IN F O R M A T IO N TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While
the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Paga(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 with a large round black mark, it
is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have
moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
photographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper
left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to
right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until
complete.
4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver
prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.
5. PLEASE NOTE:
received.

Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as

Xerox University Microfilms
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106

I
I

73-20 pMOQ
SUVANACHOT, Cha re onp ol , 193GA STUDY OF THE LEADERSHIP AND MA NAGERIAL ROLES
OF THE DIRECTOR OF STUDENT TEACHING IN
MICHIGAN COLLEGES A N D UNIVERSITIES.
Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1973
Education, administration

University M icro film s, A XERQ\Com pany , A n n A rbor, M ic h ig a n

A STUDY OF THE LEADERSHIP AND M A N A GE R IA L
ROLES OF THE DIRECT O R OF STUDENT
T EA C H I N G IN MI CHIGAN COLLEGES
A ND UNIVERSITIES
By
Charc on p ol Suvanachot

A THESIS
Submitted to
Mic higan State Un iversity
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
D OCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
College of Education
1973

AB S TR A CT
A STUDY OF THE L EADERSHIP AND M A N A G E R I A L
ROLES OF THE D IR E CT O R OF STUDENT
TEA CHING IN MI C HI G AN COLLEGES
AND UN I VE R SI T IE S
By
Chareo npol Suvanachot

Purpose
The purpose of this study was to compare the roles
of the director of student teaching in selecte d Michiga n
colleges and universities.

The roles were d e s c r i b e d by

the heads of teacher training programs,
student teaching,

the directors of

and the college supervisors.

The roles

were descr ibed in terms of the actual and ideal ma n ag e me n t
and actual and ideal leadership r esponsibilities of the
director of student teaching.

A second purpose was

to

identify and interpret the nature and the extent of in c on ­
gruity and co nflicts
The obje ct w a s

among the several sets of perce ptions

to provide data of a sort that will assist

individual direct o rs of student teaching

in the state of

M ichigan and elsewhere to de velop better common under s ta n d
ing and ag reement among those they work with as to the pro
fessional role of the d ir e ct o r of st udent teaching.

Chareonpol Suvan a ch o t
Procedure
The literature related to the roles of the di r ec t or
of student teaching,

student teaching programs,

and e d u ­

cation al administration was reviewed in the following areas:
1.

General roles and r esponsibilities of the
director of student teaching;

2.

The director of student teaching and his
involvement in teacher education;

3.

Some research studies on the role and r e s p o n s i ­
bility of the director of student teaching;

4.

L eadership and m an a ge r ia l roles in a d m i n i s ­
tration .

Q ue s tionnaires we re ma i le d directly to the directors
of student teaching in the repres entative institutions,
and each was as ked to d is t ri bu t e the qu e st i on n ai r es

to

three college supervisors and the head of the teacher
training pro gram in his college,
tionnaire
same.

or de partment.

The q u e s ­

items to be answered by the three groups w e re the

A return of more than 85 p e rcent was rece ived from

64 respondents representing 16 different teacher training
institutions in Michigan.

Q ue s tionnaires w e r e submitted

to those respondents during the fall term
the 197 2-73 ac ademic year.
21 statements on managerial,

(or semester)

of

The qu e st i on n ai r e co n ta i ne d
and 15 statements on l e a d e r ­

ship r esponsibilities of the dire ctor of student teaching.

Chareonpol Suvanachot
A statistical analysis, which used a coded form of
q ue s tionnaire data determining

the degree of agreement or

disagreement, was used for testing the four hypotheses.
A desk calcu lator was used to analyze o t h e r information
data w h i c h were reported in terms of percent,

ranking,

and nu mbers in each category of reply to the items as
they w e r e rated by the three groups and by individual
groups of respondents.
Conclusions
The four h ypotheses tested all re sulted in sub­
stantial agreement by the heads of teacher training pro­
grams,

the directors of student teaching,

and the college

supervisors as to the ma n ag e ri a l and leade rship roles of
the d ir ector of student teaching.
The study revealed the following
1.

findings:

There were no significant differe n ce s among

the three groups.

The three groups accepted alike the

statements of both ideal and actual m a na g er i al and leader­
ship responsibilities of the director of student teaching
in Michigan.

The signifi cance of di ff erences was con­

sidered at the
2.
between

.05 level of confidence.

There was very little difference in opinion

the heads of teacher training pr ograms and the

directors of student teaching themselves;

while m o s t of

the college supervisors gave a lower percentage on

Chareonpol Suvanachot
almost all of the criteria.
agreement was

The hi ghest percentage of

found on ideal leadership responsibilities

of the director of Student teaching in Michigan.
3.

Important additions to the ma n ag e ri a l and

leadership respons ibilities of the director of student
teaching were given by the respondents.

They stressed

the need for cooperation w it h in the state,
tions and among the directors.

among i n s t i t u ­

They were concerned with

increasing the cooperation and involvement of many other
elements of the college or university in the student t ea c h­
ing program.

Their comments were princ ip a ll y in three

areas of responsibility:
to the student teachers,

r esponsibilities of the director
to the supervisors,

and for

improving the relationships between the cooperating schools
and their communities.

ACKNOW L ED G ME N TS

I wish to express my deepest app reciation and high
respect to Dr. A rc h ib a ld B. Shaw,
committee,

chairman of m y guidance

for his valuable advice, w a r m

understanding,

and encouraging s upport throughout my sftudy at Mi chigan
State University;

to Dr.

Henry W. Kennedy,

the Director of

Student Teaching,

Mic higan State University,

who,

as a

doctoral committee member, ge n er o us ly pr o vided vital
information on st udent teaching programs in Michigan;
Dr. Frederick R.

to

Ignatovich for his unrem itting effort

and kind assistance w h i c h greatly con tributed to the
success of

this study;

and to Dr.

Randall P.

Harrison,

professor of the C ollege of Communication, who greatly
assisted me throughout

the study.

My appreciation is also extended to Mrs. A rc h i b a l d
B. Shaw and Dr.

David K. Heenan who assisted my family

during our stay here.
Gratitude is also ex p re s se d to the heads of
teacher training programs,
ing,

the directors of student teach­

and the college supervisors in the parti c ip a ti n g

institutions in Mi c h i g a n whose cooperation and useful
information made this study possible.

Special thanks are also e xt ended to Mr. Kovit
P ravalprauk for his assistance in statistical design;
Mr. Charles H. Lowery,

a dm i nistrative assistant of the

student teaching office,
Mr.

and Mrs.

Michi ga n State University;

Jack M. Fraser, my good and loyal

Finally,

to my wife,

given abiding love,

friends.

Chusri Suvanachot, who has

support, and unders tanding, which

m a d e all my study possible.
my deceased mother,

and

This thesis is dedicated to

w h o gave unending love and war mth

w h i c h wi l l live with m e all the days of my life,

and to

my respected father for his love and understanding.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

..........................................

ii

LIST OF T A B L E S .................................................. vi
LIST OF C H A R T S ................................................viii
Chapter
I.

THE P R O B L E M .......................................

1

Introduction ...................................
1
Si gn ificance of the S t u d y .....................
5
Purpose of the S t u d y ............................. 10
H y p o t h e s e s ........................................... 11
L imitations of the S t u d y ......................... 12
D ef i ni t io n s of Terms
.........................
13
II.

RELATED L I T E R A T U R E .................................... 16
In troduction ...................................
16
Some Research Studios on the Role and
R es p onsibility of the Director of
Student Teaching ............................
20
The Director of Student Teaching and His
Involvement in Teacher P re p ar a ti o n . . .
27
L e a d e r s h i p and Managerial R o l e s ....................31
S u m m a r y .......................................... 4 5

III.

THE DESIGN OF THE S T U D Y ............................. 47
Introduction ...................................
47
P o p u l a t i o n ........................................... 48
P r o c e d u r e s ........................................... 49
St at istical P r o c e d u r e s ............................. 53
S u m m a r y .............................................. 54

IV.

ANALYSIS OF DATA AND F I N D I N G S .................. 5 6
Introduction ...................................
56
Hypotheses Testing ............................
57
Summary of Tests of Hypotheses ..............
62
Descri p ti v e D a t a .................................... 63
The Directors and Programs of Student
To a c hi n g- - Ge n er a l I n f o r m a t i o n .................. 91
Free Responses on M anagerial Re s po n si b i­
lities
........................................... 98
S u m m a r y ......................................
101
iv

C ha pter
V.

Page
SUMMARY,

C ONCLUSIONS

AND R E CO M ME N DA T IO N S

.

.

106

S u m m a r y ................ ...................... ...
106
C o n c l u s i o n s ....................................... 108
Recomme ndations ................................
113
BI BL IOGRAPHY

..............................................

125

A P P E N D I C E S ..................................................... 132
Appendix A--Letter to Director of Student Te aching
in Selected Institutions
..............
133
App endix B -- Follow-Up Letter .........................
135
A ppendix C--T he Questio nn a ir e Submitted to
All R e s p o n d e n t s ....................... 137
Appendix D--The Partici pating I n s t i t u t u t i o n s . .
.
145
Appendix E — Location in Michigan of the
Participating I n s t i t u t i o n s .................... 147
A pp endix F--Proposed List of De sirable Roles for
the Director of Student Teaching. .
.
149

v

LIST OF TABLES
Table

Pago

1.

Group Identification and Frequencies.

. . .

2.

Total Score Means for Actual Managerial,
Ideal Managerial, Actual Leadership, and
Ideal Le a de r s h i p Re sponsibilities of the
Directors of Student Teac hing as Pe rceived
by the Heads of Teacher Training Programs,
the Direc tors of Student Teaching, and
the Co llege Su pervisors
.....................

57

58

3.

C or r el a ti o n Ma t ri x for Act ual Managerial,
Ideal Managerial, Actual Leadership, and
Ideal L e ad e rs h ip Responsibilities Rated
by All R e s p o n d e n t s ................................ 59

4.

The V a r i a n c e and Standard Deviation of Grand
Mean S c o r e s ....................................... 60

5.

F -R a t i o for M u ltivariate Test of Equality of
Mean V e c t o r s ....................................... 61

.

T h e Number, Percent, and Rank of Statements
on Ac t ua l M anagerial Responsibilities of
the D i rector of Student Teaching Rated by
the Three G r o u p s .................................... 64

6

7.

8

.

9.

10.

The Statements of A ctual Managerial Re spon­
sibilities of the Director of Student
Te aching Ac c o r d i n g to the Percent of All
Respondents Who C h ecked "Yes"
..............

69

The Number, Percent, and Rank of the S t a t e ­
ments on Ideal M an a ge r ia l Responsibilities
of the Di r ector of Student Tea ching Rated
by the T h r e e G r o u p s ................................ 72
The Statements of Ideal Managerial R e s p o n ­
sibilities of the Director of Student
Teaching Ranked A c c o r d i n g to the Percentage
of Respondents Who Checked Them as Being
"Very Important" or of "Some I m p o r t a n c e " . .

78

The Number, Percent, and Rank of the S t at e ­
ments on Actual L e a d e r s h i p Responsibilities
of the Di rector of Student Teaching, Rated
by the Three Groups.
......................... 80
vi

Table
11.

Pag e
The Statements of Actual L e ad e rs h ip R e s p o n ­
sibilities of the Di rector of Student
Te aching Ranked A c co rding to the Percen ta g e
of Respo ndents Who Checked "Yes"
. . . .

85

12.

The Number, Precont, and Rank of the S t a t e ­
m en t s on the Ideal Le a de r sh i p R e s p o n s i b i ­
lities of the Director of Student Teaching
Rated by the Three G r o u p s ......................... 87

13.

The Statements of Ideal L e ad e rs h ip R e s p o n ­
sibilities of the Director of Student
Teaching Ranked According to the Percent of
Resp ondents Who Checked "Very Important"
and "Some Importance" .........................

92

14.

D i s t ri b ut i on of Average Number of Students
Enroll ed for Student Te a ching per T e r m or
S e m e s t e r ........................................... 94

15.

Di s tr i bu t io n of Number of Years of Experience
of the Dire ctors of St ud ent Teachi n g . . .

95

16.

Nu m be r of Professional Sta ff in the Programs
of Student Teaching and the A ve r ag e Number
of Work ing Hours Per W e e k ......................... 96

17.

Number of N o n - P r of e ss i on a l Staff in the
Progra ms and the Av er age Number of Wo rk ing
Hours Per W e e k .................................... 97

18.

The List of Respondents' Comments on
Managerial Respo nsibilities of the Directo r
of Student T e a c h i n g ............................... 102

19.

The List of Respondents' Comments on L e a d e r ­
ship Responsibility of Director of Student
T e a c h i n g ..........................................103

vii

LIST OF CHARTS
C ha r t
I.
II.
III.

Page
Student Teaching O rg a ni za t io n in Thailand .

.

The Organization for T ea cher Preparation
Programs in Tha iland
.........................

119
121

The Place of the Student Teaching Pr ogram in
the I n s t i t u t i o n ................................... 122

viii

CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM

The problem is to discover ho w three g r o u p s — the
directors,

the heads of teacher training programs,

and

the college supervisors of student t e a c h i n g — perceive the
leadership and ma nagerial roles of the di r e c t o r of student
teaching in those Mi c higan institutions that have s u b ­
stantial jirograms in student teaching.

Their views will

be gathered both on what they perceive is now the director's
role and what they perceive should be the role of the
director.
Introduction
The central

task of teacher e d uc ation institutions

is to produce good teachers.

A strong proqrain of student

teaching is an essential element in this process.
person most responsible

The

for the policies and pr ocedures in

this program is the director of student teaching.
In spite of the great potential and unmistakable
strengths of mo s t institutions of teacher education, much
of student teaching seems
fessional critics.

to be disap po i nt i ng

to its p r o ­

This makes it import ant that the

1

2
d i r e c t o r of s t u d e n t teaching

see to it that a c le a r - c u t

statem ent of the g o al s and p u r p o s e s of the s tu d en t t e a c h ­
ing p r o g r a m is shaped and a greed upon w i t h i n his i n s t i t u ­
tion .
A 1967 p u b l i ca t io n by a n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n
the

in

field r e p o r t e d some of the p r o b l e m s of student t e a c h ­

ing pr o gr a ms os the following:
Today, s t u d e n t teaching is e n t a n g l e d in a
mass of confu s io n , un-made de cisions, and e x p e d ­
iencies.
It lacks a c o m p r e h e n s i v e d e f i n i t i o n
and a c l e a r - c u t state me n t of g o al s and purposes.
D espite the fact that student t e ac h in g m u s t be
a c o o p e r a t i v e endeavor, in m a n y cases the p e r ­
sonnel in co l le g es and u n i v e rs i ti e s, p u b l i c
schools, p r o f e s s i o n a l o rg a ni z at i on s , and state
d e p a r t m e n t s of ed u ca t i o n w h o are m o s t co n ce r ne d
and in v ol v ed are not wo r k i n g c lo s el y e n o u g h
together.
Some colleges and u n i v e r s i t i e s d e v e l o p
p ro g ra m s and m e r e l y notify the sc hools of their
plans.
O t h e r s turn the w h ol e e n t e r p r i s e o v e r to
the p u b l i c schools.
In bo th instances, the key
p eople in v ol v ed in imple me n ti n g the p ro g r a m s have
no part in f ormulating them.l
A sp e a k e r at the co n fe r en c e of the A s s o c i a t i o n of
S tu d en t T e a c h i n g

in 1972 at C h i c a g o d e f i n e d the roles of

the d i r e c t o r of s t u d e n t teaching as the a d m i n i s t r a t o r and
o p e r a t o r of the s t u d e n t teaching program,
c u r r i c u l u m improvement,
re searcher,

a t e c h n i c i a n in

a leader in po l i c y making,

among others.

and a

The s pe a ke r p o i n t e d out that the

m or e the d i r e c t o r of student t e a c h i n g is i n vo l ve d in those
H o w a r d E. Bosley, T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n in T r a n s i t i o n :
An E x p e r i m e n t in C h a n g e , Vol-^ I ( B a l t i m o r e : M u l t i - S t a t e
T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n Project, 1969), pp. 103-104.

3
roles,

activities,

tasks,

and respon s ib i li t ie s that are

directly concerned with the student teaching program, the
more likelihood there is that student teaching experiences
will be of a nature and q uality that will ef f ec t iv e ly p r e ­
pare prospective teachers.
However,

there is only partial agreement between

the ideal role as de scribed in the literature and the role
perceptions held by the directors of student teaching t he m ­
selves.

The evidence set forth in Research Bulletin No.

of the Association for Student Teaching,

1968,

2

7

is that the

number of directors of student teaching who fully play the
role suggested by the Association for Student Teaching is
quite limited.

One of the problems encountered by the

practitioner is that those he w or k s with--his
superior,

the dean or president,

immediate

and his colleagues who

do the actual supervision of student t e a c h i ng - -s c em to
have expectations and criteria of a cc o mplishment that in
important, dim ensions may dif fer from his own,
each other's.

These differences,

and from

to the extent they exist,

m ay effectively prevent his playing

the role assigned to

him by his profession.
Before positive steps can be u ndertaken by the
individual director of student teaching and by his
2

A ss o ci a ti o n for Student Teaching, The Dir ector of
Student Teaching:
Characteristics and R esponsibilities
Research Bulletin No. 7 (Washi n gt o n, D .C .:
Committee on
Research, The Association for St udent Teaching, x968).

4
profession

at large to reconcile the differences and to

build congruent ex pectations and perf ormance criteria,
the nature and extent of the incongruences m u s t be a s c e r ­
tained.

Those are the p h en o m e n a that are the subject of

this study.
This study will investigate the perceptions of
three groups of people w h o are closely associated with
student teaching programs in selected M ic h i g a n i n s t i t u ­
tions of higher education.

The three groups are:

directors of student teaching,
student teaching,
tutions.

and

(1)

(2 ) college supervisors of

(3) heads of teacher training i n s t i ­

The role descrip tions given by each group will

be in terms of "ideal role" and

"actual role."

be six sets of role descriptions:
by each of the three groups;
by each.

ideal role as p er c eived

and actual role as percei ved

The study will examine and compare

sets of perceptions.

There will

the several

The data derived will be developed

and interpreted.
The purpose is to derive data that may serve
directors of student teaching,
lectively,

both individually and c o l ­

in efforts to improve the common understanding

and get fuller agre ement on what roles they should play to
make their institu tional program of student teaching e f f e c ­
tive .

5
Significance of the Study
Importance of Student
Teaching
New concepts of student teaching provide n ew d i m e n ­
sions and gr eater challenges to those entering the p r o f e s ­
sion.

The purpos es are de e pl y rooted in concepts of p r o ­

fessional competence.

P r ofessional standards, performance,

or competence that can be observed,

analyzed,

and measu re d

are the ma j or dimensions in beco ming a teacher,
to a tally of credits,

as opposed

the number of years of preparation,

or number of clock hours in front of a classroom.

This

suggests strongly where the emphasis of the director of
student teaching should be.
The initiation of the novice into the teaching
profession is a co op erative venture on the part of schools
and colleges.

Sensible as this concept sounds,

its r e a l i ­

zation demands a degree of c ooperation that is not easy
to achieve.

When the idea of the student teaching center

began to develop, with its emphas is on the sharing by the
whole profession of the responsibility for teacher p r e p a r a ­
tion,

the necessary partne rs h ip in planning and deciding

helped bring about bett er rapport between the schools and
the colleges of teacher education.
One of the most intriguing prospects of a
future in which most of the st udent teaching
will be done away from the college campus and
under the direct influence of public school
personnel is the inevitable change which must

6
result in the role of college coordi na t or (direc­
tor).
His opportu nities for service wi ll change
in character, if not in magnitude, and his purpose
will change.
U ndoubtedly this shift in the
demands upon the college coord inator wi ll develop
a new set of competencies in those who will hold
this position a new kind of person for a n e w kind
of job.
What are the dimensions of this emerging job?
Standing on a bridge betw een the student's life on
campus and his new professional life, the director
more importantly stands be tween staffs in p a r t n e r ­
ship and between their differing philosophies,
purposes, and practices.
S omehow he m u st play a
part in the articulation of these e l e m e n t s . 3
In recent years educators res ponsible for the
preparation of student teachers have displayed increasing
concern for the program of student teaching.

This concern

has shown itself in a variety of ways, but perhaps m os t
visibly in the themes of state and national co nferences
as well as in the publications of o r ga n iz a ti o ns such as
the American Association of Colleges for T e a c h e r Education,
the Association for Student T e a c h i n g , and the National
Commission on Teacher Ed ucation and Professional Standards.
The specific questions have been numerous and varied,
in the main they have asked:

but

How should the respective

roles and responsibilities of key pers onnel in teacher
preparation programs
vising teachers,
3

(cooperating school principals,

college supervisors)

super­

be defined ?

Jarao Griffith Elliott, "A Role Perception:
The
College Coordinator," in T e a c h e r Education in the Public
Schools (Cedar Falls, Iowa":
Fo r t i e t h Yearbook of the
Ass ociation for Student Teaching, 1961), p. 46.

7
Since student teaching plays so impo rtant a part
in teacher education,

the student must engage in an

o rg a nized program, d es i gn e d especially for him,
the many facets of a teac her's job,
the formal cl a ss r oo m setting.
things as

to learn

including those outside

Included m ig h t be such

(a) w orking wi th small groups or individuals

in remedial tutoring situations?

(b) visi ting homes of

students and learning about community activities;

(c)

learning about the administration of a school as viewed
by the principal,
keeper;

(d)

attendance officer,

c u st odian or ground-

learning about and w o rking with social agencies

with influence in the community;

and

(e) b ec oming familiar

with the special services of the school
ing,

library work,

(guidance,

audiovisual aids and others).

counsel-

4

Role Rel ationship of
the Director
W it h in the framework of this interp retation of the
student teaching program one of the prime responsibilities
of its director is to interpret the p rogram and the needs
of the college or university to all concerned.

The leader­

ship role of the dir ector relates ind ividuals and groups
of people who ordina r il y see themselves as separate and
di ffering in status.
4

Deans and Directors of M i chigan T e ac h er Education
Institutions, Position Pa per on St udent Te a ch i ng Programs
(unpublished, 1972).

8
The director is the liason person b et w ee n the
university and the public schools at all levels,
. . . While he m us t m ai n ta in relationships w i t h
the superintendent and the board of education, his
major opportunities and r esponsibilities lie in
working with the building principals . . . and
with the student t e a c h e r s . 5
The director thus emerges as a person wh o works
both with and through o t he r people,

singly and in groups.

He relates,

to every phase of

directly or indirectly,

teacher prep aration and to every aspect of institution
and administration.
the two institutions,

Experiences and values relating to
the college and the public school,

which cooperate to prepare teachers,

seem e ss e ntial for

the person w h o fills this position.

His success in these

leadership roles will be reflected in the prog ressive and
developing nature of the student teaching program.
Functional Relationships
of the Director
The role relationships of the director in turn
lead to ways in which he must function to ma ke these
relationships more effective.

These functions are g e n e r ­

ally of an ad ministrative or ma n ag e ri a l nature.
The selection of a supervising
a problem.

In some respects,

teacher is often

he selects himself as he

indicates a wi l li n gn e ss to work in this capacity.
superintendent,
5

principal,

Elliott,

op.

The

and the director are e xp ected

c i t ., p . 4 7.

9
to c o n s i d e r all t he factors in the s e l e c t i o n and a s s i g n ­
m e n t of a s u p e r v i si n g t e ac h er in the light of e s t a b l i s h e d
criteria,

to reduce friction and m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g .

The d i r e c t o r has se veral k i n d s of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s
in r e la t io n to the o r i e n t at i on of s t u d e n t teachers.
ma y work di r e c t l y w i t h s tu d en t t e ac h er s o n campus,
to their actual s t u d e n t te a ch in g e x p e ri e nc e s,
to u n d e r s t a n d their new roles as college
and as teachers.

He
prior

h e l p i n g them

representative

Both g r ou p and i nd i vi d ua l c o n f e r e n c e s
fT

often are used for this purpose.
The d i r e c t o r often w o r k s in the b a c k g r o u n d to a ssure
that p r op e r a r r a n ge m en t s are m ad e w h e r e b y o r i e n t a t i o n to
the total community,

school,

a n d c l a s s r o o m can be c a r r i e d

out e f f e c t i v e l y by a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and s u p e r v i s i n g
It is the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y

teachers.

and the d ut y of the d i r e c t o r to

atte mpt to find the cause of a ny d i f f i c u l t i e s and to e f f e c t
7
a workctble solution for all con cerned.
The d e v e l o p m e n t of the d i r e c t o r ' s funct io n s
is the b e g i n n i n g of a p r oc e ss in w h i c h co l l e g e s
and the p ublic schools wi l l c ar ry o u t their joint
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the p r e p a r a t i o n of t e a c h e r s . 8
In the litera t ur e there

are m a n y p r e s c r i p t i v e and

d e s c r i p t i v e statem e nt s a b ou t the roles of the d i r e c t o r of
student teaching.

Direc t or s

^ I b i d . , p.

51.

^ I b i d », p.

52.

^ I b i d ., p . 5 3.

th e ms e lv e s d i f f e r not o n ly in

10
what they d o , but in their perceptions of their actual
and ideal roles.

Further, many studies of ot her categories

of leaders suggest that there wi ll be important d i f f e r ­
ences between ho w the dire ctors and those they work with
perceive both their actual and their ideal roles.

Recogni­

tion of these differences is a necessary first step to
their reconciliation.

Other professions have encou nt e re d

similar disc repancies between the p ra c titioner's role as
established by the profession and that ex pected or p e r ­
ceived by those he works with and for.
It is expected that the data on congruence and d i s ­
crepancy in the role expec ta t io n and perceptions wi thin
the selected sample will not only be useful in these and
strictly comparable settings, but will be signif ic a nt as
well in the devel opment of the structure and roles for
student teaching programs in institutions elsewhere,

and

sp ecifically in the Kingdom of Thailand.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to de scribe the role
of the di rector of student teaching in select ed Michigan
programs of teacher education.

The roles will be d e s ­

cribed by the directors of student teaching themselves,
the college supervisors,
programs.

and the heads of teacher training

They will be dealt with in the terms of the

actual roles as well as the ideal roles of the d ir e ct o r
of student teaching.

The study will identify and

11
interpret the nature and extent of inc ongruity and c o n ­
flict among the several

sets of perceptions.

The o bject

is to provide data of a sort that wil l assist individ ual
directors of student teaching in the state of Mi c hi g an and
elsewhere to develop better common underst anding and a g r e e ­
ment among those they work with as to the profe ss i on a l role
of the director of student teaching.
Hypotheses
Tlie hypotheses which are examined have general
foundation in one assumption:
student teaching
tasks,

the more the di r ector of

is involved in various roles,

activities,

and rcsponsibilitics concerned with student teaching

program,

the more viable student teaching exper ie n ce s will

be and the better will be the qualifications of prosp ective
teacher s .
Four hypotheses are posed:
].

There is substantial agreement among the d i r e c ­
tors of student teaching, the college s u p e r ­
visors, and the heads of teacher training p r o ­
grams as to the ideal role of the dir ector of
student teaching with respect to leadership
functions.

2.

There is substantial agreement among the three
groups as to i d e a 1 role of the d i rector of
student teaching with respect to manage r ia l
functions.

3.

The three groups perceive quite differe n tl y
the actual role being play ed by the di rector
of student teaching with respect to leadership
functions.

The three groups perceive quite d i f f e r en t ly
the actual role being played by the director
of student teaching wi th respect to managerial
functions.
Limitations of the Study
This study is limited to the populat ion of p r o­
grams conducted by teacher training
in Mi c higan in 1972-73.

institutions

The po pulation is

further limited to a sample of Michigan i n s t i ­
tutions selected as follows:
a.

The eight public teacher training i n s t i t u ­
tions on the lower peninsula of Michigan
that offer undergr aduate student teaching
programs and for which the number of student
teachers is more than a hundred students in
an academic year;

b.

and

The eight non-public teacher training
tutions

insti­

in Michigan whose enrollment of

student teachers is more

than a hundred in

each academic year.
The perc eptions to be reported are limi ted to
those that can be recorded on a questionnaire.
The scope of this study is limited in d etail to
those role activities and re s po n sibilities
are professional and job-connected.

that

13
Definitions of Terms
The Head of the T eacher Training P r o g r a m :

The

person who is directly responsible for the college of e d u ­
cation, or school of education,
He is also res ponsible

or department of education.

in both academic and no n -a c ad e mi c

status to serve as the head of the institution.
titles may identify his position,

Other

such as the "Dean of the

Faculty for Professional Education" or "Dean of the School
of Education"

or "Chairman of the Department of Ed ucation."

The Director of Student T e a c h i n g :

The princi pal

administrator of the student teaching pr o gr a m at the teacher
training institutions studied.
dean, director,

coordinator,

A l though his title m ay be

or other,

for the p u rpose of

this study he will be known as the d ir ector of student
teaching.
The College S u p e r v i s o r :

An individual e m ployed by

and on the staff of the teacher training

institution whose

responsibility it is to supervise the student teaching of
a discrete number of students

in specified school settings.

In this study this will apply only to such individuals who
base their activities at the college itself,

and excludes

those based elsewhere.
Supervising T e a c h e r :

A regularly employed teacher

in a laboratory or coordinating school,

public or n o n ­

public, who has been as signed and w h o has ex p re s se d

14
willingness to accept the re s po nsibility for one or more
student teachers to work directly wi th the teacher in the
classroom.
Student T e a c h i n g :
in which the candidate

The period of guided teaching

for teacher p r ep a ra t io n assumes

increasing responsibility for the learning experiences of
a group of e lementary or secondary school pupils o v e r a
period of cons ecutive weeks.

Student teaching is part of

a total program of pr of essional laboratory experiences
which have been defined as all those co ntacts with children
and youth using

the methods of observation,

participation

and teaching w hi c h make a direct contribution to an u n d e r ­
standing of an individual and their guidance in the teach­
ing learning process.
hole:

A set of acts,

actions,

be h avior patterns,

and expectations which are ge nerally accepted by persons
assuming,

or relating to those assuming,

title or identity.
only one of many

a partic ular

A role is considered to be, in itself,

facets of a total personality,

sists of many roles,

which con­

each to be ac t ivated in situations

under circumstances where

the pa rticipant is expected to

assume such a role.
Managerial
maintaining rather
procedures,

Hole:

The role that is concerned with

than changing e s t a bl i sh e d structures,

or goals.

15
Leaders hip H o l e :

The role that is concer n ed w i th

the initiat ion of new structure or procedure for a c c o m p l i s h ­
ing an organization's goals and objectives or for changing
an o rg a nization's goals and objectives.

C H A P T E R II
RELATED LITERA TURE
Introduction
St udent teaching is w idely regarded as an e ss e ntial
e lement in teacher preparation.

Hence there is a large

body of literat ure in the field,

in the form of books,

anthologies,

commit tee and commission reports,

periodicals and in doctoral dissertations.
larger field can be

articl es in

W i th i n the

found a substantial liter ature c e n t e r ­

ing on the d i r e c t o r of student teaching.
One of the most relevant recent reports is the
Resear ch Bulletin issued by the As so c ia t io n

for S tudent

Teaching in 1968 and entitled,
Teaching;

Ch a ra c t e r i s t i c s

The Directo r of Student
g
and R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s .
It

classified the respons i bi l it ie s and ac tivities of the
d ir e c t o r of student teaching under two principal c a t e ­
gories:

n on - in s tr u ct i on a l and instructional.
The B ul letin listed under n o n - i n s tr u ct i on a l a c t i v i ­

ties the sp ecifically a d mi nistrative tasks of advisement,
publ ic service,

research,

bo th spon sored and individual,

and the actual direc t io n of student t e a c h i n g .
9

A ssociation

for Student Teaching,

16

op.

cit.

17
The in s tructional activities were c h ar a ct e ri z ed
as the more significant.
both on and off campus,

They included teaching classes
the actual super vision of student

teaching and the d e v e l o pm e nt of inservice

training programs.

In a p u blication that same year, Anne R. Gayless
d is c ussed the r esponsibilities of the dire ctor of student
teaching in these w o r d s :
The m aj o r pr o fessional re s ponsibility of the
director of student teaching is to give a high
type of forward-looking leaders hip in terms of
modern concepts of supervision. . . . The Di rector
of Student Teaching is the key person in a pr o gr a m
of profes si o na l laboratory experiences.
He sets
the pace for the many activities in which the
college personnel and the public school personnel
participate.
lie is responsible for the esprit de
corps that exists among all those who arc a s s o ­
ciated with the program.
She also found that the di rector of st udent t ea c h­
ing is the person who organizes and administers the direct
experience programs.

He should provide o v er - al l

leaders hip

to the supervisory staff and other a ss o ci a te d participants
involved in the student teaching program.
A no t he r report p r ovided by the M - S t e p in West
Virgi ni a defines

the role of the teacher e du c ation i n s t i ­

tutions in student teaching programs as follows:
The teacher e du c ation institu tions shall provide:
1.

Students to be assigned by the Ce n te r who
have d e monstrated a readiness for student
teaching through their performance in

^ A n n R. Gayless, "The Director of Student T e a c h ­
ing," Improving College and University, LII (February,
1968) .

18
subject m a t t e r areas, professional courses,
and personal behavior.
P rofessional staff time available to the
Cent er to be ut i lized through the seminar
for student teachers, the in-service pr o gram
for supervising teachers and co nsultative
services to the center staff and the adviso ry
c o m m i t t e e .H

2.

It is also necessary for the director of student
teaching to part icipate in and to become involved with the
State Department of Education to help shape the policies
provided

for the state,

according to Bosley's report.

Although teacher education institutions are di rectly
responsible for their teacher education programs,
has responsibility too.

the state

The State Depart me n t of Educat ion

has overall re sponsibility for the c er t ification of

teachers

and has an important stake in the q u al i fications of teachers
in its schools.

It has a coordinating,

ing and regulating
teaching

responsibility.

stimulating,

review­

The director of student

to be effective must work clos ely with the

appropriate state agencies

and individuals.

The same publication also suggests new concepts in
student teaching programs.
in its view,

Teacher training

institutions,

should consider new activities that may be

embodied in an ef fective student teaching experiences
program.

It says:

The new student teaching should be a creative,
fullfilling experience and at the same time provide
for critical analysis in order to make student
^Bosley,

o p . ci t . , pp.

88-89.

19
teachers and their supervisors scholars of
teaching.
It should not be confined to a block
of time at the end of the senior year.
It
should range from simple observation, to brief
e xposures with learners, to the develo p me n t of
skills in dis crete elements of the teaching act
(e.g. through micro-teaching), to analysis of
pers onal skills and insights, all the way to
the teaching of regular classes under the
analytical eye of a professional mentor.
It
should be a study of teaching in various c l in i ­
cal situations.
This new concept of student
teaching demands new arrangements, revised
admini strative structures, and new systems of
control.
There needs to be a new order in
student t e a c h i n g . 12
J ohnson and Perry regarded the director of student
teaching as the key person in the student teaching program.
Therefore,

they said, he m u st focus attention on some of

the following issues and needs.
1.
2.
3.
4.

3.
6.
7.

M or e and better school locations are needed
Cor student teachers.
The q uality of st udent supervision needs to
be i m p r o v e d .
More effective kinds of college supervision
need to be developed.
Student teaching should be carried on
throughout the teacher e d uc a ti o n program.
Careful analysis of teaching behaviors needs
to be made and utilized in the la boratory
experiences sequence.
Effective supervisory techniques need to be
a nalyzed and developed,
Cl o se r cooperat ion is n eeded between the
m an y agencies concerned wi th laboratory
process in teacher e d u c a t i o n , ^

1 2 I b i d ., p.
13

104.

J rm J o hn s on and Floyd Perry, Reading in St u dent
Teaching (Iowa:
Kendal Hunt Publishing C o m p a n y , 1969) ,
pp. 220-221.

20
These are some of the problems
d irector of s t udent teaching.
in wh i ch

faced by the

While m o st of the schools

student teaching was taking place indicated a

r elatively high degree of s at isfaction with

their role in

the p re p ar a ti o n of teachers, ma ny expressed the desire to
improve their programs.

Of mo s t concern was the pr ob lem

of the lack of sufficient time for the college r e p r e s e n ­
tative to make

frequent visits to the school

in order to

work with the sup ervising teachers, school principals,
student

teachers;

and

and of time for the st udent to observe

and be c om e involved in all facets of a successful and
rewarding

teaching experience.
Some Research Studies on the Role and
R es p onsibility of the Director
of Student Teac hing

Several

studies are related direc t ly to the roles

and functions of the director of student teaching p r o ­
gram.

A hrief de s cr i pt i on of the main aspects of four

of those studies

is given below.

Research of N. W. Madore at
Wayne" St ate U n i v e r s i t y !**
The m a j o r concern of N. W. M a dore's study was the
de termination of the status of directors of student
14

N or m an d Wi l l i a m Madore, "Status of the D ir e ct o r of
Student Teaching in M e m b e r In stitutions of the A m erican
A s s o c i a t i o n of Colleges for Teacher Education" (unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1962).

21
teaching through the reporting and analysis of existing
practice.

Data were ob tained through a q u e s t i o n n a i r e sent

to all m e m b e r institutions of the Amer ican A s s o c i a t i o n of
Colleges

for T e ac h er Education.
Madore listed these as m a j o r findings of the study:

1.

2.

3.
4.

5.

Se v enty-three per cent of the directors of
student teaching reported that their re spons­
ibility included the assignment of their s t u ­
d en t teachers to public and private c o o p e r a t ­
ing schools.
R es p onsibility for the en ti re p ro g r a m of s t u ­
dent teaching was re corded by eighty-one per
cent of the respondents.
O v e r sixty-nine per cent of those reporting
h el d doctoral degrees.
Eighty - th r ee per cent of the re spondents
reported that they had no previous experi e nc e
as director of s tu dent teaching w h e n they
e ntered their present job.
One out of every two respondents sought the
dir e c t o r s h i p as his pro fessional objective.
T h e major conclusions of the study were:

1.
2.

3.
4.
5.
G.

T h e function of the directoi* of st u dent t e a c h ­
ing was wel l es tablished in the colleges and
univ ersities reporting.
Situations where the direct or s hi p represents
a full-time work load were not e s tablished in
sufficient number to indicat e this d e v e l o pm e nt
as a m arked t r e n d .
There were no e st a bl i sh e d criteria for se l ec ­
tion of a person as d i rector of student
teachers.
There was little mobil i ty among d ir e c t o r of
student teaching.
P ri o r employm e nt by the institution appeared
to be a signi ficant factor in the selection
as director.
T here was a subst antial b od y of r es p onsibility
w h i c h respondents had assumed, and they were
of the o p in i on that they should cont inue to
do s o .

22
7.

For ev e ry two d ir e ctors of s t udent teaching
that viewed their p re sent p os ition as an
opt i m u m professional goal, there was
on e
person w h o viewed his present position as
intermediate to his optimum p r o f e s s i o n a l
objective.

Research of F. w. Motley at
University of North
C a r o l i n a lS
This study was c on c e r n e d with cu rrent practices
employed by the director of student teaching and was
limited to the southeastern section of the U n it e d States.
The study was aim ed to d i sc o ve r what w e r e

the tasks and

roles of the director of st udent teaching p r o g r a m as
revealed by the literature,
of student teaching.

and as seen by the directors

The m a j o r co nc lusions are shown

below.
Most directors of student teaching are en g ag e d in
activities other than the a dm i ni s tr a ti o n of the program.
Chief amonq these are thesis direction,
services,

and teaching co llege courses.

consultative
Only a small p e r ­

centage of directors of s t udent teaching have a u th o r e d or
co- a ut h or e d for publication anything in the area of student
teaching or teacher education.
S i g n i f i ca n t a dm i nistrative features of the program
listed by the respondents w er e the following:

cooper at i on

of the pu b li c school personnel in ce nters used for the
15

F. W. Motley, "The College D ir ector of Student
Teaching Program" (unpublished Ph.D. d i ssertation, U n i ­
versity of North Carolina, 1968).

23
student teaching experience;

support and i nt erest of

colleagues in the program; w e l l - q u a l i f i e d college s u p e r ­
visors;

and a full quarter or semest er set aside for the

student teaching experience.
He c o n c l ud e d that the specific re s po n s i b i l i t i e s of
the director of student teaching shou ld be clearly d e fi n ed
and publicized,

w i t h obvious support gi ven by supervisors;

that the role m u s t be cooperatively and ca r efully f o r m u ­
lated by all concerned;

that one should have the rank and

authority to go along with his responsibility;

and that

one person should have the full r e s p o ns i bi l it y for the
administrat ion of the program.
In sug gestions for im pr ovement in the function of
directors of student teaching,
were:

(a) he needs

the p rimary res ponses given

sufficient time,

clerical assistance,

and staff to allow him to get into the field for a f i r s t ­
hand picture of the student teaching program;

(b) his

functions should be clearly defined and u n de r st o od by all;
and

(c) he should have the authority to execute e s t a b l i sh e d

policies.
Research of J. E. Sands at
Arkans as State C o l l c g e -tb
This study was concerned wi th
experience,

the education,

and r e s p o n si b il i ti e s of the di r ector of

^ J o h n K . Sands, " Qualifications and Re s po n sibilities
of Di r e c t o r of St u d e n t T e aching and Su p er v is i ng Teach ers,"
School Review, LXI (January, 1953), pp. 34-38.

24
off-campus

student teaching and the supervising teachers.

He used 112 teacher training
in his study.

institutions as the population

He found that 61 of the directors of student

teaching r ep orted that they held the Doctor' s degree.

The

typical di r ector of off-c ampus student teaching was wellq u a l i f i e d by academic training

for the duties of his office.

The data show that some of the directors had not had any
courses in curriculum,
the gradu at e

level.

supervision,

or ad m in i st r at i on at

Most of the directors of st udent

teaching had some semester hours in profe s si o na l ed ucation
courses.
F ro m data that were collected in this study,

Sands

drew the following implications:
The job of the director of student teaching
e ncompasses excessive demands which circumscribe
the e ff e ct i ve n es s of off-campus student teaching.
To facilitate his job and expedite the a d m i n i s ­
tration of the program, the dir ector of student
teaching should appoint a co mmittee for the i n te ­
gr ation of off-campus student teaching, of w h ic h
the d i rector should serve as coordinator.
The
committee should include approxi m at e ly equal
numbers of representatives from the cooperating
supervising teachers, the college supervision of
student teaching, the college instructors of p r o ­
fessional courses, the college subject-matter
instructors, the officials from the public c o o p e r ­
ating schools, and s t u d e n t s . ^

I b i d . , p . 35.

25
Research of R . H. Hoextcr
at M i chigan State
University -18
The major concern in this study was w i t h the
coop erating school p r i n c i p a l 's role as a participant in
student teaching experiences.

The study e x am i n e d five

aspects of the principal's role in student teaching p r o ­
grams:

(1) Selection of Cooperating Teachers,

tation of Student Teachers,

(2) O r i e n ­

(3) Select ion of Student

Teachers,

(4) Supervision and E v al u at i on of Student

Teachers,

and

(5) Liaison with the Teac her Pr eparation

Institution.
A q ue s ti o nn a ir e was m a i l e d to college supervisors
from two universities in Mi c higan w ho were each asked to
identify one principal

from a cooperating

school where

the p articular college supervisor p l ac e d student teachers.
The p rincipals were asked to answer a similar q u e s t i o n ­
naire to the one answered by the college supervisors.
The study indicated that there was mo r e agre ement
be tw een principals and college sup ervisors than had been
assumed in developing the study.

It also found that

principals are not doing all they think they should wit h
respect to student teaching,

e v e n though they a r e well

aware of w h a t their role should be.
18

R. H. Hoexter, "A D e f i n i t i o n and E xamination of
the Role of School Principals in C ertain Aspe cts of St u ­
dent Teaching" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, M ic h ig a n
State University, 1970).

26
Research of G. D. Youstra
at M i chigan State
Uni v er s it y i9
This study was c o nc erned w i t h the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of
the criteria or job specifications accepted and being used
b y the a d mi n istrators of student teachin g p r ograms when
selecting

college supervisors.

One hundred se venty-six

memb ers of the Southern Regional Assoc i at i on

for Student

Teaching w er e canvassed.
His conclusions:
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

There was found to bo an absence of e s t a b ­
lished criteria or job specifications for the
pos ition of co.1 lege supervisor of st udent
teaching.
T we n ty of his t w enty-eight criteria w e r e c o n ­
s idered "basic, n ec e ss a ry requir ements" for
college supervisors by a m a jo r i t y of the
population.
T h er e was some d i s a g r e em e nt between college
pe rsonnel and the public school teachers
over the importance of some of the se lection
criteria.
The administrators of student teaching p r o ­
grams we re in a gr e ement that a list of c r i ­
teria would be helpful when attempting to
select new college sup ervisors of student
teaching.
The administrators were in agreement that a
list of criteria, similar to the one in the
questionnaire, would be important to the
success of future college supervisors of
student teaching.

19

G eorge David Youstra, "A Study of C r it e ri a for
Selection of Co llege Supervisors of Student T e ac h i n g as
Perce iv e d b y Student Teaching Admini s tr a to r s of Se l ected
Institutions of the Southern Regional A s s o c i a t i o n for S t u ­
den t Teaching" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Mi c hi g an
State University, 1970).

27
The Director of Student Teaching and His
Involvement in Te a ch e r Pr eparation
The preparation of teachers should be v i e w e d as
a cooperative

responsibility of both teacher prepara t io n

institutions and the state.

Neit her can pe r fo r m this task

well w i t h o u t the p a r t n e r s h i p of the other.

T e acher e d u c a ­

tion institutions cannot do the job w i t h o u t a laborat ory
which can only be provided in public schools.
the primary job of the p ub l ic schools
youngsters

Similarly,

is the education of

in el e me n ta r y and secondary schools.

T h e y ca n­

not be expected to totally prepare the ne cessary teachers
for their classrooms.
educat ion institutions.

This m u st be done by the teacher
It is the re s ponsibility of the

state dep artment of e du c ation to clarify the policies and
procedu res su g gested as guide l in e s for developing teacher
education in stitutions within the state,

e s pe c ia l ly in

institutions suppor ted in part by the state.

The State

of Mi c h i g a n Department of E du ca t io n has recently r e c o m ­
mended a co mpetency or p e r f o rm an c e a ssessment of te acher
prepar ation as follows:
The throe g e neral areas identified b e l o w are
r equired in the d e ve l op m en t of specific means of
d et e rm i ni n g competencies.
1.
Knowledge as an indicator
2.
Perf ormance as an indicator
3.
Net effect on pupils
20

State of Michigan, D ep a rt m en t of Education, A
Report on Te a c h e r C e r t i f i ca t io n and P rofessional D e v e l o p ­
ment ( L a n s i n g : Department of E d u c a t i o n , 1971) , pp~ 8 - l B .

28
In the same report there appear three different
performance index types required in the c o n s i d e r a t i o n of
competency or performance assessment.
1.

Training Competence
The first level should be related to the pr eprofessional experience and would indicate
training competence.
This would be as sessed
on the campus of the institution in which the
individual received his teacher preparation.

2.

Practicing Competence
A second level of competence can be determ i ne d
at the end of one or two years of actual
teaching experience.
Having been ex po sed to
the conditions of practice and h aving worked
within the formal structure of a school system,
the individual w o ul d have learned m o r e about
the instructional process and about the p r o b ­
lems encountered in working with y o u n g st e rs
in classroom settings.

3.

Continuing Competence
A third level of competence would beco me e v i ­
dent after five or six years of teaching
experience.
This might be a competency
assessment related to ultimate issuance of
a continuing certificate.
Responsibility
should lie with the school district rather
than with the training i n s t i t u t i o n .21
From this point of view,

it can be seen that the

state has some control over the teacher training i n s t i t u ­
tions in both public and private colleges.

Th e i n s t i t u ­

tion's program must be accredited by the state and t h e r e ­
fore it m u s t pay attention to the state's recomm en d at i on s
and suggestions.

The director of student te aching is the

administrative person in this unit and this un it is part
^ Ibid . , p . 10.

29
of the p r of e ss i on a l ed u ca t io n of student teachers.
fore,

There­

the director and the state should work closely

together.
Hence,

the typical p ro g ra m of student teaching is

in conformity with state policies

and the d ir e c t o r of s t u ­

dent teaching must keep abreast of state as wel l as i n st i ­
tutional policies.
Additionally,

it is not only the state that has

responsibilities for the student teaching program,

but the

individual school dist ricts also share some r e s p o n s i b i l i ­
ties.

Further,

there are often some problems in the st u ­

dent teaching pr o gram when the unive rsity

tries to operate

the s tu dent teaching program w i thout pr oviding from its
own r e so urces adequate supervision by competent personnel.
Laszio ilctenyi's study

found that:

U niversity A or college B assigns student
teachers wi thout school officials ever mee ting
a supervisor until it is time to co ll ect e v a l u a ­
tion forms at the end of the contact.
These same
adm i nistrators point with scorn to all pr ograms
which offer inadequate p reparation for the s u p e r ­
vising teacher, little or no compen s at i on for his
efforts, minimal assistance to student teachers,
and a whole host of similar ills.
With u n i v e r s i ­
ties competing for every desirable stud ent teacher
placement, school districts have at their disposal
power of great magn itude to force corrective action.
Ne ver has the district's w ea p on of institutional
e xc l us i on been more p o t e n t . 22
22

Laszxo H e t e n y i , "The Politics of School-College
Coopera t io n in Student Teaching," in P a r t ne r sh i p in T ea c he r
Education (Washington, D . C . : American A s s o c i a t i o n for
Colleges of Teacher Education, 1968).

In Georgia,
tion,

the Ge o rg i a Council on T e ac h er E d u c a ­

State Depar tment of Education,

listed the role of

the d ir ector of student teaching in the state p ro g ra m of
teacher ed u cation in the following twenty statements.
1.

Ma in taining good public relations w i th the
school and community.
2.
Selecting sc h o o l s — improvement of the total
school program.
3.
Planning for the type of visiting to be done
to the student teaching center.
4.
Dev eloping an in terest on the part of a
selected super vising teacher in doing a job
in the teacher training program.
5.
Selecting supervising teachers.
6 . Wo rking with other people in planning the
expe riences of the student t e a c h e r - s u p e r v i s ­
ing teacher, instructional supervisor,
principal, etc.
7.
Conferences with supervising teachers and
college s u p e r v i s o r s .
8 . Seeing that prospective student teachers
have field exper iences throughout their
college career.
9. Holding the hand and being an inspiration to
the student teac her--skill in human relations.
10. Helping the supervising teacher to gr ow p r o ­
fessional ly--credi t and non-credit.
11.
Assigning the student teachers to the s u pe r ­
vising teachers.
12. Knowing how the principal and other teachers
feel about using the school for o bservation
purposes.
13. Clarifying the obligation of the school to the
college and the co llege to the school.
14. Working with supervising teachers w h o are w o r k ­
ing toward provisional and p ro f es s io n al c e r t i f ­
icates .
15. Working with the co llege staff in d eveloping
the total teacher training program.
16. A dm i n i s t r a t i v e r es p on si b il i ty to the State
D ep a rt m en t of Education.
17. Evaluating the student teacher.
Bringing the
supervising teacher and the student into e v a l ­
uation process.
18. Helping the student teacher become a c q u a i nt e d
w it h the situation and the supervising teacher
become acquai n te d with the student teacher.

31
19.
20.

Assisting in guidance.
Being a resource person to the student
teacher and to supervising t e a c h e r . 2 3
Many recent studies b y such groups as the National

A ssociation for Colleges of Te a ch e r Education,

Ass ociation

for Student Teaching and others have yielded very valuable
information with regard to the roles of the college super­
visors and su pervising teacher but very few studies have
concerned themselves with the specific role of the director
of student teaching.

C o nsidering the overall importance

of the director of student teaching,

the compar at i ve lack

of study of this pos ition has been called

"almost tragic."

Leadership and Managerial Roles
A no t he r way of class ifying the demands on the
director of student

teaching is to distinguish between

the roles and r esponsibilities that are managerial or
a dminist rative

in nature,

and those that may better be

classed as leadership.
Le adership Responsibilities
The term "leadership"

has been defined of t en in

the literature of administration.
to student teaching programs,

In the studies related

however, very little atten­

tion is given to the leadership role of the director of
23
.
A ss o ci a ti o n for Student Teaching, The College
Supervisor, Conflict and C h a l l e n g e , F orty-third Yearbook
of the A ss o ci a ti o n ( W a s h i n gt o n, d T c .: As s oc i at i on for
Student Teaching, 1964), pp. 87-88.

32
student teaching.

The ma t er i al that is m o s t us eful is

to be found in the literature of organi z at i on and of
administration generally.
Gouldncr

24

found that three

fo rmulations include

the mo st typical usages of the term leadership.
1.

The leaders as those whose attainments,

in

terms of a set of the goals, are co nsidered
" high."
2.

'Die leaders as those who emit stimuli that are
"responded to in tegratively by other people."

3.

The leaders as those whose status is re c og n i z e d
as superior to oth ers e ng aged in the same
activities.

In the first of these concepts,

individuals c h a r ­

acterized as "geniuses" or "extremely competent" would
sometimes bo referred to as

"leaders."

In this notion the

index of leaders hip is neither the deference ex t ended the
pet son, nor his ability to integrate social action in the
pu rsuit of some goal.
thought of as being
others,

These individuals may be st be

"ahead"

rather than "higher"

than

in respect to the attainment of some g r o u p - a p p r o v e d

end.
The other two concepts,

those centering on l e a d e r ­

ship in terms of status or of its inte gration function,
24

York:

Al vin W. Gouldner, Studies in L e a d e r s h i p (New
Harper & Brothers, P u b l i s h e r s , 1950), p^ lb.

33
seem more helpful in assessing

le adership roles in this

study, w h i c h is focused on leadership in student teaching
programs.
A cc o rd i ng

to Katz and Kahn,

25

leadership consists

of "all acts of influence w hi c h affect ma tters of o r g a n i ­
zational relevance," with special empha s is on an increment
of influence which goes beyond that w hich formally accrues
to a role incumbent.

That is, a director of student teach­

ing who simply implemented a program policy w ou l d not be
considered,
However,

normally,

to be performing a leadership act.

a dire ctor of student teaching who supplemented

an existing policy or w h o imagin at i ve l y interpreted such
a policy might be thought to bo exercising leadership.
An ot her study of the group task has also b ee n
observ ed to influence leader behavior.

Burke found that:

. . . if a leader wit h a ta sk-oriented person a li t y
is gi ven a structured task to lead, the group will
perceive him as effective and will continue to do
so in the next, unstructured, task.
If the order
of the tasks gi ven to such a leader is re v ersed h e _ r
is not pe rceived as effective in e ither situation.
In addition to structural charac te r is t ic s of the
group,

such as the degree of structure of the task and the

power and authority given the leader by the situation,
25

Daniel Katz and Rob ert L. Kahn, The Social Psy­
chology of O r g a n i z at i on (New York:
Wiley, 1966) , pp. 3*2-44.
2g
W ar n er W. Burke, "Leadership Beha vior as a F u n c ­
tion of the Leader, The Follower, and the Situation,"
Jo urnal of P e r s o n a l i t y , XXXIII (1965), pp. 60-81.

34
i n t e r p e rs o na l factors are b el ie v ed to affect leader
beh avior-

Fielder

27

has argued that a l e a d e r ’s personal

r el a t i o n s with group members is such a factor.
i nterpe r so n al
behavior

Other

factors which are b e li e ve d to affect leader

range from member need for dependence to member

inter es t in the group task.
In another setting Fielder had this to say,
further :
L ea d er s hi p is an interpersonal relation in
w h i c h power and influence are unevenly distr i bu t ed
so that one person is able to direct and control
the actions and behavior of others to a greater
e x t e n t than they direct and control h i s . 28
O t h e r discussions of leadership and leader behavior
are found in the writings of Knezevich,
Stogdill,

Lipham,

are h e l p f u l

Gibb and French.

Likert,

Hemphill,

Some of their insights

to this study,

Knezevich speaks of leadership:
L e a d e r s h i p has been conceived of as an a t t r i ­
bute of personality, as a status, title, or p o s i ­
tion recog nized in a formal organi za t io n
chart,
and a function or role performed in an or ganized
g r o u p .^9

27

Fred E. Fielder, "A No te on Leaders h ip Theory:
The E f f e c t of Social Barriers Between Le aders and
F o l l o w e rs , " The Journal of S o c i o m e t r y , XX (1957), pp. 87-94.
28

Fred E. Fiedler, A T he or y of Leaders h ip E f f e c ­
(New York:
McGr aw-Hi 11 , 1967) , pT!

tiveness

29
Education
p~! 95.

Stephen J. Knezevich, Ad m in i st r at i on of Public
(New York:
Harper & Row, P u b l i s h e r s , 1969),

35
Likert furnishes a cri terion for leadership:
The leadership and other pr ocesses of the
organiz a ti o n must be such as to ensure a maximum
probabi l it y that in all interaction and all
re la tionship wi t hi n the o r g a n i z at i on each m ember
will, in the light of his background, values,
and e x p e c t a t i o n s , view the experience as sup­
po rtive of p e rsonal worth and i m p o r t a n c e .30
Hemphill in defining a leadership act states that
"to lead is to eng age in an act that initiates a st ructure
in interaction as a part of the process of solving a mutual
problem,"

He further describes leadership b eh avior as

the "initiation of a new structure or procedure for
accomplishing an or g an ization's goals and objectives."
For Hemphill,

31

leaders disrupt the status quo.

Stogdill,

Wherry and Jaynes saw leaders hip in terms

of its impact on the organization:
. . . leadership is judged in terms of its effect
upon the organization.
Since leadership is fr e­
q ue n t l y evaluated in terms of o rg a ni z at i on a l
effectiveness, it would appear that all aspects
of or g an i za t io n al operations invo lving c o m m u n i ­
cation, performance and personal interactions
m ight exert limiting or conditioning effects
upon leadership. . . .32
30

York:

Rensis Likert, New Patterns of Management
McGraw- H il l Book C o m p a n y , 1961), p"I 6 5.

(New

31 John K. H e m p h i l l , "Administration as Problem
Solving," in A d mi nistration Theory in Ed ucation
Midwest A dm i ni s t r a t i o n Center, 1958), pT 98.
32

(Chicago:

Ralph M. Stogdill, Robert Wherry, and W i l l i a m
Jaynes, Patterns of Ad ministrative P er f or m an c e (Columbus,
Ohio:
Bureau of Business Research, M o n o g r a p h No. 81,
1956), p. 41.

36
Gibb stated that when leadership is:
. . . viewed in relation to the individual,
leadership is not an attribute of the p er s o n ­
ality b u t a qu ality of his role w it h in a
particu l ar or specified social s y s t e m . 33
French proposes twenty-two be h aviors that m a y serve
as guidelines.
1.
2.

3.
4.

5.
6.
7.
b.

9.
10.

He says that an effective

leader:

establishes attainable but high per formance
standards and g oa l s— goals which are con­
sistent with the goal of the enterprise;
utilizes and encourages subordi nates to
utilize the app ropriate technology in a t t a i n ­
ing these g o a l s — e.g. wo rk simplification
and appropriate tools, proper layout, and
so forth;
conveys that he has confidence in his sub­
ordinates ;
permi ts subordinates to have latitude in
the solution of work problems wh e r e sub­
ordinate inge nuity can result in gains, and
w h e r e standa rdization in method is not
imperative;
permits and encourages p a r t i c ip a ti o n in the
development of methods to achieve enterprise
goals;
encourages the partici pation of subordinates,
but only on the basis of genuine interest in
utilizing co nstructive suggestions;
encourages p ar t ic i pa t io n in those matters
w he r e subordinates perceive pa rticipation
as being legitimate;
recognizes differences betw een pe o pl e in the
strength of t heir needs and their other
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s — e.g., m a y spend mo re time
with some ind ividuals in conditions of change
than with others;
helps to integrate subordinates' needs and
goals with the goals of the enterprise;
is an effective planner in terms of both
short range and long range goals and con­
tingencies ;
33

Cecil A. Gibb, “The Rese arch Ba c kg r ou n d of an
Interaction Theory of Leadership," Au s tr a l i a n Journal of
P s y c h o l o g y , II, No. 1 (1950), pp. 19-42.

37
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
lf».
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

is permissive in terms of being a pp r o a c h ­
able and friendly;
appraises subordinates as nearly as p o s ­
sible on the basis of objective, m e a s u r ­
able performance;
is eager to help subordinates to be more
effective and works at removing ob stacles
to achievement;
is an effective follower in the larger
or ganizational context;
uses subordinates* mistak es as an e d u c a ­
tional opport un i ty rather than an o p p o r ­
tunity for punishment;
is interested in his subordinates as total
persons rather than as empl oyees only;
in dealing with subordinates, is emotio n al l y
supportive and is careful to avoid e g o —
threatening behavior;
1
assists subordinates in 1minimi zing the
psychological impact of technological
changes;
gives recognition to good work;
does
not play favorites by giving d i f ­
ferential privileges;
asserts his leadership; and
communicates information needed by s u b­
ordinates to carry out their jobs, to
prevent unnecessary anxieties from
developing, and to convey the "broader
p i c t u r e . "34
Thus,

leadership is,

in essence,

human energy in an organized group.
people which can initiate,

concer ned with

It is a force among

guide activities

direction, maintain such activities,

in a given

and unify efforts

toward common goals.
It is important for a dir ector of student teaching
to be a good leader;

to know something about the role,

task,

and the types of leadership,

the structure,

the

because

leadership is a c ha r ac t er i st i c of a leader.
34
(Boston:

Wendell French, The Personal M an a ge m en t Process
lloughton-Uil 1 , 1964 ) .

38
Managerial Responsibilities
Management can be considered as administration.
For the purpose of this study m anagement and a d m i n i s t r a ­
tion are synonymous.

This study defines m a n a g e m e n t as "a

social process concerned with creating,
lating,

controlling,

maintaining,

stimu­

and unifying formally and informally

organized human and material energies w i t h i n a unified systern dcsxgned to accomplish predetermined o bjectives."

35

In identifying the principles of management,
Massie stipulated the following

fourteen,

set forth earlier

by Henri F a y o l :
1.

2.
3.

4.

5.
6.
7.

Division of work.
(He recognized the value
of s p ec i alization of effort so that each
individual may work on a limited n um b er of
o b j e c t s ,)
Authority.
(Ho declared it to be important,
but recognized responsibility as its
c o r o l l a r y .)
Discipline.
(He believed that superiors have
a n g n t to obedience, application of due
energy, and outward marks of respect from
e m p l o y e e s .)
Unity of command.
(Ho stressed that an
employee should receive orders from one
superior only, and disag reed with Taylor's
functional forem nnship concept.)
Unity of direction.
(He advocated one leader
and one plan for a given group of objectives.)
Subordination of individual interest to
general interest.
Remuneration of personnel.
(He b el i e v e d the
rate of remuneration was ind ependent of
employe r's w il l and employee's w o r t h and
should be based on such factors as cost of
living, availability of personnel, and e c o ­
nomic conditions.)
35

Knezevxch,

o p , c i t ., p.

10.

8 . Centralization.
(He bel ieved that the c o m ­
p arative m e ri t s of c en t ra l iz a ti o n vs. d e c e n ­
tralization depended on co nditions of each
institution),
9. Scalar chain.
(He d e fined this as the line
of co mmand or the flow of a ut h ority from the
h ig h es t to the lowest rank.)
10. Order.
(He believed in "a place for e v e r y ­
thing and everything in its place.")
11. Equality.
12. Stabil ity of tenure of personnel.
13. Initiative.
(He recognized its importance.)
14. Espr it de corps.
(He believed har mony and
unity among personnel to be m o s t important.)
Fayol

37

did not wish to inject inflexibility in

administration by insisting that all the pri nciples be
adhered

to strictly.

He c onsidered the principles of

management to be changeable w i t h the circumstances.
Getzels and Guba have said that the process of
administration

(management)

deals essentially with the

conduct of social behavior in a hierarc h ic a l setting.
We conceive of the social system as involving
two major classes of phenomena, which are at
once conceptually independent and p he n om e na l ly
interactive.
There are, first, the in s t i t u ­
tions with certain roles and expectations that
will fulfill the goals of the system.
Second,
inhabiting the s ystem there are individuals with
certain p e r s o na l it i es and n e e d - d i s p o s i t i o n s , whose
i nteractions comprise what we ge nerally call
"social b e h a v i o r . "38
36

J os e ph L. Massie, "Management T h e o r y ," in H a n d ­
book of O r g a n i z a t i o n , ed. by James G. M a r c h (Chicago:
Rand McNally, 1965), pp. 391-392.
37

Henri F a y o l , "Administration Industrielle et
Generale," in General and Industrial M a n a g e m e n t (London:
Sir Isaac P i tm a n & Sons, L t d . , 1949).
38
J. W. Getzels and E. G. Guba, "Social Be h av i or and
the A dm i ni s t r a t i o n Process," in Selected Readings on General
S u p e r v i s i o n , e d . by Heald, RomanoJ and G eo r gi a dy (New York:
The Macmillan Company, 19 70), p. 32.

40
Abbott further describes m a na g e m e n t in our social
system,

saying that:

. . . to u n d e r s t a n d the be h avior of spe cific role
i nc u mb e n ts in an institution, we mu st k n o w both
role e x p e c t a t i o n s and the n e e d - d i s p o s i t i o n s .
Indeed, needs and e x pectations may both be thought
of as m o t i v e s for behavior, the one de r iving from
p ersonal propensities, the oth er from i n s t i t u ­
tional requir ements, . . .39
D aniel E. Griffiths stated that
. * . the term "administration" is used to
d e s i g n at e the process (cycle of events) en g ag e d
in by all the members of the formal orga nization
to direct and control the activities of the m e m ­
bers of the organization.
Though all members
p a r t i c ip a te in "administration," there is of
c ourse d i f f er e nt i al distri b ut i on of influence
w i t h i n the organization.
Those members who are
off i ci a l l y c h arged with the functions of a d m i n i s ­
tration are called "administrators.
Hem p hi l l

41

described ad m inistration as a process

of solving mu t u a l problems.

He introduced the co ncept of

the a d m i n i s t r a t o r as one who initiates structure in i n t e r ­
action w i t h i n a group.
that d e ci s i o n ma k in g

Griffiths also developed the idea

is the central function of the a d m i n ­

istrator .
39

Max G. Abbott, "Intervening Variables in O r g a n i ­
zational B e h a v i o r , " in Sel ected Readings on General S u p e r ­
vision , e d . by Heald, R o m a n o , and Ge o rgiady (New York:
The M a c m i l l a n Company, 1970), p. 20.
40

Daniel E. Griffiths, "Administrative T he o ry and
Change in O r g a n i z at i on s ," in Organi za t io n s and Human
Behavior:
Focus on S c h o o l s , ed. by Fred D. Carver and
Thomas J. Se r g i o v a n n i (New Y o r k : M cG r aw - Hi l l Book Company,
1969), pp. 368-369.
41

Robe rt L. Ebel, e d . , Encyc lo p ed i a of Educational
Research (4th e d .; N e w York:
The M a c m i l l a n Company,
i9 60), pp. 17-19.

41
A n o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l p oi n t of v i e w wa s d e s c r i b e d by
F re d erick W, Taylor.

42

He gave

as his goal the r a ti o n a l

an alysis of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e pr o c e d u r e s
and m a t e r i a l r e so u r c e s

for e x p l o i t i n g human

in order to a t t a i n m os t e x p e d i ­

tiously the o b j e c t i v e s of an o rg a ni z at i on .
management,

he thought,

resides

in

in "knowi ng e x a c t l y w h a t

you w a n t men to do, and then seeing
and ch e a p e s t w a y . "

Excellence

they do it in the b e st

F r o m today's p e r s p e c t i v e it see ms clear

that Ta y lo r took a n a r r o w vi e w of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e b e h a v i o r
or m a na g e r i a l p o i n t of view.
interpersonal,

and e m o t i o n a l

ing h u ma n e f f o r t

He ignored
factors

for c ommon purposes.

the m o t i v a t i o n a l ,

i n vo l ve d in m o b i l i z ­
The scientific

m a n a g e m e n t m o v e m e n t re mains a m o n u m e n t to the idea that
a dm i ni s tr a ti o n can be s t udied systematically.
Fayol a l so de s cr i b e s
the m a na g er i al

the fo l lo w in g a c ti v i t i e s

roles of the admin i st r at o r.

in

He a s s e r t e d

that m a n a g e m e n t should consist o f :
Planning, that is w o rk i ng out in broad o u t ­
line the t hings that need to be done and the
m e t h o d s for d oi n g t he m to ac c o m p l i s h the pu rpose
set for the enterprise;
Orga nizing, that is the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the
formal st r uc t u r e of a ut h o r i t y th r o u g h w h ic h work
s u b d i v is i on s are arranged, d e f i n e d an d c o o r d i n a t e d
for the d e f i n e d objective;
Staffing, that is the w h o l e p e r s o n n e l f un c t i o n
of bri nging in and tr a in i ng the staff and m a i n t a i n ­
ing favorable c on d it i on s of work;
42

F r e d e r ic k W. Taylor, The P r i n c i p l e s of S c i e n tific M a n a g e m e n t (New York:
H arper & B r o t h e r s P ublishers,
1947} .

42
Directing, that is the continuous task of m a k ­
ing decisions and employing them in specific and
general orders and instructions and serving as
the leader of the enterprise;
Coordinating, that is the all-imp o rt a nt duty
of interr elating the v arious parts of the work;
Reporting, that is keeping those to w h o m the
executive is responsible informed as to w h a t is
going on, which thus includes ke eping hi m self and
his subordinates informed through records,
research and inspections;
Budgeting, wi th all that goes with budgeting
in the fQCni of fiscal planning, accounting and
control. ^
According to Hast and Rosenzweig

44

manag er i al

system has been d e fined as the coor dination of group
effort toward an established purpose.
is ef f ected primar ily
niques,

(1) through people,

(3) in an organization,

Essentially,

This c o or d in a ti o n

and

(4)

(2) via te ch­

toward objectives.

m a n a g e m e n t is the process of integrating

human and materi a l resources into a total sy st em for
objective accomplishment.
Campbell and Gregg gave a more compreh e ns i ve vi e w
of desirable a dm i nistrative activ ities in their School
Development Study at Ohio State University.

T h e i r cr iteria

of a dm i nistrative activities are as follows:
43

Jacob W. Getzels, J ames M. Libham, and Ronald F.
Campbell, E d ucational A d m i n is t ra t io n as a Social Process
(New York:
Harper & Row, P u b l i s h e r s , 1968) , p p . 23-2*7.
44

F. E. Hast and J. E. Rosenzweig, Organi z at i on
and Management:
A System A p proach (New York:
McGrawHill, 137or, pp. 340-341.

43
1.

2.
3.
4.

5.

6.

Setting goals.
This is the establi s hm e nt of
the ov erall o bjectives of the educat i on a l p r o ­
gram and the m or e immediate goals of in d i­
vidual personnel.
Making policy.
An im p or t an t area of a d m i n i s t r a ­
tive r e sp o ns i bi l it y is that of develo p in g
policy of his organization.
Determining x'oles.
It is the administrator's
respons ibility to clarify and determine roles
for and with the staff members.
Coordinating a dm i nistrative functions and
structure.
The ad m inistrative responsibility
is required to operate in such a w ay that all
the activities are coord inated and properly
fitted together.
Appraising effectiveness.
The ad m inistrator
must prov ide leadership in the continu ous
and searching appraisal of the educational
program.
Communicating.
This is a highly important
area of administrative respons i bi l it y which
all a d mi nistrators should d ev e l o p in c o m ­
m un i ca t io n skill. ^
The A me r i c a n A s so c ia t io n of School A dm i ni s t r a t o r s

assigned the duties and responsibilities of general a d m i n ­
istrators as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Developer, implementer, evaluator, and m o d i ­
fier of administrative procedures in carrying
out organizational policy.
A d mi n istrative adviser and consultant to the
staff members.
Commu n ic a to r and record keep er for a d m i n i s ­
tration of the organization.
Recruiter and recommender for appoin t me n t
of personnel of the organization.
Sup ervisor and ev a lu a to r of staff members.
Interpreter of the system's p r ogram to lay
and professional groups.
Developer of the a d mi nistrative calendar.
Adviser on legal and financial matters
applicable to the o pe r ation of the o r g a n i ­
zational system.
45

Ronald F. Campbell and Russell T. Gregg, e d s . ,
Administrative Dehavior in E du c ation (New York:
Harper &
Brothers Publishers, 1957), p p . 204-205.

44
9.
10.

A d mi n is t ra t iv e represent ative in n e g o t i a ­
tions .
Ad m in i st r at i ve researcher in d e v e l o p i n g and
producing progress reports on activities in
the o rg a ni z at i on a l system.
Finally,

Hungate identified the functions and

principles of ma n ag e ri a l responsibilities as:
determination,

operation and evaluation.

in detail about these

policy

He further wrote

functions and d r e w p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n ­

tion to the need of ma n ag e m e n t to work on the basis of
consensus rather than by domination or compromise.

He

stressed that cooperation and understanding b et w ee n the
members of the group,

the administration and the governing

board are essential for the institution to fu nction s uc c e s s ­
fully.

He placed great emphasis on e v a l u a t i o n in m a n a g e ­

ment and he stressed the need for a co n ti n uo u s program
which brings under r e vi e w the educational objectives,
physical facilities,

finance,

government and other aspects

of the institution. 4 7
In conclusion,

the dis tinction made here between

leadership and ad ministration or m a na g e m e n t carries no
implication that one is universally m o r e
important,

appropriate, more

or more difficult than the other.

leadership and administration,

In bot h

the same o r ga n iz a ti o na l and

46
A m e r i c a n A s s o c i at i on of School Admi nistrators,
Profiles of the A d mi n is t ra t iv e Team (Washington, D . C . :
American A s s o c i a t i o n of School A d m i n i s t r a t o r s , 1971),
pp. 30-31.
47

.
Book Reviews, The Journal of Educat io n al A d m i n i s ­
tration , III, No. 2 ( O c t ~ 1965), p p . 13 £ -13 7 .

45
individual va riables are involved.

A lt h o u g h the i n i t i a ­

tion of change within an o rg a ni z at i on is us ually p e r c e i v e d
as a complex and energy - co n su mi n g process,

adherence to

existing goals,

structures,

and procedures in a kaleido-

scopic field of

forces, can be eq u ally as demanding.

48

Adm i nistrative activity is concerned p ri m ar i ly
with_m a in t ai n in g rather than changing establ is h ed s t r u c ­
tures, procedures,

or goals.

L ea d er s hi p is the initiation

of a new stru cture or pr ocedure for a c co mplishing an
organization's goals and objectives or for changing

an

organization's goals and o b j e c t i v e s .
Summary
In mo st of the literature reviewed here there seems
to be general agreement on much of what the dire ctor of
student teaching programs must be and do.
bilities and roles are
1.

L ea d er s hi p

His r e s p o n s i ­

identified as follows:
responsibilities.

The d i rector of

student teaching should be involved in the following
activities:
and

(c)

(a)

to make
2.

to lead,

(b)

to be a symbol of the group,

decisions.

M an a ge r ia l

responsibilities.

roles of the di r ector of student teaching

The manag e ri a l
m a y be d e fined

48
James M. Lipham, "Leadership and A dm i ni stration,"
in Dehavioral Science and Educ ational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,
Sixty-third Yearbook of the National So ciety for the Study
of Education (Chicago:
U ni v er s it y of Ch i ca g o Press, 1964),
pp. 122-123.

46
as:

(a) policy determination,

ation,

and

(b) operation,

(c) e v a l u ­

(d) m ai n te n an c e of the stud ent teaching program.

3.

General re sponsibilities.

Two ma j or

functions

of the d ir ector of student teaching are both m a n a g e r i a l and
leadership responsibilities:

involvement in the i ns t i t u ­

tion's and the state's teacher pr ep a ra t io n programs?

and

liaison between the public schools and the teacher e d u c a ­
tion institutions.

C HA P TE R III
THE DES IGN OF THE STUDY
Introduction
A research design in the study was formulated to
analyze the data of the four variables, m a n a g e m e n t actual
responsibilities, m a n a g e m e n t ideal responsibilities,
leadership actual responsibilities,

and leadership ideal

responsibilities that may be d es c ribed as the r es p on s i­
bilities of the directors of student teaching in Michigan
colleges and universities.

The roles of the director of

student teaching that have been identified in the review of
the literature were used as the basis of a questionnaire
asking the three groups of pcople -- t he heads of teacher
training

institutions,

the directors of student teaching,

and the college su p er v i so r s- -t o identity

facets which could

be defined and examined by means of questionnaire.

Items

were con structed so as to yield both q u alitative and q u an ­
titative data on each

fact.

The qu e stionnaire items are

based on studies of pr evious d is s ertations

49

and other

definitive literature.

49

Madore,

op.

c i t .; and Motley,

47

op.

cit.

48
Popul at i on
There are two groups of te acher training

institu­

tions in Michigan:
1.

Public T e acher Training Institutions

There are ten public institutions that offer a
program of teacher education.

O mi t te d is No r th e rn Mic higan

University, which alone is located on the upper p en i ns u la
of Michigan, and Oa k l a n d University.

The public teacher

training institutions involved in this study are:
a.

Central Mi c h i g a n U niversity

b.

Eastern Mi c hi g an Unive rs i ty

c.

Ferris State College

d.

Grand V a l l e y State College

e.

Michigan State University

f.

Unive rs i ty of Michigan

g.

Wayne State Univer s it y

h.

Western Michi g an Unive r si t y

2.

No n -p u bl i c T e a c h e r Training

Institutions

Many of them have a student enrollment in practice
teaching of less than 100 students in each ac a demic year.
These are not included in this study.
which are involved are:
a.

Adrian College

b.

Albion Coll ege

c.

Aq uinas College

d.

Calvin College

The institutions

49
e.

Hope C o l l e g e

f.

M ar y grove College

g.

Nazareth Co llege

h.

U ni v er s i t y of D e t r o i t

Fr om each i ns t it u ti o n three college supervisors
were selected,

except some colleges in wh i ch the number of

college supervisors

is less than three,

teacher training program,
ing.

one he ad of the

and o n e d i re c t o r of s tu d en t t e a c h ­

The college su p er v is o rs w e r e se lected by the director

of student teaching of each institution.
The number of those to be in te rrogated wa s

74,

as f o l l o w s :
1.

42 college su pervisors

2.

16 heads of teacher training p r ogram

3.

16 di r ectors of student teaching
Procedures

Instrumentation
The data were g a thered by means of a questionnaire,
developed in sufficient detail

to test the hypothe s es but

brief enough to e l ic i t a high rate of return.
questions sought identifying
ents,

and six more w e r e

student teaching.

inform at i on

T w o opening

from all re s p o n d ­

specifi c al l y for the d i r e c t o r of

T h e n the b o d y of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was

divided into two parts,

one on aspects of the m a n a g e r i a l

role and the second on the leadership role of the director
of student teaching.

50
On the items in Part I respondents were invited to
check in the left m a r g i n wh e th e r the item represented a
r esponsibility actually being carried by the director,

and

in the right margin to assign a level of importance ideally
to be given to the re sponsibility.

In Part II the same

procedures were provided with respect to the items of
leadership responsibility.
On the last page of the questionnaire o p p o r tu n it y
was provided for free comments on both these roles.
The items in each part of the questi on n ai r e were
derived from the literature.

The num ber was r ed u c e d to

the 21 most commonly asc ribed m a n a g e m e n t functions and to
15 leadership functions.
The instrument was administered

first to fellow

members of a u niversity w o rk s ho p in the administration of
student teaching.
comments,

On the basis of their responses and

it was revised to the form given in A p pendix C

and then administered to the target group.
Collection of Data
O ue s tionnaires were mailed with a cover letter
(see A pp endix A)

to the directors of student teaching in

16 teacher training

institu tions th roughout Michgan.

Postage-paid return envelopes for each of the five people
in each institution

(dean, director,

and three college

supervisors wh o were selected by the director of student
teaching)

accom panied the questionnaire.

51
F ol l o w - u p letters

(see Ap p endix B) we r e sent to

all directors of student teaching wh o ha d not responded to
the first letter.

Te l ep h on e calls w er e m ad e to directors

who still had not responded two weeks after the follow-up
letters.
Be cause

it was inten ded to get a 75-80% response,

the investigator followed with personal intervi ews where
non-responses occurred,

using the same questionnaire.

Several colleges were v is i te d

(see Append i x D) b y the

investigator to make a pe rsonal co n tact for this purpose.
The invest i ga t or

found that in the small colleges

the directors of student teaching and the coll ege s u p e r ­
visors often are the same person.

In some colleges,

the

heads of tea cher training programs work as the direct o r
of student teaching and as college supervisors at the same
time.

These situations only occur in the private and

small colleges.

Only one public teacher training i n s t i t u ­

tion reported that the head of the teacher training pr o gr a m
and the di r e c t o r of st udent teaching

is the same person.

Handling of Data
Data from the questi o nn a ir e s r e turned were t r a n s ­
ferred to punch cards.
Data on actual a n d ideal m a n a g e r i a l roles of the
director of s t ud e nt teaching
compared.

from each of three groups were

Data on actual and ideal leadership

52
responsibilities we re also co mpared in the same m a n n e r as
the m an a ge r ia l responsibilities.

The design m odel of this

study is shown as follows:

1
i
1

Groups

M ea sured V ar iable
Director

Col.

Supervi s or

j

Dean
w

W

Ideal
....
Managerial

fc.
W

w

Actua l
w

w

Ideal
w

Leadership

w
w

Actual
w
i

.

.

A weakness of the design in this study was that the
investigator could not compare the d if f er e n t i a t i o n of the
respondents'

opinion and the w e ig h t gi ven the varia bles

between the ideal and actual roles, b e ca u s e ratings of
the ideal and actual roles w e r e made on di f ferent scales.
The ideal roles were m ea s ur e d by using o rdinal s c a l e s , and
actual roles m u s t be m e a s u r e d by nominal s c a l e s .
two scales are not comparable.

These

53
Therefore,

co m pa r is o n

b etween the actual and ideal

roles in both de p en d e nt varia bles wa s not possible.
ever,

How­

in C hapter IV nu m bers and percentages are set out

for each item and for the totals in each of the categories.
S tatistical Procedures
The statistical analysis of the data of this
when a one-way m u l t i v ar i at e analysis of v ar iance
Program)

was employed,

study,

(Finn's

was calculated on the CD C 3600 c o m ­

puter at M i chigan State Univers i ty ' s Computer Center.
analysis of data consis ts of:
at the three levels,

(a)

and

(1) one inde pendent variable

the d ir e ct o r of student teaching,

(b) the college supervisor,
training program;

(2)

and

(c) the head of te ac her

four de p en d e n t variables,

ideal managerial role,

(b) actual manage r ia l role,

ideal

and

leadership role,

Therefore,

The

(a)
(c)

(d) actual l e ad e rs h ip role.

the following proce d ur e for analysis of the data

was used:
1.

A one-way m u l t i v a r i a t e was computed that c o m ­

pared the total score on

actual

role of leadership and

managerial respon si b il i ti e s of the dir ector of
student teaching, with the total score d efined as the
number of the three groups'
is equal to "2";
is equal to "0."

op in ion on each column;

"don't know" is equal to "1";

"yes"

and "no"

54
2.

A one- way multivariate was comput ed that c om ­

pared the total score of the directors of student teach­
ing,

the heads of tea cher training program, and the college

supervisors on the ideal role of leader ship and managerial
responsibilities.

Scores we r e

degree of importance:

assigned to

"very important"

"some importance" is equal to "3";
equal to "2";
3.

and "no importance"

the

is equal to "4";

"little importance" is
is equal to "1."

The general information from the ques tionnaire

is reported in the descriptive analysis.

Percentages have

been established in terms of the total number of r espond­
ents in the several categories.
4.

R e s p o n d e n t s ' opinions on leadership and m a n a ­

gerial responsib ilities of the di r ector of student teach­
ing that were given at the end of the q u e s t i o nn a ir e arc
listed in T ab l es

18 and 19.
Summary

The preceding pages of Chapter III have described
the procedures, methods of collection of data, handling
the data, statistical procedures,
investigate

and instruments used to

the role of the direc t or of student teaching

in managerial and lea dership responsibilities.

Thirty-six

criteria were select ed from the literature to form the
basis and ra tionale for a questionnaire.
training institutions,

Si xteen teacher

both public and private schools,

55
were selected to be the population in this study.

The

three groups of people involved in this study were:
(1) 16 heads of teacher training programs,
directors of student teaching,
visors.

and

(3)

(2)

si xteen

42 college su p er ­

The percentage of q ue st i o n n a i r e s returned w as 66,

and another 20% came from the in terview using the same
questionnaire.
A pp e n d i x D contains the names of the institutions
of those responding.

An analysis of the data c ol l ected is

described in the following chapter.

C HA P TE R IV
A NA LYSIS OF DATA A ND FINDINGS
In troduction
This chapter contains the analysis of da t a which
wore ga thered to test the four hypotheses set out in
Chapter I I I :
1.

There is substantial agreement among the

directors of student teaching,

the c ol l eg e supervisors

and the heads of teacher training programs as to the
ideal role of the direct o r of student te aching w i th
respect to le a de r sh i p functions.
2.

T h e r e is substantial agreement among the three

groups as to ideal role of the d ir ector of student
teaching with respect to managerial functions.

the

3.

The three groups perceive q u i t e diffe rently

actual

role being played by the d i re c t o r of student

teaching w it h respect to leaders h ip functions.
4.
the

actual

The three groups perceive q u i t e differently
role being played b y the di r e c t o r of student

teaching wi th respect to managerial functions.
The discus si o ns of the implic a ti o ns and recommenda'
tions resulting

from the analysis of the data w i ll be made

in Cha pter V.
56

57
Hypotheses T es t i n g
In o rd e r to test the hy p ot h e s e s 21 statements of
managerial r e sponsibilities and 15 statements of leadership
responsibilities were synthesized from the literature of
student tea ching prog rams and educational administration.
The questi onnaires w e r e sent to the three groups of people
who are involved in student teaching programs in 16
teacher traini n g institutions

(see A p p e n d i x D ) .

The

numbers of people are in the table below:

TABLE 1.- - G r o u p Identification and Frequencies.
No. of
Population

No. of
Respondents

Percent
of Response

Head of Teacher
T ra i ni n g Program

16

13

81.25

Director of Student
Teaching

16

16

100.00

College Superv i so r

42

35

83.33

TOTAL

74

64

8 6 .49

Row
1.
2.
3.

Position

Four variables

for testing the hypotheses

study consist o f :
1.

Actual man agerial r e sp o nsibilities

2.

Ideal managerial respo nsibilities

3.

Actual leadership r es p on s ibilities

4.

Ideal leadership responsibilities.

in this

58
Table 2 sets out the mean scores for each of the
three groups and for the w h o l e n umber of respondents on
each of the four variables.
ables,

The scores

for the two v a r i ­

actual managerial and actual leadership r e s p o n s i ­

bilities,

are w e ig h te d total ratings on the Like rt scale

which assigns a score of 2 to the respo n se "Yes,"
"Don't Know"

and 0 to "No."

1 to

The scores on the ideal

managerial and ideal leadership v a ri ables are listed on
the Likert scale

from "Most Important" equal to 4 to "Not

Important"

to 1.

equal

Table 2.--Total Score Means for Actu al Managerial, Ideal
Managerial, Actual Leadership, and Ideal L e a d e r ­
ship Responsib ilities of the Directors of S tu d en t
Tea ching as P e r c e iv e d by the Heads of Te a cher
Training Programs, the Direc tors of Student
Teaching, and the College Supervisors.
Means
Row*

N
Actual
Management

Ideal
Management

Actual
Leade rs h ip

Ideal
Leadership

1

33.69

74 .62

26.85

54.77

13

2

32 .69

71.12

27.00

56 .87

16

3

31. 34

68.71

26.37

54.17

35

31.99

70. 51

26. 78

54 .98

64

GRAND
MEANS

*Row 1 = Heads of T e a c h e r Train in g Programs
Row 2 = Directors of Student Te aching
Row 3 = College Supervisors

59
The highest score means on the two ma n ag e me n t
v ariables are

found in Row 1.

The heads of the te a ch e r

training programs a p pa r en t ly listed sli ghtly more items as
managerial respo ns i bi l it i es both actually and ideally
assign ed than did the directors themselves.
In the leadership variables,
of student
groups,

teaching

(Row 2)

however,

the directors

score the highest of the three

although the di ff erences arc small.
The closest a gr e em e nt among the scores of the

three groups

is in the actual

leader ship items.

TAB hi' 3.--Cor relation Ma t ri x for Actu al Managerial, Ideal
Managerial, Actual Leadership, and Ideal L e a d e r ­
ship Re s po n sibilities Rated by All Respondents.
Re s po n sibilities
Variables
Actual
M anagerial

Ideal
Ma nagerial

Actual
L eadership

ActuaI
Managerial

1.000000

Ideal
Mana gerial

0.413161

1.000000

Act ual
Leaders h ip

0.653970

0 .299990

1.000000

Ideal
Leader s hi p

0.413130

0.731313

0.513319

Ideal
L ea d er s hi p

1.000000

60
The relatively high corre lation coefficients
each of the va r iable ratings in Table

for

3 are of interest.

Additional correlation coefficients w e r e cal culated to
determine which categories of statem ents

(actual managerial,

ideal managerial,

actual leadership,

and ideal lea dership

responsibilities)

showed the gr eatest ho m og e ne i ty of

ratings among the three groups of respondents.
Table 4 shows the variance and standard deviation
with a degree o f freedom of 61.

TABLE 4.— The V a r i a n c e and Standard D ev i ation of Grand
Mean Scores.

Variables

N

Mean

Variance

S ta n da r d
Deviation

Actual Manage me n t

64

31.99

44.5589

6.6752

Ideal Ma nagement

64

70. 51

153.9667

12.4083

Actual Leadership

64

26. 78

45.6371

6.7555

Ideal Leader ship

64

54 .98

100.3775

10.0189

The F -ratio for the m ul ti v ar i at e test of equality
of the m e a n vectors was found to b e 0.6857;
freedom was 8 and 116.00, with

the degree of

a P less than 0.7034.

This

answered conclusively the question of simil a ri t y or d i f ­
ference between the three groups'
following table,

however,

perceptions.

The

sets out data for each of the

four variables as a m a tt e r of interest.

61
TABLE 5,--F~Ratio for M u l t i v a r i a t e Test of Eq u al i ty of
Mean V e c t o r s .
Be tween
Mean SQ

Variable

Un ivariate
F

P Less
Tha n

Actual
Ma nagement

29.1725

0.6547

0.5233

Ideal
M anagement

169.0073

1.0977

0.3402

Actual
Leaders hip

2.5681

0.0563

0.9454

Ideal
Le adership

40.4542

0.4030

0.6701

The figures in Table 5 show that there is no
si gnificant difference among the heads of teacher training
program,

the directors of student teaching,

supervisors

and the college

for ratings re ported on the r es p on s ib i li t ie s of

the director of student teaching in M i c h i g a n colleges and
universities

With an e s t a b l i sh e d alpha level of 0.05 and

a proba bility of error less than 0.7034,

there are no

significant differences in the matters co v er e d in each of
the hypotheses.

In other words the three groups did not

perceive the actual and ideal roles of the directors of
student teaching as they w e r e identified in this st udy and
in the questio n na i re in other th an a fairly u n iform fashion.

62
Summary of Tests of Hypoth es e s
Da ta w e r e g a t h e r e d in two wa y s from the three
rep r esentative groups and a na lyzed in t es t in g the hypotheses.
First,

a s u bj e ct i ve analysis wa s m a d e of the actual

and

ideal d i me n si o ns of the role segments i dentified on the
q ue s t io n na i re
made

(see A p p e n d i x C ) , an d some inferences w e r e

from this analysis.

Secondly,

stati stical m e as u re s

were a p plied to coded data repres e nt i ng the i nvolvement of
the directors of student teaching in the various roles
identifie d on the questionnaire.
The

four hypotheses w e r e tested w i t h the following

results:
1.

The hypothesis that the th ree groups of

re spondents agree on the ideal roles of the dire ctors of
student t e aching with
was retained,
2.

at the

the respect to

le a de r sh i p functions,

0.05 level of confidence.

The hypot h es i s that the three groups of

respondents agree on the ideal roles of the directors of
student teaching with

the respect to

m a na g er i al functions,

was also retained,

the 0.05 level

of confidence.

3.

at

Th e hypoth e si s that the three groups pe rceive

quite d if f er e nt l y the actual roles of the directors of
student te a ching with the respect to le a de r sh i p functions,
was re j ec t ed for all respondents.
4.

The hypothe s is w h ic h pr edicts significant

dif ferences among the three groups on the actual roles being

63
played by the director of student teaching with respect to
managerial functions, w as also rejected for all respondents.
De sc riptive Data
Perceptions of Actual
Manager ial Roles
The responses to the qu e st i on n ai r e indicate a high
degree of agreement on the manage r ia l re sponsibilities of
the directors of student teaching in Michi ga n colleges and
universities.

In most,

if not all,

of the institutions the

relationship between the director and the college s u p e r ­
visors and b e t w e e n the director and the head of his p r o g r a m
are close and continuous,

so agreement is to be e xp ected

on w h a t are the functions actually assigned to the director.
In Table 6 are set out the number and percent in
each group of respondents w h o checked the "Yes,"
"Don't Know" column for each item.

"No," or

A final column ranks

each item in descending o r d e r according to the pe rcentage
of "Yes"

checks by the three groups combined.
From the table a number of re latio nships are

apparent.

At tention is drawn here to the m o re significant

sets of ob servations that are justified by the data as
set out

in Table 6.

Perceptions of Directors on
Actual Managerial
Responsibilities
Since the item list was der ived from many s t a t e ­
ments o f job r esponsibilities found in the p rofessional

64

TABIJ: 6.--The Number, Percent, and Bank of Statements on Actual Managerial
Responsibilities of the Director of Student Teaching Rated by the Three
Groups (.3 = "Yes," .2 * "No,” .1 = "Don't Know").

Statement

Head of Teacher
Training[ Program

Director of
Student Teaching

College
Supervisor

Total

*

Bank

No.

*

No.

%

No,

%

1.3
1.2
1.1

9
2
1

G9. 23

75.00
25.00
0

22
10
1

62. 70
26.57
2.85

43
16
2

67. 18
25.00
3.12

14

7. 69

12
4
0

2. 3
2.2
2. 1

12

14
2
0

07. 50
12. 50
0

25
7
0

71.43
20.00
0

51
10
0

79.60
15.62
0

9

0

92. 37
7. 69
0

3. 3
3.2
3. 1

9
2
1

69. 23
IS. 30
7.69

7
9
0

43.75
56. 25
0

14
14
2

40. 00
40.00
5.72

30
25
3

46.07
39 .06
4.60

20

■1.3
4.2
4. 1

11
1
1

84.61
7. 69
7.69

16
0
0

100.00
0
0

26
6
0

74.85
17.14
0

53
7
1

82 .01
10.93
1 .56

6

S. 3
S.2
5.1

H
2
1

61. S4
IS.23
7.69

14
->
0

87. 50
12. 50
0

23
8
0

65.72
22.00
0

45
12
1

70. 31
10.75
1 .56

12

b,3

33
0
0

100.00
0
0

16
0
0

100.00
0
0

23
7
1

65.72
20.00
2.05

52
7
1

01. 25
10.93
1. 56

Q

G. 2
(>.1

7.3
7.2
7.1

12
0
1

92 .37
0
7 .69

14
2
0

87. 50
12. 50
0

23
0
0

65.72
22.00
0

49
10
1

76. 56
15.62
1.56

11

0. 3
0.2
0.1

13
0
0

100.00
0
0

IS
1
0

93.75
6.25
0

26
5
1

74.85
14.28
2.85

54
6
1

04. 37
9. 37
1.56

4

9. 3
9.2
9.1

13

100.00

15
1
0

93.75
6.25
0

25

71.43
14.28
2.05

53
6
1

02.01
9. 37
1. 56

6

10. 3
10. 2
10. 1

13

14
1
1

87. 50
6.25
6.25

28
3
1

00.00

55
4

3

2

05.93
6. 25
3.12

11.3
11.2
11.1

10
1
1

IS
0
0

93.75
0
0

29
0
3

82.05
0
8.57

54
1
4

04 .37
1. 56
6.25

4

1

0
0

0
0

I S . 313

0

0
100.00
0
0

76.93
7. 69
7.69

6

1

6.57
2.85

65

TAIiJ-L 6 . — C o n t i n u e d .

Head

.Statement

of

Trai ning

Teacher
Program

No

Director of
Student Teaching

Colleen
Supervisor

%

No.

%

No,

%

12. 3
12.2
12.1

61 .64
30.76
7,69

9
7
0

66. 26
43.76
0

23
6
4

<, 5.12

4
1

1J.3
13.2
13, 1

b
4
1

61. 54
30.76
7.60

J
7
0

66.2 6
43.76
0

22
6
4

14. 3
14.2
14.1

10
3
0

70.03
23. 07
0

12
4
0

76.00
26.00
0

is.3
16. 2
16. 1

10

76,0 3
16. 30
0

16
0
0

16. 3
16. 2
16. 1

u
4

6

2

4<i. 16
30. 76
16. 3k

17.3
17.2
17.1

4
(i
2

IB. 3
IB. 2
1H. 1

•J

Total

Rank

16

6

62. 60
26. 66
7.81

62. 00
17. 14
11.46

39
17
6

60 .39
26 .66
7.81

17

22
10
0

62.HO
2ft.67
0

44
17
0

60. 76
26. 66
0

13

03.76
0
0

26
6
1

71 .43
14.24
2. HO

60
7
1

78. 12
10.93
1.66

10

66. 26
31.26
0

20
7
4

67. 24
20. 00
11.4H

36
16
f>

64 .60
26.00
9. 37

19

6
0

10. 76
40. 16
16, 3ft

4
11
n

26. 00
OH, 76
0

16
12
2

64. 20
34. 2H
6.7 2

27
29
4

42.19
46. 31
6.26

21

*.»

66. 26
37. 60
0

22
7
2

62 .HO
20. 00
6. 72

40
16
4

62. 60
23.43
(..26

16

T

60. 23
16. 3H
16. 3B

IB. 3
19.2
19. 1

7
4
2

63.b6
30.76
16. 3H

10
6

20
10
2

67. 24
20 .67
6.72

37
19
4

67. 81
29 .60
6.26

18

0

(>2.60
31 .26
0

20. 3
20. 2
20.1

10
2
0

76. 0 3
16. 30

16
0
0

100.00
0
0

30
2
1

06.71
6.72
2.06

66
4
1

87 .60
6.26
1 .66

2

21. 3
21.2
21.1

12
0
1

0 7. 37
0
7.60

16
0
0

100.00
0
0

30
1
0

86. 71
2. 06
0

6R
1
1

90.62
1.66
1.66

1

H

2

0

2

N-13

0

o

0

N= 16

17.14
11 .40

N=3 5

40
17

N“64

66
literature,

there is some interest in ex amining the degree

to which M ic h i g a n directors conform to the p ro f e s s i o n a l l y
supported expectations.

Of the 21 items, o n l y four w e r e

acknowledged as a ctual r e s p o n si b il i ti e s by all 16
directors and two others b y all 15 w h o responded to the
particular item.
#4.

Devel opment and distribution of student
teaching application blanks to all students
seeking to enroll in st udent teaching.

#6.

As s ig n me n t of student teachers to teach in
cooperating schools.

#11.

Development of handbooks and other forms
used in the student teaching program.

#15.

Application of established processes and
standards that will ens ure the fairness
of de cisions affecting the people in the
pro g r a m — students, c ol l eg e supervisors,
and to the extent a p p r o p r i a t e , the
supervising teachers.

#20.

Duties in common with all profe ssors in the
C ol l eg e of E d u c a t i o n - - e .g ., supervising
gradu at e theses, serving on college and
u niversity faculty committees, etc.

#23.

W orking individ ually w i t h appropriate
publ ic school administrators, co llege
supervisors, supervising teachers in helping
them to understand their roles and carry on
their responsibilities.

The g re atest divergence from the liter ature comes
in the m at t er of c e rt i f i c a t i o n

(Item #17).

It ap pears

that the certif i ca t io n is m o st often ma de on the basis of
the entire preparation program,
teaching experience.

The

to the state separately.

in cluding the student

latter is not usually certi f ie d

67
A second item with less than one -half "Yes"
responses has to do wi th the selection of the s upervising
teachers

(Item #3).

This re s po n si b il i ty is a c kn o wl e dg e d

by the director in only seven of the 16 cases.
Other m a tt e rs with sub stantial
largely bu dgetary in nature.

"No" responses are

Only n i n e of the directors

reported re sponsibility for the prepara t io n of the b u d g e t
(Item #12), supervision of d is bursements

(Item #13 ),

recruitment and supervision of o ff i ce pe rsonnel
and provision of instructional supplies

(Item #16),

(Item #19).

Ag reements Between Directors
and Heads of T he i r Programs
The table shows a h i g h degree of agreement b e t w e e n
the directors a n d the heads of their programs.
occasional

An

difference in perception is n ot e d for possible

investigation by the directors themselves.
Throe items that w e r e regarded as director's
responsibilities by all the pr ogram heads responding
were not accepted by one or m or e of the directors.
are fairly fundamental:
student teaching,

They

the organi za t io n and op e ration of

off campus

(Item #10);

assignment or removal of student teachers

the change of
(Item #19);

and

orie ntation of n e w college superv i so r s and supervising
teachers

(Item #8).
Another t h r e e items w h i c h are endorsed by all the

directors responding were similarly en d orsed by only 10

68
of the 13 p r o g r a m heads.

The items are development of

handbooks and ot h e r

(Item #11); d evelopment and

forms

applica t io n of fair processes and standards
affecting the p e o p l e in the pr o gram
in common w i t h

for de cisions

(Item #15); and duties

all professors in the College of Ed u ca t i o n

(Itern #20).
Agreements between Directors
and C o llege Su p er v is o rs
There are a number of r esponsibilities the
directors

feel a re theirs that are not p er c e i v e d as such

by a s ub s ta n ti a l numb er of co l lege supervisors.

Three of

these are items c he c ke d "Yes" by all the directors.
Item #6,

the a ssignment of student teachers,

supervisors said

"No."

d istribution of forms
program,

On

20% of the

On Item #4, the development and
for applying to the student teaching

17% of the supervisors disagreed.

And, pe rhaps

the mo st se n si t iv e of the list, on Item #15 wh i ch is c o n ­
cerned w i t h

fair processes and standards for the people

in the program,

less than 75% of the supervisors c he c k e d

"Yes."
In the o t h e r direction,
than directors

far more su pervisors

thought that direct ors a tt e s t e d to the

state c e r t i f i c a t i o n agency the eligibility of student
teachers for c er tificates

(Item #17) .

There w e r e other variations bet ween the two grou ps
but none other w a s

very substantial.

69
The s tatements are listed in full in Table 7, in
the order w h i c h reflects the percentage of the total
number of respon de n ts w h o checked th em as b e i n g current
responsibilities of the director.

TABLE 7.--The Statements of Actual Ma n a g e r i a l R e sp o ns i ­
bilities of the Director of S tudent Teaching
A ccording to the Percent of All Respondents
W h o Chocked "Yes."
Rank

Percent

Item

Statem e nt s

1

90.62

21

Wo rking individually w i t h appropriate
public school adminis trators, college
supervisors, supervi s in g teachers in
helping th e m to understand their roles
and carry on their responsibilities.

2

87. 50

20

Duties in common w i t h all professors
in the College of E ducat ion— o .g . ,
supervising gradua te theses, serving
on college and u ni v er s it y faculty
committees, etc.

1

85.9 3

10

Organization and o p e r a t i o n of student
teaching off-campus.

4

84.37

8

Orientation of the new college s u pe r ­
visors and supervising teachers.

4

84.37

11

6

82.81

4

Develo p me n t and d i s t r i b ut i on of
st udent teaching ap p li c at i on blanks
to all students seeking to enroll in
student teaching.

6

82.81

9

Change of assignment or removal of
student teachers, under established
process.

8

81.25

6

Assign me n t of student teachers to
teach in cooperating school.

Development of handbooks and ot her
forms used in the st udent teaching
program.

70
TABL E

7.- - C o n t i n u e d .

Rank

P e rc e nt

Item

Statements

9

79. 68

2

10

78. 12

15

11

76 . 56

7

O r i e n t a t i o n p r o g r a m for the n e w
s tu d en t teachers.

12

70 .31

5

D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f e l i g i b i l i t y of
s tu d en t s w h o a p p l y for s tu d e n t
teaching.

13

6 8 . 75

14

14

67.17

1

15

62 . 50

18

P r o v i s i o n of n e e d e d i n s t r u c t i o n a l
supplies to the e le m en t s in t h e
program.

15

62. 50

12

P r e p a r a t i o n of the financial b u d g e t
of the st ud ent te aching program.

17

60.93

13

S u p e r v i s i o n of d i s b u r s e m e n t s w i t h i n
the b u d g e t for th e student t e a c h i n g
program.

18

57. 81

19

P r o v i s i o n of p r o f e s s i o n a l l i b r a r y
m a t e r i a l s in st ud e nt teaching o f f i c e
and centers.

19

54 .68

16

R e c r u i t m e n t and su p e r v i s i o n of office
p e r s o n n e l for t h e program.

20

46.87

3

S e l e c t i o n of the s u p e r v i s i n g t e a c h e r
w i t h i n the schools.

21

42. 19

17

A t t e s t i n g to the state c e r t i f i c a t i o n
agency the e l i g i b i l i t y of s t u d e n t
teachers for certificates.

S e l e c t i o n of the c o o p e r a t i n g

schools.

A p p l i c a t i o n of e s t a b l i s h e d p r o c e s s e s
and s ta n d a r d s t h at will e n s u r e the
fairne ss of d e c i s i o n s a f f e c t i n g the
p eo p le in the prograi n--students,
c o l l e g e supervi s or s , and to the extent
appropriate, the s u pervising teachers.

M a i n t e n a n c e of p e r m a n e n t r e c o r d s of
s tu d e n t te aching p e r s o n n e l .
S e l e c t i o n of the col lege s u p e r v i s o r s
of s t u d e n t teaching.

71
Perceptions of Ideal
Managerial Roles
Very close agreement m a r k e d the rating of the
importance of the items in m an a ge r i a l responsibility,

a

rating of what ought to be, w h i c h in this study are c alled
"ideal"

roles.

The high correlation among the groups was

noted in an earlier table.

In T ab l e

8

b e l o w are set out

the specific ratings given each item by each group of
respondents.

The responses of

the whole set of respondents

are similarly tabulated and a rank is assigned to the
items on the basis of their c om p osite rating of the items
as very or somewhat important.
Perceptions of Directors on
Ideal Managerial
Responsibilities
A lthough no item was m a r k e d by all di rectors as
"very important," mo r e than three-fourths of them rated
three items that high.
visors

(Item #1)

The selection of the college s u p e r ­

led the list, w i t h 15 listing it as a

very important part of the director's re s po nsibility and
the 16th one rating

it of some importance.

Respon si b il i ty

for the orientation of the new college super visors and
supervising teachers

(Item #8 ) was rated very important

by 14 and of some importance by the other two directors.
The third item on w h i c h more than three-fourths of the
directors agreed as very important is Item #21 w h i c h

is

the respons ibility for helping all those w o r k i n g in the

72

ThBLE 0 . - - T h e N u m b e r , P e r c e n t , a n d R a n k o f
R e s p o n s ib ilitie s o f the D irector
Groups

Statem ent

Head of T eacher
Tra ining Program

the S ta t e m e n ts on I d e a l M anagerial
o f S t u d e n t T e a c h i n g Rated by t h e T h r e e

D i r e c t o r of
S tudent Teaching

Col 1ege
Supervisor

Combi n a ­
Total

%

,9 . 7 2
14.20
2 . Li 9
9.72

46
10
2

71 . 8 7
15.62
3.12
3.12

07. 49

43
14
2
1

6 7 . 1(1

89.05

21 . 8 7
3.12
1 . 66

4 .68

31
16
6

48.43

71 . 8 6

(J

12.50

21 . 8 7

34
17
5

6 3 . 12
26 . 56
7 . HI

7 9 . GH

2

3.12

10.93
HI . 24

8 2 .111

No,

i.

No.

1.4
1. 3
1. 2
1. 1

H
4
1
0

61 . 94
30.7 6
7.09
0

19
1
0
0

9 3.79
(,.29

2.4
2. 3
2.2
2.1

10
2
0
n

7o . 9 3
1 9 . 36
0
0

11
4
1
0

6H . 7 9
29.00
0.29
0

22
0
1
1

02 . 00
22.00
2.0 9

3.4
3. 3

9

0 9 . 23
1 5 . 30
7 . 69

7
r

4 3.7 9
3] . 29
(>.2 9

15
0

4 2 . Of)
22.00

1 2 . HO

4
0

11.40
1 7 . 14

'>
f

90. 2 9
31.29

10
10

91 . 0 9
20. 97

1
0

(,. 2 9
0

1
2

2 . (J 9
6.72

12

79.00
1 2 . HO
0

J V*

94 .09
29.72

37
15

2

(,.29

i

9. / 2
2. H9

3
3

57.81
2 3.43
4.60
4 . 68

12
3
0
0

7 9.00
1H. 7 9
0
0

17
H

4 0 . 97
2 2 . HO

41
12

64 .06
18.75

2

5.72
1 4 . 20

(>H. 7 9

19
4

%

0
O

3.2
3. 1

2
1
n

4.4
4.3
4.2
4. 1

7
2
3
0

9 3 . H9

'3.4
5. 3
r,. 2
6. 1

6
4
1
1

4 0.1 9
30 . 76
7.69

b.4
6. 3
6. 2
6.1

12
1
o
0

9 2 . 37

7.4
7. 3
7. 2
7. 1

11
T

11
3

0

84. bl
1 9 . 3(1
0
0

0
1

1H. 7 9
0
0.2 9

0.
U.
0.
0.

4
3
2
1

11
•t

n4 . n l
1 9 . 3H

14
•1

H7. 90
1 2 . 90

9.4
9. 3

11

9.2
9.1

0
0

10.4
10.3
10. 2
10, 1

9
2
0
0

11.4
11.3
11.2

10
3
0

11.1

0

(1

0
0

2

i

0

1 9 . 3b
23.0 7
0

7. 09

7 . 09
O
0

0
0

j

0
1

0
0

04. ul
1 9 . 30
0
0

11
3

69.23
1 9 . 30
0
0
76.9 3
23.07
0
0

0
0
OH . 7 9

No.

23
5
1
T

5

4
4
21
H
1
1

f

2 .((9

4,

41
<(

64 . 0 6
14 , 06

4
5

6.25
7 . Hi

60.0 0

46
12

71 . 8 7
18.75

1
1

1 . 56
1 . 66

36
15
4
5

5 6 . 25
23.43
6.25
7.81

79.68

60.93
23.43

0 4 . 36

1
0
11
3
0
1

60.79
10.79
0
6.29

19
10
1
1

54.85
2 8 . 57
2.85
2. 05

39
15
1

10
5
0
0

6 2 . 50
31.25
0

23
6

65.72
17.14
5.72
0

H , 57
1 4 . 2H

18

15

13

11

10.93
7 8 . 12

17

14 . 0 6
90.62

1

3.12
15

14.06
10

1.56
3.12

4.60

43
14

67.18

B9.05

2

3.12
0

0

3

9 . 36

64. 0 9
11 . 4 0
1 1 . 4H
11 . 4 0

22 . 60
2 . ii 6
2.H5

5

23.43
9 . 37

3.12
7,81

40.00
2 0 . 57

0

Rank

6 . 24

5

2

14
10
3
5

2

%

%

10.79
0 . 29
0

0

tio n

21.87
3.12

3

73

tabu:

H .--C ontinued,

ta temen t

Head o f T e a c h e r
T r a i n i n g Program

tii r e c t o r o f
Student Teaching

No ,

Co 1 1 o g n
Supervisor

No .

4

NO .

\

12.4
12.1
12.2
12.1

0
3
1
0

69. 2 3
23.07
?.(/)
0

0
4
3
0

S t . 2S
2 S. 0 0
10. 7 0
0

23
t
0
1

65. 7 2
17.14
0

13.4
1 3. 3
13.2
13.1

7
5
1
0

S 3 , nr.
313. 4 t
7 , ho
0

0
r
0

S t . 2S
3 3 .21)
1 2 . SO
0

14.4
14.3
14.2
14.1

6
C,
1
0

4E . I S
40.1 5
7 . (VI
0

1O
s
1
o

4
3
2
1

10
J
0
0

7i,. 0 3
2 3.07
0
0

It. 4
It. 3
16,2
It. 1

r

1 .
15.
1 I).
1'j .

17.4
17.3
17.2
17. 1
1 H. 4
1H. 3
IB. 2
1H. 1

7
1
0
2

3
3
5

(
T

(>

1*3. 4
19 . 3
1 ‘1. 2
1 ‘J . 1

4
5

20.
20.
20.
20.

4
3
2
1

7
T

21.4
21. 3
21. 2
21.1

10

>

1
2

2

1
0

C o mb i n a ­
tion %

64.06
2 0 . 31
6 . 25
1 . 56

R4 . 3 7

2 . H5

41
13
4
1

22
7
0
9

6 2 . HO
20.00
0
2S. 72

3H
17
3
0

53.37
26 . 56
4 .60
14 .06

85.93

0 2 . SO
31 . 2 S
0 . 2S
0

It
10
1
4

4 S. 7 2
2H.51
2 . HS
11 . 4 b

32
21
3
4

SO.00
3 2 . HI
4 .60
6 . 25

82.81

12
3
0
0

7 S . 00
10. 7 S
0
n

22
H
1
1

0 2 . HO
2 2 . U0
2 . US
2.H5

44
14
1
1

6H.
21.
1.
1.

90.62

38. 4 h
S 3 . MS
7. to
0

7
S
3
0

4 3.7 5
31 . 2 S
IB . 7 ' .
0

17
'f
1
4

4H, S7
2S.72
2 . B5
1 1 . 4H

20
21
r

88. 12

4

4 5 . 31
3 2 . B]
7 .81
6 . 25

3*'. 4 1
1 j . 3H
2 3.07
23.07

7
1

4 3. 7 S
3 1 . 2S
t . 2S
18.75

17
7
3
4

4 H. S7
2 0 . no
t(. 7 S
11 . 4H

2 ‘J
14
7
10

45.31
21 . 0 7
10.'33
1 5. 60

67. 18

3H . 4 t
30. 4 t
I f ) . 3H
0

(,

37
2 S.
t .
10 .

SO
0O
25
7S

It
0

27
1H
S
7

4 2 . 10
2 0 . 12
7.81
10.93

7 0 . 30

4

4 S. 72
2 5.7 2
S. 72
11. 4h

30*
36.
1 0.
IS.

7 v>
4<>
3H
30

t;

31 . 2S
31 . 2S
18.75
0

12
12
4
3

3 4 . 2H
34 . 2 U
1 1 .4H
H . 75

21
n

6 7 . IB

9
5

3 2 . Bl
3 4 . 37
14.06
7.81

S3.
IS.
7.
IS.

US
3d
tVJ
3d

12
4
0

75.00
2 S . 00
0
0

20
7
2
2

S7.74
20.00
S. 72
S. 7 2

39
13
3
4

6 0 . ‘*3
2 0 . 31
4 .68
6.25

81 . 2 4

70.03
I S . 30
7. 69
0

13

HI , 2 S
1 2 . SO
0.2 5
0

21
7
1
0

60.00
20. 00
2.H5
0

44
11
3
0

60.7 5
17.18
4 .68

0 5.93

N=13
uothb :

%

Total

Very Important
Some Importance
tittle Importance
No Importance.

1
3

4
1
3
S
3
0

O

T

1
0

N=1 6

2

35

0

N= 6 4

75
07
56
1)6

Ha n k

9

7.01
7

18.74
11

10.93
1

3.12
5

1 3 . 06
20

26.53
19

1 H. 7 4
20

21.87
13

10,93

4.6Q

7

74
pr ogram to un derstand and carry out their r e s p o n s i ­
bilities .
Three out of four of the directors
important four other items.
common to all professors;
teachers;

listed as very

They are #20, the duties

# 6 , the assign m en t of student

#15, the item dealing w i t h due process and fair

standards;

and #5, determining the eligibility of student

teaching applicants.
Two items w e r e reg arded as of little or no
importance by four of the directors

(25%) .

They are the

certification function

((117) and the provision of

instructional supplies

(#18).

Ag reement Between Directors
and Heads of Their Programs
Table

8

shows a high degree of agre ement b etween

the directors and the heads of teacher training program s
on what should b e the man agerial respon si b il i ti e s of the
director of student teaching.

There was no item rated

by all of the p r ogram heads as "very important," but

12

of the 13 gave high importance to Item # 6 , and 11 gave
that rating to Items

#7,

#8

and #9.

T hese are:

#6 .

As s ig n me n t of student teachers to teach
in coo perating schools.

#7.

Or i en t at i on pr o gr a m for the new student
teachers.

#8 .

O rientation of the new coll ege supervisors
and supervising teachers.

75
#9.

Change of assignment or removal of student
teachers, under es tablished process.

One item to w h i c h the directors
high importance
support

(1 0 0 % "very" or "some")

from their p r ogram heads.

themselves gave
recei v ed much less

Nearly a q ua r te r of

the latter checked this item as of little or no importance.
The directors appear to feel strongly that th ey should
give time to x;)rofessional duties

(Item #20) , whereas nearly

one-fourth of their program heads call it of little or
no importance.
Of the three r esponsibilities rated highest by the
directors,
ment on two

(Items #1,
(Items

#8

# 8 , and #21)
and #21).

there wa s close a g r e e ­

B ut on #1, r es p onsibility

for the "selection of the college supervisors of student
teaching,"

a distinctly lower rating was given by the

heads of the teacher training programs.
Three items w er e accept ed with a high degree of
agreement between both groups.
ment items are:

The almost pe rfect a g r e e ­

Item # 8 , "O rientation of the new college

supervisors and supervising teachers";

Item #15,

" E st a bl i sh ­

ment of processes and standards of decision-making";
"Item #13,

and

"The supervision of d i sbursements wi t h i n the

budget to the p r o g r a m . "

76
Agreements Between Directors
anr] College Supervisors
Items

#1,

# 6 , and #9 contain the w i d e s t av er age

difference in percentages

(about 28%)

of agreement between

the college supervisors and the directors of student
teaching.

T h e opinions of the two groups vary on Items

and #21 by almost 21%.

The opinions of the two groups vary

by 14 and 17% respectively on Items #7 and #20.
particular

#14

These

items are:

#1.

Selection of the college supervisors of
student teaching.

#6 .

Assignment of student teachers to teach in
cooperating schools.

#7.

Or ie ntation prog ram for the new student
teachers.

#9.

Change of assignment or removal of st udent
teachers, under establ is h ed process.

#14.

Maintenance of permanent records of student
teaching personnel.

#20.

Duties in common with all pro fessors in the
College of Educa ti o n— e.g., supervising
graduate t h e s e s , serving on college and
university faculty committees, etc.

#21.

Working individually w i t h appropriate public
school administrators, college supervisors,
supervising teachers in helping the m to
understand their roles and carry on their
responsibilities,

T he r e are two items which the college super visors
rated higher as ideal managerial responsib ilities than
did the directors of student teaching.

These items are:

77
#12.

Pr eparation of the financial budget of
the student teaching program.

#13.

Supervision of di sbursements w ithin the
b u d g e t for the student teaching program.

There are variations between the two groups on
other items but they are not substantial.
Table 9 shows the statements l isted in full in
the order reflecting the percentages of the total number
of respondents w h o checked th em as b e in g important
managerial responsibilities that should b o carried by the
director.
Per ceptions of Actual
Leadership Roles
The responses to the q u e s t i o nn a ir e indicate a
high d egree of agreement on the leaders hip responsibilities
of the director of student teaching in Mi c h i g a n student
teacher training programs.

Agreement among the three

groups was expected on the functions of leadership
assig ne d to the director,

according to hypotheses one and

two.
Table 10 contains the percent in each g roup of
respondents w h o checked the "Yes,"
column for each item.

"No,"

or "Don't Know"

A final column ranks each item in

descending order according to the p ercentage of "Yes"
checks by the three groups combined.

78
TABLE 9 . — The State me n ts of Ideal M a n a g e r i a l R e s p o n s i ­
bilit ie s of the Di rector of S tu d en t T e ac h in g
Ranked According to the P e rc e nt a ge of Re spondents
W h o C he c ke d Th em as Being "Very Important" or
of "Some Importance."
Rank
1

Percent
90.62

Item
15

Statements
A p p l i c a t i o n of e st a bl i sh e d processes
and standards that w i l l ensure the
fairness of decisions affecting the
people in the p r o g r a m - - s t u d e n t s ,
co llege supervisors, and to the extent
appropriate, the superv i si n g teachers.

1

90.62

8

Or i e n t a t i o n of the new co l le g e su p er ­
visors and supervising teachers.

3

89.05

2

S e le c t i o n of the cooperating schools.

3

89.05

11

Develop m en t of handbooks and o t h e r
forms used in the student tea ching
program.

16

Recru itment and s upervision of office
personnel for the program.

5

88.12

6

87.49

1

Se l ec t io n of the college supervisors
of student teaching.

7

85.9 3

13

Supervi s io n of d i sb ursements w i t h i n
the budget for the s t udent te a ch i ng
program.

7

85.9 3

21

W o r k i n g in di vidually w i t h a p propriate
public school administrators, college
supervisors, s upervising teachers in
he lping t h em to u nd e rs t a n d their roles
and carry on their responsibilities.

9

84.37

12

P re p ar a ti o n of the financial b u d g e t
of the student teaching program.

10

84.36

10

O r g a n i z at i on and o p e r a t i o n of
student teaching, off-campus.

11

82.81

6

A s si g n m e n t of student teachers to
teach in coope rating schools.

79
TA BLE 9.— Continued.
Rank

Per cent

Item

Statements

11

82.81

14

13

81.24

5

13

81.24

20

Duties in common w i t h all professors
in the C o llege of E d u c a t i o n - - e .g .,
supervising graduate theses, serving
on college and university faculty
committees, etc.

15

79.68

4

Development and distri b ut i on of
student teaching ap p li c at i on blanks
to all students seeking to enroll in
student teaching.

15

79,68

9

Change of as signment or removal of
student teachers, under establi s he d
process.

17

78.12

7

O rientation program for the new
student teachers.

18

71.86

3

Select ion of the s upervising teachers
w i t h i n the schools.

19

70.30

18

Provision of n eeded instruc t io n al
supplies to the elements in the
program.

20

67.18

17

At testing to the state certification
agency the eligibility of student
teachers for certificates.

20

67.18

19

Provis ion of profes si o na l library
m at e ri a ls in student teaching o ffice
and c e n t e r s .

Ma i n t e n a n c e of p e rm a ne n t records of
student teaching personnel.
De termination of e ligibility of
students w h o apply for student
teaching.

80

TAISLE 1 0 . - - T h e H u m b e r , P e r c e n t , a n d R a n k o f
R e s p o n s i b i 1 i t i o_q o f t h e D i r e c t o r
Three Groups.

_
Statement

Head o f T ea c h er
T r a i n i n g Program
__________ ^

t h e S t a t e m e n t s on A c t u a l L e a d e r s h i p
o f S t u d e n t T e a c h i n g , R a t e d by t h e

pj r e c t o r o f
.student Teaching
______________________ _

C ollege
S u p e r v j r-or

---------

Total

*

Rank

No.

4

Ho.

\

Ho.

1

1. 3
1.2
1 .1

11
1
1

B4 01
7 . 09
7 . 09

14
2
0

0 7 . SO
1 2 . SO
0

30
2
0

OS. 7 J
S. 7 2
0

ss
s
1

OS. 9 3
7.01
1 . SG

s

2. 3
2.2
2. 1

11
T

1s
1
0

9 3. 7 S
0 . 2S
0

30
2
0

O S . 71
S.72
0

so
s
0

0 7 . SO
7.01
0

4

0

H4 . 0 1
I S . 30
0

3. 3
3.2
3. 1

11
1
1

0 4 . bl
7 . 09
7 . (V.)

If)

9 3 . 7S
0 . 2S
0

31
1
0

0 0 . S7
2 . OS
0

S7
3
1

09 . 0 0
4 . 09
1 . SO

2

<1. 3
4.2
4. 1

11
2
0

04. bl
1 S. 3H
0

]5

9 3 . 7B
0 . 2S
0

20
S
0

74 . 20
14.20
0

S2
0
0

01 . 20

11

S. 3

11
1
0

B4. b l

15

1

27
1_t

0

0

9 3. 7S
O. 2S
0

7 7 . 14
14. 20
0

S3
7
0

02.01
10.93
0

7

7.09

0. 3
0. 2
0. 1

H>
i

IS
]
0

9 3.7 S
G. 2 5
0

20

o o . oo
S. 72
S. 7 2

S3
S
2

02.01
7.01
3.12

7

U

7o.9 2
1 S. 30
0

7. 3
7. 2
7.1

13
0
0

100.00
0
0

lb
0
0

100.00
0
U

30
0
n

US. 71

so
0

9 2 . 10
0
3,12

1

H. 3
H. 2
H. 1

12
1
0

9 2 37
7.b9
0

IS
1
□

9 3.7 S
o . 2S
0

20
4
1

00.00
11 . 4 0
2 . OS

ss
G
1

05.9 3
9 . 37
1 . SO

S

9. 3
‘3 . 2
9. 1

10
■>

13
3
0

Hi 2S
1 H. 7S
0

30

OS . 71
S . 72
2.0S

S3
7
T

02.01
10.93
3.12

7

1

70. 9 3
I S . 30
7. 09

10. 3
lO. 2
10. 1

11
1
0

0 4 . 01
7. 09
0

14

0 7 . SO
1 2 . SO
0

20

00 .0 0
11 . 4 0
0

S3

0 2.01
10.93
0

7

'
j .2

s. l

1
0

1

0

2

0

0

>

1

4
0

0
S . 72

7
0

12.00

0

81

TABLD

10.--Continucd,

.. .
.
statement

Head o f T e a c h e r
T r a in i n g Program
^
-----------------------------------uo.
»

D irector of
Student Teaching

College
supervisor
Total

Do.

y

no.

%

t

Rank

11.3
11.2
11.1

12
1
0

9 2 . 37
7. 69
0

]S
1
0

9 3.7 S
O. 2 5
0

30
2
0

(35.71
S . 72
0

57
4
0

89 . 0 6
0 . 25
0

2

12.3
12. 2
12.1

10
2
1

7 1■. 9 2
1 S . 3H
7.0')

14
2
□

0 7 . SO
12.50
0

27
2
0

77.14
S . 72
0

51
6
1

79.68
9 . 37
1.56

13

13.3
13.2
13. 1

11
1
0

H4 , 0 1
7 . (2.1
0

14

27
4
1

7 7 . 14
1 1.4H
2 .05

52
7
1

R1 . 2 5
10.9 3
1 . 56

11

0

0 7 . 50
1 2 . 50
0

14.3
14. 2
14.1

10
'1

13
3
0

HI . 2 ft
1H.7S
0

24
7
1

OH . 5 7
20.00
2 . (3 S

47
12
2

73.43
16.75
3. 12

14

]

7(.. 92
I S . 30
7 . (.9

15.3
IS. 2
IS. 1

‘1
2
1

( 19 . 2 3
I S . 3H
7.09

12
3
<)

7 5 . 00
1 H. 7 5
0

24
0
T

OH. 5 7
17.14
5 7n

45
11
3

7 0 . 31
1 7 . 18
4 . 09

15

1J *= 1 3

NOTKi

.3
,2
.1

- Ye n
= No
*= D o n ' t

Know

p

N «

If.

li =

IS

N “

04

82
Fr om Ta b le 10 a number of relationships are
apparent.

Attention is drawn here to the more im portant

sets of ob se rvations that are justif ied by the d at a as
set out in Table

10.

Agreements Among Directors on
L ea d er s hi p Responsibilities
Of the 15 items of the q ue s t i o n n a i r e on l y one was
ac knowledged by all 16 directors that conformed to the
pr ofess ionally supported expectations.
item is #7,

leadership in planning

the program.

This partic ul a r

for improvements in

All but three items w e r e checked as actual

responsibilities by at least 14 of the directors.
one,

Item #15

12 "Yes"

(supporting staff research)

checks.

Only

had as few as

In general the directors of student

teaching see themselves

as actually performing most of

the leadership roles set out in the literature of their
profession.
A greements Between Di rectors
and Heads of Their Programs
There are five items of almost perfect agreement
be tween the directors and their heads of teacher training
programs.

Th e se items are:

#1.

Providing ov e r-all educ ational leadership
in the p ro g ra m of student teaching.

#8 .

Identifying and e l iminating or reducing
obstacles to fullest use of their
ca pa bilities by individual staff members.

83
#10.

De s ig n in g an o r g a n i z a t i o n and m a i n t a i n i n g
an at titude that e n c o u r a g e s and va l u e s the
c o n t r i b u t i o n of i nd i vi d ua l staff m em b e r s
to the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and s ol u t i o n of
problems in the s t u d e n t teaching program.

#11.

Involving staff m e m b e r s
affect them.

#13.

Re c o n c i l i n g an d a d a p t i n g the v a r y i n g role
e x p e c t a t i o n s and p e r f o r m a n c e s t r e n g t h s of
individuals in the s t ud e nt t e a c h i n g program.

in d e c i s i o n s that

A o n e - h u n d r e d p e r c e n t a g r e e m e n t is o b s e r v e d b e t w e e n
the heads of teacher

t r a i n i n g p r og r a m s and the di r ectors

of st u de n t tea ching on
impro ve m en t s

Item #7,

l e a d e r s h i p in p l a n n i n g for

in the program.

N o n e of the he a ds of te a ch e r training

programs

ra ted any of the 15 items on the q u e s t i o n n a i r e of l e a d e r ­
ship r es p on s i b i l i t i e s h i g h e r
st ud ent

than did the d i r e c t o r s of

teaching.
The d ir e ctors of st udent

items

higher

than the heads of t ea c h e r t r a i n i n g programs.

Of the e n t i r e set of items,
between

teaching r a t e d nearly all

the two groups

except on It em

#6

the o r g a n i z a t i o n

the v a r i e t y of p e r c e p t i o n

is n e g l i g i b l e — less t h a n nine p e r c e n t

(making s u re that the d i r e c t o r ' s role in
is u n d e r s t o o d by all staff m e m b e r s) ,

in

w h i c h was o b s e r v e d a 27% di ff erence.
A g r e e m e n t s B et w ee n D i r e c t o r s
and C o l l e g e Su p e r v i s o r s
All of the d i r e c t o r s of s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g rated
their ac tu al
the coll ege

l e a d e r s h i p r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s h i g h e r than d i d
supervisors.

Only one

item found t h e m in

84
almost perfect agreement.

It is Item #1, p ro v iding o v e r ­

all educational leadership in the program.
The highest difference,

an a ve r a g e of 16%, be t we e n

the directors of student teaching and the co l lege s u p e r ­
visors is o b s e r v e d in Items

#4,

#5, and #7.

T he s e items are:

#4.

Holding, and m a k i n g clear to his as sociates,
soundly b as e d principles r elated to student
teaching.

#5.

E n couraging new ideas and the trying of
new ways by student teaching staff members.

#7.

L eadership in planning for im provements in
the student teaching program.

A n o t h e r difference of 13% is o b se r v e d in the
opinion of the two groups on Item # 6 , making sure that the
director's role in o r ganization is unders t oo d by all
staff members;

in Item # 8 , identifying and el i m i n a t i n g or

reducing obstacles to fullest use of their c ap abilities
by individual staff members; and in Item #14, h e l p i n g in
the development of specific sets of o bj e ct i ve s by which
student teachers may me asure their growth in performance.
The remaining items

re f lected pe rceptions of the

two groups that differed by less than

1 0 %,

w h i c h is not

substantial.
Table 11 shows the p e r c e n t a g e of the total number
of respondents w h o checked the "Yes,"
Know" column for each item,

ranked in descending o rd e r

according to the percentage of "Yes"
groups combined.

"No," or "Don't

checked b y the three

85
TABLE

11.— The S tatements of Actual L e a d e r s h i p R e s p o n s i ­
bilities of the Director of St udent Teaching
Ranked A cc o rd i ng to the P e rc e n t a g e of
Resp ondents W ho C he c k e d "Yes."

Rank

Pe rcent

Item

1

9 2.18

7

2

89.06

3

2

89.06

11

4

87.50

2

Creating a climate conducive to good
human relations among student teaching
personnel.

5

85.93

1

Providing over-a l l educa tional
leadership in the p r o g r a m of student
teaching.

5

85.93

8

Identifying and e l iminating or
reducing o b s t a cl e s to fullest use
of their capabilities by individual
staff members.

Statem ents
Le a de r sh i p in pl a nning for i m p r o v e ­
ments in the student teachin g program.
Developing pro cesses and standards
personnel problems i n volved in the
student teaching program.

for

Involving staff me mb ers in decisions
that affect them.

7

82.81

10

Desi gning an o r g a n i z a t i o n and m a i n ­
taining an attitude that enc ourages
and values the contri b ut i on of
individual staff members to the
identification and solution of
problems in student te aching program.

7

82,81

5

Encouraging new ideas and the trying
of new ways by student teaching staff
members.

7

82.81

6

Making sure that his role in the
organi z at i on is u nd e rs t oo d by all
m embers in student teaching program.

7

82.81

9

Designing an o r g a n i z a t i o n that gives
coordi n at i on to the w o r k of individual
staff members.

86
TABLE 11.- - C o n t i n u e d .
Rank

Percent

I tern

11

81.25

13

Reconciling and adapting the vary ing
role expectations and pe r fo r ma n ce
strengths of individuals in the
student teaching program.

11

81.25

4

Holding, and making clear to his
associates, soundly b a s e d principles
related to student teaching.

13

79.6

8

12

Development of perf ormance standards
for the various roles in the stud ent
teaching program.

14

73.43

14

He lping in the development of specific
sets of objectives by w h i c h student
teachers may measure their growth in
performance.

15

70.31

15

Supporting staff research ind ividual
and group— on all aspects of the
student teaching program.

Statements

Perceptions of Ideal
'Leadership Kolos'
In Table 12 arc placed the specific ratings g i v e n
each

item by each gr o up of respondents.

The responses of

the whole set of respondents are similarly tabulated and a
rank is ass igned to the items on the basis of their
composite rating of the items as very or s om e wh a t important.

87

TABI.F 12.--The Number, Pprcrnt, and Rank of the Statements on the Ideal Leadership
Responsibilities of the Director of Student Teaching Rated by the
Throe Groups.

Statement

Me a d o f T e a c h o r
T r a i n i nq I r o g ram

2.4
2. 3
2.2
2.1
3.4
3. 1
3.2
3. 1

11
1
1

u

4
1
(i
7
f
1
0

1 r.
1
(J
0

0 3.70
0. 2 b
0
0

20
1
0
1

fi2 .8 b

55
3
1
1

0 5.93
4.09
1 . 50
1 .50

90.62

2.8b
t)
2 . Hb

01 . 04
3 0 . 7 r>
7.(0)
0

14
1

07 . 50
12.00
0
0

2b
b
0
1

71.43
14.20
0
2 . Hb

47
11
1
1

73.44
17.10
1.50
1.56

90.62

'.3.0'.
3 0 . 4r,
7 . (■•)
0

14

23
7
0
1

0 b . 77
7 0 . 00
0
7.0b

44
14
1
1

GH . 7 b
21 . 0 7
1 .50
1.50

90.6 2

('
0

o 7 . r.o
1 2 . bo
0
0

14
1
1
I)

0 7 . 50
G. 2 b
o, 2 b
0

74
3
0
*)

OH. b7
H . S7
0
b. 7 7

40
0
1
3

7b. 00
9 . 37
1 . 50
4.09

114. 3(1

117 . bO
1 2 . bO
0
0

24
b
0

on. b?
14 .2H

47
10

73.44

(19.06

01 .2b
12. bO

70

0
0

1

5, 4
b, 3
b ,2
5. 1

‘1
3
1
0

0 9 . 24
2 3.07
7, GO
0

14
2

o ,4

9
'i

o9. 24

13

G. 3

2
0. 1

1
1

7 .00

11
1

(14. 01
7.00

B. 4
8. 3
a. 2
8. 1

0
0

1 b. 3M
7.00

0

lb
1
D

0 3.7b
0 .2b
0
0

20
4

(11. 2 b
0.2 b
0.2b
0

20
3

0

9
T

00.24

13

7. 00

3
1
1

0.2 b
0

7. 00

1 5 . 3H
7 .0 0

2

1
tl

1

1
1

Combi n a ­
tion t

84 . 6]
7 . O'*
7.0 9
0

7(. . 3
1 b . 10
()
7 . I.0

7. 3
7. 2
7. 1

%

No.

10
'1

7.4

Total

NO.

4.4
4. 1
4.2
4.1

[>

Col l e g e
Nupervi sor

1.

No.

1 .4
1 .3
] .2
1 .1

Director of
Student Teaching

1
1
0

0
0

2
0

0
b. 7 2

1
2

74. 0b
(1. 57

4(3

2.0 b
2 . Hb

H 2 .0 b
11 .40
0
0

74.0b
0 .b7
5.72
0

7
3
"i
55
6
0

1
40
0

4
1

Rank

3

3.12
3

3.12
3

3.12
11

0 . 25
6

15.62
1 . 56

3.12

4. OH

75.00
10.93
4 .69
3.12

05.94

85.93
9.37
0
1.56

95.31

75.00
9. 37
6.25
1 .50

8 4 . 30

9

7.81
1

1.56

7.B1

11

88

TftBIX ] 2 . — C o n t i n u e d .

Statntnnnt

Me a d o f T e a c h e r
Trai ning Program

Uiroctor of
student Teaching

Col l e g e
Oupervi nor

Total

'4,

C o mb i n a ­
tion t

■4.

tlo.

%

No.

V

<3.4
0. 3
'3.2
0. 1

H
3
1
0

Ol . 5 4
2 3 . 07
7 . O'i
0

13
1
0
1

Kl . 2 5
0.25
0
0.25

20
3
0
2

74.(45
fi. 57
0
5.72

47
7
1
3

73.43
10.03
1 . 50
4 . 00

(44 . 30

10.4
10.3
10.2
10. 1

'3
4
0

13.2-1
30 . 7 o
0

14

((7. 50
0.2 5
0 . 25
0

2f(

o
e

1
1

51
0
2
1

70.0(4
0 . 37
3.12
1 .50

00.00

2.55
2. ( 4 5
2 . H5

11.4
11.3
11.2
11.1

10

0 7 . 50
1 2 . 50
0

27
3
0
1

77.14
0 . 57
0
-■►1
fr 5■
*

51
(4

70.014
1 2 . 50
0
1 , 5-6

0 2 . 10

12.4
12.3
12.2
12.1

M

24
5
2
0

0(4. 57
14. 2(4
5.72
0

4<0
4
0

71 . ( ( 7
14.00
(,. 2 5

(4 5 . 0 4

05. 72
1 1 .414
(4. 5 7
5. 7 2

43
10
4
4

07.
15 .
O.
o.

1(4
(.2
25
25

(42.01

00. 00
20. 00
5.72
5.72

30
17
3

00. 0 3
20 . 50
4 .00
3.1 2

(47 . 50

IrH. 5 7
(>. 57
(4. 57
2 , (45

41
11
0
1

04.00
17 .1 B
0 . 37
1 . 5G

01 . 25

()
3
n
0

•1
1

o

13.4
13.3
13.2
13. 1

H

14.4
14.3
14.2
14.1

')

3
1
1

3
1

D

15.4
15.3
1 1). 2

7
4

15.1

0

'i

n

=
=
=
-

0

1

70.03
2 3. 0 7
0
0

14
'3

7t . 0 3
1 5. 30
7 . o ‘i
o

12
2
1
0

7 5 . 0 r;

0] . 54
27.07
7, 00
7.1/1

12
3
0
1

7 5. 0 0
1 M. 7 5
0
0.2 5

23
4
3

(3J. 24
23.07
7.i,o

0

50 . 25
•13.75
0
0

21
7

0 2 . 50
2 5. 00
0. 25
0

24
3
3
1

o
5 3 . H5
3U . 7 i ,
1 5 . 3H
0

N^l 3

NOTES : .4
.3
,2
.1

1
1

Very Important
Some Importance
tittle importance
No Importance.

0
n

o
1 2. 50
0.25
0

0

0
10

•1
1
0
N= 1 0

o

No.

3

2

N= 35

1

T

o

N“04

hank

11

0.2 5
0

4 . on

2

1 . 5o
0

O. 2 5
14

1 3. 50

14

7.(41

10.03

15

89
Agreement Among Directors
on Ideal Leadership
Responsibilities
N inety-four percent of the directors of s tudent
teaching we re in direct agreement on Ite m #1 and Item #7:
providing over -all educational leadership in the p r ogram
of student teaching,

and leadership in pl a nn i ng for

improvement in the program.
On six ot h e r items,

as well,

all of the directors

checked either the very impo rtant or of some im portance
column.
No item was checked by as many as two directors as
being of little or no importance.
#9

(designing an organization)

One d ir ector said that

and one said that #13

(adapting expectations to the individual)

was of no

importance.
The two items that had fewest "very important"
ratings had 56.25%

(Item #14), and 62.50%

(Item #15) w i t h

the other percentages being in the "some importance"
column.

Item #14 deals w i t h developing p e rf o rm a nc e

objectives for student teaching and Item #15 w i t h s u p p o r t ­
ing staff research.
In general the directors o v e r w h e l m i n g l y endorsed
the importance of the leadership re s po n sibilities that w er e
listed in the questionnaire.

90
Ag reement Between Directors
and Heads of Their Programs
O nl y one,

Item #14, he lping in the development of

specific sets of o bjectives by w h i c h student teachers may
measure their growth in performance,

of the 15 items w a s

rated hi gh er by the heads of t eacher training programs
than by the directors of student teaching.
The

largest differences,

34% and 26%, be tween the

directors of student teaching and the heads of teacher
training programs oc c ur r e d in Item #3, develo pi n g processes
and standards for pe rsonnel problems involved in the
student teaching program,

and Item #2, creating a c l i m a t e

conducive to good human relations a mong st u de n t teaching
personnel.

The least difference oc curred in Item #1,

providing over-all educational leade rship in the p r og r am
of student

teaching.

Almost perfect agreement was re a ched

on Item #12, development: of performance standards for the
various roles in the student teaching program.
The variation between the heads of te a cher tra ining
programs and the directors of s tudent teaching was
negligible

in the remaining items.

Agreement Between Directors
and C o l l e g e Supervisors
Items #3,

#4, and #5 contain the w i d e s t average

difference in percentage

(about

20

%) of ag reement b e tween

the college supervisors and the direct ors of student
teaching.

91
The opinions of the two g r ou p s vary b y 16% and 10%
respectively on Item #2,

creating a climate c on d uc i ve to

good human relations a m o n g student teaching personnel;
and Items #1,

#7, and #11:

pr oviding over-all

educational

leaders hip in the pr ogram of student teaching;

leadership

in planning for improvements in the student teaching
program;

and involving staff memb ers in decisions that

affect them.
There arc only tw o items w h i c h the c o llege s u p e r ­
visors

rated hi gher than d i d the di r ectors of

teaching.

student

T h e s e items are:

#14.

Helping in the d ev e lo p me n t of specific
sots of o b je c ti v es by w h i c h st udent
teachers m a y me asure their gro wth in
performance.

#15.

Supporting staff resear c h- - in d iv i du a l
and group— on all as p ec t s of the student
teaching program.

There are varia tions between the two groups on
other rema ining items but
Table

these are not substantial.

13 shows the statements

descending o r d e r according

listed in full in

to the pe rcentage of very

important and somewhat im portant ra tings combined,

given

by the whole g r o u p of respondents.
The Di rectors and Programs of Student
'fe a c hing--Generai Information
Males ou t n u m b e r e d
respondents:
male,

11

and two are

heads of
female;

females in all three groups of
teacher t ra ining pro grams are
13 responding directors of

92
TABLE 13.— The Statements of Ideal Le a de r s h i p R es p on s i­
bilities of the Director of Student Teachi n g
Ranked A c co r di n g to the Percent of Respondents
W h o C he c ke d "Very Important" and "Some
I m p o r t a n c e ."
Rank

Perc ent

Item

Statements

9 5.31

7

Leaders h ip in planning for i m p r o v e ­
ments in the student teaching program.

92.19

11

90.62

1

P r ov iding over-all educational l e a d e r ­
ship in the pr og ram of student
teaching.

90.62

2

Creating a cl imate conducive to good
human relations among student teaching
personnel.

90.62

3

Developing processes and standards
for personnel problems involved in
the student teaching program.

89.06

5

Encouraging new ideas and the trying
of new ways by student teaching staff
members.

89.06

10

Involving staff members in decisions
that affect them.

Designing an o r g a n iz a ti o n and m a i n ­
taining an attitude that encourages
and values the contribution of
individual staff members to the
identification and solution.

87,50

14

Helping in the d evelopment of spe cific
sets of objectives by w h i c h student
teachers may m e asure their growth in
performance.

85.94

12

Development of performance standards
for the various roles in the student
teaching program.

85.9 4

6

Making sure that his role in the
or ganization is u n de r st o od by all
me mbers in s t udent teaching program.

93
TABLE 13.- - C o n t i n u e d .
Rank

Percent

I tern

11

84. 38

4

Holding, and mak ing c l e a r to his
associates, soundly b a s e d principles
re lated to student teaching.

11

84. 38

8

Ide ntifying and eliminating or
reducing obstacles to fullest use
of their capabilities b y individual
staff members.

11

84. 38

9

Designing organization that gives
coor dination to the w o r k of individual
staff members.

14

82. 81

13

Reconciling and adapting the varying
role expectations and p e r f o r m a n c e
strengths of individuals in the
student teaching program.

15

81.25

15

Supporting staff r es e ar c h- - in d iv i du a l
and g r o u p — on all a spects of the
student teaching program.

Statements

student teaching are male,

and three are female;

college supervisors are male,

and

11

and 2 4

are female.

None of the institutions studied re p orted that they
were wo r ki n g only w i t h elementary schools.
work only with secondary schools.
private colleges and o n e public.

T h r e e of the 16

These three include two
The largest number,

13 of

the 16, have programs in both e lementary and second ary
schools.
The size of the programs
Eight programs enroll

is either small or large.

fewer than 100 student teachers in a

given te r m or semester.

Two enroll between 100 and 200.

94
Six have 600 or more student teachers in the p r o g r a m at one
time.

The large programs are all in Co lleges of Educat ion

in the large public universities.

One of the private

colleges is in the middle pair wi th enrollments of b etween
and

100

200

, and one of the public institutions

smallest category, with

fewer than

100

is in the

student teachers.

The dire ctors of student teaching in Mi c hi g a n ' s
programs are well experienced.

Over half of them have

been in student teaching work for more than ten years.
Only three of

the 16 report five or fewer years experience.

TABLE 14.- - Di s tr i bu t io n of Average Number of Students
E nr olled for Student T e ac h in g per T e r m or
Semester.
Number of Students
Enrollment

N u m b e r of Institutions
Public

Less

than 100

101-200

Total

Percent

6

8

50.00

2

2

12 . 50

6

37. 50

16

100.00

Private

201-400
401-GOO
601 and Over
T OTAL

95
T AB L E 15.— Di st ribution of Numb er of Years of Experience
of the Directors of Student Teaching.
Years of Experi en c es

Numb er

P ercent

3

18.75

6 - 1 0

3

18. 75

11 - 15

6

37. 50

16 -

4

25.00

1 -

5

20

Over 2 0

0

TOTAL

0

16

100.00

Ne ar ly every d i r e c t o r — 14 of the 16— has a
doctorate.

The other two have ma s te r 's degrees.

This is

a very high proportion when the range in size of the
institutions and of the student teaching programs
taken

is

into account.
The number of pr o fessionals involved in the programs

at these 16 institutions is very substantial.
w h o m data are available,

In the 14 for

there are 141 full-time,

and 146

par t-time pro fessional staff members.

The range in working

hours

suggests that these

(from 12-50 among the full-time)

are not comparable with any certainty.
reporting

Some may be

in terms of c la s s- h ou r equivalents,

clock hours.

others in

Table 16 includes them as they w e r e reported.

96
TAB Lb' 16 . — Number of Professional Staff in the Programs
of Student Teaching and the Av e ra g e Number of
Working Hours Per Week.
m.
Part-Time

Full-Time

Graduate
Assistants

Inutitution
No.

Average
Hours

No.

Average
Hours

No,

Average
Hours

Central Michigan University

34

50

2

20

-

-

Eastern Michigan University

42

15

29

-

2

20

-

-

7

15

-

-

Grand Valley State College

14

30

1

15

-

-

Michigan State University

19

50

40

10

7

17

University of Michigan

3

40

25

20

-

-

Wayne State University

4

40

a

25

-

-

Western Michigan University *

_

-

-

-

-

-

Publie S ebon1s :

Ferris State College

Private Schools:
Adrian College

3

40

2

15

-

-

Albion College

4

12

1

12

-

-

Acquvnas College

G

40

6

3

-

-

Calvin College

1

15

H

15

-

-

Hope College

R

15

1

4

-

-

Marygrove College

-

-

14

-

-

Nazareth College

3

40

2

-

-

*
Data not available.

-

—

University of Detroit*
TOT A 121

13. 5

141

—
146

9

97
TABLE 17.— Number of N o n - P ro f es s io n al Staff in the P r o g r a m s
and the Av e r ag e N u m b e r of W o r k i n g Hours Per Week.

Full-Time

Part-Time

Student Help

Institution
No*

Average

No.

Average

No.

Average

Public Schools:
Central Michigan University

2

40

4

Eastern Michigan University

2

40

2

15

Ferris State College

1

20

Grand Valley State College

2

37.5

1

15

1

10

Michigan State University

5

40

8

20

6

15

4

40

Adrian College

1

12

Albion College

1

8

Acquinas College

1

40

10

30

18

University of Michigan
Wayne State University
Western Michigan University*

Private Schoolst

Calvin College
Hope College
Marygrove College

10

e

Nazareth College
University of Detroit*
TOTALS

*Data not available.

19

287,

65

20

91

98
The su pporting staff of secretarial and o ther n o n ­
prof ossionals is ve ry small, w i t h none of the priv ate
colleg es having m o r e than one.
reported no help,

One pr iv ate institution

one used student h e l p only and one

reported only a part-time worker.
In the pu b li c institutions,
half-time worker,

o n e re ported on l y a

and one repo rted no n o n- p ro f es s io n al help.

F r e e Responses on Manage r ia l
Responsibilities
At the e nd of the qu e s t i o n n a i r e space w a s provided
for "other re sponsibilities you feel are important."

Nine

of 64 respondents added c o mments under the manage r ia l
responsibility heading.
Directors of student teaching in two of the state
institutions listed these r e sponsibilities as important:
Es tablishing a resource center of information
that can be referred to by other units of the
university.
Develop ing cooperative w o r k i n g re lationships wi t h
o t h e r directors of student teaching of ot h er state
institutions.
Students need to have h a n d in decisions w h i c h
a ff e ct them such as lo cation of their assignment,
who their supervisor is, etc.
T he head of the teacher training pr o gr a m in a private
college added these:
P u b l i c re lations functions wi th m a n y school
districts.

99
The program head in another s ta t e institution
added:
Develop i ng and m ai n t a i n i n g liaison w i t h o t h e r
elemen ts in the Un i ve r s i t y which h a v e an impact
on student teaching.
Co ll ege supervisors in private colleges had these
recommendations:
V isiting student teaching centers and counseling
university supervisors.
Having a strong back-up to the decisions.
Assisting placement office.
College supervisors in two of the state institutions
added these items:
D evelop specific procedures for gather i ng a nd
evaluating data regarding the o v erall performance
of student teaching p r ogram and to pr ovide
regular channels for "feed back" of this data
to all concerned.
Evaluation of university supervisors'

performance.

More co mmuni cation or "brain storming" sessions
between supervisors and director himself.
Give specific guidelines that could be adapted
to all schools.
Free Responses in Leader ship
Responsibilities
A second space at the end of the questi o nn a ir e
invited suggestions on other leadership responsibilities
throught to bo important.
The dire ctors of st udent teaching made m o r e than
half of the suggestions.

Th r e e of the directors

private colleges had these additions:

from

100
C om munal involvement in decisions and planning
of any student teaching affair w i t h col lege
supervisors.
L e a d e r s h i p in student teaching lab-classes or
seminars.
As sisting placement office.
F ol l o w - u p studies.
From three of the state institutions the direc tors
had these suggestions:
A ct i v i t y in state-national professional o r g a n i z a ­
tions interested in t eacher education.
C o o r d i n at i ng teacher preparation activities with
other institutions in the state and keep c o m m u n i c a ­
tion lines open with b o t h the state and national
level.
International education;

directed teaching.

D ir ected teaching is an all— university as w e l l as
r es p o ns i bi l it y of the professors as a whole.
Reducing emphasis on managerial role can inhibit
fle xibility of o perations as well as c ooperation
w i t h other agencies and institutions.
A private college he ad and the p ro g ra m head in a
state institution su ggested these additions:
C o ns u lt a nt role to schools of our c o op e ra t in g
pro g ra m in student teaching.
Developing state standards in student teaching.
Supervi s or s

from one private and two public

institutions ma d e these suggections and comments:
P re s en t in g carefully drawn proposal of p r og r a m
changes, pilot programs, etc., to the d e c i s i o n ­
make rs w h o have the po w er to ap prove them.
(Proposals developed in conjunction w i t h student
teaching staff members.)

101
M a i n t a i n i n g lines of c o mm u ni c at i on w i t h the
academic d epartments of the university.
Couns el i ng students and directing them to other
a p p r o p r i a t e counselors.
Having a strong ba ck- up to the decisions.
C ap a c i t y for change.
Tables

18 and 19 il lustrate the respondents'

comments at the end of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e on managerial
and l e ad e rs h ip r e s p o ns i bi l it i es of the d ir ector of
student teaching.

Most of the r ec o mmendations w e r e m a de

by the directors of student teaching;
c ollege supervisors,

several came from

and a few from the heads of te acher

training program.
Summary
The testing of the four hypotheses showed no
sign ificant differ en c e s among the three groups in their
perce pt i on s of the managerial and l eadership roles that
are actually b ei n g

filled or that ideally should bo fil led

by the di rectors of student teachi ng in Mi c hi g an ' s teacher
training programs, w h e n alpha is considered at the
level of confidence.

For the most part,

.05

the three groups

a cc epted the statements as set out in the questionnaire,
w it h the directors g en e ra l ly accepting and holding as
i mportant somewhat mo re of th em than did the o t h e r two
groups.

102
TABLE 18.--The List of Respondents' Comments on Manage rial
Responsibilities of the D ir e c t o r of Stud ent
Teaching.
Comments
1.

Public relations functions with many school districts.

2.

Establishing a resource center of information that can be
referred to by other units of university.

3.

Developing cooperative working relationships with other
directors of student teaching or other state institutions.

4.

Flexibility.

5.

Develop .specific procedures for gathering and evaluating data
regarding the overall performance of student teaching program
and to provide regular channels for "feed back" of this data
to all concerned.

6.

Evaluation of university supervisors' performance.

7.

More communication or "brain storming" sessions between super­
visors and director himself.

0.

Give specific guidelines that could be adapted to all schools.

9.

Developing and maintaining liaison with other elements in the
University which have an impact on student teaching.

10.

Students need to have hand in decisions which affect them such as
location of their assignment, who their supervisor is, etc.

11.

Counselling of students prior to student teaching to insure
appropriate placement.

12.

Conducting business and professional meetings of college super­
visor and supervising teachers.

13.

Representing the college on inter-institutional meetings for
correlation of work of the college with that of others in
placement, etc.

14.

Assisting placement office.

103
TABLE 19.— The List of Respondents' Co m me n ts on L ea d er s hi p
Responsibility of Director of Student Teaching.
Comments
1.

Consultant role to schools of our cooperating program in student
teaching.

2.

Leadership in student teaching lab— classes or seminar.

3.

Activity in state-national professional organizations
interested in teacher education.

4.

Follow-up studies.

5.

Communal involvement in decisions and planning of any student
teaching affair with college supervisors.

6.

Capacity for change.

7.

Presenting carefully drawn proposal of program changes pilot
programs, etc., to the decision-makers who have the power to
approve them.
(Proposals developed in conjunction with student
teaching staff members.)

8.

Maintaining lines of communication with the academic departments
of the university.

9.

Counseling students and directing them to other appropriate
counselors.

in.

Visiting student teaching centers and counseling university
supervisors.

11.

Having a strong back-up to the decisions.

12.

International education; directed teaching.

13.

Coordinating teacher preparation activities with other
institutions in the state and keep communication lines open
with both the state and national level.

14.

Developing state standards in student teaching.

IS.

Directed teaching is an all-university as well as responsibility
of the professors as a whole.

16.

Reduce emphasis on managerial role can inhibit flexibility of
operations as well as cooperation with other agencies and
institutions.

104
Comparisons w e r e made for all four sets of data to
discover not only a high a cc e pt a nc e and g e neral agreement
in the categories,

b ut to find individual items that evoked

the g r e a t e s t a g re ement or the m o s t divergence in opinion.
The re sponses of the directors co i ncided q ui t e highly with
the recommendations

in items de r iv e d from t h ei r professional

1iterature.
The heads of

teacher tr a ining programs shared most

of the item va luations made by the directors,

as did the

college supervisors.
In the free responses,
recomme ndations w e r e made,
directors,
those

some useful specific

for the attention of the

adding a number of items of r es p onsibility to

listed in the questionnaire.
Finally,

we re male,

it w a s discovered that the r espondents

by a ratio of three to one;

Mich igan are well-experienced,

that d ir e ctors in

averaging w e l l over ten

years of experience in st ud ent-teaching programs;

that

they have doctoral degrees,

and that

in all but two cases;

they typically do n o t have mu c h no n- p ro f es s io n al help.
The student-t eaching
under 100 students,

programs i n clude eight enrolling
two enrolling 100-200,

more than 600 enrolled.

and six with

Three of the programs are in

secondary schools only,

the o t h e r 13 are in both elementary

and secondary schools.

As for staffing,

the several

the pr o grams in

institutions involve a number o f full-time

105
profess ionals ranging from none to 42, and of part-time
pr ofess ionals from 1 to 40.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY,

CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The pu r po s e of the study was to descri be the roles
of the director of student teaching in sele cted Mich igan
programs of tea cher education.

The roles were described

by the directors of student t e a c h i n g , the heads of teacher
training programs,

and the college supervisors.

The roles

were described in terms of actual and ideal ma n ag e r i a l
responsibilities and actual and ideal leadership r es p o n s i ­
bilities of the director of student teaching.

The h y p o t h ­

eses of the st udy were stated as follows:
1.

T h er e is substantial a gr e ement among the
d ir e ct o rs of student teaching, the college
supervisors, and the heads of teacher
trai ning programs as to the ideal role of
the director of student teaching w i t h
r e s p e c t to leadership functions.

2.

T h e r e is substantial ag r ee m en t among the
three groups as to the ideal role of the
d i r e c t o r of student teaching with r es p ec t
to managerial functions.

3.

The three groups perceive q ui t e differe n tl y
the actual role being pl a y e d by the director
of student teaching with respect to l e a d e r ­
ship functions.

4.

The three groups perceive quite differe n tl y
the actual role being p l a y e d by the director
of student teaching with respect to m a n a ­
g e r i a l functions.
106

107
Teacher education pr o fe s si o na l s

seem g e ne r al l y

to agree that student teaching ex pe riences are very
imp ortant in programs of t e acher preparation.
played

by the director of s t udent teaching,

now in

actual practice,

importance,

and those

The roles

both

those

that should be

given

were tested in some detail among the three

groups of people m o s t sp ecifically c o n c e r n e d wi th student
teaching programs in Michigan,
To app roach the pu rpose of the study,

the i n v e s t i ­

gator selected sixteen teacher training institutions,

both

public

and private,

sub­

mitt ed

to the dire ctor of s tu d e n t teaching,

in

Michigan. Q u es t io n na i re s

the teacher training program,
visors,

were

the head of

and three c o llege s u p e r ­

selected by their d ir e ctors of st udent teaching,

in each of the institutions.
The instruments contain 21 statements of m a n a ­
gerial and 15 statements of leade rship r e sp o ns i b i l i t i e s
of the di r ector of student teaching.

All criteria had

been synthesized from the literature of the field.

A

return of more than 85 percent was r ec eived from the 74
people in the three groups in the 16 teacher traini ng
institutions in M ic h i g a n included in the study.
Data we r e analyzed by using the co m puter C.D.C.
to test the hypotheses.

3600

Ot her d escriptive da ta were c o m ­

puted by the investigator on a desk calculator.
hypotheses were tested to de termine if there were

The

108
significant diff erences among the three groups in their
pe rc eptions of the ideal and actual m anagerial and l ea d er ­
ship resp onsibilities of the directors of student teaching
in those selected teacher training institutions.

A one-way

multiva r ia t e analysis was c o mputed that compared the total
scores of the directors of student teaching,
teacher training programs,

the heads of

and the college supervisors on

actual and ideal m a na g er i al and leadership responsibilities.
The data were an alyzed in detail showing the p e r ­
centage number,

rank,

etc.

of each criterion and total

criteria as responded to by the three groups and by in d i­
vidual groups of respondents.

The descriptive analysis

shows differ en c es on details wi t hi n groups and among the
three groups,

although the data were

found g en e ra l ly to

support the results of the multiva r ia t e analysis.
The individual items were studied to discover
relative

frequency and importa nce as signed to them by the

groups separately and in comparison.
Conclusions
The conclusions that seem justified in this study
are set out in three categories:

(1)

the conc lusions that

deal with testing the hypotheses;

(2) the c onclusions that

derive from analysis of the d escriptive data;
conclusions suggested by the respondents'

and

(3) the

comments.

109
Testing Hypotheses
The results of testing hy potheses showed no signif­
icant differences among the three groups.
showed no s i gnificant differences,

at the

The three groups
.05 level,

in

their perceptions of both the ideal and actual managerial
and leadership re s po n sibilities of the director of student
teaching in Michigan colleges and universities.
Descriptive Analysis
The results

from the analysis of data of each set

of criteria of actual and ideal manage ri a l r e s p o n si b il i ­
ties,

and actual and ideal leadership re sponsibilities of

the director of stu dent teaching showed not very much d i f­
ference in opinion be tw een the heads of teacher training
programs and the directors of student teaching

themselves,

w hile most of the college supervisors gave a lower p e r ­
centage on almost all of the criteria than the other two
groups.

The three groups gave a high rating to the cri­

teria on ideal leader ship responsibilities.

It may be

concluded that they agree that their directors of student
teaching should play their roles as set out in the listed
criteria.

They we re agreed that those ideal leadership

respon sibilities we re

important in student teaching

programs.
For only six of the 21 managerial items d er i ve d
from the p r ofessional

literature did all the direct ors

110
state that they cu rrently carry that responsibility.
two,

fewer than one-half so stated.

For

One recomme n de d p r a c ­

tice that is not typically carried out here is the r e s p o n s ­
ib ility for selection of the cl a ss r oo m teacher who is to
sup ervise the student teacher.

It appears that this

selec­

tion is largely made by the school's a dm i nistrators either
w it h or w i t h o u t consul t at i on wi t h the college supervi s or
or director.
A nother group of items that are

frequen tly not the

re s p onsibility of directors in this study are of a business
nature.

Only a small ma j or i ty of the di rectors said that

they had re s ponsibility
pro g r a m budget,

for preparing the student teaching

supervising disbursements,

providing s u p ­

plies or library materials.
In personnel selection,

the record is also d i f ­

ferent from the p rofessional recommendations.

On ly three-

fourths of the directors do the selection of college s up e r­
visors,

and even fewer select their office personnel.
One r es p o ns i bi l it y that seems to be highly important

in the college world today was ch ecked by all the d i r e c ­
tors who responded,
two groups.

but was seen di f f e r e n t l y by the other

It was to apply

"established processes and

standards that will ensure the fairness of decisions
af fecting

the people in the program.

..."

Whe n the q u estion was shifted to what ought to
be the director's re s po nsibility the m a t t e r of selecting

Ill
the supervising teachers ra nked near the bo t to m in all
three groups.
In the budgetary matters,

about the same p r o p o r ­

tions of the three groups thought that the d i re c t o r should
have important r e sp o ns i bi l it y in this area as had checked
that he n ow has it.
In the selection of college supervisors,

all but

one director thought this should be a very impo rtant
re sponsibility and the exception listed it ne xt to the top
in the scale.
All groups,

The other g roups reacted less strongly.

however,

gave a little m o r e importance to the

directo r's re s po nsibility for selecting office personnel.
On one item there w a s a su bs tantial disagre e me n t
b et ween the directors and their supervisors.

The directors

seemed to feel it to be important that they wo rk as p r o ­
fessors in the usual pr o fessorial d u ti e s as a regular part
of their assignment.

On e -f o ur t h of th e ir p ro g ra m heads

rated this for the di r ector as being of

little o r no

importance.
Of the 15 leadership responsibilities listed,

the

directors said that they were performing nearly all of them
now.

One-qu a rt e r a ck n ow l ed g ed that they did not feel

responsible for supporting staff res earch on student t e a c h ­
ing;

and even fewer felt that it should be a very important

responsibility.

112

The g r o u p as a w hole also s a i d that directors n o w
are not h e l p i n g

in the d e v e l op m en t of o b j e c t i v e s for s t u ­

dent tea chers o r of pe r fo r ma n ce s t a n d a r d s

for the v ar i o u s

roles of w o r k e r s in the program.

T h e s e two a re ranked

h i g h e r in i m po r ta n ce as desirable

responsibilities#

by

all three g r o u p s of respondents.
The o t h e r s ta t em e n t s in the
all checked as
mor e

l e a d e r s h i p list w e r e

im p or t an t and d e s i r a b l e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s by

than four out of five respondents.

Respondents 1 Comments
Many r e s p o n d e n t s

took a d v a n t a g e of the in v it a ti o n

and o ffered some good suggestions.

A number of them

s tr e ss e d the n e e d for c oo p er a ti o n w i t h i n the state,
institutions,
c ation

and among

among

the d i r e c t o r s and "keeping c o m m u n i ­

lines open."
O thers

s u g g es t ed greater i n v o l v e m e n t

and improv e d

c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h i n the university o r c o llege as a whole#
b u t p a r t i c u l a r l y with the academic d e p a r t m e n t s .
g e s t i o n was that

One s u g ­

the d i r e c t o r should e s t a b l i s h a r es ource

c enter of i nf o r m a t i o n t h a t could s e r v e

the o t h e r units in

the university.
The l a rg e st n u m b e r of s u g g e s t i o n s d e a l t with
responsibilities
the schools.
performance,

to the

students,

the

G e t t i n g i n formation t o
counse li n g

tionships were

supervisors,

the sch ools, e v a l u a t i n g

students, m a i n t a i n i n g

all reported.

and

closer r e l a ­

113
The high degree of agreement,

and of su pport given

to the statements of respon s ib i li t y in the questionnaire,
leads to the final conclusion that the list may be use ful
in the development of job specif ications

for the d i r e c t o r ­

ship of student teaching.
Recommendations
T hree major sets of r ecommendations are d r a w n
this
(2)

study:

(1) r ecommendations

from

for additional research;

recommendations on ap propriate roles

for the di rector

of student teaching in Michi ga n teacher education;

and

(3)

r ecommendations for c o n s i d er a ti o n by a d ir ector of st ud ent
teaching in Thailand.
R ecommendations for
Additional Research
1.

Studios similar to the p re s en t in vesti gation

should be conducted on a regional or n at ional basis.
similar results are obtained,

If

the findings should be of

gr eat value in defining the desirable role of direct ors of
student teaching and could furnish support for a po sition
statement by the A ss o ci a ti o n
2.
Ta bl es 6, 8,

This study

for Te acher Education.

found some di s ag r ee m en t s

10, and 12).

For example items

(see

3, 16,

and 19

of the actual m anagerial respon si b il i ti e s of the d i r e c t o r
of student teaching w e r e not c om monly a g re e d upon.
responsibilities need further research.

These

114
3.

Because the av erage rating of ideal l e a d e r ­

ship responsibilities of the d ir e c t o r of student teaching
in this study was h ig h er than any other variable,

it is

recom me n de d that furt her study should be done on the at t i­
tudes of college super v is o rs and the heads of teacher e d u ­
cation prog rams on the ideal leadership role of the di rector
of student teaching.
4.

This study

focused on the ideal and actual roles

of m a n a g e me n t and leadership perfor ma n ce of
of student teaching.

the director

A study of ot h er rele vants of student

teaching progra ms w o u l d be desirable.
5.

In a study using the same or similar items,

it w ou l d be desirable to investigate a diffe r en t scaling
of scores

for cu rrent practice.

R ecommendations on A p pr o pr i at e
Holes for the Director of S t u ­
dent Teaching in M i c h i g a n
T e acher Education
Of all the items in the literature,
and in the suggestions,
in vestigator to have

in this study,

the following list seems to the

the most support and to be wo r th y of

special recomme ndation:
1.

He should work in dividually wi th appropriate
public school administrators,
visors,

college s u p e r ­

supervising teachers in h e lp i ng them

to u n d e r s t a n d their roles and carry on their
responsibilities.

He should have duties in common with all p r o ­
fessors in the Co llege of E d u c a t i o n — e.g.,
supe rvising graduate theses,

serving on colleg

and u niversity faculty committees,

etc.

He should organize and operate the program of
student teaching off-campus.
He should give orientation to new college
supe rvisors and supervising

teachers.

He should develop handbooks

and other forms to

be used in the student teaching program.
He should develop and distribute student teach
ing app lication blan ks to all students seeking
to enroll

in student teaching.

Ho should be able to change assignment of or
remove student teachers,

under established

process.
lie should assign student teachers to teach
in cooperating schools.
He should be a leader in p l anning for i mp r o v e ­
m en t s in the stud ent teaching program.
He should create a climate conducive to good
hu man relations among student teaching p e r ­
sonnel .
He should involve staff me m be r s in decisions
that affect them.

116
12.

He should develop processes and standards

for

personnel problems involved in the stud ent
teaching program.
13.

He

should provide over-all e du c at i on a l l e a d e r ­

ship in the program of student teaching.
14.

He

should design an organi z at i on and m a i n t a i n

an attitude that encourages and values the
contribution of individual staff m e mbers to the
identification and solution of problems in the
student teaching program.
15.

He

should encourage new ideas and the trying of

new ways by student teaching staff members.
16.

He

should make sure that his role in the

o rg a ni z at i on is unders t oo d by all m e mbers in
student teaching program.
17.

He

should design an organi za t io n that gives

coordination to the wo rk of individual staff
members.
18.

He

should reconcile and adapt the varying

expe ctations and pe rformance st rengths of

role
indi­

vid uals in the student teaching program.
19.

He

should k e e p his o r g a n iz a ti o n and his energies

focused on the central purpose of the student
teaching experience,

whi ch is to help the s t u ­

dent teacher acquire competence in the art and
science of teaching.

117
Recommendations for C o n s i d e r ­
ation and Po s si b le A p p l i c a -~~
tion by a D ir ector of
St udent Teaching in
T ha iland
From the lists of responsibilities

in the study,

the investigator recommends these eight as bei ng essential
roles of a d ir e c t o r of student teaching

in a teacher e d u ­

cation program in Thailand.
1.

Selection of the college s upervisors of s t u ­
dent teaching.

2.

Orienta t io n of the new college supervisors and
supe rvising teachers.

3.

Prepara t io n of the financial budg et of the
student teaching program,

4.

Su pervision of disbur se m en t s w it h in the budget
for the student teaching program.

5.

D uties in common with all p r of e ss o rs in the
Col l eg e of E d u c a t i o n — e .g . supervising gr aduate
theses,

serving on college and uni versity

faculty committee,
6.

etc.

W o rking indi vidually with appropriate public
school administrators,
supervising

college supervisors,

and

teachers in helping them to u n d e r ­

stand their roles and carry on the ir r e s p o n s i ­
b il ities .
7.

Providing over-all educa tional

leadership in

the program of student teaching.

118
8.

Supporting staff research,
group,

individual and

on all as pects of the st udent teaching

program.
9.

Keeping the pr o g r a m focused on the central
purpose of student teaching, which is to h e l p
the student acquire competence in the art and
science of teaching.

Beyond the responsibilities that were
this study,

the reading,

research,

stated in

and di scussions that

were incident to the study lead to a set of recommendations
to the author himself

for e x p l o r a t i o n

in his duties in

di recting student teaching in his own country.
Findings of this study,

prev ious dissertations,

and the literature were all agreed that a strong p r ogram
of student teaching is an essential element in producing
good teachers.

The chart on page 119 shows the place of

student teaching
system.

functions in the Thai teacher education

Each of the institutions is dir ectly under the

control of the Te a ch e r Training Department of the M i n i s t r y
of Education.

The

line of o r g a n i z a t i o n shows that the

student teaching section in Th a i l a n d in institutions does
not have

full d ir e ct authority in the control of student

teaching.

Since it is a part of and under the control of

the educational division,

the student teaching section

does not have the power to o perate its program in d e­
pendently .

jMinistry of Education

Teacher Training Dept.

Other TTI's

Other Divisions

i

Etc.

TURTEP*
{Elem. Sch.
only)

Educational Division

General Ed. Sec

Two-year Preparation
Program

Other TTI

Teacher Training Institution

Student Teaching Sec

Four-year Preparation
Program

j Urban Practice
I
Teaching
j {Elem.Sch.only)

Urban Practice
Teaching
(Grade 5-10)

Other Divisions

Psy. Sec.!

; Etc

Ba ch el or 's
Program

Secondary School
Practice Teaching
(Grade 8-12)

Chart I.— Student Teaching Organization in Thailand.

*Thailand-Unesco Rural Teacher Education Project.

120
The r ec o mmendations drawn from this study suggest
that the st udent teaching section should be c ha n ge d to
make it a d iv i s i o n among the other divisions in the i n s t i ­
tution;

the student teaching p ro g ra m should be central in

the teacher p re p ar a ti o n programs of the individual i n s t i ­
tution;

the M i n i s t r y of Education and its T e a c h e r Training

Department s hould e s ta b li s h policies and p r oc e du r es

to

coordinate teacher ed u cation programs over all the country,
including programs in institutions
versities)

{colleges and u n i ­

not under their co ntrol that now i nd e pe n de n tl y

establish their own p ol i cy and standards for the p r e p a r a ­
tion of teachers.

Two models of teacher pr e pa r at i on p r o ­

grams are drawn in the
tion:

following charts

Chart 2, the o r g a n iz a ti on

prog rams in Thailand;

for c o n s i d e r a ­

for teacher p re p ar a ti o n

and Chart 3, the place of the s t u ­

dent teaching program in the institution.
In the study of actual and ideal ma n a g e r i a l
r esponsibilities of the director of student teachi ng p r o ­
grams in Michigan, mo re than four-fifths of the r e s p o n d ­
ents agreed that orientation of the new supervising
teachers and selection of the cooperating schools are
important parts of the d i rector of student teachi ng
responsibilities;

and about two-thirds of the respondents

a greed that the director of student teaching had a role to
pl ay in supervision of d i s b u rs e me n ts wi t hi n the budget
for student teaching programs.

These should be given

Association of Teacher Preparation
of Thailand
(ATPT)

The Representative
Person From the
OPM

The Representative
Person From the
MOE

1
1

The Representative
Person From the
MO I

Teachers Colleges
Universities

Educational Dept
Coll. of Educ.

Committee of Teacher
Preparation

Chart II.— The Organization for Teacher Preparation Programs
in Thailand.

Academic
Departments

Student Teaching
Centers

Province or Changwad
Educational Program

Student Teaching
Program_____
International
Student Teaching

Cooperating Schools

Communities

Chart III.— The Place of the Student Teaching Program in the
Institution.

123
serious conside r at i on

in Thailand because the directors

do not have enough o p p o r t u n i t y to work cl o se l y with s u p e r ­
visi ng teachers.

The q uality of the su pe rvising te acher

is unsatisfactory.

M os t of the supervising teachers do

not have a b a c h e lo r 's degree.
of them are untrained.

In the rural

schools, m a n y

The tasks of the d i re c to r s of

student teaching in Thailand should be to understand
above problems.

This study has fundamental

imp roving the supe rvising teachers*

the

suggestions

for

status and increasing

their qualifications.

It is str ongly r e co m me n de d that

every teacher training

institution in T ha i la n d should give

orient a ti o n to the supervising

teachers e very year.

The

director of s tudent teaching should have full a u th ority in
selection of the c ooperating schools and disbur si n g the
financial aids in student teaching programs.
Finally,

ex p er i en c e in the s upervision of stud ent

teaching is a serious pr oblem in Thailand.

M o s t of the

college supervisors are new teachers who do n o t have enough
experience in teaching

in the colleges or o t he r schools.

Experienced teachers do not want to bo co l l e g e super­
visors,

because supervisors of student teaching programs

must travel long dist ances in rural areas in addition to
supervising

in an urban program.

Therefore,

of student teaching pro grams suffers.

the quality

If t ea c he r training

institutions can select e x p e r i e n c e d teachers to supervise
s tu dent teachers and make the job attractive to them then

124
Thai teacher e d uc a ti o n programs will be strengthened.

It

is recommended that the heads of teacher training programs
and the directors of student teaching should establish as
a crit erion of selection five years of teaching experience
for a college supervisor of st udent teaching.
These recom mendations are not easy to get accepted
or implemented.

They call for the agreement and approval

of m a n y concerned officials.

Ye t they are m a d e here

because they arise clearly from this study.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

125

B IBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Abbott,

Max G.
"Intervening Va r ia b le s in Organ iz a ti o na l
B e h a v i o r ."
Selected Readings on General S uper­
vision . E d i t e d by Heald, Romano, and Georgiady.
New York:
The M ac m il l an Company, 19 70.

Am erican Associ a ti o n of School Administrators.
Profiles of
the A d m i ni s tr a ti o n T e a m . Washington, D.C.:
American A s s o c i a t i o n of School Administrators, 1971
Associ ation for Student Teaching.
A Guide to Professional
Excellence in Clinical E x pe r ie n ce in T e a c h e r E d u ­
cation"
W a s h i n g t o n , D .C .:
The Association for
Student Teaching, 1970.
_________ . Qn Professional Education of T e a c h e r s .
W a s h i n g t o n , D . C .: The A ss o ci a ti o n for Student
Teaching, 1968.
_________ . The C ol l eg e Supervisor, Conflict and C h a l l e n g e .
W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . : A ssociation for s tudent T e a c h i n g ,
1964.
_________ . The D ir e ct o r of Student Teaching:
Characteris­
tics and Re sponsibilitiein
Research Bulle t in No. 7.
W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . : The A s s o c i a t i o n for Student
Teaching, 1968.
Black, Max, ed.
The Social Theories of Ta lc ott P a r s o n s .
Eng lewood Cliffs, N . J . :P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I n c . ,
1964 .
Bosley,

Howard E.
T ea c h e r Education in Transition:
An
Experim ent in c h a n g e . Volume 17
Baltimore:
M ulti-S t at e T e a c h e r Education Project, 1969.

_________ . Teacher Ed u cation in Transition:
Emerging Roles
and Responsibilities^
V o lu m e II.
Baltimore:
M ulti-State T e ac h er Ed ucation Project, 1969.
Campbell, Ronald F . , and Gregg, Russell T., e d s . A d m i n i s ­
trative B eh a vi o r in E d u c a t i o n . New York:
Harper
& Brothers, P u b l i s h e r s , 19577

126

127

Campbell, Ronald F.; Corbally, John E., Jr.; and Ramseyer,
John A.
Introduction of Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,
boston:
Allyn and Bacon, I n c . , 1966.
Crow,

Lester, and Crow, Alice.
The Student Te acher in the
S ec o ndary S c h o o l . N e w Y o r k : The David McKay
Company, Inc., 1964.

Davies,

Devor,
Ebel,

Don.
Changes in Teac her Education:
An A p p r a i s a l .
R eport ol! the NCTE PS Columbus C o n f e r e n c e , 19 63.
Columbus, Ohio:
The National Education Associa t io n
of the United States, 1964,
John W.
The Experience of Student T e a c h i n g .
Y o r k : The Ma c mi l la n Company, 1964.

New

Robert L . , ed.
Encyclo p ed i a of Educat i on a l R e s e a r c h .
4th e d . New York : Tne M ac m il l an Company, 196 0.

Elliott, G ri f f i t h Jame.
"A Role Perception:
The Co ll ege
Coor dinator."
Teacher Education in the Public
S c h o o l s . Ce dar Falls, I o w a : Forti et h Yearbook
of the Assoc iation for Student Teaching, 1961.
Fielder,

Fred E.
A Th eo ry of Le adership E f f e c t i v e n e s s .
N ew Y o r k : McGraw-Hill, 1967.

F a y o l , Henri.
"Administration Industriellc et Generalc."
G en e ra l and Industrial M a n a g e m e n t . London:
Sir
Issac Pitman Z S o n s , L t d . , 194 9.
French, Wendell.
The Personal Management P r o c e s s .
H o u g h t o n - H i l l , 1 9 6 "4 .

Boston:

Getzels,

J. W . , and Guba, E. G.
"Social Behavior and the
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Process."
Sel ected Readings on
Ge ne ral S u p e r v i s i o n . Edited by Heald, R o m a n o ,
and Georgiady.
New York:
The M ac m i l l a n Company,
1970.

Getzels,

J. W . ; Lipham, James M.; and Campbell, Ronald F.
E ducational A d m i n i s tr a ti o n as a Social P r o c e s s .
New York:
Harper & Row, P u b l i s h e r s , 1968.

Gouldner, Alvin W.
Studies in L e a d e r s h i p . New York:
Harp er & B r o t h e r s , P u b l i s h e r s , 19 50.
Griffiths, Da ni el E.
"Administrative T h eo r y and Change in
Organiz a ti o ns . "
O rg anizations and Human B e h a v i o r :
Focus on S c h o o l s . Edited by Fred D. Carver and
Thomas J . S e r g i o v a n n i . New York:
McGr aw-Hill
Book Company, 196 9.

128
Gross,

Neal; Mason, Ward S.; and McEachern, Al e xa n d e r W.
E xplorations in Role Analysis:
Studies of the
School Su p er i nt e nd e nt R o l e , New Y o r k : Jo h n
Wi ley & Sons, I n c . , 1958.

Hemphill, John K.
"Ad ministration as Problem Solving."
A dm i n i s t r a t i o n T h e o r y in E d u c a t i o n . Chicago:
Midwest A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Center, 19 58.
Handy,

H. W . , and Hussain, K. W.
Network An alysis for
Edu c at i on a l M a n a g e m e n t . En g lewood Cliffs, N . J . :
P r c n t i c e - H a l l , I n c ., T969.

Hetenyi,

Laszio.
"The Political of School-College C o o p e r ­
ation in Student T e a c h i n g ."
Partner s hi p in Teacher
E d u c a t i o n . Washington, D.C.:
Am e rican A ss o ci a ti o n
for Colleges of Te a ch e r Education, 1968.

Houston,

Robert W . ; Blackington, Frank H . ; and Southworth,
Horto n C.
Pr ofessional Growth Through Student
T e a c h i n g . C o l u m b u s , O h i o : Charles E. Merrill
B o o k s , Inc., 1965.

Johnson,

Jim,
ing .

Katz,

and Perry, Floyd.
Readings in Student T e a c h ­
Iowa:
Kendal Hunt Publishing Company, 1569.

Daniel, and Kahn, Robert L.
The Social Psychol o gy of
O r g a n i z a t i o n . New York:
John Wi l ey & S o n s , Inc. ,
1966 .

Knezevich, Stephen J.
A d mi n i s t r a t i o n of Public E d u c a t i o n .
New Y o r k : Harper & Row, P u b l i s h e r s , 1969.
Hast,

F. E., and Rosenzweig, J. E.
Or ga nization and
Management:
A System Approach!
New Y o r k : McGrawHill Book Company, 1970,

Lane, Willard R . ; Corwin, Ronald G . ; and Monahan, W i ll i am G.
F oundat i on of Educational Administration:
A
B eh avior Ana
i s . New York:
The Ma c millan
C o m p a n y , 196 7.
Lipham,

James M.
"Leadership and Administration."
Sixtythird Yearbook of the National Society for the
Study of Education.
Chicago:
Univer s it y of
C hicago Press, 1964.

Likert,

Kensis.
patterns or
Manage
Rensis.
New Patterns
of Man
agement.
M cG r a w - H i l l Book Company, 1961.

New York:

129
Massie,

Myers,

J os e ph L.
"Management Theory."
Ha ndbook of O r g a n ization.
Edited by James G. MarcFH
Chicaqo:
Rand McNally, 1965.
George R . , and Walsh, William J.
Student Teaching
and Internship in Toda y's Se condary S c h o o l s .
C o l u m b u s ", O h i o : Charles E. M e r r i l l Books, Inc. ,
1964.

Pfeiffer, Robert T., ed.
The College Supervisor:
Con flict
and C h a l l e n g e . Forty- t hi r d Y e a r b o o k , W a s h i n g t o n ,
D .C .:
The Associa t io n for St udent Teaching, 1964.
Perrodin, Alex F . , ed.
The Student Teache r 's R e a d e r .
Chicago:
Rand Mc Nally & C o m p a n y , 1966 .
S c h m u c k , Richard, and Miles, Matt hew B . , e d s . Or g anization
D ev e lo p me n t in Schools. Na t ional Press B o o k ,
1971.
Stogdill, Ralph M . ; Wherry, Robert; and Jaynes, William.
Patterns of A d mi n istrative P e r f o r m a n c e . C o l u m b u s ,
Ohio":
Bureau of Business Research, M o no g ra p h No.
81, 1956.
Stratemeyer, Florence B., and Lindsey, Margaret.
W orking
w i t h Student T e a c h e r s . New Y o r k : Teachers
College , Co l umbia , 19^69 .
Taylor,

Fr ederick W.
The Principles of Scientific M a n a g e ment.
New YorJT:
Harper & Brothers Publishers,
T3T7.

Wilier,

David.
S ci e nt i fi c Sociology T he o ry and M e t h o d .
Eng l ew o od Cliffs, N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1967.

Wilson,

Robe rt E.
Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Columbus,
Ohio:
Charles E. Merrill Books, Inci, 1966.
U np u b l i s h e d References

Deans and Directors of Mi c higan Teacher E d uc ation I n s t i ­
tutions.
Position Paper on Student Teaching
P r o g r a m . U n p u b l i s h e d , 1972 .
Guiton,

Jean; Gordon, Shirley; and Tantawi, Ahmed.
Report
of the UNESCO Mi s si o n on Teacher Education in
T h a i l a n d . B a n g k o k : 1970.

130
Hoexter,

Robert H.
"A Definition and Examination of the
Role of School Principals in Certain Aspects of
Student Teaching."
Unpubli s he d Ph.D. dissertation,
M ic higan State University, 1970.

M a d o r e , N ormand William.
"Status of the D i rector of S t u ­
dent Tea ching in Member Institutions of the American
Associa t io n of Colleges for Te acher Education."
U np u bl i sh e d Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State U n i ­
versity, 1962.
Motley,

F. W.
"The College Director of Student Teaching
Program."
U n p u bl i sh e d Ph.D. dissertation, U n i ­
versity of North Carolina, 1968.

State of M i c h i g a n , Department of Education.
A Report on
Teacher C e rt ification and Profess i on a l D e v e l o p m e n t .
Lansing:
Depart me n t of Education, 1970.
Youstra,

George D.
"A Study of C ri teria for Selection of
College Su pervisors of St u de n t Teaching as P e r ­
ceived by Stud ent Te a ching A dm i n i s t r a t o r s of
S elected Institutions of the Southern Regional
A ssociation for Student Tea ching."
Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, M i chigan State University,
1970.
Periodicals

B u r k e , Warner W.
"Leadership B e havior as a Funct io n of
the Leader, the Follower, and the Situation."
The Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y , XXXIII (1965).
Conroy,

W i l l i a m B.
"The Vari able Role of the College
Supervisor."
Supervisors Quarterly, IV (Winter,
1969) .

Editor.

The Journal of Educational Administration,
III, No. 2 (October, 1965).

Fieldler, Fred E.
"A Note on Le a de r s h i p Theory:
The
Effect of Social Barriers Be tween Leaders and
Followers."
The Journal of Sociometry, XX
(1957) .
Gayless,

Anne R.
"The D ir ector of St ud ent Teaching."
Improving College and University, LII (February,
1968).

131
Gibb,

Cecil A.
"The Research Background of an Interaction
Theory of Leadership."
Australian Jour nal of
P s y c h o l o g y , II, No. 1 (19 50).

Gregory,

Robert J.
"Management Games for E n l i g h t m e n t ."
Educational Leadership, XXVIII, No. 7 (April,

Tmy.

--------------

Monson, Jay A., and Bebb, A ldon M.
"New Roles of the
Supervisor of Student Teaching."
Educational
L e a d e r s h i p , XXVIII, No. 1 (October,' 1970) .
Sands,

John E.
"Qualifications and Respon s ib i li t ie s of
Director of Student Teaching and Supervising
Teachers."
School R e v i e w , LXI (January, 1953).

A PPENDI C ES

132

APPENDIX A
LETTER T O DIRECTOR OF STUDENT TEACHING
IN SELECTED

INSTITUTIONS

133

135 South Clemens
Lansing, Mich.
48912
S eptember 18,

1972

Dear Dir ector of Student Teaching:
The Director of S tudent Teaching is a key person in the
teacher education program.
In the literature he is d e s ­
cribed as ha vi ng strong leadership and m a n a g e m e n t responss ibili ty for the p rogram and those in it.
We are seeking
your help in collec ting the r esponsibilities that are
ex pressed in terms of activities he performs or delegates.
The purpose of this study is to find out how Michigan
directors of student teaching, their deans and their
college supervisors of student teaching perceive the
director's role as it is in their individual institutions
and as it ought to be.
The study is part of my doctora l
dissertation and I hope to find it useful to me as I
retur n to di r ec t student teaching in Thailand.
Five copies of instruments to be used are enclosed.
We
hope to have one completed by you, as director, one passed
on to your dean, and the remainder to your colleagues who
a ctually supervise the student teachers in yo u r i ns t i t u ­
tion.
Please collect them and mail them to me as soon as
possible.
A stamped, addressed enve lope is e nc l o s e d for
your convenience.
Your comments will be welcome, and your
complete and timely return will be deeply appreciated.
Ve ry sincerely yours,
C. Suvanachot
D ir ector of Student Teaching
A yu t th a ya Teachers' College
Ayutthaya, Thailand.
I have reviewed Mr. Suvanachot's proposal and be lieve the
study would be helpful to him and to u s . I would a p p r e ­
ciate your active participation.
Sincer ely yours,
W. H en r y Ke nnedy
D irector of S tudent Teaching
M ic h i g a n State University
134

APPENDIX B
FOLLOW-UP L ETTER

135

135 S. Clemens
Lansing, Mi. 48912

O ct o be r

8

, 1972

Dire ctor of Student Teaching

Dear Director of Student Teaching,
On Se ptember 18, 1972 a q u es t i o n n a i r e was ma i l e d
to you concerning the role of the d ir ector of student
teaching in M i ch i ga n colleg es and universities.
I realize
that this is y ou r busy time but I still ho pe that y o u will
have time to complete and return the quest io n na i re wi t hi n
a short time.
I shall d ee p ly appreciate it if you can check
with the other people w h o have r e ceived this instrument.
My time in this country is limited, and the early
collect ion of these data is very important to the success
of my stay here:
Your h el p is very much appreciated.
Sincer ely yours,

C. Suvanachot

P.S.

If you ne e d more
th em promp t l y .

forms I will be h ap p y to send
C. S.

136

APPENDIX C
THE QUESTI O NN A IR E S U BM I TT E D
TO ALL RESPONDENTS

137

QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE ROLE OF
THE DIRECTORS OF STUDENT
T E ACHING IN MI C HIGAN
INFORMATION:
Name of T ea c he r Training In st itution __________________
1.

2.

Your present position
1.1

The Head of Te a c h e r Training

Program

1.2

The Director of Student Teaching

1.3

The College Supervisor

Your sex
2.1

Male

2 .2

Female

To be answered by the Director of Student Teaching
3.

Type of student teaching prog ram carried
3.1
3.2
3 .3

4.

Elementary
Secondary
Both

Average number of students enro lling
teaching per term (or semester)

for student

4.1
Less than 100
4.2
101 - 200
4.3
201 - 400
4.4 ___ 401 - 600
4.5
601 and over
5.

Number of years y o u have been involved in st u de n t
teaching programs
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5

1 6 11 16 O ve r

5
10
15
20
20
138

139
6

.

The degree held by the d ir ector of st udent teaching
in your institution.
.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6 .5
6

7.

Bache l or 's
Master's
Educational Specialist Degree
Doctor's
Other

Please indicate the number of the p r o f e ss i on a l staff
in the p r ogram of student teaching and the average
number of their work ing hours per week
no.

average no. of work ing hrs

Full time staff m ember
Part-time
Graduate A ss i stant
8

.

Please indicate the number of n o n - p r o fe s si o na l staff in
the student teaching pro gram and the average number of
their w orking hours per week.
no.
Full time staff member
Part-time
Student help

average no, of wo rking hrs

140
DIRECTIONS:

Please p u t checks in the appropriate columns
for each question; on the left to tell whether
the item falls w i t h i n the r e sp o ns i bi l it y of
the direc to r of student teachi ng in your i n s t i ­
tution; on the right to give your o p in i on of
the degree of importance, if any, that the item
should ha v e in the director's role.
Check ( k/ ) one of the three left columns, one
of the fo u r~ rTght columns for each item.
PART I - M AN A GE R I A L RESPONSIBILITIES

DIRECTOR N O W
HAS R E S P O N S I ­
BILITY

M AN A GE R I A L
RESPONSIBILITIES

DON 'T
YES NO KNOW

SHOULD HAVE R ES P ON ­
SIBILITY; HOW
IMPORTANT?
VERY SOME LITTLE NO

1. Sele ction of the col­
lege supervisors of
student teaching
2. Selection of the co op­
erating schools
3. Selection of the s up er ­
vising teachers within
the schools
4. Development a nd d is ­
tribution of student
teaching application
blan ks to all students
seeking to e nr o ll in
student teaching
5. Determ i na t io n of e li ­
g ib i l i t y of students
who apply for student
teaching
6 . Assign m en t of student
teachers to teach in
cooperating schools
7. O r ie n ta t io n program
for the new student
teachers
8 . Orientation of the new
college supervisors
and supervising
teachers

141

D IR ECTOR NOV*/
HAS R ES P O N S I ­
B ILITY

MA N AG E R I A L
RESP ONSIBILITIES

DON 'T
YES N O KNOW

S H O U L D HAVE RE S P O N ­
SIBILITY? HOW
IMPORTANT
V E R Y SOME LITT LE NO

9. Change of assignment
or removal of student
teachers# under e s t a b ­
lished process
10. Organization and o p e r ­
ation of student
teaching# off-campus
11. Development of h a n d ­
books and other forms
used in the student
teaching program
12. Preparation of the
financial b udget of
the s t udent teaching
program
13. Super vision of d i s ­
bursements w it h in the
budget for the student
teaching program
14. Maintenance of p e r ­
manent records of s tu ­
dent teaching personnel
15. A pplication of e s t a b ­
lished processes and
standards that will
ensure the fairness of
decisions affecting
the people in the
pro g r a m — s t u d e n t s #
college supervisors#
and to the extent
appropriate, the
supervising teachers
16. Recr uitment and su p er ­
vision of office p e r ­
sonnel for the program
17. Attesting to the state
certification agency
the eligibi l it y of
student teachers for
certificates

142

DIR ECTOR NOW
HAS RE S PO N SI ­
BILITY

M AN A GE R IA L
RESP ONSIBILITIES

DON'T
YES NO KNOW

SH O UL D HAVE R E S P O N ­
SIBILITY; H OW
IMPORTANT
V E R Y SOME LI T TL E NO

18. Provision of needed
instructional supplies
to the elemen ts in the
program
19. Provision of p r o f e s ­
sional library materials
in student teaching
office and centers
20. Duties in common w i t h
all professors in the
College of Education:
e.g. supervising g r a d ­
uate t h e s e s , serving on
college and univer s it y
faculty committees, etc.
21. Working individually
with appropriate p ublic
school administrators,
college supervisors,
supervising teachers in
helping them to u n d e r ­
stand their roles and
carry on their r e s p o n ­
sibilities
PART II - LEADER SHIP RE S PO N SIBILITIES
DIR E CT O R NO W
HAS RESPONSIBILITY

LEADER SH IP
RESPONSIBILITIES

DON 'T
YES N O KNOW

SHOULD HAVE RE SPONSIBILITY; HOW
IMPORTANT
VERY SOME LITTLE NO

1. Providing over-all e d u ­
cational l eadership in
the p r og r am of student
teaching
2. Creating a climate c o n ­
ducive to good human
relations among student
teaching personnel

143

D IR E C TO R NOW
HAS R E SP O N S I ­
BILITY

LEADERSHIP
R ESPONSIBILITIES

DON'T
YES NO KNOW

S HO U LD HAVE R E S P O N ­
SIBILITY; HOW
IMPORTANT
V E R Y SOME LITTLE NO

3. Developing processes
and standards for p e r ­
sonnel problems
involved in the s t u ­
dent teaching pr og ram
4. Holding, and making
clear to his a s s o c i ­
ates, soundly based
principles related to
student teaching
5. Enco uraging new ideas
and the trying of new
ways by student t e a c h ­
ing staff members
6 . Making sure that his
role in the o r g a n i z a ­
tion is unders to o d by
all me mbers in the stu ­
dent teaching program
7. Le adership in planning
for improvements in the
student teaching
program
8 . Identifying and e l i m i ­
nating or reducing
obstacles to fullest
use of their c a p a b i l ­
ities by individual
staff m em b er s
9. Designing o rg anization
that gives coordination
to the wo r k of i nd i ­
vidual staff me m be r s
10. Designing an o r g a n i z a ­
tion and ma i nt a in i ng an
attitude that e n c o u r ­
ages and values the
c on tribution of i n d i ­
vidual staff mem bers to
the identification and
solution of pr oblems in
the student teaching
program

144

D IR ECTOR N O W
HAS RESPONSIBILI TY

T FADFR^HTP

TmTPc
RESPONSIB ILITIES

D O N ’T
YES NO KNOW

SHOULD HAVE RESPONSIBILITY j HOW
IMPORTANT

V E R Y SOME LITTLE NO
11.
12.

13.

14.

15.

Involving staff members
in decisions that
aff ect them
Development of p e r f o r m ­
ance standards for the
various roles in the
student teaching p r o ­
gram
Reconciling and a d ap t ­
ing the varying role
e xp ectations and p e r ­
formance strengths of
individuals in the stu­
dent teaching p r ogram
Helping in the d e v e l o p ­
me nt of specific sets
of objectives by which
student teachers ma y
m ea s ur e their growth
in performance
Supporting staff
r es e arch--individual
and g r o u p — on all
aspects of the student
teaching pr ogram

Other r esponsibilities you fell are important:
A. Managerial:

B. Leadership:

APPENDIX D
THE P A R T I C IP AT I NG INSTITUTIONS

145

DIST RIBUTION OF P A R T I C I P A T I N G

INSTITUTIONS

BY TYPE OF SC HO O L A ND LO CATION

No.

Name of Institution

Lo cation

Public Schools
1

.

Central Michigan U n iv er s it y

Mt.

2

.

Eastern Mi c higan U ni ve r si t y

Ypsilanti,

3.

Ferris St ate College

B ig Rapids, M ic h ig a n

4.

Grand V a l l e y State College

Allendale,

5.

Mich igan State U ni v er s it y

E a s t Lansing, Michigan

.

U ni v er s it y of M i c h i g a n

A n n Arbor,

7.

Wayne State Univer s it y

Detroit, Mi c hi g an

We stern Mich igan U n i v e rs i ty

Kalamazoo,

6

8

.

Pleasant,

Mic higan

Michigan

Mic higan

Michigan

Mic higan

Private Schools

1

.

Adri an Co llege

Adrian, M i ch i g a n

2

.

Alb ion C o llege

Albion, M i ch i g a n

3.

A cq uinas College

G r a n d R a p i d s , M ic h ig a n

4.

Calvin C o llege

G r a n d Rapids,

5.

Hope Co llege

Holland, M i ch i ga n

Marygrove College

Detroit, M i c h i g a n

N azareth College

Kalamazoo,

University of Detroit

Detroit, Mi c hi g an

6

.

7.
8

.

146

Mi c hi g an

Michigan

APPE NDIX E
LOCATION IN MICH IGAN OF
THE PARTICIPATING
INSTITUTIONS

147

148

O

Public School

□

Private School

APPENDIX F
P RO POSED LIST OF DESIRABLE ROLES
FOR THE DI R E C T O R OF
S TU DENT T EA C HI N G

149

R e sponsibilities Propos ed as Basic
and N ec e ss a ry for the Director
of student Teachimj
He

should select the college supervisors of student teaching.

He

should select the cooperating schools.

He

should select the supervising teachers wi t h i n the
schools.

He should develop and distribute student teaching a pp l i c a ­
tion blacks to all students seeking to enroll in
student teaching.
He should determine the eligibility of students wh o apply
for st udent teaching.
He should assign stud ent teachers to teach in cooperating
schools.
He should co nduct o r ie n ta t io n progr a ms
teachers.

for ne w stud ent

He should cond uct or i en t at i on programs for new college
supervisors and supervising teachers.
He should change the a ss i gn m en t or remove student teachers,
under estab lished process.
He should organize and operate the w h o l e program of student
teaching, o f f - c a m p u s .
He should de v elop handbooks and other forms used in the
student teaching program.
He should prep are the financial bu dg e t of the st udent
teaching program.
He should supervise disbur se me n ts w i t h i n the budget for
the student teaching program.
He should maint a in p e rm a ne n t records of student teaching
personnel.

150

151
He should apply establ i sh e d processes and standards that
will ensure the fairness of decisions affecting the
people in the p r o g r a m — s t u d e n t s , college supervisors,
and to the extent appropriate, the supervising
teachers.
He should recruit and supervise office person n el for the
program.
He should attest to the eligib i li t y of s tu d en t teachers
for certificates.
He should provide needed instructional supplies to the
elements in the program.
lie should provide pro fessional library m a te r i a l s in student
teaching office and centers.
He should have duties in common with all professors in the
College of E d u c a t i o n — e.g. supervising graduate theses,
serving on college and university fa culty committees,
etc.
He should work ind ividually with appropriate public school
administrators, college supervisors, and supervising
teachers in helping them to understand their roles and
carry on their responsibilities.
He should provide over-all educational leadership in the
pr ogram of student teaching.
He should create a climate conducive to g o o d hu man r e l a ­
tions among student teaching personnel.
He should develop processes and standards for personnel
problems involved in the student teac hing program.
He should hold, and make clear to his associates,
ba sed principles related to student teaching.

soundly

He should encourage new ideas and the trying of new ways
by student teaching staff members.
He should make sure that his role in the o r g a n i za t io n is
u nderstood by all m e m b e r s in the student teaching program.
He should be a leader in planning for improvements in the
student teaching program.

152
He s h o u l d i d e n t i f y and e l im i n a t e o r reduce o b s t a c l e s to
fullest use of their c a p a b i l i t i e s by i n d i v i d u a l staff
members.
He should d e s i g n an o r g a n i z a t i o n that gives c o o r d i n a t i o n
to the w o r k of i n d i v i d u a l staff members.
He sh o ul d d e s i g n an o r g a n i z a t i o n and m a i n t a i n an attitude
t ha t e n c o u r a g e s and v al u es the c o n t r i b u t i o n of i n d i ­
v idual s ta f f m e m b e r s to the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a nd s o l u t i o n
of p r o b l e m s in the s t u d e n t t e ac h in g program .
He s hould i nvolve staff m e m b e r s in d e c i si o ns th at affect
them.
He should d e v e l o p p e r f o r m a n c e s t a n d a r d s for the v ar i ou s
roles in the stud ent teaching program.
He should h e lp in the d e v e l o p m e n t of s p ec i fi c sets of
o b j e c t i v e s by wh i c h s t ud e nt t e achers ma y m e a s u r e their
g r o w t h in per formance.
He s h o u l d s u p p o r t staff research, i n di v i d u a l and group,
all a s pects of the s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g program.

on