r‘xv—w— '_ — _ - - DIFFERENTIAL PERCEPTIONS 0F FACTORS IMPORTANT IN THE SELECTON OF STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATORS IN MIDWESTERN UNIVERSITIES Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LINDA HUNT HESTER 1971 E n O 5 f 1 Q J \ IIIIIIIIIIIIILIIIIIIIIISIIIIIILIIIIIII E This is to certify that the thesis entitled DIFFERENTIAL PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS IMPORTANT IN THE SELECTION OF STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATORS IN MIDWESTERN UNIVERSITIES presented by LINDA HUNT HESTER has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for _Eh_..D_.____. degree in ____Ed_.__ \ Major professor Date February 12, I97] 0-7639 —: .I'A».A I 1‘ . [Mine .. Jae. ‘21“;an nu“. av—wfinn‘umv ‘ ' “v "'-' n v ’ u...~a~n‘o¢c-4J Ag. .- p-uu I o o wan—v ‘ "U c. u .o .5.“ Qua...»- . YFPngm—o-n . \ .. . an. on.) .= (E m U) *4 .3 zet'fieen f I \ \ -_‘ , .::‘.“" ‘ “‘ V’e ajrr l ABSTRACT DIFFERENTIAL PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS IMPORTANT IN THE SELECTION OF STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMIN- ISTRATORS IN MIDWESTERN UNIVERSITIES BY Linda Hunt Hester The major purpose of this exploratory study was to dis- cover the kind and relative value of the factors important in the employment and promotion of personnel to managerial, execu- tive and chief student personnel administrative positions in public, coeducational universities. A related purpose was to accertain differences in perception of kind or importance of factors named between four personnel groups—-presidents, chief, male executive and the highest-ranking female student personnel administrators—-in the two university groups studied. The 12 universities were selected on the basis of strat- ified random sample and represented exactly one-half of all. public, coeducational Midwestern universities in each of the two university groups. There were four "Big Ten" universities udth student populations over 25,000 and eight medium universi- ties with student populations of 10,000--24,999. The data was collected by means of a structured inter- xnlew on the 12 university campuses with each of the 44 of a possible 47 sample personnel. A "Conceptual Model of Student Insrsonnel Organizational Structure" and two interview sched- ules-~0ne for presidents, one for executive student personnel . 'I pa-’ .‘V 3-....-H-I .F' -- -ov: 5 :-.¢qu .p«- :. .lpfi ~I-OEV'i" _: ...= as“. 0“ .. . . - ‘ Ooveo‘oeau‘ your v " Jul .1:.----.-Cu .uao ' Q ‘ - " «e- ‘ Q. A -- -: : ”:J" y" ' {.2 <'-' U‘UVV‘UO.--. C - ‘ ‘ o a— n 'z" but ':‘ v- .‘ ~.-..b~-.-h‘ -‘y-...~ ‘ ' ;~-—.._ ..._ ~': "‘“'I I---u‘~' . ‘ - "“-—n. . -:. '--.—~.‘~“‘ n.» ....: h-..“ fin f‘ .‘»-VOI ~ .. ‘ ."v- V... T‘. "O:.' " I e ‘C‘.-V. e A ~ .I ‘ h‘ .A ‘ ~.: :‘4 arTAF“ v — 'T‘3vu"‘ h':v~ ‘ b""‘~3_ . u .- ‘ ..-.:‘ .. ‘Fo . on 5... SE 65‘. Q v»- ‘-._.' . ~ ' . a . . -tu'.£ f: ‘ ‘ . '- V‘ 8‘4"; ‘ “V..- :\. ~. .V‘t a: ' .-., L’Q . s .5 cat; '5 ‘ .._ ~ . , -‘ . . .-~-::' 1 “I: ‘0. r.- .'““I ." ‘4 . -. ‘ ~._ v. ‘ 's «V\ , e s. ““u" P... ~ k: . ~9'o' ‘_- t ‘ .r‘ _ Linda Hunt Hester administrators-~similar, but not identical, were developed to guide the interview and collect the data. All interviews were tape recorded. A stratified random sample of these structured inter- views was subsequently analyzed by professional judges. The mean reliability ratings for the presidential interviews was 92 percent and for the executive student personnel adminis- trators 94 percent. The interview schedules were judged to have content validity. The investigation centered around the education/profes- sional preparation, employment and personal background experi- ences and personal characteristics which comprised the factors evaluated in the selection of an individual for a particular kind and level of student personnel position. The analysis and summary of the data were presented in terms of frequencies and reported, in part, numerically by proportions or percen— tages, but primarily by means of descriptive, integrative and, occasionally, interpretative summary statements regarding the areas studied. Findings and conclusions (of the study) were the following: (1) The basic objectives of the study were accom- plished and have implications for the planning and advisement of and development of more realistic and relevant professional preparation programs for prospective professionals by faculty:. trainers as well as more realistic career planning by and in- service education for current practitioners in the field. (2) Differences were found in the perceptions of the kind of factors p ‘ -1 ‘ - ‘0 r "“‘7... :C: .Nte Stbt» ..'.~i Q ‘ ‘ ~ " '.""" 03‘.e 5 Ce - ' ....:t ‘5' - .-,. » V a r.‘ .r.- -.b:v9v‘;nuc a..u ’- ' .nuusl.v- .- U...b.-Alb. . ..--. q‘l;::vafl.§ .‘ cf 8 .. ‘.U'IOA 53.. L:.....: n... were 8‘" - ... p'.-'.‘: A - -l. a -4. "'~-..vloU~ o wu- , h" "a a I'v-An’_fl a... u. .b.» eel-VCN'h-cwfl C -.. . ‘ .'.. ::- :" Yrcvo;—fl ‘ uncovv n..u . h»--~_..'_ .-. ‘. 02-45 -::. u ..- ...-, to- betb b- . --~.‘ \ - 2‘;-: ' .L;'a in g A one-.- “as a \vr‘ \‘ - \-"v-“. ;?e a. ‘ V.-. 2 .. _ nu... “ 9-9 '1 by _~ _ ,-, b..- y— ‘— .-\A - .»._.: nau-‘;_ ‘ . ~ v-..:~‘trap. ‘ ' ‘ bun ‘O‘ .__ . L‘ .'~ - u. q: :s :a. a? fl w. “ :C. .H . x.‘ ::\._. “'- ~A . v-3 I..‘st ‘._ ‘- . . »- N. v .‘ :r‘-‘~‘ .gt.‘\ ya‘ V F I .. §_ - ' "uA‘A-l ‘ua. '5 ‘~Y 5‘9. . 5. ,2 \" ‘u. ‘v- .n':' A. a "3 “‘1". ~‘.‘..‘ Q“ ‘9 5a ‘. ‘.'._-_ ...._:‘ t“: . .‘ ‘H ‘t. a q‘_ V‘e :‘;~. ‘ a “ b " e::v- ‘~~C.N“.I . . ~ung" 1 ‘~ fl‘ ‘ § ‘2' .fl: \u: \. ‘A . e . “V ’ H C.§ 8 ‘g‘. .53“. -‘_ a “ H“a. y» ‘- ‘r-ICcs ‘3. ' \. :.;. \\"“, ‘e K 3.. u‘ s I “~‘ “- K“ ‘ “‘3 5 P L ~e .. \:~s‘ 5” . - . ‘-.. PA“ ~ ... ‘5 V- ‘*S ' ‘5 ”I ~ \“ v .~ v~~_ 5“ :v:“‘~ ‘5 ’ t I Linda Hunt Hester important for the selection of student personnel administrators at the three levels of responsibility among the four personnel groups interviewed and among the two university groups. The major differential of expectation was that chief officers and executive staff were expected to possess a breadth of knowl- edge, experience and perspective in contrast to managerial staff who were expected to possess an in-depth knowledge, expertise and experience in at least one or more specialized areas. As the position decreased in importance in the uni- versity, there was a corresponding decrease in expectations regarding the degree of knowledge, experience or refinement of skills that must be possessed by candidates for the posi- tion. Although some differences existed for these groups in relation to the degree of importance or relative value of the factors considered in the selection process, there was some consensus among all regarding the kind and relative importance of the factors most important in the selection of student per- sonnel administrators. The essential factors in order of importance were: (a) the individual's personal qualities; (b) previous administrative experience, preferably in student personnel and in a similar kind and type of university; (c) academic respectability, as reflected in the possession of an earned Ph.D., preferably in a substantive area of Social/ Behavioral Sciences, e.g., Psychology, Sociology; (d) leader- ship ability; (e) well-developed communication skills. Finally, a Caucasian male between the ages of 35-45 at the time the selection occurs would be the preferred candidate for all gthxae positions if he possessed the other essential factors. £33c~ a-Iiililai: 3.? Aggie pfOCEQ'dIeS .-::.:: srecess for a. Laxative positions“ ;;::;:;:, visibility, a: I:;::., e.g., chief 5’. :'--'~-- n”: U..."- Ina-l rigorous ‘ l v ‘_ I;O.( a: 5"- I ‘ -"I I ..-... «L sue aval Ada; l ' .s:a::s of the perscrx 22.12: gracess. HI ' v.- -~ .‘. 5;: executive and I Em Personnel in ‘~ use for manager ad speciali “Ell'regardt “‘2' ‘(.'_,: . ‘ “NS Of univen ‘ . , . >~r ‘ u . n'.‘ ' ‘:-‘-‘¢Za“ ~lonal s. “-.: 1:21 t}. Ae ki ‘ nr‘ Q . “ T r‘v— (3) Six basic procedures were found to be involved in the Linda Hunt Hester selection process for all three levels of student personnel administrative positions. The greater the responsibility, authority, visibility, and status attached to student personnel position, e.g., chief student personnel administrator, the more demanding and rigorous was the process of selection. The higher the rank of the available position, the greater number, rank, and status of the personnel from the university involved in the selection process. (4) The major source of potential candi- dates for executive and chief student personnel positions were well-regarded chief officers and executive practitioners in student personnel in similar kinds of universities. The major source for managerial candidates was the use of national generalized and specialized professional organizations and the use of more well-regarded specialized administrators in similar kinds of universities. (5) "Functional" student per- sonnel organizational structures which are most in evidence today, because of their more specialized nature, were felt to limit the personal and professional growth of practitioners working within them by limiting both lateral mobility and promotion to higher level positions. Finally, recommendations were made by the investigator relative to potentially fruitful areas of study of selection or employment and promotion of student personnel administra- tors, and with regard to potentially profitable procedures, 'nethods and the kinds of studies that might be of value in studying selection. \.gm av..- _,-.,..-.-‘-~I' | ' an. O nth-n M. Loo» nv-Q 7‘ uh \> I any as.“ T \' .J L A ‘ CL 0 t HM C.» .3 i ‘ q_.‘ . es .s. v 5x~IAL PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS IMPORTANT j~ SELECTION OF STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMIN- tsmnamons IN MIDWESTERN UNIVERSITIES BY Linda Hunt Hester A THESIS Submitted to .' Michigan State University 71 fulfillment of the requirements _ Arhfor the degree of EPLVDOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ‘ )Administration and Higher Education 1971 :1 X “a ee- :7. v‘ ,, d!" 3 ‘. P.»- .I.E i‘ILZEI lS grat- ..... nix-I" - — .. ‘ u ‘ f.— 1 rs F 5. v I ‘ ' on «do. gVUSAU‘c ~ -......- ‘ ~~-..v.-..:., its 5“ \.. . '- ._ u--u~n..—‘. V I " -~--el.au:.¢1 all C: - fi O r- p by hue stuj'v'. 4 .;a .. ‘ :.:I""“':Y" ' _ . . eb‘guee 1F“... ‘ USU e 'hn . . '7 V‘ ~- I 5“;'" c ‘ B‘ct’ 0‘ the \. '----.a:-j recog..izr -.Qc» ~¢. (ICC .. I - 'II «c 4\"‘~ ~I:'~:“r a'H I '§ VHS an: A.“ tr A ”t” .. g .- u ' ' e. ‘e.e e.” A 4. T‘ ACKNOWLE DGEMENTS The writer is grateful to the many people who made this research possible by their guidance, cooperation, Participation, and support. It is not possible to acknow- ledge individually all of the persons who were involved relative to the study. However, there were some individuals Who were particularly instrumental in the development, con- duct, and writing of the study and who, therefore, should be particularly recognized. I The researcher wishes to express her sincere appre- |Ciation to Dr. Laurine E. Fitzgerald, her doctoral guidance COMittee chairman and dissertation director, and to the Members of her doctoral guidance committee: Dr. Walter F. JOl'mson, Dr. Edward B. Blackman, and Dr. James B. McKee, and Committee substitutes, Dr. Eldon Nonamaker and Dr. Louis C- Stamatakos, for their assistance in the development, guidance, and examination of the completed study. She is Particularly grateful to Dr. Milton B. Dickerson, Vice- President of Student Affairs at Michigan State University, Whose suggestions and sponsorship through letters of an 99°“- tO the sample personnel made this study possible. ii .‘egreciation is ex: :.i-::;ersomel admini 232:: who served as :15 assisted in re ' ' “var-an- i. z .1 ”press exhibit 2:235 for both the ‘ “I ELILWAEdgEd. T‘i‘A Ea ~l:: fig, . r a. particular I '0 “Press her a. ‘33:: c . °~ SOCIOIOCY . a .‘t. \. ~ "2995ti0ns COT student personnel administrators and professional— Appreciation is expressed to those executive level trainers who served as "professional judges" for the study and assisted in refinement of the instruments and interview procedures as well as the determination of inter—judge reliability and content validity. The time and thoroughness exhibited in their review of the taped interviews for both the pilot and major studies is grate— fully acknowledged. The judges included: Dr. Milton B. Dickerson, Dr. Laurine E. Fitzgerald, Dr. Patricia Houtz, Dr. Robert R. Fedore and Dr. Thomas H. Zarle. Several individuals were of special assistance in the work on particular parts of the study. The researcher wishes to express her appreciation to Dr. Ruth H. Useem, Professor of Sociology and Education, who made many helpful suggestions concerning the procedures and techni— ques appropriate and useful in the structured interview in field study research. She would like to express her gratitude to Dr. Natalie L. Sproull, consultant in the Bureau of Educational Research, for her guidance relative l I I f to the refinement of instruments and appropriate research I I methods to be used in the determination of reliability and I validity for this study. Sincere appreciation is extended . -o.. ' ~ “"3 5i”: e rev: - O . . ‘w .‘. -. . I n ”E'CA'H 1“ a... -‘v..‘ ..‘ I. . . -‘-‘ ‘0. s . .--er 13 F”: O “ .“ -1 -‘~. . "w"; a .. '_ nun ~8’Shv— ‘ t s v.“: .M. ‘ s ‘. n. -.‘.- $.‘ ‘8,- Q‘F ‘ a M... u .‘h ‘ -\. v a. ”' ”‘U‘Ol :h: H..‘ 3‘. T a v ."‘ “: I " . c ““ :Et‘ A\-\ ‘V u‘ .g . ‘ ‘ u ~ I ‘-. .3. ‘ o b \J.. th' fl, \J . ‘ . .‘Q ‘~ ~ Q “ n“=‘ ‘\ ~ ’ a‘. ‘- .._‘-‘ . \"— ' “ P “' ~L ‘ ' x..e r ‘E: .- M "~ ‘1 l 4*: ‘ ‘\ \. I ,- “Ef‘h; Q .“ .. ‘ . » =“"= t: the rese . A u... :94 H~-A 4"“ ~" m...- u T " V‘ .5 . ”"-‘ «nub: “8-8 I .-;.; :... run-q “.4” 0-. I». 51.-., 55“. a n; ‘ n- v .u. . L... ‘ ., -V:a_'a . .~.~._... to Miss Marie Smith, a 1970 Master's Degree recipient in Student Personnel Administration, who provided time—saving assistance to the researcher through her aid in the tabu- lation and summary of the data. All of the personnel pre— viously noted were most helpful in offering suggestions relative to the development, conduct, and/or the analysis of data for this study. The researcher is deeply indebted to all pilot and major study sample personnel who willingly participated in the personal interviews used to collect the data for this study. Their thoughtful cooperation and that of other personnel in their institutions significantly aided in the process of data collection and the quality of the data obtained. The writer is most appreciative of the editoral assistance and personal encouragement provided by Miss Dorothy E. Culver. She is most grateful to her typist, Mrs. Ann P. Brown and her associates who worked long, ; patiently, and meticulously with the writer from the I study's inception to its conclusion and the typing of the final draft of the dissertation. Finally, the researcher is deeply grateful to her mother, Mrs. Jennie Hunt Hester, and two friends, in iv 21:32.1, Dr. Marian E :iie-i personal enccu: ::.;'.'.:1t this study. Titian the invalx {3:21, this resear I' e, Krughout the ext 252;.‘5, LEese person: '.::.:e, assistance, 3:; particular, Dr. Marian E. Chaskes and Dr. Mary C. Berg, who provided personal encouragement and moral support to her throughout this study. Without the invaluable contributions of all these personnel, this research study would not have been possi- ble. Throughout the extended period of time involved in the study, these persons provided the encouragement, guidance, assistance, and support which sustained the researcher and made the conduct and completion of this study a reality. ‘O: - r-n .-. V w‘..' ~' v ---~- 2"; CT. rflv“ ‘- ‘ v.:_..izak.; .‘u 7 T r‘ I‘r‘trcfi.‘ r s . S c r' s iew c CLOC‘ mi TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . I LIST OF APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . ’II ‘ VITA I O I C O I I I U I C l I I I O I Chapter I. THE PROBLEM I I O O O I O O I I O 0 Introduction and Statement of the Problem . Need for this Study. . . . . . . Objectives of this Study . . . . II. Importance of this Study . . . . . Limitations and Scope of this Study . Definition of Terms. . . . . . Organization of this Study . . . . .A REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH . . . . . . An Introduction to the Scope of the Literature . . . . . . . . . . Need for this Study. . . . . . . Background Characteristics and Career Development of Student Personnel Administrators. . . . . . . Recommended Professional Functions, Prepara- tion, Employment Experiences, and Personal Characteristics for Student Personnel Administrators. . . . . . . . A Review of Related Literature . . . . . ME THODOLOGY O O I O O O O I I O C 0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . Selection of the Sample . . . . . The Research Method: The Structured Interview . . . . . . . . . . Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . The Pilot Study . . . . . . The Process of Data Collection . . The Method of the Analysis of Data. vi Page ii ix 25 36 37 55 73 84 84 85 94 112 135 139 143 O ‘ Q o ‘- .- I- - o Afi" \ b I u- on. .-‘ I.- r. vaob My . \p‘ Q .. l‘~ .- .. _-\—IC ,2 n .. a- . .— p‘vc- DU. II“. I .- I“ . , '.',.~..A§ ‘ C . v.~"‘nt a ‘.,.... an... . v \ o Oar .9. v~* “.90Q' - A .n- o . . ~— I‘ -‘ 0.00“ ”-9 ,...-o r L. a. T ... Y. .Q‘ ‘- 5 u. v. A. Au 5. .- VA A» .- :u .5. A V 5": a EXdeF Chapter Page IV. DATA ANALYSIS: PRESIDENTS . . . . . . . 153 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 153 Sample Participation: Presidents . . . 156 Basic Background Information: Presidents . 159 Sources of Potential Candidates for Executive Level Student Personnel Positions . . . . 166 Personnel Involved in the Selection Process for Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators. . . . 168 Factors Important in the Selection of Chief Student Personnel Administrators in Universities . . . . 171 Changes in the Importance of Factors as a Function of Time in the Selection of the Chief Student Personnel Administrator . . 181 Presidential Perceptions of the Factors Which Determine the Acceptance of the Selected Chief Student Personnel Administrator by the Student Personnel Staff. . . . . 189 Factors Important in the Selection of Other Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators in Universities . . . . 191 Sex as a Factor in the Selection of Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators. . . . . 198 Race as a Factor in the Selection of Executive Level Student Personnel . Administrators. . . 217 The Relationship of the University Student 1 Personnel Organizational Structure to the 1 Selection of Student Personnel Administra- ' tors . . 235 Recommendations Relative to the Educational, Professional Preparation, Employment and Personal Background Experiences Desired for Student Personnel Administrators . . 237 Summary of Salient Data . . . . . . . 243 V. EHKTA ANALYSIS: EXECUTIVE LEVEL STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATORS . . . . . . . . 269 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . 269 Sample Participation: Executive Student Personnel Administrators . . . . . . 272 Basic Background Information: Executive Student Personnel Administrators. . . . 276 vii 1....y .4! vvh Scurces cf 1 Executiv Perscnnel ' Perscnnel I:- for Etude: :«a‘f‘r -"'F.r' UV»- I, 5: . xecutive fircrpF .. ' L‘ \r nun-c- . F O A I" \ 0" ‘ ’FRNv‘O . It. '4 ‘ hr- V'r 'OVoas .- ‘ ’ the nCC 'L‘,_ .. . :1“ce:t Fe 5 . '- Syuccr.t ‘oJ () :v in a: ) :1 :1 m r4 "i 5—4 Li! 'H L U “'13" l~“o\1’ r\;"‘v v. k“ mumter Page Sources of Potential Candidates for Executive and Managerial Level Student Personnel Positions . . . 282 Personnel Involved in the Selection Process for Student Personnel Administrators . . 286 Factors Important in the Selection of Executive and Managerial Student Personnel Administrators . . . . 293 Perceptions of the Factors which Determine the Acceptance of the Selected Chief Student Personnel Administrator by the Student Personnel Staff. . 320 Sex as a Factor in the Selection of Student Personnel Administrators . 322 Race as a Factor in the Selection of Student Personnel Administrators . . . 340 The Relationship of the University Student Personnel Organizational Structure to the Selection of Student Personnel Admin- istrators . . 356 Recommendations Relative to the Education, Professional Preparation, Employment and Personal Background Experiences Desired for Student Personnel Administrators . . 362 Summary of Salient Data . . . . . . . 371 VI - SUMMARY , CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . 4 11 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . 411 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . 435 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . 451 BI31:106leng,.............459 APPENDJ: CES I o o I o o n o o I o o u o 478 viii _.-..‘.z :I'II . C r“ wt Cu Cu 0 r. .1; ‘1‘ O.- \hu §v a» .3 a. an rm w“ I C p. .1 :u ‘1 ». 9C rm .3 a . S u I .3 .: uu. n: u“ awn ~s. a: .n O A v r. F b , LIST OF APPENDICES Page 'ilinatruments Utilized in the Major ‘.?§”rch Study . O I I O C C U U C ‘ 479 . cations with Sample and Pilot smel. a o o a o o o o o a o 51 3 .~ ~tlaa§tlonal Materials Utilized in Research ' study I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5 3 1 ,.O*.:u ' ‘,'M‘ ‘01."- . ' .l I II“. .. .. , 2': f: 31.4. EAL. f‘» — I ' Differ. .—_— ' ' .3322: 1n tne S- ‘. w- u~~6735crs i“ P‘, Ugoucu uguh 0‘ ._._':.: 3": as A . - . rd -c-9 L ".pou up "- v'..-.. y:.'~..'lL.na l. . ‘ . :I-':-":. ‘I‘f‘. O n.-....‘—.A.e 5'44;QS O JTT,__-;..-, ‘ — J -.v. :...Ibl.cal L‘d . ‘ ~ ‘ (‘ 'D-~fi:'."‘ r‘.“nfiq nus y LL41 bank“ I. "e 1‘15. D‘ t --: 1 .1: a e or '-~~Q&-~L{ ~. 7' ' H --.vnb.:¢A--I\.rll"’Er .F ~‘ ..___- \ H'HGQI . wb“- -V. 3'2“: , u.".-“ :Q‘h‘selln’: a ‘ J :1:33 335. Date--V—. I’lt-t‘Fq--I .V‘ hiu'ver '5“? r.-StH‘ i-. 29:: PErs VITA--—LINDA HUNT HESTER Date of Final Exam: February 12, 1971 Thesis Topic: "Differential Perceptions of Factors Important in the Selection of Student Personnel Administrators in Midwestern Universities" Birthdate and Place: June 16, 1938 in Winston—Salem, Nort Carolina Under raduate Studies: Major-—Pfiy51cal Education for Women Minor--Health Education Degree and Date--Bachelor of Science, June, 1960 Institution--University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin . Graduate Studies: Major--Counseling and Guidance (Education) Degree and Date—-Master of Science, January, 1964 Institution--University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin Major--Student Personnel Administration in Higher Education Minor-—Sociology Degree and Date--Doctor of Philosophy, 1971 Institution--Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mi ch igan PJI'Ofessional and Em lo ment Ex erience: Instructor 1n Health and Physical Education for College Women; University of Texas, Austin, Texas; September, 1960--June, 1962 Honse Director and Counselor (half-time) in Approved Rouge for Graduate Women (privately owned); University Of Wisoonsin, Madison, Wisconsin; September, 1962-- 1 June . 1963 substitute Teacher—-Hea1th and Physical Education for 3 grades 1—12; Madison Public Schools, Madison, Wisconsin; eptember, 1963—-December, 1963 ifs-llsfzant Dean of Women (for freshmen, orientation and Ch 1V1 ..::o.- v. nude- - x...- -— . .. _‘ n..:'qo:.if\“ p- :- -~:-. fl.*\,‘. ecu D 9 "" ’1""‘-r -5». . I. “ """V- Onyav C . ‘l I ‘ ‘ -eznaun ‘ .5 .— ‘ ‘ ~-. van-r: -3 Lose 5 U o t . o . . w..__ u. .. RFS.-“F"- ._-. HHN..‘ ."x- tbglvaab “d: u . :‘vna ."V- ‘ ‘f- ~5.',_ “ rare?“ ' ulgtu r ‘5“. ~;‘ ""0..- q 9 ' ..-.. Q._‘. 63“.. C- t‘" ‘ VI. - C.‘ .“u“ ‘ , _ ~. - nu... -~... " ‘.r\v~ *~~~S.eus v: ‘ \. .‘ . .I PL‘- ":“J- I“ re . Qp.‘ i _ ”~qr. r -- e v", ( C i ‘969) “sis _ ' ~l,’ ".,~+ " VM\tQ‘ .. f. 'v 1‘. ’ Various research techniques for collecting the desired data Were considered; however, this investigator believed as a result of suggestions of previous researchers and profes- sional observation that the best means for determining the kind of factors most often utilized and the degree of their importance in the selection process in filling various student personnel positions was to use a field study approach employ— ing a structured personal interview. An interview was con— ducted with each of those personnel involved in and/or making the final decisions regarding the selection of persons for specific personnel positions in a stratified random sample Of Midwestern universities. The data collected was of both a quantitative and qualitative nature. The information Obtained was utilized to validate or invalidate past descrip- tive studies and their conclusions, to provide new insights regarding selection factors and into the selection process itself which could be expressed through descriptive, integra- tive and interpretative statements; and finally, to ascertain any Similarities and differences existing among the various groups of personnel involved in the employment and promotion of student personnel administrators and between the two size r - - - 9 cups Of univer51t1es. Need for this Study Re<3eht research, including studies by Sherburne (1968) ' Foy (1969), and Haller (1967) and books and articles by Dutton, Eat—all. (1970), Nygreen (1968), Shelden (1968 ) ' H111st (1966), Mueller (1961), and Williamson (1961), . , . w-c-"O. rvnIVVI-IQFH ‘f‘r a..:.... r s . I e" . .I‘j . - .4 n. . \ .anw .., d I“ . o f“’=“”a'+ ":vc .- Hod-fl-..» ~-.~ . -..._. :,. . .‘- V ’3‘... ‘WH‘, - u - has .. 1.: ‘.‘b_- :.:‘ ; . 6 ;\ __ c . ....._:I ‘- 9 .\ Rev “ V y: - ,' ~. ‘ ‘..:.v§..' ‘ n 4 , ‘-Q".‘.V‘ trr‘" r.‘+:_ v.4 .' ’ s ‘ I . . ....:_.v: VCTQVF \U by... § -‘u ’£~:Vl: ":“H 1‘; 15 - N 1‘ _ r'.‘ u‘.‘ 'N v ‘ :9-5’“' - 4.... (D ‘I ' 's ,‘ . I I. ‘ ‘ . V :: ‘ " " ‘ ~§~. ”0“»: b a. \’ C: “ E; l ‘. . .. v ‘ A .“ ‘_ set‘ 19; . ‘ .7; c-, k.“§4 O . . o 'A ~ «.5 5“ v ‘V s A .‘ \n ‘_ “E3 ‘_ ‘- n‘ .. ‘ - F a "3‘: A: ‘ ‘4‘ #h 1 Hate ‘a“ . ‘- - ‘l~‘ ~ A '7 \L-. * Ch ““3 0" 4- ‘ L .- x. . ‘ I. U . In ‘.: “ Satyr: >. ‘ 9N . '. ‘- - . I' 3:" a . . - tin“ ' ‘_‘H‘ a“ . ”‘5 V- .‘ h‘ ‘. A -.‘s\‘. . v 'I\ ‘ . point up the need for understanding career development and patterns providing for individual success and satisfaction in the various levels and kinds of student personnel posi- tions. These writers discussed the problem particularly in terms of three concerns: (1) The lack of clear and definitive knowledge about what criteria or factors con— stitute adequate performance and success at the various levels of student personnel administration, (2) The tendency for many institutions, particularly large uni— versities, to employ their chief student personnel administrator from outside the existing student personnel organization (Sherburne, 1968; Hulet, 1966; and Foy, 1969). In this regard, it is noted, also, that many of these chief student personnel administrators have little or no previous formal educational or employment background in this field, and (3) The fact that well-qualified women r are rarely, if ever, promoted to or employed as the chief student personnel administrator at the executive level or even as division heads at the managerial level (Sherburne, 1968; Haller, 1967; Shelden, 1968; and Greenleaf, 1968). It is of value to note some evidence of inconsistency in the case of the latter two concerns. Many institutions, in fact, seven of ten Western Conference Universities, had graduate professional preparation programs in Higher Education and Administration with a special area of concen— tration-~Student Personnel Administration; and they also . ,pw. ‘,,.‘ V‘" . '. C ‘..e" . :. udzoé.‘ \J ‘l' .-0" . s ' A ' -;-: :-- 53:395. tic ' ‘ . - 'fll I I ~....- IA'FI‘Y' ...'....: 3:..C-~ n-1‘e ' 4 v - ~Av warn ~ '- ----.~.~’ .»§ 3 ‘44-. LII u. . ~g~npn a; ? ~.....-...= bus 59 LC ......-. 5' - “lr:::as pcte:.1_ Q .:-.' ”'A: .f‘v- \m~.1, ,.V- 5518. ,-~--. .' v ‘ n w ' ‘ ~~\ v- 6 ‘ ‘ «-.-...:. a-J.».- ls r V o "- 0 .. Ayn.:::."“.‘ - ,\__ ‘ovA»~g-V..c-S. - ‘.-.: ~ , - -. V's—:‘ " ‘hvv . . ‘ .2 n.- :~b§ A. '-~-~_‘ ‘I ‘ L-..: .‘ vi 0‘ 5““ . .,__ . ; ;.. .:: ‘ .fi. . A ‘. H-;E\,t t:.e .1 0.. . \.' "A‘, ' "" \- "‘ "'§r\ a \v V U‘VC-trs ' z; . n . " m: ‘76": §‘ v- “‘I a ‘ .. :v. s... “v..‘ ~ o "o W- . v~‘e. .8 “mt. Nth 0-. ‘ “- .E h,‘ C ' n‘v :C'.h§‘ ‘ “‘5 F . A “A .I s ‘A- ‘-_‘_ w ~- “'F’.‘ ‘0“ s.‘ IV ‘ ‘ltq a“ ~ 4 o“ \;l‘ ‘ .,_ _, ~ ~VA . 5‘35:th ...._ z_;._ .4‘ - - .. .,..b “~51 Pn- - E ‘ a “Wu 6‘“ ._. .j‘:v-r.::‘ O \ «g. L1. ' ‘c.e h - Na” 1. . y 'n ' -. s \ A v \ . ‘s‘ r V admitted qualified women to both Masters and Doctoral pro— grams and awarded the Ph. D. and/or Ed. D. to successful students (Sherburne, 1968). It has been difficult, therefore, for many in this field to understand why these institutions choose to eliminate from consideration and/or appointment as potential chief student personnel adminis— trators many professionally trained persons in Student Personnel Administration and even more any well—qualified women professionals. This kind of decision—making on the part of Presidents, in particular, and others involved in the selection of student personnel heads, tends to seriously affect the "morale" of seemingly well—qualified current practitioners, and perhaps, as well, the kind and degree of commitment that current practitioners and pros— pective student personnel administrators are willing to make to the field, and the quality of study and work on the many problems now facing this area of higher education. There is no doubt that this problem is one of concern to all those working and preparing to work in the area of Student Personnel Administration. There are a number of studies providing demographic data regarding the background of various kinds and levels of student personnel administrators at differing types of institutions (Hoyt and Tripp, 1967; Ayers, Tripp and .Russel, U. S. Office of Education, 1966; Sherburne, 1968; Bess and Lodahl, 1967; Cameron, 1965; Cheatham, 1964; rfihuiman, 1961; and McBee, 1961). These studies are V’V‘ ‘ :«j taloment i.;;., .1. 11:": 30.53.1015 and I .:.:-S..: 3:10“ I A sap-Y 3117:2123: that Eff-i ’,“‘:’- O -., 2d prorct i "g. ‘ ‘ _0.. a etployers . 1. LEEE; and Hoyt 12:: :J: as ins‘ 92px;-aticn affect select 4,:- F, ‘:«3" ~ESS c .: “ 0‘ I- h‘OQQG S - .k“ e: ‘.‘:..‘ a“- verao f-x,‘ ~-. s_‘~~ v‘. '9‘ i‘.r(\ a W ‘- \‘ Lg. v.5 \. ‘ “lit be '::\,‘ a: ~‘~' G_ty we lHSt4 \“' J primarily descriptive and report the educational, experi— ential, and employment backgrounds of individuals in various positions and institutions in student personnel administration. Many of these writers conclude with the recommendation that empirical studies are needed to determine the degree to which certain of these background factors, if any, are important in relation to the actual employment and promotion decisions made by student personnel employers. Some studies (Haller, 1967; Feder, 1959; and Fincher, 1967) indicate that personality factors and other variables, not usually studied, may be as or more important in such decisions than previous educational or employment experiences. In addition some of the above sources (Ayers, Tripp and Russel, U. S. Office of Educa— tion, 1966; and Hoyt and Tripp, 1967) indicated that factors such as institutional size, control, kind of student population and location of the institution may, also, affect selection decisions. To investigate the kind and importance of the factors used in the decision-making— selection process for student personnel administrators, nmany of these researchers advised the use of an in—depth interview approach with the student personnel employers concerned. Through this method, more subtle and complex factors might be ascertained. In addition, some sources suggested the institutional comparisons might prove fruitful in determining the relative value of criteria or 55:5 for selection. 322 personnel grou; :.::. However, the '; :;::ally, was in al .. 2: :f institutions 0 Since the entire fiatpersornel admi.’ :13::iieé directly, :zieaore direct a: 3:79 exployers or t? 2:255 would prove me. 33:91 with selectir *1 if this into emplr N who -~' L Lgut be S‘ 1‘; ikl'n' £13 in .. Student Persr 5 factors for selection. Thus, this study attempted to compare personnel groups in institutions of two different sizes. However, the "control," both economically and politically, was in all cases public, with the kind and type of institutions considered—-coed universities only. Objectives of this Study Since the entire area of how and on what basis student personnel administrators are selected has not been studied directly, it was felt by this researcher that the more direct approach of personally asking the pros- pective employers or those involved in the employment process would prove most fruitful. The investigator was concerned with selection in the broad sense and a break- down of this into employment and promotion of the kind of persons who might be selected to serve as student per- sonnel administrators at the executive and managerial levels in student personnel organizations. The two kinds and levels of student personnel administrative positions are based on the use of Sherburne's 'Conceptual Model of Student Personnel Organizational Structure" utilized in his thesis (1968) on Western Con- ference Universities (see Appendix A). This model was originally based on Jenning's (1967) business model in the Mobile Manager. This "Conceptual Model" assisted personnel in the selected institutions not only to identify those executive level student personnel ' 1. .. --....':QA'S who 5 “ ..-...: ..-A»v. u cu. ....:. 'nnb also a: :vm‘z ”“" V' - o n ‘ O a.» A" vv. c an n ' u”: u' .to-VOA to. res o -- m»; “d A -~:: .n o‘uauh act he ‘I”": q ‘.IH '. .: ' 5‘ v " --..... ...I..'.t&u In v.- Q. . . :ovzbay lawns at the ‘ ..-..:;:y--execu‘: ve a: -_...;...e mantis * b n' .- o s i '0 \, ‘ _ A o 5.“. CS ‘4 an.“ kn0w19r ‘ the . actor administrators who should be personally interviewed for this study but, also, provided a basis during the inter— views by which the researcher could explore the differ— ences in kind and degree of importance of the various factors involved in the selection of student personnel administrators at the two levels of responsibility and authority--executive and managerial and further, enabled comparative analysis to be made between sample personnel groups. The investigator reviewed the literature relating to this area and discussed possible variables important in the selection process with various student personnel administrators and professional preparation faculty in this field. While this researcher proposed no hypotheses to be tested, she did operate under the assumption that the Presidents' and Executive Level Student Personnel Adminis— trators to be interviewed would be concerned and involved ‘with different phases, levels, and stages of the selection process, and believed that there would be different kinds (of concerns and knowledge about student personnel adminis— ‘tration from these two groups of people. Further, she assumed that institutional size might have a significant effect on the factors deemed important in the selection of student personnel administrators. These assumptions were made on the basis of a review of relevant literature, ::.“::::::.:r nces OR 2.... filifj t0 app-C)“ M» :f;:.a‘.'.y, discussic ":3 23' professional :2: .:::::r1ate in 7:15 was an exp‘. i ‘: ”:5 ' .i-al concern millElStIatC ~15 a; 'd personne " 395021621 adri: 't-Jtz '- A , .3. as Its 0';- The i'jentici Citlon of ‘- I“: per: S’wilC' 3‘11"... 10.000 in 5* 4 me Q g . ‘i‘r:l‘1 e~ePlT Swie plaCE' :NCESS at 1 u t“ H inso ~81: IT 7*: bseleci .59: 09. C073 h‘i.‘ 2:61 i . ‘v ' .' tant h ‘lCh ' pirtgvart l 1 “(3111 «E9; at -. El 0: cc»..- . t "‘ recent occurrences on university campuses, observation with regard to appointments of personnel in this field, and finally, discussion with student personnel administra- tors and professional trainers. The Pilot Study did reflect these differences and therefore, a testing of them seemed appropriate in the actual study. This was an exploratory study of an area considered to be of vital concern to present and future student personnel administrators and persons engaged in the pro« fessional preparation of these personnel. It was a direct effort to disCover the factors, their importance, procedures and personnel involved in the selection of student personnel administrators. Specifically, this research had as its objectives: 1. The identification of and possible verifi- cation of factors deemed to be importance in the selection of executive and managerial level student personnel administrators in student personnel organizations in coed, public, Midwestern universities above 10,000 in student population; 2. The determination of the importance or value placed on each factor in the selection process at the two 1eve1s——executive and managerial—~in student personnel adminis— tration; 3. An investigation into the possible biases and other more subtle factors entering into selection decisions which may or may not be conscious and/or made public by the personnel involved in the selection process; but, which, nevertheless may play an impor— tant part in the final decision regarding a particular person for a specific kind or level of position in student personnel administration; C" 1. 2. pr- 6'1! ‘ b f‘ .7 .v 5.1 U u. ' s Ou-n - "4 1r. Inna: SCAL :5»? If.- hrabvfis “U "P“753nn . .o- hJ. End-v o ‘F no i... m 1'.ESt.- ":V'nn ‘_‘ lu--‘v‘ ”u 2 ‘ P ' at. Sc-t-_- "“" we; r 3"“ 3.5.0 -1 I F 'F ’ - 35.33:...6; a R I '0 " _ .0 1:.ESZ‘C; .e ’0‘;" r". m. Lan&be.b- 5‘. ‘ ME factors :‘E:iSin-S In: :XE: ‘ltixve LE- “'3:ch (wj Q ‘ ::rShFI ‘ F Vsu| . ‘ a Chief g ~4/ . dg/Cr ther Scnnel Ai‘;* ‘0 Ge me "‘6 56‘9“. C traits in v- 19,030 to 2 -e L. l ‘1 r::ard SC :' o.. .N . ' Q. . I J, and Yv'» ‘. "a ~:Sc. - . - OCJEC‘:~.QE 5‘ ' »‘ I?“r u. \L n)- ‘ V' ‘«5+ t‘ b '- 0.IEQ i a. - .-=C~ ‘H5:’ Sta‘g ‘ b- 13s.”: . v ‘11, of + i v.“ t» . S I 6.‘:-1, ‘. «Q s to A. Visa. .\: :. Mk «1:; 10 4. To try to assess whether some factors utilized in the selection of student personnel adminis— trators would be of greater or of lesser importance in such selection decisions today (1969) than in the past; 5. An investigation into the kinds of personnel and various stages at which they are involved in both the selection process and making the final deci- sion with regard to the various levels of student personnel administrative positions; 6. To investigate and perhaps verify whether the University Presidents' perceptions of the factors important in these selection decisions might be different from those Executive Level Student Personnel Adminis- trators (with or without formal Student Personnel Training) involved in the selection } of a Chief Student Personnel Administrator and/or other Executive Level Student Per— sonnel Administrators; 7. To determine if the personnel involved in the selection of student personnel adminis— trators in public, coed universities from 10,000 to 24,999 in student population might regard some selection factors to be of greater or lesser importance than those selection personnel in universities above , 25,000. These, then, were the primary objectives of this study. The results and conclusions to be given in Chapter IV, V, and VI should indicate the degree to “V'Vrov vv' which these objectives have been obtained. Importance of this Study The first three sections of this chapter imply and, ' in some cases, state the possible values to be derived frrnn a study of this nature. The purpose of this explora— tory'study is to discover the universe and value of various factors relative to the actual factors in both . ’ ‘ .,. -¢< ”a"? .. «a In" “‘2. I. ....... l ‘...' ' 4. o. -:.:-~oc:$ a‘1~s‘nls bra v ~. has, permit vali :1- ,2 o ‘ -5 :35. 59- ee of if} ection cf 1: 2232.151335 of ot; “.‘"“Al‘ F " .I-ovfzbfi &‘ dof ba: ' n app. Uni. O n». . ~ - '~§-ve essionals. slave to the impor'. :seglzgte’it and pr’ :23. hiany case, Liza; be utilized, T4&5 to aid in the ~ 4L5 are a 0f the e.~ “““ 3 Prefessiona; 3P€leica11y' a: ‘5 "* -.;5 M”; Scuuy regar . ‘tsELECtion ‘ 0f studa Wfavc . filter: . to qualify as: it» ‘ “$033191 p08 . 1 Provide (.1 utu- . 129d In of + l. l ‘ A m: J Fermi; ‘r— .w. y 11 kind and degree of importance utilized by employers in the final selection of executive and managerial student personnel administrators. This investigation should, perhaps, permit validation, in part, of descriptive data and conclusions of other studies relating to career development and of background necessary for student per: sonnel professionals. It may, also, provide new insights relative to the importance of various factors utilized in the employment and promotion of student personnel adminis- trators. In any case, the information derived from this study may be utilized, along with that of other related studies to aid in the formulation of testable hypotheses in this area of the employment and/or promotion of student Personnel professionals. Specifically, and more immediately, the knowledge fr°m this study regarding factors and their importance in the Selection of student personnel administrators should Provide professionals with a better understanding of what 1'8 Jrequired to qualify for a specific kind and level of Student personnel position today. Such knowledge may: 1- provide an awareness of the actual factors utilized in the employment and promotion of student personnel administrators which might permit current student personnel prac— titioners to become more realistic in terms of their professional expectations. This would imply that they can (a) accept their limitations in terms of these selection p . IECCOIS dRC 3 +¥ ' ‘ ‘ LUEAI Lt .. L; ' ~ owl-A . u.:utr *e‘.'e_‘ a4». ‘SETcni. A I G fats: 0 P" L ‘ . (Cy- “v::‘h s “.ei bf. :‘ Q .;~L 5d Cha'h “Mt-S iijl, /Vr C'rc k ‘U«Q: ‘ E‘ 33%». fire tL «.e E h y ‘H‘Sf i | 12 factors and recognize the likelihood or not of their being promoted to or employed at higher level student personnel administrative positions; (b) prepare themselves in the indicated "weak" areas by securing additional educational, professional preparation, and/or other employment and personal experiences; or (c) in relevant cases, examine self— limiting attitudes and other personal char— acteristics with the intent of changing them. In any case, a knowledge of the actual factors deemed important in the employment and promotion of student personnel professionals by the Presidents and current practitioners involved in the selection process should improve the "morale" of current student per— sonnel practitioners since they would know what the expectations are and, thus, they could be more realistic in their aspirations; lead to changes in the kind and degree of advisement, emphasis and/or content in pro— fessional preparation programs in Student Personnel Administration in Higher Education. Such changes in individual program planning and/or professional curriculum might help prepare the prospective student personnel professional to obtain the kind and level of _.; pr; :.-er.t pt- ~ d... .J-o- 5 e on: res no vs C. ‘ Q neednl‘ ‘ . 1...] but-nu» b ‘-.--';-o “Pr-1‘ #QO'I . . . -....-..- livid-0‘ bi Mr A a o ‘ 'g . ’tev c-ny 3r V‘y-Vfiifiv -. v. moon‘o“ “so. ’ V H. I1 V'A "‘ N: M ""v -~ ‘5... Y ‘ Ht; 6 .2 as previous; R:-- ~ . ~ere tie has is -. ._ . 1‘ R..... 3" the areas t: \' :5. A: . ‘u. 6 ~ .1 . ,‘fl‘. V' ‘ ‘ SthLg:‘EI' \ U“ ‘n 3‘ rfi'n . ~ bvoo-ernea y. ‘ \ ‘b -"». ‘ f~ezyc ‘ ‘ ~ “‘Q 7- he: I ~ “.2»: . “ ‘ ‘2\nh . h 3 tue ‘_ - 13 student personnel administrative position desired. The results of this study should be applicable to pflflic, coeducational midwestern universities above 10,000 histudent population; and, they may, also, be representa- tive of similar universities in other regions of the United States as well . Limitations and Scope of this Study It was previously indicated that objectives, not hypo- theses were the basis for development and investigation in this study. These objectives provided the overview and indicated the areas to be explored with the employers through the use of structured interview schedules. This investigator "as less concerned with the movement of the individual pro- feSsional in reaching certain levels or student personnel POSitions, than she was in the competencies, important educa- tional , employment and personal background experiences and “her more subtle and complex factors which determined the actual Selection of an individual for a specific kind and level of student personnel administrative position in the two siZe universities. With this exploratory purpose in mind, and due to the size of the sample and method of data collec— tio - . n, 1t appeared best not to employ statistical analyses in s marizing the results. r"“1313 study was further delimited by consideration of on 13' Public, coeducational universities above 10,000 o . A? n ...5 T.“ o ‘g‘ ' ::¢I:clh hint“ b‘JOI ’ o ,ln“u-;I A: .I §"““ .: has: v. u nay-at. . q “noun-ob “‘~e't .~ . . ..o-...v.~a~ van a. t - -~..... . h - '1‘“ c.. .4 -.:----p.ircos .‘U‘ adbu . “ I . . ~uo; >1~F H .31 C‘."‘ I». ".21..-" “~‘ :u-:o .F‘;hp“r‘ DIV--vy ‘e 2"- A... "~- L'- O o \. Ag _ fialbtozbe li‘c‘.““ ..~ b‘ \Il'i‘i ‘ ‘fi . "' *0 tire 3;, u‘. ‘- Q.- ‘."~. 5 F . ‘ "‘i CC.. ‘ "‘3. V4 1. s... .‘..:..b a ‘V'ru— “‘ F'?‘ ‘ VA ,.J t. . , 'o‘ihh‘ r Vt. ’- . te‘SZroro' t;o.; ‘ ‘0' c- “ 1 - “ ~.VA dhya .ern “ u u a u 5 , u L tn 0 “A Cf‘v- a. V..- I‘~:_ ' .4 . - l: ‘ "a," D~-‘P 5‘“ i ‘v V‘WQI‘S 4 ‘ A 5‘ ~ ‘ u‘ :4" ‘wgcs q nr‘fi‘c“) .a" r; 3 ‘9: N ‘3‘EEd t f“ v ‘ M ; . ‘ "V .31! 9": a‘F ‘ I c “SIZC‘CQ. \~ ~ ‘I ‘.‘.p "A ‘\ A ‘t MU t U ~ ~. ‘L\ .V . A ‘- ‘~. :L ~ f.‘V I‘ )a ., ‘¢.‘ 'fi ‘ \ ‘3.“ “‘e ‘- 3‘ s “s. ‘X. :5 \ 1‘ V.‘ C \- ‘p‘ ‘ I‘ a F ' A .i““ I a“ 14 in student population since these are most representative of the kinds of institutions that are experiencing the most significant student protests today, recurrent difficulties in the area of student affairs, and seemingly the greatest expectations for and changes in the objectives, operation, and organization of student personnel organizations. It is in the highly visible and larger public universities in which the varying pressures, problems, and expectations appear to be most noticeable and difficult to resolve to the satisfac- tion of all constituencies at this particular time in history. The careful selection of personnel is, then, even more impor- tant in these institutions. Due to time, distance, the research method utilized, and financial considerations, this study considered only the empfiloyment and promotion of full-time executive and managerial leVel student personnel administrators within the randomly Selected midwestern universities. Due to the content and nature of this study, the utmost 1n cooPeration from the selected institutions and student personnel employers interviewed was required. This investi— gator believes, however, that those institutions and person- nel which agreed to participate in this study were as coopera- ti Ve, c>E>en and honest. Such honesty regarding the factors and their importance which are utilized in employment and promotion decisions made possible good quality data and, thus, 81'lould make possible a more accurate summary, interpre- tation and conclusions made by the researcher regarding the selec . t1°n of student personnel administrators. 3’ ' Li:i:atior.s in ' .s a: data come 15 Limitations in the use of the structured interview as a means of data collection will be discussed in Chapter III. Definition of Terms In this section, the investigator expects to clarify the terminology that was of special use in this study. Differential. Refers to variances in belief, attitude, knowledge and experience between and among the personnel groups interviewed in this study. Perceptions . The particular view involving sensitivity, knowledge, past experience, awareness, and moti— vation that one person or a group of persons may hold toward specific persons, positions, organiza— tions, situations or things. As used in this study is interchangeable with Factors. criteria; and, factor is interchangeable with criterion. This is defined to mean the specific Characteristic(s), including educational, experis ential, and personal, that should be part of the background of a person seeking a particular student Personnel administrative position. __g\_De tee of Importance. Refers to the value placed on the specific characteristic named by the respondent. In this study, this term as used in the instru- Inexits refers to such values as: essential, very inportant, important or desirable. Selee - my As used in this study incorporates both j~111t1a1 emploment in a position and vertical [IL A} :rtrctic'n from _ ~ 7‘ :e:scr.r.e1 0:93... O that same orgar. (J ‘ -~: sex-went “- L:"""'I‘ "‘ ‘ Unv-‘uH.VL“d 0‘ e I. l experiences the its various prc. Lzzl'ncual may w. ca “U ‘ .miralized dif: 55, :: 335,-;‘40 3| cl4W Expected 13.6 entrance , :- u“. ~~~=ls (1968) a. E‘V‘R‘v H‘ “‘1 Lie V— - ‘ 1 16 promotion from one position in a particular student personnel organization to a higher position within that same organization. (hreer Development. Refers to the specific foundation or background of educational, employment and personal experiences that may determine and/or contribute to the various professional positions for which an individual may qualify, be considered, or be selected. Level of Operation. As used in this study refers to the generalized differences in authority and responsi— bility expected by the university of individuals who hold entrance, managerial or executive level posi- tions within a student personnel organization. Conceptual Model. Was the generalized overview of the level of operation possible in a student personnel (organization structure, adopted from Sherburne's 'thesis (1968) and originally from Jennings (1967) Study The Mobile Manager (see Appendix A). model served in three ways in this study: This (£1) it assisted Chief Student Personnel Adminis- trators to determine those persons in their student personnel organizations who would qualify as Executive Level staff and, thus, should be interviewed by the investigator during her visit to that university; ‘.‘ .' — '.-l ,‘ . ml at Ecaaheea . t: express f ace of we:- A :c the here Q . . '.vfly’n—~- ‘V‘ Vh-\...\" a a 0. (i :4 (I) ,. (D I). T‘ r 9‘ .I. Q ‘ " ~11V‘S, If-vfiv: v .I “::"D . . 17 (b) it enabled the sample personnel interviewed to express their differences in the import- ance of various selection factors according to the level of operation--Executive or Managerial—-at which the individual would be working; and (c) it made possible comparative analysis of dif- ferential perceptions of factors important in selection at the two levels of operation as viewed by the various personnel groups inter- viewed in the two size universities. flggynestern Opiversities. Refers to those institutions of higher learning awarding, at a minimum, the Bachelors Degree and utilizing the term "university" in their institutional name. The Midwest was defined as including the states of: Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. (a) Large University: refers to a university with a student population of 25,000 or over. (1)) Medium University: refers to a university with a student population of 10,000 to 24,999. EEE£L~£SSE§£E£SE- As used in this study means that the researcher visited the selected institutions and inter- "5Llanned the study, conducted the research, did all interviewing pt ":lge research 5“ ._" As used in cooperation: ht :‘te interviewer vie. regard to willingness ‘0 position of 93C 3....- interviewer mig of respondents: or lead the res tE:;,‘r.asis, facia behavior to ans ireccurately 01' :espons es . "if 3:.21‘.’ " \Q' Refer 6 .325 ,s of the ir 20 interviewing personally, and wrote up the results of the research study. mqmprt. As used in this study refers to the degree of cooperation, honesty, and respect exhibited between the interviewer and interviewee during the interview with regard to an appreciation, understanding and willingness to accept the power, perspective and position of each other. Interviewer Bias. Refers to the possibility that the interviewer might use preference in the selection of respondents; may elicit certain kinds of responses or lead the respondent by verbal explanation, emphasis, facial expression or other non—verbal behavior to answer in ways not intended, or; may inaccurately or inappropriately interpret and record responses . in e Analysis. Refers to the use of professional judges ‘flua listened to randomly selected and coded recorded ‘tapes of the interviews and completed the appropriate 1 (blank) interview schedule at the same time so that is judgement could be made by the judges regarding 1the presence or absence of content validity in this astudy and reliability could be determined. i (a) Content Validity: refers to the degree to which the questions asked by the interviewer and answers given by the interviewee appear to be ’ O . o o "“ .I‘er-qu~-m “‘1, cos- . u...- rezers to t . cular res;«;~ fl. " ‘Vl‘ 5.2:“ uq‘e Of 1 ate r'." i eqfl'e r 21 appropriate and relevant to the objectives of this study. In this study, this was determined by the professional judges. Interfijudge percentage of agreement or reliability: refers to the degree of agreement between two independent judges as to the same interpretation for the content of the answers given by a parti- cular respondent (unknown to the judges). The degree of agreement was compared not only between the judges but, also, with the completed interview schedule of written responses of the investigator—- interviewer in this study. COding System. As used in this study refers to the match- ing of a particular respondent with a number for jpurposes of anonymity for the respondent. Only the :researcher has the matching names and code numbers. EEEES>rliil Academic and/or Professional Stature. Refers in 1:his study to the subjectively perceived status or Jreputation by the respondent of an individual in Ein academic field of study and/or in Student Person— ? ' inlel Administration; and the degree to which a IFIrominent and high status would effect the selection ‘:>:f an individual for a particular position in Student JE’Cersonnel Administration. mm .11 ’ L “5EL__JRe1ations Ability. Refers to the adeptness of the :ielndividual being considered for a particular student verscmel P051‘ 3,: in a writt‘ 5:: o‘JtSide 0f I racerns reiaU z'j authoritY- “acteris‘. behaviors. bell :‘iat m indi‘v'i '3 ziiers and the 1 Ann. :C. ection of a Student pe rs onr‘. :fii’fi‘t -n.. In this ini'istrial orga Lr‘ ‘gL ‘ ‘ -. ...e manageri L“. Student Pers ;:.ese, then , a: "- linssion of th: “~tlcn ar‘d l ':_E:eh '71 ‘ “v Lhe 2‘98 ,. v v‘ '- .‘ Of the Stu 22 personnel position to express himself well verbally and in a written manner to the various publics within and outside of the university regarding particular concerns related to his purview of responsibility and authority. Personal Characteristics. Refers to those attitudes, behaviors, beliefs, appearance, and individual traits that an individual appears to display in the past to others and the present to those involved in the selection of a particular individual for a specific student personnel administrative position. Management. In this study will refer to business and industrial organizations and would be most comparable to the managerial and executive levels of operation in Student Personnel Administration. These, then, are the terms that will be utilized in the discussion of this research and which hopefully may now be better understood by the reader of this study. ggggpization of this Study This study includes six chapters. Chapter I has been 'mllntroduction and Overview of the study; a Statement of the Problem; The Need for this Study; the potential Import- ance or Value of this Research to Student Personnel Adminis- tration and Higher Education; and has Defined the Limitations and Scope of the Study; as well as the Terminology and oqflmnization specific to this investigation. 1 "‘ee‘er II is 54.‘:rbv :aE-asi: ccncerns c- Ettizzticn to the E ') 33".".32‘. in Bus ines .. ;::a....; a need for . - ‘ .;-;......A f“, f“ ‘ I "' :o-nuu bt.ara‘,\, Y. .. T5315. including ar. ~32: m tne sele :.2:e: to the effect grazicnal s truct final Performanc 23 {oncerns of this study. It begins with an agépon to the Potential Scope of Literature on § rich in Business and Student Personnel Administrative ,1"! ’d perceptions of personnel involved in the selec- Vstudent personnel administrators in universities; IN V" Li gultm‘al; a d: 5):, 13.8 3‘ NC? '34.: rent of int 3i,§3:$€lr StIEL -- ”A. ‘ ,— ‘1 -;:.u;' atria IECV «at. StiCMS ell‘. ~.e I: . 11:“ h" ".1. ".1 a di scuss 1““. - , I ‘ ‘ . " .....ZC3, 1r A‘Cl‘dalr 3:" ‘ ~' 4.» ~-.. ~I afld CORU Shagzers IV an j. 122.5335 Wild“ t h‘ -:1 . st InV'fC 111,68 M ‘e~t11 I::.‘.‘| . “k. .‘at‘ P“ ‘Q‘ts re ": as,~ ‘ ‘ JiTs-Ent .“::J:er \"I 1:“. _ \:‘- u“ 24 ‘; a discussion of the Research Method, .areas under study. Included in these chapters are ‘ V.“- n e;- .. ‘ - ‘. "VA’AHA.‘A'- :- 0.. ...'-“‘vv- N :b'.flv(--.~¥ YE'Iu H ."V‘vuuas 5 I. . ‘ ‘ ‘ _ ..-;~'vg I-In‘ NI- ~‘ ~,. -.......... *“$».. ‘ ‘I L- ‘ .‘n. ‘cs 54.e SQ \— .' ‘ :-,~ -~ .‘~ CHAPTER II -A REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH ~1;1~.~—- 7 ‘7. fIntroduction to the Scope of thg Literature I. an A‘ ; .41. ._ 'AJ/i Ihigher education. The investigator found no research setting forth the decisive factors -t in the selection of student personnel adminis— :'The studies and literature to be presented in rpose of this chapter is threefold: (l) to ereader with an overview of previous studies .;--1-.A":"+ 1n the u CH." '*.b u . . I . - m -on~ no. GP} “n-_ .n....:‘ u! Lee‘s loo ! a ,. 1 ' 1 v"). :n:‘ :H. V‘ ..... quQQ-IH- n; n’l- ”,5 '4 “vac‘Q ..... .«w mud Usu \.¢ s u I ' v: A. .1- l ‘- v- A DUI... U. .--.~‘Orb lob. 11...... ‘ . . :~- ':~r~r "n“ -~-n¢. Uu'ak'CQCH41KA 4 "v .'..,.. 'V‘H ‘ ' "he:nfi)VC“‘A ' “And 5. j~o=.. .5 mm“: 'z’r" “ms at var ;.-..:;:;.' in higher e \ h'. I ~_ “C ‘ vw‘e ' ~11 lnfl x3 -: “ 591ect4 _ e Ag ‘ “:24“ ~‘b‘gs ' fi:. . 5 ::‘: l.+ l»eratm. 5 u. ‘.‘ L -_ .,. U: ‘Q: 'v uy‘SlC‘jp‘ *fi \_::r.‘. .m . s, H . 26 be important in the conduct, procedures, and instruments utilized by this investigator in this study; and, (3) to present available knowledge relating to the process, procedure and practices utilized, personnel involved, factors of importance, and the actual professional and personal background as well as the recommended background for those who would be selected as student personnel administrators at various levels of responsibility and authority in higher educational institutions. While this chapter will primarily concern itself with L the three purposes stated above as related to selection of student personnel administrators, this researcher believes that it may be worthwhile to indicate the relationship of the selection processes utilized in business and industrial , organizations. In reviewing the literature, there was J continual reference made to these, and study in this area has undoubtedly influenced her thinking concerning the problem of selection of the right individuals for managerial and executive level administrative positions in large Organizations, in general, and student personnel positions in universities, in particular. An extensive review of P Studies and literature on business management selection Will not be feasible because of space and time limitations. FUrthermore, the question is raised by some writers about the direct applicability of some of the processes, pro— cEdures, and factors considered important in business I . .Aonnp uvl “ C‘s- ' . .'_.:._..“ “ll 0‘ ‘ p- q Hut 0 131.132.2215 5213') as 3;": :cv:: . ' ' .193 of ~ 2" A: I "' " :uSiHESS LE. 21:3:e:;:i‘.°e level I.- . .. ‘:.’ _ ~. u +“G -.-. u _ r.- - “' :1 new. ‘t; iii-TE“ ”e: b .: U .H‘ VEaabc“ :- ‘- ‘ .-" "‘e e2“ . “‘9: h” ‘o- ' 'E~ -’ ~A“" '-.- p; I! -. u_'h.. w~ *L. ' e e you _ n‘. "‘\..‘ ‘ M ‘ a .V in“..: ~ I n -\ 'h‘ ‘ .~ A” 1 ”V‘s“ hr‘.' a~d ' e I.’ 1.. “v5 . a; _‘ "'y V ' v ”Wed .‘vp; Wy- s... s“ "\_I F: s U 27 selection when compared to selection in educational institutions such as universities and in the area of student affairs. In this section, the investigator will present a general overview of the kinds of considerations and con— cerns of business management in selection of managerial and executive level administrators. In addition to the Bibliography, the reader is referred to the Supplementary References presented at the end of this study which will provide the reader who wishes to pursue the topic in greater depth with the sources of studies and literature relating to management policies, practices, and procedures used in the selection of business personnel. As noted above, some concern was evidenced regarding the appropriateness of comparing the same or similar policies, procedures, and techniques utilized in the selection of administrative personnel in business to those used in institutions of higher education to select admin— istrators, particularly in the area of student affairs. Several writers pointed out that such comparisons are not desirable because these organizations differ in setting, PUrposes, operation, and potential for measuring accurately the effects of functions, and therefore the effectiveness 0f Personnel selected in terms of outputs. John Millet in his book The Academic Community: An Essay op Organization {1952} took this position and stated: ". . . ideas drawn :::t:;s;r.ess anc ; If: 'o'I'LZEI'S dCI’EECI ":' 3“”‘2‘ “ on r a" .T.. 0-.54‘! v. '8‘»! H‘vlt .-0 up. “*3” *' \ru 4 “p -—-. -Il“ Uvgonuu . § ' ~o.upp.. n " l ' ~{\ "' """":O0::SO .av‘t: -::'~ P":‘v 2...“ .c..\.. icrs ( i....".._~ "‘l";\ I . .. . " r \g-n: .‘L-aa ..e ‘ :.,_.. ‘ . "¢...:, g'.= "a“ a“ BAR-vs. < 112':- 28 from business and public administration have only a very limited applicability to colleges and universities" (p. 3). Other writers agreed that business and institutions of higher education may differ on purposes, internal opera- tion, and, perhaps the feasibility of directly measuring effectiveness. However, they also believed that some of the basic behaviors expected of all administrators such as working with the budget, staffing, supervision, communi- cations, evaluation of and long-range planning, and pro- vision of a climate and an organization conducive to the best functioning of the institution or business and the attainment of its goals are common to all top-level administrators, irrespective of the setting in which they may happen to work. (Rourke and Brooks, 1966; Burns, 1962; Bursch, 1962.) Rourke and Brooks in their study of institutions of higher education point up in The Managerial RevolutiOn in Higher Education (1966) some of the reasons for resistance to application of business management techniques. They found that: Opposition from administrators and faculty members to the new form of management is rooted in certain basic beliefs regarding both the administrative and the educational processes that have long been prevalent in colleges and univer- sities in this country. These beliefs are: (1) that educational outputs cannot be measured, and that any attempt to do so is ludicrous if not actually subversive of the purposes for which academic institutions exist; (2) that there is an inherent conflict between administrative efficiency on the one hand and academic effectiveness on the other; (3) that efforts to improve management la‘ ' . O‘fl“'m' V r. ::.ovb:u\r: a‘e ' ‘ ‘ . .. a 4"“ C .‘ul’r C. ass-«$.05- :erzers. .uu‘. u‘ 1 I . ‘52.: :‘.‘:.'.5, e31 tcr . ‘ '. rV‘ ‘u A. - ‘N- v. :‘u -‘d..- . I ":9 :u'vaz‘q L '1 Chums. 1 ~. .uu'uub-0.. 2‘,‘ I v ~~. u. " “r-oq" ..e.-......e tenet . u. g ‘ . ~ .an3‘ fl “-6 . ~-. “‘.¥‘~ u ‘AG- . Iv 5g ~~ «5 rela‘; 5‘5 serves bee V 5‘ A .' .53.:1’ 11:15:, E: ‘. L' . ~ ’5 tie 117.115 33 in acader; hn“ L ‘ . “*LewOl'athI b. . “‘bycbl'~e a ‘- A;: tHort to as v- 1.. “‘|‘ I. a ‘: VT"? 5;: V A V-s §V~ C” ‘ 'nse‘i‘dence Ill ‘ u s \ ~ '1' Va ~“§~ N ». 9f '— * J l ‘L. ~‘ 5 £1: - k ‘. A 's \S ‘4 ‘4' “% Q L ‘y“ ‘S . b l. L‘- .‘~ .‘ ‘P .V ler .n‘lgcca‘h ‘ ~l _‘ 29 efficiency are really designed to increase the power of administrators at the expense of faculty members. (p. 8.) Gerald Burns, editor of Administrators in Higher Education (1962), spoke directly in his recommendations to the ques- tion of similarities and differences in institutions of higher education compared to business organizations, and administrative behaviors appropriate to each setting. Burns indicated that: 1. In exercizing authority, the administrator should stress collaborative effort, especially in his relations with professional personnel. He serves best as a leader among scholars rather than as an executive over employees. As the limits of authority increase (as they do in academic organizations), the degree of collaboration must increase as well. Effective administration requires a conscious effort to assure a logical sequence in making and implementing decisions. This involves not only appropriate data and a recognition of consequences of decisions but proper communi- cation, effective controls, and regular appraisal for adjustment and change. Too many decisions in the academic realm, especially on the part of committees, are made without a clear awareness of what implementing them involves. Finally, the effective administrator understands well the character of his institution but refuses to allow it to impose insuperable barriers to the objectives he believes important. He must act with a realistic understanding of his institu- tional environment and with a recognition that he can modify and shape it to help maintain the policies he advocates. (p. 43.) Charles Bursch (1962) had the following to say specifically ammu:the role of the Vice President of Student Affairs or Dafilof Students in institutions of higher education as related to management behavior: Centralized, ccv zaticn is main; mint. That is, ::::fessional cc: Latitution to :: efficiently. (' . .‘R‘l ‘ 2* fl‘ -: . 1.3... .u yer ahHs d ‘ .22 arznlstrat; 1:1.3 own to t- =: .......mg ex" ‘v:tay .....s in other .2 0....‘3 appear that ' :‘ ...lstrator “'35 §~1~’POSes 't’ 11’ 30 Centralized, coordinated student personnel adminis— tration is mainly justified from a management view- point. That is, the dean of students makes his professional contribution largely by enabling the institution to carry out its total purpose more efficiently. (p. 144.) Bursch later adds: The administrative problems of a dean of students boils down to budget, communications, evaluation, and planning even as do the problems of adminis- trators in other areas. (p. 147.) It would appear that these four behaviors as well as the "enabling function" in his first statement are integral parts of good administrative behavior regardless of the organizational setting. A good case, therefore, can be made for stating that there exists considerable similarity between effective and desirable general administrative behavior irrespective of the particular work setting of the administrator. One must account, however, for the unique purposes and operation of the various organizations, as well as the specific kinds and types of personnel, . tools, and materials with which an administrator must deal in considering the unique knowledges, skills, and afiiitudes that an administrator must have in order to be effective in a particular kind of organization. With the above view in mind as the basis for com— wnfison between educational and business administration, fl:appears appropriate to proyide a general overview of Smmaof the considerations and concerns put forth in the ‘Studies and literature relating to the efficient and 4.1.: I Q nfi 1.55.79 S€.eCtltI‘x . g - .;-:~;7I:I F”! e" R‘ ...-.-.a& All uh \ru . . , ‘ _ 22‘2" ”W n. n a . 33.8.. f‘ ‘5‘: .‘. W: .- Ann; .“ v. T "" "‘2 ‘uAA -E...rCLa- .~ . - -' .'__‘ :u L -.‘. a A 1 ‘u.-... d.‘u se‘ : ~4- a: ‘t.... :- Y’ o . - ...-‘V C.‘ t::e ] ~~4 ~¥. 5“ . “~E‘:i so... -J: = ‘- n: v‘ .~ ’7 . ‘4 s_ ‘ ._ .~_~._ . ‘.“‘\~ ‘1‘ \ ‘. I 3‘33 K "- {v . -:: t V A‘- \ V‘ 31 effective selection of business administrators at the managerial and executive levels of administration. The reader reviewing this subject in greater depth, would note the contemporary emphasis by business, industry, and public organizations on the importance of viewing personnel management and Selection as a process concerned with people; their potential, needs, interpersonal relation- ships, and organizational behavior. The emphasis today is not only on the individual's potential for success on the job, but the likelihood that the job will provide the individual with personal satisfactions which would increase productivity and employee retention rates. The orientation today in business administrative selection is clearly one with a strong tie to the behavioral sciences. The literature relating to selection for managerial and executive positions was primarily of a theoretical and descriptive nature. Again, there was little or no research related to direct questioning of business employers with regard to considerations in selection procedures and/or decisions. Further, there exists a lack of follow—up of selection choices in terms of assessing the effectiveness of the policies, practices, procedures, specific techni— ques and criteria utilized in the selection of various kinds and levels of administrators. For example, the procedures and techniques put forth in some studies as effective devices for use in selection have often been utilized on :‘ggc-re occasion ir. titular kind or 1 1: techniques wou‘; 2231:. other organi :f gersc-mel . fir. overview of 12:33:.el select ion 2:2: with selecti :3: educational 3- :itat selection w Eject to ct tange as .: .1“ characterig nitration has b 32 only one occasion in a particular organization, or for one particular kind or level of administrator. Therefore, such techniques would have questionable applicability if used in other organizations for different kinds and levels of personnel. An overview of some of the concerns of business personnel selection revealed, however, many areas of mutual concern with selection for student personnel positions in higher educational institutions. Mandell (1964) pointed out that selection was a dynamic field and constantly subject to change as a result of our increasing knowledge of human characteristics and methods for their evaluation. Cbnsideration has been given to the kinds of persons, criteria, procedures, and techniques, including screening devices, e.g., testing and interviewing methods, effective in the selection process. (Nash, 1966; Dunnette, 1963; and Grant gt_al., 1967.) Other studies have considered the effect or impact of organizational structure on recruit— ment and evaluation of potential candidates and the subsequent job performance, satisfaction and retention of those employed (Argyris, 1964; Katzell, g£;§1., 1968; and Jennings, 1967). Further investigation has been made into the desirable management, training, and proper pflacement of personnel selected, with the suggestion in the latter case that it is easier to fit the job to the man than to change the man's personality to fit the job (Fiedler, 1965; Tannebaum et a1., 1961; and Mandell, 1964). Ziere has beer- ;::::'p:te:1tial s; p 4-5. I A . . .:::;.':.'.:':S 32': 'rlt ; ot‘pv: . I \I‘ ...-.: hulcn \Oaii ..'.....:..:1! q -..-......l 5 Success §-‘ ! ‘ , .vanap I C‘s-van»... 196*; {I u ‘OQ- 33 There has been considerable study concerning predic- tion of potential success of an individual. Several researchers and writers have studied and analyzed the possible combinations of procedures, techniques, and factors which would ensure more accurate prediction of an individual's success in business (Dunnette, 1963; Bentz, 1967; French, 1964; and Jennings, 1967). These are closely related to the studies regarding prediction of potential for job performance, success and job satisfaction (Lawler, 1967; Cummin, 1967; Ghiselli, 1968; Kindall and Gatza, 1963; Bonner, 1968; Carlson, 1967; and Argyris, 1964). Many investigators in the area of selection of top—level personnel for business organizations decried the use of too much subjectivity in such decisions. They desire more open, specific, well-conceived and implemented, objective and scientific measures for individual analysis in personnel selection (Nash, 1966; Grant, Katkovsky and Bray, 1967; and Dunnette, 1963). Because prediction of one's future performance is the function of selection, Mandell (1964) indicated that a description of the job performance and behavior category would be most useful in the selection process. In relation to the latter, he pro— vided support for the use of the kinds of questions relating to the degree of importance of various factors in selection cfi’personnel for various kinds and levels of positions, contained in the instruments developed and utilized by N: 00"68: Gator 1.11, '2: pets cartels We ation w: ie isei as 9.1171 ":3: :ualiti es ‘. :22: these pa: .i_ . . - q : 131:5? 51:, a-: .." an» ‘n I .0. may» he e‘u'a- .. . '. , . 31:: “items mi :Tci- in 0:1 - 1...; .:,:‘ :ill e; 5- ‘d -- . n‘ ‘ ‘ - ....'., he {mg l- 2: :e SE‘ECto's ‘~I .‘ r “" ‘9"..3‘ hi ‘. -5'5=l. as in the :'~:::iohist' 5': 1::;st sp.eci ‘5}. ‘zv.\ q ‘ "‘ 5‘1““. (En-3‘ i ‘ ‘tZ'V :--‘ ' ‘ 'f:-;::..t or “.i ‘51? interview: .‘V s \Q a 1'0 . s 0.. ‘0.- ‘v‘ “ -.':“ ‘7‘ “minding ukzl‘EETEKt pcsi "' h“ “at .3 . C :‘u eM tna .‘q'. ‘ Q‘." a “N d«Solo \:: :3 c “ o .s. ‘O‘nd t 3’1: , .“ a . V C. “t- is C"‘ L . . ['8 ¥ar"‘1 Q“ 13:2»; . .5 Cohhh‘ .V..‘ .. The? ‘ ‘ \C CO nr‘ ‘- - rrt'fifiq . V L i Y* V‘VS ls . '..‘:‘e‘- . 6‘ ‘ Jer it . “:03; M ‘J he'i’e ¥ .. h | ‘ 18 Dr kl 3. N; g ‘Oceqc “‘8" H x.» 3‘31: "“Q'w’ t “ h t Prev-,t. as .. “'v’ 1 I ::.E'_ "S‘On n ‘ fi s:.Q.’ ‘s-. u‘. at ‘ ar“ ‘1; l 1 “let 34 this investigator in the current study. Mandell (1964) stated: The personnel specialist must indicate in his specification which of the items included will be used as eliminators; that is, no matter what other qualities the applicant has, failure to meet these particular requirements will dis- qualify him, although an excess over the minimum will not be evaluated. Second, he must determine which items will serve as both eliminators and selectors, in other words, less than the required level will eliminate and more will be an asset. Third, he must identify the attributes that are to be selectors only, by which he means that a low level will not lead to rejection but a high level, as in the case of typing speed for a receptionist, will be a plus sign. And, finally, he must specify instances in which too much of a certain quality either will be used to reject an applicant or will count against him in selection, as in interviewing a highly intelligent young man for a routine clerical job with few opportunities for advancement (pp. 92-93). In concluding this overview of the selection process :finrmanagement positions in business organizations, it should be noted that Ferguson (1966) found value in both research and disclosure of information concerning pro- motion. He found that a survey of companies revealed about one-half of those managers in the 30-40 age group who were viewed as outstanding candidates for substantial future advancement commonly said that: 1. 2. They do not know what the present promotion process is. Whatever it is, it is different from what they have been told. The process is not uniformly administered. They know that just doing an outstanding job will not assure them of consideration for promotion, but they are uncertain what else they "should" do. They cannot aim for a particular job because of lack of knowledge beforehand about probable or actual opportunities. 1d q El .3 ... .1 S I .i. l .. .. t a. . a 4 .. . C. 5. C. S ”a 1.. . S ... 5 ME A.“ .6 . m. m r .n .3 “a m l a. e «u l .1 I ‘3 ll .L S E r .i. . .. an - .u e o e at a S v. E U 9 .1 . S a... S 3 C n. a. Q. .C .. t r t S e C nu 3 .u t. e .C u. 4n. n. e r :l .L 7 .. m. L e l r. .1 C C. e e .5 n. .1 ts. \.I .... e 3. C. T. e ‘1 .u .1. . .d r. C e C S .t a: l pry. S .r. C. ~.. .0 at r. q l .9. v. .3 C .t 3 v. an C A; . an 5.. n. .Tu a .l a. S .1 is C a n "14.0% a “do “4‘ "Ike IV. ! I. .11.. I 9’ IFM ‘ 2.“ AK» “n ‘4‘ AH» a& Na by Me o .2 .a a. .a f m. l .s. "a. .2 9..."... . e r x -. .. . . .- . - . ,\ . .. . 7 p. .» .. t n. . uh. \A. .0» a: nu. .. vI Aw I,- w.“ ~ . s . .au u we a 2 “a E as: was» nu :4 2‘ 2. 3. in .3 ..~ s... 2. As. H... ..~u ‘ u . u: ... .2 L... i. . . .qu y . :. o.” 2. ..|. 6.. ~-.. has new. .A . a._.. "H. .u.s. he .uu .v~. .u w.... ... MN .. .. - \\ 35 6. They are unable to discern any consistent historical patterns in the promotions made. 7. As a consequence, they do not know how best to prepare themselves for the next possible advancement and are often less effective and purposeful in their present jobs than they would be if there were a consistent, rational, well-understood basis for review and selection of individuals for promotion to key jobs (pp. 144-145). Ferguson (1966) summarized some of the problems of indi— viduals in business organizations attributed to these tmknowns in the selection process when he stated: It also appears that the individual prediction is greatly improved, adjustment to reality facili— tated, and individual motivation increased by the open dissemination of reliable information about job requirements and rewards, the promotion pro— cess really being followed, the current and probable future state of promotion opportunities, and the criteria actually used for selection (p. 145). The reader will recall that these were some of the same reasons cited in Chapter I relating to the importance of the present study. It would appear that administrative personnel in business organizations as well as prospective and current student personnel administrators in institutions of higher education share problems in common relating to the selection process, i.e., those of lessened job satisfac— tion, poor "morale," an inadequate knowledge of and belief in.the fairness of the selection process, with the latter accompanied by lack of understanding of what steps these individuals might appropriately take to better prepare themselves for new or higher level positions in their chosen fields of work. g a ...u o ”P U . -~v v-r H. . u“" (on. u- ‘ h. \J ' V ‘. ' we a i-“ ‘- -e'ige a: _ 9" n -u'.-‘ ‘v‘l. . a... .t i . . :--‘—~ (byz‘i F“ ous...»-u -‘ a b- v'lt _,. . . {153 V“ A.» ‘ -- a ‘- ‘A ...: 3593‘ 55,. ‘V‘ L'.. ‘7‘:: I. It . :- ‘::M‘.: ’ L “4 ‘ I ~dseq ‘ ‘~. ‘._L:&..'n . -_ -‘ h \u v in ,_ _‘..v ‘--‘C. Vs”... ' V fl la. . n e V‘,‘ y. Q,‘ -.. t. .D “Q ‘. v . my (‘ ‘ a “a “LHuS C I“; ". ~ ‘ ‘t o ‘ x ‘ I a‘.rv ‘ :-~-. u.‘ ‘L -‘ I N. l hetr“ 1;: .H 1 P. in, . \:“\ "ER‘ C _ (3‘ 3. ~ ‘\:": o u 1": . o“ ‘ “*C‘ 2- I q KC w‘ “ ‘ . -.A \i. “. -i‘ 36 Need for this Study To provide all interested and concerned professionals with a knowledge and understanding of the essential elements in employment and promotion in the field of student person- nel administration was the primary purpose of the present study. It is anticipated that once the bases for selection are understood, appropriate measures will be taken by individual trainees, current practitioners, and professional trainers to consider and incorporate these elements into their career planning, programs of professional preparation, in-service training, individual appraisal, and advisement for prospective professionals who desire to move into certain kinds and levels of positions in the field of student personnel administration. The need for this study was briefly highlighted in Chapter I. It is the purpose of this chapter to develop the primary bases for this study, including the problems and queStions raised through research studies and the literature which provided the motivation for the present study, the kinds of procedures and techniques utilized in conducting it, and the kind of content areas explored, through the instruments with the sample personnel inter— viewed, A review of the literature and available studies in the field indicates the lack of clear and definitive know- ledge about what constitutes adequate performance and r. e ‘3“ 4.-\- --vv3“+ v--¢v-OU :- — a. l... a m m l o n. e c... a 3 v r d S Ow MW r. v . a. v . unuu NJ. {in ~ .- C u c!”- ...... ....... ........ ...;.. ..... A ‘I‘ s J h eats recar“ H‘ol b N.. v 37 success in the various kinds and levels of student per— sonnel positions. Until such time as these factors are determined, it will be difficult for a professional to prepare and plan for a successful career in this field. The current literature principally has provided infer— ences relative to the necessary educational, experiential, and personal background of the individuals who would be appointed to various kinds and levels of positions in student personnel administration. These major factors were inferred from observation and study of the personal and professional career development of selected adminis- trators and their job functions. From this has evolved statements regarding factors which would appear to have relevance to selection and to preparation for successful performance in the field. Research has not revealed the degree of importance of various factors for employees in the selection process nor the specific background or personal and professional factors and experiences which would expedite promotion from an entry level position to the position of chief student personnel officer. Background Characteristics and Career Develgpment of Student Personnel Administrators David Riesman (1969) pointed out the problem for adminis- txative career development, in general, in a Speech presented at an ACPA convention meeting in 1969. He stated: An extraordinary thing about higher education, and this always astonishes businessmen, is that there is no career line for the top job. A group Ct n v - "V .4 .— C) ..‘_ A'- Van . . . . . . - 3 a. - t . . . e a L C .m -1 e +_— hlv \U‘ n a r .¥ t s ufi. ‘ a a d “b ‘L t a v "M r five G» “U n\u Mm . Av La. “be t“ o u |. *b I o S O me O J v5 M: . l .3 .1 mt . “C t I bet. .2 .L f H“ 3 C .. .un "t u e a. c. C e e e s. a a o. m s e .t 2.. . o f ...u .. v. .a. _. 5. C. .1 .v at a u. S a. m. 4. .: .. .. a. a. .3 a. v“ ... .: . .3 a: . u . u :u . a u a a: r» . .3 us. In ~.. 2. ... nlu ~u. "ad a. go. a: "a. ”1“ 2‘ . a v. ~ ~ ._. a. in“ "a“ n. on .r. ... :m . .... ..... .1... .. .. . .u .. ... _ .. . L .5 .. I _.. .. 1? an ‘ 5‘ 5.. ~T ye- O -. «1' "I 38 of students at the Harvard Business School once asked me how to get into administrative work in higher education, and I said you can't do it by training for it--you have to do it by training to be something else and then be unlucky (p. 368). Riesman's statement is, perhaps, true for the majority of the top positions in student personnel administration in large institutions of higher education. (Hulet, 1966; Foy, 1969; and Sherburne, 1968.) Williamson (1961) called attention to the lack of development of effective administrative practices in selecting student personnel workers. He noted that due to the greatly expanded college enrollment and the necessity to develop programs to meet the needs of these students, there had been little time available for perfecting techniques of selection. However, with an increase in the number of available positions in this field as well as a greater staff turn— over, this area of selection in student personnel would soon become of concern. Trueblood (1966), Nygreen (1968), and Shaffer (1966), noted the lack of an agreed upon pattern of career deve10pment for the student personnelv administrator due to a lack of professional self-definition of roles to be performed, and, as a result, the lack of extensive and scientific research in college student personnel job analyses and functional differentiation which would make possible the establishment of realistic learning goals for the future. Nygreen (1968) indicated that.tuufll.role conflicts which threaten self-concepts and professional role—definition are resolved, agreement .n l a (x .. .. .1 t C E E r e i e E r r E r e r . .2 L“ r .C E C .2 S t T. t t E S .1 C S Q S c. e S .l .l s a .l S . T. S r. o‘ < e O l e Y «‘5 L1 C .3 . .u a .u‘ 0 . a» .. 1. .3 1..“ T u C C. .1 NW . rzv 3am Cu S P4 LL r Lu .4. uni“ S C e .3 e S .l T I .l .d C ,E . .l I .. m. .6. a; S s.. u. “do a we C at Au ft .. 3. mt. Q LL .. a“ 3 m .m C S C. t .d 9.. an .m. w& C e t .o S .2 c. .7. . at. c.” i. :3 I .. E C t .c T .. C S I C 3 T. E t c .f. C 9.1.1 .1. + i 1. .3 .3 I 3. a .1. . . .. . E c. ... f. at .3 L .. u .. ... Z _ . a . t a a. c ~ . . A... e E .3 u. E u. ... t. a e. 5 :4 E .3 L . v. C. ... at r T. r a. .1 ax 3 .~\ r. w. L. z. .n .3 .... Cw : . a... a. w . .2 a: s. 5. «l at at .Q .. a: n.. .L a. .. . . .. .C v. a. .. a... . . v. a v! :a u. .5 . L. l a: a: a .. .. a a.» as u . .va ... .-m 3.. .nw u.“ m... .. v. J: 1‘ .a ..~ I I Ne. . s 5‘ us 3. A. 5‘ :. 1.. x .\s w... n. w“ a h nu” - .0... v. :. a... o. so u.. 1.. u.‘ u a .J.‘ J.“ as... . .a. .-_.~ ..~. .. \ ..&.. ,. .\ MAR \ . ..... ..\ ... y“. “wm . e .u... nu”. mm a -. Nua. up. u...» . .s. ..-;. 6.3-» H... N. K” .C. u.. u . .W. n. o . \ s ~ ~ 5 . ‘— .4..u T. n.“ m... .n . "2i. .. .. ... ..... . . w . .. 39 on appropriate professional preparation and advisement of present and future professionals regarding career develop- ment in the field is unlikely. Guidelines could result from resolution of these professional role—definitions if there were agreement among the various kinds and types of employing institutions of higher education and personnel involved relative to the procedures and criteria for selection. This would aid in resolving one side of this problem. The factors of the kind of control, type, and size of the institution of higher education appear to be closely related to the kind of student personnel organi— zational structure established, and the particular roles defined within the latter and thus, perhaps, the selection criteria employed. These appear to be dependent on each other in descending order. If there is a change in the former, there is likely to be a change in the organiza— tional structure and roles of personnel (Fitzgerald and Belson, 1969; Lee, 1959; and Barton, 1961). The career development studies pointed to the existence of these variables and their importance for the selection process. However, Shaffer (1959) noted that: First, the development and organization of student personnel services reflect the personality, tradi- tions, historical developments, and general charac- teristics of the particular institution rather than its size. Secondly, the basic problem involved in the administration of these services on the large campus is one primarily of effective communication, not administrative organization itself. u— n‘ I-z“:"5 state...e.. . uvcoi. . Q «no -o-~—:H p‘ e ~7- .....- :ua‘u“ UL ‘ . ~ A" ".3... :pp‘ CV‘HSH.‘ ‘:""' HUI U by: v a ‘ ’9 ~“ 5“. wt: l -5. 5.1.. *__‘s - n "A 'F ' F :‘.y‘ 30. h- ‘s u- . u . 'VA“ I n 9. .._ ‘ I . ”3"" :.~ f‘WQ' "V- we. u=‘.--..‘u . ‘ V o 2.. s: n f“\-_v ‘II -bv ,“ “ '9...“ V§ns "A ' ,4 ‘Q P '- :..-5 h ( k‘~.. m“: n: H. '..4" \4 . Lane CE -, a ' . ‘ ‘ '::~:‘:"‘ “'1 ..--~ "“b 4.“ - ~- _~ . , ' i... ‘ ‘ "G-nv' -- '.—O p \v§“~e . l.‘{:’--“:rtfi h“ ‘ ”v .“‘ i‘ 'v -.A::- : P“ -.v ‘- J C E: ‘v.'.! A -' was 0. 96:... \ v- ‘::v I :- ‘v‘ V Q bnne «lei ‘2‘: , .1 . '5 ~0;‘e:n t‘ ‘a‘I-‘A ‘ ‘ {7'07 ‘ H- k“ t) (7 o l O 1' (I) ;, fJ. ‘ b. ~‘k t::e u. ‘:Seh.e ‘1‘ I. s ' L‘ e k-. ‘l . “' .f‘o ' :"‘t ‘ 1:;EI‘ ~§\: V -.‘H . -:3‘;.;EbiJOnSl ‘3‘” c ‘ In“ 0 tn 2," ‘ H x .. btwvhie Q \sIE:S{“’ :1 55%;“ “I (20* \. Q I 3 ”3:” ‘4 .m “Stag LA 5, ‘ 3. fit 1": 1‘ at . ‘ “10— ' d 9‘. 'I ' u . 5F“ 'Véch \\ 40 Shaffer's statement was based on a‘Carnegie Corporation grant study of eight large universities. Armacost (1965) discussed the problem of communication about student personnel programs, activities, and integration of faculty and students when the size of the student per— sonnel staff was large. Barry and Wolfe (1963) noted: As numbers of students mount and problems accruing from bigness increase, the dean's work centers more on administrative and disciplinary problems and less on direct contacts with students. While group work with students remains within the pro— vince of the deans, it is frequently handled by assistants and lower echelon workers. Individual counseling is largely the responsibility of special counselors in counseling bureaus or similar offices. The role of the college personnel worker--particularly if he wants to advance in his profession--has become administration-centered (pp. 233-234). g The problems of general and specialist student personnel mMUnistrators are continuing ones in terms of role— Chfinition, performance, measurement, and formal prepara— tion for the field. Lee (1959) stated: In the college that manages to remain small and independent there will be room for the deanly scholar, but the booming university will have to reserve the big chair for the organization man, the impersonal personnel specialist whose first responsibility is managing the masses instead of the individual. The very nature of a cumbersome student body and the unwieldly university colossus makes his professional services essential (p. 25.) Feder (1959) noted, also, that there were more generalists au:smaller institutions and specialists at larger institu- tions and at higher levels in the latter. Greenleaf U968) observed that the staff structure was changing and Etta: was a 593 '. I Q 'I ‘ ~“ .- -- all) ”I“ -..:u It...“ 0; s--»AA . . a :10 Z; :nu's s*\~r‘"-‘ .- nuuuvta U ‘4' ‘ H ‘ nun : “vars? ..... :- U.~U.essl"'e "'V'vO-A“ : slaw-n l ..v.~-.vot Ob . V. -c-. ~;'.~°‘;v It“; V ...-- v‘fue‘ I ‘0 opp.‘ ' .:' 1"]. CW+ .: A on..1 ‘5 \A ‘. ~..‘.‘... ' ' -.- C ‘I f» ‘ ...-.. A“: the It.“ I. Q ‘ "“F‘ F ‘ ... - or M... ‘ -‘~I I. erSw-‘QQEQ ‘ O ‘ . --...- hE'E '6‘ § 0 n. - ~ . on ”Q L ‘ .."-“— ‘L CYP; ‘x... \:. ‘ T“- “1; over 1 3.3 4:331:13. 3 Eil-e“:el"ES 1 17.“:3 2‘ ‘he\ V "‘ *L " 33 03'. I 1 'L .3- Q‘A 1“” q x: “h 5";k ‘ ‘~ t~ ‘. ‘C R; ‘_ ‘ Ut-V-g 'u ‘ ...;el ‘_. .‘\'I ~ .. .I‘ 41 that there was a decrease in the number of positions titled_"dean of men" and "dean of women." Fitzgerald‘s and Belson's study-in-progress supports this trend; they found a progressive decrease over the past decade in the proportion of women holding the title ”dean of women.” Some writers (Feder, 1959; Williamson, 1961; and Green— leaf, 1968) cited the strengths, weaknesses, and role- conflicts in the roles of generalists and specialists in student personnel administration. They believed the generalists were necessary to coordinate the specialists and provide the broader perspective necessary in the operation of student personnel services. Both groups frequently overlap in functions and lack definite role delineations. There is a tendency for generalists to spread themselves too thin and be unable to prove the results of their work. The specialists have well—defined roles, the skills necessary for competence and are more clearly discernable. However, the narrowing of perspec- tive for many specialists was cited as a major limitation. There was some disagreement regarding the responsibility for role-definition. One view states that role—definition should be solely or primarily the responsibility of the profession or personnel in it. The other prevailing posi- tion is that the duties, functions, and responsibilities of the personnel deans should be clarified and clearly defined by presidents and other institutional personnel, Kiriarly for t?" L: L: axinlstrat‘. .. 375(3), 1955) 2... 5 ' ' .n-vhto 9. 3;. s, 19 ~ mg. a u' A .-... .l‘;.":lS tratc: in. . . - ;::fess;cnals . ;..'-‘ ‘ “a V ,e.sonr~.el C; 4 -.. .-n “w- ....... due to in: ’s.‘ f;.na- :‘ ‘o -......icts rez= "a . ‘ “ I. kill, a2 ~-...-...:1ng of t. I. - ‘ . ~ “,3: process \..~ ~-".:i:':~ ‘ ‘ “‘thlO‘x A ' -..':--‘ .V—s $033197 4 L. 3‘: “-"H N ‘3“ as Q ‘ I I w. Wlt' . .s.‘ . ‘0‘ ". \_:\t‘a‘ Q “‘er" D 1‘ - -.\: y. -satOs- . s . ”.ng ‘--' ‘.e t“! s (.8 I“: \‘. H‘ a; V. I;‘ .. ‘ a“: L‘ - «.1 ‘- we 2" \_‘A"+ \.‘ 2:2». as i ffz. n t .233 42 particularly for those personnel with little or no train- ing in administration, supervision, or personnel work as such (Boykin, 1955). It would appear desirable for the professionals to define the appropriate roles (as in Dutton gt_al.'s, 1970 NASPA study) and for the presidents, other administrators, faculty and students to concur with the professionals. Until some consensus is achieved, student personnel deans will continue to experience frus— tration, due to inappropriate expectations, and evidence role-conflicts regarding some of their duties (Ingraham, 1968). It will, also, be impossible to develop a common understanding of the importance of various factors in the selection process for various kinds and levels of posi— tions. Further, programs of professional preparation will not be able to obtain the consensus necessary for standardization, and accreditation of training for the student personnel professional. Rhatigan and Hoyt's study (1970) on the differences in accuracy with which professionals--student personnel faculty-trainers perceived the work of student personnel administrators in large universities, attempted to determine the degree of standardization of these func- tions. They found there was a reasonably accurate under— standing by the faculty-trainers of the work functions and amount of time required in each for senior college administrators. Some differences were noted between the two groups in terms of the amount of time spent by admin- istrators and importance of various functions as related , . t‘ :.~~fl;.. H '5 “F _ _".\,..» :1 . ¢|.c A ' ' - ‘ 1:... pan, «5 V' ' -—.: .:.:=.l've \‘a- I . ‘ v .,-.-~~ '_.-::;"‘5- pm": i . ' y.. - It“- 5 ' ‘ .o—A ’ __._'_':. he c‘-qr:~v . or. Ubi‘u' ' 4 TELZEIS 5.5 a CI " d -_._ .....::.:e and over '9‘--a . 'R “Ru“: wernJu C ‘ ‘-----.— a '4 (D {L r' ) ii? =‘rn‘: " a--.u-"! “,VQ ‘ "-.. Ann ""‘--o-: re u) ‘1) Ii :1: H 1 . . ‘ “jg-«4 \ot ‘~ . ~ ‘..9 0‘!“ -."e¥ -‘ x S .‘ ;. ~‘\ ‘ a“e t. Ch .‘ l d ~ 2.8 - ¥ S‘ r\ kw: ‘ti :4». w; ‘ ' Q S ' ‘1': ~: ‘ \ by, 2181-3 i“ ' r . ’fi ‘ \“‘S C: k R St.." ‘. Q ‘I‘ e. 27“? ‘1 I s __ *lcQ -:‘.::=-‘- \ ‘\ K 43 to student personnel administrative positions; as well as the relative value of on-the-job training compared to professional preparation for the various functions per- formed. The study pointed out that, perhaps, faculty- trainers as a group underestimated the value of on-the-job experience and over-estimated the value of academic training compared to the reality of student personnel administrative practice. Even with differences in per- ceptions regarding role functions and the relative value of practical experience and professional preparation for effective performance of some functions, there was substan- tial agreement among senior college administrators on the distribution of their professional time and the ratings of the importance of various activities for which they were responsible. Six "crucial" functions were identified and there was considerable overlap between the junior and senior college listings of functions. Such agreement on job functions is a necessary first-step in determining the competencies important in selection of student personnel administrators. The other side of the career development problem relates to the goals, needs, and background of the indi- ‘vidual professionals in the field. Three recent and related studies in the area of career development are thoseeof Ayers, Tripp and Russel (1966) on backgrounds and functions of student personnel administrators, made for the U. S. Office of Education; Sherburne's (1968) study on career mobility in which the backgrounds of Western I . I ‘ '...;v;lfl ‘ uyuovg v-lV .. ..-;??-. .erber a -.. 2...-1 "‘Yf‘ La..:::& L‘0.v " P Unv- ‘ - I." ‘ f‘ ’ ..-.... *‘. c-....€ . A “'_~Onr - O f.— ‘-.-»_\.‘.s C- k,” .4. .2" Au.‘ 0 V A »...._"..“- ‘ ..ZEIE.'.2&S in "’e ;' -‘-.‘ _ fl . """J‘I‘a‘0 an: ‘1‘ Q 1::‘fi— fichv’: : V‘ ‘- .'~..‘ " Ufiu'fint- ~§ 44 Conference ("Big Ten") student personnel administrators were studied; and Foy's (1969) study on career development of NASPA member institutions' personnel. Ayers, Tripp and Russel through a questionnaire studied the chief student personnel administrator, deans of men and women, and directors of counseling in 50 percent of the higher educational institutions in the U. S. They reported differences in the job titles; functions; personal, educational, and experiential backgrounds of these personnel according to the control, type, and size of institutions of higher education. Significant differences in the background of these administrators was found accord— ing to the kind of institution of higher education in which they were employed. Sherburne (1968) sent a mobility audit questionnaire to re3pondents in his study of the rates and patterns of mobility of executive level "Big Ten" administrators. He found that the fastest rate to the top position (Chief Student Personnel Administrator) in the student personnel organizations within the Big Ten was not through upward promotion from.within the organization but from a previous position outside the student personnel organization. However, he also found that the predominant pattern for promotion and for filling vacancies within these large student personnel organizations, appeared to be by moving present staff up from within the organizations. Other findings of importance, relative to the current study, include: (a) the fact that the older one was at the time A ¢v---' “5 0“- h” .3 .e 3.8 C! I & L v.‘ U‘Vg “J: 1 1 .6 o A. npA : ‘-§ .~.| .u-VA‘ " 5w ~_.v‘.. @- -.,-w an. -~".‘ au- , o ‘ 4 b... ‘ . .u -- .u .,. . . - a. -- .. «. .... .....v..\ "‘ _'..ub.V." t 969) s: k- l‘ ‘ -*lv _l o 45 of his appointment in a student personnel position at his institution, the higher one tended to advance in position; and (b) that female student personnel administrators were less mobile than males even though (in some cases) they were as well or better qualified (in terms of type and level of professional preparation) for upward mobility. Thus, differences were found relative to age and sex of student personnel administrators in these large univer— sities. Differences were not found according to previous type and level of professional preparation and personal background experiences. Sherburne, also, found that organizational and title changes were occurring within these institutions which affected tenure in positions. Foy (1969) studied the personnel in 499 of 742 NASPA member institutions of higher education. He used a partial open-ended questionnaire and the Myers—Briggs Type Indicator (F) to gather the data by mail. He stated the sample institutions were representative by geographical region, enrollment, and type of institutions of higher education. The personnel studied included the male and female chief student personnel administrators, directors of student counseling, student housing and student acti— vities. He attempted to determine the associations exist— ing between the career patterns, educational backgrounds, work experiences, personal characteristics, and opinions of student personnel administrators, and their feelings of loyalty, happiness in their work, and adequacy in their jobs. He provides findings with regard to age, marital 32:3. highest deg W511 exoenene :ze. 1:231 stucent ... I ‘ ‘ I c . .- .:.l:at10u, LE :sL;;i::s orie“ ‘ *4 Abb 5‘ ‘Ipnlll 'A ' L...-:32cC next ‘ . I ..:t.e 523.: E . Q 3:52:31 czar: 3: :e'cnh 1 . _ auv'd.a<‘:’ -: :.,. ', L ' v.- ‘ ' ~ ...::I' ”as ltuz‘l § . .."‘h‘v‘ . . personne I, "A -1 ‘ lurch. CEans ,‘,. '2: .‘zcsee’ l :2“.- I" . I I 'r a“ R . ‘6 83C: “-..-'1‘ Etta " 2.1-; s ~ ' .1, ' a‘A/ “a... f‘ v f ‘- 3 0‘ tL s I.e CC “3:16 1“ I .,'~ ‘ ‘: ‘~‘.:. L \ "‘ 5E”: ~ V >- . . Q; “~ “ ‘ ‘HQ/Cr ‘ E \ ‘-‘:~ 3‘.. x“; ‘ 46 status, highest degree held, field of preparation, pro« fessional experience in present position, previous experi— ence, total student personnel work experience, research and publication, feelings of adequacy, happiness in work, religious orientation, opinion on formal training, and anticipated next professional move. Foy (1969) noted that: Little space has been given to career patterns, personal characteristics, academic backgrounds, or personality type of professionals (p. 11). His study has implications for the professional preparation of student personnel administrators. There are a number of other studies in career develop- ment relative to roles and functions of student personnel administrators. Many deal with specific kinds of personnel, e.g., women deans (Haller, 1968; Spencer, 1951; Koenig, 1964; and McBee, 1961), chief student personnel adminis- trators (Upcraft, 1967; Ingraham, 1968; and Hargrove, 1969), or are sponsored by and involve only certain pro- fessional association members' personnel or institutions (Hoyt and Tripp, 1967; Cheatham, 1964; Cameron, 1965; and Foy, 1969), and/or kinds of institutions, or certain regions of the country (Bess and Lodahl, 1967 and Sherburne, 1968). Some of these studies provide findings having limited applicability because of the lack of breadth and/or depth of study. These studies, however, provide evidence of common concerns and approaches to the study of personnel who serve as student personnel administrators. Nearly all ~o-V;"l:ate tbte ki: rs work '1 . . r ‘» -::~:s;‘.13r.s 0. 1‘ u..- .- Q ‘- ..s:';;r.t to de. ' ‘ Q! n ‘ " :2 3.8.9... to . -‘- 'R‘I‘, 2.1:. Status. C . . . . . ..-I'.5L.". KLESS a. o..- ‘ ' . N ‘ Vfl‘rhv- ~ ~ \ .- "‘: stawv..s-s§ .L . 3 s}- ...._ .1 H“ vs u.ese 8 Lu\ 2 V 25:10:31 um I _ . . ‘>:‘v;fi. A w *9“ .~..“‘.Vn l£¢. l - F “fir-C ‘3‘ :‘U‘ _. 'I :5“ . . me? . .._- . - h C ‘ “Q erme: x: :’>‘.fi t‘ h .‘s‘ga &O“S .it‘ .‘1 ‘ “'"h assoc «L .‘:“ ‘ . . .V . ‘ ~~E..:s 1* I -.i2:.a‘ ~~§“-al ‘ I E) 1..- ‘~: -1 3 ’o la “‘ "‘30 M 4 ‘1 "I to _ ~ 5‘ “‘ \“Q-\ h ‘° r! t“ !‘-A I -.:.:“ ‘~ »~' \. “V _ 3 Prc: 9. ‘\\:. \‘u Fgwh V mes \ ;. -3 ‘ ‘ ‘I a!” ‘ _ ‘4‘. ‘ (:1_Q \ .fi.‘ F .‘ \- ye‘ em. _ \4“‘ .2“; -. -‘ s“ + ‘ we 47 investigate the kind and type of professional preparation and previous work experience of the personnel who occupied the positions of interest to the particular study. Most have sought to determine certain characteristics believed to be relevant to the positions held, e.g., age, sex, marital status. Others have related the above variables to certain kinds and types of institutions of higher education, organization of student personnel services and role responsibilities within these institutions. Further, some of these studies have explored additional areas such as vocational interests, feelings of satisfaction and frustration within the work role, feelings of loyalty and commitment to the field of student personnel (as compared to the professional's commitment to the particular insti- tution in which he is employed), percentage of time spent in various professional activities, including research and publications, and memberships and activity in pro— fessional associations. Finally most studies noted signi- ficant trends in the above areas with reference to the professional, experiential, and personal background of personnel who are serving in various kinds of positions. Some studies provided evidence of a current trend toward increasing professionalization of this field as a function of time. Others noted the professional and personal con- fusion, and discrimination which continue to exist in student personnel administration. Most conclusions were based on the indirect approach of inferring certain of :es: factcrs and t ;-.:5 :::.el in t?‘ e f: 15"5 2:: yet been (i Legrz—e .: irportart-C ;:::a:.t in tne se 2;:istrators for 7:25 kinds and tj :1. In Ctaoter V "“34 POllCle .- 1 ,,,,, 48 these factors and trends from a background study of the personnel in the field. Present or prospective employers have not yet been directly asked to name the kind and degree of importance of factors which they believe to be important in the selection of competent student personnel administrators for specific kinds of positions in the various kinds and types of institutions of higher educa— tion. In Chapter VI comparisons of some of the specific major findings observed in these studies will be inte- grated with the findings of this current study relative to the selection of student personnel administrators. Many of the career development studies indicated that certain policies, procedures and factors which may be involved in the selection process were the product of several variables; including kinds of control, size, type and location of the institution of higher education; the student personnel organizational structure in existence at the various institutions; and the functions-— stated or implied—-which are assigned to student per— sonnel administrators, which may or may not be represented by the title and assigned job role of the individuals employed therein. These studies indicated that some factors in the background of the personnel studied were considered more important than others and that which of these factors were important might vary according to the perception of the personnel involved in the selection process. Amber of s 1225, particularl 2‘ ’ ...ient perscnn '33 -..Craham, l9? israters (Du: 5115 were general: ..e ent reca ~ ‘‘‘‘‘‘‘ 49 A number of studies have noted perceptual differ— ences, particularly the view held by some faculty members of student personnel services, functions, and administra- tors (Ingraham, 1969; Feder, 1959; Fitzgerald, 1959; Dutton §E_31., 1970; and Armacost, 1965). Other studies presented students' perceptions of these functions of administrators (Dutton §E_al., 1970 and Kinnane, 1966). Deans were generally viewed by faculty and students as more competent regarding discipline, or welfare and social affairs, than in academic matters. Student personnel deans have had difficulty in winning acceptance from their faculty peers. This has constituted the professionals most pressing problem of public relations within institutions of higher educa- tion (Williamson, 1961). They are perceived as shallow regarding their concern for the vital issues of the day and appear to be preoccupied with housekeeping functions, control matters, and are more technically—oriented than culturally "educated" persons. Even in the areas of policy regarding student affairs and the regulation of student conduct, citizenship, and student rights, stu— dents view student personnel administrators as advisors and consultants rather than as equal voting members in the policy committees and this fact reflects a lack of respect for the competence of these personnel (Dutton et a1., 1970). I Q ‘ :‘ :reszaer. s a ..-'- ~v::uce aSS- 5-1211: with St; 2. - ”‘0‘ Q‘ ' € : :et'oer 0-. . ‘ P' 1'2 151:5, also, a: :e E'A'aluatei on LEE ‘3'; V: n t 1... V. the ace: ~:.;. an and EC: I‘vv ‘A‘ “ .«..__'. -~ .— .-~..-- woul .--:.‘~: .‘ . . - _ ...:thual r1 :_ “a . -. .. , ...-.Abes 1:1 I -§ .3‘ J ‘ ,- .. .::= hp‘ c b “V s. ‘4 ‘.2 ‘ . “‘ I " 4. ‘ . \.‘D~ Q ‘ “Wat‘s: ‘ ,2‘- “a ." ‘ 99's \ ‘ ~~ ‘ .‘ r‘ ‘M - ~-;::‘ ‘.~~‘ ‘ \ Q‘N ‘ IN ~‘I‘ .‘x ‘W ‘: Q‘ ' s ‘ “258% .3 ‘ "‘\~V‘\_‘I ‘C:‘. a“ 4‘ ‘A Q: ~ '\ $~ ‘..Q ‘_ \ L \ \ ly- ~-3 . 50 Presidents and deans agreed the role of the dean should include assisting in determining policy in con- sultation with students and faculty and participation as a voting member of a campus governance group. Presidents and deans, also, agreed that the deans' competency should be evaluated on the basis of their relationships with members of the academic community and administrative competence and effectiveness. However, deans perceived presidents would place a high value on their maintenance of control and order in the academic community and the latter did not do so to the same extent as the deans. Instead, the presidents placed greater emphasis on the deans' contribution to student development and assessment of student needs (Dutton §E_21., NASPA Study, 1970). Professional Writers have found indications of perceptual differences in research studies and have inferred such differences from professional and personal observation. Some differences noted in the selection of person— nel were not felt to be the result of lack of knowledge or understanding of the roles student personnel adminis- trators would play in the institutions, but of personal "biases" held by those involved in the selection process. Many of these "biases" did not appear to be based on the individual applicants' qualifications but on the personal view of the perceiver. Professional student personnel workers were demoralized and resentful after being passed 1‘ SS Vie‘ i a 9 ..., oar ;" uvo ‘c gt a l H acce“ 1 R u e bV n It. '5‘ ‘ n ‘a'ql‘ ll -qnv. .:,.:' .p‘ ' ‘ --vo -‘-‘ "1.5".5 and SE .,4.. -\ e L» La. CA ‘ .tr “-....un‘ a- ‘V‘vv- — .... ....a An Qua \. .2” .11.;ersonn \ fi“ H..‘ e g e v- -. ..., ‘-a' W's- .,‘~‘ ~ I... 51 over for less well—qualified applicants for positions due to perceived "bias" relative to their sex or race. Even harder to accept and understand was the practice of some presidents and selection committees to seek and select personnel for the top position in the student personnel organization in their institutions from persons who had no previous preparation or experience in the area of student personnel administration (Hulet, 1966; Sherburne, 1968; and Foy, 1969). Yet many institutions, where this occurred, have university-approved graduate level train— ing programs for preparation of administrators for this field (Sherburne, 1968). Hulet (1966) wrote: we note some concern over the fact that a few top-level student personnel positions at large universities have recently gone to academicians without student personnel experience. This should serve as a challenge to the field and reflect, how, in many instances, we have cut ourselves and the enterprise of student personnel adrift from the educative function. We do not wish to belabor this point, but it seems significant that few deans of students jobs are listed with the NASPA Place— ment Service. While it is recognized that many positions at this level are not advertised anywhere, the matter causes concern (p. 14). This statement reflects not only a professional association placement officer's concern regarding the tendency to employ the top personnel, in some cases, from nonvstudent personnel trained and experienced groups; but, also the concern of many professionals regarding the sources and methods utilized for recruitment of administrators in this field. However, Bursch (1962) observed that: “12:25. the has. sill influence :res, is wheth he better serv» iatration a go 2:9 who has th- ;e:‘:aos not ti: 5 : o-I-:b. " ..yuleI‘ASI aLSCI :.j:e:‘.ence and aah—q -. I I ...‘XlCdthI‘; k t" n . “. -.C.a.OIS an: ‘ ..A‘ " ‘I _...::.o;y he ea '.3._..;... x... “‘.AA: Heen :15 resident will a::‘.' ,3. .. 1c..nts (p; ~\.- lF 0 -~ M352) 1nd: .“ ~;-., 52 As a college President thinks about hiring a Vice President for Student Affairs or a Dean of Stu— dents, the basic administrative decision, which will influence all subsequent recruiting proced- ures, is whether that college or university will be better served through bringing into the admin- istration a good man from the teaching faculty, one who has the personal qualities desired but perhaps not the professional experience, or by seeking to promote to the deanship a working student personnel administrator who in addition to his possession of the desired personal quali- fications, also has had directly applicable experience and training. In the former case, communication between faculty and academic admin- istrators and the student personnel groups will probably be easier. In either event, a decision having been made and a job description the average president will need help in locating suitable applicants (pp. 151-152). Bursch (1962) indicated the best resources were NASPA, APGA, major university placement services, and incumbent deans of students at major universities for the names and recommendations of trained and experienced administrators ready for employment and promotion to new and/or higher level student personnel positions. A number of writers and researchers noted the small numbers of women employed and/or promoted to executive and managerial level positions. When one considers that one-half of all entering college students are women, the proportion of women selected for these positions is not representative of the student population with which these personnel work. Ayers, Tripp and Russel (1966) found males were 4 to 1 compared to females in the top jobs in colleges and universities. Further, when fewer women who who enter and complete graduate degrees are accounted for, . . Y. mu .3 r“ a .1 2.. T. «.3 e u‘ .s‘ 3. 3. . a .n b .5 n? Ha I Y. n a .1 pk. e 2*. pu) .ru 6 n .. .3 ..L C. .—L. O ,. '2. ..b .«n. G. at :u o. r... w. w. as an. A . :~ 2* u“ .: . ..l mu . v . no“ ... .u. .... .u. n . .... ;.. - ... ..I. .. . w.” .5 .n‘ ~. ,9_\ ..m - ad.“ 0 A: C .2 t r e . . e .C r e; 3 E C. e C n»; .nu nus I No. ‘1‘ an t C f e a e O O n .l n r a: e .l r by Q» I a» v. V. e s n» v. .1 a t. S .-.. r. , at n. .l v. .. a. fly "I o . qnu n . NV AH— WV. 3... .3» a e Z. i . s . .I .R n u - . .. ~ :- :2“ .... mJu x... “v. up“ saw .vn 4... Nu. .3 U r ..d C. t 5 a .l e t.» 11* s *_ l «G a O C NV. 0 e . \II Au 9 J a PP. ... . e . a A: a a: .w... a» .... Le c . C ... . . ... . .. . .. , a! CU . ‘- ‘a’. “ 53 there still appeared to be subtle discrimination against women operating in the selection decisions at these levels (Kaufman, 1961; Haller, 1967; Greenleaf, 1968; Shelden, 1968; and Sherburne, 1968). Sherburne (1968) found in studying the "Big Ten" institutions that many of the women were as well or better qualified than their male counter- parts who were promoted. He stated: However, on the basis of the findings, it is concluded that factors which were not investi~ gated are operating to prevent the upward mobility of female student personnel adminis— trators in relation to their professional training and experience. Some of these factors may include the personal desire on the part of female adminis— trators to seek upward mobility. Other factors may include attitudes of male administrators toward female colleagues, and the influence on female mobility as a result of organizational structure (p. 86). Haller (1967) and Lewis (1968) reported that there appeared to be resistence to a woman administrator because men do not like working for a woman. Haller (1967), also, found that some women deans had not gone on for an advanced degree because the presidents at the time of their expressed interest indicated that it was unnecessary; yet, some were later passed over for promotion because they did not do so. Shelden (1968) stated the problem thusly: On large campuses, where there are large student personnel staffs, very few women are in key posi— tions as deans of student affairs, or even as functional department heads (p. 7). Ste later suggeste 1 .1: ttis problem _ .‘ieanwhile, c. roles, women a- -sitions aggre rcles. Few ma; minority status eiucation with still realize VI 05 women are p._ All ted OPPO It (g. 7), Greenleaf (19 o 'o‘ 9 . . e . ...-v ' 4'5: the first t :C'Jlg “Oman t0 31' a StUdent p FECessaI-Y fOr t Salaan anoppOrtu Ip- 4185' had 0 a "as “1 institut :2 1a . " Studies spec .5.‘ is”ration in t «H.195 noted it sudt mtropo l temSen to tng \ ons, This ‘C: ‘LJQI. . ‘ e are 91‘0“ ‘Khl‘i‘d h egro Dr atltutions ‘ ‘Ztl, .3 tile l‘e . ‘Véisg . 58 knee: 54 She later suggested attitudes which might aid in elimin— ating this problem for women administrators: Meanwhile, contrary to their customary cultural roles, women administrators will have to seek top positions aggressively or remain in secondary roles. Few male administrators recognize the minority status of administrative women in higher education with its accompanying behavior; fewer still realize that the traditional limited roles of women are perpetuated by low expectancies and limited opportunities for executive leadership (P. 7) . Greenleaf (1968) reflected on this problem, and stated: For the first time, one hesitates to encourage a young woman to secure a doctorate in preparation for a student personnel position. A doctorate is necessary for top positions, but do women really have an opportunity for such jobs? (p. 31.) ”Bias” had, also, been noted in the selection of Negroes in institutions of higher education. While there are no studies specifically related to student personnel administration in this area, there may be some relation to tendencies noted in higher education. Rose (1966) indi- cated that metropolitan institutions reflected a generally greater tendency to hire Negroes than the non-metropolitan institutions. This may be partially a function of the fact that-there are growing numbers of Negro students and qualified Negro professionals in metropolitan communities and institutions. He noted that except for tokenism, currently there was discrimination in higher education. There has been, however, a general improvement in the E iring C I ’. ‘ ...,A‘, .I-e F .11... "' M ' A83: ‘ . \ ..-...tr 0f .- ...-r“ .4‘ . Le an incr .....' N '— W o . ess in t3 Ov- SEI e. C O H ..t S sane CC strators n of stu. e L I . ; Q ‘\ ...v Q“ I— - “EX .- “-.. .‘\!_I 1 . :N—vhi uk-‘ao‘ v u - b ....“ ~‘s-g‘.‘ -‘ ' 'nu out. 3. ;~..,‘ .._ u-.- 55 market from 1960 to 1966 and the latter is beginning to favor the hiring of Negroes. Further, with the increas- ing number of Negroes in doctoral programs there will likely be an increase in the participation of Negroes in academic communities. Rose (1966) added: The further emphasis on equality of opportunity as a national commitment should likewise reduce the extent of this subtle form of discrimination employed deliberately or indeliberately by administrators who hide behind the cloak of color blindness in their hiring practices (p. 119). This same comment is, also, relevant with regard to discrimination on the basis of sex of personnel in the selection of student personnel administrators. Recommended Professional Functions, Preparation, Emplgyment Experiences, and Personal Characteristics for Student Personnel Administrators The changes occurring in society and in institutions oflfigher education have brought consequent changes in the services offered by student personnel organizations and roles performed by administrators in this field. Cosby (1965) and Shaffer (1967) pointed up some of these trends. They noted an increase in the complexity of American colleges and universities with a tendency to heavier admin- istrative loads and greater bureaucratization leading to the trend towards depersonalization for the individual in the academic environment. Further, American students display a greater academic orientation toward the ~-';v~raiuate 9X9’-_ -'~--' "t difficult their offer 'r'=*r:.el area its .1553 noted the g 31:51 at a time in" ----- . I... “'" "av-n ........ graduate Prior to dis Friaration and ex 5:251 aiministrat rarefied functi' :‘atcrs should per. 7.2.:ties deemed 56 undergraduate experience. Student personnel administrators find it difficult to keep up with the rapid changes and to adjust their offerings accordingly, since the student personnel area itself is in a process of flux. Cosby (1965) noted the growing specialization in student per— sonnel at a time when a generalist approach would appear necessary to provide a synthesis and rationale for work with undergraduate students. Prior to discussion of the recommended professional preparation and experiential background of student per~ sonnel administrators, it is necessary to consider the recommended functions and roles that individual adminis— trators should perform and the professional and personal qualities deemed necessary to perform them well. Only then can meaningful training programs and experiences be established to develop the essential competencies and qualities necessary for effective performance of student personnel administrators. Most of the professional trainers and experienced administrators indicated that a student personnel adminis— trator should first and foremost be an educator (Miller, 1967; Trueblood, 1966; French, 1965; and Thrash, 1965). This means that he should work to create a desirable educational climate as an active teacher and faculty meme her, to serve as an integrator for the various groups of personnel involved with the institution, and to assist in I I ---;~v:6-v~~ the C ......bovv&on:4 ob . 3 ”" "‘ "e Std... any“ -\I 90- V '1 .-.::'.'e a.l , t i".'.‘.“‘." 0‘ nay-so - Osvmugua . _V‘;naes 'fiir‘ "k -“:'.."‘V tQ'ira. pl. . I _.- “'9n¢s ,. _ ........._. ..5 ~. '-'“"‘:°r SOClal - ‘ F ‘V‘vain "A. ' I! ‘ ‘1._---“|c W ’5‘ . J 0"“:- ‘ 'Vng‘ .. A :..:_P:r :aP“‘ .. ‘ \. :i'ch‘ 4 . o ‘-ui‘:i SO-‘~“‘ . 5“ .u‘c v.- —“ ' - unripe-L. 1 ‘ . " Av‘h“&9- v 7 A . - ‘ ‘.: S‘CF :‘h‘ ‘1 ‘*\rdh louac :6 Oh .... 3 :31 a“ " e ‘ ‘ :LA:‘ ’0 u- 1 \.- 3) , ~ -. . ‘-. Vs v ‘ i‘ Y ‘ «S t 2. a 1" ‘q' a. “..f '~~ly t'-' ' § . ' “17,-: *C ' , a H ‘L QVr l V a A. 4. ecsr‘h. 5. 5:“ .VI“f - H . "'\. ‘o‘ ‘ 'f“ ..C S~HI‘E ‘- ‘\._ 8 . ‘i; V I . '0 lat “-.fi. ¢.~QV:‘ '.:.':Y ‘ «u: 5 ‘. Y " +v~ . ,‘~H. g‘.e " ‘ v‘.“.e¥‘ ‘ v s In . I, r»: ‘H‘ Ln a‘t“ .. MC“¢ .‘:s_ a ': :u \.d tw“ “at +1 -25 g‘ n.‘ '- :nh‘ whg "y— - lf- Pacze -‘:Q 3‘.‘ 57 interpreting the student to the institution and the insti— tution to the student. Above all, the student personnel administrator needs a breadth of perspective in order to provide the necessary experiences which complement the academic curriculum of the institutions and contribute to the intellectual, spiritual, social and physical growth of the student. Armacost (1965) stated: Thus, assisting students in developing new and exciting intellectual activities, stimulating greater faculty acceptance of student attitudes, general stimulation of academic motivation and responsibility, and reducing student provincialism are significant challenges which our faculty collea— gues feel are unmet by student personnel administra— tion (p. 5). Rothman and Keenen (1970) summarized the role of these administrators: The writers take the position that the student personnel worker, whatever his assigned role, should be a whole human being, second a teacher, and only third, if at all, a college functionary. Is it unreasonable to believe that those who choose student personnel work as a profession like to interact with students? All too often, however, they wind up working with pieces of paper, machinery, and other professionals rather than with the students themselves . . . . (p. 148). They added that the student personnel worker should be available for adoption as a "role model" for students to emulate and that there exists a variety of personalities evident among professionals from which students might choose. These writers reflect opposition to the current tendency for student personnel administrators to appear : :ecl'nical-soek c; :95 (Killer , 19E T: be viewed 5 act as faculty with academic safe manner as mid need to Strong. public 121's an identi 39?:lar teach; E; H':"‘: I 5.4.--Ces in S. ‘I-.“' .;_.,-e positions , ,Ef EMT": "“ent PEISC nt EX 3..- . . L '1 anothe: -~::c~‘ “*lC COT”??- :_:.. .. LA ls vie 32* m . attltL .‘il ‘h Uncr I» kl .39 if \lnds 0c 58 as technical—specialists or as service—oriented function— aries (Miller, 1967). Nygreen (1968) stated: To be viewed again as faculty we would have to act as faculty. we would need to be identified with academic disciplines and be qualified in the same manner as are our teaching colleagues. We would need to be identified as research persons through publications. Most importantly we must have an identity with the classroom through regular teaching involvement (p. 287). This view has been reflected in some of the person- nel practices in selection for student personnel adminis- trative positions, i.e., the trend toward appointment of chief student personnel administrators who are without previous student personnel training or experience but "strong" in another academic discipline. Some profes- sionals (Trueblood, 1966) disagreed with Nygreen's view, and believe that student personnel professionals should be educators with a somewhat different orientation to the academic community than that usually identified with faculty. This view was reflected in earlier statements concerning role. Drawing upon the role expectations outlined above, and, perhaps, their own professional observations and experiences, some writers have specified knowledges, skills, and attitudes which the student personnel pro- fessional must possess or develop in order to effectively perform his functions. The kinds of persons who tend to enter student personnel work was studied by Thomas Frantz (1969). He sa;i to be IEPIES‘ Ea results oi tin; .-..':r.ei question: c~.-\ :- - -.12;.'ent of the --~ ...}! . “...-..s (1966) I: .'.. . a» c ..;;s;:;:ation ana .‘\“‘ \\ ‘~\e‘:‘. tag, and 55 _ V ‘ 11".th gs. \. \if . -z. TEE‘ ‘ 1 t8: 3-‘~s;:w.e ‘ ‘. tf§e :é ‘.‘n “N 59 sent 165 questionnaires to different types of institutions said to be representative of those in higher education. The results of this study were based on 79 percent or 131 returned questionnaires. He examined the vocational development of the student personnel workers according to Holland's (1966) majors and occupational personality classification analysis scheme. The data supported five hypotheses: (a) many female student personnel workers bypass or delay marriage in favor of unison with an occupation; (b) prior to entering the field, student personnel workers exhibit considerable vocational inde- cision; (c) persons entering student personnel work do so primarily under the influence of normative social pressures and through the process of identification; (d) most student personnel workers enter the field by accident or because of a desire to nestle in a nutrient environment; and (e) student personnel workers tend to have a non-intellectual orientation. On the basis of Holland's classification, student personnel workers are primarily social and, secondarily, enterprising personality types. They tend to be sociable, feminine in orientation, responsible types, needing attention and non-intellectual; some are, also, of the dominating, leading, masculine and non-intellectual orientation type. Men and women enter student personnel at about 25 years of age and for comparable reasons, as do those at different levels in rmesent positions in the field. Sizer “rite ::' :erscnS who on} 5' w _, a». -"—. “0‘ (1' :‘;i‘.eS of 9 : :erscnalit" C." O ‘ . ate r-xctaDly 1:; .;‘~ L ‘ ‘ :..-: .C‘CY O; ' . 2"“. b v.._.:\- -erlstlc in Order ~ ,- .~-:::cl’}' pro-on .' ~‘ - erser to Se see: gialifiej 23"“ .1?- A“. 3.2:t‘e. (1939) 2.2252319 in d. ...659' l “ -... With I'JC 1"“. ‘50de I“ :;:':.'.:s 51‘201113i n: 60 Other writers made suggestions regarding the kinds of persons who ought to enter this field. Feder (1959) noted that: Studies of the personal characteristics and personality qualifications of personnel workers are notably lacking. But there is a consider- able body of published comment concerning the characteristics that personnel workers should have in order to profit from the type of pre- paratory programs which have been developed and in order to serve effectively once they have been qualified by education and experience (p. 204). Farnsworth (1959) indicated that women deans need to think about people in dynamic terms and need to understand others. These, like other skills can be developed, although with much greater difficulty in some persons than others. Woodburne (1958) indicated that the Dean of Students should approach student affairs from a positive, constructive, educational, social and intellectual atti— tude rather than a negative, worried and restrictive orientation. Feder (1959) indicated that the candidate should have the ability to maintain objectivity in inter- personal relationships and avoid becoming too highly ego- involved in order to function effectively. He should be possessed of a reasonable level of maturity so that his personal needs are satisfied within himself. Further, he should be able to cultivate permissiveness and/or flexi— bility as an ingrained and value-oriented behavior pattern. Finally, he should be able to accept others non-judge- mentally. In other words, personnel workers must not be :;:;:‘ QGISCRdlitl:. :esgzzisnt (from ': :elizies could t. :2 irii'cidual wt; "sent al ..- I 17159:— ‘-'- 5...: - ‘._. deuents' neg N... a "‘v , concerned Wi :he Pafiphle- . ’7 ”Q \. EPared by .‘A .‘ .. ‘313' H, I Sore e“‘:r‘a4 .: .c o y F ‘u Co. Sic-n, “‘neral 5"”: be *e 312:“: ‘- sS CC“ posse . ~tEn . P satiscac far“ :35 tic-w: -.. ‘\. ~~ \.\S t s‘." S La? ‘2: L . '. ~ 4}.“ ‘ \‘ &. ~ fi‘ a .‘c‘n ". ‘~ tL \ti‘a‘fi “e ( ‘ l n a: 9 A s O v, . Cu {‘1 “‘kihh ‘ ‘. 61 rigid personalities. Haller (1967) found that while one respondent (from her "expert" sample) thought these qualities could be taught; other respondents felt that the individual who was too authoritarian, rigid, too judgemental, insensitive or overly sensitive, over—aligned with students, negative in attitude, unable to be objec— tive, concerned with prestige or power, or wanted to manage others should be counseled out of the training program. The pamphlet Careers in College Student Personnel Work prepared by the Commission on Profession Development of COSPA indicated that a student personnel worker must have an interest and faith in and understanding of stu- dents; the educational process and appreciation of the role of higher education and a commitment to achieving the goals of his institution. Regarding the personal qualities, the report stated: In general, the college student personnel worker should be healthy physically and emotionally. He should possess physical stamina for his assignment is often arduous and demanding. He should find satisfaction in being of service to others. He must be able to function effectively at irregular hours and to adjust to the unexpected and the unusual. In planning and in actual performance he must respect others and be able to work effec- tively with those who have a different point of View. His standards of conduct must be high in order that he may, by example as well as precept, demon- strate the qualities he encourages students to develop. He should willingly accept opportunities to demonstrate on the campus and in the community . n :15 interest 3:5 a sense C‘ :33, are mp" see}: a career . The charact» (.-. 228' 5 staff .‘.:;'.';:f;al enterii 62 his interest in the welfare of others. Patience and a sense of humor, where the situation calls for them, are important characteristics of those who seek a career in college personnel work (pp. 9-10). The characteristics of naturalness and sincerity with one's staff and students were noted as important ones by Lee (1959). The need to find satisfaction in service and administration was stressed by Feder (1959), and Mueller (1966). Feder (1959), however, felt that the individual entering this work must have an essential dedication to it as a phase of education without being addicted to self-gratification in "soul—saving" and "ser- vice-to-mankind." Thrash (1965) indicated the essential qualities were integrity (personal and professional honesty), intelligence, openness (acceptance of experi- ence), commitment, and responsibility, including personal courage under pressure. Student personnel deans should be free, responsive and caring persons. The skills and attitudes as put forth by these writers relate most closely to what in generally termed personal characteris- tics. There are, however, other skills, more specific to the work of student personnel administrators which are, perhaps, more open to development within a student personnel training program or can be developed as a result of on-the-job experiences. For instance, Greenleaf (1968) suggested that the administrator must be a manager; skilled in the art of communication; sharp intellectually; sflu u r. ..i. C t. O .l C 0 3. ,t. in“ I\0 Viiiu .m" .m: ...l ... C e oean C 1 .- ....n ‘5 C ...-u- ... els l'QAv-u "v'dabc'. (hy- .‘ . 2 . ':§‘A.. ..- “DA 1 63 traveled; a skilled administrator; a generalist, with ability to coordinate specialist functions; and a catalyst in dealing with individual students. Feder (1959) indi- cated the dean of students needed coordinative and facili- tative skills of high order, a high respect for objective fact, research and evaluation; and, absolutely essential, the ability to delegate because most of the work of the modern dean 22922.15 done through the specialists on his staff. Fincher (1967) stated: A major source of difficulty in planning and coordinating an adequate program of student personnel services is that student personnel programs are so frequently a function of the personalities of the student personnel workers (p. 42) . He added: Where there is a minimum of community of interest and purpose there is a definite lack of teamwork and a pronounced tendency toward maintaining territorial integrity (p. 42). There is obviously much concern among professionals in this field regarding the question of what kind of professional and personal skills and attitudes one should have in order to be effective. Most writers mentioned the necessity for more research which would assist in determining those characteristics and qualities the individual needs to possess initially in order to be admitted to training programs and to practice in the field, and those qualities which could be developed or influenced in favorable directions through professional preparation programs, internships, and/or other experiences prior to :: firing practic- L?€";. The M) .G mation (draft K 22:25 assessmen‘. ;:e;a:ation in te: :i :Izaracteristi "‘5: qualities an ;:::e:.t to profe fizicn, despite 1 "Caters of an 3?: :ften stress ‘4 part, dete “319$. shoulc .M ._ -.ese Pers onn ""if i. .. n tote t" r. {t prOfe: . w... of pro 'tt‘sl‘xals t: 3s for 9:: \‘:‘ r 64 or during practice in the field (Feder, 1959 and Haller, 1967). The A.P.G.A. Inter—Divisional Committee and the COSPA Proposal for College Student Personnel'Professional Preparation (drafted and revised in 1964) suggest con— tinuous assessment of the candidate during his program of preparation in terms of developing the necessary qualities and characteristics. Some writers appear to believe that these qualities and characteristics may be as or more important to professional success, competence and satiSe faction, desPite the lack of research relating to them, than others of an academic nature which are, perhaps, more often stressed. Whether such is the case, should be, in part, determined by the current study. Further, the relative importance of these factors, and others not mentioned, should become evident as a result of inter— viewing employees, superiors, and colleague-practitioners of these personnel. With the proposed roles and functions clarified and important professional and personal qualities suggested, it was, thus, possible for some professionals to recommend programs of professional preparation to assist prospective professionals to develop and improve these qualities in order to adequately meet role demands. Barry and Wolfe (1963) expressed their discouragement regarding training programs for guidance—personnel work. They noted con- fusion resulting from conflicting practices and role demands \/ I . - p r: :-:.e held, an» 2:22:11. They pr . . ...... b .- .. ..o deterni. ::-'-_'.;;:s and whet b- ._‘ ..... teiez' as training o ‘.e - -.:~ 0 "‘v\u'd I Scurse work c ‘1' Culi 55' 0f traine :19 perlers 2:: ‘c ‘ o s_‘a‘ ‘4 58 t( :N' \ . ‘ ‘S‘Y‘Q‘ ‘. L‘.Q -' “ ‘- ::_“*E:‘ C. ‘x 65 in the field, and the lack of a clear focus in the training program. They proposed that guidance-personnel workers needed to determine the competencies required by the job openings and whether a common course of training was possible, in addition to the specialized training offered. They indicated that some study of emphasis is needed as training is diffuse and undifferentiated. They stated: Course work consists of a melange of courses from various disciplines, all of which may be useful, but probably are meaningful only if the student himself can synthesize and apply the materials to his particular endeavor. This is a great deal to ask of trainees since lack of synthesis is one of the problems of the whole field (pp. 234-235). This statement is, in part, relevant today. However, it is possible to note a recommended basic core program for preparation programs as one reviews the literature on preparation of student personnel administrators. As the profession has begun to "come of age," a core of study related to the behavioral science disciplines, and administration in higher education has become the bases for these programs. (Nygreen, 1968; Trueblood, 1966; Miller, 1967; Greenleaf, 1968; and the COSPA Report, 1964.) Nygreen (1968) pointed out: In the area of training our concerns about our differences of opinion tend to obscure the large area of basic agreement and common understanding (p. 288). .‘icst traini‘ I active perf ‘£- ‘ ‘1 v4 ..-: ~‘:"~~. “ "Mg of t H ‘4 \~ .‘u‘J‘Q ‘ ‘.‘4 s dssZEd S‘,Ln *4“: E: “‘H ':. VH- . . _ :~ 3‘9. . \s.‘ t:.e . .3 r “: n‘A‘V 2‘ t “ e?“ _ we: -\ in‘. 5" ‘\ natl ‘ ‘;"l I l 9 lie: ‘. I “:3. ‘I 66 Most training programs in existence today seem to reflect these basic areas of study considered essential to effective performance. The individual student needs to study the growth and development, the psychological and sociological bases of behavior, and general charac« teristics of the college—age student; to obtain a clear understanding of the context and foundations of higher education in America and elsewhere; to learn the concepts and attitudes essential to the art of counseling; to understand the basic principles and practices necessary to implement and coordinate student personnel programs; to become skillful in methods and approaches used by counselors, educators and administrators, in working with students and others in formal and informal group and individual situations. Further, these personnel need to have an opportunity to obtain a grasp of certain of the specialized substantive areas of student personnel. They need opportunities to assimilate and integrate the theore— tical with the practical by way of supervised practicum field work experiences and/or internships. Finally, these personnel need to obtain a comprehensive grasp of researchV/w and evaluation, and the function and techniques of eval— uation which may be useful in student personnel adminis- tration (Miller, 1967; Greenleaf, 1968; Trueblood, 1964 and 1966; Cosby, 1965; and the COSPA Prop08a1'for College Q 522:1: Personne - raised in 1964) . Same of the prziessionals to . ":an- -.....aiuate lev- :;=:.':ation is a l =‘..:.:es. A nmrb 22:: of distingu: A...’ y ......a. progrars ?2'_-.e Stud" ' 3:: of two ‘ r?‘ list Cert git: ‘imed sin 67 Student Personnel ProfessiOnal Preparation, drafted and revised in 1964). Some of the above writers would prefer prospective professionals to have a liberal arts background at the undergraduate level, while others believe that the best orientation is a broad major in the social or behavioral sciences. A number of these proposed programs make the point of distinguishing, in part, between masters and doctoral programs of preparation. The proposed differ— ences are basically those of degree of emphasis and understanding expected of students rather than differences in kind. It is generally expected that those in doctoral programs will show evidence not only of greater commitment to the field, but, also, have a broader understanding and a more specialized knowledge of the skills relating to it than those in masters' programs (Greenleaf, 1968; True- blood, 1966; and Miller, 1967). Miller (1967) indicated that the masters' programs could train people for termi- nal subordinate positions in the field, or serve as the foundation for entrance into an advanced program of graduate study. The masters' program should take a minimum of two years or four full-time semesters. The specialist certification is a pre-doctoral or a post-M.A. program aimed at up-dating masters' preparation and/or providing additional study beyond the M.A. degree. The doctoral program should be designed to prepare a stir-educators 11:7; difficult ' 5:23. it was 5‘ :2 2331228 indivrt :a:3:r.nel organize itere exists $5125 effectiven i'_:e:so....e1 a5 .. . ." b. a u.. ...»: ' -. H" an e‘b’al‘x 4:3; Of its t: I (I! «- :3 91 me t5. Q -. . ‘ ~ 68 scholar-educator—administrator able to meet all the differ— ent and difficult roles of the chief student personnel leader. It was suggested that the primary goal should be to produce individuals prepared to function as educators and researchers in graduate programs of student personnel preparation and/or to take leadership roles in student personnel organizations around the country. There exists a void regarding systematic evaluation of the effectiveness of programs of preparation for stu- dent personnel administrators. One study, however, reported an evaluation of a preparation program from the opinion of its trainees. Keller (1962) used the descrip- tive survey method and sent questionnaires to 181 doctoral trainees and alumni of a large university program. Based on an 88 percent response, he concluded that the major strength of the program, in the opinion of the trainee, was the interest staff members di3played in them; and the major weakness was the limited opportunity for supervised practice. More time in and facilities for extended services in supervised practice was recommended by the trainees. Course work in student personnel training was found useful in helping trainees perform.what was required of them.as student personnel workers. The above study reflects the substantial agreement found by Rhatigan and Hoyt (1970) with regard to the similarity of the perceptions of faculty trainers and administrators of the actual work 7.195 and functic i‘: studies impl fessiemi trainer. al'fiie training Lianerience in :51: roles and f ‘33 in practice. 7.3.36 as too absi 13 :ecessary und' :fision for opp if the practical ::‘::tz (1968) 51 69 roles and functions required in administrative practices. Both studies imply that careful selection of the pro« fessional trainers is important to the development of valuable training programs. These trainers should have had experience in the field in order to understand the basic roles and functions, and degree of importance of each in practice. The professionalntrainers have been viewed as too abstract, and theoretical, and lacking in the necessary understanding of, emphasis on, and adequate provision for opportunities for administrative practice and the practical aspects of student personnel work. Schultz (1968) stated: In the final analysis, a program of professional preparation in higher educational administration must be judged by the success of its graduates in roles for which the program was intended to prepare them (p. 392). The best resources for these trainers are professors of guidance in schools of education or departments of psychology (Bursch, 1962). The thoughtful selection of these trainers is a major factor in professionalizing student personnel administration. Feder (1959) noted: The graduate institutions themselves will assist materially in the future development of the pro- fession of educational personnel work by rigorous screening and evaluation of its products. If it is assumed that members of the faculty involved are competent representatives of the profession, they must assume responsibility for at least some minimal screening of those upon whom they would confer professional status and the right to practice in their field. . ' ' ~ ...~ =:".'ise.'.e at 9“- :;.::n A” “Y . HOV“ .‘t rr ..... nhflfit 2::Lr Of the 3.91:5 in 1964 ‘ 15;: studies tha' 32:3 cne. Fran -=i.=::s of air 1'“ eat 73‘. :eflect a rat 1 4 : . . 33: pcsxtv A-“ O ----- :. caoxce ‘ V' ‘ a ' artrulst L_v- - ‘ usv ““ean = .i"‘:'s .‘ ..-e: fiat t 3“. 31:3: ..- .‘kleutat it; a ‘s‘ C ‘Q sqilst ' l 39-"; -Iyral s“ T.|I:;A~n ‘:~. *K . L3 Sr 70 This may be accomplished by use of interviews, references and advisement exams during both the screening for admission into programs of preparation, and continuous assessment of the candidate throughout the preparation itself. (Miller, 1967 and The COSPA Proposal for College Student Personnel Professional Preparation, drafted and reviewed in 1964.) Both Frantz (1969) and Foy (1969) determined from their studies that this profession was not a vocationally mature one. Frantz (1969) found that scrutiny of the reasons of administrators for entering this field did not reflect a rational choice, planning, or commitment. He found only 18 percent of his sample had entered the field for positive or mature reasons, that is, due to a rational choice, a desire to improve education, or to satisfy altruistic needs. Foy (1969) noted the short careers (mean = 5.65 years) of personnel in the field and indicated that training departments should be greatly con— cerned about this, and, therefore, more careful in the selection of entrants into their programs. They, further, need an orientation in the programs for these trainees toward a full-time career commitment in student personnel. .Several suggestions were made to up-grade the knowledge and skills of student personnel practitioners already in the field. The lack of formal training and experience in student personnel by some present practi— tioners, as well as the rapid changes occurring in society ..: :-.. ' «“f—S “lr‘ 'I \""‘5 80 elimination of and less student enrollment in single-sex private non-denominational colleges and universities and an increase in institutions and numbers of students enrolling in coed, public institutions, as well as a trend toward the elimination of the long-held separate regulations governing the conduct of women students; (4) students today appear to have more concern regarding societal conditions and operations, and are more academi- cally-oriented and less inclined toward collegiate social life, and the institutional student activity group con— cerns of the past; (5) with the increasing bureaucratic higher educational structures has come an increase in the number and proportion of specialists in student per- sonnel services; (6) student personnel organizations are changing from the traditional structure organized on sex-based lines of a "dean of students," and "deans of men and women" and their assistants to a so-called "func- tional" organization usually based on a service approach including a "vice president for student affairs" and/or a "dean of students" with several associate and assistant deans of students followed by the specialists in various personnel areas; (7) the student personnel administrators tend to be younger in age at time of entrance into the preparation programs and the field; the women tend to be single and the men married; more have undergraduate majors or backgrounds in the behavioral and/or social sciences, =--' west have if. at}: in this he ' ' ' \-4 23:11:35 in t... o’:u:':. ....-.-.ion pro; .'::-. ““7 fi:“§'< on...“ nth-IL bua. be A. .555 effort is d i: reassess. .e .‘t .. were eXis* . a“ 7“ «at C0“""E .‘A - ~ ' .‘8sb..\'e in c ..h‘. A Q.‘ .‘F‘A .“9 ‘F‘ I “'“‘ yrafi ,-~: -. ‘..b 5 “Yea; ‘ s‘. ~> ‘~ :- \ '9 xi‘, ‘1 #3 ' .“-‘ '-Z' ‘-‘ ...-e; (12) fl “: . :':~~' ~_ \ Py- ‘Vd. ‘ :7 V““ ‘ C1 : 4 ". ‘h ‘ “w a fix p‘. \ _:.-: g - .6 ‘2 g h \J 5“e h § .__ ' "ts-3“ ‘ttg Hahn PKV‘ \‘fl‘n 's. n g ‘5: Sin: U ‘- ‘ " ... ‘h h “e CVFC ‘ -L ‘l‘ “ -.’ i.) .\.: 81 and most have the master's degree upon entrance into work in this field; (8) the mean years for remaining in positions in this field has decreased; (9) professional preparation programs in student personnel have increased in the U. S. and the numbers of students enrolling in them as well; (10) there is a greater effort made to screen applicants for admission into these programs, but less effort is displayed relative to continuous evaluation and reassessment of applicants throughout the programs; (11) there exists substantial agreement as to the core content of preparation programs, which include an emphasis on the behavioral sciences, higher education, administra— tion and counseling, working with individuals and groups, experience in some specialized substantive areas, and supervised practicums and internships (although the latter remains a weak area), and familiarity with the research in this field, and evaluation techniques appropriate to practice; (12) there was noted a trend toward greater gprofessional association membership and loyalty to this field and a decrease in institutional loyalty when com— pared to the past; which is, perhaps, a reflection of the increasing professionalization of this field, as evidenced by ianreasing membership in, coordination and cooperation among the professional associations; and the encouragement of more and better quality research and publication rele— vant tx: student personnel administration. These, then, 1:: the tree '5 ~¢.:v--D +0 a“; "-.....nb u. ;‘..L..',.'.' +nr ‘ ‘ ’w-S . ....u.' v- M v n n. . ‘ “n: +£I~”H‘ ~tr Evy-...‘H “ 4 ‘L: ‘ 1 A! '0'. I'vvog’ ‘.bfi ' r, n. ' V ' a "'v‘. ‘TNuL‘CE 0: a,~ . ‘- -.:S :-A ' - . h «“ uslrfis f‘ Au . ’Q ; 3; .‘ L " wrcam . . I 1,_ ... :‘p‘: I‘V‘ a I). 82 are the trends which have affected and will likely continue to affect the selection process in this field. With regard to the selection of student personnel administrators there is an increasing concern for perfect- ing the techniques of selection. The selection process itself, however, was shown to be dependent on several other variables; namely, professional role-definition and the importance of agreement among professionals, trainers and employers on personal and professional qualifications needed in student personnel administration, according to the various kinds and levels of positions for different types and kinds of higher educational institutions. This is an important first step if good selection of candidates for professional preparation is to be made; helpful career advisement is to be offered; and, if appropriate profes- sional preparation programs and experiences are to be established to train persons who will enter the field. The various perceptions apparently held by the different personnel involved in the selection process have made an understanding and knowledge of the expectations and pro- cess, itself, difficult for student personnel administra- tors, and, in turn, have made difficult self-improvement for professional advancement. There is evidence that "biases" are operating in the selection process and that the "morale" of the student personnel professional is ., “AHA“ {p :::."=.y a‘:EC' Q I ‘ I U ¢‘;V:?:"~" ' ~ .....uuahnu.“ I - J I? .... o \ ..:.. as it EX; Mb“ “ ‘ 5&5“ “:3 \ C N ..szmlikelv t -.:=e' therefor»; ’rse(Mandell 3;s*e:ts andl 5131:“.red a: 3?. :5 Subsecse : s.‘ 7 83 seriously affected as a result of lack of knowledge, understanding, fairness, and, thus, faith, in the process itself as it exists today. Although selection in student personnel administra- tion appears to be largely intuitive and human judgement will always be subject to error, selection can be improved beyond its current level. French (1964) stated: The more carefully clues about an applicant are cross-validated with other information, the higher the validity of the selection procedure is likely to be (p. 139). It is unlikely that any one human being will possess all of the qualifications of an executive job to a high degree; therefore, executive selection is always a com- promise (Mandell, 1964). The art is to determine which requirements and factors (or characteristics) can be safely ignored and which are essential to effective selec- tion and subsequent performance in student personnel positions. CHAPTER I II METHODOLOGY Introduction The major purpose of this study was to explore the importance of various factors utilized in the selection of student personnel administrators in public universi- ties. Methodology was developed to facilitate the achievement of this primary objective and the additional ones as outlined in Chapter I. The investigator sought to combine sound scientific methods with the "art" required, using the field study approach with the struc— tured interview as the research method in this exploratory study. This chapter includes a discussion of the procedures involved in selecting the sample, methods used to secure their cooperation and participation and the arrangements .made fOr collecting the data. The research method, the strwurtured interview, is outlined along with the reasons for its selection for this research, its strengths and weaknesses, and the necessary conditions for its 84 effectiveness . 1:1; with the f p .q 511154210“! ”3‘ «2.....‘Edu lhe D 1 :1'inq tee 85 effectiveness. Development of the instruments is discussed along with the necessary considerations for developing satisfactory interview schedules and recording the data obtained. A Pilot Study was conducted prior to the major study. The benefits derived from this study relative to refinement of instruments, interview procedures, classifi- cation systems for data collected, and the determination of reliability and validity for this pilot study are outlined. The process of data collection including interviewing the appropriate sample personnel, recording the data, and, in general, the strengths and difficulties of this system for collecting the data are presented. The manner and methods to be utilized in the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the data as related to the objec— tives of this study are enumerated. Again, validity and inter-judge reliability measures relative to the value of ‘flhe structured interview, the interview schedules and the process of data collection as reflected in the actual study are cited. Selection of the Sample A review of available literature on this topic (see Chapter II) indicated that the kind, type, control and size of collegiate institutions may affect institutional policy, practice, procedures and criteria relative to the employment and promotion of student personnel administra— tors. On this basis and with the considerations of time, ..."J L. . I‘OQQZEC' tills - 3.: . we -.:‘d eaaeuom sar-E 23232931 uni'v' 3;’-'e:sities frofl -?I'E.r.€’r’ it has: e L ::-'3stern unive‘ 3,31 . e ...024,9j9 "L . . ...e instit: ifii'ier ; . i 0. the j ‘ '5'.“ “ :H . vus¢0n Bl] -E P? . U y. . ‘ “Edie“; 1 711‘: - .Lf large ant ..e 8337:1318 86 distances, costs, and the nature of the research method utilized, this investigator decided to utilize a strati— fied random sample of coed, public (state-supported) midwestern universities enrolling 10,000 or more students. The researcher further divided the university population above 10,000 students into two groups: medium universi- ties from 10,000 to 24,999 enrolled students, and large universities from 25,000 andabove in enrolled students. (However, it happened that there were actually no public midwestern universities in existence in 1969 enrolling 20,000 to 24,999 students.) The institutional population was determined through a review of the following pertinent and current sources: (a) Education Directory 1968-69, Part III. Higher Education, 1968, and (b) Information Please Almanac Atlas and Yearbook, Dan Golenpaul, editor, 1969, pp. 651-669. The investigator compiled a list of the universities that met the above criteria and listed them in the two groups: large or medium universities. She decided to utilize one—half of the total institutional population in each of the two groups for her sample. There were, therefore, to be four large and eight medium universities for a total of twelve sample institutions in this study. (See Appen— dix Ch, "Research Design: Sample of Institutions.') A second ; 1:121:11}! dram .-. crcuzs, wi t: 1 :::;rise the I .. :' ......‘M‘ .: =-=~.......ES 513:: of the r: 3: J-J .--- -.. the res-... : the Order dr; fir-..- . "*‘ues (‘ a V 1.“. i. “\‘92 H \. ._.~ :‘~\".L 7": \‘_ “\qk_\‘ 4L Je C ‘\ c h 87 A second party, divorced from this study, was asked to randomly draw all numbers of the population for the two groups, with the first four large universities drawn to comprise the sample and the remaining four to serve as substitutes in the order drawn. Similarly, the first eight of the medium universities drawn made up that sam- ple and the remaining eight were listed as substitutes in the order drawn, in the event that any of the initial sample were unable or unwilling to participate in this study. It was not, however, necessary to utilize the substitute institutions in this study since 100 percent of the appropriate personnel at the initial sample insti— tutions of the two size university groups agreed to participate in this study. A stratified random sample of institutions was deemed appropriate for this study as much of the data analysis is concerned with comparisons (of perceptions) between various personnel sub-groups among the two size inrrversities (Borg, 1926). This kind of sampling pro- cedures provided assurance that the sample would be representative of the population in terms of the critical factors that have been used by the investigator as a basis for stratification. The major disadvantage of this sam- pling method was eliminated by the availability of accurate information on the proportion of the population attxi ion C tr 5 After deta ect ‘ l u fa.“ .- :‘vo‘ I ‘ 2" 5 Sv‘ . ,_‘ \AK‘ \ w 9555er t' gen p). by ..- I! l.. .. ‘ ya"! u 1 was to“ .F‘ ‘V a ‘4 e-u' p . .. :."~~ ' .. “1 ‘a \ ~ 6‘ \- 88 in each stratum and, therefore, accurate classification and selection of the two institutional sample groups. After determination of the institutional sample, it was necessary to determine which of the personnel at these institutions ought to be interviewed for the pur- poses of this study. A review of related literature, discussion with practitioners and faculty-trainers in this field, and observations of past appointments indicated that the presidents, chief student personnel administra— tors and, perhaps, other executive level student personnel staff had or would have the most significant involvement in the selection of student personnel administrators for executive and managerial level positions. Available evidence indicated, too, that the presidents and execu- tive level student personnel staff would be differentially concerned and involved with the various phases, levels and stages of the selection process. Furthermore, differing knowledges, experiences, and attitudes and, thus, per- ceptions were believed to exist between these two groups. This study was designed to explore not only differences in perceptions of personnel according to the size of the collegiate institution, that is between large and medium universities; but, also, to determine perceptual differ- ences, if any, according to the personnel groups involved, i.e.,,«comparing presidents to executive level student personnel administrators, and additionally within the ‘ . 51-32:; 0. t . “f. ,. 22.21.: perso.... I I ‘.'. i=:.a.e executi. . “an an. ‘ ‘9 level 9 AA: c t” h 7 ':‘ ’~ “8 5 “Hz"‘ C a. 7.“ “hfye 0 § M ‘— «Ii exert a v D . .22.”. “Nail I‘. .‘ 7‘“..a+es , ;S 7‘ :‘Lstrators if ?‘ ~ 89 sub-group of the latter groups including, the chief student personnel administrators, the highest—ranking female executive level administrator and the remaining executive level staff. The investigator secured the names of the presidents and chief student personnel administrators of these twelve sample institutions. The next step was to secure their COOperation, assistance, and participation in this study. It was felt that if these leaders could be con— vinced of the potential value of this study and the importance of their participation in it, that they, in turn, could exert a persuasive force by their example and recommendation of this study for the participation of their subordinates, the other executive level student personnel administrators, in this research (Richardson, Dohrenwend and Klein, 1965). Three things became necessary: (1) the need to obtain the cooperation and participation in a 45-minute structured interview with these university presidents and chief student personnel administrators; and (2) to secure from the latter the names and agreement for the interview participation of other student personnel execu- tive level student personnel staff who would be involved in the selection process; and (3) to arrange with the chief student personnel administrator for a "contact person " to be designated in order that arrangements for ....' a. ‘4' :vi»;:- :Ieruts ‘ a‘ I . I I street-moves; 1‘, y! 2 :21- ct he H‘h u “g ‘ A .3.8 l“ i e: Peseerch Com—4 . A.‘LA‘ ‘ :..:LIS at VlCI‘. .. _ -.-. personnel 41:“. 83:7th C .‘te resea J 7T; a- . ‘~ ‘11 ‘- ‘ o :g--. fitted ‘3‘ ae. :~: \‘ y: “SPECte-I ‘ q ‘1 \. T “Ci-e. s~¥ers ‘ ‘43:; 1 - ““I~air. “55:1”,2‘ ‘ I -*~Cr t: :j‘,“, "1" 2.4... . M . Val-~19. L“. "-.~'h‘ 871-9885 “‘b‘ . s.:r‘t c «VI. t . a; ._C. ‘ ‘ «as ., ’ 12d t‘he «; h ~- .~ .u.‘ 90 appointments with these personnel might be made for an agreed—upon-day for the investigator's campus visitation to collect the data for this study. The investigator discussed this study with her Research Committee and the Vice-President of Student Affairs at Michigan State University. The Vice—President offered to write a letter in support of this study and its potential value to the university presidents and chief personnel administrators selected in the stratified random sample groups. The researcher believes that the outstanding assistance, cooperation, and interview participation of these top level administrators of this study is, in part, due to the sponsorship and support by a visible and respected Vice-President of Student Affairs of a large and respected university similar to those in the large university group of this study. Letters were written by the Vice—President for Student Affairs at Michigan State University and the investigator to the presidents and chief student per— sonnel administrators of these 12 institutions. These letters stressed the following elements believed to be important for their cooperation in a study of this nature: (1) theznature of the topic, the lack of knowledge avail~ able, and the potential value of knowledge to the field, in general, and practitioners, in particular; (2) the s;;;es:ion that the 1 122.15 st‘ad'; (3) t3- alreai'; obtained for 353115195 support ir. :312aticn Of the t :;;a:icn., as well as - . ouga - - :1: r beliefs and 91 suggestion that the letter recipient's beliefs were vital to this study; (3) the level of support and sponsorship already obtained for this study as evidenced by the Vice- President's supporting letters (see Appendix B), and (4) minimization of the time required for the interview parti- cipation, as well as any threat involved due the expression of their beliefs and attitudes, the latter accompanied by an assurance of anonymity for the participants (Hyman, gt_al,, 1954; Kahn and Cannell, 1959; and Richardson in Human Organization Resources, 1960). The letters from the investigator to the chief student personnel administrator requested a 45—minute structured interview, designation of other executive level student personnel staff who had had or would have signi- ficant involvement in the selection of executive and managerial level student personnel administrators and who, therefore, should be interviewed; and designation of a "contact person" on his campus who might work with the investigator to determine the day and appointment interview schedule for the campus visitation with the appropriate personnel. Both the presidents and chief student personnel administrators were informed that cooperation and participation in this study was being sought by the investigator from both of them. Further, a "Conceptual Model of Student Personnel Organizational Structure" and the appropriate "Insert" for the president 15’s: Chief Student 22:1: letter. The Co: 15 kinds and levels u.- [IN 1"." ...... .erned and , a1 ';V:AIF .. . u .. . .el administra' ;e:s:.'..el should be i A ~~ rive and manager ....- I.- a... a ‘-A u. ..1.;oendix B for 1 .. .. _ -I‘ can .“refiyu is and chief -é'Z:ser ts" were t: 31': 13.7931. .igator so -....'.'e1‘.'ec in the 8 ..‘EC 2‘7‘786 ' f at; 3:; al :39 to the . . 111*: 3:31;? 5‘ CE . . ‘lef St ‘T =rs. 92 and/or Chief Student Personnel Administrator accompanied each letter. The Conceptual Model was designed to clarify the kinds and levels of personnel with which this study was concerned and, also, to enable the chief student personnel administrator to adequately determine which personnel should be interviewed regarding the selection of executive and managerial student personnel administrators. (See Appendix B for letters, and "Inserts" sent to the presidents and chief student personnel administrators.) The lInserts" were to have been completed and returned to the investigator so that she might know who was or would be involved in the selection of which level student per— sonnel staff and the degree of that involvement. It happened that only five institutions, four medium and one large university chief student personnel administrators either returned or gave their inserts to the investigator, and only two presidents of the eight medium universities. However, she was able to secure the desired information by means of the appointment schedule calendars, and the personal interviews with the sample personnel. Finally, the chief student personnel administrators were requested to encdose, if available, an organizational chart of their student personnel organization, in their letter of response to the investigator. Four medium and one large university chief student personnel administrators sent such charts to the investigator. lost of the P“- 2:21 trators respct :i’a: Vice-President Szazetniversity that - participation in 5212;: or hesitahcy (2 2:1: or doubt as to Irritation to it, t resident or chief s‘ Elsi-3:19 and clarif Lifter-re of their ~a successful foll "L - s..e Ltlll Zed t 93 Most of the presidents and chief student personnel administrators responded by letter to the investigator and/or Vice—President for Student Affairs at Michigan State University that they were agreeable to cooperation and participation in this study. In those few cases of delay or hesitancy due to lack of understanding of the study or doubt as to the potential relevancy of their contribution to it, the researcher contacted the individual president or chief student personnel administrator by telephone and clarified the study and the value and importance of their participation in it. This proved to be a successful follow-up approach. She utilized the telephone, as well, to work with * the designated "contact person" to arrange an agreeable date for her visit to the campus and the appointment schedule for the personal interviews of the appropriate staff on that day. With the assistance of these "contact persons," a well-planned and logically arranged travel schedule was established for the researcher and the appropriate personnel were expected to be available for their interview at the designated appointment hour on the day'<3f the investigator's campus visitation. Most of the universities sent the investigator, in advance of the interview trip, a written schedule of arranged appoint- ments for the day of her visit to that institution. The few institutions which did not verbally provided the service scheduie l telephone. The cooperatio. 1.;.)esitive attitud. ieir colleagues as 1 exceeded the exp. search study. . l .. ~ \ h ' “we » , \“ 94 interview schedule listing to the investigator over the telephone. The cooperation, assistance and highly thoughtful and positive attitude of both the sample personnel and their colleagues as reflected in the interviews, and throughout the day on which she visited on each campus far exceeded the expectations of the investigator of this research study. The Research Method: The Structured Interview The structured interview method utilized in this study is a technique rather infrequently utilized for student personnel research. For this reason and the importance that this method assumed in this research, the investigator believes it is important to discuss the major considerations and conditions which may make this an effective vehicle for the collection of data. Dis- cussion of this method in theory and practice should be distinguished from the later discussion of the process of data collection which will consider primarily the external concerns involved in the actual conduct or this research with the sample personnel. The structured interview is closely related to the instrumentation developed for this study. The choice of the former determined in large measure the choice of the latter. The instruments were selected and designed to :athize the collect :fiata related to tr alltzent provided L Q Cabr- A'j ho n-‘J' Q The structured 1.!f.‘ i>~ as follows: ice interview is role situation if viewer, asks a pe respondent, QUES' Pertinent to th 19. 469) : azd Cannell (19 59159 the term ‘5‘le Pattern :3 tlated f 95 maximize the collection, standardization, and recording of data related to the study's objectives within the time allotment provided by the 45-minute structured interview method. The structured interview was defined by Kerlinger (1965) as follows: The interview is a face-to-face interpersonal role situation in which one person, the inter- viewer, asks a person being interviewed, the respondent, questions deSigned to obtain answers pertinent to the purposes of the research problem (p. 469). Kahn and Cannell (1959) added: We use the term interview to refer to a spec- ialized pattern of verbal interaction-- initiated for a specific purpose, and focused on some specific content area, with consequent elimination of extraneous material. Moreover, the interview is a pattern of inter- action in which the role relationship of interviewer and respondent is highly specialized, its specific characteristics depending somewhat on the purpose and character of the interview (p. 16). While both used the term "interview" in general their definitions most closely resemble the "structured inter- view" in which the purpose is to secure information, beliefs, and attitudes relative to a particular research problem or set of similar problems. (See Chapter I, Definition of Terms: Structured Interview.) The researcher decided to use the structured inter- view in this study based on consideration of the nature of this study (exploratorY). the objectives established, a :ez'iew of relevant 1 1:15 of previous re The topic of e. pastel administra' these making t‘r.’ 11:, therefore, the ~49 + ..... .o discover the Le _:::cedures , praC' :_‘, :ao.’ "vab-v ' 1n of stucent 1;:isa'1d levels of :rzation secured .' . :‘Qyo \:~‘ ‘3‘ .~ive data an: $95353 studies am ‘=-=‘-1'.-’e to the sele k. ‘:“" 0bjeCtives 13:5) . - ‘0 gdlde the C1 1711i” L I he Paramet. ‘. ‘1 could be dEto 3352:); .. . rfist}: .. \- “ ESeS. .1Pport fOr t" 4513 H “Y QYJer 96 review of relevant literature including the recommenda« tions of previous researchers of related studies. The topic of employment and promotion of student personnel administrators has not been directly studied with those making the decisions in these areas. It was felt, therefore, that an exploratory study was needed in order to discover the factors, their relative importance, the procedures, practices and personnel involved in the selection of student personnel administrators for various kinds and levels of positions. It was expected that the information secured would, perhaps, validate or invalidate descriptive data and conclusions of previous related research studies and, also, hopefully provide new insights relative to the selection of these administrators. As a result, objectives not hypotheses were established which were to guide the conduct of this study. It was expected that if the parameters and variables relative to this topic could be determined by this study that future researchers in this area of study could formulate test- able hypotheses. . Support for the use of the structured interview was provided by several previous researchers studying career ‘development of student personnel administrators and other research sources, in general. These writers suggested that the personal interview would likely be the most effective technique for greater probing of subtle and 'pX ‘actors and "'"E ‘0 a prOblem, I fired the sum“: terrier to gather Cf teleshcne from t} 2:2; Given her SIT-5 0- a A p 1 to“ amt of relev :slazi-re to "The Putt :"‘;:-+ w»... Per .sonnel Ad: r». u t; 3‘ a Suggested 3:19 (1368) utilize: 4:224? H’Ev‘y ‘ H ‘ . .elopment 0. '9 H ~¢u men" institu‘ 97 complex factors and the provision of new insights rela— tive to a problem, if employed with relatively small sample groups in an exploratory study (Borg, 1926; Macoby and Macoby, 1954; Kerlinger, 1965; Sherburne, 1968 and Haller, 1967). Haller (1967), in an exploratory study employed the structured outline questionnaire and a tape recorder to gather data by personal interview and over the telephone from the 13 "experts" comprising her sample group. Given her small sample, she garnered a substan— tial amount of relevant, subtle and complex material relative to "The Future Role of the Highest Ranking Woman Student Personnel Administrator in the College or Univer- sity and a Suggested Training Program." Although Sher— burne (1968) utilized a questionnaire in his study on career development of student personnel administrators in "Big Ten" institutions, he recommended in his conclu— sions that: A personal interview should be conducted with the institutions selected for this study in order to further investigate variables which would not lend themselves to questionnaire instrumentation (p. 92). Because the current study was also interested in many of the same variables relative to promotion, which were part of Sherburne's study and, further, one of its two sample groups of institutions, the large universities, ‘was composed entirely of "Big Ten" institutions, it was felt that the structured personal interview might be :articularly effect; rived in select!- ...... I... p 115 promotion 0 by research In stages relative to )- n".- o exception. Sc 22 extra time requi $1.19 difficultie: - K 5.?on v ..-.'ew data (301' rises-by, 1954) . t t to be that .a,‘ ‘ I it a: sawi‘ay‘es the set?” eXP‘ ;:- 1 1.9 data I “1 "Valli sa‘me f! not biperm 98 particularly effective for investigation of the variables involved in selection decisions relative to student per— sonnel administrators. These studies, thus, lend some support for the use of the interview method for explora- tory studies with those concerned with the area of employ— ment and promotion of student personnel administrators. Any research method has both advantages and disad— vantages relative to its use. The structured interview is no exception. Some of the disadvantages noted included the extra time required, the higher cost of the research, and the difficulties associated with the analysis of interview data (Borg, 1926; Kerlinger, 1965; and Macoby and Macoby, l954). The major disadvantage, however, is thought to be that of inducing greater subjectivity and possible bias into the collection of data (Borg, 1926). The interview is rarely uniform, less standardized and provides less anonymity for the respondent (Sellitz, gt_al, 1962). Hyman, g2_31. (1954) stated: What makes the interview method in all fields singularly exposed to criticism is the fact that the data collected are so clearly derived in an interpersonal situation. In other methods where the same sort of interdetermincy may actually operate, the visibility of the problem may not be so marked, and criticisms are unfairly reserved for the interview method (p. 8). Others add that it is precisely this interpersonal situa- ‘tion which makes the interview a valuable method. Bingham, Moore and Gustad (1959) pointed out: Sources of “Me viewer) in the 2 relationship be‘ it is precisely Lie interview a :‘iffer race lies 1:: 939 quality 3:11, et al. (1954 _....;::;, coding, rec n: “" ' . ....e:*.'iew Situa‘ - .a'qqf‘ .....e their effe n W "-.. 1 ~35" h . ..ave, at lea.c -.z .r: interviewiuc Lirewise , the ie‘i ' unite advar i {Queriety of :5 interview it"s-.35 m. is 1513:} lgut C :11 PErson. 9 e ‘ 1" \u‘ Y & r‘ l I” I {Sir-J» SEC" “is.“ ‘ :CS‘J fill and C‘s: ‘11) the S . .TLai’xES f e. r’ ( . 1( 1e I ::-. and reasc «as and at ll 05 all ;£¥ edue 99 Sources of unreliability inhere in the inter- viewer, in the person interviewed, and in the relationship between the two. Paradoxically, it is precisely these same elements which make the interview a valuable instrument. The difference lies in the conduct of the interview and the quality of the relationship (p. 9). Hyman, et a1. (1954) suggest that biasing factors (e.g., probing, coding, recording, and judging of material) in the interview situation need be discovered and manipulated to reduce their effects. This requires that the inter- viewer have, at least, a minimumzof training and experi- ence in interviewing. Likewise, the interview as a research technique has some definite advantages. Hyman, et a1. (1954) stated: A variety of gains result from the fact that the interviewer, while he might be a biasing agent, might conceivably be an insightful, helpful person. He might be able to amplify a given question, probe for clarification of an ambiguous answer or elaboration of a cryptic report, or to persuade the respondent to answer a question that he would otherwise skip. All such advantages involving the insightful and resourceful interviewer are lost in the self-administering situation where mistakes of the respondent have a quality of finality (p. 16). Thus, the response rate is likely to be higher rela- tive to securing answers to all questions, leads can be followed up, greater clarity and depth of response is possible, and reasons for subtle and complex preferences, opinions, and attitudes may be better ascertained from persons of all educational levels. In short, the interview is a more flexible and adaptable technique and the process 11 content of data {Kerlinger, 1965; F, 121 Bingham, Moore 11 interview methc :21; research studi fl, 1954) . Am ‘1‘. of greater con‘ :e respondent cannq rust or edit earlir 1... u, later questio: spouses given to :5 V. n aoby and Maco In Order to YT 100 and content of data collection can be better controlled (Kerlinger, 1965; Borg, 1926, Macoby and Macoby, 1954 and Bingham, Moore and Gustad, 1957). This, thus, makes the interview method particularly appropriate for explora- tory research studies (Macoby and Macoby, 1954 and Hyman, gE_§l., 1954). Another important value of this method is that of greater control of the sequence of questions. The respondent cannot read through the entire instrument first or edit earlier answers in light of later questions. Thus, later questions cannot affect the results or responses given to earlier questions (Hyman, gt_al., 1954, and Macoby and Macoby, 1954). In order to meet the objectives of a research pro- blem and to be able to compare sample groups relative to their responses to these objectives, a degree of struc— ture must be established for both the process and content of the interview. The interview may involve responses to a completely ”closed” pre-coded schedule of questions or to broad, general "open" free-answer type questions--or, perhaps something in between these extremes depending on the problem at hand. Discussion to follow will consider the concerns and considerations involved in the structured interview and the kind and type cf instruments developed to be utilized in the interview in order to meet the objectives of this study. Some of the literature on "Interviewing" in the Bibliography contains considerable iscussion of the rm structure and guest. various intervi- Successful in certain external cor :‘terviewer trainin 1:2: in the current :ten'iewing as an j Einct, however, p: .tten'i ewing . As a '.:~' -. ..-,(‘rOj 9M and expe ..-..e through 1 ...‘u prior to me .. anestigat EC!“ bl'Je - lnt : ~' er I‘ “Ting b ack “stag, sr 101 discussion of the merits of the various kinds and types of structure and questions that may be utilized effectively for the various interview purposes. Successful interviewing requires the presence of certain external conditions, interviewer motivation and interviewer training, behaviors and attitudes. The investi- gator in the current study had had previous experience in interviewing as an instructor, advisor and counselor. She had not, however, previously been involved in research interviewing. As a result it was necessary to gain some background and experience in the latter. This was made possible by review and study of relevant literature on the interview process, discussions with faculty field researchers in the social and behavioral sciences, and practice through interviewing in the pilot study con- ducted prior to the major research study. The conditions established and attitudes which prevailed in the inter- views were ascertained and critiqued by faculty-judges and the investigator by reviewing the tapes made during the pilot study. These evaluations enabled her to modify the procedures, techniques and instruments accordingly for effective interviewing in the major study. Previous interviewing background, study in this area, and pilot study evaluations, provided an awareness and sensitivity to tie necessary condi irate research i ’;r:fessional judge. ages of the currer. :‘I he 1 .ata obtainei tithe saiple perSCf a: least minimal cor ”- n52 uuuuu rch interviewin It is not feaE rezsive discussior .2 .. were present : Ifilg' . v ..l:,.m‘ 5" it is desi :s and behaviors 5‘.- Dn ’ I ut‘fihfl‘. 102 the necessary conditions and attitudes with which to con- duct the research interviewing. It would appear from the "professional judges" and investigator's review of the tapes of the current study and the quality and quantity of the data obtained as well as the subjective reactions of the sample personnel to the interview experience that at least minimal conditions existed making for effective research interviewing. It is not feasible to provide the reader with an extensive discussion of all conditions which ought to be or were present in the structured interview situation. However, it is desirable to outline the major considera- tions and behaviors determining the success or lack thereof in this research method. While it is somewhat difficult to separate the discussion of the interview method from that of the instrumentation an effort will be made to do so for purposes of clarification. However, the reader needs to recognize that both were utilized simultaneously. To minimize the problems of interpretation and other biasing elements in the interview situation, the interview should be carefully structured and handled. Thoughtful planning regarding the time and place available for the :zerview is import relation to the iii". regard to sett release of content kite, 1960) . Int» truths and extra: . ...... .‘ """" 103 interview is important. The position of the investigator in relation to the respondent must be considered. Privacy with regard to setting and anonymity relative to the release of content of the data obtained must be assured (Whyte, 1960). Interference by other persons and dis- tractions and extraneous noise should be eliminated wherein possible or, at the least, minimized. Procedures for the handling of the instrument and the recording equipment, the presentation of questions, and the recording of data should be as efficient and standardized as possible. This will allow more interview time for a thoughtful considera- tion of and response to the questions by the respondent, which is where the emphasis ought to be in the research interview. Interviewee or respondent motivation is inextricably linked to interviewer behavior. Given an understanding of the purpose and potential value of the research as well as the respondent's willingness to be interviewed and the external conditions as outlined above, whether the interview method is an effective vehicle for collection of quality data is primarily determined by the interviewer's behavior (Caplow, 1956). Careful selection, adequate training and practice are necessary ingredients to good interviewing. The training and practice afforded the investigator in this study has been discussed. Several considerations enter ::o the selection I' Q Q ... A V I 1947) states 5:21 pecple make be Zertain personal ct; believed to contr it 152163;. Above E; He "listen1 :"2l‘:’\h s -, conprenen: ‘‘‘‘‘ n' ‘- 104 into the selection and training of an interviewer. 01d— field (1947) states "It is generally acknowledged that some people make better interviewers than others )p. 60)." Certain personal characteristics and experiences are believed to contribute to the ability of a person to interview. Above all, an interviewer must be able to listen. He "listens" by his concentration, active parti— cipation, comprehension, objectivity and by being obser— vant during the interview (Fenlason, 1962). The inter- viewer to be successful, also, must be fairly well put together himself, capable of reacting empathically and non-judgmentally to the other person, widely read and extremely thoughtful about personality and its dynamics (Bingham, Moore and Gustad, 1957). Further, he must have sufficient self-confidence to initiate contacts and establish rapport with stranger after stranger and not display anxiety and hesitancy lest this be sensed by the respondent and lead to refusal to participate or affect unfavorably the participation of the respondent in the interview (Richardson, Dohrenwend and Klein, 1965). Some of the personnel interviewed were of greater value to this research project than others by virtue of their knowledge, experience, perspective, sensitivity, and ability to understand, recall and/or anticipate their experiences and attitudes regarding selection; and, their motivation and ability .to articulate these adequately and ua forthright man if the traits of th 113ensman; 1960, sftiis research me' levels of the inveSf I With no excep‘ level and all had ti £51 had the doctore ““““ p "F'- z...iation could be 111211 of time and :zicated that this .i'..0r, Further ' t] tee of the in "1965,. K n ~13; 1954) . c «ea effect 01 113;; 6t <11. “Eff 105 in a forthright manner, which are considered to be some of the traits of the good informant (Back, 1960; Vidich and Bensman; 1960, and.Whyte, 1960). One thing in favor of this research method was the similarity of educational levels of the investigator—interviewer and respondents. With no exceptions all had studied at the graduate level and all had the Masters Degree. Many, however, also had the doctorate. Back (1960) found that the higher the educational level of the respondent the more information could be obtained in the interview with a minimum.of time and effort. The related literature indicated that this is the most important background factor. Further, the respondent's occupational, economic and social status levels as well as his age, sex and race are all felt to be related to the amount of information which can be secured in the interview. If there are perceived gaps by the respondent between his knowledge, experience, educational, economic or social status when compared to the interviewer this may have a negative influence on the motivation of the respondent and the content of the interview (Richardson, Dohrenwend, and Klein, 1965; Kahn and Cannell, 1959; and Macoby and Macoby, 1954). Group membership similarities have a decided effect on securing and maintaining good rapport (Hyman, §£_al., 1954). In addition, these variables will affect the kind and type of structure and questions ::iiized in the int experiential le Structured and "clo Lithe interview ar. rigid and limiting heeledge of the re Fichardson, Dohrern ?e:erally desire an ~‘~ mil- (1954' J race and/or sex 51:91 to tailor, u: ere c1 059117 with t} 1:12;; w,- . ‘lt .. ”S on :‘39013 rapport Li‘s‘glc ‘itiv e t0 the . : lr “'Olds- 106 utilized in the interview. The higher the education and experiential level of the sample, the less highly structured and "closed" type questions should predominate in the interview and interview schedules. To be too rigid and limiting is to insult the intelligence and knowledge of the respondent and lose his interest (Richardson, Dohrenwend, and Klein, 1965). These persons generally desire an active interplay with the interviewer. Hyman, gt_§l. (1954) found that a respondent of a differ— ent race and/or sex than that of the interviewer generally tended to tailor, unconsciously, his response to fit in more closely with those attitudes perceived to be held by the interviewer. These factors should be kept in mind as the data are examined and interpretations are made. Despite the importance of certain similarities between the respondent and the interviewer for the best interview interaction, there are certain interviewer behaviors and attitudes which may substantially assist in offsetting effects of any discrepancies in background. Many writers on the interview have studied interviewer behavior and most all stress the importance of develop- ing good rapport with the respondent and providing psy- chological as well as social assurance of anonymity relative to the interview content. (Sellitz, §E_§l., 1962; Oldfield, 1947; Borg, 1926; Whyte, 1960; Hyman, et a1., 1959; Kahn =11 ."acoby and Mace n". that they imply :mtivate the res nation. Rapport is do 3395? and respect Itervievee with re 2: willingness to -L‘ Aer. ' (See Chapt. 3151‘; levee Partici; n: . ..z in a defined an “1% “e rel eVane . e O; 33:10. .1 < “Ll ”a,“ res yuan . 9e (Kahn ch“- : 1% 11.51 e o i 107 §E_§l., 1959; Kahn and Cannell, 1959; Richardson, 1960; and Macoby and Macoby, 1954). These two factors and all that they imply are critical if the interviewer is to motivate the respondent to provide the desired infor— mation. Rapport is defined as "the degree of cooperation, honesty and respect exhibited between interviewer and interviewee with regard to an appreciation, understanding and willingness to accept the power and position of the other." (See Chapter I.) Part of the motivation for interviewee participation is the respect accorded the respondent by singling him out as an experienced author— ity in a defined area. The incentives he may perceive often include altruism, that is, advancing scientific knowledge, prestige from cooperation with a research project and the interest that the respondent may have in the particular subject under investigation (Richardson in Human Organization Research, 1960 and Sellitz, gt_al., 1962). If the latter is lacking, it is necessary for the investigator to attempt to help the respondent to see the relevance of the topic, procedures and interview content to his own goals and interests as well as the potential of the research to, perhaps, bring about desir— able change (Kahn and Cannell, 1959). In any case, the research technique or the method of data collection needs to appear meaningful and be need—fullfilling to the respondent (Argyris, 1960). The interviewer can enhance the motivation of t V npyvfi ‘ '1 ......ed and arranc 51:1, and by clarii case in the inter Aside from t3. ''' .: cztalning the f ceresy, increase t3 well, 1959) . '1" 55.31" h ' ....e brief, ca irie‘ 5+ \. .atement as sea statement r a; ‘L .. ..e respondent «Li'lewer should "U‘ u. H K h- w 0“ .s, Conversa 3“; ':"~e: .'.7 he and 91 “fl, .h .1). VJ)- . A.VS t lmporta: ..,-3 a D . . ermlSSive 1‘:'~.1 ' "$7.16?“ 108 the motivation of the interviewee by minimizing the time involved and arrangements necessary for gathering the data, and by clarifying what is expected of the inter— viewee in the interview situation. Aside from these broader motivations which are either present in the respondent or can often be culti— vated, certain interviewer attitudes exhibited in the interview itself would appear to enhance the possibilities for obtaining the frank and complete answers desired and, thereby, increase the validity of the interview (Kahn and Cannell, 1959). The interviewer's introduction of self should be brief, casual and positive, followed by a brief statement as to the purpose of the research. A general statement relative to the expectations for behavior of the respondent in the interview is helpful. The interviewer should endeavor to build rapport by a friendly, courteous, conversational and confident manner. He should be attentive and give his full concentration to the inter- view; Most importantly, the interviewer needs to pro— vide a permissive, non-threatening and non-judgmental atmosphere (Argyris, 1960; Edwards, 1957; Sellitz, gE_§l., 1962; and Kahn and Cannell, 1959). The interviewer needs to inspire trust in himself and must not be in a position to cxnrtrol sanctions affecting the respondent (Gusfield, 1960 and Macoby and Macoby, 1954) . He needs to be out— side the power heirachy affecting the present and future :yssition of the res ' I ems?!) ‘ no. .1 . . .ron expre. isagreerent with t I give the responi '- ~ 1" w a. ""fisuflly treaa . 5:." ‘ ' C. . thrther mh' \ Elm- +1. 5“ "v- .4. 1"!" ‘ . “hiding t’ 5" v. .‘ a 5“ I "1! al ‘ ‘ Questl; Tea ‘0 ‘th‘v 109 position of the respondent. While the interviewer should refrain from expressing his views and/or agreement or disagreement with those of the respondent, it is helpful to give the respondent the feeling that the interviewer is an informed stranger and is knowledgeable about and acquainted with the wide variety of opinions and atti- tudes that may be expressed on any given aspect of the subject. This will help the respondent to feel more secure in the expression of his beliefs and to feel that they will be understood and accepted, and assist in eliminating his need to be evasive concerning them (Gusfield, 1960 and Richardson, Dohrenwend, and Klein, 1965). In summary, the interviewer needs to be able to successfully tread the fine line between being involved and committed to his project and the collection of his data and yet objective, detached and permissive in doing so. He further must be accepting, respectful, patient and tolerant of the respondent and yet be able to main— tain control of the interview and so direct the communi- cation including probes towards frank, complete and adequate answers to the questions in his schedule in order that maximum use can be made of the interview perirxi, all questions answered, and valid data can be obtained. Interviewer "bias" is a term often used in connec- tion with the use of the interview technique to collect fate for research 3 iscussed when dis: siiered earlier in ;-:ssiixility that t':‘ I : selection of re 13: b M) - FA out doses from the thesis, facial e): 3.5 :ey cause the tended and/or his 33??»10priately int: QR... ‘st'er. Interviewe: 110 data for research purposes. This concern was in part discussed when disadvantages of the interview were con— sidered earlier in this chapter. It refers to the possibility that the interviewer might use preferences in the selection of respondents, may elicit certain kinds of responses from the respondent by verbal explanation, emphasis, facial expression or other non—verbal behavior. This may cause the respondent to answer in ways not intended and/or his responses may be inaccurately or inappropriately interpreted and recorded by the inter— viewer. Interviewer "bias" can be the result of sys— tematic and/or variable errors in the interview. Some "bias" is almost inevitable because the interview is an interaction between two fallible human beings both of whom have certain personality structures, wishes, expec- tations and perceptions relative to the appearance and behavior of each other and to the various aspects of the topic (Sellitz, §t_§l., 1962). In addition, if the interview is to provide complete answers to questions sometimes probes (but 225 leading probes) must be used by the interviewer to encourage the interviewee to enlarge upon and/or complete his answer. All possible conditions and problems that may arise in the interview cannot be anticipated in advance nor would such complete structure necessarily be desirable. Insight into subtle and :c-rplex attitudes i.ese attitudes re. 5:: the interviewe. :erefal selection 2 :5 standardization 1 :strnents should 121.. m” 19: ieteiled explanatic :22: question in th ~...:er and asked .. messary, shoul ~; ...e interviewer Pirticnl ..ar frame 0 ‘ 3?. of + .he questic lll complex attitudes and investigation into reasons for these attitudes requires that some degree of flexibility for the interviewer should be present. However, a more careful selection and training of interviewers, a degree of standardization of procedures, and pre-testing of the instruments should eliminate much unwanted "bias" (Hyman, 2E_gl., 1954). Initially, there should be no detailed explanations of the research, the interview pro- cedures or the contents of the schedule (Caplow, 1956). Each question in the interview schedule should be taken in order and asked exactly as worded. Clarification, if necessary, should be minimal and care must be taken by the interviewer not to provide the respondent with a particular frame of reference by any additional explana- tion of the question given (Sellitz, g£_gl., 1962). The interviewer must politely and tactfully refrain from expressing any attitudes or beliefs about questions raised, even when requested to do so by the respondent. It may be possible to respond to such a request at the end of an interview with a general statement of experi— ences or findings up to the present on a point; however, the interviewer must be careful never to give the respondent the feeling that his answer is irrelevent, inappropriate or in any way objectionable. The major point with regard to interview "bias" concerns the necessity to ascertain those parts of this research :e:?:.i:;ie wherein factors can be :t':.:eracted and/o: attaining quality t I.‘ (\— . . (1) between saxo‘ It has been ; 1 -s :eveloped f or re - 0.1}: lRStrm Stud (Se ...: sunglce OE +‘F‘IQ 2:2??? ' ‘ ' 5rcr k and lite (SEQ Chant 32:5“ I'N W“ to be . “hints V d lnter ‘41iali. :tif‘h ‘3“31 \‘ ‘54:. ' S ’wl‘vv ‘ 112 technique wherein "bias" may result. If the major bias— ing factors can be determined then they can better be counteracted and/or controlled. This is essential for attaining quality data to be used for comparative pur- poses between sample groups. Instrumentation It has been previously pointed out that the instru- ments developed for use in this study were specifically designed to coincide effectively with the structured interview method as the technique which was utilized to collect the data pertinent to the objectives of this study. Four instruments were deve10ped and used in the final study. (See Appendix A for Sample Instruments.) The choice of the kind of instruments and considerations employed in their development were based on previous research and literature regarding the objectives of this study (see Chapter II), literature relative to instru— mentation to be used effectively in conjunction with the structured interview method, and refinements of the initially developed instruments after they were pre—tested in the pilot study. It is appropriate at this point to explain the pur— pose and use of each of these four instruments. The investigator believed that it might be of value to secure institutional, student personnel organization personnel and individual respondent background information relative I. -\~ ~»~ 113 to the concerns of this study. .After examination of the proposed combination of demographic information and interview schedules which.were initially developed, it was decided that except for a few basic questions rela— tive to the respondent, that this demographic information should be obtained outside the interview situation. Part of the reason for this change lay in the excessive length of the combined schedule and thus the interview could not have been completed within the allotted time of 45—minutes. As a result, the quest for this information was sought through the instrument entitled "Demographic Information on Institution and Student Personnel Organization,” which was given to the chief student personnel administrator at the time of his interview and was to have been completed by or under his supervision as soon as possible following the completion of the interview and then either given to the interviewer later that day or mailed to her. This procedure did not appear to be an effective one for secur— ing this information. The final count revealed that only 50 percent of these forms were returned. Thus, six of the twelve institutions including three large and three medium size universities returned the forms. In approxi- mately one-half of these returned forms, the information was incomplete particularly regarding the characteristics of the student personnel organizational staff. In some cases information on the institution especially composition :f the faculty by as not available. rite reasons for Perhaps, the infor: 1;;eared to demand :5 institutional p: serve-en the request .... ‘5‘ LLLL 1‘,- t 114 of the faculty by sex and by race (percentage requested) was not available. The investigator can only speculate on the reasons for the lack of return of these forms. Perhaps, the information requested was not available or appeared to demand too much time and effort on the part of institutional personnel, and/or maybe the connection between the requested information on this form and the content of the interview was not made clear by the inves- tigator nor adequate motivation developed within the chief student personnel administrator so that this form would be returned. Whatever the reason, the fact that only 50 percent of the forms were returned and the infor— mation on at least half of these was incomplete or inade— quate for use in analysis indicated that there was little value in attempting to analyze this information in rela- tion to the rest of the data obtained in this study. The "Conceptual Model of Student Personnel Organiza- tional Structure" was the second instrument utilized. This smas used not only in the interview situation but, as indi- cated, enclosed, also, in the initial letters to presidents and chief student personnel administrators to assist them in identifying those executive level student personnel administrators in their institutions who should :QfViQVEd {Or th “59 in the intervi 2: managerial" an d . WC" the indivi Pam, this model 115 be included among the sample personnel to be personally interviewed for this study. (See Appendix A.) Its primary use in the interview was to assist the respondents to identify and state the importance of various factors in selection according to the level of operation—~executive or managerial--and, in one or two questions, entry level, at which the individual selected would be working. In summary, this model provided a standardized base for expression of differences relative to the level of opera— Eigg_of the potential worker. Thus, comparative analysis of differences in perception relative to the factors considered important at various levels of operation between and among the sample groups of the two size universities can legitimately be made. In effect, this model served in an adjunct capacity in the interview situation. It merely provided a standardized guideline or designated frame of reference for respondent consideration of the questions contained in the interview schedule (Kahn and Cannell, 1959). The major instruments utilized in this study were the two ”Interview Schedules: President and Executive JLevel Student Personnel Administrators" (see Appendix A). 'These were developed initially subsequent to a review of related.literature and research (see Chapter II), iscussion with Pr practitioners in s a: b' .. :ae basic objec aid the method to literature relativ~ :tensiew method w. :str'ments develo; :2 revised accord: - \.-. ‘‘‘‘‘ ‘31. investigat 33 research cons ult “Is. 2.:le .rew schedules ;-.:e the intervie‘. 3252‘“ ' . ..rc questions ”particular or‘ ~..:n:1ewer with t ..... WGStiOnS by . 2» . ‘k' -“:.l!'7 e analysis :TVS trities ' The 1 . of “.Le groups H‘lo :Cie .116 discussion with professional trainers and executive level practitioners in student personnel, and after determination of the basic objectives (see Chapter I) of this research and the method to be used to collect the data. The literature relative to instrumentation for the structured interview method was reviewed carefully. The initial instruments developed were pre-tested in the pilot study and revised according to the suggestions of the "pro- fessional judges," the reaction of the pilot sample per— sonnel, investigator's evaluation, and with the assistance of research consultants in the College of Education. The interview schedules were utilized in this study to (a) guide the interviewee in the interview by providing specific questions (relative to the research objectives) in a particular order on the schedules; (b) provide the interviewer with the space to note the answers given to each questions by the respondent; and, (c) permit com- parative analysis of responses among and between sample groups of the personnel interviewed at the two—size uni- versities. The latter was made possible by standardiza— tion of the schedules in order that the responses of the sample groups might be compared as a result of exposure to the same stimuli or questions in the same order for each group (Hyman, §t_gl., 1954 and Richardson, gt_§l., 1965). The most important consideration in the development and use of such instruments is that they must be relevant :c the objectives Berg, 1926; Kahn L‘.‘.‘Ci'~’€d in the se 2::H i..istrators and "en 6-; 35.5.3510 :f itese schedules hiring, kind and . <19 :ajcr dif EXECItiv v‘ feren e and mana exe3‘;tive level. St Presidents . I "i?“ the use of 355319 1‘ ' v cutne leve wtelv 1n the \-2 4V a‘lr‘g any a ‘ Ia; 117 to the objectives of the study (Sellitz, gt;§l., 1962; Borg, 1926; Kahn and Cannell, 1959, and Budd,‘g§;§l., 1967). As noted two interview schedules were developed. The literature indicated and the pilot study confirmed the fact that presidents and executive level student per— sonnel administrators were differentially concerned and involved in the selection process for student personnel administrators and for those at the various levels of operation in the student personnel organization. A review of these schedules by the reader will reveal that the wording, kind and order of the questions were the same. ~The major difference was that of investigation of both executive and managerial level selection factors with executive level staff and omission of the latter with the presidents. Investigation in this area was done through the use of the same kind of question as that for the executive level selection and, indeed, followed it immediately in the executive level schedule, thereby eliminating any adverse effects relative to comparison of later responses to the questions. Further, the presi- dent's schedule contained two questions not in that of the executive level administrative schedule. One question requested information regarding the involvement of other university and non—university personnel in the selection of the chief student personnel administrator (p. 8); the second difference-—an optional question--asked if the ;:esident utilized today when he last I personel administ :crtant at that except for those c. berade between tho'l Eéfsornel administ: EiilES With regard at personnel admi 35551519 between tt are“tive level stu ..zer student per 8c are executive 16 "333+; “‘Ve"1evel s ta 3313-8. . was defined ‘ 118 president utilized the same factors listed as important today when he last made the selection of a chief student personnel administrator or were some other factors more important at that time (pp. 4—5). In all instances, except for those cited above, legitimate comparisons can be made between the presidents and executive level student personnel administrative groups in the two size univer— sities with regard to selection of executive level stun dent personnel administrators. Comparisons are also possible between the various sub-sample groups of the executive level student personnel administrators, e.g., chief student personnel administrators, highest—ranking female executive level administrator, and other executive-level staff between the twOvsize university groups. The major terminology utilized in the instru— ments was defined under "Definition of Terms" in Chapter I. TheSe would include "factors," "degree of importance," "selection-employment and promotion," "national academic and/or professional stature," and "personnel characteris— tics." The terms "executive, managerial and entrance level" were defined as well in Chapter I under the explanation of the "Conceptual Model of Student Personnel Organizational Structure." Before leaving the discussion of instrumentation, it appears appropriate to discuss some of the major considerations that must be taken into account in the ievelopment of eff iiscussions are av :ewing' in the Bi). ms of instrumen uSellitz, et a1. E 2; an interview st :the content, for ii sequence of qu< . In. . ‘Qn “' t‘r and Sheats lq 23“ be Clear, unan SZ‘M‘IA «..lu be Shared by "Invition of the r "hunger, 1965; K ”Staci. 1957; a "want that the . 17.3 and schedules ‘. .‘\ . u at} on reac‘Cions 119 development of effective interview schedules. (Detailed discussions are available in many of the books on "Inter- viewing" in the Bibliography. One of the best discus- sions of instrumentation is by Kornhauser and Sheatsley in Sellitz, gt_al., 1962, pages 552-574.) When develop- ing an interview schedule, consideration must be given to the content, form (language and frame of reference) and sequence of questions (Hyman, gt_2l., 1954 and Korn— hauser and Sheatsley, 1962). The language or phraseology must be clear, unambiguous and the vocabularly meaning should be shared by both interviewer and interviewee. The wording of the questions may profoundly affect the motivation of the respondent and the answers given (Kerlinger, 1965; Kahn and Cannell, 1959; Bingham, Moore, and Gustad, 1957; and Vidich and Bensman, 1960). It is important that the wording used be uniform in all inter- views and schedules so that comparative data will be based on reactions to the same stimuli, the same ques- tions (Richardson, Dohrenwend, and Klein, 1965). The concerns presented relative to the wording of questions assumes less importance when the respondents and investi— gator-interviewer have similar backgrounds, e.g., educa- tion and kind and place of work, and, in general, are more homogeneous and have, in common, greater familiarity with the subject matter (Richardson, et a1., 1965). The literati: :e:its and denerit sincen or free- a l3:5;. Kornhauser a 1334; Hyman, et al Snell, 1959) . E qqqqq jcrad rantages C i seizardization o f . 1 13.: if?“ ....tification :sul: as greater 5 .- ... ..azn descriptive :terpretation, the \- vat maYI by 1i ES, affect t ~E one "n freez~answe 120 The literature on interviewing delves into the merits and demerits of both pre—coded closed questions and open or free—answer type questions (Richardson, §E_gl., '1965; Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1962; Macoby and Macoby, 1954; Hyman, §£;2l,, 1954; Borg, 1926; and Kahn and Cannell, 1959). Both of these types of questions were defined under "Definition of Terms" in Chapter I. The major advantages of the pre-coded closed question is the standardization of response-and easier analysis of data and quantification of answers. Greater reliability should result as greater standardization exists. Closed ques— tions more appropriately assess facts, verify or not certain descriptive data and limit investigator—interviewer interpretation, thereby increasing objectivity in measure— ment but may, by limiting the respondent's possible responses, affect the accuracy or validity of his response. The open free-answer questions also have certain advan- tages. They are likely to have greater appeal for persons of superior education, intelligence and socio—economic status, to elicit greater depth and thoughtfulness in responses given and to, perhaps, allow for some assessment of the reasons for various responses. Thus, free-answer questions are likely to yield more valid answers because of the existence of greater flexibility particularly to complex, subtle, and sensitive issues but, they require greater subjectivity in interpretation of the meaning of :esponses given or. Free-answer quest: 1relevant data wt. isusually conside Livestigator agree tastination of the :estions in the i :terview was like i§cod interview f ‘5 obtain both val like? Possible wj L'acc bY and Macoby 53;. 1925- ' HYman {U 4). onsldera “ity of the 121 responses given on the part of the investigator—interviewer. Free—answer questions lead to qualitative and often irrelevant data which may be immaterial to the study and/or is usually considerably more difficult to analyze. The investigator agreed with several of the writers that a combination of the closed pre—coded and open freeuanswer questions in the interview schedules for the structured interview was likely to be most effective for sustaining a good interview for this exploratory study. She desired to obtain both validity and reliability which was most likely possible with such a combination of questons (Macoby and Macoby, 1954; Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1962; Borg, 1926; Hyman, gt_gl., 1954; and Richardson, gt_gl., 1965). Consideration must be given to the wording and adequacy of the categories used in pre-coded questions and to the impartiality and balance required when the interviewer needs to use probes to follow-up open free— answer type questions. It is not always feasible to anticipate and plan in advance when, where, and with whom such probes may be necessary. There is considerable difference of opinion with regard to the value of leading questions. Such questions may threaten validity, intro- ject bias by the interviewer, and suggest answers. The use of such questions appears most useful when the respondent does not know the interviewer, has the know- ledge and information on the topic and needs support, :zccuragenent, int viewer in order tt :tis investigator is: may I She mor - ------ :.;:;ting honest a .es;or.:’ents but a] .;=.s of sample s1 .....-.cal sequencn . M P1- eceding que. .. ..e context ‘- u‘i. . '1. ~ answers (Ca Eatsley , 19 ...:‘iOn S S more 5.". 3 any lOglc, 29. am “7118, t ( 2Int x #01. the k . When in t .lCal Se .e c 122 encouragement, interest and informality from the inter— viewer in order to provide the needed information. While this investigator rarely utilized leading questions in her study, she more frequently employed the probing ques- tion in order to gain greater clarification of depth in and reason for particular responses by respondents to questions. The ordering and grouping of questions is of utmost importance in the interview schedule not only in terms of eliciting honest and thoughtful responses from motivated respondents but also to allow for later comparative ana— lysis of sample sub-groups as a result of providing an identical sequence of questions (Richardson, gE_§l., 1965). All preceding questions in any schedule constitute part of the context of the interview and are likely to affect in some manner the orientation of reSpondents to subse- quent answers (Caplow, 1956; Payne, 1951; and Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1962). The psychological sequence of questions is more important in the interview situation than is any logical sequence, however desirable the latter may be. Thus, the development of the schedules had to account for the kind of questions--open or closed--to be used and when in the interview in conjunction with the psychological sequence or order of topics and questions desirable for sustaining the respondent's train of thought .35 positive moti‘ situation- . I It IS gener: :e answer objeCti‘l .‘ experience th-i ions about attit; t'terefore, usually factual questions later, after great “1'15- nore sensitive s relativeI :estior . 5:: beliefs (Kornh var-e, Gustad, 195 W; and Richards In regard to Lianne stars that gut 3‘ 123 and positive motivation and rapport in the interview situation. It is generally agreed that people are more willing to answer objective questions about situations, behavior and experience than the more sensitive, threatening ques— tions about attitudes, preferences, and motives. It is, therefore, usually best to start with the more objective, factual questions initially in the interview schedule and later, after greater rapport has been established, to ask the more sensitive, complex, and psychologically difficult questions relative to attitudes, preferences, and reasons for beliefs (Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1962; Bingham, Moore, Gustad, 1957; Macoby and Macoby, 1954; Edwards, 1957; and Richardson, §£_gl., 1965). In regard to the use of open and closed questions, it appears that questions of broad scope may usefully be employed early in the interview if the respondent is familiar with the general area under discussion, possesses or is provided with a similar frame of reference to that of the interviewer (i.e., "Conceptual Model") for thinking about the subject matter, is articulate, and able to organize his thoughts. "In such a case, a question of broad scope may result in a highly meaningful response which covers a good deal of the area planned for the interview." (Richardson, g£_§l., 1965, p. 210). Particu- larly, in an exploratory interview the interviewer may use respondent antecee ...”.l. a ' C .._.. questions or risk were sugges: areas which the if no a: I; c I - 1: srg..l.icant. - is. thus, best to mains to be as a Q‘. . ,- an“. Kornhauser and: Specificallv :iterxiew schedule ,.es:;ons , except 433, first gave t‘; :u’ §. ' rate his prefer “ lT-PCrtance of V: p~0CESS The re. . '1 to the C10 estlons to t \l . 124 respondent antecedents of key respondents following—up with questions of narrower scope to capitalize on responses which were suggestive, insightful or opened up new topic areas which the interviewer had not previously recognized as significant. In constructing an interview schedule it is, thus, best to proceed from the general to the specific questions to be asked on a topic (Richardson, gt;gl,, 1965 and Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1962). Specifically, the investigator sought to develop her interview schedules with these basic principles in mind. Questions, except for basic employer background informae tion, first gave the interviewee an opportunity to state and rate his preferences with regard to the kind and degree of importance of various factors in the selection process; then, the schedule asked his reaction to specific factors (believed from the literature and professional sources to be important) in order to validate or invalidate existing descriptive data (including biasing factors) relative to policies, procedures, personnel, and factors in the selec- tion process. The questions were ordered not only from the open to the closed, but, also, from the general fac- tual questions to those later of the more potentially threatening, sensitive, or emotionally-laden types of questions. Questions relative to reasons, perceived effects of policies, practices, and procedures, and reactions to "biasing factors" were held to near the end cf the interview a rcr last questior itese narrow conce 2;;ortunity to ma}: fixation, eXperie _:ective and practi In the devel far this research, tassification sch ' I M. :e interview. I v. ' \ luv. “. ion 5 and spao see schedule in O .1! - a 125 of the interview after rapport had been established. The very last questions again brought the respondent from these narrow concerns to broader ones and give him the opportunity to make suggestions for improvement in the education, experiential and personal background of pros- pective and practicing student personnel administrators. In the development of effective interview schedules for this research, consideration had to be given to the classification schemes or categorization of data obtained in the interview. It was deemed desirable to include both questions and space and/or categories for answers in the same schedule in order to avoid the necessity for the interviewer to handle multiple material or sheets during the interview. Basically two kinds of data needed to be recorded—~quantitative and qualitative. The quantitative data is best linked to the closed pre-coded questions, where either specific facts were recorded, e.g., age, amount of education, position, etc., or categories checked, e.g., essential, very important, important, or desirable or yes, or no, etc. Qualitative data is most aptly asso- ciated with the open free-answer type question where a word, theme, assertion, sentence, statement, association, rela- tionship, or paragraph provided by the respondent repre- sents his answer to the question. It places the reaponsi- bility on the respondent to provide the answers to the question and on the interviewer to adequately understand 3;;eanin9 _: gcrI‘ECtly xzed in 1'91 :efxtner C :fiata. In the 1: this case ;:r.ciples m1 ngé,effic: :nired in i :eniew as je::ive methc 5::e3tify to €13.39». 5“ tire Y iii-Sta .. ‘1 to ‘3: butI alS< 333 :- u‘. ' «mildI T1. t4 ‘u‘i': 1x *8 e deri inc N.» Set 0C fl .3}. . ‘V;JA .fi VH;Q.~ I ‘301-1638 a} 55k 5 126 the meaning of the respondent's answer and to interpret it correctly. Both kinds of data as they are to be ana— lyzed in relation to the objectives of this research will be further discussed later in this chapter under Analysis of Data. In the development of the instruments, however, and, in this case, the interview schedules certain fundamental principles must be kept in mind in providing for the rapid, efficient and accurate classification of the data obtained in the structured interview. Even though the interview as a research method is viewed as a highly sub— jective method for data collection, it is possible to objectify to a considerable extent some types of data obtained therein. Upon deciding whether and when to use pre-coded closed questions in the interview, it becomes necessary to consider not only the purpose of the ques— tion but, also, the set of categories and/or method of assessment which will best assist to quantify the data. It is generally agreed that three basic principles are crucial if pre-coded, quantified material is to be reliable and valid. These include: (a) the set of categories should be derived from a single classificatory principle; (b) the set of categories should be exhaustive; that is it should be possible to place every response in one of the categories of the set; and, (c) the categories within the set should be mutually exclusive; it should not be 127 possible to place a given response in more than one category within the set (Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1962; Kerlinger, 1965; Payne, 1951; and Budd, §£_gl., 1967). Some writers note that it is vital that the classification principles and set of categories be derived from the research question or objectives (Kerlinger, 1965 and Budd, gt_§l., 1967). In determining categories for these research schedules, the investigator tested possible sets of categories in the pilot study and revised the instru- ments for the major study according to an analysis of preliminary study of samples of content and practice coding in the pilot study interviews (Oppenheim, 1966 and Budd, gt_§l., 1967). The attempt was to state questions and/or pre-code categories so that their meaning was well—defined and clear for the respondent and, thus, the interviewer could accurately interpret the response given in order that high reliability would result in recording the data. The major concern in quantification of data in this study related to the frequency with which certain categories were mentioned by sample respondents as best representing to them the degree of importance that they would attach to certain factors in the selection of stu— dent personnel administrators. While pre—coding has its advantages in greater precision, efficiency, objectivity, and reliability in the classification of data, one must exercise caution that the question may appropriately be aclosed pr scald not 1. or force an: :.2_:;enheim , Eereleson , J v OI -a see pre-cc 3'3 ordered if the vario iifferences tacrta'ice 0 ;Want to :‘a-fla coded Ca' ETErage minim isiecialll’ at I} to Choose 35:51 Staten “—2.. subject "mew t c:oL. you] and M It is n, '35:! 128 a closed pre—coded one and pre-coded in a manner which would not lead to inaccuracy of classification of data or force answers into an inappropriate coding frame (Oppenheim, 1966; Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1962; and Bereleson, 1956). The kinds of rating scale utilized in these pre-coded categories provided data which could be rank ordered in intensity in terms of degree of importance of the various selection factors. Thus, sample sub-group differences can be compared in terms of the degree of importance of the various factors in selection. It is important to note that the respondent has a tendency in pre-coded categories to: (a) choose the middle or average number in a list of numbers; (b) to choose extremes especially at the beginning in a list of ideas; and, (c) to choose more often the last statement in a list of verbal statements (Payne, 1951). Further, with emotionally— laden subject matter or attitudes, the respondent would have a tendency to idealize behavior or attitudes and feelings (Macoby and Macoby, 1954 and Edwards, 1957). It is neither appropriate nor feasible to try to quantify, in the usual sense, most open free—answer types of questions (Bereleson, 1956). However, qualitative data can be categorized by noting all answers given to a free-answer question and examining such answers for similarities and differences in content analysis in terms of words, themes, assertions, associations, relationships, tic A ,1 n A ;..er:ret h u an s u Afifli n “S Ni 1 'u.l~tl.v § J». u rasteristic 1 -u beéESls :O‘k I Rva u' y in o .4. I; 15 CORC . A m. 5-“ ..y n "h 129 items or space-—time measures (George, 1959; Bereleson, 1956; and Oppenheim, 1966). Qualitative data is by nature more subjective and requires great care in recording and interpretation of the meaning on the part of the inter— viewer. These units of content analysis are more flexible and descriptive. Themes and assertions are appropriate for studying meanings relative to association and rela— tionships and any of the other above units of content analysis may effectively aid in the discovery of new relationships, observation, or lack thereof, of content characteristics present relative to the selection process or factors and, in summary, provide a fruitful reading for hypothesis formulation (George, 1959). The important difference between closed and open questions is that the former is concerned with the frequency of response and the latter primarily with the mere existence--presence or absence--of certain attitudes, beliefs or values expressed (George, 1959 and Bereleson, 1956). Further, while closed pre-coded questions are likely to have higher reliability, the open free-answer questions will likely yield greater validity, and more subtle and complex insights into the research questions (Bereleson, 1956). The above is not intended to imply that pre-coding is not possible for open free-answer questions; however, if such (is done in advance, categories must not be rigid and must be based on a preliminary analysis of a representative sample of data, i.e., as that involved in a pilot study or 130 after several regular interviews. When in doubt, it is best to record free—answer questions verbatim in the interviews and plan to categorize the data after it is collected by using the themes, assertions, etc. indicated above (Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1962; Oldfield, 1947; and Macoby and Macoby, 1954). In the present research, the previously discussed quantified data is, in part, of an ordinal nature while the qualitative data will fall into the nominal area of measurement (Budd,'g£;§l,, 1967). In both cases, in this and most studies, judgment, accur- ate understanding, classification, and interpretation of the meaning of the answer is required by the investigator— interviewer for good research. The interviewer needs to be able to distinguish the wide range of motivation in the respondent's answers, such as between ”what it is feasible to do" or "had to" and "what should be done'I or ”want to." One final but, nonetheless, important consideration in the development of instruments is the concern related to recording the data. As noted, in the discussion in establishment of coding frames and categories, this inves— tigator felt that it would make for a smoother interview to record the responses to the questions after each ques— tion on the interview schedules. This would eliminate much paper shuffling. The investigator utilized two methods for recording responses during the interview. 131 She noted the answer on the interview schedule following each question and utilized a tape recorder, as well, to record the entire interview. All tapes and schedules were coded by number for purposes of anonymity for respon— dents. This, she believes, accounted, in part, for the unanimous consent given by all respondents for their interviews to be taped. The decision to use the written method of recording responses on the schedules was based on several factors: (a) the likelihood that some respon— dents might not permit tape recording of the interview; (b) the possibility that a cassette cartridge tape could break during the interview without the awareness of the interviewer or respondent and thereby valuable and irre— trievable interview data would be lost; and, (c) the cost and time involved in transcribing the large number of taped interviews. In the recording of any response, interviewer judg- ment with regard to marking the proper category in closed pre—coded questions and, in addition, interpretation regarding stating the primary attitude or belief relative to each open free-answer question must of necessity enter into the report (Hyman, gt_§1., 1954). It will often be difficult to get down everything said to a free-answer question, but aside from obvious irrelevancies, repetition and omission of articles and parenthetical expressions, the interviewer should attempt 152 to obtain all the relevant material (Sellitz, §E_§1., 1962; Macoby and Macoby, 1954; and Payne, 1951). If the interviewer begins to write as soon as he has asked the question while the respondent is talking without waiting until the end of the answer, and uses common abbrevia- tions, and key phrases, it should be possible to obtain the complete answer without long pauses or breaking the respondent's train of thought in the interview for com— pletion of response writing (Bingham, Moore, and Gustad, 1957; Sellitz, gt_31., 1962; and Whyte, 1960). If errors are made the interviewer should.cross out rather than erase them since this is faster. As the interviewer con— ducts more interviews, and becomes increasingly familiar with the possible response and potential territory of an exploratory study, he is likely to be able to maximize the relevance, coverage, accuracy and speed with which he can understand and interpret free-answer responses (Richardson, gt_gl., 1965). Not only were the above points considered as the investigator recorded data on the interview schedules, but several considerations entered into the decision to, also, use the tape recorder. The tape recorder has the advantages of capturing feeling tone better, perhaps, than the written response, data can be rechecked, responses verified and investigator "bias" can be reduced and reliability judgments can be made as others can code and/or ML. “fl 153 evaluate the categorization of data of the investigator at a later date (Hyman, §E_al., 1954; Macoby and Macoby, 1954; and Borg, 1926). In a well—designed study a relia— bility coefficient or percentage of inter-judge agreement of .90 is not unusual. Further, mechanically taping the interview speeds up the interview process, reduces over— loading some categories, and interviewer fatigue from note taking (Borg, 1926). It is particularly helpful for the highly intelligent quick-thinking respondent whose time is valuable (Richardson, §E_al.,'l965). Tape recording of interviews does have disadvantages, however. First, the recorder and tapes are expensive and may not be always reliable, e.g., tape breakage. If relied upon only, transcription of all tapes is costly as well (Whyte, 1960). Taping can capture what is said, but it cannot portray gestures or other non-verbal behavior (Sellitz, gt_§1., 1962 and Osgood, 1959). Since profes- sional ethics requires that recordings of the interview be made only with the knowledge of the respondent, it is important to obtain this agreement prior to the interview (Kahn and Cannell, 1959). Even if such agreement is given, some respondents may be sensitive to the taping or reluctant to express their true feelings, beliefs, or attitudes, thereby minimizing the validity of the inter— view with the use of the tape recorder. Fortunately, this investigator was apparently able to adequately explain its purposes :f :he respon of having th ‘. .::i he a a‘§¥.\_a. 'v‘m .. rye ry fort ::G to he,” :33 if": ‘H VG . 5rlf '~":3 c «r ' inte. :‘. EC: 134 the purposes of the recording and to gain the confidence of the respondent so as to minimize undesirable effects of having the interview recorded. Several things seemed to help: (a) assurance of anonymity and requesting respondents to refer to titles rather than names in responSes; (b) offering the respondent the option to have the recorder turned off at any point in the interview at his request; (c) quoting a code number for each tape at the beginning of the interview in front of the respondent; (d) keeping the recorder in open view throughout the interview; and, (e) wording of the interview schedule questions in order that highly specific and personalized identifying institutional or personal responses were not required. While the investigator-interviewer did not insist that respondents permit use of the tape recorder during the interview, she strongly encouraged them to do so. Very fortunately and surprisingly all respondents agreed to having their interviews taped. The fact that this was to be utilized in a research project may have also affected their decisions. Caplow (1956) indicated that the use of both mechanical recording for complete- ness and verification, and written (interview schedule) notes for interpretation and continuity should be the most effective combination for the recording of interview data. The investigator-interviewer felt that the combina- tion of these two methods should provide for maximum coverage ar. likely prod :.: reliabi A pilc 10 the actue ETC-l studen -'"4=?‘-i;an Sta Q‘ ' ’37"; ‘7". I an 3‘1" . VES Of t '3: l? u. . “Cleared 135 coverage and complete data from all interviews, and would likely produce the best possible degree of both validity and reliability for this research study. The Pilot Study A pilot study was conducted by the researcher prior to the actual research study. The presidents and executive level student personnel administrators of two universities: Michigan State University, representing the large university category, and Central Michigan University, representing the medium university category, were interviewed in the same form and manner anticipated for use in the actual study. Many writers and researchers on the use of the interview schedule in a structured interview for explora— tory research purposes strongly advocated making a pilot study prior to the conduct of the actual research study (Borg, 1926; Richardson, gt_31., 1965; Whyte, 1960; Hyman, gt_al., 1967; and Sellitz, gt_al., 1962). The researcher utilized her pilot study to accomplish the following purposes: (a) to provide the investigator- interviewer with experience in the use of the structured interview; (b) to aid in refinement of interview procedures and techniques; (c) to assist in determining the value of the various initial interview schedule questions to the objectives of the research and refinement of questions where indicated; (d) to refine content classification/ categorization systems for the data, and (e) to determine 136 if the two kinds of interview schedules--the presidents and executive level student personnel administrators-- were appropriate for the two sample groups at both sizeS- of universities or if four forms would need to be developed. All these objectives were accomplished in the pilot study with the aid of respondent and investigator-interviewer reactions to the interviews, and the use of student personnel professional trainers and executive level administrators who served as "professional judges" for the pilot study. The latter were asked to review two tape recordings of interviews made with the pilot study personnel in order to offer suggestions relative to improvement and refinement of interview procedures, techniques, schedule items, and content classification systems. In addition these judges made an estimate regarding content validity of the interview schedules and a percentage of agreement for interjudge reliability of the content classification/Categorization of the data was determined by the investigators. All four pilot judges were given a sheet of direc- tions which served as a guideline for their evaluation of the interview tapes. In addition, they were given the appropriate tapes and tape recorder, "Conceptual Model," 137 and the appropriate blank interview schedules on which to write the answers of the respondents as they listened to the tape of each interview. The judges in the pilot study made many helpful observations and suggestions to the investigator which aided greatly in improving the actual research study. They agreed that the two interview schedules previously described were necessary because the pilot study indicated that the presidents and executive level student personnel administrators would be concerned and involved at different phases, levels, and stages of the selection process and there was evidence of different kinds of concern and knowledge about student personnel administration between these two groups of people. They, further, suggested that most of the demographic information be incorporated into a separate form to be completed by the chief student per- sonnel administrator at a time other than the interview. Their suggestions with regard to refinement of interview .procedures and techniques, omissions of and/or changes in the various questions of the interview schedule and refinement of content classification systems for the data were noted and employed in the development of the final interview schedules and in carrying out the interviews in the major research study. The judges felt that with the elimination of several questions and the reworking of others, as well as some of the classification systems, the interview schedules, in general could be said to have content validity. Each pro— fessional judge independently listened to and recorded 138 responses for different interviews. There were two judges for each sample respondent. An item by item comparative analysis of respondent answers was made for the judges. A percentage of inter-judge agreement was determined for each interview. Finally, these percentages were noted in terms of range for both the presidents and executive level student personnel administrators. An average per- centage for each group was computed from this range. Inter-judge reliability was found to be 87 percent for the presidents interview schedule and 93 percent for the executive level student personnel administrators schedule. These same materials were provided the judges and procedures utilized with the exception of an analysis of a breakdown of executive level schedules into the chief student per- sonnel administrator and highest-ranking .female executive level administrator, for the system employed for inter-judge reliability and to determine content validity of the final interview schedules following com— pletion of the major research study. Procedures for development of these checks on reliability and validity were determined with the assistance and advisement by the staff of the Bureau of Educational Research along with a review of sources in educational research and interviewing in research (Sellitz, gt_gl,, 1962; Macoby and Macoby, 1954; Bereleson, 1956; George, 1959; Hyman, et a1., 1954; Stempel, 1966; and Schutz, 1952). 139 The Process of Data Collection Following the determination of the sample institu- tions and the appr0priate personnel—-presidents and executive level student personnel administrators--who should be interviewed, and after obtaining their consent to do so, the investigator began to work with the designated staff member in each sample institution to determine a date for visitation and to develop an interview appointment schedule with the appropriate personnel for the agreed— upon-date that the investigator-interviewer would be on each university campus. Concurrently, the investigator— interviewer reviewed the procedures and techniques involved in the research method--the structured interview, developed and tested preliminary instruments in the pilot study, and as a result of the latter, made the recommended and appropriate changes in both interview procedures and the refinement of the instruments. Upon completion of these tasks, the investigator-interviewer was ready to begin the actual process of data collection for this research study. Some discussion of considerations in and actual internal and more detailed elements involved in the col- lection of the data have been previously noted in this chapter with regard to the sample, research method, the structured interview, and the instrumentation. The pur- pose of the present discussion is to: (a) incorporate the Process of Data Collection in the order in this chapter in which it occurred with regard to the order of 140 the processes and procedures utilized in the Methodology for this research study; and, (b) to point up the major external and general considerations involved in the col- lection of data. The latter includes an evaluation of the usefulness as well as strengths and weaknesses involved in this procedure for data collection. The investigator worked with the institutional "contact person" and attempted to determine a date which was agreeable to both the personnel to be interviewed and the investigator. Fortunately, a schedule was able to be arranged for the sample interviews at the institutions for days on which all personnel appropriate to this study would be available and one which was compact in terms of collecting all the data within a period of several weeks and generally logical with regard to consideration of the time necessary and order desirable for driving from institution to institution. The data was collected in May and June of 1969. Careful planning_ of the procedures for the collection of the data made this part of the study operationally smooth. Further, the per- sonnel interviewed and the "contact person" and other staff at nearly every institution were most thoughtful and helpful in directing the investigator to the various buildings and offices of the personnel to be interviewed and in many cases rearranging appointment schedules so that all appropriate personnel could be interviewed. The latter was sometimes necessitated by campus "emergencies," recently scheduled meetings, or unexpected commitments. The investigator 141 will provide the reader in Chapters IV and V with the breakdown on the number of personnel interviewed in each of the sample groups. It is sufficient to indicate here that, except in one or two instances of unanticipated late commitments away from that city, or illness on the day of visitation, she was able to see all necessary personnel. In these few cases, either later taped telephone inter- views were held with the personnel, including the missed personal interview with the one president and one chief student personnel administrator. In the few similar situa- tions with other executive level staff either telephone conversations were utilized when possible or the appro- priate schedule was left to be completed and returned later to the investigator by mail. In instances of the latter, a set of directions about completing the schedules, particularly with regard to answering the questions in the order listed, etc., similar to that which would have been utilized in the interview procedure was provided the respondent. The investigator-interviewer was exceptionally pleased with the thoughtfulness and consideration of the person- nel at each of these institutions in terms of their assistance to her as a researcher and campus visitor. The sample personnel were most cooperative and very generous with their time and appeared to be thoughtful, open, and honest during the actual interviews themselves. 142 The interviewer found the techniques, procedures, "Conceptual Model" and interview schedules adequate for the collection of data even with different kinds and groups of persons. She was able to maintain the structure and usually retain control of the interview situation, with the possible exception of always being able to eliminate and minimize irrelevances and to keep the interview to the established time limits. Time proved to be a problem in that often the interview appointment schedule did not allow enough or any time for the interviewer to move from one building to another for the next interview. Further- more, while the final interview schedules were pre-tested for this time element, some interviews ran over the time. This was due to: (a) interruptions of the interview by others or calls to the respondent during the interview; (b) the differences in knowledge, experience and/or simply the desire to talk among the respondents; and (c) the longer length, including additional considerations regarding mana- gerial level selection factors which were included in the executive level student personnel administrator's schedule but not the president's schedule. Despite some limitations, the investigator believes that this was a most appropriate and effective process for accomplishing the stated objectives of this research study. Further, she found she gained not only the necessary and essential data for this study in using. u 143 these methods and procedures but, concurrently, learned a great deal about higher education, including the philoso- phies, problems, objectives and concerns, from these top- level decision-makers who were immediately and actively engaged with responsibility in and authority to operate these larger complex universities. This study provided, also, the opportunity for the researcher to meet personnel normally not readily accessible to her and to become per- sonally acquainted with both presidents and student person- nel administrators actively involved in confronting the practical concerns relative to higher education, in general, and student affairs, in particular. In summary, the entire process of interviewing these personnel and visiting and observing various university campuses and their students was an invaluable learning experience for this investigator and easily one of the highlights of her doctoral study in Student Personnel Administration in Higher Education . The Method of the Analysis of Data Following the process of the collection of data, content validity and inter—judge reliability were again ascertained with regard to the major study. Six tapes of interviews were randomly selected, stratified only by grtmp membership and institutional size, and reviewed and evaluated by four professional student personnel trainems and executive level administrators serving as trofessi '~ rs i tj gersonnel the levei age revie Basi 32' relia" hse '1». q ‘. ,"Qd1~ ‘ A 5, “re V meted OI Sn'L. . "'“dth”. if U 144 “professional judges." Two tapes each, one for each size university, in the categories of president, chief student personnel administrator, and highest-ranking female execu- tive level student personnel administrator comprised the tape review sample. Basically, the procedures utilized for an evaluation of reliability and validity were identical to those described for ascertaining the same in the pilot study with the following exceptions: (a) two of the four professional judges were different personnel than those judges utilized in these evaluations in the pilot study; (b) due to the larger number of potential taped interviews for each sample group, it was decided that the fairest procedure Was to use a stratified random sample of tapes selected on the basis of the first two chosen in each of the three sample groups representing each of the two size institutions; and, (c) in contrast to the evaluation made for the pilot study, not only were tapes of the presi-l dents and executive level student personnel administrative staff evaluated, but, the latter group was broken down into two groups, the chief student personnel administra— tors and the highest ranking female executive level student personnel administrators. Judges of both sexes rated tapes of the same and opposite sex. The same materials including a set of directions for the judges, tape recorder, tapes and blank appropriate 145 interview schedules were provided each judge. (See Appen- dix C, "Directions for 'Judges' of Interview Schedules for Research Study on Factors in Employment and Promotion of Student Personnel Administrators.") Each listened inde- pendently to two tapes and recorded the answers of the respondents. These judges were compared with each other and with the investigator—interviewer's completed schedule on the same interview at the time of the original interview. Inter-judge percentage of agreement was determined rela- tive to both the clOsed pre-coded marked and free-answer content of the interview responses. The percentage of inter-judge agreement for the interviews with the presidents ranged from 89-95 percent with an average of 92 percent; for the chief student personnel administraw tors, the range was 86-95 percent with an average of 90 percent; for the highest—ranking female administrator the range was 96—97 percent with an average of 97 percent agreement. Combining the latter two groups into execu— tive level administrators, in general, the average was 94 percent agreement. The "professional judges" were asked, also, to make not only an appraisal of the inter— view methods, procedures and instruments utilized, but to assess whether they believed that the final interview schedules utilized had content validity or that the ques— tions asked and responses given were appropriate and relevant to the objectives of this study. All judges 146 felt that both the (two) interview schedules had content validity. Further, with one exception among the six tapes, all interviews were judged to reflect a coopera- tive, open, frank, helpful approach on the part of the reSpondent and validity was not felt to be affected by the taping of the interview. Finally, judges' felt that the structured interview approach appeared to be an effective method for obtaining the desired data. Several judges noted a couple questions, sometimes the same ones by different judges, on the final interview schedules which appeared to be ambiguous, poorly worded, misunderstood by, or, threatening to the respondent. These will be noted in Chapters IV and V when summary evaluations are made with regard to the value of the instruments (and specific questions therein) utilized in this study to obtain the data relative to each objective. As a result of the fact that the reliability ratings were with all three sample groups and on both instruments at the level of 90 percent or better in inter-judge percentage of agreement, the investigator in consultation with the Bureau of Educational Research and her doctoral advisor decided that it would not be necessary to transcribe the data from the tapes but to simply utilize the investigator-interviewer's initial interview schedule for purposes of analysis of the data. 147 In this case, reliability of the randomly selected taped interviews was so high that there was the likelihood that little, if any, relevant data had not been obtained and recorded on the schedules completed during the interviews, so potentially little was to be gained by such a procedure. The tapes were utilized, however, to clarify and/or verify unclear or ambiguous written responses as necessary as the data was tabulated, summarized and evaluated during the course of the analysis of the data. The purpose of this exploratory study was to dis— cover the degree of importance of the major policies, practices, procedures, personnel, and factors in the selection of executive and managerial level student per— sonnel administrators. This information obtained through the interviews may validate or invalidate, in part, des- criptive data and conclusions of other studies relative to career development of student personnel professionals and should, further, provide new insights into the process of selection--employment and promotion-~of student personnel administrative staff. The information resulting 148 from this study, along with that of other related studies, may then be utilized to aid in the formulation of test— able hypotheses for further research in this area. With the above general purpose in mind, both closed pre-coded and open free-answer questions were utilized in the schedules. The questions and content classification/ categorization systems in the interview schedules were developed, utilized in, and eliminated and/or refined as a result of an analysis of their relation to the stated objectives of this research study and the suggestions and experience in their use in the pilot study. It was possi— ble to develop specific objective and well—defined cate— gories for the closed pre-coded types of questions in advance of the collection of data in the final schedules. With a few exceptions, it was not possible to do the same with the open free-answer questions so that unlike the marking of a category or use of a word for the closed questions, the investigator—interviewer found it necessary to record the free-answer responses as close to the verbatim statement as possible. Due to the nature and objectives of this study, exploratory and the small sample sizes composing the sample personnel groups, e.g., twelve presidents, twelve chief student personnel administrators, etc., no attempt ‘will be made to do a statistical analysis of the data. Rather, the frequencies of response noted in the closed 149 pre-coded categories will be tabulated and, in relevant cases, reported numerically. With regard to the open free-answer questions, all verbatim reSponses will be recorded during analysis, and then reviewed for evidence of significant commonalities and differences present or absent in terms of themes, assertions, associations and relationships existing among characteristics, etc. These similarities and differences in patterns, themes or trends in the various categories relative to beliefs and attitudes important in selection will finally be summarized for each of the sample personnel groups and comparisons can then be made between these groups in the two size universities, by use of descriptive, integrative and, finally interpretative statements relative to the impor— tance of the various policies, practices, procedures, personnel and factors utilized in the employment and pro- motion of student personnel administrators. Further, these commonalities and differences among and between groups may, in part, be related to the basic demographic information obtained about these employers, e.g., age, sex, position, length of time in present position, etc. The analysis of all data will follow the question areas specified in the interview schedules. These schedules were developed with the seven objectives of this study as their bases. When the data are appropriately analyzed as indicated above, all of the stated objectives . 150 of this study should have been met. It may be feasible as well as desirable to combine responses relative to the same or related categories, e.g., for age, sex, race, academic degrees, etc., during the summary process. This is legitimate in content analysis. However, no category will be divided into a smaller unit than that presently in the schedules (Budd, e£_al., 1967). Finally, the num- bers of persons for each sample group in each of the two size universities participating in the total study as well as the numbers responding to each question, in the same or different ways, including the numbers of persons in each group not answering the question or not responding to the category at all will be noted in order that the reader may accurately assess the relative significanCe not merely numerically, but, also, socially or psycholo— gically of any findings noted. After the data analysis is complete, it is expected that all major variables, their importance, and any associations and relationships existing among them will have been discovered and their value determined relative to the selection of student per— sonnel administrators in publiq,midwestern universities. It must be noted that content analysis of interview data requires very thoughtful, careful and as objective judgment as it is possible to make by the analyst. It is impossible to eliminate all subjectivity in the analysis and particularly the interpretation of any data for any 151 research study, but greater care than usual is certainly necessary in a study of this kind. As a result, the researcher has attempted to use rigorous pre-testing, refinement, standardization, and evaluation relative to all procedures, methods, and instruments employed in this study. This is reflected in the conduct and evalua- tion of the pilot study and of the determination by inter-judge reliabilities and validity by use of "profes- sional judges" for the procedures, methods, and instru- ments following both the pilot and major research studies. The purpose of (data) analysis is to summarize the completed observations in such a manner [as decided above] that they will yield answers to the research questions. It is the purpose of inte retation to search for the broader meaning of these answers by linking them to other available knowledge. (Sellitz, et a1., 1962, p. 386.) Chapters IV and V will include the analysis of the data and VI, a comparative summary of similarities and differ- ences between the various sample groups in the two size universities. Inferences from these comparative find- ings, along with descriptive data of past related studies should form the bases for the conclusions drawn. Any qualifications relative to these inferences and subse- quent conclusions will be noted. These might include a notation of any poorly worded, frequently misunderstood, unanswered or "loaded" questions in the instruments or unusual circumstances——behavioral or situational—— 152 surrounding the collection of data relative to a cate- gory. Following, the conclusions in VI, implications with regard to the findings will be noted. These may include relevant questions that are still unanswered, new questions raised by this study, and quite likely recommendations for future research needed in regard to this topic. In summary, however, regardless of how carefully such a study as this one has been planned, developed, implemented and evaluated, the degree to which it is possible to predict future behavior or subsequent actions relative to the selection process from the present beliefs and attitudes or the past experience and behavior of the employer-respondents as expressed by them in the inter- views cannot accurately be determined within the con- fines, time, and scope of the present study. Thus, the investigator may only be able to make a subjective judgment of probable behavior of the employers-respondents based on the results of the analyzed data of this study, including consistency within the interviews relative to the various questions relating to a category, and her reaction and that of the "professional judges" relative to the degree of validity of the data obtained in this research study and that from previous studies and pro- fessional observation. CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS: PRESIDENTS Introduction An explanation of the methods, instruments, and procedures utilized in this study to collect and analyze the data were presented in Chapter III--Methodology. The purpose of this chapter is to provide the results obtained from the analysis of data relative to those persons com- prising the sample of presidents in this study. I The data were gathered from the presidents of these twelve midwestern, public, coeducational universities by means of a personal structured interview with each of the presidents of these institutions. Each president was given a "Conceptual Model for Student Personnel Organizational Structure" and asked to review it. (See Appendix A.) This "Conceptual Model" served as the standardized frame of reference for the president as he proceeded to respond to each question in the interview schedule. 153 154 Frequencies in the form of number, percentages and/or proportions of the total responses are indicated relative to expressed similarities and differences for the various areas among and between presidents of the two size univer- sity groups. Reasons for the results obtained were pre- sented in a descriptive manner and, in some instances, interpretations relative to the results obtained and/or reasons provided were made by the investigator-interviewer. This Chapter includes, in order of topics, a dis- cussion of the (Presidential) sample participation; basic background information concerning these presidents; sources utilized to locate potential candidates for exec- utive level student personnel positions; personnel involved in the selection process for executive level student personnel administrators; the value of various factors identified by the presidents and suggested by previous studies and their importance to these presidents in the selection of the chief student personnel adminis- trators; changes in the factors utilized and the degree of their importance in selection of the chief student personnel administrator as a function of time (the past compared to the present); perceived determinants (by the presidents) of the acceptance of the selected chief stu- dent personnel administrators by the student personnel staff at their institutions; the value of various factors 155 identified by the presidents and suggested by previous studies and their importance to these presidents in the selection of other executive level student personnel administrators; sex as a factor in the selection of executive level student personnel administrators; race as a factor in the selection of executive level student personnel administrators; the relationship of the univer- sity student personnel organizational structure to the selection of student personnel administrators; recommenda- tions (of the presidents) relative to the education/ professional preparation, previous employment, and per- sonal background experiences desired for student personnel administrators; and finally, a summary of salient data for the chapter. Throughout the presentation of the data obtained from these presidents, not only were the total number of presidents in agreement or disagreement regarding the various areas noted, but they were compared according to whether they were part of the large or medium size university group when significant differences were noted regarding an area under discussion. Although the chief student personnel administrators are "officially" considered part of the executive level student personnel staff in the "Conceptual Model," for purposes of closer examination of the policies, practices, personnel, and 156 factors involved in the selection of the chief student personnel administrators, they were considered separately in this study; and the analysis of data and comparisons were noted for them as well as the process and considera- tions involved in the selection of other executive level student personnel administrators. Sample Participation: Presidents The procedure utilized to secure the cooperation and participation of the sample of presidents in the 45-minute structured interview was outlined in Chapter III, under the section "Selection of the Sample." The procedure was deemed effective since presidents from all twelve initially selected sample universities agreed to participate in this study. These twelve institutions represented one-half of the total population of public coeducational universities above 10,000 in student pOpu- lation in the previously designated seven midwestern states. Four of the twelve presidents interviewed were chief executive officers of the four large universities which had a student population of 25,000 or more in 1969, representing one-half the total population of all large public coeducational universities in the midwest. The other eight were chief executive officers of the eight medium universities which had a student population ranging k the total pic-fie ‘- “ 4 b A U‘“ l .., -..Ee was 13 this c‘ :19 presi< “33': was 1 mus. '1 3933 act "Kiversit ..'.is Presi iii ti: 80 I‘. I “ "' 23. ... ' «EWE ‘ :1“ n«‘ u on St‘ - V“ Qt “in The ‘4‘: M ‘ 9 “' LWO a“ ‘ ‘u' h “hell’s: 157 ranging between l0,000-20,000, and representing one-half the total population of all medium public, coeducational universities in the midwest. (None of the public, coedu- cational midwestern universities fell between 20,001 to 24,999 in student population in 1969.) Nine of the twelve chief executive officers were presidents of their universities. One of the remaining three was designated "Acting President" and had served in this capacity for six months due to the illness of the president. The other two were Chancellors. One of whom was the highest-ranking chief executive on that campus. The other was in essence the chief executive officer since the president "in-residence" on that campus actually coordinated the operations for an entire "university system," including all branch campuses. This President was contacted initially and indicated that the chancellor of that ("home") campus should be interviewed since the latter would make the final deci- sion on staff appointments for that campus. This chan- cellor agreed to participate in this study. The breakdown for the four large universities was, thus, two presidents, one acting-president, and one chancellor. For the medium universities, seven of the 158 eight were presidents and one was a chancellor. For convenience in the presentation of the analyzed data as representative of these two groups in this chapter and study, the twelve officials were referred to as "presi- dents." Eleven of the twelve presidents were interviewed personally in their university offices. One had a schedule conflict on the day of the investigator's visit to that campus; however, he was later interviewed over the telephone. Tape recordings as well as written responses to all interview questions on the "Interview Schedule" were made for the entire group. A phone hook-up device connected between the telephone and tape recorder made taping, with the president's permission, of the one last interview possible. Twelve was the base number representing the reSponses of the total sample group of presidents. Four was the total presidential sample of large university presidents, while eight was the total presidential sam- ple of the medium university presidents. When compari- sons between groups were discussed the similarities and differences were related to these totals and numbers for each of the two groups, unless noted otherwise. 159 Basic Background Information: Presidents All of the presidents were male Caucasians. Those from the four large universities ranged in age from 40—61 years, and had held their positions for a period of time ranging from six months to 24 years. The young- est president in this group--40 years old--had held the position for the shortest period of time--six months; while the oldest--61 years old--had held his position the longest period of time--24 years. The remaining two presidents were both 52 years of age. Notably, three of the four large university presidents had held their positions only eighteen months or less. The age range for the eight medium university presidents was 46-63 years old. They had held their present positions for a period of time ranging from two and three-quarter years to eight and one-half years. The oldest medium university president--63 years old-- had, along with one other man, held his position the longest time--eight and one-half years. It was of interest to note that the oldest president in each of the two groups had also been in his position the longest. However, age comparisons between the two groups, exempting the 40 year old "Acting President," indicate that the medium university presidents appear to be both propor- tionately younger and older than the large university presidents. 160 In contrast to the three-fourths of the large uni- versity group who had held their positions 18 months or less, all of the medium university presidents had held their positions a minimum of 32 months and three-fourths of their group had held the position four years or more. This difference was an important one and was reflected in the data presented concerning the previous involvement of the two groups in the employment and promotion of student personnel administrators. Two of the medium university presidents (two of the twelve presidents or one-sixth of the total group) had had previous training, and/or employment as chief student personnel administrators in other universities prior to their present appointments. Nine of the twelve presidents or 75 percent had had experience in the employment of executive level student personnel administrators. Eight of the twelve, or two-thirds of the presidents, were involved in the employment of the chief student personnel officer, and seven had made the final decision in this case; while one had been consulted only. Seven of the twelve were involved in the employment of other executive level stu- dent personnel staff, however, only two of the seven had made the final decision; the remaining five presidents had simply been consulted prior to the final decision by the chief student personnel officer. Six of the twelve :presidents or 50 percent of the total presidential group 1.01 had been involved in either decision-making or consulta- tion concerning the employment of both chief student per- sonnel administrators and other executive level student personnel staff. Two of the three presidents, one each from a large and a medium university, who had had no previous experi- ence in the employment of executive level student per- sonnel administrators had been in their reSpective posi- tions and universities for the longest period of time. Three of four large university presidents and six of eight medium university presidents or 75 percent of the presidents in each of the two university groups had had previous experience in the employment of executive level student personnel administrators. A further breakdown revealed that three of four large university presidents and five of eight medium uni- versity presidents had been involved in the employment of chief student personnel administrators. Two of four of the large university presidents had made the final decision relative to the employment of the chief student personnel administrator; while one large university "Acting Presi- dent" had been consulted only, as a member of a search and screen committee, prior to assuming his present position. All five of the eight medium university presidents involved in the employment of the chief student personnel administrator had made the final decision. 102 Only two of four large university presidents had been involved in the employment of other executive level student personnel staff. Both of these presidents had been consulted only prior to the decision by the chief student personnel administrator. Again, five of the eight medium university presidents had been involved in the employment of other executive student personnel staff. Two of five medium university presidents had made the final decision on employment of these staff; while three of these five presidents had been consulted only prior to the final decision by the chief student personnel admin- istrator. Two of the four large university presidents and four of the eight medium university presidents or 50 percent of the presidents in each of the two size university groups had been previously involved in the employment of both chief student personnel administrators and other executive level student personnel staff. In summary, while the two groups had similar pre- vious experience in the employment of all executive level student personnel staff members; the large university presidents had slightly more involvement than the medium university presidents in the employment of chief student personnel administrators; however, the medium university presidents had more involvement, particularly in terms of making the final decision, than the large university 163 presidents in the employment of other executive student personnel administrators. Ten of the twelve presidents had had previous experience in the promotion of student personnel adminis- trators from one level--beginning at the managerial level-- to a higher level within a student personnel organization. Eight of the twelve presidents or two-thirds of the group were involved in promotion of executive level staff to the position of chief student personnel administrator. Five of the eight presidents had made the final decision on promotion to this position; while three of the presi- dents were consulted only. Seven of the twelve presidents had had previous experience in the promotion of student personnel staff from managerial to executive level posi- tions. Three of the seven presidents had made the final decision on promotion to the executive level position; the remaining four presidents were consulted only, prior to the final decision by the chief student personnel adminis- trator. Six of the twelve presidents--or 50 percent of the group had been involved in promotion of student per- sonnel staff at both levels--managerial to executive level, and executive level to chief student personnel administrator. Differences were noted when the large and medium university presidential groups were compared. »Two of the four or 50 percent of the large university presidents had been involved in promotion of executive level staff to -- . _--._——‘ ‘ It. ‘1 9 ~ ‘ 1.64 the position of chief student personnel administrator; while six of eight or 75 percent of the medium university presidents had had such experience. The two large uni- versity presidents had been consulted only. Five of the eight medium university presidents had made the final decision regarding these promotions; while one medium university president was consulted only prior to the decision. Two of the four large university presidents or 50 percent had been involved in the promotions of managerial level student personnel staff to executive level student personnel staff. Both large university presidents had been consulted only. Five of the eight medium university presidents had been involved in the promotions of mana- gerial staff to executive level student personnel staff. Two medium university presidents-had made the decision relative to these promotions; while three medium univer- sity presidents had been consulted only prior to the final decision by the chief student personnel administrator. The medium university presidents had significantly more involvement in promotions from managerial level to executive level student personnel staff and executive level to chief student personnel administrators. None of the large university presidents had made a final decision on a promotion for these staff. Five of the medium univer- sity presidents had made the final decision for promotion to chief student personnel administrator; while two of the 165 medium university presidents had made the final decision for promotion from managerial to executive level student personnel administrator. Large and medium university presidents were similar in their previous experience in consultation except that medium university presidents were involved in decision-making rather than consultation for promotions to chief student personnel administrator. Fifty percent of the presidents of each of the two groups had some previous involvement in promotions at 2222 levels--managerial to executive and executive level to chief student personnel administrator. The fact that medium presidents had comparatively longer tenure in their positions than large university presidents (with one exception) may, in part, account for the more extensive previous experience of the medium university presidents in the promotion of all executive level student personnel administrators. Finally, these presidents as a group had nearly equal experience in both of the areas of employment and promotion of executive level student personnel adminis- trators. There was a marked trend for all presidents to be more knowledgeable, concerned, and significantly involved in the final decisions relative to employment and promotion of personnel to the position of chief student personnel administrator. However, while these presidents were also concerned and involved in the employ- ment and promotion of other executive level staff, they 100 generally left the final decision to their chief student personnel administrators; although the presidents expect to be involved and often interviewed and were usually consulted by the chief student personnel officer for their reaction and evaluation of final candidates prior to the latter's final decision on the selection of other executive level staff. The presidents had little concern and involvement relative to the employment and/or promotion of student personnel administrators below the executive level positions, with the possible exceptions of inter- viewing, evaluating candidates, and/or being consulted and/or consulting others prior to the final decision on the directors of health and/or counseling services (which, according to the "Conceptual Model" would be classified as managerial level student personnel administrative Positions in this study). Sources of Potential Candidates for Executive Level Student Personnel PositiOns The sources for obtaining names and recommendations of Personnel who might fill the position of chief student persOllnel administrator varied according to the size of the University. Three of the four large university presidents or 75 percent, first, would establish and UtiliZE a search and screen committee, composed of faculty, administrators, and students from the institu- tion' Secondly, these presidents would look for recom- men - . . . . . . datl the objectives of the study. The judges felt that the conduct of the interviews was effective, that there was "good rapport established with the respondents," and that 268 the respondents proved "cooperative, highly thoughtful, gracious and positive in their attitudes" in these inter- views. Further, their responses were believed to be ”frank, Open, helpful and complete" relative to the ques- tions. Thus, these "professional judges," who listened to a random sample of the taped interviews with the presidents representing both large and medium university groups, felt that the structured interview was an effective and valid procedure for obtaining the data necessary to accomplish the objectives of this study. The reliability percentage of agreement ranged from 89-95 percent with a mean of 92 percent for the presidential interviews. It may be recalled that these "professional judges" included both men and women and faculty trainers and practicing adminis- trators in student personnel. CHAPTER V DATA ANALYSIS: EXECUTIVE LEVEL STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATORS Introduction The purpose of this chapter was to present the find- ings obtained through an analysis of data for the sample of executive level student personnel administrators in relation to the objectives of this study. The methods used to determine the sample to be surveyed and to obtain their COOperation were explained in Chapter III--Methodology. Likewise, the procedures and instruments used in collecting the data were discussed in Chapter III and in the sections "Introduction" and "Sample Participation“ in Chapter IV. The data was gathered through a structured interview with each of the executive level student personnel staff in the twelve midwestern, public, coeducational sample 'wniversities. The "Conceptual Model" (see Appendix A) served as the standardized frame of reference for each student personnel administrator as he proceeded to respond to each question in the interview schedule. Similarities and differences regarding beliefs rela- tive to the various areas under study were reported in the 269 270 form of numbers, percentages and/or proportions of the total responses to tOpical area studied. Reasons provided by the respondents for their expressed beliefs were pre- sented in a descriptive manner and, in some instances, interpretations were made by the investigator relative to the responses and/or reasons given. Similarities and differences in response were noted and compared among and between the three groups comprising the executive student personnel sample--chief student personnel administrators, other male executive student personnel staff, and the high- est ranking female student personnel administrators--and between the large and medium university groups. In general, the sequence of areas and questions listed in the ”Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Per- sonnel Administrators" was followed in the analysis and ‘presentation of the data. However, in several areas, categories of data were combined and/or the order of pre- sentation of data differed from that in which it was (flitained in the interview. The element of threat and the likelihood of "loaded questions" must be considered in the interview wherein responses to certain questions may be more readily influenced and, perhaps, "biased“ by the association and/or contiguity of questions. Such did not need to be considered in the analysis and presentation of data. Finally, the "Interview Schedule: President" and "Inrterview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel 271 Administrators" were very similar in order of areas pre- sented, content and organization. This made possible some comparative analysis between the two groups in Chapter VI. While the President's Schedule emphasized the selection of chief student personnel administrators and other execu- tive level staff, the Executive Level Student Personnel Administrator's Schedule emphasized other executive level and managerial level staff selection. Further, the presi- dents were asked to consider the changing effect Of time lapse on the importance of factors in the selection of chief student personnel administrators. The executive level staff were asked what they believed were the major factors in their selection to their current positions and their duties in those positions, while the presidents were not asked these questions. This chapter included, in order of the topics, a discussion of the (executive student personnel adminis- trator's) sample participation; basic background informa- tion concerning these sample personnel; sources utilized to locate potential candidates for executive and managerial level student personnel positions; personnel involved in the selection process for student personnel administrators; :flactors important in the selection of executive level stu- Cknrt personnel administrators and duties thereafter; fac- tors important in the selection of managerial level stu- dent personnel administrators; perceived determinants (by executive student personnel staff) of the acceptance of 272 the selected chief student personnel administrators by the student personnel staff at the universities; sex as a factor in the selection of student personnel adminis- trators; race as a factor in the selection of student personnel administrators; the relationship of the univer- sity student personnel organizational structure to the selection of student personnel administrators; recommenda- tions (of executive level student personnel staff) rela- tive to the education/professional preparation, employment and personal background experiences desired for student personnel administrators; and, finally, a summary of salient data for the chapter. Sample Participation: Executive Student Personnel AdminiStrators The procedures utilized to secure the cooperation and participation of the sample of executive level student personnel administrators as outlined in Chapter III were deemed effective. All of the forty-two student personnel administrators originally designated as executive level staff by the chief student personnel officers in the tnwelve sample universities (four large and eight medium) agreed to be interviewed for this study. Of these original forty-two staff, thirty-two comprised the final base total utilized in this study. This total included eighteen Caucasian males, two Negro males and twelve Caucasian females. Among the ten Caucasian males not included in time final analysis, seven of these personnel were 273 inaccurately classified as executive staff by their chief student affair officers when they were, in fact, managerial level student personnel staff according to the "Conceptual Model of Student Personnel Organizational Structure" (see Appendix A). The "Conceptual Model" was sent to the chief student personnel Officers in advance for purposes of selection of executive level sample personnel. As a result of the inaccurate classification and, hence, inclusion of some persons to be interviewed for this study inappropriate to its specific goals, such personnel interview data was subsequently excluded from the data analysis by the researcher in consultation with her guidance committee chairman. These exclusions were based on a consideration of the ”titles" and "major duties" as well as the content of the interviews with these personnel when compared to the "Conceptual Model." The remaining three persons, all of whom.might be considered as male executive level staff, were unable to beeinterviewed for this study due to their unexpected absence from the campus at the time of the investigator's ‘visit (in one case) or the lack of time for such an interview during the day of campus visitation( in two cases). In the latter instances, the interviewer ran short of time due to unavoidable delays in the presidential jtherviews immediately prior to these two scheduled inter- views. In these three cases, the investigator left an "Jnrterview Schedule" for the individuals to complete along 274 with some brief written directions for maintenance of the order or preferred reSponse sequence to be the same as that in the interview situation. They were requested to com- plete the schedules and to return them to the investigator. None of the three were returned. In summary, then, data was not available for three persons who might be considered executive level staff members at the time of this study. Of the thirty-two executive level student personnel staff interviewed, twelve were chief student personnel administrators, ten were the highest ranking female stu- dent affairs administrators in these universities, and ten were other executive level male student affairs staff members. These figures comprised the base totals for the analysis and comparison of data for the three groups of executive student personnel staff included in the study. The composition of the group of twelve chief student personnel officers included representatives of all four large and eight medium universities. Two of the large university chief student personnel officers were in “Acting" positions. Ten of the twelve chief officers were personally interviewed by the investigator. Two medium sized university officers were not available on the day of the investigator's campus visit due to illness, in one case, and an unexpected other commitment in the second. However, one was able to be interviewed over the telephone by the investigator later and the other com- pleted and returned the "Interview Schedule" in accordance *with directions left by the investigator. 275 While there were actually twelve Caucasian females included in this study as the highest ranking female stu- dent personnel administrator in each of the twelve sample universities, only ten comprised the base number for their group in the analysis. The other two females were ”Acting" chief student personnel officers in their two universities at the time of this study and it was believed best to include them, as members of the group of chief student personnel officers. All of the twelve women included in this study were personally interviewed by the investigator. Finally, ten males comprised the third and final group of executive student personnel administrators. All were personally interviewed by the investigator. In con- trast to the previous two groups, these men represented only two large and six medium universities. Two large and two medium universities were not represented among staff in this group. Two of the three men not returning the completed "Interview Schedule" would have represented other male executive staff in one large and one medium university. The remaining large and medium university had no other male student personnel executive staff. However, the medium university had a male chief student affairs officer. 276 Basic Background Information: Executive Student Personnel Administrators The thirty-two executive student personnel adminis- trators in the sample included eighteen Caucasion males, two Negro males and twelve Caucasian females. The chief student personnel officers group was composed of nine Caucasian males, one Negro male representing a medium sized university and two Caucasian females of large universities. The latter two persons were serving in an "Acting" capacity only. Such was not the case with the ten men. The male executive group was composed of nine Caucasian males and one Negro male. The female executive group included ten Caucasian females. The age range for the entire sample was 31-69 years ‘with the average age approximately 45 years old. Medium university chief student personnel officers and male student personnel executive staff tended to be younger than their counterparts in large universities. However, large university female student personnel executive staff tended to be younger than medium university female execu- 'tive staff. The two Negro males and the two female {Acting" chief student personnel administrators were jyounger than the average age of their group of executive staff. Male executive student personnel administrators :in the medium universities were the youngest of all groups (of staff. Female executive staff in the medium universi- 'ties were the oldest staff group. 277 The executive student personnel administrators ranged from five months to 22 years with regard to length of time in their present positions. The modal length of time was five years. As with the presidential group, the oldest and youngest individual executive student personnel administrator had been in their positions respectively the longest and shortest periods of time. Medium university executive level administrators in each of the three groups had been in their positions longer than their reSpective groups in the large universities. Male and female execu- tive student personnel staff at medium universities had been in their positions longer than any other groups. Chief student personnel officers at both large and medium universities had been in their positions the least amount of time. The two Negro males, also, tended to have less time in their present positions than the Caucasian males. ‘WOmen executive staff in both large and medium universi- ties had more experience in their positions than the male chief student personnel officers, but less than the other Inale executive student personnel staff in the two univer- sity groups. Male executive staff in the medium univer- sities were in their positions the longest period of time of any group in this study. The figures given above are an accurate reflection (of the experience of these personnel la their present Imasitions. However, a review of the data revealed that many of these persons had been in another executive level position or the same position with another title in the 278 same university at some time prior to the appointment to their present position. Thus, in instances where organi- zational structures and/or titles have changed in recent years. The length of time an individual has spent in his present executive position may not accurately reflect the full extent of his executive student personnel admin— istrative experience. There was evidence, as with the presidential group, of considerable experience by the executive student personnel administrators in the employment of other student personnel administrators at all levels. Thirty of the thirty-two executive staff had had experience in the employment of student personnel staff. This included all chief student personnel officers, both Negro males and all twelve females in the study. Only two male executive staff had had no previous experience in employment. While the executive level "Interview Schedule“ (see .Appendix A) did not ask specifically as in the presidential "Interview Schedule" what kind of experience in employment and promotion, i.e. making the final decision, or being consulted before such a decision, these personnel had had, it was possible to determine several trends with regard to 'the kind of involvement of these personnel in selection. SommerespondentS'on their own stated their specific kind (If involvement and, further, the figures or degree of experience for the three groups reflected the level (5) of personnel selection involvement and concern. 279 Twenty-two of the thirty staff experienced in employment had been involved in selection at all three levels--entry, managerial and executive. Only three of those twenty-two staff had made decisions at all three levels. Nine of these twenty-two staff, largely from medium universities, had made decisions regarding employ- ment only at entry and managerial levels and were consulted only about executive level appointments. Of the remaining ten with experience in employment at all three levels, six had been involved only at the entry level and, four, pri- marily from medium universities, only at the managerial level. Differences between executive student personnel staff of the two sexes and races and in the two university groups ‘wererunzsignificant relative to total employment experience. Chief student personnel officers were slightly more experi- menced in the employment of student personnel staff at all levels than either of the two executive male and female staff groups. The latter two groups had nearly identical employment experience. Chief student affairs officers evidenced a tendency to make the final decision relative in) employment of other executive and managerial level staff. They tended to be consulted only regarding appoint- ments relative to chief personnel officer and entry level positions. Male and female executive level staff appeared to make more final decisions relative to entry and mana- gerial level staff; and to be more often consulted only 280 regarding other executive and chief student personnel administrative appointments. Of the thirty-two executive student personnel staff, twenty-seven had had experience in the promotion of stu- dent personnel staff from one level to another within their university student personnel organizations. Five persons, including one chief personnel officer, one female execu- tive, and three male executive staff members had had no experience in the promotion of student personnel adminis- trators. Thus, of the total groups, eleven of twelve chief officers, nine of ten female executive staff and seven of ten male executive staff had been involved in promotion of staff. Male executive level staff had the least such involvement among the three groups of personnel. Four of the five persons with no experience in promotions were from the medium university group. All of the twenty-seven executive student personnel staff who had had experience in promotion of staff had been involved in promotions made from entry to managerial level positions. The breakdown for the twenty-seven per- sonnel included only one chief officer involved in promo- tions at all four levels; sub-entry to entry, entry to xmanagerial, managerial to executive level and executive level to chief student personnel officer. Ten other personnel had been involved in promotion at three of the four levels excluding the managerial to executive ‘9: rmmnagerial 2; executive to chief personnel officer. 281 Another thirteen staff had been involved in two levels of promotion. Ten of these had had involvement in sub-entry to entry level and entry to managerial level appointments. Three more had been involved in entry to managerial and managerial to executive level selection. Finally, three staff had had experience at only one level of promotion-— entry to managerial. There were only slight differences in involvement in promotion for personnel staff. Medium university staff appeared to have slightly less experience than large uni- versity staff. There was a slight tendency for the two Negro males to have a lesser amount of and lower level involvement in promotion of student personnel staff. Female staff appeared to have greater involvement in pro— motions from managerial to executive level positions. Chief student personnel officers comprised four of the five total personnel staff who had had any involvement in ;promotions from managerial 95 executive positions to that of chief student personnel officer. They, also, were the grOUp who had had more experience at more levels. Seven 13f twelve of the chief officers were involved in promo- ‘tions at three or more levels. Other male and female lexecutive staff were generally more involved in promo- 'tions at only two levels. Chief student personnel officers \were the only group markedly involved in staff selection for executive and chief student personnel officer posi- -tions; while, other male and female executive staff‘were amast often concerned about sub-entry to entry and/or 282 entry to managerial level staff promotions. The chief student personnel administrators tended to make more final decisions on the promotion of managerial level staff to executive level positions. They were more likely to be consulted only prior to the final decision on promotions from sub-entry to entry level. In contrast, male and female executive staff more frequently made the final decisions relative to sub-entry to entry level and often entry to managerial level positions. These staff were more likely to be consulted only on promotions from mana- gerial to executive level and/or managerial or executive level to chief student personnel officer. Both chief student personnel officers and female executive staff had had greater involvement in promotions than male executive staff. In summary, executive student personnel administra— tors had had considerable involvement in both employment and promotion of student personnel administrative staff. HOwever, these thirty-two sample personnel had had slightly greater experience in the employment (30) than in the ;promotion (27) of student affairs administrators. Sources of Potential CandidateS'for Executive and ManagerIaI€EEV§I_— Student'Personnél'Positions The executive level staff were asked what sources they would utilize to secure names and recommendations of potential candidates for executive level student personnel Ixasitions in their universities. The major sOurce for 283 both large and medium university executive personnel staff was professional colleagues, particularly other student personnel executive level administrators at similar kinds of universities. Large university staff generally used both internal and external professional administrative colleagues; while medium university staff relied more on colleagues external to their institution including both professional student personnel administrators and well- regarded faculty-trainers. As their second and third sources, large universities further utilized search and screen committees and tended to look internally for possi- ble personnel who might be promoted to executive level positions. The former source was notably absent and the latter less often utilized among medium university execu- tive student personnel staff in this study. However, medium university staff utilized as their second source national professional student personnel organizations, their placement services and annual professional conven- tions to a larger extent than large university staff who rarely used the placement services of these organizations, except perhaps, at the annual professional meeting. The professional student personnel organizations most often used by both university groups were, in order: (1) NASPA, (2) NAWDC, (3) APGA—ACPA. Male executive staff tended to use NASPA more often; while female staff favored NAWDC as a professional source. Both groups used APGA-ACPA as a second professional organizational source of candidates. 284 Chief and executive level student personnel staff did not differ significantly on their respective first two sources: (1) well-known student personnel administra- tors at other similar kind universities, and (2) profes- sional organization placement bureaus and conventions. However, chief student personnel officers looked internally for potential candidates for promotion and used search and screen committees while executive staff were less likely to do so. Both utilized well-regarded professional faculty- trainers of student personnel administrators at other universities. However, executive staff were more likely to do so than chief officers. Female staff utilized the same sources as male executive staff"with the exception of the two female "Acting" chief female student personnel officers who used the same sources as the ‘male chief student personnel officers. The Negro males tended to look internally for potential candidates for possible promotion of present staff to a slightly greater degree than did Caucasian males. The second question asked executive student personnel staff in this section was what kind of sources they would utilize to secure names and recommendations for Ixatential candidates for managerial level student personnel ;positions. Only eleven of thirty-two staff interviewed stated that the sources used to secure possible candidates were the same as those for executive level staff. Of the twenty-one staff who noted that the sources differed to 285 some degree, most named professional organization placev ment services and annual conventions as their first source; and fellow professional student personnel admin— istrators (both those in other similar universities and those "inside" on their present staffs, including those in specialized areas of concern) as second sources for managerial level candidates. The value of professional organization placement services and conventions as a first source did not differ between large and medium university staff. However, large university staff felt student per- sonnel administrators in other universities were a better second source; while medium university staff believed Specialized professional organizations (e.g. ACUHO for directors of housing) and consultation with professional student personnel administrators in these special areas in their own and other universities were respectively the best second and third sources. Chief student personnel officers did not differ with (other executive level staff with the possible exception (If a slightly greater use of more specialized student personnel administrators. Women were inclined to utilize both general and specialized national professional organizations for managerial level staff. Finally, the most noticeable differences between the sources used to secure names for potential candidates for executive com- pared to managerial level positions included the greater use of executive student personnel administrators, both 286 those currently on their staff as well as those well- regarded administrators located in other similar kinds of universities for candidates for executive level student personnel positions; as compared with the greater use of national general and Specialized professional stu- dent personnel organizations, as well as the use of more specialized managerial student personnel administrators externally and internally as sources for candidates for managerial level positions. Personnel Involved in the Selection ProceSS'for Student Personnel Administrators The intent of the questions relative to this section (see Section IIIG, l. of "Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators in Appendix A) was to ascertain which university staff were involved in the actual selection process for full-time student personnel administrators. In addition, the investigator wished to determine the kind and extent of involvement of student personnel staff in this process. It became evident to the researcher during the analy- sis of data that section G of the "Interview Schedule" should have incorporated specific questions relative to university staff involvement in the selection of executive, managerial and, perhaps, entry level student personnel staff-~not simply chief student personnel officers. Fur- ther, the questions should have asked sample personnel to specifically indicate which level of student personnel and 287 other university staff were involved in what areas of the selection process,e.g. recommending names of potential candidates, reviewing credentials, interviewing and evalu- ating candidates and making the final decisions on the choice or rank ordering of a group of candidates for the available student affairs position. The investigator was able to determine the latter information by recognition of the situation before the beginning of sample interview- ing (but, after the printing of the "Interview Schedule”) and subsequently asked this Specific information in the interviews. The information relative to the problem of Selection for student personnel staff other than chief officers was ascertained from answers to ques- tion IIIG, l and IIIA, 1 and 2, ”Sources of Potential Student Personnel Administrators” in the "Interview Schedule'I and from additional elaboration on or comments about the selection of chief officers and/or the involve- ment of student personnel staff. The sample personnel were asked if student personnel staff were consulted in the selection process for a chief student personnel officer. One hundred per cent or all university executive student affairs staff interviewed indicated "yes” that some student affairs staff were con- sulted at some point(s) in the process of selection. In the selection of student personnel administrators to fill other executive and managerial level positions, these student personnel staff were likely to be even more 288 involvedvand in several of the Six stages of the process in these universities. When a chief student personnel officer was to be selected, suggestions and recommenda- tions of names of potential candidates were solicited from the external sources noted previously in this chapter and such internal sources as a Search and Selection Committee (if one was appointed by the president) generally composed of students, faculty and administrators, and executive level student affairs staff in that university. Perhaps, managerial and entry level student affairs staff were consulted informally and/or suggestions of names of candi- dates solicited by the Search and Screen Committee through a general announcement to all members of the university community. The academic credentials and recommendations for each potential candidate were reviewed by the Search and Screen Committee, and academic deans and/or department heads, particularly if the individual to be appointed was expected to teach academic classes. Quite likely execu- tzive student affairs staff, the president and/or the pro- vmxst, also, reviewed the credentials of the more promising candidates. Following this, the Search and Screen Commit- tee and/or president of the university extended an invi- turtion to the most promising candidates in rank order of cfiuiice to come to the university for a visit and inter- vifinvs. During the campus visit, the candidate was inter— viewed by the president, other university vice-presidents, the Search and Screen Committee, executive student 289 personnel administrators in that university, and, perhaps some managerial student personnel staff. Additionally, if he were to teach, the appropriate academic dean, depart- ment chairman and/or senior department faculty would inter— view him. Reactions to these interviews and evaluations of each candidate were solicited from the interviewing per- sonnel by the president and/or the Search and Screen Committee. Upon receipt of all reactions to and evalua- tionS of the candidates, the President would make the final decision from among the final candidates regarding the selection of an individual for the position of chief student personnel officer. In the event of several well- qualified and favorably evaluated candidates, the presi- dent would rank order a list of the candidates and offer the position to each individual in descending order until one of the individuals accepted. The request for approval of the selection was presented by the president to the IBoard of Trustees or Regents who most generally would officially confirm the appointment of the individual to the post of chief student personnel officer for that university. The selection of other executive, managerial and enrtry level student personnel staff follow the same Six steps in the same order; however, different personnel groups in the university participate to a greater or lesser degree and have more responsibility and authority rxalative to the various stages of selection according to 290 the level of staff to be selected. In general, the higher the level of the "open" position the higher the level of student personnel administrative staff and the greater the representation and higher level of the other non-student personnel university staff involved and vice versa. Thus, the more "critical" the position in terms of responsibility, authority and visibility the more rigorous would be the process of selection for both the candidates and the universities. The sources utilized to secure names of potential candidates for other executive student personnel positions were Similar to those of the chief officer except that there may or may not exist a Search and Screen Committee and there was generally greater reliance on the chief student personnel officer and his executive associates to locate and suggest names of potential candidates for the position. Credentials normally were reviewed by the chief student affairs officer, the appropriate academic dean, department head or senior faculty if the individual was expected to teach and perhaps, the president and/or pro- vost, other executive level student personnel staff and a Search and Screen Committee (if established). The chief student affairs officer would issue an invitation for the most promising candidates to visit the campus. The candidate would be interviewed by the chief student affairs officer, other executive student per- sonnel administrators, either the president or the provost 291 and the relevant academic dean, department head, or faculty representatives, if he were to teach. Further, some managerial student personnel staff and perhaps students, particularly student leaders, were often asked to talk with the candidates. Reactions to the interviews and evalua- tions from these interviewing personnel with regard to the various candidates were obtained by the chief student affairs officer. The latter made the final decision after consultation with the president or provost. His recome mendation was, then, sent to the president who requested that the Board of Trustees or Regents officially approve the appointment. Internal sources for potential candidates for mana- gerial level appointments were largely the responsibility of chief student affairs officer, other executive student personnel staff, and quite possibly the out-going mana- gerial level specialist staff member. Some immediate entry level subordinates of the out-going managerial head were frequently informally consulted as well. Credentials were reviewed by these same personnel, except entry-level staff, and might include academic faculty of the appro- priate department if the individual appointed was expected to teach. The invitation to visit the campus was issued by the chief student affairs officer to the best candi- dates. The candidates would be interviewed and evaluated by the chief student personnel officer, his executive staff, other managerial student affairs staff, and the 292 entry level personnel working in the same area as that of the "open" managerial position. If the individual was to teach the appropriate academic staff would interview him. If the managerial level position available was either that of Director of the Health Service or Counseling Center, the president and, perhaps, the provost would, also, interview the candidates as well as in the former instance, the Dean of the Medical School. The final deci- sion on most managerial level appointments would be made by the chief student affairs officer. In the two cases cited above, the president and/or provost might make the decision, but if not would most certainly be consulted by the chief student affairs officer prior to it. Entry level student personnel vacancies were the primary responsibility of managerial student personnel administrators. When a position was "open" in a Specific area of student affairs, the managerial head of that area was responsible for seeking suggestions and recommendations from among student personnel staff, reviewing credentials in conjunction with, perhaps, executive student affairs staff and the chief officer, and for, perhaps, inviting the best candidates to the campus for interviews. Inter- views and evaluations of entry level position candidates generally were made by the managerial head, his staff in that area, and, quite likely some student leaders. Fre- quently, other managerial and executive student affairs staff including the chief officer might meet with and 293 react to the candidates. The final decision on an entry level appointment would usually be made by the managerial head of that area in consultation with the chief student personnel officer and, perhaps, one or more other execu- tive student personnel staff members. With the possible exception of some entry level candidates, all other candi- dates for higher positions in student affairs were required to visit the campus and be interviewed by the above-named personnel in these universities prior to being seriously considered as a final candidate for a student personnel administrative position. No differences were noted in the perceptions between large and medium university staff, males and females or Caucasians and Negroes, nor among chief officers and male and female executive student personnel sample staff rela- tive to the kind and degree of involvement of various university groups in the selection process. Factors Important in the Selection of Executive and Managerial Student Personnel Administrators The factors which were considered important in the selection of executive student personnel administrators were determined by two means. First, the executive student personnel staff interviewed were asked in the "Interview Schedule" (III, D,l-3) to identify those factors they con- sidered important in the selection of student affairs staff for 294 executive positions. Secondly, they were asked to desig- nate their preference in relation to certain suggested factors (III, E,l-2) for selection of personnel at this level. The latter suggested factors were an outgrowth of a review by the investigator of previous research studies as well as beliefs of professional observers in this field. These sample personnel were, also, asked to state a reason for factors noted or preferences indicated. For purposes of clarity and to minimize repetition, several areas, e.g. personal characteristics, were combined, fol- lowing analysis and summary, in the presentation of the data. The executive student affairs staff felt strongly that an earned doctorate was very important for executive level administrators in this field. Of the thirty-two responses, twenty—eight, including all chief student affairs officers, preferred the doctorate while only two male and two female executive staff did not feel it was important. There was a slight preference for the Ph.D. degree over any other doctorate, particularly among the female executive staff. Differences were not significant between the staff of the two university groups. The- doctorate was viewed as important in order for the execu- tive student affairs administrator to obtain the academic respectability and acceptability necessary in a university community. Without faculty acceptance and good relations the administrator could not be effective. Furthermore, 295 knowledge of an academic discipline and evidence of con- tinued growth and learning as well as dedication to the same were deemed valuable attributes in attaining this respectability. Choice of major field of study was considered a factor in selection, but of lesser importance than the fact of having an earned doctorate. While many of the executive staff named several majors, as a total group they appeared to prefer substantive graduate majors in the Social-Behavioral Sciences area, e.g. Psychology and Sociology. This was particularly true of chief student affairs officers in this study. However, male and female executive staff added, as desirable, broad majors in Student Personnel Administration, Higher Education, and Coun- SEIing and Guidance. They preferred that these majors be broadly oriented and up—to-date with an emphasis on higher education. Student Personnel Administration was not: viewed as the most valuable area of study by this executive sample. Medium university executive staff Placed more importance on these major areas of study, in general, and Student Personnel Administration, in par ticular, than did large university executive student affairs administrators. The above-named majors were felt to be relevant and helpful to work as an executive Student affairs administrator. However, the preferred major area of study might depend on the individual's a . . . . . . tea of job respons1bility, his personal interests, 296 qualifications otherwise and staff balance in relation to major fields of study. There was a definite tendency on the part of chief student affairs officers and female executive staff to prefer a strong background in the Liberal Arts or Humanities at the undergraduate level and a broadly-based major in the social-behavioral Sciences or related majors previously named at the graduate level of study. This kind of preparation was felt to, perhaps, provide the individual student affairs administrator with a broad knowledge of many areas of study and life. There was a definite trend toward avoidance of any preference for majors in the physical sciences. Previous college teaching experience was deemed desirable by most of the sample. Half of the executive staff interviewed felt such previous experience and/or credentials appropriate to as well as interest in and potential to teach was an important criteria for execu- tive student personnel administrators. Medium university staff felt previous experience and/or potential for college teaching was more important than did large uni- versity staff. Seven of eight of the medium university chief student affair officers deemed such experience or potential as more important than any other group of staff interviewed. In striking contrast, three of four chief officers of the large universities felt that such experience was not important or of little value except in, perhaps, one or two areas. Male and female executive 297 staff in the two university groups fell in between the two chief student affairs officers' groups on this point. Reasons given for the desirability of teaching experi- ence included the value of understanding the numerous student and faculty problems related to the academic life, the possibility of enhancing student personnel administra- tive-faculty relationships and development of mutual respect between the two groups and, finally, the fact that several of these university student personnel executive positions require the individual to teach as well as be an administrator. Like the doctorate, twenty-eight of thirty-two of the sample felt that previous college administrative experi- ence was important, very important or essential. "Impor- tant" was the most frequently named value (13); however, ”very important" or "essential” (15) was,when combined together equally high on the list. Large university female executive staff felt it was of lesser value than did large university male executive staff, or than medium university chief officers and female executive staff. None of the per- sonnel felt it was not of value. Several of the sample noted they would like the experience to be in an institu- tion Similar in kind and type to the present one for which the individual was being considered for employment. Rea- sons given for its importance included the necessity for an understanding of university organization and the kind of processes and procedures utilized therein to accomplish institutional and student affairs goals. 298 Twenty-one of the thirty—two staff felt that national academic and/or professional stature and visibility was “important" (12) or "desirable" (11). The remaining nine were divided between feeling that it was "very important" (4) or "not important" (5). No staff interviewed believed it was an "essential" factor to be considered in the selection of executive staff. It was certainly not a deciding factor in most cases of selection. The male executive staff of both university groups considered it to be slightly more desirable than did other personnel groups. Differences were not significant according to the two university groups. This factor was deemed valuable because of the desire for increasing personal and insti- tutional visibility, the potential aid of professional friends and contacts particularly when candidates were being sought to fill other student personnel positions in the university, and the value to the students, the insti- tution and the individual administrator if the latter kept up-to-date with current professional thinking and develop- ments in student affairs related to new policies, prac- tices, problems and programs. Wherever possible, pro- fessional contributions or research were, also, felt to be desirable. Most importantly, these executive staff simply felt that an individual in an executive student affairs position should exhibit desire and/or have pro- fessional interest and membership in relevant professional groups and evidence some interest in attending professional 299 conventions. This reflected a desire to advance in one's work. The holding of significant offices or research or publication related to professional organizations and journals was not seen as important. Interestingly enough, seven of the sample interviewed stated they would encour- age this professional interest in the individual if he had not previously shown any evidence of it. However, many of these personnel further noted that the individual's time, effort and presence on his administrative job in his "home" university and the problems and concerns related to that position as well as student and staff contacts ought not be sacrificed, as some have done in the past, by over-involvement in regional and national professional organizations or in extensive research to the neglect of the responsibilities and associations connected with one's administrative position in student affairs. Public relations ability or the presence of well- develOped communication skills was conceived by 31 of the 32 respondents to be essential (16) or very important (15) for an executive administrative position in student affairs. Only one respondent felt it was simply important. No one viewed this ability as merely desirable or unimportant. Differences were not significant between the two univer- sity groups or among the three personnel groups. The ability to be articulate, both verbally and in writing, concerning institutional, student personnel and student goals and needs with members of the academic 300 community and the public at large, as well as the willing- ness and capacity to listen well and understand the needs and concerns of both those members of the university com- munity as well as the citizenry were deemed of great value for one in a high level administrative position in a public university. Public relations ability was viewed in a positive sense by a majority of the respondents. However, one large university chief student personnel officer noted the necessity for an effective student personnel adminis- trator to recognize when to keep still on issues and pro- blems. Thus, timing as well as tact and diplomacy were all conceived as part of good public relations for adminis- trators. Finally, some respondents indicated that some student personnel positions were more "sensitive" in terms of visibility than were others and this fact would, in part, determine the degree of public relations Skills required of potential administrators. The respondents were queried as to the preferred age of the individual at the time of his appointment to an executive position in student affairs administration. The majority of respondents preferred the individual be in the age range of 35-50 years old. Although differences were not significant between the large and medium univer- sity staff groups, the medium university chief student personnel officers and male executives would be more will- ing to drop the lower limit to 30 years of age. These 301 respondents noted they preferred that the person not be over 45 at the time of initial appointment to such a posi- tion. It must be noted that many of the personnel inter- viewed felt that age was a less important criterion than the person's maturity, flexibility and competency as well as the potential number of years of future service relative to their institution. The respondents were finally asked to suggest per- sonal characteristics that they desired in a candidate for an executive student affairs administrative position. Many personal characteristics had previously been included by respondents in III D, l-3a, where they were asked to identify any factors important to them in selection of these staff, but many of the respondents cited additional factors in III E, l-8. These fell into five factor clus- ters of characteristics. They were (in order of frequency): (1) a flexible, resilient, perceptive, and warm personality with a sincere interest in and respect for people as well as a good sense of humor; (2) good personal grooming and appearance; (3) an intelligent, innovative and competent leader who had a broad perspective about life and understood and could articulate well institutional and student person- nel goals and needs and, further, was concerned about the professional and personal growth of student affairs staff and students; (4) an individual who possessed a good sound ethical/moral value system and philosophy of life, evidenc- ing such qualities as integrity, honesty, loyalty and 302 responsibility; and, finally, (5) the possession of good physical and mental health including the ability to be poised and the capacity to endure stress during crisis periods in the university. One female executive adminis- trator in student affairs summed up these personal char- acteristics aptly by noting that executive student affairs administrators should be "tender hearted and tough minded." Two of these five aspects (numbers 1 and 3) which dealt with personality characteristics and leadership traits were noted as very important by the respondents when they "identified" factors of importance in III, D-la. Differences were significant between the two univer- sity groups only in relation to item (4) above regarding a sound ethical/moral value system, philosophy, and appro- priate accompanying behavior. Medium university personnel stressed this to a greater extent than did large university respondents. There were no significant differences between the three personnel groups interviewed in relation to these five factors. Likewise age and tenure in position of the respondents were not related to their choice of or value placed on these personal characteristics. The most significant part of this section relative to the value of factors in selection of student personnel administrators was part III D, l-2a. In this section of the "Interview Schedule" the respondents were given a "free hand" to identify factors of importance to them, provide 303 a rating as to the degree of importance for the factor suggested, and a reason for their feeling that the factor was of value in the selection of an individual for an executive position in student affairs in their universities. The results of the data analysis yielded five major factors rated essential by between 20-26 of the 32 personnel inter- viewed. These five critical factors (in order of frequency) included: (1) Personal characteristics; (2) Leadership ability; (3) Possession of a Ph.D. in the social-behavioral sciences; (4) Previous college administrative experience, preferably in a university similar in kind to the one for which the individual is being considered for employment; and, finally, (5) well—developed communication Skills. Personal characteristics was of great importance to these respondents. Many noted that "the kind of person one was" was the critical factor in selection of personnel in this field. Certain personal qualities could be less easily developed than many of these other factors. They felt that given the "right kind of person" he could learn the other essentials. These personal qualities included the possession of a flexible, resilient and warm personality, enthusiasm, a good sense of humor, empathy, perceptiveness, intelli- gence, a creative/innovative approach to problems, will- ingness to listen, and to admit and adjust to mistakes, courage, ability to make difficult decisions and hold to them when necessary, integrity, personal maturity, good judgment, and the physical and emotional stamina to endure periods of sustained crisis and stress. 304 Differences in the particular factors emphasized according to the value placed on them were noted. Large university staff tended to place previous college adminis- trative experience first, rather than fourth when compared with the reSpondent group as a whole and with the medium university staff who placed personal characteristics first. Otherwise there were no significant differences in order of factor value between the two university groups or in comparison to the value order for the total group of respondents. Among the sample groups, several differences were noted. While male and female executive staff tended to follow the total group order, they tended to place somewhat greater emphasis on personal characteristics and previous college administrative experience than did chief student affairs officers who frequently felt that leader- ship ability might be more essential. The value of these five critical factors did not differ according to sex; however, the Negroes in this sample would appear to place less value on the possession of a Ph.D. degree in the Social-behavioral Sciences than would the Caucasian mem- bers of the sample group. The respondents noted that an understanding of, respect for, confidence in and rapport with the present generation of college students was another very important factor in selection. They believed that two other impor- tant factors were a broad range of educational experience, including all ages and kinds of people, and hopefully some 305 teaching and an interest and participation in and, perhaps, service and/or research contributions to national profes- sional groups and organizations. There was evidence among the respondents of a slightly different emphasis in relation to some of the personal characteristics and leadership qualities desired. Older reSpondents in terms of both age and tenure in position tended to stress some of the more traditional qualities, e.g. honesty, integrity, understanding people, personal maturity, good judgement, courage and enthusiasm and such leadership qualities as effective planning and organization of student affairs. Younger staff responded with stress on a flexible and resilient personality, low levels of anxiety, rapport with and confidence in students, student development as an approach, an innovative/creative leadership approach, independent thinking, willingness to admit mistakes and ability to adjust to them as their preferred personal and leadership qualities. The investigation provided an Opportunity for com— parison of these factors initially identified by the respondents as most important or essential in the selection of executive student affairs administrators ("Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators" III D, l—2a) with those factors considered most important by the respondent in his/her selection as an executive staff member in a university ("Interview Schedule" II, G-H). The data revealed seven factors considered by these 306 respondents to be most important in their selection for their present positions. These were in order of frequency: (1) previous experience in student personnel administra- tion; (2) possession of an earned doctorate, close to it or a masters degree plus experience; (3) experience at same institution; (4) (tie) being known by or having good previous relationships with the student affairs staff, chief student personnel officer or president of their present institution and previous experience in teaching at the college level (particularly, for the Negro respondents); (5) (tie) good student/faculty respect and relationships and educational background or their major field of study; (6) (tie) personality/character and previous experience in a non-student personnel field, i.e., business; and (7) previous experience in the same type of job. Differences were not significant between large and medium university staff groups. The first three factors for the total group were the three most important for both groups. The only difference was that experience at the same institution was slightly more important for large university staff, while possession of the doctorate appeared to be slightly more important for medium univere sity staff. Chief student affairs officers and female executive staff agreed on factors important to their selection. Both felt that previous student affairs experi- ence and experience at same institution were the two major factors. However, male executive staff believed possession 307 of the earned doctorate or close to it was the most impor- tant factor. Male chief student affairs officers felt also, that the doctorate in an appropriate field of study was important. Male executive staff added such factors as student/faculty respect and good relationships and previous experience in a non-student personnel field. Female executive staff added an appropriate field of study and previous college teaching experience as important factors. By far, the most important factor to all of these executive student affairs staff was previous experience in student personnel administration. This contrasts sharply with their preference for one who possesses cer- tain personal characteristics as their most essential criterion in III, D l—2a. The latter ranked only in a tie for sixth place in the reasons for their own selection but would appear to rank first in their criteria for the selection of other executive student affairs staff in Similar positions and universities. Further, leadership ability and possession of communication skills were' apparently not viewed as important in their selection but would apparently be more important for other executive Staff. Finally, experience at the same institution Was felt to be a far more important factor in the selection Of these staff than it would be for other executive staff in future selection decisions. 3) U 2?, These executive student affair administrators were asked in II D of the "Interview Schedule" to cite the major duties of their positions. The purpose of this question was twofold: (l) to determine according to the "Conceptual Model for Student Personnel Organization Struc- ture" (see Appendix A) which of these staff actually held executive positions in student affairs in order to include data from these persons among the data to be analyzed; and (2) to attempt to relate the essential factors in selection for future executive staff and those believed by these executive respondents as very important in their selection to the responsibilities and requirements of executive student affairs administrative positions in these universities. The former purpose was accomplished as explained in III of this study. The latter purpose can now be discussed and related to the necessary factors for work at the executive level in student affairs. There were, of course, twelve chief student personnel officers who had the final responsibility and authority for planning, }organizing, administering and regulating policies, pro- grams and services in the area of student affairs. These officers generally served as the chief Spokesman and as the chief advisor to their presidents and/or Boards of Trustees or Regents in the area of student affairs. The other twenty executive student affairs administrative staff were composed of ten males and ten females. Their job functions were more specific and of a more in-depth 309 nature in various areas when compared to the more general and broader responsibilities of the chief officer. Many of these staff had responsibilities for several different functions of both a general and specific nature. The following were the principal functions for the executive staff (in order of frequency): (1) advising student activ- ities--13 of 20; (2) coordinating programs for same sex students-~8 of 20; (3) student conduct/discipline--7 of 20; (4) (tie) counseling students and other university staff 22g coordinating residence hall programs--6 of 20; (5) (tie) recruitment/5election/training of staff and assist- ing the chief student personnel officer--5 of 20. All four large university executive student affairs staff were significantly involved in assisting their chief student affairs officers. Medium university staff--12 of l3--were most Significantly involved in advising student activities. Male executive staff tended to be more involved in the latter function and assisting the chief student personnel officers more than the female executive staff. The latter were more often responsible for student conduct/discipline and recruitment/3election/training of staff than were their male counterparts. In the areas of coordinating programs for same sex students, counseling students and staff, and coordinating residence hall programs the two sexes were equally as involved. The medium university male Negro executive staff member was reSponsible for a human relations center which focused on improvement of 310 the university environment and services for minority groups,disadvantaged and handicapped students. When these job functions were considered against essential or very important criteria, as proposed by the respondents, the latter appeared to be appropriate to the effective performance of the former. Previous experience in student personnel administration, experience at the same or a similar kind of institution, having a background of study in the social-behavioral sciences, leadership ability, good communications ability, possession of cer— tain desirable personal characteristics and character traits, as previously named, and good rapport with and respect of students, faculty, and student affairs staff would all appear to provide an individual with the basis essentials for effective functioning in an executive position in student affairs. Such factors as the posses- sion of an earned doctorate and previous college teaching experience would appear to add to the individual's back- ground and thus, make it easier for him/her to effectively perform job functions and particularly those which were dependent on faculty respect and rapport and related to student academic concerns and counseling. These latter two factors, however, would not appear to be essential for the actual effective performance of these executive job responsibilities. It Should be noted that these basic factors are of a general nature for all executive positions in student 311 affairs. The particular job functions of some executives, i.e. counseling, advising student activities and coordi- nating residence hall programs would require, in addition, a more specific and in-depth study and understanding of these more specialized areas. As was noted in previous sections of this chapter the procedures for selection of managerial level staff in student affairs were less exhaustive and somewhat more informal than for selection of the chief or other execu- tive level student affairs staff. While the final decision was, in most cases, made by the chief student affairs offi- cer, all student personnel staff had considerable interest and participation in the selection process for managerial staff. Many of the factors and most all of the reasons for the factors described earlier in this section as being of considerable importance in the selection of executive staff would, also, be of importance for managerial staff selection. Other factors noted for executives would not be important for managerial administrators. Finally, some factors yet unnamed or previously named would be more .important for staff at this level in student affairs. Basically, the qualities outlined as of value to executive student affairs staff were important, also, for managerial staff. The primary difference was that of degree rather than kind with regard to these factors. 312 In general, managerial staff were not expected to be as knowledgeable or as refined in their skills or to possess the same breadth and depth of experience in administra- tion, in general, and student affairs, in particular, as executive staff. They were, however, expected to be more knowledgeable and very skilled in relation to their more specialized areas of responsibility in student affairs, i.e., housing, student activities, financial aids, etc. Thus, they were required to possess a more in-depth back— ground in one or more areas while executive staff needed a broader knowledge and perspective of all areas of stu- dent affairs.. In relation to the Specific factors, suggested by previous research and other professional observers, and reacted to by the executive staff respondents in section III, E 1-2 of the "Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators) (see Appendix A) the expectations for managerial level staff were generally lower than those cited for executive staff. While most all preferred the earned doctorate for persons at the executive level, only half preferred it at the managerial level. This half included primarily large university respondents and principally chief and other executive male student affairs staff. The Masters degree plus pre- vious administrative experience in student affairs was quite acceptable to another half of the respondents. This was particularly true for medium university staff, 313 in general, and female executive staff, in particular. The reSpondents noted that the necessity for the doctorate might depend on one's area of responsibility, e.g. Direc- tor of the Counseling Center or Health Service. These positions would require the highest degree in these fields of study. Most of the respondents noted that the job functions or specific areas of responsibility were important con— siderations relative to kind and type of major preferred for managerial candidates. For example a background in the field of business administration was considered desir- able for a Financial Aids Director. However, in general, there was a preference for graduate study in a broad applied program in Student Personnel Administration, Higher Education, Counseling and Guidance and the social/ behavioral science areas. Medium university staff, with one exception, were the staff more specifically favoring Student Personnel Administration as a major field of study. There was evidence of a tendency to consider more specific majors, as noted, in the social/behavioral sci- ence areas as desirable for managerial staff. Whereas, broader "more substantive and solid academic majors" e.g. Sociology, Psychology, Political Science were pre- ferred for executive staff. In both cases, female execu- tive staff in medium universities felt that a solid aca- demic discipline in the Liberal Arts or Humanities was preferable as the area of undergraduate study. 314 Previous college teaching experience, and/or the possession of acceptable credentials and/or interest in such experience was deemed desirable or important by four- teen respondents and not important or unnecessary by eleven others. Only two respondents felt it was very important and both were medium university chief student affairs officers. Medium university personnel felt that this experience or potential for college teaching was ranked important to desirable compared to the large university staff who felt it was not important. While medium univer- sity chief student affairs officers and female executive staff felt such experience was more important, large university chief officers and male executive staff felt it was not important, except, perhaps in one or two special areas. Preferences for previous college administrative experience for managerial staff were divided between being viewed as important by fourteen and desirable by twelve of the reSpondents. However, only four persons felt it was very important and none that it was essential when compared with seven and eight respectively for other executive staff candidates. Again, large university female executive staff attached lesser importance to this factor when compared with other staff groups. Only one medium university chief officer felt it was not a necessary fac- tor. 315 National academic and/or professional stature was deemed desirable by twenty-one of the thirty-two respondents. Five others felt it was important and seven others believed it was not important. No respondent felt it was very important or essential for managerial student affairs staff. In comparison, at least half or sixteen of the respondents felt it was important or very important for executive student affairs staff. This factor was certainly not a deciding one in relation to selection of managerial staff. Differences were not significant between the two university staff groups or the three personnel groups sampled. As with the executive staff, public relations ability or good communications skills both verbal and written were considered very important (17) or essential (9) for mana- gerial staff by the large majority of personnel interviewed. This was felt to be an important factor by three others and a desirable factor by three more. Again, no respondent felt it was not important or unnecessary. This ability was viewed only slightly more essential for executive than managerial staff. Large university staff felt it was less essential for managerial personnel than did medium university staff. The reasons for its importance were Similar to those given for executive staff; however, several other comments were made specifically relating to manageral staff. One respondent noted that public rela- tions and communications ability had become increasingly important for managerial staff in the past four to five 316 years. Other respondents felt that the importance of communications skill as a factor in selection would, in part, be dependent on the nature of the responsibilities and visibility of the particular managerial position to be filled. Some felt that a managerial candidate could learn some of the communication Skills on the job, yet others appeared to believe that this was not as desirable. verbal communications were felt to be more important by one respondent for managerial than executive staff because the former was believed to generally have more direct student contacts. Finally, respondents noted that good internal communications were more frequently expected of managerial administrators whereas both internal and external communications would be the responsibility of chief officers and other executive student affairs staff. The preferred age range for managerial staff at the time of their initial appointment to positions in student affairs in these universities was 30-55 years of age. This age range granted five years more and less for mana- gerial than executive staff. There was a definite pre- ference for and faith in younger staff for these manager- ial positions, particularly, if the position was a "deve10pmental one” and dealt with broad problem areas in student affairs. Youth was viewed as an asset and younger personnel were seen as very able to handle such positions if they were mature, competent and flexible. Personnel who were older and nearer to the upper age limit 317 were acceptable in the more narrowly specialized and/or terminal positions. The personal characteristics most frequently men- tioned by the respondents and noted in this section in relation to executive staff applied, also, to managerial staff. These areas (in order) which included: a flexible, resilient, warm and perceptive personality, good grooming and appearance, an intelligent, innovative and competent leader, a person with a good sound ethical/moral value system and philosophy, and the possession of good physi- cal and mental health to withstand crisis periods were all of importance to managerial staff. Perhaps, one--that of being an intelligent, innovative and competent leader-- would be less well-develOped in a managerial than an executive candidate at the time of appointment; however, the former would be expected to improve in this area and gain broader perspective concerning the institutional and student affairs goals and refine his skills in order to effectively communicate with and better relate to others during his period on-the-job. Finally, the kind of factors identified by the respondents as essential or very important ones in III D, l-2a in the "Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators" (see Appendix A) were, also, the most important ones for managerial staff. However, there was a lesser expectation that these fac- tors would be as developed or refined to the same degree 318 for managerial as compared to executive staff. Of these five factors (in order of frequency) the differences for managerial staff included: (1) personal characteristics-- essentially the same expectations; (2) leadership ability-- less breadth of perspective, and lesser degree of refine- ment of Skills; (3) possession of the Ph.D. in the Social/ Behavioral Sciences--the Ph.D. was deemed slightly less important except in such areas as the Directors of Counseling or Health Center; and the graduate training program might well be more specialized and of more applied nature; (4) previous college administrative eXperience--less breadth of and extensive experience expected in administration; (5) communications skills--less experience in public Speaking and lessened refinement of these skills generally. While there was a definite trend to expect less in terms of knowledges, skills and experience from managerial than executive student affairs administrative candidates, there was one exception noted by nearly all of the respon- dents. Managerial student affairs staff Should present evidence of an in—depth knowledge and expertise as well as a sound background of experience and competency (to an even greater degree than executive staff) in their specialized areas of managerial assignment and responsibility. The managerial head must be able to work exceedingly well directly with both students and staff and be able to estab— lish and.maintain an area of operation efficiently and 319 effectively. These heads should be competent in super— vising staff. They should be able to recognize diffi- culties, and to apprOpriately refer and/or solve them within their area of responsibility. They must work and communicate well with their superiors and keep the latter appraised of difficulties, needs, programs and methods of operation in the special area. Managerial positions were viewed by these reSpondents as positions of a more specialized in-depth, functional nature which would serve as training or developmental posi- tions for younger staff who might later aspire to executive administrative positions in student affairs. In contrast, the nature of executive student affairs positions required candidates to have a more general background of knowledge, skills and a breadth of perspective and extensive adminis- trative experience in all student affairs areas. In gen- eral, managerial staff would not be expected to make and assume the responsibility for the more difficult and fare reaching decisions in student affairs as would be expected of chief officers and other executive staff. If such a decision were to be made by the managerial head, he would gemerally be expected to consult with either the chief «officer and/or other executive student affairs adminis— ‘trators in that university prior to making such a decision. 320 Perceptions of the Factors which Determine the Acceptance of the Selected Chief Student Personnel Administrator by the Student Personnel Staff The executive staff respondents were asked to Specify which factors they believed were the most important ones in determining the acceptance by the current student per- sonnel staff of that university of any individual appointed to the position of chief student personnel administrator (see "Interview Schedule": III G.2 in Appendix A). These factors could be grouped into fiVe basic categories. The following were considered the most impor- tant factors and categories (in order of frequency): (1) a courageous, confident, innovative and competent democra- tic leader. One who is honest, fair and consistent in his decisions and is willing to listen and involve appro- priate others wherein possible. He should be able to delegate appropriate authority and responsibility to his student affairs staff in order that they may be effec- tive in their special areas of work; (2) an individual who has respect for, confidence in and rapport with his student affairs staff as both professional workers and individuals. He must be sensitive to and attempt to understand their needs and concerns and be able to provide support and encouragement to them as well as recognize and appreciate their efforts and good work; (3) an individual who possesses an educationally and experientially sound academic and professional background which is academically :nespectable and leads to respect for and confidence in him 321 by his student affairs staff, faculty, other administra- tive staff, his superiors and students; (4) an individual who evidences respect for, faith in and a sensitivity to students, their needs and concerns and organize the stu- dent affairs resources in a manner calculated to best meet these student needs; (5) an individual who exercises due caution with regard to making any major changes in the Operation or organizational structure of the student affairs area until he has gained an understanding and appreciation of the particular university, its organiza- tion and the current organization and personnel in student affairs. In order to minimize the threat to the profes- sional and personal security of the student affairs staff, he should seek out their opinions, feelings, and views and actively involve or consult with them prior to the decision and during the planning stage for any major changes, e.g. reorganization of areas in student affairs. This last cate- gory was of particular concern to female executive staff in both the large and medium universities. One-half or five of ten of these women noted that this was an important factor in their acceptance of the appointed chief student affairs officer. This area was of importance to only one .male:executive staff member and not mentioned by any chief student affairs administrators in this study. There were no significant differences in the value «of the first four categories of factors among the three personnel groups, nor between the large and medium univer- sity executive staff on their perceptions of the importance 322 of these factors in determining the acceptance of the selected chief student personnel administrator. Sex as a Factor in the Selection of Student Personnel Administrators The factors of sex and race of potential candidates for executive and managerial student personnel positions were discussed separately in this chapter in a manner Similar to that of Chapter IV and for the same reasons-- the suspected bias against women and Negro candidates for these positions in student personnel administration. This possible bias was suggested in Chapter II by the writings of researchers and professional observers in the field. As a result of this belief more space, questions and time were allocated to these factors in the instruments: "Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators" (Sections H and I), than to other factors in this study. (See Appendix A for the "Interview Schedule.") As a result, a similar degree of emphasis and Space has been devoted to the presentation of the data obtained from the chief student affairs officers and male and female executive student affairs respondents in this study. These personnel would have the major respon- sibility in selection decisions--including both employment and promotion--for executive and managerial student per- sonnel administrators. This section related the data relative to the importance and effect of the sex of a candidate on the likelihood of the individual being appointed to an executive or managerial position. 323 As was previously noted in Chapter IV, among the twelve women in the sample designated by the chief student affairs officers as being the highest ranking women in their student affairs organizations, only eight clearly held executive positions in student affairs in their universi- ties. Two of these were serving as "acting" chief student personnel officers at the time of this study. One of the two had been and would likely continue to be an executive student personnel administrator following the selection of a permanent chief officer. Four of the twelve or one- third of the highest-ranking women administrators--all from medium universities--were not in executive positions. Three were in managerial positions, one was "Acting Director of the Counseling Center" and the other an "Associate Dean of Student Life" and a third was an "Associate Dean of Stu- dents for Residence Halls." The fourth woman was an “Associate Director of Residence Halls." It must be noted, however, that one of these four medium universities was seeking a woman candidate to fill an "open" executive posi- tion as "Associate Dean of Students and Director of Women's Affairs" at the time of this study; thus, there would be left.three non-executive level female administrators in these sample universities. The executive student personnel administrators of the twelve universities were initially asked in this section Iif they felt it_was important tg_have women i2_their student personnel organizations at their universities. 'Thirty of the thirty-one respondents believed it was 5;} important to have women staff members in student affairs and all twelve universities had them. (One medium university male chief respondent who mailed in his "Interview Schedule" had not answered this question in this section.) Only one large university female "Acting" Chief Student Personnel Administrator believed it was not important and that student affairs staff appointments should be made strictly on the basis of talent without con- sideration to sex of the candidate. With her "no'I response to this question she was thereafter eliminated from further questioning in relation to this section. This left a base total of thirty respondents for the remaining questions in this section. The respondents were next asked 32 what levels should there pg_women i2 their student personnel organizations. Of the thirty respondents, twenty-eight believed it was important for women to be represented at all three levels-- entry, managerial and executive-~in their student affairs organizations and that both sexes Should be available to work with students at all levels in coeducational univer- sities. One medium university male chief student affairs officer felt women should be in managerial and entry level positions although there was a woman at the executive level in that university. One other large university female "Acting" chief student officer felt women Should definitely be in entry level positions. Aside from herself, there were no other women in executive or managerial level positions 325 in student affairs at that university. (She later, how- ever, in this section indicated that she might select a woman over a man, if equally well-qualified, for a mana- gerial position because there were no women at the mana- gerial level in that university.) The respondents were then asked what 322! believed should pg the functions and/or areas pf responsibility £2£.2.EQEEE.EE the executive and managerial levels ip_ student affairs i2 their universities. A majority of those interviewed-~21 of 30--believed that women in executive level positions "should have no Special job functions and/or areas of responsibility beyond those designated for the particular executive position." Some of these personnel noted, however, that it was important to have female input into policy and decision-making relative to student affairs, university governance and the academic environment since, in some cases, nearly half of the students in these universities were female. Furthermore, for the same reason, staff balance in student affairs in terms of equitable representation of the two sexes was desired. Finally, some of these respondents, while in Opposition to the organization of student person- .nel services on the basis of sex related functions, noted 'that to women executives "would naturally fall" more women's concerns and problems relative to higher education. Compared to the 28 of 30 who believed it was impor- tant to have women at the executive level, only 9 Of 30 326 believed that women in this executive position in student affairs Should have any Special job functions or responsi- bilities in addition to those designated for a man who might be selected for the same position. Those taking this position were primarily from medium universities and represented all three personnel groups. They believed basically that a woman executive staff member should serve as a focus for women's interests and needs on the campus. She should serve as a spokesman for women's concerns and, also, in a leadership capacity to plan and organize to meet the educational, vocational, social and personal needs and problems of women students. She should act as a resource person serving in a counseling and/or advisory capacity to individual women students, their groups and staff members working with women and their programs. Several noted that women have a unique role to play in our society quite different from those expected of men in this society, and, thus, the former need counseling and programs designed to help them understand and fulfill their role(s). These responsibilities (and similar ones for managerial women staff) were either functions expected of a woman in addition to the "functional" position des- cription functions, e.g. "Associate" or "Assistant Dean of Students" (or "Director of Student Activities" for a managerial woman) 9£_ they' ‘were areas of responsibility directly related to the position description, e.g. "Dean of WOmen” or "Director of Women's Affairs" (or "Associate" 327 or “Assistant Dean of Women" for managerial staff women). In the latter case, the position could only be filled by a woman. Regardless of the Specific position description and/or job title, many respondents expected that any person at the executive level in student affairs would have a breadth Of perspective and concern about all areas Of student affairs, and the effectiveness of the student affairs office, in general, in meeting the needs of all students and the educational goals of the university. Slightly fewer respondents--l7 of 30--believed that women in managerial level positions should have no special areas of responsibility or job functions different from those a man might have in that same position, even though 29 of 30 felt it important to have women in managerial level positions. However, thirteen other respondents (compared to nine at the executive level) primarily medium university female executive staff and some chief officers, felt that a woman at the managerial level should have special responsibilities which included serving as leader for women's student interests and advisor in relation to their activities and concerns. In general, women at the managerial level were viewed as having lesser responsibility for direct input into the policy-making at higher administrative levels in the university and student affairs, but as having more responsibility for direct and continuous contact and advisement of individual students and groups, e.g. sororities, and specific women's groups. One final notation involved the observation by several respondents that while women student affairs administrators should not be treated differently than men, in fact, a difference existed; and, women were likely to experience greater difficulty in being accepted by other staff members and students than would male student affairs administrators in similar positions. The respondents were asked what they believed should 22 the title for women aE_the executive and managerial level positions i2 student affairs. Twenty of the thirty respondents or two-thirds indicated that they had "no preference" relative to titles for women at the executive level. Among these twenty, seven noted that the title Should relate well to the organizational structure present in the student affairs area of that university and be representative of the job functions as well as clarify the responsibilities for that particular executive position. Ten of thirty or one-third of the respondents felt that a woman's title might be anything from "Vice-President of Student Affairs," "Dean of Students,“ "Associate" or "Assistant Dean of Students," to "Assistant Vice—Chancellor for Student Affairs." Of the ten, four suggested the traditional "Dean of Women" as a possible title. Differ- ences were not significant between the two university groups or three personnel groups with regard to titles for executive women in student affairs. 329 Twenty-six of thirty respondents had "no preference" concerning titles for managerial women staff members. Ten of the twenty-six noted, again, that the title would depend on and should be representative of the student personnel organizational structure and the job functions or responsibilities attached to a particular managerial position in the student affairs organization. Large uni- versity chief officers and male executive staff from both university groups specifically took this position. Finally, four of the sample group, primarily women and chief officers from medium universities, noted that the title for a managerial staff member might include that of "Associate or Assistant Dean of Students," or "Director of (Counseling or Health, etc.) Service. Only one large university respondent, a female executive admin- istrator, suggested a title that was related to the con- cept of a traditional organizational structure that of "Associate Dean of Women." Two medium univer- sity male executive administrators stated that they were Opposed to the traditional sexed-titles or any different titles for a woman compared to a man performing in the same or Similar executive or managerial level positions. These executive staff personnel were asked what factors they would consider most important $2 the selection ‘2: g woman a3 the executive and managerial level positions ip student affairs. Twelve of the thirty respondents felt that there Should be no special factors or additional 330 requirements expected of a female candidate compared to the factors required of a male candidate for the same or similar executive position in student affairs. They believed the only criteria Should be those previously named for all executive candidates. PrOportionately a larger group of female respondents--5 of 12--held this view as compared with seven of twenty male student personnel administrators in the sample. Furthermore, several of the remaining eighteen respondents who denoted some special factors indicated that they did not actually believe there should be additional considerations in the selection of a woman at the executive level; yet, they were aware that such was usually the case. The following were the most important additional factors to be considered or weighted more heavily by the eighteen respondents in the selection of a woman execu- tive student affairs administrator: (l) A woman executive must neither be defensive about nor "trade" (take~advantage) in a Situation on the basis of her sex. She must not seek to obtain Special privileges, considerations or expect to Operate under a different set of conditions than do men in similar positions in the student affairs organization. This was somewhat more important to the males (both the chief officers and executive student personnel administra- tors)in this study. (2) A woman should have proven pro- fessional competence including evidence of personal and professional self-confidence, good administrative and 331 organizational skills, Objectivity, good judgement, ability 'to communicate well and have a "good personality" with the ability, not only to be professional but, also, personable and warm as a human being. She must particularly be able to supervise and/or work and relate well to persons of both sexes. This set of factors was of slightly greater importance to the women (both the (two) female chief offi- cers and executive student personnel administrators in this sample). (3) A woman should be comfortable being a woman and accept herself as such. She should be a good role model for woman students and will be judged more critically than a man on the basis of her personal appearance, attrac- tiveness and cleanliness. (4) Marriage, possible pregnancy and family responsibilities would be factors to be considered in the selection of a woman for an executive position. Some of the respondents saw this last set of factors as a "mixed blessing," but most felt that a single woman was more likely to be selected than a married woman for an executive student personnel administrative position because the former was likely to evidence a greater involve- ment in and primary commitment to student personnel admin- istration. A married career woman would probably be less accessible and available for evening work, during crisis, and would not be able to work as long hours as could a single career woman. On the other hand, a married career- ‘woman might better represent to women students more Options .in terms of possible life styles for women in our society. 332 These four clusters of factors would be Of import- ance, in addition to the other previously mentioned factors, when a woman candidate was being considered for either an executive or managerial position in student affairs. However, some of these factors might be some- what less critical in the case of managerial appointments depending on the nature of the position or areas of responsibility. Additionally, women candidates for mana— gerial positions would not be expected to manifest the same degree of general knowledge and perspective, refine- ment of administrative skills or professional commitment as women candidates for executive administrative positions in student affairs. Finally, the chief student personnel officers and other executive respondents were asked 22 select between .22 equally well-qualified man and woman for the positions pf executive and managerial student personnel administra- pppg 229 pg give reasons for their choices. ("Equally well-qualified" in this question was defined for all of them as meaning "equivalent" pep identical in qualifi- cations.) This question proved to be rather difficult and even threatening to some of the respondents. Given recognition now that this question might have, perhaps, been worded differently to provide clarity and minimize threat, one might still find respondents hedging and/or trying to circumvent the content of the question. Some reSpondents, however, did admit to a preference for one 333 sex or the other; and some gave seemingly reasonable and valid reasons for their choice. Others appeared to be more defensive in attitude in relation to their choices and reasons for them. The largest group of respondents--18 of 30--were either ”uncertain," "uncommitted" or unable to respond in the abstract, noting that it would depend on which candi- date was the better qualified for the executive level position, according to the previously stated criteria. Several respondents noted that they did not feel it was possible to have two equally well-qualified candidates and that some factor(s) would be present to "tip the scale one way or the other" in favor of the selection of one individual over another. Differences were not signi- ficant between the large and medium university respondents but proportionately more female executive staff (8 of 10 or four-fifths of total) as compared to male chief Offi- cers and executive staff (10 of 20 or one-half of total) took this position. Ten other persons would probably select the male over the female for an executive position. Except for one large university male chief student affairs officer, these were all from medium universities and all, but one, were male chief Officers and executive respon- dents. Only two of the thirty in the sample believed they might select the female over the male candidate. This included one medium university male chief student affairs officer and one large university female executive 334 staff member. The former individual qualified his answer to a considerable extent and noted that his response was based on a particular need (for a woman executive and better staff sex balance in that student affairs organi- zation) at the time of this study. Thus, he might not always select a woman over a man candidate if equally well-qualified. The respondents provided reasons for these choices and some gave more than one. There were four principal reasons for the eighteen respondents who were "uncertain" or"unable to decide" which candidate--male or female-- they would select for a position. First, the greatest number of persons indicated that if the two candidates were equally well-qualified they would probably decide on the basis Of which sex was least represented at the executive level and give "the minority candidate the nod." Most wanted a good sex balance in their student affairs organizations. One male chief officer of a large univer- Sity noted that it was important for the morale of the Women on the student affairs staff to have visible higher level women in the organization and that if he felt that the women in that organization felt there was a lack of higher level women he might select the woman candidate. The second basic reason given for the "uncertain" posi~ tion was that the choice would depend on the campus situation at the time of selection--the problems imminent, the type of student affairs programs needing to be developed, 335 the nature of the available position, and the sex of the students and staff with whom the individual would work (e.g. a sex-related position such as "Dean of Women"). The third major response involved the notation by several that sex should not be the determining factor in selection decisions and these respondents did not believe there would ever be two equally well-qualified candidates. They felt that some important factor would be present in one candi- <1ate more than the other(s). One felt that, perhaps, something in the interview with the candidates would help hinldecide. A female executive respondent felt that a woman candidate would probably have to be better qualified than a man in order to be viewed as equal to a man for an executive position. Finally, a fourth response centered on the personal characteristics and personality of the candidates as the factor(s) determining the decision. Several persons noted that the personality Of the individual must be taken into account and that "the fit" of the candi- date tO other staff and the ability Of the individual to relate well to other top-level institutional administrators, faculty and students would be the deciding element in making the selection for the executive position. Ten persons noted that one or more of four reasons were operating in their probable selection of a male rather than a female candidate for an executive position. First, some noted that if there was considerable student 336 unrest and militancy at the university at the time, they would select a man since they felt that ,he could probably be more aggresive and forceful in dealing with student militants during demonstrations and protests. In such a case, the job to be done at the time might well determine the sex of the candidate selected, according to one respondent. The respondents felt that a man might better withstand the pressure and stress inherent in such crisis situations. Furthermore, some of these respondents took a protective attitude toward women noting that they did not want to subject a woman "to the obnoxious behavior and vulgar verbal abuse that one in such a position might incur.” Thus, they would choose a man for the position if there was considerable student unrest. The second major reason for choosing a man over a woman was related to the biological-psychological factors of childbearing, menstrua- tion and the menopause and the effect of these on woman's stamina, time and primary commitment to the job and the profession, in general. One noted that if a woman had already passed through these three stages he might not feel this to be an important factor. Another felt that if the woman were a single career woman family responsibilities would be less and the factor less important. A third basic reason for the choice of a man over a woman related to the fact that there were more men than women students enrolled in some of these universities and, further, in a coeduca- tional institution a man could better handle more difficult 337 situations. Several of these universities were in urban slum and industrial areas and populated by students from strong ethnic backgrounds. In the latter case, it was noted that women were expected to be subordinate to men. The personnel indicated that,due to this type Of institu- tional character and setting and the need for the indi- vidual to work some nights on the campus, a man would be the better choice. A fourth and final reason indicated for selecting the man was the likelihood that there would be better personal relationships among male student per- sonnel staff because of the potential for more common pro- fessional and recreational interests existing among men who dominate, in terms of numbers, most university student personnel organizations. One male executive administrator noted that "the talk is different when women are present." Finally, two persons felt that they might select a woman over a man for an executive position in student affairs. The large university female executive felt that women were more compassionate than men and that competent women role models were needed. The medium university male chief officer would probably select a woman 22 present because there were no women represented at the executive level among the five executive staff .members in that student personnel organization. He wanted a sex/racial balance at this level (and there was already'a Negro in an executive position there) but not an overbelance of women to men. He noted that he was 338 prejudiced in favor of men because of the potential effect of marriage and its effects on the primary commitment of a career woman, and because men could better communicate on a "gut level" which was not possible between men and women. In summary, when all the reasons and qualifying statements were considered in relation to this question, it would appear that no more than one executive reSpondent--a female--would today definitely select a woman over a man for an executive student affairs admin— istrative position. However, six more of the eighteen respondents in the "uncertain" or "unable to decide" category might select a woman rather than a man if they were equally well-qualified and if there was an inadequate sex balance (more men) in the student affairs organization and/or the nature of the job was specifically sex-related (e.g. "Dean of Women") or if a "functional" position, one in which a woman would not be subject to excessive pressures, stress or student militancy. Thus, seven of thirty respon- dents might select an equally well qualified woman over a man fOr an executive student affairs position. When considering selection of an equally well-qualified 1mm: and woman for a managerial position in student affairs, twenty-three Of the thirty respondents would make the same choices and for the same reasons at this level as for the executive level. Six medium university staff members, all but one, male who would choose a man over a woman at the 339 executive level indicated that they would have "no (sex) preference“ at the managerial level. They felt that candidates were not as likely to be equally well-quali- fied for the managerial positions and that the nature of the position and reSponsibilities attached therein as well as the sex of the students and staff with whom one would principally work (e.g. "Associate Dean of WOmen,‘ "Advisor for Sorority Affairs," etc.) would likely deter- mine the choice. Such positions as Director Of Student Research, Data Systems, Testing and Counseling might be better for women, they noted. The desire for a better sex/ratio or balance among the student affairs staff would also be considered in the case of two candidates with equivalent qualifications. In the latter case, the minority group member would probably be appointed. These Six respondents changed to ”uncertain" for mana- gerial selection when added to the eighteen respondents ”uncertain" for both executive and managerial positions jprovided a total of twenty-four of thirty respondents ”uncertain" with regard to the choice of one sex over the other for managerial level positions. This leaves three persons-~all men who would select a man over a woman for both executive and managerial positions in student affairs. Only one person—~-a large university female "acting“ chief student.personnel officer, who was "uncertain" relative to executive appointments, would probably select a woman over a man for the managerial job because She felt "there 340 were few women in managerial positions and there was a need for a better sex balance." She noted that most women in student affairs organizations today were in entry level positions. This would increase the number from two at the executive level to three at the managerial level of respondents who stated they would select a woman over a man for a managerial position. Two of these would pro- bably select a woman for both executive and managerial positions; however, the male respondent of the three gave the same qualifying statements as for executive women candidates. Thus, only two persons--both female respondents would definitely select an equally well- qualified woman over a man for a managerial position. However, when the reasons were reviewed again for the (now) larger group of "uncertain" reSpondents relative to choice at the managerial level, it would appear that, perhaps, ten of thirty or one-third of the respondents might select a woman for a managerial position in student affairs. Race as a Factor in the Selection of Student Personnel AdminiStrators The reasons for providing greater time, space and emphasis both in the "Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators," Section I (see Appendix A) and in the data analysis on race as a factor in selection were the same as those previously cited in ‘flhis chapter with regard to "Sex as a Factor in the 341 Selection of Student Personnel Administrators." The kind and order of questions and presentation of data were the same for both of these sections. Although research studies were limited on race as a factor in the selection of administrators in universi- ties, and particularly with regard to student affairs administrators, it was the opinion of some professional observers that race, like sex, might be a "biasing" fac- tor in the selection of student personnel administrators in universities. These observers felt that if the candi- date was a Negro or member of another racial minority group this might act as a factor against the selection of this candidate for an administrative position in student affairs, even though he might be as well or better quali- fied than many potential Caucasian candidates for the position. The questions in this section of the "Interview Schedule” attempted to determine the effect of a potential candidate's race, specifically that of being a.Negro, to the chief officers and executive student personnel administrative respondents as a factor of importance in the selection of executive, managerial and, in some cases, entry level student personnel positions. The executive respondents were, first, §§E§§.in this section _if they felt i_t_ Was important ‘t_o have a Negro EELtheir student personnel'organizations. Of the thirty—one responses to this question (one failed to 342 respond to this section in his returned form), twenty- nine respondents believed that it was important to have Negroes today in their student personnel organizations. Several of the respondents qualified this stating that this would be true only if the Negro was qualified for and competent in relation to the position. One respondent felt it was particularly important to have a Negro on the staff if there were Negroes on campus. Another believed that a Negro might relate better to minority students. One medium university respondent believed it was not necessary to have a Negro on the staff unless there were sufficient Negroes on campus. Finally, a medium university Negro respondent felt that it was "not neces- sarily'I important. On the basis of these responses, the latter two respondents stating “no“ were relieved of responding to the remaining five questions in this section (with the exception of the Negro respondent who voluntarily responded to the last question). Thus, the base total of responses for each remaining question in this section was twenty-nine. The sample was EEEEQ.EE.What levels Negroes Should pe_ip_their student personnel organization i2 the univer- §i£y. Of the twenty-nine responses, twenty-eight felt it was desirable to have Negroes at all levels--entry, mana- gerial and executive in their student personnel organiza- tion. One medium female executive respondent, however, felt that Negroes should specifically be in managerial and entry level positions. 343 It was interesting to note that while twenty-nine felt it was important to have Negroes in their student personnel organizations and twenty-eight at the executive level only two Negroes were, in fact, members of the executive staff sample of the universities in this study. Both were in medium universities and one was a chief stu- dent personnel officer and the other was an executive administrator--a I'Dean of Human Relations." The respondents were then asked what they believed should pe_the functions and/or areas pf responsibility ‘9£_§ Negro 2p the executive, managerial and entry level positions ip student affairs. About half of the respon- dents--15 of 29--believed that Negro student personnel administrators should have no special functions or areas of responsibility different from a white and from those specifically designated for a particular position. Large university respondents (5 of 8) felt that this should be the case more than did medium university respondents (10 of 21). Some of those responding qualified their answers by stating that despite their belief, unfortunately, (according to some), a Negro administrator at any level in a university today would probably be expected to particularly communicate, work with and handle the con- cerns of minority group students on the campus more than would a white administrator in the same position. Another half, fourteen of twenty-nine respondents indicated that they expected a Negro in any student 344 affairs position would or should have some special func- tions and/or areas of responsibility other than a white in the same or Similar job in addition to those normally assigned to the particular position. Eleven (of twenty- one) male and female medium university executive staff felt this would be the case compared to only three (of eight) large university chief student affairs officers. Most of these special functions were felt to be the responsibility of a Negro staff member regardless of the level at which he was employed. The only differences related to those normally attached to the jobs at the different levels (i.e. the expected greater degree of direct contact and communication with students for those in managerial and entry level positions as well as greater specialization of functions in these positions as compared to the broader perspective, interpretative-spokesman role and more general functions of those in executive positions). The primary functionpeither stated or implied for a Negro administrator employed in a student affairs position in these universities,was to serve as a leader and interpreter of minority group concerns and problems to the larger university community as well as a counselor, advisor and provide assistance to minority group students in resolving their special concerns and difficulties related to the university community, in particular, and higher education, in general. Furthermore, a Negro admin- istrator should be able to serve as a good role model for 345 minority group students. He should be able to establish a good relationship with them and to help improve both the academic environment and personal relationships within the university community by aiding minority group and white students and staff to better understand and accept each other. It was noted by several respondents that there was today and would in the near future be a very real need for more Negro student affairs staff meme bers, perhaps, more so than has been the case or would be so in the distant future. This feeling was based on the increasing number and severity of campus conflicts, and student unrest in these universities precipitated in part by the actual or perceived inequities related to the educational and social climate and opportunities available for minority group students in the university and society, at large. Several areas of student personnel work were felt to be most particularly in need of one or more Negro stu- dent personnel workers. The most frequently named posi— tion fer a Negro worker was as a counselor. Next in import- ance were positions related to community or human rela- tions, Special problems and services, the latter included remedial assistance. Other areas named in which a Negro student affairs staff member might be most helpful were residence hall positions, discipline, financial aid, placement, student activities and organizations and volunteer services . 346 Finally, several of the respondents noted that the Negro administrator in any student personnel position would need a breadth of perspective and good sensitivity to per— form well in his job. It was felt that he must be able to work well with ell students and staff, not just the minority group students, if he was to be able to fulfill not only the functional responsibilities of his particular position but, also, be effective in assisting the minority group students and the larger university community to understand each other and the latter to understand, organize, and plan adequately to meet the needs of the former. The executive respondents were then asked what they believed should pg the title g a N_eg§2 gt the executive, managerial and entry leyel positions. A large majority, twentyeone of twenty-nine, believed that there should be no special title for a Negro administrator in an executive position in student affairs other than that particularly ascribed to or designated as the functions of the posi- tion as it relates to the particular organizational struc- ture of student affairs in each university. Numerically, there were no significant differences between the two university staff groups; however, all large university male and female executive staff respondents favored this position. Eight of the twenty—nine reSpondents felt that there would or should be a Special title for a Negro executive administrator. This group primarily included.medium 347 university chief student affairs officers and male execu- tive staff as well as large university chief student affairs officers. Titles suggested included the follow- ing: ”Special Assistant to the Vice President of Student Affairs," "Advisor to Black Students” under the "Vice- President of Student Services," ”Dean for Human Relations" (2) "Coordinator of Programs for Minority Group Students,“ "Director of Black Student Affairs," "Dean of Developmental Services" and "Associate“ or "Assistant Dean of Students." One of these respondents was against any title relating to "minority affairs." Another respondent believed that a Negro executive administrator might better serve the total university community, including minority group stu- dents, in a position outside of the student personnel organization. This reSpondent suggested the title ”Vice Chancellor for Afro-American Affairs." There were no expressed title preferences for a Negro in a managerial or entry level position. However, some of the titles previously suggested for a Negro in in an executive position would tend to suggest that the executive position might more accurately be classified as a managerial one in relation to the "Conceptual Model” (see Appendix A) including such positions as "Coordinator" or "Director" of "Black Student Affairs" or "Minority Group Programs." Otherwise, titles suggested for mana- gerial or entry level positions would reflect the general or specialized functions of the particular position with- out regard to the race of the appointee, e.g. "Associate 343 Dean Of Students or (Men)" or "Director of Placement" (managerial positions) or "Assistant to (the Dean of Men) the Dean of Students" or "Assistant Director of Placement” (entry level positions). The executive staff were next asked what factors they would consider most important ip_the selection gfflg Negpg Egg pp executive, managerial and entry administra- tive position ip student affairs. Exactly 50 percent or fourteen of twenty-eight of the respondents believed that there should be no additional or special factor requirements for a Negro in any position in student affairs beyond that criteria previously named for the various level positions in student affairs. Proportion- ally, Slightly more medium university respondents (11 of 20) took this position than did large university execu- tive staff (3 of 8). Furthermore, a larger proportion of female executive respondents, eight of nine, believed this as compared with only six of nineteen male chief Officers and executive staff in the study. Five of the remaining fourteen respondents indicated that they believed the same criteria previously cited Should be the basis for selection, however, each of the five added some one other factor which should be considered in the selection of a Negro at the executive level. For a managerial or entry level position six of the fourteen would add one other factor for consideration in the selection process. (Five 349 of these six persons were the same for both levels.) Among all fourteen respondents one cluster of these factors con— stituted the most important additional considerations in the selection of a Negro for a position in student affairs, regardless of the level or the specific posi- tion involved. These respondents felt that a Negro administrator must have the respect of, rapport with and be accepted by the black community. He must not be viewed as an "Uncle Tom“ or an "arm of the establishment." He would need to understand the divisions existing in the black community and be able to interpret these to the larger, predominately white community of the university. At the same time, a Negro should not be a militant black but should be able to serve as a good role model for black and minority group students. He Should have a proven record of successful work experience, adequate educational and professional preparation and have developed an objec- tive attitude and broad perspective relative to all groups ‘within.the university and in the larger society. The latter was believed to be a critical factor if a Negro administrator was to be able to materially assist in improving communications and reducing tensions between groups and help to eliminate the problems preventing mutual understanding among the various groups in the university. While many of the respondents felt it was important that a Negro be as well-qualified educationally and experientially as a white for the same or a similar 350 position in student affairs, some (including a maleflNegrO executive staff member) indicated that they might be will- ing to make some allowances for some deficiencies in edu- cation, professional preparation and/or experience for some student personnel positions if the Negro candidate had acquired the reSpect of, rapport with and acceptance of 225p the black and white community at the university. Without this respect and acceptance a Negro would prO‘ bably be ineffective in meeting the special needs and problems of minority group students in the uni- versity. There were no differences between large and medium university administrators or among the three personnel groups of respondents comprising the study sample in terms of the kind of additional factors named as important in the selection of a Negro student personnel administrator. Finally, the executive staff were asked.g§p;ppey_ would select if Epey'peg’ep_eguallywell—qualified white and Negro for 32 executive, managerial or entry level ppsition ip_student affairs i2 their universities. ("Equally well-qualified” was defined for them to mean that the individuals had "equivalent,“ not identical, qualifications for the position.) Again, this forced choice question, like that relative to sex, proved to be difficult for the respondents to answer. There was evi- dence of some defensiveness and/or evasiveness and a tendency to provide qualifying statements for the reasons 351 given. Even when the substance of the question was clari- fied, some respondents tended to hedge in their responses. It is evident that this question might have been more clearly worded, not to change the substance of the ques- tion, but, in an effort to reduce the apparent threat, defensiveness and evasion resulting from it. The largest group of respondents--l4 of 30--or nearly one-half were either “uncertain," "uncommitted" or had 'no preference" for one race over the other in the selec- tion of a candidate for an executive student personnel position. Some of the respondents felt.it was unlikely that there would be two equally-well-qualified candidates and that some factor(s), previously noted, was likely to be present in one more than another. Further, the parti- cular needs of the student affairs organization or insti- tutional situation and problems at the time of selection would have a Significant bearing on the choice of a person of one race over another if the two were equivalent in qualifications. More large university male and female executive staff took this position. Ten of the thirty or one-third of the respondents believed they might select a INegro over a white for an executive position if the two were equally well-qualified. Half of this group of respondents were the chief student affairs officer of both large and.medium universities. The remaining Six respon- dents or'one-fifth of the group felt that they would pro- bably choose a white over a Negro for an executive student 352 personnel position. These respondents were primarily medium university male and female executive staff. There were few changes in respondent choices for managerial and entry level positions. Of the thirty reSpondents, twenty-six would take the same position in selection at the managerial and entry level positions as they did for executive level positions. Only four medium university staff, half of whom were male executive staff would make any change. All four indicated that they would change from the selection of a white at the execu- tive level to the "uncertain," "uncommitted" or ”no preference" category in the selection of managerial and entry level positions. This means that at the managerial and entry positions these categories would change to eighteen "uncertain," "uncommitted" or "no preference," ten Negroes (no change) and two whites as the reSpondent choices in the selection of managerial staff. Among the four respondents changing, one gave no reason, one noted that the candidates were not likely to be equally, well- qualified for managerial/entry positions, one felt his choice would depend on the particular position, and, finally, one believed it would depend on the staff racial balance or ratio of Negro to white on the student affairs staff. For the fourteen respondents choosing the "uncertain," ”uncommitted," or "unable to respond in the abstract" posi- tions when choosing between a white and Negro for a student 353 personnel position, one or more of five basic clusters of factors comprised their primary reasons. (1) These respondents indicated that prior to the decision, they would consider the total needs and unsolved problems facing the university and the student affairs area at the time of the selection and their decision would be based on which candidate might best meet their needs. (2) Their choice would in large part depend on the parti- cular position to be filled and job functions or areas of responsibility attached to the position. (3) Their decision would be based on which candidate appeared to be most professionally and socially compatible with and acceptable to the student affairs staff and students of the university. The personal characteristics, interests and past experience of the individuals would be important in the decision. (4) The decision would not be based on the race of the candidates but on how well the individuals met the criteria important for the particular kind and level of position. Respondents taking this position believed that some finer screening technique or, perhaps, the personal interview would help one make the decision. (5) If the two candidates were equally well-qualified, several respondents felt that they would probably "give the nod" to the minority group candidate. There were three primary clusters of factors pro- vided as reasons by the ten persons who would probably select the Negro over the white if the two candidates 354 were equally well—qualified. The first and most frequently cited reason was the need for more Negro student affairs staff members at all levels in order to have a better staff racial balance in student affairs. The second rea- son was the fact that today—-in this day and age-—the racial questions and problems surrounding the university were of considerable importance to all groups within the university and, indeed, they, in part, threatened the basic principles, philosophy as well as the very existence of the university itself. There was expressed a need to accelerate the pace at which universities were moving to improve the education of students from minority groups. The third and final reason was the belief that minority group students need more visible and accessible Negroes in universities to provide good role models for them and to listen to and assist them. The six respondents who indicated that they would select a white for a student personnel position had three basic reasons for their choices. The first and most fre— quently noted reason was the fact that there were more white than Negro or minority group students in the campus population of their universities. The second reason related to the belief that a white would be more accept— able to their university community as well as the broader community in which some of these institutions were Situated at this particular time or in this day and age. The third and final reason provided by one male executive respondent 355 related to his personal lack of knowledge and experience witthegroes, his lack of contact with successful Negroes and his feeling that a Negro might have greater diffi— culty in adjusting to the institution and student affairs organization. A number of the respondents, whatever their choice, noted how difficult it was to find and keep well- qualified Negro administrators. In summary, when all of the qualifications and reasons for the choices were considered in all three cate- gories in relation to the choice between two equally well- qualified candidates for an executive position in a univer- sity student affairs organization it would appear that possibly nine of the thirty respondents would probably select an equally well-qualified Negro over a white for an executive position in student affairs; and, perhaps, eleven of the thirty would select a Negro rather than a white for a managerial or entry level position. The figure in the latter case might be slightly higher depend? ing on the particular job available and institutional needs and problems at the time of selection. However, approximately one-third of the respondents would be inclined.to select an equally well-qualified Negro over a white candidate for a student personnel position. 356 The Relationship of the University Student Personnel Organizational Structure to the Selection of Student Personnel Administrators The purpose Of the questions in this section was to attempt to determine the effect of the kind of student personnel administrative organizational structure existing in the sample universities on the kind of factors con- sidered important in the employment and promotion of student personnel administrators by the chief student affairs Officers and executive student personnel adminis- trators interviewed in this study. This section F of the "Interview Schedule: Execu- tive Level Student Personnel Administrators'l (see Appendix A) was designated as an optional one to be asked only if, in the Opinion of the investigator-interviewer, there would be adequate time during the interview to do so and still complete the remaining questions in the “Interview Schedule." Time did not permit the interviewer to query all thirty-two sample respondents; however, it was possi- ble to obtain responses from eighteen persons. In addition, some of the other respondents had either stated or implied their views,previously,about the value and impact of their student affairs organizational and administrative structures in their responses to other areas and/or ques- tions in this study. Four of the twelve or one-third of the sample univer- sities--one large and three medium--had continued operating 357 under what is known as a "traditional" structure, while eight of the twelve or two-thirds of the universities-- three large and five medium--were currently operating with the so-called "functional” structure. Staff members interviewed in three of the twelve universities noted that they were either in a state of transition.(l) or that the organization was being restructured (2). One university was moving from a "traditional“ to a "functional" structure, another from a "functional" to a ”developmental" and the third, currently using a ”func- tional” structure, did not Specify the new structure they hoped to develop. With the possible exception of some staff from three (one large and two medium) of the eight universities operating in a ”functional structure" it appeared that all staff classified and interviewed as executive student affairs administrators for this study could be themselves classified as "generalists" more than "Specialists" and, thus, the factors previously identified as important for executive staff persons in these universities would be those more closely related to the performance of a I"generalist" in student affairs for three-fourths of the staff regardless of the type of student affairs organi- zational structure in existence at their universities at the time of this study. There were a total of eighteen of thirty-two execu- tive staff members responding to the questions in this section. Ten of these were chief student personnel 358 officers, four were male executive staff and four were female executive staff. Proportionately,there were more large (6 of 8) than medium (12 of 22) university respon- dents. The respondents were initially asked if they believed that the kind pf student personnel organizational structure ip_existence 2p their institution seemed 32 make any dif- ference $2 the factors considered important i2 either emplgyment 9; promotion p£_student personnel staff. Of the eighteen reSponseS, fourteen answered "yes," two ”partly" (a difference), one “no” and one "other" (actually the latter Should have been 'partly'). The reasons provided for the responses were, in part, vague and quite broad. Even more important many of the reasons related to very Specific individual university situations and difficulties observed in relation to that particular structure. It was possible, however, to determine several commonly held beliefs relative to the kind of situation, competencies required, and to relate these to the factors needed by an individual who would be employed or promoted in universities having either the "traditional“ or ”functional” organization. In addition, respondents, in some instances, indicated the difficulties for individual promotion inherent in the organizational structures as presently operating. In addition to the previously stated criteria nec- essary for employment or promotion to an executive or 359 managerial level position in these universities, the candi- date would find greater emphasis or importance placed on some factors than others depending on the kind of organi— zational structure established in the particular university for which he is a candidate for a position. Those univer- sities employing a "traditional" organizational structure would expect that a candidate for either employment or promotion be Slightly older in age, have greater maturity and experience because his responsibility and authority were felt to be broader and more comprehensive. He needed a breadth of perspective, to be comfortable in a "generalist" role and yet have acquired some specialized knowledge and skills in several student personnel areas, particularly a good understanding of the total environment of the student at the university, the residential life and its potential effect on the student, and a good understanding of and ability to communicate well with and to serve as a spokes— man for the needs and concerns of students Of one's own sex. The traditional system involves the assignment of responsibilities on a sex—related basis. Because of this division of responsibilities based on sex, there is greater individual autonomy but, also, there would be a need for greater COOperation and ability to work well with others of the Opposite sex, particularly when problems involve both sexes and, perhaps, some mediation and compromise. The respondents who discussed the traditional structure felt that they would look for successful experience in JbO relation to these particular abilities not only in rela- tion to those they would consider for employment at the executive level but in persons at the managerial/entry levels already on their staff who might be considered for a higher level position in this kind of organization. Several noted that in the hiring of managerial staff, they particularly sought a person who exhibited by experience and attitude the potential to someday be a successful "dean" at the executive level. The two key qualities sought were a breadth of perspective and an interest and ability to serve primarily as a "generalist” in student affairs. Those who were members of a university student affairs organization Operating under a ”functional” approach stressed the necessity for the candidate to exhibit a specialized competency or expertise in one or more areas and to be able to be largely self-sufficient and function autonomously a good portion of the time. They believed that a division of labor and specialization in the student affairs area enabled the functions to be better performed and allowed for more direct contact with students. They felt such a system, perhaps, better rewarded the individual who was particularly competent in an area while at the same time placed greater respon- sibility (depth ppp_breadth) upon him because of his particular knowledge and autonomy in working in a more specialized area. They added that great staff team work with the "parts" fitting into a "whole" was needed if 361 the organization was to be effective. It was suggested that perhaps more persons in terms of numbers were required to staff a "functional” student affairs organi- zation. It was further noted that such a system.per- mitted the most competent person in an area to be hired regardless of the sex of the candidate. Personnel in this system operated, in part, as generalists at the executive level, as did those in the ”traditional" system; however, they tended generally to have some Special areas of responsibility pep sex/related in nature. There were advantages and disadvantages noted in relation to personnel employment and promotion in relation to the organizational structures. Both lateral and verti- cal mobility were somewhat easier within a "traditional" system of organization. Respondents working in ”functional" organizations noted the tendency for good personnel to become "pigeon-holed“ in more highly Specialized functions and, thereby, be deprived of the breadth of perspective necessary for broader application of their work and advancement to higher level positions in the student affairs organization. The latter may be cause for frustration and resentment and might seriously affect the student personnel adminis- trator's attitude when he realized that he was too specialized and "couldn't expect to go any higher.” Finally, such specialized work may seriously limit the individual's professional and personal growth. There was 362 less Opportunity for lateral moves or changes in the "functional” structure when compared with the "traditional structure." However, there was believed to be slightly greater autonomy and, perhaps, more immediate and frequent per- sonal.rewards for one with a specialized area of knowledge auui experience in a "functional” structure of organization in student affairs. Recommendations Relative to the Education, ProfessiOnal Preparation, Emplbyment and Pérsonal Background Experiences Desired— for Student Personnel Administrators The recommendations and suggestions of thirty-one chief officers and executive student personnel staff interviewed with regard to the questions in.III, J 1-3 of the "Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel Administrators" (see Appendix A) are reported in this section. (The one chief officer respondent returning his "Interview Schedule" by mail did not complete this section.) Examination of the data revealed that the suggestions and recommendations did not differ signifi- cantly between large and medium university student per- sonnel staff and among the three student personnel groups: chief Officers, male executive staff and female executive staff. Thus, the concerns and recommendations were con- sidered together according to the nature of the topic with no special differentiations according to university or personnel groups who made the suggestions in each area discussed. It must be noted that any recommendation noted in this section was of concern to and/or made by more than one executive respondent in this study. Although the respondents were not forewarned with regard to the kind of questions they might be asked in the interviews, their ability to think clearly and articulate well their views and beliefs in regard to the ”Interview Schedule” and particularly in relation to this section was a good measure of the breadth and depth of their experience. The investigator-interviewer felt that their beliefs about the value of certain background experience for student affairs administrators in public, coeducational universities about 10,000 in student population were interesting and would be potentially valuable to not only prospective and present practitioners in student personnel administration but to faculty-trainers and advisors of these professionals as well. The reSpondents, first, discussed the personal qualities and the educational and professional development preferred for individuals desiring to become effective student personnel administrators. Several began by noting that the recruitment and selection process must become more SOphisticated regarding the selection of better counselors and student personnel administrators. They suggested that it would be best to identify potential student personnel workers early and begin to guide them in the best direction for training in this field. The 364 respondents felt strongly that it was important to have "the right kind of person" in this field. The individual's maturity, character and personality were deemed by some to be more important than any specific education or training background. They believed that given this kind of person he could be provided a good in-service training program in student affairs and quite possibly be a very competent administrator. They noted that no amount of training could help some peOple to be effective administrators if they did not possess some or all of these basic character- istics. Several of the executive staff stated that they did not believe that formal graduate training in Student Per- sonnel Administration was a requisite to competent per- formance in this field today. Their feeling was that some professional programs were not up-to-date and con- temporary enough in orientation and/or were too broadly theoretical or too narrowly—specialized to be adequate to the needs of the prospective practitioner. The majority of respondents believed that all student personnel workers needed a stronger emphasis in the social/behaviorial sci- ences,particularly at the graduate level of study. They felt that these prospective professionals needed an undergraduate and even M.A. graduate educational program geared to a strong grounding in an academic discipline. This was particularly true if an individual planned to major in Student Personnel Administration or Higher 365 Education at the Ph.D. level. An earned doctorate was deemed necessary for those who aspired to executive posi- tions in student affairs as it reflected both more study and greater academic experience. The executives suggested that certain personal characteristics might either be present in or should be develOped by future student personnel professionals in order for them to be considered as potentially succeszul administrators and, thus, as desirable candidates who Should be admitted to graduate programs of preparation in student affairs and/or as practitioners in the field. These executives would try to assess the individual's ability to conceptualize situations, and potential leadership qualities such as understanding organizational processes, methods of change and methods to resolve diffi— culties existing in a university community without conflict. They would be most concerned that the individual be able to relate and work well with people, to communicate effec- tivelyy and to be open and relaxed, and able to listen to and.understand students as well as other groups within the university. They would seek some evidence relating to the individual's self-confidence, self-understanding and maturity'as reflected in his interactions with others in terms of appearing consistent, predictable and reasonable in his professional and personal behavior. Finally, they wanted the professional to have integrity, conviction and loyalty as basic character traits and to be willing to 366 stand behind sound principles and beliefs, even under strong pressure to the contrary. The respondents in this study had rather strong feel- ings about the kind of emphasis and course content most frequently included or excluded as part of student per- sonnel graduate training programs. Some of these practi- tioners suggested, first, that there was a need to restate and clarify the purpose of student personnel work. If that purpose was to enhance the self-development and self- understanding of students both individually and through work with their Special interest groups, then, training program curricula should be developed to accomplish these ends. There was considerable feeling that student per- Sonnel training programs today were too theoretical and unrealistic in that they were not geared to deal with current issues and problems in higher education and student affairs. Respondents urged that there be a break from traditional patterns in both content and teaching and that consideration be given to use of the "case study .approach' in rational problem solving. .At the same time (other respondents felt that current professional programs were too "practically-oriented" and too narrow in view. 'They noted the importance today of having practitioners ‘iho had, vision, a broad perspective and experience. It ‘appeared that a majority felt that these training programs 'today need ”gear up" to produce practitioners who could operate as generalists and specialists. It was 367 suggested that while such professional training programs were being reviewed, up-dated, and developed, ' the prospective professional needed greater individual assist- ance in devising a program of study which would prepare him best to meet his individual career objectives as well as the needs of this field. There were several areas of emphasis and courses on experiential changes recommended by these reSpondents as being of primary value to prospective professionals in this field. First, they emphasized the necessity for sensitizing these students to an awareness and understand- ing of the collegiate academic community and its unique role in society. Professionals need torecognize the primary functions of the university, to be aware of the various kinds of learning environments existing therein and the roles and concerns of the faculty, students and administrators comprising the university community. In addition, student affairs staff need an awareness of the various academic areas of study and their divergent demands on their students. Further, they need to be sensitive to and knowledgeable about the characteristics, needs, motives and goals of contemporary youth, and college students in particular. They should be able to understand student activists, drop-outs and those with academic and emotional difficulties. Student personnel administrators must be able to interpret current social trends, movements and problems in society from a 368 philoSOPhical and historical perspective. In short, while the respondents believe there was some cause for the current- day anxiety among practitioners and the public about students and higher education, they strongly believe that a profes- sional armed with such a breadth of perspective, experience and knowledge could effectively influence the course of events. Certain areas of study or preparation were suggested as being valuable to all practitioners. The respondents indicated_there was need for a greater study and under- standing of the legal implications relative to students with regard to student affairs and higher education. They suggested an emphasis be placed on knowledge of procedural and substantive due process as it related to academic and personal decisions by courts in relation to institutions of higher education. They recommended the individual either have experience in and/or be provided more training in public Speaking. They noted that there might profit- ably be a shift in doctoral requirements from languages to "computer efficiency” and methods in data processing. It was felt that most practitioners lack adequate knowledge and understanding of budget-making relative to their Special areas, student affairs or the university. They need to know how to establish and work within a budget. Several respondents felt that all professional student per- sonnel workers need a minimal background regarding techni- ques and methods used in counseling and guidancersensitivity 3‘09 training and experience in confrontation tactics or role-playing. Finally, the respondents indicated that there was a strong need for prospective professionals to have greater breadth and depth in practicum and internship experiences with more competent and careful supervision by professionals. They suggested that rotating internships would probably provide the necessary diversity of experience both in breadth of coverage and some experi- ence in working in and understanding the various specialized areas of student affairs, e.g. financial aids, residence halls, student activities, etc. The executive staff proposed some means to enable current practitioners to keep up-to-date. They encouraged the development of strong in-service training programs to be provided on-the-job for professionals. These might specifically include an awareness of change procedures and processes which can be appropriately utilized in a university community and a better understanding of research as a part of effective student personnel administration. The respondents were very much concerned about a per- ceived lack of SOphistication and understanding by prac- titioners of research and its associated techniques as it relates to effective evaluation, and planned change in student personnel programs and organizations. They sug- gested that both vision and hard and vigorous thinking were necessary for effectiveness in student affairs in the future. Finally, the respondents proposed that student 370 personnel practitioners should keep abreast of the devel- Opments in their field and higher education by attendance at national professional association meetings, and perhaps, some professional consulting. The executives were then asked what other employment and/or personal background experience they believed might be valuable to prospective professionals and current practitioners. Teaching experience (at any level), high- school and/or college counseling experience and employment as a staff member in a residence hall program were the three background experiences most closely related to employment in student personnel. Other work experiences which were considered helpful were serving as a camp counselor or camp director, working with some federal government and/or foreign programs, e.g. VISTA or the Peace Corps, military service and personnel work in business and industry. The respondents indicated that any work or experience as a volunteer involving direct contact With individuals and groups of people of different ages, socio-economic situations and life patterns would be helpful. WOrk with young people, particularly, and diverse groups of college and non-college bound, non-students and inner-city youth in athletics, church work, service and youth clubs and other community activities should help the prospective or current professional to develop a "healthy appreciation for cultural differences" among PeOple and enable him to have an understanding of, empathy 311 with and ability to communicate with the diverse groups of students among the heterogenous student population which comprise these large public universities. The executive reSpondents suggested that travel and participation in community affairs of all kinds were ’ personal experiences of benefit to the professional. They felt that student personnel administrators must know “the facts of life,“ the world outside of academia, and have had “real world experience" in life. In summary, "the fuller the life experience the better“ said one executive. Summary of Salient Data There were thirty-two executive student personnel administrative respondents representing the twelve sample universities in this study. Eight of these persons were members of student affairs staffs of the four large, pub- lic coeducational "Big Ten“ universities with a student enrollment of 25,000 or more in 1969. Twenty-four of these respondents were from eight medium universities with a student enrollment of 10,000—20,000. These univer- sities represented exactly one-half of all public coedu- cational large and medium Midwestern universities in the U. S. in 1969. There were no public, coeducational universities in the seven state.Midwest area with a stu— dent enrollment between 20,000—24,999 in 1969. Of the thirty-two respondents, twelve were chief student per- sonnel Officers, ten were other male executive staff members and ten were the highest ranking female staff 372 uembers. These groups comprised the base total for the analysis and comparison of the data obtained in this study. Significant differences between the executive staffs of the two university groups were noted in this summary, as well as major differences among the three personnel groups. The purpose of this‘summarwaas to outline the major descriptive findings of this study as determined by anal- ysis of the data provided by the executive respondents. Reasons for the findings were previously noted in detail and were not given again in this summary. With the exception of two chief Officers, one ill and the other unavailable due to a conflict in schedule on the days of campus visitations, all of the thirty—two executive respondents were personally interviewed by the investigator. One of the two chief officers was personally interviewed later by telephone; the other completed and returned the ”Interview Schedule: Executive Level Student Personnel Administrator” to the investigator. The executive student personnel administrative sample included eighteen Caucasian males, two Negro males and twelve Caucasian females. The age range for the entire sample was 31-69 years old with an average age of approximately 45 years. The medium university male execu- tive staff tended to be younger than their large university counterparts and the youngest of all personnel groups. IHowever, the medium university female executive staff 373 tended to be Older than their female counterparts in the large universities and the oldest group in the executive sample. The executive student personnel staff had been in their present positions ranging from five months to twenty-two years. There was a tendency for the Oldest and youngest individual executive staff members to have been in their positions respectively the longest and shortest period of time. Medium university staff parti— cularly male and female executive staff had been in their positions, on an average, longer than those in large universities. Chief student personnel officers at both large and medium universities had been in their positions the least amount of time. Male executive staff in medium universities had been in their positions the longest period of time of any personnel group. While this was an accurate reflection of the experience of these per- sonnel _ig M present positions it must be noted that there had been some organizational structure and/or titles changed within recent years in these universities, thus, some of these individuals had been in the same, similar or even different executive student personnel positions in these universities longer than reflected in the data presented above and, thus, in some cases had had more executive experience. These executive student personnel administrators had had considerable experience in both the employment 374 and promotion of student personnel administrators. Of the thirty-two personnel, thirty had had employment experience and twenty-seven had had experience in promotion of stu- dent personnel staff. Male executive student affairs staff included more persons without either employment or promotion experience than the other two personnel groups. Twenty-two of the thirty staff experienced in employment had been involved in employment at all three 1evels--executive, managerial and entry. Only three had made decisions at all three levels, while the rest were consulted regarding appointments at one or more levels. Differences in the kind of involvement in the employment of student personnel administrators was not significant among the two university groups or according to sex or race of the respondent. However, chief student personnel officers were slightly more experienced in the employment of student personnel staff at all levels and were more likely to make the final decision on the employment of other executive and some managerial student affairs administrators . They tended to be consulted only regard- ing entry level positions. The male and female executive staff were more likely to make the final decisions rela— tive to entry and, perhaps, some managerial level posi- :ions and were consulted only regarding other executive LI'ld chief student personnel officer appointments. Slightly less, twenty-seven, compared to thirty for mployrnent , of the thirty—two executive staff had had 375 previous involvement in promotion in student affairs. All of these twenty-seven had been involved in promotion of staff from entry to managerial level student personnel positions. Eleven personnel had been involved in promo- tion at three or four levels from sub-entry to chief student affairs officer promotions. Another thirteen staff had been involved with two or more levels of pro- motion, primarily sub-entry to entry and entry to mana- gerial level . Medium university staff appeared to have slightly less experience than large university personnel in pro- motion of student affairs staff. Chief student affairs officers comprised four of five total personnel staff members in this study who had had any involvement in promotion of staff from managerial or executive positions to the position of chief student personnel officer. They also comprised the group of respondents who had had more experience at more levels, either in making the decision or being consulted prior to the decision. There was a marked trend for chief student affairs officers to make final decisions on higher level positions and .to be con— sul ted only regarding sub-entry and entry to managerial promotions. In contrast, both male and female executive staff were generally consulted about higher level promo- tions and were more likely to make the final decisions on the lower level student personnel appointments. 376 The executive respondents were asked to specify the most widely used sources for securing names and recommenda- tions of candidates for executive student affairs positions. The major source for both large and medium universities was well-regarded student personnel administrators at similar Second source preferences kinds and types of universities. Large uni- differed between these two university groups. versities,next; set up Search and Screen Committees, com- posed of faculty, administrators and students, and, also, tended to look internally in their present student affairs organization for possible personnel who might be promoted. Medium universities tended to rely far more on external sources and as their second source utilized national pro- fessional student personnel organization placement bureaus, annual conventions and well-regarded student personnel The faculty-trainers of student personnel administrators. most frequently utilized professional organizations were in order of frequency: (1). NASPA; (2) NAWDC; and (3) There were only slight differences in the APGA-ACPA. frequency of use of the various sources named by the three personnel groups. Only eleven of thirty-two staff interviewed indicated that the same sources used in seeking executive level candidates would be those utilized for managerial candi- dates- The differences were those of frequency of use Of the twenty-one persons who indicated rather than kind. that the sources differed, most noted that they would 377 utilize professional organization placement bureaus, including both the general and specialized national organ- izations, e.g. NASPA and ACUHO, to a greater extent. Equally, they would rely on both personnel in their own specialized area in their university organization for names as well as well-regarded practitioners in special- ized managerial positions in similar universities for names and recommendations of knowledgeable, experienced and competent specialists in that student affairs area needing a managerial head. Medium universities preferred to use professional organizations slightly more than did the large universities. Differences were not significant between the personnel groups. This investigation included a study of the kind of personnel involved and the extent of this involvement in each of the various six stages of the selection process when a candidate was sought to fill a student personnel position in a public university. One-hundred percent of the executive respondents indicated that some student affairs staff in their universities were consulted at some one or more stages in the process of selecting a candidate for the positions of chief student affairs officer and executive and managerial student affairs adminis trators . In general, the higher the level of student per- sonnel position "Open," the higher the level of student personnel administrative staff and other non—student $7 8 personnel university staff-administrators and faculty and, Thus, perhaps, selected students involved in the process. the process of selection would be most rigorous for both the candidates and the university when seeking to fill the position of chief student personnel officer and least demanding for both when filling an entry or sub-entry position in student affairs. The more "critical" the position in terms of the associated responsibility, authority, and visibility, the more caution, care and greater scrutiny exercised by the institution in its selection of a particular candidate to fill that position and the more difficult the "hurdles" and numerous the person- nel of different orientations in the university that the candidate must meet and please in his quest for the There were no significant differences in the position. procedures or personnel involved in the process of selec- tion as perceived by the two university groups and the three personnel groups of this study. When a chief student affairs officer was to be selected, the names and recommendations of potential candidates were sought from well-regarded student personnel admin- istrators in other similar kinds of universities and from the executive student affairs staff in that university. If a Search and Selection Committee had been appointed by the president, as was often the case in large universities, too secured names of potential candidates from mem— they, bers of the university community and appropriate external 379 sources. Upon receipt of recommendations of candidates, credentials were requested from the candidate and/or a placement bureau and reviewed by the Search and Screen Committee, the executive student affairs staff (in some cases), and the appropriate academic deans and/or department heads, particularly if the individual was expected to teach. The credentials of the most promising candidates were reviewed by the president and/or provost. The presi- dent or the Search and Screen Committee issued an invita- tion to the best potential candidates to come to the cam- pus for a visit and interviews. All of the above per- sonnel along with the other university vice-presidents and, perhaps, some managerial student affairs staff, would be expected to interview the candidate and provide reactions to him so that an evaluation might be made. These reactions were forwarded to the president who would then consider all the candidates and make the final decision. In the event of several well-qualified and favorably evaluated candidates, the president would rank order a list and offer the position to each individual on it in descending order until an individual accepted it. The president's recommendation for appointment was then sent to the Board of Trustees or Regents for their official confirmation of the individual as chief student personnel officer for that university. These same six steps in the same order were involved in the process of selection for other executive, managerial mo and entry level student personnel positions. Names and reconendations were sought, credentials reviewed and evaluated, interviews conducted, evaluations made, and recommendations made for appointment of an individual to a particular position, subsequent to the acceptance by the individual and the Board of Trustees. However, the personnel involved in other appointments were generally less in number and importance in the university. For the appointment of an executive level student affairs administrator, the basic differences would include, quite possibly, no appointment of a Search and Screen Committee, greater responsibility and reliance on the chief student affairs officer and his other executive associates to locate potential candidates, review their credentials, invite them to campus for an interview and evaluate them. The appropriate academic personnel or department head would review credentials and inter- view him if he was expected to teach. The president and/or provost might also interview the candidate as might the managerial staff in student affairs and, perhaps, some student leaders. Reaction to the inter- views would be received by the chief student affairs officer who, upon consultation with the president, would make the decision and recommend to the president that the candidate be appointed to the executive position. Managerial appointments were handled similarly, except the sources of names for potential candidates were 581 likely to include entry level specialists in the specific area at that university, well-regarded specialists at (ther similar kinds of universities and the greater use cfi'professional organizations, particularly the ones related to the specialized area in which the vacancy occurred. Quite possibly, the out—going managerial head in that area might, also, be consulted. Credentials were generally reviewed by all but entry-level personnel in student affairs and, perhaps, some managerial staff. .All student personnel staff from managerial level up would interview and evaluate the candidate. In addition, entry- level staff in that special area and student leaders related to the area, as well, would interview and react to the candidate. Reactions and evaluation of candidates would be sent to the chief student affairs officer or executive level administrator who would.make the final decision. Entry-level student personnel vacancies were the .primary'responsibility of the managerial student affairs staff member in whose area the vacancy occurred. He had primary responsibility from seeking candidates to making the decision for these staff appointments. He would be expected to confer with the chief officer, other executive student affairs staff, and other entry staff and, perhaps, students involved with the special area. With the possi- ble exception of entry level candidates, all candidates for higher positions in student affairs in these 382 universities were usually required to visit the campus and be interviewed by the above-named personnel prior to being seriously considered as a candidate for a student personnel administrative position. I To best describe the critical factors in the selec- tion of executive and managerial student personnel staff it appeared best to both "typify” the kind of person most likely to be appointed to these positions and to outline the basic factors one must possess. A Caucasian male bemeen 35-50 years old .at the time of an open position would have the best chance to be selected for an executive student affairs position if he, also, had the additional qualifications noted below. He should have an earned doctorate, preferably a Ph.D. , in a substantive area of the social/behavioral Sciences. Such areas as Sociology, Psychology and Political Science were preferred. However, Counseling and Guidance Student Personnel Administration and Higher Education were accept- able if the latter were broadly-oriented and up-to—date. The individual should preferably have a strong academic background in the Liberal Arts or Humanities at the undergraduate level of study. Previous college teaching experience was most desirable, but potential for (adequate credentials to qualify) and/or interest in teaching was considered even more important, even though the position might not require actual classroom teaching. Previous college administrative experience, preferably in an J83 institution similar in kind to to the present one for which the individual was being considered for employment, was considered to be very important by these respondents. National academic and/or professional stature and visi- bility was felt to be most desirable, but not an essen- tial factor in selection. However, some written or expressed evidence of professional interest and desire for continued professional growth was important, Public relations ability or the ability to listen and communicate well, both verbally and in writing, the goals, needs and concerns of the university and student affairs to those inside and the public outside the uni- versity was considered essential or very important by all but one executive respondent, in this study. They believed the use of appropriate language, accurate word- ing and the timing of communications was very important. They recognized that some executive student personnel positions might be more “sensitive" in terms of visibility than might others. Personal characteristics felt to be important to the candidate were (in order of frequency): (1) a flexible, resilient, perceptive and warm personality with a sincere interest in and rapport with and respect for people particularly today's college students, as well .as a good sense of humor; (2) good personal grooming and appearance; (3) an intelligent innovative and competent leader with a breadth of life perspective, a good communi— cator and concern for the professional and personal growth $84 of student affairs staff and students; (4) a person with a good sound ethical/moral value system and philosophy of life and one whose professional and personal behavior reflected this system of values and principles; and (5) possession of good mental and physical health including the capacity to endure strain and stress during crisis periods as often exist today in universities. Two of these five characteristics, (1) personality characteris- tics and (3) leadership traits, were also identified in another section of the "Interview Schedule” as factors of importance in selection. Differences were not signi- ficant in the degree of importance of these factors among the three personnel groups. However, medium university staff placed greater emphasis on (4) a good sound ethical/ moral value system and philosophy of life. When the respondents were given a ”free-hand" to identify those factors most crucial to them in the selec- tion of an executive student affairs staff member, five major factors could be identified as being essential to between 20-26 of the thirty-two personnel interviewed. These critical factors were (in order of frequency): (1) personal characteristics; (2) leadership ability; (3) possession of a Ph.D.. in the social/behavioral Sciences; (4) Previous college administrative experience, preferably in a similar kind and type of institution; and (5) well- developed communication skills. Personal characteristics appeared throughout this study to be the most essential concern of the executive Job respondents compared to all other factors named as impor- tant in the selection of an executive student affairs staff. Many noted that "the kind of person one was" was the most important consideration in selection of personnel. They felt that some of these personal qualities the indi- vidual must already possess because some could less easily be developed or taught. With personal effort, however, others might be acquired successfully. Given "the right kind of person" many felt he could learn most of the essentials required in student personnel positions. This kind of person was typified as one who possessed a flexible, resilient and warm personality, enthusiasm, a good sense of humor, empathy, perceptiveness, intelligence, a creative/ innovative approach to problems, a willingness to listen, and the capacity to admit to and adjust to mistakes, courage, ability to make and hold to difficult decisions *When necessary, integrity, personal maturity, good judge- :mentq and the physical and emotional stamina to endure periods of sustained stress. Differences between the three personnel groups were not significant compared to. those between the two university groups. Large university reSpondents tended to place greater emphasis on previous college administrative experience compared to medium university staff who emphasized personal characteristics as their primary concern. ‘As with the presidential sample, older reSpondents in terms of age and tenure in position tended to stress )86 more of the traditional qualities, e.g. honesty, integrity, maturity, good judgement, courage, understanding people, enthusiasm and effective planning and organization, com- pared to younger staff in age and tenure in position who stressed more contemporary factors, e.g. having a flexible and resilient personality, low levels of anxiety, rapport with and confidence in students, student development as an approach, innovative/creative leadership, independent thinking, willingness to admit mistakes and ability to adjust to them. When the factors considered important by these respondents in the selection of present and future execu- tive student personnel administrators were compared to the beliefs of these executive respondents relative to the factors or reasons responsible for their selection to their present executive positions some differences were noted. These different factors included: experience at the same institution, being known by or having good pre- vious relationships with the student affairs staff, chief officer and/or president of that university, previous collegezteaching experience, previous experience in a non- student personnel field, i.e. business, and previous experience in the same type of job. Similarities of fac- tors important in their selection and their view of those important in future selections included: previous adminis- trative experience, possessing the Ph.D. , good student/ faculty respect and relationships, study in social/behavioral 387 sciences, and personality/character traits. Large univer- sity staff felt that experience at the same institution was somewhat more important; while medium university staff felt the possession of an earned doctorate was more so. Other differences were not significant. It was, however, interesting to note that previous experience in student personnel administration was felt to be the single most important factor in their selection; however, they felt (particularly medium university staff) that the personal characteristics of the individual would be their most important concern in the selection of a person for present and future executive student affairs positions. The respondents were asked to describe their major functions. Twelve of these were chief student personnel officers with the final responsibility and authority for planning, organizing, administering and regulating poli— cies, programs and services in the area of student affairs. These officers served as chief advisors on student affairs to the presidents and/or Board of Trustees and most often as the major spokesman for student affairs at their universities. The remaining twenty staff-~ten male and ten femalev-were executive student personnel administrators. Their job functions were of a somewhat more specific and in-depth nature in the various student affairs areas when compared to the chief officers. These executive staff had responsibility for one or more of the following principal functions (in order of frequency): 366 (l) advising student activities; (2) coordinating programs for same sex students; (3) student conduct/discipline; (4) (tie) counseling students and other university staff 222 coordinating residence hall programs; (5) (tie) recruitment/5election/training of staff and assisting the chief student personnel officer. All four large univer— sity executive student affairs staff were significantly involved in assisting their chief student affairs offi- cers; while, medium university staff were more signifi- cantly involved in advising student activities. .Male executive staff were usually involved in both the above activities; while female executive staff were usually more responsible for student conduct/discipline and recruitment/selection/training of staff. When these job functions were considered against the previously noted essential or important criteria for executive positions, as prOposed by the reSpondents, it was concluded that the general factors named as important were appropriate for the effective performance of an executive job in student affairs. Of course, some of the more specialized respon- sibilities of an executive, e.g. counseling, residence hall programs, etc. would require, also, that the indi— vidual have, in addition, a more Specific in-depth know- ledge, understanding and experience in these particular areas. In considering selection of managerial student per— sonnel staff, the major factors described previously as 389 important for executive positions would, also, be important for managerial positions. The primary differences in relation to the value of these factors were degree of importance of factor rather than kind of factor. Mana- gerial staff were not expected tohave the .same amount of knowledge, breadth and, in some cases, depth of experi- ence and refinement of administrative skills as were executive staff. They were, however, expected to be knowledgeable, experienced and skilled with regard to their specialized areas of past or future responsibility, i.e. housing, student activities, financial aids, etc. Thus, they needed a more specialized in-depth background in one or more functional areas compared to the broader knowledge, perspective and extensive administrative experience needed by executive staff in student affairs. In relation to the specific factors investigated in this study, the expectations were somewhat less for managerial as compared to executive staff. A Caucasian male between 30-55 years of age .at the time of consideration would have the best chance for selection. There was a definite preference for mature and competent young peOple and most viewed these positions as ”develop- mental" ones providing experience for persons who might later aspire to executive administrative positions in student affairs. Unless the position was rather narrowly specialized and/or terminal, persons who were nearer the upper age limit were not usually considered. The earned 390 doctorate was preferred by half of the executive respon- dents, particularly males and those in large universities, while the masters degree plus administrative experience in student affairs was acceptable to the other half of those interviewed, particularly females and those in medium universities. The necessity for the doctorate might, however, depend on one's area of responsibility, e.g. Director of the Health Service or Counseling Service. The job functions and specific areas of responsibility were important considerations relative to the kind and type of major preferred. In general, the majors such as Student Personnel Administration, (previously favored by medium university staff) Higher Education, Counseling and Guidance and the social/behavioral sciences areas were preferred; however, a major such as Business Administra- tion or Accounting would not be inappropriate for a Financial Aids Officer. A solid academic discipline in the Liberal Arts or Humanities was also the undergraduate educational background preferred for the managerial candidate. Previous college teaching experi- ence, or interest in and/or potential to teach, was deened desirable by the majority of respondents, primarily from medium universities. Previous college administrative experience was felt to be important but certainly not essential by these respondents. However, all but one respondent attached some value to such experience. National academic and/or professional stature was rated 391 as desirable by most of the respondents. It was of lesser value for managerial than executive staff as a factor considered in selection. Public relations ability or communications skills were considered very important to managerial staffin student affairs, as compared to being only slightly more essential for executive staff. Large university staff viewed it as less important than did medium university staff for managerial personnel. Some reSpondents noted that this factor had become more impor- tant for managerial staff only in the past four to five years. Others felt that the degree of importance of this factor in the actual process of selection was somewhat dependent on the nature of the responsibilities and the visibility of the particular managerial position. Greater stress was placed on the importance of good internal come :munications by managerial staff as compared to the neces- sity fer both internal and external communications expected.of executive staff in student affairs. The personal characteristics both suggested and identified as important for executive candidates were also of importance for managerial candidates. There was a lesser expectation that not all of these characteristics. would reflect the same breadth of experience, knowledge and refinement of skills, attitudes and competencies as those expected of executive student affairs staff members. However, a managerial staff member must be able to work exceptionally well directly with both students and staff, 392 be able to establish and maintain an area of operation efficiently and effectively, be particularly competent in supervising staff, and able to quickly recognize, appropriately refer and/or solve problems arising within his special area of responsibility. He must work and communicate well with his superiors and keep the latter informed regarding all aspects of his operation. Finally, managerial staff were not expected to make or assume responsibility for the more difficult and far- reaching decisions in student affairs as were chief offi- cers and other executive staff. If such a decision were to be made by a managerial head he would most generally be expected to consult, prior to the decision, with either the chief officer and/or other executive student affairs administrators in the student personnel organi— zation of the university. Nearly all executive student affairs respondents believed it was important to have women and.Wegroes in these public coeducational large and medium universities. Almost.all believed that they should be employed at all levels--executive, managerial and entry. However, respondents particularly desired them to be located in managerial and entry level positions. Four of twelve or one-third of these universities had no women in executive level positions at the time of this study; while only two Negroes (both male and in medium univer— sities served in executive positions. One was a chief 393 student affairs officer and the other a "Dean of Human Relations." One-third of the respondents believed that women in student affairs positions should or would have special reSponsibilities or functions in addition to those desig- nated for the particular "functional" position available. Likewise, one-half of the respondents felt that Negro student personnel administrators should or would have special areas of responsibility in addition to those norms ally associated with the "functional” position. These expectancies were, thus, applicable to both groups and all levels of administration. The primary special responsib- ilities for women centered around their roles in functioning as a focus and spokesman for women students' interests and needs on the campus. Negroes were expected to serve as spokesman for and interpreter of minority group student con- cerns to the larger white university community. Both women and Negroes were expected to serve as advisors and counselors respectively to individuals and groups of women and minority students. There were particularly strong feelings in rela- tion to the necessity for assistance to minority groups, most esPecially today and in the future, until educational and social inequities are resolved. The latter was felt in part, a causative factor in many of the campus to be, conflicts and student activism evident in these univer- sities today. No such special or additional job functions 394 were expected of Caucasian males who were appointed to student personnel positions. The respondents had no title preferences for women or Negroes in student affairs positions. Most merely wanted the title to reflect both the job functions and the particular student personnel organizational structure in existence at that university. Between one-half (for Negroes) and two-thirds (for women) of the respondents felt there were or should be addi- tional factors, beyond those previously noted as criteria, considered in the selection of a woman or a Negro for a student personnel position. These were in addition to those required of Caucasian males. Some of these factors were more important in selection for an executive position than they were for managerial or entry level positions. Some of the factors named appeared to relate to special job functions of these two groups, particularly those for atNegrOu Additional factors considered important in the evaluation of a woman candidate for a position include: (1) neither a defensive attitude nor desire to take advan- tage of her sex in securing special opportunities or special consideration in the performance of her job; (2) proven professional competence, self-confidence, good administrative and organizational skills, objectivity, good judgement, good in cxxmnunication, and a good "personality"--professional, but personable and warm as a human being; (3) being comfortable 595 in being a woman and accepting self as such--being a good role model for women students and particularly reflecting a good personal appearance, attractiveness and personal grooming; (5) marriage and family responsibilities as balanced against the necessity for a primary professional commitment to student personnel, particularly in the execu- tive position, was considered as a "mixed blessing." While married career women might serve as role models offering broader role options to women students, they might not be as accessible or available for working longer hours, at ' nights or for campus crises. The factors of marriage and a family would appear to serve more as a factor against the employment of a woman in an executive position than as an asset to her professionally in this field. There was a cluster of factors serving as special considerations in the selection of a Negro for a position in student affairs: (1) he must have the respect of, rapport.with and acceptance of the black community and not be viewed as either an "Uncle Tom" or an I'arm of the establishment"; on the other hand, (2) he should not be a black militant, but be able to serve as a good role model for Negro and other minority group students; (3) he should understand the divisions in the black conununity and be able to interpret these to the larger, white com- (4) he should have a proven record of successful annuity? work experience, adequate education, professional preparation 396 and an objective attitude and broad perspective with regard to all groups in the university and the larger society. Without this objective and breadth of perspective and without the respect, rapport with and acceptance of bgth black and white community he would be unable to effectively meet the needs of minority students and the university by assisting in the improvement of communications, the reduc- tion of inter-group tensions and the elimination of pro- blems preventing mutual understanding and effort and improvements in the education for all groups in the uni- versity. When the respondents were asked to select between an equally well-qualified (meaning equivalent, Egg identi— .EEE) man and woman and white and Negro for a position in student personnel, two-thirds or more would select the Caucasian male over either a woman orra Negro. Numerous .reasons were provided for the various choices indicated be the respondents. There was a trend toward choosing rmore equally well-qualified women and Negroes for manager- .ial and, particularly, entry level positions than would be chosen for executive positions. Staff sexual and racial balance in student affairs was an important consideration for the executives in the larger, public, heterogeneous, coeducational universities as well as the desire to have tine staff representative of the student population (pri- xmarily viewed as Caucasian.males). Two major factors operated against the selection of a woman or Negro 39/ at the executive level. The respondents believed that women should not be directly exposed to aggressive behavior and student unrest--militancy and verbal abuse which so ' frequently prevailed today in these universities. They felt these situations involved more pressures and stress than those to which a woman should have to be subjected. A.major factor against the employment of more Negroes in student personnel administration was the difficulty observed in locating, employing and retaining well-quali- fied Negro administrators. There were, however, other reasons militating against selection of women and.Negroes in student personnel administrative positions. Examination of the data relative to sex and race of candidates as factors in the selection of student per- sonnel administrators and all the special factors, condi- tions and qualifications noted would appear to support the observations of professional observers and researchers that these two factors of sex and race serve as "biases" operating against the selection of well-qualified women and.Negroes when compared to Caucasian men, particularly for the executive positions in student affairs in these Inniversities. Five clusters of factors were discovered from examination of the data concerning the executive sam- ple's beliefs about which factors were most important in determining the acceptance of the selected chief 398 student personnel officer by the student personnel staff in their universities. The following, (in order of fre- quency) were considered the most important kinds of factors for acceptance: (1) a courageous, confident, innovative and competent democratic leader; (2) an individual who has respect for, confidence in and rapport with his student affairs staff as both professional workers and individuals; (3) an individual who possesses an educationally and experientially sound academic and professional background, which is academically respectable and inspires confidence in and respect for him by all members of the university community; (4) an individual who evidences respect for, faith in and a sensitivity to students, their needs and concerns and organizes the student affairs resources in a :manner calculated to best meet these needs; (5) an indi— vidual who exercises due caution with - regard to :making any major changes in the operation or organizational structure of the student affairs area until he has gained an understanding and appreciation of the particular uni- ‘versity, its organization, goals, and the current organi- zation and personnel expectations of the student affairs staff. This latter factor of possible reorganization of (areas in student affairs was an area of proportionately greater concern and importance to the female executive staff in both large and medium universities than to any «other groups. Otherwise, differences were not significant between the kind and order of importance of the first four 399 clusters of factors for either of the two university or three personnel groups when related to the factors deter- mining the acceptance of the chief student personnel officer. The effect of the kind of student personnel admin- istrative organizational structures existing in these sample universities was examined with the respondents in order to determine the effect of such structures on the kind and degree of factors considered important in the employment and promotion of student personnel administra- tors. Four of the twelve or onenthird of the sample univerp sities had continued under what is known as a "traditional" structure; while eight of the twelve or two-thirds of the universities were currently operating with the so-called "functional" structure of organization. Three of the twelve universities--one "traditional" and two "functional" ‘were in either a state of transition or the process of restructuring the organization. With the possible exception of some staff from.three of the eight universities operating under a "functional'I structure, all personnel designated and interviewed as executive student affairs administrators for this study could best be classified as "generalists" more than as "specialists." Those executive staff in the "functional" organizations would operate not only as "generalists" but also with more specialized areas of responsibility 400 that were not sex-related but related to specific student affairs areas affecting all students. Hewever, "tradi- 'tional" executive staff acted not only as generalists but had their primary specialized responsibilities in some sex/related areas. The criteria previously noted as important for executive staff in universities would remain so for these “generalists" with the exception of a greater emphasis and knowledge relative to the above specialized areas of concern. There were some general considerations involved in the selection of staff for work within one of these two types of administrative organization. ‘Somewhat greater value would appear to be placed on certain factors involved in the selection of a candidate for work, particularly, in managerial positions. in each of the two types of organi- zations. Universities employing a "traditional” organi- zational structure would seek a candidate slightly older in age, more mature, with broader and.more comprehensive experience in student affairs and a greater breadth of ;perspective about the total student affairs operation and its role in the university. He should have a particularly good understanding of the total environment of the stu- dent at the university, including the effects of the :nesidential life of the campus on the student. He must have an ability to understand, communicate and relate well with all students, but most particularly those of the same sex. Finally, an individual must be able to cooperate 401 and work well with staff of the opposite sex when concerns, needs, and problems must be resolved or some common pro- grams are indicated for both sexes. A person in a "tradi- tional'system tended to have greater autonomy and authority in general in the work situation, but also greater respon- sibility to make some concrete and valuable contributions to better the welfare and education of students. One who was uncomfortable with a "generalist" role at either an executive or managerial level position, for instance, a person who had difficulty in tolerating a certain amount of ambiguity and broad responsibilities in his work would not be a good candidate for a position in an organization having a "traditional" structure. Candidates sought for :managerial positions were those who evidenced the potential in terms of broad experience, perspective, maturity, and attitude needed to someday be a successful executive ”dean.” A person seeking a position in a "functionally" structured organization must particularly exhibit an interest and depth of experience and expertise in, as well as aptitude for specialized competency in one or more specific non-sex/related areas of student affairs. {the individual would work as a part of a smaller team in (a specialized area and his work.would permit greater .autonomy but, primarily in that particular speciality aiream However, the individual must be content to contri- bute a smaller "specific part" .to the ”whole" effort of 402 the student affairs organization. He 'might' have greater direct contact with students and staff as well as be better noticed and rewarded for his particular compe- tency in a specific area of work. The "functional" system had the advantage of permitting the most competent indi- viduals to be employed in each position, regardless of the sex of the candidate. However, respondents noted that a greater number of personnel were often required to staff a ”functional” student affairs organization than were needed in the "traditional” organization. These differences noted above should be considered both by the candidates and employers when selections are to be made to fill managerial and executive positions in student affairs. The interests and needs of both the individual administrator and the particular student affairs organization must be compatible for effective performance and operation in student affairs. Promotions were likely to be influenced by the kind of organizational structure in existence. Lateral and vertical mobility were felt to be easier in an organiza~ tfirnl structured along "traditional" lines- Personnel in ”functional" organizations were believed to be more readily "pigeon-holed" in their specialized areas of responsibility and, thereby, were deprived of the breadth.of perspective,knowledge and experience as well as the broader understanding of the student affairs organization and its place in the total university, which 40. were deemed as requisites for advancement of personnel from managerial to executive positions in student affairs. This situation was felt to be conducive to frustration and resentment in some staff as they realized that they were too specialized and ”could not expect to go any higher." While the "functional” organizational structure was obviously the one most prevalent in these universities, one might wonder as to its desirability in meeting the professional and personal needs and growth of the student affairs staff as it would appear to more readily limit opportunities for both lateral and vertical mobility, breadth of experience and perspective, and, of course, possibly promotion. The executive staff interviewed in this study were given an opportunity to make recommendations with regard to the desired education/professional preparation, employment and personal background experiences which they believed would better prepare an individual to Ibecome an effective student personnel administrator in a public university. Their suggestions reflected their lxreadth and depth of experience in this field as well as .a thoughtful "visionary" approach to the present and future needs of professionals. Their recommendations were believed to have merit and be, hopefully, of assistance tx: prospective and present professional practitioners in student personnel, as well as faculty-trainers and advisors of prospective professionals. 404 Initially, the respondents noted the necessity for the recruitment and selection process to become more 'sophisticated. They suggested that if "the right kind of person" could be identified earlier he might be guided more effectively in the best direction for training in the field. These staff felt strongly that it was most important to have "the right kind of person," in terms of his maturity, character and personality, as a prospective professional student personnel administrator. This was viewed by some to be more important than any specific education or training background. Several went so far as to note that "the right kind of person" given a good in-service training program in student affairs could quite probably become a very competent student affairs administrator. Formal graduate training in Student Personnel, while preferred by some, was not a requisite for most respondents to effective performance in this field today. They felt that some of these professional programs were irrelevant to the contemporary needs and problems of students and universities today and thus, to the practitioner working with them. To some the programs were too broad and theoretical, and to others they were too narrowly specialized. ‘A majority of the respondents preferred a strong academic discipline in the Liberal Arts or Humanities at the undergraduate level of study, and preferably an academic discipline in the Social/behavioral sciences at 40:) M.A. level if the individual planned to seek a Ph.D. in the social/behavioral sciences (their first preference), Student Personnel Administration, Higher Education or Counseling and Guidance. The reSpondents felt that a Ph.D. in a substantive academic area of the social/ behavioral sciences was probably the best preparation for executive student affairs staff. Personal qualities were deemed of importance relative to both admission to a graduate program and for practice in the field. Assessment should be made of the individual's ability to conceptualize situations, his leadership quali- ties, his ability to relate and work well with peOple, to be effective in communications, and to have the capacity and willingness to listen to and understand students and others within the university- .Some evidence should be sought relative to the individual's self-confidence, self~ understanding and maturity as reflected in his interactions ‘with people and his behavior--consistent, predictable and :reasonable--in relation to them. Finally the integrity, conviction and loyalty or basic character traits should be present in the individual prospective professional. These executives had a number-of suggestions to make regarding the kind of emphasis that should be present in the professional curricula in a graduate training program ir: student personnel. They suggested the need for a review aand overhaul of these programs in light of the basic pur- pose of student personnel work in higher education-"that 406 of enhancing the development and self-understanding of individuals and groups of students. Respondents urged that more of the study relate to current issues and problems, involve the use of the "case study approach” in rational problemrsolving and yet retain a broad perspec- tive versus a too practiCally-oriented and narrow view. They felt that practitioners today needed vision, a breadth of experience and perspective. Training programs need need "gear up” to produce both.generalists and specialists. Finally, the prospective professional needed better advise- ment in devising a program of study to best prepare him to meet his career objectives as well as the needs of this field. Within the professional curricula, itself, several suggestions were made. There was felt to be a need for a greater sensitization of students to an understanding «of the collegiate community, its unique functions in society, the roles and concerns of the various groups cxmmprising the university--students, faculty and adminis- 'trators--and the kinds of learning environments present iJi these institutions. These prospective professionals need to be knowledgeable about the characteristics, needs and goals of contemporary youth, and college students le particular. They should be able to understand student activists, drop-outs and those with academic and emotional difficulties. They need be able to interpret current social trends and movements in society from a philosophical 407 and historical perspective. A professional armed with this breadth of perspective and experience can ably help reduce current day anxieties about students, and the unih versity; serve an interpreter of both to the larger society,- as well as, hopefully, influence the course of events in the area of student affairs within the university. These executive staff suggested that training pro- grams include a greater emphasis on procedural and sub- stantive due process in relation to students and higher education; provide training and experience in public speaking; a greater understanding of the use of. computers and data processing; an understanding of budget-making and how to work within one, in relation to their specialized areas, student affairs and the university; and require minimal training in the techniques and methods used in counseling and guidance. Finally the respondents urged greater depth and breadth, under more competent professional supervision,. in practicum and internships. Rotating internships might better provide the diversity of experience and breadth of coverage needed by both generalists and specialists. For current practitioners, these respondents sug- gested the development of strong in-service training programs to be provided on-the-job. These might include an understanding of university process, change procedures and an increased understanding of the value of built-in research and evaluation programs in student affairs areas and organizations, as well as an understanding of the 408 effective use of the results of such programs in improving the operation of student affairs as a whole and its separate areas within. Current practitioners were further advised to keep abreast of new developments in their field and in higher education by attendance at national profes- sional association meetings and, perhaps, by some pro- fessional consulting. The respondents suggested that such experience as teaching (at any level), high school and/or college coun- seling experience, employment experience in college residence hall programs, camp counseling and/or camp directing'federal government and/or foreign programs, e.g. VISTA or the Peace Corps, military service and per- sonnel work in business and industry would all be valuable to the student personnel administrator. They felt that any work or experience, paid or volunteer, involving direct contact with people of all ages, socio—economic situations and varying life patterns and goals would.be (If value. Any work with diverse groups of young people, particularly in such areas as athletics, church work, service and youth clubs and other community activities should enable the prospective or current professional to be sensitive to, understanding of and able to communicate with all groups of students which make up the heterogene— ous student pOpulations of these large, public universities. .Finally the executives suggested that travel and participation in community affairs of all kinds would be 409 personal experiences of benefit to the professional. They concluded by noting that student personnel professionals must have “real-world experience in life' and understand the larger world outside of academia. This completes the analysis, summary and interpreta- tion of the actual interview data for the executive student personnel administrators in this study. As with the presidential sample, the use of the structured personal interviews with these thirty-two executives and the instru- ment “Interview Schedule:n Executive Level Student Person- nel Administrators“ were judged by the "professional judges' and the investigator-interviewer as successful and valid methods for collection of the essential data relative to the factors important in the selection of executive and managerial student personnel administrators. The "professional judges" believed that the instrument had content validity since the questions asked and the responses provided appeared appropriate and relevant to the objectives of this study. The conduct of the inter- ‘Views was felt to be effective as "good rapport”‘was restablished with the respondents and the latter proved "cooPerative, highly thoughtful, gracious and positive in their attitudes" in these interviews. Further, their responses appeared "frank, Open, helpful and complete" with regard to the questions. The "professional judges" listened to a random sample of tapes representing both chief student personnel officers and other executive 410 staff of both large and medium universities. The separate reliability percentages of agreement made for chief student affairs officers ranged from 86-95 percent with a mean of 90 percent; and, for executive student affairs administra- tors the range was 96-97 percent with a.mean of 97 percent. The reliability percentage of agreement for the Egtgl executive student personnel administrators sampled in this study ranged from 86-97 percent with a mean of 94 percent. CHAPTER.VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summggy This chapter includes an integrated final summary of the primary objectives which guided the development, con- duct and analysis of data for this study and the major findings which emerged as a result of this investigation. Conclusions follow the summary section and include an out- line of areas of agreement and difference. between this study and those of previous researchers as well as a pre- sentation of the most significant conclusions and resulting implications. Recommendations were made relative to the research methods and procedures and potentially profitable Inethods and areas of study relating to selection. The basic purpose of this study was to discover the Jkind and degree of importance of various factors which may (metermine the selection of one individual over another for 23 position as an executive or managerial student personnel administrator. Seven specific objectives were outlined (in Chapter I) which served as guidelines in the development, 411 412 conduct and analysis of data of this investigation in order that this basic purpose might be accomplished. The sample included twelve universities--four large and eight mediums—representing one—half of all Midwestern public, coeducational universities in each of the two groups. They were selected by use of a stratified random sample. All presidents and executive student affair administrators at each of the twelve universities participated in a struc- tured interview with the investigator. The number of per- sons comprising the final sample was 44, including 12 presidents, 12 chief student personnel officers, 10 highest ranking female executive staff members and 10 other male executive staff members. There were 30 Caucasian males, 12 Caucasian females and 2 Negro males among the sample per- sonnel. These sample personnel had had considerable experience in the employment and promotion of student personnel adminis- ‘trators. Seventy-five percent or 9 of 12 presidents had had (experience in employment compared to 30 of 32 executive :respondents who had had such experience. More medium univer- sity'presidents--75 percent compared to only 50 percent of the large university presidents--had had experience in pro- nmotion of student personnel administrators. The reverse was 'true for executive reSpondents where 27 of 32 of the total group had had promotion experience but, medium university artaff had had somewhat less experience than those in large universities . 41.3 There were some definite trends noted in the kind and extent of participation of these personnel in the selection process. The presidents evidenced greater concern and involvement in the selection of the chief student personnel officer, generally making the final decision on this selec- tion. For executive student affairs staff, the president might interview and evaluate the candidate but would leave the final decision to the chief student affairs officer. The latter would be expected to consult with the president before making this final decision. Presidents indicated they had less concern for or involvement in appointments below the chief officer and executive student affairs staff level. This same trend was evident in relation to executive staff for both employment and promotion. Chief student affairs officers usually made decisions on the selection of candidates for executive and, perhaps, some managerial ;positions, being only consulted on entry level appointments. ‘Executive staff made more decisions on entry and sometimes managerial staff selection, but were usually only consulted (regarding executive and chief student affairs officer .appointments. In general, the more responsibility, author- ity and visibility attached to the available student affairs position, the higher the level of student personnel staff .and.other university personnel involved in the evaluation .and.decision regarding the selection of the individual to 4fill the position. This same principle applied to the actual process of selection. 414 There was basic agreement among the respondents regarding their chief sources for locating and obtaining possible candidates to fill positions in student affairs. The differences which existed were in the degree of use of the various sources according to the level and kind of position to be filled. First choice was the use of well- regarded student personnel administrators at similar kinds of universities. Second choice for large universities was to establish a Search and Screen Committee and to look internally for personnel worthy of promotion. Medium.uni- versities utilized professional conventions, placement bureaus and well-regarded student personnel faculty- trainers. If the position "open" was for a chief student affairs officer, in a larger university, there would usually be a Search and Screen Committee established,composed of faculty, students and administrators. Presidents would *write to other presidents in similar universities for sug- gested candidates. Annual professional conventions and ‘placement bureaus were rarely used in seeking candidates for chief student affairs administrators in these universi- ties. Sources utilized for executive student affairs staff ‘openings were similar, except that Search and Screen Commit- 'tees were less likely to be utilized and there was greater ;presidential reliance on the chief student affairs officer 'to locate good potential candidates. When personnel were sought to fill a managerial position, there was a marked ‘tendency to rely more heavily on the general and.more 415 specialized professional organization placement bureaus, annual conventions, and the suggestions of those holding similar positions in other universities as well as, perhaps, the out—going managerial head and entry staff in that specialized area. All 44 respondents agreed that some student affairs staff currently employed in their universities would be consulted at one or more of six stages in the process of selecting candidates for the positions of chief student affairs officer, and executive, and managerial student affairs administrators. The six basic stages are: (1) names of potential candidates are sought; (2) recommendations and credentials are obtained; (3) recommendations and credentials are reviewed or evaluated; (4) the individual is invited to visit the campus and is interviewed by appropriate per- sonnel; (5) evaluation of and reactions to the individual are sought by the “decision-maker"; and (6) the final decision is made and/or a list of several well-qualified candidates is rank ordered with each candidate being offered the position in descending order until an acceptance is received. There is a seventh step which usually presents no difficulty. The president must make a recommendation to the university's Board of Regents or Trustees that the selected individual be appointed. If the Regents follow this recommendation, as they generally do, the appointment becomes official in relation to both the university and the 416 individual. One variation from these stages in selection was the lack of requirement in some universities that all candidates for entry or sub-entry positions come to the university campus to be interviewed. The latter were fre- quently interviewed at professional conventions. The factors important in the selection of the chief student personnel officer were explored with the presidents; while, the factors important in the selection of managerial student personnel administrators were investigated with the executive student personnel administrative sample. Only the factors important in the selection of executive student personnel administrators were explored.with both personnel groups. (Specific differences were outlined in detail in Chapters IV and V.) The differences were largely those of degree of importance rather than kind of factors important in the selection process. These factors assumed a higher degree of importance in the selection of chief student personnel officers and a progressively lesser degree of importance in the selection of executive and managerial student personnel administrators. The importance placed on these factors was very definitely related to the authority, responsibility and visibility of the particular student ;personnel position in question. Presidents were most likely to select a male, Cauca- sian candidate between the ages of 35-45 for the position of chief student personnel administrator. They expected Ihim.to have obtained an earned doctorate, preferably the 417 Ph.D. in a respected academic field of study. They preferred a.major in one of the Fsblid' substantive Social/Behavioral Science areas, e.g. Psychology, Sociology, Political Science, Public Administration and Management. Only one-third of the presidents primarily, from.medium universities, mentioned Student Personnel Administration and/or Higher Education as desired major fields of study. The candidate must have had previous college administrative experience, preferably in a similar kind of university, and possess effective communi- cation skills. Previous college teaching experience and national academic or professional stature were deemed desir- able assets but not essential to selection. Large university presidents were more concerned that the chief officer have some national visibility and stature than were medium uni- versity presidents. Above all other factors, the presidents believed it was most important to select "the right kind of person” and, if necessary, teach him certain aspects of the job. This view was, also, held by executive student personnel respondents in relation to executive and managerial student ;personnel positions. The essential professional and per- sonal qualities that a chief student personnel administrator should possess included integrity, courage, and a good sound 'value system relative to ethics and morals. These tradi- tional personal characteristics were of greater importance to»those presidents and executive respondents older in age and.tenure in position. Other personal characteristics of particular importance to presidents and executive respondents 418 younger in age and tenure included qualities of a more contemporary emphasis, such as a flexible and resilient personality, openness, candidness, a non-authoritarian approach to problems; patience, a willingness to listen, a willingness to admit mistakes; a breadth of perspective about life, the role of the university and student affairs; and the physical and emotional stamina to endure sustained periods of stress and crises. Other important characteris- tics included the individual's potential for growth in the position, a desire to learn, enthusiasm and the ability and desire to use imaginative and innovative approaches to meeting student needs. Desirable characteristics included "being a good role model for students," including personal grooming, adult behavior, idealism, personal "well- roundedness," and a professional rather than a clock-hour orientation (8-5) toward one's work. Sex and race definitely entered into the factors considered important in selection. Analysis of data rela- tive to these two factors indicated that neither women nor Negroes compared favorably with Caucasian males when open- ings at.either the chief or other executive level positions occurred. In a large, public coeducational university respondents believed there should be at least one woman in an executive position, and a Negro "somewhere" in the administration but not necessarily. in the student affairs organization. If Negroes were in student affairs, respondents believed they could serve best in managerial and entry positions. 419 WOmen and Negroes were expected to have a particular concern for and involvement in, respectively, the problems and needs of women students and minority group students. When all the beliefs, attitudes and qualifications expressed by respondents in this study were considered against the numbers of women and diversity of students, including many racial minority students, in these institutions, the factors of sex and race 'would appear to act as "biasing agents" against the selection of an equivalently well-qualified woman or Negro as compared to a Caucasian male for chief student personnel officer or other executive student personnel position. Both the presidents and executive student personnel respondents were asked to specify which factors they believed 'were the most important in determining the acceptance of the selected chief student personnel officer by the student per- sonnel staff in their universities. Differences were not significant between the two university or four personnel groups. The following six clusters of factors were con- sidered.most important: (1) significant participation in some manner in the selection process by a majority of the student personnel staff; (2) selection of a courageous, confident, innovative and competent democratic leader; (3) an.individua1 who had respect for, confidence in and rapport with the student affairs staff as both professional workers and individuals; (4) an individual who possessed an educationally and experientially sound academic and pro- fessional background which was academically respectable and 420 inspired the confidence in and respect of other members of the university community; (5) an individual who evidenced respect for, faith in and a sensitivity to students, their needs and concerns and organized the student affairs resources in a manner calculated to best meet these needs; (6) an individual who provided his staff with some measure of job security by exercising due caution with regard to making initial major changes in the operation or organi- zational structure of the student affairs area. This sixth factor was of proportionately greater concern and import- ance to the female executive staff in both large and medium universities than to any other groups. The factors considered important to selection of per— sonnel at the executive level were the same ones considered of value to the selection of chief student affairs officers, ‘with the exception that there was less expectation of and emphasis on the possession of and degree of refinement of certain skills, personal characteristics and knowledges as evidenced by behavior in administrative, organizational and interpersonal experiences. Both the presidents and execu— tive respondents felt that executive level staff members were expected "to be gaining experience”. and preparing them- selves for future consideration for a position as a chief student personnel administrator. The presidents preferred executive student affairs staff to be 35-39 years of age at the time of intial appointment; while, executive staff felt that 35-50 years 421 of age were acceptable limits. Executive respondents, in contrast to the presidents, expanded their preferred major areas of study to include not only substantive and "solid" study in the Social/Behavioral Sciences but, also, more specific majors such as Counseling and Guidance, Student Personnel Administration and Higher Education. The execu- tives further expressed a preference for the undergraduate major field of study to evidence a strong academic back- ground in the liberal arts, humanities and social sciences. While previous college teaching experience was considered desirable by both groups, the executive respondents believed it was more important that the executive candidate have adequate credentials to qualify for teaching in the univer- sity as well as the potential to teach. When the factors considered by the executive respon- dents to be important in the selection of present and future executive student personnel administrators were compared to the beliefs of these respondents relative to the factors they felt were responsible for 32215 selection to their present executive positions some differences were noted. Previous experience in student personnel administration was believed to be the single most important factor in their selection; however, they felt (particularly medium univer- sity staff) that the personal characteristics possessed by the individual would be most important in the selection of a person in the present or future for an executive student affairs position. Other factors which they felt aided them 422 in obtaining their positions, but which were seemingly not as important to them for selection of executive student affairs staff included: experience at the same institution, including being known by or having good relationships with the student affairs staff, chief officer and/or president of that university; previous college teaching experience; previous experience in a non-student personnel field; and previous experience in the same type of job. Similarities of factors important in their selection and their view of those important in future selections included: previous administrative experience, possession of the Ph.D., good student/faculty respect and relationships, study in social/ behavioral sciences, and personality/character traits. Large university staff believed that experience at the same institution was somewhat more important, compared to medium university staff who felt that the possession of an earned doctorate was more important. The executive respondents were asked to describe their major job functions. These were compared with the criteria named by them as essential or important for any individual who might be considered for executive student affairs posi- tions. The investigator concluded that the general factors named as important in selection were appropriate to the effective performance of either a chief student personnel officer or an executive student affairs administrator. However, some of the more specialized responsibilities of these executive administrators, e.g. counseling, residence 423 hall programs, etc., would require that the individual executive have a more in-depth knowledge, understanding, experience and skills in these particular areas. There were few differences in the factors considered important in the selection of chief and executive student affairs administrators and those for managerial student personnel staff selection. The major difference was that a managerial student personnel administrator was expected to have a greater depth of knowledge, experience and skills in relation to the specialized area(s) of responsibility, e.g. housing, student activities, financial aids, etc. for which the individual was being considered for selection. Managerial student affairs administrators would need a more specialized in-depth background in one or more of the stu- dent personnel functional areas rather than the breadth of knowledge, perspective and more extensive experience in and refinement of general administrative skills expected of chief and other executive student affairs administrators. The preferred age range for managerial staff was 30-55 years at the time of selection. There was a definite preference for mature and competent young peOple as most managerial positions were viewed as "developmental" ones providing further experience for persons who might later aspire to executive administrative positions in student affairs. Unless the position was rather narrowly specialized and/or terminal, persons who were nearer the upper age limit ‘were not usually considered. 424 The earned doctorate was the preferred degree and essential for some positions, e.g. Director of Health or Counseling Service and, particularly preferred by male respondents and those in large universities; however, the masters degree plus administrative experience in student affairs was acceptable to half of those interviewed, parti- cularly female respondents and those in medium universities. Previous college administrative experience was important but, certainly not essential or very important to the selection of managerial staff. Public relations ability or communication skills was felt to be a most important factor in selection of a managerial student personnel administrator. Several respondents noted that this factor had become more important for managerial staff only in the 'past four to five years. Some believed that the degree of importance of this factor in the actual process of selec- tion was somewhat dependent on the nature of the responsi- Jbilities and the visibility of the particular managerial 3position. In general, chief and executive student affairs staff were expected to be competent in both external and internal communications; while managerial student personnel staff must be most competent in internal communications. Examination of the data revealed that executive :respondents believed it was more important to have women (and Negroes in managerial and entry level positions than .in.chief or executive student affairs positions. There was evidence of concern that a reasonable degree of sex/race 421) staff balance be obtained in these larger public, hetero- geneous, coeducational universities. Even in managerial and entry positions there was the implied expectation by some respondents that women and Negro staff members would be expected to effectively represent and provide assistance relative to the concerns, respectively, of women and minority group students in the university i2 addition to whatever regular responsibilities were a part of the parti- cular functional position for which they were employed. No such special responsibilities or expectations were held for Caucasian men appointed to the same or similar posi- tions. Additional factors were considered by many of these respondents in the case of a woman or Negro candidate seek- ing an executive position in student affairs. While these special factors were still considered in managerial and entry level appointments, they were of lesser importance for women candidates. The special criteria noted in rela- tion to Negro candidates were important at all student affairs levels. Two thirds of the executiverespondents would pro- .bably select a Caucasian male over a Caucasian female or a ZNegro for any student personnel position. When all the data were analyzed, and the conditions and qualifications examined, there still appeared to be some bias against the selection of a woman or Negro for student personnel adminis- 'trative positions. 426 The effect of student personnel administrative organi- zational structures on factors important in the selection of student personnel staff was examined.with these respondents. Four of the twelve or one-third of these universities, including one large and three medium universities had con- tinued what is known as a ''traditional" structure, while eight of the twelve or two-thirds of the universities were currently operating with the so-called "functional" struc- ture of organization. The data indicated that the kind of student personnel organizational structure--"traditional" or "functional'-- in existence in a particular university would have an effect on both the kind and degree of importance of certain factors considered in selection of candidates to fill positions in these universities. In the interests of effective indi- vidual performance and organizational operation, the compati- bility of the interests and needs of both the individual administrative candidate and the employer for the particular student personnel organization must be carefully considered in the selection process. With the possible exception of a few staff in three of the eight ”functional" student affairs organizations, all chief and executive student affairs respondents inter- viewed for this study could best be classified as “generalists" who would need to possess the factors previously Specified as important for chief and executive student affairs adminis- trators. The only difference was that those executive staff in "functional" organizations would, additionally, have some 427 specialized areas of responsibility that were related to specific student affairs areas affecting all students, as compared with executive staff in *traditional' organiza- tions whose primary specialized functions were on a sex/ related basis. Otherwise there was no significant differ- ence in other interests or qualifications expected of executive student personnel administrators when seeking such positions in these universities. The selection factors for managerial student personnel staff were most notably effected by the two different organi- zational structures. Universities employing a "traditional“ organization would tend to employ a candidate slightly older in age, more mature, with a broader and more comprehensive experience in student affairs and a greater breadth of perspective about the total student affairs operation and its role in the university. The candidate should have a particularly good understanding of the total environment of and resources available for the student at the university, including the effects of the residential life of the campus on the student. He must be able to relate well to all stu- dents, but most particularly those of the same sex. However, he must be able to work well with the opposite sex in resolving common problems and developing coeducational pro- grams. An individual in a "traditional" system.may have :more general autonomy and authority, but also greater reSpon- sibility to make concrete and valuable contributions to the ‘welfare and education of students. He must be comfortable 428 with a “generalist" role, be able to tolerate a certain amount of ambiguity, and manage broad responsibilities covering several areas at the same time. A managerial student personnel candidate for a posi- tion in a "functionally” structured organization must exhibit interest and depth of experience and expertise in, as well as aptitude for and competency in one or more specialized areas of student affairs. He might expect to have greater autonomy in one specialized area, to have more direct contact with students and staff, and be noticed and rewarded for his particular competency in a specialized area of work. However, he must be content to contribute a smaller "specific part” to the “whole" effort of the stu- dent affairs organization. The ‘functional' organizational structure had the advantage of permitting the most competent individuals to be employed in each position, regardless of the sex of the candidate. However, respondents noted that a greater numr ber of personnel were often required to staff a I'functional" student affairs organization than were needed in the "traditional" organization. The kind of organizational structure in existence at the university affected not only the employment, but, also, the promotion of individuals. Both lateral and vertical mobility, including advancement to executive positions,were felt to be easier for the individual student personnel administrator in an organization structured along "traditional" 429 lines. Personnel in ”functional” organizations were believed to be more readily "pigeon-holed" in more specialized areas of responsibility and, thereby, were deprived of the breadth of perspective, knowledge and experience needed for advance- ment from.manageria1 to executive positions in student affairs. The presidents and executive student personnel inter- viewed for this study were given the opportunity to make recommendations with regard to the desired education/pro- fessional preparation, employment and personal background experiences which they believed might better prepare an individual to become an effective student personnel adminis- trator in a public university. Their suggestions reflected their breadth of perspective and experience as well as depth of understanding of the problems and promise held in rela- -tion to contemporary American higher education. Their recommendations were believed to have merit and, hopefully, provide assistance to prospective and current professional practitioners in student personnel, as well as faculty- trainers and advisors of prospective professionals. Differ- ences were not significant between the two university or four personnel groups. Thus, these recommendations have been reported according to topic. lIt was notable that the majority of the presidential and executive student personnel administrative respondents Ibelieved that given "the right kind of person" in terms of maturity, character and personality, he could be trained 430 to do the job of a student affairs administrator, but the reverse was not true. They believed that no amount of training could help some persons; nor help Ell student affairs administrators to handle all situations that they might encounter in their work. These respondents did not believe that the best persons or potential student personnel administrators of today came either from an academic back- ground in Student Personnel Administration and/or Higher Education. They felt that some of these professional pro- grams were irrelevant to the contemporary needs and problems of students and universities, and thus, to the practitioner working with them. To some, the programs were too broad and theoretical, and to others, they were too narrowly specialized. These reSpondents noted that the recruitment and selection process for prospective student personnel adminis- trators should become more sophisticated. Some assessment should be made of the candidate relative to his possession of certain personal qualities, such as evidence of leader- ship ability, administrative potential, effective communica- tion skills; a person with a sensitive, flexible and human- istic approach to problems and people, one who had the personal qualities of self-confidence, self-understanding and maturity as reflected in his interactions with people and by consistent, predictable and reasonable behavior; and, jhad such character traits as integrity, conviction and loyalty. He should, further, evidence a desire to continue his professional growth. 431 The respondents, particularly the executive student personnel, suggested the need for a review and overhaul of the professional curricula in the graduate training pro- grams in student personnel administrations, keeping in mind the basic purpose of student personnel work in higher educa- tion--that of enhancing the development and self-understand- ing of individuals whether individually or in groups. They urged that more of the preparation relate to current issues and problems, involve the use of the "case study approach" in rational problem-solving, and practice in decisionemaking processes and skills, and yet, retain a broad versus too practically-oriented and narrow perspective. They felt that practitioners today needed vision, a breadth of experience and perspective. Training programs must ”gear up" to pro- duce both generalists and specialists. The prospective professional was believed to need better advisement in devising a program of study to best prepare him to meet his career objectives as well as the projected needs of this field. Several suggestions were put forth relative to the professional curricula. There was felt to be a need for a greater sensitization of students to an understanding of the collegiate community, its unique functions in society, the roles and concerns of the various groups within the university--students, faculty and administrators--and the kinds of learning environments present in these universities. Prospective professionals need to be knowledgeable about the 432 characteristics, needs and goals of contemporary youth, and college students in particular. They should be able to understand student activists, drop-outs, and those with. academic and emotional difficulties. They need be able to interpret current social trends and movements in society from a philosophical and historical perspective. Armed with this breadth of perspective and experience, a profes- sional should be able to reduce current anxieties about students, and the university, and serve as an interpreter of both to the larger society, in addition to influencing the course of events in the area of student affairs in the university. These respondents believed professional training pro- grams should include: a greater emphasis on procedural and substantive due process in relation to students and insti- tutions of higher education; provide training and experience in public speaking; leadership knowledge and skills; a greater understanding of the use of computers and data pro- cessing; an understanding of budget-making; and require a minimal amount of training in techniques and methods used in counseling and guidance. Further, the respondents urged greater depth and breadth, under more competent professional supervision, in practicums and internships. Both presidents and executive respondents felt that rotating internships (similar to those in medicine) might provide the diversity of experience and breadth of coverage needed by both gen- eralis ts and specialists . 43.) The respondents noted that current practitioners needed strong in-service training programs. These might include an understanding of university process, change procedures and an increased understanding of the value of built-in research and evaluation programs in improving the Operation of student affairs as a whole and its separate areas within. Current practitioners should evidence an interest in intellectual scholarship and continued profes- sional growth by keeping abreast of new developments and current problems in their field and in higher education by periodically taking graduate courses, attending workshOps, seminars and/or national professional association meetings. When queried relative to employment and/or personal background experiences of value to prospective and current student personnel administrators, the reSpondents believed that any experience providing opportunity for learning the administration and management of human resources was of worth. Teaching (at any level), high school and/or college counseling experience, employment in college residence hall programs, camp counseling and/or directing, federal govern- ment and/or foreign programs, e.g. VISTA or the Peace Corps, military services and personnel work in business and indus- try would all be valuable to the student personnel adminis- trator. They, further, felt that any paid or volunteer work or experience involving direct contact with people of all ages, socio-economic situations and varying life patterns and goals would be helpful. Any experience, particularly 4.54 with diverse groups of young people, whether it be in athletics, church work, service or youth clubs and other community activities, should enable the prospective or current professional to be more sensitive to, understand- ing of, and better able to communicate with all groups of students which make up the heterogeneous student populations of these larger public universities. The respondents noted that participation in travel, athletics, cultural and community activities of all kinds would be personal experiences of benefit to the professional in this field. Both the presidents and executive respondents noted the necessity for student personnel professionals to have a breadth and depth of "real world experience in life“ and understand as well the larger world outside of academia. Finally, the presidents noted that there was no substitute for the value of personal experience "in the school of hard knocks." They felt that student personnel administrators who had had to struggle for certain things and/or at cer- tain periods in their lives would evidence the greater sensitivity, understanding and empathy desired in work with others, especially young people who were, themselves, encountering personal difficulties and problems as they develOped and pursued a higher education. Possession of some or many of these recommended and desired background knowledges and experiences should not {only be valuable in the effective performance of one's ;professional responsibilities, but add immeasurably to the desirability of an individual who is under consideration for employment or promotion to a student personnel adminis- trative position. Conclusions The major concern of this research was to discover from the employers the general competencies--educational, employment, and personal characteristics--as well as back- ground experiences considered the most important factors involved in the actual selection of an individual for a particular kind and level of student personnel administra- tive position in a university. Secondarily, this study examined the process of selection including the personnel and procedures involved. The conclusions based on this and previous studies have significant implications for all those concerned with the effective selection and subsequent performance of stu- dent personnel administrators in the present and future in public coeducational.Midwestern universities with a popu- lation of 10,000 or more students. The information gained through this and other related research regarding criteria for employment and promotion in student personnel administration should aid motivation and improve the professional attitude of prospective and current practitioners as their professional preparation and personal and professional expectations can become more realistic, that is, rational and planned, in light of the findings of this and other studies. 436 The findings of this research revealed many areas of agreement (regarding procedures, personnel and factors believed to be important in selection) with those of pre- visous researchers and professional observers in the field of student personnel administration in higher education as noted in Chapter II-—A.Review of Related Literature. It would appear that expressed beliefs and attitudes may be a fairly accurate indicator of observed behavior in relation to procedures, personnel and some of the factors involved in selection of student personnel administrators. Such areas of agreement between previous research, observations of professionals and this study included: the importance of the factors of kind of control, type and size of the institution on selection process and criteria; the trend toward changes in organizational structures and titles for student personnel administrators; the problems and dif- ficulties inherent in generalist and specialist work roles in student personnel; agreement that the predominant pattern for filling vacancies in large or "Big Ten" institutions was promotion from within student personnel organizations, except that chief student personnel officers, although sel- ected from within the institution, frequently came from outside the student personnel organization; evidence to support the claims of many that there are "biases” involved in the employment and promotion of women and Negroes to higher level positions in student affairs; the importance of the previous experience of the candidate; the continuing 437 difficulty that student personnel deans have experienced in winning respect and acceptance of faculty and students and being viewed as academically respectable by faculty colleagues; agreement with regard to the general personal and profes- sional characteristics and attitudes needed by a student personnel administrator; a basic agreement on the core of, and emphases needed, in both undergraduate degree programs and professional preparation programs, as well as supple- mentary in-service training and professional association participation; the professional and desired personal experi- ences needed by prosPective and current practitioners; and, evidence that this field is in a process of maturation and has begun to develop consensus in fundamental areas, pro- viding a trend toward professionalization of student per- sonnel administration. The major areas of difference between this and pre- vious research and observation of professionals were as follows: (l) the tendency of previous research to infer the factors important for these personnel from background studies rather than by directly asking the employers what factors were important; (2) previous researchers and observers did not ascertain degree of importance or rela- tive value placed on various sources of candidates or fac- tors in selection preferred for candidates and practitioners; (3) the present study sought not merely to discover what sources and factors were important or should be important in selection of student personnel administrators, but why these 438 these factors were of importance; (4) this study, addi- tionally, explored the relationship of the organizational structure to individual potential for employment and promo- tion in the field; and (5) finally, this research directly explored the question of the existence of perceptual differ- ences among the personnel involved or responsible for the selection of personnel at the various levels in the selection process. The one area of substantial agreement in both kind and importance of factors was that related to personal character- istics, or more specifically, personality type. There was general agreement that if a person was too authoritarian, rigid, too judgemental, insensitive, overly sensitive, over- aligned with students, had a negative attitude, was unable to be objective and had too much concern for power, prestige and too great a need to manage others that such should be assessed prior to admission to programs of professional preparation; previous research tends to indicate that certain characteris- tics may be less amenable to change through professional pre- paration programs and/or in on-the—job experience. Minor differences between this and previous studies included: the seeming lack of role conflicts in this study relative to the various kinds and levels of administrative responsibility and, thus, the ability to determine some pro- fessional and employer consensus regarding the relative importance of the various factors for personnel at various levels of student personnel administrative positions; the degree of importance in this study of personal characteristics, the kind and level of educational preparation and previous experience, and the ability to gain and retain the respect of and rapport with all segments of the academic community compared to the seemingly greater importance of administrative and organizational skills as reflected in previous studies; and, finally, the finding by several previous researchers of a seeming lack of career commitment due to the fact that per- sonnel appeared to have been in their positions a relatively short time. This research provided substantial evidence of considerable previous experience and commitment to the field of student personnel administration by the majority of per- sonnel involved. The following were the conclusions of this study: (1) One of the most striking aspects of this study was the lack of significant differential perceptions between the four personnel groups and the two university groups in the kind, importance, and use of procedures, personnel, and factors in the selection process for student personnel administrators at the several levels of authority and responsibility studied. The differ- ences that did exist were rather subtle and those relating to the order of importance or relative value of a factor rather than the kind of factor for the three levels of student personnel work investigated. Since the investi- (gator believes that these personnel were representative of employers and practitioners in public universities above 10,000 in student population in higher education, it would 440 appear reasonable to conclude that it would be both feasible and desirable to have a consensus of belief and opinion on all phases of the selection process for chief officers, executive and managerial student personnel administrators related to their employment and promotion in public univer- sities. Such knowledge could lead to more realistic plan- ning, training and expectations among all those concerned with the employment or promotion of student personnel adminis- trators; (2) The slight perceptual differences which existed in the importance or relative value of various factors were a result, in part, of the position of the personnel—employers interviewed. There was a definite tendency for presidents and chief student personnel officers to appear more formal and removed from the selection process and to place greater value on appropriate credentials, including educational degree, major, and background and evidence of effective communication skills. In contrast, both male and female executive student personnel administrators assumed a more informal and personalized approach, evidencing greater con- cern relative to the individual's previous university administrative experience, leadership potential and, most ;particularly, his personal qualities and characteristics; (3) The respondents in this study had considerable previous experience in employment and promotion regarding the selection of personnel for all kinds and levels of student ;personnel positions; (4) Although, there were no clear -trends regarding the likelihood of more employment or more 441 promotion of personnel to higher level student personnel positions in these universities, an examination of the sources utilized to secure names and recommendations of candidates for managerial, executive and chief student per- sonnel administrative positions, as well as a review of the personnel and procedures involved in selection, provided evidence which indicated that large universities tended to promote personnel within their current student affairs organizations to higher level positions (except to the chief student personnel position) as frequently as they would employ personnel from outside their organization; while, medium universities tended to more frequently employ new personnel from outside their student affairs organizations; (5) It may be concluded that the process of selection for managerial, executive or chief student personnel officer involved basically six stages or procedures for the indi- vidual and the university; (6) The results of an analysis of the procedures and personnel involved in the selection process lead to the conclusion that the higher the level of the student personnel administrative position to be filled, the more rigorous and demanding was the selection process for both the individual candidates and the insti- tution involved. Additionally, the process was marked by the involvement of more and varied institutional personnel and more of those personnel holding higher status positions in the various areas with which the university was concerned. The greater the responsibility, authority and visibility 442 associated with the particular "open" position, the greater the care and caution exercised in selection; (7) One of the most notable discoveries made in this study was the fre- quency of use and value placed on the various sources available to universities seeking to fill student personnel administrative positions at the chief student personnel and executive administrative levels. The findings of this study appeared contrary to the major sources seemingly most currently utilized by candidates seeking these positions, i.e. professional organization placement bureaus, conven- tions and recommendations from faculty-trainers of profes- sionals in this field. The personnel in the universities in this study indicated that when seeking candidates to fill, particularly, executive or chief student affairs officer positions they would, first, seek recommendations from well-regarded current chief and executive student per- sonnel practicing administrators. The other sources were less frequently utilized. It may, thus, be concluded that it is important for potential candidates for university student personnel positions to become better acquainted with the well-regarded practicing executive administrators and chief student personnel officers and to endeavor to have frequent and pleasant associations with them. These practitioners in large measure hold the key to admission to candidacy for personnel interested in being considered for executive and chief student personnel administrative positions in public universities with student populations 443 above 10,000; (8) it was concluded that an individual cur- rently working in a similar kind and type of university-- public, coeducational above 10,000 in student population-- as those surveyed in this study, would have the best chance to be both recommended and selected for a higher level student personnel position in the future in a public university. This implied that any prospective professional who believed that he may someday wish to be a student per- sonnel administrator in a similar kind of university should attempt initially in his career to seek employment in a student personnel position in a similar kind and type of university and thereby begin to gain university administra- tive experience, which was the second most important factor in selection according to this study. Vertical mobility or employment in executive or chief student administrative positions is improbable for student personnel administra- tors who are without practical university experience in this field preceding the university job opening; (9) The factors important for selection of chief student personnel administrators were similar to those for other executive and managerial student personnel administrators. One dif- ference was the lesser expectation of employers that executive and managerial personnel would possess the same degree of knowledge, experience or refinement of skills as the chief officer. These factors decreased in their degree of importance progressively in descending order from chief student affairs officer to managerial student personnel 444 administrator. Both managerial and executive staff were considered to be "on their way up" in their professional development and continuing to gain greater knowledge, experience, and refinement of skills in order that they might at some time in the future qualify for a higher level position in the field; (10) One significant concern of these respondents when considering all the factors impor- tant in selection of a candidate for a positon was in finding I'the right kind of person" for the available posi- tion. These personnel gave top priority to the personal characteristics and personality type of the candidate. (These were described in detail in the Summary section of this chapter.) Many of the respondents believed that given ”the right kind of person" he could be taught the technical and administrative aspects of the position and become a competent student personnel administrator. However, the reverse was not felt to be true. These personal charac- teristics identified by the respondents were believed to be essential to effective and competent performance in student personnel positions in these universities. The presence or absence of these essential personal qualities was felt to be, perhaps, the best means for discriminating between two otherwise equivalently well-qualified candi- dates. This significant finding and the consensus evident relative to the desired personal characteristics implied that greater efforts should be made in screening persons with regard to their possession of these essential personal 445 and professional qualities both in the evaluation of candidates for admission to student personnel preparation programs as well as an on-going evaluation of these char— acteristics during such programs and prior to admission to practice in this field. In order to assess the presence or absence of such qualities, reliable and valid measures including the use of recommendations, testing, and observa- tion of behavior may need to be utilized. The development of new measures for screening purposes would, also, be desirable. Evidence indicated that there was a necessity to determine which of these essential personal and professional qualities could be influenced and/or developed in profes- sional training programs and by on-the—job experiences and which qualities were not amenable to change but must be initially possessed by the individual; (11) the results of this research indicated that the academic respectability of the candidate selected was one of the major concerns of all the employer-personnel interviewed in this study. The implication was that unless the individual had the essential academic credentials which would warrant the respect of the faculty, students and other administrators, he would not be able to adequately perform his job. This was particularly true for the chief student personnel officer. In order to be considered academically respectable, a candidate needed to have the earned doctorate, preferably the Ph.D., and preferably in a substantive area of the social/behavioral 44o sciences, e.g. Psychology, Sociology, Political Science, etc. A.major in Student Personnel Administration and/or Higher Education was not considered necessary by most respondents or even desirable by some for either executive and most especially, chief student personnel-Officers. This finding would appear to lend support to those pro- fessional observers who have noted the tendency for an individual to be selected to fill the position of chief student personnel officer despite the lack of any profes- sional study in Student Personnel Administration; (12) The importance of good communication skills and potential for positive public relations was found to be an essential factor in the selection of an individual to fill student personnel administrative positions. While skills in both internal and external communication had been important in the selection of chief officers and executive level student personnel administrators previously; such skill, particu- larly in internal communications was deemed to be of increasing importance to any individual currently seeking a managerial level position. It was apparent from this, and previous studies and professional writing that little or no effort had been directed toward the improvement of communication skills--particularly verbal skills--in the training, preparation or in-service training of personnel in this field; (13) This investigation revealed that 30 years of age was the minimum age acceptable to most employer- respondents for managerial level position candidates; 44/ while, 35 years of age was the minimum acceptable for executive and chief student personnel officer candidates. While the respondents indicated a preference for youth and appeared to be more concerned with the personal maturity of the individual than his age, such suggested age minimums would appear to relate to the degree of administrative experience preferred for candidates for these positions. The investigator could only conclude that despite the possession of most or all of the designated essential qualities, including the earned doctorate in an appropriate field of study and previous university adminis- trative experience, an individual who was under the minimum age limits, as ascertained in this study, was unlikely to be selected for a managerial or executive position in student affairs in a public, coeducational university with a p0pulation of 10,000 or more students. This conclusion . has implications for the faculty advisors of prospective student personnel administrators. Likewise, one beyond the age of 50 may be handicapped in being considered for an executive or managerial position in a public coeducational university; (14) It may be concluded that both sex and race biases exist and affect the individual's potential selection as a practitioner in student personnel at the executive and chief student personnel administrative posi- tions. Evidence would indicate that a well-qualified woman or a Negro would less likely be selected to fill these positions regardless of the current social and institutional 448 conditions in existence at any particular time. However, equivalently well-qualified women and Negroes would appear to have almost an equal chance with Caucasian males to be selected for managerial and, particularly, for entry-level positions in these larger, public, coeducational universi- ties. The opportunities for Negroes today are viewed as better than ever; because student protest in these insti- tutions is felt to revolve around and/or include in large measure the dissatisfaction of and discrimination against as well as lack of understanding of Negroes and other minority group students in the academic community and society at large. This investigation further revealed that when women or Negroes are considered foremployment or pro- motion in student affairs organizations in these universi- ties, for about 50 percent of the employers they are sub- ject to special criteria in addition to that of a Caucasian male for the same position, and as well, are expected to serve additional functions such as that of being a focus of and aid to women students for women administrators and serving as a representative of and providing assistance to minority group students for a Negro administrator in addition to whatever functional responsibilities may be assigned to the particular student personnel administrative position. Two major conclusions that emerged from this investigation included first, the fact that there was a considerable degree of student unrest and protest existing in many of these larger public universities and this fact, served, in 449 part, to mitigate against the selection of well-qualified women to fill top level positions in student affairs. Secondly, there was a definite lack of well-qualified and professionally trained and experienced Negro candidates for positions in student personnel today and this served to limit the number of Negroes that could and would be qualified to be hired to work in this area; (15) It was noted that while the student personnel organizational structure in existence in two-thirds of these universities was of the so-called "functional” type, the majority of respondents in this study believed that this type of structure served as a limiting factor in the professional and personal growth opportunities for entry and managerial personnel working within it. They felt that these personnel, perhaps, were too narrowly Specialized and had a limited breadth of perspective and experience covering all areas of student personnel administration and, thus, would be less likely to be considered for employment or promotion to higher level positions which required more of a "generalist" approach and background such as those of an executive or chief stu- dent personnel administrator. The "traditional" system of organization in student affairs, while in existence in only one-third of these universities, was not believed to limit the individual's potential for either lateral or vertical xmobility as did the "functional" structure. This finding leads one to conclude that perhaps student personnel organi- zational structures need to be re-examined and/or new 450 organizational structures developed which would provide the individual practitioner with the variety of experiences and breadth of knowledge and perspective necessary for future professional and personal growth and potential for upward mobility; (16) The most frequent recommendation of the employer-reSpondents in this study was the need for more extensive, varied and better supervised practicum and internship experiences for prospective student personnel administrators. Available evidence from previous studies, and as indicated here, leads one to conclude that most practicum and internship experiences now provided in student personnel preparation programs are lacking in the amount of time involved, breadth and depth of coverage of the various areas, actual personal and professional experience with students rather than observation of the work of others with students, and, finally, inadequate supervision of and con- sultation with individual trainees by practitioners serving as their supervisors and consultants in these Specialized areas. Perhaps, consideration should be given to the development of a post-M.A. practicum and/or a post-doctoral year long internship in order to provide the individual professional with a sound basis and adequate experience necessary for actual practice in the field; (17) This investigation revealed a very contemporary orientation rela- tive to the selection of student personnel administrators to serve in public universities in this day and time. This contemporary orientation was reflected in the procedures 451 utilized as well as the relative value placed on certain factors related to the selection of student personnel administrators for the present and future. There ig evidence from previous research, professional observation and from one section in this study relative to the change in importance of factors as a result of time lapse (see Chapter IV) which indicates that the basic pro- cedures and factors cited as important ones in the selection process for student personnel administrators were also important as selection factors in the past and quite likely to be so in the future. The change is not likely to be in the kind of factors important in the selection of these personnel but, in the degree of importance or relative value of those factors in selection. The degree of value of any particular factor is, thus, in part, dependent on or influ- enced by the concerns, needs, and problems present in higher education and in that particular institution in that period of history at the time the selection must be made. Recommendations The recommendations made in this section were of two kinds; first, those relating to areas of the process, which :might profitably be further explored in order to gain greater knowledge which may aid in the better selection of prospective candidates for admission to preparation programs and.their subsequent advisement in the programs, as well as, hopefully more competent practitioners in the field. 452 The second recommendations relate to potentially valuable methods and kinds of procedures in research which may provide further information relative to the selection of student personnel administrators for various kinds and types of positions in institutions of higher education. There was some necessary overlap in these two areas of recommendations. A 7 Recommendations relating to areas of the selection process needing further study were as follows: (1) Study is needed to determine which of the preferred professional and personal characteristics, as discovered in this and pre- vious studies, can successfully be developed or influenced through programs of professional preparation and/or by on-the- job experience and which of these qualities are less amenable to change or influence through such preparation and/or practi- cal experience and, thereby, must be initially possessed by the individual prior to admission to programs of professional preparation. Those characteristics found to be amenable to change may then be adOpted as behavioral objectives in student personnel preparation programs and, perhaps, for current prac- titioners in in-service training programs, seminars and insti- tutes. When it is determined which essential characteristics and qualities must be initially possessed by the individual because they do not appear amenable to change, such knowledge can then be employed in the assessment of individuals for admission to training programs and to counsel out persons already in these programs from continuing study and future 453 work in this field. The current research was a step in this direction; however, this study taken with previous research and the careful observations of professionals should enable some consensus to be achieved by professional trainers and practitioners in terms of the relative value of the various qualities and experiences necessary to competent and satis- fying professional performance in the various kinds and levels of administrative positions in this field in relation to employment in public universities; (2) Researchers need to devote time and effort to the development of reliable instru- ments and the refinement of available ones which Show pro- mise of helping to operationally define those characteristics which would appear to be related to effectiveness in student personnel administration; (3) Further, if the selection fac- tors noted in this study are to become promising predictors of effective performance of student personnel administrators in public universities, they Should be validated in that setting. That is, individuals selected to fill various kinds and levels of student personnel positions in public universities should be subsequently evaluated in the per- formance of their duties in order to determine if the cri- teria employed in the selection of these individuals is a valid predictor of effective or competent performance in those positions. The criteria can, thus, be changed, eliminated or additional factors added according to the results of the post-selection evaluation; (4) It is sug- gested that further research might also be directed toward 454 determining which of the better personnel selection prac- tices employed in business management may be of value in the recruitment, screening, and evaluation during profes- sional training and, subsequently, of on-the-job perform- ance for student personnel administrators in public univer- sities. Admittedly, there are different goals and environ- ments in business organizations as compared to institutions of higher education. However, there are, also, Similarities such as their common responsibility to the public and most notably, the organizational size of both enterprises. The findings of this and other studies along with the accomplish- ment of the above recommendations should serve to aid in the establishment of a basis for both the accreditation of professional preparation programs as well as the certifica- tion of individual practitioners for specific kinds and levels of student personnel positions. This study, hopefully, provides one more step toward further professionalization of this field; (5) There is an increasing need for some determination of the most effective, productive and personally and professionally satisfying organizational structure(s) to be utilized in student personnel services in public univer- sities. The so-called "functional" structure which iS most in evidence today in larger public universities appears to seriously limit, by its more Specialized nature, both the lateral and vertical mobility of the individual student per- sonnel practitioner working within it, and, thereby, the individual's personal and professional growth; (6) Finally, 455 a most obvious need is an investigation to determine the probability of more promotion of personnel to higher level positions in these universities. No clear trends were in evidence from this study and such information would enable practitioners in these institutions to plan their profes- sional careers accordingly. The second phase of recommendations relates to methodo- logical areas of potential value in the quest to learn more about all phases and factors bearing on the selection of student personnel administrators: (7) If the present study were to be replicated, it is suggested that certain methodo- logical procedures be modified. The basic procedures which should be retained in a similar exploratory study include the use of the stratified random sample, the assistance of a well-regarded Sponsor, the structured interview which is invaluable and should be utilized in more student personnel research, the use of a "Conceptual Model," the use of inter- view schedules, the pilot study, and the "professional judges" to help objectify a study of a rather subjective nature; reasons for this recommendation and the advantages of these methods have been provided in Chapter III--Methodology. It should be noted that an exploratory study seeks not only to determine what exists but, also, why. The procedures utilized in this study were deemed effective for these pur- poses. Four areas where changes would be indicated for similar future studies relate to the objectives, the inter- view schedules, and the analysis of data, in the development and conduct of such a study. More Specifically: (a) the current study was too large in terms of manageable objectives. It attempted not only to determine factors and procedures important to presidents and executive student personnel administrators of the two university groups, but to also determine perceptual differ- ences between the three groups of executive level student r personnel administrators. The latter determination might better have been the subject of a second or a later study, r perhaps, of a survey nature, after the initial factors were determined. Such a change would have made this study more manageable and reduced the time necessary to its com- pletion; (b) although the interview schedules were initially developed by the investigator and refined after their use in a pilot study prior to conducting the actual investigation, subsequent results as determined in the process of analyzing the data provided some evidence that certain of the questions might be eliminated and some (as noted in Chapters IV and V) need further refinement for the sake of clarity, Specificity and to reduce further any implied threat, leading or slant- ing of questions, or other directional biases which might affect the results; (c) the analysis of data was extremely involved and time-consuming. However, the purpose of this study was exploratory and because of this, as well as the size of the sample and type of data collected statistical 457 analysis was not advisable. The investigator suggests that in similar future research the size of sample should be reduced and the areas of exploration limited; or both might be the same or increased if there were several conducting the research, perhaps, with each person assigned to work specifically with only one or two phases of the research project and with several assigned to the various areas in the analyses of the data; (8) It is recommended that the information gained in this exploratory study, along with that of previous research, observation on selection, and demographic information available concerning student per- sonnel administrators, may be used in future research to establish statistically testable hypotheses for further study in the area of employment and promotion of student personnel administrators; and finally, (9) The investigator believes that since the area of the selection of student personnel administrators is a relatively unexplored one with considerable potential for assisting individual pro- fessionals and enabling greater professionalization of the field, consideration should be given to developing and con- ducting a national study in this area. Many of the pro- cedures utilized in this study would be useful on a larger scale; however, the project would require adequate financial 458 support and a number of personnel to plan and conduct it. Such a study might be similar in its descriptive value to that conducted by Ayers, Tripp and Russel (1966) for the U. S. Office of Education. However, it should include a search for the "why" or reasons behind the criteria chosen as well as the “what" relating to the selection process. For this reason, the structured interview would appear to be the best method for collecting the desired data. Pre- ferably, such an investigation Should include study of selection of student personnel administrators for all kinds of institutions of higher education, e.g. junior and com- munity colleges, senior colleges and private universities and institutions representative of all geographic regions of the united States. BIBLIOGRAPHY 459 BIBLIOGRAPHY A.P.G.A. Inter-Divisional Committee Report. Washington, D.C.: American Personnel and Guidance Assn., 1966. (Mimeographed.) Argyris, Chris. ”Creating Effective Relationships in Organizations," Chapter X. Human Organization Research. Edited by R. N. Adams and J. J. Preiss. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, Inc., 1960. Argyris, Chris. Integrating the Individual and the Organizatigg. New York, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1964. Armacost, Peter H. ”A House Divided." Journal of the Association of Deans and_Administrators of Student Affairs, VOl. 2, No. 34(January, 1965), pp. 3-9. Ayers, Archie A.; Tripp, Philip A.; and Russel: John A- Student Services Administration in Higher Educatigg. Washington, D.C.: Bulletin No. 16, U.S. Office of Education, 1966. Back, Kurt W. ”The Well-Informed Informant," Chapter XV. Human Organization Research. Edited by R. N. Adams and J. . Preiss. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, Inc., 1960. Barry, Ruth and Wolf, Beverly. Modern Issues in Guidance-- Personnel WOrk. New York, New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, second printing, 1963. Barton, Allen H. Or anizational Measurement and Its Bearing on the Study of College Environments. New York, New York: College Entrance Examinatian Board, Research Monograph No. 2, 1961. 460 461 Bentz, V. Jon. “The Sears Experience in the Investigation, Description, and Prediction of Executive Behavior,” Chapter VII. Measuring Executive Effectiyeness. Edited by Frederic R. Wickert and Dalton E. McFarland. New York, New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts, 1967, pp. 147-205. Bereleson, Bernard. ”Content Analysis," Chapter XIII. Handbook of Social Psychology. Edited by Gardner Lindzey, Vol. I, Part 3. New York, New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, second printing, 1956, pp. 488-522. Bess, James J. and Lodahl, Thomas M. ”Career Patterns and Satisfactions in University Middle Management." A preliminary report, Cornell University, 1967. Bingham, Walter; Van Dyke, Moore; Bruce, Victor; and Gustad, John W. ggw to Integyiew. New York, New York: Harper and Brothers, Inc., fourth edition, 1959. Bonner, Hubert. "Human Relations in Industry," Chapter VIII, Part VI. Management and the Behavioral Sgiences: Text and Readings. Edited by Maneck S. Wadia. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968, pp. 149-166. Borg, Walter. EducationalpResearch: An Introduction. New York, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1926. Boykin, L. L. ”Who Should Do What? The Allocation of Duties and Responsibilities Among the Personnel Deans." Educational Administration and Su ervision, V01. 41, No. 7 (November, 1955), pp. 397-401. Budd, Richard W.; Thorp, Robert K.; and Donohew, Lewis. Contgnt Analysis of Communications. New York, New York: The MacMillan Company, 1967. Burns, Gerald P., Ed. Administrators in Higher Education. New York, New York: Harper and Brothers, Inc., 1962. Bursch, Charles W. I'The Vice President or Dean of Students,” Chapter 9. Administrators in Higher Education. Edited by Gerald P. Burns. New York, New York: Harper and Brothers, Inc., 1962, pp. 141-155. 462 Cameron, Alexander Robert. "An Analysis of the Interests, Educational Preparation, and V0cational Background of Student Personnel Deans.“ Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1965. Dissertation Abstracts, XXVIII (Part 2, 1967), pp. 1226Ar1227A. Caplow, Theodore. ”The Dynamics of Information Inter- viewing.“ The American Journal of Sociolo , V01. 62, No. 2 (September, 1956), pp. 165- 71. Careers in College Student Personnel work. A brochure prepared by the Commission on Professional Develop- ment of the Council of Student Personnel Associa- tions in Higher Education, APGA Publication Sales, 1605 New Hampshire Avenue, Washington, D.C., 1965. Cheatham, Anne Loring Smith. I"Student Personnel W0rk as a Career: A Study of Members of the American College Personnel Association in Terms of Selected Demographic Data, Background Factors and Percep- tions of the Field." unpublished Ed. D. disserta- tion, Columbia University, 1964. Cosby, Betty. “Professional Preparation for Student Personnel Work in Higher Education. Journal of 593 National Association of W0men Deans and Counselors, V01. 29, No. 1 (Fall, 1965), pp. 14-18. COSPA Proposal for College Student Personnel Professional Preparation: .A Special Report. Revised by members of the Commission on ProfesSiSnal Development of the Council of Student Personnel Associations in Higher Education, November 17, 1964, Chicago, Illinois. Cowley, W. H. "Reflections of a Troublesome but Hopeful Rip van Winkle." Journal of College Student Personnel, V01. 6, No. 2 (December, 1964), p . 66-73. Cummin, Pearson C. 'T.A.T. Correlates of Executive Per- formance." Journal of Appligd Psychology, V01. 51, No. 1 (February, 1967), pp. 78-81. Dohrenwend, Barbara S. and Richardson, Stephen A. I'A Use for Leading Questions in Research Interviewing.” Human Organization, V01. 23, No. 1 (Spring, 1964), pp. 76-77. 463 Dunnette, Marvin D. "A Modified Model for Test Validation of Selection Research.“ Journal of Ap lied Psychology, V01. 47, No. 5 (October, 19 3 , pp. 317-323. Dunnette, Marvin D. "Predictions of Executive Success," Chapter I. Measuring Executive Effectiveness. Edited by Frederic R. Wickert and Dalton E. McFarland. New York, New York: Appleton-Century- CroftS, 1967, pp. 7-48. Dutton, Thomas B.; Appleton, James R.; and Birch, Edward E. "Assumptions and Beliefs of Selected Members of the Academic Community." A special report of the National Association of Student Personnel Adminis- trators, Division of Research and Program Develop- ment, Monograph No. 3, April, 1970. Edwards, Al1en L. Techniques of Attitude Scale Construc- tion. New York, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957. Farnsworth, Dana L. "Personality Problems for Deans." Journal of the National Association of ngen Deans and Cognselors, Vol. 22, No. 4 (June, 1959), pp. 178-183. Feder, Daniel D. "The Emerging Role of the Professional Personnel Worker," Chapter VIII. Personnel Services in Education, 58th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1959, pp. 181—209. Fenlason, Anne F. Essentials in Interviewing. Revised edition by Grace Beals Ferguson and Arthur C. Abrahamson. New York, New York: Harper and Row, Inc., 1962. Ferguson, Lawrence L. "Better Management of Managers' Careers." Harvard Business Review, V01. 44 (March- April, 19667} PP. 139-152. Fiedler, Fred E. "Engineer the Job to Fit the Manager." Harvard Business Review, V01. 43 (September-October, 1965), PP. 115-122. 464 Fiedler, Fred E. "Style or Circumstance: The Leadership Enigma." Psychology Today, V01. 2, No. 10 (March, 1969), PP. 38—43. Fincher, Cameron. "Planning for Students." The Adminis— trative Team and LongrRange Planning Institute of— Higher Education. Edited by G. Drewery. Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press, 1967. Fitzgerald, Laurine Elisabeth. "A Study of Faculty Per- ceptions of Student Personnel Services." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1959. Fitzgerald, Laurine E. and Belson, Beverly A. "A Student Personnel Organizational Patterns Survey." A.study in progress for the National Association of women Deans and Counselors, 1969. Foy, James Edgar V. "Career Patterns of Student Personnel Administrators." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1969. Frantz, Thomas T. "vocational Development of Student Personnel workers." Personnel and Guidance Journal, V01. 47, No. 6 (February, 1969), pp. 537-542. French, Arden 0. "Student Activities and Faculty Rela— tionships.” Journal of the Association of Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs, V01. 2, No. 3 TEanuary, 1965), pp. 9-14. French, wendell. The Personnel Management Process: Human Resources Adminigtratigg. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton-Mifflifi Co., 1964. George, Alexander L. "Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Content Analysis," Chapter I. Trends in Contegt Analysis. Edited by Ithiel De Sola Pool. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1959. Ghiselli, Edwin E. "Interaction of Traits and Motivational Factors in the Determination of the Success of Managers." Journal of Applied Ps cholo , V01. 52, No. 6 (December, 1968), pp. 480-383. Grant, Donald L.; Katkovsky, Walter; and Bray, Douglas W. "Contributions of Projective Techniques to Assess- ment of Management Potential." Journal of Applied Psychology, V01. 52, No. 3 (June, 1967), pp. 226-232. 465 Greenleaf, Elizabeth. "Who Should Educate the College Student Personnel worker and to What End?" Journal of the Association of Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs, V01. 6, No. 1 (July, 1968), pp. 29-32. Gusfield, Joseph R. "Field W0rk Reciprocities in Studying a Social Movement," Chapter IX. Human Organization Research. Edited by R. N. Adams and J. J. Preiss. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, Inc., 1960. Haller, Lola M. ”The Future Role of the Highest Ranking W0man Student Personnel Administrator in the College or University and a Suggested Training Program." Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Hargrove, Hayward W., Jr. "The Personal Characteristics, Background, and Role of the Chief Student Personnel Directors in Universities and Senior Colleges Which are Members of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Mississippi, 1969. Hoyt, Donald P. and Tripp, Philip A. "Characteristics of ACPA Members.“ Journal of College Student Personnel, V01. 8, No. 1 (January, 1967), pp. 32- 39. Hulet, Richard E. "Perils of a Placement Office." Journal of the Association of Deans and Administra- tors of Student Affairs, Vol. 3, No. 4 (April, 1966), pp. 13-14. Hyman, Herbert H., et al. Interviewing in Social Research. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1954. Ingraham, Mark H. The Mirror of Brass: The Compensation and W0rking Conditions of College and University Administratggg, Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1968. .Jennings, Eugene E. The Mobile Manager: A Study of the New Generation of Tgp Executives. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Bureau of Industrial Relations, Graduate School of Business Administration, the University of Michigan, 1967. Kahn, Robert L. and Cannell, Charles F. The Dynamics of Interviewing: Theory, Techniques an Cases. T 1rd Edition. New York, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1959. 466 Katzell, Raymond A.; Barrett, Richard S.; and vann, Donald H. “Organizational Correlates of Executive Roles." Journal of A lied PS chol , V01. 52, No. 1 (February, 1968;, pp. 22-28. Kaufman, Helen M. "The Status of women in Administration in Selected Institutions of Higher Education in the United States." Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, New York University, 1961. Keller, Leonard I. ”Evaluation of a Student Personnel Training Program Through the Opinions of its Trainees.” Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1962. Kerlinger, Fred N. Foundations of Behavigrgl Research. New York, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965. Kinda11,A1va F. and Gatza, James. "Positive Programs for Performance Appraisal. ” Harvard Business Review, V01. 41 (November-December, I963 3), PP. 153—166. Kinnane, Mary. "The Undergraduate's Perception of the Dean of women." Journal of the National Association of W0men Deans and Counselors, V01. 29, No. 3 (Sprin , 1966). pp. 122—128. Koenig, Willa Lisette. ”The Dean of W0men: Ideal and Actual Perceptions of Role." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1964. Kornhauser, Arthur and Sheatsley, Paul B. 'Quesionnaire Construction and Interview Procedure," Appendix C. Research Methods in Social Relations. Edition by Clair Sellitz, Marie Jahoda, Morton Deutsch, and Stuart W. Cook. New York, New’York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962, pp. 546-587. Lawler, Edward E., III. "The Multitrait-Multirater Approach to Measuring Managerial Job Performance.” Journal of A lied Psychology, V01. 51, No. 5 (Octdber, 1967), pp. 369-381. Lee, W. Storrs. God Bless OurQueer Old Dean. New York, New York: G. P. Putnast Sons, 1959. Lewis, Edwin C. Developing W0man's Potential. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University, 1968. 467 Macoby, Eleanor F. and Macoby, Nathan. "The Inverview: A Tool of Social Science," Part III. 'HapdbOOk of Social Psychology, V01. 1. Edited by Gardner Lindzey. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1954, pp. 449-484. Mandell, Milton M. The Selection Process: Choosing the Right Man for {He Job. New York, New York: Amefi- can Management Association, Inc., 1964. McBee, Mary Louise. "The Role of the Dean of W0men in Selected Institutions of Higher Learning." Unpub- lished Ph. D. dissertation, The Ohio State Univer— sity, 1961. Merton, R. K.; Fiske, Marjorie; and Kendall, Patricia L. The Focused Interview. New York, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1961. Miller, Theodore K. ”College Student Personnel Prepara- tion--Present Perspective and Future Directions.“ Journal of the Association of Deans and Administra- tors of73tudent Affairs, VOITi4, No. 4 (April, ID‘ETY. pp. 177—14 . Millet, John D. The Academic Community: An Essa on Organization. New York, New York: McGraw—HilI Book Company, Inc., 1962. Mueller, Kate Hevner. Student Personnel work in Higher Education. Boston, Massadhusetts: Houghton— Mifflin Company, 1961. Mueller, Kate Hevner. "Three Dilemmas of the Student Personnel Profession and Their Resolution." Journal of the National Association of wgpen Deans and gounselors, Vol. 29, No. 2 (Winter, 1966), pp. 81-92. Nash, Allan N. “Development of an SVIB for Selecting Managers." {pprnal of Applied Psychology, V01. 50, No. 3 (June, 1966), pp. 250-254. Nygreen, Glen T. "Professional Status for Student Person- nel Administrators." Journal of thepéssociation of Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs, V01. 5, No. 3 (January, 1968), pp. 283-291. Oldfield, R. C. The Psychology of the Interview. Third Edition. London, England: Methuen and Company, 468 Oppenheim, A. N. Qpestionnaire Design and Attitude Mea- surement. New York, New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966. Osgood, Charles. "The Representational Model and Relevant Research Methods," Chapter II. Trends in Content Anal sis. Edited by Ithiel De Sola Pool. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1959. Payne, Stanley L. The Art of_Askipg Questions. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1951. Penney, James F. "Student Personnel work: A Profession Stillborn." Personnel and Guidance Journal, V01. 47, No. 10 (June, 1969), pp. 958-962. Rhatigan, James J. and Hoyt, Donald P. ”Student Personnel Administration: Faculty-Trainer Perceptions and the Reality of Practice.” Journal of the_§ssociation of Deans and Adminisppators of_§tudent Affairs, V01. 7, No. 3 (January, 19707, pp. 156—163. Richardson, Stephen A. "A Framework for Reporting Field- Relations Experiences," Chapter XI. Human Organiza- tion Research. Edited by R. N. Adams and J. J. Preiss. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, Inc., 1960. Richardson, Stephen A.; Dohrenwend, Barbara S.; and Klein, David. Interviewing: Its Forms and Functions. New York, New York: Basic BoOks, Inc.,—1 5. Riesman, David. ”The Collision Course of Higher Educa— tion.” Journal of CollegeStudent Personnel, V01. 10, No. 6 (November, 1969), pp. 363-369. Rose, Harold M. "An Appraisal of the Negro Educator's Situation in the Academic Marketplace.” Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Winter, 1966), pp. 18-26. Rothman, Leslie K. and Keenen, Charles D. ”Machines, People and Ideas: In Quest of Clarification of the Role of the Professional Student Personnel W0rker." Journal of the Asspciation of Qeans and Administra- tors of Student Affairs, V01. 7, No. 3 (January, 1970TI Pp. 143-156. Rourke, Francis E. and Brooks, Glenn E. The Managerial Revolution in Higher Education. Baltimore, Maryland: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1966. 469 Schultz, Raymond E. "Preparation of College and Univer— Sity Administrators.” 'Phi‘Delta'Kappan, V01. 54, No. 7 (March, 1968), pp. 390—394? Schutz, William C. "Reliability, Ambiguity, and Content Analysis." Psychological Review, V01. 59, No. 2 (March, 1952), pp. 119-129. Sellitz, Claire; Jahoda, Marie; Deutsch, Morton; and Cook, Stuart W. Research Methods in Social Relations. Revised one-volume edition. New York, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962. Shaffer, Robert H. "Effect of Large Enrollments on Student Personnel Services." Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 37, No. 9 (May, 1959), pp. 626-632. Shaffer, Robert H. "Issues and Problems in the Organiza- tion, Administration and Development of College Student Personnel Programs in the Years Ahead,“ Chapter I. College Studgpt Personnel'Work in the Esprs Ahead. Edited by Gordon K10pf. washington, D.C.: ACPA Monograph No. 7, 1966, pp. lv9. Shaffer, Robert H. "Meeting the Challenges of Today's Students." Journal of theéssociation of'Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs, V01. 4, No. 4 (April, 1967), pp. 177-182. Shelden, Miriam A. "Contemporary Challenge to Traditional Concepts." Journal of the Association of DeanS'and Administrators of Student Affairs, V01. 6, No. 1 (July, 1968), PP- 3-9. Sherburne, Paul Rogers. "Rates and Patterns of Mobility of Student Personnel Administrators: A Pilot Study in the Western Conference Institutions of Higher Education." Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Michi— gan State University, 1968. Spencer, Louise walcutt. "Eleven Years of Change in the Role of Deans of W0men in Colleges, Universities and Teachers Colleges." Journal of the National Association of womgn Deansgnd_§ounselors, V01. 14, No. 2 (January, 1951f} pp. 51—83. Stempel, Guido H., III. "Increasing Reliability in Con- tent Analysis." Journalism Quarterly, V01. 32, No. 4 (1966), PP. 449-455. 470 Tannebaum, Robert; weschler, Irving R.; and Massarik, Fred. Leadership and organization: 'A Behavioral Science A roach. New York, New York: McGraw- Hill Book, Co., Inc., 1961. Thrash, Patricia A. "The Changing Role of the Student Personnel Dean." Journal of the National'Associa- tion of women Deanstand Counselors, V01. 29, No. 1 (Fall, 1535). pp- 10-13. ‘ Trueblood, Dennis L. "ACPA President's Message: The College Student Personnel Leader of the Future is an Educator.” Journal of College Student Personnel, V01. 5, No. 3 (March, 1964), pp. 186-i88. Trueblood, Dennis L. "The Educational Preparation of the College Student Personnel Leader of the Future,” Chapter X. College Student Personnel W0rk in the Years Ahead. Edited by Gordon K10pf. WaShihgton, D.C.: ACPA M0nograph No. 7, 1966, pp. 77-84. Upcraft, M. Lee. "Role Expectations for Chief Personnel Administrators in Large Universities." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Useem, Ruth Hill. "Professionalizing an Academic Occupa- tion: The Case of Student Personnel W0rk.” Journal pf the National Association of W0menygeanS'an Counselors, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Winter, 1964), pp. -101. Vidich, Arthur and Bensman, Joseph. "The validity of Field Data," Chapter XVI. Human Orranization Research. Edited by R. N. Adams and J. J. Preiss. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, Inc., 1960. ‘Whyte, William F. "Interviewing in Field Research,‘ Chapter XXVII. Human Organization Research. Edited by R. N. Adams and J. J. Preiss. HomewoodeIllinois: The Dorsey Press, Inc., 1960, pp. 352-374. Williamson, E. G. Student Personnel Services in Colleges and Universities. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1961. ‘W00dburne, Lloyd S. ”Dean of Students Office," Chapter XI. Princi les of Colle e and Universit Adminis- tration. Palo Alto, California: Stanford Univer- sity Press, 1958. SUPPLEMENTARY REFERENCES Adams, Arthur S. "The Role of the Dean of W0men on the College Campus." Journal of the National_Associa- tion of women Deans and Counselors, V01. 26, No. 1 (OCtBber, 1962), pp. 20-2 . American Personnel and Guidance Association. "Ethical Standards." Personnel_and Guidance Journal, V01. 40, No. 2 (October, 1961), pp. 206-209. American Women. Report on the President's Commission on the Status of W0men. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963. American women, 1963-1968. Report of the Interdepartmental Committee on the Status of W0men. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968. Argyris, Chris. Personalipy and Organization: The Con- glict Between the System and the Individual. New Yofk, New York: Harper and Row, Inc., I957. Ashby, Eric. ”The Administrator: Bottleneck or Pump?" Daedalus. Journal of the Academy of Arts and Sciences (Spring, 1962), pp. 264-278. Banta, Trudy W. ”Selecting Student Orientation Assistants: A Comparison of Approaches." Journal of Colle e Student Personnel, V01. 10, No. 4 (July, I969), pp. 240-243. Bennis, Warren G. Changing Organizations: Essays on the Development and EvolutiOn of Human Organization. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1966. .Bernard, Jessie. Academic Women. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1964. 471 472 Caplow, Theodore and McGee, Reece J. The Academic Market- place. New York, New York: BasiE'BookS, Inc., 1958. Carlson, Robert E. "Selection Interview Decisions: The Relative Influence of Appearance and Factual Written Information on an Interviewer's Final Rating." Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 6 (December, 1967), pp. 461:368. Coombs, Clyde H. "Some Hypotheses for the Analysis of Qualitative Variables." Psychological Review, V01. 55, No. 3 (May, 1948), pp. 167-174. Cronbach, Lee J. Essentials of Psychological Testing. New York, New York: Harper and Brothers, second edition, 1960. Cuniff, John. "Managerial Role: Qualities Described." The State Journal (Newspaper), August 4, 1969, p. C-7. Eran, Mardechai. ”Relationship Between Self-Perceived Personality Traits and Job Attitudes in Middle Management.” Journal of Applied PS cholo , V01. 50, No. 5 (October, 1966), pp. 424-%30. Famularo, Joseph J. "Woman Power." Journal of Colle e Placement, V01. 27 (April-May, 1967), pp. 32-41. Ginzberg, Eli and associates. Life Styles of Educated Women. New York, New York: Columbia University Press, 1966. Haire, Mason; Ghiselli, Edwin E.; and Poter, Lyman W. "Cultural Patterns in the Role of the Manager," Chapter XXXIV, Part IX. Management and the Behavioral Sciences: Text and Readings. Edited by Maneck S. Wadia. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968, pp. 443-463. Hartnett, Rodney T. College and University Trustees: Their BackgroundstRoleS and Educational Attitudes. Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service, 1969. Henderson, Algo D. Policies and Practices in Higher Educa- tion. New York, New York: Harper and Brothers, Inc., 196 . I73 Henderson, Algo D. "The Decision-Making Process in Higher Education." Journal of C011e e Student Personnel, V01. 2, No. 4 (June, 1961;, pp. 26-31. Herzberg, Frederick. "New Approaches in Management Organization and Job Design," Chapter XIX, Part VII, Management and the Behavioral_Sciencesgr Text and Readings. Edited by Maneck S. wadia. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968, pp. Hicks, John A. and Stone, Joics B. "Identification of Traits Related to Managerial Success." Journal of A lied PS cholo , V01. 46, No. 6 (DeceEbE§T_I962), pp. 428-432. Hirt, Michael L. “Aptitude Changes as a Function of Age." Personnel and Guidance Journal, V01. 53, No. 2 (Octbber,‘l964), pp. 171—177. Hovland, Carl I. and Sherif, Muzafer. 'Judgemental Pheno- mena and Scales of Attitude Measurement: Item Displacement in Thurstone Scales.“ Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, V01. 37 (I952), pp. 822-832. Howes, Raymond F. Ed. Toward Better Preparation ofiCollege and University Administrators. Associatibn for Higher Education, a division of the National Education Association, 1201 Sixteenth Street, N.W., washington, D.C., 1964. Hull, Raymond. I'The Peter Principle." Esgpire, V01. 67 (January, 1967), pp. 76-77. Jennings, Eugene E. The Executive in Crisis. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Business Studies, 1965. iKatzenbach, Edward L., Jr. "Changing Administrative Patterns in Higher Education.“ Journal of the National Association of women Deans and Counselors, Vol. 30, No. 2 (Winter, 1967), pp. 77-82. lLahiri, Dilip K. and Srivastva, Suresh. "Determinants of SatiSfaction in Middle Management Personnel." Journal of A lied PS chol , Vol. 51, No. 3 (June, 19675, pp. 254-265. ILeggett, Glenn. "Female in Academe: A Partial and Non- Statistical View." AAUP Bulletin, V01. 49, No. 3 (September, 1963), pp. 237-239. 474 Lewis, Lionel S. “Institutional Inbreeding and Dissimilar Views on Faculty Autonomy." College and University, V01. 42, No. 1 (Fall, 1966), pp. 5-12. Likert, Rensis. "Motivation: The Core of Management," Chapter XIII, Part V. Management and the Behavioral Sciences: Text and Read1ngs. Edited'by Maneck S. Wadia. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968, pp. 224-240. Litchfield, Edward H. "Notes on a General Theory of Administration." Administrative Science Quarterly, V01. 1 (June, 1956), p. 28 McConnell, T. R. "The Relation of Institutional Goals and Organization to the Administration of Student Personnel W0rk. " Approaches to the Stud of Adminis- tration in Student Personnel W0rk. d1te by Martin L. Snoke. Minnesota Series in Student Personnel W0rk, No. 9. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 1960, pp. 19-35. Moore, Leila V. ”Some Problems in the Study of Students' Perception of Personnel Services." Journal of the National Association of W0men Deans and Counselors, v01. 30, No. 1 (Fall, 1966), pp. 33-36. Mueller, Kate Hevner. "Educational Issues and Training of Student Personnel workers." Journal of the Association of Deans and Administrators of Student Affa1rs, V01. 4, No. 4 (April, 1967), pp. 167-170. Newcomb, Theodore M.; Turner, Ralph H.; and Converse, Philip E. Social Psychology: The Study of Human Interaction. New York, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965. O'Banion, Terry. fProgram Proposal for Preparing College Students Personnel workers." Journal of Colle e Student Personnel, V01. 10, No. 4 (July, 19695 pp. 249-253. Oblas, Arthur S. "Will the Real College Dean Please Stand Up?" Journal of the Association of Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs, V01. 7, No. 2 (October, 1969), pp. 97- 100. 475 Paine, Louise Tips. "A Survey of Current Personnel Prac- tices in Selected Colleges and Universities as Related to the Functions of the Office of the Dean of WOmen." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Cornell University, 1949. Parker, Clyde A.; Wright, E. Wayne; and Clark, Selby G. "Questions Concerning the Interview as a Research Technique." Journal of Educational Research, V01. 51, No. 3 (November, 1957 , pp. 5- . Penney, James F. "Personnel: Executive Recruits." Newsweek, Vol. 73 (April 7, 1969), pp. 70-72. Pool, Ithiel De Sola. "Trends in Content Analysis Today: A Summary," Chapter VII. Trends in Content Analysis. Edited by Ithiel De Sola Pool. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1959. Pope, LeRoy. "Middle Management Revolt is Harrassing Business in America." The State Journal (Newspaper), September 5, 1969, p. D-8. Richardson, Stephen A. "The Use of Leading Questions in Non-Schedule Interviews." Human Organization, V01. 19, No. 2 (Summer, 1960), pp. 86-89. Roethlisberger, Fritz J. "Contributions of the Behavioral Sciences to a General Theory of Management,” Chapter I, Part IV. Management and the Behavioral Sciences: Text and Readings. Edited by Maneck S. Wadia. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968, pp. 56-74. Rowe, Patricia M. ”Individual Differences in Selection Decisions.” Journal of A lied Ps chology, V01. 47, No. 5 (October, 19635, PP. 304-307. Russel, John H. ”Some Points of Concern in Student Services Administration." Journal of Colle e Student Personnel, V01. 7, No. 4 (July, 1966), pp. g41-245. Schein, Edgar H. "Management Development as a Process of Influence," Chapter IV, Part V. Managementiand the Behavioral Sciences: Text and Readings. Edited by Maneck S. Wadia. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968, pp. 101-117. Seashore, Stanley. Group Cohesiveness in the Industrial fibrk Group. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Michigan Institute for Social Research, 1955. 476 Simon, Rita James; Clark, Shirley Merritt; and Galway, Kathleen. "The WOman Ph. D.: A Recent Profile.” Social Problems, Vbl. 15, No. 2 (Fall, 1967), pp. 221-256. Smith, Fred W. "Student Personnel Deans: Faculty Per- spective." Journal of the Association of Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs, vol. , No. (January, 1965), pp. 14-17. Smith, Patricia Cain. "Predictors of Executive Success: A Critique," Chapter II. Measuring Executive Effectiveness. Edited by Frederic R. Wickert and Dalton E. McFarland. New York, New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, 1967, pp. 49-72. The Code of Ethics of the Education Profession. Adopted by the NEA Representative Assembly, Detroit, Michigan, July, 1963. A Pamphlet distributed by the NEA Committee on Professional Ethics. Triandis, Harry C. "Cultural Influences upon Cognitive Processes,” Chapter I. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, V01. I. Edited‘by Leonard Berkowitz. New York, New York: Academic Press, 1964. wadia, Maneck S. ”Management and the Behavioral Sciences: A Conceptual Scheme," Part III. Management and the Behavioral Sciences: Text and Readings. Boston, MassaChusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968, pp. 37-53. walton, Francis x. and Sweeney, Thomas J. ”Useful Predic- tions of Counseling Effectiveness.” ‘Personnel and Guidance Journal, V01. 48, No. 1 (September, 1969,, pp. 3 -38. Whyte, William F. "On Asking Indirect Questions." Human Organization, Vol. 15, No. 4 (Winter, 1957), pp. 21-23. Wickert, Frederic R. and McFarland, Dalton E. Measuring Executive_Effectiveness. New York, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1967, pp. 228-232. Wbodburne, Lloyd S. FacultyPersonnel Policies in Hi her Education. New York, New York: Harper and Brothers, Inc., 1950. 47'] wyatt, Dale F. and Campbell, Donald T. ”A Study of Interviewer Expectations and Own Opinions." ”Inter- national Journal of OpiniOn Attitude'Research, v01. 4 (Spring, 1950), pp. 77-83. Zaklind, Sheldon S. and Costello, Timothy W. "Perception: Implications for Administration," Chapter II, Part V. Management and the Behavioral Sciences: Text and Readings. Edited by Maneck S. Wadia. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968, pp. 81-92. APPENDICES 478 APPENDIX A FINAL INSTRUMENTS UTILIZED IN THE MAJOR RESEARCH STUDY 479 CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF STUDENT PERSONNEL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE Executive Level Position Description The Chief Student Personnel Officer and his immediate subordinates who direct, control, or supervise the student personnel program or staff. Educational and Professional Requirements Persons who have had extensive experience in academic or personnel administration, who generally hold an advanced graduate degree, and who have had considerable experience as a student personnel administrator or equivalent experi- ence in a related field. Qualifying Questions 1. Do these peOple have an overall responsibility. for the total student personnel program? 2. Can the immediate subordinates act in the absence of the Chief Student Personnel Officer? Managerial Level Position Description The staff who are responsible for the direction, con- trol or supervision of the WELFARE (testing, counseling, health service, financial aids, housing, placement), CONTROL (records, admissions, discipline), ACTIVITIES (cocurricular and extra-curricular programs, student government, student publications, student union and cultural programs), and other special informational educational services in resi— dence halls and elsewhere in the college community), func- tions and staff. Educational and Professional Requirements Persons who are knowledgable in the welfare, control, activities and teaching functions and who are competent in administering a program of student services. These persons will generally hold a graduate degree or will be currently enrolled as a candidate for an advanced degree. Qualifying Questions 1. Are these people responsible for a part or parts of the total student personnel program? 2. Do these persons generally have a staff of professionals and/or professionals-in-training_ to assist them in the administration of their student personnel service? Entrance Level Position Description The staff who assist in carrying out the welfare, control, activities, and teaching functions. Educational and Professional Requirements Persons who are somewhat limited in their experience as a student personnel administrator or specialist and who are currently considered to be gaining this experience. Others at this level may be held there due to limited edu- cational or other professional qualifications. Generally a person entering the profession for the first time from a program of professional preparation or from a position in a related field will be assigned a position at this level before being given management responsibilities as described above. These persons will generally be complet- ing a graduate program and will be thought of (for the most part) as non-career personnel. Most graduate assistants or part-time staff, as well as full-time Junior staff members, 'will be considered at this level. Qualifying Questions 1. Are these positions generally thought of as non-career positions? 2. Are these positions generally filled, when vacancies occur, through the employment of recent master's degree recipients or experi- ence public school personnel? 3. Would most persons with little or no experi- ence in student personnel at the college level tend to enter your student personnel organization at this level? monaaaps :0» oo moonsom puns .nopwnpmficflsce Hoccomuom pcocspm uofino no coapamo on» non mopwcficcwo Hwfipcopod mcfixoom who so» cons .H unapwspmficaeue Hoccomnom pcoospm Hmfipcopod mo moossom .< whopdhpdeHEU¢ HUCGOmhmm QGMUSpm .HO COHPOEOQW Uflw DGOEhOHmEm 039 CH whopomh .HHH Aauaoodmv ow< .o Ahmaoodmv nospo onwmz cmammosmo Aoco oaonfiov comm .m camsmm mam: . Amco oaonaov xom .m Azmfioodmv coHpHmOQ pcommnd ca was» go npmcmq .o Apcoccodmon ma pcmoflmonm can» smcpo may "mofipso hamsfism .o Ammaomdmv coHpHmOQ no meHB .m A.oc mcoo zmfiomdmv soapspfipmcH .< coapmenomcH somoHdem osmmm .HH .mammann pa 3oa>on on omens cum :mpsposnpm HchpruHcmmno Hmccomnmm pcmcSLm pom Hmooz flagpomocoo= m cm>aw on case; pcmcfimmnm comm .3ofi>nmpcfi on» mom» on cmfiz m.pm3ma>pmpcfi mo coapwcmaaxo new ummsumn use .8“: no“: saw» on spficspn0ddo you soapmfiomnddm mo commmmpdxm .mcspm no mo>fipomnpo 0p coapwawn 2H 3mfl>nmpcfi no owedssd .9m3ma>smpcfi no cofiposoospcfi hmfinm .H ll.-; -:-- BzmaHmmmm ”mqsmmmom 3MH>mmBZH Ammwoodmv nospo Amvll umpfiamcoo "emmo op Hmsofl .omxm Amen: oopasmcoo ”Ho>oa o>apsooxm op Haasomacmz Adv A.pasmcoo mo mapfip opwofiocfi a one xoonov_mcdzoaaom on» nmzmcm .cofipwpasmcoo ca no moh.9H Ammaoodmv nmspo Amvnonpo popasmcoo . copasmcoo mmz oz no» Amco maonfiov mcompwuflcwmno Hmccomnod pcmospm a canoes nonpocm on Ho>oa «:0 Some myopmnpmacfi8oo Hoccomnod pcoospm mo cospoEono on» ca mocoasmexo mzofi>onm and can so» o>wm .o>ona lasted new Adv cs umpflsmcoo "spam Amen: oopHSmcoo ”mAOpmnpchHEoe Hmccomnom pcocspm Ho>oq o>apsomxm nonpo Amvll oopasmcoo "nonwnpmficdeo< Hmccomnmm acmcSpm moaco AHYII A.pasmcoo mo mama» mpwoflccfi a one xoonov mcfizoflflom on» swamcm .cOHpmpHsmcoo as no no» mH Ammaomdmv nocpo Amvsocpo cmpasmcoo cmpflsmcoo max 02 mm» nmco oaonfiov «whopwnpchHEow uncoopm mo pcmEmoHdEo on» CH mocmfinqum m50H>oam and can so» o>mm "monsoon pcosmmmau on» cfimadxm .zaunwm no mo» 9H I'll ADCO MHOLHHO iiuddj) Advil-I... )) .nflwma .pdEH .udEH.zso> .Cmmm condonedEH pom cammmm _ mocupLOQEH no oonwmn I nopwnpmficasv< amazemnom pcocSpm moano ,.m «so» on pcwpnoaefi unopoam omen» was an; «coamaoov Hogan 9305 SH unannooefi mnOpomu mums» go some who oonwou pass 09 «on: so» canoe mflnmpfino go on“: panz IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII: mfihmpfiho ho vcfix zapnam 02 no» Amco «Honfiov «use» pan» pa accuse SH ones unapomm nocpo onus .m mm Ahmaoodmv porno zapsmm 02 mm» Ammo oaonfiov «cozoaflom on on maps oopmaa so» «Hampflao on» onoz .H souanpmficfisc< Hoccomnom pcocspw guano a mo cospooaom on» ca co>Ho>cH puma osoz :0» con: .m . .Am .0 sexuaa m no H .m on =m0s= as sage .m xm< “opozv .pfimmo .pdEH .pdeH snm> .cmmm monopLOQEH sou commmm mflnwpfino no ucax mocmunodeH no munwoo .mCOApachmo Ho 0 a on nomon .znwmmoooc MH .mofi A m = o 2 Has» 00:00: o:-s-mHHaommeeQO no“: Hancomnmd mm swamHmmewmomMwwwmdeCMprmwe cocwfimmm I . DJ. 9.1:.) it Ampaeaa nosed no goddsv om< .m Amvnonmz oasoooo< .m oogamoo common oasoooo< pmmnmgm .H ggupm _ ggapm Ho>oq .ooxm «gmo _ . Ho>oq .ooxm «mmo o no 9 o c guano. nocpo H pH 0 g o ax I mocmnogogm hog condom mocmgogogm .mogpmaflbfimcodmog go mcoapocsg oocmHmmo gaadoagaoodm nods Hoccomnod no coco gonads cospogodo go Ho>mH on» on wcfiogooom oopooamm on o» Hoccomnoa on» gooamcoo .cflow4 A.pcoocoamon on» so pcopnodsfi on on oopooaoca mausofi>ogd moons moon» peso oasozvs .mmocogogond goo» hog Amvcoooog goo» caoadxm .m emgopoog wcfizoaaog on» on cofipoaog cu oocogmgmgd goo» opoofiocH .H .50» oasoz .cofipfimoa m>aponpchHEo< Hoccomnom pcoosom Ho>oq o>aosooxm so on m wooe>gocs go cospoEogm no mmmaxmwmml on» ca oogoofimcoo on unwae use» manopago oabammo smcpo op ogowon coast .g ”coco pcougodsa mgoe mmmmqom Illumefip pan» pa umfluusMHn .II.., all. . w . . t . , . A 4|...L Pr. ‘ . . . . I . . . ., , ..,.A.....Hlvamiggmmofi.. .. .4: 5 ..n .. v ... .- 11X ., .4. V. r ..fi . . .31... ”$4.1 1. . . , . . . . . ... 1.. i . . . , ‘ . P.,. pocmgwnfin .m moapwagwpomgmno Hmcomgom sogafipm mQOHpmHog ofiaosm “soapmpHSmcoo gog mommsomg .monoomem .chHpmoHHosa .mQOHpmNficomgo .H.gogg CH came m0ofiggo mcfiosaocfiv ogSpMpm HmCOHmmmgoga go\ocm anoowom HmQOHpmz mocofigoaxm m>fipmgochH2om owoaaoo m50a>ogm monoggmoxo wcgcomop omoaaoo moOH>ogg ggmpw Ho>wq .ooxm honpo ma HH¢ Ho>oa mgpcm Hm>ma Hmfigmwmcmz Hm>oH m>fip50mxm Ammo oaogfiov mompHSmcoo wgo ggopm Hoccomgmm uncoopm go Hm>ma soaps .mosgomEom go mom gH Asgfiomomv gonpo moefiposom 02 mm» Amco mHogHo mompaomcoo co mN cmwg occ osmosom pcmmogq on» m1: v an H o H omgom «boas mLOpmgpchHEo¢ Hmccomgom pamoSpm on» mg< .H u I! oopcfiommm mo 0» mH goomgpmficfiso< Hmccomgmm uncoopm goano m con: .m smapfip use on canons m>mHHmn dog as page .N mwuaafioamcoewmg go mmmgo g0\ocm AchOHpocsg no: on oasonm o>maaob so» oo ponz .H .azua mcoapmoso xmo oaooz gozmfi>gmpcfi on» =.oc= con» oso gospo zoo ma omcommmg ocp gH "opozv woo so» no Homg so» has cfiwaexm so» cado3 "3mm :02: we gmzmcm on» gH gmnpo oz esopgmocz zabammog mow mono maogfiov ecospouficmmgo Hmccomgmd uncoopm gsoz cd Hm>mH m>Hpoomxm on» no cmsoz m o>m£ 0p pcmogomsfi ma pg pong Homg soz on .H Azgaooemv ngpmgpwficHEo< awesomgo m Demo: oopcfioaam Hmoofi>fiocfi zcm go ggmum HmCCOmgm on» mcficfiagopoo mMOpomg pcmpgoasfi pmoE m: gull. -flanv a...“ glad-l ol".I‘l-‘u\ 1"} ‘.u-I14 in: \ 1.... 7 It . . 91 .I. . .\ as- ..‘¢I f). .. . . ~ A 0306:...» ten .. ..w.....,.. 0")!' 10 «Nufiafiofimconog go mmmgo go\oco cofipocog man on oasonm o>mfiamn oo» oo pong .H .Anua mc0fipmoso zoo oasos gm3oa>gopcfi on» =.oc: coco mco gobpo »cm ma mmcoamog on» gH "mpozv goo so» no Homg so» »n3 cfioaaxm so» oflooz "xmm =oz= ma gmsmcm gH gonoo oz cfiwpgmoCD »Hbfimmog mm» mono maogfiov gQOHpoNHcmwgo Hoccomgmd pcooopm goo» ca Hm>mfi m>apzomxm on» no og oz m o>mc op pcougomefl we we own» Homg so» on .h g»n3 goooflmm so» oaooz noes: .gOpmgpchHEo< Hmccomgmg uncoopm guano go cOHpfimmm on» gog cmEoz ocm cos ooggfiamomraamz »Hamzom cm can so» gH .: «cowpfimoa o>o I: .m 0 go COHuomHmm 003 CH uCMugomEH pmoE hmomeOM JMWuwwMMW E2m803 0.1))‘I3‘ 'III-» - _ _ . ... o 5 . servitmhmwete (I. \) ll gamgcomgmg moon» gog Emgmoga mchngp go Hmsofipoosom on» gs momsmco go go pcmsm>oggeH mflofimmog one .H "wcfiogmwmg goggo so» pcwfis mcofipmowwsm owns .QOHpmosom gmewam ca sOfipmgpchfiEo< Hoccomgmg osmospm go mgspsg meg »Hgmasofipgma ocm ucmmoga on» wcfigmofimgoo cH .z .mamcofimmogogg Hmccomgmm osmosgm on cgmocoo go momgo ngm>mm op m>fipoaog mgofiamb gso» mgoofiogfi so» m>mn op mxHH oHsos H .oosaocoo m3 ogogmb psb .3mg>goucfi one go saw one wcfigomg ogm o3 ggnz mpomHmm so» oasoz boas: .gOpmgpmacfiEo4 Hmcgowgmg osmospm gofino go cogpfimom or» gog ogwwz ocm moan: omfigfiamsonflamz »HHmsom cm can so» gH .2 scofipgmomam>ma o>Hpsooxm cm gog ogMoz o go cogpomamm on» as pcmpgogefi omos goofimcoo so» oasos mggmuggo omnz .m 12 "3mfi>gmng go »ngEsm m.gm3mg>gmng .>H .3mfi>gopcfi was» 2H goaumgoQQOo osm mega gso» gog nose »go> so» scone . H»gaomdm .mm» gH oz mm» Amco oHogHov wmcoagmmwmsm gmzpo »c< .m ....WWOCQHQTQKD D4414. 4.03)) ...) )...b:-) 1 googogooo use» gog cofipooaom gso» cfi mgopoog pcopgomed umoe opp ogoz m>oHHmo so» on ponz .o A»gaooamv cofipflmog pammmgd ca mag» go cameos .g ow< A»gaoogmv gospo ogwoz cmfimmosmo Ammo maogfiov oomm .m OHMEmfiH OHMZ ATCO mHohHOv Kmm .Q A»gHooamv mmflgso gOnoz .o Agggooomv oogogooo go ogpgg .m A.oc mooo u»gfiomamv gospspfipmgH .< cogoosgoch go»oaqsm osmom .HH .»Hgmfigo pa 3mfi>mg on ooxmo oso :mgsposgpm HoQOHpouHcmwgo osmosom gog Hoooz Hospamocoo: o co>gw on. Haas pcoocogmog comm .3ofi>goch or» camp on cogs m.gm3mfi>gopcfi go cofioocmaaxm oco pmosomg oco.EHg coax saw» on »pficspgoaao gog coapmfiomgaam go coammogoxm new .»ospm go mo>aooonno op codpoaog cH 3ofi>gopca go omoqgso .gozmfi>gmpcfi go coHposoogch godmm .H mmoemq m>HBDomxm "mamammom 2mH>mmezH u. OZ TOO.) wouaagps so» on moogsom use: .cofipmufismwgo mgasggo osmospm gso» ca mcoapamoo Hm>ma o>Hpsomxm Hafig on mopoofiocmo Hoapcouoo wcfixoom ago so» sons .H uthpdhpmflgHEUd HOCCOmhmm meUSpm Hdfluflmpog MO mmohsom .¢ mgOpogpchHso< Hmscomgog osmospm go cospoEogm osm pcms»oamem on» as ogopomg .HHH wcofigfimoQ1chp gog cogoooaom gso» on oousbgggCOo »Hpcooggfigwfim o>wg . »oe Hoog so» poop oocoggoQMo o>googsmgcgsoo gmrwcggomop omoggoo msog>mgo mogmfigmaxm pcmE»mHQEo go ngogpMosom mm nosm .mgopomg gmguo »mm ogmzp mg< .m .. 4.1.1. .‘L. 1"‘lil1 Judd.“ on. uu‘pl 'Fl.“UH-II Ilsa .1 111......1111 . ......J 11.1...mrifiiwfitL 1.1.. Emir. . J . 1 . .. g1 ......_.1 .1....1.,- .c. . 1 Hr . 141.. .m... .1...,rl..|.l......1... III.“ 1.1”.1._s\. Iwr‘mw 1.14311. {.11. .1... .. .1..1. U mHILIfiJ J slalom .' ... .13....11111. o. 1.1 ..111’013L1’Woiffn1i . 2.11.1191"? 1..'||.Iv 1.1. 1 A.mGOHpacaumc =Hmcoz daupnmocoo= on nmmmg .zaammmomc MHV .mmfipaaanamzoammn no muonpocsm cmsmfimmw maaaoamaomgm new: HmccOmAma mm can» nmspmn dadudmudqlqa Ho>ma on» on mcaunooow umpooamm mp on HmccOmnma map nmcamcoo «so» on pampnoasa mam agapomm mums» 533 .m «coamaomc Hanan gso» ca ucwpuoasa mnouowm mums» mo scam mad monmmc pass 09 .m «was no» case: «Humpano mo ccfix pmnz .H «nupsm map 2H muouwapmficfisv< Hmccomnmm pcmvSpm pomamm on mam: so» mH Ammaomamv hwnpo ma .ooxm IIIHo>mH m>apsowxm on Hm>ma Hmfinmwmcmz IIIHm>oH Hmapmmmcwz on Hm>wa mgpcm Hm>mH znpcm on mppcmunzm A¢co xoosov wcfizoaaom ms» nmsmcm .mapnma no mm» mH Ahmaomamv mappmm 02 mm» Amco maonfiov wGOfipmNHcmwuo Hmscomnma pcmospm m canvas nmnpocm ou Hm>mH mco Eonm mmmmmmmmwdwadm amazempMd.pcmuflmm mo coaposonm on» CH mocmfinmmxw m30fi>mpm mam can 30% m>mm mHm>mH HH< Hm>ma m>fipsomxm Hm>ma Hwfigmwmcmz Hm>mH anucm Amco maopfiov wcflzoaaom ms» pmzmcm .mappwq 90 mm» MH Azmfiomamv mapnmm 02 mm% Ammo maonaov meOpmppnwcHEUm Hmccomnma,usmo:pm mo ucmEmOdem ms» CH mocmfinmmxm m30a>mpm ham can so» m>mm mmoasom pcmumMMHu ms» camaaxm .mappwa Lo mm» MH mappmm 02 mm» Amco mHonHov meOHpHmom Hm>mH Hmfinmmmcmz HHHM 0p muwpm wcfixmmw Ems: UmNHHHps mmohsom pcmhmMMfiU mam mLme mmx .u . .uqqtfl 111. ...u ..n .1. . ....s ....H.._.H1n,1..1- . .. .1 ...: Ramadan... Yul¢ 1 1‘ fi... 1. .a L2...u1. n . IQ ... .. . 119.113..-.»1w . . . E“? .333 . 1.. .1 1.11.- 111'... in 1 (I 111 II 11...\l. ...-Ill . 11.. 1.1!... All.) I. I1 I .l 11 . . li‘l111111 1. . 1.1.1.1.‘1 11111.! .. .1 .....l . .wafiq .puEH xnm. 1" mocmugoaeh mo mmummo .muhwunmw .711 “Cu. ..111. ’JV. . U .1 r .15. II . .l . t... . ... 1. _F‘. Tr} ... . .mmeHHHnHmQOQmon go macapocsm Umcwflmmm zHHNOHmHoQO and: Hmccomgma mm can» pmnpmn coapapwao mo Hm>mH mg» on wcfivnooom wouomamm mp Op Honcomnmn map nmUHmcoo camw< A.p:oucoamon on» an pcwpnoasfi ma 0» umpNOfiucd mamsoa>mgm amend mmozp pHEo cflso3vs .moconommnn use» now common gso» cawfimxm .m .mmopowm wcfisoaaom on» 0» coauden ca mocmnmmmna gso» mpMOHuGH .H use» cases .mmOHpHmoq Hmccomnmm mcmuSpm on mHmswfipmmma ho nadmmammm no unmENoamEo mg» :a cohocfimcoo mp pnwfie pmsp mfipmpfiko oHnHmmom1nmsuo on unmwmu spas: .m .pHmwQ .pQEH .pQEH mgm> .Cmmm megappoaeH how COmMmm mfipmpfipo mo ucfix mocwuaomsH mo monwmo ..w Hu>oq Hmfipm mam: .o . .... .. ...... I . ...o. ..Crilj. _.~...._...1 1 ... Tami. .. - ..1 lu......1.1’..:il_. 11.. I)“ o... ..... . . tobkrftwklliu 1.12.1111 a .4 5.1 & .OO'U 1])‘1-1 d weapmfinopompmso Hmcomnmm hpfiaanm macapwama oHHnsm soaumpHSmcoo mom mummSUon .mmSOmem .mCOHp unofiansa .chpruH unawno Hmcoammomopm ca vamp mQOHmwo wcfiosaocflv mQSpwpm HmGOHmmmmong n0\vcm oHEmcmom HmQOHpmz mocmfinqum m>HmepchHEom wwwafloo m30H>mgm mocwfimmaxm wcfinowop mwmfiaoo m30H>mgm AmpfiEHH mmzofl mo amansv ww< AmVpOnmz ofiEmomo< oopfimmc mmpwmo OHEQomo< pmmnwfim HmHhmwmcmz o>deowxm OOCUeerHOHm. .1HO.H CO WMDE. adfiawwmcmz ll"! m>Hpsowxm 1’ wfihmpdhu Ho dzqc .1 kg . . 1' $131.31.). . m l.!.. ._ rs...» . w ‘ uam>ma Ha< Hu>oa manna Hm>oH deammwcwz Hm>md m>apzomxm Aoco «Hoaaov «umpHsmcoo mam madam Hocconhbm.pcmbbpm.mo.am>ma.noank..mmsdpm80m no mm» uH Ahmaomamv nonpo mmaapmsom 02 mm» Amco maoaaov «umpasmcoo coapmuficmwuo Hmccomamm pcmuspm pcomoun map canvas mnoumnpmucfieu< Hancomnom pcmcspm mn< .H "copcaoaad up on ma nonmnpmficfisc< amazemnmm pcmuspm mmuno a cmss .m “camaaxm mmwwaa .mapqu 90 mm» uH mapamm 02 mm» Ammo maonfiov «Hmccomnum no cofipoaoam map CH mocmpmmmfiv m .zapuma no mm» MH .m "Qamaaxm mmmwau .mapnma no mm» MH mapnmm 02 mm» Amco oaoufiov wamccompmm no pcmemoamEm an» CH mogmpmmmao m .zappma no mm» MH .H pmzpo maunmm oz mmw hwco maonfiov wummpm Hmccompmm pamcdpm mo coauoEoMm I1 11 11 no 2mg 3% wmawmmmfifimwpmflmoo 2303 9: 5 883:3 .5... $9.. 3.3%... 2: 3.33 H aposnum HMCOfiprHcmwno Hmccomhmm pcmvsuw mommmmfipzufipmcfl UCHVm mCD DD?) 0 .4 wzmaommmv prpmppmficHEU< Hmccomnmm pcmwzum Mmfino mo soapfimom mg» on nmpcfimmmm Hmsva>fivcfi mam mo QMMpm Hmccompmm pamcdpm mnu Mm mocmpqmoom mg» wchHEpopmv mLOpomm pampgomafi pmoE map ma 0» m>mfiamn :0» cu pmnz .m "cfiwaaxm mmwmaa .mmsfiumEon a) :1: “Hm>ma Hmanmmmcmz .n ”Hm>ma o>ap30oxm .m "030 pm amaafinamcommmn mo mmmnm a0\ocw mcoapocdm pm: on vasosm m>mHHmn 30m 06 pan: .m A.mnm macapmmzu ca cmmmsomfio mam Amvam>ma scans mcaEnmme Hafiz H .m on pmzmcm was "mpozv mHm>mH HH¢ Hm>ma mnpcm Hm>ma Hafinmmmcmz Hm>mH m>ap50mxm “Mmzo maonaov "mam>ma pass p¢ .H A.mua macapmmSU xmw vasoz pmzmfl>nmpca mSp :.oz: ems» mco amspo mam ma mmcoammn map mH "mpozv Nov 50% mm Hmmm so» has cfimaaxm so» oasoz "xmm :02: ma gmzmcm map MH pmnuo oz campnmocb zfiofimmom mm» Amco maonfio wco pmu cmmwo Hmccomnmm pchSpm 930% CH cmEoz m>mn on pumpaomefi ma pH pmnu HWmM %02 0Q .m ._ .. . » 4...: “741% 10 «mn3 ”Hm>ma m>fip50wxm .w ms» nu pooamm so» vasoz Scans .coapfimon Hmccompmq meGSpm w you cwsoz vcm awe vaMHstmnaamz zaamsmm cm was so» MH "Hm>ma Hmfigmwmcmz .n "Hm>ma m>fiu50mxm .m on» pm cmsoz m mo coapomfimm mg» CH pampmomsfi pmoe pmvamcoo so» UH303 mLOpomm pmnz "MM>mH Hmfipmwmnma .n ”Hm>ma m>fip50mmm .m m: m II. .1 p p vamapfip mm: mm canonm m>mfiamp 30% oo Ju - 3.. .m o. 1151‘ ti!‘.-"(’a.l 11’ "ao>oa m>apsooxm .m map pm.NpfiHHnachQmmn mo mamaw n0\vcm mcoapocsm man up oasogm m>maamn 50% cu pmnz .m A.mlm .H mGOHpmmfiv CH UmmmSOMHU mhm Amva>0H SOH£3 mGHEhmPGU HHHS H .H 00,.H03m2d 09H. "0007C mam>ma HH< Hm>ma mnpcm Hm>ma Hafinowmcwz Hm>ma m>apdomxm AMmco oaonfiov "mam>ma pmsz p4 .H A.mla macapmmsw xmm vase; nmzmfi>nmpca map =.oz= can» mco amSpo mam ma mmcoammn map mH "mpozv moo 50% mm Hmmm so» zsz nfimamxm 50m wasoz ”xmm :oz: ma hmzmcm msp 9H Amzpo oz cfimppmocb manfimmom mmw wmco maopfiov wCOHpmNchmpo Hmccomnmm pamGSpm gso» CH mmopmmz m>mn on pamppomefi ma pa was» Hmmm so» on .H 1.232 a. if... 12 "Hm>ma Haven .0 "Hm>ma Hwfinumwcmz .n "Hm>ma m>auSomxm .m 0:» pm onumz m mo coapomamm map ca pamppOQEa pmoe hmuamcoo 30% case: mMOpomm pmsz .: "Hm>ma mppcm .o "Hm>mH Hmfigmmmsmz .n "Hm>ma m>fip30mxm .m map pm Amvmapfip man mp vasonm m>mHHmn 50» ow pmnz .m “.mHQmHHm>m mew» Ucm N,oprpm3mcm co mcwmcmqmmlleQOHumo ma m "Hm>mH mnpcm .o “mpozv . 01. ....o 1.1171. .11... 1:..Hn...m&m.. ...q. . 13 wamccomnma mama» non Ewhmona meandwnp go Hanoapwosvm m2» GH mmwcmzo no mo pcmsm>oaaefi manfimmoa was .H ”mcfionmmmn hmmwo so» unmae mCOfipmowwsm pan: .zoapmozvm nmnmfim 2H coauwnumficasu¢ Hmccomnmm pcmcSpm mo mnspsm map maanSoHpan new pzmmmna map wcanmvfimcoo cH .h .mHMQOHmwmmomQ amazemnmm pchSpm 0p Gamecoo mo mmmnm Hmnm>mm on m>fipmamh mmmfiamn gso» mumofivcfi so» m>w£ 0p mxfia oasoz H .mcsaocoo m3 maommn pan .3ma>gmpnfi map mo ucm map wcfinmmc mam m3 was; "Ho>mH Nupcm .o 9mg: ”Hm>ma Hmfipmmmcmz .p mags ”Hm>mfi m>HpSOowm .w _ 3 ”W .mmCCUOchVQ pcwvdpm .m .HO.H IOIMMOIZ Ucm mHQMHUWMHWWWMMm 50% UHSOS £0H£3 ..COHPHWONW lain; haidifiu :l O ... m . é..:3<5$l1301lfltfivgk . . . gig .1. 1.13.513 f ..fl ......_1..1.551.. MV‘. 1a.. . _| u t :1 .\ .0311! ....u. .H#.w\. .414..»....u. . 1 I -7 1 5 11. ....l. ll} "3mH>pmch walwpmessm m.nm3mfi>nmch .>H .3ma>nmpcfi many 2H soapmpmqooo new med» use» QO% nose mhm> so» xcmne ”mmfiomam .mmz MH 02 mm» Amco mflomfiov meOHummmmSm pmnpo zc¢ .m M1mmocmd1u1nul