Committee that members
often respond that they have certain needs but may not be suffi-
ciently interested to participate in a training program. This query
addressed itself, therefore, directly to the question of willing-
ness or desire to participate in formal training programs.

Responses were coded on a l to 5 scale, where l=very low,
2=low, 3=medium, 4=high, and 5=very high. Respondents were asked to
circle the response which best indicated their perceptions of their
own situations. The instrument was labeled M.A.S.A. Members Needs
Assessment.

The instrument contains two major divisions: a section
dealing with demographic data and a section dealing with the spe-
cific skills of interest. It was planned thereby to compare various
patterns of skills possessed or deemed important with various situa-

tional aspects of the superintendency.

Demographic Data

 

The demographic data are organized in two separate compon-
ents. These are personal characteristics of the superintendent and
organizational characteristics of the district. The personal char-
acteristics of the superintendent about which data were requested
included: age, years in current position, degree status, most recent
previous experience, total years in education, and whether or not
this was a first superintendency. The following questions were thus

included to obtain this personal information:

63

1. What is your age? (check one)

( ) above 60
) 55-60
) 50-54
) 45-49
) 40-44
) below 40

check one)

(
(
(
(
(
2. How many years have you held your current position?
( ) less than 5
( ) 5-10
( ) 11-15
( ) 16-20

( ) more than 20

3. What is your highest degree attained? (check one)

( ) post doctorate
( ) doctorate
( ) education specialist
( ) post masters
( ) masters degree
( ) less than masters

4. What was your most recent previous experience?

( ) superintendency?

) central office (not superintendent)
) secondary administration

) elementary administration

) classroom teaching

) other

AAAAA

 

5. How many total years have you been in education?
(write in)

years

 

6. Is this your first superintendency? (check one)

( ) Yes
()No

The organizational characteristics about which demographic
data were requested included: size of district, wealth of district,
political subdivision of district, political orientation of the board

of education, educational orientation of the board of education,

64

racial composition of district, number of staff administrators,
number of line administrators. The questions asked to obtain
these data were:

1. What is your current student population (Fourth Friday
count)? (check one)

( ) above 10,000
( ) 7,000-9,999
( ) 5,000-6,999
( ) 3,000-4,999
( ) 1,000-2,999
( ) below 1,000

Thus, size of student pOpulation was used as the indicator
of district size. This was an arbitrary decision based on the
assumption that student population size determined need for ser-
vices and thus organizational size.

2. What is your current SEV/pp? (check one)

( ) above 25,000
( ) 20-25,000

( ) 15-19,999
( ) 10-14,999
( ) 7- 9,999

( ) below 7,000

SEV per pupil is a measure of the amount of tax base avail-
able for every child which the district must educate and represents
a standard measure of district wealth.

3. According to state assessment criteria, in what political
subdivision is your district? ‘

( ) Metropolitan core
( ) City

( ) Town

( ) Urban fringe

( ) Rural

All Michigan school districts have been defined as belonging

to one or the other of these categories by the state Department of

65

Education, for purposes of the Michigan Assessment of Basic Skills
program.

4. How would you characterize the political orientation
of your board? (check one)

( ) Predominantly conservative
( ) Predominantly liberal
( ) It varies from issue to issue
This variable, which is hereafter referred to as political
orientation, was consistently mentioned by practitioners in committee
meetings, interviews,1and the subsequent field test as a major factor
in determining how the superintendent must function, and therefore,

what skills he must possess.

5. How would you characterize the educational orientation
of your board? (check one)

( ) Predominantly traditional
( ) Predominantly progressive

Like political orientation, educational orientation was
postulated as a major determinant of administrator action. Perhaps
closely related to political orientation, this variable was none-
theless included to test the notion that administrators from dis-
tricts with different educational orientations will require differ-
ent sets of skills.

6. What is the racial composition of your current student
population? (check one)

5 ) All white
) Predominantly white
é ) About evenly mixed
) Predominantly black or other minority
( ) All black or other minority
This variable was included to test the voracity of the popu-
lar conception that the presence of a racial mixture or the neces-

Sity of dealing with a predominantly minority clientele will dictate

66

the need for different skills than other administrators need. It
is, however, recognized that this variable may be contaminated by
virtue of the fact that most districts with predominantly minority
student pOpulations are also core city districts and, therefore,

are also very large districts. It becomes problematic as to whether
size, urbanity, or the minority status Of the students influences
the skills needed by the administrators.

7. How many staff administrators does your district
employ? (write in)

staff administrators

 

8. How many line administrators does your district
employ? (write in)

line administrators

 

Questions 7 and 8, when combined into a ratio, may be used
to compare the relative complexity of the administrative unit of the
district. This is done by dividing the number of line administra-
tors by the number of staff administrators. Thus, if a district
employed two assistant superintendents and nine principals, the
relationship would be 10:2 or 5:1. A district of 23 principals
might employ only three assistant superintendents, giving a line-to-
staff ratio of 24:3 or 8:1. The second district, even though larger
in size with a larger administrative component, would be less com-
plex in terms of the structure of the administrative hierarchy. It
was anticipated that superintendents in districts with a more complex
administrative structure would need different skills than those who
are required to do more of the actual maintenance system work them-

selves.

67

Though no formal theoretical principles were formulated to
be tested, the questions asked and information sought presumed that
inherent in the data would be an evident structure which would pro-
vide logic to the seemingly random information. Examination and
analysis of the data should disclose essential relationships which
exist in reality. In a sense, then, there were a priori assumptions
which may be said to have been tested. The decision to ask cer-
tain questions and not others presumes a vested interest in certain
information. Thus, throughout the survey, the assumption which comes
through is that administrators with differing personal and organiza-
tional characteristics will require different managerial skills.

Or, put another way, personal and organizational characteristics

will determine to some extent the skills needed by superintendents.
In addition, the assumption is made that the administrative process
is finite and identifiable in the sense that there are specific
skills which are summative in defining the process. The nature of
this assumption is more specifically spelled out below in the section
on skills assessment data. In essence, however, the additive com-
ponents of the process for purposes of this study are assumed to be:
planning skills, managing skills, decision-making skills, evaluating
skills, and communicating skills.

It is thus assumed that superintendents of differing ages,
years in position, degree status, previous experience, total years
in education, or number of previous superintendencies will report
differing patterns of skills possessed, skills of importance, influ-

ence of training, and desire for further training. Similarly, the

68

assumption is made that superintendents from districts of varying
size, wealth, political identification, political orientation,
educational orientation, racial composition, or complexity will
require different skills, etc. The null hypothesis is, of course,
most appropriate for purpOses of testing statistically. Accordingly,
it may be stated as follows:

HO : u = u0 and H1 : u f uo where no directionality is predicted.
The skills against which to compare these characteristics were

obtained from the skills data section of the questionnaire.

Skills Assessment Data
The assessment of the perceptions of practicing superin-

tendents regarding their technical-managerial skills was developed
around five classical management components which are presumed to
represent the broad spectrum of the administrative process. These
five elements were: (1) planning, which includes needs assessment,
goal identification and setting, and budgeting skills; (2) managing,
which includes such concepts as organizing, controlling, coordinat-
ing, etc.; (3) decision making, which involves the monitoring pro-
cesses; (4) evaluating, which involves scientific analysis considera-
tions; and (5) communicating. Each of these components will be
considered separately along with the items from the questionnaire
which were intended to scan the perception of superintendents.

1. Planning involves forecasting the future either in terms of
predicting outcomes or defining desires. The instrument contained
11 items which directly pertained to this functional principle.

Those items, as they occurred in the questionnaire, were:

69

a. Ability to predetermine the flow of activities and
responsibilities within your organization.

b. Ability to identify institutional goals based on commu-
nity needs.

c. Ability to write policy statements which Operationalize
institutional goals.

d. Ability to identify community needs.

e. Ability to initiate action rather than reacting to
situational demands only.

f. Abitity to gain subordinate acceptance for institutional
goa s.

9. Ability to prepare an adequate financial plan.

h. Ability to identify major activities to implement
organizational goals.

i. Ability to locate and use available funding sources.
j. Ability to allocate limited resources to priority goals.
k. Ability to gain community acceptance for institutional

goals.

2. Managing includes such concepts as control, coordinating, and
organizing. It relates to planning in that it has to do with the
operationalization of the plan. Another word for managing might be
implementation. This is a general concept into which many different
styles, philosophies, and ideologies may be fit. For this reason,
managing may not be a discrete administrative process but rather
several alternative processes. The items included in the instrument

which relate to managing were:

a. Ability to criticize performance of subordinates to
affect positive change.

b. Ability to inspire and influence subordinates through
various motivational techniques.

c. Ability to develop individual potential for positions
of responsibility.

d. Ability to use third-party intervention in problem solving.

e. Ability to use different management styles in different
situation for maximum effect.

f. Ability to monitor the progress of assigned activities
without interfering with the process.

9. Ability to get maximum effectiveness from individuals
on the management team.

h. Ability to reduce conflict in favor Of cooperation.

Ability to organize your time for maximum efficiency.

—I0
I

70

3. Decision making represents the end product of a process of

 

gathering and analyzing information for the purpose of monitoring

the system.

Five items were included in the instrument which related

directly to this component. They were:

a.

b.

Ability to use theoretical principles of complex
organizations.

Ability to identify and select alternative courses of
action to achieve goals.

Ability to use formal methods of gathering opinions and
judgments.

Ability to make maximum use of management information
systems.

Ability to make maximum use of data processing and
computer technology.

4. Evaluation is another process of gathering and analyzing

 

information but is a more discrete entity than decision making and

is, thus, considered separately. The purpose of evaluation is to

assess progress toward achievement of the plans or goals of the

organization. Through evaluation and decision making, the organi-

zation is continually restructured where needed or plans are changed

to reflect reality. The specific items included relative to evalua-

tion were:
a.

b.

Ability to understand and use statistical analysis
procedures.

Ability to understand and use appropriate sampling
procedures.

Ability to develop appropriate evaluation designs to
assess organizational effectiveness.

Ability to use scientific procedures for collecting
information about the results of programs.

Ability to state evaluation objectives in measurable
terms.

5. Communication is, of course, an integral part of every pro-

 

cess involved in dealing with peOple. Three items, however, were

71

included which deal with the concepts of what might be called the
science of communication. These items are:
a. Ability to recognize the extent and direction of com-
munication distortion in your system.
b. Ability to identify communication networks within your
organization.
c. Ability to manage communication flow within your organi-
zation.
The 33 skill statements are intended to be representative
of the process of administration. This process is conceived to
represent at least three principal functions for the superintendent.
The superintendent is expected to assume leadership in defining and
clarifying the direction and purpose of the organization. He is
further responsible for the establishment and maintenance of the
organization to work toward those purposes. In addition, he must be
professionally competent to take the lead in restructuring and
redefining organizational needs, direction, and processes where
necessary. The format of skills statements, based as it is on this
triad of functioning, is in agreement with the theoretical postu-
lates of Litchfield, who views the administrative process as cycli-
cal. The evaluation component (reappraisal) brings the entire
administrative process back to its beginnings. The elements of the
entire process, however, notwithstanding Litchfield's pronouncements,
appear to this researcher to be interdependent, with formative evalu-
ation processes comparing planned progress (coordination and control)
to planned objectives for the on-going process of decision making.

It is thus an assumption of this instrument that, similar to the

notions of Simon, Griffiths, and Campbell, decision making is the

72

underlying thread in the administrative process. Further, the other
elements are either contributors to or results of administrative
decision making. More specifically, planning and evaluation are

seen as the tandem elements which provide input to the decision-
making process, while coordination, control, and organization are
viewed as the products of the decision-making process, both aspects
being served by the vehicle of communication. The structure of the
instrument, the questions asked, and the assumptions made will deter-

mine the nature Of the analysis of the data.

Research Questions and Analysis of the Data

Eight research questions were formulated prior to collect-
ing the data for this study. While no conceptual theoretical frame-
work is used to develop specific hypotheses against which to test
empirical findings, the very act of devising an instrument presumes
a preconceived perspective which may be confirmed or rejected. Thus,
the eight research questions are used as a guide to analysis of the
data, but in addition, a priori assumptions upon which some question-
naire items are based are also tested. The research questions are
considered in order and various related assumptions are included in
the discussion of the question to which they are related.

Basic to the entire study are three general assumptions:
(1) that the membership of the Michigan Association of School Adminis-
trators (representing 97 percent of the total pOpulation of Michigan
superintendents) is a more than adequate sample from which to draw
inferences of a general nature; (2) that superintendents would

objectively evaluate and honestly report both the level of their

73

skill and the importance of those skills to the performance of their
jobs; and (3) that the skills represented in the instrument are in
fact important skills and sufficiently inclusive to represent the
range of skills of the administrative processes considered. While
these assumptions are not testable in the sense of establishing
probability relationships which confirm or deny conclusions,

certain indications of validity may be obtained from the quantity
and distribution of responses.

Because this study did not set out to test any specific
hypotheses, but, rather, attempted to discern patterns which may be
inherent in the data, descriptive statistics and measures of central
tendency were appropriate to much of the analysis. Frequency dis-
tributions, means, standard deviations, cross-tabulations, and cor-
relations allowed comparisons to be made from one population subgroup
to another. The following research questions may be answered by
using such descriptive statistics:

Research Question 1: Which skills do practicing superin-
tendents perceive themselves to possess?

 

Research Question 2: At what levels of competence do
practicing superintendents report that they possess various
skills? This question is a subset of question 1.

 

Research Question 3: Which skills will be reported by top-
level managers to be of most importance in the performance
of their jobs?

 

Research Question 6: How important will top-level school
managers perceive their formal training to have been in the
acquisition of skills possessed? This question is a subset
of question 1.

 

Research Question 7: How important will tOp-level school
managers perceive their formal training to have been in the
acquisition of important skills? This question is a subset
of question 3.

 

74

The initial analysis procedure involved use of a factor
analysis in an attempt to empirically verify the dimensionality
built into the instrument. This data-reduction technique, however,
failed to confirm the five factors (planning, managing, decision
making, evaluating, communicating) as independent dimensions of the
administrative process. Because the procedure used (verimax rotation)
establishes orthogonal factors, it was decided to factor analyze again
using a procedure which defines clusters of variables which may be
correlated with one another (oblique rotation). The variables which
comprised each factor identified were not substantially different
between the two factor analysis procedures, and in neither case did
the isolated factors conform to those upon which the instrument was
built. Two limiting concerns, however, should be noted.

First, factor analytic techniques require a large number of
responses per variable in order to adequately ascertain underlying
patterns in the data. The gross rule of thumb requires at least 20
respondents per variable, which in this case would necessitate
approximately 660 responses (33 variables x 20 respondents). This
questionnaire was returned completed by 285 superintendents. Thus,
the N in the analysis may not have been sufficient to divulge the
true underlying pattern of factors implicit in the data.

Second, the response scale built into the instrument allowed
for a range of from one to five. This range may not have been
adequate 'UD allow sufficient variability among responses to produce

discrete factors.

75

Because of the foregoing, the factor analysis procedure was
not used either to confirm or deny the presence of the five dimen-
sions of the instrument. While the analysis did produce from three
to five factors in each response category, those limiting concerns
which precluded eliminating the original dimensions also prevent
acceptance of the new ones. Thus, the researcher was left with a
choice: Either to accept the results of the factor analysis (even
though flawed) and proceed to compare the new factors against the
demograhpic data, or to disregard the results of the factor analysis
and proceed to compare summated variables reflecting the original
factors against the demographic data. While the researcher believes
that factor analytic techniques can produce the dimensions sought,
the second choice was made due to the limitations mentioned. Thus,
responses pertaining to each dimension were summed and divided by
the number of items in that factor, giving a summated dimensions
score for each individual respondent. These elements were then
compared to subgroups of the population of respondents. In addition,
inter-item correlations were produced to determine the relative
relationship which items so grouped would have. Pearson's product-
moment correlation coefficients for summary dimensions may be
found in Appendix B. The indication is that items so grouped are
sufficiently related to support the structure of this instrument.
Cross-tabulations with population subgroups and analysis of vari-
ance were used in these comparisons. The following research ques-

tions were analyzed via these processes:

76

Research Question 4: Will the pattern of skills reported
to be possessed by superintendents vary according to envi-
ronmental, personal, or organizational characteristics of
the superintendency?

 

Research Question 5: Will the skills reported to be most
important to superintendents vary according to environmen-
tal, personal, or organizational characteristics of the
superintendency?

 

Research Question 8: Will the perception of superintendents
with regard to the importance of formal training in acquiring
important skills vary according to environmental, personal,
or organizational characteristics of the superintendency?

 

Analysis of the data will be reported in Chapter IV. It
was expected that patterns of response could be determined through
these procedures. The purpose of these analyses was to determine
meaningful differences among the responses and to report them

according to how these differences pertain to the research questions.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Introduction

 

This chapter presents the data as they pertain to the
research questions and assumptions upon which the study is based.

It also interprets those data in terms of general and specific

results which provide answers to or statements about those questions
and assumptions. The following chapter will draw further conclusions
and make recommendations based upon these interpretations and findings.

Because this study does not deal with a randomly selected
sample group, inferential statistics were considered inapprOpriate.
Rather, analyses were based on descriptive statistics such as mean
scores and frequency distributions. Rank orderings by mean and by
percentage response are also employed.

A major problem in dealing with large amounts of data, such
as this study employs, is that of data reduction for the purpose of
analysis. The discussion in Chapter III of the factor analysis
limitations indicates one such attempt to reduce the mass of data to
a manageable, manipulable number of variables from which to extract
inherent patterns. It was necessary to reduce the 132 skills vari-
ables to a smaller number in order to compare them with the demo-
graphic characteristics of the superintendents. Factor analysis is

one method which may be employed and which represents an important

77

78

and needed area of further research as a means of developing an
instrument which may reasonably measure the managerial skills
employed by practitioners. It was not, however, the purpose of

this study to make such a measurement. This study was intended as

a measure of perceptions rather than actual skill levels, with the
assumption being that, given the opportunuty, superintendents would
report accurately and objectively their level of competence. It

is recognized that this measure of perception may be considerably
different from a measure of skill, and it is, therefore, not repre-
sented as such. The same may be said of the other three questions
relative to the skills statements. The measure of superintendents'
perceptions of the influence of formal training may be quite differ-
ent from a measure of the actual influence, just as their percep-
tions of the importance of various skills may differ from the impor-
tance of those skills in actual practice. Definitive measures of
these areas (skill level, skill importance, and influence of formal
training) cannot be claimed until an instrument is developed with
appropriate reliability.

Because factor analytic techniques could not be adequately
utilized, the logic built into the questionnaire was utilized to
reduce the data. That is, the five dimensions of planning, managing,
decision making, evaluating, and communicating were computed as new
variables. This was done by combining the skills statements con-
sidered to relate to each area into a summary index and calculating
the mean score for that new variable. These summary variables may

be found in Table 1. Thus, rather than 132 skills variables (33

79

statements x 4 questions), we now are dealing with 24 skills variables

(6 summary scales x 4 questions).

Table l.--Twenty-four new variables: summary dimensions.

 

Level of
Planning Skill

Importance of
Planning Skill

Influence of
Training on
Planning Skill

Desire for
Further Training
in Planning

 

Level of
Managing Skill

Importance of
Managing Skill

Influence of
Training on
Managing Skill

Desire for
Further Training
in Managing

 

Level of
Decision-Making
Skill

Importance of
Decision-Making
Skill

Influence of
Training on
Decision-Making

Desire for
Further Training
in Decision

 

 

 

Skill Making
Level of Importance of Influence of Desire for
Evaluating Evaluating Training on Further Training
Skill Skill Evaluating in Evaluating
Skill
Level of Importance of Influence of Desire for
Communicating Communicating Training on Further Training
Skill Skill Communicating in Communicating
Skill
Total Level Total Importance Total Influence Total Desire for
of Skill of Skill of Formal Further Training
Training

 

 

 

 

In this way, it is possible to describe the current level

of planning skills of superintendents, the importance of planning

skills in the performance of their jobs, their desire for further

training in planning skill areas, and the influence of formal train-

ing in the development of planning skills.

Bearing in mind that

what we have measured is the superintendents' perceptions, and that

each administrative dimension is defined by the skills statements

80

contained in the instrument, similar analyses of managing, decision
making, evaluating, and communicating may be developed.

In addition, it becomes possible to compare mean scores of
various subgroups from the population to determine where differences
might lie in relation to skills possessed, deemed important, influ-
ence of formal training, or desire for further training.

A consideration of the responding population will first be
reported. This will be followed by responses to each of the eight

research questions.

The Population

 

The population of interest to this study was the superin-
tendent membership of the Michigan Association of School Adminis-
trators. This group comprises the largest element of the MASA,
which also includes intermediate district superintendents and some
assistant superintendents. There is a total of 515 superintendents
on the mailing list of the association. Of the 570 superintendents
in the state, these comprise 90 percent. The total return from
superintendents was 285, a return percentage of 55 percent of the
MASA superintendents and exactly 50 percent of the superintendents
in the state.

The instrument was designed to obtain information on personal
characteristics of the superintendents as well as district char-
acteristics. Personal characteristics selected as relevant were
age, years in current position, highest degree attained (degree
status), most recent previous experience, total years in education,

and whether or not the individual is in his/her first superintendency.

81

Aside from comparing these data with skills only, some subcategories
of personal information were cross-tabulated with others. Thus,

age was compared with years in position to better describe the
composition of the population of respondents. This information had
not beem compiled in this fashion prior to this time, or at least

does not exist in any document known to the researcher.

Age of Superintendents

The age of superintendents was originally conceptualized as
a possible factor in determining the skills employed by and thought
to be important by superintendents. It was assumed perhaps more
strongly that age would determine the desire for further training and
the perception of the influence of formal training on the development
of skills.

In response to the question, "What is your age?" the follow-

ing result was obtained:

Above 60 4%
55-60 12%
50-54 22%
45-49 29%
40-44 22%
Below 40 16%

It can readily be seen that the bulk of the respondents were
between the ages of 40 and 55, with as many below age 40 as above
age 55 and about one-third of the respondents in their mid- to late
forties. The question of the possible influence of the age of the
superintendent on the skills, importance, impact of training, and
desire for further training will be taken up as each research ques-

tion is considered later in this chapter.

82

Years in Current Position

 

Information was requested regarding longevity in position
based on the assumption that newer superintendents would need dif-
ferent skills, see different skills as important, have different
training desires, and perceive differences in the influence of formal
training from superintendents who had been in the position longer.
The response to this assumption will be taken up in dealing with
research questions number 4, 5, and 8.

The responses to this question obtained the following result:
How many years have you held your current position:

Less than 5 44%

5-10 38%
11-15 12%
16-20 4%

More than 20 2%

It is this result which causes concern among superintendents,
has been the motivation for several studies of superintendent dis-
missal, and in large part provided the impetus for this study. That
82 percent of the respondents had less than ten years in position,
and that 44 percent had less than five years in position is cause
for alarm when this result is compared to other factors. For
example, 58 percent of the respondents reported that they were in
their first superintendency. Assuming that some time is needed to
become fully acclimated to the district and to institute program and
procedural functions which are particular to an individual adminis-
tration, a large proportion of superintendents may not have the time

to learn the job before being given the opportunity to move on.

83

This factor (years in current position) was checked against
age categories to determine if any subgroup of superintendents was
differentially affected. It is to be expected that younger superin-
tendents will have less longevity in position than older superin-
tendents and this is borne out. Thus, 87 percent of the superin-
tendents with five years or less in position were under 50, whereas
only 30 percent of those with 11-15 years in position were under

50 years of age.

Degree Status of Superintendents

In addition to age, years in position was compared with the
degree status of superintendents to determine whether or not higher
degree status may result in greater longevity in position. The
result was that, in general, superintendents with less positional
seniority held higher degree status than those with greater tenure

in position (see Table 2). Thus, of the 44 percent (146 respondents)

Table 2.--Years in current position compared with degree status.

 

 

Years Post-Doc. Doc. EDS Post-MA MA Less MA Total
Below 5 4% 30% 23% 28% 14% 1% 44%
5-10 4% 11% 28% 41% 16% -- 38%
11-15 -- 15% 28% 18% 39% -- 12%
16-20 -- -- 31% 46% 23% -- 4%
Above 20 14% 14% 14% 29% 29% -- 2%

 

Totals 4% 19% 26% 33% 18% -- --

 

84

with five years or less in position, 57 percent had an EdS or above,
with 34 percent having a doctorate or above. Of those with 5 to 10
years in position, 43 percent possessed an EdS or above, while only
15 percent held a doctorate or more. Of those with 11-15 years in
position, the picture is similar to the 5-10 years group except that
none of these respondents reported post-doctoral work. In the 16-20
year seniority group, 31 percent reported EdS degree status, with no
doctoral or post-doctoral status reported. The group above 20 years
in position included only 2 percent of the total population (seven
respondents). They were distributed across the whole range of degree
categories. Most superintendents (33 percent) had completed

degree work beyond the masters level. Twenty-six percent of the
respondents had completed the EdS degree, while 19 percent held a
doctorate. The highest degree status among the newest superin-
tendents was the doctorate, while the post-masters status was the
most frequently reported category among the 5-10 year group. The
masters degree was the most frequently reported status among the
11-15 year subgroup.

It may be seen from this information that increasingly super-
intendents are being required to have more formal training than in
the past and that the degree status requirement is moving toward the
EdS and doctorate levels. The following result was obtained with

respect to degree status:

85

What is your highest degree attained?

post-doctorate 4%
doctorate 19%
education specialist 26%
post-masters 33%
masters degree 18%
less than masters 1%

Most Recent Previous Experience

 

It appears also to be true that the route to the superin-
tendency is changing. Thus, the experiential background of various
seniority subgroups differs (see Table 3). The most recent previous
experience for superintendents with five years or less in position
was a central office job (assistant superintendent) or another super-
intendency. Among the 5-10 year longevity group, the most recent
previous experience was rather evenly distributed between a former
superintendency, a central office position, or a secondary school
administrative position. The most recent previous experience of
those from the 11-15 year seniority group, however, includes only a
very small percentage of central office backgrounds, and the 16-20
year group includes 62 percent secondary school experience.
Apparently, while the superintendency continues to be the preferred
experiential background for subsequent superintendencies, increasingly
the assistant superintendency (central office position) leads to
the top management spot, while the high school principalship appears
to be decreasing in frequency as a stepping stone to the superin-
tendency. The following results were obtained in response to the

question, "What was your most recent previous experience?"

86

Superintendency 36%
Central office (not superintendent) 30%
Secondary administration 22%
Elementary Administration 7%
Classroom teacher 2%
Other 4%

Table 3.--Years in position compared to most recent previous

 

 

 

experience.
Central Sec. Elem.
Years Supt. Office Admin. Admin. Classroom Other
Less than 5 34% 40% 16% 7% -- 2%
5-10 33% 27% 24% 7% -- 7%
11-15 59% 8% 26% 3% 5% --
16-20 15% 8% 62% 8% 8% --
More than 20 29% 14% 14% 14% 14% --
Total 36% 30% 22% 7% 2% 4%

 

Total Years in Education

Because school managers have historically been hired from
among the ranks of educators, it is to be expected that those reach-
ing the status of superintendent will be those who have been in the
field for some time. In fact, in terms of length of educational
service among reSpondents, 95 percent of the superintendents had more
than 15 years experience. The necessity for previous administrative
experience as well as advanced degree status requires a considerable
investment in years prior to assuming such a position. As education

begins to look outside the manpower pool found among the teaching

87

ranks for its administrative personnel, this picture may be altered.
An increasing number of noneducator specialists are being employed

in staff capacities at the central office level. Accountants, data-
processing managers, and other business-oriented individuals are
finding their way into educational management positions, particularly
in large districts. Thus, specialization may decrease the salience

of the experiential background among administrators of the future.

Previous Superintendengy

The last question relative to personal information about
superintendents had to do with whether or not the individual was in
his first superintendency. Responses to this query provided the
following result:
Is this your first superintendency?

Yes 58%
No 42%

To summarize, then, the majority of respondents are in their
first superintendency, they have less than ten years in the same
position (most have less than 5), and the majority are under 50
years of age. In addition, they are increasingly better educated
and they come to the superintendency out of another superintendency,

the central office, or the high school principalship.

Size of District
In addition to data concerning individuals, information was
requested relative to the organizational characteristics of the

districts in which respondents found themselves. The size of the

88

district was defined as the number of pupils served as determined
by the Fourth Friday count.

School district data of this type are available and may be
compared against the percentages of responses for each size category
reported in this study. While numeric categories differ somewhat, a
compilation of district size subgroups done by Dr. Carl Brautigam
of the Michigan State University Placement Office provides such a
comparison (see Table 4). Responses in terms of district size
yielded the following result:‘

What is your current student pOpulation? (Fourth Friday count)

Above 10,000 10%
7,000-9,999 6%
5,000-6,999 8%
3,000-4,999 20%
1,000-2,999 42%
Below 1,000 14%

These numbers are translated to be roughly equivalent to the

categories used by Dr. Brautigam in his compilation.

Table 4.--Size of district: total population compared to survey

 

 

respondents.
Total POpulationa Survey Population
Number of Districts = 570 Number of Districts = 285

O-l,OOO --19% Below 1,000 --l4%
l,OOl-2,500 --40% 1,000-3,000 --42%
2,501-5,000 --25% 3,000-5,000 --20%
5,001-10,000--10% 5,000-l0,000--14%
Above 10,000-- 6% Above 10,000--10%

 

aCompiled by Dr. Carl Brautigam, Michigan State University,
1975.

89

Table 4 indicates the representativeness of the response
return for this study, showing the returns to closely approximate

the actual count in terms of subcategories of district size.

District Wealth

 

Districts were classified according to state equalized valu-
ation per pupil, a common measure of relative welath. With the
average SEV/pp at $20-25,000, the following results were obtained:
What is your current SEV/pp?

Above 25,000 36%
20-25,000 22%
15-19,999 26%
10-14,999 13%
7-9,999 2%
Below 7,000 1%

This classification scheme breaks down the poorer districts
(those below the state average), while lumping those above average
together. The intent was to see if increasing means would necessi-
tate differences in skills among superintendents. This question
will be dealt with in consideration of research questions 4, 5,
and 8.
Political Subdivision
of the District

Because school districts exist in a variety of community
environments, it was presumed that the relative degree of urbani-
zation might affect the Operation of the schools, and therefore the
skills needed and possessed by the superintendent. One convenient
classificatory scheme which identifies districts in terms of their

political system of government is that employed by the state

9O

assessment program. Since this system has been employed for a
number of years, all superintendents are familiar with it. The
following result was obtained in response to this question:

According to state assessment criteria, in what political subdivision
is your district?

Metropolitan core 3%
City 7%
Town 14%
Urban fringe 31%
Rural 44%

Rural districts are, of course, the most numerous since
school districts are organized among community patterns more than
population patterns. A large number of separate communities exist
around the large metropolitan areas. Thus, urban fringe districts
are the second most numerous in terms of political identification.
Metropolitan core, city, and urban fringe categories were considered
to be more urbane than rural and town categories.

Political Orientation of
the Board of Education

It was assumed that superintendents serving politically
conservative boards of education would require different skill
patterns and expectations than those serving more liberal or variable
boards of education. Thus, respondents were asked to rate their
board's political orientation. This question resulted in the fol-
lowing distribution:

How would you characterize the political orientation of your board:
Predominantly conservative 50%

Predominantly liberal 6%
Varies from issue to issue 44%

91

The classification of political subdivision was compared
with political orientation to attempt to better describe the envi-
ronment in which superintendents find themselves. The assumption
about urbanization appears to be supported by this comparison.
Thirty percent of the metropolitan core, city, and urban fringe
superintendents report predominantly conservative boards of educa-
tion, while 52 percent of the superintendents from the town category
report conservative boards and 66 percent of those from rural
districts perceive the board to be predominantly politically con-
servative.

Educational Orientation
of the Board

 

 

In addition to the board's political perspective, it was
felt that their educational orientation would have an effect on the
functioning of the superintendent. In this case, educational
orientation was defined as either traditionalist or progressive with
respect to programs, practices, and procedures. The following dis-
tribution was produced in response to this item:

How would you characterize the educational orientation of the board?

Predominantly traditional - 72%
Predominantly progressive 28%

Quite obviously, and perhaps not surprisingly, the great
majority of the educational philosophical context in which the
superintendent finds himself is traditionalist in nature. This
appears to be true no matter which political subdivision his dis-

trict is in. There are no significant variations in the reported

92

amount of traditionalism vis-a-vis progressivism when political

subdivision categories are compared against educational orientation.

Other Organizational Data

Three other questions were asked but were not used in the
data analysis. These were racial composition of the district,
number of staff administrators, and number of line administrators
employed.

Racial composition was included in an attempt to investi-
gate possible differences in skills patterns reported by superin-
tendents of districts with varying minority populations. The
response to this item, however, indicated that the 285 respondents
were not typical in this regard since 97 percent of the superin-
tendents reported either all white or predominantly white student
populations. Only 1 percent reported an even mixture and 2 percent
predominantly minority student population. The responding popula-
tion, then, was virtually homogeneous in terms of racial composition.

With respect to line and staff administrative positions, the
research instrument was inadequate and the responses were inapprop-
riate. It was originally intended that a measure of district com-
plexity could be obtained by comparing the line/staff ratios.
Accordingly, the questions were asked:

How many staff administrators does your district employ?
How many line administrators does your district employ?

Unfortunately, specific criteria were not built into the
instrument which would provide guidelines for superintendents in

responding consistently to these items. The definition of line and

93

staff designations is apparently not shared universally among prac-
titioners, some of whom responded "none" to the line administrator
query. Thus, it was determined that the reported numbers were not
reliable in terms of common classification and this measure was,

therefore, disregarded.

Summary
The population of respondents has been viewed from at least

two separate perspectives in this study. Individual superintendents'
personal characteristics have been classified, and some organiza-
tional characteristics of their districts have been examined.

These data will be used later in this chapter in comparison with
various skills patterns in consideration of research questions 4,

5, and 8.

Skills Assessment Data

Research Question 1: Which skills do practicing superin-
tendents perceive themselves to possess? That is, are some
skills more frequently possessed than others among superin-
tendents, and if so, which skills?

 

This research question may be combined with research ques-
tion 2, which is a subset of question 1.
Research Question 2: At what levels of competence do

practicing supeFintendents report that they possess various
skills?

 

Thus, the restated question becomes,

With which skills do superintendents report the greatest to
least amounts of competence?

This question deals only with the current level of skill

response category. Analysis is done in terms of individual skill

94

statements as well as summarized skill classifications. Rank

ordered by mean score, the 33 skill statements are examined first,
followed by the summary category rankings and a table of percen-
tages of response in each summary skill area. Table 5 lists the 33
skill statementsirithe questionnaire, displays the summary cate-
gories into which they are grouped, and reports the ranking of each
statement in relation to each of four queries. This table will be
referred to in consideration of research questions 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7.
Column 2, Skill Level, reports the rank ordering of the various skill
statements in terms of the superintendent's perception of his current
level of competency with that particular skill. These skills are
ranked by mean score for all those responding to that item. "Ability
to prepare an adequate financial plan" was rated highest by most
superintendents and "ability to make maximum use of data processing
and computer technology" was rated lowest by most superintendents.
There were differences among mean scores for skills, with the high-
est ranked skill obtaining a mean score of 4.02, while the lowest
rated skill obtained a mean score of 2.97. The overall mean level

of skill reported by all superintendents on a scale from 1 to 5 was
3.5.

By combining the individual mean scores of those skill
statements grouped under the headings of Planning, Managing,
Decision-Making, Evaluating, and Communicating, general statements
may be made about these data. These summary skills may then be rank
ordered by mean in the same way that individual statements in

Table 5 are.

95

Table 5.--Summarized rankings of skills statements by perceived level of competence,
importance of skill, desire for further training, and influence of formal training
on skill development.

 

Skill Skill Training Influ. of

Sk111 Statements Level Importance Desire Training

 

 

1. Planning Skills (1) (l) (2) (2)
1. Ability to prepare an adequate

financial plan. 1 1 10 6
2. Ability to identify major activities

to implement organizational goals. 18 16 20 9
3. Ability to allocate limited

resources to priority goals. 2 10 11 28

4. Ability to predetermine the flow
of activities and responsibilities

within your organization. 4 8 30 15.5
5. Ability to identify institutional
goals based on community needs. 12 12 13.5 5

6. Ability to write policy statements
which Operationalize institutional
goals. 17 17 19 ll

7. Ability to initiate action rather
than reacting to situational

 

demands only. 9 ll 15 19
8. Ability to gain subordinate

acceptance for institutional goals. 7 13 l8 l9
9. Ability to gain community accep-

tance for institutional goals. 10.5 6 3 23
10. Ability to identify community needs. 8 14 16.5 7.5
11. Ability to locate and use available

funding sources. 15 15 6 32
II. Managipg_Skills (2) (2) (l) (4)

 

1. Ability to inspire and influence
subordinates through various
motivational techniques. 14 7 7 12.5

2? Ability to develop individual
potential for positions of
responsibility. 13 19 21 21

3. Ability to use different man-
agement styles in different sit-
uations for maximum effect. 21 20 13.5 14

4. Ability to get maximum effec-
tiveness from individuals on
the management team. 5 2 2 12.5

5. Ability to criticize performance
of subordinates to affect
positive change. 10.5 4 8 15.5

6. Ability to monitor the progress
of assigned activities without
interfering with the process. 16 23 27 26

Table 5.--Continued.

96

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Skill Skill Training Influ. of
Sk111 Statements Level Importance Desire Training

7. Ability to organize your time

for maximum efficiency. 22 3 l 29
8. Ability to reduce conflict in

favor of cooperation. 6 5 4 22
9. Ability to use third party

intervention in problem solving. 24 29 28 30.5

111. Communicating Skills (3) (3) (3) (5)

1. Ability to identify communication

networks within your organization. 19 21 25.5 17
2. Ability to manage communication

flow within your organization. 20 18 25.5 24
3. Ability to recognize the extent

and direction of communication

distortion in your system. 23 22 22 30.5
IV. Decision-Making Skills (4) (4) (5) (3)
1. Ability to use theoretical prin-

ciples of complex organization. 32 33 33 10
2. Ability to identify and select

alternative courses of action

to achieve goals. 3 9 16.5 3
3. Ability to use formal methods of

gathering opinions and judgments. 25 3O 29 4
4. Ability to make maximum use of

management information systems. 28 26 23 19
5. Ability to make maximum use of

data processing and computer

technology. 33 28 12 33
V. Evaluating Skills (5) (5) (4) (l)
1. Ability to develop apprOpriate

evaluation designs to assess

organizational effectiveness. 29 24 5 27
2. Ability to use scientific proce-

dures for collecting information

about the results of programs. 31 27 24 7.5
3. Ability to state evaluation

objectives in measurable terms. 26 25 9 25
4. Ability to understand and use

statistical analysis procedures. 30 31 31 2
5. Ability to understand and use

appropriate sampling procedures. 27 32 3O 1

 

97

It can be seen from Table 5 that, in general, planning and
managing skills are ranked highest, while evaluating and decision-
making skills are ranked lowest. After summarizing the statements

and rank ordering these summary variables, the following result is

obtained:
1. Planning skills mean = 3.75
2. Managing skills mean = 3.63
3. Communicating skills mean = 3.52
4. Decision-making skills mean = 3.25
5. Evaluating skills mean = 3.12

While no great differences appear to exist among the various
categories of skills which superintendents perceive themselves to
possess, the order of competence may be important. Because
measures of central tendency often tend to obscure subtle differ-
ences in favor of global patterns, it was decided to look at this
summary ranking in greater detail. Mean score rankings may be
compared for congruence or discrepancy. Rank order correlations
give an indication of the agreement or commonality (concordance)
which the rankings show across the four areas of inquiry. Kendall's
W coefficient of concordance indicated the following rank order

agreement:

All 33 items = .64
Planning items = .77
Managing items = .65
Decision-making items = .49
Evaluating items = .16
Communicating items = 20

Thus, respondents who rated planning levels of skill high
tended to rate importance, influence of training, and desire for
further training in planning skills as high also. There was less

agreement in managing rankings and decreasing agreement in

98

decision-making, communicating, and evaluating rankings. Overall,
the coefficient of concordance was .64, indicating inter-category
or structural agreement on the instrument.

It was possible, in addition, to focus more closely on
individual categories of rankings to assess areas of greatest and
least commonality. Thus, one may determine how much the ranking
on one variable agrees with the ranking on one other variable.
Using the Spearman rank order correlation, the four indices of
perceived level of skill, importance of skill, influence of train-
ing on the development of skills, and desire for further training
were tested against one another and correlations were obtained
between the rankings of these items. The six matrices obtained
using this procedure appear in Table 6. Thus, it may be seen that
there is a high correlation (.85) between the ranking of items
having to do with the current level of skill (Lev.) and items having
to do with the importance of these skills (Imp.). Referring to the
Kendall W correlations, when all 33 items are used the correlation
is .64. The Spearman correlations show the nature of that agree-
ment to be in the relationship between level of skill and impor-
tance of skill (.85) as well as importance and desire for further
training (.69). Thus, overall, if one tended to respond high to
level of skill items, the response to importance items was also
high. If one tended to respond high to importance items, the
desire for further training was also high. Other relationships

of a similar nature may be seen from an examination of Table 6.

99

Table 6.--Spearman rank order correlations for summary variables.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All 33 Items: Planning (11 items):

Lev. Imp. Des. Inf. Lev. Imp, Des. .Inf.
Lev. .85 .29 .10 Lev. .76 .15 -.02
Imp. .69 -.O3 Imp. .43 -.03
Des. -.18 Des. -.20
Inf. Inf.
Managing (9 items): Decision Making(5 items):

Lev. Imp. Des. Inf. Lev. Imp. Des. Inf.
Lev. .60 .42 .60 Lev. .50 -.1O .90
Imp. .92 .40 Imp. .70 .20
Des. .34 Des. -.30
Inf. ' Inf.
Evaluating (5 items): Communicating_(3 items):

Lev. Imp. Des. Inf. Lev. Imp. Des. Inf.
Lev. .10 .30 -.10 Lev. .50 .60 1.0
Imp. .90 .80 Imp. .60 .50
Des. -.90 Des. .60
Inf. Inf.

 

 

Key: Lev. = Level of Skill; Imp. = Importance of Skill; Des. = Desire
for Further Training; Inf. = Influence of Training on Skill
Development.

Table 7 shows the breakdown of responses by percentage of
respondents in relation to each summary category. This table shows
the summated factors in relation to the percentage of respondents.
who reported their skills at the various levels. The skills are
listed in order of precedence, showing that respondents consider
planning to be their highest skill, followed by managing, commu-
nicating, etc. This conclusion may best be illustrated by a con-

sideration of the column which displays the percentage of thoSe

100

reporting a high level of skill. Thus, planning skills are reported
high by 71 percent, managing skills by 60 percent, communicating by
49 percent, decision making by 29 percent, and evaluating skills

by only 22 percent. It should be noted, however, that 53 percent

of the superintendents rate their level of skills as high, and

95 percent rate them moderate to high. Thus, the differences in
percentages are accounted for by those rating the level of their
skills in the medium range, not in the low range. Only 3 percent
rated their overall level of skill as low. It may be that superin-
tendents were not as objective in their ratings as the researcher

had assumed they might be.

Table 7.--Level of competence in relation to summary skills.

 

V. Low Low Medium High V. High

 

Planning level 1% 2% 22% 71% 4%
Managing level -- 3% 33% 60% 4%
Communicating level 2% 3% 42% 49% 5%
Decision-making level 1% 8% 61% 29% 2%
Evaluating level -- 14% 61% 22% 2%
Total skill level -- 3% 42% 53% 1%

 

Research Question 3:, Which skills will be reported by tOp-
level managers to be of most importance in the performance
of their jobs?

 

Table 5', (pp. 95-96), Column 3, Skill Importance, shows the

33 separate skills rank ordered in terms of those considered by

101

the respondents to be most important in the performance of their jobs.
Again, “Ability to prepare an adequate financial plan" ranked most
important by most respondents. When considered in summary form, a
pattern similar to the reported level of competence is apparent.

The rank order of importance of summary skills is as follows:

1. Planning importance mean = 4.05
2. Managing importance mean = 4.01
3. Communicating importance mean = 3.78
4. Decision-making importance mean = 3.51
5. Evaluating importance mean = 3.43

The relative importance of the summary skills categories
may also be broken down in terms of the percentage of responses at

each level. Table 8 shows this breakdown.

Table 8.--Importance of skills by percentage of responses.

 

V. Low Low Medium High V. High

 

Planning 1% 2% 7% 72% 18%
Managing 1% 2% 9% 71% 17%
Communicating 1% 3% 24% 58% 13%
Decision-making -- 5% 40% 52% 3%
Evaluating 1% 5% 48% 42% 4%
Total importance 1% 2% 15% 76% 6%

 

A comparison of Tables 7 and 8 indicates that the general
pattern of skills possessed and skills considered to be important
is the same. That is, planning skills are perceived by superin-

tendents as most important in the performance of their jobs and

102

at the same time planning is perceived to be that area with which
they possess the greatest competence. In both perceived level of
competence and level of importance, planning skills are followed
in order by managing skills, communicating skills, decision-making
skills, and finally, evaluating skills.

There are, however, a few individual differences which
occur between the rankings of level of competence and level of
importance. These differences may be seen in Table 5 by comparing
those skills ranked as highest level of importance with those
ranked as lowest level of competence. By subtracting the rank
value of Column 2 from the rank value of Column 3, a difference
value may be obtained. In this way, a discrepancy analysis may be
performed to determine which skills superintendents rank highest in
importance but lowest in level of possessed competence. The results
of such a contrast are seen in Table 9.

Using this difference score, the assumption may be made
that a high positive score will indicate that a specific skill
has been rated low in terms of level of skill possessed and high
in terms of relative importance. Such information should be of
value to program planners, representing as it does the essence of
the needs assessment. With this method, three specific skills
statements produce substantial differential scores.

1. Ability to organize your time for maximum efficiency.

This skill statement was ranked number 22 in terms of
level of competence, but was rated as the third most

important skill among practitioners.

103

Table 9.--Level of skill rankings contrasted with importance of

skill rankings.a

 

 

 

E2951 Impgtt;;ce Digigtgnce 3:951 Impgtt;;ce Di§:§:§"ce
Rank Rank Rank Rank
1 '1 = 0 22 3 = 19
18 16 = 2 5 5 = 1
2 10 - -8 24 29 = -5
4 8 = -4 19 21 = -2
12 12 = o 20 18 = 2
17 17 = o 23 22 = 1
9 11 = -2 32 33 = -1
7 13 = -6 3 9 - _5
'1o.5 6 = 4.5 25 3o - -5
8 14 = -6 28 26 = 2
15 15 = O 33 28 = 5
14 7 = 7 29 24 = 5
l3 19 =' -6 31 27 = 4
21 20 = 1 26 25 = 1
5 2 = 3 3O 31 = -1
10.5 4 = 6.5 27 32 = -5
16 23 = -7

 

aRankings

taken from Columns 2 and 3 of Table 5, pp. 95-96.

104

2. Ability to inspire and influence subordinates through
various motivational techniques. This skill area was
rated among superintendents as fourteenth in terms of
skills possessed but seventh in terms of importance to
the performance of their jobs.

3. Ability to criticize performance of subordinates to
affect positive change. This skill was ranked 10.5 (tie
for tenth) in level of competence and fourth in impor-
tance.

It is possible to generalize from these rankings, and some
conclusions will be drawn in Chapter V from these contrasts. What
is intended, however, is to attempt to view the world of adminis-
tration from the practitioner's perspective. Given such an intent,
these rank orderings and contrasts should be taken at face value and
interpretation of meaning must necessarily be limited. What is
important is which skills practitioners possess and which ones they
feel they need. Interpretation beyond ranking is purely specu-
lative.

Research Question 4: Will the pattern of skills reported

to be possessed(by superintendents vary according to per-

sonal or organizational characteristics of the superin-
tendent?

In order to investigate this question, one-way analysis of
variance was used to compare the mean scores for various demo-
graphic subgroups in relation to summary skills categories. Thus,

for example, the mean of the various age classifications in relation

to planning skills is compared against the total planning mean to

105

determine if a significant difference exists for any subgroup.
With an alpha level of .05, the Scheffe post hoc analysis was used
to analyze the nature of any differences. Table 10 indicates the
areas in which one-way analysis of variance shows a significant

difference among subgroups.

Table lO.--Significant differences among demographic subgroups with
respect to reported level of competence.

 

Plan. Man. D-M Eval. Comm. Total
(3.75) (3.63) (3.25) (3.12) (3.58) (3.52)

 

Age X X
Yrs. in Pos. X
Degree Status X X X X X

First Supt.?

Size X X X
Wealth
Pol. Subdiv. X X X X

Pol. Orient.

Educ. Orient.

 

Table 10 indicates that two demographic factors (one indi-
vidual and one organizational) have an apparent effect on the pat-
tern of skills possessed among respondents. Degree status sub-
groups show significant differences in all skills areas, except
communicating skills, and political subdivision classifications

show differences among subgroups in three of five areas.

106

Degree status subgroups show significant differences in
terms of total skills possessed. Superintendents with masters
degree status reported a mean level of skill of 3.33, significantly
lower than those with the doctorate degree status who reported a
mean level of skill at 3.68, and post-doctoral superintendents who
report a 3.99 level of skill. This result is not surprising since
higher levels of training should result in greater skill acquisi-
tion. We will have more to say about this in consideration of the
influence of formal training on the development of skills (research
question 6).

In addition to the fact that superintendents with higher
degree status rated their overall level of skills significantly
higher, there were also differences to be noted in terms of the
percentage of those individuals who rated specific skills areas
highly.

Table 11 illustrates the percentage of respondents, accord-
ing to degree status, who rated their level of skill in each sum-
mary area to be high or very high.

It can be seen from Table 11 that respondents with the
degree status doctorate and post-doctorate rated their evaluation
skills substantially higher than the other degree status groups.

In addition, as a general pattern, greater percentages of respon-
dents reported higher levels of skills as the degree status increased.

In addition, Table 10 indicates that significant skills
differences are found among degree status subgroups in all areas

except communicating. With respect to planning skills, there are

107

significant differences only between the masters degree status
vis-a-vis the post-doctoral respondents. That is, post-doctoral
superintendents report their level of planning skill to be 4.16

while M.A. status superintendents report their level to be 3.57.

Table ll.--Percentage of degree status respondents rating skill
levels high to very high.

 

H/VH H/VH H/VH H/VH H/VH

 

Degree Level Level Level Level Level Nugger
Status Plan. Man. D-M Eval. Comm. Res ond
Skill Skill Skill Skill Skill 9 °
Post-Doc. 83% 75% 58% 75% 75% 12
Doctorate 81% 70% 53% 44% 52% 64
Ed.S. 74% 63% 28% 22% 57% 86
Post-M.A. 77% 63% 25% 14% 53% 108
M.A. 62% 55% 18% 15% 48% 60

Less than M.A. . -- -- -- -- -- -_

 

This appears to be true of the level of managing skills
among superintendents also; however, the post-hoc analysis fails to
define the exact nature of the difference. In terms of decision-
making skills, the post-doctoral group reports a significantly
higher level of skill than the M.A., post-M.A., and Ed.S. subgroups.
And in the area of evaluating skills, the post-doctoral and doc-
toral groups report significantly greater competence than the M.A.

group.

108

The organizational variable which produced the greatest
differences in skills levels was political subdivision. In this
area, the overall level of skills as well as managing, decision-
making, and evaluating skills differed for specific political sub-
division groups. While the one-way analysis of variance indicated
significant differences among subgroups, the post-hoc analysis
failed to identify the nature of those differences. Mean scores,
however, in all cases showed metropolitan core and urban fringe
respondents to report higher mean levels of skill than town and
rural reSpondents.

In direct response to research question 4, the degree
status of respondents is the greatest determinant to the level of
skills. That is, in general, the more formal training reported,
the greater the level of skill reported by respondents. In addi-
tion, the more urbane the school district, the higher levels of
skill reported by respondents. Urban fringe and metropolitan school
districts tend to require higher degree status among superinten-
dents than rural and town districts which may account for the level
of skills reported.

Whether or not an individual is in his first superinten-
dency does not seem to affect his perceived level of skill in any
area. In addition, neither the political orientation of the board
(conservative-liberal), nor its educational orientation (traditional-
progressive) is reported as having an effect on the perceived levels
of skill in any category. Further, the relative wealth of the dis-

trict does not produce subgroups of varying skill levels and the

109

number of years in position provides no substantial variation in
any of the five skills areas.

Research Question 5: Will the skills reported to be most

important to superintendents vary according to environ-

mental, personal, or organizational characteristics of the
superintendency?

This question deals with those skills which superintendents
reported as most important to them in the perfOrmance of their jobs.
Again, one-way analysis of variance was used to compare mean scores
reported by superintendents of various subgroups according to the
demographic variables selected. Table 12 shows the demographic
variables which included subgroups which produced statistically
significant variations in the reported importance of the skills
categories used. It can be seen from this table that, like the
reported level of skill, degree status of respondents produces the
greatest subgroup variation of any of the demographic variables
employed. These variations occur in the areas of managing, decision
making, evaluating, and overall importance of skills. In each case,
the doctoral and post-doctoral degree levels ascribe greater
importance to these skill areas than the other subgroups, while
masters degree respondents perceive them to have less importance.

No differences between degree status categories exist in terms of
the reported importance of planning skills or communicating skills.

In terms of different age groups, some variations can be
seen to exist in the areas of total importance of skills, planning
skills, and managing skills. In each case, the exact nature of the

differences is not evident, though the pattern seems to be similar

for each skill classification. In all cases, the respondents in

110

the age groups between 45 and 55 rated these skills (planning and
managing) more important than other age groups, and the respondents
in the age group from 40 to 44 rated these skills at lower levels
of importance. As in level of skill, no differences were reported
by subgroups in the level of importance of skills when grouped
according to years in position, whether or not this is the first
superintendency, the political orientation of the board, or the
educational orientation of the board. No systematic differences
appear to occur according to any other demographic subgroup classi-

.fication.

Table 12.--Significant differences among demographic subgroups with
respect to reported importance of skill.

 

Plan. Man. D-M Eval. Comm. Total
(4.05) (4.01) (3.51) (3.43) (3.78) (3.84)

 

Age X X X

Yrs. in Pos.

Degree Status X X X X
1st Supt.?

Size X

Wealth X X

Pol. Subdiv. X X

Pol. Orient.

Educ. Orient.

 

111 '

There is a degree of similarity in the overall response
pattern of level of skill perceived and the importance of skills
in the performance of the job. It may be that superintendents who
responded high on one skill in terms of the current level of com-
petence responded high in relation to the perceived importance of
that skill. Overall, importance levels were generally higher than
competence levels, but the patterns did not appear to vary inde-
pendently. Thus, skills were ranked in order of planning, managing,
communicating, decision making, evaluating both in terms of current
competency as well as importance. While the possibility of the
contamination of importance responses by competency responses can-
not be overlooked, the effect of such contamination would be to
diminish the contrast which might exist between skills considered
to be possessed and those considered to be important. Thus, such
contrasts as do exist would of necessity be more marked by virtue
of having survived the contamination. Those discussed in relation
to research question 3 may be given greater validity by virtue of
such effects.

The last three research questions have to do with the
influence of formal training on the acquisition and importance of
technical-managerial skills.

Research Question 6: How important will top-level school

managers perceive their formal training to have been in
the acquisition of skills possessed?

 

Referring again to Table 5, pp. 95-96, the rank of influ-
ence of formal training in relation to each skill statement as well

as each summary skill area may be found in Column 5. The overall

112

perception of respondents regarding the influence of their formal
training on the development and acquisition of their skills is that
it is comparatively low. That is, on a 1 to 5 scale, the overall
rating of influence was 2.72. Rank ordered by mean, the influence

of formal training in relation to summary skills is as follows:

1. Evaluating mean = 2.84
2. Planning mean = 2.74
3. Decision making mean = 2.69
4. Managing mean = 2.63
5. Communicating mean = 2.58

Thus, not only is the level of influence rated by respondents as
low, but the pattern of skills is different from those perceived

to be possessed or most important. Table 13 compares the mean
response scores for each skill area in relation to each query of
interest. Whereas evaluation skills were perceived to be possessed
least and of least importance, these are the skills perceived to

be most influenced by formal training. Thus, it would seem that
training programs have their greatest perceived impact in the skill

area, which is perceived to be least important to practitioners.

Table l3.--Mean scores of summary skills by level of skill, importance
of skill, influence of formal training, and desire for further training.

 

 

Skill Skill Training Influence

Level Importance Desire of Training
Planning (3.75) (4 05) (3 51) (2.74)
Managing (3.63) (4 01) (3 54) (2.63)
Decision making (3.25) (3 51) (3 25) (2.69)
Evaluating (3.12) (3 43) (3 27) (2.84)
Communicating (3.52) (3 78) (3 37) (2.58)

 

Totals (3.52) (3.84) (3.43) (2.72)

 

113

Because this research question was intended to describe the
practitioner's view of his formal training with respect to the skills
which he possesses, a contrast of rankings in these two dimensions
was done. The same process of comparison was employed as that used
in the discussion of research question 3 (page 100). That is, each
individual skill statement was compared in terms of its ranking
with respect to the current level of that skill and the influence
of formal training in the development of that skill. The rank of
influence was subtracted from the rank of skill level. Thus, a
contrast wherein a high level of skill is perceived to have been
influenced very little by formal training will result in a high
negative number. Conversely, low levels of skill compared with high
influence resulted in positive numbers. Table 14 shows the con-
trasts obtained from this process. Contrasts of interest from
this table include those which show a high influence of formal
training on high levels of skill, and high influence of formal
training on low levels of skill.

Such items as "ability to identify and select alternative
courses of action to achieve goals," which was ranked high in terms
of current level and high in terms of influence of formal training,
may indicate training areas which have been most beneficial to
practitioners. Contrasts such as this are represented by either
positive or negative numbers which approach zero, and tend to
represent a measure of the appropriateness of training emphasis.
Thus, "ability to make maximum use of data processing and computer

technology" is reported by practitioners as the lowest ranking

Table

l4.--Influence of formal training compared to current level

of skill rankings.

 

 

 

fill} Iiiifiefige Digggggnce fill} Ifiiifiafiée Diggg;§nce
.Rank of Tra1n1ng Rank of Tra1n1ng
1 - 6 = -5 22 29 = -7
l8 - 9 = -9 6 22 = -15
2 - 28 = -26 24 30.5 = -6.5
4 - 15.5 = -Jl.5 19 17 = 2
12 - 5 = 7 20 24 = -4
l7 - 11 = 6 23 30.5 = -7.5
9 - 19 = -10 32 10 = 22
7 - 19 = -12 3 3 = 0
10.5 - 23 = -l3.5 25 4 = 21
8 - 7.5 = 0.5 28 19 = 9
15 - 32 = -17 33 33 = o
14 - 12.5 = 1.5 29 27 = 2
13 - 21 = -8 31 24 = 7
21 - 14 = 7 26 25 = 1
5 - 12.5 = -7 30 2 = 28
10.5 - 15.5 = -5 27 1 = 26
16 - 26 = -10

 

115

skill in their repertoire. Similarly, it is reported to have been
the least influenced by formal training. ReSpondents, it would
seem, indicate by such rankings that, while this skill is not a
product of their formal training, neither is it a skill that they
have developed through experience or other means. It may, perhaps,
then, be appropriate to assume that this particular skill has not
represented a consistently salient need of practitioners. Similar
findings may be observed regarding skills ranked number 6, 7.5,
12.5, 17, 24, 27, and 25 in column 5, Table 5, pp. 95-96.

Contrasts shown on Table 14 resulting in higher negative
numbers may represent a much different perception among respondents.
These contrasts result from a perception of high levels of skill
compared with low levels of training influence. Thus, one might
assume that the respondents felt needs were in areas not approp-
riately addressed by training programs. Again, Table 14 shows the
contrast in rankings which are derived from columns 2 and 5 of
Table 5.

That skill rated second in terms of current level of com-
petency (column 2, Table 5) may be seen to rank twenty-eighth
in terms of influence by formal training. "Ability to allocate
limited resources to priority goals," it would seem, is a skill
which respondents perceive themselves to have developed to a com-
paratively high degree with relatively little formal training
assistance. Such contrasts as these may then represent areas in
which formal training is inadequate either because of a lack of

program emphasis, or because such skills may not lend themselves

116

to classroom teaching. Examination of these high negative con-
trasts may lead to support for both interpretations. That is,
"ability to reduce conflict in favor of cooperation" and "ability
to gain community acceptance for institutional goals" both show
high negative contrasts. Though conflict resolution and public
relations are popular areas of managerial training, no specific
technological process has been identified which may be abstracted
for teaching purposes and prescriptively generalized. Vague prin-
ciples are taught and application is left to be determined by con-
text. Such skills may not, therefore, be seen as having been
"learned" in formal training, since the critical skill involved is
the timely application of a vague principle which is dependent upon
contextual circumstances. "Ability to predetermine the flow of
activities and responsibilities within your organization" and
"ability to locate and use available funding sources" may represent
areas of training which are not as effective or as highly empha-
sized as they might be, thus resulting in low influence. A careful
examination of these contrasts may provide program planners with
valuable clues to perceived areas of training productivity. Depend-
ing upon the interpretation given to such contrasts, program empha-
sis may be altered to close the gap between perceived levels of
skill and perceived influence of formal training.

Finally, contrasts between skills reported to be possessed
least and influenced most by training may be seen. These contrasts
result in high positive numbers and show the greatest differences

of all contrasts considered. Thus, the skills reported as ranking

117

twenty-seventh, thirtieth, thirty-second, twenty-fifth, and twenty-
eighth in current level of competence are rated first, second, tenth,
fourth, and nineteenth in terms of influence of training. It is
possible that training emphasis is perceived as being misplaced,
with greatest areas of skill not being produced by training experi-
ences.

Research Question 7: How important will top-level school

managers perceive their formal training to have been in
the acquisition of important skills?

 

This query is similar to research question 6, and is
intended to describe the practitioner's perception of his formal
training in regard to the skills most important in the performance
of his job, regardless of his level of competence with those skills.
Table 13, page 112, shows the mean summary responses for skill
categories. A comparison of the influence of training with the

level of importance produces the result shown in Table 15.

Table 15.--Rankings of skills"importance compared with rankings of
influence of formal training.

 

 

suns - 11:41:59 .2455;
Planning 4.05 2.74
Managing 4.01 2.63
Decision Making 3.51 2.69
Evaluating 3.43 2.84
Communicating 3.78 2.58

 

Totals 3.84 2.72

118

As with the level of skill possessed, the influence of
formal training is reported to be greatest for evaluation skills.
These skills were reported to be of least importance to superin-
tendents in the performance of their jobs.

Contrasts similar to those employed in research questions
3 and 4 may also be used here. These contrasts may be used to add
information to that provided by prior contrasts. That is, it is
possible to consider the additional factor of perceived importance
of various skills as well as reported levels of competence when
discussing the influence of formal training. Contrasts of this
nature may be found in Table 16.

Skills reported to be of highest importance but influenced
least by formal training result in high negative numbers. Those
of low importance and high influence result in high positive num-
bers. Those approaching zero would seem to be most apprOpriately
weighted according to the perceptions of practitioners.

Referring again to Table 5 (column 3 minus column 5), it
can be seen that that skill ranked third in terms of importance is
ranked twenty-ninth in terms of influence of formal training. Thus,
it would seem that "ability to organize your time for maximum
efficiency" is a skill which program planners may wish to consider
for greater emphasis in training, since practitioners also report
relatively low levels of competency in this area. "Ability to
allocate limited resources to priority goals" was reported as a
high competency skill of practitioners which was not seen as a

product of formal training. This skill is also perceived to be of

119

Table 16.--Influence of formal training compared to importance of
skill rankings.a

 

 

its? 0:412:25. gag, its" .i'ilzinifig 35:,
Rank Rank Rank Rank
1 - 6 = -5 3 - 29 = -26
16 - 9 = 5 5 - 22 = -17
10 - 28 = -18 29 - 30.5 = -1.5
8 1- 15.5 = -7.5 21 - 17 = 4
12 - 5 = 7 18 - 24 = -6
17 - 11 = 8 22 - 30.5 = -8.5
11 - 19 = -8 33 - 10 = 23
13 - 19 = -6 9 - 3 = 6
6 - 23 = -17 3O - 4 = 26
14 - 7.5 = 6.5 26 - 19 =. 7
15 - 32 = -17 28 - 33 = -5
7 - 12.5 = -5.5 24 - 27 = -3
l9 - 21 = -2 27 - 7.5 = 19.5
20 - 14 = 6 25 - 25 = O
2 - 12.5 = -lO.5 31 - 2 = 29
4 - 15.5 = -11.5 32 - l = 31
23 - 26 = -3

 

 

aRankings taken from Columns 3 and 5 of Table 5, pp. 95-96.

120

relatively high importance (tenth). Accordingly, a skill of high
importance, possessed by practitioners at a relatively high level,
ought to be considered carefully by those who would provide train-
ing to school managers. Similar analysis of these contrasts may
be done for high negative contrasts.

High positive contrasts would indicate areas of low impor-
tance which are most influenced by training experiences. Con-
trasts with numbers approaching zero indicate more appropriate
training influences. Again, there seems to be a high negative
correlation between those skills perceived to be of least impor-
tance and greatest training influences. The dual possibility
exists that either (1) the most important skills of school
managers do not readily lend themselves to formal training experi-
ences, or (2) formal training experiences do not adequately address
the most important skills required by school superintendents.

Research Question 8: Will the perception of superintendents

with regard to the influence of formal training in acquiring

skills vary according to environmental, personal, or organi-
zational characteristics of the superintendency?

 

This final question was formulated to attempt to discern
whether the individual context in which the superintendent func-
tions might have an impact on his perception regarding the influence
of his formal training experiences.

One-way analysis of variance was used to analyze the
responses, with the Scheffe post-hoc analysis used to define the
specific nature of differences. Table 17 shows the demographic
variables selected for consideration and the summary skills with

which they were compared.

121

Table l7.--Significant differences among demographic subgroups with
respect to influence of formal training.

 

Plan. Man. D-M Eval. Comm. Total
(2.74) (2.63) (2.69) (2.84) (2.58) (2.72)

 

Age X

Yrs. in Pos.

Degree Status X X X
lst Supt.?

Size

Wealth

Pol. Subdiv. X

Pol. Orient.

Educ. Orient.

 

Perhaps it is because of the overall low rating reported
universally by respondents regarding the influence of formal train-
ing that so few significant variations are reported by subgroups.
Wide general agreement, however, is apparent.

Only in degree status does any consistent variance occur
in reported influence of formal training between subgroups. As
with the reported importance of skills and the perceived level of
skills, in general the higher the degree status the greater the
perceived importance of formal training. This result was contra-
dictory to the overall pattern of low influence of formal training
found in consideration of overall mean scores in Table l3, page ll2.

That is, whereas the generally reported perception of respondents

122

is that formal training rates low in comparison to skills possessed
and skills perceived as important, the population subgroups con-
sistently report higher influences of training with greater acqui-
sition of degree status. Such a finding may have implications for
lower level degree programs which are consistently perceived as
having less influence than higher level programs. No other factor
produces subgroups which vary according to perceived influence of

training.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

It was the purpose of this study to assess the perceptions
which practicing superintendents have of their own management skills.
Specifically, the skills of interest were those which the prac-
titioner currently possesses and those which he perceives to be of
most importance in the performance of his job. In addition, this
study attempted to describe the perceived impact of formal training
in the develOpment of skills. This information was solicited as a
vehicle to aid in the understanding of the practitioner's needs in
terms of training either for pre-service or in-service preparation
of school managers. Further, in pursuit of this end, superin-
tendents were asked to respond in terms of those skills areas in
which they would desire further training. Several conclusions have
already been drawn in the treatment of the analysis of results in
the preceding chapter. It was assumed that each of the areas of
inquiry would be related and that results of each would support the
others. This did, in fact, prove to be true. Superintendents
generally perceived the skills which they possessed to be the skills
which were most important in the performance of their jobs. In
addition, the greater the level of skills possessed, the higher was
the level of influence of formal training reported by the respon-

dents.

123

124

It is important to note that the results of this study may
only be used to provide a description of the practicing superin-
tendent's view of his skills, and may not be safely assumed to
represent a real measure of that skill. Accordingly, conclusions
drawn from these data are interpreted only as indicators of possible
areas of interest to planners of in-service or pre-service training
functions. These results may act as red flags to alert such plan-
ners to general areas toward which to consider directing program
goals. Specific implementation of program emphasis may take many
forms and may include many individual skills for development.

’ Those skills and skill categories included in this study served
only for convenience of data reduction and analysis. Any user of
this information should undertake a thorough understanding of the
parameters of the terms utilized. Only in this way may contextual
translations be reliably done.

The following conclusions are based upon the evidence
obtained in this study. The inference is made that if the data are
valid for superintendents who responded to the questionnaire, the
data are also valid for superintendents in similar situations who
did not respond.

l. The skills which superintendents perceive themselves

with the greatest degree of competence are planning
951.113-

Respondents universally rated their competence highest in
relation to planning skills. Seven of the ten highest ranked
skills were from the group of statements defined as planning skills.

The mean score for level of planning skill possessed was 3.75,

125

compared to managing (3.63), communicating (3.52), decision making
(3.25), and evaluating (3.l2). The highest rated planning skills
were:

1. Ability to prepare an adequate financial plan.

2. Ability to allocate limited resources to priority goals.

3. Ability to predetermine the flow of activities and

responsibilities within your organization.

4. Ability to gain subordinate acceptance for institu-

tional goals.

5. Ability to identify community needs.

These skills, overall, rated 1, 2, 4, 7, and 8, respectively,
in terms of skills possessed at highest levels of competence by
respondents. The ranking of perceived competence may be used to
describe the current skills situation. No attempt was made to
determine cause and effect. Why certain skills appear to be more
universally possessed than others may only by the subject of specu-
lation in this study. The assumption is made, however, that these
are the skills most used by superintendents and, therefore, repre-
sent the highest levels of competence.

2. The skills_perceived to begpossessed least by practi-
tioners are evaluatinggskills and decision-makinggskills.

There was consistent agreement among all groups of superin-
tendents in their rankings of the five skill areas. Evaluating
skills and decision-making skills never failed to be rated lowest.
All of the five statements defined as evaluating skills and four of
the five decision-making statements were ranked in the bottom ten

skills.

126

Because these skills involved handling and analyzing infor-
mation for the purpose of problem solving or assessing effective-
ness in a formal and scientific manner, a technology is implied
with which reSpondents report less facility than other skills.
Since all skills were rated at least moderate (3) or above in
importance, these skills would seem to indicate a possible area of
training need.

3. The superintendent's description of skills does not

differ according to situational characteristics except
by degree status categories.

 

 

 

In general, as degree status goes up, so too does reported
skill level, skill importance, and influence of formal training.
Despite this factor, descriptions of skills do not vary suffi-
ciently to justify differential training needs for specific manage-
ment situations of superintendents. It would seem that similar
skills are required of those who must function in very different
situations.

4. Specific skill areas which the needs assessment shows

to be most problematic for superintendents are tech-
nologically vague.

 

 

 

Skills seen as having the greatest importance were also
seen as being influenced least by formal training.
1. Ability to organize your time for maximum efficiency.
2. Ability to inspire and influence subordinates through
various motivational techniques.
3. Ability to criticize performance of subordinates to

affect positive change.

127

Superintendents perceive these skills to be important in the per-
formance of their jobs but do not see them as developing out of
formal training. The conclusion is that the essence of such skills
may not be adequately taught in a classroom setting. At least,
they are not perceived to be taught there. Nevertheless, pragram
goals should take these concerns of practitioners into account
since they represent those skills which are important to them. New
training techniques and experiences should be devised which will
improve the relevance of both pre-service and in-service programs.

The implications of this conclusion are that pre-service

and in-service programs need to address with high priority the
general areas of time management, personnel management, and tech-
niques of supervision in new and more effective ways.

5. Program emphasis for training_should be directed at
closinggthe gap between high level skills withilow
traihing influence.

That is, skills reported to be possessed at high levels by superin-
tendents were acquired somehow, either by formal training, job
experience, or otherwise. Such skills which are also reported as
having had little influence from formal training should be prime
targets for program emphasis to increase the relevancy of such
training. The assumption here is that skills possessed at high‘
degrees of proficiency are those which have been developed out of
practical need and ought, therefore, to be included in pre-service
and/or in-service training. Skills thus identified include:

l. Ability to allocate limited resources to priority goals.

2. Ability to locate and use available funding sources.

128

3. Ability to reduce conflict in favor of cooperation.

4. Ability to gain community acceptance for institutional

goals.

5. Ability to predetermine the flow of activities and

responsibilities within your organization.

All but one of these skills (#3) are defined under the
general classification of planning skills. Because planning skills
were identified as those perceived to be most important in the
performance of the superintendent's job, develOping training objec-
tives in this area would seem most appropriate.

6. Re-evaluation of training emphasis and practices may

need to be done in relation to areas of high training_
influence but low skill competengy.

 

Superintendents generally reported higher.influence of
training in the areas of evaluation skills and decision-making
skills. These skills were those reported to be the lowest compe-
tencies of superintendents. The conclusion is that such skills
may not be those most called upon by practitioners. This conclusion
is supported by the ratings of skills which are considered most
important in the performance of the job. Those skills rated
twenty-seventh, thirtieth, thirty—second, and twenty-fifth in level
of proficiency were also rated thirty-second, thirty-first, thirty-
third, and thirtieth, respectively, in terms of importance. These
skills, however, represented the areas of greatest perceived
influence of formal-training. Thus, formal training was generally

perceived to result in comparatively low levels of skill in areas

129

which are comparatively unimportant. The specific skills in ques-
tion are:

1. Ability to understand and use apprOpriate sampling

procedures.

2. Ability to understand and use statistical analysis

procedures.

3. Ability to use theoretical principles of complex organi-

zations.

4. Ability to use formal methods of gathering Opinions and

judgments.

5. Ability to make maximum use of management information

systems.

Program planners must decide the philosophical question as
to whether such skills are truly important to practitioners even
though they may not be called upon to use them very often or have
little proficiency in their use. Viewed from the perspective of
most practitioners, such skills do not appear to represent prime
targets for emphasis. It should, however, be noted that those
superintendents who possess such skills rate their value higher
than those who do not. It would seem that higher levels of train-
ing result in greater competence with such "research" skills and
that, conversely, lower levels of training do not produce profi-
ciencies sufficient to be regarded as important. It is suspected
from this study that the process is a circular one, whereby prac-
titioners use the skills they have and perceive these skills to be

nxast important. Thus, the development of new skills should change

130

the reported skills of importance. This conclusion is borne out by
the apparent effects of degree status on the perceptions of respon-
dents.

7. Superintendents desire further training most in the
areas of managing and planning skills.

 

 

Ranked by mean score in terms of desire for further train-

ing, the ordering of skills categories occurred as follows:

l. Managing mean = 3.54
2. Planning mean = 3.5l
3. Communicating mean = 3.37
4. Evaluating mean = 3.27
5. Decision making mean = 3.25

Specifically, time management was named as the area in which
most superintendents were desirous of further training. This skill
was also rated as the third most important skill while being
reported as relatively low (twenty-second) in terms of competency
possessed.

It seems apparent that skills which involve specific tech-
nologies such as statistical analysis procedures, computer utili-
zation and data processing, management information systems, sampling
procedures and those having to do with the gathering, processing,
and evaluating of information are perceived to be most directly
attributable to the influence of formal training. In general,
however, those skills involving a more vague technological base
such as conflict resolution, community relations, and goal-setting
skills are not seen as having been developed primarily through for-
mal training. The inference is that such skills have not been
adequately adapted to the classroom to be seen as being primarily

learned there. Such learning must be the product of experience

131

which may not be abstracted for the purpose of teaching in a setting
other than its situation-specific context. While one may talk

about the process of developing individual potential for positions
of responsibility, one cannot do it in a classroom or in a workshop.
Those skills perceived by superintendents as the most important
skills were not the same skills which they perceived to have been
developed through formal training.

One interpretation of this phenomenon is, of course, that
formal training programs do not provide the administrator with
important skills, that the really important skills are learned only
through practical experience. An alternative conclusion is that
the skills considered by practitioners to be important are not
necessarily the same skills which make them effective and effi-
cient managers of the educational enterprise. What has been most
problematic for superintendents in recent years has been survival.
Skills which allow the individual to survive in a largely political,
often emotional, generally nonrational milieu may, in fact, not be
skills which can be learned in any other way but by experience.

It is left to the individual to decide which skills he
will need to devel0p, survival skills or managerial skills. It is
left to the in-service and pre-service program planner to decide
which emphasis to provide in training. The evidence of this study
appears to indicate that current training emphasis is not perceived

to meet the skill development needs of most superintendents which are

132

largely survival rather than efficiency needs. The question to
be resolved is, should training emphasis change or should manage-

ment emphasis change?

APPENDIX

PEARSON CORRELATION MATRICES

133

APPENDIX

PEARSON CORRELATION MATRICES

PLANNING: LEVEL OF SKILL

 

016 040 044 056 068 076 084 088 108 128 140

016 .51 .46 .54 .47 .46 .36 .41 .30 .43 .38
040 .44 .63 .50 .51 .26 .38 .32 .41 .40
044 .43 .42 .38 .28- .37 .19 .33 .26
056 .47 .52 .32 .38 .33 .37 .43
068 .48 .29 .39 .29 .40 .36
076 .31 .39 .32 .33 .45
084 .51 .52 .57 .48
088 .54 .61 .56
108 .49 .48
128 .59
140 '

PLANNING: INFLUENCE OF FORMAL TRAINING

017 041 045 057 069 077 085 089 109 129 141

017 .49 .42 .45 .51 .52 .38 .44 .41 .43 .37
041 .55 .61 .49 .46 .36 .42 .37 .40 .39
045 .49 .46 .42 .33 .40 .38 .36 .41
057 .53 .58 .36 .46 .45 .43 .40
069 .63 .34 .46 .42 .47 .39
077 .41 .51 .47 .42 .45
085 .50 .55 .45 .43
089 .54 .56 .49
109 .53 .51
129 . .62
141

134

135

PLANNING: IMPORTANCE OF SKILLS

018 042 046 058 070 078 086 090 110 130 142

018 .44 .38 .47 .43 .48 .23 .29 .25 .29 .34
042 .49 .54 .46 .47 .29 .36 .34 .38 .44
046 .45 .41 .47 .29 .41 .30 .33 .36
058 .51 .57 .26 .33 .30 .30 .37
070 .53 .29 .34 .27 .35 .39
078 .26 .41 .37 .29 .42
086 .51 .59 .48 .54
090 .57 .57 .67
110 .53 .61
130 .66
142

PLANNING: DESIRE FOR FURTHER TRAINING

019 043 047 059 071 079 087 091 111 131 143

019 .50 .49 .52 .49 .48 .32 .37 .28 .39 .42
043 .60 .69 .57 .64 .40 .51 .40 .51 .51
047 .59 .54 .57 .43 .50 .40 .48 .51
059 .54 .62 .40 .54 .41 .51 .49
071 .58 .45 .43 .37 .50 .45
079 .36 .56 .43 .56 .55
087 .58 .58 .58 .51
091 .54 .65 .67
111 .55 .55
131 .63

143

136

MANAGING: LEVEL OF SKILL

028 048 072 080 092 112 116 124 144

028 .57 .50 .33 .35 .36 .40 .44 .34
048 .47 .31 .38 .32 .43 .45 .27
072 .37 .41 .50 .37 .41 .36
080 .26 .30 .25 .32 .19
092 .51 .56 .59 .45
112 .60 .60 .55
ll6 .6l .48
124 .52
144

MANAGING: INFLUENCE OF FORMAL TRAINING

029 049 073 081 093 113 117 125 145

029 .57 .49 .39 .41 .33 .43 .40 .39
049 .46 .42 .43 .39 .46 .47 .36
073 .62 .45 .46 .50 .45 .42
081 . .37 .35 .36 .39 .31
093 .53 .61 .55 .45
113 .66 .54 .48
117 .63 .51
125 .53

145

137

MANAGING: IMPORTANCE OF SKILLS

030 050 074 082 094 114 118 126 146

030 .57 .33 .19 .30 .37 .41 .40 .44
050 .38 .24 .32 .32 .42 .40 .41
074 .35 .30 .35 .26 .30. .25
082 .27 .27 .19 .20 .17
094 .60 .60 .58 .55
114 .60 .62 .62
118 , .70 .67
126 .72
146

MANAGING: DESIRE FOR FURTHER TRAINING

031 051 075 083 095 115 119 127 147

031 .56 .47 .43 .37 .38 .49 .46 .45
051 .55 .52 .51 .43 .54 .49 .52
075 .52 .51 .53 .49 .44 .45
083 .48 .44 .44 .41 .37
095 .65 .64 .6l .58
115 .64 .61 .55
119 .66 .68
127 .59

147

138

DECISION MAKING: LEVEL OF SKILL
032 036 052 096 132

 

032 .34 .37 .35 .33
036 .40 .38 .19
052 .36 .17
096 .48
132

DECISION MAKING: INFLUENCE OF FORMAL TRAINING
033 037 053 097 134

033 .45 .48 .43 .35
037 .48 .38 .22
053 .38 .32
097 .45
134

DECISION MAKING: IMPORTANCE OF SKILLS
034 038 054 098 135

034 .26 .38 .31 .12
038 .46 .33 .15
054 .28 .16
098 .44
135

DECISION MAKING: DESIRE FOR FURTHER TRAINING
035 039 055 099 136

035 .46 .47 .39 .19
039 .56 .46 .23
055 .38 .25
099 .47

136

139

EVALUATING: LEVEL OF SKILL

 

020 024 104 120 136

020 .49 .18 .32 .32
024 .29 .41 .36
104 .58 .54
120 .57
136

EVALUATING: INFLUENCE OF FORMAL TRAINING
021 025 105 121 137

021 .64 .34 .43 .35
025 .30 .42 .35
105 .64 .61
121 .60
137

EVALUATING: IMPORTANCE OF SKILLS
022 026 106 122 138

022 .51 .23 .22 .30
026 .27 .35 .38
106 .53 .62
122 .61
138

EVALUATING: DESIRE FOR FURTHER TRAINING
023 027 107 123 139

 

023 .61 .33 .30 .31
027 .36 .41 .32
107 .56 .62
123 .56

139

140

COMMUNICATING: LEVEL OF SKILL
060 A 064 100

060 .56 .31
064 .33
100

COMMUNICATING: INFLUENCE OF FORMAL TRAINING
061 065 101

061 .62 .35
065 .48
101

COMMUNICATING: IMPORTANCE OF SKILLS
062 066 102

062 .65 .41
066 .39
102

COMMUNICATING: DESIRE FOR FURTHER TRAINING
063 067 103

063 .69 .40

067 .52

103

BIBLIOGRAPHY

141

BIBLIOGRAPHY

American Association of School Administrators. Staff Relations in
School Administration. Washington, D.C.: AASA, 1955.

 

 

Argyle, Michael. "The Relay Assembly Test Room in Retrospect." Qggg;
pational Psychology 27 (1953).

 

Argyris, C. Personality and Organization. New York: Harper, 1957.

 

Back, Kurt W. Beyond Words. New York: Russell Sage Foundation,
1972.

 

Bales, R. F. "The Equilibrium Problem in Small Groups." In Working
Papers in the Thegry of Action. Edited by T. Parsons,
R. F. Bales, and E. A. Shills. New York: The Free Press of
Glencoe, 1933.

 

Barnard, Chester 1. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard UniVersity Press, 1938.

 

Bateman, E. A. Development of the County—Unit School District in
Utah. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College,
Columbia University, 1940.

 

Bavelas, A. "Leadership: Man and Function." Administrative Science

Quarterly 4 (1960).

Benne, K. D., and Sheats, P. "Functional Roles of Group Members."
Journal of Social Issues 4 (Spring 1948).

 

Bennis, Warren G. Changing Organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1966.

 

Blake, R. R., and Mouton, Jane S. The Managerial Grid. Houston:
Gulf Publishing Company, 1964.

Brayfield, Arthur H., and Crockett, Walter H. “Employee Attitudes
and Performance." Psychological Bulletin 52,5 (l955).

Burbank, Natt B. Superintendent of Schools. Danville, Illinois:
Interstate Printers, Inc., 1968.

 

Callahan, Raymond E. Education and the Cult of Efficiency. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1962.

142

143

Campbell, Roald F. "The Changing Role of the Superintendent."
Contemporary Education 39 (May 1968).

Superintendency of Schools. Danville, Illinois: Inter-
state Printers, Inc., 1968.

 

; Bridges, Edwin M.; Corbally, John E.; Nystrand, Raphael 0.;
and Ramseyer, John A. Introduction to Educational Adminis-
tration. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1971.

Campbell, Roald F.; Cunningham, Luvern L.; and McPhee, Roderick F. fl1_e_
Organization and Control of American Schools. Columbus,
Ohio: Merrill, 1965.

Campbell, R. F., and Gregg. R. I., eds. Administrative Behavior in
Education. New York: Harper and Row, 1957.

Carey, Alex. "The Hawthorne Studies: A Radical Criticism." American
Sociological Review 32 (June 1967).

 

Coladarci, A. P., and Getzels, J. W. The Use of Theory in Educa-
tional Administration. Stanford, california: Stanford
University Press,71955.

 

Coleman, James, et al. Youth: Transition to Adulthood. Report of the
Panel on Youth of the President‘s Science Advisory Commit-
tee. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.

Cook, Desmond L. Educational Project Magggement. Columbus, Ohio:
Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., 1971.

Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Associa-
tion and The American Association of School Administrators.
"The Unique Role of the Superintendent of Schools." Washing-
ton, D.C.: 1965.

Fayol, Henri. General and Industrial Management. Translated from
French edition (Durod) By Constance Stours. London:
Pittman Co., 1949.

Fultz, David A. "A Study of the Reasons Why Michigan School Super-
intendents Were Dismissed or Encouraged to Leave Their
Positions Between 1965 and 1975. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan
State University, 1975.

Gardner, John. Self Renewal. Evanston, Illinois: Harper, 1963.
Gilland, Thomas. The Origin and Development of the Powers and Duties

of the City Superintendent. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1935.

 

144

Goldhammer, Keith; Aldreidge, William; Suttle, John; and Becker,
Gerald. Issues and Problems in Contemporary_Educational
Administration. Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon
Press, 1967.

 

Gouldner, A. W. Studies in Leadership. New York: Harper and Row,
1950.

Gregg, Russell T. "The Administrative Process." In Administrative
Behavior in Education. Edited by Roald F. Campbell and
Russell T. Gregg. New York: Harper, 1957.

 

Griffiths, Daniel E. "Administration as Decision-Making."
In Administrative Theory_in Education. Edited by Andrew W.
Halpin. Chicago: Midwest Administration Center, The Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, 1958.

. Administrative Theppy. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts, 1959.

 

Gulick, L., and Urwick, L., eds. Papers on the Science of Adminis-
tration. New York: Columbia University, Institute of Public
Administration, 1937.

Haire, M. "Industrial and Social Psychology." In Handbook of Social
Psychology. Edited by G. Lindzey. Cambridge: Addison-
Wesley, 1954.

 

Halpin, Andrew W., ed. Administrative Theory in Education. Chicago:
Midwest Administration Center, University of Chicago Press,
1958.

"The Leadership Behavior and Combat Performance of Airplane
Commanders." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49
1954 .

Hart, Deborah. "Conference Report." UCEA Review 17 (October 1975).
Columbus, Ohio: University Council for Educational Adminis-
tration.

Hay, Clyde L. The Blind Spot in American Public Education. New
York: Macmillan and Co., 1950.

Hemphill, J. K. A Proposed Theory of Leadership in Small Groups.
Columbus: The Ohio State University, Personnel Research
Board Technical Report, 1954. (Unpublished.) In Stogdill,
Ralph M. Handbook of Leadership. New York: The Free Press,
1959.

 

Homans, G. C. The Human Grogp, New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1950.

145

Huff, Russell J. "How Superintendents See Themselves.‘ 'Nation's
Schools 84 (November 1969). ‘

Hulin, Charles L., and Blood, Milton R. "Job Enlargement, Indi-
vidual Differences, and Worker Responses." Paycholggical
Bulletin 69,1 (1968).

Innaccone, Laurence. Politics in Education. New York: The Center
for Applied Research in Education, 1967.

Kahn, R. L., and Datz, D. "Leadership Practices in Relation to
Productivity and Morale." In Group Dynamics. Edited by
D. Cartwright and A. Zander. New York: Harper and Row,
1960.

Koopman, Robert G.; Miel, Alice; and Misner, Paul J. Democracy in
School Administration. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,
Inc.,71943.

Korman, Abraham K. "Consideration, 'Initiating Structure,‘ and
Organizational Criteria--A Review." Personal Psychology
19,4 (1966).

LaPiere, R., and Farnsworth, P. R. Social Psychology. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1963.

Lawler, Edward E. III, and Porter, Lyman W. "The Effect of Per-
formance on Job Satisfaction." Industrial Relations 7
(October 1967).

Lieberman, M.; Yalom, I.; and Miles, M. "The Group Experience
Project: A Comparison of Ten Encounter Technologies." In
Encounter: Confrontations in Self and Interpersonal Aware-
ness. Edited by L. Blank, G. Gottsegen, and M. Gottsegen.
New York: Macmillan, 1971.

Likert, Rensis. New Patterns of Management. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1961.

Litchfield, Edward. "Notes on a General Theory of Administration."
Administrative Science Quarterly_(June 1956).

March, J. G., and Simon, H. A. Organizations. New York: Wiley,
1958.

McGregor, Douglas M. The Human Side ofagnterprise. New York:
Wiley, 1958.

Meiklejohn, Alexander. Education Between Two Worlds. New York:
Harper, 1942.

I'll-I'll!!! “11 1110’s..

146

Michigan Department of Education. "Superintendent Turnover Averages
Nine Percent Annually." January, 1975.

Mooney, J. D., and Reily, A. C. The Principles of Organization.
New York: Harper, 1939.

National Council of Professors of Educational Administration.
CCBC Notebook. Committee for Competency Based Curriculum
in Educational Administration, 1972.

 

Newman, William H. Administrative Action. Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,T1950.

 

Odiorne, G. S. "The Trouble With Sensitivity Training." Training
Director‘s Journal 17,10 (1963).

Perrow, Charles. Complex Organizations. Glenview, Illinois:
Scott, Foresman and Co.,51972.

 

Pierce, Paul R. The Origin and Development of the Public School
Principalship._ Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934.

 

Reddin, William J. Managerial Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1970.

 

Reller, Theodore L. The Development of the City Superintendency of
Schools in the United States. Philadelphia: Published by
the author, 1935.

 

Roethlisberger, F. J., and Dickson, William J. Management and the
Worker. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1941.

Sears, Jesse B. The Nature of the Administrative Process. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1950.

Shartle, G. L. Executive Performance and Leadership.. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1956.

Sheldon, Oliver. The Philosophy of Management. London: Pittman
Co., 1923. ,

Simon, Herbert A. Administrative Behavior. New York: The Macmillan
Co., 1945.

Smith, M. "Personality Dominance and Leadership." Sociology and
Social Research 19 (1934).

 

Stock, Dorothy. "A Survey of Research on T-Groups." In T-Group
Theory and Laboratory Method. Edited by L. P. Bradford,
J. R. Gibb, and K. D. Benne. New York: Wiley, 1964.

147

Stogdill, R. M. Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and
Research. NewTYork: The Free Press, 1974.

 

. Individual Behavior and Grogp Achievement. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1959.

 

, and Coons, A. E., eds. Leader Behavior: Its Description
and Measurement. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University
Bureau of Business Research, 1957.

 

Suzzallo, Henry. The Rise of Local Supervision in Massachusetts.
New York: Columbia University,71906. In Wever, Christian.
Basic Philoapphies of Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart,
and Winston,51960.

 

 

Taylor, Frederick W. "The Principles of Scientific Management."
In Scientific Management. New York: Harper and Row, 1947.

 

Toffler, Alvin. Future Shock. New York: Random House, Inc., 1970.

 

Weber, Max. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization.
Translated by A. M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons.
Oxford University Press, 1947.

Wilensky, Harold. "Human Relations in the Workplace." In Research
in Industrial Human Relations: A Critical Appraisal. Edited
by Conrad Arensberg et al. New York: Harper, 1957.

 

    

  

I'IICHIG N STRTE U IV. L BRQRIES

11111111111111111111111111111111

31293100307200