IN F O R M A T IO N TO USERS This dissertation was produced from a m icrofilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation o f techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" fo r pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s}". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image o f the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being ph oto grap hed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding o f the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. University Microfilms 300 North Z m b Road Ann Arbor. Michigan 40106 A Xarox Education Company 72-29,987 JACKSON, Allen, 1930A COMPARISON OF THE ROLE CONCEPT OF THE DISTRICT PERSONNEL DIRECTOR BY CERTAIN MICHIGAN SUPERINTENDENTS AND SELECTED AUTHORITIES IN SCHOOL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1972 Education, administration U n iv e rs ity M ic ro film s , A XEROKCom pany . A n n A rb o r. M ic h ig a n THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED A COMPARISON OF THE ROLE CONCEPT OF THE DISTRICT PERSONNEL DIRECTOR BY CERTAIN MICHIGAN SUPERINTENDENTS AND SELECTED AUTHORITIES IN SCHOOL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION By Allen Jackson A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1972 PLEASE MOTE: Some pages may indistinct Filmed as University Microfilms, * have print. received. A Xerox Education Company ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OF THE ROLE CONCEPT OF THE DISTRICT PERSONNEL DIRECTOR BY CERTAIN MICHIGAN SUPERINTENDENTS AND SELECTED AUTHORITIES IN SCHOOL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION By Allen Jackson Purpose of the Study This study was an attempt to make comparisons of the role concept of the district personnel director as p e r ­ ceived by certain Michigan superintendents and by selected authorities in school personnel administration. Specifi­ cally the study attempted to answer the following questions: 1. of the Is the the superintendents' of school role concept personnel director consistent with the role concept as defined by selected authorities? 2. school Is the role of the personnel director in large districts consistent with the role definition by selected authorities and superintendents? Allen Jackson Description of the M e t h o d s , Technique/ and Data Used The nature of the type of study pro b l e m implied the use of the normative survey method of research. The most practical and feasible means of gathering data for this study was considered by the researcher to be the use of a questionnaire--a method widely used in survey research involving large sample studies. With the realization that restrictions are existent in research projects utilizing questionnaires, it was decided to proceed under the assumption that administrators would be inclined to respond in an accurate and forthright manner to an unsigned checktype survey form. The instrument. Check-type Personnel Function Questionnaire was administered to twenty-nine superin­ tendents and six selected authorities in the field of personnel administration. Additional information on school personnel adminis­ tration was obtained from secondary sources in the professional literature. Current researchers and practitioners were used in the development of a list of authorities. If the educator was indicated as having researched, or diligently studied the field of school personnel administration, he was considered as an authority in the area of school personnel administration. Alien Jackson Questions for Further Study 1. Would it be valuable to replicate this study by administering a comparative survey of smaller school districts in the state of Michigan? 2. To what extent would it be valuable to perform an experimental study of this nature comparing the opinions of district administrators and selected authorities within the state of Michigan to those in comparable districts in the neighboring states of Wisconsin and I l linois» to test the reliability of this instrument? 3. Would it not be valuable for each school district in Michigan to consider conducting a longitudinal study of its personnel functions over a period of years to see if there are any changes in the opinions and perceptions by the superintendents ar>d selected authorities? 4. if the role of the personnel director is to be investigated, should not the personnel directors themselves indicate what they perceive their role as being? 5. Should the personnel functions of the district be determined by other district administrators? 6. The respondent superintendents of school were selected by stratified random sample for this study. Would the evidence supplied by another technique show a difference in the results? Allen Jackson Major Findings 1. Data revealed few differences between the opinions of selected authorities and Michigan superintendents on the assigning of the personnel functions. 2. The authorities and Michigan superintendents generally agree on the assignment of the responsibility of 76 of the 93 personnel functions surveyed. 3. The greatest disagreement, among the two groups, were those functions listed in the area of personnel transfer, adjustment counsel, and compensation. 4. in the area of recruitment, the function of "supervising student-■teacher training programs and activities of the Future Teachers of America Club** was assigned to the assistant superintendent of personnel and sharing this responsibility with principals and assistant superintendent of instruction equally, by most Michigan superintendents. The authorities, however, felt this responsibility was more exclusively that of the building principal. 5. The authorities assigned the personnel leaves of absence function about equally among the assistant superin tendent of personnel and the superintendent. The Michigan superintendents would assign these functions to the assistant superintendent of personnel. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am greatly indebted to Dr. Louis R o m a n o , my thesis advisor who provided me with encouragement and inspiration throughout the final stages of my doctoral pursuit. His professional guidance and personal approach has been a model to emulate. I, also, would like to thank the members of my thesis committee, Dr. Samuel Moore, who directed my first cognitive personnel experiences which attracted me even more into this field. 1 am indebted to Dr. James McKee, who graciously agreed to serve on my c o m m i t t e e , and directed my sociological endeavors. A very special thanks to Dr. Donald Nickerson, my friend of sixteen years, who directed the early stages of my doctoral work, and to w h o m I shall ever be grateful for his encouragement, direction, and support through all phases of my graduate program. The understanding and purpose which Barbara, Allen Jr., and Sherri Jo, the writer's wife and children provided were indispensable to the completion of this thesis. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. Page THE P R O B L E M ...................................... Introduction .................................. Significance and Background of the Study. . Purpose of the S t u d y ........................ Need for the S t u d y ........................... Limitation of the S t u d y ..................... Definition of T e r m s ........................... Questions to be Resolved ..................... Overview ...................................... II. III. IV. 1 1 2 4 4 S 6 9 9 REVIEW OF RELATED L I T E R A T U R E ................. 11 S u m m a r y ......................................... 41 DESIGN OF THE S T U D Y ........................... 43 The Sample and Its S e l e c t i o n ................. Plan of the S t u d y ........................... Development of the Questionnaire . . . . Method of Collecting D a t a .................... Treatment of D a t a ........................... S u m m a r y ......................................... 43 44 46 47 48 49 PRESENTATION OF D A T A ........................... 50 Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel— Policy F o r m u l a t i o n .............. Data on Administrator Responsible for Inter-District C ommunications.............. Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel R e c o r d s ........................... Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel Needs ........................... Data on Administrator Responsible for R ecruitment.................................. Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel Selection ........................ iii 50 54 60 61 66 71 Chapter Page Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel Assignment ........................ 77 Data on Administrator Responsible for Substitute Teachers ........................ 79 Data on the Administrator Responsible .............. 81 for Liaison Responsibilities Data on Administrator Responsible for Orientation and Induction of Personnel . . 84 Data on Administrator Responsible for In-Service Development .................... 87 Data on Administrator Responsible for E v a l u a t i o n ...................................... 90 Data on Administrator Responsible for Promotion......................................... 95 Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel T r a n s f e r ............................... 98 Data on Administrator Responsible for Adjustment C o u n s e l .............................. 100 Data on Administrator Responsible for ............................... 103 Certification Data on Administrator Responsible for Formulation of Job D e s c r i p t i o n ................ 106 Data on Administrator Responsible for C o m pensation..................................... 109 Data on Administrator Responsible for Work L o a d s ..................................... 115 Data on Administrator Responsible for Leaves of A b s e n c e .............................. 118 Data on Administrator Responsible for Tenure Recommendations .................... 121 Data on Administrator Responsible for Grievances of Personnel ..................... 124 Data on Administrator Responsible for D i s m i s s a l........................................ 126 Data on Administrator Responsible for R e t i r e m e n t .....................................129 Questions to be R e s o l v e d ....................... 133 Inconsistencies Between the Selected Authorities and the Superintendent . . . 139 S u m m a r y ............................................ 148 V. SUMMARY f CONCLUSIONS t AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . 149 S u m m a r y ............................................ 149 Statement of the P r o b l e m ........................149 Limitations of the S t u d y ....................... 150 Review of the L i t e r a t u r e ....................... 150 Design of the S t u d y ........................... 151 iv Page Chapter Conclusions Based on Major Findings . . . Discussion of Inconsistencies of Personnel Functions Between the Selected Authorities and the Superintendents . Recommendations............................... Recommendations for Further Study. . . . R e f l e c t i o n s .................................. BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................ 152 153 162 164 165 167 APPENDICES Appendix A. B. C. Michigan Superintendents Mailing List . . . Authorities Mailing L i s t .................... Transmittal Letter and Survey Questionnaire . v 171 173 17 4 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. General Organization— Policy Formulation 2. General Organization— Inter-District Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 . 55 . . . 62 3. General Organization— Personnel Records 4. Staff Procurement and Utilization--Personnel N e e d s ..................................... 64 5. Staff Procurement and Utilization— R e c r u i t m e n t ..........................................67 6. Staff Procurement and Utilization— Personnel Selection 72 Staff Procurement and Utilization— Personnel Assignment 78 Staff Procurement and Utilization— Substitute Teachers ........................... 80 Staff Procurement and Utilization— Liaison Responsibilities ............................... 83 7. 8. 9. 10. Staff Development— Orientation and Induction of Personnel......................................... 85 11. Staff Development— In— Service—D e v e l o p m e n t . 12. Staff Development— Evaluation. 13. . . . . . . . . 89 92 Staff Development— P r o m o t i o n ......................... 96 14. Staff Development— Personnel Transfer . . . . 99 15. Staff Development--Adjustment Counsel . . . . 101 . . . . 104 16. Conditions of Service— Certification Table 17. Page Conditions of Service— Formulation of Job D e s c r i p t i o n ........................................ 107 18. Conditions of Service— Compensation. 19. Conditions of Service— Work Loads 20. Conditions of Service— Leaves of Absence . . 119 21. Conditions of Service--Tenure Recommendations . 123 22. Conditions of Service— Grievances of Personnel............................................ 125 23. Conditions of Service--Dismissal............... 127 24. Conditions of Service— R e t i r e m e n t ........... 130 vii . . . . 110 .............. . 116 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction Procuring, developing, and maintaining an effective school staff is one of the most important functions of school administration. The profession and institutions of higher learning should constantly strive to develop the appropriate person­ nel and conditions of service so that the result will be an improved student. A n increased conscientious effort in the area of school personnel administration is essential for every school district. Castetter lends emphasis to this idea by his statement of: It is generally conceded that the success of any human endeavor is closely related to the quality of person­ nel, who perform the tasks necessary to the achievement of purpose, as well as to the conditions which affect their physical and mental well-being. This assumption is as applicable to school systems as it is to any organization of human effort. The extent to which public administration succeeds will depend, to a large extent, upon the quality of the personnel engaged in the educational process, and upon the effectiveness with which they discharge individual and group re­ sponsibilities . The school plant is important. Purposes count for more than a little. Money is 1 2 significant, A well designed program is essential. Leadership is vital. But the most crucial single element in the educational process is the competency of the personnel charged with the task of effecting desirable changes in children and youth.1 Significance and Background of the Study Michigan has kept abreast with the developments of educational materials and methods. The three major state institutions of higher learning have done an excel­ lent job in preparing their respective graduates with the educational methods that are current and effective. In the past, the state institutions of higher e du­ cation have met the increased educational demands for personnel for Michigan public schools. The nation as a whole has experienced a shortage of personnel to staff the schools. in H a v i g h u r s t ’s report to the National Education Association on supply and demand in 1955, he projected the demand for teachers to be 1,685,000 by 1965 with the 1955 supply being 1,200,000 or a needed increase of 485,000 for a ten-year period. 2 Needless to say, this supply has long since diminished. ^"William B. Castetter, Administering the School Personnel Program (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962") , p7 '4'. --2 Robert J. Havighurst, "Manpower and the Teacher Shortage," Teacher E d u c a t i o n , National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards (Washington, D . C . : National Education Association, 1955) , p. 217. 3 Due to Michigan's increased certification requirements for teachers and administrators, that was legislated in 1963 and again in 1967, and the explosive population of the state, the state institutions of higher learning have been hard pressed to furnish the Michigan public schools with the adequate required supply. The National Education Association research report. Teacher Supply and Demand in Public S c h o o l s , 1963, indicated a supply of elementary and secondary school teachers being graduated from state institutions for the next five years was insufficient."* The Michigan Education Association Research division reports an increase of 2,455 teachers who were placed in Michigan schools from 1968 to 1969. The United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's Digest of Educational Statutes lists an increase of some 25,000 students in Michigan schools from fall 4 1968 to fall 1969. However, in a recent study by the Michigan State Board of Education, it was revealed that if present trends in teacher training continue, Michigan will have an average of 15,000 to 19,000 qualified National Education Association, Teacher Supply and Demand in Public Schcxals, 1963, R esearch R e p o r t , 1963-64 (Washington ft.C. : National Education Association, May, 1963), p. 34. 4U.S., Department of Health, Education, and Wel­ fare, Bureau of Educational Research and Development, Digest of Educational Statistics, Bulletin No. 4 3 (Wash­ ington , D . C .: Government Printing Office, 1968), p. 5. 4 teachers for w hom no jobs will be available in the 1980 *s .5 With the supply problem with the trend toward consolidated districts, increased school services, and increased professional and allied employee organizations, then it would seem that there should be greater focus on the functions of school personnel administration in Michigan. Purpose of the Study This study is an attempt to make comparisons of the role concept of the district personnel director as perceived by certain Michigan superintendents and by selected authorities in school personnel administration. Need for the Study The majority of the present Michigan superin­ tendents have met the requirements and standards for their positions and now find themselves the head of a complex school system after administering a relatively small school district for years. Historical data point out that superintendents first saw the need for assistance in handling the business affairs of their expanding districts. trollers, business managers, Accountants, comp­ and assistant superintendents ^"Study Foresees Surplus of Teachers in Michigan," State N e w s , February 11, 1972, p. 1. 5 of business affairs were positions designated as part of the central staff. in Michigan, Today, of the 5 30 operating districts 138 employ a person at the district level to administer the business affairs. The realization of assistance in the area of instructional programming was made by Michigan superin­ tendents of expanding districts. There are presently ninety-eight districts with a curriculum director. There are but fifty-four full-time personnel directors employed in the state of Michigan. These data show that Michigan superintendents include in their responsibilities the job of recruitment, of personnel. Therefore, selection, etc., it would appear that a survey of the perceptions of superintendents would show the areas of agreement and disagreement in regard to duties and responsibilities of a district personnel director. This would be a starting point to assist present and future administrators in determining the role of a district personnel director. Limitation of the Study This study is limited to the following areas of school personnel administration: (1) general organization, (2) staff procurement and utilization, ment, and (3) staff develop­ (4) conditions of service. All Michigan school districts that have a student average daily attendance (1971-72) of 3,000 students or 6 more were surveyed. A list of professional authorities in the field of school personnel management were sur­ veyed in a like manner. The Michigan superintendents' opinions were compared with the opinions of the selected authoriti e s . Definition of Terms For the purpose of this study, the following definitions are used: District Personnel Director refers to that person assigned to a school system district office who has the responsibility delegated to him from the board and superinintendent through policy of obtaining, retraining, develop­ ing, and the training of the district employed personnel. Recruitment constitutes that phase of pre-service selection in which promising persons are encouraged to become part of the district staff. Selection refers to the securing of information about applicants for district positions and the appointment of the best qualified applicants. Assignment is the process of appointing an employee to a certain position or to certain duties in the school district. 7 Orientation is the process of making a person aware of such procedures in his school environment for the purpose of facilitating effective adaptation. Induction is the process of gradual introduction of employees into the school situation with a view to assisting them in making successfully the full adjustments that are involved later in their work. In-Service Development is special training or instruction for district-employed persons w i t h a view to increasing the workers' competence. Promotion is an advance rank, position, or re­ sponsibility of a member of the certified or classified personnel of the school system. Appraisal is that process of synthesizing and interpreting data concerning a district employee. Compensation refers to those benefits and reim­ bursements allowed an employee for service rendered. Transfer concerns that process of assignment of duties and responsibilities to another position within the system. Evaluation is the process of ascertaining or judging the value of employees after careful appraisal. 8 Tenure is a system of school employment in which the teacher or other e m p l o y e e , having served a probationary period of a certain number of years, retains his position indefinitely and is protected in his position either by statute or by rule of the school board. Grievances are those discussions or meetings pertaining to a real or imagined wrong presented by employee(s) . Dismissal is the separation of an employee from a school system by requesting his resignation or by a d i s ­ charge effected by proper authority. Retirement refers to the permanent withdrawal of a teacher from a district by reason of age or of length of service. Certification means meeting the qualifications that are established by state departments of education for teachers in public schools and of issuing teaching certi­ ficates to those qualified persons. Work Loads mean the total responsibilities or units of time for which an employee is expected to provide his services. Leaves of Absence refers to those periods of time when an employee is absent from his assigned responsi­ bilities involving an extended period of time. 9 Questions To Be Resolved X. Is the superintendents' of school role concept of the personnel director consistent with the role concept as defined by selected authorities? 2. Is the role of the personnel director in large school districts consistent w i t h the role d e fi­ nition by selected authorities and superintendents? Overview It has been the intent of Chapter I to describe the purpose of the study and to explain why there is a need for a comprehensive comparison of the role concept of the District Personnel Administrator as seen by certain Michigan superintendents and selected authorities in school personnel administration. Concepts vital to an understanding and appreciation for the objectives of the study were explained, followed by a statement of three questions to be resolved. Chapter II is a review of literature pertinent to the study. Specifically, it will deal with background authority in school personnel administration, and the significance of developing functions, duties, and r e ­ sponsibilities specific to the personnel administrator. The significant features of these studies will be summarized in the final section of the chapter. 10 The design of the study will be described in Chapter III, including a description of the sample used in the study. The chapter will include a description of the instruments used in the study. A discussion of methods of administering of the instruments and their scoring will be followed by a statement of the statistical methodology to be used. Chapter IV will be devoted to an analysis of the data gathered for each category of personnel management included in this study. Findings will be given in the same order as were the questions to resolved in Chapter I. Superintendents' and authorities' opinions on the d e l e ­ gation of responsibilities are compared. The last chapter will contain a summary of the study and findings. Concluding this chapter will be implications and a list of recommendations for further study. Having presented the purpose of this study, need, and some questions to be resolved, its it is now essential that a review of the literature be undertaken. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Related literature is reviewed in this chapter. The decade 1952 to 1962 has the focus of attention and received the most concentrated treatment. Recognized standard research sources were reviewed for sources of information about public school personnel administration. These include Encyclopedia of Educational R e s e a r c h ^ the Education I n d e x ,^ Research Studies in Ed u c a t i o n ,3 and the Review of Educational R e s e a r c h .^ Surveys of administrative organizations of the school systems, textbooks in the fields of public school administration and of school personnel administration were also consulted. Research ^Chester W. Harris, e d . , Encyclopedia of Education (3rd ed. ; New York: Macmillan C o m p a n y 1960) . 2 H. W. Wilson Company, Education Index The Company, January 1929-December 19^0), V o T T I-XI. (New Yor Phi Delta Kappan, Research Studies in Education (Bloomington, Ind.: Phi Delta Kappan, 1941-1962). American Educational Research Association, Review of Educational Research, Vol. I, Nos. 2 and 3; Vol. TV, V IT,™ X , X I I I , K V I, XirX, x x n . 11 12 It was discovered in most textbooks and indexes of literature that the term "personnel administrator" usually referred to the school guidance officer. There appeared to be a lack of reference made to the public school personnel administrator and his department. G o o d ’s Dictionary of Education added and listed first, a third definition of the term "director of person­ nel" : Director of Personnel: (1) the administrative official in charge of personnel selection, transfer, and dismissal, the maintenance of records concerning teachers, and in some instances, other personnel programs; usually found only in large school systems; recommends action to the superintendent rather than directly to the school board; (2) a college a d m i n i ­ strator responsibile for supervising the student personnel program; (3) frequently used as the title of the head counselor.6 Previous to this 1959 edition, there were only listed the latter definitions. In 1937 Weber's b ook6 was one of the first p u b l i ­ cations to give considerable treatment to the personnel department. He states that the superintendent's job becomes too complex in cities of 100,000 population for the superintendent to do justice to the function of teacher selection. 5 Carter V. Good, e d . , Dictionary of Education (2nd ed. ; New York: McGraw-Hill Book do. , Inc. , 1959 J , p T 175. 6 Samuel Edwin Wfeber, Cooperative Administration and Supervision of the Teaching Personnel (Hew YOrk: Thomas Nelson and S o n s , 1937). 13 Appointment should be placed in the hands of an assistant or associate superintendent in charge of personnel who should act as the chief e x a m i n e r , but the superintendent of schools should be the ex­ officio chairman of the board of examiners, and all policies observed by that board should be first submitted to him. The superintendent should have the sole responsibility of selecting the administrative and head supervisors employed in his district.7 Weber also indicated that the personnel director should be considered as a functional officer whose d e ­ partment should serve as the clearing agency for the entire system and advice concerning staff personnel problems. He further proposed that he should devote much of his time to holding personal interviews with teachers and applicants, classifying teachers for salary purposes, visiting classrooms to establish friendly personal relation ship with as many teachers as possible, efforts of teachers at work, contributing to the supervising maintenance of complete personnel records and teachers' classifications, circulating of teacher-rating forms, and administering examination programs. In 1938 Sears Q set up a model program of adminis­ trative rules and regulations for large school systems. ^ I b i d . , p. 253. Jesse B. Sears, City School Administrative Controls--An Analysis of the Nature, Placement, and Flow of"Authority and Responsibility in the Management of a city School System (New Y o r k : McGraw-Hill Book C o m p a n y , ---Inc., 1938K 14 Sears stated that an assistant superintendent of personnel to be an executive head of the division of staff personnel and responsible f o r : All services pertaining to the eligibility, selection, assignments, salaries, efficiency, p r o ­ motion, transfer, tenure, resignation, dismissal, absence, retirement, and training in-service of all employees of the school.® Sears further stated that special attention should be given to the professional improvement of the staff members in the teaching services, and that continuous studies of work conditions, health, morale, salary schedule, and staff efficiency should be maintained throughout the system and reported to the superintendent. In 1951 P i t t e n g e r ^ management should endeavor cation, and stated that school personnel (1) to achieve aims of e du­ (2) to protect and promote the proper interest of the personnel. The efficiency concept envisions every individual in an organization as a contributor to the accomplishment of the organization's function. of the organization are placed foremost. Purposes The human viewpoint emphasizes the rights of the individual as a person. Pittenger would give recognition to both v ie w ­ points in personnel administration with direct 9 I bid., p. 143. Benjamin Floyd Pittenger, Local Public School Administration (New York: McGraw-Hill Book C o . , l & 5iJ. 15 responsibility being placed on the administrator for basing decisions on the welfare of pupils. The author emphasized the need for a clear definition of function by the personnel department and the administrative staff in matters of employment, and promotion. assignment, Decentralization of authority was proposed to the officer within whose unit or agency the employee would w o r k . It was also the author's opinion that principles laid down for school personnel management should cover all employees, not just preferred segments. Yeager,1 ^ in 1954, attempted to define the nature and limits of the administration of teaching personnel. Confining the position taken by other writers in the field, administration of the school is viewed as a cooperative group enterprise. The author included a chapter on the organization for personnel administration that gives general treatment to the area under investigation in this study. Selected desirable objectives of the personnel department include: 1. 2. To plan for the over-all policy of personnel administration within the school system, and designate the functions to be performed. To set up an organization designed to facilitate the administration of all functions previously determined and assigned to this division. (New York: William A. Yeager, Administration and the Teacher Harper and B r o t h e r s , P u b l i s h e r s , 1954). 16 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. To plan such cooperative relationships with the other staff members, line officers, and teachers which will be necessary in approving the staff in-service, such as workshops and supervision. To report regularly to the superintendent con­ cerning those responsibilities assigned to his office, especially business problems requiring his attention. To advise the superintendent concerning changes in policy as well as matters pertaining to the administration of the office. To conduct studies and engage in research and experimentation in activities associated with personnel. To co-ordinate other services and agencies directly associated with the personnel function, such as teachers' committees, educational departments of higher institutions, placement agencies, and in the co m m u n i t y . The division will be organized in larger districts to include assistant directors in charge of instructional staff, and (1) the (2) the non-instructional staff, including clerical employees. It was noted that custodians might be assigned to the business division, depending upon administrative policy, with references to include them in the personnel division. The director will be directly responsible for the organization and functional arrangement of his department. The author defined certain responsibilities directly related to this investigation, including (1) policy development prior to determination by the chief executive officer and the board of education, (2) selection of employees and compilation of eligibility list, selection of administrative personnel, 12Ibid. (3) (4) evaluate 17 efficiency, <5) salary adjustment, dismissal, and (6) transfer, (7) (8) conflicts. In discussing teachers' unions, it was pointed out that it may become necessary for the personnel adminis­ trator to deal with their official representatives. Yeager continued w ith this view: Ordinarily, there would appear to be no obligation of responsible administrative officers to engage in conferences of this nature. In dealing with these matters, a larger interest of the all-staff members and all the boys and girls should receive major attention.13 Further evidence of cooperative action between colleges and universities, and administrators of personnel was reported in the area of assignment of practice teachers, in-service education, ratory, internship programs, Morphett, Johns, use of school as a labo­ and study councils. and R e l l e r ^ in their 1959 study, emphasized the importance of trained leadership in school administration. The position was held that the adminis­ trator should be capable of helping people to identify emerging issues of significance and should possess leader­ ship ability in developing procedures for obtaining solutions. The authors stressed the magnitude of the problem of school personnel administration since large 13 I b i d . , p. 547. ^ E d g a r L. Morphett, Roe L. Johns, and Theodore L. Reller, Educational Administration (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, I n c . , 1959>. 18 numbers of people are involved and their salaries consti­ tute about 85 per cent of the operating budget of public education. Participation in teacher education programs was considered to be an emerging function of school personnel administrators. The authors noted the rather large number of experimental teacher education programs as evidence of more active cooperation in planning and evaluating than are generally found. It was held that local school systems should do more than provide directed teaching experiences. Involvement of several staff members in the selection and assignment process was advocated. The authors stated specifically that the principals of the schools should have an established part in the assignment of teachers if they are to be held responsible for the work in their respective schools. of promotion, Similarly, in the area staff participation was recommended in the development of policies pertaining to the selection. Weber's 1 5 study identified current school problems of school personnel management and proposed new approaches to obtaining solutions. 15 Clarence A. Weber, Personnel Problems of School Administration (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, I n c . , 1954) . 19 The author reiterated substantially the same view as the other more recent writers in the field in the area of participation in policy formulation. The continual need for status leaders was recognized, but in a different setting than they were utilized in the traditional linestaff pattern of organization. Authority was considered to be a practical necessity and an essential element in the operation of the school assistant. Weber holds that authority in a democratic society lies not in persons, but in common agreement regarding a course of action. Leader­ ship becomes essential in executing the course after it has been established. In 1954 Ellsbree and Reutter^-® presented an analy­ sis of problems related to the professional staff employed in public schools. Trends in school personnel management were identified and their relationship of local leadership to instructional efficiency was established. The authors pointed out several philosophical tenets on which enlightened school personnel administration might be based. Priority given to the work of the indi­ vidual would be reflected in personnel policies and management. Evidence of faith in group judgment and discussion would characterize this type of administration. ^ W i l l a r d S. Elsbree and Edmund E. Reutter, Staff Personnel in the Public School (New York; Prentice-HalT In c ., 1 9 5 4 ) : ----------------------------------------- 20 Mandates would be an out-growth of group decisions in which the administrator participated. Staff participation in the selection of teachers was advocated by most writers in the field. Elsbree and Reutter maintained that the principal who shared in the responsibility of selecting the members of his staff has a greater interest in the success of the candidate chosen than the principal who is not consulted. A similar position was taken in the statement that cooperation of both principals concerned should be obtained in the transfer of teaching personnel. The role of the board of education in the selection of teachers was limited to the formulation of policies. Commenting on the phenomenal growth of employees' organizations in recent years, Elsbree and Reutter noted a parallel growth in the power and influence of such organi­ zations. This was viewed as an out-growth of normal, human desires for security, status, and a feeling of b e l o nging . A rather general analysis was made of the program of the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association. Similarities in the programs were reported to be more general than the differences. Chief difference between the two associations was attributed to the methods employed in achieving their ends and in the philosophy underlying the associations. An essential element of personnel administration identified b y the 21 authors was the statement that good human relations depend upon clarity of function. This concept represents one of the major assumptions on which this investigation is based. The following quotation exemplifies this principle: When employees understand their respective roles and the relationship of their work to the work of others, they are likely to be more efficient. Perhaps the view where the greatest need exists for a clear statement in relationship is in the central office. Supervisors often tread on the toes of principals because of the over-lapping duties, and when the functions of these officers have not been clearly delineated, teachers are sometimes caught between the upper and nether m i l e s t o n e s . ^ In 1955 Moore and Walters^8 attacked the problem of personnel administration from the standpoint of human relations involved as well as the functions to be performed. Theoretical approaches to the solution of school personnel problems were supported by selected examples of good practices in the field. A traditional line and staff hierarchy in school administration was questioned. It was proposed that sharp delineation between the two be eliminated. Typical of the attitude expressed was the statement that the greatest challenge to future administrative leadership involves successful administration of the personnel function. Xdiq• § p* 18 7a Harold E. Moore and Newell B. Walters, Personnel Administration in Education (New Y o r k : Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1955). 22 Farther evidence of the authors' views regarding the significance of the field of school personnel adminis­ tration is indicated in these statements: It is an axiom in most organizations where success is essentially involved with human services that the best leadership be in that area. To apply such a point of view to public education would require that boards of education, school administrators, and even the profession itself re-orient its thinking.19 The authors emphasize the tendency for problems of personnel management to become more complicated in districts of extreme size. A high priority was given to the human relationship aspects of personnel administration with lesser importance being attributed to organizational -patterns. In 195 5 Chandler and Petty20 utilized the findings of research in business and industry as well as the total field of school administration in charting the future of school personnel work. An excellent summary of the trend related to this investigation appearing since 1949 include: 1. 2. More attention given to the welfare of the less important person in organizations. Writings dealing with research indicate that most attention has been given to the more obvious aspects of personnel activity, such as time, motion, and duties studies rather than to analyse relationships. 19I b i d ., p. 455. 20 B. J. Chandler and Paul V. Petty, Personnel Management in School Administration (Yonkers-on-Hudson, N . Y . : World Book, 1955V. 23 3. 4. 5. 6. The in-service aspect of personnel preparation is receiving added attention. Employment and discharge practices are b e ing more formalized. Personnel administration has made exceptional progress in the areas of industry and the public "classified services" but is lag in such areas as public education and hospital administration. Little writing has been done exclusively in the field of public school personnel administration. The authors view line and staff distinctions as to function as an out-moded concept. It was held that the most modern day positions hold some of both advisory and so-called command functions. Emerging pattern of organi­ zation and administration is positive, operation, flexible in its but at the same time, democratic and efficient. Advisory councils composed of teachers and adminis trators were proposed as a promising technique for encouraging participation. Personnel policy committees were suggested as one approach to obtaining better person­ nel administration through involvement in policy formu­ lation . The authors emphasize the importance of communi­ cation and its effect on relationship. Primary function of communication channels was for the accurate disseminination of knowledge to combat the negative influence of r u mors. Persons in groups within the over-all organization have been for working together in situations were all are 21 Ibid., pp. 19-20. 24 of the same level within a functioning organization. Leadership emerges from the combined groups, and the quality of their relationship in this respect is largely dependent upon the quality of communications. The authors stated further that communications from the top, organizations, in the case of the superintendent's office should encourage inter-group activities, and at the same time set a high tone for carrying out these activities. Castetter's 22 book represents a study of personnel problems within the framework of the total school adminis­ tration process. School personnel management is given the full treatment under the four parts: (1) fundamental concepts of school personnel administration, ing personnel need, and (2) determin­ (3) satisfaction of personnel need, (4) maintaining and improving personnel service. In Part I Castetter presents an overview of the social change, technological revolution, human revolution, population trends, economic revolution, professional supply and demand, employment conditions and their implications for personnel administration. perspective, purpose, nature, An examination of the scope, significance, o r gani­ zation, budget, and policy development of the personnel function is made within this part of the book. 22 Concluding Wil l i a m B. Castetter, Administering the School Personnel Program (New York: The H a c m i 11an C o m p a n y , 1962). 25 this Part I, the author points up the problems created by individual needs and organizational demands. Part II deals with the determination of personnel needs by considering quantity, quality, structure. and compensation Sub-topics within the aspects of "personnel quantity" that are given attention are: scope of the educational program, and class size, (1) nature and (2) district, school, (3) balance in instructional service, staff utilization, (5) schedules and work loads, and (4) (6) function analysis. The author presents the topic of "quality person­ nel" by focusing on the processes of quality control, position specification, and employment standards. Salary scheduling and its factors for certified and classified personnel are given the full treatment by the author in the section titled "The Compensation Structure." After establishing the concepts of personnel needs, the author, in Part II, follows a natural pattern by presenting the "satisfaction of personnel n e e d . " The concepts, practice, and issues of personnel recruitment, selection, and induction receive complete attention by Castetter in this section. Part IV, "maintaining and improving personnel service," is a good analysis of the development, appraisal, and general welfare of school personnel. Development of school personnel and in-service development are synonymous 26 in meaning in the profession these days. The author goes into all the ramifications of in-service training programs for administrators, teachers, and classified personnel. The topic of "appraisal of personnel" is a major function of the personnel management progress. This book organizes and presents the personnel functions of transfer, p r o ­ motion, and dismissal under personnel appraisal. The welfare provisions to be treated within this text are: (1) leaves of absence, (2) substitute service, (4) grievances, (5) academic freedom, (7) tenure, and (8) retirement. (3) health, (6} associations, Castetter pulls together the newest trends in personnel policies and draws freely upon the writings, surveys, and researches of both practitioners and students of the subject consideration. Emphasis is given throughout to the relationship of the personnel function to the total administrative process of today. In 1953 G r e e n ^ surveyed the personnel policies and practices of 990 school systems in cities with popu­ lation ranging from 10,000 to 30,000 and compared their status with ideal policies and practices presented in the literature. Full time or part time personnel directors were indicated in 18 school systems in 8 states and 23 John Albert Green. "The Policies and Practices of Personnel Administration in the Public School Systems of the Cities Between 10,000 and 30,000 in Population" (un­ published Ed.D. dissertation, University of Colorado, 1953). 27 personnel staff members In 159. districts, In 95 per cent of the it was indicated that the superintendents, principals, and other staff members held the responsi­ bility for personnel practices. Madsen^ sought to answer two questions: (1) What responsibility should be assigned to the department of personnel administration, and (2) on what responsibility should the most and the least emphasis be placed in a well balanced program of personnel administration? This study was of personnel administration in city school systems with populations ranging from 100,000 to 900,000. Out of 17 school districts to which he sent questionnaires, Madsen identified seven with personnel departments and a d m inis­ trators. He reported on titles of persons with major responsibility for personnel administration, adequacy of their staff of assistants, their responsibilities, experi­ ence, training, and desirable personnel and professional qualifications. McCarthy's 25 195 3 study focused directly on school personnel administrators as individuals or position holders 24 Donald H. Madsen, "Personnel Administration in Large City School Systems" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1953). 2S Francis J. McCarthy, "The Personnel Administrator in City School Systems: A Study of the Duties and Functions of Personnel Officers and Administrative Organi­ zational Plans for Personnel Management in Public School Systems in Selected Cities as Compared to Personnel 28 rather than on personnel administration as a function. He studied their duties and functions in the administrative organizational plan for personnel management in school systems as compared to business, administration. industry, and public He identified three organizational plans for personnel administration in 67 school systems with between 100,000 and 500,000 in populations: 1. 2. 3. No personnel department; superintendent acting as personnel director in 24 or 36 per cent of the cities. Personnel function centralized to the extent that an administrator was responsible for it in addition to other duties; for example, director of i n ­ struction in personnel in 14, or 21 per cent of the citie s . A separate personnel department headed by an executive responsible only for personnel adminis­ tration in 29, or 43 per cent of the cities.26 He obtained data on the origin and function of the personnel administrator in 33 cities that had centralized the personnel function. In public schools of cities with 15,000 to 30,000 inhabitants, M i l l a r 2^ studied the status and trends in teacher personnel administration. He interviewed 20 admin­ istrators in 5 states to devise a check list on current Practices in Other Fields" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation. New York University, 1953). 26 I b i d . , p. 12 3. Allen Robert Millar, "Teacher Personnel Adminis­ tration in School Systems in Cities 15,000 to 30,000 in Population” (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation. University of Nebraska, 1956) . 29 practices and projected practices. The check list was sent to 257 administrators in 47 states. Only 13.3 per cent of the reporting schools had personnel departments in o p e r ­ ation. The study indicated 74 per cent of the adminis­ trators reporting considered teacher personnel departments necessary or desirable. Administrators indicated four chief reasons for establishing teacher personnel d epa r t ­ ments: (1) greater increase in personnel problems, (2) the increased awareness by the administration for greater personnel expertness in the area, administrator's duties, and (3) general increase in (4) the proven worth of expert personnel management. The findings indicated that the personnel director should always be responsible to the superintendent. The duties of the teacher personnel department should include (1) recruitment, (2) examination of certified personnel, participation in ftie selection of teachers, of teachers, (3) assignment (4) maintain evaluation records, mendation of termination, and (5) recom­ (6) the administration of policies and regulations for promotion of position and salary, tenure. retirement, teacher loads, leaves of absence, and Other duties of the teacher personnel department should be in maintenance of personal files of information on vital statistics, training experience, evaluation of records, professional activities, publications and civic activities of certified personnel. 30 The study recommends that the administrator, in planning a course of action to establish such a department, should familiarize himself with the general field of personnel problems. In 1956 Wheeler^8 sought responses from 234 districts and found 32 per cent with personnel offices. Through these responses he proposed (1) to determine the responsibility of the personnel department in school districts of 10,000 to 30,000 students; (2) to outline the relationship of the personnel department with other divisions within the school district; (3) to determine how the personnel practices in the districts of 10,000 to 30,000 students are fundamentally different from those in districts of larger school population; (4) to discover at what size district, as based on enrollment, department, as such, a personnel is a practical addition to the administrative structure; <5) to develop a set of criteria by use of which each school district administration can evaluate the functions of its own personnel office, or to enable the organization of a personnel department in such districts that do not already have such an organization. 28 Donald R. Wheeler, "The Organization, Relation­ ship and Responsibilities of the Personnel Office in School Districts of 10,000 to 30,000 Enrollment" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation. University of Southern California, 1956) . 31 Tritt 2 9 made basically the same study as Millar, except with school population. interviewed. systems in cities of 30,000 to 60,000 Eighteen administrators in six states were F rom the information gained from 117 adminis­ trators in 45 states who completed a check list, trends and status of the organization of teacher personnel departments were ascertained. At this time only 22 per cent of the schools reporting have teacher personnel departments in operation. The study did indicate that 77 per cent of the school administrators reporting considered professionally operated teacher personnel departments necessary and desirable. Tritt's recommendations of proposed duties and responsibilities of teacher personnel departments were basically the same as Millar's. Egly^® in 1959 investigated personnel practices in public school districts in cities of 100,000 or more population in the United States, with respect to the granting of fringe benefits. Evaluative criteria were drawn to assist districts in the development of fringe Charles William Tritt, "Teacher Personnel Adminis­ tration in School Systems in Cities, 30,000-60,000 in Population" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation. University of Nebraska, 1956). 30 Edgar Carl Egly, 'Fringe Benefits for Classified Employees of Large City School Districts" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation. University of Southern California, 1959). 32 benefit policies. Comparisons were made with existing practice in industry. The author recommended that fringe benefits for classified employees be similar to those granted certified personnel, taking into consideration differences in re­ sponsibility in training. It was held that constant evaluation of the program should be made to ascertain how well the goals for granting such benefits were achieved in practice. Reference was frequently made in the literature to the dual approach to the school personnel management in which a separate system exists for classified and certified administration. A trend toward a more complete integration of the two kinds of school employees in regard to personnel policies was reported. Mack 31 in 196 0 sought to determine the personnel functions that should be performed in school districts, the administrative position that should be assigned responsi­ bility for each function, and the patterns of organization that are most conducive to successful performance of the personnel functions. The normative survey technique was employed to collect data from 2 6 unified and common administration school districts in California. A sample ^ J a y David Mack, "The Organization of DistrictLevel Personnel Functions in Selected California School Districts" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1960). 33 of the districts was selected having from 5,000 to 22,000 enrollment. Many of the findings in Mack's survey study are directly related to this investigation and are summa­ rized as follows: 1. 2. 3. The average ratio of certified employees to enrollment was 24 students for each certified employee, and size of district had little bearing on the ratio. Large districts were found to maintain one classified employee for each 60 students. Ratio of certified to classified was approximately two to o n e .32 Findings related to the position of personnel administrator and pertinent to this study include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The administrator most frequently assigned to the major responsibility for personnel was the person­ nel director in large districts, and the assistant superintendent in m e d i u m size districts. The titles most frequently utilized by districts for classification for large to small were: a. personnel director b. assistant superintendent c. superintendent Respondents usually recommend that titles used be the same as those in actual use. Existing and recommended responses most frequently selected an assistant superintendent, usually the one in charge of business services, to be responsi ble for classified personnel. Slightly more than half of the districts had a single administrator who carried major responsi­ bility for both certified and classified pers o n ­ nel. *3 Further findings in the area of assigned personnel functions include: 32l b i d . , p. 463. 33 I bid., pp. 463-64. m 1. 2. 34 The superintendent should have major responsi­ bility for salary program. The assistant superintendent should have major responsibility for: a. assignment and transfer b. orientation and in-service training c . employee handbooks d. personnel policies, with minor responsibility for personnel records and the retirement program. More than three-fourths of all personnel a d m inis­ trators were directly responsible to the superintendent, and all respondents favored this relationship. As district enrollments increased, the certified and classified employees assigned to personnel functions increased. A slight increase in the number of such employees was recommended. In two-thirds of all districts an advisory relationship exists between the personnel administrator and the assistant superintendent in charge of business services. In almost half of the districts studied, a staff relationship existed between the personnel administrator and the assistant superintendent in charge of instructional services. A majority of the respondents recommended an advisory relationship with the school principal. There was near unanimity of opinion that personnel responsibilities should be stated in writing. enrollment increased, As districts' there was a tendency for personnel responsibilities to be separated f rom the line relationship 3 4 Ibid., pp. 467-68. 35 and to be performed by staff specialists. Mack concluded that there is a general desire on the part of personnel administrators to achieve some form of centralized person­ nel organization, and a trend was noted in this direction. An advisory relationship should exist between the personnel administrator and other district level administrative positions and school principals. Addington,^ in 1961, conducted a study to determine whether there are methods, practices, or techniques useful in human relations revealed by research in personnel administration, in business and industry, that could be useful in, but are being used little or not at all in educational personnel administration. After his review of literature, he concluded, among the implications for public education were t h e s e : 1. 2. 3. 4. Horizontal communications channels should be kept open to encourage joint problem solving among peers. Teachers and other school employees should receive recognition for work well done. Recognition of good work will contribute to high morale and continued good work. School employees should be informed of school financial matters. Employees, especially teachers, should be informed of the financial reports before the reports are released to the public. Teachers will benefit so far as income taxes are concerned if the school corporation pay retirement costs, life and health insurance premiums. 35 Chester Luther Addington, "A Review on Human Relations in Business and Industrial Personnel Adminis­ tration with Implications for Educational Personnel Administration" (Abstracts of Doctoral Dissertations, Indiana University, 1961). 36 organizational membership fees, and school business travel expenses directly rather than paying this money to the teacher who must pay tax on it.-*® Morton's^ 1961 study was made to discover the functional relationship which should be maintained by the school district personnel administrator and other d e ­ partments of the central office, including school principal, employee groups, and certain other agencies. Specifically, the study sought to answer the following questions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. What is the current staffing pattern and status of school personnel departments? What are some of the representative relationships maintained by the personnel department with other divisions of the district? What are some of the representative relationships of the personnel department with certain groups outside the district? What would constitute a desirable environmental setting for the operation of the personnel d e ­ partment in relationship with other departments of the central office and the school administrators? What are some of the desirable representative working relationships to be maintained by the personnel department with certain agencies outside the district?38 From the questionnaire sent to 88 school districts in cities of the United States having a population from 3^ I b i d ., p. 134. O "7 Clayton Robert Morton, "The Organization and Relationships of School Personnel Departments in Cities of 100,000 to 500,000 Population in the United States" (un­ published Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1961). 38 . , _ I b id., p . 7. 37 100,000 to 499,999, Morton obtain his information and drew these conclusions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The school personnel administrator maintains an advisory relationship with the staff members. Competency in the performance of assigned functions of all employees is an appropriate concern of the personnel staff. Recognition of the potential role of an adequately staffed personnel department has not been uniformly attained. The assignment of responsibility for all personnel management to a single staff position is an emerging organizational pattern. Effective functioning of the personnel staff requires the maintenance of positive working relationships, through operative communications channels with administrators, professional groups, employees' unions, and agencies. Awareness of the dynamics of employee group action and its bearing on the power structure of an administrative organization is an essential concept in school administration. It is prudent to secure participation of all affected in the recruitment and in-service training of both certified and classified school district employees. Schools of education, teacher placement offices, professional organizations, school principals, the instructional staff, and quality of the in­ structional programs are important cogs of the personnel depart m e n t , ” From these conclusions, Morton made the following recommendations: 1. 2. Staffing of school personnel departments needs to be reviewed to determine the adequacy of numbers of employees allocated to perform assigned fu n ctions. In view of the unanimity of opinion regarding the responsibility of the personnel administrator in policy formulation and proposals for change, it is recommended that this position be designated to work directly with officers of professional orga n i ­ zations and employees' unions on an established board adopted policy basis. Thus seen, salary 3 9 I b i d . , p. 167. 38 3. 4. 5. 6. requests and other employees' benefit issues would be analysed by the personnel staff and referred to the superintendent with a proposed plan of action. It is recommended that central staff operating patterns be designed to provide an opportunity for the function interaction necessary to insure m a x i ­ mum utilization of human resources in the education of children. It is recommended that a planned program be created to promote the coordinated efforts of local schools of education, placement offices, instruction and personnel staff members, and school administrators in the recruitment and training of classroom teachers. To recommend that school districts investigate the possibility of utilizing more fully the services of local state employment offices in the recruitment of classified school employees and the procurement of labor market and wage data. This study was brought in scope to encompass staffing patterns, general relationships, maintained by school personnel administrators. Future study is necessary to identify specific techniques, particularly in the field of relationship with employee unions, personnel organizations, localstate employment offices, and creating and m a i n ­ taining the relationships identified in this study. The entire field of cooperative endeavor by indi­ vidual school districts and local schools of education in the recruitment and training of teachers merits further study. Donald's4 * study in 1962 was undoubtedly one of the most complete and recent studies in the area of public school personnel administration. 40 41 I b i d . , p. She did a four place 172. Eleanor Donald, "The Public School Administrator, A Study of the Origin, Administrative Status, Duties and Responsibilities, and Trends of the Position" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1962). 39 project including the areas of public school personnel administrators' origin, status, duties and responsibili­ ties, and trends of the position. Of course, the area of public school personnel administrators' duties and responsibilities has great significance to this study. Her stated purpose for the study was: 1. 2. 3. 4. To study the origin of the position of public school personnel administrators— when, where, and why it was originally established. To describe the administrative status, duties and responsibilities of the personnel administrator. To describe the personal and professional specifi­ cations established for the incumbent and character­ istics of those persons presently holding the position. To describe directions in which the position will probably d e v e l o p . ^ To find the answer to these problems, Donald reviewed the literature, made a brief inquiry form, sent it to school districts known or believed to employ personnel administrators, had interviews with selected superin­ tendents and personnel administrators, and a study of job descriptions of personnel administrators. After studying and analyzing 73 job descriptions as stated by personnel administrators and interviewing 15 district superintendents and personnel administrators, Mrs. Donald made this summary of her findings: 1. The Personnel Administrator, regardless of title, is usually directly responsible to and under the supervision of the superintendent of schools. 42 I b i d ., p. 7. 40 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12 . 13. The personnel administrator is generally responsible for two groups of p e r s o n n e l , the professional and clerical staff of the personnel office and other personnel on a district-wide basis. The personnel administrator is always responsible for certified personnel and usually for classified personnel. The personnel administrator holds a staff (rather than line) position in most cases. The personnel administrator is usually a member of the superintendent's administrative cabinet. The personnel administrator is employed on a twelve month basis, with one month vacation. The personnel administrator is subject to state certification laws as well as local laws, rules, and regulations pertaining to other school district personnel, but otherwise, restricted only by his job description. The personnel administrator works closely in a cooperative advisory capacity with other central office administrators, supervisors, and principals. Duties, responsibilities of the position are a college pulled away from or shed b y the board, the superintendent, the superintendent's secretary, assistant superintendents of elementary or secondary education, instruction or business, the board of examiners, directors, supervisors, and principals. Creation of the position represents an attempt to have the central office personnel function performed more effectively on a full time basis by someone specifically assigned to this responsibility, and to free other administrators for other tasks. Recruitment of teachers and maintenance of person­ nel records have always been the personnel adminis­ t r a t o r ’s primary responsibility. The personnel administrator participates in many other personnel functions. These are expanding in volume and scope to include activities or functions not originally included in the personnel function when the position was first established forty years ago. Personnel administrators are now in charge of a wide variety of programs and services; indications are that more and more activities will come to be regarded as properly the responsibility of the personnel administrator.4 ^ 4 3 I b i d . , pp. 173-74. 41 If this be the case, there is no doubt Michigan and the United States as a whole should, and will have to, concentrate more on perfecting the personnel function of school districts. The relationship between the school board and the superintendent of schools has been a problem of great magnitude in recent years. The principle appearing frequently in the literature that the superintendent evaluates and recommends and the board appoints the selection and promotion of school personnel. Disregard of this principle has been noted in some incidence of actual practice. The policy approach to the personnel management through the board adopted policies is recommended. Re­ sponsibility for adoption would rest with the board of education with the help of the superintendent, assistant superintendent of personnel and representative members of the school board, both instructional and non-teaching. Human values are considered to be of paramount importance in personnel evaluation. References have been made throughout the literature to the concept that personnel administrators represents all the people in the organization. A very significant statement in this regard, and serves as a genesis and a 42 summation for this investigation is stated in the next p a r a grap h . Personnel administration must inject a strong dose of realism into the idealistic mixture prepared by e du­ cational planners. Without an understanding of human limitations and without policies and practices that take these limitations into account, participation in the edu­ cational enterprise can become more and more frustrating, and the aims of education can become empty promises. CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY This study was designed to determine which e d u ­ cational administrators within the school system should be assigned selected personnel functions according to the judgements of (1) Michigan superintendents, and (2) selected authorities in school personnel administration. The nature of the type of study problem implied the use of the normative survey method of research. The most practical and feasible means of gathering data for this study was considered by the researcher to be the use of a questionnaire— a method widely used in survey research involving sample studies. With the realization thAt restrictions are existent in research projects utilizing questionnaires, it was decided to proceed under the assumption that administrators would be inclined to respond in an accurate and forthright manner to an unsigned checktype survey form. The Sample and Its Selection The normative survey method of research will be used, and the data will be secured by means of a 43 44 questionnaire which will be sent to forty of the 150 Michigan school districts having an average daily at­ tendance of 3,000 students or more. A list of authorities in the area of school personnel administration will receive the same questionnaire. A stratified random sampling technique will be used. The statistics will be shown by tables and in percentage form. Plan of the Study Primary sources of original data were the responses from superintendents of schools in the state of Michigan and authorities in the area of school personnel adminis­ tration on a questionnaire indicating their opinions concerning the delegation of responsibilities for personnel functions. Information on school personnel administration was obtained from secondary sources in the professional liter­ ature. Current researchers and practitioners were used in development of a list of authorities. was indicated as having researched, If the educator or diligently studied the field of school personnel administration, he was c on­ sidered as an authority in the area of school personnel administration. Educational directories were requested from the state superintendent of public instruction of the state of Michigan. From this source the names and addresses of the superintendents of schools, in districts having 3,000 45 average daily attendance or more, were obtained. The forty school districts sampled and the six authorities that received the questionnaire are listed in Appendix A. The questionnaire technique for collecting data was used in this investigation for the following reasons: (1) since respondents were actively engaged in the field and familiar with personnel procedures, there appeared to be little need for further clarification, (2) interviews would have been difficult to schedule due to the varied locations of the r e s p o n d e n t s . The survey method of research was used, and the dat a were secured by means of a questionnaire which was sent to forty of 150 Michigan school districts with an average attendance of 3,000. sample. The selection was a random A list of authorities in the area of school personnel administration received the same questionnaire. Valid responses were received from twenty—nine superin­ tendents, which represents 73 per cent of the superin­ tendents contacted. Questionnaires were sent to six authorities, and six authorities responded. Further analysis was made of the responses in terms of geographic area, size of community, and selected authorities. It was believed that the study would be more meaningful if current opinions could be obtained from Michigan superintendents, administration. and authorities in school 46 The questionnaires were addressed to the superin— tendent of schools of the districts. All authorities received their questionnaires addressed to them at their employment address (see Appendix B ) . identified the researcher, The cover letter stated the purpose, indicated method of response, and assurred the respondents that their identity or contribution would not be indicated by name. Return envelopes and postage were included. Development of the Questionnaire A preliminary questionnaire was developed from the literature and through conferences with administrators actively engaged in school personnel w o r k plus the exami­ nation and analysis of job descriptions for school person­ nel administrators. Previous research studies, and p ro­ fessional books and periodicals, were utilized to obtain an extensive list of functions performed by school person­ nel managers. The preliminary trial questionnaire was reviewed by selected members of the Michigan State U n i ­ versity, Department of Administration and Higher Education. The questionnaire was designed to reflect the opinions of selected superintendents and authorities regarding the delegation of various district personnel functions. There were four parts of the questionnaire. Part 1 of the questionnaire obtained opinions relative to the general organization of the personnel 47 function for a school district. formulation, Sub—topics weret policy inter-district c o m m u n ications, and personnel records. Part II required an opinion as to the delegation of duties and functions of school personnel administration in the area of staff procurement and utilization. this area, the following topics were nel needs, (2) personnel recruitment, (3) personnel selection, (4) personnel assignment, (5) substitute teachers, and Under included: Cl) person­ (6) liaison responsibilities. The third part was titled "staff d e v e l o p m e nt." Here, opinions were obtained on the topics of: o r ien­ tation and induction of personnel, professional d e v e l o p ­ ment, evaluation, promotion, personnel transfer, and adjustment counseling. Conditions of service is the last part of the questionnaire and included thirty-three items under the sub— titles of certification, formulation of job descriptions, compensation, work loads, absence, leaves of tenure recommendation, grievances, dismissal, and retirement. Method of Collecting Data Thirty—two superintendents out of the forty S2uc.pled responded to the questionnaire. authorities contacted, O f the six six responded to the questionnaire. This return represents 83 per cent of the total number of 48 questionnaires distributed. questionnaires, Due to three invalid 7 per cent of the responses were void and not made part of the study. By eliminating those districts with incomplete and invalid responses, this gives a 76 per cent valid response which provides basic data for the study. This percentage was considered adequate for the purpose of this investigation. Treatment of Data Selection of this treatment was made after the following steps were taken: (1) information from all sections of the questionnaire was tabulated manually, (2) the opinions of the Michigan superintendents and authorities for the degree of agreement or disagreement were established with deviations indicated. This information is reported in Chapter IV. Consistency of responses between the selected authorities and the superintendents was placed at the 60 per cent level, i.e., if the selected authorities stated that a particular personnel function was at the 50 per cent level and the superintendents placed it at the 70 per cent then this particular personnel function was considered to be consistent. 49 The purpose of this chapter has been to explain the procedures and instrumentation used to fulfill the o b ­ jectives of this study. A detailed description of the questionnaire related to the roles and functions of the District Personnel Director as seen by cer t a i n Michigan superintendents and selected authorities was given. The manner in which it was developed was explained. The forty school districts and six selected authorities which constituted the sample used in this study were described. Unique characteristics of the school districts which make up the sample were listed and discussed. An explanation of the mechanics of survey a d m i n i s ­ tration was given, stressing the need to maintain anonymity among school districts in order to attain the highest possible level of hon e s t expressions from respondents. explanation of how the d ata would be treated was also given. The following chapter will be devoted to the analysis of the data gathered in this study. An CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION OF DATA In the preceding chapter the methods of procedure for this research survey were presented. Contained in Chapter IV is an analysis of the data and the findings. This chapter is divided into twenty-five sections, one for each of the twenty-four areas of interest chosen for study, and a section that lists selected authorities and superintendents* responses to two questions to be resolved. The statistical analyses of all data for this study were done manually by the investigator with assistance from the Computer Center at Michigan State University. Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel— Policy Formulation The presentation of data in this section is c o n ­ cerned with research and personnel policy, development of personnel policy, organization and consolidation of already existing personnel policy, and administering and in­ terpreting personnel policy. 50 51 Table 1 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the M i c h i g a n superintendents as related to the areas in policy formulation. Data in Table 1 indicate t h a t : 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that the development of personnel policy should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel while 93 per cent o f the superintendents would assi g n this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superintendents would share this responsibility with other m e m b e r s of the central office staff, while a small percentage of the authorities would share this function with the superintendents. 2. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities reported that the development of personnel policy should be the responsibility of the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of personnel to be shared equally, while 93 per cent of t h e superin­ tendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- one per cent of the superintendents indicated that this responsibility should be a s s i g n e d to the superintendent. TABLE 1. General Organization— Policy Formulation. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Superintendents Asst Asst Asst Asst ASSt Asst Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of of Other of of of Other Supt Bus Xnst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin A. Research and survey personnel policy 17 83 14 7 10 93 7 7 B. Be responsible for the development of person­ nel policy 83 83 31 3 7 V 10 7 C. Organize and consolidate already existing person­ nel policy 17 83 10 7 3 100 3 D. Administer and interpret personnel policy 50 66 10 7 7 93 14 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 7 53 3. Eighty—three per cent of the authorities stated that organizing and consolidating already existing personnel policy should be the duty of the assis­ tant superintendent of personnel, while 100 per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superin­ tendents would share this responsibility with other central office personnel, while a small percentage of the authorities would share it with the superintendents. 4. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that the responsibility for administering and inter­ preting the personnel policy should be assigned to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 50 per cent of the authorities state that this responsibility also should be assigned to the superintendent. Ninety—three per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this personnel function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, and a small percentage of the superin­ tendents would share it w i t h other central office personnel. 54 Data on Administrator Responsible for Inter-District Communications The presentation of data in this section is c on­ cerned with (a) keeping the superintendent and the board of education informed on personnel matters; ing vacancies; (b) advertis­ (c) maintaining contact with college placement bureaus and applicants for employment; id) com­ piling and distributing a policy handbook for personnel and a district personnel directory; tact wit h and working with union, munity groups; (e) maintaining co n ­ professional, and com­ (f) keeping informed on recent developments in the field of personnel administration; Ig) contributing items of interest on personnel to the district and circu­ lating bulletins to personnel and dissemination infor­ mation from central office to individual schools. Table 2 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the M i chigan superintendents as related to the areas of Inter-District Communications. Data in Table 2 indicate t h a t : 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that keeping the superintendent and the board of education informed on personnel matters should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel and 33 per cent of the authorities would assign this personnel function to the superintendent. Ninety— seven per cent of the TABLE 2. General Organization— Inter-Diatrict Communications. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should ASSt Supt of Supt Bus A. Keep the superintendent and the board of education informed on personnel matters 33 Advertise vacancies Asst ASSt Asst ASSt ASSt Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Supt of Bus Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin S3 17 100 C. Maintain contact with college placement bureaus and applicants for employment 17 100 D. Compile and distribute a policy handbook for per­ sonnel and a district personnel directory 33 100 E. Maintain contact with and work with union, pro­ fessional, and conmunity groups 50 B, 17 Superintendents 100 3 7 10 97 7 7 7 14 97 28 3 97 3 3 93 17 10 100 TABLE 2. Continued * Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Supt of Supt Bus F. Keep informed on recent developments in the field of personnel adminis­ tration 50 G. Contribute items of interest on personnel to the district 50 H, circulate bulletins to personnel and disseminate information from the central office to indi­ vidual schools 50 I. Plan and administer the district public relations program 50 17 33 Superintendents ASSt ASSt Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus ASSt ASSt Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 100 28 10 10 97 7 7 17 100 17 14 14 97 14 17 17 63 17 10 20 86 33 50 34 3 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 52 28 57 M i c h i g a n superintendents assign this responsi­ b il i t y to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 2. O n e —hundred per cent of the authorities stated that advertising vacancies should be the responsi­ bility of the assistant superintendent of person­ nel, while 97 per cent of the Michigan superin­ tendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 3. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that maintaining contact with college placement bureaus and applicants for employment should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 97 per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 4. O n e — hundred per cent of the authorities reported that compiling and distributing a policy handbook for personnel and a district personnel directory was the responsibility of the assistant superin­ t endent of personnel, while 33 per cent of the authorities further assigned this duty to the superintendent. Ninety—three per c ent of the M i c h i g a n superintendents assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 58 5. One-hundred p e r cent, of the authorities stated that maintaining contact with and working w ith union, professional, and community groups was the responsi­ bility of the assistant superintendent of pers o n ­ nel, while 50 per cent of those authorities would assign this personnel function to the s u p e r i n ­ tendent on a sharing basis w i t h the assistant superintendent of personnel. One—hundred per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superin­ tendents w o u l d share this responsibility w i t h other members of the central office staff. 6. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that keeping informed on r e c e n t developments in the field of personnel administration was the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l , while 50 per c e n t of the authorities would assign this function to the superintendent. Ninety-seven per cent of the Michigan s u p e r i n ­ tendents w o u l d assign this personnel function to the assistant superintendent of p e r sonnel. A small percentage of the superintendents w o u l d assign this function to the superintendent. 7. One-hundred percent of the authorities reported that contributing items of interest on personnel 59 to the district is the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l , while 50 per cent of the authorities would divide this function equally between the superintendent and the personnel officer. The authorities also shared this responsibility with the assistant superintendent of business (17%), and the assis­ tant superintendent of instruction (17%). Ninety- seven per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while a small p er­ centage of the superintendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff. 8. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities would assign the personnel function of circulating bulletins to personnel and disseminating infor­ mation from the central office to individual schools to the assistant superintendent of person­ nel, while 50 per cent of the authorities see this function as a major responsibility of the superintendent. Seventeen per cent would share this responsibility w i t h the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction. Eighty— six per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of 60 personnel. A small percentage of the superin­ tendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff. 9. Fifty per cent of the authorities stated that planning and administering the district public relations program should be the responsibility shared equally by the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities further revealed that this responsibility should be divided between the assistant superintendents for business and instruction. Fifty-two per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 34 per cent of the superintendents w o u l d assign this responsibility to their office. This responsibility would be also shared by other administrators in 28 per cent of the cases. The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned w i t h developing and designing a system of personnel records including forms and/or procedures, keeping, m a i n ­ taining, and using accurate complete and up-to-date personnel records. 61 Table 3 shows the percentage of response by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas of Personnel R e c o r d s . Data In Table 3 indicate that: 1. O n e —hundred per cent of the authorities stated that developing and designing a system of person­ nel records including forms and/or procedures should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 100 per cent of the Michigan superintendents agreed with the authorities and would assign this duty to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 2. O n e —hundred per cent of the authorities reported that keeping, maintaining, and using accurate, complete, and up-to-date personnel records was the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 100 per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this personnel function to the assistant superintendent of pe r s o n n e l . Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel Needs The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned w ith planning and directing studies of present and future personnel needs, maintaining close communication with all district administrative and advisory personnel TABLE 3. General Organization— Personnel Records. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Superintendents Asst Asst Asst Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of of of of of Other Other Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus A. Develop and design a system of personnel records including forms and/or procedures 100 B. Keep, maintain, and use accurate, complete, and up-to-date personnel records 100 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 10 7 7 3 100 100 10 10 63 and others in line relationship w ith employees who supply information on long— and short-range personnel needs, and assembling and coordinating information of personnel needs. Table 4 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas of Personnel Needs. Data in Table 4 indicated that: 1. One-hundred per cent of the authorities reported that planning directing studies of present and future personnel needs should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thir t y —three per cent of the authorities would also assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction. Seventeen per cent would allocate this responsibility to both the superin­ tendent and the assistant superintendent of bus i ­ ness. Eighty-six per cent of the Michigan superin­ tendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superintendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff, except for the assistant superin­ tendent for instruction 2. (24%). One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that maintaining close communication w ith all district administrative and advisory personnel TABLE 4. Staff Procurement and Utilization— Personnel Needs. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should A. Plan and direct studies of present and future personnel needs Asst Supt of Supt Bus 17 17 B. Maintain close communi­ cation with all district administrative and advisory personnel and others in line relationship with employees who supply infor­ mation on long and short range personnel needs 17 17 C. Assemble and coordinate information of personnel needs Superintendents Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus 33 17 Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin ASSt 100 14 7 24 86 100 24 17 14 83 10 7 10 86 100 17 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 10 7 10 7 65 and others in line relationship with employees who supply information on long- and short-range personnel needs should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 17 per cent of the authorities would assign this function to b o t h the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of business. Eighty- three per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty-four per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the superintendent, while 17 per cent of the superintendents would share this responsibility w i t h the assistant superintendent of business. 3. O n e —hundred per cent of the authorities stated that assembling and coordinating information of personnel needs should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 17 per cent of the authorities would share this responsibility w i t h the principal and the assistant superintendent of instruction. Eighty- six per cent o f the Michigan superintendents assigned this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. A small percentage of the 66 superintendents would share this responsibility w i t h other members of the central office staff. Data on Administrator Responsible for Recruitment The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned with supervising student—teacher training programs and activities of Future Teachers of America Club, pla n ­ ning, directing, coordinating, and participating in d is­ trict recruitment programs; advertising openings and p re­ paring promotional literature, maintaining effective contact with college placement officers and professors, traveling to college campus placement officers to inter­ view prospective teachers and participate in career—day a c t i v i t i e s , and scheduling trips and making arrangements for recruitment teams. Table 5 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Recruitment. Data in Table 5 indicate that: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that supervising student-teachers programs and activities of Future Teachers of America Club should be the responsibility of the principal. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction and 17 per cent to the TABLE 5. Staff Procurement and Utilization— Recruitment. Superintendents Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Supt of Supt Bus A. Supervise student-teacher training program and activ­ ities of Future Teachers of America Club Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus 33 17 B. Plan, direct, coordinate, and participate in district recruitement program 83 C. Advertise openings and prepare promotional literature 83 D. Maintain effective contact with college placement officers and professors 83 3 Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 31 62 31 10 o\ 33 83 33 17 17 20 86 28 14 17 14 100 10 14 7 97 7 3 TABLE S. Continued. Authorities Which Administrator (s) Should E. Travel to placement interview teachers, in career Superintendents ASSt ASSt Asst Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Other of of of of of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus college campus offices to prospective and participate day activities 100 10 97 31 F. Schedule trips and make arrangements for recruit­ ment teams 100 7 100 7 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 14 69 assistant superintendent of personnel. Sixty- two per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-one per cent of the superintendents further indicate that the assistant superintendent of instruction and principal should share this responsibility. 2. Eighty—three per cent of the authorities would assign the responsibility of planning, directing, coordinating, and participating in district recruitment programs to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities assign this function to the prin­ cipal. Eighty-six per cent of the Michigan superin­ tendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. The superintendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff, namely, the assistant superintendent of instruction (28%), and other administrator 3. (20%), principal (14%). Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that advertising openings and preparing promotional literature was the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel; and 17 per cent of the authorities would assign this function to other administrators, while 100 per cent of 70 the superintendents would assign this responsi­ bility to the assistant superintendent of person­ nel, and 14 per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction, and 14 per cent of the superintendents assign this duty to other adminis­ trators, 10 per cent assigned this responsibility to the principal. 4. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities reported that maintaining effective contact with college placement officers and professors should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 33 per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction and 17 per cent to the principal. Ninety-seven per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 5. One—hundred per cent of the authorities stated that traveling to college campus placement officers to interview prospective teachers and participate in career-day activities should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 97 per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to 71 the assistant superintendent of personnel with assistance from the assistant superintendent of instruction (10%), principal administrator 6. (31%), and other (14%). One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that scheduling trips and making arrangements for recruitment teams should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 100 per cent of the Michigan superintendents agreed w ith authorities on this assignment to the assistant superintendent of personnel. The presentation of data in this section is concerned w i t h interviewing and if possible observing all candidates on the job, processing applications for p ro­ spective employees, collecting references, reviewing transcripts, checking certification, verifying application forms, arranging interviews for candidates with other district personnel, administering examinations, giving preliminary screening to candidates' applications, and establishing eligibility lists. Table 6 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Personnel Selection. TABLE 6. Staff Procurement and Utilization— Personnel Selection. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Supt of Supt Bus A. Interview, and if possible observe all candidates on the job Superintendents Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus 17 66 66 3 Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 20 86 48 100 3 B. Process applications for prospective employees 100 C. Collect references, review transcripts, check certi­ fication, verify appli­ cation forms 100 100 7 D. Arrange interviews for candidates with other district personnel 100 100 14 E. Administer examinations 100 7 100 3 F. Give preliminary screening to candidates' appli­ cations and establish eligibility list 100 3 89 10 3 14 TABLE 6. Continued. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst ASSt Asst Asst Asst AS8t Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of of Other of Of Other of Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt BUS Prin Inst Pers Admin G. Receive and submit to the superintendent and board recommendation for employ­ ment H. Issue contracts to employed personnel Superintendents 17 33 100 17 83 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 3 20 3 7 100 89 10 74 Data in Table 6 indicate that: 1. Sixty— six per cent of the authorities stated that interviewing and if possible observe all candidates on the job should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities also reported that this function should be the responsibility of the principal, while the assistant superintendent of instruction would share in the responsibility. Eighty—six per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. F o rty—eight per cent of the superintendents further revealed that this function should be designated to the principal, while the assistant superintendent of instruction (20%) and other administrator (14%) would also assist. 2. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that processing applications for prospective employees should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 100 per cent of the superintendents agreed w ith the authorities and assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of p e r s o n n e l . 3. O n e —hundred per cent of the authorities stated that collecting references, reviewing transcripts, 75 checking certifications, verifying application forms should be the responsibility of the assis­ tant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l , while 100 per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 4. One-hundred per cent of the authorities reported that arranging interviews for candidates with other district personnel should be the responsi­ bility of the assistant superintendent of person­ nel, while 100 per cent of the superintendents agreed w ith the authorities o n the assignment of this function. Principals (14%) would share in this responsibility according to the superin­ tendents . 5. O n e — hundred per cent of the authorities stated that administering examinations should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. One—hundred per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 6. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that giving preliminary screening to candidates' applications and establishing eligibility lists should be the responsibility of the assistant 76 superintendent of personnel. Eighty—nine per cent of the superintendents would assign this r esponsi­ bility to the assistant superintendent of pers o n ­ nel. A small percentage of the superintendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff. 7. One-hundred per cent of the authorities reported that receiving and submitting to the superintendent and board recommendations for employment should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l , and they would share this responsi­ bility with the assistant superintendent of instruction (17%) , and the principals (17%). One-hundred per cent of the Michigan superin­ tendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, also. 8. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that issuing contracts to employed personnel should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the superintendent. Eighty-nine per cent of the Michigan superintendents w o u l d assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 20 per cent of the superin­ tendents would have this function assigned to the superintendent. 77 Data on Administrator Responsible for Personnel Assignment The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned with conducting studies relating to basis for assigning personnel in the school, and coordinating and supervising assignment of personnel to the superintendent. Table 7 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the M i chigan superintendents as related to the areas in Personnel Assignment. Data in Table 7 indicate that: 1. One-hundred per cent of the authorities reported that conducting studies relating to basis for assigning personnel in the school should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities also would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction and the principal. Eighty-three per cent of the Michigan s uperin­ tendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- four per cent of the superintendents w o u l d share this responsibility w i t h the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction, w h i l e 24 per c ent would share it w i t h the p r i n c i p a l . 2. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that coordinating and supervising assignment of TABLE 7, Staff Procurement and Utilization— Personnel Assignment. Superintendents Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Asst Asst Asst Asst ASSt Supt supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Other of of of Other of of of Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin A. Conduct studies relating to basis for assigning personnel in the school B. Coordinate and supervise assignment of personnel to the superintendent 17 50 66 100 66 83 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 10 34 03 24 24 17 79 7 3 79 personnel to the superintendent should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of pe r s o n n e l , while SO per cent of the authorities would assign this responsibility to the superin­ tendent. Seventy—nine per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. They would also share this responsibility with the assistant superintendent of instruction (17%), and the superintendent (24%). Data on Administrator Responsible for Substitute Teachers The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned with recruitment, approving, and maintaining lists of substitute teachers, verifying information on applications from substitute teachers, distributing substitute teachers lists. Table 8 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Substitute Teachers. Data in Table 8 indicate that: 1. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that recruitment, approving, and maintaining lists of substitute teachers should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while sharing this function with the principal TABLE 8. Staff Procurement and Utilization— Substitute Teachers. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should A. Recruit, approve and maintain list of substi­ tute teachers B. Verification of infor­ mation on applications from substitute teachers C. Distribute substitute lists Note: Superintendents Asst Asst ASSt Asst ASSt ASSt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of of of Other of Other of Admin Inst Prin Pers Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus 17 100 33 97 7 100 17 97 3 83 33 100 All figures are percentages of the group. 3 3 81 (33%) , and the assistant superintendent of instruction (17%). Ninety— seven per cent of the M ichigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l . 2. One-hundred per cent of the authorities reported that verifying information on applications from substitute teachers should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, and also share this w ith the principal (17%), while 97 per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. 3. E i g h t y —three per cent of the authorities stated that distribution of substitute lists should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Thirty—three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal. One—hundred per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Data on the Administrator Responsible for Liaison Responsibilities The presentation of data in this section is c o n ­ cerned with representing the school system on all occasions 82 w hen personnel administration is a topic of concern, representing the superintendent's "voice of personnel" at professional meetings by giving speeches to educational councils. Table 9 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Liaison Responsibilities. Data in Table 9 indicate that: 1. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that representing the school system o n all occasions when personnel administration is a topic of concern should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cert of the authorities would divide this function between the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of personnel. The assistant superintendent of instruction and the superintendent of business share this responsibility. (17%) (17%) would Ninety-three per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 20 per cent of the superintendents would share this responsibility with the assistant superintendent of personnel. 2. One—hundred per cent of the authorities stated that representing the superintendent's "voice of TABLE 9. Staff Procurement and Utilization— Liaison Responsibilities Authorities Which Administrator (s) Should A. Represent the school system on all occasions when personnel adminis­ tration is a topic of concern B. Represent the superin­ tendent's "voice of personnel" at pro­ fessional meetings by giving speeches to educational councils Asst Supt of Supt Bus 33 17 Superintendents ABst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus 17 100 20 100 17 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 93 7 86 3 84 personnel** at professional meetings by giving speeches to educational councils should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 86 per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Seventeen per cent of the superintendents reported that they would share this responsibility with the assistant superintendent of personnel. Data on Administrator Responsible for Orientation and Induction of Personnel The presentation of data in this section is c on­ cerned w ith assisting teachers in finding suitable living accommodations, being chairman of the orientation program committee, planning, direction, and conducting the orien­ tation and instruction program. Table 10 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas of Orientation and Induction of Personnel. Data in Table 10 indicate t h a t : 1. Eig h t y — three per cent of the authorities stated that assisting teachers in finding suitable living accommodations should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 50 per cent of the authorities would share this TABLE 10* Staff Development— Orientation and Induction of Personnel Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Superintendents Asst Asst Asst Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of of of Other Of of Other Supt BUS Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin A. Assist teachers in finding suitable living accomodations 83 50 17 7 10 3 93 24 14 B. Be chairman of the orien­ tation program committee 17 33 83 33 3 24 79 10 3 C. Plan, direct, and conduct the orientation and induction program 17 17 83 33 3 24 86 10 3 17 66 33 7 7 89 7 10 D. Distribute informational materials to new employees Note: All figures axe percentages of the group. 3 86 responsibility with the principal. Ninety-three per cent o f the Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superin­ tendent o f personnel, whi l e 24 per cent of the superintendents would share this responsibility with the principal. 2. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that being chairman of the orientation program committee should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would divide this function between the assistant sup e r i n­ tendent of instruction and the principal and the superintendent (17%) . Seventy-nine per cent of the M i c h i g a n superintendents would assign this f u nction to the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l ( while 24 per cent would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instru c t i o n . 3. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities reported that planning, directing, and conducting the orien­ tation and induction pro g r a m should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal, while the assistant superintendent 87 for instruction (.17%) and the superintendent would share in this responsibility. (17%) Eighty— six per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel, while 24 per cent of the superintendents assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction. 4. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that distribution of informational materials to new employees should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities further indi­ cated that this function should belong to the principal, while the assistant superintendent of instruction would share in this responsibility. Eighty-nine per cent of the superintendents assign the responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superin­ tendents would share this responsibility w ith other members of the central office staff. Data on Administrator Responsible for In-Service Development The presentation of data in this section is c on­ cerned with directing the administration of the in-service development program, analyzing, and recommending in-service development, maintaining records of in-service development p a r t i c ip a t i o n . 88 Table 11 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas involved in in-service training. Data in Table 11 indicate that: 1. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that directing the administration of the in-service development program should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction, while the principal (33%) and the assistant superintendent of business would share in this responsibility. Fifty-nine per cent of the selected superintendents w ould assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 4 5 per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction. 2. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that analyzing and recommending in-service development should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of instruction. Thirty—three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel and 17 per c e n t to the principal. Sixty-nine per cent of the superintendents would assign this TABLE 11, Staff Development— In-Service-Development. Superintendents Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Asst Asst Asst Asst ASSt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of Other of of of Other Of Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin I A. Direct the administration of the in-service develop­ ment program 17 66 66 33 7 3 45 59 10 7 B. Analyze and recommend inservice development 66 33 17 10 7 42 69 14 3 C. Maintain records of inservice development participation 33 83 17 34 72 10 3 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 90 responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. F o rty— two per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction. 3. Eighty— three per cent of the authorities reported that maintaining records of in-service development participation should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of instruction. Seventy-two per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-four per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction. Data o n Administrator Responsible f°r Evaluation The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned w i t h developing a system of evaluation procedures, standards, and forms, administering the evaluation pro­ gram, distributing evaluation forms to principals and supervisors, evaluating personnel if there is some doubt about a particular individual, evaluate principals and supervisors, and assemble and rev i e w evaluations. 91 Table 12 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Evaluation. Data in Table 12 indicate that: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that developing a system of evaluation procedures standards and forms should be the responsibility o f the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal, while 17 per cent of the authorities would further assign this responsibility to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction. Sixty—nine per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Forty—two per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction. 2. O n e —hundred per cent of the authorities reported that administering the evaluation program should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Thirty—three per cent of the authorities would share this function with the principal. Sixty-six per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while TABLE 12. staff Development— Evaluation. Superintendents Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Asst Asst Asst ASSt ASSt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Other of of Other Of of Of of Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin A. Develop a system of evaluation procedures, standards and forms 17 83 33 B. Administer the evaluation program 100 33 C. Distribute evaluation forms to principals and supervisors 100 D. Evaluate personnel if there is some doubt about a particular individual 33 17 33 83 E. Evaluate principals and supervisors 33 33 33 33 F. Assemble and review evaluations 66 50 66 Note: 17 14 10 42 69 20 14 7 3 31 66 17 7 20 69 7 3 3 83 All figures are percentages of the group. 17 17 10 42 69 28 10 45 7 34 52 3 10 14 62 3 34 93 31 per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction and 17 per cent to the p r i n c i pal. 3. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that distributing evaluation forms to principals and supervisors should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Sixty-nine per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Twenty per c ent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of instruction. 4. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that evaluation of personnel if there is some doubt about a particular individual should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Eighty— three per c ent of the authorities also stated that this function should be shared by the principal, while 33 per cent of the authorities would divide this responsibility between the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of instruction. Sixty-nine per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Forty-two per cent of the superintendents would also assign this function 94 to the assistant superintendent of instruction, and to other central officers as follows: superintendent 5. (17%) and principal (28%). Thirty-three per cent of the authorities stated that the evaluation of principals and supervisors should be the responsibility of four district administrative officers, the superintendent, assistant superintendent of business, assistant superintendent of instruction, and the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fif t y — two per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Forty-five per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this function to the superintendent's office and 34 per cent to the assistant superintendent of instruction, 6. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that assembling and reviewing evaluations should be the responsibility equally shared by the superin­ tendent and the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of instruction. Sixty-two per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent 95 of personnel. Thirty— four per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the superintendent. Data on Administrator Responsible " for Promotion The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned with advertising promotional openings, screening candidates, and compiling promotional eligibility lists, administering promotional examinations, organizing, planning, and implementing a cadet or administrative training program. Table 13 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Promotion. Data in Table 13 indicate that: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that advertising promotional openings should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while sharing this responsibility with the superintendent (33%), the assistant superintendent of instruction administrator 2. (17%) and other (33%). One-hundred per cent of the authorities reported that screening candidates and compiling pro­ motional eligibility lists should be the responsi­ bility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. TABLE 13. Staff Development— Promotion. Superintendents Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should ASSt Supt of Supt Bus Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus A. Advertise promotional openings 33 17 83 B. Screen candidates and compile promotional eligibility list 17 17 100 33 7 C. Administer promotional examination 17 17 100 17 10 34 83 17 D. Organize, plan, and implement a cadet or administrative training program 17 Asst 33 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 66 Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 3 100 3 10 100 10 3 7 89 7 14 89 7 7 14 Asst 7 7 97 Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal# w h i l e the superintendent (17%) and assistant superintendent of instruction (17%) would share in this responsi­ bility. One—hundred per c e n t of the s u p e r i n ­ tendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superintendents would share this function with other mem b e r s of central office. 3. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that administering promotional examinations should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel# while the s u p e r i n ­ tendent business (17%) and the assistant superintendent of (17%) instruction bility. and assistant superintendent of (17%) would share in this r e s p o n s i ­ Eighty— nine per c e n t of the s u p e r i n ­ tendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 4. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that organizing# planning# and implementing a cadet or administrative training program should be the responsibility of the assistant s u p erin­ tendent of personnel. T h i r t y — four per c e n t of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction. 98 and 66 per cent would assign this responsibility to other administrators. Eighty— nine per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsi­ bility to the assistant superintendent of person­ nel. A small percentage of the superintendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff. D ata on Administrator Responsible for Personnel Transfer The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned with receiving and reviewing all requests for transfer, processing, and implementing the transfer. Table 14 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Personnel Transfer. Data in Table 14 indicate that: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that receiving and reviewing all requests for transfer should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal. Ninety— three per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel, a small percentage of TABLE 14. Staff Development— Personnel Transfer. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Asst ASSt Asst ASSt Asst Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of of Other of of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus A. Receive and review all requests for transfer B. Process and implement the transfer Superintendents 17 17 17 83 33 17 3 7 10 93 83 33 50 10 10 14 93 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 100 the superintendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff. 2. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities reported that processing and implementing the transfer should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. T h i r t y — three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the pr i n c i p a l . They would also share this responsibility w i t h other administrators, superintendent business (17%), assistant superintendent of (17%), assistant superintendent of instruction (17%), and other administrator (50%). Ninety-three per c e n t of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Data on Administrator Responsible for A d j u s t m e n t Counsel T h e presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned w i t h aid and assistance to teachers with personal complicated and emotional or mental problems, and being able to divest himself of the aura of administrative office and be able to create a climate of genuine trust and confidence for the teachers. Table 15 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Adjustment Counsel. TABLE 15. Staff Development— Adjustment Counsel Superintendents Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should A. Aid and assist teachers with personal compli­ cated and emotional or mental problems Asst Supt of Supt Bus Asst Supt of Bus Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other InstPers Prin Admin Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other InstPers Prin Admin 33 17 33 83 66 17 14 14 17 83 24 7 B. Be able to divest himself of the aura of his adminis­ trative office and be able to create a climate of genuine trust and confi­ dence for the teachers 50 50 50 83 66 50 42 34 34 72 14 31 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 102 Data in Table 15 indicate that: 1. Eighty-three per c e n t of the authorities stated that aid and assistance to teachers w i t h c o mpli­ cated emotional problems should be the responsi­ bility of the assistant superintendent of person­ nel. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the p r i n c i p a l , while 33 per cent of the superintendents, 33 per cent of the assistant superintendents of instruction, and 17 per cent assistant superintendents of business would share in this responsibility. Eighty—three per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty-four per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the principal, w h i l e 17 per c e n t of the superintendents would have the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction share in this responsibility. 2. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities reported that the central office administrative officer most likely to be able to divest himself from the aura of administration should be the responsi­ bility o f the assistant superintendent of person­ nel. S i xty— six per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign the shared 103 responsibility between the superintendent, assistant superintendent of business, assistant superintendent of instruction, and the other administrator. Seventy-two per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-four per cent of the selected superintendents would divide this responsibility between the assistant superintendent for business and the assistant superintendent of instruction, while 42 per c ent would assign this responsibility to the superintendent, and 31 per cent would assign this function to other administrators. Data on Administrator Responsible for Certification T h e presentation of data in this section is c on­ cerned with evaluation of transcripts in terms of the certification law, determining whether teachers are fully and properly certificated, and if not, help them become so, act as contact w ith and a resource to the state department on certification matters, keep teachers posted on changes in state certification law. Table 16 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas of Certification. TABLE 16. Conditions of Service— Certification. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Superintendents Asst ASSt Asst Asst ASSt ASSt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of of Other of of of Other Prin Admin Inst Pers Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt BUS A. Evaluate transcripts in terms of the certification 17 law 100 B. Determine whether teachers are fully and properly certificated, and if not, help them become so 17 100 C. Act as contact with and a resource to the State Department on certifi­ cation matters 17 100 D. Keep teachers posted on changes in state certifi­ cation law 17 100 33 17 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 17 10 3 100 7 10 3 100 7 10 3 100 10 13 3 100 7 7 105 Data in Table 16 indicate that: 1. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that evaluating transcripts in terms of certifi­ cation law should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities w o u l d assign this function to the principal. O n e —hundred per cent of the selected superintendents assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 2. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that determining whether teachers are fully and properly certified should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 100 per cent of the selected superintendents assigned this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel, also. 3. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that acting as contact with and a resource to the State Department on certification matters should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel, while 100 per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, also. 106 4. One-hundred per cent: of the authorities stated that keeping teachers posted on changes in state certification law should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel* One- hundred per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Data on Administrator Responsible for Formulation off Job Description The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned w ith preparing job descriptions, maintaining an up-to-date file on job descriptions, and studying new or modified positions and alter the job description as need e d . Table 17 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Formulation of Job Descriptions. Data in Table 17 indicate that: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that preparing a job description should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities w o u l d assign this function to the principal, while 17 per cent of the superintendents, 17 per cent business office, and 33 per cent assistant superintendents of instruction would share in TABLE 17, Conditions of Service— Formulation of Job Description. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should A. Prepare/ or have prepared, by a staff committee or by persons most closely associated with or who knows the most about a particular job Asst Supt of Supt Bus 17 17 Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus 33 B. Maintain an up-to-date file on job description C. Study new or modified positions and alter the job description as needed Note: Superintendents 17 Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 83 50 24 17 20 97 17 100 33 17 3 7 100 3 83 33 17 10 14 93 10 All figures are percentages of the group. 14 10 108 this responsibility. Ninety—seven per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty-four per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this function to the superintendent, while the assistant superin­ tendent of business (17%), assistant superin­ tendent of instruction (20%), and principal (17%) would share in this responsibility. 2. One-hundred per cent of the authorities reported that maintaining an up-to-date file on job descriptions would be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal. One-hundred per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superin­ tendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff. 3. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that studying new or modified positions and alter the job description as needed should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the 109 principal• Ninety-three per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel, A small percentage of the superintendents w o u l d share this responsibility w i t h other mem b e rs of the central office staff. Data on Administrator Responsible for Compensation The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned w ith interpreting the salary schedule to personnel, administer the salary schedule, study, prepare, develop, and revise salary schedule for district, keep up-to-date on local conditions and maintain a level of compensation competitive with other fields, interpret training and experience of prospective employees prior to their place­ ment o n the salary schedule, negotiate with employee groups on salary questions, and certify the payroll to the business department. Table 18 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas of Compensation. Data in Table 18 indicate that: 1. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities reported that interpreting the salary schedule TABLE 18. Conditions of Service— Compensation. Superintendents Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Supt of Supt Bus Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus A. Interpret the salary schedule to personnel 33 50 50 7 7 B. Administer the salary schedule 50 33 33 14 38 C. Study, prepare, develop, and revise salary schedule for the district, keep upto-date on local conditions and maintain a level of compensation competitive with other fields 33 17 33 24 D. Interpret training and experience of prospective employees prior to their placement on the salary schedule 17 14 33 33 66 33 Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 89 3 3 72 3 3 28 76 3 10 3 100 3 3 7 TABLE 18. Continued. Superintendents Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should ASSt ASSt Asst Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of of of of of Other Other Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus E. Negotiate with employee groups on salary questions 17 33 F. Certify the payroll to the business department 33 50 17 33 17 50 17 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 17 17 69 3 20 83 17 7 112 to personnel should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of business. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities w o u l d assign this responsibility to the superintendent. Eighty—nine per cent of the selected superin­ tendents assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superintendents would share this responsi­ bility with other members of the central office staff. 2. Fifty per cent of the authorities reported that administering the salary schedule should be the responsibility of the superintendent. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of business. T h i r t y —three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l . Seventy-two per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty—eight per cent of the superin­ tendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of business. 3. Thirty—three per cent of the authorities stated that preparing, developing, and revising salary schedules for the district should be the 113 responsibility of the superintendent. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities also assigned this responsibility to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel, while 17 per cent of the authorities assigned this function to the business office. Seventy-six per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty-eight per cent of the superintendents assigned this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of business. Twenty— four per cent of the superintendents assign this function to the super intendent. 4. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities reported that interpreting training and experience of pro­ spective employees prior to their placement o n the salary schedule should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the superintendent. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would divide the function between the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction and the principal. One- hundred per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l . 1X4 5. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities stated that negotiations with employee groups o n salary questions should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of pe r s o n n e l . Thirty- three per c ent of the authorities r eported that this function should be assigned to the assistant superintendent of business, while the superin­ tendent (17%> and the principal share in this responsibility. (17%) , would Sixty-nine per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 20 per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this function to other central office personnel. 6. Fifty per c ent of the authorities stat e d that certification of the payroll to the business department should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l . Thirty- three per c ent of the authorities w o u l d assign this function to the superintendent, while 50 per cent assigned the business office, to instruction superintendent, 17 per cent 17 per cent princi­ pal, and 17 per cent other administrator sharing this responsibility. Eighty-three p e r cent of the superintendents assigned this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 115 17 per cent: of the superintendents would share this responsibility w ith the business office, and 17 per cent of the principals share this function. Dat-a o n Administrator Responsible for Work Loads The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned with study work loads of all personnel, and make appropriate recommendations for equitable distribution of work l o a d . Table 19 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the M ichigan superintendents as related to the areas of w ork loads. Data in Table 19 indicate that: 1. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that studying w o r k loads of all personnel should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of b u s i n e s s , while 17 per cent of the authorities would share this responsibility with the assistant superintendent of instruction, principal, and other administrator. Sixty-nine per cent of the selected superintendents assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of p e r s o n n e l . Twenty— four per cent of TABLE 19. Condition* of service— Work Loads. Authorities Which Administrator(*) Should Asst Asst Asst Asst ASSt Asst Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Of of of Other of of of Other Supt Bus Inst Fers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pars Prin Admin A. Study work loads of all personnel B. Hake appropriate recom­ mendations for equitable distribution of work load Note: Superintendents 17 33 17 66 17 17 20 17 24 69 14 20 17 50 66 50 17 20 14 24 72 14 20 All figures are percentages of the group. 117 the superintendents would assign this responsi­ bility to the assistant superintendent of instruction, 20 per cent to the superintendent, 17 per cent to the business department, 14 per c ent to the principal, and 20 per cent to other central office staff. 2. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that making recommendation for equitable distribution of work loads should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction and the principal, while 17 per cent of the authorities would assign this responsi­ bility to the business office, and 17 per cent to the superintendent. Seventy-two per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty-four per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction, while 20 per cent of the authorities would have the superintendent and other administrator share this responsibility. 1X8 Data on Administrator Responsible for Leaves of Absence The presentation of data in this section is c o n ­ cerned w ith developing and recommending leave policy, receiving and processing leave requests, keeping and checking records to determine eligibility for leave, providing information and advice to staff members about leave, recommendation of persons eligible for leave to the superintendent. Table 20 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the area of Leaves of Absence. Data in Table 20 indicate that: 1. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that developing and recommending leave policy should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the superintendent. Ninety— three per cent of the selected superintendents assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty—one per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the superintendent. Twenty— four per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of instruction, and 17 per cent TABLE 20, Conditions of Service— Leaves of Absence, Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Superintendents Asst Asst Asst Asst Asst ASSt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Of of of Other Supt BUS Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin A, Develop and recommend leave policy 50 B. Receive and process leave requests 33 17 33 17 33 17 Keep and check records to determine eligibility for leave D. Provide information and advice to staff members about leave 17 66 17 83 17 83 17 83 66 63 33 17 31 17 24 93 14 17 7 10 97 3 3 7 3 100 3 3 7 7 100 10 7 10 100 7 C. E. Recommend persons eligible for leave to the superin­ tendent Note: 17 17 All figures are percentages of the group. 17 3 120 of the authorities would share this responsibility w i t h the assistant superintendent of business. 2. Eigh t y —three per cent of the authorities stated that the receiving and processing of leave requests should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this responsibility to the superintendent, while 17 per cent would have the assistant superintendent of business and the assistant superintendent of instruction, principal, and other administrator share this responsibility. Ninety— seven per cent of the superintendents assign this responsi­ bility to the assistant superintendent of person­ nel, with the superintendent (17%) sharing this function. 3. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that keeping and checking records to determine eligibility for leave should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 33 per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the superintendent. One-hundred per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 121 4. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that providing information and advice to staff members about leave should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the superintendent. Sixty- six per cent of the authorities would assign the responsibility to the principal. One-hundred per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 5. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that recommending persons eligible for leave to the superintendent should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal. One-hundred per cent of the selected superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Data on Administrator Responsible for Tenure Recommendations The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned with keeping track of those employees eligible for 122 tenure, and submitting to the superintendent a list of staff to be tenured with recommendations from their immediate supervisors. Table 21 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Tenure Recommendations. Data in Table 21 indicate that: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that keeping track of those employees eligible for tenure should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Seventeen per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of business. Ninety-three per cent of the superin­ tendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fourteen per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the principal. 2. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that the submitting to the superintendent a list of staff to be tenured with recommendations from their immediate supervisors should be the responsi­ bility of the assistant superintendent of person­ nel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this responsibility to the assistant TABLE 21. Conditions of Service— Tenure Recommendations. Author i tie s Which Administrator(s) should Asst Supt of Supt Bus A. Keep track of those employees eligible for tenure 17 B. Submit to the superin­ tendent a list of staff to be tenured with recommendations from their immediate superiors 17 Super intenden ts Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt 83 33 83 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 7 Asst Supt of Bus Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 3 93 14 7 97 20 3 124 superintendent of instruction. Ninety— seven per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Twenty per cent of the superintendents would share this responsibility with other members of the central office staff. Data on Administrator Responsible for*"Grievances of Personnel The presentation of data in this section is c on­ cerned with maintaining contact with the grievance co m ­ mittee of the teachers' association and union, and being aware of the work w ith all grievances submitted by local teachers' organizations. Table 2 2 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Grievances of Personnel. Data in Table 2 2 indicate that: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that maintaining contact with the grievance c om­ mittee of the teacher's association and union should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this responsibility to the principal. Eighty-six per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility TABLE 2 2 . Conditions of Service— Grievances of Personnel Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Supt of Supt Bus A. Maintain contact with the grievance committee of the teachers1 association and union B. Be aware of and work with all grievances submitted by local teachers' organi­ zations Note: 33 superintendents Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus Asst ASSt Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 83 50 10 3 7 86 20 7 66 50 28 7 14 93 14 7 All figures are percentages of the group. 126 to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the principal. 2. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities reported that being aware of and working with all grievances submitted by local teachers * organizations should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal. Thirty-three per cent of the authori­ ties assign the responsibility to the superin­ tendent. Ninety-three per cent of the superin­ tendents assign this function to the assistant superintenent of personnel. Twenty-eight per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the superintendent. Data on Administator Responsible for Dismissal The presentation of data in this section is c on­ cerned with developing policies or procedures under which staff may be dismissed, evaluating recommendations for termination of an employee, and assembling information for dismissal of an employee. Table 2 3 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Dismissal. TABLE 23. Conditions of Service— Dismissal. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Superintendents Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of Other of of Supt BU5 Inst Pers Prin Admin Asst Asst ASSt Supt Supt Supt Other of of of Supt Bus Inst Pers Prin Admin A. Develop policies or procedures under which staff may be dismissed 50 17 17 66 50 17 24 17 17 93 17 7 B. Evaluate recommendations for termination of an employee 50 17 50 66 33 17 24 10 20 93 10 10 C. Assemble information for dismissal of an employee 17 17 17 66 50 17 14 3 10 89 17 3 Note: All figures are percentages of the group. 128 Data in Table 23 indicate that: 1. Sixty— six per cent of the authorities stated that developing policies or procedures under which staff may be dismissed should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the superintendent, and the principal. N in e t y —three per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty-four per cent would assign this responsibility to the superin­ tendent, while the assistant superintendent of business (17%)r assistant superintendent of instruction (17%), and the principal (17%) would share this responsibility. 2. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that evaluating recommendations for termination of an employee should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign the responsi­ bility to the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of instruction, while the principal (33%) and the business office in this responsibility. (17%) should share Nin e t y —three per cent of the superintendents would assign the 129 responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty-four per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this function to the superintendent, and 20 per cent w o u l d assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of instruction. Data on Administrator Responsible for Retirement The presentation of data in this section is con­ cerned with developing policy on retirement, acting as the authorized agent for the state retirement fund in the district, providing resource data as a basis for retire­ ment legislation, keeping and checking records for verifi­ cation of status of employees, counsel personnel of problems related to retirement, and providing information to the business department of the district and to the state or local retirement board. Table 24 shows the percentage of responses by the selected authorities and the Michigan superintendents as related to the areas in Retirement. Data in Table 24 indicated that: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that developing policy on retirement should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would also assign this function to the TABLE 24. Conditions of Service— Retirement. Authorities Which Administrator(s) Should Asst Supt of Supt Bus A. Develop policy on retire­ ment 50 B. Act as the authorized agent for the state retirement fund in the district 33 50 C. Provide resource data as a basis for retirement legislation 17 33 D. Keep and check records for verification of status of employees Note: to the of the state board 17 Asst Asst Asst Supt Supt Supt of of Other of Inst Pers Prin Admin Supt Bus 83 17 E. Counsel personnel of prob­ lems related to retirement F. Provide information business department district and to the or local retirement Superintendents 66 33 83 17 17 Asst Asst Supt Supt of of Other Inst Pers Prin Admin 24 28 10 83 14 45 3 55 3 79 7 10 100 17 14 24 66 17 3 20 63 7 83 17 7 17 79 10 3 48 66 All figures are percentages of the group. 7 72 3 131 superintendent, while 33 per cent of the a uthori­ ties would assign this function to the principal. Eighty-three per cent of the selected superin­ tendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty- eight per cent of the superintendents w o u l d assign this function to the assistant superintendent of business. Twenty-four per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign the responsibility to the superintendent. 2. Eighty—three per cent of the authorities stated that acting as the authorized agent for the state retirement fund in the district should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of business, and 33 per c ent of the authorities assigned this responsibility to the superintendent. F i f t y — five per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Forty-five per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of business. 3. One-hundred per cent of the authorities stated that providing resource data as a basis for retirement 132 legislation should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of business, while the superintendents (17%), the assistant superintendent of instruction the principal (17%), and (17%) would share this responsibility. Seventy-nine per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty— four per cent of the superintendents assign this function to the assistant superintendent of business. 4. S i xty—six per cent of the authorities report that keeping and checking records for verification of status of employees should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 17 per cent of the authorities would share this responsibility with other central office staff. Eighty-three per cent of the selected superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 20 per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of business. 5. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that counseling personnel on problems related to 133 retirement should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 79 per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superin­ t endent of personnel. 6. Sixty-six per c ent of the authorities report that providing information to the business department of the district and to the state or local retire­ m e n t board should be shared by the assistant superintendent of personnel and the assistant superintendent of b u s i n e s s . Seventy-two per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsi­ bility to the assistant superintendent of person­ nel, while 48 per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of business. Questions to Be Resolved Question 1.— "Is the superintendents' of school role concept of the personnel director consistent with the role concept as d e f i n e d by selected authorities?" Q uestion 2.— "Is the role of the personnel director in large school districts consistent w i t h the role d e f i ­ nition by selected authorities and superintendents?" In the data presented, there w ere seventy-six job responsibilities of the personnel directors' position in 134 which there was consistency between selected authorities and superintendents. The role definition of the personnel director in large school districts (15,000 pupils enroll­ ment or over) was consistent w i t h the role definitions of the selected authorities and superintendents in agree­ ment with job functions as listed. These job responsi­ bilities are as f o l l o w s : 1. Research and survey personnel policy 2. Be responsible for the development of personnel policy 3. Organize and consolidate already existing person­ nel policy 4. Keep the superintendent and the board of education informed of personnel matters 5. Advertise vacancies 6. Maintain contact with college placement bureaus and applicants for employment 7. Compile and distribute a policy handbook for personnel and a district personnel directory 8. Maintain contact with and work with union, p r o­ fessional, 9. and community groups Keep informed on recent developments in the field of personnel administration 10. Contribute items of interest on personnel to the district newsletter 135 11. Circulate bulletins to personnel and disseminate information from the central office to individual schools 12. Plan and administer the district public relations program 13. Keep, maintain, and use accurate, complete, and up-to-date personnel records 14. Plan and direct studies of present and future personnel needs 15. Maintain close communication with all district administrative and advisory personnel and other in line relationship with employees who supply information on long and short range personnel needs 16 . Assemble and coordinate information on personnel needs 17. Plan, direct, coordinate, and participate in district recruitment program 18. Advertise openings and prepare promotional lit­ erature 19 . Travel to college campus placement offices to interview prospective teachers 20. Schedule trips and make arrangements for re­ cruitment teams 21. Process applications of prospective employees 136 22. Collect references, certification, 23. review transcripts, check verify application forms Arrange interviews for candidates with other district personnel 24. Administer examinations 25. Give preliminary screening 26. Receive and submit to the superintendent and board recommendations for employment 27. Issue contracts to employed personnel 28. Conduct studies relating to basis for assigning personnel in the school 29. Coordinate and supervise assignment of personnel to the superintendent 30. Recruit, approve, and maintain list of substitute teachers 31. Verification of information on applications from substitute teachers 32. Represent the school system on all occasions when personnel administration is a topic of concern 33. Represent the superintendent's "voice of personnel" at professional meetings by giving speeches to educational councils 34. Assist teachers in finding suitable living accommodations 35. Be chairman of the orientation program committee 36. Plan, direct and conduct the orientation and induction program 135 11. Circulate bulletins to personnel and disseminate information from the central office to individual schools 12 . Plan and administer the district public relations program 13. Keep, maintain, and use accurate, complete, and up-to-date personnel records 14. Plan and direct studies of present and future personnel needs 15. Maintain close conmmnication with all district adsdnistrative and advisory personnel and other in line relationship with employees who supply information on long and short range personnel needs 16. Aaiesble and coordinate information on personnel needs 17. Plan, direct, coordinate, and participate in district recruitment program 18. Advertise openings and prepare promotional lit­ erature 19. Travel to college campus placement offices to interview prospective teachers 20. Schedule trips and make arrangements for re­ cruitment teams 2 1 . Process applications of prospective employees 137 37. Distribute informational materials to new employees 38. Direct the administration of the professional development program 39. Maintain records of development {In-Service) 40. Development of a system of evaluation procedures, s t a ndards, and forms 41. Evaluate principals and supervisors 42. Assemble and review evaluations 43. Advertise promotional openings 44. Screen candidates and compile promotional e li­ gibility lists 45. Administer promotional examinations 46. Organize, plan, and implement a cadet or adminis­ trative program 47. Receive and review all requests for transfer 48. Process and implement the transfer 49. Aid and assist teachers with personal complicated and emotional or mental problems 50. Be able to divest himself of the aura of his administrative office and create a climate of genuine trust and confidence of the teacher 51. Evaluate transcripts in terms of the certification law 52. Determine whether teachers are fully and properly certificated 53. Act as a contact with and a resource to the State Department on certification matters 138 54. Keep teachers posted on changes in state certifi­ cation law 55. Prepare job description about a particular position 56. Maintain an up-to-date file on job description 57. Study new or modified positions and alter the job description as needed 58. Study work loads of all personnel 59. Make appropriate recommendations for equitable distribution of work load 60. Develop and recommend leave policies 61. Receive and process leave requests 62. Keep and check records to determine eligibility for leave 63. Provide information and advice to staff members about leave 64. Recommend persons eligible for leave to superin­ tendent 65. Submit to the superintendent a list of staff to be tenured with recommendations from their immediate superiors 66. Maintain contact with the grievance committee of the teachers' 67. association of union Develop policies or procedures under which staff may be dismissed 68. Evaluate recommendations for termination of an employee 139 69. Assemble information for dismissal of an employee 70. Develop policy on retirement 71. Provide resource data as a basis for retirement legislation 72. Keep and check records for verification status of employees 73. Counsel personnel of problems related to retire­ ment 74. Provide information to the business department of the district and to the state or local retirement board 75. Plan and administer the district public relations program. 76. Develop and design a system of personnel records including forms and/or procedures. Inconsistencies Between the Selected "“Authorities and the Superintendents Tables 1, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12, 18, 22, and 24 include the inconsistencies of responses by selected authorities and superintendents concerning the questions to be resolved. The data in Table 1 show: 1. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities would assign further responsibility of development of personnel policy to the superintendent and share this responsibility w i t h the assistant 140 super in tendent of personnel, while only 31 per cent of the selected superintendents would assign this responsibility to the superintendent. 2. Sixty— six per cent of the authorities stated that the responsibility for administering and interpret­ ing the personnel policy should be assigned to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 50 per cent of the authorities state that this responsibility also should be assigned to the superintendent. Ninety-three per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this personnel function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, and a small percentage of the superin­ tendents would share it with other central office pe r s o n n e l . 3. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that supervising student-teachers of America Club should be the responsibility of the principal. Thirty—three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of instruction and 17 per cent to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Sixty— two per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty-one per cent 141 of the superintendents further indicate that the assistant superintendent of instruction and the principal should share this responsibility. 4. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities reported that maintaining effective contact w i t h college placement officers and professors should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 33 per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction and 17 per cent to the principal. Ninety—seven per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this responsi­ bility to the assistant superintendent of p e rson­ nel . 5. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that interviewing and if possible observe all candi­ dates on the job should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities reported that this function should be the responsibility of the principal, while the assistant superintendent of instruction would share in the responsibility. Eighty-six per cent of the Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. F o r t y —eight per cent of the superintendents further revealed that 142 this function should be designated to the principal, while the assistant superintendent of instruction (20%) and other administrator (14%) would also assist. 6. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities stated that the distribution of substitute lists should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of p e r s o n n e l . Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal. One hundred per cent of the Michigan superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 7. sixty-six per cent of the authorities stated that analyzing and recommending in-service development should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of instruction. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, and 17 per cent to the principal. Sixty-nine per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Forty— two per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction. 143 8. One hundred per cent of the authorities reported that administering the evaluation program should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would share this function with the principal. Sixty-six per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 31 per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of instruction and 17 per cent to the principal. 9. One hundred per cent of the authorities stated that distributing evaluation forms to the princi­ pals and supervisors should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Sixty-nine per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty per cent of the superin­ tendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of instruction. 10. Eighty-three per cent of the authorities reported that the development of personnel policy should be the responsibility of the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of personnel to be shared equally, while 93 per cent of the superin­ tendents w o u l d assign this responsibility to the 144 assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- one per cent of the superintendents indicated that this responsibility should be assigned to the superintendent. 11. Fifty per cent of the authorities reported that interpreting the salary schedule to personnel should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of business. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this responsibility to the superintendent. Eighty-nine per cent of the selected superin­ tendents assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel. A small percentage of the superintendents would share this responsi­ bility w ith other members of the central office staff. 12. Fifty per cent of the authorities reported that administering the salary schedule should be the responsibility of the superintendent. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of b u s i ­ ness. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the assistant superin­ tendent of p e r s o n n e l . Seventy-two per cent of the 145 Michigan superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of person­ nel. Thirty-eight per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of business. 13. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities stated that preparing, developing, and revising salary schedules for the district should be the responsi­ bility of the superintendent. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities also assigned this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 17 per cent of the authorities assigned this function to the business office. Seventy-six per cent of the selected superin­ tendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Twenty- eight per cent of the superintendents assigned this function to the assistant superintendent of business. Twenty-four per cent of the superin­ tendents assign this function to the superintendent. 14. Sixty-six per cent of the authorities reported that interpreting training and experience of prospective employees prior to their placement on the salary schedule should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign 146 this function to the superintendent. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would divide the function between the assistant superintendent of instruction and the principal. One-hundred per cent of the superintendents would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. 15. Thirty-three per cent of the authorities stated that negotiations with employee groups on salary questions should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities reported that this function should be assigned to the assistant superintendent of business, while the superin­ tendent (17%) and the principal this responsibility. (17%) would share Sixty-nine per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while twenty per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to other central office personnel. 16. Fifty per cent of the authorities stated that certification of the payroll to the business department should be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. Thirty- three per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the superintendent, while 147 50 per cent assigned the business office, 17 per cent to instruction superintendent, 17 per cent to the principal, and 17 per cent other adminis­ trator sharing this responsibility. Eighty-three per cent of the superintendents assigned this function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, while 17 per cent of the superin­ tendents would share this responsibility with the business office, and 17 per cent of the principals share this function, 17, Sixty-six per cent of the authorities reported that being aware of and working w i t h all grievances submitted by local t e a c h e r 1s organizations should be the responsibility of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities would assign this function to the principal. Thirty— three per cent of the authori­ ties further assign this responsibility to the superintendent. Ninety-three per cent of the superintendents assign this function to the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l . Twenty- eight per cent of the superintendents would assign this function to the superintendent. 18. Eighty— three per cent of the authorities stated that acting as the authorized agent for the state retirement fund in the district should be the 148 responsibility o f the assistant superintendent of personnel. Fifty per cent of the authorities assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of business, and 33 per cent of the authorities assigned this responsibility to the superintendent. Fifty-five per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel. Forty- five per cent of the superintendents assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of business. Summary Presented in Chapter IV is an analysis of the data obtained from 81 per cent return of completed question­ naires from the forty Michigan school superintendents and six selected authorities. The chapter was divided into twenty-five areas; one for each of the major personnel functional categories, and section concerning the three questions to be resolved. Tables consisting of the percentage of response by selected authorities and Michigan superintendents were constructed for each of the twenty-four major personnel categories, and the major findings presented in each table were explained. In Chapter V, the summary, major findings, con­ clusions, discussion and recommendations will be reported. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS In the preceding chapter the findings of this research survey were presented. found: In this chapter may be (1) summary of the survey conducted, major findings, (2) the (3) conclusions based upon the findings, (4) discussion, and (5) recommendation for further research. Summary Statement of the Problem This study was designed to determine which edu­ cational administrators within the school system should be assigned selected personnel functions according to judgments of (1) Michigan superintendents, and (2) selected authorities in school personnel administration. In order to explore the purpose of this study, two questions to be resolved were developed: 149 150 1. Is the superintendent's school role concept of the personnel director consistent with the role concept as defined by selected authorities? 2. Is the role of the personnel director in large school districts consistent w i t h the role d e f i ­ nition by selected authorities? Throughout Chapter IV data w e r e presented in an attempt to answer those two questions. Limitations of the Study This study was limited to the following area of school personnel administration: zation (1) General O r g a n i ­ (2) Staff Procurement and Utilization, Development, and (3) Staff (4) Conditions of Service. All Michigan school districts that have a student average daily attendance more were surveyed. (1970-71) of 3,000 students or A list of professional authorities in the field of school personnel management were s u r ­ veyed in a like manner. The Michigan superintendents' opinions were compared with the opinions of the selected authorities. Review of the Literature The general area of interest for this study consisted of pertinent literature which specifically dealt with background authority in school personnel adminis- 151 tration, and the significance of developing f u n c t i o ns, duties, and responsibilities specific to the personnel admini strator. The principle appearing frequently in the lit­ erature that the superintendent evaluates and recommends and the board appoints the selections and promotions of school personnel enhances the relationship between the school board and the superintendent. The policy approach to the personnel management through the board adopted policies is recommended. Responsibility for adoption would rest with the board of education with the help of the superintendent, assistant superintendent of personnel and representative members of the school board, both instructional and non-teaching. Personnel administration must inject a strong dose of realism into the idealistic mixture prepared by e du­ cational planners. Design of the Study The primary purpose of this study was to determine which educational administrators within the school system should be assigned selected personnel functions according to the judgments of Michigan Superintendents and Selected authorities in school personnel administration. The sample used in this study consisted of twentynine Michigan Superintendents and six Selected Authorities 152 In school personnel administration. The schools partici­ pating in this study were selected by random sample. A preliminary questionnaire was developed from the literature and through conferences with administrators actively engaged in school personnel work plus the exami­ nation and analysis of job descriptions for school person­ nel administrators. Previous research studies, and pro­ fessional books and periodicals were utilized to obtain an extensive list of functions performed by school adminis­ trators. The questionnaire was designed to reflect the opinions of selected superintendents and authorities regarding the delegation of various district personnel functions. Consistency of responses between the selected authorities and the superintendents was placed at the 60 per cent level, i.e., if the selected authorities stated that a particular personnel function w a s at the 50 per cent level and the superintendents placed it at the 70 per cent than this particular personnel function was considered to be consistent. Conclusions Based on Major Findings A major finding of this study was that the data revealed few differences between the opinions of selected authorities and Michigan superintendents on the assigning of the personnel functions. 153 1. The authorities and Michigan superintendents generally agree on assigning the responsibility of seventy-six of the ninety-three personnel functions surveyed. Discussion of Inconsistencies of Personnel functions Between the Selected Authorities and the Superintendents It was found that in seventeen personnel functions the selected authorities and superintendents could not agree. Each of the seventeen functions are listed and discussed to determine probable reasons for this incon­ sistency between their responses. 1. Development of personnel policy The selected authorities would share this re­ sponsibility with the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of personnel. Development of personnel policy would definitely be included in the job functions of the assistant superintendent of personnel, but it would be imperative that the superintendent would be involved in possibly the development of the policy, but most assuredly, at that point where the policy must be approved before submission to the Board of Education. to note that the superintendent It is interesting (93%) would assign this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel 154 while 31 per cent of the superintendents would share this responsibility with the superintendent's office. 2. Administering and interpreting personnel policy The selected authorities stated that this personnel function should be shared with the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of personnel. One report stated, "The assistant superintendent of personnel has the major responsibility of this task, but the superintendent must be available to assist in any way in the administration and interpretation of policy related to personnel a d m inis­ tration." This comment points out that the major re­ sponsibility is in office of personnel, but shared w i t h the superintendent. 3. Supervising student-teacher training programs and activities for Future Teachers of America Club The authorities w o u l d assign this responsibility to the principals while the superintendents would assign it to the assistant superintendent of personnel. The authorities see this job function as a principal r esponsi­ bility because the direct supervision of training programs is usually an activity under the leadership of a member of the teaching staff of a particular building. does not belong in the personnel office. responsibility of a principal. It, therefore, Clubs, too, are a Superintendents may have decided that the statement implied the coordination of student teachers, which could rightfully be placed in the 155 personnel office, but the direct supervision of a student teacher program is the responsibility of the building principal. 4. Maintaining effective contact with college placement officers and professors (Table 6) Ninety-seven per cent of the superintendents placed this job function in the office of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel, but the selected authorities gave it to the assistant superintendent of personnel the assistant superintendent of instruction comment from a selected authority stated, (83%) and to (33%). A NI t as good for the assistant superintendent of instruction to have contacts with professors especially for in-service work." This certainly is true, but this statement has nothing to do with contacting placement officers and professors for teacher procurement. There seems to be no logical reason for having the assistant superintendent of instruction involved in this job function. 5. Distributing substitute lists (Table 8) The selected authorities gave this responsibility to the assistant superintendent of personnel the principal (33%). (8 3%) and to It would seem that the actual making of the substitute lists would be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel, and he would in turn distribute them to the principals. Question must be raised on the sharing of this responsibility with the 156 principals. The principals would use the approved list of substitutes to pick qualified substitutes. 6. Analyzing and recommending in-service development (Table 11) In both cases, the selected authorities and the superintendents would share this responsibility with the assistant superintendent of personnel and the assistant superintendent of instruction. Possibly there was a need to define who would be involved in the in-service program. If secretaries and other nonprofessional personnel are to receive in-service work then it would be the responsibility of the assistant superintendent of personnel. In-service work for teachers should be the major responsibility of the assistant superintendent of instruction, but the assistant superintendent of personnel might serve on the curriculum council. The curriculum council representing teachers at all levels would develop in-service programs for professionals in cooperation with the assistant superintendent of instruction and the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel. 7. Administering the evaluation program (Table 12) The selected authorities would share this re­ sponsibility as follows: personnel assistant superintendent of (100%) and the principal (33%). Again a clearer definition of this job function would have eliminated the confusion. The assistant superintendent of personnel 157 would be responsible for adnd.nistrat.ion of the evaluation program, i.e., distribution of evaluation forms to the principal, collection of evaluation forms from the principal, and summarizing the data collected. The principal would be responsible for administration of the evaluation program through visiting classrooms for determining teacher effectiveness and then completing the necessary evaluation forms. These forms would then be submitted to the assistant superintendent of personnel. The superintendents in turn w o uld share this responsi­ bility with the assistant superintendent of personnel (66%), assistant superintendent of instruction and the principal (17%). (31%), The confusion here might be due to the fact that in some school districts the assistant superintendent of instruction does play a part in the evaluation of teacher effectiveness. It is surprising to note that the superintendents only include 17 per cent of their responses to the principal. 8. Distributing evaluation forms (Table 12) One hundred per cent of the authorities gave this job function to the assistant superintendent of personnel, but the superintendents would share this responsibility w ith the assistant superintendent of personnel the assistant superintendent of instruction (6 9%), and (20%). Again it would seem that in some school districts the assistant superintendent of instruction is involved in the 158 supervision of teacher effectiveness and would therefore distribute the necessary forms to teachers. 9. Interpret the salary schedule to personnel The selected authorities would share this re­ sponsibility as follows: personnel assistant superintendent of (50%), assistant superintendent of business (50%), and superintendent (33%). Apparently, the selected authorities felt that these three professionals should be available for the interpretation of the salary schedule. Traditionally, this has been the responsibility of the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of business. More and more the interpretation of the salary schedule is placed in the hands of the assistant superin­ tendent of personnel because it is another of the many personnel functions staff is concerned about. 10. Study, prepare, develop, and revise salary schedules for district (Table 18) Both the selected authorities and the superin­ tendents would share this responsibility w i t h the assistant superintendent of personnel, assistant superintendent of business, and the superintendent. function, In this particular job it would seem logical that all three pro­ fessionals would be involved. 11. Interpret training and experience of prospective employees prior to their placement on the salary schedule. 159 The selected authorities shared this res p o n si­ bility w i t h the following people: of personnel (66%), superintendent superintendent of instruction tendent of business assistant superintendent (33%), assistant (33%), assistant superin­ (33%), and the principal (33%). Logically, this responsibility should be in the hands of the assistant superintendent of personnel. He is the person who has all of what is desirable on training and experience of a prospective employee. The task would then mean assigning the correct salary level according to the prospective employees training and experience. It must be questioned placing this job function in the office of the principal and the assistant superintendent of instruction. Traditionally, this has been placed in the superintendent's office and/or the assistant superintendent of business. With a trained personnel officer, this job function should be placed in his office. 12. Negotiate with employee groups on salary questions (Table 18) The selected authorities shared this responsibility as follows: of business superintendent (17%), assistant superintendent (33%), assistant superintendent of personnel (33%) and the principal (17%). M uch confusion exists at the present time in the state of Michigan in the area of negotiations. Even the literature is not clear on w ho is responsible for this job function. It is interesting to 160 note that the superintendents placed this job function in the assistant superintendent of p e r s o n n e l ’s office (69%). Apparently, the superintendents are following the in­ dustrial model where the personnel officer is directly involved in this job function. 13. Certify the payroll to the business department (Table 18) The selected authorities shared this responsibility with most of the administrators in the central office and the principal. The job function clearly states the task, but apparently tradition comes into play. For example, in many small school districts the superintendent still certifies the payroll. It is surprising to note that the principal does this task in some school districts. It is no small wonder that the principal does not have time for educational leadership tasks. The majority of the superin­ tendents placed this job function with the assistant superintendent of personnel superintendent of business (83%) and the assistant (17%). Again it has been the pattern that the business office certify the payroll. 14. Be aware of the work with all grievances submitted by local teacher's organizations (Table 22) The selected authorities and superintendents would share this responsibility with the assistant superintendent of personnel and the principal. This would seem logical because the first level of grievances would be at the 161 building level. If the grievance can be handled suc­ cessfully at this level then it would not go any further. If the grievance should go to the second level then the assistant superintendent of personnel w o u l d definitely be involved. 15. Act as the authorized agent for the state retire­ ment fund in the district (Table 24) Both the selected authorities and the superin­ tendents placed this job function with the assistant superintendent of pe r s o n n e l , assistant superintendent of business, and the superintendent. Again, traditional patterns found in small districts prevails. The superin­ tendent and assistant superintendent of business have served in this capacity in the past years. As the personnel officer comes into his own, this job function will be placed in that office. 16. Administer the salary schedule (Table 18) Both the selected authorities and the superin­ tendents placed this job function with the assistant superintendent of personnel, assistant superintendent of business, and the superintendent. This pattern of operation is found in many small school districts where the superintendent and the assistant superintendent of business administer the salary schedule. Confusion resulted in this job function because of the meaning of the term "administer." 162 17. I n t e r v i e w , and if possible, observe all candidates on the job Both the selected authorities and the superin­ tendents shared this responsibility with the assistant superintendent of personnel and the principal. The principals should visit teachers on site because these teachers will be placed in their respective schools. The assistant superintendent should do the initial screening so as to eliminate prospective candidates who do not fit the job description. Following the initial screening, principals would have the opportunity to have a closer look at prospective candidates on site. Recommendations This study was designed to determine which e du­ cational administrators within the school system should be assigned selected personnel functions according to the judgments of (1) Michigan Superintendents, and (2) Selected Authorities in school personnel administration. Based on the data obtained in this study, and the infor­ mation acquired from reviewing the literature, the following recommendations for further research are made: 1. It would be valuable to replicate this study by administering a comparative survey of smaller school districts in the state of Michigan. It would be valuable to p e r f o r m an experimental study of this nature comparing the opinions of district administrators and selected authorities within the state of Michigan to those in comparable districts in the neighboring states of Wisconsin and Illinois, to test the reliability of this instrument. Each school district should consider conducting a longitudinal study of its personnel functions over a period of years to see if there are any changes in the opinions and perceptions by any of the superintendents and selected authorities. Personnel administrators in each district in this study should consider a further investigation of each individual personnel function. This w o uld be particularly significant for those functions which receive negative responses from district adminis­ trators, teachers, and the community. The role of the personnel administrator should be investigated more thoroughly. The results of this study indicates that the personnel administrators are unsure of the degree of responsibility they should assume. 164 6. The role of the personnel administator in the management of the responsibility of the personnel functions of evaluations, adjustment counsel and dismissal should be investigated. As was stated in Chapter I , the purpose of this study was to Compare the Role Concept of the District Personnel Director by Certain Michigan Superintendents and Selected Authorities in School Personnel Adminis­ tration. After conducting this study of twenty-nine school district superintendents and six selected authori­ ties, the researcher feels that other states and other districts will find the same methods and instruments are effective means for researching district personnel functions. Recommendations for Further Study It is recommended that an in-depth study of each of the major personnel categories outlined in this study be conducted to further determine the effectiveness of personnel administration in the public high schools of the state of Michigan. Also recommended is a comparative study between states to assess the opinions of superintendents and selected authorities toward personnel administration programs operating in their respective states. 165 This research raises questions and suggests answers which will lead to the selection and preparation of programs in personnel administration that will result in desirable experiences for teachers. Reflections Some confusion existed when the data were analyzed because the job function statements were not clear cut. In a replication of the study, the researcher would define clearly terminology used in some of the job functions. Despite a definition of terminology, confusion would still reign. Many school district officials tend to administer as they observed it, or assumed certain job functions which they "felt" belonged to their office or to another position. It was disturbing to see the difference of opinions among the authorities as to the job functions of the assistant superintendent of personnel. The confusion was caused when two of the selected authorities would check more than one position for a particular job function. In many cases, they would be three and four positions for a particular job function. In a replication of the study, the researcher would develop an ideal job description as defined by the four selected authorities who were c o nsis­ tent in their definition of the role of the assistant superintendent of instruction. This ideal job description would be given to the superintendents to determine their 166 agreement, or disagreement with the job description. Another approach to this problem is to ask the assistant superintendent of personnel in several major cities and personnel directors in the business world to define an ideal job description. Maybe this procedure would result in a more accurate job description. This job description would then be submitted to the superintendents. It would have been interesting to determine if the assistant superintendent of personnel in the reporting school district is actually involved with the job functions checked by the superintendents or was it a case where the superintendent thought it would be advisable to have the personnel director carry out this job function. In conclusion, much needs to be done in researching the role of the assistant superintendent of personnel especially with the many changes going on in education such as negotiations. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books American Association of School Administrators. Profile of the Administrative T e a m . Washington, D.C. : TKe American Association o f School Administrators, 1971. Castetter, Wil l i a m B. Administering the School Personnel P r o g r a m . New Y o r k : The MacMi 1 lan C o m p a n y , 1962 . Chandler, B. J . , and Petty, Paul V. in School A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Personnel Management Elsbee, Willard S., and Reutter, Edmund E. Staff Personnel in the Public S c h o o l . New Y o r k : P r e n t i c e -Hall, I n c ., 1954. E n g e l h a r d t , Fred. tration. Public School Organization and A d m inis­ New York: Ginn and Company, 1931. Moore, Harold E. , and Walters, Newell B. Personnel Administration in E d u c a t i o n . New Y o r k : Harper B r o t h e r s , 1955. Morphett, Edgar L. ; Roe, L. Johns; and Reller, Theodore L. Educational Admin i s t r a t i o n . Englewood Cliffs, N . J .j P r e n t i ce - H a l l , I n d . , 1959. Pittenger, Benjamin Floyd. Local Public School A d m i n i s ­ tration . New Y o r k : McGraw-Hill Book C o . , 1951 . Sears, Jesse B. City School Administrative Controls--An Analysis of the N a t u r e , P l a c e m e n t , and Flow of Authority and Responsibility in the Management of a City School System. New York : Me Gr aw-Hi 11 Book Co., 1938. Spears, Harold. Curriculum Planning Through In-Service P r o g r a m s . Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prenti c e-Hall, Inc., 1957. 167 168 Weber, Clarence A. trators . Personnel Problems of School Adminis­ Weber, Samuel Edwin. Cooperative Administration and Supervision of the Teaching P e r sonnel. Sew- Sfork: Thomas kelson and S o n s , 1937. Whitehill, Arthur M. Jr. Personnel Relations. McGraw-Hill Book Co-.", 1955. New York: Wiles, Kimball. .imoaxx. Supervision supervision for tor Better £ Sch o o l s . Prentice-Halt, Inc. , T9TT7 New York: Yeager, William A. Administration of the Noninstructional Personnel and Se r v i c e s . N e w Y o r k : Harper and Brothers Publishers, T959. Publications of Organizations American Association of School Administrators. School Board Superintendent Relationships. Thirty-fourth Yearbook. Washington^ D . C . : American Association of School Administrators, 1956. _________ . Staff Relations in School Admin i s t r a t i o n . Thirty-third Yearbook. W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. : 'American Association of School Administrators, 1955. _________ . The American School Superintendent. Thirtieth Yea r b o o k . W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . : American Association of School Administrators, 1952. Havighurst, Robert J. Manpower and the Teacher Storage-Teacher E d u c a t i o n . National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1955. National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards. Personnel Policies for Schools of the F u t u r e . Report of the Washington Conference. W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.: National Education Association, June, 1957. National Education Association. A New Personnel Adminis­ trator is A p p o i n t e d . Research Bulletin XC. Washington, D . C . : National Education Association, May, 1962. 169 National Education A s s o c i a t i o n . Teacher Personnel Practices, 1 9 5 0 - 5 1 t Appointment and Termination o f S e r v i c e . Research Bulletin XXX. Washington, D . C .: National Education Association, February, 1952. _________ . Teacher Personnel P r a c t i c e s . Urban School D i s t r i c t s , 1955-56. Special M e m o . Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, June, 1956. State News. Study Forsees Surplus of Teachers in Michigan February 11, 1972. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Digest of Educational S t a t istics. Bureau of Educational Research and Development. Bulletin #4 3. Wash­ ington, D . C . : Government Printing Office, 1963. . Staff Personnel Administration, Selected Practices and Issues'! Bulletin #6. W a s h i n g t o n , D . C .: Government Printing Office, 1963. Unpublished Materials Addington, Chester Luther. "A Review of Human Business and Industrial Administration Implications for Educational Personnel tration. " Unpublished thesis, Indiana 1951. Relations in with Adminis­ University, Deever, Roy Merwin. "An Analysis of Personnel Practices in Selected School Systems of the Southwest Region." Unpublished thesis. The University of Oklahoma, 1959. Donald, Eleanor. "The Public School Administrator, A Study of the Origin, Administrative Status, Duties and Responsibilities, and Trends of the Position." Unpublished thesis, Columbia University, 1962. Egly, Edgar Carl. "Fringe Benefits for Classified Employees of Large City School Districts." Unpublished thesis. University of Southern California, 1959. Green, John Albert. "The Policies and Practice of Person­ nel Administration in the Public School Systems of the Cities Between 10,000 and 30,000 in Population." Unpublished thesis. University of Colorado, 195 3. 170 Mack, Jay David. HThe Organization o f District-Level Personnel Functions in Selected California School Districts." Unpublished thesis, University of Southern California, 1960. Madsen, D o n a l d H. "Personnel Administration in Large City School Systems." Unpublished thesis, Yale U n i ­ versity, 1953. McCarthy, Francis J. "The Personnel Administrator in City School S y s t e m s : A Study of the Duties and Functions of Personnel Officers in Public Systems in Selected Cities as Compared to Personnel Practices in O t h e r Fields." Unpublished thesis. N e w York University, 19 53, Millar, A l l e n Robert. "Teacher Personnel Administration in School Systems in Cities 15,000 to 30,000 in Population." Unpublished thesis. University of Nebraska, 1956. Morton, Clayton Robert. "The Organization and Re l a tion­ ships of School Personnel Departments in Cities of 100,000 to 500,000 Population in the United States." Unpublished thesis, University of Southern California, 1961. Tritt, Charles William. "Teacher Personnel Administration in School Systems in Cities 30,000 to 60,000 in Population." Unpublished thesis. University of Nebraska, 19 56. APPENDICES APPENDIX A MICHIGAN SUPERINTENDENTS MAILING LIST APPENDIX A MICHIGAN SUPERINTENDENTS MAILING LIST Carlo W. Heikkinen, Supt. A d r i a n School District 2 04 E. Church St. Adrian, Michigan, 49221 Jack E. Meeder, Supt. Albion School District 709 N. Clinton St. Albion, Michigan 49224 Harry R. Davidson, Supt. Battle Creek School District Willard Library Bldg. Battle Creek, Michigan 49016 Randall Coates, Supt. Beecher School District 1020 W. Coldwater Rd. Flint, Michigan 48505 Raymond Sreboth, Supt. Benton Harbor School District 400 Pipestone St. Benton Harbor, Michigan 49022 Malcolm Katz, Supt. East Lansing School District 509 Burcham Dr. East Lansing, Michigan 48823 W. Carl Holbrook, Supt. Eaton Rapids School District 501 King St. Eaton Rapids, M ichigan 48827 John J. Houghton, Supt. Feradale School District 130 E. Nine Mile Rd. F e r n d a l e , Michigan 48220 Wi l l i a m J. Early, Supt. Flint Public School District 932 E. Kearsley St. Flint, Michigan 48502 M. B. McDonald, Supt. Flushing School District 525 Coutant St. Flushing, Michigan 484 3 3 Donald R. Shader, Supt. G a rden City School District 1333 Radcliff St. Garden City, Michigan 48135 Phillip Runkel, Supt. Grand Rapids School District 14 3 Bostwick, NE Grand Rapids, Michigan 49502 LaVerne H. Boss, Supt. Grandville School District 3131 Barrett, SW Grandville, Michigan 49418 Paul H. Emerich, Supt. Highland Park School District 20 Bartlett St. Highland Park, Michigan 48203 171 172 Lawrence F . R e a d , S u p t . Jackson School District 290 W. Michigan Ave. Jackson, Michigan 49201 Reed H. Ha.,on, Supt. Kalamazoo School District 1220 Howard St. Kalamazoo, Michigan 49001 Willis C. Olson, Supt. L'Anse Creuse School District M t . Clemens P O Mt. Clemens, Michigan 49946 I. Carl Candoli, Supt. Lansing .Public School District 3426 S. Cedar St. Lansing, Michigan 4 8910 Howard Campbell, Supt. Lincoln Park School District 15 45 Southfield St. Lincoln Park, Michigan 48146 Holland H. Upton, Supt. Livonia Public School District 15125 Farmington Rd. Livonia, Michigan 48154 George H. Owen, Supt. Midland Public School District 600 E. Carpenter St. William L. Austin, Supt. Midland, Michigan 48640 Muskegon School District 349 W. Webster St. John E. S y d n o r , Supt. Muskegon, Michigan 4 9440 Muskegon Heights School District Richard B. Warren, Supt. Peck & Sherman Sts. Niles School District Muskegon Heights, 720 E. Main St. Michigan 49444 Niles, Michigan 49120 Kenneth W. Olsen, Supt. Okemos School District 4406 Okemos R d . Okemos, Michigan 48864 James Rossinan, Supt. Plymouth School District 1024 S. Mill St. Plymouth, Michigan 48170 Robert W. Coulter, Supt. Port Huron School District 509 Stanton St. Port Huron, Michigan 48061 Paul S h o e m a k e r , S u p t . Redford Union School District 18499 Beech-Daly Rd. Detroit, Michigan 48240 Jack Taylor, Supt. Saginaw Public School District 550 Millard St. Saginaw, Michigan 48607 APPENDIX B AUTHORITIES MAILING LIST APPENDIX B AUTHORITIES MAILING LIST Dr. Phillip Gusick 409 Erickson Hall Michigan State Univ. East Lansing, Michigan Dr. Vandel C. Johnson 419 Erickson Hall Michigan State Univ. East Lansing, Michigan Dr. Samuel A. Moore II 404 Erickson Hall Michigan State Univ. East Lansing, Michigan Dr. Kenneth Harper Director of Personnel Service East Lansing School District 509 Burcham Dr. East Lansing, Michigan 48823 Dr. Alexander J. Kloster 4 08 Erickson Hall Michigan State Univ. East Lansing, Michigan Dr. Louis Romano 406 Erickson Hall Michigan State Univ. East Lansing, Michigan 173 APPENDIX C TRANSMITTAL LETTER AND SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE MICHIGAN c o iu c c or lltC K S O M im ic STATE U N I V E R S I T Y « tn w • o c t a j it m c m t or «ast u m w o u p m ih h t m t io w and • tttemoAM n > a i— w i m m ic a t io n HA1X February 26, 1972 Dear Sir: I am pursuing a Doctor of Philosophy degree at Michigan State University. This s t u d y has the endorsement of the Bureau of E d u ­ cational Research and Services at Michigan State University. You have been randomly selected to participate in a study to d etermine the consensus of opinions of public school superin­ tendents and authorities in school personnel management as to the delegation of the responsibility of certain school personnel functions. This questionnaire is arranged in such a manner that the check mark system w i l l indicate your response. According to the pilot study, it can be completed in approximately 15 minutes. Identity of the person or district or its contributions to the study will not b e m ade a part of the results. All partici­ pants will receive a summary of the opinions expressed by all respondents, if requested. In the interest of educational research, your contributions to this study will be greatly appreciated. A self-addressed envelope of the investigator is attached for the return of the questionnaire. Sincerely yours, A l l e n Jackson R oom 503(E) O wen Graduate Hall Michigan State University E ast I^ansing, Michigan 174 175 For tha purpose of this study, m s u m you have the following assistants in your district! assistant superintendent of business* assistant superintendent of instruction* and assistant superintendent of personnel. Other title descriptions or designations*for these positions nay exist in your district. The district daily attendance is: (10/1/71) On ay district staff I presently have: _____ An _____ An _____ An Assistant Superintendent of Business Assistant Superintendent of Instruction Assistant Superintendent of Personnel You are asked to designate the person to whom the responsi­ bilities of staff recruitment* selection* placement, orientation, and other personnel related tasks should be assigned. GENERAL ORGANIZATION Policy Formulation supt Which administrator(s) should: A. Research and survey personnel policy? B. Be responsible for the development of per­ sonnel policy? C. Organize and consoli­ date already existing personnel policy? D. Administer and inter­ pret personnel policy? Inter-District Communications Which administrator(s) should: A. Keep the superintendent and the board of edu­ cation informed of personnel matters? ____ Asst. Asst. Supt. Supt. of of BUS. Instr. Asst. Supt. of Pers. Prin. Other Admin 176 Asst. supt. of Bus. B. Advertise vacancies? C. Maintain contact with college placement bureaus and appli­ cants for employment? D. Compile and distri­ bute a policy handbook for personnel and a district personnel directory? E. Maintain contact with and work with union, professional, and community groups? F- Keep informed on re­ cent developments in the field of per­ sonnel administration? G. Contribute items of interest on personnel to the district news­ letter? H. Circulate bulletins to personnel and dis­ seminate information from the central office to individual schools? I. Plan and administer the district public relations program? Personnel Records Which administrator(s) should: A. Develop and design a system of personnel records including forms and/or procedures? Asst. Supt. of Instr. Asst Supt of Pers Other Admin, 177 Supt. B. Keep, maintain, and use accurate, complete, and up-to-date per­ sonnel records? STAFF PROCUREMENT AND UTILIZATION Personnel Needs Which administrator(s) should: A. Plan and direct studies of present and future personnel needs? B. Maintain close com­ munication with all district administra­ tive and advisory per­ sonnel and others in line relationship with employees who supply information on long and short range per­ sonnel needs? C. Assemble and coordinate information on personnel needs? Recruitment Which Administrator{s) should: A. Supervise studentteacher training pro­ gram and activities of Future Teachers of America Club? B. Plan, direct, coordi­ nate, and participate in district recruit­ ment program? test.. As*t, ASSt.. Supt. of Bus. Supt. of Xnstr. SUpt. of Pers. Prin. Other Admin. 178 Supt. C. Advertise openings and prepare promotional literature? D. Maintain effective contact with college placement officers and professors? E. Travel to college campus placement offices to interview prospective teachers, and participate in career day activities? F. Schedule trips and make arrangements for re­ cruitment teams? Personnel Selection Which administrator(s) should: A. Interview, and if possible, observe all candidates on the job? B. Process applications of prospective em­ ployees? C. Collect references, review transcripts, check certification, verify application forms? D. Arrange interviews for candidates with other district personnel? E. Administer exami­ nations? F. Give preliminary screening? Asst. Supt. of Bus . ASSt. SUpt. of Instr. Asst. Supt. of Pers. Prin. other Admin, 179 Asst. Asst. Supt« supt. G. M. Asst. Supt, of Bus. of Instr, Supt. of Pers. Prin. Receive and submit to the superintendent and board recommen­ dations for employment? _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Issue contracts to employed personnel? _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Personnel Aasiqnamnt Which administrator(s) should: A. B. Conduct studies re­ lating to basis for assigning personnel in the school? Coordinate and super­ vise assignment of personnel to the superintendent? substitute Teachers Which Administrator(s) should t A. Recruit, approve, and maintain list of substitute teachers? B, Verification of in­ formation on appli­ cations from substi­ tute teachers? C. Distribute substitute lists? _____ Other Admin. 180 ASSt. Supt. of BUS . GENERAL ORGANIZATION Liaison Responsibilities Which administrator(s) should: A. Represent the school system on all occasions when personnel adminis­ tration is a topic of concern? B. Represent the super­ intendent's "voice of personnel" at pro­ fessional meetings by giving speeches to edu­ cational councils? STAFF DEVELOPMENT Orientation and Induction of Personnel Which administrator(s) should: A. Assist teachers in finding suitable liv­ ing accommodations? B. Be chairman of the orientation program committee? C. Plan, direct, and conduct the orien­ tation and induction program? D. Distribute infor­ mational materials to new employees? Asst Asst. Supt supt. of of Instr. Pers Other Admin. 181 Supt. Profession D a w l o p t n t Which administrator(s) should: A. Direct the adminis­ tration of the pro­ fessional development program (college courses, university workshops, etc.)? B. Analyze and recom­ mend? C. Maintain records of development? Evaluation Which administrator(s) should: A. Develop a system of evaluation procedures, standards, and forms? B. Administer the evaluation program? C. Distribute evalu­ ation forms? D. Evaluate personnel if there is same doubt about a particular individual? E. Evaluate principals and supervisors? F, Assemble and review evaluations? Asst, Supt. of Bus. Asst. Asst. Supt, Supt, of of Instr. Pers. Prin. Other Admin, 182 Supt. Pronotions Which administrator (a) should: A. Advertise pronotional openings? B. Screen candidates and compile promotional eligibility list? C. Administer promotional examination? D. Organize, plan, and implement a cadet or administrative train­ ing program? Personnel Transfer Which administrator(s) should: A. Receive and review all requests for transfer? B. Process and implement the transfer? Adjustment Counsel Which administrator(s) should: A. Aid and assist teachers with personal complicated and emotional or mental problems? B. Be able to divest him­ self of the aura of his administrative office and be able to create a cli­ mate of genuine trust and confidence of the teacher? Asst. Supt. of Bus. Asst. Asst. Supt. Supt. of of Instr.Pers. Prin. Other Admin. 183 Aset. supt. of BUS . CONDITIONS OF SERVICE Cart.If ication Which administrator(s) should j A. Evaluate transcripts in terms of the certifi— cation law? B. Determine whether teachers are fully and properly certifi­ cated, and if not, help them become so? C. Act as a contact with and a resource to the State Department on certification matters? D, Keep teachers posted on changes in state certification law? Formulation of Job Description Which administrator(s) should? A. Prepare, or have pre­ pared, by a staff com­ mittee or by the person(s) most closely associated with or who knows the most about a particular position, a job description of it? B. Maintain an up-to-date file on job description? C. Study new or modified positions and alter the job description as needed? Asst . Supt. Of Instr. Asst, Supt. of Pers. Other Admin. 184 supt. Asat. Supt, of Bus . Asst. Supt. of Instr. Asat, Supt. of Pars. Prln. _ _ _ _____ _____ _____ _____ Compensation Which administrator(s) shouldi A. Interpret the salary schedule to personnel? B. Administer the salary schedule? C. Study, prepare, develop, and revise salary schedules for the district, keep up-to-date on local conditions and attempting to maintain a level of compensation com­ petitive with other fields? D, Interpret training and experience of pro­ spective employees prior to their place­ ment on the salary schedule? E. Negotiate with em­ ployee groups on salary questions? F. Certify the payroll to the business department? Work Loads Which administrator(s) should: A, Study work loads of all personnel: B. Hake appropriate recom­ mendations for equitable distribution of work load? Other Admin. 185 Asst, Supt. Asst. Asst. Supt , Supt . of of Bus. Instr. Supt. of Pers. Prin. _____ _____ _____ _____ L e a v e of Absence Which adninistrstor(s) should: A. Develop and reconmend leave policies? B. Receive and process leave requests? C. Keep and check records to determine eligi­ bility for leave? O. Provide information and advice to staff members about leave? E. Recommend persons eligible for leave to the superintendent? Tenure Recommendations Which administrator(s) should: A. Keep track of those employees eligible for tenure? B. Submit to the super­ intendent a list of staff to be tenured with reconnendations from their ionediate superiors? Grievances of Personnel Which administrator(si shouldi A. Maintain contact with the grievance caamittee of the teachers' associ­ ation and union? _____ Other Admin. 186 Supt. B. Be aware of and work with all grievances subsiitted by local teachers * organi­ sations? Dismissal Which administrator(s) should: A. Develop policies or procedures under which staff may be dismissed? B. Evaluate recommendations for termination of an employee? C. Assemble information for dismissal of an employee? Retirement Which administrator(s) should: A. Develop policy on retirement? B. Act as the authorized agent for the state retirement fund in the district? C. Provide resource data as a basis for retire­ ment legislation? D. Keep and check records for verification of status of employess? E* Counsel personnel of problearn related to retirement? Asst* Supt, of Bus. Aut, Allt, Supt. Supt, of of Xnstr. Pers. ___ ____ Other Prin. Admin. 187 Supt. F. AlBt« Supt, of Bus. ASSt. Supt. of Xnstr. Asst Supt of Pers Provide information to the business and de­ partment of the district and to the state or local retirement board? Signature District Prin. Other Admin.