THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEACHER PERCEPTION 0F ELEMENTARY SCHOOL GRGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT A Disser’tohon Ior Mm Degree of DH. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY David S. Morton 197.7 W W’? IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII L = u c em I I, a, Ll1;l\*Cl‘>I‘7 I; IIIII III III III I 4mm.- '- vi" .r—r This is to certify_that the thesis entitled The Relationship Between Teacher Perception Of Elementary School Organizational Climate And Student Achievement presented by David S. Morton has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree inAdministration and Higher Education WK Major professor Date 7‘ I 7‘ 9 I 7 '7 0.7639 ABSTRACT THE RELATIONSHIP BETMEEN TEACHLR PoRCfiPTION OF ELELENTARY SCHOOL ORGANIAATIONAL CLIMATn AND sTuoaxT AssisvsuauT By David S. Morton Theoretical Background The theory underlying this research comes from what is generally known as the Human Relations school of organiza- tional thought. The basic premise of this school is that productivity is best attained by more satisfied workers, and conversely, less satisfied workers will produce less. The major factors contributing to worker satisfaction include the behavior of the leader, peer-group relations, and the economic and non-economic rewards, In this study student achievement in the cognitive areas is viewed as the "product" of the elementary school. Proceeding from this assumption and combining it with the human relations point of view: teachers' satisfied with the leadership behavior of their principal, satisfied with their peer~group relations, and satisfied with a combination of economic and non-economic rewards should produce students With higher achievement test scores than teachers who are less satisfied with these factors. David S. Morton Statement of the Problem This study was undertaken to determine if a relation- ship existed between teacher perception of the organiza- tional climate of the elementary school and the academic achievement of students. Organizational climate was defined as teacher group behavior, principal leadership behavior and teacher job satisfaction. It was measured by selected subscales from the Leadership Behavior Descrip- tion Questionnaire - Form XII, the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire - Form IV, and an adaptation of the Short-Form Measure of Self-Actualization. Student achievement was measured by selected parts (mathematics and reading) of the l97h-75 Michigan Educational Assessment Program. Study Design Instruments were sent to teachers in 306 elementary schools which agreed to participate in the study. The reSponses from 1,976 teachers in 221 buildings were used in the analyses. The major question posed in the study, the relationship between elementary school organizational climate and student achievement, was examined by first computing mean scores for each subscale by building and then using a correlational model. Follow-up analyses included: 1. examination of scattergrams of nine subscales with student achievement variables for curvilinear relationships; 2. examination of David S. Morton summated scales by climate components with student achieve- ment variables for curvilinear relationships; 3. examination of relationships among the nine subscales using a correla- tional model; and 4. analysis of relationships among nine subscales using a step wise multiple regression model. Findings Correlational analyses among the student achievement variable (math and reading scores) and the nine subscales of elementary school organizational climate found no signi- ficant relationships. Follow-up analyses examining the scattergrams found no curvilinear relationships. No signi- ficant relationships were found when summated climate scales were correlated with the math and reading scores. Examina- tion of the scattergrams for the summated climate scales and student achievement also revealed no linear or curvilinear relationships. EXploratory analyses using the correlational model revealed a number of significant correlations among the nine subscales defined as elementary school climate. Subsequent use of the stepwise multiple regression model indicated that the job satisfaction of teachers can be predicted by a combination of the principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior subscales. Discussion of these findings and implications for further research were dis- cussed. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEACHER PERCEPTION OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT By *tnu‘ox David S. Morton A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1977 DEDICATION To my wife, Jeri, and to my son, Aaron. ii ACKNOJLEDGEENTS To Lynnie, BB, Tommy P. and Jeri, the infamous Menage a Quint, my gratitude, for without your support, I would not have finished this endeavor. To Preston, my lifelong friend, thanks for your support when I needed it. To Fred and Phil, more than professors. To my parents, for their help in this and whenever I have needed them. And to my wife, Jeri, with whom I have shared ten wonderful years, my deepest appreciation for her faith in my ability and support in this task. iii Chapter I II III IV TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . Need for the Study . . . . Statement of the Problem . Assumptions . . . Limitations of the Study . Definition of Terms . . . Organization of the Study . REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . Theoretical Background . . . Leadership Behavior .-. . Description Questionnaire Organizational Climate . . . Description Questionnaire Job Satisfaction . . . . . . Michigan Educational . . . . Assessment Program Research Combining the Four . Components summaryooooooooooo Conclusion . . . . . . . . . DESIGN OF THE STUDY . . . . . . Instrumentation . . . . Determination of Population . Summaw........... ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS . o . . . Reliability of Subscales . . Correlation Between Subscales Principal Leadership Behavior Subscales Teacher Behavior Subscales . Correlations Summary. Leadership Behavior and Teacher . Behavior Subscales Correlation iv L: m (D OCD'QO\O\U H TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) Chapter Principal Leadership Behavior . Subscales and Job Satisfaction Correlations Teacher Group Behavior and Job Satisfaction Correlations Summary of Correlation Analysis Stepwise Multiple Regression Analysis Principal Leadership Behavior . Subscales Teacher Group Behavior Subscales Job Satisfaction Subscale . Summary . . . . . . . . . . V SUMMARY, FINDINGS, AND DISCUSSION The Purpose of the Study . Limitations of the Study . The Procedures Used . . . . Research Findings . . . . . Multiple Regression Analysis Summary and Conclusion . . Discussion . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A . . . . . . . . . . APPEINYDIX B O O O U I O O C O O BIBLIO GRAPE-{Y O O I C O I I O I 10 ll 12 LIST OF TABLES Summary of Sample Returns . . . . . of the Study Elementary School Organizational . Climate Subscale Reliability: Split-Half, Full-Length Math and Reading Correlations . . . with All Subscales Correlation Analyses for School . . Climate Summated Scales Correlation Analyses for Principal Leadership Behavior Subscales Correlation Analyses for Teacher . Group Behavior Subscales Principal Leadership Behavior and . Teacher Group Behavior Correlations Principal Leadership Behavior . . . and Job Satisfaction Correlations Teacher Group Behavior Subscales . and Job Satisfaction Correlations Stepwise Multiple Regression . Analysis of Dependent Variable Role Assumption Stepwise Multiple Regression . . . Analysis of Dependent Variable Initiating Structure Stepwise Multiple Regression . . . Analysis of Dependent Variable Production Emphasis vi us 50 52 59 6h 68 71 77 79 80 Table 13 1h 15 l6 17 18 19 LIST OF TABLES (Cont‘d.) Stepwise Multiple Regression . Analysis of Dependent Variaole Tolerance of Freedom Stepwise Rultiple Regression . Analysis of Dependent Variable Consideration Stepwise Iiultiple Regression . Analysis of Dependent Variable BSprit Stepwise hultiple Regression . Analysis of Dependent Variable Disengagement Stepwise Multiple Regression . Analysis of Dependent Variable Object Socialization Stepwise Multiple Regression . Analysis of Dependent Variable Job Satisfaction Correlation Analysis Coefficients vii 8h 86 88 90 91 124 Figgre 1 LIST OF FIGURES Graphic Representation of . Prediction Variables viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Since 1966 a great deal of research in educational administration has been conducted on the concept of organi- zational climate within the school. Ralpin (1966, p. 131) suggested, "Anyone who visits more than a few schools notes quickly how schools differ from one another in their 'feel' ... one finds that each appears to have a 'personality' of its own. It is this 'personality' that we describe ... as the 'Organizational Climate' of the school." Halpin's description of the "personality" of the school originated from a research project undertaken by he and Croft (1966). Each of the studies which emanated from the original work has taken the approach that organizational climate is divided into two basic areas: leadership and group behavior. While this perSpective includes two aSpects of school function, it fails to take into account the teachers' feelings concerning job satisfaction. A distinction among these areas can be eXplained as follows: 1) Principal leadership behavior focuses on the relationship between the teacher and the principal within the work environ- ment. This encompasses the day to day encounters between 1 2 the two and the teachers' perceptions of these encounters. 2) Teacher group behavior involves the interaction between teachers in both professional and social relationships and the individual teacher's perceptions of these situations. 3) Job satisfaction is the level at which the teachers feel their wants and needs are being fulfilled in their teaching position. Principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior deal with teachers' attitudes toward professional and social interpersonal relationships. Job satisfaction involves other areas in the work environment including monetary reward, physical environment, professional growth, and job security. Job satisfaction also includes the level of reSpect the teachers feel they have been accorded by significant others and the gratification they receive from their work. Three Specific tasks were undertaken in this research project: first, to develop a scale which would measure job satisfaction of teachers: second, to examine the relation- ship among job satisfaction principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior: and three, to determine if a relationship exists between the three components and the achievement of students in elementary schools. It was assumed that job satisfaction was an added dimension to the concept of organizational climate, was a unique component and was not accounted for in principal leadership and teacher group behavior. 3 In addition, an attempt was made to determine if the achievement of students in school was related to the teachers' perceptions of the three components mentioned. Since the interaction between student and teacher is an integral part of the learning process, it was assumed that that teachers' perceptions of the organizational climate affected their teaching and interaction with students, therefore influencing the classroom learning environment and impacting upon the achievement of students. It was also assumed that if teachers had positive perceptions of their principal's leadership behavior, the teacher group behavior in their building, and the satis- faction derived from their jobs, then students would achieve at a higher level than if teacher perceptions of these same variables were negative. Need for the Study The need for this study stems from the public pressure for educational accountability and the gap existing between practitioners and theoreticians which prevents the use of theoretical concepts in analyzing the intricacies and com- plexities of the school's organizational environment and its effect upon student achievement. The Accountabilitinssue In.August of 1970, the Michigan legislature charged the Michigan Department of Education with the responsibility 4 for operating a statewide assessment program of educational effectiveness. Public Act No. 38 required the Michigan Department of Education to: 1) Establish meaningful achievement goals in the basic skills for students, and identify those students with the greatest educational need in these skills: 2) Provide the State with the information needed to allocate State funds and professional services in a manner best calculated to equalize educational opportunity for students to achieve competence in such basic skills. The movement toward an accountability model has caused concern and conflict in local education agencies throughout the state of Michigan. These problems are reflected in the following two quotations. According to House, River,and Stufflebeam (197A, p. 667), "Some principals have been told to raise the scores of their students on the Assessment Test in their schools or lose their jobs." Chabotar, Sederburg, and Lad (1974, p. 6) state, "The Michigan educational accountability model holds administrators and teachers responsible for results." The Michigan Department of Education has denied that the purpose of the accountability model is the evaluation and possible replacement of public school personnel. However, since it may be possible that principals and teachers would be held accountable for the achievement of their students, information concerning organizational characteristics which could be identified with levels of student achievement would be of value to both administrators and teachers. In fact, informa- tion which would help identify situations in which positive 5 or negative student gain could be predicted, or at least suggested, might help influence educational practices. Bgidging the Gap Between Theory and Practice The second need for this study relates to the anti- theoretical bias of practitioners and the inability of theoreticians to demonstrate the practical use of theoretical models and concepts. Getzels (1968, p. 37) says, The study and practice of administration are beset with controversy. There are opposing conceptions of administrative behavior and, accordingly, of the most fruitful ways for selecting and preparing administrators. There are unsettled issues regarding the relations among theories of administration, research in administration and the practice of adminis- tration. There are those that argue that knowledge of organizational and administrative theory and research is a burden rather than a help to the practicing administrator, and those who assert that the practice of administration must be founded on theoretical understanding and research, however. imperfect these may be, or it will be founded on myth, emotion, and unquestioned recipe. Although a great deal has been attempted during the past two decades and many researchers' questions have been asked and answered, the conflict over the value of theory remains. If theoretical information is to be of use to practi- tioners in the field, biases against these inputs must be eliminated with systematic research which can show the validity and applicability of theoretical systems. The intent of this research is to help reduce the theoretical biases of practitioners by showing the utility of examining 6 the organizational climate and its relationship with other selected variables. If the construct of organizational climate is to be of use to practitioners, it must be studied and demonstrated to be a viable tool in analyzing the school as a social organization at the building level. Statement of the Problem The problem of this study was to determine whether a relationship exists between teacher perception of the organizational climate of the elementary school and the academic achievement of students. Organizational climate was considered as a combination of teacher group behavior, principal leadership behavior, and teacher job satisfaction. Student achievement was defined as the acquisition of basic skills in mathematics and reading. Assumptions Certain assumptions are made by any researcher in a study of this type. These assumptions are the underlying premise upon which the framework of the research is built. The assumptions ascribed to in this study include the following: 1) The concept of organizational climate first named by Halpin and Croft is valid and the "personality" of the elementary school can be described by collecting the perceptions of teachers in a given building. 7 2) The Michigan Educational Assessment Program is an indicator of pupil achievement in elementary schools and that a large sample of elementary schools will represent the achievement of all students in an elementary school, even though it is given only to fourth-grade children. 3) The instruments used to measure each of the climate variables adequately operationalize the teachers' perceptions of organizational climate. Limitations of the Study The limitations for generalizability of the findings in this study are in four areas: sample, definition of achievement, definition of climate, and scale development. Sample: Only elementary schools in the state of Michigan with an organizational pattern of kindergarten through the sixth grade were included in the population of schools. In addition, each school needed to have ten or more teachers and ten or more classrooms within the building and a full- time principal to be included in the population. Although several attempts were made to have all selected districts participate, some chose not to participate in the study. Generalizations made concerning the findings of this study must be confined to the parameters and population selected. Achievement: The variables of mathematics and reading were selected to represent the achievement of students, and only scores from fourth-grade students were used to represent the entire kindergarten through sixth-grade achievement. 8 Climate: Only selected subscales of the Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire Form XII and the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire were used in the study. Scale Development: The Job Satisfaction subscale has been adapted from the Bonjean and Vance (197u) instrument and has not been used in this form in previous research: therefore, no prior evidence of its reliability or validity exists. Definition of Terms 1) Job Satisfaction Subscale: This measure was developed by Argyris (1960) as a semi-structured interview and revised by Bonjean and Vance (1974) into a short form, and has been used for assessing the satisfaction of employees in their work. This instrument was reconstructed in questionnaire form for the purposes of this study. Items included questions about teachers' 1) attitudes toward economic rewards: 2) fringe benefits: 3) physical surroundings: 4) non-economic rewards: and 5) general satisfaction with the position in which they now reside. 2) Leadership Behavior Subscales: These measures were adapted from the Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire XII developed by Stogdill (1963, p. 3) for the purposes of gaining group members' perceptions of leadership behavior. Subscales to be used include (1963, p. 3)‘ a) Initiating‘Structure - the leader clearly defines his own role and lets his subordinates know what is expected of them. 9 b) Tolerance of Freedom - the leader allows his subordinates scope for initiative, decision, and action. c) Role Assumption - the leader actively exercises the leadership role rather than surrendering leadership to others. d) Production Emphasis - the leader applies pressure for productive outputs. e) Consideration - the leader regards the comfort, well being, status, and contributions of his subordinates. 3) Teacher Group Behavior Subscales: These subscales were taken from two sources: Disengagement and ESprit were taken from Halpin-Croft Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire (1966, p. 150-151): and Object Socialization was taken from a reappraisal of the Halpin-Croft work by Hayes (1973, p. 23). a) Disengagement - refers to the teachers' tendencies to be "not with it". This dimension describes an attitude that is "not in gear" with reSpect to the tasks of the organization and the work at hand. It corresponds to the more general concept of anomie as first described by Durkheim. The subtest focuses upon the teachers' behavior in task-oriented situations. b) Es rit - refers to staff morale. The teachers' feeling that their social needs are being satis- fied, and that they are, at the same time, enjoying a sense of accomplishment in their work. c) Object Socialization - refers to the teachers' enjoyment of social relations with each other and students in a work-oriented situation. This dimension describes a situation in which attention is directed toward the work objectives, relation- ships centered around task-accomplishments, and job-oriented interactions. 4) Michigan Sample: The sample of elementary schools chosen for the purposes of this study from the population of all elementary schools in the state of Michigan. Schools 10 must possess three characteristics to be included: a) Have a full-time principal: b) Have ten or more classrooms and teachers: 0) Have an organizational pattern of kindergarten through sixth grade. 5) Principal: The elementary school, organizationally- appointed leader. The object of investigation for the principal leadership behavior variables. 6) Teacher: For the purposes of this study, the pro- fessional staff member assigned to elementary school teaching duties. 7) School: The unit of analysis for this study is a kindergarten through sixth grade elementary building within a school district. 8) Climate: For the purposes of this study, climate was defined as the perceptions of teachers concerning three aSpects of the work environment: the interaction between principal and teacher, teacher peer relationships, and teacher job satisfaction. The definition is intended to exPand upon Halpin's (1966) definition of climate as "the personality of the school" by enlarging the concept to include job satisfaction. Organization of the Study Chapter II is a review of literature divided into seven separate sections: a theoretical background for the study, literature concerning the Leadership Behavior 11 Description Questionnaire XII, literature concerning the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire, literature dealing with the concept of job satisfaction, literature concerning the Michigan Educational Assessment Program, research and information combining these four variables in any combination, and research and studies concerning school size and socio-economic status in dealing with these variables. The design of the study and the methodology employed in carrying out the research is presented in Chapter III. Presentation of the findings in Chapter IV concentrates on three areas: the reliability of the subscales, the correlations between subscales and the correlations between each subscale and math and reading, and the results of the application of the multiple regression analyses. An elaboration upon the findings, discussion of con- clusions, and recommendations for future research are presented in Chapter V. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The literature presented in this chapter is reviewed in eight parts: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) Theoretical Background for the Study: Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire Form XII - Background and Related Research: Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire - Background and Related Research: Job Satisfaction - Development of the Instrument and Related Research: Michigan Educational Assessment Program - Background and Development: Research and Studies which combine the previously mentioned areas: Research and Studies Related to School Size or Socio- Economic Status: Summary and Conclusions. The review is organized in this manner to facilitate answering a series of questions concerning the problem of the study. Theoretical Background The theory underlying this research comes from what is generally known as the Human Relations school or organiza- tional thought. The basic premise of this school is that 12 13 productivity is best attained by more satisfied workers, and conversely, less satisfied workers produce less. A major factor in worker satisfaction is the behavior of the leader in the work environment. A second factor is the worker's peer-group relationships. A third ingredient in this satisfaction is non-economic rewards. Therefore, it is reasoned in this study that the behavior of the principal as leader, the relationships between the staff members, and their perceptions of satisfaction with non-economic rewards influence the production level of the school. Etzioni (1964, p. 34-35) in discussing the Hawthorne study, suggested: 1) The level of production is set by social norms not physiological capacities; 2) Non-economic rewards and sanctions significantly affect the behavior of the workers and largely limit the effect of economic incentive plans: 3) Often workers do not act or react as individuals but as members of groups. Etzioni has also suggested the importance of leadership activity in setting and enforcing group norms and influencing the production level. In this study student achievement in the cognitive area is viewed as the "product" of the elementary school. Com— bining this idea with the human relations point of view, teachers satisfied with the leadership of their principal, satisfied with the peer~group relations, and satisfied with the non-economic rewards will produce higher achieving Students than teachers who are dissatisfied in these areas. 14 Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire The Leadership Behavior Description.Questionnaire - Form XII, referred to from this point on as the LBDQ XII, is an instrument designed to obtain the perceptions of leadership behavior of a supervisor by his subordinates. Deve10ped by Stogdill (1963), the instrument consists of 100 items grouped into 12 subscales, each describing a behavior characteristic of a leader. As previously indicated, this study utilizes only five of these subscales. The five subscales used in this research were selected for the following reasons from the 12 subscales developed by Stogdill: l) The reliability coefficients for these subscales have been established from previous research and are high. 2) The subscales selected represented the leadership charac- teristics the researcher felt impacted most upon the principal-teacher relationship. 3) The researcher attempted to integrate the leadership behavior, teacher group behavior, and teacher job satis- faction variables into one instrument. The number of items on the instrument sent to teachers was a consideration in selecting subscales for each variable. Initial studies by Hemphill (1949), Halpin and Winer (1957), and Fleishman (1957) indicated that significant differences could be found between subordinates' perceptions of leadership behavior in both the areas of consideration and initiation of structure. 15 Stogdill (1959) developed the concept of dividing the functions of leadership into role differentiation and group achievement. This division was used in many studies and produced several new measures: representation of group interests, role assumption, production emphasis, and orien- tation toward superiors. Further research and revision of the instruments produced the LBDQ XII containing 12 subscales. Stogdill (1959, p. 60) eXplains the broadening of the concepts contained in the original work to those presented in the LBDQ XII by saying, “... leadership is not a matter of passive status, or of the mere possession of some com- bination of traits. It appears rather to be a working relationship among members of a group, in which the leader acquires status through active participation and demon- stration of his capacity for carrying COOperative tasks through to completion." The Kuder-Richardson formula was used to determine the reliability of the LBDQ XII subscales by Stogdill in 1963. Each item was correlated with all the other items in its subscale. The following are the ranges of correlation coefficients established by this method for the subscales used in various studies: 1) Initiating of Structure - .70 to .80 2) Tolerance of Freedom - .58 to .86 3) Role Assumption - .57 to .86 4) Consideration - .76 to .87 5) Production Emphasis - .38 to .79 16 Related Research Hunt (1967) found statistically significant differences in the perceived leadership behavior of elementary school principals. Hunt used two subscales of the LBDQ, initiating structure and consideration, in collecting the perceptions of elementary school teachers. Ignatovich (1970) found certain principal types by factor analyzing the LBDQ XII items. Three basic types of principal leadership behavior were found to exist by analyzing the perceptions of 1,113 elementary school teachers in Iowa. In reviewing the literature, it seems clear that researchers have shown that differences do exist between the leadership styles of principals as perceived by their staff members. This would indicate that studying leadership as a set of behaviors exhibited by the principal is appro- priate. Since the LBDQ XII was constructed and field tested many times to obtain the perceptions of teachers concerning the leadership behavior of their principal and found to have high reliability, it seems to be an appro- priate instrument for use in this area. Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire (OCDQ) The Halpin and Croft instrument developed in 1962 con- sisted of eight subscales made up of 64 items. These questions were designed to gain information concerning two Specific areas of an elementary school's organizational 17 climate: teacher group behavior and principal leadership behavior. Hayes (1973) replicated the original work and found all the subscales to be reliable, but added two additional subscales: Object Socialization and Logistical Support. Stansbury (1968) also replicated the Halpin-Croft work and found the scales to be appropriate. The Spearman-Brown Formula for Split-half reliability was utilized by Halpin and Croft and the coefficients for -subscales used in this study were: 1) Disengagement .73 2) ESprit .75 The same formula was used by Hayes (1973) in his reappraisal and the coefficient established for the two additional scales were: 3) Object Socialization .71 4) Logistical Support .72 A number of research studies have correlated the OCDQ subscales with other variables. Levy (1969) used the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale in an attempt to correlate the OCDQ with the dogmatism of princi- pals. No significant correlations were found. Gross and Herriott (1966) found significant correlations between the Executive Professional Leadership (EPL) Scale and OCDQ subscales of Thrust and ESprit. The EPL is designed to measure the effect of leadership in professional organizations. 18 Winter (1968) used the OCDQ in an attempt to measure the correlation between the sex of principals and the climate of the school. No relationships were found between the age of princi- pals and the climate of their schools by Ernst (1965). The original work done with the OCDQ by Halpin (1966) and the subsequent replications indicate that the instrument does measure teachers' perceptions of the organizational climate of their schools. It is important to note that the reliability of the instrument has been established as high in both the original work and replications. This would indicate that it is appropriate for this study. Job Satisfaction Frederick Herzberg (1959) attempted to identify the factors which were the sources of satisfaction and dissatis- faction te workers in their jobs. His studies, which were done with accountants and engineers, suggested that the variables which determined satisfaction and dissatisfaction were mutually exclusive. “The opposite of job satisfaction would not be job dissatisfaction, but rather no job satis- faction", Herzberg (1959, p. 71) suggested. In addition, Herzberg postulated that the satisfying factors are related to the nature of work, while the dis- satisfiers are related to work environment. Dissatisfying areas of work, called hygiene factors, were classified into eight specific areas: salary, inter- 19 personal relations with peers, supervision, company policy and administration, working conditions, personal life, status, and job security. The job satisfiers, which Herzberg called motivators, were subdivided into six categories: achievement, recognition, work itself, reSponsibility, advancement, and growth. The hygiene factors were those which an employee was attempting to avoid or maintain at a low level, while the motivational factors were areas which the employee was seeking to improve or gain. The Herzberg theory is closely related to Maslow's (1959) Hierarchy of Needs, in which the author described a continuum of lower-order to higher-order needs of man. Five areas were identified by Maslow: physiological, security, social, esteem, and self-actualization. Physiological needs deal with food, water, oxygen, and other elements necessary for basic survival. Safety needs are related to the search for security, stability, and order. Maslow describes social needs as affection and belongingness with love and interpersonal relationships. Esteem needs are of two types: self-esteem and prestige. The final stage, self-actualization, is the realization of one's potential to succeed beyond the need for esteem. Herzberg's hygienic needs closely resemble the lower- crder needs described by Maslow. The satisfiers more closely relate to the higher-order needs of esteem and self-actualiza- tion. 20 Sergiovanni (1967) attempted to cross-validate Herzberg's model with a sample of teachers. Using 127 teachers in New York state, he replicated Herzberg's methodology by asking teachers to describe areas which gave them satis- faction and dissatisfaction in their work. The results of Sergiovanni's work suggested that three primary areas accounted for the bulk of the job-satisfying eXperiences for teachers: achievement, recognition, and responsibility. These areas were very closely related to the factors identified by Herzberg and Maslow. The satis- faction factors focused directly on conditions and circum- stances that are not given and which do not come with the job. These factors constitute rewards that must be earned through performance of the job. Argyris (1960) suggested the use of a semi-structured research interview to measure employee self-actualization. In the original research, organization members were inter- viewed and asked 30 questions dealing with their attitude toward their organization. Bojean and Vance (1974) attempted to shorten the inter- view process and increase the reliability of the format. In the original (Bojean and Vance, 1974, p. 310) study, ten separate findings were put forth concerning the level of self-actualization of employees: 1) The lower the self-actualization, the more likely employees are to daydream. 2) The lower the self-actualization, the more likely employees are to have aggressive feelings towards their supervisors. 21 3) The lower the self-actualization, the more likely employees are to have aggressive feelings towards their co-workers. 4) The lower the self-actualization, the less likely employees are to show interest in their work. 5) The lower the self-actualization, the more likely employees are to restrict output. 6) The lower the self-actualization, the more likely employees are to make mistakes or errors in their work. 7) The lower the self-actualization, the more likely employees are to postpone difficult tasks or decisions. 8) The lower the self-actualization, the more likely employees are to be concerned with the material rewards of work. 9) The lower the self-actualization, the less likely employees are to indicate they are "very well satisfied with their jobs". 10) The lower the self-actualization, the more likely employees are to have thought about doing work other than that in which they are currently engaged. Argyris' original sample consisted of managers, busi- nessmen, and workers in hOSpitals and retail stores. A Spearman's rank correlation test was used to determine whether the original instrument correlated with the short form. A correlation of .61 was established for the short form used by Bojean and Vance. Herzberg and Sergiovanni have established that employee job satisfaction does exist and is a concept which can be measured and investigated. The relationship between job satisfaction and the self-actualization employees eXperience has not been clearly established, but it is suggested By this research. 22 Therefore, measuring of this concept is viable since the instrument deve10ped by Argyris and adapted by Bojean and Vance has acceptable reliability coefficients. Michigan Educational Assessment Program The Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) was instituted by the Michigan Department of Education. The purpose of the program was to fulfill three objectives (1973' p. 21) I 1) To provide the State Board of Education. the Executive Office. the Legislature. and citizens with data describing the levels of basic skills attainment and other relevant descriptive data about each of Michigan's schools and school districts. 2) To provide local educators with specific information about the levels of basic skills educational attainment of students and of other relevant descriptive data for their own schools and school districts. 3) To provide information regarding the progress of the Michigan educational system as a whole and the progress of its school districts and schools over a period of years to the State Board of Education. the Executive Office. and the Legislature. and citizens. While the MBA? is given to first. fourth and seventh graders. only the fourth-grade achievement measures will be discussed here. The first-grade test has been given on a pilot basis with only a few districts involved. The MEAP is an objective-referenced test which was developed through the efforts of the Department of Education. consultants. and selected school district representatives. The test is divided into three major portions: Student Achievement, Size Measures. and an optional section, Attitudes. 23 This study was concerned only with the Student Achievement section consisting of three parts: Word Relationships. Reading, and Mathematics. Word Relationships is an optional section for districts. so scores on the Reading and Mathe- matics only will be discussed. The reading portion consists of 19 items and the mathe- matics section has 30 items. All #9 items are keyed to performance objectives. Scores are reported by the number of performance objectives realized. Districts administer the test during the first weeks of school in September. All fourth and seventh grade students receiving regular classroom instruc- tion take the test. Results are reported by district, by school. and by students. Research Combining the Four Components Leadership and Climate Research Not Including Job Satisfaction Prenoveau (1967) found a positive correlation between teacher classroom behavior and principal behavior. and teacher social relationships. Using the OCDQ as a measure of climate and the Vincent's Indicator of Quality Rating Scale. which measures the educational process of the school. the investigator found a high correlation between Esprit (one of the teacher group behavior subscales in this study) and teacher classroom behavior. In addition. he also found a high correlation between Consideration, a subscale in the 2M principal leadership behavior component of this study, and the classroom behavior of teachers. Ignatovich (1970), using a combination of the LBDQ XII and OCDQ subscales, found that certain types of principals had significantly different climates in their schools as indicated by scores on the Disengagement, Hindrance, and Esprit subscales as perceived by elementary teachers. The three types, entitled Tolerant-Integrator, Intolerant- Structuralist, and Tolerant-Interloper, accounted for 67.47% of the total variance. The study was done in Iowa elementary schools, with 1,113 teachers participating. Two important points noted from this research pertain to this study. First, principal leadership behavior has been found to correlate with teacher classroom behavior. Second, certain types of principal leadership behavior have been noted and quantified in research projects, suggesting that differences in leadership style and types of organiza- tional climate of schools do exist. glimate and Achievement Research Without Job Satisfaction A study in Minnesota by Miller (1971) found significant correlations between achievement scores, as measured by the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and the Lorge-Thorndike, and the Climate of elementary schools, measured by the OCDQ. Sig— nificant correlations were found with three OCDQ subscales (Disengagement, ESprit, and Consideration) and student 25 achievement. The study involved the achievement scores of over 6,000 elementary students from grades three to six, and the perceptions of the organizational climate of 37k teachers. The perceptions of 267 elementary teachers were used by Guy (1970) to examine the relationships between climate, leadership, and the achievement of students in nineteen elem- entary schools. Achievement was measured by the Iowa Test of Basic Skills for fourth graders and Stanford Test of Basic Skills for sixth graders. The researcher found a significant correlation between the OCDQ subscales, Consideration and Esprit, and student achievement. A study was undertaken by Hale (1965) in ninety-six elementary schools. The OCDQ was used for the climate measure while the California Achievement Test (CAT) was used as the achievement measure. Open climate rankings and subscale scores were measured against pupil scores on the CAT sub- scales of reading, math, and language. Significant correla- tions at the .05 level were found between three OCDQ sub- scales (Hindrance, ESprit, and Production Emphasis) and the language and reading scores. Math scores were not used in the analysis. In a similar study, Feldvebel (1964) found significant correlations between student achievement, using the Stanford Achievement Test subtests of reading and math, and the OCDQ subscales of Hindrance, Production.Emphasis, and Consideration. 26 Reilly (1972) found no significant correlation between OCDQ subscales dealing only with the principal leadership behavior area and student achievement, using socio-economic status as a covariate. The Michigan Assessment Test was used as a measure of student achievement. A total of 916 teachers in 120 schools participated in the study. No significant relationships were found by Flagg (1964) between openness of climate and achievement of students in a study of urban elementary schools. Only ten schools were involved and no analysis of individual subscales was done. Based upon the information presented in this literature review, no definitive statement can be made concerning the relationship between elementary school climate and the achievement of students. Evidence is available both pro and con in researching the subject. However, since significant positive relationships have been found when employing portions of the OCDQ instruments, it would seem reasonable to examine this area more closely. An eXpansion of the concept of organizational climate (as undertaken in this study) may eXplain some of the inconsis- tencies in the research findings now available. figsearch Concerning Job Satisfaction and Organizational Climate A high correlation was found to exist between Open climates and teacher job satisfaction by MacTaggert (1967) in a study of Florida elementary school teachers. The OCDQ and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, an instrument 27 designed to establish teacher job satisfaction, were employed. This study examined the relationship between organiza- tional climate and teacher job satisfaction andpositive significant correlations were found. The indication from this research is that a relationship does exist between these two variables. Summggy Principal Leadership Behavior and the LBDQ A theoretical basis for the study of principal leader- ship behavior as perceived by their subordinates has been established by Stogdill et. al. The research has indicated: 1) Differences do exist in the leadership styles of principals as perceived by teachers. 2) The LBDQ XII is a reliable measure of the leadership style of the principal. 3) The same instrument has been successfully used in previous research in the same manner as proposed in this study. 4) The subscales of the LBDQ XII have been tested for reliability and may be used separately from the entire instrument with confidence. Teacher Group Behavior, Organizational Climate, Climate gpd the OCDQ_ The Halpin-Croft work and subsequent studies in the area of organizational climate with the OCDQ indicates that one portion of this concept deals with the interaction 28 between teachers, referred to here as teacher group behavior. Three assumptions and conclusions can be made from the literature review: 1) The OCDQ has been proven to be a reliable instrument, and the subscales have reliability coefficients which allows them to be used individually. 2) The concept of teacher group behavior can be elicited from the teaching staff by use of the OCDQ instrument. 3) Although research findings concerning the relationship between elementary school climate and student achievement are somewhat contradictory, studies have shown a positive relationship between the two variables in certain instances, and a need to further investigate these areas seems reasonable. Job Satisfaction A theoretical basis for examining job satisfaction has been established and researched by several authorities in the fields of education and business. The results of their inquiries indicate the validity of the concept of job satis- faction. While the job satisfaction instrument in the form used in this study has not been tested for reliability, post hoc calculations may be used to establish the revised instruments' reliability coefficients. 29 Combining Job Satisfaction, Teacher Group Behavior, and Principal Leadership Into a Single Organizational Climate Instrument The relationship between teacher group behavior and principal leadership behavior has been established by pre- vious research and inquiry. There are also studies indica- ting a strong correlation between teacher group behavior as measured by the OCDQ. and job satisfaction, which was measured by several different instruments. The theoretical construction of the concept of job satisfaction and the subsequent research has indicated that it is an integral part of the environment of workers. This concept, although not wholly supported by the literature, seems to be an addition to the concept of organizational climate, which to this point has concerned itself with the principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior. The inclusion of job satisfaction with these two variables seems to give a more encompassing picture of the workers, in this case, teachers organizational environment. Since the LBDQ Form XII has been used to gather teachers' perceptions of their principal and the OCDQ has been employed to gather teachers' perceptions of teacher group behavior, it seems appropriate to use these two instru- ments to elicit information for this study. The factor of job satisfaction is added as an additional component of organizational climate. The instrument to be used, while not previously field-tested, will be subject to statistical procedures to determine its correlation to the other climate 30 variables and internal reliability. While no conclusive evidence supports adding job satis- faction to the organizational climate variables, the theoretical background and minor research findings seem to indicate the merit of its inclusion. Michigan Educational Assessment Program The use of the MEAP may be questioned as an indicator of student achievement, since it is not nationally normed and only the fourth-grade reading and math scores will be used. However, the test can be said to be appropriate for the subjects it was administered to, since it was referenced to objectives for the target population. CorrelatinggOrganizational Climate and Student Achievement In several cases positive relationships have been found to exist between organizational climate and student achievement. other research studies have indicated no relationship exists. The researcher takes the position that no relationship was found in these studies because the concept of organiza- tional climate was limited to principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior. Since relationships have been found between job satis- faction and organizational climate, and correlations dis- covered between organizational climate and student achievement, the researcher suggests that the inclusion of job satisfaction 31 will supply added information to make the correlation between organizational climate and student achievement clearer. Conclusion The traditional approach has been to research the area of organizational climate by investigating only principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior. The review of literature has given adequate indication that the researcher's original observation about teacher job satisfaction and its relationship to the organizational climate of the school, while not conclusive, indicates a relationship could exist. In summary, both the theoretical basis and other research findings present a reasonable case for continuing study in this area. CHAPTER III pagicN OF THE STUDY The design of the study involved selecting appropriate instruments, modifying existing scales, defining the popula- tion and sample, writing the hypothesis statements, and determining appropriate analysis procedures. Instrumentatigg Instruments were selected to measure the three com- ponents identified as school organizational climate. The first component, principal leadership behavior, was comprised of five subscales from Stogdill's Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire - Form XII (LBDQ). The subscales were Initiating Structure, Tolerance of Freedom, Role Assumption, Production Emphasis, and Consideration. Each subscale consisted of ten items. These particular subscales were selected because they represent the elements of leader- ship which have the most effect upon the climate as indicated in the review of literature in Chapter II. Teachers were asked to rate their principal's behavior on a five-point Likert scale: A-Very Frequently: B-Often; C-Occasionallys D-Seldom: and E-Very Rarely. ReSpondents 32 33 were told to select the responses most representative of the principal's behavior. The second section of the questionnaire was taken from the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire (OCDQ) by Halpin (1966) and subsequent research done by Hayes (1973). The first two scales, Disengagement and Esprit, were subscales of the original OCDQ: the third subscale, Object Socialization, was taken from Hayes' re-analysis of the OCDQ. Teachers were asked to give their perceptions of the group behavior of the professional staff. The first two subscales consisted of ten items each while the third, Object Socialization, had seven items. Teachers were told to rate peer group behavior by selecting one of four choices: VPO-Very Frequently Occurs: OO-Often Occurs: SO-Sometimes Occurs: and RO-Rarely Occurs. Teacher job satisfaction was the final portion of the questionnaire. Faculty members were asked to respond to items which describe job and job-related characteristics. The subscale, which was adapted from a semi-structured interview instrument by Argyris (1960), consisted of 20 items. Teachers were asked to describe the level of satisfaction they felt about a number of job-related and non-job-related activities by selecting one of four responses: VS-Very Satisfied: S-Satisfied: U-Unsatisfied: and VU-Very Unsatisfied. The Michigan Educational Assessment Program data were used as the indicator of student achievement. The data were 34 in the form of percentages by fourth grade class by school. Only reading and math scores were used. Determination of the ngulation All elementary schools in the state of Michigan which met the following criteria were designated as the population: 1) The building had to have a full-time principal: 2) The building had to have at least ten classroom units and ten or more classroom teachers: 3) The building had to contain all grades from kindergarten through sixth grade. The criteria were met by 986 elementary schools within 10h school districts. Selection of the Sample All 10# districts were contacted and a total of 89 agreed to participate. There were 306 elementary schools and 3,978 teachers which met the criteria (see Table 1). Collection of Data Instruments were field-tested at two elementary schools with 7? teachers. Following corrections of minor errors, 5,000 copies of the instrument were printed. Superintendents of all districts which contained elementary schools meeting the criteria had been contacted by letter. A letter, asking for their c00peration was co-signed by Dr. Norman Wienheimer, Executive Secretary of the Michigan Association of School Boards. A self-addressed stamped postcard was included so Table l -- Summary of the Sample Returns of the Study Number of Number of Percent Number of Schools Schools Agreeing Schools Meeting Agreeing to be Returning Selection to be in in Study Sufficient Criteria Study Instruments 5A7 306 56% 221 Percent Number of Number of Percent Returning Teachers Teachers Teachers Sufficient Sent Returning Returning Instruments Instruments Instruments Instruments 72% 3.978 1.947 49% 36 recipients could indicate their decision to participate in the study. Packets were prepared for participating schools. Each packet contained the following items: 1) A cover letter to the principal of the school eXplaining the nature of the project. The letter was co-signed by Dr. Edwin Keller, Executive Secretary of the Michigan Association of Elementary School Principals. 2) Self-addressed and stamped booklets were provided for every staff member. 3) Instructions were included for handling and distribution of the instruments. b) A letter to each participating staff member was included which eXplained their role in the study. Two weeks after the distribution of the packets, a follow-up letter was mailed to all principals reminding them of the project. In addition to the nine subscales listed under instru- mentation, each booklet contained seven additional items: 1) A six-digit identification number. The first two numbers indicated the district. The second two numbers identified the school. The last two digits were for teacher identifica- tion. Principals were told that reSponses from their staff members would be identified with their building. Teachers were told that their reSponses would not be individually identified, but would be used in compiling data about their building. 37 2) Six pieces of teacher demographic information were collected: a) sex; b) grade level taught; 0) age; d) number of years teaching; e) number of years taught in building; and f) highest degree held. When the return rate of instruments dwindled to one or two per day, no further reSponses were accepted and analyses were begun. In using the LBDQ, Halpin (from Stogdill, 1963, p. 12) indicates that "... a minimum of four respondents per leader is desirable, and additional respondents beyond ten do not increase significantly the stability of the index scores. Six or seven reSpondents per leader would be a good standard." For purposes of this study, a minimum of five reSponses for schools with lb or less teachers and ten reSponses for schools with 15 or more teachers was used as the standard by which to determine if the school was to be used in the analysis. Of the 306 elementary schools which agreed to be part of the study, 221 returned sufficient numbers of the instru- ments to be included. The responses from 1,976 teachers were used in the analysis. See Table 1. for more detail about sample return. Methods and Procedures Isaac (1971, p. 13) identified nine Specific types of research designs. "When the research study has been formu- lated, the next step is to construct the research design. This is the plan of attack: what approach to the problem will 38 be taken? what methods will be used? what strategies will be most effective? ‘ The correlational model is the appropriate methodology to employ to answer the basic question posed in this study: what is the relationship between the organizational climate of the elementary school and student achievement? By dividing the components leadership behavior, teacher group behavior and teacher job satisfaction into subscales, the correlation among each of the areas and the achievement of students can be examined. According to Isaac (1971, p. 21), the purpose of corre- lational research is "To investigate the extent to which variations in one factor correspond with variations in one or more other factors based on correlation coefficients." Isaac (1971, p. 21) suggests that correlational research has three characteristics: 1) Appropriate where variables are very complex and/or do not lend themselves to the eXperimental method and controlled manipulation. 2) Permits the measurement of several variables and their interrelationships simultaneously and in a realistic setting. . 3) Gets at the degree of relationship rather than the all-or-nothing question posed by eXperimental design: “Is an effect present or absent?" Because of the nature of the data and the fact that eleven variables were examined, correlation analysis as defined by Isaac was the appropriate statistic for this study. To facilitate the use of a correlational model in analyzing the data, a set of hypotheses was needed to focus 39 upon the questions to be answered. The following research hypotheses were deve10ped in order to accomplish this transition: Question 1 H - There is no relationship between principal leadership behavior and student achievement Hl - There is a relationship between principal leadership behavior and student achievement. Question 2 H - There is no relationship between teacher group behavior and student achievement. H - There is a relationship between teacher group behavior and student achievement. Question 3 H - There is no relationship between teacher job satisfaction and student achievement. H - There is a relationship between teacher job satisfaction and student achievement. In order to examine the relationship among the three components of elementary school organizational climate, hypotheses were developed for each of the nine subscales to generate the correlation coefficients for each combination of subscales. The following is a listing of those hypotheses and their alternative hypotheses: Question h HO - There is no relationship among the subscales of principal leadership behavior. Hl - There are relationships among the subscales of principal leadership behavior. Question 5 H - There is no relationship among 0 the subscales of teacher group behavior. 40 H1 - There are relationships among the subscales of teacher group behavior. Question 6 HO - There is no relationship between the principal leadership behavior subscales and the teacher group behavior subscales. 1 - There is a relationship between the principal leadership behavior subscales and the teacher group behavior subscales. Question 7 H - There is no relationship between the job satisfaction subscale and the principal leadership behavior subscales. 1 - There is a relationship between the job satisfaction subscale and the principal leadership behavior subscales. Question 8 H - There is no relationship between the job satisfaction subscale and the teacher group behavior subscales. H - There is a relationship between the job satisfaction subscale and the teacher group behavior subscales. All of the hypotheses were stated without indicating the strength or direction of the relationships. This was due to the eXploratory nature of the research and the absence of a theoretical framework to suggest Specific relationships. Treatment of Data Questionnaire reSponses were keypunched on data cards with identification numbers, demographic information, principal leadership items, teacher group behavior items, and job ul satisfaction items. A Fortran program was written to produce a subtest mean for each of the nine subtests for each individual. This program also reversed the scales for negatively scored items. Positively scored items were 1, 2, 3, u. and 5 on a five-point scale and l, 2, 3, and u on a four-point scale. A second Fortran program provided subtest mean scores for schools, the unit of analysis to be used. The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) pro- gram produced the correlation coefficients between each of the nine subscales and the student achievement data. SPSS was also used for the eXploratory follow-up analyses. C‘ Summary Chapter IV is devoted to the findings of these analyses and discusses them in depth. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS The problem of this study was to determine if a relationship exists between teacher perception of the organizational climate of the elementary school and the academic achievement of students. Within this problem are three major sub-questions which this chapter will address: 1) What is the reliability of the organizational climate subscales used in this study? 2) What are the correlations among the climate subscales and are they significant? 3) What is the correlation between each of the climate subscales and student achievement as measured by the Michigan Assessment Test subscales for Mathematics and Reading? In this chapter the findings for each of these questions are presented. In addition, several analyses were conducted Which provided some insight into the nature of the relation- Ship among the variables. The discussion of the analyses and the findings are presented in the folIOWing order: 1) Reliability of the Subscales 2) Correlation Analysis a) Correlation among elementary school climate subscales and reading and math subscales: N2 #3 b) Correlation among elementary school climate subscales of principal leadership behavior, teacher group behavior, and teacher job satisfaction. 3) Multiple Regression Analysis a) Examination of the elementary school climate subscales as independent variables with the reading and math subscales as dependent variables: b) Examination of each of the elementary school climate subscales as a dependent variable with the remaining eight subscales as independent variables. Reliability of Subscales The Spearman-Brown, split-half, reliability coefficient formula was used to determine the internal consistency of the subscales and to estimate the reliability of the full- length subscales. According to Thorndike and Hagen (1969, p. 180), ”This formula ... makes it possible for us to compute an estimate of reliability from a single adminis- tration of a single test." Since the instrument in this study had been administered only once to sample the popula- tion, it is appropriate to use this technique. The estimate of the reliability was computed using the formula . 21‘1/2 1/2 1 + r1/2 1/2 Where r11 is the estimated reliability of the full-length r'11 test and rl/E 1/2 is the actual correlation between the two half lengths. Correlation coefficients for each subtest were computed by dividing the subscale items into two groups, odd and even. 44 By dividing the subscales in this manner, a correlation can be computed between the two halves. Significant positive correlations were found for each of the subscales used in the study (see Table 2). These correlations indicate an acceptable internal reliability for each subscale. In order to determine the estimated reliability of the full-length subscale, the correction for attenuation formula was used. The results of these computations indicated that most of the subscales except for Object Socialization (r=.39) had acceptable reliability coefficients (see Table 2). From this analysis it seemed reasonable to assume that most of the subscales are reliable and are not a major source of error variance. The notable exception is the Object Socialization subscale. Interpretation of analyses employing this subscale should be done with caution since the reliability is low. Correlation Between Subscales The discussion of the correlation between subscales is divided into five parts: 1) A discussion of the math and reading correlations between: a) The math and reading subscales: b) The principal leadership behavior, teacher group behavior, and the job satisfaction subscales. 2) The correlation of subscales within the leadership behavior component: 45 Table 2 -- Elementary School Organizational Climate Subscale Reliability: Split-Half, Full-Length Corrected for Subscale Split-Half Attenuation Initiating .65 .79 Structure Tolerance .79 .88 of Freedom Assumption Consideration .8h .91 Production .67 .80 Emphasis Disengagement .67 .80 Esprit e 66 e 79 Object .2h .39 Socialization Job .79 .88 Satisfaction Note: Nsl,813 for all subscales 46 3) The correlation of subscales within the leadership behavior component: b) The correlation of subscales between the leadership behavior and teacher group behavior components: 5) The correlation of subscales between the job satis- faction component and both the leadership behavior and teacher group behavior components. The review of literature indicates mixed opinions as to what meaning to attribute to the strength of correlation coefficients. Abraham Franzblau (1958, p. 81) stated that ”... there are no sharp lines of demarcation..." for deciding when a correlation coefficient is high or low. However, Franzblau (1958, p. 81) sets forth the following characterizations for correlation coefficients: Reliable coefficients of correlation ranging from zero to about .20 may be regarded as indicating no or negligible correlation. Reliable coefficients of correlation ranging from .20 to .ho may be regarded as indicating a low degpee of correlation. Reliable coefficients of correlation ranging from about .hO to .60 may be regarded as indicating a moderate degree of correlation. Reliable coefficients of correlation ranging from about .60 to .80 may be regarded as indicating a marked degree of correlatipn. Reliable coefficients of correlation ranging from .80 to 1.00 may be regarded as indicating high correlation. The correlations reported will be analyzed according to these five categories. 47 Math and Reading Correlations The Michigan.Assessment Test (MAT) scores for math and reading were correlated with each of the principal leadership behavior, teacher group behavior, and teacher job satisfaction subscales. These calculations were performed to determine if significant relationships existed between any of the above mentioned scales and the achievement of students as measured by the two MAT scores. The hypotheses stated H0 “1 for the examination were: There is no relationship between principal leadership behavior and student achievement. There is a relationship between principal leadership behavior and student achievement. There is no relationship between teacher group behavior and student achievement. There is a relationship between teacher group behavior and student achievement. There is no relationship between teacher job satisfaction and student achievement. There is a relationship between teacher job satisfaction and student achievement. The results of the correlation analysis pertaining to these hypotheses can be found in Table 3. The analysis for each of the stated hypotheses found that no significant correlation existed. In other words, no subscale included in this study was found to have a #8 Table 3 -- Math and Reading Correlations With All Subscales Subscale Math Reading Initiating Structure .06 .003 Tolerance of Freedom .003 .Ooh Principal Behavior Role Assumption -.07 -.03 Consideration -.05 -.02 Production.Emphasis .03 .Oh Disengagement .05 .06 Teacher Behavior Esprit .05 .04 Object Socialization .03 .006 Teacher Satisfaction Job Job Satisfaction .03 -.Ol Satisfaction Math and Reading Correlation - .92 Q a significant correlation at = .05 N a 219 49 significant relationship with either reading or math achievement. It can therefore be concluded that no single area from the three major components (Principal Leadership Behavior, Teacher Group Behavior, or Teacher Job Satisfaction) defined as elementary school climate in this study correlates significantly with student achievement. The correlation coefficient between the math and reading variables was found to be .92. This high positive correlation indicates a very strong relationship between the two variables. EXploratory analyses were undertaken to determine if other than linear relationships existed between the nine elementary school climate subscales and student achievement (math and reading). Scattergrams were plotted for each subscale with math and reading. Inspections of the scatter- grams revealed no apparent curvilinear relationships. Further correlational analyses were conducted. The five subscales of principal leadership behavior were combined into a summated scale and an analysis was run to determine if a relationship existed between this scale and either math or reading. This procedure was repeated with the teacher group behavior component. (In both cases, no rela- tionship was found to exist between the summated scales and either math or reading. The procedures were not undertaken for the job satisfaction component since it consisted of a single subscale and was included in the previous analyses (see Table 4). Table h -- Correlation.Analyses Scales Principal Leadership Behavior Teacher Group Behavior Job Satisfaction 50 Math .0? -.ou -.lO * - Significant Correlation at N I 219 for School Climate Summated Student Reading Achievement .06 .07 -.04 -.04 -.07 -.08 51 Principal Leadership Behavior Subscales Teachers' perceptions of the leadership behavior of their principal included five subscales. These five sub- scales, which were taken from the LBDQ XII, are re-summarized below with the definitions Stogdill (1963) attached to each: 1) Tolerance of Freedom - Depicting the amount of initiative the principal allows his teachers: 2) Production.Emphasis The amount of pressure the princi- pal applies for organizational outputs: 3) Consideration - The degree to which the principal regards the well being and comfort of his staff: h) Role Assumption - The degree to which the principal exerts his leadership role: 5) Initiating Structure The degree to which the principal defines his role and lets teachers know what is eXpected of them. The hypothesis posed in the investigation for this area was: - H - There are no relationships among the subscales of principal leadership behavior. - H1 - There are relationships among the subscales of principal leadership behavior. The discussion here will center around the correlation between each of these subscales and will attempt to eXplain What the relationships mean. The correlations are listed in Table 5. Tolerance of Freedom Four correlations were examined to study the relationship between the Tolerance of Freedom subscale and the other 52 Table 5 -- Correlation Analyses for Principal Leadership Behavior Subscales Production Role Initiating Emphasis Consideration Assumption Structure Tolerance —.31' .72‘ .22' -.12 of Freedom Production .01 .39‘ .73‘ Emphasis Consideration .62* .34. Role Assumption * a significant correlation.at10( a .05 N 8 219 .73" 53 leadership subscales. A marked, significant, positive correlation of r = .72 was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Consideration. This suggests that the more initiative the principal allows his staff members, the more considerate of their well being they felt he is. The low, significant, positive correlation found between Tolerance of Freedom and Role Assumption (r = .22) indicates that increased leadership by the principal is accompanied by an increase in the amount of initiative he allows staff members. A low, significant, negative correlation (r = -.31) was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Production Emphasis, indicating that staff members feel that the harder the principal presses for organizational outputs, the less initiative the principal allows them. In summary, it appears that there is a strong relation- ship between the initiative the principal allows his staff members and the consideration they feel he shows. A low, but significant relationship is indicated between the Principal's Tolerance of Freedom and both the amount of leadership action he assumes and the organizational output he demands. Production.Emphasis Four correlations were examined to study the relationship between the Production Emphasis subscale and the four remaining 54 leadership behavior subscales. A low, significant, negative correlation was found between Production.Emphasis and Tolerance of Freedom (r I -.31), indicating an inverse relationship between the amount of organizational output the principal presses for and the amount of initiative he allows. The more production he emphasizes, tie less initiative staff members feel they can exercise. A low, positive, significant correlation was found between Production Emphasis and Role Assumption (r a .39). A marked, positive, significant correlation was found between Production Emphasis and Initiating Structure (r 8 .73). To a low degree, the first correlation suggests that the more production output is stressed by the principal, the more the staff members perceive him as exercising his leadership role. The second correlation suggests, to a marked degree, that Production Emphasis by the principal is perceived to increase the structure of the school by more clearly defining staff roles.' No significant correlation was found to exist between teachers' perceptions of principal Consideration and Produc- tion.Emphasis. The finding indicates that staff members perceive no relationship between the organizational output required by their principal and the consideration they per- ceive. 55 Consideration Four correlations were examined to study the relation- ship between Consideration and the four remaining leadership behavior subscales. Significant, positive correlations were found between Consideration and three leadership subscales: Tolerance of Freedom (r - .72), Role Assumption (r 8 .62), and Initiating Structure (r = .34). The marked degree of relationship between Consideration and Tolerance of Freedom indicates that the more initiative staff members feel they are allowed, the more considerate they perceive the principal. The marked degree of correlation between.Consideration and Role Assumption suggests that the well being and comfort of the staff increases as the principal assumes an increased leadership role. A low relationship between Consideration and Initiating Structure indicates that when the principal defines the roles in the organization clearly, the principal is viewed as a more understanding leader. No significant correlation was found to exist between teachers' perceptions of principal Consideration and Production Emphasis. A A synthesis of these correlations suggests that staff perception of a principal is tied closely to the amount of freedom allowed. To a lesser degree, perceived consideration is also linked to the degree to which the principal asserts 56 a leadership role and the amount of organizational structure maintained. Role Assumptipp Four correlations were examined to study the relationship between Role Assumption and the remaining leadership behavior subscales (Table 5). Role Assumption was found to have a low, significant, positive correlation with Tolerance of Freedom (r s .22) and Production Emphasis (r - .39). Role Assumption was also found to have a marked, significant, positive correlation with Consideration (r a .62) and Initiating Structure (r z .73). Teachers' perceptions of Role Assumption and Tolerance of Freedom indicated a weak relationship between the amount of leadership role the principal assumes and the amount of initiative allowed the staff. A low relationship is also noted between the amount of leadership role the principal assumes (Role Assumption) and the amount of production (Production Emphasis) required. In addition, the marked correlation between Consideration and Role Assumption indicates the more active leadership role the principal exerts with his staff, the more considerate he is perceived to be. Finally, there is a marked correlation between the structure the principal is perceived to initiate in the organization (Initiating Structure), and the level of his leadership role (Role Assumption). 57 These correlations suggest that the principal who assumes and exerts his role as leader is perceived to be oriented to accomplishments or organizational output, open to initiative by staff members, considerate of the well being of his teachers, and very structured in assigning and maintaining roles within the organization. Initiating Structure . Four correlations were examined to study the relation- ship between Initiating Structure and the remaining leader- ship behavior subscales (again see Table 5 ). Initiating Structure was found to have significant, ‘positive correlations with Production.Emphasis (r - .73), Consideration (r 8 .3h), and Role Assumption (r c .73). The marked correlation between Initiating Structure and Production Emphasis suggests that the more the principal presses for organizational outputs, the more teachers per- ceive him to be structuring roles within the school environ- ment. The Initiating Structure and Consideration low corre- lation coefficient indicates that the more considerate a principal is felt to be, the more structured he appears to be in dealing with employee roles. ' The marked, positive correlation between Initiating Structure and Role Assumption suggests that when teachers perceive the principal to be taking a strong leadership role, they also feel he is letting the staff members know exactly 58 where they stand. The non-significant correlation between Initiating Structure and Tolerance of Freedom indicates that no rela- tionship exists between the amount of initiative teachers feel they are allowed and the structure they perceive the principal to be implementing and maintaining. In conclusion, it would seem that the principal who is more structured in his staff relationships is felt to be more considerate of the staff's well being, presses for organizational outputs, and assumes a leadership role which the staff members perceive as active. Teacher Behavior Subscales Correlations The teacher behavior subscales in this study were: 1) Esprit — a measure of the morale of the teaching staff. 2) Disengagement - the feeling by the teachers of not being engaged with the goals of the organization. 3) Object Socialization the comraderie among the staff members. Question 5 - H6 - There is no relationship among the subscales of teacher group behavior. - H1 - There is a relationship among the subscales of teacher group behavior. This section attempts to explain the correlations which were found among these subscales (see Table 6). 59 Table 6 —- Correlation Analysis for Teacher Group Behavior Subscales Qisengagement Esprit Esprit -.6#* Object Socialization -.28* .61' * =- significant correlation at K = .05 level N = 219 6O Esprit Two correlations were examined to study the relationships between Esprit and the remaining teacher group behavior sub- scales. ‘ A marked, significant, positive correlation was found between Esprit and Object Socialization (r a .61). This indicates that the closer the staff members perceive their interpersonal and professional relationships with other teachers to be, the higher is the teacher morale. A marked, significant, negative correlation of r = -.64 was found between.E3prit and Disengagement, suggesting that the more disengaged teachers feel with the work of the organization, the lower the morale of the staff. Stated differently, the more engaged teachers feel with the work of the school organization, the higher they perceive the morale of the staff. ' Disengagement Two correlations were analyzed to investigate the relationship between Disengagement and the other teacher group behavior subscales. A marked, significant, negative correlation was found between Disengagement and Esprit (r 2 -.6h). A low signifi- cant negative correlation was found between Disengagement and Object Socialization (r a .28). As indicated above, a marked correlation between Esprit and Disengagement would indicate that when teachers perceive 61 that they are involved with the tasks of the school organiza- tion, they also perceive a higher staff morale. In addition, to a low degree, the correlation between Disengagement and Object Socialization suggests that involvement in the tasks of the organization was related to a close relationship between teachers. Object Socialization Two correlations were reviewed in investigating the relationships between Object Socialization and the remaining teacher group behavior subscales. Object Socialization was found to have a marked, positive, significant correlation with ESprit (r a .61). It was also found to have a low, significant, negative correlation with Disengagement (r = -.28). This analysis indicates that the closer teachers feel to each other, the more involved they feel in their work. As previously stated, the correlation between Object Socialization and ESprit indicates that the closer the staff members perceive their interpersonal and professional relationships to be, the higher the teacher morale. Summa A marked relationship exists between the morale of the teaching staff and the comraderie teachers feel toward one another. In addition, working on the tasks of the 62 organization by teachers is strongly related to the level of staff morale. There is a low relationship between the involvement teachers feel in the tasks of the organization and their relationship with fellow teachers. Leadership Behavior and Teacher Behavior - Subscales Correlation As previously mentioned, there were five leadership behavior subscales: Initiating Structure, Tolerance of Freedom, Role Assumption, Consideration, and Production Emphasis. These five scales were designed to elicit the perceptions of teachers of the principal's leadership behaviors. The three teacher behavior Subscales (Disengagement, Esprit, and Object Socialization) were designed to gather teachers' perceptions of the behavior of staff members. Question 6 - H - There is no relationship ° between the principal leadership behavior subscales and the teacher group behavior subscales. - H - There is a relationship 1 between the principal leadership behavior subscales and the teacher group behavio subscales. - The correlations between principal leadership behavior subscales and teacher group behavior subscales were computed to study the relationship between these two climate components. In order to present these correlations in an efficient manner, each leadership subscale will be discussed with the three 63 teacher behavior subscales. Table 7 presents the computed correlations. Initiatin Structure Three correlations were examined to study the relationship between Initiating Structure and the three subscales of the teacher group behavior component. Significant, positive, low correlations were found between Initiating Structure and both ESprit (r - .36) and Object Socialization (r = .33). When the principal is perceived to be defining his and the teacher's role more clearly, the staff has higher morale and comraderie. In addition, a significant, loW, negative correlation (r = -.26) was found between Initiating Structure and Disengagement. This indicates a low inverse relationship between teachers' feeling of non- involvement and the amount of structure the principal is perceived to initiate. Tolerance of Freedom Three correlations were examined to study the relationship between Tolerance of Freedom and the three teacher group behavior subscales. A significant, low, negative correlation was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Disengagement (r - -.29). This indicates a low inverse relationship between the freedom staff members perceive the principal allows and their feeling of non-involvement. 61+ Table 7 -- Principal Leadership Behavior and Teacher Group Behavior Correlations Teacher Behavior Subscales Leadership Object Subscales Disengagement Egprit Socializatigfl___ Initiating -.26* .36* .33. Structure TOlOrfince " e 29* o 48* e “'6. of Freedom R010 ' "’ e “'7‘ e “6* e 38* Assumption Consideration -.41* .57‘ .43* Production -.03 .21. .19* Emphasis * - significant correlation at 0< :- .05 N a 219 65 Tolerance of Freedom was found to have significant, positive, moderate correlations with ESprit (r s .h8) and Object Socialization (r a .h6). In the first correlation, it appears that the more freedom the principal allows the higher staff morale. Second, increased teacher freedom is related to closer staff relations. {ggle Assumptigg ‘ The relationships between Role Assumption and the three subscales of the teacher group behavior components were examined. Role Assumption was found to have a significant, negative, moderate correlation with Disengagement (r a -.h7) and a significant, positive, moderate correlation with ESprit (r - .us). In addition, a significant, positive, low correla- tion was found to exist between Role Assumption and Object Socialization (r = .38). The moderate relationship between Role Assumption and Disengagement suggests that the more leadership the principal exerts, the less non~involved the staff members become. The moderate relationship between Role Assumption and Esprit indicates that an increase in leadership activity is accompanied by higher morale. An increase in leadership increased the feeling of staff comraderie, indicated by the low correlation between Role Assumption and Object Socialization. 66 Consideration The relationships between Consideration and the three subscales of the teacher group behavior component were analyzed. 3 Consideration, the perception of the principal's under- standing and regard for staff members, was found to have a significant, positive, moderate correlation.with both ESprit (r 8 .57) and Object Socialization (r a .43). These moderate correlations indicate that when staff members perceive a high degree of consideration by the principal, they also feel higher morale. ’ The significant, negative, moderate correlation found between Consideration and Disengagement (r - -.hl) suggests that when teachers feel the principal is considerate of their needs, they also feel they are more involved in the tasks of the organization. Production.Emphasig Three correlations were examined in order to investigate the relation between Production Emphasis and the three sub- scales of the teacher group behavior component. No significant correlation was found between Disengagement and Production Emphasis, indicating no relationship exists between the amount of work teachers feel the principal asks and the degree to which they feel involved in their work. However, a significant but low positive correlation was found between Production Emphasis and ESprit (r I .21). A 6? negligible (r 8 .19). Positive, significant correlation was found between Production Emphasis and Object Socialization. The low correlation between Production Emphasis and Esprit would suggest that with increased pressure teachers feel higher morale. In addition, the low relationship between Production Emphasis and Object Socialization indicates that increased pressure by the principal is accompanied by stronger relationships. Principal Leadership Behavior Subscales and Job Satisfaction Cgrrelations The following hypothesis was posed for investigating the relationship between the leadership behavior component and the job satisfaction subscales Question 7 - Ho - There is no relationship between the Job Satisfaction subscale and the principal leadership behavior subscales. - H1 - There is a relationship between the Job Satisfaction and the principal leadership behavior subscales. The Job Satisfaction subscale was designed to elicit the teachers' perceptions of their total employment eXperi- ence, including their attitude toward the community, the school, and their subordinate, superordinate, and peer relationships. The correlations between principal leadership behavior subscales and the Job Satisfaction subscale were computed to study the relationship between these two climate compo- nents. The results of these analyses can be seen in Table 8. 68 Table 8 -- Principal Leadership Behavior and Job Satisfaction Correlations Leadership Behavior Job Subscales Satisfaction Initiating .29* Structure Tolerance .h7* of Freedom Role .47* Assumption Consideration .59* Production. .07 Emphasis * a significant correlation at 0‘ = .05 N a 219 69 Job Satisfaction - Initiating Structure A significant, positive, low correlation was found between Job Satisfaction and Initiating Structure (r s .29). This low correlation indicates that the teachers perceive higher job satisfaction when they feel the principal is more explicit in defining their roles. Job Satisfaction - Tolerance of Freedom A significant, moderate, positive correlation was found between Job Satisfaction and Tolerance of Freedom (r s .47). The correlation suggests that higher job satisfaction is felt when their principal allows them freedom. Job Satisfaction - Role Assumption Job Satisfaction was found to have a significant, moderate, positive correlation with Role Assumption (r 8 .47). Higher job satisfaction is indicated by teachers who feel their principal is taking an active leadership role. Job Satisfaction - Consideration Consideration and Job Satisfaction were found to have a moderate correlation of r a .59, which was both positive and significant. This correlation suggests that where teachers feel their principal is more understanding their job satisfaction increases. 70 Job Satisfaction - Production Emphasis No significant correlation was found between Job Satis- faction and Production Emphasis (r 8 .07). In other words, no relationship exists between the teachers' job satisfaction and the amount of work the principal asks. Teacher Group Behavior and Job Satisfaction Correlations The following hypothesis was posed for investigating the relationship between the teacher group behavior component and the Job Satisfaction subscale: Question 8 - H - There is no relationship between - ° the Job Satisfaction subscale and the teacher group behavior subscales. - - H1 - There is a relationship between the Job Satisfaction subscale and the teacher group behavior subscales. Table 9 includes the correlations which were examined to answer this question. Job Satisfaction - Disengagement A significant, negative, moderate correlation was found between Job Satisfaction and Disengagement (r - -.47). Where teachers feel greater satisfaction they also feel more involved in their work. Job Satisfaction - Esprit Job Satisfaction and Esprit were found to have a sig- nificant, marked, positive correlation of (r - .67). A 71 Table 9 -- Teacher Group Behavior Subscales and Job Satisfaction Correlations Teacher Group Behavior Job Subscales Satisfaction Disengagement -.47* Esprit .67* Object Socialization .54’ * a Significant Correlation at = .05 N 8 219 72 stronger feeling of job satisfaction is found where higher staff morale exists. Job Satisfaction - Object Socialization A positive, significant, moderate correlation of (r a .54) was found between Job Satisfaction and Object Socialization. This would indicate teachers feel more job satisfaction when a stronger comraderie exists. Sunmagy Job Satisfaction was found to be significantly correlated with all but one of the leadership behavior and teacher group behavior subscales. In the area of principal leadership, to a moderate degree, teachers are more satisfied in their jobs where the principal exerts leadership, is considerate, and allows ‘freedom. A higher degree of teacher job satisfaction exists when higher staff morale and positive interpersonal relationships are perceived. In addition, the amount of work required is apparently not a factor in teacher job satisfaction. Further- more, the level of that satisfaction increases as the feeling of involvement in the organization increases. Summa f C r elat n Anal sis The correlation analysis has provided information con- cerning the relationships among the individual subscales 73 and between each subscale and the dependent variables, math and reading. ' ' It is clear at this point that no individual subscale is significantly correlated with either of the dependent variables, math or reading. ' It has been shown, however, that significant correlations do exist between individual subscales for principal leadership behavior, teacher group behavior, and teacher job satisfaction. Since the correlations in many instances were relatively high, it seems logical to examine the contents of each area to identify certain factors of principal leadership behavior, teacher group behavior, or job satisfaction which can predict dependent variables. In other words, each subscale will be examined as a dependent variable in order to ascertain which subscales predict that variable. ~ Stepwise Multiple Reggessional Analysis Findings from the correlation analyses indicate signifi- cant correlations exist between individual subscales of. organizational climate. To examine these relationships, the stepwise multiple regression model was employed. The purpose of this analysis was to determine if a subscale, designated as a dependent variable, could be predicted by an individual subscale or group of subscales designated as independent variables. Three questions were posed: 1) De climate subscales account for a significant amount of the variance in each of the leadership behavior subscales? m 74 2) Do climate subscales account for a significant amount of the variance in each of the teacher group behavior subscales? 3) Do subscales from the leadership behavior and/or teacher} group behavior components predict the job satisfaction of teachers? As a point of reference, the reader is reminded that the principal leadership behavior subscales (Stogdill, 1963, p. 3) were: Depicting the amount of initiative the principal allows his teachers: 1) Tolerance of Freedom The amount of pressure the principal applies for organizational outputs: 2) Production.Emphasis 3) Consideration - The degree to which the principal regards the well being and comfort of his staff: h) Role Assumption - The degree to which the principal exerts his leadership role: 5) Initiating Structure - The degree to which the principal defines his role and lets teachers know what is expected of them. The teacher group behavior subscales (Halpin, 1966, p. 150-151 and Hayes, 1973. p. 23) were: 1) Disen ement - refers to the teachers' tendencies to Be “noé with it." This dimension describes an attitude that is "not in gear” with respect to the tasks of the organization and the work at hand. It corresponds to the more general concept of anomie as first described by Durkheim. The subtest focuses upon the teachers' behavior in task-oriented situations. 2) Es rit - refers to staff morale. The teachers' feeling th£t_their social needs are being satisfied, and they are, at the same time, enjoying a sense of accomplishment in their work. 3) Object Socialization - refers to the teachers' enjoyment o soc a re a ons with each other and students in a work-oriented situation. This dimension describes a situation in.which attention is directed toward the work objectives, relationships centered around task accomplishments, and job-oriented interactions. 75 The job satisfaction component included questions con- cerning the teachers' attitudes toward economic and fringe benefits, physical work surroundings, anticipated and realized non-economic rewards, and general satisfaction with the position in which they were employed. The discussion of the multiple regression analysis will be divided into four parts: 1) Using selected leadership subscales as the dependent variable: 2) Using selected teacher behavior subscales as the dependent variable: 3) Using the Job Satisfaction subscale as the dependent variable: #) Summary and Conclusions. Stepwise multiple regression was used to determine the order in which the independent variables predict significant proportions of variance in the dependent variable. Stepwise regression creates a prediction equation in several steps: in each step the most significant remaining predictor variable is entered into the equation allowing the researcher to examine the increasing value of R2 (total variance accounted for) aseach additional independent variable is added to the equation. In addition, the simple correlation (r), which is the correlation between each independent variable and the dependent variable, is listed. The multiple correlation (R) is simply the correlation between the dependent variable and all of the independent variables included. 76 Principal Leadershiprehavior Subscales Each of the principal leadership behavior subscales was entered into the stepwise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable, with the remainder of the principal leadership behavior, the teacher group behavior, and the Job Satisfaction subscales as independent variables. Results of these analyses are discussed below. Role Assumption The results of the regression analysis with Role Assumption as the dependent variable can be seen ianable. Two variables, Initiating Structure and Production Emphasis, were found to have a statistically significant multiple correlation (R s .83) with the dependent variable at the .05 level (see Table 10). Initiating Structure, which had a .73 simple r, accounted for sum of the variance for the dependent variable. Pro- duction.Emphasis accounted for an additional R square change of .16 which raised the total variance accounted for in the dependent variable to 70%. This suggests that the amount of leadership authority the principal is perceived to be exercising can best be predicted by the amount of structure he initiates within the teaching staff. The second most significant predictor of the leadership role assumed by the principal is the amount of organizational output he is perceived to be asking of staff members. 77 85 33 N: smashes om. 58 .nm N9: 8 .s mm .2 m Snowshoe ma. sham m mm magnum“, a 88% 8o: 85am no as no some? as. u m 3&3: 3885 8.3 mm. 3. as. mm. o8. concussions ensuosHum SQ ma. em. on. m. 08. sameness .m m 393m mg 982% m 853.53me . poaounm Hesse M 88am a a mans: _ finesse .§uosam< 30m 335/ “Beacon as 83 $83 Sheaves was :88um mo monopoaom. .aowumnfimfioom 30 m8 .cowuummmwumm now .uflmmm $8.5»ng 8388380 .osuabm wfiuflfifi 833.5 “5835 as no 3R3 838an oflfiuds--.oa «Home 78 Initiating Structure The Initiating Structure subscale was entered into the stepwise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable with each of the remaining subscales as independent variables. The results of that analysis can be seen in ‘ Table 11. Two variables, Production.Emphasis and Role Assumption, were found to have a statistically significant multiple cerrelation (R - .88) at the .05 level. Production Emphasis, which had a .73 simple r, accounted for Shfi of the variance in the dependent variable. Role Assumption accounted for an additional 2h$ of the variance, which raised the total variance accounted for in the dependent variable to 78%. This indicates that the most accurate predictor of the structure teachers perceive the principal initiating is the amount of organizational output they perceive him demanding. The second most accurate predictor of the structure initiated by the principal is the amount of leadership he assumes. Productipn Emphasis The Production.Emphasis subscale was entered into the stepwise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable, with each of the remaining subscales designated as independent variables. The results of that analysis can be seen in Table 12. 79 2N Haida S. 58 .3. sod an: m Swooouwom an . mam m 8.2a 23 80.8. B moan—waxy a 858$ 82 83am no as no mosaics. 8. n m 33nd: 3. ma ma . in. R . go. see. 3cm mm .mS mm. am. mm. mm. 000. 3%,. saucepan a m 38am 885 «Hang a oofiofldaam Bees $896 mousse. m a minus $3.5, .ossosbm espouse: 38sec, diseases ofi BE steam p5 .ugwmwfima .cowumuwamwoom use ha .sowuummmwumm non .cofiumwopwmcou .aopooum mo mos—wagon. 5039-63. oaom dang gages—m moaning “.86ch 93 mo manhag 838.“me oHaHufiSIIAH 03mm. 8O so. $5 NE 338m 3. 58 .um on? 8. Rs w Esteem S. sham m B moafiflm> a Renew 8% Basso no as no «Shoes. 8. u m mans: 093.33“ mo 39392. 3% i. R. R. 8. 8o. mausfim wfiufififi a a 395 owned mega , a salesman 883. House seam m a mans: «.335, 88:95 Embossed 38nd, “Reason as £3 Snowflaoom use n8 paw iguana—.62 30m .385 we mos—3309 .guommflumm new 685ng duflamm .Snmesaeso .messfim masses Basses. assessed was no mazes Basses «Handgun flee 81 Only one variable, Initiating Structure, was found to have a statistically significant correlation (R x .7h) with Production.Emphasis at the .05 level. The Initiating Structure variable accounted for 57% of the variance in the dependent variable. These findings indicate that the most significant predictor of the principal's demand for output is the staff member's perception of the amount of structure he initiates. Tolerance pf Freedom The Tolerance of Freedom subscale was entered into the stepwise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable with each of the remaining subscales as independent variables. The results of that analysis can be seen in Table 13. Two variables, Consideration and Initiating Structure, were found to have a statistically significant multiple correlation (R a .82) with the dependent variable at the .05 level. Consideration, which had a .72 simple r, accounted for 52% of the variance for'the dependent variable. Initiating Structure, which had a -.12 correlation, accounted for an additional 15% of the variance, which raised the total variance accounted for in the dependent variable to 67%.- These findings indicate that the best predictor of the amount of freedom the principal is perceived to allow is the staff perception of his consideration. The second most significant predictor of the amount of freedom he allows is 82 3.2 SN game 58 .um RS can 3.3 m easements egg m m§> m 3.855 g moussvm mo gm me we $9393. . n M dawn: 33 2.- B. as. No. 80. 8:88am wfiuflsfi on . a: Na. a... mm. Na. 8o. 8.3 $6328 a m 39% swamps seesaw a message. Remus snag «saw a a «Hausa: 38nd, demos mo 88639 33.5, afiefiaoo ofi some consummmflmm sea. as 83958... 3cm 5&8ng .flmflefi nauseous .Saoofiafloom 6&8 dress .onuuospum wfiufiufin .soaumuogmzbo moanmwng ”.9858ch 2.3 mo fiefldfi. Swomonwom oafiudszutma manna 83 the perceived level of structure he initiates. Consideration The Consideration subscale was entered into the step- wise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable with each of the remaining subscales as independent variables. The results of that analysis can be seen in Table 14. Two variables, Tolerance of Freedom and Role Assumption, were found to have a statistically significant multiple correlation (R = .86) with the dependent variable at the .05 level. i ' Tolerance of Freedom, which had a simple r of .72, accounted for 52% of the variance for the dependent variable. Role Assumption, which had a simple rbof .62, accounted for an additional 23% of the variance, which raised the total variance accounted for in the dependent variable to 75%. These findings indicate that the best predictor of consideration the principal exhibits towards his staff is the amount of freedom he is perceived to allow that staff. The second most significant predictor of principal considera- tion toward staff members is the amount of leadership role he assumes. Teacher Group Behavior Subscales Each of the teacher group behavior subscales was entered into the stepwise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable. The remainder of the teacher group behavior sub- cod NNAH NAN Hggmmm mm. Son .um 02m a} is? w cosmonauts R. egg m .5 gay m mommsvm and: 3.33% we gm mo 393mg mm. u a 03.332 :03ng oofim No. MN. mm. mm. coo. 30m 58am mo omdfl mm. mm. mm. an. 08. oQHmHoHoH m a museum , . . .owfifi . . A . 38$ . m 883mg. .m possum. dog museum m m wands 03mins, 8338380 masons, advise as fine Japan. as .Snfiafloom “836 .ufiaowewfima shunned gaseous .osuufim masons; .Snoflfluom non don—95mg oaom .gooflm mo 09.8an mmaamfihg ugamvfi «5 mo mamfimfiw §mmonwom saggy": .3 manna 85 scales (i.e. principal leadership behavior) were designated as independent variables. The results of these analyses are discussed below. Esprit The ESprit subscale was entered into the stepwise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable with each of the remaining subscales designated as independent ’variables. The results of that analysis can be seen in Table 15. Three variables, Disengagement. Object Socialization, and Consideration. were found to have a statistically signi- ficant multiple correlation (R 8 .80) with the dependent variable at the .05 level. Disengagement, which was negatively correlated (1’s -.6h) accounted for hl% of the variance in the dependent variable. Object Socialization. which had a simple r of .61. accounted for an additional 20% of the variance. Consideration. which had a simple r of .57. accounted for an additional “fl of the total variance. These three independent variables combined to account for a total of 65% of the total variance in the dependent variable Esprit. These findings indicate that the best predictor of staff morale is the level at which staff members feel involved in the tasks of the organizations. The second best predictor of staff morale is the comraderie teachers feel toward 86 8. is SN 3?QO om. $8 .um 8.3 s: 343 m Seams“ as. shag m a 63> a 33$ as: 85% mo :8 mo ashes. mm. u m flaws: 3.5 R. 8. no. 8. afiufimfisso soap -fififloom 8.02 3. om. 3. mm. “8.30 3&3 so: 3. 3. so. sausage a M £95 swans egg a 852m Basses 3890 seam m a 3532 Essays, . panama. oa§> 33839 «A... 553 u§m3 was .fimflaa Sflaeem .cfiuoflfluem nos .SUesté .msuushm msflmflsh assess mo 3538. .§usam2 30m .c3u3308 6&8 fishes. afiefiaflfi 9s so 339% assesses masses... .3 33 8? fellow staff members. The third best predictor of staff morale is the teachers' perceptions of the principal's consideration of their needs. Qisengagement The Disengagement subscale was entered into the step- wise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable. With each of the remaining subscales designated as indepen- dent variables. The results of that analysis can be seen in Table 16. Two variables. Esprit and Role Assumption. were found to have a statistically significant correlation (R s .67) with the dependent variable at the .05 level. Esprit. which had a -.6h simple r. accounted for hlfl of the variance for the dependent variable. Role Assumption. which had a simple r of -.h?. accounted for an additional #% of the variance. which raised the total variance accounted for in the dependent variable to “5%. The results of these analyses indicate that the most significant predictor of the level of involvement in organizational tasks by members of the staff is the perceived level of staff morale. The second best predictor of staff involvement in organizational tasks is the amount of leadership role the principal assumes within the organiza- tional activities. 88 «0.0 ww.w NAN HMSfiammm ON. .>mn .um 3% em; 35 m Bentham mm. 38$ m B 03> m 85.3. .5: 836m m8 8m we 33mg ma. n m «and: coaumasmm< 3mm 3.- 8. 3. 3. m8. 3am Ndm «of 3. .3. so. 80. uwummm m .m oaaawm owcmnu mumsvm .m ouqmowmwcwwm pmnmucm 2890 macaw m m Sands 33.5, .ucmsmwmwcmmaa manmwum> ucmncmama any nuH3.mn5uusnum wcflumauHGH ecu .cauommflumm now .8883“ no mystics .Sflfimflmg .cofimuafifioom ”.830 .msmfiosm can? .§uosm2 3am Juana $335, ufiweamefi ufi mo assays. 838% 3335.-.,3 ~33 89 Object Socialization ' The Object Socialization subscale was entered into the stepwise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable. with each of the remaining subscales as independent variables. The results of that analysis can be seen in Table 17. Two variables. Esprit and Disengagement, were found to have a statistically significant multiple correlation (.62) with the dependent variable at the .05 level. Esprit, which had a .64 simple r correlation. accounted for 37% of the variance for the dependent variable. Disengagement, which had a simple r of -.28. accounted for an additional 2% of the variance. which raised the total variance accounted for in the dependent variable to 39%. These findings indicate that the best predictor of the level of comraderie teachers feel is the perceived level of staff morale. The second most significant predictor of teacher comraderie is the level at which staff feel involved in the organizational tasks. ng Satisfaction.Subscale The Job Satisfaction subscale was entered into the stepwise multiple regression formula as a dependent variable with the principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior subscales designated as independent variables. The results of this analysis can be seen in Table 18. 90 mo . om . o NHN 1&6.“me ma . 5mm . um 2.x 2. 83 m 833% me. muggy. a ma mo§> a «egg 8% 83.3 .ua new mo 3%? no. u m 3&3: 3.8 3.. 8. mm. mm. o8. ufiBwumaemE Sea e9- . R. R. S. o8. panama a a £95m omega $83 m Savanna Bumps“ flange «H83 m m «33?: «genes _ .SHumunfioom uoeBo «Snug “game at £3 3% gnu—68m was .cowuommmwumm new .cowumumgmsoo .mnsuusflm mfiuumfiug 58E mo munNHmHom. .§u&.mm< man 6ng .uwummm meaning #86qu mfi mo munmbg Sammmummm mamflfiilufia magma. 91 Ho. mm.m NAN Hmscwmmm ma. .>mn..um 8.3 on 8.0 w 838..”me «0. $83 m ma oocmwmm> A a «883 as: 83X we new we when? om. u m mind: me. 8. S. me. So. 8333.5 3% 3. an. «n. mm. 80. panama m m 395m «were egg m mesodgm amnesia neg egg m a 3.5.3: «Hans, .afiuoflflumm as. .335, usages mfi fie, sawhlefln as .soeooua .ua gfloa .§ucn.m2 Sam .msuafim waning saunas Sneeonm .aoflmfiaoom “8.30 £3383ch spasm emanates “Snag an we engage Sammeuwmm 333,7.an 33. 92 Two variables, ESprit and Consideration, were found to have a statistically significant multiple correlation (R = .78) with the dependent variable. Esprit, which had a simple r of .67, accounted for 52% of the variance for the dependent variable. Consideration, which had a simple r of .65, accounted for an additional 9% of the variance which raised the total variance accounted for in the depen- dent variable to 61%. These findings indicate that the most accurate predictor of teacher job satisfaction is the perceived level of staff ,morale. The second most accurate predictor of teacher job satisfaction is the teachers' perceptions of the level of consideration shown them by the principal. Summary The analyses indicated no relationship between elemen- tary school organizational climate and student achievement. This finding was determined by using two separate correlation analyses. First, each of the nine subscales was correlated with the math and reading subscales. Follow-up analyses were used to examine relationships among the summated scales for each of the three components and the math and reading subscales. No significant relationships were found in these analyses. Second. scattergrams were plotted to determine if curvilinear relationships existed among the math and reading subscales and the summated scales or the nine individual subscales. Examination of the 93 scattergrams indicated that the distributions were random and therefore no linear or curvilinear relationships were found. Examination of the relationship between the nine sub- scales revealed thirty-three significant correlations among the fifty-four possible. The use of the multiple regression analyses was anzattempt to further explain the relationships among the subscales of the three components. Results of the analyses have shown that each of the subscales can be predicted by a combination of the remaining subscales. A further elaboration of the analyses and a discussion of the implications for future research is found in the following chapter. CHAPTER V SUMMARYL FINDINGS; AND DISCUSSION This chapter is divided into three sections. The first section is devoted to a summary of: l) The purpose of the study; 2) The limitations of the study; 3) The procedures used in the study. The second section reviews the findings of the analyses, and the final section discusses the recommendations for future research. The Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to find if a relationship exists between teacher perceptions of the organizational climate of the elementary school and the achievement of students in the classroom. By defining the organizational climate of an elementary school as principal leadership behavior. teacher group behavior. and teacher job satis- faction. an attempt was made to isolate specific organiza- tional characteristics and to examine their relationship with student achievement. The principal leadership behavior component was comprised of the five subscales: Tolerance of Freedom. Role Assumption. Initiating Structure. Consideration. and Production Emphasis. 9h 95 Each was selected to collect teacher perceptions of Specific leadership behaviors. In essence, the suggestion was that these characteristics of the principal have the most impact upon the school environment from the leadership sector of the organizational climate. A series of questions were posed about these five leadership characteristics and their relation to other variables. The teacher group behavior component, which was comprised of the subscales Esprit. Disengagement. and Object Socializa- tion. examined the teachers' perceptions of their interactions with peers and their attitudes toward the school organization. In examining the job satisfaction of teachers, the researcher asSumed that it is a separate and distinct area in the organizational climate of elementary schools. By designating one subscale. which encompassed a variety of teacher attitudes toward internal and external factors in their work life. it was assumed that teacher job satisfaction has an impact upon the organizational climate of the elemen- tary school. Subsequently. the relationship between the elementary school organizational climate and student achieve- ment was investigated. A series of questions were posed about this subscale and its relationship to the other variables in the study. Student achievement was measured by selected parts (mathematics and reading scores) from the 1974-75 Michigan Assessment Program. 96 Limitations of the Study Criteria were established to determine the population which consisted of elementary schools in the state of Michigan. These criteria were: 1) An organizational pattern of kindergarten through sixth grade; 2) Ten or more teachers; 3) Ten or more classrooms; a) A full-time principal in the school. Several schools elected not to participate in the study. Some schools which agreed to participate in the study did not return a sufficient number of instruments to be included. Two additional limitations were noted: 1) The variables of mathematics and reading were selected to represent the achievement of students and scores from fourth grade students were used to represent the entire kindergarten through sixth grade. 2) The Job Satisfaction subscale. which was adapted from the Bojean and Vance (1979) instrument. had not been pre- viously used. and, therefore. there are some doubts concerning its reliability. The reliability of the instrument was examined in this study. Thg_§£9cedures Used Upon receipt of permission from superintendents and principals to involve their elementary school in the study. instruments containing the items were mailed to elementary 97 teachers in 306 buildings. Two hundred twenty-one buildings returned a sufficient number of booklets to be included. The instruments were coded by building. keypunched and the analyses performed. Reliability coefficients were calculated for each subscale. correlation coefficients were found for each pair of subscales, and a stepwise multiple regression model was used for further examination of the relationships between subscales. Research Findings The discussion of the research findings is divided into three sections. These sections are: 1) Reliability of the Subscales; 2) Correlation.Analysesg 3) Multiple Regression Analysis. figliability of the Subscales The Spearman-Brown. Split-half. reliability coefficient formula was used to determine the internal consistency of the subscales and to estimate the reliability of the full- ‘length subscales. Significant positive correlations were found for each of the subscales used in the study. indicating that each subscale had high reliability except Object Sociali- zation which was found to have a low (r = .39) coefficient. In general. the subscales were determined to be reliable and not a major source of error variance. 98 Correlation.Analyses 4 The discussion of the correlation analyses is divided into eight parts. These sections are: l) The relationship between principal leadership behavior and student achievement: 2) The relationship between teacher group behavior and ‘ student achievement: 3) The relationship between teacher job satisfaction and student achievement: . a) The relationship between the subscales of principal leadership behavior: 5) The relationship between the subscales of teacher group behavior: ' 6) The relationship between principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior: 7) The relationship between Job satisfaction and principal leadership behavior; 8) The relationship between job satisfaction and teacher group behavior. 1) Principal Leadership Behavigp - Student Achievement The relationship between principal leadership behavior and student achievement was examined by using the correlation model. Each of the five subscales of principal leadership behavior (Initiating Structure. Production Emphasis. Tolerance of Freedom. Role Assumption. and Consideration) was correlated With the two subscales of student achievement. math and reading scores. No significant correlations were found to exist between student achievement and the five principal leadership behavior subscales. .99 2) Teacher Group Behavior - Student Achievement The relationship between teacher group behavior (Disengagement. Esprit. and Object Socialization) and the two subscales of student achievement was examined. No sig- nificant correlations were found to exist between student achievement and the three teacher group behavior subscales. 3) Teacher J b Sat sfact on - Student Achievement The result of this analysis was that no significant correlation was found between teacher job satisfaction and student achievement. a) Principal Leadership Behavior Subscales The findings for the principal leadership behavior sub- scales were: a) A significant. but low correlation of -.31 was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Production Emphasis. This indicates that a low inverse relationship exists between the amount of freedom the principal allows his staff and the amount of output he demands from them. b) A significant correlation of .72 was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Consideration. This indicates a marked relationship between the amount of freedom the Principal allows his staff and the consideration.he shows them as professionals. 6) A significant correlation of .22 was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Role Assumption. This indicates 100 that a low relationship exists between the amount of freedom the principal allows his staff and the amount of leadership he assumes. d) No significant correlation was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Initiating Structure indicating that no relationship exists between the freedom the principal allows his staff and the amount of structure he initiates in the organization. e) No significant correlation was found between Production Emphasis and Consideration indicating that no relationship exists between the amount of output the principal demands and the consideration he shows his staff members. f) A significant correlation of .39 was found between Production.Emphasis and Role Assumption. This indicates a low relationship between the amount of output the principal demands of staff members and the amount of leadership he assumes. g) A significant correlation of .73 was found to exist between Production.Emphasis and Initiating Structure. This indicates a marked relationship between the amount of output demanded by the principal and the level of structure he interjects into the organization. h) A significant correlation of .62 was found between Consideration and Role Assumption. This indicates a marked relationship between the consideration that a principal shows for his staff members and the amount of leadership role he assumes. 101 i) A significant correlation of .73 was found to exist between Role Assumption and Initiating Structure. This indicates a marked relationship exists between the amount of leadership role the principal assumes and the structure he initiates into the organizational activities. 3) A significant correlation of .34 was found between Initiating Structure and Consideration. This indicates a low relationship between the level of structure the principal interjects into the organization and the consideration he shows his staff. The examination of the relationship between the subscales of the principal leadership behavior components asked the question: what is the relationship between leadership charac- teristics exhibited by the principal? Taken individually. each of the principal leadership behavior subscales was found to have significant correlations with one or more of the remaining subscales. Tolerance of Freedom was found to have significant correlations with Production Emphasis, Consideration, and Role Assumption. Increased Tolerance of Freedom was accom- panied by a decrease in Production Emphasis. As teachers perceived that the principal allowed them more freedom in their work. they perceived less pressure brought to bear for organizational outputs. As an increase in work output was perceived by staff members, less freedom was perceived to be allowed in their work activities. Increased Considera- tion was accompanied by an increase in Tolerance of Freedom. 102 An increase in the freedom the principal allowed staff members was accompanied by an increase in the perceived level of consideration. Also, Tolerance of Freedom increased with Role Assumption. A perceived increase in freedom of work activities was accompanied by an increase in the per- ception of authority the principal assumed. Production Emphasis was found to have a significant correlation with Initiating Structure and Role Assumption. As Production Emphasis increased, Initiating Structure also increased. Where teachers perceived an increased demand for organizational output, they also perceived the principal to initiate more structure into the organization. An.increase in Production Emphasis was accompanied by an increase in Role Assumption. A perceived increase in demand by the principal for organizational output was associated with an increase in the level of authority he assumed in the organi- zation. Consideration was significantly correlated with Role Assumption and Initiating Structure. .An increase in Con- sideration was accompanied by an increase in Role Assumption. The increase in the leadership role of the principal was associated with a perceived increase in principal's considera- tion of staff members. An increase in Consideration was accompanied by an increase in Initiating Structure. .As teachers perceived the principal to be more considerate of their position. an associated increase in the amount of 103 structure he initiated into the organization was perceived. ‘Finally. Role Assumption and Initiating Structure were found to be significantly correlated. A perceived increase in the authority assumed by the principal was accompanied by a perception of increased structure initiated into the organization by the principal. 5) Teacher Group Behavior Subscales The findings for the teacher group behavior subscales were: a) A significant correlation of -.28 was found between Disengagement and Object Socialization. This indicates that a low inverse relationship exists between the level at which teachers feel they are involved in the tasks of the organization and the comraderie they feel toward staff members. b) A significant correlation of .61 was found between Esprit and Object Socialization. This indicates that a marked relationship exists between the level of staff morale and the level at which teachers feel they are involved in the tasks of the organization. c) A significant correlation of -.6h was found between Disengagement and Esprit. This indicates that a marked relationship exists between the level of staff morale and the level at which teachers feel involved in the tasks of the organization. Illllluui 10# In summary. these analyses examined the relationships between the subscales of the teacher group behavior component. Esprit was found to have a significant positive correlation with both Disengagement and Object Socialization. .An' increase in staff morale was accompanied by an increase in the comraderie felt among staff members. .An increase in Esprit was accompanied by a decrease in Disengagement. As staff morale increased. teachers felt more involved in the organizational tasks and less disenfranchised. Finally. Disengagement and Object Socialization were significantly correlated.’ An increase in the comraderie among staff members was accompanied by an increase in the teachers' positive attitude toward the tasks of the organization. 6) Principal Leadership Behavior and Teacher Group Behavior The findings for the relationships between principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior were: a) A significant correlation of ;.26 was found to exist between Initiating Structure and Disengagement. This indicated that a low inverse relationship exists between ' the amount of structure the principal initiates into the organizational activities and the level at which teachers feel involved in the tasks of the organization. b) A significant correlation of .36 was found between Initiating Structure and Esprit. This indicated that a low relationship exists between the amount of structure the 105 principal initiates into the organizational activities and the level of staff morale. c) A significant correlation of .33 was found between Initiating Structure and Object Socialization. This indicates that a low relationship exists between the amount of structure the principal initiates into the organizational activities and the comraderie teachers feel toward fellow staff members. d) A significant correlation of -.29 was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Disengagement. This indicates that a low inverse relationship exists between the amount of freedom the principal allows staff members in their work and how involved teachers feel in the tasks of the organization. e) A significant correlation of .hB was found between Tolerance of Freedom and ESprit. This indicates that a moderate relationship exists between the amount of freedom the principal allows his teachers and the level of staff morale. . f) A significant correlation of .h6 was found between Tolerance of Freedom and Object Socialization. This indicates that a moderate relationship exists between the amount of freedom the principal allows his teachers and the comraderie teachers feel toward fellow staff members. g),A significant correlation of -.u7 was found between Role Assumption and Disengagement. This indicates that an inverse relationship exists between the amount of leadership role the principal assumes and the level at which teachers feel involved in the tasks of the organization. 106 h) A significant correlation of .h6 was found between Role Assumption and Reprit. This indicates that a moderate relationship exists between the amount of leadership role the principal assumes and the level of staff morale. i) A significant correlation of .38 was found between Role Assumption and Object Socialization. This indicates that a low relationship exists between the amount of leader- ship role the principal assumes and the comraderie felt among staff members.‘ . j) A significant correlation of -.UI was found between Consideration and Disengagement. This indicates that a moderate inverse relationship exists between the teachers' perceptions of principal consideration for their position and the level of staff involvement in the tasks of the organization. k) A significant correlation of .57 was found between Consideration and Esprit. This indicates that a moderate relationship exists between the teachers' perceptions of principal consideration for their position and the morale of staff members. 1) A significant correlation of .43 was found between Consideration and Object Socialization. This indicates a moderate relationship exists between the teachers' percep- tions of principal consideration for their position and the comraderie felt among staff members. m) No significant correlation was found between Production Emphasis and Disengagement indicating that no relationship 107 exists between the demand for organizational output made by the principal and the level at which teachers feel involved in the tasks of the organization. n) A significant correlation of .19 was found to exist between Production.Emphasis and Object Socialization. This indicates a negligible relationship exists between the demand for organizational output made by the principal and the comraderie felt among staff members. In summary. these analyses attempted to examine the relationship between the principal leadership behavior component and teacher group behavior component subscales. Initiating Structure was found to have a significant corre- lation with Disengagement. Esprit. and Object Socialization. As Initiating Structure increased. Disengagement decreased. As teachers perceived the principal emphasizing structure in the organization. they also felt more positively about the tasks they were engaged in. ESprit and Initiating Structure increased together. As the morale of the teaching staff increased. the perception of the structure initiated into the organization by the principal increased. Initiating Structure and Object Socialization also increased together. An increase in the amount of structure initiated by the principal into the organizational setting was accompanied by an increase in the comraderie between staff members. Tolerance of Freedom was also correlated with all of the teacher group behavior subscales. As Tolerance of Freedom increased. Disengagement decreased. As teachers 108 perceived the principal to allow them more freedom. staff morale increased. Tolerance of Freedom and Object Sociali- zation increased as the principal allowed more freedom in work activities. Role Assumption was found to be significantly correlated with the three teacher group behavior subscales. As Role Assumption increased. Disengagement decreased. As staff members perceived the principal to assume more authority in his role. they felt less disenfranchised from the organi- zation. Role Assumption and Esprit were directly related. As the principal was perceived to be taking more authority in his role. staff morale increased. Finally. Object Socialization and Role Assumption increased together. Comraderie among staff members increased as the principal more actively assumed his role. Consideration was found to have a significant correlation with Disengagement. ESprit. and Object Socialization. Con- sideration and Disengagement were inversely related. As the staff perceived the principal to increase his considera- tion. their feelings of anomie decreased. Consideration and Esprit were directly related. As staff morale increased. the perception of the consideration by the principal increased. Consideration and Object Socialization increased together. As the principal was perceived to be more considerate of the teaching staff. the comraderie among staff members increased. ' h. 109 Production Emphasis was found to have significant correlations with Esprit and Object Socialization.- As Production Emphasis increased. Esprit increased. When the principal was perceived to be asking for more organizational output from staff members. the morale of the staff increased. Production Emphasis and Object Socialization increased 1 together. As the principal demanded more organizational output. the comraderie among staff members increased. 7) Teacher Job Satisfaction - Principal Leadership Behavior The findings for teacher job satisfaction and principal lleadership behavior were: a) A significant correlation of .29 was found to exist between Job Satisfaction and Initiating Structure. This indicates that a low relationship exists between the satis- faction teachers feel in their job and the amount of structure the principal injects in the organization. b) A significant correlation of .h? was found to exist between Job Satisfaction and Tolerance of Freedom. This indicates that a moderate relationship exists between the satisfaction teachers feel in their job and the amount of freedom the principal allows his staff members in their work. c) A significant correlation of .59 was found to exist between Job Satisfaction and Consideration. This indicates that a moderate relationship exists between the satisfaction teachers feel in their job and the amount of consideration the principal is perceived to have for his staff members. 110 d) No significant correlation was found between Job Satisfactionand Production Emphasis indicating that no relationship exists between the satisfaction teachers feel in their job and the demand for organizational output made by the principal. ' e) A significant correlation of .47 was found between Job Satisfaction and Role Assumption. This indicates that a moderate positive relationship exists between the satis- faction teachers feel in their job and the amount of leader- ship authority the principal assumes. 8) Teacher Job Satisfaction - Teacher Group Behavipp The findings for teacher job satisfaction and teacher group behavior were: , a) A significant correlation of -.h7 was found to exist between Job Satisfaction and Disengagement. This indicates that a moderate inverse relationship exists between the satisfaction teachers feel in their job and the level at Which staff members feel involved in the tasks of the organi- zation. b) A significant correlation of .67 was found to exist between Job Satisfaction and Esprit. This indicates that a marked relationship exists between the satisfaction teachers feel in their job and the level of staff morale. c) A significant correlation of .5“ was found to exist between Job Satisfaction and Object Socialization. This indicates that a moderate relationship exists between the 111 satisfaction teachers feel in their job and the comraderie staff members feel toward one another. The examination of the relationship between the Job Satisfaction subscale and the remaining two components of the study. principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior. answered two questions: 1) Which leadership behaviors of the principal have a relationship with the Job Satisfaction of teachers? 2) Which group behaviors of teachers have a relationship with the Job Satisfaction of teachers? Job Satisfaction was found to have a significant correlation with four of the principal leadership behavior subscales: Initiating Structure. Tolerance of Freedom. Role Assumption. and Consideration. Job Satisfaction increased as Initiating Structure increased. Teachers were more satis- fied in their job as the principal increased the amount of structure in the organization. Role Assumption increased as Job Satisfaction increased. As the principal assumed more of a leadership role in the school. the Job Satisfaction experienced by teachers increased. Job Satisfaction and Consideration were directly related. Teachers became more satisfied in their jobs as the principal increased his understanding of their position. Job Satisfaction was found to have significant corre- lations with all teacher group behavior subscales: Disengage- ment. Esprit. and Object Socialization. Job Satisfaction increased as Disengagement decreased. An increased satis- faction in the job was accompanied by a decrease in the 112 dissatisfaction and unrest teachers felt toward the organiza- tion. An increase in Job Satisfaction was accompanied by an increase in ESprit. .As the staff morale increased. teacher job satisfaction also increased. Job Satisfaction increased as Object Socialization increased. The increase in the comraderie of staff members was accompanied by an increase in teacher job satisfaction. Multiple Regression.Analypip The information presented in Chapter IV concerning the stepwise multiple regression analysis examined the relationship of each subscale. designated as the dependent variable. with the remaining subscales of the three components designated as independent variables. This section of Chapter V summarizes the information presented in Chapter Iv. Research activities utilizing regression models have significantly increased in recent years. The regression models which have the most relevance for educational research are found in the social sciences. but with correlation methods even the highest correlation coefficients are only expressions of relationships or prediction and not indicators of causation. Conran (197h) used stepwise multiple regression to establish a causal model to demonstrate relations between principals' leadership. teachers' attitudes and performance. student attitudes and performance and certain student demo- graphic variables. In employing this approach. it was suggested that principal leadership had a causal relationship 113 to student achievement through the independent variables. Conran employed a Time-Series Model in plotting the relation- ship between variables and used the beta paths from the multiple regression analyses to establish this flow. This study used the significant percentage of the variance accounted for in each dependent variable by independent variables to establish the line of prediction. The significant percentage of the variance was used rather than the beta paths to further explain the findings for two reasons. First. since the percentage of the variance had been used in Chapter IV to explain the relationship between dependent variables. it seemed appropriate to use the same vehicle in examining the same data. Secondly. in consulting with a statistician concerning the use of beta paths or significant percentage of the variance. it was concluded that the informa- tion presented would be the same regardless of the method chosen. Therefore. Figure 1 presents the line of prediction for the variables in the study based upon the significant percentage of variance accounted for in the dependent variable by the independent variable(s). A brief explanation of the development of Figure 1 will provide the reader with a better understanding of the relation- Ship between the variables. Each of the subscales from the teacher group behavior. principal leadership behavior. and teacher job satisfaction components were examined as dependent variables (Figure 1). As each subscale was listed. the independent variable(s) which accounted for a significant 114 How poursooom 35% mo ”.385 Beheaded now n ma. gufiauom uoo .30" masons—4m uflammn mamomnsm ugwmwngn :63on mo oosmwoaoau «somfim Bananas 3am" oHBmBm masses assessed" «Assam gBflm assumed I m we mm mm 333% gmgwmsoon 20 H. mm mm H 383.3me Goa: women 833.com.“ hgnao n ago soflomMmflmm new season. usage Hog 96.6 assume “#88980 woymsom aEmbsmfl assent { LimH amassing sounuowpoum mo gfisgowaom swag: . H magma 115 portion of the variance in the multiple regression analysis was noted. Lines were then drawn from the independent variable(s) to the dependent variables with an arrow indicating the line of prediction. ' As an example. see Initiating Structure (IS) in Figure 1. Figure 1 shows that Initiating Structure can be predicted by two independent variables. Role Assumption and Production Emphasis. Lines are drawn with arrows indicating that these two independent variables account for a significant portion of the variance in the dependent variable (IS). and. therefore. are predictors of this sub- scale. Each of the subscales was treated in the same manner and the subsequent discussion is a result of this activity. When Figure l is examined. it will become apparent that the outgrowth of all the one-way prediction lines is JS (Job Satisfaction). The most important single finding of this analysis was: the job satisfaction of teachers can be pre— dicted from a combination of principal leadership and teacher group behavior variables. However. in order to better understand the relationships leading to this con- clusion. the researcher will begin at the opposite end of the figure. . Initiating Structure (IS) concerns the amount of structure the principal initiates in the organization. The multiple regression analysis indicated that the amount of” structure the principal initiates can be predicted by the .116 organizational output he demands (PE) and the level of authority he assumes as leader of the organization (RA). It would appear that if we wished to examine how structured the elementary school organizational activities were. we could elicit the teachers' perceptions of the amount of work they were being asked to accomplish and the strength of the principal in his leadership role. What. in turn. can be used to predict Role Assumption and Production Emphasis? The only factor which predicts the amount of organizational output required by the principal (PE) is the amount of structure he initiates into the organization (IS). The amount of leadership role he assumes (RA) is predicted by the structure he imposes (IS) and the work output he demands (PE). What we have found in the analyses of the first three variables. all subscales of the principal leadership behavior component. is a close relation- ship between the three with two-way prediction in each instance except PE and RA. The noticeable exception to these principal leadership behavior component relationships are the two remaining subscales. Tolerance of Freedom and Consideration. Tolerance of Freedom is predicted by Initiating Structure. The amount of freedom a principal allows his Staff (TF) can be predicted by the amount of structure the principal initiates in the organization. One can also predict the amount of freedom allowed (TF) by the level of consideration 11? the principal is perceived to have for his staff members (CN). Therefore. one can predict the amount of autonomy allowed a staff by their perceptions of the leadership strength of the principal and the understanding he shows toward their position and activities. Consideration (CN) can be predicted by two variables. Tolerance of Freedom (TF) and Role Assump- tion (RA). The level of consideration (CN) the principal is seen to have toward staff members can be predicted by the freedom he allows in work activities (TF) and the amount of leadership role he exerts.- What we have discovered is that the principal leadership behavior variables are closely related and predict each other in a pattern which finds Consideration an outgrowth of the interrelationships of the others. Neither the teacher group behavior nor the job satisfaction components appear to have any predictive relationship with the subscales of the prin- cipal leadership behavior component. An examination of the teacher group behavior variables suggests that a similar pattern of prediction evolves within the subscales of the teacher group behavior components as noted in the principal leadership behavior component: the majority of the predictors are within the teacher behavior subscales. However. one exception is noted: principal leader- ship behavior subscales are significant predictors of individual teacher group behavior subscales. Disengagement (DS). the subscale which described the teachers' feeling of involvement in the tasks associated 118 with the organization. is predicted by Role Assumption (RA) and ESprit (EP). The degree to which teachers feel involved in the organization can be predicted by the level of staff morale (EP) and by the amount of leadership authority by the principal (RA). ' Esprit (EP) is also predicted by one principal leadership behavior variable. Consideration. and two teacher group ‘ behavior variables. Disengagement and Object Socialization. The level of staff morale can be predicted by the level of consideration shown teachers by the principal (CN). the extent to which teachers feel involved in the organization's undertakings (DS). and the comraderie felt between staff members (DS). 1 Finally. the Object Socialization variable (OS) can be predicted by the two remaining teacher group behavior subscales. Disengagement and ESprit. The comraderie felt . among staff members can be predicted by the level of staff morale (EP). and the level of staff involvement in the work of the organization (DS). 1 In summarizing the teacher group behavior component. three interesting factors are noted: 1) The major predictors of teacher group behavior variable fall within subscales in that component. 2) Unlike the principal leadership behavior component. subscales from another component (Role Assumption and Consideration) are found to be significant predictors of teacher group behavior variables. 3) ESprit. like Consideration in the principal leadership behavior component. seems to be the variable which is an outgrowth of the other subscales within the teacher group behavior component. ....ll.l[l.l.l 119 Job Satisfaction was found to have two variables which significantly predicted the level of satisfaction teachers felt in their work. One variable. Esprit. was from the teacher group behavior component. while the second. Consideration. was a subscale within the principal leadership behavior component. The relationship between Job Satisfaction and- Esprit suggested that we can predict the satisfaction teachers feel from their jobs by the level of staff morale. In analyzing the relationship between Consideration and Job Satisfaction. it would seem that a prediction of teachers' satisfaction in their work can be based upon the amount of consideration the principal is perceived to have for his staff members. It is interesting to note that the predictors of Job Satisfaction came from both the areas of teacher interaction with peers and principal leadership behaviors. It may be concluded that a combination of these two areas contributes to the satisfaction teachers feel in their work. Summary and Copplusion An examination of the results from the correlational analyses between student achievement and the three components of elementary school organizational climate indicated that no relationship could be found. Further analyses designed to examine the possibility of curvilinear relationships indicated that no relationships of that nature existed. Exploratory analyses using the correlational model revealed a number of significant correlations among the nine 120 subscales defined as elementary school organizational climate. Subsequent use of the stepwise multiple regression model provided the information presented in this section. It seems apparent that. according to these analyses. the leadership behavior of the principal has impact upon the teacher staff behavior. Each of the principal behavior subscales have either a direct or an indirect relationship with the teacher group behavior subscales. It also seems that the leadership behavior of the principal cannot be predicted by the interaction of teachers. Combining these two findings indicates that while the principal's leadership may influence staff morale. staff comraderie. and the staff involvement in work tasks. the level of these teacher group behavior variables has no influence upon the leadership behavior of the principal. Finally. it is a combination of teacher group behavior. crystallized in the Esprit variable. and principal leadership behavior. identified in the Consideration subscale. which defines the satisfaction teachers find in their work. Discussion The major problem of this study was to determine whether a relationship exists between teacher perception of the elementary school organizational climate and the academic achievement of students. In this regard. the findings are clear: no such relationship was found. The researcher was surprised by this finding. His professional experience and 121 educational background had led him to a basic belief that elements such as the principal's leadership behavior. job satisfaction of staff members and professional and personal relations among teachers combined to create a ”climate” which would affect the academic achievement of students. This conjecture seemed reasonable. well founded. and in keeping with a long line of organizational thoughts. However. given that the data was carefully collected and appropriately analyzed. the conclusion is undeniable. The evidence yielded no relationship between elementary school organizational climate and student achievement. However. this information may be interpreted in different ways. First. it may be concluded that there is no need to pursue this topic further: that indeed. there is no relation- ship between these two variables. While this may be the case. the researcher feels that such a conclusion would be too rash. This was only one study and much more data needs to be gathered before any such final conclusion could be drawn. This does not mean that the results of the study are to be rejected. It simply means that at this point the researcher is unwilling. given previous research findings. to write off school climate as a factor affecting student achievement. ' It may be that the student achievement variables iden- tified for this research are too limited. Student achievement may be broader than can be indicated by scores received in two cognitive areas. The researcher is suggesting a broader 122 definition of student achievement. possibly including the affective and psychomotor domains and other areas of the cognitive domain. Future research may consider student achievement with variables which researchers have not begun to envision. Or. a closer look may lead one to conclude that only selected variables were used in this study. The researcher takes the position that a contribution of this study is the elimination of stated principal leadership and teacher group variables from consideration as components in future studies of this subject. Many more leadership and-teacher group variables exist and a closer examination may reveal a rela- tionship between alternative variables and student achievement. It may be that organizations have become so increasingly complex that current research methods and procedures are no longer useful in generalizing across organizational settings. Regarding studies of organization leadership. Perrow (1972. p. 118) has stated. "A great deal has been learned about individuals and small groups ... but what we have learned about organizations is primarily that our simple models do not hold in all cases. nor do they account for much of the variance when they do hold ... The models have become increasingly complex ... We are now in a situation where the variables are so numerous and complex that we can hardly generalize to organizations or even types of organi- zations." 123 The two most important findings in the study are the significant relationships discovered among the three com- ponents of the school organizational climate: 1) the relation- ship between principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior: and 2) the relationship between teacher job satis- faction and the remaining two components of organizational climate. principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior. The study has shown as association between teacher perception of principal leadership style and teacher group interaction. In other words. teachers' attitudes toward their interpersonal relations in the school are related to their perceptions of the leadership style of the principal. The study has also shown that teacher job satisfaction can be predicted from principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior. This is the most important finding of the study. .The teachers' level of satisfaction with their work is dependent upon the leadership style of the principal and the interactions with their peers. With these factors in mind. the researcher makes the following recommendations for future research: 1) The possibility of combining survey instruments and observational techniques for further research: 2) A further examination of the variables which contribute to teacher job satisfaction: 3) Examination of the possible causal relationship which exists between principal leadership behavior and teacher group behavior. APPENDIX A 124 HNN nz mo. u as Estates “lasagna .- .. «No. Mung 8..- mo. .umm how 8o. .. 8. «a... .8m .8 8. «S. S. is. .mfl 8. no. is- law... as.- .mm 3. mo. 8. *2. EN. 8.- .5 .8m 8.- 8.- am. the. cam. .23.- 8. .80.- mo.- 3.- swe. smm. s3. «3..- .«mm. sum. .3. .Hom e8. m8. is. «3. as. «a... tam.- 3. «mm. ems Ace m8. 8. am. ..mm. *8. 8.- am. am. ..ma. 2.- cam .ufi waves firs .umm now 68.8 .mmm ..m-w. 5.8m .80 mass assoc. .mqsmmmefifimz .BUmfiHfioom “.8 .Eo .msususm mfiufluEH .SflUflmflmm non .fi-amm £68?ng .333 EU -8e8m .aoflfimflsbo .83ng fies seems-s mo masts“. associates $33.. cantata-LS £3. APPENDIX B Ach zzbkmd mom mam: uAmga= oueum aewunuuz dds: cooxuauu do: useuaaon< oussvsuo couuox .m va>ua mamas asuuzuqz .msqns-A anon hue-unrusa oueum sewage“: «as: sooxouuu doe ugsuu«en< quest-nu souuoz .m pu>oa - . j.«_—:s-d'.pw._éi. dang-5.. Der Coll-segue: nessmywesreunde uisdesigoedtoss-ieeeleeen- tary school teeoher's perceptions of their work emits-eat. He hope you can help us with this endeavor. hclosed you will and e three part questionnaire with 97 it-. Directions Ire given for each section. You should he shle to finish in 20 to 30 limtes. Your booklet is identified with s code “or. mess m- rs ere necessary so that questionnaires ney be grouped by school for date snelysis. - ' fied. Neither you, your district. nor your school will be identified in teportiu of the results of this study. . This study is based on s untully selected rsnda'swle of schools filth as yours. Therefore. - ss ls is essential for the study. You say drop this masticnneire in s neil box and it will he returned to us. All inter-tion will he treated in the strictest confidence sod profession-l end ethical studsrds will he followed through- out the study. sincerely. 444.2% w W Greduste Assistant PLEASE MIMI THESE GIBSTIONS Teacher Intonation 1. Male Panels 2. Grade level you teach: K 1 2 3 lo 5 6 Other 3. Ass lo. lu-bcr of years teaching experience (Specify) 5. Have you taught in this building during the out!” ”I“ Yes No 6. Highest Degree field rm 1 LEADER BEHAVIOR DESCRIPTION GIBSTIONNAIRB” Teacher Porn Purpose of the Questionnaire: 0n the following pages is a list of ital that may be used to describe the behavior of your principal. Each it:- describes a specific kind of behavior, but it does not ask to judge whether the behavior is' de- sirable or undersirable. Although some items may see: similar they express differences that are important in the description of leader- ship. Each it- should be considered as a separate description. This is not a test of ability or consistency in leaking answers. Its only purpose is to nuke it possible for you to describe, as accurately as you can, the behavior of your principal. DIRECTIONS: 1. READ each item carefully. 2. THINK about how frequently the principal engages in the behavior described by the ital. 3. DECIDE whether be (A) Very Frequently, (B) Often, (C) Occasionally, (D) Seldom, or (2) Very Rarely acts as described by than 4. DRAW A CIRCLE around go; of the five letters (A B C D E) following the item to show the answer you have selected. A - Very Frequently B - Often C - Occasionally D - Seldom E - Very Rarely 5. MARK your answers as shown in the examples below. anple: He gigs, acts as described..................A ® C D I Example: He Wants as described............A b c D ® Example: Be Occasionally acts as described...........A I! © D E 6. ANSWER EACH MS’I‘ION. *Copyright-1962 by the Ohio State University A s c o E VOFY Frequently Often Occasionally Seldom Vary Rarely I. He lsts teachers know what is expected of than.......... i. A I C D E 2. Ha allows the teachers complete fracdoo in their work... ' 2. A I C D E 3. He is hesitant about taking initiative with the faculty................................................. 3. A I C D \E b. He is friendly and approachable......................... h. A I C I E 5- He encourages after-school work by teachers....... ..... . 5. A I 'C D E 6. Ha encourages the use of uniform procaduras............. 6. A I C D E 7. Ha permits the teachers to use their own judgment in solving problems..................................... 7. A I C D E 8. Ha fails to take necessary action....................... 8. A I C D E 9. He does little things to make it pleasant to be a member of the faculty........................ ...... 9. A I C O E lo. Ha stresses being ahead of competing schools ............ 10. A I C D E ii. He tries out his ideas with the faculty................. ii. A I C D E 12. Ha encourages initiative in the teachers................ '2. A I C C E ‘3. Ha lots other persons take away his leadership in the faculty.......................................... l3. A I C D E Ih. He puts suggestions made by the faculty into operation.. ii. A I C D E is. He needles teachers for greater effort.................. is. A I C D E l6. He makes his attitudes clear to the faculty....... ...... l5. A 0 C D 5 '7. Ha lets tho teachers do their work the way they ' think best. ..... .............................. ...... .... 17. A I C D E l0. he lets some teachers take advantage of him............. i8. A I C D E l9- Ha treats all teachers as his equal..................... l9. A I C D E 10' "' “OOPS the work moving at a rapid pace..... .......... . 20. A B C D C 3‘- "a decides what shall be done and how it shall ' “done. ....... .. .................. . ....... ........ 21. A a c o E 13' "' "3‘908 a task. than lets the teacher handle lt...... 22. A I C I E 23. He is the leader of the faculty in name only ............ 23. A I C D E 3 I I C II I . F I If ‘ ' ” In!“ Von Ilnly ‘ ' II. hglvoooduaoooootlcaofaha-ma....................... 2A. A I c I t Is. Ilomhoolor l-ocrooaodproductlon 25. A I c I I ’ II. llooaolm toachoro topartlculor taska................. 26. A I c I I 27. llo turns tho toochora looao on a Job. and Iota th- " 000°" . 27. A I c o t “ 18.7 llohockodmnuhonhoought to stand flr-............... 28. A I C I E ' as. an.” tohlnsolf 29. A I c I t ll 30. Ho oaks tho taochoro to work hardar 30. A I c I I ll 3|. u. molt-s suro that hlo port In tho school It undor- stoodbytha tadtors................................... 3L A I C I E pl 31. Ila la roluctant to allow tho toochors any froadoo of action............................................... 32. A I C I I H 33. Ilo lots aaoa tuchors hova authority that ho should ll koop.................................................... 33- A I C D I H M. No looks out for tho poroonal wolfaro of taachors....... 3‘. A I 35- Ho pornlto tho toachors to toko It any ln tholr work... 35. A I 'l 36. liaachodulos thonork tobodono ..... 36. A I .l 37. Mo allow! the faculty a hlgh degroc of lnltlotlvo....... 37. A I .l 38. No tokoa full chorgo whorl morgulclos orlsa............. SI. A I .I 39. No It ullllng to alto chongou 39. A I .l " Iofllodrlvoa hordwhonthoro looJoI tobodono........... 50. A I kl. Ho nalntolna doflnlto atandorda of parforlaonco.......... Al. -A I 5' z o truats tho taochora to oatorclao good Johanna...” fl. ‘3. No ovorcuos atto-pts lodo to challongo hla laodorohlp‘.. A3. A I A I M. Na rofuooa to oxploln hla octlona....................... IL, A I I5. No urgoa tho faculty to boot lta provlous momma"... A E No aaka that taacharo follou‘suodoro‘ rulao and A I C D Vary Froquontly 0fton Occasionolly Solde- h‘]. Honor-Hts tho faculty to lot ltsounpocommmuu. '08. No Is aoally rocognlzod as tho laodar of tho faculty.... #9. Ho acts without consultlng tho faculty.................. 50. Ho hoops tho faculty worklng up to copoclty............. Vary :orolx A I C I I A I C ll E A I C D E AICDE Part II Organlzotlonal Climate Questlonnalre* Purpose of the QuestIonnalre: Enclosed In thls folder are some questlons about sltuatlons and how toachers 5ehave In your school. Please answer them by drawing a cIrcle around one of the four responses (VFO, 00, 50, R0). 00 not dwell too long on any one Item but answer It as you thlnk the sltuatlon exists In your school. Remember: Answer each questIon as you thlnk the sItuatIon exists In your school. You as an Indlvldual win not be Identlfled with thls Instrument. MARK YOUR ANSWERS AS SHOWN IN THE EXAHPLES BELOW. Example: The item Verz Frgguenslx chgrs as described ........ 00 SD R0 Example: The Item W as described .................. VFO . 50 R0 Example: The Item Sometimes Occurs as descrlbed .............. VFO 00 . no u Example: The Item Rarely Occurs as descrIbed ................. VFO 00 SO MSUER EVERY QUESTION *Raprlnted by permisslon of the publisher, from Andrew II. Halpin, Theor and Research In Adminlstratlon (New York: The Hacrnllllan Company, 1966;, pp. III- R '50 very ‘ c‘ Occurs YFO J' o ." II ‘1 e a The nannarlsms of teachers at thls school are annoylng........................................ Teachers spend tlmo after school wIth students who have IndIvIduaI problems........................ There Is a mlnorlty group of teachers who always oppose the majorlty.......................... Extra books are ovallablo for classroom use......... Teachers exert group pressure on nonconforming faculty members. In faculty neetlngs, there Is the feallng of "let's get thlngs done" Teachers seek speclal favors from the prlnclpal..... School suppIIes are readlly avallable for use In classworh. ....... . Teachers Interrupt other faculty mecnbers who are talklng ln staff maetlngs host of the teachers hare accept the faults of tholr colloaguos.................................... There Is considerable laughter when teachers gather lnfornally............... ea-aoooaaloaal Teachers ask nonsenslcal questlons In faculty nos............... ..... Custodlal sorvlco Is avallablo when noedad......... Teachers rdle dun they talk In faculty Teachers at thls sdnool show much school splrlt..... 00 $0 on... Occurs Sana! loos Occurs l 1 1 + l l Scars JSGIO lSO Very Freguontly Occurs IS. 20. 2|. 22. 23. 2s. 25. 26. 27. VFO 00 SO Often Occurs Sometimes Occurs Teachers socialize together in small select groups.. l9. Teachers talk about leaving the school system....... 20. Teachers' closest friends are other faculty‘ m" .t th" ‘wm'IIOOOQCOOICOOOC......I... lllll 2'. Teachers spend time after school with students “h". IndIVIdMI Prob'.m...000OOIIOOOOIOOOOIIOOO 220 Teachers invite other faculty to visit them at hmaaeeeooeoeeeoaee aaaaaaaaaa ea eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 23a The principal makes all class scheduling docislons.. 2h. Teachers help select what will be taught....... ..... 25. instructions for the operation of teaching aids are available ............. . ................. ... 26. Sufficient time Is given to prepare adminis- tr.‘lv. report300.....OOUOOOOOOOOOOI 0000000000000000 Z7. Rarely Occurs YFOOOSO VFO VFO VFO VFO YFO VFO VFO W0 00 00 00 00 SO SO SO SO SO SO 50 R0 R0 R0 III Job Satisfaction Instructions: This portion of the instrument is designed to measure how satisfied you are with certain specific characteristics of your 105- P1°"¢ answer these questions in relation to how satisfied you are with each 313' in your particular position. DIRECTIONS: Read each item carefully. Decide how satisifed you are concerning this job characteristic in your present position. Decide whether you are (V3) Very Satisfied, (S) Satisfied, (U) Unsatisfied, or (VU) Very Unsatisfied. Draw a circle around one of the four letters (VS, S. U. W) following an item to show the answer you have selected. VS - Very satisfied 8 - Satisfied U - Unsatisfied VU - Very Unsatisfied Examples: If you feel Very Satisfied with this Job Characteristic “....vs 8 U If you feel Satisfied with the Job Characteristic aark..........V3 3 u If you feel Unsatisfied with this Job Characteristic Iark.......VS 3 0 3555 If You feel Very Unsatisfied with this Job Characteristic Iark..VS S U ANSHIR EVERY QUESTION a _ "MI" v I”. .5 w » 4" . _ ._'~' 3."..I ‘Ik... {. r . r"- ‘ a... V8 8 0 VII Job Characte 1 tie Va iafiad Sati ed neatiofied Ve Onset l. Thee-initylwork in............................ 1. V8 3 ll VI '2. ‘l‘henewendvariedtaakalhavefrondaytoday.... 2. VS 5 ii Vii 3. The physical surroundings where I writ............. 3. VS s I W 4- Doinsuyuork inlayownwey........................ 1.. VS 5 O W 5. file availability of the principal and the dimctim he give. “0.0.0.00.aoaueooeoooeoeeoeoewe 5. vs s n W no 6. ‘lhe opportunity to direct other people's utiutt.....l......COOOOIOCOCO......OOOOOCCOOOOOOO 6. vs s u w “ 7. fly caphint. are considered and handled fairly.... 7. vs s u w 8. The paperwork and detailed rules and regulations for th“ JObOCOOOOOCOCOCOIOOOOO.0...O.......OIOIOOC 8. w s u w 9. The responsibility and pressure of this position... 9. VS 8 U W if . 10. The :11 ad , d, opportu tytoecquirenewtnowledge .19fle “111............ICOCO.........OCOUCCOOCCOO...-.... 10' B s u w Ill 11' RBCOsnition “I.“ I “ . 10b “llaeeeeeoaeaeeeaeaeee 11' B s u w 12. The respect ay position is accorded by people U inthe cm“!Indiycolleacuee................. 12. VS 3 U 13. ‘lhevoioelhavoindetereiningteachingeethoda, U W ““1. m “b1“: mc.r................C.......... 13' W S M. Fringe benefits (retir-ent, insurance, etc.)...... 14- V3 5 U W . 15. My responsibility and importance of my 10b :0 VS 5 0 VII m .MI Otmutim.............a....a.....oo.a 15e 0 VII ”w 15- The-cunt of moneyInote......................... 16. V5 5 u W 0 w - 17- The relationships I have with my colleagues........ 17- V5 5 18 VS 5 U W cw 18. m..cuflcy 0f thu ”Ultimo......-......ua-oooo ' vs S U W u w 19. The help ml underotandin; q coll-sauc- 81W "3-" 19' 20. The .onnt of independence I - given by “'9 20. vs S U W Pmc1NIOOOeaeeoaeeoeeeeaeeoaeeaeeeeeeoeaeaaa0000' 10 A4? l‘f) "-A ‘ t rlx“-’,“4-‘I;5”“; _- _____.__. —__r BIELIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Argyris. Chris 1960 Understanding Organizational Behavior. ‘ Homewood. Illinois: Dorsey Press. Bojean. Charles and Gary Vance 197% "A Short-Form Measure of Selquctualization.' Jgurnal of Applied Behavioral Science. “(November): 1 -17o Chabotar, Km. William A. Sederburg and Lawrence J. Lad l97h . 'Implementing.Education Accountability.“ Report 31. Michigan Department of Education (January). Conran. Patricia l97h - A Study of Causal and Other Relations Among Loadershipl Teacher and Student Achievement Variables in Curriculum.Engineering. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Northwestern University. Ernst. Richard J. 1965 An Investigation of the Relationship Between Selected Characteristics of Principals and Organizational Climates of Elementary Schools. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Florida. EtZioni . Amit‘i 196u Modern Organizations. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Inc. Foldvebel. Alexander M. 1964 ”The Relationship Between Socio-Economic Status of the School and Pupil Achievement Level.“ Administrator's Handbook XII (April). Flagg. Joseph T. 19 The Organizational Climate of Schools: Its Relation to Pupil Achievement. Size of School. and Teacher Turnover. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Rutgers State University. Fleishman. Edward A. 1957 “A Leadership Behavior Description for Industry". in Leadership Behavior: Its Description and Measurement. R.M. Stogdill and A.E. Coons. Eds. Columbus. Ohio: Ohio State University Press. 126 127 Pranzblau. Abraham 1958 A Primer of StatistiCs for Non-Statisticians. New York: Harcourt. Brace. World. Inc.: 81. Getzels. Jacob 1968 ”The Study of Administrative Behavior.” Contemporary Education XLIV (November). Gross. Neal and Robert Herriott 1966 Staff Leadership in Public Schools: A Social Inquiry. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Guy. Renzo M. 1970 The Relationship Between Organizational Climate. Leadership and Progress. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Auburn University. Hale. Jack 1965 A Study of the Relationships Between Selected Factors of Organizational Climate and Pupil Achievement in Reading. Arithmetic and Language. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Alabama. Halpin. Andrew 1966 Theory and Research in Administration. London: The MacMillan Company. Halpin. Andrew and B.J. Winer 195? "A Factorial Study of the Leadership Behavior Description". in Leadership Behavior: Its Description and Measurement. R.M. Stogdill and A.E. Coons. Eds. Columbus. Ohio: Ohio State University Press. Hayes. Andrew E. 1973 ”A Reappraisal of the Halpin-Croft Model of the Organizational Climate of Schools." A paper presented to Division A of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans. Louisiana. (February). . Hem hill. R.. Jr. 19 9 “Situational Factors in Leadership.“ Monograph No. 32. Bureau of Educational Research. Columbus. Ohio: Ohio State University Press. Herzberg. Frederick. Bernard Mausner and Barbara Snyderman 1959 The Motivation to Work. New York: Wiley. Inc. House. R. Ernest. Wendell Rivers and Daniel Stufflebeam 197“ "An Assessment of the Michigan Accountability System.“ Phi Delta Kappan. 55(June): 667. _128 Hunt. John L. 1967 Teachers' Perceptions of Elementary School Principals in Selected Schools. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Chicago. Ignatovich. Frederick 1970 Types and Effects of Elementary School Principal- Leaders: A Q-Factor Analysis. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Iowa. Isaac. Stephen 1971 Handbook in Research and Evaluation. San Diego: Robert R. Knapp. Publisher. Levy. Maurice 1969 The Relationship of Dogmatism and Opinionation of Principals to the Organizational Climate of Elementary Schools. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Georgia. Maslow. Abraham 1959 Toward a Psychology of Being. New York: Van Nostrand C ompany e . MacTaggert. Donald S. 196? Job Satisfaction and Organizational Openness as Perceived by Elementary Teachers in a Florida School System. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Miami. Michigan Department of Education 1973 Objectives and Procedures for the 197u-75 Michigan Educational Assessment Program. Lansing. Michigan (August). 197“ A Staff Response to the Report on.Assessment of the Michi n.Accountability System. Lansing. Michigan November). Miller. Harris E. 1971 An Investigation of Organizational Climate as a Variable in Pupil Achievement Among Twenty-Nine Elementary Schools in an Urban School District. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Minnesota. Perrow. Charles 1972 Complex Organizations: A Critical Analysis. Glenview. Illinois: Scott. Foresman and Company. Prenoveau. Joseph 1967 An.Examination of the Relationships Between the Organizational Climate and a Measure of the Teaching Learning Process in Elementary Schools. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Columbia University. 129 Reilly. James 1972 Organizational Climate and Pupil Achievement in Michigan Elementary Schools. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Michigan State University. Sergiovanni. Thomas J. 19 7 ”Factors Which Affect Satisfaction and Dissatis- faction of Teachers." Journal of Educational Administration. 11(December): 66-82. Stansbury. Robert 1968 A Validation Study of the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire for Iowa Elementary Schools. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Iowa. State of Michigan 1970 Public Act No. 38. Assessment of Educational Progress and Remedial Assistant Program Goals. 338. 1081. Stogdill. Ralph M. 1958 "Personal Factors Associated with Leadership: A Survey of the Literature". in The Study of Leadership. C.G. Browne and Thomas Cohn. Eds. Danville. Illinois: The Interstate Printer and Publisher. 1959 Individual Behavior and Group Achievement. New York: Oxford Press. 1963 Manual for the Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire. Bureau of Research. Ohio State University Press. Thorndike. Robert L. and Elizabeth Hagen 1967 Measurement and Evaluation in Psychology and Education. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Winter. James A. 1968 Age and Other Personal Factors Related to Climate. Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation. George Peabody College for Teachers. : 0‘11 "TVQWATLHIEIIJM‘MW