This is to certify that the dissertation entitled ROLE, SKILL AND KNOWLEDGE PERCEPTIONS OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS IN AL—HASA AND EASTERN PROVINCE SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE EASTERN REGION OF SAUDI ARABIA presented by Abdulla Abdulaz iz AlSahlawi has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph . D. Educat ional Adminis t rat ion degree in 7 ’/ Map/professor // MSUiJ an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-1277! MSU LIBRARIES » AAAA‘ l _ c "l ‘. "3 KM?» w RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. ~- 1W Bream “‘ ‘. K039 \: 7/l Q3 ROLE, SKILL, AND KNOWLEDGE PERCEPTIONS OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS IN Al-HASA AND EASTERN PROVINCE SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE EASTERN REGION OF SAUDI ARABIA BY Abdulla Abdulaziz AlSahlawi A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ‘Department of Educational Administration College of Education 1987 ABSTRACT ROLE, SKILL, AND KNOWLEDGE PERCEPTIONS OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS IN Al-HASA AND EASTERN PROVINCE SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE EASTERN REGION OF SAUDI ARABIA BY Abdul la Abdulaziz A1 Sahlawi The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare the perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province school districts in Saudi Arabia regarding their actual and preferred role, skill and knowledge. The instrument used for this study was developed after an extensive search of the literature, including a review of instruments used in similar studies. V Data were collected from all forty principals in both districts during the 1986-1987 school year. A E- test was used to examine the differences between actual and preferred role and actual and preferred skill ‘and knowledge in each district. Multivariate analysis and one-way analysis of variance were used to test the effect of demographic characteristics on the overall perceptions of actual and preferred role, skill and knowledge. AlSahlawi The following conclusions were drawn from the findings: 1 - Senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province are not satisfied with their present level of involvement in the six major areas of responsi- bility. They revealed a belief that their level of involvement should be much different than it now is. 2 - Senior high school principals in both school districts are not satisfied with their present level of skill and knowledge. They expressed a desire to have a higher level of skill and knowledge in the six major areas of responsibility than they actually have. 3 - Of the six areas of responsibility, senior high school principals in both districts perceived Financial Management and Instructional Leadership as having the greatest discrepancy between the actual and preferred role involvement. 4 - Of the six areas of responsibility, senior high school principals in both districts viewed their actual level of skill and knowledge as being lowest in Instruc- tional Leadership. DEDICATION To those who struggle for a productive desert ACKNOWLEDGMENTS No research study is ever completed by a single person. Many people contributed to this effort, and here I wish to acknowledge their contributions. I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my academic advisor, Dr. James Costar, for his overall guidance and constructive suggestions. I thank my dissertation director, Dr. Louis Romano, for his. frequent helpful suggestions as well as for his careful stylistic comments on each chapter of this study. A special word of thanks to Dr. Robert Craig for his prompt, careful, and insightful reading of each chapter and for his honest and encouraging commentary. I also wish to thank Dr. Christopher Vanderpool for his many valuable comments. A special appreciation is extended to the senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province school districts who gave freely of their time to make this study possible. The greatest gratitude and recognition are due to my parents, Abdulaziz and Aysha. Words are truly inadequate to express my appreciation for their teaching V me what can never be learned at a university and for their guidance and support throughout my educational endeavors. To my wife, Monira, I owe a lifetime of gratitude. Her love, infinite patience, and unfailing confidence provided the moral support and the motivation to over- come all obstacles. A special note of thanks is extended to my two sons; to Wail, who behaved in ways that reflected an understanding far beyond his years. And to Muthanna, a delightful addition to our family, who arrived as this study got underway and who made the completion of this work more challenging. And finally, sincere appreciation is extended to my brothers and sisters and to all my friends for their constant support and encouragement. vi. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF FIGURES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Chapter I. II. INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Statement of the Problem . Purpose of the Study . . . Need for the Study . . . . Research Questions . . . . Definitions of Terms . . . 1 Limitations and Delimitat'o of the Study . . . . Overview of the Study . 005000.. 0 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . The Eastern Region of Arabia . . . . . Public Administration in Saudi Arabia 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Educational Administration in Saudi Arabia 0 O O O O O O O O O O O I O O The Role of the School Principal in Saudi Arabia . . . . . . . . . . . . Preparation and Training of Principals in Saudi Arabia . . . . . . Appointments and Selection of Principals in Saudi Arabia . . . . . . . The Importance of the Principalship in the Educational System . . . . . . Duties and Responsibilities of the High School Principal in the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development . . . . . II. Staff Personnel Administration . III. Student Personnel Administration Page ix xii 10 14 14 15 16 17 18 20 22 25 28 30 32 35 37 45 50 IV. School Organization and School- Plant Administration . . . . . . . . . vii 54 V. School- Community Relations . . . . VI. Financial Management . . . . . Competencies and Skills Needed by High School Principals . . . . . . . Studies of the High School Principalship That Have Significant and Specific Relevance to the Present Study . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I I O METHODOLOGY 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Population . . . . . . . . . . Instrumentation . . . . . . . Validation of the Instrument Translation . . Data Collection . Data Analysis . . Null Hypotheses . Major Hypotheses Minor Hypotheses Sumary . . . . . IV. PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSES Demographic Data . . . . . . . . . Age 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 Years of Experience as Principal Educational Level . . . . . . . Teaching Experience . . . . . Type of School . . . . . . . . Size of the School . . . . . . Number of Native Teachers . . Number of Non-Native Teachers Data Related to the Hypotheses . Other Related Data . . . . . . . Role Perception by Item . . . Skill and Knowledge Perception by Item V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDICES REFERENCES Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations for Further Research . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 viii Page 57 61 64 L IST OF TAB LES Age Distribution of Respondents . . . . . . . . Distribution by Years of Experience of Respondents O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Distribution by’Ievel of Education of the Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distribution by Teaching Experience of the Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distribution by Type of School where the Respondents Taught . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distribution of School Size by NUmber of StUdents O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Distribution of Number of Native Teachers . . . Distribution of Number of Non-Native Teachers . t-Test Result of Comparing Actual and Preferred Role Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in Al-Hasa . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 Al-Hasa Senior High School Principals' 10. Perceptions of Their Actual and Preferred Role in Six Areas of Administrative Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . teTest Result of Comparing Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge Perceptions of Senioriiigh School Principals in Al-Hasa . . 10.1 Al-Hasa Senior High School Principals' Perceptions of Their Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge in Six Areas of Administrative Responsibility . . . . . . ix Page 90 91 92 92 93 94 95 95 96 98 104 105 Page 11. ngest Result of Comparing Actual and Preferred Role Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in Eastern Province . . . . . . . 111 11.1 Eastern Province Senior High School Principals' Perceptions of Actual and Preferred Role in Six Areas of Administrative Responsibility . 112 12. t-Test Result of Comparing Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in Eastern PIOVince O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O 118 12.1 Eastern Province Seniorlligh School Principals' Perceptions of Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge in Six Areas of Administrative Responsibility . . . . . . . . 119 13. MANOVA and ANOVA Results for Comparing the Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in District 1 (Al-Hasa) with the Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in District 2 (Eastern Province) Regarding Their Actual and Preferred Role, Skills and Knowledge . . . . 125 14. MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Age on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions . . . . . . . 128 15. MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Years of Experience on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 16. MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effects of Teaching Experience on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 17. MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Size of School on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions . . . . 132 18. MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Number of Native Teachers on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 X Page 19. MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Number of Non-Native Teachers on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 20. thest Results of Comparing Actual and Preferred Role Perceptions of All the Forty Principals in Each of the 44 Items . . . . . . . . . . . 137 21. t-Test Results of Comparing Actual and Preferred '_ Skill and Knowledge Perceptions of All the Forty Principals in Each of the 44 Items . . 146 xi LIST OF FIGURES Page Means Assigned to Six Areas of Administrative Responsibility by Al-Hasa Senior High school PrinCipals O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 100 Comparison of Mean Scores of the Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge in Six Areas of Responsibility as Perceived by Al-Hasa Senior High School Principals . . . . 106 Means Assigned to Six Areas of Administrative Responsibility by Eastern Province Senior High School Principals . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Comparison of Mean Scores of the Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge in Six Areas of Responsibility as Perceived by Eastern Province Senior High School Principals . . . 120 Comparison of Mean Scores of the Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge of Senior High School Principals in Both Districts Based on the Scores of A11 44 Items . . . . . . . . 126 xii CHAPTER I I NTRODUCT I ON Education can never be understood in isolation from the wider political and social contexts, nor from their grounding in the structure and movement of the economy. Within Saudi Arabia, during the 19703, increasing oil revenues led to drastic and rapid social changes, and to the virtual wholesale dependence of the country's economy on the oil sector. As a result, the country became oriented more toward consumption, while production in other economic sectors decreased. In order to mitigate the potentially disruptive effects on the political system of such an influx of wealth, the government claimed that it must accomplish as much "development" as possible before the "one-shot bonanza" provided by oil ceased. For the past few decades, these development efforts have been based on the theoretical assumption that large infusions of capital would accomplish the country's modernization and development "overnight," i.e., within the period of a decade or so. The programs implemented upon such assumptions created a consumption economy, and led to rampant urbanization, 1 depopulated agricultural villages, and increasing food shortages. The prevalent belief that money can solve all problems generated within Saudi Arabia, as a whole, generally apathetic attitudes toward hard work and creative thought. Although during the 19708 and early 19803 many expressed the need for reforms and changes in the social, economic, and political realms, the great wealth available to the government led to the cooptation of many potential reformers. These attitudes of complacency were strongly and quickly shaken in the mid-19803, more precisely in March 1986, when the price of oil dropped sharply, from $30 to $13 per barrel. This decline generated widespread financial stress and economic recession, so much so that the government .could not publish a budget for the year 1986. This was "the straw that broke the camel's back." The people of Arabia are now facing the reality that the country‘s prosperity and their future have long been linked to the world oil market, over which they no longer exercise any control. In light of this situation, there have been increasing demands for a diversified economy, balanced social development, and efficiency in operation. More and more will be demanded of the country's resources, but since these resources are scarce, care must be taken to make maximum use of whatever is available. More importantly, Saudi Arabia must make a strong commitment to fostering its human resources as its most precious resource. Education will play an important role in this process. The Arabian people have great faith in, and commitment to, education as a primary means to help solve, or at least ameliorate, social, political, and economic problems. Nonetheless, it is important to emphasize that, although education is a potentially powerful regenerative force, it alone cannot be used to solve problems that are deeply rooted in all major institutions of our society. Education is only one arena through which social problems may be acted upon; however, it is an important one. The educational system of Saudi Arabia is being challenged more than ever by the changing economic and social conditions that have necessitated greater respon- siveness to rising popular demands and expectations. Nonetheless, education in Saudi Arabia has its problems as well. Numerous scholars and commentators have delineated the nature of these problems. Hammad (1973) has given a survey list of some of the issues facing the educational system as follows: These educational developments before the 19508 have influenced greatly the foundation of contem- porary education in Saudi Arabia and understanding them sheds light on the most difficult problems facing the system today. Such problems include, among others: 1) excessively centralized admini- strative organization; 2) the failure to provide the competent manpower needed for societal develop- ment; 3) the overwhelming dominance of some religious and liberal studies over vocational and technical studies in curricula; 4) the difficulty in adopting the traditional ways of learning to modern educational theories and techniques; 5) the continuous lack of qualified indigenous teachers; 6) emphasis on quantitative expansion which is unmatched by a qualitative improvement; 7) growth of several educational authorities without enough coordination and cooperation among them; and 8) lack of equal educational opportunities for large segments of the population, such as for girls and for nomadic people. (pp. 89-90) A few years later, Manuie (1976) more specifically focused on the structure of educational administration by noting that, At present, the Ministry of Education of Saudi Arabia exhibits a highly inconsistent hierarchical structure, characterized by a lack of precise specification of functions and scope of offices and an inconsistent set of reporting relationships among organizational offices. (p. 21) He went on to say that such a state of affairs has led to central educational organizations being responsible for such minor activities as, for example, supplying books and other materials to the local schools. Zaid (1972), who now occupies a top position in the Ministry of Education, concurs with Hammad and Manuie when he concludes that: "Arabia now is in the midst of an overall educational crisis. The country lacks clarity of vision, professionalism in administration, qualified planners, highly trained teachers, and a pragmatic political, social and educational philosophy“ (p. 136). Finally, a very recent study of educational leadership styles, attitudes, and needs in Saudi Arabia reveals that, unfortunately, one of the hardest problems faced by the Saudi Arabian educational system is the standard or kind of qualifications possessed by the people who manage the educational system. Many of these administrators may have had only a very basic education themselves. The shortage of highly trained administrators is a major problem in Saudi Arabia (Al-Shakhis, 1984, p. 89). Taking into consideration these viewpoints, it is apparent that the educational system has long been relatively unresponsive to needed reform and change. These changes that have taken place have been merely additive and refining in nature, rather than redefining and reconstituting the system itself. Under present economic conditions, this situation will not long be tolerated, and public response will be brought to bear on altering how schools are administered, what is taught, and the nature of the roles and functions of those in leadership positions. Educators must direct their efforts toward making the educational systan responsive and effective in meeting the people's demands and needs. In effect, educators must take on more social responsibility and channel more of their energy into producing quality education. To achieve this, educational administrators will be looked to for new and imaginative ways of providing excellence in education in the most economical and efficient manner possible. Because of their pivotal positions, school principals in particular will take on new burdens in meeting these goals. Therefore, they must be prepared to respond with high-quality leadership to ensure that the changing demands of society are met. Statement of the Problem Anderson and Van Dyke (1972) argue that secondary school administrators occupy positions "where the action is" within the public school system. Secondary schools are where student activism is likely to be most aggres- sive, curriculum problems become increasingly complex, demands for innovations in the organizational plan of the school are present, and new patterns of staff utilization are tested. It is principals who must provide the neces— sary leadership if the secondary schools are to cope with these changing danands, recognizing that the quality of education is directly related to their knowledge and skills. The secondary school principal is a key person influencing the conditions that affect instruction and social relationships within the school, and thus plays an essential role in whether the school's goals succeed or fail. Sarson (1971) has emphasized the importance of the principal's role in the change process: Any proposal for change that intends to alter the quality of life in the school depends primarily on the principal. One can realign forces of power, change administrative structure, increase budget for material and new personnel, but the intended effects of all these changes will be drastically diluted by principals . . . who are ill prepared for the role of educational and intellectual leader (p. 148). Furthermore, just as research evidence emphasizes the importance of the principal's role in school improvement efforts (Mize, 1978, and Wellisch, 1978), theorists on school administration are also concerned about the principal's role in educational improvement. Miles (1964), for example, has pointed out that without the support of key administrators little chance of educational improvement exists. In Saudi Arabia, it is believed by some writers that educational administrators have not played an effective leadership role--mainly because the range of their role is ambiguous, their responsibilities are undefined, and they lack the required knowledge and skills to function effectively. Policy statements issued by the Ministry of Education seem to lack clarity, with the effect that principals are kept guessing about their roles and duties. The result is that many school principals spend their valuable time and energy performing insignificant and/or irrelevant' routine duties. Manuie (1976) points out that: The principals of the schools at all educational levels perform their duties similarly. Principals do not play a leadership role because they do not have the authority to initiate changes within their organizations. Therefore, most of the school principal's time is spent on clerical details and minor issues (p. 32). Elsewhere he argues that: The procedure and the selection criteria are broadly stated without specific position descrip- tions. This method of selection may increase the irrelevancy between job and qualifications. A person may be selected for a job whose duties and responsibilities are not clearly defined (p. 35). Thus, no viable, systematic rationale exists to guide the secondary school principal in determining what is expected of him and the criteria by which his perform- ance can be measured. The inevitable outcome has been the generation of conflict and misunderstanding between principals and their superiors, staff, and students. It is not surprising, therefore, that many principals today suffer an acute identity crisis and experience ambiva- lence and uncertainty about what their role is or should be. The ambiguity of the principal's role is com- pounded by the traditional belief, which still exists, that the training given to the teacher is also adequate preparation for the principal. Thus, there is no system of formal preparation for secondary school administra- tors and principals who come from the teaching ranks. mreover, many principals are selected because they have conformed to the system and the expectations of their superiors; promotions have little to do with the knowledge and skills required. Manuie (1976) makes this point when he says: Many administrators are in jobs which are unre- lated to their training. Most of the positions in the educational system are filled by people with limited backgrounds in education. . . . Many administrators have not taken any course in administration. Most of them are graduates of religious institutions with a limited view of education (p. 38). The existence of problems such as these in the Saudi Arabian educational system sharply draws attention to the need for developing guidelines toward the develop- ment and redefinition of administrative roles. In particular, the responsibilities of the principal have expanded as societal demands on the school have grown. And, like all roles in education, the principalship will continue to change. As secondary school principals face increasing demands for quality, accountability, exper- tise, and professionalism, it is imperative that educational planners be sensitive to these demands and changes, and thus clarify the role of the contemporary administrator and the skills and knowledge needed to carry out that role. This can contribute to making the principalship more "livable," and hence more productive. Purpose of the Study Primarily, this study investigated and examined the perceptions of senior high school principals in the Al-Hasa and Eastern Province school districts, located 10 in the Eastern region of Arabia, regarding their role and the knowledge and skills necessary to carry it out. In particular, the following issues were addressed: (1) what the principals perceive their role to be in actuality; (2) in comparison, what they think their role should be; (3) what knowledge and skills they think they possess that are relevant to being a principal; and (4) what knowledge and skills they would prefer to have that pertain to being a principal. The secondary purpose of this study is to provide information and possible direction to the Ministry of Education, universities, researchers, and others interested in quality secondary school administration and education regarding what areas are essential for the role, and what areas where secondary principals feel that growth and improvement are needed . Need for the Study A survey of secondary principal's perceptions of their role, skills, and knowledge is a positive step in the effort to improve and strengthen the educational program. In 1966, Goldman warned that study and redefinition of the role of the principal would be necessary: The issues and problems which face today's prin- cipal are not easily resolved. There is a need for a careful, studied appraisal of his functions, responsibilities, and role in light of the challenges of twentieth century society and the 11 demands of educational leadership contained therein. As the challenges vary, so too will the demands of each school principal (p. 35). More recently, in 1982, Drake and Miller again emphasized the importance of continuing the redefinition of the principalship: The principalship in the '803 needs to be rede- fined if it is to retain significant viability. Such an undertaking should be identified as a major priority, since the nature of the principal- ship and those who will fill this role will, to a large extent, detemmine the character of secondary education in the future (p. 25). In Saudi Arabia, there is no clear definition of the role and duties of the secondary school principal. Furthermore, the role of the principal is in constant change, and many shifting demands have been placed upon him. Therefore, studies of the type proposed here must be conducted on a regular basis in order to investigate and document changes in the principal's role, to deter- mine what areas of responsibility are essential for the role, and to ascertain to what degree principals feel a need for knowledge and skill improvement so that they may be helped to cope with these changes. It is the principals themselves who must determine what role they play within the school, and within the educational system as a whole. However, what they do speaks louder than what they abstractly envision. Thus, principals must reflect their own actual priorities, expertise, knowledge, and skills. If the actual role of the 12 principal is not congruent with the preferred role, consideration and planning should be directed toward assisting and facilitating such congruence. Self-role analysis is a worthwhile experience for many principals; it can pinpoint areas of discrepancy to which more attention must be directed. The increasing and shifting duties and responsi- bilities of Arabian principals necessitate developing training programs and initiating in-service programs that will help principals carry out their role more effectively. As a response to this need, two special training programs were established in 1972 and 1973 at the Colleges of Education in the universities at Riyadh and Mecca in the Central and Western regions of Arabia (Manuie, 1976). In the third largest region in the country, the Eastern region, no college of education existed until very recently, when in 1981 a College of Education was established at King Faisal University. This College of Education plans to develop a department of educational administration, the main responsibility of which will be developing programs to train and prepare school principals. As part of that mandate, the department will have to recognize the altered role of principals in changing social and economic circumstances. Consequently, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of this study will be 13 submitted to the authorities of King Faisal University. Also, this study's findings will be recommended to the Ministry of Education. In general, it is anticipated that this study will make the following contributions: 1. It will assist universities in establishing in- service and pre—service training programs for principals so that these principals may be provided with needed competencies and skills. 2. It will provide the Ministry of Education with the data needed for job analysis, and for the selection, appointment, and promotion of senior high school principals. 3. It will provide the Ministry of Education with information that will help in the process of assessment and evaluation of senior high school principals. 4. It will bring to light some of the inadequacies and weaknesses that currently exist in the present educational system, in general, and principalship, in particular. 5. It will serve as an aid to principals as they establish priorities and make decisions about how to more effectively carry out their role. 6. It will serve as a guide to teachers and others who aspire to become secondary school administrators as they assess their own potential for success in the role. 14 Research Questions The following questions were addressed by this study. 1. 5. 6. Are there discrepancies between the "actual” and the "preferred” role perceptions of senior high schools principals in Al-Hasa? Are there discrepancies between perceptions of the “actual” and the “preferred" level of skill and knowledge of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa? Are there discrepancies between the 'actual" and the "preferred” role perceptions of senior high school principals in Eastern Province? Are there discrepancies between perceptions of the ”actual” and the "preferred" level of skill and knowledge of senior high school principals in Eastern Province? Are there differences between perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and perceptions of senior high school principals in Eastern Province regarding their "actual“ and "preferred" role, and level of skill and knowledge? Do age, years of experience as principal, teaching experience, size of the school, and number of native and non-native teachers in the school have any effect on the perception of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their "actual” and "preferred" role and level of skill and knowledge? Definitions of Terms Actual level of knowledge and skill. The respond- ent's perception of the degree of knowledge and skill of the principal as it really _i_§ in the areas of responsibility. 15 Preferred level of knowledge and skill. The respondent's perception of what the degree of knowledge and skill of the principal should be in the areas of responsibility. Actual role. Refers to the job tasks presently performed by the principal. Preferred role. Refers to the job tasks as they should 23. Role. Refers to those duties and responsibilities which an individual performs in his/her position. Senior high school is defined in this study as a public school that contains grades 10, 11, and 12, and is established and financially supported by the Ministry of Education. Limitations and Delimitations of the Study l - This study is limited to the senior high school principals in the Al-Hasa and Eastern Province school districts of Saudi Arabia. 2 - The findings of this study are applicable to the Eastern region of Arabia and possibly to other areas or regions in the country. lbwever, if an attempt is made to generalize and extend the findings of this study to other regions without considering similarities in situation and population, a limitation will be present. 16 Overview of the Study This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter I presents a background for the study, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, and need for the study. The research questions are then presented, followed by definitions of key terms used in this study and by limitations of the study. Chapter II includes information related to the current status of the principalship in Saudi Arabia. It also reviews the literature relevant to the topic in the United States. Chapter III contains descriptions of the methodol- ogy, the population, the instrument used in this study, the data collection procedures, and the statistical analysis employed. Chapter IV reports the results of the data analy- sis and the interpretation of the collected data. Chapter V provides a brief summary of the problem and the methodology of the study. The conclusions and recommendations derived from the findings are presented. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE This study's major purpose was to investigate the perceptions of senior high school principals in the Eastern region of Saudi Arabia regarding their actual and preferred role, knowledge, and skills. After pre- senting an overview of the Eastern region, this chapter reviews the literature on the following subjects: 1. Public administration in Saudi Arabia. 2. Educational administration in Saudi Arabia. 3. The school principal's role in Saudi Arabia. 4. Preparation and selection of school principals in Saudi Arabia. 5. The importance of the principalship in the educational system. 6. The duties and responsibilities of the high school principal in the 0.8. 7. Competencies and skills needed by the high school principal. . 8. Studies of the high school principals that have significant and specific relevance for the present study. 17 18 The Eastern Region of Arabia The Eastern Region is that area of Arabia that skirts the Arabian Gulf. It stretches from the state line of Najid in the west to the Arabian Gulf in the east; in the south, it meets the Empty Quarter, while in the north it borders Kuwait. This region includes two educational districts: Al-Hasa and the Eastern Province. In 1936, the Eastern school district superinten- dent's office was opened in the city of Al-Hofut, the old capital of the Eastern Province. After the dis- covery of oil in the region in the 19303, the city of Addmmam was chosen as the new capital of the Eastern Province. In 1955, the school district superintendent's office, along with all other government agencies, was transferred from Al-Hofut to Addmmam. l-bwever, in 1966, a new school district superintendent's office was again opened in Al-Hofut (the Al-Hasa school district). Each of these two districts is headed by a superintendent who is appointed by and responsible to the Ministry of Education (Al-Salloom, 1974). During the 1985-1986 school year, the Eastern Province school district operated 26 senior high schools, 64' intermediate schools, 162 elementary schools, and 3 special schools for handicapped children. These 255 schools had a total enrollment of 79,706 students who were taught by 4,721 teachers. During the 19 same period, the Al-Hasa school district had 13 senior high schools, 46 intermediate schools, 131 elementary schools, and 4 special schools for the handicapped. These 194 schools had a total enrollment of 57,129 students who were taught by 3q136 teachers (Ministry of Education, 1986). The Eastern Region was chosen as the site of this study for the following reasons: - No previous studies have been conducted on the principalship in general or the role of the senior high school principal in particular in this region, while a few studies have been carried out in the Central and western Regions. - In 1981, a College of Education was established at King Faisal University in the Eastern Region. This College of Education plans to develop a department of educational administration, the main responsibility of which will be the development of programs to train and prepare school principals. As part of that mandate, the department will have to recognize the altered role of principals in changing social and economic circum- stances. - The findings of many studies on the function of the school principal have suggested that a definite consensus concerning the principal's functions will never be reached within a broad geographical area. 20 Therefore, it seems to this researcher that more concentrated research, conducted within limited regions or even at district levels, would more likely result in data that could prove beneficial in the development of viable job descriptions and the reduction of uncertainty concerning the senior high school principalship within given locales. It is for this reason that an in-depth, limited-area study has been conducted. Public Administration in Saudi Arabia Many studies have been concerned with major problems in the public administration of Arabia, such as bureaucracy, centralization, organizational change, and local autonomy, while only a few have dealt with the problems of educational administration. Because of this and because schools in Saudi Arabia are governmental enterprises--educational administration is considered one of the major segments of the present Saudi bureau- cracy--,it is proper to briefly review some of the studies that deal with public administration in the country in order to give perspective and to establish a context for discussion of educational administration in Saudi Arabia. The history of the administrative system in Saudi Arabia is a relatively short one. It has grown from a simple structure, represented by a small number of 21 government agencies, to a more complex structure encom- passing many agencies. As a result of the increased complexity of the society and the vast growth in both the size and complexity of the administrative system, many administrative problems have emerged. Al-Awaji (1971), in his thorough discussion of Saudi bureaucracy, asserts that "Saudi Arabian bureaucracy has developed from a non-uniform and fragmented organization to an extremely centralized system” (p. 217). According to him, that centralization has led to the following practices: - Top officials spend their time discussing or signing papers of insignificant value to their official responsibilities. - Ministers and top officials spend a great portion of their office hours receiving people who have followed up their concerns by coming to these officials regardless of the importance of the issues involved. - In both personal and financial matters, little authority is delegated to people at the local level (pp. 207-210). Not only do such problems of organizational defici- ency exist, they are continually increasing because of the growth and complexity of the system, and because of inherited administrative corruption. Eight years after Al-Awaji's study, Abussuud (1979) studied administrative development and planning in Saudi Arabia and also recorded some of the Saudi bureaucracy's problems. Among these were: lack of security, lack of motivation 22 on the part of Saudi officials, lack of qualified personnel, and the problem of high personnel turnover. In 1985, Al-Hegelan and Palmer conducted a study to assess the major problems restricting the develop- mental capacity of the bureaucracy in Saudi Arabia. They evaluated the developmental capacity of the Saudi bureaucracy across six dimensions: psychological drive, flexibility, communications, client relations, imparti- ality, and job satisfaction. Problems in any one of the six areas would impair the developmental capacity of any bureaucracy. According to that study, the respondents gave the Saudi bureaucracy poor marks in each of the six areas, which suggests that the developmental capacity of the Saudi bureaucracy is low. Al-Hegelan and Palmer pointed out that: The Saudi bureaucracy is hardly in a position to provide the drive or thrust required to transform Saudi Arabia from a consumer-oriented rentier economy into a Saudi-based, production-oriented economy. (p. 55) This state of affairs within the national bureaucracy has influenced and affected the development of educa- tional administration in the country as well. Educational Administration in Saudi Arabia Little literature exists that relates specifically to educational administration in Arabia, but because the educational system is a subset of the wider governmental 23 system, the preceding discussion of public administra- tion lays the groundwork for discussion of educational administration in Saudi Arabia. The same problems are common to the educational system. Strong centraliza- tion, ineffective leadership, shortage of specially trained personnel, and the lack of precise specification of function are features of Saudi educational administra- tion. Manuie (1976) has indicated that: The growing complexity of the Ministry of Educa- tion and the General Administration of Girls' Education has led to several problems in communi- cation, recruitment, selection, favoritism, overstaffing, lack of administrator and teacher training, and poorly defined authority structures. . (P- 23) The Ministry of Education formulates and imple- ments educational policies for the entire country, and supervises and finances public education at all levels. It oversees all personnel in that it trains, recruits, promotes, assigns, transfers, disnisses, and retires all staff members. It provides individual schools with textbooks, educational facilities, and health services. It also constructs, rents, and maintains school build- ings (Al-Ajroush, 1980). The Ministry of Education has the final decision in all educational policies. In fact, major decisions are seldom made at a level lower than the Ministry. Even such details as the amount of time to be spent on each part of a course of study, the setting of examinations, and the determination of 24 teaching methods are decided by the Ministry of Education (Al-Salloom, 1974). It has often been found that the Ministry of Education, located in the capital, is often not aware of local needs. On many occasions, the district superin- tendent finds himself so tied up with the regulations of the Ministry of Eiucation that he cannot take any action without consulting the Ministry in the capital. Manuie (1976) states, for example: The school district superintendent and his staff play almost no role in general policy formulation, and they do not have the power to adopt general policies locally. They are compelled to conform to specific policies formulated centrally. (p. 26) This problem has been compounded by the problem of ineffective communication. Al-Ajroush (1980) argues that Communication between the decision-making body and the individual school is poor, and communication from the base of the hierarchical structure, the school, to the top of the pyramid, the Ministry, is also ineffective. (p. 181) He makes a further interesting comment on this situation: The issue here is certainly not centralization versus decentralization, but it is inconceivable that an agency such as the Ministry of Education, with an unquestioned deficiency of highly quali- fied personnel, could be effective and efficient in handling all the aspects of learning that are related to education of the younger generation. (pp. 74-75) 25 The Role of the School Principal in Saudi Arabia The above discussion of the Ministry of Education has direct relevance for illustrating the kind of situa- tion under which Arabian principals now function. The school principal occupies an important position, located midway between educational policy makers, on the one hand, and teachers and students, on the other. Yet, in Saudi Arabia, the principal has no voice in many crucial matters, such as selection of teachers, transfer of staff members from or to his school, curriculum develop- ment, choice of textbooks, and the like. He has no freedom for action, even in day-to-day operations. The official description of the role of the princi- pal put forth by the Ministry of Education (Manuie, 1976) is as follows: The school principal supervises directly all the activities in the school and is responsible for the school's direction to accomplish its purposes by creating a favorable climate for students to obtain their studies according to the planned curriculum. (pp. 3-4) It is obvious from the vague statement that the role of the principal suffers from a lack of clarity. The prin- cipal here is held responsible for every small thing that happens in the school. Relevant literature amply reveals that the role of the school principal in Saudi Arabia is to solve routine problems and to comply with and implement the rules and regulations of the Ministry 26 of Education. More specifically, he carries out, directs, performs, and follows established policies, regulations, and procedures. He has no authority to formulate policies or to initiate change in his school. This situation has led many principals to perform their duties in a similar manner, and to spend most of their time and energy performing insignificant and/or irrelevant routine duties. Manuie (1976) has noted: The principals of the schools at all educational levels perform their duties similarly. Principals do not play a leadership role because they do not have the authority to initiate changes within their organization. Therefore, most of the school principal's time is spent on clerical details and minor issues. (p. 32) In addition, Ellis (1972) maintains that the clarity of a principal's role has an effect on his effectiveness: "The effectiveness of the principal's involvement in high level tasks will depend on the clarity with which his job responsibilities are defined” (quoted in Chaudhary, 1980, p. 24). Although the researcher could locate no document that defined and detailed the duties and responsibili- ties of senior high school principals, an example of how high school principals cope with the situation outlined above may be seen in the fact that some of them still refer to the "Interior System of the Elementary School,” which was issued by the Ministry in 1964 and outlined the duties of the elementary school principal. In 27 actuality, it is of limited practical use to principals; in fact, many principals are even unaware of its existence. The following outlines how this text defines the role of the elementary school principal: l. The principal is the first one to be responsible for the school system and its activi- ties. He provides all administrative work if he is alone and he may have assistants, in which case administrative work should be equally shared. 2. The school principal should be responsi- ble for the accomplishment of all school subjects at the end of the school year. He should follow the direction of the Ministry in this regard, and he should: (a) distribute the hours and classrooms to teachers according to their abilities. It is desirable that the principal seek the opinion of the teachers in this matter. (b) prepare the school schedules on the first day of school 3. The school principal should communicate to teachers all the infommation which he receives from the Ministry. 4. The school principal should hold staff meetings from time to time for the discussion of problems in the schools and about matters which may raise the level of education in the school. 5. The school principal should keep records of staff meetings and provide the educational district with copies of these records. 6. 'Phe school principal should visit teachers in the classrooms. He should see their notebook preparation every day. He should keep records about each teacher which may be needed when writing secret reports to the educational district. 7. The school principal should not advise or criticize teachers in front of the pupils. 8. The school principal should keep the record of presence and absence of school staff in his office and he should tell the staff to sign every day in their record. 9. The school principal should come to school every day fifteen minutes before school starts. 10. The school principal should be concerned about the activities of the pupils, and should try to provide the necessary services for the school activities (quoted in Manuie, 1976, pp. 32-33). 28 As is apparent, these ten functions stress the managerial aspect of the principal's role. The princi- pal is seen as an employee in a bureaucratic school organization who acts under the supervision of higher level authorities. Preparation and Training of Principals in Saudi Arabia The procedures for training and preparing high school principals in Saudi Arabia are currently in the earliest stage of development. In discussing programs for the preparation of educational administrators, Hakim (1974) has asserted that: Programs for the preparation of educational admini- strators are currently in the incubation stage in Saudi Arabia. At the present time there is little coordination between universities, or between universities and the schools. (p. 1) As a response to the lack of adequate training for educa- tional administrators, two special training programs were established in 1972 at the Colleges of Education in Riyadh and in Mecca (Manuie, 1976). Hakim's (1974) study compared two preparation programs for educational administrators--one at Riyadh University and one at the University of Arizona--and concluded that the "existing educational administration programs in Saudi Arabia are not meeting the needs of school administrators as [they are] expressed by the respondents“ (p. 120). As an indication of the ineffectiveness of the preparation and 29 training programs for educational administrators in the country, the educational system still faces the continu- ing problem of unqualified administrators. Al-Shakhis (1984), who has studied the educational leadership styles, attitudes, and needs in Saudi Arabia, points out that: Unfortunately, one of the hardest problems faced by the Saudi Arabian educational system is the standard or kind of qualifications possessed by the people who manage the educational system. Many of these administrators may have had only a very basic education themselves. (p. 89) In spite of the existence of such programs, to date no special pre-service administrative preparation is required for the position of high school principal. The prevailing belief is that the training given to the teachers is adequate preparation for administrators, and the attendant belief that one can become a successful principal simply by imitating one's predecessors still exists to a large extent in Saudi Arabia. Most prac- ticing principals are graduates of teacher training colleges. Many hold degrees in Arabic, history, geography, Islamic studies, and math, but very few, if any, are specialized in educational administration. This situation only contributes to the ineffec- tiveness of the public school system. A high school principal who has no different preparation than that of his staff cannot be expected to carry out his responsi- bilities effectively. A high school principal who lacks 3O proper preparation will not be able to achieve the school's purposes and goals. Appointment and Selection of Principals in Saudi Arabia The selection process for school principals in Saudi Arabia has been influenced by how other public employees are selected, especially the role played by personal relationships. Al-Awaji (1971) writes that: Social relations are deeply reflected in bureau- cratic behavior. Objective considerations are of a secondary importance in determining the selec- tion of employees and in assuming the necessary cooperation within the organization. It is common to see many friends and relatives of top officials working in their ministries, departments, or divisions. (p. 228) Although the official regulations of the Ministry of Education state that "The educational staff is selected from among those who have scientific, teaching, and technical qualifications and enjoy noble Islamic character" (quoted in Abo-Laban, 1978, pp. 17-18), actual practices are different. In this regard, Manuie (1976) points out that "The procedure and the selection criteria are broadly stated without specific position descriptions“ (p. 35). It becomes obvious, then, that such a broad statement applies to all educational staff members, but cannot be employed as an objective criteria in the selection of an effective school principal. Despite the efforts that have been made and continue to be made to establish some kind of special 31 acadenic requirements for the position, there are still principals who have only a middle- or high-school diploma. Many principals have been appointed not on the basis of professional training for the job, but on their conformity to the system and to the expectations of their superiors. Their selection and appointment has little to do with the position's requirements. As Manuie (1976) summarizes: Many administrators are in jobs which are unre- lated to their training. Most of the positions in the educational system are filled by people with limited backgrounds in education--many administra- tors have not taken any course in administration. (p. 38) As mentioned above, many high school principals are also appointed directly from a teaching position. To appoint a teacher as a principal is considered by some officials of the Ministry of Education as a privi- lege to which many teachers look forward. Even the principals themselves understand the appointment as a privilege conferred and not as a matter of heavy respon- sibility. For many, becoming a principal means relief from teaching responsibilities that have become tiresome. The existing procedures and policies for selection and appointment of school principals are a major cause of the unhealthy educational environment that prevails in some schools in Saudi Arabia. For example, often, 32 teachers become antagonistic toward principals who have been selected for reasons other than competence. A principal who is not accepted by his teaching staff cannot provide the leadership necessary to attain the school's educational goals. A more careful selection of principals, based on scientific standards, is an impor- tant step in remedying this situation. The Importance of the Principalship in the Educational astem There is no significant body of professional liter- ature in Saudi Arabia that deals with the nature of the principalship, its administrative functions, and the competencies needed for incumbents to the position. For this reason, the following discussion draws upon the literature in the United States in order to establish a context and framework for the present study. Little disagreement exists that the principalship is one of the most, if not lie most, important positions in public education. Educational authorities concur that the principal is the most influential and powerful person in a school. This view is particularly well- stated in a report by a select committee of the 0.8. Senate (quoted in Jackson, 1978): I In many ways the school principal is the most important and influential person in any school. He is the person responsible for all activities that occur in and around the school building. It is the principal‘s leadership that sets the tone of the school, the climate for learning, the level 33 of professionalism and morale of teachers, and the degree of concern for what students may or may not become. The principal is the main link between the community and the school, and the way he or she performs in that capacity largely determines the attitudes of parents and students about the school. If a school is a vibrant, innovative, child-centered place, if it has a reputation for excellence in teaching, if students are performing to the best of their ability, one can almost always point to the principal's leadership as the key to success. (pp. 25-26) Various studies over the past twenty years give support to these conclusions of the select committee. Culbertson and Wenson (1974) conclude that, in an over- all sense, the principal is the person with primary responsibility for the development of the school as an adaptive organization within a rapidly changing society. As Stoops, Rafferty, and Johnson (1975) indicate, the quality of a school seldom rises above the quality of leadership provided by the building principal. Although it is sometimes the case that the principal is held personally responsible for all happenings in a school, it is actuality his leadership that not only sets the tone for the school but also serves as the primary link between the school and the community (Epstein, 1974). The principal's leadership is of crucial centrality and is directly related to pupil achievement, pupil attitudes toward self and school, and parent satisfaction (Rakhshani, 1980, and Andrews and Soder, 1987). In a study aimed at elucidating the management 34 and organization characteristics which lead to success in raising student achievement, Wellisch, MacQueen, Carriere, and Duck (1978) found five factors which appear to differentiate successful from unsuccessful schools. In successful schools, principals (l) were more concerned with instruction, (2) communicated their views about instruction, (3) took responsibility for decisions relating to instruction, (4) coordinated instructional programs, and (5) emphasized academic standards. In another study, Mize (1978) confirms that teacher morale in high-achieving schools is linked to perceptions of the principal as a provider of high levels of support in instructionally related areas. As he puts it, Teachers in higher-achieving schools consistently reported that principals gave them greater support in instructionally related areas such as provision of adequate materials and support for new ideas and special projects" (p. 29). It is nosurprise, then, that others--such as Greene (1972) and English (l975)--also assert that the principal is the most important determiner of the educational climate in a school. English, in fact, argues that not only the professional staff, but laymen as well, believe that a ”well-run" school is a “well-administered" school. Many have come to realize, as Houts (1975) asserts, that the principal is the key to whether or not a school works. Likewise, in his examination of the 35 principalship, Mitchell (1972) cites several studies of the principal's effect on. the school and concludes that the principal is easily identifiable as the key deter- miner of the climate of a school. He states that one crucial way in which principals influence the learning process is through teachers; when principals offer teachers support and assistance in instruction, teachers are better able to do their job. As the literature here amply shows, it is the unique position of the principal and how his leadership qualities are put into action that determine whether a school is a success or a failure. Duties and Responsibilities of the High School Principal in the United States The functions of the school principal's role have evolved over a long period of time, and even today still continue to change. In recent years, debate has contin- ued to center on the exact role of the school principal. Burnham (1978) reported that the jobs are different today and the people serving [in] the jobs are different. Old data on the principalship are irrelevant to today's context. Because of the rapid rate of change in today's societies, it is likely that future studies will result in similar conclusions. (P. 14) The contemporary principal is increasingly called upon to perform many roles. Thus, the principal is seen 36 as an instructional leader (Gaye, 1979); as a business administrator; as a manager (Lipham, 1977); and as a linker, facilitator, human relations/resource specialist (Schmuck and Nelson, 1970). A survey of the literature reveals that the various duties or responsibilities of school principals may be categorized in a meaningful way. While different authors employ different terminol- ogies to describe and label these general categories or areas, six major areas may be put forward as encompass- ing many of the functions of the high school principal: I. Instructional Leadership and curriculum Development. II. Staff Personnel Administration. III. Student Personnel Administration. IV. School Organization and School-Plant Admini- stration. V. School-Community Relations. VI. Financial Management. In the following pages, the role of the high school principal is discussed within these six major areas. Definitions of each area and an explanation of the principal's functions in fulfilling each role are attempted. Although each area is here treated as a separate role for the school principal, it is recognized that there are overlapping responsibilities among them. 37 I. Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development Lipham, Rankin and Hoeh (1985) have defined leader- ship as ”that behavior of an individual that initiates a new structure in interaction within a social system by changing the goals, objectives, configurations, proce- dures, inputs, processes or outputs of the system" (p. 67). They point out that the principal who provides educational leadership carefully examines the formal and informal structures of the school and then initiates changes that will improve role relationships, coordina- tion, cooperation, and integration throughout the school. Campbell, Corbally, and Nystrand (1983) report that the effective leader forms goals and objectives, sets standards of performance, creates a productive working environment, and obtains needed support. Among those who specify the role of the high school principal in instruction, Brieve (1972) has stated that the secondary school principal is the single most important individual to influence the instructional program in a school. He has argued further that instruc- tional leadership is a four-part role: 1. Administration--by which a principal influences instruction. 2. Support--by which a principal encourages and facilitates instructional efforts initiated by staff at his local school. 3. Coordination--by which a principal coordinates instructional activities both among his staff and between his staff and central and other school staffs. 38 4. Initiation--by which a principal initiates or serves as the impetus in developing an outstanding school program. (PP. 11-15) Thus, in providing instructional leadership, the principal is responsible for many diverse activities. Franklin, Nickens, and Appleby (1980) identify these activities as curriculum planning, curriculum implemen- tation, curriculum evaluation, classroom observation, pupil scheduling, program coordination/orientation, and teacher scheduling. In effect, the principal initiates and adapts the curriculum to student needs and encour- ages change in curriculum objectives (Berenji, 1979) . As an instructional leader, the principal is- primarily responsible for facilitating and fostering improvement in the school instructional program by being directly involved in the development, implementation, evaluation, and refinement of the instructional program. Studies on school effectiveness show that principals of effective schools: -- are committed to instructional improvement. -- show strong knowledge of and participation in classroom instructional activities. -- monitor the effective use of classroom time. -- engage in effective instructional improvement processes. -- have positive attitudes toward staff and students (Lipham, 1981, p. 13) . Another study that has specified the principal's activities within the instructional leadership role was developed at the School Effectiveness Program. This 39 study's model of instructional leadership may be subdivided into three general dimensions. According to Hallinger, Murphy, Weil, Mesa, and Mitman (1983), these dimensions are: 1. Defining the school's mission. 2. Managing curriculum and instruction. 3. Forming a positive school learning climate (p. 85). The first of these dimensions is composed of two func- tions: framing the school's goals, and communicating these goals. The principal plays a key role in conceptu- alizing the school's goals, obtaining staff input on their development, and framing them in a manner that increases their usefulness for the purposes of instruction and assessment. In the second dimension, the principal's role is to maintain consistency between the school's achievement goals, classroom objectives, curricular materials in use, and the instructional practices of the teachers. This involves, according to Hallinger et al., four separate leadership functions: -- knowledge of curriculum and effective instruction. -- supervision and evaluation of instruction. -- curricular coordination. -- monitoring of student performance (p. 87). In the third and final dimension of this model, the principal plays the major part in establishing an effective climate for instruction. The focus in this dimension is on the ways in which the principal can 40 influence the attitudes and beliefs of others in the school with respect to student achievement. This dimension' 3 functions are: -- establishment of high expectations for students. -- establishment of academic standards and incentives for learning. -- protection of instructional time. -- promotion of instructional improvement and professional development (p. 88). Despite the considerable attention and the rigor- ous inquiry devoted to instructional leadership, it remains a controversial area (role), and a large body of literature focuses on the issue of whether or not the principalship is to properly focus on instructional leadership or on school management. Authorities in the field do not agree on the principal's most important role. A considerable number give the emphasis to instructional leadership. Corbally, Jenson, and Staub (1965), writing about the high school principal, have stated that, "Despite the frustrations of administration and demands on his time, the improvement of instruction is his most important responsibility“ (p. 139). In 1967, Stewart also argued that the principal's true function is educational leadership and that his or her primary concern must be the instructional program of the school. Jacobson, Logsdon, and Wiegman (1973), among others, are in agreement that the most important task of the principal is the improvement of instruction. They 41 all have maintained that in achieving this objective the principal should act as a coordinator rather than as a supervisor. Thus, most theorists (and job descriptions as well) call upon the principal to be the school's instruc- tional leader. Gaye (1979) has pointed out that princi- pals must take a leadership role in instruction because: -- the school program is becoming increasingly complex and one person must. orchestrate this complexity. -- reduced resources for curriculum leadership require that the principal play a more assertive role. -- curriculum innovations demand that principals be aware and capable of using new methods to promote teacher effectiveness. -- the pluralism of pupil needs obligates the principal to manage a total, consistent, and congruent program for all. Likewise, the Alaska Research on School Effectiveness Project conducted a study to answer the question "Does the active instructional leadership on the part of the secondary school principal have a positive effect on the academic achievement of the students?" The study con- cluded that "it does appear that when principals assume an active instructional leadership role, student achieve- ment is enhanced" (Cotton and Savard, 1980, p. l) . 42 Thus, if the leadership qualities of the principal can have such an effect on student achievement and on what goes on in the school, many authors maintain that principals ought to take seriously their role as instruc- tional leaders. However, not everyone agrees that the principal should play an instructional leadership role. In 1962, Lucio and McNell presented their view of the changing supervisory function of the principal, and suggested that general supervisory functions had dimin- ished in the wake of the trend toward enlarged systems with many new specialists. In addition, they identified the growth of professional organizations and the improved preparation of teachers as factors that detract from the principal's supervisory function. Burnham (1978) shared this position when he asserted that the expectation that the principal provide leadership in the instructional program is an unrealistic one. He stated that instructional supervision by the principal is both less defensible and less necessary in many schools. In the 19703, Hencley (1970) also argued that principals should be increasingly oriented toward admini- stration and coordination of school operation. Myers (1974) echoed this sentiment when he noted that the principal is not a leader in the school but rather a "functionary," one who in effect works for teachers and neither has nor ought to have power. He further 43 suggested that principals should accept their subordin- ate role as functionaries, forgetting their own beliefs about what is best for the instructional program in favor of the beliefs of the teachers. Gorton (1976) continued this line of reasoning when he pointed out that teachers do not recognize the principal as an instructional leader and that much research shows many principals are unable to function as instructional leaders within their schools. Weldy (1979) asserted that principals are not and never have been maximally effective instructional leaders for four basic reasons: -- principals are not trained to be instructional leaders. -- principals are too involved in other administra- tive activities. -- principals do not have time to be instructional leaders. -- the art of instructional leadership is under- developed and therefore not even available for principals' use (p. 72). Rallis and Highsmith (1986) have recently argued that the first realistic step in school improvement is to recognize that school management and instructional leadership are two different tasks that cannot be per- formed well by a single individual. They assert that the disparities within the principal's overall role are too great for him or her to be an effective manager and an educational leader at the same time. In effect, the training and skills requisite for management of a building are quite different from those needed to lead 44 teachers. Roe and Drake (1974) even go so far as to state that "instructional leadership talk is often lip service paid to create a greater self-respect within the professional group itself“ (p. 10). The most radical position on this question has been taken by Hoban (1973), who maintains that the position of the principal- ship ought to disappear altogether. Advocating the ”school without a principal ," Hoban would turn instruc- tional duties over to teachers and an elected dean of studies. A conciliatory position within this debate is represented by McIntyre (1971) when he argues that the principal's role should be a combination of the two (instructional leadership and administration), and that the contention by some that a principal should spend 90% of their time in one or the other realm is simply unrealistic. McIntyre envisions the principal as "becoming an expert on how to change the environment for accomplishing the school's goals rather than being oriented solely toward either management or instruc- tional functions" (p. 5). It is unlikely that an acceptable set of role norms for the principalship will ever be identified. Nonetheless, it remains the case that the main reason for having a principal is to facilitate learning. As Houts (1975) cogently comments, the functions of the 45 position should not be written in stone, but should be left to vary as required to meet the goals of the schools. In the meantime, it remains necessary, as English (1975) and Greene (1972) maintain, to continue to study and redefine the role in order to keep pace with rapid social change. II. Staff Personnel Administration A review of the literature reveals five major staff personnel functions for the principal: 1. Identification of new staff: assessing the degree to which the values of the community and the objectives of the school coincide with the personal values, needs, and abilities of each prospective staff member. 2. Assignment of staff: ensuring maximum compati- bility between the demands of the role and the needs of the individual. 3. Orientation of staff: conducting activities that clarify instructional roles and relation- ships. 4. Evaluation of staff: assessing the degree to which individuals are performing in accordance with expectations held for their roles. 5. Improvement of staff: conducting activities that improve the abilities of each individual to perform effectively (Lipham, Rankin, and Hoeh, 1985, p. 160). The identification of prospective staff consists of two phases. The recruitment phase identifies potentially acceptable candidates, while the selection phase eliminates candidates who fail to meet the require- ments of the position. The principal's responsibilities in these two phases may vary depending on the size of the school system. Generally, the building principal is 46 in some way involved in the selection of personnel for his school. This means that the principal has great influence in defining job expectations, in seeking people who can meet such expectations, and in clarifying the assignments made to such personnel after they join the staff (Flood, 1980). The recruitment and selection of personnel comprise only the initial phase of staffing. An equally important responsibility of the principal is that of assigning personnel in a way that maximizes each staff member's effectiveness in the school. The principal should create a climate in which the staff and himself work together, each fulfilling his unique role, by involving them in decisions related to their roles. Leithwood and Montgomery (1986) point out that highly effective principals come to understand staff's needs and preferences about being involved in decisions by getting to know them and by directly checking out staff preferences for involvement in school decision-making. Furthermore, a common feeling of mutual understanding, respect, and commitment is engendered among staff by highly effective principals. The principal's initial responsibility in the third function, staff orientation, is to familiarize the new teacher with the curriculum that will be taught and all of the resource materials in the school. The new 47 teacher also should be oriented to the school's staff, students, and the community (Lipham, Rankin, and Hoeh, 1985). In performing the function of staff evaluation, the principal gathers evidence and uses standards to measure and judge the extent to which the performance of each staff member is accomplishing desired outcomes. In describing the behavior of effective principals in staff evaluation, Leithwood and Montgomery (1986) note that highly effective principals develop, with the staff member, specifications for the criteria and standards to be used in evaluation. In relation to each criterion, appropriate expectations are identified for each staff member in collaboration with the staff member and other relevant staff. In terms of procedures for evaluation, Leithwood and Mcntgomery state that: Highly effective principals try to identify both strengths and weaknesses. Provision is made for agreement about the data to be collected, the methods of collection, and the identification of obstacles faced by individual staff members. . . . The criteria, standards, and procedures for evalu- ation are communicated clearly by these principals to each staff member well in advance of carrying out the evaluation. . . . Each staff member is given both verbal and written information result- ing fran the evaluations. (p. 104) Staff improvement and development, the fifth staff personnel function, comprises a variety of techniques and activities. These may range from professional associations, to the professional library, to student- teacher programs, to in-service training (Lipham, 48 Rankin, and Hoeh, 1985, pp. 181, 183). In his function of providing staff with knowledge and skill, Leithwood and Montgomery (1986) go to some length to describe the highly effective principal: Highly effective principals have many ways of providing knowledge and skill for their staff, and they consider it an important thing to do. They try to be aware of staff needs and the help available, suggesting that staff use this help. They arrange for assistance for staff and attempt to match the type of assistance to individual needs and differences as much as possible. Highly effective principals provide staff with relevant materials to read and bring people into the school to speak about issues where knowledge and skill are needed. Staff are advised to go to particular courses and conferences. As well, in-service with staff is conducted within the school by arranging for staff to visit each other and by getting. resource staff to come to the school to help staff. (pp. 90-91) Two activities in particular--classroom observa- tion and in-service training--receive stress in the literature on staff improvement. Lipham, Rankin, and Hoeh (1985) argue that classroom observation is extremely important, since the principal must know what goes on in the classroom in order to be of assistance to any teacher. Therefore, they outline four steps to make such visits effective: 1. Preparing the faculty: The principal must exercise care to create within the staff a receptive climate for classroom visits. 2. The pre-visit conference: Before observing in the classroom, a principal should hold a pre- visit conference with the teacher to identify cooperatively the goals and objectives of the lesson. 3. The observation visit: The observation should not be disturbing to the teacher or students. 49 The principal should remain inconspicuous during the visit. 4. The post-visit conference: This meeting is for mutually determining the effectiveness of the lesson in terms of the pre-established goals (pp. 177-180). Such classroom visits may be ineffective, however, without follow-up in-service training. Berenji (1979) maintains that the secondary school principal, in his/- her staff development role, facilitates maximum teacher participation in self-development and in-service educa- tional programs and conferences. By stimulating and encouraging teachers to keep abreast of current educa- tional information, he/she helps them to understand, apply, accept, and be committed to continual improvement of their skills. Finally, meeting with staff is an important component of the principal's role in staff personnel administration. Regular meetings of the faculty and other school personnel are recommended in order to provide the staff with opportunities to participate actively in making decisions affecting the school. Duke (1982) summarizes the points discussed above by providing a list of questions that would assist in the recognition of the principal who is effective in staff development. The questions are: r 1. Does the principal possess a plan for recruit- ing the best possible teachers? 2. Is the staff encouraged to participate in in- service activities? 3. Does a plan exist for the regular offering of in-service opportunities? 50 4. Do staff members participate in decision-making regarding leadership? 5. In what ways does the principal encourage teacher leadership? 6. How does the principal respond when a teacher is having trouble meeting instructional objec- tives? (PP. 9-10) III. Student Personnel Administration According to Berenji (1979), in fulfilling his/her responsibility for student personnel administration, the high school principal directs, plans, organizes, super- vises, coordinates, and evaluates: 1. student guidance and counseling service. 2. student activities such as student organiza- tions, extracurricular activities, and support. 3. student disciplinary procedures and attendance accounting. Likewise, according to Lipham, Rankin, and Hoeh (1985), student personnel services include such areas as health care; social services, provided by social workers and attendance officers; and guidance services, provided by counselors, psychologists, and teachers. A viable guidance programs is central to the effectiveness of a school. The guidance program's basic purpose is to increase student feelings of satisfaction, belongingness, identification, and achievement. Toward that end, the principal should strive to remove admini- strative constraints that prevent counselors from being of maximum service to students (Lipham, Rankin, and 51 Hoeh, 1985). Shertzer and Stone (1976) have identified the following major functions in which the principal is expected to engage: -- secure adequate numbers of competent counselors. -- assure that roles of counselors are defined and that staff members are able to function in these roles. -- provide adequate physical facilities and materials. -- interpret to teachers and the public the objectives of the school guidance program. -- promote in-service education in guidance for the faculty. -- encourage formal evaluation and improvement of the guidance program. -- consult with teachers and counselors regarding specific needs and problems (p. 379). In order to improve student personnel administra- tion, students themselves must be involved in decision- making. Research on decision-making shows that, of all the important reference groups within the school, stu- dents are the least involved in making major educational decisions (Eye, Lipham, Gregg, Netzer and Francke, 1966; mtkins, 1978). Students particularly desire additional involvement in decisions having to do with improving instruction, co-curricular activities, and student personnel services. According to Lipham, Rankin, and Hoeh (1985), at the school-wide level in secondary schools, students desire increased involvement in "the formulation of rules and policies that affect students, the revision and improvement of the instructional program, and the planning and implementation of the co-curricular program" (p. 201). 52 They suggest that a principal must provide structural leadership in organizing the school so that students can become involved in the mainstream of decision-making. In addition, positive student involvement in informal, less structured settings should also be encouraged. The student council may be the most effective organization for achieving the purposes of student participation and involvement in decision-making. The council is a body of representative students elected to perform certain functions in a broad program of student participation (Anderson and Van Dyke, 1972). A principal who understands the decision-making process can help increase student involvement in appropriate decisions at the proper stages to benefit students and the school. He/she should initiate new mechanisms that insure the formal representation of students at faculty meetings, on curriculum committees, and in formulation of rules and policies that affect them. In addition, students should be given the opportunity to evaluate the instructional program, and such evaluations must be considered by school authorities (Al-Tammar, 1983). Student discipline and pupil personnel records and reports are among the essential duties performed by the principal as student personnel administrator. Most school administrators recognize that principals are pressured daily to deal with discipline problems, and 53 that teachers depend on the principal to deal with difficult cases. In fact, board of education members and the superintendent delegate to the principal the responsi- bility of dealing with discipline problems. In this regard, Lipham, Rankin, and Hoeh (1985) remark that: Principals usually are evaluated by district staff, parents, and teachers partly in terms of the extent to which discipline problems are treated promptly and fairly, but a principal must be careful not to overreact, thereby risking loss of respect of the student body and staff. (p. 218) They suggest that well-defined written policies dealing with discipline problems can be of considerable help, but that a principal must be sure of the facts before making decisions on the severe cases that ultimately must be resolved. A problem common to all pupil personnel service departments is how to handle student records. Particu- larly at the high school level, the principal is called upon to gather data, to expedite communication, and to furnish information about students or former students. Ensuring the confidentiality and security of student records is a problem that has received considerable attention (Raubinger, Sumption, and Ram, 1974). The principal should implement a well-planned and carefully maintained system for collecting, storing, and dissemin- ating student data. Such a system is essential if the high school principal is to meet the numerous requests for information about his students and his school. 54 IV. School Organization and School-Plant Administration Because the school building is an important factor in the success of any educational program, school-plant planning and school operation and maintenance are among the major responsibilities of the school principal. As the major learning resource, the school building should be designed and maintained as a functional, safe, and attractive place for teaching and learning. Visitors to a school are quick to form impressions about how the building and grounds are kept, and such judgments often serve as one measure of a principal's and a school's success. According to Lipham, Rankin, and I-beh (1985), the principal, as head of the school, is the immediate super- visor of all custodial and maintenance personnel within the building. In large school districts, supervisors of buildings and grounds may select, supervise, and evalu- ate plant personnel; establish work procedures and schedules; coordinate continuing and emergency services; distribute maintenance supplies; inspect buildings for health and safety; and provide many other technical and supportive services. To keep custodial and maintenance personnel from conflict that can result from dual super- vision, a principal must establish continuing coopera- tive working relations with district supervisors. 55 Nonetheless, an effective principal actively supervises and evaluates custodial, and maintenance personnel so that a clean, attractive and functional learning envir- onment can be provided. He frequently inspects the buildings and grounds to ensure that they are clean and safe, and confers with the custodian about problems encountered in keeping standards high. Another aspect of the principal's role in school organization and school plant administration is his involvement in the administration of school supplies and instructional materials. Supplies and instructional materials should be provided in adequate amounts when they are needed, in conformity with the educational requirements of the teacher and the students. As Elsbree, McNally, and Wynn (1967) assert: The kinds of supplies and equipment provided in a school and the manner in which they are admini- stered can have a considerable influence on the program of teaching and learning. It is obvious that poor and insufficient instructional supplies will severely hamper the efforts of a teacher. Somewhat less obvious is the fact that poor admini- stration of them can vitiate the usefulness of even the most excellent instructional supplies. (p. 396) The principal's responsibility for supplies and equipment varies from one district to another. Studies of supply management indicate that the principal's responsibility for the various functions ranges from full responsibility to no responsibility at all. In 56 many school districts, however, principals carry only part of the responsibility for determining the amount and nature of supplies for their schools, and usually collaborate with the central office. The principal's chief functions in supply administration are helping his staff to compile a list of their needs and preparing an annual estimate of his school's needs; receiving, storing, and distributing supplies to teachers; keeping accurate records of their receipt and consumption; and making an annual inventory at year's end. He is further responsible for the care and use of the materials within the school in order that waste and abuse be avoided (Elsbree, McNally, and Wynn, 1967). Organization and preparation of the school schedule is one of the school principal's administrative responsibilities. Anderson and Van Dyke (1972) define the schedule as "a chart or general plan of action by which the different activities of the curriculum involving pupils, teacher, and other school personnel are accorded a sequence and location" (p. 152). The philosophy behind the school's educational program and the administrative competence of its principal are often reflected in the school schedule. If the schedule is inflexible, carelessly drafted, and generates confusion, it usually reflects an inexperienced principal. Con- versely, if the schedule shows modern offerings, makes 57 provisions for student differences, and functions smoothly, the chances are good that it expresses a well- designed educational program and competent principal (Elsbree, McNally, and Wynn, 1967). Particularly in large schools, it is impossible for any one person to perform the many administrative tasks involved in the operation of a high school. Therefore, it is often necessary for the principal to delegate some of his managerial and administrative tasks. Examples of these tasks are enrolling and trans- ferring students, classifying students for placement, and the testing program. These and similar tasks may be delegated by the principal to his/her assistant or to other staff members, but the delegation of such tasks must. be accompanied by the authority needed to carry them out . V. School-Community Relations The principal's responsibility for school- community relations has the dual purpose of obtaining and administering community support for school programs, and of assuring that the community is fully involved in activities of the school (Sergiovanni et al., 1980; Daresh, 1983). Many studies have shown the importance of establishing positive interactions between school, home, and community. Hobson (1976) has found a signifi- cant positive correlation between parental involvement 58 in school activities and student achievement. Walberg (1984) and Lareau and Benson (1984) report that parental involvement in school can dramatically raise educational productivity. Finally, Danzberger and Usdan (1984) have discovered that dynamic partnerships between school and community improve the effectiveness of the schools and contribute to the quality of life in the entire community. According to Sergiovanni et a1. (1980), the major task of school-community relations may be subdivided into five subtasks. These subtasks, which provide substance to the general task, are: l. Assisting the community to contrast its current sense of what schools do and ought to do with other conceptions of education. 2. Interpreting the educational program to the community. 3. Working closely with official representatives of the community. 4. Working with administrators of other human services. 5. Explaining the community to the professional staff (pp. 261-262). The maintenance of effective school-community relations is a mutual process. The public high school as a public enterprise should seek to inform the community about its operations, its staff, its students, and its programs. Likewise, the community should know about its policies, plans, and problems, so that it may participate in policy formulations and problem solu- tions. To achieve this end, the school principal plays 59 a major role. A review of the literature on the principal's role in this area reveals that the principal interprets the educational program to the community, interprets the community to the teachers and administra- tors within the school, and translates available know- ledge about the community into recommendations for action. Goldman (1970) expresses his position toward the principal's role as a community-oriented administra- tor when he states: In essence, the position taken here is that princi- pals must, in the future, become more community- oriented and their prime function will be that of school-community specialists. Numerous writers have already stated and documented the need for principals to gain increased understanding of, and to initiate extensive involvement with, the communities surrounding their schools. (p. 136) Although the nature and scope of the principal's involve- ment will be determined to some extent by the policies of the wider system of which the school is a part, he/she has (much of the responsibility for seeing that effective communication between the school and the community is established and maintained. System-wide policies, if they are well-founded, will serve as a base upon which an appropriate and effective communication structure may be developed and maintained (Raubinger et al., 1974) . Leithwood and Montgomery (1986) indicate that effective principals employ diverse strategies as they 60 work toward building a positive relationship with the community. Based on data from their research, they report that effective principals often work with their staffs to prepare and maintain for parents and members of the community a handbook which informs them about school goals and plans, school procedures and practices, special events and occasions, and the roles and responsi- bilities of the school and school personnel. Other prominent and useful strategies are: - being visible in the community (shopping activi- ties, sports, etc.). - providing frequent and varied opportunities for parents and members of the community to come to the school. - actively seeking community input into school decision making when appropriate. - inviting parents into the classroom on a well- planned basis. - asking staff to encourage students to talk about school at home. - using a "two-way" booklet which both sends information home and provides opportunities for parents to send information back. - communicating to parents about "good things" (not just difficulties)(pp. 94-95). In summary, in performing his/her function in public relations, the principal has to create two-way school- community communications; involve the community in educational planning; and inform the community of the objectives, programs, activities, and needs of the school. Periodic assessment of public opinion and attitudes toward the school must be made in order to determine what the community knows about the school, 61 what the people think of the school, and what they want from the school. VI. Financial Management As a financial manager, the high school principal organizes” supervises, plans, prepares, and evaluates those aspects of the finance and budgeting processes that pertain to his/her school. Knezevich (1975) points out that the principal has a significant responsibility for fiscal resources, which includes such activities as budget-making, handling of funds, purchasing, account- ing, controlling inventory, financial reporting, and analyzing costs. In commenting upon the multi-faceted role of the principal, Jacobson, Longsdon, and Wiegman (1973) differentiated educational functions and business functions. The school is obviously an educational enterprise and as its manager the principal is responsible for its total operation. This means that he has business functions to perform as well as educa- tional functions. The educational functions, of course, exceed in importance the duties which are managerial in nature, yet without the efficient performance of the managerial tasks, the school as an educational enterprise operates under serious handicaps. (p. 145) As this argument implies, the school principal is respon— sible for the total school operation. As such, he is not expected to be directly responsible for purchasing, receiving, storing, and distributing supplies, etc., 62 rather he is a leader, a coordinator, a facilitator who gets work done with his administrative team. When the principal is functioning in the business role, it is important not to interpret that as a devalu- ation of his role as instructional leader (Berenji, 1979). The principal's function in budgeting and facili- ties management is important in education only when the emphasis is on using school resources properly in terms of educational ends. Lipham, Rankin, and Hoeh (1985) point out that careful attention to planning, preparing, managing, and evaluating a school budget provides principals with many opportunities to affect the success of the school in all respects. Therefore, principals must understand and practice sound administrative and business management techniques throughout the entire budgetary process. To that end, Lipham, Rankin, and Hoeh (1985) present a model for improving the budgetary process. According to the model, the budgetary process includes (1) the acquisition of resources, which involves planning and preparing the budget, and (2) the use of resources, which involves managing and evaluating the budget. Planning the Budget. The major activities for a principal and staff in this phase of the budgetary process include: 1. Assessing community, school, and student needs, problems, and issues. 2. Identifying and reviewing existing goals and priorities. 63 3. Translating general goals into measurable performance objectives. 4. Developing a program structure and format to achieve the objectives. 5. Analyzing alternative approaches and options to achieve the objectives. 6. Recommending and selecting the most cost- effective alternatives for attaining the objec- tives. Preparing a Budget. Attention to the mechanics of the budgetary preparation process is necessary. Forms must be acquired and distributed, supporting data must be provided, instructions must be clearly delineated, and the completion of staff requests must be monitored if the results are to be effective.- In conjunction, an adequate inventory of existing equipment, materials, and supplies must be maintained to prevent unnecessary dupli- cation and waste. Following this, a major responsibility of a principal and staff is the assignment of costs to each program. Managing the Budget. Management of a school's resources includes careful attention to appropriate accounting, purchasing, and control procedures to assure. that the funds appropriated are recorded and expended according to the budget. Evaluating the Budget. This final step of the budgetary process fs evaluation of how well the budget has served to enhance the effectiveness of the school (pp. 239-245) . Although effective financial management by the principal is acknowledged as important, many obstacles may impede its implementation. The degree of centraliza- tion in the wider school system may be a major stumbling block. In a highly centralized educational system, such as that in Saudi Arabia. The use of new techniques in management and budgeting at the school level is imprac- tical when individual schools are given control over only a small percentage of their financial resources, while the rest is planned by the Ministry of Education. 64 Competencies and Skills Needed by High School Principals Many authors have emphasized the importance of preparing school principals so that they can work effec- tively. It is well recognized that the school principal has some significant effect upon student learning. His/her competency, knowledge, and skills influence substantially the growth and development of the children, the atmosphere created in the school, and the teachers' morale and effectiveness. Therefore, it becomes necessary to identify and examine the compe- tencies and skills needed by school principals. The literature contains several studies which reveal that the school administrator must be a person of broad knowledge, penetrating vision, humane understand- ing, and effective administrative and organizational skill (Elsbree et al., 1967). Kraft (1971), for example, has argued that leadership skills may be grouped roughly into the following three categories, first used by Katz to describe managerial skills: 1. Technical skills are defined as those involving specialized ‘knowledge, analytical ability within the speciality, and facility in the use of tools and techniques of the specific discipline--in this case, administration. 2. Human skills include those necessary for working effectively as a group member and building cooperative efforts within the team. 3. Conceptual skills involve the ability to see the enterprise as a whole, which includes recog- nizing how various functions of the organiza- tion depend on one another and how changes in any one part affect all the others (p. 57). 65 Research conducted by the Bureau of Enementary and Secondary Education in 1975 identified the following areas of competence related to the three management skills mentioned above: 1. Technical skills: a. d. The principal is responsible for planning in the school system: 1. establishes budget. 2. issues contracts. 3. purchases books and supplies. 4. plans for future events, with a vision of the future. 5. identifies community groups and goals in relation to the school setting. The principal is able to communicate effec- tively, check on others' perceptions through description of behavior, description of feelings, and paraphrasing. The principal is a skillful manager of his school: 1. establishes structural arrangements providing incentive to elicit contribu- tions from members of organizational staff for accomplishment of tasks. 2. allocates staff personnel to accomplish instructional goals. 3. allocates time and space to accomplish instructional goals. 4. develops and utilizes materials, equip- ment, and facilities to accomplish instructional goals. 5. is aware of new techniques and arrange- ments, their advantages and limitations. 6. utilizes technical skills involved in budget preparation, accounting for expen- ditures, and maintaining inventories of supplies and equipment. The principal shows skill in monitoring decisions. Human Skills: b. The principal takes the lead in building a cooperative effort between faculty members. The principal serves as a mediator between faculty and central office. The principal sets the tone for openness and trust in both formal and informal interper- sonal relationships. The principal is aware of others' percep- tions of his role and behavior. g. h. 66 The principal recognizes the value of other staff members and strives to help them build a sense of achievement. The principal provides opportunities for staff members to accept responsibility. The principal provides opportunities for staff advancement and personal growth. The principal builds effective and meaning- ful interpersonal relations. Conceptual skills: a. b. The principal is responsible for decision- making and conflict resolution within the school. The principal is able to analyze and diag- nose conflict situations and choose courses of action that respond accurately and adequately to these situations. The principal has the ability to conceptua- lize and assess conflict. The principal can determine the nature of conflict and understands the sources of conflict (quoted in Rakhshani, 1980, pp. 55-56). Several other studies have also concentrated on identifying areas of competency for school principals. For example, in 1973, Austin identified eight general areas as: l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Organization and administration. Curriculum design and improvement. Instructional process. Business and financial management. Student management. Personnel management. Facilities, equipment and supplies. Communication. Thomas' 1974 study identified similar task areas, while in Edward's (1974) research over 150 competencies were 67 identified by administrators as necessary in order to function in an administrative capacity. These 150 competencies were then refined by the staff of the project and organized into the following five cate- gories: (1) general administration, (2) program planning, (3) personnel, (4) public relations, and (5) student services. Another study with the aim of defining and priori- tizing competencies needed by the secondary school principal was conducted by Gale and McCleary (1972). A national sample was obtained from a group of secondary school principals. Data were collected in the form of reaction to 39 competency statements. As a result, the areas of competence were ranked in order of their perceived importance as follows (the first five areas were considered by the respondents as being highly important): 1. principal and climate 2. principal and public relations 3. principal and staff personnel 4. principal and instruction 5. principal, program, and planning 6. principal and student personnel 7. principal and management To improve the principalship selection process, the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) 68 developed, refined, and sponsored the use of principalship assessment centers. The assessment center was developed to measure 12 important administrative skills that are defined as follows: 1. 7. 8. 9. 10. Problem analysis: ability to seek out relevant data and analyze complex information to determine the important elements of a problem situation; searching for information with a purpose. Judgment: ability to reach logical conclusions and make high-quality decisions based on avail- able information; skill in identifying educa- tional needs and setting priorities; ability to critically evaluate written communication. Organizational ability: ability to plan, schedule, and control the work of others; skill in using resources in an optimal fashion; ability to deal with a volume of paperwork and heavy demands on one's time. ‘ Decisiveness: ability to recognize when a decision is required (disregarding the quality of the decision) and to act quickly. Leadership: ability to get others involved in solving problems; ability to recognize when a group requires direction, to interact with a group effectively, and to guide them to the accomplisl'ment of a task. Sensitivity: ability to perceive the needs, concerns, and personal problems of others; skill in resolving conflicts; tact in dealing with persons from different backgrounds; ability to deal effectively with people concerning emotional issues; knowing what information to communicate and to whom. Stress tolerance: ability to perform under pres- sure and during opposition; ability to think on one's feet. Oral communication: ability to make a clear oral presentation of facts or ideas. Written communication: ability to express ideas clearly in writing; to write appropriately for different audiences--students, teachers, parents, and so on. Range of interest: competence to discuss a variety of subjects--educational, political, current events, economic, etc.; desire to actively participate in events. 69 11. Personal motivation: need to achieve in all activities attempted; evidence that work is important to personal satisfaction; ability to be self-policing. 12. Educational values: possession of a well- reasoned educational philosophy; receptiveness to new ideas and change (NASSP, 1984, p. 2). Some might argue that it is unrealistic to expect any person to have all these competencies. This may be true, yet because of the significance of the principal's role, every effort should be made to overcome this difficulty by preparing and selecting competent people for the principalship. As indicated earlier, if the role of the principal is exanined closely, the skills and competencies needed to carry out this role can be identified and, consequently, become a part of the training programs for preparing prospective principals. Studies of the High School Principalship That Have Significant and Specific Relevance to the Present Study A considerable number of studies have investigated the functions, role, and knowledge and skill of high school principals. Since several of these studies have important implications for the present study, their findings and conclusions are presented in this section. In a study of senior high school principals in Louisiana, Turner (1969) found that of the nine hours principals spent at school on a typical day, 4 hours were utilized in administration, 2.5 hours in super- vision, and 1.5 hours in public relations. The 70 techniques of supervision used most frequently were planned visits, professional study committees, and in-service programs. Turner recommended that a study be made of the principal's leadership role in administra- tion, supervision of instruction, and public relations. Wasson's (1971) study of junior high school principalship in Louisiana yielded no basic conclusions concerning the principal's duties and professional activities. In comparing his findings with a study conducted six years earlier, he did conclude that the role was a changing one rather than one that was limited, static, and clearly defined. Gould (1972) found that significant differences exist between teachers' and principals' expectations of high school principals. He also found that even within each group there were significant differences in percep- tions of the role of the principal, and that the sex, level of instruction, and length of teaching experience had limited effect on the perceptions of teachers. In 1977 Brown tested the effect of school size, sex, and type of respondent (students, teachers, and principals) on the expected role functions of the high school principal. He found that significant differences existed on 24 of the 40 items, and that school size was a significant factor in that the smaller-school sample expected the principal to take primary responsibility 71 for more duties. Regardless of school size, there was close agreement among students, teachers, and principals in their perceptions of the expected role of the princi- pal, but these perceptions were not consistent with the findings of previous studies using the same instrument. Jackson (1978) conducted a study to determine the elementary school principals' perceptions of their actual and preferred administrative roles, knowledge, and skills. The study concluded that there was a signi- ficant difference at the 0.001 level between Arkansas elementary principals' perception of their actual and preferred participation in seven areas of administra- tion. Also, a significant difference was found at the same level (0.001) between the perceptions of actual and preferred knowledge and skills in the seven basic areas of administration. In 1978 Bendbow studied selected areas of the roles of the secondary school principal, and the ques- tion of whether additional instruction and experience should be included as part of the preparatory program for the principal's position. He found that, generally, secondary school principals in Missouri see their actual roles as being consistent with their perceptions of their ideal roles. It was further concluded that these principals were not receiving in their preparatory programs appropriate experiences in the areas of school 72 finance, personnel services, general administration, and curriculum and instruction. Webb (1979) compared current and desired practice of junior and senior high school principals in the Kansas City school district. He concluded that most respondents indicated that they wished to change current practice in the direction of desired practice. Further- more, junior high school principals expressed a greater need for change to desired practice than did senior high school principals. Wilson (1980) did a comparative study of the actual and ideal role and skill perceptions of elemen- tary, junior high, and senior high school principals. He found that principals agreed upon significant discrepancies (p < 0.05) between their actual and ideal role perceptions in the areas of instructional leader- ship; personnel administration; student guidance; activities and behavior; school management; community relations; and professional development. He also found significant discrepancies (0.05) between their actual and preferred levels of knowledge and skills in these administrative areas. A study by Chaudhary (1980) investigated the per- ceptions by Ministry of Education officials, teachers, and principals of the actual and ideal role of high school principals in India. Among the findings, is only 73 one area of the seven (instructional leadership and curriculum development) did a significant difference exist between what principals perceived as the amount of time actually devoted to the task and the amount of time that should have been spent on the task. In the remaining six task areas, no significant differences were shown between the actual and preferred amount of time spent performing the tasks. Al-Halteh's (1980) study of the role of the secondary school principals in Jordan found that school principals perceived that their engagement in daily work limited their opportunities to plan ahead and deal with programs, faculty, and students. Principals looked forward to more administrative support, security, and flexibility, and to less interference on the part of the central office. They also hoped to have a decentralized form of administration that would grant them more authority for hiring teachers, allocation of funds, and the authority to use discretionary funds. In 1983 Al-Tammar studied the actual and preferred role of the secondary school principals in Kuwait. Among her conclusions was that the actual participation of the principals in professional activities was confined to the level of meeting with their colleagues. They desired to participate more with the Ministry of Education and with professional and local groups. She 74 also found that the secondary school principals have no authority over matters such as selecting new teachers or allocating funds. The respondents indicated that they would prefer to have such authority, but only with the assistance of the Ministry. In addition, Al-Tammar found that secondary school principals in Kuwait spent more hours in their work than they desired. Summary This chapter has reviewed the literature on the principalship in Saudi Arabia and it indicates that educational administrators in Saudi Arabia have not played an active leadership role. This chapter also contains a review of the literature that relates to the importance of the principalship in the educational system, and to the role and competencies of the high school principal in the United States. Based on the substance of this literature, it may be concluded that the principalship has become a more complex, demanding, and important role, resulting in the need for a greater degree of administrative involvement, and for skills and knowledge in critical areas of administration. In the last section of this chapter, studies that have signifi- cant and specific relevance for the present study have been presented. It is clear that at present no conclusive evidence exists concerning the actual role and the preferred role 75 of high school principals. As evident in the preceding reports, an abundance of studies have been conducted which seem to approach the problem from many different perspectives, and using various instruments. It is apparent that the principalship has changed substanti- ally in its demands. Consequently, redefinition and continued study of the role of the principal need to be undertaken on a regular basis. Chapter III addresses the methodology and the procedures used in collection and analysis of data for this study. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY The primary purpose of this study was to investi- gate and examine the perceptions of senior high school principals' in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province school districts regarding their actual and their preferred role, skills, and knowledge. The secondary purpose was to provide information and possible direction to the Ministry of Education, universities, and researchers regarding what is and what should be the principal's role, and to help delineate preparations and in-service needs in order to achieve congruence between actual and preferred roles. In order to select the appropriate research method for this study, a number of similarly designed studies with similar purposes and problems, and a number of selected publications on educational research methods, were carefully reviewed. In light of this examination, the survey method was chosen for this study. Survey research has long been a useful tool for educational fact finding, and is considered an adaptable method for obtaining personal and social facts, attitudes and 76 77 beliefs. Borg and Gall (1979) emphasize the usefulness of survey research in the investigation of a wide range of educational problems. And Babbie (1973) describes survey research as logical, deterministic, general, parsimonious, and specific. Population All senior high school principals in the school districts of Al-Hasa and Eastern Province during the school year of 1986-1987 comprised the invited popula- tion of this study. The entire population was used in this study because of the relatively small size of the total population. The findings of this study are not confined to the population of this study. It is reasonable to assume that principals who participated in the study are repre- sentative of those who will hold the principalship position in the near future. Therefore, the findings can be generalized to those who will hold this position. In addition, the findings are applicable to the senior high school principals of the whole country who share similar characteristics with the population of this study. Instrumentation Following the comprehensive review of documents, related research and other professional literature, a 78 questionnaire was constructed and developed as the basic data-gathering device in order to elicit the opinions of senior high school principals regarding their actual and their preferred role, skills, and knowledge. The ques- tionnaire was constructed and designed in the pattern of similar instruments previously utilized. Special atten- tion was given to five instruments which have been used in previous studies: "A comparative study of the actual and ideal role perceptions of principals" (Wilson, 1980). "Disparity between the perceptions of elementary principals actual and preferred administr- tive roles" (Jackson, 1978). "A study of the real and ideal role perceptions of junior and senior high school principals" (Webb, 1979). "A study of the tasks and responsibilities of secondary principals" (Flood, 1980). ”A study of selected areas of the role of Missouri secondary school principals" (Bendbow, 1978). The instruments used in the first two studies above were partially adopted to be used in this study. They were modified to assure their applicability and understanda- bility to the Saudi Arabian senior high school prin- cipals. 79 The research instrument for this study explores six major areas of administrative responsibility. These areas were established from the review of the literature for this study, and were identified as being major areas of responsibility of school principals. Each item on the questionnaire was classified and assigned to one of the six major areas, and each area was defined by those items assigned to it. These areas are: 1. Instructional leadership and curriculum devel- opment. 2. Staff personnel administration. 3. Student personnel administration. 4. School organization and school-plant admini- stration. 5. School-community relations. 6. Financial management. The instrument consists of two parts. Part one included items designed to obtain demographic informa- tion, such as professional background, level of educa- tion, and years of experience. This kind of data is needed to help interpret the findings of the second part of the instrument. Part two contained 44 items related to each of the six areas of administrative responsi- bility. These items were designed to elicit each respondent's opinion regarding his actual and his preferred role, skills, and knowledge. 80 The 44 items were placed in a two-dimensional actual and preferred role inventory, and in a two- dimensional actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge inventory, with five possible responses on a Likert-type scale: "far above average," "above average," "average," "below average,” and "far below average or no." Each participant was asked to record £225 responses for each item. The first response represented the principal's perception of his actual level of involve- ment in the role. The second response indicated the participant's preferred level of involvement. The third one represented the participant's actual level of skill and knowledge. The last response indicated the respondent's preferred level of skill and knowledge. An arbitrary numerical weighting was used to measure the actual and the preferred role involvement and the actual and the preferred level of skill and knowledge. This weight is as follows: Far above average = 5 Above average = 4 Average = 3 Below average = 2 Far below average or no = 1 Validation of the Instrument In its first stage of development, the instrument contained 62 items. The dissertation director and 81 several educators with experience in school administra- tion reviewed the questionnaire and, upon their recommen- dations and suggestions and further researcher evalua- tion of each item, the number of items was reduced to 44. The 44-item questionnaire was submitted to two of the doctoral comittee members and to several graduate students from Saudi Arabia who had worked as principals. They were asked to critique the questionnaire, to indi- cate whether any items were ambiguous, and to ascertain the clarity, clearness of direction, and overall format of the instrument. Many of their suggestions were implemented and incorporated into the final design of the instrument as used in the study (Appendix A). It its final form the questionnaire contained 44 items. Nine items were assigned to the first area of responsibility, Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development; nine items grouped into Staff Personnel Administration; eight items assigned to Student Person- nel Administration; seven items to School Organization and School-Plant; six items to School-Community Relations; and five items to Financial Management. Translation Translation validity was implemented by the following procedures. Since the native language of the 82 respondents is Arabic, the researcher translated the original instrument (English version) into Arabic for use in this study. The Arabic version was given to three native Saudi Arabian professors from the College of Education at King Faisal University. The Arabic version was also checked and revised by an Arabic language instructor from King Faisal University. In addition, both the Arabic and English versions of the questionnaire were submitted to the Foreign Languages Department at the College of Education, King Faisal University, to assure the accurateness of the translation. Both versions were formally approved by the department (see Appendix A). Back translation was also conducted to ascertain that words were translated accurately, and to ensure that phrases and words used conveyed equivalent meanings across the two languages. Furthermore, the questionnaire was pretested by administering it to five principals to check its clarity and comprehensibility. The results of all the above activities were taken into consideration in the final form of the instrument. Data Collection Before data collection began, the researcher secured the permission and support of King Faisal Uni- versity. The Vice-President of King Faisal University 83 sent formal letters to the superintendents of the Al-Hasa and the Eastern Province school districts, explaining the purpose and importance of the study and asking the superintendents to cooperate with the researcher in his conduct of the study. Consequently, the superintendents sent formal letters to all senior high school principals in both districts, asking then, in turn, to cooperate with the researcher. (Copies of these letters are in Appendix B). Data for this study were obtained directly from the principals by the investigator. Although the researcher might have sent the questionnaire through the. superintendent's offices to every senior high school included in the study, thus saving time, energy, and travelling expenses, it was felt that such an approach might affect the respondents' perceptions and cause bias in the responses. Thus, the researcher visited all senior high schools in the Al-Hasa and Eastern Province districts, and met personally with each principal to ensure that responses were obtained from all forty principals who participated in the study. The first school was visited on September 20, 1986, and the last school on December 15, 1986. Each principal was given the questionnaire and a personal letter that explained the nature and purpose of the study and solicited cooperation in the completion of 84 the survey. The letter emphasized that the study was in no way an attempt to evaluate the performance of any principal. Assurances of confidentiality and anonymity were made to all participants. (Copies of the Arabic and English cover letters are included in Appendix A). Each participant was urged to complete the questionnaire promptly but was given adequate time for responding. The researcher was present to assist respondents with overall comprehension of the nature and the purpose of the survey and with any problems they encountered in responding to the questionnaire. Responses were obtained from all forty principals, i.e., from 100 percent of the principals who participated in the study. Data Analysis This study investigated and compared both the actual and the preferred role, skills, and knowledge as they were perceived by senior high school principals in the Al-Hasa and Eastern Provinces. It should be noted that the principals who participated in this study were treated as if they were a random sample of a hypotheti- cal and larger population of principals who may hold the principalship position in the future. Therefore, the data were analyzed as follows: 85 1. Following data collection, the responses were tabulated, coded, and then transferred to computer sheets. The Michigan State University Computer Center's Cyber 750 system was employed in treating the data. 2. A _t-test was computed to test hypotheses one, two, three, and four. 3. Multivariate analysis and one-way analysis of variance were used to test hypotheses five through eleven. 4. The 0.05 alpha level was selected as the criterion for the rejection of the null hypotheses. 5. Descriptive statistics were used in the analysis and presentation of the data. The mean, standard deviation, and percentage were calculated. Null Hypotheses To determine possible answers to the research questions, the following null hypotheses were formulated and tested. Major Hypotheses H01: No significant differences exist between per- ceptions of role performed in current practice and perceptions of role as it might be performed in desired practice by senior high school principals in Al-Hasa (District 1). H02: No significant differences exist between per- ceived "actual" and perceived "preferred” level of knowledge and skill of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa. 86 No significant differences exist between percep- tions of role performed in current practice and perceptions of role as it might be performed in desired practice by senior high school princi- pals in Eastern Province (District 2). No significant differences exist between perceived ”actual" and perceived "preferred” level of knowledge and skills of senior high school principals in Eastern Province. Minor Hypotheses No significant differences exist between the perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and the perceptions of senior high school principals in the Eastern Province regarding their "actual" and their ”preferred“ role, skills and knowledge. No significant differences exist between age groups of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their perceptions of their "actual" and ”preferred” role, skills and knowledge. No significant differences exist between groups according to years of experience of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Pro- vince regarding their "actual” and “preferred" role, skills and knowledge. No significant differences exist between groups, according to years of teaching experience, of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their "actual" and "preferred" role, skills and knowledge. No significant differences exist between perceptions of senior high school principals of small schools and senior high school principals of large schools regarding their ”actual" and ”preferred” role, skills and knowledge. No significant differences exist between groups, according to number of native teachers in the school, of senior high principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their ”actual" and "preferred" role, skills and knowledge. 87 H011: No significant differences exist between groups, according to number of non-native teachers in the school, of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their "actual” and "preferred" role, skills and knowledge. Summary The methodology involved in this research-- including the population, the instrument used and its validation, translation of the instrument, data collection procedures, and techniques used to analyze the data--have been discussed in this chapter. Chapter V presents the analysis of the data and the results of this analysis. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSES This chapter analyzes the data gathered and reports the findings relevant to the hypotheses formu- lated in Chapter III. The data presented are based on responses given by 14 senior high school principals in Al-Hasa school district and by 26 senior high school principals in Eastern Province school district. This chapter is divided into three sections. The. first reports the demographic data. The second focuses upon the results of testing the eleven null hypotheses with which the study was concerned. The final section presents the results of comparing actual and preferred role, and actual and preferred skill and knowledge for each item on the questionnaire. Demographic Data The first part of the questionnaire elicited per- sonal and demographic data, including each principal's age, administrative experience, highest degree held, and teaching experience. Also obtained were data related to the size of the school and the number of native and non-native teachers in the school building. This 88 89 information is reported by frequency and percentages, and is displayed in Tables 1-8. Age Table 1 presents the distribution of the respon- dents by age. As the table shows, 10% or four, of the principals (one from District 1 and three from District 2) were under 30 years of age. Fifteen principals (five from District 1 and ten from District 2), or 37.5%, fell into the 31-35 age category. Of the forty principals, ten of them, or 25% (five from each district), were from 36 to 40 years of age. Three principals (one from Dis- trict 1 and two from District 2), or 7.5%, fell into the fourth age category of 41-45 years. Finally, six princi- pals (two from District 1 and four from District 2), or 15%, were from 46 to 50 years old; while only 2 respon- dents (from District 2), or 5%, were over 50 years old. Years of Experience as Principal The distribution of respondents according to years of experience as principal is shown in Table 2. There were five principals (two from District 1 and three from District 2), or 12.5%, who had one year of experience. Fourteen, or 35% of the respondents (four from District 1 and ten from District 2) had 2-5 years of experience; ten principals (six from District 1 and four from District 2), or 25% served 6-10 years as principals; 90 Table l--Age Distribution of Respondents. Number of Principals Age Al-Hasa Eastern Province Total % District 1 District 2 under 30 yrs 1 3 4 10% 31-35 yrs 5 10 15 37.5% 36-40 yrs 5 5 10 25% 41-45 yrs 1 2 3 7.5% 46-50 yrs 2 4 6 15% over 50 yrs 0 2 2 5% Total 14 26 40 100% five principals from District 2 (12.5%) were in the 11-15 years category; 10%, or four principals (two from each district), had from 16-19 years of experience; and only two respondents from District 2 (5%) served for more than 20 years as principals. \ Educational Level The responses, as shown in Table 3, showed that four principals (10%; one from District 1 and three from District 2) had a diploma in Education; 72.5% or twenty- nine principals (eleven from District 1 and eighteen from District 2) held bachelor's degrees; and 10%, or four of the respondents (two from each district), held master's degrees. Three principals (all from District 2) fell into the fourth category (other); two of these 91 Table 2--Distribution by Years of Experience of Respondents Number of Principals Years Al-Hasa Eastern Province Total % District 1 District 2 one year 2 3 5 12.5% 2-5 yrs 4 10 14 35% 6-10 yrs 6 4 10 25% 11-15 yrs 0 5 5 12.5% 16-19 yrs 2 2 4 10% 20 or more yrs 0 2 2 5% Total 14 26 40 100% three principals had only a middle school diploma, while the third had a high school diploma. Teaching Experience Table 4 displays the data related to the respon- dents' years of teaching experience. Nineteen (47.5%) principals (six from District 1 and thirteen from Dis- trict 2) taught for 1-3 years. Twelve (30%) principals (seven from District 1 and five from District 2) had from 4 to 7 years of teaching experience; while eight (20%) principals (one from District 1 and seven from District 2) fell into the 8 years or more category. Type of School Table 5 summarizes the data pertinent to the type of school where the principals had their teaching 92 Table 3--Distribution by Level of Education of the Respondents. Number of Principals Level of Al-Hasa Eastern Province Total % Education* District 1 District 2 Diploma in Education 1 3 4 10% Bachelor's degree 11 18 29 72.5% Master's degree 2 2 4 10% Other 0 3 3 7.5% Total 14 26 40 100% *(highest degree held) Table 4--Distribution by Teaching Experience of the Respondents. Number of Principals Years of Al-Hasa Eastern Province Total % Teaching District 1 District 2 1-3 yrs 6 13 19 47.5% 4-7 yrs 7 5 12 30% 8 yrs or more 1 7 8 20% Tetal 14 25 39 97.5% 93 Table 5--Distribution by Type of School where the Respondents Taught. Number of Principals Type of Al-Hasa Eastern Province Total % School District 1 District 2 Elementary I 4 6 10 25% Middle school 6 6 12 30% High school 4 13 17 42.5% Total 14 25 39 97.5% experience. Ten (25%) principals (four from District 1 and six from District 2) taught at an elementary school; twelve (30%; six from each district) at a middle school; and seventeen (42.5%; four from Lustrict l and thirteen. from District 2) at a high school. Size of the School . The responses displayed in Table 6 indicate that there were fourteen (35%) schools (six in Ifistrict l and eight in District 2) with a student population of 200 or less; 30%, or 12, schools (five in District 1 and seven in District 2) fell into the range of 201-400; seven (17.5%) schools (all in District 2) fell in the third category of 401-600; six (15%) schools (two in District 1 and four in Ifistrict 2) had a student population ranging from 601 to 800. Only one school (in District 1) had more than 800 students. 94 Table 6--Distribution of School Size by Number of Students. NUmber of Schools Number of Al-Hasa Eastern Province Total % Students District 1 District 2 200 or less 6 8 14 35% 201-400 5 7 12 30% 401-600 0 7 7 17.5% 601-800 2 4 6 15% more than 800 l 0 1 2.5% Total 14 26 40 100% Number of Native Teachers Table 7 displays information obtained about the number of native teachers in the schools in each dis- trict. Nine (22.5%) schools (three in District 1 and six in District 2) did not have any native teachers; nineteen (47.5%) schools (six in District 1 and thirteen in District 2) had one to four native teachers; eight schools (20%; four in each district) fell into the third category of five to eight teachers; and two schools (one in each district), or 5%, had nine to twelve native teachers. Only two schools (both in District 2), or 5%, had more than twelve native teachers. Number of Non-Native Teachers According to Table 8, twelve schools (five in Dis- trict l and seven in District 2) had from one to ten 95 Table 7--Distribution of Number of Native Teachers. Number of Schools 'Number of Al-Hasa Eastern Province Total % Teachers District 1 District 2 None 3 6 9 22.5% 1-4 6 13 19 47.5 5-8 4 4 8 20% 9-12 1 l 2 5% more than 12 0 2 2 5% Total 14 26 40 100% non-native teachers. Seventeen schools (six in District 1 and eleven in District 2) had eleven to twenty non- native teachers; eight schools (one in District 1 and seven in District 2) had from twenty-one to thirty non- native teachers; and three schools (two in District 1 and one in District 2) had thirty-one to forty non- native teachers. This indicates that 30% of the schools Table 8--Distribution of Number of Non-Native Teachers. NUmber of Schools Number of Al-Hasa Eastern Province Total % Teachers District 1 District 2 1-10 5 7 12 30 11-20 6 ll 17 42.5% 21-30 1 7 8 20% 31-40 2 l 3 7.5% Total 14 26 40 100% 96 had one to ten non-native teachers; 42.5% had eleven to twenty; 20% had twenty-one to thirty; and 7.5% had thirty-one to forty. Data Related to the Hypotheses Hypothesis 1; Actual and Preferred Role Differences in Al-Hasa The first hypothesis stated: 01: No significant differences exist between per- ceptions of role performed in current prac- tice and perceptions of role as it might be performed in desired practice by senior high school principals in Al-Hasa (District 1). A E-test was used to test the first hypothesis. Two mean scores (actual and preferred.role) were calculated for all 44 task items (covering all six areas of administrative responsibility). The result of the g-test is presented in Table 9. The mean score of the actual role was 3.04, while the mean score of the preferred role was 4.20. These scores produced a E-value of 11.07, rejecting Hypothesis 1 at the .001 Table 9--t-test Result of Comparing Actual and Preferred Role Perceptions of Senior High School Princi- pals in Al-Hasa. Mean ‘E Variable N Mean SD Diff. value p Decision Actual role 3.04 .49 14 1.16 11.07 .001 Reject Preferred H 1 role 4.20 .41 0 97 level of significance. Standard deviations were 0.49 for the actual role and 0.41 for the preferred role. The data were further examined to locate differ- ences between perceptions of actual and preferred role in terms of each of the six areas of responsibility. The result of the E-test comparing the actual and pre- ferred role, using the mean of the total score for each of the six areas, showed significant differences existed in five areas. As shown in Table 9.1, statistically significant differences existed at the .001 level of significance in the areas of Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development, Staff Personnel Administra- tion, School-Community Relations, and Financial Manage- ment. For Student Personnel Administration, significance was at the .001 level. No statistically significant differences were found in the area of School Organiza- tion and School Plant, which received the highest mean in perceived actual role and the lowest mean in per- ceived preferred role. Mean scores for actual role involvement ranged from 2.35 in Financial Management to 3.71 in School Organization and School Plant. Preferred role involve- ment produced mean scores ofgreater consistency, ranging from 3.88 in School Organization and School Plant to 4.36 in Staff Personnel Administration and in Student Personnel Administration, as shown in Table 9.1. 98 va a z Hoe. mm.m ~m.a um. ma.v mm. mm.~ Decadence: Hmwucmcwm .m Hoe. mm.h >~.H Ho. mm.v an. mo.m chMDmHmm howserOUnHoonom .m «mm. mm. ha. Ne. mm.m Np. H>.m pecan Hoonom one cowumuficmmuo Hoonom .v Hoo. ~H.¢ ow. mm. om.v aw. mm.m cofiumuunwcweoc Hmccomuom accosum .m Hoe. om.>~ Hv.a He. om.v mm. mm.m sawumuumwcfieom Hocconumm ummum .N Hoe. mv.ma om.a ee. mo.v om. hm.~ DowadoHo>oo anacofiuusu ocm dwnmuooooa achMuocuuucH .H m mo~n> M. .ufin one: am come on some cone oouuomoum Hcsuoc .MDMHMofiucommcm m>wumuunwce26¢ mo mowed xwm cw maou ooqumoum one amoeba messy mo ncouummouwm .namdfiocmum Hoonom new: newcmm onmmuacuna.m ounce 99 Figure 1 depicts the means of the responses regarding actual and preferred role involvement in each of the six areas of general responsibilities of the high school principal. The greatest mean difference between the actual and the preferred role was in the area of Financial Management (1.82), followed by Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development (1.50), Staff Personnel Administration (1.41), and School-Community Relations (1.27). In the area of Student Personnel Administration, the difference was only 0.80, however it was statistically significant. In School Organization and School Plant, the difference was very small (0.17); therefore no statistically significant difference was found. The preceding analysis suggests that senior high school principals in District 1 (Al-Hasa) thought that their actual role involvement was average (mean a 3.04), and that they preferred above average involvement in these six task areas (mean =- 4.20). In the area of Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development, the actual role involvement mean was 2.57, indicating below average involvement in the nine task items assigned to this area. The respondents preferred to have above average involvement in this area (mean - 4.08). The fourteen principals in District 1 perceived their actual role involvement in Staff Personnel Mean Response 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 100 Actual Role Preferred Role 4.36 4.36 /.’— - — ' 4.35 4.08/. ‘\ 3.33 .A\ 4.18 ‘ / . ‘ \'/. \’ 3.71 305?. 0 ....‘.o. 3.08 o O. I. . 0.. 2,095 .g. 2357 2.35 ‘5 h H c c c H F40 o o c find a 44 c c :14 u u o g c>m c m a u vlh :. u u oun Fifi #3“ u I: m e): cum L)@ m LJQ N 0 via and H :44 Fwd Fae u S.“ 33' ‘= 3 a 8 5 8 *3 5 8° m a mg :13 .1: no .cv-l c: as a. a. as as :5 Areas of Responsibility Figure 1--Means Assigned to Six Areas of Administrative Responsibility by Al-Hasa Senior High School Principals. 101 Administration as below average (mean =- 2.95), while they felt that they should be involved at an above average level (mean =- 4.36). The actual and preferred role involvement means for Student Personnel Administra- tion were 3.56 and 4.36, respectively, suggesting that there was little discrepancy between the actual and the preferred role, and that the respondents preferred little more involvement than what they actually have. In School Organization and School Plants, perceived actual role (mean - 3.71) was congruent with preferred role (mean - 3.88). For School-Community Relations, the respondents indicated that they wish to change current practice (mean - 3.08) in the direction of desired practice (mean = 4.35). For Financial Manage- ment also, respondents expressed desire for change from actual practice (mean = 2.35, which indicates below average involvenent) to preferred practice (mean - 4.18, which indicates above average involvement). The mean scores for the top three areas of pre- ferred role involvement--Staff Personnel Administration, Student Personnel Administration, and School-Community Relations--were 4.36, 4.36, and 4.35, respectively- This indicates that, generally, the senior high school principals of District I believed they should have above average involvement in these three areas. They further thought that their level of involvement in these areas 102 should exceed their level of involvement in the other three areas of responsibility--Financial Management, Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development, and School Organization and School Plant, with mean scores of 4.18, 4.08, and 3.88, respectively. It should be noted that, under the preferred condition, none of the six areas received a mean of 3 (average involvement). The lowest mean was 3.88, which is close to 4 (above average). A possible interpretation of this is that all six areas were considered essential areas of responsibility for the senior high school principal. Although Financial Management, Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development, and Staff Personnel Administration received high means under the preferred condition, they received the lowest mean scores (2.35, 2.57, and 2.95, respectively) under the actual condition. This indicates that these areas are not receiving the attention and proper involvement they deserve. The remaining three areas—-School-Community Relations, Student Personnel Administration, and School Organization and School Plant--received actual mean scores of 3.08, 3.56, and 3.71, respectively, indicating that the respondents' actual level of involvement in these areas is average to above average. 103 Hyppthesis 2; Actual and Preferred Skill and Knowledge of Differences in Al-Hasa The second hypothesis stated: H02: No significant differences exist between per- ceived "actual" and perceived "preferred" level of knowledge and skill of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa. A _t_-test was used to test this hypothesis. Two mean scores (actual and preferred levels of skill and know- ledge) were calculated for all 44 task items (covering all six areas of responsibility). Table 10 presents the results of the E-test. The mean scores for actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge were 3.17 and 4.33, respectively. These scores produced a Ervalue of. 8.91, rejecting Hypothesis 2 at the .001 level of signi- ficance. Standard deviations were 0.50 for the actual level of skill and knowledge and 0.38 for the preferred level. The data were further examined to locate differ- ences between perceptions of actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge in terms of each of the six areas of responsibility. The result of the g-test comparing the actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge, using the mean of the total score for each area, showed significant differences existed in every one of the six areas of responsibility. As displayed in Table 10.1, statistically significant differences were found at the .001 level of significance in the areas of Instructional 104 Table 10--_t_-test Result of Comparing Actual and Pre- ferred Level of Skill and Knowledge Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in Al-Hasa. Mean 5 Variable N Mean SD Diff. value p Decision Actual skill and knowledge 3.17 .50 14 1.15 8.91 .001 Reject Preferred H02 skill and 4.33 .38 knowledge Leadership and Curriculum Development, Staff Personnel Administration, Student-Personnel Administration, School- Community Relations, and Financial Management. For School Organization and School Plant, significance was at the .01 level. Mean scores for actual level of skill and knowledge ranged from 2.78 in Instructional Leadership and curricu- lum Development to 3.41 in Student Personnel Administra- tion and in School Organization and School Plant. Preferred level of skill and knowledge produced mean scores ranging from 3.96 in School Organization and School Plant to 4.49 in Staff Personnel Administration, as shown in Table 10.1. Figure 2 shows the means of the responses for actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge in each of the six areas of general responsibilities of the high school principal. It can be seen that the greatest mean difference was in the area of Instructional Leader- ship and Curriculum Development (mean difference - 1.54), 105 ea u z ace. HH.> mm.a Hm. om.v we. Hm.~ Decadence: Hmwocmcwm .o Hoe. mm.m ma.H vm. He.e mm. -.m maneumamm auwcsssoouaoonom .m Ho. mm.~ mm. as. om.m mm. Hw.m nomad Hoocom ocm sawumnficmmuo Hoonom .v Hoo. mm.m mo.H mm. nv.e mm. He.m cowumuumacwaoe Hoccomuom ucmosum .m Hoe. ~m.m mH.H mm. mv.v we. mN.m cofiumuumficweoa Hoccomuom mumum .m Hoe. Hm.ma em.H ov. mm.v we. mn.~ ucoeaoHo>oc EBHcOwuuco can mwzmuoocoa Hmc0wuosuumca .H a ocam> M. .wwo one: on some cm coma cone condemoum Hmsuoc oco Hmsuoe Leone mo unamumoOLom .auwawnwmcomumm o>fiumuumwcfieo¢ mo nomad new ca omooasocm one Hawxm mo Ho>oq oouuomoum .mammwocflum doonom cm“: uoHcom onm:n~¢nu~.ca canoe Mean Response 5.00 4.80 4.60 4.40 4.20 4.00 3.80 3.60 3.40 3.20 3.00 2.80 2.60 2.40 2.20 106 Actual Skill and Knowledge 3.29 2.78 a 0 W4 1.: G H 1..) G H g < Instructional Administration Staff Administration Student 3.41 School Preferred Skill and Knowledge 3.96 Organization 4.41 3.22 School Comm. Relations Areas of Responsibility L_, 2.91 Financial Figure 2--Comparison of Mean Scores of the Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge in Six Areas of Responsibility as Perceived by Al-Hasa Senior High School Principals. Management 4.30 107 followed by Financial Management (1.39), Staff Personnel Administration (1.19), School-Community Relations (1.19), Student Personnel Administration (1.06), and School Organization and School Plant (0.55). The preceding analysis suggests that senior high school principals in District 1 (Al-Hasa) thought their actual level of skill and knowledge to be average (mean =- 3.17), and that they preferred their level of skill and knowledge to be above average (mean - 4.33). In the area of Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Develop- ment, the mean for actual level of skill and knowledge was 2.78, indicating a below average level in the nine task items assigned to this area. Respondents wished to have an above average level of skill and knowledge (mean a 4.33) in order to perform the task items grouped under this.area. The fourteen principals perceived themselves as having average skill and knowledge (mean - 3.29) in Staff Personnel Administration, while they preferred to have above average skill and knowledge (mean - 4.49) in this area of responsibility. The means for actual level of skill and knowledge in Student Personnel Administra- tion and in School Organization and School Plant were the highest (both means a 3.41), suggesting that the respondents believed their actual level of skill and knowledge were average to above average in these two areas. The means for preferred skill and knowledge in 108 these two areas were 4.47 and 3.96, respectively. This indicates that the respondents wished to have an above average level of skill and knowledge in order to carry out the task items grouped under the area of Student Personnel Administration, while their actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge in School Organization and School Plant were almost the same. In the area of School-Community Relations, the fourteen respondents expressed a discrepancy between their actual skill and knowledge (mean . 3.22) and their preferred skill and knowledge (mean - 4.41). The discrepancy was even greater in the area of Financial Management, where respondents displayed a heightened. desire to have above average skills and knowledge (mean a 4.30) in order to perform the tasks grouped under this area when compared to their below average level of actual skill and knowledge in this area (mean a 2.91). The mean scores for the top three areas of pre- ferred role involvement--Staff Personnel Administration, Student Personnel Administration, and School-Community Relations--were 4.49, 4.47, and 4.41, respectively. This indicates that, generally, the senior high school principals of District 1 desired to have above average and far above average levels of skill and knowledge in order to perform the tasks grouped into these three areas. The other three areas--Financial Management, 109 Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development, and School Organization and School Plant--received mean scores of 4.33, 4.30, and 3.96, respectively, suggesting that the fourteen principals of District I wished to have average and above average levels of skill and knowledge to perform the tasks grouped into these three areas. It should be noted that, under the preferred condition, none of the six areas received a mean of 3 (average involvement). The lowest mean was 3.96, which is very close to 4 (above average). This might be interpreted as an indication of the importance of these areas to the role of the senior high school principal, and the high levels of skill and knowledge necessary to perform in these areas of responsibility. It also should be noted that the rating of role involvement was consistent with the rating of level of skill and knowledge. The top three mean scores occurred in the same areas in both role perception and in perception of skill and knowledge. Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Develop- ment, Financial Management, and School-Community Rela- tions received the lowest three mean scores (2.78, 2.91, and 3.22, respectively) under the actual condition. This suggests that senior high school principals of Al-Hasa perceived themselves as having below average to 110 average levels of skill and knowledge in the tasks grouped under these three areas of responsibility. Staff Personnel Administration,- Student Personnel Administra- tion, and School Organization and School Plant received mean scores of 3.29, 3.41, and 3.41, respectively, indi- cating that the respondents' from District I believed that they had average level of skill and knowledge in the tasks assigned to these areas. Hypothesis 3; Actual and Preferred Role Differences in Eastern Province The third hypothesis stated: H03: No significant differences exist between perceptions of role performed in current practice and perceptions of role as it might be performed in desired practice by senior high school principals in Eastern Province (District 2). A _t_:_-test was used to test this hypothesis. NO mean scores (actual and preferred role) were calculated for all 44 task items (covering all six areas of admini- strative responsibility). The result of the E-test is presented in Table 11. The mean score of the actual role was 3.21, while the mean score of the preferred role was 4.29. These scores produced a E-value of 13.48, rejecting Hypothesis 3 at the .001 level of significance. Standard deviations were 0.51 for the actual role and 0.33 for the preferred role. The data were further examined to locate differ- ences between perceptions of actual and preferred role 111 Table ll--£-Test Result of Comparing Actual and Preferred Role Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in Eastern Province. Mean 3 Variable N Mean SD Diff. value p Decision Actual role 3.21 .51 26 1.07 13.48 .001 Reject Preferred H03 role 4.29 .33 in terms of each of the six areas of responsibility. The result of the _t_-test comparing the actual and pre- ferred role, using the mean of the total score for each of the six areas, showed significant differences existed in five areas. No significant differences were found in one area. As shown in Table 11.1, statistically signifi- cant differences existed at the .001 level of signifi- cance in the areas of Instructional Leadership, Staff Personnel Administration, Student Personnel Administra- tion, School-Community Relations, and Financial Manage- ment. For School Organization and School Plant, no significant differences were found. This area received the highest mean in perceived actual role and the lowest mean in perceived preferred role. Mean scores for actual role involvement ranged from 2.63 in Financial Management to 3.64 in School Organization and School Plant. Preferred role involve- ment produced mean scores ranging from 3.92 in School 112 ma u z Hoe. vv.aa mm.H mm. oa.v mm. mo.~ Decadence: Hmwocmcfim .m Hoe. mm.m hH.H me. Hm.e mu. vm.m anewumawm unacceEoouaoonom .m oma. Hm.a mN. em. mm.m om. ew.m nomad Hoosom ocm aceumuficmmuo Hoonom .e Hoe. en.m me. he. om.v Hm. nm.m cOLDmuuanHaoe Hoccomuom ucoosam .m Hoo. mo.ha om.H mm. «m.e Hm. H~.m newumuumwcfiene Hmccouumm «may» .m Hoe. om.>a wv.a om. Hm.v em. mm.~ acoamoHo>oa asHsOLHHsU can mwnmumoooq Hoco«uosuuucu .H m osam> M. .uwn com: um coma am some none omuummoum Hcouoc .muwaenfimcommom m>fiumuuuficfieo¢ mo undue sew c“ oflom omuummoum ocm Hmsuoe mo mc0wuamouom .mflmmwocwum Hoosom no“: uOLcmm mocw>oum cumumnmuna.aa manna 113 Organization and School Plant to 4.52 in Staff Personnel Administration, as shown in Table 11.1. Figure 3 depicts the means of the responses regard- ing actual and preferred role involvement in each of the six areas of general responsibility of the high school principal. The greatest mean difference between actual and preferred role involvement was in the area of Financial Management (1.52), followed by Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development (1.46), Staff Personnel Administration (1.30), and School-Community Relations (1.17). In the area of Student Personnel Administration, the difference was only 0.73, however it was statistically significant. In School Organization and School Plant, the difference was 0.28; therefore no statistically significant difference was found. The preceding analysis suggests that senior high school principals in District 2 (Eastern Province) thought that their actual role involvement was average (mean = 3.21), but that they wished to have above average involvement in these six task areas (mean a 4.29). In the area of Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development, the mean for actual role involve- ment was 2.85, indicating below average involvement in the nine task items grouped under this area, yet the respondents preferred to have above average involvement in this area (mean a 4.31). 114 .......... Actual Role ._..._._.. Preferred Role 5.00 “-22 4.51 4.50 o/ \‘\4030 ‘ 4‘; '\ 3.92 . ‘\ 4-16 4) . ‘ t 2 4.00 \~ ‘ 2. 3.57 . 8 .‘000000; 64's.... 3 34 °‘ 3.50 .‘ ° ‘. c ' 2 ,.I 2 3.00 '...D 3.21 0.. 2.85 '. 8 2.50 2.63 2.00 h u G G G v-l H O O O G OH "-1 w-l G :3 GU J-I U 0 E O G O Q v-l H vii-a H H H on HG .414 u u m C.) G G! 43 um 01 an N 0 H5 3H 'I-I Gw-l v-lH v-l-I-l U H G ‘HG 0G OG OH coo u-H ‘H “DE 00 CG CG :5 33 a. a” as s= H< m< m< m5 mm mg Areas of Responsibility Figure 3--Means Assigned to Six Areas of Administrative Responsibility by Eastern Province Senioriligh School Principals. 115 The twenty-six principals in District 2 perceived their actual role involvement in Staff Personnel Admini- stration as average (mean = 3.21). They felt that they should be involved at an extent of above average to far above average in the nine task items assigned to this area (mean a 4.52) . The mean for actual role involve- ment in Student Personnel Administration was the second highest at 3.57, indicating that the respondents thought they had average involvement in this area. They preferred a little more involvement (mean I 4.30); the difference between the two means was only 0.73. School Organization and School Plants received the highest mean for actual role involvement (mean - 3.64). This sug- gests that the respondents considered their involvement in this area ‘to be more than in the other five areas, yet at the same time they preferred to be less involved (mean a 3.92, the lowest among the preferred means). In the area of School-Community Relations, the respondents showed their desire to change their actual practice (mean =- 3.34) of average involvement to preferred involvement of above average (mean a 4.51). The principals also expressed their below average involvement (mean =- 2.63) in the area of Financial Management, and their desire to change that to above average involvement (mean - 4.16). 116 The mean scores for the top three areas of pre- ferred role involvement--Staff Personnel Administration, School-Community Relations, and Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development--were 4.52, 4.51, and 4.31, respectively. This indicates that, generally, the senior high school principals of District 2 thought they should have above average to far above average involve- ment in these three areas. They further thought that their level of involvement in these areas should exceed their level of involvement in the other three areas of responsibility--Student Personnel Administration, Finan- cial Management, and School Organization and School Plant, with mean scores of 4.30, 4.16, and 3.92, respec- tively. It should be noted that, under the preferred condition, none of the six areas received a mean of 3 (average involvement). The lowest mean was 3.92, which is very close to 4 (above average). This might be interpreted as an indication of the importance of these six areas to the senior high school principal's role. Although Financial Management, Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development, and Staff Personnel Administration received high means under the preferred condition, they received the lowest mean scores (2.63, 2.85, and 3.21, respectively) under the actual condition. This indicates that these areas are not receiving the attention and proper involvement they 117 deserve. The other three areas--School-Community Relations, Student Personnel Administration, and School Organization and School Plant--received actual mean scores of 3.34, 3.57, and 3.64, respectively, indicating that the respondents felt they had an average to above average involvement in the task items grouped under these three areas. Hypothesis 4: Actual and Preferred Skill and Knowledge Differences in Eastern Province The fourth hypothesis stated: H 4: No significant differences exist between perceived "actual” and perceived "preferred“ level of knowledge and skills of senior high school principals in Eastern Province. A t-test was used to test this hypothesis. mo mean scores (actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge) were calculated for all 44 task items (covering all six areas of responsibility). Table 12 presents the results of the t-test. The mean scores for actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge were 3.41 and 4.40, respectively. These scores produced a t-value of 8.48, rejecting Hypothesis 4 at the .001 level of significance. Standard deviations were 0.73 for the actual level of skill and knowledge and 0.37 for the preferred level. . The data were further examined to locate differ- ences between perceptions of actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge in terms of each of the six areas 118 Table lZ-eg-Test Result of Comparing Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in Eastern Province. Mean 3 Variable N Mean SD Diff. value p Decision Actual skill and knowledge 3.41 .73 26 .99 8.48 .001 Reject Preferred H04 skill and 4.40 .37 knowledge of responsibility. The result of the t-test comparing the actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge, using the mean of the total score for each area, showed significant differences existed in every one of the six areas of responsibility. As presented in Table 12.1, statistically significant differences were found at the .001 level of significance in all six areas. Mean scores for actual level of skill and know- ledge ranged from 3.09 in Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development to 3.62 in Student Personnel Administration. Preferred level of skill and knowledge produced mean scores ranging from 4.13 in School Organi- zation and School Plant to 4.53 in School-Community/ Relations, as shown in Table 12.1. Figure 4 depicts the means of the responses for actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge in each area of the six general responsibilities of the 119 ll 2 mm Hoe. ma.» oH.H mm. vm.¢ ma.H ¢~.m ucmsmmmcmz Hmfiocmcfim .w Hoe. -.h vm. we. mm.w mm. mm.m mcofiumaom auwcsEEounaoonom .m doc. ~>.¢ hm. vs. ma.v on. ov.m ucmam Hoonom can cofiumuficmmuo Hoonom .v Hoo. m¢.m pm. mv. cm.v mm. ~m.m cowumuumficwaom Hmccomumm ucopsum .m doc. «5.5 mo.H mm. mm.v mm. v¢.m cowumuumwcfieuc chcomuom «muum .m Hoo. mv.HH m~.H cc. mm.v mm. mo.m ucoamoam>oo Esasoauusu 0cm mwnmumpqu Hmcowuosuumcn .a m os~m>.w .mflo com: on some am some nous vouuomoum amsuoc .auwaunfimcomnom o>wuouumacfiand mo mmoum xwm cw ompwazocu 0cm HHfixm mo Hm>oq couuououm 0cm Hmsuod mo acowumooumm .nammwocwum Hoonom am“: uoficom mocw>oum cuoumnmuta.ma manna Mean Response 5.00 4.80 4.60 4.40 4.20 4.00 3.80 3.60 3.40 3.20 3.00 2.80 2.60 2.40 2.20 Actual Skill and Knowledge EL09 Instructional Administration 4.52 3.44 F1 . Administration Staff 120 3.62 4.50 .__1. Student Administration 3.46 Preferred Skill and Knowledge 1:] 4.53 .r— 4.34 ‘—‘ 4.31 ELSB 3.24 a o O H U M 30) H: G G 00 N 0 H8 3: an °a 00 0Q g0 :25 :39: a. Areas of Responsibility Figure 4--Comparison of Mean Scores of the Actual and Preferred Level of Skill and Knowledge in Six Areas of Responsibility as Perceived by Eastern Province Senior High School Principals. 121 high school principal. It shows that the greatest mean difference was in the area of Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development (mean difference 8 1.28), followed by Financial Management (1.10), Staff Personnel Administration (1.08), School-Community Relations (0.94), Student Personnel Administration (0.87), and School Organization and School Plant (0.67). The preceding analysis suggests that senior high school principals in District 2 (Eastern Province) thought their actual level of skill and knowledge to be average (mean - 3.41), and that they preferred their level of skill and knowledge to be above average (mean =- 4.40). In the area of Instructional Leadership and Curriculum Development, the mean for actual level of skill and knowledge was 3.09, indicating an average level of skill in the nine task items grouped under this area. Respondents preferred to have an above average level of skill and knowledge (mean = 4.38) in order to perform the task items grouped under this area. The twenty-six principals of District 2 perceived themselves as having average skill and knowledge (mean a 3.44) in Staff Personnel Administration. They wished to have above average skill and knowledge (mean 8 4.52) in this area of responsibility. The mean for actual level of skill and knowledge in Student Personnel Administra- tion was the highest (3.62), suggesting that the 122 respondents believed their actual levels of skill and knowledge in this area was average to above average. However, they preferred to have above average to far above average skill and knowledge in this area (mean =- 4.50). In School Organization and School Plant, the respondents felt that in actuality they have average skill and knowledge (mean a 3.46), but preferred to have above average skill and knowledge in this area (mean =- 4.13). The level of actual skill and knowledge in School- Community Relations was perceived to be average to above average (mean a 3.58). But respondents felt they should have above average to far above average skill and knowledge to carry out their responsibility in this area (mean 8 4.53). The discrepancy was great between actual skill and knowledge (mean = 3.24) and preferred skill and knowledge (mean =- 4.34) in Financial Management. Respondents wished to have above average skills and knowledge instead of the average level they felt they actually have. The mean scores for the top three areas of pre- ferred role involvementu-School-Community Relations, Staff Personnel Administration, and Student Personnel Administration--were 4.53, 4.52, and 4.50, respectively, indicating that the senior high school principals of Eastern Province preferred to have above average to far 123 above average levels of skill and knowledge in order to perform the tasks grouped into these three areas. The other three areas--Instructional Leadership and Qirri- culum Development, Financial Management, and School Organization and School Plant--received mean scores of 4.38, 4.34, and 4.13, respectively, suggesting that the respondents preferred to have an above average level of skill and knowledge in these three areas. It should be noted that, under the preferred condition, none of the six areas received a mean of 4 (above average involvement). The lowest mean was 4.13. This suggests that the respondents felt these six areas to be critical to their role and that they wished to, have high levels of skill and knowledge in these areas in order to perform their role effectively. It also should be noted that the rating of role involvement was consistent with the rating of level of skill and knowledge. Those areas which received high means in role perception also received high means in skill and knowledge perception. Instructional leadership and Curriculum Develop- ment, Financial Management, and Staff Personnel Admini- stration received the lowest three mean scores (3.09, 3.24, and 3.44, respectively) under the actual condi- tion. This indicates that the twenty-six principals from District 2 considered themselves to have an average 124 level of skill and knowledge in these three areas. The other three areas--School Organization and School Plant, School-Community Relations, and Student Personnel Administration--received mean scores of 3.46, 3.58, and 3.62, respectively, which suggests that senior high school principals of Eastern Province had average to above average levels of skill and knowledge in these three areas. Hypothesis SiyActual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Differences by D istrict The fifth hypothesis stated: 5: No significant differences exist between the perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and the perceptions of senior high school principals in the Eastern Province regarding their "actual" and their "preferred” role, skills and knowledge. To test this hypothesis, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used. Table 13 shows the results of MANOVA relative to the differences between the two districts in their overall perceptions of actual and preferred role and of actual and preferred skill and knowledge on the summed data obtained from all 44 task items. The test produced an 3: value of 0.303, indicat- ing no significant differences existed between the two districts in overall perceptions of actual and preferred role and of actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Hypothesis five was not rejected at the 0.05 level of significance. 125 Table 13--MANOVA and ANOVA Results for Comparing the Perception of Senior High School Principals in District 1 (Al-Hasa) with the Perceptions of Senior High School Principals in District 2 (Eastern ProvinCe) Regarding Their Actual and Preferred Role, Skills and Knowledge. Test F p Significance MANOVA 0.303 0.87 No sig. H05 was not rejected ANOVA Actual Role 1.021 0.319 No significance Preferred Role 0.473 0.496 No significance Actual Skill & Knowledge 1.164 0.287 No significance Preferred Skill 8 Knowledge 0.347 0.559 No significance ANOVA was used for further examination of the data to locate differences between the two districts in any one of the four outcomes (actual role; preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and knowb ledge). The test produced g values of 1.021, 0.473, 1.164, and 0.347, respectively, indicating that no signi- ficant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the two districts in any one of these four outcomes. Table 13 shows the results of ANOVA. Figure 5 depicts the means of the actual role, the preferred role, actual skill and knowledge and preferred skill and knowledge for both districts (Al-Hasa and Eastern Province). The difference between the means for actual role perception of Al-Hasa and Eastern Province is only 0.17. Al-Hasa's mean for preferred role 126 Role Perception Level of Skill and Knowledge Perception Mean Response 5.00 4.40 4.50 4.29 473: .— 4.20 "'— 4.00 3 50 1L4l 3.21 3.17 3.00 2.50 2.00 i Eastern Eastern Al-Hasa Province Al-Hasa Province Actual - Preferred . I Figure 5--Comparison of Mean Scores of the Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge of Senior High School Principals in Both Districts Based on the Scores of All 44 Items. 127 perception was 4.20, while Eastern Province's was 4.29, indicating a difference of 0.09. The means for actual skill and knowledge were 3.17 for Al-Hasa and 3.41 for Eastern Province, thus exhibit— ing a difference of 0.24. The difference between the two districts' means for preferred skill and knowledge was only 0.07. These indicate very slight differences between the two districts, in general. It was apparent that there was a high level of agreement between the principals from both districts regarding their actual and preferred role, and their actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Hypothesis 6; Effect of Age on Actual and Preferred Role, SkiTl and Knowledge The sixth hypothesis stated: H 6: No significant differences exist between age groups of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their perceptions of their "actual” and "preferred" role, skills and knowledge. MANOVA and ANOVA were used to test this hypothe- sis. As shown in Table 14, the multivariate analysis (MANOVA) indicated that no significant differences existed between the age groups in their overall percep- tions of actual and preferred role and of actual and preferred skill and knowledge. The test produced an 5 value of 1.436, indicating no significant differences existed between the three age groups (under 36 years; 128 36-40 years; and above 40 years) regarding their actual and preferred role and actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Hypothesis six was not rejected at the 0.05 level of significance. Table l4--MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Age on the Overall Actual and Preferrec Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions. Test F p Significance MANOVA 1.436 0.197 No sig. H06 was not rejected ANOVA Actual Role 0.071 0.931 No significance Preferred Role 1.339 0.275 No significance Actual S kill a Knowledge 0.234 0.792 No significance Preferred Skill 5 Knowledge 3.449 0.042 Significant ANOVA was used for further examination of the data to locate differences between the two districts in any one of the four outcomes (actual role; preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and knowledge). The test produced F values of 0.071, 1.339, 0.234, and 3.449, respectively, indicating that no significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the three age groups with regard to their means for actual role, preferred role, and actual skill and knowledge. However, a significant difference was found in preferred skill and knowledge at the 0.05 level. 129 Hypothesis 7: Effect of Years of Experience on Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge The seventh hypothesis stated: 7: No significant differences exist between groups according to years of experience of senior high school principals in Al—Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their "actual” and "preferred" role, skills and knowledge. To test this hypothesis, MANOVA and ANOVA were used. As shown in Table 15, the multivariate analysis (MANOVA) produced an g—value of 0.909, indicating that no signi- ficant differences existed between the three groups' overall perceptions regarding their actual and preferred role and actual and preferred skill and knowledge. The three groups according to years of experience were (1) 5 years and below, (2) 6-10 years, and (3) more than 10 years. Hypothesis seven was not rejected at the 0.05 level of significance. ANOVA was used for further examination of the data to locate differences between the three groups in any one of the four outcomes (actual role; preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and know- ledge). The test produced _F_ values of 1.975, 1.099, 0.175, and 0.033, respectively, indicating that no signi- ficant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the three age groups with regard to their means for actual role, preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and knowledge. Table 15 shows the results of ANOVA. 130 Table lS-—MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Years of Experience on the Overall Actual and Preferrec.Role, Skill and Knowledge Percep- tions. Test F p Significance MANOVA 0.909 0.514 No Sig. H07 was not rejected ANOVA Actual Role 1.975 0.153 No significance Preferrec.Role 1.099 0.344 No significance Actual Skill & Knowledge 0.175 0.839 No significance Preferred Skill & Knowledge 0.033 0.967 No significance Hypothesis 8; Effect of Years of Teaching Experience on Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge The eighth hypothesis stated: 8: No significant differences exist between groups, according to years of teaching experience, of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their "actual" and "preferred" role, skills and knowledge. This hypothesis was tested by using MANOVA and ANOVA. As Table 16 shows, the multivariate analysis (MANOVA) produced an 5 value of 0.492, indicating that no significant differences existed between principals who taught for 5 years or less and principals who taught for 6 years or more regarding their overall perception of their actual and preferred role and of their actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Hypothesis eight was not rejected at the 0.05 level of significance. 131 The data were further examined to locate differ- ences between these groups in any one of the four outcomes (actual role; preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and knowledge). For this purpose, ANOVA was used. The test produced g values of 0.001, 0.061, 0.362, and 2.449, respectively, indicating that In: significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between those two groups of senior high school principals regarding their means for actual role, preferred role, and their actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Table 16 shows the results of ANOVA. Table l6--MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Teaching Experience on the Overall Actual and Preferrec.Role, Skill and Knowledge Percep- tions. Test F p Significance MANOVA 0.869 0.492 NO Sig. H08 was not rejected ANOVA Actual Role 0.001 0.986 No significance Preferred Role 0.061 0.805 No significance Actual Skill 8 Knowledge 0.362 0.551 No significance Preferred Skill & Knowledge 2.449 0.126 No significance Hypothesis 9;yEffect of School Size on Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge The ninth hypothesis stated: H09: No significant differences exist between per- ceptions of senior high school principals of small schools and senior high school princi— pals of large schools regarding their "actual” and "preferred” role, skills and knowledge. 132 To test this hypothesis, MANOVA and ANOVA were used. As Table 17 shows, the multivariate analysis (MANOVA) produced an F value of 1.800, indicating that no significant differences existed between the two groups of principals regarding their overall perception of their actual and preferred role and of their actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Hypothesis nine was not rejected at the 0.05 level of significance. It should be noted that school size was determined by the number of students. Schools with an enrollment of 300 students or less were considered small schools, while those with more than 300 students were considered large. Table l7--MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Size of School on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions. Test F p Significance MANOVA 1.800 0.151 No Sig. H09 was not rejected ANOVA Actual Role 2.666 0.111 No significance Preferred Role 7.754 0.008 Significant Actual 8 kill 8 Knowledge 0.849 0.363 No significance Preferred Skill 8 Knowledge 3.568 0.067 No significance ANOVA was used for further examination of the data to locate differences between these groups in any one of the .four outcomes (actual role; preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and knowledge). 133 The test produced F values of 2.666, 7. 754, 0.849, and 3.568, respectively, indicating that no significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between those two groups of principals regarding their actual role, actual level of skill and knowledge, and preferred level of skill and knowledge. However, significant differ- ences, at the .008 level, were found between the two groups regarding their preferred role. Table 17 shows the results of ANOVA. Hypothesis 10; Effect of Number of Native Teachers on Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge The tenth hypothesis stated: 10: No significant differences exist between groups, according to number of native teachers in the school, of senior high principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their "actual” and "preferred” role, skills and knowledge. MANOVA and ANOVA were used to test this hypothe- sis. As shown in Table 18, the multivariate analysis (MANOVA) produced an F value of 1.183, indicating that no significant differences existed between the two groups of principals (principals in schools having 3 or less native teachers and principals in schools having 4 or more native teachers) regarding their overall percep- tion of their actual and preferred role and of their actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Hypothesis ten was not rejected at the 0.05 level of significance. 134 Table l8--MANOVA.and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Number of Native Teachers on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Know- ledge Perceptions. Test F p Significance MANOVA 1.183 0.335 No Sig. H010 was not rejected ANOVA Actual Role 3.904 0.056 No significance Preferred Role 2.252 0.142 No significance Actual Skill & Knowledge 4.049 0.051 Significant Preferred Skill 5 Knowledge 1.271 0.267 No significance ANOVA was used for further examination of the data to locate differences between the two groups in any one of the four outcomes (actual role, preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and knowledge). The test produced 2 values of 3.904, 2.252, 4.049, and 1.271, respectiveLy. This indicates that no significant differences, at the .05 level, existed between the two groups of principals regarding their perceptions of actual role, preferred role, and preferred level of skill and knowledge. However, significant differences, at the .05 level, were found between the two groups regarding their perceptions of actual skill and knowledge. Table 18 shows the result of ANOVA. 135 Hypothesis 11; Effect of Number of Non-Native Teachers on Actual and Preferred Role; Skill and Knowledge The eleventh hypothesis stated: 011: No significant differences exist between groups, according to number of non-native teachers in the school, of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their "actual“ and ”preferred” role, skills and knowledge. To test this hypothesis, MANOVA and ANOVA were used. As shown in Table 19, the multivariate analysis (MANOVA) produced an _F_ value of 1.021, indicating that no significant differences existed between the two groups of principals (principals in schools having 15 or less non-native teachers and principals in schools having 16 or more non-native teachers) regarding their overall perception of their actual and preferred role and of their actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Hypothesis eleven was not rejected at the 0.05 level of significance. Table l9--MANOVA and ANOVA Results of the Effect of Number of Non-Native Teachers on the Overall Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Perceptions. Test F p Significance MANOVA 1.021 0.410 No Sig. H011 was not rejected ANOVA Actual Role 2.833 0.101 No significance Preferred Role 3.425 0.072 No significance Actual Skill & Knowledge 1.415 0.242 No significance Preferred Skill & Knowledge 0.785 0.381 No significance 136 ANOVA was used for further examination of the data to locate differences between the two groups in any one of the four outcomes (actual role, preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and knowledge). The test produced 1!: values of 2.833, 3.425, 1.415, and 0.785, respectively. This indicates that no significant differences, at the .05 level, existed between the two groups of principals regarding their perceptions of actual role, preferred role, actual skill and knowledge, and preferred skill and knowledge. Table 19 shows the result of ANOVA. Other Related Da ta Role Perception by Item Senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province assessed their involvement in 44 task items, rating their perceived actual involvement versus their perceived preferred involvement. Two mean scores, actual and preferred role involvement, were calculated for each one of the 44 task items in the questionnaire. These two mean scores were compared by using the t-test. The results are show in Table 20. Statistically significant differences existed between actual practice and preferred practice for 39 of the 44 items. Only five of the 44 items revealed no 137 Table 20--t-Test Results of Comparing Actual and ‘Preferrec Role Perceptions of All Forty Principals in Each of the 44 Items. Mean of Mean of Actual Preferred Mean Item N Role SD Role SD Diff. Eevalue p l 40 3.47 .90 4.67 .57 1.20 9.22 .001 2 40 3.10 1.00 4.40 .67 1.30 9.31 .001 3 40 3.85 .89 4.72 .55 0.85 6.49 .001 4 40 2.67 1.20 4.32 .73 1.65 8.94 .001 5 40 1.17 .44 3.65 1.00 2.47 15.46 .001 6 40 3.67 .79 4.60 .59 .92 8.02 .001 7 40 1.97 .92 3.67 .99 1.70 10.84 .001 8 40 1.27 .59 3.37 1.07 2.10 12.86 .001 9 40 3.62 .83 4.70 .46 1.07 9.80 .001 10 40 3.32 .82 4.27 .75 .95 7.37 .001 ll 40 3.30 1.06 4.73 .86 1.07 7.00 .001 12 40 3.62 .92 4.50 .96 .87 6.07 .001 13 40 4.05 .74 4.90 .30 .85 7.68 .001 14 40 3.92 .82 4.57 .67 .65 5.34 .000 15 40 4.00 .90 4.80 .46 .80 6.68 .001 16 40 2.85 1.27 4.47 .67 1.62 8.79 .001 17 40 1.35 .73 4.05 .81 2.40 21.59 .001 18 40 1.67 .88 4.25 .80 2.57 16.13 .001 19 40 4.25 .67 4.82 .44 .57 5.39 .001 20 40 3.90 .84 4.15 1.16 .25 1.12 .269 21 40 3.02 1.00 4.20 .75 1.17 7.76 .001 Table 20--Continued 138 Mean of Mean of Actual Preferred Mean Item N Role SD Role SD Diff. IE-value p 22 40 3.07 1.40 4.07 1.09 1.00 4.53 .001 23 40 3.47 1.13 4.35 .97 .87 6.73 .001 24 40 3.62 .86 4.52 .64 .90 7.65 .001 25 40 3.15 1.16 4.05 .87 .90 5.51 .001 26 40 4.05 .98 4.42 .95 .37 1.92 .062 27 40 3.45 1.23 4.07 1.11 .62 2.92 .006 28 40 3.87 1.09 4.07 1.04 .20 0.89 .378 29 40 3.97 1.02 4.37 .86 .40 2.39 .022 30 40 3.67 1.09 3.97 1.18 .30 1.45 .154 31 40 3.12 1.06 3.90 1.15 .77 5.50 .001 32 40 3.42 1.29 3.60 1.21 .17 .084 .406 33 40 4.17 .81 3.40 1.21 .77 3.21 .003 34 40 3.10 1.15 4.40 .77 1.30 8.29 .001 35 40 3.62 1.03 4.60 .54 .97 6.92 .001 36 40 3.90 1.00 4.60 .70 .70 4.86 .001 37 40 2.22 1.14 4.17 .90 1.95 10.90 .001 38 40 3.70 1.04 4.65 .58 .95 6.44 .001 39 40 2.97 1.33 4.35 .83 1.37 8.44 .001 40 40 2.45 1.58 4.17 .98 1.72 8.03. .001 41 40 3.60 1.41 4.45 .81 .85 4.37 .001 42 40 2.90 1.48 4.42 .87 1.52 7.78 .001 43 40 1.07 .26 3.67 1.04 2.60 15.55 .001 44 40 2.67 1.34 4.12 .88 1.45 8.45 .001 139 significant difference at the 0.05 level. These items were as follows: Item 20 - Supervise student attendance accounting As shown in Table 20, the actual role involvement mean score for Item 20 was 3.90; the preferred role involvement mean score was 4.15. These two mean scores produced a t-value of 1.12, indicating no significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the actual and the preferred practices. The mean difference was only 0.25, suggesting a very slight discrepancy between what principals do and what they wish to do regarding this task item. Item 26 - Study students' records to ensure that these records are properly completed and filed. As shown in Table 20, the actual role involvement mean score for Item 26 was 4.05; the preferred role involvement mean score was 4.42. These two mean scores produced a t—value of 1.92, indicating no significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the actual and the preferred practices. In this task item, senior high school principals in both districts perceived themselves as having above average level of involvement; they desired the same level of involvement. The difference between the two means was 0.37, 140 suggesting very little discrepancy between actual and preferred practice. Item 28 — Supervise the receiving and distribution of supplies, textbooks, and equipment. As shown in Table 20, the actual role involvement mean score for Item 28 was 3.87; the preferred role involvement mean score was 4.07. These two mean scores produced a t-value of 0.89, indicating no significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the actual and the preferred practices. The difference between the two means was only 0.20, suggesting that senior high school principals viewed the actual level of involvement as congruent with their preferred level of involvement in this task item. Item 30 - FBtablish and maintain an accurate inventory of equipment and materials assigned to the school. As shown in Table 20, the actual role involvement mean score for Item 30 was 3.67; the preferred role involvement mean score was 3.97. These two mean scores produced a t-value of 1.45, indicating no significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the actual and the preferred practices. Senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province perceived themselves as having an average level of involvement in this task item, and wished to keep their involvement at 141 the same level (average). The difference between the two means was only 0.30, suggesting that actual practice and preferred practice were highly congruent. Item 32 - Prepare the school schedule. As shown in Table 20, the actual role involvement mean score for Item 32 was 3.42; the preferred role involvement mean score was 3.60. These two mean scores produced a _t_:_-value of 0.84, indicating no significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the actual and the preferred practices. Actual role involve- ment was perceived by senior high school principals as average, and they wished to have the same level of involvement in this task item. The difference between the two means was only 0.17, suggesting a very slight discrepancy between actual and preferred practice. Senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province expressed desire to see a difference between their actual and preferred practices in 39 of the 44 items. For all these 39 items, the differences were statistically significant, and the mean scores for the preferred practice were greater than the mean scores for actual practice. The exception was one item where mean score for actual practice was higher than the mean score for preferred practice. That item was: 142 Item 33 - Am involved with actions and paper work, such as directives and correspondence with the Ministry. As shown in Table 20, the mean score for actual role involvement for Item 33 was 4.17, while the mean score for preferred role involvement was 3.40. These two mean scores indicate that senior high school princi- pals perceived their actual involvement as above average in this task item; however, they wished to have less involvement (average). One could speculate that this task was perceived either as unimportant to the principal's role, or was viewed as an overwhelming task. The mean difference between actual practice and preferred practice was calculated for every item in the questionnaire. The differences ranged from a high of 2.60 to a low of 0.17. The higher the difference, the higher the discrepancy between actual and preferred role involvement. As shown in Table 20, the five top mean differences were found for Items 43, 18, 5, 17, and 8. Item 43 - Participating in determining the budget allocation for the school. As shown in Table 20, the actual role involvement mean score for Item 43 was 1.07, while the preferred role involvement mean score was 3.67. These scores indicate that senior high school principals in both districts perceived themselves as having no involvement 143 or far below average involvement in this task item. On the other hand, they wished to have average involvement. The mean difference was 2.60, the highest discrepancy between what senior high school principals do and what they think they should do. Item 18 - Participate in decisions regarding the transfer of staff members from or to the school. As shown in Table 20, the mean score for actual role involvement for Item 18 was 1.67, while the preferred role involvement mean score was 4.25. These two produced a mean difference of 2.57, suggesting a very high discrepancy between what senior high school principals actually do and what they prefer to do. They perceived themselves as having no involvement or far below average involvement in this task item. However, they wished to have above average involvement in decisions regarding the transfer of staff members from and to the school. Item 5 - Participate in curriculum development. As shown in Table 20, the mean score for actual role involvement for Item 5 was 1.17, while the pre- ferred role involvement mean score was 3.65. The mean difference was 2.47, indicating a very high discrepancy between what senior high school principals currently do and what they think they should do. They perceived 144 themselves as having no involvement or far below average involvement in this task item. They felt that they should have average participation in curriculum development. Item 17 — Participate in selection and assignment of personnel. As shown in Table 20, the mean score for actual role involvement for Item 17 was 1.35, while the preferred role involvement mean score was 4.05. The mean difference was 2.40, indicating a very high discrepancy between what senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province currently do and what they believe they should do. In actual practice, they haveno involvement or far below average involvement in the process of selecting and assigning personnel. Their preference was for above average involvement in this task. Item 8 - Conduct demonstration lessons for teachers. As shown in Table 20, the task item received 1.27 as a mean score for actual role involvement, while 3.37 was the mean score for preferredrole involvement. The mean difference was 2.10., indicating a very high discrepancy between the actual and preferred practices of senior high school principals in both school dis- tricts. The principals perceived themselves as having 145 no involvement or far below average involvement in conducting demonstration lessons for their teachers. However, they wished to have average involvement in this process. Skill and Knowledge Perception by Item Senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province assessed their level of skill and know- ledge in 44 task items, rating their perceived actual level of skill and knowledge versus their perceived preferred level of skill and knowledge. Two mean scores, actual and preferred skill and knowledge, were. calculated for each of the 44 items in the question- naire. These two mean scores were compared by using the E—test. The results are presented in Table 21. Statistically significant differences, at the .000 level, existed between actual skill and knowledge and preferred skill and knowledge for 43 of the 44 items. Only one item revealed no significant difference, at the .05 level, between the actual and the preferred levels of skill and knowledge. This item was: Item 33 - Am involved with actions and paper work, such as directives and correspondence with the Ministry As shown in Table 21, the actual skill and know- ledge mean score for this item was 3.92, and the preferred skill and knowledge mean score was 3.75. 146 Table 21-15-Test Results of Comparing Actual and Preferred Skill and Knowledge Perceptions of All Forty Principals in Each of the 44 Items. Mean of Mean of Actual Preferred Mean Item N Skill SD Skill SD Diff. IE-value p 1 40 3.15 1.00 4.47 .64 1.32 9.76' .001 2 40 3.00 1.10 4.47 .59 1.47 10.30 .001 3 40 3.45 .74 4.77 .48 1.32 11.48 .001 4 40 2.90 1.00 4.50 .59 1.60 9.80 .001 5 40 2.57 1.05 4.05 .98 1.47 8.24 .001 6 40 3.47 1.01 4.55 .59 1.07 7.42 .001 7 40 2.47 1.15 3.80 1.15 1.32 8.20 .001 8 40 2.62 1.10 4.10 .95 1.47 9.71 .001 9 40 3.25 .89 4.55 .63 1.30 10.39 .001 10 40 3.45 .95 4.50 .64 1.05 7.85 .001 11 40 3.47 .98 4.50 .75 1.02 8.10 .001 12 40 3.50 .98 4.57 .63 1.07 7.92 .001 13 40 3.75 1.12 4.67 .57 .92 5.72 .001 14 40 3.65 .92 4.55 .63 .90 7.03 .001 15 40 3.70 1.09 4.72 .55 1.02 7.52 .001 16 40 3.35 1.07 4.50 .67 1.15 7.89 .001 17 40 2.70 1.20 4.30 .72 1.60 8.80 .001 18 40 2.97 1.23 4.32 .73 1.35 7.77 .001 19 40 3.97 .86 4.80 .51 .82 5.45 .001 20 40 3.90 1.08 4.47 .96 .57 4.03 .001 21 40 3.27 .87 4.47 .67 1.20 8.08 .001 147 Table 21--Continued Mean of Mean of Actual Preferred Mean Item N Skill SD Skill SD Diff. t-value p 22 40 3.37 1.17 4.32 .97 .95 4.25 .001 23 40 3.50 .87 4.47 .71 .97 6.92 .001 24 40 3.42 .98 4.62 .58 1.20 8.08 .001 25 40 3.17 1.10 4.25 .77 1.07 6.08 .001 26 40 3.80 .99 4.52 .78 .72 5.06 .001 27 40 3.02 1.18 4.15 1.00 1.12 7.17 .006 28 40 3.52 .84 4.10 .95 .57 3.91 .001 29 40 3.65 1.02 4.42 .93 .77 5.18 .001 30 40 3.37 1.03 4.02 1.09 .65 3.91 .001 31 40 3.17 1.10 3.90 1.21 .72 4.22 .001 32 40 3.47 .93 4.20 1.04 .72 4.65 .001 33 40 3.92 .91 3.75 1.23 .17 0.89 .337 34 40 3.40 1.12 4.37 .89 .97 7.15 .001 35 40 3.67 .97 4.65 .62 .97 7.41 .001 36 40 3.60 .92 4.60 .49 1.00 7.21 .001 37 40 3.05 1.06 4.35 .86 1.30 7.89 .001 38 40 3.50 .84 4.47 .71 .79 8.03 .001 39 40 3.52 1.08 4.50 .64 .97 6.92 .001 40 40 3.15 1.18 4.12 .85 .97 6.17 .001 41 40 3.45 1.28 4.47 .75 1.02 5.27 .001 42 40 3.15 1.18 4.52 .67 1.37 7.43 .001 43 40 2.82 1.03 4.17 .87 1.35 9.88 .001 44 40 3.07 1.11 4.35 .77 1.27 7.96 .001 .148 These two scores produced a _t_-value of 0.89, indicating no significant differences, at the 0.05 level, existed between the actual and the preferred level of skill and knowledge. Senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province perceived themselves as having average skill and knowledge in this task, and they wished to maintain the same level. However, it should be noted that the mean score for actual skill and knowledge was higher than that for preferred skill and knowledge by 0.17. This suggests that the respondents wished less skill and knowledge in this task item than what they currently have. The mean difference between actual and preferred skill and knowledge was calculated for every item in the questionnaire. The differences ranged from a high of 1.60 to a low of 0.17. The higher the difference, the higher the discrepancy between the actual and the preferred level of skill and knowledge. As shown in Table 21, the five top mean differences were found for Items 4, 17, 2, 5, and 8. Item 4 - Inform teachers of new findings in educational research As Table 21 shows, the mean score for actual skill and knowledge for Item 4 was 2.90, while it was 4.50 for the preferred skill and knowledge. The mean difference was 1.60, indicating a high discrepancy between the 149 actual skill and knowledge available to senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province to carry out this task and the level of preferred skill and knowledge. The principals perceived themselves as having below average skill and knowledge needed to carry out the task of informing their teachers of new findings in educational research, yet they wished to have above average skill and knowledge in this task item. Item 17 - Participate in selection and assignment of personnel As shown in Table 21, the mean score for actual skill and knowledge for Item 17 was 2.70, whereas the mean score for preferred skill and knowledge was 4.30. The mean difference was 1.60, suggesting a high discrepancy between the actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge in this task item. Senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province perceived themselves as having below average skill and knowledge needed to participate in the selection and assignment of personnel. Their desire, however, was to have above average skill and knowledge in this process. Item 2 - Identify teachers' in-service training needs ,As shown in Table 21, the mean score for actual skill and knowledge for Item 2 was 3.00, while the mean score for preferred skill and knowledge was 4.47. The 150 mean difference was 1.47, suggesting a high discrepancy between the actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge in this task item. Senior high school princi- pals in both school districts perceived their actual level of skill and knowledge in identifying teachers' in-service training needs to be average. However, they preferred to have an above average level of skill and knowledge in this task. Item 5 - Participate in curriculum development As shown in Table 21, the mean score for actual skill and knowledge for Item 5 was 2.57, while the mean score for preferred skill and knowledge was 4.05. The mean difference was 1.47, suggesting a high discrepancy between the actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge in this task item. Senior high school principals in both school districts perceived their actual level of skill and knowledge in curriculum development to be below average, while their desire was for above average skill and knowledge. Item 8 - Conduct demonstration lessons for teacher As shown in Table 21, the mean score for actual skill and knowledge for Item 8 was 2.62, while the mean score for preferred skill and knowledge was 4.10. The mean difference was 1.47, suggesting a high discrepancy 151 between the actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge in this task item. Senior high school princi- pals in Al-Hasa and Eastern ,Province perceived their actual level of skill and knowledge in conducting demon- stration lessons to be below average. They desired, however, to have above average skill and knowledge in this task. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Analysis of literature on the principalship revealed the importance of the principal's role in educational improvement and school effectiveness. In the case of Saudi Arabia, educational administrators have not played an active leadership role because their role is ambiguous, their responsibilities are undefined, and they lack the required skills and knowledge. In addition, societal demands on the school have grown. In turn, the role of the principal has grown more complex, demanding, and important. Due to this, it is imperative that there be continual examination and clarification of the role of the principal and the skills and knowledge needed to carry out that role. In an effort to determine what the senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province school districts perceive to be their actual and preferred role involvement, and their actual and preferred levels of skill and knowledge, this study was undertaken. The instrument used for this study was developed after an extensive search of the literature, including a 152 153 review of instruments used in similar studies. All senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province identified by the Ministry of Education were invited to participate in this study. Data were collected from all forty principals. Eleven null hypotheses were formulated in order to answer the research questions. Demographic data were analyzed by using percentages. The t-test was used to test Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4, while MANOVA and ANOVA were used to test Hypotheses 5 through 11. Summary of Findings The findings for each research question were as follows: Question 1; Actual and Preferred Role Differences in Al-Hasa Are there discrepancies between the actual and the preferred role perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa? The data collected in this study revealed signifi- cant differences at the .001 level between perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa regarding their actual and preferred role involvement in the areas of Instructional Leadership, Staff Administration, Student Personnel Administration, School-Community Relations, and Financial Management. The difference found was a directional one. In these five areas of 154 administration, the principals perceived their actual involvement at a lower level than their preferred involvement. Only in School Organization there were no signifi- cant differences at the .05 level between perceived actual and perceived preferred role involvement. How- ever, the data revealed a significant difference at the .001 level between actual and preferred role involvement for all six areas of responsibility combined (all 44 items). (Question 2; Actual and Preferred Skill and Knowledge Differences in Al-Hasa Are there discrepancies between perceptions of the actual and the preferred level of skill and know- ledge of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa? According to the findings of this study, signifi- cant differences at the .01 level were found between perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa regarding their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge in each individual area and in the total of all areas of administration. The data also revealed that in all six areas of responsibility the principals perceived their actual skill and knowledge at a lower level than their preferred skill and knowledge. 155 Question 3; Actual and Preferred Role Differences in Eastern Province Are there discrepancies between the actual and the preferred role perceptions of senior high school principals in Eastern Province? The finding of this study reflected significant differences at the .001 level between perceptions of senior high school principals in Eastern Province regard- ing their actual and preferred role involvement in the areas of Instructional Leadership, Staff Administration, Student Personnel Administration, School-Community Rela- tions, and Financial Management. The difference found was a directional one. In these five areas of responsi-‘ bility, the principals perceived their actual involve- ment at a lower level than their preferred involvement. For School Organization, In) significant differ- ences were found at the .05 level between perceived actual and perceived preferred role involvement. Yet, the data revealed a significant difference at the .001 level between the actual and preferred role involvement in all six areas of responsibility combined (all 44 items). Question 4; Actual and Preferred Skill and Knowledge Differences in Eastern Province Are there discrepancies between perceptions of the actual and the preferred level of skill and knowledge of senior high school principals in Eastern Province? 156 Based on the findings of the study, significant differences at the .001 level were found between percep- tions of senior high school principals in Eastern Province regarding their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge in each individual area and in the total range of areas of administrative responsibility. The data also revealed that in all these six individual areas, the principals perceived their actual skill and knowledge at a lower level than their preferred skill and knowledge. Question 5; Actual and Preferred Role, Skill and Knowledge Differences by District Are there differences between perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and perceptions of senior high school principals in Eastern Province regarding their actual and preferred role, and their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge? According to the findings of this study, there were no significant differences at the .05 level between the principals of Al-Hasa and those of Eastern Province regarding their actual and preferred role, and their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge. A high level of agreement existed between the principals of both school districts regarding the way they viewed their actual and preferred role, and their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge, in all six major areas of responsibility. 157 Qeestion 6; Effect of Demographic Characteristics on Actual and Preferred Roley Skill and Knowl edge Do age, years of experience as principal, teaching experience, size of the school, and number of native and non-native teachers in the school have any effect on the perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their actual and preferred role, and their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge? 593. Based on the findings of this study, there were no significant differences at the .05 level between the age groups (40 years and below; and 41 years and above) in their overall perceptions of their actual and preferred role, and of their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge. Years of Experience as Principal. No significant differences existed at the .05 level between principals with 5 years or less of experience as principal and those with 6 years or more of experience as principal in either their overall perceptions of their actual and preferred role, or of their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge. Teaching Experience. Based on the finding of this study the numbers of years of teaching did not affect the overall perceptions of senior high school principals in both school districts regarding their actual and preferred role, and their actual and preferred skill and knowledge. 158 School Size. No significant differences existed at the .05 level between principals of small and large schools in their perceptions of their actual and preferred role, and of their actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge. Number of Native and Non-Native Teachers in the School. According to the findings of this study, the number of native and non-native teachers in the school had no effect on the overall perceptions of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province regarding their actual and preferred role, and their actual and preferred skill and knowledge. Conclusions After processing the data and analyzing the results, the following conclusions were drawn: 1 - Senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and Eastern Province are not satisfied with their present level of involvement in the six major areas of responsi- bility. They revealed a belief that their level of involvement ought to be much different than it currently is. 2 - Senior high school principals in both school districts are not satisfied with their present level of skill and knowledge. They expressed a desire to have a higher level of skill and knowledge in the six major areas of responsibility than they actually have. 159 3 - Of the six areas of responsibility, senior high school principals in both districts perceived the areas of Financial Management and Instructional leader- ship as having the greatest discrepancy between the actual and preferred role involvement. 4 - Of the six areas of responsibility, senior high school principals in both districts viewed their actual level of skill and knowledge as being the lowest in the area of Instructional Leadership. 5 - Under the actual condition, senior high school principals in both districts viewed themselves as being most involved in the area of School Organization. 6 - Under the actual condition, senior high school principals in Al-Hasa viewed their level of skill and knowledge as being the highest in the areas of School Organization and Student Personnel Administration. 7 - Under the actual condition, senior high school principals in Eastern Province perceived themselves as being most skilled and knowledgeable in the area of Student Personnel Administration. 8 - At the preferred level of role involvement, -senior high school principals in both districts ranked Staff Personnel Administration first among the six areas of responsibility. 4 9 - Of the six areas of responsibility, senior high school principals in Al-Hasa preferred to be most 160 skilled and knowledgeable in Staff Personnel Administra- tion. 10 - Of the six areas, senior high school princi- pals in Eastern Province preferred to be most skilled and knowledgeable in School-Community Relations. 11 - Though School Organization ranked first in actual role involvement, it received the lowest rank under the preferred condition. 12 - Generally, senior high school principals in both districts see their actual role involvement as being consistent with their preferred role involvement in School Organization. 13 - In sharp contrast to the actual condition, principals in both districts do not wish to become involved in actions and paperwork, such as directives and correspondence with the Ministry of Education. Neither do they wish to have more skill and knowledge than they actually have in this task. 14 - Since the respondents considered the six major areas of responsibility as important components of the senior high school principal's role, and since there was a high level of agreement between the principals as to the level of involvement they should have in the 44 task items, it can be concluded that the checklist contained a reasonably valid list of activities which senior high school principals believe they should perform. 161 Recommendations The following recommendations are offered as a result of this study: 1 - Senior high school principals must be granted substantial autonomy, a considerable amount of responsi- bility, and more authority for decision making. 2 - The role of the senior high school principal must be clearly defined in order to reduce or eliminate the ambiguousness of the role and attendant uncertainty. 3 - The Ministry of Education should recognize and acknowledge the differences between principals' percep- tions of their actual and their preferred role in the six major areas of responsibility. Policies and procedures to achieve congruence between the actual and the preferred role should be initiated. 4 - Senior high school principals should be given more responsibility and allowed more involvement in the areas of Staff Personal Administration and School- Community Relations, since these two areas were ranked very high under the preferred condition. 5 - Senior high school principals should be less responsible for and less involved in the tasks grouped under School Organization and School Plant, since this area received the lowest rank under the preferred condition. 162 6 - The Ministry of Education and universities should develop and implement training programs to meet the needs of the senior high school principals for skill and knowledge in the six major areas of responsibility. This especially applies in the areas of Instructional Leadership and Financial Management, where the respond- ents perceived the greatest discrepancy to exist between actual and preferred skill and knowledge. 7 - Senior high school principals should be prepared and trained in the areas of Staff Personnel Administration and School-Community Relations, since these two areas were ranked very high under the preferred condition. 8 - Principals should be encouraged to pursue an advanced degree in educational administration. Cbncomi- tantly, they should be encouraged to continually acquire additional skills and knowledge, and to involve them- selves in activities that will expand their professional abilities, such as educational conferences and profes- sional associations. Recommendations for Further Research This study focused only on the role and the level of skill and knowledge of senior high school principals. Further research should be conducted to determine whether the role and the level of skill and knowledge of 163 elementary and middle school principals are the same or similar to those identified in this study. Further research should be undertaken to compare the perceptions of other groups (i.e., superintendents, teachers, students, and parents) with those of princi- pals with regard to actual and preferred role, and actual and preferred level of skill and knowledge. The causes for the identified discrepancies between actual and preferred role, skill and knowledge were not explored in this study. Further research to explore and explain these causes would be valuable. APPENDICES APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE 164 Dear Principal, I an undertaking a study of the role, knowledge, and skill of senior high school principals in Al-Hasa and the Eastern Province. The study is part of my doctoral research in educational administration. This study will contribute to the efforts to improve the educational system in our country. Without your assistance and cooperation, little will be done. Your carefully considered responses to this survey could provide a strong basis for supporting the efforts of senior high school principals to be more effective. The study is in no way an attempt to evaluate the performance of any principal. All information will be held in strictest confidence and in no case will efforts be made to single out a participant for special attention. The information will be analyzed as group data and will be used only for statistical purposes. Your help is gratefully appreciated. Sincerely yours, Abdulla Al-Sahlawi 165 QUESTIONNAIRE ON SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPAL'S PERCEPTION OF THEIR ROLE, SKILL AND KNOWLEDGE Part 1 General Information 1. Educational District City or Village 2. Number of Students 3. Nmnber of Teachers Native Non-Native Please answer the following questions in the spaces provided. 4. What is your age? under 30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 UDDUDU over 50 5. How many years have you served as principal? B one year G 2-5 years G 6-10 years [I] 11-15 years [I] 16-19 years [:1 20 years or more 166 6. Highest degree held: [I] diploma in education D bachelor ' a degree [:1 master ' 8 degree [Z] other (please specify) 7. Have you ever served as a teacher? [I] No [Z] Yes If yes, for how many years? At what level? [I] elementary school B Middle school [:D high school Part 2 Please read carefully the following instructions before responding. Instructions A. On the following pages are some statements relating to the actual and preferred role, skill, and knowledge of the senior high school principal. Please respond to each of the following statements; gg_not leave any blank. Each statement is to be prefaced by "As a principal, I ..." In the role perception in area columns, circle a number from 1 to 5 in the ”Actual" column and in the ”Preferred” column. The circled numbers indicate an estimate of your actual and preferred role perception (level of involvement) of the principal in that area. Use 167 the same procedure in the "Actual" and "Preferred” columns for knowledge and skill in area. E. Seeie; The options given indicate the following. 1 - far below average or no involvement and far below average or no knowledge and skill N I below average involvement and below average knowledge and skill 3 ' average involvement and average knowledge and skill 4 - above average involvement and above average knowledge and skill S - far above average involvement and far above average knowledge and skill Example j" ”As a principal, I...” Role Perception Knowledge and Skill in Area Perception in Area Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Participate in textbook 1 2®4 5 l 2 3 4@ @2 3 4 5 l1 2 3695 selection 7 The example above indicates (3) average involvement as the actual role perception in the area and (5) far above average as the preferred role perception in the area. It also indicates (1) far below average or no actual knowledge and skill, and (4) above average the preferred knowledge and skill. Please complete the questionnaire according to this example. Area lo 168 Instructional leadership. Item “As a principal, 1...” Role Perception in Area Knowledge and Skill Perception in Area Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Meet with teachers individually and as a group to discuss curriculum or instructional matters Identify teachers' inrservice training needs Visit classrooms and observe teaching methods and teaching materials used Inform teachers of new findings in educational research Participate in curri- culum development Develop a system for teachers to evaluate the principal Develop a plan to prevent dropout Conduct demonstration lessons for teachers Work with teachers in diagnosing students' learning difficulties Area 2. 169 Staff personnel administration. Item ”As a principal, 1...” Role Perception in Area Knowledge and Skill Perception in Area Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Involve staff in decision-making concerning personnel policies within the school Work with staff in determining school needs for supplies and equipment Evaluate the work of all personnel in the school according to a known plan Define and clarify the responsibilities of all personnel Assume responsibility for the induction and orientation of all newly appointed staff Hold meetings with staff to discuss work problems Make recommendations to the superintendent regarding termination of non-native teachers contracts and deter- mine the unsuitability of native teachers Participate in selec- tion and assignment of personnel Participate in decisions regarding the transfer of staff members from or to the school Area 3. 170 Student personnel administration. Item ”As a principal, 1...” Role Perception in Area Knowledge and Skill Perception in Area Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Assume responsibility for student order and discipline Supervise student attendance accounting Involve students in decisions regarding some administrative and academic matters Suspend and dismiss students within limits defined by the Ministry Encourage, and help in, the establish- ment of a Student Council Discuss with students common personal and social problems and assist them in solving these problems Organize extra- curricular and athletic programs Study students' records to ensure that these records are properly completed and filed Area 4. 171 School organization and school—plant administration. Item ”As a principal, I...” Role Perception in Area Knowledge and Skill Perception in Area Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Supervise maintenance of the school grounds and ph ysi cal structure Supervise the receiving and distribution of supplies, textbooks and equipment Inspect grounds, play areas, equipment, buildings to ensure that they are well kept up Establish and maintain and accurate inventory of equipment and materials assigned to the school Delegate to other staff members a portion of my responsibilities together with the appropriate authority Prepare the school schedule Am involved with actions and paper work, such as directives and correspondence with the Ministry Area 5. 172 School-community relations. Item ”As a principal, 1...” Role Perception in Area [I Knowledge and Skill Perception in Area Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Interpret the educa- tional programs of the school to the community and keep citizens informed about educational matters Discuss students' academic and behavioral problems with their parents Encourage the establishment of parents' councils Build a cooperative relationship between area universities and the public school Encourage parents and other interested citizens to visit the school and express their views regarding educational matters Encourage parents to participate in decisions related to the education of their children 4 5 4 5 4 S 4 5 4 5 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 F 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 I1 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 S 4 5 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 Area 6. Financial management. 173 Item ”As a principal, 1...” Role Perception in Area Knowledge and Skill Perception in Area Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Approve requisitions for equipment and materials to be purchased by the school Assume responsibility for the proper management of the school's budget Prepare a budget that establishes a priority of needs for each program within the school Participate in determining the budget allocation for the school Estimate the financial require- ments of the school 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 S 1 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 S 1 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 THANK YOU. 174 sweats—=4» Kingdom oI Saudi Arabia Ministryomignat Education M f't‘h‘" .91).) KING FAISAI UNIVERSITY ¢ : QM) 1’ ,‘i' AL.ANSA “LP-Vi COILEGE OF EDUCATION is!“ . o” l6 Rbai II .1407 ‘ Dec I7, 1986 T0 WHOM IT MAY CONCERN The Arabic translation of Hr.AbduIIa AI-Sahiawi's Questionnare for his study of ”The Role,Knowle’dgeand Skill of Senior High SchoOI'Prin- cipais in Al-Ahsa and the Eastern Province" is an accurate translation of. the English Originai. Hr.Ai-Sahlawi was‘given this testimonial at his . (iii/m r.Abduilah E.Al-Saadatv Chairman request. Department of Foreign Languages. mv~~t-«AJ-m-«wn-mw-«nu—J cum-m-.~i.i-——.m~-u..sm.t......t_.n mt.” omm-a.o.aum-toummsst.w.m “sashes scam.w«aamarusatu-w.m om cut! 175 r—er-“oe’fl' hue-r l—qfilul paid-III ’14-“ #5 J, gig-phi P—Ha'w MOM-u emu 176 HJJIWJJI aJJlf—p (fie-4' .O............ .................. O... IL)“ x“ V.‘ 00.1...." ‘45)...) LL" by M '3..." ,,__II hurl-.1." IJIaiI ,1 sig.-Jul tbauhupu fi-‘a‘b‘ was L—m-av. WIS-H LJJ..." JHJJI-uJGIJIfi.’ ”fly-aria“ . (“1.1.4- - I up: um, mom Hanging: a)..." V) fol—.3 0| ,s LIJJJI .3. g. 3).." as..." an 0I__i «but... we. 09., MI in, w’ Wit-II ya..." no! 0.9.3,. ¢I__....,.:-YI Ida 9.1a 11,14.” only!“ oi . ”Jean 9,5...)qu Ha 5,1»; 1.4.1.1., nus Jest 1,3,3; losinggiui 'IJM'JRMVA fol-1.. VJIa—J NJ.» 'IJI m” "J: Jiyxi 0. die .5!qu LIJAJI .4. 0| I-w JalaSJ’. glfiz-YI Ida (’0 Mar-h MI aIafimm-JI w oi i..s 4.).___a 4.1.: gl elJI-‘ala 2.,” gigwuigi 5,. “,4. tin, 0.1., 1.1:. . Lens! .91,” fan-s, any“! . 5_,J,:.Ji .tu “1.3L, Niel-‘3‘ Jul, aginw )9! 1.9th ’14. 9'6! ‘ hart-unusa- Wm use: may... _ ¢J$_.+.JI ”Jim’s HUI“ 177 Hfl'o‘w’ we: Hauv H’U‘FJ PJJ-‘J L—aIJ chug—LI: ___.__z__.u.u‘,l w_—WM ____1_.JAJL.JI-a.u air—xi “H . ~.—-'-'-J 0.3.: V) “has. 9,. 1.39m...“ unmissitisjui (If—[Jul ) ”’1'... but. 3.3“. ‘6 ‘0 Via “Cl am at] we! [:1 M'J" Dwayne,“ Id———’IJL’¢- D ' 1 ', JJUI fl -\ -I -1' 178 . twang.» :smum -1 ° H-rfl'p-l—r-i D firm-4‘51 D . J_.:-pl.a D - 4,112." us} «143433. E] y ,1;____:i.,s.s.1..4s -v .' c—‘oISIJI 34.45 H...“ ' cuts-ls.» ,9 9A.; LIQNI 7" VJ '. wwxgiv-b .v___.‘.l.t.'-pl D 179 LEI-“‘2“ f—“I . Liui 93 ”Jada: wide-.14..” 3H,! tisJJi 34—... WOIJIJ U‘ by" ”.105 ”HI-'2’ cola-4‘." awaIJ-I L)“ ”A: JJIAa‘, uIJIfi’ .AIJ.._J uI «I; f.“ I‘M); aIJiqul an,» 0.31“?” 'IQJJI ° ( Lakxmiva-wsoiwbiwfioihi t‘ (.0411 fin! (Isles-1... ) guy ”4.1.1,,“ 3,..." v‘ dflW‘MO-S-vuua (0) u' (i) o‘- r-b 6‘ tri- U" 0434-. L4” .n-h (Le-I xvi-H Mun-4 We}: a)“; . waflwcpdiyfiw ,;,____. p, «I ,1. 3):.” 8JJIJJJ©IJI+QUN J’s-ml?) chdsflsflafl ”Mes-v a”: (0) u" (i) let-'4 -o, V3?! “in; en biweiJ1131I Jé—JJOOJJI -—..qu er" Libs-=51 Jen-Foes!” - I . JJI...’ :4le «1,3,3!» ”as, o'JIMMJ-fiu’ 0‘ JJI—xihpiqflh-JRJMJ o- JJI a Y . :JJMJJI...» .r—b-i .4 J1... wer— 3..» «ma v» 4...... an,» . r . Jan...» spun-I .n-If-JW o- fisI—Jfil-rpivflu—MWJ—SI . t . my...» BIJIH 41—“: 0.. gen, —JJM¢'I¢WMJA&JWVJ$SI . . . 4J1...» 1:9!le Hywfi 0 J”... g eI—nrlfi-JI -\ -1’ -I’ q,- -s.,.-.i.,i...u,,.: Jiwwwyfi ”sh—Ir 'I‘t” (3):...- u—e sub" its—4M 9 so‘r’ I r—JN Lanai—~46, ' . {D r- hi 0 . : «461 @h r: ml 0 161 I Juneau VI «but a..,1.Jl.,.IJJ c.9- 180 -, gsh ,1. J1, 53:4 Ji:...JI t,—".SJIJI.,:5I v1 truss JESJIémbI ”.2. 1.,» ”4.5 cm Wale «H «but: a! s4} is." (r) Jud u,l.:'. 3W hue—II . (.) AJanoafisI 35th «_an you duals cow-n «63-: o' t.» a... wuss: m JA—ma’ 0‘ JJI 3”” h'JJ#.O’JW' Arlen... Mimi.) I‘JI’ (”y—3,3,.» 1.1.4 up LJMJJISJJSIJIM OI ,I ”as, L_s.,i.:.n DWI JJI-lfi” sums: ,3); 5):... we. 0' .113: 1.1., . (¢)J.t..1¢,.,:sia,u 1.4.4 saw: . as! 0...: Ji:...1J m, ¢i.....:.xi la. .Ji..sI 'LpJJI . 181 -. ans-Lu w.” -. um git-w Jun-l eiJi-mM v49)" ”.21 JJ' 4": (.33-“PH?” 3:3”) ‘s'J'TG‘JJI V_JI.,JI 19.91“ His: .iri I‘alYI’ I' .t'ri i atrii oi—aiefisuyos-Jugoezei I JsiJJgijui yuppie: I. whit-“5) r—b’ atfii atI’Ii atriiotfi“ Hjadeiei‘big—Anfif—nsi ‘» .lwasl cit-ti atrii alI'I'ioothI b—bwiéiJh-IJ-fldxuwi r .1.“ otrii .trii atTTIothIHaslmfilquawyuefllg . hfijéflJéIa'JJ .irii otrii otrviotriiW'MNHk-luvaajm . ‘ OIYII alI’Ii attYioifI bl-Jado-Wvfie-Jmei 1 eth'I .trii oIYYiotYYifi—orvoloi-Jde’oé-Um I v ax“ ‘ pIYYI .trii atf'fiatfi' WJuf‘*Iv?AJ‘5WJJIv4I:-rfflI A w—u a, “11 Lu“: fl-Jéitiefl. I L——_-,.n 444-5) “my,“ 9.4»: gay-,1: w . 1 .irii alI'Yi .trtiotrn LAquJAJg-im-Mddfii I JJIJMW QIJIJJJJIQI .LJAJI otrvi OIYI’I .triiotrii Ljuworhidsos-Judj-I : wLJaJciqieblww VI .ZmiiJaIA‘J otffiatfviatftiotf'fiLJMvIO-r-L'Jes-QJ-fleS-fl Y Ifirhéthfirmw’IJ-f oI-LI- 182 _ 1 .. JJI “1'; (”Jeri-snuf-‘I 3.5 Quyf-IIHIJ 9.994! V-JIJ alI'I'i strivetrir airiias-I-i-Jcs-ntei-rJfi-aegbwl : .LJJJ alf'l'I atrii atrii atriiwoeheufidydlAfi-qpfii . 0L)” .irii atI'I'I atrii airtiL—quios-hld ea»! 1 _ ' i...i.2.i,i~, 4...: Jsie. mug OIYII .trii atrii .triiL—Ih-‘nJ'fi-uulgsi-A): ,I v J—J'IJMg—h—‘IAQJKEA‘L it...» ,1”! “at.” 0...,“ '9-5fluu-‘J .trii otI'Ii athi OITYIHfiaJI-eiflwwdjfl A OITI‘I olI'I‘I atrii 011'") I-AwgJuiJIflwJJI-fl \ Mwagim—JzJIJI -YJUQ,:..:3JIJI gWW’JJIM obi—mm”); Nflsfi-J -.. “x “A “’4 (”WI-'4" §t=L (L___J.t.,,.t.s) '1 H—‘rs‘idj sr—J'” “‘32" sL—J'” ~ .triiotrii athIotrYi-I'I-riéiinuu’UHfflI i . .axui I .iriiotrii alfYIothi-yl—UvH-‘fih-‘Hu-ht‘fiI : airiiotrii OII’YIOIYTI M—a-M-s-haqlwv-I—uds-I rs OWIs’IJMIJUI OII'YIOII'I'I .iriietrii I—Lpbos-UIMWJ-MJIJJJI : OII’I’IOITYI otriistrii wwwwuw .‘I . aLJLQfi‘ 183 —. v .- 9IJl—g‘l4"; \r-L‘LJ‘JJ‘J 5,. J)! ‘JJ (:ALpI‘JJ 5).”) I‘——-—-——J~J-r-I-5) OIYYIJaIYYIJ atft'iatfi'Il-‘i-fit‘lUWiymdflénf-a' ‘I aIYYIOIYYI striiotrtivimwiswssvu'wwrm v .LJIJ JSIJQIWIflJJh-IJJ atriiotrii atriioiriiasiwoweit-seu-huh x . H-nsfiJHJi-és u‘ :LJAJDI-soww :zflgI-sb-IJI-Ml 9'v'.)'—--!-"'..i.9‘-' v—‘r’flua‘f’ dgl AA.) (JQJ'LYJI'PU “’3‘, ( 1 h x“, a: 144ny v—TM my.» -’ OII’YI atrii otriiotriibww I-HUI-A'LJ-“u-b i . i..Ji.,.i:..n “flaunt”: ”Jr—lg: .triiotrii atriiatriis-SleurseL'h-luuhdxl I a UJQUIJUIMJ suit otrii otriiotrii iwiisuMJLJMV-Ie-wi r i- . IQLQOASIJW _‘.:ri.i...trii. OII’I’IOII'JI .oU-fl-‘éé-i-ixamrfl' 1? Lad-J‘s}... V" 93.. QIJUIJORUIJ ‘ .triiot‘rii olfYIothIOrh'Jw-r-‘wivifio-l’xv‘l" . LdflILI—IWIJ LJJAJVJ .trti otrii otTIiatI'YI orIJJJM-m 1 OH'YIOII'YI oIYYIOIYYI61—93'50Jfi-0'J3u-1NJ’I-rfflI v ' J“J'1JIJ'J:J'£H' . afiJ’UI WJIJUIq’ 1 HM) LJJJ '. u-o'” £2). tiled a:'4"—“"-”r; (WW . “ .1 L ., ”VJ‘J‘J Irv—Jan ‘HJYJ‘M I I 4'” 4"“) O‘I’IIOEYYIOII’IIOIYIILJ-‘Jv‘ ' f)” f—Jl ".41"..th wwwI: ILJJ' .LJJAJI 9'. thq s, :L I 184 GIJI_§.JJ"3 w-L-J‘J" - 1‘ 43' ”‘3 (”WM-r1" Jfi-‘i l IL-———"'J‘I“fl‘"sI 1 elegy v__.n...Ji etc-,1,» w-JIJ otrri‘otrii'otrii'striiusl-Jfiu-u-U'WJSI-‘nuuui : ‘PJJ‘I'HJJ'O‘ OIYYIOIYYIOITIIatI’YIIo'I-ng-JpWI-tg-IOJQIJQSI r siftiatftiati'!)athIo—r-rlr-‘uusuxn'usubwi g 3.13).! al.,“) aha-I91: 93'9“ _.UL.'.JVI .iriiotriiotrii.triiu—ho.=-H strikingly! . Levi-whale tie-4L.» Kiwi-1‘3 atriiotriiotrriotrtiLei-athJVI-uaiasi 1 Qfiw aIJIJLIJu-f use: .flsireIHJr.’ quJiJ‘IZIaYI gvalJWflJIw- cam—4‘41»? v—Ufl'arf’ 5‘ OIYYIOITYIOII’YIatTYiGI—ei-ebl'Ifiai-p-n-vbéalaii WQIJJUIJOJRUI Cf. Luv-haul otriiotriiotriiairtihsulé'gvdefilfis-i—MI i otftiatftiatfi‘iatftiI—n-‘aS-IalaaILJaJUIx-B' 1' - 1.0.5.4 eivJfiiI-eflx OII'YIO‘YYIOtI'IIOIYYIJIJ—JIqMQIJIfl’V-‘dghfl t ctrii.triiotrii.:riiL———JMaIeI-.:»I,ui . . .:._.,.n..Ji APPENDIX B LETTERS RELATED TO THE RESEARCH 185 . «,.---.,'a.. .. ;... a. .... - . . '. ...... . .. ‘ ‘ . .a '0'.,L‘0 . . . . .... .- .", 3a , . "-s’ . 3 on 04- owl..."rfi-.C-?.o.." " no-Io... '., '5 3"." at”. «056‘ W": 1.1. - a. a _a(0 , II... .-a uro'-oa.~amn o“ . 3 u: ’ . ' . "‘J' . - . ' - ' so a , -.-.va. 0 . ° ' my '0", . ' ‘ I . ‘ . , . . .. ... . t .. 5“ ’M ... 4 m o "3“" s a: tfia: 7' a 3 - ° ... .a o- o 3‘3: -. o .3. - i 0 z: . -:‘ . f ' ,n k 5’ I’m: 0”!in "Elfin-II}: ‘ [JU- - :I..|I ”Ira-f u hau- has... OII—l'l‘.‘ ..-..uhu la limo msn ummism' $403636 ’gfi utmx' icons“ ’3. h' " ' 9...»... .._. .. ... .._... --. :L_...—_’.._3.":.. "ti. ' ’l‘JLt’.‘ -fi'”' .41-ab..-” ...T' - , .. , "..." 51.1", M buy-1,4- (3...? ...—u m ... ...- .---.-.; —. "" ' ' -- W‘d—F‘J’r . «L'V-‘I..'I¢"‘"&r" ' ”in; I-e-I-h" ”Lb-BLQI-rJ-IZTL.LL:': . D”.~_='3anmfikwwy&?3gtyfikw Wm? ...... 1.... .- U. .—'—I"J W 3.4“” ”a Liv-SIM ‘LI’IUJ a..' usual... ...-.2 "W ...-3""9WJ—n umnumzjmr ~ ”.43....r'g‘g $.11... ' . J’W‘wwfiwww ”'AW‘a" 1“ 0:... ‘.:.:ss...-..:-. ‘. 3 '-"i' .. '4 'wma-“7-“W3‘ufifir- "Clears-n: Tut»- .. ""7"“: "~ TJI’{.O:-’: ‘ ' . -l‘ol‘...:.. - a ‘. ...:.. O a .‘ a. a ‘ 53.1." chm. . g1“. - ..-_ ... -= '3)” ”H 9:: 9‘13“?" 59" 0' £13 1'0””4“ «5:33; . _-. """~?“‘-:. ... '2‘... .....i -. ...: '.I 4;. 2".- . ‘ '_-3.:,..t ....J‘E'éO ‘5}. 0:- P‘s-..H no: ..'. ‘_' '.l'o- ‘t‘az'hs'. or... Ni.- ‘a. 0.. a . '- ,gg.‘ . . . .._ D. . J: . .... . r ‘0‘- :. '- 'Q g , I..:,aa .. .- ‘,"' " .-'. :-_,..-'-.-:. -_' -':- sf- 5 “ .3} 0n? “3""... \ '-' "...-7 'I-‘L' .r .10.?" - :‘A"""' '-o . . .-.' a - '. -h‘o‘ ‘..-_ “0" -. ... . w M: W IUL—o. Sp“ v Q: N ILL-9:1...” “U; H)..‘_.; _g' :Lm.: ea- «a ‘v . . a a m- a . o 0..) - 33.1: ' ‘ ’.' ..'.'.‘.,. 0.. 1 “filing .: .... I}. 'J—rlhl 45", 0': “.10 “H Jul-3'0 :W 69*.” ”'91?” .',.. 3.."ng ' ' _3 .. ~ ' ’."I.‘.'u ..o.‘ \annn. 0 - - .t~._.’-"°.-. -.." . ' -'. . ‘-_- “Atob?oo'ua-,-:aa; .‘o'.l'.g". . . '. ... . a .a :l:;.:' :f‘II-h‘“! #JLB. was.” ‘fiy O. :LJM. ‘::.. .... *ag...~ . t:‘.M..q. . .. .. as... -1"... . .. - a. . ‘ ._ .‘ . “.._“ : dd _’~f ...:\ .".}.' ... 0' '- ‘Um. “:0 a! A. $54,341:: .'.' '. . . ' ' .3‘2- '” -- . "it-".3 -- . “I“TLt.’ ', 4t: .-°."I:'-..-t:w.‘e,‘.:;~..;‘zg, IJ‘.""‘..."'."i. : - . . __ . - . 2.. v -'...'. . 3:73:12" ‘ - ' :33.- _, .- 3». .. “may -;»-;:_j_~u‘—g.; ‘2‘ ‘s' '9' -"'P'."A'-’." .' . '.° ' . Q‘ ' a“ 'a‘ . '.a’.da 'akl' v‘... 1 '. °‘, ., ° T21” ...“ u‘ z. 33a... ‘.I ‘2 3:» _,--,-,_- t - . - . ' ' «s‘ ”a" “'4‘.” “‘7'” 4-.~.’.Tf'»s"‘“"'.. y- .- sis-7:: "a M:.'f‘:..( ... ."..u \ ... -O.a" ;;0.§.: n " r ' ‘~.::;.:";a.‘§10‘.;§: a :6 . [:rl'LI'a-"J-.= ’ 3 . - ». .3: ' .' “ I '" n‘ ' 0 o:' a a- a- a... .. o .0 .3 0 I -.-. -- . ~- .. --~'-’ .. .. 5“); ..-. craz- m‘s-zv-é-W'r. “ya"? u 0.15.1 73274:“. I- l." - 'I-r “35.33.315.33: - _- ...... . 4'04:- true-.933 if“; ‘tr-IP’Iga ~ ‘ P0049..z- 5'3." I .341. ' . - ~'-'- ‘—-".. .~ "" L“ 4;“1 {fian'i'ri- iii... - '.-. :2- i--W-F'itt-rih-W-“firr-i "as I 1...... . . ‘ :'£.‘a.m.',' r“ ‘..' ;“‘F“:.d{.‘s.5f' fi':::'-' .fi?‘.,..,.3 3"E—" a a 8 _0 . " O- . ' ' . ’--'.. . a .0 H“. ' .2. ..a" _"T .r... . g ' . . ' ‘ """ -" ' . u' :0 ’“OOOGI at.“ : ... ' - .~-l-.") '- "r' :- * - 3'. " ‘ '- °. “Sakai-Ti?" 33.. - .- ”1“- My“ 9 f‘.‘ .‘ al.,“. I . ...-a _° on Me ."A’.:' 0‘... A . . .~ s ‘n'0 -a . r. as a -_- a. a ...:e .0- wo,":. , -- I“ ‘3'.‘" {gr-931- . 0...... ...-IOIUO-Oab. ‘, . 9 fi::o--I a- .. .20"... ' A a I a ' i - V— s aw . ' ' g; . .‘ :. a 0 . 1:. - 1‘." ‘. ~‘ ' '- ’4'?“ .. 05’ .- A; ... , . .. ‘f‘f-i'? \IAI'\'\I\‘I’ R .: :1.” H, t___,.-'st raw-.1» ' ' ngq/Y/Iha’u «rU'wI-i-chv-dm w'fir" . ' .rfi-J‘ I. s. . -. -: [La-“a'hrI-I'. ...: .: WhfifldImAM” fl . .it-o Y/I/IIaYYr'Juhk-Jk wwluupsisucumxi ”.._, .: . algddIO'aon e.‘ Jenn—913 0,1...” W'“fi”'4v’/ wnau UL .. 1 . . u: E_—-: 4". fine-Jr” t1..." J-IS . L :11", 'fiL—‘J' '4 .- ... J 3/ LX~S\\.‘Ki: e: )U - a -o -3 .o co 0 a .. -0 ....o -0 ......- 187 r--".r" 0*)“ .11qu 3: r4," 1 fiJfiJ'H‘J'm‘ :‘ bowl Urd'mudhnhzfllwlifia‘ll -- .._... Jan .. w|w' " 'WU' M'U-J'J. 5...] (p.1- Mm...__ M“... r ”12.4! :; L,...,...~SJI v..:6,,.mz..'.,,.5.1.,)l.fl rL____':.'.JJ HWLMW'm‘p’J-ialhgfih 433” , Lair-‘5' Jgg-d'» «mu/ Ara-4' "ah-Mt- own": .3 H- -.JL___....J,_-,1c.,., nguww vsggyuuguupyu ' -. ' .I'U'WLLIJ‘U'U'J'J'J' 'b-br-k-mlr-e: ' ...-...,,L\ ‘L_,1.L.J'c.L,L..JIC...~ 9‘ ..-..,.. M’SUI3JL- Jig. v-'-—-"~r~r9: "‘s—er-‘E'f‘f-‘Lr‘h‘n “Jr-'- 4' (fl/A @ ' \IQ‘\ g—&-\ \i - .'H&"1~bw0J . OJ‘I“ my ~ 0 \fiJ-‘zu" W‘Miy / J3" ‘45} ( i, .Nl .. \a‘ - . fit any 9‘2»! «mm REFERENCES REFERENCES Abo-Laban, Mansour A. A Study of Teachers Perceptions of the Principal's Performance ih Selected High Schools in Mecca and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Ph.D. dissertation, University of—Eklahoma, 1978. Abussuud, Alawi N. Administrative Envelopment and Planning in Saudi Arabia: The Process of Differ- entiation and Specialization. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, 1979. Al-Ajroush, H.A. A Historical Development of the Public Secondary School Curriculum in Saudi Arabia from 1930 to the Present. Ph.D.:iiSsertation, University of Oklahoma, 1980. Al-Awaji, Ibrahim M. Bureaucracy and Society in Saudi Arabia. Ph.D.«iissertation, University of Virginia, 1971. Al-Halteh, A.I. The Secondary School Principalship in Jordan (The Hashimite Kingdom of Jordani. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utah, 1980. Al-Hegelan, Abdelrahman, and Palmer, Monte. Bureaucracy and Development in Saudi Arabia. The Middle East Journal 39(1):48-68 (Winter 1985). Al-Salloom, Hamad I. A Study of the Relationship of School District Size and Administrative Practices in Schools in Saudi Arabia. Ph.D.