The purpose of the study was to develop guidelines relative to the collection, organization, and presentation of data by Indiana school governing body negotiation personnel for use by a fact finder during impasse situations in the collective bargaining process.Study participants included fifty-six individuals identified by officials of the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board as qualified to serve as fact finder in impasse situations between a school governing body and a teacher organization. Participants provided value judgment responses to statement items identifying data which should be included in reports developed for use by fact finders. Statement items were organized to present data relative to General Background Information, Revenue, Salary and Fringe Benefits, Budgeting, Cash Flow and Cash Balance, Non-Financial Issues, and Miscellaneous General Comparisons. The combined responses were developed into a preliminary set of guidelines.Selected administrative heads of eight Indiana school systems involved in fact finding procedures during 1975, and fact finder specialists employed full time by the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board, reviewed and analyzed the preliminary guidelines and made suggestions, corrections, additions, deletions, and/or editing changes based on past experience. The findings of the study were developed into a set of guidelines for the development of reports prepared by school management negotiation team personnel for use by a fact finder in Indiana impasse situations. The Guidelines for the Development of Reports for Fact Finders was divided to include coverage of general background information, revenue information, salary and fringe benefit information, budgeting information, non-financial issues, data, and miscellaneous general comparisons. Miscellaneous suggestions not involved in the study format were also included.

The purpose of the study was to determine if a particular school board bargaining team composition resulted in shorter negotiating time for teacher-school board contract settlement and if a particular composition of the school board bargaining team resulted in lower cost increases for salaries and fringe benefits that result from a negotiated teacher-school board contract.The study was limited to all school districts in Indiana in which a teacher-school board contract was negotiated for the 1975-76 school year. The study was restricted to the 1975-76 contract negotiations.The study was limited further in that only the composition of the school board bargaining team as related to time/cost factors were examined.A review of literature and related research revealed that the recommendations regarding bargaining team composition were diverse and that many different bargaining team compositions had been used by school boards in Indiana.All superintendents of school systems in Indiana where a teacher-school board contract was negotiated for the 1975-76 school year comprised the population for the study.Seventeen null hypotheses were developed relative to school board bargaining team composition and time/cost factors.A questionnaire, with a cover letter and an endorsement from the Indiana School Boards Association, was mailed to 280 Indiana school superintendents. Responses were received from 228 superintendents after two mailings. Responses to the questionnaire were recorded on contin-gency tables to allow chi-square analysis to be utilized to statistically test the hypotheses. The .05 level was established as the level of confidence to reject a null hypothesis.The findings were based on data presented in Chapter IV. 1. School board bargaining teams with school board members, teams with superintendents without school board members, and other teams were significantly different in the amount of time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.2. School board bargaining teams with board members and teams without superintendents or board members were significantly different in the time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.3. School board bargaining teams with superintendents without board members and teams without superintendents or board members were significantly different in the time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.4. School board bargaining teams with superintendents and teams without board members or superintendents were significantly different in the amount of time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.5. School board bargaining teams with board members and/or superintendents and teams without board members or superintendents were significantly different in the time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.6. School board bargaining teams having chief spokesmen with different titles were significantly different in the time required to negotiate a teacher-school board contract.No other significant differences relative to team composition and time/cost factors were discovered.The following conclusions were based on the data presented in Chapter IV and the findings related to the hypotheses.1. School board bargaining teams with superintendents as members and school board bargaining teams with superintendents and board members as members tended to negotiate teacher-school board contracts in a shorter amount of time than teams composed of persons other than superintendents or board members.2. Superintendents and school board members as chief spokesmen for the school board bargaining team tended tonegotiate a teacher-school board contract in less time than teams with other persons as spokesmen.3. Administrators other than the superintendent as spokesmen tended to take a longer amount of time to negotiate a teacher-school board contract than all other spokesmen.4. School board bargaining team composition was not significantly related to the increased cost of salaries and fringe benefits that resulted from a negotiated teacher-school board contract.54

Recently there has been considerable discussion concerning the role of the elementary school principal in professional negotiation. A large body of evidence points to the fact that elementary principals do not have a specifically determined role in the process of professional negotiation.The purpose of the study was to assess the perceptions of two groups of public elementary school principals, from dissimilar professional environments, toward selected position, institution, and issue concepts relevant to professional negotiation, in order to derive information which would serve to explicate and facilitate the development of guidelines for the future role of the elementary principal in professional negotiation.The two groups chosen to participate in the study were the public elementary school principals in Muncie and Anderson, Indiana. The selection was made on the basis of the comparable size and geographic location of the cities, the close parallel in average daily attendance of the school systems, and the similarity in socio-economic composition of the communities involved.The elements of diversity between the groups were that the Anderson principals operated in a professional environment characterized by active formal negotiation; whereas, the Muncie principals functioned in a professional environment not yet actively involved in formal negotiation.Two instruments were utilized in the study: a semantic differential instrument composed of ten bi-polar adjective scales, five each for the evaluative and potency dimensions, designed to judge twenty-six position, institution, and issue concepts relevant to professional negotiation and a follow-up questionnaire composed of fifteen items designed to provide comparative and descriptive data.Data from the instruments were presented in the form of group factor means, concept scale means, group profiles, semantic distances, semantic space models, and tabulated response frequencies. The methods employed in presenting the data were designed to provide a complete comparison of the two groups of elementary school principals. A one-way analysis of variance was employed for statistical treatment of the data in order to determine differences of statistical significance between group factor comparisons.In summary, only eight of the fifty-two possible factor comparisons proved to be statistically significant using .05 as the acceptable level of significance. On the evaluative dimension, the Anderson elementary principals perceived the concepts of (1) exclusive recognition, and (2) unlimited scope of negotiation to be of a more negative value, and the concept of (3) the elementary principal on the board negotiating team as a more favorable action than did the Muncie elementary principals.On the potency dimension, the Anderson elementary principals perceived the concepts of (4) strike and (5) American Federation of Teachers to be more forceful, and the concepts of (6) the elementary principal on the elementary principal negotiating team, (7) mandatory state legislation on professional negotiation, and (8) the American Arbitration Association as being less forceful than did their counterparts in Muncie.Both groups favored the inclusion of the elementary school principal on an independent elementary principal negotiating team, the board of education negotiating team, or a middle management negotiating team over affiliation with the teachers' negotiating team or a non-participation position. An independent elementary principal team was the most popular and a non-participation alternative was viewed with the greatest disfavor.Significant findings from questionnaire data were that Anderson elementary principals (1) were more experienced with work stoppages and strikes, (2) had been involved more frequently in formal negotiation with teachers, (3) held a much lower opinion of the effectiveness of the elementary principal in professional negotiation, (4) felt more strongly that professional negotiation would lessen the authority of the elementary principal, (5) indicated more divergent views regarding the future role of the elementary principal in professional negotiation, and (6) exhibited considerably less membership support of professional organizations than did the elementary school principals in Muncie.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1966. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record.

No description available.

The purpose of the study was to identify and describe the nature of change, relative to the roles and responsibilities of personnel administrators in selected Indiana public school corporations, resulting from mandated teacher collective bargaining.Personnel administrators with seven or more years of experience were selected to insure that participants in the study had had experience both before and after the enactment of Public Law 217. In-depth taped interviews were conducted with nine personnel directors.The responses of personnel directors participating in the study were compared, correlated and contrasted with statements made by authorities in the field relative to private and public sector personnel administrators. Major findings were:Additional Time Requirements1. Personnel directors are devoting additional time to record keeping activities, such as:a.Formulating reduction in force lists and call back lists.b. Reviewing and revising student enrollment by building and class as necessary.c. Developing expanded salary schedules which reflect broader range of teacher educational preparation.d. Maintaining information relative to the number of graduate hours taken and advanced degrees earned by teachers.e.Maintaining information relative to teacher fringe benefits.f.Maintaining information relative to compensation for extracurricular responsibilities.g.Maintaining information relative to number and type of leave days taken by teachers.h.Maintaining teacher requests for transfers.i.Maintaining detailed information relative to teachers holding temporary contracts.j.Maintaining information relative to teacher seniority by school system and building.2. Personnel directors are devoting additional time to activities required for the collective bargaining process, such as:a. Collecting and organizing financial and personnel information.b. Providing and explaining financial and personnel information to the chief spokesman.c. Preparing salary schedules to determine cost of various teacher group and board proposals.d. Compiling and analyzing statistics relative to the number of various teacher leave days taken and days on which leaves occurred.e. Developing expanded salary schedules which reflect broader range of teacher educational preparation as required by the agreement.3. Personnel directors are devoting additional time to consultation, such as:a. Providing guidance to building administrators relative to teacher evaluations.b. Advising building administrators regarding granting of teacher leave days.c. Discussing the status of negotiations with building administrators, superintendent and board members.d. Providing guidance to building administrators relative to contract implementation.4. Personnel directors are devoting additional time to grievance activities, such as:a. Reviewing teacher evaluations to prepare for grievance hearings.b. Meeting with union officials to hear grievances.Preparing for grievances and arbitration hearings.5. Personnel directors are devoting additional time to inservice training activities, such as:a. Explaining evaluation procedures and instruments to building administrators.b. Explaining the intent of contract language to building administrators to insure uniform contract implementation.6. Personnel directors are devoting additional time to cooperative activities with union officials, such as:a. Providing personnel and financial information relative to teacher seniority, salaries, and fringe benefits.b. Developing and revising teacher evaluation instruments.c. Hearing grievances and jointly determining equitable settlements.7. Personnel directors are devoting additional time to other activities, such as:a. Considering leave requests of teachers.b. Planning for staffing needs and teacher vacancies.Changed Organizational Relationships1. The majority of personnel directors have been placed in the grievance structure and now represent the superintendent, usually at the second or third step of the grievance procedure. Therefore, personnel directors now have more line authority to make binding decisions regarding grievances.2. Because personnel directors now have line authority in the grievance structure, personnel directors may support or reverse the decisions of building administrators regarding grievances. Therefore, building administrators are now consulting more with the personnel director relative to the handling of employee grievances at the initial step of the grievance structure.3. Building administrators are now seeking advice and approval of personnel directors regarding teacher evaluations and granting of leaves.4. The majority of personnel directors participate in the negotiation process either as chief spokesman or members of the negotiating team. As the administrative representative in the collective bargaining process, personnel directors are now the main communication link between the teacher union, superintendent and board of education.5. As the administrative representative in the collective bargaining process, personnel directors have been given the additional responsibility of insuring that principals understand the intent of contract language and implement the contract accordingly.Direct Participation in the Negotiations Process1. The majority of personnel directors participate in the negotiation process either as chief spokesman or members of the negotiating team.a. As chief spokesmen, new roles and responsibilities of the personnel director include:(1) Consultation with the superintendent relative to the selection of negotiating team members.(2) Consultation with the superintendent and other administrative personnel concerning the collecting, organizing and writing of board proposals for negotiations.(3) Consultation with the superintendent and other administrative personnel relative to the development of a negotiation strategy.(4) The presentation of school board proposals.(5) Receiving teacher union proposals during negotiations.(6) Communications between the teacher union, superintendent and school board.(7) Consultation with the superintendent and board members concerning the development of school board counterproposals.(8) The equitable and expeditious conclusion of negotiations.b. As members of the negotiating team, new roles and responsibilities of the personnel directors included:(1) Providing relevant and necessary personnel and financial information to the chief spokesman.(2) Explaining and describing pertinent conditions surrounding negotiations, personalities of the individuals involved in negotiations, and attitudes within the community.

There is no abstract available for this dissertation.

The problem of the study was to determine if a relationship existed between selected characteristics of Indiana public school corporations and the occurrence of impasse with teacher units during the process of collective bargaining in 1975.The fifteen selected characteristics of Indiana public school corporations chosen for the study were: student enrollment; average student-teacher ratio; adjusted assessed valuation per resident average daily attendance; annual net current operating expenditures per year end average daily attendance; mean age of teachers; age of the superintendent of schools; mean educational training of teachers; educational training of the superintendent of schools; mean educational experience of teachers; educational experience of the superintendent of schools; the location within a specific school corporation of the Uni-Sere office of the Indiana State Teachers-Association; past impasse history; the identification of a school corporation as being urban, suburban or rural; and he differential occupation of the school board spokesperson on the collective bargaining team.Data for the fifteen selected characteristics were obtained from the Indiana Department of Public Instruction, the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board and the Indiana School Boards Association. A General Null Hypothesis and fifteen Null-Sub-Hypotheses were formulated to test the relationship between selected characteristics of Indiana public school corporations and the occurrence of impasse during 1975. Of the 305 Indiana public school corporations, 246, or 85 per cent were utilized in the study.The multiple point-biserial correlation was used to test the General Null Hypothesis to determine if a relationship existed between the fifteen selected characteristics and the occurrence of impasse during 19.7.5. The point-biserial correlation was utilized to determine the relationship of eleven of the selected characteristics. The chi-square test of independence was used to test the remaining four selected characteristics. The hypotheses were rejected if either of three statistical treatments reached the .05 level of confidence.A significant relationship was found between selected characteristics of Indiana public school corporations and the occurrence of impasse in 1975. The following four characteristics were significant:1. The mean student enrollment was significantly larger for Indiana public school hcorporations that experienced impasse in 1975. There was a relationship between student enrollment and the occurrence of impasse.2. The majority of the school corporations that experienced impasse in 1974 also experienced impasse in 1975. The number of school corporations experiencing impasse in 1575 was greater than the number experiencing impasse in 1974. The number of schoc_ corporations not experiencing impasse in 1974 decreased in 1975. There was a relationship between past impasse history and the occurrence of impasse.3. Indiana public school corporations having teacher units exclusively represented by the Indiana State Teachers Association or the Indiana Federation of Teachers in 1975 significantly experienced impasse more frequently than teacher units that were represented by another teacher organization. There was a relationship between the exclusive representative for teachers and the occurrence of impasse.4. Indiana public school corporations categorized as being urban in 1975 significantly had more impasse occurrences than suburban or rural school corporations. Suburban school corporations significantly had more impasse occurrences than rural school corporations. There was a relationship between an urban, suburban and rural Indiana public school corporation and the occurrence of impasse.In 1975, Indiana public school corporations with larger student enrollments located inurban areas had a greater tendency to experience impasse in the process of collective bargaining than corporations with smaller enrollments located in suburban or rural areas. The likelihood of Indiana public school corporations experiencing impasse in subsequent years was greater after the initial experience with the impasse process. Indiana public school corporations having teacher units exclusively represented by the Indiana State Teachers Association or the Indiana Federation of Teachers were more likely to experience impasse in 1975.

The purpose of the study was to determine if there is a relationship between types of entry-level preparatory nursing programs in which a nurse receives basic nursing education and conceptual and theoretical approaches to patient care. A secondary purpose of the study was to determine if there is a relationship between entry-level basic preparatory nursing education and nursing leadership, the ability to make nursing diagnosis, and implementation, as well as evaluation of the nursing process. Three nursing practice categories were identified and included: professional, all-nurse, and technical.Useable data collected by short-essay questionnaire from 343 out of 344 sample subjects were computed to determine the relationship, if any, between basic preparatory nursing education and conceptual and theoretical approaches to patient care. Decisions about three Null Hypotheses were made at the 0.05 level of significance utilizing analysis of covariance and the 0.01 level of significance utilizing Chi-Square analysis.FINDINGS1. For Hypothesis I, the main effect for degree work when covaried with Verbal Scholastic Aptitude Test Scores, Quantitative Scholastic Aptitude Test Scores, time, and age indicated a significance of 0.000 for all item associations in the professional, all-nurse, and technical categories utilizing analysis of covariance, and 0.0000 utilizing Chi-Square analysis.2. For Hypotheses II and III, the main effect for degree work when covaried with the aforementioned variables indicated a significance of 0.000 utilizing analysis of covariance, and 0.0000 utilizing Chi-Square analysis.Conclusions1. Graduates of Baccalaureate degree programs do vary in conceptual and theoretical approach to nursing care in specific nursing care situations.2. There is a significant relationship between the level of basic educational preparation and the degree and proficiency of leadership demonstrated by a nurse in specific nursing care situations, particularly, when uncontrolled variables have been controlled.3. There is a significant relationship between educational preparation and degree of proficiency to which the nurse makes nursing diagnosis, executes, and implements the nursing process, and evaluates the effects of nursing interventions.

The purpose of the study was to develop a human relations systems model for professional personnel in higher education. The model developed provided a mechanism for systematically analyzing bargaining alternatives.A review of selected literature on alternative approaches for collective bargaining and creative or innovative alternatives within collective bargaining was made. Models for bargaining in higher education, selected management strategies, union strategies, and union-management cooperation efforts were summarized. In addition, strikes, impasse procedures, state statutes involving impasse procedures, as well as proposals for federal legislation were reported. Among the strategies selected were Boulwarism, cost package bargaining, multi-employer bargaining, joint bargaining, coalition bargaining, profit and progress sharing plans, and union-management cooperation. Impasse procedures included strikes, arbitration, mediation, and fact-finding. The impasse procedures of the New York, Massachusetts, Hawaii, and Pennsylvania bargaining statutes were examined. The review consisted of an explanation of each alternative, and an evaluation in terms of the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. A review of selectedliterature on systems theory, and models and systems in labor re-. lations was also made.A human relations systems analysis model, designed from the literature review pertaining to models and systems of labor relations, was presented. The model provided a means of analyzing alternatives and generating tailor made approaches to bargaining, and spawned new hypotheses.Practical utilization of the model by analyzing alternatives in hypothetical settings and generating tailor made approaches to bargaining was demonstrated. Important factors favoring or not favoring an alternative were reported. The efficacy of an approach was entirely dependent upon the unique educational setting.The majority of alternatives examined were judged as possessing potential for application in higher education. Of the alternatives studied all could be expected to be associated with operational difficulties in higher education institutions. Alternatives were seen as requiring varying degrees of modification before being implemented in higher education in order to minimize such difficulties. Most of the alternatives examined should not be used as the sole approach, or method in an approach, to human relations taken by an institution; but rather, should be included as part of a more comprehensive approach to human relations. Most constructive changes in collective bargaining for education were judged as being derived from strategies, mechanisms, methods, and procedures.All management strategies studied were judged to be applicable for higher education collective bargaining. Joint bargaining by unions was anticipated in states where funding for higher education was represented by a single line item in the state budget. Union-management cooperation was the alternative closest to the concept of integrative bargaining, and represented the approach most writers in the field were suggesting be pursued. Profit and progress sharing plans were thought to have limited application as principal approaches to faculty-administration relations.Many alternatives studied were best characterized as attempts to avoid or circumvent the strike. A major problem facing the education relations system appeared to be in finding an acceptable substitute for the strike in the public sector. At present no single impasse procedure appeared to be as effective as the strike in resolving labor disputes. The most viable impasse procedures were identified as procedures in which the government official responsible for settling such disputes was provided with as many alternatives as possible, including non-intervention, and was given complete freedom in making a choice of which procedure or combination of procedures were to be used in an intervention into a labor dispute. Separate legislation as well as federal legislation for education labor relations appeared inadvisable.Implications of the study were identified. Recommendations to improve bargaining, and recommendations for additional research were offered.