The purpose of this study was to clarify the thoughts of five population groups concerning the selection and evaluation of a secondary school principal, in Indiana. The following four questions were used as a basis for the study.1. Is there a difference of opinion between what the superintendent and the school board members look for in an applicant's credentials, and the qualifications a teacher perceives as necessary for the position of principal?2. Is there a clear-cut pattern of undergraduate majors among the group of principals?3. Do the five population groups studied agree or disagree concerning what is important when evaluating a principal?4. Is there a difference of opinion regarding the principals most important function as seen by the five groups questioned?The randomly selected participants, which included students, teachers, principals, superintendents, and school board members, were chosen from the eight counties in East Central Indiana as follows: Blackford, Delaware, Grant, Henry, Jay, Madison, Randolph, and Wayne.The study was conducted entirely by mail. The potential school board members, superintendents, and principals were asked to take part in the study. In addition,, principals were asked to select a teacher and a student who would be representative of the faculty and student body.At this point, pre-tested questionnaires were sent out to each of the five populations. No attempt was made to identify the individual respondents; however, the questionnaires were separated into one of five responding categories. First, answers to questions were compared within the various occupational categories to determine if a consensus of opinion existed among those persons within that group. For example, do the school board members agree on items which are important in selecting a principal. Second, the responses were compared between groups. For example, do teachers and superintendents agree or disagree on those items of importance in principal evaluation.In order that a comparison could be made, the multiple-choice answers were assigned a numerical value of one-to-four. Questions having mean scores of one were considered very important in the selection or evaluation process.All five populations participated in principal evaluation, but the student category was not asked to answer questions on principal selection. After all mean scores were figured, a composite, using all categories, was developed using the most important and least important items in principal selection as seen by all responding groups. The same procedure was used to develop a composite for principal evaluation.Items which were seen as important in the selection of a principal are given in the paragraphs which follow. Respondents rated the applicant's willingness to work with assistants and other subordinates now in the system as extremely important when selecting a principal. Also receiving a high rating was the applicant's awareness of current educational trends and ideas.Sincerity and a pleasing personality received high marks, as did an understanding of community problems. Completion of a one-year principal internship program received a 1.4 composite score, as did the applicant's ability to emphasize a total school program. A mean score of 1.5 was given to the applicant's plans and steps for improving the school.The paragraphs which follow summarize those points that are considered to be of least importance when selecting a principal.Being a native of the city was definitely not considered important in a principal's selection. In addition, two rather unrelated items, being interested in advancement beyond the principalship, and having previous experience as a coach received a low rating of (3.9). The marital status of the applicant seemed to be of little concern with a composite mean score of (3.3).Four items received equally low scores of 3.2, they are as follows: The applicant's position on the salary scale was not important. Is the applicant presently an assistant in the system? Has the applicant written articles for professional journals?Has the candidate been a member of a teacher union?Findings concerning the question of principal evaluation follow.A principal is expected to know his job and have the confidence and respect of his subordinates. He should be a self-starter who is able to complete his work with a minimum of supervision. The principal must have an interest in the student body. He is expected to have a friendly, well-informed office staff.The principal is expected to keep conversations confidential while being firm and fair in his decisions. He should have a positive attitude. Finally, he should encourage his teachers to continue educational growth beyond the minimum requirements needed for the job.Those items which were not considered of significance in evaluating a principal included: dressing in the latest styles, and holding each of the departmental budgets to the same amount as was spent the previous year.Two points were clearly important to those questioned with regard to principal selection. First, an applicant should have demonstrated his leadership ability. Second, he should have a well-rounded personality which can help in working with various groups he will meet as a school principal.No definite pattern of undergraduate major appears to have existed in this study; however, it is interesting to examine the high percentage of principals having either a social studies or physical education background.The educational leadership, skill in public relations, coordination of school activities, and reception to new ideas were all considered important in principal evaluation. Finally, all groups placed performance in meeting requirements of the job high on the list of priorities for a principal.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/179924 |
| Date | January 1975 |
| Creators | Ray, James Larry |
| Contributors | Park, Don L. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | vi, 96, [1] leaves ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds