INFORMATION TO USERS
The most advanced technology has been used to photo
graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm
master. UMI films the original text directly from the copy
submitted. Thus, some dissertation copies are in typewriter
face, while others may be from a computer printer.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a
complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will
be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyrighted material had to
be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re
produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper
left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal
sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is available
as one exposure on a standard 35 mm slide or as a 17" x 23"
black and white photographic print for an additional charge.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been
reproduced xerographically in this copy. 35 mm slides or
6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for
any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for
an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
II
UMI
A ccessin g the World's Information sin ce 1938
300 North Z eeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA
O rder N u m b er 8900070
Efficacy characteristics o f principals in low- and high-perform ing
M ichigan elem entary schools
Lipsett, William Frank, Ph.D.
Michigan State University, 1988
Copyright ©1988 by Lipsett, William Frank. All rights reserved.
UMI
300 N. ZeebRd.
Ann Arbor, MI 48106
PLEASE NOTE:
In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy.
Problems encountered with this docum ent have been identified here with a check mark V .
1.
Glossy photographs or p a g e s_____
2.
Colored illustrations, paper or print______
3.
Photographs with dark background_____
4.
Illustrations are poor copy______
5.
Pages with black marks, not original copy______
6.
Print shows through as there is text on both sides of p a g e _______
7.
Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages
8.
Print exceeds margin requirem ents_____
9.
Tightly bound copy with print lost in sp in e_______
i/
10.
Computer printout pages with indistinct print______
11.
Page(s)____________lacking when material received, and not available from school or
author.
12.
Page(s)____________seem to b e missing in numbering only as text follows.
13.
Two pages num bered
14.
Curling and wrinkled p ag es______
15.
Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed a s received_________
16.
Other_______________________________________________________________________
. Text follows.
UMI
EFFICACY CHARACTERISTICS OF PRINCIPALS IN LOW- AND
HIGH-PERFORMING MICHIGAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
By
William Frank L i p s e t t
A DISSERTATION
Submitted t o
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y
in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f t h e re q u ir e m e n ts
f o r t h e degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department o f Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
ABSTRACT
EFFICACY CHARACTERISTICS OF PRINCIPALS IN LOW- AND
HIGH-PERFORMING MICHIGAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
By
William Frank L i p s e t t
The
w riter
hypoth esi zed
that
principals
of
hig h -p erfo rm in g
Michigan elem ent ary sc ho ols were more e f f i c a c i o u s than p r i n c i p a l s of
low-performing s c h o o ls .
E f f ic a c y was d e f i n e d as t h e e x t e n t t o which
one b e l i e v e s h e /s h e can produce a d e s i r e d outcome.
criterio n -referen ced
levels.
State -ma nda ted
t e s t s were used t o d e t e r m i n e
perform ance
Schools where 90% or more o f t h e s t u d e n t s achieved minimum
mastery over a t h r e e - y e a r pe rio d were i d e n t i f i e d as h ig h -p e rf o rm in g ;
scho ols where th e p e rc en ta g e was below 75% were c h a r a c t e r i z e d
as
low-performing.
Two
questionnaires
were
developed
to
Confidence, and Importance e f f i c a c y l e v e l s .
assess
A b ility,
One q u e s t i o n n a i r e was
based on t h e e f f e c t i v e - s c h o o l s l i t e r a t u r e , and t h e second was based
on
Gibson’ s
Teacher
Efficacy
inc lud ed
res po nse s
between,
and 55 high-p er fo rmi ng
Four p r i n c i p a l s
Questionnaire.
from p r i n c i p a l s
in
in
final
45 low-performing,
schools--a
high-perform ing
The
return
schools
and
rate
four
sample
59
in -
o f 60.5%.
in
low-
performing scho ols were a l s o i nt e rv ie w ed using a c r i t i c a l - i n c i d e n t s
format.
William Frank L i p s e t t
Prin ci pal -comp onen t
factor
analysis,
discriminant
function
a n a l y s i s , and one-way ANOVA f a i l e d t o i d e n t i f y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r
ences among t h e t h r e e groups.
substantiated
Mean s c o r e d i f f e r e n c e s by item were
by i n t e r v i e w d a t a
from p r i n c i p a l s
in t h e
high-
performing sample but no t f o r p r i n c i p a l s in low-performing s c h o o l s .
Questionnaire
res ponse s
from p r i n c i p a l s
in low-performing
sch ools
su gge st ed th e y were both competent and c o n f i d e n t co nducting school
needs a ss e ss m e n ts , y e t none o f t h e f o u r p r i n c i p a l s i n te rv ie w e d was
involved in such a c t i v i t i e s .
principals
in t h e
Conversely,
hi gh -pe rf orm ing
sample
q u e s t i o n n a i r e d a t a from
indicated
t h e i r b e h a v io r had an e f f e c t on t h e i r s t a f f ;
the
interview s.
The f i n d i n g s
the y
believed
t h i s was confirmed by
suggested t h a t
principals
in
high-
performing s c h o o ls , because the y engaged in t h e be hav io rs l i s t e d in
the
their
questionnaires,
performance
were more
than
were
knowledgeable
their
and
colleagues
realistic
in
about
low-performing
s c h o o l s , who o v e r e s t i m a t e d t h e i r A b i l i t y , Confidence, and Importance
efficacy lev els.
The i n t e r v i e w d a t a confirmed t h a t p r i n c i p a l s
in
hig h -p erfo rm in g sc h oo ls were more knowledgeable and e x p l i c i t r e g a r d
ing t h e i r
efficacy
characteristics
and more a c t i v e
in l e a d e r s h i p
a c t i v i t i e s than were t h e i r c o l l e a g u e s in low-performing s c h o o l s .
Copyright by
WILLIAM FRANK LIPSETT
1988
ACKNOW LE D GM EN T S
I n d i v i d u a l s , l i k e i n s t i t u t i o n s , can be compared t o a c o l l e c t i o n
of
circles.
Each c i r c l e
determ ines
i n c l u s i o n o r one o f e x c l u s i o n .
its
own
"ethos"--one
of
I am ind e bt e d t o t h e C o lle g e of
Education a t Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y f o r c r e a t i n g and m a in ta in in g
an environment o f i n c l u s i o n t h a t has made me a b e t t e r communicator,
a b e tte r adm inistrator,
a b e t t e r p e rs on ,
and, above a l l ,
a better
educator.
A number o f i n d i v i d u a l s c r e a t e d , n u r t u r e d , pro vided a s s i s t a n c e ,
and s u p p o r t e d t h e r e q u i s i t e t e a c h i n g / l e a r n i n g e n v i r o n m e n t t h a t
c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h i s growth.
Included in t h i s l i s t a r e members o f my
family--my w i f e , P h y l l i s , and our two c h i l d r e n , Adina and C h r i s t i a n .
I
am a l s o
in de bte d
t o my mother and
father,
who
continuously
s t r e s s e d hard work, high e x p e c t a t i o n s , and t h e need t o l e a r n .
of
im portance
were
an a u n t
and u n c l e ,
Dr.
and Mrs.
Also
Murray
Wannamaker, who were in s t r u m e n t a l in my a t t e n d i n g c o l l e g e fo ll ow in g
graduation
from
high
graduate s tu d en ts,
s c h o o l.
Also
inc lud ed
were
two o f whom I wish t o r e c o g n i z e :
a
number
Dr.
of
Camille
Donnelly and Dr. Marianne Higgins.
At t h e u n i v e r s i t y l e v e l , t h e r e were many whose c i r c l e s e n ri c h ed
and s u s t a i n e d my per so nal p u r s u i t o f e x c e l l e n c e .
o f my committee:
Dr. Larry L e z o t t e ,
There were members
who c h a ll e n g e d and c r y s t a l l i z e d
my th ou gh ts
about
education;
Dr.
John
Suehr,
who t a u g h t
me to
re co gnize my weaknesses; Dr. J a n e t Alleman, who was always t h e r e t o
encourage;
and Dr.
communicator.
Joseph
Straabraher,
And t h e r e were o t h e r s .
who made me a b e t t e r
Dr. Fred I g na to v ic h provided
s t i m u l a t i o n and s u p p o r t , and he a s s i s t e d me in so many ways.
Phil Cusick made me f e e l
l i k e one o f t h e f a c u l t y .
a f f o r d e d me an o p p o r t u n i t y t o expand my h o r i z o n s .
Dr.
Dr. Sam Moore
Dr. Jim C o s t a r ,
by h i s buoyant and encompassing c h a r a c t e r , was e q u a l l y h e l p f u l .
Dr.
Brian Rowan,
And
by h i s
interest,
also
e n ri c h ed my e x p e r i e n c e .
t h e r e were th e s e c r e t a r i e s , who were c o r d i a l and h e l p f u l .
In c l o s i n g , t h e r e were many, many c i r c l e s .
Within each I found
someone who extended a hand and welcomed my p a r t i c i p a t i o n .
h i g h e s t compliment I can make i s t o say t h a t a l l
each I say , "The Very B e s t ! . "
v
are f rie n d s .
The
To
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF T A B L E S ................................................................................................
ix
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................
xiv
Chapter
I.
II.
III.
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY .........................................................
I n t r o d u c t i o n ...............................................................................
Problem Stateme nt and R a t i o n a l e f o r th e Study . . .
Need f o r t h e S t u d y ..................................................................
Purposes o f t h e Study .............................................................
The E f f i c a c y C o n s tr u c t .........................................................
O p e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f t h e E f f i c a c y C o n s tr u c t . . .
A s s u m p t i o n s ...................................................................................
D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms ..................................................................
O v e r v i e w ........................................................................................
1
2
3
5
6
12
12
13
15
LITERATURE REVIEW ..........................................................................
17
D i s c r e t i o n a r y Behavior o f P r i n c i p a l s ...........................
Theory and Research on E f f i c a c y ........................................
E f f e c t i v e Le adership Behaviors ........................................
G o a l s ............................................................................................
F a c t o r s ........................................................................................
S t r a t e g i e s ...............................................................................
Decision-Making Proces ses ................................................
R el ate d Research ..................................................................
Summary............................................................................................
17
21
27
31
39
52
65
66
71
DESIGN OF THE STUDY......................................................................
73
General Design ..........................................................................
The S a m p l e ...................................................................................
I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n ..........................................................................
P i l o t S t u d y ...................................................................................
The Ta rge t Po pu la ti o n .............................................................
Research Que stions ..................................................................
S t a t i s t i c a l - A n a l y s i s Procedures ........................................
73
74
75
78
79
83
84
vi
Page
IV.
V.
F I N D I N G S ....................................................
86
Demographics ...............................................................................
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e A na ly si s .........................................................
Order E f f e c t ..........................................................................
R e l i a b i l i t y A na ly si s .........................................................
A n a ly si s o f Data f o r t h e P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ..........................................................................
A na ly si s o f Data f o r t h e Modified P r i n c i p a l
E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e .....................................................
Mean D i f f e r e n c e s ......................................................................
A n a ly si s o f I n te r v ie w Responses ........................................
General P a t t e r n s ..................................................................
Inf orm ation Search .............................................................
Sense o f M i s s i o n ..................................
Curriculum A c t i v i t y .............................................................
Achievement O r i e n t a t i o n .....................................................
Te ac h e r- S u p er v is i o n P r a c t i c e s ........................................
I n - S e r v i c e A c t i v i t i e s .........................................................
P e rs ua sio n S k i l l s ..................................................................
Group S k i l l s ..........................................................................
Conflict-Management S k i l l s ............................................
The Wallenda Fa c to r .............................................................
School Image ..........................................................................
Paper W o r k ...............................................................................
Job S a t i s f a c t i o n ..................................................................
T r a in i n g Recommendations ................................................
Summary.......................................................................................
86
89
89
90
99
101
103
105
106
110
122
124
125
127
129
130
131
133
134
135
136
136
137
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMEN
DATIONS ............................................................................................
139
Summary............................................................................................
F i n d i n g s .......................................................................................
Measurement Questions .........................................................
Mean D i f f e r e n c e s ..................................................................
In t e r v i e w Data ......................................................................
Im p l i c a t i o n s ...............................................................................
L i m i t a t i o n s ...................................................................................
Recommendations ..........................................................................
139
142
142
144
147
155
158
162
91
APPENDICES
A.
PRINCIPAL EFFICACY QUESTIONNAIRE
........................................
166
B.
GIBSON TEACHER EFFICACY QUESTIONNAIRE ...............................
176
C.
MODIFIED PRINCIPAL EFFICACY QUESTIONNAIRE ......................
179
vii
Page
D.
STRUCTURED INTERVIEW GUIDE
E.
T A B L E S .....................
BIBLIOGRAPHY
....................................................
183
186
.....................................................................................................
vi i i
242
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
2.1
Summary o f E f f i c a c y Theory ..........................................................
28
2 .2
Dimensions o f P r i n c i p a l Behavior .............................................
30
2.3
Competencies o f Average and High-Performing
P r i n c i p a l s ........................................................................................
68
3.1
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o T a rg e t P o p u la ti o n
.
80
3 .2
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Completed Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s :
Final
S a m p l e ................................................................................................
81
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents by School P op ula tio n
and by P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and
Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f ic a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ..................
87
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents by Gender and by
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and Modified
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ........................................
87
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents by Age and by P r i n c i p a l
E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and Modified P r i n c i p a l
E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ..............................................................
87
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents by Education and by
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and Modified
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ........................................
88
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents by Employment in an
Educational S e t t i n g and by P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
88
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents by A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Expe
r i e n c e and by P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and
Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ..................
89
R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r th e P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and t h e Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
90
4.1
4 .2
4. 3
4. 4
4.5
4.6
4 .7
ix
Page
4.8
4 .9
4.1 0
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15
E.l
E.2
E.3
E.4
E.5
E.6
E.7
C o r r e l a t i o n o f Rand Items and Goals, F a c t o r s ,
S t r a t e g i e s , and Decision Making: P r i n c i p a l
E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e .............................................................
93
Pe rc en tag e o f Explained Variance: P r i n c i p a l
E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and Modified P r i n c i p a l
E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e .............................................................
94
R e s u l t s o f U n i v a r i a t e and M u l t i v a r i a t e A n a ly si s o f
Variance Measures f o r Goals, F a c t o r s , S t r a t e g i e s ,
and Decision Making: P r i n c i p a l E f f ic a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
96
R e s u l t s o f MANOVA f o r A b i l i t y , Expectancy, Importance
by Performance: P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e
.
97
R e s u l t s o f Canonical D i s c r im in a n t- F u n c ti o n s
Analysis: Principal EfficacyQuestionnaire
98
. . . .
Pearson C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s : Rand Items by
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e S u b t e s t s ..................
99
R e s u l t s o f MANOVA of Items by Performance: Modified
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ........................................
100
R e s u l t s o f Canonical D is c r im in a n t- F u n c ti o n s
A n a ly s is : Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n
n a i r e ................................................................................................
101
Achievement Data f o r Low-Performing-School Sample:
Nonrespondent P op ul a tio n .........................................................
186
Achievement Data f o r Ir.-Setweer.-School Sample;
Nonrespondent P o pu la tio n .........................................................
188
Achievement Data f o r High-Performing-School Sample:
Nonrespondent P o pu la tio n .........................................................
190
Achievement Data f o r Low-Performing-School Sample:
Respondent P op ul a tio n .............................................................
192
Achievement Data f o r In-Between-School Sample:
Respondent P op ula tio n .............................................................
194
Achievement Data f o r High-Performing-School Sample:
Respondent P op ula tio n .............................................................
196
A b i l i t y E f f i c a c y by Frequency, Mean, Standard
D ev ia ti o n : P r i n c i p a l E f f ic a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . . . .
198
x
Page
Expectancy E f f i c a c y by Frequency, Mean, Standard
D e v ia ti o n : P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . . . .
200
Importance E f f i c a c y by Frequency, Mean, Sta ndard
D e v ia ti o n : P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . . . .
202
A b i l i t y by Performance Mean, Sta ndard D e v ia ti o n ,
S i g n i f i c a n c e Values: P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
204
Expectancy by Performance Mean, Sta ndard D e v ia ti o n ,
S i g n i f i c a n c e Values: P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
206
Importance by Performance Mean, Standard D e v ia ti o n ,
S i g n i f i c a n c e Values: P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
208
Factor Loadings--Ability Efficacy: Principal
E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e .............................................................
210
F a c t o r Loadings--Expectancy E f f i c a c y : P r i n c i p a l
E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e .............................................................
211
F a c t o r Loa dings --Importance E f f i c a c y : P r i n c i p a l
E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e .............................................................
212
F a c t o r Loadings: Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e With Gibson S t a t i s t i c s ...............................
213
Personal E f f i c a c y by Frequency, Mean, Standard
D e v ia ti o n : Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
214
A d m i n i s t r a t o r E f f i c a c y by Frequency, Mean, Sta ndard
D e v ia ti o n : Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
214
Personal E f f i c a c y Importance by Frequency, Mean,
Standard D e v ia ti o n : Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
215
A d m i n i s t r a t o r E f f i c a c y Importance by Frequency, Mean,
Standard D e v ia ti o n : Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s ti o n n a ir e ...............................................................................
215
Personal E f f i c a c y Items by Performance Mean,
Standard D e v ia ti o n , S i g n i f i c a n c e Value ...........................
216
xi
Page
Personal E f f i c a c y Importance Items by Performance
Mean, Standard D e v i a t i o n , S i g n i f i c a n c e Value
.. . .
217
A d m i n i s t r a t o r E f f i c a c y Items by Performance Mean,
Standard D e v i a t i o n , S i g n i f i c a n c e Value ...........................
218
A d m i n i s t r a t o r E f f i c a c y Importance Items by
Performance Mean, Standard D e v ia ti o n ,
S i g n i f i c a n c e Value ......................................................................
219
Reg ression T a b l e s : Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , Low-Performing-School Sample
.. . .
220
Regression T a b le s : Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , In-Between-School Sample ......................
222
Regression T a ble s: Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , High-Performing-School Sample
224
.. . .
H ie ra rch y o f A b i l i t y / G o a l s by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e .......................................
226
H ie ra rchy o f A b i l i t y / F a c t o r s by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e ........................................
227
Hiera rchy o f A b i l i t y / S t r a t e g i e s by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e ........................................
228
H ie ra rc hy o f A b i l i t y / D e c i s i o n Making by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e ........................................
229
H ie ra rchy o f Expectancy/Goals by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e .......................................
230
H ie ra rchy o f E xpec tan cy /F act ors by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e .......................................
231
H ie ra rchy o f E x p e c t a n c y / S t r a t e g i e s by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e ........................................
232
H ie ra rchy o f Expec tancy/Decision Making by Perform
ance: P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ......................
233
Hie rar chy o f Importance/Goals by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e .......................................
234
H ie rarchy o f Im p o r ta n c e /F a ct o rs by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s ti o n n a ir e .......................................
235
xii
Page
E.38
E.39
E.40
E.41
E.42
E.43
H ie ra rc hy o f I m p o r t a n c e / S t r a t e g i e s by Performance:
P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ........................................
236
H ie ra rchy o f Im port anc e/ D eci si on Making by Perform
ance: P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ......................
237
H ie ra rchy o f Personal E f f i c a c y by Performance:
Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ..................
238
H ie ra rchy o f I m p o r ta n c e /A d m in is tr a to r E f f i c a c y by
Performance: Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
239
H ie rarch y o f Im po rt anc e/ Pers onal E f f i c a c y by
Performance: Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...............................................................................
240
H ie ra rchy o f A d m i n i s t r a t o r E f f i c a c y by Performance:
Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ..................
241
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1.1
Bandura’ s S e l f - E f f i c a c y Model ..................................................
2.1
Ashton e t
a l . ’ s E f f i c a c y Model
xiv
........................................
8
23
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
Introduction
Most c u r r e n t l e a d e r s h i p models c h a r a c t e r i z e p r i n c i p a l s along a
continuum (Leithwood & Montgomery, 1982; S e r g io v a n n i, 1984).
At one
end o f t h e continuum, p r i n c i p a l s a re d e s c r i b e d as managers; a t t h e
other,
th e y a re
literatu re
also
seen
has
as
goal-directed
indicated
that
visionaries.
some p r i n c i p a l s
The
a re
current
actively
involved in school-improvement agendas, whereas o t h e r s a re n o t .
Why such
differences
exist
has y e t
to
be
explained.
One
h y p o th e s i s i s t h a t d i f f e r e n c e s in p r i n c i p a l be hav io r r e s u l t from th e
p r i n c i p a l s ’ c o g n i t i v e me dia tio n o f p a s t e x p e r i e n c e s .
For example,
i s i t p o s s i b l e t h a t v i s i o n a r y p r i n c i p a l s have p ro c e ss ed in fo r m a t io n
arising
from
past
experiences
m an ag erial-o rien ted colleagues?
effectiv e
leadership
characteristics.
and
d ifferen tly
more
Q uestions of i n t e r e s t concern
cognitively
processed
efficacy
Why do some and not o t h e r s
academic p ro g r e s s with school pe rs on nel ?
the
status
quo
rather
organizations?
1
review
Why do some and no t o t h e r s
i n i t i a t e school-wide i n - s e r v i c e programs?
a cc e p t
th eir
Why do some p r i n c i p a l s and not o t h e r s communicate
t h e i r g o a l s f o r improvement?
others
from
And why do some and not
than
create
self-renewing
2
In t h e i r s y n t h e s i s of e f f e c t i v e - s c h o o l s r e s e a r c h , Leithwood and
Montgomery
(1982)
su g ge st ed
b e h a v io r a l
sets.
It
principal
behaviors
that
principals
might very well
described
by
attend
be t h a t
the
Lei th w ood
to
different
less-effective
and
Montgomery
c h a r a c t e r i z e i n d i v i d u a l s who, based on p a s t e x p e r i e n c e s ,
have come
t o b e l i e v e t h a t l e a r n i n g i s not t h e primary goal o f t h e s c h o o l , who
f o r some c o g n i t i v e l y based reason a r e unable t o c r e a t e a v i s i o n f o r
t h e i r b u i l d i n g s , and s t i l l
o t h e r s who a r e a f r a i d t o become involved
with any s i t u a t i o n in v o lv in g a degree o f r i s k .
th a t the d e b ilita tin g
based
more
on
i n f o r m a t io n
investigation
low-,
o r empowering images p r i n c i p a l s p o s s e s s are
how th e y
itself.
was
in-b et w een ,
I t might a l s o be
have
pro ce sse d
With t h i s
und ertaken
to
in fo r m at io n
possibility
deter mine
than
in mind,
whether
the
on
present
principals
and hig h -p erfo rm in g Michigan e le m ent ary
th e
in
schools
d i f f e r e d in t h e i r b e l i e f t h a t th e y could i n f l u e n c e d e f i n e d school
outcomes
(efficacy
characteristics).
The r e s e a r c h e r hy poth esi zed
t h a t p r i n c i p a l s in h ig h- pe rf orm in g sc ho ol s would be more e f f i c a c i o u s
tha n t h e i r c o l l e a g u e s in lew-performing s c h o o l s .
Problem State ment and R a t i o n a l e f o r t h e Study
Perusal
of the adm inistrative leadership l i t e r a t u r e
indicated
t h a t much o f t h e r e s e a r c h in t h i s a r e a has "epitomized t h e BaskinRobbins c h a r a c t e r " and has been based on "raw empiricism o f meager
i n t e r e s t to scholars
17-1 8) .
and p r a c t i t i o n e r s
alike"
(B ri d g e s ,
1982,
pp.
Rese ar che rs a l s o have noted t h a t th e r e s u l t s o f one study
f r e q u e n t l y a r e a t odds with t h o s e o f a n o th e r (Behling & Champion,
3
1984),
which
has
le d
many
practitioners
to
"underestimate
importance o f t h e p r i n c i p a l as an agent a f f e c t i n g school
( G r e e n f i e l d , c i t e d in t h e AASA C r i t i c a l
Partly
outcomes"
I s s u e s R e p o r t . 1983, p. 8 ) .
because o f t h e dominance o f survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e s
environm ental
principalship
external
often
of
researchers
have
environment
characteristics
p hy s ic a l
focus,
lim ited
while
the
characteristics
seeking
their
" d is m is s in g
person
or
that
as
could
has r e s u l t e d
and an
understand
to
the
the
subjects’
irrelevant
any
unique
not
be
explained
e v en ts
in
the
by
person’s
This p e r s p e c t i v e , based as i t i s
on t h e premise t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s have l i t t l e ,
t h e i r be h a v io r ,
to
focus
by p hy s ic a l
h i s t o r y " (de Charms, 1976, p. 3 ) .
the
i f any, c o n t r o l
in t h e r e d u c t i o n o f a l l
over
be h a v io r t o
s t i m u l u s - r e s p o n s e sequences.
Countering t h e t r a d i t i o n a l b e h a v i o r i s t p o i n t o f view has been a
layman’ s o r i e n t a t i o n
that
p r o f e s s i o n a l community.
has
steadily
gained
a cc e p ta n c e
According t o t h i s o r i e n t a t i o n ,
in
th e
individuals
a r e unique e n t i t i e s who indeed t h i n k ab ou t, and c o n s c i o u s l y c o n t r o l ,
their
overt
promulgated
internally
b e hav io r .
by
social
directed,
This
"new"
perspective,
psychologists,
intentionally
s u g g e s ts
cau sed,
which
has
been
that
be h a v io r
is
and b e s t
explained
by
investigating internal cognitive processes.
Need f o r t h e Study
The need f o r a c o g n i t i v e - o r i e n t e d
b e ha vi or a r i s e s from two s o u rc e s .
investigation
of principal
F i r s t , although a growing body o f
l i t e r a t u r e has confirmed t h a t p r i n c i p a l s do d i f f e r in terms o f t h e i r
4
b e h a v io r ,
no
investigation
has
been
undertaken
to
discover
me dia ting thoug ht p r o c e s s e s accompany such be ha vio ra l
Using t h e
efficacy
construct
l e a d e r s h i p from a f r e s h
pro vi de s
differences.
an o p p o r t u n i t y
perspective.
Indeed,
what
to
e x p lo re
exploring cognitive
e f f i c a c y p r o c e s s e s t o deter mine how p r i n c i p a l s t h i n k about i s s u e s
and t h e i r a b i l i t y t o perform given b e h a v i o r ( s ) might prove v a l u a b l e
in expanding an unde rs ta n d in g o f t h e p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
exploring
cognitive
importance
discover
efficacy
dim ensions)
affords
u n i q u e m e n ta l
differences.
p ro c e ss e s
(ability,
researchers
processes
th at
To e l a b o r a t e ,
e xpec ta ncy ,
and
an o p p o r t u n i t y
account
for
to
behavioral
In some i n s t a n c e s , d i f f e r e n c e s can be e x p la i n e d by the
s e l f - p e r c e i v e d pr e s en c e o r absence o f s p e c i f i c
skills,
by varyin g
p e r c e p t i o n s o f on e ’ s chance o f su ccess when performing a s p e c i f i c
b e h a v io r , a n d /o r by t h e importance p r i n c i p a l s a s s i g n t o a s p e c i f i c
s e t o f b e h a v io r s .
Second,
there
is
a pressing
need
to
i n v e s t i g a t i o n s t o meet i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l
strengthen
leadership
sch o o l- re fo rm agendas.
As o f Jan ua ry 1983, 2,378 scho ols in 875 d i s t r i c t s in 35 s t a t e s were
involved in school-improvement p r o j e c t s , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e g en er al
p o p u la ti o n
pe rsonnel
is
e x p e c ti n g
(M iles,
Farrar,
more
in
th e
& Neufeld,
way o f
1983).
reform
from
school
A s s oc ia te d with
the
p r e s s f o r change i s t h e knowledge t h a t pr e v io u s e f f o r t s t o change
sch oo ls have been c o n si d e re d f a i l u r e s
(Goodlad,
1983;
K r a je w i s k i,
1982), which in t u r n has c r e a t e d an e x p e c t a t i o n t o do b e t t e r .
c e n t r a l f i g u r e in t h e change e f f o r t i s t h e p r i n c i p a l .
and G r i f f i n ’ s
(1984)
co n cl u s io n
that
"it
appea rs
A
H a l l , Hord,
that
the
most
5
impor tant f a c t o r t o e x p l a i n t h e q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y o f change in
sch ools i s t h e concern o f t h e p r i n c i p a l
and what t h e p r i n c i p a l did
o r di d not do" (p. 95) emphasizes t h e need t o d e te rm in e t h e e x t e n t
t o which p r i n c i p a l s ’ c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s i n f l u e n c e t h e i r b e h a v io r .
In summary, i f one acknowledges t h a t p r i n c i p a l s a r e i m p o r ta n t,
that
research d escrip tio ns
of
effective
principal
beh av io r s
have
become more c o n s i s t e n t ( e . g . , Blumberg & G r e e n f i e l d , 1980; Croghan,
Lake,
& Sch roder,
Hal l i n g e r
1983:
& Murphy,
Goldhammer e t
1985;
al.,
1971;
Leithwood & Montgomery,
Gregory,
1982;
1980;
Lipsitz,
1984; R u s s e l l , M a z z a re ll a , & Maurer, 1985; Wilson, 1982), and t h a t
be hav io r i s c o g n i t i v e l y mediated and c o n t r o l l e d ,
exploration
of p r in c ip a ls ’ a ttitu d e s
i t fo ll o w s t h a t an
and b e h a v i o r s
using
the
e f f i c a c y c o n s t r u c t i s a worthy u n d e rt a k in g .
Purposes o f t h e Study
The major purposes o f t h e c u r r e n t
investigation
were
(a)
to
deter mine whether p r i n c i p a l s in high -pe rf orm ing Michigan e lem en tary
WVI ■V WI W
cr hnnl c
a
*«o
M• V
schools,
(b)
m nyro
HIV I V
to
oPP-iVrMa
r i niic
W •
rnurTnrurr
ou i i r iucMisC
1 c 0 *
t 0
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
macci l a i d vv i i#it jruui
dcaii*
5. Create concrete, precise, outcome-based state
ments that describe your school’s mission.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
6. Conduct a school/community needs assessment.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
7.
Develop specific long- and short-term academic
goals for a select group(s) of students.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE I 2 3 4 5 6
8.
Identify positive and negative forces operating
within your school and in your community that
have an impact on goal attainment.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
9.
List specific actions (events) that need to
be initiated in order to reach goals you have
established for your school.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
170
SKILL STATEMENT
Low
High
10. Formally monitor your school’s progress on
goal-attainment activities.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
11. Communicate school goals and your expectations
to teacher and central office personnel.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
12. Develop long- and short-term academic goals
for ALL students.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
-CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
13. Talk with parents and student groups about
school goals and your expectations.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
14. Establish challenging but realistic instruc
tional goals for teachers to attain.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
15. Involve parents and teachers in the goalsetting process.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
16. Initiate research-based instructionalimprovement activities.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
17. Select school-improvement goals from multiple
data sources (e.g., respected colleagues,
research articles, relevant others).
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
18. Focus student, teacher, and community attention
on school goals.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
i1n9•
11 A L 9 *«t r9 O
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
uajc
s»u< i i wui uui
ucw i a twild/ p u p i » wi a a d i u u t i i
activities on the school’s goal statement.
a n r i ttw
/ I DA LA
*
20. Find the necessary time to be an instructional
leader (e.g., attend to instructional improvement
and school goals) while adequately dealing with
managerial demands (e.g., paper work).
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
21. Employ efficient procedures for use of and
accounting for supplies and equipment.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
22.
23.
Nurture two-way communication systems between
yourself and the community.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
Identify specific reasons for visiting a
classroom prior to making the visit.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
171
SKILL STATEMENT
Low
High
24. Assess maintenance status of your building
and its equipment.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
25. Consistently enforce disciplinary codes.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
26.
Identify learning and teaching philosophies
of prospective teachers.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
-CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
27. Maintain high levels of community involvement
in the school’s academic programs.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
28. Regularly supervise the instructional activities
of the entire staff.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
29. Have teachers’ instructional objectives stated
in concrete, measurable, and observable terms.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
30. Coordinate (scope and sequence) basic curriculum
objectives between and within grades.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
31. Match curriculum materials and student charac
teristics to maximize student learning.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
32. Demonstrate promising new instructional practices
to teachers.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
33.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
Identify instructional strengths and weaknesses
of your staff.
34. Discuss specific strengths and weaknesses of
core curriculum programs.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
35. Assign students to teachers to maximize
student learning.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
36. Keep the staff working on the agreed-upon course
of instructional activities and practices.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
37. Identify general trends or conditions by noting
the behaviors of others and by seeing relation
ships between events.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
38. Nurture friendly and cooperative relationships
between yourself and your staff.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
172
SKILL STATEMENT
Low
High
39. Identify classroom and school-wide factors that
need to be addressed to increase student achieve
ment levels.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
40. Acquire external funding and/or support in order
to achieve goals.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
41. Actively participate in teacher in-service
activities relating to instructional and curricu
lum issues.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
"IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
42. Organize cooperative teacher work/planning
teams.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
43. Use metaphors, analogies, historical examples
to describe desired teacher behavior and
attitudes.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
44. Promote the use of promising teaching practices
by giving teachers encouragement and feedback.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
45. Establish trusting relationships with staff by
listening attentively, paraphrasing for mutual
understanding, and by sharing your own feelings
with them.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
46. Informally observe and interact with students
and staff in order to identify in-service programs.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
47. Deliver an in-service program in an area of
expertise (e.g., instructional techniques,
curriculum, or classroom-management areas).
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
48. Work with an individual teacher to identify and
agree on reasons why specific students or
student groups are not achieving at expected
performance levels.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
49. Identify teaching and learning values of tenured
staff.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
50. Give teachers detailed situation-specific infor
mation following a classroom visit, during feed
back sessions.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
51. Prevent unwanted intrusions into high-priority
school activities (e.g., refuse school partici
pation in a community project because it would
drastically cut into classroom time).
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
52. Find nonteaching time for teachers to work on
designated projects.
ABILITY
CONFIDENCE
IMPORTANCE
12 3 4 5 6
12 3 4 5 6
12 3 4 5 6
173
SKILL STATEMENT
Low
High
53. Have fun with and enjoy students in your school.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
54. Facilitate within-school communication relating
to professional issues (e.g., regularly having
teachers report to the entire staff about special
team/work projects).
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE I 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
55. Review and discuss with staff information regard
ing the school’s performance.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
56. Be honest, direct, and sincere with your staff.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
57. Give specific reasons for using a particular
influence strategy with a teacher, teacher group,
students, and/or parents.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
58. Establish two-way school/community communication
systems by organizing parent groups, holding meet
ings with parents to discuss school goals, or
building parent and teacher project teams.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE I 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
59. When a particular influence strategy is not work
ing quickly, initiate a second strategy to accomp
lish the results you desire.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
60. Maintain high visibility in the school by talking
daily with students, teachers, and support staff.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
61.
Identify influential staff members to participate
on school decision-making teams.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPuRiANCt 1 2 3 4 5 6
62.
Impose controls over others when they are
involved in delegated decision-making activities.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
63. Acquire relevant information from your staff on
important issues that would ultimately have an
impact on their activities.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
64. Establish an informal information network both
within your building and with others in the
community to help you identify problems.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
65. Use a variety of decision-making techniques to
define problems (e.g., decision trees, flow
charts).
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
66. Develop both short- and long-term strategies to
implement solutions designed to solve a problem.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
174
SKILL STATEMENT
Low
High
67. Use specific techniques to reach consensus with
others.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
68. Develop problem-solving skills within groups.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
69. Make decisions which may be unpopular and
involve high risk.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
‘CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
70. Delegate responsibilities to others who are
capable of performing desired tasks.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
71. Resolve conflicts which arise during the
decision-making process.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
72.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
Initiate problem-solving activities quickly
(proactive stance).
73. Accept authority and assume responsibility for
ALL activities in your school.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
74.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
Identify situations where external help is
required in order for personnel to solve a
specific problem.
75. Have others freely express their personal opinions
and attitudes during problem-solving sessions.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
76. Accurately describe the perceptions others are
expressing during problem-solving meetings.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
77.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
Identify causal relationships from data collected
from a variety of sources.
78. Monitor individual and group problem-solving
activities.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
79. Make decisions not to decide.
ABILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6
CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6
80. Acquire information from a variety of sources
before making a decision.
ABILITY
CONFIDENCE
IMPORTANCE
123 4 5 6
123 4 5 6
123 4 5 6
175
JUST TWO MORE . . .
Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree
with each statement below by circling the appropriate
numeral to the right of each statement.
1. When I really try, I can get through to the most
difficult of teachers.
12
3 4 5 6
2. An administrator is very limited in what he/she
can achieve because the teacher’s peer group has
a large influence on his/her performance.
1 2 3 4 5 6
PLEASE PLACE THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE IN THE SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE AND MAIL AT
YOUR EARLIEST CONVENIENCE.
Thank you.
APPENDIX B
GIBSON TEACHER EFFICACY QUESTIONNAIRE
PLEASE NOTE:
C op yri ghte d m a t e r i a l s in t h i s document
have n o t been f i l m e d a t t h e r e q u e s t o f
t h e a u t h o r . They a r e a v a i l a b l e f o r
c o n s u l t a t i o n , however, i n t h e a u t h o r ' s
university lib rary .
These c o n s i s t o f pa ges :
P. 176-178
University
Microfilms
International
300 N. ZEEB RD.. ANN A RBO R. Ml 4 8 1 0 6 (313) 761-4700
APPENDIX C
MODIFIED PRINCIPAL EFFICACY QUESTIONNAIRE
179
QUESTIONNAIRE: FORM 0
Please respond to all of the questions. It is recommended that you 9 0 through the
questionnaire quickly and record your initial responses to each item. To indicate
the degree to which you agree or disagree with each statement, simply circle the
appropriate numeral to the right.
A self-addressed envelope is enclosed for your convenience.
Thank you.
1. When a teacher does better than usual, many times it
is because I exerted a little extra effort.
1 2 3 4 5 6
2. The hours I spend working with teachers have little
influence on teachers as compared to the influence of
other teachers.
12 3
4 5
6
3. If my superintendent commented to me that teachers are more
professional in my school than in other schools, It probably
would be because I have some specific technique of managing
their behavior which other principals may lack.
12 3
4 5
6
4. The degree that a teacher can change his/her behavior is
primarily related to factors outside of the schools’
control.
12 3
4 5
6
5.
12 3
4 5
6
12 3
4 5
6
I have enough training to deal with almost any teacher.
12 3
4 5
6
. My administrative training program and experience have
given me the necessary skills to be an effective administ.rator.
12 3
4 5
6
3
4 5
6
Some teachers need to be placed in lower grades or assigned
lower levels or responsibilities so that they are not
subjected to unrealistic expectations.
12 3
4 5
6
11.
Individual differences among administrators account for
the wide variation in student achievement.
12 3
4 5
6
12.
When a teacher is having difficulty with a new teaching
assignment, I am usually able to adjust my explanation
of it to the teacher’s level.
12 3
4 5
6
If one of my new teachers cannot remain on task for a par
ticular assignment, there is little I could do to increase
his/her attention until the teacher is ready.
12 3
4 5
6
1
4 5
6
6
. If teachers are not self-disciplined they are not likely
to accept any discipline from me.
7.
8
If a principal has adequate skills and motivation, he/she
can get through to the most difficult teacher.
9.
10.
13.
14.
Many administrators are stymied in their attempt to help
teachers by lack of support from the community.
When a teacher gets a better rating than usual it is
because I found better ways of helping that teacher.
1
2
2
3
180
15. When I really try, I can get through to the most difficult
of teachers.
12
3 4 5
6
16. An administrator is very limited in what he/she can achieve
because the teacher’s peer group has a large influence on
his/her performance.
12
3 4 5
6
17. Principals are not a very powerful influence on teacher
behavior when all factors are considered.
12
3 4 5
6
18. If teachers are especially upset one day, I ask myself "
what I have been doing differently.
12
3 4 5
6
19. When the achievement levels 1n the school Improve, it is
usually because I found more effective principal/staff
approaches.
12
3 4 5
6
20. If my superintendent suggested that I change some of my
school curriculum, I would feel confident that I have the
necessary skills to Implement the unfamiliar curriculum.
12
3 4 5
6
12
3 4 5
6
21.
22.
23.
24.
If a teacher masters a new teaching technique quickly,
this might be because I knew the necessary steps 1n
teaching that technique.
Teacher conferences can help a principal judge how much
to expect from a teacher by giving the principal an idea
of the teacher’s values toward education, discipline, etc.
If teachers would attend workshops and take courses, I
could do more.
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
If a teacher did not remember Information I gave in a
previous meeting, I would know how to increase his/her
retention in the next meeting.
12
3 4 5
6
If a teacher in my school becomes disruptive, I feel
assured that I know some techniques to redirect him/her
quickly.
12
3 4 5
6
26.
District, school board, and union rules/policies hinder
my doing the job I was hired to do.
12
3 4 5
6
27.
The influence ofpeer pressure and external policies can
be overcome by good administrator practice.
12
3 4 5
6
28.
When a teacher progresses after being reassigned to my
building, 1t 1s usually because I have had the chance to
give him/her extra attention.
12
3 4 5
If one of my teachers could not perform a teaching assign
ment, I would be able to accurately assess whether the
assignment was an appropriate one for him/her.
12
3 4 5
6
Even a principal with good administrative abilities may
not reach many teachers.
12
3 4 5
6
25.
29.
30.
Just a few more to d o ...... Please go to the next page.
6
181
With the following, please indicate the importance you place on the behavior by
circling the appropriate numeral to the right of the statement. The numbers are in
ascending order, with the numbers 1 and 2 indicating low importance response levels
and the numbers 5 and 6 high importance response levels. A "1" response would
indicate that the skill is useless, while a "6 " level response would indicate that
you consider the skill extremely important.
Low
. Work extra hard with teachers to make sure that they
do their best.
High
1 2 3
4 5
6
2. Work with teachers because 1 have an influence on their
behavior.
12
3
4 5
6
3. Use strategies which promote the development of professional teacher attitudes.
12
3
4 5
6
4. Change teacher behaviors regardless of existing variables
that tend to support the "status quo."
12
3
4 5
6
5. To be motivated and skilled at a level which permits me
to get through to the most difficult teachers on my staff.
12
3
4 5
6
. Discipline teachers when their performance is below my
expectations.
12
3
4 5
6
7. Actively seek additional training on how to deal effectively with student learning problems.
12
3 4 5
6
12
3 4 5
6
Acquire community support for my school.
12
3 4 5
6
Reassign teachers when they are subjected to unrealistic
expectations.
12
3 4 5
6
1
3
6
1
6
8
. Enroll in college/university courses to improve my administrative effectiveness.
9.
10.
11
I I •
i\bVIUVW
m w in f in n r
« U I I UW t Wlt<«
in
I mnn
U b l l t k. » WlilWI I l> W W V n b W I I
j p b b
f 4^
I I
student populations (e.g., male/female or minority groups).
2
4
5
12. Adjust my expectations for a teacher when he/she is having
difficulty with an assignment.
12
3 4 5
6
13.
Ensure that teachers successfully follow directives issued
by myself.
12
3 4 5
6
14.
Find ways to help a poor teacher improve his/her performance ratings.
12
3 4 5
6
15.
Put forth extra effort in order to communicate with the
most difficult staff member(s).
12
3 4 5
6
16.
Control the school’s learning climate.
12
3 4 5
6
17. Exert a powerful influence over teacher behavior.
12
3 4 5
6
18. Continuously seek relevant feedback regarding my impact
on teachers.
12
3 4 5
6
182
Low
19. Find effective administrator-staff approaches to raise
student achievement levels.
12
3 4
5 6
20. In a proactive manner assist teachers implement unfamiliar
curriculums.
12
3 4
5 6
21. Explain and/or model new teaching concepts with teachers
who are having difficulties with a new instructional
approach.
12
3 4 5 6
22. Conference with teachers to learn about their attitudes
regarding teaching and learning.
12
3 4 5 6
23. Get teachers to help one another with issues and concerns.
12
3 4 5 6
24. Confirm during a conference or staff session that participants understand what I have said.
12
3 4 5 6
25.
Redirect disruptive teacher behavior.
12
3 4 5 6
26.
Ignore and circumvent policies that hinder my doing the
job I was hired to do.
12
3 4 5 6
27.
Overcome the influence of negative teaching practices by
using effective administrative strategies.
12
3 4 5 6
28.
Improve the performance ratings and effectiveness of
teachers who have transferred into my building because of
poor performance ratings in the previous building.
12
3 4 5 6
29.
Assess the appropriateness of a teacher’s grade level and
subject assignment in order to maximize learning outcomes.
12
3 4 5 6
30.
Maximize my administrative skill levels to reach ALL
teachers.
12
3 4 5 6
PLEASE PLACE THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE IN THE SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE AND MAIL AT
YUUK tAKLltSI CUNVtNltNCt.
Thank you.
APPENDIX D
STRUCTURED INTERVIEW GUIDE
183
SCHOOL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER:
DATE:
The purpose o f t h e i n t e r v i e w i s t o c a p t u r e t h e e ss e n c e o f how
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s f e e l about t h e j o b .
I have pr e p a re d a l i s t o f
g e n e r i c q u e s t i o n s which I hope w i l l he lp unlock some c r i t i c a l
i n c i d e n t s t h a t s t a n d o u t in y o u r mind as b e i n g i m p o r t a n t .
Obviously, what you say w i l l be kept c o n f i d e n t i a l and r e f e r e n c e s in
my d i s s e r t a t i o n w i l l be a l p h a b e t i c a l , e . g . , P r i n c i p a l A, P r i n c i p a l
B, e t c .
1.
2.
3.
Did you do any th in g d u ri n g yo ur p u b l i c school y e a r s t h a t has had
an impact on how you do t h i n g s ?
Did you do any th in g in c o l l e g e t h a t has had an impact on how you
do t h i n g s ?
What e ve nt o r
adm inistrator?
conversation
prompted
you
to
become
a
school
4.
Can you d e s c r i b e any e ve nt o r s i t u a t i o n ( s ) t h a t made you t h i n k
t h a t y o u ’d l i k e t o do something e l s e ?
5.
De scr ibe a plan o r program t h a t you i n i t i a t e d t h a t worked w e l l .
Were you unsure o f y o u r s e l f ?
What made you c o n f i d e n t t h a t you
could do i t ?
What d id you l e a r n from t h i s e x p e r ie n c e ?
6.
De scr ibe a program o r plan you i n i t i a t e d t h a t d i d n ’ t work w e l l .
How d id you f e e l when i t was over?
7.
How would you d e s c r i b e y o u r s e l f :
p roactive or reactiv e?
De scr ibe what f o r c e s , p e r s o n s , or s i t u a t i o n s s u p p o rt yo ur beinq
one o r t h e o t h e r .
8.
D e sc rib e a major d e c i s i o n you made t h i s y e a r .
making i t ?
9.
D esc rib e an unp opular d e c i s i o n you have made r e c e n t l y .
you f e e l about i t ?
How di d you fe e l
How did
10.
What d e c i s i o n have you pondered t h e l o n g e s t in a r r i v i n g a t a
conclusion?
Is t h i s t y p i c a l , or was t h i s a unique s i t u a t i o n ?
Why do you t h i n k t h a t i t took so long?
11.
Does yo ur school have a mis si on s ta t e m e n t?
How did you inform
t e a c h e r s ? P a r e n ts ? Were you uncomfortable e x p l a i n i n g t o o t h e r s
what was im port ant t o t h e school?
184
12.
Desc ribe a d i f f i c u l t
a c t i o n you t oo k t o p r o t e c t
t h e w e l f a r e of
you r s t u d e n t s . What f e e l i n g s did you have doing t h i s ?
13.
Desc ribe th e l a s t one-on-one c onfe re nc e you held with a person
in your s c h o o l. How d id you de te rm in e t h e p o i n t o f view o f t h e
o t h e r person?
14.
Desc ribe t h e most complex problem you have handled a t your
s c h o o l.
From whom and how did you c o l l e c t your in fo r m a t io n ?
Has t h e r e e v e r been a s i t u a t i o n where you d i d n ’ t g e t a l l th e
in fo r m a t io n you needed? Why?
15.
De scr ibe a s i t u a t i o n where you had t o o r g a n i z e d a t a i n t o some
kind o f meaningful p a t t e r n .
Do you e njo y f i n d i n g p a t t e r n s in
data/situations?
16.
Describe a group s i t u a t i o n where you were t h e f a c i l i t a t o r
had t o ga in consensus where d i v e r g e n t views were p r e s e n t .
do you view o t h e r s who c h a l l e n g e what you a r e saying?
17.
De scr ibe a c o n f l i c t you have r e s o l v e d .
How do you f e e l
c o n f l i c t between y o u r s e l f and t h e s t a f f ? P a r e n t s ?
18.
Tell me o f a su cc e ss you have
you say t h a t you have good
a c q u i r e them?
19.
Tell
me o f a time when you have been t h e b r u n t o f n e g a t i v e
publicity.
Did you handle i t ?
Did anyone h e lp you?
Did you
seek he lp from o t h e r s ?
20.
Desc ribe something t h a t you do b e t t e r th a n t h e m a j o r i t y o f your
p e e r s . What re a so n s do you have t o su p p o rt t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e ?
21.
Describe a t y p i c a l e v a l u a t i o n sequence you f e l l o w when a s s e s s i n g
your s t a f f .
How do you r e a c t when you o b s e r v e s u p e r i o r
performance? Poor performance?
22.
Describe a s i t u a t i o n where you s e t g o a l s
di d you f e e l about i t ?
23.
Describe a time p e r io d when e v e r y t h i n g had t o be done a t once,
and how you handled i t .
Would you say t h a t t h e paperwork e ve r
g e t s t o you?
24.
Do you a s s i g n work to o t h e r people?
monitor t h e i r p r o g r e s s ?
25.
Desc ribe a s i t u a t i o n where you had t o g e t o t h e r people t o help
you when i t was not t h e i r r e g u l a r ass ign me nt. How di d you f e e l ?
and
How
about
had in i n f l u e n c i n g o t h e r s .
Would
persuasive s k i l l s ?
How did you
for a subordinate.
What?
To whom?
How
How do you
185
26.
D escribe t h e most complex r u l e o r p o l i c y you had t o e x p l a i n to
o t h e r pe op le. How di d you pr e pa re ? Were you uncomfortable?
27. Are some p r e s e n t a t i o n s more demanding th a n o t h e r s ?
g iv e me an example? What makes them t h i s way?
28.
29.
Could you
What do you do when you cannot s o lv e a problem o r s i t u a t i o n in
your a r e a o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ? How do you f e e l about t h e s e s i t u a
tions?
Have you e ve r had t o say t o your s t a f f ,
going t o be"? How did you fe e l a f t e r ?
"This i s t h e way i t
is
30.
Have you e ver give n i n - s e r v i c e t o yo ur s t a f f ? How did you fe e l
t h e f i r s t time you did i t ? Do you f e e l t h e same way now?
31.
Are t h e r e any s k i l l s you f e e l t h a t c o l l e g e s , u n i v e r s i t i e s ,
d i s t r i c t s should o rg a n iz e f o r b u i l d i n g a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ?
32.
What do you t h i n k o t h e r s t h i n k o f yo ur work?
Your schoo l?
or
Why?
APPENDIX E
TABLES
186
Table El.--Achievement data for low-performing school sample:
nonrespondent population.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tud en t Po pu la ti o n
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
70.17
72.10
69.23
66.77
47.53
65.73
58.60
62.60
63.17
63.17
67.70
65.83
70.30
64.57
50.17
66.47
61.33
68.73
67.87
67.03
70.40
51.40
69.10
64.53
61.67
69.50
69.77
70.10
69.70
64.40
73.23
63.73
64.57
67.13
60.40
61.20
56.10
70.30
68.80
71.03
61.97
48.00
57.37
74.20
40.17
52.07
50.27
40.27
48.07
57.53
55.93
52.90
43.23
58.70
51.20
58.10
48.93
55.13
56.07
59.90
56.97
53.30
52.17
54.93
60.97
53.10
46.73
54.03
61.43
49.40
58.73
48.73
45.63
41.60
57.63
45.57
57.93
47.77
76.47
63.07
170.
448
305
165
389
225
222
483
246
284
251
412
388
212
178
206
470
352
347
150
400
241
242
510
379
180
204
179
442
469
245
179
288
432
296
408
205
190
142
252
187
Tab le El.--Continued.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu de nt Po pu la ti o n
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
71.17
65.20
72.47
67.80
66.60
70.40
60.37
70.77
55.53
62.27
67.30
66.50
61.27
48.63
67.03
63.77
61.60
52.93
61.17
64.83
64.87
55.53
62.70
58.97
235
143
153
274
175
144
141
143
153
164
454
189
188
T a b le E2.-- A ch i ev em e nt data for in-between school sample:
nonre s po n de nt population.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu de nt P opula tio n
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
83.03
83.90
85.10
85.70
88.50
83.23
81.17
87.33
88.13
82.27
88.70
84.00
86.83
86.57
80.73
82.13
84.50
83.07
86.90
87.93
82.97
83.17
85.17
77.13
83.00
84.60
87.13
82.13
80.83
82.43
80.67
79.10
87.77
78.20
90.03
87.80
86.50
80.83
85.00
84.00
81.20
87.97
82.03
78.87
77.87
82.53
89.77
82.43
83.17
88.03
80.70
86.23
81.20
78.53
88.27
79.20
85.50
87.10
83.87
76.13
78.80
79.60
83.93
80.63
85.03
84.47
79.53
83.33
81.63
78.47
75.13
87.03
80.50
78.30
81.23
86.00
80.87
77.87
189
205
153
183
190
163
215
202
317
327
261
366
173
349
271
215
283
213
170
191
260
179
354
216
186
147
141
176
282
273
235
475
148
131
148
197
294
202
347
189
T able E2.--Continued.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu de nt P op ula tio n
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
88.53
83.87
82.40
87.67
82.63
74.83
86.03
83.57
82.47
88.27
78.33
87.17
88.57
83.14
83.47
80.47
82.77
85.10
79.33
80.20
81.33
76.23
82.70
83.33
82.60
85.83
82.67
83.07
196
220
260
316
155
180
335
133
440
144
252
302
180
301
190
Table E3.--Achievement data for high-performing school sample:
nonrespondent population.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tud en t P o pu la tio n
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
96.87
92.50
90.87
91.47
95.43
97.30
93.00
93.50
94.37
95.13
91.27
96.67
96.43
96.13
95.73
95.97
93.13
93.60
93.43
93.77
96.67
94.63
91.63
94.57
92.67
95.87
95.67
oc on
93.17
91.97
97.60
94.80
97.57
93.70
94.26
98.03
97.60
93.70
89.77
89.50
92.77
94.50
89.50
93.03
90.87
92.60
95.00
92.57
93.00
90.50
94.50
93.83
92.83
90.60
92.73
93.40
96.70
90.27
90.70
93.23
94.43
97.30
92.07
166
157
153
249
150
217
289
147
176
205
180
271
220
209
166
146
151
193
139
228
143
178
227
136
232
189
161
137
154
173
170
148
162
175
135
444
n n
r\
i
IV
90.17
93.80
95.40
94.10
95.83
95.30
93.07
95.70
191
T able E3.--Continued.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu de nt Po pu la ti o n
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
96.47
94.03
94.53
94.17
99.40
95.83
91.63
96.00
94.33
96.90
92.53
94.43
95.97
92.37
91.53
100.00
93.17
90.40
95.40
94.47
90.83
95.30
90.73
97.00
91.93
92.37
92.27
93.87
95.73
93.10
96.17
94.17
94.40
91.47
97.93
96.20
95.47
90.23
254
159
182
161
168
149
144
131
168
215
189
180
152
148
164
130
131
176
190
192
T able E4.--Achievement data for low-performing school sample:
respondent population.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu de n t P o pu la tio n
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
010
011
012
013
014
015
016
017
018
019
020
021
022
023
024
025
026
027
A'lO
\JLU
65.53
71.70
67.00
72.63
72.67
57.80
62.60
69.70
65.23
72.47
63.50
58.30
72.40
72.70
65.90
65.70
62.50
69.63
61.37
69.90
67.17
69.30
74.30
66.30
66.00
72.93
55.17
rV/■?. 90
71.67
65.87
72.70
66.47
66.63
61.33
65.83
70.57
71.87
69.10
63.77
52.07
70.80
60.50
56.40
59.13
38.23
62.73
36.77
69.17
69.30
54.43
61.23
48.73
69.10
55.87
70.27
67.43
67.60
63.73
69.07
62.53
69.40
67.63
52.20
68.97
67.03
64.80
ri i ^
3 1.1/
56.67
56.33
65.63
57.13
63.77
49.40
58.27
52.00
60.73
56.97
59.73
174
250
169
199
146
292
157
152
188
212
164
149
307
175
513
205
144
151
410
281
129
240a
436a
126a
204
189
144
274
330
162
169
245
206
393
202
340
366
185a
232
029
030
031
032
033
034
035
036
037
038
039
193
Table E4.--Continued.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu de nt Po pu la ti o n
040
041
042
043
044
045
68.50
70.50
51.50
73.67
61.90
70.77
65.40
64.07
38.77
64.80
46.50
44.87
126
247
149
229
209
311
P r i n c i p a l interviewed.
194
T able E5. -- A ch i ev em e nt data for in-between school sample:
r espondent population.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu d e nt P o p u la ti o n
046
047
048
049
050
051
052
053
054
055
056
057
058
059
060
061
062
063
064
065
066
067
068
069
070
071
072
86.47
88.17
89.20
88.00
85.27
89.23
79.43
83.00
86.30
83.33
87.43
84.47
83.57
84.50
83.17
85.90
85.80
88.77
87.90
84.43
86.73
78.63
85.10
78.57
87.43
87.57
81.63
82.93
84.47
84.73
79.83
85.33
80.47
81.20
84.07
82.30
76.67
82.33
79.70
83.50
78.20
84.67
80.10
75.77
84.03
84.57
83.13
83.77
80.47
88.33
75.97
86.70
69.07
78.43
A*7A
V/ O
QC* i O
1A
^a
^
/3.U/
074
075
076
077
078
079
080
081
082
083
084
085
086
77.70
77.83
82.90
78.30
86.87
87.60
82.47
81.67
80.73
83.23
86.20
81.33
81.90
80.73
79.93
76.10
82.03
82.10
86.10
87.87
74.73
80.27
84.80
84.90
79.00
81.40
160
160
142
179
254
156
245
161
255
150
280
134
145
403
142
135
156
252
194
158
339
318
154
374
196
281
249
204
146
213
163
247
230
137
148
164
384
191
202
162
172
A A
195
Table E5.--Continued.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tud en t P o p u la ti o n
087
088
089
090
091
092
093
094
095
096
097
098
099
100
101
102
81.40
83.63
86.80
86.07
83.77
84.23
84.07
76.87
83.33
79.23
84.00
84.97
88.10
81.73
82.30
82.70
86.23
78.03
84.97
85.43
82.57
87.23
86.57
83.27
82.53
79.30
78.37
87.63
84.90
78.63
86.93
79.30
215
152
172
179
142
140
184
205
144
377
245
282
186
190
178
163
196
Table E 6. --Achievement data for high-performing school sample:
respondent population.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu de nt P op ula tio n
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
1
1JU
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
94.30
91.93
92.93
95.37
97.50
94.50
96.40
94.83
91.37
98.10
99.53
91.67
97.93
90.73
97.27
94.40
97.20
96.20
97.63
91.57
95.77
95.53
95.17
89.27
95.00
98.80
90.77
m /■
»«*
3H.0/
93.47
94.50
95.57
94.13
90.07
93.77
93.13
91.37
94.73
97.57
96.03
96.63
92.00
91.57
94.10
91.03
96.30
95.60
92.17
93.77
95.37
93.83
99.00
92.87
98.57
94.03
97.93
95.23
90.87
93.83
93.80
94.40
89.87
94.73
93.03
93.27
92.90
94.57
91.20
92.40
92.90
95.97
95.60
91.87
93.63
93.10
93.53
93.17
97.07
96.47
94.10
96.63
270a
164
265
145
142a
146
166
162
150
211
192
154
141
287
189
230
157
134
177
182
155
183a
202
204
198
172
189
149
168
213
155
261
160
219
217
231
199
177
203
178
a
197
Tab le E6.--Continued.
Number
Mathematics
Reading
S tu de nt Pop ul atio n
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
92.93
98.77
91.97
94.93
95.20
92.50
91.33
96.13
97.77
96.57
93.63
94.00
93.40
94.90
90.47
92.57
91.97
89.87
92.77
94.67
96.07
92.30
93.83
94.83
95.43
91.63
94.57
93.93
94.63
96.47
239
140
371
278
168
258
209a
207
176
196
161
184
147
153
211
P rincipal
in te r v ie w e d .
198
Table E7.--Ability e fficacy by frequency, mean, standard deviation:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Item
1
1A
2A
3A
4A
5A
6A
7A
8A
9A
10A
11A
12A
13A
14A
15A
16A
17A
18A
19A
20A
21A
22A
23A
24A
25A
26A
27A
28A
29A
30A
31A
32A
33A
34A
35A
36A
37A
38A
39A
40A
41A
42A
43A
1
1
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
5
2
.
Frequency
3
4
5
2
5
5
5
1
7
2
6
3 13
4 12
2 11
2
6
0
3
1
8
0
1
3 10
0
0
1
2
4
8
5 13
3 12
7
6
2 10
13 13
3
9
1 10
1
7
2 10
0
3
0 12
5 15
0
9
5 12
5 10
6 15
5 20
1
7
1 12
1
4
1
2
5 11
0
2
1
5
12
8
0
2
5
9
11 17
10
29
18
18
13
22
15
22
24
23
19
21
16
22
19
23
27
24
24
28
24
20
14
18
8
21
22
25
25
24
24
19
10
29
14
25
28
6
22
23
19
22
22
40
24
31
33
27
25
32
29
28
23
30
27
24
30
27
20
17
26
23
11
26
25
24
27
24
27
21
25
26
30
24
18
36
29
32
36
24
29
29
18
27
31
17
6
19
13
20
20
22
14
18
17
23
21
29
17
37
23
19
15
17
14
16
11
15
21
32
20
43
17
14
17
10
10
8
17
25
8
25
15
7
41
19
17
31
12
5
Missing
Cases
Mean
S.D.
2
2
1
0
0
0
1
3
1
3
0
0
2
1
2
2
3
2
4
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
3
1
3
0
0
0
2
4.857
4.416
4.756
4.797
4.620
4.342
4.679
4.697
4.910
4.724
5.101
4.532
5.273
4.923
4.636
4.312
4.434
4.442
4.547
3.883
4.532
4.714
5.013
4.688
5.372
4.590
4.269
4.564
4.266
4.380
4.128
4.278
4.975
4.392
4.897
4.785
4.184
5.397
4.789
4.215
5.101
4.456
3.649
1.035
1.128
1.059
0.992
1.233
1.229
1.063
0.994
0.871
1.028
0.810
1.153
0.789
0.894
1.123
1.228
1.124
1.153
1.065
1.298
1.059
1.050
1.038
1.079
0.824
1.074
1.224
1.112
1.140
1.066
1.155
1.240
0.960
0.912
1.112
0.827
1.092
0.744
0.943
1.374
0.856
1.084
1.326
199
T a b le E7.--Continued.
Item
1
2
44A
45A
46A
47A
48A
49A
50A
51A
52A
53A
54A
55A
56A
57A
58A
59A
60A
61A
62A
63A
64A
65A
66A
67A
68A
69A
70 A
71A
72A
73A
74A
75A
76 A
77A
78A
79A
80A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
6
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
4
0
1
1
2
3
5
1
0
3
7
0
3
3
0
2
2
6
0
0
4
0
1
12
2
3
4
3
3
1
3
0
1
2
1
6
3
7
0
Frequency
3
4
5
4
3
4
16
11
7
2
7
14
3
12
4
0
10
12
13
1
0
12
5
11
20
12
9
14
7
5
1
8
0
5
6
6
15
10
14
3
10
7
17
17
15
22
15
17
22
6
18
17
2
22
23
23
6
6
26
21
27
19
22
26
30
20
17
19
20
13
15
12
22
31
30
20
16
27
29
34
29
24
33
24
21
18
22
20
23
24
23
19
26
20
25
23
32
22
12
24
25
17
27
29
42
27
24
33
29
32
15
24
20
28
6
36
38
20
13
22
14
38
28
16
48
22
31
53
21
22
8
51
47
11
19
17
9
17
13
12
22
?R
16
20
41
24
29
15
7
9
8
29
Missing
Cases
Mean
S.D.
1
1
2
1
2
2
0
2
1
0
4
1
0
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
2
5
3
6
3
5.192
5.282
4.857
4.423
4.610
4.675
5.241
4.792
4.244
5.456
4.613
4.962
5.646
4.654
4.603
4.182
5.551
5.526
4.286
4.795
4.551
4.654
4.456
4.385
4.165
4.734
4 861
4.899
4.679
5.304
4.949
4.987
4.662
4.027
4.342
3.945
5.092
0.941
0.881
0.956
1.111
1.226
0.924
0.851
1.218
1.291
0.797
1.184
1.086
0.532
1.091
1.132
1.155
0.696
0.639
1.134
0.972
1.028
1.193
1.207
1.165
1.192
1.083
1.059
0.778
1.087
0.897
0.938
1.038
1.008
1.060
0.987
1.343
0.867
200
T able E8.--E xp e ct an c y e fficacy by frequency, mean, standard d e v i a
tion: Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Item
1
2
IE
2E
3E
4E
5E
6E
9E
10E
HE
12E
13E
14E
15E
16E
17E
18E
19E
20E
21E
22E
23E
24E
25E
26E
27E
28E
29E
30E
31E
32E
33E
34E
35E
36E
37E
38E
39E
40E
41E
42E
43E
1
3
1
0
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
2
2
2
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
2
0
0
3
0
2
7
4
3
4
1
3
6
1
2
1
6
2
3
2
5
4
5
2
9
1
0
1
2
0
2
4
5
6
5
9
7
2
5
1
1
5
1
1
9
3
5
13
Frequency
3
4
5
6
11
10
7
8
12
8
12
5
8
4
7
14
14
15
10
14
7
9
6
14
11
2
6
15
8
16
18
16
14
3
10
5
6
13
3
5
9
5
9
20
17
21
15
20
22
22
22
18
17
19
23
24
16
22
28
21
17
19
23
18
14
19
5
25
24
15
21
13
18
15
18
29
15
20
25
4
18
17
17
21
17
31
29
25
24
24
24
23
23
30
23
18
24
29
21
15
23
30
19
25
25
25
22
25
21
17
27
19
24
20
27
27
20
27
31
17
26
26
18
21
24
14
6
18
11
24
26
21
11
25
22
25
21
30
21
15
14
15
16
13
21
18
26
23
22
45
22
17
20
lb
17
14
14
28
13
28
20
13
43
25
22
32
17
7
Missing
Cases
Mean
S.D.
2
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
2
0
1
1
2
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
2
1
0
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
4
2
4
1
1
1
1
4.649
4.321
4.658
4.859
4.677
4.167
4.797
4.615
4.936
4.538
4.909
4.671
4.462
4.244
4.286
4.421
4.500
4.434
4.658
4.895
4.667
4.671
5.468
4.628
4.278
4.558
4.231
4.390
4.182
4.308
4.974
4.295
4.948
4.808
4.187
5.390
4.920
4.333
4.949
4.423
3.500
1.156
1.222
1.249
1.028
1.101
1.243
1.042
1.198
0.958
1.276
1.066
1.083
1.181
1.271
1.145
1.225
1.065
1.370
1.014
1.053
1.192
1.124
0.736
1.196
1.280
1.303
1.268
1.248
1.285
1.282
0.993
1.163
1.075
0.954
1.259
0.861
0.983
1.483
1.115
1.274
1.430
201
T able E7.--Continued.
Frequency
3
4
5
2
Item
1
44E
45E
46E
47E
48E
49E
50E
51E
52E
53 E
54E
55E
56E
57E
58E
59E
60E
61E
62E
63E
64E
65E
66E
67E
68E
69E
70E
71 r
/ 1L
72E
73E
74E
75E
76E
77E
78E
79E
80 E
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
1
0
6
2
0
7
2
2
1
0
0
1
2
4
5
5
5
0
4
8
1
5
3
0
3
7
8
1
0
12
2
6
12
4
3
9
5
1
A
U
A
V
r
3
0
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
0
2
2
2
2
2
9
5
9
2
8
1
2
5
6
15
10
20
4
6
4
10
12
11
4
4
5
11
2
13
5
2
9
6
10
1
0
14
4
14
11
6
12
9
11
8
6
Missing
Cases
26
27
25
19
24
30
24
20
22
21
19
22
19
21
23
25
18
30
18
30
17
13
23
25
15
21
28
37
39
23
17
22
14
37
32
21
48
22
30
51
25
24
13
52
39
7
21
21
9
19
18
18
24
30
2
2
3
2
2
3
1
2
0
1
3
2
1
2
0
1
1
2
2
2
0
2
1
2
2
1
1
7A
A A
a
r*
IO
OC
LO
7
1
21
10
21
9
16
26
28
18
11
24
23
31
26
28
10
21
16
27
22
42
20
34
25
13
12
8
33
2
1
2
2
1
4
2
5
2
7
5
14
22
15
23
13
15
16
6
17
17
6
18
19
20
5
8
20
18
21
25
24
17
25
17
11
Mean
S.D.
5.195
5.260
4.697
4.325
4.610
4.579
5.205
4.883
4.430
5.449
4.526
4.922
5.526
4.688
4.646
4.244
5.487
5.403
3.688
4.753
4.418
3.675
4.526
4.481
4.273
4.615
5.000
4.987
4.727
5.308
4.805
5.065
4.833
3.960
4.286
3.797
5.104
0.987
0.979
1.189
1.302
1.226
1.062
0.903
1.246
1.356
0.847
1.259
1.109
0.751
1.228
1.241
1.311
0.936
0.674
1.426
1.149
1.267
1.464
1.235
1.263
1.334
1.240
1.059
0.590
1.072
0.930
1.026
1.128
1.121
1.330
1.157
1.324
1.008
202
T able E9.--Importance e fficacy by frequency, mean, standard
deviation: Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Item
1
2
11
21
31
41
51
61
71
81
91
101
111
121
131
141
151
161
171
181
191
201
211
221
231
241
251
261
271
281
291
301
311
321
331
351
361
371
381
391
401
411
421
431
1
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
7
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
3
0
1
8
8
7
6
2
3
4
4
2
0
3
0
3
0
0
4
4
2
3
1
0
2
1
6
3
0
2
5
0
7
1
2
1
0
1
0
7
0
1
5
1
2
8
Frequency
3
4
5
16
5
8
2
7
11
9
9
4
5
4
3
2
1
7
13
7
5
5
2
16
3
11
10
1
7
7
4
11
5
3
10
2
6
2
9
1
2
8
5
8
18
13
24
15
9
11
23
20
16
19
9
12
18
17
12
14
16
24
16
16
4
20
6
16
19
1
11
21
14
12
19
17
13
12
9
13
22
2
5
15
9
19
20
25
28
25
23
24
20
25
20
28
30
19
22
22
30
24
24
23
25
25
18
22
29
19
24
22
28
18
19
26
29
29
27
25
20
29
24
23
30
25
23
29
13
6
10
12
22
42
33
20
19
30
27
30
43
30
38
35
28
20
19
27
27
52
16
37
20
22
54
30
27
40
22
24
25
27
39
40
34
12
51
37
22
40
19
10
Missing
Cases
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
4
3
3
3
0
1
1
0
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
4
2
4
1
1
1
2
Mean
S.D.
4.128
4.390
4.551
5.295
4.987
4.526
4.551
4.870
5.000
5.026
5.295
4.859
5.215
5.269
4.795
4.558
4.618
4.895
4.920
5.579
4.447
5.289
4.190
4.667
5.654
4.937
4.705
5.234
4.577
4.897
4.947
4.885
5.295
5.156
5.218
4.293
5.610
5.333
4.538
5.231
4.667
3.675
1.252
1.183
1.345
0.955
1.134
1.170
1.202
1.140
0.897
1.063
0.913
1.235
0.872
0.767
1.242
1.198
1.119
1.090
1.088
0.717
1.124
0.877
1.578
1.136
0.577
1.147
1 21ft
0.930
1.284
0.961
0.978
1.069
0.824
1.125
0.816
1.228
0.610
0.827
1.374
0.979
1.113
1.482
203
Table E9.--Continued.
Item
1
2
441
451
461
471
481
491
501
511
521
531
541
551
561
571
581
591
601
611
621
631
641
651
661
671
681
691
701
711
721
731
741
751
761
771
781
791
801
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
7
0
1
2
1
2
0
1
0
o
0
2
1
1
0
1
1
5
0
0
0
3
5
0
1
0
3
1
0
1
0
0
3
5
3
0
0
13
0
3
11
4
4
5
4
1
i
1
3
2
1
2
4
3
6
1
Frequency
3
4
5
2
1
6
11
6
4
5
4
10
2
8
4
0
8
1
10
3
3
20
1
8
15
5
9
5
9
2
0
5
2
2
2
2
13
9
16
4
6
3
12
18
8
16
7
10
17
6
17
13
3
17
15
16
5
5
20
18
21
21
22
13
23
13
7
17
25
24
24
31
34
23
24
23
16
22
18
12
23
26
29
11
18
8
30
22
15
20
28
18
28
29
G
OT
W1
13
8
8
7
14
23
31
14
10
21
16
33
24
34
20
18
19
20
*
6
51
48
31
18
32
21
43
37
25
54
27
42
63
25
31
17
58
51
9
28
23
13
25
21
26
23
39
37
47
31
42
25
13
14
14
41
Missing
Cases
Mean
S.D.
2
2
3
2
2
3
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
5
3
5
3
5.481
5.558
4.974
4.468
5.156
4.921
5.333
5.128
4.705
5.564
4.829
5.273
5.769
4.727
4.987
4.532
5.610
5.519
3.468
5.104
4.654
3.974
4.718
4.610
4.714
4.692
5.321
5.244
5.143
5.231
5.117
5.312
5.013
4.297
4.368
4.054
5.263
0.912
0.639
1.119
1.252
0.904
0.906
0.892
1.073
1.229
0.749
1.148
0.927
0.508
1.210
1 . 1 1 1
1.231
0.781
0.788
1.438
0.804
1.193
1.376
1.216
1.289
1.191
1.231
0.845
O.Sbb
1.009
1.237
1.026
0.990
0.925
1.190
1.118
1.479
0.971
204
T a b le E10.--Ability by p er fo rmance mean, standard deviation, s i g
nificance values: Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Item
1A
2A
3A
4A
5A
6A
7A
8A
9A
10A
11A
12A
13A
14A
15A
16A
17A
18A
19A
20A
21A
22A
23A
24A
25A
26A
27A
28A
29A
30A
31A
32A
33A
34A
35A
36A
37A
38A
39A
40A
Cases
77
77
78
79
79
79
78
76
78
76
79
79
77
78
77
77
76
77
75
77
77
77
78
77
78
78
78
78
79
79
78
79
79
79
78
79
76
78
76
79
School C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Performing
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
5.000
4.682
4.727
4.913
4.652
4.696
4.955
4.909
5.273
5.091
5.261
4.565
5.364
5.000
4.667
4.546
4.524
4.381
4.750
4.000
4.524
4.571
5.273
4.773
5.652
4.727
4.136
4.348
4.391
4.609
4.217
4.391
5.000
4.522
4.818
4.913
4.136
5.522
5.000
4.130
0.976
1.128
1.203
1.164
1.402
1.185
1.133
0.972
0.767
1.065
0.752
1.308
0.790
0.976
1.461
1.143
1.167
1.351
1.020
1.517
1.327
1.248
0.935
1.23?
0.573
1.203
1.521
1.526
1.196
1.076
1.413
1.373
1.168
0.846
1.296
0.668
1.246
0.731
1.024
1.546
5.000
4.448
4.724
4.759
4.655
4.276
4.586
4.643
4.656
4.630
5.069
4.483
5.179
5.000
4.793
4.241
4.310
4.621
4.724
3.655
4.655
4.828
5.172
4 =821
5.393
4.448
4.138
4.793
4.172
4.172
4.214
4.172
5.103
4.379
4.931
4.690
3.964
5.414
4.643
4.138
1.134
1.213
0.996
1.023
1.010
1.192
1.018
0.989
0.814
0.967
0.799
1.122
0.819
0.802
0.861
1.380
1.198
1.015
1.032
1.317
0.814
0.929
0.966
0.983
0.832
1.089
1.157
0.902
1.038
1.071
1.031
1.256
0.772
0.903
1.100
1.039
1.170
0.628
0.989
1.356
4.577
4.154
4.815
4.741
4.556
4.111
4.556
4.577
4.889
4.519
5.000
4.567
5.296
4.778
4.444
4.192
4.500
4.296
4.192
4.037
4.407
4.704
4.630
L Aft?
5J lT
4.630
4.519
4.500
4.259
4.407
3.963
4.296
4.815
4.296
4.928
4.778
4.462
5.269
4.769
4.370
0.945
0.925
1.039
0.813
1.340
1.281
1.050
1.027
0.934
1.014
0.877
1.086
0.775
0.934
1.086
1.132
1.030
1.137
1.059
1.091
1.083
1.031
1.115
1.051
6! 934
0.967
1.014
0.860
1.228
1.047
1.055
1.137
0.962
0.993
0.997
0.698
0.812
0.874
0.815
1.276
F
S ig .
of F
1.456
1.337
.061
.218
.055
1.490
1.033
.727
3.352
2.117
.675
.041
.352
.539
.679
.563
.282
.587
2.323
.717
.378
.359
3.022
77?
t
2.823
.444
.853
1.096
.232
1.091
.416
.200
.637
.378
.076
.463
1.445
.708
.891
.257
.2398
.2690
.9406
.8046
.9464
.2319
.3610
.4867
.0403
.1277
.5123
.9602
.7047
.5856
.5104
.5720
.7550
.5585
.1053
.4914
.6868
.6998
.0547
Accn
.0658
.6433
.4301
.3394
.7932
.3411
.6610
.8192
.5318
.6863
.9268
.6311
.2425
.4961
.4147
.7743
•
* W
• TW
W
W
205
T able E10.--Continued.
Item
41A
42A
43A
44A
45A
46A
47A
48A
49A
50A
51A
52A
53A
54A
55A
56A
57A
58A
59A
60A
61A
62A
63A
64A
65A
66A
67A
68A
69A
70A
71A
72A
73A
74A
75A
76A
77A
78 A
79A
80A
Cases
School C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Perform ing
F
S ig .
of F
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
79
79
77
78
78
77
78
78
77
79
77
78
79
75
78
79
78
78
77
78
78
77
78
78
5.000
4.435
3.455
5.174
5.348
4.826
4.348
4.609
4.913
5.261
5.000
4.364
5.522
4.682
5.217
5.783
4.739
4.455
3.864
5.609
5.636
4.546
4.739
4.546
0.798
1.343
1.683
1.073
0.832
0.937
1.071
1.033
0.900
0.864
1.024
1.465
0.665
1.287
1.043
0.422
1.389
1.262
1.424
0.656
0.581
1.057
1.214
1.057
5.276
4.379
3.586
5.214
5.107
4.815
4.393
4.357
4.556
5.241
4.964
4.379
5.310
4.741
4.679
5.552
4.621
4.759
4.500
5.414
5.414
4.179
4.821
4.552
0.841
0.979
1.268
0.917
0.994
1.145
1.166
1.062
1.013
0.912
1.105
1.115
0.806
1.259
1.219
0.572
1.050
1.023
0.962
0.780
0.733
1.390
0.863
1.183
5.000
4.556
3.885
5.185
5.407
4.926
4.519
4.667
4.593
5.222
4.444
4.000
5.556
4.423
5.037
5.630
4.615
4.556
4.111
5.654
5.556
4.185
4.815
4.556
0.920
0.974
1.033
0.879
0.797
0.781
1.122
0.920
0.844
0.801
1.423
1.330
0.892
1.027
0.940
0.565
0.852
1.155
1.050
0.629
0.577
0.879
0.879
0.847
.3908
.8298
.5127
.9876
.4165
.8996
.8531
.4853
.3385
.9876
.1837
.4850
.4676
.5957
.1929
.2970
.9072
.6205
.1429
.4011
.4533
.4513
.9487
.9994
70
#w
0 0 * 7A
V •V / V
1 7 A f\
1 « / "TV
7
•T W t
ACM
T OAT
1 • tmU 1
O
400
• *t O L
l *>rr\
1 •O O ?
.954
.187
.674
.013
.886
.106
.159
.730
1.099
.013
1.734
.731
.768
.522
1.682
1.234
.098
.480
1.998
.925
.800
.804
.053
.001
79
78
79
79
79
79
78
79
78
78
77
74
76
73
76
4.565
4.913
4.304
5.044
4.957
4.870
5.000
5.478
5.087
5.087
4.909
4.000
4.273
3.750
4.955
1.409
1.041
1.363
0.976
1.022
0.757
1.087
0.790
0.793
1.276
1.065
1.225
0.935
1.517
0.999
4.414
4.241
4.138
4.552
4.966
4.862
4.483
5.345
4.966
4.793
4.345
4.036
4.276
4.071
5.172
1.086
1.215
1.093
1.121
0.944
0.953
1.056
0.721
0.944
1.048
1.045
0.999
1.162
1.331
0.848
4.407
4.077
4.074
4.667
4.667
4.963
4.615
5.111
4.808
5.115
4.808
4.040
4.480
3.960
5.120
1.185
1.093
1.174
1.109
1.209
0.587
1.098
1.121
1.059
0.766
0.849
1.020
0.823
1.241
0.781
.131
3.742
.238
2.418
.684
.137
1.541
1.091
.541
.807
2.459
.009
.357
.330
.408
.8776
.0282
.7885
.2485
.5077
.8719
.2208
.3408
.5842
.4500
.0925
.9907
.7008
.7197
.6666
206
Table E ll .--Expectancy by performance mean, standard deviation, s i g
nificance values: Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Item
IE
2E
3E
4E
5E
6E
7E
8E
9E
10E
HE
12E
13E
14E
15E
16E
17E
18E
19E
20E
21E
22E
23E
?4F
25E
26E
27E
28E
29E
30E
31E
32E
33E
34E
35E
36E
37E
38E
39E
40E
Cases
77
78
79
78
78
78
79
78
79
78
78
78
77
79
78
78
77
76
76
76
76
76
78
7fi
77
78
79
77
78
77
77
78
78
78
77
78
75
77
75
78
School C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Perform ing
In-Between
Performing
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
4.727
4.304
4.913
4.864
4.455
4.500
4.522
4.783
5.087
4.870
4.046
4.727
5.046
4.522
4.227
4.261
4.227
4.650
4.571
4.300
4.950
5.000
4.773
1.121
1.396
1.240
1.125
1.143
1.102
1.238
1.278
1.084
1.180
0.950
1.279
1.045
1.201
1.270
1.322
1.232
1.387
1.128
1.780
1.050
1.026
1.343
4.544
4.345
4.241
4.724
4.586
4.069
4.241
4.414
4.621
4.571
4.966
4.310
4.643
4.621
4.483
4.276
4.379
4.379
4.621
4.414
4.621
4.828
4.586
4.786
5 ! 536
4.552
4.103
4.586
3.897
4.069
4.036
4.310
4.966
4.414
5.103
4.690
3.786
5.517
4.714
3.966
1.317
1.203
1.431
1.032
1.082
1.335
1.380
1.323
1.083
1.230
1.052
1.312
1.129
1.015
1.243
1.437
1.147
1.293
1.147
1.150
0.863
1.197
1.181
0.995
0! 637
1.055
1.145
1.296
4.519
1.252
1.262
1.339
1.017
1.053
0.860
1.039
1.343
0.575
1.084
1.476
4.577
4.308
4.889
5.000
4.926
4.000
4.482
4.577
4.741
4.444
4.815
4.630
5.074
4.852
4.630
4.192
4.231
4.296
4.308
4.556
4.482
4.889
4.667
4.230
5! 333
4.889
4.667
4.462
4.519
4.577
4.222
4.370
4.852
4.185
4.852
4.926
4.423
5.269
5.000
4.482
1.027
1.123
0.934
0.961
1.072
1.387
1.087
1.138
0.944
1.188
0.879
1.245
0.997
1.064
1.043
1.059
1.107
1.031
1.011
1.281
1.122
0.934
1.109
1.115
6! 832
1.050
1.038
1.240
1.312
1.302
1.281
1.182
0.949
1.302
0.989
0.829
0.945
1.041
0.849
1.424
l
R71
5.546
4.409
4.044
4.636
4.318
4.591
4.318
4.227
5.136
4.273
4.857
4.818
4.429
5.364
5.095
4.636
1
0.739
1.501
1.609
1.433
1.323
1.141
1.359
1.378
1.037
1.162
1.424
1.007
1.399
0.954
0.995
1.529
F
S ig .
of F
.099
.009
2.661
.497
1.242
1.038
.403
.558
1.356
.808
.367
.768
1.391
.620
.706
.032
.152
.500
.652
.201
1.267
.156
.150
.9059
.9911
.0764
.6105
.2946
.3591
.6700
.5748
.2638
.4497
.6939
.4673
.2553
.5404
.4970
.9687
.8593
.6089
.5242
.8185
.2878
.8561
.8611
O A1O
tm
•70C1
fwv 1
.687
1.071
1.945
.115
1.790
1.560
.313
.074
.493
.270
.498
.424
2.347
.577
1.034
1.506
.5065
.3478
.1500
.8914
.1740
.2171
.7325
.9290
.6130
.7639
.6209
.6560
.1030
.5643
.3609
.2285
•
207
Table Ell.--Continued.
Item
41E
42E
43E
44E
45E
46E
47E
48E
49E
50E
51E
52E
53 E
54E
55E
56E
57E
58E
59E
60E
61E
62E
63E
64E
65E
66E
67E
68E
69E
70E
71E
72E
73E
74E
75E
76E
77E
78E
79E
80 E
Cases
78
78
78
77
77
76
77
77
76
78
77
79
78
76
77
78
77
79
78
78
77
77
77
79
77
78
77
77
78
78
78
77
78
77
77
78
75
77
74
77
School C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Perform ing
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
4.682
4.727
3.522
5.364
5.409
4.727
4.136
4.409
4.818
5.318
4.955
4.478
5.591
4.696
5.182
5.455
4.864
4.696
4.261
5.409
5.429
4.000
5.000
4.739
3.864
4.546
4.682
4.182
4.909
5.227
4.909
4.955
5.455
4.864
5.136
4.913
4.000
4.479
3.714
4.913
1.323
1.352
1.675
0.848
0.959
1.203
1.356
1.297
1.007
0.946
1.214
1.473
0.590
1.329
1.007
0.858
1.490
1.363
1.484
1.141
0.676
1.342
1.234
1.176
1.833
1.371
1.359
1.532
1.231
0.813
1.065
0.950
0.800
0.990
1.283
1.311
1.380
1.123
1.648
1.164
5.103
4.069
3.172
5.179
5.214
4.556
4.107
4.536
4.333
5.276
4.857
4.586
5.345
4.444
4.643
5.552
4.552
4.552
4.286
5.586
5.414
3.379
4.750
4.069
3.357
4.586
4.517
4.276
4.483
4.862
5.035
4.586
5.310
4.862
4.966
4.724
3.750
4.138
3.857
5.069
1.145
1.387
1.365
0.983
0.917
1.188
1.315
1.374
1.144
0.882
1.239
1.181
0.814
1.368
1.193
0.632
1.183
1.270
1.411
0.733
0.733
1.720
1.041
1.335
1.367
1 lOI
1 • IUI
1.153
1.192
1.214
1.157
0.823
1.181
1.105
0.990
1.180
1.162
1.322
1.125
1.325
1.100
5.000
4.556
3.846
5.074
5.185
4.815
4.704
4.852
4.630
5.037
4.852
4.222
5.444
4.462
5.000
5.556
4.692
4.704
4 .185
5.444
5.370
3 .778
4.556
4.519
3.852
4.444
4! 269
4.346
4.519
4.963
5.000
4.692
5.185
4.692
5.115
4.885
4.160
4.280
3.800
5.320
0.877
1.013
1.223
1.107
1.076
1.210
1.203
0.989
1.006
0.898
1.322
1.450
1.050
1.104
1.074
0.801
1.050
1.137
1.076
0.974
0.629
1.086
1.188
1.221
1.200
1 77 O
1.313
1.355
1.282
1.055
0.832
1.050
0.834
1.123
0.952
0.909
1.313
1.242
1.041
0.690
F
S ig .
of F
.936
1.939
1.547
.521
.359
.325
1.802
.869
1.323
.725
.050
.518
.521
.294
1.580
.134
.398
.128
.042
.262
.049
1.244
.905
1.972
1.041
.094
.650
.088
.862
.806
.126
.755
.502
.233
.179
.218
.635
.549
.068
1.001
.3968
.1511
.2197
.5963
.6999
.7238
.1722
.4238
.2726
.4878
.9518
.5980
.5958
.7463
.2128
.8745
.6733
.8797
.9587
.7704
.9520
.2943
.4090
.1462
.3585
.9106
.5252
.9155
.4265
.4505
.8822
.4736
.6074
.7930
.8366
.8044
.5327
.5799
.9342
.3710
208
Table El2 . --Importance by performance mean, standard deivation, s i g
nificance values: Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Item
11
21
31
41
51
61
71
81
91
101
111
121
131
141
151
161
171
181
191
201
211
221
231
241
251
261
271
281
291
301
311
321
331
341
351
361
371
381
391
401
Cases
78
77
78
78
78
78
78
77
78
77
78
78
79
78
78
77
76
76
75
76
76
76
79
78
78
79
78
77
78
78
76
78
78
78
77
78
75
77
75
78
School C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Performing
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
4.130
4.000
4.591
5.091
4.818
4.682
4.636
5.273
5.227
5.182
5.227
5.318
5.348
5.182
5.000
4.500
4.619
4.950
4.850
5.650
4.850
5.300
4.261
4.773
5.727
4.870
4.818
5.364
4.909
4.955
5.000
4.864
5.318
4.682
5.000
5.182
4.191
5.591
5.286
4.909
1.140
1.414
1.469
1.306
1.220
1.287
1.399
0.883
0.869
0.907
1.020
0.716
0.832
0.907
1.234
1.336
1.244
1.276
0.988
0.489
1.137
1.031
1.657
1.152
0.456
1.254
1.402
0.954
1.109
0.950
0.926
1.246
0.946
0.946
1.265
0.795
1.436
0.734
0.956
1.269
4.241
4.517
4.379
5.310
4.897
4.276
4.276
4.793
4.897
4.893
5.414
4.483
5.000
5.172
4.690
4.517
4.483
4.897
4.828
5.517
4.035
5.241
3.862
4.517
5.690
4.690
4.379
5.070
3.966
4.586
4.778
4.724
5.276
4.586
5.035
5.103
4.036
5.552
5.321
4.379
1.244
1.243
1.399
0.806
1.176
1.162
1.162
1.236
0.860
1.133
0.780
1.573
0.886
0.759
1.198
1.353
1.214
1.176
1.136
0.785
1.085
0.951
1.726
1.214
0.660
1.257
1.147
0.961
1.375
1.053
1.050
1.066
0.841
0.867
1.085
0.900
1.262
0.572
0.945
1.425
4.000
4.577
4.704
5.444
5.222
4.667
4.778
4.615
4.926
5.037
5.222
4.889
5.333
5.444
4.741
4.654
4.769
4.852
5.077
5.593
4.593
5.333
4.482
4.741
5.556
5.259
4.963
5.307
4.963
5.185
5.074
5.074
5.296
4.778
5.407
5.370
4.654
5.692
5.385
4.407
1.386
0.809
1.203
0.751
1.013
1.074
1.050
1.169
0.958
1.126
0.974
1.050
0.877
0.641
1.318
0.892
0.908
0.864
1.129
0.797
1.047
0.679
1.312
1.060
0.577
0.859
1.091
0.884
1.091
0.786
0.958
0.917
0.724
1.251
1.047
0.742
0.936
0.549
0.571
1.394
F
S ig .
of F
.250
1.721
.414
.833
.915
1.054
1.306
2.152
.990
.451
.385
3.025
1.411
1.080
.424
.123
.443
.045
.410
.206
3.715
.077
1.114
.398
.619
1.816
1.772
.746
5.909
2.904
.658
.750
.016
.239
1.048
.773
1.853
.373
.085
1.121
.7796
.1860
.6628
.4386
.4049
.3536
.2771
.1235
.3763
.6391
.6816
.0545
.2502
.3450
.6563
.8845
.6442
.9556
.6651
.8141
.0291
.9260
.3336
.6731
.5412
.1697
.1770
.4777
.0041
.0610
.5210
.4757
.9840
.7879
.3561
.4652
.1642
.6899
.9182
.3313
209
T able E12.--Continued.
Item
411
421 '
431
441
451
461
471
481
491
501
511
521
531
541
551
561
571
581
591
601
611
621
631
641
651
661
671
681
691
701
711
721
731
741
751
761
771
781
791
801
Cases
78
78
77
77
77
76
77
77
76
78
78
78
78
76
77
78
77
78
77
77
77
77
77
78
77
78
77
77
78
78
78
77
78
77
77
77
74
76
74
76
School C l a s s i f i c a t i on
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Performing
F
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
4.864
4.727
3.636
5.455
5.591
4.864
4.136
5.091
5.136
5.273
5.087
4.646
5.546
4.727
5.364
5.727
4.818
5.136
4.455
5.455
5.571
3.762
5.136
4.773
4.000
4.773
4.818
4.500
4.864
5.546
5.318
5.364
5.546
5.000
5.318
5.273
4.333
4.546
3.714
5.000
1.207
1.352
1.814
1.224
0.734
1.125
1.320
1.019
0.560
0.935
1.084
1.177
0.739
1.454
0.902
0.631
1.296
1.082
1.405
1.057
0.746
1.480
0.774
1.110
5.276
4.448
3.310
5.393
5.500
4.852
4.286
5.036
4.667
5.276
5.072
4.655
5.379
4.741
5.250
5.690
4.621
4.897
4.571
5.655
5.379
3.172
5.000
4.517
0.960
0.948
1.312
0.832
0.577
1.099
1.182
0.922
0.961
1.032
1.275
1.446
0.903
1.023
0.887
0.541
1.237
1.145
1.168
0.614
0.942
1.466
0.861
1.243
0.700
1.064
1.275
0.694
0.636
1.145
1.174
0.785
1.038
0.698
0.847
1.039
0.506
1.746
VR?1
1
1.343
1.220
1.336
0.990
0.596
0.646
0.790
0.739
1.024
1.249
0.827
1.238
1.011
1.765
1.234
4.690
4.690
4.862
4.586
5.207
5.069
4.897
4.828
5.310
5.207
4.966
4.123
4.310
4.286
5.414
1.199
1.257
1.026
1.323
0.902
1.067
1.145
1.605
0.930
1.082
0.944
1.146
0.968
1.357
0.780
5.482
4.852
4.115
5.593
5.593
5.185
4.926
5.333
5.000
5.444
5.222
4.815
5.778
5.000
5.222
5.889
4.769
4.963
4.556
5.692
5.630
3.556
5.185
4.704
a m
4.704
4.346
4.731
4.667
5.259
5.370
5.231
5.407
5.000
5.423
4.846
4.440
4.280
4.080
5.320
1
. 0
0
0
1.023
0.320
1.142
1.126
1.188
0.679
0.629
1.368
0.786
1.235
1 IRQ
1.171
1.384
1.251
1.330
0.944
0.742
0.992
1.010
1.131
0.578
0.967
1.228
1.370
1.352
0.900
2.561
.964
2.092
.336
.180
.743
3.027
.820
1.829
.314
.156
.162
2.043
.459
.151
1.187
.186
.296
.061
.623
.763
1.104
.383
.317
.304
:oii
.884
.576
.321
1.116
.984
1.508
2.634
.824
.322
1.341
.418
.387
.898
1.206
S ig .
of F
.0839
.3859
.1307
.7156
.8353
.4791
.0545
.4443
.1679
.7312
.8556
.8504
.1368
.6335
.8602
.3108
.8305
.7447
.9406
.5391
.4699
.3369
.6831
.7293
7Q0G
.9693
.4174
.5647
.7264
.3330
.3788
.2280
.0784
.4428
.7261
.2678
.6599
.6805
.4118
.3053
• 0 W W W
210
Table E13.--Factor loadi n gs - -a bi l it y efficacy:
Questionnaire.
Principal Efficacy
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
1
2
3
4
5*
6
7
8*
9*
10
11*
12
13*
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
-.01271
.21383
.11706
.28055
.72050
.27391
.29313
.78818
.61525
.38559
.61164
.18649
.64579
.33352
.23566
.12010
.20017
.49158
.31345
-.18554
21
22*
23
24
25
26*
27*
28*
29
30
31
32
33
34*
35*
36
37
38
39
40*
.11483
.62213
-.05491
.49407
.16652
.66458
.66796
.65938
.17764
.22154
.25740
.40902
.30299
.47909
.71222
.08921
.40245
.29926
.26242
.59479
41
42
43
44
45*
46*
47
48
49*
50
51
52
53
54
55
56*
57*
58
59
60
.37678
.00783
.01033
.49970
.67140
.71712
.10109
.66360
.60181
.45552
.20440
.06274
-.01678
.03037
.33123
.60501
.52896
.27291
.12452
.14512
61
62
63
664
65*
66*
67*
68*
69
70*
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
.07007
.28864
.28295
.23013
.82983
.71578
.61317
.78438
.09501
.50691
.08234
.49329
.12501
.27068
.09119
-.04403
.36269
.26405
.18957
.04079
*It em was used for further analysis.
211
Table El4 . --Factor loadi n gs - -e xp e ct an c y efficacy:
Questionnaire.
Principal Efficacy
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
1
2
3
4*
5*
6
7
8
9
10
11
12*
13*
14*
15*
16*
17*
18*
19*
20*
,04224
.25176
.04962
.52651
.51158
.10276
.28655
.23241
.17530
.25390
.21485
.62354
.61844
.62415
.76832
.57652
.51529
.52574
.52590
.70803
21
22
23*
24*
25
26*
27*
28*
29
30
31
32*
33*
34*
35*
36
37
38
39
40
.11196
.38030
.70031
.60090
.08525
.61706
.55258
.50902
.16419
.11366
.18421
.67233
.56037
.66466
.65487
.23930
.38051
.05543
.31756
.53755
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48*
49*
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57*
58*
59*
60
-.01111
.07048
.22766
.18419
.29481
.42475
.41269
.65427
.54213
.12456
.23102
.14315
.00372
.33984
.31503
.11735
.62421
.85696
.82117
.21255
61
62
63*
64*
65*
66*
67
68
69
70*
71*
72*
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
.70285
-.14017
.54906
.58398
.55580
.71234
.31194
.49181
.36591
.57205
.78346
.68319
.07243
.35524
.21543
.12431
.29490
.30667
.08911
.04335
* Item was used for further analysis.
212
Table E 15.--Factor loadings - -i mp o rt an c e efficacy:
Efficacy Questionnaire.
Principal
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
Item
Loading
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10*
11
12*
13*
14
15*
16
17*
18*
19*
20
-.06789
.07905
.23293
-.02621
.13837
.33521
.32994
.35832
.25204
.54572
.15801
.77957
.57577
.31048
.65404
.47950
.68284
.57301
.51756
.00810
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36*
37
38*
39*
40
.05021
.04369
-.19610
.28402
.48912
.15432
.03748
.24475
.14504
-.01754
.04406
.27714
.44803
.15063
.28547
.66808
.48429
.68696
.77319
.42907
41
42
43
44
45
46*
47
48*
49*
50
51
52
53
54
55*
56
57*
58*
59
60
.18365
.05695
.08797
.07533
.10125
.56915
.18472
.67609
.62634
.38442
.44998
.40828
.24255
-.01935
.75101
.18438
.67285
.66017
.17830
.20760
61
62
63
64
65*
66*
67
68*
69
70
71
72
73
74*
75
76
77*
78*
79
80
.16729
.04800
.26306
.23549
.66017
.69224
.23664
.74753
.20339
.25539
.22104
.22954
.00394
.73074
.17496
.27643
.69102
.67414
.28348
.21593
* I t em was used for further analysis.
213
Table E 1 6 .- -F a c to r lo a d in g s : Modified P r in c i p a l E f f ic a c y Q u e stio n n a ire
w ith Gibson s t a t i s t i c s .
Item
Personal
E ffic a c y
1
3
7
8
12
14
15
18
19
20*
21
24*
25
28*
29*
.15907
.35816
.02610
.09383
.48587
-.02052
.26308
-.03304
.28265
.86996
.48600
.75090
.46293
.61882
.63395
Import.
E ffic a c y
.07830
.13021
.07271
-.02548
-.01815
* .52395
.39258
* .64304
* .66934
.35341
.42704
* .71627
* .60098
* .84098
* .67396
Gibson
Item
Admi n .
E f fic a c y
.49
NA
NA
NA
.46
.46
.53
NA
.55
NA
.61
.51
.49
NA
.48
2*
4
5
6
9
10
11
13
16*
17
22
23*
26*
27
30
.61725
.37975
-.03051
-.06454
.09513
.10753
.01816
.09041
.76807
.46923
.10726
.60638
.62266
-.08771
.23627
*Item was used f o r f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s .
Im port.
E f fic a c y
* .55397
-.01022
.03652
-.19531
.48076
.11046
.23195
.22545
.02987
.29287
* .78954
* .87626
-.01771
.29287
* .61278
Gibson
.54
.54
NA
.60
NA
NA
NA
NA
.65
NA
NA
.52
NA
-.5 2
.45
214
T able E17.--Personal efficacy by frequency, mean, standard
deviation: Modified Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Item
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
1
3
7
8
12
14
15
18
19
20
21
24
25
28
29
1
2
0
2
6
6
3
7
3
20
2
0
4
3
0
1
1
7
5
5
4
5
14
7
18
8
3
10
7
6
5
1
Frequency
3
4
5
6
M issing
Cases
Mean
S.D.
33
26
11
15
25
35
22
13
34
15
26
16
16
31
16
10
7
16
22
7
2
13
6
10
31
5
14
23
9
22
0
1
0
0
5
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
4.250
4.266
4.475
4.512
4.240
3.321
4.291
2.962
4.125
4.962
3.912
4.313
4.734
4.295
4.785
1.085
1.129
1.432
1.467
1.195
1.201
1.312
1.642
1.205
1.084
1.285
1.346
1.174
1.082
1.082
8
8
4
5
6
14
7
22
7
5
10
10
5
7
8
22
31
38
20
29
6
27
12
19
26
25
30
29
25
31
Table El8 . - - A d m in is t r a t o r e f f i c a c y by freq u e n cy , mean, s ta n d a rd
d e v i a t i o n : M odified P r in c ip a l E f fic a c y Q u e s tio n n a ir e .
Item
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
2
4
5
6
9
10
11
13
16
17
22
23
26
27
30
1
2
19
24
10
15
20
34
18
31
21
35
4
5
10
2
12
22
27
12
16
20
18
16
33
28
28
3
12
20
4
18
Frequency
3
4
5
6
Missing
Cases
Mean
S.D.
13
8
17
20
11
13
22
4
9
6
26
20
17
17
20
1
2
12
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
13
6
8
21
4
2
0
1
0
1
4
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
2.564
2.287
3.772
3.012
2.620
2.171
3.000
1.937
2.410
1.938
4.316
3.675
3.287
4.675
3.150
1.275
1.214
1.640
1.392
1.371
1.370
1.493
1.066
1.284
1.129
1.266
1.357
1.536
1.220
1.422
18
17
8
16
20
7
10
8
13
8
8
18
14
5
15
5
2
20
12
5
2
12
2
6
2
25
19
11
31
11
215
T a b le E19.--Personal e fficacy importance by frequency, mean, standard
deviation: M odified Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Item
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
1
3
7
8
12
14
15
18
19
20
21
24
25
28
29
1
2
1
1
1
11
7
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
3
1
0
0
3
8
18
1
1
5
0
3
1
2
6
3
1
Frequency
3
4
5
5
3
4
10
10
1
4
10
1
2
6
5
4
5
5
11
12
21
18
22
9
18
14
10
12
14
18
18
11
13
29
30
26
22
16
27
24
25
23
33
29
22
24
30
26
6
M issing
Cases
Mean
S.D.
33
33
25
11
5
42
33
25
46
30
30
32
26
23
34
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
5
0
5.101
5.139
4.787
3.813
3.474
5.350
5.050
4.650
5.425
5.063
5.012
4.975
4.675
4.747
5.050
1.008
0.957
1.133
1.608
1.439
0.828
0.980
1.284
0.759
0.985
0.987
1.062
1.320
1.295
1.078
Table E 2 0 .- -A d m in is tra to r e f f i c a c y im portance by fre q u e n c y , mean,
s ta n d a rd d e v i a t i o n : Modified P r in c i p a l E f fic a c y Ques
tio n n a ire .
Item
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
2
4
5
6
9
10
11
13
16
17
22
23
26
27
30
1
2
19
24
10
15
20
34
18
31
21
35
4
5
10
2
12
22
27
12
16
20
18
16
33
28
28
3
12
20
4
18
Frequency
3
4
5
18
17
8
16
20
7
10
8
13
8
8
18
14
5
15
13
8
17
20
11
13
22
4
9
6
26
20
17
17
20
5
8
20
12
5
2
12
2
6
2
25
19
11
31
11
6
M issing
Cases
Mean
S.D.
1
2
12
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
13
6
8
21
4
2
0
1
0
1
4
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
2.564
2.287
3.772
3.012
2.620
2.171
3.000
1.937
2.410
1.938
4.316
3.675
3.287
4.675
3.150
1.275
1.214
1.640
1.392
1.371
1.370
1.493
1.066
1.284
1.129
1.266
1.357
1.536
1.220
1.442
216
T able E21.--Personal e fficacy items by p er fo rmance mean, standard
deviation, significance value.
Item
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
1
3
7
8
12
14
15
18
19
20
21
24
25
28
29
Cases
80
79
80
80
75
78
79
80
80
80
80
80
79
78
79
School C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Perform ing
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S .D.
Mean
S .D.
4.318
4.318
4.591
4.500
4.550
3.227
4.409
2.409
4.136
4.818
3.682
4.091
4.773
4.500
4.591
1 .171
1 .249
0 .959
1 .439
0 .826
1 .307
0 .854
1 .501
1 .390
1 .097
1 .555
1 .509
1 .343
0 .964
1 .221
4.100
4.138
4.467
4.533
4.133
3.207
4.241
3.200
3.967
4.967
3.933
4.267
4.793
4.393
4.833
0 .995
1 .157
1 .479
1 .456
1 .432
1 .114
1 .596
1 .710
1 .217
1 .159
1 .202
1 .461
1 .114
0 .832
0 .986
4.357
4.357
4.393
4.500
4.120
3.519
4.250
3.143
4.286
5.071
4.071
4.536
4.643
4.036
4.889
1 .129
1 .026
1 .707
1 .552
1 .130
1 .221
1 .323
1 .627
1 .049
1 .016
1 .152
1 .071
1 .129
1 .347
1 .086
F
S ig.
of F
.460
.296
.116
.005
.916
.557
.121
1.767
.502
.331
.567
.695
.130
1.323
.502
.6328
.7447
.8906
.9953
.4046
.5753
.8865
.1777
.6070
.7195
.5698
.5023
.8781
.2724
.6075
217
T able E22.--Personal e fficacy importance items by p erformance mean,
standard deviation, significance value.
Item
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
PEIMP
Cases
1
3
7
8
12
14
15
18
19
20
21
24
25
28
29
79
79
80
80
78
80
80
80
80
80
80
79
80
75
80
School1 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Performing
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
5.381
5.048
4.636
3.773
3.273
5.409
4.955
4.864
5.455
4.864
4.864
5.046
4.818
4.762
5.182
0.740
0.974
0.954
1.343
1.518
0.734
1.046
1.167
0.739
1.207
1.082
0.899
1.259
1.044
0.853
5.100
5.100
4.600
3.733
3.517
5.533
5.200
4.733
5.367
5.000
4.900
4.966
4.733
4.808
4.933
0.960
1.155
1.404
1.552
1.503
0.776
0.997
1.173
0.890
0.831
0.885
1.017
1.388
1.497
1.413
4.893
5.250
5.107
3.929
3.593
5.107
4.964
4.393
5.464
5.286
5.250
4.929
4.500
4.679
5.071
1.197
0.701
0.875
1.884
1.338
0.917
0.922
1.474
0.637
0.937
1.005
1.245
1.319
1.307
0.813
F
S ig .
of F
1.423
.303
1.754
.114
.314
2.047
.557
.928
.140
1.234
1.264
.075
.399
.067
.340
.2473
.7392
.1799
.8929
.7313
.1361
.5752
.3998
.8700
.2967
.2884
.9282
.6724
.9350
.7129
218
Table E 23.--Administrator e fficacy items by performance mean, standard
deviation, significance value.
Item
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
2
4
5
6
9
10
11
13
16
17
22
23
26
27
30
Cases
78
80
79
80
79
76
80
79
78
80
79
80
80
80
80
School C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Performing
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
2.273
2.409
4.318
2.773
2.546
2.381
2.818
2.227
2.200
1.818
4.667
3.818
3.546
4.909
3.500
1.386
1.563
1.323
1.412
1.405
1.359
1.593
1.412
1.240
1.053
1.197
1.259
1.921
1.019
1.596
2.500
2.100
3.800
3.400
2.517
2.321
2.967
1.933
2.400
2.100
4.100
3.533
3.333
4.733
3.000
1.009
1.185
1.750
1.429
1.379
1.442
1.426
1.048
1.248
1.373
1.494
1.332
1.493
1.143
1.339
2.885
2.393
3 .296
2.786
2.786
1.852
3.179
1.704
2.571
1.857
4.286
3.714
3.036
4.429
3.036
1.423
0.917
1 .660
1.287
1.371
1.292
1.517
0.669
1.372
0.891
1.013
1.487
1.232
1.425
1.427
F
S ig .
of F
1.451
.568
2.447
1.904
.313
1.153
.365
1.479
.483
.498
1.258
.292
.694
1.011
.896
.2409
.5693
.0934
.1559
.7323
.3215
.6953
.2342
.6186
.6096
.2901
.7474
.5025
.3686
.4123
219
Table E 24.--Administrator efficacy importance items by p erformance
mean, standard deviation, significance value.
Item
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
AEIMP
Cases
2
4
5
6
9
10
11
13
16
17
22
23
26
27
30
80
80
79
80
80
77
77
80
78
80
80
80
80
79
80
School C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
Low
High
Performing
In-Between
Performing
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
5.091
4.364
5.046
4.136
5.182
3.895
4.182
4.546
5.571
4.500
4.636
5.182
3.000
4.727
5.182
1.019
1.177
0.785
1.552
0.853
1.487
1.593
1.299
0.811
1.406
1.136
0.733
1.480
1.162
1.053
5.067
3.967
5.133
4.167
5.267
3.700
3.786
4.400
5.367
4.433
4.900
5.267
3.267
4.733
5.467
0.980
1.402
1.042
1.464
0.868
1.466
1.618
1.248
0.809
1.305
1.029
0.907
1.982
1.230
0.730
5.071
4.536
5.482
3.429
5.464
3.857
4.333
4.286
5.370
4.329
5.000
5.429
2.964
4.926
5.286
1.120
1.374
0.580
1.200
0.637
1.604
1.641
1.117
1.115
1.219
0.943
0.690
1.575
1.207
0.600
F
S ig.
of F
.001
1.384
1.956
2.434
.867
.121
.835
.280
.368
.122
.799
.645
.264
.234
.871
.9963
.2566
.1484
.0944
.4241
.8864
.4380
.7567
.6931
.8857
.4536
.5277
.7685
.7921
.4226
220
Table E25.--Regression tables: Modified Principal Efficacy Q u e s t i o n
naire, low-performing-school sample.
V a ria b le s e n te r e d on s te p
M u ltip le
R
R Square
A djusted R Square
Stand ard
E r ro r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Sex
Age
A d m in is tra to r e f f i c a c y
Level o f e d u c a tio n
Approx. number o f s tu d e n ts
Personal e f f i c a c y
Personal e f f i c a c y (im portance)
Years in a d m in is tr a tio n
A d m in is tra to r e f f i c a c y (im p o rtance)
Employment in p u b lic school system
0.40174
0.16140
0.03986
0.44029
R Square Change
F Change
S i g n i f . F Change
0.16140
1.32797
0.2334
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
R egression
R esidual
df
SS
Mean Square
F
S ig . o f F
10
69
2.57429
13.37571
0.25743
0.19385
1.32797
0.2334
VARIABLES IN EQUATION
Var.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
CONST
B
-.090645
-.006403
-.035331
0.078571
0.185305
0.029127
0.114123
-.084919
-.194458
0.155922
0.243931
SE
Beta
C o rre l.
P artial
C o rre l.
0.125786
0.105206
0.057096
0.073714
0.101427
0.065145
0.091054
0.055991
0.108481
0.103772
0.676943
-.091879
-.011428
-.072352
-.120627
0.215110
0.058341
0.198030
-.229393
-.307871
0.282040
-.103604
0.056209
-.012501
-.080640
0.117741
-.066710
0.069475
-.131714
-.102713
0.073654
-.079444
-.006710
-.068219
-.117507
0.229708
0.049290
0.138174
-.167201
-.197616
0.165646
T
-.721
-.061
-.6 1 9
-1 .06 6
1.827
0.447
1.253
-1.517
-1.793
1.503
0.360
S ig.
of T
0.4736
0.9516
0.5381
0.2902
0.0720
0.6562
0.2143
0.1339
0.0774
0.1375
0.7197
S U M MA R Y TABLE:
STEP
MULTR
RSQ
ADJRSQ
F(EQN)
L O W - P E R F O R M I N G S C H O O L S A M PL E
SIGF
RSQCH
FCH
SIGCH
BETAIN
CORREL
1
IN SEX
-.1 0 3 6
-.1 0 3 6
2
IN AGE
0 .0 5 4 8
0.0562
3
IN AE
-.0 0 4 8
-.0 1 2 5
4
IN ED.
-.0 8 7 9
-.0 8 0 6
5
IN STU.
0.2 63 4
0.2297
6
IN PE
-.0 2 3 0
-.0 6 6 7
7
IN PEIMP
0.0482
0.0695
8
IN YEARS
-.1 7 1 6
-.1 3 1 7
9
IN AEIMP
-.2 4 8 2
-.1 0 2 7
IN EMP
0.2820
0.0737
10
.4017 .1614
.0399
1 .3 2 8
.233
.1614
1.32 8
.233
222
T able E26.--Regression tables: M odified Principal Efficacy Q u e s t i o n
naire, in-between school sample.
V a ria b le s e n te r e d on s te p
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
M u ltip le
R
R Square
A djusted R Square
S tan dard
E rro r
Sex
Age
A d m in is tra to r e f f i c a c y
Level o f e d u c a tio n
Approx. number o f s tu d e n t s
Personal e f f i c a c y
P ersonal e f f i c a c y (im p ortan ce)
Years in a d m i n i s t r a t i o n
A d m in is tra to r e f f i c a c y (im p o rta n ce )
Employment in p u b lic school system
0.36196
0.13102
0.00508
0.48594
R Square Change
F Change
S i g n i f . F Change
0.13102
1.04030
0.4199
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
df
R egression
R esidual
10
69
SS
Mean Square
F
2.45654
16.29346
0.24565
0.23614
-i 0 4 0 3 0
S ig . o f F
0
4199
VARIABLES IN EQUATION
Var.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
CONST
B
0.270517
0.222072
-.049453
-.088823
0.815304
-.003059
0.037270
0.010310
0.062315
-.278961
0.474280
SE
Beta
C o rre l.
0.138830
0.116115
0.063017
0.081357
0.111944
0.071900
0.100495
0.061797
0.119730
0.114532
0.747137
0.252900
0.365531
-.093403
-.125773
0.367304
-.005652
0.059648
0.025688
0.090995
-.465400
0.149752
0.000000
-.045886
-.142554
0.007567
0.291700
0.037291
0.013379
0.037665
-.139860
P a rtial
C o rre l.
0.218672
0.214629
-.088067
-.122520
0.000784
-.004775
0.141619
0.018723
0.058408
-.273337
T
1.949
1.913
-.7 8 5
-1.0 92
0.007
-.0 4 3
0.371
0.167
0.520
-2 .4 3 6
0.635
S ig .
of T
0.0054
0.0600
0.4353
0.2787
0.9944
0.9662
0.7119
0.8680
0.6044
0.0175
0.5277
S U M MA R Y TABLE:
STEP
MULTR
RSQ
ADJRSQ
F(EQN)
SIGF
IN- BE T WE E N S C H OO L S A M PL E
RSQCH
FCH
SIGCH
BETAIN
CORREL
1
IN SEX
0.1498
0.1498
2
IN AGE
0.0021
0.0000
3
IN AE
-.0571
-.0 4 5 9
4
IN ED.
-.1 4 4 0
-.1 4 2 6
5
IN STU.
0.0137
0.0076
6
IN PE
0.0544
0.0292
7
IN PEIMP
0.0842
0.0373
8
IN YEARS
-.0 5 0 3
0.0134
9
IN AEIMP
-.0 0 7 5
0.0377
IN EMP
-.4 6 5 4
-.1 3 9 9
10
.3620 .1310
.0051
1.040
.420
.1310
1.040
.420
224
Table E27.--Regression tables: Modified Principal Efficacy Q u e s t i o n
naire, high-performing-school sample.
V a ria b le s e n te r e d on s te p
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
M u ltip le
R
R Square
A djusted R Square
Standard
E r ro r
Sex
Age
A d m in is tra to r e f f i c a c y
Level o f e d u c a tio n
Approx. number o f s tu d e n t s
Personal e f f i c a c y
Personal e f f i c a c y (im portance)
Years in a d m in is tr a tio n
A d m in is tra to r e f f i c a c y (im p ortance)
Employment in p u b lic school system
0.45474
0.20679
0.09183
0.45741
R Square Change
F Change
S i g n i f . F Change
0.20679
1.79882
0.0770
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
R egression
Residual
df
SS
Mean Square
F
10
69
3-76355
14.43645
0.37636
0.20922
1.79882
S ig . o f F
0.0770
VARIABLES IN EQUATION
Var.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
CONST
R
0.179872
-.215669
0.084784
0.167393
-.186086
-.026067
0.151392
0.074609
0.132142
0.123039
0.281788
SF
Ret.a
C o rre l.
P a rtia l
C o rre l.
0.130679
0.109298
0.059317
0.076581
0.105372
0.067679
0.094595
0.058169
0.112701
0.107808
0.703272
-.170681
-.360315
0.162536
0.240584
-.202225
-.048879
-.245928
0.188673
0.195853
0.208349
-.055009
-.052620
0.058277
0.220183
-.222721
0.032843
-.102890
0.109724
0.057924
0.073007
-.147580
-.211566
0.153252
0.234362
-.189347
-.041296
-.171595
0.137521
0.125714
0.122366
T
-1 .37 6
-1.973
1.429
2.186
-1.766
-.3 8 5
-1.600
1.283
1.173
1.141
0.401
Sig.
of T
0.1731
0.0525
0.1574
0.0322
0.0818
0.7013
0.1141
0.2039
0.2450
0.2577
0.6899
S U M M A R Y TABLE:
STEP
MULTR
RSQ
ADJRSQ
F(EQN)
H I G H - P E R F O R M I N G S C H O O L S A M PL E
SIGF
RSQCH
FCH
SIGCH
BETAIN
CORR
1
IN SEX
-.0 5 5 0
- .0 5
2
IN AGE
-.0 5 3 4
- .0 5
3
IN AE
0.0624
0.05
4
IN ED.
0.2285
0.22
5
IN STU.
-.2 6 0 4
-.22
6
IN PE
-.0 3 3 7
0.03
7
IN PEIMP
-.1 3 0 6
-.1 0
8
IN YEARS
0.2117
0.10
9
IN AEIMP
0.2400
0.0 5
IN EMP
0.2083
0.07
10
.4547 .2068
.0918
1.799
.077
.2068
1.799
.077
226
Table E28.--Hierarchy of ability/goals by performance:
Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Perform ing
In-Between
No.
Item
Mean
No.
22
22
13
9
23
11
10
1
5.3636
5.2727
5.2609
5.0909
5.0000
5.0000
4.9545
4.9130
4.9091
4.7500
4.7273
4.6937
4.6818
4.6667
4.6522
4.5652
5.5455
4.5238
4.3810
4.0000
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
27
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
22
22
22
22
23
14
7
4
22
20
22
19
3
23
22
21
23
23
22
21
21
21
8
6
2
15
5
12
16
17
18
20
Principal
High Perform ing
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
13
5.1786
5.0690
5.0000
5.0000
4.7931
4.7586
4.7241
4.7241
4.6562
4.6552
4.6429
4.6296
4.6207
4.5862
4.4824
4.4483
4.3103
4.2414
4.2759
3.6552
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
26
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
26
26
26
27
27
13
5.2963
5.0000
4.8889
4.8148
4.7778
4.7407
4.5769
4.5769
4.5666
4.5666
4.5666
4.5185
4.5000
4.4444
4.2963
4.1923
4.1923
4.1528
4.1111
4.0370
11
14
1
15
4
19
3
9
5
8
10
18
7
12
2
17
16
6
20
11
9
3
14
4
1
8
7
5
12
10
17
15
18
16
19
2
6
20
227
Table E 29.--Hierarchy of ability/factors by performance:
Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Perform ing
In-Between
Principal
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
23
23
22
21
23
23
23
34
29
32
28
31
27
37
40
29
28
29
29
29
29
28
29
29
29
28
29
29
28
29
29
29
29
29
28
5.4138
5.3929
5.1724
5.1034
4.9310
4.8276
4.8214
4.7931
4.6897
4.6552
4.6429
4.4483
4.3793
4.2143
4.1724
4.1724
4.1724
4.1379
4.1379
3.9643
26
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
38
25
35
33
36
39
21
21
5.6522
5.5217
5.2727
5.0000
5.0000
4.9130
4.8182
4.7727
4.7273
4.6087
4.5714
4.5238
4.5217
4.3913
4.3913
4.3478
4.2174
4.7273
4.1364
4.1304
38
25
23
33
35
23
25
38
23
39
33
36
35
24
26
30
5.2692
5.1111
4.9279
4.8148
4.7778
4.7692
4.7037
4.6296
4.6296
4.5185
4.5000
4.4815
4.4615
4.4074
4.4074
4.3704
4.2963
4.2963
4.2593
3.9630
22
22
23
23
22
22
22
22
23
22
22
23
22
24
28
36
21
39
26
34
31
32
30
29
27
40
37
22
26
23
27
28
24
37
30
21
40
34
32
29
31
228
Tab le E 30 .- -Hierarchy of a bi li ty/strategies by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
56
60
53
45
50
55
44
51
41
49
46
57
54
48
58
42
52
47
59
43
5.7826
5.6087
5.5217
5.3478
5.2609
5.2174
5.1739
5.0000
5.0000
4.9130
4.8261
4.7391
4.6818
4.6087
4.4545
4.4348
4.3636
4.3478
3.8636
3.4545
29
29
29
29
29
28
28
28
29
27
27
28
29
27
28
28
29
29
28
29
56
60
53
41
50
44
45
51
58
46
54
55
57
49
59
47
42
52
48
43
5.5512
5.4138
5.3103
5.2759
5.2414
5.2143
5.1071
4.9643
4.7586
4.8148
4.7407
4.6786
4.6207
4.5556
4.5000
4.3929
4.3793
4.3793
4.3571
3.5862
26
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
26
60
56
53
45
50
44
55
41
46
48
57
49
58
42
47
51
54
59
52
43
5.6538
5.6296
5.5556
5.4074
5.2222
5.1852
5.0370
5.0000
4.9259
4.6667
4.6154
4.5926
4.5556
4.5556
4.5185
4.4444
4.4231
4.1111
4.0000
3.8846
22
23
23
23
23
22
23
22
23
22
23
22
22
229
T able E 31.--Hierarchy of ability/decision making by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
61
73
75
74
69
72
70
80
67
76
71
63
5.6364
5.4783
5.0870
5.0870
5.0435
5.0000
4.9565
4.9545
4.9130
4.9091
4.8696
4.7391
4.5652
4.5455
4.5455
4.3043
4.2727
4.0000
3.8696
3.7500
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
29
28
28
28
61
73
80
74
70
71
63
75
69
64
72
5.4138
5.3448
5.1724
4.9655
4.9655
4.8621
4.8214
4.7931
4.5517
4.5517
4.4828
4.4138
4.3448
4.2759
4.2414
4.1786
4.1379
4.0714
4.0357
3.4643
27
25
26
27
27
27
26
26
27
27
26
27
25
27
27
26
27
25
25
27
61
80
75
73
71
63
76
74
70
69
72
64
78
5.5556
5.1200
5.1154
5.1111
4.9630
4.8148
4.8077
4.8077
4.6667
4.6667
4.6154
4.5556
4.4800
4.4074
4.1852
4.0769
4.0741
4.0400
3.9600
3.4815
23
23
23
23
23
23
22
23
22
23
23
23
66
22
22
64
62
23
68
22
21
78
77
65
79
23
20
66
76
78
67
62
68
79
77
65
66
62
67
68
77
79
65
230
Table E32.--Hierarchy of expectancy/goals by performance:
Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
Principal
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
23
9
13
5.0870
5.0455
5.0455
4.9130
4.8696
4.8636
4.7826
4.7273
4.7273
4.6500
4.4545
4.3000
4.5714
4.5217
4.5217
4.5000
4.3043
4.2609
4.2273
4.2273
29
29
29
28
29
29
29
29
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
11
4.9655
4.7241
4.6552
4.6429
4.6207
4.6207
4.6207
4.5862
4.5714
4.4828
4.4138
4.4138
4.3793
4.3793
4.3448
4.3103
4.2759
4.2414
4.2414
4.0690
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
26
27
27
27
27
26
23
27
26
26
27
13
4
5
3
14
9
15
5.0741
5.0000
4.9259
4.8889
4.8519
4.7407
4.6296
4.6296
4.5769
4.5769
4.5556
4.8148
4.4815
4.4444
4.3077
4.3077
4.2963
4.2308
4.1923
4.0000
22
22
23
23
11
3
10
22
4
23
8
12
1
22
22
20
22
20
21
23
23
22
23
23
22
22
18
5
20
19
14
7
6
2
16
17
15
4
1
13
19
14
9
5
10
15
20
8
18
17
2
12
16
7
3
6
12
8
1
20
11
7
10
19
2
18
17
16
6
231
Table E33.--Hierarchy o f expectancy/factors by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
22
22
21
20
20
21
22
22
22
22
22
21
21
22
22
22
22
22
23
25
38
33
39
22
21
35
36
23
40
28
30
24
37
26
31
29
34
32
27
5.5455
5.3636
5.1364
5.0952
5.0000
4.9500
4.8571
4.8182
4.7727
4.6364
4.6364
4.5909
4.5714
4.4286
4.4091
4.3182
4.3182
4.2727
4.2273
4.0435
28
29
29
29
29
28
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
29
29
28
25
38
35
33
22
24
39
36
21
28
23
26
34
32
27
30
31
29
40
37
5.5357
5.5172
5.1034
4.9655
4.8276
4.7857
4.7143
4.6897
4.6207
4.5862
4.5862
2.5517
4.4138
4.3103
4.1034
4.0690
4.0357
3.8966
3.9655
3.7858
27
26
26
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
26
27
26
27
27
27
25
38
39
36
26
22
35
33
27
23
24
30
29
40
28
21
37
32
31
34
5.3333
5.2692
5.0000
4.9259
4.8889
4.8889
4.8519
4.8519
4.6667
4.6667
4.6296
4.5769
4.5185
4.4815
4.4815
4.4615
4.4231
4.3704
4.2222
4.1852
232
T able E 34.--Hierarchy of expectancy/strategies by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
23
23
22
23
22
23
22
23
53
56
60
45
44
50
55
51
57
49
46
42
58
54
41
52
48
59
47
43
5.5909
5.4545
5.4090
5.4090
5.3636
5.3182
5.1818
4.9545
4.8636
4.8182
4.7273
4.7273
4.6957
4.6957
4.6818
4.4783
4.4091
4.2609
4.1364
3.5217
29
29
29
29
28
28
29
28
28
29
27
29
29
28
27
27
28
28
29
29
60
56
53
50
45
44
41
51
55
52
46
58
57
48
54
49
59
47
42
43
5.5862
5.5517
5.3448
5.2759
5.2143
5.1786
5.1034
4.8571
4.6429
4.5862
4.5556
4.5517
4.5517
4.5357
4.4444
4.3333
4.2857
4.1071
4.0690
3.1724
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
26
27
27
26
56
60
53
45
44
50
55
41
51
48
46
58
47
57
49
42
54
52
59
43
5.5556
5.4444
5.4444
5.1852
5.0741
5.0370
5.0000
5.0000
4.8519
4.8519
4.8148
4.7037
4.7037
4.6923
4.6296
4.5556
4.4615
4.2222
4.1852
3.8462
233
Table E35.-- Hi e ra rc h y of expec t an c y/ de c is io n mak in g by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
21
22
22
22
22
23
23
22
22
22
23
22
22
23
22
22
21
22
21
73
61
70
65
63
72
80
76
71
69
74
64
67
66
78
68
77
62
65
79
5.4545
5.4286
5.2273
5.1364
5.0000
4.9545
4.9130
4.9130
4.9091
4.9091
4.8636
4.7391
4.6818
4.5455
4.4783
4.1818
4.0000
4.0000
3.8636
3.7143
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
28
29
28
61
73
80
71
75
74
70
63
76
72
66
67
69
68
78
64
79
77
62
65
5.4138
5.3103
5.0690
5.0345
4.9655
4.8621
4.8621
4.7500
4.7241
4.5862
4.5862
4.5172
4.4828
4.2759
4.1379
4.0690
3.8571
3.7500
3.3793
3.3571
27
25
27
26
27
27
26
26
26
27
27
27
27
26
25
26
25
27
25
27
61
80
73
75
71
70
76
74
72
63
69
64
66
68
78
67
77
65
79
62
5.3704
5.3200
5.1852
5.1154
5.0000
4.9630
4.8846
4.6923
4.6923
4.5556
4.5185
4.5185
4.4444
4.3462
4.2800
4.2692
4.1600
3.8519
3.8000
3.7778
234
T able E 36 .- - Hierarchy of importance/goals by performance:
Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
Principal
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
20
23
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
20
20
22
22
22
21
22
22
23
22
20
13
12
8
11
9
14
10
4
15
18
19
5
6
7
17
3
16
1
2
5.6500
5.3478
5.3182
5.2727
5.2273
5.2273
5.1818
5.1818
5.0909
5.0000
4.9500
4.8500
4.8182
4.6818
4.6364
4.6190
4.5909
4.5000
4.1304
4.0000
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
20
11
4
14
13
18
9
5
10
19
8
15
16
2
17
12
3
7
6
1
5.5172
5.4138
5.3103
5.1724
5.0000
4.8966
4.8966
4.8966
4.8929
4.8276
4.7931
4.6897
4.5172
4.5172
4.4828
4.4828
4.3793
4.2759
4.2759
4.2414
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
27
26
26
26
26
20
14
4
13
11
5
19
10
9
12
18
7
17
15
3
6
16
8
2
1
5.5926
5.4444
5.4444
5.3333
5.2222
5.2222
5.0769
5.0370
4.9259
4.8889
4.8519
4.7778
4.7692
4.7407
4.7037
4.6667
4.6538
4.6154
4.5769
4.0000
235
T able E 37 .- - Hierarchy o f importance/factors by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
22
22
22
20
21
22
21
22
22
22
22
23
22
20
22
22
22
23
21
25
38
28
33
22
39
36
35
31
30
40
29
26
32
21
27
24
34
23
37
5.7273
5.5909
5.3636
5.3182
5.3000
5.2857
5.1818
5.0000
5.0000
4.9545
4.9091
4.9091
4.8696
4.8636
4.8500
4.8182
4.7727
4.6818
4.2609
4.1905
29
29
28
29
29
29
29
29
27
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
29
29
29
25
38
39
33
22
36
28
35
31
32
26
34
30
24
40
27
37
21
29
23
5.6897
5.5517
5.3214
5.2759
5.2414
5.1034
5.0690
5.0345
4.7778
4.7241
4.6897
4.5862
4.5862
4.5172
4.3793
4.3793
4.0357
4.0345
3.9655
3.8621
26
27
27
26
27
27
26
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
27
27
38
25
35
39
36
22
28
33
26
30
32
31
29
27
34
24
37
21
23
40
5.6923
5.5556
5.4074
5.3846
5.3704
5.3333
5.3077
5.2963
5.2593
5.1852
5.0741
5.0741
4.9630
4.9630
4.7778
4.7407
4.0357
4.0345
3.8621
4.4074
236
T able E38.--Hierarchy of importance/strategies by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
23
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
56
45
53
60
44
55
50
58
49
48
51
46
41
57
54
42
52
59
47
43
5.7273
5.5909
5.5455
5.4545
5.4545
5.3636
5.2727
5.1364
5.1364
5.0909
5.0870
4.8636
4.8636
4.8182
4.7273
4.7273
4.6364
4.4545
4.1364
3.6364
29
29
28
28
29
29
29
28
28
28
29
27
27
27
29
29
28
29
28
29
56
60
45
44
53
50
41
55
51
48
58
46
54
49
52
57
59
42
47
43
5.6897
5.6552
5.5000
5.3929
5.3793
5.2759
5.2759
5.2500
5.0714
5.0357
4.8966
4.8519
4.7407
4.6667
4.6552
4.6207
4.5714
4.4483
4.2857
3.3103
27
27
26
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
26
27
26
56
53
60
45
44
41
50
48
55
51
46
54
49
58
47
52
42
57
59
43
5.8889
5.7778
5.6923
5.5926
5.5926
5.4815
5.4444
5.3333
5.2222
5.2222
5.1852
5.0000
5.0000
4.9630
4.9259
4.8148
4.8519
4.7692
4.5556
4.1154
237
Table E 39.--Hierarchy of importance/decision making by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
21
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
21
22
21
21
61
73
70
72
75
71
76
63
80
74
69
67
66
64
78
68
77
65
62
79
5.5714
5.5455
5.5455
5.3636
5.3182
5.3182
5.2727
5.1364
5.0000
5.0000
4.8636
4.8182
4.7727
4.7727
4.5455
4.5000
4.3333
4.0000
3.7619
3.7143
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
28
28
29
80
61
74
75
70
71
63
76
72
68
73
67
66
69
64
78
79
77
65
62
5.4138
5.3793
5.3103
5.2069
5.2069
5.0690
5.0000
4.9655
4.8966
4.8621
4.8276
4.6897
4.6897
4.5862
4.5172
4.3103
4.2857
4.1429
3.8214
3.1724
27
26
27
27
25
27
26
27
26
26
26
27
27
27
25
26
25
27
25
27
61
75
73
71
80
70
72
63
74
76
68
66
64
69
77
67
78
65
79
62
5.6296
5.4231
5.4074
5.3704
5.3200
5.2593
5.2308
5.1852
5.0000
4.8462
4.7308
4.7037
4.7037
4.6667
4.4400
4.3462
4.2800
4.1111
4.0800
3.5556
238
Table E 4 0 . - -H ie ra r c h y o f pe rsonal e f f i c a c y by performance:
Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
Modified
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
22
22
22
20
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
20
25
29
7
12
28
8
15
3
1
19
24
21
14
18
4.8182
4.7727
4.5909
4.5909
4.5500
4.5000
4.5000
4.4091
4.3182
4.3182
4.1364
4.0909
3.6818
3.2273
2.4091
30
30
29
30
30
28
30
29
30
29
30
30
30
29
30
20
29
25
8
7
28
24
15
12
3
1
19
21
14
18
4.9667
4.8333
4.7931
4.5333
4.4667
4.3929
4.2667
4.2414
4.1333
4.1379
4.1000
3.9667
3.9333
3.2069
3.2000
28
27
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
25
28
28
27
28
20
29
25
24
8
7
3
1
19
15
12
21
28
14
18
5.0714
4.8889
4.6429
4.5357
4.5000
4.3929
4.3571
4.3571
4.2857
4.2500
4.1200
4.0714
4.0357
3.5185
3.1429
239
Table E41. - - H i e r a r c h y o f i m p o r t a n c e / a d m i n i s t r a t o r e f f i c a c y by
performance: Modified P r i n c i p a l E f f i c a c y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
21
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
19
22
16
30
23
9
2
5
27
22
13
17
4
11
6
10
26
5.5714
5.1818
5.1818
5.1818
5.0909
5.0455
4.7273
4.6364
4.5455
4.5000
4.3636
4.1818
4.1364
3.8947
3.0000
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
28
30
30
30
16
23
9
5
2
22
27
17
13
6
4
11
10
26
5.4667
5.3667
5.2667
5.2667
5.1333
5.0667
4.9000
4.7333
4.4333
4.4000
4.1667
3.9667
3.7857
3.7000
3.2667
27
28
28
27
27
28
28
27
28
27
28
28
28
28
28
5
9
23
16
30
2
22
27
4
11
17
13
10
6
26
5.4815
5.4643
5.4286
5.3704
5.2857
5.0714
5.0000
4.9259
4.5357
4.3333
4.3214
4.2857
3.8571
3.4286
2.9643
240
T a b le E 42 .- -Hierarchy of importance/personal efficacy by performance:
Modified Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
High Performing
In-Between
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
22
21
22
21
22
22
22
22
22
22
21
22
22
22
19
14
1
29
3
24
15
21
20
18
25
28
7
8
12
5.4545
5.4091
5.3810
5.1818
5.0476
5.0455
4.9545
4.8636
4.8636
4.8636
4.8182
4.7619
4.6364
3.7727
3.2727
30
30
30
30
30
30
29
30
30
26
30
30
30
30
29
19
14
15
20
3
1
24
29
21
28
25
18
7
8
12
5.3667
5.5333
5.2000
5.0000
5.1000
5.1000
4.9655
4.9333
4.9000
4.8077
4.7333
4.7333
4.6000
3.7338
3.5172
28
28
28
28
28
27
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
27
19
20
21
3
14
7
29
15
24
28
25
18
1
8
12
5.4643
5.2857
5.2500
5.2500
5.1071
5.1071
5.0714
4.9643
4.9286
4.6786
4.5000
4.3929
4.8929
3.9286
3.5926
241
T able E 43.--Hierarchy of a dm inistrator e fficacy by performance:
Modified Principal Efficacy Questionnaire.
Low Performing
In-Between
High Performing
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
No.
Item
Mean
22
21
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
21
22
22
20
22
27
22
5
23
26
30
11
6
9
4
10
2
13
16
17
4.9091
4.6667
4.3182
3.8182
3.5455
3.5000
2.8182
2.7727
2.5455
2.4091
2.3810
2.2727
2.2273
2.2000
1.8182
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
29
30
30
28
30
30
30
27
22
5
23
6
26
30
11
9
2
16
10
17
4
13
4.7333
4.1000
3.8000
3.5333
3.4000
3.3333
3.0000
2.9667
2.5172
2.5000
2.4000
2.3214
2.1000
2.1000
1.9333
28
28
28
27
28
28
28
26
28
28
28
28
28
27
27
27
22
23
5
11
30
26
2
9
6
16
4
17
10
13
4.4286
4.2857
3.7143
3.2963
3.1786
3.0357
3.0357
2.8846
2.7857
2.7857
2.5714
2.3929
1.8571
1.8519
1.7037
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
AASA C r i t i c a l I s s u e s R eport. (1983). The r o l e o f t h e p r i n c i p a l in
e f f e c t i v e s c h o o ls : Problems and s o l u t i o n s (Stock No. 021 00839). A r l i n g t o n , VA: J ac k McCurdy.
Armor, D., Conroy-Oseguera, P . , Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, L. ,
P a s c a l , A., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1976). A n a ly si s o f th e
school p r e f e r r e d r e a d in g program in s e l e c t e d Los Angeles minor
i t y sc hools (Santa Monica, CA:
Rand). (Bethesda, Md.: ERIC
Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 130 243)
Ashton, P. T . , Webb, R. B., & Doda, N. (1982). A Study o f
t e a c h e r s ’ sense o f e f f i c a c y ( G a i n e s v i l l e : U n i v e r s i t y o f
F l o r i d a , C o n tr a ct No. 400-790- -75, National I n s t i t u t e o f
E d uc a tio n) . (Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction
S e r v i c e , ED 231 834)
________ .
(1983). A stu dy o f t e a c h e r s ’ sens e o f e f f i c a c y ;
Executive r e p o r t ( G a i n e s v i l l e : U n i v e r s i t y o f F l o r i d a ,
C o n tr a c t No. 400-79-0075, National I n s t i t u t e o f E d u c a ti o n ).
(Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 231
833)
A u s t in , G. (1979). Exemplary sch ools and t h e s ea rc h f o r e f f e c
t i v e n e s s . Educational L e a d e r s h ip . 7 ( 1 0 ) , 10-14.
Bandura, A. (March 1377). S e l f - e f f i c a c y : Toward a u n i f y i n g t h e o ry
o f b e hav io r al change. Ps yc hological Review. 84> 191-215.
________ . S e l f - e f f i c a c y mechanism in human agency.
c h o l o g i s t . 3 7 ( 2 ) , 122-147.
American Psy
________ , & Schunk. (1981). C u l t i v a t i n g competence, s e l f - e f f i c a c y ,
and i n t r i n s i c i n t e r e s t through proximal s e l f - m o t i v a t i o n .
Jou rnal o f P e r s o n a l i t y and Social Psychology. 41.(3), 586-598.
Bar th, R. S. (1984). Ou tside looking i n - - I n s i d e looking i n .
Delt a Kappan. 6 6 (1 5) , 356-358.
Behling, H., J r . , & Champion, R. H. (1984).
i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e a d e r . L u t h e r v i l l e , MD:
ment I n s t i t u t e .
242
Phi
The p r i n c i p a l as an
I n s t r u c t i o n a l Improve
243
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The s t r a t e g i e s f o r
t a k i n g c h a r g e . New York: Harper & Row.
Berman, P . , & Milbrey, W. M. (1977, A p r i l ) . Federal programs
s u p p o r t i n g e d u c a t i o n a l change: Vol. VII. F a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g
e d u c a ti o n a l change (San ta Monica, CA: Rand).
(Bethesda, Md.:
ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 140 432)
Blumberg, A ., & G r e e n f i e l d , W. (1980). The e f f e c t i v e p r i n c i p a l :
P e r s p e c t i v e s on school l e a d e r s h i p . Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
B o s s a r t , S. T . , Dweyer, D. C., Rowan, B., & Lee, G. V. (1982). The
i n s t r u c t i o n a l management r o l e o f t h e p r i n c i p a l . Educational
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q u a r t e r l y . 1 8 ( 3 ) , 34-64.
Bray, J . H., & Maxwell, S. E. (1982). Analyzing and i n t e r p r e t i n g
s i g n i f i c a n t MANOVA’ s . In L. Crocker & J . Algina ( E d s . ) , I n t r o
d u c t i o n t o c l a s s i c a l and modern t e s t th e o r y (pp. 256-264). New
York: H olt , R i n e h a r t , & Winston.
B rid ge s, E. M. (1982). Research on t h e school a d m i n i s t r a t o r : The
s t a t e o f t h e a r t , 1967-1980. Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Quar
t e r l y . T8, 12-33.
Brookover, W. B., G i g l i o t t i , R., Henderson, R., & S c h n e id e r , J . M.
(1973). Elementary school s o c i a l environment and school
achievement: Final r e p o r t (East Lansing: Michigan S t a t e
U n i v e r s i t y , College o f Urban Development). (Be thes da , Md.:
ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 086 306)
Brookover, W. B., & L e z o t t e , L. (1979). Changes in school c h a r a c
t e r i s t i c s c o i n c i d e n t with changes in s t u d e n t achievement
(Occasional Paper No. 17). East Lansing: Michigan S t a t e Uni
v e r s i t y , I n s t i t u t e f o r Research on Teaching.
Brookover, W. B., S c h w e it ze r, J . , Beady, C., Flood, P . , & Wisenb ak er, J . (1977). Schools can make a d i f f e r e n c e (E as t Lansing:
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , College o f Urban Development).
(Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 145
034)
Brookover, W. B., S c h w e it ze r, J . , Sc hn e id er , C. B., Flood, P. K., &
Wisenbaker, 0. (1978). Elementary school c l i m a t e and school
achievement. American Educational Research J o u r n a l . 1 5 ( 2 ) ,
301-318.
Brundage, D. (1981). The .journalism r e s e a r c h f e l l o w s r e p o r t : What
makes an e f f e c t i v e school (Washington, DC: George Washington
U n i v e r s i t y , I n s t i t u t e f o r Educational L e a d e r s h i p ) . (Bet hes da ,
Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 226 505)
244
Burlingame, M. (1985). Images o f l e a d e r s h i p in e f f e c t i v e sc ho ol s
l i t e r a t u r e . Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e Annual Meeting o f t h e Edu
c a t i o n a l Research A s s o c i a t i o n , Chicago, IL.
C a l i f o r n i a S t a t e Department o f Education. (1977). C a l i f o r n i a
school e f f e c t i v e n e s s s tu d y . The f i r s t ye a r : 1974-1975.
Sacramento: C a l i f o r n i a S t a t e Department o f Edu c a tio n, O f f i c e
o f Program Ev a lu a ti o n and Research.
C h e s l e r , M., Schmuck, R. A., & L i p p i t t , R. (1975). The p r i n c i p a l ’ s
r o l e in f a c i l i t a t i n g i n n o v a t i o n . In J . V. B al dri dge & T. E.
Deal ( E d s . ) , Managing change in e d u c a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s .
Berk ele y, CA: McCutchan.
C la rk , D. L ., L o t to , L. S . , & McCarthy, M. M. (1980). F a c to r s
a s s o c i a t e d w ith s u c c e s s in urban e le m entar y s c h o o l s . Phi Delta
Kappa. 6 1 ( 7 ) , 467-470.
Coghan, J . , Lake, D., & Schro de r, H. (1983). I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f th e
competencies o f high performing p r i n c i p a l s in F l o r i d a . T a l l a
ha ss e e : F l o r i d a Department o f Educa tion, F l o r i d a Council on
Educational Management.
Cronbach, L. J .
(1951). R e l i a b i l i t y and t h e c l a s s i c a l t r u e s cor e
model. In L. Crocker & J . Algina ( E d s . ) , I n t r o d u c t i o n t o
c l a s s i c a l and modern t e s t t h e o r y . New York: H o lt , R i n e h a r t &
Winston.
Crowson, P. (1980). D i s c r e t i o n a r y be h a v io r o f p r i n c i p a l s in l a r g e
c i t y s c h o o l s . Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q u a r t e r l y . 1 6 ( 1 ) , 4569.
de Charms, R.
Press.
(1968).
_________. (1976).
Publishers.
Personal c a u s a t i o n .
Enhancing m o t i v a t i o n .
New York:
New York:
Academic
Irvington
Dembo, M. H., & Gibson, S. (1985, November). T e a c h e r s ’ sens e o f
e f f i c a c y : An im po rt an t f a c t o r in school improvement. The E le
mentary School J o u r n a l . 8 6 ( 2 ) , 173-184.
Edmonds, R. (1978). A d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e and i s s u e s
r e l a t e d t o e f f e c t i v e s c h o o l i n g . Paper pre pa re d f o r t h e
National Conference in Urban Education. S t . Louis, MO:
Carmel.
245
________ , & F r e d e r i c k s o n , J . R. (1979). Search f o r e f f e c t i v e
s c h o o l s ; The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and a n a l y s i s o f c i t y sc h oo ls t h a t
a r e i n s t r u c t i o n a l ! v e f f e c t i v e f o r poor c h i l d r e n (Boston, MA:
Harvard U n i v e r s i t y ) . (Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduc
t i o n S e r v i c e , ED 170 396)
Edwards, P. (1984). Percei ved l e a d e r s h i p b e h a v io r s and demographic
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f p r i n c i p a l s as t h e y r e l a t e t o s t u d e n t r e a d in g
achievement in e lem en tary sc hoo ls ( T a l l a h a s s e e : F l o r i d a
Educational Research and Development C o u n c i l ) .
(Bethesda, Md.:
ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 264 547)
F e l s e n t h a l , H. (1982). F a c to rs i n f l u e n c i n g school e f f e c t i v e n e s s :
An e c o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s o f an e f f e c t i v e school (P aper p r e s e n t e d
a t t h e Annual Meeting o f t h e American Educa tiona l Research
A s s o c i a t i o n , New York, NY). (Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document
Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 214 299)
F r e t t e r s , W. B., C o l l i n s , E. F . , & Smith, J . W. (196 8) . C h a r a c t e r
i s t i c s d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g under- and o v e r - a c h i e v i n g e le m ent ar y
sch o o ls (Report No. 15; Washington, DC: D i v is io n o f Data
A n a ly si s and D is se m in a ti o n , National C en te r f o r Educational
S tatistics).
(Be thesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v
i c e , ED 021 318)
F u l l a n , M. (1982). The meaning o f e d u c a t i o n a l ch an ge .
Teachers College P r e s s , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y .
Gibson, S . , & Dembo, M. H.
construct validation.
569-582.
New York:
(1984, Aug ust ). Teacher e f f i c a c y : A
J ourn a l o f Educational Psyc hology. 76,
Goldhammer, K., Becker, R., Withycombe, F . , Doyle, E ., M i l l e r , C.,
Morgan, L., D e l o r e t t o , & A ld e r id g e , B. (1971). Elementary
school p r i n c i p a l s and t h e i r s c h o o l s : Beacons o f b r i l l i a n c e and
o o t h o l e s o f p e s t i l e n c e (Monograph No. 23) . Eugene: U n i v e r s i t y
o f Oregon, Cent er f o r t h e Advanced Study o f Educa tiona l Admin
i s t r a t i o n , 1971.
Goodlad, J .
(1983, A p r i l ) . Improving s c h o o li n g in t h e 1980’ s:
Toward t h e n o n r e p l i c a t i o n o f no ne ven ts . Educational
L e a d e r s h i p . 40, 4-7.
G r e e n f i e l d , W. D. (1983). A review o f t h e r e s e a r c h on t h e p r i n c i p a l s h i p : 1971-1.981. In The r o l e o f t h e p r i n c i p a l in e f f e c
t i v e s c h o o l s : Problems and s o l u t i o n s (American A s s o c i a t i o n o f
School A d m i n i s t r a t o r s C r i t i c a l Is s u e s R e p o r t) . Sacramento, CA:
Education News S e r v i c e .
246
Gregory, L. (1980). Why do some urban scho ols succeed? (Phi Delta
Kappa Study o f Exceptional Urban Elementary S c h o o l s ) . Bloom
i n g t o n , IN: Phi D e lta Kappa.
Gross, N., & H e r r i o t , R. E. (1965). S t a f f l e a d e r s h i p in p u b l i c
s c h o o l s . New York; John Wiley & Sons.
H a l l , G., Hord, S . , & G r i f f i n , T. (1984). In D. Hopkins & M. Widen
( E d s . ) , A l t e r n a t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e s on school improvement. P h i l a
d e l p h i a , PA: Falmer P r e s s .
Hall, J .
(1974). The ac h ie v in g manager: A be h av io r al p r o f i l e .
Conroe, TX: Te le o m e tr ic s I n t e r n a t i o n a l .
H a l l i n g e r , P . , & Murphy, P. (1985). A sse ssi ng t h e i n s t r u c t i o n a l
management be h a v io r of p r i n c i p a l s . The Elementary School
J o u r n a l , 86, 217-247.
Hannaway, J . , & S p r o u l l , L. (1978-1979). Who’ s running t h e show?
C oo rdi na tio n and c o n t r o l in e d u c a ti o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Admin
i s t r a t o r ’ s Notebook. 27, 1-4.
Hanson, M. (1976-1977). Beyond t h e b u r e a u c r a t i c model: A st ud y o f
power and autonomy in e d u c a ti o n a l d e c is io n -m a k in g . I n t e r
ch ang e. 7 ( 2 ) , 27-38.
Heckman, P . , Oakes, J . , & S i r o t n i k , K. A. (1983, A p r i l ) . Expanding
t h e conce pts o f school renewal and change. Educational
L e a d e r s h i p . 40, 26-34.
Huberman, A. M., & C r a n d a l l , D. (1984, Summer). E f f e c t i v e scho ols
and school improvement: A comparative a n a l y s i s in two l i n e s of
i n q u i r y . Educational A d m in is tr a ti o n Q u a r t e r l y . 20, 41-68.
Huff, S . , Lake, D., & Schaalman, M. (I98Z). P r i n c i p a l d i f f e r e n c e s :
Ex ce lle nce in school l e a d e r s h i p and management. Boston, MA:
McBer A s s o c i a t e s .
Isherwood, G. (1983). The p r i n c i p a l and h i s a u t h o r i t y :
cal s tu d y . The High School Jou rnal 5 6 ( 6 ) . 291-303.
An e m p i r i
J a r v i s , 0. T . , P a rk e r, C. A., & Moore, A. A., J r .
(1970). A s t a t e
survey o f th e e lem ent ary school p r i n c i p a l s h i p in Georgia. 1969
(Athens: U n i v e r s i t y o f Georgia, Georgia Department o f Elemen
t a r y School P r i n c i p a l s and t h e Bureau o f Educational S t u d i e s and
F i e l d S e r v i c e s , College o f E d uc a tio n) . (Be thesda, Md.: ERIC
Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 047 397)
Johnson, S. M. (1983). Teacher unions in s c h o o ls : A u t h o r i t y and
accommodation. Harvard Educational Review. 5 3 ( 3 ) , 309-326.
247
Johnson, T. (1985).
6 4 ( 3 ) , 42-43.
P r o file of a successful p r in c i p a l.
Principal.
Koff, R. H., Laff ey, J . , Olson, G., & Achon, D. (1979). S t r e s s and
t h e school a d m i n i s t r a t o r . In The r o l e o f e le m en ta ry school
p r i n c i p a l s : A summary o f r e s e a r c h . A r l i n g t o n , VA: Educa
t i o n a l Research S e r v i c e s .
K r a j e w i s k i , R. (1982, May). How t o avoid being ta k en f o r a r i d e
when t h e nex t bandwagon s t a r t s t o r o l l . American School Board
J o u r n a l . 169. 30-31.
Kunz, D. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1976). Le adership s t y l e o f p r i n c i p a l s
and t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l zone o f acc e pt an c e o f t e a c h e r s . Educa
t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q u a r t e r l y . 1 2 ( 3 ) , 49-64.
Leithwood, K. A., & Montgomery, D. J . (1982). The r o l e o f t h e e l e
mentary school p r i n c i p a l in program improvement. Review o f
Educational R es e ar ch . 5 2 ( 3 ) , 309-339.
________ . (1984). P a t t e r n s in growth in p r i n c i p a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s
(Paper p r e s e n t e d a t th e Annual Meeting o f t h e American Educa
t i o n a l Research A s s o c i a t i o n , New O rl e a n s , LA). (Bet hes da , Md.:
ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 246 526)
Levine, D. V., & S t a r k , J .
(1981). I n s t r u c t i o n a l and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l
arrangements and p r o c e s s e s f o r improving academic achievement
a t i n n e r - c i t v e le m ent ary sc hools (Kansas C it y : U n i v e r s i t y o f
Missouri School o f Educa tion, Center f o r t h e Study of Metro
p o l i t a n Problems in E d uc a tio n). (Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document
Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 213 814)
L i p s i t z , J . (1984).
Brunswick, NJ:
Succ ess ful sch ool s f o r voung a d o l e s c e n t s .
T r a n s a c t i o n Books.
New
Marcus, A. C., W e ll is c h , J . B., MacQueen, A. H., Duck, G. A., & Lee,
D. R. (1976). A d m i n i s t r a t o r l e a d e r s h i p in a sample o f s u c
c e s s f u l sch ools from t h e n a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e emergency
school a i d a c t (Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e Annual Meeting o f t h e
American Educational Research A s s o c i a t i o n , San F r a n c i s c o , CA).
(Be thesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 125
123).
Maryland S t a t e Department o f Education. (1978). Pr ocess e v a l u a
t i on: A comprehensive stu dy o f o u t l i n e r s (B a lt im o re : Maryland
S t a t e Department o f Education, U n i v e r s i t y o f Maryland, and
Cent er o f Educational Research and Development). (Be thesda,
Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 160 644)
Mi le s, M. B., F a r r a r , B., & Neufeld, B. (1983). Review o f e f f e c
t i v e sc h oo ls programs. Cambridge, MD: Huron I n s t i t u t e .
248
National I n s t i t u t e f o r Educa tion. (1978). V i o l e n t s c h o o ! s - - s a f e
s c h o o l s : The s a f e school stu dy r e p o r t t o t h e Congress (V ol .
1 ) . Washington, DC: U.S. Department o f H e a lt h , Educa tion, &
Welfare.
Newell, K. M. (1978). Some i s s u e s on a c t i o n p l a n s . In G. E.
Stellmoch ( E d . ) , Info rm at ion p ro c e s s i n g in motor c o n t r o l and
l e a r n i n g . New York: Academic P r e s s .
New York C it y Board o f Educa tion. (1979). School improvement p r o j
e c t : The case s tu dy p h a s e . New York: New York C it y Board of
Ed uc at io n, School Improvement P r o j e c t .
P a t t e r s o n , B. B. (1984). P e r c e p t i o n s o f e f f i c a c y in e f f e c t i v e and
in e ffe c tiv e p r in c ip a ls . D isse rta tio n Abstracts I n te r n a tio n a l.
45, 3504-A. ( U n i v e r s i t y Microfilms No. DA 8503751)
Peabody, R. L. (1962). P e r c e p ti o n s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a u t h o r i t y :
comparative a n a l y s i s . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Science Q u a r t e r l y . 6,
463-482.
P e t e r s o n , K. D. (1977). The p r i n c i p a l ’ s t a s k s .
Notebook. 2 6 ( 8 ) , 1-4 .
A
A dm inistrator’s
P h a r r i s , W., & Za ka riy a , S. (1979). The e le m en ta ry school p r i n c i p a l s h i p in 1978: A r e s e a r c h s t u d y . A r l i n g t o n , VA: Na tional
A s s o c i a t i o n o f Elementary School P r i n c i p a l s .
Phi
D e lta Kappa. (1980). Why do some urban sc ho ols succeed? The
Phi D e lta Kappa stu dy o f e x c e p ti o n a l urban e le m en ta ry s c h o o l s .
Bloomington, IN: Phi D e lta Kappa.
R e i n h a rd t , D., Arends, R., Burns, M., Kutz, W., & Wyart, S. (1979).
A stuuv o f t h e Dr ii ic i pal’ s rule in externally funded change
pro.ie cts and t h e implementation f o r i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g (Vol. 1)
(Technical Report from t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f Oregeon Teacher Corps
Project).
Rose, J . S . , & Medway, F. J .
(1981). Measurement o f t e a c h e r s ’
b e l i e f s in t h e i r c o n t r o l over s t u d e n t outcomes. J o ur na l o f
Educational R e s e a r c h . 74, 185-190.
Rosenburg, J . R.
(1980). The r o l e o f e le m en ta ry school p r i n c i p a l s
in t h e c u rr ic u lu m development p ro c e ss (Ed.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U niversity of M assachusetts). D is s e rta tio n A bstracts I n t e r
n a t i o n a l . 40-12A. 6137.
R o t t e r , J . B. (1966). Gen era liz e d e x p e c t a n c i e s f o r i n t e r n a l ve rsu s
e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t . Ps yc ho lo gi cal Monographs.
80, 1-28.
249
Rowan, B., Dweyer, D., & B o s s a r t , S. (1985, J a n u a r y ) . Methodologi
cal c o n s i d e r a t i o n s in s t u d i e s o f e f f e c t i v e p r i n c i p a l s .
In L.
Manasse ( E d . ) , Improving Co ndi tio ns f o r P r i n c i p a l E f f e c t i v e
n e s s : P o li c y I m p l i c a t i o n s o f R es e ar ch . Elementary School
J o u r n a l ♦ 85, 24-31.
Rummel, R. J .
(1970). Applied f a c t o r a n a l y s i s .
Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .
Evanston, IL:
R u s s e l l , J . S . , M a z z a r e l l a , T. W., & Maurer, S. (1985). Linking t h e
b e h a v io r s and a c t i v i t i e s o f secondary school p r i n c i p a l s t o
school e f f e c t i v e n e s s : A focus on e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e
b e h a v i o r s . Eugene: U n i v e r s i t y o f Oregon, C ol le ge o f Educa
tion.
S a l t z e r , E. B. (1982). The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f p e rs on al e f f i c a c y
b e l i e f s t o b e h a v i o r . B r i t i s h Jou rnal o f So ci al Psychology. 21,
213-221.
Sa ras on , S. B. (1971). The c u l t u r e o f t h e school and t h e problem
o f ch an ge . Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
S e r g i o v a n n i , T. J .
(1984, F e b ru a ry ). Leadership and e x c e l l e n c e in
s c h o o l i n g . Educational L e a d e r s h i p . 41, 11-23.
Smith, L. M.; & K e i t h , P. M. (1971). Anatomy o f e d u c a t i o n a l in n o
v a t i o n . In K. A. Leithwood & D. J . Montgomery ( E d s . ) , The r o l e
o f t h e e le m en ta ry school p r i n c i p a l (1982). Review o f Educa
t i o n a l R es e ar ch . 5 2 ( 3 ) , 309-339.
S t a t e o f New York. (1974). School f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g re a d in g
achievement: A c a s e stu dy o f two i n n e r - c i t y s c h o o l s . Albany:
S t a t e o f New York, O f f i c e o f Education Performance Review.
S t o g d i l l , R. M. (1974). The handbook o f l e a d e r s h i p :
t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h . New York: Free P r e s s .
A survey o f
S t o k e r , W. M. (1975). Four hundred e lem en ta ry school t e a c h e r s look
a t t h e e le m entar y school p r i n c i o a l s h i p . (B e th es da , Md.: ERIC
Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 122 414)
S t r o t h e r , D . B. (1983). The many r o l e s o f t h e e f f e c t i v e p r i n c i p a l .
Phi D e lta Kappan. 6 5 ( 4 ) , 291-294.
Sweeney, J .
(1982, F e b ru a ry ). Research s y n t h e s i s on e f f e c t i v e
school l e a d e r s h i p . Educational L e a d e r s h i p . 39, 346-352.
250
U n i v e r s i t y o f t h e S t a t e o f New York. (1976). Three s t r a t e g i e s f o r
s tu d y i n g e f f e c t s o f school p r o c e s s e s : An expanded e d i t i o n of
which school f a c t o r s r e l a t e t o l e a r n i n g . Albany: U n i v e r s i t y
o f t h e S t a t e o f New York, Bureau o f School Programs E v a l u a t i o n ,
New York S t a t e Education Program. (Be thes da , Md.: ERIC Docu
ment Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 123 572)
Utz,
R. T. (1972). P r i n c i p a l l e a d e r s h i p s t y l e s and e f f e c t i v e n e s s
as p e r c e iv e d bv t e a c h e r s (Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e annual meet
ing o f t h e American Educational Research A s s o c i a t i o n , Chicago,
IL ). (Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED
064 240)
V a l l i n a , S. A. (1978). A n a ly si s o f observed c r i t i c a l t a s k perfor m
ance o f T i t l e 1--ESEA p r i n c i p a l s , S t a t e o f I l l i n o i s (Ed.D. d i s
s e r t a t i o n , Loyola U n i v e r s i t y o f Chic ago ). D i s s e r t a t i o n
A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 3 8 / 1 1 . 6461-A.
Venezsky, R. W., & W i n f i e l d , L. F. (1979). Schools t h a t succeed
bevond e x p e c t a t i o n s in t e a c h i n g r e a d i n g . ( U n i v e r s i t y o f De la
ware S t u d i e s on Educa tion, Technical Report No. 1 ) .
(Bethesda,
Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 172 484)
Watson, G. (1976). In I . Morrish ( E d . ) , Aspects o f e d u c a t i o n a l
ch an ge . New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Weber, G. (1971). I n n e r - c i t y c h i l d r e n can be t a u g h t t o re a d : Four
s u c c e s s f u l sc hools (Occasional Paper No. 18 ). Washington, DC:
Council f o r Basic Edu ca tio n.
Weick, K. (1976). Educational o r g a n i z a t i o n s as l o o s e l y coupled
sy stems. A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Science Q u a r t e r l y 21, 1-19.
W e l l i s c h , J . B., MacQueen, A. H., C a r r i e r e , R. A., & Duck, A. A.
(1978). School management and o r g a n i z a t i o n in s u c c e s s f u l
s c h o o l s . Sociology o f E du c a tio n. 5 1 ( 3 ) , 211-226.
White, R. W. (1959). M otiv a tio n r e c o n s i d e r e d : The concept o f
competence. Ps yc ho lo gi c al Review. §6, 297-333.
Wilson, K. (1982). An e f f e c t i v e school p r i n c i p a l .
L e a d e r s h i p . 39> 357-361.
Educational
Wittmer, J . , & Loesch, L. (1976). A s tu dy o f t e a c h e r - p r i n c i p a l
r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The Humanist Ed u c a to r. 1 5 ( 1 4 ) , 98-105.
Wo lcott, H. F. (1973). The man in t h e p r i n c i p a l ’ s o f f i c e :
e t h n o g ra p h y . New York: H o lt , R i n e h a r t , & Winston.
An
251
Wynne, E. A. (1981).
6 2 ( 5 ) , 377-381.
Looking a t good s c h o o l s .
Phi D e lt a Kappan.
Z i r k e l , P. A., & Greenwood, S. C. (1987). E f f e c t i v e sc h o o ls and
e f f e c t i v e p r i n c i p a l s : E f f e c t i v e r e s e a r c h ? Teachers Co lle ge
Record. 8 9 ( 2 ) , 255-267.