This study examined the effects of experience on the ethical decision making of elementary school principals through the use of personal interviews. Five beginning principals (two or less years of experience) and five veteran principals (greater than ten years of experience) were asked to respond to a set of ethical dilemmas based on realistic administrative situations. Each interviewee was asked to provide a course of action and explanation for each dilemma or situation. Interview results were analyzed and compared within the two groups, beginning and experienced, and between the two groups as well. Results were classified according to Roche's Framework. Results showed a strong pattern of similarity between the responses of the two groups. While responses or choices for courses of action were similar between the groups, differences were noted in the rationales for the solutions between the two groups. Beginning principals tended to be more rules based in their responses because of their lack of experience and knowledge of potential consequences. Because they possessed a depth of experience and knowledge of consequences, veteran principals tended to be more ends based in their thinking and decision making.

The study of electoral defence and its stated advantages are an integral part of American political science. Post-war, much academic literature has emerged in an attempt to identify and explain rising re-election rates of congressional incumbents and the political consequences of such a phenomenon (Mayhew 1974; Fiorina 1977; Cain, Ferejohn & Fiorina 1987; Gelman & King 1990; King 1991). Conversely, the study of political incumbency in Britain can be attributed to a handful of scholars who tend to consider the repercussions at parliamentary level (Williams 1967, King 1981, Cain, Ferejohn and Fiorina 1984, Norton 1990 & 1994, Norris, Valance & Lovenduski 1992). Consequently, incumbency advantage at the local level remains a relatively under-researched topic in England, confined to the sub-chapters of Rallings & Thrasher (1997). The aim of this thesis is to research and present evidence in support of incumbency effects in English local elections and the extent to which they influence their outcome, in that, incumbent candidates fare better than less experienced candidates, to different degrees across the three major parties. It will do so using survey and electoral data collected by The Elections Centre at Plymouth University, drawing on established methods from the literature and demonstrating via a variety of data and methods, that incumbency advantage is indeed a real phenomenon effecting the outcomes of local elections in England. The research provides substantial evidence for Sophomore Surge and Retirement Slump effects throughout the period examined (1974-2010). These methods of estimation feature alongside a number of others, which are constructed to uncover the significance of defending, rather than challenging for a council seat. A number of influences on the advantage that defending councillors maintain are also presented, including district magnitude, ward size and rural/urban classification. Results reveal a modest advantage for Conservative and Labour incumbent candidates, whilst the effects are shown to be stronger for the Liberal Democrats, a finding that is in step with the existing literature on electoral trends and the local campaign strategy of the party (Dorling et al, 1998; McAllister et al, 2002; Russell & Fieldhouse, 2005; Cutts 2006).