ABSTRACT A STUDY OF THE TEACHER-ADMINISTRATOR RELATIONSHIP AND THE INFLUENCE OF NEED PATTERNS. by Harvey Goldman Ell—£22.12 g £h_e, 553311. The role of personality traits and their influence on the teacher-administrator relationship has received little attention in the literature. This study sought to deal with this relationship in terms of new dimensions. Need patterns (as derived from.the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule) were related to teachers' perceptions of their principals and to principals‘ attitudes toward their teachers. A major goal was to determine the validity of the Theory of COmplementary Needs as it applied to the teacher- administrator relationship. A second objective was to investigate those factors which teachers recognized as pertinent in their evaluations of principals. An investigation of the relationship between selected socio-economic and educational factors and.various need patterns of teachers was also undertaken. W Within a single urban school district in.Michigan, fifty-five principals and six hundred fifty- seven teachers participated in the study. All participating teachers completed the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and the National (Goldman) Principalship Study: Teacher Section. The principals completed the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and the Administrative Preference Form, an instrument designed for use in this study. Need patterns were derived from the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule for both teachers and administrators. From the National Principalship Study: Teacher Section information was obtained about teachers' attitudes toward their principals, factors related to those attitudes, and socio-economic data about the teachers themselves. 0n the Administrative Preference Form each principal was asked to list the names of the quarter of his staff ‘with whom he most preferred to deal and the quarter of his staff with whom he least preferred to deal in school- related situations. Conclusions. The need patterns of teachers and principals were quite similar. Significant differences were found for only two variables. Principals expressed a significantly greater need for Deference and less for Autonomy than teachers. This indicated that, as a group, they were not highly independent or autonomous, and were not likely to play an active leadership role. Male and female principals operating at both the elementary and secondary levels were found to have very similar.need patterns. Male teachers at the elementary and secondary levels had.very similar need patterns, but numerous differences (Goldman) existed between the need patterns of elementary and secondary female teachers. The conclusion was drawn that level of teaching served to mask intra-sex differences. The Theory of Complementary Needs was not found operative with respect to intensity of needs in this study. When the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis was investigated with respect to kind of needs, three significant relationships were found which supported the original premise. When principals exhibited high need for Order, those teachers who expressed affinity for them had low need for Change; when principals had high need for Aggression, those teachers who expressed affinity for them were high on the variable Abasement; when principals were rated low on the need for Deference, the teachers who expressed affinity for them exhibited low need for Aggression. The five other significant relationships found did not support the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis. On the basis of the data obtained, it was concluded that the Theory of Complementary Needs was not validated with regard to kind of needs. Teachers felt that those principals who provided them with understanding and help in solving the problems they faced, and those who allowed teachers to participate in the decision-making processes of the schools, best fulfilled the role of principal that the teachers considered desirable. Socio-economic, educational, and demographic factors were found to be related to personality patterns, but some factors were more discrhminating than others. A STUDY OF THE TEACHER-ADMINISTRATOR RELATIONSHIP AND THE INFLUENCE OF NEED PATTERNS by Harvey Goldman A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR.OF EDUCATION Department of Administration and Higher Education 1966 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It would not only be difficult, but impossible, to conduct a study of this type without considerable assistance from other people. Because of the number and variety of operations involved, the study could never have been completed had not a number of peOple been so kind as to make available their special skills and talents. The writer is deeply indebted to his committee chairman, Dr. James E. Heald, without whose aid and encouragement this study might never have been undertaken. His guidance and advice throughout the duration of the study was invaluable. To Dr. Clyde M. Campbell, Dr. George R. Myers, and Dr. Arthur M; Vener, the writer extends his sincerest appreciation for their counsel and friendship. It would be impossible to personally thank the many public school teachers and administrators whose c00peration made this study possible. Without their support this study could not have been initiated. The analysis of the profusion of data was made possible through the efforts of Mrs. Norma Ray, Mrs. Joanne Landis, and Mrs. Carol Thomas. Their successful efforts with regard to computer programming greatly simplified the work at hand. The utmost in gratitude is due my secretary, Mrs. Mary Alice Hrinevich, whose time and concern was continually expended in the writer's behalf. Her efforts in times of crises were most appreciated. The financial support for the study was provided by a grant from the united States Office of Education, and is acknowledged with gratitude. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Importance of study 1 Theoretical basis for the study 3 Statement of the problem 5 Definition of terms 6 Hypotheses 8 II RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 General 12 Need patterns 19 The Complementary-Needs Hypothesis 26 Executive Professional Leadership 38 III METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Introduction 43 The community 43 The participants 44 A comparison of participants and non-participants 45 School size 53 Information collection 54 Nature of the instruments 58 iii CHAPTER ' PAGE Conversion of the hypothesis 66 Treatment of the data 69 1v ANALYSIS or THE DATA. . . . . . . . . . . 75 Introduction 75 The need patterns of teachers and principals 75 Male-female differences with regard to need patterns 88 Differences in intensity and kind of needs of teachers who express affinity and disliking for their principals 94 Differences in intensity and kind of needs of preferred and least preferred teachers 101 The Executive Professional Leadership score and related teacher- administrator relationship factors 105 Socio-economic and educational factors, and need patterns 111 V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . 131 Summary 131 Hypotheses 1 and 2 131 Hypotheses 3 and 4 133 Hypothesis 5 134 Socio-econmmic and educational factors, and need patterns 134 iv CHAPTER PAGE Conclusions 137 Hypotheses 1 and 2 137 Hypotheses 3 and 4 140 Hypothesis 5 142 Socio-economic and educational factors, and need patterns 143 Recommendations 147 BIBLIOGRAPI'IY e e e e e e e e e e e e e 0 e e e e e 150 TABLE 1. 2. 10. LIST OF TABLES A comparison of participants and non- participants with regard to age. A comparison of participants and non- participants with regard to years of teaching. A comparison of participating and non- participating teachers with regard to academic degrees attained. A comparison of participating and non- participating teachers with regard to sex. Number and percentages of all elementary schools with given number of teachers A comparison of means and standard deviations on the EPPS variables for rincipals (N=55) and teachers (N=657 in Urban City A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by male elementary principals (N=11) and male secondary principals (N=10) in Urban City. A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by elementary teachers (N=405) and secondary teachers (N=252) in Urban City. A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by male elementary teachers (N=36) and male secondary teachers (N=133) in Urban City. A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variable by female elementary teachers €N=369g and female secondary teachers N3119 in Urban City. vi PAGE 46 47 49 51 53 82 83 85 87 TABLE 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. LIST OF TABLES PAGE A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by male elementary principals (N=11) and female elementary principals (N=33) in Urban City. A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by male elementary teachers (N=36) and female elementary teachers (N=369) in Urban City. A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by male secondary teachers (N=133) and female secondary teachers (N=119) in Urban City. A comparison of mean deviation scores attained on the EPPS variables by teachers who expressed affinity (N=244) for their principals and those who expressed disliking (N=229) toward their principals. Chi Square analyses of complementary needs when one variable (down) represents the need of principals rated high on that variable and the second variable (across) represents the need of teachers who expressed affinity for or dislike of their principals (df=1). Chi Square analyses of complementary needs when one variable (down) represents the need of principals rated low on that variable and the second variable (across) represents the need of teachers who expressed affinity for or disliking of their principals (df‘l). A comparison of mean deviation scores attained on the EPPS variables by teachers who were most preferred (N=153) and least preferred (N=113) by their principals. vii 9O 92 95 97 98 101 103 TABLE 180 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. LIST OF TABLES Chi Square analyses of complementary needs when one variable (down) represents the need of principals rated high for that variable and the second variable (across) represents the need of teachers with whom the principals most preferred to work and least preferred to work (df=1). Chi Square analyses of complementary needs when one variable (down) represents the need of principals rated low on that variable and the second variable (across) represents the need of teachers with whom the principals most preferred to work or least preferred to work (df=1). A multiple correlation with Executive Professional Leadership the dependent variable and the five teacher- administrator relationship factors the independent variables. A multiple correlation with Executive Professional Leadership the dependent variable and Perceived Social Support of Teachers and Perceived Level of Staff Involvement the independent variables. A correlation matrix depicting relation- ships between Executive Professional Leadership and five teacher- administrator relationship factors. A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by teachers from five age groups. A comparison of means attained on EPPS variables by teachers who earned varying percentages of their undergraduate expenses. viii PAGE 104 106 108 109 110 113 115 TABLE 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. LIST OF TABLES comparison of means attained on EPPS variables by teachers of differing marital status. comparison of means attained on EPPS variables by teachers from different types of communities. comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by teachers who preferred teaching as a career (N=582) and by teachers who did not prefer teaching as a career (N=74) in Urban City. comparison of means attained on EPPS variables by teachers who perceived their families as being from different economic strata within their communities. comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by teachers with Master's degrees (N=136) and those with Bachelor's degrees (N-493) in Urban City. comparison of means attained on EPPS variables by teachers who were full- time undergraduate students (N=555) and teachers who were part-time undergraduate students (N=98) in Urban City. comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by teachers who attended public secondary schools (N=554) and teachers who attended parochial secondary schools (N=83) in Urban City. comparison of means attained on EPPS variables by teachers from.four teaching levels. ix PAGE 116 119 121 122 124 125 127 128 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 33. A comparison of means on EPPS variables by teachers of specific subjects. 130 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A COVER AND FOLLOW~UP LETTERS Teachers' Cover Letter Principals' Cover Letter Follow-Up Letter B INSTRUMENTS Administrative Preference Form The National Principalship Study: Teacher Section Edwards Personal Preference Schedule xi PAGE 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 176 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Importance 21:; EM' The importance of a study of this type is, initially, best described by Hemphill when he states that "if we concern ourselves with these persons as individuals, we must consider, among other factors, their values, their traits, and their need-dispositions."1 In effect, this constitutes Hemphill's declaration that there is a demand for information clarifying the relationship between need satisfaction and perceptions of individuals. This study deals with the need patterns of teachers and school administrators, but also involves an attempt to relate those patterns to the teachers' evaluations of their principals, to the principals' evaluations of their teachers, and to a variety of socio-economic factors. The results of the study could have a significant impact on administrative behavior. In particular, if the hypotheses tested are held to be valid, there would be considerable cause for review of present personnel selection and placement procedures. Certainly there would be cause to view administrative behavior in a new light. 1John K. Hemphill, "Administration as Problem- Solving," in Administrative Theory In Education, edited by Andrew'w. Halpin, Chicago: The Midwest Administration Center, University of Chicago, 1958, p. 107. Perhaps it would be best to select and situate personnel in those positions where there would be a high degree of probability that such placement would contribute to faculty cohesiveness and at the same time better meet the needs of teachers. The need patterns of potential administrators might then become factors for consideration during selection and placement procedures. If administrators were cognizant of the need patterns of those with.whom they worked, and if such patterns were known to be aids in predicting individual behavior, it might be possible for them to modify their own behavior in order to maintain group cohesiveness and direction toward institutional goals. Regarding any of these possibilities, and if the assumption that personality interaction affects institutional conflict is found to be true, a greater understanding of the interaction would.make it possible to modify the degree of conflict existing in any segment of the institution. Determination of the amount of conflict considered desirable in any given situation would require a value Judgment on the part of the administrative officer in charge. In any case, it is certainly not being argued that need patterns could become the panacea everyone is seeking, but only that they might provide one more significant piece of information for use by administrators. Theoretical‘bagig Egg Eh; ggggz. The theoretical framework within which this study was fashioned is that set forth by Murray,2 a formulation which accounts for the influence of personality traits on individual behavior in terms of interaction. To be more exact, "since psychology deals only with motion-processes occuring in 3 This time, none of its prOper formulation can be static." sets the stage for the presentation of a theory of personality development based on man's relations to man; a theory that is dynamic in nature. Therefore, the development of an individual's personality is a function of many influences, some of which are internal while others are external. By internal we refer to physical aspects such as metabolic-rate. The external elements are assumed to be environmental or social. The physical composition of the body can affect personality development, but it must be recognized that within the environmental situations in which the individual finds himself there are numerous influential forces which also affect personality development. In fact, with reference to the dynamic approach to personality develOpment, emphasis is placed on the situations with which the individual interacts. Thus dynamism emphasizes the study of total behavior patterns. The assumption is made that people utilize behavior to attain psychological equilibrium. Murray's studies are based on the assumption that all 2Henry A. Murray and others. Explorations in so i , (New Yerk: Oxford UniverSity PressI—1938), PP- 3Ibid., p. 36. people can have similar needs, and that the distinguishing factor among peOple is the intensity, endurance, and relationships between needs, rather than a difference in the kind of needs. A need can not be measured directly; instead, its existence must be inferred from some aspect of the situation that can be measured (i.e., behavior). These inferred needs are referred to as "forces", and can be treated as facts because such a construct is needed to develOp a dynamic theory of personality. Each need is constantly interacting with other needs; one need succeeds another. On the basis of this rationale it can be stated that "a need is a hypothetical process the occurrence of which is imagined in order to account for certain objective and subjective facts." Needs can be divided into two categories-Viserogenic (Primary) and Psychogenic (Secondary). The viserogenic needs are physical in nature, such as the needs for food and warmth, while the psychogenic needs refer to mental or emotional states. From the total possible selection of needs a group of manifest needs can be drawn, these defined as those needs which can be inferred after observation of manifest behavior. It is with these needs that this study deals. The relationship of these needs to one another can be said to form a "need pattern" and is referred to by that name in this study. One must also be cognizant of the fact that groups of needs operating in unison might lead an individual to respond 4Lbid., p. 54. to a stimulus quite differently than would the same needs Operating independently. When a single action pattern satisfies two or more needs at the same time we may speak of a fusion (F) of needs. Confluences of this kind are extremely common.5 It would seem, then, that if the existence of needs can be inferred through.manifest behavior, then the observation and measurement of that behavior can be used as a basis for determining the intensity and endurance of needs as well as the possible combinations in which they might be operative with regard to a particular situation. Statement gf'ghg problem. This study presents an analysis of the relationships between personality patterns of teachers and principals. Included is a study of the relationship when teachers and principals are asked to rate each other in terms of previously specified criteria. In this way the value of need patterns as a basis for predicting behavior can be ascertained. As the concommitants of these patterns are discovered, a better understanding of manifest behavior under conditions similar to those studied is possible. The investigation includes a test of the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis; thus it involves an attempt to determine whether teachers and administrators with similar or'opposite need patterns work best together. The Complementary-Needs Hypothesis, as stated by 5;bid., p. 86. Winch6 is predicated on the basis that those with dissimilar need patterns will tend to work best together and those with similar patterns will not work well together. Winch hypothesized that need patterns can be similar or dissimilar in terms of intensity or of kind. An example of dissimilarity of the first type (intensity) would take place when a principal has a high need for dominance and a teacher exhibits a low need for dominance. For an example of the second type of dissimilarity (kind), a principal might possess a high need for dominance while the teacher exhibits a high need for deference. Finally, the influence of selected sociOmeconomic factors on need patterns will be considered. An investigation of the relationship between these factors and teachers' attitudes toward administrators will also be undertaken. In this manner a "steppingnstone" relationship can be establiShed. First, the effect of the need patterns them- selves on the teacher-administrator relationship is to be studied. Then, factors related to the personality variables will be investigated. It is anticipated that one can then consider the effects of the related factors on the teacher- administrator relationship. Definition of terms. In this study the terms "administrator" and "principal" are used interchangeably 6Robert F. Winch, and Thomas and Virginia Ktsanes. "The Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: An Analytic and Descriptive Study." The American Sociological Review, 19 140.13.241-49, June, 19523??- """"""' because principals are the only administrators involved in the study. Both elementary (K-6) and secondary (7-12) school principals are included in the study. Teachers referred to are those personnel working in the schools whose only duty is that of teaching in the classroom. Both elementary and secondary teachers are included, and there is a possibility that some teachers may spend.a small part of their days supervising study halls, cafeterias, school activities, or other similar duties. Only those teachers who were at least half-time classroom teaching employees were asked to participate in the study. Within this study, a "need pattern" refers to the profile of needs derived from the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. This pattern will also be referred to at times as a "personality profile" or "personality pattern." A listing of the needs and their definitions can be found in Chapter III, page 59. Teacher affinity for principals is represented by the composite Executive Professional Leadership (EPL) score derived from the Teacher Section: The National Principalship Study (See Appendix B). This score represents the extent to which the principal conforms to the role of principal that the teacher sees as being desirable. The assumption is made in this study that a given teacher would express affinity toward a principal whose behavior conformed to the teacher's expectations; the opposite also being true, the teacher would express a lack of affinity (dislike) toward a principal whose behavior did not conform to his expectations. Throughout this study the Executive Professional Leadership score is referred to as the EPL. Principal's preference for teachers was ascertained by asking them to list the quarter of their staffs with whom they most preferred to deal and the quarter with whom they least preferred to deal in the school setting. Specifically, they were asked to list the names of those teachers with whom they most and least preferred to deal on school-related committees, conferences, and decision-making situations. It was made clear at that time that the investigation did not seek to determine the effectiveness of each individual as a teacher, but only sought to determine the quality of inter- personal relations existing between the teachers and the principal. Hypotheses. The purpose of this study is to determine the validity of the following hypotheses: 1. There will be differences between the need patterns of teachers and administrators as measured by the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. Nthp where Nt refers to teachers' need patterns and Np to principals' need patterns. 2. Differences will exist between the need patterns of males and females as measured by the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. Nm # Nf when Nm constitutes the need patterns of males and Nf is an expression of the need patterns of females. 3. Teachers who express affinity for their principals will have need patterns dissimilar to those of their principals, and teachers who express a disliking for their principals will have need patterns similar to those of their principals. Similarity and dissimilarity will be considered in terms of intensity and kind. The relationship between teachers and affinity for principals with regard to intensity of needs is represented by the following equations. Nt = 1 (for teachers who express affinity T‘ E? toward their principals) and Nt = N (for teachers who express disliking 1" TE' toward their principals) when N: represents the intensity of a given teacher's need pattern and Np represents the intensity of a given principal's need pattern. Dissimilarity of kind can be expressed by the equations which follow: (for teachers who ' express affinity toward their principals) 2 ita’Nb 1 ”I” HI tc. = di . 1 and = (for teachers who express disliking toward their principals) 1 O O O 0 1E8. ’ .L ;__tsN 10 when Nta and Ntc represent a teacher's specific needs, and pr and di represent the specific needs of a principal. The teacher's need "a", in this case, is judged to be complementary to principal's need "b", and the same situation is judged to be true with regard to teacher's need "c" and principal's need "d". 4. Principals who express a preference to work with certain teachers will have need patterns dissimilar to those of the teachers, and principals who express an aversion to working with certain teachers will have need patterns similar to those teachers. Similarity and.dissimilarity will be considered in terms of intensity and kind. The relationship between principals and preference for teachers with regard to intensity of needs is represented by the following equations. N ' 1 (for principals who express a T2’ ‘fi; preference toward working with certain teachers) E2 ' Nt (for principals who express an 1 T" aversion toward working with certain teachers) when Np represents the intensity of a given principal's need pattern and Nt represents the intensity of the same need pattern for a given teacher. f Dissimilarity of kind is expressed by the equations which follow. 2 II N a ‘ Nth ; c Ntd (for principals who TL '1'— ‘12— T" . . . express a preference toward working with certain teachers) and 11 U. E22=l_ 1 N29 = 1 . . . (for principals who Ntb 1 Ntd express an aversion toward working with certain teachers) when Npa and Npc represent a principal's specific needs, and Ntb and Ntd represent the Specific needs of a teacher. The principal's need "a", in this case, is judged to be complementary to teacher's need "b", and the same situation is judged to be true with regard to principal's need "c" and teacher's need "d". 5. There will be a direct relationship between the Executive Professional Leadership Score and the teacher-administrator relationship scores which are considered concommitants of EPL (i.e., Perceived Support of Teacher Authority, Perceived Level of Egalitarian Relationships, Perceived Managerial Support of Teachers, Perceived Social Support of Teachers, Perceived Staff Involvement). This relationship is expressed as follows: EPL = TARf . 1 ,1 Here, EPL refers to Executive Professional Leadership and TARf refers to those interpersonal relationships which are considered concommitants of EPL. CHAPTER II RELATED LITERATURE General. Ryans, in an article about the implications of behavioral theory and research for teacher education, pointed out that the development of a theory of teacher behavior is still in its infancy.7 He suggested the point of view that, in the development of such a theoretical construct, teachers should be regarded as information- processing systems. All environmental, physical, and psychological conditions would constitute the input factors and the observable behavior of the teachers would represent the output. The ultimate purpose of this approach, as stated in the article, is the acquisition of information about the influence of these variables on behavior to facilitate behavioral adaptation on the part of teachers. Emphasis was placed on the fact that the psychological states of teachers serve as input factors and have a considerable impact on behavioral reactions. It is therefore, necessary that an intensive study of psychological states and their ability to affect behavior he undertaken. 8 A study conducted by Lien sought data noting the extent 7David G. Ryans, "Teacher Behavior and Research: _ Implications for Teacher Education," ‘Journal gglgeacher Education, 14 No.3:274-293, September, 1963. ,_ 8Ronald L. Lien, "Democratic Administrative Behavior,” ulletin of the gational ssociation g£_Secondagz School Pr npraIs, 48-No.29 : - , March, 1964. 13 to which the behavior of selected secondary principals was democratic in nature. A principal finding was that, in general, principals did not exhibit the degree of democratic behavior that might be expected in our society; at the same time, the research did indicate a tendency toward democratic administration on the part of the principals. A second}. significant finding was that neither age, guidance courses completed, years of teaching experience, degrees earned, time elapsed since last attending college, type of undergraduate school attended, type of graduate school attended, size of secondary school attended, nor religious affiliation was a reliable factor in attempting to predict behavior. This, failure to relate behavior to objective measures implies that other factors might have a greater impact. The conclusions of a study by Taylor indicated that there was evidence to support the use of personality testing as a part of the vocational guidance process.9 He cautioned that those using the tests should not assume them to have predictive validity. As he stated at one point, ". . .the use of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule as a guidance instrument requires the assumption that the need 10 measures are relatively stable over a period of years." At .gBernard Harrison Taylor, Use of the Edwards Personal Préference Schedule Lg Establish ngFEersonaligy Profiles for 1%Eee Colle e Maaors, Unpublished Master's Thesis, University 0 ‘Wash ngton, . 10Ibid” p. 29. 14 the same time, he did point out that considerable evidence existed which supports the thesis that such tests do have concurrent validity. Motives, of which need-dispositions are one type, have been shown to affect the making of major decisions.11 Teachers, according to this study, have two sets of values which operate independently. The first is a set of "personal gratifications (needs) which were being satisfied through the art of teaching," and the second is a "net of rationalizations, or attitudes, which supported and justified these gratifications."12 After administering two instruments developed expressly for the study, a number of conclusions were drawn. The first was that undergraduate education.majors scored higher on child-centered motives than did experienced teachers. A follow-up studyafter student teaching experience showed that their originally high child-centered motives had weakened considerably and that there was a corresponding strengthening of teacher-centered motives, indicating that the intensity of personality variables can change and that there is a tendency for teachers to be self-oriented rather than student-oriented. Evidence gathered during the study indicated that elementary teachers were significantly higher on child-centered and dependency motives than secondary teachers, but that the latter group f llJoseph Masling and George Stern, "Changes in Mogives as A Result of Teaching " Theogz Into Practice No. : 95-104, April, 1963.. ’ """ """"'"'" lsz d. 15 was significantly higher with regard to motives for dominance. In an investigation of another aspect of the situation, Leavitt13 stressed the responsibilities of the administrator for organizational leadership. In particular, he stated that the leader is an initiator of organizational action, but that he is not, himself, a direct action person. Essentially, the leader's role is to organize and control his environment to accomplish desired goals. Three classes of controls, through which the environment can be managed, are structural, technical, and human. It was suggested that human controls are the most difficult to work with, and that they involve the changing of attitudes, relationships, and levels of aspiration., Within the text of the article it was stated that, Feelings and attitudes are generated by administrative acts whether we intend to generate them or not. . . Then we learned that those feelings Eggasigitpges influenced work After underscoring the role of the administrator in making work interesting, challenging, and exciting for others, the author explained that one of the ways to do this is to ’involve others in the decision making process. Hence the development in recent years of programs within organizations and outside them for equipping administrators 13Harold J. Leavitt, "Consequences of Executive Behavior; The Administrative Two—Step and Other Seemly Dances for Administrators, " The Bulletin of the National Association 2: Secondary School hinci als, 485No.29: , Apri , 4. 14;b1d. 16 with skills in setting up and leading groups, and skills in diagnosing and responding to what used go look like irrelevant human needs.1 In closing, he stressed the importance for the administrator of clearly understanding the nature of his organizational system and its many aspects. One research team compared teachers in New Ybrk City special schools, New York City regular schools, and New York area suburban schools to determine the extent of problems concerning parent-teacher relationships, student discipline 16 In the first case (parent-teacher and classroom routine. relationships), it turned out that teachers from the New York City special schools were having the greatest amount of difficulty, the teachers from the New York City regular schools had the second greatest difficulty, and the suburban teachers had the least problem. In the second and third cases (discipline problems and those related to classroom routine) the teachers from New Ybrk City regular and special schools suffered equally while the suburban schools had the least difficulties. Findings also showed that there was a negative correlation between grade point average of teachers and the severity of the discipline problems they perceived. In conclusion, the question was raised as to whether the problems stated by the teachers were "real" or "perceived" as a result __V_~._ w lslbid. 16Stanley Dropkin and Marvin Taylor, "Perceived Problems of Beginning Teachers and Related Problems," Journal 9: Teacher Education, 14 No.4:384-390, December, 1963. 17 of previously internalized attitudes or personality traits. Discussing the need for appraisal and evaluation of prospective teaching personnel, Ryans expressed the opinion that the National Teacher Examination provided an adequate basis for evaluating the extent of their factual knowledge.l7 At the same time, he underscored the fact that more than knowledge is required if a person is to be an acceptable teacher. Information about attitudes, interests, level of motivation, and numerous other factors must be taken into consideration if the selection process is to be a complete one. Personality variables, according to Heil,18 are essential determinants of the effectiveness of the instructional process.- As he pointed out, Much of our modern educational theory is based on the assumption of the teacher- education student as intellectualizing and self-accepting and of the child as striving and generally conforming.19 Further study by Heil indicated that different kinds of teachers were effective in different ways. In general, his research indicated that teachers fall into three personality- t7P6 groups: 1) THE SELF-CONTROLLING TYPE. These are most 17David G. Ryans, "Appraising Teacher Personnel," Journal f Experimental Education, 16 No.1:1-30, September, 194 . 18Louis H. Heil, "Personality Variables: An Important Determinant In Effective Elementary School Instruction," Ihpppz Into Practice, 3 No.1:12-15, February, 1964. lglbid. 18 compatible in highly structured traditionally oriented classrooms and often work well with negative and opposing students; 2) THE SELF-ACCEPTING TYPE. These teachers are creative and value originality. They prefer unstructured intellectually oriented classrooms; and 3) THE SELF- EFFACING TYPE. This group of teachers is generally apprehensive and fearful. Their uncertainty brings about a confusing atmosphere in which it is difficult for students to learn. This personality type is likely to stress the mechanics of formal order and discipline. The author estimated that this group, which poses a serious problem for the schools, accounts for twenty-five to thirty per cent of all prospective elementary teachers. He recognized the extent to which the existence of personality types presents problems for school administrators. These problems should be considered both in the teacher-education programs and in the selection of teachers for particular schools.20 When scores derived from a personality inventory were compared with conclusions of independent raters who observed classroom teaching, it was found that the inventory could be utilized to predict some aSpects of classroom behavior.21 In general, it was found that there were no significant differences between the scores from the personality inventory 2°;b1d. 21Kenneth H. Wodtke and others, "Patterns of Needs As Predictors of Classroom Behavior of Teachers,"‘ Educational and Psychological Measupgment, 23 No.3:569-577, Autumn, 1963. 19 and those obtained from the independent raters except for the Affiliation score on which those with high inventory scores exhibited warm, permissive, quiet, and controlled behavior while the control group exhibited behavior of an opposite nature. This, according to the authors, suggests that the relative strengths of some needs may determine behavior, but that other needs may function independently. 329g EEtterns The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule was originally standardized on a group of students all of whom had some college training and which is titled the College Sample in the test Manual.22 The sample consisted of seven hundred forty-nine college women and seven hundred sixty college men enrolled in day and evening liberal arts courses at universities and colleges throughout the country. In this study men were shown to have significantly higher mean scores (at the one per cent level) than women for Achievement, Autonomy, Dominance, Heterosexuality, and Aggression; women's mean scores were significantly higher than.men's (at the one per cent level) for Deference, Affiliation, Intraception, Succorance, Abasement, Nurturance, and Change. With regard to Order, Exhibition, and Endurance there were no significant differences. 22Allen L. Edwards, Edwards Personal Preference Schedule Manual, New Egrk: The Psychological Corporation, Revised, : PP. 9' o 20 A second study,23 on a national basis, of approximately four thousand male and five thousand female household heads was also undertaken (involving five thousand one hundred and five households). In the test Manual, Edwards presented data from that study relative to male-female differences. As was true for the College Sample, men had significantly higher mean scores (at the one per cent level) than women on Achievement, Autonomy, Dominance, Heterosexuality, and Aggression. The women, as was true for the previously discussed sample, were significantly (at the one per cent level) different on the variables Deference, Affiliation, Intraception, Abasement, Nurturance, and Change. In addition to these differences, other significant differences appeared in the General Adult Sample which were not true for the College Sample. Here, the men had significantly higher mean scores (at the one per cent level) than women for Exhibition and Endurance, while the women's score for Order was significantly higher than the men's mean score. Although differences existed in the mean scores attained by men and women in the two samples, the general direction of all means was clearly the same. Kempza studied the need patterns of teachers, principals, and guidance counselors to determine similarities and differences, and utilized the Edwards Personal Preference 23Ibid., p. 15. 24C. Gratton Ramp, "A Comparative Study of the Need Structures of Administrators, Teachers, and Counselors," Journal p£,Educational gesearch, 57 No.8:425-427, April, 1964. 21 Schedule in his research. He undertook the study to provide a basis for considering the advisability of interchanging roles among the three groups. It was found that no significant differences between the mean scores of administrators, teachers, or counselors existed as far as Abasement, Autonomy, Change, Dominance, and Heterosexuality were concerned. But principals were found to have significantly greater needs for Achievement and Endurance (at the .01 level), Aggression (at the .02 level) and Deference (at the .05 level) than the teachers. Teachers, on the other hand, had significantly greater need than the principals for Succorance (at the .05 level) and Nurturance (at the .001 level). While the needs of the three groups tended to be generally similar, there did appear to be definite areas of differentiation. On the basis of those differences Ramp concluded that the responsibilities of teachers, administrators, and counselors should be discrete and not overlapping, and that need patterns should be taken into consideration by graduate schools who train people in these areas. Cuba and Jackson, anticipating that knowledge about the structure of need patterns would offer clues as to why people select occupations and yield insights into job satisfaction and.morale, studied three hundred sixty-six teachers from twenty-two schools in suburban Chicago.25 In so doing, they 25Egon G. Cuba and Philip W. Jackson, "The Need Structure of In-Service Teachers: An Occupational Analysis," School Review, 65 No.2:176-192, September, 1957. 22 took into consideration sex, years of teaching experience, and level of teaching. After comparing the mean scores of the teachers with those of the College Sample included in the test Manual, a number of conclusions were drawn. All males and female elementary and secondary teachers indicated a significantly greater need (at the .01 level) for Deference and significantly lower need (at the .01 level) for Heterosexuality. Female secondary teachers scored significantly lower than the norm (at the .01 level) on the need for Change, and all female teachers scored significantly low (at the .05 level for secondary teachers and the .01 level for elementary teachers) on the need for Dominance. Teachers' scores with regard to Intraception, Affiliation, and Nurturance, when compared with the scores obtained by the College Sample, were not significantly different. This led Cuba and Jackson to conclude, Thus existing evidence indicates that teachers, in general, are not highly motivated by a strong interest in social service, by powerful nurturant needs, or even by a deep interest in children.26 When the Chicago teachers were distributed into three groups on the basis of experience (1. novices-0-3 years experience, 2. intermediates-4 to 9 years experience, and 3. veterans-10 or'more years experience) and compared, other patterns evolved. These groups were separated by sex 26;b d. 23 for purposes of comparison. Regardless of the experience level, male teachers scored significantly low on Hetero- sexuality. All levels of experience exceeded the College Sample norm for Deference and the difference became greater with experience. The veteran male group scored significantly low on the need for Exhibition, and this trend increased in inverse ratio to number of years experience. For the groups of females, the needs for both Deference and Order increased with years of experience, while there was a downward trend with experience for Affiliation and Heterosexuality. Novice and intermediate females were low with regard to need for Exhibition, but the veteran mean dropped considerably. Although novice and veteran female groups scored high on need for Endurance, the mean of the veteran females was substantially higher. ‘When comparing male and female veteran teachers with novice teachers, it was found that both groups of veteran teachers had very similar need patterns while male and female novices had very different need patterns. In general, it appeared that teachers were high on Deference, Order, and Endurance, and low'on Exhibition and Heterosexuality. These characteristics appear to fit the stereotypic model of the teacher as sexually impotent, obsequious, eternally patient, painstakingly demanding, and socially inept-the stereotype which is 27 frequently portrayed in the mass:media. In conclusion, it was stated "that communalities do exist within the teaching population at the level of 27Lbid. 24 psychological need," and that "an occupational synchrome emerges which cuts across sex and teaching level boundaries."28 The authors presented the hypothesis that these occurrences could be a result of any of the following factors: 1. Experienced teachers are a residual group which emerges as those who do not conform to their peers and elders leave the profession; 2. With exPerience, teachers' psychological needs tend.more and more to conform to those with whom they work; 3. Both the above-mentioned factors Operate simultaneously. Gray29 lamented the fact that more information about personality patterns was not available to counselors. Factors such as intelligence, interest, scholastic abilities, and Special aptitudes have been reasonably well isolated, but the lack of investigation into personality characteristics satisfied in occupations has created a void that seriously limits the scope of the sophisticated counselor. His attempt to learn more about the relationship between personality patterns and job satisfaction involved comparisons between three occupational groups--teachers, mechanical engineers, and accountants-~all of whom completed the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and the Miller Occupational Values Indicator. With regard to the Edwards Personal 281bid. 29James T. Gray "Needs and.Velues In Three Occupations," Personnel and Guidance Journal, 42 No.3:238-244, NOvember, 301bid. 25 Preference Schedule no significant differences were found between accountants and.mechanical engineers, but numerous differences were found between teachers and the two groups. Teachers mean scores were significantly higher than those of accountants for Deference, Affiliation, Intraception, Abasement, and Nurturance, while needs of accountants were significantly higher for Achievement, Exhibition, Dominance, and Endurance. When compared with mechanical engineers, results were very similar. Teachers had significantly higher needs for Affiliation, Intraception, Succorance, and Nurturance; on the other hand, engineers yielded significantly higher mean scores for Achievement, Order, Dominance, and Endurance. Comparing teachers who were satisfied with their chosen field of work with education students and the College Sample used by Edwards to develop norms for his inventory, Tobin 31 His research found a number of significant relationships. was predicated on the notion that if more was known about need patterns and their relationship to job satisfaction, this information would be of great assistance in personnel selection and placement. The male teachers and the male education majors all were significantly higher (at the .01 level) on the variable Deference than the normative group. The author felt this indicated "that the variable Deference 31Walter William Tobin, Use of the Edwards Personal Ppeference Schedule gp Establishifig Personality ProfiIes For Teachers and Education Students, Unpublished Master's Thesis, Uh versity of Washington, 1956. 26 is closely tied in with job satisfaction for teachers."32 Relatively high scores on the variables Order, Affiliation, and Endurance seemed to characterize male students who were likely to become satisfied teachers. Male teachers and male education students were significantly lower than the normative group with regard to needs for Dominance (at the .01 level) and Autonomy (at the .05 level). The sample of male teachers was lower than both the normative groups and the group of education students on the need for Hetero- sexuality (at the .01 level) and Intraception (at the .05 level). The female teachers were higher than the normative group on need for Deference and Order (at the .01 level); they scored lower than the norm group on variables. Heterosexuality (at the .01 level), and Dominance and Aggression (at the .05 level). Female education students were, like the teachers, higher than the normative group on need for Deference (at the .05 level), and lower than the normative group on need for Dominance and Heterosexuality (at the .05 level). On the basis of the evidence derived from.his study, Tobin made the following statement: This suggests that education students select teaching in part on the basis of the strengths or weaknesses of various personality needs.33 The Complementapz-Needs Hypothesis. The Complementary- 32;b1d., p. 13. 33Ibid., p. 22. 27 Needs Hypothesis was originally advanced by Winch and Ktsanes on the basis of studies of factors operative during the mate- 34 selection process. The theory is actually a theory of motivation; one which attempts to account for why people behave the way they do. The following three quotes provide a basic understanding of the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis. The basic hypothesis of the theory of complementary needs in mate-selection is that in mate-selection each in- dividual seeks within his or her field of eligibles for that person who gives the greatest promise of providing him or her with maximum need-gratification. It is not assumed that this process is totally or even largely conscious.35 It follows from the general motivational theory that both the person to whom one is attracted, and the one being attracted, will be registering in behavior their own need patterns. Then a second hypothesis follows from the first-that the need pattern of B, the second person or the one to whom the first is attracted, will be complementary rather than similar to 36 the need-pattern of A, the first person. It is now in order to explain the terms "need" and "complementary." We conceive of "need" as a goal-or§$nted drive, native or learned. . . This goal oriented drive enables the individual to 34Winch and szanes, Tpg.,g;§. 35Winch and Ktsanes, pp. g;£., p. 246. 36Winch and Ktsanes, pp, p;£., p. 246. 37Winch and szanes, pp. p;§., p. 246. 28 organize his thoughts and actions in a manner permitting him to overcome unsatisfying situations. Complementariness of need patterns, as spoken of here, is discernable in terms of differences in intensity or kind. Differences in intensity are illustrated by the individual with a high need for dominance who marries an individual with a low need for dominance. A situation in which a person with a high need for dominance selects a mate with a high need for deference serves to illustrate differences of kind. The sample of 50 people (25 married couples) involved in the study was highly homogeneous. They were all native Americans and of the same socio-economic status, race, religion, and age. All had been married two years or less and were childless. At least one member of each couple was an undergraduate student at Northwestern University. The data, on the basis of which the authors' conclusions were developed, were derived from three sources: 1) an initial interview from which evidence of needs was obtained; 2) a case-history interview; and 3) an eight card Thematic Apperception Test. In this study only the first source of information was dealt with. After the initial interview forty-four sub-variables (needs) were derived. Using the product-moment correlation it was possible to compute 1936 interspousal correlations. From the total number of possible correlations the authors, on the basis of the Theory of Complementary-Needs, hypothesized the signs of three hundred eighty-eight. When a Chi-Square analysis was applied to the resulting 29 coefficients of correlation, it was apparent that the data tended to support the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis. Of the three hundred eighty-eight possibilities, thirty-four were significant in the hypothesized direction at the one per cent level and seventy-one at the five per cent level. Two hundred twenty-one of the possible permutations fell in the hypothesized direction. A second study by Winch38 dealt with the analysis of all the data gathered in the initial study of mate selection. At this time the author utilized the following five sets of ratings obtained from independent judges: 1) a content analysis of the initial need interview; 2) a holistic analysis of the need interview; 3) a holistic analysis of the case history; 4) a holistic analysis of the Thematic Apperception Test; 5) a holistic analysis of the final conference. The results were quite similar to the initial study. A relatively small number of the permutations were significant (at the .05 level) in the hypothesized direction for each of the data categories, but many more fell in the hypothesized direction although not significant) than might have been expected by chance. In general, the trend was in support of the initial hypothesis. 38Robert F. Winch, "The Theory of Complementary Needs In Mate Selection: Final Results in the Test of the General Hypothesis " American Sociological Review, 20 No.5:552-555, October, 1955. 30 Another test of the Theory of Complementary Needs was conducted by Ktsanes.39 This study utilized the same sample of married couples involved in Winch's studies. At this time those in the sampling who exhibited similar factors (needs) were grouped together and were said to constitute a personality type. Four of the factors thus obtained were analyzed, the assumption being that if one member of a couple was high on a given factor then the other member would have a low rating on that factor (and vice versa). Utilizing the four factors discussed above, eight personality types were derived, and these accounted for forty-four of the fifty persons in the sampling. The remaining six had idiosyncratic personality patterns. Of the nineteen couples remaining in the sample after those who exhibited idiosyncratic patterns were disregarded, no husband and wife team fell into the same category of personality type. The author stated that the principal hypothesis appeared.valid for two of the factor types, and that with respect to the others the trend.was in the same direction (but not conclusively so). Murstein4O studied newly married and.middle-aged married couples in an attempt to determine the validity of the 39Thomas Krsanes, "Mate Selection on the Basis of Personality Type: A Study Utilizing An Empirical Typology of Personality," Aperican Sociological Review, 20 No.5:547-551, October, 1955. 40Bernard 1. Murstein, "The Complementary Needs Hypothesis In Newlyweds and Middle-Aged.Married Couples" Journal lof Abnom land Social Ps cholo , 63 No. 1:194-197 July, T961. 31 Complementary-Needs Hypothesis. The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule was administered to all participants in the study. He concluded that, For adequate marital adjusmment some needs require complementary components in the marital partner, while others 41 necessitate homogamous need patterns. His results indicated that the strength of any given need can vary with the individual and the situation. Bowerman and Day,42 using the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, investigated the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis with a sample of sixty college couples who were engaged, dating consistently, or going steady. It was hypothesized that fifteen of the possible need intercorrelations (involving the same needs) would be negative and two hundred ten (involving different needs) would be positive. The results, however, showed that only two of the fifteen like-need correlations were negative, and neither of these was statistically significant. At the same time, only four of the anticipated positive correlations were significant at the five per cent level, and they were in a direction which supported the Theory of Homogamous Needs in mate selection rather than the Camplementary-Needs Hypothesis. On the basis of the data obtained the authors concluded 41Tbid. 42Charles E. Bowerman and Barbara R. Day, "A Test of the Complementary Needs Hypothesis As Applied to Couples During Courtship," gperican Sociological Review, 21 No.5:602-605, October, 1956. 32 that the evidence did not support the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis. Of all the needs which could be listed, we might expect only a few to be highly relevant to mate selection and marital adjustment. Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that all needs shoul be either homogamous or complementary. Burgess andWallin44 reported a study of one thousand engaged couples through which they hoped to determine the influence of need patterns on mate-selection. By utilizing engaged couples they hoped to escape the criticism that homogamous or complementary need patterns were attributable to the time spent together while married. Information about physical and psychological characteristics of the one thousand couples was obtained, and the resulting evidence tended to substantiate a homogamous theory of mate-selection with respect to both sets of factors. For five out of six physical traits the data gathered was statistically significant in the direction that tended to show that "like mates with like." For seventeen of thirty-one personality characteristics examined, there was a greater than chance combination that men and women with similar traits would be engaged. The major problem, as stated by the authors, is that of determining what the need patterns of engaged couples are and the chances of their being fulfilled in engagement and marriage. 431pm. . 44Ernest W. Burgess and Paul wallin, Courtship, Epgage- ments and rria e. (New York: J.B. Lippincott Company, s PP. " o 33 Becker,45 in a test of the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis, administered the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule to thirty-nine couples married two years or less, engaged, or dating steadily. Another battery of tests from which as F score, representing authoritarianism, was derived was also administered. He derived the following conclusions: 1) whether dominance is part of complementary or a homogamous relationship depends, in large part, on the authoritarian attitude of the couple; 2) differences in authoritarianism can be attributed to the male partner of the couple, while it is the female partner who determines differences in Dominance; 3) we need more research concerning the mediating processes through which complementarity and similarity are determined. In general, the conclusions indicated that, . . .symbiosis, if selectively operative, can be demonstrated only when the con- ditions under which it operates are specified and samples are selected for research in accordance with those specifications.4 The need patterns of divorced couples were compared with those of successfully married couples in a study by Ca:man.47 All participants in the study were administered the Edwards 45Gilbert Becker, "Complementary Needs Hypothesis, Authoritarianism, Dominance, and Other Edwards Personal Preference Schedule Scores," Journgl pp Personality, 32 NO. 1:45-56’ "filth, 19640 461bid. 47rh111p MCClellan Carman, :pe gelationship pg Tndividual ppp Husband-Wife Pgtterns pg_Personalipz Characteristics pp Marital Stabilipz,'Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, U’ versity of Washington, 1955. 34 Personal Preference Schedule. The two groups were controlled for age, length of time married, education, number of previous marriages, religious preferences, number of children, and type of occupation. Divorced men and women were found to have significantly higher scores (at the .01 level) on the variable Intraception than married.men or women. The author felt this was under- standable since, . . .the tendency to analyze others' motives could be a real handicap to adjustment in marriage. Persons who tend to interpret the actions of others may be inclined to interpret the actions of their Spouzgs in highly personalized ways. The divorced men had a significantly greater need (at the .05 level) for Succorance than married men. Married men exhibited a greater need for Endurance than married women while divorced men manifested a considerably lower need for Endurance than divorced women. Married.men achieved significantly lower need scores (at the .01 level) for Intraception than divorced men. Generally, the research did not indicate that need patterns were highly related to marital stability. Married.women tended to display those character- istics usually associated with their sexual role to a greater extent than divorced women. 48Tbid., p. 70. 35 TWO researchers49 addressed themselves to studying the influence of managerial traits on group effectiveness. They were concerned with the fact that in some group situations, an effective outcome requires a coordinated and somewhat harmonious interaction; this is particularly true with regard to the managerial functions of planning, integrating, and directing the activities of individual organization members. Of prime concern here were two traits: 1) supervisory ability and 2) the decision-making approach. The study was conducted by having different combinations of participants integrate their skills to operate two electric trains over the same track. The authors found that when one member of a given pair had a high rating with regard to supervisory ability or the decision-making approach, there was no guarantee that it would be a significantly more productive combination. It was when a member of a combination was uncontested with regard to supervisory ability or decision-making approach that the pair tended to be more productive. Another conclusion made is that organizations with a high degree of personnel stability will be more productive because their members will not have to continuously learn new behavioral responses to accommodate new group members. Gross, working with.members of the United States Air 49Edwin E. Chiselli and Thomas M. Lodahl, "Patterns of Managerial Traits and Group Effectiveness," The gournal p: Abnormal and Social Ps cholo , 57:61-66, 1958. 36 Force, studied symbiosis and consensus as integrative factors in small groups.50 A consensual group, as defined here, was one in which all the members exhibited similar characteristics. In a symbiotic group the members display different character- istics. They asked the airmen to identify those people whose company they most preferred under a variety of different conditions. The evidence indicated that consensual groups were only moderately well integrated rather than highly or poorly integrated. Symbiotic groups tended to be composed of men of dissimilar or contrasting characteristics. This was found to be especially likely if the characteristics were related to adjustment to the job or to living or gfcreational conditions on the air site. Therefore, a single man would be friendly with a married man and his family, thereby providing him with a link.to family life and.home. The formation of consensual groups was especially likely when the characteristics were related to adjustment to the Air 52 Force as a whole and to its group goals. A likely symbiotic relationship would involve an airman with complaints about the Air Force who turned for help to another airman who had previously solved similar problems. In conclusion, the_author stated that both consensus and soEdward Gross, "Symbiosis and Consensus As Integrative Factors In Small Groups " Aperican Sociological Beview 21 No.2: 174-179, April, 1956. ' 511bid. 521b1d. 37 symbiosis may act as cohesive elements, but symbiosis seemed to be most effective as a binding agent. Another researcher advanced and tested the following theory: . . .that different combinations of dominant and/or submissive individuals achieve more or less successfully according to the pair-combination as well as the conditions of assignment of dominant or submissive roles, and that it is possible to predict differential success among these permutations according to hypotheses derived from personality theory. In line with the hypothesis stated above, persons in a state of anxiety would be unable to function effectively under certain conditions. The inquiry involved students who had previously been rated with regard to the degree of dominance or submissiveness each.manifested through behavior. 'The students were then paired, and each pair was requested to operate two mechanical trains over the same tracks simultaneously. Each train was Operated by one member of the pair, and one train was always assigned the right of way on the tracks. Achievement records maintained during the experiment tend to validate the hypothesis on which the study was based. When a dominant individual and a submissive one worked together, and if the dominant person had the control- ling position (i.e., the right of way on the tracks), highest 53WilliamT. Smelser, "Dominance As A Factor in Achieve- ment and Perception In Cooperative Problem-Solving Inter- actions," he ournal of bnormal and Social Ps cholo 62 No.3:53 .- ai"_, May, Usi—‘f — '—"‘ ' 'l 38 achievement was recorded. The least productive group was the same combination with the roles reversed. ExecutivelProfessional Leadership. The concept of Executive Professional Leadership was formally defined by Gross as "the efforts of an executive of.a professionally staffed organization to conform to a definition of his role that stresses his obligation to improve the quality of staff performance."54 To measure EPL, Gross and his associates utilized twelve statements about principals behavior which are descriptive of efforts to conform to an EPL definition of their roles (The statements are listed in Chapter III, page 62. It is important to note that all EPL scores are relative in nature; that is, a principal with an EPL score of “3" is relatively higher than a principal with a score of "2". The scores only have meaning as they are seen in relation to one another. The answers given by the teachers to each question were assigned numerical values ranging from one to six, and these values were averaged to obtain a single EPL score for each teacher. 55 The authors pointed out that EPL is a resultant of 54Neal Gross and Robert E. Herriott, Whip. In Public Schools: ASociolo ical Inquiry, New York: John 'fiiley and Sons, Inc., I§53$, p. 25. 55All information regarding EPL and related teacher- administrative factors can be found in Chapter 7 of Gross and Herriott's Staff Leadership In the Public Schools: A Sociological Lnguigz. are n .- \- t. 39 administrative behavior, and that principals can make adjustments in their behavior if they felt that such changes would enhance their image in the teachers' eyes. In the initial hypothesis, the authors felt that those principals who asked their teachers for cooperation in making decisions pertaining to the schools would have higher EPL's than those who did not, since they were voluntarily relinquish- ing part of their own authority. The teachers responded to four statements which represented different areas of staff- involvement (The statements are listed in Chapter III, page 64). When the scores derived from each of these statements were cross-tabulated with the principal's EPL scores, they were all found to be significantly related (at the .001 level). The evidence was accepted as supporting the original premise. The hypothesis was then presented that when the relationship between teachers and principals was perceived (by the teachers) to be an egalitarian one, the principal's EPL scores would be higher than if this were not the case. Five statements were asked of teachers and the scores obtained were averaged to obtain an average index of the type of relationship existing between a principal and his teachers (The statements are listed in Chapter 111, page 64). Again, these scores were cross-tabulated with principals' EPL scores and the evidence was supportive of the hypothesis at the two per cent level. The assumption was made that teachers, because of their numerous contacts with children, need associations with 40 adults during which they can express themselves freely and feel they are being understood. This being the case, the theory was advanced that when principals met these needs, their EPL scores would be higher. Teachers' responses to six statements were averaged to obtain a measure of principals social support of teachers (The statements are listed in Chapter III page 66), and after cross-tabulation of these scores it was found that the hypothesis was supported by the data (at the .001 level). Scores from.six statements were averaged to obtain a Perceived Managerial Support of Teachers score (The state- ments are listed in Chapter III, page 65). It was anticipated that the greater the managerial support a principal offered his teachers, the greater his EPL score would be. When the results were cross-tabulated, they supported the hypothesis (at the .001 level). The last type of teacher-administrator relationship studied was Perceived Support of the Teachers' Authority. The assumption was made that the greater the principal's support of his teachers in cases of teacher-pupil conflict, the greater his EPL score would be. Values derived from the state- ments were averaged to obtain a single score, and these scores were then cross-tabulated with the principals' EPL scores. (The statements are listed in Chapter III, page 63). Signifi- cant results (at the .001 level) were again found to support the hypothesis. EPL is, essentially, a measure of the extent to which 41 the principal diaplays those behavioral patterns which teachers perceive as desirable for those in the principal's role. Doyle56 found that teachers' and administrators' dbfinitions of the teacher's role were more similar than such delineations on the parts of school board members and parents. Special note was made of the fact that both teachers and administrators tended to view the teacher's role in terms of traditional orientations (although both.may have had different reasons for defining it in a similar manner).57 The research reported indicates that teachers have relatively accurate perceptions of the expectations of administrators.58 Another finding59 was that such factors as age, years of teaching, number of school systems in which the:teacher had taught, and the expected number of future years of teaching bore little relationship to the kinds of role expectations which an individual would prescriberor members of roles other than his own. When the scope of the social system under consideration is enlarged, the terms in which it discussed became more —— V . 56Louis Andrew Doyle, A;Studv‘g§_the Expectations Which Elementary I achers, School Administrators, Board.Members and Parents Have 0 the Elementary Teachers' Role, Unpublished w Doctoral DisEZEEsEIbEI‘MIEEIgan State University: 1956. 572535., pp. 77-90. 53%., p.499. 591631., pp. 67-71. 42 general because fewer of the situational elements found in smaller systems are common to the larger ones.60 As the size of the social system being analyzed decreases, it becomes possible to discuss minute elements such as specific behavioral patterns. _'___ 60Neal Gross, Ward S. Mason, and Andrew'W} MCEarchern, £8212§££122§.lB.BQL§,Aa§Lz§;_: Studies 2; the Su erintenden ' gale New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,—T553), p. 36. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY Lgtroduction. This chapter includes a complete statement of the methodology utilized in the study, but begins with a description of the community, the teachers who took part in the study, and the school system. An understanding of the nature of these elements is necessary if the study is to be viewed within a comprehensive social setting, and it enables the reader to better perceive the kinds of relationships existing between and among the various segments of the system. The cgmmunigy. The city from which the participants were drawn is in the western part of Michigan and will henceforth be referred to as urban City. The papulation of the city is approthateky 180,000, and it is much like other urban districts throughout the country which have downtown shapping areas, older, run-down housing which surrounds the downtown area and the industrial area, and new neighborhoods encircling the older ones. The newer residential areas are composed largely of middle and upper class whites. An increasing percentage of Negroes also resides in the city. As in many other cities with similar characteristics, the vast majority of Negroes currently residing in the city live in the older areas surrounding the downtown shopping center and around the industrial areas. There are over twenty-five manufacturing plants in the 44 city which employ over three hundred fifty peOple each, and over eight hundred plants and factories currently operating. Within the city there are numerous cultural opportunities. Among them are two degree-granting colleges and a junior college. Extensions of the larger state universities are also to be found. A museum, library, and symphony orchestra are available. The participants. Every teacher whose professional responsibilities included teaching in a classroom setting at least fifty per cent of the time was approached and asked to participate in the study. Six hundred sixty-six elementary teachers and the principals of fifty-one elementary schools were initially approached. At the same time, four hundred seventy-six secondary teachers and eleven secondary principals were asked to cooperate. Of the sixty-three schools in the system, only one elementary school was not involved in the study. This was due to the fact that a new principal had assumed administrative responsibility for the school shortly before the study was begun, and under those conditions it would have been difficult, it not impossible, to obtain fair ratings of the teachers and the principal. Of the six hundred sixty-six elementary teachers approached, four hundred five completed the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and the Teacher Section: The National Principalship Study. (See Appendix B for samples of these 45 forms). _This constituted 64.41 percent of the elementary universe. Within the elementary sample three hundred sixty- nine were female (91.11 per cent) and thirty-six were male (8.89 per cent). Virtually all the males in the elementary sample taught in the upper elementary grades (i.e., grades four, five and six). Forty-four elementary principals completed both the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and the Administrative Preference Form, the two forms from which the principals' information was gathered (See Appendix B for sample of the Administrative Preference Form.). Within the sample of elementary principals thirty-three were female and eleven were male. TWO hundred fifty-two (52.73 per cent) of the total four hundred seventy-six secondary teachers completed both the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and the Teacher Section: The National Principalship Study. Of those who returned all the information one hundred thirty-three were male and one hundred nineteen were female. With regard to the secondary principals, all eleven completed both.forms given them. Ten of the secondary principals were male and one was female. Thus, six hundred fifty-seven (57.53 per cent) of the opossible eleven hundred forty-two teachers completed and returned all the materials given them. A_comparisOn pf participants and non-participants. Comparative information regarding four characteristics of 46 those who did or did not return the requested data is presented at this time. The four factors are as follows: 1) age, 2) years of teaching, 3) degrees attained, 4) sex. To compare those who did and did not return the questionnaires, comparative information was obtained for twenty-five elementary teachers who did return the materials; identical data were collected for twenty-five elementary teachers who did not return the materials. Similar data were gathered for nineteen secondary teachers who did return the information, and for twenty-eight secondary teachers who did not return the instruments. 1. AGE - The elementary teachers who did return the completed instruments averaged 39.24 years old and those who did not return the data averaged 40.48 years old. In terms of average age the elementary teachers can be said to be quite similar (the difference being only 1.24 years). Table 1 A comparison of participants and non-participants with regard to age. 4 I —-—‘_ _______v Average Age Average Age of of Participants. Non-Participants Elementary , ' ‘ Teachers 39.24 40.48 Secondary Teachers 39.58 33.57 47 The secondary teachers who returned the completed information averaged 39.58 years old and those who did not averaged 33.57 years old. Although both groups were in the thirtyito forty year old age bracket, those who chose to participate were older than the rest by 6.01 years. 2. YEARS TEACHING - Elementary teachers who did return the information averaged 8.60 years teaching in Urban City and 13.28 years total teaching, as opposed to an average of 8.20 years teaching in Urban City and 10.96 years total teaching for those who did not return the data. As can be determined by scanning the data presented in Table 2, those who participated in the study were quite similar to those who did not with regard to years of teaching in Urban City, the participating group having taught in the school system only .40 of a year longer than the non-participating group. Table 2 A comparison of participants and non-participants with regard to years of teaching. mu; t‘ * PARTICIPANTS NON-PARTICIPANTS Average Total Average Total Years Average Years Average Teaching Years Teaching Years in Urban of in Urban of ,City Teaching City Teaching -Elementary Teachers 8.60 13.28 8.20 10.96 Secondary Teachers 7.73 11.47 8.60 9.92 “4X 48 For total years of teaching, the participating teachers had taught 2.32 years longer than those not participating. Even so, both groups averaged more than ten and less than fifteen years of teaching experience, and they were, on that basis, considered similar. Secondary teachers who returned the requested data averaged 7.73 years of teaching in the school system and a total of 11.47 years experience. Those who did not return the data averaged 9.92 years of teaching in Urban City and 10.96 years of total teaching experience. Thus, as was true for the elementary teachers, the secondary teachers were very similar with regard to years of teaching in Urban City (the non-participants averaging .51 years more experience), but a greater differential existed (the participants averaging 1.55 more years teaching experience) with regard to total years teaching. 3. ACADEMIC DEGREES - The elementary teachers who did return the questionnaires were similar to those who did not with regard to level of education attained. In each group of elementary teachers only one teacher (four per cent of each set) had only a certificate which permitted him to teach in the public schools. The participating teacher with a Special certificate had ten years teaching experience and the non- participating teacher with the same certificate had twenty- six years experience. Twenty-two teachers (eighty-eight per cent) of the non-participants had Bachelor of Arts degrees as opposed to seventeen (sixty-eight per cent) of those who did 49 oo.w~ m o¢.HN ON mm.ou m wo.mm ea mumrooma mumocooom oo.w N oo.ww NN oo.q H oo.wm N oo.wo NH oo.¢ H mumnomoy zumucmaoam N .02 N .02 N .02 N .02 N .02 N .oz .<.z .<.m oumowmwuumo .<.z .<.m oumowwwuuoo mHzHo>CH momnomme mpmrommH mueuocu5< wmmum mo upoaasm mo uuoaanm mecmumommq mawrmcoHumHmm MonumoH mo mo Hm>mg Hmeoom Hmwomwmcm: Hmconmmmoum cmwumuwamwm mo uuoaasm pm>Hmoomm pm>ewoumm om>wmopmm m>wusumxm Hm>mq om>emonmm om>ewoewm oo.H mm.o em.o «0.0 HN.o NH.o ucoEm>Ho>CH mmmum mo Hm>mA om>wmoumm oo.e ma.o an.o mm.o me.o .sonomma mo usoaasm Hmwoom om>wmoumm oo.H no.0 wN.o NH.o muoromma mo uuoaanm Hmwumwmcmz om>wmouwm oo.H Hm.o ma.o menmumomoq Hmcoemmmmoum m>eusomxm oo.e mo.o meanmaoaumemm cmeumuwawwm mo Hm>oq om>emoumm .oo.H zuwuonun< HonommH mo uuoamsm om>wmoumm .muouomw aflnmcowumawu woumuumHCwEomnumsommu m>wm pcm mermpmomma Hmcowmmmmopm m>eusomxm cmmzumo mmwrmcowumfimo wcwuowdmp xwuume :oflumamuuoo < NN mHan 111 Egalitarian Relationships (r = +0.31). The relationships between EPL and Perceived.Manageria1 Support of Teachers (r 3 +0.77), and Perceived Level of Staff Involvement (r = +0.64) were considerably higher. It would seem that Perceived Social Support of Teachers, alone, was the most accurate single predictor of EPL. When correlated with EPL, that factor alone was nearly as good a predictor (r = +0.77) as the multiple correlation utilizing all five factors (R = +0.81). 0n the basis of the evidence presented, the Null Hypothesis is rejected in this case. All of the five teacher- administrator relationship factors were shown to be positively related to EPL, although in varying degrees. In a multiple correlation all five factors produced a multiple correlation coefficient of +0.81; the same calculation utilizing only two factors (Perceived Social Support of Teachers and Perceived Level of Staff Involvement) produced a multiple correlation coefficient of +0.80. When simple correlations were calculated between and among all the variables (five.teacher-administrator relationship factors and EPL) it was found that the best single predictor of EPL was Perceived Social Support of Teachers with a coefficient of correlation of +0.77. §ogio~economic and gducatignal factors, and need pattgrns. It is common knowledge that the type of environment in which an individual is born and subsequently reared affects 112 personality development. Therefore, the conditions under which he lives and has lived have an impact on his personality. At this time the Urban City teachers will be viewed in terms of socio-economic factors and the need patterns associated with them. A comparison of mean need scores attained by teachers from five age groups (the age groups were 1. 21-25 years, 2. 31-35 years, 3. 41,45 years, 4. 51-55 years, and 5. 61-65 years) is presented in Table 23. From rapid inspection of the chart, it is apparent that significant differences existed between age groups. With regard to the variable Deference, there was a definite trend (significant at the .005 level) for the mean raw score to increase with age. This same trend was apparent concerning the need for Order (significant at the .005 level), and Endurance (significant at the .005 level). The apposite trend, for the mean scores to decrease with increases in age occurred with regard to the variables Exhibition and Heterosexuality (both significant at the .005 level). With regard to the variable Dominance, the scores tended to rise with age until the 41-55 year old group and then decrease with age. Clearly, certain need.variables were heavily influenced by the age of person. In a study by Garrison and Scott,72 involving prospective 72Karl C. Garrison and Mary Hughie Scott, "The Relationship of Selected Personal Characteristics to the Needs of College Students Preparing to Teach," ducational and Pszcholggical Measurement, 22 No.43753-58, 962. 113 mz omw.a ee.oH ma.ea Ne.a mH.HH sn.oH acemmmswwe moo. qm0.mH mm.w mm.HH 00.HH mq.¢H 80.ma xuwamsxomoumuom moo. 00N.m mm.0H N0.¢H 00.ma 0N.¢H NH.MH mocmH30cm mz eeo.~ oe.ee mq.me m~.ee mo.ge me.ae .wcmeu mz 0H0.H 08.0H mm.mH mm.mH mm.¢H 0¢.mH mocmuSuusz mz HHN.H NH.mH m~.mH N0.mH Nn.mH 00.8H ucmEmmmn< H0. 0NN.m H0.HH 0m.m~ ~0.¢H mm.mH mm.ma mocmcHEoQ mz 000.0 mm.NH 0m.HH mH.eH 0N.HH mw.HH mocmoooosm mz HOM.H mm.0~ H00.ma N0.0H N0.mH NH.NH COwuomumuucH mz 0N0.H 00.NH 00 me 0m.0H mm.mH 00.0H scammeawmmm m2 own.H HN.NH 00.NH 0m.HH mm.mH Hw.NH >EOCOu3< m00. q00.m H0.NH oq.mH qm.mH mw.mH mm 0H sceuwnwrxm m00. mmm,HH q¢.mH 0H.MH N0.MH 00.NH em.0H ompoo m00. 0mm.qa «8.0a Hm.mH 0H.mH qw.ma 0H.NH mocmuomoo mz 000.H H0.mH m0.mH mm.qH m0.¢a 00.0H ucmEo>mwno< m oaomesmsm-e Ammuzv Ammuze Ammuzv Aemqu AomHuzv. magmasm> m0-~0 mmnHm mmufiq mmnfim mmufim monouo owfl .masouw mwm m>wm Eouw mumsomou xn moanmwum> mmmm osu co posemuum momma wo acmwumofioo < mm oHLmH 114 women teachers (college students), the findings were that younger prospective teachers indicated a greater need for Nurturance than the other respondents. In this study no significant differences were found regarding the variable Nurturance when five age groups were compared. Garrison and Scott also found that older prospective teachers had greater need for Achievement, Endurance, and Aggression. The present study found that older teachers had less need for Achievement, greater need for Endurance, and that there were no significant differences among age groups with regard to the variable Aggression. When teachers were divided into categories on the basis of the percentage of undergraduate expenses which they earned (Those in category 1. earned 0-25 per cent of their expenses, category 2. earned 26o50 per cent of their expenses, category 3. earned 51-75 per cent of their expenses, and those in category 4. earned 76~100 per cent of their college expenses.) significant patterns are obvious (Table 24). As the percentage of undergraduate expenses earned increases, so did the means on the variables Autonomy (significant at the .005 level), and Dominance (significant at the .005 level). At the same time the mean scores decreased for the variables Affiliation (significant at the .005 level), Succorance (significant at the .01 level), and Nurturance (significant at the .005 level) as the percentage of undergraduate expenses earned increased. Marital status appears to have substantial impact on personality patterns. The data in Table 25 indicates that 115 mz m¢m.~ me.ae mm.ee om.oa eg.oe ocemmmtwwe oz oeo.o mm.~H mm.mH oH.~H oa.NH aoeemsxomosmomm oz moo.o Ho.oa Ho.oa mo.ma om.ea mucossocm oz Hme.o No.oa oa.oe Ho.oe ma.on .moooo moo. meo.m mo.ee so.oe No.oe Ho.oe mocmsasssz oz oeo.o oo.ma mo.eo so.mH No.me soosmmmo< moo. mom.g om.ea me.oe mo.mH om.NH .oomoasoo Ho. moa.m ea.oe mo.ee No.ee mH.NH .oomsooooo oz moe.o oo.ee oN.oe me.ea og.oe ocesomomsuce moo. omm.w oe.me No.ea Ha.oa oo.oa ceaumaaeoo< moo. meo.m om.me om.ma HN.NH oN.Ne asoc0u5< oz omo.o oN.me No.mH om.me oo.me coaoaoeexm oz ooa.o HN.NH ga.~e No.NH go.NH smoso oz Nom.o om.ee Na.mH go.ea oa.oa moomsoomo oz NHH.N am.on oo.sa oe.oa ao.mn some.>mfloo< o aaomesmum-o Amoeuzo Amoenzo goonzo Aaomnzo mesmesm> eooe-oe emn-am eom-o~ emm-o pmcumm mmmcmmmu mm.mowmucmonom .mmwcmoxw mumnpmowpmpo: uHmLu mo wmwwucmoomo wcfixpm> oocsmm 0:3 wumrommu >3 mmfiomwum> mmmm so posemuum momma mo cowwumano < «N oHQmH mz meo.a Ho.o oo.ea oo.NH om.em eg.oa scammmswo< oz moo.a om.HH me.ee oo.me mm.me om.me assemsxmmosmumm moo. mmo.m on.oa mo.me oo.ma No.me Na.mm woomssooo ,0 oz Nao.o He.om om.mm oo.a~ om.om me.oe .momeo nu mz mNo.o mo.oe go.oa oo.ea mN.me om.ma muomssussz Ho. “Ha.m om.mm om.ma oo.HH om.me go.oe ucmsmwmo< moo. Hmm.o oo.oe Ho.NH oo.em Ne.oe mo.NH .uomcesoo moo. mo.o oH.NH No.NH oo.a so.oa ao.~a woomsoooam oz mmo.H Ho.ma oo.ma oo.om eo.ma ao.ge oceuomomsuCH No. moo.m me.ga Ho.oe oo.om ma.me No.me schoonemmm< mz mmo.a om.~e om.HH oo.oe Ho.mu mm.ma gsoa0uo< oz mNo.N eN.~H oH.mH oo.me om.me. me.ee oceueosoxm moo. ooo.o ma.oa am.mm oo.NH em.ma No. H “moso moo. Nme.o No.me oo.ee oo.oe mo.ee oe.ma mucmsmmmo moo. oom.m oo.NH om.mo oo.ma ma.ee em.ma somsm>mfioo< o oesmeumu.-o Asmuzo AoNuzo gonzo Aooouzo Amomuzv .Hm.H..> Boomz poouo>mn poumumomm powwow: mawcem msumum Hmuwumz .msumum Hmumuma womemwwwp mo muosommu mp moanmmum> mmmm so posemuum memos mo COmHumoEoo 4 mN maan 117 significant differences appeared between single, married, divorced and.widowed teachers in Urban City. Only one person fell into the separated category, but his scores did not alter the validity of the statistics since an analysis of , variance technique designed for use with unequal subclasses was applied to the data. Nevertheless, it would be unwise to make any Judgements about a total class of people on the basis of information provided by a single individual. Significant differences for eight of the fifteen variables were found when the teachers were separated according to marital status. The need for Achievement increased (significant at the .005 level) as one moved from the single to the married to the divorced categories, but there was a marked decrease in need for Achievement within the widowed stouP. The need for Deference was lowest for those in the single category, relatively the same for the married and divorced categories, and increased sharply for widowers (the differences being significant at the .005 level). Those in the single category were lowest with regard to need for‘ Order, the married.and divorced categories were approximately the same, but the need for this variable increased sharply for widowers (the differences were significant at the .005 level). The need for Affiliation was highest for those in the single, divorced, and widowed categories, and lowest for those who were married (the difference being significant at the .02 level). Mbrried teachers appeared to have less need for Succorance 118 than single, divorced, and widowed teachers, all of whom had similar scores (the difference was significant at the .005 level). Widowers expressed the lowest need for Dominance of the four categories, and.married teachers expressed the highest need for the same variable, the single and divorced categories were quite similar (significant at the .005 level). Those in the divorced category expressed the lowest need for Abasement of the four categories, with the single teachers being next highest; the married and divorced teachers were lowest on need for Abasement (differences were significant at the .01 level). The single and divorced categories displayed the least need for Endurance, the married category was next highest, and those in the widower category expressed a considerably higher mean score than the other categories (the differences were significant at the .005 level). The type of community from which a teacher came appeared to have a sizable influence on personality patterns (Table 26). Those teachers from farm communities had the lowest need for Achievement, those from cities and villages were very much alike, and those from the small cities had the greater need to achieve. Those from the farms and villages had greater need for Deference than those from the small and large cities (the difference was significant at the .005 level). For the Urban City teachers, the need for Exhibition increased as the community of origin became more urbanized (the trend being significant at the .01 level). The Opposite situation occurred with regard to the variable Intraception; the need 119 .ouoE yo COeuoasaoo 000.0m u xueo cohomosooa ooo.om 0o ooo.om u goeo Homsm :oHumaoooo 000.0H hope: u CBOH go oonHw> .mopm wcHEomw mamwuma .amosu >um> n zuHCDEEou Enema oz moa.o me.aa mN.HH Ho.oo Ne.oo scammmsowo no. mom.m oo.mH me.mu mm.me oo.en goeomsxomosmomm mz goe.o oo.om oo.mo mm.om em.me ouomssoom mz oeo.o oo.oa mm.om mm.ao oo.mm .wcmoo mz qu.m mm.me eo.oo oo.mo oa.oo soomssossz No. emN.m oo.mm me.mH oe.me em.ma somswmmoo oz oem.o oa.oa em.mH oo.~m No.Na summonseo mz omo.a an.oo am.eo HH.HH oo.oe .ucmsooosm No. mmm.m o¢.oo em.oa mo.aa oo.oo ooflsamuosocm oz maN.H He.oo mo.me oo.mm No.oo ceasmaeamm< mz ooo.o mo.mm oo.~H mo.NH am.~a asooooao Ho. omo.m so.ma oo.me om.mo mm.NH cowswmaoxo oz mom.~ om.NH Ho.me mm.~H mo.oe smoso moo. ome.o ma.mH om.me oa.sm oo.mo mucosmomo mo. mom.~ mo.om HN.mH Hm.om so.mo somsm>meoo< o uaomhomom-m Aooouzv Aoonzv Ammonzo Amouzv mommasm> goao gone spasm mommoe> Esme NuHCDEEoo.Mm omNH .mmeumCDEEoo mo moomo ocmooMMeo Eoow moocomoo mo mmfiomflom> mmmm co noseooom momma mo acmeeanoo < 0N meooe 120 for Intraception decreased as the community became more urbanized. The greatest need for Abasement was manifested by those in the farm category, with the other three categories being quite similar (difference significant at the .02 level). Another linear relationship occurred with regard to the need for Heterosexuality; the farm category achieved the lowest mean score for this variable and the magnitude of the means increased with the corresponding increase in size of community. Seventy-four of the respondents volunteered the information that, at the time they began teaching, they would have preferred to enter some other occupation but ‘were unable to do so. When these teachers were compared with those who stated that teaching was their first choice, some differences were readily observable (Table 27). Those who did not prefer teaching had significantly higher mean scores on the variables Achievement (significant at the .05 level) and Aggression (significant at the .02 level). They had a significantly lower score (at the .05 level) on the variable Order. The teachers in Urban City were asked to estimate the economic position of their families within their home communities by determining whether they were in the highest, next highest, third highest, or lowest economic quartile. ‘When the mean scores attained by the groups on the need ‘variablds were compared, only one significant difference was found (Table 28). There is a clear decrease for the variable Heterosexuality as one moves from the highest to 121 Table 27 A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by teachers who preferred teaching as a career (N=582) and by teachers who did not prefer teaching as a career (N=74) in Urban City. Teachers Who Preferred Did Not Prefer fVariable Teaching Teaching "t" P Achievement 14.18 15.27 -2.230 .05 Deference 14.24 13.43 1.660 NS Order 12.97 11.67 2.180 .05 Exhibition 13.65 13.47 0.420 NS Autonomy 12.72 13.06 -0.760 NS Affiliation 16.21 16.04 0.327 NS Intraception 16.83 16.66 0.304 NS Succorance 11.50 11.36 0.225 NS Dominance 13.31 14.37 -1.679 NS Abasement 13.92 13.75 0.257 NS Nurturance 15.58 V 14.47 1.924 NS Change 16.48 17.29 -1.493 NS Endurance 14.82 13.67 1.771 NS Heterosexuality 12.63 13.17 -0.738 NS 10.84 12.21 -2.527 Aggression a .05 = 1.960 b .02 = 2.326 c .01 = 2.576 122 oz omo.o Nm.ee oo.oo no.em oo.me ocemmmsww< moo. ooN.m om.oe mo.Ne mm.mo om.oo goeomsxmmossoox oz omm.e no.mo om ea oo.ee Ho mm muomsoocm oz ama.o mm.om mm.oo om.oa om.ee moomoo mz ao~.H mo.sm oo.me ao.mo oo.me moomssosoz mz. Nmm o Nm.em Ne.mo oo.ma no.mo sesammmoo mz mom o ma ma mm.me sm.mm so.oe muomoaaoo mz ooa.o on no so.em oo.ee NN. H mooooooosm mz oom.o Hm.ae om.oe oo.ae mo.oo cohooooossom oz ema.o oo.me mo.oo Ho.oo so.ma coaoooaaoma mz Noo.o No.me Ho.me oo.mo an.~e agooooae mz Hom.o mo.mo oo.mo oe.me no.me acaoeoeoxm mz Nma.o No.me so.mo se.mo oe.me smoso mz aoN.H No.eo om.oe mo.me oo.mH moomsmmmo mz Hoo.a oo.eo om.oe oo.mo mo.om ocmsm>ooeo< o seommomom-o Amouzo Aoomuzo Aoemuzv Aoouzo whomasm> ummaoq umoswem ummnwwm ummhwmm .oseoe oooomm MUWHum UHEOCOUM .\ .momumc:EEoo omoru secomz momuum oHEocooo econommmo Boom women we momHmEmw umoru oo>wooome 053 momnomou an moaommum> mmmm co poemmuuo momma mo COwHumoEoo < 0N oHan 123 the lowest economic quartile (significant at the .005 level). Perceived economic status does not appear to be a highly discriminative factor for this population. There are a variety of reasons that teachers seek advanced academic degrees. Some do so because it will enable them to attain higher salaries; others do so because the school systems or the state make it a condition of continuing employment; and still others attend graduate school for prestige or because they enjoy doing so. Whatever the reasons, the assumption was made that personality differences did exist between those who had advance degrees and those who did not. The data in Table 29 indicate that the assumption was an accurate one. Significant differences were found between the two groups on five of the fifteen variables. Those with Master's degrees had higher mean scores than those with Bachelor‘s degrees on the variables Achievement and Autonomy (both significant at the .05 level), Deference (significant at the .01 level), and Dominance (significant at the .002 level). Those with Bachelor's degrees had a greater mean for the need Abasement (significant at the .002 level). It was found that a number of personality differences existed between those who were full-time undergraduate students and those who were part-time undergraduate students. The full-time students were found to have greater need for Achievement and Heterosexuality (both significant at the .05 level). They also had higher mean scores for Succorance 124 Table 29 A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by teachers with.Master's degrees (N=136) and those with Bachelor's degrees (N=493) in Urban City. Bachelor's Master's . Variable Degrees Degrees "t" P Achievement 14.12 14.97 -2.301 .05 Deference 13.87 14.83 -2.627 .01 Order 12.79 12.88 -0.202 NS Exhibition 13.78 13.28 1.392 NS Autonomy 12.57 13.24 -2.106 .05 Affiliation 16.35 15.56 1.739 NS Intraception 16.79 16.72 0.161 NS Succorance 11.56 11.41 0.330 NS Dominance 13.15 14.66 -3.183 .002 Abasement 14.27 12.45 3.776 .002 Nurturance 15.61 14.96 1.482 NS Change 16.69 16.02 1.512 NS Endurance 14.50 15.21 -1.500 NS Heterosexuality 12.95 12.13 1.366 NS Aggression 10.86 11.50 -1.584 NS a .05 = 1.960 b .02 = 2.326 c .01 = 2.576 d .002 3 3.090 125 Table 30 A comparison of means attained on EPPS variables by teachers who were full-time undergraduate students (N=555) and teachers who were part-time undergraduate students (N=98) in Urban City. ' Full-time Partotime Variable Undergraduates Undergraduates "t" P Achievement 14.48. 13.38 2.198 .05 Deference 14.01 14.91 -1.943 NS Order 12.63 13.87 -2.333 .02 Exhibition 13.83 12.52 3.163 .002 Autonomy 12.71 12.98 ~0.602 NS Affiliation 16.23 15.90 0.784 NS Intraception 16.71 17.46 -1.572 NS Succorance 11.69 10.40 3.020 .01 Dominance 13.28 14.34 -1.798 NS Abasement 13.90 14.11 -0.383 NS Nurturance 15.45 15.43 0.043 NS Change 16.61 16.37 0.488 NS Endurance 14.48 15.77 «2.545 .02 Heterosexuality 12.90 11.36 2.261 .05 Aggression 10.98 11.06 -0.182 a .05 a 1.960 b .02 = 2.326 c .01 = 2.576 d .002 ’-3.090 126 (significant at the .01 level) and Exhibition (significant at the:.002 level). Part-time undergraduate students were fOund to have significantly higher need for Order and Endurance (significant at the .02 level). When teachers were separated on the basis of whether they had attended public or parochial secondary schools, the lack of differences was most noticeable (Table 31). Those who had attended parochial schools had a significantly higher score for the need Exhibition (at the .05 level), but no other significant differences appeared. If considered desirable, teachers (as a group) can logically be divided into any of a number of different categories. At this time, for purposes of comparing need patterns, it was decided to separate them into lower elementary, upper elementary, junior high school, and senior high school groupings. The data (Table 32) reveal that wide differences existed between the groups with respect to need patterns. A number of relationships occurred which depict increasing mean need scores as one moves from the lower elementary group to the senior high school category. This linear relationship held true with regard to the need variables Achievement and Succorance (both significant at the .005 level). For the variables Autonomy, Affiliation, and Aggression it was partly true; that is, in all three cases the Junior high school categories are slightly higher than the senior high school group, but the trends are apparent and the differences are significant for all three 127 Table 31 A comparison of means attained on the EPPS variables by teachers who attended public secondary schools (N=554) and teachers who attended parochial secondary schools (N=83) in Urban City. Former Former Public Parochial School School Variable Students Students "t" P Achievement 14.28 14.65 -0.708 NS Deference 14.33 13.39 1.838 NS Order 12.81 12.93 -0.208 NS Exhibition 13.44 14.38 -2.013 .05 Autonomy 12.62 13.13 -1.098 NS Affiliation 16.27 15.54 1.516 NS Intraception 16.96 16.18 1.485 NS Succorance 11.57 11.01 1.125 NS Dominance 13.36 14.07 -I.153 NS Abasement. 13.88 13.93 -0.080 NS Nurturance 15.51 15.18 0.596 NS Change 16.52 16.87 -0.713 NS Endurance 14.75 14.85 -0.165 NS Heterosexuality 12.68 12.40 0.362 NS 10.91 11.42 -l.019 NS Aggression a .05 = 1.960 b .02 = 2.326 128 .NH.HH.oH mesmeu .a.m.e mmempo .e.m.e mesmpo .m.~.e.e museum Hoozom swem newcom Hoozum ewe: “cease u >umucmEmHm none: I humuceanm Heaoq moo. me.oH Nw.HH em.NH m¢.oH oH.oH scammeuww< moo. Hmo.m Hw.NH om.mH No mH oo.HH zuflfimsxmmonmuom mz oom.o Ho.mH mo.¢~ m¢.eH mn.¢H mocmusocm mz mae.o oh.ee mm.ea mw.ee we.ea mesmeo moo. emo.HH mm.mH mm.MH Hm.mH om.oH mocmusuusz moo. moN.N oe.NH wq.mH om.mH mo.qH ucmEmmmo< moo. oo~.¢~ He.mH mm.mH Hm.mH mm.HH mommCMan moo. mem.q o~.oH mm.oH co HH mH.NH mocmeoooom eo. moo.~ ¢H.oH om oH ow oH oe.mH cowuamomuucH moo. omo om Hm.mH oq.eH mm.o~ eo.~H cowumwawmme moo. moo.o om.mH eq.mH mo.mH No.HH mEo:0us< mz Nmm.H em.mH oa.efi Ho ma H¢.mH c0wuwhflnxm mz Nem.H om,~H mH.NH Hw.NH em.mH poopo Ho. oom.m 0H.ea mH.mH Hm.eH mo.eH mucouowoo moo. ooq.mH mm.ma me.mH ofi.eH wH.mH ucmEo>mHno¢ m geomesmum-m Aemuzv Ammauzv Aoeauzv Anewuzv mesmeem> swam swam mumucmeHm xumuceswam .um .uo “one: Hmsou Ho>oq wcflrommH .mHm>mH weerommu ~30m Echo whorommu an moanmwem> mmmm so cmsflmuum memes mo acmwumoEoo < mm manna 129 variables (at the .005 level). At numerous times in the educational literature the point has arisen that very possibly different kinds of persons elect to teach different subjects. It has been hypothesized that personality patterns might be one differentiating factor among these people. In Table 33 the mean scores of teachers from ten categories are presented. Although.some significant differences were found it would be difficult to do more than state that differences between the lower and higher score for these variables were significantly different. Because of the large number of categories it was not expected that statistical significance regarding differences would be very meaningful, but it was hoped that sight inspection of the chart would provide those concerned with education information about teachers which was not previously available. .130 mz mmw.H om.~H co NH mm.mH mm.HH oo.o Nn.ma em.NH mo.NH mm.NH om.HH scammmpww< mz mmm.o um.mH om.eH em.mH oo.HH mq.mH m¢.NH em.NH oo.¢H oo.mH eq.mH xuwamsxmmoemuez mz ooH.H mw.¢H mH.eH mm.ea an.wa Hw.eH mo.mH no.mH No.¢H mw.¢H He.mH mocmpsocm mz «no.0 mm.oH N¢.NH mo.mH mw.eH mm.oH oo.mH om.mH oe.oH om.mH no.0H mwcwro mz moo.H oo.eH mH.mH mq.eH ¢H.mH oo.NH oo.qH om.¢a oo.¢H mo.mH mo.eH mocmusuuaz mz Now.a mm.w oN.NH mq.mH mm.HH Hm.mH Hw.NH em.qH wH.NH ow.NH nm.mfl ucmEmmmn< mz Hoe.H om.wH oo.oH oo.eH wN.mH me.mH mo.mH N¢.¢H mH.mH w¢.mH mm.¢H mocmcflEom mz ooo.o um.oH mm.oH RN.HH wN.oH oo.NH om.HH qo.oH o~.w o¢.oH ow.HH mocmuooosm mz nom.H No.5H mm.efl mH.mH mw.mH mm.oH em.mH NH.NH om.oH mo.oH om.mH cowuaeomuuCH M2 omH.H mn.mH oH.eH oo.qH Hm.oH wH.mH Hw.eH NH.¢H nm.¢H oN.¢H .mo.ma cowumflawmw< mz oow.H mw.HH nm.qH om.NH mw.HH mN.HH oo.oH eo.mH mm.mH Hm.mH oo.NH zsoc0us< No. NNN.N oo.mH mw.mH mm.mH oo.HH Hw.eH om.ma «HHNH No.qH ee.mH omyea cowufinwrxm mz wan.o mm.oH No.oH me.NH mw.eH oo.NH me.ma mm.NH we.NH qo.mH mm.NH ueouo mo. mwm.a um.ma om.NH mq.NH wN.oH om.NH oo.NH no.mH o~.¢H mw.¢H mo.NH ouceummmm mo. mow.H mw.wa mo.mH om.ma HN.¢H Hm.eH oo.oH wo.ma oo.mH wo.mH mm.mHm uceEm>mwro< a Unumeumum-e Amaze AQNHZVAHHHZV gauzo Aefiuzv Asauzv Ammuzv Aemuzo Aoeuzv Ameuzo mmenmeam> porno mup< .om wmmcflmsm .om wwwmswcmg rum: wocmwom .um.oom Lmflawcm maflm .mzzm mEom mmHMOOMH mmmm co momma mo comwumoEoo < mm edema CHAPTER‘V SUMMARX, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summagz. The data summarized here were grouped according to the hypotheses to which they were related. flzggshgggg‘l‘gggjg. Principals, in general, had similar need patterns regardless of sex and level of position. Male elementary principals were very much like male secondary principals; so much so, in fact, that not one significant difference could be found when their need profiles were compared. A comparison of male elementary with female elementary principals turned up similar findings; only two of the fifteen need variables were significantly different. The male elementary principals had significantly higher Achievement scores and lower Succorance scores. Because only one female secondary principal participated in the study, no comparison was made between male and female secondary principals or between female elementary and secondary principals. When need patterns achieved by the total group of principals were compared with those manifested by the total group of teachers, only two significant differences were found. Principals were found to have a significantly greater need for Deference and less need for Autonomy than the teachers. Extensive differences were found to exist between the need patterns of elementary and secondary teachers. 132 Statistically significant differences were found for twelve of the fifteen variables. Elementary teachers had significantly greater mean need scores on the variables Deference, Order, Affiliation, Intraception, Succorance, Abasement, and Nurturance. Secondary teachers exhibited greater need for Achievement, Autonomy, Dominance, Heterosexuality, and Aggression. When the need patterns of male elementary teachers were compared with those of male secondary teachers only one significant difference was found. Male elementary teachers had a higher moan score for the variable Intraception. But when the need patterns of female elementary teachers were compared with those of female secondary teachers significant differences were found for seven variables. Female elementary teachers manifested greater need than female secondary teachers for Deference, Order, Affiliation, and Nurturance. Secondary female teachers had higher mean scores for Achievement, Dominance, and Aggression. A comparison of need patterns of male and female elementary teachers also indicated significant differences for seven variables. Men had significantly greater mean scores on the variables Achievement, Autonomy, Dominance, and Aggression. The females had significantly higher scores for the variables Affiliation, Succorance, and Nurturance. Nine significant differences were found when the need patterns of male and female secondary teachers were compared. Males had significantly higher mean scores on the variables 133 Autonomy, Dominance, Endurance, and Aggression, and they had significantly lower mean scores than the women with regard to Affiliation, Intraception, Succorance, Abasement, and Change. Hngthgses g and g, The use of deviation scores as a means of determining the intensity of teachers' needs when compared with their principals' needs indicated that there were few differences between those of teachers who were most preferred and those who were least preferred by their principals. Teachers expressing affinity or dislike for their principals showed little difference in need patterns when compared with each other. The least preferred teachers had a significantly higher mean deviation score for the variable Exhibition than the most preferred teachers, and those teachers who expressed disliking toward their principals had significantly higher mean deviation scores for the variables Achievement and Abasement. ‘When Chi Square analyses were calculated for ten need variables of twenty principals on which they were rated high and complementary needs exhibited by teachers who expressed affinity or disliking for those principals, significant differences occurred for five of twelve analyses. Two of these were in a direction which supported a Theory of Complementary Needs and three did not. Another twelve Chi Square analyses, again utilizing complementary needs expressed by principals and teachers, but this time involving principals rated low on the same ten variables brought to light only one significant difference, and it also fell in a direction which supported the Theory of Complementary Needs. 134 Again, utilising twenty principals rated high and twenty rated low'on the same ten variables, twentyofour Chi Square analyses were calculated using the complementary needs of those teachers with whom the principals most preferred to work and those teachers with whom the principals least preferred to work. This time two significant differences were found; neither one was supportive of the Theory of Complementary Needs. The evidence obtained regarding intensity and kind of needs did not support the Complementary- Needs Hypothesis. Hypothesis 2. As was true when Gross defined the Executive Professional Leadership quality, the five teacher- administrator relationship factors which he also defined were found to be positively related to EPL. However, when a multiple correlation was applied to the data, two of the five factors (Perceived Social Support of Teachers and Perceived Level of Staff Involvement) appeared to be the most significant contributors to the multiple correlation. When only those two factors were correlated with EPL, they yielded a multiple correlation of +0.80, very close to the one obtained.(*0.81) when all five factors were considered. The Perceived Social Support of Teachers score was the best single predictor of EPL (r = +0.77). Sggig-economic and educational factors agg‘gggg,pg£ggggg. Some socio-economic and educational factors appeared closely related to certain types of need patterns. Age appeared to be a highly discriminative factor. The raw scores for the 135 variables Deference and Order appeared to increase as age increased, and the scores for the need variables Exhibition and Heterosexuality decreased as age increased. The need for Dominance increased until reaching the 41-45 year old age group, and then decreased with increasing age. The greater the proportion of their undergraduate expenses earned, the greater the Autonomy and Dominance scores of the teachers. There was a corresponding decrease in need for Affiliation, Succorance, and Nurturance with increasing percentage of expenses earned. Married teachers had less need for Succorance and Affiliation than single, divorced, and widowed teachers. Widowers tended to have high.mean scores for Deference, Order, and Endurance, and less need for Achievement and Dominance. The single teachers had lower need for Achievement, Deference, Order, and Endurance, but expressed a high need for Affiliation. The type of community in which an individual spent most of his youth appeared related to some needs measured by the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. Teachers from farm communities had significantly less need for Achievement than those from.villages, small cities, or larger cities. Those from farms and villages had greater need for Deference than those from the cities. It also seemed that the teachers who spent most of their youth living in a farm or village community had a greater need for Intraception and less need for Heterosexuality than those coming from the small and large cities. The teachers from the villages and cities had 136 considerably lower scores for the need Abasement than did those from farm communities. Teachers who did not prefer teaching as a career when they entered the profession are characterized by higher needs for Achievement and Aggression and less need for Order than those who did prefer teaching. The higher the economic strata in which the teacher perceived his family, the greater the need for Heterosexuality. Teachers with Master's degrees manifested greater need for Achievement, Deference, Autonomy, and Dominance, and less need for Abasement than teachers with Bachelor's degrees. Those who were part-time undergraduate students expressed less need for Achievement, Exhibition, Succorance, and Heterosexuality than teachers who were full-time undergraduate students. At the same time, former full-time undergraduate students expressed less need for Order and Endurance. Only one significant difference appeared when teachers who had attended parochial secondary schools were compared with those who had attended public secondary schools; the former parochial school students expressed a greater need for Exhibition. A comparison of teachers in terms of teaching levels (the four_levels being lower elementary, upper elementary Junior high school and senior high school) brought to light numerous significant differences. There was a trend for mean scores on the variables Achievement, Autonomy, Aggression, and Dominance to increase as one moves from the lower 137 elementary category to the senior high school group; the opposite trend was noticeable for the variables Affiliation, Intraception, Succorance, Abasement, and Nurturance. Lower elementary teachers appeared to have a lower need for Heterosexuality than the other three groups. gonclusions. The conclusions presented here were grouped according to the hypotheses to which they were related. flypgtheses l and g. Principals, as a group, differed from.teachers, as a group, only on the two variables Deference and Autonomy. The principals expressed a greater need for Deference and less need for Autonomy than the teachers. This pattern continued regardless of the level or sex of principals or the level or sex of teachers with whom they were compared. The two variables are especially important when viewed in relation to one another, since a high Deference score indicated a greater need to be led or follow others and a lower Autonomy score denoted less need for independence. Either of four factors might account for the occurrences of this pattern. First of all, there is a possibility that teachers with these characteristics tend to gravitate toward principalships, actively seeking them out. A second factor might be that those responsible for selecting principals purposefully select teachers who manifest behavior representative of those needs. This would infer that those doing the selecting find it desirable to 138 have as principals those who exhibit this type of behavior. A third area for consideration might be that the first two possibilities operate in unison. Finally, there is the possibility that the significant differences between teachers and principals were the result of a chance selection of principals. Numerous differences appeared when the needs of elementary teachers were compared with those of secondary teachers; in fact, significant differences occurred with regard to twelve of the fifteen variables, and nine of these differences were significant at the .002 level. When the differences between elementary and secondary teachers were explored further, an interesting pattern appeared. Initially, when the need patterns of male elementary and.male secondary teachers were compared, only one significant difference appeared. The male elementary teachers had a greater need for Intraception than the male secondary teachers. On the other fourteen variables no significant differences occurred. However, when female elementary teachers were compared with female secondary teachers, significant differences appeared for seven of the fifteen variables. This would indicate that the males at all levels of teaching in Urban City had similar need patterns, but that the need patterns of the females from the elementary and.secondary levels quite different. This trend was further accentuated when need patterns of male elenentary teachers were compared with those of female eefiLeanentary teachers and when a secondary malemsecondary female 139 comparison was made. At the elementary level, the inter-sex comparison turned up seven significant differences and the secondary comparison showed nine significant differences. Thus two important, and inter-related, conclusions can be drawn. The first is that the apparent differential in need patterns existing between elementary and secondary teachers was accounted for almost totally by the differences in female need patterns at both levels. The second is that level of teaching has apparently masked the intra-sex differential that existed. A comparison of male and female elementary teachers from Urban City with those in Cuba and Jackson's73 study indicated that both groups of teachers were highly similar for all fifteen need variables. The authors pointed out that teachers, as a result of the nature of their positions, would be expected to be highly nurturant, affiliative and intraceptive. But as was found for the teachers in their sample, this was not found to be true. It is appropriate here to repeat a quote taken from their study and which was also included in Chapter II of this study. Thus existing evidence indicates that teachers, in general, are not highly motivated by a strong interest in social service, by powerful nurturant needs, or even by a deep interest in children.74 73Cuba and Jackson, loc. cit. 74;b d. 140 Another parallel between the teachers involved in Cuba and Jackson's study and the Urban City teachers can also be drawn. Both groups expressed high need for Deference, Order, and Endurance, and low need for Exhibition and Heterosexuality (when compared to Edwards College Sample). Thus it is again appropriate to repeat another quote taken from.their research and which was included in Chapter II of this study. These characteristics appear to fit the stereotypic model of the teacher as sexually impotent, obsequious, eternally 5321233 {Sié‘i’fa‘fi‘fiy demanding’ and Care must be taken when one attempts to derive meaning from the low Heterosexuality scores which teachers consistently attain. Although.many reasons have been set forth to account for this recurring phenomena, it is here suggested that one influential factor'might be an extreme degree of caution exercised by teachers fearful that higher scores on variables of this nature might be misinterpreted. It is highly possible that teachers, not wishing to provide the public with any more grounds for criticism.than is currently available, carefully avoid any such situations. flypotheses §_§gg_fl. The Theory of Complementary Needs, was originally developed and researched to explain the mate- selection process, and the research related to that theory has centered around the inter-relationship of need patterns in.mate-selection. In this study data was sought as a basis 751b1d. 141 for determining whether or not the same process was Operative when the interpersonal relationships existing between teachers and school principals were examined. On the basis of results obtained from investigating the relationships between intensity of needs of principals and teachers, the conclusion is that the Theory of Complementary Needs was not found to be operative with regard to those relationships. Of the three significant differences that were found, none were in support of the Theory of Complementary Needs. The Theory of Complementary Needs received some support from the investigation of kinds of needs. Of the eight significant relationships found, three were in support of the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis. A number of factors might account for the results obtained regarding the Theory of Complementary Needs. It is entirely possible that the influence of need patterns on teacher-administrator relationships differs from that which is operative regarding the matemselection process. Bowerman 76 on the basis of their research, concluded that and Day, some needs might operate in a complementary manner, others might operate homogamously, and still others may not exert any influence at all. The possibility also exists that the procedures applied to test the relationships of intensity and kind of needs to the teacher-administrator relationship did not discriminate 76Bowerman and Day, loc. cit. 142 sufficiently to permit discovery of existing relationships. Hypothesigié. It is apparent from the data that the extent to which principals gave their teachers social support in the sense of understanding and help with the problems they faced was highly related to whether or not the principals fulfilled the professional role which the teachers saw as desirable. When the Perceived Social Support of Teachers score was combined with the Perceived Level of Staff Involvement score, they yielded a multiple correlation as high as was achieved when all five teacheroadministrator factors were involved in the multiple correlation. The conclusion can be drawn that teachers felt they should work :!££§ the school administrators and not £25 them. The act of working with someone also implies the right to participate in the decisionomaking processes of the institution. It would seem that the remaining three teachermadministrator relationship factors (Perceived Support of Teachers' Authority, Perceived Level of Egalitarian Relationships, and Perceived Managerial Support of Teachers) lacked greater influence within the original multiple correlation because their emphases were restricted and all were encompassed within the remaining two factors (Perceived Social Support of Teachers and Perceived Level of Staff Involvement). After all, a principal who understands and aids in the solution of his teachers' problems would provide adequate support of their authority and sufficient managerial support. It would also seem that when teachers are fully involved in the decision- making processes of the school, equality of relationships is inherent in the situation. 143 Socio-economig and educational factors, and gggg pattern . Older teachers had need patterns quite different from those of younger teachers, and for some variables (i.e., Deference, Order, Exhibition, Endurance, and Heterosexuality) the relationship was linear; that is, the magnitude of the need expressed increased or decreased with increasing age. Any of three alternative reasons could account for this pattern. First, the intensity of needs could change with increasing age. Second, the older teachers might be a residual group, the remaining teachers with other need patterns having left the profession. Third, both of the previous two alternatives could be operating concurrently. The evolving pattern is a quite understandable one. As teachers grow older and manifest the attributes characteristic of old age, they become more deferent and have a greater need to handle their affairs in an orderly manner. They also find little need to be exhibitionists or for a high degree of heterosexual relationships. At the same time, they exhibit a greater need for endurance in a world where they must compete with the young and energetic. Another factor should be mentioned at this point which refers to statements made earlier regarding teachers' scores on the variable Heterosexuality. When the teachers were broken down into age categories, the youngest category manifested a need for Heterosexuality higher than that expressed by any of the other groups of teachers to whom.the test Was administered. But the need for Heterosexuality appeared to decline rapidly with increasing age so that any average of all teachers would include a great majority whose 144 need for Heterosexuality is in varying states of decline. It is quite understandable that those who found it necessary to earn their way through college had a greater need to be autonomous and dominant, and less need for Affiliation, Nurturance, and Succorance. They are those people who found it necessary to be independent and, as a result, expressed those needs which are associated with independence. Investigation of need patterns when teachers were separated according to marital status must be undertaken with caution. It seems reasonable that a large percentage of the single teachers would be younger, and a large percentage of the widowed teachers would be elderly. Thus, one might mistakingly attribute differences to marital status which were actually a function of age. In line with this possibility, it should be noted that the trends for the variables Achievement, Deference, Order, Affiliation, Succorance, Dominance, and Endurance were similar to those which occurred when teachers were separated on the basis of age. Separation of teachers on the basis of the type of community in which.most of their youthful years were spent can also be misleading. If general population mobility patterns are taken into consideration, there would be a strong possibility that many of those who spent their elderly years on a farm were older, and thus even though needs were a factor of age, there might be a tendency to over-estimate the influence of the community. Nevertheless, some trends were 145 apparent. Those coming from farms and villages exhibited greater need for Deference than those from the cities. It might be that, working in a highly urbanized area, those from the cities felt better able to cope with their environment. Teachers who spent most of their youth in the city exhibited less need for Intraception than those from the farms and villages. One conclusion might be that those from the farms and villages had.more opportunities to be by themselves and consider the many aspects of the world around them. A factor that might account for the lower need for Heterosexuality exhibited by those from farms and villages is that they always had a great deal of work at hand which was time- consuming and which left them with little time for hetero- sexual relationships. Teachers who did not prefer teaching as a career differed from those that did prefer teaching on the variables Achievement and Aggression. This is quite understandable since those entering the field of education generally have limited Opportunities for advancement in terms of position and salary. Thus, an aggressive person with a need to achieve might very well prefer some occupation other than teaching. The corollary of this is that those with less aggressive tendencies and less need to achieve select and are happy with their teaching positions. Division of teachers on the basis of academic degrees earned provided a number of significant differences. As might be expected, those teachers who desired, sought out, and completed.Master's degrees had a greater need for 146 Achievement than those with Bachelor's degrees. It is also highly probable that a much greater percentage of women are content with Bachelor's degrees. Teachers with advanced degrees, who can be viewed as people attempting to improve themselves within their chosen profession, also had significantly higher mean scores for Dominance and Autonomy. Among the peOple seeking advanced degrees are a number who are seeking advancement in terms of positions and financial remuneration, and these people might be expected to be autonomous and independent. It is also interesting to note that those with advanced degrees tended to have a greater need for Deference; an especially meaningful fact when it is recalled that theprincipals in Urban City were highly deferent when compared to the teachers. As might be expected, the need patterns of teachers who were part-time undergraduate students were very similar to those of teachers who had earned between seventyosix and one hundred per cent of their undergraduate expenses. Although there are probably other reasons for part-time attendance, the need for finances would be a major factor. Unaccountably, the former fullwtime students had a significantly higher mean need score for Achievement. The fact that the part-time students exhibited greater need for Order and Endurance, and less for Exhibition is understandable. Going to school part-time while carrying out other activities necessitated a great deal of endurance while maintaining their affairs in an orderly manner and left little time for exhibitionist activities. 147 When the need patterns of teachers, divided into categories according to teaching level, were compared, numerous differences appeared. There is a strong possibility that these differentials are actually sex-linked. All of the lower elementary teachers were females, and all but thirty-six of the upper elementary teachers were females. On the other hand, fifty-one per cent of the junior and senior high school teachers were male. In fact, it was pointed out earlier that the level at which some females were teaching served as a mask to hide intra-sex differences. Recommendationsa A great deal of research remains to be done with regard to the influence of need patterns on the teacher-administrator relationship. Newer, more discriminative, procedures must be developed to more effectively investigate the importance of intensity of needs as they affect interpersonal relationships. The Theory of Complementary Needs stated that a complementary relationship exists with regard to both intensity and kind of needs, but the related research is centered on the study of kind of needs. This study represents the first attempt to investigate the Complementary-Needs Hypothesis with regard to intensity of needs. Research is currently needed to determine how‘various need patterns are satisfied by different occupational positions. For example, why should any of the subjects an individual might teach better satisfy one need pattern over another, or does the possibility exist that, within any 148 occupational category, all need patterns could be 77 investigation satisfactorily accommodated. Heil's indicates that teachers with highly diverse personality patterns are able to function effectively under varying conditions, thus paving the way for future research regarding the relationship between personality patterns, conditions of work, and effective instruction. Another area in need of exploration relates to the stability of needs over both limited and extended periods of time. The study by Masling and Stern78 lent credence to the point of view that personality patterns can change as a result of highly meaningful experiences. Teacher education institutions would find it quite valuable to have data available which could document what personality changes, if any, took place during academic training of prospective teachers. Those responsible for personnel placement in school systems would find it advantageous to know more about the impact of personality variables on interpersonal relationships ‘within the schools and also as they relate to effectiveness ‘within a given occupational position. The conclusions of 79 and Edward Gross8O attest to the fact Ghiselli and Lodahl that personality variables influence interpersonal relation- ships and job effectiveness. '77He11, loc. cit. 78Masling and Stern, loc. cit. 79Ghiselli and Lodahl, loc. cit. 80Gross (Edward), loc. cit. 149 It would be quite interesting to examine the inter- relationship between teacher-administrator personality patterns and effectiveness Of instruction, or the influence of these variables on superintendent-principal relationships and their impact on administrative effectiveness. Since other instruments which purport to measure aspects of personality are available, research utilizing them should be conducted with the purpose of determining their effective- ness and usefullness within the school setting. In general, the study of needs and their interrelationships within the educational setting Offers a multitude of Opportunities for further research. BIBLIOGRAPHY 151 BIBLIOGRAPHY Becker, Gilbert. "The Complementary-Needs Hypothesis Authoritarianism, Dominance, and Other Edwards Personal Preference Schedule Scores," The Journal gfi Personality, 32 No.1245-56, March, 1934. Bowerman, Charles E. and Barbara R. Day. "A Test of the Theory of Complementary Needs as Applied to Couples During Courtship," American Sociological Review 21 No.5:602-605, October, 1956. Burgess, Ernest W. and Paul Wallin. Courtship, Engagement and Marriag . New York: J.B. Lippincott Company, TWA 440 pp . Carman, Philip McClellan. Egg Relationship gg Individual and HusbandDWife Patterns 9i Personaligy Characteristics £9 Martial Stabiligy. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Washington, 1955, 84 pp. Doyle, Louis Andrew. A Study 3; Egg Expectencies'Which Elementary Iggghers, School Administrators, Boagg Members and Earents Have 2; the Elementary Teachers' Roles. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1956, 169 pp. Dropkin, Stanley and Marvin Taylor. "Perceived Problems of Beginning Teachers and Related Factors," Journal of Teacher Education, 14 No.4:384-390, December, 1963: Edwards, Allen L. Edwards Personal Ereferencg Schedule Manual. New York: The Psychological Corporation, Revised, 1959, 27 pp. Garrison, Karl C. and Mary Hughie Scott. "A Comparison of the Personal Needs Of College Students Preparing to Teach In Different Teaching Areas," Educational and Psychological Measurement, 21 No.4:955-964, 1951. and Mary Hughie Scott. "The Relationship Of Selected Personal Characteristics to the Needs Of College Students Preparing to Teach," Educational gag Psychological Measurement, 22 No.4:753-758, 196i. Ghiselli, Edwin E. and Thomas M. Lodahl. "Patterns of Managerial Traits and Group Effectiveness," The Journal gfi Abnormal and Social Psychology, 57:61-66, 195 . 152 Gray, James T. "Needs and Values In Three Occupations," Personnel and Guidance Journal, 42 No.3:238-44, November, 1963. Gross, Edward, "Symbiosis and Consensus As Integrative Factors In Small Groups," American Egciological ReVieW, 21 N0023174-79’ April, IgSgo Gross, Neal and Robert E. Herriott. Staff Leadership En the Public Schools: A Sggiological In ui . New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1965} pp. , Ward S. Mason and Alexander W. McEachern. Egplorations Lg Role Analysis: Studies of the School Su erintendenc Role. New York: John WiTey and Sons, Inca. 1538. 37% pp. Guba, Egan G. and Philip W. Jackson. "The Need Structure of In~Service Teachers: An Occupational Analysis," School Review, 65 NO. 22176-92, Summer, 1957. Heil, Louis H. "Personality Variables: An Important Determinant In Effective Elementary-School Instruction," Theogy Into Practice, 3 No.1:12-15, February, 1964. Halpin, Andrew W., editor. administrative gheogy E3 Education. Midwest Administration Center, University of Chicago, 1958, 185 pp. Kemp, C. Gratton. "A Comparative Study of the Need Structures of Administrators, Teachers, and Counselors," Journal 9; Educational Research, 57 No.8:425-27, April, 1964. Ktsanes, Thomas. "Mate Selection on the Basis of Personality Type: A Study Utilizing An Empirical Typology of Personality," merican Sociological Review, 20 No.5: 547-51, October, . Leavitt, Harold J. "Consequences of Executive Behavior: The Administrative Two-Step and Other Seemly Dances for Administrators," The Bulletin 9; the National I sociation g; SecongggynSchool Princi als, 48 No.291: - , Apri-1, 40 Lien, Ronald L. "Democratic Administrative Behavior," The Bulletin 2; the National 9 sociation pg Secondary- School Princi als, 43 No. : - , March, . Masling, Joseph and George Stern. "Changes In MOtives As A Result of Teaching " Theogy Into Practice 2 No.2: 95-104, April, 1965. """' "'"""'"" 153 Murray, Henry A. and Others. mplorations In Personalit New York: Oxford University Press, 1933: 761 pp. Murstein, Bernard I. "The Complementary-Needs Hypothesis In Newlyweds and Middle-Aged Married Couples," Journal 22 Abnormal ggd‘gggigElggychologY. 63 No.1:194-1 July, 1961. Ryans, David G. "Appraising Teacher Personnel," Journal %§ Experimental Education, 16 No.1:1¢30, September, 94 . . "Teacher Behavior Theory and Research: Implications for Teacher Education," Journal of Teacher Education, 14 NO. 3. 274- 93, September, 1963.— Smelser, William T. "Dominance As A Factor In Achievement and Perception In Cooperative Problem Solving Inter- action," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62 No. “535 42, May, 1961. Taylor, Bernard Harrison. Use git the Edwgrds Personal Preference Schedule In Eg§_blishing Personality Profiles for Three College Maqug . Unpublished Master's Thesis, Universitym of Washington, 1957, 45 pp. Tobin, Walter William. Use Of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule” In Establishing Personalzlty Profiles for Teachers and Education Students. Unpublished Master 3 Thesis, University of Washington, 1956, 27 pp. Winch, Robert F. "The Theory of Complementary Needs In Mate Selection: Final Results on the Test Of the General Hypothesis," American Sociological Review, 20 NO. 5: 552- 55, October, 1955. and Thomas and Virginia Ktsanes. "The Theory of Complementary Needs In Mate Selection: An Analytic and Descriptive Study," American Sociological Review, 19 No.3:241-49, June,-T954. Wodtke, Kenneth H. and others. "Patterns of Needs As Predictors of Classroom Behavior of Teachers," duc tional and Ps cholo ical Measurement, 23 No.3: - , Autumn, 1963. APPENDIX A COVER AND FOLLOW-UP LETTERS 155 TEACHERS' COVER LETTER Dear Staff Member, Since we have already met and discussed this study, you are aware that we are attempting to determine the influence of teachers' and principals' personal preferences on the relationships between teachers and their administrators. In attempting to measure these qualities we are using both the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and the Teacher Section: The National Principalship Study. Please use a pencil with soft lead when answering the questions on the two instruments. Because we must reuse the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule again very soon, it would be appreciated if you would complete and return them within a few days after receiving them, Read the directions on the front page carefully. Write all answers on the separate answer sheet placed inside the booklet, and please answer all the questions. Do not write you name on any of the enclosed materials. Also note that the answer spaces on the answer sheet have been placed horizontally in groups of five. 0n the Teacher Section: The National Principalship Study the-answers should be written in the booklet. No identification is required on this instrument. Again, your cooPeration in returning the materials as soon as possible would be greatly appreciated. When the instruments have been completed, seal them inside the stamped addressed envelope in which they were given to you and place the package in any united States mail box. Thank you.very much for your cooperation. Sincerely, . Harvey Goldman 156 PRINCIPALS' COVER LETTER Dear Principal, Since we have already met and discussed this study, you are aware that we are attempting to determine the influence of teachers' and principals' personal preferences on the teacher-administrator relationship. In attempting to measure these qualities we are asking all the principals to complete the enclosed materials which include the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and the Administrative Preference Form. Please use a pencil with soft lead when answering the questions on both instruments. With regard to the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule please do not make any marks on the booklet since it must be reused. Read the directions on the front page carefully. Write all answers on the answer sheet placed inside the booklet, and please answer all the questions. Do not write your name on any of the enclosed materials. Also note that the answer spaces on the answer sheet have been placed horizontally in groups of five. All necessary directions are included on the Administrative Preference Form. No identification is required on the form. Thank you very much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Harvey Goldman 157 FOLLOW-UP LETTER Dear 9 Approximately a week ago, after meeting with you and your fellow staff members to discuss a research project through which the relationship between teachers and their principals is being investigated, research instruments need to be reused, and their return within the next few days would be appreciated. Thank you for honoring this request. With your cooperation, I am hopeful that new information concerning teacher- principal relationships will evolve from the study. Thank you once again. Sincerely, Harvey Goldman APPENDIX B INSTRUMENTS 159 CN ADMINISTRATIVE PREFERENCE FORM Listed below in alphabetical order are the names of all members of your staff who spend half or more of their working time teaching classes. After careful consideration place a letter X on the line to the left of the ___teachers' names with whom you would.most prefer to deal in staff meetings and individual consultation, during conferences and on committees, and in decision-making situations. Then, on the lines to the left of the ___teachers' names with whom you would least prefer to deal in similar situations, place a circle 0 . __1 __19 __2 _20 __3 ___21 __ __4 _22 __5 ___23 ___6 __24 _7 ___25 ___8 _26 _9 __27_ 10 ___28 Z _11 _29 12 __30 _T 13 __31 _ __14 _32 _ 15 __33 16 __34 17 _35 - 18 i _36 160 THE NATIONAL PRINCIPALSHIP STUDY: TEACHER SECTION a research study Sponsored by the COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM U. S. OFFICE OF EDUCATION and the GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION HARVARD UNIVERSITY 20 Oxford Street, Cambridge 38, Massachusetts APRIL 1961 Reprinted in part with permission 161 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE QUESTIONNAIRE YOu.will find that each section of the questionnaire can be completed rather quickly. Please read the instructions carefully at the heading of each of the sections. Please answer all questions. You may find a few questions inappropriate to your particular situation, but remember that the questionnaire is being given to elementary, junior and senior high school teachers in all regions of the United States. If you feel a question is not appropriate to your situation use the response category, "Not relevant to my situation." If you have difficulty in answering any question, please give us your best estimate or appraisal. If, after responding to a question, you.would like to comment on it you.may do so in the margin. In completing the questionnaire, you may wonder about the numbering system used and the large numbers and X's occasionally inserted near the places where you are asked to indicate your responses. These procedures have been used to facilitate the I.B.M. tabulation of the data. You will note that a code number has been placed on the front page of the questionnaire. This number provides a way for tabulating the shmilarities and differences among schools and school systems in teacher's views of the principalship. Please do not place your name anywhere on the questionnaire. Instructions. which a PRINCIPAL can engage. and Question 4 by writi in C01. I 162 Listed below are some activities in Please answer Question 3 the LETTER and in 601. II the NUMBER which best represent your replies. Questionpg Do you feel the PRINCIPAL OF YOUR SCHOOL should engage in the following activities? I feel that the principal of my school. . . Question‘fi How frequently does your principal do this? My principal. . . . . . . does this 0 o O O 0 O o O m A = Absolutely must 1 = Always B = Preferably should 2 = Almost always C 3 May or may not 3 ? Occasionally D ’ Preferably should not 4 3 Almost never E = Absolutely must not 5 3 Never N ' This activity not N = This activity not relevant to my school relevant to my school 001.1 Col. 11 11. Support a teacher's discipline decision . that the principal believes is grossly unfair to the child. , 14. Insist that students obey teacher's instructions first, and complain about them later. 15. Side with the teacher when a student complains about the teacher's behavior, even if the student's complaint is legitimate. 22. Back the teacher in any public controversy between teacher D and student. 14. Encourage all teachers to call him by his first name, when students are not present. 15. Make it a practice to have lunch frequently with the teachers in his school. 163 16. Discourage teachers from treating him as "one of the gang" at informal gatherings of teachers. I I l 24. Avoid first-name relationships with his teachers. 25. Insist, tactfully, that teachers show due respect for his position as principal. Ill] Instructions. Listed below are some activities in which a PRINCIPAL can engage. Please answer Question 3 and Question 4 by writing in C01. I the LETTER and in C01. II the NUMBER which best represent your replies. Question Q Question 3 Do you feel the PRINCIPAL How frequently does your 9: YOUR SCHOOL should engage principal do this? in the following activities? I feel that the principal My principal does of my school. . . this. A a Absolutely must 1 = Always B = Preferably should 2 = Almost always C ' May or may not 3 ? Occasionally D ' Preferably should not 4 = Almost never E ' Absolutely must not 5 3 Never N ' This activity not N = This activity not relevant to my school relevant to my school F Col. I Col. II 11. Share with teachers the responsibility for determining the minimum level of satisfactory student performance in your school. 12. Share with teachers the responsibility ‘ for evaluating how good a job the school is doing. 164 13. Share with teachers the responsibility for determining how teachers should be [:J supervised. 14. Share with teachers the responsibility for develOping a policy for handling student discipline problems. l: Instructions. Please answer Question 6 for each statement listed below as it applies to the principal of your school. In answering the question, please write in each box the egg letter that best describes the behavior of your principal. Question E To what extent does A 3 Always your PRINCIPAL engage B 3 Almost Always in the following C 3 Frequently kinds of behavior? D ? Occasionally E # Almost Never F 3 Never N = I do not know' §tatements 11. Gives teachers the feeling that their work is an "important" activity. 12. Gets teachers to upgrade their performance standards in their classrooms. 13. Gives teachers the feeling that they can make significant contributions to improving the classroom performance of their students. 15. Makes teachers'meetings a valuable educational activity. 16. Has constructive suggestions to offer teachers in dealing with their major problems. l7. Takes a strong interest in my professional development. 18. Treats teachers as professional workers. [—JL—JLJ C] U CID 22. 25. 26. 27. 280 12. 21. 24. 25. 32. 33. 12. 13° 16. 18. 19. 20. Statements Considers "what is best for all the children" in his decisions affecting educational programs. Maximizes the different skills found in his faculty. Brings to the attention of teachers educational literature that is of value to them in their jobs. Helps teachers to understand the sources of important problems they are facing. Displays a strong interest in improving the quality of the educational program. Procrastinates in his decision making. Displays inconsistency in his decisions. Has the relevant facts before making important decisions. Requires teachers to engage in unnecessary paper work. Makes a teacher's life difficult because of his administrative ineptitude. Runs meetings and conferences in a disorganized fashion. Puts you at ease when you talk with him. Rubs people the wrong way. Develops a real interest in your welfare. Devel0ps a "we-feeling" in working with others. Makes those who work with him feel inferior to hhn. Diaplays integrity in his behavior. DECIDED-C] LLICJDCICLF-WI—l Fir—l 165 166 Below you are being requested to furnish information about your students, their parents, and your fellow teachers. We ask that you provide this information in the form of percentages, although we know it is difficult to give exact percentages for most of the questions. Please write in your SINGLE BEST ESTIMATE of the percentage that you feel most accurately reflects your situation. A. Of the STUDENTS you teach, what per cent. . . 11. Are not interested in academic achievement? 1 13. Have been discipline problems during the . last school year? 1 15. Werk up to their intellectual capacities? 1 17. Were not adequately prepared to do the grade level work you expected of them when they entered your class (or classes)? 1 33. Are one or more years behind grade level in reading ability? 1 35. Are not mastering the subject matter or skills you teach at the minimum level of satisfactory performance? 1 C. Of_the TEACHERS in your school, what per cent. . 11. Display a sense of loyalty to the school? 1 13. Enjoy working in the school? 1 15. Respect the judgment of the administrators of the school? 1 17. w’ork cooperatively with their fellow teachers? 1 19. Display a sense of pride - in the school? 1 21. Accept the educational philosOphy underlying the curriculum of the school? 1 23. Try new teaching methods in their classrooms? 1 27. Do everything possible to motivate their students? 1 33. Do "textbook teaching" only? 167 37. Take a strong interest in the social or emotional problems of their students? 1 45. Plan their classes so that different types of students can benefit from them? 1 47. Provide opportunities for students to go beyond the minimum demands of assigned . work? 1 Instructions. At the heading of the column below is Question 13. Please answer this question for each of.the statements found below. In answering the question, write in the one code letter which best represents your answer. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Question 13 How desirous are you of doing the following? = I would not want to... = I am not especially 'anxious to... I have some desire to.. ? I would very much like to... 3 I am extremely anxious tOOOO' MUG 613’ ll Statements Become an assistant principal Become the principal of an elementary school. Become the principal of a junior high school. Become the principal of a senior high school. Become a staff specialist attached to a central office. Become an assistant superintendent of schools. Become an associate superintendent of schools. [ADDED-['0 168 Statements 18. Become a school superintendent. 19. Remain a teacher in this school for the remainder of my educational career. 20. Remain a teacher in this school system for the remainder of my educational career, but move to a school in a "better neighborhood." 21. Remain a teacher at my present grade level(s) for the remainder of my educational career. 22. Obtain a higher paying teaching job in another school system. 23. Obtain a higher paying position outside the field of education. DUE] EJ [3D Instructions. Our purpose here is to obtain background characteristics of teachers. This information will be used to compare the background of teachers and principals and to examine factors related to the views held by teachers about the principal's role. Please answer the following questions by checking the ONE answer which best specifies your reply. — f 11. How many years have you been a teacher? I; 1 year 6) 6-10 years 2 2 years n. 7) 11-15 years 6 3) 3 years 8) 16-20 years a 4) 4 years 9) 21-25 years 5) 5 years 0) 26 years or mo re 12. How many years have you taught in this school system? 1) 1 year 6) 6-10 years 2) 2 years _7) 11-15 years 3) 3 years . 8) 16-20 years 4) 4 years 9) 21-25 years 5) 5 years 0) 26 years or more 13. 14° 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 169 How many years have you taught in this school? I; 1 year _6; 6-10 years 2 2 years 7 11-15 years 3) 3 years :8) 16- 20 years *4) 4 years m9) 21- 25 years :5) 5 years 0) 26 years or more In how many schools in this system have you taught? I; 1 school . 4 4 schools 2 2 schools 5 5 schools 3) 3 schools 6 6 or more schools At what time do you customarily arrive at school for work? . ___ before 7:30 A.M. ___2 between 7:30 and 8:00 A.M. ___3 between 8:01 and 8:30 A.M. ___4 between 8:31 and 9:00 A.M. ___5) between 9:01 and 9:30 A.M. At what time do you customarily leave school? ___1) before 2:00 P.M. ___2) between 2:00 and 3: ___3) between 3:01 and 4: 4 between 4:01 and 5: between 5:01 and 7: after 7:00 P.M. 9_ the avera e how frequently do you work on school acti ivit as at home? ___1 zero nights per week _2 one night per week :3 2 to 3 nights per week :4 4 to 5 nights per week :5) more than 5 nights per week 9g the avera e, how much of your week-end is taken up with school work? , .1 none . 2 very little _3 some :4 a great deal On the avera e, how frequently are you contacted at home about school matters? ‘___1) once a week or less ___2 2 to 4 times a week _fi_3 5 to 10 times a week ___4 more than 10 times a week 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 170 When were you born? ___1; 1891-1895 {___6) 1916-1920 ___2 1896-1900 ___7) 1921-1925 ___3) 1901-1905 ___8) 1926-1930 ___4) 1906-1910 ___9) 1931-1935 ___5) 1911-1915 ___0) 1936-1940 Are you: __J; Female __2 Male Where were your parents born? 1) both in the United States . 2) one in U.S. and one foreign born 3) both foreign born What was your father'§,MAJOR lifetime occupation? ___1; education ' ___2 professional (other than education), or scientific ' ___3) managerial, executive, or prOprietor of large business 4) small business owner or manager ___5; farm owner or rentor ___ clerical or sales ___ skilled worker or foreman semi-skilled worker ____ unskilled worker or farm laborer ___0) other (specify__ _4_ What was your mother's MAJOR lifetime occupation (other than housewife)? ___1) none ___2) education ___3) professional (other than education), . or scientific 4) secretarial, clerical small business owner or manager skilled worker domestic worker or unskilled worker semi-skilled worker- . 9 other (specify ) . 6 , 7 ___8 What was your father's highest educational attainment? 1 no formal education 2 some elementary school 3 completed elementary school 4 some high school, technical school or business school 5) graduated from high school, technical school or business school 171 6) some college 7; graduated from college 8 graduate or professional school 26. What was your mother's highest educational attainment? ___1) no formal education ___2) some elementary school ‘___3; completed elementary school some high school or business school 5) graduated from high school or business school 6) some college *7) graduated from college :8) graduate or professional school 27. In what type of a community did you Spend the MAJOR part of your youth? *1) farm :2) village or town (under 10,000) ___3) small city (10, 000 - 50,000) _4) city (50,000 or more) 28. In what type of schools did you receive MOST of your elementary school education? “. 1) public 2; parochial 3 private 29. In what type of schoold did you receive MOST of your secondary education? .71 public 2 parochial 3 private 30. In general, what was the quality of your work when you were in secondary school? 2 above average 3 average ‘___4) somewhat below average ‘1; way above average 31. In general, how active were you in extra- curricular activities when you were in secondagz school? .___1) far more active than average ___2 more active than average ‘__‘3 about average ___4 somewhat less active than average 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 172 What was the income position of your parents at the time of your graduation from high school? 1 highest 25% of our community 2 second highest 25% of our community 3 third highest 25% of our community 4 lowest 25% of our community At what type of college did you do MOST of your undergraduate work? ____1) state university ___2) state teachers' college or . normal school ___3) other public college or _ university 4; private university 3 5 private teachers' college or .. normal school 6) other private college In general, what was the quality of your work when you were in college? I graduated with honors 2 above average ___3 average ___4) somewhat below average In general, how active were you in extra- curricular activities when you were in college? ___1 far more active than average ___2 more active than average ___3 about average ___A) somewhat less active than average At what type of college did you do MOST of your graduate work? ___0 I have not done graduate work ___1 state university ___2) state teachers' college or q. normal school ___3 other public college or university 4 private university ___5 private teachers' college or . normal school ___6) other private college 37. 38. 39. 41. 42. 43. 173 When you were in undergraduate college what per cent of your expenses did you personally earn? __1; 0 to 25% ___2 26 to 50% ___3) 51 to 75% ___4) 76 to 100% In what way did you do MOST of your undergraduate college work? 13 full-time study 2 part-time study In what way did you do MOST of your graduate study? A 1) full-time study 2) part-time study What plans do you have for future formal education? .___1) I have no plans ___2) I plan to take courses, but not toward a specific degree ___3) I plan to study for a master's but not a doctorate ___4) I plan to study for a doctorate How many semester hours of education courses did you have as an undergraduate? ___1) none ___5 31 to 40 __2; 1 to 10 ___6 41 to 50 ___3 11 to 20 ___7 51 to 60 ___4) 21 to 30 ___8 more than 60 How many semester hours of graduate work have you taken? 1 __1 none ___5 31 to 40 __2 1 to 10 ___6 41 to 50 ___3 11 to 20 ___7 51 to 60 ___4) 21 to 30 7 ___8 more than 60 What is the highest academic degree which you have received? 1 certificate 2 bachelor's ___3 master's ___4 master's plus 30 hours ___5) doctor's _ «__- What is your marital status? __1) single ___2) married 174 _3) separated :4) divorced :5) widow or widower category best represents your current salary? _1) Less than $4, 000 45. Which :2) $4, 000 :3 $5,000 :4 $6,000 :5 $7,000 _6 $8,000 “7 9,000 :8 $ 0,000 ”_- through $4,999 through $5,999 through $6,999 through $7,999 through $8,999 through $9, 999 through $10,999 :9) More than $11,000 46. When did the idea FIRST occur to you that you might enter :3 ___3) teaching? Before entering high school In high school After completing high school, but before graduating from college 4) After graduating from college When did you make the FINAL decision to enter teaching? ___1> :33 __4> At the time you made the FINAL decision did you prefer teaching over any other occupation? :3 Which one of the following persons was most influential in your decision to enter teaching? 47. Before entering high school In high school After completing high school, but before graduating from college After graduating from college 48. Yes, I preferred teaching No, I preferred another occupation, but was not able to enter it 49. di_l) A member of my family who was a teacher .___2; A friend who was a teacher _‘_3 Someone else who was a teacher ___4) A member of my family who was not a teacher ___5 A friend who was not a teacher ___6 Someone else who was not a teacher __7 No one 175 50. What grade level(s) do you teach? If more than one, indicate your MAJOR grade level with a double check. : 3 ___? 6 1 2 3 K or lst grade ___7) 7th grade 2nd grade ___8 8th grade 3rd grade 9) 9th grade 4th grade -—10;10th grade 5th grade _—_‘11 11th grade 6th grade __12)12th grade (FOR.JUNIOR HIGH AND SENIOR HIGH TEACHERS, AND DEPAREMENTALIZED ELEMENTARY TEACHERS). 51. What subject area(s) do you teach? If more than one, indicate your MAJOR area with a double check. 1 J I I l LL! U HOOGDNO‘ 3 E E English History; social studies Science Mathematics Foreign languages Heme economics Business or commercial subjects Physical education; health Fine arts (music, art, etc.) Industrial arts , . Other (specify__» fi_ ) Edwards Personal Preference Schedule Allen L. Edwards, University of Washington DIRECTIONS This schedule consists of a number of pairs of statements about things that you may or may not like; about ways in which you may or may not feel. Look at the example below. A I like to talk about myself to others. B I like to work toward some goal that I have set for myself. Which of these two statements is more characteristic of what you like? If you like "talking about yourself to others” more than you like "working toward some goal that you have set for yourself,” then you should choose A over B. If you like "working toward some goal that you have set for yourself" more than you like “talking about yourself to others,” then you should choose B over A. You may like both A and B. In this case, you would have to choose between the two and you should choose the one that you like better. If you dislike both A and B, then you should choose the one that you dislike less. Some of the pairs of statements in the schedule have to do with your likes, such as A and B above. Other pairs of statements have to do with how you feel. Look at the example below. A I feel depressed when I fail at something. B I feel nervous when giving a talk before a group. Which of these two statements is more characteristic of how you feel? If "being depressed when you fail at something" is more characteristic of you than "being nervous when giving a talk before a group," then you should choose A over B. If B is more characteristic of you than A, then you should choose B over A. If both statements describe how you feel, then you should choose the one which you think is more characteristic. If neither statement accurately describes how you feel, then you should choose the one which you consider to be less inaccurate. . Your choice, in each instance, should be in terms of what you like and how you feel at the present time, and not in terms of what you think you should like or how you think you should feel. This is not a test. There are no right or wrong answers. Your choices should be a description of your own per- sonal likes and feelings. Make a choice for every pair of statements; do not skip any. The pairs of statements on the following pages are similar to the examples given above. Read each pair of statements and pick out the one statement that better describes what you like or how you feel. Make no marks in the booklet. On the separate answer sheet are numbers corresponding to the numbers of the pairs of statements. Check to be sure you are marking for the same item number as the item you are reading in the booklet. If your answer sheet is printed If your answer sheet is printed in BLACK ink: in BLUE ink: For each numbered item draw a circle around For each numbered item fill in the space the A or B to indicate the statement you under A or B as shown in the Directions have chosen. on the answer sheet. Do not turn this page until the examiner tells you to start. Copyright 195'. All rights reserved. "a...“ in ”A, The Psychological Corporation, New York, N.Y. “.24, n CopyrigN in Great Britain The schedule contained in this booklet has been designed for use with answer forms published or authorized by The Psychological Corporation. If other answer forms are used, The Psychological Corporation takes no responsibility for the meoninofulness of scores. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 w>w> > w 31> a» > w > w>w>w>w w > Wilt I like to help my friends when they are in trouble. I like to do my very best in whatever I undertake. I like to find out what great men have thought about various problems in which I am interested. I would like to accomplish something of great signifi- cance. Any written work that I do I like to have precise, neat, and well organized. I would like to be a recognized authority in some job, profession, or field of specialization. I like to tell amusing stories and jokes at parties. I would like to write a great novel or play. I like to be able to come and go as I want to. I like to be able to say that I have done a difficult job well. I like to solve puzzles and problems that other people have difficulty with. I like to follow instructions and to do what is expected of me. I like to experience novelty and change in my daily routine. I like to tell my superiors that they have done a good job on something, when I think they have. I like to plan and organize the details of any work that I have to undertake. I like to follow instructions and to do what is eXpected of me. I like people to notice and to comment upon my ap pearance when I am out in public. I like to read about the lives of great men. I like to avoid situations where I am expected to do things in a conventional way. I like to read about the lives of great men. I would like to be a recognized authority in some job, profession, or field of specialization. I like to have my work organized and planned before beginning it. I like to find out what great men have thought about various problems in which I am interested. If I have to take a trip, I like to have things planned in advance. I like to finish any job or task that I begin. I like to keep my things neat and orderly on my desk or workspace. A I like to tell other people about adventures and strange things that have happened to me. I like to have my meals organized and a definite time set aside for eating. I like to be independent of others in deciding what I want to do. I like to keep my things neat and orderly on my desk or workspace. I like to be able to do things better than other people can. I like to tell amusing stories and jokes at parties. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 w>w>w>w>w>w>w> > w>w>w>w>w>w>w>w Ull> I like to conform to custom and to avoid doing things that people I respect might consider unconventional. I like to talk about my achievements. I like to have my life so arranged that it runs smoothly and without much change in my plans. I like to tell other people about adventures and strange things that have happened to me. I like to read books and plays in which sex plays a major part. I like to be the center of attention in a group. I like to criticize people who are in a position of au- thority. I like to use words which other people often do not know the meaning of. I like to accomplish tasks that others recognize as re- quiring skill and effort. ' I like to be able to come and go as I want to. I like to praise someone I admire. I like to feel free to do what I want to do. I like to keep my letters, bills, and other papers neatly arranged and filed according to some system. I like to be independent of others in deciding what I want to do. I like to ask questions which I know no one will be able to answer. I like to criticize people who are in a position of au- thority. I get so angry that I feel like throwing and breaking things. I like to avoid responsibilities and obligations. I like to be successful in things undertaken. I like to form new friendships. I like to follow instructions and to do what is expected of me. I like to have strong attachments with my friends. Any written work that I do I like to have precise, neat, and well organized. I like to make as many friends as I can. I like to tell amusing stories and jokes at parties. I like to write letters to my friends. I like to be able to come and go as I want to. ' I like to share things with my friends. I like to solve puzzles and problems that other people have difficulty with. I like to judge people by why they do something—not by what they actually do. I like to accept the leadership of people I admire. I like to understand how my friends feel about various problems they have to face. I like to have my meals organized and a definite time set aside for eating. I like to study and to analyze the behavior of others. 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 4s 46 47 48 w> >w>w>w> > out» >w>w> > W?» I like to say things that are regarded as witty and clever by other people. I like to put myself in someone else’s place and to imagine how I would feel in the same situation. I like to feel free to do what I want to do. I like to observe how another individual feels in a given situation. I like to accomplish tasks that others recognize as re- quiring skill and effort. I like my friends to encourage me when I meet with failure. When planning something, I like to get suggestions from other people whose opinions I respect. I like my friends to treat me kindly. I like to have my life so arranged that it runs smoothly and without much change in my plans. I like my friends to feel sorry for me when I am sick. I like to be the center of attention in a group. I like my friends to make a fuss over me when I am hurt or sick. I like to avoid situations where I am expected to do things in a conventional way. I like my friends to sympathize with me and to cheer me up when I am depressed. I would like to write a great novel or play. When serving on a committee, I like to be appointed or elected chairman. When I am in a group, I like to accept the leadership of someone else in deciding what the group is going to do. I like to supervise and to direct the actions of other people whenever I can. I like to keep my letters, bills, and other papers neatly arranged and filed according to some system. I like to be one of the leaders in the organizations and groups to which I belong. I like to ask questions which I know no one will be able to answer. I like to tell other people how to do their jobs. I like to avoid responsibilities and obligations. I like to be called upon to settle arguments and dis- putes between others. I would like to be a recognized authority in some job, profession, or field of specialization. I feel guilty whenever I have done something I know is wrong. I like to read about the lives of great men. I feel that I should confess the things that I have done that I regard as wrong. I like to plan and organize the details of any work that I have to undertake. When things go wrong for me, I feel that I am more to blame than anyone else. 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 w>w>w>w>w>w> w>w>w>w>w> w>w>w> > I like to use words which other people often do not know the meaning of. I feel that I am inferior to others in most respects. I like to criticize people who are in a position of au- thority. I feel timid in the presence of other people I regard as my superiors. I like to do my very best in whatever I undertake. I like to help other people who are less fortunate than I am. I like to find out what great men have thought about various problems in which I am interested. I like to be generous with my friends. I like to make a plan before starting in to do some- thing difficult. I like to do small favors for my friends. I like to tell other people about adventures and strange things that have happened to me. I like my friends to confide in me and to tell me their troubles. I like to say what I think about things. llike to forgive my friends who may sometimes hurt me. I like to be able to do things better than other people can. I like to eat in new and strange restaurants. I like to conform to custom and to avoid doing things that people I respect might consider unconventional. I like to participate in new fads and fashions. I like to have my work organized and planned before beginning it. I like to travel and to see the country. I like people to notice and to comment upon my ap- pearance when I am out in public. I like to move about the country and to live in differ- ent places. I like to be independent of others in deciding what I want to do. I like to do new and different things. I like to be able to say that I have done a difficult job well. I like to work hard at any job I undertake. I like to tell my superiors that they have done a good job on something, when I think they have. I like to complete a single job or task at a time before taking on others. If I have to take a trip, I like to have things planned in advance. I like to keep working at a puzzle or problem until it is solved. I sometimes like to do things just to see what effect it will have on others. B I like to stick at a job or problem even when it may seem as if I am not getting anywhere with it. 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 l> w>w>w>w> > w > 51> > I like to do things that other people regard as un- conventional. I like to put in long hours of work without being distracted. I would like to accomplish something of great signifi- cance. I like to kiss attractive persons of the opposite sex. I like to praise someone I admire. I like to be regarded as physically attractive by those of the opposite sex. I like to keep my things neat and orderly on my desk or workspace. I like to be in love with someone of the opposite sex. I like to talk about my achievements. I like to listen to or to tell jokes in which sex plays a major part. I like to do things in my own way and without regard to what others may think. I like to read books and plays in which sex plays a major part. I would like to write a great novel or play. I like to attack points of view that are contrary to mine. When I am in a group, I like to accept the leadership of someone else in deciding what the group is going to do. I feel like criticizing someone publicly if he deserves it. I like to have my life so arranged that it runs smoothly and without much change in my plans. B I get so angry that I feel like throwing and breaking w>w>w>w> await» > things. I like to ask questions which I know no one will be able to answer. I like to tell other people what I think of them. I like to avoid responsibilities and obligations. I feel like making fun of people who do things that I regard as stupid. I like to be loyal to my friends. I like to do my very best in whatever I undertake. I like to observe how another individual feels in a given situation. I like to be able to say that I have done a difficult job well. I like my friends to encourage me when I meet with failure. I like to be successful in things undertaken. I like to be one of the leaders in the organizations and groups to which I belong. I like to be able to do things better than other people can. When things go wrong for me, I feel that I am more to blame than anyone else. I like to solve puzzles and problems that other people have difficulty with. 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 01> :9 I like to do things for my friends. When planning something, I like to get suggestions from other people whose opinions I respect. I like to put myself in someone else’s place and to imagine how I would feel in the same situation. B I like to tell my superiors that they have done a good >w>w> tn? job on something, when I think they have. I like my friends to be sympathetic and understanding when I have Problems. I like to accept the leadership of people I admire. When serving on a committee, I like to be appointed or elected chairman. When I am in a group, I like to accept the leadership of someone else in deciding what the group is go- ing to do. If I do something that is wrong, I feel that I should be punished for it. I like to conform to custom and to avoid doing things that people I respect might consider unconventional. I like to share things with my friends. I like to make a plan before starting in to do some- thing difficult. I like to understand how my friends feel about vari- ous problems they have to face. B If I have to take a trip, I like to have things planned (113’ RH? in advance. I like my friends to treat me kindly. I like to have my work organized and planned before beginning it. I like to be regarded by others as a leader. I like to keep my letters, bills, and other papers neatly arranged and filed according to some system. I feel that the pain and misery that I have suffered has done me more good than harm. B I like to have my life so arranged that it runs smoothly w» w>w>w> 31> > and without much change in my plans. I like to have strong attachments with my friends. I like to say things that are regarded as witty and clever by other people. I like to think about the personalities of my friends and to try to figure out what makes them as they are. I sometimes like to do things just to see what effect it will have on others. I like my friends to make a fuss over me when I am hurt or sick. I like to talk about my achievements. I like to tell other people how to do their jobs. I like to be the center of attention in a group. I feel timid in the presence of other people I regard as my superiors. I like to use words which other people often do not know the meaning of. I like to do things with my friends rather than by myself. I like to say what I think about things. 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 w> w> I like to study and to analyze the behavior of others. I like to do things that other people regard as uncon- ventional. I like my friends to feel sorry for me when I am sick. I like to avoid situations where I am expected to do things in a conventional way. A I like to supervise and to direct the actions of other w>w>w >lfi >w>w>w>w> i> people whenever I can. I like to do things in my own way without regard to what others may think. I feel that I am inferior to others in most respects. I like to avoid responsibilities and obligations. I like to be successful in things undertaken. I like to form new friendships. I like to analyze my own motives and feelings. I like to make as many friends as I can. I like my friends to help me when I am in trouble. I like to do things for my friends. I like to argue for my point of view when it is at- tacked by others. I like to write letters to my friends. I feel guilty whenever I have done something I know is wrong. I like to have strong attachments with my friends. I like to share things with my friends. I like to analyze my own motives and feelings. I like to accept the leadership of people I admire. I like to understand how my friends feel about vari- ous problems they have to face. I like my friends to do many small favors for me cheerfully. B I like to judge people by why they do something— w>w>w> > w>w> not by what they actually do. When with a group of people, I like to make the decisions about what we are going to do. I like to predict how my friends will act in various situations. I feel better when I give in and avoid a fight, than I would if I tried to have my own way. I like to analyze the feelings and motives of others. I like to form new friendships. I like my friends to help me when I am in trouble. I like to judge people by why they do something— not by what they actually do. I like my friends to show a great deal of affection toward me. Ilike to have my life so arranged that it runs smoothly and without much change in my plans. I like my friends to feel sorry for me when I am sick. I like to be called upon to settle arguments and dis- putes between others. I like my friends to do many small favors for me cheerfully. 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 I feel that I should confess the things that I have done that I regard as wrong. I like my friends to sympathize with me and to cheer me up when I am depressed. I like to do things with my friends rather than by myself. B I like to argue for my point of view when it is at- > >w>w>w w» w> w>w> > 63> tacked by others. I like to think about the personalities of my friends and to try to figure out what makes them as they are. I like to be able to persuade and influence others to do what I want to do. I like my friends to sympathize with me and to cheer me up when I am depressed. When with a group of people, I like to make the decisions about what we are going to do. I like to ask questions which I know no one will be able to answer. I like to tell other people how to do their jobs. I feel timid in the presence of other people I regard as my superiors. I like to supervise and to direct the actions of other people whenever I can. I like to participate in groups in which the members have warm and friendly feelings toward one another. I feel guilty whenever I have done something I know is wrong. I like to analyze the feelings and motives of others. I feel depressed by my own inability to handle vari- ous situations. I like my friends to feel sorry for me when I am sick. I feel better when I give in and avoid a fight, than I would if I tried to have my own way. I like to be able to persuade and influence others to do what I want. I feel depressed by my own inability to handle vari- ous situations. I like to criticize people who are in a position of authority. I feel timid in the presence of other people I regard as my superiors. I like to participate in groups in which the members have warm and friendly feelings toward one another. I like to help my friends when they are in trouble. I like to analyze my own motives and feelings. I like to sympathize with my friends when they are hurt or sick. I like my friends to help me when I am in trouble. I like to treat other people with kindness and sym- pathy. I like to be one of the leaders in the organizations and groups to which I belong. I like to sympathize with my friends when they are hurt or sick. 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 w>w> as >w>w>w w> I feel that the pain and misery that I have suffered has done me more good than harm. I like to show a great deal of affection toward my friends. I like to do things with my friends rather than by myself. I like to experiment and to try new things. I like to think about the personalities of my friends and to try to figure out what makes them as they are. I like to try new and different jobs—rather than to continue doing the same old things. I like my friends to be sympathetic and understand- ing when I have problems. I like to meet new people. I like to argue for my point of view when it is at- tacked by others. I like to experience novelty and change in my daily routine. I feel better when I give in and avoid a fight, than I would if I tried to have my own way. I like to move about the country and to live in differ- ent places. I like to do things for my friends. When I have some assignment to do, I like to start in and keep working on it until it is completed. I like to analyze the feelings and motives of others. I like to avoid being interrupted while at my work. I like my friends to do many small favors for me cheerfully. I like to stay up late working in order to get a job done. I like to be regarded by others as a leader. I like to put in long hours of work without being distracted. A If I do something that is wrong, I feel that I should out» be punished for it. I like to stick at a job or problem even when it may seem as if I am not getting anywhere with it. I like to be loyal to my friends. I like to go out with attractive persons of the op— posite sex. A I like to predict how my friends will act in various w>w> situations. I like to participate in discussions about sex and sex- ual activities. I like my friends to show a great deal of affection toward me. I like to become sexually excited. When with a group of people, I like to make the decisions about what we are going to do. I like to engage in social activities with persons of the opposite sex. 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 I feel depressed by my own inability to handle vari- ous situations. B I like to read books and plays in which sex plays a w» > major part. I like to write letters to my friends. I like to read newspaper accounts of murders and other forms of violence. I like to predict how my friends will act in various situations. B I like to attack points of view that are contrary to w 3’ wt> a» w» w» w>w>w>w>w>w>w>w> 61> mine. I like my friends to make a fuss over me when I am hurt or sick. I feel like blaming others when things go wrong for me. I like to tell other people how to do their jobs. I feel like getting revenge when someone has in- sulted me. I feel that I am inferior to others in most respects. I feel like telling other people 03 when I disagree with them. I like to help my friends when they are in trouble. I like to do my very best in whatever I undertake. I like to travel and to see the country. I like to accomplish tasks that others recognize as requiring skill and effort. I like to work hard at any job I undertake. I would like to accomplish something of great sig- nificance. I like to go out with attractive persons of the op- posite sex. I like to be successful in things undertaken. I like to read newspaper accounts of murders and other forms of violence. I would like to write a great novel or play. I like to do small favors for my friends. When planning something, I like to get suggestions from other people whose opinions I respect. I like to experience novelty and change in my daily routine. I like to tell my superiors that they have done a good job on something, when I think they have. I like to stay up late working in order to get a job done. I like to praise someone I admire. I like to become sexually excited. I like to accept the leadership of people I admire. I feel like getting revenge when someone has insulted me. When I am in a group, I like to accept the leadership of someone else in deciding what the group is going to do. I like to be generous with my friends. I like to make a plan before starting in to do some- thing difficult. 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 w> w» w» Vw>w>w>w> :> w>w> w>w>w> I like to meet new people. Any written work that I do I like to have precise, neat, and well organized. I like to finish any job or task that I begin. I like to keep my things neat and orderly on my desk or workspace. I like to be regarded as physically attractive by those of the opposite sex. I like to plan and organize the details of any work that I have to undertake. I like to tell other people what I think of them. I like to have my meals organized and a definite time set aside for eating. I like to show a great deal of affection toward my friends. I like to say things that are regarded as witty and clever by other people. I like to try new and different jobs—rather than to continue doing the same old things. I sometimes like to do things just to see what effect it will have on others. I like to stick at a job or problem even when it may seem as if I am not getting anywhere with it. I like people to notice and to comment upon my ap- pearance when I am out in public. I like to read books and plays in which sex plays a major part. I like to be the center of attention in a group. I feel like blaming others when things go wrong for me. I like to ask questions which I know no one will be able to answer. I like to sympathize with my friends when they are hurt or sick. I like to say what I think about things. I like to eat in new and strange restaurants. I like to do things that other people regard as un- conventional. I like to complete a single job or task at a time be- fore taking on others. I like to feel free to do what I want to do. I like to participate in discussions about sex and sex- ual activities. I like to do things in my own way without regard to what others may think. I get so angry that Irfeel like throwing and break- ing things. I like to avoid responsibilities and obligations. I like to help my friends when they are in trouble. I like to be loyal to my friends. I like to do new and different things. I like to form new friendships. 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 A When I have some assignment to do, I like to start w>w >w > wt>w>wt>w> > in and keep working on it until it is completed. I like to participate in groups in which the members have warm and friendly feelings toward one another. I like to go out with attractive persons of the op- posite sex. I like to make as many friends as I can. I like to attack points of view that are contrary to mine. I like to write letters to my friends. I like to be generous with my friends. I like to observe how another individual feels in a given situation. I like to eat in new and strange restaurants. I like to put myself in someone else’s place and to imagine how I would feel in the same situation. I like to stay up late working in order to get a job done. I like to understand how my friends feel about vari. ous problems they have to face. I like to become sexually excited. I like to study and to analyze the behavior of others. I feel like making fun of people who do things that I regard as stupid. I like to predict how my friends will act in various situations. I like to forgive my friends who may sometimes hurt me. I like my friends to encourage me when I meet with failure. A I like to experiment and to try new things. B I like my friends to be sympathetic and understand- w>w> >wt>w> w> ing when I have problems. I like to keep working at a puzzle or problem until it is solved. I like my friends to treat me kindly. I like to be regarded as physically attractive by those of the opposite sex. I like my friends to show a great deal of affection toward me. I feel like criticizing someone publicly if he de- serves it. I like my friends to make a fuss over me when I am hurt or sick. I like to show a great deal of affection toward my friends. I like to be regarded by others as a leader. I like to try new and different jobs——rather than to continue doing the same old things. When serving on a committee, I like to be appointed or elected chairman. I like to finish any job or task that I begin. I like to be able to persuade and influence others to do what I want. 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 w>wz> > > I like to participate in discussions about sex and sex- ual activities. I like to be called upon to settle arguments and dis- putes between others. I get so angry that I feel like throwing and breaking things. I like to tell Other people how to do their jobs. I like to show a great deal of affection toward my friends. When things go wrong for me, I feel that I am more to blame than anyone else. I like to move about the country and to live in differ- ent places. B If I do something that is wrong, I feel that I should be punished for it. I like to stick at a job or problem even when it may seem as if I am not getting anywhere with it. B I feel that the pain and misery that I have suffered > has done me more good than harm. I like to read books and plays in which sex plays a major part. B I feel that I should confess the things that I have w>w> 63> done that I regard as wrong. I feel like blaming others when things go wrong for me. I feel that I am inferior to others in most respects. I like to do my very best in whatever I undertake. I like to help other people who are less fortunate than I am. I like to do new and different things. I like to treat other people with kindness and sym- pathy. When I have some assignment to do, I like to start in and keep working on it until it is completed. B I like to help other people who are less fortunate w>w>w> than I am. I like to engage in social activities with persons of the opposite sex. Ilike to forgive my friends who may sometimes hurt me. I like to attack points of view that are contrary to mine. I like my friends to confide in me and to tell me their troubles. I like to treat other people with kindness and sym- pathy. I like to travel and to see the country. I like to conform to custom and to avoid doing things that people I respect might consider unconventional. I like to participate in new fads and fashions. I like to work hard at any job I undertake. I like to experience novelty and change in my daily routine. 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 w>w>wt> w>w> tn> >w>m>w>w> > I like to kiss attractive persons of the opposite sex. I like to experiment and to try new things. I feel like telling other people off when I disagree with them. I like to participate in new fads and fashions. I like to help other people who are less fortunate than I am. I like to finish any job or task that I begin. I like to move about the country and to live in differ- ent places. I like to put in long hours of work without being distracted. If I have to take a trip, I like to have things planned in advance. I like to keep working at a puzzle or problem until it is solved. I like to be in love with someone of the opposite sex. I like to complete a single job or task before taking on others. I like to tell other people what I think of them. I like to avoid being interrupted while at my work. I like to do small favors for my friends. I like to engage in social activities with persons of the opposite sex. I like to meet new people. I like to kiss attractive persons of the opposite sex. I like to keep working at a puzzle or problem until it is solved. I like to be in love with someone of the opposite sex. I like to talk about my achievements. I like to listen to or to tell jokes in which sex plays a major part. I feel like making fun of people who do things that I regard as stupid. I like to listen to or to tell jokes in which sex plays a major part. I like my friends to confide in me and to tell me their troubles. B I like to read newspaper accounts of murders and 61> no» other forms of violence. I like to participate in new fads and fashions. I feel like criticizing someone publicly if he de- serves it. I like to avoid being interrupted while at my work. I feel like telling other people off when I disagree with them. I like to listen to or to tell jokes in which sex plays a major part. I feel like getting revenge when someone has in- sulted me. I like to avoid responsibilities and obligations. I feel like making fun of people who do things that I regard as stupid.