DOCUMENT RESUME - ERIC · DOCUMENT RESUME ED 128 911 EA 008 682 AUTHOR Wilson, Alfred P., Comp.;...

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 128 911 EA 008 682

AUTHOR Wilson, Alfred P., Comp.; And OthersTITLE The Principalship. A Selected Bibliography. No.

17601.PUB DATE 76NOTE 31p.; For related document, see ED 098 702

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

MF-$0.83 HC-$2.06 Plus Postage.Administrative Personnel; *Administrator Role;*Bibliographies; Elementary Secondary Education;*Principals; Publications

ABSTRACTThis bibliography lists approximately 400 articles

and books published after 1969 that deal with the function of publicschool principals in the United States. The periodicals included werechosen from those listed in "Education Index" from 1970 through June1976. Books with a post-1969 copyright were selected from those inthe 1976 edition of "Books in Print." Articles are listed in separatesections by year of publication, while books are listed in a singlesection covering the entire period 1970-1975. Within each section,all publications are listed alphabetically by author's name. (JG)

***********************************************************************Documents acquired by ERIC include many informal unpublished

* materials not available from other sources. ERIC makes every effort ** to obtain the best copy available. Nevertheless, items of marginal *

* reproducibility are often encountered and this affects the quality *

* of the microfiche and hardcopy reproductions ERIC makes available *

* via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS). EDRS is not* responsible for the quality of the original document. Reproductions ** supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original.***********************************************************************

v--4

CC)

T-4

U 5 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.EDUCATION & WELFARENATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

EDUCATION

THIS DOCuMENT HAS BEEN REPRO-DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PEASON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN-ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONSSTATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRE-SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OFEDUCATION POSII:ON OR POLICY

The Principalship

A Selected Bibliography

compiled by

Alfred P. Wilson Kansas State UniversityAssistance was provided by Vivian E. Smith

.Greenfield Park, Quebec, Canada; Stanley E. Hudson,The ,!-!lersity of Wyoming; and John Mook, Kansas State University

^400

1976 17601

CDCD

Forward

This bibliography lists those articles and books which dealt with

the function of the public school principalship in the United States.

The periodicals were those listed in Education Index from 1970

through June 1976. The books were those listed in the 1976 edition of

Books in Print with a post 1969 copyright.

The key word "Principal" was used to locate articles. In the book

search the following key words were used: principal; elementary school

administration; middle school administration; junior high school admini-

stration; high school administration; secondary school administration;

senior high school administration; school administration; supervision;

and management.

3

ti

Articles published in 1970

Ban, John R. "25 Cardinal Principles for the School Principal," The Clearing

House, 44, (March, 1970), 441-445.

Appleberry, James B. "Teacher-Principal Relationships in 'Htimanistic' and

'Custodial' Elementary Schools," Journal of Experimental Education, 39,

(Winter, 1970), 27-31.

Barber, William R. "The Principal and Morale," School and Community, 56,

(March, 1970), 23.

Bard, Bernard. "New York City Principals: On the Razor's Edge," Saturday

Review, 53, (January, 1970), 58-59.

Barnes, Melvin W. "Administrator's Role in Humanizing the School," The Nat-

ional Elementary Principal, 49, (February, 1970), 37-40.

Brown, Raloy E. "Humanizing the Role of the Elementary School Principal," The

National Clemoituly Principal, 49, (April, 1970), 24-26.

Craig, Robin, W., Charlotte W. Franc's, and John L..Taylor. "Coping with

Disunity," The Instructor, 79, (.anuary, 1970), 41.

Cunningham, Luvern L. "Educational Reform and the Principal," NASSP Bulletin,

54, (November, 1970), 1-23.

"Hey Man, You Our Principal? Urban Education as I Saw It,"

Education Digest, 35, (February, 1970), 5-8

Dal Santo, John. "Guidelines for School Evaluation," The Clearing House, 45,

(November, 1970), 181-185.

Drummond, T. Darrell. "To Make a Difference in the Lives of Children," The

National Elementary Principal, 49, (February, 1970), 31-36.

Edwards, Clifford A., and Keith R. Burnett."The Principal's Role in Negotia-

tions," Contemporary Education, 41, (May, 1970), 311-313.

Ferreira, Joseph L. "The Administrative Internship and Role Change: A Study

of the Relationship between Interaction and Attitudes," Educational

Administration Quarterly, 5, (Winter, 1970), 77-90.

"Florida Accountability Plan Focuses on the Principal," Nation's Schools, 86,

(November,1970), 54-55.

Goldhammer, Keith, and Gerald L. Becker. "Whiq Mikcs a Good Elementary School

Principal?" American Education, 6, (April, 1970), 11-13.

4

ti

page 2

1970 cont.

Goldman. Harvey. "Evaluation of Administrative Behavior at the Building Level."

NASSP Bulletin, 54, (September, 1970), 70-79.

. "New Roles for Principals," The Clearing House, 45, (November,

1)70), 135-139.

.

Gorton, Richard. "Principal's Orientation Toward Participation in School

Decision 14,711<ing,"Journal of. Secondary Education, 45, (arch, 1970),

124-129.

Harkin, Roy E. "The Principal as Mediator," The High School Journal. 53.

(March, 1970), 334-343.

Honn, Tloyd. R."What's Happening?" Journal of Secondary Education, 45, (October,

1970), 285-287.

Hudgins, Jr., H.C. "Are Student Lockers Off Limits to Principals?" NASSP Bul-

lain, 54, (Septomher, 1970), 101-104.

'Hughes, Larry W., and Gerald C. Urben. "New Leadership for the Secondary

School," NASSP Bulletin, 54, (September, 1970), 61-69.

Hutson, P.W. "The Education of the Guidance Team," Counselor Education and

Supervision, 9, (Summer, 1970), 234-240.

"Interviews," T.P. Carter, J. Samora, G.I. Sanchez, The National Elementary

Principal, 50, (November, 1970), 93-104.

Jenkins, Kenn th D. "Renaissance - '7^," The Clearing Hmise, 44, (February,

1970), 338-342.

Jciy, R.W. "High School Principal Looks at Drug Abuse," Compact, 4, (June,

1970), 37-39.

Jones, Gary Denis. "A Note on the Principal," School and Community, 57,

(October, 1970), 46.

Ketcham, Orman W. "The School and the Law," NASSP Bulletin, 54, (May, 1970),

60-66.

Kudela, Raphael M. "Facing Student Unrest," The Clearing House, 44, (May,

1970), 547-552.

5

1970 cont.

Kukla, David A. "Pretest in Black and White: Student Radicals in High Schools,"

NASSP Bulletin, 54, (January, 1.,:70), 72-86.

Levenson, William B. "School Principal: On the Cross-Fire Line?" The Clearing;

House, 45, (December, 1970), 216-218.

Levine, Daniel U. "The Principalship in Schools That are Coming Apart," NASSP

Bulletin, 54, (November, 1970), 24-39.

Mahan, James M. "The Teacher's View of the Principal's Role in Innovation,"

The Elementary School Journal, 70, (April, 1970), 35-65.

Mayer, Frank C. "The Role Of the State Elementary School Principals Association

as Seen by a Superintendent," The National Elementary Principal, 50, (Feb-

ruary, 1971), 52-55.

McConnell, A.W. "Why California is Losing Its Principals," Journal of Secondary

Education, 46, (March, 1971), 106-108.

McGee, Robert T. "Accountable Leadership," The Clearing House, 46, (November,

1971), 170-172.

Melton, George E. and John Stanavage. "Job Specifications for Principals,"

Education Digest, 25, (October, 1970), 25-28.

Null, Eldon J. "The Hierarchy of Personal Needs: Its Significance to School

Principals," Peabody Journal of Education, 47, (May, 1970), 347-351.

Ochberg, Frank M. "Drug Problems and School Principal," NASSP Bulletin, 54,_

(May, 1970), 123-129.

Ogletree, Earle, and Lester Rowe. "Training Principals for Inner-City Schools,"

Education, 90, (April, 1970), 291-292.

"Opinion Poll," The Instructor, 79, (April, 1970). 43.

"Opinion Poll," The instructor, 80, (December, 1970), 19.

Palardy, J. Michael. "Needed: Requiem for a Structure," The Clearing House,

54, (February, 1970), 360-363.

Panush, Louis, and Edgar A. Kelley. "The High School Principal: Pro-active or

Reactive Roles?" Phi Delta Kappan, 52, (October, 1970), 90-92.

Pederson, Monroe. "Effective and Ineffective Actions of the High School

Principal," Journal of Secondary Education, 45, (October, 1970), 260-264.

6

q

1970 cont.

Popper, Samual W. "Why Don't Elementary School Principals Raise Some Hell?"

The Nati nal Elementary Principa , 49, (April, 197C), 59-62.

Shannon, Thomas A. "Legal Aspects of Confrontation," Journal df Secondary

Education, 45, (May, 1970), 195-201.

. "The Principal's Management Role in Collective Negotiations,

Greivances, and Strikes," Journal of Secondary Education, 45, (February,

1970), 51-56.

Spencer, Ralph. "In Defense of Administravia," NASSP Bulletin, 54, (November,

1970), 90-94.

Swyers, Betty. "The Principal Teacher," Grade Teacher, 88, (December, 1970),

8-9.

Taylor, Robert M., and Jim Rackers. "How Missouri High School Principals Deal

with Student Use of Tobacco, Alcohol, Narcotics, Drugs," School and Com-

munity, 56, (March, 1970), 7.

"The Teacher's View of Authority Given Principals," National Education Associa-

tion Research Bulletin, 48, (December, 1970), 125-126.

Thurman, Robert S. "The Principal aad the Kindergarten," Childhood Education,

46, (January, 1970), 205-208.

Tye, Kenneth A. "The Principal as a Change Agent," The National Elementary

Principal, 49, (February, 1970), 41-51.

Vacca, Richard S. "The Principal'sResponsibility in Relation to Court Decisions

Involvin'' Public Education," The High School Journcl, 53, (February, 1970),

323-332.

Articles published in 1971

Ackerly, Robert. "Reactions to the Reasonable Exercise of Authority," NASSP

Bulletin, 55, (February, 1971), 1-19.

Annese, Louis E. "The Principal as a Change Agent," The Clearing House, 45,

(January, 1971), 273-277.

Aspy, David N. "Toward a Technology Which Helps.Teachers Humanize Their

Classrooms," EducationalLeadership, 28, (March, 1971), 626-628.

Byrd, Jr., Manford. "The Widening World of the Principalship," Integrated

Education, 9, (July-August, 1971), 17-22.

Cawelti, Gordon, and Bruce Howell. "Help for the Man in the Middle," School

Management, 15, (March, 1971), 22-23.

Cross, Roy. "The Principal as a Counterpuncher," The National Elementary

Principal, 51, (October, 1971), 26-29.

Demsch, Berthold and Dan Muller. "Games Principals Shouldn't Play with Teach-

ers," The Clearing House, 45, (April, 1971), 473-475.

DeWitt, Gerald. "School Conflict Engulfs the School Principal," The North

Central Quarterly, 45, (Spring, 1971), 349-355.

Elliot, Alexander. "Men in the Middle Seek Greater Voice," The National

Elementary Principal, 51, (October, 1971), 48-53.

Goldman, Harvey. "Educating the Administrators," Association for Supervision

and Curriculum Development Yearbook, (1971), 127-146.

4

Gorton, Richa.d. "Comments on Researc.: Collective Negotiations and Administra-

tion of the Master Contract," NASSP Bulletin, 55, (March, 1971), 123-129.

Hatch, Terrance E. "The Principal's Role in Collective Negotiations," NASSP

Bulletin, 55, (December, 1971), 26-39.

Hutchison, William I. "The Principal's Role During a Strike," NASSP Bulletin,

55, (May, 1971), 172-184.

Jennings, Robert E. "Student Activism: A Perspective and Strategy," The

Clearing House, 46, (October, 1971), 86-90.

J.L. "Decentralizationas a Management Tool," NASSP Bulletin, 55,

(December, 1971), 83-91.

Keith, Kent M. "The Principal and the Student Council," NASSP Bulletin, 55,

(September, 1971), 66-74.

1971 cont.

Kramer, Edwaru D. "Grievance Procedures: The Principal's.Role Where There

Is a Negotiated Contract," NASSP Bulletin, 55, (May, 1971), 159-167.

Lessinger, Leon N. "The Principal and Accountability," The NaXional Elementary

Principal, 51, (October, 1971), 8-11.

Linkletter, Art. "How Principals Can Fight Drug Abuse," NASSP Bulletin, 55,

(May, 1971), 12-21.

Melton, Joseph. "Role Perceptions of the Elementary School Principalship,"

The National Elementary Principal, 50, (February, 1971), 40-43.

Moss, Theodere C. "The Elementary School Principal and the Middle School,"

The National Elementary Principal, 51, (November, 1971), 36-45.

"Opinion Poll," The Instructor, 81, (March, 1971), 33.

Panush, Louis, Samuel A. Moore II, and Edgar A. Kelley. "Conceptual Change

and the Role of the Principal," NASSP Bulletin, 55, (April, 1971), 285-287.

Pentecost, Percy M. "The Changing Secondary Principalship: A Case Study,"

Journal of Secondary Education, 46, (February, 1971), 52-59.

"Principal as a Professional and His Role in Change--A Symposium," NASSP

Bulletin, 55, (October, 1971), 1-40.

Rosenberg, Max. "The Values of School Principal Evaluation," Education, 91,

(February, 1971), 212-214.

Smith, Carl B. "Dealing with Environmental Reading Preblems, " The National

Elementary Principal, 50. (January, 1971), 33-38.

Southall, Carey T. "The Role of the Principal in Student Teaching," School

and Community, 58, ( November, 1971), 27.

Tankard Jr., George G. "Identifying and Providing Quality Education," The

High School Journal, 54, (February, 1971), 331-336.

Thomas, Terry A. "Human Relations Training for Elementary School Principals,"

The National Elementary Principal, 50, (nay, 1971,, 59-62.

Trubowitz, Sidney. "Confessions of a Ghetto Administrator," Phi Delta Kappan,.

53, (Decembr, 1971), 210-213.

9

. 1971 Cont.Page 7

Vacca, Richard S. "The Principal as Disciplinarian: Some Thoughts and

Suggestions for the 70's, "The High School Journal, 55, (March, 1971,

5-10.

Vick, Willaim W. "Leader, Innovator, Dreamer, Worker, "Instructor, 81,

(Aucust, 1971), 35.

Articles Published in 1972

Ambrosio, Frank, and Robert W. Heller. "The Secondary School Administrator

and Perceived Teacher Participation in the Decision-Making Process,"

The Journal of Experimental Education, 40, (Summer, 1972), 6-13.

Barrilleaux, Louis E. "Accountabiiity Through Performance Objectives,"

NASSP Bulletin, 56, (May, 1972), 103-110.

Bernard, Roscoe G. "Plight of the Administrator," School and Community, 49,

(October, 1972), 16-17.

Biondolillo, Thomas C. "Helping Teachers Improve Themselves," Instructor,

81, (March, 1972), 39.

Brieve, Fred J. "Secondary Principals as Instructional Leaders," NASSP

Bulletin, 56, (December, 1972), 11-15.

Brockman, Fred J. "Program Budgeting:Implications for Secondary Principals,"

NASSP Bulletin, 56, (October, 1972), 34-42.

Casey, Arthur L. "The Administrator as a Decision Maker," School and Com-

munity, 58, (May, 1972), 25.

Daraio, Peter J. "Leading a Staff into New Attitudes," Instructor, 81,

(January, 1972), 31.

Dcmsch, B. "Principal and School Social Work," Education, 92, (February, 1972),

111-113.

Ellenburg. F. C. "Factors Affecting Teacher Morale," NASSP Bulletin, 56,

(December, 1972), 37-44.

English, Fenwick, and James Zaharis. "Crisis in Middle Management," NASSP

Bulletin, 56, (April, 1972), 1-10.

Erlandson, David A. "The Principal: Power or Pawn?" dASSP Bulletin, 56,

(December, 1972), 1-15.

George, Paul S. "Changing Classroom Behavior," NASSP Bulletin, 56, (Decem-

ber, 1972), 31-36.

10

1972 Cont.

Goldman, Harvey. "The Principal and the School Community," Theory into

Practice, 11, (rebruary, )972), 9-16.

Hartley, Harry J. "PPBS in Local Schools: A Status Reporti" NASSP Bulletin,

56, (Oct,ber, 1972), 1-16

Hertz, Karl V. "Enthusiasm: Yes," NASSP Bulletin, 56, (December, 1972), 26-30.

Hunkins, Francis P., "New Identities for New Tasks," Educational Leadership,

29, (March, 1972), 503-506.

Klopf, G. J. "Principal as an Educational Leader in the Elementary School,"

Journal of Research and Development in Education, 5, (Spring, 1972),

119-125.

Kostman, Samuel, "The Principal as Mediator and Leader," NASSP Bulletin,

56, (April, 1972), 11-18.

Lipman, Harold J. "Instructional Leader or Administrative Robot," NASSP

Bulletin, 56, (April, 1972), 19-43.

Mallcry, Elizabeth. "To Our Principal Partners," The National Elementary

Principal, 55, (April, 1972), 63.

Mattaliano, Anthony P. "Management by Objectives, Techniques for the Principal,"

NASSP Bulletin, 56, (October, 1972), 66-75.

McPhee, Mary, "Building Manager Manages to Free Building Principal," School

Management, 16, (October, 1972), 36-37.

Nibholson, Evertt W. "The Performance of Principals in the Accountability

Syndorme," NASSP Bulletin, 56, (May, 1972), 94-102.

Nickerson, N,a1 C. "Status of Progra.s for Principals," NASSP Bulletin, 56,

(March, 1972), 10-20.

Parsons, John M. "PPBS--How it Affects the Role of the Principal," NASSP


Redfern George B. "Principals: Who's Evaluating Them, Why, and How?"

NASSP Bulletin, 56 (May, 1972), 85-93.

Redmond, James F., Morton L. Elenbogen, and Frank W. Gardner. "Certifica-

tion of the Principal: One City's Experience," NASSP Bulletin, 56,

(March, 1972), 88-94.

Richards, James v. "People Problems: The Human Component in PP3S," NASSP


11

1972 Cont.

Richardson, III Arleigh D., and Peter R. Greer. "Humanities and Humanizing:A Role for the Principal," NASSP Bulletin, 56, (February, 1972), 25-30.

;

Ruben, Ann G. "Humanizing School PrinCipals," NASSP Bulle6in, 56, (December,1972), 20-25.

Riffin Jr., Santee C. "The Principal as a Communicator," NASSP Bulletin, 56,(April, 1972), 33-38.

Sarason, Seymour B. "When Change Agents Collaborate," Childhood Edcuation,49, (October, 1972), 15-18.

Sartore, Richard L. "A Principal with a New Outlook is Needed for the OpenSchool," The Clearing House, 47, (November, 1972), 131-134.

Smith, David C. "Professional Negotiations and the Principal," The NationalElementary Principal, 52, (November, 1972) 93-95.

Swaab, Alexander M. "Organizational Change and the Peincipal," Educational'Technology, 12, (October, 1972), 55-57.

Torigan, Richard. "Do-It-Yourself Ideas for Principals Facing Plant ManagementProblems," School Management, 16, (June, 1972), 35.

Trump, J. Lloyd. "Principal Most Potent Factor in Determining School Excel-lence," NASSP Bulletin, 56, (March, 1972), 3-9.

Turnage, Martha. "The Principal: Change Agent in Desegregation," IntegratedEducation, 10, (March, 1972), 41-45.

Tye, Kenneth, A. "The School Principal: Key Man in Educational Change,"NASSP Bulletin, 56, (May, 1972), 77-84.

Urich, Ted, Norman Van. "The Role of the Principal in Collective Negotia-tions," The Journal of Educational Research, 65, (May, 1972), 401-404.

Walden, John C. "Law and the School Principal," The National Elementary Prin-cipal, 51, (January, 1972), 103-105.

. "Law and the School Principal," The National Elementary Principal,----317Trebruary, 1972), 100-102.

. "Law and the School Principal," The National Elementary Principal,----STT-TS-eptember, 1972), 97-99.

1 2


"The Administrator and Staff Leadership," School Management (April,

1973), 14-15.

Amar, Wesley F. "A Survival Kit for the Inner City School Principal,"The Clearing House, (May, 113), 45-49.

0

Bhola, H. S. "Effective Communication and Good Communication," NASSPBulletin, (May, 1973), 103-109.

Brown, Glenn J. and Rentschler, James E. "Why Don't Assistant PrincipalsGet the Principalship?" NASSP Bulletin, (October, 1973), 36-48.

Davidson, Roscoe L. "Moving Your School from Where It Could Be," TheNational Elementary Principal, (January, 1973), 51-55.

Evans, M. I. "Vanishing Americans," JOHPER, (October, 1973), 55-57.

Finley, E. R. "Advisors to the Principal," School and Community.,(October, 1973), 20-21.

Fiorello, Anthony. "Leadership Concepts for Principals," NASSP Bulletin,(November, 1973), 19-23.

Floyd, Jeremiah. "The Black Principal and Educational Policy, "TheJournal of Educational Research, (October, 1973), inside cover.

Garrison, X. L. and Hardin, Elizabeth. "The Principal and School Law,"NASSP Bulletin, (November, 1973), 4u-54.

Hedges, W. D. "Being a Leader," NASSP Bulletin, (November, 1973), 29-36.

. "The Principal, the Computer, and Emerging Applicationsto Instruction," Phi Delta Kappan, (November, 1973), 174-176.

Isherwood, Geoffrey B. "The Principal and His Authority: An Empirical

Study," The High School Journal, (March, 1973), 291-303. ..

Joly, Roxee W. "A Principal Looks at the Assistant Principal," NASSPBulletin, (October, 1973), 16-27.

Kelley, Judith M. and George P. Grill. "Secondary School Administrators,"National Business Education Yearbook, (1973), 45-68.

Koerner, Thomas F. "The Care and Feeding of the New Breed SchoolPrincipal," The American School Board Journal, (June, 1973) 33-34.

McLoughlin, W. P. "Comparison of the Administrative Leadership ofPrincipal'sin Graded and Nongraded Elementary Schools: PrinciapPsInterview Guide," Education Leadership, (February, 1973), 450-456.

13

1973 cont.

Melton, George E. "Update '73--Who Me?" NASSP Bulletin, (May, 1973),

34-42.

Nickerson, Carl J. "The Secondary School Principal anil Student Drug

UsL," NASSP Bulletin, (Apr'l, 1973), 55-65

Nygren, Burton M. "The Suburban High School Principal," NASSP Bulletin,(November, 1973), 24-28.

Price, Nelson C. "The Principal and the Stull Act" NASSP Bulletin,

(November, 1973), 66-72.

Rafferty, M. "Principal Clears Trash Out Fast," Nation's Schools,

(August, 1973), 10.

Ritchie, Richard M. "pue Process and the Principal," Phi Delta Kappan,

(June, 1973), 697-698.

Rosenberg, Max. "How to Evaluate Your Principals without Scaring

(or Turning) Them Off," The American School Board Journal,(June, 1973), 35-36.

Scherdell, Raymond. "To Make a Principal More Effective," The Education

Diciest, (September, 1973), 36-37.

Schott, James L. "Communications.: The Principal and Students,"

NASSP Bulletin, (December, 1973), 86-90.

Smith, David C. "Professional Negotiations and the Principal," TheNational Elementary Principal, (January, 1973), 84-86.

. "Professional Negotiations and the Principal," TheNational Elementary Principal,(February, 1973), 109-112.

Steere, Bob F. "Four SMOPE's of Principals," NASSP Bulletin, (November,

1973), 60-65.

VanderWerf, S. "Administration of Educational Enterprises,"Educational Forum, (Nover'er, 1973), 93-99.

Wagstaff, Lonnie H. "Unionized Principals - You May Be Next," NASSP

Bulletin,(November, 1973), 40-47.

Walden, John C. "Law and the Principal: Two Courts Look at Insub-

ordination," The National Elementary School Principal, (November,

1973), 52-55.

1 4

ti

cont.

Wood, C. L. "Teacher Morale and the Princiaal", NASSP Bulletin,(October, 1.973), 113-117.

Zellers, R. W. "Tolerance of Principals in Accepting AlternativeTeaching Styles," Education, (September, 1973), 48-49.

15


"Accountability: A Long Journey--A Symposium," NASSP Bulletin,

(September, 1974), 1-52.

-"Internal Party Battle Behind Hunt For A London Head:, Highbury Grove

School," Times Education Supplement, (October 25, 1974), 10-11.

"Mazoo Method of Measuring Staff Performance," American School Board

Journal, (March, 1974), 32-36.

"Notes from the Front: Seven Principals Talk about Their Jobs," The

National Elementary Principal, (May, 1974), 25-31.

"Options, '74: Papers From The 58th Annual Convention, NASSP," NASSP

Bulletin, (May, 1974), 1-181.

"Principal and Public Relations--A Symposium," .NASSP Bulletin, (January,

1974), 1-99.

"Teachers and their Principals: Teacher Opinion Poll," Todays Education,

(January, 1974), 19. .

Abney, E. E. -"Status of Florida's Black School Principals," Journal

of Negro Education, (Winter, 1974), 3-8.

Abramowitz, M. . W. "Principal is the Key to Teach& Training and Growth,"

Momentum, (December, 1974), 10-11.

Afton, Alex. "Perceptions of the Principal's Role," NASSP Bulletin,

(September, 1974), 71-75.

Bishop, S. O. "Where Have All The Headmistresses Gone?," Indiana School(October, 1974), 22-24.

Bobru.I, John L., Howard, Joan G., and Howard, Alvin W. "The Principal-ship: Junior High and Middle School," NASSP Bulletin, (April,1974), 54-62.

Boyd, J. D. and Bowers, R. A. "Behavioral Analysis: The Principal andDiscipline," The Clearing House, (March, 1974), 420-426.

Brown, Charles E. "The Principal as Learner," The National ElementaryPrincipal, (July, 1974), 19-23.

1974 cont.

Calder, C, R., and Schibles, M. "British Headmaster and the American

Principal: A Comparison of Goals," Elementary School Journal,

(April, 1974), 393-8.

Cardellichio, Thomas L. "Evaluating Teachers' Methods," NASSP Bulletin,

(December, 1974), 8-12.

Carter, D. G. "Accountability 3n Stage...Again," NASSP Bulletin,

(September, 1974), 37-44.

Cavender, Edith. "Women in Administration? You've Got To Be Kidding,"

NASSP Bulletin, (December, 1974), 90-94.

Cogan, Morris L. "The Principal and Supervision," The National Elementary

Principal, (May, 1974), 20-24.

Cook, Ann. and Mack, Herb. "Educational Leadership: A TransAtlantic

Perspe:tive," The National Elementary Principal, (May, 1974),

11-15.

Cross, R. "Administrative Team or Decentralization," National Elementary .

Principal, (November, 1974), 80-82.

Cunningham, Luvern L. "The Principal in the Learning Community,." The

National Elementary Principal;. (July, 1974), 40-46:

Danforth,: Ethel M. "Long Live Zapita," The Instructor, (June, 1974),

18-19.

Dete, F. G. "Administering the Nongraded School," Contemporary Education,

(Fall, 1974), 42-44.

Davis, Harold S. "Preparing Principal's for Action, Leadership,"

NASSP Bulletin, (September, 1974), 29-36.

Dutch, William. "Some Administrative Considerations," NASSPBulletin, (November, 1974), 58-64.

Evans, M. W. "School Evaluation: _A Lever for* Meaningful Change,"

No th Central Association :uarterly, (Winter. 1974), 306-313.

Eye, G. G. "Principalship: Antidote to Oligarchy," Journal ofEducational Research; (September, 1974), 3-8.

Findley, Dale and Hales, Dave. "Certification Options for SecondarySchool Principals," NASSP Bulletin, (May, 1974), 126-134.

Fins, Alice. "Sex and the Principal: A Long Look at Title IX," NASSPBulletin, (September, 1974), 53-62.

17

1974 cont.4

Gaslin, W. L. "Evaluation of Administrative Performance by a School's

Teaching Staff," NASSP Bulletin, (December, 1974), 72-81.

Gill, R. "La Remuneration Au Merite Et L'Evaluation Pour Les Principaux,"

Education Canada, (June, 1974), 25-27. (Article in French)

Gray, John W. and Ward, Allan L. "Improving Communications Between

Student and Principal," NASSP Bulletin, (October+, 1974), 3-12.

Hansen, J. Merrell. "Administration: Role and Function in Education,"

NASSP Bulletin, (December) 1974), 82-89.

Harper, M. A. "Principal Factor in Policymaking," Momentum, (May, 1974),

38-41.

Holden, J. S. "Interim Head," Indiana School Bulletin, (October, 1974),

65-66.

Houts, Paul L. and Others. "The Remaking of the Principalship," The'National Elementary Principal, (March, 1974), 6-57.

Hoy, Wayne K., and Rees, Richard. "Subordinate Loyalty to ImmediateSuperior: A Neglected Concept in the Study of EducationalAdministration,' Sociology of Education, (Spring, 1974), 268-286.

Husarik, Ernest A., Wynkoop, Robert J. "A Principal's Dilemma: Can

Supervising Be Collegial?" NASSP Bulletin, (December, 1974),

13-19.

Hurd, Calvin J. "The Principal: The Person Who Knows," NASSPBulletin, (May, 1974), 79-84.

King, James C. "Education Administration," The National Elementary


Kirsch, M. G. "Are Secondary School Principals Ignoring Tinker?," Phi Delta

Kappan, (December, 1974), 286.

Kline, C. E. and McGrew, C. D. "Student Activities: An Essential Component,"

-,NASSP Bulletin, (October, 1974), 41-43.

Krug, Mark M. "Chicago: The Principals Predicament," Phi Delta Kappan,(September, 1974), 43-45.

Landers, Thomas J., and Silverlqn,Robert S. "It's the Principal of theThing," NASSP Bulletin, (September, 1974), 45-47.

Lewis, Kent. "My First Two Weeks at School: A Beginning Principal's

Memoir," The National Elementary Principal, (July, 1974), 62.

Lutterbie, P. H. "Black Administrators: Winners and Losers,"

Integrated Education, (May, 1974;!, 42-45.

1974 cont.

Magurie, J. W. "School Principals and Community Power," Intellect,

(Summer, 1974), 510-11.

McIntyre, K. E., Wagstaff, L. H. and Spillman, R. "Viewing the Selection

Process," The National Elementary Principal, (July, 1974), 23-38.

McManama, John. "Middle Managers Wanted: Apply Here," The National Elemitart


McNally, Harold J. "Summing Up," The National Elementary Principal, (September,

1974), 6-17

Merrow, John, Foster, Richard, and Estes, Nolan. "Networking: A

White Paper on the Preparation of School Administrator," The

National Elementary Principal, (July, 1974), 8-18.

Merullo, Emanuel A. "Inservice Programs for Principals," NASSP

Bulletin, (May, 1974), 142-146.

Miller, Irving, "An Administrator's Primer for a Teacher Strike,"

Phi Delta Kappan, (June, 1974), 698-699.

Morland R. B. "From Coach to Principal," JOHPER,(June, 1974), 38-40.

Moser, Robert P. "Principals: Shock Absorbers and Stimulators,"

Nation's Schools, (August, 1974), 11-14.

Moset, Robert P. "Today's Principalship: New Dimensions/New Demands,"

North Central Association Quarterly, (Fall, 1974), 294-300.

Myers, Daniel 8. "A Principal Characterizes A Good School," The

National Elementary School (November, 1974), 75.

Myers, Donald A. "The Chautauqua Papers: A Dissent," The National

Elementary Principal, (September, 1974), 18-26.

Nathe, T. "Teacher/Administration Relationships," School and Community,

(April, 1974), 21.

Nicholson, Everett W. and Nasstrom, Roy R. "The Impact of Collective

Negotiations on Principals," NASSP Bulletin, (October, 1974), 100-107.

Nicholson, Everett W. "What Motivates Principals?," NASSP Bulletin,

(January, 1974), 107-110.

Nicholson, E. W. "What Motivates Principals by R. Iannone--A keport,"

NASSP Bulletin, (January, 1974), 107-109.

Nolte, M. C. "Double-Loaded Power Squeeze is Crunching Your Principals,"

American School Board Journal, (August, 1974), 28-30.

1 9

1974 cont.

Olds, Robert. "The Principal's P.R. Role," NASSP Bulletin (January,1974), 17,21:

Outlaw, H. B. "Letting Go," The National Elementary School Principal,(July, 1974), 76-78.

Panush, Louis. "One Day in the Life of an Urban Hiah School Prin-cipal," Phi Delta Kappan (September, 1974), 46-50.

Pharis, W.L. "What Is A Principal?" The National Elementary Principal,(May, 1974), 58.

Pharis, W. L. "Nine False Assumptions: A Critical View of PreparationPrograms," The National Elementary Principal, (July, 1974), 26-28.

Pharis, W. L. "Turning Lemons into Lemonade," The National Elementary

Principal, (September, 1974), 45.

Rogers, V. R. "Sense of Purpose," The National Elementary Principal,

(May, 1974), 46-48.

Rosenberg, 11. "How does your Principal Rate?" Teacher, (May, 1974),

25-27.

Roy, Jack. "Hey Hr. Principal! What's the Climate Really Like in

Your School?" School and Community, (November, 1974), 32-34.

Ruff, Thomas P., and Orlich, Dunald C. "How do Elementary School

Principals Learn about Curriculum Innovations?" The Elementary

School Journal, (April, 1974), 389-392.

Sarason, Seymour B. "The Principal and The Power To Change," Th0.


Sause, Edwin F. "Demonstrating Competency as a Principal," NASSP

Bulletin, (September, 1974), 19-28.

ti

Seawall, W. H. and Canady, R. L. "Where Have All the Women Gone?," TheNational Elementary Principal, (May, 1974), 46-48.

Shannon, Thomas A. "Your Stake, Mr. (or Ms.) Administrator, in Three

1974 Supreme Court Decision," Phi Delta Kappan, (March, 1974), 460-62.

Shuttlesworth, J. and Evans, N. "Why a Principal Nust be a Supervisor,"

School Management, (May, 1974), 46-48.

Smith, David C. "Professional Negotiations and the Principal: What's

Negotiable?" The National Elementary:Principal (March, 1974),

73-76.

Smith, David C. "Professional Negotiations and the Proincipal," The

National Elementary Principal, (May 1974), 67-66. ,

1974 cont.

Spodek, B. "Pressure to Conform," The National Elementary Principal,

(May, 1974), 16-19.

Starratt, Robert J. "Prose, Poetry, and the Principalship," The


Sullivan, Philip E. "The Principal as Good Guy,"*NASSP Bulletin,

(December, 1974), 66-71.

SWift, David I. "Situations and Stereotypes: Variations in the

School Administrator's Role," The Elementary School Journal,

(November, 1974), 69-78.

ti

Taggart, R. J. "Open Education Without Professional Autonomy? The English

Head Versus the American Principal," Elementary School Journal,

(March, 1974), 336-343.

Thomas, Donald."The Priricipal and Teacher Evaluation," NASSP Bulletin,

(September, 1974), 11-7.

'Thomas, Donald, "!!ha Is .zr-i Effective Principal? NASSP Bulletin,

(September, 1974), 48-52.

Wagstaff, Lonnie H.,and. Spillman, Russell. "Who Should Be

Principal?" The National Elementary Principal, (July, 1974),

35-39.

Walden, John C. "Law and the School Principal.: A Right to Privacy,"

The National Elementary Principal, (July, 1974), 86-87.

Walden, John C. "Law and the School Principal: Contributory Negli-

gence," The National Elementary Principal, (November, 1974),

86-87.t.

Walden, John C. "Law and the School Principal: Privileged Commun-

ication, " The National Elementary Principal, (September, 1974),

46-48.

Walden, John C. "Law and the School Principal: Teacher Dismissal

Laws," The National Elementary Principal (May, 1974), 63-64.

Walden, John C. "Law and the School Principal: The Administrator

and First Amendment Rights," The National Elementary Principal,

(January, 1974), 86-87.

Walden, John C. "Law and the School Principal: The.Student Press,"

The National Elementary Principal, (March, 1974), 69-70. -

Wayson, William N. "A Proposal to Remake the Principalship," The

National Elementary Principal, (September, 1974), 28-44.

21

1974 cont.

Wayson, William W. "A Tickler File for Educational Leaders'," The

National Elementary Principal, (May, 1974), 34-38.

Weischadle, David. "The Principal: Reviving A Waning Educational Role,"

The Clearing House, (April, 1974), 451-455.

Wood, C. L. "Preparation, Inservice for School LeaderW NASSP Bulletib,

(September, 1974), 110-117.

Wurman, Richard S., Katz, Joel, and Donovan, Nancy. "A Day in the Life

of a Principal," The National Elementary Principal, (July, 1974), 60-61.

Yeager, Robert. "Administrator Turn, Teamster," Nation's Schools,

(February, 1974), 18-19.


tI

"Community Education--A Symposium," NASSP Bulletin, (November, 1975), 1-74.

"Experience and Challenge of Urban Education--A Symposium," NASSP Bulletin,

(March, 1975), 1-50.

"Principals/Teachers: Staff Relationships--A Symposium," NASSP Bulletin,

(December, 1975), 1-65.

"Principalship: An Interim Report--A Symposium," National Elementary


' "Salary, Contracts, and Tenure: A Research Report," National Elementary


"Scholastic Journalism--A Symposium," NASSP Bulletin, (February, 1975), 1-66.

"Status and Welfare; The Pressure and the Responses--A Symposium," NASSPBulletin, (September, 1975, 1 1-40.

Allen, H. C. and Mullarney, P. B. "Innovative Process for the Future,"NASSP Bulletin, (November, 1975), 51-58.

Allnutt, B. W. "In Scholastic Journalism: Advisers and Principals, PartnersNot Adversaries," NASSP Bulletin, (FebriJary, 1975), 1-6.

Bell, T. H. "Principal's Chair: Pivotal Seat in Secondary Education,"NASSP Bulletin, (May, 1975), 13-18.

Benner, J. M. "Book of Revelations," NASSP Bulletin, (September, 1975), 39-40.

Bluford, D. F. and Erlandson, D. A. "Inner-City Experience: A Guide for

New Principals," NASSP Bulletin, (March, 1975), 1-8.

Bromberg, M. "Principal William Shakespeare," NASSP Bulletin, (October, 1975),

78-82.

Brown, W. and others. "Establishing Role Dissonance Among Principals: A

Consultation Technique," Psychology in the Schools, (January, 1975) 59-63.

Carpenter, C. C. "Principal Leadership and Parent Advisory Groups," PhiDelta Kappan, (February, 1975), 426-427.

Colton, D. and others. "Professional Development for Urban Administrators:Danforth Foundation Program," NASSP Bulletin, (March, 1975), 13-20.

Crooks, J. B. and others. "Inservice for Educational Leadership," Nationa1

Elementary Principal, (November, 1975), 74-78.

2 3

1975 cont.

Ditzhazy, H. E. R. "Some Trends in Salaries and Fringe Benefits,"NASSP Bulletin, (September, 1975), 26-28.

Enfield, N. R. "Mr. Enfield Teaches, Too," Instructor, (November, 1975), 38.

Engelhardt, R. "Teacher/Principal: A Partnership Plan," School and ,

Community, (January, 1975), 22.

Eye, G. G. "Educational Shackle-Breakers," Journal of Educational Research,(January, 1975), 202-207.

Fishel, A. and Pottker, J. "Performance of Women Principals: A Review ofBehavioral and Attitudinal Studies," The National Association of WomenDeans, Administrators and Counselors Journal, (Spring, 1975), 110-117.

Fleming, W. and Youngmans, D. "Community School Coordinator's Relationshipto the Principal," NASSP Bulletin, (December, 1975), 91-94.

Fredrickson, J. H. "Principal's Role in Facilities Planning," NASSP Bulletin,(September, 1975), 79-82.

Gilbert, M. B. "Salary Formula for Principals," NASSP Bulletin, (September,1975), 22-25.

Hatley, R. V. and Pennington, B. R. "Role Conflict Resolution Behavior ofHigh School Principals," Educational Administration Quarterly,(Autumn, 1975), 57-64.

Heichberger, R. L. "Creating the Climate for Humanistic Change in theElementary School with Principal as Change Agent," Education,(Winter, 1975), 106-112.

Hertz, K. V. "Changing Professional Positions: Questions to Ask theInterviewers," NASSP Bulletin, (March, 1975), 51-54.

Kallem, J. H. "How Principal Characteristics Affect Pupil Civil Rights--Kansas," NASSP Bulletin, (October, 1975), 57-59.

Keith, P. M. "Administrative and Faculty Turnover and Diffusion of anEducational Innovation," -Urban Education, (October, 1975), 297-304.

Kern, C. R. "Improving Relationships: White Principal, Black Students,"NASSP Bulletin, (March, 1975), 32-35.

Kuehn, P. R. "Principal and the Media Center," NASSP Bulletin, (September,1975), 51-60.

Licata, J. W. "In the School Social System, Is the Principal an EffectiveChange Agent?," NASSP Bulletin, (December, 1975), 75-81.

2 4

1975 cont.

McDermott, E. J. "Principal as a Religious Leader," Momentum, (February,1975), 49.

McGinley, D. J. and Rafferty, B. F. "The Principal and the Teacher Strike:

Philadelphia, 1972-73," Urban Education, (April, 1975), 49-53.

McNerney, E. "Walk Through the School: Method of SuOervision," Momentum,

(May, 1975), 43-45.

Monks, R. "What About the Principal's Right to Due Process?," ClearingHouse, (October, 1975), 62-63.

Panush, L. "Urban Principal's Clientele: Students," NASSP Bulletin, (March,

1975), 39-45.

Pharis, W. L. ."Next Big Step," National Elementary Principal, (March, 1975),79

Pulley, J. L. "Prificipal and Communications: Some Points of Interference,"NASSP Bulletin, (January, 1975), 50-54.

Rutledge, E. M. "What Principals Owe to Reading Teachers and Programs,"Reading Teacher, (May, 1975), 748-749.

Salek, C. J. "Helping Teachers vs. Evaluating Teachers," NASSP Bulletin,(September, 1975), 34-38.

Schmerber, R. J. "Issues and Dialogue: Relating to Your School Administrator,"

Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, (December, 1975), 116-122.

Silver, P. F. "Principals' Conceptual Ability in Relation to Situation andBehavior," Educational Administration Quarterly, (Autumn, 1975), 49-66.

Slate, V. S. "Program to Train the Middle School Principal," NASSP Bulletin,(November, 1975), 75-81.

Smith, D. M. "Career Structure of Headteachers in a Midlands City,"Educational Research, (November, 1975), 31-41.

Sommers, K. M. "How to Make Your Teachers Love You," National ElementaryPrincipal, (January, 1975), 69.

Splaine, J. E. "Media and the School Principal," Audiovisual Instructor,'(October, 1975), 12-13.

Stoker, W. M. "Elementary School Principaliship in Texas, 1974-1975,"Studies in Education, (May, 1975), 1-18.

25

1975 cont.

Swick, K. J. and Driggers, R. K. "The Principal and Curriculum Planning."

Education, (Summer, 1975), 335-336.

Tatarunis, A. M. and Besson, M. E. "How Musical is the Principal; HowEducational, the Music Teacher?," NASSP Bulletin, (October, 1975), 23-30.

Traviss, M. P. "Principal, Moral Education, and Staff'Development,"Momentum, (December, 1975), 16-20.

Walden, J. C. "Insubordination," National Elementary Principal, (January, 1975),

72-74.

Walden, J. C. "Law and the School Principal: Administrator's Liability in

Pupil Discipline Cases," National Elementary Principal, (July, 1975),

104-106.

Walden, J. C. "Law and the School Principal: The Buckley Amendment,"National Elementary Principal, (May, 1975), 71-72.

Walden, J. C. "Law and the School Principal: The Courts Look at StandardizedTesting," National Elementary Principal, (March, 1975), 80-81.

Walden, J. C. "Law and the.School Principal," National Elementary Principal,(January, 1975), 72-74.

Wayson, W. W. "Misconceptions About Leadership," National Elementary Principal,

(November, 1975), 12-17.

West, P. T. "Excelsior: Poetics of the Principalship," Clearing House,

(September, 1975), 16-20.

Wiley, E. J. "Mr. Clawson Is a Good Listener," Instructor, (Mar. , 1975), 32.

Articles Published Through May 1976

"Brewing and Perhaps Still Preventable Revolt of the School Principals,"American School Board Journal, (January, 1976), 25-27.

"Brewing and Perhaps Still Preventable Revolt of the School Principals,"American School Board Journal, (February, 1976), 32-34.

tI

"Ecology of Education: The Arts--A Symposium," National Elementary Principal,(January, 1976), 6-94.

"Politics and School Principals--A Symposium," National Elementary Principal,(January, 1976), 1-70.

Barnard, D. P. and Hetzel, R. W. "Principal's Role in Reading Instruction,"Reading Teacher, (January, 1976), 386-388.

Eye, G. G. "Principal's Principles," Journal of Educational Research,(January, 1976), 189-192.

Herman, J. J. "If you Want Strong Principals, Give Them A Real Role,"Clearing House, (February, 1976), 271-272.

Jenkins, J. K. "Advisory Councils and Principals in Los Angeles,"Intergrated Education, (January, 1976), 27-31.

Lyons, D. S. and Achilles, C. M. "Principal as a Professional DecisionMaker," Educational Administration Quarterly, (Winter, 1976), 43-53.

Lytle, J. "Schools Cannot Be Managed the Way Industry Is: Allocation ofResources Within Schools," American School Board Journal, (February,1976), 36-37.

Meade, D. W. "How State Associations Can Affect Legislatures," NASSP Bulletin,(January, 1976), 38-42.

Miller, W. C. "Can a Principal's Improved Behavior Result in Higher PupilAchievement?," Educational Leader, (February, 1976), 336-338.

Pharis, W. L. "Spare the Rod and Save the Principal," National ElementaryPrincipal, (January, 1976), 95-96.

Williams, T. R. "Principals: Political Kings or Pawns?," NASSP Bulletin,(January, 1976), 30-37.

Wolfe, G. R. "I Was a Recycled Principal," Instructor, (April, 1976), 60-61.

Zanella, R. E. "Can Principals Still Discipline?," NASSP Bulletin, (February,1976), 67-70.

2 7

PART II

Selected Books

Books Published 1970-1975

4

Anderson, Lester W. and Van Dyke, Lauren A. Secondary'School Administration.

New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1972.

Barradough, Terry. Employment Contracts for Secendary School Administrators.

Reston, Va.: NASSP, 1974.

Bell, T. Performance Accountabiliq System for School Administrators.Engelwood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1974.

Bogue, E. Grady and Landers, Robert L. The Educational Manager: Artist and

Practitioner. Belmont, Ca.: Charles A. Jones Publishing Co., 1975.

Berman, Louise M. Supervision, Staff Development and Leadership.Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1971.

Bogue, E. Grady and Landers, Robert L. The Educational Manager: Artist andPractitioner. Belmont, Ca.: Charles A. Jones Publishing Co., 1975.

Bradfield, Luther E. and Kraft, Leonard E. The Elementary SchoolPrincipal in Action. Scranton, Penn.: InternationalTextbook Company, 1970.

Bradford, Eugene J., Doremus, Albert F., and Kreismer, CliffordR. Elementary School Evaluation: Administrator's GuideTo Accountability. West Nyack, New York: Parker PublishingCompany, Inc., 1972.

Campbell, Roald F., et al. Introduction to Educational Adminis-tration. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1971.

Casavis, James N. Principal's Guidelines for Action in ParentConferences. West Nyack, New York: Parker PublishingCompany, Inc., 1970.

Correa, Hector. Analytical Models in Educational Planning and Administration.New York, N.Y.: McKay, David Co., Inc., 1975.

Culbertson, Jack A. and Henson, Curtis. Performance Objectives for School

Principals. Berkeley, Ca.: McCutchan, 1974.

2 8

1970-1975 cont.

Davis, J. Clark. The Principal's Guide to Educational Facil-

ities Design, Utilization and Management. Columbus, Ohio:

Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1973.

Epstein, Benjamin. Principals: An .Organized Force;for Leader-

ship. Reston, Virs'nia: National Asrociation of Secondary

School Principals, 1974.

Eye, Glen G. Supervison of Instruction. New York: Harper and

Row Publishers, 1971.

Faber, Charles F., and Shearron, Gilbert F. Elementary School

Administration. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,

Inc., 1970.

Forsythe, Charles E., and Keller, Irvin A. Administration of

High School Athletics. Englewood Cliffs, M.J.: Prentice-

Hall, Inc., 1972.

Gearheart. B. B. Administration of Special Education: A

Guide for General Administrators and Special Educator.

5Pringfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher. 1970.

Greene, Robert E. Administrative Appraisal: A Step to Improved

Leadership. Washington, D.C.: National Association of SecondarY

School Principals, 1972.

Hale, James M., and Ulmer, Dr. Curtis. Administrator's Guide to

Trlininn_Paraprofessionals EnglewaidCliff7, N.J.: Prentice-

Hall, Inc., 1972.

Hencley, Stephen P., McCleary, Lloyd E., and McGrath, J. H. The

Elementary School Principalship. New York: Dodd, Mead in-a

Company, 1970.

Hughes, rieredy G. Secondary School Administration. New York: Perga-

mon Press, 1970.

Hughes, M. G., ed., Secondary School Administration: A Management Approach.

Elmsford, N.Y.: Pergamon Press, Inc., 1974.

Jacobson, Paul B., Logson, James D., and Wiegman, Robert R. The

Principalship: New Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,

Inc., 1973.

2 9

1970-1975 cont.

King, Ronald. School Organization and Pupil Involvement. Boston:

Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1973.

Knezevich, Stephen. Administration of Public Education. Scranton,

Pa.: Harper & Row Publishers Inc., 1975.

Koch, Harry Walter. Administration and Supervision. San Francisco:

The Ken-Books, 1972.

Lewis, Jr., James. Administering the Individualized InstructionProgram. West Nyack, N. Y.: Parker Publishing Company, Inc.,1971.

Lipham, James M. and Hoeh, James A., Jr. The Principalship: Foundationsand Functions. New York: Harper and Row Rublishers, T974.

McIntyre, Kenneth E. Principalship in the 1970's. Austin, Texas:University of Texas Press, 1971.

NASSP. The Principalship: Job Specifications and Salary Considerationsfor the 70's. Washington, D.C.: National Association of Second-

ary School Principals, 1970.

NASSP. Theory and Practice of Administrative Team. Reston, Va.: NASSP, 1973.

Nelson, Lloyd D. School Business Administration. Lexington, Mass.:

Lexington Books, 1971.

Ornstein, Allan C. Administrative Organization of Metropolitan Schools,

Netuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, Inc. 1973.

Roe, 11. H. a OraLe, T.L. Principalship. Riverside, New Jersey: Macmillan,

1974.

Shuster, Albert H., and Stewant, Don-H The Principal and the Autonomous

Elementary School. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishfng

Company, 1973

Stoops, Emery, et. al. Handbook of Educational Administration: A Guide for

the Practitioner. Rockleigh, N.J.: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1975.

Swaab, A. School Administrator's Guide to Flexible Modular Scheduling.

Engelwood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975.

30

Ii

1970-1975 cont.

Thomas, George Isaiah. Administrator's Guide to the Year-Round

School. West Nyack, N.y.: Parker Publishing Company, Inc., 1973.

Unruh, Adolph, and Turner, Harold E. Supervision for Change and

Innovation. San Jose, H. M. Gousa Company, 1970.

Weldy, Gilbert R. AdministeriNg a Negotiated Contract. Reston, Va.:

National Association of Secondary School Principals; 1973'

Whitt, Robert and Burden, Larry. The Community School Principal:

New Horizons, Hidland, Nichigan: Pendell Publishers, 1973.

Wolcott: Van in the Principal's Office, Nod York: Holt, Rinehart

and Winston, Inc., 1973.

3 1

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 128 912 EA 008 683

AUTHOR Wilson, Alfred P.; Rezac, JamesTITLE The Functions of the High School Principal as

Perceived by Student Body Presdents.PUB DATE 76NOTE 25p.; For a related document, 5ee ED 114 928

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

MF-$0.83 HC-$1.67 Plus Postage.Administrative Personnel; *Administrator Role;*National Surveys; Predictor Variables; *Principals;*Secondary Education; *Student Attitudes; StudentCharacteristics

ABSTRACTThis study gathered data on high school student body

presidents' perceptions of the principal's role and sought todetermine if these perceptions were significantly affected bydifferences in geographic location, school size, sex, race, academicsuccess, and parents' occupations among the responding students. Datawere gathered through a Likert-type questionnaire that was mailed to25C student body presidents representing all parts of the UnitedStates. The students were asked to indicate the importance theyattached to 124 administrative functions. The least squares analysisof variance and Fisher's Least Significant Difference test were usedto analyze the collected data. No significant differences inresponses were found to be related to differences in race, geographiclocation, or size of school attended by respondents. However, femalerespondents had a higher response mean for all Categories ofadministrative functions than did males, and students with the lowestgrade averages perceived all administrative functions to be morei_sgnificant than did more successful students. Differences inparents' occupations significantly affected students' perceptions ofthe relative importance of different administrative functions.(JG)

***********************************************************************Documents.acquired by ERIC include many informal unpublished

* materials not available from other sources. ERIC makes every effort ** to obtain the best copy available. Nevertheless, items of marginal *

* reproducibility are often encountered and this affects the quality *

* of the microfiche and hardcopy reproductions ERIC makes available *

* via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS). EDRS is not* responsible for the quality of the original document. Reproductions ** supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original.***********************************************************************

rJu.S.DtTARTmENr-4 T OF HEALTH.

EOUCATIoN & WELFARE

ENDT

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

:14NIS DoCUME BEEN REPRO..

rJ PUCE() EXACTLY As RECEIVED FROMnNE PERSON OR

TING POINTS oF viEW OR OPINIONS .r"4 -RGANIZATIONSTATED DO NOT NECESSANIL"

REPRE.TIONALsENT OFFICIAL NA INSTITUTE OrEoucArtoN POSITION oR POLICY

The Functions of the High

School Principal as Perceived

by Student BodY pres idents

Alfred P. Wilson

James Rezac

Kansas stat e ni vertY$ah

Manhattan,

oh ,rinei,This is one publication from a set,les of P4perSOI the revail"ars

functions. Additional studies of

by writing Dr. Alfred P. Wilson atIcIlijoinV K4%aarse5tatea4le

University, Manhattan, Kansas 66s06

1 9762

760

THE FUNCTIONS OF THE HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPLEAS PERCEIVED BY STUDENT BODY PRESIDENTS

by

Alfred P. Wilson and James Rezac

A considerable amount of research concerning the

Principal's role has been conducted in the last two decades.

Most of this research has addressed itself to the percep-

-tions of principals themselves and other professional

educators. The present nation-wide study was an.attempt to

assess high school student body President's perceptions

(If the principal's role, in an attempt to contribute to

this somewhat neglected area of rese'arch.

PurPoses and Objectives

The specific objectives of the research were:

1. To determine if geographic location affects

high school student body presidents' perceptions of the

high school principal's role in curriculum and instruc-

tional leadership, personnel guidance, school-community

t'elations, administrative responsibility, evaluation

t'esponsibility, and professional improvement.

2. To determine if school size affects high school

tudent body presidents' perceptions of the high school

Principal's role in curriculum and instructional leadership,

3

personnel guidance, school-community relations, adminis-

trative responsibility, evaluation responsibility, and

professional improvement.

3. To determine if the sex of high school student

body presidents affects their percepti,ons of the high

t

school pirncipal's role in curriculum and instructional

leadership, personnel guidance, school-community relations,

administrative responsibility, evaluation responsibility,

and professional improvement.

4. To determine if the race of high school student

body presidents affects their perceptions of the high

school principal's 1le in curriculiim and instructional



and professional improvement.

5. To determine if the academic success of high

school stucnnt body presidents affects their perceptions

of the high school principal's role in curriculum and

instructional leadership, personnel guidance, school-

community relations, administrative responsibility,

evaluation responsibility, and professional improvement.

6. To determine if the occupation of their parents

affects the student body presidents' perceptions of the

high school principal's role in curriculum and instructional



4

and professional improvelnent.

A Likert-type questionnaire was mailed to 250

randomly selected student body presidents, representing

all parts of the United States. The students were able

to indicate the importance they attached to 124 adminis-

trative functions. The least squares analysis of variance

and the fishers Least Significant Difference (LSD) test

were the statistical procedures used to analyze the

collected data.

To accomplish the objectives of the study, the

investigator tested the following specific hypotheses:

1. No significant difference existed in students'

perception of the principal's role iiccording to geographic

location within the United States.

2. No significant difference existed in the percep-

tion of the principal's role between students from small

high schools, medium-silzed high schools, or large high

schools.

3. No significant difference existed in the way

young men and young women perceive the principal.

4. No significant difference existed in student

perception of the principal between the various ethnic

groups: Black, Caucasian, Oriental, Spanish-American

and others.


perception of the principal between students of varying

5

academic success.


perception of the principal's role according to occu-

pational category of their parents.

Profile of a Student Body President

Because the sample was stratified by state when

selection was made, we can construct a profile of an

American high school student body president from the

163 useable returns. Our confidence in generalizing is

further enhanced by the fact that our returns represent

small, medium-sized, and large high' schools in approx-

imately equal proportions.

Most high school student body presidents are seniors

Eighty-six percent of the respondents indicated they were

in grade twelve.

It is apparent, not surprisingly, that our typical

student body president is a successful student with a

high academic.average. No respondent indicated a grade

point average of less than 2.5 (4.0 = A). Only ten

percent had less than a "B" average, and 50 percent had

averages of 3.5 to 4.0. This would seem to indicate that

high school students have a strong inclination to elect

as their leaders students who are considerably above

average as far as classroom success is concerned.

6

A breakdown of respondents by sex indicates that

sixty-eight percent of the schools sampled see the role

of student body president being filled by a male.

The vast majority of the respondents (86.5 percent)

indicated their race as Caucasian. The next largest

group was Black (8 percent), followed by Spanish-American

(3.7 percent), Oriental (1.2 percent), and one respond-

ent indicated he belonged to some other ethnic group.

The occupation of parents proved to be a relevant

variable.. Forty-one percent of the student leaders

indicated a parent occupation that was in the professional

managerial category, 42 percent were categorized as blue

collar, nine percent were in the category of service

occupations, and seven percent were from farm homes.

Less than 25 percent of American workers are from ftomes

in which the primary wage earner is in a professional-

managerial occupation (The World Almanac, 1976). We

might conclude, therefore, that there is a strong tend-

ency for students from upper-middle class and upper

class homes to -un for and be elected to this leadership

position in a frequency that is disproportionately

large when compared to their actual number.

Hypothes.is Number 1

The hypothesis that no significant differences

existed according to geographic location and the six

major categories of the high school principal's functions

as perceived by student body presidents was tested by

computing an analysis of variance for the six categories

of functions and six geographic areas. An F ratio of

2.29 was necessary to be significant at the .05 level.

None of the six F rations was this large, so this

hypothesis was not rejected.

Hypothesis Number 2

The hypothesis is that no significant differences

existed according to school size and the six major cate-

gories of the high school principal's functions as per-

ceived by student body presidents was tested by computing

an analysis of variance for the six categories of functions

and the three groups of school size (Small: under 500;

Medium: 500-1500; Large: Over 1500). An F ratio of 3.07

or larger was necessary to reject the hypotheses. None

of the six F'ratios approached the region of rejection,

so the hypothesis was not rejected.

It seems likely that the actual role of a principal

varies considerably from small high schools with limited pr

programs and facilities to large high schools with their

diverse programs and several assistant principals. It

is interesting to note that in the face of this varied

exposure to the principal's role, the students were not

significantly inconsistent in their impressions of the

role a principal ought to fill.

Hypothesis Number 3


existed according to the sex of the respondent and the

six major categories of the high school principal's

functions as perceived by student body presidents was

tested by computing an analysis of variance for the six

categories of functions and the categories of male and

female. An F ratio of 3.92 was necessary for rejection,

and this value was exceeded for three of the variables:

curriculum and instructional leadership, personnel

guidance, and evaluation responsibility. The hypothesis

was rejected.

An analysis of the response means of the three

9

catevories with a significant F, indicates that in the

areas of curriculum and instructional leadership, personnel

guidance, and evaluation responsibility, female student

body presidents, in each case, assigned a significantly

greater importance to these three categories than did

their mile counterparts.

Closer analysis reveals that the mean response

of the females was higher then the males for all six

categories, although for the categories of school-

community relations, administrative.responsibility, and

professional improvement, the difference was not statis-

tically significant at the .05 level.

Hypothesis Number 4


existed according to the race of the respondent and the

six major categories of the high school principal's


tested by computing an analysis of variance for thE six

categories of functions and the two categories for race:

caucasian and non-caucasian. An F ratio of 3.92 or

larger was necessary to reject the hypothesis. None of

1 0

the six F's was near the. region of rejection.

Hypothesis Number 5


existed occording to the academic success of the student

and the six major categories of the high sch,Jol principal's


tested by comput-ftg an analysis of variance for the six

categories of functions and the three categories for

academic success (G.P.A. = 2.5-2.99; 3.0-3.49; 3.5-4.0).

An F ratio of 3.07 or larger was necessary to reject the

hypothesis. This region of rejection wa, reached for

three of the variables: personnel guidance, administrative

responsibility, and evaluation responsibility. The

hypothesis was rejected.

An analysis of the response means of the three

categories with a significant F, indicates that in the

areas of personnel guldance, administrative responsibility,

and evaluation responsibility, students with the lowest

grade point average (2.5 2.99) assigned a significantly

greater importance to the administrative functions in

these three categories than did students who were more

successful in school as evidenced by their higher grade

point averages. Students in this lowest of academic

11

achievement categories place the relative importance of

principal functions at a higher level then the more

successful students in all six categories, although the

differences were not great enough to be statistically

significant in the areas of curriculum and instructional

leadership, school-community relations, and professional

improvement.

Hypothesis Number 6


existed according to the occupational category of the

parent and the six major categories, of the high school

principal's functions as perceived by student body pres-

idents was tested by computing an analysis of variance

for the six categories of functions and the four cate-

gories for parent occupation: professiona1-mana9eria1,

blue collar, service occupations, and agricultural.

An F ratio of 2.68 or higher was required to reject the

hypothesis. This region of rejection was reached for

four out of the six categories: curriculum and instruc-

tional leadership, personnel guidance, school-community

relations, and professional improvement. The hypothesis

was rejected.

An analysis of the response means indicates that

in all six categories of administrative functions the

category of student with the highest mean was the agri-

1 2

cultural group, and the service occupation group had the

lowest mean, with professional-managerial and blue collar

somewhere between the two extremes. The two occupa-

tional categories are at opposite poles when compared

by their dependency upon organizational structure. The

farmer is almost entirely independent in terms of a job

structure imposed from a supervisor. The service worker,

on the other hand, is directly dependent upon another

for the structure of the job and could almost be said to

be subservient to others in the course of a day's work.

It is interesting that these extremes apparently have an

effect upon the manner in wh(1,,, student leaders reared in

these environments view the importar!.ce of the administrative

functions of an organizational leader.

When we analyze more closely the variable with a

significant F, we find that in the area of curriculum

and instructional leadership students in the agricul-

tural, blue collar, and professional-managerial categories

ranked the importance of this function significantly

higher than students in the service occupation category.

Although agricultural students rank this function higher

than blue collar students, and blue collar students rank

it higher than professional-managerial students, none

of these differences is significant at the .05 level.

An analysis of the personnel guidance function

shows an identical relationship. Agricultural students

13

developed the highest mean. They were followed by blue

collar and professional-managerial in that order. These

then, while not being significantly different from each

other, were significantly higher than students from

service worker homes.

The school-community relations function shows a

somewhat similar pattern. We find that agrir.ultural

and professional-managerial students ranked this function

significantly above students from service occupation homes.

There was no significant difference between blue collar

respondents and any of the other three categories at the

.05 level.

In analyzing the professional improvement category,

again we find agricultural students with the highest mean,

but this time they are significantly higher than the other

three categories. This seems to be a logical finding.

Few occupations in America are more independent of others

than the American farmer. A large degree of his success

or failure is dependent upon his degree of self-deter-*

mination and initiative. It is fitting then, that students

from this environment see the need for self-initiative

in a more important light than their fellow students from

other occupational backgrounds.

14

RankinQ of Princi al Functions

Although not one of the specific hypotheses of

the study, it seemed desirable to determine the over-all

rank of importance of the administrative functions by

examining,the responses. Evaluation responsibility

received the highest over-all response from the students.

It was followed by personnel guidance, curriculum and

instructional leadership, professional improvement

administrative responsibility and school-community

relations, in that order. An analysis of variance was

done and LSD technique was applied. The results indicated

that the evaluation responsibility factor was significantly

higher than the other five, and that personnnel guidance

and curriculum and instructional leadership were signif-

icantly higher than professional improvement, administra-

tive responsibility, and school-community relations.

Summary of Findings

No significant differences were apparent in the

responses when based on the race of respondent, the geo-

graphic residence of the respondent, or the size of high

school attended by the respondent.

An analysis of the responses when compared by

1 5

,011 nonsemale-female indicates that females have a hi r resr

alf

mean for all six categories than do ma1 s.feni

es

lo ve

trhresponses in the areas'of curri culum anq in5 - Qtiona

1

n).leadership. personnel guidance, and evaitiati

.0

,()

bility that are significantlY higher at the level'

Whien comparing reSponses according to ' `Itilic

lpsuccess, it was found that stuH

-ents with the /41stto

grade point average Perceived ail principal `tio05

be more important tha n the more academically sc55folV11' r in

students. These differences wepe signi fi can h ighe

the areas of personnel guidance, administrat' 1,spo

bility, and evaluation responsibility.44-le

The occupational category of parenc5 P'

Otiof the most no table respo0setting for some ps ffere

ation. Students from agricultut.al homes 1404 °Mouted

as having the highest mean in all six catigo:, while

students from service occuPation homes had tr 'otve5t

,mean in all six categories. There were sign capt

.ifferences in only four of the six categories

' hwever'

eddIn the area of curriculum and instruction

i

al P 4et,shiP'

students in the agr icultural, bl ue col lat., a0 P,ro fes'

taosional-managerial categories ranked the wpo(c of

,

her sl in tPethis function significantly hig than ucieot

1 n

service occupation categorY- In the peronne 'tlidanCe

orarea, student5 in the agricultu"1, blue col'

l

professional-manageri al'categories rankel the lOortOce

16

of this function significantly higher than students from

service worker homes. In the area of school-community

relations, students from agricultueal and professional-

managerial homes ranked the importance of this function

significantly higher than students from service occu-

'Dation homes. In the professional improvement category,

students from agricultural homes perceive this function

as significantly more important than students from the

other three occupational categories.

Discussion

The theoretical framework to which this study

addressed itself identified two distinct facets which

determine human behavior within the setting of a social

sYstem. One facet being the personality and need

dispositions of the individual, and the second facet

being the institutional goals which are organized into

roles and serve as norms of behavior for the role incum-

bents.

It was this second facet with which this study was

concerned. A considerable amount of research has been

done to identify the role expectations fellow professional

educators have for high school principals. There has

been a lack of research done to identify the expecta ions

of a very important population, the high school students

17

themselves.

The purpose of this research was to provide a

greater understanding to the practicing high school prin-

cipal of the expectations students have concerning the

importance of his various functions. It was hoped the

data that was collected could assist the principal in

making wiser choices as he establishes his priorities.

It is hoped that this study will indeed assist

practicing principals. If it does, it will also have

implications for central office personnel, boards of

education, administrator-preparing institutions, and

research personnel.

Perhaps one of the most interesting results of

this study, was that it was possible to construct a pro-

file of American high school student body presidents,

since the study was based on a nation-wide sample of

_randomly selected student body presidents. It was found

that the typical student body president was a senior

with a rather high academic average of between B+ and

A. This academically successful senior is a your.g man

(In 68% of the cases), and is white (In 87% of the cases).

Although his home respresents many occupational categories,

a disproportionate number are from families headed by

parents in professional and management occupations.

It should be important to mobile professionals,

and particularly to administrator-training institutions

Q

to learn that there is no significant differences (.05 level)

in the perception by high school student body presidents of

the principal's role based on geographic location. The re-

sponses of students from all six areas were remarkably

similar.

In a similar vein, it was discovered there were no

significant differences (at the .05 level) in student per-

ceptions based on school size and race of respondent, it

cannot be inferred that the principal's function is the same

in a small high school as in a large one, nor is it justifi-

able to conclude that the principalship in an inner-city,

multi-racial high school is equivalent to an all-white

suburban high school. It is interesting, however, that

students from ea.ch of these categories seem to have much the

same expectations for high school principa;s in terms of the

importance they assign to his job-related functions.

To the practicing principal it is worthwile to

note that female high school students see all administra-

tive functions in a more important light than do the males.

Curriculum and instructional leadership, personnel guid-,

ance and evaluation responsibility were higher to a

statistically significant degree.

The criterion of academic success of the responding

student provided the information that students with the

lowest grade point averages among respondents rank all

areas of administrative functions higher than more success-

1 9

ful students. It should not be inferred that all low

achievers share these perceptions. The students sampled

were student leaders who had been elected to this position

by their peers, and had been in office most of a.year when

sampled. It seems probable they had developed an appreci-

ation foq "administration" to a higher degree than many

a'verage or low-achieving students. Indeed, they had 'a

higher appreciation for all administrative functions than

even the more successful students, and were significantly

higher in the areas of personnel guidance, administrative .

responsibility, and evaluation responsibility.

Even at the most rudimentary levels of teacher

preparation, the value of understanding the home environ-

ment is emphasized. The findings of this study corroborate

that pOlosophy. Students from different home environments

do vi5.1w the prinipal's function in a different light.

Students from farming backgrounds view all principal

functions as more important then their fellow students,

and students with parents in Service occupations tend to

rank all functions as being less important.

An analysis of variance indicated there is a

significant difference in the relative importance assigned

to the six major fuftctions of principal's functions by

student body presidents.

The highest ranking category was evaluation

responsibility which was significantly above the other

20

five. There was no significant difference between the

category means of personnel guidance, which ranked second,

and curriculum and instructional leadership, which ranked

third. These were significantly above the means of pro-

fessional improvement, administrative responsibility, and

school-community relations which ranked in that order.

This'study has provided some insights into the

manner in which students view the principal's functions.

It is hoped other researchers will continue to add depth

and breadth to this area of understanding that should be

vital to the discipline of building level administration.

2 1

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Accredited Institutions of Higher Education; Candidates.1974. Washington D. C.: American Council onEducation.

Afton, Alex. 1974. "Perceptions of the Principal'sRcAe." National Association of Secondary School

Principal's Bulletin. Washington D. C. September.

Barnett, Rosalind C. and Renato Tagiuri. 1973. "What

Young People Think About Managers." Harvard Business

Review. Vol- 51. May-June.

Briner, Conrad. 1960. "Unhinging the High SchoolPrincipalship." The School Review. LXVIII. Summer.

Corbally, John E., T. J. Jenson, and W. Frederick Staub.

1961. Educational Administration: The Secondary

School. Boston, Massachusett: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Costanzo, Matthew William. 1972. Perceptions of the Roles

and Functions of Philadelphia Public High SchoolPrincipals as Expressed by the Principals and Other

Members of the Community. Unpublished Doctoral,

Dissertation, Columbia University, New York, New York.

DeVries, Ted and Boyd Carter. 1968. "How Teachers See

Their Principals." Clearing House. Vol. 43. November.

Dictionary of Occupational Titles. 1965. Vol. 1, Third

Edition. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington

D. C.

Directory of Public Elementary and Secondary Day Schools.

1970. Superintendents of Documents Catelog No.

HE5. 220: 20126. Vol. I-IV. Washington D. C.

Fenwick, English and James Zaharis. 1972. "Crisis in

Middle Management." National Association of Second-

ary School:Principals Bulletin. April.

Fish, Kenneth L. 1969. "Coping With Student Activismin Secondary School." Catholic High School Quarterly.

July.

2 2

Getzels, Jacob W. and Egon G. Guba. 1957. "SocialBehavior and the Administration Process." TheSchool Review. LXV. Winter.

Gibb, Jack R. 1967. "The Expanding Role of the Admini-strator." National Association of Secondary SchoolPrincipals Bulletin. LI. May.

Goldsborough, Harriett. 1971. "The Man in the Middle:How the Urban Secondary School Principal Sees HisRole and Responsibilities." Result of CanadianEduication Association Survey. ERIC ED 077 071.

Griffiths, Daniel E. 1956. Human Relations in SchoolAdministration. New York, New York: Appleton-Century-Crafts, Inc.

Grieder, Calvin, Truman M. Pierce and William Rosenstengel.1961. Public School Administration. New York, NewYork: The Ronald Press Co.

Gross, Neal, Ward S. Mason and Alexander W. McEachern.1966. Explorations in Role Analysis. New York,New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Haslam, Raymond M. 1972. The High Schoo. Principal AsPerceived By A Group of Students From Thirteen HighSchools in Utah. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,Utah State University, Logan, Utah.

Hicks, Jess Thomas. 1972. The Role of the SecondarySchool Principal as Perceived by School Personnel,Students and Parents. Unpublished Ed. D. Disserta-tion, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Hudson, Stanley Eugene. 1975. Immediate Superordinates'Perception of the Middle School Principal's Functions.Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Kansas StateUniversity, Manhattan, Kansas.

Jones, Gary Denis. 1970. "A Note on the Principal."School and Community. October.

Kelley, Earl C. 1962. In Defense of Youth. EnglewoodCliffs, New Jersey.

Knezevich, Stephen J. 1962. Administration of PublicEducation. New York, New York: Harper and Brothers.

23

Lipman, Harold J. 1972. "Instructional Leader orAdministrative Robot." National Association ofSecondary School Principal's Bulletin. April.

McAulay, John D. 1968. "Principal-What Do Your ChildrenThink of You?" The National Elementary Principal.

XLVII. March.

McCleary, Lloyd E. 1971. "An Essay on Role Attrition:Three Studies of the Job of the Principal".ERIC ED 077 135.

McGregor, D. 1967. The Professional Manager. New York,

New York: The McGraw-Hill Book Co.

McNally, Harold J. 1968. "The American PrincipalTomorrow." National Elementary Principal. XLVII

May.

Melton, George. 1970. "Job Specifications for Principals."The Principalship" Job Specifications and SalaryConsiderations for the 70's. Washington D. C.

Melton, Joseph. 1958. Perceptions 'of the Ideal andActual Role of the Elementary Schocl Principalship.Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Wayne StateUniversity, Detroit, Michigan.

Newcomb, Theodore M. 1950. Social Psychology. New York,

New York: Dryden Press.

Niblett, Lawrence James. 1972. The Changing Role of theSecondary School Principal. Unpublished Ed. D.Dissertation, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.

Ocker, Sharon Dale. 1967. An Analysis of Trends inEducational Administration. Unpublished Ed. D.Dissertation, University of Nebraska Teachers College.

Pederson, Monroe Ellsworth. 1970. Pupil Expectations.ofthe High School Principal. Unpublished DoctoralDissertation, University of Southern California, Los

Angeles, California.

Pierce, T. M. and E. C. Merrill. 1957. "The Individual .

and Administration Behavior." AdministrativeBehavior in Education. Edited by R. F. Campbell and

R. T. Gregg. New York, New York: Harper and Brothers.

24

Redfern, George B. 1968: "Negotiations Changes Principal-Teacher Relationship." The National ElementaryPrincipal. April.

Sergiovanni, Thomas J. and Fred D. Ckrver. 1973. The

New School Executive. New York, New York: Dodd,Mead and Co.

Shelton, Landon. 1965. "Supervision of Teachers: TheAdministrator's First Responsibility." NationalAssociation of Secondary School Principals Bulletin.XLVX. October.

Smith, Vivian E. 1974. The Principal's Functions asDerived from Authors of Books and Periodical Articlesfrom 1970 through 1973. Unpublished DoctoralDissertation, Kansas State University, Manhattan,Kansas.

Snyder, Willard S. 1968. Elementary School Principal'sPerceptions of High Ideal and Actual Role. UnpublishedEd. D. Dissertation, United States InternationalUniversity, California. Western Division, California.

The World Almanac. 1976. Newspaper Ente,prise Association,Inc., New York, Cleveland. (Publisher - Edward R.Kennedy).

Thomas, Michael P. Jr. 1971. "Students and the Shapingof the Principalship." The Principalship In the1970's. Edited by Kenneth E. McIntyre, University ofTexas, Austin, Texas.

Tomkins, Ellsworth. 1965. "The Principal's Role in SchoolDevelopment." National Association of SecondarySchool Principal's Bulletin. XLI. October.

Wiggins, Thomas W. 1970. "Conceptualizing PrincipalBehavior in the School Climate: A Systems Analysis."Paper presented March 3, 1970, at the Annual Conventionof the American Educational Research Association,Minneapolis, Minnesota. ERIC ED 041 387.

Willower, Donald J. 1962. "Education Students' Perceptionsof School Administrators." The School .Review.Autumn.

Winer, B. J. 1962. Statistical Principles in ExperimentalDesign. San Francisco, California: McGraw-Hill BookCo

25

DOCUMENT RESUME - ERIC · DOCUMENT RESUME ED 128 911 EA 008 682 AUTHOR Wilson, Alfred P., Comp.;...

Documents

Transcript of DOCUMENT RESUME - ERIC · DOCUMENT RESUME ED 128 911 EA 008 682 AUTHOR Wilson, Alfred P., Comp.;...