rzqrg‘.” A STUDY OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF INSTRUCTION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF THE STATE ‘ ”OF MICHIGAN, EXCLUSIVE OF THE UPPER PENINSULA AND THE CITI OF DETROIT By Gerald Raymond Rasmussen AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS Submittedlto Nuchigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of.Education 1962 Page 1 of h ABSTRACT A STUDY OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF INSTRUCTION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN EXCLUSIVE OF THE UPPER PENINSULA AND THE CITY OF DETROIT by Gerald Raymond Rasmussen Statement of the Problem To facilitate instructional improvement, a structure is needed through whiCh it can function. This is a study of that structure with reference to administrative organisation in the public schools of Michigan. The dissertation maintains that the public schools must have an administrative organization that allows for and encourages the promotion of the democratic way of life and the festering of creativity on the part of teachers and pupils. It develops the point of view that the administrative structure that will best satisfy these goals will utilize existing prin- ciples of administrative organization; but these principles will assume unique characteristics in the administrative structure of public education. A The problem in this dissertation was to develop an approach to such an administrative organization and to compare Gerald Raymond Rasmussen. Page 2 of A it with current practices and procedures in the public schools of Michigan. Procedure The procedures used in this study were: 1. To select and briefly describe a set of principles from the literature in the general area of administrative organization. 2. To develop an approach toward administrative or- ganization for the improvement of instruction in the public schools. This approach was based upon selected principles as they should apply to the democratic way of life. 3. To determine the current practices of administra- tive organization in the public schools of Michigan through a questionnaire submitted to a random representative sample of those schools. A. To draw conclusions and make recommendations based upon comparisons between the developed approach and current practices. Major Findings of the Study The major findings of this study were: 1. There are no common administrative organizational procedures in the public schools of Michigan. Gerald Raymond Rasmussen Page 3 of A 2. There is a definite indication of lack of under- standing of principles of administrative organization on the part of superintendents of schools in Michigan. 3. In many cases the superintendents of schools are not the instructional leaders of their school systems. The data collected in this study strongly suggests that building principals are the instructional leaders in most school districtsin.Michigan. a. There is positive evidence of overlapping, and vaguely defined functions of administrators and committees in Michigan public schoOls. 5. Administrative organization is an essential key to establishing an educational system that frees teachers and pupils to become creative, and insures a dynamic, grow- ing institution. If this organization is to be effective, it must be planned in such a way that the superintendent of schools is freed of managerial details so that he will have the time necessary to become the instructional leader of his school system. 6. If the public schools of the United States are to continue to serve the needs of a free society that is dedi- cated to the recognition of the worth and dignity of every individual and is based upon the fundamental premise of constant evaluation and dynamic change, the schools must be so organized as to recognize and promote creativity, Gerald Raymond Rasmussen Page 4 of h individual freedom of thought and inquiry, individual worth and dignity, and individual development to capacity. A firm implication in this study is that these goals can best be realized when the superintendent of schools is an educational leader in his school system, and when the entire administrative organization is based upon a philosophy of freeing teachers and pupils to be creative and productive in an over-all framework of cooperative participation of all employees, lay citizens, and pupils. A STUDY OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF INSTRUCTION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, EXCLUSIVE OF THE UPPER PENINSULA AND THE CITY OF DETROIT By Gerald Raymond Rasmussen A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of Education 1962 PEPE?" l: [7 \a- ' / 9 / _4 v. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many persons have given of their time, counsel, and confidence so that this study might become a reality. It is impossible to thank all of them in print; but certain persons deserve special recognition at this time. I am especially grateful to Dr. Clyde Mt Campbell, chairman of my doctoral committee, for his original sugges- tion for this study. I shall always be indebted to him for his professional counsel and guidance, his perception and stimulation, and his patience with and prompt attention to the problems connected with the study. I should like to express my thanks to Dr. William H. Roe, Dr. Carl R. Gross, and Dr. John Useem, members of my doctoral committee, for their counsel and assistance. Each contributed freely and willingly of his time and offered con- structive suggestions that were very helpful. I am grateful to my mother and father, Mr. and Mrs. Raymond L. Rasmussen, and to my father- and mother-in-law, Mr. and.Mrs. Albert W. Robertson, for their ever-present encouragement and confidence. I should like to express my appreciation to the super- intendents of schools in Michigan who so willingly partici- pated in the study by answering the questionnaire sent to them. Without their COOperation the study could never have been completed. ii 1c.“- . Lastly, I wish to give a special acknowledgement to my wife, Jacqueline; my daughter, Ann; and my sons, Dean and Russell. Without their confidence, understanding, en- couragement, and faith I would not have even attempted to undertake the completion of an advanced degree, let alone the completion of this dissertation and earning its accompany- ing degree. It is with deep appreciation and love that I dedicate this study to them. 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x CHAPTER I. THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The Importance of the Study . . . . . . . . 2 Need for the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Purpose of the Study . . . . .'. . . . . . . 8 Hypotheses . . . . . .E. . . . . . . . . . . 10 Basic Assumptions . .F. . . . . . . . . . . 10 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Methodology of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 11 Organization of the Study . . . . . . . . . 12 II. SCOPE AND METHOD OF INVESTIGATION . . . . . . 15 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 15 .Method of Investigation . . . . . . ._. . . 16 Selected principles . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Collection of data . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 The Sample . . . . . . . . . . ._. . . . . . 19 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 III. SELECTED PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZATION . . . . . 26 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 iv CHAPTER Selected Principles . . . . . Common purpose . . . . . . Unity of direction . . . . Line and staff . . . . . . Span of supervision . . . . Centralization-decentralization . . . . . . Departmentation e e e e e e Infernal organization . . . Summary........... 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 IV. AN APPROACH TOWARD ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP ORGANIZATION FOR IMPROVED INSTRUCTION . . . . IntrOdUCtj-OH e e e e e e e e The Democratic Society . . . General characteristics . . Democratic principles . . . Democracy and Educational Administration . . Uniqueness of education .'. O O O 0 O C O 0 Control, power, and authority . . . . . . . Administrative Organizational Public Education . . . . . Common purpose . . . . . . Unity of direction . . . . Line and staff . . . . . . Span Of supervision . . . . V Principles for PAGE 30 31 32 3h 37 39 #2 #3 #6 L6 47 #8 A9 52 52 5h 58 58 59 61 CHAPTER Selected Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . Common purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unity of direction . . . . . . . . . . . . Line and staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spanofsupervision. . . . . . . . . . . . Centralization-decentralization . . . . . . mmmmmmmn.............. Informal organization . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. AN APPROACH TOWARD ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP ORGANIZATION FOR IMPROVED INSTRUCTION . . . . Introduction .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Democratic Society . . . . . . . . . . . General characteristics . . . . . . . . . . Democratic principles . . . . . . . . . . . Democracy and Educational Administration . . Uniqueness of education .‘. . . . . . . . . Control, power, and authority . . . . . . . Administrative Organizational Principles for Public Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . Common purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unity of direction . . . . . . . . . . . . Line and staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Span of supervision V PAGE 30 31 32 3# 37 39 #2 #3 #6 #6 #7 #8 #9 52 52 5# 58 58 59 61 CHAPTER PAGE Centralization-decentralization . . . . . . 62 Departmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6# Shared responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Informal organization . . . . . . . . . . . 67 The Organizational Scheme .~. . . . . . . . . 68 Formulation of policy . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Adeption of policy . . . . . . . . . . . . 7O Execution of policy . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Review of policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Superintendent of schools . . . . . . . . . 71 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 V. PRESENTATION OF-DATA ‘. . . . . .' . . . . . . . 76 Introduction . . . . .‘. . . . . . . . . . . 76 Analysis of Responses to the Questionnaire . 77 Basic School District Data . . . . . . . . . 79 Administrative Personnel . . . . . . . . . . 81 Teacher-administrator ratio . .'. .'. . . . 81 Teaching administrators . . . . . . . . . . 83 Line and staff administrators . . . . . . . 83 Operational Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Committee involvement . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Committee function . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Involvement of the superintendent . . . . . 98 Duties of administrators . . . . . . . . . 109 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 vi CHAPTER PAGE VI. ANALYSIS OF DATA WITH RESPECT TO SELECTED ISSUES OF PUBLIC SCHOOL AMNISTRATIVE OR- GANIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 The Degree to Which Physical Characteristics of School Districts Have an EffeCt on Ad- ministrative Organization . . . . . . . . 131. Size of district . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13A Geographicarea............. 135 Number of buildings . . . . . . . . . . . 136 The Breadth of Administrative Positions in Public Schools and Its Effect on Adminis— trative Organization . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Number of administrators . . . . . . . . . 137 Kinds of administrative positions . . . . 13? Teaching administrators . . . . . . . . . 1A0 The Degree that Principles Of Line and Staff are Misunderstood and/or Improperly Used and the Effect that this has on Administrative Organization............... 11.1 Number of line and staff positions . . . . l#l Confusion over line and staff definition of administrative positions . . . . . . 1A2 vii CHAPTER The Degree that Span Theory is Misunderstood and/er ImprOPerly Used and the Effect that this has on Administrative Organization The Degree that School Systems are Utilizing Centralized or Decentralized Organiation and the Effect this has on Administrative Organization e e e e e e e e e e e e 0 Committee activity and membership . . . Administrative positions 0 e e e e e e Teak performance e e e 0 0°. 0 e e e e The Degree that School Systems Utilize Depart- mentation and the Kinds of Departmentation Being Practiced and the Effect of These Variables on Administrative Organization . Summary .‘. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII. ANALYSIS OF DATA WITH RESPECT TO A POINT OF TOWARD ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION . . . IntrOduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shared Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . PrimaryFunctions............ Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Administrators ............ Superintendent Leadership . . . . . . . . Summary 0 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 0 viii VIEW PAGE 150 156 156 158 158 160 16# 165 165 166 168 169 171 172 175 CHAPTER VIII. GENERAL FINDINGS O O O O C O O O O O O 0 Introduction 0 e e e e e e e e e e e e Interviewed Versus Mailed Responses Original Purposes of the Questionnaire HypOtheses e e e e e e e 0‘. e e e e 0 Summary 0 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e IX. CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FORFURTHERSTUDI ........ Introduction e e e e e e e e e- Conclusions . . . . . . . . . Theory conclusions . . . . . Data conclusions . . . . . . Recommendations . . . . . . . Suggestions for Further Study BIBLIOGRAPHI.............. APPENDIX................ Letter of Transmittal . . . . . . . . QUGStionnaire e e e e e e e e e e e 0 ix PAGE 177 177 177 180 183 186 187 187 189 190 193 ‘ 197 199 207 215 216 217 TABLE I. II. III. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS Number and Per Cent of School Districts in Total Population, by Stratum . . . . . . . . Number and Per Cent of School Districts Chosen in Each Stratum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Schools Selected for the Questionnaire Sample with Pertinent Selection Data . . . . . . . Analysis by Stratifications (Groups) of Total Population, Random Sample, and Usable Ques- tionnaires Returned . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis by Groups of Physical Features of SchoolDistricts.............. Analysis by Groups of Professional Personnel of School Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis by Groups of Teaching Administrators Analysis by Groups of the Number of Administra- tive Personnel per District . . . . . . . . Analysis by Groups of the Line and Staff Rela- tionship of Elementary Administrative Positions Analysis by Groups of the Line and Staff Rela- tionship of Senior High Administrative Posi- tions PAGE 20 21 22 78 80 82 8# 86 87 88 TABLE XI. XII. XIII. XIV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. Analysis by Groups of the Line and Staff Rela- tionship of Central Office Administrative Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis by Groups of Use of Administrative Councils in School Districts . . . . . . . Analysis by Groups of Use of Building Curricu- lum Committee in School Districts . . . . . Analysis by Groups of Use of Subject Matter or Grade Level Curriculum Committees in School Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis by Groups of Use of System-wide Cur- riculum Committees in School Districts . . Analysis by Groups of Use of Citizens Curricu- lum Committees in School Districts . . . . Primary Function of School Committees as Per- ceived by the Superintendent of Schools . . Analysis by Groups of Professional Contacts by the Superintendent per week . . . . . . . . Number of Contacts per Week by Group One Superintendents with Various Persons in Com- parison with All Superintendents . . . . . Number of Contacts per Week by Group Two Super- intendents with Various Persons in Comparison With All superintendents e e e e e e e e 0 xi PAGE 89 92 93 9# 95 96 99 101 103 10A TABLE XXI. XXII. XXIII. XXIV. XXVI. XXVII. XXVIII. XXIX. Number of Contacts per week by Group Three Superintendents with Various Persons in Com- parison with All Superintendents . . . . . . Number of Contacts per week by Group Four Superintendents with Various Persons in Com- parison with All Superintendents . . . . . . Number of Contacts per week by Group Five Superintendents with Various Persons in Com- parison with All Superintendents . . . . . . Analysis by Groups Of Persons Directly Respon- sible to the Superintendent . . . . . . . . Number of Positions by Groups with Direct Access to the Superintendent . . . . . . . . Analysis by Groups of Existing Positions which have Direct Access to the Superintendent . . Time Devoted to Various Activities by Group One Superintendents in Comparison with All Superintendents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Devoted to Various Activities by Group Two Superintendents in Comparison with All Superintendents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Devoted to Various Activities by Group Three Superintendents in Comparison with All superintendents eeeeeeeeeeeeee xii PAGE 105 106 107 108 110 111 112 115 117 TABLE XXXI. XXXII. XXXIII. XXXIV. XXXVI. XXXVII. XXXVIII. Time Devoted to Various Activities by Group Four Superintendents in Comparison with All Superintendents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Devoted to Various Activities by Group Five Superintendents in Comparison with All Superintendents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Person or Persons Actually Performing Various Tasks the Majority of the Time (Supervision and Discipline) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Person or Persons Actually Performing Various Tasks the Majority of the Time (Committees and Meetings) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Person or Persons Actually Performing Various Tasks the Majority of the Time (Management and Administrative Detail) . . . . . . . . Per Cent of Superintendents Performing Various Tasks the.MaJority of the Time . . . . . . Functions of Administrative Positions as Per- ceived by the Superintendent of Schools . . Per Cent of School Districts by Groups Having Various Administrative Positions in Their Organization e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e Number of School Districts by Groups Reporting no Line or Staff Positions e e e e e e e e xiii PAGE 119 121 123 12A 125 127 129 138 1A6 TABLE XXXIX. XL. XLI. XLII. XLIII. CHART I. Number and Per Cent of Various Positions that are Defined as Line or Staff Positions . . . Number of Persons by Total Sample Directly Re- sponsible to Various Line Administrative Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of School Districts, by Groups, that Have Centralized and Decentralized Organi- zation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kinds of Positions and Number of Districts Having Positions in Subject Matter and General Education Departmentalized Organi- zation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of School Districts by Groups Having Subject.Matter and General Education De- partmentalized Organization e e e e e e e e The EVOlUtion 0f SChOOl Palicy e e e e e e e 0 PAGE l#7 153 159 161 162 7# CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM This dissertation is a study of administrative or- ganization in the public schools of the state ofJMichigan as it relates to instructional leadership. The study will compare a set of selected principles of,organization with existing procedures of Operation as a step towardimproving an area of investigation that has received meager attention in administrative theory as well as in practice. In the beginning, it should be stated that "organi- zation" is a term which can encompass a variety of meanings. A school may be organized in terms of things or Objects, such as a federation of teachers, school grade-levels, and buildings, to serve certain purposes. A system of Operation may also be established to serve certain functions, such as office administration, production, sales, public rela- tions, and various phases of the educational enterprise. Considerable research has been done in relation to the physical structure of the public schools in the United States. Most of this research has been concentrated on grade separation, location of buildings, and grade combinations within buildings; but little effort has been exerted in the area of personnel organization for instructional improvement. -1- -2- This dissertation deals with the organization of staff personnel rather than that of the physical aspects of a school system. Specifically, it deals with how school personnel can be organized for the improvement of instruc- tion. Selection of a set of organisational principles was made from broad areas of administrative theory and practice, including disciplines outside the field of public education. These principles were used as a framework upon which to build a workable and logical administrative organization fer the improvement of instruction. To determine the degree to which these principles were being applied in the public schools of the state, a random representative sampling of the schools was taken. The ad- ministrators of the schools selected for sampling were sent questionnaires and interviewed in order that the degree of application of the selected principles could be determined. I. .IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY There is a pressing need to study administrative or- ganization in the public schools as it relates to instruc- tional improvement. within an administrative structure commensurate to the need, it could be possible for the super- intendent and other administrative personnel to release talented teachers and citizens to plan and direct learning better than they do under the present systems of operation. Many people who possess the will and desire to move forward -3- with new and improved educational programs today feel them- selves throttled by roadblocks, real or imaginary, such as uncertainty about the priority of purposes as valued by the chief school administrator and the board of education, lack of clarity about the amount of freedom and responsibility of teachers or lay citizens in a particular educational situation, encroachment on other persons, Jurisdictional rights, and the like. To say it another way, an administra- tive organization can obstruct the progress of competent, industrious, and dedicated people at every turn, even when all other aspects of the school system reflect high quality to a superb degree. The reasons fer the existence of this problem.are many. Among the most obvious are the physical and technical complexities of modern public education. In modern school systems there are many administrative details that distract ‘ the administrator from his responsibilities as an instruc- tional leader. School districts in the state of Michigan have attempted to solve the problem of instructional leader- ship by employing assistants to the superintendent, assist- ant principals, administrative assistants, staff specialists, department heads, supervisors, and committees whose purposes have been to help carry out the instructional leadership functions for the school systems.1, In reviewing studies Hflichigan Department of Public Instruction Di 'ion EU cto of [52°89 Guggiculum Proggams in fichigan, Publicat No. , 9 , e d. sing: he Department, 1960, 1961). -4- prepared by the Michigan Department of Public Instruction, one finds no indication of a pattern evolving. The respon— sibility for instructional leadership varies from none at all, through committees, principals, administrative assist- ants, to the superintendents of schools.2 Specific details of operation such as transportation, school lunch, maintenance, finance, and public relations are important to the overall functioning of the system; but they all exist fer, and should be secondary to, the true purpose of the administrative function, which should be in- structional leadership. When the superintendent fecuses his efforts on the managerial aspects of school operation, instructional leadership is assumed by other administrative personnel: by committees, or by individual teachers. Often the committee or individual approach results in persons or small groups working with no leadership at all. In any case, the instructional program suffers to the degree that it has been assigned a position of lesser importance in the organi- zational scheme of the school district. To facilitate instructional improvement, a structure is needed through which a program can function. The most important aspect of the structure should be an organization through which people can channel their collective efforts, and through which human worth and creativity can be realized. 2mg. -5- Neither the chaotic organization of laissez-faire programs nor the autocratic organization of superimposed ones will satisfy the need. The organization that will best suit public education must be tailored to the unique features and characteristics of it in such a way that classroom teachers may be released from burdensome details and allowed to challenge the minds of young people and adults. When such an organization is focused on the administrator as the in- structional leader of the school and community, and when the organization encompasses the ideals of democracy as a way of life, the primary emphasis of the entire school and com- munity will be on instructional improvement through the free inter-play of facts, ideas, and points of view; When this ideal organization is attained, the instructional program not only will resist spot criticism.and fears but also will reflect the real needs of a constantly changing and evolving community and society. A study of the problem Of administrative organization, as it relates to instructional leadership, indicates that trends will be discovered, and techniques and guidelines developed, that will be valuable to all school systems. WOrth- while and lasting improvement of the instructional program is a distinct probability. -6- II. NEED FOR THE STUDY An undertaking that successfully accomplishes its purposeshas a structure around which it operates. Edu- cational administration, dependent upon a system of operation or an organization that serves as a framework for the func- tioning of its purposes, is no exception. The keystone of the structure is here to determine the kind of organization that is commensurate with the needs of public education. During the past fifty years considerable thought and attention have been given to administrative organization in various institutions of American society. In these deliber- ations, however, inconsiderable attention has been given to administrative organization in education. Griffiths and his associates note this paucity of interest when they ob- serve that "organization as an administrative function of education has been largely ignored in the literature and research of education."3 These school administrators who have been aware of the need for organization in their opera- tions have tended to imitate the structures of business, church, or military organization with little or no regard fer the unique features of the educational program in a democratic society. 3Daniel E. Griffiths at al., 0 21 Schools fer Ef e iv Educat on (Danville7—IIIinoIs: Tfie Interstate nters an s ers, 1962), p. 3. -7- Two of the few attempts to gather information per- taining to administrative organization for instructional improvement were undertaken by the Michigan State Depart- ment of Public Instruction.“ These studies listed positions and groups that were responsible fer curriculum improvement in the public schools of Michigan; but no attempt was made to relate the positions to any type of organization, or to draw any conclusions from.the data. Thus, there appears to be a serious gap in the liter- ature of educational administration and research in the area of organization for the improvement of instruction in the public schools. By determining the existing patterns of organization for instructional improvement and evaluating them.in terms of selected prinCiples, as these principles fit into the democratic way of life, a new look can be taken at the structure and function of administration in public education. These selected principles may be fOund to have been misunderstood and thus misused by public school officials. By re-evaluation and redefinition of these principles in the context of freedom.af speech, religion, the press, and of other fundamental concepts of a democratic society, they can be used to build an effective organization as a framework for instructional improvement. NMichigan Department of Public Instruction, loo. cit. -3- Such a study will be of specific value and interest to those engaged in public education; it will relate the findings and points of view of many writers, with varied backgrounds in administrative organization, to an administra- tive operation in public education that allows for creativity, and recognizes individual worth and dignity. Schoolmen will be given insights into current practices and will have a specific point of reference from which to evaluate their own administrative organization structure. III. PURPOSE OF'THE STUDY It is the purpose of this study (1) to propose an administrative organizational structure fer the improvement of instruction in the public schools of the state of Michi- gan; (2) to determine how the public schools of Michigan are organized to carry out the function of instruction, as in- dicated by the responses of a random representative sampling of superintendents of these schools to a questionnaire; and (3) to show relationships between the proposed structure and the existing organizational practices as determined by the questionnaire. From its inception, public education has had instruc- tion as its primary function. The term "instruction" has encompassed a variety of degrees of meanings frOm the limited, classical concept of the Latin Grammar School to the broad interpretation of experiences considered by John Dewey and William Kilpatrick. -9- Regardless of how narrowly or broadly it has been defined, instruction has remained the paramount function of public education; and the appointed head of a school system, it seems logical to infer, should strive constantly to imp prove that system's instructional program. To make possible the maximum utilization of a school superintendent's leader- ship function and advantageous utilization of the talents of all members of the teaching staff and the community, or- ganization is necessary. This study, then, is addressed to the problem of determining the most effective organization for the en- couragement and nurturing of instructional leadership in the public schools. A system of organization that allows a superintendent to devote the largest portion of his atten- tion to the instructional program of his school, to share details of the program with specialists, and to make possible "cooperative participation"5 throughout the system should help, by its very nature, to facilitate and to improve in- structional leadership. A careful consideration of principles of administra- tive organization suggests certain procedures that can be applied successfully to instructional leadership organization in a public school system. These principles can provide a 5Ephraim.Vern Sayers and Ward Madden, Educatiog and the g; at Faith (New York: Appleton-Century- re s, 1959), PP- '5 . -10- broad foundation upon which the improvement of instructional leadership organization within a public school can be built. in 1. 2. 3. A. 1. 2. 3. be 1. IV. HIPOTHESES The following hypotheses were fermulated for analysis this study: The public schools of Michigan have no common organiza- tional pattern to facilitate instruction. An appreciable number of school districts that were con- sidered in this study show a lack of instructional leadership organization. An appreciable number of school districts that were con- sidered in this study and that have an organizational structure for instructional leadership, do not have ihedsuperintendent of schools as the instructional ea or. The selected principles of organization will serve as guidelines for determining when certain types of ad- ministrative positions should be added to the personnel of a school system. V. BASIC ASSUMPTIONS The basic assumptions underlying this study are: The superintendent of schools should be the instructional leader in a school system, so that the most effective instructional program can be assured. Instructional leadership cannot be carried out effectively without organization. Administrative organizational principles can be applied effectively to instructional leadership organization. VI. DEFINITION OF TERMS The following terms are defined so that there will common understanding among readers. Sufierintgndgnt of schogls. The appointed administrative ea 0 a so 00 system is the superintendent of 301100130 r1 (fair, L‘swtflz .I ! -11- 2. Organization. As used in this study, the term "organi- zation" refers to the framework around which an under- taking is carried toward its goals. The framework refers to human associations and purposes rather than to physical aspects of organization. Chester I. Barnard defines organization as “. . . a system.of con- sciously coord nated activities or forces of two or more persons." The American Association of School Administrators defines organization as ". . . the act of putting into systematic relationships those elements and activities essential to achieving a purpose.'7 Organization, in this study, then, is defined as the framework of human association, responsibilities, duties, and functions necessary to the smooth opera- tion and ultimate accomplishment of the purposes of an undertaking. 3. Administration. Administration has been defined in autocratic terms, on one hand, as the decider, director, or controller of an enterprise. Administration has been associated with such democratic terms, on the other hand, as cooperation, guidance, and leadership. It is in the latter sense of joint cooperation that adminis- tration is defined in this study. The definition by William H. Newman, that administration is "the guidance, leadership, and control of the efforts of a group of individua 3 toward some common goal"8 is accepted with the provision that the terms "guidance” and "leader- ship” receive maximum importance, while the term ”con- trol” be given only minor importance. A. Iggtructignal feadgrship. That framework around which the instructiona program of the public schools is fostered is termed "instructional leadership.“ VII. METHODOLOGY 0!" THE STUDY This chapter presents only a brief review of the methodology of the study. Because of the importance of the 6Chester I. Barnard, The gunctiOEE 8f the Eggcgtive (Cambridge: Harvard Univers ty ress, , p. . 7American Association of School Administrators, Ihg Su d at as Instructional Leader, Thirty-fifth Yearboo of the Association (Wash ngton: e Association, 1957, p. 1 3. 8William H. Newman, Admi istrative Action: the Tech— nigues of Offanizatiog gpd Ezfiagement {New York: Prentice-hall, 1P0 ' -12- method of investigation to the over-all study, a detailed de- scription and discussion is presented in chapter II. In general, the methodology is divided into two parts. The first half of the study is based upon historical research procedures, and is concerned with the selection of a set of administrative organization principles from the broad field of administrative literature. The study evaluates these principles in terms of how they should function in a demo- cratic society. The second half of the study is based upon descriptive survey research, and is concerned with the current practices of administrative organization in the public schools of Michigan as determined by a combined questionnaire-interview technique. Comparisons and evalu- ations of current practices and selected principles conclude the study. VIII. ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY Chapter I introduced the problem. It set the stage for the dissertation by discussing the need for and the importance of the study and by describing the problem.- The chapter also includes statements of hypotheses, basic assump- tions, and definition of terms fundamental to the study. Chapter II, also introductory in nature, considers the scope and method of investigation. The selection of principles of administration is the concern of Chapter III. These principles serve as a basis for administrative -13- organization in public schools. They were selected from the broad areas of administrative organization for the purpose of presenting as unbiased an approach as possible to the principles underlying organization. To understand the functioning of the selected principles, it was necessary to develop a point of view toward administrative organization for improved instruction as this organization relates to a democratic society. The goals of public education in such a society are important to the determination of how these principles should be applied in an educational setting. Chapter IV is addressed to these problems. The compilation and analysis of the data collected from the questionnaires are covered in chapters V, VI, and VII. These chapters represent the practical side of the dissertation in that an analysis is made of the organiza- tional situation as it exists in the public schools of Michigan today. In chapter VIII, the findings of the dissertation are summarized. Conclusions, recommendations, and sug- gestions for further study appear in chapter IX. The approach to this study, as outlined above, should present a logical and workable scheme for administrative organization for improved instruction in the public schools of.Michigan. The selected principles with the consideration of the point of view toward the role of administration in a democratic society, serve as a frame of reference. The -lh- analysis of the data determines existing patterns and allows evaluation of current practices in relation to the previously developed frame of reference. Finally, the last chapter summarizes this study and raises questions for further study. CHAPTER II SCOPE AND METHOD OF INVESTIGATION I. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDH This study is interested in the organizational as- pects of selected public schools in the state of.Michigan as they pertain to the instructional programs in these schools. The intent here is to develop principles of or- ganization that,theoretically, should lead toward improved instruction. No attempt will be made to prove effective- ness of instruction in relation to any given organizational pattern. Perhaps a follow-up investigation that would imple- ment the principles developed herein, and then determine the extent of improved instruction, would be a valuable second step to this study. Specific limitations of the study are: 1. Or anizational principles are focused on administrative _eadership of the instructional program. The physical aspects of organization, such as size of district, class size, and grade separation, are not included in the research. 2. Organizational patterns for instructional leadership are confined to public elementary and to senior high schools employing twenty-six or more teachers. The number, twenty-six, is used as a cut-off point in this study because in school districts employing twenty-five or fewer teachers the superintendents of schools are usually the only full-time administrators. Also, the faculty interactions in small school systems are apt to be face-to-face contacts of a semi-formal or informal nature, which are not practicably adaptable to formal organizational procedures. -15- -16- 3. The random representative sampling is taken from.the schools of the Lower Peninsula of the state of Michi- gan, excluding the city of Detroit. The Upper Peninsula is not included in the sampling because there are rela- tively few school districts there of the size investi- gated for this study. Detroit is omitted because it has the only school district of its size and complexity in the state. Large cities outside of Michigan would have had to be studied if valid comparisons were to have been II. METHOD OF INVESTIGATION The method of Investigation for this study includes three phases. First, a set of organizational principles was selected from writers in the broad area of administra- tion. Second, current organizational practices in the public schools of the state of Michigan were determined. This was done by means of a questionnaire submitted to the superin- tendent of schools in a sample of the public schools of the state. Third, a comparison was made between the developed principles and the current practices as determined by the questionnaire. Selected pginciples. The principles selected for this study were chosen from writings in the broad field of ad- ministration. These writings are in general agreement with respect to the importance of the principles selected for this study. Chester Barnard and James D. Mooney represent a group of authorities who place considerable emphasis on human relations in administrative organization, but they still agree with traditional writers when they discuss basic principles. -17- Since no wide divergence in basic principles was found among recognized authorities in the area of’administra- tive organization, the principles selected represent a con- sensus. These principles were specifically selected with respect to their degree of applicability to the unique func- tion of public education in a democratic society. Collection of data. The data concerned with current practices of administrative organization for the improvement of instruction was obtained through a combined interview and questionnaire technique. Thesampling and the details of obtaining it are discussed in detail in the next section, so they will not be covered here. - The questionnaire was constructed to detenmine (l) the existing patterns of organization in the public schools that pertain to the instructional program, (2) the position or positions that perform specific selected functions common to most public schools, (3) the degree that the superinten- dent is free to exert instructional leadership, (A) the de- gree of involvement of citizens and staff in the development and execution of the instructional program, and (5) the de- gree that the principles discussed in chapters III and IV are being implemented in the public schools ofIMichigan.1 1 See Appendix p. 217. -18- To validate the questionnaire, a number of techniques were used. First a rough draft of the instrument was con- structed. This was submitted for evaluation to members of the Guidance Committee on research. A second draft of the instrument was then submitted, by personal interview, to six superintendents of schools for the purpose of varifying clarity of questions and ease of answering. Fifteen of the final questionnaires, which contained corrections and changes gathered from the sources discussed above, were completed during personal interviews with the superintendents of schools. The remaining 95 questionnaires were mailed to the participating school districts. This technique was used as a further check against the validity of responses from the mailed instrument. A The questionnaire was divided into three parts. In Part I, basic school district data was requested. Physical information about the school district, much of which was obtainable from records in the State Department of Public Instruction, was collected as a foundation for analyzing data with respect to the physical characteristics of the school district. Part II requested information about the administrative personnel of the school district to give to this study a picture of the kinds of administrative positions in school districts, the number of these positions, and the number of people responsible to each position. Part III explored the Operational procedures of the school districts -13- To validate the questionnaire, a number of techniques were used. First a rough draft of the instrument was con- structed. This was submitted for evaluation to members of the Guidance Committee on research. A second draft of the instrument was then submitted, by personal interview, to six superintendents of schools for the purpose of verifying clarity of questions and ease of answering. Fifteen of the final questionnaires, which contained corrections and changes gathered from the sources discussed above, were completed during personal interviews with the superintendents of schools. The remaining 95 questionnaires were mailed to the participating school districts. This technique was used as a further check against the validity of responses from the mailed instrument. ' The questionnaire was divided into three parts. In Part I, basic school district data was requested. Physical information about the school district, much of which was obtainable from records in the State Department of Public Instruction, was collected as a foundation for analyzing data with respect to the physical characteristics of the school district. Part II requested information about the administrative personnel of the school district to give to this study a picture of the kinds of administrative positions in school districts, the number of these positions, and the number of people responsible to each position. Part III explored the Operational procedures of the school districts -19- with respect to the instruction program to determine how the schools operated in.the area of instructional leader- ship and improvement. III. THE SAMPLE The process of selecting the random.representative sampling of persons to whom the questionnaires were sub- mitted required that a total population be determined and that the sample be selected from this population. The methods used fer determining the total population for this study were as follows: 1. All class A, B, and C public schools in Michigan's Lower Peninsula, as defined by the Michigan High School Athletic Association,2 were selected excepting Detroit. 2. The schools selected were arranged in order of the number of teachers employed as determined from the.MicE%gan E cation D etc .5 Schools employing less t twenty-s teac ers were excluded from this list. These procedures resulted in a choice of 367 school districts; and the number of teachers employed ranged from 26 to 1370. The total population thus obtained had two charac- teristics: (l) the wide variation in numbers of teachers employed, and (2) a skewed population, with many school zyiihiggg HIE? School Athletic As§ociatio§ Bulletin, Directory ssue, ovem er, , pp. 2-232. 3 chi an ducation Director and Bu er's ide, 1261-62 iIEHsing: IDEII, pp. IEE-igs. -20- districts employing a small number of teachers a few school districts employing a large number of teachers. Table I gives the stratification areas and also shows the two points made above. Table I.--Number and Per Cent of School Districts in Total Population, By Stratum Strata Divisions Number of Per Cent of Total (Teachers Employed) Schools Population 1. 501 - above 15 A 2. 201 - 500 35 10 3. 101 - 200 71 19 h. 51 - 100 115 32 5. 26 - 50 131 35 Total 367 100 —— __:-. ’— ——__—— Hansen, Hurwitz, and madow suggested a method of sampling a highly skewed population: It is desirable in such sampling problems to identify in advance the units that are large in size and include in the sample a higher preportion of these than of the smaller units. “Morris H. Hansen, William N. Hurwitz, and William G. Madow, Sam e Surve methods and Th (New York: _John Wiley and Sons, nc., 53 , o . , p. 102. I Iii???" -21- They refer to this method of handling highly skewed popula- tions as "disproportionate stratified random sampling."5 In line with this approach toward skewed populations a disproportionate stratified random sample was taken for this study. The population was stratified with respect to number of teachers employed by the school district. Each stratum was sampled disproportionately with respect to the range of size of school districts within each stratum. The following table shows the stratification and proportion of school districts chosen in each stratum of the population. Table II.--Number and Per Cent of School Districts Chosen in Each Stratum ___- _ __ M — r4 _ Strata Divisions Size of Per Cent of Stratum (Teachers Employed) Sample in Sample lo 501 " above 15 10000 3. 101 - 200 2A 33.8 h. 51 - 100 30 26.0 5. 26 - 50 24 18.3 Total 110 5 Ibido , p. 2050 -22- Table III.--Schools Selected for the Questionnaire Sample with Pertinent Selection Data =3; 1 Number of Stratification School District Teachersa Assigned Ann Arbor 650 1 Birmingham 512 l Dearborn 977 1 Flint 1257 1 Grand Rapids 1370 l Kalamazoo 755 l Lansing 107A 1 Livonia 8A5 1 Pontiac 7A5 1 Port Huron 622 1 Royal Oak 723 1 Saginaw 802 1 Taylor Township 529 l waterford Township 510 l wayne 510 1 Battle Creek AA3 2 Berkley 375 2 Farmington A08 2 Garden City A65 2 Grosse Pointe A55 2 Hazel Park 300 2 Jackson A61 2 Lincoln Park A60 2 Midland A02 2 Mt . Clemens 251 2 Muskegon A67 2 Portage 321 2 Roseville A33 2 Southfield 325 2 Trenton 208 2 Utica 321 2 Wyandotte 373 2 Adrian 193 3 Avondale 10A 3 Bedford Temperance 130 3 Bloomfield Hills 195 3 TMic Educati Di t and er's Guide, 1261- égl(Lans ng: , pp. - , -23- Table III - Continued ' Number of Stratification School District Teachers Assigned Cadillac 107 3 Clawson 1A1 3 Goldwater 102 3 Davison 113 3 Dearborn Township # 3 3 Flint Kearsley 120 3 Fraser 120 3 Grand Blanc 131 3 Harper Creek, Battle Creek 111 3 Holland 195 3 Howell 118 3 Huron Valley, Milford 160 3 Inkster 162 3 L'Anse Creuse 1A9 3 Ludington 103 3 Madison Heights 167 3 Mt. Pleasant 155 3 Muskegon Heights 192 3 Southgate 150 3 South Lake, St. Clair Shores 186 3 Airport, Carleton 67 A Algonac 68 A Bendle, Flint 87 A Big Rapids 63 A Blissfield 79 A Cheboygan 52 A Clare 5A A Croswell-Lexington 62 A East Jackson 61 A Fremont 68 A Haslett 72 A Hastings 87 A Kelloggsville, Grand Rapids 90 A Manistee 79 A Mason, Erie 66 A Mt. Harris 98 4 Napoleon 5A A Northville 90 A Otsego 91 A Parma Western 6A A 7‘3?““" an. ' fl Table III - Continued -2A- ‘— A Number of Stratification School District Teachers Assigned Pennfield, Battle Creek 73 A Petoskey 63 A Plainwell 88 A Richland 52 A Romeo 9A A Shepherd 51 A Stockbridge 68 A Vicksburg 88 A west Bloomfield, Orchard Lake 67 A Williamston 52 A Boyne City A2 5 Bridgman 29 5 Cedar Springs A9 5 Centerville 28 5 Charlevoix 35 5 Decatur A0 5 East Jordan 30 5 Frankenmuth 29 5 Fulton, Middleton 35 5 . Galien 3A 5 Harbor Springs 28 5 Hartland 37 5 Ida 50 5 Jonesville A6 5 Linden 30 5 Marcellus 32 5 New Troy 27 5 Portland Al 5 Quincey A8 5 Sebewaing 29 5 Thornapple Kellogg, Middleville A2 5 'West Branch A0 5 Whiteford, Ottawa Lake 3A 5 White Pigeon 39 5 -25- The sample was randomized by use of the table of random numbers found in Dixon and Massey.6 The school districts included in the sampling and data pertinent to the statification may be found in Table III. These school districts are a representative sample of all school districts in the total population as defined on page 19 of this chapter. Thus, the data gathered from this group of school districts may be generalized upon to all of the school districts in Michigan. IV. SUMMARY Chapters I and II have considered the mechanics of the dissertation. The rationale, need, importance, and limitations of the study are covered. Explanation of the methodology of the study and a description of the sampling procedure also are included. In general, these chapters have set the stage for the remainder of the dissertation by defining, describing, and delimiting the problem. The remaining chapters deal with development and completion of the dissertation. 6Wilfrid Jo Dixon and Frank Jo Massey, Jro, tro- duction to Stat at al a1 sis (New York: MbGraw- 1 Book Company. 57 . pp. -37 . CHAPTER III SELECTED PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZATION I. INTRODUCTION To understand the framework upon which current ap- proaches to public school administrative organization is based, a familiarity with selected principles of administra- tive organization from writers in fields outside of educa- tional administration is necessary. Such a familiarity is important because of the close association between these prin- ciples and current administrative organizational patterns in public education. One must be aware of the basic principles underlying a problem before an evaluation can be intelligently made of, and new approaches proposed to that problem. This chapter deals with the selection and brief devel- opment of a set of principles of administrative organization upon which public school administrative organization is built. The fields chosen to develop this background infor- mation to educational administrative theory and practice were public administration, business administration, and military administration. These three areas were chosen be- cause (1) they were deep historical background, (2) the great majority of literature in the area of administrative organi- zation has been presented from the points of view of these -26.- -27- areas, and (3) these areas seem to encompass the principles which have been accepted by public education in the past. The importance of, and necessity for, administrative organization to help perform.any task in which two or more persons are involved has been recognized and accepted through- out recorded history. Chester Barnard writes: . . . many of the superior formal organizations of western civilization are traceable to the early Christian Church the empire of Charlemagne, and the government of William the Conqueror. . . . but back of these is also a long history of formal organiza- tion extending into prehistoric times in the case of government, and to the small group of Apostles in the case of the Church.1 There are many examples, both in the literature of the field and in everyday practice, of the need for organi- zatiOn. Mooney notes that "the term organization, and the principles that govern it, are inherent in every form of concerted effort, even where there are no more than two people involved."2 Many examples of everyday practice could be cited to verify the existence of, and necessity for organization in carrying out a task. A small group of men attempting to lift a heavy object must organize their efforts and work together if they are successfully to move 1Chester I. Barnard, ¥hg ggpctions of the Eéecutive (Cambridge: Harvard Univers ty ess, , p. . 2Luther Gulick and L Urwick (ed ) and others Papers 0 O ' of the Sc%egce of Administration (New York: Institute 0 C A Distrat on, , p. 910 -23.. the object. Without some form of organization, the efforts of the men lack the necessary unity for them to complete their task. The formal study of organization in terms of the development of scientific principles began at about the turn of the century. Before that, the church and the mili- tary did much toward the development of a system of organi- zation; but there appeared to be very little fermal writing and no systematized approach to the problem in the literature. Such writers as Henri Fayol, Alan C. Reiley, Mary P. Follett, James D. Mooney, and Chester I. Barnard began to look criti- cally at a science of organization and to propose certain principles which they felt were applicable to a sound theory of organization. As the study of administration and adminis- trative organization progressed, there began to appear an argument that there were aspects of organization which were common to all types of administrative responsibility. IMany authors have expressed their ideas about this point. Barnard comments that : Many similarities in the conduct and attitudes of executives of these systems may be observed, and several students have postulated common elements in these sys- tems. It is evident that if there are uniformities with respect to them generally they will be found in particu- lar aspects or sections of them that are common to all. Effective study of them will therefore require the iso- lation or definition of these aspects. We shall name one common aspect "organization."3 3Barnard, op. cit., pp. 65-66. IMP?" ‘ -29- Urwick's point of view toward common aspects of organiza- tion is that . . . there are principles which can be arrived at inductively from the study of human experience of organization, which should govern arrangements for human association of any kind. These principles can be studied as a technical question, irrespective of the purpose of the enterprise, the personnel compos- ing it, or any constitutional, political or social thea'y underlying its creation.A Pfiffner and Presthus observed that . . . specialists in blic administration have achieved a considerab e degree of uniformity in their thinking on those problems of administration which tend to exist irrespective of the subject matter of the service or function being performed.5 They make a plea for . . . the recognition of the ”generalizing mind," especially in general staff positions. . . . a "generalizing mind" is one which can grasp a multi- tude of complex relationships, penetrate and under- stand the significant conclusions of a variety of technical specialists, bring them together into order and unit , and lay out a plan of action which is within t e realm of existing possibility.6 There is a fine point of distinction here which must be made clear. The above quoted authors present a point of view in favor of aspects of administrative organization which are common to any type of undertaking. This paper hLuther Gulick,et al. (eds.), Pa 3 of the Sci nos 0 Administrat on (New York: Institute of PEEIic AdmInIs- tration, , po ‘59. 5John M. Pfiffner and a. Vance Presthus, Pub c Ad- ministration (New York: The Ronald Press Company, I953), p. 9. 61big., p. 11. -30- accepts the existence of common principles but rejects the argument that maintains a thorough knowledge of these prin- ciples is all that is needed to insure successful adminis- tration in all fields. In order to administer-~in a leader- ship sense--the administrator must not only be well versed in general principles of administrative organization but also must have a fundamental knowledge of the technical aspects of the enterprise he is administering. The suc- cessful administrative leader must be well founded in both the technical aspects of his enterprise and general prin- ciples of administrative organization. It is from this point of departure that the principles of organization used in this study were selected and developed. II. SELECTED PRINCIPLES Writers in the field approach the subject of organiza- tion from their own specific points of view and use their own terminology. As one reviews their contributions, certain concepts and principles seem to be common to all. Chosen to be developed here are principles that are fundamental to organizational theory and specifically oriented to the public schools. They are (1) common purpose, (2) unity of direction, (3) line and staff, (A) span of super- vision, (5) centralization-decentralization, (6) depart- mentation, and (7) informal organization. Following is a brief explanation of each. .1‘ r1 ‘V't .9 (:10 T.‘ -31- Cppppn purppse. Fundamental to any successive enter- prise is the necessity for a common purpose among all parts of the enterprise. Urwick points up this idea, saying: Every organization and every part of every organi- zation must be an expression of the purpose of the undertaking concerned or it is meaningless and there- fore redundant. You cannot organize in a vacuum: you must organize £9; something.7 Barnard lists the elements of organization as "(1) communi- cation; (2) willingness to serve; and (3) common purpose."8 The first two elements refer to the third common purpose. Common purpose cannot exist without communication of that purpose and a willingness on the part of employees to serve that purpose. The successful organization will have purposes that are carefully developed and well understood by all members of the system from the common day laborer, through the entire membership, to the senior executive. Gulick uses the term ”work division" in discussing the same point. He writes that . . . it is not possible to determine how an activity is to be organized without, at the same time, consider- ing how the work in question is to be divided. Work division is the foundation of organization; indeed the reason for organization.9 7Lyndall Urwick, Notes on the Theor of Dr anization (New York: American Management Association, 1952), p. I9. 8Barnard, Op. cit., p. 82. 9Gulick, et al., op. cit., p. 3. -32- For an undertaking to be successful it must first have a purpose: a reason for the undertaking. To win games is the primary purpose of athletic teams, along with develop- ment of sportsmanship and skills. Also, common purpose im- plies an understanding and acceptance of the purposes by everyone associated with an enterprise. If winning, as a purpose, is not understood and accepted by each member of the athletic team, the successful accomplishment of this purpose may be seriously hindered. The degree to which the goal of common purpose is achieved will directly affect the efficiency of the enter- prise. The methods used to accomplish this ideal of common purpose may be defined as the organization of the enterprise. Unity of direction. Unity of direction is similar to common purpose but is more directly concerned with the internal operation of the enterprise. Whereas common pur- pose refers to understanding and acceptance of goals, unity of direction is related to implementation and interpretation of these goals. There should be a single person responsible for execution of policy. The need for unity of direction is recognized in or- ganization literature. Dimock and his associates refer to unity of command (direction) by stressing . . . the fact that if all component parts of an ad- ministrative program are to move forward in a unified and synchronized fashion, there must be a single Yef‘Vf‘r'\" ‘l' _’| -33- directing official at the top to see that this inte- gration takes place.10 An organization that has more than one head is open to different interpretations of purposes, and thus to con- fusion on the part of its members. To quote from Gulick: A man cannot serve two masters. A workman subject to orders from several superiors will be confused, in- efficient, and irresponsible; a workman subject to orders from but one superior may be methodical, effici- ent, and responsible.1 Basic to any organizational strcuture is the concept that there must be a single individual or board that is the sole, or final responsible agent for the aims and purposes of that organization. Workers who find themselves reporting to more than one supervisor in relation to the same or overlapping areas will often be confronted with conflicting points of view and emphasis. When this situation arises, a person, or several persons within a department can be caught between conflicting directions and allegiances, and they can find themselves lacking a unity of direction. As the individual workers have direction, so the over-all institution tends to proceed smoothly toward its goals. 10 .Marshall E. Dimock, Glad s O. Dimock, and Louis W. Koenigiggfiblic Agpinistration New York: Rinehart and a PP. " 0 Company, 11 Gulick et al., op. cit., p. 9. -33- directing official at the top to see that this inte- gration takes place.10 An organization that has more than one head is open to different interpretations of purposes, and thus to con- fusion on the part of its members. To quote from Gulick: A man cannot serve two masters. A workman subject to orders from several superiors will be confused, in- efficient, and irresponsible; a workman subject to orders from but one superior may be methodical, effici- ent, and responsible.1 Basic to any organizational strcuture is the concept that there must be a single individual or board that is the sole, or final responsible agent for the aims and purposes of that organization. Workers who find themselves reporting to more than one supervisor in relation to the same or overlapping areas will often be confronted with conflicting points of view and emphasis. When this situation arises, a person, or several persons within a department can be caught between conflicting directions and allegiances, and they can find themselves lacking a unity of direction. As the individual workers have direction, so the over-all institution tends to proceed smoothly toward its goals. 10 .Marshall E. Dimock, Gladys 0. Dimock, and Louis W. Koenig Publ c A nistration (New York: Rinehart and Company, 195 , pp. - . l mliCk at 310, 020 Cite, po 90 -33- directing official at the top to see that this inte- gration takes place.10 An organization that has more than one head is open to different interpretations of purposes, and thus to con- fusion on the part of its members. To quote from Gulick: A man cannot serve two masters. A workman subject to orders from several superiors will be confused, in- efficient, and irresponsible; a workman subject to orders from but one superior may be methodical, effici- ent, and responsible.1 Basic to any organizational strcuture is the concept that there must be a single individual or board that is the sole, or final responsible agent for the aims and purposes of that organization. Workers who find themselves reporting to more than one supervisor in relation to the same or overlapping areas will often be confronted with conflicting points of view and emphasis. When this situation arises, a person, or several persons within a department can be caught between conflicting directions and allegiances, and they can find themselves lacking a unity of direction. As the individual workers have direction, so the over-all institution tends to proceed smoothly toward its goals. 10 Marshall E. Dimock, Glad s 0. Dimock, and Louis W. Koenig g§blic Administration New York: Rinehart and £95 , pp. -1 0 Company, 11 G‘lliCk at 310, 02o Cite, po 9o weer -35- When a school board member attempts personally to implement his point of view without working with his fellow board members and the superintendent of schools, unity of direction of the entire system is in jeopardy. Line and staff. The physical complexities brought about by the number of employees and their geographic dis- tribution requires that a plan be adopted that will integrate the various aspects of an enterprise to insure growth and improvement. The system developed and accepted in all fields of administrative organization theory is called "line and staff." Considerable confusion has existed and still exists about the definitions of the two terms. Gulick's definition is, ". . . there are included in staff all of those persons who devote their time exclusively to the knowing, thinking, and planning functions, and in the line all of the remainder who are, thus, chiefly concerned with the doing function."12 He places the emphasis on de- limiting the staff function. Pfiffner and Presthus define the line clearly as . . . those operating officials, and workers who are in the direct line of command of the scalar ladder. They are the ones who issue orders and those who work at the tasks relating directly to the func- tional objective.l3 121t1d., p. 31. 13Pfiffner and Presthus, op. cit., p. 8A. Hr"."‘*" -35- The principle of line includes the following: (1) a frame- work or channel for the transmission of decisions, directions, and other processes pertaining to direct day-by-day opera- tions of an enterprise: and (2) those positions that are primarily responsible for the daily operation of an enter- prise. ‘As an example, when it becomes necessary to transmdt specific directions to all teachers and students in a school system, such as disaster alert procedures, the detailed plan originates in the office of the superintendent. He relays the information through the line to an assistant. The assistant, in turn, relays the information to the building principals, who, in turn relay it to department heads, or directly to teachers who finally relay it to the individual pupils in each of the classrooms throughout the school system. This process operates in reverse when it is nec- essary to transmit information to the superintendent con- cerning an individual pupil or classroom. Suppose there is an outstanding accomplishment produced by a pupil in a specific classroom, and the teacher wishes to have the ac- complishment recognized throughout the district. The usual procedure is to call the accomplishment to the attention of the department head. A report of the accomplishment is re- layed in turn, up the line, until it is finally acknowledged by the superintendent and board of education. -36- In contrast, but certainly complementary to the prin- ciple of line, is the sister principle of staff. Newman gives a broad definition of staff assistants when he says: "One of the best ways to regard staff assistants and staff divisions is as extensions of the thinking capacity of the executives they serve. They do planning work that the executive might do himself if he had the time."1lv 10. 11. He lists the duties assigned to staff positions as: Assembling facts; Summarizing and interpreting facts; Recommending courses of action; Discussing proposed plans with various other execu- tives and obtaining their concurrence or reasons for objection; Preparing written orders and other documents nec- essary to put a plan into action; Explaining and interpreting orders that have been ssue : watching actual operations to ascertain if the orders issued are achieving the desired results; On the basis of operating experience and antici- pated conditions, initiating new plans: Promoting an exchange of information among operating officials so that there will be greater voluntary coordination; Developing enthusiasm among operating people for established policies and program; Providing information and advice to operating people regarding performance of duties that have been delegated to them.15 From this list it is easy to see that the staff function may serve a wide variety of purposes in an organization. It 1‘William H. Newman, A nistrat ve Action: he ch- ni s of Dr zatio and Mana ement ew or : ent ce- 8 , nc., ' p. O 15 Igido, ppo 181-1820 -37- is from this diversity of responsibilities that much of the confusion over staff duties arises. In public schools, the staff position should be one of assistance and service to the line person. Subject matter directors, visiting teachers, educational consultants, the business manager, and counselors are examples of staff positions. Their function is one of giving technical assist- ance to line administrators and classroom teachers so that line persons may better perform their jobs-~teaching children. A The top executive must weigh complexity and expense against efficiency and effectiveness when considering the addition of staff persons to his organizational complex. Span o; ggpgrvision. As the principle of line and .staff is developed along with that of unity of direction, there begins to appear the questions of how many persons can one individual direct and supervise, and how complex an organization can one man administer effectively. These ques- tions serve to introduce.the principle of span of super- vision. Span of control (supervision) is defined as (l) "the number of subordinates to which one administrator can give his time without exceeding the limits of effective attention,"16 16 Dimock, Dimock, and Koenig, op, cit., p. 131. -38- (2) "The number of persons who should report to an adminis- trative chief or supervisor,"17 and (3) "The number of men an executive can supervise effectively and still perform the other duties he has been assigned."18 In each case, number of persons is basic to the definition; and in two cases, effectiveness of operation is important. The problem of how many persons one individual can effectively supervise has been considered by many writers, and it varies from three to twenty, with the majority of writers agreeing on a figure that is less than ten.19 Urwick considers in depth the complexities of numbers of persons reporting to a supervisor. He summarizes his findings as follows: Students of administration have long recognized that, in practice no human brain should attempt to super- vise directly more than five, or at the most, six other individuals whose work is interrelated. A supervisor with five subordinates reporting directly to him, who adds a sixth, increases his available human resources by 20 per cent. But he adds approximately 100 per cent to the complexity and difficulty of his task of co- ordination. The number of relationship: which he must t consider increases not by arithmetical by geometrical progression.20 l7Pfiffner and Prethus, pp, cit., p. 72. 18Newman, op. cit., p. 259. 19Barnard, . cit., pp. lOA-lO6; Urwick, o cit., p. 53; Pfiffner an esthus, op. cit., p. 72. ZOUrwick, cit., pp. 53-54. -39- To understand fully the philosophy of span, it is necessary to consider broad underlying factors that form the basis for span theory. Graves expresses a realistic approach to span when he writes: It is probable that no definite rule can be estab- lished and that the span will vary in any given case according to the ability and experience of the super- visor, the nature of the work being done and the character of‘ability of the members of the staff.21 In any case, all authorities on administrative or- ganization would agree that there is a limit to the number of persons or tasks that one individual can direct or super- vise at one time. The administrator must be aware of this principle and constantly evaluate himself and other employees to be sure that none of them is spread too thin in relation to the variety of responsibilities he directs. CeppraligatiOp-deceptrglization. Another important principle in organization theory is expressed by the opposing terms of centralization and decentralization. The degree of opposition between these terms can best be expressed by asking the degree to which an institution or enterprise should be run from one office, by one individual or board. Fortunately, this is not an either-or principle; there are degrees of centralization and decentralization recognized 21w. Brooke Graves, Public Administration in a Demo- ' oratic Society (Boston: D. C. Heath and Company, 15553, p. -40- by many authors in the field of organization. Newman sum- marizes many of these positions. He lists and describes four degrees of centralization and decentralization: Centralized administration . . . depailed and comppehensive plpppipg by tpe key eecutve.... Iimited decentralization . . policies, programs, and major procedures are de- cided in the top echelons of the company; the a li- cat on of these elans to s- c fic situations - 5 the oeta ed --'-to--a' . annin; are de egateo oown t e Ine to t e rst or secon» level of supervision. Delegated authority . . . operating decisions are pushed well down the line... Bottom-up administration . . . not onl a horit but also it ativ is d - cenprazIze§.2§ According to Newman, the advantages of centralization are that it tends (l) to stimulate the use of knowledge of the top executive; (2) to improve regulation of quality, service, risk, et cetra; and (3) to keep expenses at a minimum.23 Advantages of decentralization, he explains, provide (1) Relief of senior executives from the time-consuming attention to detailed methods; (2) Increased flexibili- ty . . . : (3) Greater interest and enthusiasm of ems ployees . . . 3 (A) Development of junior executives. A practical example of degree of opposition between centrali- zation and decentralization can be cited in relation to 22 Newman, pp. 201,-208, again. 23Ih1d., p. 205. 2 1’Ibid., p. 208. -b1- curriculum development. The centralized approach holds that curriculum should be determined in one place by one person or group of persons for the entire system. Centrali- zation tends to encourage standardization and, in its extreme form, would expect all pupils of a given grade to be study- ing the same thing at any given time. Decentralization takes a different point of view and.maintains that the curriculum can best serve the needs of the pupils if it is allowed to vary with individual buildings and even with individual teachers. The decentralized approach to curriculum develop- ment places the responsibility in separate buildings and in the hands of the teachers in those buildings. It is interesting to note that little attention is given to human relations in the literature pertaining to centralization and decentralization. The emphasis is on the effect of authority, communication, and smooth operation of the machinery of the organization. Newman expresses the general tone of public administration toward this problem by noting that: The real issue is the decentralization of author- ity to plan, that is, who is to decide what is to be done. . . . Viewing the problem from a higher echelon are the executives expected to make detailed plans that are then carried out by their subordinates, or are executives primarily concerned with helping subordinates do their respective jobs we11725 2 5Ib1d., p. 203. -42- To develop human relations--human worth and dignity-- as a basic philosophy of organization, it becomes necessary to develop a system that is dedicated to involving people. In this context the principles of decentralization are of primary importance and it behooves the administrator to develop an organizational structure that will allow and encourage individual involvement. One of the better ways to accomplish this is through decentralization. Depappmentation. Departmentation is a specialized part of decentralization. Departmentation is a way of dividing the work force or employees of an undertaking according to some factor which is common among them. The reasoning behind this approach is that common experiences or interests will tend to bind a group together to make progress easier to achieve. Integral to this concept is the present trend in our society toward specialization. As a person begins to specialize, his interests and knowledge become confined to the area of his specialization. Since specialization can be more than a specific task, depart- mentation often is considered in terms of various factors operating within the organization. Strict adherence to the fundamental principles of departmentation introduces difficulties into the organization and operation of an enterprise. Departmentation, as a means of decentralization, was introduced with the advent of specialization. This type of organization, however tends to -43- encourage further specialization and thus ”kingdom building" within the system. When "kingdom building" occurs, unity of purpose is threatened and often the overall operation becomes composed of a number of smaller operations each competing with the others. The degree of specialization de- sired in an organization will determine, to a large degree, the amount of departmentation desireable for that organiza- tion. Informal organization. To this point the discussion has been confined to selected principles of formal organi- zation. Co-existent with formal organization is the system of day-by-day interactions of the members of the organiza- tion. These interactions develop from similar interests, similar jobs, physical proximity, social contacts, and many other cultural and societal factors that comprise the lives of individuals. These kinds of interactions are referred to as informal organization by authorities in administration. Barnard describes the factors involved in informal organiza- tion when he comments: It is a matter of general observation and experi- ence that persons are frequently in contact and inter- act with each other when their relationships are not a part of or governed by any formal organization. . . . The fact of such contacts, interactions, or groupings changes the experience, knowledge, attitudes, and emotions of the individuals affected. . . . By in- formal organization I mean the aggregate of the personal contacts and interactions and the associated groupings of people that I have just described.26 26Barnard, op. cit., pp. llt-lls. Hi. cl. I -44- A good example of informal organization in a school system is the association of teachers with each other in the teachers lounge. Hmch of the faculty reaction to policies, procedures, and practices is determined in this room over cups of coffee. So that the formal organization may function properly and smoothly, the executive must be aware of the existence of an informal organization within his enterprise. Beyond this, he must know something of the subtleties of such an informal system by being aware of its leaders; its system of communication; and, in general, the social, physical, and political factors underlying its existence and operation. III. SUMMARY This chapter has dealt with the presentation of a set of selected principles of administrative organization as found in the writings of authors in fields other than education. For a full understanding of administrative or- ganization, such a presentation was necessary. Had the re- search for this study been confined to administrative or- ganizational principles found in education, only a limited approach to the problem could have been presented. By com- bining the principles presented here with public education philosophy and administrative organizational theory, a broad and realistic approach can be taken toward instructional leadership organization in the public schools. -55- Each of the principles selected-~(l) common purpose, (2) unity of direction, (3) line and staff, (4) span of supervision, (5) centralization-decentralization, (6) de- partmentation, and (7) informal organization-dwere presented, defined, and briefly analyzed in terms of their respective values and limitations, their relation to each other, and their relation to the whole concept of administrative or- ganization. CHAPTER IV AN APPROACH TOWARD ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP ORGANIZATION FOR IMPROVED INSTRUCTION I. INTRODUCTION This chapter is concerned with a point of view and practical approach to public school organization as it re- lates to instructional leadership. The contention here is that there are aspects of public education that may make its administration quite different from parallel situations in business, industry, the church, or the military. Education in a democratic society should have distinct features and goals that should, in turn, determine the kind of organization to be used in educational institutions. Edu- cation in a democratic society sets out to develop individ- uals. Rather than being merely a process of indoctrination, it should be an attempt to further critical thinking and to recognize worth and dignity in every person. Thus, crea- tivity should be the key feature of an instructional program. If creativity is a primary purpose of instruction, then it should follow logically, that administrators, teachers, and pupils should be afforded an atmosphere that will allow and encourage creative and critical thinking. The tone of such an atmosphere is set by the kind of administrative -g6- 374F311" -h7- organization functioning in an institution. This concept should dictate a modified interpretation of organizational principles for instructional leadership in the public schools. This chapter develops the unique features of a demo- cratic society, places the principles selected in chapter III in this context, and suggests an approach toward ad- ministrative organization which utilizes the point of view developed herein. II. THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY To discuss administrative organization for the im- provement of instruction intelligently, it is necessary to understand the concepts and ideals underlying the society in which this organization functions. The United States is found upon a philosophy of democratic government and opera- tion within and among its institutions and social agencies. The assertion here is that these founding principles are still fundamental to the American way of life and are the prevailing principles upon which the United States operates domestically and internationally. Few people would quarrel with the above conceptions. The difficulty that often arises in a discussion of democracy is the interpretation of the true and deeper meanings of the word. An understanding of the basic aspects of a free society is vital to any analysis of public school adminis- tration operating within it. Clyde M. Campbell comments that: Yd ffi'fi‘s ‘ ~ _P -A8- Surely one of the most significant problems in public school administration today is the establish- ment of a structure that will help to further the democratic idealism that has been discussed so widely by educators in the last two or three decades.1 Before the structure can be developed, an understanding of that "democratic idealism? is necessary. General characteristics. The founding fathers of this nation approached the word "democracy" primarily in relation to a ferm of government. This approach is still important to an understanding of the term and is encompassed in the phrase, "government of the people, for the people, and by the people." As the nation progressed, the word "democracy" began to assume a broad connotation that can best be expressed as a way of life. In the words of Kil- patrick; The term dgmpcracf is . . . used in two senses. On the one han , it ndicates a kind of government, a government of the people. On the other hand, it means a way of life, a kind and quality of associated living in which sensitive moral principles assert the right to control individual and group conduct.2 Dewey expresses a similar viewpoint. "A democracy," he says, "is more than a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint communicated experiences."3 1Clyde M. Campbell, "The Administrator Treads a Perilous Path," Th Nation's Schools, XLIX (March, 1952), A9. 2William Heard Kilpatrick, Philoso h of Education (New York: The Macmillan Company, I95I’, p. I57. 3John Dewey, Democrac and Education (New York: The Macmillan Company, 19%), p. IOI. r4173?" -49- This way of life is based upon an approach of the personal conduct of the individual toward himself and his fellow man. To quote from Childs: ”. . . the person is the ultimate seat of all value, and, as Dewey has observed, 'the cause of democracy is the moral cause of the dignity and worth of the individual.'"“ In order to accomplish the democratic way of life, society must arrive at some point not only where authoritarianism is rejected, but also where more than anarchy is accepted. Childs describes the nec- essary characteristics of a democratic society when he says: It [democracy] is a pattern of moral authority which is to be differentiated from a social regime that requires uncritical obedience to whatever happens to be established in its operating customs and in- stitution, from a situation of anarchy in which each person is a law unto himself, and from an autocratic system in which the many are subjected to the arbi- trary exercise of power by some privileged group. This type of moral authority denotes a system of self- government in which activities are carried on under authorities which the people have formed and sanc- tioned and which they voluntarily obey. Insofar as any society provides in its social and legal arrange- ments for the functioning of this kind of authority, it will be marked by characteristics we have come to recognize and cherish as democratic.5 Depocpatic principles. In a set of principles which comprise the framework upon which these characteristics should function, general statements become specific criteria of ~4John L. Childs, American Ppafspt%sm and Education (New York: Henry Holt an ompany, 5 , p. 3 . 5Ibid., pp. 130-131. fut-31s" -50- operation. Many writers have addressed their thinking to such a set of principles.. Kilpatrick developed one when_ he listed and discussed the "principles that characterize democracy as a way of life." 1. "Sovereignty of the Living Individual"; 2. The Principle of Equality: "Equal Rights for All” . . . Perhaps the most personally cherished of all democratic rights is the right to grow and thrive, so that each may be given a fair chance in comparison with others to make of himself and his life the best that in him lies; 3. Rights Imply Duties; A. Cooperative Effort for the Common Good . . . Since each individual enjoys the common good, each is involved in supporting the common good; 5. Faith in the Free Play of Intelligence: Discussion and Persuasion, not Force or Violence; 6. Freedom of Discussion. Specifically, democracy de- mands that each be free to think for himself--this is the chief dignity of man-~and free likewise to argue his belief before others.6 Child indicates his views regarding a democratic framework when he remarks that: A society in which authority rests on the voluntary consent of its members will . . . tend to support the principle of e ualit . . . . A society which lodges its authority n t e uncoerced consent of its members will not only be marked by the principle of reciprocity, it will also be characterized by a genuine sharing of interests. . . . A society which measures up to the moral criterion approved by Dewey will not pretend to have any good or and other than the good of individual human beings. The center of conscious experience is the individual human being. . . . A society which regulates its processes of social control by this cri- terion must be one in which all its members, irrespec- tive of factors of race, creed, color, sex, and occu- pation, have an effectual share in making and evaluating asic social policies. . . . A society cannot provide 6Kilpatrick, op. cit., pp. 139-146, pagsim. -51- fOr this kind of moral authority in the political sphere unless it maintains procedures that make it possible for governments to function efficiently and at the same time remain subject to the popular will. . . . A society can provide the conditions essential for a continuation of this kind of voluntary moral and political authority only as it keeps open the avenues of inquiry; discussion, criticism, and agi- tation. . . . A society which is to respect the demo- cratic criterion must be a plural society able to preserve certain abiding restrictions on the sphere and authority of government. In a democratic society, government may not use its power to suppress or domi- nate the process by which ideas are expressed and matured, and the public is made conscious of its own interests and becomes intelligent about the concrete means by which their interests are to be promoted.7 The following quotation from Campbell should serve to estab- lish the intended democratic point of view: ”Democratic living is not a station at which people arrive, it is a method of traveling."8 These principles of democratic behavior suggest an administrative structure that is quite different from the traditional authoritarian leader of the past. This state- ‘ment is especially true when one is discussing an institution that is charged with the dynamic evolvement of its society and thus the development of individuals to the limits of their ability and the recognization of the worth and dignity of every person in that society. 7Childs, op. cit., pp. 131-135, paggim. 8Campbell, "A Democratic Structure to Further Demo- ggatic values," Progreppiyg decapipp, XXX (November, 1952), -52- III. DEMOCRACY AND EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION What does this discussion of democratic philosophy have to do with the topic at hand? The answer to this ques- tion can best be given by quoting Dewey. Government, business, art, religion, all social institutions, have a meaning, a purpose. That pur- pose is to set free and to develop the capacities of human individuals. . . . Democracy has many mean- ings but if it has a moral meaning, it is found in resolving that the supreme test of all political in- stitutions and industrial arrangements shall be the contribution to the all-around growth of every member of society.9 Childs, paraphrasing Dewey, brings in the word "education." He writes: According to his [Dewey's] view, there is an in- herent connection between democracy and education, for democracy signifies the deliberate effort to organize a society in such a way that its social practicei will contribute to the growth of all its members. 0 These references should serve to point up the true bond that should exist between the aims of’a democratic society and the educational program within that society. Upiguepggg of educapiop. To accomplish democratic goals, every person associated with the educational enter- prise should be involved in the policy-making function. 9John Dewey, R onstru t o Philo o h (New York: Henry Holt and Company, , p. . lo Childs, OE. Cit., p. 1050 “PEPE-:2;- r. -—__~ I - S 75.3%.- * -53- The correct democratic procedure is the procedure of all of the people, not the decisions of a few administrators or other officials. This concept, coupled with the creative and highly technical nature of teaching, sets educational administration apart from administration in other enterprises of society. Campbell shows the basic differences between educa- tion and these other enterprises. He Observes that: To a great extent, the professions do things f people, rather than do things with people. In e uca- tion the task is not to do things to Tpeople, but to help people to do things for themse ves. Helping teachers to be creative calls for a differ- ent kind of administrative leadership from helping routine workers learn accepted ways of performing assigned tasks. The administrator of creative workers ghoulgzthink with staff members, not for staff mem- €r3e ‘Whitehead, discussing the management of the university, makes an observation pertinent to this discussion. He says: . . . the management of a university faculty has no analogy to that of a business organization. The public opinion of the faculty, and a common zeal for the purposes of the university, form,the only effec- tive safeguards for the high evel of universit work. The faculty should be a band of scholars, sti ating each other, and freely determining their various activities. You can secure certain formal requirements, 11Campbell, "Human Relations Techniques Useful in School Administration," The Amgrican School Boapg Jppppgl, 12Campbell, "A Democratic Structure to Further Demo- cratic values," Ppogregsive Education, XXX, 26. J —"--I-—'£- - -54- that lectures are given at stated times and that in- structors and students are in attendance. But the heart of the matter lies beyond all regulation.13 By expanding Uhitehead's point to include the public schools, the approach toward instructional leadership expounded in this thesis is well presented. C wer d a t . The discussion thus far has touched on the basic point in the consideration of democratic school administrative leadership. This basic point revolves around the concept of control, power, and authority. These terms have different meanings, depending on the philosophical basis of the society in which they are used. The traditional and somewhat autocratic approach used in many communities, boards of education, and offices of school administration, is that the superintendent of schools and building principals are hired to cqptppl the school system by exercising the ppppp vested in them by virtue of the ppppppipy of their position. Such an ap- proach may lead to a smoothly running machine but certainly does not utilize or accept any of the democratic principles discussed herein. This type of school administration places the superintendent in a dictatorial position in the school 1 3Alfred North Whitehead Th of Education (New York: The Macmillan Company, 192 , p. . INF?” -55- system, pre-supposes a definite hierarchy, establishes strict lines of’authority, and, in general, fosters an autocratic situation in which conformity and uniformity becomes the ac- cepted and expected mode of behavior. Horne's comments on uniformity in education are relevant. He declares that: The bane of the school has been the insistence upon uniformity of method and uniformity of product. This is not development but moulding. JMen are not made after the fashion of the factory, but of the garden. The pupil must not be conformed to the wooden educa- tional image, but transformed into the likeness of his true self.lh A comment by Campbell helps to clarify the shortcomings of the autocratic method of management. . . . the present structure has encouraged people to dominate others more than to cooperate with others. In short, the administrator is determining the policies, executing the policies, and recommending for dismissal those who refuse to abide by the POI-10133.15 In a democratic setting the traditional definitions of control, power, and authority are rejected because they are in opposition to the basic philosophy of dignity and worth of the individual. The democratic way of life cannot be realized when an administrator sends down decisions from above or considers it his position to hold control, power, therman Harrell Horne, The Phi§gspppz 05 Education (New York: The Macmillan Company, , pp. - . 15 Campbell, "A Democratic Structure to Further Demo- cratic Values," essive Education, XXX, 25. -56- and authority over employees under his supervision. On the other hand, the administrator who exerts no leadership, and who allows each individual complete freedom of choice and decision without regard for his fellow man, is not recogniz- ing the intent of individual worth and dignity. If a society dedicated to the worth and dignity of the individual and to his maximum development and self- realization cannot accomplish its goals with either autocratic or autonomous organization, how then is organization ap- proached with respect to control, power, and authority? It is the contention of this dissertation that an adminis- trative organization must be devised that will utilize and help to develop the unique talents and abilities of every member connected with the school program. Such an organi- zational scheme means many controls rather than one control. In the words of'Mary Follett, ". . . (1) control is coming more and.more to mean fact-control rather than man-control: (2) central control is coming more and more to mean the correlation of many controls rather than a superimposed con- trol."16 Power means a developmental power which, according to Pollett, is the only genuine power. She says: "Genuine power can only be grown, it will slip from every arbitrary 161Mary Parker Follett, amic A t n (New York: Harper and Brothers Pub 8 ers, , p. . '39“ (P_g~- .- - -57- hand that grasps it; for genuine power is not coercive con- trol, but coactive control.n17 And control means group authority not arbitrary authority from above. Again quoting from.Follett: Genuine authority is not a matter of "will” even of the "will of the people"; it is an interweaving actigi ! e The authority of the chief executive is not, in the best managed businesses, an arbitrary authority imposed from above, but the gathering up of many authorities found at different points in the or- ganization.18 Thus there is developed, in the words of Follett, "the author- ity of the situation."19 In an organization based upon these concepts the administrator truly becomes a leader and coordinator. Ac- cording to Griffiths and his associates: The superintendent's job is to develop along with the professional staff the community and the board of education, those poIicies which will enable the school system to produce the finest educational pro- gram possible.20 l7 Follett, Cregtpve Egpfrigpce (New York: Longmans, Green and Company, , p. . 18Ipid., pzpamio Aggipippratipp, p. 296. 19Ipid., p. 59. 20Griffiths, et al., izi Sc ls fo Ef ec- tive Educatign, p. 155. -58- IV. ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL PRINCIPLES FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION It now seems propitious to evaluate the principles selected in chapter III in relation to their consistency with, and utility in the democratic setting outlined above. The real test of any thoretical and philosophical proposal is its applicability in practice. Common purpppe. The principle of common purpose as presented in chapter III is as necessary in education as it - is in any other type of undertaking. The important point in a democratic setting is that the purposes of the enter- prise should be arrived at cooperatively. This can best be done by group participation in the development of those policies. According to previous discussion, the purposes of public education in a democratic society should be the development of the individual to the limit of his ability, and the recognization of the worth and dignity of every person. To realize these purposes, the administration must first recognize them within the staff of the school system. The autocratic administrator refuses to accept equality among his employees and often hands down decisions because he considers himself and his administrative staff to be above the rest of the employees. The purposes of democratic group involvement become a reality only if they are in -53- IV. ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL PRINCIPLES FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION It now seems propitious to evaluate the principles selected in chapter III in relation to their consistency with, and utility in the democratic setting outlined above. The real test of any thoretical and philosophical proposal is its applicability in practice. Common purpppe. The principle of common purpose as presented in chapter III is as necessary in education as it ‘ is in any other type of undertaking. The important point in a democratic setting is that the purposes of the enter- prise should be arrived at cooperatively. This can best be done by group participation in the development of those policies. According to previous discussion, the purposes of public education in a democratic society should be the development of the individual to the limit of his ability, and the recognization of the worth and dignity of every person. To realize these purposes, the administration must first recognize them.within the staff of the school system. The autocratic administrator refuses to accept equality among his employees and often hands down decisions because he considers himself and his administrative staff to be above the rest of the employees. The purposes of democratic group involvement become a reality only if they are in -59- operation at all levels of the school setting-~in the com- munity, with pupils, teachers, and above all, administration. Upipp'of dipgction. The unity of direction in public education should be a unity in broad general aims with an atmosphere of academic freedom.and individual experimenta- tion prevailing within the broad general aims. General aims consistent with democratic philosophy can be developed effectively by cooperative action on the part of all partici- pants. The administrator can set the example in terms of how he operates with the staff. As an example, the development of what is to be taught in the school system should be a cooperative process that involves all facets of the community. The decision of how it is to be taught should rest with individual teachers. The administrator has a responsibility to lead, guide, and help teachers evaluate their techniques in this process; but when both the "what" and the "how" of teaching become standardized, creativity, critical thinking, and experimenta- tion are stifled. The distinction between unity, with respect to broad aims, and individual freedom, with respect to specific techniques, requires a fine administrative technique. When broad directions are developed cooperatively, the dignity of individual teachers can be maintained within a framework of general.operational rules for the over-all institution. rm .3”, -60- L ne ta . As long as the traditional concept of line and staff prevails, with its hierarchical connota- tions, it will be a hinderance to democratic operation and creativity in the schools. Griffiths and his associates recognize this point of view. They hold that "The line and staff concept has been associated with autocracy.”21 They further comment: The eatest dissatisfaction found with the line i‘e‘deiiis‘efii353-2233?23.§€1§e§’§?§§3§fifie§iemt due to the fact that the hierarchical chain of author- ity must be followed throughout.22 Unfortunately, line organization is often associated with autocratic administration when the top line-position is the final authority, and has absolute power to enforce his authority. When the concepts of line positions are placed in a context of democratic living in such a way that they guide, direct, and enforce group policies-~not personal policies--then, and only then, will the principle of line organization realize its proper function in democratic school administrative organization. In this-frame of refer- ence one might say that the line administrator becomes a leader, a motivator, and a resource person; he enforces group policies through the line organization, but he is not the final authority. ZlGriffiths, et al., op, cit., p. 27. 22 Ipid., p. 25. -61- In the same vein, the staff person becomes an expert resource person in a specialized area. His function should always be one of service to the teaching staff. He too can motivate and lead, but his primary responsibility should be specialized service to the over-all aims of the school system. The staff person should not make decisions, but should help teachers and the community make better decisions for them- selves. Mary Follett captures much of this approach to line and staff when she says: When the process of cooperation between expert and peOple is given its legitimate chance, the experi- ence of the people ma change the conclusions of the expert while the cone usions of the expert are chang- ing the experiences of the people; further than that, the people's activity is a response to the relating of their own activity to that of the expert. Here we have the compound interest of all genuine cooperation.23 Considering the execution of adopted policy, the line administrator's emphasis should change from one of over-all concern to one of direct responsibility. In this context the administrator must assume the responsibility for proper enforcement of policies through the line positions of the organization. Spap of gppgppigign. The principle of span of super- vision, as presented earlier, has application in the demo- cratic school organization. This application should not be 2 3Follett, Cppapive Experiencp, p. 218. 7:43:31" ’ -52- in terms of superior-subordinate relationships but in terms of leadership, motivation, and service to a group. The psychological limitations on one person's ability to participate in or perform a limited number of tasks or responsibilities effectively at one time must be accepted regardless of the type of society or philosophy in operation. The important difference in democratic administration is the context under which the principle of span is operated. The democratic administrator should allow the principle of span to be applied from.the point of view of service to the teachers. When his service functions become so complex that he cannot relieve the creative worker of operational details so the creative worker can perform his contracted task, reduction of span by increasing the administrative personnel should be considered. C nt z t 0 -de t 1 ti n. In an organization that adheres to the democratic philosophy, the dispute over whether to have a centralized or decentralized administration should be quickly solved. If the definition for centraliza- tion by the American Association of School Administrators is accepted; Centralization is based upon the conviction that instructional improvement should be initiated, planned, Amanaged, and conducted by persons in the central office of a school system. The concern is usually with prob- lems of the entire school system rather than with the roblems of individual schools or of individual teachers. dividuals in the central office determine the goals to be attained and prescribe the technics and methodology 1 I Tarp-r“- -63- to attain these goals. Even the subject-matter and learning experiences may be written down and handed to a corps of teachers to be followed rather pre- cisely.2h It is easily seen that this approach has no place in a so- ciety recognizing and nurturing the worth and dignity of each individual, a society that works toward the goal of creativity and critical thinking on the part of all the people. . By rejecting the centralized approach because of its complete lack of harmony with democratic principles and its tendency to encourage standardization and thus reduce creativity, some degree or type of decentralization should be adopted. The extreme definition of decentralization would lead toward anarchy. Each individual would go his own way with no regard for his fellows. The American Association of School Administrators has suggested a type of decentralized organization that they call ”centrally coordinated." They de- fine centrally coordinated organization as follows: The centrally coordinated approach to instructional improvement maintains that the efforts of individual schools, individual teachers, and the central office are significant. The teachers in individual schools are encouraged to improve the instructional process in order to serve their children better. At the same time, staff members of some or all schools, together with supervisors and others, may combine their efforts to attack a problem of instructional improvement common to all or several schools.25 2“American Association of School Administrators, The Su erintendent a Inst cti nal Leader, Thirty-fifth YeaFFEok (Washington: The Association, I957}, p. 170. 25Ihid., p. 171. e ,mf 7'-ir:‘\ _w‘-7_*__q ..... -6£.- Thus there is developed a vehicle to allow and encourage cooperative participation in the solving of common problems. Departmentation. It was established in chapter III that departmentation had its seeds in decentralization and specialization. Decentralization has been defended above; and specialization is a fact of a modern, industrial, and highly complex society. Then, it should follow that de- partmentation is an established fact in public education. A qualification of the term and an understanding of the goals are needed, however, before the above statement can be accepted. Departmentation by subject-matter specialization tends to build empires within the school system and en- courages a highly academic curriculum. An organization policy that allows all teachers of a given grade in the elementary school, or a given subject in the secondary school, to meet and plan by themselves, tends to loose continuity of program. Individual departments tend to compete against each other fOr funds, excellence, and special considerations. If academic excellence per se, with no regard for integra- tion of subject matter, is the primary goal of the school system, academic departmentation may be an excellent tool to aid in its accomplishment. Academic departmentation has serious limitations, however, if the primary goal of the public schools is to provide a broad education, accompanied by exploratory -65- experiences in a number of specializations, in an over-all atmosphere of academic excellence as it relates to critical thinking and the discovery of ultimate truths in our society. An alternative proposal could be the organization of groups of faculty members representing different grade levels in the elementary schools, and different subject matter speciali- zations in the secondary schools. This type of departmenta- tion would encourage the study of broad problems common to the entire school, would tend to make specialists aware of the problems and points of view of other specialists, and would bring various specialized skills and knowledges to bear on school problems. SW. The principle of shared re- sponsibility receives little attention in areas other than public school organization, and therefore, it was not in- cluded in chapter III. This principle is so basic to demo- cratic school administrative organization that it must be included in this chapter. For the principle of span of supervision to work, it is necessary that the organization be so structured that detail work is assigned to detail workers, or that it is shared equally by all employees. Some executives feel that their positions require them to fulfill the "Folklore of the Big Man": a. If you keep lots of people waiting in your anteroom. b. If you have a lot of people reporting directly to YOUe ynrr' -66- c. If you make yourself indispensable by refusing to pass on your knowledge to others. d. If you do more detail work than anyone under you. e. If you show the other fellow how wrong he is. f. If you stick your fingers into other people's pies. g. If you sign or initial a lot of apers. h. If you make a big fuss over litt e things to show you are perfect and expect perfection in others. i. If you do these things, Yo Are a --In 0 Own Ezes!26 Such an executive is devoting his time to unnecessary detail work and is overemphasizing the importance of his position. The true leader of an organization must be concerned with the management and over-all operation of that organization. His energies must be applied to broad policies relating to the total function of the organization. On the other hand, when creative workers are over- burdened with detail work their creative potential is stiffled and their effectiveness reduced. In an enterprise of creative workers, each of whom is a specialist in his own right, the individual should be responsible for the functioning of his specialized area. Campbell vertifies this point in relation to education when he notes: "The structure in educational administration should place responsibility and authority with the job to be done."27 One of the primary functions ¥ L..- 26Catheryn Seckler-Hudson.(ed.). 222%§¥§¥§_2§-Q£E§21: tio d5 a ement (washington: Public a re ress, e P0 0 27 ~ * Campbell, "A Democratic Structure to Further Demo- cratic Values," gppgpegsivp Education, XXX, 28. -67- of the administrator in a school system.is to free the specialist so that he can apply his energies to his speciali- zation. According to Griffiths and his associates: The role of the administrative staff in an insti- tution is to create an organization within which the decision-making process can operate effectively. The organization should permit decisions to be made as close to the source of effective action as possible.28 Such an organization places the administration in the position of service to the specialized creative wonker. This is as it should be for, if the institution is to accom- plish its function, specialization must be handled by persons trained and equipped to carry out that function. Campbell notes this approach when he says: Creative workers should delegate routine duties to administrators rather than administrators delegating time consuming tasks to creative workers. Educational administrators should clear the way for teachers rather than teachers removing obstructions for administrators.29 The ideal alternative to such an approach is a true coopera- tive sharing of responsibilities on the part of all employees when duties and responsibilities are shared cooperatively and not delegated to or by anyone. Informal organization. Since informal organizations exist in all formal organizations, no attempt will be made 28 Griffiths, et al., Organizing Schools for Efgecpiye Edngapion, p. 62. 29Campbell, "A Democratic Structure to Further Demo- cratic Values,” Prognessive Edupation, XXX, 28. 74¢?" -68- to deny it. Informal organizations are often in conflict 'with the aims and purposes of formal organizations; and the serious administrative problem of trying to resolve the conflict does exist. It is the contention here that if prin- ciples of democratic behavior and cooperative participation are adhered to, aims and purposes of the informal organi- zations will tend to blend with those of the formal organi- zation. If employees are encouraged to express themselves openly and freely within the framework of the formal or- ganization, the conflicts that often arise informally will be more apt to be brought out in the open than to be allowed to fester in meetings and associations of the informal groups. V. THE ORGANIZATIONAL SCHEME The consideration of the operational organization for the improvement of instruction, within the framework of the definitions and qualified principles discussed in this chapter, is important to this discussion. A proposal regarding administrative organization for the improvement of instruction in the public schools will be made in this section. The organizational scheme will be divided into four major areas: (1) formulation of policy, (2) adoption of policy, (3) execution of policy, and (A) review of policy. Fo at on of lic . The policies of the school system should be formulated cooperatively by the total community to fit the needs and specific characteristics of 7I'r 12%" id'— - -68.. to deny it. Informal organizations are often in conflict with the aims and purposes of formal organizations; and the serious administrative problem of trying to resolve the conflict does exist. It is the contention here that if prin- ciples of democratic behavior and cooperative participation are adhered to, aims and purposes of the informal organi- zations will tend to blend with those of the formal organi- zation. If employees are encouraged to express themselves openly and freely within the framework of the formal or- ganization, the conflicts that often arise informally will be more apt to be brought out in the open than to be allowed to fester in meetings and associations of the informal groups. V. THE ORGANIZATIONAL SCHEME The consideration of the operational organization for the improvement of instruction, within the framework of the definitions and qualified principles discussed in this chapter, is important to this discussion. A proposal regarding administrative organization for the improvement of instruction in the public schools will be made in this section. The organizational scheme will be divided into fOur major areas: (1) formulation of policy, (2) adoption of policy, (3) execution of policy, and (A) review of policy. Formulation of pplicy. The policies of the school system should be formulated cooperatively by the total community to fit the needs and specific characteristics of yiffl'" l~'*' 4" -59- the community. Because of the creative nature of teaching, the teaching staff should be allowed and encouraged to take an active part. Engelhardt recognizes the need for coopera- tive effort in policy formulation when he says: Cooperative effort is primarily necessary in the determination of the general school policies to be recommended to the school board for consideration and approval, in the preparation of the curriculum and in the selection of textbooks and instructional supplies.30 The importance of involvement of school staff in policy formulation was observed by the Education Policies Commission, as is evident in the following quotation. The formulation of school policy should be a co- operative process capitalizing the intellectual re- sources of the whole school staff.. . . Some plan should be provided through which the constructive thinking of all the workers in a school system may be utilized.31 School policy, then, should be developed and formu- lated cooperatively by the teaching staff with the aid of the parents and pupils in the community. By the use of teacher aids and clerks to perform routine classroom opera- tions and day-to-day management, the teacher will be re- lieved of details and will be able to apply time to policy formulation. 30Fred Engelhardt, Public School Or anization and Ad- ministpapion (New York: Ginn and Company, I93I), p. 158. 31Education Policies Commission, The St ture and A ati n of Educatio in Ame ic D ocrac (WasEIng- ton: at one ucat on ssoc at on o t e nited States, 1938), p. 67. -70- A o t on o lo . The adoption of school policy has been, and must remain, a function of the board of edu- cation. "That the board of education should adopt policies,” in the words of Campbell, "is a principle seldom, if ever, questioned by those who believe in democratic administra- tion."32 Thus, the staff formulates policy and submits it to the board of education for adoption. The board of educa- tion has the alternative of accepting staff-formulated policy and adopting it, or returning it to the staff for further consideration. If the board cannot accept proposed policy it should continue to work.with the staff until such time that mutual agreement is reached and followed by board adoption. Execution of policy. The role of the superintendent of schools and the rest of the administrative personnel should be to see to it that policy, as formulated by the total staff and community and adopted by the board of edu- cation,is properly executed. The responsibility of the administration of the school system is seeing that adopted policies are carried out, and that the school system runs smoothly within the framework of the adopted policies. 32Campbell, "The Administrator Treads a Perilous Path," The Nation's Schools, XLIX, 50. -71- The execution of policy must be the ultimate responsi- bility of the superintendent of schools. Because of the limitations of span, he must employ and select others to assist him in these duties. Within the confines of execution of policy, the tra- ditional concept of line and staff may be in operation within the organization of the school. Repiew of pglicz. The agency that formulates the policy—~teachers and community-~shou1d also be the agency that reviews the functioning of the policy. In this capacity, the teachers and the community review the effectiveness of policies as their execution affects the operation of the educational program. As policies are reviewed they will tend to be revised and new policies formulated. Such a process leads back to the beginning, and begins the cycle over again. This type of organization develops an ever-changing environment that ‘will be able to facilitate the constantly fluctuating needs of the community and the society in which the schools function. Supgpintendent of sghools. The unique nature of the positions of superintendent of schools and other administra- tive personnel in this type of organization must receive special comment. Besides being an executor of policy, the superintendent must be the primary instructional leader of the school system. He must lead in all four phases of the operation. His motivation, along with the resources of the -72- rest of the administration, are keys to the success of any proposal. This, of course, does not mean to deny the leader- ship role of other employees who, under varying circumstances and situations, should be encouraged to assume leadership roles commensurate with their specific training and knowl- edge. This section, however, focuses attention on the superintendent of schools as in a leadership position. In Edugatponal Administration in a Cpnnging world, the thirty-seventh yearbook of the American Association of School Administrators, is the following quotation. As executive officer of the board of education, according to the thirty-seventh yearbook of the American Association of School Administrators, the superintendent . . . must serve as the key man in a team.of educa- tional leaders in developing and managing the educa- tional program within broad guidelines of school district policy. His is the task of integrating a process of planning managing, decision-making, re- search, and evaluation to the end that all resources of the district are brought to bear on the day-by- day educational influences effecting the boys and girls of the school district.35 A further statement by Campbell will help to crystallize the position of the school administrator; The public school administrator should be es- pecially proficient in helping pupils, teachers, 35American Association of School Administrators, Educ tional Administration in a Chan n Communit , Thirty- seventH Yearbook (WasEIngton: The Association, I553), p. 1&3- -73- and citizens evolve programs for the furtherance of learning experience in the school and community. The primary task of the administrator should not be to put over his program, bu to get people to think through their own programs.3 Thus the superintendent should operate at the execu- tion position of the continuum through the total administra- tive staff. He must also be in the middle of the total organization in his leadership, motivation, and resource role. In this capacity the superintendent of schools be- comes the most vital individual in the school system. When a leadership role of this nature is assumed in connection with the top executive position, the energies and creative potentials of hundreds of teachers and pupils are released. No other single position in any walk of life carries with it the opportunity for as worthwhile and farrreaching con- tribution to society and its members. The following chart will serve as a graphic representa- tion of this proposed organizational scheme. VI . SUMMARY This chapter has been concerned with the establish- ment of the democratic theory and philosophy of human re- lations as it relates to individual worth and dignity, the 36Campbell, The Anerican School Board Journal, CXXX (June, 1955), 32. -74- Chart I THE EVOLUTION OF SCHOOL POLICY FORMULATION (Employees, Community, Pupils) ll REVIEW ‘ I ADOPTION (Employees, fi—l soggfiggggfigm (Board of Community, Education) Pupils) r ' i EXECUTION (Superintendent and Administration) The process is underlined while the agency with pri- mary responsibility is in parenthesis. The superintendent appears in the center with leadership lines going to all p ases. -75- development of the individual to the limit of his capacity, and cooperative participation as a mode of democratic de- cision making. The application of this philosophy to the general area of educational administration and to the prin- ciples of administrative organization selected in chapter III, was also covered. The final concern of the chapter was to propose a specific scheme of organization for the public schools. This scheme was based upon the selected principles as they apply to the features of a democratic society, and more specifically, the institution of public education in such a society. The plan was based upon policy evolution with respect to (l) policy formulation, (2) policy adoption, (3) policy execution, and (4) Policy review. It was suggested that (1) staff, with the aid of the community, formulate policy; (2) the board of education adopt policy: (3) the superintendent of schools, in conjunction with his adminis- trative staff, execute policy: (h) the staff and community review policy; and (5) the superintendent act as leader and motivator of all phases of the operation. It is within this mode of operation that the organi- zational procedures of the school districts in the state of ‘Michigan, as determined by the questionnaire prepared for this study,37 will be analyzed. 37See Appendix. CHAPTER V PRESENTATION OF DKTA I. INTRODUCTION To determine the existing patterns of administra- tive organization fer instructional improvement, a ques- tionnaire was developed and submitted to a disproportionate stratified random sample of public school districts in the state of Michigan. Disproportionate stratified random sample in this instance means that the total population was divided into five strata according to number of teachers employed and that different percentages of each stratum ‘were selected at random to comprise the total sample. In each of the school districts included in the sample, the superintendent of schools was asked to complete the ques- tionnaire in terms of school records and his personal opinion of his Job and his school district operation. This chapter will present the data obtained from the questionnaires that are pertinent to administrative organi- zation for improved instruction. The chapter raises issues discovered from the responses that are relevant to specific data, presents the data in tabular form, and contains brief explanations of the tables developed. -76- _ -77- Chapter VI will present an analysis of the issues raised. Chapter VII will further analyze the data presented herein in terms of the point of view developed earlier in chapter IV. Chapter VIII will discuss general findings of the dissertation. II. ANALYSIS OF RESTONSES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE Tables I, II, and III of chapter II presented the details of the original sampling technique. These tables, along with their descriptive information, verified the facts that (l) the total population for this study in- cluded public schools in the state of Michigan employing twenty-six or more teachers: (2) because of the size of the city of Detroit and the sparsity of schools in the Upper Peninsula of the state these areas were excluded: (3) the total sample contained 110 school districts from the total population: (A) questionnaires were submitted to the super- intendents of schools of the districts included in the sample; and (5) the sample was divided into five strata, or groups, in terms of number of teachers employed. . Table IV presents data on the total population, the original sample, and number and per cent of usable question- naires returned from each stratum. It can be seen from.this table that the percentage of usable questionnaires returned in each group remained in the same relative ratio as the we? -73- mmmmoamsm oepmowmfipnmo genome» Om on ON a m nacho moohoamEm nonwoNMHpAmo nmsommp OOH on Hm u 4 macaw moohoamsm cmpmoamapnmo nmnomeo ooN on HOH n m goono mmmhoaa8m oopmowmaoamo nmnommp 00m op HON u N mocha momhoaa8m oopmoamwptmo umnomop o>onm one Hem a a macho ¢.¢N 0.0m 0m H.0m oaa 00m Hopes m.oa 5.Hm NN m.ma eN HMH m N.ON v.05 MN m.oN om add a m.©N N.mn 0H m.mm 4N an m N.um n.0n ma ©.we ma mm N o.ow o.ow NH o.ooa ma ma H nonempom omanopmm omnnopem oHaEmm cw maaemm cowumasmom macho noapmasmom oHaEmm mo R monwmcaowommsq macho Ho R we ouwm Hmpoe Hence 90 R manmmmo mo .02 coausoom metamQGOHpmoso cannon: new .mamemm Scream .cowpmflsaom Hmpoa mo amasonov mmowpmowmwpmupm hp mamhammH manna -79- original sampling percentage in each group. The original sample represented 30.1 per cent of the total population whereas the usable questionnaires represented 24.A per cent of the total population. Thus, although the total sample dropped from 30.1 to 2A.h per cent, the relative proportion between groups remained constant. The questionnaire was divided into three major areas: basic school district data, administrative personnel, and operational procedures. The data presentation, along with issues discovered, will follow the general make-up of these three broad areas. All data is presented with respect to the five groups (strata) so that comparisons can be made in terms of size of school districts. III. BASIC SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA The issues relating to basic school district data of school districts as they affect admdnistrative organization are: l. The relationship of geographic area of school districts and number and type of administrative personnel. 2. The relationship of size of school districts, as deter- mined by number of teacher-certificated personnel, and number and type of administrative personnel. 3. The relationship between geographic area and size of school district as a combined factor effecting number and type of administrative personnel. The number of buildings in, and area of, school dis- tricts in the sample are presented in Table V. This table presents information on number of elementary buildings, sostmE cam EdEHGHE u mesmeoxm mmmAOHQEe ooomOHmenoo nonommp Om on ON n m moonu mothHQSm nopmonHpnmo genome» OOH on Hm u a macho moo>OHQEo ompmoHMHunmo genome» OON op HOH u m macho methHQEm oooMonHpnmo Monsoon» OOm op HON u N macaw mmohOHmsm cmpmonthoo genome» o>onm cam HOm u H macho m .w H5 m.mu OOHIO.Om N m.N m uN mO.H NIH O.H O.H e nH m an e.mm OmHnO.m m O.m ONum mO.H NnH 0.4 m.e mHnN 4 NH N.mN NOHum.N u w.O HHnm OO.H HaH 0.0 m.m OHue m mH m.eN mm uO.e HH e.NH mNnO mO.H NIH 0.0H m.HH NNnm N Om m.Oe NHHIO.mH 5N O.hN OSuOH OO.N :uH O.mN O.mN hmuaH H mama mnmwomz mmmozvmmEmprm moses mesmnpxm momHomz some: mmEmtpxm macho mmHH: mam: m cH muoHuumHa Ho moa< mHNUOB smHm mmm .NmeamEmHm peHnumHa hem mwnHOHHSm mo amneoz mpOHnumHO Hoonom mo monopmmm Hoonhsm mo mmoono an mHthmn mHnme -81... number of senior high buildings, total number of buildings, and geographic area of school districts in square miles. By careful inspection of these data it can be seen that there are extreme variations in both number of buildings and geographic area within the school districts of any one group. For example, group A districts have between 2 and 19 elementary buildings, 1 and 2 senior high buildings: 3 and 20 total.buildings, and have geographic areas varying from 3 to 150 square miles. Similar observations can be made in all groups. However, mean and median figures show that (1) there is a direct relationship between number of buildings and number of teachers employed, and (2) there is an inverse relationship between area of school districts and number of teachers employed. IV. ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL The number and type of admdnistrative personnel in school districts is fundamental to a study of administrative organization. Basic data of this nature is necessary befbre any analysis of the organizational procedures can be under- taken. Teagher—agginistrator ratio. The issue with respect to teacher-administrator ratio is the relationship between number of teachers per administrator in various size school districts. Table VI reports the findings of the question- naires with respect to this issue. An interesting observation . 2 an. Esstma one ESEHGHE u mmEmauxm mommOHQso oopmoHqutoo genomeo Om on ON n m anonO memAOHQEm wepmoHMthoo nonommu OOH on Hm n 4 macho mmohOHmam oomeHMHunoo nonommp OON op HOH u m macho mmomOHmam umpmonthmo genome» OOm on HON u N macaw moohOHQEm ompmoHMHpnoo negommp m>onm one HOm u H macaw O.mH m.wH uHumN mm um Om umN O.N O.N m IH m m.mH m.mH 4HuHm mp 55 OOH uHm 0.4 0.: h IH e ¢.mH H.mH mHnHN OHH meH OON anH m.m m.m mHam m H.5H O.mH HHneN cum mum 04m ubHN O.NN O.4N maam N H.mH m.mH NHION 4mm Hmw NmeHaHOs 0.0m 0.4m ONHun H msmHomz names mmamapxm OHpmm nonmApchHao oHnme -33- that can be made from this table is the relative consistency of the mean and median teacher-administrator ratio. The mean ratio varies only from 15.1/1 to 18.5/1 while.the median ratio varies only from 15.1/1 to 19.0/l. In contrast with these data, the extreme variation is actual teacher-adminis- trator ratios shows a range from ll/l to 70/1. Thus, it can be seen that there is a school district with one admin- istrator for every 11 teacher-certificated employees while there is another school district with an administrator for every seventy teacher-certificated employees. Tgachigg againistrators. The issue here is that many school districts expect their administrators to teach along with the performance of their administrative duties. When an administrator is forced to devote part of his time to teaching, his administrative function is reduced. In the case of very small buildings, this situation may be a wise utilization of manpower, but whenever the administrator must devote part of his time to non-administrative tasks his leadership service and the effectiveness of his position is reduced. Table VII analyzes the data collected on teaching . administrators. It can be observed that both the number of teaching administrators and the per cent of their time devoted to teaching increases as the school districts get smaller. Lip; and gtaff againigtratorg. Data on teacher- administrator ratio and teaching administrators were mom%0HmEm osmeHmehoo nonommp Om 0p ON u m macho mmmAOHmSe oopmoHMHpuoo pmnomop OOH op Hm u a macho mmo>0HmSm oopmonHpAoo nonomop OON op HOH u m macho moohOHmsm umpmonHpaoo hegemop OOm op HON n N macho -34- meo>0HaEm umpMonHpnmo amnomop m>opm use HOm u H macho HO Om H a a HH m mm mm OO as m H a ON 5H s mm mm m m H a m mm ON H N N N n I a open on I I a H N N H .anm .apnm .nHam .cHnm .cHam .chm .oHam .aHam maH macaw .pmma .pmma swam .mHm .pmm< .pmma swam .on -aoHaem swam . m .mHm .sm nape .nm .mHa .em .pmpa :OHHMH0065§< .HO eoz op vmpo>mo maHe mo poem hem pom: weepmppmHsHeu< wsHaomme mo .02 muopmApchHav< waHnomoa mo museum hp mHthmp meme -35- presented above. It now becomes necessary to discuss the kinds of administrative positions in existence in terms of their line or staff definition. The questionnaire defined line positions as being supervisory or authoritative in nature. Staff positions were defined as advisory or re- source positions. The issues here are: l. The relative number of line and staff positions in school district organization. 2. Types of positions that are considered line or staff. 3. The de es of confusion that exists over the line or staf definition of various positions. A. The degree that certain administrative positions are defined as line when they clearly should be staff positions; i.e., business managers, administrative assistants, and subject matter or grade level curriculum coordinators. Table VIII compares the number of line and staff positions by groups. As would be expected, the mean number of both line and staff administrators decreases as the schools become smaller. The fact that the median figures agree favorably with the mean figures indicates that the spread of numbers of positions within groups is evenly dis- tributed. Careful inspection of the data in this table shows that there is at least one district that reported no line administrators while another reported A8. Similarly, at least one district reported no staff administrators while one reported 37. Tables IX, X, and XI analyze the line and staff interpretation of various administrative positions in 34‘7”" -36- Table VIII.--Ana1ysis by Groups of the Number of Administrative Personnel per District Number of Administrators Line Administrators Staff Administrators Group Extremes Means Medians Extremes Means Medians 1 0-A8 31.3 31.0 0-37 17.A 18.5 2 13’25 1901 1900 0-32 908 800 3 A-25 9.5 9.0 0-16 3.9 1.5 A 0-18 5.7 5.0 0- 6 1.3 0.0 5 0- A 2.6 3.0 0- 3 0.4 0.0 Group 1 = 501 and above teacher certificated employees Group 2 = 201 to 500 teacher certificated employees Group 3 = 101 to 200 teacher certificated employees Group A = 51 to 100 teacher certificated employees Group 5 = 26 to 50 teacher certificated employees Extremes = minimum and maximum TH?” -87.. memAOHmao umpmonHpnoo nepommp Om op ON a m macho mmthHQEm ompmoHMHpnoo hoaommp OOH op Hm n 4 macho mom>0HQEm vmpmoHHHpaoo honommp OON op momNOHQEe especHMHpAee penemep OOm op msoNOHQSm oopmoHHHpnmo amaomep o>opm use whopmpvaooo estoHupso weepmcHnaooo poppmz posnpom weepmmHoaooo spHoOHaaoO mchHHsm mHmaHomHum pampmHmm< no 00H> stepmoHeaooo Ho>mHumcmaO mnmom pseSpamamO HOH u m aoono HON u N macho HOm u H macaw hampmmsmHm .5 hampsosmHm .O hampneEmHm .m hampCmEmHm .¢ humpnoSon .m hampmmamHm .N mHmaHoanm hampomsmHm .H «mam m>opm 0p Umaaomoa mcoHpHmoa mo momma mcHH u H Hampm n m H «H a m m m m N mm m a N u H m H e mm m m H N ON N a m u mmH N H m ON 4 N OON H m macho Mllfi.m H O m H m .Hijdim H m .I. H N m H m:0HpHmom moOHam> waHhmsooO snowmen Ho hepesz mmOHpHmom m>HpMApmHaHB IO< hampamsmHm mo mHnmnowpmHsm ooHH com mmmpm opp mo museum hp mHthmnasn.xH meme 1':st -33- momHOHQEm OopmoHHHpamo amsommp Om 0p ON wmohOHasm umpMonthoo amnommp OOH op Hm memAOHQEN umpmoHHHpnmo nocommp OON 0p HOH u methHQSm OomeHMHpamo monomep OOm 0p HON mmmAOHasm OopmoHMHpnmo nmnommp m>opm cam HOm mnopmepesooo ssHsopneso meHeHHsm seem topamm .mH mHaHO no amen .ON mHmQHosHpm pompmHmmN no moH> stm aOHcmm .mH whom we amen .mN mnopwsHvaooo pGOSpAonmnmmoaO :me aoHamm .OH maOpNoHvaooo soHsoHaaoo :me aOHnmm .ON whopmeHenooo seeps: pomnnsm nape noaemm .mH m @9090 H apouu m QSOAO N.msoao H macho mvmmm pmepnmmmn anm nOHsem .mH mHmapoeHea amen seesaw .eH ue>opm op Omaammmn mGOHpHmoa mo momma mpHH u H mmepm u m H ON m H H H H m N H mH N HN H N N N N H H H a H HH H OH m OH m H O O NH 4 m ON Om 4H N m O N Hm N 0 OH 3 ON H n m H m n m m u m m m u m m m u m agate ON wN ON H OH H OH H H mGOHpHmom mpoHam> waHhmpooO maomamm Ho pmpEdz maOHpHmom m>ppeapmpcpeea swam noaemm No apameoppmHmm mean age Nessa map No manage am mamaHmca--.x mHan mmoho mas OopmonHpnmo nonommp Om 0p ON m macaw mmmOOH as OopmoHHHpaoo genomep OOH op Hm u a macaw mooHOHgam ospmoHMHpnmo Aesommp OON 0p HOH u m macaw mmthHmsm nepmeHmeamo amnommp OOm 0p HON u N nacho mmmAOHOEm uopmonthmo amnemmp m>opm use HOm a H macho GOHpopnpmpH mo swampo pH pomenmpaneasm pampmHmm< .HN esHpoHaaoO mo nepomnHO .mH aoHpmopOm hampnmEmHm mo nopoeaHO .NH :OHpmopOm hnmnnoomm Ho nopomaHO .HN mHoonom Ho pamusmpaHamaom .HH NN One HN maepesz Ho GOHpmaHpEoo .mN maemmsmz mmmonzm .OH Hmcaompmm mpnmpmHmm< m>HpMApmHnHEO< .O we mwnmno.oH pneczmanhemsm pampmHmm< .NN maOpmoanooo EpHsoHnaou HoosomnHHH .m ue>opm 0p Omnaman mGOHpHmom mo magma ocHH u H mmmpm u m H H OH N m N N H N H OH m H H H N H a H H m H H N H N H mH m N m O OH O O N N H H H H NH N N O N N N m H m m O a H 4H s OH N N e H OH H #310000 u m H m H m H m H m H m H m N N NN HN mH NH HH OH m w l ) m:0HpHmom mSOHem> wnHmanuoO mnompmm mo pmpasz m Hm amasoee m20HpHmom m>Hpmnp anaHEO< oonmO Hmppomo Mo aHnmnoHpmHmm moHH use wwmpm esp no maooao an mHthmGHpenpmHaHaO< .N pneooepaHneasm poepmHmm< .m mHoosom mo pceeaechaemom .H ue>ope op Oeahemea muoHpHmoo mo momma OOH OOH OOH O.m m um O.NN m NN m O HO NH aN OOH O OOH O.m O um O.eO OH mN 4 ON HO H: mm OOH mO OOH 0.0 OHnm 4.:O OH OH m em mm Om mm OO Om NO 0.0H emuO 0.00H mH mH N Om OO Om OO OO OO OO OOH 0.0m OOum m.mw OH NH H m O m m a m N (Hr enema mmEeapxm .oz mpoanmHO macho msoHpHeom osz meeppHsaom.mo poeo pea so maomaem m eppHa no .02 no nepasz uaoO wmwpem muopnpmpo «o O use .02 mpopnpmao Hooaom as mHHoeeoo osapetpmHeHEea mo em: mo sneeze an mamaHmeas-.HHx meea -93- essteE One adaHoHE eEOApxm meeOoHOSO oepeOHmeteo aegoeep Om op ON a m Osoao meeOoHOeo oepeOHmeheo henoeep OOH 0p Hm H OnoAO meeOoHan OepeOHmeheo nepoeep OON op HOH a m Ozono meeOonae OepeOHmeneo nonoeep OOm op HON n N Opoao eeeOoHaEe oepeOHmeaeo nepoeop e>ope One HOm u H macho mHeOHoaHam pmepmHmm< .O weepenHoaooO peppezrpoenpsm .m moeem paeEphean .m maegoeea .N mHeOHoaHam quOHHsm .: mnopeaHonooo esHooHaeso .H ue>ope op veanemep mooHpHmoO mo mama NO m OOH w N.O Omum mm NH NN m NN OH 4O 4O NN m.O OHum wO OH MN O me me OO HN OOH HN m.m O am mO OH OH m OH Om ow OH OOH OH ¢.OH mmum OO OH mH N Om Om mm mm OOH OH N.O mHuO Om O NH H m m (H m m H mceefi meEeapxm pceolmmm .oz mpOHapmHO mooao mnoHpHmom psz meeppHsEoO Ho pneo hem no emompem eeeppHe Mo .02 no hepasz taco wnH>em epOHApmHO no O One .02 mpOHapmHO Hoonom pH meeppHEEoo 85H50Heaoo meOHHsm no em: no maooaO Op mHmOHeaope one HOm u H anono moeem pneEpnemeO .O mnopenHonooO peppez poenpnm .m mnoHeennoO .m mnenoeea .N mHeOHoanm pnepeHmm< .4 mHeOHoanm mnHoHHnm .H ue>ope op oennwmen mnoHpHmom mo onOa m m m 03 mm 2 o.- ..m a S N m HN OH OH OH mO am 0.0 mH um mm OH mN O NH He NH mm 4O HO O.w OmHnm #O OH OH m OH O mH mm NO mm w.O OH um OOH mH mH N OO Om HO OO OOH OOH m.OH mm um mO O NH H m m a m N H mneeE monenpxm pneo nem .oz mpOHApeHO OnonO enoHpHmom npws eeeepaaaoo mo pneo new no mnomnem meeppflfi Ho .02 no 909832 3800 wnH>em mpOanmHO mo O one .02 1“ ll seventeen Hooaom ea meeppHsEoO enHSOHnnnO He>eH eoenO no peppez pomhpnm mo me: we monoao Op mHeOHenauu.>HN ereO -95- Enstes one sneHnHe u meaenpxm meeOonEe oepeOHMHpneo nenoeep Om op ONnum aspmu meeOoHOEO oepeonHpneo nonoeep OOH op Hm u Hensono meeOonse oepeOHMHpneo nonoeep OON op HOH u m Ononc eeoOoHOEe oepeOHmeneo nonoeep OOm op HON u N OnonO eeeOoHan oepeOHmeneo nonoeop e>ope one HOm u H Onono mnmnoeee .O mnopenHonooO annOHnnnO mnHoHHnm .O mnopenHonooO annOHnnnO no noHponnpmnH eanOHnnno HebeH ooenO no neppez poenpnm .m no emneno nH pneoneannemnm pnepmem< .m mnopenHonooo enHoOHnnnO eonnaemem .N mHeOHoanm wnHoHHnm .e mHoonom no pneonoannennm .H ue>ope Op oennemen mnoHpHmoO mo mama OOH HH Om HH OO O.NN Nms m H: O NN m OO HH NN Om mm Om O.mN Om aN Om O mN 4 OO Hm mH OOH mN Hm OO m.Om OONuO NO mH OH m OO ON OO OOH ON Om OH 0.0N OH aHH OO OH MH N OOH OH OO OOH OH Om ON H.MN me am mm OH NH H O m m J m m, H mneeE moaenpxm pneo nem .oz mpOanmHn anonO enoHpHmom anz meeppHemOO Ho pneo new no mnoenem weeppHs mo .02 Ho nepsnz taco wngem mpOaneHO no O one .02 mpOanmHO Hoonom nH meeppHEeoo EanoHnnnO eoHSuEemem no em: no mmnono Op eHmOHen¢:|.>x eree -96- Table XVI.--Ana1ysis by Groups of Use of Citizens Curriculum Committees in School Districts Number and Per Cent of Dis- tricts Having Committees Group Number of Districts Number er Cent 1 12 2 l7 2 13 1 8 3 l9 5 28 A 23 2 9 5 22 A 18 Group 1 = 501 and above teacher certificated employees Group 2 a 201 to 500 teacher certificated employees Group 3 = 101 to 200 teacher certificated employees Group A = 51 to 100 teacher certificated employees Group 5 26 to 50 teacher certificated employees -97- Table XIII shows that about three quarters of the districts questioned have building curriculum committees and that the mean size of these committees is fairly constant regardless of size of district. The positions of persons (most often found on these committees are teachers and build- ing principals. In larger districts, department heads and assistant principals often are added. The use and composition of subject-matter or grade- 1evel curriculum committees is analyzed in Table XIV. These kinds of committees are used rather commonly in group 1, 2, 3, and A schools-~from.100 to 75 per centof the time-- but by only 55 per cent of group 5 schools. The size of these committees varies from 3 to 150 persons with mean sizes being relatively constant in all but group 1 schools. These data indicate that building principals and teachers are the only persons on committees common to all sizes of school districts. Systemewide curriculum committees are reported often by large schools--72 to 83 per cent of the time--but less often by smaller schools, as shown in Table XV. The ex- tremes of membership are from 2 to 200; but, except for group 3, the mean memberships are even. Positions on these committees most common to all groups are building principals and teachers. Large districts add assistant superintendents in charge of instruction, and small districts add the super- intendent of schools. -93- Table XVI indicates that citizens curriculum advisory councils are not uniformly accepted by the districts in this sample. The percentages of districts reporting them is both small and inconsistent between groups. Committee guggtion. The questionnaire asked the superintendent to indicate, in open-ended questions, the primary function of the various committees discussed above. These data are tabulated in Table XVII. The table lists the functions reported by the superintendents in broad areas, and shows the number of groups of districts respond- ing and number of individual responses fer each function. As can be observed from this table, administrative councils have the widest variety of functions, while systemewide curriculum committees have more limited functions with con- siderable agreement among superintendents as to their func- tions e Iggolvemegt of the gupgrintgndgnt. The issue dis- covered in relation to this set of data are: 1. The degree to which excessive personal contacts by the superintendent affect his leadership role. 2. The degree to which superintendents of schools are using acceptable span of supervision theory. 3. The extent of local leadership exerted by the superin- tendent, as indicated by kinds of positions he has contacts with most frequently and the frequency of these contacts. A. The conflict between responsibility and accessability to the superintendent. Table XVIII analyzes the number of different people the superintendent comes in contact with, in a professional -99- Table XVII.--Primary Functions of School Committees as Per- ’ ceived by the Superintendent of Schools Administrative Councils (5) G T Coordination 5 26 Recommend policies 5 16 Advisory to the superintendent A 1A Establish polcies A 11 Planning A 10 Communication 3 9 Review policies 3 8 Evaluation 2 7 Interpret policies 2 5 Curriculum 2 5 Execute policies 1 1 Instructional leadership 1 1 'Social 1 1 Create and improve functional organization 1 1 Building Curriculum Committees (5) Improved instruction 5 38 Recommend improvements 5 25 Evaluation 5 l6 Coordination 3 9 Select materials 5 8 Review research 2 7 Develop programs 2 5 Advisory l 1 New buildings 1 l G = Number of groups reporting. T = Total number of times reported. ( ) = Numbercf‘groups having the committee. -100- TABLE XVII (Continued) J Subject Matter or Grade-Level Curriculum G T Committees (5) Select materials 3 21 Evaluation 5 17 Develop curriculum 5 16 Study curriculum A 12 Steering and coordination A 10 Recommend policies 3 9 Planning 3 8 Instructional improvement 2 7 Review research 1 3 Advisory l 2 Standardize curriculum 1 2 Improve teaching 1 1 System-Wide Curriculum Committees (5) Develop general curriculum 5 23 Coordination 5 11 Evaluation A 9 Recommend policies 3 9 Develop specific curriculum 3 A Citizens Curriculum Committees (5) Advisory to the board of education 5 8 Specific problems 5 8 General study 3 A Communication 2 2 Advisory to the superintendent l 1 Advisory to the staff 1 1 Evaluation 1 l m f G = Number of groups reporting. T 7 Total number of times reported. Number of groups having the committee. -lOl- meeOoHaae oepeOHmeneo nonoeep Om op ON a m Onono monOHOso oepeOHMHpneo nenoeep OOH op Hm u a Onono meeOOHaae oepeonHpneo nonoeep OON op HOH u m Onono eeoOonse oepeOHMHpneo nenoeep OOm 0p HON u N Onono eeeOoHOse oepeOHprneo nenoeep e>ope one HOm u H OnonO ON ON ON OH NN m m mN eH ON mN O mN e O NH O NH OH HO O OH m m mH mH mH mm mH N w mm mm mN NH H ..m ne>. .. u . .. u . .. u. mO: m .mu .mnm u. mpoaneHO Onono memnommem no pneo new MO .02 New; neg pneoneannemnm map Op epoepnoo HenOHmmemonm Ho masonO Op mHmOHen¢n|.HHH>N ereO ~102- way, during an average week. The responses show that the number falls between 15 and 75 persons. Feurteen per cent of the superintendents reported between 200 and 500 contacts per week, and 3A per cent reported between 0 and 15 contacts per‘week. Tables XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, and XXIII report the data obtained from the question regarding how often the super- intendent has contacts with specific persons in his school district weekly. These tables compare the superintendents' responses by group with the responses of all of the super- intendents. The figures are reported in percentages so that comparisons can be made between groups and positions. For example, Table XIX shows that 83.A per cent of the ‘superintendents in group 1 have between 0 and 5 contacts with.their high school principals per week, and 36.A per cent of all of the superintendents have between 0 and 5 con- tacts with their high school principals per week. By read- ing other tables, it can be seen that comparable figures for groups 2, 3, A, and 5 are 76.9, 27.8, 20.0, and 9.2. per cent respectively. Similar comparisons can be made for each interval of number of contacts and for each person listed. When asked the number of employees directly responsible to them, superintendents responsed as shown in Table XXIV. When asked the question, "How many of the following persons have diregt accegs to you concerning a professional matter .Amnnnpen OmO epneoneannoanm Hepos a Hepoe .Hmnnnpen NHO H OnonO a H .90 Ill) P )r -103 - HN.mHO 0.0H HH.N O Hm.emO 0.00 HO.HHO N.OH mm NH mnHenna Hooaom no OH>HO no mneNHpHO Hm.O O N.HH Hm.OmO m.mm Hm.OmO m.mm HO.NHO N.NN Nm O nemeeeznmmmnHmsm .s.N O .m.mHO m.mm .N.ONO m.m HO.mmO e.mm Hm NH meeenem HH.OHO m.m .H.OHO HH.OHO AH.mOO O.HO OO NH mHHnsm H0.0 O m.m -w.mNO o.mN Am.HOO 0.00 Hm NH mnopomnHo seneonn HO.N O .O.¢HO AH.NmO 0.00H em HH memmm semapneamo .0.0 O .s.m O Hm.ONO m.m Am.HOO O.HO mm NH mnmaommn OnenemEQHa O0.0 O HO.mHO Hm.HHO 0.0H Hm.OOO H.mm mm NH assesses Hoopom anm -m.O O Hm.ONO HO.mNO o.mN Am.OeO o.mO NO NH HeaHoaHnn OnmpeeEmHm -0.0HO w Aa.NNO m.m HO.omO m.m He.OmO s.mm mm NH HmaHoeHnn Hooeom emHm Am.mNO 0.0H H0.0NO 0.0H -H.ONO 0.0H Om.ONO 0.0m am NH. somemHmma .eea H0.0NO 0.0H H0.0HO m.mm Hm.OHO m.m Hm.NNO O.HH OH NH pnoeeeannmnsm SampmHmma epo . O Hepo H .90 Hepoa .OO mnoHp H Onono enoenem ommoa .Ilumempnun. .uinummmwaln. -Hmom eH meoHp pee: new mpoepnoo no .02 nHeom mo mnopsnz mnOHneO mannoaem mpneoneannomnm no pneO new Hepoa mo .02 U l ' III II) mpneoneannemnm HHe ppHs nomHnemsoo nH enomnem mnoHne> ppps mpnooneannemnm enO OnonO Op mesa nmm epoepnoo mo nepsnzun.xHx erea .Aennnpen OOO epneoneannemnm Hepoa a Hepoa .Hmnnnpen mHO N OnonO u N .90 (1‘ I)) l“. I) )IIH) -104- AN.mHO N.O OH.O O 0.0 HO.HmO N.Om OO.HHO O.mm mm mH mnHmnnH Hooeom no OH>HO no mneNHpHO Hm.O O 0.0H nm.OmO 0.0m Hm.OmO 0.0H .0.0HO Nm OH sewage: mmoanmsm HH.N O m.m Hm.mHO m.m HN.ONO H.mN HO.mmO m.mm Hm NH mpeenen .H.OHO HH.OHO HH.OHO 0.0H OH.mOO m.mm ON NH mHHasn .0.0 O m.O HO.mNO O.mN Hm.HOO 0.00 Hm NH mnopomnHO senwonm .O.N O OO.HHO 0.0H .H.NOO 0.00 Hm OH meme: semapneamo H0.0 O OH.O O m.m Om.ONO -m.HOO O.HO mm NH mnmpomon OnenessOHm A0.0 O OO.mHO m.m. .m.HHO Am.OOO O.HO mm NH enmeoemn Hooaom awn: .m.O O m.m Hm.ONO m.m HO.mNO m.m .m.OHO H.nO NO NH HeaHoeHnn OnepcmaeHm .O.OHO OH.NNO OO.OmO H.mN AH.OmO 0.00 mm mH HmnHoeHnN Hooeom gene Hm.mNO O.mN H0.0NO m.Om .H.ONO m.Om Hm.ONO Hm m pnepmHmma .EOH H0.0NO 0.0H H0.0HO m.mm Hm.OHO O.mN Hm.NNO OH NH pnoeaopcnnonsm .pmma Hemmm, N .OO Hepom N .OO epoe .OO Hepos N .OO mnoHp N OnonO nnomnem l. OMwON‘ 1 HOWHOH OH- ulzlxwumnusu -Hmom an muons News nem mpoepnoo mo .02 uHmom mo enopsnz wnoHneO mannoOem epneoneannmnnm no pneo new Hepoa mo .02 ‘II I (I mpneoneannemnm HH< psz nomHneaaoO nH mnoenem OOOHneO psz mpneoneanannm 038 anonO Op xees new mpoepnoo mo nepsnzau.NM ereO _‘v’_ .Hennnpen OOO mpneonoannemnn Hepoe a Hepoe .Hmnnnpen OHO m Onono u m .OO III) I )(I‘ (I'll!) ).IH) .N.mHO O.mH HH.O O . .O.HmO m.ON .O.HHO O.mm mm OH mnHenNH Hosesm no OH>HO no mneNHpHo .m.O O .0.0mO O.NH Om.OmO O.NH .0.0HO H.HH Nm O nomeae: amoeHmom HH.N O Hm.mHO O.H .N.ONO 0.0H .O.mmO m.OO HO HN mpnenem .H.OHO .H.OHO O.NH HH.OHO O.NH HH.mOO O.mO OO OH mHHOea A0.0 O O.mN -O.mNO O.mN Hm.HOO 0.0m Hm H mnopoonno eenmonm “O.N O HO.HHO m.ON HH.NOO m.HO Hm O moeem pnespneaen H0.0 O OH.O O O.m .m.ONO O.OH .m.HOO m.OO mm OH mnoaoemn anesamseHm H0.0 O .O.mHO 0.0H «m.HHO O.m .m.OOO m.OO mO OH mnepoeee Hoopom pOHm Hm.O O m.m Am.ONO 0.0H “O.mNO 0.0N Hm.OHO 0.0m OO OH HemHoanm OnepneaeHO .0.0HO H.HH .H.NNO m.ON O0.0mO m.mm .H.OmO m.ON mm OH HenHoeHnn Hooaom amHm Hm.mNO m.ON H0.0NO N.OH HH.ONO m.Om “m.ONO N.OH Hm HH pnepmHmma .so< H0.0NO N.NN H0.0HO H.mm Hm.OHO N.NN .m.NNO N.NN OH O pneonoanneesm .pmm< Hepoa m .OO epo m .OO Hepom m .OO Hepoa m .90 mnoHp m noonO mnomnem .lImPLHNWP. ONnxeez non epoepnown LVLHVIII. memwm nMHMwMHp mo enepanz enoHne> Oannomem mpneoneanneanO mo pneo nem Hepoa no .02 u“ is I. l1 1: it maul: epneoneannemsO HH< psz noeHnemsoO nH mnomnem mnoHne> psz mpneoneannemnm eenpa OnonO Op Hoes new mpoepnoo Ho nepanun.HNM erea 'LUU" .Amnnnpon OOO epneonoanneanm Hepoe u Hepoa .Hmnnnpmn mNO H Onono a H .90 HN.mHO m.OH HH.O O m.OH HO.HmO O.Hm HO.HHO H.OH mO OH mnHenn< Hoopom no oH>HO no eneNHpHO Hm.O O .m.OmO 0.0N Hm.OmO 0.0N A0.0HO 0.0m Nm H newsman mmeanmsm HH.N O O.m Hm.mHO O.mH HN.ONO O.mm .O.mmO O.mH HO ON mpnenen .H.OHO O.m OH.OHO 0.0H OH.OHO 0.0H OH.mOO O.mO OO ON mHHaem AO.O O «O.mNO “m.HOO O.OOH Hm H mnOpoonHO Senwonm .O.N O O.mN HO.HHO O.mN HH.NOO 0.0m Hm H momma pnoepnenoo H0.0 O m.O HH.O O m.O Hm.ONO O.mN .m.HOO N.Om mO HN mnmnueee OnepneseHm .0.0 O m.HH O0.0HO m.O Hm.HHO 0.0H Om.OOO N.Om mm HN assesses Hooeom HOH: Hm.O O O.H Hm.ONO H.Om «O.mNO 0.0H Hm.OHO H.Om OO HN HenHoann OnepneaOHm O0.0HO 0.0H .H.NNO O.mm H0.0mO O.mm .H.OmO O.ON mm ON HmanoeHnn Hooeom aeHm “m.mNO 0.0m “0.0NO HH.ONO «m.ONO 0.0m Hm N pnepmHOOH .soH “0.0NO m.mm “0.0HO m.mm “m.OHO 0.0H .m.NNO 0.0H OH O pneoneanneOnm .pmeH Hepoa H .OO Hepoa H OOO Hepoe H .OO HMpoa H nmw mnoHp H OnonO mnomnem llblbhfn I CE: I. .. on... 9.6 aHmom 5" 28.3 gee: nem epoepnou mo .oz uHmom Mo mnepanz nnoHneO Oannomem mpneoneannemnm mo pneO non Hepoa mo .oz 5" mpneoneanneanO HH< ppH3 noeHneOEoo nH mnomnem enoHneO psz mpneoneannemnO nsom OnonO Op new: nem epoepnoo mo nepsn nu.HHNN eres .Hmnnnpen OOO epnoonoannemne Hepos u Hepoa .Hmnnnpen mNO H OnonO a H .OO II’. III, I’ll -.Luo- HN.mHO m.OH HH.O O m.OH «O.HmO O.Hm “O.HHO H.OH mO OH mnHennH Hoopom no 336 no 2333 Hm.O O Om.OmO O.ON .0.0mO O.mN O0.0HO 0.0m Nm H nomeaen mmmaHmsm HHN O O.m Hm.mHO O.mH N.ONO O.mm O.mmO O.mH HO ON apnenem HH.OHO O.m HH.OHO 0.0H HH.OHO 0.0H .H.mOO O.mO OO ON mHHnsm HO.O O «O.mNO “m.HOO O.OOH Hm H mnopoenHO senwonm .O.N O O.mN HO.HHO O.mN HH.NOO 0.0m Hm H eoee: pnOEpnean H0.0 O m.O HH.O O m.O “m.ONO O.mN “m.HOO N.Om mO HN mnepoeee OnepneseHm HOO O m.HH O.mHO m.O .mHHO 0.0H Hm.OOO N.Om mO HN mnepoeee Hoopom anm “m.O O OH 3.03 H.Om O.mNO 0.0H Hm.OHO H.Om OO HN HenHoann OnepnOeOHm O0.0HO 0.0H OH.NNO O.mm H0.0mO O.mm .H.OmO 0.0N mm ON HeaHoeHnO Hooeom Hana «m.mNO 0.0m H0.0NO “H.ONO Hm.ONO 0.0m Hm N pnepmHmm< .ao< H0.0NO m.mm 0.0HO m.mm Hm.OHO 0.0H .mNNO 0.0H OH O pneoneannenH-m .pmmH epoa H .OO Hepoa H .90 epo H .OO HMpoe H mmw nnOHp H anonO enomnem n::mwupm;. .1. OmuDH DH: aHeom nH mnoHp x0e: nem epoepnoo no .oz uHmom Mo enepanz enoHneO Oannoaem mpneoneannemnm Ho pneO nem Hepoa no .02 ll .mpneoneanneQnm HHH ppH3 nomHneOEoo nH mnomnem mnoHne> psz mpneoneanneOnO noon anono Op Hoes nem epoepnou no nepsnzun.HHNN eree .Hmnnnpen OOO epneoneannemne Hepoa u Hepoa .Hmnnnpen NNO m noonO a m .OO AN.mHO O.mH HH.O O 0.0N HO.HmO O.mN HO.HHO 0.0H mO ON mnHeHHH Hoonom no OH>HO no mneNHpHO .m.O O Hm.OmO .m.OmO 0.0m .0.0HO O.Om Nm N newsman memenmsm HH.N O Hm.mHO H.HN .N.ONO 0.0m HO.mmO H.NH HO OH mpnenem .H.OHO O.Hm .H.OHO H.HN .H.OHO 0.0m HH.mOO m.OH OO OH mHnnen H0.0 O AO.mNO 0.0m .m.HOO 0.0m Hm N enopoenHO Senwonm HO.N O OO.HHO 0.0m .H.NOO 0.0m Hm N meme: peospnenmp .0.0 O 0.0N OH.O O m.HH Hm.ONO H.Om .m.HOO H.OH mO HN assesses OnepemeOHO H0.0 O O.mN AO.mHO m.mm Hm.HHO O.mN .m.OOO H.OH mO HN mnepoees Hoopom pOHm .m.O O m.mH .m.ONO 0.0N .O.mNO 0.0H O0.0HO m.mH OO OH HenHoaHnO OnepameOHe H0.0HO O.NN HH.NNO m.ON .0.0mO 0.0H “H.OmO N.O mO NN HeOHoann Hoopom HOH: .m.mNO .0.0NO .H.ONO .0.0NO 0.00H Hm H peepmHmmH .aOH .0.0NO .0.0HO .m.OHO Om.NNO 0.00H OH H pnmeaopeHnensO .pmma Hepoa m. Hepoa «:0 epoa m Hepoa m .90 enoHp m OnonO nnomnom .IIHmmHOWIII. ONIOH OrIIIHmwper. .IIIIHHAMIIII -Hmon an muons Hoe: nem mpoepnoo no .oz IHmom mo mnepadz enoHneO Oannoaom mpnooneanneOnO mo pneo nem Hepoa mo .02 mpneoneanneOnm HHH psz nomHneOEoO nH mnoenem epoHne> ppH3 mpneonoannemnm ebHO OnonO Op Hoe; nem mpoepnoo Ho nepSSZII.HHHHN erea -108- Table XXIV.-—Analysis by Groups of Persons Directly Responsi- ble to the Superintendent ——_ L Number of Persons Group Extremes .Means Medians l A- 28 8.7 5.5 2 2-A00 ~ A1.A 10.0 3 2~136 38.0 11.0 A 2-1A0 26.7 8.0 5 3- 80 25-9 19.5 W 501 and above teacher certificated employees 201 to 500 teacher certificated employees 101 to 200 teacher certificated employees 51 to 100 teacher certificated employees 26 to 50 teacher certificated employees Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group A Group 5 III!" Extremes = minimum and maximum -109- without permission or previous discussion with one of your subordinate administrators? (Please ignore whatever open- door policy you may have regarding your employees.)," they responded with the data tabulated in Tables XXV and XXVI. The data presented in Tables XXIV and XXV are contradictory in that one set of data reports persons with direct access to the superintendent at a mean of between 7.9 and 5.8 and the other reports the number of persons directly responsible to the superintendent at a widely varying mean or between “oh and 8070 Table XXVI presents the percentage figures on spe- cific positions with direct access to the superintendent. For example, all assistant superintendents, administrative assistants, curriculum coordinators, and business managers reported in this study have direct access to the superin- tendent. As school districts become larger, the number of persons with direct access to the superintendent becomes smaller. Duties 9f administratozs. AThe issues connected with this section of the questionnaire are: 1. The degree to which the superintendents perform tasks and spend time in activities of a local, educational- leadership nature. 2. The determination of who the instructional leader of the school system is. 3. The conflict between the declared or perceived educational leader and the actual, in practice, educational leader. A. The degree that centralized or decentralized organization is in operation in the public schools. 5. The degree that shafled responsibility is being practiced in public school administrative organization. -110- Table XXV.--Number of Positions by Groups with Direct Access to the Superintendent Number of Positions Group Extremes Means Medians l 3-lA 7.9 7.5 2 3-lA 7-9 7-0 3 3-1A 6.3 5.5 A 3- 9 5.8 6.0 5 3- 9 5.8 6.0 Group 1 a 501 and above teacher certificated employees Group 2 = 201 to 500 teacher certificated employees Group 3 = 101 to 200 teacher certificated employees Group A = 51 to 100 teacher certificated employees Group 5 = 26 to 50 teacher certificated employees Extremes = minimum and maximum -lll- meeOoHOsO oepeOHmeneo nepoeep Om op ON I m OnonO eeeOoHOse oepeOHprneO nepoeep OOH op Hm I H OnonO eeeOonse oepeOHanneo nepoeep OON op HOH u m anono meeOoHOSO oepeOHMHpneo nepoeep OOm op HON u N OnonO meeOoHnEe oepeOHmeneo nepoeep e>ope one HOm u H Onono mmmppHssoo memNHOHO so: OH .2 nanoemn Hooeom HOHO .m meppHssoO umepm 00: o< .2 nopenHonooO anHSOHnnno .H HenHoanm .eHm .O newene: emenHmnm .H nopoenHO senwonm .m .anm Hoopom nOHm .o mpemnen .O Oeom .pOmO .O .pmma .sOH .O mHHmnm .O .nepoeoa .eHO .O .pmnm .pmeH .4 HH NN Om NN OOH. H OO NN HH NN OOH N BH H OOH H NO NN NO NN HO OH 09.. NN OOH H NN m mm mN ON mN OOH m HO mN ON mN OOH m mm m mN H Om mN HO mN OO mN HO mN OOH N OOH O mN H Om OH mm OH OOH O HO OH OH OH OOH O Om O OO m ON OH NN OH OO OH OO OH OOH OH OOH OH OH M NO mH Hm mH OOH HH mO mH mN mH OOH O .HH.H Om O Hm mH Hm mH OO NH mO mH OOH O OOH NH mH N OO NH Om NH OOH OH Om NH mN NH OOH OH HO O mm O OH NH OH NH mO NH mO NH OOH O OOH HH NH H ntN O .02 O .02 O .02 O .02 O .02 .02 O .02 O .02 O .02 o .o O .02 O .02 O .oz .- .o m.m .3 2I :_ .H OH .HunI. OIHII .O my a O O O m H ”.0 -s meeoo< poenHO psz pneo nem one noHpHmom OnH>em mpOanmHO mo nepenz pneonean Ineanm opp op mmeoo< poenHO e>e= pOHp3 enoHpHmom Oanmem no manonc Op mHeOHenOII.H>NN ereO -112- A~.H O AO.m A0.0 O OH .m.O~. Om .O.HOV OO .pme mopmmo no OHHOOOO AO.~ A0.0 O ON AO.mmO Om .O.mmv Om mmmppflesoO OOH: chpmmz AO.m V OH Am.¢H. Om Am.OOv OO HHoqdoo O>Hpmhp -OHOHEOO anz OanOOz AO.N O A0.0 AO.O O ON “H.Omv Om Am.HmO Om mmpp :wHHOOM 30: you OCHccmHm .N.H O .O.m ON .H.OHO Om .O.Hmv Om Am.HmO ON mwcppmms Opmon pom OancmHm .O.m v AO.~HO AH.mOO OOH mononflmpsfime wawmfl>pogsm .~.H O .~.H O A~.mOO OOH mpumpmmmo OOHOH>LOOOO .~.H O .0.0 O A~.OOV OOH coapmpgommcmup OchHbummsm .N.H O “O.N .O.OHO .m.mmv o: AO.0mO 0O pmwusp so wgfixuoz, “N.O V Am.ONV OO Am.NOV OO OOHOmOn HO20HmmOmoum .O.m OH .¢.w O OH .O.mmv Om AO.OOO Om macapmNOnmwuo new mmchmms HOconmmmoum mpoe H .OO HOOO wpo .OO HOpoO H.OO HOpOm, lemm. OpH>wpo< « o N.OH OSHA ommuo Opa>fipo< mg» op maps pawns no mmwmpnmoumm msoHnw> mcho>OO mpcmucmquuOmam mo pamo awn mpOOaOqupmmsm HH< spa: nomHumO :800 :H mpsovcmanpmasm Ono OdouO On mmeH>Hpo< OOOHpm> op Ompo>mO msHauu.HH>NM meme .Amchspmp OOO mpcmccmpaHummsm Hmpoe u Hmpoe .HOOASpOp NHV mpcmvcmanuOOSO H macho a H .OO l AN.H. A0.0 O OH Am.Hmv OO «N.OOV Om H¢.O V Oppoamp ‘ Ocm monmwcommmuhoo H0.0 O ON .m.mmv Om “O.HOO Om .0.0~O ON mmeH>Hpom h35258 my AN.HV .N.H O .~.O O OH .m.mHO OH .0.000 OO OOONHOHO OOH; 4. 3.: 3.~ V 3.0 v 3.03 cm 2&8 8 2233 fig HO.~. H0.0 O OH HO.NHO Om H0.04O OO .O.mm. Om mHmOHochO OOH; “ESHSOHLHSO OQHOOSOOHO. H¢.~ v .O.H~O OO, Hm.~OO Om mucoumm OOH: OOHpmmz “mace H .OO Hmpoa H ”mm proa H .Ow Hmpoe H .OO OOH>Hpo< OOH-ON_ .1. www-0H OOH-m ., Ow O OpH>Hpo< Osp op OBHO AHOSH mo womwpumonmm msoHMOO wcho>OO mpcmunmanpmmsm Ho pamo pom OmzaHpsoo - HHOHH mHnma -114- In an attempt to determine the actual duties or functions of various administrative positions, as perceived by the superintendent, three different questions were asked. The first question asked the per cent of the superintendents' time devoted to seventeen activities. The data collected regarding this question is presented as the per cent of superintendents in each group answering in each percentage time band. Similar data were compiled for the total sample so that the individual group figures may be compared with the over-all figures. Tables XXVII, XXVIII, XXIX, XXX, and XXII present this information for groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 respectively. Thus, it can be seen that 60 per cent of group 1 superintendents spend between 5 and 10 per cent of their time at professional reading, while 26.5 per cent of all superintendents spend a similar amount of their time at this activity. Comparable figures for groups 2, 3, h. and 5 are 8.3, 22.2, 13.6, and 28.6 per cent respectively. The second question asked which person or persons actually perform a variety of tasks the majority of the time. These tasks were tabulated in terms of the broad areas of supervision and discipline, committees and meetings, and management and administrative details. Tables XXIII, 111111, and XXXIV show the person or persons receiving the greatest percentage of responses for each group and for the total sample. It can been seen from these data that, except for the area of management and administrative details, the -115- ON.HO OO.m O m.m O0.0 O Om.O~O O.mN OO.HOO O.OO .pws OOHOOO no mHHmOeO He.~ O O0.0 O «O.mmO 0.00 .O.mmO m.mm mmmppHesoo OOH: wermmz HO.m O .m.eHO 0.0H Hm.OOO m.mm HHoqsoo m>Humep -mHaHaOO OOH: mermmz OO.NO Om.e O m.m .0.0 O 0.0H OH.OmO O.He OO.HmO O.He mmeHHHome 3mm you OchcmHm ON.HO O4.m O HH.OHO O.mN “O.HmO m.mm Om.HmO m.mm mmermes . Oumon pom OchamHm “O.m O “O.NHO 0.0H AH.mOO m.mO chmnHmanme OnHmH>umazm H~.H O O~.H O H~.mOO 0.00H mHnopeeeo weHmeummsm .~.H O O0.0 O O~.OOO 0.00H OOHpmpeommceep OGHOH>umOsO ON.HO .O.~ O O0.0HO m.O .m.mmO m.mm .0.0mO O.OO OOOOOO mo mceros O~.O O m.O Om.O~O m.m .m.~OO m.mm OOHOOOe Heeonmmeoem .0.0 O .0.0 O m.m O0.0mO 0.0m “0.000 O.He OOOHOONHOOOOO OOO mOanOOB HanonmOmoum mpoe .OO egos m.OO Hence m.OO Heuoe m.OO OOH>HOOH OOH-O~ In mmmwm Omuonnu OpH>Hpo< Onp op OEHO pHone mo mmwmpcmonom msoHLOO Oano>OO mpnmuqepsHhempm no pqOO hem mpnoumopcmuomsm HH< :pHs now uHumOEoO OH mpcOOnOanAOOOO 039 macho Op OOHpH>Hpo< OSOHLOO op Oopo>OO osHann.HHH>xM OHOOO -116- .Amcpzpmh OOO mpcOOnOchpOOSO Hepoe u HOpOO .Amnthmh mHO mpamucmanmOOSO N @5090 u N .90 l,“ I O~.H O .0.0 O 0.0H .m.HmO O.mN .~.OOO O.He .0.0 O 0.0H espouse OOO Oocmuzoamehnoo Om.e O m.m Om.m~O m.mm OO.HeO O.mN OO.ONO m.mm mmOerwpoe Opeeseaoe O~.H O O~.H O O~.O O m.O Hm.mHO m.O H0.000 m.mm meoquHo OOH; .~.H O OO.~ O .0.0 O m.O Hm.ONO .H.mOO O.Hm meegommp OOH; O4.~ O O¢.O O OO.~HO m.m O0.000 m.mm OO.mmO m.mm mHmaHocHnO OOH; . ”ESHpOHuezo OchmdomHO .H.N O HO.H~O 0.0H Om.~OO m.mm meaeeeg OOH: OOHOOOE Hence m.OO Hence m.OO Hence .mnmw Hepoe m.OO Hepoa m.OO OOH>HOOO lfiwulodll OOLOHON OONOH In?! IIIOWHOII OpH>Hpo< map op msHa pHmns mo mmwmpumopmm msoHpOO qupo>OO mpcovcmpaHhemsm Ho pcmo MOO II, i OOOOHOOOO . HHH>HM mHnma -117- OOH>HooH on» op osHs eHeee Ho mmwmpsmopmm msoHAOO OQHpo>OO mpcmvnmqunmme mo pmmo new .m.HO “O.mO O.m H0.0 O O.m Hm.ONO 0.0N HO.HOO H.HO newsmwmcme oonmo mo mHHmomO OH.NO H.HH OH.O O H.HH OO.mmO 0.0m OO.mmO m.mm oomopHesoo OOH: OOHeoos .O.m O H.HH Hm.OHO m.mm .m.OOO O.mm HHoosoo o>HpOep -mHoHeOo OOH: OOHpomz OO.NO O.m OO.HO H.HH O0.0 O H.HH .H.OmO O.ON OO.HmO O.mm OOHOHHHoOO 3mm pom OchcmHm H~.HO HO.NO AH.OHO 0.0N “O.HmO O.mm .m.HmO 0.0H mmngoos Opmon pom OGHGQOHO “O.m O O.m .O.NHO HH.mOO 0.00 monochpaHes OOHOH>OOOOO .~.H O ON.H O .~.mOO 0.00H mHuooono OOHOH>HOOOOO O~.H O O0.0 O .N.OOO 0.00H ooHomoeoOmowep wchH>mOOsO H~.HO OH.~O O.m .0.0HO H.HH Hm.mmO m.mm HO.OmO m.mm pmwesp no OOngoz ON.O O N.NN .m.O~O O.m Om.~OO N.NO moHoeoe Hmoonooeoem O0.00 N.NN H0.0 O 0.0H H0.0mO N.NN OO.H¢O 0.0m meoHoouHemwoo OOO mwanOOa HmconnOmoum mpoe m.OO mpo m.OO mpo m.OO mpoa m.OO Hmpoa m.OO OpH>Hpo< wmwsOm OWNION NWNuOH menm wwso 1" III leIIH‘ Hlvlq ll.“ mpGOOaOpOHpOOSO HH< :pHs nomHemm nEoO sH mpcmvcmchpOOsO Oomph OOOAO On mmeH>HpO< Oonpw> op Ompo>mO OsHenu.xHNN OHOOO -118- .Hmnpdpmm OOO mpnmumopaHeOOSO Hmpoa u Hmpoe .AmnASpmn OHO mpcevcochpoOam m macho u O .OO ll HN.HO .H.OO 0.0H .m.HmO 0.0H .N.OOO O.mm .H.O O H.HH mpeomoe Ocm mocmuaommmhuoo Ow.OO Om.m~O m.mm .o.HeO m.mm .m.w~O O.ON moprppoom OpHoseeoo AN.HO HN.HO O.m .N.O O O.m “m.mHO m.mm “0.000 O.mm OnoquHo :sz «m.HO H4.NO H.HH .0.0 O N.NN Hm.ONO 0.0H HH.mOO 0.0m mnmsommp anz HO.NO H¢.OO N.NN “O.NHO 0.0H HO.¢OO 0.00 «O.mmO 0.0H mHOOHocHeO anz "ssHsOHAAsO OnHmmsomHO OO.H~O m.mm .m.~OO 0.00 apnoeoa Opp: Oeromz Hepop m.OO Hepoan,mumw Hepop m.OO Hopoe m.OO OpH>HpOH 2%qu Oomom I?! O3 OpH>Hpo< Opp op OaHa eHeaa no mmmwpamopmm msoHum> OsHpo>OO mpceuamannOOSO mo pcmo new ooserooO . HHHH oHpmp -119- th>Hpo< esp op osHa eHosa mo mmwmpcoopmm msoHum> Ocho>OO mpcovcmannoOsO mo pamo hem O~.HO m.O OO.mO O0.0 O m.O Om.ONO N.OH .H.HOO O.mO poosomeoee OOHmHo Ho mHHepoO HH.~O O0.0 O m.O .O.mmO O.mH Ho.mmO O.Hm mooppHssoo Opp; OOHpooz “O.m O Am.OHO m.O “m.OOO m.mO HHocsoO O>Hpmpp -mHoHsOO ng: moHpemz .H.NO m.O HO.HO H0.0 O m.O “H.OmO m.ON Hm.HmO O.mO on,‘...SOHHHOH..H am: now wchanm O~.HO .H.~O HH.OHO H.O .O.HmO H.Om .m.HmO O.OH OOOHpmoe Osmop pom OGHOOOHO .O.m O m.: .O.~HO N.OH .H.mOO O.mO mocooHOpOHOe OOHOHspOOOO .~.H O m.O .~.H O O~.mOO 0.00 oHeepoHOo OOHOHpemOOO AN.H O m.O H0.0 O m.O .N.OOO 0.0m OOHpOpooamcmep mnHmH>pOOdO “m.HO OO.NO .0.0HO O.NN .m.mmO O.Hm HO.OmO m.me pmmosp :o OOeroz .~.O O Om.O~O O.mH “m.muO O.Hm OOHOome HmconmoOoom A0.00 O.mH H¢.O O m.O “0.0mO 0.0m H0.0¢O 0.0m m:OHpmmHnmwpo Ocm mwchmoe HmnonmOmopO Hepoe H.OO Hepop eumw. Hmpoe O.mO Hopoe HOMO mpH>HpoH OOH-OH OOmuom OOHum Omuo.|r mpcmvcmpaHnmasm HH< nEoO :H mpcmucmannmmsm usom macho Op mmeH>Hpo< OSOHpm> 0p ssz nomHumO Ompopmn OEHOI|.HNN OHOOO -120- .Amnhspou OOO mpnmvnmpaHummpm Hmpoe u Hmpoa .Hmcuspop mNO mpdovmmanpoasm 4 OsopO a O .OO O~.HO m.O .0.00 m.O Om.HmO O.mH H~.OOO O.mO H¢.O O O.mH opooOoe Oam mocmocoammppoo H0.00 m.O .m.m~O N.OH HO.HHO 0.0m .0.0NO m.ON OOHpH>Hpoo mpHcseaoO O~.HO m.O H~.HO .~.O O m.O Om.mHO m.O H0.000 H.OO mooquHo anz ON.HO m.O HH.NO .0.0 O H.O Om.ONO H.O .H.mOO m.OO meonomop Osz HO.~O H.O O0.00 m.O. HO.NHO H.O OO.HOO O.Hm OO.mmO m.me mHoeHooHeO anz "asHsOHpuso mnHmmsomHO .4.m O m.O .4.HNO m.O Hm.NOO O.OO mpcoewm anz werooz Hepos H .OO Hopop 0.00 Hopoe HumO Hopop H.OO Hepoe H.OO OpH>HpoH .. www-0m IIIOONHOMII OON-OH OOHuw, Om-o epHpHpoH opp op oaHp eHopp mo mmmmpumouom szHAOO OaHpome mpnOOcmanpomsm mo pnoo pom OoechooO . xxx OHpoe -121- A~.HO HO.mO O.H H0.0 O O.m Om.O~O H.Om OH.HOO O.m: .pwe ooHpHo no OHHOpoO HO.~O HH.O O m.O “O.mmO m.mm OO.mmO O.HO mooppHeeoo esz OoHpmez HO.m O “m.OHO “m.OOO m.OO HHoczoo Op peep ancHBOO anz :Hpooz “O.mO HO.4O O.e O0.0 O 0.0 OH.OmO 0.0H Om.HmO O.OO moHpHHHome So: you OchcmHm AN.HO 0.0 “O.NO HH.OHO m.O HO.HmO 0.00 “m.HmO H.Om OOOHpOOs Opmop pom mancmHm “O.m O O.d “O.NHO 0.0H AH.mOO N.OOmoomaHmanme OchprOOSO H~.H O .~.H O 0.0 O~.mOO m.OO «Hoopomeo OOHOH>eoOom AN.H O H0.0 O 0.0N AN.OOO O.HO OOHpmpuommmmup wchpromsm AN.HO O.¢ HO.NO O.H A0.0HO m.O Hm.mmO O.mN “0.0mO O.Nm powesp no Oonpoz O~.O O O.e Om.O~O O.ON Om.~OO O.HO OOHomoe Hoeonmopoem H0.00 A¢.O O O.¢ H0.0mO O.N: “0.000 O.Nm OHHOHORTHEOOho one mmchmes HOGonmOw0pm Hmpo .OO wpo m.OO mpo m.OO Opo m.O OpH>Hpo< idmlhfiwmwlhfiwqfll io OpH>Hpo< opp 0p OEHB pHona no mowmpneouom msoHnw> Ocho>OO mpnmucmanummnm mo paoo mom i sip tmfil mpcmvaoquuomsm HH< ssz nomHewO 3800 CH OpmmvzmpaHmesO O>Hm macaw On OOHpH>Hpo< msoHum> op OOpo>mO OEHBII.HNxN OHnme -122- .Amspspmp OOO mpnmvaeanpmmpm Hmpoe u Hmpoa .Amcpzpmp NNO mpnmvcmanhmmam m macho u m .OO H~.HO H:.OO Am.HmO O.Nm “N.OOO H.Om .0.0 O mpeomoe qu monmvcommmhuoo .0.00 Om.m~O m.OH OO.HHO O.mH H0.0NO m.mm OOHpHsHpoH mpHOOEEoO O~.HO O~.HO O~.O O m.O Hm.mHO m.m O0.000 m.OO oeoquHo ana .~.HO .H.~O O0.0 O O.H Om.OmO m.mm .H.mOO H.OH whosoemp esz Oe.~O .H.OO O.H OO.~HO m.O OO.HOO H.OH OO.mmO H.Om oHOOHoeHeO anz ”EOHSOanso OchmsomHO .H.~ O 5.4 OO.H~O O.mN Om.~OO O.HO opeoeom Opp: onpmms opoe m.OO Opop m.OO Hepop m.OO opoa m.OO Hepop m.O OpH>HpoH HIIQNAIO....‘...Iod| Ono -ON '3' o H.. Illwnuollnb OpH>Hpo<,onp op oeHa eHoOH mo mmmmpnmopmm msoHpmb Ocho>OO mpcmocmpaHumOsm Ho pnoo pom lr oesoHpooO - HHHH oHOmp mmmOOHOEO OOpOOHMprOO umnomwp Om op ON u m macho mmmOOHOEO OmmeHmehOo pmnommp OON op HOH u m @5090 mmmOoHOSm mmmOoHOSm mOpOOHMHpLOO Menommp OOm op HON N OSOpO OmpOOHMprOo nmnommp OOH 0p Hm n 4 macho mmmOoneO OOpOOHMHpLOO umnowmp Opopm Onm HOm M H Osopo -123- x x ESHSOprsO Ho hopoopHO x popmcHOhooo ESHSOHupsO OOO: .pOOO mmmppHeeoO poquHOnooO noppme pomnpsm pmnowoa .OHem .pmmH AXON an N N X. “NON um N N On Avnvun N on N. X ANON an um um an ANOX um um N N ANOK X eflflhnw owUHm x .pOSO .pmm< .pOSO m p m H H O m N p_ m H m N m e m N H p m H m N p m H m «Homemm {I125 .IIIIIHIHP IIIIIH :IHHHHHHHML mHH Om mpmnomop .O.m Ohmsomoe msoopmmmHO OnHHOHomHO mmenoapm mpwnvao OumpnmsmHm pHmH> sou OOO OpmcHOpooo mmepmasO Ocm omH>pmmpm EdHOOHuusO mmepOOsO mpOanmHO Hmpoa Om OOO mpOprmHO mo masono Om xmma AOOHHOHOOHO Ocm onmH>AOOsOO OSHO map we OpHnonmS map mxmma msoHpm> OGHEhoHAOm OHHOOpoO maompmm no compmmnn.HHNNx OHOOO -12h- OOOOoHOEO OmmeHprpmo hegemop Om op ON n m @5090 mmmOoHOEm OOpOOHMHpLOO Lenommp OON op HOH u m Osoho OOOOOHOEO mmOOoHOEO OopOOHHprOO genommp OOm op HON u N macho OOpOOHMprOO menommp OOH op Hm u 4 macho mooMOHOEO OOmeHMprmo henowmp m>onm OGO HOm u H Ozone x ESHSOHALSO no nopomnHO x x x popmnHOpooo BszOthpo mvmmx.pama x OOOppHESoO popquOoooO umppms pomnpsm AKO x x x K hmnomme .aHpO.pmm< HxOx x x x ANOX x x x HxOx x x x x AxOx x x x HxOx x x x.:Hnm.OOHm N x .pnsm.pmm< O m d m N H a m 4 m N H a m J m N H a m O m NIH a m d mHWIH a m p m N H a m 4 m N H :OOLOO 3 mg 3 a: .58 OOHHOH: .eoo HOBHHSH.H g . OpHsme uHSomm HO>OH OpHpOmm OOH: OpHpOmm uOHunso OOH; typo kappa: OESHOOHLQSO .Hoppmz 8% 3on OHoOH ...pmHO Box .38 OHoOO ...pmHO..HHmHOO .25 .8 H33 .OOHméHoHOO .85 Bob memmo .HHoHHO mpOprmHO Hepoa Om Ocm mpOprmHO Ho masonO Om mxmme Amwchmmz.Ocm momppHeeoOO OSHO Onp mo OthOnmz esp mxmme msoHpm> OcHenompOm OHHOOpo< mnomemm so nompmmua.HHHMxx OHOOO wmmOoHOEO OOpOOHpreOO ponomop Om Op ONn m Ozone mmmOoHOEm OOmeHmenOO pmnommp OOH op Hm n 4 macho OOOOOHOEO OOpOOHmepOo nogommp OON op HOH u m macho mmOOoHOsm OOpOOHmepmo Amsomop OOm op HON u N OdopO mooOOHOaO OmpmoHMprmo pmnommp Opopm UGO HOm u H macaw x esHpOpr3O no popOOAHO x x x popmcHOpooo ESHOOHpHpO mummm.pOmO x OOOppHeaoO popmcHOpooO umppms pomnpnm .r HXO x x x x pmsowme m .oHeanmmH . AxOx x x x HxOx x x x AxOx x x x x HxOx x x x AxOx x x x.anO.OOHm x x .pOsO.pmm< e m 4 m N H a m 4 m N H a m 4 m N H a m 4 m N H a m 4 mN a m 4 m N H a m 4 m N H compmm mmmeOmz.. mmnH p.mlm_.z_ Hp mm:.H..pO OE! .ummeallmlozI-.. .Eoo swam .eoo OOH—Hepo Hp JMOIIppHHdOHHHIIIIoO . OpHsomm uHsomm HO>OH OpHpomm OOH; Oszomm. :OprsO OOH; typo neppm2_ 85H:OHup:o 33% 2% OOSO OHoOO ...po.HO Ho: .38 OHoOO 158.3%8 .pom .8 H33 .OOHOéHmHHO updm OHom, mwmmc uHmno mpOprmHO Hmpoa Om OOO mpOprmHO mo mmsopo Om mxmme uunnnuu HmmchmOS mam mmmppHeeoOO OEHB map 90 OpHponz Opp mxmms msoHpm> OOHEAoHpOm OHHmspOH m:0mpmm no nompmmuu.HHHMxx OHQOO mmOOoHOEO OOpOOHHHmeO ponommp Om op ON I m Opopo mmmOoneO OOpOOHmepOO pmnommp OON Op HOH m Osopo OOOOoHOEO OOOOoHOEO OopOOHmehmo genommp OOm op HON u N OpopO i OOmeHHthOO pmgommp OOH op Hm u 4 Osopo mmmOOHOEO OopOOHMHpAOO umnowmp Opomw Onm HOm u H msOmO ll EstOprsOmo x LOpOthO popmnHOpooO EsHsOHupsO mummm.pOmO AXO N x x OOOppHEEoO popmcHOpooo pmppms pomhpsm MOO; x .HOHOOOOO A. .anm.pmm< .xOx x x x x x x ANOK x .chm.wOHm HxO x x x t . x x x x x .pmsm.pwm¢ x x AxOx x x x x HxOx x x x ANOX x x “KO x .pasm a m 4 m N H mxm 4 m N H a m 4 m N H a m 4 m N H a m 4 m N H a m 4 m N H a m 4 m N H meomemm OOHSOOOOO OxoopprO OxOOQpKOa :onH>Om mpmgomma mumsomms NOSpO OHHsm nacho pmov< xoopprO OOHOEO o>HpomOmonm esHOOHLuso .{ Omoesoomm zmehman, OoOOoupaMI mpOprmHO Hmpoe Om cam mpOHupmHO Ho mOsopO Om mxmme uliIl‘illiiuI II"! fl Ft HHHOpOO O>HpmppmHnHEO< OOO pcmsmwmcmEO OEHO Opp mo OpHpohmz map mxmme msoHpOO OOHSLomnOm OHHOspom mnompmm no nompmmuu.>HNNM OHOOB -126- building principal is the key person in the tasks listed. Table XXXV analyses the data from this question with re- spect only to the superintendent of schools. Here a com- parison of the duties of superintendents in schools of different sizes can be made. As an example, superintendents in group 1 schools report being involved in only 10 of the listed tasks, with not mere than 66.7 per cent of them per- forming any one task. This task is the adoption of text- books. Group 5 superintendents report being involved in all 20 of the listed tasks. They have sole responsibility for interviewing prospective teachers and employing teachers. The third and final question was concerned with the duties or functions of selected administrative positions. This question was open-ended and asked the primary function of the superintendent of schools, assistant superintendents of schools, curriculum coordinators, and building principals. The results obtained from this question were categorized and tabulated into areas of responses, and are so presented in Table XXXVI. The superintendent of schools has the greatest variety of functions with "carry out policies" and "instructional leadership" receiving the most responses. The function of the building principal was to "administer the building" and be the "instructional leader of the build- ing." The assistant superintendent's functions were equally divided among "business," "instruction," and “plant and transportation." To supervise instruction is the most -127- 4.HH H.O m.4 O.mH O.mN m.O mponomop Hoonom SOHO epmcHOnooO Ocm mmenOOsm O.4H m.ON m.4 O.mH O.mN meonooop OpOpOoa :OHO OpmcHOnooo Ocm omH>umOsm 0.04 0.0m H.Om 4.04 O.H4 0.0H msoonmmmHO pHmH> m.Om O.HO 0.04 H.HN wxoonprp peOnO 4.HO H.Om 0.00 N.mO m.mm 0.00 oxooopxop pOoOH O.NN O.Hm 0.0 m.ON O.mN 0.0H HHOHOHOHO.H xooppxmp O:OEEoOOm O.mm 0.00H O.mO m.OO O.HO O.mN meonomop aoHOem O.HO 0.00H O.NO N.4O m.mm 0.0H mmmnomep opHpOOOmonO 3OH>pman N.OH O.NN H.ON H.HN m.O OOSpm ESHSOHAASO OmH>nOOaO H.4m m.m4 O.4m O.Hm O.mN O.mN OOSpm EOHSOHLLSO mosvopan O.mH O.mH m.OH m.m H.OH mmooHEEOO ESHOOHausO OOHznpOHupmHO prao m.4 N.OH ooppHEEoo ESHSOHnuso nmppme pomwppm no HmpeHuOprO prno m.4 H.O O.O eeppHEEoo EsHsOprzo .OOHO nHmnO Hmpoe m Osopo 4 macaw m OzouO N OOOLO H Opopo mxmme mpOanmHO Hmpos Om new mmsopO Op mpnevcmananpO Ho pnmo Lem Ill ‘l“ ll'H 'H'H mEHO esp Oo OpHuonmz Opp mxmma msoHpm> wcHEpompmm mpnmucechpemsm mo pcmo pmmnu.>xxx OHDOO -128- memOoHOeO OemeHmenOO hegemop Om op ON a m @9090 OOOOoHOEO OemeHmepoo nonomop OOH op Hm a 4 macho monoHOEO OmmeHmepOo nosomep OON op HOH m OsopO OOOOoHOEO OomeHHHpnOo genomep OOm op HON N OpopO mmmOoHan OOpOOHmepOo monomep o>onw One HOm n H OOOLO ‘IW’I' - llU‘ N.OH m.ON .. 0.0 m.m OOHSOOOOO OHHsm O.O O.NN _ m.OH mHHOOO ooHHoHoOHO H.O O.NN m.4 m.m m.m mmsppmme OpHpoOm poppme pomnpsm OHo: H.O O.NN O.mH OOOHpOOE OpHpowm HmpmHnOprm OHom O.HO N.OO 0.00 m.OO 0.00 O.Om oonpooe apHsomm OOHe-poHepOHo OHom m.NH O.Hm m.4 O.mH mmanmOe OpHsomm OsHOHHsp OHo: O.O m.ON m.m mHHOSO OmH>pOOsO Hepoa m macho 4 OponO m OsopO N OsopO H macho mxmme mpOprmHO Hmpoe Om OOO masonu Om mpneocmanpmmsm mo pcmo pom OOOOHpooO - >HHH OHooe mooOoHOEO OOmeHHHpnOO nmsommp Om op ON u m Osopo mmmOoHOEO OOpOOHMHpnOo empowep OOH op Hm u 4 nacho mmoOOHOEO OOpOOHHHpnOo nonommp OON op HOH u m macho OOOOOHOEO OomeHprnmo penommp OOm op HON u N Opono mOeOoHOeO OmmeHMprOO nOnOmOp O>opm Onm HOm n H macho bllr N.OH m.ON 0.0 m.m OOHsvmnom OHHnm 0.0 O.NN m.OH mHHOpO OGHHOHOOHO H.O O.NN m.4 m.m m.O mmaneOe OpHSOmm umppme pomnpsm OHom a“. H.O O.NN O.mH mmchmeE m... OpHpowm HO>mHnOOmpw OHom . O.mO N.OO 0.00 m.OO 0.00 0.0m mwchOOE HpHsomp oOH3-poprmHo OHom m.NH O.Hm m.4 O.mH OOOHpome OpHsoom OOHOHHOO OHom O.O m.ON m.m OHHOSO OmenOOsm Hmpoe m macho 4 macho m OdouO N macho H macho Oxmme mpOprmHO Hmpoe Om Ocm mmsopo Om mpnOOGOpOHpOOsO Ho pcmo pom OmanpcoO I >NNN OHDOB -129- Table XXXVI.--Functions of Administrative Positions as Per- ceived by the Superintendent of Schools Superintendent of Schools (5) G T Carry out policies 5 23 Instructional leadership 5 22 Coordination 5 13 Executive officer 3 10 Recommend policies 3 9 Business 3 9 Supervision 3 8 Resource for the entire school 1 7 Direct 3 6 Improve instruction 2 6 General administration 2 6 Evaluate policies 3 5 Develop policies 2 a Public relations 1 A Interpret policies 2 2 Hire 1 2 Communication 1 1 Create climate 1 1 Planning 1 1 Materials 1 1 Make everyone happy 1 1 Curriculum Coordinators (A) Supervise instruction 4 11 Develop curriculum 2 9 Study and evaluate curriculum 2 7 Coordination h 6 Leadership 1 2 Meet faculty and lay people 1 2 Delegated by the superintendent l 1 Improved instruction 1 l G = Number of groups reporting. T = Total number of times reported. ( ) = Number of groups having the position. -13 0. Table XXXVI - Continued Assistant Superintendent of Schools (4) G T Business A 18 Instruction 4 1 Plant and transportation 4 1 Personnel 3 8 Carry out policies 2 6 Assist the superintendent 3 5 Delegated by the superintendent 2 3 Public relations 1 1 Building Principals (5) Administer the building 5 56 Instructional leader of the building 5 30 Supervision 4 1? Curriculum improvement 2 8 Coordination 2 6 Carry out policies 1 4 Discipline l 2 Hire teachers 1 1 Delegated by the superintendent l 1 Communication 1 1 Provide optimum conditions for teachers to teach l l G = Number of groups reporting. T = Total number of times reported. ( ) = Number of groups having the position. -131- commonly reported function of the curriculum coordinator. ‘Variety of responses and less frequently reported responses 'will be analyzed in a later chapter. VI. SUMMARY This chapter has raised issues and presented a tabu- lation and brief description of data obtained from.the ques- tionnaires developed for this study and mailed to the school districts appearing in the original sample. The chapter contains a comparative analysis of the total population, sample size, and usable questionnaires returned, plus a descriptive tabulation of the responses to the questions of the questionnaire. The issues raised were an outgrowth of the content of chapters III and IV, and the information collected in the questionnaires. The chapter was divided into the general categories of basic school district data, administrative personnel, and operational procedures. All data were presented and tabulated with reference to the original stratification of the population. Thus, it is possible to compare responses between strata, or groups, and responses between any single stratum and total sample responses. Because of the variety and complexity of the data, and the fact that the issues raised revolve around more than one section of the data, no attempt at detailed analyses or implications was attempted in this chapter. Analyses -132- ‘will be made in the following chapters. The data will be applied to specific issues of administrative organization and to the point of view toward administrative leadership organization for improved instruction developed in this study. CHAPTER VI ANALYSIS OF DATA WITH RESPECT TO SELECTED ISSUES OF PUBLIC SCHOOL ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION I. INTRODUCTION As the data was presented chapter V many issues were perceived and listed. These specific issues may be combined to fOrm broader issues, the solutions of which are funda- mental to good administrative organization for improved instruction in public education. For the purpose of this discussion the individual issues will be categorized under the following headings: (l) the degree to which physical characteristics of school districts have an effect on admin- istrative organization; (2) the breadth of administrative positions in public schools and its effect on administrative organization: (3) the degree to which principles of line and staff are misunderstood and/or improperly used, and the effect that this misunderstanding has on administrative or- -ganization; (A) the degree to which span theory is misunder- stood and/or improperly used, and the effect that this mis- understanding has on administrative organization: (5) the degree to which school systems are utilizing centralized or decentralized organization, and the effect that this utilization has on administrative organization; and (6) the -133- -13h- degree to which school systems utilize departmentation, the kinds of departmentation being practiced, and the effect of these variables on administrative organization. This chapter will analyze the data presented and tabulated in chapter V with respect to important issues as categorized above. Other issues will receive attention in chapter VI, where the data will be analyzed with respect to the point of view toward public school administrative organization that was developed in chapter IV. II. THE DEGREE TO WHICH PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE AN EFFECT ON ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION Information was collected regarding size of school dis- tricts as determined by number of teacher-certificated em- ployees, geographic area of school districts in square miles, and number of buildings in individual districts. All three of these sets of data have an effect on administrative or- ganization. Size of district . All of the data is presented with reference to number of teacher-certificated personnel. Through- out the entire analysis reference will be made to this point. It should be clear to the reader that the number of employees in any enterprise is a key factor in determining such organi- zational procedures as number and type of administrators em- ployed, problems of communication, span of supervision, and problems of centralization-decentralization. -13h- degree to which school systems utilize departmentation, the kinds of departmentation being practiced, and the effect of these variables on administrative organization. This chapter will analyze the data presented and tabulated in chapter V with respect to important issues as categorized above. Other issues will receive attention in chapter VI, where the data will be analyzed with respect to the point of view toward public school administrative Iorganization that was developed in chapter IV. II. THE DEGREE TO WHICH PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE AN EFFECT ON ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION Information was collected regarding size of school dis- tricts as determined by number of teacher-certificated em- ployees, geographic area of school districts in square miles, and number of buildings in individual districts. All three of these sets of data have an effect on administrative or- ganization. Size of districts. All of the data is presented with reference to number of teacher-certificated personnel. Through- out the entire analysis reference will be made to this point. It should be clear to the reader that the number of employees in any enterprise is a key factor in determining such organi- zational procedures as number and type of administrators em- ployed, problems of communication, span of supervision, and problems of centralization-decentralization. -135- The number of buildings and area of the school dis- tricts in the sample are presented in Table V. This table shows that (1) there is a direct relationship between number of buildings and number of teachers employed, and (2) there is an inverse relationship between area of school districts and number of teachers employed. Geographic area. School districts with large geo- graphic areas are more difficult to administer than districts with small areas. The problems of communication and inte- gration grow more complex as the area increases. In school districts with large geographic areas it is difficult for teachers in one section of the district to be familiar with the activities in other sections of the district. The factor of distance is an organizational hurdle. Thus, the organi- zation must be such that lines of communication are made available throughout the various sections of the district. Committee involvement, news letters, and interaction among areas of the district will all contribute to better organiza- tion in large geographic-area districts. Table V shows that school systems in group 5 have the largest mean area; and the data in Tables XII, XIV, and XV indicate that these school systems have fewer administra- tive councils, subject matter or grade level curriculum committees, and systemdwide curriculum committees. There- fore, it can be concluded that large geographic-area dis- tricts are not involving people to the degree that they could -136- for competent administrative organization. Number of buildings. The number of buildings in a district is an important variable when considering organi- zation. Few buildings suggest either a small district or one that is concentrated into a small area. If the districts are small they will need fewer administrators than large districts. If districts are the same size but concentrated, however, they probably will need the same number of adminis- trators as large districts, but with different functions and emphasis. For example, a building that houses 1000 pupils will have only one principal but will probably also have an assistant principal. A district with two buildings, each housing 500 pupils, will have two principals but no assistant principals. Therefore, the type of administrative positions needed in an organization should be practically determined by the physical characteristics of the district. III. THE BREADTH OF ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND ITS EFFECT ON ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION The number and type of administrative personnel in school districts is fundamental to a study of administrative organization. Basic data of this nature is necessary before any analysis of the organizational procedures can be under- taken. -137- Number of administrators. Table VI reports the data regarding the number of full-time administrators in the school districts studied. These data show that there are more administrators in larger schools than there are in small schools. More important, they show that the mean and median teacher-administrator ratios are similar among groups; schools in group A and 5 have slightly higher means than do the others. Thus, it would appear that the ratio between number of administrators and number of teachers does not change appreciably among school systems of different size. K nds f administrat v sit ons. Table XXXVII shows the per cent of school districts in each group having specific administrative positions. 0f the 26 positions listed, group 1 schools report having 22; group 2 schools, 21; group 3 schools, 23; group A schools, 20; and group 5 schools, 7. ‘Thus, except for group 3 schools, as the size of the district decreases the variety of administrative positions decreases. When less than 50 per cent of the schools in a group report having a given position it can be said that there is little common agreement as to the importance of the position. Table XXXVII shows that there are 10 positions in group I, 6 in group 2, 5 in group 3, 3 in group A, and 3 in group 5 having more than 50 per cent accord among school districts as to the occupancy of a given position. The only positions with more than 50 per cent agreement among all districts are -138... ‘Table XXXVII.--Per Cent of School Districts, by Groups, Hav- ing Various Administrative Positions in Their Organization Position Per Cent of Districts Having Positions 5 _— Elem. Principals Elem. Dept. Heads Elem. Grade Level Coordinators Elem. Vice or Asst. Principals lElem. Sub. Matter Coordinators Elem. Curriculum Coordinators All-School Curriculum Coordinators Administrative Asst. Business Managers Superintendents of Schools Directors of Elem. Education 100.0 8.3 16.7 50.0 33.3 16.7 50.0 91.7 100.0 33-3 Directors of Curriculum 25.0 Sr. High Principals Sr. High Dept. Heads Sr. High Cross—Dept. Coordinators Sr. High Vice or Asst. Principals 100.0 #1.? 83.3 100.0 7.7 7.7 30.8 30.8 23.1 30.8 38-5 8h.6 100.0 7.7 15.4 100.0 69.2 7.7 92.3 100.0 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 21.1 57.9 h2.1 100.0 15.8 21.1 100.0 26.3 57.9 100.0 4.3 13.0 8.7 13.0 13.0 8.7 h.3 100.0 13.0 #.3 100.0 13.0 ho3 17.h 100.0 ho3 100.0 4-3 100.0 ho3 -139- Table XXXVII - Continued Position Per Cent of Districts Having Positions A 5 Sr. High Bldg. Curriculum Coordinators 5.3 Sr. High Sub. Matter Coordinators 50.0 10.5 l7.h Sr. High Curriculum Coordinators 16.7 10.5 A.3 ASSto Supt. in Charge of Instruction 58.3 23.1 5.3 l7.h A.3 Asst. Supt. in Charge of Personnel 66.7 15.h 5.3 Combination of two above 8.3 38.5 15.8 Directors of Secondary Education 25.0 5.3 Deans of Boys 25.0 23.1 26.3 h.3 Deans of Girls 8.3 30.8 21.1 h.3 Total Number of Districts 12 13 19 23 22 -140- elementary principals, superintendents of schools, and senior high principals. These positions have 100 per cent agree- ment in all groups. The only other positions having any agreement between groups are administrative assistants, groups 1 and 3; business managers, groups 1 and 2; and senior highschool vice- or assistant principals, groups 1, 2, and 3. Thus, it can be seen that there is little unanimity among school districts of any size even in terms of the types of administrative positions they have in their organization. The process of administrative organization is complicated enough without having to debate kinds of positions necessary for its effective Operation. Teaching administrators. Table VII presents another set of data that further verifies the lack of agreement among school districts with reference to administrative positions. This table shows that both the amount and per cent of time applied to teaching by teaching administrators increases as the school districts get smaller. Thus, al- though the previous discussion indicated that there is 100 per cent agreement with respect to elementary and senior high school principals, the data in Table VII refutes this statement. When administrators teach, they cannot apply full time to administration or be considered full-time ad- ministrators; and their effectiveness is reduced. -141- These data on breadth of administrative positions indicate that, although the teacher-administator ratio is nearly constant in schools of all sizes, teachers in small schools are not receiving the administrative assistance that teachers in large schools receive. The data also point up a serious lack of consistency in terms of type of admin- istrative positions used in public schools. Over-all, these data verify the contention that there is no common organi- zational patterns in the public schools of the state. THE DEGREE THAT PRINCIPALS 0F?“ LINE AND STAFF ARE MIS- UNDERSTOOD AND/0R IMPROPERLY USED AND THE EFFECT THAT THIS HAS ON ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION IV. The discussion under section III of this chapter deals with the lack of consistency among school districts as to the kinds of administrative positions in their organi- It now becomes necessary to analyze these positions zation. An over-all view in terms of their line or staff function. of the data suggests that the principle of line and staff and its various ramifications is one of the most confusing, misunderstood, and misinterpreted aspects of administrative organization uncovered in this study. Number of line and staff msitions. The number of line and staff positions per school district is tabulated There are consistently fewer staff persons in Table VIII. The number of per district than there are line positions. 41,2- staff positions in districts employing less than 101 teachers (groups I. and 5) is small. This information indicates that a majority of administrators in the public schools hold supervisory or authority positions with few in advisory or These data indicate that public schools resource roles. They also suggest are top-heavy with line administrators. that superintendnets of schools see the main job of admin- istrators as one of controlling and directing teachers rather than one of freeing teachers from details and moti- vating them to competently perform their chief purpose-- This point of view is in direct opposition to the teaching. That point of view will be one developed in this study. analyzed in detail in Chapter VII. Confusion over line and staff definition of adminis- trative msition . When superintendents of schools were asked to indicate whether a position was line (supervisory or authoritative) or staff (advisory or resource), their 01' the twenty-six administrative responses were inconsistent. positions listed in Tables IX, X, and XI, only elementary subject-matter coordinators, senior high school cross-de- partment coordinators, senior high school building-curriculum coordinators, and assistant superintendents in charge of instruction and personnel are in complete agreement as to These data indicate an in- their line or staff function. consistency in the definition of administrative functions and thus, a tendency toward a breakdown in the lines of -143- communication. One may argue that functions may be well defined within individual districts; and this may be true. That school systems of similar characteristics define spe- cific positions differently, however, indicates definite confusion with respect to organization. Table XXXIX presents a summary of the definition of positions data and points up the fact that there is con- siderable confusion among superintendents as to the defi- nition of many of these positions. When 80 per cent or more of a given position are reported as either line or staff, it may be said that those positions have a high level of agreement among superintendents. Those positions with less than 80 per cent agreement represent an area of confusion or broad disagreement. The breakdown of positions at 80 per cent is presented below. LINE POSITIONS STAFF POSITIONS Elementary Principals *Elementary Subject-matter Coordinators Supts. of Schools All School Curriculum Coord. Directors of Elem. Education *Sr. High Cross-department Coordinators Senior High Principals *Sr. High Building-curriculum Coordinators *Asst. Supts. in Charge of Sr. High Subject-matter Curriculum and Instruction Coordinators Directors of Secondary Edu. Deans of Boys *Positions that have 100 per cent agreement. -1hh- POSITIONS OF CONFUSION (Less t an o agreement) Elem. Department Heads Directors of Curriculum Senior High Vice- or Asst. Elem. Grade-level Coordina- Principals tors Elem. Vice- or Asst. Senior High Department Heads Principals . Elem. Curriculum Coordina- Senior High Curriculum tors Coordinators Administrative Assistants Asst. Supts. in Charge of- Personnel Asst. Supts. in Charge of Instruction Deans of Girls BusinesslManagers When 60 per cent or more of a given position are reported as either line or staff, instead of 80 per cent, as listed above, it may be said that those positions lack uniformity of'agreement among superintendents while the remaining positions represent a high level of confusion of disagreement. The breakdown of positions at the 60_per cent cut-off point is presented below. LINE POSITIONS Elementary Principals Business Managers Supts. of Schools Directors of Elem. Education Senior High Principals Senior High Vice- or Asst. Principals lssistant Superintendents in Charge of Instruction STAFF POSITIONS Elementary Departments Heads Elem. Grade-level Coordinators Elem. SubjecteMatter Coordi- nators All-school Curriculum Coordi- nators Directors of Curriculum Senior High Cross-department Coordinators Senior High Building-curriculum Coordinators -ll+5- W STAFF: .PQSILFIONS Assistant Supts. in Charge Senior High Subject-matter of Personnel Coordinators Asst. Supts. in Charge of Senior High Curriculum Instruction and Personnel Coordinators Directors of Secondary Deans of Boys Education Dean of Girls POSITIONS OF CONFUSION as t an o agreement) Elementary Vice- or Asst. Administrative Assistants Principals Elementary Curriculum 00- Senior High Department Heads ordinators It can be seen from the above data that there are four positions that no common definition of line or staff function. The reader may choose between the thirteen posi- tions listed previously and the four positions listed above as to the areas of confusion. In any case this information verifies the contention that there is confusion over the line and staff status of many administrative positions in the public schools of the state. The data in Table VIII also points up the lack of understanding of line and staff organizational principals on the part of superintendents of schools. Five districts report no line administrators in their organization, while 1.2 districts report no staff administrators. The tabulation of this information appears in Table XXXVIII. From the analysis of these data it can be seen that there is considerable confusion about definitions of line -ll.6- Table XXXVIII.--Number of School Districts, by Groups, Re- porting No Line or Staff Positions 3i i Total No. Number With Number With Group of Districts no Line no Staff 1 12 1 2 2 13 3 3 19 5 z. 22 2 ll. 5 22 2 l8 wr-—. ‘- and staff functions of various administrative positions. When superintendents declare that there are no line or no staff positions in their administrative organization, as indicated above, it seems probable that they are not giving serious consideration to the terms, and that a weakness in their training and orientation is strongly suggested. It can be seen from Table XXXIX that there are twenty- two different administrative positions that are considered "supervisory or authority" positions, to some degree, by the superintendents responding to the questionnaire. The per- centages vary from 5.3 for senior high school subject-matter coordinators to 100 for assistant superintendents in charge of instruction and personnel. The average of these twenty- two positions that are defined as line is 53.9 per cent. Thus, more than half of these positions are defined as -lh7- Table XXXIX.--Number and Per Cent of Various Positions That Are Defined as Line or Staff Positions W Total Defined Defined No. of as Line as Staff Positions Positions 0. o o. Elem. Principals 559 538 96.2 21 3.8 Elem. Dept. Heads 9 2 22.2 7 77.8 Elem. Grade-Level Coordinators l6 5 31.3 11 68.7 Elem. Vice- 01‘ A3313. Principals 19 10 52.6 9 h7.h Elem. Bldg. Curriculum Coordinators Elem. Sub. Matter Coordinators 53 53 100.0 Elem. Curriculum Coordinators 12 5 41.7 7 58.3 All-School Curriculum Coordinators BA A 11.8 30 88.2 Administrative Asst. 29 15 51.7 lb #8.3 Business Managers 30 23 76.7 7 23.3 Superintendents of Schools 84 7A 88.1 10 11.9 Directors of Elem. Education 11 9 81.8 2 18.2 Directors of Curriculum. 22 5 22.7 17 77.3 Sr. High Principals 109 103 9A.5 6 5.5 Sr. High.Dept. Heads 178 78 A3.8 100 56.2 Sr. High Cross-Dept. Coordinators 6 6 100.0 ~1h8- Table XXXIX - Continued Total Defined Defined No. of as Line as Staff Positions Positions No. 70 0. Sr. High Vice- or Asst. Principals 68 _ 52 76.5 16 23.5 Sr. High Bldg. Curriculum Coord inat are l l 100 . 0 Sr. High Subject Matter Coordinators 37 2 5.3 35 9A.6 Sr. Hi h Curriculum Coor inators 5 2 40.0 3 60.0 Asst. Supt. in Charge - of Instruction 19 12 63.2 7 36.8 Asst. Supt. in Charge of Personnel 13 8 61.5 5 38.5 Combination of two above 11 11 100.0 Directors of Secondary .Education 5 A 80.0 1. 20.0 Deans of Boys 17 3 17.6 11. 82.3 Deans of Girls 15 A 26.7 11 73.3 W -ll.9- supervisory or authoriative by the superintendents of schools. Such an abundance of line positions is bound to lead into overlapping directions and confusion about reporting proce- dures. For example, 76.7 per cent of the business managers, between 11.8 and 22.7 per cent of the curriculum coordinators, 51.7 per cent of the administrative assistants, and between 5.3 and 41.7 per cent of the subject-matter or grade-level curriculum coordinators are defined as line positions in this survey. When these kinds of positions are defined as line, the teacher is often placed in the unfortunate situ- ation of reporting to, and taking directions from, more than one. person on similar matters. Authorities on administrative organization agree that even when positions of this nature are defined as staff serious operational problems arise in that persons occupying the positions tend to carry their function over into the area of line responsibilities. School districts that define such positions as line create an organizational monstrosity that is not only overloaded with line administrators but also has little unity of direction. Such a procedure places principals and teachers in the impossible situation of not knowing who to consult or to take directions from, or of being faced with conflicting opinions and directions on like problems. Another set of data that supports the contention that administrative organization in the public schools of -150- Michigan is confused and poorly conceived can be found in Tables XXIV and XXV. These tables show respectively the number of persons directly responsible to the superintendent and the number with direct access to the superintendent. The data indicates that as many as 386 persons are directly responsible to the superintendent but do not have direct access to him. It is difficult to imagine how there can be unity of direction, common purpose, or any semblance of a smooth-running organization when a person who is responsi- ble to another person cannot consult with him unless he works through a third person. It may be concluded from these data that there are serious organizational problems in Michigan's public schools with respect to line and staff definition and function re- garding many administrative positions. Also, there appears to be like problems with respect to persons who are directly responsible to the superintendent but do not have direct access to him. THE DEGREE THAT SPAN THEORY IS MISUNDERSTOOD AND/0R IMPROPERLY USED AND THE EFFECT THAT THIS HAS ON AD- MINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION V. That there is a limit to the number of persons or tasks one individual can direct or supervise effectively at one time, has been established. Data collected from the questionnaires relate directly to this point. -151- Teacher-administrator ratios in Table VI show that mean and median figures agree closely with recommended span figures, assuming that there is equal distribution of per- sonnel among all administrators. Many authorities agree that a span of between fifteen and nineteen to one is not unreasonable. However, extreme figures in this table show definite irregularities in teacher-administrator ratio. When there is an administrator for every eleven, twelve, thirteen or fourteen teachers it can be concluded that the system is overstaffed with administrators. On the other hand, when there are seventy teachers for every administrator the opposite is true. When a person is directly responsible to an adminis- trator the administrator has responsibilities for supervising that person. Numbers of people directly responsible to the superintendent are tabulated in Table XXIV. These data show highly varied figures with little agreement between means and medians or between groups. Superintendents who have only two, three, or four persons directly responsible to them have a limited span and are probably over staffed or over organized. Yet, superintendents who have four hundred or, for that matter, more than fifty persons directly re- sponsible to them are violating all principles of span theory. Perhaps these persons did not understand the questionnaire. If they did, they do not understand span theory and their system is improperly staffed. -152- Similar data were compiled for other line adminis- trative positions. These. data appear in Table XL. Inspec- tion of the figures leads to similar conclusions for all administrative positions, and shows that there is not equal distribution of personnel among administrators. The mean number of persons directly responsible to administrators other than the superintendent varies from 18.1/1 for ele- mentary school principals to 273.8/1 for assistant super- intendents in charge of personnel. The average of the means for all of these positions is 85.2. An interesting related issue to this discussion is that of the number of persons with direct access to the superintendent (Table XXV). By comparing the data in this table with that in Table XXIV, it would appear that there are from 1 to 386 persons who are responsible to the super- intendent but have no direct access to him. The data in Table XXVI show the positions with direct access to the superintendent. Regardless of size of district, all assistant superintendents, administrative assistants, curriculum co- ordinators, and business managers have direct access to the superintendent. The variety of positions with direct access increases as the districts become smaller. Group 5 districts show 6 positions with 100 per cent agreement regarding direct access and 1. positions with more than 80 per cent agreement. Group 1 districts show 1. positions with 100 per cent agreement on direct access and only 2 with more -153- Table XL.--Number of Persons, by Total Sample, Directly Re- sponsible to Various Line Administrative Positions No. of Dist. Number of Positions Having Per District Position Positions M Elementary Principals 72 7- A7 18.1 Elem. Grade-Level Coordinators 33 h- 55 27.3 Elem. Vice- or Asst. Principals A 7- 35 17.0 Elem. Curriculum Coordinators 3 5- 300 115.0 All-School Curriculum Co- ordinators 2 10- A08 209.0 Administrative Assistants ll 1- 300 73.3 Business Managers 17 l- 300 48.5 Superintendents of Schools 59 1-1000 81.6 Directors of Elem. Education 7 l- 165 32.9 Directors of Curriculum A l- 250 9h.3 Senior High Principals 70 l- 140 38.8 Senior High Department Heads 7 6- no 19.3 Senior High Vice- or Assistant Principals 1A 1- 90 Ah.2 Assistant Superintendents in Charge of Instruction 9 l- 750 104.3 Assistant Superintendents in Charge of Personnel 4 1- 750 273.8 Assistant Superintendents in Charge of Instruction and Personnel ~ 5 10- A08 165.A -153... Table XL.--Number of Persons, by Total Sample, Directly Re- sponsible to Various Line Administrative Positions No. of Dist. Number of Positions Having Per District Position Positions M Elementary Principals 72 7- A7 18.1 Elem. Grade-Level Coordinators 33 h- 55 27.3 Elem. Vice- or Asst. Principals 4 7- 35 17.0 Elem. Curriculum Coordinators 3 5- 300 115.0 All-School Curriculum Co- ordinators 2 10- 408 209.0 Administrative Assistants 11 l- 300 73.3 Business Managers 17 1- 300 48.5 Superintendents of Schools 59 l-lOOO 81.6 Directors of Elem. Education 7 l- 165 32.9 Directors of Curriculum 4 l- 250 94.3 Senior High Principals 70 l- 140 38.8 Senior High Department Heads 7 6- 40 19.3 Senior High Vice- or Assistant Principals 14 l- 90 44.2 Assistant Superintendents in Charge of Instruction 9 l- 750 104.3 Assistant Superintendents in Charge of Personnel 4 l- 750 273.8 Assistant Superintendents in Charge of Instruction and Personnel - 5 10- 408 165.4 w—r— Wi— -154- than 80 per cent agreement. Thus, these data uncover another area of poor organization and confusion within the adminis- trative organizational scheme. The final bit of information that relates to span of supervision is in terms of the number and kinds of personal contacts that superintendents have in relation to their job. It has been established that instructional leadership is a primary function of the superintendency. To lead, one must meet people and communicate with them. But, if the super- intendent attempts personally to lead all members of his staff and the community, he may well forfeit his leadership role for one of a glad hand and pleasant word. To be effec- tive as a leader he must work through other administrators 'who have been hired to assist with specific functions and/or groups of people. As an example, principals should work closely with teachers, business managers with salesmen, and public re- lations specialists with the public and mass communications agencies. In this manner, the superintendent can exert his leadership through other administrators and be freer to give leadership at selected times and places at all levels of the school system. Table XVIII shows that the majority (between 12 and 41 per cent) of the superintendents report between 15 and 75 professional contacts per week. These are not unreason- able figures and, although 75 represents an average of 15 -156- As the data relating to span of supervision is analyzed it can be seen that there are glaring inconsistencies, in- stances of misunderstanding, and/or improper use of the prin- ciple at every turn. There are many examples of proper use and apparent understanding of span theory. The data points ‘up, however, that in the public schools, in entirely too many cases, there is unfamiliarity with the theory. VI. THE DEGREE THAT SCHOOL SYSTEMS ARE UTILIZING CENTRALIZED OR DECENTRALIZED ORGANIZATION AND THE EFFECT THIS HAS ON ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION In an attempt to determine the degree of centraliza- tion or decentralization in Michigan's public schools, the questionnaires gathered information on kinds of committees, and persons performing selected tasks during the majority of their time. The analysis of these data sheds light on a fundamental issue of administrative organization in public education and gives some insights into the extent that schools are centralized or decentralized. Committee activitx and membership. Administration be- comes decentralized when teachers and building principles are given an opportunity to participate in the process of decision making. Committee involvement is one way to accom- plish the goal of teacher and principal participation in decision making. -155- contacts per day, personal observation and experience would tend to verify these figures. Fifteen per cent of group 2, 12 per cent of group 3, and 5 per cent of group 4 superin- tendents report between 101 and 200 contacts per week. These figures represent a maximum of 40 persons a day-~an average of twelve minutes per person, based upon a 40-hour week. Eight per cent of group 2 and 6 per cent of group 3 super- intendents reported between 200 and 500 contacts per week. This represents a maximum of 100 persons per day-~4.8 minutes per person. These figures indicate that a small percentage of superintendents are obviously bogged down by mere numbers of persons they come in contact with professionally. In an attempt to determine the kinds of professional contacts superintendents have, Tables XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, and XXIII were developed. Examination of the data in these tables shows that as the size of the district decreases the superintendent's contacts with professional staff and pupils increase. The reverse is true regarding the superintendent's contacts with citizens about civic or school affairs. From these data it would appear that the superintendent in a small school system is more involved in working with his pro- fessional staff and the superintendent in a large system apparently devotes more time to contacts with citizens. This conclusion agrees with the data about direct access reported on page 153. -157- According to Table XII, administrative councils are common in districts of all sizes except those in group 5 (26-50 teachers). There, only 22.7 per cent of the dis- tricts reported having administrative councils. The size of these councils varies from 3 to 60 members. It would seem that a 60-member council would serve as little more than an information group according to span theory and mere size in numbers.) Group 1 districts have the widest variety of positions on their councils (8 in number) with variety decreasing by size of district to only 3 positions in group 5 schools. Positions common to all councils are superin- tendents of schools and senior high school principals. Ele- mentary school principals are common to all but group 1 districts. The decrease in numbers of positions on councils with respect to size of districts is probably due to the lack of variety of administrative positions in smaller dis- tricts. In any case, the practice of using administrative councils is a form of decentralization and is well estab- lished in all but the small school districts. System-wide, subject-matter or grade-level, and building-curriculum committees are being used by between 55 and 100 per cent of the schools in this study, in all dis- tricts except those in group 5. In group 5 the figures are .between 41 and 55 Per cent. Positions common to all of these committees in districts of all sizes are building -158- jprincipals and teachers. Thus, in terms of committee mem- 'bership, school districts are decentralized. Administrative positions. A second way to analyze 'the degree of centralization or decentralization is to study the type of administrative positions used by school districts. By defining centralized positions as elementary school curriculum coordinators, all-school curriculum co- ordinators, directors of elementary education, directors of curriculum, assistant superintendents in charge of instruc- tion, directors of secondary education; and decentralized positions as elementary school department heads, elementary school grade-level coordinators, elementary school building- curriculum coordinators, elementary school subject-matter coordinators, senior high school department heads, senior high school cross-department coordinators, senior high school building-curriculum coordinators, senior high school subject-matter coordinators, and senior high school curricu- lum coordinators, one achieves some insights into the degree of centralization or decentralization that can be obtained. Table XLI presents this information. The table shows considerable overlapping, a definite trend toward centrali- zation in group 4 schools, and no appreciable trend in any other group or in the total sample. Task performance. A final indication of centralization- decentralization can be found by noting which persons perform certain tasks in the school system. If the tasks are -159- Table XLI.--Number of School Districts, by Groups, that Have Centralized and Decentralized Organization .— No. of Centralized Decentralized Groups Districts Total Only Total OfiIy Both 1 12 12 3 9 9 2 13 9 1 ll 3 8 3 19 11 4 10 3 7 z, 22 10 7 3 2 5 22 2 2 l 1 Total 88 44 17 36 10 26 performed by central office personnel, the system can be said to be centralized. If, however, the tasks are per- formed by teachers or administrators working at various levels throughout the system, a decentralized organization is indi- cated. The latter case is shown by Tables XXXI, XXXII, and XXXIII. The only tasks that are performed in the central office regularly have to do with management and administrative details (Tables XXXIV and XXXV). Principals, teachers, and committees, usually perform other tasks. Analysis shows conflicting data regarding the degree of centralization-decentralization in the school districts in this sample. With committee involvement, decentralization is indicated, types of administrative positions show consider- able overlapping, and performance of tasks suggests decentrali- zation. -l60- Public education must operate within the context of a decentralized administrative organization if the talents of its professionally trained staff are to be recognized and utilized, and if the philosophy of cooperative partici- pation, individual freedom of expression, and individual worth and dignity is to be realized. When decisions, policies, and procedures are determined in the central office, as is the case in centralized organization, none of the above listed goals is practiced. Certainly the schools cannot hope to teach the democratic way of life if they do not practice it in their own operation. VII. THE DEGREE THAT SCHOOL SYSTEMS UTILIZE DEPARTMENTATION AND THE KINDS OF DEPARTMENTATION BEING PRACTICED AND THE EFFECT OF THESE'VARIABLES 0N ADMINISTRATIVE OR- GANIZATION The degree to which public school systems in Michigan are departmentalized can be seen by studying the frequency of numbers of department heads in these systems. Table XLII lists those positions that are associated with some form of departmentation. The data shows that 22 school districts have senior high school department heads and 2 districts have elementary school department heads. Thus, only about one quarter of the districts studied have traditional de- partmentation. -l61- Table XLII.--Kinds of Positions and Number of Districts Hav- ing Positions in Subject Matter and General Edu- cation Departmentalized Organization No. of Position Districts WW Elementary Department Heads 2 Elementary Grade-Level Coordinators 9 Elementary Subject Matter Coordinators 12 Senior High Department Heads 22 Senior High Subject Matter Coordinators 9 GENERAL EQQCATION DEPARTMENTATION Elementary Curriculum Coordinators 12 All-School Curriculum Coordinators 13 Directors of Elementary Education 12 Directors of Curriculum 11 Senior High Cross-Department Coordinators 7 Senior High Building Curriculum Coordinators 1 Senior High Curriculum Coordinators Assistant Superintendents in Charge of Instruction 16 Directors of Secondary Education 5 -l62- Table XLIII indicates that more than half of the dis- tricts questioned have some form of departmentalized organi- zation. This table also shows that departmentation is much more common in large districts than it is in small districts. Table XLIII.-~Number of School Districts, by Groups, Having Subject Matter and General Education Depart- mentalized Organization No. of Subject Matter General Education Groups Districts Tota Only TotaI OnIy Both l 12 9 2 12 3 7 2 13 ll 4 8 1 7 3 l9 9 4 10 5 5 4 22 2 10 8 2 5 22 l l 2 2 Total 88 35 13 42 20 21 Tables XLII and XLIII also present data on the kind of departmentation in existence in public schools. The tables are divided into "subject matter" and "general educa- tion" columns. Subject-matter departmentation provides for positions with major concern in subject areas, such as English and science. General-education departmentation pro- vides for positions with major concern in the over-all edu- cational program, rather than in one segment of it. It can be seen from these tables that there are only five "subject -163- xmatter" positions and that there are ten "general education" jpositions. In spite of this, there is only a slight differ- ence in the number of districts having general-education over subject-matter departmentation. As was the case with centralization-decentralization, 'these data show no trend except in the districts in group 4 ‘where a definite leaning toward general-education depart- mentation may be observed. There is an indication here that if school districts do not departmentalize their organiza- tions they tend to have a centralized organization. 0n the other hand, when they decentralize through departmentation the departments formed are apt to be subject-matter oriented;and the entire system leans toward subject-matter preparation as the basis of a good education. This type of school system often produces people who know many facts but who are not truly educated because they cannot integrate the facts into useful and purposeful wholes. It would seem that a system of departmentation that emphasized the grade level or total building rather than specific subjects would not only serve the needs of a de- centralized organization and the general education of today's youth, but also would make available avenues for teachers to broaden their outlooks by working and sharing ideas with fellow teachers who have different interests and academic preparation. Such department groups would be able to bring a cross section of interests, ideas, training, and -164- specialization to bear on problems facing the school dis- trict. VIII. SUMMARY This chapter was concerned with analysis of the data presented in chapter V with respect to selected issues con- fronting administrative organization in the public schools. The issues that were analyzed were concerned with physical characteristics, breadth of administrative positions, line and staff, span theory, centralization-dccentralization, and departmentation in public schools. The data uncovered many problem areas in the field of administrative organization, such as an overemphasis on line administrators, misunderstandings of line and staff, and too large or too small spans of supervision. The most significant single conclusion that can be drawn from the analysis is that there is no common system of administrative organization among the school districts included in the sample. One can find examples of districts that seem to be practicing all of the principles of good organization, through the continuum, to districts that seem to be prac- ticing none of the principles. Chapter VII will continue the analysis of data with respect to the point of view toward administrative organi- zation developed in Chapter IV. CHAPTER VII: ANALYSIS OF DATA WITH RESPECT TO A POINT OF VIEW TOWARD ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION I. INTRODUCTION In chapter IV, a point of view was developed toward administrative organization that is based upon fundamental principles of a democratic society and the unique character- istics of education in such a society. The point of view is based upon the concept of shared responsibility and pro- poses an approach to administrative organization in public schools which should implement sound principles of organi- zation in a framework of democratic freedom and cooperative participation. The core of this point of view can be called the "policy circle organization" (page 74). This policy circle includes formulation, adoption, execution, and review. This chapter will present an analysis of the degree to which this point of view is being used in the administrative organization of the public schools of Michigan. This approach suggests that employees, lay citizens, and pupils should cooperatively formulate policies for board of education adoption; superintendents and other administra- tors should be responsible for the execution of the adopted -165- CHAPTER VII; ANALYSIS OF DATA WITH RESPECT TO A POINT OF VIEW TOWARD ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION I. INTRODUCTION In chapter IV, a point of view was developed toward administrative organization that is based upon fundamental principles of a democratic society and the unique character- istics of education in such a society. The point of view is based upon the concept of shared responsibility and pro- poses an approach to administrative organization in public schools which should implement sound principles of organi- zation in a framework of democratic freedom and cooperative participation. The core of this point of view can be called the "policy circle organization" (page 74). This policy circle includes formulation, adoption, execution, and review. This chapter will present an analysis of the degree to which this point of view is being used in the administrative organization of the public schools of Michigan. This approach suggests that employees, lay citizens, and pupils should cooperatively formulate policies for board of education adoption; superintendents and other administra- tors should be responsible for the execution of the adopted -165- ~166- policies; and the employees, in turn, should review and reformulate policies in light of their effectiveness in an ever-changing society. It was further suggested that for this system to function properly, the superintendent of schools has to lead in all phases of the operation. There- fore, the key features of such an approach toward administra- tive organization are (1) shared responsibility throughout the entire system, (2) proper definition of function within the organization, and (3) leadership on the part of the superintendent. II. SHARED RESPONSIBILITY The degree to which responsibilities are assigned and shared at various levels of the organization is important to this discussion. If responsibilities are jealously guarded by any one person or group within the system, the entire operation loses its effectiveness. Data collected on task performance (Tablex XXXI, XXXII, XXXIII, and XXXIV) will shed some light on this topic. Along with information about who performs certain tasks the majority of the time, careful inspection of these data shows that all twenty tasks are shared among various persons in all five groups of districts. As a matter of fact, the tasks are shared to such a degree that one begins to question whether the principle of shared responsibility is overemphasized to the detriment of smooth organizational -167- operation. When three or four different positions perform a task the majority of the time, there is reason to question the placement of responsibility for that task. Kinds of responsibilities assigned to administrators and to committees also will give insight into the degree to which responsibility is being shared in public school organi- zation. This facet of the analysis will be presented under the section on primary functions. Formal systems for involving citizens in the principle of shared responsibility, as indicated by the number of citizens' advisory curriculum councils, are few in number. Table XVI shows that these kinds of committees are used by between 8 and 28 per cent of the school districts studied. Size of district seems to have no connection with the use of such committees as their percentage of use from largest to smallest group is 17, 8, 28, 9, and 18, respectively. Data were not available regarding the extent of citizen and pupil involvement in school curriculum committees except through an "other" space under each committee question. Only two superintendents listed either of these groups on any of their curriculum committees. This lack is unfortunate and limits the principle of shared responsibility by elimi- nating two important groups of peeple from the sharing pro- cedure. Shared responsibility means that the various tasks, responsibilities, and operational functions of the district ~168- should be assigned at various levels throughout the district. It does not mean that many people perform the same task at the same time. The data on task performance, committee func- tion, and administrative function indicate the existence of shared responsibility at various levels of the organization. They also suggest that many specific tasks and functions are shared by many people at the same time. For example, super- intendents in group 1 reported that superintendents, assist- ant principals, building principals, subject-matter directors, department heads, curriculum coordinators, and directors of curriculum all visit classrooms. It can be concluded that the principle of shared re- sponsibility is being used among school employees in public school organization. There are indications, however that the principle is misinterpreted by many superintendents. III. PRIMARY FUNCTIONS The questionnaire asked the superintendent to list the primary functions of administrative councils, building- curriculum committees, subject-matter or grade-level curricu- lum committees, system-wide curriculum committees, and citizens' curriculum advisory councils. He also was asked to list the primary function of the superintendent of schools, assistant superintendents of schools, curriculum coordinators, and building principals. This information was requested in open-ended questions so that freedom of expression could be -l69- allowed. The responses were tabulated in Tables XVII and XXXV. Committeeg. Table XVII contains the data on primary functions of committees. These data indicate that com- mittees often formulate policies in the form of recommenda- tions to various other committees, the superintendent of schools, the board of education, and other administrators. The variety and overlapping of answers in the table suggests confusion of function and duplication of effort between com- mittees. Many of the answers also indicate a lack of under- standing of organization theory. For example, 11 superin- tendents, representing all 5 groups, said that administrative councils "establish policy." This is a function of the board of education. It is difficult to see how a committee or council can execute, lead, or interpret policies; these are duties that must be performed by individuals. Groups become ineffective when they attempt these functions. Coordination is one of the most common functions listed between committees and within individual committees. The term "coordination" suggests a felt need for harmony and perhaps even standardization between the parts and levels of the school system. Two superintendents said that the primary function of subject-matter or grade-level curriculum committees was to standardize curriculum. There is no ques- tion that coordination in terms of unity, reduced duplication -170- of effort, and mutual understanding is vitally important to the successful operation of a school system; but when co- ordination becomes standardization, the whole concept of individual freedom and development is stifled. Advisement to the board is listed as the primary function of citizens' curriculum-advisory committees by 8 superintendents representing all groups of districts. This is as it should be, for the board of education is an agent of the peOple and is charged with adoption of policies that will best meet the needs of its school district. Citizens' committees that are advisory to the superintendent or the staff have questionable legal status and may cause a com— munity split between the board, the teachers, and the com- munity. Thus, it can be seen that committees are perceived by many superintendents to have the function necessary for them to be the policy formulating agencies of the schools. They are composed of teachers and principals, but lack citizens and pupils for truly effective community involve- ment. There is a wide variance in the superintendents' conceptions of functions of committees; an additional fact to support lack of an organizational pattern. Committees should be the primary instrument for policy formulation in school systems. They need to be com- posed of a cross section of the faculty and should have well defined aims and objectives that coordinate with other -l7l- committees. In such a manner they may utilize the thinking of many persons, hear all sides of an issue, and be less apt to conflict with the function of other committees in the system. Administrators. The functions of selected adminis- trative positions is presented in Table XXXV. The three functions common to all groups of school districts, and re- ceiving the highest number of total responses were: (1) to carry out policies, (2) to provide instructional leadership, and (3) to coordinate. The table lists eighteen other functions from ”make everyone happy" to "direct." It can be seen from these data that superintendents see policy execution as their primary job with instructional leader- ship running a close second. The superintendents also list a wide variety of other functions as primary to their position. Curriculum coordinators and assistant superintendents have primary functions that tend to be quite specific and specialized in nature. The curriculum coordinator is expected' to supervise, develop, study, and evaluate curriculum. Assist- ant superintendents are specialists in business, instruction, plant and transportation, and personnel. The building principal's most common function is to administer his building. Instructional leadership and super- vision occupy second and third positions respectively. The list includes eight other functions that are perceived by the superintendents to be primary for the position. ~172- Superintendents who define the primary function of other administrators as "delegated by the superintendent"-- as is the case with each of the positions studied here-- appear to have loose organizations with no apparent, spe— cifically defined duties or responsibilities. Those super- intendents seem to consider their position to be one of ab- solute authority. It is not difficult to imagine these men as despotic administrators operating autocratic school systems. It can be concluded from these data that a large number of superintendents perceive their position, and the positions of other administrators, as leadership positions ‘with a specific responsibility for execution of policies. These functions agree with the point of view developed in this thesis. IV. SUPERINTENDENT LEADERSHIP The questionnaire asked two other questions that were designed to find out the real duties of the superin- tendent and other administrators in the schools. One ques- tion asked how much time the superintendent gave to various activities. The data from this question appears in Tables XXVI, XXVII, XXVIII, XXIX, and XXX. The other question asked who performs selected tasks the majority of the time. The data from this question appears in Tables XXXI, XXXII, XXXIII, and XXXIV. ~173- These data are analyzed in chapter VI. They indi- cate that, in practice, the superintendent is not the instruc- tional leader. Rather, he is tied down with administrative and management details such as interviewing prospective teachers, employing teachers, adopting textbooks, and order- ing textbooks. These data suggest that the building principal is the real instructional leader of the public schools of the state. Such a conclusion is drawn from the fact that they perform the following tasks the majority of the time: Introduce Curriculum Study Build Schedules Supervise Curriculum Study Visit Classrooms Supervise and Coordinate Supervise and Coordinate Elementary Teachers High School Teachers Supervise Pupils Discipline Pupils Chair Building-Curriculum Chair District-Wide Curricu- Committees lum Committees Hold Building Faculty Meetings Hold Grade-Level Faculty Meetings Hold SubjectéMatter Faculty Meetings The data in Tables XXVI, XXVII, XXVIII, XXIX, and XXX attempt to find out the kinds of activities that occupy most of the superintendents' time. This information should serve as another indication of the extent to which they are truly instructional leaders in their school systems. These data reveal that all group 1, 2, and 3 superintendents spend between 0 and 5 per cent of their time supervising trans- portation, and cafeterias. A broad analysis of these tables -l7h- uncovers a group of activities that most superintendents spend a majority of time on, and another group of ac- tivities that most superintendents spend little time on. These activities are listed below. Appipities Consuming More Time Working on Budget Planning New Facilities Office Management Discussing Curriculum with Principals Working on Correspondence and Reports Professional Meetings and Organizations Meeting with Committees Activities Consuming Little Time Professional Reading Supervising Transportation Supervising Cafeterias Supervising Maintainence Meeting with Administrative Councils Meeting with Parents Discussing Curriculum with Parents Discussing Curriculum with Citizens These lists suggest that superintendents spend a dispro- portionate amount of their time on management and operational details, while the activities related directly to improved -l75- instruction within the district are left unattended or assigned to others. Again, there is reason to question the degree to which the superintendent is an instructional leader in his school district. It may be argued that he functions at a very high level in the areas of finance, facilities, and state and national programs, which may well be the case. It does not appear that the instructional leadership at the local level is being assumed.by the superintendent. For the superintendent to become a real instructional leader in his school system, he must be freed of manageral details so that he will have time fer the instructional pro- gram. One way to accomplish this is to assign these tasks and details to specialists in the system. The last responsi- bility that the superintendent should give up is leadership of and direct concern for the instructional program. V. SUMMARY As the data was analyzed in this chapter with respect to a point of view toward administrative organization, it could be seen that the point of view developed in this study is not entirely foreign to public school administrative organization. Many superintendents see their role, and the role of other administrators and committees, as agreeing with the approach taken in chapter IV of this study. -l76- The point of view was analyzed in terms of shared responsibility, primary functions of curriculum committees and selected administrative positions, and superintendent leadership. It should be pointed out that the data did not uncover any significant trends. They did uncover indications of widely varied organizational patterns. Some were in agreement with, and others in opposition to, the point of view toward administrative organization presented herein. These data definitely support the hypothesis that there are no common organizational patterns for the improve- ment of instruction in the public schools of the state. Chapter VIII will conclude the analysis of data by presenting findings as they relate to general statements and purposes of this dissertation. CHAPTER VIII GENERAL FINDINGS I. INTRODUCTION The two previous chapters have been concerned with the analysis of data with respect to specialized aspects of the dissertation. There remains certain general areas, which were presented early in the thesis, that must receive attention. These areas are; (1) returns from interviewed sample versus mailed sample, (2) original purposes of the questionnaire as presented in chapter II, and (3) hypotheses of the study as presented in chapter I. This chapter will present the findings of the data collected from the questionnaires as these data relate to the three areas listed above. II. INTERVIEWED VERSUS MAILED RESPONSES The superintendents of schools in fifteen of the school districts included in the sampling received question- naires in interview situations. The remaining ninety-five school superintendents received the questionnaires by mail. The sample interview was used as a method of verifying the validity of the results from the mailed questionnaires. -l77- -]_78- Careful study of the tabulated data, with a view t3<>ward comparing the results from the mailed questionnaires ‘With the results from the questionnaires completed in inter- view situations, uncovered only two areas of possible con- fusion or misunderstanding. All other parts of the ques- tionnaire showed no noticeable difference in responses from the two techniques. The first area of possible misunderstanding appeared in the definition of line and staff positions; question 1, part II. Of all superintendents sampled, only five reported no line administrators in their districts: or 5.6 per cent of the total sampling. One is in group 1, 2 are in group 4, and 2 are in group 5. Of the superintendents who received their questionnaires in interview situations, only one re- ported no line administrators in his district: or 6.7 per cent of the interviewed superintendents. His district is in group 1. Of all superintendents sampled, forty-two reported no staff administrators in their districts: or 47.2 per cent of the total sampling. Two are in group 1, 3 are in group 2, 5 are in group 3, 14 are in group 4, and 18 are in group 5. Of the superintendents who received their questionnaires in interview situations, five reported no staff administrators in their districts: or 33.3 per cent of the interviewed superintendents. One is in group 1, 2 are in group 4, and 2 are in group 5. -l79- These data may be significant enough to indicate an area of misunderstanding; however, it appears to the in- vestigator that the comparative figures are not enough dif- ferent to indicate a major discrepancy. The second area of possible misunderstanding is with respect to the number of persons directly responsible to the superintendent: question number 6, part III. In spite of the fact that the superintendents were asked to ignore what- ever open-door policies they might have, the data from the mailed questionnaires shows isolated cases where the "directly responsible" figures are extremely high--they probably in- clude all the employees in the districts. There are no such cases among the responses of the interviewed superintendents. The largest number of persons reported as "directly responsible" by the interviewed superintendents is 29. That superintendent's school district lists 540 teacher-certificated employees. Among the mailed questionnaires, similar figures are 400 "di- rectly responsible" in a district listing 376 teacher- certificated employees. Thus, there is a real indication of misunderstanding on the part of some superintendents who received the ques- tionnaires by mail regarding the question asking the number of persons directly responsible to them. There is, therefore, some basis for questioning the validity of the answers to this question. Misunderstanding may account for the wide ‘variation in data obtained from the answers to the "directly responsible" question. -180- III. ORIGINAL PURPOSES OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE Determine the existing patterns of organization in the pubiic schools that pertain to the instructional program. According to the data collected, the school districts in Michigan have no common organizational patterns for improved instruction. Some broad trends gathered from the data would suggest that: (1) teacher-administrator ratios are constant among different size districts (there is a slight increase in small districts); (2) there are appreciably more line administrative positions in the public schools than there are staff administrative positions; (3) large school dis- tricts employ a higher percentage of administrators than do small districts; (4) span of supervision figures show no consistency, either between or among positions: (5) all school districts, except those employing between 26 and 50 teachers, use teacher committees to a great extent in their instructional improvement organization; (6) unity of direc- tion is both varied and confused in most districts; (7) the data are not sufficiently different to show any trend in subject-matter versus general-education oriented organization; '(8) features of both centralized and decentralized organi- zations are evident from the data (small districts tend toward decentralization, and large districts tend toward centralization). -l81- Determing what position or ppsitions perform certain (selected functions common to most public schools. Super- intendents of schools tend to perform administrative and Inanagerial tasks. Their task performance would suggest lleadership at an over-all level rather than instructional ileadership within the local school district. As the school districts become smaller, the superintendents become more involved in local problems of an instructional nature. Data on time given to selected activities verifies ‘the conclusion that superintendents do not perform nor spend sufficient time at tasks that are directly related to instructional improvement in the local district. Committees recommend textbook revisions, and teachers chair grade-level or subject-matter curriculum committees. In terms of task performance, the building principal is the instructional leader of the school system. He is expected to perform all of the tasks that are directly re- lated to the local instructional program. Determine the degree that the superintendent is free to exert instructional leadership. According to the data collected on responsibility, professional contacts, number of contacts with selected persons per week, and direct access, it is strongly indicated that superintendents of schools are not free to exert the kinds of leadership that will result in improved instruction at the local level. They are bogged down by numbers of people, technical details -182- of finance, purchasing, building construction, procurement of teachers, and community and civic activities to the ex- tent that they do not have time left to exert local leader- ship specifically oriented to improved instruction. Determine the degree of involvement of citizens and staff in the development and execution of the instructional program. School employees are involved to a considerable degree in the development and execution of the instructional program. Their role as committee members and chairmen, along with their involvement in task performance, places them in an excellent position to assist in the development and exe- cution of policies related to the instructional program. The opposite is true of citizen involvement. Only two school districts out of’eighty-nine reported citizens as members of school curriculum committees. These are in systemdwide curriculum committees. The use of citizens' curriculum-advisory committees is limited in the school districts studied. Deteppine the dggree that the principles discussed in chappeps III and IV are being implemented in the public schools of.Michiggn. Chapters VI and VII presented a de- tailed analysis of the degree to which the principles dis- cussed in chapters III and IV are being implemented in Michigan's public schools. It should be noted here that examples were uncovered of districts that are following the selected principles ~183- in their organizational framework, and that some examples of utilization of the point of view developed in this study toward administrative organization were found. The data, nevertheless, shows a wide variety of practices with no commonality or uniformity of organizational patterns apparent. IV. HYPOTHESES Hypothesis 1. The public schools of Michigan have no common organizational pattern to facilitate instruction. This hypothesis is verified by the data and analysis dealt with in chapters V, VI, VII; and in section II of this chapter. At every turn, the questionnaires uncovered data that support this hypothesis. School districts in the study display organizational patterns that have no line positions; others that have no staff positions. In some districts, all employees are directly responsible to the superintendent; in others, as few as four or five are directly responsible to the superintendent. Some districts have autocratic organizations; others have democratic prac- tices and procedures. Similar examples can be given in almost all cases as supporting evidence for the acceptance of this hypothesis. Therefore, hypothesis number one is accepted. It represents the strongest conclusion made from this study. Hyppthepis 2. An appreciable number of school dis- ‘tzricts that were considered in this gpudy show a lack of -184- instructional leadership organization. This hypothesis is more difficult to verify than the previously stated hypothesis. The data strongly suggest that the statement relates more closely to small districts than it does to large districts. The absence of staff positions and administrative councils, along with fewer curriculum committees in smaller districts, helps to support this conclusion. Therefore, hypothesis number two is only partially accepted. The definition of the term "appreciable number" gives rise to some reservation. Certainly, there are some districts in this study with no instructional organization, but they are few and the exact number is difficult to as- certain. Hyppthesis 3. An appreciable number of school dis- tricps that were considereg_in this study and that have an organizational structure for instructional leadership, do not have the supgrintendent of schools as the instructional later. This hypothesis is definitely proved by the analysis of task performance and time devoted to various activities by superintendents. It was found that principals usually spend their time performing those tasks that are connected ‘with.local instructional leadership. Teachers, through committee membership and chairmanship, also contribute much to instructional leadership at the local level. -185- Superintendents are heavily involved in managerial, finan- cial, and operational facets of the school system. Therefore, hypothesis number three is accepted. It, along with hypothesis number one, represents a major con- clusion of the study. Hypothesis_4. The selected principles of organization ‘will serve as gpidelines fog determinipg when certain txpes of administratize ppsitions should be added to the personnel of a school system. The selected principles referred to in this hypothesis ‘were presented and briefly developed in chapter III. This hypothesis is the basis for the presentation made in chapter IV, in which a point of view toward administrative organi- zation for improved instruction was developed. Chapter IV set forth an approach toward administrative organization that recognizes a need for a modification of traditional concepts of line and staff; rejects the autocratic implica- tions of power, control, and authority in a democratic society; recognizes shared responsibility as an important concept to successful, school administrative organization; and describes an organizational framework that should allow for better instruction in the public schools. In a general way, all of these points support this hypothesis. Further analysis of and comment about this hypothesis will be made in the final chapter. -186- V. SUMMARY This chapter has brought together the general state- ments,expectations, and hypotheses of the dissertation and presented an over-all analysis of them in terms of the data collected by the questionnaires. It was concluded in this chapter that (1) except for the question of direct responsibility, there is no appreciable difference between responses that were completed during interviews and through the mails; (2) the five origi- nal purposes of the questionnaire were satisfied; and (3) all hypotheses were accepted without reservation except hypothesis number two. That an appreciable number of school districts examined show a lack of instructional leadership organization was only partially accepted. It remains to draw general conclusions and make recom- mendations based upon the entire dissertation. This will be the purpose of the next and final chapter. CHAPTER IX CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY I. INTRODUCTION This dissertation is concerned with a study of admin- istrative organization for improved instruction in the public schools of Michigan. It combines theory and applied research to develop an approach toward public school administrative organization and compares this approach with current prac- tices in the field. The approach was developed by selection of a set of seven organizational principles from public administration, business administration, and church administration. The principles selected are (1) common purpose, (2) unity of direction, (3) line and staff, (4) span of supervision, (5) centralization-decentralization, (6) departmentation, and (7) informal organization. These principles then were expanded within the con- text of a democratic society and the unique features of education in such a society. It was argued that to insure a democratic way of life that insures individual freedom, recognizes the worth and dignity of every person, and attempts to develop each ~187- -188- individual to the limit of his capacity, there must be an evaluation and reinterpretation of principles of administra- tive organization. Thus, the approach developed in chapter IV attempts to place the selected principles in proper con- text for effective administrative organization of public education in a democratic society. This point of view suggests that employees, lay citizens, and pupils should fermulate policies; boards of education should adopt policies; the superintendent of schools and other administrators should execute policies; and employees, lay citizens, and pupils should review policies and recommend necessary changes in light of practical application. The point of view fur- ther suggests that the superintendent of schools should be a leader in all four facets of the system. The next phase of the dissertation was to determine how the public schools in Michigan are organized to facilitate improved instruction. A questionnaire was submitted to the superintendents in 110 public school districts selected in a representative random sampling of the state. The questionnaire was designed in such a way as to attempt to find out how the superintendents of schools see various organizational, administrative, and operational as- pects of their school systems. The data from the completed questionnaires were then used to analyze existing administra- ‘tive organizational patterns of Michigan public schools. -189- This study determines how Michigan school systems are organized to facilitate improved instruction. It also develops an approach toward organization--an approach that serves as a basis to draw conclusions regarding the effec- tiveness of administrative organization for instructional improvement in the public schools of a free society. Fur- ther, the approach serves as a basis to make recommendations fer improving public school administrative organization. This chapter deals with the conclusions and recommenda- tions mentioned above. They are drawn from the approach toward administrative organization developed in chapter IV, as compared with current practices determined by the re- sponses to the questionnaire. The chapter brings the dissertation to an end with a section on suggestions for further study. These suggestions arise from the many facets of this general problem that were discovered throughout the entire study. II. CONCLUSIONS A study of this type leads to many conclusions of differing nature. Within the body of the dissertation, conclusions are often implied and sometimes spelled out in the text. These varied conclusions, both implicit and ex- plicit, may be grouped into the broad areas of conclusions drawn from the point of view, and conclusions drawn from the questionnaire data. The former will be classified as -190- "theory conclusions" and the latter as "data conclusions." Theor): conclusions. As the principles of administra- tive organization were selected and briefly developed, and as the approach toward administrative organization for im- proved instruction unfolded, certain conclusions seemed to appear which are important to the topic studied. These conclusions fellow. l. The administrative organization of an enterprise should be determined by its goals and purposes, and should operate within the context of the basic tenets of the societal complex in which it functions. Whether these basic tenets are democratic, autocratic, laissez-faire, or otherwise, the administrative organization that will best serve the purposes of the society will assume Characteristics which agree with the operational theories that it fosters. A laissez-faire organization would have real difficulty 8uczceeding in an autocratic or dictatorial society. A laissez-faire structure does not encourage or sanction the "a? of life of these associations. Autocratic governments are not interested in social experimentation and, there- fore, would not tolerate an administrative organization that is contrary to their beliefs. True democracy not only allows but also encourages e’Cl'Derimentation within its structure. Many types of ad- ministrative organizations may exist, experimentally, in a ~191- democratic society. If democracy is to prosper, however, its administrative organizations must Operate in such a way that they agree with and encourage the democratic way of life. 2. Administrative organization in a democratic so- ciety should be based upon freedom for the individual to develop to the limit of his capacity, recognition of the dignity and worth of every person, and the development of policies and methods of operation by all of the people for the good of all of the people. To maximize creativity on the part of all people, and to be equipped to cope with a society that should have dynamic change and growth as a basis of its existence, ad- ministration in a democratic society must be so organized tShat it leads, motivates, and involves people. Traditional, autocratic concepts of authority, direction, power, and Superiority should have no place in this type of administra- tive organization. Its primary purpose should be to help pe(Ziple to help themselves. 3. The function and purpose of an enterprise should be a determining factor in the type of administrator for that enterprise. One may argue with considerable logic that adminis- tr‘éltive organization in business, industry, and the military needs to exercise a degree of direction in its operation. This may be due to the standardized nature of the product -192- being produced by these operations. Conformity to assembly- line procedures, profit-and-loss figures, and military dis- cipline and logistics are basic to the success of these institutions. In education, however, the product is individual development of human beings to the limits of their capacity. Thus, the educational enterprise is concerned with the direct opposite of a standardized product. Creativity, individual development, and inquiry are fundamental goals of education. Therefore, administrative organization in public education should have an emphasis more oriented to the principles of democratic living than industry, business, or the military. This conclusion is not meant to be in opposition to the preceding conclusion; it is meant to be a refinement and to point up degrees of relative emphasis. The intent of this conclusion is to point up the premise that if demo- cratic principles ought to be applied to administrative or- ganization in business, industry, and the military, certainly they are vital to the successful operation of the adminis- trative organization of public education. h. The primary purpose of an enterprise should be the chief concern of the top executive officer of the enter- prise. The top executive of an automotive corporation is primarily concerned with building cars that will sell; a military general, with winning battles. Similarly, a -l93- superintendent of schools should be primarily concerned with instruction. Top executives that are not familiar with, and deeply involved in the primary purposes of their enter- pmises will find that their enterprises lack the top-level leadership and guidance needed to reach maximum effective- ness. These statements imply that there is no one executive who can successfully administer all types of operations. The contention here accepts the view that there is a common core of administrative knowledge useful and basic to all situations, but qualifies this view by adding that the truly successful executive must also possess specific knowledge of the undertaking that he is administrating. Thus, educa- ‘tional, business, industrial, public, and military adminis- ‘trators should have much in common with respect to their Preparation and point of view toward their function; but, 130 be truly effective, each must possess talents and pre- Paration uniquely suited to the specialized goals in his institution. Data conclusions. As the data collected from the questionnaires were tabulated and analyzed, they gave in- sights into the administrative organization of public schools in Michigan. These insights, in turn, led to the following conclusions: 1. There are no administrative organizational pro- ‘3edmmes common to all the public schools of Michigan. -19h- This conclusion is drawn from.the many incidents of variation in organizational patterns reported in the data. Personnel employed, definition of function of administrators and committees, span of supervision, and task performance are some of the areas that showed extreme variations between school systems. Some degree of individuality is healthy in democratic institutions. The lack of common patterns found in this study, however, are so extreme that they can only lead to inefficient and slip-shod operational procedures. 2. There is a definite indication of lack of under- standing of principles of administrative organization on the part of superintendents of schools in.Michigan. This conclusion is based on data analysis that indi- cates some school systems have no line administrators; others, no staff administrators; some, with spans of supervision as high as 1000 to 1; and some school districts with as many as 386 persons directly responsible to the superintendent, but without direct access to him. 3. In many cases the superintendent of schools is not the instructional leader of his school system. The data collected in this study strongly suggests that the building principals are, in fact, the instructional leaders in many school districts in Michigan. The superintendent of schools is so involved in details of management, finance, new buildings, public relations, and state and national -l95- affairs that he cannot devote time and energy to the direct leadership of the instructional program in the local com- munity. A. There is positive evidence of overlapping and vaguely defined functions of administrators and committees in Michigan public schools. When superintendents were asked to list the primary function of specific administrative positions and specific committees, they often listed the same or similar functions for different positions and/or committees. 5. The approach toward administrative organization for improved instruction deve10ped in chapter IV of this dissertation is not entirely new to public education. There were encouraging indications of practices being followed in isolated public schools that closely parallel the point of view developed in this study. The principle of group involvement is being used by many school systems through committee action. Familiarity with and proper use of line and staff, span of supervision, decentralization, unity of purpose, and unity of direction were found to varying degrees among the schools studied. The concept of policy formulation, adoption, execution, and review pro- posed in chapter IV is being implemented with slight vari- ations in a few school districts. 6. As long as school systems continue to lack a uni- form.plan of administrative organization, and as long as -l96- these systems continue to eXpect their superintendents of schools to be anything but the instructional leaders of the school districts, the superintendents will not be able to fulfill their roles in a democratic society as described throughout this study. Administrative organization is the key to establish- ing an educational system that promotes the democratic way of life, frees teachers and pupils to be creative, and in— sures a dynamic, growing institution. 7. If the public schools of the United States are to continue to serve the needs of a democratic society that is dedicated to the recognition of the worth and dignity of every individual and is based upon the fundamental premise of constant evaluation and dynamic change, the administra- tion of these schools must be so organized that it is oriented to, and focused on the public schools as an institution recog- nizing and nurturing the promotion of creativity, freedom of thought and inquiry, individual worth and dignity, and in- dividual development to capacity. . A firm implication of this study is that the goals mentioned above can best be realized when the superintendent of schools is truly an educational leader in his school system, and when the entire administrative organization is based upon a philosophy of freeing teachers and pupils to be creative and productive in an over-all framework of cooperative participation of all employees, lay citizens, and pupils. -l97- III. RECOMMENDATIONS This study has led to the conclusions that were enumerated above. These conclusions, in turn, suggest cer- tain modifications, changes, and specific procedures in . public school administrative organization. The recommenda- tions that follow will suggest ways that weaknesses in educational administrative organization, as revealed in this study, may be corrected in the future. 1. Public schools, through their state and national organizations, should develop a framework of administrative organization. This framework should be general enough to allow for unique features of individual districts but, at the same time, it should be sufficiently particular to help bring some degree of reason to the chaos of present—day public school administrative organization. 2. The framework recommended above should be built upon instructional leadership as the only real function of public education. Therefore, the entire administrative organization should be focused on instructional improvement with the superintendent of schools as the key leader in this program. 3. Boards of education should be made aware of the importance of the leadership nature of the position of superintendent of schools. They should be educated to the realization that instructional leadership--not finance, ~198- discipline, and details of management-~is the most important contribution that their executive officer can make. A. School administrators need to be trained in the technical field of administrative organization by the intro— duction of courses at the graduate level that are specifically concerned with principles of administrative organization and their implications in a democratic society. 5. The superintendent of schools should be relieved of much of the time-consuming detailed tasks traditionally associated with the position. There should be sufficient line administrators so that the span of supervision and channels of communication throughout the system can operate smoothly at all levels. There should also be the proper number and type of staff positions to give the line personnel freedom to exert educational leadership. A prOposal for implementing this recommendation will be made under suggestions for further study. 6. The above recommended line and staff administrative positions in public schools suggest that there should be more staff and fewer line positions in the administrative organization of public schools. With such an arrangement, lines of communication are less complicated and easier to follow, and the teacher has more freedom to be creative and to give his aid to developing the purposes of the system. 7. There should be considerable group involvement in the administrative organization of the schools. This should ~199- ‘be accomplished through the planned utilization of committees and councils in which free and open exchange of opinions, ‘points of view, and facts can be brought to bear on school problems. These committees should act as the nucleus for policy formulation and evaluation in the school system. There should be more lay citizen involvement in school policy formulation and evaluation. If schools are to reflect the communities in which they Operate, they must involve the people of that community in their deliberations. 8. Teachers should be freed from clerical duties and management details by specialists in the nature of clerks, lay readers, counselors, secretaries, and the like. When they are freed, teachers gain time to teach, and to be con- cerned with and involved in improved instruction in the school system. 9. An attempt should be made, through state and national organizations, to reach some standardization of ad— ministrative position titles in the public schools. The proliferation of such titles is a major hurdle to the study of and ultimate recommendations for improved administrative organization in public education. IV. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY As was indicated early in this dissertation, the study of administrative organization in public education has received little attention in the past. It is suggested, -200- truarefore, that many more studies related to this topic be undertaken. Some specific suggestions that might serve well as supplements to the present study are: ll. To make a similar study with a scape that would include more than one state so that a clear picture of public school administrative organization throughout more of the United States could be obtained. 2. To perform a study in depth of selected school systems for the purpose of determining the validity of the data collected in this study. 3. To make a study in an attempt to determine the effects of informal organization on the instructional program. a. To implement the approach toward administrative organi- zation developed in this study in an attempt to see if it actually produces creative growth in children. A need for improved communication that will lead to improved creative production in public schools is closely ' related to the principles of span of supervision and de- centralized administrative structure, which were discussed throughout this dissertation. The need for simplified channels of communication through the reduction of the number of line administrators, the necessity of recognizing the limitations of the principle of span of supervision, and the need to release teachers to exercise their creative abilities, all point to the need for further study concern- ing the process of adding administrative positions to public school organization. The following list of positions, with descriptive phrases, represents a possible approach to this problem. These positions are stated by authorities to be important U} c" (I (3 m U! .(s W "i (U n 0* (+ PC ..‘-~‘nistr . .‘ 11% he 1' S w—v-_—————v-——-———————- ———-— k -201- to successful public school administrative organization. They represent a synthesis of administrative structure in many cities today. This outline is not intended to be the only solution .fcxr good public school administrative organization. It nuerely represents a possible method for arriving at improved axiministrative structure and should serve as a basis for fharther study and evaluation. A. Line administrators. In each case authorities state that these positions should have well de- fined line responsibilities. a. Superintendent o£;schools. There should be one full-time superintendent for every school district. He should be the instructional leader of the district with primary concern and responsibility for the coordination of the entire instructional program throughout the system. He should work in the areas of stimulating the entire staff and motivating it toward constant instructional improvement. He should be the prime mover among the admin- istrators and staff in freeing teachers so that they may be dynamic and creative. b. Area superintendents. They should be added C. d. in school systems of 1,000 or more teachers in such a manner that they are directly under the superintendent of schools. Their duties and responsibilities should be the same as a superintendent of schools within the confines of their areas, but with limitations imposed upon them by the entire system. School systems like Detroit, Flint, Dearborn, Lansing, and Grand Rapids could profit by introducing this position into their administrative organization. Director of auxillary services. They should be responsible for non-teaching employees and the proper accomplishment of their function in the school system. In the case of small districts, these responsibilities can be assigned to specific building principals. In larger districts (one hundred or more teachers), this position should be a central-office line person responsible to the superintendent. Building principals. There should be one full- time principal for every twenty-five to thirty teachers. They should be the instructional leaders of their buildings and should assume responsibilities within their buildings similar to those described above for the superintendents of schools. e. Assistant principals. They should be added when a building staff exceeds thirty teachers. They should be responsible to the principal for a specific phase of the program within the building. B. Staffradministrators. In each case authorities state that these positions should have specialized training and ability commensurate with their duties. These duties should be specific and technical in nature with no line responsibilities. Staff persons should be authorities in their areas so they can give sound counsel and act as resource and consultant persons to line administrators and teachers with reference to their specialties. Also, staff administrators will often act as clearing agents for the line administrators in matters directly related to their duties. For example, the business manager should collect and make recommendations on all purchase requests made by teachers and principals. a. Byginess managegg. They should be responsible for budget, bookkeeping, purchasing, and finan- cial records. They should have total responsi— bility for the financial records and purchasing for the school districts, but not have responsi— bility for decisions on what should be purchased b. ~20h- or how money should be spent. They should be consultants in these latter areas, but final decisions must lie with line administrators. In small districts, part-time persons or clerk-bookkeepers can handle many of these duties, with major decisions resting with the superintendent. In large districts(fifty or more teachers), full-time persons should be employed who are familiar with public school Operation. Subjgpt matter coggdinatogg. They should be responsible for technical competency in specific areas such as art, music, reading, and science. These positions should be added when the dis- trict becomes sufficiently large with respect to number of teachers to warrant their service. In general, when there are fifteen or more teachers directly involved in a specialized area, a coordinator for that area should be added. These positions should serve to stimulate academic excellence within the framework of a pupil-centered school system by helping ad- ministrators and teachers keep abreast of cur- rent developments in subject-matter areas through conferences, meetings, research, and other in-service programs. -205- c. Deans of boys andgiglg. They should be re- sponsible for pupil-personnel services and/or counseling services. They should report to building principals and act as resources for teachers and principals with respect to their areas of specialization. They should be added when school buildings house five hundred or more pupils. d. Coordinators of instructigg. They should be responsible for leadership and consultant roles % with respect to the entire school curriculum. This position should replace the line position of assistant superintendent in charge of in- ———-— struction, and should exist in school systems employing one hundred or more teachers. 4 l 4 ) e. Coordinatorsfigfpersggggl. They should be re- ) sponsible for procurement of staff and personnel 1 problems in the district. They should be edu- 1) cators who are specifically trained in personnel ) management. They should be added to large school systems (seven hundred fifty teachers and above). The last two positions (d and e above) can assist the superintendent in his coordinating function. Acting as authorities in their re- spective fields, they can recommend, organize, -206- and carry out activities that help to strengthen and improve the overall educational program. They also can act as clearing agents for the superintendent on matters pertaining to their fields. At this point in the development of public school administrative organization any study that sheds light on theory and/or practice leading to sound procedures and techniques will be a real contribution to public education in general and to administrative organization of public education in particular. BIBLIOGRAPHY I. GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION A. BOOKS Barnard, Chester I. Th Funct one of the Executive. Cam- bridge: Harvard UnIversIty Frees, I955. 33h PP. . Or anization and Mana ement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, I952. ihh PP. Dale, Ernest, and Lyndall F. Urwick. Staff in Organization. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, . pp. Dimock, Marshall Edward. The Executi e in Action. New YOrk: Harper and Brothers, I§h§. 275 pp. , Gladys O. Dimock, and Louis W. Koenig. Public Admigistrgtion. New York: Rinehart and Company, 5 . PP- Follett Mary Parker. ngativg Egperience. New York: iongmans, Green and ompany. 3 . 303 pp. . ic Administration. New York: Harper and ' Brothers, I§h2. 355 PP- . Th New State. New York: Longmans, Green and " Company, . 373 PP- Graves, W. Brooke. Public Administ atio in a Democ atic Societ . Boston: 5. 5. Heath and Eompany, I550. 759 PP- Griffiths, Daniel E. Admini trativ h o . New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, I553. I25 pp. Gulick, Luther, et al. Papgrs 2n the Sciencg of Adminis- t ation. New Yor : nstitute of ic A n stra- t on, 9370 195 pp. jMarrow, Alfred J. Makin Nana eme t Human. New YOrk: McGraw-Hill Boo Company. 5 . 3h PP0 -207... -208- IMooney, James D., and Alan C. Reiley. The Principles of Organization. New York: Harper and Brothers, 19390 223 Pp. Newman, William H. Agministrative Action; the Techgigues * of Or anization an Mana ement. ew' or : rentice- Hall, 1951- 433 PP. Pfiffner, John M. Public Administration. New York: The Ronald Press ompany, l h . 2 pp. . The Su erv sion of Personnel. Enggewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-HaII, I§§8. 5 'pp. , and R. Vance Presthus. Public Administrat%on. New York: The Ronald Press ompany, . pp. , and Frank P. Sherwood. Administrative Or a ization. ' Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: FFentIce—HaII, I§50. #81 pp. Seckler-Hudson, Catheryn (ed.). Processes of Or anization and Managemgnt. Washington: FHEIIc Affairs Press, A . PP- Selznid Phillip. Leadershi In Administration’ A ciolo ical Int r rotation. Evanston, IIIInoIs: wa, Peterson an ompany, 957. 162 pp. Tannenbaum, Robert, Irving R. Weschler, and Fred Massarik. Leadership agd Orgggization. New YOrk: McGraw-Hill oo ompany, . 45 pp. Tead, 0rdway. Admin trat on‘ Its Pur se and Performance. New‘York: arper an rot ers, . pp. . Th Art of Administration. New YOrk: lMcGraw-Hill " Book sompany, I95I. 223 pp. Urwick, Lyndall. The Element of Administration. New York: Harper and Brothers, I344. 132 pp. . Notes on The Theo of Or anization. New York: " AmerIcan Minagement AssociatIon, I952. 75 pp. , and E. E. LingeCho MThe Makin 0f SCientif c "' Mana amen . n on: anagement PESIications Trust BEET§"I§“§ ' -209- B. PERIODICALS ,Allen Louis A. "Makin Better Use of Committees ".Mana e- , mepp Record, XVII (December, 1955), A66-h69, E9375”— . "Organization Planning," Management Record, XVI (Getober, 195A). 370-373, 40 - . . "The Use of Assistants," Mapagement ReQOEd, XVII "How to Organize for Growth," The Nation's Business, XL (July, 1957). 42-44. II. EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION AND INSTRUCTION A. BOOKS American Association of School Administrators. Educational Administration in a Changing Community. ThIrty- sevent earboo o t e ssociation. washington: The Association, 1958. 221 pp. . Sta f Relations in School Administrat on. Thirty- third ear 0 o t e Associat on. was ngton: The Association, 1955. A70 pp. . The Su erintendent as Instructio al Leader. Thirty- fiftE Yearbook of the Association. WasHIngton: The Association, 1957. A84 pp. Bent, Rudyard K., and Lloyd E. McCann. Administratio of Sgcondagg Schgols. New York: MoGraw-RIII Book Oom- PanYo PP- Briggs, Thomas H., and Joseph Justman. Improving Instruction tgpopgh Supervision. New York: e c an ompany, S . 5 3 PP- Campbell, Clyde M. (ed.). Ppactical Applications of Demo- c s: c A nistratio . ew or : arper an rot ers, 0 pp. Gillie, Francois S. Centralization or Dece trali ation? A S ud' in Educat ona Aoaotat on. ‘ew ‘or : =ureau o ' . cat one, see are 0 age, Columbia University, -210- Cooking, Walter D., and Charles H. Gilmore. Or anization and Administration of Public Education. WasbIngton: Government PrintIng Office, I938. I82 pp. Coladarci, Arthur P. and Jacob'W. Getzels. The Use of Theogjg in Educational Administration. Stanfor niversity EducationaI Administration Monograph No. 5. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1955. 28 pp. Corbally, John E. Jr. T. J. Jensen, and W. Frederick Staub. Education I Admi nistration: The Seconda School. Boston: IIIyn and Bacon, I9bI. 333 PP. Crosby, Muriel. Supervision as Co-operative Action. New York: App eton-Century-Cro ts, 5 . 3A pp. Dean, Stuart E. El m ntar School Administration and Or ani- zation. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and weIfare, Bulletin No. 11. washington: Government Printing Office, 1960. 126 pp. Elsbree, Willard S. and Harold J. McNally. Elementarfi School Administration and Su ervision. ew or : American Book Company, I959. 551 pp. Engelhardt, Fred. Public School Or an zation and Adminis- tration. New‘ or : inn an ompany, 3 . 5 PP. . Public School ization and Administration “ Szl a us. ew' or : Ginn an ompany, 3 . 76 pp. Frederick, Orie I. Two Standardized Check Lists for the Or anization of Seconda SchooIs. Ann Arbor: The Ann Arbor Press, I933. b: pp. Griffiths, Daniel E. An Evaluation of the Leadershio of th: School Su-erinten-ent° "A ”arias n :est. ‘ew or : ooperative 'rogram n Eoucationa .,“ nis- tration, 1952. 20 PP0 , et a1. Organizing Schools for Effective Education. " DabbeIe, inc 3: e nterstate r nters an Publishers, 1962. 338 pp. Koopman, G. Robert, Alice Miel, and Paul J. Misner. moc- racy in School Adm%pistration. New York: D. App eton- Century ompany, #3. 33 PP- -211- TMichigan Department of Public Instruction. Directory of Local Curriculum Progpams in Michigan. Publication No. 5 A. Lansing, Michigan: T e Department, 1960. 32 PP- Dir ctor of Local Curriculum P o rams in Michi an. PubIIcation No. 591.. EnsIng, MichIgan: Tbs Depart- ment, 1961. #3 pp. Mbehlman, Arthur B. School Administration. New'York: Houghton Mifflin ompany, e 9 pp. Mbore, Hollis A., Jr., Studi in School Administration. Washington: American Issociation of ScbooI Adminis- trators, 1957. 202 PP- Otto, Henry J. Elementa School Or anization and Adminis- tration. New or : pp eton- entury- ro ts, AA. 57 PP- Smith, B. Othanel William 0. Stanley, and J. Harlan Shores. Fundamentals of Curriculum Develo ent. New York: WorId Book Company, I955. 785 pp. Spears, Harold. Curriculum Planning Thpough In-Service Pr rams. n ewoo i s, ew ersey: rent ce- 8 p 570 350 PP. ._______. Im rovin the Su e sion of Instruction. Engla- wood C i s, ew ersey: rent ce- 3 s 530 478 PP. Stickler, Hugh W. (ed.). Or anization and Administration of Gen al Education. Dfibuque, Iowa: 'Wm. C E Company, I95I. A 0 1‘0"!) 31 PP- Stoope, Emery, and M. L. Rafferty, Jr. Practices and Trends in School Administration. New York: GInn and Com- pally, . 55 pp. The Structurg ang Administration of Educatfion in American emocracy. as ington: Nationa E ucat on ssociation o the United States and the American Association of School Administrators Educational Policies Commission, 1938. 128 pp. -212- _ Toward Im ro ed 3 hool Administration. Battle Creek, Michi- gan: Tbs C. K. ReIIogg Foundation. 67 pp. B. PERIODICALS Campbell, Clyde M. "The Administrator Treads a Perilous Path " The Nation's Schools, XLIX (March, 1952), 1.9-56. __________._____ . "A Democratic Structure to Further Democratic galggs," Progrgssive Education, XXX (November, 1952), 5- . . "Human Relations Techniques Useful in School Ad- ministration " The America School Board Journal, CXXX (June, I95 . - s ' - Campbell, Roald F. "Research and the Selection and Pre- paration of School Administratorsg'The O 0 State Un ver it Educational Research Bul et n, ebru- ary ' 5 , " O , Carr, William G. "Teacher-Administrator Teamwork," NE; Journal, XXV (November, 1956), 506-507. Redefer, Frederick L. "Toward a Theory of Educational Ad- ministration," School and Societ , LXXXVII (March 28, 1959). 135- 3 . Spears, Harold. "Can the Line-and-Staff Principle Unify Instructional Leadership?", The Bulletin of the Natioggl Association of Secon arz-Sc oo rincipals, pri , A , 25-3 . III. PHILOSOPHY A. BOOKS Bode, Boyd H. Democrac as a Wa of Life. New York: The Macmillan Company, I955. II: pp. Childs, John L. American Pra amatism and Education. New York: Henry RoIt and Company, I955. 373 pp. -213- Dewey, John. Democracy and Education. New York: The (Macmillan Company, 191 . 43A pp. . Reconstruction in Philoso h . New York: Henry Holt and Company, I929. 22h pp. Horne, Herman Harrell. The Philoso h of Education. New YOrk: The MacmilIan Company, I905. 295 pp. Kilpatrick, William Heard. Philoso h of Education. New York: The Macmillan Company, I95I. #59 PP. Sayers, Ephraim Vern, and Ward Madden. Education and the Democ atic Faith. New York: AppIeton-Century-Crofts, I959. #75 pp- Smith, T. V., and Eduard C. Lindeman. The Democratic Way of Life. New York: The New American brary o WOrId Literature, 1951. 159 pp. Whitehead, Alfred North. The Aims Of Egucation. New York: The Macmillan Company, 2 . pp. IV. MISCELLANEOUS A. BOOKS Best, John W. Resea ch in Education. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-HaII, I959. 320 pp. Campbell, William Giles. Form and Style in Thesis Writing. Boston: Houghton Mi in ompany, 54. 4 PP. Dixon, Wilfid J., and Frank J. Masseyfi Jr. Introduction to Stat st cal Anal sis. New Yor McGraw-HIII Book Company, I95Io 975 PP- Good, Carter V., A. S. Barr, and Douglas E. Scates. The Methodolo f Educational R search. New York: AppIeton-Century-Crofbs, I9AI. C90 pp. Hansen, Morris H., William N. Hurwitz, and William G. Madow. Sam 1e Surv .Methods and Theor . 2 vols. New York: John WIIey and Sons, Inco. I953. l -214- I Mighigan Education Directory and Buyer's Guide, 1261-62. 1 Lansing: l9 1. 320 pp. I B. PERIODICALS Michigan Higp School Athletic Associat§on Bulletin. Directory 1 ssue. ovem er, , 2-3 . APPENDIX Letter of Transmittal Questionnaire ~215- Y BCICh Janual Gear The at disser imp rov deterrn leader 0f Hi c A rand School soup I e that y | feel 55 imp. Hi Ch) 9 Minute May | 0P8 re: Sincen in GErald (PM i filling Sincere Or, my -216- MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING COLLEGE OF EDUCATION January 8, l962 Dear a The attached questionnaire ls part of my doctoral dlssertatlon. The dissertation is concerned with public school organlzatlon for the Improvement of instruction. The purpose of this questionnaire is to determine the exlstlng organlzatlonal patterns for instructional leadershlp in the publlc schools of the lower peninsula of the State of Mlchlgan. A random sample of llO schools was taken from the total number of schools in the area chosen. YOur school ls one of the llO ln the sample. Because a sampllng procedure was used it ls very Important that your questionnaire be returned. I feel, as I am sure you wlll, that the lnformatlon requested hereln ls lmportant and wlll be of value to the school admlnlstrstors of Mlchlgan. Pre-testlng of the questionnslre has shown that 30 to #5 mlnutes of your tlme ls needed to fill it out. May l take this Opportunity to thank you in advance for your co- Operatlon. Sincerely, «<6Z10utééé2fi?(blut4utooddukflv/ Gerald R. Rasmussen May I express my personal appreciation for your time and energy lnw filling out thls questionnaire for Mr. Rasmussen. Sincerely, 9M V'l’V Kgxmfil’M—Q Dr. Clyde M. Campbell " WaSITION Elem. “Fri? Elem. Dept Hem.FCrad Coordina em. 1 c e -217- PUBLIC SCHOOL ORGANIZATION QUESTIONNAIRE The purpose of this questionnaire is to determine how your school district is organized to carry out its function of instruction. I. BASIC SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA 1. Number of elementary buildings in district . 2. Number of senior high school buildings in district . 3. Area of school district in square miles . II. ADIENISTRATIVE PERSONNEL 1. In the following table please indicate: a. Number of persons occupying the listed positions as an advisory or resource position. (STAFF) b. Number of persons occupying the listed position 'as a supervisory or authority position. (LINE) c. Average number of persons who are directly responsible to each orthose you have :ndicated as line persons. POSITION STAFF :LINE no.0? SITION STAFF LINE N0.0F PEiB. ’ PERS. (8) (b) (c) (a) (b) (o) 4inimid’rincipzils r. High Principals H A Elem. Dept. Heads ' r. High Dept. Heads Elem. Grade-lever r. High Cross:Dept. Coordinators Coordinators Elem. Vice or Asst. r. High Vice or last. fl Principals Principals 1* Elem. Bldg. Currie. r. High Bldg. Currie. __ Coordinators r‘oordinators Elem. Subject Matter r. High Subjecf Coordinators I Matter Coordinators In Elem. Cirric. Sr. High Curriculum Poordinator Coordinator An All-School Currie. sst. Supt. in Charge { Coordinator of Instruction Kdministrative sst. Supt. in Charge Assistant of Personnel Business Manager ;ombination of the i _ two above ;Supt. of Schools ir. 01‘ Secondary ‘ Education a ir. o Elem. Educ. ean ordioys l. LDir. of Curriculum an of Girls l [Others I ‘ 1 ; Weiss List) ‘ l l __ l -213- How many of your principals also teach? Elementary, Sr. High. How many of your Asst. principals also teach? Elementary, Sr. High. /’ What percent of your geachigg administrator's time is devoted to Administration? (Hon-Teaching). a. Elementary Principals. c. Sr. High Principals. b. Elementary Asst. Principals. d. Sr. High Asst. Principals How many full-time administrators are in your school system? How many'teacher certificated persons are.employed by your.3chool district? ill. OPERATIONAL PROCEEDURES Please scan this section before proceding. Do you have an administrative council? (Regular meetings with your Administrative staff.) Yes, No. if yes: a. How many people are on it? b. Which of the following positions are represented on it? Supt. of Schools Asst. Supt. Admin. Asst. Business Manager Sr. High Principals Elem. Principals Dept. Heads Curriculum Coordinators (Others-Please List) c. What is its primary function? Do you have building curriculum committees? Yes. No. if yes: a. What is the average number of persons on each of the them? b. Which of the following positions are represented on any of them? Curriculum Coordinators Building Principals Teachers Dept. Heads Subject Matter Asst. Principals Coordinators (Others-Please Listi— c. What is the primary function of these committees? -219- Do you have either subject matter or grade level curriculum committees? Yes, No. if yes: a. What is the average number of persons on each of them? b. Which of the following positions are represented on any of them? Building Principal Asst. Principal Teachers Counselors Subject Matter Dept. Heads Coordinators (Others-Please List) c. What is the primary functionfof these committees? Do you have a system-wide curriculum committee? Yes, No. If yes: a. How many people are on it? b. Which of the following positions are represented on it? Supt. of Schools Asst. Supt. in Charge of Currie. System-Wide Curric. or inst. Coordinator Building Curriculum Subject Matter or ‘ Coordinators Grade Level Teachers Currlc. Coordin. Building Principals (Others-Please List) c. What is its primary function? Do you have a citizens curriculum advisory council? Yes, No. If yes: What is its primary function? How many peOple, employed by your school district, are directly responsible to you? What positions do these persons occupy? (See, ll-l) How many different pe0ple do you come in personal contact with, lg_ a professional way, on the job, during an average week? (Consider groups'as one contact) . ' ' a. ___p-l5, b. ___j6-30, c..' 3l-50,_d. 5l-75, e. _76-100, f. _lon-zoo. 9. “200-500, h. ___over 500. -' g.— ‘! ..T-.._-qV.—-c—_ p rofes 5 _flargfi' Profeé? \Eér’k; ng Flannins treatise, Hééting I Detai l s 1 Hess’t’nE I: Discussir - ,wj Lb wi th wi th‘ (____ --_ l i Cam-L713]: CZ Corre5p0n< ~q---‘-~r- - ~— C'o' . - -v-O~—--_~~.—-.~-- -“ . —- -.O-—-..- ~22KL- {3. In your opinion, what percent of your time is devoted to the following activlti ACTIVITY es? I- in---__._ Professional Reading ‘--¢- .--——-—” i- _Working on _Bu_dget “g__ ~Supervising cafeteria f. - . .— - _Planning_ for _new ifacili *0 .f..—.. - - .v. Meeting thfi parents SuperVIsnng_Tran5portatlon _mg. Fwlfleeting with committees Details of office management . ...,EER§§QI. ._"_.__R_._.i9;5%d_£:l9%«L Professional meetings and ___Hi_nrganizatlons_.._.. I“ [9:20% (OE.TJHE “—- v... I29:39%IM39:59%14. l Planning fer beard m_eeting§ ‘*"" T“ ‘i'”‘*“-* .1..-_.., -4.-- -.._._._.....__ .— ._.-a.-. .- tie-5m "M "'l" .c ":O.dra—..vn ~ ——-I- *o. .1?— ”H9?§i"9 with administrative council -——— -— h””—‘r~c----- c..— .-- m‘r-” 4M*-1»ow~»-. he. .mwh- II— .--—-..-- .—--— .- - with teachers - with citizens “.M— Discussing curriculum problems: .- ~witheri nslpalfi -, . van--0 -o “-I U-‘dr- Community,ActIvitIes --"—---- wwfi- .. -—.< ‘ - -.-L-.-.o.——u--ti >v-.~~ - t.“ II-._..-.._...._ t. .- 1L0.“ on..- .4“ .— ‘a-o .“ . w - . v - ~ . - Jr...-——. db I‘. -1 ~- Correspondence and reports II-- -- 9. How often do you have contacts with the following persons in an average week? gr PERSONS L.” NUMBER orgngygs. __.-_._..-.,.,.__. 1.--! ;°.__,__..‘3 23"5...i..§:..7...i..hZ:J2_J,.'0"5 15‘20 204039.729..- Asst. Supt. _ i Admins. Asst. _ I H. S. Principals Elem. Princ_pals l i .fl*§L_Teachers_ m Program Directors - Pupils Parents ‘1'- as "”“i‘“-1-~r~~+~v—A 1:“ng ., Teéct'gers H i- f j _Q_pt&_flead_s Business Manager I._ Citizens on Civic I or School affairs, l 1 l0. How many of the following persons have digggt access to you concerning a professional matter without permission or previous discussion with one of your subordinate administrators? (Please ignore whatever Open-door policy you may have regarding your employees.) a. ___Asst. Supt. d. ___Elem. Princi 9. ___pept. Head 3. ___Pupiis m. ___Ad Hoc Staff Committees b. Admin. Asst. c. pal e. ___H.$. Teacher f. h. ___Program Director i. k. ___Parents 1. n. H.S. Principal Elem. Teacher Curric. Coord. Business Manager Ad Hoc Citizen Committees .c_lr_flrl. -221- ll. Please indicate the person or persons who actually Egrform the following tasks in your school system them __Jority o t time. PERSON 0 rr CUU‘I‘I sist ts A B l S ject Hatter Yburself st. One of Ybur Princi Committees t Director of Curriculum Chair Bld Curriculum Committees r gr eve or S ect- tter rriculum it ir District Hide Curriculum ntroduce Curriculum St se rr cu um t (BEETLJEEJEflgéflfififiuXE l eachers v t extbooks 0 ex Visit c assrooms S rv se nate E em Superv se Coo nate H S T rvisg Pupils ld uildi lt t Ho D str 95:" Facult Meeti r ve acu t id Sub ect-Hatter Facult Heeti sc ne 3 Bu u as l2. What is the primary function of the following positions in your school system? a. Superintendent of Schools b. Asst. Superintendent of Schools c. Curriculum Coordinators d. Building Principals ROOM USE GNU I. s .. . J. a. _ . math}? .Prrb . i.-( . u... in .. I I .1. _ ’I.__ 7 . - . u .. v. 0 .‘O I ~l I .I 1... v on y'al- mil“ m a. -I . , . z . , ..I J l v r ‘K . s . _ . I ah M . . . 1a .. . .t a» e r $4 I u. fiw use an .a r... I... é I HICHIGRN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES ll”IW‘IWWIWHIWIINIWIII‘"HHUHIHIWI 31293103967901