Andrews University Graduate Extension School
(West Indies College Campus)
School of Education
ROLES AND TASKS OF EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP
AND THE STRUCTURAL CONSTRAINTS ON
EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION
A Project
Presented in Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Course
EDAD 690 Independent Study:
Foundations of Educational Administration
To
Dr. Cleveland J. Thomas Ph.D
By
Franklyn N. Baldeo
April 27, 1995
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vi
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
CHAPTER
I. EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND THE ADMINISTRATOR . . . . . 4
II. ROLES OF EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
A. The Administrator as a Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
B. The Administrator's Role as an Instructional Leader . . 17
C. The Administrator as a Disciplinarian . . . . . . . . . 21
D. The Administrator as a Facilitator of Human Relations . 29
i. Staff Satisfaction and Morale . . . . . . . . . . 33
ii. Collective Bargaining. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
iii. Contract Administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
E. The Administrator's Role as an Evaluator. . . . . . . . 44
F. The Administrator as Conflict Mediator. . . . . . . . . 53
G. The Administrator's Role as a Policy Enforcer . . . . . 62
III. FACTORS AFFECTING ADMINISTRATIVE ROLES . . . . . . . . . . 68
A. Personal Variables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
B. Group Expectation of the Administrator's Role . . . . . 71
i. Student Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
ii. Teacher Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
iii. Parent Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
iv. Superior Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
C. Social Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
D. School Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
IV. TASKS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL . . . . . . . . . . . 83
A. Staff Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
B. Student Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
i. Orientation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
ii. Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
iii. Health Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
iv. Food Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
v. Student Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
vi. Other Student Personnel Tasks. . . . . . . . . . . 98
C. The Administrators Task in Instructional/Curriculum Development and Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
D. School - Community / Public Relations . . . . . . . . . 105
E. The Task of School Finance and Business Management. . . 111
F. Administration of the School's Physical Plant . . . . . 115
i. Efficient and Effective Use of Building. . . . . . 115
ii. The Operation and Care of School's Plant . . . . . 118
iii. Managing School Supplies and Equipment . . . . . . 119
iv. Improving School Safety and Security . . . . . . . 120
v. Organizing and Managing Custodial Services . . . . 121
G. Administration of Minor Tasks of the Administrator. . . 124
V. PROCESSES INVOLVED IN ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS . . . . . . . . 127
A. Problem Identification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
B. Diagnosis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
C. Setting Objectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
D. Decision Making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
E. Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
F. Implementing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
G. Coordinating. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
H. Delegating. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
I. Initiating. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
J. Communicating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
K. Evaluating. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
L. Rewarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
M. Directing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
N. Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
O. Advising. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
VI. STRUCTURAL CONSTRAINTS ON EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION . . . 140
A. Administrative Control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
B. Teacher Autonomy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
C. Occupational Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
D. Career. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
E. Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
E. Equity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
(i) Paradigm of Educational Administration . . . . . . . . . 7
(ii) Key Elements in Administration Functioning . . . . . . . 9
(iii) Major Roles of Educational Leadership. . . . . . . . . . 15
(iv) Causes of Poor Discipline. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
(v) Inter-Relationship at the School Level . . . . . . . . . 27
(vi) Suggestions to Principals on Evaluation. . . . . . . . . 49
(vii) Conflict Management Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
(viii) Factors Affecting Administrative Roles . . . . . . . . . 69
(ix) Tasks Definitions of Educational Leadership. . . . . . . 86
(x) Tasks of the Educational Administrator . . . . . . . . . 87
(xi) Model For Curriculum Development . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
(xii) The School Budgetary Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
(xiii) Processes Involved in Administrative Tasks . . . . . . . 127
(xiv) The Communication Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Sir Isaac Newton said, "If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants." It is in recognition of those `shoulders' that I write this acknowledgment.
To my wife Camilla, and my son Nyron, I want to thank them for understanding, being cooperative and patient. Without their help I couldn't have made it. I would also like to specially thank Camilla, who typed and helped in the preparation of the final manuscripts. My deepest appreciation.
To Dr. Sylvan Lashley, Dr. Leslie Ferdinand, and Dr. Haldine Davies II, administrators at Caribbean Union College, I am grateful for affording me the use of the relevant volumes from their personal library.
A special note of thanks must go to Mr. Carlton Drepaul, of the English Department of Caribbean Union College for his editing skills, along with sound and insightful suggestions to improve my effort. I am deeply indebted.
I am thankful to Mrs Lucille Wiltshire, the principal of my employing institution, for allowing me the flexi-time to work on this project.
To my colleagues at the faculty of Caribbean Union College Secondary School, and especially Mr. Mervyn Austin who helped in the final editing, many thanks for your constant encouragement and support.
To. Dr. Cleveland Thomas, and Mr. Archie Williams, of West Indies College, Jamaica, who helped in the planning and consulting stages of this paper, I express my appreciation.
Lastly, I want to thank God for giving me the wisdom, insight, strength, and endurance during the last eight weeks of writing of this paper.
This paper is dedicated to all Seventh Day Adventist administrators, practicing and promising. May God's people continue to be lead by dedicated, committed, and knowledgeable administrators.
Franklyn N. Baldeo
Caribbean Union College
April 21, 1995.
ABSTRACT
In this qualitative research, I have investigated the approaches and strategies recommended by over fifty experts in the field of educational administration, to get an authoritative opinion on the roles and tasks of the educational administrator. This investigation is to alleviate the myth that educational administration is a complex and complicated process. I have looked at the information analytically and critically, resulting with a paper that represents a synthesized ideal handbook of the educational administrator. This paper authenticates the role-responsibilities, and the task-functions of the educational administrator, and shows that such responsibilities are quite a demanding, and yet is a natural process when that person is knowledgeable, properly trained and equipped, to facilitate this administrative assignment.
INTRODUCTION
The establishing and accomplishment of set goals in any organization is
paramount for its survival in this modern and rapidly changing society. As such,
every effort must be made by organizations to achieve this purpose. This
approach primarily requires the mobilizing of resources through the
administrative effort. These resources include people, materials, and machinery,
and when put into action, they will accomplish the goals of the organization.
For education, which constitutes the largest enterprise as well as the most
important business in the world today, to be a success, it must be organized and
run effectively, efficiently, and economically. This is the work of the
educational administrator. He/she is responsible for making plans and adopting
policies. Such plans and policies need to be properly executed while at the same
time information must be collected to show the efficiency of operation. This
information would now become the basis for later implementation of new and
better plans and policies. This process is termed educational administration.
An administrator of a school must have clear goals and objectives. Failing to
have these guidelines, the administrator would be like the captain of a ship
without a rudder. The ship might not sink, but the progress it makes towards its
destination will be, at best, uncertain.
It is with this notion of establishing a sense of direction that the text of
this study takes its objective. The paper takes a succinct, yet thorough view of
the educational administrator. After establishing clearly what is educational
administration, the various roles of educational leadership is singled out and
characterized, as well as the expounding of the many varied factors which impact
on those roles.
After the relationship between roles and tasks are clarified, the tasks linked
to educational leadership will be detailed, specifying the numerous processes
involved in performance of these tasks.
The paper ends by examining the issues which have structural constraints on
educational administration, which the educational administrator has no control
of, yet, prevent him/her from having the real impact of his/her administration
felt by those concerned.
The purpose of this qualitative research paper is essentially two-fold. Firstly,
to fulfill a self-study requirement for the course EDAD 690 Foundations of
Educational Administration, and secondly, to fulfill a perceived need.
During the last nineteen years of my teaching experience, I have worked with as
many as seven different principals, and for seven of those years in the capacity
of vice principal/teacher. Each principal had his/her own style, with strengths
and weaknesses, as I perceived them, yet, there was none standing-out over the
rest. This, in my view, shows a deficiency in administrative skills. It is this
deficiency this paper seeks to satisfy.
I hope that by reading this research, educational administrators will be
invigorated as they again recognize their roles and tasks. A clearer view of the
essentials of educational administration will be presented, with indepth
knowledge of what is to be expected. To the writer, it is the aspiration that
the experience will stimulate his appetite, further, into educational
administrative research.
As the paper proceeds, the writer, in many instances, will use examples within
the secondary school system of Trinidad and Tobago. This is in view of the fact
that the writer's past or present experience is at this level. Because of this,
the term "principal" will be used synonymously with "administrator" while the
term "administration" will be utilized in this paper as the process carried out
by the administrator / principal. The word "faculty" would be use
interchangeably with the word "staff," where its meaning would encompass all
workers that come under the domain of the administrator.
CHAPTER I
EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND THE ADMINISTRATOR
Educational administration in its broadest sense, is defined as "the function
that brings all components of the educational programme into harmonious
relationship for the achievement of established goals" (James-Reid, 1983). The
high point of such aspiration would be to centralize or focus on the proper
education of the learner -- students.
Orlosky, McCleary, Shapiro, & Webb (1984) state, "at the simplest level,
administration can be explained as a process that includes planning, deciding
and implementing decisions, monitoring implementations, accessing results, and
replanning."
In the book Handbook of Educational Administration, the authors characterized
school administration as a social process involving both problem-solving and
decision making. They continued by describing administration as management,
leadership, organization, manipulation, and control (Stoops, Rafferty, Johnson,
1981). I would like to introduce and add to the list the mobilization of
personnel and resources.
In another circumstance, Campbell, Bridges, and Nystrand (1977), the authors of
the book Introduction to Educational Administration, make it quite clear, "the
central purpose of administration in any organization is that of coordinating
the efforts of people towards the achievement of its goals." In education, these
goals have to do with teaching and learning. Thus, educational administration
has, as its central purpose the enhancement of teaching and learning. It means
that all the activities of the administrator, whether working with the public,
the board of education, or the professional staff, should ultimately contribute
towards the development of the student.
Much research has been done in the area of educational administration, and the
findings have become the foundation of many educational theories that have
helped in governing educational administration through the ages. What this means
is that because times, hence people, have changed, the educational administrator
does not just pull a trick out of the bag to deal with a given situation. He/she
now has to study contemporary and emerging theories in the light of research and
adopt that knowledge to the good of the organization for any given circumstance.
Educational administration, as a science, must then be seen as "the interaction
of the society (people) and its institutions (persons) in the search for usable
knowledge, and the interactive knowledge with which to guide the school and
education" (Morphet, Johns, Reller, 1982).
Administration, therefore, consists of applying rational thinking to organized
activity. Such application to rational thinking supports educational
administration as a science and gives rise to search for basic principles.
Administration is concerned with values because it must encompass goals,
purposes, and choices among alternatives. As such, it exists for the
organization and is ultimately concerned with people.
The educational administrator should not then look upon administration as an end
in itself, but as a means to an end. The end should be represented by the goals
and objectives which the organization tries to achieve. Gorton (1985) suggests
that goals and objectives give direction and purpose to the people who are
associated with the educational establishment, and help to identify the various
tasks and activities which will need to be accomplished if the establishment is
to be successful in achieving its aims.
In order for the educational administrator's aims, goals, and objectives to give
direction and purpose, there must be an undergirding philosophy on which to
build a foundation. With that philosophy revolves a paradigm. Benno Sander
(1985), in the Educational Journal of Trinidad and Tobago, mentions four
criteria for the paradigm of educational administration. These are: "(i)
administration for efficiency, (ii) administration for effectiveness, (iii)
administration for responsiveness, and (iv) administration for relevance."
Figure (i) below shows the paradigm:
┌───────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────┐
│ ───┼── │
│ EFFECTIVENESS │ EFFICIENCY │
│ │
│ │ │ │
├─────┼──── EDUCATIONAL ─────┼─────┤
│ │ ADMINISTRATION │ │
│ │
│ RELEVANCE │ RESPONSIVENESS │
│ ───┼── │
└───────────────────────────┴──────────────────────────┘
Figure (i) Paradigm of Educational Administration
Sander (1985) continues to say that this paradigm is defined on the basis of the
four criteria that have historically been adopted to evaluate and guide the
performance of administrative acts and facts.
Efficiency is the administrative criterion that reveals the real capacity to
produce the maximum with the minimum of resources, energy, and time. Lipham et
al. (1985) suggest, "efficiency is the extent to which social behavior is
congruent with the need disposition of an individual."
Effectiveness means the capacity or potential to attain proposed results, or as
Lipham, et al. (1985) put it, "effectiveness is the extent to which an
individual's behavior is congruent with expectations held for a role."
Responsiveness appears in contemporary administration as an effort to go beyond
the concept of efficiency and effectiveness. "It is the criterion of performance
that measures the capacity to produce the solution or response desired by the
participants of the community" (Sander, 1985). Relevance is that intrinsic
concept which is truly important and related to the matter at hand, that which
has value, and which is pertinent.
This paradigm represents the hallmark of true educational administration, which
aids in keeping the aims, goals, objectives, and visions of the institution in
perspective.
The administrator must then establish different structures, backed by philosophy
and research, in order to effectively administrate in the field of education.
He/she must "develop and maintain an environment which maximizes opportunities
and means of fostering student learning" (Reilly). Such a systematic plan would
be characterized by five key elements. These include: (a) programme planning,
(b) programme development, (c) programme implementation,
(d) programme improvement, and (e) programme evaluation.
The figure below outlines these elements.
┌───────────┐
│Programme │
│Planning │
└───────────┘
┌────────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐
│ Programme │ │ Programme │
│Evaluation For │ │ Development │
│Effectiveness │ └──────────────┘
└────────────────┘
┌─────────────┐ ┌────────────────┐
│ Programme │ │ Programme │
│Improvement │ │Implementation │
└─────────────┘ └────────────────┘
Figure (ii) Key Elements in Administrative Functioning
As the administrator functions within such a framework, with the necessary
knowledge and know-how of educational administration, and the expertise to
utilize this knowledge in carrying out of his/her responsibilities, the roles
and tasks of educational administration would be a rewarding experience.
CHAPTER II
ROLES IN EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Within the last two decades, there has been rapidly changing concepts of
leadership in educational administration. Hundreds of research studies have been
identifying a new and exciting body of knowledge on group characteristics,
leader behaviour and human relations.
The implications of these studies are very significant to the roles played by
educational administrators, since greater demands are made on them regarding the
various roles they play.
The definition of the term "role" is divergent and extensive. A role can be
looked at as a pattern of behaviour expected of those who hold particular status
position. Hanson (1991) declares, "it is a socially expected behaviour pattern"
which is more of a characteristic status assumed or assigned with a functional
relationship. Teacher, administrator, and student, for example, are three
different ranks or positions, and teaching, directing, and studying are their
commensurate roles.
Owens (1978) in his definition of a role asserts:
Role is a psychological concept dealing with behaviour enactment arising from
interaction with other human beings. The various offices or positions in an
organization carry with them certain expectations of behavior held by both
onlookers and by the person occupying the role. These expectations generally
define role, [together] with some additional expectations that the individual
will exhibit.
The gist of this definition reveals four different considerations. These are:
(a) role description -- the actual behaviour of the individual performing the
role, or more accurately, one's perception of that behaviour; (b) role
prescription -- the common norm in the culture for the role, or what role
behaviour is expected from the individual performing the role, for example, what
is expected of a teacher in the society; (c) role expectation -- the expectation
one person has of the role behaviour of another, for example, a teacher at a
secondary school expects certain behaviours from a principal who in turn has
certain envisioned behaviour from that teacher; and (d) role perception -- the
perception that one has of the role expectation that another person holds for
him or her. For example, the principal knows that a teacher has a role
expectation of himself/herself (the principal). The principal's estimate of that
expectation is role perception.
In their book Educational Administration - Theory, Research and Practice, Hoy
and Miskel (1987) look at the nature of roles and describe it with the following
four characteristics.
(a) Roles represent position and statuses within the institution. Each player
fits in his/her own niche.
(b) Roles are defined in terms of expectations or normative rights and duties of
the position. The expectations specify the appropriate behaviour for a specific
position. When someone, who assumes a role, behaves in a manner consistent with
the organizational requires of the position, the individual is executing the
role. In this way, roles are the institutional blueprints for action.
(c) Roles are variable. Some expectations are critical and mandatory; others are
more flexible. Many roles are not precisely prescribed; in fact, the role
expectations associated with most educational administrative positions are wide
ranging. It is such flexibility that enables different individuals to perform
the same roles without undue tension or conflict.
(d) Roles derive their meaning from other roles in the system and in this sense
are complementary. For example, it is difficult, if not impossible, to define
either the role of a student or that of a teacher in a school without first
specifying the relationship of teacher to student.
Hoy and Miskel (1987) continue by describing the roles of administrator in terms
of their communication "skills". They use the terms: (a) gatekeepers --
individuals who in the course of their job, must pass or control the flow of
information to others; (b) liaisons -- personnel who hold memberships in
different groups and serve to unite groups. They perform the vital function of
keeping groups informed about each other's activities, and (c) Isolates --
individuals who have very few or no communication contacts with other
organizational members. Such lack of communication leads to feelings of
alienation, low job satisfaction, disaffection, little commitment to the work
organization, and low performance.
Reboe (1985) in his book Educational Administration A Management Approach takes
a different slant in his approach, and views roles in terms of the leadership
responsibility performed by the administrator. He cites two types (a) the task
leader -- the individual who keeps the group engaged in work, and (b) the social
leader -- the individual who maintains unity in the group and keeps group
members aware of their importance as unique individuals whose special needs and
values are respected. It is interesting to note that both roles are imperative
for the efficient operation of the organization, yet only few individuals can
adequately perform both roles.
Mintzberg (1980) in his interpretation of administrative role defines it as
"organized sets of behaviors belonging to identifiable offices or positions."
These roles are classified in terms of three basic behaviours:
(a) interpersonal, (b) informational, and (c) decisional.
Interpersonal behaviours focuses on interpersonal contact. The administrator
exhibits: (i) a figurehead role -- the function of the manager and visible
ceremonial head symbol of the organization, (ii) a leader's role -- the driving
force behind the work effort of subordinates, and (iii) a liaison role -- the
channel of horizontal contact with other managers.
With regard to the informational pattern of behaviour, the administrator
demonstrates: (i) a nerve center role -- where there is a connection with every
individual and issue in the system, sending out the vital pulse to keep it
moving.
(ii) a deseminator's role -- where facts, ideas, values are transmitted within
the organization, (iii) a spokesman's role -- when information is passed to the
outside of the organization regarding performance, policies and plans.
In terms of decisional behavior patter, the administration displays: (i) an
entrepreneur's role -- which sets him up as a designer and initiator of planned
change effort; (ii) a disturbance handler's role -- where emphasis is place on
striving for peace and security; (iii) a resource allocator's role -- where he
decides who gets how much of what; and (iv) a negotiator's role -- where through
trading, acceptable solutions are brought about to meet the needs of individuals
and requirements of the organization (Hanson, 1991).
Adding to this list of roles, I would like to introduce here the administrator
as instructional leader with direct input into the academic programme.
As one reviews the literature on the subject of the roles of educational
administrators, there is no scarcity of opinions, proposals, or
conceptualizations. I am now proposing seven general major roles. While it is
very unlikely that an administrator will be required to enact all seven of these
roles, simultaneously, attempts should be made to become competent in each role
so that the performance can be effective if and when the situation requires.
The following summary description in Figure (ii) is intended to provide the
administrator with an introduction to each of the seven roles. The table below
gives a synopsis of the major roles of the administrator.
╔═══════════════════════════════════╗
║ ROLES OF EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP ║
╚═════════════════╤═════════════════╝
│
┌──────┬─────────┬──────────┼───────┬────────┬────────┐
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
┌────┴────┐ │ ┌───────┴────────┐ │ ┌────┴────┐ │ ┌─────┴────┐
│ MANAGER │ │ │ DISCIPLINARIAN │ │ │EVALUATOR│ │ │ POLICY │
└─────────┘ │ └────────────────┘ │ └─────────┘ │ │ ENFORCE │
│ │ │ └──────────┘ │ │ │
┌───────┴──────┐ ┌────────┴───────┐ ┌────┴─────┐
│ INSTRUCTIONAL│ │ FACILITATOR OF │ │ CONFLICT │
│ LEADER │ │ HUMAN RELATION │ │ MEDIATOR │
└──────────────┘ └────────────────┘ └──────────┘
Figure (iii) Major Roles of Educational Leadership
The Administrator as a Manager
In the eyes of many people the school administrator is first and foremost a
manger. As a manager, the school administrator is expected to procure, organize
and coordinate human effort and organizational facilities so that the
organizational goals can be attained while at the same time maximizing
productivity.
The popular notion of the manger is one who keeps things running smoothly, yet
there are some negative connotations involved. In the book Education
Administration Today the authors suggest that the term 'manager' is for
first-line officers, while the higher level personnel are branded administrators
and the top level personnel are label executive (Orlosky, et.al, 1984). If the
educational administrator is termed a manager, his/her rank may just not be seen
in the same sphere as "the administrator". This concept sometimes leads
administrators to resist the role of a manager.
As the manager of the institution, the administrator is responsible for the
day-to-day operation designed to maintain orderly functioning. This is most
important since, when different people and resources are brought together in one
location, like the school, there is need for someone to organize, schedule, and
coordinate the entire operation.
The manager's function in its narrowest sense is really the technical aspect of
administration, while in the real perspective, administration extends beyond
this level to involve the total conceptualization of the organization (Sallis,
1977). Consequently, rather than resisting the role of manager, the school
administrator should accept and implement the role in such a way that the school
is efficiently managed, and yet could be in a position to be available for other
role options. Gorton (1983) suggests that "by successfully performing the role
of manager, an administrator can help others to accomplish tasks and goals, and
in the process can generate a more positive attitude towards his/her
contribution to the school.
The Administrator Role as Instructional Leader
Improving the instructional programme constitutes the principal function of an
administrator. Lipham, Rankin and Hoek, (1985) emphasize this point when they
say:
If one had to select the single factor that spells the difference between the
success or failure of the school, it would be the ability of a principal
(administrator) to lead his staff in planning, implementing and evaluating
improvements in the school's curricular, cocurricular and extracurricular
offerings and activities.
Working with teachers and other staff members to improve teaching and learning
is a demanding job that requires a principal to have a broad understanding, to
be highly trained and skilled, and to maintain a positive attitude. There is a
vast difference between knowing about an instructional programme and being
intimately involved in its development, implantation, evaluation, and
refinement. "Research has revealed that principals of successful schools are
committed to instructional improvement, and provide for effective instructional
programming" (Lipham, et al, 1985).
In any educational establishment, there can be no administrators if there are no
teachers, and there can be no teachers if there are no learners. It seem then
that the learner should be of prime focus as the administrator performs his role
as instructional leader.
With this in mind, the needs of the learner must be paramount. There must be the
assessing of the learner's needs Tyler (1950) reiterates, "the principal must
assume the initiative for classifying and establishing educational objectives
appropriate for students of the school" Such a curriculum must provide for
special instruction for atypical students, whether they are gifted or
disadvantaged (Lipham, et al, 1985). With such a programme, the principal with
his role as the instructional leader must ensure that there is proper placement
and promotion for all students.
Since the instructional programme is essentially carried out by the teacher in
the classroom, special attention must be placed on the administration of these
instructional employees. This means that there must be the selection of
high-caliber teachers. The best qualified teachers should be selected because it
is easier and more pleasant to employ competent instructors than to have to
dismiss the incompetent.
There must be preparation and certification of teachers. This may mean providing
for in-service training so as to provide the vehicle for staff improvements
whether academic or professional. Along with that there must be a sufficiently
high schedule of pay so as to keep attracting the best young, qualified, people
into the teaching profession.
To administrate the instructional programme, the administrator must encourage
continuous curriculum planning and development. The curriculum must be
compatible to the changing needs of the society which the school serves. This
would require public approval to improve public relations for the instructional
programme of the school.
Another instructional responsibility is to ensure that there is adequate
budgeting for programme, materials, supplies, equipment, and services. These
services would include guidance/ counselling services, health services, adult
education, student welfare and library services. The inclusion on the school
budget, to provide for educational research can be of great help in a school
organization. All these play their part in aiding the instructional programme of
the school.
Lastly, the principal must provide evaluation for the whole organization. For
teaching to be efficient, teachers must be evaluated. This evaluation require a
good appraisal system. All educational programmes and services must also be
evaluated on a continual basis so as to guarantee that developing programmes are
moving in the proper direction.
For a principal/administrator to play the role of effective instructional
leader, there must be certain basic characteristics.
One important personal quality for effective instructional leadership is the
extent to which an administrator perceives accurately the existence of an
instructional problem or area in need of improvement. Gorton, (1983) focuses on
the issue by saying:
Leadership is usually simulated by a awareness of the existence of a problem.
Consequently, the administrator who perceives few problems or who tends to
minimize or ignore their existence is unlikely to see the need for instructional
leadership.
Closely related to the accurate identification of instructional problems is the
need for an administrator to process or develop "educational vision" (Gorton,
1983). He/she must have clear point-of-views about schooling, instruction, and
educational goals, and well as have forceful drives to set and achieve these
goals.
The administrator, as an authority, must possess the expertise required, and
must be so perceived by his teachers, if he/she intends to exercise effective
instructional leadership. With that commitment, time, a certain willingness to
take risk, and the guts to stay with it, the art of instructional leadership
would be the hallmark of that administrator.
The Administrator's Role as Disciplinarian
The prevention and resolution of student discipline problems have for ages been
the responsibility of the school administrator. In the past, it has been treated
as a simple matter, but now in modern times, it is now recognized as an
extremely complex condition. Findings, from research in education and similar
fields, point to the complexity of personality and social relations at every
age; hence, control and discipline must be considered more than administrative
matters. These must be interwoven and infiltrated into the programme of guiding
and learning.
The human aspect of school management, as an integral part of instruction and
learning, is related to the administrator's role. Yet, most principals at the
secondary level, tend to reject the idea that being a disciplinarian is part of
their major role. They frequently assign that responsibility to their assistant
or vice principal, who also from research findings, seem reluctant in accepting
the disciplining of students as the primary responsibility of their position.
That role, in most cases, remains the duty of a dean of discipline.
Generally, school administrators resist or reject the role of disciplinarian
because of the negative connotation of the term, and because the duties
associated with the role are frequently frustrating, irritating, and unpleasant
to perform (Gorton, 1983).
The term "disciplinarian" traditionally implies one who punishes someone else.
In this case, it is usually the student, but discipline is not punishment.
Stoops, et al. (1981), in their book Handbook of Educational Administration,
support this by suggesting:
Punishment is used as a corrective to restore disciplined behavior. Discipline
comprises the sum of the rule book. Penalties are assessed only to maintain the
sanctity of the rules, but are not a substitute for the rules.
The amount of time that an administrator should spend on discipline problems
will depend on many variables including the nature of the student, the
capability of teaching faculty (Gorton, 1983) and the willingness of teachers to
work with the administrator in a team approach.
The administrator, though, should plan wisely as he/she undertakes the role of
disciplinarian at the school level. I will like here to propose six
considerations as this planning process is embarked on.
Firstly, the administrator must clarify his own conception or philosophy of
discipline and control. This standpoint should be formulated from an educational
standpoint. Kyte (1941) suggests that these should include: " (i) insight into
right conduct, (ii) ability and disposition to act in accordance with developed
understanding, and (iii) the ideal which should emerge from the pupil's
experiences." This ideal, I believe, would ultimately develop self-discipline in
all students.
Secondly, the administrator should consider school discipline and control from
the standpoint of the many circumstances and conditions which would have
contributed towards the development of the student's personality. Each student
is unique and complex and this may be due to inherited or acquired
characteristics which can be the products of genetics and/or the environment.
This may cause that student to be like others in many respect, but unlike them
in many others. All these factors would contribute towards the student's
discipline or indiscipline. Thirdly, the principal at all times must be
up-to-date with the causes of poor discipline. Keeping in mind that discipline
problems are usually symptomatic of other problems, the role of the principal,
as disciplinarian, behooves him/her to identify and be versed in most of the
factors which may cause or be the cause of poor discipline. In the book Handbook
of Educational Administration, the authors Stoops, Rafferty, and Johnson (1981)
identify some of those factors. They are listed in the table in Figure (iii)
below:
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ *
Emotional and
social problems. │
│ │
│ * Lack of motivation. │
│ │
│ * Lack of interest in subject matter or the │
│ educational programme. │ │ │
│ * Poor presentation of the subject matter by teachers. │
│ │
│ * Emotional repression. │
│ │
│ * Conflict between the student's behaviour and social │ │ requirements or the
teacher's expectation. │
│ │
│ * Peer conflict. │
│ │
│ * Conflicts between parents and children │ │ │
│ * Conflicts between home and school. │
│ │
│ * Conflicts between teacher and child. │
│ │
│ * Personal problems. │
│ │
│ * Malnutrition or physical health problems. │ │ │
│ * Thwarted self-expression. │
│ │
│ * Inferiority complex and feelings of incompetence. │
│ │
│ * Frustration in desire to be important. │
│ │
│ * Lack of sympathy, love, or understanding. │
│ │
│ * Poor study habits. │
│ │
│ * Racial, religious, personal, or cultural │
│ differences. │ │ │
│ * Overstimulated life. │
│ │
│ * Thrill in delinquency that releases tension. │
│ │
│ * Overcrowded classrooms. │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Figure (iv) Causes of Poor Discipline
Fourthly, the administrator must take into account the effects of school
conditions on the students development. The school's experiences which include
contacts with classmates, and the personalities of teachers, all add to the
complexity of the student's adjustment. James-Reid (1983) states "the social,
physical, emotional and academic atmosphere of the classroom has personal impact
on students, " and thus affects student behaviour in the classroom. The author
continues:
The principal, through his[her] teachers, should seek to provide for the
physical comfort of the student, in which emotional tension is minimized, where
a relationship of understanding and well-being prevails, and where a curriculum
reflecting the concerns of the student is planned and implemented, is likely to
be one in which children will find a high level of satisfaction and where
effective learning will flourish. (James-Reid, 1983)
Such conditions would enhance the routine of a disciplined student.
I am very much convinced though, that the greatest percentage of problems in the
classroom is teacher-made problems. The administrator must ensure that teachers
are on time to their classes, have objectives set and achieved for each lesson,
make the classroom setting as interesting as possible with audio/visual aids and
innovative ideas as much as is possible. This would alleviate boredom on the
part of many students thus reducing possible causes of problems leading to
indiscipline.
Another aggravating area that can further indiscipline is the rigid imposition
of school rules, and especially when these rules are handed down, and have no
student involvement in their formation. The administrator must lead by
inculcating in teachers the necessary preventative and or corrective measures
needed to enhance positive self discipline.
Fifthly, the principal's approach in dealing with indiscipline problems is a
critical factor in preventing reoccurrence or allowing the discipline problem to
go through a cycle. The approach should be a teaching one, and since it is the
teacher in the classroom who essentially has to handle the problems first-hand,
then the principal should confer that responsibility and authority to the
teacher. There must then be a standard procedure to deal with disciplinary
problems. Kyte (1941), in his book The Principal at Work, gives three steps:
"(i) thorough investigation and diagnosis by the teacher, (ii) planning of a
tentative procedure for attacking the problem, and (iii) guidance of the child
in recovering from the wrongdoing."
The author continues to say that "the third phase of this teaching act,
interpreted in terms of child learning, involves self-analysis, self criticism,
and self improvement" (Kyte, 1941). For this to take place, the teacher and or
the principal must get the student to answer honestly, seriously, and with good
intention these three questions: (i) What are the wrong things I did in the
situation? (ii) What bad effects do they have on upon the school, other persons,
and myself? and (iii) What am I going to do about it? Only as these answers are
answered and viewed in the right perspective, can serious recovery take place.
Finally, the school administrator should show great concern about the quality of
leadership. He/she should be curious about the process by which the school is
organized for work, the proper use of physical facilities, the kind of
curriculum organized for the students, and the type of interpersonal
relationship that is encouraged throughout the school community. Such
relationships include: administrator <-> teacher, teacher <-> student,
administrator <-> student, and student <-> student. Figure (v) below shows the
interpersonal relationships that go on at the school level.
┌─────────┐
│ TEACHER │
└────┬────┘
│
│ ┌───────────┐
┌────────┴───────┐ │ PARENTS │
│ ADMINISTRATOR ├──────────┤ & │
└────────┬───────┘ │ COMMUNITY │
│ └───────────┘
│
┌─────┴─────┐
│ STUDENTS │
└───────────┘
Figure (v) Inter Relationships at the School Level
As a disciplinarian, the principal should be concerned with the relationship the
school has with parents and the community. James-Reid (1983) emphasizes the
point by saying: "poor parent-teacher relationship, especially when parents
criticize, demean or castigate school personnel, can undermine the teachers
[administrator's] effort." The principal must be mindful of his disposition and
attitude in dealing with others, since it sets the tone of the school's
environment, and to a large extent, what goes on is a reflection of his
leadership.
As we move towards the twenty-first century, the role of the administrator as
disciplinarian is indeed a challenging one. With so many different varying
discipline offenses in the school setting, the principal must be equipped with
the tools of identification as well as the know-how to deal with problems.
He/she must be able to define the problem, make a diagnosis, and respond to the
problem through disciplinary procedures and policies. Not having these tools,
know-how and mechanisms in place, the problem of indiscipline cannot be
effectively tackled by an administration.
The Administrator as a Facilitator of Human Relations
It is now very clear that the role of the school administrator involves a
working relationship with a multiplicity of people. These include students,
faculty, staff, parents, and the general community. Although no single
individual or group should be considered by the administrator as being more
important than the other, there is little doubt that his/her relationship with
the teaching faculty will significantly influence his/her effectiveness as a
leader. While a positive relationship will not guarantee effective
administrative leadership, it is difficult to envisage how an administrator
could continue to function successfully as a leader if his/her relationship with
the faculty is poor. The administrator, therefore, must seek to put special
emphasis on this all important issue, termed human relations.
The term human relations is a broad one that emphasizes "the interaction between
people in all kinds of situations, in which they seek, through mutual action, to
achieve some purpose" (Owens, 1991). Hodgetts (1987) adds that human relation
"is a process by which management brings workers into contact with the
organization in such a way that the objectives of both groups are achieved."
Guthrie & Reed (1991) affirm, "essentially human relations stresses the informal
dimension of an organization." Owens (1991) sums it up when he says, "human
relations emphasizes human and interpersonal factors in administering the
affairs of organizations."
Human relations is then concern with four major areas:
(i) the individual worker, (ii) the group, (iii) the environment in which the
work is performed, and (iv) the leader responsible for seeing everything is done
properly. I would like to contend here that excellent human relations brings
administration, faculty, and staff working together in a harmonious way.
Hodgetts (1987) stresses two points. Firstly, human relations implies a concern for the people, but the effective manager
never loses sight of the organization's overall objectives. He must be
interested in the people, the work, and the achievement of assigned objectives.
Some managers are so interested in pleasing their people that they never get the
work done. Others are overly concerned with the work and spend very little time
trying to understand the psychological and sociological aspect of the job.
The effective administrator, I believe, balances concern
for people and work. The author then conveys the second
point:
The effective manger realizes that human relations is important at all levels of
the organization but that the way the ideas are applied is not always the same.
The situation dictates the right way to use human relations ideas.
This emphasis, which focuses primarily on people and their relationships in
organization, is a branch of administration theory that is label "transitional"
(Kimbrough, Nunnery, 1976).
This movement gained recognition during the nineteen-forties, but even today
many of the dominant notions of the era are still mostly accepted by educational
scholars. This theory was characterized by "the goal of understanding,
explaining and predicting human behavior and interaction based upon empirical
investigation" (Kimbrough et al, 1976). The authors continue that this form of
administration is essentially concerned with "the building and maintenance of
dynamic, yet harmonious human relations" (Kimbrough, et al, 1976). It is
primarily an emphasis on meeting the psychosocial needs of the employees of the
educational institution. In the book Teaching Its Management and Function, Olga
James-Reed (1983) states that the transitional leadership style is based on the
belief that "the more a chief administrator can relate to the individual needs
of an organization and task accomplishment needs of that organization, the more
likely the organization is to move towards its goals." She continues to amplify
the concept by disclosing:
The transactional leadership style seems to offer much scope for meaningful and
effective administration by clearly defining the goals of the organization and
the roles of individuals, by giving due consideration to individual needs and
aspirations, and by seeking to integrate the two organizational dimensions.
It is quite clear that transitional leadership style is indeed an important way
in which the administrator can be a facilitator of human relations.
Kimbrough and Nunnery (1976), in their book Educational Administration - An
Introduction, suggest that for the administrator to be a facilitator of human
relations he/she must ensure that the following take place: (a) He/she must be
seen as a promotor of staff harmony and morale; (b) his/her administration must
be seen as a service; (c) decision-making must be a process that must have wide
participation as possible; (d) his/her administrative authority must be group
granted as much as is possible; and (e) he/she must be seen as a creator of
conditions to enhance the satisfaction of his subordinates. Jesus Christ, the
Master Teacher, gave us an example in human relations. He did not need anyone to
tell what people were like. "He understood human nature" (White, 1948). It will
be difficult to be like Christ because of His divine nature, but His ministry
shows how important it is to understand human nature. As human nature is better
understood, there will be improved human relation. Robert Pierson (1966), in his
book So You Want to be a Leader, states, "true Christian human relations do not
require one to practice a system of clever psychology devoid of sincerity." He
continues that the principles of human relations simply means putting our
Christian profession into maximum practice, having effective service as the
underlying essential. The author then concludes, "Jesus identifies Himself
closely with the interests and needs of others."
With human relations comes another mode of conduct that is referred to as
"organization behavior" (Owen, 1991). It is a narrower, more precise term that
falls under the broader more general meaning of human relations. Owens (1991)
says, "organization behavior is a discipline that seeks to .describe,
understand, and predict human behavior in the environment of formal
organization." He continues,
"... administration must bear responsibility for establishing internal
arrangement of the organization, so as to achieve maximum effectiveness."
It is with this aim of achieving maximum effectiveness that I would like to
explore three aspects of administration
-> staff relationships. These are (a) staff satisfaction and morale, (b)
collective bargaining, and (c) contract administration.
Staff Satisfaction and Morale:
Most administrators recognize the importance of developing and maintaining high
staff satisfaction and morale, even if they are not sure how to achieve them.
"Satisfaction and morale are attitudinal variables which reflect positive or
negative feelings about a particular situation or person(s)" (Gorton, 1983). The
two concepts are often used synonymously in educational literature and it is
easy to understand why. Gorton (1983) explains, "the state of one's morale
reflects the extent of his satisfaction with a situation or person while
satisfaction can also refer to one's feelings about himself or the situation in
which he finds himself." Both terms can be referred to here as attitudinal
characteristics.
Many attempts have been made to define the term "satisfaction" and "morale". The
term satisfaction as it applies in the work context seems to refer to the degree
to which an individual can meet his professional needs in the performance of his
role (Gorton, 1983). Lipham, et al. (1983) define satisfaction as "the extent to
which the instructional role expectations are congruent with an individual's
need disposition." Thus, the authors purports, "satisfaction results when a role
suits an individual or an individual fits a role." Continuing, they propose,
"satisfaction can be increased by adapting a role to suit a personality or by
socializing an individual to fit a role." Morale on the other hand, as defined
in the educational literature seems to hold a broader meaning. Gross (1965), for
example, in his study of staff leadership in schools, identifies the following
six indices of morale:
(i) Displays a sense of pride in the school.
(ii) Enjoys working in the school.
(iii) Displays a sense of loyalty to the school.
(iv) Works cooperatively with fellow workers.
(v) Accepts the educational philosophy underlying the curriculum of the school.
(vi) Respects the judgement of the school administrators.
These indices are based on social system theory and would be particularly
helpful to the principal in achieving organization -> individual integration to
enhance morale within the school. From another angle, morale can also be seen as
focusing on the goals of a school and the goals of the individual within the
school. On that point, Lipham, et al. (1985) suggest:
Morale becomes a function of three variables: (a) rationality. (b)
identification, and (c) belongingness. Rationality represents the extent to
which the role expectations are appropriate to achieving the goals of a
school.... Identification refers to the extent to which the goals of a school
are integrated with the need disposition of the individual, ... (while)
belongingness refers to a feeling that one will be able to achieve satisfaction
in a role, since role expectation are in accord with need disposition.
Morale, therefore, is a function of all three variables and cannot be sustain at
high levels if any of the three variables is at a minimum. Olga James-Reid
(1983) puts the issue in a very simplified manner when she asserts, "morale
refers to that condition of the organization in which people feel a sense of
worth and of satisfaction and security in service." Such individuals identify
with organization goals and always seek to accomplish them. The author
continues, "there is a high level of self confidence as well as confidence in
workers and leaders, and there is a striving towards cooperation, integration
and solidarity." Proceeding, she affirms "high morale expresses itself in
feeling of well-being and satisfaction. Everyone is proud to belong to such an
institution." The big question here is, why must administrators be concerned
with morale? The answer is very simple. "Morale affects productivity" (Lall &
Lall, 1994). The authors continue to emphasize, "high morale tends to promote
higher productivity, while low morale results in lower productivity." To many
educational administrators productivity is vital to their survival, hence the
reason why many administrators must focus on emphasizing high morale. But, it
does not just happen. It must be cultivated. It is the principal's
responsibility to take the lead towards this end. The administrator's role then
should focus on "establishing reasonable levels of congruence among the
expectations of roles, the need disposition of the individual, and the goals of
the school" (Lipham et al., 1985). It seems then, a major key to high faculty
morale and satisfaction seems to be the leadership behaviour of the school
administrator. Only as this is recognized and improved can the administrator
begin to fulfill his role as facilitator of human relations at the school level.
Collective Bargaining:
The role of the principal as the facilitator of human relations does not just
end as high morale and satisfaction of subordinates are achieved. It extends
much further. This extension is in reference to conditions of employment,
working rules, job specifications, and general job security. These, all, come
under the umbrella of what is known as collective bargaining.
Beginning in the United States in the 1960's, this new element, collective
bargaining, entered into the relationship between the faculty and administrator.
Administrators were required to negotiate with teachers about the conditions of
their employment. They were not free to make unilateral decisions affecting the
teacher's welfare. They now had to consider teacher grievances, consultation
with regard to work conditions and sharing decision making authority with the
teacher. Teachers were now consulted and were an integral part of negotiating
teams. Prior to collective bargaining, the school administrator relationship
with teachers was frequently a paternalistic one. In most situations the
administrator had a choice as to whether or not he/she would consider teacher's
grievance, consult with them about work assignment, or involve them in school
decision-making, and all too often, at least according to the teacher's
perception, he/she chose not to do so. But what exactly is collective
bargaining?, and why is the need for it?
Bolman and Dean (1987), in their book Modern Approaches to Understanding and
managing Organizations, surmise, "collective bargaining is generally viewed as a
necessary process for resolving conflicts and achieving workable agreement
between labor and management." They continued
"... through an interplay among players, position, persuasion, and power, an
agreement (can be) reached on wages and working conditions." Guthrie & Reed
(1991) expound, "collective bargaining is a continuing process in which employee
and employer representatives negotiate in good faith a written time bound
agreement covering at its most fundamental level wages, hours, and other terms
and conditions of employment."
The questions that pop up here are, what is the role of the principal in
collective bargaining? and what is the connection of collective bargaining with
the administrator's role as the facilitator of human relations?
In order to understand the role of the principal in collective bargaining, there
must be a closer look at the components in the collective bargaining process.
Guthrie & Reed (1991) suggest five components. These are:
(a) representation -- the bargaining representative must represent all
appropriate employees; (b) unit determination - the community of interest as it
relates to areas of work, wages, and terms and conditions of employment; (c)
scope of bargaining -- items and issues which are specified as bargainable items
economic or uneconomic; (d) union security -- organization which is usually that
official bargaining representative in most cases; (e) grievance procedure --
systematic and peaceful manner by which alleged management violation of an
agreement are resolved. As these components are really grasped and understood by
the administrator and he/she is able to work collaboratively with teachers and
their demands, and as such the ensuing relationship will surely be improved.
Gorton (1983) feels that the principal should be included in every phase of
collective decision-making, whenever their fate and that of the school for which
they are responsible are to be determined. The author then submits three
proposals. These are: (a) the principal should be involved in the formulation of
the school board's bargaining position;
(b) the principal should be represented on the negotiating team for the school
board or an advisory committee which gives counsel to the negotiating team
during the bargaining process; and (c) the principal should be given an
opportunity to evaluate the implications of any item considered during
collective bargaining which may affect the operation of the school, their role
in the school, or their relationship with others associated with the school.
The extent to which the principal is involved in one or more of the proposals
identified above, will depend on territorial conditions and the personalities
involved. However, it is clear that the principal can and should play an
important role in the formulation of the school board's bargaining position, and
during the bargaining process itself.
Contract Administration:
As a result of the collective bargaining process, the final product would be the
teacher's contract. This contract contains in essence the various agreements
that were reached during collective bargaining, and "specifies the terms and
conditions of employment that will govern the working relationship between
employer and employee for a designated period of time" (Guthrie & Reed, 1991).
This must now form the framework to which the administrators and faculty alike
are to be guided, and are expected to adhere to. The overseeing or execution of
this contract is the process under consideration.
The school principal is usually viewed by the school board as the main agent in
administering the contract. In fact, Lipham et al. (1985) suggest, "the
principal has complete responsibility for administering the contract at the
building (school) level." This is so because most of the teachers come under
direct control of the principal, and as Guthrie, et al (1991) submit, "the
effect of a final contract is not felt until it is implemented in the work
setting."
In recent years the bargaining process has become more sophisticated, and so the
role of the principal, in that respect, has become more clearly defined. This
role of the principal in contract administration consists of three major tasks
as proposed by Gorton (1983). These are:
"(i) interpreting the language and intent of the provisions of the contract,
(ii) enforcing the terms of the contract, [and] (iii) implementing the grievance
procedure."
The role of the principal in interpreting the language and intent of provision
of the teachers contract can be a difficult or an easy one. This depends on the
precision with which the contract was written, and the degree of orientation to
which the principal is exposed.
In most cases, the phrases used in the contract are so vague to give the desired
flexibility that the principal may have a difficult time in interpreting the
contents of the contract. As a result, says Gorton (1983), "in too many
situations the school principal is forced to make [his]/her own interpretation
of the language of the contract or else [he]/she finds [himself]/herself in the
middle between the district office and the teacher's interpretations of the
master contract."
A related problem encountered by the principal in administering teacher's
contract, arises from the fact that he/she may receive inadequate orientation to
the provision and intent of the contract. Sometimes he/she may receive the
contract long after the teachers have received their copies. All these can
reduce the effectiveness of the role of the principal as the administrator of
the teaching contract.
Interpreting the teaching contract is one aspect of contract administration.
Enforcing the provision is the second important responsibility of the school
principal. This is directly related to the style of administration practiced by
the principal. With regard to this enforcement, Gorton (1983) submits three
styles of administration. (a) Mock administration -- the non enforcement of the
rules when teachers fail to observe them. (b) Representative -- the cooperative
acceptance of the rules by principal and teachers, accompanied by enforcement by
the principal and obedience by teachers. (c) Punishment-centered -- the use of
threat or punishment in order to achieve rule adherence by teachers. These
styles singly to my mind, will not suffice for reinforcement. I therefore
propose that there must be a blending of these styles for productive
enforcement.
The key to effective enforcement Gorton (1983) continues, "seem to be intensive
and extensive communication, that is, explaining the rule and the reasons for
it, and working with teachers on interpretation of the rule." For that the
principal must become familiar with the contract's terms. What he/she should
realize, though, is that the relationship between him/herself and the staff
would be affected by the kind of approach he/she takes in enforcing the terms of
the contract.
Regardless how well collective bargaining was brought about or how well the
contract is administered by the principal, there would always be loopholes, for
contract language is most of the time subject to varying interpretation. As a
result there will be grievance from teachers, or mainly from the union
representative. Lipham, et al. (1985) declare, "a grievance is nothing more that
an alleged management violation of any provision of the master agreement."
Such disagreements can be very time-consuming, and so every effort should be
taken to minimize their occurrences. Lipham and his associates (1985) suggest
that grievances can be avoided if the principal will:
1. Take employee complaints seriously.
2. Deal with complaints promptly.
3. Resolve complaints on a sound, rational basis before they develop into
serious problems.
4. Not encourage the employee to take the complaint to the union.
To help in that process the principal should have some definite systems in
place, which should be known and accepted by all teachers, to deal with
grievances. This makes the task less difficult when it arises, and in the long
terms, enhances the role of the administrator as the facilitator of human
relations.
The Administrators Role as an Evaluator
Increase emphasis on school accountability has placed added importance on the
role of the school administrator as evaluator. Various sectors of the school's
public are no longer satisfied with the opinion of the administrator that all is
well with the school system. Evidence of effectiveness or attempts to improve
the situation seems to be the call of the day.
In order to provide evidence of effectiveness or improvement, the school
administrator will need to perform the role of evaluator. This role, according
to Gorton (1983) involves the following eight aspects:
* Determining who should be involved in the evaluation.
* Establishing evaluation criteria.
* Selecting methods of evaluation.
* Collecting data.
* Analyzing data.
* Drawing conclusions and developing recommendations.
* Reporting findings.
* Implementing recommendations.
But what exactly is evaluation? Kimbrough and Nunnery (1976) give the definition
as "a process of determining the degree of congruence between organizational
goals and performance." Stufflebeam (1971) says it is "a process that links
value, information, and decision making situations in making professional
judgement." Oliva (1989) in his book Supervision for Today's Schools, suggests,
"evaluation is a fundamental part of the curriculum development process." He
also states that it is through evaluation teachers learn whether or not stated
objectives have been reached and so intelligent curriculum decisions can be
reached. Sergiovanni (1991) suggests, "evaluation can help us determine what our
objectives ought to be as well as how well we have achieved our intents."
Over the years evaluation in education has emerged as a measurement process.
This, though, is not the true picture of evaluation. There has been a tendency
to confuse measurement, assessment, and evaluation in education. Measurement is
necessary in evaluation, but measuring is not the same as evaluating. "
Educational measurement," says Lipham, et al. (1985), often performs with the
use of tests or questionnaires, and is the process of assigning a numeral or a
letter grade to a student's performance." Assessment involves measuring and also
interpreting the measurement. "Evaluation calls for establishing criteria and
also relating the results of measurement to the criteria" (Lipham, et al. 1985).
Thus, after measuring and assessing a student's achievement in a course during a
quarter, criteria are needed to relate the actual achievement to the desired
criteria of achievement. Two types of tests, norm referenced and criterion
referenced tests are useful in this evaluation assessment.
Evaluation comes in two forms, formal and informal. By formal evaluation, a
specific method of measurement or assessment is used, with the subject being
aware of what is being measured. During informal evaluation, there is a greater
reliance on observation and general inspection with the evaluator being an
experienced person in that field. Both formal and informal evaluation can take
place within or out of the formal or informal curriculum of the school. The
principal then must be able to blend both forms of this process in the overall
picture.
Evaluation consists of two types, "process evaluation and outcome evaluation"
(Lipham, et al., 1985). The authors continue, "process evaluation directs
attention to analyzing the success with which a program is being implemented in
the educational setting for which it was intended." If during process evaluation
there is a need for programme modification, appropriate adjustment can be made.
Outcome evaluation, on the other hand, "is a process which establishes a
rational for continuing the program, with or without modification, expanding the
program, or terminating the program" (Lipham, et al., 1985).
"Central to outcome evaluation is a determination of the improvement of student
behavior or performance which, in the final analysis, is the purpose of any
instructional programme" (Orlosky, et al., 1984). A well-defined evaluation plan
makes provision for both process and outcome evaluation.
The next question that could be asked is who should be evaluated? The answer is
simply, all aspect of school life and its operations should be evaluated. The
principal could have his/her own self evaluation ensuring that he/she is
maintaining the expected status quo. The teachers who teach must be evaluated,
including as well the total curriculum. Then there is the students evaluation
which is paramount to the overall picture, since to satisfy the student is the
ultimate goal.
Since informal evaluation is taking place in and out of the school every day,
the principal has the major responsibility for formalizing the process. The
principal's attitude and procedure towards evaluation can make the programme an
enlightening, interesting or an exciting venture, or one that is frustrating,
based on fear, and viewed negatively by those involved. What the principal does,
and how he/she does it determines, to a large extent, the effectiveness of the
programme. The following guidelines, as proposed by DeRoche (1987), in his book
An Administrator's Guide for Evaluating Programs and Personnel, are suggested
for the principal to carry out as he/she performs his/her role as evaluator. The
Principal should:
(a) Be knowledgeable about the school district's goals and objectives. (b)
Assist in effectively carrying out the policies and procedures resulting from
the school's district goals and objectives. (c) Demonstrate leadership in
formulating plans and procedures for the evaluation of these goals and
objectives. (d) Provide the students, parents and teachers with the necessary
information about the district's and school evaluation programme. (e) Capitalize
on the talents of the faculty, parents, students, and community personnel in
helping formulate plans and procedures for carrying out the evaluation programme
at the individual level, and (f) Provide a plan and secure resources for helping
personnel getting job done.
Sergiovanni (1991), in his book The Principalship A Reflective Practice
Perspective, gives his more detail version of the steps the principal should
take in the evaluation process. These are:
(a) Identifying the audience for the evaluation.
(b) Determining what is valued by this audience and what its information
requirements are.
(c) Keeping in mind why the audience needs this information.
(d) Deciding on a framework for evaluation.
(e) Eliciting topics, issues, and questions of concern from the audience.
(f) Formulating initial questions to facilitate getting started.
(g) Conceptualizing issues and problems as the process is underway.
(h) Identifying informational needs.
(i) Selecting observers, judges, instruments and checklists.
(j) Collecting information from among antecedent, transitional, and outcome
categories.
(k) Preparing an interim report and sharing with the audience.
(l) Identifying and investigating a narrower range of dominant issues and
questions for further and fuller inquiry.
(m) Validating, confirming, and disconfirming information.
(n) Preparing to report the results in a narrative form to the audience.
(o) Providing information that illuminates issues and answers questions raised
by the audience.
In order to help the principal in his role as evaluator, several suggestions are
put forth by DeRoche (1987). They are accommodate in the table below as shown in
Figure (vi):
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ * Assess your current knowledge about evaluation. │ │ * Improve your knowledge
and attitude about evaluation.│ │ * Find out how other principals plan for
evaluation. │ │ * Determine what skills you have and what you will need │ │ for
evaluating your school's programs and personnel. │ │ * Determine how your
faculty and staff feel about │ │ evaluation. │
│ * Find out what knowledge and skill your faculty and │
│ staff have about evaluation. │
│ * Compare your current evaluation procedures with │
│ other procedures from other schools. │ │ * Promote a positive view of
evaluation in the school │
│ and community. │
│ * Encourage self-evaluation techniques among school │ │ personnel, including
students. │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Figure (vi) Suggestions to Principals as Evaluators
As with any area, there are pitfalls that should be avoided by the administrator
in the course of evaluation. The following guidelines, suggestion, and cautions,
as propounded by DeRoche (1987) would help the administrator in his role as
evaluator:
(i) Evaluation should not be used as a threat to faculty and staff.
(ii) Do not assume that you are the only evaluator in the school.
(iii) Too much evaluation should not occur at any one time.
(iv) Evaluation should not be done without specific objectives and plans of
action.
(v) Do not use evaluation plans that do not involve the entire faculty and
staff.
(vi) Do not allow someone outside the school to prepare evaluation plans that do
not include you and your faculty and staff in the process.
(vii) People who want to evaluate for the purpose of finding scapegoats or
cutting the budget should not gain your support.
(viii) Do not become discouraged if, as a result of your self-evaluation, you
judge yourself too critically. You're only human.
In conclusion, there are eighteen principles which DeRoche (1987) proposed to
help the principal as an evaluator:
1. Evaluation should help clarify the school's goals and objectives and extent
to which these are being accomplished.
2. Evaluation is a cooperative, team function and should be seen in a positive,
optimistic way.
3. Evaluation should be an ongoing, continuous process.
4. Performance evaluation should be required of all school personnel.
5. Performance evaluation should be honest, open, and free from threats.
6. Evaluation should contribute to the improvement of attitudes, relationships,
and morale.
7. Program and performance improvement should be the major purpose of a school's
plans for evaluation.
8. Time, assistance, training, and an appropriate budget should be provided to
each school for evaluation purposes.
9. Evaluation should help school personnel develop short- and long-range plans.
10. Evaluation should contribute to program and behavior changes.
11. Self-evaluation strategies should be an integral part of any school
evaluation plan.
12. External evaluation plans (accrediting agencies) should contribute to and
help with internal evaluation plans.
13. Evaluation should be a humane process designed to determine the strengths
and weakness of programs and personnel.
14. Through the evaluation process teachers, parents, students, and citizens
should be able to clarify and understand the objectives and programs of the
school.
15. The evaluation process should promote a positive attitude toward
self-appraisal and self-improvement.
16. The evaluation program should provide opportunities for school personnel to
diagnose difficulties, strengthen existing programs, and establish pilot
programs or projects to test new approaches.
17. Evaluation should be a process that will help teachers and learners
determine the extent to which each has been successful in the teaching-learning
process.
18. Evaluation should encourage a team effort, a cooperative spirit, and a
feeling by the community that we are all accountable for the education of our
young people.
When these principles of evaluation are followed and are carefully directed by
the principal, the effectiveness and efficiency of a school system would be
enhanced.
The Administrator as Conflict Mediator
The role of the school administrator as conflict mediator is of recent origin.
Although administrators have always been faced with the need to adjust
differences, it wasn't until the mid-sixties in the U.S.A that the need to
mediate conflict became a major aspect of the school administrator's role.
As this area of administration is explored, the various types and bases of
conflicts and the reasons why they develop will be discussed. The most evident
area of conflicts as well as various ways and approaches in managing conflicts
will be explained. In other words, the types, sources and strategies for
responding to conflict will be explained. Only as the principal is equipped to
understands the intricacies of the conflict can he/she truly become a mediator.
In the vast body of literature, there is no consensus on a specific definition
of the term "conflict." Owens (1991) reveals, "a conflict exists whenever
incompatible activities occur." When viewed from an administrative post in the
organization, Guthrie & Reed, (1991) suggest that "the term is applied to a
breakdown in the standard mechanisms of decision-making so that an individual or
group experiences difficulty in selecting an action alternative." Kimbrough &
Nunnery (1991) say, "conflict is defined as an interactive state manifested in
incompatibility disagreement, or difference within or between social entities
such as individuals, groups or organizations". The writers further assert,
"conflict arises whenever perceived or real interests collide." This collision
may be caused by a "divergence in organization goals," (Hanson, 1991) personal
ambitions, group loyalties, ethnic expectation and demands and so forth. Hence,
it could be surmised that "conflict comes from a multiple of sources and is
found at the personal or organizational levels." (Hanson, 1991).
Three major classes of conflicts are proposed by Kimbrough & Nunnery (1976).
These are: (i) individual conflict -- which arise from individual
decision-making;
(ii) organization conflict -- which involves individual or groups within the
organization; and (iii) interorganizat- ional conflict -- which happens between
organizations or groups. Sometimes the term internal or external are used in
place of organizational and inter-organizational. Hanson (1991) contends that,
based on the organizational structure, conflicts can be formal or informal.
Argyris (1957), in his book Personality and Organizations, has offered four
conditions or situations why conflicts develop. He says that conflicts exist
when an individual:
(1) wants to do two things that are liked equally well but can do only one;
(2) has a choice of doing two things that are equally disliked;
(3) has the choice of doing something that is liked but runs the risk of loss or
punishment; and
(4) has several alternatives of doing something, each of which is liked but has
an equal risk of some loss or punishment.
Within the school which is a social system, there are a number of ways and areas
in which conflict develops. The principal must now view these conflicts from a
social-system point-of-view so as to help him understand, predict and resolve
the many types of conflicts that occurs daily. Lipham, Ramkin and Hoek, (1995)
suggest five different types of conflict that may develop:
(a) School-Community Conflict -- when the community holds contradictory
expectation for the school in terms of intellectual, social, personal,
productivity, programmatic, and operational activities.
(b) Conflict between Roles - When the principal is functioning in more than one
capacity, for example, teaching and administration. These roles must be given
appropriate priority and must be reconciled.
(c) Conflict between and within Groups (these groups can be between
students-teacher, teachers-parents, student-parents, community-teachers, and
student-community.) -- When each group may hold very different expectations for
the appropriate behavior of the principal regarding any particular issue.
(d) Role-personality Conflict -- when the various tasks or processes done by the
principal may be in conflict with his personal needs and likeness.
(e) Personality Conflicts -- when situations in which some people simply cannot
seem to get along with other people, for any given reasons. There is also
conflict between what is done and what is perceived that should be done; or even
from differences in expectation or differences in perception.
The role of the administrator in dealing with conflict deserves attention. The
large number of conflicts and issues facing administrators can be overwhelming;
hence, it is wise that he sees commonalities between groups of conflicts. In
this way common structures could be developed, as well as common approaches and
processes that fit many of those problems at the same time. To do this, there
must be intense planning by the administrator. Planning, and implementation of
plans, would lead to an effective system of managing conflict.
Before this takes place, though, the conflict phenomena must be understood by
the administrator. One way of understanding conflict is to see them as models.
Hanson,(1991) identifies two models. These are:
(i) The process model which focuses upon the sequence of events which transpire
within a conflict episode, and is particularly useful when one is faced with the
need to understand and intervene directly into the stream of events of an
ongoing episode and (ii) the structural model which focuses upon the conditions
which shape conflict behaviour in a relationship, and is useful in restructuring
a situation to facilitate desired kinds of behaviour patterns.
Conflict is present in all organizations in varying degree and situations. When
decisions must be made to the satisfaction of some and not to the others,
conflict will show itself up. Yet, conflict should not be repressed or fueled,
it should be managed.
For good conflict management to take place, Hanson (1991) suggests that there
must be anticipation and detection. In anticipation "proaction rather than
reaction" would be the intended strategy. The writer refers to the process as
"conflict analysis" and are essential since "the causes might not be what they
seem on the surface." He continues, "a probing analysis would try to determine
if contributing causes (of the conflict) were structural or episodic." A
structural case would suggest that natural tension would have surfaced between
the formal and/or informal system. "Episodic conflict is unique to a specific
situation, when various people compete for the same job or promote competing
alternatives" (Hanson, 1991). An effective diagnoses and analysis can determine
and place in perspective a number of underlying issues that compound the
problem, and affect the strategy to be selected to manage the problem. This
exercise only can conflict management be a productive process.
"Conflict management is the process of removing cognitive barriers to agreement"
(Hanson, 1991). Such agreement does not suggest that the pressures creating the
conflict would have gone away, but there would be sufficient commitment so as to
allow a positive course of action.
Depending on the findings of the analysis, conflict management techniques often
focus on changing structure or process, or both. A number of techniques or
approaches have been suggested by various writers, but there are considerable
similarities in their formulations.
Approaches to conflict management are often portrayed on a continuum with
extremes, for example, flight or fright. Kenneth Thomas (1976), in his book
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, suggests the continuum
assertive and unassertive with reference to satisfying one's own concern, and
then used the continuum uncooperative and cooperative with reference to
satisfying other's concern. From this, he submits five-different approaches at
various points on the continuum. This is shown in the figure below:
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ╷ │
│ │ │
│ Assertive │ * Domination Collaboration * │
│ ╷ │ │
│ ╵ │ │
│ ATTEMPTING │ * │
│ TO SATISFY │ Compromise │
│ OWN CONCERNS │ │
│ │ │ │
│ ╵ │ │
│ Unassertive │ * Avoidance Accommodation * │
│ └───────────────────────────────────────────╴ │
│ Uncooperative <---------------> Cooperative │
│ ATTEMPTING TO SATISFY OTHERS' CONCERNS │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Figure (vii) Conflict Management Strategies
(Adapted from Kenneth Thomas, 1976)
These five approaches are:
(a) Avoidance -- suggests indifference, evasion, withdrawal, or isolation. Being
unassertive and uncooperative can also represent a delay tactic, hoping the time
and events will treat the problem.
(b) Domination -- means a desire to win at the other's expense. The opinion and
interests of others are of little interest.
(c) Accommodation -- means an appeasement or submission of others at your own
expense. It might mean conserving energy, by giving up a few battles in order to
win the war.
(d) Compromise -- means splitting the difference or giving up something to get
something.
(e) Collaboration -- represents a desire to integrate and fully satisfy the
interests of both parties. Neither party desires to acquire the advantage over
the others. (Thomas, 1976)
A Three-way approach of align with conflict is proposed by Kimbrough & Nunnery
(1976). These are (a) "domination -- is where one side wins and the other side
lose." It is often the easiest and quickest way to deal with the immediate
conflict, but in the long run is not usually successful.
(b) "Compromise -- each party giving up something so that the organizational
activity that was interrupted can be continued." I do not think compromise is
the best way for a lasting solution because the parties gave up something, and
at some point in timed the conflict would rise in another form, and (c)
"Integration -- a process by which the involved parties seek a new solution
rather than staying within the confines of existing, mutually exclusive
alternatives." In this approach both parties win, since differences are brought
out in the open for examination and evaluation.
Hodgetts (1987) puts forward a four approach strategy for the administrator to
deal with conflicts. He proposes
(i) collaboration and (ii) compromise which were very similar to the approach
advanced by Thomas (1976). In addition he advances (iii) "confrontation --
solving problems on a face to face basis."
As group are encouraged to express their objections, the administrator can
usually cultivate a feeling of harmony among them. I propose here that the
confrontation method is one of the must successful approaches to conflict
resolution because it concentrates on solving the problem directly rather than
trying to bypass it or to smooth over the issues. Then, Hodgett presents the
approval of "altering the organizational structure." This is an approach where
an administrator may decide "to resolve the conflict by reorganizing the
department structure." This type of rearrangement has been found to be very
effective in cases in which workers object to "taking orders" from other
workers.
March and Simon (1958) advocate four different approaches by which the
administrator may deal with organizational conflicts. These are (i) Problem
solving -- shared objectives are assumed, collecting of information is stressed
and emphasis is placed on identifying alternatives that meet the shared
objectives. (ii) Persuasion -- the assumption is that at some level there are
shared goals, and that the disagreements are over subgoals. (iii) Bargaining --
disagreement over goals is assumed to be fixed and agreement without persuasion
is sought, and (iv) Politics -- collations are formed and the solution reflects
the relative strength of the various parties.
The administrator, according to Gorton (1983) "attempts to secure all of the
facts in a situation, as well as the perceptions each party to the dispute has
of one another and of the issues in conflict." The goal for the administrator in
any conflict is "for each side to recognize some validity in the other party's
position, so that compromise can take place and the conflict can be resoled"
(Gorton, 1983).
The Administrator's Role As Policy Enforcer
It is a norm, moreso a requirement, that educational institutions today are
governed and run by stated philosophy, guided goals, visions, and objectives.
These are bounded up in the institutions' mission statement. From this
standpoint the school board then issues general governing statements. These
statements are termed the policy of the institution.
Policy, according to Castetter (1986) "is a plan for expressing the system's
intended behavior relative to its human resources" (or other functions). It is
developed at the highest level of the organization and its function is to guide
the course of action a system adheres to, in moving from its present status to
the desired status.
A number of policy statements grouped together is referred to as a policy
structure and these are designed "to assist the organization in carrying out
major functions such as curriculum and instruction, personnel, logistics,
planning, and external relations" (Castetter, 1986).
The highest level in most educational institutions is the school board of
governors. It is this body that is responsible for formulating policies to
govern the school. In all cases the principal of the school is an ex-officio
member of that board, and a great deal of significance rests on him/her in that
respect. His/her role is three-fold:
Firstly, as part of the policy-making process and structure, he/she has to
transmit to the board the correct feelings of the teachers, students and
parents. These are to be taken into consideration when policies are developed.
It is incumbent upon him/her to understand the process of policy making.
Secondly, after the policies are made, it is now his/her role to enforce them at
his school. Thirdly, the evaluation of the process is again in the hands of the
principal; hence, it is seen here that the principal's role is paramount to the
success of policy formulation and implementation.
The administrator, as the policy enforcer, must then first be a policy maker.
Policy making must now be assumed as a role of the administrator. But what is
policy making? Campbell and Mazzoni (1976), in their book State Policy Making
For The Public Schools, maintain it is "a decision designed to give direction to
a chosen course of action." Orlosky et al. (1984) consider policy making as "the
sum of process in which all parties in and related to a social system shape the
goals of that system." The authors went on to note five steps of policy making.
These are:
(a)Initiation: Policy making often occurs when a problem develops, hence the
authorities, in this case the school board, must be made aware of the problem or
issue, through the principal. It is the principal who experiences first hand the
problem, and so he/she must provide the ramifications to the board to guide in
the policy making process. This is initiation.
(b) Definition: A problem or issue cannot be treated accurately unless it is
properly defined or diagnosed. If this is not done, the focus might be on the
symptom of the problem and not the real problem. This does not produce
constructive action. It may often be misleading. "The very basis of dealing with
issues rest in defining them accurately."
(c) Deliberation: This involves looking at the problem or issue from as many
aspects and viewpoints as possible, while constructing alternative courses of
action. "The implications are then examined for each or the various reference
groups, publics, and resources of the school system." This is a difficult
process, at times requiring the "cooperative action of the board and the staff
to look at the politics and dynamics of the system and the community." This is a
slow process, and haste in this step can be a serious error. This is so since
"backing off or undoing policy is generally somewhat more difficult than
establishing one in a new area for the first time."
(d) Enactment: It is here that the role of the board ceases. The administrator
then takes over and "implements the policy with the full advice (and backing) of
the board." The administrator is responsible for this phase, no matter how
complex. He has to now determine how to negotiate and carry out the board's
policy directions.
(e) Consequences: The actual results of the working policy are now to be
perceived, digested and evaluated for further action. This is an action for the
board, but they are dependent almost solely on the feedback received from the
principal at that school where the policy is being implemented. Most board would
like to make corrections where and when necessary, yet it must be felt that
"scrapping a policy can be more difficult, than making one," particularly if
people identify it as a part of themselves.
As these steps are followed, policy statements are released. Analysis of policy
statements in general leads to the following observations as proposed by
Castetter (1986):
* Policy is a written statement of the general aims and intentions of the board
of education with respect to working conditions and relationships that are
intended to prevail in the school system. It is a predetermined course of action
designed to guide decisions and actions to maximize their effectiveness in
producing anticipated results.
* Policy is one of a variety of plans in a hierarchy, ranging from broad goals
through policies, programs, processes, and procedures, to specific rules.
* Policy establishes the quality of human relationships that will prevail in the
school system, thus serving as a link between the technical and the human
components.
* Policies are often confused with other types of subplans such a rules,
regulations, procedures, directions, instructions, and practice. The latter are
instruments that the administrator uses to translate broad policies into
specific objectives and courses of action. Practices, procedures, and rules are
in effect in every school system, regardless of the presence or absence of
policies.
* Policies cannot be specific. They are not intended to provide answers to every
personnel problem that arises. They are meant to allow decisions to the extent
that they confine operational activities to a predetermined course of action.
As the administrator enforces policies at the school, a number of problems may
prop up that he/she must be aware of and must seek solutions to. I would like to
identify three such situations here:
Firstly, there is the confusion of personal and professional roles of board
members. The board and administrator's roles are distinctly different. The board
errs when it moves beyond policy in trying to run the school. The administrator
himself can err when he tries to make polices by himself. This is the role of
the board only.
Secondly, the administrator must be careful to take views of his teaching staff
into account during the formulating or the initiating phase of policy making.
This is so since the administrator alone cannot implement policy. "Solutions and
procedures that affect staff have to be examined in terms of their support,
reaction and capacity to carry out their share" (Orlosky et al., 1984).
Lastly, the board or administration must not identify too strongly with a course
of action or a policy, since problems may develop in altering the behavior.
"Wise people try to hold polices flexible unless, of course, the policies
reflect basic beliefs or matters of principle" (Orlosky et al., 1984).
In conclusion, the whole issue about policy and policy making and enforcing,
lies almost directly in the control of the administration. The principal, as
head of his institution, has the responsibility for developing or shaping, what
I would call, operational polices, in keeping with board polices.
This is the implementing of the board polices, applying it to the given
situation at the school, while it is in operation. Many operational polices are
of such a nature that they must be developed at the school site. This may be a
different version of what may be termed site management, or shared
decision-making.
In this respect, the administrator's views and skills are taken into account.
They are the most important ones, since he/she is having a view from both sides
of the fence. The role of policy enforcer is then a critical and very important
aspect of the roles of the administrator.
CHAPTER III
FACTORS AFFECTING ADMINISTRATIVE ROLE
In any effectively managed organization, the administrative positions are
controlled and directed by well written job descriptions or policy statements
originating from a governing board. This incorporates the formal expectations of
the organization. In addition, there are usually implied, unexpressed,
expectations for the administrator's behaviour which originates with the various
individuals or groups with whom he/she comes into contact.
As Gorton (1983) observeS, "The expectations define for the actor
(administrator) whoever he/she maybe, what he/she should or should not do, as
long as he/she is the incumbent of the particular role." Continuing, the author
says that the expectations also serve as "evaluation standards applied to an
incumbent in a position, [and therefore can] ... represent a powerful source of
potential influence on any administrator behaviour" (Gorton, 1983).
This chapter would look at four main considerations that affect the
administrator in the performance of his/her role. The figure below gives four of
these main factors which affect administrative roles.
╷- PERSONAL
│ VARIABLES
│
│
┌───┐ FACTORS │- GROUP
│ A │ AFFECTING │ EXPECTATIONS
└─┬─┘ ADMINISTRATIVE │
│ ROLES │
│ │- SOCIAL
┌──────┴──────┐ │ FACTORS
│ EDUCATIONAL │ │
│ LEADERSHIP │ │
│ ROLES │ ╵- SCHOOL
└─────────────┘ SIZE
Figure (viii) Factors Affecting Administrative Roles
Personal Variables
The administrator's own attitude towards his/her role is important here. In
terms of personal variables Getzels et al, (1948) divulge, "the behavior of an
administrator is also affected by his/her own attitudes towards the role that
he/she should play. These attitudes constitute the self-expectation and may be
more important than the expectations of others in determining the role he/she
will take in a given set of circumstances." For example, if an administrator
feels that he/she should play the role of manager, he/she may become involved in
activities designed to bring about a more efficiently operated school, despite
the fact that contrary expectations for his/her role are held by other
individuals or groups.
Risk orientation is another personal variable. As the administrator speculates
about the risks involved in pursuing a particular role, his/her attitude towards
that role would be affected positively, if then are less risks, or negatively,
if there are many risks.
The administrator's perception of people determines the attitudes taken towards
them. If for example a person, who is esteemed by the administrator, makes a
recommendation about a particular role then the administrator's view point is
that if that person recommends it then it is a role that needs to be performed.
This, in the long term, affects the administrator's objectivity to persons and
issues.
An administrator's perception, of an issue at hand, is guided by his/her
educational philosophy, and is foremost in the decision making process, in terms
of adopting a specific role.
The concern about one's status, and how others perceive the administrator is a
very important personal variable factor. For example, an administrator asking
the question, is that the type of role the education leader should adopt? would
certainly be guided as he/she answers that question.
The last personal variable that affects the decision about the administrator's
role is his/her concern about authority and control. If the administrator
concludes that if he/she performs a distinct role he/she would loose prestige
and power, hence his/her authority would be challenged, then there would be
greater reluctance in making that decision.
It is important to note here that while the administrator cannot avoid the
influence of personal variables in making decisions about roles, he/she should
become more aware and consider the ethical and moral nature of such decisions.
Group Expectations of the Administrator's Role
The administrator is responsible to varying publics. Firstly, there are his/her
superiors, who through the school board and district administration provide the
polices and guidance. Secondly, there are his/her teachers, who are the main
implementors of the educational system. Thirdly, there is also the students who
are at the central or focusing point of administration. Lastly, there are the
parents, and the community the school serves, that the administrator has
responsibility to. While it may be impossible for a school administrator to
become knowledgeable about the expectations for his/her role held by all the
different groups who are associated with the school, it could appear essential
to be familiar with a working knowledge the major expectations of the groups.
This section endeavours to provide such.
Student Expectations
A review of the research on students' expectation for the role of the school
administrator has not revealed a great deal. What has been shown is that as
students get older, they become more aware of the roles of the principal and
more interested in how a school is administered. Their awareness grows while
seeing the importance of the administrator's personal relationship with
students. Some indication of students' expectations can be gleaned from a study
by Taylor. Gorton (1983) quotes Taylor, in an article, "If I were Boss" from the
journal Education (Fall 1978) "[high school students] wanted to change human
relations by allowing students more influence in administering the school and by
establishing fewer and more reasonable rules." These students also want
improvements in areas like textbook review, scheduling, and teacher evaluation.
Students are very concerned with behaviours or actions which concern the
principal's personal relationship with them. These actions took place in
situation in which the principal expressed "friendship, courtesy, sincerity,
praise, encouragement, interest towards students, and support of students,
faculty and all phases of the school program" (Gorton, 1983).
The behaviour, mentioned by students as ineffective, was also concerned with the
principal's personal relationship with students. It involved situations in which
the principal had acted in "an unfriendly, humorless, discourteous, affected
phony, insincere, inconsiderate, critical disinterested, or opposed manner
towards students, faculty, and all phases of the school program" (Gorton, 1983).
Gorton (1983) quotes Pedersons, (1980 in a research dissertation by suggesting
that students also expected the principal to:
(1) organize advisory group which represent the view points of all persons
interested in the school;
(2) seek and utilize the recommendation of individuals and all advisory groups
in the study and solution of school problems;
(3) act immediately to stop the misbehaviour of individuals;
(4) reprimand individuals or groups in a calm, mature, and friendly fashion
without harshness or threats;
(5) explain the school policies, practices, procedure, regulations and facts
regarding rumors for the entire student body;
(6) refrain from censoring student publications, assemblies, discussions, books
and films;
(7) assist students directly with individual and group learning project;
(8) intercede with higher authority on behalf of students;
(9) provide time, equipment, and facilities for the educational programme; and
(10) safeguard the health and welfare of students and school personnel.
Perhaps the most startling findings of Pederson's (1980) as quoted by Gorton
(1983), is that half of the students rarely observed the principal working on
the job. These findings can be interpreted in various ways, but one point is
certain; the school administrator needs to become more visible to students if
he/she is to be perceived by them as performing an important role in the school.
Teacher Expectations
Perhaps more than any other reference group teachers have the opportunity for
interaction with the school administrator, and are, therefore, in a better
position to develop expectation for his/her role. As a consequence, research
studies on teacher expectations, for the role of the school administrator, have
been numerous. These studies, in general, indicate three major expectations
which an administrator may anticipate that teachers will hold for his/her role.
These as reported by Gorton (1983) are:
(1) The school administrators should support his/her teachers on issues and
problems of student discipline. Teachers want administrators to back them in
matters involving discipline no matter who was at fault. This latter
consideration, I would like to proport, will not always be possible or even
desirable in certain situations.
(2) The school administrator should treat teachers as professional colleagues
with different but equal roles, rather than subordinates in a bureaucratic
relationship. This means the administrator must regard them as fellow workers
while at the same setting clear and fair standards for teachers' behaviour. The
teachers expect the school administrator to communicate with them frequently and
to refrain from curtailing their individual initiative or freedom.
(3) The school administrator should provide a meaningful opportunity for
teachers to participate in school decision-making and should include a
significant role for teachers in the making of final decision about those
activities directly affecting them. Such decision making should be in curriculum
development, determining of grouping and promotion, and control of students. In
addition, teacher emphasized that if they were to serve on a committee, the
committee must have the power to make decisions rather than mere recommendations
on questions already decided by the administrator.
Some other expectations as affirmed by Orlosky, et al. (1984) which teachers
hold for the principal include:
(a) The principal should "back-up" teachers in front of parents even when the
principal considers the teacher to be wrong. If the principal criticizes a
teacher it should be done, privately.
(b) He/she should "back up" teachers in front of students. If the principal
believes that a student is right, the teachers should be told so privately and
should never be criticized in the presence of a student.
(c) The principal should be a good disciplinarian.
(d) The principal should exhibit democratic behaviour.
Parent Expectations
Parents constitute an important third group that holds expectations for the role
of the school administrator. These expectations are much more varied than those
of the students or teacher.
Gorton (1983), in his book School Administrator and Supervision, uses references
from varying research, and draws up a list of these expectations in terms of
high and low priority. The high priority expectations include:
* Initiating improvements in teaching techniques and methods.
* Maintaining discipline.
* Making certain the circumstances fit the needs of the students.
* Directing teachers to motivate students to learn at their optimal levels.
* Affording teachers the opportunity to individualized programs.
* Directing teachers to coordinate and articulate the subject matter taught at
each grade level.
The low priority expectations include:
* Becoming involved in community affairs.
* Keeping a school maintenance schedule.
* Scheduling the activities of the school.
* Maintaining school records.
* Organizing parents' group.
* Report to parents on progress of children.
* Show personal interests in children.
* Protect health and safety of children.
* Work with a typical children.
From these expectations, it seems that the administrator needs to become more
aware of the expectations by parents for the role for the administrator, as well
as more knowledge about the extent to which parents feel that administrator is
not meeting their expectation.
Superior Expectations
Many school administrators consider the most important expectations for their
behaviour to be those held by their superiors. They are the individuals who had
an important role in hiring the school administrator, and will continue to play
a major role in determining his/her salary, retention, and status in the
district.
These superiors or superintendents expect their principals to engage in the
following kinds of behaviour:
(1) lead forcefully, (2) initiate action, (3) accomplish organizational goals
and (4) pay greater attention to the expectations of the organization for which
he/she works than his/her own personal needs or personal need of others with
whom he/she may be associated at the school.
Whether a school administrator will always be able to meet the expectations of
his/her superiors will depend on many factors, including the extent to which the
expectations are realistic. The administrator should attempt to change the
expectations of his/her superiors if he/she feels that they are not in his/her
best interest or in the best interest of the school. The success in this
endeavour will depend as much on his/her own skill and perseverance, as on the
receptivity of his/her superiors for change.
Social Factors
The job of the school administrator, has, of course, seldom been without
problems. Within the last thirty years several social factors have emerged which
have made the administrator job a most challenging one.
This section will look at some of these social factors and the changes and
impact they have had on the administrators' role.
Firstly, the characteristics of the family have undergone major changes in the
last two decades. The divorce rate has more than doubled; the percentage of
children born out of wedlock is increasing and the proportion of single-parent
households has been intensifying in rapid terms (Gorton, 1983).
These changes in family characteristics have impacted on schools and their
administrators. Research has shown that as a group, children in one-parent
families presented more discipline problems, were more frequently tardy and
absent, and achieved less in school than did their classmates (Gorton 1983).
Besides, there is always less support from such broken-up homes, and
administrators have a more difficult time in communicating with such homes.
In some situations there has been immigration, both legal and illegal, which
brings with it children with problems of cultural assimilation and special
educational needs.
Secondly, the state of the economy is a major social force that can affect the
role of the administrator. As inflation soars, unemployment rises, taxes
increase, hence the cost of education also rises tremendously. Parents are
having a difficult time sending their children to school, since the price of
transportation becomes high and books are expensive.
Administration now has to strike a mean of operation so as to keep the cost down
so that drop-out would be minimized. Administrators, though, have to be careful
since there is a point where continued reduction in school cost would begin to
erode severely the quality of education. What an administrator can do, advises
Gorton (1983), is "to manage the educational enterprise as efficiently as
possible, work to develop a better understanding on the part of the public
regarding goals and values of education, and identify clearly the consequences
of arbitrary reduction in the financial support of education.
A third factor which has changed the role of the school administrator is
collective bargaining. As a result of collective bargaining, the principal can
no longer act unilaterally in situation in which he/she previously had primary
authority. Because teachers are now covered by the master contract, the
administrator must administer within the frame work of a collective bargaining
agreement.
A fourth major social force which has the role of the school administrator has
been the intervention by government and the legal system in education affairs.
There have been challenges by students, teachers, and parents to school
authority and decision-making. As a result, the court has laid down a number of
rulings which have altered the role of the administrator. These rulings are on
`due process right,' racial and sexual discrimination. The administrator's
authority has been limited, and he/she is now required to demonstrate that the
school is acting fairly and prudently in its relations with others.
"The best alternative," quotes Gorton, (1983), "is for the school administrator
to move more quickly to identify and resolve problems at the local level, so
that the government's, through the ministry of education, or the legal system,
action will be unnecessary."
The last socially related factor which is affecting the role of the
administrator in these modern times is the use of technology. The impact of
audio-visuals in the school system is revolutionizing the instruction process
but moreso, the role of the computer is gradually taking over education today.
For example, a computer-generated programme could remove the need for an
administrator to know how to schedule a school's instructional programme.
Computers can make the tedious, laborious task of time-tabling a thing of the
past.
School Size
This last major factor affecting administrative role is that of school size. The
larger the school, the more impersonal the system becomes. Very little is seen
of the principal who may delegate his roles to his assistants. In large schools,
a student is less significant, only known by a name or number but not as a
person.
In the small school, the principal's role becomes a more dominant factor. He/she
is seen more often, has closer relationship with his/her staff and students, and
operates in a more personal setting.
Orlosky and his associates (1984) sums it up, "School size does make a
difference in the [administrators'] role; for principals of smaller school
become more involved with students while principal of larger schools more
closely resemble managers."
CHAPTER IV
TASKS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL
Goals and objectives represent the desired outcomes of an educational
establishment. However, these outcomes are not likely to materialize without the
organization and the administration of the human and physical resources. This
essentially is the job of the administrator, and he/she is to organize and
administrate these resources efficiently and effectively, so that the school's
objectives can be successfully achieved. These duties or functions that are
required to be performed are termed the `tasks' of the administrator.
Earlier in this paper, the roles of the administrator were researched and seven
distinct capacities were seen and scrutinized. Each position or role comes with
a set of crucial functions that must be performed for the school to operate
effectively. With these functions come specific tasks. This chapter will
endeavour to look at the various tasks that are inherent in the functional roles
of the administrator. Orlosky, et al. (1984) sum it up definitely: "tasks
represent a functional view of an administrative role."
Tasks are grouped into positions. "The degree of specialization, scope of
authority, or experience and training desired can then be determined for each
position" (Orlosky, et al). The authors continue, "When an organizational
structure is complete, a `bottom-up' procedure traces tasks back up the
structure to determine lines of communication, extent of coordination required
vertically and horizontally, and placement of authority to initiate or alter
tasks" (Orlosky, et al).
How these tasks are viewed by the administrator is very critical to how
effectively they are going to be carried out. The administrators style of
leadership is significant here, since the philosophy or guidelines behind these
leadership styles would determine how the tasks as well as the approach would be
handled. Douglas Mitchell and Sharon Tucker in an article entitle "Leadership as
a way of Teaching" in Educational Journal, propose two styles of leadership
strategies which affect the ways tasks are approached by administration. They
are "transactional" and "transformational".
"The transactional [leader] controls through the distribution of incentives"
(Mitchell & Tucker, 1992). Stephen Covey, (1990) declares that transactional
leadership focuses on the `bottom line' and is event centered. It is preoccupied
with power, position and politics, it confuses cause and symptom and is
concerned more with treatment than prevention. Sergiovanni (1991) indicates,
"the transactional leadership focuses on basics and largely extrinsic motives
and needs." It supports structures and system, maximize efficiency and guarantee
short term profits. Because of this, "the transactional leader only understands
and agrees about the important tasks to be performed" (Mitchell, Tucker, (1992).
An administrator with such characteristic would be task-oriented, ensuring that
all tasks are assigned and completed, with the prime focus being to get the work
done.
On the other hand, the transformational leader works "by transforming the goals
and aspirations of organizational members" (Mitchell & Tucker, 1992). Covey
(1990) says, "transformational leadership focuses on the `top line' and as
principle-centered and people oriented, ... which builds on man's need for
meaning." The transformational leader is preoccupied with purposes, values,
ethics and is oriented towards meeting long terms goals. He/she literally
transforms people and organizations, causing them ... "to change their mind,
vision, understanding" making their behaviour congruent with beliefs, principles
or values that would bring about permanent change (Covey, 1990). Sergiovanni
(1991) says, "transformational leadership focuses on higher-order, more
intrinsic, ultimately moral motives and needs." Such a leader leads out in new
directions which separates causes and symptoms and works at prevention. Mitchell
and Tucker (1992) summarizes it by saying, transformational leadership is "more
concern about gaining overall cooperation and energetic participation from
organizational members than they are in getting particular tasks performed."
Continuing they declare, "rather focus on tasks and performance, they build
relationships and help followers develop goals and identify strategies for their
accomplishment." The table in Figure (ix) gives a summary picture as the two
styles of leadership are compared.
TYPES OF TASKS TRANSACTIONAL TRANSFORMATIONAL
Standard Work Activities SUPERVISOR
(focus on tasks
and performance) ADMINISTRATOR
(people oriented)
Problem-Solving
Work Activities MANAGER
(getting tasks
done) LEADER
(getting overall
cooperation and
participation)
Figure (ix) Tasks Definition of Educational Leadership
I would like to propose here that a blend of transactional and transformational
styles would make the ideal administrator. Here the focus would not be fully on
the functional tasks of the position, but on relationships, especially with the
administrator and those designated to perform the tasks.
With this in mind and with relevance to the administrators task, Orlosky, et al.
(1984) mention that if for a given function "they are sufficiently complex and
numerous, a complete division may be created with a staff of specialists and
clerical support." They continue to say that "depending on the nature of the
tasks delegated, the administration will be structured into levels with
assistants in charge of one or more functions."
In effect what this is saying is that all tasks associated with the
administrative function are not necessarily done by the administrator. He/she
may delegate those tasks to specialists, yet in the end, he/she is ultimately
responsible for getting them done.
If administration is to facilitate teaching and learning, it becomes necessary
to examine the major tasks necessary for the purpose. "This tasks approach to
administration is not characterized by any highly developed theory" (Campbell,
et al., 1977); hence, there is no taxonomy in classifying these tasks. For the
purpose of this paper these tasks will be grouped into seven categories. (a)
staff personnel,
(ii) student personnel, (iii) curriculum and instruction,
(iv) community and school relationships, (vi) the physical plant, and (vii)
other administrative tasks. This order is indicative of preference of
importance. The table in the
figure below, outlines the tasks of the Administrator.
│- Staff Personnel
│- Student personnel
│- Instruction and
╔════════════════╗ │ Curriculum Development
║ ADMINISTRATIVE ║ │- Public Relations
║ TASKS ║ │- School Finance
╚════════════════╝ │- School Physical Plant
│- Professional Development
│- School Office Administration
│- Instructional Materials
Figure (x) Tasks of the Educational Administrator
Staff Personnel
The education of children should be the main purpose of any school, and the
teacher is the most important single resource in producing quality education. As
Reeder (1958) suggests, "the teacher primarily determines whether the school
will be efficient or inefficient."
The administration, being cognizant of these facts, must structure the tasks of
ensuring that the best teachers are selected and maintained. Firstly, to begin
the process, there must be needs assessment of the situation followed by a
formulation of staff personnel policy, which would give guidelines as to the
kind of teacher that would be needed at the institution.
This makes the second task area of recruitment much easier. According to Gorton
(1983), staff recruitment may be defined as the active pursuit of potential
candidates for the purpose of influencing them to apply for positions at the
school. The goal is to make the conditions attractive enough so as to attract
the best and most qualified applicants. To achieve this the principal may then
advertise through the media or make visitations to places like universities or
colleges.
The third task is the actual selection and assigning of staff personnel. The
applicants must be narrowed done to the best through screening and interviews.
Once this is done, there must be the appointment, induction and orientation.
Gorton (1983) defines staff induction as "a process by which recently employed
individuals are helped to become oriented to a new environment, which includes
the community, the school system, the teaching position, and the people with
whom they will be working." Through that process, the teacher must be exposed to
the aims, objectives, goals, visions, organizational policies, procedures,
practices, and general philosophy of the institution. It is through the
induction process, "necessary information is disseminated to new employees ...
[so they could] begin to develop a sense of organizational belongingness"
(Campbell, et al. 1977).
The next task of the administrator is to schedule teachers' assignments. This
may require a job description, with the enumeration package for the job. The
teacher should know his/her class load, and should be informed of classroom
locations as well as other related areas that he/she would need to know in the
discharge of duties.
Fifthly, the administrator must next supervise the new teacher in classroom
duties. Supervision, as Guthrie and Reed (1991) put it, "is concerned with
coordinating, directing, organizing and developing performance so that
organizational goals and objectives can be met." The focus of school supervision
is for the improvement of instruction, and function of leadership "is concerned
with improving, enhancing and reinforcing classroom or teaching effectiveness"
(Guthrie & Reed, 1991). As the process is practiced, the strengths and weakness
of the teacher can be diagnosed at an early stage, and remedied for greater
improvements. As supervision is done by the administrator, classroom problems
might turn up. The administrator should then do all in his power to help that
teacher resolve those problems.
The next task area of the administrator is one that is interdependent of
supervision. This is evaluation of staff personnel. Through evaluation, the
strengths and limitations of an individual or group are identified and defined,
while supervision is a process designed to capitalize on the strengths and
correct the weakness of an individual or group.
Evaluation is "rating [or to make a judgement of] performance in accordance with
[established] criteria" (Kimbrough & Nunnery, 1976), and does not only serve as
a barometer of individual performance, but also as an indicator of
organizational effectiveness. Known in some circles as an appraisal system, the
process gives the value of an individual within the organization, and involves
the selection and application of research techniques which will provide valid
findings regarding a particular situation. Kyte (1941) suggests six phases of
appraisal. They are: (a) delimitation of the situation to be appraised; (b)
selection of the criteria to be used as the basis of making judgements;
(c) selection of the procedures for gathering the necessary data; (d) control of
al variables except the factor to be appraised; (e) organization and analysis of
the information; and (f) interpretation of the results.
The next important task of the administration is to support the systems in place
and to help stimulate and provide opportunities for professional growth of staff
personnel. Known sometimes as in-service education, it refers to "a continuing
developmental program which focuses on a wide range of skills, abilities, and
group needs" (Guthrie & Reed, 1991). Continuing, the authors add that staff
development could be defined further as formal systematic program designed to
foster personal and profession growth.
As the teaching faculty develops and grows, varying skills and abilities would
be found within. The administrator as part of his functional tasks must be able
to maximize all the different skills to the good of the institution. This must
be done, though, in a setting of `esprit de corps,' togetherness, oneness, and
high staff morale, among the faculty. As these processes take place, the tasks
would be much more manageable to the administrator and a great deal more would
be accomplished by working with and through the faculty.
Student Personnel
There are many different kinds of students, who attend school, ranging from the
academically talented student to the special education student. Yet, in the
day-to-day operation of schools a number of services, designed for the student
welfare and safety, are essential. These are in addition to the instructional
programme and include student personnel services.
In addition to these services, appropriate educational facilities must be
obtained and maintained to ensure that students have a supportive learning
environment. This is in lieu of the fact that the major objective of education
should be to help each student achieve his/her maximum potential. The task and
responsibility for the implementation of these services resides with the
administrator.
I would like here to introduce five main areas within the boundaries of the
student personnel function. These services include (a) orientation, (b)
guidance; (c) health services; (d) food services and (e) student transportation.
Known as the auxiliary services, they generally provide the school administrator
with most of the severe day-to-day problems encountered in the typical school
system. "While these services are not directly related to the teaching-learning
situation, their absence makes it impossible for the primary function of the
school to continue" (Candoli, et.al, 1984). Taken together "these
non-instructional services contribute to student school survival and success"
(Guthrie & Reed, 1991).
Orientation
The entrance of a student to a school for the first time can be quite a
traumatic experience. Because of this likelihood, the administration must have
systems in place to minimize that possibility. The orientation process, as a
responsibility of the administrator's task, helps in that process. These are
procedures which help the student adjust to his/her new environment, and thus
alleviate some fears and anxiety.
This procedure include: (a) the admission process -- where the student is
admitted to the school. This generally involves the supplying of necessary
information for the students files and may be gotten through interviews or by
filling out forms. The parent or guardian of that student may be involved in
that process.
There is then (b) the registration process -- along with other students of the
school, the student is enrolled formally to his/her classes. This is when class
schedules are received along with other time-table schedules. In some cases, the
choice of instructional courses, if there are options, are done at this time. It
is also at this time that the payment of fees and other financial arrangements
and costs are done through the business accounting process. The student must
then be guided into the rules, regulations, expectation, and general philosophy
of the school.
The other phase follows (c) the familiarization process --the student is
introduced to the administration, the teaching faculty and non-teaching
personnel that he/she would be responsible to in his/her tenure at the
institution. The student must then be made familiar with the physical facilities
of the institution. These include the classroom, rest-rooms, recreational rooms,
cafeteria, as well as to other service-centered area like the library, health
services, counselling center, and grievance office personnel.
As these procedures are put into place by the administrator, the beginning of an
era in the students life may just be a rewarding, exciting and enjoyable
experience.
Guidance
Many students, especially at the secondary level, come to school without having
made any decision about choice of career or profession. The administrator must
then be competent in helping, by exposing that student to many choices as
possible, while assisting him/her to match interests, abilities, and disposition
to opportunities. Parental and guardian input is fundamental in this process. As
the student continues education with such aims, learning becomes a more
meaningful affair.
There are many situations where the process of disciplining students is
inevitable. Discipline in this sense is not just limited to dealing with
undesired behavior, but includes a system of rules governing conduct or activity
or in general, modeling moral character. The administrator as part of his tasks
must provide guidance systems for such ethical development.
Guidance is a broad concept which embraces a variety of planned and specialized
student services, besides choosing career and discipline. Guthrie & Reed (1991)
mention, "Guidance supplements instructional programs through counseling
services, including individual and group testing for diagnostic and placement
purposes." Continuing the authors suggest that through guidance, the student
attendance and school performance is monitored and documented "for the purpose
of assistance and reporting education and vocational placement, and student
follow-up activities" (Guthrie & Reed, 1991).
The counseling service, then, is seen as a very important service in the student
life at an institution. Guthrie and Reed (1991) disclose that the counselor
should perform the following seven tasks. The counselor should:
(i) Coordinate the school guidance plan.
(ii) Develop strategies for school staff to use in reaching students whose
academic performance has slipped or who need assistance in developing self-
confidence and in thinking about the future.
(iii) Serve as advocate for students who are at risk of not meeting new standard
and requirements.
(iv) Plan and carry out projects to inform parents about school objectives and
how they can support them.
(v) Train para-professionals and/or volunteer to perform special duties.
(vi) Work with teachers and administrators to enhance their capacities and
capabilities in guidance and counseling, and other areas in which they can
contribute.
(vii) Develop a bank of community resources to which youngsters with special
problems can be referred.
As the administrator, through his specialist personnel, the counselor, perform
these tasks, they would all help in integrating the student in the school
setting. As Kimbrough & Nunnery, (1976) sum it up: "The counseling program
should provide special opportunities for the school and the student to reach
accommodation and for the student to realize optimum educational progress."
Health Services
The primary function of school health services is "to access and diagnose the
health status of students in the school, and to work with teachers, parents,
administrators, and others to promote better student health habits and
practices" (Gorton 1983). Most school systems provide some health service for
students. Any activity of the school, to determine the health condition of
students, whether it be to correct health defects of simply to administer first
aid, may be classified as under the health services. The basic premise for
having a school health programme, of course, is that if a student is not in a
state of good health, he/she will not be able to learn as effectively as he/she
should.
Here, the tasks of the administrator is that of seeing this service be made
available and is carefully coordinated.
Food Service
A cornerstone of good health is proper diet and nutrition. Thus, food service
provisions for student exist in almost all schools. The purpose of the food
service programme is "to provide economically feasible nutritious and
well-prepared food for student" (Guthrie & Reed, 1991). Recognizing the
importance of food and student nutrition, and the harsh reality that many
students may leave home for school without breakfast, the need for providing
food becomes important. The reality that many students come to school without
eating and not having the means to buy, is even a more daunting situation. The
administrator then has to look to implement some assistance programme. In some
state-runned school systems, food-assistance programmes have become an integral
part of the school.
Student Transportation
Providing transportation services for students can be a necessary and expensive
school function. In some of the Caribbean countries, a limited amount of
subsidized transportation service is provided by the government. In Trinidad and
Tobago, students are issued with bus passes and these are produced to entitle
the uniformed-dressed student with a free ride to school destination.
In most cases, transportation for students in Trinidad an Tobago is performed by
the private bus service, taxies and maxi's (small bus service).
Other Student Personnel Tasks
There are other tasks that fall under the portfolio of the administrator. First,
there must be established policy and procedures in regard to pupil safety in the
building and on the school grounds. There must be periodic drills for disasters
like fire, earthquakes or floods. The administrator tasks entail him/her to have
all students be made aware of these emergency procedures.
Secondly, the administrator must be responsible for developing and coordinating
all extra-curricular programmes of the school. In most cases, these activities
become very meaningful to the student, and generally in the long term develop
the school spirit which enhances the instructional process in the classroom.
Lastly, the administrator may need to confer with juvenile court, police
agencies, social workers, etc. with reference to misdemeanor or problems
encountered on the part of students.
The Administrators Task in Instructional/Curriculum
Development and Improvement
The content of what is taught -- curriculum -- and the manner in which it is to
be taught -- instruction, are operational components of schooling to which
educational administrators should pay significant attention. The extent and
nature of that attention would lead to development and improvement. Kimbrough
and Nunnery, (1976) suggest that the curriculum consists of the opportunities
offered to students while the instructional methods are the medium through which
these opportunities are delivered.
The school administrator who is interested in curriculum improvement should with
the assistance of relevant others, initially concentrate his/her efforts on
assessing the need for improvement. There is little need to begin to develop and
begin to change the curriculum until the nature of the need for improvement has
been fully and accurately assessed. If this is not done there may be curriculum
development but no necessarily curriculum improvement. Gorton (1983) suggests,
"The only valid criterion for ascertaining whether a curricular change results
in significant improvement is whether the change better enables the school to
achieve previously defined educational objectives."
The administrator can assess the need for curriculum improvement by firstly,
evaluating the school's current programme of studies, utilizing previously
defined and accepted criteria, and secondly, studying and evaluating various
proposals which are offered for the improvement of the curriculum (Gorton,
1983).
Once a need is identified, then the process of development of the curriculum
begins. To do so, there must be a general idea of what is the curriculum. The
definition of curriculum can be wide and far-reaching, but for this paper, it is
seen as all the experiences that the student is exposed to that come under the
direct or indirect control of the school. With such a definition of curriculum
the administrator has to be very particular in its design and development. Peter
F. Oliva (1989), in his book Supervisor for Today's Schools, gives a model for
curriculum development. The model is based on six fixed sequence of tasks. The
figure below shows the model:
Statement of Statement of Statement of Design of Implementation Evaluation
Philosophy Curriculum Curriculum Curriculum of the of the
and aims Goals Objectives Plan Curriculum Curriculum
Figure (xi) Model For Curriculum Development (Oliva, 1989)
The curriculum begins with a statement of philosophy espoused by the school or
school system. This is followed by the statement of curriculum goals and
curriculum objectives. Curriculum goals are expectations of the student as they
encounter the curriculum and are stated in more general, non-behavioural terms.
These goals should be attainable. Kimbrough and Nunnery (1976) state, "They
should be socially relevant, individually challenging, and speak to the
compelling needs of the culture." The curriculum objectives are expectations of
the student as they encounter the curriculum and are stated in more limited,
measurable and behavioral terms. "Both goals and objectives should be stated in
terms of expectations of the student rather than expectations of the school"
(Oliva, 1989).
Following approval of the objectives, the curriculum proposals are developed by
the representative committees and considered by the faculty. "The process of
translating the goals of the school into a school curriculum is a difficult one"
so say Kimbrough and Nunnery (1976). They continue, "There is the problem of
selecting from available knowledge, and the problem of how to structure this
knowledge to facilitate attainment of objectives." The fact that what is to be
taught involves the concept of how students grow and develop, even compounds the
problem.
Once the curriculum has been developed and endorsed by the faculty, it is then
implemented. In the last stage of the model evaluation plans are designed,
reviewed by the faculty, and then carried out.
In the development of the curriculum, the administrator must ensure that all the
forces that could impact on the effectiveness of the curriculum would have an
input. These would include influential agencies, and other special interest
groups in the society which affect the school at large.
As the administrator better understands the purpose of the school in that
community, he/she would better be able to understand curriculum development. In
fact, the administrator, in developing the curriculum must, relate it to the
available time, physical facilities, and personnel. Thus "one of the most direct
ways for administrators to influence school effectiveness in the curriculum is
to exercise appropriate options in utilizing human and other resources to bring
about the best combination for the school success" (Orlosky, et al. 1984). The
authors continue by surmising, "There is a similarity between the classroom
teachers' efforts to individualize instruction to optimize learning, and the
administrator's efforts to individualize assignments to optimize teacher
effectiveness." For the administrator to provide this best condition, he/she
must "have a strong grasp of the total curriculum, the characteristics of
pupils, the strengths and preferences of the faculty and the sensitivity and
insight to blend those elements into the best combination" (Orlosky, et al,
1984). Decision made in these areas generally have the greatest impact on the
curriculum, reflecting a truly developed model.
Only as there is development is there improvement. As the administrator acts as
a facilitator in curriculum development, taking the needs of the learner and all
contributing and affecting factor into consideration, only then will the
curriculum be considered an improved one.
School - Community/Public Relations
The school is not an independent or isolated entity; it operates within a social
context. An important element here is the community. The school depends on the
community for students, financial and social support. Since the stakes are high,
the community attempts to exercise its power over the school, primarily and
firstly, through the school board. It is the school board which has the
authority to establish policies and approved financial expenditures. Secondly,
the community tries to exert its influence on the school, informally, through
parents and special interest groups. Because of these factors, the administrator
needs to develop a good understanding of, and exercise competency in, building
and maintaining effective school-community relations.
The administrator's first task in this respect is to understand and to develop
good relationship with the community that the school serves. This means that the
administrator must have the best communication process with the community, since
their opinions about the school are likely to be the most influential.
A major purpose of developing effective relations with the local community is to
enable parents and citizens to participate actively and meaningfully in the
educational activities of the school. Effective programmes of school-community
relations encourage parents and guardians to become involved in the educational
process of a school by working along with teachers in planning the individual
programmes of their children each quarter. Communication and involvement are
therefore increased because parents and guardians work closely with teachers to
monitor the progress of their students. Another purpose is to increase the
communication between a school and a community by helping teachers analyze and
understand the home and neighborhood conditions of their students.
Many studies have shown the importance of developing effective relationships
between the school and the home. It has been shown that "students who develop
rapidly at school's performance, held positive attitudes towards their families
and home in general" (Lipham et al, 1985). The authors continue, "Slow
developers, on the other hand, had parents who typically demonstrated little
involvement with their child or the school; moreover, these parents expressed
negative attitudes towards school and education." In addition to parental
involvement, a total programme of school-community relation is important. For
example, Lipham, et al. (1985) quote Danzberger and Usdan (1984) who "discovered
that dynamic partnership between school and community improve the effectiveness
of the school and contribute to the quality of life in the entire community."
Gorton (1983), in his book School Administration and Supervision, gives
suggestions to the administrator in terms of building better relationship. He
proposes that the most important step, that an administrator can take initially
to develop good school-community relations, is to study and better understand
the school's local community. To do so the administrator needs to look at the
following six areas: Firstly, he/she must study the kinds of people who reside
in the community, the socio-economic background and the information like how
many are now parents, how many are working parents, and how many single parent
homes there are. Secondly, the school administrator needs to become
knowledgeable about the different groups and organizations to which the people
in the local community belong, taking note of the group(s) having special
interest in education and in the school. Thirdly, the administrator should try
to meet the leaders of major groups and organizations in the local community the
school serves, and learn their point-of-view about education and about the
school. Fourthly, the administrator needs to become more aware of the different
places where people in the community meet, and the various methods of
communication they use in discussing education and the school. This is in order
to capitalize on those channels when he/she tries to communicate information
about the school, or needs to try to find out what people are thinking. Lastly,
the administrator needs to become knowledgeable in the educational expectation
and attitudes of its people, for it is by those standards they are going to
evaluate the performance of the school.
Other areas that the administrator could be involved in, to better help
relationships with the community are as follows: Firstly, being involved with
Parent-Teacher Association. Reeder (1964) remarks, "They [parent-teacher
associations] have been especially helpful in making parents and teachers
acquainted, in eliminating difficulties between parents and teachers and between
pupils and teachers, and in stimulating a community sentiment for education."
The author continues, "They are an excellent [way] for making the public
relations of the school a two-way street." Secondly, the administrator should
try to address as many organizational meetings as is possible. These would
provide opportunities to sell and resell the school to the public. Thirdly,
there should be if possible a publication, even if simple, to convey by the
printed medium, the news, achievements, and aspirations of the school. Fourthly,
the administrator should have special days when the public would be specially
invited to see the school at work. In addition, there should be school
exhibitions, fairs, at appropriate times to attract the public. Fifthly, school
programmes, like concerts, musicals, lectures, dramas, debating, and contests,
present other excellent opportunities for good public relations. Sixthly, adult
and continuing education classes to the public is an excellent way of selling
the school. As adults get a second chance at education, their attitude towards
the school generally becomes more positive. Seventhly, the administrator can
have the greatest relations with the public as the school turns out disciplined
and respectable students in the community. This is directly related to
outstanding teaching and general school effectiveness. The best advertisement
for the school is its students performance initiated by outstanding teaching
from its teachers. Eightly, the improvement of the school-community relationship
must be made by the administrator as a general overall activity by all who are
concerned with the school. All school officials and workers should be selling
the school by sharing accurate and timely information about the school, through
their various contacts with the community. Finally, the administrator can build
relationships through bilateral face-to-face communication. This requires a
mutually agreeable time, location and confidentiality. Lipham, et al, (1985)
suggest, "Parents' interviews, should occur at the reasonably convenience of
parents, and not just as a result of the school's schedule." With regard to such
communication "It requires development of trust between administrator and
parents," and there must be a guard against distortion of the message being
transmitted. "Proper transmission of an important message," Lipham, et al,
(1985) contends, "requires substantial preparation and time," on the part of the
administrator. They reiterate, "Effective communication depends on the
administrator's ability to determine the most appropriate medium to transmit a
particular message, to prepare the message carefully and to provide the
opportunity for feedback." Attention to these basic elements should reduce
distortion, and hence improve the communication and relationship of the school
with the community.
The Task of School Finance and Business Management
"The efficiency of the school is determined largely by the amount of school
revenue and by the wisdom with which that revenue is expended," so says Reeder
(1964), in his book The Fundamentals of Public School Administration. Every
other aspect and phase of the schools' programme is dependent on financial
support. If there were no financial support there would be no school. If the
funds were inadequate or were unwisely expended through improper budgeting, the
school would not realize its potentials. In other words "the curriculum and
instructional program desired must be translated into the financial resources
needed through [the process of] budgeting" (Kimbrough & Nunnery, 1976).
What exactly then is a budget? Budget means different things to different
people. Each person may have his/her own definition of what the term 'budget'
means. Lipham, et al, (1985) gives the definition as "a systematic statement
that relates the educational program to the receipts and expenditures
anticipated in a fiscal period, supported by data reflecting educational needs,
goals, processes, and anticipated outcomes." Guthrie and Reed (1991) state, "A
budget is a document representing an organization plans for allocating and
spending money." A short but useful definition of budget is given by Gorton
(1983), who says, "The budget is the blue print of what the educational program
will be and what it will cost."
All of these definitions assume that budgeting involves at least four elements:
(1) planning; (2) receiving funds; (3) spending funds and (4) evaluating results
-- all performed within the limits of a predetermined time.
The school budget, then, is a financial plan for a specified period of time. "It
states in dollars and cents the philosophy and policies of the school system"
(Reeder, 1964). It determines the quality and quantity of school employees and
materials, and it also determines the phases of the schools' programme which are
to be emphasized and those which are not to be.
For this we can see the administrator's tasks in school financing as being a
challenging one. He/she must understand and practice sound administration and
business management techniques through the budgeting process.
This process then becomes more than a series of action or operations leading to
an approved document. Rather, it should be the fiscal expression, translated
into programmes and observable results in the school's programme. According to
Orlosky (1984) and his associates, the result of the budget- making process
should enable the school to:
1) provide the quality of resources needed to implement the educational
programme;
2) Identify key elements in the management and allocation of funds, facilities,
materials and personnel;
3) give a comprehensive account of financial stewardship;
4) facilitate the control of expenditures;
5) appraise the operations of school programs; and
6) provide information which will contribute to greater efficiency in subsequent
budgetary planning.
The budget then to the administrator should not be viewed as a rigid document,
but as Orlosky, et al, (1984) put it, "A budget is designed to be a servant to
education and is not a master." In fact, the authors continue by quoting
Engelhardt (1977), who says, "A school budget is only as good as the
administrator who makes it; it is not a substitute for good administration, and
the budget will improve as administration improves."
The administrator must then be careful and meticulous in the steps involved in
the budgeting process. Orlosky, et al, (1984) disclose the steps as: (a)
planning and preparation; (b) presentation and adoption; (c) administration and
(d) appraisal, and review. Between the presentation and the adoption, is
sometimes included, a step that I would term as revision, where the budget is
reviewed before it is presented for formal adoption. The figure below shows the
budgeting process, and each step is separately shown since there are distinct
features about each stage. It also shows how, as a result of the budget process,
there would be results which is manifested through financial resources and as it
affects the educational programme.
┌──────────┐
│ PLANNING │
└──────────┘
┌────────┐ ┌─────────────┐
│ REVIEW │ │ PREPARATION │
└────────┘ └─────────────┘
┌────────────┐
┌───────────┐ │ RESULTS, │ ┌──────────────┐
│ APPRAISAL │ ┌─────┘ RESOURCES, └────┐ │ PRESENTATION │
└───────────┘ │ EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMME │ └──────────────┘
└───────────────────────┘
┌────────────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ ADMINISTRATION │ │ REVISION │
└────────────────┘ └───────────┘
┌──────────┐
│ ADOPTION │
└──────────┘
Figure (xii) The School Budgetary Process
As these process are carried out or supervised by the administrator, using all
the skilled and expert advise he/she could marshal. Along with the input from
the staff, general school community, and other resource parties, the school
budgetary process would be a rewarding experience to the administrator.
Administration of the School's Physical Plant
"The physical aspects of the school plant, and maintenance of its facilities
contribute to or detract from a school environment -- its culture and its
climate" (DeRoche, 1987). This is further supported by Guthrie and Reed (1991)
who remark, "... the school's physical environment contributes to school climate
and, subsequently, to teaching and learning." The school principal has the task
to supervise, manage, evaluate and improve, with assistance from other qualified
personnel, the school's physical plant and its facilities.
This section would focus on five major considerations: (a) the efficient and
effective use of the building itself; (b) the operation and care of the building
and grounds;
(c) the proper management of school supplies and equipment; (d) the safety and
security of the school's plant and facilities, as well as the people that work
in it; and
(e) the organization and managing of personnel responsible for its care and
upkeep.
Efficient and Effective Use of Building
In order to efficiently and effectively use the school building, the
administrator must ensure, as much as possible, full utilization. By
utilization, is meant having the maximum amount of persons in a room at any
given occasion for as much time as is possible. There must be significant
classroom usage for a meaningful period of time, so there can be economic
viability. Besides, the administrator should analyze the school plant from the
standpoint of such efficient usage. Kyte (1941), in his book The Principal at
Work, records seven different factors the administrator should use when making
his/her analysis. These are:
(i) Flexibility -- the extent to which alterations can be made to meet various
types of needs, especially the instructional supervisory and administrative
needs. Example of this may mean adding or reassigning classrooms, keeping in
mind the student's development and needs.
(ii) Accessibility -- involves the convenient location of facilities so as to
avoid the possibility of traffic congestion in the building. For example,
assigning classrooms based on ages of students and sizes of classes.
(iii) Orientation -- has to do with hygienic possibilities of the school plant.
Examples include making the best use of: available sunlight, the direction of
light in relation to instructional activities, or even arranging seats to avoid
direct sunlight or glare in students eyes.
(iv) Association -- applies to the feasibility of grouping facilities and rooms
according to activities and common conditions; for example, have the junior
students section in one wing and the senior students section in another wing.
(v) Disturbance -- refers to the undesirable conditions which cause disturbance
during school operation; for example, to locate the music room so that not many
persons are disturbed by the sounds. Such undesirable conditions must be
alleviated as much as is possible.
(vi) Instructional Adequacy -- connotes the capability of the school plant in
satisfying the curricular needs of all students attending the school. Examples
here would include size, location of rooms, the amount of furniture in a room
relative to the amount of students, the amount of ventilation, lighting or
amount of heat exposure. This would facilitate learning at all times, when the
school building or plant is in use. Hence, the adequate school plant makes
possible all these conditions thus assuring the students the best possible type
of schooling.
(viii) Adaptability -- relates primarily to the kinds of uses that each facility
or room permits. Consequently, when the term is applied to the school plant as a
whole, it means the suitability of the plant for various instructional
progammes. Examples here would include the use of auditorium, library or art
room, and the part they play in the instructional process.
The Operation and Care of School's Plant
The principal is responsible for the proper maintenance of the school plant, its
facilities, and its grounds. The primary goal should be, to keep the building in
good operating condition, including safety and security, for daily use. The
resource for these tasks is the school's custodial staff.
In order to carry out this task, the principal must have specific plans and
procedures. Firstly, there must be a regular plan for supervising/inspecting the
school plant, its site, and its facilities. This can be done once every term. A
checklist showing the various facilities to be inspected, the present condition,
as well as what the recommended action, must be drawn up to be used during the
inspection process. Secondly, the custodians and the other resource personnel
must be involved in planning for the care and maintenance. Thirdly, the input of
the teachers and staff must be taken to determine the extent to which the
existing facilities meet the needs of instructional programmes, the
extra-curricular programmes, and school services. Fourthly, have regular
evaluation of all plans and procedures that are implemented with regard to care
and maintenance of the school and its facilities. Finally, the principal must
endeavor to inculcate in all who use the school plant, students and workers
alike, the need to make maintenance and care of the school's plant, a part of
everybody's business.
Managing School Supplies and Equipment
There are different functions that principals must implement to effectively
manage the school's supplies and equipment. DeRoche (1987) suggests seven
different tasks in these functions. They are:
(1) Requisitioning -- the procedure used to find out supply and equipment needs
of teachers, custodians, secretaries, librarians, and other school personnel.
(2) Purchasing -- the purchasing or acquisition of needed supplies and
equipment.
(3) Receiving -- the strategy employ for receiving supplies and equipment.
(4) Storing -- the practice used to store supplies and equipment.
(5) Distributing -- the process used in the school for the handing out of
supplies and equipment.
(6) Inventorying -- the system used to keep records and reports on school
supplies and equipment.
(7) Evaluating -- the methods used to determine how effectively and efficiently
the school supplies and equipments are managed.
Improving School Safety and Security
A safe school results when the principal performs the following:
1. Establishes a safety-conscious tone.
2. Implements a safety education program.
3. Provides in-service training for faculty and staff.
4. Promotes special safety programs and assemblies.
5. Establishes a school safety patrol.
6. Participates in safety campaigns.
7. Utilizes community resource personnel.
8. Actively demonstrates concern about the safety of all people in the school.
(DeRoche, 1987)
The importance of regular building inspection for potential fire hazards cannot
be underestimated in terms of school safety and security. Such inspection should
be done at least once a year by fire officials. The principal, though, would
benefit from a self-inspection plan that includes the involvement of the school
custodian as well as other school personnel.
"The principal has the responsibility to become acquainted with state laws and
local ordinances regarding fire and accident regulations for school buildings"
(DeRoche, 1987). Such information would require regular fire drills at the
school, along with implementing and practicing evacuation procedures, among
students and workers at school. This, in recent times, has taken on greater
importance because of the potential for fire from the phenomenon of bomb
threats. This task, of managing procedures for the efficient and safe evacuation
of the school building, should not be taken lightly by the principal.
Part of the management task of the school principal is to assume the safety for
all at school. Accidents happen, some because of negligence, others because of
unforseen circumstances. The best that the principal can do is to try to instill
in the faculty, staff, and students, the concepts of accident prevention. Impact
phrases like `be prepared,' `be safety minded', `don't be negligent', `think
before you act', can all help in that mental process.
Organizing and Managing Custodial Services
While the direct responsibility for the maintenance of plant and facilitates
belongs to the principal, it is carried out by the custodial staff. The
importance of these personnel to the daily operation of the school, and to the
educational programme within the school, should not be minimized. Both principal
and custodial staff have specific responsibilities that are distinctive to plant
and facilities management.
The principal's major responsibilities in organizing and managing the custodial
services are threefold: to supervise, to administer, and to evaluate. The
principal should define the custodian's job and also seek to have teachers
respect and dignify the position of custodian. The principal should
(a) cooperate with the custodian, and appreciate them for the service they
provide;
(b) assist custodian by developing reasonable work schedules; (c) communicate
with custodians by being open to their suggestions, while listening to their
problems and concerns, and sharing with them necessary information about plant
and facilities management;
(d) mediate potential conflicts between custodians and teachers or other
personnel; and
(e) provide custodians with an office and workroom for maintaining records and
reports and storing tools and equipment.
Like the principal, the custodians also have specific responsibilities. DeRoche
(1987) lists them as follows. Custodians must:
(a) work cooperatively with the principal, teachers, and school personnel;
(b) demonstrate pride in their position and in their work;
(c) show concern for the health and safety of all school personnel;
(d) maintain high housekeeping standards;
(e) be particularly helpful in times of emergencies, problems, and special
school activities;
(f) properly clean, repair, replace, and maintain the school plant and its
facilities;
(g) periodically inspect the building and equipment;
(h) keep an up-to-date inventory of supplies and equipment;
(i) anticipate and prevent many maintenance problems; and
(j) evaluate themselves and encourage others to evaluate their work.
Winston Chruchill once said, "we shape our dwellings and then our dwellings
shape us." The physical environment in which we work can and does influence what
we do and how we feel. This is supported by Guthrie & Reed (1991) who remark,
"The school's physical environment contributes to school climate and,
subsequently, to teaching and learning." The effectiveness of the physical
environment can be viewed in what people say about it, what they do when using
the facilities, and whether they perceive it as a facility that contributes to,
or detracts from carrying out the day-to-day business of education.
Administration of Minor Tasks of the Administrator
The tasks of the administrator can be wide and far-reaching. We have already
looked at the six major task-areas. This sections would endeavour to look at
some of the other tasks that are not considered as major tasks, but in the
context of the running of the school, are very important responsibilities.
Included in these tasks are the following:
(a) Extracurricular activities -- these are activities of students which are not
a part of the regular studies of the school. Sports, clubs, school publication,
all come under the
administration of the school principal.
(b) Textbooks -- "The textbook frequently determines what is taught and the
order of presentation of the subject matter, [and] ... is frequently the course
of study for the subject" (Reeder, 1958). The textbook permits students to
review lessons at their own time, as well as it presents an excellent
organization of the information. The textbook is a large time-saver, in most
cases, for both students and teachers.
Because of these important reasons, the administrator must be very careful as to
the types of textbooks to be chosen and listed for student. Here a great deal of
reliance on the subject teacher is inevitable.
(c) Library -- The library is regarded as, next to the teacher, the most
important instructive medium of the school. "The library, [in this context],
must be a source of information, to assist the learning and instruction process.
(Reeder, 1958). In addition, the library must be a source of audio-visual
materials for the instructional process. Maps, charts, projectors,
video/television, cassette players, computer assisted instructional programmes,
etc. are just some of the important tools and equipment that should be
available. The administrator must ensure their accessibility.
(d) School office -- the effectiveness and efficiency of a school system depend
largely upon expeditious and otherwise efficient performance of numerous office
duties. There are many such duties that the administrator alone can perform.
These include matters such as directing the tasks of the administrative
assistants working at the school office, reading, considering, replying to
letters and other communication, using the telephone, or interviewing office
visitor's.
The school office of the administrator, helped by the school secretary,
registrar, vice principal or other personnel, is also responsible for tasks such
as: scheduling school programmes, keeping intact all school records, examining
reports from co-workers or department heads, making reports to present at school
board meetings or district administration meetings, attending principal's
meeting, preparing agenda and chairing faculty meetings, or just making public
appearance on behalf of the school.
Another important task of the administrator is to make continual diagnosis of
the strengths and weaknesses of the school programme. By this procedure, steps
can be made in a more positive direction in term of overall school development.
It is at the school office that personnel make first contact with anyone having
to do business with the school. For these reasons, the office must be in a
centralized position in the physical plant structure, the esthetics of the rooms
must be outstanding, as well as the personality of individuals at the office
must be warm and friendly. A simple case of answering a school telephone can
make an outsider develop a negative or positive impression of the school.
These are all demanding tasks which the administrator must perform. To do so,
he/she must apply efficiency principles to the management of his/her office.
CHAPTER V
PROCESSES INVOLVED IN ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS
This chapter and the previous chapter are close companions. Chapter IV provided
information about the various tasks of the administrator. The processes
involved, in the administrator carrying out these tasks, are mentioned in this
chapter, and shown in the figure below:
╷- Decision │ Making
│- Planning
│- Organizing
│- Coordinating
│- Communicating
│- Evaluating
│- Directing
PROCESSES │- Problem
┌───────────────┐ INVOLVED IN │ Identification │ ADMINISTRATIVE│ PERFORMING │-
Diagnosis
│ TASKS │ ADMINISTRATIVE │- Setting
└───────────────┘ TASKS │ Objectives
│- Delegating
│- Initiating
│- Reporting
│- Training
│- Advising
│- Rewarding
│- Designing
╵- Appraising
Figure (xiii) Processes Involved in Administrative Tasks
The administrative process consists of the methods which an administrator
utilizes to achieve specific tasks and objectives. As these processes are
thoroughly understood, the administrator should be able to accomplish
administrative tasks more effectively, and should experience greater success in
achieving objectives. It must be emphasized here that the effectiveness, with
which an administrator utilizes each process, is greatly enhanced through the
meaningful involvement of significant others, such as teachers.
Problem Identification
An administrator has no shortage of problem for which he/she will be expected to
provide solutions, yet he/she must not wait for problems to show up. Such a
waiting period might just cause a problem to go into a critical state. Gorton
(1983) suggests that the administrator must "begin to identify underlying
problems that will eventually manifest themselves troublesome behavior."
Continuing, the author emphasizes, [the administrator] "must begin to identify
potential problem areas, which, if not connected, could ultimately lead to
serious consequences for the school."
To identify problems, the administrator needs to set up criteria for determining
what constitutes a problem, and must then ask the right evaluative question, at
the right time. This should be initiated by peculiar signs that the
administrator, through experience, would recognize.
Diagnosis
"Diagnosis is investigating the basic cause of a problem" (Campbell, et al,
1977), and ... "is concerned with ascertaining the underlying roots of [that]
problem and distinguishing these from its mere symptoms or manifestation"
(Jacobson & Reavis, 1942). It includes careful, thorough, and objective
investigation into the condition which have led to or created the problem. Like
problem identification, the process begins with the formulation of question.
The administrator must not just seek to form conclusions from the surface, but
must go deeper into the real causes of problems. This is diagnosis, and this
process must be engaged before any attempt is made to solve any problem or
implement any task.
Setting Objectives
Administrators who wish to be reasonably effective must set objectives which
should represent the outcomes that they want to achieve as well as the targets
at which they are aiming. "The function of objective is to give an individual or
group direction, purpose, and reason for action" (Gorton, 1983).
Objectives may be categorize im three areas. These are (a) individual, (b)
group, and (c) programme. If the administrator is to be productive he/she must
set him/herself individual objectives. To capitalize on the potentialities of a
group, group objectives must be set. As the administrator works with personnel
who are involved in the programme, he/she must set programme objectives. It is
these objectives, set by the administrator, that serves as the standard by which
progress or achievement can be subsequently measured.
Decision Making
The administrator engages in decision making more often than any other person.
Guthrie & Reed (1991) affirm, "Decision making is the process of selecting the
best alternative." The authors continue by disclosing that decision making as a
process, involves six steps. These are (a) specifying or identifying the
problem; (b) analyzing the problem; (c) generating a series of strategies or
alternatives for resolving the problem; (d) examine each alternative's pros and
cons, and select, presumably, the best; (d) developing a plan for implementing
the preferred alternative; and (f) evaluating the effectiveness of the preferred
alternative.
During the process of reaching a decision, an administrator should involve
teachers, parents, students and others, as seemed appropriate, in order to
capitalize on any special insight and expertise which they may be able to
contribute.
Planning
Like decision making, planning practically overlaps into several of the
administrative processes. However, much of the planing process occurs after
goals have been established and decisions made.
Planning is concerned primarily with the question of how a goal is to be
achieved or a decision is to be implemented. Olga James-Reed (1983) says,
"Careful planning brings rich rewards. It gives purpose and direction to
everything that takes place in the school." Gorton (1983) gives the process of
planning in a series of nine questions. These are:
1. What needs to be done? ---> Task definition.
2. What resources are needed ---> Definition of resource
to do the job, and within needs and time parameters
what period of time?
3. Who is competent, ---> Selection of personnel
interested, and available
to do the job?
4. What responsibilities need ---> Definition and assignment
to be assigned to whom? of responsibility.
5. Which tasks and people ---> Identification of
need to be related to each coordination needs.
other in some manner?
6. Who should be in authority ---> Specification of
over whom? authority relationships.
7. Who should supervise whom ---> Specification of and in which area?
supervisory relationships
8. Who should communicate ---> Specification of communi-
with whom and about what? cation relationships
9. What standards will ---> Establishment of determine effectiveness? evaluation
criteria.
Implementing
Once a plan or programme has been designed, it must be implemented. This
involves the administrator in the process of making sure that the plan is
carried out as intended. This includes providing resources, assistance, and
monitoring progress.
Difficulties in implementing may arise from incorrect diagnosis of problems or
inadequate efforts to resolve problems. Fortunately, the administrator can
anticipate these difficulties and take corrective action before it becomes
major. In anticipating these kinds of problems that could occur during
implementation, the administrator would do well to remember two of Murphy's
laws; "Most things are more complicated than they initially appear to be" and "
Most things take longer than originally anticipated."
Coordinating
"The school administrator engages in the process of coordinating when he/[she]
attempts to relate people, tasks, and/or time schedules in such a way that they
are mutually supplementary and complementary" (Campbell, et al., 1977). Gorton
(1983) suggests, "A potential need for coordinating exists whenever two or more
people, activities, resources and or time schedules either operate in
conjunction with each other or should operate in conjunction with one another."
The need for coordinating is particularly evident when different specialized
personnel are working towards the same or similar objectives. The process should
occur during planning stages as well as during the implementation of those
plans.
In the process of coordinating, the administrator may have to (a) redefine roles
so that they complement each other better; (b) restructure tasks so they do not
conflict or overlap each other; (c) designate new lines of communication so
there is better coordination of activity or use of resources; and (d) rearrange
time schedules so individuals or groups can work together more easily (Gorton,
1983). In all these activities, the administrator is engaged in the process of
coordinating, which as a result, can increase the extent to which an activity or
programme will be carried out efficiently and effectively.
Delegating
No administrator can effectively perform all of the various administrative
functions and tasks within the school system. Therefore, some duties must, or at
least should, be delegated or passed on to other competent personnel.
Gorton (1983) reveals four situations when the administrator should delegate
responsibility. These are:
(1) when someone else can do the task as well or better than the administrator;
(2) when the administrator doesn't have the time for the job or have other
important priorities;
(3) when someone else can do the job adequately, if not as well, but at less
expense; and
(4) when the administrator is attempting to provide orientation and training to
someone else who is preparing for a similar position.
Initiating
The administrator engages in the process of initiating when he/she has reached
the point at which he/she is ready to take some kind of action individually, or
within a group.
The school administrator must attempt to initiate action on the part of other
people in a variety of ways. He/she will request, instruct, direct, command,
motivate, or try to persuade others to initiate a desired action or activity.
Gorton (1983) observes:
In selecting the manner in which he/[she] attempts to initiate action, the
administrator needs to examine the assumptions he/[she] may be making about
his/[her] authority and power, other people's perception and acceptance of that
authority and power, and the kind of initiating approach that is most likely to
be successful in bringing about the desired results.
In some situations, the administrator needs to consider all feasible alternative
methods for initiating action. It may be better to try to persuade someone to
take an action, rather than issuing directives, giving commands, or instructing
orders.
Communicating
Communicating is one of the most important administrative processes which is
probably engaged more often by the administrator, than any other process, with
the exception of decision making. In order to persuade, instruct, direct,
request, present, stimulate, or develop understanding, the administrator must
communicate. Guthrie & Reed (1991) give an outline of the communication process:
The communication process involves a sender who must first encode a message to
be sent. Encoding refers to the transformation of ideas or thoughts into a form
that will, conceivably, convey those ideas or thoughts to an intended receiver.
Following encoding, a sender transmits the message which may be written, spoken,
or non verbal thought a formal or informal channel. Next the receiver must
decode the message within his or her mental attitudinal frame of reference. To
ensure that the message has been received, feedback should be provided to the
sender.
The communication process is depicted in Figure (xiv) below.
(ideas)
┌──────┐ ┌────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌────────┐
│Sender├─────┤ Encoding Channel/medium Decoding Receiver
└────┬─┘ └────────┘ └─────────────┘ └─────────┘ └────┬───┘
│ (thoughts) (message) (message) (message)
│ │
│ │
│ ┌──────────┐ │
└──────────────────────┤ Feedback ────────────────────
└──────────┘
Figure (xiii) The Communication Process Evaluating
Evaluation represents one of the most important processes that a school
administrator can utilize, but one which, unfortunately, seems to be among the
least frequently employed.
According to Gorton (1983), "Evaluation can be defined as the process of
examining as carefully, thoroughly, and objectively as possible an individual,
group, product, or program in order to ascertain strengths and weakness."
Guthrie & Reed (1977) add, "To evaluate is to make a judgement with respect to
establish criteria."
The administrator should engage in the evaluative process in relation to (a)
others, eg. teachers, (b) school programme, product, or process, and (c) self.
DeRoche (1981), gives three uses of evaluation. They are evaluation for:
(a) improvement, (b) accountability, and (c) enlightenment. I would like to
introduce here a fourth use, (d) performance.
Rewarding
After performance evaluation comes the administration of rewards. Rewarding is
defined by Collins English Dictionary as the act of something being given or
received in return for a deed or service rendered. In relation to educational
administration, the administrator must make rewards available which are
sufficient to induce the person to change his/her way of thinking or behaving.
Campbell, et al., (1977) cite some different behaviours, "praise, promotion,
salary increase, access to scarce organizational resources, and preferential
treatment, [which] can be incentives for behavior." The authors continue, "The
anticipation of these rewards, as well as the actual offering and receipt of
them, can motivate people to act in ways which are congruent with the
administrator's behavior."
Directing
Directing is the process where one seeks to facilitate purpose and orderliness
in an establishment. Personnel, sometimes, need direction and guidance in
planning, preparation, selection, and appropriation.
The educational administrator's role in this regard is unlimited. This is
because he/she is directing not only people, but activities, and material
resources.
Directing requires a certain method of procedure, and its aim is to provide the
guideline for achieving certain goals. The administrator must be knowledgeable
in the area he/she directs, must have a sense of purpose and determination to
accomplish the tasks, and he/she must seek to practice his/her methods. This is
important since more is learnt through his/her examples set, and methods used,
than through directives. By directing, the administrator can monitor the plans
that he/she has put into action, thus ensuring that activities are carried out
according to expectations.
Training
Training is applicable when a person is willing to change but lacks the
necessary skills which may be developed through some type of training programme.
Furthermore, the person agrees with the administrator that the new belief,
value, or way of behaving, is a desirable one.
Hodgette (1987) suggests four types of training. These are (a) apprentice
training -- given to people who are new to a job; (b) vestibule training --
takes place in an environment that stimulates the actual workplace; (c)
on-the-job training -- provided by immediate superior and by fellow workers; and
(d) off-the-job training -- done away from the workplace.
Advising
The is the giving of information or recommendation regarding a decision or a
course of conduct. This "is most effective when a person is dissatisfied with
the existing set of circumstances but is unable to determine the particular
condition or state which will yield more satisfying outcomes"
(Campbell, et al.,1977).
In advising, the administrator is perceived to have the knowledge and expertise
necessary to free the individual from his/her current problematic situation.
Campbell, et al.(1977) continue to suggest that the major obstacle to change is
the person's inability to identify the state or condition which represents a
solution to his/her problem. Therefore, the individual is susceptible to
influence by the administrator, if he/she has the intellectual resources to
solve the problem.
CHAPTER VI
STRUCTURAL CONSTRAINTS ON EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION
Every effective school administrator's dreams of a school system are that the
school is functioning with no hitches or problems. This is hardly likely since
the school system is a dynamic one, and with such dynamism comes change which
brings with it inevitable problems. Some of the causes of problems are in direct
control of the administrator; yet, there are many situations where he/she is
almost helpless in terms of control.
This chapter discusses some structural constraints that limit the capacity of
the administrator to control the work of teachers and students in school. This
capacity has as its source, the way in which power and authority are
distributed.
Constraints in this sense refers to the state of being checked or restricted.
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines the term constraints as "compelled
to avoid or perform some action; a repression of one's own feelings, behaviour
or action." The various issues in this chapter would be shown in some cases to
have such an impact upon educational administrators.
Six different issues will be looked at, each capable of producing its own
tensions and conflicts leading to constraints of varying intensity on the part
of the administrator. The first two are associated with administrative context
of work in school, the third and fourth with the occupational structure of
teaching, and the last two with classrooms as social systems and work settings.
These three dimensions constitute the main parameters of work in the school.
Administrative Control
In large school districts, central office administrators are officially in
charge; yet, many policies, for a given school, are determined by the action of
local school boards. Consequently, the district office administrators are held
accountable for things they cannot always control. Boyan, Ed. (1988), in the
book Handbook of Research on Educational Administration, quotes Corwin and
Borman, "Implementing educational policy is legally and politically the
responsibility of high-level school district administrators." Whenever
centralized decisions are made at the district level, they are passed on from
top down ensuring that at all stages there are checks and balances. However, in
practice only certain decisions are centralized. Most decisions are localized at
the school board, and local administrative level. The authors continued by
affirming, "chain-of-commands protocols help preserve administrative control,
but they can interfere with the ability of the school (hence the administrator)
to solve local problems." These leads to tension between the district
administrator and the local school.
This tension between school district administration and schools are products of
a complex balance of power. On one side of the equation "administrators
responsibilities have become separated from administrator's ability to control
the conditions necessary to fulfill those responsibilities." (Boyan, ed., 1988).
Administrative control is constrained, not only by the need to delegate certain
decisions, but also because subordinate units can independently exert influence
over areas that are still the official responsibility of administrators. Such
tension can lead ultimately to the relationship between the school and central
administration being based on negotiations.
Teacher Autonomy
The next issue that is associated with the administrative context of work in the
schools, and has constraints on educational administration, is that of teacher
autonomy. This issue falls under three categories. They are (a) Teacher
Discretion (b) Teacher Subordination, and (c) Teacher Collective power.
As in the case of the relationship between schools and central administration,
the balance of power fluctuates between teachers and the local school
administration. On one hand, administration must share their authority with
teachers, yet teachers, because of not being closely supervised can exercise
discretion within their classrooms over crucial instructional decisions. Boyan,
ed. (1988) suggests that this discretion also gives the teachers (i) the
opportunity to resist administrative initiative, (ii) the leverage of compete
among themselves for status and resources, and (iii) the capacity of teachers to
teach defensively in order to circumvent certain types of administrative
restraints. The result is that autonomy places limits on administrative control.
In addition to teachers personal discretion, "teachers can collectively exercise
influence over some policy areas through collective bargaining. Union and labor
contracts impose further limitations on the power of the administrator" (Boyan,
ed. 1988).
As the discretionary power of the teacher is investigated, the final analysis is
that teachers are subordinate, employees of the school district, and subject to
district-wide policies, rules, and procedures. Hence their "autonomy is never
absolute, but always subject to negotiation" (Boyan, 1988). Teachers autonomy
can be influenced by their collective power, in term of unity as a group, but as
Boyan (1988) surmises, "it has probably been weakened by role overload, ... by
fragmentation into implicit specialties and into [different] grade levels, and
by interpersonal competition and disputes."
Occupational Status
In the preceding sections, the discussions were focused on the position of
teachers within the school district. The same themes will be pursued under this
heading except for a more systematic account of the teachers roles and the
structure of teaching.
Occupational status becomes a constraint as the product or the result of the
contradictions between professional and employee's roles, are seen. Professional
norms can reinforce teacher autonomy, (as was previously discussed) and to that
extent they will sometimes act as a constraint on administrative control. At the
same time, teachers are subordinate employees, and thus expected to obey
administrative superiors and to comply with organizational rules.
Compliance with administrative polices and procedures can interfere with
professional norms. In this case, professional norms constitute a potential
threat to administrative control. As such, the most compliant teachers are not
necessarily responsive to the circumstances of their students. This is because
the teacher's work has become routinized, and at the same time lesson plans,
precise schedules and deadlines, required textbooks, and standardized tests, are
not equally appropriate for all students. Simultaneously, the goals of service
are also constantly jeopardized by the teacher endeavoring to strike a balance
between his/her own principles and what is required by the job. In that
situation, there seems to be an implicit division among groups of teachers: some
segments emphasizing professional norms, and others their employee roles. The
end result is normally a pragmatic one where the teacher takes on a practical
approach to problems and affairs.
Career
Providing incentives for teachers has been a difficult task for the
administrator because of the way teaching career is structured. Those teachers
who choose to make a life-long vocational commitment, do so at the expense of
formal advancement after mid-career, since in any event, promotion requires
leaving the classroom.
The predicament of career is as a result of teachers, whose career ladder is
truncated, making lifelong commitments to the teaching occupation. The lack of
promotion opportunities enormously complicates the tasks of rewarding teachers
and providing adequate incentives to attract and retain competent people.
Compared to other kinds of middle-class work, there is less opportunity for
upward movement into more specialize,d higher paying positions or positions of
higher authority, responsibility, or social prestige. Teachings is often
considered to be a low-commitment occupation, largely because teachers still
have conflicting allegiances to other things besides teaching. Families, other
part-time jobs, and other commitments, are all included.
As a result, some teachers view teaching just as a job and not as a career. Any
better opportunity that presents itself is taken once it is perceived as
resulting in greater benefits.
These issues create a constraint on educational administration since the quality
of the teachers is affected. Boyan, Ed., (1988) sums it up:
The quality of the teaching labor force constitutes one of the most fundamental
constraints on administrative control, since we must assume that the options
open to administrators are in large part a function of the quality and
commitment of he teachers within a district and more generally,within the labor
pool as a whole. Certainly any effort to improve the quality of teaching must be
framed within the constraints of this variable.
Order
So far not much have been said about student-relationship. Yet, administrative
control, autonomy, occupational status, and career all impinge on classroom
performance.
As the problem of order is looked at, it is desirous that tension develops in
the classroom between keeping order and providing education for a diverse
student population. This creates a dilemma for administrative control in dealing
with an issue like student resistance. This is so since student resistance is an
important source of constraints on administrative control.
The administration has to ensure that policies are formulated and applied
consistently in order to establish order, and to maintain control over students.
Such policies, though, may be inconsistent with the policies needed to assure
and reward good academic performance. In other words, as Boyan, ed. (1988) sums
it up, "schools exist to educate students, but they also must keep order.
Arrangements necessary to maintain order can subvert the goals of instruction."
Another issue here is the balance of power between teachers and students. On one
viewpoint of the issue, there is reason to believe that what young children
learn from one another is an important ingredient of their school. Also,
teachers often negotiate the curriculum with students, adapting their teaching
practices as well as their administrative and instructional policies to the
condition of the students and the demands of the students various subculture.
On the other viewpoint of the issue, teachers certainly have not relinquished
control. On the contrary, student activities have been institutionalized and
student conduct has been legislated in the form of codes, rules and regulations,
administered by administration. The teachers are then confronted with the
problem of simultaneously adapting professional norms and administrative polices
to student subcultures while trying to overcome student resistance and providing
quality education.
In the final analysis, the demands of maintaining order often dictate classroom
teaching practices and undoubtedly some administrative polices as well. In many
cases, the requirement of order seems more important than concern for how
students learn. Moreover, it is possible that what students do learn is
determined more directly by the values of their own subcultures than by what
teachers or administrators do (Boyan, 1988).
Equity
The difficulty of maintaining order, that was just discussed, grows out of
tension involving the management of authority relationships within the
classroom. A related difficulty concerns possible inequities in the way students
are organized for learning.
The sheer number of students in schools and school district is one of the most
fundamental constraints on the administrative control, and "the problem of
managing size is compounded by an egalitarian ideal that blames school when
children fail" (Cusick, 1983).
This then sets up the school administration to manipulate their programme to
ensure that the instruction process is improved so the students will improve,
thus preventing blame being pointed to administration. The instruction process
would require students to be classified or organized into different classrooms,
programmes, and learning groups. Each classification must be treated in a
special way and require trade-off for different types of resource. Since such
different kinds of instructional arrangements, that are now made, are so
complex, they would almost certainly produce some inequities in the classroom.
To make assignments and to follow learning theories, would mean basing the
instructional process on the needs of the individual learner. Yet, in reality,
schools are organized around batch-processing or group-focused principles. Boyan
(1988) contends, that because of those processes, "some students are
disadvantaged by the practice of assigning them to ability groups for
instructional purposes."
The diversity and uniqueness among students would seem to require personal
attention. To do this, there must be manoeuvering of teaching strategies to fit
the needs, abilities and interest of each student. However, as Philip Jackson
(1968), in his book Life in Classrooms, puts it, "school is a place where
students learn to live in crowds." Continuing, the author suggests, "teachers
must work with students in large and small groups as well as individually." The
constraints, inherent in comprehensive classrooms, make it difficult for
teachers to provide much individualized instruction.
The result is teacher biases. Good & Brophy (1973), in their book Looking in
Classrooms, say "There is evidence that teachers interact differently with
students of different ability level. For example, teachers are more likely to
give perceived high-achieving students a second chance to respond to an
incorrect answer, and wait longer for them to answer questions."
This inequity, or lack of it, becomes a constraint to the administrator, since
it is not supposed to be part of good administration leadership.
CONCLUSION
The untrained person's viewpoint of this paper, would deem the educational
administrator's job as an overwhelming responsibility. This may be correct in a
certain sense, since what was presented was accomplished and formulated with the
`ideal' in mind. This is not to say that all administrators, are expected to be
idealistic in their fulfillment and enforcement of the role-responsibilities and
the task-functions. In fact, every administrator operates in his/her own unique
setting, with its given situation, conditions, and militating factors. Within
the scope of that given locality, each administrator must now seek to utilize
the ideal form of administration required in its locality. This must be as close
to the `ideal,' as presented in this paper, for the given circumstance.
Educational administration, as presented in this paper, requires effective
leadership that can evaluate both programmes and personnel in an organized
manner. The task may seem enormous, but the professionally trained administrator
only has to function using the fundamentals that should be part of his/her
instinctive approach.
The practicing administrator must be knowledgeable of his/her roles and
tasks-functions. As he/she becomes knowledgeable, and is able to professionally
utilize that knowledge towards the achievement of his/her roles-responsibilities
and task-functions, educational administration becomes a very easy venture, but
without that knowledge and understanding, it can be quite a frustrating
undertaking.
If after reading this paper at least one person would have become less
frustrated and more knowledgeable in his/her administrative efforts, the
cardinal objective of this paper would have been achieved.
REFERENCES
Argyris, Chris. Personality and Organization. New York: Harper, 1957.
Bennis, Warren. On Becoming a Leader. New York: Addison- Wesley Publishing
Company Inc., 1989.
Bolman, Lee G., and Terrence E. Deal. Modern Approaches to Understanding and
Managing Organizations. San Francisco:Jossey-Bas Publishers, 1987.
Boyan, Norman J. Ed. Handbook of Research on Education Administration. New York:
Longman Inc., 1988.
Brown, Walton J. A Guide to School Administration. Department of Education -
Inter American Division, 1965.
Burrup, Percy E., Vern Brimley Jr., and Rulon R. Garfield. Financing Education
in a Climate of Change. 4th Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1988
Campbell, Roald F., Edwin M. Bridges, and Raphael O. Nystrand. Introduction to
Educational Administration 5th Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1977.
Campbell, Roald F., Edwin M. Bridges, John E.Corbelly, Raphael O. Nystrand, and
John A. Ramoyer. Introduction toEducational Administration. 4th Ed. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1971.
Candoli, Carl I., Walter G. Hack, John, R. Ray, Dewey, H. Stollar. School
Business Administration A Planning Approach. 3rd Ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon,
Inc., 1984.
Castetter, William B. The Personal Function in Educational Administration. 4th
Ed. New York: Macmillian Publishing Company Inc., 1986.
Clarke, Robert and Thomas Gerrity. "The Role of the Principal as Supervisor."
Education. 104:3, 275-280.
Covey, Stephen R. Principle-Centered Leadership. New York: Longman Ltd., 1987.
Covey, Stephen R. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon and
Schuster, 1989.
Cusick, P. The Egalitarian Ideal and the American High School. New York:
Longman, 1983.
DePree, Max. Leadership is an Art. New York: Dell Publishing Group, Inc., 1989.
DeRoche, Edward F. An Administrator's Guide for Evaluating Programs and
Personnel. 2nd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1987.
Getzels, Jacob W, James M. Lipham and Roald Campbell. Educational Administration
as a School Process: Theory, Research and Process. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.
Good, T. and J. Brophy. Looking in Classrooms. New York: Harper and Row, 1973.
Gorton, Richard A. School Administration and Supervision. Bubaque, IA: Wm.C.
Brown Company Publishers, 1983.
Gross, Neal, and Robert E. Herriot. Staff Leadership in Public Schools: A
Sociological Inquiry. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965.
Guthrie, James W., and Rodney J. Reed. Educational Administration and Policies.
2nd Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1991.
Hanson, E. Mark. Educational Administration and Organizational Behaviour 3rd Ed.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1991.
Harris, Ben M., Betty Jo Monk, Kenneth E.McIntyre and Daniel F. Long. Personal
Administration in Education. 3rd Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1992.
Hodgetts, Richard M. Modern Human Relations at Work. 3rd Ed. Chicago: The Dryden
Press, 1987.
Howard, Eugene R. and Edward A. Brainard. How School Administrators Make Things
Happen. New York: Parker Publishing Company Inc., 1975.
Hoy, Wayne K. and Cecil G. Mishel. Educational Administration - Theory, Research
and Practice 3rd Ed. New York: Random House, 1987.
Jackson, Philip. Life in Classrooms. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston Pub. Co.,
1968.
Jackson, Paul B. and William C. Reavis. Duties of School Principals. New York:
Prentice-Hall Inc., 1942.
James-Reid, Olga. Teaching Its Management and Function. Kingston: Kingston
Publishers Ltd., 1983.
Jenkins, Kenneth. "Metaphor and Mindset for Educational Leadership." The
Educational Forum. 52:2 (Winter 1988): 143-151.
John, Denys. Leadership in School. London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1980.
Keith, Sherry; Gerling, Robert Hendriques. Education, Management, and
Participation - New Directions in Educational Administration. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon,1991.
Kimbrough, Ralph B. and Michael Y. Nunnery. Educational Administration An
Introduction. New York: Macmillian Publishing Company Inc., 1976.
Kounert, William M. and John J. Augeastein. The Superintendency in the Nineties.
Pennsylvania: Technomic Publishing Company Inc., 1990.
Kyte, George C. The Principal at Work. Boston: Gian and Company, 1941.
Lall, Bernard Mohan and Greeta Rani Lall. New Dynamic Leadership. Michigan:
Feetanjali Publishers, 1994.
Lipham, James M., Robb E.Rankin and James A. Hoek Jr. The Principalship
Concepts, Competencies and Cases. New York: Longman Inc., 1985.
March, James G. and Herbert A. Simmon. Organizations New York: Wiley, 1958.
Mayon-White, Bill. Ed. Planning and Managing Change. London: Paul Chapman
Publishing Ltd., 1988.
Mintzbergy, Henry. The Nature of Managerial Work. Engle Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall Inc., 1980.
Mitchell, Douglas E. and Sharon Tucker. "Leadership as a Way of Thinking."
Educational Leadership. 49:5 (February 1992): 30-35.
Mitchell, Terence R. People in Organizations Understanding Their Behavior. New
York:McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1978.
Morphet, Edgar L., Roe L. Johns and Theodore L. Reller. Educational Organization
and Administration. 4th Ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1982.
Ohlsen, Merle M. Guidance Services in the Modern School.
2nd Ed. New York: Harcourt Brace Javanovich Inc., 1974.
Oliva, Stephen R. Supervision for Today's Schools. 3rd Ed. New York: Longman
Ltd., 1989.
Orlosky, Donald E., Lloyd E. McCleary, Arthur Shapiro and
Dean L. Webb. Educational Administration Today. New York: Macmillian Publishing
Company, 1984.
Owens, Robert G. and Carl R. Steinoff. Administering Change in Schools. New
Jersy: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1976.
Owens, Robert G. Organizational Behaviour in Education.
4th Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1987.
Pierson, Robert H. So You Want to be a Leader. Mountain View: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1966.
Poster, Cyril. School Decision-Making. London: Heinemann Educational Books,
1976.
Rebore, Ronald W. Educational Administration A Management Approach. New Jersey;
(Englewood Cliffs) Prentice Hall Inc., 1985.
Reeder, Ward G. The Fundamentals of Public School Administration 4th Ed. New
York: The Macmillian Company, 1964.
Reilly, David. "The Pricipalship: The Need for a New Approach." Education.
104:3, 242-247.
Reilly, David H. "Educational Leadership: The Missing Element." Education.
106:4, 421-429.
Saleh, Mahmond A. and Mohammed O. Kasshmeeri. "School Administration: Factors
Associated with Distress and Dissatisfaction." Education. 108:1, 93-97.
Sallis, Joan. School Managers and Governors. London: Ward Lock Educational,
1977.
Sander, Benno. "Educational Administration in Latin America and the Caribbean."
The Educational Journal of Trinidad & Tobago. 9:1, (Jan.-June 1885): 21-39.
Saxe, Richard W. Perspectives on the Changing Role of the Principal. Springfield
(illinois): Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1968.
Sergiovanni, Thomas J. The Principalship. 2nd Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.,
1991.
Stoops, Emery, Max Rafferty and Russel E. Johnson. Handbook of Educational
Administration. 2nd Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1981.
Stufflebean, Daniel L. Educational Evaluation and Decision Making. Itasce,
Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers Inc., 1971.
Thomas, Kenneth. Handbook of Industrial and Organization Psychology. Chicago:
Rand McNally & Co., 1976.
Tyler, R. W. Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1950.
Virgilio, Stephen J. and Irene R. Virgilio. "The Role of the Principal in
Curriculum Implementation." Education. Vol. 104:4, 346-349.
White, Ellen G. Testimonies for the Church. Vol. 2. Mountain View: Pacific Press
Publishing Association., 1948.