“L‘VL—‘l ~ . l“. . VALUES AND VALUE SYSTEMS IN THE ; 7 SELECTION OF LEADERS IN EDUCATLON' . Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D. ~ MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY HARLEY G. ROTH 1970 tan-lat.“ I ma \ M‘l- 'INTIUILIITITTHIW:{ILHIISIIMW an: {if 5t. or ' _, _m~. Uml‘i‘glfy This is to certify that the thesis entitled VALUES AND VALUE SYSTEMS IN THE SELECTION OF LEADERS IN EDUCATION presented by Harley G. Roth has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for ABSTRACT VALUES AND VALUE SYSTEMS IN THE SELECTION OF LEADERS IN EDUCATION BY Harley G. Roth Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to determine the role of values and value systems in the identification and selection of participants in an internship program in edu- cational leadership. Three specific questions were postu- lated: 1. What are the values of a specific group of doctoral students in this program? 2. What roles do values play in the screening and selection of applicants for this program? 3. Are there specific values that identify partici- pants in this program? Procedure The Value Survey, the chief research tool, and a data sheet were mailed to applicants selected at random and to each of the candidates selected to participate in the interview program. The present interns and the members of Harley G. Roth the interview teams also responded to the scale. Returns of the survey ranged from 86.6 per cent to 100 per cent of usable responses for the various groups. The survey instrument consisted of one set each of eighteen terminal and eighteen instrumental values and defining phrases. The respondent was asked to rank order each set in order of preference--as guiding principles in his life. The median scores of each set of responses were sub- jected to the median test and the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance. An index of homogeneity of value systems within each group was also established by computing the coefficient of concordance. Major Findings What are the Values of the Partici- pants in the Internship Program? It was found that the interns in the leadership program place high priority on a sense of accomplishment and self-reSpect and low priority on national security, pleasure, a comfortable life, and salvation as end-states of existence or goals in life. Also, the values, honest, responsible, capable, broadminded, and independent were rated high and obedient, clean, cheerful, and polite were ranked low as modes of behavior or ways of achieving one's goals. Harley G. Roth What Roles Do Values Play in the Screening and Selection of Appli- cants for the Program? There were no significant differences in the value systems of applicants at the first level of screening-- whether or not the application data was in complete form. Six values, wisdom, helpful, honest, true friendship, obedi- ent, and courageous, differentiated between applicants at the second level of screening--the "paper screening" of ap- plicant data. The third level of screening-~the interview program—~did not differentiate, in terms of values, between the final two sets of applicants interviewed for the program. It was also found that the value systems of the candidates not selected and the candidates selected in the interview were significantly different from the value systems of the members of the interview teams. Similarly, the value systems of the candidates not selected in the interview were significantly different from the value systems of the present participants of the intern- ship program. Slight differences were found to exist be- tween the candidates chosen for the program and the present interns in the program. Are there Specific Values that Identify Participants of this Program? Careful perusal of the data revealed six values that identified, in varying degrees, the interns from the "general pOpulation" of educators. Of the thirty-six values Harley G. Roth in the Value Survey, a sense of accomplishment, at the first (.001) level; obedient and salvation, at the (.01) second; and freedom, capable, and wisdom, at the third (.05) level differentiated the interns from the national sample of edu- cators. Questions for Further Study The analysis of the data has suggested several questions for further study. 1. What changes occur in values and value systems as a result of specific programs in the undergraduate and graduate preparation of educators? 2. How do values and value systems of educators differ in relation to various demographic variables? 3. What is the relationship of values and value systems of the various educator groups who must work closely together? 4. Do specific values or value systems predict or identify persons of meritorious performance in the pro- fession? VALUES AND VALUE SYSTEMS IN THE SELECTION OF LEADERS IN EDUCATION BY Harley G. Roth A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1970 g‘\ a: J p -'\ Greeting his pupils, the master asked: What would you learn of me? And the HOW HOW HOW How HOW For And the reply came: shall shall shall shall shall we we W8 W6 W9 care for our bodies? rear our children? work together? live with our fellow man? play? what ends shall we live? teacher pondered these words And sorrow was in his heart, For his own learning touched not these things. Anonymous ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Sincere appreciation is expressed to the people who have contributed to this study by their encouragement, advice, timely suggestions, and specialized knowledge. Gratitude is extended to each of the members of my committee: to Dr. Louis Romano, chairman, for his confi- dence and leadership; to Dr. Clyde Campbell for making the internship program a reality to me; and to Dr. Stanley Bryan, Dr. Ernest Melby, and Dr. Dale Alam for their assistance and cooperation. A special expression of appreciation is extended to Miss Jo Lynn Cunningham, Research Consultant, for her many hours of valuable assistance, direction, and encouragement in the design and statistical analysis of this study. Many thanks are extended to Dr. Milton Rokeach for the advice and consultation given to this investigation. His time and materials have been invaluable. This year of study was made possible by a fellowship in the Mott Inter-University Clinical Preparation Program for Educational Leadership. Appreciation is extended to the C. S. Mott Foundation of Flint, Michigan. \ iii The greatest amount of love and admiration is eXpressed to my wife, Eleanor, and children, Steven, Randall, and Beverly, for their patience, encouragement, and unfailing support during the year. They have been the inspiration to make this study a reality. Many, many friends, teachers, and colleagues have also helped in making the internship program and this dis- sertation a success. Many thanks to each of you. HOGIR. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLE DGMENTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF FIGURES. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Chapter I. II. III. THE PROBLEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction and Theoretical Basis Purpose of the Study . . . . . . Significance of the Problem. Definition of Terms. . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . General Hypothesis I . General Hypothesis II. General Hypothesis III Overview . . . . . . . . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . The Meanings of Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . Psychological and Sociological Studies in Values. . . . . . . . . . Studies of Values in Education . . . . The Mott Inter-University Clinical Preparation Program for Educational Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . THE METHOD OF INVESTIGATION. . . . . . . Definition of the Population . . Description of the Instrument. . Collection of Data . . . . . . . Statistical Treatment of the Data. Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page iii vii ix PJH HHmmmmonH H 15 15 22 38 44 51 55 55 61 64 68 Chapter IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . . The Value System of Mott Interns Null Hypothesis I. . . . . . . . Null Hypothesis II . . . . . . . Null Hypothesis III. . . . . . . Values That Identify Mott Interns. Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, QUESTIONS, BIBLIOGRAP APPENDICES AND REFLECTIONS O O O O O O O O O 0 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . Purpose of the Study . . . Review of the Literature . The Method of Investigation Conclusions. . . . . . . . . The Values of Mott Interns General Hypothesis I . . . General Hypothesis II. . . General Hypothesis III . . Values That Identify Mott I Questions for Further Study. Reflections. . . . . . . . . t r o o :3 o o o o o o o o o o o (D o o o o o o o o o o o :3 o o o o o o o o o HY O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 APPENDIX A O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O 0 APPENDIX B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 vi Page 69 69 80 89 90 102 111 111 111 112 114 115 115 117 118 118 119 120 122 125 130 133 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. A Summary of the Number of Participants in the Study 0 I O O O O O O O O 58 2. A Summary of the Demographic Data of the Participants in the Study . . . . 60 3. The Terminal Values and Defining Phrases . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4. The Instrumental Values and Defining Phrases . . . . . . . . . . . 63 5. Frequency Distributions of Value System Reliabilities Obtained for Form E O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 65 6. A Summary of the Number of Returns Received in the Study . . . . . . . 67 7. The Value Rankings of Intern Candidates and Present Interns . . . . . . . 7l 8. Intern Median Test Frequencies Above and Below the Grand Median for Equality . . . . . . . . . . . 74 9. Intern Median Test Frequencies Above and Below the Grand Median for Clean . . 74 10. The Value Rankings of the Applicants with Incomplete Application Forms and the Applicants with Completed Application Forms . . . . .‘ . . . ,77 11. The Value Rankings of the Applicants Considered for the Internship Program and the Candidates Selected to Par- ticipate in the Interview Program . . . .81 vii 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Page The Value Rankings of the Candidates Not Selected and the Candidates Selected for the Internship Program . . . 83 The Value Rankings of the Candidates Invited to the Interview Program and the Members of the Interview Teams . . . 86 The Value Rankings of the Candidates Invited to the Interview Program and the Present Interns . . . . . . . . 91 A Comparison of the Terminal Values of the Mott Interns and the General Education Population . . . . . . . . 95 A Comparison of the Instrumental Values of the Mott Interns and the General Education Population . . . . . . . . 96 Significant Value Differences Between the Mott Interns and the General Education Population . . . . . . . . 97 A Summary of the Low, Medium, and High Distribution of Significant Value Differences Found for the Respondents in this Study . . . . . . . . . . 99 A Comparison of the Differences in Value Rankings of the Respondents in this Study 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 108 viii LIST OF F IGURES Figure Page 1. General Hypothesis I . . . . . . . . 10 2. General Hypothesis II . . . . . . . 12 3. General Hypothesis III . . . . . . . l3 4. A Diagram of the Participants in th e S tudY O O I O O O I O O O O 5 9 5. The Distribution of Values by Median Scores for Mott Interns . . . . . . 73 6. The Moral and Competence Value Distribution of Mott Interns . . . . 7S ix CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction and Theoretical Basis There is little consensus about what is meant by values and there is confusion about the difference between the terms attitudes, beliefs, opinions, and values. The two terms, attitudes and values, are often used interchangeably by professional writers and researchers as well as lay people. Rokeach has devised four subsystems within the value-attitude system which may clarify this dilemma. First, several beliefs may be organized together to form a single attitude focused on a specific object or situation. Second, two or more attitudes may be organized to- gether to form a larger attitudinal system, say, a religious or political system. Third and fourth, two or more values may be or- ganized together to form an instrumental or a terminal value system. Several studies in the theory and measurement of attitudes and values have been made by social scientists 1Milton Rokeach, "A Theory of Organization and Change in Value and Attitude Systems," Journal of Social Issues, XXIV (January, 1968), 19. (Hereinafter referred to as Theory of Organization and Change.) and educators. Of the two areas, attitudes have received the most attention. Allport, in 1935, makes this comment: The concept of attitudes is probably the most dis- tinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary American psychology. No other term appears more fre- quently in the experimental and theoretical literature.2 Rokeach questions the emphasis on research of attitudes during the past half century: Several considerations lead me to place the value concept ahead of the attitude concept. First, value is clearly a more dynamic concept than attitude having a strong motivational component as well as cognative, affective and behavioral components. Second, while attitude and value are both widely assumed to be deter- minants of social behavior, value is a determinant of attitude as well as behavior. Third, if we further assume that a person possesses considerably fewer values than attitudes, then the value concept provides us with a more economical analytic tool for describing and ex- plaining similarities and differences between persons, groups, nations, and cultures.3 Values serve a number of purposes in our daily lives. They tell us how to act or what to want and how to justify behavior. Values are standards that help us to judge and to compare ourselves with others. Allport states that the most important categories a man has are his own values. "He lives by and for hisvalues."4 So important are the values one has, evidence and reason are ordinarily forced to conform to them. r 2Gordon w. Allport, "Attitudes," in A Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. by C. Murchison (Worchester, Mass.: Clark University Press, 1935), p. 798. 3Rokeach, Theory of Organization and Change, p. 19. 4Allport, Attitudes. Rokeach finds that various combinations of values differentiate individuals, groups, nations, and cultures. "They can differentiate men from women, hippies from non- hippies, hawks from doves, . . . , Jews from Catholics, Democrats from Republicans, and so forth."5 The ranking of values can predict church attendance, socio-economic status, political orientation, and general educational attainment. He has developed a rather unique instrument to measure values and value systems. The Value Survey consists of one set each of eighteen instrumental and eighteen terminal values, each arranged in alphabetical order. Each value, along with its defining phrase, is rank ordered by the respondent " . . . in order of importance as 'guiding '"6 The average time principles in YOUR daily life. . . . required to complete the survey is approximately fifteen minutes for the two pages. The Value Survey has been found to be reliable, on the average, between 0.72 and 0.80.7 Values have been found to be much more stable than attitudes. As stated by Williams in the International EncyclOpedia of the Social Sciences, "[they] serve as cri- teria for selection in action."8 Perhaps this suggests that 5Rokeach, Theory of Organization and Change. 6- . Ibid. 7 _- Ibid., p. 99. 8Robin M. Williams, Jr., "The Concept of Values," International EncyclOpedia of the Social Sciences, XVI (New York, N. Y.: The Macmillan Company, 1968), 238. values are predictors of professional or occupational patterns and have a role in the selection and decision- making processes of people entering or engaged in a par- ticular profession or vocation. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to answer three questions: 1. What are the values of a specific group of doctoral students engaged in an internship program in educational administration? What roles do values play in the screening and selection of applicants for this program? Are there specific values that identify partici- pants in this program? Significance of the Problem There can be no doubt of the importance of preparing future educational leaders of high quality. A preparation program for teachers and practitioners of educational ad- ministration should be reflective of the role values play in effective leadership and human relations. Rokeach states that "a person's values have social consequences." 9 Culture and social experience, on one hand, and personality factors, 9Milton Rokeach and Seymour Parker, "Values as Social Indicators of Poverty and Race Relations in America," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CCCLXXXVIII (March, 1970), 98. on the other, produce variations in value systems. As a result of these two basic assumptions about the role of values, great care should be taken that individuals in leadership roles have value systems consistent with edu- cational objectives. The problem investigated in this research is the relationship of values and value systems in determining the selection of individuals to participate in a unique training program for training leaders in education. It will be concerned with assessing the values of those participating on the selection teams, those participating in the applying and screening processes, and those already in the program. This study is also directed toward determining whether there are unique values or value patterns that may identify participants in the program. Definition of Terms Attitude.--An attitude is an enduring organization of several beliefs focused on a specific object (physical or social, concrete or abstract) or situation, disposing one to respond in some preferential manner.10 Belief.--A belief is any simple proposition, con- scious or unconscious, inferred from what a person says or 10Milton Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values (San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass Inc., 1968). does, capable of being preceded by the phrase, "I believe that . . . "11 Opinion.--An opinion is a verbal expression of some belief, attitude, or value.12 Value.--A value is an enduring belief that a spe- cific mode of conduct or end state of existence is per- sonally and socially preferable to alternative modes of conduct and end-states of existence.13 Instrumental Value.--An instrumental value expresses a specific mode of conduct as personally or socially prefer- able to alternate modes of conduct.14 Terminal Value.--A terminal value expresses a spe- cific end-state of existence as personally and socially preferable to alternate end states of existence.15 Moral Values.--Moral values refer mainly to those modes of behavior which, when violated, arouse pangs of 12Ibid. 13Ibid.: pp. 159-160. 14Ibid., p. 160. 15Ibid. conscience or feelings of guilt or wrongdoing; they have an interpersonal focus.16 Competence Values.--Competence values refer to pre- ferred modes of behavior which, when violated, lead to shame about competence rather than to guilt about wrong- doing; their focus is personal rather than interpersonal.l7 Value §ystem.--A value system is a rank ordering of 18 values along a continuum of importance. Internship Program.--The internship program is a cooPerative venture between the Flint Community Schools, the Mott Foundation, and the seven state universities of the 19 This program is entitled the Mott State of Michigan. Inter-University Clinical Preparation Program for Edu- cational Leaders and is often referred to as the Mott Leadership Program. Intern.--An intern is a participant in the Mott Leadership Program for a given academic year. 16Milton Rokeach, "Value Systems in Religion," Review of Religious Research, XI (1969), 6. 17Rokeach, Value Systems in Religion. 18 and 167. Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, pp. 124 19Mott Inter-University Clinical Preparation Program for Educational Leaders, "Internship Handbook," Flint, Mich., 1969, p. 2. (Mimeographed.) Applicant.--An applicant is one who has made appli- cation to the Mott Leadership Program for an internship. Intern Candidate.--An intern candidate is one who has made application to the Mott Leadership Program and has been invited to participate in the interview procedures. Field Administrator.--A field administrator is an education administrator currently engaged in professional practice. Interview Team.--The interview teams are groups of professors of education and field administrators whose tasks are to interview intern candidates for the final selection process. Hypotheses General Hypothesis I The following hypotheses were investigated to de- termineif a significant difference existed between the levels at which decisions are made in the screening and selection of applicants for a specific doctoral internship program in educational administration. . Ia. Of the people who applied for the internship program, there is no difference in the value systems of those who have completed the appli- cation process and are considered for the in- ternship and those who have not completed the Ib. IC. application process and are not considered for the internship program. Of those peOple who submitted completed appli— cations, there is no difference in the value systems of those who are selected for the inter— view process and those who are not selected for the interview process. Of those people who are selected for the inter— view process, there is no difference in the value systems of those who are selected for the internship and those who are not selected for the internship program. General Hypothesis I is illustrated by Figure 1 on page 10. General Hypothesis II The following hypotheses were investigated to de- termine if a difference existed between the value systems of those who participated in the interview process and those who were members of the interviewing teams. IIa. IIb. There is no difference in the value systems of those who are not selected for the internship program and those who are members of the inter- viewing teams. There is no difference in the value systems of those who are selected for the internship .H mamoauooam Hmumcooau.a mmoon 10 mecmcuousH ecu mflnmcuoucH Mom you couooaom couooaom uoz 3ma>umucH 3ow>nmucH on cmuw>cH on pouw>cH uoz _ _ _ DH— mcowumoaammd chADMOAHmmm wouoameou ouoamaoocH :j _ w mcowumowammm Hmuoa 11 program and those who are members of the inter- viewing teams. General Hypothesis II is illustrated by Figure 2 on page 12. General Hypothesis III The following hypotheses were investigated to de— termine if a difference existed between the value systems of the 1969-70 participants in the internship program and the candidates who participated in the interview program to be selected for the 1970-71 participants in the internship program. IIIa. There is no difference in the value systems of the candidates not selected for the internship program and the present participants of the program. IIIb. There is no difference in the value systems of the candidates selected for the internship program and the present participants in the program. General Hypothesis III is illustrated by Figure 3 on page 13. Overview The values and value systems of the participants of a unique internship program for preparing educational leaders and the role they play in the selection of the par— ticipants of the program were explored. The intent of this chapter is to describe the purpose of the study, and to 12 Total Applications Incomplete Completed Applications Applications Not Invited to Interview r______.- i Interview Teams } L__- 1 Invited to Interview _\\ Not Selected for Internship Selected for the Internship IIb I l l | ._..____J FIGURE 2.--Genera1 Hypothesis II. l3 .HHH memmru0dmm Haemauouu.m mmaon QHHH III; manoucH Duos owlmmma quI.MHHH mwnmcuoucH on» How pouooaom — --qh mwcmcuoucH Mom couomamm uoz 3ow>uwucH OB emua>aH 3ow>noucH OE ouua>eH uoz mGOAHMOHHmmd pouoameou mcowumowammd muoamfioocH mcoflumowammd Hmuoa l4 explore briefly the theoretical basis upon which this study is based. The hypotheses have been stated and illustrated, and the terms specific to this study explained. A detailed review of the literature explores the psychological, sociological, and educational developments in value research. A brief review of the development of the Mott Leadership Program and the purpose of the internship follows. A summary concludes the chapter. Chapter III describes the design of the study in detail. The source of data and a description of the popu— lation precedes a description of the instrument used in the study. Methods of data collection and statistical treatment of the data also are described in this chapter. In Chapter IV the method of presenting and re- porting the survey findings is made. The findings related to each research question are reported. The final chapter summarizes the research, expresses conclusions, and raises questions for further study. Re— flections on the results of the research findings conclude the thesis. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The review of the literature explores the psycho- logical and sociological developments in the study of values and then focuses upon specific treatments of research in values in the field of education. An overview of the history and purposes of the Mott Leadership Program ties these two areas together. The subsequent analysis of data pertaining to this study may be viewed with greater clarity with a review of literature in this manner. The Meanings of Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values It is assumed that each individual differs from another not in the fact that he does or does not possess values but rather in the way he arranges them into a hier- archical system of preference along a continuum. There has not always, however, been a clear consensus of the meaning of value. The terms beliefs, attitudes, and values are often used interchangeably in the writings of social scientists. Rokeach, in his recent writings, states that "there is 15 16 little consensus about what we mean by values, or how values differ conceptually from attitudes or opinions."1 Beliefs are statements which are used to describe our environment. According to Froman, they are of two kinds: beliefs in something and beliefs about something.2 Statements of belief in something are not subject to em- pirical proof. They are matters of faith. There are two kinds of beliefs about something: that about which there is low agreement about the validity of the belief, and that about which there is little or no controversy concerning its validity--a fact. Rokeach describes a belief as " . . . any simple proposition, conscious or unconscious, inferred from what a person says or does, capable of being preceded by the phrase 'I believe that . . '"3 Attitudes are typically defined as "predispositions to respond in a particular way toward a specific class of objects."4 Rosenberg and Hovland go on to explain that attitudes are not directly observable or measurable but are lRokeach, Values as Social Indicators, p. 98. 2Lewis A. Froman, People and Politics (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1962), p. 20. 3Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, p. 113. 4Milton J. Rosenberg and Carl I. Hovland, "Cogni- tive, Affective, and Behavioral Components of Attitudes, Attitude Organization and Change (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1960), p. l. (Hereinafter referred to as Components of Attitudes.) 17 inferred from the way we react to a particular stimulus. Thus when attitudes are studied, stimuli and various kinds of responses are observed. These types of responses are commonly used as "indices" of attitudes and fall into three major categories: cognitive, affective, and behavioral.5 Froman states that an attitude is a predisposition of an individual to evaluate some aspect of his world in a favorable or unfavorable manner, that is, a predisposition to approve or disapprove, like or dislike, some social or physical object.6 According to him, attitudes may be thought of as having two components, the affective and the cognitive. The affective component consists of feelings of like and dislike, which may vary in direction and in in- tensity. The cognitive component is the belief component. In other words, attitudes are made up of feelings (affective component) and reasons (beliefs) why the person feels the way he does.7 Rokeach defines attitudes as an enduring organi- zation of several beliefs focused on a specific object (physical or social, concrete or abstract) or situation, predisposing one to respond in some preferential manner. SIbl'd. 6Froman, People and Politics, p. 20. 7rbid. 8Milton Rokeach, "The Role of Values in Public Opinion Research," The Public Opinion Quarterly, XXXII (Winter, 1968-69), 550. 18 He clarifies this by describing an attitude as a package of beliefs consisting of interconnected assertions to the effect that certain things about it are desirable or unde- sirable. Serif and Serif, on the other hand, state that an attitude is more adequately represented as a range or lati- tude of acceptance.9 Values, as described by Rokeach, transcend specific objects and specific situations: "Values have to do with modes of conduct and end-states of existence."10 Froman, on the other.hand, states that values are of three kinds: the desired, the needs and wants of a person; the desirable, the most common of values, which express the "should" and “ought" questions. The third involves the relationship of means to an end.11 He explains that some values are more personal than others and some may be relatively more im— portant than others. For example, personal tastes in food or clothing may be felt less important than an ideal that all men should be treated equal. Or, a value may be placed on medicine because it is perceived to contribute to the restoration of health, even though it does not taste good or fit into the scheme of things considered to be inherently 9Carolyn W. Serif, et al., Attitude and Attitude Change (Philadelphia, Penn.: W. B. Saunders Company, 1965), p. 264. 10 Research. Rokeach, The Role of Values in Public Opinion llFroman, People and Politics. 19 valuable. "The more intense our values, the more important they are to us, and the more likely we are to act on them, all other things being equal."12 Kluckhohn expresses three elements as essential when thinking about values: the affective ("desirable"), cognitive ("conception"), and conative ("selection"). He defines values as a conception, explicit or implicit, dis- tinctive of an individual or characteristic of a group, of the desirable which influences the selection from available . 13 modes, means, and ends of action. Morris expresses the term value as one of the "Great Words" whose meaning is multiple and complex. Rather than defining the word, he distinguishes three ways in which the term is used. At times the term "value" is employed to refer to the tendencies or dispositions of living beings to prefer one kind of object rather than another. . . . Such values may be called operative values. . . . the term "value" is often restricted to those cases of preferential behavior directed by "an antici- pation or foresight of the outcome" of such behavior. In contrast to the operational values, such values may be called conceived values. A third employment of the term "value" is concerned with what is preferable (or "desirable") regardless of whether it is in fact preferable or conceived as lzl‘bid. l3Clyde Kluckhohn, "Values and Value-Organization in the Theory of Action: An Exploration in Definition and Classification," in Toward a General Theory of Action, ed. by Talcott Parsons and Edward A. Shils (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962), p. 595. 2O preferable. Since the stress is upon the properties of the object, such values may be called object values. Three kinds of values are also identified by Williams in the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences: cognitive (desire, liking), achievement (success vs. frustration), and affective (pleasure vs. pain or un- pleasantness).15 Accordingly, values serve as criteria for selection; values become criteria for judgment, preference, and choice. Reid saw values as dealing with a variety of preferences and comparisons and the justifications of judg- ments about them. In A Theory of Values, he states: Considering the number of times a day we express preferences or value judgments, make critical compari- sons of one sort or another, and try rationally to justify them, it would seem that these activities, which constitute the subject matter of value theory, ought to be on their own worth investigating.16 Values, as described by Rokeach, and used in this study, have to do with modes of conduct and end-states of existence--two different kinds of values--which he calls instrumental and terminal values. He points out the differ- ence between values and attitudes: 1. A value transcends specific objects and situations, while an attitude focuses directly on specific objects. 4 . . . 1 Charles Morris, Varieties of Human Values (Chicago, Ill.: The University of Chicago Press, 1956), pp. 10-11. 15Williams, The Concept of Values. 16J. R. Reid, A Theory of Values (New York, N.Y.: Charles Scribner and Son, 1938), p. v. 21 2. A value, unlike an attitude, is a standard or yard- stick guiding not only attitudes, but also actions, comparisons, evaluations, and justifications of self and others. 3. A value, unlike an attitude, is a distinct prefer- ence for a specific mode of behavior or for a spe- cific end-state of existence. Examples of instrumental values are beliefs that we should behave ambitiously, obediently, responsibly, broadmindedly, or logically. Examples of terminal values are beliefs in freedom, equality, a sense of accomplishment, and salvation. The concept of value systems--a hierarchical ar- rangement of values--a rank ordering of values along a con- 18 Handy,19 and others. tinuum is also discussed by Rokeach, Thus, in light of previous discussion, all men possess two kinds of value systems--an instrumental and a terminal value system--the function of which is to help him choose between two alternatives and to resolve conflicts between alterna- tives in everyday life. A person's value system may be said to represent a learned organization of rules for making choices and for resolving conflicts. 17 Research. Rokeach, The Role of Values in Public Opinion 18Rollo Handy, Value Theory and the Behavioral Sciences (Springfield, 111.: Charles C. Thomas, 1969), pp. 48-49. - 19 Research. Rokeach, The Role of Values in Public Opinion 22 Psychological and Sociological Studies in Values In the study of values, the "pure" scientist has traditionally prided himself on his concern for fact and his indifference toward values. However, in the 1930's, there emerged applications of the scientific method to the study of values. Dukes lists three primary directions taken in psychological studies of values: 1. 2. 3. Measuring the values of groups or individuals and relating the results to other data concerning the groups (individual differences). The origin and development of values within the individual. The influence 0 an individual's values on his cognitive life. Handy, nine years later, listed most of the hypotheses held by numerous researchers in the behavioral sciences as: 1. 2. 3. Values help to organize, guide, and direct behavior. Many values are not explicitly or consciously held. The value system of a culture tends to maintain itself and to change much less rapidly than any other aspects of the culture, such as its mode of economic organization. Land normally is a value symbol in peasant societies but not in hunting-gathering societies. Values can be measured through the use of attitude scales. Content-analysis of literature, the mass media, etc., can reveal the values held by social groups. A person's attitude toward an event tends to be consistent with his values and the way he sees the event relevant to those values. The values held by a person are strongly influenced by the values he judges other people to hold.21 20William F. Dukes, "Psychological Studies of Values," Psychological Bulletin, LII (1955), 24. 21Handy, Value Theory and the Behavioral Sciences. 23 The subsequent review of value studies examines hypotheses in each of the eight areas listed by Handy except number four, which is considered irrelevant to this study. A process for value analysis of verbal data was 22 in 1951. It was found that propaganda reported by White and public opinion materials, autobiographies, clinical interviews, and other devices of personality study can be described quantitatively with a maximum of objectivity and a minimum of emotional dynamics using the content—analysis procedure. In this study, a content analysis was made of the propaganda and public opinion materials in Hitler, Roosevelt, and the Nature of War Propaganda and of the per- sonality study in Black Boy.23 He devised a system of symbols to represent the basic values of which there were two kinds--goals and standards of judgment. The two documents were perused by, various individuals according to the following directions: 1. Put in the margin a symbol corresponding to each goal or each value judgment that is explicitly stated in the material, or clearly implied by it. 2. Tabulate the results. 24 3. Interpret each numerical result . . . . 22Ralph K. White, Value-Analysis: The Nature and Use of the Method (Glen Garden, N. J.: Libertarian Press, 1951), p. l. (Hereinafter referred to as Value-Analysis.) 231bid., p. 14. 24Ibid., p. 22. 24 A statistical analysis of the results gave data for inter- pretation of the values expressed in each work. The technique was found to be highly reliable. Two separate analyses of a ten-page autobiography produced an agreement represented by a correlation coefficient (product- 25 White concluded, "Our culture does have a moment) of .93. value system which can be empirically studied, and which constitutes a common background for the most diversified types of research."26 The Allport-Vernon Study of Values, a pioneer test in the study of attitudes and values, has been used in many investigations for several decades. The instrument, based upon Spranger's six distinctions of value-type, measures values in the following categories: theoretical, the dis- covery of truth; economic, the exploitation of usefulness; aesthetic, the merit of form and harmony; social, the ex- pression of love for people; political, the quest for power; 27 and religious, the search for unity. Over the years the 25'Ibid., p. 81. 261bid., p. 87. 27Gordon W. Allport, Pattern and Growth in Person- ality (New York, N. Y.: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961), PP- 297-299. (Hereinafter referred to as Pattern and Growth.) 25 scale has been revised to meet specific needs or to be appropriate for specific populations. Rothney28 prepared a revision designed to be used with high school youngsters. 29 30 and Maller and Lurie, Van Dusen, Wimberly and Mosier, Glaser31 constructed similar tests based upon Spranger's value categories and much of the Study of Values format. Early research findings point out that there are characteristic differences in values of people. For example, men score higher on theoretical, economic, and political values; women score higher on aesthetic, social, and re- ligious values. Likewise, individuals in scientific fields have high theoretical value scores, individuals in the field of art have high aesthetic value scores, and individuals in business and commercial fields have high economic value scores . 28W. J. M. Rothney, "Evaluative Attitudes and Aca- demic Success," Journal of Educational Psychology, XXVII (1936), 292-298. 29W. A. Lurie, "A Study of Spranger's Value-Types by the Method of Factor Analysis," Journal of Social Psy- chology, VIII (1937), 17-37. 30A. C. Van Dusen, S. Wimberly, and C. I. Mosier, "Standardization of a Values Inventory," Journal of Edu- cational Psychology, XXX (1939), 53-62. 31J. B. Maller and E. M. Glaser, Interest-Values Inventory (New York, N. Y.: Bureau of Publications, “Teachers College, Columbia University, 1939). 26 Research byiKelsey,32 Norwalk-Polsky,33 and Rauler- son34 during the past decade has shown a continued interest in the Study of Values as an investigative instrument. Results from these three investigations reveal similar con- clusions to those found three decades ago. Raulerson found that the value differences of doctoral students grouped according to region of origin are greater than when they are grouped according to subject area. Kelsey and Norwalk- Polsky also reaffirmed earlier findings. For example, in sex differences, males dominated political, economic, and theoretical values, and females religious, aesthetic, and social values. Kelsey states that some significant changes over the last three to four decades include an increased preference for theoretical and political values and a de- crease for aesthetic values.35 Norwalk-Polsky found that 32Ian Bruce Kelsey, "A Comparative Study of Students Attending the University of British Columbia in 1963 as Measured by the Allport-Vernon Test for Personal Values" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, 1963). (Hereinafter referred to as A Comparative Study of Students.) 33Zita Norwalk-Polsky, "A Preliminary Study of the Belief Systems and Selected Values and Attributes of Faculty and Students in a State College for Teachers" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1968). (Herein— after referred to as A Preliminary Study.) 34Lewis Albert Raulerson, "A Study of the Values of Doctoral Students in Selected Major Subject Fields" (un- published Ph.D. dissertation, Florida State University, 1962). 3SKelsey, A Comparative Study of Students. 27 elementary faculty members scored higher on social values and secondary education faculty members scored higher on theoretical values.36 Morris initiated another approach to the study of values in hopes that "it would be of service to man in his characteristic activity of valuer."37 His document, Ways to Live, describes in long paragraph form thirteen concep- tions of "the good life." The "ways to live" are listed in brief form below: Way 1: preserve the best that man has attained Way 2: cultivate independence of persons and things Way 3: show sympathetic concern for others Way 4: experience festivity and solitude in alter- nation Way 5: act and enjoy life through group participation Way 6: constantly master changing conditions Way 7: integrate action, enjoyment, and contemplation Way 8: live with wholesome, carefree enjoyment Way 9: wait in quiet receptivity Way 10: control the self stoically Way 11: meditate on the inner life Way 12: chance adventuresome deeds Way 13: obey the cosmic purposes.38 Students in America, India, China, Japan, Italy, and Norway were asked to read and rank order their first choices. Ways 7, 1, and 6 were distinctly favored and Ways 9, 2, 11, and 13 were distinctly disfavored by American students.39 36Norwalk-Polsky, A Preliminary Study. 37Morris, Varieties of Human Values, p. Vii. 381bid., p. l. 391bid., pp. 45-46. 28 Allport's interpretation of Morris' results is that American youth subscribe more frequently to "dynamic integration of diversity," showing that they wish a rich, full life and abhor both routine and boredom in their existence.40 Rokeach has done extensive research in the field of values in the past few years. An extensive researcher in the areas of dogmatism,4l prejudice,42 social psychology,43 and attitudes44 before turning to values, he finds it diffi- cult to conceive of a human problem that would not be better illuminated if relevant and reliable value data concerning it were available. Differences in culture, social classes, occupation, sex, religion, or politics are all equally translatable into questions concerning differences in under- lying values and value systems.45 40Allport, Pattern and Growth, p. 296. 41Milton Rokeach, "The Nature and Meaning of Dogma- tism," Psychological Review, LVI (May, 1954), 194-204. 42Milton Rokeach, "Prejudice, Concreteness of Thinking, and Reification of Thinking," Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, XLVI (January, 1951), 83-91. 43Milton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind (New York, N. Y.: Basic Books, Inc., 1960). 44Milton Rokeach, "The Nature of Attitudes," Inter- national Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, I (New York, N. Y.: The MacMillan Company and The Free Press, 1968), ' 449-457. 45 pp. 2-3. Rokeach, Theory of Organization and Change, 29 His approach to the measurement of values was based upon three assumptions: 1. . . . every person who has undergone a process of socialization has learned a set of beliefs about modes of behavior and about end-states of existence that he considers to be personally and socially desirable. 2. . . . every person differs from every other person not so much in whether or not he possesses . . . values but rather in the way he arranges them into value systems, a hierarchy or rank-ordering. . . 3. . . . everything that a person does and all that he believes is capable of being justified . . . in terms of modes of behavior and end-states of exis- tence are personally and socially worth striving for. He clarifies this last statement by explaining that a person will only express those values he is willing to admit pos- sessing to others as well as to himself. Socially unde- sirable values such as dishonesty, cowardice, and irre- spOnsibility and values of immodesty and boastfulness such as brilliance, cleverness, and charm are avoided. Several studies have been made since the intro- duction of Rokeach's Value Survey in the past five years. 47 Two investigations, Beech and Hollen,48 were made during 46Milton Rokeach, "The Measurement of Values and Value Systems" (pre-publication copy, Michigan State Uni- versity), p. 14. 47Robert Paul Beech, "Value Systems, Attitudes, and Interpersonal Attraction" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966). 48Charles c. Hollen, "The stability of Values and Value Systems" (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1967). (Hereinafter referred to as Stability of Values.) 30 the process of developing the present two forms of the survey instrument. Hollen's study, a master's thesis, sought to de- termine the reliability of the terminal and the instrumental value scales, to determine whether some people are more re- liable than others in terms of assessing values, and to determine whether certain factors in the test influence the reliability of the scale. The study was conducted in two parts. The first set of data was obtained by administering Form A value scales to 444 introductory psychology students at Michigan State University in the spring of 1966. Seven weeks later 210 of the students were retested for the pur-1 pose of obtaining test-retest reliability data. The second set of data was collected from 440 introductory psychology students who responded to a questionnaire containing the Form B value scales and Troidahl and Powell's short form of Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale.49 Hollen concluded that although the value ranking scales provided data of sufficient reliability to discrimi- nate between groups, they are not reliable enough to warrant 50 Attempts to predict the use for correlational techniques. individual differences in value stability proved to be un- successful; but value stability of groups may be considered 49Ibid., p. 24. 50Ibid., p. 52. 31 measurable by use of both the instrumental and terminal value systems scales. Beech studied the relationships among value system similarity, attitudinal similarity, and interpersonal at-l traction. He hypothesized and found that the more a person perceives another person to be similar to himself, the more likely he is to be attracted to that person. Because a person's value system is generally expressed mainly through his attitudes, attitudinal similarity is of greater im— portance than value system similarity in determining attraction between two persons who have had a brief inter- action.51 It is suggested, however, that value system similarity becomes more important as two people continue to interact with one another over a longer period of time. In another study the following year, Homart52 researched the cognitive and associative meaning of each item in the Value Survey. Two hundred sixty-four social psychology and introductory psychology students at Michigan State University defined the meanings of values in Form D of the value scale and a set of control words constructed for the study. The subjects showed agreement on the con- notative meaning of both the terminal and instrumental 51Beech, Value Systems, Attitudes, and Interpersonal Attraction, pp. 80-88. 52Robert J. Homart, "The Meaning and Ranking of Values" (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State Uni- versity, 1967). 32 values, and agreement on the associative meaning of instru- mental but not terminal values.53 Homart further concluded that no difference was found in the associative meaning of the individual values as a function of their rank. Rokeach's Two-Value Model of Political Ideologies was used by Bishop5 in studying the socio-political orien- tations of presidential candidate supporters during the Approximately 120 politically active, adult last campaign. campaign workers of six of the presidential candidates for 1968 were administered the terminal value portion of the Value Survey and a Political Preference Survey. Several national security, as values--salvation, family security, well as freedom and equality--were found to differentiate significantly among the six presidential groups. In the model, the terminal values, freedom and equality, were used to determine political liberalism and conservatism as well as denote political ideology orientation--socialism, com- munism, capitalism, and facism. '53Homart, The Meaning and Ranking of Values, pp. 65-67. 5(J'Milton Rokeach, "A Two-Value Model of Politics" (pre-publication copy, Michigan State University), p. 14; Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, p. 171. 5F’George Franklin Bishop, "Presidential Preferences (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan and Values in 1968" State University, 1969). 33 The conclusions reached by Bishop were: 1. The liberal ideology in American politics can be characterized as a non-authoritarian, non- traditionalist value system that is positively oriented toward individual freedom and positively oriented toward equalitarianism. 2. The conservative ideology in American politics can be characterized as an authoritarian, traditionalist value system that is positively oriented toward individual freedom and negatively oriented toward FT? 1 I I i equalitarianism. 3. The antagonisms in American political life center primarily around differences in orientations toward equalitarianism. The results supported the two-value model of ideologies: Supporters of presidential candidates McCarthy and Humphrey each exhibited a liberal value orientation by placing a high value on both freedom and equality; supporters of candidates Rockefeller and Nixon each showed a moderate value orientation by placing a high value on freedom and an intermediate value on equality; and supporters of candidates Reagan and Wallace each showed a conservative value orientation by placing a high value orientation on freedom and a low value on equality. Milton Rokeach has conducted several research projects in values and value systems since his development of the Value Survey instrument. Using data gathered from a sample of 1,400 Americans over twenty-one years of age con- ducted by the National Opinion Research Center in April, .1968, the role of values in religion, politics, prejudice, and pnflilic opinion, as well as several other areas of social psychology, has been explored. Two investigations in value 56Ibid., p. 32. 57Ibid., p. 31. 34 systems in religion have been reported in the H. Paul Douglass Lectures for 1969.58’59 The value systems of the national sample of Americans identified by nominal religious identification, frequency of church attendance, self-ratings on perceived importance of religion in one's daily life were ' studied for differences. The findings confirmed that the value systems of the religious, the less religious, and the non-religious are distinctly different from.one another. He reports: Religiously oriented Christians constantly ranked the terminal values salvation higher and pleasure lower than those less religious and nonreligious. Moreover, the religious typically ranked the moral values for- giving and obedient and the competence values inde- pendent, intellectual, and logical lower than the less religious and nonreligious. And when magnitude of value difference was considered as well as statistical sig- nificance two values, salvation and forgiving, were found to be most distinctively Christian values. The companion research project to the one described above was to determine to what extent religious values are related to a compassionate social outlook. In the national sample, responses to several questions were solicited re- garding: reactions to the assassination of Martin Luther King; attitudes toward equal rights for blacks, the poor, the student protest movement, and the church's involvment 58Rokeach, Value Systems in Religion. 59Milton Rokeach, "Religious Values and Social Com- parison," Review of Religious Research, XI (1969), 24-38. 60Rokeach, Value Systems in Religion, pp. 3 and 22. a “I." 'W‘F 71.1721"- 35 in political and social affairs. Rokeach summarizes his findings:é The findings suggest that those who place a high value on salvation are conservative, and anxious to maintain the status quo, and are generally more in- different and unsympathetic with the plight of the black and the poor. They had reacted in a more fearful and calloused way to the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, were more unsympathetic with the student protest movement, and were more opposed to the church's in- volvement in everyday affairs. . . . [The] value for forgiving (the second most distinctively Christian value) was also found to be negatively related to social com- passion but to a generally lesser extent than was the case for salvation. . . . Frequent churchgoers were found to be somewhat less compassionate than less fre- quent churchgoers. The Two-Value Model of Politics has been briefly described by Bishop62 earlier in this chapter. In develop- ing the model, Rokeach used the content-analysis procedure in analyzing value systems expressed in writings repre- senting four political ideologies. The writings of Gold- water, Lenin, Hitler, and the socialist ideologists, Norman Thomas and Erich Fromm,63 revealed significant differences in value orientation with regard to two values, freedom and equality. A straightforward count of the values found in Conscience of a Conservative revealed that Goldwater .mentioned freedom most frequently and equality least frequently among seventeen terminal values. A similar 61Rokeach, Religious Values and Social Comparison, p. 24. 62Bishop, Presidential Preferences and Values in 1968. 63Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, p. 171. 36 count of Lenin's Collected Works, employing the same seventeen terminal values, showed the opposite: equality was mentioned most frequently and freedom least frequently. For the socialists, freedom ranked first and equality second'among the seventeen values, and for Hitler's Mein Kampf content analysis revealed that freedom and equality were at the bottom of his lists of values.6 Based upon these findings, a two-dimensional model similar to the four points of a compass was developed to express political ideology. Liberal Democrat, humanist, and socialist orientation ranking freedom and equality high would be placed at the north pole; Nazis, Ku Klux Klan, and fascist orientation ranking freedom and equality low, at the south pole; to the east, on the right, would be placed capitalist orientation expressed by the John Birch Society, conservative Republicans, and by the followers of Ayn Rand ranking freedom high and equality low; and on the left, to the west, would be the communist orientation of Stalin or Mao ranking freedom low and equality high.65 The most recent investigation was reported by Rokeach and Parker and is a study of the extent of cultural differences between groups of different socioeconomic levels and race using value responses from the national sampling cited earlier in this chapter. Comparisons were made ac- cording to income, level of education, race'(blacks and 64Rokeach, The Measurement of Values and Value Systems, p. 14. 65Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, p. 171. 37 whites), and race matched for income and education. The results have led to the conclusions discussed by the authors below: The results show that persons of low status, as compared with persons of high status, are more religious, more conformist, less concerned with responsibility, more concerned with friendship than love, and less con- cerned with competence and self-actualization. When we move to an analysis of value differences between whites and Negroes, however, we find generally fewer differ- ences. The major difference is on the value for equality. Other value differences, such as those in- volving competence and self—actualization, seem to parallel the differences found between groups of high and low status. When status is held constant, or when poor whites and Negroes are compared with one another, most of the value differences previously found disappear or become minimal. Our summary of these differences indicates that many are characteristics attributed by various writers to the culture of poverty. With regard to Negro-white differ- ences, however, we saw that the relatively few differ- ences that remained when status position was controlled provide no support for a distinctive Negro culture of poverty. Although several of the preceding studies in values and value systems have implications for the field of edu- cation, no studies utilizing the Value Survey have been reported to date. Attention shall be focused briefly upon other reported research investigations of values in the edu- cational setting. 66Rokeach and Parker, Values as Social Indicators, pp. 97—111. 67Ibid., p. 110. 38 Studies of Values in Education Several studies of values in the field of education 68 69 have been made in the past decade. Kramer, Ecker, Thicepn)and Larson 1 have studied values pertaining to educational administration. One, a study of the inter- actions of attitudes and values of elementary principals and their staffs, was conducted by Price in a Chicago suburb. Three instruments, the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory, Prince's Differential Values Inventory, and the Chandler- Mathis Value Inventory, were administered on two separate occasions with a seven month interval of elapsed time. He found that: There was no indication that principals had any 1. effect upon staff attitudes and values . . . . 68James Guy Kramer, "Perceptions of Value Orienta- tions and the Interactions Between Administrators and School Boards" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation) University of Wis- (Hereinafter referred to as Perceptions.) consin, 1966). 69William B. Ecker, "A Study of Values and Person- (ality Factors as Predictors of Administrative Behavior" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1968). (Hereinafter referred to as Values and Personality Factors.) 70Alfred John Price, "A Study of the Interactions of Attitude and Values of Elementary Principals and Their Staffs" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University, 1961). (Hereinafter referred to as A Study of the Interactions.) 71Raymond O. Larson, "School Board Members' Values, Belief Systems, and Satisfaction with the School Board Role" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wis- (Hereinafter referred to as School Board.) consin, 1966). 39 2. There was some indication that attitudes . . . of principals were affected by pressure toward the norm of the administrative group. . Values appeared much more stable than attitudes. 4. There was no indication that a relationship existed between attitudes, values and morale . . . . 5. Strong indication was present that principals se- lected new teachers in line with their own atti- tudinal orientations, but that once the new teacher began interacting with the staff he changed in atti- tudes. 6. New teachers appeared to gravitate toward the norm of the staff, but did not change significantly in values. 7. Express views of the central administration appeared to be ineffective in retarding attiygdinal change of new teachers toward the staff norm. Items three and five have particular relevance to this study. Ecker studied 177 principals and 2,915 members of their teaching staffs in the state of New York. The purpose of the inquiry was to ascertain the relationship between teachers' perceptions of principals' administrative prac- tices and the principals' perceptions of their own person- ality characteristics and value orientation as measured by the Differential Values Inventory and the Administrative Behavior Scale. No significant difference was found between value orientations of principals with democratic-autocratic administrative behavior, or between principals with various biographical data variables. Years of experience in edu- cation and age were found to be the best indicators of accu- racy of teachers in perceiving administrative behavior.73 72Price, A Study of the Interactions. Ecker, Values and Personality Factors. 40 The study of perceptions of value orientations and the interactions of superintendents and school board members by Kramer, found that congruence of value orientations was not related to group interaction patterns. Patterns of interaction were found to be quite stable and consistent and there was not a relationship between the degree of accuracy of group members' value orientation and the group inter- action patterns exhibited by the groups in their meetings.74 Larson used the Study of Values, the Haiman scale for measuring open-mindedness, and the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale plus a satisfaction scale in his study of satisfaction derived from the role of school board membership in relation to values and beliefs. The school board members of twelve Wisconsin school districts expressed no significant re- lationships between role satisfaction and values or open- mindedness. When the individual members of the boards of education were congruent in belief systems, they expressed significantly more satisfaction with the role than did those who disagreed in beliefs. Satisfaction was not re- lated to tenure, age, level of education, or income. It was also noted that school board members with higher incomes were less closed-minded than those who earned relatively less salary.75 74Kramer, Perceptions. 75Larson, School Board. 41 A study of the changes of attitude and value orien- tation of university freshmen was conducted on the Michigan State University campus in 1961. Payne76 investigated the changes in relationship to selected background character- istics. The characteristics of the 2,219 students examined are as follows: size of home community, parents' education, fathers' occupation, religious affiliation, size of high school graduating class, and type of secondary school at— tended. As measured by the Inventory of Belifs and the Differential Values Inventory, the majority of students be- came less rigid, compulsive, and authoritarian; they became less stereotypic during the freshman year in college. Both male and female students exhibited significant value changes and became less traditional, or more emergent, as a result of one year of experience in the college and university setting. Another study of traditional and emergent values of 77 in 1967. Nine educators was undertaken by McAllister status-role groups of educators (education students, ele- mentary teachers, secondary teachers, elementary and secon- dary administrators, education professors, counselors, 76Isabelle K. Payne,"The Relationship Between Atti- tudes and Values and Selected Background Characteristics" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1961). 77Bernice Jacklyn Lyons McAllister, "Educators and Traditional-Emergent Values" (unpublished Ph.D. disser- tation, Stanford University, 1967). 42 non-education professors, and school board members) in California responded to three data-gathering instruments, including Prince's Differential Values Inventory which tests for traditional and emergent values. The results indicated that males held more tra- ditional values than females, older administrators were more traditional than younger, counselors and elementary adminis- trators expressed value patterns different from all others, and school board members and secondary school administrators held similar value orientations that were different from all others. Two additional dissertations in values relating to education should be reported at this time. One is a report of value preferences for types of employment opportunities by male elementary teachers and the other was a content- analysis of values expressed in reading textbooks adopted by the state of Texas. In the study of value preference by Jackson,78 eighty-one male elementary teachers in north-central Cali- fornia responded to the Study of Values scale and a ques- tionnaire designed to examine career orientations and re- spondent characteristics. He found that aspirant career teachers were found to be high in social value orientations 78Martin Jay Jackson, "Expressed Value Preferences for Types of Employment Opportunities by Male Elementary Teachers" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Berkeley, 1967). 43 and aspirant career administrators were found to have low social and high political value orientations. Desires for leadership, autonomy, and group decision-making opportuni- ties were evident for both groups. Career teachers desired employment situations in grades seven and eight in larger school districts, whereas career administrator aspirants preferred smaller though rapidly growing suburban or rural communities and accepted teaching assignments in K-6 ele- mentary schools. His recommendations to school districts desiring to attract career-oriented male elementary teachers are: 1. Include an examination of the decision-making process utilized by male teachers as they make their organizational choice. 2. Determine what effects the provision of opportuni- ties for autonomy and participation have upon the teacher and upon the school district. 3. Investigate value and career orientations, related to occupational choice-making, held prior to em- ployment by male elementary teachers. Hobson's80 content analysis of ten third grade reading textbooks adopted by the state of Texas was made in 81 study reported earlier in a procedure similar to White's this chapter. Harold D. Laswell's system of values--power, respect, affection, rectitude, well-being, wealth, 79Jackson, Expressed Value Preferences for Types of Employment Opportunities by Male Elementary Teachers. 80Stanley Preston Hobson, "A Value Analysis of Se- lected Elementary Reading Textbooks" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, East Texas State University, 1967). 81White, Value Analysis. 44 enlightenment, and sk11182--was used in the study. His conclusions showed that the elementary textbooks were dis- proportionately oriented toward rectitude (morality)83 and well-being (body and psychic integrity),84 followed by skill, power, enlightenment, and respect, and then followed by wealth and affection. The content-analysis procedure was found to be adequate for this type of study; but it stipu- lates that the process requires well-defined procedures, and suggests that the procedure may be easily adapted for simi- lar studies in other disciplines. The remaining portion of this chapter describes the Mott Leadership Program and its relationship to this thesis. The Mott Inter-University Clinical Preparation Program for EducationaIILeadershIp One of the most unique internship programs of edu- cational leadership is the Mott Inter-University Clinical Preparation Program for Educational Leaders, located in Flint, Michigan. This program, involving the auspices of seven universities in a coordinated program for training masters' degree and doctoral degree candidates in community 82Harold D. Laswell, Power and Personality (New York, N. Y.: W. W. Norton and Company, 1948), p. 17. 83Ibid. 84Ibid. 45 education, grew from the interest of the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation in spreading the community school concept to other schools, communities, and educational institutions. The community school concept began in Flint, Michi- gan, in the early 1930's as a result of the efforts of Frank J. Manley, the Director of Physical Education and Recreation r- for the school system, and C. S. Mott, a long-time resident of the community. 5 Concerned about the lack of safe play a. areas for youngsters and the need for health and social .‘ services accelerated by the adverse living conditions brought on by the depression, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation allotted funds to the Flint Board of Education for initial programs in recreation, health, and juvenile delinquency prevention. From the formation of a Sportsman- ship Club in a local school evolved a pilot project that opened the doors of school facilities to citizens of all ages in the community. The resultant program developed into a program "known around the country and has been 86 and attracts thousands of adopted in over 200 cities," C. M. Campbell, visitors from many states and nations. editor of The Community School and Its Administration, 85Clarence H. Young and William A. Quinn, Foundation McGraw-Hill'Book Company, for Living (New York, N. Y.: 1963), p- 114f. 86"Charles Stewart Mott and the Mott Foundation," Fnternship Handbook (Flint, Mich.: Mott Leadership Center, 1. d . ) , p . 8 . (Mimeographed. ) 46 provides a chronology of events that has led to the program as it is today: 1. :n11931 sportsmanship clubs were added in two other schools. ‘ 2. Shortly thereafter appeals were made to the Park Board, Recreation Board and social agencies for cooperation and assistance. No action was forth- coming from these institutions. 3. Data were gathered on youth needs for the purpose of carrying the message to the people . . . . 4. :n1the early years of the depression, ninety boys whO‘were to be sentenced to a reform school were reprieved to . . . [a] Mott Foundation representa- tive for counseling, guidance and club activities. In 1933 Charles Stewart Mott, Senior, Vice President of the General Motors Corporation, established The Mott Camp for boys at Pero Lake. This was Mr. Mott's first identification with the community school program. 6. In 1935 Mr. Mott financed a program for keeping the schools open at night. Three purposes were given: a. Reduce juvenile delinquency. b. Improve safety conditions for children. c. Provide recreational and athletic activities for all age groups in the community. 7. In 1937 visiting teachers were employed. 8. Shortly after the visiting teachers began oper- ations, ineservice training programs in child growth and development were provided for both teachers and parents. 9. In 1939 The MOtt Foundation Children's Health Center was established. It had these three purposes:’ ea. To inform teachers and parents of good health practices. 1:. Provide medical care for the needy. c. JRender service of a preventive nature. 131 1947 a comprehensive pilot community school program was initiated in the Fairview School, a school located in a socially deprived area. 11. It: 1950 Charles S. Mott presented a surprise gift of $1,000,000 to the Board of Education provided that the voters would approve a $7,000,000 school build- ing bond issue. Since 1950 the program has continued to grow in its many and varied aspects. Here are some highlights functioning at the present time: Ta. .All school areas in Flint have community facili- ‘ties and a program. 'rhere is a community school within walking dis- ‘tance of every family in Flint. lo. .12. I). .99. “._'1‘_,i{ imi-h'"_“'¢(- 1 47 d The board of education provides a coordinated program for all ages--from pre-school age to master's degree and beyond. a The average Flint school day lasts from 8 A.M. to 11 P.M. e. More people use Flint's schools at night than during the day. f. Flint's adult education program offers over 900 classes each term and has recorded 60,000 en- rollments in a single year-~roughly one-third of the total adult population. 9. Over 25,000 school children take part in summer enrichment programs offered by the schools. h. A $25,000,000 community college and cultural center is being built entirely from private gifts. TMepurpose of the community education movement is stated in the Philosophy and Interpretation of the Community Educatnnzprogram prepared by the Michigan Community Edu- catnnzlegislative Planning Committee, chaired by the then Lieutenant Governor William G. Milliken: The most dividuals to productive, ships: the urgent social objective is to help in- develop themselves, to grow, to become contributing forces in all their relation- family, the neighborhood, their jobé the broader communities of city, state, and nation. The program has profession. Dr. received much acclaim from notables in the Ernest Melby summarized the essence of the community education concept in a speech given on February 28, 1957, during a workshop in community education: 87Clyde M. Campbell, ed., "Flint's Community School Its Origin and Operation," The Community School and Its ministration, £38 1 i losophy and Howard W. Hickey and Curtis Van Voorhees, eds. , Interpretation of the Community Education agram, " in The Role of the School in Community Education Ldland , Mich. : Pendell Publishing Company, 1969), p. 3. FEW-'- im m.:..nv-—mm . i i 48 .. . an educational system which helps people do The key is getting people to do things for themselves. things. . . . If we give every man, every woman, and child in American a chance to take active part in edu- cation, we won't have to worry about shortages of build- We can get anything we want. At the lugs and teachers. same time, if we have faith in our people, and respect our people, we can learn from them, and in working to- gether they will come to respect and love each other. Think of the problems in human relations that would . I'm convinced that what really educates solve. . . people is not what they hear or what they read, but what they do.89 The demand for educators with community education experience soon exceeded the supply as many communities began to request trained Flint people. Under the leadership of Melby and Campbell, an experiment in studying the role of the community school director was undertaken in 1963. From this experience, a proposal was extended to the Mott Foun- dation that a training program for educational leaders be established using Flint as a laboratory. Early in 1964, The Mott Inter-University Clinical Preparation Program for Educational Leaders was created as a cooperative venture between the Mott Foundation, the Flint Community Schools, 90 and the seven state universities of Michigan. The objectives of the program were as follows: To make available for study by community education leaders, the total resources of the universities and 89Ernest O. Melby, "The Community-Centered School ," 3peech given at a Workshop in Community Education, February 38, 1957, in Clarence H. Young and William A. Quinn, Foun— McGraw-Hill Book ‘ation for Living (New York, N. Y.: ompany, 1963), p. 216. 9ol‘ntzernship Handbook, p. 2. 1‘ I, 1'. ’v_’.h..1 a. 49 the Flint Community Schools including: --A philosophy of education which believes that the child is the product of his total environment--home, church, community and school, and that the school must understand and develop co-operative working relation- ships with all resources of the community. --A structural organization providing services for all segments of the community regardless of the economic, social, or educational station and recognizing the fact that the school is the only single agency serving as a common denominator of society. --A relationship with all agencies to develop and en- courage cooperation and understanding for the mutual betterment of the total community. The training of the intern is accomplished by work- “9:. amifi: is”- was; 7 J ing with school administrators and community school di- F, i . I rectors. The program has two components: three universi— ties (Central, Eastern, and Northern Michigan Universities) provide Mott Fellows who are working toward the master's degree experiences with community school directors; four universities (Michigan State, Wayne State, Western Michigan, and the University of Michigan) provide doctoral fellows with experiences with community education programs as well as extensive internship experience with other community agencies. Dean Melby served as the first university coordi- zator, and the program began with fifty-two fellows in 1964- 5'. A total of 356 interns have participated in the pro- ams during the first six years of operation, and another renty-two Mott Interns have been selected to participate the 1970-71 school year. 911bid., p. 2f. 50 Each year the Mott Foundation and the seven cooper- ating universities offer a total of seventy-two fellowships in community education leadership to eligible candidates. The fellowships (forty doctoral and thirty-two masters) are available to applicants who have demonstrated leadership ability in various roles in education and who have an interest in community education. The qualifications for doctoral fellowships are: 1. Submission of completed application and credentials. Masters degree. Preferred candidates shall be under forty years of age . Desire to be involved in Community Education. Completion of designated tests. Demonstrated leadership potential. Acceptance by one of the cooperating Universities for graduate study. Completion of personal interview in Flint as part of selection process. LON o 0 0° \lmmh .00. Additional criteria are listed in the recruitment brochure as selection factors: Successful teaching experience and/or evidence of leadership ability. b. Recommendations for the program from university faculty and/or employing officials. c. Undergraduate and graduate scholastic records. d. Score on the Miller Analogy Test. e. Fluency in the English Language. f. Interview. a. The deadline for receiving applications is December 15.94 92"Doctoral Fellowships," Internship Handbook (Flint, Mich.: Mott Leadership Center, n.d.), n.p. rraphed.) (Mimeo- 93Ibid. 4 . Ibld. .3- 1.x“. gilt“..— “filial: 51 The need for new types of training for school ad- ministrators was called for by Dean Melby when he was with the School of Education of New York University in 1955. He expressed, then, his concern for educational administrators' lack of understanding of community structure, organization, and leadership: Programs of preparation must be revamped. The number and length of education courses should be re- duced; facilities should represent specialists from other disciplines, and extensive participation in com- munity and civic processes [should be encouraged for students and faculty].95 Melby calls for higher standards of leadership, integrity, creativity, training, and competence on the part of adminis- trators and administrator training programs. The Mott Inter-University Clinical Preparation Program in Educational Leadership is the outgrowth of his thoughts in 1955. Summary The purpose of this chapter has been to review the general writings and specific studies which are relevant to the study of values and value systems. In the literature, the parameters of the meaning of values have been estab- lished: 1. There is no clear consensus of the meaning of values as used by the writers in the field; and 95Ernest 0. Melby, Administering Community Edu- cation (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1955), p. 257. 4. It explored in the study of values: 52 the terms beliefs, attitudes, and values are often used interchangeably, Whereas beliefs are personal feelings and atti- tudes are an organization of several beliefs, values are basic predictors of behavior and the end products of action, Values are arranged in a system and individuals differ from each other in the way they arrange them into a hierarchy of preference, A person's values have social consequence. was found that three primary areas are usually of individuals or groups, the origin and deveIOpment of values within the individual, and the influence of values on one's life. Most studies of values involve one of seven expressed hypotheses: 7. Values originate and guide behavior. Values are explicitly and consciously held. Values are self—maintaining. Values may be measured by attitude scales. Content analysis of literature can reveal values. A person's perception is consistent with his values. Values are influenced by the values of others. Values serve a number of purposes in our lives. They tell us how to act, what to want, and how to justify the measurements of values .___ ‘- -. ‘ 53 one's behavior. Several implications for this study have been gleaned from the literature: 1. Values are more stable than attitudes. 2. Individuals select other individuals in line with their own attitudes and values. 3. There are characteristic value differences in people. 4. Values are an expression of the self--the good life. 5. Values have reliable meanings. 6. Values express political, racial, ideological, and religious beliefs. 7. Variations in value systems are produced by cultural and social, as well as personality, factors. 8. Changes in values result from certain experi- ences. 9. Values serve as criteria for selection and judgment. 10. Our culture does have a value system and it can be studied empirically. In addition to the review of the literature and studies relating to values and value systems, the community school program of Flint, Michigan, was discussed. Special emphasis was placed upon the internship program as a labo- ratory experience. Selection criteria and the overall \- a 'v o ”In... 54 requirements of the leadership program were explained and emphasis was placed upon the unique training program for future educational leadership. The following chapter describes the design of the study and the method of investigation. h.‘. '21- .210! an. I.) mt: 1 . . . FT. _ CHAPTER III THE METHOD OF INVESTIGATION In order to test the hypotheses, analysis was made of the values and value systems of individuals applying for acceptance into a unique internship program in educational E E. 5. . leadership. Each applicant had had previous experience and training and was currently engaged in various professional activities in the state of Michigan or across the nation. Also included in the study were professors of education and field administrators who served on the interviewing and selection teams of the applicants, and the participants of the internship program for the present school year. Definition of the Population A most crucial factor in survey research is the problem of sampling. This factor to be considered is ex- pressed by Mouly: The problem of sampling is of primary concern in all survey studies, for unless the sample on the basis of which data are collected is representative of the pOpu- lation selected for investigation, the conclusions drawn cannot apply to that population. 1George J. Mouly, The Science of Educational Re- search (New York, N.Y.: American Book Company), p. 235. 55 56 In this study there are six sub-groups: the applicants not considered because of incomplete applications, the appli- cants screened but not invited for the interview, the candi- dates invited for the interview but not selected, and the candidates selected for the internship. Two of the six, the interview team members and the present interns, are also included in the investigation. It should be pointed out that this method of using six different subgroups is the stratified sample technique. The advantages are explained by Ardmore: Establishing subpopulations or strata, as they are called, may result in a better sample design than a simple random sample. . . . Each stratum will be treated as a separate and independent population.2 The nature of the topic of study and the relatively small numbers of persons in four of the six subpopulations necessitated a high percentage of returns. Mouly cautions against negative factors implied by non-respondents: Empirical studies have shown that some important differences exist between respondents and non- respondents. . . . An incomplete sample ordinarily indi— cates a greater representation of the persons who are interested, who are cooperative, who are favorable on the issue under investigation, and so on. On the other hand, it is logical to assume that the non-respondents' refusal to participate is frequently not independent of such factors as a negative attitude toward the sponsor of the investigation.3 2Sidney.J. Ardmore, Introduction to Statistical .Analysis and Inference for Psychology and Education (New ‘York, N.Y.: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966), pp. 498-499. 3Mouly, The Science of Educational Research, p. 241. 57 The 491 applicants were divided into four groups according to the amount of progress made in the selection process. Of the total applicants, there were 149 declared incomplete at the time of initial screening by faculty members of each respective university.4 Forty-five subjects were selected at random from this group. A second group consisted of the 342 individuals whose applications were complete and who were considered for the internship. Seventy-four persons of this group were selected to partici- 1)...- 4. pate in the interview program in Flint, Michigan. Of the remaining 268 applicants with completed application forms, a random sample of forty-five persons was drawn to partici- pate in the investigation. The population is used for each of the remaining subgroups. The seventy-four candidates invited for the interviews were divided into two groups: the thirty-eight not selected for the internship and the thirty-six who were selected to participate in the leadership program. The 1969-70 doctoral participants in the Mott Lead- ership Program served as the fifth study group. Each of the interns had participated in a similar screening procedure as a requirement for acceptance into the program. The sixth group of participants in the study are the lnembers of the interview teams. The fifty-five team members 4Patricia Redfern, personal interview in Flint, Idichigan, May 25, 1970. 58 are members of the faculties of the four universities that participate in the doctoral program of the Mott Leadership Program and field administrators from the Flint, Michigan, area schools and supporting-cooperating agencies. Table 1 summarizes the number of participants in the study and Figure 4 illustrates the distribution. A data sheet accompanied each Value Survey used in the study. The demographic data included related to age, sex, university affiliation, race or ethnic background, socio-economic background, years of experience in education and in administration, level and title of position, and yearly income. Table 2 lists a summary of the data col- lected in this study. TABLE l.--A summary of the number of participants in the study. Participants n N % Total Applicants to the Mott Leadership Program 491 100 Subjects with Incomplete Applications 149 45 .30 Subjects with Completed Applications 268 45 17 Subjects Invited to the Interview but not Accepted for the Leadership Program 38 38 100 Subjects Accepted into the Internship Program 36 36 100 Interview Team Members 55 55 100 Present Mott Interns 42 42 100 i i L__ fl. 59 Total Applications n=49l Incomplete Completed Applications Applications n=149 N=45 n=342 N=45 Not Invited Invited To Interview To Interview n=268 n=45 ‘n=74 N=74 r—————-" ‘— ———————\ | \. I 7 ,l- ' Not Selected Selected for for Internship the Internship Interview I Team . n=38 n=36 I n=55 N=55 | N=38 N=36 I I — I L_.___J 1969-70 Mott _.__.J Interns n=42 N=42 FIGURE 4.--A diagram of the participants in the study. o e H o o o m>on< I ooo.m~ H «N m o o o mmm.vm I ooo.om NH 5H MH OH m h mmm.mH I ooo.mH mm m pH Hm mm mH mmm.¢H I coo.0H m o N 5 HH HH mmm.m m I sonm “>HMHmm e h m m H m Hwnuo H m m H o m uHso¢ m mm m m m m ommHHou m o o o H o omoHHoo uoHcsb m o m m m m cmHm MOHcsh no mHocez mH OH 0H OH H m ocH3uoHHumHQ m o m o mH OH Hoonom runs a a m OH mH m mumpsosmHm "coHuHmom mo Ho>oH 0 m.v m.mH m.v m.m .¢.z .¢.z coHumnuchflEom GH ,0 m.oa s.mm e.oH o.OH ~.m v.0H consensus eH "mocmHuomxm mo unto» H o H m o o stuo Hm me mm mm mm Hm mUHn3 “comm m m h N m m xomHQ o . . N H m v onEom . ea c 2 am pm mm Hm one .xom vavm mmIom vaom owImm vamm vamm .zr;ii.¢¢¢& "0mm m.em b.mv N.vm m.vm N.mm o.om ommuo>m ovuz meuz omnz mmuz Heuz mmuz uchucH names cmuomHom pwboMHmm mcoHumoHHmmm mcoHumOHHmmd ucmmmum 3mH>HoucH mmumpHpcmo p z UmumHmEoo mumHmEoocH moumchcmo .mpsum on» CH mucmmHoHuumm map mo sump UHcmmumoEmp map mo humEESw «II.~ mqmde 61 Description of the Instrument The Value Survey, developed by Milton Rokeach of Michigan State University, was selected to measure the values and value systems of the participants of the study. The instrument consists of a set of eighteen terminal values and defining phrases, and a set of eighteen instrumental values and defining phrases, each set arranged in alpha- betical order. The terminal and instrumental values are listed in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. The respondent is asked to rank order from 1-18 the value statements on each of two pages. The directions for Form E are as follows: Below is a list of eighteen values arranged in alphabetical order. Your task is to arrange them in order of their importance to YOU, as guiding principles in YOUR life. Study the list carefully. Then place a l_next to the value which is most important for you, place a‘g next to the value which is second most important to you, etc. The value which is least important, relative to the others, should be ranked lg. Work slowly and think carefully. If you change your mind, feel free to change your answersS The end result should truly show how you really feel. The survey had been pretested and found to require approxi- mately fifteen to twenty minutes to complete. In an ac- companying letter, each respondent was urged to "follow the directions on the inside cover and to do one page completely before going to the next."6 51bid. 6Letter to respondents. 62 TABLE 3.—-The terminal values and defining phrases.a Terminal Values (and Defining Phrases) A Comfortable Life (a prosperous life) An Exciting Life (a stimulating, active life) A Sense of Accomplishment (lasting contribution) A World at Peace (free of war and conflict) A World of Beauty (beauty of nature and the arts) Equality (brotherhood, equal opportunity for all) Family Security (taking care of loved ones) Freedom (independence, free choice) Happiness (contentedness) Inner Harmony (freedom from inner conflict) Mature Love (sexual and spiritual intimacy) National Security (protection from attack) Pleasure (an enjoyable, leisurely life) Salvation (saved, eternal life) Self-Respect (self-esteem) Social Recognition (respect, admiration) True Friendship (close companionship) Wisdom (a mature understanding of life) aMilton Rokeach, Value Survey, Form E, p. 2. 63 TABLE 4.--The instrumental values and defining phrases.a Instrumental Values (and Defining Phrases) Ambitious (hard-working, aspiring) Broadminded (open-minded) Capable (competent, effective) Cheerful (lighthearted, joyful) Clean (neat, tidy) Courageous (standing up for your beliefs) Forgiving (willing to pardon others) Helpful (working for the welfare of others) Honest (sincere, truthful) Imaginative (daring, creative) Independent (self-reliant, self-sufficient) Intellectual (intelligent, reflective) Logical (consistent, rational) Loving (affectionate, tender) Obedient (dutiful, respectful) Polite (courteous, well-mannered) Responsible (dependable, reliable) Self-Controlled (restrained, self-disciplined) aMilton Rokeach, Value Survey, Form E, p. 3. 64 Previous research using the Value Survey has shown that respondents rank order the eighteen terminal and in- strumental values in a reasonably reliable manner. For Form B, the reliabilities range from about .10 to the high .90's for the terminal values and from about -.20 to the high .90's for the instrumental values.7 Although re- spondents may consider the rank-ordering task to be a diffi- cult one, the skewed distribution illustrated in Table 5 demonstrates that the overall reliabilities are satisfactory for research purposes. The nature of the scale permits re- liability measures for each separate value, as well as for value systems as a whole. For the terminal values the re- liabilities (product-moment) range from .51 for a sense of accomplishment to .88 for salvation. The average relia- bility of the individual terminal values is around .65. The range of individual instrumental values is .45 for responsi- bility to .70 for ambitious,ImiUIan average of around .60.8 Collection of Data The Value Survey and an accompanying data sheet were mailed to the applicants to the internship program and to the members of the interview teams. They were requested to complete the survey and the data sheet and to return them 7Rokeach, The Measurement of Values and Value Systems, p. 23. 81bid., p. 10. 65 TABLE 5.--Frequency distributions of value system reliabili- ties obtained for Form E.a artiste 52:32am? .90 - .99 11 5 .80 - .89 54 26 .70 - .79 45 49 .60 - .69 35 31 .50 - .59 27 28 .40 - .49 9 20 .30 - 39 3 10 .20 - .29 2 7 .10 - .19 3 6 .00 - .09 2 -.10 - -.01 4 - 20 - -.ll 1 N = 189 189 aMilton Rokeach, Value Survey, Form E, p. 24. in a pre-addressed, pre—stamped envelope provided with each packet. The instrument was administered to the 1969-70 interns during regular seminar sessions held by each uni- versity group in the Mott Leadership Center. The response forms for the interview teams and the present interns were not coded in any way, but they were coded for the other participants in order to differentiate each group--those selected or not selected. Response forms 66 of different colors were used to differentiate responses from intern candidates, interview team members, present interns, and other applicants to the program; green, blue, yellow, and white, respectively. It was anticipated that there would be a high per- centage of returns as a result of the educational and motivational level of the participants of the study. Ap- proximately 70 per cent of the responses were returned within a three-week period following each initial mailing date. Another packet of materials including a second letter of request with a hand-written comment was sent to the addresses not represented in the returns. After a second two-week allowance of time for returns, the remaining re- spondents were followed up with a long-distance telephone call and a third packet sent by special delivery mail or by a personal visit to those living in close proximity. Table 6 illustrates the total number of returns received in the survey. It is apparent that the total response to the survey was more than adequate to establish a representative value system of each subgroup that would be essential in this study. Statistical Treatment of the Data A variety of measures may be obtained with the rank- ordering procedure of Rokeach's Value Survey. An index of value system stability may be obtained by correlating the 67 TABLE 6.--A summary of the number of returns received in the study. Respondent :0 Returns % Sample with Incomplete Applications 45 39 86.6 Sample with Completed Applications 45 42 93.3 Subjects not Accepted into the Internship Program 38 38 100.0 Subjects Accepted for the Intern- ship Program 36 36 100.0 Interview Team Members 55 48 87.3 Present Interns 42 40 95.2 Total ‘26: (EXT 92.3 rank orders given by a respondent on one occasion with those given at a later time. Similarly, value system change may be measured after the introduction of some sort of "treatment." Beech, in his 1966 study of the relationship between value system similarity and interpersonal attrac- tion, measured the value system similarity of two persons.9 An index of homogeneity of value systems of more than two persons may also be obtained from this instrument. 9 Attraction. 10 Manual for: Valuetest (East Lansing, Mich.: 10 Beech, Value Systems, Attitudes, and Interpersonal Charles C. Hollen, Program Description and User's Michigan State University, 1969), p. 4. (Mimeographed.) 68 Statistical treatment of the data was executed through the facilities of the Computer Laboratory of Michi- gan State University. The responses of each individual in the study were tabulated and placed on IBM cards. The Valuetestll program written especially for the Value Survey computed the median scores of each group, and analyzed the data with the median test (two-way analysis of variance) and the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance. A coef- ficient of concordance,12 the measure of the amount of agreement within each group, was also computed. The resulting statistics were analyzed and inter- preted in answer to each question stated in the study. Summary This chapter has presented the plan for the col- lection and analysis of the data. The chief instrument used in the survey, the Value Survey, was described and infor- mation on the reliability and validity of the test was given. The selection of the sample was explained and a brief description of each subgroup was supplied. The collection and statistical treatment of the data was explained in detail. The following chapter is devoted to an analysis of these data. llIbid. 12Index of homogeneity. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA The purpose of this study has been to identify the value priorities of a specific group of doctoral students engaged in an internship program in educational leadership, to determine what role values play in the selection of the participants of this program, and to identify the specific values that distinguish these participants from other students and practitioners of educational administration. Six hypotheses were presented in Chapter I; each has been analyzed separately, and the data obtained and appropriate explanation are presented in this chapter. The Value System of Mott Interns The candidates selected for the Mott Leadership Program for the 1970-71 school year and the present (1969- 70) participants of the program were compared in terms of value priorities as expressed in the Value Survey. The two groups together consider themselves to be honest, respon- sible, capable, broadminded, and independent. They do not see themselves as giving priority to obedience, cleanliness, cheerfulness, and politeness over the fourteen other values 69 70 listed in the instrumental scale. High priority was placed on a sense of accomplishment and self-respect, and low value on national security, pleasure, a comfortable life, and salvation as terminal values. Similarity was found to exist between the value systems of the two groups of interns. Six values, a world of peace, mature love, social recognition, wisdom, ambitious, and responsibility, had a correlation of 1.000 and eight additional values had a correlation of .75 or higher when measured by the median test. Homogeneity of value systems is reflected in the coefficients of concordance of .28 for the terminal value systems and .24 for the instrumental values of the group. The value priorities of the interns are listed in Table 7 and are diagrammed in Figure 5 by distribution of median scores. Two values, equality and clean, show a difference at the .05 level of significance as tested by the median test and the Kruskal-Wallis test of significance. Equality was ranked sixth by the new interns and second by the present participants of the program. Although clean was ranked seventeenth by both groups, the median scores of 14.50 for the new interns and 16.63 for the present interns demonstrate the difference in central tendencies of the value rankings of the two groups. Table 8 illustrates the distribution of scores above and below the grand median for equality and Table 9 illustrates the distribution for the value clean. 71 n mm.h HNm.o NHv.o ooo.H ooo.o h NH.N m oo.m soomHz HH mN.0H Hom.o opo.H wom.o mvv.o HH om.m HH no.OH QHSmccmHHm onus vH om.MH Hmo.o mmH.o ooo.H Hoo.o vH mm.MH mH oo.¢H cOHuHcmoomm HmHoom N oq.v va.o mmo.o mmm.o CON.o m HN.v m mh.v poommmMIMHom mH oo.vH NHN.o mmm.H Hmv.o mh¢.o NH NH.mH MH oo.MH coHum>Hmm NH mm.vH NNm.o mnm.o mmn.o NHH.o mH ow.vH NH om.¢H musmmon mH mN.mH nvv.o mnm.o oom.o moo.o mH om.mH mH oo.mH NUHusomm HmcoHumz m om.m NNN.o oNH.o ooo.H mmo.o m om.m m om.m m>0H mucus: m mm.m Nam.o ooo.o Hoo.o th.o o om.w v NH.m acoshmm HoscH 0H NH.m Nvm.o Hom.o Nmm.o hom.o NH no.0H h mm.h mmochmmm o mm.m ooo.o ovm.m mNN.o mmH.H o mm.v m om.m Eooomum m NH.m Noo.o mnv.m mHm.o th.o m om.m N om.v wuHucoom mHHEmm v mv.m ammo.o ovN.¢ ammo.o th.v N vv.m m om.o huHHmscm mH om.MH vmm.o vvo.o mHm.o mmo.o mH wo.mH vH om.MH wusmmm mo UHHOS 4 m mn.m mnm.o mNH.o coo.H Hoo.o m om.m oH mH.m momma um pHuoz d H mN.m mmm.o mmN.o mom.o mvv.o H om.N H mh.m ucoEEmHHmEoood mo oncom d NH vv.0H omo.o oON.o NOH.o mmm.N oH mm.m NH hm.HH mMHH msHuHoxm cs oH om.vH meo.o mON.o mHm.o mmo.o mH oo.mH oH om.vH wMHH mHnmuHomEoo d mosHm> HmcHEuoe xcmm CMHomz Q m m Nx xcmm cmHooz xcom GMHUmz msono mcumch pmuomHmm wmsHm> Hmuoe mHHHszmemsux umoe :mHtoz ucmmoum mouthtcmo .mcuouCH ucmmmnm tam mountHocmo cumucH mo mmcchmu wsHm> onaII.n mqmda 72 .mocmonHcmHm mo Hm>mH mo. msu um ucmumMMHt mosHm>m on mm. mm. oo.m mm.m mm.wH NH.hH OH.OH om.OH no.m OH.h om.m oo.v oo.m oo.OH om.h mm.mH om.mH ON.o Hh.w HN.m mmm.o Hom.o mmm.o hmm.o oom.o va.o mHh.o mmo.o Nwm.o hmo.o omm.o onm.o Hmw.o MmHo.o HNm.o 055.0 va.o mmo.o Hmo.o vmm.o mvm.o ooo.o mvH.o mmm.H MMH.o Nmm.N moo.o hem.m 05H.o mNm.o HMN.o mhv.m mHv.o mmo.o mmo.H CNN.o 5mm.o ooo.H mmv.o 5mm.o wom.o Hmv.o 5mm.o omN.o Hmv.o mmo.o Hhm.o oom.o Hum.o ooNo.o HmN.o Hhm.o hmm.o ooo.H Nvo.o Nvo.o mmm.o NwH.o mvv.o mhv.o NwH.o mmN.H mhv.o vmm.m Hoo.o moo.o Hoo.o Nom.v mHm.H Hoo.o omh.o Nvo.o ow Hm. we. om.m om.m Nh.vH oo.hH mh.m mm.m oo.m mm.m 5H.m mN.m mN.m om.OH mN.m mo.mH om.NH mm.w om.w NH.m mm OH 5N. om. om.m oo.w NH.VH om.hH oo.HH om.0H hH.0H om.h om.h om.N om.h mm.m mN.b om.vH mm.MH oo.m om.b mN.m HZ mmsHm> HmucmsduumcH mmsHm> HmcHEHmB "ucmHonmm Ioo mocmouoocoo ooHHouucooIMHom oHnHmcommmm opHHom ucmeono OGH>OH HMOHOOH HmsuomHHoucH unmocommocH o>HpmchmEH unocom HomaHom mcH>Hmuom msoommusoo cmmHU Homummno mHnmmmu pochEomoum msoHUHnsd mosHm> HmucmesuumcH Instrumental Values 73 Terminal Values it A Sense of Accomplishment Honest _ Self-Respect ‘“ Family Security Equality Responsible ~ Inner Harmony Capable ‘" Freedom Broadminded Independent -w , ,____Wisdom Courageous Helpful >- Imaginative Mature Love Self-Controlled -— .ggrlgngzspeace Ambitious pp Intellectual Forgiving . . Loving True Friendship Logical—Hr” _ Cheerful Polite Clean Obedient.___a FIGURE 5.--The distribution Mott An Exciting Life ____A WOrld of Beauty Social Recognition Salvation A Comfortable Life Pleasure National Security < - of values by median scores for Interns. 74 TABLE 8.—-Intern median test frequencies above and below the grand median for equality. Number of scores at or above the median Number of scores below the median Median Scores: 5.50 Chi Square: 4.27500 Carissa 13:52:: 13 25 38 23 15 38 36 40 76 6.9000 3.4444 Level of Significance: 0.0380 TABLE 9.--Intern median test frequencies above and below the grand median for clean. Number of scores at or above the median Number of scores below the median Median Scores: 16.00 Chi Square: 4,90160 this? 1:252:22 27 19 i 45 9 21 30 36 40 75 14.5000 16.6250 Level of Significance: 0.0258 75 The instrumental values may be grouped as moral and competence values which, when violated, give feelings of guilt or shame of ability.13 The two intern groups col- lectively tended to have a balanced distribution of moral and competence values, with moral values holding the extreme rank positions. Figure 6 illustrates the distribution of the moral and competence values of the two groups. Rank Moral Values Competence Values 1 Honest 2 Responsible 3 Capable 4 Broadminded 5 Independent 6 Courageousa —————————————————————— '( -——-—-—-—-——-—--——— 7 Helpful 8 Imaginative 9 Self-Controlled 10 Ambitious 11 Intellectual 12 Forgiving _______________________ ,___-_---_____--_-_- 13 Lov1ng l4 Logical 15 Cheerfula l6 Polite 17 Clean l8 Obedient aThese values are not classified as either moral or competence values. FIGURE 6.--The moral and competence value distribution of Mott interns. 13Rokeach, Value Systems in Religion, p. 6. 76 Null Hypothesis I HOIa: there is no difference between the value system median scores of those who had completed the appli- cation procedure and were considered for the internship and the value system median scores of those who had not com- pleted the application procedure and were not considered for the internship program. The analysis of this hypothesis necessitated the comparison of the value systems of the two major groups of applicants to the program--the ones with complete appli- cations and the ones with incomplete applications. To accomplish this, random samples of the two groups were ad- ministered the Value Survey. The median score of each value was compared to determine the degree of correlation, if any, that exists between the two values. The median test and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used in this analysis. Of the thirty-six values, not one combination reached the degree of difference at the .05 level of sig- nificance. Table 10 lists distribution of value rankings of the two groups. It should be noted that a high degree of value system similarity is in evidence between the two groups. Eight values, a comfortable life, a world of beauty, mature love, national security, social recognition, true friendship, broadminded, and courageous have a correlation of 1.000 and eleven additional values have a correlation of .75 or above,as expressed by the results of the median test. 77 NON.0 0N¢.H 050.0 000.0 N 0H.0 N 0N.0 EOan3 Nv0.0 000.0 000.H 0N0.0 0H 0H.m 0 5H.0 mHnmncoHum onus 000.0 500.0 000.H N00.0 «H 00.0H 0H 00.0H coHuHcmoomm HMHoom 000.0 N05.0 00H.0 050.N 0 NN.0 v 05.0 vommmmmIMHmm 00H.0 000.N 000.0 000.0 NH 0H.0H 0H 00.NH coHuo>Hom 00H.0 0vN.N 000.0 000.0 0H 0N.0H 0H 00.0H unammon 000.0 005.0 000.H 000.0 0H 00.0H 0H 00.0H 5uHHsomm HmcoHumz 000.0 000.0 000.H 000.0 0 00.0 0 00.5 0>0H musumz 000.0 000.0 005.0 000.0 0 00.0 5 00.5 acosumm umccH «00.0 0N0.0 000.0 0H0.0 m 50.0 0 5H.5 mmmchmmm 050.0 000.0 000.0 0H0.0 5 00.5 0 00.5 Eocmmnm N5H.0 v00.H 000.0 «00.0 H 00.0 0 00.0 huHusomm NHHEom 0N0.0 00v.0 NNN.0 000.H 0 0H.5 NH 00.0H mUHHmscm 55N.0 00H.H 000.H 000.0 0H 00.0H vH 00.0H wusmmm mo oHuoz 4 00N.0 NNv.H HN0.0 00N.0 HH 0N.0 HH 5H.0H commm mo oHuoz 4 00H.0 555.H 05N.0 0HN.H v 50.0 H 00.0 ucmsanHQEoood wo omcmm d 00H.0 000.N 00v.0 000.0 0H 0H.NH 0H 00.0 mmHH mcHuHoxm ad 0H0.0 00N.0 000.H 000.0 5H 00.0H 5H 5H.0H mmHH oHnmuuomEoo d mmsHm> HmcHsume a m m Nx xcmm CMHomz xcmm smHtmz mHHHmzumemsus umma CMHomz coHDMOHHmmd woumHmEou coHMMOHHmmd ouonEoocH osHm> .mEHom :oHumoHHmmm omuonEoo nuHs mucmoHHmmm 050 can mEn00 cpomoHHmmm ouonEoocH :uH3 mocMOHHmmm map 00 wmcchmu osHm> onBII.0H mqmde 78 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 005.0 000.0 005.0 N00.0 000.0 H00.0 500.0 0N5.0 000.0 00H.0 000.0 00H.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 00N.0 000.0 0HH.0 500.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 HN0.0 000.0 0NH.0 N00.0 050.N 005.0 N05.H NOH.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 0H0.0 05H.0 0H0.0 005.0 0H0.0 H50.0 0H0.0 0N0.0 000.0 000.0 000.H 00H.0 000.0 0NN.0 000.H 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 0H0.H 000.0 050.0 50N.0 00H.0 0H0.0 050.0 0H0.0 000.0 000.0 50H.N 0N0.0 000.H H00.0 000.0 H0 HN. 50. 00.0 00.0 05.0H 00.0H 0N.0 00.0H 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 05.0H 00.0H 00.0 05.0H 00.HH 05.5 5H.5 00.0 00 0H HN. HN. 00.0 00.0 00.0H 00.0H 00.0H 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0H 00.0 00.0 5H.0H 00.0 00.0H m0.NH 5H.0 00.5 00.0 n z moch> HmpcmsduumcH mmsHm> HmcHshoa ucoHOHmmoou mocmcnoocoo meHOHHGOUImem oHnHmcommmm ouHHom ucmHomno 0CH>0H HMUHmoH HmsuomHHoucH unmocomoocH 0>HumchoEH ummcom HomaHmm 0GH>H0Hom msommmusou cmmHU Homnmmcu mHnmmmo ooocHsomoum mDOHanE< mosHm> HmucoEdMumcH 79 Homogeneity of value systems within each group is expressed by concordance coefficient scores of from .21 to .27 (see Table 10) for the two groups. It was concluded that there is a high degree of similarity of value systems between the two groups and Null Hypothesis Ia was accepted. HOIb: there is no difference between the median value system scores of the applicants who were considered for the program and the candidates who were selected to participate in the interview program. The values of the random sample of applicants considered for the program were compared with the returns of the total group invited for the interview program. The Value Survey responses of the two groups yielded five values, wisdom, helpful, honest, true friendship, and courageous, that had median scores that differed at the .05 level of significance,and one value, obedient, that differed at the .01 level of significance. Honest, helpful, and cou- rageous were ranked higher by the candidates invited for the interviews, and obedient, true friendship, and wisdom were ranked higher by the general applicants to the program. Null Hypothesis Ib was rejected and the following hypothe- sis accepted: H there is a difference in the median value AIb system scores of the applicants who had completed appli- cation forms and were considered for the internship and the applicants invited to participate in the interview and screening process. Twelve of the thirty-six values had a 80 correlation of 1.000 and eight additional values had a level of significance of .75 or greater. Consult Table 11 for the value distributions for the two groups. HOIc: there is no difference between the median value system scores of the candidates not selected for the internship program and the median value system scores of the candidates selected for the program. From the total re- sponses to the Value Survey, the median test and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used to ascertain the degree of similarity between the two groups, and an analysis of the results revealed no median scores at or below the .05 level of significance. Thus, Null Hypothesis Ic was accepted. It should be noted that seven of the values had a 1.000 correlation and fifteen additional values had a .75 level of significance or greater. Only six values had median scores below the .50 level of significance. Table 12 lists the value rankings, median scores, chi square, and level of significance for each of the thirty-six values for the participants of the interview program. Null Hypothesis II The two following hypotheses were explored to de- terndne if there is any similarity between the value systems Of the two groups invited to participate in the interview Program.and the members of the interview teams. H : there is no difference between the median 02a value system scores of the applicants not selected for the 81 ammo.o 0o0.0 omo.o ~00.~ a m~.n a 0H.m soomHz aseo.o oma.m Hmo.o 0~o.m HH 0m.oH OH 0H.m stmoauHum onus evm.o mom.o HHm.o 000.o 0H oo.0H 0H 00.0H eoHuHemouom HMHoom pmm.o maa.o mmm.o ooo.o m no.0 m -.0 nooamomImHom 0o~.o ~00.H 000.0 00H.o NH oo.HH NH 0H.OH coHum>Hmm onm.o mmm.o ooo.H oom.o 0H sm.0H 0H m~.mH ousmmmHm 0mm.o s-.o HHm.o mmo.o pH 00.0H 0H 00.0H moHusoom HmcoHumz emv.o HHO.o 000.H aoo.o m no.0 0 o0.0 0>oH 005002 00m.o ooo.o Hoe.o m00.o 0 mm.m m 00.0 seasons umceH 0-.o 000.H mom.o 00o.H a 05.0 a sm.0 mmmeHaomm HmH.o mmm.m Hm~.o HOH.H m OH.0 a mm.h sooooum esm.o on.o ems.o emo.o m sH.0 H 00.0 stuoomm sHHsmm vo0.o m0~.o ooo.H use.H 0 00.0 0 0H.» mbHHmoom osH.o 000.H 000.H 00H.0 0H om.MH 0H 00.0H 009000 no oHuos 0 000.0 H00.0 ooo.H moo.o OH 00.0 HH mm.m momma mo oHnoz a 00o.o Hmm.m 000.0 m~0.o m om.0 0 50.0 nemesmHHaeoooa mo mmeom a Hm~.o 0H0.H ooo.H 000.0 MH H0.HH mH 0H.NH mmHH meHuHoxm ea mmo.o 50H.o coo.H moo.o 0H om.0H pH 00.0H mMHH 0H000000200 a mmDHw> HMCHEHTB a m a «x xemm cmHooz xemm smHooz mmsHm> pmuH>cH wmuoUHmcou mHHHmsImemaux ohms eMHomz moomoHocmo mnemoHHaam .Emumoum 30H>Hoch 0:0 cH mummHOHunmm ou ponomHmm moumoncmo may 0cm Emumoua QHcmcumucH 0:0 H00 UmeCHmcoo muCMOHHmmm mnu Mo mmcchmu msHm> mnBII.HH mqmde 82 .mOGMOHMHcmHm mo Hm>oH H0. may no ucmumMMHo mmsHu> n .mocmoHMHcmHm mo Hm>0H 00. mnu um ucmHmMMHt mmsHm>m oms.o sHm.o omm.o ooo.o nH~0.o Hem.o mom.o 000.0 mmo.o moo.o ammo.o mmm.o msHo.o 050.0 Ham.o emm.o smm.o m0~.o 0HH.0 NNO.H 0H0.0 000.5 H00.0 000.0 0N0.0 0H0.0 0NN.0 H00.0 H05.0 50H.0 00N.0 05H.0 005.0 050.0 N00.0 500.H 000.0 000.0 000.H 000.0 000.H 000.0 H50.0 055.0 000.H 0000.0 M5N0.0 5N0.0 000.0 000.0 05N.0 000.0 005.0 000.H 000.0 500.0 000.0 505.5 H00.0 000.0 H00.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 500.0 000.0 000.0 05H.H H00.0 000.0 000.0 05 0N. 00. 5H.0 H5.0 00.0H 00.0H 0H.0 00.0H 0N.0H 0N.0 00.0 05.N 00.5 05.0 HN.5 00.0H 00.0H 00.5 00.5 00.0 H0 HN. 5N. 00.0 00.0 05.0H 00.0H 0N.0 00.0H 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 05.0H 00.0H 00.0 05.0H 00.HH 05.5 5H.5 00.0 R Z mmsHm> HmucmsdusmcH mosHm> HmcHEHma ucmHOHmmmoo mocmwnoocoo omHHouucOUIMHmm oHnHmcommom ouHHom ucoHcmno 0cH>0H HMOHmoH HmsuowHHmpsH ucmvcmmmtcH 0>HumchmEH ummcom HomaHom 0cH>H0Hom msommmnsoo smmHU stnwmzu mHnmmmo UmvcHEomoum mSOHuHQE¢ mosHm> HmucmesuumcH 83 0N0.0 500.0 000.H 000.0 0 00.0 5 00.5 EopmHz H50.0 5N0.0 005.0 050.0 HH 05.0H NH 00.HH mHnmpcoHum mane 000.0 000.0 000.H 000.0 0H 00.0H 0H 00.0H GOHchmooom HcHoom 050.0 05H.0 0N0.0 00N.0 0 05.0 0 00.0 poommmmIMHmm 000.0 HN5.N 000.0 000.0 0H 00.0H 0H 00.0 coHum>Hmm 50N.0 00H.H 000.0 000.0 5H 00.0H 5H 0H.0H whammon 005.0 000.0 000.H H00.0 0H 00.0H 0H 05.0H wuHusomm HmcoHumz H00.0 0H0.0 0N0.0 000.0 0 00.0 0 00.0 o>oq mucus: 00N.0 000.H H00.0 500.0 0 5H.0 0 00.5 0GOEHmm HmccH 0N0.0 000.0 0N0.0 00N.0 5 00.5 HH 00.0 mmochQmm 500.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 0 00.0 N 00.0 Eooomum 500.0 N00.0 0N0.0 000.0 N 00.0 H 0H.0 muHHsoom mHHEmm H00.0 000.0 050.0 55H.0 0 00.0 0 0N.0 muHHmsvm 000.0 00H.0 000.0 000.0 0H 00.0H 0H 00.0H ausmmm mo 0HH03_< 000.0 000.0 000.0 500.0 0H 5H.0 0 0H.0 00000 00 UHHOB d 00H.0 NHH.N 00N.0 N00.H H 05.0 0 00.0 pcmEEmHHmEoood mo omcwm 0 000.0 0N0.0 055.0 000.0 NH 50.HH 0H 00.HH mMHH 0GHuHoxm c4 0N0.0 000.0 0H0.0 000.0 0H 00.0H 0H 00.0H mMHH mHnmuuowEoo d mmsHm> HmcHEHmB a m m Nx xcmm cmHUoz xcmm cmemz mosHm> wouomHmm oouoonm uoz mHHHszmemsum umos cmemz mmumochmU mmumvHocmo .Emumoum chmcumucH mnu Mom wouomHmm moumewcoo 0:0 000 wmuomHom no: mmumchcmo may 00 mmcchmu osHm> mnBII.NH mHmda 84 000.0 000.0 NOH.0 050.0 0N5.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 050.0 000.0 500.0 NN0.0 HH0.0 N00.0 050.0 000.0 500.0 000.0 00H.0 000.0 NOH.N 000.0 0NH.0 000.0 5H0.0 0H0.0 H00.0 000.0 0N0.0 000.0 H00.0 500.H 055.0 0N0.0 N00.0 0H0.0 0N0.0 000.0 0H0.0 00N.0 000.0 050.0 000.H 0N0.0 000.0 000.H 000.0 0H0.0 000.H 000.0 00H.0 00H.0 000.H 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 00N.H 000.0 H00.0 000.0 00N.0 NNN.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 H00.H 050.N 000.0 000.0 00 5N. 00. 00.0 00.0 5H.0H 00.5H 00.HH 00.0H 5H.0H 00.5 00.5 00.N 00.5 00.0 0N.5 00.0H 00.0H 00.0 00.5 0N.0 00 0H 0H 0H 0H NH 0H 5H 0H HH 0N. 00. 00.0 05.0 05.0H 00.0H 00.0 5H.0H 00.0H 00.0 00.0H 00.N 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.0H 00.NH 00.0 00.0 00.0 "Z mosHm> HmucossuumcH mosHm> HmcHsums ucoHOHmmmoO mocmnuoocoo omHHouucooIMHmm mHnHmcommmm muHHom uconono 0cH>0H HMOHmoH HmsuomHHmucH ucmocommocH 0>HumchmEH ummcom Hsdeom 0CH>HOHom msommmusou cmeU stummco oHnmmmo omwcHsdmoum msoHuH354 mosHm> HmucmESHUmcH 85 internship program and the members of the interview teams. The value systems, as expressed by the Value Survey, of the total pOpulation of the candidates not selected for the program and of the returns of the interview teams were analyzed by the median test and the Kruskal-Wallis test. The median score of each value ranked by one group was com- pared with the median score of the same value ranked by the second group. Two values, salvation and true friendship, demon- strated a difference at the .05 level when the data were analyzed by the median test. And when analyzed by the Kruskal—Wallis test, four values differentiated the two groups. Salvation differentiated at the .001 level and mature love, honest, and self-controlled differentiated at the .05 level of significance. Therefore, as a result of five values significantly differentiating between the unsuccessful candidates and the members of the interview teams, Null Hypothesis IIa was rejected and the following hypothesis accepted: HAZa: there is a difference between the value systems of the candidates not selected for the internship program and the members of the interviewing teams. Table 13 illustrates the value distributions of the two groups. 86 00N.0 0 00.0 000.0 050.0 05N.0 0HN.H 0 05.0 50N.H 000.H N00.0 5 00.5 soc-H3 HH 05.0H 000.0 000.0 050.0 0HH.0 0H 00.0 000.0 000.0 «000.0 500.0 NH 00.HH aHaaOGOHuh osua 0H 00.0H 00N.0 000.H HON.0 050.H NH 00.NH 000.0 000.0 00N.0 000.H 0H 00.0H coHuHcooooz HdHoom 0 05.0 500.0 N00.0 000.H 000.0 0 00.0 000.0 0N0.0 00H.0 005.H 0 .00.0 uoumnoquHoa 0H 00.0H 6000.0 500.0 00H.0 0H0.N 0H 0N.0H nH00.0 000.9Hn000.0 0N0.0 0H 00.0 coHuo>Hum 5H 00.0H 0000.0 H00.0 N50.0 0NN.0 5H 50.0H NON.0 0H0.H 0NH.0 0H0.N. 5H 0H.0H ousuuon 0H 00.0H 000.0 00N.0 000.H H00.0 0H 05.0H 000.0 000.0 000.H N00.0 0H 05.0H huHusoow HucoHuaz 0 00.0 «HN0.0 N00.0 000.0 000.0 HH 00.0H «000.0 550.0 0NH.0 0H0.N 0 00.0 o>oa ousuc: 0 5H.0 0000.0 NN0.0 H00.0 H50.0 0 0N.0 NH0.0 N50.0 005.0 NOH.0 0 00.5 unasuam Hogan 5 00.5 000.0 H00.0 0N5.0 HNH.0 0 00.0 N50.0 0N0.0 000.H H00.0 HH 00.0 noochmom 0 00.0 H00.0 000.0 000.H 000.0 5 50.0 000.0 0H0.0 000.0 000.0 N 00.0 sovouuh N 00.0 000.0 500.0 0N5.0 HNH.0 N 00.0 005.0 H50.0 000.H 0H0.0 H 0H.0 huHusoum 0HHsuu 0 00.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 0 00.0 N00.0 NN0.0 000.H 000.0 0 0N.0 huHHdsvu 0H 00.0H 000.0 NH5.0 000.H 0NN.0 0H 00.NH 00N.0 000.H 000.0 000.0 0H 00.0H Nansen uo oHuo: ¢ 0H 5H.0 550.0 00H.0 00H.0 000.H 0 00.0 00N.0 00N.H HON.0 000.H 0 0H.0 ounce an vHuoz 4 H 05.0 0N0.0 000.0 0N0.0 000.0 H 00.0 00H.0 0H0.N 05N.0 05H.H 0 00.0 acuszuHHmsooo< uo oncum 4 NH 50.HH HN0.0 H00.0 00N.0 000.H 0H 00.NH 000.0 000.0 0H0.0 HON.0 0H 00.HH ouHH mcHuHoxm :4 0H 00.0H 050.0 0N0.0 000.H 000.0 0H 00.0H 005.0 050.0 000.0 000.0 0H 00.0H uuHH oHnnuuowsoo < ousHu> HccHsuoa xcum coHooz a a a Nx xcum caHMOE a a a Nx xcdm nnHvo: .0000. 00%.. a... ........ Hen”... a... sauna. .nEuuu 30H>uoucH on» No nuchfims 0:» can Edumouq 30H>uoucH on» ou vouH>cH moumqucou on» No nmcchnu osHo> oneII.0H mqm0H H00. any as ucououqu nosHo>n .oocdoHuchHa no Ho>oH 00. may an acououuHo nosHa>d 00 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H NH HH 5H 0H 5N. 00. 00.0 00.0 5H.0H 00.5H 00.HH 00.0H 5H.0H 00.5 00.5 00.N 00.5 00.0 0N.5 00.0H 00.0H 00.0 00.5 00H.0 000.0 0H0.0 H05.0 000.0 0HN.0 HH0.0 0N0.0 050.0 00N.0 500.0 050.0 0H5.0 050.0 HON.0 H00.0 NOH.0 m~.a upmo.o 00N.N NN0.0 HH0.0 050.0 000.0 0N0.H 0H0.0 000.0. H00.0 0N0.H 000.0 055.0 00H.0 50H.0 0HH.H 000.0 00N.N N00.0 000.0 000.0 000.H 000.H 000.H 000.0 000.H 0HN.0 000.H 00N.0 00N.0 0H0.0 050.0 000.0 00H.0 000.0 00N.0 050.0 000.0 005.0 500.0 00N.0 500.0 005.0 0N0.0 000.H 000.0 00N.H H00.H 0H0.H H00.0 500.0 NH5.H 500.0 00N.H 00N.0 00 0H 0H 0H NH 0H 5N. 00. 05.HH d000.0 0N.0 00.0H 00.5H 00.0H 00.0 0N.0H 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0N.0 00.5 00.0H 00.HH 0N.0 00.0 00.HH 0H0.0 00H.0 000.0 H00.0 0H0.0 N00.0 H00.0 000.0 «500.0 000.0 050.0 000.0 050.0 000.0 5NN.0 500.0 5NN.0 NN0.0 000.0 N00.H 000.0 000.0 0N0.0 H00.0 050.0 00H.0 N00.0 000.0 0N0.0 0H5.0 NN0.0 HOH.0 000.H 000.0 000.H 000.0 000.0 0H0.0 0N0.0 000.0 HH0.0 000.H 000.0 005.0 05N.0 000.0 050.0 005.0 N05.0 000.0 000.0 005.0 000.0 N00.0 000.0 000.0 00N.0 000.0 N00.0 N00.0 HHN.0 NOH.0 HON.H 005.N 05H.0 000.0 N00.0 N00.0 000.0 «0H.0 000.0 00 0H 0H 0H 0H NH 0H 5H 0H HH 0N. 00. 00.0 05.0. 05.0H 00.0H 00.0 5H.0H 00.0H 00.0 00.0H 00.N 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.0H 00.NH 00.0 00.0 00.0 noch> Hancoasuuacu noan> HocHsHoa HGOHOHMHOOU oosuouoocou UOHHouu:OUIuHow oHnHacooaoa ouHHom acoHcogo ueHsna HeoHuoH HasuooHHoucH acouconoucn o>HuasHmosH wuocou HsuaHou 0cH>H0u0h uncomouaoo adoHU Hauuoozu oHnudao nooaHevooun nsoHans£ .03 CD Houcolsuuacu 88 HOZb: there is no difference between the median value systems scores of the candidates selected for the internship program and the members of the interview teams. The results of the responses to the Value Survey of each group were compared by the median test and the Kruskal- Wallis test. Careful perusal of the data revealed no significant differences between the two groups when compared by the median test. However, when the data were computed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, six values were found to be different at the .05 level of significance. Inner harmony, mature love, pleasure, salvation, wisdom, and ambitious reflect differences in the internal distribution of value scores as detected by the Kruskal-Wallis test of significance. Based upon the findings that six of the thirty-six values, when tested by the Kruskal-Wallis test, were sig- nificantly different, Null Hypothesis IIb was rejected and the following hypothesis was accepted: HAZb: there is a difference between the value systems of the candidates selected for the program and the members of the selection teams. Table 13 points out the value differences of the two groups. Note that the degree of homogeneity within each group is reflected in the con- cordance coefficient scores. 89 Null Hypothesis III The third set of hypotheses were studied to make a comparison of the value systems of the present interns with those of the newly selected interns and with the candidates not selected to participate in the program. The purpose was to establish continuity between the present and in-coming interns. H there is no difference between the median 03a: value system scores of the candidates not selected for the internship program and the present interns. The Value Survey was administered to the total population of each group and analyzed by the median test and the Kruskal- Wallis test. The data reveal that three values, a sense of accomplishment, salvation and honest were significantly different (at the .05 level) when computed by the median test. When analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis test, four values, a sense of accomplishment, and family security (at the .05 level) and honest and salvation (at the .01 level), were found to be different. A sense of accomplishment was ranked higher and family security and salvation were ranked lower by the interns than the unsuccessful candidates. Al- though honest was ranked first by both groups, the dis- tribution of scores above and below the median was signifi- cant at the .01 level. As a result of this data, Null Hy- pothesis IIIa was rejected and the following hypothesis accepted: 90 HABa: there is a difference between the value systems of the candidates not selected for the internship program and the present interns. Table 14 lists the value rankings of the two groups. Ho3b: there is no difference between the median value system scores of the candidates selected to partici- pate in the internship program and the present interns. This hypothesis, similar to the preceding hypothesis, com- pares the results of the Value Survey by use of the median test and the Kruskal-Wallis test. The data reveal that one terminal value, equality, and one instrumental value, clean, differ at the .05 level of significance when examined by both statistical tests. The results of this analysis were discussed earlier in this chapter. Null Hypothesis IIIb was rejected and the follow- ing hypothesis accepted: H there is a difference between the value A3b: systems of the candidates selected for the internship and the present participants of the program. Table 14 illus- trates the value distributions of both sets of interns. Values That Identifnyott Interns As stated previously in this study, the third pur- pose of this research was to identify the specific values that distinguish the participants of the internship program from other students and practitioners of educational admin- istration. The value system priorities of the present 91 o oo.o Han.o HHo.o ooo.H ooo.o o pH.» Hmo.o nno.o ooo.H ooo.o p on.» Ion-H: HH oo.oH Hon.o oso.H oom.o Hoc.o HH oo.o mon.o Hoo.o ooo.o HHo.o «H oo.HH nHa-oaoHuu onus 0H oo.oH Hoo.o HoH.o ooo.H Hoo.o 0H .no.mH ooo.o moH.o ooo.H ooo.o 0H oo.HH aoHuHaooooc HuHooa n no.0 HHo.o ooo.o mmo.o oo~.o 0 HH.. oH..o ooo.o oo~.o qm~.H n om.m boom-oquHoo HH oo.nH HHH.o omm.H Hoo.o moe.o pH oH.mH booo.o ooo.o «Hoo.o an.o oH oo.o aoHuu>Hao HH om.vH NHH.o ooo.o omo.o NHH.o 0H oo.oH ~oo.o oHo.o ooo.o ~oo.o oH vH.mH one-aon oH oo.mH oo..o oam.o ooo.o ooo.o oH om.mH Ho~.o HHo.H ooo.o HNH.o oH mo.oH HuHuaoom HaaoHuuz o om.o Hop.o oNH.o ooo.H mmo.o o om.o Hao.o Hmo.o «Ho.o omo.o o oo.o o>oH cacao: o pH.» Hoo.o ooo.o Hoo.o mo~.o o om.o ooH.o noo.H Hao.o Hmo.o o oo.o saunas: HoaaH o Ho.o ~on.o Hoo.o Hmm.o aoo.o HH oo.oH ooo.o an.o ooo.o HH~.o HH om.o uuoaHddun m om.o ooo.o ooo.o oo~.o ooH.H . Ho.o HNH.o Hmo.H ooo.o ooo.o H om.m cocoons H om.o ~oo.o ooo.m oHo.o oo~.o m om.m uHmo.o oHo.n HH~.o won.H H oH.o HuHuaooo HHHauu o oo.o aooo.o oo~.v aooo.o ma~.v H vv.n oHH.o ooo.~ HHH.o voo.~ m m~.o NHHHosun .H om.nH ooo.o ooo.o oHo.o mmo.o HH Ho.mH ooo.o oHo.o Hoo.o ono.o .H om.nH Hanson Ho oHuoz 4 oH oH.o Hho.o oeH.o ooo.H Hoo.o o om.o ooo.o ooH.o ooo.o ooo.o a oH.o cocoa an oHuo: 4 H ma.n mom.o oo~.o ooo.o Hoo.o H oo.~ cono.o ooo.m aHHo.o ooH.H o oo.m uaosraHHdeoooa «o cocoa s «H oo.HH ooo.o oo~.o ooH.o oom.~ oH oo.o Hom.o ooo.o 05H.o Hmo.H nH om.HH «HHH ocHuHouu a4 oH om.vH ooo.o oo~.o oHo.o Hmo.o oH oo.mH .oom.o Ho~.o ooo.H ooo.o oH om.mH ouHH poauuouaoo a nosHab HocHqua room no: a m a «x scam no: a m a «x Haas no: ocHa> .000“... an”. .2... ”fie... he...» .2... shah. .ocuoucH vacuoun onu can fiduooum 30H>HoucH on» o» couH>cH nouochcuu ecu no nmcchdu osHu> onaII.0H mqmda .ru-r’ ’75,...D u r . ,I. HT! IV E”. £92 .oocuoHuHcmHu uo Ho>oH H0. .oocaoHuHcmHa no Ho>oH 00. on» an acououch mosHu> 0:» an ucouumuHc uosHu>d n 00 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H NH HH 5H 0H 5N. 00. 00.0 00.0 5H.0H 00.5H 00.HH 00.0H 5H.0H 00.5 00.5 00.N 00.5 00.0 0N.5 000.0 H00.0 000.0 500.0 005.0 00H.0 0H5.0 000.0 N00.0 500.0 000.0 050.0 H00.0 00.0H n0H0.0 00.0H 00.0 00.5 0N.0 HN0.0 055.0 00N.0 000.0 H00.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 00H.0 000.H 00H.0 N00.N 000.0 500.0 05H.0 0N0.0 HON.0 050.0 0H0.0 000.0 000.H 0NN.0 500.0 000.H 000.0 500.0 000.0 H00.0 500.0 00N.0 H00.0 000.0 H50.0 000.0 H50.0 00N0.0 HON.0 H50.0 500.0 000.H N00.0 N00.0 000.0 NOH.0 000.0 050.0 NOH.0 00N.H 050.0 000.0 H00.0 000.0 H00.0 N00.0 0H0.H H00.0 005.0 N00.0 00 0H 0H NH 0H 0H 5H 0H HH H0. 00. 00.0 00.0 N5.0H 00.5H 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 5H.0 0N.0 0N.0 00.0H 0N.0 00.0H 00.NH 00.0 0N.0 5H.0 000.0 000.0 050.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 000.0 nmoo.o 000.0 0N0.0 00N.0 5H0.0 000.0 HHH.o 000.0 000.0 0N0.0 500.0 HHH.o. 050.0 H00.0 000.0 00N.0 000.N 00N.0 005.5 0H0.0 000.0 550.H 000.0 5N0.0 000.N 00H.0 N00.0 HN0.0 N00.0 0N0.0 H00.0 000.0 000.H 000.0 NHH.0 000.H noHo.o 5N0.0 HN0.0 000.0 000.0 000.H 00N.0 000.H 000.H H00.0 000.0 0H0.0 00N.0 000.0 000.0 00H.0 0H0.N 000.0 000.0 00N.0 H00.0 0N0.0 050.0 H00.0 00N.H 000.0 000.0 00 0H 0H 0H 0H NH 0H 5H 0H HH 0N. 00. 00.0 05.0 05.0H 00.0H 00.0 5H.0H 00.0H 00.0 00.0H 00.N 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.0H 00.NH 00.0 00.0 00.0 nosHa> Haucossuuucu noan> HocHsuoa uaoHoHuuooo oocovuoosou coHHouucOOIwHum mHnHucomuux ouHHOA unuHcono ocHsoa HouHooH HanuooHHoucn unoccodoucu 0>HuachnsH yucca: HauaHos 0cH>H0u0h uncomcusou cuoHU chuuuno anomuu coccHsccoun asoHans¢ noswup HuucmssuuucH 93 interns and the newly selected participants of the program were compared with the value system priorities of the three sets of applicants described as having incomplete appli- cation forms, completed application forms, and not being selected during the interview procedure. These three groups will be referred to as the general education population. The value expressions of the two groups were compared by using the median test and the Kruskal-Wallis test as ana- lytic tools. It was found that the median test differentiated the interns from the other educators in three values in varying degrees. The terminal value, salvation, was ranked fif- teenth by the interns and twelfth by the other group; the median scores were 14.00 and 10.42, respectively. This yielded a .047 level of significance at one degree of free- dom. Obedient, an instrumental value, represents the second value that the median test distinguishes the interns from the others in the study. It was ranked eighteenth by both groups but had median scores of 17.12 and 15.77 for each respective group and was different at the .01 level of sig- nificance. Obedience, to a greater degree than salvation, differentiates between the two groups. The third and most differentiating value was found to be a sense of accomplish- ment. The median test score for the interns was 3.28 and 5.92 was the score for the general education population, with the interns ranking the value first and the general 94 educators ranking it third. The chi square (X2) was 9.020 and the difference was significant at the .002 level. When the data were subjected to the Kruskal-Wallis test of Significance, six values, a sense of accomplishment, obedient, salvation, (all mentioned previously), freedom, capable, and wisdom were found to differentiate significantly the interns from the general education population. As in the previous results, a pattern evolved with these data. A sense of accomplishment was Significant at the .001 level; obedient at the .003 level; salvation at the .005 level; and freedom, capable, and wisdom at the .05 level of significance. Tables 15 and 16 offer a comparison of the value systems of the Mott Interns and the general education population. Thus, it is concluded that the six values, in vary- ing degrees, differentiate the Mott Interns from the general education population. Freedom, capable, and wisdom are the values that differentiate on the first level. The second level of discrimination is represented by obedient and salvation. The most distinguishing value is a sense of accomplishment. Freedom, capable, and a sense of accomplish- ment were rated higher by the interns and obedient, wisdom, and salvation were ranked higher by the representatives of the education profession. Table 17 illustrates the sig- nificant value differences between the interns and the edu— cators. The homogeneity of the value systems within each group are compared by the use of the coefficient of 95 .AmocsHHs> mo mHthscs msBIOBuV puma cchm: .mocsHHs> mo mHmmHscs ms3Imco mHHHsBIstmcHM n s chmsmHm muHHcomm HscoHusz 0H mMHH mHnsuHowEou 4 mucmsmHm 5H muHHcomm HscoHusz mMHH mHnspHowEoo 4 0H coHuHcmoomm HsHoom sAH0.v GOHus>Hsm 0H mucsmm mo UHHOB 4 coHuHcmoomm HsHoom 0H omHH ocHuHoxm :4 005000 «0 anos « 0H sAH0.v coHus>Hsm mMHH 0cHuHoxm :4 NH chmccmHHm mcHB QHSmccmHHm mcHB HH mosmm mo UHHOB 4 mmmchmsm 0H mmmchmsm mosmm mo cHHoz 4 0 m>OH mucus: m>0H mucus: 0 NuHHmsom mimo.o eosmHz a maoEHsm HmccH nA00.v 800mmum 0 nA00.v Eocmmum macausm HmccH 0 mimo.c soomHs NHHHssom 0 sAH00.V ucmscmHHmEooo4 mo mmcmm 4 wuHHcomm mHHEsm 0 sommmmmIMHmm commmmmIMHmm N auHHcomm mHHEsm sHH00.V usmEcmHHmEooo4 mo mmcmm 4 H mmcHs> coHuchmom coHusoccm HsHmcmo mmcHs> cumucH nuo: xcsm .coHuchmom coHusoccm Hsumcmm mcu ccs mcnmucH who: mcp mo mmcHs> HscHEHmp mcu mo COmHHsQEoo 4II.0H mqm49 96 .HmocsHHs> mo mHmmHscs mssIo3uV umma cchm: .mocsHHs> mo mHmmHscs >s3Imco mHHHsZIstmcHM n s nHHo.c 0:0Hsono nHHo.c uc0Hsono 0H csmHu csmHU 5H muHHom muHHom 0H chummcu Hcmummno 0H HsOHmoH HsonoH 0H 0cH>H0Hom 0cH>0H 0H m>HpscH0sEH 0cH>H0Hom NH HscuomHHmucH HscuomHHmucH HH 0cH>0H mcoHpHnE4 0H mcoHanE4 cmHHouucooIMHmm 0 HcmmHmm m>HuscH0sEH 0 omHHouncooIMHom HsooHom o ucmccmmmccH mcommsncou 0 mcom0sucoo ucmccmmmcsH 0 almo.o 0Hnnomo ooocHEomoum H ooocHsomoum mimo.c mHnmamo m mHnHmcommmm mHnHmcommmm N ummcom ummcom H mmcHs> COHpchmom coHusoccm Hsnmcmo mmcHs> cumucH uuo: xcsm .coHuchmom coHusoccm Hsnmcmm map was mcumucH puo: man 00 wmcHs> HsucmscnumcH may mo comHHsQEoo 4II.0H mqm4e 97 ruins... . «MN... . mmcHs> HsucmscuumcH .mTSHM> HMGHEHQBM o0o.o 0HN.H 02 e NN.o s 00.0 agoomHz ooo.o 000.0 02 a 0N.s N oN.0 annmomo oao.o NHo.o 02 0 00.0 0 no.0 aeoommum "Hm>mH UHHna 0oo.o ooo.o ooo.o HN0.0 NH N0.oH 0H oo.HH acoHnm>Hmm moo.o ooo.o oHo.o ooo.o 0H 00.0H 0H NH.oH anamHomno "Hm>mH tcoomm Hoo.o Nmo.oH Noo.o oNo.o N No.0 H 0N.0 muaoesmHHo IEOOOd m0 mmfimm ¢ "Hm>mH umHHm a m a Nx scam so: scam so: II mmcHs> mHOflMOSGm mEHOUGH mHHHmsIHmsmsss ammo aaHoos Hnsmsoo boos Hsnmcmm map was .coHuchmom coHpsoccm mfihmfifiH “#02 ®£# G003U®Q mMOCmHTMMflU mcHs> ucsoHMHcmHmII.5H mqm49 98 concordance scores. The terminal value systems of the interns had a concordance coefficient of 0.36, as compared with 0.25 for the educators; the instrumental value systems had 0.28 and 0.23 as respective scores. The difference in size of the two groups necessitated the use of a correc- tional factor applied to the scores. The resultant con- cordance coefficients were: intern terminal value systems-- 0.38; educator terminal value systems--0.24; and the intern instrumental value systems--0.26; educator instrumental value systems--0.22, indicating that the value systems "within" the general educator group were much more homo- genous than the value systems "within" the two intern groups. The formula for the median test,14 utilizing the chi square two-way analysis of variance, used in the sta- tistical analysis of the data is as follows: EA + c] [Bl D (A,C) = + Bl 111 + n2 A + B and the formula for the test of significance using the chi square15 is as follows: l4Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics: for the Behavioral Sciences (New York, N. Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956), p. 111. 15Deobold B. Van Dalen, Understanding Educational Research (New York, N. Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1962), p. 130. r3}; Ill Ill-Ill ISL— 99 m 2 m z z n: socmHz Q Q Q ME A m2 no: macmccmflnm mane coHuHcmoomm Hafioom nommmmmlmamm 2 no a H z o z coHum>Hmm no Q n ma DA m m mHSmmmHm Q wpflusomm Hmcoflumz 22 Q2 2 m>oq ousumz m2 m n wcoaumm HmccH n mmmcflmmmm am am Eocmmum am am hpflusomm kHHEmm m: cm huflamswm spammm mo cHuoz 4 mommm pm UHNOB 4 9mm ham nmm m mm ucmEcmHHmEooo4 mo mmcmm 4 Q owed mcflufloxm c4 owed manmuHOMEOU 4 mmDHm> HmcHEHmB. l s l s t s w s l s 5.0 s.d d s e s a r a n n n e m a e e e e e e n t n r o t r e r .1 a t.t t.t t.t t o e o e.t o e s e v e o a a c a c e.1 1.1 n a T.t e+t rlT T.d _d e d e l.t oft e c n r n e .1 .1.1 .111 D.a m a G u .1 Pcl t .d .d e d e m c o c mmSHm> d n n n": nnb c.1 c.1 E I a a a ncl n11 C C C.t P I P o p. P N A A .hosum menu cw mucmccommmu one now UCDOM mmocmHmMMHU moam> ucmoHMHcmflm mo coflusnfluumflc amen can .EDHUmE .30H map mo wumEESm 4|I.ma mqm4e 100 “‘1 i. 112'... .ummu mfiaamzlamxmsux 9:» >3 cmcfleumump mm3 .ummu cmapma on» an pmcflaumump mos mHIMH Umumwuo «Hun cmuocuo m IH cmumcno .nmflm u m “Edficwz u z “309 u A mocwuwMHcmwmn cosmoflmwcmwmm xamm "aon xcmm ”Edwpmz xcmm "30A ”muoz vmaaouucOUImamm manflmcommmm muflaom ucmwcmno mcH>oq HMUfimOA HmsuomaamucH ucmpcmmmccH 0>HumcflmmEH ummcom HamaHmm UGfl>flmHom msommwusou cmmao Homummco manmmmu coccwecmoum msoflufinE4 mmsam> HmucmssuumcH 101 2_(o-E)2 The Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance,18 also used in the statistical analysis of the data, has the following formula: k .2 “mail 32R Jj— 3(N+1) In the comparison of homogeneity of value systems between groups, the following coefficient of concordance17 formula was used: 2 w= 120 _ m2 (N) (N2 - 1) Differences in group sizes necessitated the use of the following correction factor18 in computing the concordance coefficient: r _ kW - l sav k - l l6Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics: for the Be- havioral Sciences, p. 185. 17N. M. Downie and R. W. Heath, Basic Statistical Methods (2nd ed.: New York, N. Y.: Harper and Row, Pub- lishers, 1965), p. 210. 18Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics, p. 232. 102 The data were programmed and computed on the CDC 3600 computer at Michigan State University. The Valuetest19 computer program was used in the analysis of the data. Summary In this chapter, the results of the analysis of data were presented in answer to the three purposes of this study. Information regarding the value systems of the Mott Interns was compiled in order to arrive at a descriptive statement of their values and value systems. Three general hypotheses were postulated to determine the role value systems play in the screening and selection of individuals for partici- pation in the internship program. The third purpose was to identify, if possible, the specific values that dis- tinguish the participants of this unique program in edu— caational leadership from other members of the education profession. It was found that the present participants of the Enxxfiram and the newly selected interns see themselves as being; honest, responsible, capable, broadminded, and inde- pendeqzt. They placed high priority on achieving such goals as having a sense of accomplishment, self-respect, and familg; security. They did not interpret such values as Obedience, cleanliness, cheerfulness, and politeness as l9 Value-test, Hollen, Program Description and User's Manual for: 103 having high priority in relation to the other instrumental values. Low emphasis was expressed for the values national security, pleasure, and a comfortable life as goals or end products of behavior. A high degree of homogeneity was found within the value system expressions of the two groups, with the present interns being slightly less homogenous than the new interns. Two values, equality and clean, indicated the major differences in value systems of the present interns and the candidates selected for the following year. The role of values and value systems in the se- lection of candidates is summarized by stating each hypothe- sis in question and answer form. Question 1a.--Is there a difference in the values of the applicants to the internship program who had incomplete application forms and, thereby, were not considered for the program and the applicants who had completed application forms and were considered in the initial screening procedure? The data revealed that none of the thirty-six values ranked by the two groups were different at the .05 level of significance. In addition, it was found that nineteen values had a correlation of .75 or above and eight of these values were at the 1.000 level of significance. It was concluded that a high degree of similarity existed between the values of the two groups of applicants to the program. Question lb.--Is there a difference in the value systems of the applicants in the initial screening and the 104 value systems of the candidates invited to participate in the interview program? An analysis of the data revealed that six values, wisdom, helpful, honest, true friendship, and courageous, at the .05 level, and obedient, at the .01 level of signifi- cance, differentiated the candidates invited for the inter- views from the general applicants to the program. The hy- pothesis was rejected and it was concluded that there was a difference between the applicants at the second level of screening. Question lc.--Is there a difference between the value systems of the candidates not selected for the intern- ship program and the value systems of the candidates se- lected for the program? No significant differences were found between the value systems of the two groups of candidates, Also, twenty-two of the thirty-six values had median scores at or above the .75 level of significance--a high indication of value system similarity. Thus, no differences in median value system scores, as expressed by the Value Survey, were found at the first level of screening--that being whether the applicant had all the proper forms and letters in order by the application deadline. A difference in four of the thirty-six values was found at the second level of screening. Helpful and 105 honest20 were ranked significantly higher by the candidates and wisdom and obedient were ranked higher by the general applicants to the program. The final screening procedure-— the interview program--resu1ted in no significant differ- ences in the value systems of the candidates selected for the internship and the candidates not selected for the program. Two additional hypotheses were investigated to determine whether any relationships exist between the value systems of the candidates interviewed for the program and the members of the interview teams. Qpestion 2a.--What is the relationship between the value systems of the candidates not selected for the intern- ship program and the members of the interview teams? Perusal of the results of the survey indicates that five values, salvation, self—controlled, mature love, honest,21 ranked higher by the candidates not selected, and true friendship, ranked higher by the members of the inter- view teams, differentiated between the two groups. It was concluded that there was no significant relationship between the value systems of the two groups. 20Although honest was ranked first by both groups, a significant difference was found in the median scores of the two groups. 21Ibid. 106 Question 2b.--What is the relationship between the. value systems of the candidates selected for the internship program and the members of the interview teams? An analysis of the data revealed that inner harmony, mature love, pleasure, salvation, wisdom, and ambitious were significantly different between the two groups. Each value 22 was ranked higher by the candidates, with wisdom being the exception. It was concluded that the value systems of the sun a). inf Mt“ maul-1‘7 successful candidates were not similar to the value systems of the individuals who selected them for the program. A comparison of the value systems of the present interns and the two groups of candidates to the program was made for continuity. Question 3a.--How do the value systems of the candi- dates not selected for the program compare with the value systems of the present interns? The value ratings of these two groups differed sig- nificantly in four values. A sense of accomplishment was ranked higher by the interns and honest,23 family security, and salvation were rated higher by the candidates not selected for the program. No significant relationship was found to exist between the two groups. 22Although honest had the same rank order, the me- dian scores were significantly different between the two groups. 23Pleasure had the same rank order, seventeen, but the median scores were significantly different. 107 Question 3b.--How do the value systems of the successful candidates compare with the value systems of the present participants of the program? A difference in the median scores of the values, equality and clean, was found at the .05 level of signifi- cance. Equality was ranked sixth by the newly selected in- terns and second by the present interns. Although clean was {r ranked seventeenth by both groups, the median scores were 2 significantly different. Therefore it was concluded that g there is a difference, however slight, in the values ex- ; pressed by the two sets of interns. Table 19 summarizes the i—- relative value ranking of the various groups compared in this study. It was established that the Mott Interns differed, in varying degrees, from the general education population in the ranking of values. Six values, wisdom, capable, and freedom at the lowest level, obedient and salvation at the second level, and a sense of accomplishment at the highest level, differentiated between the two groups. The Mott Interns gave higher priority to a sense of accomplishment, freedom24 and being capable than the general education popu- lation. The educators gave higher priority to obedient, 25 24Although freedom was ranked high by the edu- cators, the intern median scores were significantly higher. 25Although obedient was ranked the same by both groups, the educators had a higher median score. 108 m sounds In mdcmpcmwum mane coHuesooomm Hmwoom uncommmlmaom mun an: gum gum coHun>Hmm be no balm n ousnwmam n wuwusomm Hmcowumz nnlm nqlm m>on muons: Aim acosumm HoccH mmmcflmmmm Aim Eocmmnm a but: humusomm aaflemm muHHmscm museum mo cHuoz a mommm um pauoz 4 bmqnm human ucoscmemEooo4 mo modem 4 oMHq mcHuHoxm c4 omeq manmuu0msou 4 Complete mosam> All Interns and Other Educators Selected and Present Interns Not Selected and Present Interns Selected and Interview Teams Not Selected and Interview Teams Not Selected and Selected Complete and Candidates Incomplete and .mcaum ern CH mucopcommmu can mo mmcexcmu moaw> cfl moocouowwflp mcu mo COmHHmmEoo 4|n.mH mqm49 109 .ummu meHmBImemSHM on» an pmcwEHmuop mm3 unconfinecmem n .umou cmwpos on» an pocflshmuoc was oOCMOHMflsmfimM amen u m «30A u A “wuoz nexus QAIE QweHIm MEIR MEIR min pmaaonucouumamm manflmcommmm muHHom usowpmno mcw>oq HMUHmoq HmsuomaamucH ucwpcommch m>eumcmeEH unocom Hsdemm mcw>wmnom msommmusou sumac Homnomcu manmmmo popcwecmonm msoHuwnE4 mooam> HmucmesnumcH 110 salvation, and wisdom than did the participants of the leadership program. A summary of the significant differences in value rankings of the various groups in this study appears in Table 19. Chapter V summarizes the research findings, offers conclusions, postulates questions, and expresses reflections resulting from this study. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, QUESTIONS, AND REFLECTIONS .3... This final chapter is devoted to the summary of the study and a discussion of the conclusions derived from the analysis of the data. Recommendations for further study and ;,« reflections on the findings of this study conclude the research report. Summagy Values serve a number of purposes in our lives. They are standards that help us to compare and judge our- selves with others. Various combinations of values differ- entiate individuals, groups, nations, and cultures. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study has been to answer three questions: 1. What are the values of a specific group of doc- toral students engaged in an internship program in educational leadership? 2. What roles do values play in the screening and selection of applicants for this program? 111 112 3. Are there specific values that identify partici- pants in this program? In order to answer the aforementioned questions, interpretation of the findings of the Value Survey adminis- tered to the participants of the internship program and to the interns selected for the following year resulted in answers for the first and third questions. Three general hypotheses were formulated to explore an answer to the second question. The findings to all three questions are discussed later in this chapter under the heading Con- ‘13!“ 3'“ .'1| ‘4‘ ri_il 0’ ' ‘3‘. “aft-j clusions. Review of the Literature The parameters of the meaning of values had been established in the literature as: I. There is no clear consensus of the meaning of the term values: and the terms beliefs, atti- tudes, and values are often used interchangeably. 2. Beliefs are viewed as personal feelings and attitudes are an organization of several beliefs; values are viewed as basic predictors of behavior and end products of action. 3. Values are arranged into systems and individuals differ in the way they arrange them into a hierarchy of preference. 4. An individual's values have social consequence. 113 The review of the literature in this study clarified the meaning of values in respect to attitudes and belief systems. For the purposes of this study it was concluded that there were two types of values, those depicting end states of existence or terminal values, and those described as "selectors" of behavior or instrumental values. An investigation of several studies of values re- sulted in the following implications for this study: 1. Values are more stable than attitudes. 2. Individuals select other individuals for inter- action who have attitudes and values in line with their own. 3. Our culture does have a value system and it can be empirically studied. 4. There are characteristic value differences in people. 5. Values are an expression of the self--of the good life. 6. Values have reliable meanings. 7. Values express various beliefs. 8. Values serve as criteria for selection and judgment. 9. Changes in values result from certain experi- ences. 10. Variations in value systems are produced by cul- tural, social, and personality factors. -.1' Q‘D‘.\i _. ‘q . ,, 114 The community school program of Flint, Michigan, was discussed in addition to the studies of values and value systems. Concerned about the lack of safe places to play and the lack of health and social services, Charles Stewart Mott and concerned school officials began a unique arrange- ment in developing a program to be known throughout the world. As a result of the success of the program, a demand for personnel trained in the community school concept was met by the initiation of the Mott Leadership Program. Seventy-two interns are selected and trained each year in the program involving the Flint Community Schools, the Mott Foundation, and the seven state universities of Michigan. The leadership program calls for internship experiences in school and community agencies and graduate study leading to a master's or doctorate degree. The Method of Investigation In order to assess the values and value systems of the participants and applicants of the program, the Value Survey was selected as the chief research tool. The instru- ment was mailed to applicants to the program selected at random from the applicants who had incomplete application forms and the applicants who had completed application forms. Each of the candidates selected to come to Flint, Michigan,to interview for the program also responded to the scale. In addition to the applicants to the program, the present interns and the members of the interview teams 115 participated in the survey. Returns of the survey ranged from 86.6 per cent for the applicants with incomplete application forms to 100 per cent for the candidates invited for the interviews. The survey instrument consists of eighteen terminal values and defining phrases and eighteen instrumental values and defining phrases, each set arranged in alphabetical order. The respondent was asked to rank order each set in order of preference, and required approximately fifteen minutes to complete. The Form B, Value Survey reliabilities range from about .10 to the high .90's for the terminal values and from about -.20 to the high .90's for the instru- mental values; and the reliabilities for individual values in the scale average around the .60's. The responses to the Value Survey were subjected to the median test,in which the number of responses above and below the median were compared with the grand median of the two comparisons, and the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance. The median scores were tested for significance of difference. A measure of homogeneity of value systems within each group was made possible by computing and com- paring the concordance coefficient. Conclusions The Values of Mott Interns It was found that the newly selected interns and the present participants of the program place high priority 116 on a sense of accomplishment and self-respect, as goals or end states of existence and low priority on national security, pleasure, a comfortable life, and salvation as goals. The two intern groups value being honest, respon- sible, capable, broadminded, and independent, and place low value on obedience, cleanliness, cheerfulness, and polite- ness as modes of conduct or behavior instrumental in formu- lating judgments, making comparisons, and establishing priorities. Two values indicated a significant difference be- tween the newly chosen interns and the present participants of the program. Although clean was ranked seventeenth by both groups, the significant difference between the median scores points out the differences in central tendencies of the value systems of the two groups. Equality was ranked sixth by the new interns and second by the present interns. When compared with the respective ranking of freedom (see Table 7), the relative placement of each value by each group suggests that the present interns are slightly more con- cerned about the "freedom of others" (equality) than the new interns. As illustrated in Figure 5, three values, a sense of accomplishment, honest, and self-respect, stand out as being ranked higher than the other values. Twenty-three additional values cluster in the upper two-thirds of the distribution, and a gap of three whole spaces separates the 117 lower-ranked values. Two instrumental values, clean and obedient, were ranked noticeably below the eight other lowers ranked values. The interns tended to have a balanced distribution of moral and competence values (see Table 9). The moral values were ranked at the extreme first, second, sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth positions, with six of the seven competence values placed in the upper middle positions. General Hypothesis I The role of values and value systems in the screening and selection of candidates for the internship was investigated to see if a relationship existed at the various levels of the selection procedure. It was found that there were no significant differences in the value systems of applicants at the first level of screening. The value systems of the applicants with incomplete application forms: and thus eliminated from consideration for the internship: were similar to the value systems of the applicants with completed application forms and were, therefore, considered for the internship. The data revealed there were six values, wisdom, helpful, honest, true friendship, obedient, and courageous, that differentiated between groups at the second level of screening. The first five values were significant at the .05 level and obedient differentiated at the .01 level of significance. 118 The third level of screening, the interview process, did not differentiate between groups in relation to values and value systems. The candidates selected for the program did not differ significantly in any of the thirty-six values from the other candidates invited to the interview program. General Hypothesis II The similarity between the value systems of the candidates who participated in the interview procedure and the members of the interview teams was explored. It was found that five values, salvation, true friendship, mature love, honest, and self-controlled, were ranked significantly differently by the candidates not selected for the program and the interview teams. Therefore, it was concluded that the two groups were dissimilar in value systems. In the question of similarity between value systems of candidates selected for the internship and members of the interview teams, it was found that six of the thirty-six values were ranked significantly differently by the two groups. They differed in priorities given to ambitious, inner harmony, mature love, pleasure, salvation, and wisdom. It was concluded that the interview team members were not selecting applicants with values similar to their own. General Hypothesis III An additional comparison was made between the value systems of the candidates selected for the interview program 119 and the present participants of the internship program. Four values were found to differentiate the candidates not selected for the program from the present interns. A sense of accomplishment was ranked significantly higher and family security and salvation were ranked significantly lower by the interns. Although honest was ranked the first by both groups, the median scores were significantly different. The values of the candidates selected for the pro- gram differed in only two values from the values of the present interns. The median scores of equality and clean were found to be significantly higher and lower, respec- tively, for the present participants of the program. It was concluded that differences exist, however slight, in the value systems of the two sets of interns. Values that Identify Mott Interns Careful perusal of the data comparing the two groups of interns, the present and newly selected interns, with the other respondents to the survey, the general representatives of educators, found six values that differentiate in varying degrees between the two groups. Two terminal values, freedom and wisdom, and one instrumental value, capable, differentiated the two groups at the .05 level of signifi- cance. Obedient, an instrumental value, and salvation, a terminal value, were different at the .01 level of signifi- cance. And a sense of accomplishment, a terminal value, distinguished the interns from the other educators at the 120 .00l level of significance. Thus, it can be concluded that of all the thirty-six values in the Value Survey, a sense of accomplishment, first; obedient and salvation, second; and freedom, capable, and wisdom, third--in that order--differ- entiate the Mott Interns from the general population of edu- cators. The interns ranked a sense of accomplishment, freedom,26 and capable significantly higher and obedient,27 salvation, and wisdom significantly lower than the repre- sentatives of the education profession. Questions for Further Study The analysis of data and the general conclusions drawn regarding this survey lead to several additional questions for further study. The first series of questions is concerned with suggestions for study in the general field of education. 1. What changes in values and value systems occur as the result of specific programs in the undergraduate and graduate preparation of educators? 2. How do the values and value systems of educators differ in relation to various demographic data? Do they differentiate between educators of different ages, sex, race, or level and/or area of specialization? 26Although freedom was numerically ranked lower by the interns, the median score was significantly higher. 27Although obedient was ranked eighteenth by both groups, the median scores were significantly different. 121 3. What is the relationship of the values and value systems of various educators who work closely together? What is the relationship of values and value systems of teachers and students; teachers and administrators, or other specialists; administrators and school board members; and educators and the general public? 4. Do specific values or value systems predict or identify persons of meritorious performance in the profession? Several questions have been raised relating di- rectly to the findings of this study. 5. In light of the significant difference and the relative ranking of the value, equality, by the newly selected interns and the present interns, is the difference a result of experience in the unique Mott Leadership Program? Does the internship program change one's values in relation to race, poverty, and other forms of discrimination? 6. Is the lower ranking of the moral values of clean and obedience indicative of a more liberal attitude on the part of interns (as future school administrators) toward "dress codes" and "rules and regulations" in schools? 7. Is the significantly higher ranking of a sense of accomplishment by interns, as contrasted to family security as first choice of the general educators, predictive of greater achievements in educational leadership for which the intern program was designed? 122 8. In light of the findings that there is only a differentiation of value systems at the second level of screening applicants, does the interview process differen- tiate between candidates in factors other than values? a. What is the purpose of the interview procedure? b. Is the interview procedure of each of the four participating universities the same? Is one procedure more successful than the others in discriminating between candi- dates? 9. Are the success and achievement of past interns measurable in relation to values and value systems? Reflections The results of this study were neither predictable nor conclusive. The nature and measurement of values and value systems are such that conclusive generalizations can not be drawn based upon small representative samples. Al- though the returns ranged from 86.6 to 93.3 per cent for the two samples and from 87.3 to 100 per cent for the total pOp- ulations surveyed, the numbers of responses were not large enough to indicate more easily differences in results. That is, the very nature of any survey procedure ensures that differences are much more apparent with larger samples than with smaller samples. It is suggested that if similar studies are undertaken, it is advisable to use samples or populations in large numbers for more reliable results. 123 It is also suggested that the instrument used in this survey be given to assembled respondents. It is very difficult to get large returns through the mail. Respond- ing to the instrument is a stress-producing experience to the conscientious respondent, and the instrument can easily be avoided or placed aside by the individual who receives it ,ee through the mail. ; Caution should be expressed in basing the acceptance or rejection of a hypothesis upon finding one, two, or three ? values out of thirty-six with median scores that are sig- nificantly different. The nature of this test--a test of rank ordering two sets of eighteen independent yet interde— pendent items--necessitates caution in interpretation of results and hesitancy in the absolute acceptance or rejec— tion of specific hypotheses. Rather, the nature of the results calls upon greater interpretation by the reader as well as the research reporter. The findings of this study in relation to the Mott Leadership Program need comment at this time. It has been stated several times by program officials that there is little difference between the various candidates invited for the interview procedure. The findings of this study confirm that point of view; in terms of values, there are no signif- icant differences between the candidates not selected and the candidates selected, as groups. Of the six groups studied, the present interns had the highest coefficient of concordance scores—-.44 for the . ID. V Lu. .5. 124 terminal values and .31 for the instrumental values. These scores indicate less homogeneity of value systems within the group. Is it the purpose of the program to select and train interns to have divergent and different value systems? Or is it the nature of individuals with high priorities for a sense of accomplishment, capableness, broadmindedness, and independence to be diverse in value preferences? A follow-up study of the value changes of the newly selected interns as they participate in the 1970-71 internship program is encouraged. "Greeting his pupils, the master asked: What would you learn of me . . " BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Admore, Sidney J. Introduction to Statistical Analysis and Inference for Psychology and Education. New York, N. Y.: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966. Allport, Gordon W. "Attitudes." A Handbook of Social Psy- chology. Edited by C. Murchison. Worchester, Mass.: Clark University Press, 1935. } . Pattern and Growth in Personality. New York, hr N. Y.: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961. Downie, N. M. and Heath, R. W. Basic Statistical Methods. 2nd ed. New York, N. Y.: Harper and Row, Pub- lishers, 1965. Froman, Lewis A. Peeple and Politics. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962. Handy, Rollo. Value Theory and the Behavioral Sciences. Springfield, 111.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, 1969. Hickey, Howard W. and Van Voorhees, Curtis. The Role of the School in Community Education. Midland, Mich.: Pendell Publishing Company, 1969. Kluckhohn, Clyde. Values and Value-Organization in the Theory of Action: An Exploration in Definition and Classification. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni- versity Press, 1962. Laswell, Harold D. Power and Personality. New York, N. Y.: W. W. Norton Company, Inc., 1948. .Maller, J. B. and Glasser, E. M. Interest-Values Inventory. New York, N. Y.: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1939. Inelby, Ernest O. Administering Community Education. Engle- wood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1955. 125 126 "The Community-Centered School." Foundation for Living. Clarence H. Young and William A. Quinn. New York, N. Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963. Morris, Charles. Varieties of Human Values. Chicago, 111.: The University of Chicago Press, 1956. Mouly, George J. The Science of Educational Research. New York, N. Y.: American Book Company, 1963. Reid, J. R. A Theory of Values. New York, N. Y.: Charles Scribner, and Son, 1938. Rokeach, Milton. Beliefs, Attitudes and Values. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, Inc., Publishers, 1968. . "The Nature of Attitudes." International Encyclo- pedia of the Social Sciences. Vol. 1. New York, N. Y.: The Macmillan Company and the Free Press, 1968. . The Open and Closed Mind. New York, N. Y.: Basic Books, Inc., 1960. Rosenberg, Milton J., and Hovland, Carl I. "Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Components of Attitudes." Attitude Organization and Change. Rosenberg, et al. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1960. Serif, Carolyn W., et al. Attitude and Attitude Change. Philadelphia, Pa.: W. B. Saunders Company, 1965. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics: For the Behavioral Sciences. New York, N. Y.: McGraw- Hill Book Company, 1956. White, Ralph K. Value-Analysis: The Nature and Use of the Method. Glen Garden, N. J.: Libertarian Press, 1951. Williams, Robin M. "The Concept of Values." International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences. Vol. 16. New York, N. Y.: The Macmillan Company, 1968. Young, Clarence H., and Quinn, William A. Foundation for Living. New York, N. Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963. I II? 127 Periodicals Campbell, Clyde M. "Flint's Community School--Its Origin and Operation." The Community School and Its Ad- ministration, I (October, 1962), 3-4. Dukes, William F. "Psychological Studies of Values." Psychological Bulletin, LII (1955), 24-50. Lurie, W. A. "A Study of Spranger's Value-Types by the Method of Factor Analysis." Journal of Social Psy- chology, VIII (1937), 17-37. Rokeach, Milton. "The Nature and Meaning of Dogmatism." Psychological Review, LXI (May, 1954), 194-204. . "Prejudice, Concreteness of Thinking, and Reifi- cation of Thinking." Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, XLVI (January, 1951), 83-91. . "Religious Values and Social Comparison." Review of Religious Research, XI (1969), 24-38. . "The Role of Values in Public Opinion Research." The Public Opinion Quarterly, XXXII (Winter, 1968- 1969), 547-559. . "A Theory of Organization and Change in Value and Attitude Systems." Journal of Social Issues, XXIV (January, 1968), 13-33. . "Value Systems in Religion." Review of Religious Research, XI (1969), 3-23. Rokeach, Milton, and Parker, Seymour. "Values as Social Indicators of Poverty and Race Relations in Americafl The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CCCLXXXVIII (March, 1970), 97-111. Rothney, W. J. M. "Evaluative Attitudes and Academic Success." Journal of Educational Psychology, XXVII (1936), 292-298. Van Dusen, A. C.: Wimberly, 8.: and Mosier, C. I. "Stand- ardization of a Value Inventory." Journal of Edu- cational Psychology, XXX (1939), 53-62. 128 Unpublished Materials and Other Sources Beech, Robert Paul. "Value Systems, Attitudes, and Inter- Bishop, personal Attraction." Unpublished Ph.D. disser- tation, Michigan State University, 1966. George Franklin. "Presidential Preferences and Values in 1968." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1969. Ecker, William B. "A Study of Values and Personality Hobson, Hollen, Homart, Factors as Predictors of Administrative Behavior." :n- Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of _ [ New York at Buffalo, 1968. 4 Stanley Preston. "A Value Analysis of Selected . Elementary Reading Textbooks." Unpublished Ph.D. L dissertation, East Texas State University, 1967. E Charles C. Program Description and User's Manual 3 for: Valuetest. East Lansing, Mich.: Michigan - ir”' State University, 1969. (Mimeographed.) . "The Stability of Values and Value Systems." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State Uni- versity, 1967. Robert J. "The Meaning and Ranking of Values." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State Uni- versity, 1967. Internship Handbook. Flint, Mich.: Mott Leadership Center, n.d. (Mimeographed.) Jackson, Martin Jay. "Expressed Value Preferences for Types Kelsey, Kramer, of Employment Opportunities by Male Elementary Teachers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Uni- versity of California at Berkeley, 1967. Ian Bruce. "A Comparative Study of Students At— tending the University of British Columbia in 1963 as Measured by the Allport—Vernon Test for Personal Values." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Uni- versity of Washington, 1963. James Guy. "Perceptions of Value Orientations and the Interactions Between Administrators and School Boards." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Uni- versity of Wisconsin, 1966. 129 Larson, Raymond 0. "School Board Members' Values, Belief Systems, and Satisfaction with the School Board Role." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Uni- versity of Wisconsin, 1966. McAllister, Bernice Jacklyn Lyons. "Educators and Traditional-Emergent Values." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1967. "Charles Stewart Mott and the Mott Foundation." Internship Handbook. Flint, Mich.: Mott Leadership Center, n.d. (Mimeographed.) -1. Norwalk-Polsky, Zita. "A Preliminary Study of the Belief Systems and Selected Values and Attributes of Faculty and Students in a State College for Teachersfi Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1968. Payne, Isabelle K. "The Relationship Between Attitudes and Values and Selected Background Characteristics." he" Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State Uni- versity, 1961. Price, Alfred John. "A Study of the Interactions of Atti- tudes and Values of Elementary Principals and Their Staffs." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, North- western University, 1961. Raulerson, Lewis Albert. "A Study of the Values of Ph.D. Students in Selected Major Subject Fields." Un- published Ph.D. dissertation, The Florida State University, 1962. Redfern, Patricia. Personal Interview. Flint, Michigan. May 25, 1970. Rokeach, Milton. "The Measurement of Values and Value Systems." Pre-Publication COpy, Michigan State University. . "A Two-Value Model of Politics." Pre-Publication COpy, Michigan State University. ‘Value Survey, Form E. Copyrighted by Milton Rokeach. (Mimeographed.). APPENDICES APPENDIX A VALUE SURVEY AND DATA SHEET -_I.L ‘ " Illa! Ill 5.! VALUE SURVEY FORM E Below is a list of 18 values arranged in alphabetical order. Your task is to arrange them in order of their importance to YOU, as guiding principles in YOUR life. Study the list carefully. Then place a 1 next to the value which is most important for you, place a 2 next to the value which is second most important to you, etc. The value which is least important, relative to the others, should be ranked l8. WOrk slowly and think carefully. If you change your mind, feel free to change your answers. The end result should truly show how you really feel. A Comfortable Life (a prosperous life) An Exciting Life (a stimulating, active life) A Sense of Accomplishment (lasting contribution) A World at Peace (free of war and conflict) A World of Beauty (beauty of nature and the arts) Equality (brotherhood, equal opportunity for all) Family Security (taking care of loved ones) Freedom (independence, free choice) Happiness (contentedness) Inner Harmony (freedom from inner conflict) Mature Love (sexual and spiritual intimacy) National Security (protection from attack) Pleasure (an enjoyable, leisurely life) Salvation (saved, eternal life) Self-Respect (self-esteem) Social Recognition (respect, admiration) True Friendship (close companionship Wisdom (a mature understanding of life) 130 131 Below is a list of another 18 values. Rank these in order of importance in the same way you ranked the first list on the preceding page. Ambitious (hard-working, aspiring) Broadminded (open-minded) Capable (competent, effective) Cheerful (lighthearted, joyful) Clean (neat, tidy) Courageous (standing up for your beliefs) Forgiving (willing to pardon others) Helpful (working for the welfare of others) Honest (sincere, truthful) Imaginative (daring, creative) Independent (self-reliant, self-sufficient) Intellectual (intelligent, reflective) Logical (consistent, rational) Loving (affectionate, tender) Obedient (dutiful, respectful) Polite (courteous, well-mannered) Responsible (dependable, reliable) Self-Controlled (restrained, self-disciplined) (c) 1967 by Milton Rokeach 132 DATA SHEET Age (as of last birthday): University with which you were affiliated for the inter— views: Michigan Wayne State Western Racial or ethnic background: Would you describe your childhood socio-economic back- ground as basically: lower class middle class upper class Total number of years you have had as a professional educator as an education administrator General level of your present position: elementary middle or junior high school high school junior college college district wide adult other Title of your present position (i.e., professor, principal, director, etc.) Salary in this position: below $9,999 15,000-19,999 above 25,000 10,000-14,999 20,000-24,999 Full-time employment (after college) in a field other than education: ‘ Number of years: APPENDIX B LETTERS OF TRANSMITTAL MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY um mmmmeuom «m COLLBGI OI? EDUCATION - DBPMTMINT OP ADHINISTIATION AND HIOHII EDUCATION BMCKSON HALL Dear Colleague: Two weeks ago you had the opportunity to participate in the Mott Intern interview and selection procedure. The enclosed Value Survey is concerned with the rank ordering of specific values by the participants. Your assistance will be greatly appreciated. The survey has been pre-tested and found to require only fifteen or twenty minutes to complete. Please be assured that the information and responses will be held in strict confidence. No references will be made to individual responses in the reporting of the findings. Follow the directions on the inside cover sheet. Do one page completely, then go on to the next. It will be appreciated if you will complete the survey at your earliest convenience and mail it in the enclosed, stamped, pre- addressed envelope by March 20 to: Survey, P. O. Box 4304, Flint, Michigan 49504. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Louis Romano, Ph.D. Harley G. Roth Associate Professor Mott Intern, 1969-70 Administration and Michigan State University Higher Education 133 .L‘:[« [I M- .— n J’_ 134 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ammo-manna «an -..o-.... . - -~——_ u...- COLLIOI OF IDUCATION 0 BRICKSON HALL Dear Colleague in Education: We are engaged in a study to determine the role of values and value systems in the decision-making process. Your name was selected from a list of professionals from across the nation to give us background information on the values and value systems of people actively involved in edu- cation. Your participation in this survey will be greatly appreciated. The enclosed Value Survey is concerned with the rank ordering of specific values. It has been pre-tested and found to require approximately fifteen minutes to complete. Please be assured that the information and responses will be held in strict confidence. Follow the directions on the inside cover. Do one page completely, then go on to the next. Please complete the survey at your earliest convenience and mail it in the enclosed, stamped, pre-addressed envelope by May 15 to: Survey P.O. Box 4304 Flint, Michigan 48504 Thank you for your c00peration. Sincerely, Louis Romano, Ph.D. Harley Roth Associate Professor Graduate Student jf Enclosure I kWh! -. ..—-' "‘11111111111111?S