INFORMATION TO USERS
T he m ost advanced technology has been used to photograph and
reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the
text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any
type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
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 copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 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.

U niversity M icrofilm s International
A Bell & H owell Information C o m p a n y
3 0 0 North Z e e b R oad . Ann Arbor. Ml 4 8 1 0 6 -1 3 4 6 USA
3 1 3 /7 6 1 - 4 7 0 0

8 0 0 .5 2 1 -0 6 0 0

O rder N um ber 0117702

Selected roles/fun ctions o f M ichigan secondary principals:
A stu dy o f perceived needs for preparation and continuing
professional developm ent
Austin, C. Danford, Ph.D.
Michigan State University, 1990

Copyright ©1090 by A ustin, C. Danford. All rights reserved.

UMI

300 N. Zeeb Rd.
Ann Aibor, MI 48106

SELECTED ROLES/FUNCTIONS OF MICHIGAN SECONDARY PRINCIPALS:
A STUDY OF PERCEIVED NEEDS FOR PREPARATION AND
CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
By
C. Danford Austin

A DISSERTATION
Submitted t o
Michigan S t ate Un iver sity
In p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t of th e requirements
f o r the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Teacher Education
1990

ABSTRACT
SELECTED ROLES/FUNCTIONS OF MICHIGAN SECONDARY PRINCIPALS:
A STUDY OF PERCEIVED NEEDS FOR PREPARATION AND
CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
By
C. Danford Austin

The r e s e a r c h e r ’ s pu r p o se was t o
im portant

areas

principalship:

related
(a)

to

the

better

Michigan

understand
s e c o n d a ry

p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions about the

importance of t h e i r job r o l e s ,

(b) needs p r i n c i p a l s

three
school

range

and

identify for

f u r t h e r p r e p a r a t i o n and c o n t i n u i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l development t o
respond to t h e i r job r o l e s , and (c) what p r in c ip a ls i d e n t i f y as the
primary source o f t h e i r

prep ar atio n

and continuing

professional

development.

the

sample

Participants
Michigan,

of

504

reflected

Michigan
th e

using the school

distribution

p r i n c ip a ls h i p

listin g

role

D evelopm ent/P erso nnel

school

principals.
districts

in

school

P r in c ip a l s responded t o a 34-item
descriptors

under four c a te g o r i e s :

Curriculum Development and

of

school

d i s t r i c t code t h a t c a te g o r i z e s

d i s t r i c t s by student enrollment.
questionnaire

s eco n d ary

I n s tr u c t io n a l

Implementation,

Management.

associated

the

Supervision,

Leadership,

For each r o l e

with

and S t a f f

descriptor,

C. Danford Austin
respondents were asked to i n d i c a t e how important i t was t o t h e i r
success as a p r i n c i p a l , t h e i r personal need f o r f u r t h e r pr ep ar at ion
and continuing professiona l development, and t h e i r primary source of
p repara ti on and continuing pro fessional development.
The f our major

r o le s / f u n c t i o n s

important t o the p r i n c i p a l s ’ j o b .

were

perceived

to

be

very

However, Leadership and I n s t r u c ­

ti o n a l Supervision were perceived as r e l a t i v e l y more important than
Curriculum Development and S t a f f Development/Personnel Management.
Females perceived the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s to be more important than did
m a le s .

However,

s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were n o te d o n ly f o r

I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision and Curriculum Development and Implementa­
tion.

No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found in p r i n c i p a l s ’ percep­

t i o n s of the importance o f the four major r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s according
t o age group.

Differences in th e importance of th e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s

emerged f o r p r i n c i p a l s who had been employed f o r 11 to 15 yea rs as
compared to those in o th e r experience c a t e g o r i e s .

S i m ila rly , those

who had earned Ed.D. or Ph.D. degrees perceived th e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s
t o be more important than did those who held the
mas ter’ s degrees.

specialist

or

These d i f f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t f o r the r o l e s /

f unctions of Curriculum Development and Implementation and S t a f f
Development/Personnel Management.

Secondary p r i n c i p a l s i d e n t i f i e d

u n i v e r s i t y / c o l l e g e course pre pa ration as a primary source of prepa­
r a t io n and continuing profes sion al development in l e s s than 10% of
the responses f o r 27 of the 34 r o le s / f u n c t io n s o f the p r in c ip a l s h i p .

Copyright by
C. DANFORD AUSTIN
1990

Dedicated t o Randi and Ashley.

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish t o thank Dr. Charles Blackman, committee chairman, f o r
h is continual encouragement and guidance in th e completion o f t h i s
study.

His

f r ie n d s h i p

and w illingness

suggestions are most apprec iat ed .
Dr.

Frederick

Ignatovich

for

to

offer

direction

and

Special thanks are extended to
his

thoughtful

suggestions

and

a s s i s t a n c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y with the phase of the study to e s t a b l i s h
the r e l i a b i l i t y of the survey instrument.

I wish to thank both Dr.

Edward Duane and Dr. George Ferns fo r t h e i r e n t h u s i a s t i c i n t e r e s t in
t h i s study and the challenges they offered to make th e most of the
study.

I als o wish t o thank Dr. Cas te !le Gentry, who served on a

committee f o r a comparable study on elementary p r i n c i p a l s and made
valuable suggestions t h a t strengthened t h i s study.
Special reco gn it io n is given to my f rie n d and colleag ue, Jane
Kuckel; who conducted a comparable study on elementary p r i n c i p a l s .
She was a constant source of i n s p i r a t i o n , encouragement, thoughtful
sug ges tions , and, a t the r i g h t moments, a sense of humor.

Without

her support t h i s study would c e r t a i n l y have been more d i f f i c u l t .
I e s p e c i a l l y ap preciate the support and cooperation of Jack
B ittle,

Executive

members o f

the

Secondary School

D ir ecto r;

Executive

James Ba llar d,
Board of

Principals,

enhanced th e study.

the

Deputy D ir ecto r;

Michigan Association

who made numerous

suggestions

and
of
that

For her special a s s i s ta n c e in the s t a t i s t i c a l area , I wish to
thank Dr. Ghada Khoury o f the Michigan Department o f Education.
advice and a s s i s ta n c e

with

the

format

of

the

survey,

Her

sampling

techniques, and handling of the d ata ar e deeply ap preciated.
their

exceptional

assistance

in

the

e s p e c i a l l y a p p r e c i a t iv e o f th e loyal
Lisa Ebersole.

word-processing

ar ea,

For
I

am

support of Cindy Travis and

Special thanks t o Susan Cooley f o r her thoughtful

and pr ofe ssi onal work in processing and e d itin g the f in a l d r a f t s of
th is dissertation.
I wish to thank a l l

my family,

friends,

t h e i r on-going support and encouragement.
Hawks,

Deputy Superintendent o f Public

t o t a l support and encouragement.

and colleagues f o r

Special thanks to Gary D.
Instruction,

who gave me

Special rec ognition and thanks are

extended t o my p ar en ts, Franklin R. Austin and Evelyn Marie SquiresAustin,

who taught

me the

value

of

education

and

always

were

outstanding r o l e models.
F in a lly , most of a l l , I wish t o thank my wife, Randi, f o r a ll
the love and support she gave and the s a c r i f i c e s she and daughter
Ashley made so t h i s study could be completed.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES

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

x

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.......................................................

1

In troduction ...........................................................................
Problem Statement ...................................................................
Purpose of the Study ...........................................................
Signifi ca nce of the Study ..................................................
L i m i t a t i o n s ................................................................................
Delimitations ...........................................................................
Research Questions ...............................................................
Summary........................................................................................

1
4
8
9
11
11
12
13

Chapter
I.

II.

III.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

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

14

The Reform Ef f o rt in Administrator Preparation . .
Michigan P o li c ie s Related to Administrator
P r e p a r a t i o n ...........................................................................
E f f ectiv e Schools Research and Administrator
R o l e s ........................................................................................
Roles of School Administrators ......................................
Summary........................................................................................

15

22
26
30

RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURE ..............................................

32

Phase 1: I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Role Descriptors f o r
Secondary School P r in c ip a ls ..........................................
Phase 2: Development of the Survey Instrument . .
Phase 3: P i l o t S t u d y ...........................................................
Phase 4: Data-Collection Procedure and Sample
S e l e c t i o n ...............................................................................
Phase 5: Data A n a l y s i s ......................................................
Summary........................................................................................
IV.

19

33
35
36
38
42
44

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THEDATA............................

45

C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Survey Sample .........................
Results f o r the Research Questions ..............................

45
50

viii

Page
Research Question..1 ..........................................................
Research Question..2 ..........................................................
Research Question..3 ..........................................................
Research Question..4 ..........................................................
Research Question..5 ..........................................................
Summary........................................................................................

50
56
66
74
82
86

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................

89

Summary of Purpose and Methods ......................................
P u r p o s e ....................................................................................
S u b j e c t s ................................................................................
M e a s u r e s ................................................................................
P r o c e d u r e s ...........................................................................
Data Analysis .......................................................................
Major Findings and Discussion .........................................
Research Question 1 ..........................................................
Research Question 2 ..........................................................
Research Question 3 ..........................................................
Research Question 4 ..........................................................
Research Question 5 ..........................................................
C o n c l u s i o n s ................................................................................
Recommendations .......................................................................
For College and University Administrator
Preparation Programs ...................................................
For the Michigan Department o f Education . . . .
For Local School D i s t r i c t s ...... .........................................
For Future Research ...........................................................

89
89
90
92
92
92
93
93
97
99
102
104
106
112
113
114
115
115

APPENDICES
A. THE INSTRUMENT............................................................................

117

B. GROUPING OF SCALE ITEMS USED INTHE QUESTIONNAIRE . .

123

C. INITIAL LETTER TO SAMPLE

126

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

D. FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO NONRESPONDENTS

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

128

E. PUBLIC ACT 1 6 3 .............................................................................

129

BIBLIOGRAPHY

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

ix

131

LIST OF TABLES

Table
3.1

Page
Cronbach Alpha f o r the D if fe r e n t Categories o f the
Survey Questionnaire ...............................................................

37

D i s tr i b u t i o n o f School D i s t r i c t s in the Population
by School D i s t r i c t Code .......................................................

40

D i s t r i b u t i o n of School D i s t r i c t s in the Sample by
School D i s t r i c t C o d e ...............................................................

41

4.1

D i s t r ib u t io n

of P a r t i c i p a n t s

by Gender ..............................

46

4.2

D i s tr ib u tio n

of P a r t i c i p a n t s

by Age

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

47

4.3

D i s tr i b u t i o n

of P a r t i c i p a n t s

by Degree H e l d .................

47

4.4

D i s tr ib u tio n of P a r t i c i p a n t s by Their Current
Primary Assignment as P r in c ip a ls ......................................

48

4.5

D i s t r ib u tio n

.

48

4.6

D i s t r ib u tio n of P a r t i c i p a n t s by the Size o f Their
School D i s t r i c t (Student Enrollment) ..............................

49

D i s t r ib u tio n of P a r t i c i p a n t s by Likelihood of Their
Re tiring Within the Next Five Y e a r s .............................

50

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions of the
Importance of th e Four Roles/Functions of the
P r in c i p a ls h i p ...........................................................................

51

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions o f the
Importance o f I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision .....................

52

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions of the
Importance of Curriculum Development and
Implementation ...........................................................................

54

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions o f the
Importance of Leadership ......................................................

55

3.2
3.3

4.7
4. 8

4.9
4.10

4.11

of P a r t i c i p a n t s

x

by Years of Experience

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions of th e
Importance of S t a f f Development/Personnel
Management ....................................................................................

57

One-Way Analysis o f Variance on the Importance of
th e Roles/Functions of th e P r in c i p a l s h i p and
Gender ............................................................................................

58

One-Way Analysis o f Variance on the Importance of
th e Roles/Functions o f the P r in c ip a ls h ip and Age . .

59

One-Way Analysis o f Variance on the Importance of
t h e Roles/Functions of th e P r in c i p a l s h i p and
Years of Experience ...............................................................

60

One-Way Analysis o f Variance on the Importance of
the Roles/Functions of the P r in c ip a ls h ip and
Degree ............................................................................................

62

One-Way Analysis of Variance on th e Importance of
th e Roles/Functions of the P r in c ip a ls h ip and
Assignment Level .......................................................................

64

One-Way Analysis o f Variance on the Importance of
the Roles/Functions of th e P r in c ip a l s h ip and
School D i s t r i c t Size in Terms of Student
Enrollment ....................................................................................

65

One-Way Analysis of Variance on the Importance of
th e Roles/Functions of the P r in c ip a ls h ip and
the Likelihood of R eti ring Within the Next
Five Years ....................................................................................

66

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions of Their
Personal Needs f o r Further Preparation in the
Roles/Functions o f the P r in c ip a ls h ip ..............................

67

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions of Their
Personal Needs f o r Further Preparation With
Regard t o Roles in the Category of I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision ................................................................................

68

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions o f Their
Personal Needs f o r Further Preparation With
Regard t o Roles in th e Category of Curriculum
Development and Implementation ..........................................

70

xi

Page
4.23

4.24

4.25

4.26

4.27

4.28

4.29

4.30

4.31

4.32

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions of Their
Personal Needs f o r Further Preparation With
Regard to Roles in th e Category of Leadership . . .

71

Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ’ Perceptions of Their
Personal Needs f o r Further Preparation With
Regard to Roles in the Category of S t a f f
Development/Personnel Management ......................................

73

One-Way Analysis o f Variance on the P r i n c i p a l s ’
Personal Need f o r Further Preparation and
Continuing Development in Each of the Role/
Function Categories and Gender ..........................................

75

One-Way Analysis of Variance on the P r i n c i p a l s ’
Personal Need f o r Further Preparation and
Continuing Development in Each o f the Role/
Function Categories and Age ..............................................

76

One-Way Analysis of Variance on the P r i n c i p a l s ’
Personal Need f o r Further Preparation and
Continuing Development in Each of the Role/
Function Categories and Years of Experience . . . .

77

One-Way Analysis of Variance on the P r i n c i p a l s ’
Personal Need f o r Further Preparation and
Continuing Development in Each of th e Role/
Function Categories and Degree Held .............................

78

One-Way Analysis of Variance on the P r i n c i p a l s ’
Personal Need f o r Further Preparation and
Continuing Development in Each of th e Role/
Function Categories and Assignment Level .....................

79

One-Way Analysis o f Variance on the P r i n c i p a l s ’
Personal Need f o r Further Preparation and
Continuing Development in Each of the Role/
Function Categories and School D i s t r i c t Size
in Terms of Student Enrollment ..........................................

80

One-Way Analysis of Variance on the P r i n c i p a l s ’
Personal Need f o r Further Preparation and
Continuing Development in Each of th e Role/
Function Categories and Likelihood o f Re tir ing
Within the Next Five Years ..................................................

81

Percentage D is tr i b u t i o n o f the Primary Source o f
Preparation and Continuing Professional Develop­
ment: I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision ......................................

83

xii

Page
4.33

4.34

4.35

Percentage D i s tr i b u t i o n o f the Primary Source of
Preparation and Continuing Professional Develop­
ment: Curriculum Development and Implementation . .

84

Percentage D i s t r i b u t i o n o f the Primary Source of
Preparation and Continuing Professional Develop­
ment: L e a d e r s h i p ....................................................................

85

Percentage D i s tr i b u t i o n o f the Primary Source of
Preparation and Continuing Professional Develop­
ment: S t a f f Development/Personnel Management . . .

87

xiii

CHAPTER I
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Introduction
Current

literature

about

school

effectiveness

consistently

c i t e s th e p r in c ip a l as th e key to a successful school.
Brookover,

Goodlad,

Lezotte,

and

other

Studies by

r e search ers

continue

to

support th e theory t h a t the p r a c t i c e s and procedures o f the building
principal

as

a leader

have

a significant

e f f e c t i v e n e s s of th e school,

particu larly

influence

on

the

as measured by t h e

v a r i a b l e of studen t achievement.
In his

study e n t i t l e d What Schools Are For. Goodlad

concluded t h a t the princip al
school

wi ll

ta ke.

i s ce ntral

The p r in c ip a l

community and the school.

is

(1979)

t o the d i r e c t i o n t h a t

the

main

link

a

between the

The prin cipa l must have an understanding

o f and a f e e l i n g f o r how the community per ceives the r o l e of the
school in order f o r t h a t p r in c ip a l to develop a sense of mission and
direction.
Brookover and Lezotte, in t h e i r 1979 study of Michigan schools
e n r o l l i n g p rim arily low-income minority c h i ld r e n ,
behaviors, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ,
other

climate

a c h ie v e m e n t.

factors,
Their

found t h a t

and b e l i e f s of p r i n c i p a l s ,

clearly
studies

influenced
suggested

1

the
that

level
the

the

along with
of

student

creation

of

2
ap propri at e school lear ning climates i s a more e f f e c t i v e remedy for
low student achievement than i s the c l i n i c a l an a ly s is of individual
s tu d e n ts .

Effective schools have p r in c i p a ls who be liev e and promote

th e b e l i e f t h a t a l l

stu den ts can le ar n re g a rd le s s of background,

r ac e, or socioeconomic s t a t u s .

L i t e r a t u r e on e f f e c t i v e schools has

suggested t h a t such schools have p r i n c i p a l s who are not content with
th e

status

quo

and

exhibit

deliberate

instructional

toward th e premise t h a t every student can l e a r n .
high

achievement,

the

p r in c ip a l

assumes

the

le ad er sh ip

In schools with

responsibility

for

id e n t i f y i n g the s ch oo l’ s educational mission as high achievement for
a l l stu den ts and then proceeds to coordinate and monitor a l l school
a c t i v i t i e s to see t h a t they co n tr ib u t e to t h i s go al.
P r i n c i p a l s r e p r e s e n t t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a u t h o r i t y o f th e
school, and in t h a t regard, they serve to symbolize what the
school stands f o r , how i t will oper ate, and what i s important.
In gen er al , they s e t the educational tone f o r th e school. The
r e s e a r c h on e f f e c t i v e s c h o o l s ,
e f f e c t i v e educational
innovations, and e f f e c t i v e s t r a t e g i e s f o r planning change all
point to the p r in c ip a l as a s in g u la r ly important person in the
s u c c e s s f u l school syst em . ( L e z o t t e , Hathaway, M i l l e r ,
Passalacqua, & Brookover, 1980, p. 93).
According to the U.S.

Department of Education (1987).

principals

stand a t the c en ter of school reform:
Successful p r i n c i p a l s command a t t e n t i o n , i n s p i r e r e s p e c t , set
high goa ls, and motivate teachers and stu de nts to meet them.
Such p r i n c i p a l s have a compelling vi si on of what the school
should be and they a r t i c u l a t e i t c l e a r l y and rep ea tedly to
s tu d e n ts , te a c h e r s , parents and members of the community.
(P. 1)
In 1983,

the American Association

of

School

Administrators

undertook a study to i d e n t i f y s t r a t e g i e s and programs co n tr ib u t in g
to more e f f e c t i v e schools.

As p a r t of t h e i r r es ea rch , they reviewed

3
more t h a n

a decade o f r e s e a r c h

ch aracteristics

associated

and w r i t i n g s

with

resear ch overwhelmingly c i t e d

"effective

th e prin cipal

important keys to excellence in schools:

related

to

schools."

the

T h e ir

as one of the most

"Research fin dings on the

way good s c h o o l s f u n c t i o n p l u s t h e accum ulated e x p e r i e n c e o f
s up erintende nts and p r i n c i p a l s combined to demonstrate t h a t schools i t e l e a d e r sh ip i s an e s s e n t i a l

ingre die nt f o r successful schools"

(p. 5).
With t h e

growing c o m p l e x i t y o f

today’s

society

and

the

concomitant importance o f the r o l e of the school in developing young
a d u lt s who wi ll be able t o meet the challenges o f tomorrow’s world,
i t i s c r i t i c a l f o r the building prin cipal t o be s k i l l e d in many and
d iv e r s e

lead er sh ip

roles.

Some o f

these

r o le s

are

community

r e l a t i o n s exp er t, personnel s p e c i a l i s t , finance d i r e c t o r , curriculum
planner,

and i n s t r u c t i o n a l

leader.

"With the

increased evidence

t h a t p r i n c i p a l s are cr ucial to the operation o f e f f e c t i v e schools
w ill

come t h e r e c o g n i t i o n

f o r t h e need t o p r o v i d e f o r

their

continuing pr ofessional development" (Lezotte e t a l . , 138C, p. 36).
In

1986,

P rincipals

the

N a tio n a l

(NAESP)

characteristics

u n d e r to o k

and a p t itu d e s

p r i n c i p a l s (grades K-8).
forth,

A ssociation
a

of

s tu d y

Elementary
to

School

d e t e r m in e

most needed by today ’s

the

elementary

In t h i s study, the NAESP attempted to s e t

in a p o s itio n paper, the s k i l l s ,

traits,

and c a p a b i l i t i e s

t h a t make f o r the types of p r i n c ip a ls who develop elementary schools
(grades K-8) o f outstanding q u a l i t y .
NAESP study revealed t h a t

Like Goodlad’ s r es ea rch , the

"as the school’ s l e a d e r ,

the building

4

p r in c ip a l

i s the s in g l e most important f i g u r e

e f f e c t i v e n e s s of those y e a r s . "
p rin cip als

possess

in determining the

The NAESP s t r e s s e d t h a t e f f e c t i v e

appropriate

personal

characteristics

and

a p t i tu d e s and t h a t t h i s pro fessional pr ep aratio n must be r e l e v a n t
and e f f e c t i v e .
The National Association of Secondary School P r in c i p a l s (NASSP)
developed an assessment model f o r secondary school p r i n c i p a l s .
model

as ses ses

principals

on

12

skill

c a te g o r ie s

and

The

provides

d ia g n o s t ic da ta designed t o develop a customized t r a i n i n g program
f o r th e examinee t o improve performance.

The model i s used in 40

s t a t e s , including Michigan.
Problem Statement
The problem addressed in t h i s study i s the l im ite d information
a v a i l a b l e on the pr ep aratio n and continuing professional-development
needs

of

Michigan

Michigan
is

secondary

implementing

a

principals.

Given

new a d m in is t r a to r

the

fact

certification

that
and

prepara tion program and t h a t i t i s expected t h a t approximately 32 %
o f a l l c u r r e n t l y employed secondary p r i n c i p a l s will r e t i r e by 1991,
it

is

critical

that

information

exist

on

th e

pr ep aratio n

and

continuing professional-development needs o f secondary p r i n c i p a l s .
Without c u r r e n t information on th e pr ep ar at ion needs of p r i n c i p a l s ,
i t will be more d i f f i c u l t f o r S ta te policy makers, those providing
directio n
preparation
principals

for

college

pro grams,

and

university

professional

and o t h e r school

school

adm inistrator

organizations

adm inistrators,

of

school

and l o c a l

school

5

d i s t r i c t leaders t o design and implement e f f e c t i v e pr ep aratio n and
continuing professional-development programs f o r p r i n c i p a l s .
Chester E. Finn, J r . , former A s s is ta n t Secretary and Counselor
to the U.S. Sec retar y of Education, in w r iti n g f o r the 1987 r e p o rt
of

the

National

Commission

on

Excellence

in

E d u c a t io n a l

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , u n d e r s c o r e d t h e need f o r s t r o n g e r p r e p a r a t i o n
programs f o r school p r i n c i p a l s and sup erintende nts as a n e c e s s i ty
f o r promoting high-achieving school systems.

Finn observed t h a t :

P r a c t i c a l l y never does one encounter a good school with a bad
p r i n c i p a l o r a h i g h - a c h i e v i n g school s ys tem w it h a low
pe rfo rm ance s u p e r i n t e n d e n t .
Ample r e s e a r c h i n t o t h e
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e schools confirms the
conclusion of common sense.
The c a l i b e r o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l
lead er sh ip powerfully influences the q u a l i t y of education.
Yet, a t a time when th e nation i s deeply concerned about the
performance o f i t s schools, and near -to-obse sse d with the
c r e d e n t i a l s and c a r e e r s of those who teach in them, scant
a t t e n t i o n has been paid t o the pre par at ion and q u a l i f i c a t i o n s
of those who lead them. (p. 89)
Achilles

(1987) observed t h a t the l i t e r a t u r e

on educational

ad m in i s tr a to r pr ep arati o n and c r i t i c s of the programs, as well
practitioners,

all

as

have in dic ate d t h a t education needs p r i n c i p a l s

who deal with i n s t r u c t i o n a l leadersh ip and change and are adept at
s c h o o l - s i t e management.

However, Ach illes suggested t h a t :

The c o n t r a d i c t io n s between course work and p r a c t i c e should be
given se rio us a t t e n t i o n sin ce c u r re n t resear ch suggests t h a t
student outcomes seem r e l a t e d to a d m i n is tr a to r behaviors t h a t
are not commonly i d e n t i f i e d through observational s tu d i e s in
schools or taught in pr ep ar at ion programs, (p. 44)
In 1986, Public Act 163, r equiri ng the c e r t i f i c a t i o n of school
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , was passed by th e Michigan L e g is la tu re and signed
in to law by Governor James J . Blanchard.

On J uly 1, 1988, Public

6
Act 163 became e f f e c t i v e , as did emergency r u l e s promulgated by the
S t a t e Board o f Education.
became f i n a l
detail

the

certification,

The a d m i n i s t r a t o r - c e r t i f i c a t i o n

on January 14, 1989.
processes

and

r u le s

These r u l e s were designed to

requirem ents

for

adm inistrator

including requirements f o r (a) i n i t i a l

p r e p a ra t io n ,

(b) continuing pr ofe ssional development r e s u l t i n g from th e required
renewal o f the a d m i n is tr a to r c e r t i f i c a t e every f iv e y e a r s , and (c)
state-approved school

a d m in i s tr a to r pr ep ar at ion programs a t

state

co lleg es and u n i v e r s i t i e s , based on S tate Board Standards o f Quality
f o r Administrator Preparation Programs.
Before passage o f Public Act 163, th e S ta t e Board of Education
and the

L e gis lature

had not

articulated

identifiable

sta nd ards,

organized programs, or developed s t a t e policy f o r th e prepara ti on
and continuing profession al development of school a d m i n i s t r a t o r s .
r eview o f S t a t e Board m in u tes

and p u b l i c

comment b e f o r e

A
the

L e g is la tu re during the debate of Public Act 163 (House B ill 4282)
suggests t h a t much of what c o n s t i t u t e d a d m in i s tr a to r pr ep aratio n had
been done through autonomous
co lleg es and u n i v e r s i t i e s .
independently

from any

advanced degree

programs

at

state

These programs have g e n e r a lly operated

statewide

policy

direction,

with

little

coordination among i n s t i t u t i o n s and minimum linkages with p r a c t i c i n g
school

adm inistrators.

As Finn (1985) o b s e r v e d ,

college

and

u n i v e r s i t y programs have been c r i t i c i z e d f o r o f f e r in g "Mickey Mouse"
courses, providing poor c l i n i c a l p r epara tion, and being out of touch
with the needs of to d a y ’s p r i n c i p a l s .
"with

rare

exceptions,

a

graduate

Finn s t a t e d f u r t h e r t h a t
program

in

education

7

adm in is tr ation resembles an a r t s and science program more c l o se ly
than anything e l s e and has very l i t t l e

about i t t h a t implies the

natur e of th e t a s k awaiting i t s alumni" (p. 97).
Although

the

requirem ents

o f M ic h ig a n ’ s

Public

Act

163

e s t a b l i s h a framework f o r developing s t a t e po licy f o r a d m in istr a to r
pre par at ion and continuing professional-development programs, i t is
only the beginning.
next c r i t i c a l

Deciding the content of th e s e programs i s the

phase i f

ad m in istr ato r prepara tion

is

to have any

influence on the p r a c t i c e s and q u a l i t y of schools in Michigan.
Also, major changes in the supply and demand o f experienced
school p r i n c i p a l s are a second f a c t o r to be considered in any e f f o r t
t o improve the pre par at ion of school p r i n c i p a l s and to provide for
th eir

continuing

professional

de ve lopm ent.

In h i s

s t u d y on

a d m i n i s tr a t o r supply-demand commissioned by the National Commission
on Excellence in Educational Administration, B lis s (1986) observed
t h a t the "supply o f school a d m in istr a to rs will have an impact on the
w illingness
ap propri at e

of u n iv e rs ity
voluntary

chairpersons

adjustments

in

and de an s

their

admission

to

promote

standa rds,

c u r r i c u l a and teaching s t r a t e g i e s " (p. 193).
Two re cent s tu d i e s

conducted by the Michigan Department

of

Education (1986, 1987) on the e l i g i b i l i t y and plans f o r r etir em en t
of c u r r e n t l y employed school p r in c ip a ls found t h a t approximately 97%
o f th e secondary school p r i n c i p a l s e l i g i b l e f o r r etir em en t a c t u a l l y
plan to r e t i r e from s e r v i c e in Michigan public schools by 1991.
This re p re s e n ts 32% o f a l l c u r r e n t l y employed secondary p r i n c i p a l s .

8
The Michigan experience in turnover of school p r i n c i p a l s r e f l e c t s a
national

trend.

During the next ten y e a r s ,

almost h a l f o f a ll

c u r r e n t p r i n c i p a l s will r e t i r e (U.S. Department o f Education, 1987).
This means t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t numbers o f buildin g p r i n c i p a l s who are
employed over the next ten year s will be new to t h e i r p o s itio n as a
building p r i n c i p a l .
Purpose of the Study
The r e s e a r c h e r ’ s purpose in t h i s

study was t o

collect

and

analyze d ata to b e t t e r understand th re e important areas r e l a t e d to
the Michigan secondary school p r in c ip a ls h i p .

These areas are (a)

+'ie per ceptions of p r in c ip a ls about th e range of percep tions and
importance of s e le c te d job r o l e s , (b) the needs p r i n c i p a l s i d e n t i f y
f o r f u r t h e r prep ar at ion and continuing prof es sion al development to
respond t o t h e i r job r o l e s , and (c) what p r i n c i p a l s i d e n t i f y as the
primary source

of t h e i r

prep ar atio n

developm ent.

The c a t e g o r i e s

of

and continuing
inquiry

used

in

pr ofessional
the

s u rv ey

instrument were s e le cted because they form the common th re ad

in

e f f e c t i v e schools l i t e r a t u r e regarding the r o le s / f u n c t i o n s o f school
principals.

This information may help S t a t e policy makers, f a c u l t y

of co lleg e and u n i v e r s i t y school a d m i n is tr a to r prepara tion programs,
professional

o r gan izations o f school

principals

and o th e r

school

a d m i n i s tr a to r s , and school d i s t r i c t lea de rs to design and implement
e f f e c t i v e p r e p a r a t i o n and c o n t i n u i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l - d e v e l o p m e n t
programs f o r p r i n c i p a l s .

9

S ig nifican ce o f the Study
New ex pec tations f o r school p r in c ip a l
th e changing r o le s of p r i n c i p a l s ,

pr ep ar at ion r e l a t e d to

and th e expected r e t ir e m e n t of

l a r g e numbers o f c u r r e n t l y p r a c t i c i n g school ad m i n is tr a to rs , suggest
t h a t the fin dings and a n aly s is from t h i s study will

be useful

in

providing answers to several important ques tions, such as:
1.

How should co lleg es and u n i v e r s i t i e s modify th e curriculum

of th e ir

adm inistrator preparation

programs

so as t o

assist

pros pe ctive a d m in istr a to rs in becoming more e f f e c t i v e in the v a r i e t y
of r o le s required of a building p r in c ip a l?
2.

How can c u r r e n t a d m i n i s t r a t o r p r e p a r a t i o n programs be

redesigned so as t o be more c o n s i s t e n t with the f in dings of research
on the r o l e of the p rin c ip a l in an e f f e c t i v e school?
3.

What

principals

must

continuing
be

met

to

professional-developm ent
ensure

that

p r in c i p a ls

needs
can

of

respond

e f f e c t i v e l y to changes in s ocie ty and the expectations f o r schools?
4.

What mechanism(s)

must

be

in

place

to

respond

to

the

continuing professional-development needs of p r in c ip a ls ?
Although the focus in t h i s study was pr im ar ily on the l a s t two
o f thes e questio ns, i t i s hoped t h a t the r e s u l t s will prove h e l p f u l,
in some measure, as a l l of thes e questions are addressed.
At p r e s e n t, l im it ed information i s ava il a b le to a s s i s t s t a t e
policy makers, those providing d i r e c t i o n s f o r college and u n i v e r s i t y
school
tions

a d m in istr a to r pr ep ar at ion
of school

p r i n c ip a ls

programs,

and ot her

profes sional

school

organiz a­

a d m i n i s tr a to r s ,

and

10
local

school

d i s t r i c t le a d e r s t o respond to the pr ep aratio n

and

continuing professional-development needs o f secondary p r i n c i p a l s .
Comparing th e resear ch c i t i n g the q u a l i t i e s ,

characteristics,

and

p r a c t i c e s o f p r i n c i p a l s who can and do make a d i f f e r e n c e in stude nt
achievement with

th e

Michigan

S tate

Board

of

Education’ s

1986

Michigan Public School Retirement Report and 1987 Report on Survey
o f Michigan School S t a f f E l i g i b l e to R etir e (which showed t h a t 32.2%
o f secondary p r i n c i p a l s were e l i g i b l e t o r e t i r e in 1986, 41.3% were
e l i g i b l e t o r e t i r e between 1986 and 1988, and 86% of those e l i g i b l e
indicated a d e s i r e to r e t i r e by 1991),
examine

how p r a c t i c i n g

p r in c ip a ls

i t seems most c r i t i c a l

perceive

their

to

role/function,

where t r a i n i n g f o r various r o le s / f u n c t io n s has been obtained,

and

where more t r a i n i n g i s needed.
The new Michigan c e r t i f i c a t i o n requirements

(Public Act 163)

f o r school a d m in is tr a t o r s , pr eparation standards f o r ad m inistration
prep aratio n programs a t s t a t e colleg es and u n i v e r s i t i e s , continuing
professional-development requirements f o r school a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , and
the a n t i c i p a t e d r etir em en t o f many secondary p r i n c i p a l s by 1991 have
s i g n i f i c a n t implica tion s f o r the i n i t i a l p r e p a ra t io n , t r a i n i n g , and
continuing profes sion al development of persons who wi ll be s e le c te d
to f i l l

new r o le s as secondary building p r i n c i p a l s .

Former U.S.

Secr etary of Education William J . Bennett observed t h a t :
The q u a l i t y of th e men and women who take t h e i r places will
g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e t h e kind o f e d u c a t i o n we e n j o y and,
e v e n t u a l l y , t h e kind o f s o c i e t y in which we l i v e .
The
le adersh ip they provide will determine, to a la r g e e x t e n t , what
kind of tea ch er s are r e c r u i t e d , how many good ones s ta y in the
pr ofe s sion, and how many i n e f f e c t i v e ones leave. We must take
t h i s opportunity t o f i l l our schools with dynamic, committed

11
le a d e r s , f o r they provide th e key to e f f e c t i v e schools where we
will e i t h e r win or lose th e b a t t l e f o r excellence in education.
(U.S. Department o f Education, 1987, p. i i i ) .
Limitations
This study was lim i te d to a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of secondary
school p r i n c i p a l s employed during 1989-90 from a s t r a t i f i e d sample
o f public

school

districts

across

th e

state

of Michigan.

The

r e s u l t i n g d ata were li m it e d by the method of data c o l l e c t i o n - - a
mailed q u e s ti o n n a ir e .

Nonresponse i s u n c o n tr o ll a b l e

in a mailed

survey.
The d ata
individual

from t h i s

study

were

based

th e

responses

of

p r i n c i p a l s regarding t h e i r perceptions about th e range

and importance of t h e i r job r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s
need

on

for

further

preparation

and

in r e l a t i o n to t h e i r

continuing

professional

development.
Del i m it atio ns
The study was lim i te d

specifically

to

secondary

p r in c ip a ls

employed in Michigan secondary schools in grades 7 through 12 during
the 1989-90 school year.

The p a r t i c i p a n t s in the study were asked

t o s e l e c t th e range and importance of s e le c t e d job r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s
and to i d e n t i f y t h e i r individual need f o r f u r t h e r prepara ti on and
continuing prof es siona l development in each job r o l e / f u n c t i o n .

The

content of the survey was li m it ed to four r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s t h a t have
been i d e n t i f i e d in the l i t e r a t u r e as being asso ciated with e f f e c t i v e
schools.

12
The data generated in th e study were c o l l e c t e d by use o f a
w r i tt e n

q u es tio n n air e

individual

perceptual

in which respondents were asked f o r

their

responses,

being

in

contrast

to

responses

determined by the r e s e a r c h e r as a r e s u l t o f ex ter nal obs ervation and
a n a l y s is .
The survey instrument used in t h i s study was not meant t o be
comprehensive in addressing a l l the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f the secondary
principal.
The study was focused on only four main r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f the
prin cip alsh ip .

These

Supervision,

Curriculum

(b)

roles/functions

are

Development

and

(a)

Instructional

Implementation,

(c)

Leadership, and (d) S t a f f Development/Personnel Management.
Research Questions
Responses were sought t o determine what degree of importance
secondary school p r i n c i p a l s at tached to iss ue s addressed in each of
th e following f i v e ques tio ns:
1.

What i s th e range of secondary p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions of

th e importance of s e le c t e d a d m in is tr a to r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ?
2.

What d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t among secondary p r i n c i p a l s regarding

t h e i r perceptions about a d m in is t r a t o r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s , comparing the
variables

of gender,

age,

length

of

service

as

a s eco n d ary

p r i n c i p a l , and the s iz e and l o c a tio n of t h e i r school?
3.

What do secondary p r in c ip a ls perceive to be t h e i r degree of

need f o r f u r t h e r pr ep aratio n and continuing profe ssional development
in each of the s e le c te d r o le s / f u n c t io n s ?

13
4.
their

What d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t among secondary p r i n c i p a l s regarding
professional-development needs,

comparing the

variables

of

gender, age, length o f s erv ic e as a secondary p r i n c i p a l , and size
and l o c a ti o n o f t h e i r school?
5.

What do secondary p r in c i p a ls

identify

as

source o f pre par at io n and continuing profes sion al

their

primary

development for

each of the s e le c te d a d m in is t r a t o r r o le s / f u n c t io n s ?
Summary
In

this

study

the

rese archer

examined

th e

per ce ptions

Michigan secondary school p r in c ip a ls in th r e e areas:
and importance of t h e i r job r o l e s ,

of

(a) th e range

(b) the needs i d e n t i f i e d

for

f u r t h e r p r e p a r a t i o n and c o n t i n u i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l dev elop men t t o
respond t o t h e i r job r o l e s ,

and (c)

the primary source o f t h e i r

pr ep aratio n and continuing professional development.

The study was

focused on only four main r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s

principalship.

of the

These are (a) I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision, (b) Curriculum Development
and

Implementation,

Personnel Management.

(c)

Leadership,

and

(d)

Staff

Development/

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In t h i s

study o f building p r i n c i p a l s '

perceptions

regarding

t h e i r r o l e s in i n s t r u c t i o n a l su pervision, curriculum development and
implementation, le a d e r s h ip , and s t a f f development/personnel manage­
ment,

the

r esear ch er

sought

to

identify

th e

personal

needs

of

p r in c ip a ls f o r continuing professional development r e l a t e d to each
r o l e category and each individual p r i n c i p a l ’ s perception s o f h i s / h e r
most valuable
development.

source of

pre paration

and continuing

pr ofessional

As shown in t h i s review o f the l i t e r a t u r e , c o n s id e r ­

able a t t e n t i o n has been given to the r o le s served by school adminis­
trato rs

in p r o v i d i n g e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u c t i o n a l

n a t i o n ’ s schools.

Also,

school a d m i n i s tr a to r s ,

educational

teachers,

programs f o r t h e

policy makers,

researchers,

and higher education f a c u l t y who

p r o v i d e a d m i n i s t r a t o r p r e p a r a t i o n programs have a l l

expressed

concerns about the content and q u a l i t y of a d m in is tr a to r pr ep ar ation
programs.

Although t h e r e has been s i g n i f i c a n t resear ch on th e r ole s

of school ad m in i s tr a to rs , i n s u f f i c i e n t a t t e n t i o n has been given to
t h e i r pre pa ration needs in r e l a t i o n to t h e i r r o l e s .
In t h i s review of the l i t e r a t u r e ,

an overview of the reform

e f f o r t in ad m in istr ato r pr ep ar at ion i s provided.

This is followed

by a discussion of changes in Michigan educational p o l i c i e s r e l a t e d
14

15
to a d m in istr a to r p r e p a ra t io n , a review of the influence of e f f e c t i v e
schools research on the r o le s o f a d m i n i s tr a to r s ,

and a review of

research focusing on i d e n t i f i a b l e r o le s f o r school a d m in is tr a t o r s .
The Reform E f f o rt in Administrator Preparation
Since th e r e l e a s e o f the U.S. Department of Education’ s r e p o rt
A Nation a t Risk in 1983, many r e p o r t s have focused on th e s t a t u s
and f u tu r e d i r e c t i o n s o f education in the United S t a t e s .
national

reports

resulted

from the work o f d iv e r s e

publ ic,

p r i v a t e , e d ucational, governmental,

studied

various elements o f the present

These

committees--

b u s i n e s s - - a l l of which

system of education

and

recommended changes f o r th e f u tu r e .
These i n i t i a l r e p o r t s focused on c a l l s f o r reform in d e liv e r y
of i n s t r u c t i o n , standards of q u a l i t y in student achievement, t e a c h e r
prep ar at ion and c e r t i f i c a t i o n ,
and c i t i z e n s

in educational

and r o le s and fu nc tio ns of pare nts

de cision making.

One r e s u l t of a ll

thes e r e p o r t s was the challenge presented to the governors of the 50
states,

who took up educational reform as a

f i r s t p r i o r i t y ( M iller,

1987).

The r e p o r t s also focused c r i t i c i s m on educational

adminis­

t r a t o r s by suggesting t h a t school a dm inist rators are j u s t not as
competent as a d m i n ist r a t o rs

in oth er f i e l d s

(G riffiths,

Sto ut,

&

Forsyth, 1987).
In w r itin g f o r th e Education Commission of the S t a t e s ,

Green

observed t h a t the second round of reforms must address omissions in
the i n i t i a l e f f o r t s .

A focus of a second wave of reform r e p o rts has

been on local schools and t h e i r l e a d e r s - - t h e school p r i n c i p a l .

In

16
A Time f o r Results:

The Governors’ 1991 Report on Education, the

n a t i o n ’ s governors reported t h a t "school leadersh ip will be th e key
ingre die nt o f the second wave o f reform" (p. 51).
Synonymous with the pr ep ar at ion of p r i n c i p a l s i s graduate study
in educational
National
Pitner

a dm inistration.

In w r iti n g f o r th e r e p o r t o f the

Commission on Excellence
(1987)

obs erv ed

practitioners

are t h a t

that,
faculty

in

Educational

in g e n e r a l ,
have not

Administration,

the

com plaints

had experience

as

of
line

a d m in i str a to rs in public schools, t h a t u n i v e r s i t y programs do not
provide the opportunity f o r applying t h e o r e t i c a l knowledge t o actual
situations,

that

th e

theory

itself

is

too

ofte n

irrelevant

or

ta n g e n tia l to real-world needs, and t h a t p r a c t i t i o n e r s are not used
in teaching and course development.

P i t n e r also observed t h a t :

I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o i g n o r e t h e t e s t i m o n y o f school
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s t h a t t h e i r t r a i n i n g programs a r e f a r from
adequate in preparing them to resolve the problems they face.
S in c e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s c l a i m t h e y a r e u n p r e p a r e d f o r t h e
r e a l i t i e s of managerial work, i t behooves us to examine what
t h a t work e n t a i l s and i t s impact on the school o r g an izatio n s,
(p. 369)
In

several

a d m in is t r a t io n ,
bears

little

stud ies,

as

researchers

p r acticed

resemblance to

have

found

by superintendents
school

that

and

ad m inistr ation

as

school

principals,
taught

in

graduate schools of education (Peterson & Finn, 1985; P i t n e r , 1982).
In

a review

of the

adm inistrators

really

practice

of

school

adm inistrators--w hat

do--Pitner

(1982)

found

that

although

pre par at ion programs offe re d many courses on such t o p ic s as finance
and p o l i t i c s o f education, p r in c ip a ls spent much of t h e i r on- th e-j ob

17
tim e on d i s c i p l i n e , e x t r a c u r r i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s ,

s e r v i c e , p u p il

c o n t r o l, or gan iz at ional maintenance, and n o n i n s tr u c tio n a l m atters .
Peterson and Finn (1985) disparaged a d m in is tr a t o r pr ep ar at ion
programs f o r what they des cribed as t h e i r "Mickey Mouse" courses,
f o r following an a r t s and sciences
school model,
training.

model r a t h e r than a professional

f o r low admission s tanda rd s,

and

f o r poor c l i n i c a l

G r i f f i t h s (1979) argued t h a t th e t h e o r e t i c a l underpinning

o f school ad m in istr ati o n p r a c t i c e is under a t t a c k on a number of
grounds.
G riffiths
National

et al.

(1987),

in

Commission on Excellence

w r i ti n g
in

f o r the

Educational

report

of the

Administration,

charged t h a t :
P erhaps
t h e s i n g l e most
d e stru c tiv e trend affectin g
pr ofessional p rep aratio n in school a d m in istr a tio n during the
l a s t t h i r t y ye ar s has been domination by an a r t s and sciences
model r a t h e r than a profes sion al school model o f education.
The consequent f a i l u r e to develop a s o p h is t i c a t e d knowledge
base f o r p r a c t i c e and divorce of p r ep aratio n from th e school
s e t t i n g are a t l e a s t p a r t l y the r e s u l t o f t h i s domination, (p.
299)
G r i f f i t h s e t a l . f u r t h e r contended t h a t th e p u r s u i t of p u blication
r equired f o r f a c u l t y tenu re has disp laced f a c u l t y concerns f o r (a)
review and renewal of th e pr ep ar at ion program, (b) development and
supervision of the c l i n i c a l
( c)

overseeing

development

and

aspects of a d m i n is tr a to r p r ep arati o n ,

recruitm ent

and

innovation,

and

selection,
(e )

(d)

providing

instructional
liaison

wit h

pr ofes sio na l p r a c t i c e groups.
In summary r e p o r t s , Hawley (1987), P i t n e r (1982), and McCarthy
(1987) d e s c r i b e d a c o l l e c t i o n

of serious

difficu lties

in t h e

18

pre p a ra ti o n o f school a d m in istr ato rs in th e United S t a t e s .
suggested several

problems t h a t must be a d d r e s s e d t o

a d m i n i s t r a t o r prepara tion programs.
1.

Hawley
improve

The problems a r e:

Most f a c u l t y ar e only marginally more knowledgeable than

t h e i r s tu d e n t s .
2. Few persons teaching in doctoral

programs have ever been

involved in re se ar ch and are not q u a l i f i e d to supervise r esear ch .
3.

Admission standards ar e weak and performance c r i t e r i a i l l

def in ed .
4.

Professors o f educational

adm inist rat ion ofte n bear much

hea vier teaching and advising loads than do doctoral profes so r s in
other fie ld s .
5.

Uncertainty of purpose and lack of se lf - e ste e m among educa­

t i o n a l ad m in istr atio n p rofe sso rs c o n tr ib u te to and are f o s t e r e d by
low s t a t u s not only within u n i v e r s i t i e s but within schools of educa­
tion.
6.

There is v i r t u a l l y no investment in t a r g e t e d and systematic

pro fe ssi onal upgrading of co lleg e f a c u l t y .
7. Linkages t o p r a c t i t i o n e r s are t y p i c a l l y weak and ar e more
o f te n based on personal r e l a t i o n s h i p s than on the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of
interdependent but d i s t i n c t c a p a b i l i t i e s .
P i t n e r (1982) observed t h a t the s tu d ie s of what p r i n c i p a l s do
on

the

job

have

presented

pr e p a ra t io n programs.

an

addit io nal

P i tn e r concluded:

dilemma

to

reform

of

19
While we know t o th e minutest d e t a i l the length o f every phone
c a l l made and meetings attended by the a d m i n i s tr a to r , the
people with whom he or she i n t e r a c t e d , and th e l o c a tio n s of
the se encounters, we know very l i t t l e about what impact these
a c t i v i t i e s have on th e school or gan iza ti on and, s p e c i f i c a l l y ,
on studen t achievement, (p-. 287)
Ach illes

(1987) observed t h a t the

adm inistrators'

preparation

and

literature

critics

of

on educational

the

program

and

p r a c t i t i o n e r s a l l have in dic at ed t h a t education needs p r i n c i p a l s who
deal

with

instructional

s c h o o l - s i t e management.

leadersh ip

and change and

are

adept

at

Ach illes suggested, however, t h a t :

The c o n t r a d i c t io n s between course work and p r a c t i c e should be
given se ri ou s a t t e n t i o n since c u r r e n t resear ch suggests t h a t
student outcomes seem r e l a t e d to a d m i n i s tr a tiv e behaviors t h a t
are not commonly i d e n t i f i e d through obs ervational s tu d i e s in
school or taught in prepara tion programs, (p. 44)
Michigan P o l i c i e s Related to Administrator Preparation
Since 1986, Michigan has experienced s i g n i f i c a n t change in i t s
educational

policies

related

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . Public Act

to

the

preparation

163 o f 1986, r e q u ir in g t h e

of

school

certification

o f school a d m i n i s tr a to r s , was passed by the Michigan L e g is la tu re and
j m m a iJ

1 * » i.i

U w

an u j

m M M

u v v g i

iiui

1

rw#>> r» 1

d l y n c u

ill cm I

v a i n e r

Public

Act 163 became e f f e c t i v e ,

v •

D l

lm u n v u a i

as did

u •

A n

vii

emergency

r u l e s promulgated by the S t ate Board o f Education.

l n l

w

w u i j

1

i>

1 O Q O

i vw w )

certification
The S t a t e Board

o f Education’ s r u le s governing a d m i n is tr a to r c e r t i f i c a t i o n

became

f i n a l on January 14, 1989.
Public

Act

163

defined

minimum

qualificatio n s

for

supe rin tend en ts and o th e r a d m inistrators o f local and intermediate
school d i s t r i c t s .

Those requirements included (a) possession of a

v a l i d Michigan t e a c h e r ’ s c e r t i f i c a t e ;

(b)

possession of

a va li d

20

Michigan school a d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s c e r t i f i c a t e f o r a l l persons employed
as

a s upe rin tend en t,

principal,

assistant

principal,

or

ce ntral

o f f i c e a d m in is tr a to r whose primary r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s administering
i n s t r u c t i o n a l programs o r serving as th e c h i e f business o f f i c i a l ;
and (c) renewal o f the a d m in istr a to r c e r t i f i c a t e every f i v e years
upon completion o f renewal u n i t s , as determined by the S ta te Board
of Education.
The

final

S tate

Board

of

E d u c atio n

rules

g o v e r n in g

a d m in istr a to r c e r t i f i c a t e s provided f u r t h e r d e t a i l to Public Act 163
with r e sp e c t
certification.

to

th e

process

The r u le s

a d m in istr a to r p r e p a ra ti o n ,

and

requirements

included requirements

for

adm in is trator

for

(a)

initial

(b) continuing professiona l development

r e s u l t i n g from the required renewal of th e a d m in i s tr a to r c e r t i f i c a t e
every f i v e y e a r s ,

and (c) s t a t e approval

of school

adm inist rato r

prep ar at ion programs a t s t a t e colleg es and u n i v e r s i t i e s ,
State

Board

Standards

of

Quality

for

Administrator

based on

Preparation

Programs.
The requirements o f Michigan’ s Public Act 163 and the r u le s
governing

a d m in istr a to r

certification

establish

a

framework

for

developing s t a t e policy f o r a d m in istr a to r pre pa ration and continuing
professional-development programs.

The Standards of Quality for

Administrator Preparation Programs, as adopted by the S t ate Board of
Education on August
requirements.

9,

1989,

give

further

definition

to

these

21
The S t a t e Board’ s c e r t i f i c a t i o n r u l e s f o r school a d m in istr a to rs
require

that

prospective

superintendents,

central

office

a d m in is tr a t o r s , and elementary and secondary p r i n c i p a l s a l l complete
a p repara ti on program t h a t includes the following components:
1.

Leadership theory and p r a c t i c e

2.

Management o f educational systems

3.

I n s t r u c t io n a l supervis ion and evaluation

4.

Curriculum development

5.

Methods and processes f o r school improvement.

6.

School finance

7.

School law

8.

Personnel management

9.

Community r e l a t i o n s

10.

Adult and community education

The prepara tion program f o r a c h i e f school

business o f f i c i a l

s h a ll include a l l of the following components:
1.

Business management, including a l l of th e following:
d*

SCiiGGl

flncm Cd

b.

Accounting

c.

School law

d.

Budgeting

e.

Purchasing

f.

F a c i l i t i e s planning

g.

Investment and r i s k management

h.

School maintenance and operation

i.

Basic da ta processing

22

2.

Personnel management, Including:

3.

a.

Labor r e l a t i o n s

b.

Personnel s uper vision, motivation, and appr aisal

Professional education, including:
a.

Educational le adersh ip

b.

School improvement

c.

Curriculum development

The S t a t e Boa rd ’ s S t a n d a r d s
Preparation

Programs

are

bas ed

of Quality of A dm inistrator
on

the

requirements

of

the

a d m in istr a to r c e r t i f i c a t i o n code and will be used by th e S t a t e Board
of Education to review and approve a l l

a d m in is t r a t o r prepara tion

programs proposed by Michigan colleges and u n i v e r s i t i e s .
Effecti ve Schools Research and Administrator Roles
In 1966, a r e p o rt e n t i t l e d Equality o f Educational Opportunity
was re le a se d by the U.S. Office of Education.
became known as the Coleman r e p o r t ,
James

S.

Coleman,

advanced

the

after

p o li c y

its

that,

achievement i s a measure of an e f f e c t i v e school.

That r e p o r t , which
p r in c ip a l
students’

author,
academic

Before th e Coleman

r e p o r t , most s tu d ie s on school improvement had focused on p u p i l s ’
access to educational res ource s.

The public policy b e l i e f before

the Coleman r e p o rt g e n e r a lly suggested t h a t the wealth of a school
d i s t r i c t determined s t u d e n t s ’ academic achievement.

I t was commonly

believed t h a t students from r i c h school d i s t r i c t s achieved more than
stu de nts from poor school d i s t r i c t s .

23
The Coleman r e p o r t
schools themselves.

helped focus educational

research

on

the

I t provided an impetus t o examine the question

o f why some schools were e f f e c t i v e re g a rd l e s s of wealth.

A study by

Weber (1971) suggested t h a t th e r e were school c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t
were the

p r in c ip a l

Weber found t h a t
leadership;

high

determinants
effective

of

instructional

schools

expectations;

are

an

effectiveness.

c h a r a c te r iz e d

orderly,

by strong

quiet,

pleasant

atmosphere; major emphasis on pupil a c q u i s i t i o n o f reading s k i l l s ;
additional

reading

personnel;

emphasis

on

phonics;

and

i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n of i n s t r u c t i o n .
A 1974 r e p o r t by the Office of Education Performance of the
S t a t e o f New York on two i n n e r - c i t y New York p u b l i c
supported many of the conclusions of Weber’ s rese arch.

schools

The New York

study found t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e s between high-achieving schools and
low-achieving schools were a t t r i b u t a b l e to a d m in is t r a t o r behavior,
school p o l i c i e s and p r a c t i c e s , an a d m in istr a to r team t h a t balanced
i n s t r u c t i o n a l and management s k i l l s , and teachers who believed they
I*

it au

a

m

4 4 4

pud i t i v c

mi

m m

iugiiuc uii

+ It n

1 ^ ^ w n t n m

viic icui

Mf

vi

^ k f t t w*

vii&ii

vusjcitv>) •

Brookover and Lezotte (1977) found th e following c h a r a c t e r i s ­
tics

in t h e i r

study of e f f e c t i v e

schools

in Michigan:

(a)

an

emphasis on reading and math o b j e c t i v e s , (b) a b e l i e f by th e s t a f f
t h a t a l l students can lear n and master i n s t r u c t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s , (c)
a climate o f high ex p ectatio n s , (d) te ac her s who assumed the respon­
s i b i l i t y f o r teaching ba sic s k i l l s ,
instruction,

(e) more time spent on reading

(f) a p r in c ip a l who was an i n s t r u c t i o n a l lead er and a

d i s c i p l i n a r i a n , (g) a p r in c ip a l who assumed the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for

24

ev aluating the achievement of basic o b j e c t i v e s ,

(h)

a s t a f f who

accepted t h e i r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , ( i ) t e ach er s who were l e s s s a t i s f i e d
with the s t a t u s quo, ( j ) p a r e n t - i n i t i a t e d involvement, and (k) l e s s
emphasis on par ap rofe ssion al or compensatory education programs.
In h is e f f o r t s t o i d e n t i f y th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h
e f f e c t i v e schools from noneffe ctive schools, Edmonds (1978) found
broad c a t e g o r i e s common t o e f f e c t i v e schools.

In th e Model C i t i e s

Neighborhood S tu d y , he found t h a t s t u d e n t s ’ f a m i l y background
n e i t h e r caused nor precluded a school’ s i n s t r u c t i o n a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s .
Edmonds i d e n t i f i e d seven c o r r e l a t e s of e f f e c t i v e schools t h a t have
commonly been

accepted

These c o r r e l a t e s
clim ate

ar e

in

(a)

the

literature

a sa fe

o f high e x p e c t a t i o n s

on e f f e c t i v e

schools.

and or derl y environment,

for

success,

(c )

(b)

a

instructional

l e a d e r s h ip , (d) a c l e a r and focused mission, (e) the oppo rtu nity to
lear n and student time on t a s k , ( f ) freque nt monitoring o f student
progress, and (g) home-school r e l a t i o n s .

A key finding of Edmonds’

re search was t h a t one of the primary r o l e s served by the p r in c ip a l
in an e f f e c t i v e school i s t h a t of i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e a d e r .
The American As sociation of School Administrators

(1983),

in

t h e i r study e n t i t l e d The Role of the P r incipa l in E f f e c t iv e Schools,
als o c i t e d th e p r in c ip a l
program.

as the key to a successful

educational

They supported th e concept t h a t p r i n c i p a l s must be t r a in e d

in the knowledge and p r a c t i c e s t h a t will enhance the co nditions of
learning.
organize

They concluded t h a t
and s u s t a i n

p r i n c i p a l s must

an e f f e c t i v e

(a)

instructional

know how to
program;

(b)

25
u n d e r s t a n d t h e n a t u r e o f t h e l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s and c u r r i c u l u m
p r a c t i c e s ; (c) be able t o organize and c a r ry out s t a f f development;
(d)

understand and apply p r i n c i p l e s

o f change;

c o n t i n u i t y and s t a b i l i t y in schools;

(e)

provide

for

( f ) coordinat e, d is c u s s ,

and

advise on i n s t r u c t i o n ; (g) manage time e f f i c i e n t l y and e f f e c t i v e l y ;
(h) make sound d e c i s io n s ; ( i ) a l l o c a t e resources wisely;
o u t schoo l

and d i s t r i c t

policies;

( j ) carry

and (k) o f f e r t h e

kind o f

le a d e r sh ip t h a t motivates s t a f f toward common goals.
In an e f f o r t t o t r a n s l a t e v alid s tu d ie s on school e f f e c tiv e n e s s
in to

practice,

the

Michigan

S t a te

Department

of

Education,

c o n j u n c t i o n w it h t h e E d u c a t io n a l T e s t i n g S e r v i c e ,
booklet in 1985 c a l l e d School
Make a D i f fe r e n c e .

Ef f ecti v en ess .

published a

Eight Variables That

In t h i s booklet, they combined the re se ar ch of

many leading a u t h o r i t i e s in the area of school research
Lieberman,

Brookover,

Bloom,

Brophy,

Stallings,

and

(Edmonds,

o th e r s)

des cri b e seven v a r ia b le s t h a t a f f e c t pupil achievement.
(a)

in

p r in c ip a l ex pec ta ti ons,

(b) t ea ch er ex p ectati o n s ,

to

They are
(c) time on

t a s k , (d) classroom management, (e) reinforcement and feedback, (f)
r e c i t a t i o n , and (g) parent involvement.
Mortimer and Simmons
id e n t i f y what f a c t o r s

(1987)

conducted a f o ur- year

contr ib uted t o the p o s i t i v e

study

to

influences

of

schools t h a t are more e f f e c t i v e in promoting s t u d e n t s ’ lear ning and
development.

They followed a c l a s s of stu de nts in 50 schools over a

f o ur- year period, through t h e i r e n t i r e secondary experience.
in to account the fin d in g s

from t h e

Coleman r e p o r t ,

Taking

t h e y d id

26
extensive research on student backgrounds and attempted to control
f o r socioeconomic s t a t u s and personal background.

They found t h a t :

From d e t a i l e d examination of our d a t a , we found t h a t much of
t h e v a r i a t i o n between s c h o o ls can be a c c o u n t e d f o r by
d i f f e r e n c e s in school p o l i c i e s and p r a c t i c e s within control of
the p r in c ip a l and te a c h e r s . . . . Schools which are e f f e c t i v e
in promoting the progress of one group are also e f f e c t i v e f o r
oth er groups and those t h a t are l e s s e f f e c t i v e f o r one group
are also l e s s e f f e c t i v e f o r o t h e r s . An e f f e c t i v e school tends
to "jack" up the performance o f a l l students i r r e s p e c t i v e of
t h e i r sex, social c l a s s , o r ig i n s or race.
Mortimer and Simmons found 12 key f a c t o r s t h a t , when combined,
form a p i c t u r e of what c o n s t i t u t e s e f f e c t i v e secondary education.
All of the se p o l i c i e s and processes are within the control of the
p r in c ip a l and t e a c h e r s .

They are (a) purposeful le a d e r sh ip of the

s t a f f by th e p r i n c i p a l , (b) involvement of the a s s i s t a n t p r i n c i p a l ,
(c) involvement of teachers in curriculum planning, (d) consistency
among

teachers,

(e)

stru ctu red

challenging te a c h e r s ,

(g)

communication

teachers

between

lessons,

work-centered
and

(f)

intellectually

environment,

s tu d e n ts ,

(i)

within s e s s i o n s , ( j ) record keeping, (k) parental

(h)

maximum

lim it e d

focus

involvement, and

(1) p o s i t i v e climate.

Roles o f School Administrators
Greenfield (1982) observed t h a t while "leadership" may be what
is

d es ir ed o f school

principals,

research emphasizing only

this

dimension of the r o l e may obscure many o th e r dimensions of what i t
i s t h a t p r in c ip a ls do.

A wide range of personal, o r g a n iz a tio n a l,

group, and environmental f a c t o r s influence the p r i n c i p a l , and most
researchers have not examined such v a r i a b l e s .

27
Greenfield also observed t h a t educational r esearchers in recent
yea rs have begun t o observe and record s y s te m a t ic a l ly th e day-to-day
behavior o f p r i n c i p a l s .

The bulk o f t h i s e f f o r t has been focused on

elementary p r i n c i p a l s .

G reenfield

suggested

t h a t much more

resear ch i s needed on the d a i l y r o le s o f p r i n c i p a l s , p a r t i c u l a r l y a t
the secondary l e v e l .

He also advocated t h a t i n s e r v ic e t r a i n i n g and

s t a f f development f o r school

p r i n c i p a l s could be instrumental

in

introducing new p r a c t i c e s and developing the s k i l l s needed f o r the
job i f those a c t i v i t i e s are well informed by an understanding of the
actual problems p r i n c i p a l s face.
A s tu d y

by McPherson

and

Buehr

(1979)

resulted

development of the Job Function Inventory f o r School

in

the

P r in c i p a l s .

The r e sear ch er s found t h a t th e s in g le l a r g e s t job category involved
t h e p r i n c i p a l ’ s r e l a t i o n s h i p s with p e o p le and g r o u p s .

Their

resear ch revealed four bas ic p a t t e r n s used by p r i n c i p a l s in response
t o t h e i r work:

(a)

emphasizing the

involvement and support of

groups, (b) focusing on the evaluation and improvement o f academic
performance, (c) developing q u a l i f i e d s t a f f through personal e f f o r t ,
and (d) emphasizing f i s c a l control and close r e l a t i o n s h i p s with the
central

o ffice.

principals

in

They co ncl uded t h a t

terms

of

a d m inistrative

the job
rather

than

is

defined

by

instructional

functions and t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l conceptions of th e p r in c ip a l

as an

i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e a d e r in cr easin g ly c o n f l i c t with pres su re s t o be a
production manager.
In a study of 60 " e f f e c t i v e " sen ior high school p r i n c i p a l s by
the National Association of Secondary School P r in c i p a ls (1979), i t

28

was found t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f p r i n c i p a l s

thought t h e i r

top

p r i o r i t i e s should be program development (curriculum, i n s t r u c t i o n a l
leadership),

personnel

(evaluation,

advising,

conferencing,

r e c r u i t i n g ) , and school management, in t h a t or der.
Descriptions o f the s t r u c t u r e and content of th e d a i l y work of
school a d m in is tr a t o r s have been provided in several
s tu d ies o f p r i n c i p a l s and a s s i s t a n t p r i n c i p a l s

observational

(Crowson & P orte r-

Gehrie, 1980; Morris, 1981; Peterson, 1978; Wolcott, 1973).
d e s c r i p t i v e s tu d ie s have suggested t h a t p r i n c i p a l s

These

spend most of

t h e i r time working with stu de nts who are d i s c i p l i n e problems and
with

tea ch er s

attending

to

pleasantries

who have n oninstructional
logistics,
(Sproull,

external
197 9);

and

needs

(Peterson,

requirem ents,
overseeing

and

1978);
social

organizational

maintenance, pupil c o n t r o l , and e x t r a c u r r i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s (Martin,
1980).

P r in c ip a l s engage predominantly in s e r v i c e ,

advisory,

and

auditing r e l a t i o n s h i p s ; they n e i t h e r become d i r e c t l y involved in the
workflow a t th e classroom level

nor

seek change or

through innovation or s t a b i l i z i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s

improvement

(Peterson,

1978).

This is in c o n t r a s t to the fundamental t e n e t of th e j o b - - t h a t the
building

p r in c ip a l

should be th e

"instructional

leader"

of

the

school (Jacobsen, Logsdon, & Wiegman, 1973; Lezotte, 1980; Lipham &
Hoeh, 1974; Roe & Drake, 1980).
Faber and Shearron (1970) looked a t the r o l e o f the p r in c ip a l
from two p e r sp ectiv es :
fell

into s ix areas:

tas ks and process.

Task r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s

(a) i n s t r u c t i o n and curriculum development,

29
(b)

pupil

personnel,

l e a d e r sh ip ,
school

(e)

(c)

school

staff

p la n t

personnel,

and school

programming,

(c)

i n t o f i v e areas:

com municatio n,

community-school

transportation,

f i n a n c e and b u s i n e s s management.

responsibilities fell

(d)

P rincipals'

and

process

(a) d e cis io n making,

(d)

controlling,

(f)

and

(b)
(e)

r e a p p ra is in g .
Smythe (1980) observed t h a t the p r in c ip a l
technical s k i l l .

needs co nsiderable

He suggested t h a t the p r in c ip a l does not need to

have as much s p e c ia l iz e d academic knowledge as individual te a c h e r s ,
but the p r in c ip a l

should be an expert

curriculum planning,

a n a l y s is

in pedagogical

of lea rning

pro cesses,

practices,
and program

implementation.
Genck (1983) studied the p r a c t i c e s of ne arly 1,000 schools over
a period o f ten y e a r s .

From h i s s tu d i e s he concluded t h a t

cause of d e c lin in g performance l i e s

in challenging

"the

circumstances

combined with inadequate management" (p. 3) and t h a t "the rea l cause
of d eclin e in educational performances over the l a s t decade or two
l i e s in inadequate school management" (p. 13).
In w r iti n g f o r The E f f ectiv e P r i n c i p a l :

A Research Summary,

compiled and d i s t r i b u t e d by the National Association of Secondary
School

Principals,

Manasse

(1982)

observed

that

as

the

growing

research base on e f f e c t i v e schools c o n s i s t e n t l y has hig h l ig h te d the
p r in c ip a l as the key to success, school d i s t r i c t s and o th e r s t a t e
agencies

have begun to

reexamine t h e i r

criteria

for

certifying,

s e l e c t i n g , and evalua ting p r i n c i p a l s and t o develop a wide range of
new p r eser v ic e and i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g

approaches.

Manasse also

30

noted t h a t rece nt re se ar ch has focused s p e c i f i c a l l y on what i t
t h a t p r i n c i p a l s do and has begun to e s t a b l i s h

is

l i n k s between the

management and l e a d e r s h ip o f schools and th e l e a r n in g t h a t takes
place in them.
Summary
In t h i s

review o f the l i t e r a t u r e ,

th e r e s e a r c h e r discussed

f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t h e p r e p a r a t i o n and c o n t i n u i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l
development o f school

a d m in is tr a t o r s .

been

roles

focused

on

th e

served

Considerable a t t e n t i o n
by

school

a d m in istr a to rs

has
in

providing e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u c t i o n a l programs f o r the n a t i o n ’s schools.
The

r e v ie w

p r o v id e d

an

a d m in is t r a to r p r e p a ra tio n .

ove rview

of

the

reform

effort

in

Also discussed were changes in Michigan

ed u catio n al p o l i c i e s r e l a t e d to a d m in is tr a to r p r e p a r a tio n , the
influence

of

administrators,

effective

schools

and re se ar ch

research

focusing

on

the

roles

of

on i d e n t i f i a b l e

r o le s

for

school a d m in is tr a t o r s .
In th e review of th e l i t e r a t u r e on a d m i n is tr a to r p r epara tion,
the

researcher

efforts,

desc rib ed

the

first

wave

of

educational

reform

which c a l le d f o r reform in th e d e l iv e r y o f i n s t r u c t i o n ,

standards of q u a lity

in s t u d e n t a c h ie v e m e n t,

p r e p a r a t i o n and c e r t i f i c a t i o n ,

tougher teach er

and s t r e n g t h e n i n g o f r o l e s and

f unctio ns of parents and c i t i z e n s in educational d e cis io n making.
The f i r s t wave of reform r e p o rts led to a second wave o f educational
reform r e p o r t s t h a t focused on th e lead er of the loc al sc hool- -the
principal.

31

The r e se a r c h e r des cribed th e d i s p a r i t i e s
practice

of

school

adm inistr ators -- what

prep ar at ion they r e c e iv e .
the ro le s

they

between th e
really

actual

do--and

the

In t h i s study, the r e s e a r c h e r looked at

of secondary p r i n c i p a l s ,

t h e i r degree

o f need f o r

ad ditional pre par at io n t o meet th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f t h e i r r o le s ,
and the primary source o f t h e i r ad m in istr ato r p r e p a ra ti o n .
The review included a disc ussio n of Michigan p o l i c i e s r e l a t e d
to a d m in istr a to r p r ep aratio n ,
Public

Act

163,

a d m i n i s tr a to rs .

including an exten siv e di sc ussio n of

requiring

the

certification

Public Act 163 defined

of

school

minimum q u a l i f i c a t i o n s for

superintendents and o th e r a d m in is tr ato rs o f local and interm ediate
school d i s t r i c t s .

The requirements and im plica tions o f new Michigan

S t a t e Board of Education r u le s governing th e c e r t i f i c a t i o n of school
a d m in istr ato rs and the State-Board-adopted Standards o f Quality for
Administrator Preparation

Programs were also dis cu ssed .

All

of

th e se new requirements f o r a d m in istr a to r pr e p a ra ti o n have provided a
framework f o r developing a Michigan S tate policy f o r ad m in is tr ato r
pre pa ration and continuing professional-development programs.
The h i s t o r y of e f f e c t i v e schools research was reviewed.

This

included a review of the implications of e f f e c t i v e schools research
f o r the r o le s of a d m i n i s t r a t o r s .

This body o f r e s e a r c h

has

s u g g e s t e d t h a t one o f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

th at distinguishes

effective

is

schools

from non effective

serves as an i n s t r u c t i o n a l le a d e r .

schools

a p r in c ip a l

who

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURE

This study was designed as d e s c r i p t i v e rese arch .
(1983)

defined

the

purpose

" c h a r a c te riz e a sample . . .
This study i s
continuing

of

descriptive

Borg and Gall

research

on one or more ca te g o r ie s"

one o f a p a i r o f s tu d i e s

professional-developm ent

as

(p. 30).

on the pr ep ar at ion

needs

of

to

elementary

and
and

secondary school p r i n c i p a l s in r e l a t i o n to t h e i r perceptions about
the range and importance of t h e i r job r o l e s .

In t h i s

study the

r e se a r c h e r focused on the prep ar at ion and continuing professional
development of secondary school p r i n c i p a l s .
focused on elementary p r i n c i p a l s .
the r e s u l t s of the two s tu d i e s .

The other study was

No attempt was made t o compare

Such comparisons could be the focus

of a f u tu r e study.
This study comprised f i v e phases.

The f i r s t phase of the study

was t o i d e n t i f y primary r o l e d e s c r i p t o r s f o r secondary p r i n c i p a l s
that

have

correlation

some b a s is
to

the

in e f f e c t i v e

actual

job

schools

r o le s

as

resear ch

and a high

perceived

by

secondary

p rincipals.

The second ph as e was development

of the

s u rv ey

instrument.

In the

of

survey

third

phase,

a pilot

questi onnaire was conducted to t e s t
fourth

phase

consisted

of

the

instrument

identifying

32

study

and

the

itself.

implem enting

The
a

33
d a t a - c o l l e c t i o n procedure and s e l e c t in g a random sample of secondary
school

principals

schools.

from

a

In phase f i v e ,

stratified

sample

of

Michigan

public

the da ta from the surveys were analyzed

statistically.
Phase 1; I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Role Descriptors f o r
Secondary School P r in cip als
The f i r s t

phase o f t h i s study was to i d e n t i f y primary r o le

d e s c r i p t o r s f o r secondary school p r i n c i p a l s t h a t have some b as is in
e f f e c t i v e schools research and a high c o r r e l a t i o n t o th e actual job
r o l e s as perceived by secondary school p r i n c i p a l s .

A review o f the

l i t e r a t u r e suggested t h a t the r o le s o f elementary, middle, and high
school

principals

are more s i m i l a r than d i f f e r e n t .

However,

as

Dulce (1987) noted in Thinking About School Leadership, a review of
p r i n c i p a l s ’ job d e s c rip tio n s
expectations

does r e v e a l

some d i f f e r e n c e s

f o r e l e m e n t a r y and s e c o n d a ry p r i n c i p a l s .

in

These

d i f f e r e n c e s r e l a t e t o span o f c o n t r o l , age o f s tu d e n ts , complexity
of curriculum, and community expe ctatio ns .
In id e n t i f y i n g

the

r o le d e s c r i p t o r s

to

be

included

in

the

survey instrument to meet th e purpose of t h i s study, th e rese archer
re view ed
principals,

the

literatu re

on

school

effectiveness,

professional-development needs o f p r i n c i p a l s ,

prepara tion of p r i n c i p a l s .

roles

of

and the

The r esear ch er examined several survey

instruments t o assess school climate and leadersh ip r o l e s , and the
r o le s o f the p r in c ip a ls in e f f e c t i v e schools were also reviewed;
these included (a) the School I n s tr u c t io n a l Climate Survey (SICS),
developed by Jackson, Logsdan, and Taylor (1983) and based on school

34

effectiveness
(ILS),

re se arch;

developed

by

(b)

th e

Patterson

I n s tr u c tio n a l
(1977);

and

Leadership

(c)

a

study

Survey
on the

I n s t r u c t io n a l leadership of high school p r i n c i p a l s by Smith and Muth
(1985), f o r which the Perception o f School Quality Inventory (PSQI)
and the I n s t r u c t io n a l Leadership Behavior Questionnaire (ILBQ) were
developed.
In a d d i t i o n ,

t h e r e s e a r c h e r reviewed p u b l i c a t i o n s o f t h e

American A s s o c i a t i o n

of

School

A dm inistrators,

A s s o c i a t i o n o f Elem entary School P r i n c i p a l s ,

the

N a ti o n a l

and t h e N a ti o n a l

A s s o c i a t i o n o f Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s r e l a t e d t o i n i t i a l
pr in c ip a l pr ep ar at ion and continuing pr ofessional development.
Role d e s c r i p t o r s f o r the four broad c a te g o r i e s of I n s tr u c t io n a l
Supervision, Curriculum Development and Implementation, Leadership,
and

Staff

Development/Personnel

Management

were

taken

from the

l i t e r a t u r e described above and from o th e r survey instruments t h a t
have been used to asse ss these r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s .

As a r e s u l t of the

l i t e r a t u r e review, r o l e d e s c r i p t o r s were i d e n t i f i e d f o r each of the
fo ur c a t e g o r i e s .

Then th e d e s c r i p t o r s were screened f o r dup li cati on

and items t h a t did not p r e c i s e l y r e l a t e to the category heading.
The f o u r c a t e g o r i e s were t h e n
researcher,

university professors,

reviewed by c o l l e a g u e s
and a s s o c ia te s

Association of Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s .

of the

in the Michigan

This process produced a

l i s t of r o l e d e s c r i p t o r s t h a t was compiled as a survey instrument.

35
Phase 2:

Development o f the Survey Instrument

In the second phase, th e r e s e a r c h e r developed an i n i t i a l survey
instrument with 54 qu es tio n s .
qu estions

listing

various

The survey q u e s tio n n a i r e included 46

r o le

descriptors

a s so ciate d

p r i n c i p a l s h i p u nder t h e m ajor c a t e g o r i e s o f ( a )
Supervision,
Leadership,

(b)

Curriculum Development

and (d)

and

the

Instructional

Implementation,

S t a f f Development/Personnel

each r o l e d e s c r i p t o r ,

with

(c)

Management.

respondents were asked t o i n d i c a t e

For

(a)

how

important th e r o l e / f u n c t i o n is t o t h e i r success as a p r i n c i p a l , (b)
th eir

personal

need

for

further

preparation

and

continuing

pr ofe ssi onal development in order to be as e f f e c t i v e as they would
l i k e t o be in each of th e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s l i s t e d ,

and (c)

their

primary source of pr ep arati o n and pro fe ssi onal development.
The survey q u es tio n n air e

also

included e ig h t

questions

that

provided demographic d e s c r i p t o r s about each respondent, such as age,
y e a r s o f s e r v i c e as a p r i n c i p a l ,

c u rre n t assignment,

enrollment of the d i s t r i c t

in which the

employed,

earned,

highest

degree

r etir em en t in the next f i v e y e a r s .

p r in c ip a l

gender,

and

student

was c u r r e n t l y
likelihood

of

A copy of th e survey instrument

i s provided in Appendix A.
The survey instrument was not meant to

be comprehensive

addressing a l l th e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of the secondary p r i n c i p a l .

in

Such

an instrument would be too cumbersome to administer and analyze.
The c a t e g o r i e s l i s t e d above were s e le cted f o r th e survey because
they form a common th re ad t h a t can be found in th e l i t e r a t u r e on
e f f e c t i v e schools regarding the r o le s of school p r i n c i p a l s .

36
Phase 3:

P i l o t Study

To t e s t the survey instrument, the r e s e a r c h e r randomly s e le c t e d
a population

of

40

currently

Michigan public schools.
survey

instrument

and

employed

secondary

Each p r in c ip a l
asked

to

In conducting the

pilot

seeking t o

determine whether t h e

in

was s e n t a copy o f the

complete

researcher.

principals

and

study,

survey

return
th e

it

to

the

r e s e a r c h e r was

directions

were

clear,

t o disco ve r approximately how long the survey took t o complete, and
t o generate data with which to do an item a n a l y s is o f r e l i a b i l i t y to
ensure t h a t each item under each category was s i g n i f i c a n t to t h a t
category.
The p r i n c i p a l s who p a r t i c i p a t e d in the p i l o t study s t a t e d t h a t
the d i r e c t i o n s

and survey were very c l e a r .

They were able

to

complete the survey in about 20 minutes.
A fter the p i l o t f i e l d t e s t , an item an a ly s is o f r e l i a b i l i t y was
co n d u cte d t o

ensure

that

each

s ig n if ic a n t to th a t category.

item u nder each
A Cronbach

category

alpha

was

analysis

of

r e l i a b i l i t y was used.

Table 3.1 co ntains th e values o f the Cronbach

alpha

the

analysis

q u e s ti o n n a ir e .
values were:

for

different

categories

of

the

s u rv ey

For th e importance of th e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s , the alpha
I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision, alpha -

.5256; Curriculum

Development and Implementation, alpha - .5463; Leadership, alpha =
.6957; S t a f f Development/Personnel Management, alpha = .9088.
the

need

for

further

preparation,

the

alpha

values

For
were:

I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision, alpha ® .7671; Curriculum Development and
Implementation,

alpha = .8357;

Leadership,

alpha = .9313;

Staff

37

Development/Personnel Management, alpha - .9135.
items

combined under th e

.8823.

importance

of

th e

The alpha f o r all
roles/functions

was

The alpha f o r th e need f o r f u r t h e r pre paratio n f o r a l l items

combined was .9526.

Table 3 . 1 .--Cronbach alpha f o r the d i f f e r e n t cat e g o r i e s of the
survey q u e s tio n n a i r e .
Importance o f the
Role/Function

Need f o r Further
Preparation

I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision

.5256

.7671

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

.5463

.8357

Leadership

.6957

.9313

S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management

.9088

.9135

All items combined

.8823

.9526

Role/Function

As a result, of th e item an a ly s is ,

the survey instrument was

reduced from 46 r o l e d e s c r i p t o r s to 34.

To determine the survey

items t h a t best measured each r o le function of the p r in c ip a l ship
defined in the study, each item was d e le te d s y s te m a t ic a l ly , and a
new Cronbach alpha was computed f o r th e balance o f the items in the
r o le / f u n c t i o n category, using the program SPSS.

Based on the value

of the r e s u l t i n g Cronbach alpha, the r esear ch er decided to remove
from each r o l e / f u n c t i o n
significantly

category the

when d e l e t e d

items t h a t

and t h a t

were

increased

ju d g e d

not

alpha
to

be

38

detrimental to the measuring o f t h a t r o le / f u n c t i o n category o f the
p rin c ip a l sh ip .

Appendix B shows the grouping o f th e s c ale items

used in th e survey instrument.
Phase 4:

Data-Collection Procedure and Sample Selec tion

The fou rth phase of t h i s study was t o ask a sample o f Michigan
secondary

public

school

principals

employed

school ye a r t o complete the survey.
two-step procedure.

during

the

1989-90

The da ta c o l l e c t i o n followed a

Step one involved mailing th e q u e s tio n n a ir e and

an explanatory cover l e t t e r t o a randomly s e le c te d sample of school
p r i n c i p a l s drawn from a systematic s t r a t i f i e d
public schools.

sample of Michigan

This i n i t i a l mailing included a stamped, r e tu r n -

addressed envelope f o r th e survey.

I t also included a numbered post

card t h a t was r eturn -ad dre ss ed and stamped.

The number on the post

card corresponded to a number t h a t was given to th e respondent in
the i n i t i a l sample.
those

in

the

d u p l ic a tio n
involved

This procedure was followed so as to i d e n t i f y

sample who had returned

in a follow-up mailing.

s en d in g

a second

th e

survey

and to

avoid

Step two o f th e procedure

copy o f t h e

questionnaire

and

an

ap propri at e cover l e t t e r with a stamped, retu rn -addre ss ed envelope
to those persons who had not returned th e o r ig in a l survey within six
weeks.
The population f o r t h i s study consisted of a l l secondary school
p r i n c i p a l s in Michigan public schools.

According to the Michigan

Department of Education’ s Professional Personnel R egis ter d ata for
the year 1987-88, t h e r e were 1,033 secondary school p r i n c i p a l s in

39

Michigan public schools.
(10%) were females.

Of th e s e , 931 (90%) were males and 102

They were d i s t r i b u t e d in 57 intermed iate school

d istricts

(ISDs) r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e t o t a l

Michigan.

Within th e 57 ISDs, t h e r e ar e 564 local school d i s t r i c t s

t h a t vary in pupil population s i z e .

geographical

area of

However, only 524 of these

d i s t r i c t s provided a f u l l K-12 program and had a t l e a s t one high
s ch ool .
For p u r p o s e s

of

categorizing

school

d istricts

by

p u p il

population, the fiv e-code c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system r e f l e c t i n g the pupil
population s iz e of school d i s t r i c t s as s p e c if ie d by the Michigan
School Code o f 1976 was used.
1.

A school

d istrict

The codes are as follows:
of

t h e F i r s t C la s s

w i th a p u p i l

of

t h e Second C l a s s

with

a p upil

w ith

a pu pil

with

a pupil

w ith

a p u p il

population of 120,000 or more.
2.

A school

d istrict

population of more than 30,000 and l e s s than 120,000.
3.

A school

d istrict

of

the Third Class

population of more than 2,400 and l e s s than 30,000.
4.

A school

d istrict

of

t h e F o u r th C l a s s

population of more than 75 and l e s s than 2,400.
5.

A school

d istrict

of

the F i f t h Class

population of l e s s than 75.
Ta ble 3 . 2

shows t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n

of local

public

school

d i s t r i c t s , using the school d i s t r i c t codes 1 to 5 in the population
of local school d i s t r i c t s .

40
Table 3 . 2 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of school d i s t r i c t s in th e population by
school d i s t r i c t code.

Frequency

First

Second

Third

Fourth

1

3

132

412

Fifth

Total

16

564

A sample s iz e o f 384 secondary p r i n c i p a l s was determined by the
r e s e a r c h e r t o provide a level

of confidence equal

t o 95% and a

sampling e r r o r no g r e a t e r than plus or minus 10%.
pres u m p tio n

o f a 75% r e t u r n

approximately

508 secondary

rate

school

of

m a ile d

principals

Based on a

questionnaires,
were

s e le cted

to

re p r e s e n t a t o t a l of 1,033 secondary school p r i n c i p a l s in th e s t a t e .
To s e l e c t a sample t h a t was r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the population of a ll
secondary school p r i n c i p a l s in Michigan, a p r o p o rtio n ate s t r a t i f i e d
systematic

sampling

procedure

d i v e r s i t y of the geographical

was
areas

followed.
in

all

To

r e p re s e n t

o f Michigan,

d i s t r i c t s were drawn from each ISD in the s t a t e .

the

school

Because Michigan

school d i s t r i c t s vary in population s i z e , a p r o b a b i l i t y sample of
school d i s t r i c t s p r o p o rt io n a te t o pupil
d i s t r i c t s was drawn.

population s iz e o f school

The local school d i s t r i c t s within each ISD

were s t r a t i f i e d according to the school d i s t r i c t codes (1 to 5),
which r e f l e c t the pupil population s iz e of t h a t d i s t r i c t .
The four l a r g e s t urban school d i s t r i c t s in th e s t a t e (codes 1
and 2) were added as c e r t a i n t y s e l e c t i o n s .

These are the D etr o it

Public Schools, F l i n t Public Schools, Grand Rapids Public Schools,
and Lansing Public Schools.

Then 285 local

school d i s t r i c t s were

41
s e le c te d s y s t e m a tic a lly from the pool o f the remaining s t r a t i f i e d
560 school d i s t r i c t s , r e pre s enting school codes 3 t o 5 and using the
sampling r a t i o (the proportion o f school d i s t r i c t s in the population
t h a t were s e le c te d ) o f o n e - h a lf f o r each s t r a t i f i e d grouping.
first

school

d istrict

grouping was s e le c te d

on th e

list

of

s y s te m a ti c a ll y ;

each

stratified

district

then every second d i s t r i c t

following was s e le c te d f o r the local school d i s t r i c t sample.
3.3

shows th e d i s t r i b u t i o n

s e le c t e d sample.

o f school

The

districts

by s i z e

The proportion of th e se c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s

Table
in

the

in the

sample was designed to r e f l e c t the same proportion in the population
of th e 564 school d i s t r i c t s .

Table 3 . 3 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of school d i s t r i c t s in th e sample by school
d i s t r i c t code.
First

Second

1

3

Frequency

Third
73

Fourth

F ifth

Total

201

11

289

Once the sample of school d i s t r i c t s had been s e le c t e d , a l i s t
of a l l secondary school p r i n c i p a l s in th e se d i s t r i c t s was prepared
t o give a t o t a l of 508 names.
461

(90.75%) were males.

actual

These numbers are c o n s i s t e n t with the

percentages o f males and females in th e population o f the

1,033 secondary school
C h a p te r

Of th e s e , 47 (9.3%) were females and

IV).

A ls o ,

principals
the

in Michigan

age d i s t r i b u t i o n

(see Table 4.1
of the

in

respondents

corresponded t o the age d i s t r i b u t i o n of the population of secondary

42

principals

in Michigan f o r

th e yea r

1987-88

(see

Table 4.2

in

Chapter IV).
Phase 5:

Data Analysis

In analyzing th e d a ta , the r e s e a r c h e r proceeded in two main
phases.

In phase one, d e s c r i p t i v e analyses were used to examine the

d i s t r i b u t i o n s of th e dependent v a r i a b l e s in the sample as a whole,
as well
v a r ia b le s

as w i t h i n t h e v a r i o u s
(gender,

length

of

categories

service,

age,

s choo ls), f o r each of th e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s .
and standard d evia tion o f the

perceived

of the

independent

and demographics

of

S p e c i f i c a l l y , th e mean
importance

and t r a i n i n g

needs f o r each of the four r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s were c a l c u l a t e d f o r the
sample as

a whole and within th e c a t e g o r i e s

o f th e

independent

variables.
A r o l e / f u n c t i o n was judged important or a p r i o r i t y need for
training

if

i t received an average r a t i n g of a t l e a s t 3 . 5 .

To

determine the range of importance of a given r o l e / f u n c t i o n and i t s
perceived t r a i n i n g needs, the following s c a le was used:
1.0-2.49 = Not important/no need
2.5 -3.4 9 - L i t t l e importance/moderate need
3.5+
« Very important/high need
The means of th e perceived importance and th e t r a i n i n g needs of
th e four r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s were then rank ordered t o determine the
r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s t h a t p r i n c i p a l s perceived as the most important or
the most needed f o r t r a i n i n g .
To f i n d

t h e p r e v i o u s pr im a r y s o u r c e s o f p r e p a r a t i o n

and

t r a i n i n g in t h e s e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s , t h e p e r c e n t a g e d i s t r i b u t i o n

43
(frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n ) was con structed f o r th e items within the
fo ur r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s f o r th e sample population.
In th e second phase of the a n a l y s i s , th e perceived importance
o f th e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s and t h e i r t r a i n i n g needs o f the sample were
compared among various

categories

o f th e

independent

variables:

gender, length of s e r v i c e , age, and demographics o f the schools.
do the comparison between th e sample means,

To

one-way a n a ly s is of

variance with p o s t e r i o r i c o n t r a s t s was used.
The following re se ar ch questions wil l be answered as a r e s u l t
of t h i s study:
1.

What do secondary p r i n c i p a l s perceive t o be the range of

importance o f the s e le c t e d a d m in i s tr a to r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ?
2.

What d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t among secondary p r i n c i p a l s regarding

t h e i r perception s about a d m in is tr a to r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s , comparing the
variables

of gender,

age,

length

of

service

as

a s e c o n d a ry

p r i n c i p a l , and the s i z e and l o c a tio n of t h e i r school?
3.
IIWVVI

• VI

What do secondary p r in c ip a ls perceive t o be t h e i r degree of
f

IMI

k f t v* n i * o n

WIIWI

9W < i f

^1 W|rfUI U W

i a a

I WII

UMVi

r n n f

pIaw aI o n m A n f

WWII W I ••W •

MVf « •

IIV

in each of the s e le c te d r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ?
4.

What d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t among secondary p r i n c i p a l s regarding

t h e i r professional-development needs,

comparing th e

v a r ia b le s

of

gender, age, length of s e r v ic e as a secondary p r i n c i p a l , and s iz e
and l o c a ti o n of t h e i r school?
5.

What do secondary p r i n c i p a l s

identify

as

source o f pr ep ar at io n and continuing prof es siona l
each of th e sele cte d a d m i n is tr a to r r o l e s / f u n c t io n s ?

their

primary

development for

44

Summary
The work of t h i s chap te r co nsis te d o f fo ur phases.

The f i r s t

phase was t o i d e n t i f y primary r o l e d e s c r i p t o r s f o r secondary school
p r i n c i p a l s t h a t have some b as is in e f f e c t i v e schools resear ch and a
high c o r r e l a t i o n to the actual job r o le s as perceived by secondary
school p r i n c i p a l s .
initial

In t h e second phase, th e r e s e a r c h e r developed an

survey instrument with 54 questio ns t h a t

included

e ig h t

questions on demographic d e s c r i p t o r s about each respondent and 46
questions

listing

various

role

descriptors

a s so ciated

p r i n c i p a l s h i p under t h e m ajor c a t e g o r i e s o f (a)
Supervision,

(b)

Curriculum Development

and

with

Instructional

Implementation,

Leadership, and (d) S t a f f Development/Personnel Management.
three

involved

a pilot

test

of

the

survey

the

instrument

(c)
Phase

with

40

c u r r e n t l y employed secondary p r i n c i p a l s in Michigan public schools.
A fter th e p i l o t f i e l d t e s t ,
conducted

to

ensure

that

an item a n a ly s is of r e l i a b i l i t y was
each

s ig n if ic a n t to th a t category.
r e l i a b i l i t y was used.
questions,

item

under each

A Cronbach

alpha

category
analysis

was
of

As a r e s u l t , the instrument was reduced to 34

plus the e i g h t questions on demographics.

The fourth

phase was t o ask a sample of 508 Michigan secondary public school
p r i n c i p a l s employed during the 1989-90 school ye ar to complete the
survey.

CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA

Presented 1n t h i s ch apter are the analyses and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
of the d ata gathered from th e responses o f 312 secondary school
p r i n c i p a l s to the instrument t h a t was developed f o r the study.

The

i n s t r u m e n t in c l u d e d a 3 4 - i t e m s c a l e d e s c r i b i n g v a r i o u s r o l e s /
fu nc tions a s so ciated with the p r in c ip a l s h i p , as sessing t h r e e ar eas:
the

im port ance o f t h e s e

roles/functions

as p e r c e i v e d

by t h e

p r i n c i p a l s , th e p r i n c i p a l s ’ personal needs f o r f u r t h e r pr ep ar ation
and continuing

pr ofe ssion al

development,

and

th e

most

valuable

source of pr ep ar at ion and continuing professional development.

In

ad d it io n , th e instrument included an eig h t-i te m background s e c tio n .
C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Survey Sample
Five hundred four building p r in c ip a l s
instrument in September 1989.

were sent

th e

survey

Of t h a t number, 312 returned surveys

f o r a response r a t e of 61%.
In Tables

4.1

through

4.7

the

sample

of

secondary

school

p r i n c i p a l s i s described in terms of gender, age, degree held, t h e i r
c u r r e n t and prim ary a s s i g n m e n t ,

years of experience,

student

enrollment of the school d i s t r i c t in which they were employed, and
the lik e li h o o d of t h e i r r e t i r i n g within the next f i v e ye ar s.

45

46

Ninety-three per cent (286) o f the respondents were males, and
7% (23) were females (see Table 4 . 1 ) .

The corresponding percentages

in th e population o f a l l secondary school p r i n c i p a l s in Michigan for
the year 1987-88 were 90% for males and 10% f o r females.

Table 4 . 1 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s by gender.
Sample

Population

Gender

Male
Female
Total

N

%

N

%

286
23

92
7

931
102

90
10

312a

100

1,033

100

aThree of the p a r t i c i p a n t s did not r e p o r t t h e i r gender.

The m ajo rity of respondents, 52%, i d e n t i f i e d themselves in the
range of 41 t o 50 year s

of age.

Thirty-three

percent

of

the

respondents were 51 years of age or o lder, and 15% were l e s s than 40
ye ar s o f age (see Table 4 . 2 ) .
Two hundred t h r e e (65%) respondents held a m aster ’ s degree.
additional

22% h e l d

a specialist

degree.

respondents held e i t h e r an Ed.D. (7%) or a Ph.D.
Table 4 . 3 ) .

Only

12% o f

An
th e

(5%) degree (see

47
Table 4 . 2 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s by age.
Sample

Population

Age Group
N
< 30
30-40
41-50
51-55
> 55
Total

%

N

%

2
43
163
65
38

1
14
52
21
12

1
104
468
231
239

0
10
46
22
22

312a

100

1,033

100

a0ne of the p a r t i c i p a n t s did not r e p o r t age group.

Table 4 . 3 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s by degree held.
Sample

Population

Degree Held
N

%

N

%

Bachelor’ s
Master’ s
Speci a l i s t
Ed.D.
n
r n .u .

0
203
67
23
i/

0
65
22
7
O

48
793
72
70
50

5
77
7
7
5

Total

312a

1,033

100

h l

100

aTwo of the p a r t i c i p a n t s did not r e p o r t degree held.

One hundred f i f t y - s e v e n r e s p o n d e n t s
assigned

to

the

s en io r

high

as

(50%) were c u r r e n t l y

principals.

An ad di tional

respondents (11%) had s p l i t j u n i o r / s e n i o r high assignments.
190 respondents

(61%)

had

a

s en io r

high

p r in c ip a l

35

Thus,

assignment.

48
T h i r t y - s i x percent (111) of th e respondents reported being assigned
t o th e j u n i o r high (see Table 4 . 4 ) .
Table 4 . 4 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n o f p a r t i c i p a n t s by t h e i r c u r r e n t primary
assignment as p r i n c i p a l s .
Sample

Population

Primary Assignment

Elementary
J u n io r high
Senior high
J u n i o r / s e n i o r high
Other
Total

N

%

N

%

8
111
157
35
0

3
36
50
11
0

20
373
435
120
85

2
36
42
12
8

312a

100

1,033

100

a0ne o f the p a r t i c i p a n t s did not r e p o r t a primary assignment.
T h ir ty -n in e percent of the respondents had ten year s or l e s s
experience as a p r i n c i p a l .
less

experience,

Twenty-two percent had f i v e yea rs or

and 22% had 20 years or more experience

as

a

pr in c ip a l (see Table 4 . 5 ) .
Table 4 . 5 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s by years of experience.
Years of Experience
0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20+
Total

N

%

70
53
55
65
68

22
17
18
21
22

312a

100

a0ne o f the p a r t i c i p a n t s did not r e p o r t the years o f experience.

49

Ten respondents (3%) were employed in Michigan’ s only Class 1
public school d i s t r i c t - - D e t r o i t .

Another te n respondents (3%) were

from th e t h r e e Class 2 public school d i s t r i c t s
Rapids,
were

Flint,

employed

and Lansing.
in

Class

3

in Michigan--Grand

One hundred s i x t y respondents
public

school

d istricts,

(51%)

and

131

respondents (42%) reported being employed in Class 4 public school
d i s t r i c t s (see Table 4 . 6 ) .

Table 4 . 6 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s by the s i z e o f t h e i r
school d i s t r i c t (stud ent enro llment).
Number

Student Enrollment
More
More
More
More
Less

than
than
than
than
than

120,000 (Class 1)
30,000; l e s s than 120,000 (Class 2)
2,400; l e s s than 30,000 (Class 3)
75; l e s s than 2,400 (Class 4)
75

Total

Percent

10
10
160
131
0

3
3
52
42
0

312a

100

a0ne o f the p a r t i c i p a n t s did not r e p o r t student enrollment.

T h i r t y - s i x pe rce nt of th e respondents i n d icated they would be
r e t i r i n g in the next f i v e yea rs

(see Table 4 . 7 ) .

retiring,

the

44% s e le c te d

p os sibly r e t i r e .

1993

as

yea r

they

Of the number
would

likely

or

50
Table 4 . 7 . - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s by lik e lih o o d o f t h e i r
r e t i r i n g within th e next f i v e years.
Likelihood o f Re tiring

Number

Percent

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

66a
46a
197

21
15
63

Total

312b

100

aThe majo rity o f those r e t i r i n g (44%) indicated t h a t they would
be very l i k e l y or pos si bly r e t i r i n g in 1993.
bThree of the p a r t i c i p a n t s did not r e p o r t t h i s item.

Results f o r the Research Questions
Five research questions were formulated t o serve th e purpose of
th e

study.

restated,

In th e
followed

following

by a r e p o rt

pages,

each

of the

data

research

question

p e r ta i n in g

to

is
that

qu es tion.
Research Question 1
What i s the range o f secondary p r i n c i p a l s ’ perception s of the
importance of s e le c t e d ad m in istr ato r r o l e s / f u n c t io n s ?
The secondary school pr incipa ls* perceptions of th e importance
o f the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f the p r i n c ip a ls h i p are shown in Tables 4.8
through 4.12.
As shown in Table 4 .8, secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions
of

the

importance

of

th ese

r o le s / f u n c t io n s

ranged

from

L ittle

Importance (3 on the scale) t o Very Important (5 on the s c a l e ) .
Leadership, with a mean score of 4.65, was i d e n t i f i e d as the most

51
important r o l e , followed by I n s t r u c t io n a l

Supervision with a mean

score of 4.54, S t a f f Development/Personnel Management with a mean
score of 4.53, and Curriculum Development and Implementation with a
mean score o f 4.46.

Table 4 . 8 . --Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions of the impor­
tance o f th e four r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

I n s t r u c t i o n a l Supervision

301

3

5

4.54

0.35

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

295

3

5

4.46

0.42

Leadership

296

3

5

4.65

0.29

S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management

304

3

5

4.53

0.37

Role/Function

As shown
Supervision,

in

Table

the most

4.9,

in

important

the

category

individual r o l e

of
as

Instructional
perceived by

secondary school p r i n c i p a l s was Item 6, Maintain t h a t a l l
can lea rn and expect them t o succeed.
score o f 4.80.
of la te s t
4.69;

This category had a mean

I t was followed in second place by Item 1, Knowledge

research r e l a t e d to i n s t r u c t i o n , with a mean score

in t h i r d pla ce ,

Encourage

students

teachers

with

to

curriculum o b je c ti v e s

use

a mean score of 4.65,

was

of

Item 5,

instructional

techniques

r e le v a n t to

and research-based

principles

o f teaching.

Viewed as the l e a s t important individual r o l e in t h i s area was Item
3,

Use o f t e s t

scores

to

recommend changes

in

instructional

52

program,

with

a mean score of

4.23.

Seen

as

the

next

least

important r o l e 1n rank order was Item 7, Bring i n s t r u c t i o n a l issues
to th e f a c u l t y f o r d is c u s s io n , with a mean score o f 4.37.

Table 4 . 9 . --Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ per ceptions of the impor­
tance o f I n s t r u c t i o n a l Supervision.
Item Content
1.
2.

3.

4.
5.

6.

7.

Min.

Max.

311

3

5

4.69

0.48

Use o f g o a l - s e t t i n g to
improve i n s t r u c t i o n and
involvement of s t a f f in
goal s e t t i n g toward more
e f f e c t i v e schools

312

2

5

4.54

0.57

Use of t e s t scores to recom­
mend changes in i n s t r u c ti o n a l program

311

2

5

4.23

0.68

308

1

5

4.48

0.66

Encourage tea ch er s to use
i n s t r u c t i o n a l techniques
r e l e v a n t to c u r r i c u l a r
o b je c tiv e s and researchbased p r i n c i p l e s of lear ning

312

1

5

4.65

0.51

Maintain t h a t a l l students
can lear n and expect them
to succeed

310

1

5

4.80

0.47

311

2

5

4.37

0.62

301

3

5

4.54

0.35

Knowledge of l a t e s t research
related to instruction

Student time on t a s k is
encouraged

Bring i n s t r u c t i o n a l issues
to f a c u l t y f o r discussion
I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision
(items combined)

N

X

SD

53
For th e category of Curriculum Development and Implementation,
the

individual

secondary

role

school

with

the

principals,

hi g hest
was

development within the building,
Table 4 .1 0 ).

ranking,

Item

9,

as

perceived

Coordinate

by

curriculum

with a mean score o f 4.68

(see

I t was followed by Item 8, Knowledge about thinking

and resear ch r e l a t e d to c u r r i c u l a r needs o f s tu d e n t s , with a mean
score of 4.54; and Item 11, Help tea ch er s implement th e curriculum,
with a mean score o f 4.52.
the

least

important

Consistent with the r e s u l t s f o r Item 3,

individual

role

in

this

A b i l i t y t o d i s a g g r e g a t e and examine t e s t

area

was

Item 12,

score data to

recommendations f o r curriculum r e v i s i o n , with a

make

meanscore of 4.10.

As shown in Table 4.11, f o r the category of Leadership, the most
im portant

individual

role

as

perceived

by

secondary

school

p r i n c i p a l s was Item 23, Develop sense of teamwork among s t a f f , with
a high mean score of 4.82.
problem s o lv e r ,

This was followed by Item 16, Be a good

with a mean score o f 4.80;

Item 21,

Have

good

w r i tt e n and oral communication s k i l l s , with a

meanscore of

4.78;

and Item 14, Knowing when to d e leg ate, with a

meanscore of

4.77.

The l e a s t important individual r o le in t h i s area was Item 24, Apply
v a lid research findings to school p r a c t i c e , with a mean score of
4.32.

The next l e a s t important r o l e was Item 17, A b i l i t y t o gather

and analyze data r e : co g n it iv e , a f f e c t i v e , and climate needs of the
building, with a mean score of 4.36.

54

Table 4.10.--Secondary school principals’ perceptions of the impor­
tance of Curriculum Development and Implementation.
Item Content

N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

8. Knowledge about thinking
and re se ar ch r e l a t e d to
c u r r i c u l a r needs of stu de nts

309

3

5

4.54

0.58

9. Coordinate curriculum
development within th e
building

309

1

5

4.68

0.57

309

3

5

4.49

0.58

302

3

5

4.52

0.61

304

1

5

4.10

0.81

304

1

5

4.46

0.57

96C

w

*

c

A
Ad
1 »1 V

Q.42

10. Aid s t a f f in as su ring c u r ­
riculum i s a p p li cab le to
s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s p r e s ­
ent s tu dents w il l need as
a dults
11. Help tea ch er s implement
the curriculum
12. A b i l i t y t o disag greg ate and
examine t e s t score data to
make recommendations f o r
curriculum re v is i o n
13. S k i l l s in curriculum
articulation
Curriculum Development
J fAllip 1ClllCilbOb 1VII
ailU
(items combined)
•

am

w

55
Table 4.11.--Secondary school principals’ perceptions of the impor­
tance of Leadership.
Item Content

N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

14. Know when t o del egate

307

3

5

4.77

0.44

15. Adjust le ad er sh ip s t y l e to
f i t the needs of th e s i t u a ­
ti o n

307

2

5

4.61

0.54

16. Be a good problem s o lv er

308

3

5

4.80

0.42

310

1

5

4.36

0.70

308

3

5

4.65

0.50

19. Keep a b r e a st of c u r re n t
re se ar ch and trends in edu­
cat io n

309

1

5

4.55

0.59

20. Be adept a t c o n f l i c t manage­
ment

308

3

5

4.73

0.46

21. Have good w r itte n and oral
communication s k i l l s

308

3

5

4.78

0.43

22. Involve oth er s ap p r o p riately
in de cisio n making

310

3

5

4.73

0.46

23. Develop sense of teamwork
among s t a f f

308

3

5

4.82

0.39

24. Apply v a l i d research f i n d ­
ings t o school p r a c t i c e

308

2

5

4.32

0.62

296

3

5

4.65

0.29

17. A b i l i t y t o ga ther and
analyze data re : co g n i tiv e ,
a f f e c t i v e , and climate
needs o f the building
18. Be v i s io n or ie nte d and aid
s t a f f in long-range planning

Leadership
(items combined)

56
For th e category o f S t a f f Development/Personnel Management, the
most important individual

r o l e i d e n t i f i e d by secondary p r i n c ip a ls

was Item 33, A b i l i t y t o take c o r r e c t i v e ac ti on on personnel matters
t o maintain q u a l i t y and e f f e c t i v e n e s s , with a mean score of 4.74
(see Table 4.12).

This was followed by Item 31, Encourage tea ch er s

to t r y new ideas without f e a r of r e p r i s a l f o r f a i l u r e , with a mean
score o f 4.73; and Item 26, S k i l l s in building upon s tr e n g t h s of
s t a f f members, with a mean score o f 4.68.

The l e a s t

important

individual r o l e was Item 25, Be able t o understand and apply adult
lear ning and motivation theory, with a mean score of 4.03.

The next

l e a s t important ind ividual r o l e was Item 28, A b i l i t y t o as sess ins e rv ic e needs and seek resources to f i l l

those needs, with a mean

score of 4.29.
Research Question 2
What d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t among secondary p r i n c i p a l s regarding
t h e i r perceptions about a d m i n i s tr a t o r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s , compar­
ing th e v a r i a b le s of gender, age, length of s erv ice as a
secondary p r i n c i p a l , and th e s iz e and l o c a t io n o f t h e i r school?
To

answer

this

hypotheses were t e s t e d .

research

question,

several

statistical

Each one i s s t a t e d , followed by th e r e s u l t s

o f the s t a t i s t i c a l analyses f o r t h a t hypothesis.
Hypothesis 1 : There are no d i f f e r e n c e s between male and female
secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions o f the importance of
the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of th e p r i n c ip a ls h i p .
To t e s t whether th e r e were any d i f f e r e n c e s , a one-way analysis
o f v a r i a n c e was p e r fo r m e d , f o llo w e d by a Student-Newman-Keuls
p o s t e r i o r i c o n t r a s t t e s t f o r comparisons of a ll a v a i l a b l e p a i r s of
means, when found necessary.

57
Table 4.12.--Secondary school principals’ perceptions of the impor­
tance of Staff Development/Personnel Management.
N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

308

1

5

4.03

0.84

26. S k i l l s in building upon
s tr e n g t h s of s t a f f members

309

1

5

4.68

0.53

27. A b i l i t y to a r b i t r a t e d i s ­
putes and agreements

310

3

5

4.62

0.56

311

1

5

4.29

0.69

311

3

5

4.67

0.50

30. Ensure t h a t s t a f f development programs are
based on t e a c h e r s ’ needs

311

1

5

4.47

0.70

31. Encourage tea ch er s t o t r y
new ideas without f e a r of
reprisal for fa ilu re

310

3

5

4.73

0.48

32. Conduct s t a f f meeting which
te a c h e r s perceive r ele v an t
and informative

310

2

5

4.56

0.57

311

3

5

4.74

0.46

311

3

5

4.53

0.55

304

3

5

4.53

0.37

Item Content
25. Be able to understand and
apply a d u lt l earning and
motivation theory

28. A b i l i t y to as sess i n - s e r v i c e
needs and seek resources to
f i l l those needs
29. Encourage leadersh ip by
s t a f f and students

33. A b i l i t y to take c o r r e c t i v e
action on personnel matters
t o maintain q u a l i t y and
effectiveness
34. A b i l i t y to a s s i s t s t a f f
members in s e t t i n g r e a l i s t i c
and appropri at e goals for
growth and improvement
S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management
(items combined)

58
Table

4.13

shows

th e

results

variance f o r gender d i f f e r e n c e s .
Female

p rincipals

roles/functions.
the

null

scored

of

the

one-way

a n a l y s is

of

Some gender d i f f e r e n c e s emerged.

higher

than

males

in

all

four

However, on the b as is o f the computed s t a t i s t i c ,

hypothesis

was

rejected

for

two

ro les/fu n ctio n s:

I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision (p < .01) and Curriculum Development and
Implementation (p < .01).

Females tended to perceive th e se two

r o le s as s i g n i f i c a n t l y more important than did males.

Table 4 . 1 3 . --One-way a n aly s is of variance on the importance o f the
r o le s / f u n c t io n s of the p r in c i p a ls h i p and gender.
Gender

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

P

I n s tr u c t io n a l
Supervision

Male
Female

277
22

4.52
4.77

0.35
0.24

10.55

.0013*

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

Male
Female

269
23

4.44
4.72

0.42
0.30

9.90

.0018*

Leadership

Male
Female

270
23

4.64
4.74

0.29
0.25

2.64

.1050

Mai e
Female

97P

4.52
4 ! 67

0.36
0*42

3.38

.0670

Role/Function

wvui i

H aw oln n m on t/
wwvwt
vy

Personnel Management

♦S ig n if i c a n t a t the .01 l e v e l .

Hypothesis 2 : There are no d iff e r e n c e s among th e d i f f e r e n t age
groups with regard to t h e i r perceptions of the importance of
the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of the p r i n c ip a ls h i p .
As shown in Table 4.14, the one-way a n aly s is of variance showed
no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e s among the four age groups

59
(p > .05) with regard t o t h e i r perceptions of the importance o f the
roles/functions.

Thus,

the

null

hypothesis

of

no

significant

d i f f e r e n c e s was not r e j e c t e d a t the .05 s ig n i f i c a n c e l e v e l .

Table 4 . 1 4 . --One-way a n a ly s is o f variance on th e importance o f the
r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of the p r i n c ip a ls h i p and age.
Role/Function

Age

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

p

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

< 40
41-50
51-55
> 55

43
162
58
37

4.48
4.58
4.50
4.51

0.36
0.34
0.33
0.36

0.54

.2036

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

< 40
41-50
51-55
> 55

43
154
58
38

4.40
4.48
4.48
4.53

0.44
0.43
0.42
0.37

1.06

.3675

Leadership

< 40
41-50
51-55
> 55

43
155
60
37

4.68
4.63
4.64
4.70

0.24
0.32
0.26
0.28

0.81

.4916

< 40
41-50
51-55
v< w
CC
w

45
158
62

4.60
4.49
4.52

0.33
0.39
0.37

2.54

.0568

00
vv

A dA
T«V 1

ft

S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management

V 9

90

Hypothesis 3 : There are no d i ff e r e n c e s among th e groups with
d i f f e r e n t years of experience with regard t o t h e i r perceptions
of th e importance of the r o le s / f u n c t i o n s of the p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
S t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i ff e r e n c e s were found among th e fiv e
groups f o r a l l the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of the p r i n c ip a ls h i p (see Table
4 .1 5 ).

The null

hypothesis

of

no s i g n i f i c a n t

differences

was

r e j e c t e d a t the .01 level f o r I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision, Curriculum

60

Development and Implementation, and Leadership; I t was r e j e c t e d at
th e .05 level f o r S t a f f Development/Personnel Management.

Table 4 . 1 5 . --One-way a n a ly s is of variance on the importance o f th e
r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f th e p r in c i p a ls h i p and year s o f
experience.

Role/Function
I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

Leadership

S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management

Years of
Exper.

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

P

0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20+

68
53
52
64
63

4.55
4.54
4.69
4.44
4.50

0.35
0.33
0.28
0.38
0.33

3.95

.0039*

0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20+

68
51
49
62
64

4.50
4.47
4.62
4.33
4.43

0.42
0.44
0.34
0.37
0.37

3.74

.0055^

0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20+

69
50
54
58
64

4.66
4.63
4.76
4.56
4.63

0.26
0.37
0.24
0.29
0.28

3.53

.0079*

0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20+

69
51
54
62
67

4.54
4.49
4.66
4.44
4.53

0.37
0.42
0.28
0.38
0.35

2.78

.0270A

♦ S ig n if ic a n t a t the .05 l e v e l .
♦ ♦ S ig n if ican t a t the .01 l e v e l .

To t e s t
difference,

which two groups were c o n t r ib u t i n g
Student-Newman-Kurls comparison t e s t s

to

the

ov erall

were conducted.

61
For I n s t r u c t i o n a l

Supervision,

t h e p a i r s o f gr o u p s t h a t were

s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t a t the .05 level were the groups with 11-15
years of p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience and 0-5 years of p r i n c ip a ls h i p
experience, with

th e f i r s t scoring higher;

the groups with 11-15

y e a r s o f p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience and 16-20 years o f p r in c i p a ls h i p
experience, with th e f i r s t group scoring higher; and the groups with
11-15 ye ar s o f p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience and 20 or more yea rs of
p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience, with the f i r s t scoring higher.
For Curriculum Development and Implementation, the only groups
t h a t d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y a t the .05 level were those with 11-15
years o f p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience and 16-20 years of p r in c i p a ls h i p
experience, with th e f i r s t scoring higher.
For Leadership,
different

th e p a i r s of groups t h a t were s i g n i f i c a n t l y

were

t h e grou p

with

11-15

years of

principalship

experience

and

t h e gr oup

w i th

16-20 y e a r s o f

principalship

experience

(p

<

.05),

and

the

group

w ith

11-15

years

of

p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience and the group with 20 or more year s of
p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience (p < .05).

Again, th e group with 11-15

year s o f p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience scored higher.
For S t a f f Development/Personnel Management, the only p a i r t h a t
showed a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was the group with 11-15 yea rs of
prin cip alsh ip

experience

and t h e

group w it h

16-20 y e a r s

of

p r i n c i p a l s h i p experience, with the f i r s t scoring higher (see Table
4 .1 5 ).

PLEASE NOTE:
Page(s) not included with original material
and unavailable from author or university.
Filmed a s received.

UMI

64
Table 4 . 1 7 . --One-way a n a l y s is of variance on the importance o f the
r o le s / f u n c t io n s of the p r i n c ip a ls h i p and assignment
level.
Assignment

N

X

SD

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

J r . high
Sr. high
J r . / s r . high

113
152
35

4.50
4.57
4.51

0.38
0.30
0.36

1.51

.2224

Curriculum
Development &
Implementation

J r . high
Sr. high
J r . / s r . high

114
146
34

4.46
4.48
4.43

0.43
0.41
0.42

0.21

.8141

Leadership

J r . high
Sr. high
J r . / s r . high

109
152
34

4.61
4.68
4.60

0.32
0.26
0.33

2.51

.0832

J r . high
Sr. high
J r . / s r . high

114
154
35

4.47
4.58
4.52

0.41
0.38
0.36

3.21

.0419*

Role/Function

S t a f f Develop­
ment/Personnel
Management

F-Ratio

P

♦ S ig n if ic a n t a t th e .05 l e v e l .

Hypothesis 6 :
There are no d if f e r e n c e s among the groups of
s e c o n d a ry schoo l p r i n c i p a l s who a r e employed in school
d i s t r i c t s of d i f f e r e n t student enrollments with regard t o t h e i r
perceptions of th e importance o f th e r o le s / f u n c t i o n s of the
p r in c ip a l s h i p .
The a n aly s is
differences
different

of

variance

showed t h a t

among groups of p r in c ip a ls

none

of

from school

the

over all

districts

of

student enrollments was s i g n i f i c a n t with regard t o the

fo ur r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of the p r in c i p a ls h i p (see Table 4.18 ).
null hypothesis of no s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e s was r e t a i n e d .

The

65
Table 4 . 1 8 . --One-way a n aly s is o f variance on the importance of
the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f the p r i n c ip a ls h i p and school
d i s t r i c t s i z e in terms of studen t enrollment.
D i s t r i c t Size
(Enrollment)

N

X

SD

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

> 30,000
2,400-30,000
< 2,400

20
150
150

4.64
4.55
4.51

0.41
0.35
0.33

1.31

.2722

Curriculum
Development &
Implementation

> 30,000
2,400-30,000
< 2,400

18
152
124

4.62
4.44
4.46

0.53
0.43
0.40

1.41

.2451

Leadership

> 30,000
2,400-30,000
< 2,400

20
151
124

4.65
4.66
4.63

0.40
0.30
0.26

0.51

.6016

> 30,000
2,400-30,000
< 2,400

20
155
128

4.60
4.54
4.51

0.40
0.38
0.36

0.61

.5453

in

secondary

school

Role/Function

S t a f f Develop­
ment/Personnel
Management

To t e s t whether th e r e were d if f e r e n c e s

F-Ratio

P

p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions of the importance of the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of
the p r in c ip a ls h i p and the lik elihood of t h e i r r e t i r i n g within the
n o v t~

fiuo

v o a r cw

a

n n o - w■■a u

c
-a n• a- lvv c- i1*'

nw f*

w
o
. a.v ' i-a. .n~rw

Table 4.19 shows the r e s u l t s of t h i s a n a l y s is .

uiac

nov'
-Pnv'
r
w • moH
•••***- •

As shown in the

t a b l e , no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r any
o f the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s and the l ik e lih o o d o f r e t i r i n g within the
next f i v e y e a r s .

However, the group who were not l i k e l y t o r e t i r e

within the next f i v e years had the highe st scores on most of the
roles/functions.

66

Table 4 . 1 9 . --One-way a n aly s is o f variance on the importance of
the r o le s / f u n c t i o n s o f the p r i n c ip a ls h i p and the
li kelihood o f r e t i r i n g within the next f iv e y e a r s .

Role/Function

Likelihood of
Re tiring

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

P

I n s tr u c tio n a l
Supervision

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

62
45
191

4.53
4.46
4.56

0.37
0.37
0.33

1.60

.2040

Curriculum
Development &
Implementation

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

62
41
189

4.46
4.38
4.48

0.45
0.44
0.41

0.96

.3846

Leadership

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

62
43
188

4.65
4.64
4.65

0.30
0.27
0.30

0.01

.9935

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

63
45
193

4.55
4.52
4.52

0.37
0.33
0.38

0.13

.8753

S t a f f Develop­
ment/Personnel
Management

Research Question 3
What do secondary p r i n c i p a l s perceive to be t h e i r degree of
need f o r f u r t h e r prepara ti o n and continuing p ro fe s sio nal d ev el­
opment in each of the s e le c t e d r o l e s / f u n c t io n s ?
As shown in Table 4.20,
average,

secondary school

principals,

expressed moderate need f o r f u r t h e r pr ep aratio n

se le c te d r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s .

on the
in

the

The need f o r f u r t h e r pr ep aratio n f o r the

r o l e /f u n c t i o n ranged from a score of 1,

i n d ic a tin g no need, to a

score of 5, in d icatin g a high need, with a mean score of l e s s than
3 .5.

Comparing the four ca te g o r ie s of r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s , Curriculum

Development and Implementation was i d e n t i f i e d as th e category in
which th e p r in c i p a ls had the highest need f o r f u r t h e r p r epara ti on,
with a mean score of 3.36.

I n s t r u c tio n a l

Supervision was ranked

67

second, with a mean score of 3.24.
with a mean score of 3.02.

Leadership was ranked t h i r d ,

Last was S t a f f Development/Personnel

Management, with a mean score of 3.01.

Table 4 . 2 0 . --Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ percep tions of t h e i r
personal needs f o r f u r t h e r prep aratio n in th e r o l e s /
functions o f the p r in c i p a ls h i p .
Role/Function

N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision

292

1

5

3.24

0.80

Curriculum Development and
Implementation

285

1

5

3.36

0.84

Leadership

280

1

5

3.02

0.89

S t a f f Development/Personnel
Management

297

1

5

3.01

0.89

As shown

in

Table

4.21,

in

the

category

of

I n s t r u c t io n a l

Supervision, the area of highes t need f o r f u r t h e r pr ep arati o n was
Item 1, Knowledge of l a t e s t research r e l a t e d to i n s t r u c t i o n , with a
mean score o f 3.69, followed by Item 5, Encourage teachers to use
i n s t r u c t i o n a l t e c h n i q u e s r e l e v a n t t o c u r r i c u l a r o b j e c t i v e s and
research-based p r i n c i p l e s of teaching, with a mean score of 3.48,
and Item 2,

Use o f g o a l - s e t t i n g

to

improve i n s t r u c t i o n

and the

involvement o f s t a f f in g o a l - s e t t i n g toward more e f f e c t i v e scores,
with a mean score of 3.33.

In t h i s category, the individual role s

in which p r i n c i p a l s perceived t h a t they needed th e l e a s t additional
prepara tion were Item 4, Student time on t a s k i s encouraged, with a

68
mean score o f 2.82, and Item 6, Maintain t h a t a l l stu den ts can le arn
and expect them t o succeed, with a mean score of 2.97.

Table 4 . 2 1 .--Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ perception s o f t h e i r
personal needs f o r f u r t h e r prepara tion with regard to
r o l e s in the category of I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision.
Item Content

N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

310

1

5

3.69

0.90

310

1

5

3.33

1.08

306

1

5

3.28

1.07

303

1

5

2.82

1.18

5. Encourage teachers to use
i n s t r u c t i o n a l techniques
relevant to curricular
o b je c ti v e s and researchbased p r i n c i p l e s of lea rning

306

1

5

3.48

1.09

6 . Maintain t h a t a l l students
can le a r n and expect them
to succeed

305

1

5

2.97

1.28

308

1

5

3.15

1.09

292

1

5

3.24

0.80

1. Knowledge o f l a t e s t re se ar ch
related to instruction
2. Use of g o a l - s e t t i n g t o improve
i n s t r u c t i o n and the invo lve­
ment o f s t a f f in g o a l - s e t t i n g
toward more e f f e c t i v e schools
3. Use o f t e s t scores to recom­
ment changes in i n s t r u c t i o n a l
program
4. Student time on task is
encouraged

7. Brings i n s t r u c t i o n a l issue s
t o th e f a c u l t y f o r disc ussion
I n s t r u c t i o n a l Supervision
(items combined)

69
As shown

in T able

4.22,

in

Development and I m p l e m e n t a t i o n ,

the
the

category
individual

of
role

Cur ric ulu m
in which

p r in c ip a ls perceived the most need f o r f u r t h e r prepara tion was Item
8 , Knowledge about thinking and research r e l a t e d t o c u r r i c u l a r needs
o f s tu d e n ts , with a mean score o f 3.58, followed by Item 10, Aid
s t a f f in as suring curriculum i s ap plica ble t o s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s
pres en t s tu dents will need as a d u l t s , with a mean score of 3.42, and
Item 9, Coordinate curriculum development within th e bu ild in g , with
a mean score of 3.39.

The individual

role

in which p r in c ip a l s

perceived th e l e a s t need f o r f u r t h e r pre pa ration was Item 11, Help
te achers implement th e curriculum, with a mean score o f 3.21.

The

r o l e ranked next to lowest in terms of need was Item 13, S k i l l s in
curriculum a r t i c u l a t i o n , with a mean score of 3.27.
As shown in Table 4.23,
individual

role

in the category of Leadership,

in which p r i n c i p a l s

the

perceived the most need for

f u r t h e r pr ep ar at ion was Item 18, Be v is i o n - o r ie n te d and aid s t a f f in
long-range planning, with a mean score of 3.43.
np flUs Wc V
a

i.i>f
nu«*

T to m

A b C III

10

I V }

ll\iW'oW
o ^n

a h io a a c f

M WI VW«« *<

Ranking in second

nW f« nVi%v• •' »•»W
o<nl W
t v• oWWWMI
c o 3 ><rh
anrl
VM
M IIV .

+v*onHc
W
l w« « w V

i•n••

education, with a mean score of 3.41; in t h i r d place was Item 17,
A b i l i t y t o ga ther and analyze data r e :

c o g n itiv e ,

affective

climate needs of the bu il d in g , with a mean score of 3.29;

and

and in

fo urt h place was Item 24, Apply va lid research fin dings to school
p r a c t i c e , with a mean score o f 3.27.

The individual r o le in which

p r in c ip a ls perceived they had the l e a s t need f o r f u r t h e r pre pa ration
was Item 21, Have good w r itte n and oral communication s k i l l s , with a
mean score of 2.71.

The r o l e ranked next to lowest in terms of need

70

Table 4 . 2 2 . --Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions of t h e i r
personal needs f o r f u r t h e r pr ep ar ation with regard
to r o le s in the category of Curriculum Development
and Implementation.
Item Content

N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

8 . Knowledge about thinking
and resear ch r e l a t e d to
c u r r i c u l a r needs o f students

207

1

5

3.58

0.98

9. Coordinate curriculum
development within the
building

307

1

5

3.39

1.09

10. Aid s t a f f in as suring c u r ­
riculum i s a p p licab le to
s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s p r e s ­
ent stu d en ts will need
as adults

304

1

5

3.42

1.01

11. Help tea ch er s implement
the curriculum

300

1

5

3.21

1.05

300

1

5

3.29

1.16

302

1

5

3.27

1.11

285

1

5

3.36

0.84

12. A b i l i t y t o disagg re ga te and
examine t e s t score data to
make recommendations for
curriculum r e v is io n
13. S k i l l s in curriculum
•% v * 4- 4 « * m 1 i t f i a m
ttl W 1 V U 1 U U 1 V II

Curriculum Development
and Implementation
(items combined)

71

Table 4 . 2 3 . --Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ percep tions o f t h e i r
personal needs f o r f u r t h e r prepara tion with regard to
r o le s in the category of Leadership.
Item Content

N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

14. Know when t o de le gate

304

1

5

2.72

1.30

15. Adjust le adersh ip s t y l e to
f i t th e needs of the s i t u a ­
tion

301

1

5

2.72

1.17

16. Be a good problem solv er

301

1

5

2.80

1.20

308

1

5

3.29

1.06

303

1

5

3.43

1.05

306

1

5

3.41

1.05

20. Be adept a t c o n f l i c t manage­
ment

305

1

5

2.99

1.13

21. Have good w r i t t e n and oral
communication s k i l l s

304

1

5

2.71

1.24

22. Involve o thers ap propri ately
in de cisio n making

308

1

5

2.84

1.20

23. Develop sense o f teamwork
among s t a f f

305

1

5

2.96

1.21

24. Apply v a li d research f i n d ­
ings t o school p r a c t i c e

304

1

5

3.27

1.00

280

1

5

3.02

0.89

17. A b i l i t y to gather and
analyze data r e : c o gniti ve,
a f f e c t i v e , and climate
needs of the building
18. Be v isio n o r ie n te d and aid
s t a f f in long-range planning
19. Keep a b r e a s t o f c u rre nt
re search and trends in edu­
ca tion

Leadership
(items combined)

72

was Item 14, Know when to d e le g a t e , with a mean score o f 2.72,
followed by Item 15, Adjust lead er sh ip s t y l e t o f i t th e needs of the
s i t u a t i o n , with a mean score o f 2.72.
As shown in Table 4.24, f o r the category o f S t a f f Development/
Personnel

Management,

perceived

th e most

the

need

individual
for

further

roles

in

which

pr ep ar at ion

principals

were

Item 34,

A b i l i t y to a s s i s t s t a f f members in s e t t i n g r e a l i s t i c and appropri ate
goals f o r growth and improvement, with a mean score o f 3.22;

Item

28, A b i l i t y t o asse ss i n s e r v i c e needs and seek resources to f i l l
those needs,

with

a mean score

of 3.19;

Item 25,

Be able

to

understand and apply a d u lt l ear n in g and motivation theory, with a
mean score of 3.10; and Item 33, A b i l i t y t o take c o r r e c t i v e action
on personnel matters to maintain q u a l i t y and e f f e c t i v e n e s s , with a
mean score
expressed

of
the

3.07.
least

The
need

individual
for

further

role

in

which

prepara tion

was

principals
Item 31,

Encourage te achers t o t r y new ideas without f e a r of r e p r i s a l

for

f a i l u r e , with a mean score o f 2.70, followed in ascending ord er by
Item 27, A b i l i t y to a r b i t r a t e dis pute s and agreements, with a mean
score of

2.83;

Item 32,

Conduct

staff

meetings

which

tea ch er s

perceive to be r e le v a n t and informative, with a mean score o f 2.88;
and Item 29, Encourage l e a d e r sh ip by s t a f f and s tu d e n ts , with a mean
score of 2.92.

73
Table 4 . 2 4 . --Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ percep tion s o f t h e i r
personal needs f o r f u r t h e r pr e p a ra tio n with regard
t o r o le s in the category of S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management.
Item Content

N

Min.

Max.

X

SD

304

1

5

3.10

1.00

26. S k i l l s in building upon
s t r e n g th s of s t a f f members

308

1

5

3.02

1.15

27. A b i l i t y t o a r b i t r a t e d i s ­
putes and agreements

306

1

5

2.83

1.14

28. A b i l i t y t o assess i n - s e r v i c e
needs and seek resources to
f i l l those needs

310

1

5

3.19

1.08

29. Encourage leadersh ip by
s t a f f and students

310

1

5

2.92

1.10

30. Ensure t h a t s t a f f development programs are
based on t e a c h e r s ’ needs

308

1

5

3.00

1.09

31. Encourage teachers t o t r y
new ideas without f e a r of
reprisal for failu re

309

1

5

2.70

1.28

32. Conduct s t a f f meeting which
tea ch er s perceive r elev an t
and informative

309

1

5

2.88

1.22

310

1

5

3.07

1.18

310

1

5

3.22

1.07

297

1

5

3.01

0.89

25. Be able t o understand and
apply a d u lt learning and
motivation theory

33. A b i l i t y t o take c o r r e c t i v e
ac tion on personnel matters
to maintain q u a l i t y and
effectiveness
34. A b i l i t y t o a s s i s t s t a f f
members in s e t t i n g r e a l i s t i c
and appropri at e goals for
growth and improvement
S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management
(items combined)

PLEASE NOTE:
Page(s) not included with original material
and unavailable from author or university.
Filmed a s received.

UMI

75
Table 4 . 2 5 . --One-way a n a l y s is o f variance on the p r i n c i p a l s ’
personal need f o r f u r t h e r prepara tion and continuing
development in each of the r o le / f u n c t i o n c a t e g o r ie s
and gender.
Role/Function

Gender

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

P

In s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

Male
Female

269
21

3.26
3.97

0.80
0.86

2.66

.1040

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

Male
Female

261
23

3.38
4.72

0.82
0.30

1.25

.2654

Leadership

Male
Female

256
21

3.04
2.94

0.89
0.98

0.25

.6146

S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management

Male
Female

271
23

3.03
2.83

0.88
1.03

1.09

.2968

Hypothesis 2 : There are no d i f f e r e n c e s among p r i n c i p a l s in the
d i f f e r e n t age groups with regard to t h e i r pe rc ep tion s of t h e i r
needs f o r f u r t h e r pr ofessional development in the s e le cted
r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f the p r in c ip a l s h i p .
As shown in Table 4.26, the r e s u l t s of the one-way an a ly s is of
variance in dic ate d t h a t t h e r e were no s i g n i f i c a n t over all

differ­

ences (p > .05) among the d i f f e r e n t age groups f o r a l l the r o l e s /
functions of the p r i n c ip a ls h i p .
expressed

relativ ely

higher

However, the younger age groups
needs

for

development in the r o le s o f I n s tr u c t io n a l

further

professional

Supervision,

Development and Implementation, and Leadership.

Curriculum

The null hypothesis

of no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was not r e j e c t e d at th e .05 l e v e l .

76

Table 4 . 2 6 . --One-way a n a ly s is of variance on the p r i n c i p a l s ’
personal need f o r f u r t h e r pre par at ion and continuing
development in each o f th e r o l e / f u n c t i o n ca t e g o r ie s
and age.
Role/Function

Age

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

p

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

< 40
41-50
51-55
> 55

43
152
59
36

3.45
3.21
3.16
3.22

0.71
0.83
0.77
0.83

1.31

V

f !■ f V v

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

< 40
41-50
51-55
> 55

41
151
56
36

3.53
3.38
3.16
3.38

0.68
0.85
0.83
0.93

1.69

.1699

Leadership

< 40
41-50
51-55
> 55

39
145
59
36

3.17
2.98
2.99
3.11

0.92
0.83
0.89
1.10

0.62

.6018

< 40
41-50
51-55
> 55

44
152
62
38

3.09
2.93
3.07
3.15

0.81
0.85
0.89
1.15

0.90

.4436

S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management

w fV

.2709

Hypothesis 3 :
There are no d if f e r e n c e s among the groups of
p r i n c i p a l s with d i f f e r e n t years of experience, with regard to
t h e i r perceptions of t h e i r needs f o r f u r t h e r profes sional
development in t h e s e l e c t e d r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f t h e
p r i n c ip a ls h i p .
As shown in Table 4.27, p r in c ip a ls with fewer than ten years of
experience

expressed

relativ ely

higher

needs

for

further

pr ofes sio na l development in th e r o le s of I n s tr u c tio n a l Supervision
and C u r r ic u lu m Development and I m p le m enta tion t h a n d i d t h e i r
c o unterpart s with more experience.

However, the one-way a n a ly s is of

variance in dic at ed t h a t none of the over all d if f e r e n c e s among the

77
f i v e groups considered was s t a t i s t i c a l l y
Thus,

th e null

hypothesis

of

significant

no s i g n i f i c a n t

(p > .05).

difference

was not

r e j e c t e d a t the .05 l e v e l .

Table 4 . 2 7 . --One-way a n a ly s is o f variance on the p r i n c i p a l s ’
personal need f o r f u r t h e r prepara tion and continuing
development in each of the r o l e / f u n c t i o n ca te g o r ie s
and year s of experience.

Role/Function
I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

Leadership

Years of
Exper.

X

SD

F-Ratio

p

0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20+

64
49
51
63
64

3.27
3.34
3.13
3.18
3.37

0.91
0.71
0.78
0.83
0.77

0.56

.6884

0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20+

66
48
49
58
63

3.41
3.53
3.27
3.24
3.35

0.92
0.78
0.74
0.90
0.81

1.00

.4097

0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20

63
46
51
58
Ol

3.03
3.09
3.04
2.92

0.93
0.85
0.82
0.93

0.28

.8937

A ■»
o . u /

\J.?C

67
47
54
61
67

2.98
3.15
2.94
2.91
3.10

0.87
0.90
0.88
0.90
0.93

0.77

.5429

« a

C\J f

S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management

N

.

0- 5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20+

r

1

A

A A

78
Hypothesis 4 ; There are no d i f f e r e n c e s among secondary school
p r i n c i p a l s with regard t o t h e i r per ceptions of t h e i r needs for
further
professional
preparation
in
the
selected
r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p , based on d i f f e r e n c e s in
earned degrees.
As shown in Table 4.28, th e r e s u l t s of th e one-way a n a ly s is
showed t h a t f o r a l l th e r o le s / f u n c t i o n s o f the p r i n c i p a l s h i p , none
of the o v e r a ll d i f f e r e n c e s among the fo ur groups was s t a t i s t i c a l l y
s i g n i f i c a n t (p > .05).

Thus, the null hypothesis of no s i g n i f i c a n t

d i f f e r e n c e among th e various groups with regard t o t h e i r perceptions
o f t h e i r needs f o r f u r t h e r pr ofessional prepara tion was not r e j e c t e d
a t the .05 l e v e l .

Table 4 . 2 8 . --One-way an a ly s is of variance on the p r i n c i p a l s ’
personal need f o r f u r t h e r prepara tion and continuing
development in each of the r o l e / f u n c t i o n c a t e g o r i e s
and degree held.
Role/Function

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

P

Master’ s
Spec.
Ed.D.
du n

191
63
21
1c

3.25
3.24
3.14
0 TO

0.79
0.84
0.80

0.14

.9348

Curriculum Development
and Implementation

Master’ s
Spec.
Ed.D.
Ph.D.

188
58
21
16

3.38
3.36
3.29
3.50

0.83
0.84
0.82
0.93

0.82

.4860

Leadership

Master’s
Spec.
Ed.D.
Ph.D.

186
58
19
15

3.02
3.10
2.90
2.96

0.86
0.94
0.90
1.14

0.31

.8196

Master’s
Spec.
Ed.D.
Ph.D.

195
61
22
17

2.99
3.13
2.98
2.92

0.87
0.96
0.83
1.03

0.50

.6814

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

Degree

I «• • W *

S t a f f Development/
Personnel Management

1V

V t

1^

n
oa
V t VV

79
Hypothesis 5 :
There are no d i f f e r e n c e s among the groups of
secondary school p r i n c i p a l s with d i f f e r e n t c u r r e n t and primary
assignments with regard t o t h e i r perceptions of t h e i r need for
f u r t h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l developm ent i n t h e s e l e c t e d r o l e s /
funct io ns of th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
As shown in Table 4.29, th e r e s u l t s o f the one-way a n a l y s is of
variance demonstrated no o v er all s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r ­
ence (p > .05)

among the t h r e e groups with d i f f e r e n t assignment

l e v e l s with regard t o t h e i r need f o r f u r t h e r profe ssion al develop­
ment.

Thus, the null hypothesis of no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was

not r e j e c t e d a t th e .05 l e v e l .

Table 4 . 2 9 . --One-way a n a ly s is of variance on the p r i n c i p a l s ’
personal need f o r f u r t h e r prepara tion and continuing
development in each o f the r o l e / f u n c t i o n c a t e g o r i e s
and assignment l e v e l .
Assignment

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

P

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

J r . high
Sr. high
J r . / s r . high

117
147
33

3.15
3.27
3.42

0.84
0.76
0.86

1.69

.1858

Curriculum
Development &
Implementation

J r . high
i.
or. ri 19(i
J r . / s r . high

112 3.24
1HU J.HU
32 3.56

0.85
U.OI
0.85

A

L .L i

. 1091

Leadership

J r . high
Sr. high
J r . / s r . high

103
143
33

3.01
3.03
3.06

0.94
0.87
0.87

0.04

.9630

J r . high
Sr. high
J r . / s r . high

113
150
33

2.94
3.04
3.14

0.90
0.87
0.95

0.80

.4504

Role/Function

S t a f f Develop­
ment/Personnel
Management

• _•

i

«a

««

• A

A

A1

AA

80
Hypothesis 6 :
There ar e no d if f e r e n c e s among the groups of
secondary p r i n c i p a l s who ar e employed in school d i s t r i c t s with
d i f f e r e n t student enrollments with regard to t h e i r perceptions
of t h e i r needs f o r f u r t h e r professional development in the
s e le c t e d r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of th e p r in c i p a ls h i p .
The r e s u l t s of the one-way a n a ly s is of variance showed t h a t
none o f t h e

overall

differences

among t h e

s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (p > .05)

three

g roups

(see Table 4 . 3 0 ) .

was

Thus, the

null hypothesis o f no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s was not r e j e c t e d a t
the .05 l e v e l .

Table 4 . 3 0 . --One-way a n a ly s is o f variance on the p r i n c i p a l s ’
personal need f o r f u r t h e r pre pa ration and continuing
development in each o f the r o l e / f u n c t i o n ca t e g o r ie s
and school d i s t r i c t s i z e in terms of stude nt e n r o l l ­
ment.
D i s t r i c t Size
(Enrollment)

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

P

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

> 30,000
2,400-30,000
< 2,400

18
150
130

3.25
3.18
3.30

1.13
0.76
0.80

0.75

.4721

Curriculum
Development &
Implementation

> 30,000
2,400-30,000
< 2,400

15
152
124

3.30
3.25
3.49

1.14
0.78
0.85

2.75

.0654

Leadership

> 30,000
2,400-30,000
< 2,400

17
142
120

3.29
2.94
3.09

1.28
0.85
0.87

1.76

.1737

> 30,000
2,400-30,000
< 2,400

18
153
125

3.21
2.93
3.08

1.19
0.86
0.89

1.35

.2615

Role/Function

S t a f f Develop­
ment/Personnel
Management

81
To t e s t whether t h e r e were d i f f e r e n c e s
p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions

of th e ir

needs

for

in

secondary

further

school

pr ofessional

development in the s e le c t e d r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p and
the lik e lih o o d of t h e i r r e t i r i n g in th e next f i v e y e a r s , a one-way
an a ly s is of variance was performed.

Table 4.31 co ntai n s th e r e s u l t s

of t h i s a n a l y s i s .

Table 4 . 3 1 .--One-way a n a l y s is o f variance on the p r i n c i p a l s ’
personal need f o r f u r t h e r pr ep arati o n and continuing
development in each of the r o l e / f u n c t i o n c a t e g o r i e s
and l ik e li h o o d o f r e t i r i n g within th e next f i v e y e a r s .

Role/Function

Likelihood of
Re tiring

N

X

SD

F-Ratio

P

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

61
44
184

3.21
3.07
3.29

0.82
0.81
0.80

1.39

.2497

Curriculum
Development &
Implementation

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

60
41
181

3.29
3.25
3.41

0.87
0.78
0.84

0.88

.4163

Leadership

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

59
44
1/5

2.90
3.08
5.06

1.00
0.90
0.85

0.80

.4508

Very l i k e l y
Possibly
Not l i k e l y

62
43
189

3.08
3.09
2.98

1.04
0.82
0.86

0.50

.6062

S t a f f Develop­
ment/Personnel
Management

82
Research Question 5
What do secondary p r i n c i p a l s i d e n t i f y as t h e i r primary source
of pr ep ar at ion and continuing pr ofessional development f o r each
of th e s e le c t e d a d m in is tr a to r r o l e s / f u n c t io n s ?
The

percentage

distributions

of

the

p r im a r y

source

of

pr ep ar at ion and continuing pr ofessional development as perceived by
s e c o n d a ry

school

roles/functions

of

p rincipals
th e

for

p r in c ip a ls h i p

each

of

the

are

shown

in

identified
Tables

4.32

through 4.35.
As shown in Table
Instructional

4.32,

for

the

role/function

category

Supervision, the primary sources of pr ep ar at ion

of
for

p r i n c i p a l s were Workshops/Conferences (percentages ranged from 29%
to 60%), Professional Readings/Self-Study (percentages ranged from
17% t o 35%), and On-the-Job Experience (percentages ranged from 2%
to 40%).
For the r o l e / f u n c t i o n category of Curriculum Development and
Implementation, the primary sources of pr ep ar at ion f o r p r i n c i p a l s
were Workshop/Conference
Professional
31%),

(percentages

Readings/Self-Study

and On-the-Job Experiences

ranged

(percentages
(percentages

from
ranged

28% to

46%),

from 14% to

ranged from 5% to

33%) (see Table 4.33).
As shown in Table 4.34, f o r the r o l e category of Leadership,
the primary sources o f pre par at io n f o r p r in c ip a ls were On-the-Job
Experience (percentages ranged from 2% to 56%), Workshop/Conference
(percentages ranged from 19% to 46%),

and Professional

Self-Study (percentages ranged from 7% to 59%).

Readings/

Table 4 .3 2 .--Percentage d istr ib u tio n o f the primary source o f preparation and continuing
p rofessional development: Instructional Supervision.

On-the-Job
Work
Experience

Mentor/
Collegial
Relations

Professional
Readings/
Self-Study

Workshop/
Conference

University
Course

2

1

30

60

6

23

6

17

47

5

3. Use of te st scores to
recommend changes in
instructional program

40

6

23

39

8

4. Student time on task
is encouraged

40

7

17

29

3

5. Encourage teachers to use
Instructional techniques
relevant to curricular
objectives and researchbased principles of
learning

10

3

21

56

9

6. Maintain that all stu­
dents can learn and
expect them to succeed

29

6

23

34

4

7. Bring instructional
issues to faculty for
for discussion

20

9

35

31

3

Item Content

1. Knowledge of la te st
research related to
Instruction
2. Use of goal-setting to
improve instruction and
the involvement of sta ff
in goal-setting toward
more effective schools

Table 4.33.--Percentage distribution of the primary source of preparation and continuing
professional development: Curriculum Development and Implementation.
Mentor/
Collegial
Relations

Professional
Readings/
Self-Study

Workshop/
Conference

5

4

31

46

13

9. Coordinate curriculum
development within the
building

27

11

18

33

9

10. Aid s t a f f in assuring
curriculum i s applicab le
to s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s
present students will
need as a dult s

20

7

25

40

7

33

14

14

28

6

19

6

15

42

14

17

7

15

38

21

Item Content

8 . Knowledge about t h i n k ­
ing and research r e l a t e d
to c u r r i c u l a r needs o f
students

11. Help teac her s implement
the curriculum
12. A b i l i t y t o disaggregate
and examine t e s t score
data to make recommenda­
ti o n s f o r curriculum
r evisio n
13. S k i l l s in curriculum
articulation

On-the-Job
Work
Experience

University
Course

85

Table 4 .3 4 .--Percentage d is tr ib u tio n o f the primary source o f preparation and continuing
p rofessional development: Leadership.

Item Content

On-the-Job
Work
Experience

Mentor/
C ollegial
Relations

Professional
Readings/
Self-Study

14. Knowing when to
delegate

56

8

10

20

3

15. Adjust lead ersh ip
s ty le to f i t th e needs
o f the s itu a tio n

52

11

9

22

3

16. Be a good problem so lv er

53

9

9

24

4

17. A b ility to g ath er and
analyze d ata re : cogni­
tiv e , a ffe c tiv e and
clim ate needs o f the
building

26

6

15

41

11

18. Be v ision o rien ted and
aid s ta f f 1n longrange planning

17

8

19

46

7

19. Keep a b re a st o f c u rren t
research and tren d s In
education

2

1

59

33

4

20. Be adept a t c o n flic t
management

47

7

8

30

5

21. Have good w ritte n and
oral communication s k i l l s

32

3

13

19

30

22. Involve o th e rs appropri­
a te ly 1n d ecisio n making

50

11

8

25

4

23. Develop sense o f team­
work among th e s ta f f

49

14

7

24

3

24. Apply v a lid research
findings to school
p ra c tic e

12

2

39

32

12

Workshop/
Conference

U niversity
Course

86

For

the

role

category

Management, th e p r in c ip a l

of

S taff

Developm ent/P erso nnel

sources o f pre par at io n were On-the-Job

Experience (percentages ranged from 14% t o 55%), Workshop/Conference
(percentages ranged from 20% t o 39%),

and Professional

Readings/

Self-Study (percentages ranged from 5% to 28%) (see Table 4.35).
Summary
In t h i s cha pter d ata were presented on c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the
sample o f secondary school p r i n c i p a l s , including gender, age, degree
held, c u r r e n t and primary assignment, years of experience,

student

enrollment o f the school d i s t r i c t in which they were employed, and
th e l ik e l ih o o d of t h e i r r e t i r i n g within the next f i v e y e a r s .

A

d e s c r i p t i o n of background of respondents in the study was presented.
Data f o r each o f th e f i v e research questions were reporte d.
The resear ch questions f o r which data were reported are:
1.

What i s the range o f secondary p r i n c i p a l s ’ perception s of

th e importance of s e le c te d ad m in istr ato r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ?
tm»

nnaw

nj i i i c i c i i v c o

c a io i

atnviitj

^ c s * v / i i u a i jf

pi m w i p a i d

icyaiuiny

t h e i r per ce ptions about a d m in is tr a to r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s , comparing the
variables

of gender,

age ,

length

of

service

as

a seco n d ary

p r i n c i p a l , and the s iz e and l o c a tio n of t h e i r school?
Six

research

hypotheses

were

tested

to

determ ine

what

d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d among s e c o n d a ry p r i n c i p a l s r e g a r d i n g t h e i r
perceptions comparing th e r e l a t e d v a r i a b le s .

87

Table 4 .3 5 .--Percentage d is tr ib u tio n o f the primary source o f preparation and continuing
professional development: S ta ff Development/Personnel Management.
On-the-Job
Work
Experience

Mentor/
C ollegial
Relations

Professional
Readings/
Self-Study

Workshop/
Conference

14

4

28

35

15

48

14

9

22

5

59

10

5

22

3

23

16

17

39

3

48

11

12

25

3

30. Ensure th a t s t a f f development programs are
based on te a c h e rs’ needs

37

10

17

31

3

31. Encourage teach ers to tr y
new Ideas w ithout fe a r
o f re p ris a l fo r f a ilu r e

55

10

12

20

1

55

11

10

20

1

33. A b ility to take c o rre c ­
tiv e actio n on personnel
m atters to m aintain
q u a lity and e ffe c tiv en e ss

43

13

9

29

5

34. A b ility to a s s i s t s t a f f
members 1n s e ttin g
r e a l i s t i c and appropriate
goals fo r growth and
Improvement

33

10

10

38

6

Item Content

25. Be able to understand
and apply a d u lt le a rn ­
ing and m otivation
theory
26. S k ills 1n building
upon stren g th s of
s t a f f members
27. A b ility to a r b itr a te
d isputes and agreements
28. A b ility to assess Inservice needs and seek
resources to f i l l
those needs
29. Encourage leadership
by s t a f f and students

32. Conduct s t a f f meeting
which teach ers perceive
to be re le v a n t and
Informative

U niversity
Course

88
3.

What do secondary p r i n c i p a l s perceive t o be t h e i r degree of

need f o r f u r t h e r prep ar at ion and continuing prof es siona l development
in each o f th e se le cted r o le s / f u n c t io n s ?
4.

What d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t among secondary p r i n c i p a l s regarding

t h e i r professional-development needs,

comparing the

variables

of

gender, age, length o f s e rv i c e as a secondary p r i n c i p a l , and siz e
and l o c a ti o n o f t h e i r school?
Six

research

hypotheses

were

tested

to

determine

what

d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d among s e c o n d a ry p r i n c i p a l s r e g a r d i n g t h e i r
perceptions comparing the r e l a t e d v a r i a b l e s .
5.

What do secondary p r in c ip a ls

identify

as

source o f pr ep ar ation and continuing pr ofes sio na l
each of the s e le cted a d m in i s tr a to r r o le s / f u n c t i o n s ?

their

primary

development for

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This ch apter comprises four major s e c tio n s :
pu r p o se and methods,

(b)

major f i n d i n g s

conclusions, and (d) educational
Major f in d in g s

and t h e i r

(a)

summary of

and d i s c u s s i o n ,

(c)

im plications and recommendations.

relationship to

fin ding s

from previous

s tu d ie s are also discussed in t h i s chapter .
Summary o f Purpose and Methods
Purpose
The r e s e a r c h e r ’ s purposes in t h i s study were to (a) examine the
perceptions and needs of secondary school p r in c ip a ls with regard to
a se le c te d group of p r o f i c i e n c i e s and s k i l l s of the p r in c ip a ls h i p ;
(b) examine the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between thes e perceptions and needs
and s e le c t e d f a c t o r s such as gender, age, years of experience as a
principal,
d istrict,

degree held,
measured

in

assignment l e v e l ,
terms

of

pupil

and s iz e of the school

population

i d e n t i f y th e most valuable source of pre pa ration

size;

and

(c)

and continuing

professional development for each of the sele cted r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ,
as perceived by secondary school p r i n c i p a l s .

The study was designed

to improve the understanding of the perceived needs of Michigan

89

90
secondary p r i n c i p a l s

for

pr ep ar ation

and continuing

professional

development, to respond t o t h e i r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s as p r i n c i p a l s .
The s ig n i f i c a n c e o f the study comes as a consequence of Public
Act 163, which r e q u i r e s the c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f school
in Michigan.

I t i s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t th e r e s u l t s of th e study will

help policy makers i d e n t i f y the
adm inistrator

preparation

standards of q u a l i t y needed for

pr og rams,

per ceptions o f the p r a c t i t i o n e r s .

taking

to

modify

programs

into

These sta nd ards,

influence co llege and u n i v e r s i t y school
programs

a d m inistrators

to

account

the

in t u r n , will

a d m in is t r a to r pre par at io n

better

a d m i n i s tr a to rs f o r the v a r i e t y o f r o le s

prepare

prospective

required o f a secondary

school p r i n c i p a l .
A q u es tio n n air e composed of four major r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of the
p r i n c i p a l s h i p , drawn from a review of th e l i t e r a t u r e and d is cussio ns
with p r a c t i c i n g secondary school p r i n c i p a l s , was co n s tr u c te d .

The

r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f th e p r in c ip a l s h i p included in the questi onnair e
were:

(a) I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision, (b) Curriculum Development and

imp iciiicuuat iuii)

/ ~ \

i

ucaucidiiip,

j

anu

m v

\ uj

r4..*.rr

otai i l/cvc lupmcn t/ rei auiinc i

Management.
Subjects
Three hundred twelve high school p r in c ip a ls responded to the
qu e s ti o n n a ir e .

These respondents represented approximately 30% of

a l l public secondary school p r in c ip a ls in Michigan employed f o r the
year 1987-88.

The sample was s y s t e m a ti c a l ly se le c te d through a two-

stage p r o po rt io nate s t r a t i f i e d sampling procedure.

School d i s t r i c t s

91
within each in te rm ed iat e school

d i s t r i c t were s e le c t e d

first

to

r e p r e s e n t th e d i v e r s i t y o f geographical areas and the various sizes
o f school d i s t r i c t s in Michigan.

Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s were

then drawn from each s e l e c t e d school d i s t r i c t to form the sample of
th e study.
Ninety-two percent (286) of the respondents were males and 7%
(23) were females.
years of age.

Of these respondents, 66% were between 30 and 50

The corresponding percentages in th e t o t a l population

o f Michigan secondary school p r i n c i p a l s were 90% f o r males and 10%
f o r females, with an ove rall average age of 48 y e a r s .
academic

pr ep aratio n

and ye ar s

of

experience

on

As f o r t h e i r
the

jo b,

the

m ajori ty o f respondents (65%) held a m aster ’ s degree, whereas 22%
had a s p e c i a l i s t degree and 12% had e i t h e r an Ed.D.
degree.

or a Ph.D.

The average years o f experience of the sample of secondary

school p r i n c i p a l s ranged from 0-5 years t o 20 or more y ear s.
As

for

assignment

level,

86% of

the

sample

of

secondary

p r i n c i p a l s had t h e i r c u r r e n t and primary assignment a t the j u n i o r
and s e n io r high l e v e l s ,

and 54% came from school d i s t r i c t s

with

s tuden t populations ranging between 2,400 and 120,000; 42% came from
school d i s t r i c t s with studen t populations ranging between 75 and
2,400.

As f o r the l i k e lih o o d of r e t i r i n g , th e r e s u l t s of t h i s study

revealed t h a t 21% o f th e secondary p r i n c i p a l s were "very l i k e l y " to
retire

in the next f iv e yea rs and t h a t

r e t i r i n g within t h a t same f iv e - y e a r period.
(36%)

suggest t h a t

a significant

15% could

"possibly"

be

Those f ig u r e s combined

proportion o f

secondary

p r i n c i p a l s (one of th r e e ) will be "new" t o th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p .

school

92

Measures
The Instrument developed f o r t h i s study included 34 questions
describing

four

p r in c i p a l s h i p :

m ajor

roles/functions

associated

with

the

(a) I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision, (b) Curriculum Devel­

opment, (c) Leadership, and (d) S t a f f Development/Personnel Manage­
ment.

Each o f the questions under th e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s req uire d a

t h r e e - p a r t response t h a t included th e importance o f t h e r o l e s / f u n c ­
t i o n s as perceived by p r i n c i p a l s , the p r i n c i p a l s ’ personal needs for
f u r t h e r prepara tion and continuing pro fessional development, and the
most valuable source of p r ep aratio n .

In ad d iti o n ,

the instrument

included an e ig h t-ite m background s ectio n i d e n t i f y i n g the gender,
age,

ye ar s

of experience,

degree held,

assignment

level,

school

d i s t r i c t s i z e , and the secondary p r i n c i p a l s ’ l i k e l i h o o d of r e t i r e ­
ment within the next f i v e y e a r s .
Procedures
The q u e s ti o n n a ir e ,

to g e th e r with

an explanatory

letter

and

retu rn post Cara, was mailed to the s e le cted sample of secondary
school p r i n c i p a l s .

A follow-up reminder l e t t e r and a second copy of

the survey were mailed to the p r i n c i p a l s who had not returned the
post card.

The d a t a - c o l l e c t i o n process was completed in about th re e

months.
Data Analysis
The d ata gathered from the instrument were analyzed mainly by
using the S t a t i s t i c a l

Package f o r th e Social

Sciences

(SPSS/PC)

93
data-analysis

system.

Specifically,

subprograms

of

variance

in

descriptive

w ith

posteriori

statistics

and one-way a n a l y s i s

contrasts,

namely Student-Newman-Keuls, were u s e d .

Also,

the

r e l i a b i l i t y program from SPSS/X was used to examine th e r e l i a b i l i t y
o f th e s c a l e s .

The program y i e l d s Cronbach alpha c o e f f i c i e n t s for

each s c a l e , and the c o e f f i c i e n t s were used t o judge the q u a l i t y of
th e s c a l e s .
Ha.ior Findings and Discussion
In t h i s s e c tio n , major fin ding s regarding th e iss ue s of t h i s
study,

in accordance with the questions and hypotheses s t a t e d

in

Chapters I and IV, are discussed and compared, where ap p r o p riate, to
previous r e le v a n t re se ar ch f in d i n g s .

The fin dings o f t h i s study are

th e r e s u l t s o f two types of analyses:

d e s c r i p t i v e and comparisons

between sample means.
Research Question 1
Hhat i s th e range o f secondary pr in cip als * perceptions o f th e
importance o f s e le c te d ad m in istr ato r r o le s / f u n c t i o n s ?
The

descriptive

analysis

of

the

data

showed

that

all

r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s considered in t h i s study were perceived by secondary
school p r i n c i p a l s as very important to t h e i r jobs
each s c ale was g r e a t e r than 4 . 0 ) .
roles/functions,
Instructional

the

analysis

Supervision

were

(mean score on

However, comparing thes e major
revealed

that

relatively

Leadership

perceived

as

and
more

important than Curriculum Development and Implementation and S t a f f
Development/Personnel Management.

This finding was c o n s i s t e n t with

94
the

e f f e c t i v e schools l i t e r a t u r e , which has emphasized the r o l e of

th e

p r in c ip a l

as an i n s t r u c t i o n a l

le a d e r

Weber (1971),

Brookover and Lezotte

Mortimer and

Sammons (1987),

for

in

(1977),

Edmonds

example,

found

schools are c h a r a c t e r iz e d by strong p r in c ip a l
exp e c ta tio n s .

effective

schools.

(1978),

that

and

effective

lead er sh ip and high

I f p r i n c i p a l s are t o influenc e studen t achievement,

they must have an influ en ce on the teaching s t r a t e g i e s t h a t enhance
le a r n i n g .

They must f re q u e n t ly monitor student progress and help

te a c h e r s make adjustments when achievement does not meet expected
outcomes.
While prepara tio n in Leadership and I n s t r u c t io n a l
skills

andconcepts seems to be

exp ec tations o f secondary school

Supervision

what i s more c o n s is t e n t with r o le
principals,

the r e s u l t s of

this

study suggest t h a t co n s id e ratio n should also be given to pr eparation
in S t a f f Development/Personnel Management and Curriculum Development
and Implementation (mean score was g r e a t e r than 4 . 0 ) .

This supports

the fin dings o f Greenfield (1982), McPherson and Buehr (1979), and
r

•» k mm

tawci

« m

J

anu

o n c a i i ut i

/ 1

fl7 A

V 19

1

>

«.,U a

mi u

1 ^ «

a u v

4 »* ** 1 11 ^4

imwiuucu

iucii v i i icu

r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of p r i n c i p a l s to include i n s t r u c t i o n and curriculum
development and s ta f f /p e r s o n n e l fu nctio ns.
o f 60 " e f f e c t i v e "

s e n io r high school

S im ila rly , in th e study

principals

by the National

Association of Secondary School P r in c ip a l s (1979), i t was found t h a t
p r i n c i p a l s p r i o r i t i z e d t h e i r r o le r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s as follows:

(a)

program d evelopm ent,

and

including

instructional

leadership

curriculum; (b) personnel, including s t a f f development, r e c r u i t i n g ,
and e valuation; and (c) school management.

The finding t h a t
roles/functions
important

of

but

to

secondary school

principals

Curriculum Development
a

lesser

degree

than

and
th e

identified

the

Implementation

as

roles/functions

of

Leadership and I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision may be explained p a r t l y by
th e f a c t t h a t many l a r g e r Michigan school d i s t r i c t s have f u l l - t i m e
curriculum d i r e c t o r s who e i t h e r assume the e n t i r e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for
t h i s r o l e or support and a s s i s t the p r in c ip a l in t h i s ar ea.
In r e v i e w i n g
I n s t r u c t io n a l
a n aly s is

the

Supervision

specific
and

item s

Leadership

within
roles,

showed t h a t th e highest-ranked individual

each
th e

of

the

descriptive

r o l e areas of

importance were:
1.

Develop sense o f teamwork among s t a f f .

2.

Be a good problem solv er.

3.

Maintain t h a t a l l

stu den ts can lear n and expect them to

succeed.
4.

Have good w r i tt e n and oral communication s k i l l s .

5.

Know when t o d e leg ate.
P a~ —
aH
a t r—n ..........
n f l i—
rt
~' a- rn t- —

m a n a nj o m—
o n t- -

7.

Involve ot her s ap p r o p riate ly in dec is ion making.

8.

Knowledge of l a t e s t research r e l a t e d t o i n s t r u c t i o n .

9.

Be visio n o rie nte d and aid s t a f f in long-range planning.

10.

Encourage tea ch er s to use i n s t r u c t i o n a l techniques r e le v a n t
to c u r r i c u l a r o b je c t iv e s and research-based p r i n c i p l e s of
le arning.

11.

Use o f goal

setting

involvement of s t a f f .

to

improve

instruction

and

the

96
Again,

these

results

literatu re,

which

has

achievement,

principals

role.

supported

suggested
should

the

th at,

take

an

effective

schools

influence

student

to

instructional

leadersh ip

The development of a sense o f teamwork among s t a f f i s a

lead er sh ip

skill

roles/functions

that

ranked

first

of p r in c i p a ls h i p s

in

importance

addressed

in

this

among th e

34

study.

To

influenc e studen t achievement, p r i n c i p a l s must work to g e t h e r with
staff

members

skills,

toward

d e le g a ti o n ,

this
and

end.

staff

Communication,
support

were

also

problem-solving
identified

as

important r o le s perceived by the secondary school p r i n c i p a l s in t h i s
study.
Also,

to

influence s t u d e n t s ’ achievement,

to d a y ’ s p r i n c i p a l s

must be able to lead and support the changes needed through s t a f f
support, communication, and problem so lving.

However, the r o l e s /

function s t h a t ranked r e l a t i v e l y the l e a s t important among th e 34
r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s considered were:
1.

The a b i l i t y

to

understand and apply a d u lt

l earning

and

motivation theory,
2.

A b i l i t y to disa ggre gate and examine t e s t score da ta to make
recommendations f o r curriculum r e v i s i o n .

3.

Use of t e s t scores t o recommend changes in i n s t r u c t i o n a l
program.

4.

Apply v alid research findings to school p r a c t i c e .

5.

A b i l i t y to asses s in - s e r v i c e needs and seek resources to
f i l l those needs.

97
6.

A b il i t y t o ga th e r and analyze d a t a r e : c o g n i t i v e , a f f e c t i v e
and climate needs o f the buil di ng.

The need f o r p r i n c i p a l s t o be knowledgeable and s k i l l e d

to

apply a d u lt lear nin g and motivation theory and re se arch f in dings to
school p r a c t i c e ,

use o f t e s t

scores

f o r curriculum r e v i s i o n

and

i n s t r u c t i o n a l development, and s t a f f i n s e r v ic e ar e among th e areas
t h a t have been promoted in the l i t e r a t u r e .

It

appeared in t h i s

study t h a t secondary school p r i n c i p a l s were not y e t f u l l y r e a l i z i n g
how to function in t h e s e area s or how they a f f e c t school

success

when analyzing t h e i r perceptions of the importance o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l
supervision

and l e a d e r s h i p

sk ills

of the p r in c ip a ls h ip .

In

comparing th e highest - and lowest-ranked individual r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s
of the p r i n c i p a l s h i p ,

it

must be kept

in mind t h a t

all

roles/

function s were perceived to be important (mean score g r e a t e r than
4.0) and t h a t th e r e was a d if f e r e n c e of only .79 between t h e mean of
the highest-ranked individual r o l e / f u n c t i o n (No. 23: Develop sense
o f teamwork among s t a f f ;

mean -

4.87)

and t h e

low est-ranked

individual r o l e / f u n c t i o n (No. 25: Be ab le t-0 understand and apply
a d u l t l ear n in g and motivation theory; mean ■ 4.03).
Research Question 2
What d if f e r e n c e s e x i s t among secondary p r i n c i p a l s regarding
t h e i r p e rc e p tio n s about a d m in is tr a to r r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ,
comparing th e v a r i a b l e s o f gender, age, length o f s e r v i c e as a
secondary p r i n c i p a l , and t h e s i z e and l o c a tio n o f t h e i r school?
In

all

f o u r m ajor r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s

of

the

p rincipalship

addressed in t h i s study, females considered the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s to
be more

important

than

did

their

male

c o u n te r p a r ts .

However,

98

s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found only f o r the two major r o l e s /
f unctions of

I n s t r u c t io n a l

and Implementation.

Supervision and Curriculum Development

These d i f f e r e n c e s can be explained p a r t l y by

the f a c t t h a t a higher percentage o f females (30%) than males (11%)
had earned e i t h e r a Ph.D. or an Ed.D. degree.

The d ata c o l l e c t e d in

t h i s study als o suggest t h a t th e level of degree held influenc ed, to
a c e r t a i n e x t e n t , the p r i n c i p a l s ’ per ceptions o f th e importance of
the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s .
As f o r

age,

no

significant

d if f e r e n c e s

were

found

in

the

percep tion s o f secondary school p r i n c i p a l s regarding the importance
o f t h e f o u r major r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s
considered in t h i s study.
o th e r

interacting

among t h e

f o u r age groups

This may be explained by th e e f f e c t of

factors,

such as degree

held

experience as a secondary school p r i n c i p a l .
ye ar s of experience as a p r i n c i p a l ,

and/or yea rs

of

When considering the

differences

in how secondary

p r i n c i p a l s perceived th e importance of the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f the
principalship

emerged

for

p r in c ip a ls

who

had

secondary school p r i n c i p a l s f o r 11 to 15 y ear s.
category

of

experience

perceived

the

been

employed

as

P r in c ip a ls in t h i s

roles/functions

were

more

important than did respondents who were in the ca t e g o r ie s of higher
or lower y e a r s of experience.
of the degree held,

secondary

S im ila rly , when examining th e e f f e c t
school

principals

who had earned

e i t h e r an Ed.D. or a Ph.D. degree perceived the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s to
be more important than did those who held a s p e c i a l i s t or a m aster ’s
degree.

These d if f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t f o r the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s

99
of

Curriculum

Development

and

Implementation

and

Staff

Development/Personnel Management.
It

is

als o

interesting

primary assignment was

at

that

th e

principals

s en io r

high

whose
level

c u r re n t

and

perceived

the

r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of the p r in c i p a ls h i p to be more important than did
those a t

ot her assignment

levels.

However,

s i g n i f i c a n t o n ly f o r t h e r o l e / f u n c t i o n
Personnel Management.
larger

school

th e d i f f e r e n c e

was

o f S t a f f Development/

I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g als o t h a t th e p r i n c i p a l s in

districts

(30,000 studen ts or more)

perceived

the

r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision, Curriculum Development
and Implementation, and S t a f f Development/Personnel Management t o be
more important than did those
30,000 s tu d e n ts .

in school

districts

of l e s s

than

This d i f f e r e n c e can be explained by the f a c t t h a t ,

within l a r g e r d i s t r i c t s , th e r e are more support s t a f f , s p e c i a l i s t s ,
and community pressure than t h e r e are in smaller school d i s t r i c t s .
However, none of these d i f f e r e n c e s was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t .
Research Question 3
What do secondary p r in c ip a ls p erceiv e t o be t h e i r degree of
need f o r f u r t h e r p r e p a r a t i o n and c o n t i n u i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l
development 1n each o f th e s e le c te d r o le s /f u n c tio n s ?
Secondary

school

principals,

on

the

average,

identified

a

moderate need f o r f u r t h e r pre pa ration and continuing pr ofessional
development in a l l the s e le c te d r o le s / f u n c t io n s of th e p r in c ip a ls h i p
(mean s c o r e on most s c a l e s

was l e s s

th a n

3.5).

C u r r ic u lu m

Development and Implementation was the highest-ranked area of need
f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g and pr ofes sio na l development, although i t was

100
perceived as having th e

relatively

least

importance as

a role/

function of the p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
The da ta suggest t h a t secondary school

p r i n c i p a l s might not

have f e l t as adequate in t h i s area as in the o th e r area s, such as
Leadership,

Instructional

Personnel Management.

Supervision,

Perhaps t h i s

and S t a f f Development/

i s because p r i n c i p a l s do not

have as much individual control over curriculum development as they
do over i n s t r u c t i o n and the other r o le s of the p r i n c i p a l s h i p .

The

n e x t - h i g h e s t - r a n k e d need f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g and p r o f e s s i o n a l
development

was

in

Principals

r an ked

the
this

area

of

Instructional

role/function

as

r e l a t i v e l y more needed than other r o l e s .

very

Supervision.
im portant

and

As f o r S t a f f Development/

Personnel Management, t h i s r o l e was not ranked as having e i t h e r high
im p o rta n c e o r need f o r f u r t h e r p r e p a r a t i o n .

I t may be t h a t

secondary

sources

school

universities

principals

depend

and p r o f e s s i o n a l

on

ou ts ide

organizations

to

such

design

as

staff-

development o p p o r t u n i t i e s .
When

examining

the

individual

roles/functions

of

th e

p r i n c ip a ls h i p addressed in t h i s study, the highest-ranked r o le s in
terms o f need f o r f u r t h e r pre pa ration were:
1.

Knowledge o f l a t e s t research r e l a t e d to i n s t r u c t i o n .

2.

Knowledge about thinking and research r e l a t e d to c u r r i c u l a r
needs of s tuden t.

3.

Encourage teachers t o use i n s tr u c tio n a l techniques r elevan t
to c u r r i c u l a r o b je c tiv e s and research-based p r i n c i p l e s of
le ar n in g .

101

4.

Aid s t a f f in as suring curriculum i s app lic a b le to s k i l l s
and a b i l i t i e s prese nt stu den ts will need as a d u l t s .

5.

Coordinate curriculum'development within th e bu ilding.

P r in c i p a l s

may not

have

th e

time

or

necessary

access

to

rese ar ch t o keep c u r r e n t with the importance and a p p l i c a t i o n s o f the
on-going educational re se ar ch r e l a t e d t o curriculum development and
instruction.
I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note f u r t h e r t h a t the f i v e lowest-ranked
r o l e s in terms o f needs were r e l a t e d prim arily t o Leadership and
S t a f f Development/Personnel Management.
1.

Encourage t e a c h e r s t o t r y

They were:
new i d e a s w i t h o u t

f e a r of

r e p r i s a l or f a i l u r e .
2.

Have good w r i tt e n and oral communication s k i l l s .

3.

Adjust l e a d e r s h ip s t y l e t o f i t the needs of th e s i t u a t i o n .

4.

Be a good problem s o lv e r .

5.

Student time on t a s k .

6.

A b i l i t y to a r b i t r a t e di sp utes and agreements.

7.

Involve oth er s ap p r o p ria te ly in decisio n making.

8.

Develop sense of teamwork among th e s t a f f .

9.

Maintain t h a t a l l

stu de nts can lear n and expect them to

succeed.
Secondary

school

principals

perceived

less

of

a

need

for

pr ep aratio n in the areas of communication and decision-making s k i l l s
and in maintaining th e climate t h a t a l l stu de nts can l e a r n .
interesting

that

these

role/fu n ctio n

areas

were

among

I t is
the

102
highest-ranked areas o f importance.

I t appears t h a t p r i n c i p a l s f e l t

conf id ent and well prepared in these ar eas.
It

is

im portant

to

m e n ti o n ,

however,

that

most

of

the

r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p addressed in the study f e l l
within th e "moderate need" category
3.5).

(mean scores were l e s s

than

As with importance, i t must be noted t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e in

means between the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ranked highes t in terms o f need
(No. 8: Knowledge o f research r e l a t e d to i n s t r u c t i o n ; mean * 3.69)
and the

role/function

ranked

lowest

in

terms

of need

(No.

Encourage teachers t o t r y new ideas without f e a r of r e p r i s a l

31:
or

f a i l u r e ; mean * 2.70) was only .89.
Research Question 4
What d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t among secondary p r i n c i p a l s regarding
t h e i r professional-development needs, comparing th e v a r i a b le s
of gender, age, length of s e r v ic e as a secondary p r i n c i p a l , and
s i z e and l o c a ti o n o f t h e i r school?
When examining the need f o r f u r t h e r development by gender,

it

was found t h a t males perceived higher needs f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g
than

did

females

in

the

role/function

areas

of

C u rric ulu m

Development and I m p le m e n ta tio n and S t a f f Develo pm ent/Perso nnel
Management.

As f o r the r o l e / f u n c t i o n o f I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision,

females expressed higher needs f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g than did males.
However, no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found between
males and females in terms o f need f o r pro fessiona l development.
As f o r age, secondary p r i n c i p a l s who were l e s s than 40 year s of
age

expressed

prof es sion al

more

of

development

a

need

in the

for

train in g

r o le s / f u n c t io n s

and
of

continuing
I n s tr u c t io n a l

103

S upervision,

C u r r ic u lu m

Development

and

Implementation,

Leadership than did thos e who were 41 ye ar s of age or o ld e r .

and
These

fin ding s may be due t o the f a c t t h a t younger p r i n c i p a l s are us uall y
less

experienced

and have probably

had

fewer

f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g and profe ssional development.
however,

that

none

of

the

differences

opportunities

for

I t should be noted,
related

to

age

was

s ta t i s t i c a l l y significant.
S i m ila rly , when examining th e years o f experience as r e l a t e d to
their

needs

for

further

training,

principals

with

10 ye ar s

of

experience or l e s s as a secondary school p r in c ip a l expressed higher
needs f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g

and pro fe ssi onal

development than did

p r i n c i p a l s with 11 t o 20 years o f experience.

P r in c i p a l s with more

than 20 ye ar s of experience expressed r e l a t i v e l y higher needs f o r
further training

in most

o f the

roles/functions.

This may be

p a r t i a l l y explained by the f a c t t h a t a lower percentage of th e ol d er
p r i n c i p a l s held e i t h e r a Ph.D. or an Ed.D. degree.

However, none of

th e s e d i f f e r e n c e s was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t .
When examining p r i n c i p a l s ’ needs f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g by type
o f degree held, i t appeared t h a t secondary school p r i n c i p a l s with a
m a s te r ’ s or
pr of es siona l
degree.

a sp ecialist

degree

expressed

higher

ne ed s

for

development than did those with a Ph.D. or an Ed.D.

Again, however, none of thes e d i f f e r e n c e s was s t a t i s t i c a l l y

significant.
S im il arl y ,

no s t a t i s t i c a l l y

significant

differences

in

were found among p r i n c i p a l s in va r io u s- siz e d school d i s t r i c t s

need
for

104
any of th e four broad c a t e g o r ie s o f r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s .

However, i t is

an i n t e r e s t i n g finding t h a t p r i n c i p a l s in l a r g e r school d i s t r i c t s
expressed r e l a t i v e l y higher needs f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g in th e areas
of Leadership and S t a f f Development/Personnel Management than did
those in smaller d i s t r i c t s .
Research Question 5
What do secondary p r in c ip a ls i d e n t i f y as t h e i r primary source
o f p re p a ra tio n and continuing p rofession al development fo r each
o f t h e s e le c te d a d m in istra to r r o le s /f u n c tio n s ?
When secondary school p r i n c i p a l s were asked t o i d e n t i f y t h e i r
p r im a r y

source

of

preparation

and

continuing

professional

development, u n i v e r s i t y / c o l l e g e pr ep aratio n received l e s s than 10%
response f o r 27 of the 34 r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s .

S im il a rly ,

college/

u n i v e r s i t y prepara ti o n rep rese nted 9% or l e s s o f th e responses for
10 of th e

11 areas

exception was the

ranked highest
role/function

communication s k i l l s ,

of

in terms

of

importance;

Have good w r i tt e n

and

areas

ranked

oral

in which 30% of the responses i d e n t i f i e d the

u n i v e r s i t y / c o l l e g e as a primary source f o r such p r e p a r a tio n .
th e

the

hi ghest

in

terms

of

need,

As for

university/college

received 10% or l e s s of the responses f o r four of th e f i v e areas
ranked h ig h e s t in terms of need for f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g .

Knowledge

about th i n k i n g and research r e l a t e d to curriculum needs o f student
received 13% of th e responses as an area of need.
The highe st responses in the u n i v e r s i t y / c o l l e g e category were
30% f o r Item 21 (Have good w r i t t e n and oral communication s k i l l s ) ,
21% f o r Item 13 ( S k i l l s in curriculum a r t i c u l a t i o n ) ,

and 15% for

105
Item 25

(Be a b l e t o u n d e r s t a n d and a p p ly a d u l t

learning

and

motivation th e o r y ).
When examining secondary school p rin c ip a ls * responses f o r the
primary source o f p r ep aratio n by th e areas o f th e se r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ,
it

was found t h a t ,

for

I n s t r u c t io n a l

Supervision

and Curriculum

Development and Implementation, th e highest response category was
workshop/conference (percentages ranged from 28% to 60%).
other

hand,

f o r Leadership

and

S taff

On the

D evelo pm ent/P ersonnel

Management, the high es t response category was on -th e-j ob experience
(percentages ranged from 21% t o 59%).
for

professional

The high es t response category

r e a d i n g s / s e l f - s t u d y were

ab r east o f c u r r e n t resear ch and tre nds

for

th e

roles:

in education,

Keep

apply valid

research f in dings to school p r a c t i c e , knowledge about thinking and
rese ar ch r e l a t e d t o c u r r i c u l a r needs of s tu d e n ts ,

and be able to

understand and apply a d u lt lea rning and motivation theory.
The r e s u l t s of t h i s study,
Peterson

and Finn (1985),

( 1 9 8 7 ),

and G r i f f i t h s

Pitner
et

al.

in p a r t ,

support th e f in din gs of

(1987), Hawley (1987),
(1989),

who

found

Achilles
that

the

c o l l e g e / u n i v e r s i t y a d m i n i s t r a t o r p r e p a r a t i o n programs a r e not
perceived t o be a primary source f o r preparing a d m i n ist r a t o rs to
f u l f i l l th e r o l e expec tat ions of the p r i n c i p a l s h i p .

As perceived by

the secondary p r i n c i p a l s in t h i s study, c o l l e g e / u n i v e r s i t y courses
are not well recognized as primary sources f o r most of the important
and needed r o le s of th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
r o l e expec tat ions

for principals

that

This may be due t o changing
have occurred

since

their

i n i t i a l p r e p a ra ti o n , or the preference of p r in c ip a ls to p a r t i c i p a t e

106

in a l t e r n a t i v e forms o f profe ssion al development such as workshops
r a t h e r than enro ll

in co ll eg e or u n i v e r s i t y courses.

One might

conclude t h a t the c o l l e g e / u n i v e r s i t y programs ar e not addressing
those r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s f o r which p r i n c i p a l s perceive more o f a need
f o r continuing pr of es sion al

development.

The low percentage of

response f o r u n i v e r s i t y / c o l l e g e preparation courses f o r most o f the
r o le s

indicates

that

secondary school

p r in c ip a ls might not

view

c o l l e g e / u n i v e r s i t y a d m in is t r a to r pr ep ar ation programs as r e le v a n t to
what t h e y p e r c e i v e o r d e s i r e
le a d e r s h ip .

for e ffe c tiv e

s e c o n d a ry

school

This may be due t o minimal linkages between c o l l e g e /

u n i v e r s i t y f a c u l t y and K-12 school a d m in istr a to rs .
Conclusions
In Chapter I ,
o u tlin e d

the iss ue s

and di scussed.

related

to e f f e c t i v e

The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

school

p r i n c i p a l s were c i t e d

school

success and student

as

among the

achievement.

schools were

and prepara ti o n

of

main c o n t r ib u t o r s

to

Limited

information

is

a v a i l a b l e in t h i s area t o a s s i s t policy makers to provide d i r e c t i o n
f o r c o l l e g e s ’ and u n i v e r s i t i e s ’ school

a d m in is t r a t o r

programs.

This study was undertaken to b e t t e r

im portant

areas

principalship.
the

range

prin cip als

related

They ar e:

to

the

for

understand th re e
s e c o n d a ry

school

(a) the perceptions of p r i n c i p a l s about

and im p o rta n ce o f t h e i r
identify

Michigan

pre paration

further

job

roles,

preparation

(b)
and

the

needs

continuing

prof es sion al development to respond to t h e i r job r o l e s , and (c) what
p r i n c i p a l s i d e n t i f y as the primary source o f t h e i r prepara tion and

107

continuing profe ssional development.

The following conclusions are

suggested by the r e s u l t s .
1.

Secondary

school

principals,

in

ge n e r a l,

perceived

the

r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f I n s t r u c t i o n a l Supervision, Curriculum Development
and

Implementation,

Leadership,

and

Staff

Development/Personnel

Management addressed in t h i s study as very important f o r t h e i r jobs
as p r i n c i p a l s (mean scores ranged from 4.10 t o 4 .8 2 ).
Leadership

and

Instructional

Supervision

were

The r o le s of
perceived

as

r e l a t i v e l y more important than the r o le s of Curriculum Development
and Implementation and S t a f f Development/Personnel Management.

It

appeared t h a t secondary school p r i n c i p a l s in Michigan, in agreement
w i th f i n d i n g s o f p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h ,
Instructional

p e r c e i v e d L e a d e r s h i p and

Supervision as more r e l a t e d t o school

effectiveness

and studen t achievement and success.
2.

Secondary school

p rincipals,

in g e n e r a l ,

perceived a

moderate need f o r f u r t h e r continuing pro fessiona l development in the
r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f th e p r in c i p a ls h i p t h a t were addressed in t h i s
study (mean scores ranged from 2.70 to 3.69).

R e la t iv e ly higher

needs were expressed f o r the r o l e s of I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision and
Curriculum Development and Implementation.
3.

The a b i l i t y to apply ad ult lea rning and motivation theory

and research fin dings t o school p r a c t i c e ,

use of t e s t scores for

curriculum and i n s t r u c t i o n development, and s t a f f i n - s e r v i c e were
ranked r e l a t i v e l y among th e l e a s t important areas as perceived by
s e c o n d a ry

school

p rin cip als,

when

compared

to

all

other

108
r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of th e p r in c ip a ls h i p .

However, to develop a sense

o f teamwork among s t a f f , communication s k i l l s , p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g
s k i l l s , deleg ation and s t a f f support, and maintaining a climate t h a t
a l l studen ts can lear n and expecting them t o succeed were among the
most

important

principals.

roles

as

perceived

by

the

s e c o n d a ry

school

The above r e s u l t s supported th e notion o f the e f f e c t i v e

schools l i t e r a t u r e , which suggests t h a t th e i n s t r u c t i o n a l leadersh ip
role

of the

principal

is

significant

in

influencing

student

achievement and school success.
4.
ranked

Curriculum Development and Implementation was the highes tarea

of

need

for

further

training

and

professional

development, although i t was perceived as r e l a t i v e l y l e s s important
as a r o l e / f u n c t i o n .

However,

Instructional

Supervision

was

perceived as very important and r e l a t i v e l y more needed when compared
t o other r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s .

As f o r S t a f f Development/Personnel Man­

agement, t h i s r o l e was not ranked a t the top of e i t h e r importance or
need.
tant

**7

The Leadership r o le /f u n c t i o n was perceived as th e most impor­
hut rolatiwolw the le a st neeHprl for further oreoaration.

"'** *

5.

t V I « VI . w

—-

——
— —

t

I

Knowledge of th e l a t e s t research r e l a t e d to

c u r r i c u l a r needs o f s t u d e n t s , use o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l

instruction,
techniques

r e l e v a n t t o c u r r i c u l a r obje c ti v e s and research-based p r i n c i p l e s of
le a r n i n g , and curriculum development within the building were c i t e d
as the most needed areas f o r f u r t h e r pr ep ar at io n by secondary school
principals.

However,

problem-solving

skills,

leadership

style,

communication s k i l l s , and a b i l i t y to encourage te a c h e r s to t r y new

109
ideas without f e a r o f r e p r i s a l

or f a i l u r e were c i t e d

relatively

among th e l e a s t needed areas f o r f u r t h e r p r e p a ra tio n .
6.

When comparing secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ pe rce ptions of

th e importance and need f o r prepara tion in the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of
th e p r in c ip a l s h i p by gender, age, length o f s e rv ic e as a secondary
principal,

current

primary assignment

level,

and

s iz e

of

their

school d i s t r i c t , th e following r e s u l t s were noted:
Gender.

Females perceived a l l r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of th e p r i n c i ­

pa lsh ip as more important when compared t o males.

Differences were

s i g n i f i c a n t f o r I n s t r u c t i o n a l Supervision and Curriculum Development
and Implementation.

These d i f f e r e n c e s appeared to be r e l a t e d to

d i f f e r e n c e s in the education of the two genders.

Higher percentages

of females had e i t h e r a Ph.D. or an Ed.D. degree.
needs

for

further

p r e p a ra ti o n ,

males

perceived

As f o r t h e i r

more needs

than

females in the areas o f Curriculum Development/Personnel Management,
whereas

females

expressed

more

needs

for

the

role/function

of

I n s t r u c t io n a l Supervision.
Age.

In comparing various age groups, no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r ­

ences were found in the secondary school p r i n c i p a l s ’ per ce ptions of
th e importance of the four major r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s among the fo ur age
groups considered.

One would expect t h a t the importance o f r o le s

would increase with age.

However, in t h i s study, i t appeared t h a t

old e r p r i n c i p a l s had l e s s formal prepara tion than younger p r i n c i ­
pals.

Formal prepara tion in terms of degree held had an e f f e c t on

p r i n c i p a l s ’ p e rceptions.
tion,

As f o r t h e i r needs f o r f u r t h e r p repara ­

secondary p r i n c i p a l s

who were l e s s

than

40 year s

of

age

110

expressed more of a need f o r t r a i n i n g and continuing pr ofessional
development in the r o l e s of I n s t r u c t io n a l
Development and Implementation,
were 41 or o ld e r .

Supervision,

Curriculum

and Leadership than did those who

This might be r e l a t e d to t h e i r lack o f work

experience, or i t may support th e fin din gs in the l i t e r a t u r e t h a t
suggest t h a t c o l l e g e / u n i v e r s i t y a d m i n is tr a to r prepara tion programs
do not adequately prepare in d iv id u a ls f o r the p a r t i c u l a r r o l e s of
the p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
Length o f s e r v i c e as a secondary p r i n c i p a l .

In comparing the

groups o f p r i n c i p a l s with d i f f e r e n t yea rs o f experience,
found t h a t

secondary school

principals

with

11 to

it

15 yea rs

was
of

experience perceived the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of Curriculum Development
and Implementation and S t a f f Development/Personnel Management to be
more important
experience.

than did

principals

As f o r t h e i r

needs f o r

with

more or

less

further training,

ye ar s

of

secondary

school p r i n c i p a l s with 10 years o f experience or l e s s had a higher
need than did any of the o th e r groups, p a r t i c u l a r l y those with 11 to
20 ye ar s o f experience.

I t is i n t e r e s t i n g , however, t h a t p r i n c i p a l s

with more than 20 year s of experience expressed r e l a t i v e l y higher
needs f o r f u r t h e r p r e p a ra ti o n .

Again, t h i s might be due t o the f a c t

t h a t a lower percentage of o ld e r p r i n c i p a l s had e i t h e r an Ed.D. or a
Ph.D. degree.
Degree held.

The level of the degree held had a s i g n i f i c a n t

impact on th e perceptions of the importance of the r o le s / f u n c t i o n s
o f th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p .

Secondary school p r i n c i p a l s who held e i t h e r a

Ill
Ph.D. or an Ed.D. degree perceived the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s to be more
important than did those who held a s p e c i a l i s t or a m as ter’s degree.
The d i f f e r e n c e s were p a r t i c u l a r l y

significant

fo r the r o l e s /

f u n ctio n s o f Curriculum Development and Implementation and S t a f f
Development/Personnel Management.

As f o r t h e i r needs f o r f u r t h e r

t r a i n i n g , i t was observed t h a t secondary school p r i n c i p a l s who had a
m aster ’ s or a s p e c i a l i s t degree expressed higher needs f o r f u r t h e r
p r e p a ra ti o n than did those who held e i t h e r a Ph.D.

or an Ed.D.

degree.
C u r r e n t and p r im a r y a s s ig n m e n t l e v e l .
p r i n c i p a l s who had t h e i r

current

s e n io r

perceived

high

school

level

and primary
th e

Secondary

school

assignment

at

role/function

of

the
Staff

Development/Personnel Management as more important than did other
principals.

As f o r t h e i r

needs f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g ,

secondary

school p r i n c i p a l s who had t h e i r cu r ren t and primary assignment at
t h e s e n i o r / j u n i o r high level

had r e l a t i v e l y higher perceptions of

needs f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g than did those who had assignments at
vwiiei

icvc ij •

Size

of

school

district.

Secondary

school

principals

in

school d i s t r i c t s of 30,000 stu den ts or more perceived th e r o l e s /
fu nctio ns of I n s t r u c tio n a l

Supervision, Curriculum Development

and

Implementation,

Development/Personnel Management to

be

and S t a f f

more important than did those in smaller school d i s t r i c t s o f fewer
than 30,000

s tu dents .

As f o r

their

pr ep ar at ion

needs,

it

was

observed t h a t p r i n c i p a l s in the l a r g e r school d i s t r i c t s expressed

112
r e l a t i v e l y higher needs f o r f u r t h e r t r a i n i n g in Leadership and S t a f f
Development/Personnel Management.
7.

Across t h e f o u r broad c a t e g o r i e s o f r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s ,

secondary school p r i n c i p a l s received t h e i r most valuable t r a i n i n g
either

from w o r k s h o p s / c o n f e r e n c e s

or

on-the-job

experience.

Conversely, very few secondary school p r in c ip a ls received t h e i r most
valuable t r a i n i n g a t the u n i v e r s i t y / c o l l e g e l e v e l .

The percentages

o f r e s p o n s e s s u p p o r t i n g u n i v e r s i t y / c o l l e g e p r e p a r a t i o n as most
valuable were l e s s f o r most of the r o le s / f u n c t io n s (1% t o 30%) than
the percentages of responses f o r workshops/conferences (28% t o 60%)
or o n-th e -j ob experience (21% to 59%).

The r e se a r c h e r concluded

t h a t c u r r e n t l y employed secondary school p r i n c i p a l s perceived t h a t
the

u n iversity/college

sig n ifican t

adm inistrative

programs

were

in p r e p a r i n g them f o r t h e r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s

p r i n c i p a l s h i p considered

in t h i s

not

as

of the

study as were o th e r methods of

p r e p a ra ti o n .
Recommendations
In

this

study

the

r esear ch er

examined

the

percep tions

of

secondary school p r i n c i p a l s about t h re e important area s r e l a t e d to
the Michigan secondary school p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
th e perception s o f p r i n c i p a l s
t h e i r job r o l e s ,

(b)

th e

(a)

about the range and importance of

needs p r in c ip a ls

prepara tion and continuing profes sional
t h e i r job r o l e s ,

Those areas are:

identify

for

further

development to respond to

and (c) what p r i n c i p a l s i d e n t i f y as the primary

source o f t h e i r pr ep ar ation and pr ofessional development.

113
Based on th e r e s u l t s of t h i s study, th e following recommenda­
t i o n s are made.
For College and Univer sity Administrator
Preparation Programs
1.

It

i s recommended t h a t

Michigan t h a t

prepare

colleges

s e c o n d a ry

school

and u n i v e r s i t i e s
p rincipals

in

develop

a

mechanism t h a t will provide f o r the continual updating and r e v isio n
of

a d m in is tr a to r

prep ara ti on

courses

so

as

to

respond

to

the

i d e n t i f i e d r o le s and functions of the p r in c ip a l s h i p .
2.
prepare

It

is

recommended t h a t

a d m in is tr a to rs

co lleg es

formally

implement

and

a curriculum

committee f o r school a d m in is t r a t o r p rep ara ti on.
committee would include c o l l e g e / u n i v e r s i t y

adm inistrators.

committee would meet r e g u l a r l y

for

that

advisory

Such an advisory

faculty,

m ak er s, and p r a c t i c i n g school

the

universities

state

policy

The c u r r i c u l u m

purpose of

advising

and

recommending changes in the ad m in istr ato r pre par at ion program.
3.

It

is

recommended t h a t

the

college/university-based

a d m i n i s tr a t o r prepara ti o n program? consider and implement stro nge r
f i e l d - b a s e d components t o p r o v i d e p r o s p e c t i v e s e c o n d a r y school
principals

and o th e r

a d m in is trators

with c l i n i c a l

e x p e r i e n c e s t h a t f u r n i s h a more r e a l i s t i c

ad m in istr a ti v e

perspective

on t h e

principalship.
4.

It

is

recommended t h a t

the

college/university-based

a d m in is t r a t o r prepara ti o n programs expand o f f e r in g s f o r continuing
p r o f e s s i o n a l development f o r seco n d ary p r i n c i p a l s ,

based on a

114
needs-assessment model and th e expectation s f o r the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s
secondary p r i n c i p a l s must respond t o in schools.
For the Michigan Department
o f Education
1.

I t i s recommended t h a t the Michigan Department of Education

and th e S t a t e Board o f Education implement a mechanism to allow for
the

in volv em en t

ad m in is t r a t o rs

in

of

secondary

p e r i o d ic

school

review and

p rincipals
r e v is io n

of

Standards of Quality f o r Administrator P r ep ar atio n.

and
the

other

Michigan

Such a review

would include co nsid e ra tio n o f c l i n i c a l or f ie ld - b a s e d experiences,
such as an i n t e r n s h i p ,

as a condition o f a d m i n i s tr a t o r c e r t i f i c a ­

tion.
2.

I t i s recommended t h a t the Michigan Department of Education

provide professional-development o p p o r tu n iti e s t o secondary school
p r i n c i p a l s t h a t focus on the r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of the p r i n c i p a l s h i p ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y in the area o f curriculum development and i n s t r u c t i o n a l
s uper vision.
O

4*

T

Jk « n

MM A M m m A M r l n c l

it id Ictuiiiiiiciiucu

ttiat

4 Um U4 mU4
ciic

implement a system of p e riodic

H n M

ucpai

m
cimchc

program review f o r

4?
cm
m

»I M M ^ 4 M m

tuucotiun

ad m in istr ato r

prep aratio n programs every f iv e years.

Such a review should include

th e involvement of p r a c t i c i n g

a d m in istr a to rs

school

and f a c u l t y .

Renewal o f pr ep ar at ion programs should be based on t h i s system of
p e riodic program review.
4.

I t i s recommended

t h a t the Michigan Department of Education

develop and seek l e g i s l a t i v e funding f o r

a statew ide p r o f e s s i o n a l -

development program f o r secondary school p r i n c i p a l s and other school

115

administrators.

This

program would

be

similar

to

the

cu rre nt

program provided by Section 97 of the S t a t e School Aid Act.
initial

target

Its

audience f o r programs could be the one of thre e

p r i n c i p a l s new to t h e i r p o s it i o n s over t h e next t h r e e y e a r s .
For Local School D i s t r i c t s
1.

I t i s recommended t h a t local school d i s t r i c t s e s t a b l i s h an

o n - g o in g p r o f e s s i o n a l - d e v e l o p m e n t program f o r s e c o n d a r y school
p r i n c i p a l s and o t h e r a d m i n i s tr a to r s .

Such a program would use a

needs-assessment

focus

model

and

co uld

r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f the p r i n c i p a l s h i p ,
s u perv is io n,

(b)

on

the

including

curriculum development

and

(a)

four

major

instructional

implementation,

(c)

l e a d e r s h ip , and (d) s t a f f development/personnel management.
2.

It

is

recommended

that

local

c o o p e r a t i o n with c o l l e g e / u n i v e r s i t y

school

d istricts,

adm inistrator preparation

programs, e s t a b l i s h a p a r t n e r s h ip to provide c l i n i c a l
f o r prosp ec tive secondary school

in

principals.

i n te r n s h ip s

Such an i n t e rn s h i p

would allow p r in c ip a l candidates t o have f ie ld - b a s e d experiences in
the major r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s o f the p r in c i p a ls h i p and bridge the gap
between theory and p r a c t i c e .
For Future Research
In co nsidering f u tu r e resear ch as a r e s u l t of t h i s study, the
r e s e a r c h e r makes th e following recommendations:
1.

Consideration should be given t o r e p l i c a t i n g t h i s study but

including other r o l e s / f u n c t i o n s of secondary school p r i n c i p a l s , such

116
as

building

management,

community r e l a t i o n s ,

student

r e l a t i o n s , and influence with th e local school board.

and

parent

Also, i t is

recommended t h a t an open-ended question be Included in th e survey
t h a t would r e q u e s t

respondents to

id en tify additional

roles/

function s o f importance t o th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p , as well as needs f o r
f u r t h e r prepara tion or continuing profe ssion al development.
2.

I t i s recommended

t h a t a s im i l a r

study be conducted in

o th e r s t a t e s and then compared t o the f in dings o f t h i s study.
3.

I t i s recommended

t h a t t h e r e be an on-going u n i v e r s i t y -

based re se arch e f f o r t t o study th e changing r o l e ex pectati o ns for
secondary school p r i n c i p a l s , as well as t h e i r need f o r pr ofes sio nal
development.
4.

I t i s recommended t h a t a comparison study be conducted to

compare th e r e s u l t s o f t h i s study with those of th e p a r a l l e l study
on elementary school p r i n c i p a l s conducted by Kuckel (1990).

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A
THE INSTRUMENT

E
N M M T i a i m b c a n m r a e p r o f e s s h n a l tE v H D M n r « e b o r m a n o m s r b b a r v w b i m i

M IE C T iaB : U i t a d in t i n q u e s tio n n a ir e a r t v a rio u s r o la a /lv n e tlo M a i i o e l a t a d w ith th e p r in c i p a l s h ip . Tha a e jo r M l n g a f o r M a aa a r e : I I U I U I I M L RMCRVTSW; 2 1 Q B H I I I
(OELO nOfT M B BMlSOfTATlON; SI LEACERSUP: and 4} STIFF OEVELBMBnyPERSOBCL NMIAGBBff. For a a ch r o le d e s c r i p t o r . p le a s e p ro v id e t h r e e p ie c e * o f ln f o r a e tlo n : I I DFWTMEE 10
FOUR E l i AS f tf lC V M . ( P le a s e I n d ic a te hou ia p o r ta n t t M s r o la /fu n c tio n la to your s u c c e s s a s e p r i n c i p a l . P le a s e rmmbmr t h a t « a a r a looking f o r p a r c a p tio n * baaed on I n d iv id u a l s itu a ti o n s ) *
21 1 0 » PERSONAL MEED fOR RflH IBI PREPARATION M B GDNTDtfTB PROFESSIONAL CEVElfln O fT CPlaaM I n d ic a te th a d e g re e t o u h le h you f a a l a naad f o r f u r th e r c c n tlrailng p ro fa a a lo n a l developm ent
In o rd er to he a* e f f e c t lv a a a you vould I lk a t o h a In aa ch o f th a r o le / f u n c t io n s l l a t a d l t end 31 MOST VALUABLE SOURCE OF PREPARATION M B G O H T m tlB PROFESSIONAL OEWLOFtOfT ( P la e e a In d ic a te
v h ara you rec e iv ed th a g r s a t a t t a a o u n t o r th a a o a t v a lu a b le k in d o f In te r n e tlo n /c o n tIn u in g p r o fe s s io n a l d e v alo p o en t t o h a s u c c e s s fu l In aa ch r o le / f u n c t io n ) . C i r c l e o n ly one resp o n se fro *
each heed in g . PLEASE USE A #2 LEAD PENCIL AND CIRCLE ONLY ME ICSPOMSE IN EACH CATEGORY.

SAMPLE OUESntM

CATEGORY M O QUESTIONS

l lp R n M X ID YOUR ROLE AS PRINCIPAL
U t i r c i e o n ly one resp o n sei

—

I ^ m IM
S

w m u lr
L ltti.
b p v la il b p o tw n
4
J

R et P a r t a f
w
W
t a s w u n t Mm t I k I t
*
1

10UR PERSONAL ICEO PON
FURTHER PREPARATION AMP
O fT M ftN G PROFESSIONAL
( C i r c l e o n ly m

NDST VALUABLE SOURCE OF PBPABA1I0H MB
O W nM llIB PROFESSNMAL 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

,

resao n sal

MlfN H s d a ra ta
new
9
4
3
2

Na
1

*=* rM*anN ^ M. | M |
U n iv e rs ity Vkrhshep
C surso
C onference
9

4

0.

«.

R a o iln g a /
S e lf-S tu d y

C e lle g la l
R e la tio n e

M
Nark
C aper la n c e

3

2

1

MSTItCTHMAL SUPERVISHN
1.

The p r in c ip a l r e g u la r ly e v a lu a te * th a
I n s tr u c tio n p r o g ra s .

Q

» 6 ) 3 ■* *

,

4

S

2

Q

a i B BW M B QUESTIONS

M rtn c e
m rcw

o n ly n

V ery
( R o r ta n t

9

10 t o m

r d le a s p rin c ip a l

fio o n m

Ita d a ra U ly
L tttlo
Ia p o rta n t ta p o rta n c a

4

3

Not
te p o rte n t

2

Not P o r t o f
Ny i o b /
Never (to t t

1

TOUR PERSONAL * 1 0 PON
njRTtCR PREPARATION M O
ODNTMIOB PROFESSION*,
rrv n n m n fr
( C irc le o n ly on> resoonse!
H igh I W a r a ta
M-

M

No

*
i^na

—
----

hmv

9

4

3

2

1

nsnUCTXMAL SUPERVISION
1.

Tba p r in c ip a l la know ledgeable o f th e
l e t e e t re e o e rc h r e l a te d to I n s tr u c tio n
which enha n ces le a r n in g .

9

4

9

4

3

2

1

2.

The p r ln c lp e l u se e p o e t- e e tt in g t o lep ro u s
I n s t r u c t i o n end In v o lv es s t a f f a a n b e rs In
g o a l- s e tt in g tow ard wore e f f e c ti v e s c h o o ls .

9

4

9

4

3

2

1

3.

The p r ln c l p e l wees t e a t s c o re a and o th e r
o u tco n s-b o so d d a te in o rd e r t o reccaeend
a o d lf lc e tlo n /c h a n g e s In th a I n s tr u c tio n a l
p ro g re a .

9

4

9

4

9

2

1

«.

The p r in c i p a l answrae s tu d e n t t i e s an
te s t.

9

4

9

4

3

2

1

9.

The p r ln c lp e l encourages ts e c h e re t o wee
I n s t r u c t i o n a l te c h n i ques end s t r a t e g i e s
w hich e r e r e le v a n t to th a c u r r i c u l a r
o b j e c tiv e s end to rese a rch -b a sed
p r in c i p le s o f le a r n in g .

9

4

3

2

1

6.

The p r in c i p a l a a l n t s l n s t h a t a l l s tu d e n ts
can le a r n end e u p a c ts th ee t o succeed .

9

4

3

2

1

Tha p r in c i p a l r e g u la rly b rin g s I n s tr u c ­
tio n a l Iss u e s to th e f a c u lty f o r d is c u s s io n

9

4

3

2

1

7.

KST.VAU1ABLE SOURCE OP PREPARATION M B
CONTIIRflNB PROFESSUNM. CEmOMMVT

^ Ifia s a ^ ^ “
r**P0*, lr o la a a to a a l
N ontor
U n iv e rs ity Uortshop
R e a d in g s/
O o llo g U I
Course

Conforoneo

S a l t* l ta d y

R e la tio n s

On th n A
Norh
C xportoneo

9

4

9

2

1

yam personal ic e d for
CA TKnrr M o g u E s r n a

«»«««

i b i r c t o o n ly o a roaponsoi
Vary
N odorataty
L ittle
lo p o rta n t l a p i r ta n t to p o rto n c o
S
CUMtKUUM
8.

P.

10.

11.

12.

IS .

I

■BT.VAUIMLE SOURCE OF R E N M T M l M O
OONTtnniO PROFESMNM. OEVEUPICMT

fURIN R FREPMMTKM M B
OONTINUINB m n S N M L

tWQtTMCE IQ TOUR ROLE AS fVDCtPftL

Not
In p o rta n t

2

S

Not P a r t o f
Ny Jo b /
Navar Do I t

C i r c l e o n ly o n e roaponsoi
High M oderate

No

1

-.O
.
RM
9 4 5 2 1

.T1' o n .
U n iv e rs ity
Caurao

9

r « p o n ^ l #fM aId (|# l

Nark shop
Confaranco

4

R eadings/
S olf*S tudy

3

N antor
C o llo g ta l
R a la tlo n a

2

On th o Jo b
d o rk
Iv p a r lo n c o

1

CEmenOCTM B NdS-BdTkTlOM

Tha p r in c ip a l la knowledgooblo about
th in k in g and ro aa a rc h r a l a ta d t o th o
c u r r i c u l a r noada o f M a /h o r e tu d o n ta .

5

4

9

2

1

9 4 3

1

9

4

3

2

1

Tho p r in c i p a l co o rd Inn t o t c u r r lc u tu a
davolopoant u l t h l n th o b u ild in g .

9

4

3

2

1

9

4

3

1

9

4

3

2

1

Tho p r in c ip a l «M< th o e t a f f In o a a a rln g
t h a t th o c u rricu lu m l a a p p lle o b lo t o th o
a k i l l a and a b l l l t t o a th a t p ro aa n t
a tu d o n ta *111 noad a t a d u lt a .

9

4

9

2

1

9

4

9

1

9

4

3

2

1

Tn* p r in c ip a l ho lp a to n e h a ra t o lo p lo a a n t
th a c u r r lc u lu a .

9

4

3

2

1

9

4

3

1

9

4

3

2

1

Tha p r in c ip a l l a a b lo t o d lia g g r a g a to ond
ouan ln o to a t a c o ro d a ta In a rd o r t o oafco
r a c c n o tn d ttlc n t f o r c u rr ic u lu o r e v i s io n .

9

4

9

2

1

9

4

9

1

9

4

3

2

1

Tho p r in c i p a l h o t a k i l l a tn c w rrte u lu a
a r tic u la tio n .

9

4

3

2

1

9

4

3

1

9

4

9

2

1

UACER9IIP
14.

Tho p r in c ip a l knout * w n t o d a lo g a ta .

9

4

9

2

1

9

4

3

9

4

3

2

1

IS .

Tho p r in c ip a l a d ju s t s h U /h a r le a d e r s h ip
t t y l a to f i t th a noada o f th a s i t u a t i o n .

9

4

3

2

1

9

4

3

9

4

3

2

1

Tho p r in c ip a l l a a good p r e b la o « a o lv e r.

9

4

3

2

1

9

4

3

9

4

9

2

1

16.

120

s t

s t.v a u m b u s u n s o f b c m m tk m m
coNTDuiMO F n m s n w . k y i u m n t

tWOTTMCE TO KXJ* ROLE AS
i c i r c i * o i l y e * a r t tp o n iS T

trf
‘tw it

'tc

to t i l l thOSO
29.

Tho principal
•M ff

90.

Tho p r in c ip a l

th a t s t a f f dovalopid on t —chars* nssd

ta a e h a rs t o t r y
Tha principal
now Idas* without faar of r s p r ls a l
fs llu r s .

s ta f f a s s tln g s
Tha principal
which tha taaehars pereslvo to be rsli
and inforastlvO .
99.

Tha p rin c ip al Is a b ls to ta b s cor m e t! vs
ac tio n on personnel a a t t s r s In ordar to
o s ln ta ln q u ality and o ffs c tlv sn a ss .
Tha p rin c ip al is able to a s s is t s ta f f
ills tlc
nsabsrs In s o ttin g
sp p ro p rlsts goals for growth
laprovsaont.

Modoratsty U t l h
la p ir ts n t la p o rta n c t

,C .r C .

Not
fa p o rtsn t

» ,

High N ad cn U No
NMd
Nssd
N fd

^

Ih lv tn lty
V brliitaf
Courts
C « f K « ic i

M la g s /
3alf*Study

C ollegia!
Ib litlM i

122

35.

What is your age group?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

36.

0-5 Years
6-10 Years
11-15 Years
16-20 Years
Over 20 Years

___
___
___
_____

Elementary (1-6 or 1-8)
Jr. High (7-8 or 7-9)
Sr. High (9-12 or 10-12)
Jr.-Sr. High

What is the student enrollment at the school district in which you are
currently employed?
a.
b.
c.
d.

39.

___
___
___
___
___

What is your current and primary assignment as a principal?
a.
b.
c.
d.

38.

Less than 30 Yeurs of Age
30 to 40 Years of Age
41 to 50 Years of Age
51 to 55 Years of Age
Over 55 Years of Age

How nany years have you been a principal (including assistant principal)?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

37.

___
___
___
___
___

___
___
_ _
___

1st
2nd
3rd
4th

Class
Class
Class
Class

(more
(more
(more
(more

than 120,000 students)
than 30,000, less than 120.000 students)
than 2.400. less than 30.000 students)
than 75, less than 2,400 students)

What is the highest degree you have earned?
a.
b.
c.
d.

___
___
___
___

Master's
Specialist's Degree
Ed.D.
Ph.D.

40.

What is your gender?

Male

Female

41.

How likely is it that you will retire within the next five years?
a. _____ Very likely
b. _____ Possibly
c.
Not likely

42.

If your response to #41 is "Very likely", please Indicate the year you are
most likely to retire:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

____
____
_____
____
____

1989
1990
1991
1992
1993

APPENDIX B
GROUPING OF SCALE ITEMS USED IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE

123
Grouping of Scale Items Used in the Questionnaire
Item
No.

Item Content

Item Grouping

1

Knowledge of l a t e s t research r e l a t e d
to instruction

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

2

Use of g o a l - s e t t i n g to improve
i n s t r u c t i o n and th e involvement of
staff

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

3

Use of t e s t scores t o recommend
changes in the i n s t r u c t i o n a l program

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supe rviseon

4

Student time on t a s k i s ensured

I n s t r u c t i onal
Supervisi on

5

Encourage t ea ch er s to use i n s t r u c ­
t i o n a l techniques r e l e v a n t to
c u r r i c u l a r o b je c tiv e s and researchbased p r in c i p l e s of learning

I n s t r u c t i onal
Supervisi on

6

Maintains t h a t a l l studen ts can
lear n and expects them to succeed

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

7

Bring i n s t r u c t i o n a l iss ue s to
f a c u l t y f o r discu ssion

I n s t r u c t io n a l
Supervision

8

Knowledge about thinking and
research r e l a t e d to c u r r i c u l a r
needs of students

Curriculum
Development and
Implementation

9

Coordinate curriculum development
within the building

Curriculum
Development and
Implementation

10

Aid s t a f f in as suring curriculum i s
a p p li cab le t o s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s
present students will need as adults

Curriculum
Development and
Implementation

11

Help tea ch er s implement the c u r ­
riculum

Curriculum
Development and
Implementation

12

A b i l i t y t o disaggr eg ate and exam­
ine t e s t score da ta to make
recommendations f o r curriculum

Curriculum
Development and
Implementation

124
13

S k i l l s in curriculum a r t i c u l a t i o n

Curriculum
Development and
Implementation

14

Know when to de le gate

Leadership

15

Adjust l e a d e r s h ip s t y l e to f i t
the needs of the s i t u a t i o n

Leadership

16

Be a good problem-solver

Leadership

17

A b i l i t y t o g a t h e r and analyze data
r e : co g n it iv e , a f f e c t i v e and
climate needs o f the building

Leadership

18

Be v i s i o n - o r i e n t e d and aid s t a f f
in long-range planning

Leadership

19

Keep a breast of c u r r e n t research
and trends in education

Leadership

20

Be adept a t c o n f l i c t management

Leadership

21

Have good w r i t t e n and oral com­
munication s k i l l s

Leadership

22

Involve oth er s ap p r o p ri a t e ly in
dec isio n making

Leadership

23

Develop sense o f teamwork among
the s t a f f

Leadership

24

Apply v alid resear ch findings to
school p r a c t i c e

Leadership

25

Be able to understand and apply
a d u l t lear ning and motivation
theory

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

26

S k i l l s in building upon s tr e n g th s
of s t a f f members

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

27

A b i l i t y to a r b i t r a t e dis pute s and
agreements

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

28

A b i l i t y to asse ss i n - s e r v i c e needs
and seek resources to f i l l those
needs

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

125
29

Encourage le a d e r sh ip by s t a f f and
stu de nts

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

30

Ensure t h a t staff-development
programs are based on t e a c h e r s ’
needs

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

31

Encourage te a c h e r s t o t r y new ideas
without f e a r o f r e p r i s a l f o r f a i l u r e

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

32

Conduct s t a f f meetings which
te a c h e r s per ce ive r e l e v a n t and
informative

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

33

A b i l i t y to take c o r r e c t i v e action
on personnel m atters t o maintain
q u a l i t y of e f f e c t i v e n e s s

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

34

A b i l i t y t o a s s i s t s t a f f members
in s e t t i n g r e a l i s t i c and approp­
r i a t e goals f o r growth and
improvement

S t a f f Development/
Personnel
Management

APPENDIX C
INITIAL LETTER TO SAMPLE

126

August 21, 1989

Dear Co lit)ague:
Tou have been selected as part of a sample of currently employed
Michigan secondary principals to participate in a research study I am
conducting to help better understand three important areas related to
the Michigan secondary school principalship.
The three areas of the secondary school principalship which form the
focus of this study are: 1) the range of job roles and their
importance as perceived by principals; 2) needs principals identify
for further preparation and continuing professional development to
respond to their job roles; and 3) what principals identify as the
primary source of their preparation and continuing professional
development.
Currently, there is limited knowledge to assist state policymakers,
college and university school administrator preparation programs,
professional organizations of school administrators and other school
administrators, and local school district leaders to respond to the
preparation and continuing professional development needs of building
principals. Also, a Michigan Department of Education study projects a
turnover of up to 60 percent of currently employed building principals
by 1993. The results of this study may be useful in building
administrator preparation programs for the candidates who aspire to the
principalship.
Tour individual responses to this survey will remain strictly
confidential. The survey methodology does not identify survey
responses with an individual. Please do not sign your survey. All
data will be reported in aggregate form. Tour participation in this
study is voluntary. A postcard is enclosed with the survey for you to
mail at the same time that you mail your completed survey instrument,
so that I will know that your survey has been returned and therefore, I
will noi. Duiiu you fcllcv-up letters.
The validity of this study depends on the number of responses returned
by the sample population. So, please set aside 20-30 minutes of
uninterrupted time during the next week to respond to the survey
instrument.
Please return the survey instrument by September 1, 1989. If you wish
to discuss this study with me, I can be reached at my office at (517)
373-1926, or at my home at (517) 332-7802. Thank you for your
cooperation.
Sincerely,

C. Danford Austin

127

N-°
Please mail th is postcard when you
have completed and returned your
survey. That way, a follow-up
reminder le tte r w ill not be sent to
you.
Again, thanks for.your assistance.

C. Danford Austin

332

APPENDIX D
FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO NONRESPONDENTS

128

October 23, 1989

Dear Colleague:
In the early fall you received a survey questionnaire from me as part of
a research study I am conducting to help better understand three important
areas related to the Michigan Secondary School Principalship.
You were selected as part of a sample of currently employed Michigan
Secondary Principals to participate in the study.
If you have not had the opportunity to complete the survey, I am
enclosing another copy for your use.
It would be appreciated if you would
return the completed survey in the enclosed, pre-addressed, stamped envelop.
If you have already returned the survey, I thank you for your time and
support of this research project.
I can be reached at my office at (517) 373-1926, if you wish to discuss
this study with me.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,

C. Danford Austin

Enclosures

APPENDIX E
PUBLIC ACT 163

129

Act No. 163
Public A cts of 1986
Approved by tha Governor
July 6 .1 9 6 6
Filed with tha Sacratary of Stata
July 7 .1 9 8 6

ST A T E O F M IC H IG A N
8 3 R D L E G ISL A T U R E
REG ULAR SE SS IO N OF 1 9 8 6

Introduced by Rep*. Knight. Runco. Allen. Hayes. Keith. Gtlmer. O'Neill. Leland, Bennane, Randall.
Brown. Nash. Hoffman. Ouw inga. Ostllnc, P orreca. M Iddaugh. P ridnia. Bam*. C agliardi, Koivisto.
Hood. Hollister. Dillingham. E ngler. Dunaskiss, O aender. Furton. Bankes and M iller

ENROLLED HOUSE BILL No. 4282
AN ACT to amend section* 651 and 1246 of Act No. 451 of the Public Acts of 1976. entitled as amended “An
act to provide a system of public instruction and elementary and secondary schools: to revise, consolidate, and
classify the laws relating to elementary and secondary education: to provide for the classification, organization,
regulation, and maintenance of schools, school districts, and intermediate school districts; to prescribe rights,
powers, duties, and privileges of schools, school districts, and intermediate school districts: to provide for school
elections and to prescribe powers and duties with respect thereto: to provide for the levy and collection of taxes:
to provide for the borrowing of money and issuance of bonds and other evidence* of indebtedness; to provide for
and prescribe the powers and duties of certain boards and officials: to provide for licensure of boarding schools:
:o prescribe penalties: and to repeal certain acts and p a n s of acts.” being sections 380.661 and 380.1246 of the
Michigan Compiled Laws: and to add p a n 22a.
The People of the State of Michigan enact
Section 1. Sections 651 and 1246 of Act No. 451 of the Public Acts of 1976, being sections 380.651 and
380.1246 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, are amended and p a n 22a is added to read as follows:
Sec. 651. (1) An intermediate superintendent shall possess the following minimum qualifications:
(a) Forty-five months’ experience u a teacher or administrator in public or nonpublic schools.
(b) A teacher’s certificate issued by the state board and a m aster’s degree in education from a college or
university approved by a recognized accrediting agency.
This subsection shall not apply aftor June 30.1988.
(21 Beginning July 1. 1988. ■!>*) « » » t as provided in subsection (3) and in section 1536. a person employed
by an intermediate school district as a superinundent or other person whoa* prim ary responsibility is
adm inisuring instructional programs or as a chief business official shall possess a valid Michigan school
administrator’s certifieau issued by the sta u board.
<31 An inurm ediau school district may employ as a superinundent or other person whose primary
responsibility it administering instructional programs or as a chief business official a person who is enrolled in
a program leading to certification as a school administrator. Beginning July 1. 1988. a person who it employed
as a school administrator pursuant to this subsection shall have 5 years to meet the certification requirem enu of
section 15.” 1.
(4) Beginning July 1.1988. a person employed by an inu rm ed iau school district as a superinundent or other
person whose primary responsibility is adm inisuring instructional programs shall possess a valid teacher's
certifieau.
Sec. 1246. (1) A person employed by a school district as a superinundent of schools shall possess a t least an
earned bachelor's degree from a college accepuble to the s ta u board and shall be the possessor of or be eligible
for a teacher's certificate or have educational qualifications equivalent thereto, under standards deurm ined by
the s ta u board. This subsection shall not apply a fu r June 30.1988.

130

(2) Beginning: July 1.1988. end except as provided in subsection (3) and in section 1536, a person employed
by a school district as a superintendent, principal, assistant principal, or other person whose primary
responsibility is adm inisuring instructional programs or u a chief business official shall possess a valid
Michigan school administrator's certifieau issued by the sta u board.
(3) A school district may employ as a superinundent. principal, assistant principal, or other person whose
primary responsibility is adm inisuring instructional programs or as a chief business official a person who is
enrolled in a program leading to certification as a school administrator. Beginning July 1.1988. a person who is
employed as a school administrator pursuant to this subsection shall have 5 years to meet the certification
requirements of section 1536.
>4) Beginning July 1. 1988. a person employed by a school district as a superintendent, principal, assistant
principal, or other person whose primary responsibility is adm inisuring instructional program s rhall possess a
valid uacher's certificate.
PART22A
ADMINISTRATORS’ CERTIFICATES
Sec. 1536. (1) The s u u board shall develop a schooladministrator's certifieau which shall be issued not later
than July 1. 1988 to all school district and inu rm ed iau school district superintendents, principals, assistant
principals, and other persons whose primary responsibility is adm inisuring instructional program s and to
school district and inurm ediau school district chief business officials. Not la u r than July 1. 1968. the state
board also shall develop appm priau certifieau endorsements for school district and in u rm e d ia u school district
superinundents, chief business officials, and by elementary school, middle school, and high school level building
administrators. The s u u board shall deurm ine the educational and professional experience requirements fur
and issue all certificaus for these school administrators and shall deurm ine how a school adm inistrator ma\
obuin renewal units for periodic recertification. The s ta u board shall provide a waiver for any person who if
not able to meet these requirements due to unusual circumsunces. In addition, the s u u board shall issue nr.
initial administrator's certifieau to any person described in this subsection who is employed by a school district
or inurm ediau school district as a school administrator and does not meet the certification requirements for
tne position the person holds on July 1.1988.
<2>An administrator’s certifioate issued under subsection (1: shall be valid for 5 y e a n and shall be renewed
upon completion of renewal units as deurm ined by the s u u board.
(3i The s u u board shall prom ulgau rules to implement this section.
This act is ordered to u k e im m ediau effect

Clerk of the House of Represenutives,

Secretary of the Senate.

Approved

Governor.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A c h il le s , C. M. (1987). Unlocking some my steries of ad m inist ration
and a d m in is tr a to r pr ep aratio n : A r e f l e c t i v e proposal. In
Report and papers of th e National Commission on Excellence in
Educational Administration (pp. 41-67). Berkeley, CA:
NcCutchen.
American Association of School Administrators. (1983). The r o l e of
the p rin c ip a l in e f f e c t i v e schools: Problems and s o l u t i o n s .
Arin-Krupp, J . (1981). Adult development: Implications f o r s t a f f
development. Colchester , CT: P rojec t RISE.
Arin-Krupp, J . (1982). The a d u lt l e a r n e r . Colches ter , CT:
P roje c t RISE.
Barr, R., & Dreeben, R. (1983).
v e r s i t y of Chicago Press.

How schools work.

Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders:
ing charge. New York: Harper & Row.

Chicago:

Uni­

The s t r a t e g i e s f o r t a k ­

Blanchard, K., & Johnson, S. (1982). The one minute manager:
quickest wav to increase vour own p r o s p e r i t y . New York:
Berkeley Books.

The

B i i s s , J . R. (1987). Public school ad m in is tr a to rs in the United
S t a t e s : An a n a ly s is o f supply and demand. In Report and
papers of W e National Commission on Excellence in Educational
Administration (pp. 193-199). Berkeley, CA: McCutchen.
Blumberg, A., & Greenfield, W. C.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

(1980).

The e f f e c t i v e p r i n c i p a l .

Bossart, S. T., Dwyer, D., Rown, B., & Lee, G. V. (1981). The
in s t r u c t i o n a l management r o l e of th e p r i n c i p a l : A preliminary
review and c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n . San Francisco: Far West Labora­
to ry f o r Educational Research and Development.
Bowles, D. R. (1968). E f f ecti v e elementary school a d m i n i s t r a t i o n .
West Nyack, NY: Parker Publishing Co.

131

132
Brandt, R. (1987, September). On leadersh ip and stud en t achiev e­
ment: A conversation with Richard Andrews. Educational Lead­
ership.
Brookover, W. B., & Lezotte, I . W. (1977). Changes in school
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s coinc iden t with changes in student achievement.
East Lansing: Michigan S ta te U niver si ty, College of Urban
Development.
Bussis, A., Chittenden, E., & Amarel, M. (1976).
cu rricu lum . Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Bevond surfa ce

C a l i f o r n i a Elementary School Administration As sociation. (1968).
Role o f the elementary school p r i n c i p a l . Palo Alto, CA:
National Press.
Campbell, R. F ., Fleming, T., Newell, J . L., & Bennion, J . W.
(1987). A h i s t o r y o f thought and p r a c t i c e in educational
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . New York: Teachers College, Columbia Univer­
sity.
Carey, J . (1984). An i n v e s t i g a t i o n of p a r e n t s ’ perceptions of the
junior-academy p r i n c i p a l ’ s r o l e in the Lake Union Conference of
Seventh-Day Adventists (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Andrews Univer­
s i t y ) . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 46, 1136A.
Coleman, J . S . , Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, D. J . , McDartland, J . ,
Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1980). Equality
of educational o p p o r tu n ity . Washington, DC: U.S. Of fic e of
Education, National Center f o r Educational S t a t i s t i c s .
Cowan, A. T. (1960). The F l i n t building d i r e c t o r : Role expec ta­
t i o n s held bv r e le v a n t groups. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a ­
t i o n , Michigan S t a te University.
Crowson, R., & Porter-G ehrie, C. (1980). The 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 in l ar g e c i t y schools. Educational
Administration Q u a r te rly . 16( 1), 45-69.
Daresh, J . C., & Liu, C-J. (1985). High school p r i n c i p a l s ’ percep­
t i o n s o f t h e i r I n s t r u c t io n a l lead er sh ip behavior. Paper p r e ­
sented a t th e Annual Meeting of th e American Educational
Research As sociation.
Dev ille, J . (1984). The psychology of l e a d e r sh i p , managing
resources and r e l a t i o n s h i p s . New York: New American Library.
Digest o f educational s t a t i s t i c s . (1980). Washington, DC: U.S.
Of fice o f Education, Division of Educational S t a t i s t i c s .

133
Doud, J. L. (1989). The K-8 p r in c ip a l in 1988: A ten year study.
Ar lington, VA: National Association o f Elementary School P r in ­
cipals.
Dow, J . , J r . (1971). A comparative study o f i n n e r - c i t v elementary
teachers* and p r i n c i p a l s ’ perceptions of and r o l e expectations
f o r th e lea der sh ip behavior o f s e le c t e d i n n e r - c i t v elementary
p r i n c i p a l s . Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S ta te
Univer sity.
Drucker, P. F.
& Row.

(1967).

The e f f e c t i v e e x e c u tiv e .

New York:

Harper

Duke, D. L. (1987). School le a d e r sh ip and i n s t r u c t i o n a l improve­
ment. New York: Random House.
E f f ectiv e school p r i n c i p a l s (Report t o the Southern Regional Board
by i t s Commission f o r Education Q ua lity. (1986). A tla n ta , GA:
Southern Regional Education Board.
English, F. W. (1975). School organization and management.
Worthington, OH: Charles A. Jones Publishing.
Esbree, W. S ., McNally, H. J . , & Wynn, R. (1967). Elementary
school ad minist ration and s u p e r v i s io n . New York: American
Book Company.
Faber, C. R., & Shearron, G. F. (1970). Elementary school admin­
i s t r a t i o n . New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Finn, C. E., J r . (1988, June). Expand your visi on and pick p r i n c i ­
pal s with v is i o n . The Executive Educator. 10, 20-21.
Fox, R. S ., e t a l . (1973). School climate improvement: A c h a l ­
lenge to the school a d m i n i s t r a t o r . Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta
Kappa.
Fullen, M. (1982). The meaning o f educational change.
Teachers College Press.

New York:

Geneck, F. H. (1983). Improving school performance: How new
school management techniques can r a i s e le a r n in g , confidence,
and morale. New York: Praeger.
Glatthorn, A. A. (1987).
Good Year Books.

Curriculum l e a d e r s h i p .

Glenview, IL:

Glickman, C. D. (1987, A p r i l ) . Good and/or e f f e c t i v e schools:
What do we want. Phi Delta Kaooan.

134
Golanda, E. L. (1982). The elementary p rin c ip a l as an i n s t r u c ­
ti o n a l leader: An an a ly s is o f th e perceived i n s t r u c t i o n a l
supervisory s k i l l s , a t t i t u d e s and p r a c t i c e s o f s e le c t e d Michi­
gan elementary school p r i n c i p a l s . Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r ­
t a t i o n , Michigan S t a t e Univer sity.
Goldhammer, K., & Taylor, R. C. (1972). Career education: Per­
spec tiv e and promise. Columbus, OH: Charles E. M e r r i l l .
Goodlad, J . C. (1979). What schools ar e f o r . Los Angeles, CA:
Univer sity o f C a l i f o r n i a a t Los Angeles.
Goodlad, J . C. (1984). A place c a l l e d school:
f u t u r e . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Prospects f o r the

Gottfredson, G. D., & Hyble, L. G. (1987). An a n a l y t i c a l d e s c r i p ­
t i o n of the school p r i n c i p a l ’ s lob (Report No. 13). Baltimore,
MD: Johns Hopkins Univer sity, Center f o r Research on Elemen­
t a r y and Middle Schools.
Gr ee nfield, W. D. (1982, March). Empirical resear ch on school
p r i n c i p a l s : The s t a t e of the a r t . Paper pr esented a t the
Annual Meeting o f the American Education Research Association,
New York, NY.
G r i f f i t h s , D. E., Sto ut, R. T., & Forsyth, P. B. (1987). The
pr ep ar at ion of educational a d m in i s tr a to r s . In Report and
papers of the National Commission on Excellence in Educational
Administration (pp. 284-304). Berkeley, CA: McCutchen.
Gross, N., & H e r r i o t t , R. E. (1961). The pro fessiona l le adersh ip
of elementary school p r i n c i p a l s . Washington, DC: U.S. Office
of Education, Department of Health, Education & Welfare.
ii.li

/»

n a i i 9 u.

r

e

L. y a n u r u ,

the p r o c e s s .

r*

o.

n

n.

Albany:

/i

{tzo/j.

r>\

uidiiuc

s

m

_
_■
_
__i _

auiuuis*

jp

n

*a . i _•___

idiitiidtiim

S tate Univer sity of New York Press.

Hawley, W. D. (1987). U n i v e r s i t i e s and the improvement o f school
management: Roles f o r the s t a t e s . In Report and papers of the
National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration
(pp. 82-88). Berkeley, CA: McCutchen.
Hersey, P ., & Blanchard, K. (1982). Management o f or g an iza tional
behaviors: U t i l i z i n g human r e s o u r c e s . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ:
P r e n ti c e - H a l l .
Herzberg, F. (1988, January-February). One more time: How do you
motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, p. 57.

135
Hoard, S . , Rutherford, VI. L., Huling-Aust, L., & Hall, G. E.
(1987). Taking charge of change. Alexandria, VA: Association
of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Howard, E., Howell, B., & Brain ia rd, E. (1987). Handbook f o r
conducting school climate improvement p r o j e c t s . Bloomington,
IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
Hoy, W. K., & Hiskel, C. G. (1982). Educational ad m in istr atio n :
Theory, rese arch, and p r a c t i c e (2nd e d . ) . New York: Random
House.
Hoyle, J . R., English, F . , & S t e f f y , B. (1985). S k i l l s f o r suc­
cessful school l e a d e r s . Arlington, VA: American Association
of School Administrators.
Jackson, S. A., Logsdan, D. M., & Taylor, N. E. (1983, A p r i l) .
I n s t r u c t io n a l lead er sh ip behaviors: D i f f e r e n t i a t i n g e f f e c t i v e
from i n e f f e c t i v e low-income urban schools. Urban Education.
] 8 , 59-70.
Jacobson, P. B., Logsdan, J . D., & Wiegman, R. R. (1973). The
p rin c ip a l ship; New p e r s p e c t i v e s . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
King, C. T. (1978). Professional development needs as perceived bv
f u l l - t i m e teach ers not pursuing advanced study and f a c t o r s
a f f e c t i n g t h e i r acceptance of programs designed to meet those
needs. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S t a t e Uni­
versity.
K i r s t , M. W. (1984).
Freeman.

Who c o n t r o ls our schools?

New York:

W. H.

Kuckel, J . (1990). Selected roles/functions of Michigan elementary
p r i n c i p a l s : A study of perceived needs f o r prepara tion and
continuing profe ssion al development. Unpublished doctoral
d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S t a t e Univer sity.
Lane, J . J . , & Walberg, H. J . (1987).
Berkeley, CA: McCutchen.

Effectiv e school l e a d e r s h i p .

Lezotte, L. W., Hathaway, D. V., M il le r , S. K., Passalacqua, J . , &
Brookover, W. B. (1980). School lea rn ing climate and student
achievement. Ta llaha ss ee : Florida S ta te U niver sity, Teacher
Education P r o je c ts .
Lezotte, L. W., & Passalacqua, J . (1978). Individual school b u i l d ­
ings do account f o r d i f f e r e n c e s in measured pupil performance.
East Lansing: Michigan S t a t e Univer sity, I n s t i t u t e f o r
Research on Teaching.

136
Lieberman, A. (1986, February).
Leadership. 42. 4-8.

Collabor ativ e work.

Liphum, J . , & Hoeh, J . (1974). The p r in c ip a l ship:
j u n c t i o n s . New York: Harper & Row.

Educational
Foundations and

Madaus, G. R., A i r ia s i a n , P. W., & Kellagnan, T. (1980). School
e f f e c t i v e n e s s : A reassessment o f the evidence. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Manasse, A. L. (1982).
mary. Reston, VA:
P r in c i p a l s .

The e f f e c t i v e p r i n c i p a l : A research sum­
National Association of Secondary School

Mann, D. (Ed .). (1978).
College Press.

Making change happen.

New York:

Teachers

Martin, W. (1980). The managerial behavior of high school p r i n c i ­
p a l s . Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Pennsylvania S ta t e
University.
McPherson, S. D., & Buehr, M. E. (1979). What p r i n c i p a l s do: A
preliminary occupational a n a l y s is . In D. A. Erickson & T. L.
R eller (Eds.), The p r in c ip a l in metropolitan s c h o o ls .
Berkeley, CA: McLuthan.
Michigan Department of Education. (1989, January). Administrative
r u le s governing the c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f Michigan school adminis­
t r a t o r s . Lansing: Author.
Michigan S t a te Board of Education. (1986). Michigan public school
re tirem ent r e p o r t . Lansing: Michigan Department of Education.
Michigan S t a te Board of Education.
U 4
i i i w i M w a H

j v i i u u i

^
j v a i

f
i

r tl 4
4 k l a
0 1
i m i u i c

(1987).
♦ a
t v

i c u

4 m a
> i c

Report on survey of
I
«

a a •
^ a n * > i n ^ t

M 4 a U 4 a ^ n
u i w i i i ^ a i i

Department of Education.
Michigan S t a t e Board of Education. (1988, December). A proposal to
c r e a t e a pr ofes sio na l standards commission f o r adm inistr ation
preparation and c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Lansing: Michigan Department
of Education.
Michigan S ta te L e g is la tu re .
M il le r , E. A.
Trenton:

(1986).

Public Act 163.

(1987). A new balance: Reshaping th e p r i n c i p a l s h i p .
New Je rs e y P r in c ip a l s & Supervisors Association.

M il le r , R. W. (1984). A d e s c rip ti o n of s a t i s f a c t o r y pr in cip al
lea der sh ip from the perspectiv e of teac her s (Doctoral d i s s e r ­
t a t i o n , University o f North Carolina a t Greensboro). D is s e r ­
t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 45, 12591.

137

Morris, V., e t a l . (1981). The urban p r i n c i p a l : D is cre tio nary
decision-making in a lar g e educational o r g a n i z a t i o n . Chicago:
Univer sity o f I l l i n o i s .
Murks, J . R., Stoops, E., & King-Stoops, J . (1985). Handbook of
educational s upe rv is ion: A guide f o r th e p r a c t i t i o n e r .
Newton, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
National Association o f Elementary School P r i n c i p a l s . (1984).
Standards f o r o u a l i t v elementary s c h o o ls . Reston, VA: Author.
National Association o f Elementary School P r i n c i p a l s . (1986).
P r o f ic ie n c ie s f o r p r i n c i p a l s . Arlington, VA: Author.
National Association of Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s . (1982). The
e f f e c t i v e p r i n c i p a l : A research summary. Reston, VA: Author.
National Association o f Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s ' Assessment
Center. (1986, January). Selec ting and developing school
le a d e r s: P a r t i c i p a n t s r e l a t e experiences, d e s c rib e values.
NASSP B u l l e t i n . 70, 1-58.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation
a t r i s k : The imperative f o r educational reform. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration.
(1987). Leaders f o r America's schools . Tempe, AZ: University
Council f o r Educational Administration.
National School Public Relations Association. (1981). Good
Schools. What Makes Them Work. Ar lington, VA: Author.
New rorx. u r r i c e ot t o u c a n on rerrormance Keview.
acnooi
f a c t o r s influencing reading achievement: A case study of two
inner c i t v s c h o o ls . Albany: Author.
Osborne, W. D. (1987). An a n a ly s is of actual and d e s ir e d task s
as sociate d with the high school p r i n c ip a ls h i p in Oklahoma.
D is s e r ta tio n Abs tra cts I n t e r n a t i o n a l .
Peterson, K. D. (1978). The p r i n c i p a l ’ s t a s k .
Notebook. 26(8 ), 1-4.

Administrator

Peterson, K. D., & Finn, C. E., J r . (1987, Spring). P r in c i p a l s ,
su perintende nts, and the a d m i n i s t r a t o r ’ s a r t . The Public
I n t e r e s t . 72, 42-62.

138
P it n e r , N. J . (1982, March). The Mintzberq method: What have we
r e a l l y learned? Paper presented a t the Annual Meeting o f the
American Education Research J ourn al, New York, NY.
P i t n e r , N. J . (1987). School Administrator P r ep ar ation: The s t a t e
of th e Art. In Report and Papers of the National Commission on
Excellence in Educational Administration (pp. 367-402).
Berkeley, CA: McCutchen.
Ravitch, D. (1983). The troubled crusade:
(1945-19801. New York: Basic Books.

American Education

Rice, R. H. (1984). Differences in r o l e percep tions between urban
and suburban elementary p r in c ip a ls (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
Temple U ni ve rsi ty , 1983). D is s e r ta tio n Abs tracts I n te r n a ­
ti o n a l . 44Roberts, A. D., & Cawelti, G. (1984). Redefining general education
in th e American high s ch ool . Alexandria, VA: Association f o r
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Roe, W., & Drake, T.
Macmillan.

(1980).

The p r i n c i o a l s h i p .

New York:

Runkel, P. (1986, Winter). Highlights from the 24-hour c o n f e r ­
ence . Lansing: Michigan Coalition f o r S t a f f Development and
School Improvement.
Rutherford, W. L. (1985, September). School p r i n c i p a l s as e f f e c ­
t i v e l e a d e r s . Phi Delta Kaooan. 67, 31-34.
S al ley , C., McPherson, R. B., & Baehr, M. E. (1979). What p r i n c i ­
pals do: A preliminary occupational a n a l y s is . In D. A.
Evidson & T. L. R e l le r (Eds .), The p r in c ip a l in metropolitan
s c h o o ls . Berkeley, CA: McLuLhan.
Shieve, L. T., & Schoenheit, M. B. (Eds.). (1987). Leadership:
Examining the e l u s i v e . Alexandria, VA: Association f o r
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
S i r o t n i k , K. A., & Oakes, J . (Eds.). (1986). C r i t i c a l pe rsp ectives
on th e org an ization and improvement o f s chooling. Boston:
N ijhoff Publishing.
Smith, C. R., & Muth, R. (1985). I n s t r u c tio n a l le ad er sh ip and
school e f f e c t i v e n e s s . Paper presented a t the Annual Meeting
of th e American Educational Research As sociation.
Smythe, W. J . (1980). The p r in c io a ls h i p and the development of
i n s t r u c t i o n a l e x p e r t i s e . Unpublished paper, Deubin U niver sity,
V i c to r ia , A u s t r a l i a .

139

Snyder, F. A., & Peter se n, D. A. (1970). Dynamics of elementary
school a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
S p r o u ll , L. (1979). Managing education programs:
behavioral a n a l y s i s . Unpublished paper.

A micro-

S t a f f . (1982). The r o l e o f elementary school p r i n c i p a l s : A
summary o f th e r e s e a r c h . Ar lington, VA: Educational Research
Service.
Stevens, B. (Ed .). (1985). School e f f e c t i v e n e s s : Eight v a r i a b le s
t h a t make a d i f f e r e n c e . East Lansing: Michigan S t a t e Board of
Education.
Stevenson, J . B. (1973). An in tro d u ctio n to c a r e e r e d u c a tio n .
Worthington, OH: Charles A. Jones.
Talerngsok, S. (L984). A study o f th e perceived importance of
managerial s k i l l s o f educational a d m in istr a to rs (Doctoral
d i s s e r t a t i o n , I l l i n o i s S t a t e U n i v e r s it y ) . D i s s e r t a t io n
A bstrac ts I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 4jj, 2723A.
U.S. Department o f Education, Office o f Educational Research and
Improvement. (1987, June). Pr incipa l Sel ec tion Guide. Wash­
ington, DC: Government P r in ti n g Offi ce.
Walton, M. C. (1985, January). Schools and homes--Connecting with
computers. Communicator. 2, 2.
Weber, G. (1971). Inner c i t v c hil dre n can be taught t o read: Four
successful s c h o o ls . Washington, DC: Council f o r Basic Educa­
tion.
Wiles, J . , a Bondi, J. (1981). The e s sen tial middle sc hoo l.
Columbus, OH: Charles E. M e r r i l l.
Wolcott, H.
raphy.

(1973). The man in th e p r i n c i p a l s o f f i c e :
New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

An ethnog­