@RéENiTATEQN 6% LA? PEMONS EMPLGYEQ AS LUNCHRGC‘M SQFERV‘ESQRS EN MELWAUKE’E, WI$CGNS'EN PNEMC ELEMEN‘EAR‘Y SCHOGLS “test-a $09 the Dogma a“? M. 5. WCEEGAN STATE UNEVERSITY Mary E... Doazzg‘izerty 1968 MICHI IGAN 3m CW WIE GEnr WEMUWEVERSITY ECOLOGY W Michigan State University 1 i ‘4 o mu-- LMMJQhen"ty, rfiary [2. F i Urlvnfuiiuu 0F Lav Fir OHS FF ' M.. f lWflH HNF ‘ _ _, _._ ___i._, J DAT! 1 :Jggggg TO fj l Doughmrty, Mary F. Drienfatimm 0F Lay Paraonfi Fmplove M.S~ lfififl HNF iififfia’iGIW STATE UNiVFQQ‘TY CULLELECW‘hULUNJEQSLOGY REFERENCEIJBRARY MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSETY COLLEGE OF HELTE iLJOEiCLEF-SS EAST LANSING, itiiC-iiiLii‘i PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 8/01 c:/CIRC/DateDue.p65-p.15 ABSTRACT ORIENTATION OF LAY PERSONS EMPLOYED AS LUNCHROOM SUPERVISORS IN MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS BY Mary E. Dougherty This study was concerned with appraisal of the over— all content of existing orientation programs for lay persons employed as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors in 35 Milwaukee Public Elementary Schools. Survey instruments were designed to obtain similar information from two different points of view-~that of the elementary school principals, and that of the noon-hour lunchroom lay supervisors employed by those principals. Both groups were asked for information concerning content and procedures of their present orientation programs, lay supervisory responsibilities and authority, extent of supervision and evaluation of employee performance, and per— sonal characteristics viewed as essential for lay supervi- sors. Opinions and ideas were also sought from the princi— pals regarding the desirability of initiating a citydwide orientation program for lay persons beginning employment as noon-hour supervisors of elementary school children. Two Mary E. Dougherty different survey techniques were used: school principals were personally interviewed by a professional staff member of the Food Service Division of the Milwaukee Public Schools; lay supervisors were surveyed by means of a written question- naire. Results of the study show that orientation was provided by nearly all elementary schools regularly employ- ing lay persons as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors, that the program was generally conducted by the principal and/or vice— principal, and that the major areas covered included general school policies and regulations, conditions of lay employ- ment, and the mechanics of maintaining order. Educational goals and objectives of the school lunch program were cov- ered in only a small number of the schools surveyed. The use of printed material to reinforce oral presentation cov- ering lunchroom supervision was limited. There was no evi- dence that follow-up training sessions were provided. The expectations of the principals with regard to the major responsibilities of lay supervisors, and the interpretation of their responsibilities by lay supervisors were quite consistent. With regard to delegated authority, there appeared to be some discrepancy between the extent of authority delegated as expressed by the principals and as interpreted by the lay employees. Although supervision of lay employees by the person(s) reSponsible for their perfor- mance was provided with reasonable frequency, job performance Mary E. Dougherty evaluations were usually unscheduled, unstructured, and pro— vided no continuous record of employee progress. With the exception of ability to manage young children effectively, principals and lay supervisors generally agreed on the char- acteristics important for a lay person to have in order to become a successful noon-hour supervisor of elementary school children. Fulfillment of the second important objective of the school lunch program--the development of social graces and attitudes--rests with those individuals responsible for supervising children in the lunchroom. Suggestions are made for greater involvement of lay persons supervising in the lunchroom through increased understanding of the educational system of which they are a part, of their place within that system, and of the contribution they can make to the total education of elementary school children. Further study is indicated relative to selection techniques for auxiliary personnel of elementary schools, employee performance evalua- tion procedures, and development of methods for effectively systematizing orientation and training procedures for lay supervisory personnel. ORIENTATION OF LAY PERSONS EMPLOYED AS LUNCHROOM SUPERVISORS IN MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS BY Mary E. Dougherty A PROBLEM Submitted to the College of Home Economics Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Institution.Administration 1968 i—‘— ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to eXpress gratitude to Dr. Richard P. Gousha, Superintendent, Milwaukee Public Schools, and to his staff for their permission to conduct this study in the public schools; to G. Dwight Rowe, Coordinator of Educational Research, for his assistance and guidance; and to Thomas J. Farley, Director, Food Service Division, and his staff of supervisors--Marguerite Tice, Gretchen Kubisch, Carol Schlenzig, and Mary Kelly--for their suggestions and assis- tance in conducting this study. The author gratefully acknowledges the contribution made by the principals and lay personnel who participated in the survey. The author wishes to eXpress appreciation to Professor Katherine Hart for her support and encouragement during the author's period of graduate study. Special grat- itude is extended to Dr. Grace A. Miller for her patience, guidance, and assistance in the development of this study and the completion of the manuscript. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Education of Adults . . . . . . . . . . Orientation of Lay Employees . . . . . . . III. SURVEY PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . Characteristics of the Sample . . . . . . Sub-sample A . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sub-sample B . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Survey Instruments . . . . . . . . . . Procedure for Analysis of Data . . . . . . IV. ANALYSIS OF THE SURVEY DATA . . . . . . . . Report of the Principals . . . . . . . . . Orientation Program Content and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . ReSponsibilities and.Authority of Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . . Supervision and Evaluation of Employee Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . Personal Characteristics Essential for Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . Group Orientation Program . . . . . . Report of the Lay Supervisors . . . . . . Orientation Program Content and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . Responsibilities and Authority of Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . Supervision and Evaluation of Employee Performance . . . . . . . Personal Characteristics Essential for Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . iii Page 12 14 18 18 19 19 20 20 22 24 24 25 31 35 36 38 42 42 45 51 53 Chapter Page V. SUMMARY) CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Orientation Program Content and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Principals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Responsibilities and Authority of Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Principals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . 6O Supervision and Evaluation of Employee Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Principals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Personal Characteristics Essential for Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Principals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Lay Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Group Orientation Program . . . . . . . 63 Conclusions and Implications of the Study . 64 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 68 References Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Additional References . . . . . . . . . . . 70 APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 iv 10. 11. LIST OF TABLES Person(s) Responsible for Orienting Lunchroom Supervisors (Principals' Report) . . . . . . . Major Areas Covered in Orientation Programs for Lunchroom Supervisors (Principals' Report) 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 C O Orientation Time for Lay Supervisory Personnel (Principals' Report) . . . . . . . . Person(s) Responsible for Orientation of New Lay Personnel Employed During the School Year (Principals' Report) . . . . . . . . . . . Major Responsibilities of Lunchroom Lay Supervisors (Principals' Report) . . . . . . . Authority Delegated to Lunchroom Lay Super- visors (Principals' Report) . . . . . . . . . . Source of Help for Lay Supervisors Experiencing Difficulty in Handling Behavior Problems (Principals' Report) . . . . . . . . . Personal Characteristics Essential for Success as a Noon-Hour Lunchroom Lay Supervisor (Principals' Report) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Person(s) from Whom Lunchroom Supervisors Received Orientation (Employees' Report) . . . Source of Help for Lay Supervisors EXperiencing Difficulty in Handling Behavior Prdblems (Employees' Report) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Methods Used to Gain Children's Attention in the Lunchroom (Employees' Report) . . . . . . . Page 26 28 29 31 32 33 34 37 43 49 50 Table Page 12. Person(s) Directly ReSponsible for Lunchroom Lay Supervisor Performance (Employees' Report) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 13. Supervision of Lunchroom Lay Supervisors (Employees' Report) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 14. Description of Sub-Sample A (Principals) . . . 71 15. Description of Sub-Sample B (Lay Supervisor) . 72 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Major Areas Covered in Orientation Programs for Noon-Hour Lunchroom Lay Supervisors (Employees' Report) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2. Major ReSponsibilities of Lunchroom Lay Supervisors (Employees' Report) . . . . . . . . 46 3. .Authority Delegated to Lunchroom Lay Supervisors (Employees' Report) . . . . . . . . 48 4. Personal Characteristics Important for Lay Persons Employed as Noon-Hour Lunchroom Supervisors (Employees' Report) . . . . . . . . 54 vii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Food service to children in the Milwaukee Public Schools began in 1904 when the Women's School Alliance initiated noon service in three elementary schools. By 1915 the program had grown to such proportions that this group of volunteer women petitioned the Milwaukee Board of School Directors to assume full reSponsibility for the program. This transfer of Operational reSponsibility was accomplished by 1917 and by 1931 there were 17 schools serving lunch. On October 2, 1944, the Milwaukee Public Elementary Schools began Operating under a program wherein the U.S. Government, using funds from a permanent annual Congres— sional appropriation (l4), subsidized school lunches for schools that guaranteed to serve meals containing certain types of food in amounts Specified by the National Nutrition Council as adequate for a growing child's needs (Type A lunch). By 1949, the entire Milwaukee school lunch Opera— tion, including secondary schools, was included under the terms of a signed agreement with the Department of Public Instruction of the State of Wisconsin as provided by the National School Lunch Act (Public Law 396, 1946). From its small beginning in 1904, the lunch program in the Milwaukee Public Schools has expanded to the present total of 99 ele- mentary and 31 secondary schools serving approximately 48,000 meals a day. In January 1959, the Department of School Lunch Services was established with administrative reSponsibility for the lunch program of Milwaukee Public Schools. The departmental name was subsequently changed to Food Service Division and at the present time is composed of the Division Director and a staff of five professional supervisors with training in food service administration. The objectives of the Food Service Division, as recorded in the 1963 Proceed— ings of the Milwaukee Board of School Directors (7c), are as follows: The major objective of the school lunch programs is to safeguard and improve the health and well- being of school children. The lunchroom is an educational facility for teaching good dietary practices through the serving of nutritionally adequate and attractive meals. A second objective of the school lunch programs is the development of social graces and attitudes, making use Of the many excellent Opportunities inherent in the fellowship of school companions during lunch periods. Technically, the authority of the Food Service Division over the school lunch program ends at the serving counter. The Division plans the menus, prepares specifications for the purchase of food and equipment, and is responsible for the preparation and service of the Type A lunch. Traditionally within the Milwaukee School System, noon-hour supervision of children in elementary schools has been a duty which all teachers have accepted as a regular responsibility. In a 1943 policy statement issued by the Milwaukee School Board (7a), playground and lunchroom super— vision were formally included among the various services required of elementary school teachers with supervisory duties rotated and shared by all teachers according to indi- vidual school needs. However, as the number of elementary schools in the Milwaukee program eXpanded, and as student participation rose, the number of teachers needed for noon- hour supervision also increased. Over time, teachers have become more and more reluctant to accept noon-hour supervi— sion assignments and the number requesting release from noon— hour supervisory duties has steadily grown. In June 1960, the Milwaukee School Board revised its policy and authorized monetary compensation for teachers who voluntarily engaged in noon-hour supervision of pupils in elementary schools (7b). A free lunch was also granted to those supervising with the eXpectation that it would be eaten in company with the children. Although this plan proved satisfactory for a time, all problems were not solved and dissatisfaction was again heard. In an effort to find a more effective solution, the Milwaukee School Board further modified its policy on noon- hour supervision of elementary school children (7d). Effective with the Spring semester, 1964, the practice of supplying a lunch gratis was discontinued. The volunteer supervising teacher was no longer eXpected to eat with the children and the monetary compensation was increased by 50 percent. In order to eXplore the possibility of relieving all teachers in elementary schools of all noon-hour supervision duties, in 1965 the Milwaukee School Board authorized devel- opment of a pilot program using lay persons instead of teach- ers for noon—hour lunchroom and playground supervision (7e). The Assistant Superintendent in charge of elementary schools was designated director of the pilot program and the respon- sibility for selection, orientation, and supervision of these lay peOple was delegated to the principal of each participating school. During the 1966 spring semester, 11 elementary schools, representing various areas of the city, chose to participate in the pilot program. A total of 29 lay persons, recruited by the individual principals from within their respective school districts, were employed on an experimental basis. In general, the number of lay posi- tions authorized for each participating school was on the same basis as for teacher supervision although type of facilities available and the inherent characteristics of the particular school population were also taken into considera- tion. Lay persons were employed for a period of one and one-half hours per school day to supervise both noon—hour lunchroom and playground activities, and were paid a per diem.wage. Evaluation of the pilot program by the Assistant Superintendent in charge of elementary schools (16) indi- cated that the use of lay persons for noon-hour supervisory duties was effective and satisfactory. Those principals who participated in the eXperimental study expressed support for retention of the program on an optional basis. As a result, principals in all Milwaukee Public Elementary Schools are now permitted three options: (a) to employ lay persons exclusively for noon—hour supervision, (b) to employ volun- teer teachers exclusively for these supervisory duties, or (c) to use a combination of teacher(s) and lay person(s) to perform these services. The acceptance and effectiveness of lay persons as noon-hour supervisors in elementary schools is evidenced by eXpanded employment: during the 1967 Spring semester, 76 lay persons were employed in 37 schools; as of the 1967 fall semester, 92 lay persons were employed in 48 schools. The Food Service Division is vitally concerned with noon-hour lunchroom supervision in the elementary schools and its effect upon pupil participation in the school lunch program. The responsibility for developing and maintaining a social atmosphere conducive to the development and prac— tice of social graces falls to those who supervise in the lunchroom. The kind of atmOSphere created and the methods of control and/or discipline used by those supervising are two factors which have definite bearing on student partici- pation and, therefore, upon the success or failure of the lunch program in a particular school. To date, the Food Service Division has been neither involved in the planning of, nor invited to participate in, the orientation sessions for lay employees given at the individual elementary schools. There is general concensus among the staff members of the Food Service Division that in a number of elementary schools orientation coverage concerning the educational objectives of the school lunch program and its relation to the elemen- tary school program as a whole may be inadequate. This survey was conducted in an effort to determine if, in fact, such inadequacies do exist in the present orientation programs and, if so, to identify those Specific informational areas in need of improved coverage. In plan- ning the investigation, three basic assumptions were made: 1. that the practice of employing lay persons to release elementary school teachers from noon—hour supervision of lunchroom and playground activities will continue. 2. that as teacher demands for a duty-free noon-hour continue and as more federal programs which require the direct involvement of minority groups and/or the culturally deprived in school activities are initiated, the employment of lay persons for noon- hour lunchroom and playground supervision will increase. that aS lay persons become increasingly involved in noon-hour lunchroom supervision, it is imperative that they be adequately informed of the educational Objectives of the school lunch program and their responsibilities in relation to this school-related activity. The objectives of the survey were: to determine the eXpectationS, understanding of educational Objectives, and interpretation of duties and reSponSibilitieS of lay persons currently employed as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors in the Milwaukee Public Elementary Schools. to determine the eXpectationS of the principals Of the Milwaukee Public Elementary Schools with regard to the level of performance and extent of responsi- bilities of lay persons employed as noon-hour lunch- room supervisors. to examine and appraise the over-all content of existing orientation programs for lay persons employed as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors in Milwaukee Public Elementary Schools. to identify Specific informational areas which, if given more adequate coverage in the orientation pro- grams for lay persons employed as noon-hour lunch- room supervisors, might measurably contribute to improved on-the-job performance. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Orientation Orientation, as defined by Planty §£_§1, (12), is the planned and guided adjustment of the employee to his place of employment as well as to his job. If the employee is to adjust to his employment in terms of facts as they are now and to the ever-changing facts of environment and job, orientation must be viewed as an on-going process for the employee--a process of continuous adjustment to everything that bears on the employee-employer relationship. The basic purpose of orientation is to prepare the employee to perform his job well. Such preparation includes not only the teach- ing of Skill, but also involves imparting knowledge that induces intelligent action and encourages development of attitudes which bring willing COOperation with fellow- employees and with the employer. .According to Koontz and O'Donnell “fl, orientation begins with the introduction of the new employee to his physical and human environment. This introduction should include information regarding the purpose, goals, and philOSOphy of the organization as a whole; the conditions of 10 employment, such as pay, time cards, hours, and fringe bene— fits; and the nature and Specific requirements of the work assignment. In order to perform well, the new employee must understand not only the job itself and its relationship to the enterprise as a whole, but also its purpose, its scope, and the extent of authority delegation. These authors firmly believe that a written job description and statement of authority delegation will help clarify these points for the employee. Schein (13) has pointed out that work performance depends not upon the individual alone but also upon the net— work of social relationships within which he Operates. Informal associations and groups are found in almost any organizational circumstance and have profound effects on motivation to work and on the level and quality of job per— formance. Koontz and O'Donnell (6) maintained that the new employee must be oriented to his relationships with other employees on several different levels: (a) with persons on the same level in the same work group, (b) with persons at higher or lower levels in the same work group, (c) with persons at higher or lower levels in other parts of the orga— nization, and (d) with persons outside the organization. The new employee Should be personally introduced to those persons with whom he will have considerable contact. He also needs to know how to get things done and how to make use of sup— portive serviceS--what services are available, where they 11 are, what they can do for him, and what procedures to follow in requesting them. Planty, McCord, and Efferson (12) claimed that the new employee may be oriented through the use of any one or a combination of the following vehicles: 1. Formal class orientation. The formal, planned presentation is the fundamental vehicle of orien- tation. Regardless of whether the formal presen- tation is made to one employee or to a group of fifteen or twenty, the critical factors are that it has been planned in advance and is presented by a qualified individual(S). 2. Informal orientation. Informal orientation is the acclimating of the new employee to his job by fellow workers and/or other employees of the organization. It may take the form of the buddy system where an efficient, well-qualified worker is assigned to work with the new employee. Or it may include any employee of the organization who may pass on to the new employee information or misinformation, positive or negative atti- tudes, and correct or incorrect work habits. 3. Printed material. This includes such material as the handbook and the neWSpaper of an orga- nization. While the handbook is generally used as a reference book for facts covered by other orientation vehicles, the neWSpaper is more often employed as a means of continuing orien- tation to keep employees abreast of activities and changes within the organization. A number of positive results have been attributed to well-organized, on-going orientation programs. According to Planty gt 31, (12), a well-organized program which in— cludes all of the information necessary for success on the job, arranged and presented in a manner designed to facil- itate employee learning, can Shorten total learning time, augment understanding of the job and the organization as a 12 whole, reduce the kind and amount of beginning supervision needed, and improve the quality of employee performance. More often than not, a better understanding of the job and of the organization as a whole lessens absenteeism and per- Sonnel turnover attributable to unjustified dissatisfaction with the job or with the organization, provides a natural bridge for effective employee-employer communications, and strengthens employee morale. Feelings of isolation, the accumulation of misinformation, and the develOpment of nega- tive attitudes may be alleviated if the employee understands the importance of his job to the organization as a whole, through whom to work to get his job done, the lines of com- munication available to him, and assurance that these lines are Open to him whether he has a need for information or assistance, or wishes to air a grievance. In addition, through stimulating employee interest in his job and the organization as a whole, improvement in the methods and systems presently Operative within the organization may be effected. Education of Adults In writings on adult education (5,9,15), there appeared to be general concensus that learning ability does not change Significantly between the ages of 20 and 60. IrreSpective of age, the ability to learn, the existence of motivational needs, a receptiveness of attitude, and some 13 degree of Skill exist in all individuals in varying degrees. These authors suggested that intensity of interests and clarity of incentives may compensate for decreases in sen- sory efficiency which are frequent concomitants Of increas— ing age. Although the capacity to learn does not decrease with age, the adult may be harder to motivate than the child because he approaches the learning situation with a back- ground of varied experiences and habits which make him less flexible and less imaginative than the child. What appears as lack of capacity may be the result of lack of consistent practice, especially for those adults out of touch with learning activities. Consequently, some adults simply learn more Slowly. Kintzer (5) has identified four deterrents to adult learning: 1. (Fear of self. The fear of losing one's self- confidence. 2. Fear of individuals. This fear is particularly prevalent in situations where more mature adults must compete with younger persons. 3. Fear of ideas. The fear that arises when tena- ciously held attitudes, values, and beliefs are threatened by new ideas, new information, and new procedures. 4. Fear Of association. The fear which originates from the uncertainties regarding one'S personal, community, or job status. Wagner (15) believes that most adults need help in order to become more venturesome, more interested in the world around them, and less concerned about making errors. 14 Their attitudes are likely to improve and/or change as they see the need for continued learning. AS with children, the adult is strongly influenced in his attitudes toward learn- ing by what his contemporaries do. Perhaps even more impor- tant, adult attitudes generally improve and/or change as success is realized. Unless the adult learner is contin- uously advised of his progress, little improvement can be eXpected. Orientation of Lay Employees Little information is available relative to the employment of lay persons as supervisors of lunchroom and playground activities. In recent years, however, lay per- sons have been increasingly employed as teacher aides. Evaluations of some of these programs provide helpful infor- mation concerning the necessity for and the content of orientation programs for lay persons employed by school systems. A study of auxiliary school personnel conducted by Bowman and Klopf of the Bank Street College of Education (1) contains the following recommendations concerning the plan- ning and development of orientation programs for lay employees: . . . that there be preservice training of auxil- iaries to develop communication Skills and other concrete skills as well as the basic understandings needed for success during their first work experi- ence, thus bolstering self-confidence and encourag- ing further effort. 15 . . . that the training be differentiated to meet the Special needs and characteristics of each group, considering such variables as the age of the trainees and the levels (elementary, middle or secondary) at which they are being trained to work. . . . that a practicum be included in all preser- vice training--i.e., a field teaching eXperience where professionals and non—professionals try out and evaluate their team approach, under the close supervision of the training staff. . . . that there be a comprehensive, continuing, in-depth program of development and supervision of auxiliaries closely integrated with a long term program of stable, open-ended employment, so that each level of work reSponSibility will have comparable training available. . . . that mechanisms for process observations and feedback be developed with a Spirit of open- ness to suggestion SO that dynamic role concepts and relationships may emerge which are relevant to each Specific Situation. In the literature available (2,3,4,8,10,ll), there appeared to be general agreement that duties, responsibil- ities, and authorities Should be carefully planned and specified, preferably in writing, prior to the employment of lay persons; that adequate provision Should be made for a program of pre-employment orientation for lay persons and those school staff members directly involved in working with the lay people; and that the program of using lay persons should be evaluated at regular intervals. In the studies reported by these authors, initial orientation for lay per- sons ranged from one day to one week. Most of the authors strongly supported weekly or periodic in-service orientation sessions to provide the lay employees with information aimed 16 at increasing their understanding of children and with an opportunity to share information, eXperiences, and questions. Included in the information conveyed by orientation programs reported were: 10. ll. 12. personnel policies school policies, goals, and procedures the roles of the principal, teachers, and other auxiliary school personnel relative to the school as a whole background of the program of employing lay persons relationship of the lay employee's job to the school curriculum ethical reSponSibilitieS of lay employees need for good grooming need for communication the role a pleasant personality plays in working with others clarification of the discipline role of the lay employee opportunities for self-enrichment inherent in the program fundamentals of mental, physical, and emotional growth of children. Initial orientation and in-service follow-up pro- grams were evaluated in terms of the following observable behavior. 1. Lay employees Showed an improvement in attitudes toward the children, by developing a more realis- tic, open-minded and objective viewPoint about children, and toward the school personnel with whom they worked, as evidenced by the development of a team attitude. 17 2. Lay employees diSplayed greater interest in and enthusiasm for their jobs. School/community relations were also reported to have improved as the lay employees gained insight into the teach- ing profession itself, and into the COOperative efforts of all school-related personnel directed toward the education of children. CHAPTER III SURVEY PROCEDURE Sample Selection At the beginning of the 1967 fall semester 92 lay persons were employed in 48 Milwaukee elementary schools to serve as noon-hour supervisors of lunchroom and playground activities. Ten of these schools, however, had no formal lunchroom service but assigned lay employees to supervise children who brought lunches from home and ate on the school premises. Because this study was primarily concerned with the orientation procedures for lay persons employed as noon- hour supervisors in schools where lunch service was under the direction of the Food Service Division, only 38 of these schools qualified for inclusion in the survey. Collectively, these 38 schools employed 8O lay persons as noon-hour super- visors. After review and approval of the survey proposal by the Superintendent's Staff of the Milwaukee Public Schools, permission to use these selected elementary schools for col- lection of the desired data was granted. Individual school participation, however, was dependent upon two additional factors: the willingness of the principal, as an employer 18 19 of lay persons for noon-hour lunchroom supervision, to participate in the study, and his approval for collection of data from his noon-hour lunchroom lay supervisory personnel. In an effort to gain maximum participation, a letter describing the nature and purpose of the proposed study, the school personnel who would be involved, and the estimated amount of participative time required of these persons was sent to the school principals by the Department of Psycholog- ical Services and Educational Research, Milwaukee Public Schools. In addition, this communication requested approval for the collection of pertinent data from the principal, himself, and the noon-hour lunchroom lay supervisory person- nel of his school. Of the 38 principals contacted, 35 agreed to have their schools participate in the study. This provided a total sample population of lO8--35 employers (principals) and 73 employees (lay supervisors). Characteristics of the Sample To facilitate more meaningful collection and compara- tive analysis of data obtained from the employers and from the employees, the total sample population was divided into two sub-samples. Sub-sample A Sub-sample A included the 35 principals who were willing to participate in the survey. They represented school districts ranging from better neighborhoods to 20 depressed areas with wide variations in student enrollments, in average daily lunch program participation, and in the number of noon-hour lay supervisors employed. A more de- tailed description of Sub-sample A is presented in Table 14, the Appendix, page 71. Sub-sample B Sub-sample B consisted of all lay persons employed as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors in the 35 elementary schools in which data collection had been approved by the principals. Of the 73 persons in this group, 70 were women and 3 were men. In general, the members of this group were 35 years of age or older and had completed high school. Fifty-three percent of the group had been employed as noon- hour lunchroom supervisors for two or more semesters. A more comprehensive description of Sub-sample B is available in the Appendix, Table 15, page 72. The Survey Instruments Two different survey techniques were used to assemble the data for this study. The school principals (Sub-sample A) were personally interviewed by one of the five profes- sional staff members of the Food Service Division involved with collection of data for the study. To ensure consistency and completeness of inquiry, a printed interview guide was designed for and used by the interviewers. The format of the guide also provided for orderly recording of reSponseS of the 21 interviewees. A written questionnaire, which included both closed- and open-response items, was designed for soliciting information from the lay supervisors (Sub-sample B). ‘Although the two instruments differed in form, they contained Similar questions designed to elicit responses concerning the extent of and major subject areas covered in the existing orientation programs for lay supervisors of noon-hour lunchroom activities, the major reSponSibilities of and the extent of authority delegated to these lay super- visors, the amount of on-the-job assistance and supervision given to the employee and by whom, how and by whom employee job performance was evaluated, and the personal characteris- tics essential for success aS a noon-hour lunchroom lay supervisor of elementary school children. In addition, the principals were asked for their views concerning the desir- ability of initiating a city-wide orientation program for lay persons beginning employment as noon-hour supervisors. Reproductions of the interview guide for Sub-sample A and the written questionnaire and cover letter of instructions for Sub-sample B are included in the Appendix, pages 73 through 80. Prior to the develOpment of the survey instruments, several elementary school principals and lay supervisors were contacted in an effort to determine the type and range of responses which might be anticipated. The initial form and content of each instrument and the cover letter for 22 Sub-sample B were submitted to the Coordinator of Educa- tional Research for evaluation and approval. In addition, suggestions and assistance were requested from the Director, Food Service Division, and the four professional staff mem- bers who assisted with the study. Refinements were made on the basis of suggestions and comments submitted by the eval- uators and the revised instruments were resubmitted to the evaluators for final approval. Following permission by the principal to gather data in a particular school, the principal was contacted by the staff interviewer to arrange an interview appointment. ,At the close of the interview with the principal, the necessary number of packets were left with the principal or school secretary for distribution to the noon-hour lunchroom lay supervisors. Each packet consisted of a cover letter of instructions, the questionnaire, and a stamped, addressed envelope for direct return to the investigator. Procedure for Analysis of Data The data gathered for this study included facts, opinions, attitudes and judgments of individuals relative to the same general questions but viewed from two distinctly different points of view. The use of two different tech- niques of inquiry precludes meaningful statistical compar- ison of reSponseS although percentage comparisons can be made and general conclusions may be drawn. 23 There were actually two systems of noon-hour lunch- room supervision used in the elementary schools: teacher(s) plus a lay supervisor(s), and a lay supervisor(s) only. Since it was found that initial orientation of lay supervi- sors in schools using the teacher/lay supervisor combination did not differ appreciably from the orientation in schools using lay supervisors exclusively, no attempt was made to separate the responses on the basis of the supervisory system used. ,All reSponseS were hand-tabulated. Answers to ques— tions requiring a Single reSponse were totaled and are reported as percentage of total sub-sample reSponse. ,Answers to multi-reSponSe questions were tabulated as a percentage of sub—sample reSponse for each category listed. Where appro- priate, reSponses are arranged in descending order. In order to facilitate data presentation and analysis, the survey results for Sub—sample A and for Sub-sample B are divided into four basic categories: initial employment orientation, lay supervisory responsibilities and authority, supervision and job performance evaluation, and personal characteristics for on-the—job success. PF» - 1'5”"- - CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE SURVEY DATA Because of the professional interests of the inves- tigator, a staff member of the Food Service Division, Milwau- kee Public Schools, the survey information sought was limited to facts, Opinions, and attitudes concerning the individual orientation programs for lay personnel employed, in part, as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors in 35 Milwaukee elementary schools. The data herein reported represent two different points of View concerning program content and pro- cedures, lay supervisory responsibilities and authority, extent of supervision and evaluation of employee performance, and personal characteristics viewed as essential for on-the- job success aS a lay supervisor of elementary school chil- dren. Information obtained from the principals is presented first followed by Similar data contributed by the lay person- nel employed by these principals. Report of the Principals For this portion of the study 35 elementary school principals were individually interviewed by a staff member of the Food Service Division. A detailed description of the 24 25 composition of Sub-sample A, the principals' group, and the interview guide used by the interviewers are found in the Appendix. Orientation Program Content and Procedures Thirty-three principals (94%) indicated they had an orientation program for lay persons employed as regular noon— hour lunchroom supervisors. Of those who did not (6%), one relied upon an eXperienced lay supervisor to train new employees and found this system satisfactory for his partic- ular Situation. The other principal was in his first semes- ter in this particular assignment. All of his noon-hour lay supervisors and subStituteS had served previously and were functioning satisfactorily. At the time of this survey (fall semester 1967) he had not, as yet, develOped an orien- tation program for lay personnel in his school. Ten principals (30%) indicated they also provided an orientation program for substitute supervisors while 23 prin- cipals (70%) said they did not. Of the 23 who did not, 13 did not employ substitutes. In case of absence, the lunch— room supervisory duties were assumed by the principal, vice— principal, or a teacher, or the situation was such that on a temporary basis, supervision was feasible with one less per- son. Eight principals relied upon the present lunchroom supervisors to train substitutes for their routine duties, and 2 principals employed substitute persons who had pre- viously worked as lay supervisors. 26 In the 33 schools having orientation programs, 18 principals (55%) indicated orientation was held on a group basis while 15 principals (45%) indicated lay persons were oriented individually. These data are somewhat misleading because of the 15 schools orientating lay personnel individ- ually, 12 employed only one lay supervisor, two schools em- ployed 2 supervisors and one school employed 3 supervisors. Another factor affecting group or individual orientation was the number of new persons who began their jobs at the same time. As Shown in Table l, in 21 schools (64%) orientation was conducted by the principal and/or vice-principal. In 12 schools (36%) the principal was assisted by the teacher(s) who also supervised in the lunchroom, had previously super- vised in the lunchroom, or were specifically assigned to train lay supervisory personnel. TABLE 1. PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR ORIENTING LUNCHROOM SUPERVISORS (PRINCIPALS‘ REPORT) ReSponseS Person(s) No. % Principal only 19 58 Principal + teacher(s) 12 36 Vice-principal only 1 3 Principal + vice-principal __;L ___3 Total 33 100 27 In regard to place of orientation, 14 schools (43%) conducted the orientation in both the school office and the lunchroom, 10 schools (30%) used the school office only, and 9 schools (27%) used the lunchroom only. In those schools using a combination of School office and lunchroom, four different methods of orientation were reported: 1. Principal covered general school rules and lunchroom procedure. Lay personnel received on-the—job training from a teacher who also supervised in the lunchroom. 2. Principal covered lunchroom routine in the school office and then worked along with the lay employee(s) in the lunchroom for the first two to five days. 3. Principal talked briefly with the new employee(s). Teachers able to control children well were designated to train new personnel with one teacher assigned to each new employee for the first week. 4. In addition to the oral instructions from the principal, new lay employees observed the opera- tion of the lunchroom, which was under teacher supervision, for one to two days before assuming supervisory duties themselves. Two methods were reported for the schools using the lunchroom only for orientation of lay personnel: 1. Principal worked along with the new employee(s) for the first week or two. 2. New lay supervisors were trained on-the-job by a teacher with previous eXperience in lunchroom supervision. The major areas covered in the orientation programs are summarized in Table 2. From the information given by the principals it appears that major orientation emphases include general school policies and regulations, conditions 28 TABLE 2. MAJOR AREAS COVERED IN ORIENTATION PROGRAMS FOR LUNCHROOM SUPERVISORS (PRINCIPALS' REPORT) Responses Major Areas No. % General school policies and regulations 10 30 Conditions of employment 9 27 School lunch program Educational aSpects and program goals 8 24 Philosophy of the program 2 6 Operational policies and procedures Routine lunchroom duties 24 73 Order and discipline 21 64 Seating and dismissal of children 19 58 Lunchroom policies 4 12 Student welfare 4 12 Role of student hosts/hostesses/ monitors/cadets 4 12 Communication with children 3 9 Table set-ups 2 6 of employment, and the policies for three basic operational procedures: routine lunchroom duties, and seating and dismissal of the children. order and discipline, Only 8 programs (24%) included the educational aspects and program goals of the school lunch program. Information pertaining to the philosophy of the school lunch program, lunchroom policies, student welfare, the role of student hosts, hostesses, monitors or cadets, communication with children, and the routine for table set-ups is included in only 12 percent or less of the existing programs. Eight principals (24%) indicated that printed mate- rial covering lunchroom supervision is provided for lay 29 employees, while 25 principals (76%) indicated they had no such prepared materials. For the most part, materials which were available for distribution were mimeographed at the particular school and varied from a Simple Sheet outlining general rules to quite detailed position descriptions. In most cases, this material had been developed prior to the inauguration of the noon-hour lay supervisory program and written for teachers who had formerly served as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors. The amount of time Spent on employee orientation (Table 3) varied considerably. In nearly half of the schools (49%) initial orientation took less than one hour and included information pertaining to both lunchroom and playground supervision. Subsequent on-the-job training and supervision varied according to the individual needs of new personnel. TABLE 3. ORIENTATION TIME FOR LAY SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL (PRINCIPALS' REPORT) Responses Time No. % Less than 1 hour 16 49 1-4 hours 3 9 1-4 days 1 3 1-4 weeks 5 15 Over 4 weeks 6 18 No reSponse 2 6 Total 33 100 30 A major factor affecting both the length of the orientation period and the comprehensiveness of the informa- tion given seemed to be the familiarity of the new employee with the general operation of the particular school. Eleven principals (33%) indicated that their orientation sessions were usually "informal" and/or "brief" for new employees if they had one or more of the following qualifications: 1. had previously assisted in the school library and/or health program 2. were active in the P.T.A. of the school 3. were college graduates 4. had children who had previously attended or were presently attending the school or 5. had had some previous eXperience in dealing with large numbers of children. In the event new lay persons were hired during the school year, the majority of the principals (61%) indicated that their office continued to provide the initial orienta- tion information (Table 4). Ten of these principals (30%) indicated they were assisted by trained lay supervisors or by teachers with lunchroom supervision experience, while an additional ten principals (30%) indicated that greater responsibility for training newly employed persons in the technical aspects of the job was delegated to a trained lay supervisor. 31 TABLE 4. PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR ORIENTATION OF NEW LAY PERSONNEL EMPLOYED DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR (PRINCI- PALS' REPORT) Responses Person(s) No. % Principal and/or vice-principal 12 37 Lay supervisor only 10 30 Principal + lay supervisor 6 18 Principal + teacher 4 12 NO reSponse __1 __g_ Total 33 100 ReSponsibilities and Authority of Lay Supervisors Table 5 summarizes the responsibilities of noon-hour lunchroom supervisors into three general areas: order and discipline, physical operation of lunchroom service, and student welfare as viewed by the principals surveyed. Order of importance, as indicated by frequency of mention, shows the most important responsibilities to be maintenance of student order, seating and dismissal of children, encourag- ing children to eat, control of noise level, discipline, and attending to the needs of children. Secondary responsibil- itieS include maintaining physical orderliness of the lunch- room, teaching and/or encouraging table manners, supervising monitors/cadetS/hosts/hostesses, and ensuring the safety of 32 TABLE 5. MAJOR RESPONSIBILITIES OF LUNCHROOM LAY SUPERVISORS (PRINCIPALS' REPORT) Responses Responsibilities No. % Order and discipline: Maintain student order 29 83 Control noise level 11 32 .Discipline 10 29 Physical Operation of lunchroom service: Seating and dismissal of children 14 40 Attend to needs of children 10 29 Maintain physical orderliness 8 23 Supervise monitorS/cadets/hostS/hostesseS 6 l7 Supervise collection of lunch tickets 2 6 Sell milk to bag lunchers l 3 Report food-related complaints 1 3 Student welfare: Encourage children to eat 12 34 Teach/encourage table manners 7 20 Ensure safety of children 4 ll Encourage courtesy l 3 Ensure proper lavoratory procedures 1 3 Care for injured children 1 3 the children. ReSponSibilitieS viewed as relatively unimpor— tant are supervising the collection of lunch tickets, sell- ing milk to bag lunchers, reporting food-related complaints, encouraging courtesy, ensuring proper lavoratory procedures, and caring for injured children. As seen from Table 6, in 14 schools (40%) lay lunch- room supervisors have been delegated the same authority as a teacher. According to one of the principals interviewed, a teacher supervising in the lunchroom has the authority to: 33 l. discipline the children 2. temporarily remove a child from the lunchroom and send him to the school office 3. contact parents in case of an emergency 4. administer first aid. One school also authorized the lay supervisor to send warn- ing letters home. These are form letters informing parents of their child's misbehavior and possible suspension of the lunchroom privilege Should this misbehavior continue. TABLE 6. AUTHORITY DELEGATED TO LUNCHROOM LAY SUPERVISORS (PRINCIPALS' REPORT) Responses Authority No. % Same as teacher 14 40 Modified teacher 13 37 General discipline/minor behavior problems 5 14 Very little 2 6 No authority __l __41 Total 35 100 The term "modified teacher" is used to designate those lunchroom supervisors who had been delegated the same authority as a teacher but with one or more of the following exceptions: the supervisor cannot-- 34 l. eXpel or suSpend a child from the lunchroom 2. send a child home 3. contact the child's parents 4. handle severe disciplinary problems 5. take the monitor privilege away from a child 6. administer first aid. In five schools the authority Of the lay supervisor is restricted to general discipline and minor behavior prob- lems. Limiting the authority of lunchroom lay supervisors occurs most frequently in those schools which use a combina- tion of teacher/lay personnel supervision in the lunchroom. When a lay supervisor experiences difficulty in handling a child, in the majority of cases She is eXpected to turn to the principal, vice-principal, or lunchroom or hall super- vising teacher for assistance (Table 7). TABLE 7. SOURCE OF HELP FOR LAY SUPERVISORS EXPERIENCING DIFFICULTY IN HANDLING BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS (PRIN- CIPALS' REPORT) Responses Person(s) No. ‘% Principal or vice-principal 23 66 Principal or teacher on lunchroom or hall duty 5 14 Teacher in lunchroom 3 8 Principal or school secretary 2 6 Principal first, then classroom teacher 1 3 Fellow aides l 3 Total 35 100 35 In some schools, the lunchroom supervisors are pro- vided with mimeographed forms on which to record the names of children who are disruptive and the nature of the behav- ior problem. These reports are turned in daily to the school office for review and further action by the principal. In other Schools, the principal is available daily for a fifteen minute period (generally 1:00 to 1:15 p.m.) during which time lunchroom supervisors may present their questions and problems for discussion. ,Supervision and Evaluation of Emplpyee Pegformance In 33 schools (94%) the principal and/or vice- principal are directly reSponSible for the performance of noon-hour lunchroom supervisors, while in 2 schools (6%) the principal and the teacher supervising in the lunchroom Share this reSponSibility. Thirty-four principals (97%) indicated that lay supervisors were supervised by those individuals who were directly responsible for their performance and supervision was provided four to five days a week in 22 schools (65%), three times or less per week in 5 schools (15%), and only occasionally in 7 schools (20%). Only 20 principals (57%) indicated that their lay supervisors were given some type of performance evaluation. In general, performance evaluations were quite informal and consisted of occasional to frequent talks with the lay super- visors, and the giving of praise periodically. Three 36 principals indicated that in addition to suggestions and praise, they felt obligated to evaluate each lay supervisor in a more formal manner at the end of each semester or at the end of the school year. Those principals who did not evaluate the performance of lay supervisors indicated they felt the lay personnel knew they were doing a good job with— out actually being told and there was no need at this time to evaluate performance. One principal expressed the opin- ion that Some type of systematic formal performance rating of lunchroom lay supervisors would ease problems related to lay employee dismissal. Personal Characteristics Essential for Lay Supervisors Regardless of how well—structured a particular posi- tion may be, success or failure is determined, in large measure, by the personal characteristics of the individual. Taking into consideration the needs of their particular schools, the principals were asked to indicate personal characteristics they felt were important for a lay person to have in order to become a successful noon-hour lunchroom supervisor. Their answers have been summarized under three major headings: physical attributes; personal qualities; and leadership qualities, abilities, and eXperienceS (Table 8) . 37 TABLE 8. PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS ESSENTIAL FOR SUCCESS AS A NOON-HOUR LUNCHROOM LAY SUPERVISOR (PRINCIPALS' REPORT) ReSponseS Characteristics No. ‘% Physical attributes: Appropriate occupational dress 11 32 Emotional stability 10 29 Strong, pleasant voice 6 17 Mature stature 3 9 Good health 3 9 Personal qualities: Pleasant diSposition 12 34 Dependable 9 26 'Cooperative and discrete 6 17 Mature, intelligent adult 4 11 Not too well known by children 3 9 Leadership qualities, abilities, eXperiences: .Ability to manage young children effectively 33 94 Interest, patience, understanding in working with young children 23 66 Fair, firm, effective disciplinarian 9 26 Communicate and relate effectively with children and adults 6 l7 Capable of making sound decisions 5 14 Some group work experience 5 l4 Ability to adjust quickly to new Situations 4 11 Respect and enforce school policies 1 3 Ability to do simple first aid 1 3 In evaluating the responses summarized in Table 8, the frequency with which certain characteristics were men- tioned may be misleading. Although the needs of the differ- ent schools might be eXpected to vary with the area of the city, the make-up of the student population, the physical features of the school, etc., the mere fact that a 38 characteristic was mentioned attests to its importance to a principal in reSpect to his particular Situation. Order of importance, as indicated by frequency of mention, shows the most important personal characteristics to be the ability to manage young children effectively; interest, patience, and understanding in working with young children; a pleasant disposition; appropriate occupational dress; and emotional stability. Secondary characteristics include dependability; ability to be a fair, firm, and effective disciplinarian; strong, pleasant voice; COOpera- tive and discrete; and the ability to communicate and relate effectively with children and adults. Characteristics viewed as relatively unimportant are the ability to make sound decisions, some group work eXperience, maturity and intelligence, the ability to adjust quickly to new situa- tions, mature stature, good health, not too well known by the children, reSpect for and ability to enforce school policies, and ability to perform simple first aid. Group Orientation Program The opinions and ideas of Sub-sample A (the princi— pals' group) were sought regarding the desirability of group orientation for lay persons seeking employment as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors in the Milwaukee elementary schools. Group orientation was defined aS an orientation program planned by a central committee to present general background information applicable to all elementary schools to new lay 39 employees. Those principals who indicated such a program would be desirable were asked for their ideas as to who should be responsible for planning and presenting such a program, where it should be conducted, and the information areas they felt it Should cover. Twenty-one principals (60%) indicated they felt such a program would be desirable, one principal (3%) felt it would not, and 13 principals (37%) preferred not to commit themselves at this time. Several principals who favored group orientation felt such a program would reduce the amount of time that each principal would need to Spend on lay employee orientation. If general background information applicable to all_elementary schools was presented to lay employees, the principal could Spend his time covering in— formation specific for supervision in his particular school. Mention was also made of resistance on the part of some noon-hour lay supervisors to accept suggestions or criticism from professional staff members. City-wide orientation might encourage develOpment of the attitude that lay employ- ees, as part of a larger group employed by the school board, are working for the benefit of children throughout the school system. Such an attitude should promote improved working relationships between lay supervisors and profes- sional staff members. Those principals who felt city-wide orientation would be desirable indicated that the reSponSibility for 4O planning and presenting such a program Should not be vested in one individual. Rather, they felt a team approach would be more effective. Suggestions as to possible team members included principals, Food Service Division staff members, school psychologists, school nurses, members of the Recrea- tion Department, and selected experienced lay personnel. A number of suggestions were made as to possible content of a group orientation program: 1. Noon-hour lay supervision: the purpose of the program; the place of the lay employee in the total school system; the working relationships between the lay employee and other school person- nel; the question of responsibility; the role of the lay supervisor in the lunchroom. 2. .Details of employment: routine procedures for filling out time cards; the importance of prompt- ness, of attendance regularity, and of reporting personal absence. 3. General schoolgboard policies: to include the importance of good public relations to the indi- vidual school and to the school system as a whole, and the role of the lay employee in fostering such relations. 4. Child psychology: how children react in group Situations; behavior to expect of different age groups; effective methods of control and/or discipline of children in groups; types of prob— lems the lay employee might eXpect to encounter; how to communicate effectively with children. 5. School lunch program: objectives of the program; an eXplanation of the Type A lunch and how requirements are implemented; the nutritional basis for the menus; a variety of means for encouraging food acceptance and for developing social graces; interpretation of "desirable social atmOSphere." 6. Noon-hour playground supervision: role of the lay employee as playground supervisor; suggested activ- ities for normal and inclement days. ing the for lay 41 A number of thoughtful suggestions were made concern- implementation of a city-wide orientation program personnel: Hold orientation on a district or regional basis rather than at the School Board Administration Building. Some lay persons might feel more at ease if orientation was held in or near their own school districts; problems differ with area of the city; and smaller groups encourage interaction of partic- ipants. Tour several lunchrooms in various parts of the city so that different types of Situations could be observed. Follow tour with buzz sessions to discuss suggestions and remedies for problems observed. Conduct one- or two-day group orientation sessions annually in May or June with follow-up sessions during the two-day Teachers' Convention in November. Have the program conducted by at least three people, such as a principal or teacher who have had "success- ful" lunchroom experience, a member of the Food Ser- vice Division staff, and a school psychologist. .Make use of visual aids. When speaking of social graces, use a film to Show the lay employees the social graces which children are expected to learn and practice. Use the panel discussion technique. Group orientation sessions Should be considered as part of the lay employees' working year with mone— tary compensation for this time. 42 Report of the Lay Supervisors Questionnaire distribution was restricted to the 74 elementary school lunchroom lay supervisors employed by the 35 principals participating in the study. Of these, 73 (99%) completed and returned the questionnaire as requested. In this section, the percentages of group reSponse reported are based upon the 73 returns. Further information concern- ing the 73 participants (Sub-sample B) and the cover letter and questionnaire used for this group are included in the Appendix. Orientation Program.Content and Procedures - Sixty-nine lunchroom supervisors (95%) indicated that, when they began their jobs, they received some instruc- tion and training regarding their duties and responsibilities whereas four (5%) reported they had not. As Shown in Table 9, 32 lay supervisors (46%) received their orientation from the principal and/or vice-principal only; 27 (39%) received their orientation from the principal and/or vice—principal plus school personnel who had been or presently were involved with supervision in the lunchroom; 6 (9%) reported they had been oriented by the principal and/or vice-principal with the assistance of the school secretary, a teacher, or a member of the Food Service Division staff. In 4 cases (6%) the principal relied entirely upon a teacher or an experienced lay supervisor to perform this service for the new employee. 43 TABLE 9. PERSON(S) FROM WHOM LUNCHROOM SUPERVISORS RECEIVED ORIENTATION (EMPLOYEES' REPORT) Responses Person(s) No. % Principal/vice-principal only 32 46 Principal/v-p + lay supervisor 15 22 Principal/v-p + teacher ll 16 Principal/v-p + teacher + lay supervisor 1 l Principal/v—p + school secretary 2 3 Principal/v-p + school secretary + teacher 2 3 Principal/v-p + Food Service Division staff 2 3 Teacher only 2 3 Lay Supervisor only 2 3 Total 69 100 Respondents were asked to indicate which of the 10 informational areas listed on the questionnaire were included in the orientation program at their school. Figure 1 sum- marizes the percent employee response for each item listed. Areas most frequently covered were seating and dismissal policies, lunchroom conduct eXpected of the children, whom to turn to with a disciplinary problem, general school rules, procedures for handling a sick or injured child, and methods of controlling and/or disciplining children. Covered less frequently were the role of hosts, hostesses, monitors or cadets, and the most appropriate clothing to wear. Those areas covered least frequently were educational objectives of both the lunchroom and the school. 44 MAJOR AREAS Seating and dismissal policies Lunchroom conduct expected of children Whom to turn to with a disci— plinary problem General school rules Handling procedures for a Sick or injured child Methods of controlling and/or disciplining children Role of hosts, hostesses, cadets, or monitors Most appropriate clothing to wear Educational objectives of the lunchroom Educational objectives of the school III,IIIIIII 96% l 94%~ I 93% I 90% T 84% T 77% ET 53% pJ 46% ] 19%| 3 12% l 1 1 n 1 J r 1 1 J o 20 4o 60 80 ' 100 Coverage (%) FIGURE 1. MAJOR AREAS COVERED IN ORIENTATION PROGRAMS FOR NOON-HOUR LUNCHROOM LAY SUPERVISORS (EMPLOYEES' REPORT) 45 The lunchroom supervisors were asked to identify other areas which they wished had been covered in the ini- tial orientation. Fifty-five (80%) did not respond to this question and two (3%) Specified "None." The remaining 12 (17%) eXpressed a desire for more information in the area of controlling and/or disciplining children and indicated a need for greater clarification of authority. Their responses posed such questions as: How far may a lunchroom lay super— visor go in disciplining a child? Should possible repercus- sions from parents be taken into account with individual children? How much authority does the lunchroom lay super- visor have over children who are brought from another school by bus? What is the extent of the lay supervisor's authority when a teacher also supervises in the lunchroom? In addition to verbal orientation only, 10 lay super- visors (15%) indicated that they were given printed instruc- tions concerning the duties of a lunchroom supervisor. Of those who had not received such materials, several indicated that printed instructions would be helpful so that both supervisors and children would know exactly what the policies and rules are and disciplinary procedures could reflect greater consistency among supervisors in the same school. Responsibilities and Authority of Lay Supervisors Percent responses of lay supervisors with reSpect to their job reSponSibilitieS are Shown in Figure 2. From the 46 MAJOR RESPONSIBILITIES Ensure orderly entrance and exit of children to and from lunchroom Maintain order in the lunchroom Develop a friendly relationship with the children Encourage children to try all foods Encourage hosts, hostesses, monitors, or cadets to help maintain order Teach children proper use of napkin and utensils Maintain complete Silence among children during the meal Other responsibilities 100% J 97% T 78% J 74% ] 64% I 43% 1 14%| 34% L I I I I I I I I I 0 20 4O 6O 80 100 Group Response (%) FIGURE 2. MAJOR RESPONSIBILITIES OF LUNCHROOM LAY SUPERVISORS (EMPLOYEES' REPORT). 47 vieWpoint of the respondents all or nearly all felt respon— sible for maintaining order as the children entered the lunchroom, during the meal period, and at the time of dis— missal. Approximately 75%.of the lay employees indicated responsibility for developing a friendly relationship with the children and encouraging them to try all foods served. Two-thirds of the group surveyed indicated responsibility for encouraging hosts, hostesses, monitors, or cadets to assist them in maintaining order. More than half (57%) indicated no reSponSibility for teaching children the proper use of a napkin and eating utensils. Only a few (14%) felt it necessary to have the children remain silent during the noon hour. Three members (4%) indicated service tasks which were a part of their assigned duties: selling milk to bag lunchers, helping the kitchen personnel set tables before the meal service and wiping them off after the meal, and checking the completeness of table settings before the meal service. Types of authority delegated to lunchroom lay super- visors are given in Figure 3. Nearly all respondents (90%) were authorized to require the children to clean up their table area before being dismissed. Seventy-five percent of the group surveyed determined the order of entry and exit of children to and from the lunchroom. A little more than half (56%) had the authority to determine lunchroom dismissal time on normal and inclement days. Only 37% of the 48 DELEGATED7AUTHORITY Make sure children clean up their table area before being dis- missed Determine order of entry and exit of children to and from lunchroom Determine lunchroom dismissal time on normal and inclement days Temporarily or permanently with— draw lunchroom privileges of a child for repeated misbehavior Retain a child in the lunchroom until his plate is clean Restrict drinking of milk until the child has eaten most of his food Other delegated authority 90% a“ .t‘ {Ii-’- 75% w 1“ C.'.“:u . t 56% 37% 36% 36% j 3% I 1 I I 1 l l I O I 20 J 40 6O 80 100 Group ReSponse (%) FIGURE 3. AUTHORITY DELEGATED TO LUNCHROOM LAY SUPERVISORS (EMPLOYEES' REPORT). 49 respondents could temporarily or permanently withdraw the lunchroom privileges of a child for repeated misbehavior. The authority to retain a child in the lunchroom until his plate is clean, to restrict the drinking of milk until the child has eaten most of his food, to separate the seating Of children if their behavior warranted, and to retain a child h .AL. in the lunchroom for misbehavior was delegated to only a few ‘. '1' r of the reSpondentS (6%Ior less). Should they experience difficulty in handling behav- ior problems, 48% of the lay supervisors indicated they would seek help from the principal and/or vice-principal (Table 10). Fifty-one percent indicated that in addition TABLE 10. SOURCE OF HELP FOR LAY SUPERVISORS EXPERIENCING DIFFICULTY IN HANDLING BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS (EMPLOYEES' REPORT) Responses Person(s) No. % Principal/vice-principal only 35 48 Principal/v-p + child's teacher 19 26 Principal/v-p + parents 6 9 Principal/v-p + child's teacher + parents 6 9 Principal/v-p + teacher on lunchroom duty 2 3 Principal/v-p + child's teacher + teacher on lunchroom duty 1 l Principal/v-p + another lay supervisor l 1 Principal/v-p + child's teacher + another lay supervisor l l Principal/v-p + child's teacher + another lay supervisor + parents 1 1 Child's teacher only __1 .__1 Total 73 100 50 to the principal or vice-principal they would turn for assistance to one or a combination of the following: the child's teacher, the child's parents, a teacher supervising in the lunchroom, or another lay supervisor. Only one lay supervisor said she would Speak to the child's teacher only regarding behavior problems. .A number of methods are used by the lay supervisors to gain the children's attention and to control the noise level of the lunchroom (Table 11). Indicated as the methods employed most frequently were Speaking in a loud voice only (30%), blowing a whistle only (15%) and combining voice and whistle (21%). Three percent reported Speaking with the aid of a microphone only and 3 percent flicked the lunchroom lights only. Twenty-seven percent of the lay supervisors TABLE 11. METHODS USED TO GAIN CHILDREN'S ATTENTION IN THE LUNCHROOM (EMPLOYEES' REPORT) ReSponseS Methods No. % Loud voice only 22 30 Loud voice + whistle 15 21 Whistle only 11 15 Microphone only 2 3 Flick lunchroom lights only 2 3 Other combinations 20 27 No response 1 1 Total 73 100 51 combined two or more of the following methods: Speaking in a loud voice, blowing a whistle, speaking with the aid of a microphone, flicking the lunchroom lights, clapping the hands, ringing a bell, and hitting a glass with a fork. Several lay supervisors reported the use of methods which would seem more applicable to smaller groups of children: speaking in a low voice, speaking to each child individually, and Speaking to one table of children at a time. Supervision and Evaluation of Employee Performance The majority of lunchroom lay supervisors (97%) felt they were directly responsible to either the principal or the vice-principal or both (Table 12). Of this group, 5 per- cent indicated they were also responsible to a teacher. Two lay supervisors (2%) felt they were responsible only to the teacher supervising in the lunchroom. TABLE 12. PERSON (S) DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR.LUNCHROOM LAY SUPERVISOR PERFORMANCE (EMPLOYEES' REPORT) Responses Person(s) No. % Principal/vice-principal 67 92 Principal/vice—principal + teacher 3 5 Lunchroom supervising teacher 2 2 NO reSponse l 1 Total 73 100 52 Seventy-two lay supervisors (99%) indicated that the person to whom they are directly responsible did visit the lunchroom while they are on duty. The majority of lay super— visors (86%) reported being supervised daily or once or twice a week by the person(s) to whom they felt directly reSponSible (Table 13). Fourteen percent indicated they were supervised once a month or less. TABLE 13. SUPERVISION OF LUNCHROOM LAY SUPERVISORS (EMPLOYEES' REPORT) Responses Frequency No. % Daily 42 58 Once or twice a week 20 28 .About once a month 5 7 Not very often __Ji __1_ Total 72 100 Sixty-five lunchroom lay supervisors (89%) indicated 'that the person to whom they are directly responsible had discussed their job performance with them or had given them suggestions directed toward making. their work easier or more effective. Eight lay supervisors (11%) indicated their job pelrformance had not been discussed with them nor had they beesn given suggestions regarding their work. 53 Personal Characteristics Essential for Lay Supervisors The lay employees were asked to identify those characteristics which they considered important for effec- tive performance as a lunchroom supervisor. Their responses are summarized in Figure 4. AS indicated by percentage of group response, those characteristics considered most important included a pleas- ant and patient disposition, ability to control one's temper, good personal hygiene, and good personal appearance. Sixty- Seven percent felt that having children of their own was important. Physical stamina, strong voice, and loyalty to the school were indicated by approximately 50 percent of the lay supervisors. Approximately one-third of the group surveyed identified eXperience in group activities (P.T.A., Girl Scouts, etc.); a high school education; and having an interest in and the ability to understand and handle young children effectively. Only a few (12% or less) felt Special on-the-job training, stern appearance, the ability to estab— lish good relationships with professional staff members, dependability, and good hearing were important characteris- tics. 54 PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS Pleasant and patient disposition Ability to control one's temper Good personal hygiene Good personal appearance A family of one's own Physical stamina Strong voice Loyalty to the School Experience in P.T.A., Scouts, etc. High school education Interest in, understand, and ability to handle children effectively Special on-the-job training Stern appearance Communicate effectively Other characteristics FIGURE 4. lllellllfi 100% 1 90% IT 86% J "3 . v . ~ 84% j 67% J 55% l L— 49% 43% l 33% l 32% ] 32% J _:| 12% _j 10% j 4% j 4% 1 1 11 1, 1 1 1 1 1 1 O 20 4O 6O 80 100 Group Response (%) PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS IMPORTANT FOR LAY PERSONS EMPLOYED AS NOON-HOUR LUNCHROOM SUPERVISORS (EMPLOYEES' REPORT). CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY This study was concerned with appraising the over- all content of existing orientation programs for lay persons employed as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors in 35 elementary schools in the Milwaukee Public School System. Survey instruments were directed toward obtaining information Spe— cifically related to orientation of lay persons for lunch- room supervision. Information was sought from two different points of view--that of the elementary school principals, and that of the noon-hour lunchroom lay supervisors employed by those principals. Those elementary school principals who agreed to have their schools participate in this study were asked for information concerning content and procedures of their pres- ent orientation programs, lay supervisory responsibilities and authority, extent of supervision and evaluation of employee performance, and personal characteristics viewed as essential for on-the-job success as a lay supervisor of elementary school children. In addition, opinions and ideas were sought regarding the desirability of a citydwide 55 56 orientation program for lay persons beginning employment as noon-hour supervisors. The personal interview technique was used to assemble these data. With the exception of opinions concerning a city- wide orientation program, the same basic information was gathered from noon-hour lay supervisors employed in those elementary schools in which data collection had been approved. For this group, a written questionnaire, which included both closed- and open-reSponse items, was used. This chapter summarizes the data discussed in Chapter IV. Conclusions are drawn, and implications for future orientation programs for noon—hour lay supervisors and for further investigation are suggested. Orientation Program.Content and Procedures Principals Nearly all of the principals interviewed indicated they had an orientation program for lay persons employed as regular noon-hour lunchroom supervisors. Approximately one- third also had an orientation program for substitute super- visors. Of those principals who did not, over half did not employ substitutes and the others either relied upon the present lay supervisors to train substitutes for their routine duties or employed substitute persons who had pre- viously worked as lay supervisors. In general, orientation was held on a group basis where more than one lay supervisor 57 was employed. In 64 percent of the schools, orientation was conducted by the principal and/or vice-principal while in the remaining schools, the principal was assisted by a teacher(s) with lunchroom supervision experience. In regard to place of orientation, approximately the same number of schools conducted the orientation in both the school office F? and the lunchroom as did schools using the school office or I? the lunchroom only. Although different methods of orientation are used, -1 in general, following a session with the principal, the new ? lay employees were trained in the technical aspects of lunch- room supervision by the principal himself or a teacher(s) who also supervised in the lunchroom, had previously super— vised in the lunchroom, or were Specifically assigned to train lay personnel. From information given by the principals, it appears that, in addition to general school policies and regulations and conditions of employment, major orientation emphases include the policies for three basic operational procedures: routine lunchroom duties, order and discipline, and seating and dismissal of children. Eight principals indicated that printed material covering lunchroom supervision is provided for lay employees. In most cases, however, this material had been developed for use by teachers prior to the inauguration of the noon-hour lay supervisory program. 58 The amount of time Spent on employee orientation varied from less than one hour to more than four weeks. In nearly half of the schools, initial orientation took less than one hour and included information pertaining to both lunchroom and playground supervision. A major factor affect- ing both the length of the orientation period and the compre- TE“? hensiveness of the information given seemed to be the famil- f‘fi " ah“?- iarity of the new employee with the general Operation of the particular school. W" E In the event new lay persons were hired during the school year, the majority of principals indicated that their office continued to provide the initial orientation infor- mation. Approximately one-third indicated that greater responsibility for training newly employed persons in the technical aspects of their job was delegated to a trained lay supervisor. Laygsupervisors Ninety-five percent of the lay supervisors indicated that, when they began their jobs, they received some instruc- tion or training regarding their duties and reSponSibilitieS. The majority received their orientation from the principal and/or vice-principal only, or the principal and/or vice— principal plus school personnel who had been or presently were involved with supervision in the lunchroom. 59 Those areas covered most frequently during orienta- tion were seating and dismissal policies, lunchroom conduct exPected of the children, whom to turn to with a disciplin- ary problem, general school rules, procedures for handling a sick or injured child, and methods of controlling and/or disciplining children. When asked to identify other areas which they wished had been covered in the initial orienta- tion, a small number of lay supervisors expressed a desire for more information in the area of controlling and/or dis- ciplining children and indicated a need for greater clarifi— cation of authority. In addition to verbal orientation, ten lay super- visors indicated that they were given printed instructions concerning the duties of a lunchroom supervisor. Of those who had not received such materials, several indicated that printed instructions would be helpful. Responsibilities and.Agthority of Lav Supervisors Principals ‘As indicated by the principals interviewed, the most important reSponSibilities of lay supervisors are maintain- ing student order, seating and dismissal of children, encour- aging children to eat, control of noise level, discipline,' and attending to the needs of children. 60 In the majority of schools, lay supervisors have been delegated the same authority as a teacher,.or the same authority with one or more restrictions. In a small number of schools, generally those using teachers in addition to lay persons for supervision, the lay supervisor is restricted to general discipline and minor behavior problems. .5,“ ...-I When a lay supervisor eXperiences difficulty in handling a child, in the majority of cases she is expected to turn to the principal, vice-principal, or lunchroom or hall supervising teacher for assistance. “Imr“—T7~w~ Lay Supervisors From the viewpoint of the lay supervisors, all or nearly all felt responsible for maintaining order as the children entered the lunchroom, during the meal period, and at the time of dismissal. Approximately 75 percent indicated responsibility for developing a friendly relationship with the children and encouraging them to try all foods served, and two-thirds of the lay supervisors indicated responsibil- ity for encouraging hosts, hostesses, monitors, or cadets to assist them in maintaining order. Nearly all of the lay supervisors reported they were authorized to require the children to clean up their table area before being dismissed from the lunchroom. Two-thirds were authorized to determine the order of entry and exit of children to and from the lunchroom; slightly more than half had authority to determine lunchroom dismissal time on 61 normal and inclement days. Only 37 percent of the lay super- visors could temporarily or permanently withdraw the lunch- room privileges of a child for misbehavior. Should they eXperience difficulty in handling behav- ior problems, a little less than half of the lay supervisors indicated they would seek help from the principal and/or vice-principal. Slightly more than half indicated that in addition to the principal or vice-principal, they would turn for assistance to one or a combination of the following: the child's teacher, the child's parents, a teacher super- vising in the lunchroom or another lay supervisor. Although a number of methods are used by lay super- visors to gain the children's attention and to control the noise level of the lunchroom, the methods employed most frequently were speaking in a loud voice, blowing a whistle, or combining voice and whistle. Supervision and Evaluation of Employee Performance Principals In 94 percent of the schools, the principal and/or vice-principal are directly reSponsible for the performance of noon-hour lunchroom supervisors. A majority of principals indicated that lay supervisors were supervised by those indi— viduals who were directly responsible for their performance, and supervision was generally provided four to five days a week. 62 A little more than half of the principals indicated that their lay supervisors were given some type of perfor- mance evaluation. In general, performance evaluations were quite informal and consisted of occasional to frequent talks with the lay supervisors, and the giving of praise period- ically. Those principals who did not evaluate the perfor- mance of lay supervisors indicated they felt the lay per- sonnel knew they were doing a good job without actually being told and there was no need at this time to evaluate performance. Lay Supervisors The majority of lay supervisors felt they were directly responsible to either the principal or vice-princi- pal or both. Most of them indicated they were supervised daily or once or twice a week by the person(s) to whom they felt directly responsible. Eighty-nine percent of the lay supervisors indicated that the person to whom they are directly reSponsible had discussed their job with them or had given them suggestions directed toward making their work easier or more effective. 63 Personal Characteristics Essential for Laygsupervisors Principals The personal characteristics the principals felt were most important for a lay person to have in order to become a successful noon-hour supervisor varied with the needs of the particular school. However, as indicated by frequency of mention, the most important personal character- istics are the ability to manage young children effectively; interest, patience, and understanding in working with young children; a pleasant disposition; appropriate occupational dress; and emotional stability. Lay Supervisors From the point of View of the lay supervisors, the personal characteristics they considered most important included a pleasant and patient diSposition, ability to con- trol one's temper, good personal hygiene, and good personal appearance. Group Orientation Program Sixty percent of the principals interviewed indi- cated they felt an orientation program for presenting gen- eral background information applicable to all_elementary schools to new lay employees would be desirable. Collec- tively, they suggested that a city-wide orientation program be planned and presented by a selected team of individuals, 64 and cover information related to the noon-hour program for supervision, details of employment, general school board policies, child psychology, and the school lunch program. Conclusions and Implications of the Study From the information gathered for this study, the following conclusions are drawn: 1. Orientation is provided by nearly all elementary schools employing lay persons on a regular basis as noon—hour lunchroom supervisors. f 2. Although orientation is generally conducted by the a principal and/or vice-principal, it appears that i greater reSponSibility for training newly employed persons in the routine duties of lunchroom supervi- sion is being delegated to trained lay supervisors. 3. In addition to general school policies and regula- tions and conditions of employment, the major areas covered in the orientation programs are concerned mainly with the mechanics of maintaining order. 4. The amount of time given to initial orientation, generally less than one hour, appears reasonable for the material covered. However, there is no evidence that follow—up training sessions were provided. 5. The use of printed material to reinforce the oral presentation covering lunchroom supervision is limited and, in most instances, not specific for lay personnel. 6. The eXpectations of the principals with regard to the major reSponSibilities of lay supervisors, and the interpretation of their responsibilities by lay supervisors, appear to be quite consistent. 7. With regard to delegated authority, there appear to be some discrepancies between the extent of author- ity delegated as eXpressed by the principals and as interpreted by the lay supervisors. 8. Supervision of lay employees by the person(s) reSponSible for their performance is provided with reasonable frequency. 65 9. The job performance evaluation procedures reported indicate that for lay supervisory personnel these evaluations are usually unscheduled, unstructured, and provide no continuous record of employee progress. 10. With the exception of ability to manage young chil- dren effectively, principals and lay supervisors generally agreed on the characteristics important for a lay person to have in order to become a suc— cessful noon—hour supervisor. From the point of view of the Food Service Division, the preparation and service of the school lunch fulfills only one of the objectives of the program--that of safe- guarding and improving the health and well-being of school children. The second objective--the development of social graces and attitudes--rests with those individuals respon- sible for supervising the children in the lunchroom. The educational aSpects and goals of the school lunch program were covered in the orientation programs of only 8 schools (24%). If the lunchroom were viewed as a practical labora- tory for the teaching of social graces, and if the teaching and encouraging of such behavior were to be included as a major responsibility of lay supervisors, the children would ultimately benefit. It is recognized that money is a strong incentive for employment and continued employment. For women in particular, and most of the noon-hour lay supervisors at the present time are women, the feeling of involvement and con- tribution may be equally strong incentives. Greater job involvement and satisfaction of lay supervisors are "I It- ' - I imp») _-_ “PP—- .r-—. tam - 66 contingent upon an increased understanding of the educa- tional system of which they are a part, of their place within that system, and of the contribution they can make to the total education of children. Increased personal growth and satisfaction might be expected to accrue from the real- ization that, in addition to maintaining order in the lunch— room, one has taught a child the proper use of a napkin or a knife or the accepted manner of conversing with others during a meal. This is not to minimize the importance of nor necessity for maintaining order, but to suggest that the duties of the lunchroom lay supervisors be extended to in- clude the encouraging and teaching of social graces. A city-wide orientation program for lay supervisory personnel is one possible way to encourage increased job involvement through increased knowledge and understanding. Suggestions relevant to such a program include that it: 1. be planned and presented by an instructional team representing those departments whose information would be pertinent to successful noon-hour super- vision. be presented for one or one and one-half days at the end of the spring semester for those lay employees planning to continue in the fall or at the beginning of the fall semester so as to include new lay employees, with follow-up sessions planned for later in the school year. be presented at selected locations throughout the city in order to reduce the size of the group, minimize travel distance for participants, and to allow for differences in school community character— istics and supervisory needs. ‘fix us" -L‘M‘: “ya-2..., . ' ‘ J F—-- 4.... 67 4. present background information applicable to all elementary schools in the Milwaukee public schools system, such as: educational philosophy of the school system, basic school board policies, details of employment, the purpose of the noon—hour lay supervisory program, educational aspects of the school lunch program, educational aSpects of play- ground activities, information relevant to under- standing the behavior of children at different age levels, and methods for controlling behavior in large and small group situations. This study has attempted to examine and appraise the over—all content of existing orientation programs for noon— hour lay supervisors. The data suggest the need for further study concerning selection techniques for auxiliary person- nel of elementary schools, employee performance evaluation, and possible methods for effectively systematizing procedures for orienting and training lay supervisory personnel. 1' .A’Ojunwm “‘7‘? .71") . was BIBLIOGRAPHY ll .. _ ...._ W “nan“... mt q.‘ -¢5T.'-~.~.:-, . BIBLIOGRAPHY References Cited Bowman, Garda W. and Klopf, Gordon J. Auxiliary School Personnel: Their Roles, Training, and Institution— alization. A study conducted by the Bank Street College of Education for the U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity. New York, Oct., 1966. f .5 Central Michigan University. A Cooperative Study for , the Better Utilization of Teacher Competencies: a Final Evaluation Report. An evaluative report prepared by an outside evaluating committee. Michigan: Mount Pleasant, 1958. Cutler, Marilyn H. "Teacher Aides are Worth the Effort," The Nation's Schools, LXXIII, No. 4 (April, 1964), 67-69. Duvall, Elven. ,A Dual Opportunity Educational Services Program: Utilizing Teacher-Aides in the Jackson, Michigan Public Schools. A report submitted to the Michigan Education Association. East Lansing, July, 1968. Kintzer, Frederick C. "Approaches to Teaching Adults," Journal of the American Dietetic Association, L, N00 6 (June, 1967), 475-77. Koontz, Harold, and O'Donnell, Cyril. Principles of Management: An Analysis of Managerial Functions. 3d ed. New Ybrk: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964, pp. 473, 476-77. Milwaukee Board of School Directors. Proceedings, Milwaukee Board of School Directors. Milwaukee, Wisconsin. a. 1943-1944 Proceedings, p. 91. b. 1959-1960 Proceedings, p. 140, p. 538. 1962-1963 Proceedings, pp. 533—38. 1963-1964 Proceedings, p. 261. . 1965-1966 Proceedings, p. 94. (DQJO 68 10. 11. 12. 13. l4. l5. 16. 69 New Jersey Education Association. Auxiliary Personnel in New Jersey School Districts. A report prepared by the New Jersey Education Association. Trenton, Spring, 1967. Noble, B. Catherine. "Training the Older Worker." Unpublished Master's problem, Department of Institu- tion Administration, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1960. Park, Charles B. "The Bay City Experiment . . . As Seen by the Director," The Journal of Teacher Education, VII, No. 2 (June, 1965), 101-110. Parsons, Mae. Teacher Aides Are Helping Hands: A Successful Program. A report on the use of teacher aides, School District of the City of Highland Park, Michigan. Distributed by the Office of Professional Development and Instructional Services, Michigan Education Association. East Lansing, January 22, 1968. Planty, Earl G., McCord, William S., and Efferson, Carlos A. Training Emplpyees and Managers. New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1948, pp. 3, 8-13, 160-69. Schein, Edgar H. Organizational Psychology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965, pp. 29, 33-42. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Yearbook of Agriculture: 1959, p. 694° Wagner, Florence E. "Some Principles of Adult Education," The Journal of the American Dietetic Association, XLIV, No. 1 (January, 1964), 34—35. . "Lunch Room Aide Pilot Project." Personal communication to Harold S. Vincent, Superintendent of Milwaukee Public Schools, from Peter Brem, Director, Elementary School Administration. May 31, 1966. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 70 Additional References Ferver, Jack, and Cook, Doris M. (eds.). Teacher Aides. A handbook for instructors and administrators. Published by University Extension, The University of Wisconsin. Madison, 1968. Glovinsky, Arnold. The Paraprofessional Study of Wayne County Intermediate School District. A report distributed by the Office of Professional Develop- ment and Instructional Services, Michigan Education Association. East Lansing, May 7, 1968. Leep, Albert G., and Tracy, Dick B. "Teacher Aides," Ohio Schools, LXV, N00 7 (October, 1967), 26-29. National Education Association. Auxiliapy School Personnel. A statement by the National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards, National Education Association of the United States. Washington, D.C., 1967. U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity. New Partners in the American School: A Study of Auxiliary Personnel in Education. A study conducted by the Bank Street College of Education for the U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity. New York, November, 1967. Wolf, William B. The Management of Personnel. San Francisco: Wadsworth Publishing Co., Inc., 1961. APPEND IX .momHusmmH .mcchsm H OHDHB pod COHDMUSUm mumpcoumml>umucmEon How pm>oummm mHoozom mo umHH co comma coHuMUHMHmmMHU*« .hmmH .umnflmuwa .coHummHoHuumm HHmsm EoouSOGSH NHpr mmmnw>m can usmEHHoucm NHHmp mwmuw>¢y 71 wN 0 MN ms mHmuoa x .. H H H.mm omN mmh mm x .. H N m.Nm on Nmm «m x .. .. m m.mm gmN mmo mm .. x N H 0.0m mMN Nmo Nm x .. .. m N.mm mmH mmm Hm x .. H H m.>N HOH mom cm x .. .. w o.mm NoN hMb mN X .. H N N.Hm mmN mNm mN x .. N H m.mm mON 5mm nN x .. .. w H.0m mmN moo 0N x .. .. m o.o~. mnN omOH mN x .. .. m o.Hv NhN #00 «N x .. .. H p.mN NHH Hmm mN .. x .. H v.0m vm mom NN x .. H H H.Nm moH mNm HN x .. H H H.oo omN oN¢ 0N x .. H H m.0m NOH 5mm mH .. X H N 6.0m wON wmo mH x .. .. w m.Nm mmm th NH x .. .. m m.m¢ va mvm 0H x .. N N m.Nm «NN Hmo mH x .. .. N m.Nn NmH moN vH .. x H N m.om mvN Nmo MH .. x .. H N.>m omH mHe NH x .. .. m m.oN OON emu HH x .. .. N ¢.mN hmH mHo OH x .. .. m o.NN mMH mHo m x .. N H o.Hm nmN . mov m x .. H N 0.0m moH com 5 x .. H N o.¢¢ nmN mum o x .. .. N m.NN ¢¢H mHm m x .. N H o.Hm mmH wmm v x .. N H m.ov MNN moo m .. x .. N m.¢N nmN NNNH N x .. .. m m.Nv vON ohv H pommmumooucoz pommwummo mumnomme m:0muwm >04 8 .oz h..quEHHHoucmH Hoonum iiuoHuumHo Hoonom mmxe an conH>uomsm Eooucucsq «coHumaHoHuumm HHmDm Eoouzocsq AmdfimHUZHmmv 4 mqmzdmlmbm m0 ZOHBmHmUmma .VH mdméh '72 .pmuUSUcoo mmB xm>usm on» SUHSB mcHHSp umummem mnu mcHUSH0:H« OH HH 0N [x Q' In H N \D M N on me mN Hmuoa mo 8 0 OH O 0 O 0 DH Il-I 'HH ' ONHN ov-Iu-I 0—1 0 H 3 ...—{AN 0 on. ou—{r-tl op—IN .000 oooqo—j co. 0‘. .NHHI m ...q 'NHMF‘NHHN ’HH H o 'O—‘HHNN 0 cor-4 cu—(o 'F'l 0H CHI—l 09-! o NrH—q. .Nru—dquH oviN -NrnF4H .HrchVus¢ oH - ONrfibaHrfl m <- H o loo—IIQIIHHH—I oNr-{Iooooooououp-iql Op—I‘ oHa—l 0| [x r-l NNHHH—l Oil-(H mm 0—! QMVHHHI—‘l ONO—i OHM-4 ”-4 o oNu—(M u oH . oH oo—4H . ud—4NcuN . .. .H -H - oN -—4N 0H OFJH 1 N N QHHN o u-Iv-i mH NCHOIONcop-(lordoooHy—(HuoHoOHp—ioor-{HogNoHl «wNud—dNrun:Hrnn:m-dn:Nrun1¢cv—4H.H—qunuw¢—4oa¢ndwwdanvHI m l‘ Hmuos mm #m mm Nm Hm Om mN mN hN 0N mN vN MN NN HN ON mH mH 5H 0H mH ¢H MH NH HH OH HNMfl'l-OOI‘QO‘ wwucu cmnu one: mouse O39 wso :mcu who: pmumeEOU cmnu mmmd um>0 a m¢ flfilmm QMIHN aucmEondEm mo mumummswm coHumosom Hoocum roam mmcmm 004 CwaoHQEm Hmnfidz Hooaom HmmOmH>mmmDm Nddv m mqmzdmlmbm m0 ZOHBmHmommo .mH Ndmdfi 73 SURVEY OF PRINCIPALS MILWAUKEE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Do you have an orientation program for the lay women employed in your school as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors? If "yes": a. Is the orientation given to all the women at one time or to each woman individually? b. Is the orientation given to substitutes as well as to regularly-assigned aides? c. Where does the orientation normally take place? d. By whom is the orientation conducted? e. What major areas are covered in the orientation? f. Are hand-outs covering lunchroom supervision made available to the lay women? If "yes," what kind of hand- outs? 9. How long does the orientation take? h. In the event that new employees are hired during the year, what provision is made for the orien- tation of these women? yes no group individual yes no off. classrm. 1.rm. other P V-P teacher other U'l-bUJNI" O yes no 74 If "no": a. How do the lay women obtain their information regarding their duties and responsibil- ities as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors? b. Do you feel a formal orientation program would be desirable for your lay women? 1) If "yes," who would you sug- gest be responsible for con- ducting such an orientation program? 2) What major areas would you like to see covered by such an orientation program? As noon-hour lunchroom supervisors, what are the major responsibilities of the lay women? As noon-hour lunchroom supervisors, what authority is delegated to the lay women? If a lay woman experiences diffi- culty in handling a child in the lunchroom, to whom should she turn for help with her problem? Who is directly responsible for the performance of the lay woman assigned as noon-hour lunchroom supervisor? a. Does this individual supervise the lay woman while she is on duty in the lunchroom? If "yes," how often is she supervised? yes no P V—P teacher other 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. P V-P teacher other P V-P teacher other yes no "“7 “"‘"’““‘jaW2.--y 75 b. .Are the lay women employed as noon-hour lunchroom supervisors given a performance rating? If "yes," how often are such ratings given? Taking into consideration the needs of your particular school, what do you feel are the most important qualifications for the lay woman who is to be employed as a noon—hour lunchroom supervisor? Other desirable characteristics? yes no U1®WNH poorer—4 76 December 1, 1967 Dear Lunchroom Aide: The attached questionnaire is concerned with the orientation or training, duties, and responsibilities of lay women who are employed as lunchroom aides in Milwaukee Public Elementary Schools. It is part of a study being carried out in all public elementary schools which employ lunchroom aides. The results of this study will help in the develOp- ment of guidelines for the planning of future orientation programs for women, like yourself, who accept employment as lunchroom aides. The principal of your school has been asked for his ideas and suggestions regarding the training of new aides. Since you have had eXperience as a lunchroom aide, your ideas and suggestions are also very important to this study. This questionnaire will take you about ten minutes to complete. Please do not sign your name. The principal will not see your answers and it is not necessary for us to know who you are. The answers you give will be more mean- ingful if they are your own, so we ask that you not confer with the other aide(s) until after you have finished. Once you have completed the questionnaire, please place it in the stamped, self—addressed envelope provided and drop it in the mailbox on your way home or return it to the school office for mailing. Thank you for your cooperation and help. Sincerely, Mary E. Dougherty, Supervisor School Food Services Division 77 SURVEY OF LUNCHROOM AIDES MILWAUKEE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS When you began your job as a noon—hour lunchroom aide, were you given any instruction or training regarding your duties and responsibilities? 1. Yes 2. No If "yes," complete a,b,c, and d; if "no," omit a,b,c, and d, and go on to item 2. a. From whom did you receive this information? (Check as many as apply) [—4 . Principal . Vice-Principal N 3. A teacher 4. School secretary 5. A former lunchroom aide 6. An aide who was to be your co-worker 7. Other b. How many of the following areas were covered? (Check as many areas as apply) 1. Educational purposes of the school 2. General school rules (such as, no running in halls) 3. Educational purposes of the lunch program 4. Lunchroom conduct eXpected of the children 5. Seating and dismissal policies 6. The purpose for, and duties of, hosts, hostesses, monitors, or cadets 7. Procedures to follow in the case of a sick or injured child 8. Methods of controlling and/or disciplining children 9. Most appropriate clothing for you to wear lO. Whom to turn to with a disciplinary problem c. What other areas do you wish had been covered? H w 78 d. Were you given any printed instructions to follow? 1. Yes 2. No While on duty as a supervisor in the lunchroom, what are your main responsibilities? (Check as many as apply) 1. Ensure orderly entrance and exit of children to and from the lunchroom 2. Develop a friendly relationship with the children 3. Encourage the children to try all foods 4. Maintain order in the lunchroom 5. Teach children proper use of napkin and utensils 6. Encourage hosts, hostesses, cadets, or monitors to help you maintain order 7. Maintain complete silence among children during the meal 8. Other While on duty as supervisor in the lunchroom, do you have the authority to: (Check as many as apply) 1. Determine the order of entry and exit of chil- dren to and from the lunchroom 2. Make sure children clean up their table area before being dismissed 3. Temporarily or permanently withdraw the lunch- room privileges of a child for repeated mis- behavior . Restrict the drinking of milk until the child has eaten most of his meal 5. Retain a child in the lunchroom until his plate is clean ‘ 6. Determine lunchroom dismissal time on normal and inclement days 7. Other What method or methods do you use to gain the childrens' attention? 1. Speak in a loud voice 2. Blow a whistle 3. Speak with the aid of a microphone 4. Flick the lunchroom lights Other U'l 79 (Check as many as apply) 1. The principal 2. The vice-principal 3. The child's teacher 4. Another aide 5. The child's parents 6. Other To whom do you feel you are directly responsible? (Check one) H . The principal . The vice—principal . A teacher . The lunchroom manager . Another aide N w p U1 Does the person to whom you feel directly responsible visit the lunchroom during the noon-hour to see how things are going? 1. Yes 2. No a. If "yes," how often does he (or she) visit the lunchroom? 1. Daily 2. Once or twice a week 3. About once a month 4. Not very often Has the person to whom you are directly responsible To do an effective job as a noon-hour lunchroom aide, which of the following do you feel a woman needs to have? 1. Pleasant and patient disposition 2. Ability to control her temper 3. Physical stamina 4. Strong voice 5. High school education 6. Good personal appearance 10. 8O 7. A family (child or children) of her own 8. Experience in P.T.A. activities, Girl Scouts, etc. 9. Loyalty to the school 10. Special on-the-job training 11. Stern appearance 12. Good personal hygiene 13. Other 14. Other 15. Other This questionnaire is being completed by lunchroom aides in many other Milwaukee public elementary schools. So that the reSponses from all schools may be meaningfully summarized, please complete each section which follows a Age: 1. Under 25 2. 25 to 34 3. 35 to 44 4. 45 and over b. Education: 1. Completed college 2. Attended college 3. Completed high school 4. Attended high school 5. Completed eighth grade 6. Other c. Length of time you have been employed as a noon-hour lunchroom aide, including this semester: 1. One semester 2. Two semesters 3. Three semesters p More than three semesters MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF HOME ECOI‘IJLIIIJS EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN Thesis M.S. 1968 DOUGHERTY, Mary E. Orientation of Lay Persons Employed as Lunchroom Supervisors in MilwaUkEI Wisconsin Public Schools. 31293 02429 2645 g -._.-_.-.._< -...“ -_ 4 --...r- __ ~ .—