The purpose of the study was to examine the relationships among the Indiana State Board of Education, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the Governor of Indiana within the present legal structure, 1945-70. The focus of the study was toward determining the effectiveness of the structure rather than a consideration of the responsibilities, powers or functions of any of the parties. It was attempted to learn if pressures were applied by or toward any of the parties and to ascertain the degree of cooperation among the participants. There was an effort made to obtain suggestions from the people involved for changes in the structure. An examination was made of the records of the Indiana State Board of Education records in the Governor's office, and of the minutes of the commissions comprising the Board, which were located in the Superintendent's office. A questionnaire was developed, modified, and mailed to members of the Board, Superintendents, and Governors who served during the present structural arrangement. Fifty-two of the sixty-four Board members thought to be still living, five of the six Governors who are living, and all four of the surviving Superintendents responded.Personal interviews were conducted with twenty-nine of the Board respondents to the questionnaire, three of the Governors and two of the Superintendents who responded. The interviews were unstructured, but based on the matters covered in the questionnaire. I t was assumed that a state board of education and a chief state school officer should serve in Indiana, since all the states have some kind of state board of education and a chief state school officer.ConclusionsIt was found that the records of the Board in the Governor's office and the minutes of the Board's commissions in the Superintendent's office were kept in a manner that only shows actions taken without providing background or reasons for those actions. It was concluded that pressures were not applied by or against any of the parties in the structure. It seems clear that Superintendents cooperated with the Board, though Superintendents have been free to conduct the affairs of the State Department of Public Instruction free from interference by the Board or any of the commissions. While many participants in the structure indicated a lack of satisfaction with it, fewer were willing to suggest changes in the structure. A frequently expressed sentiment was the idea that laymen make more independent Board members than the public school administrators more often selected.It was recommended that additional study be given to the proper roles of the Board, the Superintendent and the Governor in public education. I t was suggested that the method of selecting the Board and the Chief State School Officer needs more attention. It was further recommended that more study was needed in the area of relations between the office of the Chief State School Officer and the leadership of local school corporations.

The purpose of this study was to analyze Public Law Number 326 which created the Commission for Higher Education in Indiana. The analysis of the law determined the powers delegated to the Commission, the restrictions imposed upon the Commission and the duties of the Commission as prescribed by the General Assembly. A second purpose of the study was to describe in detail four problem areas that cause trouble for statewide coordinating agencies of higher education. The four problem areas were membership on the governing board of the coordinating agency, political infringement of coordinating agency activities, reluctance of institutions of higher education to accept coordinating agencies and the failure to develop a professional staff for the coordinating agency. A third purpose of the study was to develop recommendations to help the Commission for Higher Education neutralize the effect of the potential problems.