INFORMATION 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 Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image 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: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zm b Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 75-14,697 BELL, Sally Jane, 1936THE TERRITORIALITY OF THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1974 Education, administration Xerox University Microfilms , @ Ann Arbsr. Michigan 48106 1974 SALLY JANE BELL ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THE TERRITORIALITY OF THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT By Sally Jane Bell A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 1974 ABSTRACT THE TERRITORIALITY OP THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT By Sally Jane Bell This study was planned to investigate the ‘ applicability of territoriality as a behavioral manifes­ tation in the role of the public school superintendent. It was also designed to partially replicate Keller's study of the elementary school principal. It is based as was Keller's study, on the idea that territoriality, the innate need to possess and defend a territory, physical or psychological, for which boundaries are learned and methods of defense are also learned, is an inherent aspect of the behavioral system of human and non-human animals. An integral part of the human behavioral system is the identification of one's territory, which is defined by defense. Therefore, a public school superintendent's territory would be determined by a discovery of what he would defend. Four potential threat agencies were selected to threaten each of nine selected functions of the public school superintendent. Thirty-six situations were Sally Jane Bell simulated, in which each threat agency threatened the superintendent's continuation of his decision-making role in the performance of his functions. Findings Response from 109 of 200 randomly selected public school superintendents indicated a range of defense for the nine functions tested from a low of 3.6 35 to a high of 4.4 77 on a scale of 0-5. Zero 5 indicates a vigorous defense. (0) indicates no defense, By definition the threats drew levels of defense from moderate at the lowest level to very active at the highest level. of defense these functions are In descending order (mean scores in paren­ theses) : 1. Personnel Administration. 2. Instructional Direction. 3. Evaluation. 4. Financial Administration. 5. School Plant Management. 6. Public Services. 7. Policy Development. 8. Public Relations. (3.654) 9. General Planning. (3.635) (4.477) (4.314) (4.264) (4.108) (4.037) (3.940) (3.694) The means of the levels of defense against the various threat agencies in descending order are: 1. Teachers Association. (4.388) Sally Jane Bell 2. Parent Groups. (4.135) 3. Local Board of Education. 4. State Board of Education/Legislature. (3.812) (3.720) The three null hypotheses were: Hypothesis 1 : The strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary among functions. Hypothesis 2 : The strength of defenses exerted against a threat agency does not vary among threat agencies. Hypothesis 3 : There is no interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency. A significance level of .05 was established as being suf­ ficient for the purposes of the study. An P test was done for hypothesis 3, functionthreat agency interaction. The calculated F value was 18.4223, and the tabled F value was approximately 1.52. Therefore this null hypothesis was rejected. There is significant interaction between the function and the threat agency. action, As there is function-threat agency inter­ it naturally follows there will be variation in strength of defense to retain a function and variation in strength of defense against threat agencies. Three additional questions were added to the sur­ vey instrument. These questions concerned: number of years in the superintendency, type of district, and the size of the district. was established. Again a significance level of .05 Statistical tests revealed no significance Sally Jane Bell in dealing with the first two questions. for a three way interaction, However a test threat agency-function-size of district, was found to be significant. This inter­ action is illustrated in the text. Conclusions Analysis of the findings resulted in the following con c l u s i o n s : 1. The public school superintendent possesses and defends a territory. 2. The public school superintendent's territory includes but is not necessarily limited to, the nine functions tested. 3. Public school superintendents have expressed a willingness to exert defense to protect continua­ tions of certain functions. 4. The public school superintendent is not likely to exert equal defense against all threat agencies. 5. The public school superintendent will not exert equal defense for all functions. 6. The findings reveal a three-way interaction involving size of district, threat agency and function. 7. The number of years of superintendency made no significant difference in levels of defense exerted. Sally Jane Bell 8. The type of school district a public school superintendent administers makes no significant difference in levels of defense. 9. The size of the school district administered by a public school superintendent appears to make a significant difference in levels of defense. 10. Public school superintendents will likely exert a stronger defense against teachers associations and parent groups. Implications These conclusions imply that: 1. Public school superintendents should be aware of their strong defensive reactions against teacher groups as well as other groups. 2. Public school superintendents should look to the levels of defense against the threats of various groups and determine if these levels of defense are consistent with their g o a l s , objectives and philosophy. 3. Public school superintendents should consider the possibility that even though they perceive certain functions as their territory and vigorously defend them, other groups might also view those functions as their territory and defend them w ith equal vigor. Sally Jane Bell 4. Public school superintendents might consider the possibility that their territory could legiti­ mately be shared with other groups and perhaps determine ways to involve the groups in those functions that might be shared. 5. Public school superintendents might give thought to how these functions became tory. part of their terri­ Perhaps they have territorialized functions that might be better performed totally or in part by other groups. 6. Individuals or groups seeking to reduce the decision-making role of the public school super­ intendent in performing his functions will probably be met with a 7. Public school strong defense. superintendents say they will most actively defend those functions that most directly involve children in schools-instructional direction and personnel administration. 8. Defense varies according to the function challenged, the threat agency issuing the challenge, the size of the school district and the individual super­ intendent involved. Recommendations for Further Study 1. An investigation of the methods of defense utilized by superintendents to protect their role. Sally Jane Bell An examination of the specific elements of the tested functions. An investigation of possible defense of other functions. A study of the actual behavior of superintendents as they relate to territoriality. An investigation to determine if superintendents' espousal of certain levels of defense is con­ sistent with his behavior. An examination of the territoriality of a larger group. A study to determine if territoriality or defen­ sive actions differ due to the presence or absence of collective bargaining. Conduct further studies to determine the applica­ bility of territoriality as a behavioral system to the field of educational administration. DEDICATION This volume is dedicated to the five most important people in my life. To Anna, Kathryn, Harry III and Carita, because they are marvelous people, good f r i e n d s , great e n c o u r a g e r s , and also the neatest children a Mother could hope for. To Harry, without whom, neither this nor life would have meaning or joy. To all five of you for believing I could do it and loving me through. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance and support of many, many people who helped this "slow learner" get through. Heartfelt thank you's to: Mother, who in the short time she was with us, greatly shaped my life. William E. and June Raymor together with Harry and Heloise Bell because they knew I could do it. Dr. Edward Keller, for his advice and encouragement, for his pioneer work in territoriality and for his permission to use any of the work he had completed in territoriality. His work has been the inspiration for this dissertation. All the members of the Department of Administration and Higher Education, for open doors, good advice and extend­ ing not only aid and education but friendship. Stanley Richardson whose drawing ability is reflected in the graphs displayed in the text. Bob Carr for leading me through the maze of statistics. Dr. Don Currie, without whose help and concern this study would have been much more difficult. iii The many Michigan public school superintendents who made this study p o s s i b l e , and who gave so much of their time for this research. Dr. Herbert Rudman, for his early encouragement and aid. Dr. Louis Romano, for serving not only as a committee member but as a true friend. Dr. William Durr, for his valued participation as a committee member. Dr. Sam Moore, for serving as a committee member, true friend, sounding board and d e v i l 1s advocate. Drs. Vandel Johnson, Richard Feath e r s t o n e , Sam Moore, Louis Romano, Walter Johnson, Howard Hickey, and Alexander Kloster for their help, encouragement and sound advice. Karen, Lorraine and Norma for smiley faces, cheerful greetings and giant amounts of encouragement and support. Dr. Alexander Kloster, Committee Chairman and advisor for this thesis, advice, for his encouragement, humor, good lessons on being an administrator and most importantly, his friendship. iv Shirley Hansen and Alfrieda Frost, friends, and always being there. no greater honor, for being true I can conceive of than to have you incomparable people call me, friend. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF T A B L E S ............................................. viii LIST OF F I G U R E S ........................................... ix CHAPTER I. II. III. IV. INTRODUCTION ....................................... 1 Purpose of This S t u d y ......................... Need for the S t u d y .................... Importance to Education ....................... Theoretical Foundations of the Study ......... Definition of Terms ........................... Delimitations of the S t u d y ..................... Review of Related Literature .................. H y p o t h e s e s ....................................... Procedures for Analysis of Data .............. Overview ............................... . . . . F o o t n o t e s ....................................... 1 2 4 5 8 9 9 10 10 14 15 REVIEW Part Part Part OF 1 2 3 THE L I T E R A T U R E ......................... Territoriality: Non-Human ........... Territoriality: Human .............. Public School Superintendent Role F u n c t i o n s ........................... Michigan Superintendency ....................... F o o t n o t e s ....................................... 17 18 22 D E S I G N .............................................. 52 Selection of Measures ......................... Selection of Threat Agencies .................. Sample .................................. I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n ......................... P r o c e d u r e ................................ A n a l y s i s ............................... 53 54 55 55 56 58 FINDINGS AND C O N C L U S I O N S ......................... 60 Local Board of E d u c a t i o n ...................... Parent G r o u p s ............. Teachers Associations ......................... State Board of Education/Legislature ......... 63 64 66 67 28 37 47 Page CHAPTER Mean Score Ranking— Ten Highest and Ten Lowest Scores ................................ Standard Deviation Rankings--Ten Lowest and Ten Highest S c o r e s ........................... Data M a t r i x .................................... Summary of Findings on the Original H y p o t h e s e s .................................... Three Additional Questions .................... V. CONCLUSIONS, 67 70 72 72 73 IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 82 C o n c l u s i o n s ............................. Implications ..................................... Recommendations for Further Study ........... 82 88 94 SELECTED REFERENCES ....................................... 97 APPENDICES A. L E T T E R ................................................. 107 B. DIRECTIONS AND DEFINITIONS C. POLICY DEVELOPMENT SIMULATION ................... 110 D. EVALUATION SIMULATIONS ............................ 114 E. PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION S I M U L A T I O N S ............... 118 F. FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION SIMULATIONS ............ 122 G. SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT SIMULATIONS ............ 126 H. INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION SIMULATIONS ............ 130 I. PUPIL SERVICES SIMULATIONS ....................... 134 J. PUBLIC RELATIONS SIMULATIONS ..................... 138 K. GENERAL PLANNING SIMULATIONS ..................... 142 L. D A T A ................................................... 146 M. DATA M A T R I X .......................................... 152 ........................ 108 LIST OF TABLES Mean Score R e a d i n g : Local Board of Education . . 63 Standard Deviation Ranking: Local Board of Education ......................................... 64 Mean Score Ranking: 65 Parent Groups Standard Deviation Ranking: Mean. Score Ranking: .............. Parent Groups Teacher Association . . . 65 . . . . 66 Teacher Association. 67 Mean Score R a n k i n g : State Board of Education/ Legislature ....................................... 68 Standard Deviation Ranking: State Board of Education/Legislature ........................... 68 Ten Highest Mean Scores . . . . . ................ 69 ........................... 69 Standard Deviation Ranking: Ten Lowest Mean Scores ........... 70 Ten Highest Standard Deviation Scores ........... 71 Mean Scores for Total Group ....................... 73 Means for Each Threat Agency Ranked High to L o w . 73 Ten Lowest Standard Deviation Scores • ■* * VJLli LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Function-Threat Agency Interaction ............ 62 2. Group 1. Districts of 0 to 1,500 e n r o l l m e n t ....................................... 76 Group 2. Districts of 1,500 to 2,999 e n r o l l m e n t ....................................... 77 Group 3. Districts of 3,000 to 9,000 e n r o l l m e n t ....................................... 78 5. Group 4. 79 6. Superintendent's territory in reference to each f u n c t i o n .................................. 86 Superintendent's territory in reference to each threat a g e n c y .............................. 87 3. 4. 7. Districts of 10,000 + enrollment . . . ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION An individual's role in a given group or situation is defined by the behaviors in which he engages. His role, his behavior, his space provide him with identity and security. If continuation of various behaviors, various aspects of his role, is threatened, an individual may exert defensive responses toward those who seek to encroach upon him. Should he do so, he will have, by definition, terri­ torialized his role. Purpose of This Study The author's purpose of this study is to examine whether certain functions are defended by the public school superintendent when his continuation of those functions is threatened. When threats are posed, his defense will tend to define what he perceives to be his territory. Other purposes a r e : 1. To provide knowledge about the territory of the Michigan public school superintendent. 2. To define in greater detail the applicability of territoriality as a behavior system of educational administration. 2 3. To discuss the implications of the data generated regarding the Michigan public school superintendent. 4. To establish areas for further study. Need for the Study The American Association of School A dministrators' staff concluded in the study entitled "The Education of a School Superintendent;" "As education becomes more essen­ tial and more vital in the total cultural complex, the importance of the school superintendency increases. Also: "The school superintendency is vitally re­ lated to the culture of the community, the state, and the nation." 2 It seems that if this role is so vitally impor­ tant, there is a need for a greater understanding of that role. Then, from a knowledge of what is, one can work toward what should be. The American Association of School Administrators publishes every ten years a survey on the status of the superintendency. There are job descriptions from contracts, legislative requirements set forth in school codes, and various studies done on the superintendent. Gross investigated role conflict in defining the role of the superintendent and the lack of congruence between the superintendent's view of his role and others' views of his role. There was great disagreement in the views of both the actual role and the idealized role. Lee*s 4 analysis of role consensus between school boards 5 and superintendents and S h a n k 's study of expectations for the school superintendency are cases in point. From the above there appears to be a need for a clear and definitive role description for the superintend­ ent. In light of the research on territoriality, it appears one could get a more realistic view of the role of the superintendent as he perceives it by investigating which of his functions he will defend and how strongly he will defend them. As Kira has stated: "We tend to m eas­ ure our sense of identity by the number and quality of things we call o u r s , and by which others can identify g us." Therefore, the author believes that superintendents measure their sense of identity by what they call t h e i r s . Ardrey says: "The disposition to possess a terri­ tory is innate. The command to defend it is also innate. 7 But its positions and borders will be learned." It would be helpful to discover what positions and borders superinten dents have learned. It would serve the pruposes of educa­ tion to have a definition of the superintendent's role and what he sees as its parameters and limits. There are many definitions based on the school code and job descriptions, more based on the superintendent's perceptions of his role and significant others' perceptions of his role but none on the superintendent's defense of territory. 4 Importance to Edueation One purpose of education has been to add to the knowledge the world already possesses. As Macaulay said, O "Knowledge advances by steps and not by leaps." study is intended as one more step. This There is a great deal known about the public school superintendent. The American Association of School Administrators* research study for 9 1973 contains information ranging from how old the typical school superintendent is, to what his major concerns are. The only mention of his role is that he is chief executive of the school district. It was intended that through this study, the author will add to existing knowledge a definition of the role of the public school superintendent, defined by the territory he will defend. As our definition of territory indicates, a person's territory consists of that which he will defend. Therefore, this study will add to the literature, the superintendent's role as he defends it. The author's other major intention of this study was to add to the knowledge already gathered by K e l l e r , ^ in his study, on the applicability of territoriality as a behavioral system in educational administration. 5 Theoretical Foundations of ibh'e Study Ethology is defined as the study of innate, gen­ etically determined behavior patterns. A primary aspect of ethology is the study of territoriality, the disposi­ tion to possess and to defend a territory, physical or psychological, whose boundaries are learned and for which methods of defense are also learned. 11 There are varying definitions of territory. "An area which an animal or group of animals defends as an exclusive preserve." 12 "That section of space that is defended by the occupying individual or social unit." 13 14 "A defended area." "An area . . . that is preempted and defended by an animal or group of animals, a space of ground is not only occupied but made secure from 15 16 intrusion." and "A defended area is the territory." Examples of territorial behavior are numerous in animals. Territorial boundaries may be marked by visual, olfactory or auditory signals or may exist as 18 invisible and therefore psychological borders. These borders may be defended in innumerable ways: physical attack; body posturing; threats; ritualistic signailing; and various similar ways. 19 The most often recounted story of territorial behavior is that of the "gooney birds" of Wake Island. 6 The U.S. Navy engaged in prolonged warfare with the birds. The navy made the mistake of trying to build an airfield on a "gooney bird" nesting site. The "gooney birds" behaved, however, as if the Navy installation were n on­ existent. They returned to their territory even if it meant diving directly into quonset huts that happened to be built directly over their territory. 20 There are other examples in the animal world: The stickleback fish is noted for his territorial defense and his curious behavior w hen his borders are threatened. The howler monkey defines and defends his territory with auditory signals, hence his name. Many animals establish and defend territories, as does man. life: Ardrey says, . . an evolutionary fact of man is a territorial animal." 21 Agreeing with him is Hall: "The territorial nature of man is genetic 22 and ineradicable." Man appears to be a territorial animal who establishes and defends territories which may have visible or invisible boundaries. There have been several studies done on the terri­ toriality o f man. They all support the premise that man seeks his own place, separation from others, his own phys­ ical and psychological territory. Hall^^ has investigated the concept of "personal space" for man. He found many cultural differences in 7 personal space. He also investigated interpersonal conflicts in the light of the concept of personal space. Krupka dealt with the territoriality of college students. She states, "Results . . . confirm the theory of terri24 People are affected by encroachment." toriality. 25 Sommer investigated personal space from the aspect of privacy, the keeping of distance between an individual and a potential intruder. Eigenbrod 26 also worked with college students concerning territoriality. He concluded that the w a y college students personalize their rooms is an evidence 27 of territoriality. Keller's study of the territoriality of the elementary school principal investigated the hypothesis that the elementary school principal terri­ torializes his role and will defend it. He concluded that if territory is defined as that which one will defend, the elementary school principal does indeed have a terri­ tory and will defend it. Definition of Terms AASA — tors: The American Association of School Administra­ a voluntary professional organization of school adminis trators. 8 DEFENSE — threat. The response of an individual to a perceived In this study, the following levels of defense will be considered: defense; Weak — no defense — will show concern; Slight — but will not defend; Moderate — Active — will not exert any will protest will defend mildly; will defend in a determined manner; Vigorous — will defend to the full limit of all available resources. ETHOLOGY — The study of innate, genetically determined behavior patterns. FUNCTION — An action for w h ich a person is specific­ ally fitted; in this case, an action whose performance is a portion of the school superintendent's role. MAS A — tors: The Michigan Association of School Administra­ a voluntary professional organization of Michigan school administrators. STRENGTH — The degree of force exerted by an individual intended to countervail a perceived invasion of intrusion on rights and authority. SUPERINTENDENT — One who has executive charge. The chief executive in the school district. TERRITORY — A defended area marked by visible or invisible boundaries. TERRITORIALITY — The innate need to possess and defend a territory, physical or psychological, whose boundaries 9 are learned and for which methods of defense are also learned. THREAT AGENCY — Any individual or group that has the potential or perceived potential for inflicting damage upon a n other. Delimitations of the Study The study examines the territory of the Michi­ gan public school superintendent, it examines only the territorial aspect of territorial identification through defense. As Keller did in investigating the territory of the elementary school principal, no information will be sought in determining the defense to be u t i l i z e d , or the nature of the local environment creating the particular response. The data interpretations shall be confined to the functions and threat agencies utilized and to the popula­ tion s u r v e y e d . As the threat situations are simulated, the results should be viewed as perceived threat outcomes rather than actual results. Review of Related Literature A review of the literature included: 1. Studies relating to territoriality in animals. 2. Studies relating to territoriality in humans. 10 3. Studies relating to the public school superinten­ dents 4. role. The legal mandates that, in part, proscribe the superintendent's r o l e . Hypotheses: 1. Hq : The strength of defense exerted to retain a function will not vary among functions. 2. Hq : Strength of defense exerted against a threat agency will not vary among threat agencies. 3. Ho : There is no interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency. Procedures for Analysis of Data The problem was to construct devices which will enable public school superintendents to identify those functions they will defend against encroachment; i.e., their territory. The author used devices as similar as possible to Keller's, with appropriate modifications to fit them for an investigation of the superintendent's role rather than the elementary school principal. This study par­ tially replicated Keller's study with a different popula­ tion. 11 A review of the literature on the public school superintendent revealed general agreement on a number of functions superintendents may have in common. examined included: Studies demographic studies of the superin­ tendency published by .the American Association of School Administrators; Gross*s study on role conflict; job descriptions; local, state and national legal functions; administrator evaluation documents and doctoral disserta­ tions. For the purposes of this study, nine of the most agreed upon functions will be used. It was assumed that these functions are equal in specificity. The nine functions used w e r e : 1. Personnel Administration 2. Financial Administration 3. School Plant Management 4. Instructional Direction 5. Pupil Services 6. Public Relations 7. General Planning 8. Policy Development 9. Evaluation These nine functions were designated as measures to be tested as part of the school superintendent*s 12 territory* Having selected those functions having the potential to become territory, it was necessary to provide agencies which could possibly intrude or encroach upon these functions, since defense is unlikely unless there is something to defend against. Again these threat agencies were selected to be as nearly similar to K e l l e r ’s but with the removal of the threat agency of "superintendent" from the list. These threat agencies a r e : 1. Teachers' Organizations 2. School Board 3. Legislature/State Board of Education 4. Parents' Organizations The sampling method used was random sampling, using a table of random numbers. The sampling frame was the official Michigan State Department of Education listing for the 1973-1974 school year of all public K-12 school districts in Michigan, Bulletin 1 0 1 2 . The sample was limited to K-12 public school superintendents in the state of Michigan. Using the functions and threat agencies listed, a simulated situation was developed for each functionthreat agency combination in which the continuation of the superintendent's decision-making role in implementing that function was threatened by a selected agency. For 13 purposes of this study, each threat agency-function simulation was assumed to be of equal value. Each subject was provided an opportunity to respond on a scale of 0 to 5 in indicating the strength of defense he would exert to retain his decision-making role in exercising that particular function. The range of the scale provided for "no defense" at 0 to "vigorous defense" at 5. Intervals between numerals were assumed to be e quadista n t . A repeated measures design with an analysis of variance statistical treatment was used. This design was selected in order to provide an appropriate means of testing strength of defense exerted to retain the nine selected functions across the four selected threat agency groups. A total of 200 subjects was selected from the population of Michigan public school K-12 superintendents. A level of significance of .05 serves as a suf­ ficient level in examining the following hypotheses: 1. Hq : Strength of defense exerted to retain a function does not vary among functions. 2. Hq : Strength of defense exerted against a threat agency does not vary among threat agencies. 3. H : There is no interaction between the type of o function being threatened and the threat agency. 14 Overview Following this general introduction to the study, related readings and research will be reviewed in Chapter II. In Chapter III the author will report the methodology utilized in the study with various summaries of the collected data appearing in Chapter IV. Implications of these data and recommendations for future action will be considered in Chapter V. A bibliography and various appropriate appendices will conclude the study. 15 CHAPTER I FOOTNOTES ^"The Education of a School Superintendent r'* American Association of School Administrators (Washington, D.C.: 1963), p. 7. 2 I b i d * , p. 7. 3 Neal Gross, Ward S. Mason, and Alexander W. McEachern, Explorations in Role Analysis (New York: John Wiley & S o n s , Inc * , 1964T"! 4 Thomas John Lee, Ed.D., Role Consensus Analysis Among School Board Members and Between School Board MeinEers and Their Superintendents on the Superintendent1s Role in Nonunion Collective Negotiations in New York StateT (Pub­ lication No. 69-4144) (St. J o h n 's Univer s i t y , 1968). 5 Robert Ellsworth Shanks, Ed.D., Expectations for the School Superintendency R o l e . (Publication No. 67-430) (University of Southern California, 1966). **A. Kira, "Privacy and the Bathroom," Environmental Psychology. Edited by Proshansky, Ittelson and Rivlin. (New Y o r k : Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970), p. 272. 7 Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative (New Y o r k : Del Publishing C o ™ I n c . , 1966), p. 24. g Thomas Babington Macaulay, and Baren Macauley. Essays and Biographies, Oxford Dictionary of Q u o t a t i ons. (London: Oxford University P r e s s , 1966) 324 :20. 9 "The American School Superintendent," The American Association of School Administrators. "Washington, D.C.: 1973). ■^Edward Keller, The Territory of the Michigan Ele­ mentary School Principal" Unpublished dissertation, Michi­ gan State University, 1972. ^ A r d r e y , The Territorial Imperative, p. 27. 12 Anthony Storr, Human Aggression (New York: Atheneum Publishers, 1970), pT 35. 13 Heini Hediger, "The Evolution of Territorial Behavior," Social Life of Early M a n . Edited by S. L. Washburne (New York: Werner Gren Foundation, 19 61), p. 35. 16 14 S. A. Barnett,"Instinct and Intelligence:" Behavior of Animals and Man (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, I n c . , 1967), p. 45. 15 Henry Eliot Howard, Territory in Bird Iiife (New Y o r k : Atheneum P u b l i s h e r s , 1964), p . 81. 16 Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative, p. 210. 17I b i d . , p. 2 1 0 . 18 Keller, The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Pri n c i p a l , p. 2. 19 Konrad Lorenz, On Agression (New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World, 1969), p. 40. 20 Keller, The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School P r i n c i p a l , p. 4. 21 Ardrey, The Territorial I m p e rative, p. 116. 22 Edward H a l l , The Hidden Dimension (New Y o r k : Doubleday & Co., 1966), p. 9. 23I b i d . , p. 43. 24 Judith Krupka, "Factors Affecting Territoriality in College Students," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970, p. 43. 25 Robert Sommer, "The Ecology of Privacy," Environ­ mental Psychology, Edited by Proshansky, Ittelson, and Rivlin (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1970). 26 E. A. Eigenbrod, J r . , "The Effects of Territory and Personality Compatibility on Identity and Security," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1969. 27Keller, The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE In Chapter I, the rationale and general overview of the study were presented. In Chapter II, the author will examine in three p a r t s , current related readings and research in: 1. Territoriality: non-human. 2. Territoriality: human. 3. Role of the public school superintendent. The existence of territoriality as system will be supported toriality. abehavioral by references in non-human terri­ This first section will also begin the dis­ cussion of physical and psychological territory. The concept of role as an aspect of territoriality will be developed in the discussion of human territori­ ality. In the review of the literature in Parts 1 and 2 , the support for the existence of territory is based on physical relationships, not on defense of behaviors. 17 18 This author*s study accepts that challenge and serves as evidence, with Keller*s study,'1' of defense of behaviors as having territorial implications, these behaviors being selected from references reviewed in Part 3. Part 1 Territoriality: Non-Human Robert Ardrey states: Territoriality in non-humans is indicated by their defense of physical and psychological territories. Such defense assures a species of meeting not only certain physical needs, but psychological needs as w e l l .2 As previously stated, territory is defined by behavior and has many behavioral implications. Edwards, 3 Wynne- in a study of animal dispersion and related social behavior, develops the concept of society as a "brotherhood of tempered rivalry" or "an organization capable of providing conventional competition." Konrad Lorenz also describes this concept with "the 4 tempered rivalry— a ritualization of aggression." Many examples are provided from the animal kingdom with particular emphasis on primate territoriality. Carrighar describes the invisible territories of the a n i mals: The fences are there however. They are just not obvious because they are made of such deceiving 19 materials as brush, trees, stones; of wallows and rubbing rocks; of burrow holes or m ere depressions in earth or grass; and especially of signs we are not often aware o f f — scent stations that is, . . . a map of any wilderness area, showing the plots owned by animals and birds w o uld be covered with such a network of boundary lines that one might wonder if the creatures have any freedom of m o v e ­ ment at all. Some of them do have, but many will not allow any other members of their own species to invade the spaces they have c l a i m e d .5 Carrighar also gives us a brief history of man's discovery of non-human territoriality. She tells us that the discovery that birds claim and defend territories is often thought of as a twentieth century achievement because the behavior has only been understood in detail since H. Eliot Howard published Territory in Bird L i f e ** in 192 0. Actually, Aristotle observed bird territoriality. toria Animalium he wrote, In H is- "The fact that a pair of eagles demands an extensive space for its maintenance, and con­ sequently cannot allow other birds to quarter themselves in close neighborhoods. . . . " I n the third century B.C. w r o t e , "One bush does not shelter two r o b i n s ." Zondotus Other early observers were Konrad von Gesner in 1555 and G. P. Oliva in 1622. Dimond 8 and Van Lawick-Goodall 9 added further in­ sight into the territorial aspects of animal behavior with their studies. C. R. Carpenter contributed a chapter in Behavior and Evolution10 entitled cepts and Problems." "Territoriality: a Review of Con­ It appears to be the most thorough 20 and comprehensive review in non-human territoriality to be found. He reviews the historical concepts, the major studies, the many definitions of territoriality, and the characteristics of territoriality in various types of organ­ isms. He goes on to list thirty-two functions performed by territoriality, none of which deals solely with the issue addressed by this study, the definition of territory by defense. Essential to territory is the establishment and defense of a territory and its boundaries. Hediger’*’’*’ indicates, as Carrighar described, that boundaries are marked by (1) optical, (2) acoustical, (3) olfactory, and (4) a combination of these methods. For example, as Keller states, the male stickleback fish exhibits visible ritualistic behavior at its terri­ torial boundary. of territory. Birds sing in announcing their possession Howler monkeys do just that in warning away potential i n t r u d e r s . Canines mark boundaries with urine or feces which serve as olfactory clues to territorial 12 possession. Certain concepts of distance have been investigated as they relate to territoriality. Hediger 13 has found that animals have what might be called an "individual distance," a minimum distance within which intrusion is not tolerated, and that this distance varies among species. 21 This territory has invisible boundaries. It is unmarked and exists in the mind of the animal involved. Social distance defined as the maximum distance within which an animal remains part of the group also exists, according to Hediger.1^ John Pfeiffer provides the example of a seemingly aggressive baboon at the outer edge of the baboon t r o o p 's perceived territory who exhibits markedly changed b e ­ havior as the group begins to move away. Hediger makes this observation: Social distance in animals reminds me of an elas­ tic rubber band, which invisibly connects all members of a group. This social distance is specific and can be measured exactly in meters and ce n t i m e t e r s .15 Individual and social distance are psychological territories. They obtain their existence from the mind of the a n i m a l . These concepts are documented and extended in The Territorial Imperative by A r d r e y .16 He describes research conducted on individual and group territories and the functions served by each. He uses as examples the nesting behavior of herring gulls, whose nesting sites are spaced at a pecking distance length so that each nest­ ing couple is just out of reach of being pecked by their neighbors. 22 The work of Frank Darling with red deer well substantiates the concept of psychological territory. Darling determined the limits of the red deer territory by experimenting with placement of feeding s i t e s . He found that when a feeding site was situated outside the invisible territorial boundaries of the red deer, the deer would not approach it, even though there were no observable barriers. Darling concluded that the only barrier to the deer's approach was p s y ­ chological. Thus he illustrated and described the existence of psychological territory. Fart 2 will be a review of studies relating to human physical and psychological territory and the introduction of the concept of role as having the poten­ tial for becoming territory. Territoriality: Human Robert Ardrey has expanded territoriality to include the applicability of non-human territorial func­ tions to man. As Keller mentions, Ardrey's definition of territoriality as an innate need has caused some anger, with other s c h o l a r s,3 as it implies that man has no control over his territoriality, if it is instinctive. aAmong others, M. Montagu, E. Leach, J. Crook and K. Boulding. 23 Ardrey carefully points out that: The disposition to possess a territory is innate. But its positions and borders will be learned. . . . the open instinct incorporates more and more a learned portion. In man it reaches a maximum of learning, a minimum of d e s i g n .19 This allegation seems to have been overlooked by his critics. Several writers have challenged the proposition that territoriality is innate rather than learned. Most of these writers combine Ardrey's postulate in The Territorial Imperative 20 with L o r e n z 's theories in On 21 Aggressio n . Aggression and territoriality are social behaviors learned through acculturation, not innate and 22 23 ineradicable f o r c e s , according to these w r i t e r s . ' 24 25 Montagu and Leach both did studies that portray animal social behavior leading toward greatest survival value for a species as cooperative rather than antagonistic. These studies form the basis for one of the strongest arguments opposing the instinctiveness of territoriality and aggression. The argument overlooks a major ethological study which sums up the social behavior of animals exhibited in cooperative-conflict interaction by defining a society as 9 £ a "brotherhood of tempered rivalry." Other authors support the concept of the exist­ ence of both a cooperative and an aggressive instinct. 24 Notably among them are Freedman and Roe 27 and EiblEibersfeldt 2 8 who s t a t e s : Aggression is not the only motive governing the interaction of members of the same species. In gregarious animals there are equally innate patterns leading to mutual help and support. A growing body of evidence . . . points to the conclusion that (aggression) is innate in the s p e c i e s . While arguments continuously carry on supporting or denying the innate nature of territoriality, there is little question of the existence of territoriality itself. Keller states, "There is little disagreement that man is a territorial animal." 29 C a r n g h a r 30 urges us to observe animals "as the ethologists do" so as to better understand ourselves. 31 Hutchison says, "By considering man as an animal, we may see how essential is the animal kingdom, incredible diversity, in its to a proper understanding of man." Ardrey inferred human behavioral traits from animal behaviors, but others have examined some territorial aspects of human behavior through direct observation and study of human b e i n g s . 32 Lindgren, writing of his observations of children, cites the example of one child invading another*s play area. He says, It may be that he is reacting to the invasion of his personal world, his life space for the moment. . . . 25 It may well be that this instinct to maintain and defend a personal area is present in humans and appears quite early. Studies to this "personal space" have been made. 33 34 Hall used Hediger's individual distance in animals as a basis for the concept of "personal space" for man. He de­ tails cultural differences existing in personal space and some of the problems caused in interpersonal relations when these differences are not understood. Personal space and individual distance are observ­ able. Noting the manner in which occupants of an elevator reposition themselves when others board the car, gives an indication of individual distance. Another observation is to watch a North American draw back as a South American leans closer and closer to communicate with him. A visit to an "open" school that is "open" only in physical plant provides an opportunity to observe many in ­ stances of personal space. Teachers mark off boundaries with various sorts of physical equipment. Both the visible and invisible boundaries of each teacher are recognized and respected by students and staff. Children line up in a par- ticular spot on the carpet to move from one teacher's space to another's. People follow certain paths across the carpet to avoid encroaching on territories. Sommer 35 examined personal space from the aspect of privacy, the keeping of space between an individual and an intruder. In his investigation he and his assistants ob­ served many instances of people building a wall or fence of personal belongings to keep others away. Many, with a look 26 or manner, also established their personal space or distance. They also observed the seating patterns people adopted to keep others at a distance. 36 37 Sommer and Esser also examined personal space from the standpoint of possessor identity or individual possession. Patients in institutions not only take posses­ sion of a favorite chair or table, but they also become possessive of its location. Altmann and Haythorn territorial behavior, sailors. 38 found that isolation increased in their study of isolated pairs of This behavior was indicated by possessiveness over a particular chair, a bunk or a place at the table. 39 Roos discusses an aspect of territoriality he calls jurisdiction, the temporary defense of space. When cleaning areas of a ship, sailors would adopt those areas as their territory and would resist all invasions by intruders. Another example of territorializing jurisdictions is Eigenbrod1s^® examination of college students. He says they territorialize their jurisdictions by personalizing their rooms, making each as different as possible from others, and by adding many personal belongings. K r u p k a ,^1 in her study concerning the territoriality of college students, investigated whether students would defend territoriality, and how they w o uld defend it. The most recent work done in human territoriality is Keller's The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal. Some of the conclusions reached by Keller are: 27 Since, by definition, territory is defined by its defense, and since elementary principals responded to all threatened encroachments by some level of defensive action, it is therefore concluded that elementary school principals possess and defend a territory. Territoriality, a behavioral system applicable to non-human a n i m a l s , is also applicable to the elementary school principal. By virtue of having expressed w i l l i n g ­ ness to exert defense to protect the continuation of certain fu n c t i o n s , elementary school principals have in­ dicated their territoriality, that they do possess and will defend a territory and that their role, those func­ tions they perform, is a part of that ter r i t o r y.42 43 Ardrey says, "Territoriality provides identity." Kira adds to this with "We tend to measure our sense of identity by the number and quality of things we can call o u r s , and by which 44 others identify us." What then are "the number and quality of things" that might identify the school superintendent and provide him with security and identity? If physical territory were the only response, his office, his school district or his home might become indica­ tors of his territory. But what may provide greater evidence of identity is his behavior, his role, his job. This would be especially true if the school superintendent were to ter­ ritorialize his role; that is, if he were to defend against encroachment of his responsibilities, his functions. Proshansky, et a l . ,45 have stated that. Territorial behavior is instrumental in the definition and organization of various role relationships. . . . In many instances a social or occupational role estab­ lishes exclusive or near-exclusive control of a given space or setting. The territory of the public school superintendent may be defined as those behaviors will defend against i n t r u d e r s . (those functions) which he The next section of this chapter reports on refer­ ences that deal with the role of the public school super­ intendent, how his role evolved and the various functions he performs which may serve as his territory. In Part 1 of this chapter the author considered n on­ human territoriality, both physical and psychological. References on human territorial behavior were reviewed in Part 2 of this chapter with further indication of the exist­ ence of physical and psychological human territory, including the introduction to the concept of role behavior as potential territory. Part 3 is a review of references concerned with historical development of the role of the superintendent and the role of the superintendent today. These references are composed of research studies, periodical articles, job descriptions, legal definitions of the role, proceedings of conferences and other documents dealing with the role and functions of the public school superintendent. Part 3 Public School Superintendent Role Functions It seems appropriate to begin this discussion with Jefferson's proposal for a system of public elementary and secondary schools as contained in his Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge introduced in the Virginia Assembly in 1779. In this bill is found a recommendation that if J e f f e r s o n ’s proposal was adopted an overseer 29 (superintendent) would be appointed. His duties were defined as appoint the teachers; visit and supervise the teaching; examine the pupils; and carry out the instructions of the college of William and Mary.^® Jefferson proposed superintendents only for the elementary schools, for the secondary schools he proposed a "board of visitors" that had approximately the same duties in the secondary schools as the superintendent had in the elementary schools. This serves as evidence that at least the idea of a superintendent or overseer was present in our early history. American education existed for two hundred years before the first superintendent of schools was appointed. It was another sixty years before any additional cities followed in developing and establishing the position of superintendent of schools. John Philbrick, superintendent of Boston schools in 1857, prepared a report on "City School Systems in the U. S." In this report he discussed supervision of schools. He reports that in nearly all cases the school board is aided in the care and management of schools b y a superintendent. He elaborates on the role of the superintendent: This officer depends on the board for his elec­ tion and is subject to its control. He is selected as an educational expert . . . . He is required to devote himself wholly to schools under his charge. His tenure of office is pre­ carious . . . . The salary does not differ m a ­ terially from the principal of the high school. . . . The duties are prescribed by the board and The first superintendent of schools was 30 are usually set forth in considerable detail in the rules and regulations. He is commonly r e ­ garded as the chief executive officer of the b o a r d . 47 This last statement is repeated in the AASA 19 70 Report on the Status of S uperintendents: 48 executive officer of the b o a r d . " "He is the chief T. M. Bailliet, in a report on city superintendents for the National Education Association meeting of the De ­ partment of Superintendence, March 1889, outlines the duties of superintendents. The superintendent must be a Teacher of Peda­ gogies . His most important work must be t o t r a i n his teachers . . . . Next . . . comes the teach­ ing of the details of methods, the application of principles to special cases in the school room. This can only be done by visiting schools and giving the teachers individual private help. . . Must be a practical teacher himself . . . ought to be counselor of the board on all educational guestions. . . . The superintendent ought to be recognized as the authority on educational q ues­ tions in the community . . . a scholar, a thinker, and above all a student.49 Many others add their opinion that the superintendent should be a sort of folk hero, possessing all the finest ideals and principles. A m a n for all seasons, an absolute paragon of virtue. Chancellor, writing in Our Schools: Their Adminis­ tration and Su p e r v i s i o n , in 1909, makes the case for the school superintendency as a profes s i o n . He says: A superintendent of schools cannot properly be con­ sidered a subordinate of the board of education; even less is he a subordinate of any board member. 31 A professional m a n cannot be the subordinate of one who, in respect to his profession, is a lay­ man . 50 To get a clear picture of what was expected of the early superintendent, chancellor's list of specific duties to be performed and the particular records to be kept by a superintendent, enumerated briefly as follows, viz I, II. III. Attendance at b o ard meetings. Attendance at committee meetings. Preparing reports for the above and filing duplicates for record. IV. Visiting: schools, classes, morning assemblies, special entertainments. V. Calling upon board members, city officials, school officials of the state. VI. Visiting: state normal schools, colleger to which high school graduates go, colleges that prepare teachers? and reports thereon to the board. VII. Receiving visits from out-of-city educators, board members, etc. VIII. IX. Hearing complaints from parents and pupils. Keeping records of 1. attendance 2. truancies 3. pupils reported to office for discipline 4. expulsions 32 5. library books 6 . class textbooks X. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. 7. apparatus or value 8. seating of schools Keeping an official diary Disposing of correspondence Interviewing and visiting candidates Consulting with board of examiners Talking at school assemblies and elsewhere as official head of the schools. XV. Informing one's self thoroughly as to latest advances in school architecture, hygiene, sani­ tation, ventilation, lighting, heating, courses of study, textbooks, scientific apparatus, college r e q u i r e m e n t s , new educational methods and devices. XVI. Attending t e a c h e r s ' m e e t i n g s , educational associations, citizens' meetings, etc. XVII. XVIII. Holding teachers' meetings and arranging others. Consulting with i ndividuals, p r i n c i p a l s , super­ visors and teachers. XIX. Dealing with suspended and expelled pupils, truants, habitual absentees, advising with the officers of the law upon misdemeanors of school children, e t c . 33 XX. Organizing or helping to organize neighborhood or p a r e n t s ' a s s ociations, exhibits of school work, graduation exercises, school entertainm e n t s .51 Cubberly also refers to the superintendency as "a new profession." He adds, "School supervision represents a new profession and one which will play an increasingly important part in the development of our American life." Cubberly also 52 expounded at length on the quali­ ties of men in this profession: high purpose, fine culture, courage, strong character, exact training and intuitive skill. He footnotes this discussion with, "Here, as elsewhere throughout this book, the masculine form is used, and for the simple reason that nearly all of our city 53 superintendents are men." Cubberly next, however, quali­ fies himself as one-of the early supporters of the women's liberation movement with, "What is said, however, is 54 equally applicable to women." (This appeared in 1929.) This leads to a discussion of the First Yearbook of the Department of Superintendence published in 1923. This yearbook was a status study of the city superintendent of schools. It is interesting to compare this status study with the status study published by the American Association of School Administrators in 1970. One of the comparisons deals with the subject of women in administration. The 1923 study report states the 34 superintendent is usually a man, the 1970 study reports that 99% of the superintendents were men. In regard to age of the superintendent, the 1923 study reported the middle 50% of superintendents were from 37.4 to 49.7 years old. The median age for superintendents in 1970 was 4 8. Amount of education for the superintendent in 1923 was 7.8 to 9.4 years beyond elementary school. The 1970 typical superintendent had a M a s t e r ’s Degree. Teaching experience is remarkably close considering the gap of 47 years. The 1923 middle 50% had 2.4 to 6.5 years of teaching experience. The 1970 typical superinten­ dent had spent 6 years in the classroom. Length of service as a superintendent: middle 50% had 4 to 15 years. in 1923 the The 1970 typical superinten­ dent devoted 9.3 years to the superintendency. In regard to salary, in 192 3 the middle 50% salary range was $2,876 to $4,040, the typical 1970 superintendent's annual salary was $17,310. The 1923 study contains additional information the 1970 study does not include. The 1923 study gives us insight and a definitive picture of the functions and role of the superintendent as it lists (1 ) ten functions which superintendents m ost frequently initiate, (2 ) ten functions which superintendents most frequently execute, and (3) ten functions which superintendents most frequently approve. 35 These functions are as fol l o w s : Ten functions which superintendents most frequently initiate 1. Appointment of teachers 2. Appointment of principals 3. Determining new policies 4. Dismissal of teachers, principals, and assistant superintendents 5. Transfer of teachers, principals, and assistant superintendents 6. Selection of instructional supplies. 7. Selection of textbooks 8. Transfer of pupils 9. Preparation of budget 10. Determination of content of subjects in curricula Ten Functions which superintendents most frequently execute 1. Supervision of classroom instruction 2. Determination of content of subjects in curricula 3. Determination of subjects to be included in curricula 4. Selection of instructional supplies 5. Transfer of teachers, principals, and assistant superintendents 6. Making rules and regulations for routine matters 7. Selection of textbooks 36 8 . Enforcing compulsory attendance 9. 10. laws Selection of general supplies Appointment of teachers Ten functions which superintendents most frequently approve 1. Purchase and sale of buildings and grounds 2. Preparation of plans for construction 3. Appointment of janitors 4. Supervision of construction 5. Preparation of budget 6 . Taking school census 7. Maintenance and repairs, etc 8. Appointment of attendance officers 9. Medical inspection 10. Rent of buildings and grounds. 55 These lists well describe Griffith's first stage of development of the superintendency in America, which was, "1. 1837-1910. During this time the superintendent was 56 essentially instruction-oriented." This appears to be supported by the lists of functions just presented. Griffith's second and third stages were: 2. 1910-1925. During this period the superintendent was essentially a businessman more interested in the budget than instruction. 3. 1945-. The superintendent has now entered a period wherein his position is viewed as that of a pr o ­ fessional school administrator.57 37 Michigan Superintendency In dealing with the evolution of the Michigan super­ intendent, Schug relates: The superintendency in the larger cities of M i c h ­ igan was not dissimilar to that described earlier (the early school superintendent). However, because of Michigan agrarian beginnings most of the school districts were small and of the primary or K-8 variety.58 Michigan at one time had the honor of being only one of eight states to have more than 3,000 school districts. In most cases there was no superintendent in the primary dis­ tricts. In the case of the small K-12 districts, there was often a superintendent who wore at least two h a t s : teacher and superintendent. In some cases he was also principal, bus driver, coach, and mechanic, to mention a few. The problem of having a multitude of school dis­ tricts persisted for a long time. People vigorously resisted the idea of consolidating school districts. Each small group wanted to continue their own little school. Consolidation did come, but not without a great deal of determined effort on the part of the state and the local education officers. If there is any date that can be designated to have placed the superintendency in the prominence it has in Michigan today, 1965 must be noted. It was the inception of Public Law 379 which the 38 Michigan legislature passed authorizing public employees to negotiate with the respective governing boards for the first time. With the inception of these l a w s , the superintendent became a labor negotiator in addition to his duties which had been inherent in the superin­ tendency. In bringing the superintendency in Michigan up to the present, perhaps it is now appropriate to deal with the legal prescriptions of the superintendent's duties, as set forth in the School Code for the State of M i c h i g a n . Section 340.201 First class districts; super­ intendent and other assistants; appointment term, qualifications. (M.S.A. 15.3201) Sec. 201. The board shall have the power to appoint a superintendent of schools for such term, not exceeding 6 years, and on such condi­ tions as m a y be provided for by its bylaws. The person appointed shall m e e t the qualifications prescribed in section 573. (The rest of this section deals with assistants, etc.) Section 340.161 Second class districts; super­ intendent and other assistants; appointment; com­ pensation, duties; terms. (M.S.A. 15.3161) Sec. 161. It shall be mandatory that the board by written contract appoint and employ a suitable person, not a member of the board, as superintendent of schools who shall meet the requirements prescribed in section 573, and who shall hold office for a term established in the contract but not to exceed 5 years. The contract shall provide the salary of the superintendent and m a y provide for annual revision of salary. During the period of appointment, the superinten­ dent shall have the executive management and ad­ ministrative control of the school system, under the policies adopted by the board. (The remain­ der of this section deals with hiring fiscal agents and a s s i s t a n t s.)®1 340.119 Third class districts; superintendent and other assistants; term; duties. (M.S.A. 15.3119) 39 Sec. 119. The board of any school district of the third class shall have the powers and duties: To contract w i t h , appoint and employ a suitable person, not a member of the board, as superintendent of s c h o o l s , w h o shall meet the requirements prescribed in section 573, and who shall hold office for a term fixed by the board and not to exceed 5 years . . . . The superin­ tendent shall have powers and duties as f o l l o w s : (a) To put into practice the educational policies of the state and of the board in accordance with the method provided b y the board. (b) To recommend in writing all teachers necessary fox the schools and to suspend any teacher for cause until the board may consider such suspension. (c) To classify and control the promotion of pupils. (d) To recommend to the board the best methods of arranging the course of study and the proper textbooks to be used. (e) To make reports in writing to the board and to the state board of education annually or oftener if required, in regard to all matters pertaining to the educa­ tional interests of the district. (f) To supervise and direct the work of the teachers and other employees of the board. (g) To assist the board in all matters pertain­ ing to the general welfare of the s c h o o l , and to perform such other duties as the board m a y determine. Section 340.66 concerning fourth class districts is essentially the same as section 340.119 w i t h the added stip ulation that the board shall employ a superintendent if 12 or more teachers are employed. Also, the contract of the superintendent may not exceed three y e a r s . 40 Xn each of these citations of General School Laws, reference is made to section 573, which details the qualifi­ cations of the superintendent. 340.57 3 Superintendent of schools? qualifications, waiver. (M.S.A. 15.3573) Sec. 5 73. Before any person may be employed as a superintendent of schools of any school district, he shall possess at least an earned bachelor's degree from a college acceptable to the state board of education and be the possessor of or be eligible for a teacher's certificate or have educational qualifications equivalent thereto in accordance with standards determined by the state board of education. Provided, That said state board may waive the requirements of this section for any person employed as superintendent of schools for the school year 1951-52, and subsequent years while he continues in such capacity for the same school district.64 If the lists of duties were compared with the lists of functions in the 1923 study of the Department of Super­ intendence of the National Education Association, one finds substantial agreement. In summary, the background and historical development of the role of the superintendent, has been developed. The legal prescriptions of his role have been examined, hence it is now possible to examine the current role of the superintendent. The superintendent today may have difficulty with role definition. define it another. He may define it one way but others may This difficulty is found not only with whom he works closely, board members, teachers, middle 41 management people, but with leading educators and students of the educational administration field. It is possible to line up experts on either side of a role definition question. A recent issue of the AASA Yearbook treats the superintendent as an instructional leader. Chapter two of that book starts with the caption "Instruction Comes F i r s t " ^ and then suggests that innumerable distractions prevent the superintendent's dealing with the instructional program. This position is recorded in the literatures "In the fore­ front of the Superintendent's consideration is the instruc­ tional program of the schools." However, one is easily able to find an opposing view. Dr. Roald Campbell states in the American School Board J o u r n a l : . . . It is the aim of this statement to try to clarify the purpose of education administration and to suggest that working directly and exten­ sively with the instructional program, as much as current literature s u g g e s t s , may actually prevent the superintendent from making his gg greatest contribution to teaching and learning. These conflicting references, symbolic of references in general, call our attention to the unique role of the superintendent of schools. He is in a strategic, if trying position to help not only boards of education but teachers, custodians, clerks, and other administrators, singly or in g r o u p s , as they work through their common problems. He is a professional advisor to w h o m the board 42 looks for recommendations on policy, chief administrator of the schools, leader of the professional staff, and a protec­ tor and defender of the rights of children to the best and most appropriate educational opportunity. He is a profes­ sional educator and a professional school administrator. Lehigh University planners described him well. "Man in the Middle? The Superintendent of Schools" was the title they chose for a conference on the problem. Lewis, President of Lehigh, is quoted, about the Man in the Middle? W. Deming "This conference is The Superintendent of Schools. I wonder w h y the question mark. There should be no doubt about it. G r o s s , et a l . , in the study Explorations in Role Analysis: Studies o f the School Superintendency Role describe their work dealing with conflicting role expectations. Gross summarizes the theory: The role concept, in its present most frequent usage, focuses attention on ideas of central importance to the several social sciences. One of these is that human behavior is influenced to some degree by the expectations individuals hold for themselves or w h ich other individ­ uals hold for them. Another is that a person's loca­ tions or positions in social structures influence the kind of social relationships in w h ich he is involved and the evaluative standards he or others apply to his behavior. Derivative from these is the basic proposi­ tion that human behavior is in part a function of the positions an individual occupies and the expectations held for incumbents of these positions. It is not surprising then that the role concept has found its way into models or conceptual schemes dealing with social behavior and that it is a central term in the writings of social scientists like Linton, Newcomb, and Parsons, in whose analyses attempts to cross the boundaries between the individual social science discipline can be discerned.68 43 Many other studies have been done on role analysis. Among them are Sandler's "Perceptions of the Actual and Ideal Roles of Public School Superintendents in T e x a s ," 69 Trenholm's "Superintendent's Role in Teacher Negotiations as Perceived by School Board Chairmen and Representatives 70 of T e a c h e r s ' Groups," and "The Role of the Superintendent as Perceived by Community Leaders and School Administra71 tors." All of these studies dealt with differing percep­ tions of the superintendent’s role and used Gross's model. Due to the controversy about the role of the super­ intendent, these questions come to mind: role be? How do others perceive his role? perceive it? Is it an ideal role? What should his How does he Is it a practical role? It seems logical to look at the superintendent's role not as how he would ideally like it to be but what it is. What does he do? What functions does he perform? To answer this last question, a research of the functions of the school superintendent was initiated. Through this re­ search the functions were identified that could be used in the study. They were gathered from G r o s s 's s t u d y , AASA Y ear­ books, evaluation instruments, and dissertations. The most common functions were combined in a list, together with definitions. It is as follows: 44 PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION— the selection of staff? the placement of staff; judgment of merit; improvement of services of staff; rewards for staff; and the mechanics essential for records governing these activities. FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION— includes the budget? the accounting for public income and expenditure; accounting for fiscal aspects of the service of supplies; accounting for non-public income and expenditure? maintenance of all essential and supplementary r e c o r d s . SCHOOL PLANT— the development of essential housing, the operation, upkeep and extension of the existing plant. INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION— curriculum planning and develop ment. Developing plans and means for improvement of both teaching and instructional program. PUPIL SERVICES— the function that deals with transpor­ tation of pupils, diagnostic and remedial services, operations of lunch r o o m s . PUBLIC RELATIONS— the activity whereby schools are made aware of community conditions, needs and aspira­ tions, and the means whereby the people are informed 45 of the p u r p o s e , v a l u e , conditions and needs of the public schools. GENERAL PLANNING— assessment and identification of needs. Developing strategies to deal with n e e d s . POLICY DEVELOPMENT— keeping the board informed about all aspects of educational program so it can estab­ lish policies and provide resources. Identifica­ tion of weaknesses and developing strategies to overcome them. EVALUATION— evaluating the effectiveness of the educa­ tion program in achieving school goals. The evalu­ ation of all aspects of school district operation and activity. It would be very simple at this point to say that these functions are the territory of the Michigan public school superintendent. It is impossible to take that position, however, since a territory is defined by defense. tions will not do. Listing the func­ There must be defense. These references indicate the many functions per­ formed by the public school superintendent and thus serve as a description of his role. From this role, these beha­ viors, he derives identity and from the superintendent's defense of his role may be determined those aspects of his role that comprise his territory. 46 Territoriality has b een shown to be a behavioral system of both human and non-human animals* Territories have been defined by their defense, have physical or spa­ tial components, and visible or invisible boundaries. Keller's study is the prime example. Keller found that elementary principals do have and will defend a territory. Krupka also concluded that, theory of territoriality. m e n4t.. "Results . . . confirm the People are affected by encroach- ..72 It is the purpose of this study to investigate the territoriality of the public school superintendent, to attempt to provide the superintendent with an indication of his territory, of those functions that he desires to p os­ sess and that he will defend. To provide this information is one of the purposes of this study, and to build on the research on territorial­ ity contributed by Keller. 47 CHAPTER II FOOTNOTES Edward Keller, "The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal." (Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972). 2 York: Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative Dell Publishing C o . , I n c ., 1966), pi 5T (New ^V. C. W y n n e - E d w a r d s , Animal Dispersion in Relation to Social Behavior (London: Oliver and Boyd, L t d , 1962) , p . 15. 4Konrad Lorenz, On Aggression (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 19 69) , p"I 42 7 5 Sally Carrighar, Wild Heritage (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1965), p. 156. H. 1948) Collins, 7 Eliot Howard, Territory in Bird Life [originally John Murray, London, 1920]. (Londo Carrighar, Wild H e r i t a g e , p. 160. a Stuard J. Dimond, The Social Behavior of Animals (New York: Harper and Row, 1970). q Jane van L a w i c k - G o o d a l l , In the Shadow of Man (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1971). ■^C. R. Carpenter, "Territoriality: A Review of Concepts and Problems," Behavior and E v o l u t i o n . Edited by Anne Roe and G. G. Simpson. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958), pp. 224-245. 11 Heini Hediger, "The Evolution of Territorial Beha­ vior," Social Life of Early M a n . Edited by Sherwood W a s h ­ burn. (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 19 61), p. 36. 12 Keller, "The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal," p. 17. 13 Hediger, "The Evolution of Territorial Behavior," p. 36. ^4I b i d ., p. 37. 15I b i d . , p. 54. 48 16Ardrey, Territorial Imperative. 17 Keller, "The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal," p. 20. 18I b i d . , p. 2 0 . 19 Ardrey, Territorial I m p e rative, p. 24. 28I b i d ., p. 26. 21 Lorenz, On A g g r e s s i o n , p. 7. 22 J. H. Crook, "The Nature of Territorial Aggression," Man and A g g r e s s i o n . Edited by Ashley Montagu. (London: Oxford University Press, 1968). 23 Kenneth Boulding, "Am I a Man or a Mouse— or Both?" Man and Ag g r e s s i o n . Edited by Ashley Montagu. (London: Oxford University Press, 1968. 2^M. F. A. Montagu, "The New Litany of 'Innate Depra­ vity' or Original Sin Revisited," Man and N a t u r e . Edited by Ronald Munson. (New York: Dell Publishing C o . , Inc., 1971). 2 5Edmund Leach, "Don't Say Boo to a Goose," Man and Aggression (London: Oxford University Press, 1968). 26 W y n n e - E d w a r d s , Animal Dispersion in Relation to Social B e h a v i o r , p. 23. 2 7 L. Z. Freedman and Anne Roe, "Evolution and Human Behavior," Behavior and Evolution. Edited by Anne Roe and G. G. Simpson. (New H a v e n : Yale University Press, 1958). 28Irenaus Eible-Eib e s f e l d t , "The Fighting Behavior of Animals," Scientific American, CCV. No. 6 (December, 1961), p. 122. 29 Keller, "The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal," p. 22. 30 Carrighar, Wild H e r i t a g e , p. ix. 8^G. Evelyn Hutchison, "Fifty Years of Man in the Zoo," The Subversive S c i e n c e . Edited by Paul Shepard and Daniel McKinley. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin C o . , 1969), p. 216. 32 Henry Clay Lindgren, Educational Psychology in the Classroom (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , 1^6^) , p. €>2. 49 33Edward T. Hall, The Hidden Dimension Doubleday and C o . , I n c . , 1966). 3 ^Hediger, (New York: "The Evolution of Territorial Behavior," p. 36. 35 Robert Sommer, "The Ecology of Privacy," Environ­ mental P s y c h o l o g y . Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and £«. R i v l i n . (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970) , pp. 256-266. 36I b i d . , pp. 256-266. 37 A. H. Esser; A. S. Chamberlain; E. D. Chappie; and N. S. Kline; "Territoriality of Patients on a Research Ward," Environmental P s y c h o l o g y . Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970) pp. 208-214. 38 I. Altman and W. W. Haythorn, "The Ecology o Isolated Groups " Environmental P s y c h o l o g y . Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 19 70), pp. 2 26-2 33. 39 P. D. Roos, "Jurisdiction: An Ecological Concept," Human R e l a t i o n s , XXI (1968), pp. 75-84. 40 F. A. Eigenbrod, Jr., "The Effects of Territory and Personality Compatibility on Identity and Security," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1969. 41 Judith W. Krupka, "Factors Affecting Territorial­ ity in College Students," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970. 42 Keller, "The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal." 43 Ardrey, The Territorial i m p e r a t i v e , p. 536. 44 A. Kira, "Privacy and the Bathroom," Environmental Psychology. Edited by H. Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970) p. 272. 45 Proshansky, et a l ., p. 180. 46 R. Freeman Butts and Lawrence A. Cremin, A History of Education in American Culture (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1953) , p. 93. 50 John Philbrick, "City School Systems in the United S t a t e s ," Circulars of Information of the Bureau of Education No. 1, 1 8 , (Washington, D.C. : III S^ Government Printing Office, 1885, 10153 - No. 1), p. 57. 48 American Association of School Administrators, "The American School Superintendent" (Washington, D.C.: 1973). 49 T. M. Bailliet, "The Work of the City Superinten­ dent ," Proceedings; National Education Association, Department of Superintendence (Washington, D . C . : March 1889), pp. 183-189. 50 William Chancellor, Our S c h o o l s ; Their Administra­ tion and Supervision (Boston: D.C. Heath & C o . , 1909), p. v. 51I b i d ., pp. 173-174. 52 Ellwood Cubberly, Public School Administration (New York: Houghton Mifflin C o . , 1929), p. 220. 5 3 I b i d ., p. 2 2 1 . 54I b i d . , p. 2 2 1 . 55 National Education Association Department of Superintendence, "Professional and Economic Status of Schools in the U. S.," The First Yearbook 1923 (Washington, D.C;: Department of Superintendence, N E A 1923), p. 397. 56 Daniel E. Griffiths, The School Superintendent (New York: The Center for Applied^ Research in Education, Inc., 1966) p. 2. 57_. I b x.jd . , p . 2 . C Q Victor Schug, "A Study of Perceptions of Deader Behavior of the School Superintendent in Selected Michigan School Districts with Use of the LBDQ," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1974), p. 30. 59I b i d . , p. 42. ^9The School Code of 1 9 5 5 , p. 61I b i d . , pp. 57-58. ®^Ibid., pp. 45-4 6 . 63I b i d . , p. 36. 65. 51 64I b i d . , p. 185. 65 American Association of School Administrators, The Superintendent as Instructional Leader (Washington, D. C . : National Education Association, 1957), p . 20. 66 Roald Campbell, ‘'Guilt Feelings for the Superin­ tendent," American School Board Journal (August, 1958), p. 11. 67 Lloyd Ashby, Man in the Middle? The Superinten­ dent of Schools (Danville: The Interstate Printers and Publisher s , I n c . , 1968), title page. 6 fi Neal Gross, et a l . , Explorations in Role A n a l y s i s ; Studies of the School Superintendency Role (New York: John Wiley & Sons, I n c . , 1958), p. 319. 69 Steven Sandler, "Perceptions of the Actual and Ideal Roles of Public School Superintendent in T e x a s ,” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, North Texas State Univer­ sity, 1968. 70 Ronald Trenholm, "The Superintendent's Role in Teacher Negotiations as Perceived by School Board Chairmen and Representatives of Teacher Groups," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Colorado State College, 1968. 71 Peter Corona, "Role of the Superintendent as P er­ ceived by Community Leaders and School A d m i n i s t r a t o rs," unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, U. S. International Univer­ sity, 19 69. 72 Krupka, "Factors Affecting Territoriality in College Students," p. 43. CHAPTER III DESIGN In order to fulfill the purposes of the study, to deal with the problem of constructing an appropriate device to present public school superintendents with potential threats to their continuation of certain func­ tions and elicit from them defensive responses which would thereby indicate those functions they would territorialize, the following procedures were used in the development and implementation of a study design. Threat agencies were selected. Certain commonly' agfeed upon functions of the public school superintendent were chosen. Each threat agency-function combination was represented by a written simulated situation in which the superintendent's continuation of his functions was threatened. These were patterned closely on Keller's. A random sample of Michigan K-12 public school superintendents was chosen. The thirty-six simulated threat situations were combined to make up a research instrument, which also contained definitions of functions and three additional questions. This instrument was mailed to the random sample to be completed. 52 53 The data compiled from this instrument were then analyzed in regard to the null hypotheses that had been developed. The findings are reported in Chapter XV. Selection of Measures An investigation of the public school superin­ tendent's functions, through reviewing the literature, studying job descriptions, tion forms, reviewing administrator evalua­ talking with practicing superintendents, revealed a certain number of commonly agreed upon functions. Nine of these functions were selected for this study. For purposes of this study, equal specificity is assumed. The nine functions a r e : 1. Personnel Administration 2. Financial Administration 3. School Plant Management 4. Instructional Direction 5. Pupil Services 6 . Public Relations 7. 8. 9. General Planning Policy Development Evaluation In testing these nine functions, it was then neces­ sary to select threat agencies that could interfere with the superintendent's continuation of these functions. 54 Selection of Threat: Agencies Since defense will presumably not occur unless there is a threat to defend against, it was necessary to select agencies that could interfere with the superin­ tendent's continuation of these functions. Various superintendents in the state were asked to identify the groups they perceived as having the greatest potential for exercising influence over the public school superintendent's role. These agencies were similar to those in Keller's study with the removal of the superintendent as a threat agency for obvious r e a s o n s . The agencies a r e : 1. Parent Groups 2. Local Board of Education 3. Local Teachers' 4. State Board of Education/Legislature Association Again for the purposes of this study, these agencies are assumed to be equal in threat potential. With the completion of the tasks of selecting func­ tions and threat a g e n c i e s , it next became necessary to select those public school superintendents who would have the opportunity to demonstrate the existence or non­ existence of the public school superintendent's territory. 55 Sample After consideration of many methods of securing a population upon which to test the hypotheses and consulta­ tion with the Office of Research Consultation, the method decided upon was a random sampling of the K-12 public school superintendents in Michigan. The Michigan Education Directory and Buyer's Guide for 1973-74 was cross-checked with the Michigan State Department of Education Bulletin 1012 to filter out non K-12 districts and those districts currently without super­ intendents . When this was completed the remaining listings constituted an alphabetical list of all K-12 school districts in Michigan complete with superintendent's name. This list was then numbered sequentially. K-12 public school superintendents, Of 5 30 Michigan 200 were selected through utilization of a table of random numbers. The sample is thus limited to Michigan public school superin­ tendents in K-12 school districts in the 1973-1974 school year. Once the functions, threat agencies and sample had been selected, the instrumentation was the next item to be completed. Ins trumentation As stated previously, simulated threat situations were written in which each threat agency threatened the superintendent's continuation of each function. 56 Each of these simulated situations was assumed to be of equal value. These simulations were then field-tested with a selected number of former superintendents and modi­ fications were made. Each subject was given an opportunity to respond on a scale of 0 to 5 in indicating the strength of defense he would exert to retain his decision-making role in exercising that particular function. The range of the scale provided for "no defense" at 0 to "vigorous defense" at 5. Equal distance between numbers was assumed. Having completed the survey instrument the distribu­ tion procedure was developed. Procedure Following the development of the instrumentation, the random sample of 200 public school superintendents was selected by the utilization of a table of random numbers and the previously mentioned list. Situation response sheets were arranged according to functions. Each subject received all of the threat agency- function simulations. They were ordered in sequence, i.e., function 1 threatened by each of the threat a g e n c i e s , then function 2 threatened by each threat agency, and so forth, through the last function and threats by each threat agency. The simulations were ordered in this way due to the fact that in tryouts of the instrument, the author noted 57 that some superintendents were reacting emotionally to the threat agency when presented with several simulations in succession from one threat agency. It was hoped that order­ ing by function would minimize this. Included with the response sheets was a separate sheet listing the functions with definitions (see appendix) and a separate sheet containing: 1. Instructions for response and mailing. 2. Three additional questions: (a) How many years have you been a superinten­ dent? _____________ (b) What type of school district do you administer? city ______ (c) 3. urban _______ rural_______ Size of your school district? _____________ Explanation of the scoring scale in more (a) detail: 0 - no defense— will not exert any defense. (b) 1 - w e a k — will show concern. (c) 2 - slight— will protest. (d) 3 - moderate— will defend mildly. (e) 4 - active— will defend in a determined manner. (f) 5 - vigorous— will defend to the full limit all available resources. of The survey instruments, with a stamped self-addressed envelope, were mailed to the random sample of superintendents selected. A return postcard was also included in the survey package. This postcard gave each subject a means by which 58 to indicate he had completed and mailed the instrument without identifying himself on the instrument itself. These cards made it possible to keep a master list of those who had and had not returned the instrument. Upon return of the instrument, the responses were coded by the author and keypunched on data c a r d s . These cards were then utilized for the computer programs neces­ sary to analyze the data. Analysis The three null hypotheses were: 1. Hq : The function 2. Hq : The strength of defense exerted to retain a does not vary among functions. strength of defense exerted against a threat agency does not vary among threat agencies. 3. Hq : There is not interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency. A significance level of .05 was established as being sufficient for the purposes of the study. The statistical analysis was begun with an F test for hypothesis 3. If this test proved significant, it naturally follows there will be a variation in strength of defense to retain a function and variation of strength of defense against threat agencies. The appropriate computer programs were also utilized to evaluate the thrpe additional questions posed in the survey instrument. 59 Because of the nature of this design, interpretations of results are limited to those functions and threat agencies tested and the population from which the sample was selected. This analysis provided the data which are reported in Chapter IV as Findings. Conclusions, Implications and Recommendations based on these data will be found in Chapter V. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The following is a discussion of the findings of significance regarding the functions, and the interaction between them. the threat agencies The mean scores for each function are ranked as are the standard deviation scores. The nine tested functions are ranked within each threat agency group according to mean score and again according to standard deviation score. A ranking of the ten highest and the ten lowest function-group combination mean scores is indicated. Following is a discussion of the three additional q ues­ tions included in the survey instrument, a summary of the findings concludes Chapter IV. A reasonable way to approach the statistical analysis was a significance test for function-threat agency interaction. If this test proved significant there would be no logical reason for doing significance tests for the other two hypotheses. interaction, If there is function-threat agency it naturally follows there will be variation 60 61 in strength of defense to retain a function and variation of strength of defense against: threat agencies. Therefore an P test was done for the hypothesis 3: There is no interaction between the type of function being threatened and the threat agency. The calculated P value was 18.422 3, the tabled F value is approximately 1.52. Therefore this null hypothesis is rejected. There is significant interaction between the function and the threat agency. To illustrate this interaction. Figure 1 is a graph of the strength of defense against each threat agency, by each function. function. T being a threat agency, and F being a The level of defense is 0-5. The threat agencies are identified as: T^ = Local Board of Education T 2 = Teachers Association T^ = State Board of Education/Legislature T^ = Parent Groups The functions a r e : F^ - Policy Development F 2 = Evaluation F^ = Personnel Administration F. = Financial Administration 4 Fg = School Plant Management Fg = Instructional Direction rrYr c at N3 fl f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 Key: Figure 1. Function-Threat Agency Interaction. 000 0 T2 - - XXXX 63 = Pupil Services Fg = Public Relations Fg = General Planning One might logically inquire as to the nature of the variation in strength of defense among functions and among threat agencies. Therefore the following tables are included to provide illustration of the variations within each threat agency group and across groups. Local Board of Education; As shown in Table 1, respondents to the threat agency— Local Board of Education— selected Instructional Direction as the function for which they as a group would exert the strongest defense. The function General Planning received the lowest mean score. Table 1. Mean Score Reading: Function 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Instructional Direction Financial Administration Pupil Services Personnel Administration School Plant Management Policy Development Evaluation Public Relations 9. General Planning Local Board of Education. Mean Score 4.624 4. 303 4.000 3.954 3. 862 3. 826 3.651 3.128 2.963 €4 Local Board of Education mean scores ranged from a high of 4.624 to a low of 2.96 3, while the range of standard deviation scores showed a high score of more than twice the low score. Table 2. Standard Deviation Ranking: Education. Function Local Board of Standard Deviation 1. Instructional Development 2. 3. 4. 5. .678 1.151 1.240 Financial Administration Pupil Services School Plant Management Evaluation 6. Personnel Administration 7. General Planning 1.287 1. 315 1. 322 1.521 8. Public Relations 9. Policy Development 1.522 1. 592 Parent Group: Table 3 indicates that mean scores ranged from a high of 4.743 to a low of 3.385 in the parent group. Per­ sonnel Administration scored highest on the mean score and Policy Development scored the lowest. The standard devia­ tions ranged from a low of .738 to a high of 1.478. Personnel Administration scored highest on the mean and lowest on the standard deviation. 65 Table 3. Mean Score Ranking: Parent Groups. Function Mean Score 1. Personnel Administration 4.743 4.642 4.413 2. School Plant Management 3. Evaluation 4 . Instructional Direction 5. Financial Administration 6. Public Relations 7. General Planning 8. Public Services 9. Policy Development 4.239 4.239 4.092 3.936 3.523 3. 385 Parent Group mean scores ranged from a very active defense 4.743 to a moderate defense 3.385. Table 4. Standard Deviation Ranking: Function Parent Groups. Standard Deviation 1. Personnel Administration .738 2. School Plant Management 3. Evaluation .788 .915 6. General Planning 7. Public Relations 1.079 1.130 1.188 1.206 8. Pupil Services 9. Policy Development 1.385 1.478 4. Instructional Direction 5. Financial Administration 66 Teachers Associations t The teacher association threat agency group had the narrowest range of all threat agencies in mean scores as shown in Table 5. This was also true in Keller's study. With a high of 4.752 jointly for Evaluation and Personnel Administration and a low of 3.679 for General Planning. Teacher Association rankings indicate that the lowest mean score 3.679 was higher than any other group's lowest mean score. Its highest mean score 4.752 was also higher than any other group. Table 5. Mean Score Hanking: Function 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Evaluation Personnel Administration Financial Administration Instructional Direction Public Relations School Plant Management Pupil Services Polich Development General Planning Teacher Association. Mean Score 4.752 4. 752 4.697 4. 560 4.486 4.220 4.193 4.156 3.679 The teacher association standard deviations ranged from .626 for Evaluation to 1.426 for General Planning. 67 Table 6. Standard Deviation Ranking: Teacher Association. Standard Deviation Function 1. 2. 3. 4. Evaluation Personnel Administration Financial Administration Public Relations 5. 6. 7. 8. School Plant Management Instructional Direction Pupil Services Policy Development .626 .696 .799 1.015 1.022 1.031 1.110 1. 341 1.426 9. General Planning State Board of Education/Legislature: For the State Board of Education/Legislature, Table 7 reports a high mean score of 4.459 for Personnel Administra­ tion and a low mean score of 2.908 for Public Relations. The low score for Public Relations was the lowest mean score of all the threat agency function c o mbinations. The standard deviation rankings for State Board of Education/Legislature are listed in Table 8 . They range from a low of 1.005 for Personnel Administration to a high of 1.653 for Public Relations. Mean Score Ranking— Ten Highest and Ten Lowest S c o r e s : The ten highest and ten lowest mean scores are listed in Tables 9 and 10 by mean score, function and threat agency. The ten high mean scores range difference is .339 while the range difference for the ten lowest scores is .927. 68 Table 7. Mean Score Ranking: Legislature. State Board of Education/ Function . 1 Personnel Administration 2. Evaluation 3. Public Services 4. General Planning 5. Instructional Direction 6 School Plant Management 7. Policy Development 8. Financial Administration 9. Public Relations . Table 8. Standard Deviation Ranking: E d u c ation/Legislatur e. Function Mean Score 4.459 4.239 4.046 3.963 3. 835 3.422 3.413 3.19 3 2.908 State Board of Standard Deviation 1 . Personnel Administration 2. General Planning 1. 005 1. 079 3. Evaluation 4. Instructional Direction 1.178 1.258 5. Pupil Services 6. Policy Development 7. School Plant Management 8. Financial Administration 9. Public Relations 1.279 1. 383 1.436 1.530 1. 653 69 Table 9. Ten Highest Mean Scores. Function Threat Agency 1 . Evaluation or 2. Personnel Administration 3. Personnel Administration 4. Financial Administration 5. School Plant Management Teachers 4. 752 Teachers Parents Teachers Parents Board of Education Teachers Teachers State Parents 4. 752 4. 743 4.697 4. 642 4.560 4.486 4. 459 4. 413 Ten Lowest Mean Scores • Function Threat Agency Mean Score State Board of Education Board of Education State 2. 908 6 . Instructional Direction 7. Instructional Direction 8. Public Relations 9. Personnel Administration 10. Evaluation Table 10. Mean Score 1 . Public Relations 2. General Planning 3. Public Relations 4. 624 2.963 3.128 4. Financial Administration 5. Policy Development 6. Policy Development Parents State 3.193 3. 385 3.413 7. School Plant Management 8. Pupil Services State Parents 3.422 3.523 Board of Education Teachers 3.651 9. Evaluation 10. General Planning 3.679 70 Five of the ten highest mean scores appeared in the teacher association threat agency. listed three times. The Parent groups are The Local Board of Education and State Board of Education/Legislature are each listed only once. Standard Deviation Rankings— Ten Lowest and Ten Highest S c o r e s : Table 11 lists the ten lowest standard deviation scores which show range difference of .396. The ten highest standard deviation scores appearing in Table 12 have a range difference of .270. Table 11. Ten Lowest Standard Deviation Scores. Function 1. Evaluation 2. Instructional Direction 3. Personnel Administration 4. Personnel Administration 5. School Plant Management Threat Agency Teachers School Board Teachers Standard Deviation .626 .678 .696 .738 . 788 6. Financial Administration 7. Evaluation Parents Parents Teachers Parents 8. Personnel Administration State Board/ Legislature 1. 005 Teachers Teachers 1.015 1. 022 9. Public Relations 10. School Plant Management .799 .915 71 The Teacher Association threat agency was repeated five times in this table, the Parent Groups, three times and the State Board of Education/Legislature and the Local Board of Education groups each appearing once. The function Per­ sonnel Administration was repeated three times and Evaluation and School Plant Management each appeared twice. Table 12. Ten Highest Standard Deviation Scores. Function Threat Agency Standard Deviation 2. Policy Development State Board/ Legislature School Board 1.592 3. Financial Administration State Board/ Legislature 1.530 4. Public Relations 5. General Planning 6. Policy Development School Board School Board Parents State Board/ Legislature 1.522 1.521 1.478 1 . Public Relations 7. School Plant Management 8. General Planning 9. Pupil Services 10. Policy Development Teachers Parents State Board/ Legislature 1.653 1.436 1.426 1. 385 1.383 Among the ten highest standard deviation scores State Board of Education/Legislature repeats four times, the Local School Board three times, Parent Groups twice and the Teachers Association once. The functional Policy Development 72 appears three times in the table and Public Relations appears twice. Data Matrix; To depict the various interrelationships which have been shown in separate t a b l e s , the data matrix in Appendix M was developed. Summary of Findings on the Original H y p o t h e s e s : The Michigan public school superintendents indicated a willingness to defend their decision-making rights in exercising certain functions. The strength of defense across functions ranged from 4.477 to 3.635. Table 14 ranks each function with its overall mean for all groups. Table 15 lists the means overall for each threat agency. Consideration of separate function-threat agency combinations revealed mean scores w ith a high of 4.752 for both the Evaluation and Personnel Administration w h e n threatened by the Teachers Association and a low of 2.908 for Public Relations with the State Board of Education/ Legislature as the threat agency. Varying levels of defense for the functions tested, as well as varying deviations from the mean, have been indi­ cated. Such findings, coupled with the following discussion 73 Table 13. Mean Scores for Total Group. Function Mean Score 1 . Personnel Administration 2. Instructional Direction 3. Evaluation 4. Financial Administration 4.264 4.108 5. School Plant Management 6. Pupil Services 7. Policy Development 8. Public Relations 4.037 3.940 3.694 3.654 9. General Planning 3.635 Table 14. 4. 477 4. 314 Means for Each Threat Agency Ranked High to Low. Threat Agency 1. 2. 3. 4. Mean Score Teachers Association Parents Local Board of Education State Board of Education/Legislature 4. 388 4.135 3. 812 3. 720 of three additional questions, have resulted in the conclu­ sions, implications and recommendations in Chapter V. Three Additional Q u e s t i o n s ; In addition to the simulated threats to various functions by various threat agencies, three other questions were asked of the respondents. The questions were: 74 1. How many years have you been a superintendent? 2. What type of school district do y o u administer? City___________ 3. Urban_ Rural______ Size of your school district? The responses to these questions were included on the data cards for each respondent. Using the Finn Repeated Measures program data were compiled to enable F tests to be done to determine if any of these variables were significant. Using Millman-Glass Rules of Thumb, determinations were made of the appropriate terms to be used in the F tests. First tests were completed to determine if years of superintendency made a significant difference in the levels of defense that were exerted. This was not the case, so the null hypothesis of defense varying due to years of superintendency had to be rejected. The next variable investigated was the type of school district. This variable did not prove significant. All tests were done at the .05 level. (See Appendix L for the statistical data regarding these tests.) The last test was a test of the null hypotheses concerning size of school district. using the data mentioned earlier. proved to be 1.361. An F test was made The calculated F value The tabled F value was to be determined with the aid of the computer due to the fact that the tabled F value needed was F ?2 2520 and the booJc tables do not include that range. Therefore, a computer run determined 75 that the tabled value for F should be 1.2947 at the .05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis that size of district does not affect level of defense was rejected. This test determined that there is a three way interaction involving size of district, threat agency, and function. To illus­ trate this three w a y interaction. Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5 contain graphs of threat agency-function interaction accord­ ing to the size being determined by the pupil enrollment of the district. Group 3 (Group 1 0-1,999; Group 2 3,000-9,999; Group 4 2,000-2,999; 10,000 +.) These findings should be considered in light of the fact that in Group 4, there are 32 districts of this size in the state; 16 of them were in the sample and 7 of them responded. An interesting result of these findings is that the superintendents in Group 4, often respond as one voice. three of the threats, this group was unanimous: Agency-School Board, 1) Threat function— Personnel Administration; Threat Agency-Teachers Association, On 2) function— Financial Administration; and 3) Threat Agency-Parent Groups, function— School Plant Management. On these three, Group 4 agreed exactly. The stand­ ard deviations were zero and the mean score 5. Other findings were that this group often differed widely with the other three groups. differed w ith the other groups in: These superintendents 5 ^0* s \ T \ T1 X N *1 T 2 s' v v t» # s ✓ \ / * - ■ rf — , / V ** T4 T. ) * * / + \ Key: V X \ X / / /o n ft1 > n\ 0 i * * * 0 0 0 9 V c T 2 ------ T4 2 0 0° ° ° xxxxx Figure 2— Group 1. Districts of 0 to 1,999 enrollment. , o ° \ °o Ti r" t 0 o° n * ^ X . o° \ o (N v o N . U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .(•So ++ « X -------------- T ■*■2 O0 O0 o \ \ X\ N S \ \ S ' + >* V«\* 0 «° X *4 1 , +\°o v ,o°° _ o° o°° XXXXX Figure 3— Group 2. Districts of 1,500 to 2,999 enrollment ^ \ T l KJ <0 « ‘o0< .0° 0 T2 k \ \ f °c Tx fc , 0 Key: N S / ' "0 o ri ____ ± ® C3 s.. v>* ^ \\ /' " V f2 C4 a V Jr v H 1' - N c >o\ o *> 0 ° 0 V D \p \p V © 0 o GO O0O O0 T. XXXXX Figure 4— Group 3. Districts of 3,000 to 9,999 enrollment. Key: Figure 5--Group 4. Districts of 10,000 + enrollment. 0ooo XXXX 80 X. Threat by Local Board of Education of policy development. 2. Threat by Teachers Association of policy development. 3. Threat by State Board of Education/Legislature of Instructional Direction function.(They had a mean of only 2.42 8 while the other groups were from 3.6 78 to 4.093.) 4. Threat by Parent Groups of Instructional Development function.(This group mean was 4.857, others were 4.142 to 4.225.) 5. Threat by Local School Board of Public Relations function. (This group mean was 2.428, other groups 3.06 to 3.38. This group would not defend strongly against a public relations dir e c t o r . ) 6. Threat by Teachers Association to function Public Relations. Group 4 mean was 3.4285, other as 4.465 to 4.642. Other interesting differences among groups were: 1. Threat by Parent Groups against Personnel Adminis­ tration function. defended here. 2. Group 2 as a group strongly Group 2 is districts of 1,500-2,999. Threat by Local Board of Education against the func­ tion of policy development. Group 1 superintendents were united in their strong defense w ith mean of 4.290 and standard deviation of .9016. 81 All the findings detailed in this chapter serve as the basis for the discussion of conclusions, implications and recommendations in Chapter V. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The findings reported in Chapter IV serve as the basis for the conclusions, implications, and recommenda­ tions that make up Chapter V. The first section reporting the conclusions of the study includes graphs of the extent of the public school superintendents territory. section is a discussion of the implications. The second The study is concluded w ith a third section concerning recommendations for further study. Conclusions: The findings of this study showed a variation in levels of defense for the functions tested. The variation is evident in the range of mean scores across all functions, with a high of 4,477 and a low of 3.6 35. The range of standard deviations scores went from a high of 1.449 to a low of .940. The findings have led to the following c o n c l u s i o n s : 1. The public school superintendent possesses and defends a territory. The superintendents were 82 83 given the choice of not defending at all against the threats to their continuation of the functions. The findings show that each and every function was defended when threatened. Territory was defined in this study as that which will be defended to some degree, it is threefore concluded that public school superintendents possess and defend a terri­ tory. This conclusion reinforces Keller's con­ clusions regarding territoriality and the elementary school principal. 2. The public school superintendent's territory includes the nine functions tested. This conclusion does not preclude other functions from being the territory of the public school superintendent. It only states that these are a part of the territory. There are doubtless other functions that may be a part of the territory. 3. The public school superintendents have expressed a willingness to exert defense to protect the con­ tinuation of certain functions. In this way they have indicated their territoriality, that they do possess and will defend a territory and their role, those functions they perform, is a part of that territory. 4. The public school superintendent is not likely to exert equal defense against all threat agencies. 84 Both the finding of threat agency-function interaction and the tabled values for the various threat agencies support this. 5. The public school superintendent will not exert equal defense for all his functions. The superin­ tendents were very selective in their choice of level of defense for various functions. in Chapter IV clearly indicate this. The tables As stated previously the public school superintendent will defend at a higher level those functions he feels are more important than others. 6 . The findings reveal a three-way interaction in­ volving size of district, threat agency and function. The Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5 illustrate this inter­ action. It would be most difficult to pinpoint the cause of the interaction. 7. The number of years of superintendency made no significant difference in the levels of defense exerted. This conclusion would seem to indicate that a superintendent does not become more or less defensive in regard to threats to his functions due to length of time he has been a superintendent. 8. The type of school district a superintendent administers, be it urban, city or rural makes no significant difference in his levels of defense in response to threats to his continuation of his func­ tions . 85 9. Public school superintendents will likely exert a stronger defense against teacher associations and parent g r o u p s . 10. The size of the school district administered by a public school superintendent appears to make a sig­ nificant difference in the levels of defense. Par­ ticularly interesting is the fact that superintendents from the larger districts, the group 4 superintend­ ents, often responded exactly the same. It is therefore concluded that superintendents from larger, group 4 districts differ widely from the other groups in the areas of: a. defense of policy development when threatened by the local board of education or the teachers associations. b. defense of instructional direction when threatened by the State Board of Education/ Legislature or Parent Groups. c. defense of public relations when threatened by the Local Board of Education of the Teachers A s s ociations. Charts of the territory of the Michigan public school superintendent follow in Figures 6 and 7. These charts are based on the data analyzed and reflect the concept that strength of defense defines territory. The scope of the public school superintendent's territory as well as its character has been detailed Vigorous Defense Active Defense Moderate Defense Slight Defense Weak Defense No Defense Policy Devel. Figure 6. Pers. Admin. 4 Financ. School Instruct . Pupil Public Admin. Direct. Service Relat. Planning Superintendent's territory in reference to each function. Vigorous Defense ^ 4.388 Active Defense 4 Moderate Defense 1 Slight Defense H weajc Defense No Defense m ^ 1 Ill Threat Agency A Threat AgencyB Threat Agency C Threat Agency D Local Bd. of Ed .Teacher Assoc. State Bd. of Ed. Parent Groups Figure 7. Superintendent's territory in reference to each threat agency. 88 particularly as they relate to the nine functions tested. The implications of these conclusions and recommendations for further study complete the remainder of Chapter V. Implications: The conclusions reached in this study closely paral­ lel Keller's findings. They indicate that public school superintendents do have a territory. are a part of that territory. The functions tested The superintendents will exert varying levels of defense of these functions according to the particular function being threatened. The superintend­ ents vary among themselves in the strength of defense they would exert to maintain a certain function as part of their territory. The areas of conflict could exist not because super­ intendents have a territorial right to those functions, but for various other reasons. The assumption should not be made that the public school superintendent has an inherent right to possess and defend the functions described and proved to be a part of his territory. derived from board of education policy, state board of education rules, The function may have legislative action, tradition, professional folk­ lore as to functions of superintendent or may have simply been assumed by the superintendent. Implications of the results of this study m a y be applied to the four threat agencies tested, and to the 89 population from which the sample was selected. They are discussed in that order. The state board of education/legislature threat agency drew strong defensive reaction from superintendents in the areas of personnel, evaluation, pupil services, gen­ eral planning and instructional direction in that order. The implication would seem to be that superintendents would generally resist attempts to reduce their decision-making role. These groups should be careful of intervention in these areas. Superintendents were generally not as defensive against such functions as financial administration; policy development and school plant. Perhaps they view these areas as legitimate areas for state involvement. An interesting point is the fact that public rela­ tions, was the lowest defended function. With a mean of 2.90 8 it was the most weakly defended of all functions across all threat agencies. Also this is the only simula­ tion that dea3.t with state assessment. The implication for the local board of education is that most superintendents may insist on the right to do the job they were hired to do. The superintendent appears pr e ­ pared to defend his rights as spelled out in his contract or job description. Acts of local boards of education, that either by omission or commission, would tend to decrease or eliminate the superintendent's continued decision-making 90 role could well be expected to compel defensive reactions by superintendents. Without solicitation many superintendents commented on the survey instrument, on those simulations of threats from the local board of education. ment was: first." The most frequent com­ "If they want to take over the job, I'd resign The next most frequent comment was: "That's what the superintendent was hired to do." The implications for parent groups who may feel that the parents should have a more active part in school district affairs, are that superintendents will actively defend their decision-making power against the threat of parent groups. Their defense is particularly strong in the areas of: personnel administration; tional direction; school plant; evaluation; instruc­ financial administration; public relations and general planning. Superintendents indicate a more moderate defense for pupil services and policy development. However, unsolicited comments on the survey instrument, in the several superintendents noted: 1. The parent groups should work through the board, as the board is the elected parent group. 2. Superintendents would welcome parental involvement in an advisory capacity, and they stressed a d v isory. As was true with Keller's study, the teachers associ­ ation drew the strongest defensive reactions from superin­ tendents. With the exception of general planning, all other 91 functions were in the active to vigorous response range. The range of high mean score to low mean score was narrowest of all threat agencies tested, with the lowest mean score for this group being higher than any other low mean score, in any other group. This was also true in Keller's study. These results seem to suggest that superintendents, on the whole, feel stronger defensive responses toward teacher association threats than toward other groups. Perhaps this is due to the fact that with the advent of collective bargaining, this threat agency has threatened the superin­ tendent's decision-making role more than the other agencies. Both evaluation and personnel administration elicited a high mean score of 4.752, indicating these two areas are and will probably continue to be functions the superintend­ ents will strongly defend. Considering the high mean scores of the other func­ tions the implication seems to be that the collective b ar­ gaining process will continue to be an arena where teacher attempts to gain decision-making power at the expense of the superintendent will be met with a very active defense. Implications for teacher associations seem to be: the superintendent has a territory that includes these functions and he will defend his territory very actively, particularly against your particular group. It seems logical to infer that most superintendents do not want their role diminished at the bargaining table 92 and will actively defend their role to prevent this from occurring. Teacher associations would be wise not to under­ estimate the superintendent in regard to how vigorously he will defend against encroachment of his territory. The teacher association might also consider the question of why the superintendent will defend most actively against them. Perhaps they are unnecessarily making the situation into an adversary situation. defense without threat, Since there is no it might be useful to examine the process and look for unnecessary threats or encroachment. Perhaps the association might do well to evaluate how they are going about the bargaining process. The implications of these findings to the public school superintendent in Michigan a r e : 1. Superintendents should be aware of their strong defensive reactions against teacher groups as well as other groups. 2. Superintendents should look to the levels of defense against the threats of various groups, the functions, across all and determine if these levels of defense are consistent with their goals, objectives and philosophy. For example, if superintendents are in favor of community-parental involvement but defend at an active level against parent group threats, per­ haps they should evaluate their committment to community-parental involvement. 93 3. Superintendents should consider the possibility that even though they perceive certain functions as their territory and vigorously defend them, other groups might also view those functions as their territory and defend them with equal vigor. 4. Superintendents might consider the possibility that their territory could legitimately be shared with other groups and perhaps determine ways to involve the groups in those functions that might be shared. 5. Superintendents might give thought to how these func­ tions became part of their territory. Perhaps they have territorialized functions that might better be performed totally or in part by other groups. 6 . Individuals or groups seeking to reduce the decision­ making role of the public school superintendent in performing his functions will probably be met with a strong defense. 7. Public school superintendents say they will most actively defend those functions that most directly involve children in schools-instructional direction and personnel administration. 8. Defense varies according to the function challenged, the threat agency issuing the challenge, the school district, ent involved. the size of and the individual superintend­ 94 Recommendations for Further Study As stated earlier, in human territoriality. The findings, there is a need for further study Keller's study supported this need. implications and conclusions of this study further encourage additional research. Recommendations for further study include not only those that grow directly from the findings but also those that would seek to examine terri­ toriality as it might be relevant in other aspects of educa­ tional administration. Many echo Keller's recommendations. Recommendations for further study as regards the public school superintendent's territory are: 1. Conduct a study to determine the methods of defense utilized by superintendents in protecting their role. An adjunct to this, would be to analyze the various situa­ tions for success or failure and attempt to determine the reasons why. This information could then serve to aid super­ intendents in meeting the challenge of the role and also might improve their chances of survival in a most difficult role. 2. Conduct a study that w o uld examine the specific elements of tested functions so as to better describe the superintendent's territory. Each of the tested functions could be separated into several elements. A function such as public relations could be separated into: meeting with vari­ ous groups; dealing with the media; speaking at gatherings; and getting out news releases and bulletins to the parents, among o t h e r s . 95 3. Conduct a study that would investigate the possible defense of other functions by the public school superintendent. Nine functions that make up a part of the superintendent's territory have been identified by this study. Others remain to be identified. 4. Conduct studies of the actual behaviors of superintendents as they relate to territoriality. Observers would have to be trained in how and what to o b s e r v e , not only from the aspect of superintendent behavior but also from the aspect of "intruders" responses, the territory challenged, so as to be able to identify the nature of the challenge, defensive behavior exerted and the intruder response. the Such information should provide information as to the relative success of the defense and serve as guidelines for further behavior. 5. Conduct a study to investigate if a superintend­ ent's espousal of various levels of defense is consistent with his actions. 6. Conduct a study to examine the territoriality of a larger population of superintendents— the nation, west, or a particular group of states. the m i d ­ Implications concern­ ing the future direction of the superintendency might result from such a study. These results might serve as a valuable input device for superintendent's pre-service and in-service program planning. A program such as the MSU Extern program for superintendent's might find such material useful. 96 7. Another national or large area study might be a study such as this one, with the addition of an analysis as to similarities and differences between those states that have collective bargaining and those states that do not. 8. Conduct a study to determine if the existence of certain variables affects the territoriality of the public school superintendent. Evidence that such variables exist is found in the standard deviation scores found in this study. Such variables as: administrator collective bargaining; mili­ tant or non-militant teacher groups; superintendent leadership style; might serve as areas to consider in relation to terri­ torial behavior of the superintendent. 9. Conduct a study to investigate if aiding princi­ pals and superintendents to mutually explore and understand their own and each others territoriality, would improve relationships between them. It might be that if the super­ intendent is aware of what the principal will defend as his territory, he will be better able to work with principals in defining job responsibility, division of work, and decision-making responsibility. Conversely, the principal should get a better understanding of the superintendent's territory and role. 10. Conduct a study to get at the difference between superintendent groups based on size of district. SELECTED REFERENCES SELECTED REFERENCES Territoriality (Human and Non-Human) Altman, I., and Haythorn, W. W. "The Ecology of Isolated G r o u p s ." Environmental Psychology: Man and His Physical Set t i n g . Edited by H. Prosha n s k y . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 19 70. Ardrey, Robert. 1961. African Genesis. The Social Contract. New York: New York: _________ . Territorial Imperative. I n c ., 1966. Dell Pub. Atheneum, New York: Co., 1970. Dell Pub. Co. Assem, J. Territory in the Three Spined Stickleback. Leider. : E. J. Brill, 1967. Barnett, S. A. Instinct and Intelligence. Englewood Cliffs New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1967. Beck, Robert. "Spatial Meaning and the Properties of the Environment." Environmental P s y c hology. Edited by: H. Proshansky; W. Ittelson; and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Berg, Jan Hendrik Van den. The Changing Nature of M a n . New York: Dell Publishing Co., 19 61. Blurton Jones, N. G. B. "An Ethological Study of Some Aspects of Social Behavior of Children in Nursery School." Primate E t h o l o g y . Edited by Desmond Morris. New York: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 19 69. Borel, J. C. "Security as a Motivator of Human Behavior." Arch. Gen. P s ychiat. , X (1964), 105-08. Boulding, Kenneth E. "Am I a Man or a Mouse— or Both?" Man and A g g r ession. Edited by Ashley Montagu. London: Oxford University Press, 196 8 . Callan, Hilary. Ethology and S o c i e t y . Press, 1970. 97 Oxford: Clarendon 98 Carpenter, C. R. "Territoriality: A Review of Concepts and Problems." Behavior and E v o l u t i o n . Edited by Ann Roe and G. G. Simpson. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958. Carrigan, Sally. 1965. Wild Heritage. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, Cohen, Yehudi., editor. Man in A d a p t a t i o n . Publishing Co., 196 8 . Chicago: Aldine Colman, A. D. "Territoriality in Man: A Comparison of Behavior in Home and Hospital." American Journal of Ortho p s y c h i a t r y , XXXVXXI (1968), 464-66. Comfort, Alex. Nature and Human N a t u r e . and Nicolson, 1966. London: Coser, Lewis. The Functions of Social C o n f l i c t . The Free Press, 1956. Weidenfeld Toronto: Crook, J. H. "The Nature of Territorial Aggression." Man and A g g r e s s i o n . Edited by Ashley Montagu. London: Oxford University Press, 1968. Dimond, Stuart J. Social Behavior of A n i m a l s . Harper Colophon B o o k s , 1970. N e w York: Dubos, Rene. "The Social Environment." Environmental Psy­ chology . Edited by Proshansky, Ittelson and Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, I n c . , 19 70. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Irenaus. Ethology, The Biology of B e h a v i o r . New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970. Eigenbrod, F. A . , Jr. "The Effects of Territory and Personality Compatibility on Identity and Security." Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1969. Esser, A. H . ; Chamberlain, A. S.; Chappie, E. D . ; and Kline, N. S. "Territoriality of Patients on a Research W o r d ." Enviornmental P s y c h o l o g y . Edited by H . Proshansky, W. Ittelson, and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Ewe:_‘, R. Ethology of M a m m a l s . New York: Plenum Press, Hall, Edward T. The Hidden Di m e n s i o n . and Company, Inc., 196 6 . The Silent Language. 1959. New York: New York: 1968. Doubleday Doubleday & Co., 99 Hedigen, Heini. "The Evolution of Territorial Behavior." Social Life of Early M a n . Edited by S. L. Washburne. New Y o r k : Wennen-Gren Foundation, 1961. Horowitz, M. J.; Duff, D. P.; and Statton, L. O. "Personal Space and the Body-Buffer Zone." Environmental P s y c h o l o g y . Edited by Proshansky, Ittelson, and Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970. Howard, Henry Eliot. Territory in Bird L i f e . Atheneum P u b l i s h e r s , l9§"4^ Kira, A. New York: "Privacy and the Bathroom." Environmenta1 Ps y c h o l o g y . Edited by H. Proshansky, W. I t t e l s o n , and L. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970. Keller, Edward. "The Territory of the Michigan Elementary School Principal." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972. Krupka, Judith. "Factors Affecting Territoriality in College Students." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970. LaBarre, Weston. The Human A n i m a l . Chicago P r e s s , 1954. Chicago: University of Leach, Edmund. "Don't Say 'Boo' To a Goose." Man and A g r e s s i o n . Edited by Ashley Montague. London: Oxford' University P r e s s . , 1968. Lee, Richard and DeVore, Irven. Man the Hunter. Aldine Publishing Co. , 19?T9n “ Chicago: Lindgren, Henry Clay. & Sons, 196 7. John Wiley The Cl a s s r o o m . Lorenz, Konrad. On A g g r e s s i o n . and World” l9 6 9. New York: New York: Harcourt, Brace Lyman, S. M . , and Scott, M. B. "Territoriality, A Neglected Sociological Dimension." Social P r o b l e m s , XV (1967). Medawar, P. B. The Future of M a n . I n c . , 1961. New York: Montagu, M. F. Ashley. The Human Revolution. lishing C o . , 196TI _________ . Man and Aggression. P r e s s , 196 8 . London: Basic Books, World Pub­ Oxford University 100 _________ . "The New Litany of *Innate Depravity* or Original Sin Revisited." Man and N a t u r e . Edited by Ronald Munson. New York! Dell Publishing C o . , 1971. Morris, Desmond. The Human Z o o . C o . , 1971. _________ . The Naked A p e . London: New York: Dell Publishing Jonathan Cape, 1967. ., editor. Primate Ethology. Publishing C o ., X96 7. Chicago: Pfeiffer, John P. The Emergence of M a n . and Row P u b l i s h e r s , 1969. Aldine New York: Harper Proshansky, H. M . ; Ittelson, W. H . ; and Rivlin, L. G. Environmental Psychology: Man and His Physical S e t t i n g . New Y o r k : H o l t , Rinehart and Winston, T$75. Inc., Roe, Anne and Simpson, George, editors. Behavior and Evolu­ tion . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958. Roos, P. D. "Jurisdiction: An Ecological Concept." Human Rel a t i o n s , XXI (1968), 75-84. Ruesch, J . , and Kees, W. "Function and Meaning in The Physical Environment." Environmental P s y c h o l o g y . Edited by H. P r o s h a n s k y , w! Ittelson, and £! Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Shepard, Paul, and McKinley, R. The Subversive S c i e n ce. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1969. Sommer, Robert. "The Ecology of Privacy." Environmental Psy c hology. Edited by H . Proshansky! W . I t t e l s o n , ana 17. Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 19 70. Personal Space: The Behavioral Basis of D e s i g n . New Jersey: Prentice-Ha11, I n c . , 1969. Southwick, Charles. Primate Social Behavior. Van Nostrand, C o . , 1963. New Jersey: Stea, David. "Territory, Space and Human Movement." Environmental P s y c h o l o g y . Edited by Proshansky, Ittelson and Rivlin. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1970. Storr, Anthony. Human A g g r e s s i o n . Publishers! 1970. New York: Atheneum 101 Territorial Imperative. In Print. Library College J o u r n a l , Vol. 4, n 2 (Spring, 1971), 50-53. Van Lawick-Goodall, Jane. In the Shadow of M a n . Houghton Mifflin Co” 1971. Boston: Washburn, Sherwood, editor. Social Life of Early M a n . Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. , 1961. Wylie, Philip. The Magic A n i m a l . S c h u s t e r , 1969. New York: Simon and Wynne-Edwa r d s , V. C. Animal Dispersion in Relation to Social Behavior"! London: Oliver and Boyd, Ltd. , 1962. Public School Superintendent Role and Functions' American Association of School Administrators. The American School Superintendency. Washington, D.CTl American Association of School Administrators, 1952. _________. Education of a School Superintendent. W a s h i n g t o n , D.c“ American Association of School A d m i n i s t r a t o r s , 1963. _________. Professional Administrators for America's Schools. W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . : American Association of School Administrators, 1960. _________. Profiles of the Administrative T e a m . Washington, D.C71 American Association of S c h o o l A d m i n i s t r a t o r s , 1971. _________. Inservice Education for School A d m i n istrators. Washington, D . C . : American Association of School Administrators, 196 3. _________. Selecting a School Superintendent. W a s h i n g t o n , D.C“ American Association of School A d m i n i s t r a t o r s , 1968. "Are Administrative T e a m and Collective Bargaining Compatible?" C o m p a c t , Vol. 6 , n 3, June, 1972, pp. 3-5. Ashby, Lloyd W. Man in the Middle? The Superintendent of Schools. D a n v i l l e : The Interstate Printers & Pub. I n c . , 1968. 102 Bailliet, T. M. "The Work of the City Superintendent." Proceeding; National Education Association, Depart­ ment of Superintendence7 W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . Y U. S. Government Printing O f f i c e , March 1889. Bowman, Thomas and Savage, William. "Selecting the Super­ intendent. " A d m i n i s t r a t o r 1s N o t e b o o k , IV, No. 6 (February, 1956)” Bradley, John. "The Superintendent and the Teacher." Pro c e e d i n g s ; Department of Superintendence, Bureau of E d u c a t i o n ! Circular of Information, No. T~. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Government Printing Office, 1888. Bruce, W. C. "City Superintendents in Large Cities." American School Board J o u r n a l , CXLIII (August, 1961). Burbank, Natt. The Superintendent of Schools. Danville: Interstate Printing & Pub." I n c . , 1 9 6 8 . Butler, Nicholas. "Problems of Educational Administration." Educational R e v i e w , XXXII (June-December, 1906). Butts, R. Freeman and Cremin, Lawrence A. A History of Education in American C u l t u r e . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 195 3. Callahan, Raymond E. Education and the Cult of E f f i c iency. C h i c a g o : University of Chicago Press , 196il. Campbell, Roald F . ; Cunningham, Luvern L . ; and McPhee, Roderick F. The Organization and Control of American Sch o o l s . C o l u m b u s , O h i o : Charles E. Merrill B o o k s , Inc., T965. Campbell, Roald F. "The Superintendent— His Role and Profes­ sional Status." Teachers College R e c o r d . LXV, No. 8 , May, 196 4. Chancellor, William. Supervision. Our S c h o o l s ; B o s t o n : P! Their Administration and Heath & Co. , 1909. Corona, Peter. "Role of the Superintendent as Perceived by Community Leaders and School Administrators." Ph.D. dissertation. United States International University, 1969. Cubberly, Ellwood P. Public School A d m i n istrators. New Y o r k : Houghton Mifflin C o . , 1929. 103 Dykes, Archie R. School Board and Superintendent. L l. rille, 111.: The Interstate Printers & P u b l i s h e r s , Inc., 1965. Educational Policies Committee of National Education Associ­ ation and American Association of School Adminis­ trators. "The Unique Role of the Superintendent of Schools." Washington, D . C . : Educational Policies Committee of National Education Association and American Association of School Administrators, 196 5. Fast, Raymond. "Perceptions, Expectations and Effectiveness of School Superintendents in Alberta and Pennsylvania as Reported by Principals and Board Members." Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 196 8 . Faulkner, Shannon D. "A Study of Selected Characteristics and Attitudes of Tennessee Public School Superin­ tendents." Ph.D. dissertation: Memphis State University, 19 72. Fensch, Edwin A . , and Wilson, Robert E. The Superlntendency T e a m . C o l u m b u s : Charles Merrill Co., 1964. Geissinger, John B. "Evolution of the Legal Status of the City Superintendent in Selected States." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1946. Gregg and Knezevich, Stephen. "Man We Call Superintendent." Educational D i g e s t , 37, October, 1971, pp. 21-23. Gillard, Thomas M. The Origin and Development of the Power and Duties of the City Superintendent"! C h i c a g o : University of Chicago Press, 19 35. Griffiths, Daniel E. The School Superintendent. New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, I n c . , 1966. Gross, Neal? Mason, Wards; and M c E a c h e m , Alexander. Explorations in Role Analysis Studies of the School Superlntendency R o l e . New Y o r k : John Wiley & S o n s , I n c . , 195 8. Halpin, Andrew W. The Leadership Behavior of School Super­ intendents . C o l u m b u s : Ohio State^University, 1956. Harris, Kenneth W. "Change in Role Requirements of Super­ intendents Over the Last Quarter-Century. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1968. 104 Hendrick, Jerry W. "An Investigation Comparing Teacher and Administrator Perception of the Actual and Ideal Roles of Texas Public School Superintendents." Ph.D. dis­ sertation. North Texas State University, 1969. Hinsdale, B. A. "The American School Superintendent." tional R e v i e w , January, 1894. Educa­ Holder, James L. "The Process of Selecting Superintendents of Schools as Viewed by Boards of Education." Ph.D. dissertation. Colorado State College, 1968. "How the Superintendent's Organization Stimulates Character Education." Proceedings: Department of Supervisio: National Education Association. Tenth Yearbook, February, 1932. Hunt, John J. "Politics in the Role of the Superintendent." Phi Delta Kappan, 49 (6 ) (February, 1968) pp. 348350. Kennedy, John. "The Function of Supervision." R e v i e w , May, 1891. Educational Kirby, David. "Superintendent Political Behavior." Adminis­ trator 1s N o t e b o o k , V o l . X I X , N o . 7 (March, 1 9 7 l ). Knezevich, Stephen J . , editor. Administrative Technology and the School Ex e c u t i v e . W a s h i n g t o n , D .C . : American Association of School Administrators, 19 71. • _____. Administration of Public Ed u c a t i o n . Harper and Row, 1962. New Y o r k : _________, editor. The American School Superintendent. W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . : American Association of School Administrators, 1971. Lee, Thomas J. "Role Consensus Analysis Among ichool Board Members and Between School Board Members and Their Superintendents on the Superintendent's Role in Nonunion Collective Negotiations in New York State." Ph.D. dissertation. St. John's University, 1968. Martin, James. "Before You Bargain, Make Sure Your Super­ intendent is on your side." American School Board Journal (July, 1972). Morris, Hollis A . , Jr. Studies in School Administration. Washington, D.C.l American Association of School Administrators, 1957. 105 Norton, M. S. "Current Problems of the School Superin­ tendent." Clearing H o u s e , 46 (Spring, 1971) pp. 15-19. Philbrick, John D. City School Systems o f the United States— Circular of Information ob Bureau of~Education Number O n e . W a s h i n g t o n : U. S. Government Printing Office, 1885. Powell, James R. "The Role of the Superintendent in Col­ lective Negotiations Between Teachers and Boards of Education." Ph.D. dissertation. Temple University, 196 8 . "Pressures and Part of the Superintendent's Job." The N a t i o n 1s S c h o o l s , Vol. 67, No. 3 (March, 1961). Profiles of the Administrative T e a m . Washington, D . C . : American Association of School Administrators, 1971. Reller, Theodore L. The Development of the City Superln­ tendency of Sch oo l s . P n i 1a d e l p h i a : n . p . , 1$3^. Sandler, Steven. "Perceptions of the Actual and Ideal Roles of Public School Superintendents in Texas." Ph.D. dissertation. North Texas State University, 1968. Schug, Victor. "A Study of Perceptions of Leader Behavior of the School Superintendent in Selected Michigan School Districts with Use of the LBDQ. Ph.D. dis­ sertation. Michigan State University, 19 74. Shanks, Robert E. "Expectations for the School Superintend­ ency Role." University of Southern California, 1966. Shaw, Archibald. "Directing and Serving." (November, 1962) p. 3. Overview, "State Legislation and Collective Negotiation." House 47, n. 9 (May, 1973), pp. 519-23. 3 Clearing Theisen, William Walter. The Citv Superintendent and the Board of Education" New York: Teachers College, Columbia University Contributions to Education, No. 84, 1917. Thomas, John L. "Role Consensus Analysis Among School Board Members and Between School Board Members and Their Superintendents on the Superintendents Role in Non­ union Collective Negotiations in N e w York State." University of Southern California, No. 67-430, 1966. 106 Trenholm, Ronald B. "The Superintendent's Role in Teacher Negotiations as Perceived by School Board Chairmen and Representatives of Teacher Groups." Ph.D. dis sertation, Colorado State College, 1968. Wallace, R. H. Superintendent as Educational L e a d e r . T o r o n t o , C a n a d a : Ryerson Press, 195 9 . Wilson, C. H. "Is the Superintendent Really in Charge?" School M a n a g e m e n t , VI (February, 1962), p. 5. Wilson, Robert E. The M o d e m School Superintendent. Y o r k : Harper & B r o s . , Publishers^ I960. New Design and Analysis References Babbie, Earl R. Survey Research M e t h o d s . Wadsworth Publishing C o . , 1973. Belmont, C a l i f . : Borg, Walter R. and Gall, Meredith. Educational Re search. New Y o r k : David McKay Company^ I n c . , 19 71. Michigan Education Directory and Buyers Guide, 1973-1974. Lansing, Michigan: Michigan Education Directory, 1973. Michigan State Department of Education. Bulletin 1 0 1 2 . Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State Department of Education, 1973-1974. Michigan State Department of Education. The Michigan School C o d e . Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State Department of Education. Oppenheim, A. N. Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measure­ m e n t . New York: Basic B o o k s , I n c . , 1966. Slakter, Malcolm J. Statistical Inference for Education R esearchers. Reading, M a s s . : Add!son-Wesley Pub­ lishing C o m p a n y , 19 72. Slonim, Morris James. Sampling. Schuster, 1960. New York: Simon and APPENDICES APPENDIX LETTER MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY College of Education Department of Administration and Higher Education East Lansing . Michigan . 48824 Erickson Hall May 24, 1974 Dear S u p e r i n t e n d e n t : Mrs. Sally Bell is a doctoral candidate who is now gathering data relative to her dissertation. This study has the potential for substantially adding to our understanding of the nature of the superintendent's role and function as the chief executive officer of the school district. We realize that there are many demands upon your time. However, we also believe that you will, as in the past, assist us in our efforts to continue research in this vital area. In addition to my interest in this project, Don Currie has also reviewed the purpose of the study and he also appre­ ciates y o u r efforts in assisting with this project. This study is designed to examine the territoriality of the public school superintendent. His territoriality is being defined as those functions he will defend as his, when and if an individual or group threatens his decision-making role. Instructions for responding to the instrument are enclosed. If you have any problems with the instrument please call me. Of course all information is completely confidential and noschool or person will be identified. We value your assistance in this project and would appreciate the opportunity to be of assistance to you in the future. Sincerely, Alexander J. Kloster Associate Professor AJK/kah 107 APPENDIX B DIRECTIONS AND DEFINITIONS Please respond to the following questions: 1. How many years have you been a superintendent? _____ 2. What type of school district do you administer? city _____ 3. urban _____ rural _____ Size of your school district? ________________________ Please note that you are not to sign your name on the survey, and that the survey is not coded in any way to permit identi­ fication. This, we hope, will encourage forthright answers. In order to preserve this anonymity, yet enable us to follow up with reminder notices to non-respondents, we have enclosed a stamped postcard to identify superintendents who have com­ pleted and mailed the form. Follow up reminders are costly but necessary to this study because every individual response is very important to ensure the necessary validity and accu­ racy of our results. A return mail stamped envelope is also enclosed. This study seeks to identify the importance a superintendent attaches to each of several of his functions by the level of strength he would exert to defend his continuation of that function. Enclosed are a series of 36 simulated situations, each based on one of your major job responsibilities. Each situation consists of a threat to the continuance of your decision­ making role in one of these functions. After each situation you will find a section containing num­ bers 1 to 5 which requests your response. You are asked to circle the number which best indicates the strength of defense you would exert to retain your exercise of that function. 0 - no defense— will not exert any defense 1 - weak— will show concern 2 - slight— will protest 3 - moderate— will defend mildly 4 - active— will defend in a determined manner 5 - vigorous— will defend to the full limit of all available resources. In making your choices please respond as though these simulated situations were actually occurring to you in your school district. Please try to complete the questionnaire as soon as possible, we would like to have them back by June 8 , 1974. 108 109 PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION - The selection of staff; the place­ ment and adjustment of staff; judgment of merit; improvement of services of staff; rewards for staff; and the mechanics essential for records governing these activities. FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION - Includes the budget; the accounting for public income and expenditure; accounting for fiscal aspects of the service of supplies; accounting for non-public income and expenditure; maintenance of all essential and sup­ plementary records. SCHOOL PLANT - The development of essential housing, the operation, upkeep, and extension of the existing plant. INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION - Curriculum planning and development. Developing plans and means for improvement of both teaching and instructional program. PUPIL SERVICES - The function that deals with transportation of pupils, diagnostic and remedial services, operations of lunch rooms, etc. PUBLIC RELATIONS - The activity whereby schools are made aware of community conditions, needs and aspirations, and the means whereby the people are informed of the purpose, value, conditions and needs of the public schools. GENERAL PLANNING - Assessment and identification of needs. Developing strategies to deal with needs. POLICY DEVELOPMENT - Keeping the board informed about all aspects of educational program so it can establish policies and provide resources. Identification of weaknesses and developing strategies to overcome them. EVALUATION - Evaluating the effectiveness of the education program in achieving school goals. The evaluation of all aspects of school district operation and activity. APPENDIX C POLICY DEVELOPMENT SIMULATION A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/Legislature D. Parent Groups A 1 POLICY DEVELOPMENT has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM BOARD OF EDUCATION SCHOOL EMPLOYEES NEWSLETTER "In keeping w ith our desire to maintain the best possi­ ble relationship among our staff, we are anticipating removing the superintendent from our team negotiating with the teachers union on school district policies. We have been led to believe that this interferes with positive relation­ ships between the superintendent and staff in the district." "Further discussion on this issue will take place shortly with the superintendent, but we did want you to know of our current thinking on this matter." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of POLICY DEVELOPMENT as one of your f u n c t i o n s . 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense___________________ Vigorous Defense 110 Ill B 1 POLICY DEVELOPMENT has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: FROM: Superintendent School Board President The following statement is excerpted from a letter received b y me from the E A President Bill Smith. "Our Association believes that system-wide policies affecting the working conditions of the teachers in this district can only be developed properly through the collec­ tive bargaining process. This process is one, whereby you, the school board and we, the Association, communicate, negotiate, and arrive at a determination of what is best for this school d i s t r i c t . ” "We have stated and you, as a board, have agreed, I believe that the superintendent should not be at the table on the board team due to the adversary role this would place him in, in working with staff." "We subscribe to this concept and believe that you and the Association can determine system-wide policy through negotiations without the possible and very probable, deterrent of his parti c i p a t i o n . " Note: This will be discussed at our next executive ses­ sion. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below w h ich best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of POLICY MAKING as one of your fu n c t i o n s . 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 112 C 1 POLICY DEVELOPMENT has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LETTER FROM STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Mr. Charles Riley, Superintendent Any School District Anytown, Michigan Dear Mr. Riley: A hearing on proposed rules and regulations for the funding of innovative school district programs based on the aaccountability model will be held Monday, May 13, 1974. These rules provide that school district councils of parents will provide the major thrust toward determining what programs are recommended. School district educators will serve in an advisory capacity to these councils. This hearing will take place at -.0:00 a.m. at the State Office Building Auditorium, Lansing, Michigan. Sincerely yours, Dr. William Brown Program Development Division PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of POLICY DEVELOPMENT as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 113 D 1 POLICY DEVELOPMENT has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. TEXT OP PARENT PETITION We, the undersigned, qualified registered voters of this district do hereby petition the Board of Education of this school district to involve us fully in the decisions that are made about the education of children. We submit the following demands: 1. That each school have a parent—teacher council made up of 5 parents, 3 teachers and the principal. 2. That each council make recommendations on individual school and on school district policy by majority vote. 3. That there be established a school district council advisory to the board of education. 4. That this council be composed of 1 parent from each elementary and secondary attendence area, 1 elementary and 1 secondary principal. 5. That this school district council develop recommendations by a majority vote. We do this in the interests of bringing democracy back into our community and to make our schools more responsive to the desire of the community. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below w h ich best indicates the degree to which y o u will defend the retention of POLICY DEVELOPMENT as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX D EVALUATION SIMULATIONS A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/Legislature D. Parent Groups A 2 EVALUATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. NOTE: ONE BOARD MEMBER TO ANOTHER Dear P a t : Sorry you missed the meeting. We had a lot of discus­ sion on a proposal Ted Gondert made about evaluating the program, policies and non-certificated personnel in the district. Ke wants to hire an outside consulting firm to conduct evaluations of the district on a regular basis. He said that it was just good business to get an inde­ pendent evaluation, and I think I agree with him. I figure the evaluations we get are from people who are involved in what they're evaluating. That has to affect their thinking. We are going to vote on this proposal at the next meeting. The secretary will be sending you a copy. Hope you are feeling better. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of EVALUATION ae one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense___________________ Vigorous Defense 114 B 2 115 EVALUATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM EDUCATION ASSOCIATION CONTRACT PROPOSAL "All evaluations of teachers relating to the teachinglearning process shall be conducted by a team of three teachers in each building recommended by the teachers in that building and appointed by the Association.” "This team shall submit reports on their evaluation of each teacher to the school board and the Association.” "Procedures to be followed and instruments to be used will be developed by a committee appointed by the Associa­ tion. " PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of EVALUATION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 116 C 2 EVALUATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: State Board of Education PROM: Superintendent of Public Instruction SUBJ: Teacher Evaluation The Michigan Tenure Law provides procedures for dis­ missal of incompetent teachers but does not seek to define incompetence. It seems proper, therefore, that the State Board of Education exercise its constitutional authority and its responsibility to do so in the best interest of Michigan Education. I am recommending, therefore, that the board appoint a Committee of Teacher Competency composed of two representa­ tives from the MEA, two representatives from the MFT, and five citizens-at-large who shall define competence and develop standards, policies and procedures by which teachers shall be evaluated in each Michigan School District. PLEASE CIRCLE the number w h ich best indicates the degree to which y ou will defend the retention of EVALUATION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense D 2 117 EVALUATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. PARENTS CONVERSATION WITH SUPERINTENDENT (RECORDED) "Mr. Smith, I am here representing a large group of parents in this district who don't like what some of your teachers are doing. In some cases, we don't think t h e y ’re doing much of anything. Our kids aren't learning anything and we want something done about it." "We got together the other night and decided that maybe it was about time we did something about it ourselves. That's why I'm here— to tell you what we decided." "These parents, and there are many of them, voted that they wanted to visit classes themselves and make reports to you and the school board of what they see and hear. You've got a few good teachers but most of them leave a lot to be desired." "We think the parents have a right to evaluate what's happening in the classroom and we intend to exercise that right. Parents k now what's best for their kids. They want the best for their kids and that includes the best teachers. Since we pay their salaries, we feel we have the right to judge how good they are. You've got enough to do with other things so we can do this evaluating and make these teachers accountable to the community." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of EVALUATION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX E PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION SIMULATIONS A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/Legislature D. Parent Groups A 3 PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. PRESIDENT'S STATEMENT - BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING 5-14-74 "I've had more comments these past two years about our teaching staff. Our community is very concerned about improv­ ing the quality of education in this district and feels some­ thing should be done about it." "When I inquired about how we get our teachers, I learned that almost anyone in the district could be involved. The superintendent selects some, and so do his assistants, and the principals. Some teachers have pushed some on us. Why, even one board member insisted we hire a certain person to teach for us. " "Something has to be done about this mess." "I am therefore recommending to this board that at the next meeting we consider employing a personnel director who will have full charge of recruiting, selecting, and assigning teachers. We need to place this responsibility fully in the hands of one man and stop this chaos we seem to be perpetu­ ating ." "The superintendent and the principals have other jobs to do. We need one person who can do this job and do it well, and report directly to us." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PERSONNEL ADMINISTRA­ TION a£ one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense __________________ Vigorous Defense 118 119 B 3 PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM ABC EDUCATION ASSOCIATION NEWS The ABC Education Association and the Board of Educa­ tion, according to spokesmen, are nearly at agreement on all items in their proposed new three-year contract. Still in doubt, however, in addition to salaries, is the issue of staff assignment. The ABC Education Association believes that seniority coupled with the decision of a building committee of teachers should determine the location and grade level assignment of each teacher. "Teachers know better than anyone else their special competencies," said John Martin, ABC Education Association President, "and should have the authority to place teachers accordingly." The board of education's "no comment" position makes one wonder if capitulation is near. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PERSONNEL ADMINISTRA­ TION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 120 C 3 PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: State Board of Education FROM: Superintendent of Public Instruction SUBJ: Teacher Selection and Assignment-Preliminary Report In accordance with our six stage accountability model, our division of Teacher Certification and Professional Devel­ opment has been exploring ways in which this model might be applied to their responsibilities. i The division recommends that further study be authorized on the following: 1. Regions established for Career Education, Adult Education, e t c . , by the State Board of Education should serve teacherselection assignment functions also. 2. All school districts shall submit classroom unit staff needs to the Region superintendent. 3. Each applicant for certification shall indicate the Region in which he/she prefers employment. 4. The Region Superintendent shall assign teachers to school districts, buildings and grades according to the staff needs inventory report submitted by each school district. I recommend the adoption of these recommendations in principle and that authorization be given to hold state-wide meetings on them. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PERSONNEL ADMINISTRA­ TION as one of your f u n ctions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 121 D 3 PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Superintendent FROM: The Citizens Council for Better Schools SUBJ: Personnel Placement The Citizens Council for Better Schools will be conducting a hearing on their subcommittee reports on May 23, 19 74. Included in these recommendations are such items as: Parents should and must have full participation in the selec­ tion and placement of personnel in this school district. The role of the administration is that of a partner, but the parents, whose children attend schools in the district should make the final decision as to personnel selection and place­ ment. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PERSONNEL ADMINISTRA­ TION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX F FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION SIMULATIONS A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/Legislature D. Parent Groups A 4 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. CONVERSATION SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT TO SUPERINTENDENT "Several of us have been discussing the problem of keeping up on the finances around here. We think this area is pretty important and w e don't think you have enough time to do it with everything else you are doing. So we thought w e 'd propose to the entire board that we hire a financial administrator." "We could give him authority to look after financial matters and let the business manager report to him. The financial administrator could report directly to u s , with copies of his reports to you, of course. This w a y you wouldn't have to worry about that anymore." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of FINANCIAL ADMINISTRA­ TION as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense___________________ Vigorous Defense 122 123 B 4 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. NEWSLETTER ITEM Education Association President S. Hansen, speaking before a group of parents and teachers, discussed the financial administration of the school district. Ms. Hansen said: "I believe that the best way to have good financial administration in this district is to set up a parent-teacher council to oversee it. If the superintend­ ent had to come to us on financial matters it would make the administration more accountable. "I propose we set up a study committee to lay the groundwork and then take this plan to the school board." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of FINANCIAL ADMINISTRA­ TION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 124 C 4 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Superintendent FROM: State Department of Education SUBJ: Financial Administration of Local School Districts. The State Board of Education has become aware of the great variance in methods of financial administration among school districts. In an effort to discover how widespread the problem is, I am sending to each school district, a team of two people to evaluate the financial administration of your school district. The reports of these teams will be used to decide what steps need to be taken to correct the problem. Our current thinking involves either a new division at the Intermediate level that would aid your district in standardizing procedures and setting guidelines or making these teams available on an ongoing basis. We expect to report the team findings to the Board as soon as they are gathered. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of FINANCIAL ADMINISTRA­ TION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 125 D 4 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM DAILY NEWS At the PTA Council meeting last night. Dr. Donald Richardson presented a proposal to the council regarding parental involvement in the financial administration of the school district. Dr. Richardson stated: "We are paying the bills for education for our children. I feel we should have an important part in h o w the finances of this district are handled. I favor a parent committee to review all financial matters in the district." After considerable discussion, the council voted to approach the school board on this matter at its next meeting. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of FINANCIAL ADMINISTRA­ TION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense A 5 SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT TO SUPERINTENDENT "We're not too pleased with the way the plant management is being done. We think it is because you have too much to do. Don't you think it would be better if we hired someone expressly for the purpose of managing all the plants? We could also hire someone to oversee all the new school planning With all your various other duties, I'm sure you can use more time. After all one doesn't need a college degree in admin­ istration to manage a few buildings." "We'd still keep you up to date as to how they are being managed but it would really give you more time for the educa­ tional progr a m . " PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of SCHOOL PLANT MANAGE­ MENT as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense___________________ Vigorous Defense 126 APPENDIX G SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT SIMULATIONS A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/Legislature D. Parent Groups 127 B 5 SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. DISCUSSION AT TEACHER* S MEETING "Say, did you hear about that new proposal the team is ready to push. It looks as if they might get us some decision-making power in regard to both planning new schools and managing those we already h a v e ." "Sounds good but why are they suddenly interested in that?" "They decided it's a good way to negotiate about school plant management as it relates to working conditions for teachers. They hope to get a group set up with teachers given a strong voice in both the planning and the management of the schools." "I suppose it will hit the table next week." "Right. " PLEASE CIRCLE the number below w h ich best indicates the degree to which you will defend your retention of SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 128 C 5 SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. NEWS RELEASE The Michigan House of Representatives today discussed an amendment to House Bill HR-4060. The amendment was offered by State Representative K. Hearin to deal with the problem of empty school buildings in some districts and overcrowded buildings in others. The amendment provides that the State Board of Educa­ tion set up a division to particularly oversee school plant management and planning in the state. The legislator is concerned that there is little coordination between districts as far as school plant is concerned. Rep. Hearin foresees that school districts will be expected, in the future, to clear all school plant planning with the new division. The new division will also evaluate all school plant planning and management plans for all districts. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which yo u will defend the retention of SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 129 D 5 SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING "Ladies and gentlemen, I have asked to speak to y ou tonight, in regard to what I perceive as a very real and urgent probl e m . " "This is the third Citizens Advisory Committee I've worked on, so I do know how they operate and what they are about. The problem I see is that we only a d v i s e . We are the taxpayers in this district, the consumers of the educa­ tional services in this district yet we are only allowed to advise on planning school plant and a bit on managing school plant." "I believe that we should be the decision-makers. We hired the educational staff in this district. They should be the advisors, we should make the decisions. We are allocating our money and o a r resources not theirs. We will continue to live with these schools even if the administrative staff moves on to other districts." "I firmly believe we should go to the board, as a group, and be prepared to demand if necessary to be the decision­ makers in this area. I have already discussed this with several members of this committee. There are ten of us already committed to this plan. We do hope you others will join u s . " PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of SCHOOL PLANT MANAGEMENT as one o£ your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX H INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION SIMULATIONS A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/Legislature D. Parent Groups A 6 INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. REPORT ON M S B A MEETING BY BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBER MILLICENT RILEY "While attending the National School Board Association convention, I observed a demonstration of a new reading program that was not only fascinating to behold but resulted in wonderful learning by the class of students that were there." "This program is called the Maryland Individualized Learning Skills Program. It uses a basic book for each child plus some additional audio-visual materials. According to the reports, the results are just amazing." "I will be recommending to the board of education that we invite Dr. Stanley Richardson to our next board meeting to explain his program so that we can put this program into each elementary building as soon as possible." Board Minutes: 2-13-74 Moved by M. Riley, seconded by K. Brown, that Dr. Richardson's MILS reading program be instituted in each elementary building before the end of this school year and that according to board policy, final action on this motion be taken at the March board meeting. Motion carried., PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT as one^oT your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense___________________ Vigorous Defense 130 131 B 6 INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT F ROM EDUCATION ASSOCIATION NEWS "Our Master Agreement Interest Survey shows that teachers insist on their right to determine curriculum and instruc­ tional direction. The results indicated that 92% of the respondents wanted a stronger voice in curriculum decisions in this district." "Contract negotiations, therefore, will include a demand that teachers, and teachers only, determine what their cur­ riculum working conditions will be. No longer will teachers take a second class position to the administration." "Teachers know what's best for children and youth. The Education Association will work to secure that decisionmaking right for you." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which y o u will defend the retention of Iu""RUCTIONAL DIRECTION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 132 C 6 INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION HJR 4278-Environmental Education Whereas, Environmental Education is of such great importance to individual, state, nation, and wor l d survival, and Whereas, this state has supported strong measures for pollu­ tion control and elimination, and Whereas, education is a function of this state to be exercised by the legislature, the state board of education and the local school district, Therefore, let it be resolved, that the State Board of Educa­ tion develop regulations for a positive program of environ­ mental education in each school district and building in this s t a t e , and Be it further resolved, that these regulations shall mandate the course content by grade level as well as the number of instructional hours appropriate to each course, and Be it further resolved, that the State Board of Education shall establish a system by which adherence to these regula­ tions may be assured. PLEASE CIRCLE the number b e low which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 133 D 6 INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM ANYTOWN NEWS At a meeting of the Parents for Better Schools held last evening, a resolution requiring that Parent Curriculum com­ mittees be established was pres4nted. These committees would determine what should be included in the school program. The resolution was adopted. Mrs. William Brown stated that parents have the right to determine what their children are to be taught. President Mrs. Kathryn Richardson stated that parent groups would be calling on the school board to demand this change as well as beginning a petition drive. Petitions should be presented to the Board of Education at its May meeting. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below w h ich best indicates the degree to which y ou will defend the retention of INSTRUCTIONAL DIRECTION as one of your f u n c t i o n s . 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX I PUPIL SERVICES SIMULATIONS A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/ Legislature D. Parent Groups A 7 PUPIL SERVICES has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM MINUTES: STATE SCHOOL BOARD ASSOCIATION MEETING "Mr. Donald Frake, school board member, spoke on his board's plan to remove the area of pupil services from the direction of the superintendent and hire an administrator to deal with pupil services exclusively." "Mr. Frake reported that his fellow board members believed that this action would free the superintendent for other duties but still keep the superintendent informed through reports at board meetings." "Mr. Frake stated that this plan is to be discussed at the next local board meeting and that he would welcome com­ ments on the plan from fellow members." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which y o u will defend the retention of PUPIL SERVICES as one of your functions. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No Defense___________________ Vigorous Defense 134 135 B 7 PUPIL SERVICES has been your responsibility as a public school superintendentThe action described below could affect your continuation of this function. SPEECH EA PRESIDENT TO MEMBERS "One of the aims of our association this year is to establish the teacher's right to decide what happens in the area of pupil services. This is a vital area in our work with children. We are the experts in this area and we should be the ones to decide what sorts of services should be pro­ vided and how they should be provided. We intend to push for a teachers advisory board to share in the decision­ making in the pupils services area. We feel we know best what children n e e d . " "We intend to make this aim a priority item for the coming y e a r . " PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PUPIL SERVICES as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 136 C 7 PUPIL SERVICES has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. MINUTES STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING Discussion was held concerning the proposal to put all, or nearly all, of pupil services in the local districts under the direction of the Intermediate School District. This proposal would make it possible for districts to save money and administrative time while coordinating the efforts of all pupil services in the Intermediate district. Decision made to hold state-wide hearings on the matter. Times and sites to be scheduled by the State Superintendent subject to board approval. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below w h ich best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PUPIL SERVICES as one of your fu n c t i o n s . 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 137 D 7 PUPIL SERVICES has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. LETTER TO SUPERINTENDENT FROM PTA PRESIDENT Dear Mr. Green: A number of parents in the district PTA council are becoming concerned over the state of pupil services here in the district. We don't see any coordination or account­ ability. We intend to take a plan to the board that will establish a parent governing board to work with you in planning and administering pupil services in the district. We expect May 27, 19 74. cerned. to bring this matter before the board on We think this plan will be best for all con­ Sincerely yours, Ms. Margaret Frake PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PUPIL SERVICES as one of your f u n ctions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX J PUBLIC RELATIONS SIMULATIONS A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/ Legislature D. Parent Groups A 8 PUBLIC RELATIONS has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. THE TOWN CLARION The school board meeting was greatly enlivened last night, by a very loud and angry discussion. Board member J. Gondert voiced a complaint about the way school district public relations are being handled. She questioned why there wasn't better coordination between buildings as to when bulletins are sent out. She also questioned why more positive press releases w e r e n ’t going out to balance the coverage in the district. Ms. Gondert was particularly concerned that so many reports of fights and disturbances have made the news. Board member B. Jones disagreed w ith Ms. Gondert. He stated: "The newspaper prints whatever is news. We don't need to send any news out." Several board members voiced their support of Ms. Gondert's point of view. Board member Gondert promised to return to the next meeting with a proposal that the board hire either a firm or an individual to handle public rela­ tions for the district. It appeared from the discussion that she may have the support to succeed. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PUBLIC RELATIONS as one of your functions. 0 1 2. 3 4 5 No Defense___________________ Vigorous Defense 138 139 B 8 PUBLIC RELATIONS has been your function as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT PROM TEACHERS ASSOCIATION LETTER TO BOARD NEGOTIATING TEAM "In addition to the above stated items, we feel that a competent, available superintendent is a necessary working condition for teachers. We find the superintendent is leaving the office for various purposes with considerable frequency. Are Rotary luncheons as important as immediate dealing with school district problems as they occur? We don't think so." "We want the superintendent in his office doing his job, not out somewhere unavailable for crucial problems in the school." "You can be certain that this item will be of major concern to us as we begin negotiations on our new contract." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PUBLIC RELATIONS as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 140 C 8 PUBLIC RELATIONS has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. EXCERPT FROM ASSESSMENT REPORT TO SCHOOL BOARD "While individual pupil scores will not be released, it is expected that school district results by building and classroom will be available to the public. It is con­ templated that your superintendent will expedite this com­ munication and will deal with follow-up at the district level on parent questions." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PUBLIC RELATIONS as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 141 D 8 PUBLIC RELATIONS has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. PARENT'S TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT "Hey, Mr. Jones, what's going on in this district? That superintendent is never t h e r e 1 I don't think anyone even knows who he is I" "Isn't it part of his job to be available? He always seems to be out at meetings or at some club, or just wander­ ing around the d i s trict." "Yes, he returns my calls but he's not there when I want h i m . " "How can we know what's going on in our schools when the superintendent isn't there to keep us informed?" "We parents don't like this. We want something done about it! We will be there as a committee at the next board meeting. We expect action on this problem!" PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of PUBLIC RELATIONS as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX K GENERAL PLANNING SIMULATIONS A. Local Board of Education B. Teacher Association C. State Board of Education/ Legislature D. Parent Groups A 9 GENERAL PLANNING has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. CONVERSATION BETWEEN BOARD MEMBERS "Boy, I don't feel that I am really up on what's going on in the district. No matter how I try to keep on top of what's going on, I keep hearing about n e w things that are being planned that I didn't k now about." "I think we ought to set it up so that we are doing the general planning or at least involved in it. At the very least we should be saying yea or nay on these things before they get in the planning stage." "I agree with thatl Let's bring it up at the next meeting. I think they should get the go-ahead from us before they plan new things. After all they could be using our time to plan something that we are not in favor of at all." "O.K., we'll get it out for discussion at the next meeting." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below w h ich best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of GENERAL PLANNING as one of your f u n ctions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 _________________Vigorous Defense 142 143 B 9 GENERAL PLANNING has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described bel o w could affect your continuation of this function. DISCUSSION AT NEGOTIATIONS SESSION EA Negotiator: "We feel that the general planning being done in this district is being done with little input from the teachers and little consideration for them. We believe that general planning for this district affects to a con­ siderable extent the working conditions of the t e a c h e r s , both directly and indirectly." "We are going on record in favor of teacher inclusion in general planning for the district. We intend to strive for a district-wide committee of teachers and parents to do the general planning, with administrators as expert advisors and resource people. We feel that parent and teacher working together would be a good w a y to plan for the future here in the district." PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of GENERAL PLANNING as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 144 C 9 GENERAL PLANNING has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described b e low could affect your continuation o f this function. • MEMO i ROM STATE SUPERINTENDENT TO: Superintendent FROM: State Superintendent SUBJ: General Planning In an effort to further coordinate the efforts of all local school districts in Michigan, we are proposing a plan whereby the Intermediate School District will require from each local school district a report on how its general planning is done, w h o is involved in planning, the criterion used, etc. A Planning Division of the ISC will then aid each district in setting up uniform planning procedures for general planning. Once this is completed, we would expect that all local district planning reports would be submitted to this division for review and comment. The state board will consider our proposed plan at its next meeting and then hearings will be set up. PLEASE CIRCLE the number below which best indicates the degree to which you will defend the retention of GENERAL PLANNING as one of your fu n c t i o n s . 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense 145 D 9 GENERAL PLANNING has been your responsibility as a public school superintendent. The action described below could affect your continuation of this function. PARENT SPEECH BEFORE THE SCHOOL BOARD "Thank y o u for allowing us time on the agenda this evening. I have come to speak to you of a plan w e parents have for a more viable way to do the general planning for the school district." "We feel that as the people who pay the bills we should have a major role in the planning in this district. These are our dollars that are being spent." "Therefore we propose a parents planning council made up of parents w ith the superintendent in an advisory role." "All plans developed for the district should have to be considered by our group. After all we are the ones paying the bills. We would like to ask for some discussion sessions with yo u to present our plan in more det a i l . " PLEASE CIRCLE the number below w h ich best indicates the degree to which y o u will defend the retention of GENERAL PLANNING as one of your functions. 0 No Defense 1 2 3 4 5 Vigorous Defense APPENDIX DATA In dealing with the statistical tests of the additional questions, it was necessary to generate certain data with the computer. The MANOVA Multivariance was used. Then to make use of the data, the Millman Glass Rules of Thumb were employed. The following table illustrates these rules. Table 1. riillman Glass Rules of Thumb SFT :G ST :G SF:G GFT GT GF FT T F S:G G G / / / / / / / / / X X S :G / / / / / / / / / X / P / / X / / / / / X / - T / X / / / / / X / /- FT X / / / / / X / / GF / / X / / X / / GT / X / / X / / / X GFT / / / / / / X / / / ST:G / X GFT 1 / / / / i SFT :G X / / / / / i taj 7 F 6 PT 4 GT 2 S F :G G ■ GF 3 1 1 P 3 <* t m «* L Years of superintendency was the first variable considered. Prom the data generated by computer, the following table was constructed. 146 ' 147 Table 2. Source Mean Square Degrees of Freedom G S:G 11.6364 12.327 329.922 276.592 434.3757 19.3750 4.4076 29.037 10.904 5.639 23.476 2 106 8 3 24 16 F T FT GF GT GFT , SF:G ST :G SFT :G 6 48 848 318 2544 Using the table set up to illustrate the Millman Glass Rules of thumb, the following computations were made MS MS G _ S:G - -11*636 = .9439 12.327 MS — ^ = 2 7 ^_-f = 49.050 MS 5.639 S T :G MS MS F _ 329.922 _ MS ~ L “ 1 0 7 9 0 4 “ 3 0 *257 S F *G FT _ 434.376 _ _Q , MS---------- 237476 " 1 8 '503 S F T :G MS MS _ G T _ = |M076 = MS 5.639 S T :G GF MS _ 19.376 = 10.904 S F :G MS GFT MS SFT :G __ 29.037 = 1.237 - 23.476 ^ Q 2 148 Using this data for tests: 1. Hq : There is no group by function by threat agency interaction effect. H: There is group by function by threat agency interaction effect. MS GFT _ 29.037 = , - 23.476 MS S F T :G The critical value of F i s : .05 2. Hq : H: 48,2544 approx. 1.37 So we fail to reject H o . There is no group-threat agency interaction effect, There is group-threat agency interaction effect. MS F = .782 S T :G The critical value of F is: .05 F > 2 6,318 * 10 ' ± U So we fail to reject Hq . 3. Ho : There is no group-function interaction effect. H: There is group-function interaction effect. MS F = GF = 1.777 SF:G The critical value of F i s : ne .05 F it > 1*81 16,848 So we fail to reject Ho . J 149 4. Hq : There is a group main effect. H: There is not a group main effect. MS F — MS ^ = 1 1 -6 36 12.327 9439 S:G Critical value of F is: .05 2,106 > 3,07 So we fail to reject H . o In dealing with the second question: school district, Type of it was necessary to build a table for this variable. Table 3. Source G S :G F T FT GF GT GFT SF:G ST :G SFT :G Degrees of Freedom 2 106 8 3 24 16 6 48 848 318 2544 Mean Square 17.1950 12.222 329.922 276.592 434.375 8.958 6 .342 29.233 11.108 5.602 23.473 150 Again itoing the Millman Glass table the following computations wore made: G = 17.1950 _ i .n7 S:G 12.222 “ x -qu/ F _ 329.922 SF:G 11.108 29.701 J T S T :G 276.592 5.602 = 49.374 FT SFT-.G 434.375 23.473 = 18.505 GF S F :G 8.958 11.108 = .806 GT _ 6 .342 _ , ST :G “ 5.602 GFT _ 29.233 SFT:G 2 3.473 Using this data for the hypotheses tests: 1. Hq : There is no group by function by threat agency interaction effect. H: There is group by function by threat agency interaction effect. MS „ _ GFT MS _ 29.233 ^ 1>245 23.473 SFT :G The critical value for F i s : .05 ^ 48,255 > 1 32 So we fail to reject H . o There is no group-threat agency interaction effect. There is group-threat agency interaction effect. MS ■p* — GT MS = 6.342 ... 5.602 " ST :G The critical value for F i s : .05 6,318 > 2,10 So we fail to reject Hq . There is no group-function interaction effect. There is group-function interaction effect. MS F = MS GF = 8 -9 5 8 = 11.108 one •806 S F :G The critical value for F i s : F 16,848 .05 > i 57 So we fail to reject H . o There is no group main effect. There is a group main effect. MS p - ms2 — = S:G ii'A ll9- - 1 -407 The critical value for F i s : .05 F 2,106 >3 07 So we fail to reject H o . APPENDIX M DATA MATRIX DATA MATRIX Function Threat Agency Matrix. School Board Teachers Association State Board of Education/ Legislature Parent Groups Mean 3.694 3.826 4.156 3.413 3.385 S.D. 1 . 4 4 9 1.592 1.341 1.383 1.478 Mean 4.264 3.651 4.752 4.239 4.413 Evaluation S.D. 1 . 0 0 9 1 .31.5 .626 1.178 .915 Personnel Administration Mean 4.477 3.954 4.752 4.459 4,743 .940 1.322 .696 1.005 .738 Financial Administration Mean 4.108 4.303 4.697 3.193 4.239 S.D. 1 . 1 5 0 1.151 .799 1.530 1.130 School Plant Management Mean 4.037 3.862 4.220 3.422 4.642 S.D. 1 . 1 3 3 1.287 1.022 1.436 .788 Instructional Direction Mean 4.314 4.624 4.560 3.835 4.239 S.D. 1 . 0 1 1 .678 1.031 1.258 1.079 Mean 3.940 4.000 4.193 4.046 3.523 S.D, 1 . 2 5 4 1.240 1.110 1.280 1.385 Mean 3.654 3.128 4.486 2.908 4.092 Public Relations S.D. 1 .3 4 9 . 1.522 1.015 1.653 1.206 General Planning Mean 3.635 2.963 3.679 3.963 3.936 S.D. 1 . 5 0 3 5 1.527 1.426 1.079 1.188 Function Policy Development 152 Pupil Services S.D.