IN FO R M A TIO 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 follow ing explanation o f techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "ta rg e t" 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 w ith 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 w ith 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 w ill find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part o f the material being ph o to g ra p h e d the photographer follow ed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper le ft hand corner o f 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 firs t row and continuing on un til complete. 4. The m ajority 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 w riting the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. University Microfilms 300 N o rth Z e e b R oad Ann A rb o r, M ic h ig a n 481 06 A X e ro x E d u c a tio n C o m p an y I 73-5412 KELLER, Edward Paul, 1932THE TERRITORY OF THE MICHIGAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1972 Education, administration University Microfilms, A XEROX Company , Ann Arbor, Michigan THE TERRITORY OF THE MICHIGAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL By Edward P. Keller 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 P L E A S E NO T E : Some pages may have indistinct print. F i l m e d as r e c e i v e d . University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company ABSTRACT THE TERRITORY OF THE MICHIGAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL By Edward P. Keller This study was designed to help determine whether or not territoriality as a behavioral system is applicable to the elementary school principal. It was based on the concept that territoriality, the innate need to possess and defend a territory, physical or psychological, for which boundaries are learned and methods of defense are also learned, is an inherent behavioral system of human and non-human animals. Essential to this behavioral system is the identi­ fication of one's territox'y, which is defined by its defense. Whether or not the elementary school principal possesses a territory would, therefore, be determined by a disclosure of what he would defend. Ten currently practiced functions of the ele­ mentary school principal were combined with five threat agencies (potential) to produce fifty simulated situations in which the principal's decision-making role in the exercise of these functions was threatened. Edward P. Keller Findings Responses from 203 of 250 randomly selected ele­ mentary school principal members of M.A.E.S.P. indicated a range of level of defense for the ten functions tested from a low of 3.153 to a high of 4.532 on a scale of 0 (no defense) to 5 (vigorous defense). By definition, then, the threats elicited a level of defense from moderate at the lowest level to a very active defense at the highest level. In descending order of level of defense these functions are (mean scores in parentheses): (1) Selection and assignment of teachers (4.532); (2) Assignment of pupils to grades, programs, and teachers (4.414); (3) Planning curriculum in terms of student needs (4.286) ; (4) Teacher evaluation (4.281); (5) Organization of the school for effective learning (4.158) ; (6) Interpreting the school to the public (3.8771); (7) Providing resources for education in the build­ ing (3.783) ; (8) Participation in the development of system-wide policies (3.567); Edward P. Keller (9) Developing and implementing in-service training programs for teaching personnel (3.468); (10) Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records (3.153). Significance at the .01 level caused the follow­ ing hypotheses to be rejected: Hypothesis 1 : Strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary among functions. Hypothesis 2 : There is no interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency. The lack of significance at the .05 level caused the following hypothesis not to be rejected: Strength of defense exerted against a threat agency does not vary among threat agencies. Conclusions Analysis of the findings resulted in the follow­ ing conclusions: 1. The elementary school principal possesses and will defend a territory. 2. The elementary school principal's territory includes the ten functions tested. 3. The elementary school principal will exert efforts to defend his continuation of certain functions Edward P. Keller (his territory) dependent upon the function and not upon the particular agency posing the threat. The elementary school principal will not exert equal defense for all of his functions. Elementary school principals do not hold similar views on the level of defense to be exerted for some of their functions. Implications These conclusions imply that: Those areas that most directly affect what happens to students in schools are those that are closest to the heart of the principal's territory and are those that would be most actively defended. Individuals or groups seeking to reduce the decision-making opportunities for principals in performing these functions will find themselves engaged in a battle. Defensive reactions will vary according to the function challenged and according to the indi­ vidual principal. The elementary school principal must secure a thorough understanding of his territory and of appropriate strategies and techniques for defend- Edward P. Keller 5. The M.A.E.S.P. should increase its efforts to study the elementary school principals' knowledge about his territory and about methods of defense. Recommendations for Further Study Further study is recommended in the following areas: (1) Identification of other functions that, once defended, are a part of the principal's territory; (2) Delineation among the functions tested in this study as to the territorialization of components of each function; (3) An expansion of the population tested to determine the applicability of this study's findings to the larger group-regional or national; (4) The effect of certain variables, such as current practice, leadership style, etc., on the terri­ toriality of the elementary school principal; (5) Methods of defense utilized by elementary school principals and their successes or failures. Further potential areas of study in the appli­ cation of territoriality to educational administration include: (1) Class size and personal space; (2) Motivation theory and territorial behavior; Edward P. Keller (3) School organization patterns; (4) The school superintendent: (5) Interpersonal relations; (6) Organizational management; (7) Labor Relations. his territory; ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to acknowledge the guidance, assistance, and support of the many persons who helped him in his continuation of his education leading to the completion and acceptance of this thesis. First, for the initial guidance and strong support in early educational endeavors and the encouragement that all things are possible, the writer very gratefully thanks his parents, Henry and Ruth Keller. To Dr. David C. Smith, for his considerable empathy and for always being the right man at the right time with the right word, the author wishes to express his deep gratitude. To the Michigan Association of Elementary School Principals, a most understanding and supportive employer, the writer is greatly appreciative. To the many elementary school principals who made this study possible, the author would like to express his thanks. To Mr. Sid Sytsma of the Office of Research Con­ sultation, for his assistance through the myriad paths of statistical analyses, the writer wishes to extend his appreciation. The author wishes to thank D r s . Dale Alam and C. Keith Groty for their valued participation as members of his committee. To Dr. Richard Featherstone, advisor for this thesis, the author wishes to express a most appreciative thanks for extending his territory to include the author' thesis and for his encouragement and support throughout its development and completion. Last, but certainly not least, the author thanks most sincerely his devoted and persevering family, his wife JoAnne, and his sons, Steven, David, and Matthew, who shared with him some of the efforts resulting in this thesis and tolerated those other efforts which they could not share. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. Page INTRODUCTION ................................. The P r o b l e m ............................. The Purposes of the Study................ Definitions ............................. ................................ Design L i m i t a t i o n s ............................. O v e r v i e w ................................ Value-Need................................ II. III. IV. RELATED READINGS AND RESEARCH 1 7 8 9 11 12 13 13 ............. 15 Territoriality: Non-Human ............. Territoriality: Human................... Elementary School Principal Role F u n c t i o n s ............................. 16 20 D E S I G N ....................................... 34 Selection of Measures ................... Selection of Threat Agencies............. S a m p l e .................................... Instrumentation .......................... P r o c e d u r e ................................ A n a l y s i s ................................ 34 36 37 38 39 40 FINDINGS AND C O N C L U S I O N S ................... F i n d i n g s ................................ Local Board of E d u c a t i o n ................ Parent Group ............................. Teacher Association....................... State Board of Education-Legislature . . Superintendent .......................... Mean Score Rankings: Ten Highest and Ten Lowest Scores....................... Standard Deviation Rankings: Ten Lowest and Ten Highest S c o r e s ................ iv 26 42 42 48 48 50 51 53 55 55 Chapter V. Page Data M a t r i x ............................. S u m m a r y ................................ 55 61 CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMEN­ DATIONS ................................ 63 C o n c l u s i o n s ............................. Implications............................. Recommendations for Further Study. . 63 68 78 ................................ 85 REFERENCES CITED APPENDICES Appendix A. L e t t e r .................................... 93 B. Group One Simulations....................... 94 C. Group Two Simulations....................... 104 D. Group Three Simulations .................... 114 E. Group Four S i m u l a t i o n s .................... 124 F. Group Five S i m u l a t i o n s .................... 134 v LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Significance Levels of F Distribution . . . 2. Significance Levels of Variance-Covariance M a t r i c e s ............................ 43 44 3. Mean Score Rankings Across Groups 4. Standard Deviation Rankings Across Groups. . 47 5. Mean Score Ranking: Local Board of Edu­ cation .................................... 48 6. . . . . 47 Standard Deviation Ranking: Local Board of E d u c a t i o n ............................ 7. Mean Score Ranking: Parent Group 8. Standard Deviation Ranking: 9. Mean Score Ranking: 49 . . . . Parent Group. Teacher Association . 49 . 50 . 51 10. Standard Deviation Ranking: Teacher Associ­ 52 ation................................... 11. Mean Score Ranking: State Board of Edu­ cation-Legislature ....................... 52 Standard Deviation Ranking: State Board of Education-Legislature ................... 53 12. 13. Mean Score Ranking: Superintendent. 14. Standard Deviation Ranking: . . . Superintendent . 15. Ten Highest Mean Scores................... 16. Ten Lowest Mean S c o r e s ....................... vi 54 54 56 57 Table Page 17. Ten Lowest Standard Deviation Scores . . . 18. Ten Highest Standard 19. Function-Threat Agency Matrix Deviation Scores vii . ............. 58 . 59 60 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Page A Map of the Territory of the Michigan Ele­ mentary School Principal ................ viii 67 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION As one learns of the increasing application of behavioral science research and study to the field of educational administration, the many "-ologies" become familiar terms, led by psychology, sociology, and their various subdivisions. Imagine, then, the delight of discovering an "-ology" of burgeoning import in the behavioral sciences which had not yet been related to educational administration. This increasingly popular science, ethology, is defined as the study of innate, genetically determined behavior patterns. A primary ingredient of ethology is the study of territoriality, the disposition to possess and to defend a territory, physical or psychological, whose boundaries are learned and for which methods of defense are also learned (Ardrey, 1966). Definitions of territory range from "that section of space that is defended by the occupying individual or social unit and that has a definite size as well as a 1 2 specific internal structure" (Hediger, 1961:35) to "an area which an animal or group of animals defends as an exclusive preserve" area" (Storr, 1970:35), to "a defended (Barnett, 1967:45). All definitions agree, moreover, that the essential ingredient of territory is defense. This is perhaps summed up best by the leading popularizer of territoriality, Robert Ardrey, (1966:210) who states: "Biology as a whole asks but one question of a territory. Is it defended? Defense defines it." A variety of animal species exhibit territorial behaviors, among which are boundary identification and defense. Territorial boundaries may be marked by visual, olfactory, or auditory signals or may exist as invisible and therefore psychological borders. These boundaries may be defended in innumerable ways; physical attack, body posturing, threats, ritualistic signalling (Lorenz, 1969). One animal among many that defends his territory in these ways is the tiny fish known as the male stickle­ back. He builds a small nest, turns a brilliant red in hope of attracting a female stickleback to the nest, and defends it against encroachment by other male sticklebacks. Since the red color on one seems to incite another to attack, intrusions must be frequent. The chase goes back and forth across the invisible boundary marking the stickleback's territory. Intruder 3 becomes defender as his territory is invaded and he, in turn, repels the invader. At the boundary line, however, a curious action takes place. Each fish stands on its head and pretends to nibble sand, a process thought of as a displacement reaction or a ritualization of aggression. While fish techniques of boundary defense have not excited poets, the territorial identification of birds has. Much poetry has eulogized the songs of love birds sing to one another. It became the objective reality of Eliot Howard and others to dispel that myth and to identify the true purpose for which birds sing, that of signalling "hands off" to other birds. It is through their song that birds announce their territory and its boundaries. Mating comes after territory has been estab­ lished, not before. The non-territorial bird is a silent bird. Studies of herring gulls indicate a group territory as well as individual territories. A flock will return to its same location year after year. Within that flock, gulls will return to the same nesting site regularly. This nesting site, the individual territory, will be as large as the distance a gull can peck without leaving the nest. The Navy encountered severe problems with "gooney birds" on Wake Island during World War II. Airfield 4 construction was constantly delayed because as nesting sites were disrupted, the birds would still continue to nest at that same site, regardless of what happened to be on it. They were known to dive directly into quonset huts as though they were optical illusions covering the nesting site. Howler monkeys utilize auditory signals to define and defend their territory, though perhaps less pleasurably to the human ear than do birds. As indicated earlier, birds seem to announce their boundaries prior to the existence of a need to defend them. Howler monkeys announce their boundaries in a cacophony of sound when another group of howler monkeys approaches. It is an auditory defense rather than a physical one and is respected by the intruding band. Birds, fish, and monkeys establish and defend individual and group territories. space around him as inviolate. Each defends certain So also does man. Man is a territorial animal who establishes and defends territories which may have visible or invisible boundaries (Hall, 1966:9). Like other animals who are driven to define and possess territory, man develops his own personal space or, as Hediger reports in his writing, his individual distance. Birds space themselves on a telephone wire; ducks, in a pond. line at theaters. Men space themselves while waiting in 5 Man seeks his own "nest," be it a chair, a personal seating place in a room, separation from others in a study situation, possession of equipment, or his place among his peers, his role in life. That these are as much a part of territoriality is evidenced by studies conducted in mental institutions homes, hospitals (Sommer, 1969), nursing (Esser, 1970), on board ship (Roos, 1968), and in university residence halls (Krupka, 1970 and Eigenbrod, 1969) . While these studies deal primarily with man's securing of identity and security through the establish­ ment of some physical location or material as his personal territory, territoriality is not necessarily restricted to physical objects. Territory may be movable, as indi­ cated by primate group studies and Asher, 1969). (Dimond, 1970; Hackett It may be psychological and cultural, as indicated by Hall, Horowitz, and others. Hall For example, (1969) denotes four levels of personal space— intimate, personal, social, and public— and the vari­ ations among cultures in these distances. He describes the dismay of the American businessman when his personal territory (space) is intruded upon by the Latin American whose social distance is the equivalent of the American's closer personal distance. Horowitz (1970) explored the concept of the "body-buffer zone" by having subjects approached from 6 all sides and charting the distances at which the subjects first felt uncomfortable. One of the variables in the establishment of this zone, this personal space, was the subject's psychological and cultural history, thus support­ ing Hall's contention as well as reinforcing territoriality as having psychological and cultural determinants. This apparent need for privacy is supported in further studies which develop the concept that personal space, the individual's territory, provides not only pri­ vacy, but a sense of identity and security as well 1964; Kira, 1970; Eigenbrod, 1969). (Borel, These studies further support Ardrey's contention that the possession and defense of a territory provides an animal identity and security. (man) with Not applicable here is a third component of territoriality denoted by Ardrey as stimu­ lation, discussed in sociology as social conflict (Coser, 1956) . Territoriality, then, by providing for identity and security, helps each individual deal with his multiple, changing roles (Ruesch and Kees, 1970). It is further "instrumental in the definition and organization of various role relationships" (Proshansky, 1970). Indications of the definition of one's territory to this point have been based upon spatial and physical considerations, with territory being defined by what spaces or physical possessions are defended. Since space 7 may be defined by the behavior of organisms occupying the space (Stea, 1970:37), behavior may become territory when defended. An individual's role in a ’“gi ven group o r s i t u a t i o n is defined by the behaviors in which he engages. His role, his behavior, his space provides him with identity and security. If continuation of various behaviors, various aspects of his role, is threatened, an indi­ vidual may exert defensive responses against those who seek to encroach upon him. Should he do so, he will have, by definition, territorialized his role. The Problem Various departments in universities guard their prerogatives; salesmen, their territories. have jurisdictional Labor unions (territorial) disputes; clerical employees zealously watch over their empires of records, forms, and files. In exercising his "territorial imperative," the elementary school principal exhibits concern over his role also. Publications of his state and national principals' organizations seek to alleviate this con­ cern in providing information on the status and on the role and function of the elementary school principal. Dissertations are written on the subject of principal role expectation. Local school districts develop job descriptions, a process mandated by law in Michigan. 8 It should be noted here that this law was initiated in bill form and lobbied for vigorously by the members of the Michigan Association of Elementary School Principals, who, by such affirmative action, thereby demonstrated these concerns about their role. By definition, it will be recalled, territory is defined by defense. In other words, until a physical or psychological territory is defended, it does not exist as a territory. Thus, the only way to define an ele­ mentary school principal's territory is to discover what he will defend. The problem, then, is: (1) To construct a device that will provide data on the territory of the elementary school principal; i.e., those functions constituting his role that he might defend against encroachment, and (2) To identify through this instrument, the territory of the elementary school principal; i.e., those functions he will defend. The Purposes of the Study As has been stated, man is an animal and may be studied as such. Man is also thus territorial but with the ability to extend his territory through extension of his senses (LaBarre, 1967). He extends it additionally from the physical to the conceptual (Proshansky, b, 1970). 9 The elementary school principal, a member of an occu­ pational sub-unit of man, has in various ways concep­ tualized his role. may be defended. This conceptual role, if threatened, Role then becomes territory and is defined by its defense. The purpose of this study is, therefore, to examine whether or not certain commonly assigned functions will be defended by the elementary school principal when his continuation of those functions is threatened. The strength of his defense will define his territory. Other purposes are: (1) To provide knowledge about the territory of the Michigan elementary school principal; (2) To discuss the implications of these data for the Michigan elementary school principal and others; (3) To indicate the applicability of territoriality as a behavioral system to educational adminis­ tration; (4) To establish areas for further study. Definitions In addition to the terms "territoriality," "territory," and "ethology," other terms will be utilized in achieving the purposes of this study which 10 might be unfamiliar to the reader. The following defi­ nitions are, therefore, provided to assist in a more thorough understanding of the study. Defense.— The response of an individual to a perceived threat. In this study, the following levels of defense will be considered: No defense— will not exert any defense; Weak— will show concern; Slight— will protest, but will not defend; Moderate— will defend mildly; Active— will defend in a determined manner; Vigorous— will defend to the full limit of all available resources. Elementary School Principal.— That building administrator, full or part-time who bears responsi­ bility for the elementary school in his charge, accord­ ing to Michigan law and local school district policies. Ethology.— The study of innate, genetically determined behavior patterns. Function.— An action for which a person is specially fitted; in this case, an action whose per­ formance is a portion of the elementary school princi­ pal's role. MAESP.— The Michigan Association of Elementary School Principals, a voluntary unincorporated association of 1,486 Michigan elementary educational administrators. 11 Territoriality.— The innate need to possess and defend a territory, physical or psychological, whose boundaries are learned and for which methods of defense are also learned. Territory.— A defended area marked by visible or invisible boundaries. Threat Agency.— Any individual or group that has the potential or perceived potential for inflicting damage upon another. Design As previously stated, the problem is to construct a device that will enable elementary school principals to identify those functions that they will defend against encroachment, i.e., their territory. In order to study this problem and to move toward implementation of the purposes of this study a repeated measures design with an analysis of variance statistical treatment will be utilized. The design is selected in order to provide an appropriate means of testing strength of defense exerted to retain ten selected functions across five selected threat agency groups, with fifty subjects nested within each group. A total of 250 subjects will be selected from the population of the elementary school principal membership of the Michigan Association of Elementary School Principals. A level of significance of .05 will serve as a sufficient level in examining the following hypotheses (in null terms): Hypothesis 1 : Strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary among functions. Hypothesis 2 : Strength of defense exerted against a threat agency does not vary among threat agencies. Hypothesis 3 : There is no interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency. Limitations Having considered what the study will do, it might be well to also consider what this study will not do. While this study will examine the territory of the Michigan elementary school principal, it will explore only the territorial aspect of territory identification through defense-. Since no information will be sought in determining the type of defense to be utilized, or the nature of the 13 local environment creating the particular defensive response, these possibly related concerns will have to await future studies. Interpretations of the data shall be confined to the functions and threat agencies utilized and to the population from which the subject sample was selected. Since the threat situations are simulated rather than real, the results of the study are to be viewed as per­ ceived threat outcomes rather than as results of actual threat activities. Overview Following this general introduction to the study related readings and research will be reviewed in Chapter II. Chapter III will report the methodology utilized in the study with various summaries of the collected data appearing in Chapter IV. Implications of these data and recommendations for future action will be considered in Chapter V. A citation of references and various appropriate appendices will conclude the study. Value-Need In view of the nature of the employment relation ship in Michigan due to the enactment in 1965 of the Public Employment Relations Act, this study should prove helpful in providing knowledge about the place 14 of the elementary school principal in the territorial decisions being made in the collective bargainingmanagement team processes. This study should also provide guidance to those interested in inferring the possible direction of change in the elementary school principal's role. The need for further research into territoriality and man has been suggested (Lyman and Scott, 1967). study will serve as one contribution to this effort. This CHAPTER II RELATED READINGS AND RESEARCH In Chapter I, the rationale and general overview of the study were presented. Chapter II will examine in three parts current related readings and research in the area of territoriality and of the role functions of the elementary school principal. The three parts are: (1) Territoriality: non-human (2) Territoriality: human (3) Elementary school principal role functions References in non-human territoriality will indi­ cate the existence of territoriality as a behavioral sys­ tem and introduce the reader to physical and psychological territory. Human territoriality citations will build to the concept of role as an aspect of territoriality. Throughout the review of references in Parts 1 and 2 on territoriality, the reader will note that evi­ dence of the existence of territory, either physical or psychological, is based on physical or spatial relation­ ships, not on the defense of specific behaviors associated with a given "species." This study accepts this challenge and serves as evidence of defense of behaviors as having territorial implications, these behaviors being selected from references reviewed in Part 3. Territoriality: Non-Human Territoriality in non-humans is indicated by their defense of physical and psychological territories. Such defense assures a species of meeting not only certain physical needs, but psychological needs as well 1966). (Ardrey, Part 1 of Chapter II will review various references related to non-human animal physical and psychological territory. Territory, it may be remembered, is defined by behavior and has numerous behavioral implications. Edwards Wynne- (1962), through a very comprehensive study of animal dispersion and its related social behavior develops the concept of society as a "brotherhood of tempered rivalry" or "an organization capable of pro­ viding conventional competition." This concept is described in similar form by a leading ethologist, Konrad Lorenz (1969), who calls the "tempered rivalry" a "ritualization of aggression." Numerous examples are provided from the animal kingdom with particular emphasis on primate territoriality. Carrighar (1970), and Van Lawick-Goodall (1971), Dimond (1971) add further insight into the territorial aspects of animal behavior. 17 Carpenter (1958) has provided the most thorough review of research in non-human territoriality to be found anywhere. He goes on to list thirty-two functions performed by territoriality, none of which deals solely with the issue addressed by this study, the definition of territory by defense. Essential to territoriality is the establishment and defense of a territory and its boundaries. Hediger (1961) indicates that boundaries are marked by visual, auditory, or olfactory signals. For example, the male stickleback exhibits very visible ritualistic behavior at its territorial boundary. Birds sing lustily in announcing their possession of territory. Howler monkeys do just that in warning away potential intruders. Canines mark boundaries with urine or feces which serve as olfactory clues to territorial possession. Hediger has also investigated certain concepts of distance as they relate to territoriality. He has found that animals have what might be called an "indi­ vidual distance," a minimal distance within which intrusion is not tolerated, and that this distance varies among species. Easily observed evidences of individual distance are birds perched in line on a wire or fence or ducks swimming in a pond. All seem to keep a definite, measurable distance from each other. 18 What is unique about this individual territory is that it is unmarked and exists in the mind of the particular animal involved. It has invisible rather than visible boundaries. Existing in similar fashion to individual distance is what Hediger calls social distance or the maximum dis­ tance within which an animal remains as part of a group. Pfieffer (1969) provides the example of the seemingly aggressive baboon at the periphery of the baboon troop's perceived territory who suddenly changes behavior as the group moves further away without him. When this social distance becomes too great, the baboon becomes increas­ ingly anxious and moves quickly to a place within the social distance of the group and thus the greater security. Individual and social distance, as described by Hediger and others, are therefore psychological rather than physical territories, deriving their existence from the mind of the animal, not some physical boundary such as a tree, brush, or stream. Dimond (1970:145) expands these concepts into what he calls "a mobile territory" since the concept of individual distance "allows for the possibility that an animal may defend a region around it or its family group which may vary with the movement of the individual. . . . " 19 Hall (1966) describes the clever utilization of this concept by the lion tamer, who varies his distance from the lion in order to position the lion as he desires. By moving in and out of the lion's critical distance, he is able to have the lion pursue or stop pursuit and thus control the lion's movements. Individual distance, social distance and a great deal more are documented and extended in concept in a marvelously readable book by Robert Ardrey (1966) . He describes research conducted on individual and group territories and the functions served by each. One example of simultaneous individual and group territory is in the nesting behavior of herring gulls. These birds, as a group, return to the same nesting area, with individual birds taking over the same nesting site as in previous years. Nesting sites are spaced at a pecking distance length so that each nesting couple is just out of reach of being pecked by their neighbors. Ardrey further brings out the previously cited concept of psychological territory in his reference to the work of Frank Darling with red deer. Darling found that by placing various feeding sites at different locations he could eventually determine the limits of the red deer territory. When one such feeding site was placed on one side of a shallow stream, Darling found it untouched and later observed that deer would approach the site as far 20 as the stream but that they would not cross the stream to acquire the food, even though the stream was no physical barrier to their doing so. Darling came to the conclusion that the barrier or boundary existed only in the mind of the red deer and thus proclaimed the existence of psychological territory. This research therefore is supportive of previous citations. Non-human territoriality has thus been shown to obtain for both physical and psychological territory. Part 2 will be a review of references relating to human physical and psychological territory and will introduce the reader to a territorial concept not found in pre­ viously cited studies, the concept of role as having the potential for becoming territory. Territoriality: Human As mentioned previously, Robert Ardrey (1966) has expanded territoriality to include applicability of non­ human territorial functions to man. His definition of territoriality as an innate need has created some wrath, implying that man has no control over his territoriality, it being instinctive. Ardrey very carefully points out that while the disposition to possess and defend a territory is instinctive, the territory itself and methods of defense of the territory are learned. Such evidence seems to have been overlooked by his opponents. 21 The proposition that territoriality is innate rather than learned has been challenged by several writers most of whom combine Robert Ardrey's postulates in The Territorial Imperative with Konrad Lorenz's accounts in On Aggression. They propose that aggression and terri­ toriality are social behaviors learned through accultur­ ation and are not innate and irradicable forces (Crook, 1968; and Boulding, 1968) . One of the strongest arguments opposing the instinctiveness of territoriality and aggression is based on studies that portray animal social behavior leading toward greatest survival value for a species as cooper­ ative rather than antagonistic (Montagu, 1971; Leach, 1968) . Their argument overlooks one of the major ethologi cal studies which sums up the social behavior of animals exhibited in cooperative-conflict interaction by defining a society as a "brotherhood of tempered rivalry" (Wynne- Edwards, 1962). Freedman and Roe (1958) support the concept of the existence of both a cooperative and an aggressive instinct as does Irenaus Eible-Eibensfeldt (1961:122) who states: Aggression is not the only motive governing the interaction of members of the same species. In gregarious animals there are equally innate patterns of behavior leading to mutual help and support. A growing body of evidence . . . points to the conclusion that (aggression) is innate in the species. 22 Geneticists state that genes contain the seeds of readiness for action that are triggered by environmental stimuli (Medawar, 1961:88), thus offering further support to Ardrey's concept of innate need (to possess and defend a territory) keyed by threats of territorial encroachment (the environmental trigger). While arguments continuously appear supporting or denying the innate nature of territoriality, there is little question of the existence of territoriality itself There is also little disagreement that man is a territorial animal. The transition from Carrighar's (1971:ix) encouragement to observe animals "as the etholo gists do" so as to better understand ourselves to Blurton Jones (1969:437) statement that "one can study human behavior in just the same way" as gulls and non-human primates have been studied is probably best expressed by Lionel Tiger and Robin Fox (1966:80), who state: The fact that man is an animal which has relatively recently succeeded in dominating all others does not mean that he is therefore exempt both from being an animal and from being studied as such. Though man's culture is the most evident expression of his biologi cal success over other animals it should not obscure his community with them. While Ardrey has concentrated on inferring human behavioral traits from animal behaviors, others have examined some territorial aspects of human behavior through direct observation and study of human beings. 23 Hall (1966) has redirected Hediger's individual distance of animals toward the concept of "personal space" for man. He indicates most interestingly the cultural differences existing in personal space and some of the problems caused in interpersonal relations when these differences are not understood. Personal space exists as does individual distance, differently for different cultures (for animals, dif­ ferently among species) and having invisible boundaries. One example of cultural differences has been explained in Chapter I related to North American-Latin American differences. The Arab has an even narrower personal space concept in that the body itself is not considered by him as private as the American considers his. As a consequence the Arab will tolerate extreme crowding and pushing and an almost breath-to-breath closeness with another, where this would be intolerable to an American. Personal space has also been examined from the aspect of privacy, the keeping of a given distance between an individual and a potential intruder. Sommer (1969) has reported investigations of this behavior.in libraries, study areas, and cafeterias. In order to maintain some sense of privacy people would place coats, books, or other possessions on adjoin­ ing chairs. These spaces would be respected by others 24 unless extreme crowding occurred; then requests to move these belongings would result. In other cases, individuals would seat themselves in a central location in an attempt to dissuade others from taking a seat at the same table. This phenomenon is observed similarly in bench seating at bus stops. If one person sits at one end of the bench, another may sit at the other end, but if the first person sits in the middle, the second is likely to stand. Personal space has likewise been examined from the standpoint of individual possession, of its possessor identity. Patients in institutions take possession of favorite chairs or table locations. They become very possessive of not only a given piece of furniture but of its location. It seems to become to the patient "my chair" or "my place" (Sommer, 1969; Esser, 1970). Altman and Haythorn (1970) conducted a study of eighteen pairs of sailors; nine pairs served as isolated pairs, the others as a control group. Isolated pairs were assigned to twelve foot x twelve foot rooms contain­ ing bunk beds, chairs, and a table. It was found that isolation increased territorial behavior, as did incompatability in interpersonal matters. Such behavior was indicated by possessiveness over a particular chair, a seating location at a table, or a bunk. 25 Roos (1968) discusses an aspect of territoriality he calls jurisdiction, the temporary defense of space. When cleaning areas of a ship, sailors would adopt those areas temporarily as their territory and would resist all invasions by intruders. Eigenbrod (1969) indicates how college students territorialize their jurisdictions by an examination of jurisdictional territoriality in college residence halls. Students find various ways of personalizing their rooms. As Kira (1970:272) has stated: "We tend to measure our sense of identity by the number and quality of things we can call ours, and by which others can identify us." What are "the number and quality of things" that might identify the elementary school principal and thus provide him with his measure of security and identity? If the response is left to physical territory, what may be considered are such things as have already been indicated in other studies— chairs, tables, office. But these are but physical indications of locality of position, which, while important in providing a measure of identity, may not be solely responsible for territori­ alizing the elementary school principal. What may provide greater evidence of identity for the elementary school principal is his behavior, his role, his job. This would be particularly true if the 26 elementary school principal were to territorialize his role; that is, if he were to defend against encroachment of his job responsibilities, his functions. Prochansky et a l . (1970:180) have stated that "territorial behavior is instrumental in the definition and organization of various role relationships. ... In many instances a social or occupational role establishes exclusive or near-exclusive control of a given space or setting." By introducing the proven concept of psychological territory to this statement and by defining space as the behavior of organisms occupying the space (Stea, 1970:37), the territory of the elementary school principal therefore may be defined as those behaviors (those functions) which he will defend against intruders. The next section of this chapter reports on references that deal with various functions performed by elementary school principals which may serve as the principals' territory. Elementary School Principal Role Functions Part 1 of this chapter examined territoriality as it appears in the non-human animal and considered both physical and psychological territories. References on human territorial behavior were reviewed in Part 2 of this chapter with further indication of the existence 27 of physical and psychological human territory, including the introduction to the concept of role behavior as potential territory. Part 3 is a review of references concerned with the role behavior of the elementary school principals. These references are composed of research studies, school district job descriptions, and other documents dealing with the functions of the elementary school principal. State elementary school principal association publications provide some information on various functions performed by principals in the respective states. Jarvis et a l . (1969) list such functions as recruit, select, and assign teachers, plan curriculum in terms of student needs, suggest new system-wide policies, select instructional materials, and interpret the schools to the public. An Ohio study (1965) lists teacher evaluation, teacher selection, classroom organization, and curriculum innovations as functions of the elementary school princi­ pal . The Maine Elementary School Principals Association (1963) included in its publication such elementary school principal functions as assignment and scheduling of pupils and teachers, maintenance of accurate pupil records, building of public understanding, and staff evaluations. 28 An Illinois Elementary School Principals Associ­ ation (1965) document describes the expected role of the principal in such statements a s : " . . . should be sensitive to the curricular needs of his building; should be involved in recruiting; should exercise leadership." Oklahoma (1969) reports that the principal should be responsible for interpreting the school to the public, for in-service training of teachers, and for the instructional programs. Ulhorn (1971) divides the role of the elementary principal into instructional leader, coordinator of com­ munity services, professional in the community school concept, business manager, and lobbyist. Not only have state associations examined the elementary school principal's role but so also have local school districts in their development of job descriptions. Billings such functions as: (1970) assigns to the principal administer a program of instructional supervision; provide leadership in the development and implementation of curriculum in his school; organize and evaluate staff. Sioux Falls role to include: (1968) considers the principal's assistance in selection and placement of teachers, evaluate personnel, foster a good climate, enroll students, and consult with parents. 29 The position description of the elementary school principal in Milwaukee (1969) contains such functions as: establishing and maintaining favorable relationships with local community groups, evaluating and counseling all staff members and maintaining records. In Washington, D.C. (1960), the elementary school principal is expected to organize the school for effective learning, to set the emotional tone of the building, to supervise and rate teachers, to make optimum use of facilities, and to interpret the school to the community. A study by Carlson (1971) showed that many respondents perceived the principal to function in a cooperative role with teachers, while Andlauer (1969) found among the functions of the elementary school princi­ pal instructional leadership, involvement in community life, leadership in in-service programs, and service in the employer-employee negotiating process. Frey (1963) noted the transition from 1920 to 1960 in her study. She found the 1920's concerned with functions as ends in themselves, with emphasis on records and uniformity. The 1930's saw functions become a means to an end and greater involvement of the principal in facilitating learning and in the community. In the 1940's the principal became a manager of people and implemented new organizational structures, did more in personnel management, in policy development, and 30 in community relationships. The 1950's were a period of reappraisal and a strengthening of the leadership activi­ ties of the principal in curriculum, evaluation, and com­ munity relations. In concluding her study, Frey stated that the principal is an intermediary "who promotes the productive interaction of persons and particulars." Two very valuable contributions to this study are a study by Ainsworth the author (1968) and an unpublished survey by (1968). Ainsworth sought to determine the degree of importance and the frequency of performance of eightythree functions of the elementary school principals. Those functions that received over 70 per cent response as extremely important a r e : Direct, stimulate and motivate teachers Create an atmosphere of friendly cooperation Maintain a climate conducive to good personnel relations Maintain adequate school records Keep accurate accounting records Supervise student registration Organize the staff so that each member under­ stands his role, authority, and responsibility Stimulate wholesome personal relationships among pupils, parents, teachers, and other staff members Encourage parent-teacher conferences At a 69 per cent extreme degree of importance were: Work with individual teachers to improve teaching Evaluate performance of all personnel Cooperate closely with supervisory and adminis­ trative personnel 31 When asked to rank these eighty-three functions according to frequency of performance, those functions receiving a 67 per cent or higher response on the level of very fre­ quent were: Evaluate performance of all personnel Maintain adequate school records Submit inventory and requisitions Keep accurate accounting records Supervise student registration Very frequently performed functions receiving 65-67 per cent response were: Cooperate closely with supervisory and adminis­ trative personnel Prepare schedule of staff duties Serve as building book custodian Organize the staff so that each member under­ stands his role, authority, and responsibility It would be very simple for the this point it could be said that, since author if at principals have indicated both a high degree of importance of certain functions and a high frequency of performance of some functions, those functions receiving high rankings in both importance and performance must be, therefore, the territory of the elementary school principal. Such a position is not possible, since a territory, it will be recalled, is defined by defense. Elementary school principals, to be said to possess a territory, must exert a defense. The mere listing of performed functions is not sufficient. A survey responsibilities by the author of the specific job of Michigan elementary school principals 32 conducted in 19 68 provided a highly comprehensive listing of numerous functions in very specific terms, such as, "conduct ten fire drills a year," "read ten tons of rubbish mail," and "answer surveys," as well as repeat­ ing in one form or another the many functions previously cited. Andlauer Among functions not found in other studies, except (1969) , were several related to the development and implementation of negotiated master agreements. These references indicate the many functions performed by the elementary school principal and thus serve as a description of his role. From this role, these behaviors, he derives identity and from the princi­ pal's defense of his role may be determined those aspects of his role that comprise his territory. Territoriality has been shown to be a behavioral system of both human and non-human animals. Territories are defined by their defense, have physical or spatial components, and visible or invisible boundaries. Terri­ toriality helps to define role relationships. As Lyman and Scott (1967) state: Opportunities for freedom of action— with respect to . . . maintenance of specific identities are inti­ mately connected with the ability to attach boundaries to space and command access to or exclusion from territories. While the elementary school principal has had available many descriptions of his role and many list­ ings of expected functions, he has not been provided 33 with any indication of his territory, of those functions that he desires to possess and that he will defend, the role that he may "command access to or exclusion from. II To provide such information is one of the pur­ poses of this study and is its unique contribution to the continuing growth in understanding of territoriality and its application as a behavioral science to increase man's knowledge about the human animal. CHAPTER III DESIGN In order to fulfill the purposes of the study, to address the problem of constructing an appropriate device to present elementary school principals with potential threats to their continuation of certain functions and to elicit from them defensive responses which would thereby indicate those functions they would territorialize, the following procedures were utilized in the development and implementation of a study design. Measures and threat agencies were selected. Simu­ lated threat situations were written for each functionthreat agency combination. A random sample of elementary school principal members of the M.A.E.S.P. was chosen, to which the study instrument was mailed for completion and return to the author. Data so provided were then analyzed according to the three stated hypotheses with the findings reported in Chapter IV. Selection of Measures A review of the literature on functions of the elementary school principal indicated the repetition of 34 a number of these functions. Studies examined included status studies of the principalship published by state elementary school principals' organizations, by the National Association of Elementary School Principals (Hubbard, 1968), by a regional group, as well as local, state, and national functions, job description, and administrator evaluation documents. Doctoral dissertations also added their input. The two most comprehensive presentations were a Texas study survey (Ainsworth, 1968) and an unpublished Michigan (Keller, 1968) . For purposes of this study, ten of the most commonly repeated functions were selected. It is assumed that these functions are equal in specificity. The ten functions utilized in this study are: (1) Teacher evaluation; (2) Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records; (3) Organization of the school for effective learning; (4) Providing resources for education in the building; (5) Developing and implementing in-service training programs for teaching personnel; (6) Assignment of pupils to grades, programs, teachers; (7) Selection and assignment of teachers; (8) Planning curriculum in terms of student needs; 36 (9) Participation in the development of system-wide policies; (10) Interpreting the school to the public. These ten functions were designated as the measures to be tested as part of the elementary school principals' territory. To help determine this, threat agencies capable of interfering with these functions needed to be chosen. Selection of Threat Agencies As has been previously stated, territory is defined by its defense. Once having completed the selection of measures that have the potential to become territory, it was necessary to provide agencies that could possibly intrude or encroach upon these functions, since defense is unlikely unless there is something to defend against. Various leadership groups within the Michigan Association of Elementary School Principals were asked to identify those individuals and groups they perceived to have the greatest potential for exercising influence over the principal's role. These commissions and boards of the association were selected because it is believed that elementary school principals holding these positions were likely to possess sufficient knowledge of agencies with such potential. 37 After their identification of potential threat agencies, the groups were requested to rank their selections in first. order of highest influence potential These rankings were then consolidated into one list from which the following five potential threat agencies were chosen: (1) Superintendent (2) Local teachers' association (3) Parent groups (4) Local board of education (5) State board of education— legislature For purposes of this study, these agencies were assumed to be equal in threat potential. Having completed the selection process for functions and threat agencies, it then became necessary to select those elementary school principals who would have the opportunity to demonstrate the existence or non-existence of the elementary school principals' terri­ tory. Sample A variety of methods of securing a population upon which to test the hypotheses were considered. The method deemed most appropriate was a random sampling of the elementary school principal population of the MAESP. 38 Permission to do so was authorized by the MAESP Board of Directors at its May, 1971, meeting. From 1,486 address cards of the total 1971-72 membership of the MAESP, 250 elementary school principals were selected through utilization of a table of random numbers. The sample is thus limited to elementary school principals who are members of their state association. Approximately 58 per cent of those eligible have joined during 1971-72, as of December 10, 1971. Administrators in elementary education who are not elementary school principals but are members of MAESP were excluded from this sample. The selection of functions, threat agencies, and the population having been thus completed, the appropriate instrumentation was next to be accomplished. Instrumentation As previously stated, ten functions and five threat agencies were selected to serve as the basis for instrumentation. A simulated situation was developed for each function-threat agency combination in which the continuation of the principal's decision-making role in the implementation of that function was threatened by a selected agency. For purposes of this study, each threat agency-function simulation was assumed to be of equal value. 39 Each subject was provided an opportunity to respond on a scale of 0 to 5 in indicating the strength of defense he would exert to retain his decision-making role in exercising that particular function. The range of the scale provided for "no defense" at 0 to "vigorous defense" at 5. Equal distance between numbers on this scale was assumed. The instrumentation having been established for distribution to the selected sample, the procedures for distribution and return of the instrument were then initiated. Procedure Following the development of the instrumentation, the random sample of 250 elementary school principals was selected by utilization of a table of random numbers. Each subject was then randomly assigned to one of five groups, again through the use of a table of random numbers. Threat agencies were assigned to groups randomly by the throw of a die. Situation response sheets for each function were then ordered randomly within each threat agency group in such a way that no random order was repeated for the ten functions in any group. random orders. This resulted in 250 different 40 Response sheets, along with a stamped, selfaddressed return envelope, were mailed to all subjects. Included in this mailing also was a return postcard providing each subject an opportunity to indicate his completion and mailing of the response sheets without having to identify himself on the sheets. Return of these cards enabled a check to be made against the master list of subjects for follow-up purposes. The initial mailing resulted in a return of 125 subject responses. A follow-up postcard was then mailed to all non-respondents which resulted in an additional 80 instruments being returned. Of the total 250 subjects, 203 returned usable responses. Two subjects' responses were discarded since they refused to participate in the simulations. Information from these responses was then key­ punched on data cards so that the appropriate computer program analysis could be completed. Analysis Utilizing the data provided by the subject responses and the appropriate data program cards, a repeated measures analysis was conducted to test the following hypotheses (in null terms): Hypothesis 1 : Strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary among functions. 41 Hypothesis 2 : Strength of defense exerted against a threat agency does not vary among threat agencies. Hypothesis 3 : There is no interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency. A significance level of .05 was established as being sufficient for the purposes of the study. Because of the nature of this design, interpre­ tations of results are limited to those functions and threat agencies tested and the population from which the sample was selected. This analysis provided the data which are reported in Chapter IV as Findings. Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations based on these data will be found in Chapter V. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The following is a discussion of the findings of significance regarding the functions, the threat agencies and the interaction among them. The mean scores for each function across all groups are ranked as are the standard deviation scores. The ten tested functions are ranked within each threat agency group according to mean score and again according to standard deviation. A ranking of the ten highest and ten lowest function-group combination mean scores is indicated. Following a matrix presentation of rankings by mean score and standard deviation for all functions and groups a summary of the findings may be found. Findings Findings are reported according to the three hypotheses tested. It will be recalled that a .05 level of significance was established. The statistical technique utilized is an analysis of variance of a repeated measures design. This technique yields an F distribution, which, when compared to a statistical table known as a Distribution of F, determines the sig­ nificance of that F distribution. As depicted in Table 1, an F distribution was secured for each of the three hypotheses. For Hypothesis 2, the strength of defense exerted against a threat agency does not vary among threat agencies, the F distribution was not significant at the .05 level and this hypothesis was not rejected. TABLE 1.— Significance levels of F distribution. df Threat Agencies Measures Interaction 4,198 1,198 4,198 F Distribution .05 Level .253 34.592 6.280 .01 Level 2.41 3.89 2.41 3.41 6.76 3.41 The F distributions for Hypotheses 1 and 3 were examined through the use of the conservative estimate of the adjusted degrees of freedom. This was necessary due to the fact that the Chi Square tests of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices across groups and of homogeneity for the pooled variance-covariance matrix proved significant at the .01 level (Greenhouse and Geisser, 1959:110) as shown in Table 2. 44 TABLE 2.— Significance levels of variance-covariance matrices. of Homogeneity Variance-covariance matrices across groups Pooled variancecovariance 426.696 186.53 .01 Level df 220 270.2 53 80.5 Those readers interested in statistics would find that the formula x~ 3. ~ 1/2 (X cl + /2n-l) ^ , where X 3 is the distance from the normal distribution (2.326) and n = df, has been utilized in determining the significance of Chi Square tests of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices across groups and of the pooled variancecovariance matrix. Hypothesis 1, the strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary among functions, was rejected, since significance was shown at the .01 level. Hypothesis 3, there is no interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency, was also rejected, as significance was evidenced at the .01 level. These relationships require further specificity. One might logically inquire as to the nature of the variance in strength of defense among functions. One might also seek to review the nature of the interactions that were statistically significant. 45 To indicate to the reader these variances, the tested functions are ranked according to mean score. The ranking of mean scores for each function across groups indicates the strength of defense varies among functions and further specifies the rejection of Hypothesis 1. Had Hypothesis 3 not been rejected, it would have indicated that the same rankings of strength of defense would have occurred within each threat agency group. Since this hypothesis was rejected, it seems appropriate that rankings by mean score within each group be pre­ sented in order to show the nature of the function-threat agency interaction. An additional finding worthy of reporting is the variation in the standard deviation among the various function-threat agency combinations. While no hypothesis was examined as to the existence or non-existence of such variation, it did appear in the data. Such data are herein reported to serve as a base for later comments on implications of this study. Hypothesis 1 : The strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary among functions. Ranking by mean score of the ten functions across all threat agency groups shows that the function eliciting the strongest defense is "selection and assignment of teachers" with a score of 4.532 out of a possible 5. 46 The function with the lowest mean score (3.153) is "main­ taining accurate up-to-date records." These same functions are also the low standard deviation and the high standard deviation functions respectively. Table 3 indicates the mean score ranking of the ten functions, while Table 4 depicts the rankings by standard deviation with the lowest standard deviation being listed first. Hypothesis 3 : There is no interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency. Rankings among all fifty function-threat agency combinations mean scores range from a high of 4.667 to a low of 2.512. Standard deviation scores range from a low of .621 to a high of 1.930. Since, as previously stated, rankings are not perfectly similar among groups, a ranking of function mean scores and of standard devi­ ation scores is presented in Tables 5 through 14 for each threat agency group. Tables 15 and 16 depict the ten highest and the ten lowest threat agency mean scores, while Tables 17 and 18 portray the ten highest and the ten lowest standard deviation scores. A complete matrix of mean score and standard deviation score rankings for all functions and threat agencies is presented in Table 19. TABLE 3.— Mean score rankings across groups. Function 1 . Selection and assignment of teachers 2. Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams and teachers 3. Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs 4. Teacher evaluation 5. Organization of the school for effective learning 6 . Interpreting the school to the public 7. Providing resources for education in the building 8. Participation in the development of system-wide policies 9. Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel 10. Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Mean Score 4.532 4 .414 4.286 4.281 4.158 3.877 3.783 3.567 3.468 3.153 TABLE 4.— Standard deviation rankings across groups. Function 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Selection and assignment of teachers Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams and teachers Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs Teacher evaluation Organization of the school for effective learning Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Providing resources for education in the building Interpreting the school to the public Participation in the development of system-wide policies Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Standard Deviation .864 .950 1.050 1.148 1.212 1.328 1.346 1.349 1.521 1.541 The mean scores indicate a range from a very active defense (4.532) to a moderate defense (3.153). Standard deviation scores depict a high score nearly double that of the lowest standard deviation. 48 Local Board of Education As shown in Table 5, respondents to the threat agency Local Board of Education selected planning curricu­ lum as the function for which they, as a group, would exert the strongest defense. The function, maintaining accurate, up-to-date records, received the lowest mean score. Table 6 indicates that planning curriculum also had the lowest standard deviation while participation in the development of system-wide policies scored highest. TABLE 5.— Mean score ranking: Local Board of Education. Function 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams, and teachers Organization of the school for effective learning Selection and assignment of teachers Teacher evaluation Interpreting the school to the public Providing resources for education in the building Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Participation in the development of system-wide policies Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Mean Score 4.595 4.476 4.476 4.333 4.310 4.214 3.929 3.905 3.286 2.571 Parent Group Tables 7 and 8 indicate that mean scores ranged for the Parent Group from a high of 4.667 to a low of 3.051; standard deviations, from a low of .621 to a high 49 TABLE 6.— Standard deviation ranking: cation. Local Board of Edu­ Standard Deviation Function 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams , and teachers Organization of the school for effec­ tive learning Teacher evaluation Selection and assignment of teachers Interpreting the school to the public Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Providing resources for education in the building Participation in the development of system-wide policies .665 .671 .671 1.047 1.052 1.071 1.165 1.532 1.552 1.627 Local board of education mean scores ranged from a high of 4.595 to a low of 2.571, while the range of standard deviation scores showed a high scorei more than twice the low score. TABLE 7.--Mean score ranking: Parent group. Function 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Selection and assignment of teachers Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams and teachers Teacher evaluation Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs Providing resources for education in the building Organization of the school for effec­ tive learning Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Interpreting the school to the public Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Participation in the development of system-wide policies Mean Score 4.667 4.513 4.436 4.051 3.949 3.949 3.897 3.692 3.436 3.051 50 TABLE 8.— Standard deviation ranking: Parent group. Function Standard Deviation 1 . Selection and assignment of teachers 2. Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams and teachers 3. Teacher evaluation 4. Providing resources for education in the building 5. Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs 6. Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records 7. Interpreting the school to the public 8. Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel 9. Organization of the school for effec­ tive learning 10. Participation in the development of system-wide policies .621 .683 .852 .972 1.234 1.353 1.398 1.483 1.503 1.589 Parent group mean scores ranged from a very active defense (4.667) to a moderate defense (3.051). There were fewer standard deviation scores above 1.000 in the parent group than in any other group. of 1.589. Selection and assignment of teachers scored highest on mean and lowest on standard deviation. Par­ ticipation in the development of system-wide policies scored lowest in mean and highest in standard deviation. Teacher Association The Teacher Association threat agency group had the narrowest range of all threat agencies in mean scores as shown in Table 9. From a high of 4.548 for the selection and assignment of teachers, which is also the function with the lowest standard deviation, the range 51 TABLE 9.— Mean score ranking: Teacher association. Mean Score Function 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Selection and assignment of teachers Participation in the development of system-wide policies Teacher evaluation Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Planning curriculum in terms of student needs Interpreting the school to the public Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams , and teachers Organization of the school for effective learning Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Providing resources for education in the building 4.548 4.333 4.214 4.190 4.143 4.000 3.905 3.643 3.452 3.357 lowered to 3.357 for providing resources for education in the building. Table 10 shows that the function organization of the school for effective learning pos­ sessed the highest standard deviation. State Board of EducationLegislature For the State Board of Education-Legislature, Table 11 reports a high mean of 4.634 on selection and assignment of teachers and a low mean of 2.512 on main­ taining accurate, up-to-date records. These two functions were also low and high respectively on standard deviation scores, as shown in Table 12. The range of mean scores was highest in this group as compared to all other groups. 52 TABLE 10.— Standard deviation ranking: Teacher association. Standard Deviation Function 1 . Selection and assignment of teachers 2. Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs 3. Participation in the development of system-wide policies 4. Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel 5. Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records 6. Interpreting the school to the public 7. Teacher evaluation 8. Assignment of pupils to grades, programs, and teachers 9. Providing resources for education in the building 10. Organization of the school for effective learning .739 1.072 1.097 1.131 1.153 1.169 1.220 1.322 1.358 1.543 Teacher association rankings indicated that the lowest mean score (3.357) was higher than any other group's lowest mean score. Nine out of ten standard deviation scores were above 1.000, an event that occurred in one other threat agency group, the State Board of Edu­ cation-Legislature . TABLE 11.— Mean score ranking: State board of educationlegislature. .. M..j i ■— .i iL!■ .u-m. ■. ............... ... a . i„l_i . i. -i ..a ■ Function 1 . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Selection and assignment of teachers Assignment of pupils to grades, programs, and teachers Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs Organization of the school for effec­ tive learning Participation in the development of system-wide policies Teacher evaluation Providing resources for education in the building Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Interpreting the school to the public Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Mean Score 4.634 4.537 4.317 4 .220 4.195 4.049 3.829 3.610 3.439 2.512 53 TABLE 12.— Standard deviation ranking: State board of education-legislature. Function Standard Deviation 1 . Selection and assignment of teachers 2. Organization of the school for effec­ tive learning 3. Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams and teachers 4. Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs 5. Participation in the development of system-wide policies 6 . Providing resources for education in the building 7. Teacher evaluation 8. Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel 9. Interpreting the school to the public 10. Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records .888 1.107 1.14 2 1.150 1.249 1.430 1.465 1.481 1.613 1.899 The State Board of Education-Legislature threat agency elicited nine standard deviation scores out of ten above 1.000. The low mean score of 2.512 was the lowest mean score of all the threat agency groups. Superintendent As indicated in Table 13, the mean score ranking for the Superintendent threat agency ranged from a high of 4.667 for assignment of pupils to grades, programs, and teachers to a low of 2.590 for maintaining accurate, up-to-date records. Table 14 depicts standard deviations from .701 to 1.930, the largest range among all the groups. 54 TABLE 13.— Mean score ranking: Superintendent. Function 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Mean Score Assignment of pupils to grades, programs, and teachers Organization of the school for effective learning Selection and assignment of teachers Teacher evaluation Planning curriculum in terms of student needs Interpreting the school to the public Providing resources for education in the building Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Participation in the development of system-wide policies Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records TABLE 14.— Standard deviation ranking: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 4.513 4.487 4.410 4.308 4.026 3.872 2.897 2.897 2.590 Superintendent. Function 1. 4.667 Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams , and teachers Selection and assignment of teachers Organization of the school for effec­ tive learning Teacher evaluation Planning curriculum in terms of stu­ dent needs Providing resources for education in the building Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Interpreting the school to the public Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Participation in the development of system-wide policies Standard Deviation .701 .942 1.023 1.044 1.055 1.321 1.353 1.442 1.666 1.930 55 Mean score rankings for the Superintendent threat agency contained the largest number of mean scores below 3.000 of all the groups. The high standard deviation score of 1.930 was the highest among all groups. Mean Score Rankings; Ten Highest and Ten Lowest Scores The ten highest and the ten lowest mean scores are listed in Tables 15 and 16 by mean score, function, and threat agency. The ten high mean scores range dif­ ference is .191, while the range difference for the ten lowest mean scores is .927. Standard Deviation Rankings: Ten Lowest and Ten Highest Scores Table 17 lists the ten lowest standard deviation scores which show a range difference of .321. The ten highest standard deviation scores appearing in Table 18 have a range difference of .427. Data Matrix To depict the various interrelationships which have been shown in separate tables, the data matrix in Table 19 was developed. This matrix includes for each function-threat agency combination its mean score, its standard deviation, the rank of the mean score within the threat agency, and the rank of the standard deviation within the threat agency. cell would appear thusly: An enlarged view of a sample PM1 56 TABLE 15.— Ten highest mean scores. Functions Threat Agency Mean Score 1. Selection and assignment of teachers Parent Group 4.667 2. Assignment of pupils to grades, programs and teachers Superinten­ dent 4 .667 Selection and assignment of teachers State Board of Education 4 .634 Planning curriculum in terms of student needs Local Board of Education 4 .595 Selection and assignment of teachers Teacher Association 4.548 6. Assignment of pupils to grades, programs and teachers State Board of Education 4.537 7. Assignment of pupils to grades, programs and teachers Parent Group 4.513 8. Organization of the school for effective learning Superintendent 4.513 9. Selection and assignment of teachers Local Board of Education 4.487 Assignment of pupils to grades, programs and teachers Local Board of Education 4.476 Organization of the school for effective learning Local Board of Education 4 .476 3. 4. 5. 10. a b 57 TABLE 16.— Ten lowest mean scores. Functions 1. Threat Agency Mean Score Maintaining accurate, up-todate records State Board of Education 2.512 Maintaining accurate, up-todate records Local Board of Education 2.571 Maintaining accurate, up-todate records Superinten­ dent 2.590 Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Superinten­ dent 2.897 Participation in the develop­ ment of system-wide policies Superinten­ dent 2.897 6. Participation in the develop­ ment of system-wide policies Parent Group 3.051 7. Participation in the develop­ ment of system-wide policies Local Board of Education 3.286 Providing resources for edu­ cation in the building Teacher Association 3.357 Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel Parent Group 3.436 Interpreting the school to the public State Board of Education 3.439 2. 3. 4. 5. 8. 9. 10. Four of the ten highest mean scores appeared in the Local Board of Education threat agency group. The Teacher Association group was listed but once. Selection and assignments of teachers was identified four times in the top ten mean scores. The Superintendent threat agency was indicated three times in the lowest ten mean score rankings, with the Teacher Association again being listed once. Two functions were repeated three times each. 58 TABLE 17.— Ten lowest standard deviation scores. Functions Threat Agency Standard Deviation 1. Selection and assignment of teachers Parent Group .621 2. Planning curriculum in terms of students' needs Local Board of Education .665 Assignment of pupils to grades, programs, and teachers Local Board of Education .671 4. Organization of the school for effective learning Local Board of Education .671 5. Assignment of pupils to grades, programs, and teachers Parent Group .683 6. Assignment of pupils to grades, programs, and teachers Superinten­ dent .701 Selection and assignment of teachers Teacher Association .739 8. Teacher evaluation Parent Group .852 9. Selection and assignment of teachers State Board of Education .888 Selection and assignment of teachers Superintendent .942 3. 7. 10. 59 TABLE 18.— Ten highest standard deviation scores. Functions 1. 2. Threat Agency Participation in the devel­ Superinten­ opment of system-wide dent policies Standard Deviation 1.930 Maintaining accurate, upto-date records State Board of Education 1.899 Maintaining accurate, upto-date records Superinten­ dent 1.666 Participation in the development of systemwide policies Local Board of Education 1.627 Interpreting the school to the public State Board of Education 1.613 6. Participation in the development of systemwide policies Parent Group 1.589 7. Providing resources for education in the building Local Board of Education 1.552 8. Organization of the school for effective learning Teacher Association 1.543 Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records Local Board of Education 1.532 Organization of the ' school for effective learning Parent Group 1.503 3. 4. 5. 9. 10. The Local Board of Education threat agency was repeated three times in Table 17, as was one function. The function, selection, and assignment of teachers was listed four times. Among the ten highest standard deviation scores, two functions appeared three times each, as did one threat agency. TABLE 1 9 .— F u n c tio n - T h r e a t A gency M a tr ix . Function Local Board Parent Group Teacher Association State Board Legislature Superintendent 42 39 42 41 39 203 Selection and assignment of teachers 4.532 ? Assignment of pupils to grades, pro­ grams, and teachers 4.414 3. .864 .950 Planning curriculum in terms of student needs 4.286 1.050 Teacher evaluation 4.281 5 1.148 Organization of the school for effective learning 4.158 1.212 Interpreting the school to the public 3.877 7 Providing resources for education in the building 3.783 ft, 1.346 Participation in the development of system-wide policies 3.567 9. 1.349 1.521 Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel 3.468 1.328 Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records 4.333 4 4.667 1 4,548 1 4.634 1 4.487 3 1.052 5 .621 1 .739 1 .888 1 .942 2 4.476 2 4.513 2 3.905 7 4.537 2 4.667 1 .671 2 .683 2 1.322 8 1.142 3 .701 1 4.595 1 4.051 4 4.143 5 4.317 3 4.308 5 .665 1 1.234 5 1.072 2 1.150 4 1.055 5 4.310 5 4.436 3 4.214 3 4 .049 6 4.410 4 1.047 4 .852 3 1.220 7 1.465 7 1.044 4 4.476 3 3.949 6 3.643 8 4.220 4 4.513 2 .671 3 1.503 9 1.543 10 1.107 2 1.023 3 4.214 6 3.692 8 4.000 6 3.439 9 4.026 6 1.071 6 1.398 7 1.169 6 1.613 9 1.442 8 3.929 7 3.949 5 3.357 10 3.829 7 3.872 7 1.552 9 .972 4 1.358 9 1.430 6 1.321 6 3.286 9 3.051 10 4.333 2 4.195 5 2.897 9 1.627 10 1.589 10 1.097 3 1.24 9 5 1.930 10 3.905 8 3.436 9 3.452 9 3.610 8 2.897 8 1.165 7 1.483 8 1.131 4 1.481 8 1.353 7 2.571 10 3.8977 7 4.190 4 2.512 10 2.590 10 1.532 8 1.353 6 1.153 5 1.899 10 1.666 9 10. 3.153 1.541 61 Mean Score Mean Score Rank 4.333 4 Standard Deviation Standard Deviation Rank 1.052 5 Functions are ranked at the left side in order of mean scores across groups. These scores are reported with each function heading as are each function's standard deviation. The number appearing within each threat agency designation refers to the number of respondents in that particular group. Summary Michigan elementary school principals indicated a willingness to defend their decision-making rights in exercising certain functions. across all groups ranged from The strength of defense a mean score the function, selection, andassignment of4.532 for of teachers, to a mean score of 3.153 for the function, maintaining accurate, up-to-date records. Standard deviation scores across all groups ranged from a low of .8 64 to a high of 1.541. Consideration of separate function-threat agency combinations depicted mean scores with a high of 4.667 for the function, selection, and assignment of teachers, the same function that scored the highest mean score across all groups, and a low score of 2.512 for the 62 function, maintaining accurate, up-to-date records. These expressed levels of defense were exerted against the Parent Group and the State Board of Education-Legislature respectively. Standard deviation scores similarly examined showed a low score of .621 for the function, selection, and assignment of teachers, and a high score of 1.930 for the function, participation in the development of systemwide policies. These scores occurred for the threat agencies Parent Group and Superintendent, respectively. Varying levels of defense for the functions tested, as well as varying deviations from the mean, have been indicated, not only across all groups, but also within each threat agency group. Such findings have resulted in the conclusions, implications, and recommendations appearing in Chapter V. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The findings reported in Chapter IV serve as the basis for the conclusions, implications, and recommen­ dations that comprise Chapter V. A section reporting the conclusions of the study, including a map of the territory of the Michigan elementary school principal, is followed by a discussion of the implications. Recommen­ dations for further study conclude the chapter. Conclusions As previously reported, findings indicated a variation in levels of defense for the various functions tested. This variation was reflected in a range of mean scores across groups from 4.532 to 3.153 and in a range of standard deviation scores of .864 to 1.541 across all groups. When separate threat agency-function combinations were considered, mean scores ranged from 4.667 to 2.512 and standard deviation scores from .621 to 1.930. 64 The findings presented have led to the following conclusions: 1. The elementary school principal possesses and defends a territory. Respondents had the opportunity to choose not to defend against encroachment upon the ten functions tested. Findings have indicated that each function was defended when threatened by each threat agency. Since, by defi­ nition, territory is defined by its defense, and since elementary school principals responded to all threatened encroachments by some level of defensive action, it is therefore concluded that elementary school principals possess and defend a territory. 2. The elementary school principal's territory includes, but is not necessarily restricted to, the ten functions tested. Ranging from a moderate defense of 3.153 to an active-vigorous defense of 4.532, elementary school principals responses indicated that all ten tested functions would be defended. These functions are, therefore, part of the principal's territory. 3. The elementary school principal is likely to exert efforts to defend his continuation of certain functions (his territory) dependent upon the function and not upon the particular agency posing the threat. 65 Statistical analyses of the survey data did not reject the hypothesis that the strength of defense exerted against a threat agency does not vary among threat agencies but did reject the hypothesis that the strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary among functions (see Table 1). The conclusion, therefore, obtains that the elementary school principal will defend continuance of his functions according to the function being challenged and not according to the type of threat agency exerting that challenge. 4. The elementary school principal is not likely to exert equal defense for all of his functions. The range of mean scores found for the data indicates selectivity in strength of defense for the various functions tested from a low of 3.153 to a high of 4.532. Respondents chose to defend selection and assignment of teachers at a high active level while the function of maintaining accurate, up-to-date records was defended at a moderate level. Findings of significance at the .01 level caused the rejection of the hypothesis that the strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary with the function (see Table 1) and thus supports this conclusion. 5. Elementary school principals may not hold similar views on the level of defense to be exerted for some of their functions. 66 Reported data included information on standard deviation scores, which in this study indicate variation in response as to strength of defense to be exerted to continue a particular function. A low standard deviation is indicative of little variance, a high standard devi­ ation, of significant variance. These ranged across all groups from .8 64 to 1.541. Statistical treatment of these data in analyses of Chi Square tests of homogeneity for the pooled variance-covariance matrix indicated significance at the .01 level. Such significance supports the conclusion that elementary school principals differ in their views on the appropriate level of defense to exert to retain particular functions. 6. Territoriality, a behavioral system applicable to non-human and human animals, is also applicable to the elementary school principal. By virture of having expressed willingness to exert defense to protect the continuation of certain functions, elementary school principals have indicated their territoriality, that they do possess and will defend a territory and that their role, those functions they perform, is a part of that territory. A chart of the territory of the Michigan ele­ mentary school principal follows in Figure 1. This chart is based on the data provided in Table 3, page 47, 67 Weak 1 Defense Slight 2 Defense Moderate 3 Defense Active 4 Defense Vigorous 5 Defenses a = Selection and assignment of teachers (4.532) b = Assignment of pupils to grades, programs and teachers (4.414) c = Planning curriculum in terms of student needs (4.286) d = Teacher evaluation (4.281) e = Organization of the school for effect learning (4.158) f = Interpreting the school to the public (3.877) g = Providing resources for education in the building (3.783) h = Participation in the development of system-wide policies (3.567) i = Developing and implementing inservice programs for teaching personnel (3.468) j = Maintaining accurate, up-to-date records (3.153) Figure 1. A Map of the Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal. 68 and reflects the territorial concept that strength of defense increases the closer the encroachment is to the heart of the territory (Ardrey, 1966). A reading of the previous chart indicates that defense of a given function begins at the outer periphery of the territory and continues to the level specified in the findings. For example, defense of threats exerted toward "selection and assignment of teachers" would begin at the periphery and would grow in strength if intrusion occurred almost to the heart of the territory. On the other hand, "maintenance of accurate, up-to-date records" would be defended to a depth just inside level three, where further strengthening of defensive activity would not be forthcoming. Thus the extent and nature of the territory of the elementary school principal as related to the ten functions tested has been identified. The implications of this new knowledge and recommendations for further study comprise the remaining portion of Chapter V. Implications The conclusions have indicated that the ele­ mentary school principals have a territory, that the functions tested are a part of that territory, that they will exert varying levels of defense of these functions according to the particular function being threatened, and that they vary among themselves in 69 the strength of defense they would exert to maintain a certain function as part of their territory. Some readers may feel that the areas of conflict indicated in the findings between elementary school principals and the threat agencies exist, not because principals have a territorial right to those functions, but rather because the principals learned the wrong territory. No reader should assume that elementary school principals have an inherent right to possess and defend the functions described and proven to be a part of the principals' territory. The functions may have derived from specifically adopted board of education policy on one hand or may have been assumed by the Principal in the absence of board policy on the other. In any case, regardless of the source from which the functions derived, elementary school principals have indicated that they will defend to varying degrees their right to a decision-making role in the exercise of their learned functions. Such expressed defense has led to the implications which follow. Implications of the results of this study may be applied to the five threat agencies tested, to the popu­ lation from which the sample was selected, and to the M.A.E.S.P. as the organization serving that population. They are discussed in that order. 70 For the local board of education, the implication is that most principals might insist on the right to be involved in and to make decisions about curriculum, stu­ dent placement, and school organizational patterns. Acts of boards of education, either by omission or commission, that would tend to decrease or eliminate the elementary school principal's continued decision-making rights in these areas could well be expected to compel defensive reactions by elementary school principals. Relatively low standard deviations for these areas are also indica­ tive of fairly close unanimity of principals in strongly defending these functions against local board of edu­ cation encroachment. Such evidence should serve as cautions to a local board of education as it pursues collective bargaining agreements with other employee groups. Should parent groups in Michigan school communi­ ties seek to expand their involvement in local school policy development, this study's findings imply that they might find serious opposition from the elementary school principal if they attempt to reduce his decision­ making role in the selection, assignment and evaluation of teachers, and assignment of pupils. The findings suggest that parent groups might better serve their interests in improving the schools by concentrating their efforts in other, less sensitive areas. 71 The teachers' association evoked the strongest defensive reactions from the respondents. The range of high mean score to low mean score was the narrowest of all threat agencies tested, with the lowest mean score for this group being higher than that of any other group. Such a result would seem to imply that elementary school principals, on the whole, feel stronger defensive responses toward teacher association activities than toward other groups. One notable exception to the general response pattern of the other groups was the high mean score of 4.333 as the level of defense for the function, partici­ pation in the development of system-wide policies. This implies that teacher associations must recognize that challenges to the principals' participation in policy development could be met with a very active defense. Since many system-wide policies result from the negoti­ ation process between boards of education teams and teacher association teams, it seems logical to infer that most principals do not want their role diminished at the bargaining table and will fight to prevent this from happening. Responses to simulated threats from the state board of education and the legislature revealed strong defense for such functions as selection of teachers, pupil assignment, curriculum, and school organization. 72 The implication is that elementary school principals will generally resist any attempts on the part of these bodies to reduce the principal's decision-making role in per­ forming these functions. Such responses may serve as a caution to these agencies to leave decision-making regard­ ing these areas in the hands of the local elementary school principal and not seek to develop and implement state law or policy which would deny this to the principal. Reactions to threats by the superintendent pro­ vided the highest range of standard deviations, which implies that elementary school principals had more dif­ ficulty in arriving at any unanimity in opposing these threats. The highest standard deviation of all, 1.930, for the function participation in the development of system-wide policies, occurred in this group. Implications for the superintendent would seem to be a caution against any actions that would reduce the elementary school principals' role in teacher and pupil assignment, school organization and curriculum, and teacher evaluation, and an encouragement to enter into positive dialogue with principals to mutually develop policies in these areas of potential conflict. Having reviewed specific implications for the various threat agencies, it seems appropriate at this point to discuss implications as they generally apply across groups. A**— - These implications will be discussed 73 first as applied generally for the principalship. Follow­ ing this, implications will be presented for the ele­ mentary school principal and for the M.A.E.S.P., the organization of elementary school principals in Michigan. As applied generally to the elementary school principalship in Michigan, it appears that the impli­ cations of these findings are: 1. Those areas that most directly affect what happens to students in schools are those that are closest to the heart of the principal's territory and are those that would be most actively defended. This emphasis by elementary school principals belies the trend that has been expressed for the princi­ pal to become a building manager rather than an educational leader. By his indiccition that curriculum development and organization, teacher and pupil assignment and teacher evaluation are major aspects of his role and that these functions will be defended, the elementary school principal is forging his direction toward a strengthening rather than a diminution of his educational leadership role. 2. Individuals or groups seeking to reduce the decision-making opportunities for principals in performing these functions are likely to find themselves engaged in conflict. 74 3. Defensive reactions will vary, not only according to the function challenged, but also according to the individual principal. The existence of variables affecting defensive response was indicated by standard deviation scores.For example, the standard deviation for thefunction, participation in the development of system-wide policies, is 1.521. With a mean of 3.567, this would place approximately 6 8 per cent of the respondents showing a defense of from 2.046 to 5.088, from a slight defense to a very vigorous defense. This was to be expected, of course, by virtue of the utilization of a random sample. Since these findings provide new information to the elementary school principal in identifying his territory and since territoriality is a system of behavior, implications for the elementary school princi­ pal will deal with actions to assist inthe possession and the defense of territory. This study has taken the first step in providing territorial identification, in helping identify the territory of the elementary school principal. To be able to better defend it, the following implications obtain: 1. The elementary school principal should secure through pre-service programs and through continuous 75 in-service and graduate programs a better under­ standing of his territory. This would involve such areas as supervision of instruction, cur­ riculum development, child growth and development, personnel management, and community relations. The better the knowledge of a territory, the better is the defense. On example might be the home court or home field advantage attributed to the home team in sports because of the intimate knowledge of that territory by that home team. 2. The elementary school principal should learn appropriate strategies and techniques of defense of his territory. Singing like a bird or affixing a label to a door are not sufficient protective measures when dealing with a behaviorally defined territory. The principal needs to possess skills in interaction analysis, group dynamics, and what might be called the engineering of consent. He needs to understand the importance of timing, of the use of written and verbal communication techniques with his varying clients at varying times on varying issues. 3. The elementary school principal needs to know himself, to capitalize on his strengths and to strengthen his weaknesses. Such an assessment can better help the principal meet challenges to his territory. 76 4. The elementary school principal should unite with other elementary school principals in defending group territory. The group can exert a stronger defense than can the individual. Having defined his territory, the elementary school principal would do well to unite in the common cause and so strengthen his opportunities to defend his identified territory. One means of unifying elementary school principals has been their membership in the M.A.E.S.P. This member­ ship is open to all elementary school principals in Michigan. Since the M.A.E.S.P. elementary school member­ ship composed the population from which the sample was selected, it seems appropriate that the findings might provide some implications for action on the part of that association. The M.A.E.S.P. exists to serve its members. Implications of the findings for the M.A.E.S.P. that would serve the territoriality of its members are: 1. Increased efforts in in-service offerings at workshops and conferences to strengthen ele­ mentary school principals' identification of and knowledge about the specific components of their territory and to strengthen skills that would enable principals to defend successfully their territory. 77 2. Greater emphasis in association publications of the principals' territory and methods of defending it. 3. Increased emphasis in field service activities to assist individual principals and groups of principals in an understanding and securing of their territory. Such activity may require con­ tract proposal development and collective bargain­ ing assistance to help assure principals that their role will be protected. 4. Support for further research into the principal's territory and the territoriality of the ele­ mentary school principal. 5. Closer liaison with agencies perceived as sources of threat. Awareness of these implications might become all the more meaningful when it is realized that the territory identified in this study is not only the individual's territory but the group's territory as well. The group referred to is the population tested, the elementary school principal membership of the M.A.E.S.P. It there­ fore follows that this territory is a part of the territory of the M.A.E.S.P., which, in order to maintain it, must understand it and defend it. That is the major implication for the M.A.E.S.P. supplemented by the other four pre­ viously stated implications. 78 Implications of a "hands off" variety have been indicated for the various threat agencies tested. For the elementary school principal and his association, implications for programs and activities that would pro­ vide additional knowledge about and skill in the defense of the elementary school principals' territory have been suggested. The next section of this chapter will present recommendations for further study of territoriality as it applies to the elementary school principal as well as to the field of educational administration. Recommendations for Further Study As stated in Chapter I, Lyman and Scott (1967) have indicated the need for further study in human terri­ toriality. The findings, conclusions, and implications of this study also encourage additional research. Recom­ mendations for further study encompass not only those growing directly from the findings but also those that, because of this study's applicability to educational administration, would also seek to examine territoriality as it might obtain in other aspects of educational administration. Recommendations for further study as regards the elementary school principals' territory are: 1. Conduct a study that would investigate the possible defense of other functions by the 79 elementary school principal. Ten functions that comprise a part of the principals' territory have been identified by this study. What others there are remain to be ascertained. 2. Conduct a study that would examine specific com­ ponents of the tested functions so as to better delineate the principals' territory. A function such as "interpret the school to the public" could be separated into several components: meet regularly with parent groups, join service clubs and attend meetings, publish a monthly parent bulletin, attend and speak at senior citizen meetings. 3. Conduct a study examining the territoriality of a larger population of principals— the Midwest or the nation, for example. Implications for the future direction of the elementary school principalship might derive from the results of such a study and thus serve as a valuable input device for elementary school principal pre­ service and in-service program planning. 4. Conduct a study to determine if the existence of certain variables affects the territoriality of the elementary school principals. That such variables exist is evidenced by the size of 80 several of the standard deviation scores found in this study. Such variables as the superintendent's leadership style, amount of principal autonomy, existence or non-existence of administrator col­ lective bargaining units, principal's leadership style, and current practices of the principal might serve as appropriate areas to consider in relation to the territorial behavior of the ele­ mentary school principal. 5. Conduct a study to ascertain the methods of defense utilized by principals in protecting their role and analyze these as to their success or failure. Such information could then serve to develop principals better able to meet the chal­ lenges they face daily and improve their chances for survival. 6. Conduct studies of the on-the-job behaviors of principals as they relate to territoriality through direct observation. Tiger and Fox Blurton-Jones (1969) and (1966) have stated that man is an animal and may be studied as such through the utilization of some of the same techniques used to observe animals in the wild. Observers would have to be trained in how and what to observe, not only from the standpoint of the principal's behavior but also from the standpoint of the 81 "intruders'" responses, so as to be able to define the territory challenged, the nature of the challenge, the defensive behavior exerted, and the intruder response. Such information should provide data on the relative success of the defensive behavior and serve as potential guidelines for dealing with similar future situ­ ations . Areas for further study of territoriality and educational administration are: 1. Class size— The relationship of personal space to class size seems to be one that is worthy of immediate exploration. Is the difference only the number of children that can be taught, effec­ tively by one adult or does crowding and its effect on personal space make the real difference in learning? Why is the class size for Type A special education classes maximized at fifteen? Do special education students have different personal space needs than do normal children? 2. Motivation theory— Territoriality is a behavioral system that exists to satisfy one's need to possess and to defend a territory. What are the implications of territoriality as a needsatisfier for job satisfaction, productivity, and 82 morale? The relationship of territoriality to studies of job motivation and need theory is cer­ tainly an area ripe for further exploration. 3. School organizational patterns— The effects of self-contained programs, non-graded, open class­ rooms, and other organizational patterns should be examined, as they relate to the territorial needs of school employees and of students. The input of paraprofessionals on the traditional territory of teachers might prove to make an interesting study also. 4. The school superintendent— In these days of col­ lective bargaining with employee groups and increasing demands from administrator theorists for a greater voice in decision-making through implementation of what is known as a management team, it becomes increasingly important for the superintendent to know his territory. Community groups attempt to make their inroads also. A study that would help identify the superinten­ dent's territory would be of value to him and to others who may have difficulty in determining what it is. 5. Interpersonal relations— Territoriality provides the "home team" with the advantage; the animal defending his home seems to have the additional 83 strength necessary to be the victor. The home base provides identity and security. Will parents feel more comfortable and will a parent conference be more productive if conducted in the parents' territory? Will this also apply to principal-teacher conferences? superintendent conferences? principle apply? Principal- Does the territorial Studies in these areas might shed some light on this very significant area of concern in educational administration. 6. Organizational management— What relationship does territoriality have to various aspects of organizational management, such as: a. The definition of responsibility, authority, and accountability; b. Small group identity and role; c. Participatory decision-making, in edu­ cational administration referred to as the team approach; d. 7. Organizational change? Labor relations— Is the process of collective bar­ gaining the expression of a ritualization of aggression? Are those who have participated in team sports better negotiators? What is the relationship of territoriality to such areas as jurisdictional disputes, feather bedding, etc.? 84 The reader may also have thought of additional opportunities for further study in such areas as higher education specialization, urban education, decentrali­ zation, consolidation, and bussing to achieve desegre­ gation. The author hopes so, for if this is true, then this study has achieved another of its major purposes in that territoriality suggests a verdant field for the educational administrator. May he reap wisely and well. REFERENCES CITED REFERENCES CITED Ardrey, Robert. KOJD03T c. • The 1x10 Territorial 1 03T3Tlu03T l c l x X Imperative. lU P 03r0't Dell Publishing Co., Inc., 1966. New York: Altman, I., and Haythorn, W. W. "The Ecology of Isolated Groups." Environmental Psychology: Man and His Physical Setting. Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Barentt, S. A. Instinct and Intelligence: Behavior of Animals and M a n . New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967. Blurton Jones, N. G. B. "An Ethological Study of Some Aspects of Social Behavior of Children in Nursery School." Primate Ethology. Edited by Desmond Morris. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1969. Borel, J. C. "Security as a Motivator of Human Behavior." Arch. Gen. Psychiat, X (1964), 105-08. Boulding, Kenneth E. "Am I a Man or a Mouse— or Both?" Man and Aggression. Edited by Ashley Montagu. London: Oxford University Press, 1968. Carpenter, C. R. "Territoriality: A Review of Concepts and Problems." Behavior and Evolution. Edited by Ann Roe and G~ G. Simpson. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958. Carrighan, Sally. Wild Heritage. Books, Inc., 1971. New York: Ballantine Colman, A. D. "Territoriality in Man: A Comparison of Behavior in Home and Hospital." American J. Orthopsychiat, XXXVIII (1968), 464-66. 85 86 Coser, Lewis. The Functions of Social Conflict. The Free Press, 1^56. Toronto: Crook, J. H. "The Nature of Territorial Aggression." Man and Aggression. Edited by Ashley Montagu. London: Oxford University Press, 1968. Dimond, Stuart J. The Social Behavior of Animals. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc., 1970. Downie, n . W . , and Heath, R. W. Basic Statistical Methods. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc., 1970. Eible-Eibesfeldt, Irenaus. "The Fighting Behavior of Animals." Scientific American, CCV, No. 6 (December, 1961), 112-22. Eigenbrod, F. A., Jr. "The Effects of Territory and Personality Compatibility on Identity and Security." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1969. Esser, A. H . ; Chamberlain, A. S.; Chappie, E. D.; and Kline, N. S. "Territoriality of Patients on a Research W a r d ." Environmental Psychology. Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Freedman, L. Z., and Roe, Anne. Evolution and Human Behavior. Behavior and Evolution. Edited by Anne Roe and G. G. Simpson. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958. Greenhouse, Samuel W . , and Geisser, Seymour. "On Methods in the Analysis of Profile Data." Psychometrika, XXIV, No. 2 (June, 1959), 95-112. Hackett, C. F., and Asher, R. "The Human Revolution." The Subversive Science. Edited by P. Shepard and D. McKinley. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1969. Hall, Edward T. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1966. Hediger, Heini. "The Evolution of Territorial Behavior." Social Life of Early M a n . Edited by S. L. Washburne. New York: Wenner-Gren Foundation, 1961. 87 Horowitz, M. J.; Duff, D. F.; and Statton, L. 0. "Per­ sonal Space and the Body-Buffer Zone." Environ­ mental Psychology. Edited by Proshansky, Ittelson, and Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1970. Kira, A. "Privacy and the Bathroom." Environmental Psy­ chology . Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Krupka, Judith W. "Factors Affecting Territoriality in College Students." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970. LaBarre, Weston. The Human Animal. of Chicago Press, 1954. Chicago: University Leach, Edmund. "Don't Say 'Boo' to a Goose." Man and Aggression. Edited by Ashley Montagu. London: Oxford University Press, 1968. Lorenz, Konrad. On Aggression. New York: Brace and World, Inc., 1969. Harcourt, Lyman, S. M . , and Scott, M. B. "Territoriality, A Neglected Sociological Dimension." Social Problems, XV (1967), 236-49. Medawar, P. B. The Future of M a n . Books, Inc., 1961. New York: Montagu, M. F. A. Man and Aggression. Press, 1968. Basic Oxford University ________ . "The New Litany of 'Innate Depravity' or Original Sin Revisited." Man and Nature. Edited by Ronald Munson. New YorlT: Dell Publishing Company, Inc., 1971. Pfeiffer, John E. The Emergence of M a n . Harper and Row Publishers, 1969. New York: Proshansky, H. M . ; Ittelson, W. H.; and Rivlin, L. G. Environmental Psychology: Man and His Physical Setting. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1970. ________ ;_________ ; and _________ . "Freedom of Choice and Behavior in a Physical Setting." Environmental Psychology. Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1970. 88 Roos, P. D. "Jurisdiction: An Ecological Concept." Human Relations, XXI (1968), 75-84. Ruesch, J., and Kees, W. "Function and Meaning in the Physical Environment." Environmental Psychology. Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1970. Shepard, Paul, and McKinley, R. The Subversive Science. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1969. Sommer, Robert. "The Ecology of Privacy." Environmental Psychology. Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1970. _________. Personal Space: The Behavioral Basis of Design. New Jersey:Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. Stea, David. "Space, Territory and Human Movements." Environmental Psychology. Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1970. Storr, Anthony. Human Aggression. Publishers, 1970. New York: Atheneum Tiger, L . , and Fox, R. "The Zoological Perspective in Social Science." Man, I, No. 1 (March, 1966), 75-81. Van Lawick-Goodall, J. In the Shadow of M a n . Houghton Mifflin Company, 1971. Boston: Wynne-Edwards, V. C. Animal Dispersion in Relation to Social Behavior! London: Oliver and Boyd, Ltd., 1962. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL ROLE FUNCTIONS Ainsworth, C. L. "Duties of the Elementary School Princip a l ." Selected Articles for Elementary School Principals. Washington, D.C.: Department of Elementary School Principals, N.E.A., 1968. Andlauer, Herbert R. "The Elementary School Principal in New Jersey, A Comparative Study." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers University, 1969. Billings Public Schools. "Job Description— Elementary School Principal." Billings, Montana, 1970. Board of School Directors. "Position Description: Principal, Elementary School." Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1969, Appendix B-2. Boise Independent School District. "A Job Description of the Boise Elementary School Principalship." Boise, Idaho, 1970. Carlson, Russell S. "Actual and Ideal Role Perceptions of the Elementary Principal as Seen by Superin­ tendents, Teachers, and Principals." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Montana State University, 1971, Department of Elementary School Principals. Oklahoma Education Association. "The School Principal." Oklahoma, 1969. Frey, Barbara R. "An Analysis of the Functions of the Elementary School Principal 1921-1961." Unpub­ lished Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1963. Hubbard, Frank. The Elementary School Principalship in 1968, A Research Stu<5yt Washington, D.C.: Department of Elementary School Principals, N.E.A., 1968. Illinois Elementary School Principals Association. Role of the Elementary School Principal." Illinois, 1965. 89 "The 90 Jarvis, O. T.; Parker, Charles A.; and Moore, Alan A., Jr "Status Study of the Elementary School Principal in Georgia, 1969." Georgia: Department of Ele­ mentary School Principals, Georgia Education Association and Bureau of Educational Studies and Field Services, College of Education, Uni­ versity of Georgia, 1970. Keller, Edward. "The Job of the Elementary School Princi pal." Unpublished Survey. East Lansing: Michigan Education Association, 1968. Maine Elementary Principals Association. the Elementary School." 1963. "Functions of North Eastern Ohio Elementary Principals Association. "A Study of the Principalship in Northeast Ohio." Columbus: Ohio Education Association, 1965. Public Schools of the District of Columbia. "Principals, Elementary Schools: Classification Study." Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1960. Sioux Falls Independent School District #1. "Adminis­ tration: Principal of Schools." Board policy 2210 (a) (b), 221.12 (c). Sioux Falls, South Dakota, 1968. Ulhorn, C. Monica. "The Elementary Principal as the 'Administrative Mold.'" Principal in the Seven­ ties . Maryland: Department of Elementary School Principals, XI, No. 1 (Winter, 1970), 7-10. SELECTED REFERENCES Ardrey, Robert. African Genesis. lishing C o . , Inc., 1970. ________ . The Social Contract. New York: New York: Dell Pub­ Atheneum, 1970. Beck, Robert. "Spatial Meaning and the Properties of the Environment." Environmental Psychology. Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Comfort, Alex. The Nature of Human Nature. Avon Books, 1968. New York: Education Development Center, Inc. Man: A Course of Study, Talks to Teachers. Massachusetts: Edu­ cation Development Center, Inc., 1970. Eible-Eibesfeldt, Irenaus. Ethology, the Biology of Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1970. Hall, Edward. The Silent Language. and Co., Inc., 1959. New York: Hall, Richard W. "When a Champ is a Loser." Business, November, 1971, pp. 4 7-50. Doubleday Nation's Hocking, Brian. Biology or Oblivion. Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing Co., Inc., 1965. Montagu, M. F. Ashley. The Human Revolution. World Publishing Company, 1967. Morris, Desmond. The Human Zoo. lishing C o ~ 1971. The Naked Ape. New York: 1 9 7 j- ________ . Primate Ethology. Co.^ Inc., 1969. . Dell Pub­ Dell Publishing Co., New York: Munson, Ronald. Man and Nature. lishing Co., 1971 Schachter, Stanley. California: New York: Cleveland: Doubleday and New York: Dell Pub­ The Psychology of Affiliation. Stanford University Press, 1^65. 91 92 Segal, Harvey. "Penthouse Interview-Robert Ardrey." Penthouse, February, 1971, pp. 38-42. Southwick, C. H. Primate Social Behavior. D. Van Nestrand Co., Inc., 1963. New York: VandenBerg, J. H. The Changing Nature of M a n . Dell Publishing Co., Inc., 1961. Wylie, Philip. The Magic Animal. Shuster, Inc.,1969. New York: New York Simon and APPENDICES APPENDIX A LETTER 5282 Association of Elementary School Principals Affiliated with the Michigan Congress of School Administrator Associations POST O FFIC E BOX 1455 • EAST L A N S IN G , M IC H IG A N 48823 • PHONE 517 353-8770 Dear MAESP Member: This letter is a call for help. I am requesting your assistance in an MAESP-approved research study to examine the territoriality of the elementary school principal, that being those functions he will defend as his when and if an individual or a group threatens to affect his decision-making role. This study seeks to identify the importance a principal attaches to each of several of his functions by the level of strength he would exert to defend his continuation of that function. Enclosed are a series of ten simulated situations, each based upon one of your major job responsibilities. Each situation consists of a threat to the continuance of your decision­ making role in one of these functions. After each situation you will find a section containing num­ bers 1 to 5 which requests your response. You are asked to circle the number which best indicates the strength of defense you would exert to retain your exercise of that function, number one being no defense to number five being a vigorous defense. In making your choices, please respond as though these simulated situations were actually occurring to you in your school district. Upon completing the responses for all ten items, please place them in the enclosed, self-addressed, stamped envelope and return it to me by January 21, 19 72. I would greatly appreciate your participation in this study, the results of which should provide help to the elementary school principal in determining his future direction. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely yours Edward P. Keller Executive Secretary APPENDIX B GROUP ONE SIMULATIONS SELECTION AND ASSIGNMENT OF TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. PRESIDENT'S STATEMENT - BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING 12-14-71 "I've had more comments these past two years about our teaching staff. Our community is very concerned about improving the quality of education in this district and feels something must be done about it. "When I inquired about how we get our teachers, I learned that almost anyone in the school system could be involved. The superintendent selects some, and so do the assistant superinten­ dent and the principals. Some teachers have pushed some on u s . Why, even one board member insisted that we hire a certain person to teach for u s . "Something has to be done about this m e s s . "I am therefore recommending to this board that at the next meeting we consider employing a personnel director who will have full charge of recruiting, selecting, and assigning teachers. We need to place this responsibility fully in the hands of one man and stop this chaos we seem to be perpetuating. do. "The superintendent and the principals have other jobs to We need one person who can do this job and do it well." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of selection and assign­ ment of teachers as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No D e f e n s e ^ __________________ Vigorous Defense 94 95 ASSIGNMENT OF PUPILS TO GRADES, PROGRAMS AND TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES December 14, 1971 "Added to the agenda of the January Board meeting will be Pupil Assignment Policies . M r s . Julie Maxwell requested this , expressing her feeling that our schools were too 'softr on promotion policies and that too many children were getting into junior high school that couldn't read." Superintendent Note: Principals are requested to develop a rationale supporting our current policy for our next admini­ strative council meeting or be prepared to accept greater retention of students in the elementary grades . PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of assignment of pupils to grades, programs , and teachers as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 96 PLANNING CURRICULUM IN TERMS OF STUDENT NEEDS has been your res­ ponsibility as an elementary school principal. The action des­ cribed below could affect your continuation of this function. REPORT ON NSBA MEETING BY BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBER, MARY SMITH 11-17-71 While attending the National School 3oards Association con­ vention , I observed a demonstration of a new reading program that was not only fascinating to behold but resulted in wonderful learning by the class of students that were there. This program is called the Chicago Individualized Learning Skills program. It uses a basic book for each child plus some additional audio-visual materials. According to the reports , the results are just amazing. I will be recommending to the Board of Education that wc invite Dr. Lyall Browning to our next board meeting to explain his program so that we can put this program into each elementary building as soon as possible. Board Minutes: 12-14-71 Moved by M. Smith, seconded by R. Jones, that Dr. Browning's CILS reading program be instituted in each elementary building before the end of this school year and that according to Board Policy, final action on this motion be taken at the January board meeting. Motion carried. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of planning curriculum in terms of student needs as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 Vigorous Defense 97 TEACHER EVALUATION has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES December 14, 19 71 Meeting December 14, 1971--"...Mr. Jones moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith, that the report of the Teacher Evaluation Committee be adopted as Board Policy. Motion tabled until the next board meeting, January 21, 19 7 2." Policy Excerpts: "The principal’s sole responsibility in the evaluation process is to assist in arranging visitation and conference schedules for the evaluator-evaluatee." "Evaluation of the teaching process shall be conducted by a two-man team composed of one central office representative and one teacher." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of teacher evaluation as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 98 ORGANIZATION OF THE SCHOOL FOR EFFECTIVE LEARNING has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. CONVERSATION BETWEEN BOARD OF EDUCATION PRESIDENT AND SUPERINTENDENT President: "I have been receiving a lot of calls from parents who are concerned about the quality and equality of education in our district. They feel that if we mean what we say we should have a complete individualized instruction program and all self-contained classrooms, since this would enable teachers to establish a close relationship with students and help them know the kids better." Superintendent: "This concern seems to be growing. this up at our next administrators' meeting." I'll take Board President: "I certainly am pleased to hear that. This matter has caused concern by other board members also and will have to appear on our next agenda. Unless I hear differently from you and the principals, I will be recommending a full selfcontained, individualized program in the elementary schools, since this seems to be what the community w a n t s ." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of organization of the school for effective learning as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 99 INTERPRETING THE SCHOOL TO THE PUBLIC has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Building Principals FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ: Board of Education Policy Recommendation - for Action 1-20-72 "To assure accuracy and clarity of communication, all news­ letters , bulletins , e t c . , to be developed and distributed at the building level shall be approved, prior to publication, by the superintendent's office. No building principal shall print or distribute communications without prior approval from the super­ intendent ." Superintendent N o t e : The Board feels that this policy would strengthen district public relations and would assure conformity to existing policies on release of information, building sche­ duling and activities, e t c . PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of interpreting the school to the public as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 100 PROVIDING RESOURCES FOR EDUCATION IN THE BUILDING has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. PROPOSED POLICY FOR ADOPTION AT BOARD OF EDUCATION JANUARY MEETING "All special funds collected by schools on school picture sales, candy sales, etc,, that are non-project connected shall be placed in a special general school district activities fund to be redistributed according to policies adopted by this Board. "All special projects for which funds are to be gained from sales activities must have prior approval of the Board." It has come to the Board's attention through our auditor's annual visit that individual schools have a special account that they use to buy additional books, pictures, equipment, etc., apart from the usual school district channels. The Board feels that all purchases of all materials should come through regular administrative procedures as approved by the Board. Note to Principals: trative meeting. Let's talk about this at our next adminis­ PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of providing resources for education in the building as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 101 PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SYSTEM-WIDE POLICIES has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM BOARD OF EDUCATION SCHOOL EMPLOYEES* NEWSLETTER "In keeping with our desire to maintain the best possible relationship among our building staffs, wc are anticipating r e ­ moving principals from our team negotiating with the teachers ' union on school district policies. We have been led to believe that this interferes with positive relationships in the buildings where a building principal serves on the board's negotiating t e a m . "Further discussion on this issue will take place shortly with the principals , but we did want you to know of our current thinking on this matter." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of participation in the development of system-wide policies as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 102 DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING IN-SERVICE TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR TEACHING PERSONNEL has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Administrative Personnel FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ: Board of Education Proposed Reorganization According to che current philosophy of our Board of Educa­ tion, line management functions should be separated from staff supportive functions. Principals are management's representatives in the buildings and are therefore line. Central Office staff deal with program support and have staff, rather than line, functions. The Director of Instruction, as staff, has charge of our school district curriculum development and in-service training program. Under this proposal, he will work directly with teacher committees in his endeavors. Principals will not serve on these committees since curriculum and in-service is a staff function, and they are line managers whose concerns are primarily personnel and pupil management, general administration, and local community relations. We will discuss this proposed reorganization at our next Administrative Council meeting, as the Board wants to hear our recommendations at their next study session. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of developing and imple­ menting in-service training programs for teaching personnel as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 H 5 Vigorous Defense 103 MAINTAINING ACCURATE UP-TO-DATE RECORDS has been your responsi­ bility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM "NOTES FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT'S OFFICE" "Seeking to relieve over-duplication of effort and to pro­ vide uniformity in the collection and reporting of data, as well as to achieve economy in purchasing and improved budget control, the Board of Education is contemplating moving toward greater utilization of data processing and computer technology. "This program would enable record-keeping and requisitions of supplies to move directly from the classroom teacher to the appropriate processing source, thus freeing the building princi­ pal to concentrate on the more educational professional aspects of his job. "The Board will be meeting with school administrators to discuss this proposal more fully." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of maintaining accurate up-to-date records as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 1 + 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX C GROUP TWO SIMULATIONS SELECTION AND ASSIGNMENT OF TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. N O T I C E TO: All School Principals FROM: The Citizens Council for Better Schools SUBJ: Teacher Selection and Placement The Citizens Council for Better Schools will be conducting hearings on their subcommittee reports over the next month. First to be heard will be the Teacher Selection and Place­ ment Committee’s recommendations on Monday, January 16, 1972. Included in these recommendations are such items as: "Parents should and must have full participation in the selection of each school building's teaching staffs. The role of the principal is that of a partner, but the parents, whose children are to be instructed in the school, should make the ^inal determination on who is assigned to teach those children.' PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of selection and assign­ ment of teachers as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defence_______________________ Vigorous Defense 104 105 ASSIGNMENT OF PUPILS TO GRADES, PROGRAMS AND TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. NEIGHBORHOOD FLYER IMPORTANT MEETING: Madison School at 7:30 P.M., Friday, January 17, 1972. Why are we getting the run-around? We love our k i d s ! We want them to get a good education! We pay the taxes that support this school! We should have the right to choose the room assignment our child gets! We should have the right to have our child transferred if necessary! Why don't we?? Come to the meeting and find out! Let's start acting! Sponsored by: NOW!! Madison Parents for Community Control PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of assignment of pupils to grades, programs and teachers as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 106 PLANNING CURRICULUM IN TERMS OF STUDENT NEEDS has been your res­ ponsibility as an elementary school principal. The action des­ cribed below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM ANYTOWN GAZETTE At a meeting of the Parents for Better Schools held last evening, a resolution requiring that all elementary school stu­ dents receive instruction in home economics and first aid was adopted. Mrs. John Allen, Chairman, said that she felt the schools ought to teach something useful. "Why, my son can't even put a bandaid on a cut knee, let alone sew up a tear in his pants! He probably can't even boil water!" Mrs. Allen stated that parent groups in each school district would be calling on each principal to demand these changes in school programs, as well as beginning a petition drive. Petitions would be presented to the Board of Education at their January meeting. "We're only trying to do what's best," Mrs. Allen concluded. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of planning curriculum in terms of student needs as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 107 TEACHER EVALUATION has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. PARENT'S CONVERSATION WITH PRINCIPAL (RECORDED) "Mr. Doe, I am here representing a large group of parents in this school who don't like what some of your teachers are doing. In some cases, we don't think they are doing much of any­ thing. Our kids aren't learning anything and we want something done about i t . "We got together the other night and decided that maybe it was about time we did something ourselves. That's why I'm here-to tell you what we decided. "These parents, and there are many of them, voted that they wanted to visit the classes themselves and make reports to you and the superintendent of what they see and hear. You've got a few good teachers, but most of them leave a lot to be desired. "We think the parents have a right to evaluate what's hap­ pening in the classroom and intend to exercise that right. Parents know what's best for their kids. They want the best for their kids and that includes the best teachers. Since we pay their salaries , we feel we have the right to judge how good they are. You've got enough to do with other things so we can do this evaluating and make these teachers accountable to the community." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of teacher evaluation as one of your functions. 0 Mo Defense 1 2 3 H 5 Vigorous Defense 108 ORGANIZATION OF THE SCHOOL FOR EFFECTIVE LEARNING has been your The action responsibility as an elementary school principal, described below could affect your continuation of this function. LETTER FROM PARENTS' ATTORNEY Mr. Barry Black, Principal Eastside Elementary School Anytown, Michigan Dear Mr. Black: You are hereby advised that Mr. and Mrs. Timothy Millard have retained my services in contemplating legal action against you regarding your failure to promote their son, Ronald, an action which has caused Ronald untold mental anguish. Placement of Ronald, a second-grader last year, in a class composed of children his age and other children younger than he, ostensibly a "non-graded" classroom by your own terminology is felt to be a patent subterfuge for non-promotion and very demean­ ing to Ronald. Mr. and Mrs. Millard demand that Ronald be placed in the third-grade room in which he is entitled to be. I would urge that you contact me immediately to settle this matter satisfactorily. Unless I hear from you within five days, appropriate court action will be instituted. Sincerely yours, Maxwell Frye Attorney at Law PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of organization of the school for effective learning as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense_______________________ Vigorous Defense 109 INTERPRETING THE SCHOOL TO THE PUBLIC has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. PARENT'S TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH SUPERINTENDENT "Hey, Hr. Jones, what in blazes is going on at Madison School? That principal is never there! I don't think the kids even know who he i s . "Isn't is his job to be in the school? He always seems to be out at meetings at your office, at some club, or just wander­ ing around the neighborhood having coffee with a few parents. him. "Yes, he returns my calls but he's not there when I want And it's not just him, it's other principals, too. "How can we know what's going on in our schools when the principals aren't there to keep us informed? "We parents don't like this. We want something done about it! If you don't do something, we're going to the Board of Education. "If the principals know what's good for them, they'll stay in the buildings where they belong." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of interpreting the school to the public as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 110 PROVIDING RESOURCES FOR EDUCATION IN THE BUILDING has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM PTA EXECUTIVE BOARD MINUTES Homer Wilson, PTA Safety chairman, questioned the number of field trips our children are taking away from the school. He expressed great concern over highway safety and dangers our children face with this extra travelling. Mr. Wilson thought we should state our opposition to con­ tinued use of field trips as an educational resource. It would be better, he felt, if adults were brought to school rather than children doing the travelling. Mr. Wilson said he would prepare a resolution for our action at the next board meeting. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of providing resources for education in the building as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 1 + 5 Vigorous Defense Ill PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SYSTEM-WIDE POLICIES has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. TEXT OF PARENT PETITION We, the undersigned, qualified registered voters of this district do hereby petition the Board of Education of this school district to involve us fully in the decisions that are made about the education of children. We submit the following demands: 1. That each school have a parent-teacher council made up of 5 parents, 3 teachers and the principal. 2. That each council make recommendations on individual school and on school district policy by majority vote. 3. That there be established a school district council advisory to the board of education. 4. That this council be composed of 1 parent from each elementary and secondary school attendance area, 1 elementary principal, 1 secondary principal, and 1 central office staff person. 5. That this school district council develop recommenda­ tions by a majority vote. We do this in the interests of bringing democracy back into our community and to make our schools more responsive to the desires of the community. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of participation in the development of system-wide policies as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 112 DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING IN-SERVICE TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR TEACHING PERSONNEL has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LETTER TO PRINCIPAL FROM PTA PRESIDENT Dear M r . G r e e n : A number of parents in our school PTA have become disturbed about our school's record on the state assessment tests. We feel that our children should be better readers and that, if the teachers don't understand how to teach them to read, the teachers should be taught how. Parents have been concerned about the use service" days. They have said that these days good and needy purposes. They want these days teaching teachers to improve their teaching of of so-called "inare not used for to be used for reading. I have been asked to request a meeting with you in the next two weeks so that a parent committee, myself, and you might be able to incorporate our children's reading needs into this year's "in-service" program. Please call me soon, about this , as our parent group is quite upset. Sincerely yours, Marian Reynolds PTA President PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of developing and imple­ menting in-service training programs for teaching personnel as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 ____________________ Vigorous Defense MAINTAINING ACCURATE UP-TO-DATE RECORDS has been your responsi­ bility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM PARENT ACTION COMMITTEE MINUTES "Moved by J. Warren, seconded by M. Burger, that the PAC demand that parents have access to all records that have any­ thing to do with their children. "Moved by M. Burger, seconded by L. Warren, that copies of all entries made in a child’s records be provided to the child’s parents by the principal. "Moved by L. Warren, seconded by J. Burger, that the PAC appoint a committee to meet with the principal on the previous motions immediately." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of maintaining accurate up-to-date records as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX D GROUP THREE SIMULATIONS SELECTION AND ASSIGNMENT OF TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM XYZ EDUCATION ASSOCIATION GAZETTE 12-4-71 The XYZ Education Association and the Board of Education, according to spokesman, are nearly at agreement on all items in their proposed new three-year contract. Still in doubt, however, in addition to salaries, is the issue of teacher assignment. The XYZEA believes that seniority coupled with the decision of a building committee of teachers should determine the location and grade level assignment of each teacher. "Teachers know better than anyone else their special com­ petencies," said John Martin, XYZEA President, "and should have the authority to place teachers accordingly." The Board of Education's "no comment" position makes one wonder if capitulation is near. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of selection and assign­ ment of teachers as one of your functions . 0 1 2 3 4 5 No D e f e n s e ____________________ Vigorous Defense 114 ASSIGNMENT OF PUPILS TO GRADES, PROGRAMS AND TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LETTER TO PRINCIPAL Dear M r . Smith: I am writing you on behalf of the teachers in this building who feel that student assignments to various rooms have been most arbitrary and not in the best interests of children or teachers. We also object to the cavalier manner in which child­ ren are reassigned at parent whim. We feel these are decisions that we should m a k e . We want something done about it and want to meet with you immediately. Unless this problem is resolved satisfactorily we will be forced to file a grievance against you. Sincerely yours, Agnes Matthews XYZ Association Representative PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of assignment of pupils to grades, programs ana teachers as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense PLANNING CURRICULUM IN TERMS OF STUDENT NEEDS has been your res­ ponsibility as an elementary school principal. The action des­ cribed below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM EDUCATION ASSOCIATION FLASH 12-10-71 "Our master agreement interest survey shows that teachers insist on their right to determine curriculum. The results indicated that 9 2% of the respondents wanted a stronger voice in curriculum decision in this district and in their buildings. "Contract negotiations, therefore, will include a demand that teachers, and teachers o n l y , determine what their curri­ culum working conditions will be. No longer will teachers take a second class position to principals and central office admini­ stration . "Teachers know w h a t ’s best for children and youth. The EA will work to secure that decision-making right for you." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of planning curriculum in terms of student needs as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 117 TEACHER EVALUATION has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM EDUCATION ASSOCIATION CONTRACT PROPOSAL "All evaluations of teachers relating to the teachinglearning process shall be conducted by a team of three teachers in each building recommended by the teachers in that building and appointed by the Association. "This team shall submit reports on their evaluation of each teacher to the superintendent and to the Association. "Procedures to be followed and instruments to be used will be developed by a committee appointed by the Association." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of teacher evaluation as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense r 118 ORGANIZATION OF THE SCHOOL FOR EFFECTIVE LEARNING has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LOCAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION LETTER TO: Mr. Smith, Principal The teaching staff held a meeting last evening after school. As a result ot that meeting, I have been directed to contact you to establish a date and time at which Mrs. Bruce, Mrs. Little, Mrs. Harrington, and myself could meet with you to review the needs we will have for next year for new programs. As you know, we have been displeased with the lack of response to our previous efforts to change our classroom pat­ terns . We now want to put an end to this frustration. We propose the establishment of a K-3 primary unit of individualized, multi-age group instruction, a self-contained 4th gr ad e, and team teaching and individualization in a com­ bined 5-6. Rationale, organization plans, and budget will be presented to you at our meeting with you. We urge you to call this meet­ ing as soon as possible so we can get these plans under way. Sincerely, M r s . Thelma Rugg Association Representative PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of organization of the school for effective learning as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense INTERPRETING THE SCHOOL TO THE PUBLIC has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM TEACHERS ASSOCIATION LETTER TO BOARD NEGOTIATING TEAM "In addition to the above stated items, we feel that a com­ petent, available principal is a necessary working condition for teachers. We find that principals are leaving their buildings for various purposes with considerable frequency. Are Rotary lunches as important as the immediate dealing with lunchroom pro­ blems when they occur? We don't think so. "We want principals in the buildings doing their jobs , not out somewhere in the district unavailable for crucial problems in the schools. "You can be certain that this item will be of major concern to us as we begin negotiations on our new contract." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of interpreting the school to the public as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 120 PROVIDING RESOURCES FOR EDUCATION IN THE BUILDING has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LOCAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION CONTRACT PROPOSAL Article XXI - Instructional Supplies Allocation All school buildings shall receive a per/pupil allotment for instructional supplies. This allotment shall be distri­ buted for instructional equipment and supplies as determined by the teaching staffs of each building. Rationale: Teachers have a better idea than anyone else as to what instructional materials are appropriate to their classes and should, therefore, have the opportunity to make those choices. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of providing resources foi education in the building as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 Vigorous Defense F 121 PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SYSTEM-WIDE POLICIES has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Principals FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ: Education Association Letter The following statement is excerpted from a letter received by me from the EA President, James Armstrong. "Our Association believes that system-wide policies affect­ ing education in this district can only be developed properly through the collective bargaining process. This process is one whereby you, the Superintendent, ar.d we, the Association, communi­ cate , negotiate, and arrive at a determination of what is best for this school district. "We have stated, and you have agreed, I believe, that building principals should not be at the table on the board team due to the adversary role this would place them in in relation to their teaching staffs with whom they must work daily. "We subscribe to this concept and believe that you and the Association can determine system policy through negotiations without the possible, and very probable, deterrant of their participation." NOTE: Our Board is awaiting my recommendation on this. prepared to discuss this at our next Council meeting. Be PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of participation in the development of system-wide policies as one of your functions. 0 No Defense Stow. 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 122 DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING IN-SERVICE TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR TEACHING PERSONNEL has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM TEACHERS ASSOCIATION CONTRACT PROPOSAL Article XXIII - In-Service Education Section 1: Each school building shall establish an InService Committee composed of three teachers elected by the building teaching staff. Section 2: The responsibilities of this committee shall be to initiate and direct in-service programs at the building level according to building needs. Section 3 A district in-service committee shall be formed, composed of one representative from each building committee. Section 4: The district committee shall have charge of and determine the nature, content, and pro­ cedures for in-service education programs as provided in the school calendar. Section 5 The district committee shall recommend budget­ ary needs. This budget shall be subject to negotiations between the Board and the Associ­ ation . PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of developing and imple­ menting in-service training programs for teaching personnel as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense_______________________ Vigorous Defense MAINTAINING ACCURATE UP-TO-DATE RECORDS has been your responsi­ bility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LOCAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION LETTER TO: The Board of Education We, the professional teachers, deplore the "big brother" attitude of our principals. While we realize it may be necessary because of law and state regulations that we perform certain clerical record­ keeping duties that are really non-professional and would be done by paraprofessionals, we accept the need to maintain records of a professional nature, particularly those that deal directly with our professional endeavors, namely children's cumulative records. What we cannot accept is the indignity of having these records "snoopervised" by our principals. Professionally trained teachers are very capable of maintaining these records properly. It is utterly demeaning to teachers to be subjected to this con­ stant monitoring by principals. Unless this matter is handled satisfactorily by you through regular administrative channels soon, you will force us to file a group grievance against you. We are professionally qualified educators. treated accordingly. We should be Sincerely y o u r s , James Tyler, President XYZ Education Association PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of maintaining accurate up-to-date records as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 i+ 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX E GROUP FOUR SIMULATIONS SELECTION AND ASSIGNMENT OF TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: State Board of Education FROM: Superintendent of Public Instruction DATE: January 10, 19 7 2 SUBJ: Teacher Selection and Assignment - Preliminary Report In accordance with our six stage accountability model, our Division of Teacher Certification and Professional Development has been exploring ways in which this model might be applied to their responsibilities. The Division recommends that further study be authorized on the following: 1. Regions established for Career Education, Adult Educa­ tion, etc., by the State Board of Education should serve teacher selection-assignment functions also. 2. All school districts shall submit classroom unit staff needs to the Region Superintendent. 3. Each applicant for certification shall indicate the Region in which he prefers employment. 4. The Region Superintendent shall assign teachers to school districts, buildings, and grades according to the staff needs inventory submitted by local superintendents. I recommend the adoption of these recommendations in prin­ ciple and that authorization be given to hold statewide meetings on them. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of selection and assign­ ment of teachers as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense_______________________ Vigorous Defense 124 r 125 ASSIGNMENT OF PUPILS TO GRADES, PROGRAMS AND TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM ANYTOWN DAILY NEWS (AP) The Michigan House of Representatives today has introduced a bill which would make every Michigan school and classroom sub­ ject to open enrollment. Sponsored by Representative Jack Mason (D), this bill would permit parents of any school age child in Michigan to enroll him in a school building and school room of their choice. "This bill would put control of their child's education where it belongs," said Rep. Mason, "back in the hands of the parents." A spokesman for the education community stated that adoption of this bill could be chaotic for local school districts. The bill provides for inter-school and intra-school school selection within the pupil attendance capacities of building facilities. Reaction is expected from local teachers and administrators. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of assignment of pupils to grades, programs and teachers as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 h 5 Vigorous Defense PLANNING CURRICULUM IN TERMS OF STUDENT NEEDS has been your res­ ponsibility as an elementary school principal. The action des­ cribed below could affect your continuation of this function. HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION HJR 7 878 - Environmental Education Whereas, Environmental education is of such great importance to individual, state, nation, and world survival, and Whereas, this state has supported strong measures for pollution control and elimination, and Whereas, education is a function of this state to be exercised by the legislature, the state board of education, and the local school districts, Therefore, be it resolved, that the State Board of Education develop regulations for a positive program of environmental edu­ cation in each school district and building in this st ate , and Be it further resolved, that these regulations shall mandate the course content by grade level as well as the number of instruc­ tional hours appropriate to each course, and Be it further resolved, that the State Board of Education shall establish a system by which adherence to these regulations may b assured. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of planning curriculum in terms of student needs as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 127 TEACHER EVALUATION has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO : State Board of Education FROM: Superintendent of Public Instruction DATE: January 10, 1972 SUBJ : Teacher Evaluation The Michigan Tenure Law provides procedures for dismissal of incompetent teachers but does not seek to define incompetence. It seems proper, therefore, that the State Board of Education exercise its constitutional authority and its responsibility to do so in the best interest of Michigan education. I am recommending, therefore, that the Board appoint a Committee on Teaching Competence composed of two representatives from the MEA, two representatives from the MFT, and five citizens-at-large who shall define competence and develop the standards, policies, and procedures by which teachers shall be evaluated in each Michigan school district . PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of teacher evaluation as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 128 ORGANIZATION OF THE SCHOOL FOR EFFECTIVE LEARNING has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action des­ cribed below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Superintendent John Porter FROM: Assistant Superintendent James Kelley SUBJ: Recommendation to Implement Delivery System Evaluation In moving toward full implementation of our delivery systems evaluation program, the department staff will be visiting school districts to determine the success of their organizational struc­ ture in meeting student need s. Recommendations for change will be made where needed, particularly where compensatory funds and federal funds are being expended. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of organization of the school for effective learning as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense INTERPRETING THE SCHOOL TO THE PUBLIC has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM ASSESSMENT REPORT TO SUPERINTENDENTS "While individual pupil scores will not be released, it is expected that school district results by building and by class­ room will be available to the public. It is contemplated that building principals will expedite this communication and will deal with further follow-up at the building level on parent questions." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of interpreting the school to the public as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 130 PROVIDING RESOURCES FOR EDUCATION IN THE BUILDING has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action des­ cribed below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Federal Fund Applicants FROM: State Department of Education SUBJ: New Federal Fund Program Requirements Please be advised that Michigan has been designated as a state to pilot the application of the accountability model to federally funded programs. In addition to the requirement of the six stage model, there will be also the same guarantees that have bee'n applicable to the Section Three Compensatory Education program. One further requirement being contemplated relates to the ex­ penditure of funds for audio-visual equipment and other instruc­ tional aids. If this is done, the materials are to be identified as state property and will revert to the state should the objec­ tives of your program not be accomplished. Principals and other administrators should keep this in mind and perhaps base programs more on human resource additions and professional development. Federal program monitors will be conducting meetings on these proposals shortly. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the intention of providing resources for education in the building as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 131 PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OP SYSTEM-WIDE POLICIES has bean your responsibility as an elementcary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LETTER FROM STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Mr. George Davis, Principal Evergreen Elementary School Anytown, Michigan Dear Mr. Davis: A hearing on proposed rules and regulations for the funding of innovative school district programs based on the accountabil­ ity model will be held on Monday, January 9, 1972. These rules provide that school district councils or parents will provide the major thrust toward determining what programs are recommended. School district educators will serve in an advisory capacity to these councils. This hearing will take place at 10:00 A.M. at the Seven Story Office Building Auditorium, Lansing, Michigan. Sincerely yours, Dr. Richard Farmer, Director Program Development Division PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of participation in the development of system-wide policies as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 132 DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING IN-SERVICE PROGRAMS FOR TEACHING PERSONNEL has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your con­ tinuation of this function. LETTER FROM STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Mr. Larry Brown, Principal John Doe Elementary School Anytown, Michigan Dear M r . Brown: The State Board of Education, as a part of its educational accountability thrust, is proposing in its 1972-7 3 budget, a line item of $30,000,000 for professional development. The intent of this is to provide monies for the initiation and development of in-service model programs for local school districts and to provide for the employment of professional development monitors who will supervise local schorl districts' adherence to these programs. A meeting to discuss this proposal will be held at Kellogg Center Auditorium, M S U , at 1:30 P.M., on Friday, January 21, 1972. Please plan to be present if you wish to offer testimony. Sincerely, Robert Scott, Director D i v . of Professional Development PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of developing and imple­ menting in-service programs for teaching personnel as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 133 MAINTAINING ACCURATE UP-TO-DATE RECORDS has been your responsi­ bility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT "The State Board of Education received a report from the Division of School Management Services and approved the follow­ ing recommendation: "A series of meetings will be held on the proposal that intermediate school districts serve as contracting agencies for local school districts in data processing so that greater uni­ formity in data collection may occur. "Included in the recommended program would be centraliza­ tion of purchasing for economy and greater budget control, of child accounting, and for other purposes yet to be determined. "It is conceivable that school principals will be relieved of numerous record responsibilities." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of maintaining accurate up-to-date records as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX F GROUP FIVE SIMULATIONS SELECTION AND ASSIGNMENT OF TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Board of Education For Action on 1-20-72 FROM: Office of the Superintendent The California Supreme Court has recently ruled that child­ ren must be provided an equal opportunity for education and that funds must be more equitably distributed. Staff salaries are our largest expense item and are budgeted unequally among schools due to current assignment practices. In view of our constitutional and judicial obligation toward equali­ zation, I would recommend that we determine the actual per pupil salary c o s t , apply this to each building to determine the total staff salary allowance per building, and assign staff on the basis of current salary levels to buildings so that the per pupil/ building staff salaries may be equitable throughout the system. cc: Building Principals: NOTE: You can see from the above recommendation that selection and assignment of all teaching personnel will have to be handled solely by central office in order to effectuate this equali­ zation requirement. Questions will be discussed at the next administrator team meeting on January 13 . PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of selection and assign­ ment of teachers as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 H 5 No Defense_______________________ Vigorous Defense 134 ASSIGNMENT OF PUPILS TO GRADES, PROGRAMS AND TEACHERS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LETTER TO PRINCIPAL FROM: The Superintendent I have been receiving an over-abundance of calls from par­ ents requesting reassignment of their children to some room other than the one they now have. Apparently you have made some decisions there that have completely upset your community. My strong recommendation is that you adhere to their re­ quests and make the appropriate reassignments. I think the reasons for doing so are obvious. I hope I will hear nothing further from the parents about this. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of assignment of pupils to grades, programs and teachers as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 136 PLANNING CURRICULUM IN TERMS OF STUDENT NEEDS has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your contuation of this function. ADMINISTRATIVE COUNCIL MINUTES 12-3-71 Mr. Brown, Superintendent, reported on the recent NASCD Conference and a number of new ideas and programs he saw demonstrated. After a brief discussion, it was decided that these programs should be instituted in our schools. Addendum (12-8-71). The superintendent has been able to secure some federal funds for these programs but time did not permit full discussion with you on this. Your building has been assigned the CILS program. Details will be presented at the next Admin­ istrative Council meeting on how you are to implement this program. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of planning curriculum in terms of student needs as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 137 T E A C H E R E V A L U A T I O N h a s b e e n y o u r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y as a n e l e m e n t a r y school principal. The action described below could affect your c o n t i n u a t i o n of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Principals FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ: Teacher Evaluation In order to assure the school district of uniformity in evalu­ ation procedures and reports regarding teaching personnel, I am planning, beginning January 15, 1972, that Mr. John Doe of my staff, will perform all evaluations of teaching personnel. Since principals will no longer evaluate teachers, you are therefore requested to turn in all teacher evaluation records to Mr. Doe and to cooperate with him in his assignment. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of teacher evaluation as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 U 5 Vigorous Defense 138 ORGANIZATION OF THE S CHOOL FOR EFFECTIVE LEARNING has bee n yo u r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y as a n e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l p r i n c i p a l . The action d e s c r i b e d b e l o w could affect you r cont i n u a t i o n of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Principals FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ: Organizational Planning Meeting Equality of educational opportunity has been a rallying cry for citizens throughout the nation and has meant different things to different people. In this school district, equality seems to mean sameness of classroom organization. Parents here, for various reasons, object to the differ­ ences among our schools in team teaching, non-graded, selfcontained , e t c . I want you to come prepared to our January 20 Administra­ tive Council meeting to decide on the one organizational plan that all elementary schools will follow. At the present time I see no other alternatives. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of organization of the school for effective learning as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 139 INTERPRETING THE SCHOOL TO THE PUBLIC has been your responsibi­ lity as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Principals FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ: Building Communications to Parents It has been a growing concern of mine that our school district communications consistently reflect the image we are working to maintain and improve. In the interest of such consistency, I am contemplating a restructuring of our communication process in such a way that all individual building communications, reports, bulletins, etc., would be published by and require approval from this office. This item will be a priority agenda topic at our January 13 meeting. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of interpreting the school to the public as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 140 P R O V I D I N G R E S O U R C E S F O R E D U C A T I O N IN T H E B U I L D I N G h a s b e e n y o u r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y as a n e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l p r i n c i p a l . The action d e s c r i b e d b e l o w c o u l d aff e c t y o u r c o n t i n u a t i o n of this function. m e !12.!L£.n d u m TO: All Principals FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ: Audio-Visual Equipment Distribution The following policy recommendation will be on the agenda of our next meeting. In order to provide greater equalization of educational opportunity among buildings, all audio-visual equipment pre­ sently housed in individual buildings will be collected, pro­ cessed centrally, and redistributed to buildings equally. We can no longer permit individual buildings to exceed in available equipment that which is not present in each and every building. Hereafter any contemplated equipment orders must be justi­ fied on their applicability to all buildings. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of providing resources for education in the building as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense r 14 1 PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SYSTEM-WIDE POLICIES has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Building Principals FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ: Agenda Item - Principals at the Bargaining Table Due to the fact that collective bargaining with the teachers association has, in the past, caused several problems in our dis­ trict when principals sat at the table on the board's negotiating team, I am proposing that from now on no principals be involved. You will recall the objections raised by teachers at facing their building administrator across the table as well as the com­ plaints you yourselves raised about the amount of time involved. As this will be on the agenda of our next administrator meeting, please be prepared to discuss my proposal at that tim^ . PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of participation in the development of system-wide policies as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 1 + 5 Vigorous Defense 142 DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING IN-SERVICE TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR TEACHING PERSONNEL has been your responsibility as an elementary school principal. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Principals FROM: Office of the Superintendent SUBJ : In-Service Training In order to provide for a sequential development of inservice education programs for our district, I am considering assigning this responsibility to Bob Drummond, our Director of Instruction. It will be his responsibility to initiate and direct inservice programs having system-wide applicability. We cannot afford the luxury of individual building programs. If you have suggestions or comments or some alternative acceptable means of dealing with in-service, be sure to bring it up at our next administrative meeting. The Board wants a report at its January meeting. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of developing and imple­ menting in-service training programs for teaching personnel as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 U 5 Vigorous Defense 143 MAINTAINING ACCURATE UP-TO-DATE RECORDS has been your r espon­ s i b i l i t y as a n e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l p r i n c i p a l . The action described below c o u l d a f f e c t y o u r c o n t i n u a t i o n of this function. REPORT AT ADMINISTRATIVE COUNCIL MEETING Superintendent: "I have good news for you. Our data processing program is now completed. We have placed, not only our payroll operation but our complete budget, purchasing records, supply inventories, and attendance records on the computer. "From now on, just have your secretary call in the names of absentees daily for automatic inclusion on our memory tapes. "To order supplies from central storage, a teacher will merely have to call in for what she needs and it will be deli­ vered on our daily mail and supply run within 24 hours. "Requisitions may be completed by teachers or you and for­ warded immediately to my office where they will be processed, a line item charge plugged into the computer, and a full budget accounting made monthly. "I think you will agree with me that this is a move in the right direction." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of maintaining accurate up-to-date records as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense