obi, 24.11 mm THE FLINT BUILDING DIRECTOR: ROLE EXPECTATIONS HELD BY RELEVANT GROUPS The“: {or II“ Degree OT EJ. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 7 Alton Walter Cowan 1960 A ix-‘Nutg‘s‘. C:~'\Tf‘ III!IIIIIIILIIUIHIIIIIIIJIIIIIMHIIIIIIIII :This is to certify that the . 1 thesis entitled The Flint Building Director: Role Expectations Held By Relevant Groups presented by Alton Walter Coven has been ,aeeepted towards fulfillment ' of the requirements for _E_t_1_-.‘_1L_ degree m___ Educational Adminie tration ,/// 55/7; lea/ Major professor Date m 20’ 1960 0-169 ¢.._..—~..-..—-._.h -.-m_.- ‘ I . ON: a,» L,‘ THE FLINT BUILDING DIRECTOR: ROLE EXPECTATIONS HELD BY RELEVANT GROUPS BY ALTON WALTER COWAN AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School for Advanced Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Administrative and Educational Services 1960 tame/W Alton Walter Cow an ABSTRACT The Problem The Flint, Michigan Board ofEducation has created a unique staff position, the community school building director. The purpose of this study was to identify and clarify role expectations held by building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers regarding selected aspects of the position in the Flint community school structure. It was assumed that this new position would be defined differently by the various groups of Flint educators, thus creating possibilities of role conflict. Selected personal variables were also hypothesized to be systematically related to role expectations held by the role definers. Procedure Building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators, and a stratified random sampling of teachers were sent a questionnaire regarding 74 selected aspects of the building director's professional roles. The roles were: 1) as a teacher; 2) as an administrator of the community school; 3) as a professional staff member; and 4) as a co- ordinator of school and community relations. The respondents indicated if they believed the building director should or should not do 5 IIII'lII, IIIIIIII II‘ Abstract Alton Walter Cowan what was described in the selected situations and building directors were asked to define expectations held by the significant others. Seven questions which asked for information pertinent to role clarification and general questions concerned with personal data were answered. Role expectations of the respondent groups were compared and convergence and divergence of beliefs noted. Findings The analysis of data supported the hypothesis that building directors and significant others hold different and sometimes con- flicting expectations regarding the selected aspects of the position. Principals and adult education co-ordinators held a better image of the building director‘s position than did teachers. Likewise, building directors were able to define expectations held by principals and adult education co-ordinators better than expectations held by teachers. Significant convergence-divergence of affirmative expectations held by the various groups was computed by the chi- square statistic. In the 74 selected situations, the affirmative expectations of building directors were in agreement with adult education co-ordinators in 64 items and with principals in 61 items. Building directors and teachers were in agreement on only 41 items. 4 Abstract Alton Walter Cowan Building directors' expectations and definitions of others’ expectations were in agreement with adult education co-ordinators', principals', and teachers’ expressed expectations in 64, 58, and 26 of the 74 selected situations, respectively. The building directors held an inaccurate definition of teachers' expectations in 15 items and of principals‘ expectations in three of the items, thus creating conflicting expectations where none existed. In 33 items with teachers, nine with principals, and seven with adult education co-ordinators, the building directors accurately defined divergent role expectations. In four items with principals and three with adult education co-ordinators, divergent expectations were held, and building directors failed to identify the extent of disagreement. A rank-difference correlation of preferences of respondents regarding the questions requesting additional information, demonstrated that building directors, principals, and adult education co-ordinators were significantly in agreement on three items. Significant relation- ship was noted on only one item between the preferences of building directors and teachers. A summation of recorded statements also revealed a need for role clarification. 5 Abstract Alton Walter Cowan A comparison of selected personal variables of the relevant groups with regards to the proportion of respondents defining the position and holding affirmative expectations failed to support the assumption that systematic relationships would be discovered. Recommendations To reduce possibilities of role conflict, attempts should be made to help building directors, principals, adult education co- ordinators, and teachers reach agreement in defining the building director's professional roles. An in-service education program designed to acquaint the building director with others' expectations and to encourage an understanding of what is expected of him, is recommended. The building director should also have an opportunity 1:0 communicate to significant others what he believes is appropriate behavior in these selected situations. Adequate channels of communication between the building director and his reference groups should be maintained if there is 'to be an increase in convergence with regards to role expectations. Educators at all levels in the Flint system should be aware of the convergent and divergent role expectations revealed by this study and seek ways of reducing open and potential conflict. THE FLINT BUILDING DIRECTOR: ROLE EXPECTATIONS HELD BY RELEVANT GROUPS BY ALTON WALTER COWAN A THESIS Submitted to the School for Advanced Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Administrative and Educational Services 1960 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation to members of his Guidance Committee, Dr. Fred J. Vescolani, Dr. Byron W. Hansford, Dr. Carl H. Gross and Dr. John Useem, for their criticisms and suggestions regarding the development and com- pletion of this study. Special acknowledgment is due to Dr. Fred J. Vescolani, the Chairman of the Doctoral Committee, who has given the writer constant encouragement and patient counsel throughout the study and during the past three years in the writer's studies in the field of public school administration. He wishes also to thank Dr. Wilbur B. Brookover and Mr. John J. Paterson of the Bureau of Educational Research, for their suggestions and guidance concerning the theoretical framework and statistical analysis of the study. Finally, the writer is deeply indebted to his wife, Pat, and children for their inspiration and understanding during the study. . CKVO LIST I LIST 0. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................... ii LIST OF TABLES ......................................... . v LIST OF FIGURES ......................................... . viii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION....................; ............... . 1 Introductory Statement 1 Social Setting and Background 3 Statement of Problem 7 Basic Hypothesis 9 Importance of Study 9 Scope and Limitations 17- Techniques and Procedures 14 Definitions 1 7 Summary 20 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ...................... 22 Introduction 22 Role Theory 22 Related Research 28 Authoritative Literature Regarding the Building Director's Position 40 Summary 45 III. PLANNING AND CONDUCTING THE STUDY ----------- 46 Introduction , 46 General Methods of the Study 46 Development of the Instrument 49 A Definition of the Building Director's Roles 50 Respondent Population 54 Summary 54 IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA ............ 56 Introduction 56 57 Presentation of Data Chapte r V. VI. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX A ........................ - ....................... APPENDIX B ............................................... RECORDED COMMENTS SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Analysis of Data to Indicate the Mean Proportion of Significant Others Who Hold Expectations Analysis of Data To Indicate the Mean Proportion of Building Directors Who Hold Beliefs and Definitions of Others' Expectations Analysis of Responses to Questions Requesting Additional Information Analysis of Particular Items To Determine Con- vergence and Divergence of Affirmative Expectations Summary of Analysis of Data Introduction Summation of Building Directors' Comments Summation of Principals‘. Comments Summation of Adult Education Co-ordinators' Comments Summation of Teachers' Comments Summary Summary Conclusions Recommendations Subjective‘Impressions Suggestions for Further Research iv Page 72. 79 82 87 110 115 115 116 119 120 12.0 125 9 127 127 134 139 142 149 156 162 [zit Z, T able 10. 11. 12. LIST OF TAB LES Page Numbers of building directors, principals and teachers according to schools in Flint, Michigan ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, . 58 Number of usable returns ....... . ...................... 60 Classification of principal's, teachers, and adult education co-ordinators, according to sex and years of experience Withabuildingdirector OOOOOOOOOOOOO ........ COO... ..... 61 Classification of building directors according to age, marital status, children, educational level and educational preparation...... ......... ........... 6.2 Classification of building directors according to number of other school systems in which employed, prior teaching experience, and experience as a director . . . . . ........... 62 Classification of building directors according to future plans, and statements referring to re-entering the educational profession and the position of director . ....... 63 Classification of building directors according to adminis- trative aspirations and comparing position with principal's in terms of prestige as rated by teachers and parents . . . . . 64 Classification of selected items according to the teaching role of the building director' 8 position ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Classification of selected items according to the community school administrative role of the building director's position ..... ..... 66 Classification of selected items according to the professional staff member role of the building director‘s position...... ....... ......... ............ 67 Classification of selected items according to the community and school liaison role of the building director‘s position. . . 69 Classification of items concerned with additional infor- mation regarding the director's position ................. 71 T able 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. vi Page Mean proportion of principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers holding expectations regarding the items . . . . . - 7 3 Mean proportion of men principals who hold expectations compared with the mean proportion of women principals whoholdexpectations...................... ..... ........ 75 Mean proportion of men adult education co-ordinators compared with the mean proportion of women adult education co-ordinators who hold expectations . ..... . . . . . . . 75 Mean proportion of men teachers compared with the mean 1 proportion of women teachers who hold expectations . . . ..... . 77 Principals with less than three years experience with a building director and principals with three or more years experience compared with regards to the mean proportion whohold expectations . 77 Adult education co-ordinators with less than three years experience With a building director and adult education co-ordinators with three years or more experience com- pared with regards to the mean proportion who hold expectations .. Teachers with less than three years experience With a building director and teachers with three years or more experience compared with regards to the mean proportion proportionwho hold expectations 78 Mean proportion of building directors holding a self- definition and definitions of expectations held by significant others 80 Mean proportion of building directors with definitions of others' expectations as compared with the mean proportion of significant others with expectations . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Mean proportion of building directors' beliefs, and signi- ficant others' expectations, and the building directors' definitions of others' expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . 83 Rank-difference correlation of expressed expectations of significant others as compared with building directors' expeCtathl’lS.ooo-oo................-.s eeeeee e cccccccccc 84 T able 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. Page Rank-difference correlation of building directors’ definitions of others’ expectations as compared with the . _ others’ expressed expectations . . .. . . . . . - 35 Comparison of building directors’ affirmative expectations with others’ affirmative expectations and the building directors’ definitions of others' expectations with the expressed expectations of significant others . . . . . . . . ...... 88 Classification of expectations held by building directors, definitions of others’ expectations and expressed expectations of significant others, items 1-10 . . ......... 93 Classification of expectations held by building directors, definitions of others’ expectations and expressed expectations of significant others, items 11-25 . .......... 99 Classification of expectations held by building directors, definitions of others’ expectations and expressed expecta- tions of significant others, items 26-51 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Classification of expectations held by building directors, definitions of others’ expectations and expressed expectations of significant others, items 52-75 . . . . ....... 100 Number of responses to items significantly different when comparing affirmative expectations of significant others classified according to experience. - - - . -------- . - - - 103 Number of responses to items significantly different when comparing affirmative expectations of significant others classified according to sex . . ....... 104 Comparison of the mean proportion of affirmative expectations held by the various groups of building directors 107 Rank-difference correlation between the various groups of building directors holding affirmative expectations . . . . . . . 109 Figure LIST OF FIGURES Percentages of the selected items in which there were no significant differences between affirmative expectations held bythe relevant groups ..... Percentages of selected items in which there were no significant differences between the building directors' definitions of the others’ expectations and the expressed affirmative expectations of the significant others ......... Percentages of selected items (1-74) in which A) there were no significant differences between affirmative expectations held, and B) no significant differences between building directors’ definitions of others’ expectations and the expressed expectations of significant others ........... Percentages of nonsignificant items when A) male and female respondents were compared and B) those with less and more years experience were compared . ............ . viii Page 93 94 95 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Introductory Statement Educational literature during recent years increasingly has contained references to community school education, especially concerning philosophical and sociological assumptions underlying the community school concept. Available also are numerous examples of programs initiated by schools in striving to become community centered institutions. The role of the professional neighborhood school leader in the local community school educational structure, however, has not been specifically treated in the literature. This void prompted this research. This study was designed to identify and clarify the professional roles of the neighborhood community school leader. The locale of the study was Flint, Michigan. Flint was selected because of the school district’s demonstrated interest in actively implementing the community school concept. The Flint Board of Education has planned its school plant facilities to accommodate a community school program and, in attempting to provide adequate local leadership at the neighborhood school level, has originated a new staff position designated as the community school building director. The American Association of School Administrators recognized this course of action in its Thirty-Seventh Yearbook. The Flint, Michigan public schools, having developed a community school program to a remarkable level of effectiveness, have drawn up a set of principles on which an administrative program should be based. With the help of institutions of higher education the Flint people have developed a community-centered program dealing with the concepts and skills needed by those who co-ordinate community school activities (1: 183). It is assumed that the kind of professional leadership available will influence to a great extent the implementation and promotion of the community school concept. Flint educators say that the success of their community school program is dependent upon intelligent and dedicated leaders. Leadership in Flint at the neighborhood school level is provided by the staff position of community school building director. These building directors work in forty of the forty-five Flint community schools. They arrive at school at noon, teach regular school classes (usually physical education), and are in charge of the entire after-school and evening community school pro- gram. Thus, the building directors' duties, in addition to part-time teaching, include the administration, organization and supervision of after-school activities within their buildings, and the responsibility for planning and carrying out an evening and Saturday community school educational program. The Flint people, then, have created a new kind of educational position, a new professional role in their school system. What is this position? How do various groups of Flint educators perceive it? What do building directors do in certain situations ? What are the defined and expressed expectations held by building directors concerning their role? What expectations do the incumbents of this position perceive as being held by groups significant to them? Are conflicting role expectations held by building principals, teachers, adult education co-ordinators, and building directors ? Attention was directed to these questions in this study. Social Setting and Background The Flint community school concept developed first as part of a recreation program during the early depression years. Flint, a typical Michigan industrial community, had been hard hit by unemployment, population turnover, juvenile delinquency, and lack of school operating and building funds. Teachers were earning less salary than city garbage collectors. Mr. Frank Manley, then head of the Flint physical education program, sought desperately to raise enough money to unlock the doors of the unused gymnasia for use during evenings and week ends. A turn in the tide came, however, with a. $6, 000 contri- bution from Mr. Charles S. Mott, a prominent Flint industrialist and’ former mayor. Mr. Mott had heard Mr. Manley speak at a local service club luncheon concerning the lack of recreational facilities. 4 Mr. Manley had said that the city did not need new boys' club facilities, all that was needed was money to open the physical facilities that the school system already owned. As a result of the grant, five school facilities were opened for youth, which marked the very modest beginning of the community school program in Flint and the Mott Foundation' 3 participation. Because of the uniqueness of the working arrangements and the implications of the program, it was necessary to understand the activities of the Mott Foundation program of the Flint Board of Education. A written report used in describing the Mott Foundation for the first national community school clinic held March 10-12, 1959, follows: The Mott Foundation Program of the Flint Board of Education Founded: 1926 by Charles Stewart Mott, automotive pioneer and resident of Flint since 1907. Definition: A working program, as contrasted to a purely endowed philanthrophy, which funnels its efforts through a public, tax-supported institution, the Flint Board of Education. Administered by the Board of Education. Purpose: To discover and demonstrate means whereby a community can use its own resources to solve its own problems, thus helping make the city of Flint a model community, worthy of emulation by others. Implementation: By providing the Flint Board of Education with funds necessary to carry out experimental projects in community improvement which otherwise might not be attempted by an elective body. By seeking to demonstrate the effectiveness of the public school as a focal point for the mustering of a com- munity's resources, bringing those resources to bear on the complexity of problems facing any community. Philosophy: The Mott Foundation believes that world peace and understanding among men must begin in men's hearts; that neighbor must understand neighbor and that people must learn to live together in neighborhoods and cities before nation can understand nation and a world can live in peace. To this end, people must be provided the opportunity at a grassroots level to learn to understand one another's problems, to work together and to find the means to improve themselves and their cities. Rationale: After twenty—five years of experimentation, the Foundation considers the public school the ideal instrument for the achievement of this end because: 1. The public school has played the traditional role of common denominator in our society, today as an institution truly representative of all classes, creeds, and colors. 2. Physical plants of schools, representing a huge community investment, are perfectly suitable for community recreation and education. Use of them eliminates need for costly duplication of facilities. 3. Schools are geographically suited to serve as neighborhood centersof recreation, education and democratic action. By their nature, they are readily accessible to every man, woman, and child of the nation. 4. If experimental programs can be proved feasible within a school system, the transition from private to public support is relatively easy (55: 153-54). During the Second World War, the first community school room was opened at Fairview elementary school. The Mott Foundation had sent a team of teachers into the school attendance area to survey a local health problem. The result of the survey was that an old storage room in the school was redecorated and equipped to become the first ”community room. " First it housed a breakfast program and later a community school program. Another milestone in the development of the Flint com- munity schools occurred in 1951 when the Freeman Community School was opened. This was the first public school building erected in Flint since 1929 and was the first building specifically designed for community use. Each of the nine new elementary schools, one junior high school, and a new high school, all constructed since 1951, has a community room, a kitchen, an auditorium, and a gymnasium planned in accordance with the needs of both the adult and student population in the particular school attendance area. Some thirteen older schools have since been adapted to the needs of the community school educational program by the addition of community school ”wings. " Flint purposively planned community centered schools. It has made its thirty-five elementary, seven junior high and three high schools, the focal points of community organization and activity. To a great extent the intellectual, physical and financial resources of the community's approximately two hundred thousand people have been devoted to cultural, civic and educational developments. Today the Flint Board of Education paints an attractive picture of the community in a recruitment brochure intended to attract new teachers. The following information was paraphrased from the booklet, ”It's Great To Teach in Flint" (25). Flint is a city of young people, with a median population age of twenty-nine and one-half years. Sixty-six percent of all employed citizens work for General Motors, and sixty-eight percent own their own homes. Ten percent of the population is Negro. Flint has some one hundred and eighty-eight churches of all denominations. The public school system had enrolled in 1959-60, 24, 752 children in elementary grades, and 13, 183 in secondary. The school system employs over 1, 300 professional staff members, exclusive of junior college faculty. The annual operating budget approximates $15, 000, 000 and the Mott Foundation’s share exceeds $1, 000, 000. Since 1950, Flint school tax electors have favorably passed three special tax levies by majorities of seventy, eighty, and eighty-five percent, respectively. This, in brief, is the educational and community setting in which the Flint community school building director works. Statement of Problem One of the purposes of this study was to define through direct observation, personal interviews, and the review of pertinent literature the duties and responsibilities relevant to the building director's position in the Flint community schools. A major purpose was to identify and clarify the divergence and convergence of role expectations which building directors, building principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers hold for selected aspects of the building director’s position. The research was based on the assumption that the above groups hold different expectations, and because of these different expectations, possibilities for role conflict are created. The building director needs to understand his proper roles and be prepared to fulfill those expectations ascribed to him. Some of the reasons why the building director has failed to assume his professional roles in appropriate ways may be due to his lack of knowledge of the expectations, or lack of skill in recognition of situations which call for an expanded or different set of roles. Principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers, with whom the building director interacts in fulfilling his professional role requirements, may also have expected him to behave in different ways. The building director may likewise hold role expectations and definitions of the expectations of significant others which are not convergent with the expressed expectations held by the significant others, i. e. , principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers. This study, then, constructed selected aspects of the building director's professional roles by defining his duties and responsibilities, and analyzed role expectations in light of convergent and divergent role expectations held by building directors and signi- ficant others. Basic Hypothesis The basic, testable hypothesis of this study was that building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers sometimes hold different role expectations regarding selected aspects of the building director's position in the Flint Public Schools, thus creating possibilities of role conflict. Selected personal variables of building directors were also hypothesized to be systematically related to role expectations held by building directors. Known personal characteristics of the significant others were assumed to be related to their expressed expectations, too. Importance of the Study Although the Flint community school concept gave birth during the depression years, first as a program of recreation, the real growth began with the hiring of the first community school building directors in 1952. The building director's position in the Flint community schools has now reached a point of development whereby it is adequately organized to be thoroughly studied. The building director's role in improving community education tends to be influenced by the demands of the educational 10 situation, his own beliefs concerning his role and his definition of role expectations held by significant reference groups regarding his role. His ability to win the respect and confidence of building principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers, and to adequately perceive the expectations of the numerous groups with whom he interacts, is important to the success of the community school program. Regardless of what the building director does or does not do, it is unlikely that any given act in a situation will be perceived by all groups in the same way. However, by defining more clearly areas of agreement and disagreement concerning the role expectations held by various groups, recommendations for the reduction of role conflict can be made. Dr. Bruno Solby (66) has shown that every job (role) has three values. These are identified as: 1) social saturation value, in meeting emotional needs; 2) role value, in financial compensation and experience in the job situation; and 3) integration value, in expressing SPeCifiC talents in productive work. He also states that role conflict decreases role value. If the role value is decreased and becomes smaller than the social saturation value, the social saturation value will have to increase proportionately if the degree of integration is to be maintained. If the role value however decreases without any change taking place in the social saturation value, the integration value of the job diminishes, too (66: 227). 11 More complete knowledge of the role would be the first . step towards decreasing any role conflict between the building: director and groups of significant others. In the rationale for his research, Bidwell states the following: A school system is a social system, i. e. , an integrated system of roles organizing the activities of its members toward common goals. The role expectation is a complimentary relationship between ego and alter, such that the actions and expec- tations of ego are oriented toward the expectations of alter and alter's expectations act as sanctions to ego. Role expectations allow alter to predict the behavior of ego and act toward ego in an appropriate way. It is impossible for an integrated social system to function unless such predictions are possible, since, there being no secure basis for his actions towards ego, such action becomes difficult at best. A disruption of a system of role-expectations should thus result in a disintegration of the organization, rendering it unable to achieve its goals, and satisfy the needs of its members (5: 41). Role expectations held by the building directors and significant reference groups should be clearly defined and understood. These groups need to apprehend the role as each defines it. A knowledge of the role and an understanding of potential role conflict is necessary if this new staff position of community school building director is to function adequately in the internal organization of the Flint Public School system. Chapter 11 describes many studies which have pointed out this importance in similar situations. Chilcott (14). Doyle (l9), Getzels and Guba (35), (36), (37), Gross, .Mason and 12 McEachern (42), Halpin (43), Hoffman (46), Hughes (48), Nonnamaker (59), Ort (60), Seeman (63), Smith(65), Stouffer (67), and others have studied the many aspects of role clarification in the context of its importance in understanding such things as: job satisfaction; adequate staff relationships; personality conflicts; leadership behavior; job effectiveness and efficiency; group productivity; and staff and community relationships. These explorations have been worthwhile and useful research. This research concerning the professional roles of community school building directors, the expectations held by building directors and selected groups significant to them, and the divergence and convergence of their beliefs, shouldadd to these studies. A knowledge of the duties and responsibilities of the building director's professional roles is also necessary in order to provide an appropriate basis for understanding his contribution in the development of the organizational structure of the Flint community school educational program. If the community school concept is to flourish, ways of implementing and promoting the concept through leadership in local neighborhood schools should be studied. Scope and Limitations The professional roles of the building director were defined. Various selected aspects of his position, ranging from Specific duties to broad responsibilities and functions, were determined 13 by open-ended questions during personal interviews, direct on-the-job observation, auditing of building directors’ seminars and staff meetings, and reviewing literature published by the Flint Board of Education. These were not contrived situations. The study also provided an identification of role expectations held by professional educators in Flint regarding selected aspects of his position. These were secured from: 1. The building director‘s definition of his role. 2. The building director's definition of role expectations held by significant others. 3. Expressed expectations of the building director's position held by principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers. Areas of agreement and disagreement of expectations held by these groups were demonstrated. Also indicated were relation- ships in terms of known differences in the personal characteristics of the building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers. The study measured the direction, i. e. , affirmative, negative, or neutral, of the role expectations held, and not the intensity with which they were held. Although the building director interacts with many persons and groups within and without the school system, this study was limited to the building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers within the Flint Public School 14 system during the 1959-60 school year. The findings may be generalized to this population. Only selected aspects of the professional roles of the building director’s position were studied for possible role conflict. General categories included his professional roles I) as a teacher; 2) as an administrator, organizer and supervisor of the community school program; 3) as a professional staff member; and 4) as a co-ordinator of school and community relations. Direct causes of the conflicts were not indicated. Identifi- cation of selected and potential role conflict situations, however, should furnish a starting point for clarification of his professional roles and reduction of conflict. Techniques and Procedures Used Two areas of literature in research and authoritative writings were reviewed in collecting information for this study. This was necessary as the study encompassed the professional 1‘01eS Of a community school director, and role theory and analysis of role expectations. In reviewing the literature little was found in research writings concerning the roles of the community school building director. This was assumed to be because of the newness of the position. Some details referring to his duties and responsibilities were found in descriptive materials, especially literature published by the Flint Board of Education. 15 Review of research in analysis of role expectations was concerned mainly with administrators‘ and teachers' roles. Studies that related to role theory and the concept of role were also reviewed. Professional leaders in the Flint Mott Foundation Program were interviewed in developing this study. This approach, along with on-the-job Observation, open-ended interviews with’ building directors, building principals, teachers, and adult education co- ordinators, was used in identifying the pertinent aspects of the pro- fessional roles of the building director. The writer visited the Flint school system on twenty-eight different occasions during the spring, summer and fall of 1959, and attended a national and a state community school conference held in Flint in 19 59. The professional roles of the building director were categorized into these various roles: I) as a teacher in the regular .day school; 2) as an administrator, organizer and supervisor of the community school program; 3) as a. professional staff member; and 4) as a co—ordinator of school and community relations. From these generalized professional roles was developed a check-list questionnaire of selected aspects regarding the position of building director. The steps in the development of this instrument and subsequent research follow: 1. Develop and categorize the professional roles of the building director by interviews, personal observations, and investigation 16 of pertinent literature. 2. Select aspects of the building director’s position in relation- ship to these professional roles. 3. Submit these aspects to a panel of judges in Flint for editing and clarifying statements. Remove semantic confusions and inconsistencies and resubmit for approval. 4. Submit the final questionnaire to the building directors, the building principals, the adult education co-ordinators, and a stratified random sampling of the teachers in the Flint system. 5. Submit a questionnaire to the building directors concerning fourteen selected personal characteristics. 6. Compile the data, role expectations and personal variables. 7. Interpret the data, identifying convergence and divergence of expectations held among and between the selected groups. Compare particular acts and areas of potential conflict, and analyze expectations held, recording agreement and disagreement among and between the groups. Analyze the significance of relationship of personal variables and the beliefs held by building directors and the role expectations held by relevant others. 8. Record a summation of written comments from all four groups on the questionnaire. Interpret the summations. 9. Summarize findings. Make conclusions and offer recommendations. 17 10. Indicate subjective impressions and areas of further research. Definitions The definition of terms for this study relied to a great extent on the language for role analysis developed by Gross, Mason and McEachern (42) in their studies of expectations held by school superin- tendents and board of education members in Massachusetts. These terms applied as a matter of consistency in this research, except in the description of the works of other authors, where their own definitions may vary because of context. Position Position will be used to refer to the location of an actor or class of actors in a system of social relationships, such as the position of building director in the Flint school system, in relationship with principals, teachers, and adult education people. Expectations An expectation will be defined as an evaluative standard applied to an incumbent of a position. This will refer to what should .i . happen, not to what will happen in the sense of anticipation. eff: Brookover (6) describes three levels of expg'd‘tations. 1. Members of any group have role expectations of any actor in a. broadly defined situation. 18 2. Members of any group have expectations of any actor in a particular position or situation. 3. Any group may have expectations of a particular actor in a specific situation. This study was concerned with expectations members of significant educational groups have for the position of building director in selected situations. Role A role is a set of expectations, or in terms of the definition above, it is a set of evaluative standards applied to an incumbent of a particular position. These sets of expectations may be categorized into role segments. Hartley defines the term in similar language when he states: Accordingly, to include all aspects of role requirements we must define social role as an organized pattern of expectancies that relate to tasks, demeanors, values, and reciprocal relationships to be maintained by persons occupying specific membership positions and fulfilling desirable functions in any group (45: 486). Building Director's Belief How the building director believes he should act in the described situation. _B_I_1i1ding Director's Definition of Others' Expectations How the building director defines or understands the eXPectations of others significant to him. Significant others in this study refers to teachers, principals, and adult education co-ordinators. l9 Expressed Expectation of Others How the significant others in this study, building principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers, believe the building director should act in the described situation. Community Schools For our purpose, these included all the schools in Flint, Michigan, thirty-five elementary, seven junior high, and three high schools. Building Principal The principal is the administrator responsible for the total school program in the schools described above. Building Director This person is responsible for administration, supervision, and organization of the after-school and evening community school program. He normally teaches half—time during the regular school day. This position may be referred to as the focal position. Teachers Includes personnel employed to instruct children in grades kindergarten through twelve in the regular school program. Adult Education Co - ordinators Includes staff members responsible for establishing and co-ordinating various adult education courses in all the schools of Flint. These people seldom teach classes. 20 Regular School Program This term will refer to the day school program, normally operating from 8:00 A. M. to 4:00 P. M. Community School Program This term will refer to the after-school, evening and Saturday educational program. This normally operates from 4:00 P. M. to 11:00 P. M. daily, except Saturday and Sunday. The time schedule for the Saturday program varies. Summary In this chapter the background for the study has been described and the importance of the study outlined in some detail. The basic and testable hypothesis was stated. Procedures and tech- niques to be used were examined. The scope and limitations were indicated. A list of definitions of terms to be used and a summary concluded this chapter. Chapter II contains a review of related and pertinent literature in role theory, role analysis and the normative descriptions of the roles of building director. In Chapter III, the methodology and procedures of planning and conducting the study are presented. The description of the instru- ment used in securing data for the study was included in this chapter. 21 The data are analyzed in Chapter IV and the statistical design and basic assumptions are discussed. The information is presented in tabular form and the results of the analysis are discussed Chapter V provides a summation of recorded statements and interprets them. Chapter VI contains a summary and interpretation of the data. Conclusions, recommendations, subjective impressions, and suggestions for further research are stated. 22 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction The review of literature for this study encompassed two major areas--role theory and research related to role analysis, and authoritative literature which described the duties and responsibilities of the community school building director. This chapter followed the order suggested above. Literature concerned with role theory and analysis was reviewed first and norma- tive descriptions of the position were reviewed last. Role Theory The use of the concept of role in studying a position in education is not new. Waller, using excellent personal insight in a descriptive study of the teaching profession, pointed the way for modern empirical research of role analysis. He demonstrated how the concept of role could be particularly fruitful for the understanding of the social life in schools. In 1932 he stated: The role appears as the organization of the individual with reference to an entire situation; it is the response of the individual to the entire situation as it has taken shape in his mind. Some insight (correct or incorrect) into the attitudes of others is implied. The insight may be entirely fallacious, or it may be incomplete, but to play a role is to regulate one's behavior by the imagined judgments of others (74: 322). 23 The concept of role seems to have withstood the test of time, and "in spite of the confusion and lack of consensus, the concept role is an integral part of sociological vocabulary" (57: 149). In describing the concept of role, Brookover (6: 7) said that it is well known that the concept has been used in many ways by social scientists, ranging from the structural concept generally defined as status to idiosyncratic behavior of a particular role. Many definitions and variant interpretations of the concept were found in the literature as anticipated. In their review of the literature, Gross, Mason and McEachern said, “What Linton and Newcomb define as role, Davis defines as a status; what Davis defines as a role, Newcomb calls role behavior and Sarbin role enactment" (42: 17). The authors suggested that these different definitions were simply a matter of semantics; the same phenomena were sometimes given different names. In this review, the forementioned statements proved to be true to a great extent. Nevertheless, in many of the role conceptualizations, there appeared many common elements of meaning. The variances were more in degree of emphasis and resulted from particular interests and purposes of the writers and the different disciplines the authors represented. Most of the writers frequently indicated 1) the normative aspect of role; 2) the importance of position and location; 3) the 24 behaviors related and associated with the position; and 4) the areas of socially defined expectations which accompany the role in making up the social structure. In fact, Gross, Mason, McEachern (42) concluded their review by saying that the three basic ideas which appeared in most of the conceptualizations they considered, if not in the definitions of role themselves, are that individuals: 1) in s_o_gi3_l_ locations, 2) behave, 3) with reference to expectations. They added that most of the authors have used the role concept to embrace the normative element of social behavior. One of the earlier studies dealing with the concept of role was a. re-survey of the literature done by Neiman and Hughes (57) in 1950. This article reviewed the literature from 1900 to 1950. These authors distinguished various definitions and usages of the concept in terms of l) the dynamics of personality development; 2) functional definitions in terms of society as a whole; and 3) definitions in terms of specific groups. They found three elements of similarity. 1. In all the definitions and usages of the concept there is involved either an individual definition of a specific situation or an individual acceptance of a group's definition of a specific situation. 2. Role behavior, no matter how it is defined, or even when not defined, involves the assumption of a process of symbolic interaction, or communication as a prerequisite, which leads then to further generalization; namely, that man is the only role—playing animal and that this is one of the characteristics which distinguishes man from other animals. 25 3. Human behavior cannot be explained or described by the use of traits or other atomized concepts, but must be viewed from the framework of organized and intergrated patterns of behavior (57: 147). Neiman and Hughes found that in the early historical development, in the area of theoretical assumption and implications, the frame of reference was almost exclusively that of symbolic inter- actionism and that this trend has continued to the present day, as exemplified by those who use the concept as a basic factor in the process of socialization. They said that the most definitive use of the concept and the one about which there is the most consensus, was the trend toward associating the concept of role with that of status. Sarbin's (62) article on role theory contained numerous references to work which has been done in this area. He also covered the development of and research in role theory. A paradigm of role and related concepts was developed by Brookover, with particular references to teacher and administrative roles. He examined seven various aspects of role behavior in the paradigm, from which were distinguished three types or levels of expectations which members of groups may hold in interaction with an actor. A description of the paradigm would be: General status: others' expectations of any actor in a broadly defined position, i. e. teacher. 26 Status in situation: others' expectations of any actor in a particular situation, i. e. history teacher in X school. Role: others' expectations of a particular actor in a particular situation, i. e. Mary Jones, teacher in X school in situation Y. Self-involvement: actor's image of the ends anticipated from participation in the status as he projects his image in the role. Definition: actor's definition of what he thinks others expect of him in the role. Behavior in interaction: actor‘s behavior in interaction with others. This is determined by definition and role and assumes continual redefinition of them in interaction situations (7: 3). Brookover also reviewed various research concerning the three levels of role expectations and suggested needed research in all levels. He recommended using role theory as an analytical tool. Role theory in the organization of a school was summarized by Charters. He reviewed educational literature covering works to 1952 and developed a case for the use of role theory in the study of the organizational structure of the school as an institution. His assumption was that an: Individual's behavior is strongly influenced by the expectations which members of various important groups have of himand his relationships with them. In the con— text of organizational theory, role has added significance because certain of these expectations become institution— alized and an individual is penalized by the organization if his behavior deviates from that which is expected from him (13: 42). 27 Charters encouraged studies of the internal organization and staff relationships within a school system, such as teacher- teacher, teacher-pupil, superintendent—school board, or superintendent- principal. A These, as this present study has done, would be studied from the standpoint of role expectations. Other authors have attempted to develop a language for role theory and role analysis. Newcomb (58) said that the ways of behaving which are expected of any individual who occupies a certain position constitute the role associated with that position. Linton (49) used the term ”status” instead of position. Parsons (61) agreed with Linton, in that role is the dynamic aspect of status, the behavioral counterpart of the "ideal" or expected position defined by a status. Bates (4) departed from Linton, in that he said that social role is a nonbehavioral structural sub-unity of norms. A social role is normative and structural in character, is part of a social position and not an expression of the position in action. His efforts to develop a uniformlanguage included definitions of position, role, status, and norms. A recent study by Gross, Mason and McEachern (42), categorically reviews the literature in terms of three disciplines. Brief examples follow: 1. Linton's (49) often-quoted definition is equated to include 28 normative cultural Latterns. "A role represents the dynamic aspect of status . . . . When the individual puts the rights and duties which constitute the status into effect he is performing a role" (49: 114). 2. In other definitions, role is treated as an individual's definition of his situation with reference to his and others' social positions. This is an individual's perception. 3. The third category they used places definitions which deal with role as the behavior of actors occupying social positions. Behavior implies interaction and requires a concept to show how individuals actually behave in addition to how they 9M behave. Other articles by Argyle (2), Turner (72), Getzels and Cuba (36), and Hughes (48), point to the fact that role theory is being investigated more and more and that the complexities in developing a common language for research purposes can be overcome. This writer believes that Gross, Mason and McEachern (42) have done an outstanding job of introducing concepts which are capable of operational definition and applicable to individual, social and cultural phenomena. Related Re search The studies reviewed were involved with an empirical use of role theory as an analytical tool in dealing with role expectations held by various groups in the educational profession. Greenhoe (41) attempted to define the teachers' social roles as interpreted by school boards, students and teachers. On a 29 national scale she submitted a list of varied behaviors in which teachers might participate. These were limited in the main to large aspects of broad community expectations. Surveyed were 9,122 teachers, 357 board members, 2, 095 citizens and l, 363 students. Interviews were used to develop a paper-pencil questionnaire and the results demonstrated that the social conduct of teachers was somewhat restricted and freedom unduly limited. Bidwell related job satisfaction held by teachers .to their definition of role expectations of administrators and the degree to which administrators fulfill these expectations. He mailed a question- naire to 368 teachers in five school systems, which attempted to measure the perceptions and expectations of the teachers regarding the principal and superintendent and the‘degree of satisfaction of the respondent in the teaching position. From a return of 53 percent, Bidwell concluded that: 1. Convergence of teachers' role-expectations toward the administrator and their perceptions of his behavior will be accompanied by an expression by these teachers of satisfaction with the teaching situation. 2. Divergence of teachers' role-expectations toward the administrator and their perceptions of his behavior will be accompanied by an expression by these teachers of dissatisfaction with the teaching situation (5: 47). Focused interviews were held with a limited sample. Partially substantiated from this was the hypothesis that the level of teaching satisfaction is dependent upon convergence or divergence of 30 expectations and perceptions of their fulfillment and is independent of the nature of the expectation. Role conflict in the teaching situation was studied by Getzels and Guba (37). They studied three major issues: 1) the nature of expectations attached to the teacher role; 2) the extent of conflict among these expectations; and 3) the differential effect of such conflict on the teachers as a function of certain personal and social characteristics. A conflict recording instrument covering three areas of the teacher role; 1) socio-economic, 2) citizen's and 3) professional, was devised. Another questionnaire was developed to gather personal information from each respondent. The instruments were administered to 344 teachers in 18 schools, and 166, or 48 percent responded. The authors concluded that: l. The teacher is defined both by core expectations common to the teaching situation in general and by signi- ficantly varying expectations that are a function of local school and community conditions. 2. Many of the expectations attached to the teacher role are inconsistent with expectations attached to other roles the teacher typically occupies. That is, the teaching situation is in many critical elements characterized by role conflict. 3. The nature of role conflicts is systematically related to certain differences among schools and among communitie s . 4. The existence of role conflicts may be taken as evidence that the teacher role is imperfectly integrated 31 with other roles. The consequence of role conflict may be frustration for the individual teacher and ineffectiveness for the educational institution. 5. There are differential reactions among teachers in the extent of their liability to (or being troubled by) role conflict in the teaching situation. These differential re- actions are systematically and meaningfully related to certain personal characteristics of the teachers (37:40). This present study used a procedure similar to number five above. It was designed to determine if certain personal character- istics were associated with convergent or divergent role expectations regarding certain situations. Terrien (70) concerned himself with the teachers' own conceptions of the expectations of the community. He hypothesized that the occupation of teaching tended to channel the behavior of its occupants into definite and recognizable patterns. He demonstrated that the general impression from the replies of depth interviews was that ”in part teachers conceive of themselves as loyal, nonaggressive, somewhat martyred public servants" (70: 20). Doyle (19), whose research formed the basis for the statistical analysis for part of this research, studied the convergence and divergence of expectations held by parents, board members, and elementary teachers of the elementary teachers‘ roles. He sampled ninety-six teachers from three Michigan communities, used a check- list interview containing forty-eight items covering six selected professional roles of the teacher. The categorized professional 32 roles were: 1) director of learning; 2) guidance and counselor; 3) mediator of the culture; 4) liaison between school and community; 5) member of a school staff; and 6) member of a profession. Ninety-six parents and eighteen board members were submitted to the interview in the same communities. The study indicated that teachers erroneously defined for others many role expectations and identified potential role conflict where none existed. The teachers held many beliefs which the other groups did not share. Of further interest to this research was work done by Seeman (63), who studied role conflict and ambivalence in leadership. By role conflict, Seeman means the exposure of the individual to incompatible behavioral expectations in a given position. Ambivalence was described as the subjectively sensed aspect of the role conflict. His empirical evidence was gathered from 26 randomly selected communities in Ohio. He surveyed 77 superintendents and principals (as leaders), and l, 065 teachers. Substantiated was the notion that institutional leadership positions are naturally positions of high vulnerability with mutually contradictory demands. There was evidence that role conflict derived from potential sources was in fact responded to as such by the actors in the situation. He felt that we place a leader in a position of built-in conflict, and then demand of him greater clarity and decisiveness regarding that role than we our 3 elves command. 33 Another study which referred to a position with built- in role conflict was done by Getzels and Cuba (35). They examined the relationships existing between two highly organized roles, military officer and teacher. Measured was the conflict between these two roles when held by a single individual and the consequences of such conflict for the effective management of one of the roles. People in these positions were interviewed and self-administered questionnaires were submitted to 266 subjects. It was found that over any long period the actor cannot fully meet the expectations of all roles, and to the extent he fails to meet the major expectations, he is judged ineffective in the management of one or another of the roles by the defining group. The effects of clear and unclear role expectations on group productivity and defensiveness was measured by Smith (65). Using laboratory methods and small groups of students, he used paid partici- pants who were instructed to sit in with a group and remain silent, which in turn induced ambiguous role expectations. He showed that ambiguous role expectations reduced group productivity, and that when the role of the silent participant was clarified as that of "listener, " group productivity was increased. Unclear role definitions also pro- duced defensive behavior on the part of group‘participants. Recently, three different studies of importance to this research were based upon role conflict in selected interactive relations of the school superintendency. Halpin (43), as director of a survey 34 team, assumed that the leadership behavior of selected superintendents in Ohio would be affected by the expectations and perceptions of the reference groups with whom they work. Incompatibility was measured by comparisons in a leadership behavior questionnaire which analyzed initiation structure and consideration structure. The actual and ideal behavior of superintendents was correlated. This study, like the present research, was confined to reference groups focal to the position incumbent‘s efforts in the internal organization of the schools. It was pointed out that the role which superintendents adopted in working with board members is different from that which they adopted in working with staff members. Sweitzer (69) attempted to discover the nature and extent of agreement among role expectations and role perceptions held by various reference groups concerning the superintendent‘s role. The extent to which the role expectations were fulfilled was related to teacher morale. Five dimensions of leadership behavior and inter- action were identified. The study instrument consisted of three parts and obtained the role expectations (desirable behavior) of each group, the role perceptions (actual behavior) of each respondent group, and a measurement of teacher morale. Sweitzer summarized that: Even though relatively common criteria tend to be held by the professional members of a school system, they do not perceive or interpret the superintendent‘s behavior in the same way. There are greater differences among groups in regard to role perception than there are in regard to role expectation. 35 If a superintendent's behavior in attempting to bring about instructional improvement is perceived as being too different from what others believe is effective and appro- priate behavior, the general group climate may be affected and teacher morale lowered (69: 2). Sweitzer concluded with a plea for clarification of role expectations and role perceptions and a narrowing of the gap between what ”should be" and what ”is. " In a depth study involving most school superintendents in Massachusetts, Gross, Mason and McEachern (42) explored the problems of consensus on role definition, conformity to expectations and resolution of role conflict. Tested were many theoretical hypotheses involving expectations and the behavior of incumbents of positions in educational social systems. Depth interviews of board members and superintendents, ranging from two hours for board members to eight hours for superintendents, were the main tools of research for this empirical study of role definition. Consensus of role definition was measured within groups (intraposition consensus) and between groups (interposition consensus). Macroscopic consensus focused on the role definitions of 105 superin- tendents and of 508 school board members in Massachusetts. Micro- scopic consensus was measured for particular school systems. Examined also were some areas of major role conflict with which the superin- tendents were confronted. Role consensus was [used as a variable in this study. 36 The role of the elementary special area teacher and consultant role was studied by Hoffman (46). Except for the substi- tution of mailed questionnaires for the interviews, he used methods and scales similar to Cross, Mason, and McEachern. Seventeen school districts in Michigan were chosen in which conflicting expectations held by educators concerning this role were analyzed. Questionnaires were sent to 150 teachers, 150 administrators, and 150 special area teachers and consultants. Three hundred forty-two, or 76 percent responded. Sixty-two items were selected dealing with generalized roles. In these selected items it was shown that there was inconsistency in role per- ceptions held for these roles. Possibilities of open role conflict were established. . Eldon Nonnamaker (59) studied expectations held for the role on the enrollment officer at Michigan State University. A random sampling of seven campus groups was chosen. An instrument con- cerning various expectations held for the enrollment officer's role was constructed. A sixty item schedule was mailed to 189 subjects, with 162 returns. The scale developed by Gross, Mason and McEachern (42) was also adapted for this study. It was concluded that there is no one set of expectations held for the enrollment officer. However, all groups expressed areas of agreement for many categories of the role. Significant differences were found in expectations held for the role by counselors. The duties and responsibilities of the enrollment officer consequently should be more clearly defined. 37 A study of teachers' and principals' role expectations conclude this part of the review. Both of these positions contain areas of potential role conflict, especially when studied in relationship with one another. Holden (47) studied the roles of secondary principals as reported by 42 junior and senior high school principals and 148 teachers in six counties of Washington. Recorded was the degree to which reported role perceptions clustered around three divisions of the administrative role: managing, harmonizing, and motivating. Self- perceptions of principals and perceptions of teachers were compared. A twenty statement questionnaire, 18 open-ended questions and personal observations by a survey team 'were used as research tools. It was discovered that secondary teachers and principals generally differed in use or disuse of the three categories. There was disagreement in the ways the groups perceived responses to behavior described as person-centered or process-centered. Teachers made more person- centered responses and principals more process-centered responses when describing the principals. Waite (73) made a situational analysis of teacher and principal relationships. Measured perceptions held by personnel of two schools were compared. He addressed the study to the fact that latent conflict, which is inherent in the teacher-principal relationship, is easily aroused into hostilities which can seriously hamper the effectiveness of a school principal and affect the efficiency of his staff 38 members. It was shown that in winning the support of a school staff, a principal must conform to behaviors which are regarded by the staff as his role. His effectiveness as a leader was greatly affected by the success with which he was able to comprehend the nature of these expectations and behave in accordance with them. These role expectations were grouped into three categories: 1. General expectations which evolved from the tradition and values of the teaching profession. 2. Institutional expectations which originated from the cultural setting of the school. 3. Individual expectations of staff members which vary with personality characteristics of the individual. Waite recommended that leadership training for the principal include instruction in predicting role norms or expected behavior which teachers may hold for their leaders (principals). Teacher satisfaction in relationship to teacher-principal agreement was the focal point of a study by Campbell (1 1). He hypothesized that those teachers whose wants and needs were in agree- ment with their principal's expectations would express significantly higher job satisfaction than would those teachers whose wants were in conflict with the principal‘s definition of the teacher's role. The hypothesis was supported by the results obtained from 15 principals and 284 teachers. The principal's questionnaire consisted of 60 39 statements indicating what was expected of teachers by the principal. The principal also rated the effectiveness of his teachers and each teacher indicated his own job satisfaction. In summary, administrators were warned to be aware of two aspects of social behavior, job specification and the wants and needs of the individual. It was recom- mended that the principal needed to be more effective in communicating his expectations to teachers. Other studies which reported similar approaches to the study of role expectations were made by Case (34) in the areas of teacher and parent perceptions of the role of the elementary teacher; by Chilcott (14) in the study of teacher expectations at the community level; by Cowan (18) in the area of teacher roles as perceived by academic and education faculty members on the college level; and by Melton (54) who determined ideal and actual role perceptions of elementary principals employed in Wayne County, Michigan. In summary, the literature revealed that role theory is increasingly being implemented in the study of role expectations and perceptions. The concept of role involved an actor in relation to significant others. The assumption was made that the concept is meaningful only in situations involving interaction. The empirical studies demonstrated that role expectations held by various groups can be measured and agreement and disagree- ment compared. The professional roles of the subject population were 40 categorized in many studies. A marked similarity in the methods used was found. Interviews and questionnaires were used in recording responses. Relationships between and among groups within and without the formal organization of the school were studied and potential role conflict in the situations described. The need for role clarity was shown many times. Personal and social characteristics of respondent and incumbent groups were used as variables in several studies. This concludes the first part of the review of literature. Authoritative Literature Regarding the Building Director's Position .. Most of the literature concerned with the role of the community school building director has been written by Flint people who have been associated with the Flint Public School system. These studies have been primarily concerned with normative approaches to role definition and none dealt with role analysis or expectations. A handbook, the Flint Community Schools (23), was written by graduate seminar groups enrolled in classes in Flint held by Eastern Michigan University and Michigan State University. This was developed during the summer of 1954 and the 1954-55 school year. This book described the new staff position of the Flint community school building director and his duties and responsibilities. The study summarized that in addition to half-day teaching, his duties include the organizing and supervising of after-school activities and the 41 responsibility for planning and carrying out of an evening and Saturday community school program. The director is responsible to the prin- cipal and plans the school's program with his assistance. He should work closely with other staff members and representatives of the community. He also directs a summer recreation program. Also described were techniques for good public relations and how the building director should initiate a community school program (23: 8-13). John Major, Lou Scieszka and Lou Tasse (50), building directors themselves, defined the role by evaluating discussions with administrators, service personnel, community residents, and other building directors. In a descriptive study they outlined in detail the role under the following titles: educator, administrator, leader, director, organizer, supervisor, salesman, and co-ordinator for the Mott Foundation. In outlining the staff's line of responsibility they stated that the principal is responsible to the superintendent and the building director is responsible to the principal and co-ordinating staff offices. They added that generally the roles of a building director were as follow: 1) a professional educator who conducts classes; 2) a person who acts as liaison between teachers, administrators and the community; and 3) a co-ordinator for the activities of the Mott Foundation. Nine statements they called areas of full responsibility concluded the paper. 42 A problem's course paper, ”The Role of the Building Director in the Flint Community School, " was submitted to the Depart- ment of Physical Education, Michigan State University, by Don W. Coleman (15). Coleman surveyed by questionnaire the twenty-eight building directors in 1958 and found their average age to be twenty- seven, average number of years employed to be two and one-half, and their educational achievement level to include twenty-four with bachelor's degrees and four with master's degrees. The majority had been hired immediately after graduation from college and possessed educational majors in physical education. Coleman classified the building director's roles as: 1) a staff member; 2) an administrator; 3) an educator; and 4) a co-ordinator. His survey reported that seventy-five percent of the building directors listed inadequate staff and public communications as their foremost problem. During the summer of 1958 a series of graduate seminars held in Flint and conducted by the Industrial Relations Center of the University of Chicago, attempted to clarify the key functions and responsibilities of the community school building director. A check- list questionnaire was developed that covered twenty-two general areas, from specific duties to general functions and responsibilities. The building directors were asked to examine what they were currently doing and how they were doing it; secondly, they were asked to list what they thought they should be doing and how they ought to be doing it. 43 The building principals answered the check-list, too. In general, three broad categories, i. e. , school-community relations; organization, administration and supervision; and leadership and democratic procedures, were indicated as areas in which the director's key functions and responsibilities were found. Thirteen key functions to be performed to implement plans and accomplish objectives and fifty specific responsibilities were identified by the study. The functions and responsibilities are: l. School-community relations. a. Promotes the community school concept. b. Knows the people in the community. c. Determines make-up of the community. d. Utilizes community resources. e. Creates and maintains a friendly atmosphere. f. Participates in school and community services. 2. Organization, administration and supervision. a. Organizes and administers the program. b. Supervises assigned instructional activities. 3. Leadership and democratic procedures. a. Exerts personal leadership. b. Engages in personal development. c. Provides community leadership. d. Develops effective organizational structure. e. Promotes staff leadership (29: 29-34). This work provided one basis from which the questionnaire used in this study was developed. While writing on the pattern of the community schools of Flint, Buehring (9) mentioned the role of the director. "Success of 44 the Flint community school program is dependent upon intelligent and dedicated leaders. Aside from the administrative heads, these leaders today are the school building directors, especially trained for the work" (9: 37). He listed the desirable personal qualifications for the building directors, as well as some of their duties. In answering specific questions pertaining to community school building directors, a Flint Board of Education (24) bulletin stated that the directors teach one-half load in the afternoon, continue as supervisors of the after-school and evening program, work a forty- eight week year, and are paid according to the regular teaching salary schedule. The bulletin also defined their on-the-job education, necessary educational qualifications, present educational backgrounds, and line of responsibility to the building principal. During the summer of 1959,-Edward Bailey (3) sampled twenty-five selected local leaders in Flint and interviewed them to determine their general perceptions of the Flint community school program. Of interest to this study were the findings that only three leaders knew their neighborhood school building director's name upon immediate recall and that nine respondents said that they did not know the job of the director. The remaining sixteen respondents gave answers that were unclear. The perceptions held of his job in the program were vague in this sample of community leaders. 45 Because of its relationship and importance to this study, the basic philosophy of the Flint community schools was reviewed. Areas of staff responsibility are inherent in the policy statements. This document, as revised in 1959, appears in its entirety in Appendix A. Summary The literature was reviewed in terms of providing a back- ground for the theoretical concept of role and methods and techniques used in the analysis of role expectations. The theoretical framework of role concepts was outlined and empirical research was reviewed in terms of relationship to methods used in the present study. It was shown that many studies have consisted of defining the expectations which others hold of an actor in positions of potential role conflict. Few have included a comparison of all three aspects of role expectations: the actor's beliefs, the actor's definition of others' expectations and the expressed expectations of significant others. All the literature found in the area of the community school building director was definitive and descriptive in nature. These were job descriptions and were not concerned with hypothetical assumptions regarding divergent and convergent role expectations held and the possibilities of role conflict. Some clues were found in the literature which indicated that the position of building director was one in which role conflict in interaction with relevant groups was possible. Chapter III discusses the methods of planning and conducting the study. 46 CHAPTER III PLANNING AND CONDUCTING THE STUDY Introduction One purpose of this study was to define relevant duties and responsibilities of selected professional roles of the community school building director. Situational aspects of these categorized roles were identified and chosen. Role expectations which building directors held concerning behavior they thought appropriate in these selected situations were compared with their definition of expectations held by significant reference groups. The expressed expectations of others, i. e., principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers, were determined and compared. This part of the study was based on the assumption that these different groups would hold different and sometimes conflicting expectations. The study was aimed at noting divergence and convergence between building directors' beliefs, definitions of expectations held by significant others, and the expressed expectations of other 5 . General Methods of the Study During the early part of this study, February to September, 1959, the investigator was employed as a practicing school administrator in a rural school district and since September, 1959, as a member of 47 the administrative services staff of the Michigan Department of Public Instruction. Before the study began, several state community education workshops held in Flint had been attended. In the spring of 1959 a Community School Education Fellowship provided the investigator with adequate time to study the Flint program. It soon became apparent after several visits to Flint that a study of the position of the community school building director would prove worthwhile. The writer spent twenty-eight days in Flint during the spring, summer and fall of 1959 and also attended state and national workshops held the spring and fall of 1959 in Flint. The early visits were structured by the Flint administration, guided by Dr. Fred Totten, Director of Community School Services, and Mr. George Keem, Flint Co-ordinator for Michigan State University. The purpose was to obtain an overview of the total program. Later visits were concerned specifically with viewing the role of the community school building director. Interviewed were teachers, parents, students, building directors, adult education co-ordinators, custodial staff, building principals and administrative staff responsible to the Flint Board of Education. The program in action was observed. Administrative seminars, system-wide staff meetings, building directors' meetings, and teachers' meetings held within particular buildings were attended. The interviews were held on a semi-formal basis and were structured from the standpoint of information sought. The 48 location of the conference was usually the building in which the person worked or attended school. Information secured included impressions of the overall program, and specific information concerning the role of the building director. People working with the building director were asked how they viewed his position, what specific relationships they had with him, how he allocated his time, and what effect they thought his position had on the Flint organizational structure. The building director was asked what had motivated him to become a building director, what was his educational background, how he actually allocated his time and how he would ideally allocate his time, how he perceived his relationships with other staff members, and how he viewed his job in terms of significant duties and responsibilities. Specifically interviewed in answering the foregoing questions were: eight building directors, three building principals, two staff administrators, four adult education co-ordinators, ten teachers, two custodians and ten parents. Statements and replies were recorded at the conclusion of each interview. The regular school and community school programs were observed in action in ten schools. The forementioned schools and school personnel were selected by Flint administrators as being representative of the Flint program. Many informal interviews and observations helped supple- ment the formal visits with additional information. This information was recorded and cross-checked with the formalized interviews. 49 Both sources provided similar information. Development of the Instrument The questionnaire used for the present study was developed after careful analysis of previous research that had been done in the areas of role analysis and role expectations. Information obtained from the interviews, on-the-job observations, and review of pertinent literature was used in constructing and categorizing the professional roles of the community school building director. Statements gleaned from the literature, from recorded comments, and from the investigator's first hand observations, were compiled as a pilot instrument. The basic philosophy of the Flint community schools 'also contributed many ideas from which these statements were developed. The statements were superimposed upon a questionnaire form and scale similar to that used by Doyle (l9). Ninety statements describing situations involving relevant role expec- tations of building directors were included in the first draft. This was submitted to a panel of judges familiar with the Flint program for editing and clarifying statements. Committee members also provided comments and constructive criticisms. After several revisions, the content of the questionnaire was judged to be as consistent and as accurate as conditions would permit. The format of the revised questionnaire included 75 statements of expectations that could be 50 answered in terms of agreement (yes), disagreement (no), or no expectation held (do not know) for the particular situation. Seven multiple choice questions and one open-ended question requesting additional information concluded the instrument. The building directors also answered fourteen questions concerning their personal characteristics. These were suggested by the instrument used by Getzels and Guba (37). Definition of the Building Director's Roles The four categories of the building director's roles were defined as: 1) as a teacher; 2) as an administrator, organizer, and supervisor of the community school program; 3) as a professional staff member; and 4) as a co-ordinator of school and community relations. These were developed after extensive review of literature describing his roles, review of the philosophy and objectives of the Flint community schools, and analysis of information recorded from the interviews and observations. Teacher As a teacher, the building director has responsibility for half-time instruction during the regular school program. He usually teaches afternoon physical education classes. He is expected to present common learnings and fundamental skills in his subject area. 51 He affords cooperative projects in planning, problem solving, and situations during the school day which are intended to develop attitudes and skills appropriate for living in a democracy. As a teacher, he provides a comprehensive sequence of learning activities designed to develop and enhance the abilities of his students. Problems of the student and teacher relationships are the responsibility of the building director in guidance situations. He uses community resources and encourages the partici- pation of parents and citizens in his instructional program. Dr. Ernest O. Melby has described a new role for a teacher in the community schooL Whereas in the past we assumed that the teacher was one who knew how to teach subjects, we are now assuming that the teacher is one who knows how to release the creative capacities of her pupils, who knows how to work creatively with the parents of these pupils, so that, together, she and the parents have the most creative impact on the pupils. In fact, the teacher and the parents together seek to build for the children of her classroom the most creative community in its totality'(53: 251-2). Administrator of the Community School Program The building director administers the community school Program through a definite organization or structure of plans, procedures, personnel and physical facilities. He provides the necessary leadership to direct the program and enable the program to function smoothly. Referring to the administration of the community school, Haskew and Hanna say: 52 Administration is the process of bringing people, ideas and materials into such relationships that an enterprise moves efficiently toward the achievement of its objectives. It implies planning. It includes organizing, managing and directing. It contemplates the control of quality and the evaluation of results. Although the enterprise being administered is the essential determinant of the character of the administrative task, administration itself is intrinsically process. That is, it is concerned with the way of‘getting things done (44: 133-4). The organizational, administrative, and supervisory tasks of the building director are difficult, if not impossible, to separate. In fact, effective use of available resources for the direction of the community school program demands their integration. Board of educ ation policies indicate the position as sub-ordinate to the building principal in this role. Professional Staff Member As a member of the educational profession and as a staff member of the Flint Public School system, the building director contributes to developing more adequate staff relationships. He P1")mOteS a unity 0f purpose in all activities of the profession staff organization in accordance with adopted policies. In interacting with other staff members he encourages total professional staff participation in the community SChOOl Program and involves himself in areas Of Staff adult development. It is necessary for him to interaCt with Prinmpals’ ' o o o beri education co-ordinators, and teachers in his role as a staff mem He is involved with these groups in the planning: Operating, and 53 evaluating of various phases of the community school program. He 1teeps staff members informed concerning the community school Program and co-ordinates the activities of staff members in his Program. During the regular school program he is a fellow teacher. Co-ordinator of School and Community Relations The building director is the liaison between the school and community. He is skilled in interpreting the social and physical envir onment of Flint and encourages teachers and students to use community resources in solving problems. He secures community cooperation in school activities and participates with citizens in formulating goals, objectives, and needs of the community and school. He is responsible for developing a two -way flow of information between the school and community. He attempts to increase community understanding concerning the purposes, values . PrOblems and needs of the school system. He feels the pulse 0f the community! As the middle man, he promotes the school as the focal point of the community organization and activities. Conversely, he recognizes and identifies human and physical resources in the community. He sees himself as a catylistic agent in enhancing the implementation of the Flint community school concept. In this liaison capacity he bridges the gap between school and community and helps to deVEIOP a sense Of total community in children, adults and pro— - ' ' ns feselonal educators. He improves the channels Of communicatlO among and between these groups. 54 These are the four categories of the professional roles of the community school building director which are significant to this study. The situational aspects of these classifications were Selected from these broad generalizations. Respondent Population The respondent population included the building directors, building principals, adult education co—ordinators, and a stratified random sampling of teachers who were employed in the Flint Public School system during the 1959-60 school year. As described in Chapter I, Flint, Michigan was the locale of this study. The Flint school administration also indicated a willingness to allow the inves- tigator to use the school system as the locale for the study. Questionnaires were mailed to 42 building principals: 35 building directors, 20 adult education co-ordinators, and 127 teachers. Teachers were stratified so that ten percent were selected at random from each of the 45 school buildings. The questionnaires were Sent to each person's home address and a follow-UP ktter was sent in three weeks. A random sampling of the nonrespondent groups was taken after six weeks. Summary The general methods and procedures used in planning and Conducting this study were described in this chapter. The 55 questionnaire used as the tool of investigation was described and its development outlined. The significant professional roles of the building director were defined. Purposes of the interviews, on-the- job observations, and visitations were explained. The respondent population of Flint educators participating in the research was indicated. Chapter IV presents the statistical design and analyzes the d ata. 56 CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Introduction Selected groups of educators employed in the Flint, Michigan Public Schools contributed the data for this study. Included in the population of role definers were community school building directors, building principals, adult education co-ordinators, and 3. str atified random sampling of classroom teachers. Several methods of analyzing the data were used. The analysis first sought to determine the mean pro- portion of respondents who actually held expectations concerning the selected items. This was aimed at discovering differences which might exist between the various groups. Personal characteristics of the Significant others were related to the proportion holding expectations. The Six items requesting additional information were ranked according to Preferences and resp0nses by the various groups were Compared by the rank-difference method of correlation' , Affirmative expectations held by the various groups were also identified. These were examined and convergence and divergence 0f expectations compared, The chi—square statisfic was used to . ' ative deterI'nine significant differences between the groups h01d1ng affirm 57 expectations. Conflicting expectations and definitions were noted. The percentages of items upon which expectations and definitions Were not significantly different were recorded and grouped into four Classifications. Selected personal variables and known characteristics Of the building directors and significant others were also assumed to be systematically related to expectations held. Significant differences betw een the principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers were computed by the chi-square statistic. Affirmative expectations held by building directors were ranked and the responses of the seve :ral classifications of building directors compared by the rank- difference method of correlation. All the data, except the written comments, were recorded for analysis on IBM cards. A summation of recorded statements received from the respondents appears in Chapter V. Presentation of the Data The population of role definers is described in Table 1- This table indicates the numbers of building directors. Prineipals' adult education co-ordinators, and teachers employed by the Flmt Public Schools during the 1959-60 school year. TABLE 1 58 NUMBERS OF BUILDING DIRECTORS, PRINCIPALS AND TEACHERS ACCORDING TO SCHOOLS IN FLINT, MICHIGAN Schools Principals Building directors Teachers ficondary Schools Central 1 1/ 2 75 Northern 1 1/2 66 Southwestern 1 l 66 Bryant 1 l 33 Erne rson 1 1/ 2 57 Lon gfellow l/ 2 1/2 38 Low ell 1 1/ 2 38 Mc Kinley 1/2 1/2 32 Whittier 1 1/2 49 Zimmerman 1/2 1/2 29 Elementary Schools Civic 1 1 25 Clark 1 1 19 Cody 1 o 28 Cook 1 1 l6 Coolidge 1 1 1" Cummings 1 1 2'0 Dewe y l 0 2'3 Dort 1 1 28 Doyle 1 1 2'0 Dur ant-T-Mott 1 1 36 Fairview 1 l 20 Freeman 1 l 27 Garfield 1 1 25 Gundry 1 1 34 Hazelton l O 7 Homedale 1 1 33 Jefferson 1 1 29 Lewis 1 1 / 2 21 Lincoln 1 0 12 Longfellow 1/2, 1 /2 30 Martin 1 1 3O McKinley 1/ 2 1 /2 26 59 TABLE 1. --Continued m. Schools Principals Building directors Teachers Merrill 1 1 22 Oak 1 1 13 Parkland l 1 l9 Pierce 1 l 15 Pierson 1 l 31 Potter 1 1 28 R00 sevelt l l 25 Selb y 1 l 23 Stevenson 1 l 12 Stewart 1 1 26 Walker 1 0 12 Was hington 1 1 l7 Zimmerman 1/ 2 1/ 2 20 Junior College 0 l 0 Totals 42 35 1, 271 20 Adult education co-ordinators Five schools had no building director and twelve buildings . . a1 Sher ed the services of six directors. Three pr1nc1pals 3150 had du 0 O o c . . a he 1'eepon51bilit1es. A stratified random sampling of ten percent 0f t . d. teaChing staff was chosen. Junior college instructors were eXCIude The number of usable questionnaires returned during the Specified allowable time is described in Table 2. 60 TABLE 2 NUMBER OF USABLE RETURNS ‘_ 45 Group Number sent Returned Percent Building directors 35 26 74. 2 Principals 42 33 78. 5 Adult education ._ co-ordinators 20 16 80. 0 Teachers 127 90 70. 8 Totals 224 165 73. 6 The questionnaires, which were sent to the home residences of the selected groups, had been coded for the purposes of aiding in fellow-up and identification of selected personal characteristics. It was noted that four building directors, three principals, and two teachers had erased or covered their code number. None of the adult education Personnel had done so. Therefore, for a small percentage of the resPondents, some of the personal information was not available- In place of the instrument, two teachers returned written Statements describing the building director's position. Questionnaires which Were sent six weeks after the first group were received from a random sampling of nonreSPOndents. These returns were handled separ ately and found not to be significantly different from the early respondents. 61 Table 3 classifies the building principals, teachers and adult education co-ordinators according to their sex and the number of years in which they have worked in a building with a building director. TABLE 3 CLASSIFICATION OF PRINCIPALS, TEACHERS, AND ADULT EDUCATION CO-ORDINATORS ACCORDING TO SEX AND YEARS EXPERIENCE WITH A BUILDING DIRECTOR ---—Experience in years--- * Less than 3 years Group Male Female NR NR 3 years or more Principals 15 15 3 ll 22 0 Teachers 23 65 2 31 58 1 Adult education co-ordinators 5 ll 0 6 10 0 Totals 43 91 5 48 ‘ 9o 1 *NR means no response. The incumbents of the position being studied were asked many questions concerning their personal characteristics. All of the twenty-six respondents are male, and it is known that the two late respondents and seven nonrespondents are also male. Tables 4 and 5 indicate the building directors' age groupings, marital status, number of children, educational level and preparation, number of school systems in which employed, years of teaching experience and Years of experience as a building director. The intervals used were broadened from those which the original instrument recorded. 62 m omsommmu 02 m omcommou 07H m omnommou oz vH shoe no m mH shoe no H w whoa Ho H o m sea» mmod w oaoz mH ocoz scuoouHHo wsHHoHHsn .m HoUonHo .m 9380003 3 uoHunH Hoo>oHnHEm £033 CH assume? .02 oz .02 mm ooGoHnomxo muse? mosoHnomxm wagons mo muse? Hoosom .850 Ho HQQESZ mmmoo . .4 .2 M £2 H» MHZ m J”HZ w H GoHumUsHoo 5:55.580 wH .4 .2 MH no>o u N «CH @2532 oH H96 1 0m H mH soflmUdHuo Hson>£nH v .4 .m 0H Huo m onch mH ownom son—summonm .o Ho>oH .0 son H .0 ms .m m .m C .o 999% mm 4H>H 4m HmeoHumosHomH 7H HmGoHumosHomH 7H UH.£O 7H s. a H a. .32 Z 4 ZOHB4MH4nHHMHnH 1H47HOHH4ODnHmH Q24 1HmH>mH1H 1H47HOHB4UDQH .ZQMQAHTHO .mDH4Hm 1H4HUH4H>H .HO4 OH. UZHQMHOUO4 MMHOHOMHMHQ OZHQAHDQ .mO ZOHH4UHhHmm41HU He H4m4H. 63 Table 6 describes the future plans of the twenty-six respondents, records answers relating to whether they would enter the educational profession again, and indicates whether they would become building director 5 again. TABLE 6 CLASSIFICATION OF BUILDING DIRECTORS ACCORDING TO FUTURE PLANS, AND STATEMENTS REFERRING TO RE-ENTERING THE EDUCATIONAL PROFESSION AND THE POSITION OF. DIRECTOR Future plans in 0 Would enter No Would become field of education ° profession again ' director again a. Fully expect Yes 20 Yes 23 to remain 17 b. Remain at No 2 No 3 least five years 3 c. May leave after five years 2 d. Plan to look for another job this year 0 e. No response 4 No response 4 No response 0 Table 7 records the building directors' aspirations to obtain educational administrative positions and relates their personal beliefs regarding a comparison of their position to the building principal's POSition in terms of prestige as rated by teachers and parents. 64 TABLE 7 CLASSIFICATION OF BUILDING DIRECTORS ACCORDING TO ADMINISTRATIVE ASPIRATIONS AND COMPARING POSITION WITH PRINCIPAL'S IN TERMS OF PRESTIGE AS RATED BY TEACHERS AND PARENTS Desire to obtain 0 Principal's position has more prestige administrative positions ' in eyes of: Parents No. Teachers No. Yes 21 Yes 19 Yes 19 No, I expect to remain as a director 2 No 3 No 3 No response 3 NR 4 NR 4 The seventy-five statements and multiple choice questions used in this study are listed in Tables 8 through 12. Directors were asked to check their own expectations and those they believe are held by principals, teachers and adult-education co-ordinators. The same statements and multiple choice questions were submitted to the principals, teachers and adult education co-ordinators who checked the expectations they held. A ”yes” response indicated an affirmative expectation. The respondent believed the building director should do what was described in the item. A ”no" response demonstrated that the respondent believed the building director should not do what was indicated in the Statement. A ”do not know” response illustrated that the respondent held no belief concerning what the building director should do for the H H g—o r: H I 65 particular item, thus indicating the lack of an expectation, and that no clear definition was held. When the building directors defined their own expectations the "do not know" column was omitted. It was assumed that as the position incumbents they would hold a definition of what they should do in the described situation. However, the ”do not know” column was added when the building directors were asked to indicate definitions of expectations held by significant others. The statements were categorized into five classifications for analysis. These included the building director's four professional roles and a fifth classification which included additional information. TABLE 8 CLASSIFICATION .OF SELECTED ITEMS ACCORDING. TO THEIEACHING ROLE OF THE BUILDING DIRECTOR‘S POSITION m Items 1 through 10 1. Take children on field trips during regular school hours, such as visiting industries, banks, businesses, etc. 2. Enlist the aid of business men in providing materials and supplies for various regular school activities, such as a TV dealer furnishing sets or antennas. 3. Bring parents into the regular school as curriculum resource persons, such as showing travel films, discussing their occupations, etc. 4. Provide students with opportunities to solve their own problems in teen clubs. 5- Take a regular school class on a camping trip during the school year to learn about natural resources, etc. 66 TABLE 8. - -Continued 6. Permit groups of children to help plan what to study for his regular school classes. 7. Use community facilities and services, such as YMCA boys: farm or Red Cross, as part of his regular school instructional program. 8., Counsel youngsters referred to him as "trouble makers” by teachers or by the building principal. 9. Allow children to participate in evaluation of the regular school program. 10. Use community needs and problems as a basis for curriculum development for the regular school. TABLE 9 CLASSIFICATION OF SELECTED ITEMS ACCORDING TO THE COMMUNITY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATIVE ROLE OF THE BUILDING DIRECTOR‘S POSITION Items 11 through 25 11. Plan the program of community school activities cooperatively with adults, teachers, administrators, and students. 12. Schedule activities, such as dances, basketball games, during regular school vacation periods (excluding summer). 13. Plan adult activities involving different religious groups. 14. Have authority to suspend children from community school activities. 15. Organize adult activ1ties intended to improve interracial relationships. 16. Schedule community school activities on Saturdays. 17., Select volunteer adults to work with evening commumty school PI‘Ograms. 67 TABLE 9. - -Continued 18. Be the person responsible for supervising all phases of the community school program. 19. Attempt to create better understanding among people through planning activities that will being different social groups together. 20. Encourage programs designed to develop adult leadership found within the community. 21. Use regular school facilities and educational resources to give adultmgpppo'rtunitiesf for eve'ningacademic; training. 22. Be the person who is responsible for co-ordinating his community school program with all other community school programs in Flint. 23. Plan men's clubs activities that are designed to increase under- standing between labor and management. 24. Be responsible for collecting money for after-school dances, roller skating, etc. 25. Be the person in his school responsible for developing the curricula for adult evening classes. TABLE 10 CLASSIFICATION OF SELECTED ITEMS ACCORDING TO THE PROFESSIONAL STAFF MEMBER ROLE OF THE BUILDING DIRECTOR'S POSITION ‘ Items 26 through 51 _ 26. Be responsible for selecting adult education instructors. 27. Appoint as adult education teachers only those recommended by adult education co-ordinators. 28. Delegate supervision of some after-school activities to other n‘lernbers of the regular school teaching staff. 68 TABLE 10. --Continued —— — 29. Take the initiative in explaining to the building principal signifi- cant community needs and problems. 30. Involve teachers in such activities as chaperoning teen clubs, dances, etc. 31. Be a key person in his school responsible for informing adult education co-ordinators of the types of adult education classes needed. 32. Serve on various regular school problem committees. 33. Assume leadership in his school for encouraging interest of regular school teachers in community problems. 34. Actively participate in tax levy campaigns for school funds. 35. Be an initiator of in-service education programs intended to inform regular school teachers of needed curriculum changes. 36. Possess knowledge of the professional compentencies of the regular school teaching staff. 37. Be a key person in his school for helping regular school teachers become aware of human and physical resources available in the Flint community. 38. Consult with co-ordinators of each adult education division before setting up related community school activities. 39. Be responsible to the principal for administration of the community school program. 40. Have authority to dismiss evening school adult education instructors. 41. Continue personal education by'attending week-end workshops. 42. Assist in the selection of adult education instructors by making recommendations to the building principals. 43. Keep the regular school staff informed concerning the objectives and purposes of the community school program. 44- Involve regular school teachers in such activities as community Surveys. 4| 1 '—_‘ H 69 TABLE 10. --Continued 45. Understand educational problems outside the field of his subject matter preparation. 46. Be included in planning regular school teachers' staff meetings. 47. Have a part in establishing all salary schedules. 48. Work closely with the building principal in planning the community school program. 49. Actively participate in teachers' associations. 50. Provide ways in which the regular school staff may evaluate the community school program. 51. Know and enforce Board of Education policies. TABLE 11 CLASSIFICATION OF SELECTED ITEMS ACCORDING TO THE COMMUNITY AND SCHOOL LIAISON ROLE OF THE BUILDING DIRECTOR'S POSITION Items 52 through 74 52. When finding a child or family in need of some social service, refer the case and make necessary contacts in welfare, family counseling or health. 53. Visit children's homes to become acquainted with the parents. 54. Use a community council for overall co-ordination of the ' community school program. 55. Know personally the recognized leaders in various social agencies. 56. Assume leadership in his school in co-ordinating the work of the School with various Flint social agencies. 70 TABLE 11. --Continued 57. Give talks to community groups for the purpose of interpreting the needs and problems of the Flint school system. 58. Participate actively in local civic groups. 59. Use community councils to improve communications between school and community. 60. Promote the school and its facilities as the focal point for community meetings and activities. 61. Become familiar with both sides of controversial community issues in order to provide leadership in arriving at fair solutions. 62. Encourage parents to use the services of the school in solving their personal and family problems. 63. Attempt to identify adult leadership in the community. 64. Be acquainted with such people as neighborhood businessmen. 65. Use school services to help other social agencies and institutions, such as Youth Bureau, Big Sisters, fulfill their obligations. 66. Become acquainted with the nature of the community, such as knowing the occupations of area residents. 67. Promote the school as the ideal agent for bringing about better understanding among people for solving community problems. 68. Conduct surveys to learn community needs and interests. 69. Provide newspaper publicity as community recognition for individual and group accomplishments. 70. Work with church organizations in implementing the community SChool program. 71. Offer personal opinions to community groups concerning Significant Flint school problems. 72- Be able to explain the work of regular school teachers in an understanding way to community groups. 71 TABLE 11. - -Continued 73. 74. Help identify problems which are common to the community and the school. Make surveys of physical and human resources within the community. TABLE 12 CLASSIFICATION OF ITEMS CONCERNED WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE DIRECTOR'S POSITION Items 75 through 82 75. Live in the school attendance area in which he works. 76. I believe the building director should: a. b. c. d. be regarded as having the same status as teaching personnel. be regarded as administrative personnel. be regarded as somewhere between administrative and teaching personnel, have a unique position, not clearly administrative nor Clearly teaching. other. 77. I believe that the building director should: a. b. C. d. 78. teach half-day sessions as well as administer the after- school and community school program. teach full day sessions and administer the after-school and community school programs. not teach during the regular school day, spending {1111 time with the community school and after-school program. other. Assuming that teaching is part of his job, I believe that the building director should: 9.00“?) teach physical education. teach academic subjects. makes no difference what he teaches. other. 72 TABLE 12. - —Continued 1 79. I believe the building director should have: the same salary schedule as teaching personnel. a. b. the same salary schedule as administrative personnel. c. the same salary schedule as teaching personnel, with extra pay for after-school and Saturday work. d. the same salary schedule as administrative personnel, with extra pay for after-school and Saturday work. e. a salary schedule formulated especially for their par- ticular position. f. other. 80. I believe the building director should: a. be required to enroll injob-related college courses. b. enroll at his own option in job-related college courses. c. other. 81. Do you believe that women should be hired as building directors ? a. yes b. no 82. Do you have any other comments which would help you express your point 0f view concerning the building director's position? Analysis of the Data To Indicate the Mean Proportion of Significant Others Who Hold Expectations The data were analyzed to determine the mean proportion of principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers in the respondent groups who actually held expectations regarding the Selected items. For this analysis the respondents in each group who held affirmative or negative expectation were combined and compared With those who did not hold an expectation or were unable to define an expectation for the particular item. 73 It was assumed that there would be differences between the groups of role definers when compared according to the proportion who defined expectations for the selected items. The analysis sought to determine differences in the proportion of those holding expectations among the groups when responses by men and women were compared. The data were also analyzed to point out differences when respondents with less than three years of experience with a building director were compared with respondents with three or more years of experience. Table 13 indicates the mean proportion of the three groups who held expe ctations . TABLE 13 MEAN PROPORTION OF PRINCIPALS, ADULT EDUCATION CO-ORDINATORS AND TEACHERS HOLDING EXPECTATIONS REGARDING THE ITEMS Item groupings Principals Adult ed. co. Teachers ‘ (33) (16) (90) Teaching role . 939 . 887 . 894 1-10 Administrative role . 939 . 945 . 901 11-25 Staff role . 940 ’ ' . 874 . 868 26-51 Liaison role . 908 . 882 . 848 52-74 Additional information 75. .333 .969 - 8L5 75 item average . 930 . 892 - 872 \ 74 Among the three groups, a higher proportion of principals held expectations regarding the seventy-five items. Principals and . adult education co—ordinators were better able to define expectations than were teachers. The thirty-three principals and sixteen adult education co-ordinators were able to define their expectations at the 100 percent level for 15 and 20 of the 75 items respectively. Expectations were held for only two items by all ninety teachers. The ninety teachers were below the 90 percent level on 42 of the 75 items. The principals were below the 90 percent level on only 15 items and adult education co-ordinators were below the 90 percent level on 33 items. This data indicated that proportionately more principals held expectations than did adult education co-ordinators or teachers. Likewise, Proportionately more adult education co-ordinators held expectations than did teachers. The differences found were not extreme. It was assumed that a different proportion of male respondents would hold expectations than would female respondents in these groups. Tables 14, 15 and 16 describe these comparisons. 75 TABLE 14 MEAN PROPORTION OF MEN PRINCIPALS WHO HOLD EXPECTATIONS COMPARED WITH THE MEAN PROPORTION OF WOMEN PRINCIPALS WHO HOLD EXPECTATIONS I . k Men Women : tem gmupmgs principals (15) principals (15) Teaching role . 973 . 893 1-10 Administrative role . 972 - 924 11-25 Staff role , 951 . 935 26-51 Liaison role , 921 . 879 52-74 Additional information 75. . 933 1. 000 75 item average . 948 . 911 TABLE 15 MEAN PROPORTION OF MEN ADULT EDUCATION CO-ORDINATORS COMPARED WITH THE MEAN PROPORTION OF WOMEN ADULT EDUCATION CO—ORDINATORS WHO HOLD EXPECTATIONS : . Men Women fi— _ Item groupings adult ed. co. (5) adult ed. co. (11) Teaching role . 920 . 872 l-lO Administrative role . 946 . 945 11-25 Staff role . 869 . 870 26-51 Liaison role . . 939 . 853 52-74 Additional information 75. . 800 .909 75 item average . 912 . 881 \\ 76 This information demonstrated that a slightly higher proportion of men held expectations than did women. The men were better able to define expectations held for the selected items. The differences, however, were not extreme. It was assumed that a different proportion of principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers with less than three years of experience with a building director would hold expectations than would groups with three or more years of experience. Tables 17, 18, and 19 describe the comparisons. The data revealed that a slightly higher proportion of principals with less than three years of experience with a building director held expectations than did principals with three years or more experience. It was noted in tabulating the responses that the group 0f PrinCipals with less than three years experience included only three women principals. This may have influenced the results. Responses from adult education co-ordinators revealed that those with more experience were better able to define their expectations. No trend was established when the more experienced and less experienced groups of teachers were examined. In summary, slight differences were found between the significant others when compared in regards to the proportions who defined their expectations for the selected aSpects. Principals Were better able to define their expectations than were adult education 77 TABLE 16 MEAN PROPORTION OF MEN TEACHERS COMPARED WITH THE MEAN PROPORTION OF WOMEN TEACHERS WHO HOLD EXPECTATIONS ’__ aw: It rou . Men Women em g pings teachers (23) teachers (65) Teaching role . 899 . 888 1-10 Administrative role . 944 - 813 11-25 Staff role . 875 . 865 26-51 Liaison role , 912 . 823 52-74 Additional information 75. .956 . 666 75 item average , 905 . 842 TABLE 17 PRINCIPALS WITH LESS THAN THREE YEARS EXPERIENCE WITH A BUILDING DIRECTOR AND PRINCIPALS WITH THREE YEARS OR MORE EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH REGARDS TO THE MEAN PROPORTION WHO HOLD EXPECTATIONS m Principals with Principals with Item rou ' 8 pings less experience (11) more experience (22) Teaching role . 927 - 945 1-10 Administrative role . 957 - 930 11-25 Staff role . 951 . 935 26-51 Liaison role . 924 . 902 52-74 Additional information 75. . 909 ~ 1. 000 75 item aVerage , 940 . 914 K m 1 (if! ’ 78 TABLE 18 ADULT EDUCATION CO—ORDINATORs WITH LEss THAN THREE YEARS EXPERIENCE WITH A BUILDING DIRECTOR AND ADULT EDUCATION CO-ORDINATORS WITH THREE OR MORE YEARS EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH REGARDS To THE MEAN PROPORTION WHO HOLD EXPECTATIONS IT‘- —__ Adult ed. co. with Adult ed. co. with less experience (6) more experience (10) fl Item grouping s Teaching role . 899 . 888 1-10 Administrative role . 955 - 940 11-25 Staff role , 833 . 900 26-51 Liaison role , 876 . 882 52-74 ‘ Additional information 75. . 833 . 900 75 item average . 879 ' . 900 TABLE 19 TEACHER WITH LESS THAN THREE YEARS EXPERIENCE WITH A BUILDING DIRECTOR AND TEACHERS WITH THREE YEARS OR MORE EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH REGARDS TO THE MEAN PROPORTION WHO HOLD EXPECTATIONS :1 Item groupings Teachers with less Teachers with more experience (31) experience (58) Teaching role . 870 . 904 1-10 Administrative role . 922 . 903 11-25 Staff role . 859 .875 26-51 Liaison role . 864 . 837 52-74 Additional information 75. . 870 . 965 ——___ Memes .875 .874 79 co-ordinators and adult education cO-ordinators were in turn better able to define their expectations than were teachers. The male population of respondents in the three groups was better able to define expectations than were female reSpondents. Comparisons between those respondents with less than three years experience with a building director and those with three years or more experience, indicated that proportionately more principals with less experience were better able to define their expectations and that proportionately more adult education co-ordinators with more experience were better able to define their expectations. Comparisons between teachers were inconclusive in that no directional trend was shown. Analysis of the Data To Indicate the Mean Proportion of Building Directors Who Held Beliefs, and Definitions of Others' Expectations The data were analyzed to determine the mean proportion of building directors who held definitions of their own expectations and definitions of expectations held by principals, adult education co- ordinators, and teachers. For this analysis the proportion of building directors who held affirmative or negative expectations were combined and compared with the proportion who did not hold an expectation or Who were unable to define an expectation for the particular situation. 80 TABLE 20 MEAN PROPORTION OF BUILDING DIRECTORS HOLDING A SELF- DEFINITION AND DEFINITIONS OF EXPECTATIONS0 HELD BY SIGNIFICANT OTHERS Building directors with Building definitions of expectations Item grouping directors held by' with self- f ' definitions Principals egdult Teachers Teaching role .2972 .882 ‘ .738 .657 1-10 . Administrative role . 961 . 881 . 866 , 702 11-25 Staff role ' . 961 . 830 . 789 . 663 26-51 Liaison role . 969 . 872 . 844 . 688 52-7.4 Additional information 75. l. 000 . 730 . 461 . 538 75 item average .965 .851 . 810 .676 M It was assumed that there would be differences in the pro- portion of building directors defining expectations held by the significant others. A high proportion of building directors would hold a self—definition as these responses did not indicate a "do not know" answer. Differences were noted between the proportion Of building directors who held definitions of expectations of significant others and the actual proportion of principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers who held expectation in regards to the selected aspects. Table 20 compares the mean proportion of building directors holding self-definitions and definitions Of others' expectations regarding the s elected items . 81 There was a marked difference between the proportion of building directors defining the expectations held by significant others. The data revealed that proportionately more building directors defined expectations held by principals. They defined the expectations held by adult education co-ordinators to a lesser extent, and were significantly least able to define expectations held by teachers. It was evident that their image of teachers' expectations was not clearly defined. Table 21 indicates the proportion of building directors who held definitions of significant others' expectations, as compared with the proportion of significant others holding expectations of the selected items. TABLE 21 MEAN PROPORTION OF BUILDING DIRECTORS WITH DEFINITIONS OF OTHERS‘ EXPECTATIONS AS COMPARED WITH THE MEAN PROPORTION OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS WITH EXPECTATIONS Building directors' Expressed expectations definitions of held by significant Reference group others' others expectatiOns (75 items) (75 items) Principals . 851 . 930 Adult education co-ordinators . 810 . 892 Teachers .676 .872 82 In these comparisons the building directors were unable to define the others' expectations as well as principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers were able to define their own expectations regarding the 75 selected aspects. The three groups of significant others' images of the building directors were more complete than the building directors' images of others' expectations. In summary, the building directors were to a greater extent able to define expectations held by principals, and to a lesser extent the expectations held by adult education co-ordinators. They were least able to define adequately the expectations held by teachers. The data demonstrated that in regards to the seventy-five aspects, the principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers, in that order, were able to define expectations of building directors better than the building directors were able to define the expressed expectations of the significant others. Analysis of Responses to Questions Requesting Additional Information The multiple choice questions requesting additional information were ranked according to preferences held by various groups in their responses. Table 22 describes the proportionate preferences of the four groups and the building directors' definitions of the others' expectations. 83 TABLE 22 MEAN PROPORTION OF BUILDING DIRECTORS' BELIEFS, AND SIGNIFICANT OTHERS' EXPECTATIONS AND THE BUILDING DIRECTORS' DEFINITIONS OF OTHERS' EXPECTATIONS -— _¥ Building directors' definitions of others' expectations Item Expectations held by building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers A. E. C. Tchr. Prin. A. E. C. Tchr. 76. Preference B.D. Prin. A. .000 .363 . 062 .200 .269 . 192 .038 B. .461 .060 . 250 .111 .230 .153 .346 c. . 346 .212 .187 .277 .346 . 346 .307 D. .153 .363 .4317 .411 .153 .269 .307 E. .038 .000 .062 . 000 . 000 .038 . 000 NR . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000 77. Preference A. . 230 .666 .562 . 444 .653 .538 .334 B. . 000 . 000 . 000 .033 . 038 . 153 .038 c. 461 .242 .312 .411 .153 .153 .384 D. . 153 .030 .125 .077 .038 . 038 . 038 NR .153 .060 .000 .033 .115 .115 .153 78. Preference | A. . 269 .363 . 312 .444 .461 . 346 .423 B. .076 . 030 . 062 .011 . 153 . 153 .038 c. .423 .393. .500 .366 .269 .423 . 500 D. .115 .181. .125 .111 .038 .038 .000 NR .115 . 030 . 000 .066 . 076 . 038 . 038 79. Preference A. .000 .121 .000. .111 .269 .153 .115 B. . 076 . 030 . 000 .055 . 038 . 038 . 038 c. . 153 .363 . 1:87 .166 . 384 . 538 . 384 D. . 230 . 000 . 062 .044 . 076 .000 .1153 E. . 500 .484 .750 .544 . 230 . 076 .307 F. . 038 . 000 . 000 .022 . 000 . 192 . 000 NR . 000 . 000 . 000 . 055 . 000 .000 . 000 80. Preference A. . 346 .272 .375 .211 . 307 . 230 . 538 B. .384 .666 .500 .711 .538 .615 .346 _ C. .192 .030 .062 .033 .115 .115 .076 NR . 076 . 030 . 062 . 044 .038 . 038 . 038 (uni-n. _ 84 TABLE 22. - -Continued 1 Item Expectations held by building directors, Building directors' principals, adult education co-ordinators definitions of other 5' and teachers expectations 81. Preference B. D. Prin. A. E. C. Tchr. Prin. A. E. C. Tchr. A. .115 . 090 . 250 . 222 . 076 . 076 . 076 B. . 807 . 878 . 750 . 677 . 884 . 884 . 884 NR . 076 . 030 . 000 .100 . 038 . 038 . 038 The responses to the six items were ranked and agreement between the groups compared by the rank-difference method of correlation. The correlation coefficients illustrating significant agreement between expressed expectations of the significant others and the building directors' expectations are shown in Table 23. TABLE 23 RANK-DIFFERENCE CORRELATION OF EXPRESSED EXPECTATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS AS COMPARED WITH BUILDING DIRECTORS' EXPECTATIONS m Adult education 5 percent level Item Principals co-ordinators Teachers of confidence (33: 201-2) 76. .129 . 786 . 386 . 811 4 D. F. 77. .875 . 825 .825 .878 3 D.F. 78. .925 . 825 . 875 .878 3 D.F. 79. .456 . 884 . 331 .754 5 D. F. 80. .950 .950 .800 .950 2 D.F. 81. 1.000 1.000 1.000 .997 1 D. F. 85 Table 24 indicates the extent of agreement between the building directors' definitions of others' expectations and the expressed expectations held by significant others for the questions requesting additional information. TABLE 24 RANK-DIFFERENCE CORRELATION OF BUILDING DIRECTORS' DEFINITIONS OF OTHERS' EXPECTATIONS AS COMPARED WITH THE OTHERS' EXPRESSED EXPECTATIONS M ‘ 5 ercent l . . Adult education p . evel Item Pnnmpals . Teachers of confidence co-ordmators (33:201-2) 76. .672 .672 .643 .811 4 D. F. 77. .975 .575 .750 .878 3 D. F. 78. .575 .825 .575 .878 3 D. F. 79. .795 i q. 322 .706 .754 5 D. F. 80. .950 .950 .600 .950 2 D. F. 81. 1. 000 1.000 1.000 .997 1 D. F. Significant agreement was shown between the building directors', principals', and adult education co-ordinators' expectations in three items in Table 23. Item 81 was ranked the same by all four groups. None of the items showed significant disagreement. Table 24 indicates that the building directors' definitions Were significantly in agreement with the principals' expectations in four items and with adult education co-ordinators' expectations in two items. The building directors accurately defined expectations held by the three groups in item 81. None of the items showed significant disagreement. 86 An analysis of the particular items revealed that building directors and principals were in significant agreement in items 78, 80, and 81. Most principals and building directors believed that it makes no difference what subjects the building directors teach (78), that building directors should enroll at their own option in job-related college courses (80), and that women should not be hired as building directors (81). Significant agreement was also indicated between building directors and adult education co—ordinators for items 80 and 81. In addition, a significant proportion of these groups believed that building directors should have a salary schedule formulated especially for their particular position (79). The beliefs of building directors and teachers were significantly in agreement on only item 81. Most teachers and building directors believed that women should not be hired as building directors. In defining the expectations of principals, the building directors were accurate initems 77, 79, 80, and 81. It has been shown that building directors and principals shared agreement on items 80 and 81. Although they did not share the belief to the same extent, building directors accurately defined, in item 77, that principals believed that building directors should teach half—day sessions as well as administer the after-school and community school programs. Most building directors believed that they should not teach during the 87 regular school day, but should spend full time with the community school program. In item 79 the building directors' definitions were significantly in agreement with principals' expectations in regards to the building directors') salary schedule, although their first preferences were not the same. A significant proportion of building directors recognized agreement between their own beliefs and adult education co-ordinators' expectations in items 80 and 81. They held an accurate definition of teacher 8' expectations in only item 81. Although several other items indicated a degree of agreement or disagreement, the rank-difference correlation coefficients were not significant at the 5 percent level of confidence and the extent of disagreement or agreement could have bee'anue’to Chance. Analysis of the Particular Items To Determine Convergence and Divergence of Affirmative Expectations Affirmative expectations held by the various groups for the seventy-four items in the four professional roles and one item of additional information were identified. This analysis sought to determine the eXtent to which the expectations of the respondents were in agreement or disagreement. Convergence and divergence was also noted between building directors‘ definitions of others' expectations and the others' exPressed expectations. This indicated the extent to which building 88 directors were able to define the others‘ expectation. Significant differences were noted and the building directors' ability to define conflicting expectations accurately was illustrated. The chi-square statistic was used to compute significant differences and Table 25 describes these comparisons. The first three columns compare the affirmative expectations of building directors with affirmative expectations of principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers. The last three columns compare the building directors‘ definitions of affirmative expectations held by the significant others and the others‘ express ed affirmative expectations. No significant difference in the items is indicated by the letters N. 8. TABLE 25 COMPARISON OF BUILDING DIRECTORS‘ AFFIRMATIVE EXPECTATIONS WITH OTHERS‘ AFFIRMATIVE EXPECTATIONS AND THE BUILDING DIRECTORS‘ DEFINITIONS OF OTHERS‘ EXPECTATIONS WITH THE EXPRESSED EXPECTATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS Expectations ' ' Definitions of expectations Items Prin. A. E. C. Tchr. Prin. A. E- C- Tchr. Value of chi-square at the 5 percent level of significance is 3. 84 Leaching role 1- 11.46 4. 95 28.30 N. s. N.S. N.S. 2- 20.50 6. 30 14. 05 9. 91 N. s. N. s. 3- 7.16 N. 5 14.72 N. s. N. s. N. s. 4- N. s N. s N. s. N. s. N. 5. 14.64 5- N.S N.s. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. 6- NS 4.96 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. 7- N. s. 3. 94 10. 83 N. s. N. s. N. s. 8- 15.1 N. 5. 16.73 9. 00 N.S. N.s. 89 TABLE 25. - -Continued Definitions of expectations Expectations Tchr. A. E. C. A. E. C. Tchr. Prin. Prin. Items Value of chi-square at the 5% level of significance is 3. 84 Teaching role cont. .18 8.8. NN 8.5. 10.71 NN 8.8. mm N. S. Admini s trative role wsssss 5NNNNN S.S. NN 12.69 S S S .51 8.5. NN NNNNNNN .34 SSSSSSMSSSSSSSS NNNNNNiNNNNNNNN sswssssssssssss NNaNNNNNNNNNNNN ssssssssssssmss NNNNNNNNNNNN4NN sssssssssssssss NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN ll 12 13 14 15 16. 17 18 19 20 21 22. 23 24. 25. Profes sional staff role 03 0 S65 N4N6NN NNNNNN ns.s.s.s.s. 5NNNNN S.S.w NNNNNN 6 IO NN6N8N 26 27. 28 3 7 mmmmmm 29. 30. 31. 5.5. 7 19 72 15. 68 5 89 32. 33. 34. 35 S. N. 10. 86 S .S. S. S N. N . 56 S. NN 90 --Continued TABLE 25. Definitions of expectations Expectations Tchr. A. E. C. Prin. Tchr. A. E. C. Prin Items Value of chi-square at the 5% level of significance is 3. 84 Professional staff role cont. 36. 37 SS. NN S..S_ NN 11 60 4.26 4. 06 S S .S. .S. N. N 14.14 18. 51 S. S. 38. 39. 40. 41. S, N 40 15. 32 NNN S. N N. 36 36 7. 57 3.85 S. 42. 4.81 43. N. S. 44. 45. 16. 54 S. 5. 61 N. S. 46. S . 47. NNNN 5.8.58. NNNN MN6N NNN 8888 NNNN NNNN 49. 50 51. 48. Liaison role S. N.S. N . 14. 58 14. 72 N. S. 25. 51 52. 5. 03 N- S. 10... 06 S NNNN .07 .SS.S..S.S_S.S.S:15 NNNNNNNN6 .sssssssss .NNNNNNNNN .S.SS.SS.SSSS NNNNNNNNN %ss%mssms 8NN87NN9N .SSSSSS.S.S.S .NNNNNNNNN .NNN5NNNNN 12.34.56. l0/0/0/0/0/0 91 TABLE 2 5. - -Continued Expectations Definitions of expectations Items Prin. A. E. C. Tchr. Prin. A. E. C. Tchr. Value of chi-square at the 5% level of significance is 3. 84. Liaison role cont. 67. N.S. N.S. 4.17 N. S. N. S. N.S 68. N. S. N. S. 4. 94 N. S. N. S. N. S 69. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S 70. N. S. N. S. 5. 33 N. S. N. S. N. S 71. N. S. 5. 53 4. 51 N. S. 5. 53 N. S 72. N. S. N. S. 4. 06 N. S. N. S. N. S 73. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S 74. N. S. N. S. 7. 06 N. S. N. S. N. S Additional information 75. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. The analysis of convergence and divergence of affirmative expectations is presented graphically in Figures 1, 2 and 3. Figure 1 illustrates the percentages of items in the four role classifications in which there are no significant differences in expectations. In all comparisons, most of the conflicting expectations are between building directors and teachers. '1 They disagreed on sixty percent or more of the items in the classifications describing the teaching and liaison roles. Figure 3 is the summation of items 1 to 74 and indicates that the building directors are more closely in agreement with adult education CO“Ordinators, 86. 4 percent, than with either principals, 82. 4 percent, or teachers, 55. 4 percent. 92 Figure 2 illustrates the percentage of agreement between the building directors‘ definitions of others‘ expectations and the others‘ expressed expectations. The building directors are primarily oriented towards adult education co-ordinators and to a lesser extent towards principals and teachers. Figure 3 indicates that the building directors are most accurate in their definitions of adult education co-ordinators‘ expectations, 95. 9 percent, and least accurate in defining teachers‘ expectations, 79.7 percent. Principals occupy the middle position at 90. 5 percent. The evidence drawn from this data indicates that building directors have a relatively clear image of adult education co-ordinators' affirmative expectations. Fewer conflicting expectations are held between these two groups. Principals as a reference group were also more significantly in agreement with building directors than were teachers. The analysis clearly demonstrated that building directors‘ and teachers‘ expectations are comparatively more divergent and that building directors are least able to define the expectations held by teacher 3. 93 Teaching role- -Items 1- l 0 Administrative role- —Items 11-25 I ‘ Staff member role--Items 26-51 Liaison role--Items 52-74 Building director's— Building directors- Building directors- Principals adult education teachers co-ordinators / / Figul‘e 1. --Percentages of the selected items in which there were no significant differences between affirmative expectations held by the relevant groups. Teachig role- -Items .1 - 1 0 0 Administrative role - -Items 11- 25 Staff member role-~Items 26-51 0 Liaison role - -Items 52- 74 80. 0 . 86. 9 Building directors- . Building directors- Building directors- Principals adult education teachers co-ordinator s Figure 2. --Percentages of selected items in which there were no significant differences between the building directors‘ definitions of the others‘ expectations and the expressed affirmative exPectations of the significant others. 95 A. Expectations Held Building directors- Building directors- Building directors- principals adult education teachers co-ordinators B. Definitions and Expressed Expectations Held Building directors- Building directors- Building directors- principals adult education teachers co-ordinators O C Figure 3. --Percentages of selected items (1-74) in which A) there Were no significant differences between affirmative expectations held, and B) no significant differences between building directors‘ definitions of others‘ expectations and the expressed eXpectations of significant others. 96 From this analysis, the relationships between the building directors‘ and others‘ expectations regarding the items were classified into four groups. The patterns";that emerged follow. Affirmative expectations Definitions of others‘ Type of building directors and expectations by the significant others building directors 1. convergence (+) accurate (+) 2. convergence (+) inaccurate (-) 3. divergence (-) accurate (+) 4. divergence (-) inaccurate (-) Type One (+)(+) The building directors‘ expectations are in agreement with the others‘ expectations in this classification. Also, the building directors accurately defined the expressed expectations held by principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers. Item 20 is an example: "Encourage programs designed to develop adult leadership found within the community. " The building directors and the significant others believe the building directors should do this and building directors believe that the others expect them to do this. The building directors have support on these items and correctly believe that others hold convergent expectations. ZYPe Two (+) H The building directors' expectations are in agreement with the others‘ expectations in this classification. Significant differences L- . 97 exist, however, between the building directors‘ definitions of the others' expectations and the expressed expectations held. Item 10 is an example: "Use community needs and problems as a basis for curriculum development for the regular school. " Building directors believe they should do this and teachers agree. There was significant difference between the building directors‘ definitions of teachers‘ expectations and the expressed expectations of teachers. The building directors had greater support from teachers on this item than they realized. The building directors had erroneously defined conflicting expectations where none existed. Type Three (-) (+) There are significant differences between the expectations of building directors and significant others in this classification. Conflicting expectations are held, but building directors are able to define the extent of conflict. Item 1 is an example: ”Take children on field trips during regular school hours, such as visiting industries, banks, or businesses. " Most building directors believe they should do this and most others do not. The building directors accurately estimated the others‘ divergent expectations even though the building directors did not hold the expectations themselves. in: Four <-) H There are significant differences between the expectations Of building directors and significant others‘ expectations in this 98 classification. The building directors' definitions of the others' expectations and the others‘ expressed expectations are also signifi- cantly different. Item 53 is an example: "Visit children‘s homes to become acquainted with parents. " Building directors believe they should do this, but adult education co-ordinators do not share this expectation to the same extent. Conflicting expectations are held and the building directors do not accurately define to what extent conflict exists. The building directors believe there are no discrepancies. Tables 26, 27, 28 and 29 describe the four classifications as the building directors‘ affirmative expectations, definitions' of others' expectations and the expressed expectations are compared. TABLE 26 CLASSIFICATION OF_EXPECTATIONS HELD BY BUILDING DIRECTORS, DEFINITIONS OF OTHERS‘ EXPECTATIONS AND EXPRESSED EXPECTATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS Items Building directors- Building directors- Building directors- 1'10 principals adult education teachers co-ordinators Teaching role 1- H (+) H (+) H (+) 2. H H <-) (+) (-> (+) 3- H (+) (+) (+) H (+) 4- (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) <-) 5- (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) 9 (+) (+) <-) (+) (+) (+) 7- (+) (+) H (+) H (+) 8° <-) (-) (+) (+) <-) (+) 13- (+) (+) (+) (+) <-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) 99 TABLE 27 CLASSIFICATION OF EXPECTATIONS HELD BY BUILDING DIRECTORS, DEFINITIONS OF OTHERS‘ EXPECTATIONS AND EXPRESSED EXPECTATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS Items Building directors- Building directors- Building directors- 11-25 principals adult education teachers co-ordinators Admini str ative role 11. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(-) 12. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) 13. (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) 14. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) 15. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) 16. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) 17- (+)(-) 0t)(+) (+)(-) 18. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) 19. (+)(+) 0t)(+) (+)(+) 20. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(-) 21. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(-) 22. (+)(+) 0+)(+) (+)(+) 23- (+)(+) (-)(-) (+)(-) 24. (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) Eég (+)(+9 (+)(+) (+)(+) TABLE 28 CLASSIFICATION OF EXPECTATIONS HELD BY BUILDING DIRECTORS, DEFINITIONS OF OTHERS‘ EXPECTATIONS AND EXPRESSED EXPECTATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS Items Building directors- Building directors- Building directors- 26-51 principals adult education teachers co-ordinators M21: 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. (+)(-) (+)(+) (-)(+) (+)(+) (-) (+) (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) (+) (+) (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) (+) (+) (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) (+) (+) (+)(-) (-)(+) (+)(-) (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) (-)(+) (-)(+) 100 TABLE 28. - -Continued M Items Building directors- Building directors- Building directors- 26-51 principals adult education teachers co-ordinator s Staff role 35. (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) 36. (-)(-) (+)(+) (-)(+) 37. (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) 38. (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) H 39. (+) (+) (+) (+) H (+) 40. (-) (+) (-) (+) (-) (+) 41. (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) 42- (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(-) 43- (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(-) 44- (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) 45- (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) 46. (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) 47. (+)(+) (+)(+) (-)(+) 48- (+)(+) (+)(+) (+)(+) 49- (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) 50. (+) H (+) (+) (+) (+) 51- (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) TABLE29 CLASSIFICATION OF EXPECTATIONS HELD BY BUILDING DIRECTORS, DEFINITIONS OF OTHERS‘. EXPECTATIONS AND EXPRESSED EXPECTATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS Items Building directors- Building directors- Building directors- 52-75 principals adult education teachers co-ordinators Liaison role ‘ 52. (-) (-) (+) (+) (-) (+) 53. (+) (+) (-) (-) (‘1 (+) 2:. (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 56. (-)(+) (-)(+) (-)(+) ° (-)(+) (+)(+) (+)(-) 101 TABLE 29. --Continued W Items Building directors- Building directors- Building directors- 52-75 principals adult education teachers co-ordinators ' Liaison role cont. 57. (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) (+) 53. (+) (+) (+) (+) "1 (+1 59. (+) (+) (+) (+1 (+) (+) 60. (+) (+) (+) (+) (*1 (+1 61. <-> (+) (+) (+) H (*1 62. (+) (+) (+) (+) H (+) 63. (+) (+) (+1 (+) (+) (+) 64. (+) (+) (+1 (+) (+) (+) 65. (+) (+) (+1 (+1 ('1 (+) 66. (+) (+) (+) (+1 "'1 “1 67. (+) (+) (+) (+1 "1 (+) 68. (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) (+) 69. (+) (+) (+1 (+) (+) (+) 70. (+) (+) (+) (+) “1 (+) 71. (+) (+) H H H (+) 72. (+) (+) (+) (+) ('1 (+1 73. (+) (+) (+) (+) (+1 (+) 74. (+) (+) (+) (+) H (+) Additional information 75. (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) This analysis (excluding additional information) revealed that building directors' expectations and definitions of others‘ expectations (‘1') (+). Were most in agreement with adult education co-ordinators, 64 items, and least in agreement with teachers, 26 items. They agreed With Principals in this (+) (+) classification on 58 items. 102 On fifteen items for teachers and three items for principals, the building directors defined potential conflicting expectations where none existed (+) (-). The building directors had not accurately defined the expectations of others. None of the comparisons with adult education co-ordinators were in this classification. It was significant that in Type Three (-) (+), that the building directors recognized 33 items in which divergent expectations were held between themselves and teachers. Only nine and seven items, respectively, were identified in this classification for relation- ships with principals and adult education co-ordinators. On four items for. principals and three for adult education co-ordinators there was significant divergence between building directors‘ expectations and definitions. Conflicting expectations were held and the building directors did not recognize the extent of disagreement. No comparisons with teachers and building directors were in this classification (-) (-). Analysis of the Data Based on Personal Variables Principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers were classified according to years of experience with a building director and male and female populations. Their affirmative expec- tations held were compared to discover any differences which might be related to the particular personal characteristic. The number of 103 items in the four professional role classifications in which affirmative expectations were significantly different are indicated in Tables 30 and 31. Table 30 compares respondents with less than three years experience with a building director with those with three years or more experience. Table 31 compares the groups according to male and female populations. The chi-square statistic was used to compute significant divergence. TABLE 30 NUMBER OF RESPONSES TO ITEMS SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT WHEN COMPARING AFFIRMATIVE EXPECTATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO EXPERIENCE Item Adult education grouping Prinmpals co-ordinators Teachers Teaching role 0 0 1 1-10 Administrative role 0 0 1 ll- 25 Staff role 0 0 1 26 - 51 Liaison role 0 0 Z 52 - 7 4 Additional information 75. _ o 0 ° Total of 75 items 0 0 5 m 104 TABLE 31 NUMBER OF RESPONSES TO ITEMS SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT WHEN COMPARING AFFIRMATIVE EXPECTATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT OTHERS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO SEX N Item Adult education . Principals , Teachers groupings co-ordinators Teaching role 0 1 0 l --10 Administrative role 0 0 0 l l -25 Staff role 1 0 2 26-51 Liaison role 0 O 5 52-74 Additional information 75. 0 0 1 Total of 75 items 1 l 8 m This analysis indicated that there were no marked differences in affirmative expectations held by significant others when they were compared according to years of experience with a building director or sex. The number of divergent expectations was comparatively small. Figure 4 illustrates the data with a graphic description of percentages of nonsignificant items. It shows that differences, when related to these personal variables, are not significant. The items were analyzed to determine if known personal characteristics were systematically related to affirmative expectations held by the 26 building directors. 105 A. Male and female respondents--Items 1-75 B. Respondents with less than three years experience and those with three years or more experience with a buildinLdirectoruItems 1-75 Principals Adult education Teachers co—ordinators Figure 4. --Percentages of nonsignificant items when A) when male and female 're spondents were compared and B) those with less and- more years experience were compared. 106 The building directors were classified and responses compared according to 1) age, 2) educational preparation, 3) number of school systems in which they had taught, 4) number of years teaching experience, and 5) number of years experience as a building director. The mean proportion of affirmative responses held by the various groups were identified and comparisons made. It was assumed that differences would be found. The affirmative expectations to the selected items held by the building directors in regards to the professional roles were ranked and a rank-difference coefficient of correlation computed. Areas of significant agreement were noted. It was assumed that systematic relationships would be found between personal variables and affirmative expectations held. Table 32 compares the mean proportion of affirmative expectations held by the various classifications of building directors in regards to the selected items. 107 TABLE 32 COMPARISON OF THE MEAN PROPORTION OF AF FIRMATIVE EXPECTATIONS HELD BY THE VARIOUS GROUPS OF BUILDING DIRECTORS T eaching .Adm1.n _ Staff Liai s on Groups istrative Other role role role role Items 1-10 11-25 26-51 52-74 75. 1. Age 20-29 . 730 . 794 . 733 . 862 . 307 30 - over . 800 . 880 . 784 . 908 . 200 2. Preparation ‘ Physical education . 722 . 815 . 801 . 872 . 307 Other .821 .851 ' .730 .903 . 111 3. Other school systems None . 699 . 808 . 758 . 869 . 333 1 or more .888 .875 .750 .907 .125 4. - Teaching experience None . 700 . 761 . 780 . 871 . 250 1 or more years . 797 . 884 . 743 . 895 . 266 5. Experience as building director Less than 3 .810 .873 .768 .893 .333 3 or more years .735 .804 .749 .875 (.215 108 Differences found between the proportion of affirmative expectations held by building directors classified according to the personal variables were not significant. Proportionately more building directors held affirmative expectations who were over thirty years of age, had other than undergraduate physical education pre- paration, had taught in other school systems, and had teaching experience prior to becoming a building director. Those building directors with less than three years experience held proportionately more affirmative expectations than did those with three years or more of experience. No evidence of a significant trend could be concluded from the data. Table 33 describes the rank-difference correlations between the selected groups of building directors holding affirmative expectations. The various groups were in agreement in all areas except one, and significant differences related to personal character- istics were not observed. The low correlation in the liaison role (3. other school systems) could have been due to chance. The data indicated that the known personal characteristics were not systematically related to affirmative expectations held by the various groups of building directors. 109 TABLE 33 RANK-DIFFERENCE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE VARIOUS GROUPS OF BUILDING DIRECTORS HOLDING AFFIRMATIVE EXPECTATIONS G Teaching .Admin- Staff Liaison roups istrative role role role role Items l-lO 11-25 26-51 52-74 1. Age 20-29 . 634 . 678 . 811 . 868 30 - over 2. Preparation Physical education .710 .917 .708 . 754 Other 3. Ether school systems None .610 .725 .756 .211 l or more 4. Teaching experience None . 797 . 615 . 798 . 704 l or more years 5. Experience as building director Less than 3 years . 907 . 748 . 741 .576 3 or more years 5%16V810f significance .632 .514 .388 .413 (33; 201) k 110 Summary of Analysis of Data The analysis sought to determine differences in expec- tations held by principals, adult education co-ordinators, teachers, and building directors. Building directors‘ definitions of others‘ expectations and others‘ expressed expectations were compared. Several methods of analysis were used. 1. An analysis was made to discover the mean proportion or respondents in each group who actually held expectations regarding the selected items, 1 through 75. The data indicated that proportionately more principals (. 930) held expectations regarding the items than did adult education co-ordinators (. 892), or teachers (. 872). The groups of significant others were compared according to expectations held by male and female respondents. This information revealed that a slightly higher proportion of male respondents held expectations than did female respondents. A further analysis was made comparing the groups according to years of experience with a building director. It was shown that a slightly higher proportion of principals with less experience held expectations and proportionately more adult education co—ordinators with more experience held expectations. No trend was established when less experienced and more experienced teachers‘ groups were compared. 2. Significant differences were noted when the mean pro- portion of building directors defining the others‘ expectations were identified. The recorded differences between the building directors defining others‘ expectations were: for principals, (. 851); for adult education co-ordinators, (. 810); and for teachers, (. 676). The building directors did not have as clear a definition of teachers‘ expectations as they did of the other two groups‘ expectations regarding the selected items. In comparing the proportion of building directors‘ definitions with the others‘ expectations, the evidence indicated that the principals‘, adult education co-ordinators‘, and teachers‘ images of the building directors were more complete than the building directors‘ images ofothers‘ expectations. 3. ' i The responses to the questions asking additional information were ranked and groups examined by a rank-difference correlation of preferences. Significant agreement in expectations was shown. The building directors agreed with the principals and adult education people on three items and with teachers on one. None of the relation- ships illustrated significant disagreement. The building directors‘ definitions of the others‘ expectations were significantly in agreement with the principals‘ expectations in four Statements and with adult education co-ordinators’ in two statements. Agreement With teachers’was significant on only one item. None of ‘i...-.‘». . .- 112 the responses showed significant disagreement. Those comparisons which indicated a low positive coefficient of correlation could have been due to chance. 4. Affirmative expectations held by the various groups for the seventy-four selected aspects were identified and significant convergence and divergence in expectations computed by the chi-square statistic. Conflicting expectations and definitions were noted. Per- centages of significant agreement were calculated and demonstrated that the building directors‘ affirmative expectations were most in agreement with adult education co-ordinators‘, 86. 4 percent. They were in agreement with principals‘ expectations in 82. 4 percent of the items and with teachers‘ expectations on only 55. 4 percent of the items. The building directors were also more accurate in defining the expectations held by adult education co-ordinators, 95. 9 percent. They were accurate in 90. 5 percent of the items when defining principals‘ eXpectations and in 79. 7 percent of the items when defining teachers‘ expectations. 5- The particular items were classified into four groups. Type One (+) (+) showed that the building directors' expectations and the expectations of principals, adult education co—ordinators and teachers Were in agreement on 58, 64, and 26 of the 74 items reSPECtiVely. The building directors‘ definitions were also in agree- ment for these items. 113 In Type Two (+) (-) expectations were in agreement, but the building directors defined 15 items for teachers, and three items for principals and no items for adult education co-ordinators, as areas of potential disagreement. Conflict was nonexistent, however, and the building directors erroneously defined the ex- pectations of the others. The building directors accurately defined 33 items in which divergent expectations were held between themselves and teachers in Type Three (-) (+). Only nine items for principals and seven items for adult education co-ordinators were classified accordingly. Type Four (-) (-) classified four items for principals and three for adult education co-ordinators where there was signi- ficant divergence between expectations and definitions. The extent 0f conflict was not recognized. No comparisons with teachers were in this category. 6. When responses and the personal variables and known characteristics were analyzed, the conclusion was made that there Were no significant associations between affirmative expectations and age, sex, educational preparation, teaching experience, prior experience in other school systems, or years of experience as a building director. No significant relationships were found in com- Paring expectations held when the significant others were classified 114 according to personal variables. The assumption that there would be systematic relationships was not supported. L" It can be concluded that not all groups hold expectations to the same extent and that some conflicting expectations are held. Some conflicting expectations were recognized by the building directors and others were not. Building directors also created some conflicting expectations where none existed. For the population of role definers in this study, the personal variables were not significantly related to expectations or definitions held. It should not be overlooked that significant agreement in expectations exists for many of the seventy-four selected aspects and the questions requesting additional information. Knowledge of these recognized areas of agreement or disagreement concerning selected aspects of the building director‘s position should serve as a starting point for role clarification and reduction of existing and POtential conflict. Chapter V includes a summation and classification of Statements written by respondents in describing the building director‘s POSition. 115 CHAPTER V RECORDED COMMENTS Introduction Sixty-three of the one hundred and sixty-five respondents answered the open-ended question: "Do you have any other comments which would help you express your point of view concerning the building director‘s position ?" Replies varied in length from succinct statements to full page expressions of viewpoint. Some respondents added comments explaining more fully some aspects of the questionnaire and others supplied information beyond the intended investigation of the question- naire. The comments contributed valuable information to the research and provided additional insight towards obtaining a better understanding of the position by the investigator. Because of their length, the written comments were categorized and summarized. Many were pertinent to the subject Of role clarification and role conflict, and others provided general information. Fifty-five respondents indicated a desire to receive an analysis of this study when completed. 116 Summation of Building Directors‘ Comments Twelve of the building directors answered the open- ended question and provided additional information in their comments. 1. Comments concerned with pressures of time and work load. Example s: Too much of his free time is required for his job. Eighty- five and ninety hour weeks are 0. k. if compensatory time can be provided for when he really needs a little time off. Not enough time allowed for the director to spend with his family. It is a wonderful job and we need more time to further develop our programs . . . . Many problems are not solved and many good ideas are not given a chance to grow because we do not have time to organize and study them. You must be dedicated and in top health condition, the hours require this one condition. It is physically impossible to implement all the ideas which you may think should be done in the beginning according to community interests and needs. The building director must be a do-all and be-all . The building director has too many things to do that do not concern him, e. g. , lunch duty and hall duty . 2- Statements which recognized potential conflict and the need for role clarification. Examples: I feel that the building director should be placed some- where in the administrative structure so that he and fellow workers and the community know what his responsibilities are. 117 The greatest area of misunderstanding is largely due to the uninformed staff. Each has his own view of the director. Each person who has contact with the director‘s program can present a different view of what he is and does, some good and some bad. I feel that with the degree of responsibility we must assume, we should be allowed to assume more authority. I do not think the everyday classroom teacher understands the role and responsibilities of a community director. Teachers are not familiar with the total aims of the community school program. For the most part teachers may second guess the building director, but they do not control or have any say regarding the building director‘s duties or responsibilities. I feel as if they feel it is up to the principal and building director to determine what is to be done. He must side-step and circumvent the building principal so as not to infringe on her security and get her dander up. While she professes many of the community school philosophies, she does not truly believe them. He generally has to defend his program to all except parents and com- munity groups. His position is not defined. He is to many a janitor, and to most a gym teacher. 3. Statements which referred to professional advancement and continuing education. Examples: If so desired, directors should be given the opportunity to explore other administrative positions on a trainee basis. There should be a positive outlet for the talent of directors that would like to advance. They have backgrounds that are desirable for other key positions to be filled. Further, the director needs more experience in speaking, administration and classroom teaching. [needed] criteria for advancement to either principalship, clean, or other upper classification. 118 I strongly believe that a definite program should be ex- plored enabling the director to: A. Teach and administer the program the first years to acquaint himself with curriculum and the physical outlay of the community. B. Then, turn to definite administrative duties which he should be able to explore the potential of his community area to the fullest extent. 4. References which related to job satisfaction. Examples: This is my first year as a director, but from what I have gone through so far we earn every penny we make. Still all the late hours, extra meetings, and other things we put up with, I would not trade my job for any other job in the field of education. The needs that have been met in the Flint community have been greatly due to the efforts of the community school directors. It has answered the needs of my own dedication to the welfare of the individual, family, country and God. 5. Statements which described conflicting views concerning the building director‘s teaching role. Examples: One needs to be in an administrative position to develop solutions and ideas as a full time individual. not as a part-time teacher and a part-time director. The contacts with the kids through teaching are very im- POrtant. I do not believe we should do away with the community school director‘s teaching responsibility. 6- Comments which referred to the questionnaire. Examples: The results of this survey should give insights as to how to please the principals and others, and probably to explore much more than just the surface ideas in each community school. 119 Many of the questions are related to teachers in general, rather than just the building director. I think the answers to many of these questions depend a great deal on the type of principal you work with, the neighborhood you are in and the number of years exper- ience you have in the field. Summation of Principals‘ Comments Eight building principals answered the open-ended question and p r ovided additional information. 1 . Statement that recognized the need for cooperation. Example: I feel the building director and principal have to work hand in hand. It has to be a partnership affair. Statements that described his position. 2 . Examples: Presently our building director is merely a supervisor of evening activities. He is not a principal or an assistant principal. 3. Comments which recommended professional growth and improvement. Examples: Those showing administrative potential should have an Opportunity to gain experience in teaching home room work. Frankly many of them need more close supervision in order to use their time more wisely. A building director should take a real part in a class, not jUSt a. “sitter, " while other teachers are having a class. 120 4. Statement which referred to the questionnaire. Example: Answers given by any individual are colored by his previous contacts with building directors, some of which are very good and some of which are very poor. Summation of Comments Made by Adult Education Co-ordinators Three adult education co-ordinators answered the open- ended question and provided additional information. 1. Comment that cited a need for preliminary training. Example: Should be a training period as assistant in two or more buildings before permanent assignment. Also should cover some courses first. 2. Comment which described the need for clarification. Example: I think he is often in a difficult position because his status is not clearly defined to other staff members. 3. Statement that described his responsibilities. Example: It seems that the building director‘s responsibilities are fantastically multiple. Summation of Teachers‘ Comments Forty teachers answered the open-ended question and p 1‘ ovided additional information. 121 1. Responses which referred to work load and multiple responsibilities. Examples: Carrie s considerable re sponsibility. He seems to me to be kept busier than he really ought to be. I believe the building director should not be required to serve more man hours than regular teaching persons. If he serves three evenings or Saturday hours, he should have that much released time during the day. I feel the community director is greatly over-worked with classes, teaching load and community activities. His hours of work should not exceed that of the deans. Too much is expected of the building directors. They are required to put in too many hours plus teaching half time. 2. Comments which recognized conflict and need for role clarification. Examples: I feel the director must direct his program. He needs superiors, but I am not sure the principal should be the one. I realize how rough it could be for two people to co-ordinate two different programs, but it is harder for a director to assume the responsibility he is given and then not actually directing the program. Title misleading, job should be better clarified. Too much feeling of l‘privileged character, " job not clarified. The duties of our director seem very strange to me. I wish I really knew what his job included. Better understanding [needed] on part of regular teachers as to what the building director‘s responsibility is. 122 Not sure what he does, only see him a few times a year. 3. Statements which recognized the need for professional qualifications, selection practices and promotion. Examples: I do not think that a person just out of college should be given this position. He should have several years of teaching experience and working with children and adults before being placed .in this position. They need more teaching experience before becoming building directors. This has been a definite handicap along with lack of respect for the staff. Perhaps their lack of knowledge and experience causes the intolerance they show for teachers. He should be a well trained man and skillfully selected. I believe that great care should be taken in the selection of a building director. I think they have a very difficult job. The person must have many talents. This program should not be used as a preparatory step toward administration as it is now. 4. Comments which related tosalary. Examples: Should the building director fulfill the many responsibilities mentioned in this survey, I certainly think his salary should be as I have indicated (administrative). I definitely do not believe that the building directors should receive financial or other benefits above those given the classroom teacher. He should be paid on par with the deans. 5. Comments which praised or criticized the building director. 12 3 Examples: Flint building directors are of unusually high caliber and have the ability to cope with community responsibilities. Any building directors I have been associated with have been doing a fine job. They have a big job, and we have had good ones at our schooL Do not do enough to earn their money. He should never leave groups of children unsupervised while he has a long coffee break. 6. Comments concerned with favoring one role over another. Examples: The building director for community programs should have no administrative part of the regular school program or personnel. The position should be filled with the best person available, keeping in mind the unique function of the building director, but not limiting his regular school role to that of physical education teacher. A building director should be a teacher and public person between the board of education and community. Important position . . . should teach with regular staff at least one-half day. Better cooperation and understanding with regular teachers and community problems when he teaches one-half day. He should be responsible to the principal. I do not think the building director should have any authority over the regular school teachers or program. He should attend teachers‘ meeting and participate in a liaison capacity between the school and community. I do not believe the building director should have to be a part-time, half—day plus physical education teacher. 124 He is, to me, the principal of evening classes at the school or schools he directs. 7. Statements which projected thinking beyond the position of building director to the educational program. Examples: Community classes should not interfere with academic classes. There should be a balance. I feel sincerely that the American purpose in maintaining school is being overshadowed by the swing toward building programs for all. Modern families are furthern torn apart by too many school activities for all. Care must be taken not to load the available time for activities with "busy" type activities. Community needs should constantly be kept in mind. I feel that citizens are being exploited, literally. Children are being pushed around and crowded into groups that leave no room for self-reliance and the joy of meeting the odds of life and overcoming them alone--a priceless possession. I feel the community school has a great deal to offer both children and adults, I have greatly enjoyed working in a community school . 8. References made to the questionnaire. Examples: In circling the yes answers as what I expect the building director to do, I am not sure whether they already do these things or not. It seems to me, however, that such might fall within the scope of a building director‘s job. Why is there such comparison or suggestion that they are more closely associated with administration? Perhaps through your survey and research a curriculum ~could be developed for a building director in college, probably should be heavy in social work plus education and teaching courses. 125 Summar y Comments made by sixty-three respondents in answer to an open-ended question requesting additional information were recorded. The statements varied in length and were summarized. The building directors directed their comments toward three general issues. Related by the building directors was the recognition of role conflict and the need for role clarification. Many references were made describing the excessive pressures of time and work load. The building directors also demonstrated interest in continuing professional education and advancement. Indications of job satisfaction were noted. Principals indicated a need for cooperation with the building directors and suggested areas of professional improvement. Adult education co-ordinators contributed the least in terms of recorded comments. They did cite a desire for an on- the-job training period and a need for a more clearly defined position. Many pleas for role clarification and a better under- standing of the building director‘s job were submitted by teachers. It appeared to many of the teachers that the work loads and respon- sibilities of the building director were excessive. Mentioned was his salary classification. Many references were made about the building director's various professional roles. Some projected their 126 comments beyond the building director‘s position and referred directly to the educational program. Several referred to the questionnaire. All of the respondent groups indicated a definite need for role clarification. In general, they felt that the building director‘s position was important to the successful operation of the community schoolprogranL Many respondents believed that the work loads and multiple responsibilities of the building directors were excessive, although disagreement was noted in methods proposed to limit their ‘work. Recommendations were made desiring careful selection of personnel for the position and a need demonstrated for in—service education. Many of the comments seemed to imply that the position was a stepping stone to administrative positions within the Flint system. Some areas of further research were implied in the comments, i. e. , professional preparation and qualifications; staff in-service education; analysis of work load and allocation of time; and the relationship of the community school program to the total Flint educational program. Chapter VI contains a summary of the study, conclusions, recommendations, subjective impressions and suggestions for further research. 127 CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summar y The Flint Board of Education has created a new kind of educational position. It is a unique professional role within their school system as well as within the educational profession. Through this position educational leadership is provided at the neighborhood school level. Incumbents of this new position are called community school building directors. A building director‘s responsibilities include part-time teaching during the regular school day, and admin- istration of an afternoon, evening, and Saturday community school program. He also serves as liaison between the school and community. This study assumed that this new staff position would be defined differently by various groups of Flint educators, thus creating possibilities of role conflict. Attention was directed towards identifying convergent and divergent expectations which community school building directors, building principals, adult education co- ordinators, and teachers hold for selected aspects of the building director‘s position. Selected personal variables and known characteristics of building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers were hypothesized to be systematically related to 128 role expectations held. The investigation measured the direction of expectations and not the intensity with which they were held. Direct causes of conflict were not studied. Although the building director interacts with many persons and groups, this study was limited to the expec- tations held by building directors, principals, adult education co- ordinators and teachers employed in the Flint Public School system during the 1959—60 school year. The investigation was conducted in 35 elementary, seven junior high and three senior high schools in Flint. The initial approach was to identify the professional roles of the building director‘s position. These were determined by interviews, on-the-job observation, and the review of pertinent literature. The roles were categorized into four generalized areas: 1) as a teacher in the regular day school program; 2) as an adminis- trator of the community school program; 3) as a professional staff member; and 4) as a co-ordinator of school and community relations. From these generalized professional roles was developed a check-list questionnaire regarding selected aspects of the position. Respondents recorded affirmative or negative expectations held concerning seventy-four statements which described selected aspects. A ”do not know" response indicated that no expectation was held. Seven multiple choice questions which asked for additional information concluded the instrument. 129 The instrument was mailed to 35 building directors, 42 principals, 20 adult education co-ordinators and 127 teachers. The questionnaire was sent to each person‘s home and a follow-up letter was sent after three weeks. A random sampling of non- respondents was sent the questionnaire after six weeks. Twenty- six building directors, 33 principals, 16 adult education co-ordinators and 90 teachers answered within the specified time. Data from late respondents was analyzed separately. The responses, except written statements, were recorded for analysis on IBM cards. Several methods of analysis were used. An analysis was made to determine the mean proportion of respondents in each group who actually held expectations regarding the 75 selected aspects. The data indicated that proportionately more principals (. 930) held expectations than did either adult education co-ordinators (. 892) or teachers (. 872). When the three groups of significant others were compared according to male and female respondents, the evidence showed that the male respondents were better able to define their expectations than were female respondents. An analysis based on years of experience with a building director demonstrated that a slightly higher proportion of principals with less experience held expectations regarding the seventy-five selected aspects, and proportionately more adult education co-ordinators with more years experience held expectations. Teachers‘ groups showed no significant differences when compared. 130 Significant differences were noted when the mean pro- portion of building directors defining the others‘ expectations were identified. The mean proportion of building directors defining expectations held by principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers was . 851, . 810 and . 676 for each group respectively. The building directors did not have as clear a definition of teachers‘ expectations as they did of the other two groups‘ expectations. The evidence also indicated that the significant others‘ images of the building director‘s position were better defined than the building directors‘ definitions of others‘ expectations. In a rank-difference correlation of the items requesting additional information, no significant differences in responses were noted. The building directors were in agreement in more preferences with principals and adult education co-ordinators than they were with teachers‘ preferences. Affirmative expectations held by the various groups regarding the 74 selected role aspects were identified and compared. Significant convergence and divergence in expectations and building directors‘ definitions of others‘ expectations was computed by the chi-square statistic. The data revealed that the percentage of items in which building directors‘ and adult education co-ordinators‘ affirmative expectations were in agreement was 86.4 percent. They agreed with principals‘ expectations on 82. 4 percent of the items and with teachers‘ expectations on only 55. 4 percent of the items. 131 The building directors were also most accurate in defining affirmative expectations held by adult education co-ordinators in regards to the 74 selected role aspects. For the adult education co-ordinators, principals, and teachers, the building directors correctly defined expectations held in 95. 9, 90. 5, and 79. 7 percent of the items, respectively. Affirmative expectations of the respondents and the building directors‘ definitions of the others‘ expectations regarding the selected aspects were classified into four groups. These included areas of 1) convergence between building directors‘ and others‘ affirmative expectations and the building directors‘ definitions of the others‘ expectations (+) (+); 2) convergence between building directors‘ and others‘ expectations and inaccurate definitions by building directors of the others‘ expectations (+) (—); 3) divergence between building directors‘ and others‘ expectations and an accurate definition of others‘ expectations by the building directors (-) (+); and 4) divergence between building directors‘ and others‘ expectations and inaccurate definition of others‘ expectations by building directors (-) (-). Most relationships between building directors, adult education co-ordinators and principals were of the (+) (+) type. Adult education co-ordinators', principals‘, building directors‘ expectations and building directors‘ definitions of others' expectations 132 were in agreement in 64 and 58 of the 74 items, respectively. Only 26 items were in the (+) (+) classification when building directors‘ and teachers‘ responses were compared. On 15 items for teachers and 3 items for principals, the building directors defined conflicting expectations where none existed (+) (-), and created pseudo-conflicts. The building directors had not accurately defined the others‘ expectations. None of the relationships with adult education co-ordinators were in this classification. The building directors accurately defined 33 items in which divergent expectations were held between themselves and teachers (-) (+). Only 9 items for principals and 7 items with adult education co-ordinators were in this classification. The extent of conflict was recognized for the items in this classification. Four items for principals and three for adult education co-ordinators showed divergent expectations held between the significant others and building directors and inaccurate definitions by building directors of others‘ expectations (-) (-). The extent of conflict was not recognized by the building directors. No comparisons with teachers and building directors were in this category. A comparison of personal variables and known character- istics in regards to affirmative expectations held by building directors failed to support the assumption that there would be systematic 133 relationships. There were no significant associations established between affirmative expectations and building directors' age, educational preparation, teaching experience, prior experience in other school systems, or years of experience as a building director. Relationships noted were not significant. The reference groups were compared according to affirmative expectations held regarding the selected aspects by male and female respondents and by affirmative expectations held by significant others with less than three years experience with a building director and those with three years or more of experience. No significant relationships were established between the personal variables and the extent to which affirmative expectations were held. Sixty-five respondents provided written comments regarding additional information pertinent to understanding the building director‘s position. A summation of these statements revealed many pleas for role clarification and desires for better understanding of the building director‘s duties and responsibilities. Many of the building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers agreed that the building director‘s work load and multiple responsibilities seemed excessive. They recommended that building directors be carefully selected and that an in-service education program seemed necessary for them. Statements of recommendation and criticism of building directors were noted. Some respondents 134 projected their thinking beyond the intent of the investigation and referred directly to the educational program. Conclusions Several conclusions were suggested by an analysis of the data describing building directors‘ beliefs, definitions of others‘ expectations and the expressed expectations of significant others. At the outset it was assumed that building directors, principals, adult education co-ordinators, and teachers would hold different and sometimes conflicting expectations regarding the selected aspects of the building director‘s position. This hypothesis was supported by the evidence. 1. As measured by the mean proportion of each respondent group who actually held expectations for the selected aspects, it was shown that not all groups defined their expectations equally well. a. A higher mean proportion of principals held expectations than did either adult education co-ordinators or teachers. Teachers did not appear to be as familiar with what was expected of the building directors as were the other groups. This may be due to the fact that teachers as a group are not in as close personal contact with building directors as are the other two groups. b. Male respondents were better able to define their expectations than female respondents. Because all the building directors are male, the framework of communications between 135 building directors and female principals, adult education co-ordinators and teachers, may not be as well organized as channels of commun- ications with male reference groups. c. Principals with less experience and adult education co-ordinators with more experience with a building director were better able to define their expectations. It was noted that 8 of the 11 principals with less experience were males, which may have weighted this classification with respondents who held a more clear image. It was anticipated that respondents with more years of experience with building directors might be better able to define their expectations. They would have had a greater opportunity to become acquainted with the position. It was noted, however, that neither classification of teachers were better able to define their expectations. The image evidently had not become more clear with familiarity. 2. Proportionately different definitions of others‘ expectations regarding the selected aspects were held by building directors. They were best able to define expectations held by principals and least able to define expectations held by teachers. Adult education co-ordinators held the middle position. These differences were probably due to the building directors day to day working relationships with principals in a subordinate position and their shared responsibilities with adult education co-ordinators regarding the adult education program. These reference groups may seem to hold more significance for the l 36 professional welfare of the building directors and an adequate under- standing of relationships with them may appear more important to the building directors. The extent of their hazy definition of teachers‘ expectations was extremely expressive. Building directors‘ definitions of what they believed teachers expected of them was not clear and pointed out a need for a better understanding and definition of what this reference group expects of them. 3. The three reference groups hold proportionately a better image of the building directors than the building directors hold of definitions of the others‘ expectations. As a group, then, the building directors were unable to define others‘ expectations as well as the significant others were able to define their own expectations for the selected items. The need for a more clear image is more acute among the building directors than among the significant others. 4. The building directors were closely oriented towards the principals and adult education co-ordinators when affirmative expectations regarding the selected aspects were compared. This relatively high cOnvergence in expectations indicated that these respondents had a good understanding regarding appropriate behavior for the building directors in the selected situations. The data demonstrated that mutual understanding was relatively low when building directors‘ and teachers‘ affirmative 137 expectations were compared. They were significantly in agreement on only slightly more than half the items. This significant divergence in expectations could be harmful to personal and professional relation- ships between members of the two groups. It also may indicate a need for teachers to become more familiar with the services per- formed by building directors and for building directors to understand the expectations of teachers. 5. The building directors were comparatively accurate in defining affirmative expectations held by principals and adult education co-ordinators in regards to the selected items. It would seem reasonable to conclude that less open conflict would arise from these areas of accurately defined agreement. Expectations held by teachers were not as accurately defined by the building directors. While not significantly low percentagewise, the evidence again indicates that building directors are most inconsistent in their relationships with teachers. 6. The building directors made inaccurate definitions in fifteen items for teachers and three items with principals and created conflicting expectations where none existed. It would appear that misunderstanding resulting from false definitions could be as serious a threat to satisfactory human relationships as actual conflict. 7. In several relationships with principals and adult education co-ordinators, divergent expectations were held regarding 138 the selected aspects and the building directors failed to identify the extent of disagreement. This could generate an atmosphere of discontent and the reasons would not be apparent to the building directors. 8. Convergence and divergence of affirmative expectations held was not significantly related to personal variables and known characteristics of the respondent groups. Agreement or disagree- ment on items seemed to be consistently held by most members within the defining group. Only a small percentage of convergence or divergence on the item was systematically related to differential personal characteristics. It could be concluded that the various groups of educators in the Flint Public Schools were internally in agreement or disagreement regarding their expectations concerning aspects of the building director‘s position. Intragroup convergence- divergence consistency would be confirmed, then, and intergroup convergence-divergence would not necessarily be uniform. 9. The existence of conflicting expectations may be taken as evidence that the building director‘s position is not properly integrated with the other educational positions within the system. The consequences of such conflict may be frustration for the individual building director when interacting with fellow staff members, especially teachers. The significant others may also be ineffective in their working relationships with the building director if his proper 139 position in the school system is misunderstood. This could result in ineffective operation of the community school program and im- perfect integration of the community school program with the regular school program. 10. These conflicting role expectations may add up to situations or conditions of continuous stress in the building director‘s position, Some building directors may be selective in reacting to differential expectations of others, and in doing so minimize the chances of role conflict. On the other hand, he may be torn between differential expectations he defines as held by significant reference groups. 11. All three groups impose upon the building director expectations of how he should act or behave in the described situations. When these expectations and the building director‘s definitions and expectations are essentially in agreement, the building director probably encounters no difficulty in adapting his behavior to them. To the extent that his beliefs, definitions of others‘ expectations, and the expressed expectations of the reference groups are significantly different, the building director is placed in a position of potential role conflict. Recommendations It seems readily apparent that attempts should be made to help principals. adult education co—ordinators, teachers and I40 building directors reach agreement in defining the building director‘s professional roles. A better understanding is needed of the normative expectations which relate to aspects of the building director‘s position. The building director is expected to perform certain functions and to the extent that different reference groups hold divergent expectations, potential conflict exists . The significant others hold a comparatively clear image of the building director's position and the building director should be obligated to hold as clear an image of others‘ expectation. The building director is not holding an accurate definition of others‘ e){pectations, especially teachers‘. An in-service education program designed to acquaint the building director with others‘ expectations and to encourage an understanding of what is expected of him, seems appropriate. The building director should also be given an opportunity to communicate to significant others what he believes is appropriate behavior in the selected situations. His professional roles should be examined. Through such a program the groups could be brought into closer association and attempts made to develop mutual understanding in regards to what the duties and responsibilities of the building director Should be . It also appears that most of the burden of communication lies with the building director. It is the building director who needs to be more effective in understanding the expectations of significant others. 141 It seems probable that the building director is in a position of built-in conflict and that complete resolution of conflict is impossible. On the other hand, in working with these reference groups it may not be so important what the building director actually does. The important matter may be if others believe he does what they think he should do. This requires a similarity between definitions and expectations and again implies a need for clarity in role definition. Adequate lines of communication'between the building director and his reference groups should be maintained if there is to be an increase in convergence of role expectations. It is unlikely, that there will be unanimous agreement or disagreement regarding What the building director should or should not do. Attempts should be made, however, to narrow the gap of misunderstanding. It is conceded that some of the confusion regarding role expectations may be due to the newness of the position. The recognition of this points out that when a new professional position is created, misunderstandings, fears, and insecurities, between and within interacting groups may also be created. Because of the building director‘s responsibilities in CO-ordinating relationships of the school and community, and in implementing the community school concept in Flint, the success of this program could be seriously endangered if his position is unclear I42 and confusing to those with whom he interacts within the school system. The findings of this study point out on the positive side that there are many areas of agreement which can be used as a starting point to encourage agreement in conflicting areas. Educators at all levels in the Flint system should be aware of the divergent and convergent role expectations revealed by this study and seek ways of reducing open and potential conflict. Subjective Impre s sions The creation of the position of community school building director in the organizational structure of the Flint system is predicated on the assumption that the position will provide more adequate educational leadership at the neighborhood school level. The incum- bents of the position are charged with the responsibilities of developing ways of implementing the Flint community school concept and integrating the community school program with the regular school program. The role conflict situations revealed by this study, especially those regarding relationships between building directors and teachers, could be offlserious consequence when it is recognized that basic to the community school program, is an emphasis upon involvement of the school staff with the community in the determination of curriculum content and the utilization of total community resources for program enrichment. 143 It seems apparent that if the Flint school program is to be one which meets the needs and problems of the community, it must be built upon a base of extensive and intensive school staff and community relationships. In analyzing the role conflict situations, the data demon- strated that in the 74 selected aspects the (+) (+) type (convergence of role expectations and accurate definition by building directors of others‘ expectations) of relationship was found in 64 items between adult education co-ordinators and building directors and in 58 items between principals and building directors. This variance does not appear alarming to the writer. Of signal importance, however, is the fact that the (+) (+) type relationship was found in only 26 of the '74 items between building directors and the regular school teaching staff. The data demonstrated 15 items in which the building directors inaccurately defined the role expectations held by teachers and 33 items indicated that divergent role expectations were held. It seems to the writer than an increase in the number Of staff relationships that are of the (+) (+) type would tend to improve Staff morale, provide for better group efficiency in these interaction situations, and increase the effectivenesq of the building director's position in the organizational structure. It is highly probable that building directors and members of the relevant groups who per- ceive that they are exposed to role conflict will receive less personal 144 satisfaction from their work situations. Most of the 33 items of significant conflict between teachers and building directors were found in these three classifi- cations: teaching role (6 items); staff role (12 items) and liaison role (14 items). Only one item of conflict was found in the adminis- trative clas sification. Examples of items. of most significant conflict in regards to affirmative expectations held follow. Leaching Role Item 1. Take children on field trips during regular school hours, such as visiting industries, banks, businesses, etc. Item 3. Bring parents into the regular school as curriculum resource persons, such as showing travel films, discussing their occupations, etc. :Administrative Role Item 13. Plan adult activities involving different religious groups. Staff Role Item 33. Assume leadership in his school for encouraging interest of regular school teachers in community problems. Item 37. Be a key person in his school for helping regular school teachers become aware of human and physical resources available in the Flint community. Liaison Role Item 57. Give talks to community groups for the purpose of interpreting the needs and problems of the Flint school system. 145 Item 62. Encourage parents to use the services of the echo Q 1 in solving their personal and family problems. Item 65. Use school services to help other social agencies and institutions, such as Youth Bureau, Big Sisters, fulfill their obligations. In all of the above examples, conflicting role expectati @118 were held by building directors and teachers. The building directQ rs I expectations were highly affirmative towards the situations and the teaching staff did not agree to the same extent that these were aCCeptable or appropriate functions of the building director‘s position. It is suggested that the teaching staff may see the building directors primarily as physical education teachers and that the community school program is mostly an activity and recreational program. It is also intimated that the curriculum aspects should be handled by personnel other than the building directors (in relationship to the teaching staff). At the present time the teachers may not visualize the building directors as curriculum experts. Teachers seem to believe that building directors do not have sufficient knowledge of curriculum development or enough experience as curriculum consultants to be helpful to the staff. It is the writer‘s opinion, that inherent in these divergent role expectations for the items described previously, is evidence that the community school concept and programhave not had a marked effect upon the educational experiences employed by some of the regular school teachers in the conventional classrooms. It may mean, 146 simply, that the regular school teachers, as they now perceive th e concept, believe that the community school program is not of as significant importance as the more traditional, academic offering S. of the regular school curriculum. Cooperative planning with the building directors and th e community could supply teachers with an understanding of how com~ munity resources, problems and needs, can be embraced in the curriculum. Such a program demands that teachers take an outward look, beyond the confines of the classroom, and interact with the community in its broadest sense. If the Flint community school program, as administered by the building directors, is to be successfully integrated with the regular school program, these two groups of educators in the Flint educational structure need a common understanding of the community school concept, as well as an adequate understanding of each others‘ beliefs and role expectations. Hand in hand, these groups can provide efficient and continuously functioning machinery for discovering what are the important educational needs of the citizens of the Flint community. Suggestions for Further Research Convergence and divergence of expectations held for the building director‘s position have been demonstrated. Exact causes of these different expectations could be investigated and the intensity 147 of the conflict determined. Possibly, this could be studied from the standpoint of how much agreement between the groups is necessab 3’ and essential for effective functioning of the organizational structu :l‘e of the school system. At what point does disintegration of group effectiveness occur ? This study concerned itself with the internal organizati On and relationships of the building director and reference groups within the educational profession. It might be well to determine if conflicting expectations are held by citizens, parents, or students. These people are consumers of the program and a study of their expectations would be worthwhile. Further research could be aimed at formulating appropriate professional programs for preparation of building directors. The necessary educational qualifications needed for the position could be determined and recommendations made for content in college training programs. The main instrument of this investigation was a paper- pencil questionnaire. Blind spots might be revealed if the role definers and incumbents of the position were submitted to depth interviews. A job analysis of work load and allocation of time would be helpful. It is apparent that the building director‘s position is demanding upon the incumbent and such a studyiico'u'llql result in mOre-adequate use of time and allocation of efforts for the most important duties and re sponsibilities . 148 An investigation could be directed towarl’ds an evaluati Q h of the effectiveness of the building directors' implementation of th % community school concept. The exact relationships between the community school program and the regular school program could be established and the extent of integration measured. Ways of ind proving school and community relationships would be recommendéd SELECTED BIBILOGRAPHY Numbered Consecutively for Cros 3 Reference 149 10. 11. 12. 13. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY American Association of School Administrators. Educ ation. Administration in the Changing Communi_ty.Wa.shing1:\1 D. C. National Education Association, 1959 Argyle, Michael. "Concepts of Role and Status, " The SOCiQ logical Review, 44: 39-52, 1952. Bailey, Edward. "Perceptions of Selected Community Lead Unpublished paper presented to the Flint Board of Education, 1959. (Mimeographed.) Bates, Frederic. ”Position, Role and Status, of Concepts, ” Social Forces, 34: 313-21, \ a Reformation 1956. Bidwell, Charles E. ”The Administrative Role and Satisfaction in Teaching, " Journal of Educational Sociology, 29: 41-47, 1955. Brookover, Wilbur. "Public Images and Expectations of Teachers, " College of Education Quarterly. State University, 3:4: 7-12, 1957. ”Research on Teacher and Administrative Roles, " Journal of Educational Sociology, 29: 2-13, 1955. Michigan A Sociology of Education. New York: American Book Company, 19 55. Buehring, Leo E. ”New Pattern: Community Schools, " Nation's Schools, 61: 1: 35-39, 1958. Cameron, Norman. ”Role Concept in Behavior Pathology, ” American Journal of Sociology, 55: 464-67, 1950. Campbell, Merton V. "Teacher-Principal Agreement on the Teacher Role, " Administrator's Notebook, 7:6: 1-4, 19 59. erso Qn II Carroll, K. ”Role-Concept Development in Future Administrators, " Educational Administration and Supervision, 42: 496-501, 1956. Charters, W. W. “The School as a Social System, " Review of Educational Research, 22: 41-3, 1952. 150 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. ’19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 151 Chilcott, John H. "A Study of Teacher Role ExPeCtations, u Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of OregO r) 1958. 1 Coleman, Donald E. ”The Role of the Building Director in the Flint Community School Program. ” Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, March, 1958. (Typewritten.) Cook, L. A.., Almack, R. B. and Greenhoe, F. ”The Tea and Community Relations, " American Sociologiggl Review, 3': 167-74, 1938. Q1361. Cooley, Charles H. Human Nature and the Social Order. New York; Charles Scribner“s Sons, 1922. Cowan, Persis H. ”Teacher Role Perceptions in Colleges and Universities." Unpublished Ph.. D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1956. Doyle, Andrew Louis. "A Study of the Expectations Which Elementary Teachers, 'Administrators, School Board Members and Parents Have of the Elementary Teachers‘ Roles.” Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1956. Flint Board of Education. Answers to Questions Most Fre- quently Asked by Visitors to the Flint Community School. Flint; Board of Education, 1959. Flint Board of Education. "Basic Philosophy of the Flint Community Schools. ” Unpublished paper, 1959. (Dittoed.) Flint Board of Education. Flint Center for Graduate Study in Communitj School Leadership. Flint: Board of Education, 1959. Flint Board of Education. Flint Community School Handbook. Flint: Board of Education, 1955. Flint Board of Education. For Your Information. Flint: Board of Education, 1959. Flint. Board of Education. Itis Great To Teach in Flint. Flint: Board of. Education, 1959. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 152 Flint Board of Education. The Mott FoundaW Flint: Board of Education, 1959. Flint Board of Education. "Objectives of the Flint Communi 1 Schools. " Unpublished paper, 1959. (Dittoed. ) - Y Flint Board of Education. Personnel Directorj. Flint: Board of Education, 1959. Flint Board of Education. Untitled report on the philosophy objectives. Flint: Board of Education, 1958. (Dittoeda’)2d Fountain, Benjamin E. , Jr. ”Study of the Role of Selected North Carolina School Superintendents in School-Community Relations.” Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of North Carolina, 1958. Gage, Nathaniel L. and Suci, George. "Social Perceptions and Teacher-Pupil Relationships, ” Journal of Educational Psychology, 42: 144-51, 1951. Garner, James C. ”Differential Images of School Teachers. ” Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1954. Garrett, Henry. Statistics in Psychology and Education. New York: Longmans, Green and Co. , 1958. Gass, Lloyd C. ”Parent and Teacher Perceptions of the Role of Elementary School Teachers.,” Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1959. Getzels, J. W. and Guba, E. G. ”Role, Role Conflict and Effectiveness: An Empirical Study, " American Sociological Review, 19: 164-75, 1954. "Social Behavior and the Administrative Process, " School Review, 65: 423-41, 1957. ”The Structure of Roles and Role Conflict in a Teaching Situation, " Journal of Educational Sociology, 29: 30-40, 1955. Good, Carter V. and Scates, Douglas E. Methods of Research. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1954. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 153 Gordon, C. Wayne. ”The Role of the Teacher 1n the Social- Structure of the High School, 1' Journal Of Education_a_}_ Sociology, 29:21-29, 1955. Grambs, Jean D. "Sociology of the 'Born Teacher, ' " Jon 1‘ of Educational Sociology, 25: 532-41, 1952. N1 Greenhoe, Florence. Community Contacts and ParticipatiQ of Teachers. Washington, D. C. : American Council Q Public Affairs, 1941. 1) Gross, Neal C., Mason, Ward S. and McEachern, A. W- Explorations in Role Analysis. New York: Wiley. 1958 Halpin, Andrew W. Leadership Behavior of School Supe rintendents —\———\. Chicago. University of Chicago Press, 1956. Hanna, Geneva and Haskew, L. D. "The Organization and Administration of the Community School, " The Community School. Part II, 52nd Yearbook. Nelson B. Henry, editor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953. Hartley, E. L. Fundamentals of Social Psychology. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1952. Hoffman, James D. "A Study of the Perceptions that Adminis- trators, Elementary Teachers, Consultants, and Special Area Teachers Have of the Elementary Special 'Area Teacher and the Consultant Role. ” Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1959. Holden, Leonard W. ”Administrative Roles in Secondary Education as Identified by Secondary Principals and Teachers.” Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1959. Hughes, Everett C. "Dilemmas and the Contradictions of ‘/ Status, ” American Journal of Sociology, 50: 353-59, 1945. Linton, Ralph. The Cultural Background of Personality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1947. Major, John L. , Scieszka, Lou and Tasse, Lou. "The Role of the Community School Director. ” Unpublished report, Flint, 1947. (Mimeographed. ) 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 154.- Manwiller, Lloyd. "Expectations Regarding Teachers. " Unpublished Ph.— D. dissertation, University of Oregon, 1957. Mead, G. H. Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934. Melby, Ernest O. Administering Community Education. Englewood Cliffs, N. J. : Prentice-Hall, Inc. , 1955. Melton, Joseph. "Perceptions of the Ideal and Actual Role of the Elementary School Principalship. " Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1953. Mott, C. S. Harding. ”The Flint Community School Concept as I See It, ” Journal of Educational Sociolo , 23:4; 149-52, 1959. Mryainoti, 5. Frank and Dormbusch, Sanford M. "A Test of Interactionist Hypotheses of Self—Conception, ” American Journal of Sociology, 61: 399-403: 1956' Neiman, L. J. and Hughes, J. W. "Problems of the Concept of Role—-A Resurvey of the Literature, ” Social Forces, 30: 141-49, 1951. Newcomb, Theodore M. Social Psychology. New York: Dryden Press, 1950. Nonnamaker, Eldon R. “The Role of the Enrollment Officer at Michigan State University. ” Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University. 1959. Ort, Virgil. ”The Role of the School Superintendent's Wife. " Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1955. Parsons, Talcott. Essays in Sociological Theory-—Pure and Applied. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1949. Sarbin, Theodore R. ”Role Theory, " Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. I. G. Lindzey, editor. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1954. pp. 223-258. Seeman, Melvin. "Role Conflict and Ambivalence in Leadership, " American Sociological Review, 18: 373-80. , 1953. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 155 Sklarewitz, Norman. "Happiest Town in Michigan, " Coronet, 40:6: 69-72, 1956. Smith, Ewart E. "Effects of Clear and Unclear Role-Expectations on Group Productivity and Defensiveness, " Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 55: 213-29, 1944. Solby, Bruno. "The Role Concept and Job Adjustment, “ Sociometry, 7: 222-29, 1944. Stouffer, Samuel A. "An Analysis of Conflicting Social NormS n American Sociological Review, 14: 708-1 2, 1949, ’ Stouffer, Samuel A. and Toby, Jackson. "Role Conflict and Personality, ” American Journal of Sociology, 5; 395- 406, 1951. Sweitzer, Robert E. "The Superintendent's Role in Improving Instruction, ” Administrator's Notebook, 6:8: 1-4, 1958. Terrien, Frederic W. "The Occupational Role of Teachers, " Journal of Educational Sociology, 29: 14-20, 1955. Toby, Jackson. ”Universalistic and Particularistic Factors in Role Assignment, ” American Sociological Review, 18, 134—43, 1953. Turner, Ralph H. "Role-Taking, Role-Standpoint, and Reference-Group Behavior, " American Journal of Sociology, 61: 316-28, 1956. Waite, Keith V. "A Situational Analysis of the Teacher- PrincipalRelationships." Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1958. Waller, Willard. The SociologLof Teachiil‘g. New York: John Wiley 8: Sons, 1932. Young, Kimball. Personality and the Problems of Adjustment. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1952. 156 APPENDIX A BASIC PHILOSOPHY OF THE FLINT COMMUNITY SCHOOLS 157 BASIC PHILOSOPHY OF THE FLINT COMMUNITY SCHOOLS The Community School Is the Ideal Agent for Bringing about Better Understanding among People for Solving Community Problems and for Solving World Problems I. Take the initiative in getting individual and community problems solved by bringing together pertinent community resources and services. A. Provide in-service education for administrators, instruc- tional staff and special services and maintenance personnel. 1. Conduct 6 bi-monthly, 2 hour discussion meetings with building personnel with respect to the community school concept. 2. . Encourage staff members to enroll in seminars and classes dealing with community schools. 3. Establish a Community Education Resource Materials Center including texts, pamphlets, film strips, services available from government agencies, business and in- dustry, and community agencies and organizations, etc. 4. Train staff for interviewing. Identify individual and community problems. 1. Family interview via home visitations by school personnel contacting all families in the community within each 3 year period. 2. Systematic study of school records and standardized tests by professional staff. 3. Analyze referral reports. 4. Informal personal contacts and observation by school staff. 5. Read and li.sten to ‘mass communications media. Conduct formal surveys. Conferences with community agencies and organizations. Analysis of governmental statistics. (D-xlO‘ Identify community resources and services. 1. Formal survey of people in the community. 2. Examination of resources and services in the Resource Materials Center. 158 3. Formal and informal contacts with business, industry, community agencies and organizations. D. Coordinate community resources and services with individual and community problems. 1. Presentation and discussion with the community school coordinating body. 2. Refer individual problems to appropriate resource or service agency. 3. Individual counseling by school personnel. II. Determine educational, recreational, social, health, economic, and cultural needs and interests of the community and to provide opportunities for their satisfaction for all people at all age levels. A. Determine felt needs and interests of the community. Professional literature. Informal conversations. What is being done in other communities ? Staff suggestions. Identify problems. Formal surveys. Brainstorming. Workshops and conferences. Status leaders. xomNOmvbWNr—I B. Provide organized opportunities for the satisfaction of needs and interests. Recreational activities. Social activities. Educational activities. Health activities. Cultural and aesthetic activities. Economic activities. omswww III. Assist leaders to see the interrelations between all aspects of the community. A. Involve leaders to discuss with people all aspects of the current significant civic problems. B. Furnish collected information to leaders on civic problems. C. Personal presentation by community school representatives of their perspectives of a civic problem. 159 IV. Strengthen the performance of people as citizens in a democracy. A. B. Help people become aware of their citizenship responsibilities. Importance of voting. Participation in public affairs. Fulfill family responsibilities. Awareness of heritage. Knowledge of forms and functions of the various agencies of government. mAWNt—J Provide opportunities for people to practice and experience the skills of participation in working out common problems. C. Community school organizations. Block organization. Training seminars. Advisory committees. In—service training for staff. Cooperative training program with other agencies. O‘LfiuthH Inform citi z ens of significant issues on local, state, national and world levels. 1: Free and open discussion on the facts. 2. Recommend informative mass media sources. V. Identify and develop leadership for the school attendance area. A. Identify leadership. 1. Observe people in action. 2. . Analyze survey reports. 3. Ask other people. 4. Act upon recommendations of principals, teachers, laymen, and children. B. Develop leadership. Leadership training classes for adults. Student government. . Practice leadership skills in clubs for children, youth and adults. 4. Informal counseling in leadership skills for children, DON.“ youth and adults . VI. VII. 160 5. Informal conferences in leadership skills. 6. Study of professional literature and films. 7. Informal sharing of successful leadership techniques by people who are in leadership positions. Create a better understanding among people of the community. A. D. ment. Plan activities that will bring races together. 1. Plan.inter-school activities between teams and clubs for all levels. 2. Mott Camp. 3. Hamady House 4. Big Brothers, Big Sisters, Stepping Stones, Home and Family Living, Apprentice Programs. 5. Inter-cultural educational courses. 6. Organize. di'scusSi'oni groups with leaders of different racial groups. Plan activities that will overcome negative attitudes toward bringing racial groups together. 1 Individual counseling. 2 Involvement and participation. 3. Using study committees. 4 Community survey. Plan activities to bring cultural and social groups together. 1. Form committees to welcome migrants. 2. Involve senior citizens in all kinds of activities. 3. Integrate exceptional children and their parents with others. 4. Purposively include representatives of minority groups in activities and organizations. 5. Program activities so the identity of cliques disappear. Overcome the misunderstanding between labor and manage- Improve school and community relations. A. Increase the understanding of the underlying purposes of community education. 1. Develop school programs to assist other social institutions in fulfilling their obligations. E. F. 161 2. Develop publicityc within the schools. 3. Lay participation. 4. Incorporate community problem-solving into the - curriculum. Encourage school and lay people to work together. Leadership seminars. Cooperative programs. Salvage materials from business and industry. Clothing pools. swam- Clarify school finance policies. 1. Tax structure. 2. School budgets. 3. Long range school goals. Inform people on new developments in modern education. Guidance and counseling procedures. Use of tests and measurements. Exceptional children's educational programs. Primary cycles. Common learnings. UluPszH Prepare people for social and economic change. Inform people of the purpose of community school programs and activities . Revised 9/1959 162 APPENDIX B LETTER AND INSTRUMENTS USED IN THIS STUDY MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY BASTLANSING COLLEGE OF EDUCATION - BUREAU OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH November 25, 1959 Dear The purpose of this letter is to introduce you to a study being undertaken by Mr. Alton W. Cowan, in cooperation with the Bureau of Educational Research, Michigan State University. The mad for this research has been acknowledged by Dr. Spencer Myers, Superintendent of Schools, and Mr. Frank Manley, Assistant Superintendent and Director, Mott Foundation progran, and they recognize the necessity for your participation as a Flint staff mber. As a staff member of the Flint Public Schools, you are aware of the leadership which your commity is assming in developing conniunity school education. Your school system has played a leading role in initiating programs designed to imple- ment the commity school concept and promote comunity-centered schools. We recognize that the success of such programs depends largely upon the most effec- tive use of the resources of your staff. We have found, however, very little in educational literature specifically concerned with the role of the neighborhood community school administrator in the educational structure. This void provides the basic motivation for a study we are now undertaking. In order to carry out this study we need your response to a check-list type ques- tionnaire. The enclosed questionnaire concerns some selected aspects, with which you are fmniliar, of the Commity School Building Director's position. Your con- tribution will be of great help to people who are studying the administrative and organizational structure of the Cmunity Schools in Flint. Your responses will not be disclosed in any form that will identify you. Your confidence will be re- spected. If you desire we will gladly send you a statistical compilation of responses which you and other selected Flint educators have given. Since we want to complete our analysis of the data as soon as possible, would you please return your part of the study by December 15th. We wish to express our appreciation for your cooperation in this study of some selected aspects of the Building Director's position. Sincerely yours, Dr. Wilbur Brookover, Director Bureau of Educational Research Mr. George Keem, Flint Coordinator Michigan State University Mr. Alton W. Cowan Michigan State University Aspects of the Building Director's Position in the Flint Public Schools The following statements refer to some aspects of the Building Director's position in the Flint Comunity Schools. We would like you to indicate whether or not you exnect him to do what is indicated in each statemnt. You may do 5513 by circling in the right margin the Y (yes) ifyou thinkhs should, or the N (no) ifyou thinkhe should not. If you have no idea concerning what he should do fora particular statement, you may circle the DK (don't know). For the purpose of this study the term "regular school" will refer to the day school program and the term "commnity school" to the after- school, evening and Saturday programs. // I EXPECT THE 013618 ONE EIILDING DIRECTOR TO: _Y__e_s_ 39 Don't Know 1. Tale children on field trips during regular school I Y N DK 2'. 3. h. S. 6. 7. 8. 9. hours, such as visiting industries, banks, businesses, etc. Enlist the aid of businessman in providing materials Y N DK and supplies for various school activities, such as TV dealers furnishing sets or antennas. When finding a child or family in need of some social Y N DK service, refer the case and male necessary contacts in welfare, family counseling or health. Bring parents into: the regular school as curriculum Y N DK resource persons, such as showing travel films, discussing their occupations, etc. Provide students with opportunities to solve their Y N DK own problems in teen clubs. Take a regular school class on a camping trip during Y N DK the school year to learn about natural resources, etc. Permit groups of children to help plan what to Y N DK study for his regular school classes. Use comunity facilities and services, such as Y N DK YMCA boys farm or Red Cross, as part of his regular school instructional program. Counsel youngsters referred to him as "trouble I N DK makers" by teachers or the Building Principal. I EXPECT THE HJILDING DIRECTOR TO: 10. ll. 12. 13. 15. 16. 17. 18. 21. 22. 23. 25. Allow children to participate in evaluation of the regular school program. Use community needs and problems as a basis for curriculum development for the regular school. Visit children’s homes to become acquainted with the parents. Plan the program of comnunity school activities cooperatively with adults, teachers, administrators, and students. Schedule activities, such as dances, basketball ames, during regular school vacation periods Eexcluding summer). Be responsible for selecting adult edication instructors. Plan adult activities involving different religious groups. Have authority to suspend children from community school activities. Organize adult activities intended to improve inter— racial relationships. Schedule comunity school activities on Saturdays. Select volunteer adults to work with evening community school programs. Appoint as adult education teachers only those recommended by the adult education coordinators. Be the person responsible for supervising all phases of the community school program. Attempt to create better understanding among people through planning activities that will bring different social groups together. Encourage programs designed to develop adult leader- ship found within the community. Delegate supervision of some after-school activities to other members of the regular school teaching staff. CIRCLE ONE N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N ‘ DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK I EXPECT THE HJILDING DIRECTOR TO: 26. 27. 28. 29. 31. 32. 33. 3h. 35. 36. 37. 39. ho a hl. Use a community council for over-all coordination of the community school program. Use regular school facilities and educational resources to give adults opportunities for evening academic training. Be the person who is responsible for coordinating his coummnity school program with all other community school programs in Flint. Know personally the recognized leaders in various social agencies. Assume leadership in his school in coordinating the work of the school with various Flint social agencies. Take the initiative in explaining to the Building Principal significant community needs and problems. Plan men's club activities that are designed to increase understanding between labor and management. Be responsible for collecting money for after-school dances, roller skating, etc. Give talks to commity groups for the purpose of interpreting the needs and problems of the Flint school system. ' Participate actively in local civic groups. Use community councils to improve coumunications between school and commnity Involve teachers in such activities as chaperoning teen clubs, dances, etc. Be a hay person in his school responsible for informing the adult education coordinators of the types of adult education classes needed. Promote the school and its facilities as the focal point for comunity meetings and activities. Become familiar with both sides of controversial comunity issues in order to provide leadership in arriving at fair solutions. Serve on various regular school problem committees. CIRCLE ONE N DK N DK N UK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N UK N DK N DK N DK I EXPECT THE EJILDING DIRECTOR TO: h2. h3. bh. h5- 1.6. h7- h8. h9- 50. 51. 52. 53. Asmme the leadership in his school for encouraging Y interest of regular school teachers in community problems. Encourage parents to use the services of the school Y in solving their personal and family problems. Live in the school attendance area in which he works. Y Attempt to identify adult leadership in the Y comunity. Be the person in his school reaponsible for Y developing the curricula for adult evening classes. Be acquainted with such peOple as neighborhood Y businessmen. Actively participate in tax levy campaigns for Y school funds. Use school services to help other social agencies, Y and institutions, such as Youth Bureau, Big Sisters, fulfill their obligations. Be an initiator of in—service education programs I intended to inform regular school teachers of needed curriculum changes. Possess knowledge of the professional competencies Y of the regular school teaching staff. Become acquainted with the nature of the comunity, Y such as knowing the occupations of area residents. Promote the school as the ideal agent for bringing Y about better understanding among people for solving community problems . Conduct surveys to learn comunity needs and interests. Y Provide newspaper publicity as comunity recognition Y for individual and group accomplishments. Work with church organizations in implementing Y the comnunity school program. Offer personal Opinions to community groups Y concerning significant Flint school problems. CIRCLE ONE N DK N DK N DK N UK N DK N UK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK I EXPRT THE BJIIDING DIRECTOR TO: 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. Be a key person in his school for helping regular school teachers become aware of human and physical resources available in the Flint comunity. Be able to explain the work of regular school teachers in an understanding way to community groups 0 lblp identify problems which are common to the cormunity and the school. Consult with coordinators of each adult edication division before setting up related commmity school activities. Be responsible to the Building Principal for achinistration of the community school program. Hake surveys of physical and lumen resources within the community. Have authority to dismiss evening school edrlt edrcation instructors. Continue personal education by attending week-end work shops. Assist in the selection of adult education instructors by making recommendations to the Building Principal. Keep the regular school staff informed concerning the objectives and purposes of the community school program. Involve regular school teachers in such activities as conmunity surveys. Understand educational problems outside the field of his subject matter preparation. Be included in planning regular school teacher's staff meetings. Have a part in establishing all salary schedules. Work closely with the Building Principal in planning the community school program. I I I CIRCLE ONE N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N DK N UK N DK N DK N DK N D! N D! N DK I EXPECT THE 3111mm DIRECTOR TO: CIRCLE ONE 73. Actively participate in teacher's associations. Y T N . BK 711. ProVide ways in which the regular school staff Y N DR 75. may evaluate the comunity school program. Know and enforce Board of Education policies. Y N DK With the eight questions that follow, indicate your preference to the possible answers by circling your response in the right hand column. If the answers provided do not fit your belief, please explain in the space provided at the end of each question: 1. 2. 3. h. I believe that the Building Director should: . Circle one a. be regarded as having the same status as teaching personnel. e. b. be regarded as administrative personnel. b. c. be regarded as somewhere between administrative and teaching. c. d. have a unique position, not clearly administrative nor d. clearly teaching. e. other (please explain) 4 e. I believe that the Building Director should: a. teach half day sessions as well as administer the after-school a. and community school program. b. teach full day sessions and ectninister the after-school and b. conmunity school programs. c. not teach during the regular school day, spending full time c. with the community school and after-school program. d. other (please explain) d. Assuming that teaching is part of his job, I believe the Building Director should: a. teach physical education. a. b. teach academic subjects. b. c. makes no difference what he teaches. c. d. other (please explain) d. I believe the Building Director should have the: a. same salary schedule as teaching personnel. a. b. same salary schedule as administrative personnel. b. c. same salary schedule as teaching personnel, with extra c. pay for after-school and Saturday work. d. same salary schedule as administrative personnel, with d. extra pay for after-school and Saturday work. e. a salary schedule formulated especially for their e. particular position. f. other (please explain) f. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Circle one I believe the Brilding Director should: a. be required to enroll in job-related college courses. a. b. enroll at his own option in job-related college courses. b. c. other (please explain) c. Do you believe that women should be hired as Building Directors? 30 yes Ce b. no b. Not including this year how mam years have you worked in a Flint Public School which had a Building Director on its staff? I. none as be 1'2 be cc 3'11 co d. 5 or more years d. Do you have any other coments which would ‘help you express your point of view concerning the Building Director's position? If you mid like a statistical compilation of this data, please mail a card with your nuns and address: Return questionnaire to: Alton N. Cowan Bureau of Educational Research Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan Aspects of the Building Director's Position in the Flint Public Schools The following statements refer to some aspects of the Building Director's position in the Flint Public Schools. First of all, we would lib you to indicate whether or not ou believe you should do what is indicated in each statemnt. You may do is by circling in the left margin the Y (yes) if you believe you should, or the N (no) if you believe you should not. We would also like to know what you think other relevant persons expect of you in this position. You may indicate whetESr or not you think the school principals, the adult education coordinators, and the teachers expect you to do each of the things listed. You may do this by circling in the columns to the right a Y (yes) or N (no). If you have no idea what these people expect, you may circle the DK (don't brow). For the purpose of this study, the term "regular school" will refer to the day school program, and the term 'comxmmity school” to the after-school, evening and Saturday prograns. 1,39an9 Principal Adrlt Ed. Teachers .1 1W 3 Expects Coordinators Expect in 1b To: Expect lb To: Is To: 1.’ Tab children on field trips ‘ Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK during regular school hours, such as visiting industries, banb, businesses, etc. 2. Enlist the aid of businessmen in Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK providing materials and supplies for ' various school activities, such as TV dealers furnishing sets or antennas. 3. Whenfindingachildorfamilyin YNDK YNDK YNDK need of some social service, refer the case and mab necessary contacts in welfare, family counseling or health. h. Bring parents into the regular 1 n DK Y N DK 1 N DK school as curriculum resource persons, such as showing travel films, discusa- sing their occupations, etc. 5. Provide students with opportunities Y N DK Y N DK Y 11 DK to solve their own problems in teen clubs. 6. Tab aregular school class one Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK camping trip during the school year to learn about natural resources, etc. T E .15 'lbve: 7. Permit groups of children to help plan what to study for aw regular school classes. 8. Use other comrnity facilities and services, such as YMCA boys farm or Red Cross as part of W regular school instructional program. 9. Counsel youngsters referred to me as "trouble makers" by teachers or the Building Principal. 10. Allow children to participate in evaluation of the regular school program. 11. Use comunity reeds and problems as a basis for curriculum development for the regular school. 12. Visit children's homes to become acquainted with the parents. 13. Plan the program of community school activities cooperatively with adults, teachers, administrators, and stucbnts. 11:. Schedule activities, such as dances, basketball games, during regular school vacation periods (excluding sumsr). 15. Be responsible for selecting adult education instructors. 16. Plan amlt activities involving different religious groups. 17. Have authority to suspend children from community school activities. Principal Ebcpects Me To : YNDK INDK 18. Organize adult activities intenhd Y N DK to improve inter-racial relationships. 19. Schedule conmnnity school activities on Saturdays. Adult Ed. Coordinators Expect lb To: YNDK Teachers EXpect lb To: YNDK I Believe I Should: I 20. Select volunteer adults to work with evening comunity school programs. 21. Appoint as adult education teachers only those recommended by the adrlt education coordinators. 22. Be the person responsible for supervising all phases of the comunity school program. 23. Attempt to create better under- standing among people through planning activities that will bring different social groups together. 21:. Encourage programs designed to develop adult leadership found within the conmmnity. 25. Delegate supervision of some after-school activities to other members of the regular school tanning staff. 26. Use a commmity council for over-all coordination of the community school program. 27. Use regular school facilities and educational resources to give adults opportunities for evening academic training. 28. Be the person who is responsible for coordinating my comunity school program with all other comnity school programs in Flint. 29. Know personally the recognized leaders in various comunity agencies. 3). Assure leadership in my school in coordinating the work of the school with various Flint social agencies. 31. Take the initiative in explain- ing to the Building Principal signifi- cant community needs and problems. Principal waots No To: YNDK Adult Ed. Coordinators Expect Me To: INDK Teachers Expect Pb To: YNDK Principal Adult Ed. Teachers I Behave Dcpects Coordinators Expect I Should: lb To: mpect lb To: Me To: Y N 32. Plan men's club activities that Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK are designed to increase understanding between labor and management. Y N 33. Beresponsibls for collecting Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK money for after-school dances, roller- skating, etc. Y N 31:. Give talks to community groups for Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK the purpose of interpreting the needs and problems of the Flint school system. Y N 35. Participate activelyinlocal Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK civic groups. Y N 36. Use community councilsto improve Y N DK- Y N DK Y N DK oommrnications between school and - comunity. I N 37. Involve teachers in such activi- Y N DK I N DK I N DK ties as chaperoning teen clubs, dancea’ etc. YN 38. Beakeypersoninmyschool YNDK YNDK YNDK responsible for informing the adrlt education coordinators of the types of adult education classes needed. Y N 39. Promote the school andits Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK facilities as the focal point for commrnity meetings and activities. Y N to. Become familiar with both sides Y N DK Y N DK Y I DK of controversial community issues in order to provide leadership in arriv- ing at fair solutions. Y N hl. Serve on various regular school Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK problem committees. Y N 1:2. Assumetheleadershipinnw Y N DK Y N DK Y NDK school for encouraging interest of regular school teachers in community problems. Y N ’43. Encourage parents to use the Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK services of the school in solving their personal and family problems. I N 141;. Live inthe school attendance Y N DK Y N DK Y N DK area in which I work. I Believe I Should: I Y’ N 1:5. Attempt to identify adult leadership in the community. 1&6. Be the person in my school responsible for developing the curricula for adult evening 01883630 N7. Be acquainted with such peOple as mighborhood businessmen. 1:8. Actively participate in tax levy campaigns for school funds. 1:9. Use school services to help other social agencies and institutions, such as Youth Bureau, Big Sisters, fulfill their obligations. 50. Be an initiator of in—service education programs intended to inform regular school teachers of needed curriculum changes. 51. Possess knowledge of the profes- sional competencies of the regular school teaching staff. 52. Become acquainted with the nature of the comunity, such as knowing the occupations of area residents. 53. Promote the school as the ideal agent for bringing about better under- standing among people for solving coamunity problems. 9:. Conduct surveys to learn community needs and interests. 55. Provide newspaper publicity as community recognition for individual and group accomplishments. 56. Work with church organizations in implementing the community school program. 5?. Offer personal opinions to comunity groups concerning signifi- cant Flint school problems. Principal Expects Me To : YNDK YNDK Coordinators Ercpect Me To: Y Adult Ed. NDK NDK Teachers EXpe ct Me To : YNDK YNDK I Believe I Should: I N 58. Be a by person in my school for helping regular school teachers becone aware of hrman and physical resources available in the Flint community. 59. Be able to explain the 'work of regular school teachers in an under- standing way to commity groups. 60. Help identify problems which are comon to the community and the school. 61. Consult with coordinators of each adrlt education division before setting up related community school activities. 62. Be responsible to the Brilding Principal for administration of the ‘ comnunity school program. 63. Make surveys of ptwsical and mman resources within the commrnity. 614. Have authority to dismiss evening school adult education instructors. ' 65. Continue personal education by attending week-end work shops. 66. Assist in the selection of adult education instructors by melting recommendations to the Building Fri-”ipal. 67. Keep the regular school staff informed concerning the objectives and purposes of the comnunity school program. 68. Involve regular school teachers in such activities as comunity surveys. 69. Understand educational problems outside the field of one's subject matter area. 70. Be included in planning regular school teacher's staff meetings. Principal Expects Me To : YNDK YNDK Adult Ed. Coordinators Expect Me To: YNDK Te ache rs EXpect Me To: YNDK Principal Adult Ed. I Believe Erqrects Coordinators I Should: Me To: Expect Me To: Y N 71. Have a part in establishing all Y N DK Y N DK salary schedules. Y N 72. Work closely with the Building Y N DK Y N DK Principal in planning the community school program. Y N 73. Actively participate in teacher's Y N DK Y N DK associations. Y N 71:. Provide ways in which the Y N DK Y N DK regular school staff may evaluate the community school program. I N 75. KnowandenforceBoardof Y N DK Y N DK . Education policies. Teachers Expect Me To: IN DK DE DK DK DK With» the seven questions that follow, indicate your preference to the possible answers by circling your response in the right hand column. If the answers pro- Vided do not fit your belief, please explain in the space provided at the end of each question: 1. I believe that the Building Director should: a. be regarded as having the same status as teaching personnel. b. be regarded as administrative personnel. c. be regarded as somewhere between administrative and teaching. 6.. have a unique position, nbt clearly administrative nor clearly teaching. a. other (please explain) Which of the above answers do you think would be selected by: 1. Building Principals a. 2. Teachers 80 30 AMtv Ede Coordinators a. 2. I believe that the Building Director should: a. teach half day sessions as well as administer the after-school and community school program. b. teach full day sessions and administer the after- school and community school programs. c. not teach during the regular day, spending full time with the community school and after-school program. (1. other (please explain) be 0. b. c. be Co a. b. Ce (1. 6.' or d. or do or d. Circle one 2. (continued) Circle one Which of the above answers do you think would be selected by: 10 Building Prmipala a. be c. or do 2. Teachers a. b. c. or d. 3. Adult Ed. Coordinators a. b. c. or d. 3. Assuming that teaching is part of his Job, I believe the Building Director should: a. teach physical education. a. b. teach academic subjects. b. c. makes no difference what he teaches. c. d. other (please eXplain) .d. Which of the above answers do you think would be selected by: 10 mil-ding Wipals a. be Co or do 2. leachers a. b. c. or d. 3. Adult Ed. Coordinators a. b. c. or d. h. I believe that the Building Director should have the: a. same salary schedule as teaching personnel. 3.. b. same salary schedule as administrative personnel. b. c. same salary schedule as teaching personnel, with c. extra pay for after-school and Saturday work. d. same salary schedule as administrative personnel, d. with extra pay for after-school and Saturday work. e. a salary schedule formulated especially for their e. particular position. f. other (please eXplain) 1‘. Which of the above answers do you think would be selected by: 1. Building Principals a. b. c. d. e. or f. 2. Teachers a. b. c. d. e. or f. 3. Adult Ed. Coordinators a. b. c. d. e. or f. S. I believe that the Building Director should: a. be required to enroll in Job-related college courses. a. b. enroll at his own option in Job-related college courses. b. c. other (please explain) c. Which of the above answers do you think would be selected by: 1. Building Principals a. b. or c. 2: Teacmrs a. be or Go 3. Adult Ed. Coordinators a. b. or c. Circle one 6. Do you believe that women should be hired as Building Directors? a. yes a. b. no b. Which of the above answers do you think would be selected by: 10 Building Principal: 80 or be 2. Teachers a. or b. 3. Adult Ed. Coordinators a. or b. 7. Do you have any other comments which would help you eXpress your point of view concerning the Building Director's position? ' 8. If you would like a statistical compilation of this data, please mail a card with your name and address: Please return completed questionnaire to: Alton W. Owen - Bureau of Educational Research Education minding- - _ Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan Commity School Building Directors: Please circle in the right hand column these answers which best relate to your situation: 1. 2. 4. 5. 6. 7. mm: is your age group? a. 20-29 h. 30-39 c. 40-49 d. 50 or over What is your marital status? a. single b. married c. divorced d. widowed e. other, How many children do you have? a. O b. l c. 2 d. 3 e. 4 f. 5 or more What is the highest academic degree attained? a. Bachelor's b. Master's c. other, In what areas did you, or are you preparing? A. Undergraduate majors ' minors 3. Graduate majors minors fl In how many school systems, other than Flint, have you worked? ' a. none b. l c. 2 d. 3 e. 4 or more How many years of teaching experience did you have prior to becoming a Building Director? a. none b. 1.2 c. 3-4 d. 5-6 s. 7-8 2. 9 or more 10. 11. 12. 13, Not including this school year, how many years of experience do you have as a Building Director in Flint? What are your future plans in the field of education? a. fully expect to remain in the field b. expect to remain at least five years may leave after five years d. plan to look for another job this year e. other (please explain) would you enter the educational profession again if you ‘were to start over? Do you have any desire to obtain any'of the following administrative positions within the field of education (see below)? If you answered yes, please indicate by'circling all the positions that you would accept in the following examples: a. school superintendent b. high school principal c. elementary school principal d. assistant principal e. adult education coordinator f. other (please explain) Would you become a Building Director again if you were to start over? Do you believe that the Building Principal's position has more prestige in the eyes of: a. teachers than that of the Building Director's position? b. parents than that of the Building Director’s position? or more yes nor I ex- pact to remain as a Building Director. yes no 14. In what type of comunity school district do you work? 8. a. elementary c. high school e. other, b. b. jr. high d. combination c. d. at 15. Do you have any further cements which would help us better understand your position? (use space below) Return to: Alton W. Cowan Bureau of Educational Research Education Building Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan ROOM USE ONLY ROOM USE ONLY F "1:“ <‘l'9’6r'. ‘ ' . M." “ 1")» L)“. ‘2‘ . .fl.- ‘ I m 42 ’1‘ .. ..1!i.lh..ij .. all. as . a .H .. ‘rsV- . t, .-.. it, Or Liana—J... ...lzite. . ‘ e ... E'J. ... . . “‘humhuh?