2 7 c f

N8/d /k>.{ 76 i

SELECTED MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS IN THE ROLE

OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS IN MULTI-CAMPUS

COMMUNITY COLLEGES

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

North Texas State University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

By

Willie Gene Stewart, B.S.E., M.Ed.

Denton, Texas

August, 1981

Stewart, W. Gene, Selected Management Functions in the

Role Division Chairpersons in Multi-Campus Community

Colleges. Doctor of Education (Higher Education

Administration), August, 1981, 239 pp., 48 tables,

bibliography, 79 titles.

The problem of the study was to develop and investi-

gate selected management functions in the role of division

chairpersons in multi-campus community colleges. The

researcher collected data concerning the role of division

chairperson from presidents, academic deans or vice-

presidents, and division chairpersons within the Dallas

County Community College District, Texas, and the Tarrant

County Junior College, Texas.

Purposes of the study included determining how much

formal management education the division chairpersons had

completed; and determining amounts of experience in their

current roles, and in educational and non—educational

organizations. Further purposes were to determine

perceptions of all participants concerning both the

importance of and the frequency of occurrence of 158

management activities in the role of division chairperson.

Using a model of the five management functions of

planning, organizing, staffing, directing or leading, and

controlling, and twenty management activities for

comparison, three division chairpersons developed 245

management activities which they actually performed in

their jobs. An eleven-member panel of experts validated

the proposed instrument. The list was reduced to 158

management activities. A research instrument was

constructed and subsequently completed by 93.5 per cent

of the subjects.

Narrative summaries were made concerning the demo-

graphic data which were collected. Statistical analyses

were completed for importance and frequency on each

activity which had been developed for the study, according

to means and standard deviations, analysis of variance,

Scheff£ 3 x 1 analysis, and t-test of the means. A

principal factors analysis was accomplished for each

activity, according to importance. One management

function at a time was analyzed by the method to confirm

whether division chairpersons engage in management

activities and functions as outlined by the model.

Major conclusions of the study were that division

chairpersons do engage in five management functions, but

that they may not engage in every management activity.

Chairpersons engage extensively in communications and

complete large volumes of administrative and clerical

work.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES Page vi

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION

II,

III.

Background of the Study Dallas County Community College District Tarrant County Junior College

Statement of the Problem Purposes of the Study Research Questions Significance of the Study Definition of Terms Delimitations of the Study Limitations of the Study Basic Assumptions

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 16

History of the Community College Movement Colleges Are Organizations The Scope of the Role of Division Chairpersons Management Education Is Needed Voices of Opposition to Management

Education for College Administrators Descriptions of Management Functions Management Functions and Higher Level

Administrators Descriptions of Five Management Functions

as Applied to the Division Chairperson's Role Planning Function Organizing Function Staffing Function Directing or Leading Function Controlling Function

PROCEDURE FOR COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

Procedure for Collection of Data Design of the Study Permission to Conduct Research

45

1 1 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Chapter Page

III. (Continued)

Approval from the DCCCD Approval from the TCJC

The Survey Instrument Development of the Survey Instrument The Management Model

Function One Function Two Function Three Function Four Function Five

Validation of the Survey Instrument Validation Process Revision of the Survey Instrument

Final Form of the Survey Instrument Population and Sample

Procedure for Analyses of the Data Planning Stage The I. D. Section of the Scan-Tron Forms Main Body of the Scan-Tron Form Analyses of the Data

Narrative Summaries Means and Standard Deviations Analysis of Variance 3 x 1 Analysis t-test of the Means Factor Analysis

IV. PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS 75

Demographic Analyses Five Management Functions

The Planning Function Importance of Planning Activities Frequency of Planning Activities Summary on Planning Activities

The Organizing Function Importance of Organizing Activities Frequency of Organizing Activities Summary on Organizing Activities

The Staffing Function Importance of Staffing Activities Frequency of Staffing Activities Summary on Staffing Activities

IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Chapter Page

IV. (Continued)

The Directing or Leading Function Importance of Directing or Leading

Activities Frequency of Directing or Leading

Activities Summary on Directing or Leading

Activities The Controlling Function

Importance of Controlling Activities Frequency of Controlling Activities Summary on Controlling Activities

Factor Analysis The Planning Function

Function 1 The Organizing Function

Function 2 The Staffing Function

Function 3 The Directing or Leading Function

Function 4 The Controlling Function

Function 5

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . 169

Summary Brief Summary of the Findings Conclusions Recommendations Implications

APPENDIX 191

BIBLIOGRAPHY 233

v

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I. Number of Management Activities Listed by Management Functions 55

II. Card Number Recorded on Third Line

of Scan-Tron Form 63

III. College Location 64

IV. Information Recorded on First Five Lines of Scan-Tron I. D. Section 64

V. Information Concerning Division Chairpersons 65

VI. Information Recorded on Main Body of Scan-Tron Form 66

VII. Number of Respondents According to Campus Location 77

VIII. Length of Time of Division Chairpersons in Present Positions According to Campus Location ^8

IX. Formal Management Education of Division Chairpersons According to Campus Location 79

X. Formal Management Education of Division Chairpersons Compared to Length of Time in Present Position 81

XI. Educational Management Experience Other Than in Present Position of Division Chairpersons According to Campus Location 82

XII. Educational Management Experience Other Than in Present Position of Division Chairpersons Compared to Length of Time in Present Position 83

V I

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table

XIII,

XIV.

XV.

XVI

XVII

XVIII.

XIX.

XX.

XXI,

XXII.

XXIII,

Educational Management Experience Other Than in Present Position of Division Chairpersons Compared to Formal Management Education

Management Experience in Non-Educational Organizations of Division Chairpersons According to Campus Location

Management Experience in Non-Educational Organizations of Division Chairpersons Compared to Length of Time in Present Position

Management Experience in Non-Educational Organizations of Division Chairpersons Compared to Formal Management Education

Management Experience in Non-Educational Organization of Division Chairpersons Compared to Educational Management Experience Other Than in Present Position

Respondent Means Summary for Importance of Management Planning Activities. . . .

Analysis of Variance Summary for Activity Yielding a Significant Difference Among Groups on Planning Importance .

Respondent Means Summary for Frequency of Management Planning Activities. . . . ,

Analysis of Variance Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences Among Groups on Planning Frequency. . .

Scheffe Multiple Comparison Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences on Planning Frequencies .

Respondent Means Summary for Importance of Management Organizing Activities . .

Page

84

85

86

87

88

91

93

94

97

98

101

LIST OF TABLES (Continued

Table

XXIV.

XXV.

XXVI

XXVII,

XXVIII.

XXIX.

XXX.

XXXI.

XXXII.

XXXIII.

XXXIV.

Respondent Means Summary for Frequency of Management Organizing Activities . ,

Respondent Means Summary for Importance of Management Staffing Activities . . ,

Analysis of Variance Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences Among Groups on Staffing Importance . ,

Respondent Means Summary for Frequency of Management Staffing Activities. . . . ,

Analysis of Variance Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences Among Groups on Staffing Frequency. . ,

Respondent Means Summary for Importance of Management Directing or Leading Activities. .

Analysis of Variance Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences Among Groups on Directing and Leading Importance

Page

102

105

107

108

110

113

117

Scheffe Multiple Comparison Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences on Directing or Leading Importance

Respondent Means Summary for Frequency of Management Directing or Leading Activities

119

122

Analysis of Variance Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences Among Groups on Directing or Leading Frequency 126

Scheffe Multiple Comparison Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences on Directing or Leading Frequency 127

v m

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table Page

XXXV. Respondent Means Summary for Importance of Management Controlling Activities. . 131

XXXVI. Analysis of Variance Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences Among Groups on Controlling Importance 134

XXXVII. Scheffe" Multiple Comparison Summary for Activities Yielding Significant Differences on Controlling Importance . 135

XXXVIII. Respondent Means Summary for Frequency of Management Controlling Activities . . . 138

XXXIX. Unidentified Factors in Planning Importance 143

XL. Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix on Planning Importance 144

XLI. Unidentified Factors in Organizing Importance 14 9

XLII. Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix on Organizing Importance 150

XLIII. Unidentified Factors in Staffing Importance 152

XLIV. Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix on Staffing Importance 153

XLV. Unidentified Factors in Directing or Leading Importance 156

XLVI. Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix on Directing or Leading Importance . . . . 158

XLVII. Unidentified Factors in Controlling Importance 163

XLVIII. Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix on Controlling Importance 164

IX

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Of all the institutions for learning in the United

States of America, the community/junior colleges are the

only ones which are completely American in origin. Rapidly

they have poliferated throughout the country, becoming

progressive, dynamic institutions of higher education

(5, p. 37; 8, pp. 8-11).

The first public junior college was Joliet College.

It began in 1901 with 100 students (9, p. 4). The

community colleges grew rapidly in numbers. This rapid

growth is easily perceived by a perusal of the following

facts. In the year 1910, 74 colleges had a total of

2,362 students. In 1950, 590 institutions had 72,193

students. In 1970, 1,100 plus colleges served over 2.5

million students. The importance of the two-year college

can be ascertained more closely when one considers that in

1968 there were 2,374 schools of higher education of all

kinds (1, p. 310).

Cosand (4) in 1968 predicted that by 1980 community

colleges would provide almost all of the freshman and

sophomore students with that level of education. Others

have predicted that up to 75 per cent of freshman and

sophomore students will soon be enrolled in that level of

education in the community/junior colleges (11, p. 3).

The two-year community/junior colleges are today the

most numerous of all the institutions of higher education

(2, p. 94). When one considers the size and the expendi-

tures of the total efforts of higher education, the

implications are many. In 1973-1974, higher education in

the United States had expenditures totaling some $31

billion. In the entire world, only Exxon Corporation had

revenues which exceeded the expenditures of higher educa-

tion (3, p. 130).

Many colleges have come into being without much

planning as to what pattern of operations would best

accomplish organizational goals (11, p. 352). Richardson

(13) stated that management by crisis has been common-

place in American higher education. Institutions have

been frequently weakened by inefficient management and

decision-making (10, p. 2). Patterns of governance are

beginning to change rapidly. Questions now ask, "Who

governs and in relation to what constituencies?"

(7, p. 37). Lahti (10) stated that there is a wide gap

between available professional managerial knowledge and

its application in the collegiate setting but that the

knowledge of management techniques could be put to

effective use.

There have been many problems inherent in the growth

of community/junior colleges. One of these problems is

whether management principles which are commonly studied

by and practiced by business administrators would benefit

community/junior college administrators. Several

philosophies decry any attempt to provide formal management

education for any college administrator. Others contend

that management education is essential for administrators

in community/junior colleges. Ivancevich advanced this

latter viewpoint by expressing the ideas that colleges are

becoming increasingly important in our society, and

although they are not the same kinds of organizations as

are business firms, they are organizations and as such

have need of managers (6, p. 474). Baldridge stated that

there would be a need to tell a different story of academic

leadership and management for the different types of

higher educational institutions (2, p. 11).

The purpose of this study was not an attempt to gather

information which could be generalized from a large popu-

lation or from a diversity of populations. Two locations

of one specific type of institution were the subjects of

this study. The researcher concentrated his efforts upon

the role of the division chairperson in two public, multi-

location community college districts. Tarrant County

Junior College in Fort Worth, Texas, and Dallas County

Community College District in Dallas, Texas, were the two

districts on which the research was concentrated.

Dallas County Community College District

The Dallas County Community College District has

seven colleges. Each college has a president who reports

to the Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs. At each

college campus, a president supervises a vice-president

of instruction. The vice-president supervises division

chairpersons. A chairperson supervises all of the faculty

within the division.

Several divisions have lead instructors who coordi-

nate activities which are found within one subject area.

An example would be accounting in the Business Division.

Normally there are no formal job descriptions written

for these lead instructors. They perform at the direction

of the division chairperson.

Tarrant County Junior College

The Tarrant County Junior College system exists in

reality as one district with three separate campuses.

The structure of these campuses as it concerns the division

chairperson is essentially the same as for the Dallas

County Community College District. There are department

chairpersons who operate in the same fashion as do lead

instructors in the Dallas County system. The department

chairpersons report to division chairpersons, and they are

formally charged with specific responsibilities. There

are written job descriptions for department chairpersons.

Their jobs are more formalized and they operate at a

higher level than the lead instructors in the Dallas

system. This allows for more delegation by the Tarrant

County division chairperson, and, therefore, there are, in

a few instances, fewer division chairpersons in the Tarrant

County Junior College than there are in the Dallas County

Community College District.

The DCCCD vice-president of instruction's counterpart

in the TCJC is the Dean of Instruction. Their roles are

very similar.

Statement of the Problem

This study was designed to identify and examine

selected management functions in the role of division

chairpersons in multi-campus community/junior colleges.

Purposes of the Study

The purposes of the study were

I. A. To determine the length of time that

division chairpersons have been in their present positions,

B. To determine the amount of formal manage-

ment education which division chairpersons have completedf

C. To determine the extent of educational

management experience which division chairpersons possess

other than in their present positions,

D. To determine the extent of non-educational

management experience which division chairpersons possess •

II. To determine the perceptions of college presi-

dents, academic deans or vice-presidents, and division

chairpersons concerning the importance of selected manage-

ment activities to the role of community college division

chairpersons ;

III. To compare responses between groups of presi-

dents, deans or vice-presidents, and division chairpersons

regarding the importance of identified management func-

tions to the role of division chairpersons;

IV. To determine how frequently division chair-

persons engage in the selected, identified management

activities;

V. To compare the perceptions of presidents, deans

or vice-presidents, and division chairpersons concerning

identified, selected management activities with Morrisey's

(12) model of management functions and activities.

Research Questions

To accomplish the purposes of this study, the

following research questions were utilized.

I. A. What length of time have the division

chairpersons been in their present positions?

B. What amount of formal management education

have division chairpersons completed?

C. To what extent do the division chairpersons

have educational management experience other than in their

present positions?

D. To what extent do the division chairpersons

have non-educational management experience?

II. A. What is the expectation of presidents

relative to the importance of the selected management

activities to the role of the division chairperson?

B. What is the expectation of deans or vice-

presidents relative to the importance of the selected

management activities to the role of the division chair-

person?

C. What is the expectation of division chair-

persons relative to the importance of the selected

management activities to the role of the division chair-

person?

D. Do the perceived expectations of the

importance of the identified management activities of

division chairpersons differ among division chairpersons,

deans or vice-presidents, and presidents?

III. A. What is the expectation of presidents

relative to the frequency in which division chairpersons

engage in the selected management activities?

B. What is the expectation of deans or vice-

presidents relative to the frequency in which division

chairpersons engage in the selected management activities?

C. What is the expectation of division chair-

persons relative to the frequency in which division

chairpersons engage in the selected management activities?

D. Do the perceived expectations concerning

the frequency in which division chairpersons engage in the

identified management activities differ among division

chairpersons, deans or vice-presidents, and presidents?

IV. To what extent do the management functions and

activities as outlined by Morrisey correlate with the

management activities and functions as identified in the

study to be important to the role of the division chair-

person?

Significance of the Study

The study is significant in that it focuses on two

large multi-campus community college districts in the

State of Texas. The subject was the management activities

and functions of division chairpersons.

Three division chairpersons within the two districts

developed detailed lists of activities in which they were

actually engaged. Utilizing Morrisey's definitions, these

activities were classified by the division chairpersons

into the five management functions of planning, organizing,

staffing, directing or leading, and controlling. Non-

managerial activities were deleted.

An eleven-member panel of experts validated the work

of the division chairpersons. The panel suggested that

certain revisions be made. Two university professors were

included in the panel. One was a professor of community

college administration and leadership. One was a business

management professor. Two chancellors and one vice-

chancellor of academic affairs were utilized on the panel

from two community/junior college districts. At the

college or campus level, there were two presidents, one

vice-president of instruction, one dean of instruction, and

two division chairpersons.

Ten of the panel members were selected because of

their knowledge of management principles, their experiential

base in community college systems, and their knowledge of

the division chairperson's role. One member was selected

because of his extensive background in and knowledge of

management principles.

The review of the literature suggested that college

presidents and academic deans have usually been assigned

to the role of the division chairperson before assuming

10

their present positions. College presidents supervise

academic deans or vice-presidents. These administrators

directly supervise division chairpersons. The three

groups are most knowledgeable concerning the division

chairperson 1s role.

Deans and presidents, along with division chair-

persons, were chosen as the subjects of this study. They

evaluated the identified and selected management activities

as those activities were related to the role of division

chairpersons. They evaluated the activities in relation-

ship to importance and frequency of performance.

The results of the study could be utilized by the

Dallas County Community College District, the Tarrant

County Junior College, and other public multi-location

community college districts in the study of the role of

the division chairperson. There was information in the

study which could be used as a guide to develop division

chairpersons through in-house management staff development

efforts, management education at the graduate school

level, and experience-based knowledge for practicing

administrators.

11

Definition of Terms

For the purposes of this study, the following terms

were defined and had specific meanings each time they

were used in the study.

1. Division chairperson—the person who was directly

responsible for administering an educational program for

students. This person directly supervised the instruc-

tional faculty, had the title of division chairperson, and

was an administrator as well as a teacher.

2. Community colleges—these were public post-

secondary institutions of education and learning in the

State of Texas. The term was used from this point on to

designate public two-year community colleges and junior

colleges in Dallas and Tarrant Counties, Texas.

3. Dean—this term referred to the immediate super-

visor of the division chairperson. The title a dean may

hold could be Vice-President of Instruction, Academic

Dean, Dean of Instruction, Instructional Dean, or some other

title which indicates this specific position and relation-

ship. From this point on in the study, this specific

position was referred to as dean.

4. DCCCD—this is the official shortened form of the

name of the Dallas County Community College District.

From this point on in the study, this district was

referred to as DCCCD.

12

5. TCJC—this is the official designation for the

Tarrant County Junior College. From this point on in

the study, this district was referred to as TCJC.

6. Five management functions—these are planning,

organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and control-

ling. The definitions which were used by Morrisey (12)

were used in this study.

Planning is determining what work must be done.

This includes the activities of defining roles and

missions, forecasting, setting objectives, programming,

scheduling, budgeting, policy-making, and establishing

procedures.

Organizing is classifying and dividing the work

into manageable units. This includes the activities of

structuring and integrating.

Staffing is determining the requirements for and

ensuring the availability of personnel to perform the

work. This includes the activities of determining

personnel needs, selecting, and developing personnel.

Leading or directing means to bring about the

human activity required to accomplish objectives. This

includes the activities of leading, assigning, motivating,

communicating, and coordinating.

Coordinating in this study means to harmonize

the activities of subordinates and activities with

13

organizational goals. Coordination was not used in this

study as it is used in sometimes referring to the means

of bringing together the five management functions, so

that meaningful managerial activity can occur. In that

sense of the word, coordinating would be a catalyst which

would allow the manager to harmonize each of the management

functions into integrated, holistic activity.

Controlling is assuring the effective accomplish-

ment of objectives. This includes the activities of

establishing standards, measuring performance, and taking

corrective action.

7. Management activities—those activities which

were determined to be engaged in by division chairpersons,

and which were classified and validated as being managerial

in nature.

Delimitations of the Study

The study utilized survey research, a review of

related literature, and a synthesis of related literature.

The public community colleges in Dallas and Tarrant

Counties, Texas, were the subjects for this study.

Perceptions were obtained from presidents, deans, and

division chairpersons in the DCCCD and in the TCJC

concerning the value of the managerial activities and

functions which are important to the division chairperson

in the exercise of that administrative role. Perceptions

14

from the same group of respondents were obtained concerning

the frequency in which chairpersons engaged in the

identified managerial activities and functions. A survey

instrument which was developed for this study was utilized

to obtain these perceptions.

Limitations of the Study

The study was limited to the population, and to the

number of responses which were obtained from the population;

the validity of the instrument which was used; and to the

honesty of the participants.

Basic Assumptions

Although controversy exists on whether or not manage-

ment functions are necessary to the division chairperson's

job and whether or not management education should be

part of the division chairperson's background, it was

assumed for the purposes of this study that the five

management functions of planning, organizing, directing

or leading, staffing, and controlling do, in fact, exist

as a part of the chairperson's job. Information concerning

the various degrees of importance which these functions

have to the division chairperson's role in the community

colleges of Dallas and Tarrant Counties, Texas, is

contained in the study. The frequency in which chairpersons

engage in the selected activities is also contained in the

study.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Adams, Sexton and Louis D. Ponthieu, Administrative Policy and Strategy: A Comparative Approach/ Casebook, Columbus, Grid, Inc., 1973.

2. Baldridge, J. Victor, David V. Curtis, George Ecker, and Gary L. Riley, Policy Making and Effective Leadership, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1978.

3. Bittel, Lester Robert, Encyclopedia of Professional Management, New York, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1978.

4. Eurich, Alvin C., editor, Campus 1980, New York, Delacorte Press, 1968.

5. Fields, Ralph R., The Community College Movement, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962.

6. Ivancevich, John M., James H. Donnelly, Jr., James L. Gibson, Managing for Performance, Dallas, Business Publications, Inc., 1980.

7. Jellema, William W., Efficient College Management, London, Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1972.

8. Kelley, Win and Leslie Wilbur, Teaching in the Community-Junior College, New York, Appleton-Century Crofts, 19 70.

9. Koos, Leonard V. , The Junior-College Movement, Connecticut, Greenwood Press, 1970.

10. Lahti, Robert E., Innovative College Management, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973.

11. Monroe, Charles R., Profile of the Community College, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, Inc., 19 72.

12. Morrisey, George L., Management by Objectives and Results, Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley, 1970.

13. Richardson, Richard C., Jr., Clyde E. Blocker, and Louis W. Bender, Governance for the Two-Year College, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972.

15

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

History of the Community College Movement

In the early part of this century increasing numbers

of youth in the United States began flocking to colleges

and universities, to junior and community colleges, to

technical institutions, and to all kinds of advanced

training and educational institutions. The rapid knowl-

edge explosion in the early 1900s, the industrial

revolution, and the necessity for training large numbers

of people in the military government and in business gave

the impetus to higher education to prepare the people of

the United States for a large number of roles in life

(55) .

Universities were geared to educate the intellectually

elite. Liberal thinking insisted that education should

be expanded to provide educational opportunities for all

(23, pp. 3-4). As an example of this idea, Goldberg and

Lippman (2 5) said that every human being no matter where

he is, when he was born, where he was born, what race he

is from, what sex he is, regardless of his parental back-

ground, his abilities or his environment has a right to

education. Hutchins (71) added the words "whether rich

or poor." Education is a universal human right, and it

16

17

consists basically of allowing the student to develop to

his fullest possible extent every potential capacity and

talent for his most effective self-management, security,

and satisfaction (25, p. 326). American community

colleges were developed primarily to bridge the secondary

school system to the German-influenced major university

(4 0, p. 1). As the masses of people demanded more

opportunity for career-type education, they found voca-

tional and occupational education available in the public

junior colleges because, as jobs became more complex,

industry and business demanded more highly skilled

personnel (23, p. 6). The development of the community

college, one of the most exciting creations in the

twentieth century (1, p. 6), reflected the attempts of

American educators to accomplish several of these objec-

tives. During the period from 1900 to the present, the

community college grew in numbers, size, importance, and

in the numbers of people which were served. In this

rapidly proliferating climate, the two-year college has

become the most numerous of all of the institutions in

higher education (6, p. 94).

Colleges Are Organizations

Higher education resembles, in its totality, a giant

corporation. Each institution is similar to a business

or corporation, including many bureaucratic administration

18

practices (65, p. 283). However, higher education poses

several special problems of management which are unlike

those of corporations (10, p. 130).

Colleges are becoming increasingly important in our

society. They may not be the same kinds of organizations

as are business firms, but they are organizations which

have need of managers. Those who manage in college organi-

zations may have titles other than that of managers. They

may be called chairpersons or administrators, but their

function is to perform the management job (32, p. 474).

In reference to this idea, Sprunger stated that

All organizations, whether they be schools, universities, hospitals, government agencies, unions, charitable organizations, or industries, have administrators or managers who are respon-sible for planning, organizing, staffing, leading, controlling and developing (69, p. 4).

Community colleges are organizations which consist of

people as their chief resources. These colleges have

goals, directions, and purposes. Many of the management

concepts to which organizations must commit themselves are

inherent in the community college system (18, 42, 60).

The task of managing in the community college is not a

simple process (6, p. 70). Baldridge said that, "Most

people have a very simplistic notion of how organizations

are managed" (6, p. 69).

Many have recognized the value of the community

college, and some have agreed with Baldridge and the idea

19

that different institutions of higher education have

important differences between them. In fact, a major

shortcoming of most research in college management, leader-

ship, and governance has resulted from a failure to

recognize these differences (6, p. 11).

Various professional organizations have begun to

study the values of management education for college

administrators. For example, the Texas Association of

Junior College Instructional Administrators (70) studied

the question, "What is being done in regard to providing

management training for instructional administrators?

Hull found that there was something lacking in the

preparation of college administrators. He concluded that

"the influence and implications of prior academic background

on academic administration appears to be a highly fruitful

area for research" (31, p. 341). How important are

management functions to the division chairperson? How

frequently does the chairperson engage in management

activities? These were some of the concerns of this study.

The Scope of the Role of Division Chairperson

All organizations need managers. Effective organi-

zations in our society are more important than ever before,

because management decisions have far—reaching effects

(24, p. 5). The modern community/junior college is a

sophisticated institution with multi-directional goals

20

(62, pp. 3-33). The chairperson must function to the

maximum of his potential in these institutions. Is his

managerial preparation and educational background suitable

for this to happen? Can the chairperson work to his

potential under the existing state of management and

administrative knowledge? In which management functions

must division chairpersons engage, and how frequently do

they execute these functions and activities at the present

time?

The role of the division chairperson is the key to the

entire community college mechanism (57, p. 17). This

position is the major spawning ground for higher level

administrators (57, p. 20).

The division chairperson has had to function in a

dynamic growth situation. Management functions such as

planning, organizing, staffing, directing or leading,

and controlling must be engaged in by the division chair-

person (7, 9, 35, 36, 47, 48, 49). The job of the college

administrator is often simple in description, but in

reality the job is difficult to practice effectively

(10, p. 130). The chairperson is not a virtuoso on all

instruments, but he should know enough about all of the

players to become individually proficient (57, p. 21).

The community college could not exist as we know it

today unless administrators work so as to maintain a

21

cooperative climate, while at the same time acquiring

resources and coordinating activities (69, p. 4). In the

abstract, the college administrator will recognize that

he is in service to others, but in the reality of daily

functioning of a college, the prime responsibility of the

administrator may be to handle the minute and multitudinous

details through which others may serve and be served

(22, p. 3). In fact, many new administrators overlook the

importance of handling details, and find that many of the

visions of large accomplishments are not realized because

of ineptness in taking care of details (22, p. 13).

The basic unit of administration in colleges has been

the division or department for more than a century (12,

pp. 88-89). The chairperson, who is the first-level

supervisor/manager in higher education has been viewed as

a key administrator in his college's organization, but a

need exists to more completely delineate the managerial

aspects of the job (12, p. 90). The division chairperson

is working,as so many college administrators do, without

a clearly defined role (69, p. 5). There have been some

descriptors which have been applied to the chairperson.

The division chairman is described as a "man-in-the

middle role" (54, p. 3). Priest added another dimension

to this role by stating that the division chairman is the

direct link between faculty and administration (59, p. 2).

22

A department chairperson is in a pivotal position in

facilitating change (27, p. 55), and of thus being inno-

vative .

Richardson stated that there is virtually no infor-

mation available on department or division chairmen in

junior and community colleges (53, p. 33). The information

which is available seems to indicate that community college

division chairpersons do not have access to an in-house

"grooming" program for leadership roles, and, therefore,

fly into the trials of daily experience, tutored by little

more than intitution and prayer. They become instant

administrators by being suddenly thrust from their

teaching positions into the roles of divisional leadership

(56, p. 16). Almost the only person who has advanced into

academic administration has been the college teacher

(22, p. 1). McKeachie cited himself as an example of this

type of situation. He stated that

My department chairing was done _ad hoc. Problems arose and I tried to solve them. After five years I decided that I needed to try to understand what I was doing . . . read some of the literature in . . . management and leadership . . . (66, p. 115).

Lahti, with the same idea, stated that

. . . the primary source for filling key managerial positions is untrained, upwardly mobile academicians who take their turn in the classroom and then become a part of the higher education establishment. This source of leadership leaves much to be desired and results in administrators who come to their posts as

23

amateurs, lacking management skills and the knowledge of application to management systems. . . . The instructor has accepted a managerial challenge about which he knows and understands very little (41, pp. 34-35).

The division chairperson must have talent in many

areas. He must be able to organize, to evaluate, to size

people up, to lead groups and individuals who are hostile

toward one another, to delegate, to command, and to inspire

his followership by example. He must possess charisma

and be able to live with human frailities, including his

own. He must be able to sell and to buy (60, p. 11). He

should realize that his managerial expertise could possibly

be more abundantly rewarded outside of education.

Concerning this, Priest stated, "I have never known of

anyone who did an intensive study of all professional

opportunities and after weighing them choose education

because it offered the best chance for a big kill econom-

ically" (60, p. 16). Eble summed up some of the ideas

which currently exist by advancing the idea that a teacher

or professor who wants the duties of a chairperson either

does not understand the duties, or should be considered

as a candidate for a full-time administrative post (22,

p. 94). It has also been stated that administration and

scholarship or good teaching are not compatible (22, p. 94)

24

Management Education Is Needed

There is a lack of research on the role of the

division chairman in community colleges (53, p. 33). There

also exists a need to further clarify the community

college chairman's managerial role, according to Smith

(67, 68). Although today's college administrator may

seem to have little in common with overseeing the construc-

tion of the great pyramids or of supervising textile

factory employees in the nineteenth century, many of the

same skills are required—and more (69, p. 4).

In concordance with these ideas, Strecklein stated

that

Higher education can't be run by the seat of the pants, because it's too complicated and has grown to such enormous size. Increases in students and in finances expended makes it more complex and more difficult to understand. Individuals and boards are becoming more concerned about efficient operation and effective operation and effective utilization of resources. Administrators have been forced to adopt manage-ment science techniques to assist them in understanding a multitude of bewildering problems (35, p. 96).

Also, Bittel stated that

All organizations whether they are for profit businesses, not-for-profit corporations, or government, have more in common in terms of management functions than they have differences . . . the basic functions of managing any corporation—planning, organizing, financing, communications, etc.—are common to all organi-zations . . . management in a not-for-profit environment is the most difficult of the three possibilities (10, pp. 778-779).

25

Eble stated that he had located only the two references of

Keane and Anderson, who suggested that higher education

administration might be benefited by increasing the number

of administrators who are trained in business management

(22, p. 91). Dunn advocated that ideas which have been

developed in business research be applied to educational

administration to increase faculty motivation (21, pp.

70-74). Boles did much the same thing (11, pp. 327-330).

Cohen (62) stated that administrators of colleges

will and should be concerned, not with structure, but with

the participatory processes of interrelationships. These

ideas may not be pleasant to bureaucrats who want clearly

defined power-authority-responsibility relationships.

Administrators should concern themselves with coordination

of services, establishing effective liaison with the

community, and keeping internal and external communications

lines open and free. They will then be leaders of

projects to accomplish organizational goals (13, p. 38).

Bibbers (9) found that the widely accepted business

functions of planning, organizing, staffing, directing,

and controlling were found to be common to management in

both business and higher education. The small colleges

studied were not using these management functions at a

level of effectiveness comparable to that of selected

companies. He concluded that administrators in higher

26

education show special weakness in areas of financial and

physical planning; selecting, training, and appraising of

management personnel; financial standards and control; and

management development and training programs.

Mauer stated that qualifications such as leadership

preparation and the attainment of technical skills which

are indispensable to management are missing in many of the

administrators in higher education. He further stated that

training in the profession is relatively new, and that

there are also relatively few advanced programs in the

fields, especially for those at the lower levels of the

hierarchy (46, pp. 8-9).

Bender and Richardson stated that "efforts of the

scholars to identify proper management education to

administrators has been diffuse and speculative, offering

little in the way of direction to practicing administrators"

(8, p. 26). Bender advocated that educational admin-

istrators can benefit from the study of management.

Bender quoted the American Management Association as

stating that

Management is guiding human and physical resources into dynamic organization units that attain their objectives to the satisfaction of those served and with a high degree of morale and sense of attainment on the part of those rendering the service (8, p. 18, 24).

Organizational growth versus managerial behavior is

influenced by various factors. Initiative, vision,

27

determined leadership, and managerial styles come with

the growth of an executive in an organization. Delegation

of responsibility for tasks, delegation of authority to

perform the job, planning, controls, enlightened leader-

ship, evaluation, goals such as management by objectives,

and problem analysis and conflict resolutions are things

which, if successfully mastered, tend to make the leader

successful (30; 41, p. 37). Conversely, if the manager/

administrator has no controls, no management development,

if he manages by crisis, does not develop subordinates,

fails to develop team work, has high turnover, and fails

to delegate decision-making responsibility, then the

manager/administrator begins to decline (41, p. 37).

Community college administrators are a part of the

higher education institution. As such, these adminis-

trators share in some of the perplexities which exist in

the search for what constitutes the proper preparation

of college administrators generally (5, 6, 19, 20, 45).

Anderson (4) believed that there is a dearth of adequate

knowledge concerning just what an effective theory of

administration should embrace. Anderson made the state-

ment that "I do not believe that there is a universal

theory of administration in higher education that holds

water" (4, pp. 19-20).

28

What kinds of management education should adminis-

trators have in order to be effective? Much of the

management education for all administrators is accomplished

by the use of workshops, internships, and conferences.

These are useful but nevertheless insufficient as a means

toward meeting the critical need for developing adminis-

trators. The major means of preparing education

administrators for their complex duties are experience

and in-service work (46, p. 9). Wattenbarger stated that

the historic assumption that management of business or

industrial enterprises could not be related to the

administration of an educational institution was now being

questioned or totally rejected (8, p. 3).

Does the department chairperson in today's multi-

purpose community or junior college function effectively?

The department chairperson is part assistant dean of

instruction, assistant dean of students, assistant dean of

administration, and the chief executive officer of his

segment of the college (37, p. 11).

Hammons and Wallace found in their research that

chairpersons in community colleges in the United States

cite several of their needs as being the development of

expertise in management skills, personnel, and administra-

tive skills (27, p. 59). They further identified the

needed managerial education as being in the areas of

29

motivation, skills for effecting change, techniques of time

management, goal-setting, planning, programming, budgeting,

conflict discovery and resolution, and communications

(27, p. 60) .

The application of management skills is difficult in

the community college because of the diffusion of authority

and the creative nature of the educational and the research

tasks of the institution. The answer, according to Corson,

is to adapt management techniques to the particular

character and the climate to the institution of education

(14, pp. 146-147).

Voices of Opposition to Management Education for College Administrators

Not everyone believes that management education is

what is needed, or for that matter, even desirable. Bailey

was quoted as stating "surely the ultimate philistinism

of our culture would be to impose management science upon

the educational process" (14, p. 145). To echo this

sentiment, Weathersby said that

Harried college administrators are, like the Israelites in the wilderness, looking to the tools of modern management to part the seas of red ink that stain their ledgers, hold back the cataclysmic social tides sweeping their campuses, and deliver them safely to the promised land. Unfortunately, by themselves, the tools of modern management . . . are hollow forms and faint facades of vicarious leadership (33, pp. 3-4) .

30

Descriptions of Management Functions

As various persons have identified which qualities,

characteristics, and functions should exist in the role of

the division chairperson, there are many ideas and terms

which have evolved. In identifying the functions of

management, the classical management school of thought

lists planning, organizing, staffing, directing and leading,

and controlling (38; 39, pp. 71-73). Harbison and Myers

added innovating to the list (7, p. 6). Beach also listed

communicating as one of the functions (7, p. 6).

Miller described the work of the division chairperson

as consisting of the administration of the total instruc-

tional programs of all departments within the division,

and in planning, organizing, supervising, and administra-

ting. Other aspects of his job include leading, evaluating,

scheduling, and a host of other activities (47, pp. 30-31).

He further stated that one of the purposes of supervision

is to create team work and cooperation between staff

members (47, p. 97). Miller listed the management functions

for all educational administrators as being planning,

programming, personneling, and financing (50, pp. 4-5).

Miller stated that planning is intelligent preparation

for action, and that as such, it includes the anticipation

of problems, conflicts, and unnecessary wastes of energy.

It focuses priority on decisions which help to prevent

31

attempting to accomplish too much, and to guard against not

accomplishing enough (49, p. 3). The amount of time spent

on planning varies with the level of the organization

members, but planning is important to all levels (64,

p. 13). Miller stressed time management as part of the

educational leader's planning process (47, pp. 211-219).

Planning is inseparable from management (29, p. 449). In

describing the staffing process, Miller stated that

orientation is often overlooked, but is the act which

completes the staffing process (48, p. 83).

Organizing is concerned with answering the questions

concerning who, in which environment, and with how much

authority (64, p. 13). Miller stated that the educational

administrator must be able to demonstrate his organi-

zational ability by getting people and things together

where the action will occur (47, p. 123).

Directing is used in this study as being comprised

of several concepts. One of these concepts is leadership,

a subject that probably has had more written about it

than any other single topic (43, p. 46). Priest stated

that this is an extremely important area, and that we must

recruit and retain top quality faculty who can be effec-

tive leaders (58, p. 11). Adams defined leadership as

involving attempts by a person to influence the behavior

of followers to affect the outcomes of their behavior.

32

Leadership consists of leading, coordinating, and directing

the work of others (3, p. 53).

In order to be effective, a manager must be able to

integrate the needs and desires of the worker with the

best interests and goals of the organization by balancing

individual motivation and group efficiency (64, p. 14).

Leadership is earned by a demonstrated capacity to work

effectively with people (48, p. 5). Miller stated that the

administrator is continually attempting to develop a "we"

feeling (48, p. 18). Applying these components of leader-

ship to the community college, Priest stated that the

chairman has to understand individual differences and

needs to be able to stimulate, to motivate, to inspire

and to command respect by honesty, sincerity, and consis-

tency (57, p. 20).

Priest stated that a leader must know his own

strengths and weaknesses (59, p. 3) and must develop

professional competencies so that he can recognize the

limitations in others without violating their human

dignity (61, p. 12). The leadership role is different

for chairpersons in the urban community college than for

smaller colleges, for the demands of contemporary urban

America are uniquely complex, acute, and dynamic (58,

p. 10).

33

Concerning control, Priest stated that, " . . . one

should be amazed that anything is ever accomplished when

you list the multiple sources from which control emanates"

(61, p. 11). Control, to be effective, must be able to

generate change (64, p. 15).

Larsen (42) reported sixteen management components

which existed in the business management areas which he

surveyed. These management components were policies;

creative thinking; decision-making; reference groups;

departmentalization; delegation of authority; assigning

work; providing work place; orders, instruction, and rules;

standards; reports and records; budgeting; cost; leadership;

communication; and supervision.

Larsen1s (42) findings cited the following seven

components as being affected by level of management:

policies; reference groups; assigning work; orders,

instructions, and rules; reports and records; budgeting;

and cost. Further, Larsen found that five of the

concepts have high priority for all levels of management.

These five are decision-making; orders, instructions, and

rules; leadership; communication; and supervision.

Management Functions and Higher Level Administrators

Because presidents ultimately arrive at their jobs

by way of the departmental chair, it is useful to note some

34

of their needs in the managerial area. Harper (28)

stated that a college president must have managerial

leadership to encourage, to inspire, and to direct others

(28, p. 1). Further, the president must be an effective

manager, particularly of people. He must know the insti-

tution by understanding its objectives, purposes, and

programs; must make decisions, and delegate authority;

and be able to effectively listen, sympathize, encourage,

inspire, and know when to be firm (28, p. 11).

Morgan (52) made a national survey of community

college presidents over a three-year period, and concluded

that among the five most important ingredients for success

as a college president, were human relations skills and

personal leadership ability. The sources of greatest

difficulty to the presidents were

1. Faculty recruitment, militancy, and dissention

among faculty;

2. Lack of human relations skills;

3. Fund raising, finances, and budget;

4. Lack of administrative skill, training, or

experience; and

5. Poor board or poor board relations.

Management literature reflects that certain management

techniques are singled out to be communicated by various

methods to college administrators, usually college deans

35

and presidents. Examples are management by objectives

(14; 41, pp. 52-80), equal employment and affirmative

action plans (34), laws relating to hiring and firing (12,

14), performance evaluation (26, 34), motivation (8, 34),

professional development (1, 2, 15, 51, 56, 63, 72), and

competencies of functions of chairmen (54, 56).

College administrators usually do not think highly

enough about their roles, and they usually do not receive

sufficient credit when they do administer well (22, p. vii)

Accountability is often apparent when the administrator

does not serve well. Members of the business community

often describe the contemporary college or university as

a multi-million dollar service industry that is poorly

managed by a cadre of amateurs, because the administrators

have rarely been trained for the role of management (69,

p. 6). As an example, in May, 1980, the president of

Wayne County Community College was fired because a state

audit said that the college was mismanaged (17).

Descriptions of Five Management Functions as Applied to the Division Chairperson's Role

The five management functions which were used for

this study were planning, organizing, staffing, leading or

directing, and controlling. Descriptions of these func-

tions are best related by identifying the activities

which comprise each function. The following descriptions

36

reflect the specific types of activities which were

included in each management function for the purposes of

this study.

Planning Function

The planning function involves the determination of

what work must be done. In order to accomplish this,

certain activities are included. Such activities as

defining missions and roles of the college, forecasting

future events, establishing organizational and individual

objectives, programming events, scheduling time require-

ments for people and events, budgeting resources, making

policy, and establishing procedures comprise the function

of planning.

Organizing Function

This function is that one which classifies the work

to be done, and then divides the work into manageable

units. This function includes all activities which relate

to formulating the organizational structure necessary to

accomplish organizational goals. The activity of inte-

grating related matters and tasks into the structure so

that cooperative and productive teamwork occurs, is also

included in this management function.

37

Staffing Function

The staffing function is accomplished by determining

the requirements for the personnel to perform the work which

is to be done. This includes ensuring the availability

of personnel to perform the work. To accomplish these

goals, the function would include the activities of

determining personnel needs, selecting personnel, and

developing personnel.

Leading or Directing Function

Leading or directing was used to mean the management

function which brings about the human behavior and activity

which i® required to accomplish organizational objectives.

To accomplish these ends, the activities of assigning

tasks, motivating personnel, communicating with personnel,

and coordinating activities must be done.

Controlling Function

Controlling was defined to mean that effective

accomplishment of organizational objectives was assured.

In order to perform this function, standards must be

established, performance must be measured, and corrective

action must be taken where it is appropriate.

The study used the above definitions. A more

detailed explanation of these functions and activities is

contained in Chapter III of the study.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Adams, Dewey A., "Internship in Administration," Open Door, V (Spring, 1969), 6-20.

2. , The Internship—An Innovative Approach to Providing Continuing Leadership for North Carolina's' Community Colleges, Washington, Adult Education Association of the U.S.A., 1967.

3. Adams, Sexton, Personnel Management: A Program of Self-Instruction, Columbus, Grid, Inc., 1972.

4. Anderson, Duane, The Extra-Institutional Obligations of the Community College Administrator, Proceedings of the Colorado University—Boulder Higher Education Center, Boulder, 1968.

5. Anderson, William M., "Characteristics, Preparation, and Attitudes of Selected Public Junior-Community College Deans of Instruction," summary of Ph.D. dissertation, Carbondale, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 1973.

6. Baldridge, J. Victor, David V. Curtis, George Ecker, and Gary L. Riley, Policy Making and Effective Leadership, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1978.

7. Beach, Dale S., Personnel: The Management of People at Work. London, MacMillan Co., 1970.

8. Bender, Louis W. and Richard C. Richardson, Jr., Management Concepts and Higher Education Administration, Tallahassee, Management Institute, Center for State and Regional Leadership, 1972.

9. Bibbers, Donald S., "A Study of Management Functions Common to the Administration of Commercial Businesses and Institutions of Higher Education," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1967.

10. Bittel, Lester Robert, editor-in-chief, Encyclopedia of Professional Management, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1978:

38

39

11. Boles, Harold W. and James A. Davenport, Introduction to Educational Leadership, New York, Harper and Row Publishers, 1975.

12. Clampitt, Joyce, Legal Implications of Personnel Management, Proceedings of the Annual Summer Workshop, Tallahassee, Southeastern Community College Leadership Program, 19 73.

13. Cohen, Arthur M., Dateline '79: Heretical Concepts for the Community College, California, Glencoe Press, 1969.

14. Corson, John J., The Governance of Colleges and Universities, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1975.

15. Collins, Charles C., and Chester H. Case, "The On-Site Programmatic Approach to Staff Development," Paper presented at the Conference on Graduate Education and the Community Colleges, Warrenton, 1974.

16. Comprehensive Dissertation Index 1861-1972, 22, Education I - 0, Ann Arbor, Xerox University Microfilms, 1973.

17. Dallas Morning News, May 30, 1980.

18. Dalton, Gene W. and Paul R. Lawrence, editors, and Lorsch, Jay W., collaborator, 0rganizationa1 Structure and Design, Illinois, Richard D. Irwin, Inc., and the Dorsey Press, 1970.

19. Dean, C. Thomas, and Norman R. Stanger, "The Preparation of Administrators for Post-Secondary Vocational Education: New Perspectives," Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, XI (Winter, 1974), 65-71.

20. Dissertation Abstracts I - A, Humanities and Social Science, Index, 33A, No. 12, Part 2, 1972/73.

21. Dunn, Rita and Kenneth J. Dunn, Administrator's Guide to New Programs for Faculty Management and Evaluation^ West Nyack, New York, Parker Publishing Company, Inc., 1977.

22. Eble, Kenneth E., The Art of Administration. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1978.

40

23. Fields, Ralph R., The Community College Movement, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962.

24. Gibson, James L. and others, Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes, Dallas, Business Publications, Inc., 1976.

25. Goldberg, Ignacy I. and Leopold Lippman, "Plato Had a Word for It," Exceptional Children, XL (February, 1974), 326ff.

26. Goodner, Jack, "A Check List for Top Administrators," College Management, IX (1974), 24-25, 28.

27. Hammons, James O. and Terry H. Smith Wallace, "Staff Development Needs of Public Community College Department/Division Chairpersons," Community/Junior College Research Quarterly, II (1977), 55-T6T

28. Harper, William A., Like It Is: A Report of A Workshop for New Junior College Presidents and Their Wives, Los Angeles, University of California at Los Angeles, Junior College Leadership Program, 1968.

29. Hentschke, Guilbert C., Management Operations in Education, Berkeley, McCutchan Publishing Corporation, 19 75.

30. Hughes, Charles L., Goal Setting; Key to Individual and Organizational Effectiveness, New York, American Management Association, 1965.

31. Hull, Don M., "A Construct of Organization for Higher Education," unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Texas State University, Denton, Texas, 1974.

32. Ivancevich, John M., James H. Donnelly, Jr., and James L. Gibson, Managing for Performance, Dallas, Business Publications, Inc., 1980.

33. Jellema, William W., Efficient College Management, London, Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1972.

34. Kintzer, Frederick C., Summer Workshop for New Community Junior College Presidents and Wives, Los Angeles, Graduate School of Education, University of California at Los Angeles, 1973.

41

35. Knowles, Asa S., editor-in-chief, Handbook of College and University Administration: Academic, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970.

36. , editor-in-chief, Handbook of College and University Administration; General, New York McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970.

37. Koehnline, William A. and Clyde E. Blocker, "The Division Chairman in the Community College," Junior College Journal V (February, 1970), 11.

38. Koontz, Harold and Cyril O'Donnell, editors, Management: A Book ojf Readings, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1972.

39. , Management: A Systems and Contingency Analysis of Managerial Functions, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1976.

40. Koos, Leonard V. , The Junior-College Movement, Connecticut, Greenwood Press, 1970.

41. Lahti, Robert E., Innovative College Management, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973.

42. Larsen, Edward D., "A Study of the Uses of Management Functions and the Implications for Management Training," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, 1966.

43. Luthans, Fred, Contemporary Readings in Organizational Behavior, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 19 77.

44. Malik, Joseph A. and Thomas M. Shay, Workshop in Community College Administration, Proceedings of The Colorado University-Boulder Higher Education Center, Boulder, Colorado, 1968.

45. Matthews, Elizabeth W., "Characteristics and Academic Preparation of Directors of Library-Learning Resource Centers in Selected Community Junior Colleges (Summary Report)," summary of Ph.D. dissertation, Carbondale, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 19 72.

46. Mauer, George J., Crises in Campus Management: Case Studies in the Administration of Colleges and Universities, New York, Praeger Publishers, 1976.

42

47. Miller, Bob W., Higher Education and the Community College, Washington, University Press of America, 1977.

48. Miller, William A., Faculty Personnel Administration in Higher Education: A Systems Approach, Denton, Texas, North Texas State University Printing Office, undated.

49. Miller, William A., Jr., Educational Planning and Program Management, Denton, Texas, North Texas State Press, 1975.

50. , Humanistic-Governance Management in Educational Administration, Denton, North Texas State University Press, 1975.

51. Moore, Dan W., "Internship as a Way of Life," Open Door, V (Spring, 1969), 14-20.

52. Morgan, Don A., Implications for the Junior College Leadership Training Program Drawn from a Continuing Study of the Two Year College President, Los Angeles, University of California at Los Angeles, 1968.

53. 01 Grady, James Jr., "The Role of the Department Chairman," Junior College Journal (February, 1971), 33-36.

54. Ott, Eleanor, editor, Role of Division Chairmen, Dallas, Texas, Dallas County Community College District, 1976.

55. Palinchak, Robert, The Evolution of the Community College, New Jersey, The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1973.

56. Petty, Gary F., "A Practical Look at Management Personnel Development," Community and Junior College Journal, XLV (August, 1974), 16-18.

57. Priest, Bill. "The Division Chairman in the Multi-Campus Community College," paper presented at the Community/Junior College conference on "Role of the Department/Division Chairman in the Community College," Huntsville, Sam Houston State University, 1972.

43

58. Priest, Bill J., "Leadership for the New Urban Community College," unpublished address, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, Texas, 1977.

59_ , "Leadership Roles in the Multi-Campus District," unpublished notes, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, Texas, 1977.

50. , "Responsibilities and Rewards of Academic Administration," unpublished address, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, Texas, 1977.

61. , "The Decision-Making Process and the Administration of Higher Education," unpublished address, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, Texas, 1977.

62. Richardson, Richard C., Jr., Clyde E. Blocker, and Louis W. Bender, Governance for the Two-Year College, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972.

63. Roaden, Arliss L., "The College Deanship: A New Middle Management in Higher Education," Theory into Practice, IX (October, 1970), 272-276.

64. Sartain, Aaron Q. and Alton W. Baker, The Supervisor and His Job, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1972:

65. Sexton, William P., editor, Organization Theories, Ohio, Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1970.

66. Smart, John C., and James R. Montgomery, issue editors, Examining Departmental Management, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1976.

67. Smith, Albert B., First Level Management of the Community College, Proceedings of the Annual Summer Workshop, Tallahassee, Southeastern Community College Leadership Program.

68. , "Role Expectations for and Obser-vations of Community College Department Chairmen: An Organizational Study of Consensus and Conformity," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Lansing, Michigan, 1970.

44

69. Sprunger, Benjamin E. and William H. Bergquist, Handbook for College Administration, Council for the Advancement of Small Colleges, Washington, D.C., Gary H. Quehl, General Editor, 1978.

70. Texas Association of Junior College Instructional Administrators, Membership Rating, Research Committee, June, 1975.

71. "The Men Who Gave Us Our Schools," The Book of Knowledge, Vol. XIV, New York, Grolier Society, Inc., 1956.

72. Zion, Carol and Connie Sutton, "Integrated Inservice Development," Mew Directions for Community Colleges, I (Spring, 1973), 41-50.

CHAPTER III

PROCEDURE FOR COLLECTION AND

ANALYSIS OF DATA

The problem of this study was to identify and

examine selected management functions in the role of

division chairpersons in multi-campus community colleges.

This chapter provides an explanation of the procedures

which were used to achieve the purposes of the study.

Procedure for Collection of Data

Design of the Study

This study involved two community college systems.

One system was the Tarrant County Junior College; the

other system was the Dallas County Community College

District.

Each college president, the dean or vice-president of

instruction, and all division chairpersons in both

districts were the subjects of the study. Each of the

persons in these positions received a survey instrument

and were asked to respond to the instrument in detail.

Permission to Conduct Research

Both community college districts required that the

intended research be approved by the college presidents,

45

46

the vice—chancelloirs, and. the chancellor's. Letters weire

written to receive this permission to conduct the research.

Approval from the DCCCD.—In the Dallas County

Community College District, permission was requested by

letter through the president of Eastfield College. The

president was advised of the appropriateness of the

research, the description of the research, and that the

college and the district could benefit from the research

in applying the results of the study to in-service programs

and to college management course offerings for division

chairpersons. A copy of the letter appears as Appendix A.

The president of Eastfield College met with the

presidents' council and discussed the proposal with all of

the presidents and the vice-chancellor of academic affairs

in the district. All agreed to recommend that the research

be approved. The chancellor then approved the research.

One vice—president of instruction was unwilling to ask

the division chairpersons of his individual campus to

participate. A personal visit was made to him, and after

his support was asked for and the research again explained,

he did ask the chairpersons to participate.

Approval from the TCJC.—Permission to conduct the

research in the TCJC was obtained differently. The

division chairperson who was asked to validate the survey

47

instrument advised that TCJC approval for the research

would have to be approved through their district office,

by way of their director of research.

A letter was sent to the TCJC director of research

explaining the purpose for the research. A copy of the

letter is included as Appendix B. Memorandums were written

from the TCJC director of research to the college presi-

dents, announcing that the project was approved but that

each of the presidents might wish to determine the extent

and/or manner to which their campus people would become

involved.

Each college president was then contacted personally.

Permission to conduct the research was obtained from each

one of them individually.

The Survey Instrument

The instrument, which was used for data gathering,

had two sections. Section one was used to gather demo-

graphic data. Section two was used to gather information

concerning 158 management activities which were engaged in

by division chairpersons.

In section one, all participants were asked to

identify the name of their college or campus, and their

present position. Division chairpersons only were asked

to denote the length of time which they had served in

their present positions. They were also asked for the

48

amounts of formal management which they possessed.

Educational management experience other than in the present

position, and management experience in non-educational

organizations were the other areas to which division

chairpersons were asked to respond.

Section two of the instrument contained a list of

management activities which had been developed for the

study. The activities were subdivided into the classifi-

cations of planning, organizing, staffing, directing or

leading, and controlling. The definitions of these five

functions are contained in the next subheading of this

chapter. Each activity could be responded to two times.

One response was relative to the issue of the importance

of the activity in adequately filling the role of division

chairperson. The second response was relative to the

issue of the frequency in which division chairpersons

engaged in the performance of the activity. Likert scales

were utilized for participants to mark both of their

responses to each of the management activities.

Development of the Survey Instrument

The instrument was developed by utilizing Morrisey's

(4) definitions of five management functions and twenty

management activities as an information base. In order to

develop a list of activities and to classify them as

management or non—management activities, three division

49

chairpersons were personally asked if they would partici

pate in the identification and development of the management

activities in which division chairpersons engaged. Two

of these three chairpersons were selected because they

possessed an experiential base in educational management.

The other chairperson had an experiential base in

business management. All three chairpersons were knowl-

edgeable concerning formal management education. One

division chairperson had completed over three years of

service in that position at the Tarrant County Junior

College, and one chairperson with over three years

experience was selected from the Dallas County Community

College District. One newly-appointed chairperson with

less than one year of service and who was employed with a

recently-opened college in the DCCCD was also selected.

These criteria were applied in the selection of the three

chairpersons in order to receive input from divergent

views and from both community college districts. These

experienced and inexperienced division chairpersons parti-

cipated in the development of the survey instrument by

supplying the original lists of activities which are

undertaken by division chairpersons.

The three division chairpersons were given copies of

their job descriptions, which delineated certain activities

and/or responsibilities. Each one also received a

50

description of Morrisey's definitions of management

functions and activities as outlined in this section.

They were asked to develop their own list of management

activities which related to their roles. They were asked

to classify each one of the activities which they

identified as being one of the five management functions

of planning, organizing, staffing, directing or leading,

and controlling. If any one of the activities could not

be classified into either one of the five management

functions, it was to be deleted from the list of activities.

Morrisey's definitions were to be used by the chairpersons

in arriving at their decisions. After the activities had

been identified as management activities and had been

classified as being one of the management functions, the

results were compiled into an instrument which was then

validated by the panel of experts.

The Management Model

The following model of management functions as outlined

by Morrisey (4, pp. 6—8) was used as the theoretical basis

of the study. The model delineates the five functions of

management: planning, organizing, staffing, directing or

leading, and controlling. There are twenty activities which

define the management functions in more detail. The model

which was used reflected ideas concerning management

functions which were reported in the literature to be

51

necessary to adequately fulfill the role of division

chairperson in community colleges.

Function one—Function one is planning, determining

what work must be done.

1. Defining roles and missions. Determining the

nature and scope of the work to be performed.

2. Forecasting. Estimating the future.

3. Setting objectives. Determining results to be

achieved.

4. Programming. Establishing a plan of action to

follow in reaching objectives.

5. Scheduling. Establishing time requirements for

objectives and programs.

6. Budgeting. Determining and assigning the resources

required to reach objectives.

7. Policy-making. Establishing rules, regulations,

or predetermined decisions.

8. Establishing procedures. Determining consistent

and systematic methods of handling work (4, p. 7).

Function two.—Function two is organizing, or

classifying and dividing the work into manageable units.

9. Structuring. Grouping the work for effective and

efficient production.

52

10. Integrating. Establishing conditions for

effective teamwork among organizational units (4, p. 7).

Function three.—Function three is staffing, or

determining the requirements for and ensuring the avail-

ability of personnel to perform the work.

11. Determining personnel needs. Analyzing the work

for personnel capabilities required.

12. Selecting personnel. Identifying and appointing

people to organizational positions.

13. Developing personnel. Providing opportunities

for people to increase their capabilities in line with

organizational needs (4, pp. 7-8).

Function four.—Function four is directing or leading.

This involves bringing about the human activity required

to accomplish objectives.

14. Assigning. Charging individual employees with

job responsibilities or specific tasks to be performed.

15. Motivating. Influencing people to perform in a

desired manner.

16. Communicating. Achieving effective flow of ideas

and information in all desired directions.

17. Coordinating. Achieving harmony of group effort

toward the accomplishment of individual and group objec-

tives (4, p. 8) .

53

Function five.—Function five is controlling or

assuring the effective accomplishment of objectives.

18. Establishing standards. Devising a gauge of

successful performance in achieving objectives.

19. Measuring performance. Assessing actual versus

planned performance.

20. Taking corrective action. Bringing about

performance improvement toward objectives (4, p. 8).

Validation of the Survey Instrument

Validation process.—The survey instrument was

validated for completeness and clarity by a panel of eleven

experts. Ten of the experts were selected because of

their knowledge concerning management functions and because

of their experience in management, administrative, and

leadership positions in community colleges. In addition

to these qualifications, one of the ten was also a director

of community college programs in a university and was a

professor of community college and higher education

administration. The eleventh panel member was selected

because of his experiential base in management. He was

also a professor of business management in a major

university.

In order to ensure a divergent population and at the

same time a balanced population, care was taken to select

qualified representatives from both the TCJC and the DCCCD.

54

At the college or campus level, panel members were selected

from different campuses. The chancellor, the vice-

chancellor, a college president, a college vice-president

of instruction, and a division chairperson were selected

from the DCCCD. From the TCJC, the participants were the

chancellor, a college president, a college academic dean,

and a division chairperson. Additionally, a university

professor of community college administration and a

professor of business administration were included in the

panel of experts. The participants in the development and

validation of the instrument came from the district office

of the DCCCD, the chancellor's office of the TCJC, five

colleges in the DCCCD, three colleges in the TCJC, and

from two colleges at a major university.

The panel members were asked to validate the question-

naire for completeness by deleting any of the activities

which were not appropriate, by adding any activities

which may have been left out, and by reclassifying any of

the activities which were considered to be incorrectly

classified. The panel members were also asked to examine

and to validate the questionnaire and the accompanying

instructions for clarity and for convenience in admin-

istration. They received a letter and instruction as to

their assignment. The letter is included as Appendix C.

55

The written instructions to the validation panel

contained the original list of 245 management activities

which were developed by the three division chairpersons.

The original list of management functions is presented as

Appendix D. Table I shows the number of activities which

were listed, by management function, in the first list

and in the revised list. The revised list contained 158

activities.

TABLE I

NUMBER OF MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES LISTED BY MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS

Function Original List* Revised List**

Planning 59 35

Organizing 22 12

Staffing 36 22

Directing or Leading 96 59

Controlling 32 30

Total 245 158

*Developed by three division chairpersons.

**Developed from suggestions by validation panel.

On a pre-determined date, each panel member's office

was personally visited, and nine of the completed results

of the validation process were collected. Arrangements

56

were made to return later for the results of the two members

who had not completed the process. Ultimately, all eleven

members of the validation panel completed their assign-

ments.

Revision of the Survey Instrument.—After all of the

eleven members of the validation panel had completed their

assignments, their comments were examined. The results of

their classifications of the management activities were

compiled and analyzed. Counsel was sought from English

instructors in order to be certain that the completed

document would be written according to proper rules of

syntax and grammar. The instrument was then revised,

printed, and distributed to the intended population.

Comments from the validation panel members which were

related to anticipated difficulty with the survey

instrument are as follows:

1. Could the meetings be grouped?

2. I think you've got a problem, to wit: Your

breakdown of functions involves such detail that much of

it seems to be minutiae which could properly be grouped in

larger generic segments.

3. Directing, leading, controlling, and organizing

overlap too much.

4. I got lost in the detail.

57

5. It is difficult to distinguish between "planning"

and "organizing" in practice.

6. Directing and leading per force includes elements

of other management functions. A distinctive key ought

to be whether human activity/interaction is required (?).

7. Some meetings are not specific enough.

8. Functions overlap, and some depend on the amount

of delegation.

9. What will it mean when you have collected your

data and have identified these activities?

10. It's impossible to list all of the committee

meetings.

The positive statements were as follows.

1. Promises to be an interesting study. Thanks

for the opportunity of participating on validation panel.

2. This format looks good.

3. Good luck on your research and/or dissertation.

The questionnaire's section one was revised in the

following ways. "Management Education" was changed to

"Formal Management Education." The category of "Management

Experience Other than in Present Position" was divided

into two categories: "Educational Management Experience

Other Than in Present Position," and "Management Experience

in Non-Educational Organization." To the category of

58

"Name of College" was added the word "Campus." The

category of "Position" was changed to read "Present

Position."

The instructions which were a part of the question-

naire's section two were simplified for clarity. Regarding

the activities, the suggestions of the panelists were

heeded. The meetings were grouped wherever possible.

Activities were deleted if four panelists dissented.

Several activities were grouped into larger generic

segments. There were eighty-seven fewer activities after

these actions were taken.

Two college English instructors were consulted for

guidance in rewriting the instructions and the statements

concerning each activity. As a result of their guidance,

each of the activities were written with a verb as the

first word, so that each one of the activities would be

parallel to all of the other activities. Their suggestions

enabled the recommendations of the validation panel to be

incorporated into the entire survey instrument, thus

ensuring a clear, readable, easily understandable document.

Final Form of the Survey Instrument

After the major professor was consulted for direc-

tions and advice, the final form of the survey instrument

was prepared. It was in the form of a booklet which was

prepared from printing on both sides of five, eight and

59

one-half by eleven inch pieces of paper, which were then

folded once and stapled on the fold. The booklet, when

closed, measured five and one-half by eight and one-half

inches. Each page of the booklet had been originally

typed on a regular eight and one-half by eleven inch piece

of paper, and then reduced to one-half size. Since each

page of the booklet was reduced to one-half size, the

planning process had included making provisions for the

spaces between the brackets in section one, and the spaces

between the numbers in section two to be sufficiently

large on the original paper so that respondents would have

ample room to respond after the pages were reduced in

size.

Population and Sample

The targeted population consisted of all college or

campus presidents, deans, and division chairpersons in

the TCJC and the DCCCD. The DCCCD had seven colleges,

each with a president and a vice-president of instruction.

The number of division chairpersons ranged from three to

nine at the various colleges. There were a total of

forty-six chairpersons. There were a total of sixty

administrators in the DCCCD who were included in the

population for this study. The TCJC had three campuses,

each with a president and a dean of instruction. There

were from two to five division chairpersons on the various

60

campuses, for a total of eleven division chairpersons on

the three campuses. The total number of administrators

in that college,which were included in this study, were

seventeen. The total target population of this study

was seventy-seven.

Seventy-seven survey instruments were distributed.

With each one of the instruments, an extra page,which

contained the instructions to section two of the instrument,

was included so that respondents would have convenient

and continuous access to the instructions which governed

their responses. The survey instrument is included as

Appendix E.

A letter was mailed or delivered personally to each of

the ten presidents. A copy of the letter appears as

Appendix F. The letter asked them to complete the

accompanying questionnaire and to return it in an enclosed

self-addressed, postage-free return envelope. In every

case, each president completed the survey instrument.

The deans of instruction were contacted personally

by a visit to his/her office or by telephone. Appointments

were made in order for sufficient quantities of the survey

instruments to be delivered personally to the offices of

the deans. Each dean was requested to complete the survey

instrument and at the same time to allow the division

chairperson to complete it.

61

In seven of the colleges, the survey instrument was

administered in a collective setting. In the other three

locations, the dean preferred to explain the purpose of the

research to the division chairpersons, to issue one of the

survey instruments to each of the division chairpersons,

to have them complete the instruments at their convenience,

and then return them. A number of these survey instru-

ments were returned directly and several were routed back

through the dean's office.

The goal of the study was a ninety per cent completion

rate. At least seventy completed survey instruments

would have been needed to reach that goal.

Seventy-two respondents completed and returned survey

instruments. This resulted in a 93.5 per cent rate of

completion from the total population. All of the ten

presidents, or 100 per cent of the population sample,

completed the instrument. Fifty-two out of a possible

fifty-seven division chairpersons, or 91 per cent of the

population sample, completed the instrument. All of the

ten deans, or 100 per cent of the population sample,

completed the instrument.

Four of the division chairpersons who did not complete

the instrument were in the DCCCD, and one was in the TCJC.

The chairpersons who did not participate were located in

four different colleges.

62

Procedure for Analyses of the Data

Planning Stage

To accomplish the desired analyses, a computer program

was written which allowed the data taken from the survey

instruments to be processed. It was determined that

three work spaces allocations and five files allocations

would be needed. An APL account number was requested. The

data from each one of the seventy-two survey instruments

were transferred by hand onto ten Scan-Tron Form 2 052

sheets. Only the part 1 side was used. Seven-hundred

twenty forms in all were hand coded.

The I. D. Section of the Scan-Tron Forms

The respondents were identified by numbers from 01

through 72. Each respondent's number was recorded on

line one and line two of the X. D. number section on each

one of the Scan-Tron forms, which were used to record infor-

mation on each respondent.

The third line on each of the ten forms was used to

record each respondent's ten card numbers so that the

data could be correctly identified and arranged. Table

II reflects the card numbers and the numbers which were

used to specifically identify each card number. Lines

one, two, and three were completed on all of the Scan-

Tron forms. Only the cards number 0, the first card for

63

each respondent, received any other entries in the I. D.

Sections.

TABLE II

CARD NUMBER RECORDED ON THIRD LINE OF SCAN-TRON FORM

Card Number for Each Number Used on Third Line

Respondent of Each Scan-Tron Form

1 0

2 1

3 2

4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • 3

5 4

6 5

7 6

8 7

9 8

10 9

Each college was identified by a number, as indicated

in Table III. To reflect the college name, its number was

recorded on line four of the Scan-Tron form.

Line five was used to reflect the respondent's present

position. Presidents were identified by the number 1,

deans by the number 2, and division chairpersons by the

number 3. Table IV summarizes the information which was

recorded on the first five lines of the Scan-Tron I. D.

section.

64

TABLE III

COLLEGE LOCATION

Name of College/Campus Number

North East 0

North West 1

South 2

Brookhaven 3

Cedar Valley 4

Eastfield 5

El Centro 6

Mountain View 7

North Lake 8

Richland 9

TABLE IV

INFORMATION RECORDED ON FIRST FIVE LINES OF SCAN-TRON I. D. SECTION

Line Number in

I. D. Section Information Recorded

1 First digit of respondent's number

2 Second digit of respondent's number

3 Respondent's card number

4 Location (name) of college/campus

5 Present position

Lines six through nine were used for recording infor-

mation concerning division chairpersons only. Responses

65

by division chairpersons to questions three through six

in section one of the survey instrument were identified

by the numbers 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4, according to the rank

position of the responses, starting with the top as 0.

Line ten of the form was not used. Table V is a reference

to all of the information which was recorded on each line

of the Scan-Tron Form.

TABLE V

INFORMATION CONCERNING DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS

Line Number in

I. D. Section Information Recorded

6 Length of time in present position

7 Formal management education

8 Educational management experience other than in present position

9 Management experience in non-educational organization

10 Not used

Main Body of the Scan-Tron Form

Numbers one through fifty on part one of each of the

ten Scan-Tron forms, which were used to record the data

from each one of the respondents, were used to record

section two responses from each survey instrument. Table

VI reflects the survey instrument information which was

recorded on the Scan-Tron form. The lines which were used

to record the information were also indicated in the table.

66

TABLE VI

INFORMATION RECORDED ON MAIN BODY OF SCAN-TRON FORM

Form Number Lines Used Information Recorded

0 1 through 35 Planning, importance

1 1 through 35 Planning, frequency

2 1 through 34 Organizing and staffing, importance

3 1 through 34 Organizing and staffing, frequency

4 1 through 50 Directing and leading, importance, #1-50

5 1 through 9 Directing and leading, importance, #51-59

6 1 through 50 Directing and leading, frequency, #1-50

7 1 through 9 Directing and leading, frequency, #51-59

8 1 through 30 Controlling, importance

9 1 through 30 Controlling, frequency

The possible responses in the survey instrument were

numbers 1 through 5. The main body of the form had

possible responses of A through E. In order to accurately

record the information, the letter A was used for a number

1 response. This sytem was used on through letter E,

which was used for a number 5 response.

67

Analyses of the Data

Narrative summaries.—The responses in section one of

the survey instrument were demographic in nature. They

were tabulated, grouped, and reported in narrative form.

Means and standard deviations.—Means for presidents,

deans, and division chairpersons as three different groups

were calculated from responses in section two of the survey

instrument. Means were also calculated using all respon-

dents as one total group. Calculations of the standard

deviations were made according to the formula:

sd - r * 2 -b D ~ ' N

N - 1

Analysis of variance.—Using the presidents, deans,

and division chairpersons as the independent variables,

a one-way analysis of variance was completed on the data

from section two of the survey instrument, in order to

determine whether or not the means of the responses from

the three positions differed from each other (1, pp. 154-

156). This procedure was accomplished two times on each

activity, using the responses to the questions "How

important is this activity in adequately filling the role

of division chairperson?", and "How frequently do division

chairpersons engage in the performance of the activity?"

The calculations were done according to the formulae:

68

F = MSB/MSE

M SB = S SB / d fB

df_ = Number of groups -1

SSB = I n j (X. j - X. .) 2

j=l

nj = Number for group j

X.j = Mean for group j

X.. = Grand mean for all groups

= S SE / d fE

df = Total number of respondents -number of groups

SS = Z S. E j = 1 3

"j 2 I ) Z XT. - I Xij] i=l 13 li=l I

s. = z J

nj

Yields an F with dfg and dfE degrees of freedom

3 x 1 Analysis.—Another statistical treatment which

was performed with the data from section two responses was

a 3 x 1 analysis through the usage of the Scheffe multiple

comparison technique. When the overall F test for mean

differences was significant at the .01 level or the .05

level, a Scheffe multiple comparison test was performed to

identify differences between pairs of means. A significant

F with 2 and 6 9 degrees of freedom was ^ 4.92 when a = .01,

69

and 3.13 when a = .05. The areas for comparisons were

(a.) the mean responses of the deans to the mean responses

of the presidents, (b) the mean responses of the division

chairpersons to the mean responses of the presidents, and

(d) the mean responses of the division chairpersons to

the mean responses of the deans. Additionally, the

Scheffe' multiple comparison technique was used to compare

the means of the combined responses of the deans and the

presidents to the mean responses of the division chair-

persons (2, pp. 268, 271).

Group one was comprised of the presidents. The deans

were identified as group two. Group three included all of

the division chairpersons in the study.

The formulae for the Scheffe multiple comparison

t-tests which were used were:

1. For group one versus group two

tA =

X1 " X2

,/sW2/10 + sw2/io

2. For group one versus group three

X1 " X3 tB =

/sw2/10 + SW2/52

70

3. For group two versus group three

X0 - X0

tc

/sw2/10 + SW2/52

4. For group one and two combined versus group three

(3^ + X2/2) - x3

/SW2/20 + SW2/5 2

tD =

when SW = mean square error

According to the Scheffe method, the obtained t was

compared with /F' where

F1 = (k - 1) Fa, 1, df error

a = .05 or .01

df error = N - k = 69

t-test of the Means.—A correlated t-test was

performed on four sets of means on each individual activity,

using the importance of the activity versus the frequency

of the performance of the activity. The four sets of

means were (1) the presidents, (2) the deans, (3) the

division chairpersons, and (4) the total number of all

respondents taken as one group. This test was made to

determine whether there were any significant mean differ-

ences .

In order to be significant, the results would have

had to show a t-test of 1.64 for the groups combined or

71

for the chairpersons, and 2.26 for either the presidents

or the deans as individual groups. Comparisons were made

within groups, but there were no useful or significant

statistics at the .01 level of significance. The corre-

lated t-test was discarded because no differences could be

found to exist. The formula which was used was

t = SD

Z Di

D = 1 " 1

n

where i = respondent i

n = number of respondents

D. = X importance - X frequency; for respondent i

S- = " 2

E D I 2

.S, D.2 -U=l Di/ 1 = 1 1 5

D n-1

Factor Analysis.—The last statistical procedure which

was utilized was a factor analysis, using SPSS (2, pp.

650-687). This analysis was done to determine whether or

not the management activities and functions which were

included in the survey instrument were weighted positively

toward the model of management activities and functions

which was used as a guide for the study. The factor

analysis which was completed was a principal factors

analysis, which used SPSS. An orthogonal verimax rotation

72

to simple structure was accomplished for each function,

based upon the number of activities which Morrisey (4)

had included for each management function.

The principle factors analysis was done because it

yields a mathematically unique solution of an R matrix.

The R matrix is expressed in the smallest number of factors

by the method. The analysis has been laborious to compute

in the past but is now much more easily done by the use of

computers. The analysis was done on each management func-

tion by examination of the total number of activites in

each function, which activities were loaded on what

factors, and the magnitudes of the test loadings. The

results which were produced were factor loadings which

ranged between -1.00 through 0 to +1.00, like correlation

coefficients and which were interpreted similarly (3,

pp. 653-661). Psychological meanings and relationships

were studied after the factors were rotated. In this

manner, the model of management functions for division

chairpersons which was developed in the process of the

study was compared to the Morrisey model.

This analysis could be useful in determining what a

model of management functions and activities should

include for division chairpersons in the multi-campus

community college districts of Dallas and Tarrant Counties,

Texas. The model would not be a fixed or permanent model

73

because it could change with new research and with

situational changes. It could be considered to be a

developing model for the management activities and

functions for division chairpersons.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

Edwards, Allen L. , Experimental Design in Psychological Research, New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1965.

Ferguson, George A., Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, T971.

Kerlinger, Fred N., Foundations of Behavioral Research, New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1967.

Morrisey, George L., Management by Objectives and Results, Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley, 1970.

74

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

The problem of this study was to identify and examine

selected management functions in the role of division

chairpersons in multi-campus community colleges. A

survey instrument was developed for the study by practicing

community college division chairpersons. The instrument

contained a list of 158 management activities, classified

under the appropriate management functions of planning,

organizing, staffing, directing or leading, and

controlling.

This study involved the two large community colleges

of Dallas and Tarrant Counties, Texas. Respondents

evaluated each activity concerning both its importance to

the division chairperson's role and the frequency in which

division chairpersons engaged in the activity. The

respondents included the presidents, deans, and division

chairpersons within the two community colleges. There

were a total of seventy-two respondents from a possible

total of seventy-seven. TCJC and DCCCD presidents and

deans were represented by 100 per cent of the population,

for a total of ten presidents and ten deans. From the

ten colleges, fifty-two out of fifty-seven chairpersons

responded to the survey.

75

76

The purpose of this chapter was to interpret the

data of the study. First, the demographic data were

examined and presented. Second, the management functions

were discussed, one at a time, concerning the importance

of the activities within each function to the position of

division chairperson and then concerning the frequency

in which division chairpersons engaged in the activities.

In these discussions, both of the dimensions of each

management function were discussed in terms of means,

standard deviations, F-tests for significant findings,

and Scheffe multiple comparison results. Summaries and

results followed each of the discussions. Third, the

factor analysis results and interpretations concerning

the five management functions were presented and compared

to the model of management functions which was used as

the basis of this study.

Demographic Analyses

The data, which were obtained from the respondents

of the ten colleges or campuses which were involved,

revealed that there were responses from all ten of the

presidents, all ten of the deans, and fifty-two of the

fifty-seven division chairpersons. Table VII reveals the

number of total respondents by campus location.

The figures for each location included one president

and one dean. The remainder of the respondents were

*

77

TABLE VII

NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO CAMPUS LOCATION

Campus Location Number of Respondents

North East 6 North West 3 South 7 Brookhaven. 7 Cedar Valley 4 Eastfield 10 El Centro 9 Mountain View 10 North Lake 7

Richland 9

Total 72

*Each individual number represents one president, one dean, and from one to eight division chairpersons.

division chairpersons. One division chairperson did not

complete the entire demographic data section.

Table VIII answers research question 1A, "What

length of time have the division chairpersons been in their

present positions?" The table reveals that there were a

total majority of chairpersons who had fewer than five

years of experience in their present jobs. The three

campuses in the TCJC had a greater number of experienced

chairpersons generally than did the DCCCD locations. Six

of the TCJC chairpersons, or 60 per cent, had been in their

present positions for over five years. Six of the DCCCD

chairpersons also had over five years of experience in

their present positions. However, almost a two-thirds

78

majority of DCCCD chairpersons had fewer than two years

in their present positions. All twelve chairpersons

who had served less than one year in their present

positions were located in the DCCCD.

TABLE VIII

LENGTH OF TIME OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS IN PRESENT POSITIONS ACCORDING TO

CAMPUS LOCATION

Between Between Less than 1 and 2 2 and 5 More than

Campus Location 1 year years years 5 years

North East* 1 • • 3 North West* • • . . 1 South* • * 2 • • 3 Brookhaven 3 2 • • • •

Cedar Valley • • 1 1 • •

Eastfield 5 1 • • 2 El Centro 1 3 1 2 Mountain View 1 4 2 0 m

North Lake 1 3 • • I Richland 1 4 1 I

Total 12 21 6 12

Per Cent 23. 53 41.18 11.76 23. 53

*TCJC locations.

Table IX answers research question IB, "What amount

of formal management education have division chairpersons

completed?" Ninety per cent of the TCJC chairpersons had

completed more than nine semester or twelve quarter hours

of formal management education. The one remaining TCJC

79

chairperson had completed no formal education in manage-

ment.

TABLE IX

FORMAL MANAGEMENT EDUCATION OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS ACCORDING TO CAMPUS LOCATION

1 to 3 4 to 9 Over 9 Semester Semester Semester Hours or Hours or Hours or 1 to 5 6 to 12 12 Quarter Quarter Quarter

Campus Location None Hours Hours Hours

North East* 1 m • .. 3 North West* • • • • • • 1 South* • • • • • • 5 Brookhaven 3 . . 1 1 Cedar Valley . . 1 • • 1 Eastfield 2 1 1 4 El Centro 4 • * 1 2 Mountain View 3 • • 3 1 North Lake 1 • • 3 1 Richland 3 • • 3 1

Total 17 2 12 20

Per Cent 33. 33 3.92 23.53 39.22

*TCJC locations.

Eleven, or more than 26 per cent, of the DCCCD chair-

persons had completed over nine semester or twelve

quarter hours of management education. More than 38 per

cent, or sixteen, of the chairpersons in the DCCCD had

completed no formal management education. Over 66 per

cent of the total number of division chairpersons who

80

responded had completed at least one hour of formal

management education.

Table IX depicts that twenty of the total number

of chairpersons had completed over nine semester hours

or twelve quarter hours of formal management education.

Seventeen, or one-third, of the fifty—one chairpersons

who responded had not received any formal management

education.

Table X reflects a comparison of responses of

chairpersons concerning the amounts of formal management

education which they had completed to the length of time

which they had in their present positions. Of the

twelve chairpersons who had been in their jobs for less

than one year, nine of them had completed one or more

hours in formal management education. Fourteen out

of twenty-one who had been on the job between one and

two years had completed one or more hours in formal

management education. Two—thirds of all chairpersons

had completed formal management education courses.

Table XI answers the research question 1C, "To

what extent do the division chairpersons have educational

management experience other than in their present

positions?" Over 72 per cent of the chairpersons had

educational management experience other than in their

81

TABLE X

FORMAL MANAGEMENT EDUCATION OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS COMPARED TO LENGTH OF TIME IN PRESENT POSITION

Length of Time in

Present Position None

1 to 3 Semester Hours or 1 to 5 Quarter Hours

4 to 9 Semester Hours or 6 to 12 Quarter Hours

Over 9 Semester Hours or

12 Quarter Hours

Less than 1 year 3 1 4 4

Between 1 and 2 years 7 1 6 7

Between 2 and 5 years 4 2

More than 5 years 3 . . 2 7

Total 17 2 12 20

Per Cent 33. 33 3.92 23.53 39.22

present positions. All of the TCJC respondents had more

than one year of this type of management experience.

Table XII depicts a comparison of data which were used

in answering research questions 1A and 1C, "What length of

time have the division chairpersons been in their present

positions?" and "To what extent do the division chair-

persons have educational management experience other than

in their present positions?" The table depicts that

thirty-seven of the fifty-one chairpersons had educational

management experience other than in their present positions.

82

TABLE XI

EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE OTHER THAN IN PRESENT POSITION OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS

ACCORDING TO CAMPUS LOCATION

Less Between Between More Than 1 and 2 2 and 5 Than

Campus Location None 1 Year Years Years 5 Years

North East* • • • • • • 4 North West* • • • • • • • • 1

South* • • • * 1 2 2

Brookhaven 2 • • 1 2 Cedar Valley • • 1 • • 1 • *

A

Eastfield 3 • • 1 • • 4

El Centro 3 • • • * 4

Mountain View 2 1 • • 3 1 North Lake 1 1 • * 1 2 Richland 3 1 • • 2 1

Total 14 4 3 13 17

Per Cent 27.45

00 • r- un

• 00

00

25.49 33.33

*TCJC locations.

Table XIII contains a comparison of data which were

used in answering research questions IB and 1C, "What

amount of formal management education have division

chairpersons completed?" and "To what extent do the

division chairpersons have educational management experi-

ence other than in their present positions?" There was

a positive relationship which existed between the

increased educational management experience other than

in the chairpersons' present positions and the increased

amount of formal management education which had been

83

TABLE XII

EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE OTHER THAN IN PRESENT POSITION OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS

COMPARED TO LENGTH OF TIME IN PRESENT POSITION

Length of Time in Present Position None

Less Than 1 Year

Between 1 and 2 Years

Between 2 and 5 Years

More Than

5 Years

Less than 1 year 2 2 3 5

Between 1 and 2 years 6 2 7 6

Between 2 and 5 years 3 1 1 1

More than 5 years 3 1 1 2 5

Total 14 4 3 13 17

Per Cent 27.45 7.84 5.88 25.49 33. 33

completed. Fifty-five per cent of the chairpersons had

completed both educational management experience and

formal management education. Only eight chairpersons had

none of either category.

Table XIV gives data obtained from research question

ID, "To what extent do the dividion chairpersons have

non-educational management experience?" Almost 51 per

cent had none. Five chairpersons, or almost 10 per cent,

had less than one year. Seven, or almost 14 per cent, had

between one and two years. Four, or almost 8 per cent,

TABLE XIII

EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE OTHER THAN IN PRESENT POSITION OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS COMPARED TO FORMAL MANAGEMENT EDUCATION

84

Formal Management Education None

Less Than

1 Year

Between 1 and 2 Years

Between 2 and 5 Years

More Than 5 Years

None 8 1 1 4 3

1 to 3 semester hours or 1 to 5 quarter hours 1 1

4 to 9 semester hours or 6 to 12 quarter hours 3 1 1 4 3

Over 9 semester hours or over 12 quarter hours 3 2 1 4 10

Total 14 4 3 13 17

Per Cent 27.45 7. 84 5.88 25.49 33. 33

had completed between two and five years. Nine of the

chairpersons, for over 17 per cent, had more than five

years of management experience in non-educational

organizations.

Table XV reflects a contrast of the data which were

used in research questions 1A and ID, "What length of

time have the division chairpersons been in their present

positions?" and "To what extent do the division chair-

persons have non-educational management experience?"

85

TABLE XIV

MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE IN NON-EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS ACCORDING TO CAMPUS LOCATION

Less Between Between More Than 1 and 2 2 and 5 Than

Campus Location None 1 Year Years Years 5 Years

North East* 2 • • 2 North West* 1 • . • • • • . . South* 1 2 1 1 . . Brookhaven 4 • • • • • • 1 Cedar Valley 2 • • • • • • . . Eastfield 3 1 1 • • 3 El Centro 3 1 1 1 1 Mountain View 4 • • 2 1 . . North Lake 1 1 1 1 1 Richland 5 • • 1 • • 1

Total 26 5 7 4 9

Per Cent 50.98 9.80 13. 73 7.84 17. 65

*TCJC locations.

The table shows that those chairpersons who had management

experience in non-educational organizations were repre-

sented in all categories relative to length of time in

their present positions. There were six in the less than

one year category, ten in the one to two year category,

one between two and five years, and eight with more than

five years in their present positions.

Table XVI reflects a comparison of the data which

were used in answering research questions IB and ID, "What

amount of formal management education have division

86

TABLE XV

MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE IN NON-EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS COMPARED TO LENGTH OF TIME

IN PRESENT POSITION

Length of Time in

Present Position None

Less Than 1 Year

Between 1 and 2 Years

Between 2 and 5 Years

More Than 5 Years

Less than 1 year 6 1 2 1 2

Between 1 and 2 years 11 1 3 2 4

Between 2 and 5 years 5 • • . . 1 . .

More than 5 years 4 3 2 • • 3

Total 26 5 7 4 9

Per Cent 50.98 9.80 13.73 7. 84 17.65

chairpersons completed?" and "To what extent do the

division chairpersons have non-educational management

experience?" The table reflects the fact that only six

out of the twenty-five chairpersons who had management

experience outside of the educational setting had completed

no formal management education. The remaining chair-

persons had completed over four semester hours or six

quarter hours of formal management education.

Table XVII gives the data which compared the answers

to research questions 1C and ID, "To what extent do the

87

TABLE XVI

MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE IN NON-EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS COMPARED TO FORMAL

MANAGEMENT EDUCATION

Formal Management Education None

Less Than 1 Year

Between 1 and 2 Years

Between 2 and 5 Years

More Than 5 Years

None 11 1 2 3

1 to 3 semester hours or 1 to 5 quarter hours 2 ..

m # , ,

4 to 9 semester hours or 6 to 12 quarter hours 4 3 4 1

Over 9 semester hours or over 12 quarter hours 9 2 2 1 6

Total 26 5 7 4 9

Per Cent 50.98 9. 80 13. 73 7. 84 17.65

division chairpersons have educational management experi-

ence other than in their present positions?" and "To

what extent do the division chairpersons have non-

educational management experience?" Only eight

chairpersons did not have prior management experience

either in an educational setting or in a non-educational

organization prior to being assigned to their present

positions. Twenty-four had management experience from

88

one of the categories. Nineteen chairpersons had both

types of management experience prior to their present

position assignments.

TABLE XVII

MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE IN NON-EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS COMPARED TO EDUCATIONAL

MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE OTHER THAN IN PRESENT POSITION

Educational Management Experience

Other Than in Present Position None

Less Than 1 Year

Between 1 and 2 Years

Between 2 and 5 Years

More Than 5 Years

None 8 1 1 1 3

Less than 1 year 2 1 • • 1

Between 1 and 2 years 1 2 • •

Between 2 and 5 years 7 1 4 1

More than 5 years 8 2 2 5

Total 26 5 7 4 9

Per Cent 50. 98 9.80 13. 73 7.84 17.65

Five Management Functions

Three groups of respondents evaluated 158 activities

according to their importance to the role of division

chairperson and according to the frequency in which

89

division chairpersons engaged in the activities. The

activities were classified according to the five manage-

ment functions of planning, organizing, staffing, directing

or leading, and controlling. The five functions were

examined according to the appropriate research questions.

Each function was examined according to importance and

then to frequency. The appropriate research questions

are restated here. Examinations of the functions follow.

II. A. What is the expectation of presidents

relative to the importance of the selected management

activities to the role of the division chairperson?

B. What is the expectation of deans or vice-

presidents relative to the importance of the selected

management activities to the role of the division chair-

person?

C. What is the expectation of division chair-

persons relative to the importance of the selected

management activities to the role of the division chair-

persons?

D. Do the perceived expectations of the

importance of the identified management activities of

division chairpersons differ among division chairpersons,

deans or vice-presidents, and presidents?

III. A. What is the expectation of presidents

relative to the frequency in which division chairpersons

engage in the selected management activities?

90

B. What is the expectation of deans or vice-

presidents relative to the frequency in which division

chairpersons engage in the selected management activities?

C. What is the expectation of division chair-

persons relative to the frequency in which division

chairpersons engage in the selected management activities?

D. Do the perceived expectations concerning the

frequency in which division chairpersons engage in the

identified management activities differ among division

chairpersons, deans or vice-presidents, and presidents?

The Planning Function

Importance of planning activities.--Table XVIII

depicts the means and standard deviations of each of the

three groups of respondents and for all of the respondents

as a total group. The activities were rated according

to the following scale: 1 = no importance, 2 = little

importance, 3 = important, 4 = very important, and 5 =

critical.

Of the thirty-five activities which were evaluated,

seven of them, or 2 0 per cent, had total group means

between 4.0 to 4.53; twenty-one, or 6 0 per cent, had

means between 3.0 to 3.9; and seven, or 2 0 per cent, had

means ranging from 2.65 to 2.97.

The analysis of variance revealed that there was

only one activity on which there was a significant

91

<e ** TJ «

j s > 3 +J 0 i w "

s 2

«i <h «n

c« "> ch

•h n o> »-i n# «

L «J > i -P ® h « a

" T

I

r* m « h ia O Ol ^ <0 •

H O H O O

as 0 « m <*) •« ao o * m

m m «•» r> ft

«H O A

a) >

£ 2

• * ^ <*»

I

3 §

3 1

«J P TJ « C -*

J * > J JJ u : co o

s 3

o o r * «•» VO to

O O A

s a a 3 o tr-H -4 C 3 0 •H o >

« M •S 0*

u « -P e cn e a -h c > o « v •H C-H -P « C 0 -P CP

M 0 P "O c -u c <d c -4 m •* M 3

e u 0 -H «. • » +i O*-H g < 9 B O i O a c -h ®-h

-p -p a o

5 2 I • "O

s i s

•HTJO

* § a. >

-H _ -P

•P o o 4 H > -4 3® CU 0 tJ

CU 0 3 r-t -O ® 0

« T3 I C C -4 o 3 *4 -H -H M • -P

-4 • > « 3 -H o •f 'O

^ c r S

« - s • 4J H kl 9>

CU« G a o a-3 O H « J 4 0 U 0 ® > CU-H > « > «TJ » C •O 0 W •

>i0 » •O J3 -» » C

S+i a -* •p -h c -u # > o «

c •* s IQ -o -P -P i-» H 3 0 4'0 a<i2 « a «

j< c H O O -H * t!

5 c § . •-4 0 a t )

5 2

i t C »j

•o cr u •

s . -o

a S S S

3 C •

« 0 •p -H K r-» c a •-4 Qt •O 3

§ U

I u •H

• a

•p« 0 $

| 5

° ! a <0

O CP « n c • 4 -H a O.P 0 « « o M 0 h B S

1 ! a o 3-*

i i 3*°

s !

s ! j s .

S-S 3

2 u

I

tH o §

«M «H 3 «W

92

j <a > ) 0 j Ifl u

" T

10 m 00 «

o © H H O

ot o «n r# c» ^ o cd oo r*

H H O © O

Ol M M CH

n * m <•»

r* r» r»

« « « N

fl > •U 0 UJ Q

in m m

o o o

o o o o o

TJ o 1-1 <fl *> T3 <0

I fl > J 4-> 0) : w a

T l

« OO <N h ao m r-» O O

i i

3 8

I I

0 -a C S

r-» « I

g i :

•Si C »H

" o

5 5

« n

• a ,

t 1 3 I S . iH B "H 5 <M

U H 4 ~ 3 -U

«M •

S 5

S t

o «d « §

m a iQ •* a*» « e

n

* m a® a n •o a

g y

•o c s.

• 8 $ £ S 5 J , o at as a t 05 (

- 5 J

S i

5 _

•i J « « • 8 3 4J

I 8

O 0»

* - 5

S I 4J 3 +J <H < o.

I S o 01

« 8 > Ok

n •

2.8

5 a

I s

a &

« 8

S a

M H CP 0 g g W -ri « 0 >

*> c 0 o CP-H n m 3 -H XI >

3 w a* «W •

° s • M

I f 4J Ck -H

1*3

S.§

« > > -H 0 "O

«w c

° S • «

Si

l O 0 4 <<W X 4

93

difference among groups. Activity 5, "develop the work

schedule for registration," had a significant F of 3.751

at the a = .05 level. Table XIX shows a summary of

this calculation.

TABLE XIX

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITY YIELDING A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG GROUPS ON

PLANNING IMPORTANCE

Mean Square Significance Activity Groups Error F Level

Develop work schedule for registration 2.735 0.729 3.751 .05

Note: degrees of freedom—Groups = 2; Error = 69.

To determine the point of difference, the Scheffe

multiple comparison test was completed. The difference

was between the presidents and deans as a group as

contrasted to the division chairpersons. The Scheff£

test revealed a significant difference for those groups

with a 3.208 critical value. The minimum critical value

would have been 2.50 at the a = .05 level of significance.

Presidents and deans rated the activity as being more

important than the division chairpersons.

Frequency of planning activities.—Table XX summarizes

the means and standard deviations of each of the three

94

•o «

mL s i CD O 91

1 « ft «

r* r» «0 r>

: -o o 1 U -H J 4 *i 4 -a 4 1 c-H i <d > 4 +J a J W Q

§

I

CO OB

O O

ao r* •»» <N o» n n o #

na o M f4 4 4J "0 4

O O O F-i o o o

3 g

3 g e- a

8

as r- r»

§a, o

•532 •U o ' #^•06

C « 0 « 4i •H C •U • C O 4J 0* §-H o o'O

*i 3 C 3 H O l» o i a s -P -H

M • *i <0 c -u c 4 e •H l-H l( 3

4J cn-H c 4 O* C O* O a c h a -h •H *H iH W *> U *0 3 4 •H W T> - 3 •U 4 0 *i M U D*fi C 4 4 0 U 0 > ft. u a s 0

f 3 •

• s i

IT) 2 -«ca

4 "O t C CH 0 4 «W •>4 -H <0 • -P •HH fl > 4 3 •H 0 i-TO •at* e

en 3 ® o» g jz c * 4J-H u o*

a 4 c ao a-3 o -• « » ^ 0 Wi « 0 > CU-4 >0 > Q) ^ ^ •a oi n •

>10 cr *0 J3 -<•« -a §-M a H

•(-» •-» c -u 0 > o •

c cn-w -h 3 4 T3 +i +J i-» H 3 0 « T ) a. J3 4 U 4

s .

-C • *i 0

•s6

2 1 4 S<

I s "P 3 M a

| 1

S3 0# T3

a-u 0 0

£ 1

H O

S-5 • M **

4 «

B au

S 4

* 0 o -d «w 3

*1

s * a. o

95

•o o U -r* <0 4J T3 <0

1 C -H 3 3 > 5 -4J ® 4 <n a

c <0

i

a <c w

5 C "H 1. « >

o at o\ o o « VO o o « O IA

« • * r» * oi

m w

oi - • o

O <-t r-»

00 A

01 o»

m «n

00 S0

o o

vo m

o o

<0 4J T3 <a C -H fl > O i-l H

«-» 1*1 «H

1 a J m

§» « ** I o o .! b O •

a m <a

l 8 u

<0 fl a 0

11 > 2

T3 0 c • «J Vt

s s « *

!§

• o i

1 * 1-3 o n O u

£ Si

CS >4 O >1

a 3 O

0 4 > •«

f-t -U « H

' J C T3 I 8 . ' 0 - • ** U -» O 3 +J « «M •

C C

S § •u • n o <W 4J c c

: i O O flj *-4

S I

CU4J a) a u o cu o

c a is 8 o

c 3

l a ii

a o

4 3

o •«

: i

a 8 • u •w Qi a o

T3

2S 8 * a c

21

s

Q. !! i o I U *4

s . •

C

! « •

•3

0 Is u u

** S w

« « . s 9 -U i :&

i °* « a

-H

3* f S " o o>

c

« « • •w m

)•» Oi 4

0 S

£ & 3 (0

T3 -H C C

2 S -U r-» < a

> m m 0 0 u a o 3 Vl co a

M --4 xt m a - H

0 > Wt H 0» "O

o o 0»-4 •o • 3 -W .Q >

•H 43-0

fli 4i » §

°A '4 +> a •h • • • o ^ c « & g x « •

° i

. s 5 .

O -o M a u a o < «w

* 3 *> ©

0 - •

5 ! S

96

respondent groups. Additionally, all of the respondents

as a total group was recorded. The activities were rated

according to the following scale: 1 = never, 2 = rarely,

3 = occasionally, 4 = often, and 5 = very often. Of the

thirty-five activities which were evaluated, seven, or

2 0 per cent, had total group means ranging from 4.0 to

4.42; nine, or 26 per cent, had means in the 3.0 to 3.92

range; eighteen, or 51 per cent, ranged from 2.0 to 2.99;

and one, or 3 percent, was at 1.94.

The analysis of variance revealed four activities on

which significant F's were calculated. The F was 3.862

on activity 10, 3.224 on activity 26, 4.351 on activity

34, and 9.161 on activity 35. Table XXI is a summary of

the analysis. The first three activities above were

significant at the a = .05 level, and the last activity

was significant at the a = .01 level.

Table XXII is a summary of the Scheffe multiple

comparison analysis, which revealed the differences.

Activity 10 was "prepare for advisory committee meetings,

and conduct if necessary." The difference was significant

between presidents and deans as a group versus the division

chairpersons. The critical value was 2.601. Presidents

and deans rated the activity as being done more frequently

than the chairpersons did. Activity 2 6 was "recommend

summer innovative projects." This activity was significant

97

TABLE XXI

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES AMONG

GROUPS ON PLANNING FREQUENCY

Mean Square Significance Activity Groups Error F Level

Prepare for advisory committee meetings and conduct if necessary 4.384 1.135 3.862 .05

Recommend summer innovative projects 2.960 0.918 3.224 .05

Approve expenditure of grant funds for divisional programs 4.563 1.049 4.351

LO

O •

Meet with deans of instructional television personnel 4.563 0.498 9.161 .01

Note: Degrees of Freedom—Groups = 2; Error = 69.

between presidents and deans as a group versus the chair-

persons. The critical value was 2.547. Chairpersons

rated the activity as being done less frequently than the

deans and presidents. Activity 34 was significant in two

groups. "Approve expenditures of grant funds for

divisional program" was significant between presidents and

division chairpersons, with a critical value of 2.729; and

between presidents and deans versus chairpersons, with

2.6 76 as the critical value. Chairpersons rated the

activity as being done less frequently than the other

98

TABLE XXII

SCHEFFE MULTIPLE COMPARISON SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES ON PLANNING

FREQUENCIES

Activity Group * Critical Value**

Prepare for advisory committee meetings and conduct if necessary P/D vs. DC 2.601

Recommend summer innovative projects P/D vs. DC 2.547

Approve expenditures of grant funds for divisional program P vs. DC 2.729

Approve expenditures of grant funds for divisional program P/D vs. DC 2.676

Meet with deans of instructional television personnel P vs. DC 5.746

Meet with deans of instructional television personnel D vs. DC 2. 840

Meet with deans of instructional television personnel P/D vs. DC 5.634

*"P"—president, "D"—deans, "DC"—division chair persons.

**Minimum critical value for significance at the .05 level is 2.50.

groups. Activity 35 was "meet with deans of instructional

television personnel." This activity was significant in

three groups. The critical value was 5.746 between

presidents and chairpersons, 2.840 between deans and

chairpersons, and 5.634 between presidents and deans as a

group versus chairpersons. Chairpersons rated this

99

activity as being done less frequently than all the other

groups.

Summary on planning activities.—The total group means

reflected that 80 per cent of the activities in the

planning function were considered to range from important

to almost critical, and that the remaining 20 per cent

were considered to be slightly less than important.

There was not any major disagreement among groups. There

was only one activity on which a significant difference

was found, the activity "develop the work schedule for

registration."

Total group means reflected that 20 per cent of the

activities in the planning function were considered to be

engaged in by chairpersons between often and very often,

almost 26 per cent indicated occasionally to often, 51

per cent reflected a range between rarely to occasionally,

and 3 per cent at slightly below rarely. There were four

activities on which significant differences were found.

These were "prepare for advisory committee meetings and

conduct if necessary," "recommend summer innovative

projects," "approve expenditures of grant funds for

divisional program," and "meet with deans of instructional

television personnel."

100

The Organizing Function

Importance of organizing activities.—Table XXIII

is a summary for the importance which was perceived to be

associated with the twelve identified activities in the

organizing function. The scale which respondents used

was the same one used throughout the survey instrument

and described in the section on the planning function.

Total group means revealed that the respondents had

evaluated two activities, or 17 per cent, from 4.21 to

4.41; nine activities, or 75 per cent, from 3.11 to

3.97; and one activity, or 8 per cent, at 2.76.

There were no significant differences among groups

which resulted from the analysis of variance. Therefore,

there was no need to look for significant differences

from the Scheffe multiple comparison technique.

Frequency of organizing activities.—Table XXIV

is a summary for the frequency which was perceived by the

respondents to be associated with the twelve management

activities included in the organizing function. The

scale which respondents used was the same one used

throughout the survey instrument and described in the

section on the planning function. Total group means

reflected that the respondents had evaluated ten of the

activities, or 83 per cent, from 3.03 to 3.79; and two

101

TJ § U -H <d V •O m

i S ?

en

o

H <H O

M > H E« <

o z

c :ta o

M -H . « -P • T3 »d l C -H ^ (0 > I -P $ 4 CO Q

ao o>

o o O r-t O

Eh z

w <

t3 0 U -H id -P

<d c (0 > 4J « w Q

o o o o o o *h r~ r- in • • • • •

ri n fO

g o

t— c

ta o Wt -H <0 -P T3 id

: w i

r-

o o

o o o o

00 rH 00 O

O rH O rH

(*) m f» ro

A Ot ft W

Z « Q

O cu cn

a

8 3 X

3 tr a

id jC < c -P I o o

3 • O C Id o

0) > c 3 « JJ o

© o •P U c, c

0 > I V4 I a M i

o-.

(0 T3 a c o <d .c ao -.* ao n © o o 3 C

0) -a v< c © < (1) *4-4 r •P C r

0 I < o I

u 3 o J3

U 5 <d

c •w c id « tyi o>

$ aa > © -H 0>-P

© U 9 C a> 3 H 0 rH U

8 > >4

c o o •

u > © T3 o Id •»H «M >4 «M 0 0 ©

3 2 •P

<D H

£ 1 © O to a

<o « m c •H o > H u aa

S i M

•P 0*

§ 8 u cu

a > 3 H cn T3

i •» a a c -h 3 O «M

© M *H -H j t v a o

i - ^ s . •H »4 •

"0 T3 CM M id 0 U 0

0 « ao <h «. a) 4 S m © -P id 3 * c n «P id 3 o* o S o 3 c a n U -H o cu -p -t aa as © •»

+J > 4J - c 0) c

2 | « g j C H U tj> «d M ©

..•HCfl-n » 0 Q<jQ

JH OB -H © 3 O <d -P T3 0#

5 §

n 3 id » o

4J -w 0) C M . c a o o id o o cp»H » u M OJ g 3 0 > Id T3

(DUO) 0T3 O O +J O 0

rH M M 00 id Oi Q« cn c C OH-O -H -H Id c •M -p C « (DUO

§3 *h oa

^ +JrH ^ o id

T3 oa 3 aa C C M Q ft •M n o +J •« C M •< O*H a

•a 3 « C rH C 4 3 0

o •* 00 -rH 4J •U u o V4 U 3 a 3 5

O -M 0 08 M C

a -h oa h 3 T3 »0 •P M fl • id <d <d -P •p o> c ao « oa a

U rH S ft id Q« 0 00 00 o i-4 M Q <u a> a ® > a o >

Sid u a a a*d

•P ( H 4 3 ( o •» id f MH <4

U JZ o +J o

I •d 3

. S J . o oi o a J Oil o J o* ® H C » -p H <3 +J 4J •4 J3 C *H

" S i

1 ^ 8 J « rH -r4

r-4 ^ ^ 3

3Q>i o a > a M

M <T3 -H a o o 4) M id (0 3 J3 Wi H g O 3 tji> id oo u c a <0 H «J 4J CP CT'O

c e c ^ a-H H a) « o > oo I c rlrH O B O a> o a o -h > 00 o o -P © <D >H <u « q m a m a

102

W X J o CQ Z

* 1

ho o U -4

l 5 ** ro id C - H id > ** 9

* W Q

JS u

:KT3 O - U -H j <G -P 4 T3 <d 1 § > A » g

c K3 0 U -H <d 4J •a id

8 * 5

-a o U -H id -P T3 <d C -H

j (d > • -P a> ; w a

m ao so o ao o ON »—I

r * <n

o o

r r m r»

id .c Q C 4 J g o o •H M W -P O O -H <M 0) 0) <w -h an c o > Id o

3 £

a o

3 t r

9 C I a M - .

a U T3 <P O -H « %*

» \ N O OB t J C H a c -h c > i o id id id M .c CP 0* id a » M g u <b o o g M © -P 3 O O O • 5 C CD >

<D <U -H Q* -a u CT-P O c ® a) o «—i g ® •P C rH »M > •P o O «« S! C o o ® Q

. . m

a) o tp c a) 3 H O

U

8 f r C 0 o »

•H u > © -d u « •H «W M <M O ° .

s s

S i M

•P tJ»

s s i-i a CP

H 4) 4 <0 C •w O

I » u U C - H 3 O «M

© M -H -H . * <P CB O

I 2 U & -r-» -H a#

t * -a

SIM >4 o u o

o » (0 *M »

a) <d s m a> -p « 3 n c n t { • i ff 3 a O.M M o Q* 4J r-4 CO IB O »

a c n

o * a 5 > o

at id Q* flu

<u o a

as

a

i

*0 3 § 8

3 O O* « C «B 3

c o c ® 3 -H a a at -a 9 * S M i-4 N 6 g 4t •P O « •H C r-» 5 u •O IB 3 a C cr * U 9 c e u

a id c <d n <0 -H -P a a* to o CUA ±1 10 0 14 OB -H <0 3 •P >*4 G Vl O <0 -P T3 a < O -H Q*

M CP C

3 T3 T3 - P M C id id id <P •P CP C

H M O »H V <0 Q» ®

V U O 4 Sid M O cu cu 'd

103

of the activities, or 17 per cent, had means of 2.51 and

2 . 6 0 .

There were no significant differences among groups

which resulted from the analysis of variance. Therefore,

there was no need to look for differences by the use of

the Scheffe multiple comparison technique.

Summary on organizing activities.—There were no

significant differences among groups on either importance

or frequency of organizing activities. Seventeen per cent

of the total group means reflected activities which were

between very important and critical. These were

"integrate new faculty members into the division" and

"develop teamwork with faculty in resolving schedule

conflicts, proposing curriculum changes, and recommending

appointments to occupational advisory committees."

Seventy-five per cent of the responses were from important

to very important. Eight per cent of the responses were

just below important.

Eighty-three per cent of the total group means

reflected activities which were engaged in from occasion-

ally to often. Seventeen per cent of the activities

were engaged in rarely to occasionally.

104

The Staffing Function

Importance of staffing activities.—Table XXV is

a summary of the importance which respondents placed on

the twenty-two staffing activities included in the study.

The respondents used the same one to five scale which

was described in the section on the planning function.

The total group means depicted that eleven, or 50 per

cent, of the activities ranged from 4.14 to 4.56. Ten,

or 45 per cent, of the activities ranged from 3.14 to

3.99. One mean, or 5 per cent, was 2.70. Of the ten

activities with means in the 3+ range, nine were closer

to 4 than to 3.

Activity 9, "coordinate interviews for full time

faculty with instructional dean or vice-president and

the president," was almost significant with an F of

3.071. Activity 6 was "confer with district, college,

or campus personnel or employment coordinator, to evaluate

requests for transfer." There was a significant

difference among groups for that activity. The analysis

of variance revealed an F of 4.325, which was significant

at the a = .05 level. Table XXVI is a summary of the

analysis.

To pinpoint the differences, the Scheffe multiple

comparison technique was accomplished. This comparison

revealed a significant difference between presidents and

1 0 5

Sta

nd

ard

D

ev

iati

oi

V0 CO ©

«n 00 o 0.

67 o

oo o

00 a* © 1.

03

1.00

0.78

1.05

0.71

1.22

0.74

0.66

€9

*0 1.

15

0.9

7

1 I M

ean

i 4.14

3.99

4.41

3.5

3

3.9

3

3.6

5

3.14

4.2

5

1 3.

97

4.4

7

2.70

4.31

4.39

4.51

3.85

3.96

> 3

9

3

h o o U H id - P ^ « C -H Id > 4J jn w a

s s

8

n d o

•*r •*» <*">

<d - P h 3 <d C H id > • P 01 c n Q

1 M • H O

•P c

a j • H M CD O 0) 0* U © a u i © * d O 4

• H o > »"•

M C o o

T 3 - P

* 3 -P U •H -P 3: OB

C -P -H (0 a ) M4

s o

I • H •P •P M

TJ OB

S S «—• o <—• -H 3 r-»

«m a cu

5 <d ©

•H > t > - P M —» © 3 • P o c <d

01 u © >

M -*4 O - P

<44 U

© 8. c ffl o o •C u a a 4) ^ *w © o • •p a s

c n a> © c ©

j 3 >» -P ;* O a) cu a aa jz s D O ®

© >* 0*0 0 © rH -P

i—j c u c H f i d 0 ® r - l o «d

V4 > • * O 9 u

p © OHO"M •H © -P OB M c q 4J C >-• « oo o o u

•h oa -p -p tj m <d

© c m js a - H o •P T3 «W • H OJ M » 3 O OB

a o -p n g o o» 0) <d 49 m o -P 3 e c & o u © ©

u o i n

a ) - H * 2. oo a * «3 c

S S'O-H . s «M m •

•H G •H 9 01 • P -r4 n <a M u

o c a 9 • P fit «w o ja U P • H © id c CO J J XJ U a 3 J U - P 0

0 © 3 «*4 * T3 - H • H M T J >i OB

S U > + » C v i co 3

• P H ? 8

a © c 3 • H r - i <d - P - H - P O U > r - l c c « • H M 3 M -«-> j C © 1*4 £. 9

(«-l © + j » d OB A © - H > ©

3 S 3 09 © •P >* © © <d © c id <p

• H B C >»M G H > c •H -P Q* - p -H C M 0 T3 rH | c • d 3 © «+4 OB U 3 © © i-i i •P i d M o o o • H 9 B C -P 9 0 « U o O M CD Q * u « « > o o o

a o <T» o H r-l r-»

T> © ® c

o* c

* 4 M «3 tf •P ® a > i

5 O

e l ©

TJ T 3 c <d © a

a -*4 +J

-P • s s a ©

•p o xx

o -p <d c ©

I s

© «d TJ §

© a © i * I O - p O X $ ®

O 3 o o «l «

106

1 3 <0 C - H « >

: h 3 o u - H IQ 4J

i "O <0 C -H «a >

x: u

2 U

TJ 4J T3 <0 C H A3 > 4J D) CO Q

T £

v o

0 u 1 I

>

X X

3 § c -o

T3

fa O U -H «J - P

T3 <d C H <a > - u a)

» cn Q

a o © ©

>* 4J " >

•P <

a u

n « o <W

TJ T3 «W C <U « « a j 3 <d 1 C -M s --+ » O 4J O C T J

S S 5

H

8

M

s U

§ • •r* > 1 +J +»

83 88

(1) H

iu O »-l a - • <9 P

•H <0 OB •M U

S ~ « • * «P • d S ~ « 09 c a <H H 4 a 0 • w a) c u 3 0 o «w ao o T J

i—4 •H § " 2 > O <44 CO § " 2 >

o OB O >» <0 -H "O •M « o a - o c

H O C 3 0 1—• H • o a - o c

H O C 3 a c XI 3 M -H

c 5 0 c o o . J S 0 ® C - H « « TJ + i

- H c O * i 0 c J 4J ©

a , 3 CPr-4

a - u o

3 u 1

a , 3 CPr-4

cn«—i u c <a e a> o *

0 c C <0 •H C O > M o •H > - P O U •H H • Q» c - P 0)

© © H +J +J <o +J © o u c c

T3 -H T3 © ^ £ h cu a) o gi c « e e <o > O l r - I 6 2 c c •P H Id rH a) Q i i c • a c u T3 m o oa o E O c 0 3 3 O 0) «H O at © ® - a j c o *-> © o u o 4J M c *> o u o > j 9 « © 4J «

< a O -H c o M 4)

» Q* ( 2 4J « < a u 5 © "*-i a « a

O r-J (N

107

TABLE XXVI

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES AMONG

GROUPS ON STAFFING IMPORTANCE

Activity Mean S Iquare

F Significance

Level Activity Groups Error F Significance

Level

Confer with district, college or campus personnel or employment coordi-nator to evaluate requests for transfer 4. 864 1.125 4.325 .05

Note: Degrees of freedom—Groups = 2; Error = 69.

division chairpersons. This comparison produced a critical

value of 2.773 for those two respondent groups.

Presidents considered the activity to be more important

than the chairpersons.

Frequency of the staffing activities.—Table XXVII

summarizes responses concerning the evaluation on the

frequency of performance by division chairpersons of

the twenty-two identified staffing activities. The

same scale which was defined in the section on the planning

function was used. Total group means reflected that two,

or 9 per cent, of the activities were rated 4.00 to 4.06;

sixteen, or 73 per cent, of the activities had ratings of

3.01 to 3.96; three, or 14 per cent, or the activities

108

3 °

* O z

a 3 0 st

an

aara

D

evia

tio

n

1.0

3

0.9

5 6

8*

0 0.9

3

00 o 0

.97

0.9

7

0.8

6 O

T'T 1

.00

0.9

5

0.9

2 rH 00

© 1.0

5

1.1

6

1 0

.87

o iH <d -P

3 i 3.2

8

3.6

2

3.8

9

3.3

7

3.4

8

2.6

2

3.3

5

3.8

0

3.3

0

3.4

5 r»

91 rH 3

.56 o

o •+

as VO fO 3

.66

1 3

.96

a U 9

1 rH r»

U rH

r* H r*

rH r» 69

«H r» rH r» rH r- 71 89

f t r» r» rH r-

rH 1- r-l

r*

as (0 c 0 a J-i S V4 S

tan

da

rd

Dev

iati

on

1.0

9 T

O*! 0

.91

0.9

7

0.9

2

0.9

7 6

6*

0

1

0.8

7

1.1

5

1.1

2

1.0

1

0.9

7

0.8

6

1.0

6

1.1

7 r*

00 o

<d -C U j; M

ean

!

•*>

CM CO 3

.55

3.9

8

3.4

5

3.4

7

2.4

4

3.4

7

3.8

6

3.1

4

3.4

1

1.8

8 as

3.9

8

3.5

5

3.7

1

14

.08

0 •H as •H > -H Q N

umbe

r J

51

rH m rH m 51

FH m 50

rH m rH m 51

rH m as

51

51

51

51

rH m

Sta

nd

ard

D

ev

iati

on

1

CN 00 o 0

.79

0.8

5

0.6

7

0.5

2

0.6

7

1.0

3

tn CO o 0

.95

0.5

3

0.7

1 o

©

0.5

7

1.0

5

1.1

4

•*»

00 o

Dea

ns

Mea

n 1

3.3

0

3.8

0

3.5

0

3.0

0

3.4

0 oo

<N 2.8

0

3.5

0

3.7

0

3.5

0

2.0

0

3.6

0

4.1

0 o

o -0 3

.80

3.4

0

10

10

10 o

#H 10

OI 10

10

10

10

as 10

10

10 o

rH 10

z

a -u S

tan

da

rd

Dev

iati

on

0.9

7

0.7

9

0.7

9

0.9

5

0.7

0

00 o 0

.67

0.7

9 CM

00 o 0

.70

o r* o

00 00 o 0

.82

00 00 o

9T * T 0

.74

c © T3 •H ao M

ean

3.5

0

3.8

0 o CO m 3

.30

o VO ro 3

.40

3.3

0

3.8

0

1

3.7

0

3.6

0

2.4

0

3.9

0 o

o *

o rH

3.3

0

3.9

0

© (X

Num

ber

10 0T

10

10 0T

10 0T

10

10

10

10

10 0T

10

10

10

3 §

I o +) c xl J •H V* ; a a s » 0 "O O « •H O > rH M C 0 O

TJ -P * 3 V M •H -P 3 ®

©

T3 • n 3 "H *M Q«

a » <o 9 •H >, > +J W» <H a) 3 •p a C <0

0 U 9

m 5 0 -p «m a © 8. c a o o -C M a a ® r-l «W 0 O • •p a

oi0 © c © JZ -H > +1^ o

U -H © © a <n .c 6 3 a 9

4 *»

rs

«. I 9 >i t*0 ' ® rH , S i 1 " 8 %

U > • » O ® V4 4J O OrlO<U •H ® -P « n c G •p c n 3 b o o m -H CO +> +> •a u «

© c m J3 CU'H o +J TJ «W HUM £ 3 0 0

a O +J M 6 o « © « © «W O +j 3 c c g1

o M © ® u o e u

i-©

© e

t © rH • ® « 4J ®

-H M M © -H

S 3

+1 4J C C

rH Id « rH © U

9 3 TJ t4 a <M n -H C »H 0 • •P -H U 0 M M o c a © +J a o 5

-H © id c QB -P XS 5 a 3 5 043 S u © 3 T3 -H •H U "O >i C ^ > 4J C « a u to 3 rH a © c 3 rH Id +1 -H 4J O rH c c •J 3 M •H ^ 0 +3

•5 © -H -H 3 2 B 4J 3 « 0 © 0 Id 9 C •H e C >ijj > C •riu a •P Vt «W o TJ rH I c © «M U 3 © 0 •P «J M g o o *r4 C -P © o <d -4 M M OB a u«« > O

. 00 o

rH cm /n

109

0 u 1

<d .u •o <d • - i-i . >

tfl a

j <G -u < «tj <o 83:

§ 2

C •o o u •* A3 -U •a <d c-h <*» > ^ r en c

X u

. c to o M «H

§ 2

n ih o

« in m m

o ao a o o r- **> cs

<s tn ro

3 u S o »W

c o

I

a >i e o <o r-t 1 3* 0) s u 0 TJ T3 «w C <l>«w <u 3 <0 g c ^ is -H CO O +J o c -o So c

o <d

M o 4-1 M 3 M

C o •H >» •M 4J 83 88 a<w

s cu TJ r-I c « a c i§ o a o u

+> o <d

° § C «H O -P <d

as 3 CT>f-4 c <d •H > +J «

4J U HI

p-» —• <d a a 3 n o T3 §•0 <u -H

M > O >1« HT3 u 4J a-o c

0) C <0 'O 3 u -H c o a si <d <d T3 +i ."8S8 0>r* M c <*j 6 « o* •H C fl) >

0 fi H • a> T-» +J -M fl -M m CO U C C S-H a> a) o 5 > cp-H s

4J -H <0 rH a> Qi ut) u o a O 3 3 a 0) T3 JS O w « c +J O M o > O -H c o n « u j a) <M a is

110

were from 2.62 to 2.94; and one, or 4 per cent, of the

activities had a mean of 1.97.

There was one significant difference among groups.

Activity 6 was "confer with district, college or

campus personnel or employment coordinator, to evaluate

requests for transfer." The analysis of variance

produced an F of 4.305, which was significant at the

a = .05 level. Table XXVIII is a summary of the analysis,

TABLE XXVIII

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES AMONG GROUPS ON STAFFING

FREQUENCY

Mean Square Significance Activity Groups Error F Level

Confer with district, college or campus personnel or employ-ment coordinator, to evaluate requests for transfer 4. 658 1.082 4.305 .05

Note: Degrees of freedom—Groups = 2; Error = 69.

To find the groups which differed significantly, the

Scheffe multiple comparison technique was used. This

technique revealed that the difference was between

presidents and division chairpersons. The critical value

was 2.820. Presidents rated the activity as being done

more frequently than the chairpersons.

Ill

Summary on staffing activities.—Fifty per cent of

the staffing activities were considered by the respondents

to range from very important to critical. These were

"initiate recruitment for faculty," "interview full and

part time faculty applicants," "interview full and part time

staff member applicants in person," "orient new faculty

members," "recommend new staffing needs for next academic

year," "recommend employment of part time faculty and staff

each term," "recommend employment of full time faculty and

staff," "recommend re-employment or continued employment of

faculty and staff," "recommend promotion of classified

personnel," "recommend non-renewal of contracts," and

"conduct meetings and counsel with divisional faculty to

encourage them to prepare plans for collective and indi-

vidual professional growth and development." Forty-five per

cent of the activities were evaluated as ranging from

important to very important. Five per cent were evaluated

to be just slightly below important. The only significant

difference was between presidents and chairpersons on the

one activity "confer with district, college, or campus

personnel or employment coordinator, to evaluate requests

for transfer." Presidents evaluated this activity as

being more important than chairpersons.

Nine per cent of the activities were considered by

respondents to be engaged in by chairpersons from often

to very often. Seventy-three per cent were considered

112

to be done occasionally to often. Eighteen per cent

ranged from slightly below rarely to slightly below

occasionally. The activity "confer with district,

college, or campus personnel or employment coordinator,

to evaluate requests for transfer" was found to be

significantly different on frequency. The groups of

presidents and chairpersons differed in their views on

this activity. Presidents evaluated the activity as

occurring more frequently than the chairpersons.

The Directing or Leading Function

Importance of directing or leading activities.—

Table XXIX depicts a summary of the importance which

respondents placed on the fifty-nine activities of

directing or leading. The one to five scale previously

described in the planning activities section also applied

to this function.

Total group means reflected 4.03 to 4.75 ratings on

nine, or 15 per cent, of the activities. Thirty-four

activities, or 58 per cent, were rated from 3.03 to 3.99.

Sixteen activities, or 2 7 per cent, ranged from 2.13 to

2. 93.

Table XXX shows the results of the analysis of

variance. There were significant differences among

groups on nine activities. There were eight activities

113

a ° 2 8 6 4 5

) U-W J 4 4 -o 4

I S * *2

4 >

§

£

4 <P •o « C -H 4 >

tD O 0 A

O r-< O O

r* r» \p

r» h

o« «n

p» r» r» p»

o o o\ CO *4 <H O O

« h « m vo ^ r*>

rn c i «0 f i M Ol fM CM »*>

en r% <*> -*

o o* o

oo m cn vo

o >-» i-» o

vo <-4 m

m -» <n ih «** « « « <H

U 4 3 x : H o JJ u • 3 C Q.

•o c

§ 3 4J ** *i 4 «< +>

3 3 -o J3 C • « M 4J M

• •

•H § . 5

3

8 cr 0

* 2 -

0» u 0 • i

4

! $ 1 . 38 > • *

§ * 1 o

4J o

0 3 i* 1 o I <M 11 3 0 0«M <M

o

4

o L m m "1 u m u e 3 0 s •H

•d 4

n °i s3 o a l

CLr-»

If 4 j s & 0 r-» <M

a -h u

> •

23 V ** a 4 CO N

2 a .

> 4

5* tis 4 3 CU *i

S 5

.28

«*• -H -H

H 4 a C 0 -H O

5 «

5

•I

§ 5: M - H O

s *> 2 s .

s f °

• i 3 C O

5 5 a a

-4 C > o • •H *H ^ •o u c ^ B -8 <8 M -r*

•* 4 > « • - C U

114

roup

Standard

Deviation

1.01

0.84

0.78

0.79

1.12

1.04

0.95

0.75

0.74

1.04

0.82

1.03

0.73

1.04

1.05

0.74

0.90

0.90

0.90

>tal

G

Mean !

3.67

4.13

3.87

3.47

3.10

3.25

2.46

3.33

3.99

3.31

4.08

3.31

4.32

3.71

3.93

4.29

3.19

3.43

3,63

To

Number

72

72

69

72

71

71

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

i rpersons

Standard

Deviation 1

0.98

0.85

0.80

0.83

1.16

1.05

0.88

0.76

0.76

1.00

0.81

0.99

0.75

0.98

1.03

0.73

0.92

0.80

0.90

>n Cha

Mean

3.48

3.94

3.80

3.54

2.92

3.13

2.35

3.33

3.88

3.31

4.12

3.35

4.29

3.85

3.92

4.23

3.17

3.40

3.54

Divisio

Number

52

52

51

52

51

52

52

52

52

52

52

52

52

52

52

52

52

52

52

Standard

Deviation

1.05

0.52

0.78

0.67

0.85

1.03

1.17

0.70

0.67

1.07

0.67

1.03

0.70

1.17

1.05

0.70

0.71

0.88

0.82

Deans

Mean

4.00

4.60

4.11

3.30

3.50

3.80

2.60

3.40

4.30

3.60

4.30

3.20

4.60

3.60

4.00

4.60

3.50

3.90

4.00

Number

10

10 9

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

nts

Standard

Deviation

0.82

0.70

0.71

0.67

0.97

0.87

0.99

0.82

0.63

1.25

0.95

1.32

0.63

1.10

1.29

0.82

0.94

1.29

0.95

eside

Mean

4.30

4.60

4.00

3.30

3.60

3.33

2.90

3.30

4.20

3.00

3.70

3.20

4.20

3.10

3.90

4.30

3.00

3.10

3.70

Pr

Number

10

10

9

10

10 9

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

3 § § 3

> o» 2 8

© § > u 9 U> •O O

C "• 0 « -H c •P o o -H 9 « M -W *i > • -«4 C "O

9 W i «2

11

3 H a. a* s o < m u a

C 4i

• 3 •P M

U U

O

I s *»

1 s.

8 2.

>»

3 o • V <0

i « • H o •p " 0. Q» 3 -H TJ -P C 9

u > p*

U • 2 S

I I ! §

II S 3

M <M s s

2<

•P « 3 W O -P

2 •§ M «

3 8

c « « e •m o U -H •< +i

- 5 * " 4J TJ

® s

st;

£ -« 3 2 c 3 > C

•3

«H

3

i ® • 5-3 •d « «

•p x « u

§»«w

. 3 S 8 C U

< m u o u o

. a •35 T3 «

Zi *

o 3

£ o

j s

1 1

s a

2 . a * >i S <M • -H 4 •O r-l g °

•o o 2 •

S 3 2 2

2JJ 23 a cr 5*2

-0 4 1 C-H 3 <0 > ) *i 0 4 U1 Q

115

m m c* <h fM

) fl 4J i 3 > 4 -u ai j en Q

* T I

** A n fM

<n vo • * M 0»

c* m

<N M

id > 4J jn CO O

>0 0 kl -H IQ 4J TJ 4 . S 3

;2

O «-• i—» CO *

O O

«*> fM

- S o o 0 *M O <M c o • o -H **

u 5 8. ** 0 n • • m

> 4J ©

3 « •O -w 3 > "O 5 5 c o •w 0 c 0*

' 8 £ 2

I 5 I u > a I >§ I * 4 I <M I <M M 4 O i *t 5 1 " *9 Itj A

>§ 2

2.3 3 4 (O <M

!i •U M C 0» ® o TJ M 3 a*

"0 •

c a. -§ §

CO M

£3 8-3

9 h 4 H §1 .

35 5.8 So -t <3 4 •»*

£ ** o -» CJ o

" 2 > +> M • S. o> 5 2

o a 3 o kl -H •P 0 at e > •h •o 0 •O 0 3 3 8 o

o •U « 4 4J 4J *H

• «o • 2

•as O M 8 £ tj a Sm

"H O* S -

"J! C 4J -H t-t 4 -O *> 0 c w •H O

<n ^

0 +» O

§; •H +»

kl •P 0 4 0 *o

2 3 a-H 0

je *> • •H 0 * s C 0

I s 0 0

0 4 -H 4 0« •H fi •H 0 0

1 :

S 5 , 8

01 X < a.

at •* o vn

-» 0 3 U a a

•H > kl -H *j <o

•o • 4 ^ -a c c 0 +i 4J O 3 1

• 0

01 c H o +» 0 0 H S i

C 4 il o 0 0 kl u a

G u

5 *

§! -h a 4J 4 44 0 4

§• 1 i CJ 0 ki •5 8. 2 * s s

116

I >0 > ' 'iAJ

U H fl -U -a a §3

fl *i T3 * C H

1 <0 > j a : cn Q i £

at vo o o

& s. ai >

3 I 25 (S 4 a.*»

jq o 5 S a a _

a -P a SS* at M o << oM

C • tj 3 o* I c<M i n 0 o ® • c 1 % >» •W Wt 4J

C « « 0 -» V H -H « -U -4 A a « n m •H C « U-H*J fi •'*'0 0 0 +1 k « a,

m a. o <d w

117

which were significant at the a = .05 level, and one

activity which was significant at the a = .01 level.

TABLE XXX

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES AMONG GROUPS ON DIRECTING

AND LEADING IMPORTANCE

Mean Square Significance Activity Groups Error F Level

Review policy manual 3.167 1. 005 3. 152 .05

Send letter to purchas-ing department 3.600 1.016 3. 545 .05

Develop work schedule for registration 3.460 0.943 3. 668 .05

Conduct division meetings 3.124 0.632 4. 941 .01

Approve textbook adoptions 2.988 0. 892 3. 352 .05

Counsel with students and citizens about complaints 2. 726 0. 616 4. 427

LO

O •

Supervise the preparation of responses to site visits 4. 842 1.231 3. 934 .05

Coordinate district curriculum proposals for divisional programs 2. 974 0.606 4. 905 . 05

Assist in the preparation of grant financial statements for DHEW 2. 994 0. 802 3. 734

LO

O •

Note: Degrees of freedom—Group = 2; Error = 69,

118

Table XXXI depicts the results of the significant

differences on the activities as they were discovered

through the application of the Scheffe multiple compari-

son technique. The Scheffe test was used to determine

where the analysis of variance differences occurred.

"Review policy manual," and "supervise the preparation

of responses to site visits" were determined not to be

significant by the Scheffe test.

Activity 16 was "send letter to purchasing depart-

ment." The F was 3.545. The groups which differed were

the presidents and the deans, with a Scheffe critical

value of -2.6 42. Deans felt that this activity was more

important than the presidents.

Activity 19 was "develop work schedule for

registration." The F was 3.66 8. The Scheffe test

computed critical values of 2.515 for presidents versus

chairpersons, and 2.697 for presidents and deans versus

chairpersons. Chairpersons rated the activity as being

less important than either of the other two groups.

Activity 20 was "conduct division meetings." The

F was 4.941, which was significant at the a = .01 level.

This difference was found to lie between three groups.

The Scheffe test produced critical values of 3.012 for

presidents versus division chairpersons, 3.012 for deans

versus chairpersons, and 3.953 when presidents and deans

119

TABLE XXXI

SCHEFFE MULTIPLE COMPARISON SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES ON DIRECTING

OR LEADING IMPORTANCE

Activity Group * Critical Value**

Send letter to purchasing department P vs. D -2.642

Develop work schedule for registration

P P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

2.515 2.697

Conduct division meetings P D

P/D

vs. vs. vs.

DC DC DC

3. 012 3. 012 3.953

Approve textbook adoptions D vs. DC 2. 723

Counsel with students and citizens about complaints

P P vs. vs.

D DC

-3.631 -3.183

Coordinate district curriculum proposals for divisional programs

P D

P/D

vs. vs. vs.

DC DC DC

3.491 2. 536 3.954

Assist in the preparation of grant financial statements for DHEW

D P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

2. 778 2. 935

"P"—president, "D"—deans, "DC"—division chairpersons.

**Minimum critical value for significance at the .05 level is 2.50.

were taken as a group and were compared to the division

chairpersons. Chairpersons rated the activity as being

less important than the other groups.

120

Activity 42 was "approve text book adoptions,"

which produced an F of 3.352. The Scheffe test produced

a critical value of 2.723 between deans and division

chairpersons. Deans rated this activity as more important

than chairpersons.

Activity 44 was "counsel with students and citizens

about complaints," which produced an F of 4.42 7. Differ-

ences were found between presidents and deans. These two

groups had a critical Scheffe value of -3.631. A -3.183

value was produced for presidents versus division chair-

persons. Presidents in each case rated the activity lower

than the other groups.

Activity 53 was "coordinate district curriculum

proposals for divisional programs." The F was 4.905.

The Scheffe results produced differences between three

groups. A critical value of 3.491 was found to exist

between presidents and chairpersons. A 2.536 critical

value was found between deans and chairpersons. The

presidents and deans taken as a group differed from

division chairpersons, with a critical value of 3.954.

Chairpersons, in each case, rated the activity as being

less important than the other groups.

Activity 57 was "assist in the preparation of grant

financial statements for DHEW." The F was 3.734. Scheffe

results produced two critical values. One was 2.778

121

between deans and chairpersons. The other one was a

2.935 value between presidents and deans versus division

chairpersons. Chairpersons rated the activity as being

less important than the other groups.

Frequency of directing or leading activities.—

Table XXXII is a summary of the frequency which respon-

dents believed that chairpersons engaged in the fifty-nine

identified directing or leading management activities.

The rating scale from one to five was the same as the

scale described in the planning section.

Total group means reflect four activities, or 7 per

cent, with means from 4.03 to 4.46; twenty-five, or

42 per cent, from 3.01 to 3.94; twenty-four, or 41

per cent, from 2.01 to 2.99; and six, or 10 per cent,

from 1.41 to 1.99.

Table XXXIII summarizes the results of the analysis

of variance. There were eight significant F's. Three

F's were significant at the a = .01 level and five were

significant at the a = .05 level. The .05 level was used

in all of these analyses of variances because the Scheffe

test is more rigorous than other multiple comparisons.

There would have been only three significant findings if

only the .01 level had been used in this analysis.

122

roup

Standard

deviation

0.9

6 ,

1.10

0.8

9

0.9

1

0.9

4

0.9

3

1.08

0.9

6

1.01

0.6

5

0.9

6

0.8

2

1.06

0.9

3

0.9

3

0.9

6

0.9

4

0.9

0

a ^ s 2 i 3

.36

2.6

2

2.9

9

3.4

9

2.4

7

2.6

9

2.7

8

3.3

4

2.9

9

1.41

3.0

3

2.0

1

2.1

7

1.9

0

1.96

2.3

9

3.16

3.7

6

To

Number

70

71

70

70

68

70

69

70

70

70

71

71

70

70

69

69

70

71

irperaona

Standard

Deviation

1.0

3

1.11

0.9

3

0.9

2

0.9

9

1.0

1

1.0

7

1.0

4

1.12

0.6

9

0.9

6

0.8

5

1.12

0.8

5

1.01

1.0

0

0.9

9

0.9

5

n Cha

Mean

3.3

1

2.6

0

2.9

8

3.3

7

2.3

7

2.6

9

2.5

8

3.2

7

2.9

0

1.3

7

3.0

0

1.8

6

2.1

2

1.7

4

1.8

6

2.3

7

3.2

2

3.6

9

Diviaio

Number

51

52

51

51

49

51

50

51

51

51

51

51

50

50

50

51

51

51

Standard

[Deviation

0.7

1

1.0

3

0.8

2

0.8

2

0.8

4

0.7

1

1.0

7

0.7

1

0.7

9

0.5

3

1.10

0.5

2

0.9

7

1.0

3

0.6

3

0.9

7

0.6

3

0.7

4

Deans

Mean I

3.5

0

2.8

0

3.0

0

4.3

0

2.6

0

2.5

0

3.4

0

3.5

0

3.2

0

1.5

0

3.1

0

2.4

0

2.6

0

2.2

0

2.2

0

2.6

0

2.8

0

3.9

0

Number

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

rtt8

Standard

Deviation

0.8

8

1.2

4

0.8

7

0.4

4

0.6

0

0.6

0

0.8

3

0.7

3

0.4

4

0.5

3 '

0.8

8

0.7

0

0.8

2

1.0

7

0.6

7

0.7

1

0.9

7

0.8

2

esidei

Mean 1

3.4

4

2.5

6

3.0

0

3.2

2

2.8

9

2.8

9

3.2

2

3.5

6

3.2

2

1.5

6

3.1

0

2.4

0

2.0

0

2.4

0

2.2

2

2.2

5

3.2

2

4.0

0

u 0, u

i z

Activity

1.

Confer with instructional leader*

on equipment purchases.

2.

Review equipment bids.

3.

Attend personnel workshop.

4.

Review policy manual.

5.

Attend community center presen-

tation about the college.

6.

Conduct tours of the college or

campus.

7.

Attend technical/occupational

workshop.

8.

Develop curriculum and course

descriptions for catalog.

9.

Speak to an off-campus organi-

sation.

10.

Prepare radio advertisement.

11.

Develop job specifications for

staff members.

12.

Participate in audio visual

tutorial filming session.

13.

Schedule class slots for

community services.

14.

Coordinate hiring for community

services.

15.

Prepare speech for leadership

retreat.

16.

Send letter to purchasing

department.

17.

Compose employee evaluation letter.

18.

Review division budget with

instructional dean or vice-

president .

<e 4J •o «

IC"» 3 fl > 3 4J ® 4 « Q

1 2 3

L flj >

1 L §

rH «H O O

ro ro

m m m m in in

-a o H -H «j jj T3 0 r« od m at

a a o o o a o o o o

* cm *•> m

o o 01

0 4J >

S

3

(MO »o p* ao r» o u"»

o o < o

^ *r in r» ao ao

O a o

o o o

o o o

1 8 0) o> T3 0

0 «

3 S

»ts a n o *i *•* m « H > cn

2 2

o 9 +J W

a» a o 3 W a a

4 -P

I I > s

1 I

Cfl ® "H -4 JG **

4 -U O a o 3 3 U c H

T3 -U C 0

3 1

•*"» *2

1 !

a&4 0 u

a o.

I s

> >H 4 3 3 3

H §1 §

i ! : ?

«w *a « c •p «

s t ;

>.8 *j +* *-» c 3 0 O O

> +> <0 <0 u u

"O c C-H 0 4J 4J 0

0 . •u <a

-C 3 -u a 3 *

S o •

•3S.S

3 0 «8 0 -0 > O <0 0

I a o

0 0

S 3 -o

5 5 id u c «

a T3

3 S

« 3 n « 4 >i

<u -O 0

u U CJ O (Q •*>

S 3 > • 0) T3 0 0 -H 0 l-i 3 > a a XT 0 u o« • £ • < u

1 2 4

Tj « C H fl> >

m o\ rH OB

- t O

r-» F-4 r-» 00 ^ OJ

T3 « C H «# >

rH O O 00 OB

© O

o ** r»

CN <n (N <*>

«n in «n

TJ §

o o m ao

N <n

r* r* * m

o o

o o <S "H

CM N

O O ao ao

CN <»»

O •H 4> « «

I 1 S 3

22

T3 »w

^ 2

•H >1 > >P

2 . 3 3 « tn *m

3 • •p -a 01 c

•H £ *

:§ « a -u

I I

o a « • -H -H M -H •p u <o > « s a . a ®

§§

« 4J a « •••4 H > -P

° s •0 Qu C « u

o <0 <M

a. a» 3 • ca M

> *J ® M

I S 8 3 c 3

« - o *J 0 c u •H o

2 3

S3 a - H

> a ss. a a 3 « in m

s . u

•H

J c S o 0» • 4

<0 9

3 3 * 8 3 *

3 § *H > V4 -H

-o

cp e

- S S 4-1 « <9 Vi

as.

a •

S i

4i ** G U

-S s . u o •*>

•o §

5 W» M -U 3 u a o .

C «3 I a 3

i o * i flu o*

^ m •*» •* •* «n

125

i <0 >

lL s 2

4 -O «

SS3 4 4J © 4 W Q

(0 >

£2

U 4J Id 0 cu*>

JS o

c e

0) 4J • •h e 36 tn S u a u 2 < cnQ

IS" 183

U T3 l - i 00 fl C»w <9 i . io « u

126

TABLE XXXIII

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES AMONG GROUPS ON DIRECTING

OR LEADING FREQUENCY

Mean Square Significance Activity Groups Error F Level

Review policy manual 5.517 1. 016 5.432

i—1 O •

Participate in audio visual tutorial filming session 2.372 0.670 3.539 . 05

Coordinate hiring for community services 2. 93 9 0. 890 3. 300 .05

Conduct division meetings 3.525 1.047 3. 366 .05

Conduct advisory committee meetings 4.213 1.095 3.847 . 05

Schedule and coordinate site visits for program accreditation 7.400 1.109 6.673

i—1 o •

Prepare grant reports for DHEW 3.394 0. 776 4.375

LO

o •

Assist in the prepara-tion of grant financial statement for DHEW 3.961 0. 793 4. 994

1—1 o •

Note: Degrees of freedom—Groups = 2; Error = 69.

Table XXXIV summarizes the Scheffe' results. These

computations were made on the analysis of variance results

in order to determine the differences in the groups of

respondents.

127

TABLE XXXIV

SCHEFFE MULTIPLE COMPARISON SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES ON DIRECTING

OR LEADING FREQUENCY

Activity Group* Critical Values**

Review policy manual P D vs. vs.

D DC

-3.082 2. 830

Participate in audio visual tutorial filming session P/D vs. DC 3.250

Coordinate hiring for community services P/D vs. DC 2.676

Conduct division meetings P/D vs. DC 2.526

Conduct advisory committee meetings P/D vs. DC 2.643

Schedule and coordinate site visits for program accreditation

P P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

3. 385 3.071

Prepare grant reports for DHEW P P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

3.245 3.034

Assist in the preparation of grant financial statements for DHEW

P P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

3.174 3. 446

*"P"—president, "D"—deans, "DC"—division chairpersons.

**Minimum critical value for significance at the .05 level is 2.50.

Activity 4 was "review policy manual." The F was

5.432. The Scheffe produced critical values of -3.082

between presidents and deans, and 2.830 between deans

and division chairpersons. Deans felt the activity

128

occurred more frequently than each of the other

groups.

Activity 12 was "participate in audio visual

tutorial filming session." The F was 3.539. The

Scheffe produced a critical value of 3.250 between

presidents and deans versus division chairpersons.

Chairpersons felt the activity was less frequent than

the other groups.

Activity 14 was "coordinate hiring for community

services." The F of 3.300 indicated a significant

difference among groups. The Scheffe test revealed that

the difference was between presidents and deans versus

division chairpersons. The Scheffe critical value was

computed to be 2.676. Chairpersons rated the activity to

be a less frequent occurrence than the other groups.

Activity 2 0 was "conduct division meetings." The

F was 3.366. When the Scheffe calculations were made,

the groups which differed were presidents and deans

versus division chairpersons. There was a critical value

of 2.52 6 between the groups. Presidents and deans rated

the activity as occurring more frequently than chair-

persons .

Activity 23 was "conduct advisory committee meetings."

There was a significant difference among groups, which

was reflected by the F of 3.847. The Scheffe test showed

129

a critical value of 2.643, which indicated that the

difference was between presidents and deans versus

division chairpersons. Chairpersons felt the activity

had a lower frequency than the other groups.

Activity 4 7 was "schedule and coordinate site visits

for program accreditation." The significant difference

among groups was reflected in a significant F of 6.673.

The Scheffe calculations produced two groups which

reflected significant differences. Presidents versus

division chairpersons had a critical value of 3.385, and

presidents and deans versus chairpersons had a critical

value of 3.071. Chairpersons felt that the activity was

less frequent than the other groups.

Activity 56 was "prepare grant reports for DHEW."

The F of 4.375 showed that there was a significant

difference among groups. The Scheffe test produced

critical values of 3.245 for presidents versus chair-

persons, and 3.034 for presidents and deans versus :

chairpersons. Chairpersons were lower on the rating of

this activity than the other groups.

Activity 57 was "assist in the preparation of grant

financial statements for DHEW. The significant F was

4.994. The Scheffe comparisons reflected critical values

of 3.174 for presidents versus division chairpersons, and

130

3.44 6 for presidents and deans versus chairpersons.

Chairpersons rated the activity as being less frequently

engaged in than the other groups.

Summary on directing or leading activities.—There

were nine activities on which significant differences

were found among groups on importance when the analysis

of variance was computed. The nine activities are

identified in the above discussion regarding the impor-

tance of directing or leading activities. Two of these

activities did not register differences which were

critical enough to be found in the application of the

Scheffe test. These activities were 4, "review policy

manual," and 49, "supervise the preparation of responses

to site visits."

Eight activities were found to be significantly

different on frequency and are identified in the above

discussion. The Scheffe results revealed that there were

from one to two groups where significant critical values

were recorded for each of the activities.

The Controlling Function

Importance of controlling activities.—Table XXXV

depicts a summary of the importance which respondents

placed on the thirty controlling activities. The one to

five scale previously described in the planning section

was also used for this function.

1 3 1

-O O M 'H JO -M •O <0 C "H 0 > jj « cn Q

P* H ®

m <n

o o*

•H O

m <* od

m <*i m

o\ xo

o o

CO W M 6* M > M e»

o z

Eh §

O

E-t Z

W

a

•§ z

:Ks o 1 M -H j 0 +> « 'O <0 1 c*H L <3 > i -P r-4 CO t

i— c Kj 0 M -H 0 4J «T3 0 C H 0 > •P f CO £

CM Ol 00 00

o o r-» i-| O

>

w J

9 &

W U . c

hd o Wl -H 0 -M HQ <0

T 5 i +J 0) cfl Q

T £

«m m

r-I O

S

6*

>» •P •H > •H -P «<

>» U 0

4J CJ 3 TJ

OB 1 C 0 a Vi 0 u 0 o •

3 rH 4J Wl at *0 0 C M o 0 0 > id o +J >* 0 g 0 0 a C *> >i o •d »d 0 01 r-4 M 0 M M e 3 0 «h a r-» H a o M a •d id T3 •H 0 U 6 T3 c G 0 3 <H 0 0 c o 0 0 D*

3 •H •H M 0 M i—• o •P -P 0 r-i •P >« O o c U <H o

o 3 3 O 0 u (0 -H M u «M M >1 M rH +1 •p -p 0 0 0 O 0 0 09 C r-4 a •P Q. C 09 C 0 0 >1 •P •H 0 •w t3 > Xk 0' 0 C U •H 0 -p H 0 a o> n CD U T3 0

•H 3 o jj Q) a 0 0* 0 -P 1 u •H M cu-p •H 09 Id * a S O . 0 0 +J O 3 O

S O . 0 0 •

a.r-4 rH •M •M 0 M 3 $ 6 <d t—• C 0 a 0 tr > o > 0 2 4) -4 0 0 c o © CM S X > CO u M 1

. #

. . in VO r»

1 «H o ^ o 3 0

>i Wl c 0 *» -P 0 3 o»

(0 -H +J 0 3 C 0 0 rH 0 •H 4J 0 0 > 0 4>

V4 -r4 0 o *d e o

O* IH o c •H •»J 0 o> 0 •d U IM c IH

0 8<-p 1-> . 4J B g

01 • 0 C 0 0 3 0 0 kl 0 0 H U 0 g g 9 3

o* 09 a 0 O •P c 3 0 •P M -H 0 0 -P r-» M Q, Wl CT> JC 0 0 Q M •d o +i > OtH 3 3 0 0 0 0 O ja 0 •d M C

iH CU a 0 a +J 3 o ^ 0 TJ -H 0 0 TJ r-» Id M C 0 <-• 3 0 0 c 0* 0-H o T-l JC > 0 o •P > > -o o g i-4 u -P -H 9 < 0 Q 4J CU < T3 a

00 at O r-t r-» rH

i5 u M 0 0

a 0 e c o c •H o

O <H V 0 a-p a a J3 -d £ §

a >i O «H H a> s > o -1 <0 u s s

! JS

rH 0 <o c

S 3 o -H •W OB • -M H a 3 > 3 -P -H M •H no O* 4J O 09 0 M C X! CU •H *> <0 0 0 •P 4J -H 0 *1 c d g •H 0 3 •a -p m n 0 -P o h a ~ « c U -H

§ 3

2 3

08 0Utj

II OB +i

0 0 3 • J S H B 4J Id S

Q) 0 3 0 0 •H >t >1 > +> ® M H 0 3 <0 a u -u

132

O -&«

*J *> "O <0 1 c >

c <d $

o o o

o CO Ol ^ (•» <•)

C* »-4 *2 r* r*

T3 a) 3 C

C 0 u 1 I > $ X a 03 S

. c ta o <0 4J t3 <0 C -H <0 > V © cn a

<n in f» »n at oo at o

c <e 2

> -H a . c fa o M-.

( 0 4. T3 <0 k-

fs m r» oo m ro o o o o o a r- \o o o

o o o o <* in » o

o o o o o

_-2r

ftj Q M -H <0 +J T3 <0 C ! <0 > ' AJ $

: tn a

o o o

^ CO fO <"0

-P U *M 2» 0 8 +i C C ~ P 8 0 s

rH >1 4J -r4 > M 0 o

C TJ -H id jg o

M 3 8 > O u a a <

a*j o <o •a u o © o £ <0 © <0 a G •h o > -H U SB © a> 3 *»4 03 T3

1 -M (0 M M Q 4J a © • (0 *d M

U CP >* 00 C C © « <0 « c © u «d r-» 0 a O r+ pH «M OB <-» t! r-4 0 « <w 3 3 0 Id 0 «« JQ Ui "O ft -H C C O C >1 • M 0) © 0 A >1 •U £ <0 +i OB (0 © -M •H JJ <H •»4 a x: «w MJ3 3 •o m UH (0 cro -I 01 a 3 <0 J S O 4J 5 e (0 •« T3 O <0 -P 0 10 -W © u o M a 4J 08 T3 oa a {7»-H <0 © C © C-H > rH 0* <3 N 0 +•» * 2 3 10 >1-H © ts O U C --t -P -4J •H -H © O mow > v» «0 > -H C © <0 a o U <0 +J < to a « <W rn in <N (N CM

«M M 0 fi a a © t3 <0 (0 C u io 3 o> o 0 4J u c o a •H 10 M M >.*> O 4J C «H r-» 0 3 0 9 OB • O s •M C (0 »W © c o M-l O r-» •0 T4 JQ -M OB J3 r-» 0 H 4-1 (0 M 3 > •H 3 a OB -H 5 « Cfl C a 0 M © 3 u © © U o J5 1 -H +J -M C C U © 0 o 9 © C o c m S -H . . io r» o» Ol

© s

5 •H +J © I

•u •

• © © c a «M C c 0 0 © • OB M C © u © O a © OB c a

C VI 3 O 9 3 o U a to £ u 10 c •H -H OB 0 < © •H J3 © H 4J U ^ r-» <0 X3 a 3 +J a H c © 3 <0 9 OB 0B > •H © <3 > ©

V4 M u TJ <0 © H a a«M o © 3 <*4 SITJ 03 O o> O Ol C")

133

Total group means reflected ratings of from 4.03

to 4.67 on six, or 20 per cent, of the activities.

Twenty-three activities, or 77 per cent, had means

ranging from 3.38 to 3.99. One activity, or less than

.5 per cent, received a mean of 2.65.

Table XXXVI depicts the summary of the analysis of

variance. There were significant differences among

groups on seven activities, all of which were at the

a = .05 level. These were "follow-up instructional

development progress," "coordinate institutional research

related to the divisional instruction program," "evaluate

faculty," "maintain records and recommendations of over-

loads," "approve course syllabi," "evaluate programs,"

and "review grade distribution report for division."

Table XXXVII depicts the results of the Scheffe

analysis on the activities which yielded significant

analysis of variance differences. The Scheff£ multi-

comparison technique yielded differences between two or

three pairs of groups on six activities. One activity was

significantly different between one pair of groups. A

discussion regarding these activities follows.

Activity 4 was "follow-up instructional develop-

ment progress." The F was 3.545. The Scheff£ computations

produced critical values for comparisons between two

pairs of groups. The presidents versus deans value was

134

TABLE XXXVI

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES AMONG GROUPS ON

CONTROLLING IMPORTANCE

Mean Square Significance Activity Groups Error F Level

Follow-up instructional development progress 2.189 0.618 3.545 .05

Coordinate institutional research related to the divisional instruction program 3.103 0. 763 4.065

LO

O •

Evaluate faculty 1. 538 0.361 4.259 .05

Maintain records and recommendations of overloads 3.149 0.776 4.056 .05

Approve course syllabi 2.502 0.620 4.037 .05

Evaluate programs 2.440 0.554 4.404 .05

Review grade distri-bution report for division 2.597 0.736 3.528 .05

Note: Degrees of freedom—Groups = 2; Error = 69.

-2.535, and the deans versus division chairpersons was

3.355. Deans rated the activity higher than the other

groups.

Activity 13 was "coordinate institutional research

related to the divisional instruction program." The F

was 4.065. The Scheffe calculations produced a critical

135

TABLE XXXVII

SCHEFFE MULTIPLE COMPARISON SUMMARY FOR ACTIVITIES YIELDING SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES ON

CONTROLLING IMPORTANCE

Activity Group* Critical Values**

Follow-up instructional development progress

P D vs. vs.

D DC

-2.535 3.355

Coordinate institutional research related to the divisional instruc-tion program P vs. D 3.222

Evaluate faculty P D

P/D

vs. vs. vs.

DC DC DC

3. 700 3. 700 4. 856

Maintain records and recommenda-tions of overloads

D P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

2.639 3.219

Approve course syllabi D P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

3.324 3.443

Evaluate programs D P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

3.498 3.905

Review grade distribution report for division

P P/D

vs. vs.

DC DC

2.845 2.959

*»p"—presidents, "D"—deans, "DC"—division chairpersons.

**Minimum critical value for significance at the .05 level is 2.50.

value of 3.22 2 for presidents versus deans. Deans rated

the activity as having more importance than did presidents

Activity 15 was "evaluate faculty." The F was 4.259

The Scheffe critical values were produced for three pairs

136

of groups; presidents versus chairpersons was 3.700,

and deans versus chairpersons was also 3.700. When

presidents and deans were taken together as a single

group, the critical value was 4.856 when compared to

chairpersons. All groups rated the activity as being more

important than the chairpersons.

Activity 19 was "maintain records and recommendations

of overloads." The F was 4.056. The Scheffe calcula-

tions resulted in a critical value of 2.639 for deans

versus chairpersons, and a 3.219 for presidents and deans

versus division chairpersons. Chairpersons rated the

activity as being less important than the other groups.

Activity 20 was "approve course syllabi." The F

was 4.03 7. There were two critical values which were

produced by the Scheffe comparison. A 3.324 value was

calculated for deans versus chairpersons, and a 3.44 3

value was calcualted for presidents and deans versus

division chairpersons. Chairpersons rated the activity

as being less important than the other groups.

Activity 21 was "evaluate programs." The F was

4.404. Two critical values were computed by the Scheffe

comparisons. A 3.498 value was computed between deans and

chairpersons,and a 3.905 value was computed for presidents

and deans versus chairpersons. Chairpersons thought the

activity was less important than the other groups.

137

Activity 2 5 was "review grade distribution report

for division." The F was 3.528. A Scheffe critical value

of 2.845 was computed for presidents versus chairpersons,

and a 2.959 value was computed for presidents and deans

versus division chairpersons. Presidents and presidents

with deans placed a higher importance rating on this

activity than the chairpersons.

Frequency of controlling activities.--Table XXXVIII

depicts a summary of respondent means, which indicated the

frequency that division chairpersons engaged in the

identified activities. The rating scale from one to

five was the same scale which was described in the planning

section. Total group means reflected ratings of one

activity at 4.23; twenty-four from 3.0 3 to 3.90, and

five from 2.46 to 2.93.

There were no significant differences among groups

on the frequency in which division chairpersons engaged

in the performance of controlling activities. There was

no need to compute a Scheff£ multiple comparison analysis.

Summary on controlling activities.—Twenty per cent

of the activities were rated from very important to

critical. These are "conduct evaluation on secretary,"

"evaluate faculty," "maintain evaluation file on faculty,"

"maintain records of teaching loads," "evaluate programs,"

138

<a CD

•a 0 \ C -H j <a > > *> •

4 to a

" T 2

r» as

o o

t, «J >

sa

Ch

•H O

o at

m /»>

•« « «n m tn «n

* ±j •o « c •-» « >

41 « cn a

« r*

o o

•a <0

.sr

a 0

w

0 J

t •d

G V4

3 8. -a «

u

•P >• C -p

is 4 « - o

•H 4 0 o 0

•H cr a w

•u jj •u g§ M <2

2 * *J . • a at C

o

c a -H Q

C « •M -0

<0 >» > J3

a o» 3 o

.c a •u «

w -a CL «

1 M

o a

-4 H J au

a.-a < a»

-H +» ® s al !• Si U « e

CO M

* «n vo

o u

^ a -• r-»

s - o

®s 2 >•

o • u o o •u a

0 -u at id o 3 o.<-» 6 « o > u •

1 0 0

0 w o) -H

a h m u

® 3

51 3

(U 3 « a u 4 i 3 fl « to «w >d

« •** S3

tJ §

4 4J O - ° L ~ _

s 1

•o o U -H 4 +J "0 m

£ 3

139

a r»

o o

(0 +> T3 <« C -*

) <Q >

1 3 « 4

•u • c -o

•* 4

2 - 3

> -o © ® •O M

£ 3 4-5

V 0* >t C « 4 ffl Wt TJ

U f l H c e o © ©

A B © -M OB A <W ( • U H *-* « a 4j j

4 -u ® — j j an 73 < « C H u « 3 4 U U C ^ © O 4 > w O 4 -P

& a T3 ss

•H *J -H H jC 3 fl !7> U QU 3 4

a u u

S 8 S .

s §

> H

£ 2

o o

OS O-O

•5 s U >**»

XI : - t o J 4 hi o a » 0

c <§

o Vl a

1 « 0 *M

« • •"8 c w

8 8.

55 3 £ - 5 5

a -H JS C O +J o -H O © S

31 • g •o 4

0 S . x -a

a u

s * 32

4j a a

9 3

140

"confer with faculty in cases of non-renewal of contract

and for serious problems." Seventy-seven per cent of the

activities ranged from important to very important. Three

per cent of the activities were rated slightly less than

important. There were seven significant differences among

groups on importance, as discussed above.

There were no significant differences among groups on

frequency. One activity, or 3 per cent of the activities,

was evaluated as occurring often. The activity was

"evaluate faculty." Eighty per cent occurred occasionally

to often. Seventeen per cent were rated as occurring from

rarely to occasionally.

Factor Analysis

Research question IV was "To what extent do the

management functions and activities as outlined by Morrisey

correlate with the management activities and functions as

identified in the study to be important to the role of the

division chairperson?" In order to answer this question, a

principal factor analysis was calculated on each management

function which the researcher had developed. The statis-

tical package for the social sciences data processing

program was used. The management functions and activities

which were developed in this study were compared, one

function at a time, with Morrisey's (1) management functions

and activities of planning, organizing, staffing, directing

141

or leading, and controlling. The computer program generated

results of an orthogonal varimax rotation to simple

structure.

The factor analysis was performed in a confirmatory

manner. The procedure was not done in order to determine

through an exploratory search the activities which would

be identified by the program to be a part of each function.

The procedure was done by searching for the equivalent

number of activities which Morrisey had outlined for each

function of management. Using these numbers of activities,

the computer program identified the equivalent numbers of

factors within each of the management functions used in the

survey instrument in the study and identified the management

activities from the study with the appropriate factors.

There were eight factors in planning, two in organizing,

three in staffing, four in directing or leading, and three

in controlling. Results were produced for each management

function according to importance.

First, the emergent factors were identified according

to the individual and cumulative per cent of variance which

was in the raw data. Second, the emergent factors were

analyzed according to the .5 and above correlations between

the factors and the activities which were loaded on the

individual factors. Third, psychological meanings were

assigned to the results of the varimax rotated factor

analyses. The purpose of performing the analyses was to

142

satisfactorily describe the structural properties of the

specified number of emergent factors and to compare them to

Morrisey's model of management activities and functions.

The Planning Function

Table XXXIX depicts the eight most predominant factors

in planning importance. These factors accounted for 61.7

per cent of the total variance. Factor 1 accounted for

20.5 per cent. Each of the remaining seven factors

accounted for 9.4 to 4.1 per cent of the variance. The

table also shows the sixteen factors which comprised 83.7

per cent of the total variance. The last eight factors

each contributed from 3.7 to 2.0 per cent of the total

variance.

Table XL shows the relationships between factors 1

through 8 and activities 1 through 35. Planning activities

29, 32, 33, and 34 were loaded on factor 1. These

activities are (29) supervise grant expenditures, (32)

prepare grant proposals in divisional programs, (33) assist

with budget development grant for divisional program, and

(34) approve expenditures of grant funds for divisional

program.

Planning activities 1, 3, 16, 28, and 30 were loaded

on factor 2. These activities are (1) participate in

planning meetings regarding instruction, curriculum,

scheduling, instructional development, registration,

142

TABLE XXXIX

UNIDENTIFIED FACTORS IN PLANNING IMPORTANCE

Per Cent of Variance in Raw Data Factor Individual Cumulative

1 20.5 20.5 2 9.4 29.9 3 8.3 38.2 4 5.5 43. 7 5 4.8 48.5 6 4.7 53.2 7 4.3 57.6 8 4.1 61. 7 9 3. 7 65.4

10 3.3 68. 7 11 3.1 71.9 12 2.8 74.6 13 2.7 77.3 14 2.2 79. 5 15 2.2 81. 7 16 2.0 83. 7

Note: Unrotated factors,

testing, evaluation, and budgeting; (3) develop, review,

and revise schedules; (16) plan for evaluation of

personnel; (2 8) approve requisitions for department and

program expenditures; and (30) attend campus administrative

planning retreat.

Planning activities 22, 23, and 24 were loaded on

factor 3. These activities are (22) recommend catalog

change (noncurriculum), (2 3) recommend salary levels for

new full and part time faculty and staff, and (24) prepare

contract information for continued employment personnel.

1 4 4

rH © .-4 Ot O

U <0

CM «H Vft

VO m crt

ro »H O*

o

o

o SB M z

M 0 -P o « Cm

u « b

H 0 •P O

£

o

o

m r-l r*»

•*» m C4 n r-l O

O O

£j

Q

I

U s u « b*

M 0 P o AS Cm

O

o

tn r* m r-l cm ^ oo to « O CI r- vo <* r-rt >H O O

g

I » " •d trfi H C 0 flj *r4 -H CT» +» 6 3 4 • U *0 k 0*

© +J fi CO jC OB -H CP O -W P C O Di« •*4 © 0> -P - M TJ © a a | 3 ».q

a o

O CO £-2 I S •HMO* a n o • C 3 C 4 U O O ^ > -H a - a) -u

r: -d « C O 3

-P (tj <d hi u c > P 3 0 © <0 H-H Q*P P » •h a o o* O C 3 c •H-H 14-H P -P P u cn as at AS c c « &I -H -H +i

«H 4} (d > C ® 0 TJ

O <0 3 C U 0 •P -H 00 -P c o *H 3

M a -P - a c c o •H 09 TJ > §

45 3 s a P O 3 o •H V4 —I

§U O* © M O >

f-4 3 M © 04 o a a

9 o* *0 » u 3 a c A ©-H •H J

r - l -P © Id -H -H c > > O H ® -H -P M 01 O •H <d * > a •H T3 C •O C O

id "H 9 -P J3 » « 4JH U

id -h a o <w o cn-H r-» p • © sr aa tn > c 3 c © *4 TVH 13 a p

o en « •OH C 3 C © H r-» <d > u<o

a) <d 0

Sxj Q* © »a

o* ja ou a

4

iJ OB •*4 (B t* M 0) 3 M i

o u o* 6

3 »0 ©

-C u

Q» o

c c § s x: a x: T3 jj'd -P © •H « -r4 «0 3 « 3 ©

C ® © © c 4J -U -U id c <d a c S c © •H B *H *H t3 Q* TJ r-» m -H u a 8 3- 8 §" U © U 09

U 9 S.

M &

M •H <d £ o

> •H •O

5

•H •

P 3 s s X 0>

>1 M <d

© a © a •p © -p o •h ©

!B 0 O-H

S i a TJ •H C

•a 8 ^•d

S 3

© 9 M C

H

•p

a© o

a-H 3 «« a«M

o •p

o o •p -w

M M -P © a •p -H -p »o ©

- 3

o* c

i i I 5

? S

«M D« 9 m u

u u m o o p • «M a

u I o §

-t4 P <d 3

<-4

5 a

M O

%$ I % s i s

>i o

s. s»

si i % > > a s

145

vo m o o

ro r-l ro O

»-» *

X

a s VO r-l O

VO 00 r» r»

o o

t3 o s § ca o 6 Cl 8 © u o •h

n > 09 >4 <d © rH 00 o 0) -P «—• -H 31 ii a o tn a

a, a. «

S u o* 2 a

« s

8B S a

a) -0 c c <Q

M o >» <M -P H

co 3 r-» O 4} <d > *w ©

M 4J id rH P Id U 09 Id

Q» 13 C T3

1S O rH O «H 4) 3 « <M

M O • «M r-J © C C o c •H o +j ca n o o <d r-« u 9* •m a c © o _ O TJ © © 3 M C <d -*4 a-p © c u o a* u

o •M

> •o

-o e <

6 O CP O O J&

• 9 P 09 P 0 9 <M M T3 9 C

»4J © C "H Q* O T3 X

09 X ' 5 ! il P P cn

© o > P g a Q.'O S8

«P s M O*

% +* 4 < © 09 >4 3 -P

lS o o* v 5 c c ss P r-» < cu

s o. © © u tJ* •8 p c -8 3

> •H •O c

a 2 Q*

U on •

si id M a o* © o u u a* a*

•O M 0*

•P O © U O* CU *2 3 r-» .a id

*"5 •P *H 09 <d -r4 09 P 09 O

a •o

I o»

09 M © o> M O 3 P P CU •H TJ r-» C « © c a o X -H © 09 •H © >

> H O "O P CU u a o < «w

* c o •H +J

u 4J

09 OB

© CU •o c

5 5

rn m

146

Planning activities 17 and 18 were loaded on factor 4.

These activities are (17) review district policy manual

and (18) review campus or college policy manual.

Planning activity 19 was loaded on factor 5.

Activity 19 is develop room assignment list.

Planning activities 4, 7, and 25 were loaded on

factor 6. These activities are (4) plan and develop the

divisional budget by developing goals and activities,

preparing justifications, reviewing, and adjusting;

(7) coordinate with planning office on equipment needs;

and (25) review policy recommendations.

Planning activities 14 and 15 were loaded on factor

7. These activities are (14) plan for a follow-up

system and (15) plan for registration and testing of

students.

Planning activity 5 was loaded on factor 8. Activity

5 is develop work schedule for registration.

Morrisey's function of planning is reprinted here to

be used as a basis for comparison with the results of the

study concerning the planning function. Numbers 1 through

8 are the activities which comprise the planning function.

Function 1.—This function is planning or determining

what work must be done.

147

1. Defining roles and missions. Determining the

nature and scope of work to be performed.

2. Forecasting. Estimating the future.

3. Setting objectives. Determining results to be

achieved.

4. Programming. Establishing a plan of action to

follow in reaching objectives.

5. Scheduling. Establishing time requirements for

objectives and programs.

6. Budgeting. Determining and assigning the

resources required to reach objectives.

7. Policy-making. Establishing rules, regulations,

or predetermined decisions.

8. Establishing procedures. Determining consistent

and systematic methods of handling work.

The factors which were generated from the study were

compared with the eight activities which were outlined by

Morrisey. Factor 1 appeared to be related to budgeting,

which is activity 6. Factor 2 appeared to be related to

activity 1, which is defining roles and missions. The

factor also had an element of programming in it, which

is activity 4. The third factor of the study seemed to

be concerned with setting objectives and budgeting, which

are activities 3 and 6. Factor 4 equated to activity 7,

which is policy-making. Factor 5 related to budgeting,

148

which is activity 6. Factor 6 had elements of forecasting,

setting objectives, and budgeting, which are activities

2, 3, and 6. Defining roles and missions, which is

activity 1, was the area of concern of factor 7. The

eighth factor related to activity 5, which is scheduling.

Activity 8, which is establishing procedures, was not

found to be evident in the factors which appeared when the

factor analysis was completed.

The Organizing Function

Table XLI depicts the two most predominant factors

in organizing importance as accounting for 56.7 per cent

of the total variance. There were ten factors which each

contributed more than 2 per cent of the total variance,

and which collectively contributed 97.0 per cent. Factor

1 contributed 45.9 per cent, and factor 2 contributed

10.9 per cent of the total variance.

Table XLII shows the organizing activities which were

loaded on the two factors. Organizing activities 3, 4, 6,

9, 10, 11, and 12 were loaded on factor 1. These

activities are (3) integrate new faculty members into

the division; (4) attend workshops, professional confer-

ences, and/or visit other colleges to gain ideas for more

effective organization; (6) serve as officer on college

committee or advisory council; (9) organize, structure,

and make assignments in areas of instructional development

149

TABLE XLI

UNIDENTIFIED FACTORS IN ORGANIZING IMPORTANCE

Factor Per Cent of Variance 2 in the Raw Data

Factor Individual Cumulative

1 45. 9 45. 9 2 10.9 56. 7 3 9.1 65. 8 4 6.7 72. 5 5 6.3 78. 8 6 5.3 84.1 7 4.2 88.3 8 3.5 91. 8 9 3.0 94. 7 10 2.3 97.0 11 1.7 98. 7 12 1.3 100.0

Note: Unrotated factors.

for division, department, program, or specific subject;

(10) attend meetings to organize areas of instructional

development, instructional programs, curriculum proposals,

and procedures; (11) develop status reports and position

papers regarding curriculum proposals and instructional

development; and (12) develop teamwork with faculty in

resolving schedule conflicts, proposing curriculum changes,

and recommending appointments to occupational advisory

committees.

Organizing activities 1 and 2 were loaded on factor 2.

These activities are (1) requisition textbooks and

(2) develop room assignment list.

TABLE XLII

VARIMAX ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX ON ORGANIZING IMPORTANCE

150

Activity

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7„

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

Requisition textbooks.

Develop room assignment list.

Integrate new faculty members into the division.

Attend workshops, professional conferences, and/or visit other colleges to gain ideas for more effective organization.

Develop summary of labor hours.

Serve as officer on college committee or advisory council.

Review catalog galley proof.

Supervise grant activities in divisional program.

Organize, structure, and make assignments in areas of instruc-tional development for division, department, program, or specific subject.

Attend meetings to organize areas of instructional develop-ment, instructional programs, curriculum proposals and procedures.

Develop status reports and position papers regarding curriculum proposals and instructional development.

Develop teamwork with faculty in resolving schedule conflicts, proposing curriculum changes, and recommending appointments to occupational advisory committees.

Factor 1

0.24770

0.13623

0.72633

0.76277

0.20774

0.55610

0.43317

0.48019

0.62720

0.67269

0.69787

0 . 6 8 0 8 8

Factor 2

0.68952

0.89451

0.31986

0.13785

0.37598

0.17783

0.37142

0.21578

0.22154

0.43433

0.15574

0.43646

151

Organizing was the second function of the Morrisey

model of management. Numbers 9 and 10, which appear below,

are the activities which make up that function.

Function 2_.—This function is organizing, or classify-

ing and dividing the work into manageable units.

9. Structuring. Grouping the work for effective and

efficient production.

10. Integrating. Establishing conditions for

effective teamwork among organizational units.

The two factors which emerged from the study were

compared with the two activities in the Morrisey model.

The activities of structuring and integrating were present

in factor 1. Structuring was also present in factor 2,

but that structuring appeared to be done with the student

in mind and did not directly relate to the divisional

employees.

The Staffing Function

TableXLIII depicts the three most predominant factors

in staffing importance. These factors accounted for

52.9 per cent of the total variance. There were twelve

factors in staffing importance which individually contri-

buted 2.1 per cent or more of the total variance.

These factors accounted for a combined total of 87.8 per

cent of the variance. Factor 1 accounted for 38.4 per cent

152

TABLE XLIII

UNIDENTIFIED FACTORS IN STAFFING IMPORTANCE

Factor Per Cent of Variance in the Raw Data

Factor Individual Cumulative

1 38.4 38.4 2 7.6 46.0 3 6.9 52. 9 4 6.2 59.1 5 5.6 64. 6 6 4.5 69.2 7 4.2 73. 3 8 3.6 77. 0 9 3.4 80.4

10 2.9 83.2 11 2.5 85. 7 12 2.1 87. 8

Note: Unrotated factors.

of the variance. Factors 2 and 3 accounted for 7.6 per

cent and 6.9 per cent of the variance, respectively.

Table XLIV depicts the three most predominant factors

in staffing importance. Staffing activities 1, 8, 9, 10,

12, 13, 14, 17, and 19 were loaded on factor 1. These

activities are (1) initiate recruitment for faculty,

(8) interview full and part time staff member applicants

in person, (9) coordinate interviews for full time faculty

with instructional dean or vice-president and the president,

(10) orient new faculty members, (12) recommend new

staffing needs for next academic year, (13) recommend

employment of part time faculty and staff each term, (14)

TABLE XLIV

VARIMAX ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX ON STAFFING IMPORTANCE

153

Activity Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3

1. Initiate recruitment for faculty. 0 .63223 0 .26999 0 .24525

2. Meet with dean or vice-president of instruction on load report. 0. .49621 0, .16527 0 .46749

3. Interview full and part time faculty applicants. 0 .44934 0 .20731 0 .06984

4. Compose letters to applicants. 0, .32920 0 .62705 0 .04638

5. Use the telephone for reference checking of prospective employees. 0 ,46261 0, .49321 0 .08660

6. Confer with district, college or campus personnel or employment coordinator to evaluate requests for transfer. 0, .37719 0, .35774 0 .25479

7. Answer telephone employment inquiries. 0, .12407 0, .83290 0 .21181

8. Interview full and part time staff member applicants in person. 0. .68863 0. .23990 0, .09670

9. Coordinate interviews for full time faculty with instructional dean or vice-president and the president. 0. .57839 0. .38714 0, .09743

10. Orient new faculty members. 0, .71678 0. .38087 0, .01207

11. Coordinate hiring for community services. 0, .13698 0. .05398 0, .20814

12. Recommend new staffing needs for next academic year. 0, .66712 0. .20704 0. .20552

13. Recommend employment of part time faculty and staff each term. 0, .70954 0. ,26317 0. .27539

14. Recommend employment of full time faculty and staff. 0, .76142 -0. ,00724 0, .21058

15. Supervise the preparation of part time contracts. 0, .04 723 0. ,25660 0. .26978

16. Maintain divisional personnel file on faculty and staff. 0. ,32168 0. ,55521 0. .15146

17. Recommend re-employment or continued employment of faculty and staff. 0. ,74736 0. ,15886 0. .28937

18. Recommend promotion in rank for full time faculty. -0. ,04059 -0. 04422 0. ,32700

19. Recommend promotion of classified personnel. 0. 50736 0. 18240 0. .35326

20. Recommend non-renewal of contracts. 0. 31127 0. 12179 0. ,74104

21. Attend meetings on classified personnel evaluation. 0. 20297 0. 28341 0. ,62021

22. Conduct meetings and counsel with divisional faculty to encourage them to prepare plans for collective and individual professional growth and development. 0. 24129 0. 19387 0. 50898

154

recommend employment of full time faculty and staff,

(17) recommend re-employment or continued employment of

faculty and staff, and (19) recommend promotion of

classified personnel.

Staffing activities 4, 7, and 16 were loaded on

factor 2. These activities are (4) compose letters to

applicants, (7) answer telephone employment inquiries,

and (16) maintain divisional personnel file on faculty

and staff.

Staffing activities 20, 21, and 22 were loaded on

factor 3. These activities are (20) recommend non-

renewal of contracts, (21) attend meetings on classified

personnel evaluation, and (22) conduct meetings and

counsel with divisional faculty to encourage them to

prepare plans for collective and individual professional

growth and development.

Morrisey described the staffing function of management

as containing three activities. The activities are

listed below the function.

Function 3.—This function is staffing, or deter-

mining the requirements for and ensuring the availability

of personnel to perform the work.

11. Determining personnel needs. Analyzing the work

for personnel capabilities required.

155

12. Selecting personnel. Identifying and appointing

people to organizational positions.

13. Developing personnel. Providing opportunities

for people to increase their capabilities in line with

organizational needs.

Three factors from the study were compared with the

activities in Morrisey's model. Factor 1 equated to

activity 12, selecting personnel. Only a hint of activity

11, determining personnel needs, was suggested in factor 1.

This was found in the study activity 12, which was

recommend new staffing needs for next academic year.

Factor 2 was concerned with clerical activities which

supported the staffing function. It was not related to

any of Morrisey's activities. Factor 3 contained a base

for activity 13, but it does not appear to be equal with

activity 13. The Morrisey activity states that manage-

ment provides opportunities for people to increase their

capabilities in line with organizational needs. The

study, in factor 3, seems to indicate that division

chairpersons, while encouraging instructors to prepare plans

to engage in collective and individual professional growth

and development, do not actually provide the opportunities

for the faculty to increase their capabilities.

156

The Directing or Leading Function

Table XLV reveals that the four most predominant

factors in the directing or leading importance account

for 44.6 per cent of the total variance. There were

sixteen factors which each contributed more than 2 per

cent of the total variance. Together these sixteen factors

contributed 77.7 per cent to the total variance. Factor

1 contributed 25 percent, factor 2 had 8.9 per cent,

factor 3 had 5.7 per cent, and factor 4 had 5.0 per cent

of the total variance.

TABLE XLV

UNIDENTIFIED FACTORS IN DIRECTING OR LEADING IMPORTANCE

Factor Per Cent of Variance in the Raw Data

Factor Individual Cumulative

1 25.0 25.0 2 8.9 33.9 3 5.7 39.6 4 5.0 44.6 5 4.4 49.0 6 3.6 52.6 7 3.5 56.1 8 3.0 59.1 9 2.8 61. 9

10 2.7 64.6 11 2.6 67.2 12 2.4 69. 6 13 2.1 71. 7 14 2.0 73.7 15 2.0 75. 7 16 2.0 77. 7

Note: Unrotated factors.

157

Table XLVI shows the directing or leading activities

which were loaded on four factors. Directing or leading

activities 18, 19, 20, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36,

37, 40, 43, 44, 46, 52, 53, 54, and 58 were loaded on

factor 1. These activities are (18) review division

budget with instructional dean or vice-president; (19)

develop work schedule for registration; (20) conduct

division meetings; (2 7) attend curriculum and instructional

meetings; (2 8) authorize the issuance of keys to faculty and

staff; (2 9) counsel with faculty and staff about payroll,

contracts, and evaluation; (31) coordinate the development

of class schedules; (32) coordinate the assignment of

class rooms; (33) submit class schedule information to

data systems; (34) review and modify proposed schedule of

classes; (36) approve grade change requests; (37) approve

field trip requests; (40) maintain individual faculty

teaching schedules; (43) counsel with students and citizens

about programs; (44) counsel with students and citizens

about complaints; (46) provide instructional leadership to

the division; (52) attend division chairperson meetings;

(53) coordinate district curriculum proposals for divi-

sional programs; (54) attend orientation meetings for full

and part time personnel; and (58) interview with student

newspaper.

158

\o m -4 oo

r-< o -t

to <-» tn

3 § i * * a

i § -h a 3 U cr « O Qt » -o « c > 3 S J!

0* 0 <a 4J O >4 0 <*4 •

0 -H a

| 4i a •H

M O 0

i -§ +> «

r-i 9 •H

g U •a

•*4 0 w»

4 ° 0

3 U i

3 a. 8

9 i-4

I V

o o 0

i o

14 u 3 s

9 V

O 0

•o c

a 0 «-»

+» X

9 *1 <

S 4 8. CO

tl ao A

e o >-4 -*4 -« >

? 1

" 1

2 1 M U « a a s S • u o* * c

*3 • • « r-» jC

§ •H J +> «

>4 H • a

-H a*

JS 2

-*4 u a

<M C

Si 0 4J

3 1 § J3

J e o 0 -»4

HI « > > -4 •H • s -0 -Q jp 5 a 0 § -4 « o •o

11 1 3 00 at

rH o Of

» 8 5ft r-4 0 O H Cm a

a 2 a

a 0 3 JC O -U

§ 1 & I ; i o o

I s

159

Ifl N t

<n ^ O fH <N «•» O iH

* * r»

ia n H

•

0 s

g o

s 4 0. ±>

3 "O

1 1 <M >1

5 3 * «9

1 s >i 4 O O fl. XJ-H s •W <0 «M S S3

t-4 0 0 > CQ <0 & § «o •H •

s s 3

29

.

30

.

5 *4

s a T3 4J I 5 •O 8 § u

* I

8 S S

« i o o

S 5 § 0

9 C <a o ca -H *i

U

% a

«~t -u

I * •h > r~*

1 5 3 1

S S 2 s a 3 a. o

"O i

I §

* 5 M -H s. s

• « ••4 -H O > • •

+J o •H • •a e 2 8. O 01 o •

s 3 * * 5 3 • S is ^

5 « H -H 3-0 *0 • « W

JS o a o to «

! 1 I I

3 & 5 I 3 3

I 8. 5 2 *» a •

i i >-•

S 3 a •* h* u

I 3 V* o

-r4 4 *i I A US o -H a

i i §

a s

M M *J qi • O

+J « «s c c o •H -H T3 « M -H 8 5 CJ tJ

160

•» f-l so

o • a IS 52 < 2.

a o s s

•P a « u £36 a si O U Q

8. -22

•w C sa c a •w q> •o n u O

§3

iS O'H

© o 4J 0 <fl *w Q»<m

2 tJ5

161

Directing or leading activities 47, 55, 56, and 57

were loaded on factor 2. These activities are (47)

schedule and coordinate site visits for program accredi-

tation, (55) maintain communications with grant personnel

at DHEW, (56) prepare grant reports for DHEW, and (57)

assist in the preparation of grant financial statements for

DHEW.

Directing or leading activities 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, and

12 were loaded on factor 3. These activities are (1)

confer with instructional leaders on equipment purchases,

(3) attend personnel workshop, (4) review policy manual,

(5) attend community center presentation about the college,

(6) conduct tours of the college or campus, (9) speak to

an off-campus organization, and (12) participate in

audio visual tutorial filming session.

Directing or leading activities 16, 48, 49, 50, and

51 were loaded on factor 4. These activities are (16)

send letter to purchasing department, (48) maintain

communications with accreditation agencies, (49) super-

vise the preparation of responses to site visits, (50)

act as liaison with district purchasing agents, and (51)

act as liaison with vendors.

Morrisey's function of management which is designated

as directing or leading has four associated activities,

which are restated below.

162

Function £.—This function is directing or leading.

This involves bringing about the human activity required

to accomplish objectives.

14. Assigning. Charging individual employees with

job responsibilities or specific tasks to be performed.

15. Motivating. Influencing people to perform in a

desired manner.

16. Communicating. Achieving effective flow of

ideas and information in all desired directions.

17. Coordinating. Achieving harmony of group effort

toward the accomplishment of individual and group objec-

tives.

The four most predominant factors which were

evolved from the study for this function indicate that

division chairpersons engage in communicating to a great

extent. This is Morrisey's activity 16. A portion of

factor 1 indicates that there is some assigning activity,

which corresponds with Morrisey's activity 14. The

factors from the study do not indicate that chairpersons

engage directly in coordinating or in motivating, as

these terms are defined by Morrisey.

The Controlling Function

Table XLVII contains the individual per cent of

variance and the cumulative 82.5 per cent of variance that

each of twelve major factors contributed to controlling

163

TABLE XLVII

UNIDENTIFIED FACTORS IN CONTROLLING IMPORTANCE

Per Cent of Variance in the Raw Data Factor Individual Cumulative

1 37. . 6 37. .6 2 6. .8 44. .4 3 6. .4 50. . 7 4 5. .4 56. ,1 5 4. .8 60. .9 6 4. .1 65. .0 7 3. .6 68. . 6 8 3. . 3 71. .9 9 2. . 9 74. .8

10 2. . 7 77. .5 11 2. .5 80. . 0 12 2. , 5 82. . 5

Note: Unrotated factors.

importance. The three most predominant factors accounted

for 50.7 per cent of the total variance. Factor 1

accounted for 37.6 per cent, factor 2 added 6.8 per cent,

and factor 3 contributed 6.4 per cent of the variance. Each

of the remaining nine factors had 2.5 per cent or more of

variance.

Table XLVIII contains the activities which were loaded

on three factors. Controlling activities 3, 5, 6, 8,

10, 17, 23, 24, and 25 were loaded on factor 1. These

activities are (3) compose letter to employees on

evaluation policy and procedures, (5) meet with instruc-

tional dean or vice-president on load report, (6) seek

164

m <"•> r» tn o 9% co \o rH (S o o

r-» r-4 VO ro QB \o

CO © <N IT» SO

CM CN Ol

f-4 ««• SO

> J X

3 <

•M •H >

C c o o -H 4J 4J <0 « 9 3 r-» r-t 4 « > > ® at

•u T3 O § >§ •P C 4J O < U

>i o rH a . 6 a 0) o

M O 3 4J tJ ® a u n o 4) M -m a* •p fl) «o •H C

<0 OB >i IS s»-» 8 a

a> o*

>» +> H 3 O <d

0 . 0

c « ® OS * •H 3 -H at -P «h

S « 4 . a *J

4 ©•a 5 o

•h « M M 0) ® CU4J £ 3

•d <d o

er» c

165

0 U 1

> 3 W a

i

m rH m r« rH m m m o r» 00 at vo VO m m P* r« ot r-t av * 00 u vo VO 00 o CM VO VO m m rH rH »H

o rn •*F r - rH ao m CM VO 4J •M" m r- r-» o CM m m CO O r-l o Id o o o o o o o o o o o o CM ( 1

<N ao 00 m CM rH in 00 CM m o H ao VO o ro o * CM r» m r-U <7> 00 O m i—1 m rn •H rH o o 00 r» a\ av i—• rH o vo CM fH •p m in ro (N rH C4 H O m CM O o 10 o o O O O o o o o o o o EM 1

ro ao in VO m H r» n 00 r» 00 o in 01 CM H <*> CO m 00 CM M *T r* r-l fH m rH o m ««r r-l 0 CM RN VO r* iH o •H o o av •P rn rH o RO in VO m m rH CN o i4 o o o O o O o o o o o o CM 1

OB •a 0 T3 >» . «H .

«H C JQ c 0 c U © 0 o 0 © •P -H r-l • H p P > © -C CO « OB e 0 cn •H •H fi 4J 3 > © > s ©

rH id •H c •H •P •H 0 <Q -P • •P •O © •O M rH

C « > I Vl id a ao 0 CD Vl 1 © a a c •H OB t3 C 0 c JC © 3 0 a © 0 <*4 0 • 4J •0 •H •H cn a -H c a 4J > <a to -P +J 6 c JC © <d •H U id U Vl 44 © •H P O T3 "O © *H © Q 0 »H •H •H c > O OB A £ 9 • 5 <U

«H <d © as O 6 OB <4-1 0 SZ OB • U © U id © OB 0 4J -M OB >t n a u © ©

> I 0 •u c «w id +> c <d 0> 0 •P o c © r-l H r-1 0 O OB 0 •P C 0 •H <u $ S © U 3 •H 3 Vl •H © > Vl •H i * «H J O *> c o a Vl © •H J3 a ob rH -P 0 3 •H -H 3 © u -P TJ <0 o <P 0 0 <M J3 M M 0 c u c i-4 .H Vl Vi T3 •H >t © 0 0 c «d < <d «H © 0 c c c © Vl 4J (0 <M 0 3 >1 s > a © Id 0 1 +J rH OB o OB CO as I © 0 a h OB 3 M OB 3 OB TJ S3 -O Vi to c •W 4J •H O 0 4J 0 c •H M © M 00 0 M •d id «m C •H 0 0 OB 0» © G id iH « -u 3 U *H • ©

0 M 0 •C o rH +J a v» © •o +J •P OB JC © 3 Vl •p -H 0 4 s « T3 J3 C >H > <d c P U 0 a •P Vl o a id •M 15 3 3 0 • o © <0 © -M u Vl •H (0 J= rH OB © rH c © OB 4J •P OB •o 0* 5 +> c P id vi (0 © -H $ u -H -H <d -H © c U 0 -H > © •H C (Q > 3 >T3 I—1 (Jl N 3 5 u « a 5 © a > 6 •P 0 3 Vl © 3 © >i © © Vl u vi 3

C u rH © v» O V4 «—» <-4 -H VM -P +J P T3 -H © OB •H 04 <e a o rH Id > c c © © rH Id A vi 0* > 3 O Id <M C 3 <9 0 0 © © 0 -C 3 © £ < w CA <0 u 0 K u o X X B CJ to a

. . . . . . m # a\ o !—• CM m m VO r* 00 o\ o

rH CN CM CN CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

166

approval for equipment requested by or for faculty, (8)

adjust budget regarding faculty schedule changes, (10)

attend report meeting on status of divisional program,

(17) maintain evaluation file on faculty, (23) calculate

class enrollment averages at the end of registration and

twelfth class day, (24) analyze comparison of class

sections taught by full and part time faculty, and (25)

review grade distribution report for division.

Controlling activities 1, 4, 9, 11, 14, 19, and 20

were loaded on factor 2. These activities are (1) attend

evaluation meetings; (4) follow-up instructional develop-

ment progress; (9) develop status report for instructional

development for divisional program; (11) develop curriculum

for catalog; (14) develop an annual report which summarizes

the progress, problems, and prospects of the division;

(19) maintain records and recommendations of overloads;

and (2 0) approve course syllabi.

Controlling activities 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25, and

26 were loaded on factor 3. These activities are (15)

evaluate faculty, (17) maintain evaluation file on faculty,

(18) maintain records of teaching loads, (20) approve

course syllabi, (21) evaluate programs, (25) review grade

distribution report for division, and (26) confer with

faculty in cases of non-renewal of contract and for

serious problems.

167

Morrisey ascribed three activities which are

associated with controlling. These three activities are

restated below.

Function 5^.--This function is controlling, or

assuring the effective accomplishment of objectives.

18. Establishing standards. Devising a gauge of

successful performance in achieving objectives.

19. Measuring performance. Assessing actual versus

planned performance.

20. Taking corrective action. Bringing about

performance in improvement toward objectives. .

There were three factors which were developed from

the study. These three factors did not indicate that

division chairpersons engage in estabishing standards,

which was Morrisey's activity 18. Chairpersons do measure

performance and do take corrective action, which are

Morrisey's activities 19 and 20. That these activities

take place is indicated by an analysis of the three

factors.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Morrisey, George L. Management by Objectives and Results, Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley, 1970.

168

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

This study was designed to learn more about the

management role of division chairpersons in community

colleges. The roles of chairpersons have been variously

described in the literature. Management functions are

engaged in, according to one view. Another view disputes

that claim. Insight needs to be gained in how management

functions exist as part of the role of division chair-

persons .

The problem of the study was to identify and examine

selected management functions in the role of division

chairpersons in multi-location community colleges. The

purposes of the study were to examine the demographic

data concerning chairpersons and their management education

and experience; the importance of selected management

functions to the role of division chairperson; and the

frequency in which division chairpersons engaged in the

selected management functions.

A survey instrument was developed for the study.

Three division chairpersons within Tarrant County Junior

College, Fort Worth, Texas, and Dallas County Community

169

170

College District, Dallas, Texas, developed lists of

activities in which they engaged. By using Morrisey's

definitions, these activities were classified into the

five functions of management or as non-management

activities. The non-management activities were discarded,

and the management activities were classified into the

functions of planning, organizing, staffing, directing or

leading, and controlling. A panel of eleven administra-

tive and management experts from the two community

colleges mentioned above and from two colleges within a

major university evaluated the instrument and made

suggestions for the improvement of the instrument. All

of the presidents, deans, and division chairpersons in the

two community colleges mentioned above were then asked to

complete the instrument. The instrument, in addition to

containing demographic questions, contained 158 activities

which were related to the role of division chairperson.

Respondents indicated both how important the item was to

the division chairperson's role and how frequently

division chairpersons engaged in the identified activity.

Brief Summary of the Findings

The following research questions were answered from

the demographic information which was supplied by the

respondents of the study.

171

I. A. What length of time have the division chair-

persons been in their present positions?

B. What amount of formal management education

have division chairpersons completed?

C. To what extent do the division chairpersons

have educational management experience other than in their

present positions?

D. To what extent do the division chairpersons

have non-educational management experience?

Pertinent information concerning the findings are

listed below. The majority of division chairpersons had

fewer than five years in their jobs. TCJC had more

experienced chairpersons than the DCCCD had. A two-thirds

majority of DCCCD division chairpersons had fewer than two

years in their jobs.

Nine of the TCJC chairpersons and eleven of the DCCCD

chairpersons had completed more than nine semester or

twelve quarter hours of formal management education.

Sixteen, or 38 per cent, of DCCCD chairpersons had completed

no formal management education. One chairperson in the

TCJC was in that category. Two-thirds of all combined

chairpersons had completed some management education.

Chairpersons were experienced in other management

work. More than 72 per cent of all chairpersons had

172

educational management experience other than in their

present assignments.

Fifty-five per cent of the chairpersons had both

educational management experience and formal management

education. Eight out of the fifty-one chairpersons who

responded had no formal management education and no

management experience.

Almost 51 per cent of the chairpersons had not

had non-educational management experience. Twenty-three

per cent had less than two years of this type of experi-

ence. Over 2 5 per cent had completed more than two years

in management assignments outside of education.

There were twenty-five chairpersons who had management

experience outside of educational roles. Only six of them

had completed no formal management education.

There were only eight out of the fifty-one chair-

persons who did not have any type of prior management

experience before being assigned to their present

positions.

The five management functions of planning, organizing,

staffing, directing or leading, and controlling were

studied in terms of importance and frequency. Means,

standard deviations, and F tests were calculated on each

of the five factors on both importance and frequency.

Scheffe Multiple Comparison Techniques were calculated on

173

significant analyses of variances. The above calculations

were done in order to develop insight into the managerial

role of the division chairperson by further understanding

the research questions which had been asked in the study.

Research questions appropriate to these analyses

are restated here.

II. A. What is the expectation of presidents

relative to the importance of the selected management

activities to the role of the division chairperson?

B. What is the expectation of deans or vice-

presidents relative to the importance of the selected

management activities to the role of the division chair-

person?

C. What is the expectation of division chair-

persons relative to the importance of the selected

management activities to the role of the division chair-

person?

D. Do the perceived expectations of the impor-

tance of the identified management activities of division

chairpersons differ among division chairpersons, deans

or vice-presidents, and presidents?

III. A. What is the expectation of presidents

relative to the frequency in which division chairpersons

engage in the selected management activities?

174

B. What is the expectation of deans or vice-

presidents relative to the frequency in which division

chairpersons engage in the selected management activities?

C. What is the expectation of division chair-

persons relative to the frequency in which division

chairpersons engage in the selected management activities?

D. Do the perceived expectations concerning

the frequency in which division chairpersons engage in the

identified management activities differ among division

chairpersons, deans or vice-presidents, and presidents?

Each activity in the management functions of plan-

ning, organizing, staffing, directing or leading, and

controlling were analyzed two times for significant differ-

ences. An analysis of variance was completed on each

activity according to the importance of the activity to

the division chairperson's role and to the frequency in

which division chairpersons engaged in the performance of

the activity. Where a significant F was produced, the

Scheffe multiple comparison technique was used to determine

which group or groups differed significantly. Each

activity on which a significant F was produced is listed

below as "A" following the appropriate management function.

The Scheffe results follow the activity listed as "G."

1. Planning Importance

A. Develop the work schedule for registration. G. Presidents and deans rated the item as more

important than division chairpersons rated it.

175

2. Planning Frequency

A. Prepare for advisory committee meetings, and conduct if necessary.

G. Presidents and deans rated the activity as being done more frequently than chair-persons did.

A. Recommend summer innovative projects. G. Presidents and deans rated the activity as

being done more frequently than chair-persons did.

A. Approve expenditures of grant funds for divisional program.

G. Presidents felt that the activity occurred more frequently than chairpersons did. Also, the presidents and deans as a group rated the activity as being more frequent than did the chairpersons.

A. Meet with deans of instructional television personnel.

G. Three groups differed on this activity. Presidents, deans, and presidents and deans as a group evaluated the activity as being more frequent than the chairpersons felt that it was.

3. Organizing Importance

There were no significant differences.

4. Organizing Frequency

There were no significant differences.

5. Staffing Importance

A. Confer with district, college, or campus personnel or employment coordinator, to evaluate request for transfer.

G. Presidents considered this to be more important than chairpersons did.

6. Staffing Frequency

A. Confer with district, college, or campus personnel or employment coordinator to evaluate requests for transfer.

176

G. Presidents considered this activity to be done more frequently than chairpersons felt it was done.

7. Directing or Leading Importance

A. Review policy manual. G. There were no critical differences among

groups on this activity.

A. Send letter to purchasing department. G. Presidents assessed less importance than

deans did to this activity.

A. Develop work schedule for registration. G. Presidents and presidents with deans differed

from chairpersons in that the chairpersons rated this activity much less important than the other respondents did.

A. Conduct division meetings. G. Presidents, deans, as well as presidents and

deans as a group rated the activity as being more important than chairpersons did.

A. Approve text book adoptions. G. Deans felt this activity was more important

than the chairpersons did.

A. Counsel with students and citizens about complaints.

G. Presidents rated this activity as less important than the deans and the chairpersons thought that it was.

A. Supervise the preparation of responses to site visits.

G. There were no critical differences among groups on this activity.

A. Coordinate district curriculum proposals for divisional programs.

G. Three groups differed. Presidents, deans, and presidents and deans as a group thought the activity was more important than chair-persons thought that it was.

A. Assist in the preparation of grant financial statements for DHEW.

177

G. Deans, and presidents and deans as a group, rated the activity as being more important than chairpersons rated the item.

8. Directing or Leading Frequency

A. Review policy manual. G. Deans rated the activity as occurring more

frequently than did chairpersons or presidents.

A. Participate in audiovisual tutorial filming session.

G. Chairpersons rated the activity as occurring less frequently than presidents and deans as a group did.

A. Coordinate hiring for community services. G. Chairpersons rated the activity as occurring

less frequently than deans and presidents as a group did.

A. Conduct division meetings. G. Presidents and deans as a group rated this

as a more frequent occurrence than the chairpersons did.

A. Conduct advisory meetings. G. Presidents and deans differed from chair-

persons as chairpersons rated this activity as a less frequent occurrence than they did.

A. Schedule and coordinate site visits for program accreditation.

G. Presidents and deans and presidents as a group felt that this occurred more frequently than chairpersons did.

A. Prepare grant reports for DHEW. G. Presidents along with deans and presidents as

a group rated this activity as a more frequent occurrence than chairpersons did.

A. Assist in the preparation of grant financial statements for DHEW.

G. Presidents as well as deans with presidents rated the activity as being more frequently engaged in than the chairpersons did.

178

9. Controlling Importance

A. Follow-up instructional development progress. G. Deans evaluated the activity higher on

importance than did presidents or chairpersons.

A. Coordinate institutional research related to the divisional instruction program.

G. Presidents evaluated the activity as having less importance than did the deans.

A. Evaluate faculty. G. Deans, presidents, and presidents with deans

as a group evaluated the activity as being more important than chairpersons did.

A. Maintain records and recommendations of overloads.

G. Deans and presidents with deans rated the activity as having more importance than chairpersons did.

A. Approve course syllabi. G. Deans and presidents with deans placed more

importance on this activity than the chair-persons did.

A. Evaluate programs. G. Deans and presidents with deans evaluated

this activity as being more important than chairpersons thought that it was.

A. Review grade distribution report for division. G. Presidents and deans with presidents placed

a higher importance rating on this activity than the chairpersons did.

10. Controlling Frequency

There were no significant differences on this

management function.

Research question IV was "To what extent do the

management functions and activities as outlined by Morrisey

correlate with the management activities and functions as

179

identified in the study to be important to the role of the

division chairperson?" A principal factors analysis was

calculated on each management function which the study had

developed. The statistical package for the social sciences

data processing program searched for the number of

factors within each function, which would parallel the

number of activities in each function as Morrisey (1) had

outlined them.

The following management functions and activities,

as Morrisey (1) referred to them, are compared in terms of

the emergent factors.

1. Function One—Planning.

Establishing procedures was not found among

the emergent factors.

2. Function Two—Organizing

There were no variances on this function.

3. Function Three—Staffing.

a. Determining personnel needs was only slightly

suggested.

b. Developing personnel was found to be

suggested in the study, but was not

completely represented as Morrisey (1) had

described the activity.

c. Factor two of the study related to clerical

activities and not to a management function.

180

4. Function Four—Leading or Directing.

a. The study did not indicate that division

chairpersons engage in coordinating.

b. The study did not reveal whether chairpersons

engaged in motivating, as Morrisey defined

the activity.

5. Function Five—Controlling.

The study did not indicate whether chairpersons

engaged in establishing standards.

Conclusions

The major conclusions which were derived from the

analysis of the data and of the findings are as follows.

1. Division chairpersons tend to be experienced in

management before assuming their roles as chairpersons.

2. The experience in management occurs both inside

educational organizations and in other kinds of

organizations.

3. A large percentage of current chairpersons have

completed formal management education. The more experi-

enced chairpersons had completed management education.

4. Presidents, deans, and division chairpersons

did not often differ significantly on the importance and

the frequency of management activities within the various

management functions as related to role effectiveness of

division chairpersons.

181

5. When significant differences appeared concerning

importance or frequency, it was usually because the chair-

persons had evaluated the activity to be less important

or less frequent in their roles than either the presidents,

deans, or deans and presidents as a group had done.

6. Division chairpersons engage in five management

functions which are important to that role in community

colleges.

7. The study did not reflect that chairpersons

engage in the activities of establishing procedures,

coordinating, motivating, or in establishing standards.

8. Determining personnel and developing personnel

were not extensively developed as being part of the role

of division chairpersons.

9. "Participate in planning meetings regarding

instruction, curriculum, scheduling, instructional

development, registration, testing, evaluation, and

budgeting" was planning activity number one in the study.

It has the highest mean of any of the thirty-five

activities. "Attend division chairperson meetings" was

activity number fifty-two in the directing or leading

function. It had the second highest mean of the fifty-nine

activities. "Meet with various committees" was activity

number twenty-eight in the controlling function. It had

a mean that was tied with two others as the highest

182

ratings of thirty controlling activities. These examples

were given to conclude that meetings are frequent

occurrences in the role of division chairperson.

10. Division chairpersons have as an important

part of that role, a need to accumulate information.

They must receive information from students, faculty,

citizens, and funding agencies concerning perceptions,

suggestions, and recommendations for the effective admin-

istration of instructional programs. Information must be

received from administrators in order to effectively

budget, implement, and control programs for students

and to inform and guide the faculty in instructional and

administrative procedures and directions. Information

received from peers aids chairpersons in problem solving,

as they engage in their full schedule of activities, by

helping to cope with common problems.

11. Division chairpersons are engaged extensively

in sharing information with administrators, faculty,

students, peers, and various external organizations and

individuals.

12. Division chairpersons must complete large

volumes of administrative and clerical work.

Recommendations

Based on the data gathered and analyzed in this study,

the following recommendations appear to be in order.

183

1. Division chairpersons should learn in more

detail about the management functions of planning,

organizing, staffing, directing or leading, and control-

ling by completing management education, inservice

developmental courses, and administrative internships

in order to more efficiently and effectively perform their

important roles in community colleges.

2. Division chairpersons should become highly

skilled communicators, as senders and as receivers, so

that they will be able to communicate through all possible

channels for the most effective results.

3. Administrators of community colleges in the

highest levels should consider whether chairpersons have

a need to engage in the activities of establishing

procedures, coordinating, motivating employees, and in

establishing standards.

4. The role of division chairperson should be

examined in order to determine the extent of the need to

engage in the activities of determining personnel and in

developing personnel.

5. Special care should be used to determine the

number and the frequency of meetings. Meetings could

be planned so that the number of meetings could be

reduced.

184

6. Attention to follow-up of meetings should be

given when division chairpersons miss a meeting. Based

upon the assumption that meetings are important, tape

recordings of meetings could be made available to

absentees along with all documents which were available

at the meetings.

7. It would be helpful for chairpersons to have

some managerial experience outside of their present roles

and possibly outside of educational institutions.

8. Division chairpersons should learn how to effec-

tively delegate some of their duties. This should include

downward delegation to department chairpersons, lead

instructors, clerical personnel, secretarial personnel,

and faculty.

9. Division chairpersons should seek out management

education, developmental activities such as internships,

and professional development courses or programs.

University programs in management and administration

exist in schools of education and in schools of business.

Specific programs in schools of education are designed

for the development of junior and community college

leaders in the areas of management and administration.

Because of different educational backgrounds and

interests, and because of different entrance and degree

requirements, prospective and present division

185

chairpersons could select courses and programs from between

these schools, or they could combine courses from both

schools.

10. Division chairpersons should seek the necessary

authority to more effectively administer their roles. For

example, if they determine that they should motivate

faculty, they should learn how to accomplish that

activity and seek authority to engage in it.

11. Consideration should be made to eliminate and/or

consolidate as much clerical detail as is practical in

reporting and performing the role of division chairperson.

12. Management information systems should be made

available to chairpersons in order to help them to perform

their roles more efficiently.

13. Job descriptions for chairpersons should be

written in detail to include the management role of that

position. This study could be a catalyst.

14. Community college administrators should utilize

the study as a guide in creating a more complete under-

standing of the expectations and the potential of

division chairpersons in the development of more effective

long-range planning of divisional operations relative

to college missions, purposes, goals, and objectives.

15. Community college administrators should encourage

prospective and present division chairpersons to enroll

186

in community college management and administrative educa-

tion at the university level.

16. Division chairpersons should use the study as a

guide in implementing management functions and activities

in their roles, and they should recommend to their

administrators how the five management functions could be

useful to the role of division chairperson.

17. Further study should be made to

a. Determine how effectively present chair-

persons are able to perform their roles;

b. Determine the effectiveness of formal

management education, administrative

internships, and inservice management

development programs for chairpersons;

c. Determine the relationship of being a

successful teacher to being a successful

administrator;

d. Determine whether, and to what extent,

top and middle managers differ from chair-

persons in the need to perform management

functions and activities;

e. Determine the nature of professional develop-

ment or academic preparation which is needed

for entering division chairpersons to

increase their skills and effectiveness;

187

f. Determine whether, and to what extent,

creativity and problem solving play parts

in role effectiveness of division chair-

persons.

Implication s

The managerial role of the community college division

chairperson appears to be evident. Chairpersons engage

frequently in the management functions of planning,

organizing, staffing, directing or leading, and control-

ling. These functions appear to be highly important to

the success in the role of chairperson.

Previous management experience and previous or subse-

quent formal management education are common among present

chairpersons. More than 66 per cent of the chairpersons

who participated in the study had completed formal

education in management. Do these facts indicate that

these occurrences happened because of policy or chance?

Or rather, did chairpersons complete management education

from a perceived need for more information and skills with

which to more effectively perform in the role of division

chairperson?

The managerial role of the chairperson is supple-

mented by clerical or non-managerial activity.

Chairpersons must be made aware of the probability that

their roles are vital, busy, and involved.

188

There will also probably be large amounts of time

invested in communications. Meetings, telephone activity,

writing, and conferences will be repetitive and diver-

sified. The study did not reveal the extent to which the

chairperson will become involved in being an arbitrator

for faculty, a spokeperson or a buffer for higher admin-

istration, or a change agent within the division.

To be effective and, therefore, successful, chair-

persons must learn management techniques. Attitudes,

information, and skills must be developed in the management

aspects of the role. Higher education for community

college division chairpersons should include formal educa-

tion in management. While individualized and specific

developmental programs are no doubt beneficial, develop-

mental efforts should be more broadly based and inclusive.

Management theory should be studied. Present and

prospective community college division chairpersons

should fully utilize college and university administra-

tive and management courses, administrative internships,

professional developmental activities, and supervised

projects.

If the division chairperson does not have preparation

in management, will the chairperson be as effective as

quickly as it would be desirable? Also to the point, can

it be expected that the chairperson will be able to

189

survive the demands which will be enforced upon that role

in community colleges? The era in which a division

chairperson could succeed solely because of having been

a successful teacher has passed. Today, a division

chairperson has the additional need to be a practitioner

of management functions and activities.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Morrisey, George L. Management by Objectives and Results, Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley, 1970.

190

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A

LETTER TO DALLAS COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

FOR APPROVAL FOR RESEARCH

November 1, 19 78

Mrs. Eleanor Ott, President Eastfield College Mesquite, Texas 75150

Re: Research within the DCCCD concerning the value of management functions in role effectiveness of division chairpersons

Dear Mrs. Ott:

I am working on my problem for the doctoral disserta-tion at North Texas State University. The thrust of the problem will be to research the nature of the management functions in which division chairpersons engage and to determine the emphasis or time element which is appro-priate to the various functions.

The design of the problem is to:

1. Develop a list of tasks in which division chair-persons engage. This is to be done by utilizing division chairpersons in the analysis of their jobs.

2. Develop a questionnaire from the data and to have the survey instrument validated by chancellors, vice-chancellors, presidents, deans or vice-presidents, division chairpersons, and by university professors.

3. To administer the final form of the questionnaire to all of the presidents, vice-presidents of adminis-tration, and chairpersons in the colleges within the DCCCD and TCJC.

a. The presidents would be given a copy of the survey instrument, and would be asked to return it to me.

192

193

b. I propose to ask each vice-president of administration to arrange for me to administer the questionnaire at one time to the vice-president and to the division chairpersons of the college.

My request is that you would consider this proposal. I hope that you will then recommend to the vice-chancellor that the research should be allowed. In this way, I feel that the research will be supported by the college presidents and ultimately by the vice-presidents.

The proposed method of performing the research would be done easily and quickly. The subject is very appro-priate to the needs and interests of the DCCCD. There would be minimum disruption in the campus procedures. To illustrate this, may I pose a few questions which may focus upon this area of concern?

1. Has the turnover in division chairpersons been high?

2. Has the selection in those positions been done well?

3. Are the chairpersons highly qualified in the areas of leadership, budgeting, and other management aspects of the role?

4. Are they developed in management once they have been chosen?

5. Will this research yield information on which to base inservice development activities? (I believe it will.)

6. Will this research aid in focusing emphasis upon management education in universities which could benefit DCCCD chairpersons? (I believe it will.)

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Very truly yours,

W. Gene Stewart

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B

LETTER TO TARRANT COUNTY JUNIOR COLLEGE FOR

APPROVAL FOR RESEARCH

December 8, 1978

Dr. Horace Griffith Director of Research Tarrant County Junior College 1400 The Electric Building Fort Worth, Texas 76102

Dear Dr. Griffith:

I am working on my problem for the doctoral disser-tation at North Texas State University. The thrust of the problem is to research the nature of the management functions in which division chairpersons engage and to determine the importance of these functions to that role of administration in the junior and community colleges. The frequency in which chairpersons engage in these management functions and their related activities will also be determined.

The design of the problem is to:

1. Develop a list of activities in which division chairpersons engage and to classify the activities under five management functions of planning, organizing, staffing, directing or leading, and controlling. This has been done, by three division chairpersons in the Dallas County Community College District and in the Tarrant County Junior College District.

2. Develop a questionnaire from the data and to have the management activities and the questionnaire validated by several administrators within the TCJC, the DCCCD, and NTSU. Those from the TCJC would be the chancellor, one president, one dean of instruction, and one division chairperson, from the four locations in TCJC.

195

196

3. Administer the final form of the questionnaire to each of the presidents, deans or vice-presidents of instruction, and division chairpersons within the TCJC and the DCCCD, a total of seventy-four persons.

a. The presidents would be given a copy of the survey instrument and would be asked to return it to me.

b. The deans of instruction will be asked to allow me to administer the questionnaire at one time to the dean and to all of the division chairpersons in the college.

My request is that you would consider this proposal. I hope that you will then recommend to the chancellor that the research be allowed. In this way, I feel that the research will be supported by the college presidents, the deans, and the division chairpersons at TCJC.

The proposed method of performing the research would be done easily and quickly. The subject is very appro-priate to the needs and interests of the TCJC. There would be minimum disruption in campus procedures.

This research will hopefully yield information on which to base inservice developmental activites and in focusing emphasis upon management education in universities which could benefit TCJC chairpersons.

Thank you for your consideration.

Very truly yours,

W. Gene Stewart

APPENDIX C

APPENDIX C

LETTER TO VALIDATION PANEL MEMBERS

December 6, 1978

TO: Validation Committee

FROM: Gene Stewart 132 3 Seminole Richardson, Texas 75080

Re: Validation of Management Activities and Survey Instrument

You are requested to validate a list of management activities in which junior and community college division chairpersons engage and to validate the format for a proposed survey instrument. This is in preparation for research which is to be done as part of a doctoral dissertation in community college administration at North Texas State University.

Because I do not w&nt your completed work on the study to be lost, I will come to your office on Wednesday, December 20, 19 78, to pick up the completed validation documents. Please leave them with your secretary if you will not be in the office.

Should you have any comments or questions, please write me at the above address or call me at (214) 746-3251,

success Thank you for your invaluable contribution to the ss of this research study.

198

199

SECTION ONE

MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS

Validation of the Management Activities in Which Junior College and Community College Division Chairpersons Engage

Examine the activities which are listed in this

section under the five management functions of planning,

organizing, staffing, directing or leading, and control-

ling. The activities have been developed by contemporary

division chairpersons of the Tarrant County Junior College

District and the Dallas County Community College District.

You are asked to decide whether or not the activity

is a management activity, and then to verify the classi-

fication of each activity under its appropriate management

function. Definitions for each of the management func-

tions have been included for your use in this exercise.

Please follow the procedure which is outlined below.

1. If you feel that an activity is not a management

activity, write the word "none" to the left of the

activity number.

2. If you agree that an activity is a management

activity and that it is listed under the appropriate

management function, you need to do nothing more in

regard to that activity.

3. If you believe that an activity is a management

activity but that it should be listed under any other

200

management function or functions, please indicate all of

the management functions under which the activity should

be listed, including the original function if the activity

should remain there also. Write a capital letter to the

left of the activity number to indicate the function or

functions to which you feel the activity belongs by using

the first letter only (P, 0, S, DL, or C) of the function

or functions you wish to indicate.

4. If there are any management activities which are

a part of the role of the division chairperson but which

are not included in this list, please write them on the

list under the appropriate management function.

5. If there are any other comments which should be

made, please write them on this page.

COMMENTS:

201

SECTION TWO

MANAGEMENT FUNCTION OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS

Validation of the Survey Instrument

The survey instrument is designed to contain two

sections, a demographic data section and a questionnaire

section. Please examine the two parts of the survey

instrument for clarity, completeness, and convenience in

administration. Please write any comments which are

needed to ensure that the above objectives will be

attained on the survey instrument near the material to

which they apply.

When you complete this section, please sign in the

indicated space at the bottom of this page.

Thank you for your help.

Validation Signature of Panel Member

APPENDIX D

APPENDIX D

ORIGINAL LIST OF MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

Function 1—Planning

Determining what work must be done. Includes defin-ing roles and missions, forecasting, setting objectives, programming, scheduling, budgeting, policy-making, and establishing procedures.

Activities

1. Meeting of instructional council. 2. Meeting on curriculum and instructional guidelines. 3. Letter(s) to faculty for input for schedule conflicts, 4. Schedule review. 5. Develop schedule. 6. Revise schedule. 7. Meeting with associate dean on schedule. 8. Meeting with counselors on registration. 9. Meeting with director of counselors on registration

and testing. 10. Develop goals and activities. 11. Self-review of budget. 12. Develop divisional budget. 13. Assign account codes for requisitions. 14. Adjust budget for faculty schedule changes. 15. Subcommittee meeting on evaluation. 16. Review division budget with instructional dean or

vice-president and/or other administrators. 17. Develop work schedule for registration. 18. Develop summary of labor hours. 19. Meeting with vendors. 20. Coordinate with planning office on equipment needs. 21. Coordinate with planning office on supplies needed. 22. Meeting with divisional chairs (peer group). 23. Visit another college's instructional and/or lab

facility. 24. Institute recruitment for faculty. 25. Schedule advisory meeting. 26. Prepare meeting agendas. 27. Conduct advisory meetings. 28. Develop equipment specifications. 29. Prepare budget justifications. 30. Letter to a support department at the district.

203

204

31. Move to permanent offices. 32. Review bids for equipment. 33. Honors committee meetings. 34. Set up a follow-up system. 35. Meeting on instructional development regarding

a program in the division. 36. Review district policy manual. 37. Review campus or college policy manual. 38. Develop room assignment list. 39. Meeting with textbook representatives. 40. Schedule class rooms and times for community service

courses. 41. Develop TEA program applications. 42. Recommend catalog change (non curriculum). 43. Recommend salary levels for new full and part time

faculty and staff. 44. Prepare contract information for continued employment

personnel. 45. Review numerous policy proposals. 46. Recommend summer innovative projects. 47. Recommend the development of new programs. 48. Approve requisitions for department and program

expenditures. 49. Approve media expenses. 50. Prepare bid list. 51. Supervise grant expenditures. 52. Supervise the issuance of office supplies to personnel. 53. Attend campus administrative planning retreat. 54. Counsel with students about course schedule. 55. Supervise student degree plan process. 56. Prepare grant proposals in divisional programs. 57. Assist with budget development grant for divisional

program. 58. Approve expenditures of grant funds for divisional

program. 59. Meeting with deans of instructional television

personnel.

Function 2—Organizing

Classifying and dividing the work into manageable units, Includes structuring or grouping the work and integrating or establishing conditions necessary for effective teamwork.

Activities

1. Requisition of textbooks. 2. Follow-up instructional development for divisional

program.

205

3. Meeting on instructional development for a specific subject.

4. Develop status report on a program's instructional development.

5. Formal report meeting on status of an instructional program.

6. Develop position paper on curriculum proposals. 7. Develop room assignment list. 8. Orientation of new faculty members. 9. Trip to professional conference.

10. Trip to visit a self-paced college out of state. 11. Meeting of instructional council. 12. Meeting on curriculum proposals and procedures. 13. Letter to faculty for input to resolve schedule

conflicts. 14. Develop summary of labor hours. 15. Attend technical/occupational workshop. 16. Schedule advisory meetings. 17. Prepare meeting agendas. 18. Serve as officer on college committee or advisory

council. 19. Supervise new proposals and changes in curriculum for

division. 20. Review catalog galley proof. 21. Supervise grant activities in divisional program. 22. Supervise appointment recommendations for occupational

advisory committee members.

Function 3—Staffing

Determining the requirements for and ensuring the availability of personnel to perform the work. Includes determining personnel needs, selecting personnel, and developing personnel.

Activities

1. Interview full time faculty applicants. 2. Meeting with dean or vice-president of instruction

on load report. 3. Interview part time faculty applicants. 4. Letters to applicants. 5. Telephone for reference checking. 6. Confer with district personnel office. 7. Confer with campus personnel coordinator. 8. Telephone employment inquiries. 9. Courtesy interview of district referral.

10. Interview full and part time staff members. 11. Visit existing college and review transfer file.

206

12. Coordinate interviews for full time faculty with instructional dean or vice-president and the president.

13. Visit instructional vice-president or dean of another college and discuss interviews of faculty who have requested a transfer.

14. Coordinate board agenda. 15. Work information booth at shopping mall. 16. Institute recruitment for faculty. 17. Orientation for new faculty member. 18. Coordinate hiring for community services. 19. Encourage faculty in professional growth and

development. 20. Recommend new staffing needs for next academic year. 21. Recommend employment of part time faculty and staff

each term. 22. Recommend employment of full time faculty and staff. 23. Supervise the preparation of part time contracts. 24. Maintain divisional personnel file on faculty and

staff. 25. Recommend re-employment or continued employment

of faculty and staff. 26. Recommend promotion in rank for full time faculty. 27. Recommend promotion of classified personnel. 28. Recommend non-renewal of contracts. 29. Counsel with department chairpersons. 30. Attend meetings on classified personnel evaluation. 31. Attend professional development activity sponsored by

NTSU. 32. Meeting with divisional department. 33. Supervise divisional professional activity. 34. Meeting with director of personnel. 35. Meeting with intern from a university. 36. Visit instructional workshop.

Function 4—Directing and Leading

Bringing about the human activity required to accomplish objectives. Includes assigning, motivating, communicating, and coordinating.

Activities

1. Seek approval for audio visual equipment for faculty. 2. Confer with instructional leaders on equipment

purchases. 3. Review equipment bids. 4. Attend personnel workshop. 5. Develop TEA program applications. 6. Review policy manual.

207

7. Attend community center presentation about the college.

8. Conduct tours during college dedication ceremony. 9. Attend technical/occupational workshop. 10. Develop curriculum for catalog. 11. Develop course descriptions for catalog. 12. Guest speaker for a city organization. 13. Guest speaker for the United Way. 14. Prepare radio advertisement. 15. Participate in a radio interview. 16. Develop job specifications for staff members. 17. Develop advertisement to hire instructional

assistants. 18. Participate in audio visual tutorial filming session. 19. Speaker in a feeder high school. 20. Schedule class slots for community services. 21. Coordinate hiring for community services. 22. Letter on committee. 23. Preparation for speech for leadership retreat. 24. Honors committee meeting. 25. Meeting with associate dean on schedule. 26. Committee meeting on evaluation. 27. Letter to purchasing department. 28. Letter on employee evaluation. 29. Review of division budget with instructional dean or

vice-president. 30. Letters to applicants. 31. Develop work schedule for registration. 32. Requisition text books. 33. Conduct division meetings. 34. Follow-up on instructional development for a

divisional program. 35. Visit another campus to inspect an instructional

program. 36. Conduct advisory committee meetings. 37. Coordinate board agenda. 38. Coordinate meeting location and facilities for

workshop. 39. Develop position paper on curriculum proposals. 40. Work in an information booth off-campus. 41. Trip out of town for administrative conference. 42. Attend curriculum and instructional meetings. 43. Authorize the issuance of keys to faculty and staff. 44. Authorize the issuance of parking decals to faculty

and staff. 45. Counsel with faculty and staff about payroll,

contracts, and evaluation. 46. Assign office space to faculty and staff. 47. Coordinate the development of class schedules. 48. Coordinate the assignment of class rooms.

208

49. Submit class schedule information to data systems. 50. Review and modify proposed schedule of classes. 51. Approve credit by examination requests. 52. Approve grade change requests. 53. Approve field trip requests. 54. Approve the issuance of "I" grades. 55. Submit report on off campus courses. 56. Maintain individual faculty teaching schedules. 57. Supervise mail distribution for faculty and staff. 58. Approve textbook adoptions. 59. Counsel with students and citizens about complaints. 60. Counseling with students and citizens about programs. 61. Supervise regular and late registration. 62. Provide instructional leadership to departments. 63. Schedule and coordinate site visits for program

accreditation. 64. Maintain communications with accreditation agencies. 65. Supervise the preparation of responses to site visits. 66. Liaison with district purchasing agents. 67. Liaison with vendors. 68. Attend division chairperson meetings. 69. Coordinate district curriculum proposals for

division programs. 70. Attend advisory committee meetings for occupational

programs. 71. Attend orientation meetings for full and part time

personnel. 72. Maintain communications with grant personnel at DHEW. 73. Prepare grant reports for DHEW. 74. Assist in the preparation of grant financial state-

ments for DHEW. 75. Interviews with student newspaper. 76. Attend faculty meetings. 77. Attend meeting pertaining to instructional media. 78. Attend curriculum hearings. 79. Attend meetings with district directors of purchasing

and accounting. 80. Meeting with a dean of a local university. 81. Attend department chairperson meetings, or lead

instructor's meetings. 82. Attend coffee for new dean of education department

from North Texas State University. 83. Make presentation to a class at a local university. 84. Meeting with dean or vice-president of instruction. 85. Meetings with faculty pertaining to curriculum. 86. Meetings with campus task forces. 87. Meetings with campus visitors. 88. Host a visit by DHEW official. 89. Appoint members of a committee. 90. Meetings with director of research.

209

91. Meetings with civil rights personnel at regional DHEW office.

92. Meeting with continuing education personnel. 93. Meeting to review Student Assessment Battery test. 94. Meetings of district faculty and staff. 95. Meetings of district deans or vice-presidents and

division chairpersons. 96. Meeting textbook representatives.

Function 5—Controlling

Assuring the effective accomplishment of objectives. Includes establishing standards, measuring performance, and taking corrective action.

Activities

1. Evaluation committee meeting. 2. Conduct evaluation on secretary. 3. Letter to employees on evaluation procedures and

policy. 4. Set up follow-up system. 5. Follow-up instructional development progress. 6. Meeting with instructional dean or vice-president

on load report. 7. Seek approval for audio visual equipment for faculty. 8. Confer with instructional leaders on equipment

purchases. 9. Investigate payroll error for faculty member. 10. Adjustments to budget on faculty schedule changes. 11. Develop status report for instructional development

for divisional program. 12. Formal report meeting on status of divisional

program. 13. Develop curriculum for catalog. 14. Develop job specifications for faculty and staff

personnel. 15. Coordinate institutional research related to the

divisional instruction program. 16. Develop an annual report which summarizes the

progress, problems, and prospects of the division. 17. Evaluate faculty. 18. Supervise the submission of faculty evaluation

material to data systems. 19. Maintain evaluation file on faculty. 20. Maintain records of teaching loads. 21. Maintain records and recommendations of overloads. 22. Approve course syllabi. 23. Evaluate programs.

210

24. Supervise the development of accreditation reports. 25. Calculate class enrollment averages at the end of

registration and twelfth class day. 26. Analysis comparison of class sections taught by

full and part time faculty. 27. Review grade distribution report for division. 28. Conference(s) with faculty in case of non-renewal

of contract and serious problems. 29. Meeting of admission committee. 30. Meeting consultants for programs in the division. 31. Meetings of various committees. 32. Evaluation conferences with department chairpersons.

APPENDIX E

212

APPENDIX E

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES OP

COMMUNITY COLLEGE

DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS

213

SECTION ONE

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA'

1 « NAME OF COLLEGE/CAMPUS;

2. PRESENT POSITION

President ""Dean or Vice President (Instructional) "Division Chairperson

ONLY DIVISION CHAIRPERSONS ARE TO COMPLETE QUESTIONS 3# ij., 5 AND 6.

3* LENGTH OF TIME IN PRESENT POSITION

Less than 1 year Between 1 and 2 years Between 2 and 5 years More than 5 years

IN- FORMAL MANAGEMENT EDUCATION

None *1 to 3 Semester Hours or 1 to 5 Quarter Hours \ to 9 Semester Hours or 6 to 12 Quarter Hours "Over 9 Semester Hours or over 12 Quarter Hours

5. EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE OTHER THAN IN PRESENT POSITION

None Jl.es s than 1 year [[Between 1 and 2 years "Between 2 and $ years [[More than 5 years

6, MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE IN NON-EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION

JNTone _Less than 1 year 'Between 1 and 2 years "Between 2 and 5 years "More than 5 years

214

cO S3 O CO PC M

PC HH <

0

» 0 M CO

0 M ^ 1 >

1 M Q

0 Peh M O E-» O CO pq W CO M

E-« M > L-i r-1 E-* O < E-< 55 W

o <

< a

© CO C O P , CQ © Pi

© e 0

bD C

•H rH O • P. >>

•H - P O *H

>

^ P O

S ^

3 , C rH O O CG O ©

*-• © P» S ^ r C O

4 > P « H •H t> ^-4 ©

•iH O bD 4-3 Cti 0 0 , p < 0

- p ©

O O P as ^

rx3 - P «M 0

CM 4 > O 05 ©

Tl © SJ *H

• d O CT •rH *rH CO P P

CQ <M - P © © ^ 3 H © c r

>-3 © © ^

© X - p JS - P P c

0 0 a - p

03 0 p. C X3 © O C C P

•H E O G 4-5 3 3 O H (n C 3 0 © P« O PC

4 > CD C •

M «—

T5 © © rH 03 .£ ^ C p 0 O

a CO m

0 © 05

H © H -H © as 43 c

•H • 0 «M > c O *H 1 bo

P 3 c CQ O rH *tH

• ® B) O r l • CQ H O O (D O H Pi - P rH P» rH - P *H «H O < < h O > U © © *h - p «

C as • 3: 0 P . © O rH 2 £\

as o - P > U .- _

bO C H a j *H C ©

OS o CD

00 tn © _ ai £ , £ <M

o - P © p , ©

bO ca <m bO © © O aS H P< P i rH a o © o ©

- p p

© x j o x : fM

,4J 4-? 4 > O

P. O

d TJ -P ©

w b O c j 03

m to

CL c

, £ S £ - P o -P

t J C £ © 0 0 O ^ - P

Jh JM (A G* XS ©

S CJ .O > o r-f © P

D jQ U3 d ©

PC

o co

O Q P n

C © o , a

•H - P 09

*H £ > *H

P © t£> ©

O b O - P C © <m

rH - P C ©

3 c r ©

u <M

© o

s t , E - P

P i PI "rH Jh o >

»H »H £ cd p» - P o , £ © o

W o a OS

co W

&-« M >

M

O <

DO H ©

. f l 43

CO •H

CVJ

4^ «M cd O 3 a * © © rH TJ O

+5 as ^ c ; a* a j C © X

4^ «H x ! o Pi - p O r>s £< P P bO O £ »H £ »H

•H > «H 05 *H rH *H

S - P H > O O »H nH

W « I < h Q

o -C o CQ u ©

Pu u

U 9 ^ J 0

U 9 ^ J 0

A l I B U O - p S B O O O

J 3 A a t f

* c? bO CQ 3

- P C © CQ »H « >

C © -H » bO • G *H Pf P bD t : CQ

«M O O c *H © ^ © <M © -H ^Si P. Pi T3 '* 31—i CSJ 3 O • J 3 ^ S T J

0 % w CQ O T3 1 © s ; © C © >> O M O bD, r : 0 O S5 cd rS •H SC O mH P» Jz; rH CO -H CO rH P <3j * O CQ +3 O • J C - h +5 ^ p , bO PL. bOhH E © bo c

G in d •k-H •rH • o «H b D , q C • C • S C «

•H © Cj bD £ «H *rH £ a a 3 - P H P4 O C3 *H. Pt © rQ © n © - P bO bO as

- P H w O T i - P © © 0 as Pi 3 0 Q .Q Pi O P , ; Q ©

CM

I B o x ^ i a o

^ U B ^ a o d m x

^ u B ^ a o d w i

a o u B ' 4 a o d m i © I Q - ^ T ' I

s o u B ^ J o d u i i O N

2 1 5

U \

- d -

OJ

* —

t * 1 as

S P . 3 « 3 o rH bO rH rH aS P P © >

»H O > © - P «TH © © p rs «« © p bO E P

o aJ •H bD p 4-> P •» o 03

*H p *H © fi 0 + 3 + 3 • P »H O b o OS p » P

cH O P P *H PH 3 - P O - p

P w »H © P - P p - P bO

•H (?) .H as ncJ P P 3

© . H - 4 ^ JQ - P bD 03 aS bO P -H T3 P< P *H bO P

•H *H rH © aS o d p P

•H JH TJ _ *

- P as © .4_r c2 P b O , p P O as © o © *r"1

P-» P 03 £ - P

U N

OJ

UN

- d *

c o

CM

a} C o

•H rH +3 cd o P P o P - H

- p «P 03 O P P

*H P 4 3

co ta - P P *H O

•H * 3

• 3 S >

«H *4-> 7 3 § £

P CD © H 6

, P P Pk - P O O

tH r-H P P © as P >

H 3 © pi. C Tt

o J

05

P bO c P e u

m

m

c\j

U N

c n

cm

i t 5 ©

•C O 03 ©

03 •H > ©

p

§

? ©

•H > © P

P* O

»—I • © 03 > © © rH

« P

U \

CN

OJ

U N

- d

CVJ

I T3 as

bO bO

H *H p p< P aS

aS P , * 05 bfl P P P<-H

•» ©

® S > ) 0 3 « H C rQ © > p f H ©

- P - P JL, £L © *H o bD > H t) *H

0 + 3 X j O

*3 ' d rH

as xi c S o ©

cd -H to «H

C H H - P aS > aS 03

H « H O ^ Ph b o * ^

o H 0) >

0) *3

CD >

0

t3

m P o

•-H - P as o

•H t>0 a

•H - P a 3

UN

c n

c \ j

i as P

- p TO

•p-f

bO a> P p

o <M

3 *d ©

o ffl

X P O >

P , o

I—t ©

> © '

Q - P

p o

U \

U N

OJ

U N U N U N u \

- i t - d -

CN r^N m

OJ OJ CM CM

<r- - T~ * -

P p o o

• © © © QQ o o P P •H •H O

CM 03 O P

, P o O © P<

P bO 6 0 P o P P •H

aS as P P A

rH a s

o *i-{ H

00 H P

O P , Pk o • « nH

t » CQ ^ TJ 03 P 4-i - P © *H cd «H © •H T? > • E © © •H -

a P © rcj ft 3 © © P P CO - P 4 ^ 4 3 rP o

as P 03 CO 4^ P p< P © P © *H bO o *H S *H *H

bO

rH ' d Pk rH P © P nH P P , - P © > o P O PH © © © o c r c p © P i

Q o © O 03

• • • • vO GO O

U N U N U N U N

- d * - d - - d "

m r^\ <r>

OJ CM CM OJ

T— r ~ <r- ^r-

c*N

216

X A X A X A XA X A I A

- d - _ d _ d - d - - d - d *

m m m m m m

cm cm c \ j cvi c \ j c \ j

X A X A X A X A I A X A X A

- d - - d - - d - d - ^ - d " - d -

m m m m m m m

C\J CM CM CM CVJ CVI CM

>> cd

03 0) 03 CD ©

• P o - p ©

• H C

1 O O

- P > 3 O U 3 O T2 « G

*H O > O

as

G k cd o

<M «K 03

® tsO

h d as . H ft-P a> ©

0) £

XT\

to G o

•H - P cd o

o CD ft 03

- P c CD s ft

• H 3 cr1

©

ft o

rH ©

> CD

Q

X A

m

CM CM

• bO

U © bO • 0 • o a rH <v-i 03

•H - H © >> G • P G • 0 CQ O

- P Q-f 03 G r H • H • © •H u o • © O cd f H - p s - P o 6 - P 03 3 O QQ cd ft+> • © JH g ft • P • 0 ft o - p - P © 3 rH CQ • H 2 *H G 03 G ft 6 © i d © r H CO ju, © >> Cd 6 0 - P G 03 ft _ - P E 03 © G 2 H ft ® CD ft G O 0 rH © cd

•H *H ft 0 •H r H g 05 O O t J 3 3 •rH G r H O G S O H

- P a * f • P O O O bO O cB © © S as *H ft •H O ® U

k & O u - P u 03 O bD © 4 0 U rH - p cd - P 0 03 •H 0

- P 0 rH 05 2 O a) 02 > 4-1 . p O • H rH *H so 03 U ft © SS

CO <H tiO • eg su e cd ©

ft I—1 CO

G& © GO > - p ft 0 H CQ <

T5 G& f * - p © 03 0 0 w 05 £ • H G •H E3 u e-1

0 u fc CD XI 0 © - p ® E 0 , 0 * o O • ft rH »H ft ao 4 3 £ *-» 3 5c 5 rH 0 0 C fc © - P © © cd r H 3 r H ft as *H c G « c •H • H ^ © ® B © £ ft > cd a3 a t > > G > s > O © © 1—f rH Ck H © © cd © 0 0 ©

O T5 PC O l 0 A* « 6 &0 0 Q

• • • • • • • • • m CM m - d - I A s£> r - CO O 0 v -

T~ «r- T— ^r- <r~ CM CM

X A I A XA \ A I A I A XA XA X A X A

- d - d - d - - d - d - d - - d ~ - d - d - d *

m m m m m m m m m m

CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

G o c

CM CM

2 1 7

i n i n u \ i a i n i n m m u \

- d - - d -

i a i n i a i n

- d * - d *

r o m n o r o r o n o n o n o CO n o r O C O o o

OJ CM OJ C\J CM CM OJ ( \ l (M CM OJ CM OJ

rH rH

* £ © Cm C Cd

P f - t 0 3 O

< m xi ro §

rH © ^ > P © H

H 3 O

J>> c S Sm cd

© £

• H P

T 3 C ©

c 4 ffi

o o 0 )

c c

r o CM

m

P u cd ft

p c ©

u e o • © p <H rH • c

© ro c d p c C ft o a o © o © *r-i o •H > i 3 P CO P p

c d U c d - P C ro e © T5 c d © O ©

ft G > 6 o © o ft 2

P § C o ro p £ c E C rH C *H

•H © o © O TJ s o > •H c

P i » © © p © O o © 1 3 •H ft cd rH ro x

& >> E © •H © p fi o p 43 C © *H t o P c r S o rH © c d o O TJ • TJ * u u

© ft C t n C ro to © 2 © p © P © o r-»

*•4 ?c g o g 3 > u as © s © s IH o ft ftp •H o o b0 £-1 © Q > o o o o ft 1 3

O © © u © ft £ P u o c c PC ft c c ft < U c d

• * • • « - d " i n v£> r ^ GO OJ OJ CM OJ OJ

i n m m i n i n

•

ro © © >

• H 2 P

p c d • H • d p c ro © • H ft c X •rH © s • ©

' B p p c d c d

S © GO ro u

0 - p bO ft ©

B u © CO ro O bO

• H C > rJ » h Pi a a © © c ft p 3

P rH CO < ft • •

o o OJ n o

- 4 " - d "

m m

- d - - d -

rH

ft C •H

© © ro U rH to cd © ro •

o ro P4 6

p o cd c u u © ft bO

TJ o •-H p h p C ft ro cd

?-< rH © bO cd ro • £

•H ro © o > ro PH - r t

© cd ro © o ft nH ft o © > p U

CO ft P-« t J

• • * — CM n o r o

i n

- d " - d -

P §

bO

- P C © s ft o

rH © •

> g a> ad

T J JL, bO

43 o ©

bO ft 1 3 J3 rH

, a as

& o P »H •H CO £ * H >

P «H CQ T 3

* H CO U ro o < < i n

r o n o

i n

© T 3

bO

<+h • ° §

ro k © bO U 2

P

T J r H £ « S 0 ) C ft O K - H © 0 0

• H © > > - H O £* ft u ft o

- = f C O

i n

- d -

rH 0 5 C O

• H P O 3 b

- P CO a •

* H « H ©

£ ° o

0 3 C £ j cd © © £ u

^ C

5 ° •H M

P © ® rH © ©

^ - P

i n n o

U \

- d -

m

r o r o n o r o n o n o r o n o n o r o n o

OJ CM CM CM CM CM OJ CM OJ CM CM CM OJ

m m ia i n ia ia m un

-d" -d* -d- -d- -d" -d* -d-

n"\ f*"N c"v r^ i m c+\ c<\

CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

un un

-d- _ d

UN UN UN UN

-d- -d-

UN U \

-d* -d-

r N CN r N CN CN

218

bO G

O S5

sz; <

o

0 r£ • -P CO

•P bO-H g a

*H ^ h3 •H 0) > rH

•H ,Q TJ <33

0) TJ bC

s s bG 6 G •H O >>-P ^ g •H *H 03 w J* as k

rH O o *

ft • 2 u § o o © k 0 bO bC -P

C JU *H CO 0 O -P G > as o«h

bO k *H -P G bO^P o iH 0 »H (D

-P 13 < h 3 C C <Vh -P *H O 3 T3

S § CO

o © o

k bD o G

* , £ CO

5» Jh

*rl CC CO

0 W • rH OS 0 O 0 -P O £< CI ,£ CO 0 O h -P a? G £

CO

o o &

-p X 0 -p

G o

CO •H 3 c r 0 «

-p 03

-p a 0) 6 c bO •H w CO aJ

E o c

ft o

0 Q

CM

CO

CD

s 0 6 •p

rH 3

£ ! CC ^

s -0 C ->

T3 © P 0) as XJ -p

bO © o -p -p g g M -H

U 0 • rH CD £-i CO • as ^ c rH G G -P 6 •H • o o o © O

•H bO G o CO CO -P O © 3 o 0 CO «H u rH O •H a> 03 • o rH O ft -P

^ • H n C rO O •H o > cd c cd O > U 0 -H rH fn 0 »H ft XS -P G O rH •P •

O *H 05 «H o w rH O ^ * \ t<3 O •rH as as as

03 ' d £ *H u > bO a G .H c »>> © -d -P bD o cd a* at P-i o as bD G O ,£ bO bO as O 3 to * U £ CM ^ rH Qi J* 03 o O £ ^ O aS bO P« 0 -P p O -P rH O O 0 03 0 as 0 aS £ G co > 03 0 o 03 G

® (D»H P, aS -p •H o T3 bO-P o -P > *H G 0 © O rH 0 © CO 0 <h H 0 0 > g »H 0 'H -P G r-4 «M > E > ft > -P O O 0 0 o 0 ^ -H < ! o o © Q CO o cc CO X)

* • • • • -d" UN v£5 l>- CO

vO

CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

2 1 9

U \ UN UN U \

rr\ rr\ C \

CM C\J OJ 00

I -P o O * -H

© J-, O »H - P »H O

aJ 03 oq © 6 C -H P

• H > 03 TJ -H 5 ^ 1 3 i ; o O O

P-i 03 O • cd <h £ 1?' (5 Jh +5 as a

cp - p

o 3

bO O u

^ • H a a - p o ca CQ

- P S

CD - P „ > £ ® © ® a) • n g XJ 6 +»

*H q - P o C t f lrH © cci .H aJ cd bO to £ f x . q U co o © 3

o c d ^ c d o)

CQ as ©

as - p N a)

S ^ 03 q

M Q) O >

© O

-P

* * 5

c o • H . H ^ 4 0 0 O g 3 E k

_< - P 35 SQ S C

^ o

c o

3 o

> *H *4 u 2 o •

O * <D

« k £ 3 c c ' d Jh © bo o o o fn. ^ a P ,

rH T) * c c 3 o

•H tQ -P fH O OS

I - P I Q< •H O O 03 U H O ft <D a >

£ © t j 3 ' d

w o p< o b a

« 3 rH o si

co -H c -P U o U U *H O 3 -P R O O © 3 Sh (30 1H

C <P 03 i-J GO 3 T3 C

4 > ^ qj OS

-P b C d tQ © £

S* «J & O to CO

r ! ^ H • © (D «* 4-> > ft ro a © a3 O ©

P A R S

I O

C U *H P i

T3 >> * £ - P ca of H *P 3 o O »H 03 H

<V~! «m a

^ O

I aJ P« 3 o c o o

-P 09 ©

© «P -P

O o

03 03 © -P t o c s i

o x - P *H O C £ ©

rH g O ^ 3 3 Ph ^ T3 H P , o © 3 aj yu ^ x : o o B o - h tsO co GJ 03 jL{ £ -H © M »H >

-P t£ 3 X} T3 £ O C etf

O > bO ! r H H d © O *rt > ca 03 © © o

© (H CO

O £ o o © *H

P p , ^ +>

0 s OJ

I A

-d"

UN

- d -

U \ UN

r N t N

C\J e g o j OJ

22 0

i n I A l / v U \ UN U \ UN \ A

-d* -=fr -=*"

c"\ o m j r o r n c^\ r^\

<\j C\J C\J OJ (\J OJ OJ OJ

£5 M

<

e~» CO

U • 1 o o ' d >> -P O

* r l C -P £ cd © a j »—1 © •

m U & 2 T2 43 •P *H O C * o •H U © C H ? O H as CO O 6 © mH 03 © OH © ft «H E JO © U C P © © c3 xJ © C p P < P P r-t 43 ft O o -P

•H »H 03 • <M © ' d 3 <tf E bO Pi rH o a j a} c r > p c © © 43 •H O ft © C3 O *H ft G £ > rH P« <H C C © T3

(D ^ r l M o E P £ d © Si © E C to «P O o 3 .

, £ 43 ft P, - h P« •H 03 43 © - p © 3 S £ R~H P

bO o -P o ft P. ctf o <H g bO c -P © © O © w~i £ 'H t ? H t)0 © ' C . p ^ O

.r~« p rH © £ P c •H C ^ © w a * H 3: iH

»H W p | © P . © p © ft e a c - a * o -P •H . p *H ft P © O 3 03 r-4 a j £ 02 > cd © 03 rH T? © •H C u •P ' d ^ O © > -P -P *H © p> © C © G © © •H © -P - p P 05 ft W £ TJ a © <M Jwj rH

M S O M $ • •

* — CM r n

03 -P §

O

ft as

o 43

03 ©

-P 43 ©

H

© CD o a . e o

o

03 0)

<D (p

2 ^ P o

M CL

NH <J> ©

U ©

* 5 o p

<m o ©

2 ft C 03 2 ° & u ft Oh ©

rHC^ <J> o - p

m 830

2 c

O © (D

S> o

09 •

c 43 o

Jh CO 03 O - P © u

C SJ © © © a " © ft bO S © 43 E © IH c •H C

«H o © E 43 -H H rH ©

© E

O ft-P r>> 43 03 o E «J O Pi 43

+«• © ^ rH rH ft

as G ft

o Jh a j E o •H o > © X3 •H

© © G

C rH •p rH ©

G d ft CO © o

© G

ft •H a ^ o rH Cd £ • ,cj rH O * ft 3 Pi as PH © © *+-< © U O rH © • ;Q

*rH © -P 03 rH ©

cn 5t E 5s ft cd

a § 4-> © •H © © *H E

03 «H u IH P. > © P -D -P © •H P4 <M

ft © CH c E o u 03 c r 45 OJ o a o o PI c £ 43

o O O <H <a •H M 03

CO

-= t I A v£> CO

i a \s\

•=± -=t

XA U \ \ A

-= t -d"

U \ I A

-d*

t A

r r . r^i r o <•*> r o

CM OJ OJ OJ C\J OJ OJ OJ

I A I A I A I A I A I A 1 A I A I A I A \ A

- d " - d - d - d " - d " - d " J " - d - - d

cA f A f A f A r A C \ < A c A f A < A r A

221

rvj

© e ^

• H O * - P 4 3

e £ H cd ® rH © ' d 3 T3 -H

Cm 00 H ©

k cd ^ o £ ft

Cm o •H ©

^ - P ^ £ O - P

3

> 43 c k co cd © c

- P -H - P £ £

•H C <& - P *d

© *H *H • P 5t OJ © <D G >>U

•H +3 ft ? ^ *< 3 c a o cd .

O Cm

© •H

© o

•H >

<T>

I f \

CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

• d rH © rH

© 3 3 ' d © © 4-5 rH C CM ' d

U 6 6 u •H *H • © >> o •H •H Gd Cm 43 CM •H

43 <M • P 43 ft C O i - i •H rH o cd •H

03 - P • H CM © C 43 GO • P T3 U E rH O c CO 00

CQ g CD cd b 3 c s cd

u E © ft © CM G o O TJ 3 H © o £ 43 o CO g O & o <M <M •H 43 d £ t o o £ o - p © c e <M © p« £ o cd ft • © >> •H O 6 o - P ed 43 u CM p

CM CM • £ © £ aJ rH S r H c c © © • P , cd cd o 2 O 0

-P t£> d cd E «M E © C 4-5 H O •H •H rH - P 0) }>><M IH o co ft OS 4-> 43 2 00 o as o cd ft * •H E <M O O O H - P rH - P CO m TJ © B £ cd •H £ o ft 03 ft M © - p -H fi • <M c • 0

sH ,£ © -H £ 6 XJ O > cd © o u t » u £ E © TJ © t ? - P cd *H ft 43 Pu

£ 0 © £ £ ^4 • d ^ 43 rH • © - P • r d »d ' O cd x J cd © - p 4^ TJ C • d 3 ^ ,H c cd £0 £ * a 03 C C rH C © a 0 £ ©

£ 0) © o © © >> •H O •H 3 © e © CO © £ 43 *H o E cd E - P | 43 > O cd o g >» g Cm g £ £ n -H £ £5 rH £ rH 4^ cd E O E E 0 a) JH > O - P o 3 o 3 © © c O rH O © O 03

•H o o X O O o o ft e O ft 0 E 0 1H H o © © © © aJ © cd G5 C © E © «H © ©

o o CO PC c OS CM CC OH CO 43 a o « <» PC 4 3 « ft • • • • • • • • • •

o «- CM f A - d * UN [S- CO (JN

* • " <r— T~ * — * —

I A I f \ I A I A I f \ I A \ A \ A I A I A

- d " - d " - d - d " - d r - d * - d - - d - - d -

r A f A <A f A f A f A f A f A f A f A f A

CM C\J CM OJ CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

222

\ A U \ \ A

OJ CM

* — -

•

CO -p c cd U

-P G <D a •H o

•H *H oa o 05

a* rH rH • atf O G * O <D G *H g O -P © cd

w 2 I bOrH c G cd O *H > g -P CD

j t \ T3

\ y ® rH

G S © a> a g T J g e G o o 0) 03 o -P u 0 «p ©

CC < p«

• • o CM CM

c \

CVJ

<D <D

Cd £l

G H t f l

O r H

oa 03

c ^ c f i H o

< H R P H CQ P , « b O r H (D - P C CCJ Ph r H C

cd as <d P . 3 s <D < 0 P <

* H C • P O © • H ® B J^r l O 6 >

- P . H

P, > rH »H ©

O T J > o - d + ) c ©

^ . G S G 4 ^ a> t 3 * d ^ * H , G G G

o ^ a l 3

o j OJ

i n m

- = t - d "

i n

-d-

O J CVJ CVJ

223

\a

CO

IA IA IA IA \A IA \A U\

-=t j* J$

<A rA rA c"\ pr> c a r o rA

I A

<A

CVJ CM CM CM CM CM CM CVJ C\J CM

O tz; M Q <

w

Q

< !

o £5 M EH-O w K

>>« -P © 0} »H > * • > -W bQ bO ©

•rl -P C C *d -P O »H cd O © 43 43 © cd *r"> cd cd rH

jo > C C O *H *H rH CD 43 T> cd

§ ^ 2 c • p « 6 o o 0} • Xl *H o »H © 03

rH - O - p 05 XI © a bo o ad •H X e £ - d ^ JCJ £> ^ O r l f i o

o c « ) 4^ u 43 P O 0T3 2 c 2 cd . h bO *-i ft © o to a •H 6

;Q O m - h p ft Cd 4* 43 £ C *H od 43 ©

tiOxJ & O •H £ cr C © © «H ft © •H Pi X5 a •H b0-H ^ ^ P« M rH £: © cr1 ©

• h c r o g © •H ^ © C o c >

m f ^ H o o C © o o

I A

ft O x: m X U o £

rH <D C c O CO ©

a

T) c ©

43 43 <

CM rA

IA IA

_3"

0}

C cd 6

o

o ft £ <D

*H > © PC,

cd

C © CQ ©

Ph ft k • 0) <D

-P 50 C © © H O H

O N O P •H © fi X

i 4 3

E 43 o 3 o o

. a TJ 03 fl CD C

43 O -P *H < +5

P. o

-=t IA

IA IA

-d*

H © © cd Of} bO G © o

rH •H o • rH 43 o O cd o o ft rH

C cd © o Cd 4-i

jC o as 43 o

V g o

Cm ^s. •H rH Pi

O cd 3 O o O

02 •H c U m U c O O 3 o

43 © • C »H 43 ft 43

43 • O ft ft O w T3 x ; O «H C OT H U 73 ft © ^ © O

f—• E 43 P, > DO O CD 43 O © ©

o o < Z • • •

sD r ^ a o

I A I A I A

_d* - + H-

00 2 a

W G c °

~ cd ° S

j_3 n

&0

CO 1

O

IA

43 c © s © CQ

•H -P P* ©

> TJ

as

o •H TJ cd P< ©

Jh cd ft © p. P-.

U \

<A <A CA CA f A t A <A <A

CM CM CM CM CM OJ CM CM CM CM

I A U \ U N U \ X A I A \ A \ - A I T \ I A I A X A

4 4 4 4 4

c A r A r A c a r A r A CA c a r A r A c a

f \J OJ CVJ CM CVJ AJ CVJ OJ OJ OJ OJ c u

OJ r A I A n O CO O o OJ OJ

OJ OJ

U \

4

I A

4

I A X A I A I A \ A I A

4 4 4

I A I A \ A

4 4

X A

4

r A r A r A r A r A c A r A m CA <A

2 2 4

• • - p • p C •

c

• P

© 6

u © ©

' d

• H G >>

- p u • p - p • H

CO I

oo 1 p4

u 3 - p cd © © • H o •

o • H Q* r H u t>0 r H £ CM H £ j ©

G a © © a

r H o J3 ' d G U > Pi CO CO o c 1

bO O - p © • © bO

c 2 • o

g JH bO • H • H O U 03 T5 O

o co p O © a - P cd

o bD U • H • H o o o T3 * H

- P cd > G r H P ,

- P > »H o

cd CO

- P cd

- P • H cd cd CO u © aS r H

>

©

© u © - P G H O o m 0) o r H xi

r H >

©

b O o r H © O aJ • H • H © • p o

r H >

© XJ © * H G

^ 00 o U U

r H >

© ^ G xs 6 • p O

• H 3 r H bO o 0 © ©

!»

, o as © O »H O aJ b0 00 G

<VH PU © ©

!» © G 03

© G • H

© ©

!» C O o o U vH P , • C - H 03 rG O

© ©

!» o CO • H - P > CO 03 * h g 03 • H o . - P o • H r H GO 03 nH

SU r H as , G 2 +> r H P -e ©

03 OC »H G X I CD © «H H © ctf &

r H P -e ©

*ri P u > • H

C jOi - P <M o © p © ©

r H P -e ©

> O o cd

£ ed • - P • 0 3 *4 - p

r H P -e © T3 P ,

© P-t r H © CO cd 03 - p 4-> © CO

T3 - P • 3 PH P i E • H Cfl r H © G

* H a) © © © ©

CO O Pk G « o o O * H O

G * H o IM JL,

CO r H

© CO

5 3 o o O

r H * H U *G • H T3 IM JL, CO

TJ o p -

6

© ^ r H * H o © <M - P o © > fU > m ^

TJ o p -

6 • H +> © 4^ ' d H - P

> aS U - P , G u O u £ - G

P

o p -

6 > 03 > * G r H G a> 4-3 ad 3 O © O © £ - G

© o o

© G © u o O © Q ra - p CO cO O CO f u CO CO

o o (EI nH Q - P o & • e

- p o ©

P i 0} G

o - p

CTJ 00 2 t . P« bO E o 3 u o P i

^ r d © a* .G G • p o O * H

-p 2 • H - P 02 0}

• H G > - H

OJ

OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ CM OJ OJ

UN IA lA UN UN UN UN UN U\ XA UN U\

-d*

225

rA CA fA <A fA fA rA <A fA <A fA <A

OJ OJ C\J OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ

• -p 03 rH ^ • 03 OD hO t O C5 TJ 03 03 c H C 3 a o O g as 03 o *H o o -p OS n-J aS rH as *H T3 43 •H %4 -P O H 43 a> <D o -P 03 Cm aj O as rC a> O <M 2 4 <M o e 3 2 (D as rH H O CH u 03 o -p • -P as 3 o o a> o <D +3 CO > o 43 •d CD C o o oa <D as «P a <D -p o rO c d O T3 <D C •H 03 -p U O •H C ts 6 0) O •H £ o u T? 0> as C o P. £ P, J- CD o CM CD T? o as •p o rs <D O s P« c g rH ti) H u o as *P £ C as 3 <D <D •r*4 Q* o P, as £ o 3 • H « O S> 03

S C Q £ OQ 3 -P as <» m 0 >> >> C 5H •P 2 CO «M o o a 'd as ^ • *!H u o O <D rH •*H c8 as as CO O CO •H o •H • <e <M > 2 -P SH U <D (!) « £ *d CO •P CO O -H O <D CO •P o & <£ o •H •H i—1 +3 •H ^ a o -P 00 43 £ > co aS -p as *4 -P T3 -P o *ri CO 03 • TJ O co u C *r-i O (D « <D as j>> x5 m 05 P. O £0 o -p 3 • CD aS 3E <M -P 03 4-3 H CO £ 03 a CO o GO N «k O as a> as o as 03 -P a o c • rH *r—! bO *H £>s H rH C rH as 03 O o CO ® C *x3 C Pn -P <D rH n * •H • 43 4-3 £ aJ 3 r~t P, 3 i> »H C •H O H CO o bO<M T3 T3 TJ 03 -r-i 05 0) H X3 a> & «J g <D •P X! 2 S •H CM f-« a? 6 s •H O G > ? u E -P © 4-5 O 3 t» 05 aS o jc: O o > O <D P o cO ^ aJ -P © 3 aj o as CO -P o o O o 3 o 0 CH o Q H o < 6 <C CM o a, < 03 a co O b CO 43 « O

• • • • . • • • • • • • rA -d* un vO co o O r- OJ rA _d* OJ CSJ Af OJ CVJ OJ OJ CA rA <A CA rA

IA ia IA UN u\ UN UN UN UN UN UN UN

-d" -d- -d" -=* -d- -=t -d- -d- -d" -d- -d- -d-

rA <A fA rA ro rr\ fA rA rA rA rA

CXI CM OJ OJ OJ OJ At OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ

fA

226

I A I A \ f \ VA "LA XA U \ UN tt\ \ A I A 1 A VA

_d" _d- „d* _d* -d* -d*

f A <A f A f A f A f A f A <A f A CA f A f A f A

A i OJ C\j (\1 CM OJ ( \ i CVJ AJ Ai CVJ C\J AJ

a o

•H 43 CO P

•H 6 ctf X ©

.O

*d a? P« o •

00 a> 43 > to o © k 3 Ph cr P< © < u

\ A CA

I A

• CO GO © i 00 © CO rCj C T* O a> aS 3 as U N

• JH O © o -H CO bO o 4-> 43

p • •H 00 co C CO C • O © P M 3 +3 o CO 3 03 it & rH •H p cr © E 3 43 o C © 3 cO O 2 •H cfi u a 4 o o as P 43

© <m •H a 00 © © u o 43 t o O »—1 43 *d £ s P , 5 o cd CO • cd © 3 •H 3 3 ' d A U 3 c x* nd V , o P CO o •ri as o 43 •

00 > • rH P o 00 CO © •d •H 43 •H CO *H 05 rP £~ •d rH r d © a) X3 £ cG aJ 0) © o £ r—i S *d K 43 ^ k *r4 ft •H 2 C 0 •H b0 taO P © *d © as 43 ^ O

C © 00 JH CD 0 a? • h ^4 -H ^ d> rH P > > > P 03 O > 43 > © O o o -H 43 00 h o co p u u 6 a © 3 u G ^ PA p . ft & •H bO ft o p , ^ O P< ft ft 3 <s c •3 cd p , O &

<s <c CO S -H CO Q-» c o as

• • • • • • • • SO c^- CO o CVJ f A f A f A f A f A - d -d- -d*

I A I A I A I A I A I A \ A t A

-=* -d* - d -d* -d" -d" - d - -d"

oo C © CO

•H -P

T*

§ 00

43 C ©

' d * 3 n

- p p 03 P

X! <3 -P t—! *H P , * H

o , o

<d

§ c

o

-d --d*

I A

© 43

1 •H 00 P« ©

•r4 -H •H bD jG > <P 00 P4 ©

© 43 a> *d •H •

43 as ra a as © o

rH H © «H 43 43

rO r-4 as od g as C P cd C •H *H

o ' d •H ^ ©

as 4-3 • o ^ H o c o o

^ o o o bO as © 43 CO

CO -H

© G > 2 3

© •H *H 00 • ' d © bO

•H c © rH O > o ' d ©

*H r < *d p © 43 > 43 © P . a$ o 2 U o o o CO 43 p-i 43 CO <M

• • • I A sO -d - - d -d"

U \ I A XA

-d* -d - -d -

f A f A f A f A f A f A f A f A f A f A f A

CVJ CVJ CVJ AJ AJ CVJ CM CVJ CVJ CVJ CVJ CVJ AJ

2 2 7

VA U \ U \ LA U \ U \ U \ U \ I A U \ t A \ A

- d - - d - j ± - d - -d~ -d" -d* -d" j ±

c a c A r A c a f A r A r A pr\ r A r A c a r A

O J CM C\J <\J CM CM CM CM CM CM C M C M

I •O ©

o o cd

A - p O • H 5t G •

O 03 03 • H 4->

- P . H O 03 0)

»H JH »H 43 cd > cd ft o • <D <D

• H 03 ^ 4^ £ © ft * H

- H 03 •g o CD e £ , C O O 05 • P 4-3 a t o

cd a> oo £ 03 0

- h c • H 03 cd o > c

- P * H IH O & - p a> ft

• H cd ft w cd 4 ^ ^ <D

0Q U

• • GO - d - - d -

- p •

G 03 •H

O -P •o 03 c

•H 0) TS >

rG rC -P • 43 • H 03 2 - P

fl >-* <D c

o bQ o 03 a 03

• H cd t o cd

• H c * H rH • H r H

EG 03 cd 03 cd cd

o 4 3 4 3 o O

<C ft <C

• • o r -\ A US

r - t r H

• 3 4 3 1 03 CM £

4 3 cd a> 3 JH U © £ U O to

fi 3 to <M to

r H O X5 £ ^ t i 03 4 3 o O ft bo • H 03 • H £ 3c u ^ H • H • <D b cd 4 3 ^ 01

ft ^ £ © 0 £ u o o © £ O

• H • H S £ • H cd 43 OQ o 4 3

X I O * H £ co cd • o *i-i > O u o ^

•H © *H W £ 4 3 r & 4 3 (X £ « o m cd ^ c»

• H •H ^ 43 © ^ c»

03 xs o £ £ 1 43 •r-t <;H © - H o as > © • H 43 o

43 CO JH r H 1 3 Cd r H O 4 3 £ ©

T J £ a i U * H £

T J •H 03 Tt G$ aS £ £ • " d o £ ft 4 3 o <D 03 ^ ft © £ w

4 3 bD o o 4 3 Xi * H fLj

1 2 c o u 4 3 q cd © C * H O Ph C aJ £: ft

• • • • CM r A - d - u \ U S I A u > U N

ffl Q

O <m

03 -P

o a <D u

u to

©

tt

cd ft <D

- P §

t o •

w O «

Q £ o fU

*H O - P Cm 0J t* © Cd 43 ft £ © ©

£ ft ©

43 © a

rM 4 3 -P w

£ rH •H OS

•H -P O " §

n C to »H

*3? <H

sD t*-U N I A

© ft cd ft 03 *

© g

4 3

£ © TJ

^P 03

, £ 43 •H

£ © •H > ©

43 £

CO U \

£ o ft 00

4 3 o «

T? © -H

§<m a

ad £ o x J

»H O © •P -rt Ih a j ^ o 5s f-1

•H cd £ oo £ 3 b o o § C h fc «tH 03 O - P . H O © >

0) -H £ 6 *0

•H £

© o o - P *H Otf -P 03 ft cd aJ

• h £ O -H

•H T3 - p u

O H H w O H r l

o a l p

o U \

UN

© •

h ^ 05 - P

U \ \ A

-d"

U \ U \

-d* -d"

U \ u \

-=f

I A

J *

I A I A I A

-d~ - d -

U \ I A

- d -

<A rA f A c a rA rA rA f A f A rA rA rA

(V CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

228

in in in u \ us in u\ m

-d* -d" - d -d" -d~ - d _d* _d*

m, r n ^ ^

i n

<*~\

cm cm cm c\i c\i c\< cvi cm CM

o jz; M

o a : Eh 5s; o o

1 <D je5 bO > 03 P *H

«H •H -P rH o P* 03 2 © E © W O T5 <s JH a ^ © o O H 6 o aj o

P «. bo © w 03 d > XJ -H

•H 3K -P • a* a5 o c i ' d p © © p > 3 * d 'h «h -p d <D -P W CO

o © © bO *

J2 •*-> P © -p ,q *h o

o ,p rt bD co C »H

•H O H h -°-P -p 03 a «Q a) < s

e • U P o o

cd vH •P Jn-P 01 © o d)

w p •H -p © <D e p

o •H •P CS 3 rH 3} >

©

*a a CD

-P -P <c

£ aJ

-P ©

U o (D 03

P o

P o

•H -P a5

rH 03 > ©

-P O 3 T3 P o

o

* - CM

i n u \

-d- -=*

r o m

CM CM

-P P

• © 03 S

P © D« U 1 o u O O • ©

3 rH U 03 T3 © G U o © © > cfl o •P © O © © Pu c • }>> O nd *d © © >> U • O •fn in 6 -P o 03

rH PH d rH Pi rH bD© P, aJ CJ'd •H ^ u C bO 6 •d P P <* o © *h d © p o o o a 1 cd XJ S

2 •tH •HrH © CM rH o •P •P rH CJ o

-p O o p ^ U O bO o 3 o o o U © ©

«3 •H JH «H r>> • U r-f rH -P -p -p aJ

© O © C3 P rH U P< © - P ' d -P P . p c © cd o © © +5 *H •h *d > © g bOx{ © p •H o •P © 'd o

rH o P i • x : co ^ e ^ QQ »H © -p © P4 bD ,Q

© -P 03 c x r d •H J>> >> tti at £ © ^ P, cd © •p -p •P -P O 3 O «p OT rH W H P<rH rH bO +5 © ^ 03 © 3 e ed rH O © O © © > O *r~"> O o > O U © *H © ^ £ at •d as

o © fx, Q< ^ > co cr M < u • • • • • •

- d in ND c— CO

m in in in m in

-d- -d~ -d" -d- -d- -d*

r*N cr\ co o°v r^i

CM CM CM CM CM CM

«r— * — T- «—

•P O

e i •P P m o P •H ©

•H >

O *H <M'd

-P JH U o O «H Pt © -p ^ c

© m g ^ PU

-P o CSrH

•P © 10 >

© • PWT3 S O S

rH rH U © Cd bO > p O © o Pi

Q - H (X

vO

in

-d*

CM

229

X A X A X A X A

- = * - z t

f A r A c A f A

cvj OJ CM CM

U N

<A

C\J

I A X A

J " - d "

f A < n

OJ CM

X A X A X A

- d " - d - - d -

<A f A « A

CM OJ CM

X A X A

- d - d *

r A c n

OJ OJ

C O • • CQ

• H 1 T3 03 }>a • c ^-1 P> § £ p s P 03 0 o . £ O 3 2 r H <D r H TS

O 3 03 3 P 3 cd - P CD • ^ U 0 co O 0 cd 3 t o u cd P jC « aS cd r H

4~> O 0 © 05 0 £ Cm 03 <M £ cd c-4 <M • tn C • H © bO ©

- P 03 r H <D * H X ! H Cm cd c 0 § co - P 03 CD JH £ ,£> • O P 0 • H G

as C C rH O £ cd O a 0 0 c rH Cd P k O £ t J © O 0 o • H O 0* C k P . - H O r H cd © •

Jh P 03 £ O O 03 • H O • H © U • H O CCS J~» O * H P . * »H CO P p &

G 0 © • H 02 © EG > 03 r d cd • H Pk P * H ^ O H • H r H C <M r H

- P £ s <M 2 > O TJ £ a i O O 3 i H CD 3 • H <m P - H r H • • H © u H O * H r d aJ bD a? ^ U P 03 03 03 £ bO 2 i> cd p 2 0 & P © cd

O O P . - P co © C JU P r H P 3 u © - P P 03 CQ £ ; £ c a © cd r H O 0 • m ^ P . •H P O ^ 6 cd C O CQ u o , a 13 a> 0 cd +2 > © © t 5 3 P * r H 3 0 5 © 0 £ rC Cm C © U cd 0 © cc 0 f - > as +3 4J> aJ -P co Q> O 0 0 1H C cd • -P © 03 »H £ c CJ r H

0

0 PH P* >» £ T3 £~ ft CO 0 P • H P •H • H • H Sh © t 3 **"* 0 C - P • H © CO O <D <D cd > cd cd cd cd © > £ 03 r H H r H T3 P u H N ft 3 k 3 P • P •P > 0 © *H OJ © 0 k s> bD <D «rl 01 r H <D H £ C C! O u

43 > > > O O r H O > u O cd Pu cd •H • H • H Qi P - H © © as O © © «J ?H > ^ > cd cd Cd 0-4 P*

C* a Cm O 5M P< P 6 P - W CO © 5S s 0 < • • • • • • • • • • •

0 * — CM CA X A sO c^- CO O V T— <r- «r- v— T - <r- OJ

XA

<A

OJ

XA XA

- d * - d "

<A r A

CM OJ

X A

- d *

r A

CM

X A

r A

CM

XA XA

- d " - d "

m , m

CM CM

X A X A

-=fr - d "

X A

- d

f A f A <A

Jh taO O 1H eu ©

cd ?

H cd >

OJ

OJ OJ CM

X A X A

- d - d

f A ( A

CM CM

2 3 0

I A 1 A I A vr\

- = t

I A I A UN I A I A

r A cA r A CA r A r A r A r A

CM AJ AJ AJ OJ AJ OJ CM CM

CQ o 1 © CD

•H bO i £ > cd O -H - p

05 - P S-i Xi © T? CO o • > s p P»

50 cd as CO ?« <D O +3 w cd

-P £ OS P« -P o a o rH c a , © iH O "O O © © £ -P •H £ u fH <M 3 -P a H o -< o c O -P rH

iH O In 03 C i-i •H <D -H £ «H • O 3 > -P © 50 -P © cd © of •H 00

T3 -P 00 ^ T3 & r*5 •H •H 02 aS , o

© xi aj AH CO p< £ © H O CO £ - p a) - p u O a$ o j c

O bO XJ

o T5 rH o j c O bO cd

© o © C o 3 PH • 03 Cd -P <0

S * • t>0 c

•H a$ S * p* o > H rH a) - p S * p k 05 0 , c V W H 03 CO © C O P rH « g

J-H O 3 •H *H

a o rH © « g J-H O o > >

3 »H cd p 3: 5 *H cd © -H CQ W o al -P ^ -P <M cr: T{

U O

AH

TJ CO s © CO CO aS - p

o o cd

a •H

U a •H - p

c P o rH

o o w a> £

H © as h

rCj > £> © o

•ri C ^ © P ,

I m u £ 3 © o o

£ *H £ o ^ ©

o O 00

CM AJ

r A CM CM

I A CM

vO AJ

bC O Lt P,

fn o

tin

CQ -P

S e

10 W

° 5 *d

- p © © ©

X P

r -CM

r-» ^P •H

•

CO © 03 © ©

- p O -p G *

© 00 £ M p £ © o o cn o £

O © w o P*

£ o C •H

•H o as •H XJ

a P o > aS

3 p rH C cd ©

•H > 6 © -p

P •t3 cd © rH P« © O ©

HH • •

CO a-CM CM

(D e T-f

o

Cm O © •

o H

§© a

CO 03 •H ^

(D a , ©

-P o - p <1? CO CQ

«H <D > *H k rH 0) P< P< P , 5 2 co cn

o <A

CO

I A I A

-3"

I A I A

-3

I A

-d"

I A

^ t

I A I A

-d"

I A

-=*

OA r A r A r A r A r A r A r A r A

CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

APPENDIX F

APPENDIX F

LETTER TO PRESIDENTS ASKING THEM TO

RESPOND TO THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT

April 3, 1979

Dear

Please complete the enclosed questionnaire which lists selected management activities of community college division chairpersons. The presidents within the Dallas County Community College District have approved the research.

A second instruction sheet for section two has been included as an aid in allowing you to more easily complete pages 4 through 18.

Please return the completed questionnaire in the envelope which is provided. If this could be done before April 25, it would be very helpful.

Thank you for your significant contribution to this research.

Very truly yours,

Gene Stewart

Enclosures - 2

232

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Adams, Sexton, Personnel Management: A Program of Self-Instruction, Columbus, Grid, Inc., 1972.

and Louis D. Ponthieu, Administrative Policy and Strategy: A Comparative Approach/ " Casebook, Columbus, Grid, Inc., 1973.

Baldridge, J. Victor, David V. Curtis, George Ecker, and Gary L. Riley, Policy Making and Effective Leadership, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1978.

Beach, Dale S., Personnel: The Management of People at Work. London, MacMillan Co., 1970.

Bittel, Lester Robert, editor-in-chief, Encyclopedia of Professional Management, New York, McGraw-Hill, __ 7_

Boles, Harold W. and James A. Davenport, Introduction to Educational Leadership, New York, Harper and Row Publishers, 1975.

Cohen, Arthur M., Dateline '79; Heretical Concepts for the Community College, California, Glencoe Press^ 1969.

Corson, John J., The Governance of Colleges and Universities, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1975.

Comprehensive Dissertation Index 1861-1972, 22, Education I - 0, Ann Arbor, Xerox University Microfilms, 1973.

Dalton, Gene W. and Paul R. Lawrence, editors, and Lorsch, Jay W., collaborator, Organizational Structure and Design, Illinois, Richard D. Irwin, Inc., and the Dorwey Press, 1970.

Dissertation Abstracts I - A, Humanities and Social Science, Index, 33A, No. 12, Part 2, 1972/73.

233

234

Dunn, Rita and Kenneth J. Dunn, Administrator's Guide to New Programs for Faculty Management and Evaluation, West Nyack, New York, Parker Publishing Company, Inc., 1977.

Eble, Kenneth E., The Art of Administration. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1978.

Edwards, Allen L., Experimental Design in Psychological Research, New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1965.

Eurich, Alvin C., editor, Campus 1980, New York Delacorte Press, 1968.

Ferguson, George A., Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971.

Fields, Ralph R., The Community College Movement, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962.

Gibson, James L. and others, Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes, Dallas, Business Publications, Inc., 1976.

Hentschke, Guilbert C., Management Operations in Education, Berkeley, McCutchan Publishing Corporation, 1975.

Hughes, Charles L., Goal Setting: Key to Individual and Organizational Effectiveness, New York, American Management Association, 1965.

Ivancevich, John M., James H. Donnelly, Jr., and James L. Gibson, Managing for Performance, Dallas, Business Publications, Inc., 1980.

Jellema, William W., Efficient College Management, London Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1972.

Kelley, Win and Leslie Wilbur, Teaching in the Community-Junior College, New York, Appleton-Century Crofts, 19 70.

Kerlinger, Fred N., Foundations of Behavioral Research, New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1967.

Knowles, Asa S., editor-in-chief, Handbook of College and University Administration: Academic, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970.

235

, editor-in-chief. Handbook of College and University Administration: General, New York McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970.

Koontz, Harold and Cyril O'Donnell, editors, Management: A Book of Readings, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1972.

i Management: A Systems and Contingency Analysis of Managerial Functions, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1976.

Koos, Leonard V. , The Junior-College Movement, Connecticut, Greenwood Press, 1970.

Lahti, Robert E., Innovative College Management, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973.

Luthans, Fred, Contemporary Readings in Organizational Behavior, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1977.

Mauer, George J., Crises in Campus Management: Case Studies in the Administration of Colleges anH Universities, New York, Praeger Publishers7~T976.

Miller, Bob W. , Higher Education and the Community College, Washington, University Press of America, 19 77.

Miller, William A., Faculty Personnel Administration in Higher Education: A Systems Approach, Denton, Tixas, North Texas State University Printing Office, undated.

Miller, William A., Jr., Educational Planning and Program Management, Denton, Texas, North Texas State Press, 1975.

, Humanistic-Governance Management in Educational Administration, Denton, Texas, North Texas State University Press, 19 75.

Monroe, Charles R. , Profile of the Community College, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1972.

Morrisey, George L., Management by Objectives and Results, Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley, 1970".

236

Ott, Eleanor, editor, Role of Division Chairmen, Dallas, Texas, Dallas County Community College District, 1976.

Palinchak, Robert, The Evolution of the Community College, New Jersey, the Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1973.

Richardson, Richard C., Jr., Clyde E. Blocker, and Louis W. Bender, Governance for the Two-Year College, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972.

Sartain, Aaron Q. and Alton W. Baker, The Supervisor and His Job, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1972.

Sexton, William P., editor, Organization Theories, Ohio, Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1970.

Smart, John C. and James R. Montgomery, issue editors, Examining Departmental Management, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1976.

Sprunger, Benjamin E. and William H. Bergquist, Handbook for College Administration, Council for the Advance-ment of Small Colleges, Washington, D.C., Gary H. Quehl, General Editor, 1978.

"The Men Who Gave Us Our Schools," The Book of Knowledge, Vol. XIV, New York, Grolier Society, Inc., 1956.

Articles

Adams, Dewey A., "Internship in Administration," Open Door, V (Spring, 1969), 6-20.

Dean, C. Thomas and Norman R. Stanger, "The Preparation of Administrators for Post-Secondary Vocational Education: New Perspectives," Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, XI (Winter, 1974), 65-71.

Goldberg, Ignacy I. and Leopole Lippman, "Plato Had a Word for It," Exceptional Children, XL (February, 1974), 326ff.

Goodner, Jack, "A Check List for Top Administrators," College Management, IX (1974), 24-25, 28.

Hammons, James O. and Terry H. Smith Wallace, "Staff Development Needs of Public Community College Department/Division Chairpersons," Community/Junior College Research Quarterly, II (1977), 55-76.

237

Koehnline, William A. and Clyde E. Blocker, "The Division Chairman in the Community College," Junior College Journal, V (February, 19 70), 11.

Moore, Dan W. , "Internship as a Way of Life," Open Door, V (Spring, 1969), 14-20.

O'Grady, James, Jr., "The Role of the Department Chairman," Junior College Journal, (February, 1971), 33-36.

Petty, Gary F., "A Practical Look at Management Personnel Development," Community and Junior College Journal, XLV (August, 1974), 16-18.

Roaden, Arliss L., "The College Deanship: A New Middle Management in Higher Education," Theory into Practice, IX (October, 1970), 272-276.

Zion, Carol and Connie Sutton, "Integrated Inservice Development," New Directions for Community Colleges, I (Spring, 1973), 41-50.

Publications of Learned Organizations

Adams, Dewey A. The Intership--An Innovative Approach to Providing Continuing Leadership for North Carolina's Community Colleges, Washington, Adult Education Association of the U.S.A.,1967.

Anderson, Duane, The Extra-Institutional Obligations of the Community College Administrator, Proceedings of the Colorado University—Boulder Higher Education Center, Boulder, Colorado, 1968.

Bender, Louis W. and Richard C. Richardson, Jr., Management Concepts and Higher Education Administration, Tallahassee, Management Institute, Center for State and Regional Leadership, 1972.

Clampitt, Joyce, Legal Implications of Personnel Management, Proceedings of the Annual Summer Workshop, Tallahassee, Southeastern Community College Leadership Program, 19 73.

Harper, William A., Like It Is: A Report of A Workshop for New Junior College Presidents and Their Wives, Los Angeles, University of California at Los Angeles, Junior College Leadership Program, 1968.

238

Kintzer, Frederick C., Summer Workshop for New Community Junior College Presidents and Wives, Los Angeles, Graduate School of Education, University of California at Los Angeles, 1973.

Malik, Joseph A. and Thomas M. Shay, Workshop in Community College Administration, Proceedings of The Colorado University-Boulder Higher Education Center, Boulder, Colorado, 1968.

Morgan, Don A., Implications for the Junior College Leadership Training Program Drawn from a Continuing Study of the Two Year College President, Los Angeles, University of California at Los Angeles, 1968.

Smith, Albert B., First Level Management of the Community College, Proceedings of the Annual Summer Workshop, Tallahassee, Southeastern Community College Leadership Program.

Unpublished Materials

Anderson, William M., "Characteristics, Preparation, and Attitudes of Selected Public Junior-Community College Deans of Instruction," summary of Ph.D. dissertation, Carbondale, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 1973.

Bibbers, Donald S., "A Study of Management Functions Common to the Administration of Commercial Businesses and Institutions of Higher Education," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1967.

Collins, Charles C. and Chester H. Case, "The On-Site Programmatic Approach to Staff Development," unpublished paper presented at the Conference on Graduate Education and the Community Colleges, Warrenton, 1974.

Hull, Don M., "A Construct of Organization for Higher Education," unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Texas State University, Denton, Texas, 1974.

Larsen, Edward D., "A Study of the Uses of Management Functions and the Implications for Management Training," unpublished doctoral disseration, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, 1966.

239

Matthews, Elizabeth W., "Characteristics and Academic Preparation of Directors of Library-Learning Resource Centers in Selected Community Junior Colleges (Summary Report)," unpublished summary of Ph.D. dissertation, Carbondale, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 1972.

Priest, Bill, "The Division Chairman in the Multi-Campus Community College," paper presented at the Community/Junior College conference on "Role of the Department/Division Chairman in the Community College," Huntsville, Sam Houston State University, 1972.

, "Leadership for the New Urban Community College," unpublished address, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, Texas, 1977.

, "Leadership Roles in the Multi-Campus District," unpublished notes, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, Texas, 1977.

, "Responsibilities and Rewards of Academic Administration," unpublished address, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, Texas, 1977.

"The Decision-Making Process and the Administration of Higher Education," unpublished address, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, Texas, 1977.

Smith, Albert B., "Role Expectations for and Observations of Community College Department Chairmen: An Organizational Study of Consensus and Conformity," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Lansing, Michigan, 1970.

Texas Association of Junior College Instructional Administrators, Membership Rating, Research Committee, June, 19 75.

Newspaper

Dallas Morning News, May 30, 1980.