COMPARISONS OF SELECTED FUNCTIONS PERFORMED BY ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to clarify the extent of congruence between elementary and secondary school principals in regard to their participation in five identified functions of the principalship: curriculum and instructional leadership, staff personnel, pupil personnel, school management, and school-community relations. Three sample populations from Indiana were utilized in this study: principals who have served only as elementary school principals; principals who have served only as secondary school principals; and principals who have served separately in both capacities. Thirty-seven individuals who have had experience at both levels participated in this study. Forty-three from each of the groups who have served exclusively as a secondary or elementary principal participated. The instrument used to ascertain the data was the Questionnaire of Principal's Functions, which was developed for this study as a result of review of the related literature. Six major hypotheses were formulated to determine the difference between combinations of four groups of mean scores relating to the overall function of the principalship. Five operational hypotheses related to each of the five identified functions of the principalship. An ancillary question was formulated to determine the perceived percentage of time spent by each of the four identified groups on each of the five identified functions of the principalship. An Analysis of Variance was performed to test the six major hypotheses. A separate Analysis of Variance was performed for each of the operational hypotheses relating to each of the five functions. A Chi-square statistic was used to test the six pair-wise comparisons of the four groups for each of the fifty items from Section II of the QPF. No significant differences were found between any of the four groups relating to the overall function of the principalship, or to the functions of curriculum and instructional leadership, staff personnel, and pupil personnel. However, significant differences were found between elementary and secondary comparisons relating to the functions of school management and school-community relations. Several items from Section II of the QPF were found to show significant differences between various combinations of the four groups. The results of the analysis of the data pertaining to the Ancillary Question showed significant differences between elementary and secondary comparisons relating to pupil personnel and curriculum and instructional leadership. The result of the Analyses of Variance testing the major and operational hypotheses and the comparison of the responses to the individual items from the questionnaire led to the following conclusions: (1) There were no differences between the elementary and secondary school principal with respect to participation in the function of the principalship identified as staff personnel. (2) The elementary principal participated to a higher degree than the secondary principal in the function of school management. (3) The secondary principal participated to a higher degree than the elementary principal in the function of school-community relations. (4) With respect to the functions of curriculum and instructional leadership and pupil personnel, the elementary principal and the secondary principal participated differently within a specific task area relating to their specific level. The main implication of this study was that there is justification for the positions of the elementary school and secondary school principalship. There is a need for separate preparation programs, separate certification and licensing requirements, and separate professional organizations relating to both levels of the principalship.
Degree
Ph.D.
Subject Area
School administration
Off-Campus Purdue Users:
To access this dissertation, please log in to our
proxy server.