A NATIONAL ANALYSIS OF EDUCATIONAL QUALITY AS- MEASURED BY THE EDUCATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS CRITERION (Egg , scmestENT, AND SELECTED COST FACTORS Thesis for The Degree of Ed. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY" Maurice D. Pelfon 196-6 LIBRA . Y " Michigan Oratc University ll I III IIIIIIIII II I III II IIIIIII I : THES|S This is to certify that the thesis entitled A National Analysis of ldncational Quality As I loalurod by the Educntiogg; Characteristic! Criterggn (ggg), Achievement and Selected Gout Itctors presented by Maurice D. Fulton has been accepted towards fulfil‘lment v of the requirements for _l_d,_ll,__ degree in m Maint- nrn‘aeonr Date J 111’ 38. 1966 O-l69 AUG 0 6 “3,87 ABSTRACT A NATIONAL ANALYSIS OF EDUCATIONAL QUALITY AS MEASURED BY THE EDUCATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS CRITERION (ECC), ACHIEVEMENT, AND SELECTED COST FACTORS by Maurice D. Pelton Purpose gf_$flg Study This study was undertaken to determine the relationships that exist among the perceptions of educational quality of teachers and administrators as measured by the Educational ghgracteristics Criterion (Egg), school achievement as measured by the Stanford Achievement 123;, and the educational cost factors Of size, effort, ability, and expenditure per pupil. Procedure and Design Nineteen school districts presently using the Stanford Achievement leg; in grade six agreed to participate in the study. The measurements of the perceptions of educational quality were secured by means of the Educational ghgracteristics Criterion (Egg). This instrument is designed to measure the quality of education in terms of the perceptions of those peOple who observe its process-- in this study, teachers and administratdrs. The other variables-- achievement as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test and the l Maurice D. Pelton cost factors of size, expenditure per pupil, millage, and state equalized valuation--were voluntarily submitted by the superinten- dents of the participating school districts. The l486 teachers and I3] administrators used in the study responded to the Egg by marking their perceptions of the degree to which each of SS characteristics of educational quality was present in their school system. These 55 characteristics are included in one of seven categories of educational quality. They are: (l) Student's Level of Knowledge and Attitudes; (ll) Community Attitudes; (Ill) Curriculum; (IV) Use of Facilities; (V) Socio-Cultural Compo- sition of the Community; (VI) Administration and Supervision; (VII) Teacher and Teaching Methods. For each school district, a mean total quality score (Egg score) and seven mean category quality scores were computed for teachers, administrators, and their responses combined. These, along with the district's mean sixth grade achievement score, and the four cost factors made up the 29 variables used in the compu- tations. All computations were performed on Michigan State Univer- sity's Control Data Corporation (CDC) 3600 computer. Pearson product moment correlations were secured to ascertain the rela- tionships between the variables, and the partial correlation technique was used to determine the relationship between the per- ceptions of educational quality Characteristics and school achievement. Maurice D. Pelton 3 The three general hypotheses tested were: I There is a positive relationship between administrator and teacher perceptions of characteristics of quality education as measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion' (ECC). II There are positive relationships among the administrator and teacher perceptions of characteristics of quality education as measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion, student achievement, and cost factors. lli There is a positive relationship between administrator and teacher perceptions of characteristics of quality education as measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion and student achievement independent of cost factors. Maior Findings and Conclusions l. The significantly positive correlation between the perceptions of administrators and teachers on the total quality score and on five of the seven category quality scores leads to the conclusion that in general, teachers and administrators do perceive the characteristics of quality education in the same way. It is highly probable, however, that the respondents see those factors related to educational facilities and the community much more in the same way than they do those characteristics more closely related to the teaching process. 2. The correlation between administrator perceptions of characteristics of quality and achievement is generally higher than teacher perceptions and achievement. This may be because adminis- trators get a complete picture of the characteristics of quality in their school district, while teachers' perceptions are restricted to a single classroom. Administrator perceptions of the degree to which the characteristics of educational quality included in Maurice D. Pelton A Category VI (Administration and Supervision) and Category VII (Teacher and Teaching Methods) are present in school districts seem to be eSpecially closely related to achievement. The adminis- trator total quality score is also significantly related to expendi- ture per child--an accepted measure of quality. All evidence in this study seems to point to the administrators' perceptions of educational quality factors as a promising quality measure. 3. When the cost factors are made independent by use of the partial correlation technique there is a general increase in the relationship between the Characteristics of quality education and achievement. It may be that those school districts which do not possess those characteristics of quality education that comprise the 59; compensate, in their quest for a quality program, by employing to a greater degree, the cost factors. This, in effect, means spending more money. This study has demonstrated that the §££_has definite potential as an instrument that can give an indication of the quality of school programs, and shows promise as a diagnostic instrument to help school leaders pinpoint problem areas. A NATIONAL ANALYSIS or EDUCATIONAL QUALITY As MEASURED BY THE EDUCATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS CRITERION (ECC), ACHIEVEMENT, AND SELECTED COST FACTORS by Maurice D. Pelton A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of Education l966 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. Herbert C. Rudman for his advice and encouragement in the preparation of this thesis, and for his guidance in the completion of other requirements for the degree. The assistance afforded the writer during his many years of study at Michigan State by the other members of the doctoral guidance committee is greatly appreciated. These gentlemen are Dr. Richard Featherstone, Dr. Charles Blackman, Dr. William Faunce, and Dr. Karl Hereford. Special appreciation is due to many others Who have cooper- ated with the writer in this undertaking. They are: the many teachers and administrators who contributed of their time in reSponding to the EEC, Norma Ray and Carol Thomas for their help in preparing material for the computer, the writer's parents, Mr. and Mrs. D. D. Pelton and Dr. and Mrs. G. A. Branaman, for their many favors over the years of graduate study, and Gary, Don and Eric for their patience with an often short-tempered father. Finally, to the most important person--the writer‘s wife, Dorothy--a Special acknowledgement is given. Without her love, faith, encouragement and typewriter, this thesis could never have been written. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I. THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Statement of the Problem. I Objectives of the Study . 4 Study Rationale . . . 5 Importance of the Study . 7 Assumptions and Delimitations . 8 Definition of Terms 9 Hypotheses to be Tested . . . . ll Organization of the Remainder of the Thesis . lh ll. RELATED LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IS Theoretical Statements About Education. . . . . . . l6 Related Cost- -Quaiity Studies. . . . . . . . . 28 Educational Quality as School Achievement . . . . . Al Quality as Perceptions of Educators and Laymen. . . 47 Ill. INSTRUMENTATION AND PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . Si Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sl Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6i Treatment of the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Hypothesis l. 73 Hypothesis ll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Hypothesis Ili. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9O TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued CHAPTER V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . Summary . Limitations . Conclusions . . . . . . . . Implications and Recommendations. BIBLIOGRAPHY . .APPENDICES . Page 93 93 95 96 102 III 117 TABLE I0. LIST OF TABLES _Ability (Property Valuation per Pupil) of A2 School Districts . Size GAverage Daily Membership) of #2 School Districts . Effort (Mills Levied for 0peratiOn) of #2 ‘School DistriCts . Expenditure per Pupil of #2 School Districts . Number and Percentage of ReSponses . Values of the Correlation Coefficients for Different Levels of Significance . The Variables Used in Calculations . Correlation Coefficients Between Teacher and Administrator Category Quality Score (CQS) and Total Quality Scores (TQS). Correlation Coefficients Between'ECC and School Mean Achievement Scores . Correlation Coefficients Among Egg, TQS, School Achievement, and Cost Factors . . . Correlation Coefficients Between Egg Scores and Achievement Scores and Partial Correlation Coefficients Between Egg Scores and Achievement Test Scores Independent of the Cost Factors . Page 63 53 6A 6A 68 73 7h 76 80 82 87 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A Letter Sent to Superintendents Inviting Participation in the Study . B Preliminary Information Sheet. C Educational Characteristics Criterion. D Instructions for Responding to the Educational Characteristics Criterion(ECC) . . E Supplementggy Information Form . F General Instructions for Administration and Mailing of the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC). . . G Letter of Instruction Sent to Superintendents of Participating School Districts. H Characteristics of Participating Schools . Distribution of Standardization Sample School Systems . vi Page lIB l2] ‘l23 l28 I30 I32 135 I37 '39 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem One of the major deterrents to the establishment of a quality educational program is the inability of those educators and laymen charged with the reSponsibility for determining a quality program to agree on what constitutes quality education. Firman says, “The term 'quality in education' does not mean the same thing to all of the people who may use the phrase. Every person describes a quality school in terms of his own set of educational objectives, and these objectives are certainly varied."l Quality Defined Some persons consider a school that teaches only the “3 R's” a quality school, while others insist upon a rigid academic program of college preparation. Some feel that a quality school program must include vocational training, while there are those who insist that such training has no place in a quality school system. Certain educators advocate training for life adjustment while their counter- parts would consider educational quality in a much narrower vein. ]William D. Firman, ”The Relationship of Cost to Quality in Education” (a paper presented to the Committee on Educational Finance, National Education Association, St. Louis, Missouri, I963), pp. 8-9. I 2 Clark admits that, ”There are almost as many definitions of quality in education as there are persons discussing the problem.”2 He gives his definition, however, as ”accomplishing whatever worth- “3 while ends one wants from education at a high level of efficiency. The Search for §_Quaiity Program As groups come into conflict over the definition of quality, irrational charges and countercharges are made, and the educational process is slowed for lack of an agreement as to direction. Adams says: ”The uncertainty as to what constitutes 'good education,’ and the lack of measurable indices of quality are persistent obstacles. to precise educational planning and the establishment of educa- tional priorities.“LI Because of this lack of specificity on the part of boards of education and their educational leaders, they have little choice but to turn, in their quest for a quality program, to the only known alternative--higher and higher expenditures. Although we have nothing approximating a mathematical proof, Mort points out that every known study dealing with the cost-quality relationship in edu- cation indicates that the more money spent for education, the higher its quality will be.5 2HaroId F. Clark, Cost and anlity in Public Education (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, I963): p. 2. 3Ibid. “Don Adams, ”Education and the Wealth of Nations,” Phi Delta Kapgan, 47:170, December, I965. 5Paul R. Mort, “Cost-Quality Relationship in Education,” Problems and Issues jg Public School Finance, ed. R. L. Johns and E. L. Morphet (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia UniverSity, I952), p. 9. 3 Studies Since I920 have substantiated this cost-quality rela- tionship with little apparent impact on those citizens charged with the responsibility of supporting education.6 One only has to read the ”Letters to the Editor” section of local neWSpapers following the defeat of bond and millage proposals to see that the voters want a clearer definition of the educational values held for their schools. From this it becomes apparent that haphazard Spending of more and more money is not the answer to the problem, and that there is a need for some criterion other than financial expenditure to indicate ‘what constitutes quality education. This criterion needs to be one that synthesizes the values held for education by educators and lay- men, proponents and critics. Qualigy 23 Values Held Ex Observers The old adage, ”Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” has taken on a new dimension in the recent work of Cognitive-Field psy- chologists. Their work has shown that ”what a person perceives consists of what one makes of what seems to be oneself and one's environment. Depending on the habits--insights or understandings-- a person brings to a particular occasion, he seems to give meaning and order to things in terms of his own needs, abilities, and pur- poses.”7’ 8 Harris puts it this way: 6SeeChapter II for a review of much of this research. 7Morris L. Bigge, Learning Theories E2; Teachers (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, I964), pp. l8h-I85. 8A series of experiments dealing with perception are summa- riied in Alfred Kuenzli, The Phenomenological Problem (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, I959), Chapter 8. L, We enter a restaurant, and six persons are sitting there. What do we ”see” beyond the mere fact that these are six human beings? Do we all see the same picture, either individually or collectively? A EurOpean will note that these are six Americans, by their dress and attitudes. A woman entering the room will probably note that the six consist of two married couples, an older woman, and a single man. A Southerner will see one man who could possibly be a light-skinned Negro. An anti-Semite will immediately label one of the couples as ”Jewish.” A salesman will divide the group into ”prospects” and ”duds.”9 It appears that educational quality may be perceived in the same way, and that what is needed is an instrument designed to measure the values held by observers making judgments about education. Such an instrument might give educators the added insight needed to put excellence into educational practice. The Educational Charac- teristics Criterion (ECC), designed to measure the quality of educa- tion in terms of the values that peOple hold for their schools, could be that instrument. Objectives of the Study This study has three major objectives: I. To determine the relationships that exist between the perceptions of quality of teachers and those of educational adminis- trators as measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC). 2. To determine the relationships that exist among adminis- trator and teacher perceptions of educational quality as measured by the EEE, student achievement as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test, and the cost variables of size of school district, expenditure 9Sidney J. Harris, ”Perception Warps What Eyes Behold,” The State Journal (Lansing, Michigan), December 28, I965. 5 per pupil, millage rate, and state equalized valuation. 3. To determine the relationships that exist between admin- istrator and teacher perceptions of educational quality as measured by the Egg and student achievement as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test, independent of cost variables. Study Rationaie Cost:QuaIity Relationship Previous studies dealing with cost-quality relationships in education have produced an overwhelming amount of evidence that the relationships are strong. In these studies, a variety of factors have been used as measures of quality, including: pupil-teacher ratio, training and experience of staff, the amount and kind of course offerings, percentage of students that graduate from high school, the degree to which school districts adapt to educational innovations, and student achievement as measured by standardized achievement tests. No matter how quality is defined, there is a positive correlation between the quality of the program and the amount of money Spent on education. Standardized Achievement Tests It is logical that standardized achievement tests should be used as a measure of educational quality. Although they cannot measure all educational objectives of all school systems, standard- ized achievement tests can measure one factor (maybe the only one) held to be important by all school districts-~formal academic achievement in such areas as reading, language arts, social studies, science, and mathematics. High academic achievement is aIso’one 6 objective of a school system that all concerned, i e., parents, stu- dents, teachers, administrators, and school board members, perceive to be an important Characteristic of a quality school district. The use of standardized achievement tests as a basis for judging the effectiveness of a school program has been criticized by some educators, but most would agree that standardized achievement tests can give a precise measurement of academic achievement, one of the most Important objectives of the school program. Rudman agrees with this point of view when he says, ”The standardized achievement test measures what he (the pupil) knows and it measures his ability to use logic and reason.”'0 He also States that, ”it is one of the most reliable indices available to the teacher for determining a pupil's level of knowledge.”11 EbeI agrees that standardized achievement tests are good mea- sures of quality, inasmuch as he says, ”They can help the school staff and the community it serves assess the effectiveness of the school program.”l2 Perceptions.gj Teachers and Administrators That what a person perceives is dependent upon his needs, abilities, and purposes has been well established by the Cognitive- Field psychologists.l3 That educational quality is a function of loHerbert C. Rudman, “How Good Are Standardized Achievement Tests?” The National Elementary Principal, hhz37, November, l96h. ”Ibid. IZRobert L. Ebel, ”Standardized Achievement Tests--Uses and Limitations,“ The National Elementary Principal, AI:29, September, I96]. l3Bigge, 123. cit. 7 perception is rapidly gaining acceptance by many educators.17’ ‘5 Since administrators and teachers have much to do with the determin- ation and implementation of educational programs, it is important to measure their perceptions of the characteristics which make up their programs. Previous research using the Educational Characteristics Cri- terion (ECC) as a measure of the perceptions of teachers and admin- istrators shows that it discriminates among various populations, and that it correlates highly with the cost factors of millage, size, expenditure per pupil, and state equalized valuation. Thus there should be a relationship among the perceptions of teachers and admin- istrators as measured by the Egg, school achievement as measured by a standardized achievement test, and the cost factors of millage, size, expenditure, and state equalized valuation. By using the partial correlation technique, the relationship between the perceptions of teachers and administrators and school achievement can be determined without the effect of the cost factors. Importance of the Study This study will add to the research already completed using the Educational Characteristics Criterion as a measure of educational quality.‘ Previous studies have substantiated the reliability and validity of the Egg using cost factors as measures of quality and teachers and administrators as respondents. Springer added the factor of achievement as a measure of quality in his study of IA Firman, Ioc. cit. ‘5c1ark, loc. c; 8 selected Michigan schools.‘6 This study will expand on the work done by Springer to determine if the EEE can predict achievement in schools selected in a national sample. The need for an instrument such as the EEE is voiced by McLure who stated that, ” . . . next to expenditure level in influence on high educational returns is the importance of the picture, in the minds of educators and laymen, of what constitutes good education."17 Assumptions and Delimitations I. It is recognized that school achievement is a broad term encompassing many facets of students” school life. For the purpose of this study, however, school achievement is limited to the test scores achieved on the Stanford Achievement Test by sixth grade students in the participating school districts. 2. This study is limited to a sample of school districts selected at random from among a pOpuIation of all of the school districts in the United States that are currently using the Stanford Achievement Test. This test, however, is the most widely used of all achievement tests, and is used in the largest of all school districts and in the smallest. It is used in districts of every type of socio- economic make-up in every state in the union. Because of this fact, it is assumed that Stanford users are representative of school I8 districts as a whole in the United States. l6Owen Springer, ”A Study of the Relationships Between the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC), the Stanford Achievement Test, and Selected Cost Factors” (East Lansing: unpublished Ed. D. Thesis, Michigan State University, I964). 17National Education Association, ”Better Schools Cost More,“ National Education Association Research Bulletin, 37:43, April, I959. I8See Stanford Achievement Test data, Appendix I. 9 3. It is assumed that educational quality is a relative con- cept and may be defined as the perceptions and values that peOple hold about their schools. A. It is assumed that participants will respond to the.EE_ with their honest and independent perceptions of quality. The method used to distribute the EEE among respondents is designed to ensure integrity of response. 5. It is assumed that participating school districts will report the financial data accurately. Definitions of Terms School Systems. The term school system refers to the local organi- zation created by the state for the purpose of Operating public schools having grades K-I2 or I~l2. The term school system and school district will he used interchangeably in this study. Educational Quality. Those educational characteristics of a school district, both school and community, which are perceived by educa- tional personnel as being effective in accomplishing the purposes of American public education. For the purposes of this study these characteristics are defined by the ECC. Total Quality Score (195). The sum of the weighted item responses of any individual on the ECC. Category Quality Score (CQS). The sum of the weighted item responses on the EEE included in each of the following categories of educational quality: (I) student's level of knowledge and attitudes, (2) curri- culum, (3) administration and supervision, (4) use of facilities, (5) socio-cultural composition of the community, (6) community l0 attitudes, and (7) the teacher and teaching methods. School Achievement Score. The mean score of sixth grade students tested for a particular school district as measured by the EEEnford Achievement Test. Teacher. A certified employee assigned to a group of students in grades K-IZ for instructional purposes. Administrator. A certified employee of a school district assigned to supervise the affairs of a school district or individual building. Mill. The value of a tenth of a cent or a thousandth of a dollar. Financial Ability. The state equalized valuation of a school dis- trict divided by the average daily membership (size of school district) Financial Effort. The tax rate expressed in mills voted by the people of a school district for purposes of current operating expense. Size 2E School District. The average daily school membership of a school district in grades K«12 or I-I2. Average Daily Membership- The total days' membership divided by the number of days that school was in session. Expenditure Per Pupil. The cost per pupil as determined by dividing the total current operating expenses by the average daily membership. Hypotheses to be Tested]9 General Hypothesis E There is a positive relationship between administrator and teacher perceptions of characteristics of quality education as '9These hypotheses were originated by Owen Springer for his study, Springer, loc. 21E. ll measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC). Operational Hla: There is a positive correlation between administrator—respondent scores and teacher-reSpondent scores as measured by each ECC category quality score (COS). Operational Hlb: There is a positive correlation between administrator-reSpondent scores and teacher-respondent scores as measured by each ECC total quality score (TQS). General Hypothesis ii There are positive relationships among administrator and teacher perceptions of characteristics of quality education as measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC), student achievement, and the cost variables. Operational Hiia: There is a positive correlation between administrator and teacher total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the ECC and school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test. Operational Hiib: There is a positive correlation between administrator and teacher total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the ECC and size of the school district. Operational Hlic: There is a positive correlation between administrator and teacher total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the ECC and expenditure per pupil. Operational HIId: There is a positive correlation between administrator and teacher total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the ECC and millage rate. Operational Hiie: There is a positive correlation between l2 administrator and teacher total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the Egg and state equalized valuation. Operational HIIf: There is a positive correlation between school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test and size of the school system. Operational HIIg: There is a positive correlation between school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achieve- EE££.I§§£ and expenditure per pupil. Operational HIIh: There is a positive correlation between school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test and millage rate. Operational HIIi: There is a positive correlation between school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test and state equalized valuation. General Hypothesis III There is a positive relationship between administrator and teacher perceptions of Characteristics of quality education as measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC) and student achievement independent of the cost variables. Operational HIIIa: There is a positive correlation between teacher total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the ECC and school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achieve- ment Test independent of the cost variables. Operational Hiiib: There is a positive correlation between teacher category quality scores (CQS) as measured by the ECC and school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achieve- ment Test independent of the cost variables. 13 Operational Hllic: There is a positive correlation between administrator total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the Egg and school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achieve- ‘mggE'IggE independent of the cost variables. Operational HIIId: There is a positive correlation between administrator category quality scores (CQS) as measured by the EEE and school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test independent of the cost variables. Operational HIIIe: There is a positive correlation between combined administrator and teacher total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the ECC and school mean achievement scores as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test independent of the cost variables. Operational HIlIf: There is a positive correlation between combined administrator and teacher category quality scores (CQS) as measured by the ECC and school mean achievement as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test independent of the cost variables. Organization of the Remainder of the Thesis This chapter has stated the problem, the objectives of the study, its rationale, and the importance of the study in relation- ship to the problem. The assumptions upon which this study is based were stated along with its delimitations, definitions, and hypotheses. Chapter Ii will review the literature relevant to the problem under investigation. it will be divided into the following sections: philOSOphical statements about education; related IA cost-quality studies; studies in which quality is defined as school achievement; and previous research involving the Educational Characteristics Criterion. Chapter III will examine in detail the instruments to be used in the study. Procedure and methodology will be presented, along with a detailed description of the source of data, cost factors, sample selection, research design, and the statistics to be used in the analysis of the data. In Chapter IV the data is analyzed, and Chapter V will consist of a summary, conclusions, limitations, implications, and recommendations to be drawn concerning the data collected. CHAPTER II RELATED LITERATURE Some years ago a famous educator summed up the problem of purpose of education this way: All people do not agree on those things they would have a child learn. . . . from the present mode of education we cannot determine with certainty to which men incline, whether to in- struct a child in what will be useful to him in life, or what tends to virtue, or what is exfellent; for all of these things have their separate defenders. This statement concerning the difficulty of defining what constitutes a quality education was made by Aristotle, some twenty- three hundred years ago, and the problem is still with us. This chapter will explore this problem by examing the feelings of laymen and educators about educational quality. Some views come as a result of intensive research, while others represent carefully considered phIIOSOphy. Conflicting points Of view will be presented in order to Show the breadth and complexity of the problem. The chapter is divided in several parts: (I) theoretical statements about education; (2) related cost-quality research; (3) research in which quality is defined as Standardized achievement test results; and (A) research involving the Educational Characteristics Criterion. 'John H. Fischer, “The Priorities Question in Education,“ Teachers College Record, 6I:l, l959. l5 l6 Theoretical Statements About Education Quality Education 13 Ancienthimes The basic goal of primitive education was to transmit folkways intact and unchanged because, to insure security, there had to be conformity. Likewise, the main objective of the early Oriental edu- cation was to prepare students to fit into their prOper places in the established order of things. Considering education in its broadest sense, education in today's society has elements in common with that of primitive society. Civilized man is still concerned with making the most of his material environment. Like his prehistoric ancestors, he has economic and social problems along with religions and philos- Ophy. But Ehe basic emphasis has shifted from the group to the individual. With the Greeks, some emphasis on the individual is noted. While education for citizenship (emphasis on the group) was important, the Greeks recognized the importance of individual development of the mind and the body, and stressed physical fitness, music, dancing and poetry. With this broadening of educational objectives came the beginning of the question, ”What constitutes a quality education?” This is documented by Aristotle's statement at the beginning of this chapter. Education 1_ 3 Democracy Education in modern authoritarian societies has objectives similar to primitive societies, in that ”teachers are expected to transmit a fixed set of values; education is indistinguishable from 2Carroll Atkinson and Eugene T. Maleska, I33 Story 2E Education (Philadelphia: Chilton Books, Publishers, I962), p. 9. indoctrination."3 In a democracy, where the individual is important, the problems are much greater. Fischer summarizes these problems in this statement: Even if we were to teach the common peOpIe the minimum skills of literacy and stop there, a pattern from which EurOpean nations have only recently begun to depart, the problem wouldn't be too bad. However, more than ever before, we depend upon our educa- tional establishment not only to give us a steady and growing supply of experts and leaders, but also to elevate the knowledge and competence of the whole people to the level required by the social, political, and technological conditions under which we live. . . . further complicated by the demogratic ideal of equal opportunity for personal fulfillment. . . . That the ”equal Opportunity for personal fulfillment“ ideal is not shared by all Americans is evidenced by Rickover's comment: ”England could not afford to follow the practice of many of our state universities that take in nearly all high school graduates and flunk out ho percent of the freshman class at the end of the first year. I don't think we can afford it much Ionger.‘I5 Quality Measured 32g Improved E1 National Testing Admiral Rickover's statement had to do with his goal of a national testing program. Later, in testimony before the House Appro- priations' Committee, he said: What I suggest is that you set up a small committee of eminent, scholarly persons who would be charged with working up Specifications for certain educational levels, in the form of 3Henry'Ehlers and Gordon C. Lee, Crucial issues in Education (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, I96AI, p. A. hFischer, Egg. cit., pp. I-2. SHyman G. Rickover, ”Education For All Children,” Hearings Before the Committee gg‘gppropriations, House 2E Representatives, Eighty-Seventh Congress, I962, p. I39. l8 national examinations leading to nationally valid diplomas. This would be a stgndards committee. Every country abroad has national examinations. Most American educators do not share the Admiral's enthusiasm for national testing. .Stoddard is one, and his Objection is shared by many. Do we prefer what the Bonn government has set up--a system of examinations through which the decision to go to the university, or not to go, is firmly made when a Child is ten years old? (The result: only one out Of twenty pupils make the grade.)7 Although Stoddard and many others have objected, the move for a national testing program has continued. In February of I965, under a grant by the Carnegie Corporation, the Exploratory Committee on Assessing the Progress of Education (ECAPE) met and drew up a document setting forth their plans for a tryout of new instruments designed to . assess education on a national basis. The objectives of ECAPE are set forth by John Gardner, then president of the Carnegie Corporation. A well-conceived and well-executed assessment would, It is hoped, serve several important purposes. First, jE_wouId give Zfizrican educational system. Thus, it might constitute a much more accurate guide than we currently possess to the allocation of public and private funds-~where they are needed, what they achieve-- and to many other decisions affecting education. Second, assessment results, especially_ if coupled with auxiliary information on cLar- acteristics of various regions, communities, schools, etc. , —would provide data— necessary_ for research on educational problems and processes which cannot be undertaken— now. Third, whens sampling 32g testing procedures are adeguately developed, internationpl .5 mpprisons might tbe possible. And finally, Lt is hOped tLat.p Lt _s____tands, +___ talso— Ln wLat _i__ts goals _s__hould ppppELfeijE— might be improved. 6IbId. 7George D. Stoddard, ”The Issues That Divide Us,“ ScLool and Society, 86:237, May 2A, l958. 8John W. Gardner, ”A National Assessment of Educational Pro- gress” (unpublished report, The Carnegie Corporation, April 23, I965), p. I. 19 Harold Hand objects strongly to this plan for the national assessment of education: . I am opposed to (l) a national testing program set up for purposes of comparing the school or schools in one district or region with those in other districts or regions and (2) the way in which ECAPE is functioning. I am opposed to a national testing program set up for purposes of comparing schools chiefly because (a) it would set up new obstacles to realization of our goal of equality of educational opportunity, (b) it would be the nose under the tent which would be followed by a monstrous camel in the form of a centrally controlled curriculum, (c) it would stultify the curriculum, (d) it would stifle local innovation and experimentation in respect to the curriculum, (e) it would result in unbearable pressures on classroom teachers and school administrators, and (f) it would encourage cheating on the part of students and teachers alike. I am opposed to the way ECAPE is functioning chiefly because it is violative of a cardinal principle of American democracy. . . . namely, the principle of government by the consent of the governed. In: Nation's Interest in Education Although controversy arises over almost all issues in education, there has never been an argument that education should not be provided. The issues in education have centered around what kind of education should be provided, who should be educated, how much, and by what method. As early as I787, the nation's interest in education was pointed out in the Northwest Ordinance. ”Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encour- aged."lo it is interesting to note that one of the great issues in education today is over religion in the schools, when in the early 9Harold C. Hand, ”The Camel's Nose,” Efll Delta Kappan, 47:9,l2, September, I965. l0Kenneth H. Hanson, Public Education lg American Society (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., I956), p. 38. 20 years of our country the main purpose of education was to teach reading so that everyone might read the Bible. As Atkinson and Maieska point out: It is a fact that religion was the earliest and most dominant force in the promotion of early American education. And yet today a child in a public school is taught almost everything except religion.ll The importance of the individual in American education is illustrated by this statement by the Educational Policies Commission: Universal opportunity for public education is America's re- sponse to a moral principle; that every person should have Oppor- tunity to devel0p his full potential. The interests of the nation . . . its political effectiveness, prosperity, and security . today lend new urgency to that moral principle. Education and the Nation's Strength In the decade following the end of World War II the education system in the United States became severely tested. The postwar ”baby boom” bulged the nation's classrooms. The explosion of knowledge taxed the curriculum, and the need for highly trained leaders and in- telligent followers challenged the schools as never before. The report of the Conference on the Ideals of American Freedom and the International Dimensions of Education sponsored by the United States Office of Education issued several statements having to do with tests of strength of our nation. Among them: (i) a nation's strength lies in the strength of all its people; (2) it is tested in the aspirations of its youth and the quality of its schooling; (3) our HAtkinson and Maleska, pp. pi£., p. 158. '2Educational Policies Commission, National Policy and the Financing pf Public Schools (Washington: National Education Association, 19595. P. 7. 2] democracy is no stronger than the moral and intellectual fiber of our people; (h) our country can be no richer than our teachers' minds and our children's opportunities; (5) since the quiet strength and latent power of education is less tangible than arms and missiles, it has been more difficult to realize; and (6) American education has become the testing ground for democracy.‘3 Perhaps the ultimate challenge to education is incorporated in this short statement by the Committee for Economic Development. A democracy lives or dies by the ability of its people to choose wisely. We need better schools to teach us how to under- stand the alternatives before us, and how to choose wisely among the real alternatives.l Quality Education py Legislation The turmoil created by the greatest migration in the world's history coupled with the postwar population explosion has created mon- strous problems for California in the last two decades. Following the initial furor over the Russian Sputnik launching in October of I957, the California legislature, greatly concerned about education, appointed a Citizens Advisory Committee on Education. This diverse group of pe0ple, mostly laymen, submitted recommendations which were considered at the l96l session of the state legislature. Of the 825 education bills introduced, #34 were passed, and 388 signed into law. Stone summarized some of the most important of these mandates to educators, 13United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Education for Freedom and World Understanding, Bulletin OElOOl6 (Washington, D. C.: U. 5. Government Printing Office, I962), pp. SO-Sl. I1"Ralph Lazarus, W3 Can Have Better Schools (New York: Committee for Economic Development, I959), pp h. 22 which were: l. The subjects to be taught in elementary and secondary schools, including instruction in a foreign language by I965, beginning no later than grade six. 2. A state-wide intelligence and achievement testing program, the results of which were to be reported annually to the State Department of Education and at a public meeting of each local board of Trustees. 3. A host of ”administrivia” measures, from a required salute to the flag and polio and TB injections to expulsion of students and the giving of psychological inventories only with parental consent. h. Special programs for gifted pupils. 5. New certification requirements--the Fisher Act so named for the then senator from San Diego who introduced it.15 What Shall Be Taught? One of the objectives of the California legislature and thier State Superintendent is a return to the ”basic subject matter” curri- culum. One of the major issues being hotly debated in America is what shall be taught. Unfortunately, the issue becomes clouded as all sides exaggerate in an effort to make their point. One of the leaders of the ”back to the basics'I movement is Freeman, who says: The introduction of courses in marriage and family relation- ships, child devel0pment, grooming, junior homemaking for boys, teen-age fathers, beauty care, date behavior, consumer buying, stage craft, square dancing, pep club, and fly casting without an increase in the number of classroom hours resulted in less time being spent on solid subject matter learning. Pupils took the new courses not in addition to the fundamental subjects but instead of them. Mathematics became an Optional subject through four years of high school in some of the country's largest school systems. Conant disagrees with those who would have all students take a liberal arts curriculum. He sees the expansion of the curriculum as lsJames C. Stone, ”Teacher Education by Legislation,” Phi Delta Kappan, 97:287, February, I966. l6Roger Freeman, Taxes For the Schools (Washington, D. C.: The Institute for Social Science Research, l960), p. xxiv. 2 3‘ /" meeting the need of tying school education to the requirements of society. He says: ”. . . if the schools had tried to carry through the program of one of the foremost critics of our high schools and .nl7 colleges, our whole national life would be in danger of collapse . How? Similar to the issue of what should be taught is the issue of how. illustrative of this issue is the conflict in reading instruction between the advocates of the so-called ”phonics first“ method and the ”sight-word” method champions. Here again, the issues are clouded by exaggerations and the intrusion of and simplification by self-styled experts. Actually, as‘A Report gj‘g Conference gj Reading Experts states: . extremes of ”no-phonics” or ”all-phonics” programs are exceptions; a predominantly sight-word method is practically non-existent; teachers of reading are in practically unanimous agreement on the importance of many constituent pgrts, and they report that they practice them in the classroom. Egual Opportunity For All The United States, as no other country in history, has dedi- cated itself to providing an equal opportunity for all its young to secure an education. The importance of this dedication is pointed out by the President's Committee for the White House Conference. An important reason for the growing importance of education is the plain fact that the schools have become the chief instrument for keeping this nation the fabled land of opportunity it started out to be. 17James B. Conant, The Child, The Parent, and The State (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. 1959). p. 63. 'ngggglgg,to_ Read, '5 Report of a Conference of Reading Experts (Princeton, New Jersey. Educational Testing Service, l962), p. l 2h The order given by the American people to the schools is grand in its simplicity; in addition to intellectual achievement, fos- tering morality, happiness, and useful ability, the talent of each child is to be sought out and devel0ped to the fullest. Schools of that kind have never been provided for more than a small fraction of mankind. That the public schools, with equal Opportunity for all youth as one of its ideals,havermn:provided a quality education for all, is brought home in a publication by the National Committee for the Support of Public Schools, which states that the lack of schooling and poor schooling are associated with such social problems as (l) low earning capacity, (2) large pupil drOp-out rates and subsequent unemployment, (3) rejection from military service, and (h) dependence upon relief in its various forms.20 A giant step toward the correction of this problem was taken on April ll, l965, when President Johnson signed into law the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of I965. A major part of the money provided by the act, $l.O6 billion, will be made available to the states on the basis of the number of children from low income families.21 Whether or not the ”Head Start Programs” and other products of this new act will be successful, it is too early to say, but as the N.E.A. points out: The objective of Title l is to offer the very best education we can provide to those who have too often been neglected in our 19Committee for the White House Conference on Education, A Report £2 the President (Washington, D. C.: Superintendent of Docu- ments, Government Printing Office, l956), p. 4. 20John K. Norton, ed., Changing Demands pp Education and Their Fiscal Implications (Washington, D. C.: National Committee for Support of the Public Schools, l963), pp. hS-Sl. 2‘Public Law 89-10, 89th Congress, H R 2362, 5 370» '955~ 25 schools. If increased educational Opportunity can reduce the cost of crime, delinquency, unemployment and welfare in the future, the new legislation will have been a sound investment on that count alone. 2 Economics pf Education ”Economists are interested in getting whatever it is society wants with less effort, or getting more of whatever it is society wants with the same effort.”23 There are two basic problems in education: one is to get a reasonable amount of interest in and attention to the problem of trying to increase the output of what each of us wants from education with any given input. The second part of the problem is to begin to get wideSpread understanding that more people are going to have a great deal more education, and that conse- quently more efficient methods will have to be found to provide the increased amount.2 Clark's suggestions for increasing educational output, which can raise the quality of education, provide more education, or both, include increasing the school year; extending the school day; raising the amount of homework; increasing interest on the part of all con- cerned; increasing the use of technological devices; improving the content of courses; and utilizing more efficient teaching methods.25 Freeman concurs with Clark, and Offers these suggestions: ”The schools could get a higher return on the investment (educational expenditure) by a general raising of the standards of learning, by 22"We've Got it Started: Elementary and Secondary Education Act of l965,” N.E.A. Journal, 54:38, September, l965. 23Harold F. Clark, Cost 22g Quality 12 Public Education (Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, l963), p. ll. 2“mid. 25Ibid., pp. 50-51. 26 greater emphasis upon the teaching of basic skills and knowledge, a more compact and subject-centered curriculum, fuller and more effective use of the available resources, and the introduction of ”26 manpower and space saving techniques- The Cost-Quality Relationship The cost-quality relationship in education has been widely studied, as will be pointed out in the next section of this chapter. Carr was referring to such research when he made this statement: ”We could make rapid and substantial improvements in the quality of our schools right now if we had the financial resources to do as well as we already know how to do.”27 Freeman disagrees. After extensive studies in school finance, he makes this observation: The American peOple have loyally and faithfully supported their schools. The record of steeply increasing school revenues is nothing short of Spectacular and makes no persuasive case for holding insufficient funds responsible for the shortcomings in the product of our public school system. The Place pi Education in our Value System Melby agrees that education needs more money, but feels that education suffers more because we don't place it high enough in our system of values. He sums up this idea in this statement: 26Roger L. Freeman, pp. cit , p. xix. 27William G. Carr, ”What's Past is Prologue,” N.E.A. Journal, 46:605, December, l957. 28Roger L. Freeman, School Needs in the Decades Ahead (Washington, D. C.: The Institute for Social Science Research, I958), p. ix. 27 The first thing we need to do is to give education a new place in our society. Education suffers today because it does not have enough money but it suffers even more because of its place in society, because instead of being a central concern in our way of life it is an ancillary endeavor. . . . As a people we shall never secure the educational power we need unless we can give education so high a place in our society that it becomes a matter of central concern rather than of secondary attention. Summary l. The problem of agreement about what constitutes a quality education goes back at least as far as the ancient Greeks, when some concern for the individual was recognized. 2. The country recognizes the importance of education to the strength of the nation and the role played by education in fostering the ideals of democracy. Many statements have been issued concerning the part education is playing, and must play, in providing equal Opportunity for all of the nation's citizens. 3. Because the schools are not meeting all of the needs of all of America's children, outside influences are beginning to make an impact on the educational scene that had previously not played an important part. Some of these influences are a national assessment program, legislative mandates concerning curriculum and teacher certification, and federal aid to education. A. There has never been an argument that education should not be provided in the United States. Serious issues are debated, however, concerning who should be educated, how much, and in what manner. These issues are difficult to resolve because of the emotional character of the arguments, and the oversimplification of the problem by laymen. 29Ernest 0. Melby, Education For Renewed Faith in Freedom (Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University Press, i95977 pp. 68-69. 28 5. More cures for the ills of education have been suggested. Some educators say that given more money the schools could solve many problems immediately, while economists suggest that educators can increase their output, without additional money, by applying certain economic principles. Others feel that for education to improve, Amer- icans must reserve a higher place for it in their system of values. Related Cost-Quality Studies _T_h_r_pp_E_e_i_r_ll Studies Leonard P. Ayers is generally credited with making the first scientific inquiry into the measurement of educational quality. Ranking states according to their expenditures for education between l896 and I920, he found a high correlation between expenditure and a ten item index. In his.lpgp§, Ayers used five financial items and five which had to do with tangible characteristics of the school program. Ayers lpggx: l. Per cent of school population attending school daily. 2. Average days attended by each child of school age. 3. Average number of days schools were kept open. A. Per cent that high school attendance was of total attendance. 5. Per cent that boys were of girls in high school. 6. Average annual expenditure per child in school. 7. Average annual expenditure per child of school age. 8. Average annual expenditure per teacher employed. 9. Expenditure per pupil for purposes other than teachers' -salaries. l0. Expenditure per teacher for salaries.30 in l926 Norton reported that in financially able states more money was spent per pupil, teachers were paid more, more money was (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, l920), P. lh. 29 expended on nonsalary items, and the school plant was superior. In these states, pupils attended school a greater number of days per year, more pupils went on to high school, and the teachers were better prepared.31 In the middle thirties, Ferrell studied the relationship ofs current expenditure per pupil to the following six item efficiency index: i. Per cent average daily attendance is of the census. 2. Holding power measured by the average of the sum of (a) per cent eighth grade enrollment is of first grade enroll- ment and (b) per cent high school enrollment is of the total public school enrollment. 3. Per cent of teachers employed who have a given amount of preparation. h. Per cent of teachers employed who have had three or more years of teaching experience. 5. Per cent the number of teachers is of the number of pupils. 6. Per cent the number of days in the elementary school term is of 200 days.32 Ferrell treated county schools and independent school systems separately. He found a correlation of .92 between quality as defined by his index and expenditures for county schools, and a correlation of .77 for independent districts.33 Schoolinq--Adult Life Relationship in l925 Bagley reported a study of quantity and quality in 26 3'John K. Norton, The Ability 9: States £p_Su ort Education (Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, l926). 32Doctor T. Ferrell, Relation Between Current Expenditure and Certain Measures pi Educational Efficiency jp Kentucky County gpg Graded School Systems, Contributions to Education, Number 2l6 (Nashville, Tennessee: George Peabody College for Teachers, 1936). ”um. 30 different states. As a measure of quality, he used an index based on enrollment and attendance figures, number of days that school was in session, high school percentage of total enrollment, and average annual expenditure per child of school age. These measures, obtained for l880, l890, I900 and l9lO, were correlated, a generation later, with the circulation of widely read magazines, the percentage of illiteracy among the native—born whites 2] years old or older, persons included in prlg‘ypp, per capita income, and percentage of white soldiers in the draft who received high grades on the Army Alpha. He concluded that the differences in education were the main causes of the differ- ences in the behavior and welfare factors.3h In the late l930's Thorndike carried on a study to trace the effects of education and other factors on social life.35 Using his ”goodness of life for good peOple” Index or G Index, he compared the social scene of I930 with social and educational conditions of I900. Thorndike's G Index was made up of five health factors, seven educa- tional items, two recreation items, eight economic and social items, five ”creature comfort” items, and nine miscellaneous items taken as evidence of good conditions. As measures of educational quality in I900, Thorndike used the indices of Ayers36 and Bagley.37 As a measure of personal qualities of residents he deveIOped the ”Index of Personal Qualities 31"W. C Bagley, Determinism 1p Education (Baltimore: >Warwick and York, l925), chapters h and 5. 35Edward L. Thorndike, Education A; Cause and.A§ Symptom (New York: The Macmillan Company, I939). 35Ayers, pp. cit. 37Bagley,‘pp. cit. 3] of I930” (P), a list which he believed to be indicative of the intel- ligence, morality, and devotion to the home of I900. The average correlation of the five educational items for I900 with the I930 G score was .hl, current expenditure per pupil was also .hl, while the personal qualities of residents was .59. In summing up his findings on education as a cause of the achievement of individuals and groups, Thorndike says, On the whole, the facts which I have reported probably attach less causal efficacy to schooling, home life, and special forms of training than the general opinion of educators has attached to them. They certainly do not support the promises of educational evangelists that, if all the children for a generation or two had enough education of the right sort, they would be healthy, wealthy, and wise, living in peace and amity, freg from vulgarity and meaness, busy with noble thoughts and deeds.3 Mort's Early Studies Many of the early studies concerned with the educational program were an outgrowth of the efforts to implement the concept of a foundation program of school financing. Mort's surveys of New Jersey (I933)39 and Maine (l93l-i)"'O were two such studies. More than a thousand questions designed to probe into school programs were used as a basis for observing three groups of school systems, each group representing a different level of expenditure. The areas of concern in these studies dealt with such things as administrative services, 38Thorndike, pp, pi£., p. 67- 39Paul R. Mort, Director, Reconstruction pf the System'pf Public School Support jp_£pg State pf New Jersey, Report of the Governor's School Survey Commission, II (Trenton, New Jersey: The Commission, I933). “OPaul R. Mort, Director, The Financing o_f the Public Schools ,2: Maine (Augusta, Maine: Maine School Finance Commission, l93h). 32 character of'courses of study, adequacy and condition of school plant, number and type of books provided, health services, character of attendance service, training and experience of teachers, character of the promotion program, and teachers' salaries. He found his extensive check list to be highly and positively correlated to the amount of money expended. The Regents' Inquiry In the I938 New York Regents' Inquiry, 43 school districts were graded on a 5 point scale. It was found that although many districts had high costs and inferior programs, no school systems had high educational efficiency without high expenditure. The report further indicates that the schools with superior educational results spread the greater expenditure over all the items of expense, and devote a larger proportion of the entire budget to direct instruction. A correlation of .50 was found between expenditure and the 5 point Lil scale after a correction for sparcity. The Mort-Cornell Guide In I937 Mort and Cornell deveIOped an instrument known as the MM'Self—Appraisal ,o__f_S_gl_l_o_p.l_ Systems. This instrument provides I83 items purporting to represent improvements in educational practices that had occurred in the first twenty-five years of this century. 58 of the I83 items deal with classroom instruction, 86 deal with educational leadership, and the remainder with physical facilities 41A. G. Grace and G. A. Moe,.State Aid and School Costs: Re ort‘pfi pup Regents' Inguiry (New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 19385. PP- 324-329- 33 and business management. The instrument was used to determine which communities had most rapidly taken on these improved practices. The degree to which these changes had taken place was taken as a measure of their adaptability.L+2 The Mort-Cornell Epigg was first applied to a sampling of 36 school districts in Pennsylvania. They found that although level of expenditure was not the only factor in educational quality, it was one of the highest of a series of relationships with factors chosen as being related to adaptability.~ High correlations were found to exist between the §pjpg and such factors as current expenditure per weighted pupil, community expenditure, percentage of business and professional workers, and educational level of the adult population.“3 A few years later Mort used the Mort-Cornell‘ggige again, an The Rhode Island study is especially this time in Rhode Island. significant inasmuch as 38 of the 39 school districts in the state were included. ”In Rhode Island, as in other states where the Mort-Cornell 'Guide for Self-Appraisal' or 'Lag Book' has been used, there is a clear cut unfolding of the educational program as the expenditure level rises.“L'S The scores of the school systems varied from I00 uzPaul R. Mort and Francis G. Cornell, Guide for Self- Appraisal pi School Systems (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, I937). Q3Paul R. Mort and Francis G. Cornell, American Schools in Transition (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, I9 I). uuPaul R. Mort, Director, Schools for Our Children, Report of a Survey of the Structure and Operation of the Rhode Island Public School System (Providence, Rhode Island: Commission on the Legal Structure of Rhode Island Public Education, l9hl). “Slow, p. 57. 34 ,pOints to_almost 900 pOints scored on the.§plgg. The schools in the area of l00 points had been little affected by the many educational changes introduced in the forty years preceding the study. The schools that scored close to 900 points had been affected to some degree by almost all of the I83 items included in the Epigg. In West Virginia Strayer found the typical school in the lower expenditure level to be 25-40 years behind the times in terms of the practices investigated. Some attention was paid to the basic subjects of reading, writing, and arithmetic, but health practices, music, and art were almost non-existent. Some gain in the percentage of diffusion of modern practices was found as the expenditure level rose from the lower expenditure level to the middle level, but the gain was not great. The higher expenditure level indicated the effect of the expenditure much more than did the middle level over the low. The most significant effect of these increased expenditures is the characteristics of the program that are concerned with the child as an individual. Therefore, more schools are found that provide for individual differences and make use of standardized tests. The higher level schools also provided more programs of health, music, and art, and are characterized by more flexibility of classroom instruction.#6 A study by McLure in I947 utilized an adaptation Of the Mort- Cornell Guide,“7 He selected some 100 schools in Mississippi for his study. A6George D. Strayer, Director, A Report pf 3 Survey pi Public Education 13 the State pi West Virginia (Charleston, West Virginia: State of West Virginia, Legislative Interim Committee, I945). “7Mort and Cornell, Guide, loc. cit. 35 ,B .Some of McLure's cOnclusions were that schools that spend little money have (I) unattractive buildings poorly suited for work; (2) few supplementary books; (3) almost complete absence of teaching .supplies and laboratory equipment; (4) the three R's poorly taught; and (5) few activities for deveIOping good citizenship.‘+8 in l942-l943, Vincent undertook an extensive study of three .samples of New York State school systems. The three samples repre- sented school districts from high, medium, and low expenditure levels. Vincent concludes that, There are certain general tendencies to be seen in the better supported schools which may have far-reaching effects upon schools in general. These general tendencies of better supported Sfigools can be presented and discussed briefly under five headings. The five areas referred to by Vincent are: (I) concern for the mastery of basic skills; (2) concern for the conditions of child growth; (3) attention to the needs of the individual; (4) lack of dependence of teachers upon patent devises; (5) characteristics and activities of the staff (Vincent refers to a staff that is better qualified, more resourceful, and more active).50 In the-spring of I942, 28 suburban school systems of the New York metropolitan area undertook to study their schools, using.the .Mort—Cornell Guide jg; Self—Appraisal.SI These school districts were j} 4 “William P. McLure, mgmmm Kind 91 Educationye , Need: e ort,pj.p Study,pf State‘ppg Local Support pi Mississippi's Schools University, Mississippi: .Bureau of Education Research, University of Mississippi, I948). “9William-S. Vincent, Emerging Patterns pf Public School Practice(New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, _ Columbia University, I945), p. 45. Solbid., pp. 45-46. 5'Mort and Cornell, Guide, loc. cit. 36 all well-financed and it was soon discovered that this instrument was not adequate for describing the wide variety of programs offered in these well-financed districts. Field workers were therefore instructed to record as notes such practices which they observed. Nine hundred of these notes were recorded, synthesis of which revealed that school- community interplay, high quality of personnel, democratic operation, consideration of the individual, and certain dynamics of adminis- tration have emerged as significant patterns of practice in these better supported schools. The final report of this group (which formed the nucleus of what is now the Metropolitan School Study Council) emphasizes the fact that ”you buy more when you spend more for education."52 133 Growing Edge "From the observers' notes (referred to above) and the work of Vincent In digesting the practices found in his study of the New York_State schools, I g Growing‘gggp was written.”53 .ng Growing Eggs was particularly designed to reflect those characteristics of schools which differentiated high expenditure level school districts from average ones. The instrument is limited to four facets that appear to be observed in high expenditure districts: l. The teaching of skills in a real or realistic fashion and the teaching of a wider range of skills. 2. The teaching of areas of knowledge realistically. 3. The discovery and development of special aptitudes of individuals through test and tryout. 52Vincent, pp..pl£., pp. 8-9. 53Donald H. Ross, Administration jg; Adaptability (New York: Metropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia University, I958), p. 383. 37 4. The deveIOpment of gross behavior patterns, like citizen- ship, character, and thinking, which are assumed to be develop- mental characteristics.5 Woollatt collected data from 33 New York and New Jersey subur- ban school districts, all of which were in the high expenditure bracket. These schools ranged from about I.6 times to more than four times the national expenditure level (I943-l944). Woollatt's study was undertaken to determine the relationships that existed between the four educational characteristics listed above and expenditure ElEhlfl the high expenditure group. The study showed that there is a direct relationship between those factors taken together and expenditure, and between each one individually and expenditure. The correlation be- tween the over-all score and expenditure was .59.55 James Campbell's study, reported in I956, covered the finan- cial performance of five school districts for a twenty year period.5 He concluded that small amounts spent for a category of items, which he terms ”quality improvement expenditures,” seemed to yield unusually strong results on the ”Growing Edge.” Although he considered his study a pilot study, he did formulate the following statements: I. Basic supply expenditures (expenditures for textbooks, pencils and paper, and other things associated with the bread- and-butter operation of the school) did not show a positive 5"Paul Mort,.William 5. Vincent, and Clarence A. Newell, 115 Growing Ed e: .Ap Instrument for Measuring Egg Adaptability'pf School .Systems New York: Metropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia University, I946). 55Lorne H. Woollatt, The Cost-Quality Relationship pp the. Growing Edge (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, I949). 56JamesA. Campbell, ”Small Item Expenditure and School Quality--A Cost-Quality Study” (New York: unpublished Ed. D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, I956). 38 relationship with school quality. 2. Quality improvement expenditures (expenditures for mate- rials, supplies, services, and other expenses that seem to be made with the idea of improving the program, items which were not characteristic of I920 schools) were relatively good predictors of school quality. There was no particular evidence of time lag in the effect of such expenditures on school performance. 3. Quality improvement expenditures predicted relative school quality as well as, if not better than, net current expen- ditures. 4. The present accounting system is not as helpful as it should be in sorting out expenditures that are quality producing.S7 Furno added a new dimension to cost-quality research. He looked into the time lag of desired results from changes in expen- diture. He found that increases in expenditure take several years to be fully felt in the school system. Conversely, unwise economy can cripple a system for years ahead. Furno correlated each year's current expenditure over a twenty-five year Span with school quality as measured by the Growing Edge at the end of the time Span. The procedure was carried out for two sets of data over two overlapping twenty-five year periods. Correlations between expenditure level for each year from I92l to I945 and I945 Growing Edge scores were calculated for member schools in the MetrOpolitan School Study Council. Correlations were also determined for expenditure levels for each year from I93I to I955 and I955 Growing Egg; scores. Furno concluded that communities that were high expenditure communities in l92l tended to be high in I945. These schools also were, in general, the high quality ones. The same was true of the I955 group of districts, but not to the high degree exhibited by the S7ibld., p. 64. 39 schools evaluated in I945.58 Quality pg Staff_£haracteristics Studies by Buley,59 Hall,60 and Grogan6' Shed light on desir- able staff characteristics as related to level of expenditure. Significant and positive relationships were found between the level of a district's expenditure and the years of training had by the pro- fessional staff. Other positive relationships were found between expenditure and such items as amount of travel, type of books and journals read, number of years in the same system, and certain behavior and attitude characteristics. Rating py Direct Observation Griffis, in I954, Studied 44 southeast Texas school dis- tricts. They were studied by direct observation and rated on IOO modern educational practices in relation to three expenditure levels. He concluded that the higher expenditure schools attracted better prepared teachers, gave increased attention to individual pupils, 580. F. Furno, “The Projection of School Quality from Expen- diture Level“ (New York: unpublished Ed. D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, I956). 59Hilton C. Buley, ”Personal Characteristics and Staff Patterns Associated with the Quality of Education”(New York: unpub- lished Ed. 0. Project, Teachers College, Columbia Univeristy, I947). 60Harold D. Hall, ”Relationships of Selected Characteristics of Organization to Practice in School Systems: An Exploratory Measure of the Extent and Diffusion of Administrative Procedures and Staffing Practices and Their Relationships to Selected Character- istics of School Systems” (Urbana: unpublished Ed. D. Thesis, University of Illinois, I956). 6'Robert S. Grogan, ”Determination of Staff Characteristics That Should Be Assessed in Future Studies” (New York: unpublished Ed. D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, l96l). no made use of more and better quality teaching aids, and usually had more functionally designed facilities.62 A study by Hirsch in I957 applied the following index to public schools in the St. Louis city-county area: I. Number of teachers per l00 pupils in average daily attendance. 2. Number of college hours per average teacher. 3. Average teachers' salary. 4. Percentage of teachers with more than ten years of exper- ience. 5. Number of high school credit units. 6. Percentage of high school seniors entering college.63 After determining correlations between his index and school district expenditure, Hirsch subjected the index to an interesting test of reliability. He asked a number of educators in the St. Louis area to rate the school districts on the basis of excellent, good, medium, poor, and very poor. These ratings, when compared with the 64 scope and quality index data, showed very close consistency. Summary I. Almost every study of the relationship between expen- diture and quality of education gives evidence that the relationship 62James T. Griffis, Educational Production 2; Three Cost Levels (Houston, Texas: Gulf School Research Development Association, I955). 63Warner Z. Hirsch, Measuring Factors Affecting Expenditure Levels pf Local Government Services (St. Louis: Metropolitan St. Louis Survey, I957). As cited by the author in Warner Z. Hirsch, Analysis pf the Rising Cost pf Public Education (Washington: Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States, I959), p. 27. 6"ibid., p. 28. 4l is Strong. 2. .The relationship holds true in districts of all levels of expenditure, from.Mississippi (the lowest level reviewed) to New York (the highest). 3. The relationship holds true regardless of how quality of .education is measured or defined. 4. The quantity and quality of an individual's education has an effect upon his success in later life. 5. Certain items of expenditure are better predictors of . school quality than other items of expenditure, and are better predictors than net current expenditure. 6. Increases in expenditure take several years before an increase in the quality of education is fully reayized, while unwise -economy can cripple a school system for many years. Educational Quality As School Achievement lwp _E_a_l_i_'_1y Studies One of the earliest attempts to relate the cost of education to quality, defined as school aChIevement, was undertaken by POwell in I933. .By studying 70 one-teacher schools in one New York county, he hoped to find out if increased expenditure brings increased returns. He equated two groups of 35 schools each with reSpect to intelligence and, as nearly as possible, with respect to supervision and community conditions. The schools in Group A on the average Spent about 40 per cent more than schools in Group B. Powell compared scores on (I) an achievement test battery and (2) a ”happiness test,” intended to measure certain aspects of a 42 child's adjustment to school life. He found that there are 93 chances out of I00 that schools such as those in Group A secure greater aver- age achievement in school work than those in the less well-financed group. About the same conclusions were noted in adjustment to school life as determined by the ”happiness test.” When sub—groups of schools were compared, where the higher level of support was about 75 per cent greater than the lower, Powell concluded that the differences were considerably greater and their reliability increased to 998 chances out of l000 that a child would learn more in the higher of the two groups of such schools.65 In I938 Grimm reported a study of educational Opportunities in 24 elementary-school districts in Illinois. They were selected from the entire range within the state and represented eight at the top of the expenditure level, eight in the middle, and eight in the low expenditure range. As part of the study, Grimm used a series of achievement tests. Seventh grade students were tested in reading, arithmetic, and language, while all eighth grade students were tested in reading, health, and geography. Both grade levels were also given tests of intelligence. The results of Grimm's study indicate that the student's knowledge of language and geography rises with the expenditure level. In reading and arithmetic, the results rise from the low level to the middle, but no further. The health test indicated no significant difference among the expenditure levels. 6SOrrin E. Powell, Educational Returns 2; Varying Expenditure Levels (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, I933). 43 Grimm also reported the higher level schools to have more extra-curricular activities, smaller classes, more music, better 66 libraries, and better facilities. New York Educational Conference Board Burke directed a study for the New York Educational Conference Board in I954 to identify and describe different kinds of public elementary school programs in terms of mastery of the essential skills and planned efforts to achieve other important educational Objectives, and to relate these programs to costs. Standardized tests were administered to over 5,000 pupils in I26 elementary schools. In addition teachers, administrators, and laymen made first-hand Observations of the programs in these schools.67 The significant findings of the study are these: First, the schools differ widely in mastery of basic skills. Second, the schools that rank the highest in mastery of the Three R's usually have the most comprehensive programs for obtaining other important elementary school objectives. Third, the schools which achieve the highest mastery of essen- tial skills and do the most to promote all objectives cost the most.68 'A National Study At the high school level, Bloom and Statler of the University of Chicago reported a study of factors associated with educational achievement as measured by the General Educational DeveIOpment Tests 66Lester R. Grimm, Our Children's Opportunities in Relation pp School Costs (Springfield: Department of Research, Illinois Education Association, I938). 67Arvid J. Burke, Director, What DO Good Schools Do For Our Children? (Albany: New York State Educational Conference _Board, I954). 68ibid., p. 2. 44 in English composition, literature, science, and mathematics. In I955 they tested 38,773 seniors representing 834 high schools in 48 states, and compared these results with those obtained in I943 by an fearlier investigator. The I943 survey yielded the results for 35,330 seniors from 8l4 high schools in 48 states. .A comparison of the results for the two years suggests the following conclusions: I. The level of competence, as measured by the GED, was higher in I955 than in I943 in.a majority of the states. 2. The differences among the states on the GED tests were as great In I955 as in I943 with the seniors in the lowest states at a great disadvantage when compared with the seniors in the top states. ,3. The differences in performance on the tests among the various states were highly related to differences in financial support and in the level of formal education of the adult population. The correlation between test scores and adult population educational level was significant in both years, but was not as high as the correlation between test scores and expenditure level (I943, r=.73; and I955. r=.75). 4. Shifts in the rankings of the states, between I943 and I955, were related to the factors of expenditure and adult pOpulation Teducatlon level.69 The Quality Measurement_Proiect The Quality Measurement Project of the New York State Edu- cation Department created more SOphisticated methods for assessing 69Benjamin 5. Bloom and Charles R. Statler, ”Changes In the States on the Tests of General Educational Development from I943 to ,1955,”-School Review, 65:204-22l, Summer, l957. 45 the quality of school systems.70 ’ 7' Over 70,000 pupils in grades four, seven and ten representing 98 school districts were classified on the basis of educational potential. Two kinds of data were used for classifying pupils in terms of their educational potential: a pupil's socio-economic circumstances and his intelligence. The Project relied upon achievement tests as quality indices, recognizing that these measures provide only a partial estimate of the quality of any system.72 Pupils were classified into three groups--high potential, average potential, and low potential--and mean achieve- ment scores were computed for each of the three groups of pupils in each system. It was found that students in the same classification achieved at considerably different levels from system to system. The ranges in difference were from one to two grade equivalents in grades four and seven, and as many as four grade equivalents in grade ten.73 Among the many other findings of the first Project were: expenditure is positively related to school system effectiveness even when there is control on input (I.Q. and socio-economic level). However, the relationship is not so Strong as to avoid the inference 70Samuel M. Goodman, Director, The Assessment of Quality (Albany: New York State Education Department, I959). 7'William D. Firman et aI. , Procedures in School Quality Evaluation: A Second Report of— the Quality Measurement Proiect (Albany: New —York State Education Department, l96l). 72Goodman, gp. £I_t., p. 7. 73|bid., p. 43. 46 that it is judicious expenditure, not just additional expenditure, that is related to increased effectiveness.7u Other conclusions: excellent schools average two-thirds smaller than poor ones; they were nearly twice as wealthy; 25 per cent more was spent per pupil for instructional purposes than in the poorer ones. A year later, the same groups of students were tested again, essentially confirming the earlier findings.75 Summary I. .Almost every study of the relationship between expen- diture and school achievement, as measured by Standardized tests, shows the relationship to be significantly positive. 2. As the level of financial support rises, the chances that children will learn more, as measured by standardized tests, also rises. 3. The relationship holds true in studies of a single county through studies involving every state in the nation. 4. Expenditure is positively related to school achievement even when other variables such as I.Q. and socio-economic status are controlled. 5. There is a strong indication that it is judicious expen- diture, not just additional expenditure, that is related to increased effectiveness. 47 Quality as Perceptions of Educators and Laymen Educators and School Board Members Rudman, in an attempt to delineate quality of educational programs, identified ninety factors which curriculum specialists and other educatiOnists claim influence the quality of curriculums.76 In a study replicating part of Rudman's research, Kraft studied the perceptions of educational quality by professors of education, professors in areas other than education, and board of education members. He asked his sample, selected from four regions of the United States, to react to ninety factors judged to affect the quality of an educational program. In his study, Kraft reached these conclusions: (I) there appears to be a relationship between the group the individual is a member of and his perceptions of the factors, (2) there is agreement in each group as to the importance and rele- vance of the factors concerned with teaching and teaching methods, (3) there is agreement between groups in attributing less value to the outside-the-classroom category of factors, and (4) there is no relationship between the geographic region of residence and his perception of characteristics in five of the seven categories used in the study.77 76Herbert C. Rudman and Stanley E. Hecker, I'The Determina- tion and Measurement of Factors Which Directly or Indirectly Affect the Quality of an Educational Program” (unpublished report, Michigan State University, East Lansing, l96l), p. 5. 77Leonard E. Kraft, ”The Perceptions Held by Professors of Education, Professors in Areas other than Education, and School Board Members on Ninety Factors Which May or May Not Affect the Quality of an Educational Program” (East Lansing: unpublished Ed. D. Thesis, Michigan State University, I962). 48 Teachers and Administrators From his research with professors of education and curriculum specialists, Rudman deveIOped the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC). Berg used this instrument in a study of teachers and administrators in selected Michigan schools. His sample included 87l teaChers and 82 administrators from two school districts in the high (first) quartile of each cost factor of size, ability, effort, and expenditure per pupil. The sample also included I,09I teachers and I06 administrators from thirty-nine districts in the low (fourth) quartile of each cost factor. Berg found that the gpp discriminated positively between high and low financial support quartiles. The study also revealed that teachers and administrators perceive quality in the same way on six of the seven categories included in the instrument.78 Two years later Mueller replicated Berg's study on a national basis. He found that the gpp discriminated positively between school districts in the United States having high financial support and those districts having low financial support. However, unlike Berg, Mueller found significant disagreement between teachers and adminis- trators concerning educational quality within the high financial 79 support quartiles and within the low financial support quartiles. 78Arthur D. Berg, “The Determination of the Discrimination and Reliability Indices of the Educational Characteristics Criterion with Implications Concerning Educational Cost-Quality Relationships” (East Lansing: unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Michigan State University, I962). 79Van Dyck Mueller, ”A Study of the Relationships Between Teacher-Administrator Perceptions of Educational Quality as Measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC) and Selected Cost Factors” (East Lansing: unpublished Ed. D. Thesis, Michigan State University, I964). 49 In another state-wide study, Springer set out to determine the relationship between administrator and teacher perceptions of characteristics of quality education, student achievement, and selected cost factors. The major purpose of the study was to deter- mine the ability of the Educational Characteristics Criterion to predict school achievement independent of selected cost factors. Springer's findings were: (I) there was a high positive correlation between administrator and teacher perceptions of charac- teristics of educational quality on each of the seven categories of factors identified as contributing to quality education; (2) there may be no statistically significant difference between the relation- ships of gpp scores and achievement when the cost factors are made independent and when they are not. Thus the EEC may be able to predict school achievement free of the influence of the combined factors of size, expenditure per pupil, millage, and state equalized 8O valuation. Summary I. There are factors which educators commonly agree influ- ence the quality of educational programs. 2. There is little relationship between the geographic region of residence and the perception of the characteristics of educational quality. 3. Teachers and administrators perceive characteristics of quality of education in the same way. 80Owen Springer, ”A Study of the Relationships Between the Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC), the Stanford Achievement Test, and Selected Cost Factors” (East Lansing: unpublished Ed. D. Thesis, Michigan State University, I964). 50 4. The Educational Characteristics Criterion, an instrument designed to measure the quality of educational programs, can dis- criminate between public schools having high financial support and those having low financial support. It may also be able to predict school achievement free from the influence of the combined cost factors of size, state equalized valuation, expenditure per pupil, and millage. CHAPTER III INSTRUMENTATION AND PROCEDURE This study is undertaken to determine the relationships that exist among the perceptions of educational quality of teachers and administrators as measured by the Educational Characteristics Cri~ terion (ECC), school achievement as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test, and the educational cost factors of size, effort, ability, and expenditure. Instrumentation Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC) The Educational Characteristics Criterion (ECC) was developed ' It is based by Dr. Herbert C. Rudman of Michigan State University. on the assumption that the quality of an educational program “. resides more in the mind of the observer than it does in the actual structure of the curriculum."2 Educational quality is determined by decisions about those educational characteristics of a school dis- trict which are thought to be important in accomplishing the objectives of public education. Several hundred quality and quality-related factors were identified by the faculty of Michigan State's College of Education lRudman and Hecker, pp. cit. 2lbid., p. l. SI 52 with a significantly high level of agreement prevalent on ninety educational characteristics. Rudman next asked curriculum special- ists to respond to the ninety characteristics sorted out of the original group. These items represented elements which either directly or indirectly affected educational quality. From an anal- ysis of this second phase of his study, Rudman developed the §_p. Kraft replicated the second phase of Rudman's study in I962.3 He asked professors of education, professors in areas other than education, and school board members to make judgments concerning the relatedness of the ninety educational characteristics to a concept of quality. These respondents generally concurred with the judgments of the curriculum specialists in the Rudman study. Reliability and Discrimination.--The reliability and dis- crimination indices of the §££_were determined in the studies of the 4 S perceptions of teachers and administrators by Berg and Mueller. In his study of selected Michigan school districts, Berg found that the reliability of Educational Characteristics Criterion total scores ranged from .89 to .95 according to teachers or administrators within 6 high or low support quartiles. In Mueller's study of a national sample of School districts, he found the reliability of the Egg total scores to range from .89 to .9I.7 3Kraft,‘pp. cit. “Berg, pp. cit. SMueller, pp.'pip. 6Berg, pp. cit., p. I74. 7Mueller, pp. cit , p. I79. 53 Item analysis tests administered by Mueller indicated that all but four individual characteristic scores had adequate positive discrimination (P=.0l) with reSpect to total score and related cate— gory scores.8 In Michigan, Berg found only two individual character- istic scores to lack positive discrimination power with respect to total score and related category score.9 Both studies concluded that the gpp can discriminate posi- tively between school districts having high financial support and those having low financial support. Format and Design p: the Instrument —-In its present form the Educational Characteristics Criterion is made up of fifty-five '0 a separate sheet of Instructions for Responding pp the II items, Educational Characteristics Criterion, and a Supplementary '2 of seven items to be filled out by the superin- Information Form tendent of the school district under study. The instrument is of a paper and pencil type, designed for individual response. It normally takes a respondent thirty minutes to complete the E229 though there is no established time limit. Responses are made by marking an ”X” over the number which repre- sents the degree to which the educational characteristic is perceived to be present, i.e., ”Most Characteristic . . . 4”; ”Somewhat 8M. 9Berg, pp. it, p. I93. IOAppendix C. IlAppendix D. leppendix E. 54 Characteristic . . . 3”; ”Slightly Characteristic . . . 2”; ”Least Characteristic . . . l.” Teachers and building principals are directed to reSpond to the ppp in relationship to their building experiences. Central office administrators and supervisors are directed to indicate their perceptions of the characteristics in relationship to the school system as a whole. Categories Within the Instrument.--The fifty-five items that comprise the EEC are distributed among seven categories in this manner: I. Student's level pi knowledge and attitudes: 8. Students show a positive attitude toward scholastic work. 9. Students evidence accurate knowledge of self. l6. Students are knowledgeable about the educational and social Opportunities available to them. 5I. Pupils consider an academic grade of at least ”B” to be the norm for academic achievement. 52. The professional staff of the schools in the community consider an academic grade of at least “B” to be the norm for academic achievement. 54. Parents and patrons in the community consider an aca- demic grade of at least ”B” to be the norm for academic achievement. II. Community attitudes: 2l. Parents and patrons (those residents of a school district without school-age children) are highly know- ledgeable about education. 28. 29. 30. 36. 37. 39. 40. 4S. 53. SS. 55 The perceptions of parents and patrons concerning the purposes of education are consistent and clear. The local newspaper has shown a high interest in local school affairs. There is no lag between the values taught in the school and what is practiced in the community. A high percentage of the electorate in the community vote in school elections. There are outstanding community leaders in this community who exhibit great interest in school affairs. The community exhibits a great concern for the deveIOp- ment of aesthetic and artistic interests. A two-way communication channel readily exists between the home and the school. The parents in this community expect their children to perform their share of family chores. A high value is placed on education by the parents and patrons (those residents of a school district without school-age children) of the community. Parents condone or encourage early dating for their children. Curriculum: 4. 6. Teachers perceive a coherent and coordinated structure to the educational program. Concensus exists among the staff concerning the goals of the educational program. A structure has been deveIOped that permits continual l5. I7. 56 curriculum improvement. A great variety of instructional materials are presently used in the classrooms. A complete comprehensive testing program including intelligence and achievement testing is available in the schools. Use pf facilities: 32. The physical facilities of the school system (buildings and equipment) are completely adequate. Socio-cultural composition p: the community: 25. 34. 38. 4]. 42. 44. 46. 47. 48. The social status of teachers is very high in this community. Cultural experiences are readily available in the community. This is a highly stable community which does not have too many people leaving. A high percentage of high school students own personal cars. A high percentage of homes own television sets. A high degree of ethnic, racial and religious homo- geneity exists among the local pOpulation. This community is composed of peOple who are predomi- nantly Protestant. This community is composed of people who are predomi- nantly Catholic. This community is composed of people who are predomi- nantly Jewish. VI. VII. 49. 50. 57 The population of this community is equally divided between Protestants and Catholics. One or two ethnic groups comprise the largest number of residents in the community. Administration and supervision: IO. 22. 23. 26. 35. Professional staff of the school system are involved in in-service education. Lay members of the community are highly involved in the planning of educational goals with the school staff. Regulations governing student conduct are highly explicit and detailed. Regulations governing personnel policies are highly explicit and detailed. Teachers' judgments are almost always used in the determination of educational policies. Teacher and teaching methods: I. 2. Teachers have intimate knowledge of children. Teaching practices reflect concern for individual differences. Teaching practices reflect a knowledge of individual differences. Evidence exists of instructional and/or curricular experimentation. Teachers thoroughly understand the information gathered on students and use this information to make sound educational decisions. I3. 20. 24. 3I. 33. 43. 58 All teachers are certified to teach at the grade level or subject they are now teaching. Teachers have complete freedom to teach what they con- sider to be important. A great variety of instructional techniques are presently used in the classrooms. Teachers often avail themselves of professional help. Complete freedom is granted to students to investigate any local, state, national or international issue. Availability to students of materials that reflect all shades of political and sociological points of view. High degree of teacher participation in social and political activities of the community. There exists a high level of COOperation among the teachers of the Staff. The community and its residents are used for instruc- tional purposes. A great deal of homework is assigned to students. Scoring.--Total ECC scores are obtained by the sum of the weighted reSponses to each item. Weightings are determined by the degree to which each characteristic is judged to be present in a given situation (4, 3, 2, I). Category scores are obtained by the sum of the individual educational characteristic scores included in each of the seven categories. The Stanford Achievement Test In The Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook, it stated that 59 ” . . . (the reviewer) would rate the I964 edition of the Stanford Achievement Test high among standardized achievement test batteries designed for use at the elementary school level. The new edition is in many ways superior to its predecessors and some ways to its current competitors. .”13 The present edition, the fifth, is the latest in a series of Stanford Achievement Tests, dating back to I923, making it the oldest achievement test on the market. Standardization.--The results of any test yield very little meaning until they are compared to some reference group. Scores on the I964 Stanford may be translated into grade equivelents, per- centile ranks, or stanines, and these may then be compared to the norms determined by the scores made by the national sample of pupils tested in the Standardization program. The I964 Stanford standardization sample consists of over 850,000 pupils from 264 school districts representing all fifty states. The norms are based on the total enrollment of all regular classes in the sample except for l-2% of the pupils who were judged to be extremely atypical as to age. Care was taken to include public schools (integrated, segregated white and segregated colored), private sectarian, and private non-sectarian in the sample. Size and geographic location were considered along with family income and number of years of schooling of the adult members of the family from which the students l3Oscar Kristen Buros, ed., The Sixth Mental Measurement Yearbook (Highland Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, I966), pp. l23—l24. 60 I4 being tested came. Validity.--The validity of a test depends upon the faithful- ness with which it measures whatever it purports to measure, i e., in the case of the I964 Stanford Achievement Test, I'The extent to which the content of the text constitutes a representative sample of the Skills and knowledge which are the goals of instruction. The Stanford authors sought to insure content validity by examining appropriate courses of study and textbooks as a basis for determining the skills, knowledges, understandings, etc., to be measured.”'5 The validity of a test also depends directly upon the care with which each item in the test has been chosen. In the Stanford item analysis program, experimental editions of the test were administered to approximately 49,000 pupils in I9 school districts. Each of the approximately l5,000 questions used in the experimental I6 edition was analyzed to determine item validity. Reliability.-~The reliability of a test depends upon the consistency with which it gauges the abilities of those to whom it has been applied. When a test is reliable, scores made by the members of a group, upon retest with the same or with an alternate form of the test, will differ very little or not at all from their original values. IL'Truman L. Kelley, et al., Stanford Achievement Test, Directions for Administering (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., I964), p. 27. 'Slbid., p. 25. '5ibid., p. 26. 61 In the I964 edition of the Stanford, odd-even split-half reliability coefficients corrected by the Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula and the Kuder-Richardson reliability coefficients are used. Each of these is based upon a randomly drawn sample of I,000 cases from each grade. These are presented in the Directions for Adminis- tering along with the standard error of the measurement in terms of grade scores.I7 For the sixth grade (the grade used in the present study), the Split-half coefficients range from .85 (arithmetic concepts) to .95 (language). The Kuder-Richardson Formula coeffi- cients range from .87 (arithmetic concepts and arithmetic compu- tations) to .93 (language). Subtests.--The I964 edition of the Stanford Achievement Test~ Intermediate Il Battery (used in this study) consists of nine sub- tests: Word Meaning; Paragraph Meaning; Spelling; Language; Arith- metic Computations; Arithmetic Concepts; Arithmetic Applications; Social Studies; and Science. Procedure Harcourt, Brace, and World, Inc., publishers of the Stanford Achievement Test, were asked to submit a list of those school dis- tricts in the United States who at that time were using the test. The company submitted a list of the post offices to which test re- sults had been mailed after being corrected by the company in I965. From this list a random sample of 2“O.l~as selected and a letter was written to the "Superintendent of Schools, Elementary School District” '7lbid., p. 24. 62 inviting his district to participate in the study.18 Along with the letter, which included a brief description of the study, each super- intendent was sent a Preliminary Information Sheet,'9 requesting information concerning the number of teachers and administrators in the district and detailed cost data for the l965-I966 school year. Affirmative replies and preliminary information were received from 42 superintendents, representing school districts in l8 states. An analysis of the grades tested in the 42 school districts revealed grade six to be the most common, so it was decided that it should be the grade used in the study. Classification pf School Districts Emmy: Cost Factors Previous research in which the interrelationships of educa- tional cost factors were to be determined, has deemed it advisable to consider them as a group. It was assumed that of the four factors, two would present little difficulty in obtaining precise comparable data. §jpp is defined as the average daily school membership of a school district, and expenditure per pppll is defined as the total current Operating expense, excluding capital outlay and debt service, divided by the average daily membership. The data for the factors of pjfppp (mill rate) and ability (property valuation) are certainly less precise than the two pre- viously mentioned factors. Since the assessment of prOperty for tax purposes lacks a uniform, equitable, or objective basis in the fifty '8Appendix A. '9Appendix B. 63 states for comparison purposes, the following procedure was used: Ability was computed by defining taxable valuation as the final appraisal of the worth of real and personal properties for tax purposes. The assessment ratio (assessed value divided by esti- mated market value) was applied to the final appraised value to determine the figures used in ranking the districts.20 Effort--the fluctuation in mill rate due to wide differ- ences in final appraisal of property was adjusted by applying the same assessment ratio. While assessment practices vary within any given state, it was decided that the ratios used were the most accurate and recent figures available for the purpose desired. Tables l-4 show the distribution of the 42 school districts as they were classified by quartiles. TABLE l.--Ability (prOperty valuation per pupil) of 42 school districts Property Valuation 'l Quartl e Per Pupil (Dollars) Quartile 4 47,437 - 62,000 Quartile 3 27,800 - 38,708 Quartile 2 I6,286 - 27,000 Quartile I 922 - l5,7l4 TABLE 2.-~Size (average daily membership)of 42 school districts Quartile ADM Quartile 4 ll,809 - 104,424 Quartile 3 5,6Il - 9,500 Quartile 2 3,048 - 5,450 Quartile I 225 - 2,795 20Obtained from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Taxable Property Values (Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, I963), p. 94. 64 TABLE 3.--Effort (mills levied for Operation) of 42 school districts Quartile Millage Quartile 4 46.74 - 97.20 Quartile 3 39.00 - 46.00 Quartile 2 23.l7 - 36.90 Quartile I 10.59 m 2l.60 TABLE 4.--EXpenditure per pupil of 42 school districts Expenditure Per quart'le Pupil (Dollars) Quartile 4 723 - 948 Quartile 3 539 - 666 Quartile 2 450 - 534 Quartile l I74 - 449 Selection pi the Sample The final selection of the sample was dictated by two factors: (I) the necessity that school districts included adminis- tered the Stanford Achievement Test at the sixth grade level, and (2) the need for an adequate and somewhat equal number of respon- dents, both teacher and administrator, in each of the four quartiles of cost factors. On the basis of these criteria, 28 school districts were selected to participate in the study. Fourth (High) Quartile --Four school districts were selected at random from among those districts in the fourth quartile. Geo- graphically, two districts are located on the East Coast, one on the West Coast, and the other in a North Central state. There were 821 teachers and 62 administrators in the sample based upon I00% sampling in the four districts. 65 Third Quartile.--Nine school districts comprised the third quartile of cost factors, with a total of 562 teachers and 44 admin- istrators. Geographically, two districts are located in Eastern states, two in the Midwest, and the other five in the North Central region of the United States. Second Quartile.--Eight school districts comprised the second quartile. Geographically, one is situated in New England, one in the Southwest, one on the Pacific Coast, two in Eastern states, and three in the North Central section of the country. This quartile totals I098 teachers and 88 administrators based upon I00% sampling in the districts.' First (Lad Quartile.--Seven school districts, representing 734 teachers and SI administrators, were selected to make up the first quartile. Three school districts are located in the North Central part of the country, three in the Deep South, and one in a Southwestern state. A total of 3,2l5 teacher respondents and 245 administrator respondents, representing 28 school districts in I6 states,made up the sample for this study. Not all districts were ranked in the same quartile on all four cost factors; however, each ranked in the quartile it represented in the study on expenditure per BEEll which was judged to be the most important cost factor. It was so judged because the amount of money spent on each child is a result of the other three cost factors. Mailing Procedure On February 22, I966, a letter, describing the study, was mailed to the superintendents of 240 school districts inviting 66 them to participate in the study. Included with the letter was a Preliminary Information Sheet requesting financial information about the district, the number of teachers and administrators employed in the district, and the grade levels at which the Stanford Achievement Test is used. On April 2l, I966, a package was mailed to the superin- tendent of each participating school district. The package contained enough ppps for each teacher and administrator, General Instructions for Administration and Mailing pi the Educational 2' the Supplementary Information Sheet, Characteristics Criterion, and an enveIOpe containing labels addressed for the return of all material. A personal letter was also sent to each superintendent containing additional information and postage for the return of the material.22 The superintendents were requested to have all gpps returned to his office within 48 hours from the time of their distribution. It was hoped that the 48 hour time limit would result in better individual perceptions that would be less influenced by group discussion.23 Cooperation in the study was much less than had been de- sired. Two school districts failed to return any material and 2'Appendix F. 22Appendix G. 23See Appendix F for complete mailing and administrative instructions. 67 were never heard from after the initial indication that they would participate in the study. Follow-up letters failed to stimulate any reSponse on their part. One superintendent telephoned to say that he had not had time to distribute the gpps, but that he was doing it immediately and that he would send them within a week. He failed to do so. The Stanford Achievement Test results arrived from one school district as requested in the cover letter to the superin- tendent of schools. An accompanying letter stated that the E225 had been misplaced and that if we would send duplicate material, it would be completed and returned immediately. The Eggs were returned but the percentage of response was too low to be used in the study. Apparently school had been dismissed for the summer, and the responses represented only those teachers who were still working in the buildings. Five school districts returned ppps in the manner pre- scribed, but failed to enclose the Stanford Achievement Test scores. Repeated follow~up letters failed to achieve any results. Evidently these school districts were either unable or unwilling to supply their test results. Complete data was received from l9 school districts in II states. Usable teacher responses totaled I486, and usable admin- istrator responses numbered l3l. Table 5 displays the number and percentage of responses received from the I9 school districts. _m_ucOuom 68 ee -Aeo _m _m_ MA one. co omnocuutue ocm Longsz _OHOk Nw QM; NW. w No ~m_ m— am A: cm a mm _e m. _n mm 90— m mm Om m_ No 0— mm _ mm m o— _m mm om _ _m Nu m— .o mm. mm __ 00 :N_ :— _m :m om : m: om m. _m oo: 00. mm _m mom ~— om mm 00. m mm mm __ .0 mm No m .0 mm o— ow _N 00. J _u N. m om m: oo. o m: _: w mm m: oo. : mm _: m mm Jew _m m. cm NNN o 00. N_ 00. N 00— o_ m om q: me N _m N: : mm on. mm __ em mm_ m mm we 00— m mm no N _w cm 00. m cm mm _ _m_ucouom consaz _m_ucoHOm consaz _m_uc0uom Loganz mo ommucooummlllllw mo ommucooLom mo ommucooLom _OOLOm oocmnEOQ mcoumcum_c_Eu< mLOLOOOF mpchQmOL mo ommucooLoa new consazii.m m4mmm ___z _e\oxm u~_m eoe sum mco_um_:o_mo c_ new: mo_nm_cm> ozhil.m u4m ozhii.0 u:0<0 76 ..0 0.0:. 00c.nEOu 0.0 ..mJ. L050000 0 m ..w:. 0000c00.c.50< 0:. ocoom .0000 0.0 ..0: 000.0500 0000005 m.~ m.~: c050000 .m. ... mc.;omou 0cm 00:0000 0.N 0.:: c000c00.:.50< __> 00000000 0.. m.:. 00c.nEoU co_m.>c0030 0.. 0.:. cocoooe 00. 00. oem eo_oocom_e_Eo< m.. N.m. cOumcum_c.E0< _> chWOHmu 0.. m.mm 00c.nEOu >u.c:EEOO 0:0 00 m.. w.m~ c050000 mm. mm. co_u.mOQEoo .mc30.30io.00m w.. :.00 Lopmcum_c.50< > xLOmmumu 0. 0.0 eoc_eeo0 0. 0.0 toeooo0 00. .0. mo_0_._uo. 0o 000 0. 0.0 coomcom_c_50< >_ 0c000000 0. 0.0. eoc_eeo0 m. ..m. cmgomm0 mm. ... E:.:o.cc:u 3.. 0.m. copmcum_c.80< ... >c0m00mu m.. 0.0N noc_nEOU m.. 0.0m cosomm0 mm. .0. 00030.000 >0_c:EEOQ m.N :.0N toumeum.:_80< __ >Lom0000 m. m.m. 00c.nEOu 00030.000 0cm omvm. w. m.m. 0050000 mm. mm. i300: mo .0>o. 0.0c0030m 0.. 0.0. coomcpm_c_50< _ >tommomu 0 _k 000 000.0800 000000 coumcum_:_E0< comzumn 0:0 0:0 md0 00c.nEOu 000000 cozomm0 0.;0co_um.0c 0:0 Amd0v mmcoom >0..m:o .0000 0:0 Anouv mOLOOm >0_.030 >Lom0000 c000000.:.80m 0cm cmzommu cmmzumn 00c0_o_00000 co_0m.0cc00ii.w m40<0 77 specific, in this study certain characteristics of educational quality were viewed very similarly by teachers and administrators, while other characteristics were obviously perceived from quite different points of view. 0f the seven categories of the gpp, the characteristics represented by five were perceived in the same way by teachers and administrators as evidenced by their significant and positive corre- lations. They are: Category I (Student's level of knowledge and attitudes) .35; Category II (Community attitudes) .7I; Category IV (Use of facilities) .9l; Category V (Socio-cultural composition of the community) .73; Category VI (Administration and supervision) .50. A very low correlation was found to exist between the per- ceptions of teachers and those of administrators on Category III (Curriculum) .II, and Category VII (Teacher and teaching methods) .Il. Careful analysis of the characteristics that make up the seven categories (pp. 54-58) indicates that the highest correlation between the perceptions of teachers and administrators, is found on those categories represented by factors which can be seen as a whole by teachers. The educational characteristics that make up Categories III and VII are, for the most part, those which the teacher would have little Opportunity to know the extent of their existence outside of the classroom. It seems logical to assume, for example, that a sixth grade teacher might have little knowledge of what takes place in the kindergarten room of the same building. It follows, also, that this teacher might have even less knowledge 78 of the extent to which characteristics of educational quality exist in classrooms at the high school level. Administrators, through classroom visitations and other aSpects of their job, perceive the extent to which these characteristics exist from a much broader viewpoint. Another possible explanation for the low correlation between the perceptions of administrators and teachers of these two cate- gories could be that they are not interpreting the characteristics in the same way. For example, the word ”curriculum” might mean one thing to an administrator and an entirely different thing to a teacher. 0n characteristics pertaining to the community and its people, knowledge of their presence might well come from partici- pation in affairs outside of school and could account for the higher relationships that exist between the perceptions of teachers and those of administrators on Categories I (.35), II (.7I), and V (.73). Even here, however, Category I (Student's level of know- ledge and attitudes) shows a low, even though significant corre- lation (.35), and this may be because the teacher's perceptions are limited to students in her own classroom. Categories IV (Use of facilities) .9l, and VI (Administra- tion and supervision) .50, are made up of characteristics of quality education that are easily observable and are both signi- ficant and positive. Table 8 also illustrates the relationship between the total quality score of teachers and administrators (combined TQS) and each combined category score (combined CQS). Although it has no 79 direct implications for the present study, it is interesting to note that there is a significant positive correlation between each combined category quality score and the combined total quality score. Summary It can be stated with a relatively high degree of assurance that, jp general, teachers and administrators do perceive the char- acteristics of quality education in the same way. There are certain characteristics, however, upon which there is little agreement. These characteristics fall into the categories of curriculum and the teacher and teaching methods. The reason for this lack of agreement may be because teachers see these characteristics of quality education only from the point of view of their classrooms, while administrators perceive the same characteristics from a much broader point of viéw. It may simply be, however, that they are interpreting the character- istics differently. In the other categories of quality education that make up the Educational Characteristics Criterion, there is significant agreement between the way teachers view these characteristics and the way they are viewed by administrators. The most significant. areas of agreement are those relating to the community and the adequacy of educational facilities. Hypothesis II There are positive relationships among administrator and teacher perceptions of characteristics of quality education as measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion, student achievement, and the cost variables. 80 ECC Scores and Achievement Table 9 displays the correlation coefficients that were cal- culated to determine the relationships between school achievement and the ESE scores of administrators, of teachers, and their combined ECC scores. TABLE 9.-~Correlation coefficients between ECC and school mean achievement scores Administrator Teacher Combined Category I - Student's level of knowledge and attitudes .2I .06 .I2 Categoryyll - Community attitudes .06 -05 .05 Category III - Curriculum .I3 -.06 -.04 Category IV - Use of facilities 25 .I3 .l4 Category V - Socio~cultural composition of the community .08 -.03 .00 Category VI - Administration and supervision .45* .ll .l9 Category VI! - Teacher and teaching methods .36* .07 .I4 Total .29 .05 .09 *Statistically Significant The relationship between school achievement and the combined total quality score of teachers and administrators, though positive, is far from significant. This causes a rejection of the hypothesis that there is a positive relationship between these two variables. There are no significant relationships found to exist between achievement and teacher gpp scores-~neither the total score nor any one of the category scores. No significant relationships are found 8l between achievement and combined ggg scores. This finding is not surprising, however, in light of the relationship between teacher scores and achievement, since teacher scores comprise 92% of the total scores that make up the combined score. This is illustrated by the nearness of the correlations of teacher and combined scores on each category and the total score. The relationship between achievement and administrator total quality score ( 29) is almost significant-- 30 necessary for signi- ficance--and makes one cautious in rejecting the notion that the perceptions of administrators are not good predictors of school achievement. This is especially true in light of previous research in which there was a significant relationship between the perceptions of administrators and school achievement.I An examination of the categories reveals that in each one the perceptions of administrators are more closely related to achievement than are the perceptions of teachers or the combined perceptions. As was indicated in the previous section, this is probably due to the fact that the administrator's position allows him to perceive a more comprehensive picture of the characteristics that comprise a quality program than the teacher's position allows. The highest relationships between achievement and the perceptions of administrators are in Category VI (Administration and supervision) .45, and Category VII (Teacher and teaching methods) .36. Both are positive and significant. The lowest rela- tionships are with Category II (Community attitudes) .06, and with Category V (Socio-cultural composition of the community) .08. This ISpringer, pp. cit , p. 79. 82 seems to give an indication that administrator perceptions of the existence of those characteristics of quality education most closely associated with the teaching process might be a good measure of student achievement, while their perceptions of the existence of community characteristics associated with educational quality bear little relationship to student achievement. The relationships of the other categories to achievement while not significant are corre- lated higher than the community characteristics, and are all more closely associated with the teaching process. Cost Factors and Achievement The relationships among the cost factors, achievement, and E C combined TQS are found in Table l0. TABLE l0.--Correlation coefficients among ECC TQS, school achieve- ment and cost factors Variables Adm. Teach. Combined Ach. Size SEV Mills TQS TQS TQS LeVIed Administrator TQS Teacher TQS .47k . Combined TQS .58* .99k Achievement .29 .05 .09 Size .I9 .I9 .20 -.2l SEV .00 .l2 .l0 .I6 .I6 Mills .26 -.03 .00 .34* .53* .05 Expenditure .35* .IO .I3 .50* .IO .50* .63* *Statistically Significant p= lo(.308) P= 05( 389) P: 025( 456) P=.0I(.528) P=.005(.575) 83 The high positive relationship between eXpenditure per child and achievement (.50) reinforces the long held notion that the more money spent for education, the better its quality will be. There is also a significant relationship between achievement and the number of mills levied (.34). This is not a surprising finding, in that to have high expenditure, it is necessary for the people of the district to tax themselves. The low relationship (.I6) between property valuation and achievement points out the fact that having the ability to support education in a quality manner is not enough. The peOple of the school district must be willing to make an effort to have a quality program by taxing the available resources in their community. The negative correlation between size and achievement (-.2l) indicates a trend toward an inverse relationship between these two variables among the schools in this study. This causes a rejection of the hypothesis, and supports the findings of Firman who concluded ” . . . the excellent schools were smaller than the poor ones, two- thirds as large.”2 .The relationships between expenditure and prOperty valuation (.50) and expenditure and mills (.63) is as one might expect since high expenditure is a result of some combination of the other two variables. The low correlation between property valuation and mills (.05) can be eXplained by the fact that low prOperty valuation necessitates high millage in order to have quality education. 2Firman, ”The Relationship of Cost to Quality in Education,” p. l8. 8LT Similarly, those districts fortunate enough to have high prOperty valuation do not have to tax themselves as highly as some other districts in order to finance a quality program. ECC Scores and Cost Factors The relationships between the E££_combined total quality score and size ( 20), SEV ( 10), and expenditure ( 13) are all positive but not significant. There is no relationship between the TQS combined score and millage rate ( 00). Thus, the hypotheses that there are positive relationships between administrator and teacher total quality scores (TQS) as measured by the Egg and the four cost variables of size, millage, SEV, and expenditure must be rejected. Likewise, there is no significant relationship between any of the four cost factors and teacher total quality score. There is no positive significant relationship between administrator TQS and size ( 20), millage rate (.26), or SEV (.00). There is, however, a significantly positive relationship between administrator perceptions of characteristics of quality education and expenditure per pupil (.35). This is an interesting finding, since, as has been cited so many times previously, the relationship between the amount of money spent on education and educational quality, no matter how it is defined is always positive. It may be that administrator perceptions of the degree to which character- istics of quality education exist in his school district may also be an accurate measure of educational quality. 85 Summary The relationship between school achievement and the total quality score of administrators and teachers combined, though positive, is not significant. Thus the hypothesis that there is a positive correlation between these two variables is rejected. There is, likewise, no significant relationship between achievement and any one of the combined category scores. There is no significant rela- tionship between achievement and any teacher EEE score, either total or any one of the seven categories of educational character» istics. Although the relationship between administrator total score and achievement is not significant, it approaches significance. This finding plus positive significant relationships between two of the administrator category quality scores and achievement, lends promise to administrator §££ scores as predictors of school achieve- ment. There is a significant positive correlation between achieve- ment and expenditure per pupil, and this hypothesis is accepted. Likewise, the relationship between achievement and millage rate is positive and significant. These significant correlations reinforce- the long held idea that the more money spent for education, the higher its quality will be. The positive but nonwsignificant correlation between achieve- ment and state equalized valuation causes rejection of the hypothesis that there would be a positive correlation between these two vari- ables. The negative, though non-significant, relationship between size of school district and achievement causes rejection of the hypothesis that there would be a positive relationship between 86 achievement and size. it appears as though there may be an inverse relationship existing between achievement and the size of the school district. The correlations between the combined teacher-administrator total quality score and the four cost factors of size, SEV, millage rate, and expenditure per pupil are all non-significant. This causes rejection of the hypotheses that there would be positive relation- ships between the combined TQS score and each one of the cost factors. An interesting relationship exists between the administrator total quality score and expenditure per pupil. The correlation is positive and significant. Inasmuch as expenditure per pupil is generally recognized as a measure of quality education, it appears as though the perceptions of administrators concerning the existence of characteristics of quality education in their district may also hold promise as an accurate measure of quality education. Hypothesis Ill There is a positive relationship between administrator and teacher perceptions of characteristics of quality education as measured by the Educational Characteristics Criterion and student achievement independent of the cost variables. The partial correlation coefficients computed between administrator, teacher, and combined Egg scores and achievement, independent of the cost variables, are displayed in Table ll. For comparison purposes, the product moment correlation coefficients between achievement and the §££,scores are also shown. Significant positive partial correlations are found to exist between achievement and administrator Category VI (Adminis- tration and supervision) .h8; between achievement and administrator 87 A_::.vmo.ua Amm.vo_.ua “cmu_c_cm_m >__mu_sm_umum« am. mo. oN. mo. om. mm. _muo» moOLuoE mc_comou rwm. :_. om. mo. «_3. mom. can Locomoh __> >comoumu co_m_>coa3m mm. m_. w_. __. «w:. «m:. can co_umcum_c_Eo< _>.xuomoumu >u_cseeoo ocu mo co_u_m mo. 00. mo. mo.i m_. mo. ioaeoo _mc:u_:oio_oom > xcomoumu __. :_. mo. m_. __. mm. mo_u___omm mo mm: :3 >. >Lomoumu rmm. #0.: mm. 00.- mo. m_. E:_:o_cc:w ... >coomumu mo. mo. mo. mo. m_. we. mmasu_pum >o_c:EEOU __ >comoumu moo:u_uum ocm omom_30cx mo. N_. Jo. . mo. mo. _N. »o _o>o_ m_ucoo:um . >comoumu c _m_ucma L c _m_ucma c c _m_ucma c >c0moumu ooc_nEOu cmzommp coumcom_c_Eo< .mcouomm umoo ocu wo ucmocmoooc_ mocoom ammo ucoEo>o_;om ocm mocoom mum cmmzuon muco_o_wwo0o co_um_mccoo _m_ucma pcm .mocoom ucoEo>m_zom pcm mmcoom gum coozumn mu£m_o_mmooo co_um_occoQii.__ m4m