Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Department of Educ ational Administration, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas
Ben M . Harris
Martha N. Ovando , Be n M. Harris and Pats y Me ne fe e Sc ho o l supe rinte nde nt de ve lo pme nt
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f Educ atio nal Manage me nt 1 2 / 2 [1 9 9 8 ] 8 2 –8 9
p r ofes s ion a l d evelop m en t of sch ool su p er in t en d en t s is lim it ed t o t h eir ca r eer d evelop m en t exp er ien ces a n d p a t t er n s (Bu r n -h a m , 1989) a n d t o a d es cr ip t ion of t -h eir in st r u ct ion a l lea d er sh ip com p et en cies, a n d r oles (Bu ck , 1989; H a r r is a n d Wils on , 1991; H er m a n , 1989; H o, 1992; H or d , 1990; Kn e zek , 1993; Wa lk er -F u ller, 1992). T h er efor e, r es ea r ch a d d r es s in g sp ecifi c sch ool su p er in t en d en t s ’ p r ofes s ion a l d evelop m en t effor t s m igh t h eigh t en ou r u n d er st a n d in g of t h eir p r ofes -sion a l d evelop m en t m od es a n d n eed s. T h e p u r p os e of t h is p a p er is t o r e p or t t h e p r ofes -sion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of select ed sch ool s u p er in t en d en t s id en t ifi ed t h r ou gh a com p a r a t ive r esea r ch st u dy.
The study
T h is s t u dy a t t em p t ed t o d es cr ib e t h e in d iv id -u a l p r ofes s ion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of p r a ct icin g p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s. T h e in t en t w a s t o id en t ify t h e n a t u r e of p r o-fes sion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of cen t r a l office execu t ives en ga ged in p r ofes sion a l gr ow t h a n d exp lor e d iffer en ces b et w een t wo gr ou p s, p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s p a r t icip a t in g in a n a ss es sm en t wor k s h op a n d p u b -lic sch ool su p er in t en d en t s n ot p a r t icip a t in g in a n a ss ess m en t wor k s h op. Sp ecifi ca lly, it a d d r es sed t h e follow in g q u est ion s: 1 Ar e t h er e a n y d iffer en ces b et w een t h e
p r ofes s ion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s p a r t icip a t -in g -in a d ia gn ost ic a s sess m en t cen t er a n d t h os e n ot p a r t icip a t in g in a n a ss es s m en t cen t er ?
2 Ar e t h er e a n y com m on ch a r a ct er is t ics of p r ofes s ion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s r e ga r d les s of t h eir p a r t icip a t ion in a d ia gn os t ic a s s es s m en t cen t er ?
Ad d it ion a lly, it w a s h y p ot h es ized t h a t t h er e w er e n o s ign ifi ca n t d iffer en ces b et w een t h e
p r ofes sion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of t h e t wo gr ou p s of p u blic sch ool su p er in t en d en t s. T h e in d e p en d en t va r ia ble w a s p a r t icip a t ion in a d ia gn ost ic a sses sm en t cen t er, w h ile t h e d e p en d en t va r ia bles in clu d ed fi ve ca t e gor ies of p r ofes sion a l d evelop m en t id en t ifi ed a s a ct iv it ies, r esou r ces, m ot iva t ion , self-a ssess-m en t s a n d t issess-m e fr a ssess-m es. T h e d essess-m ogr a p h ic va r ia bles in clu d ed execu t ive p osit ion , d ist r ict size, d e gr ee a t t a in m en t , p r ev iou s exp er ien ce, d ist r ict w ea lt h , st u d en t p er for m a n ce a n d loca t ion .
Given t h e p u r p ose of t h is st u dy, it w a s lim -it ed t o t h e id en t ifi ca t ion a n d com p a r ison of p r ofes sion a l self-r en ew a l b eh av ior s r e p or t ed by p u blic sch ool s u p er in t en d en t s. Docu m en -t a -t ion or eva lu a -t ion of -t h e q u a li-t y, effec-t ive-n ess, or im p a ct levels of s u ch b eh av ior s w a s n ot t h e focu s of t h is st u dy.
Procedures
Follow in g a b a sic ca su a l com p a r a t ive d esign , t h is st u dy in clu d ed t wo gr ou p s of sch ool su p er in t en d en t s d iffer in g on t h e in d e p en d en t va r ia ble a n d com p a r in g t h em on t h e d e p en -d en t va r ia ble (Gay, 1987). T h e t wo gr ou p s w er e d iffer en t in t h a t on e gr ou p of p u blic sch ool su p er in t en d en t s p a r t icip a t ed in a d ia gn ost ic a s sessm en t cen t er a n d t h e ot h er gr ou p d id n ot p a r t icip a t e in a d ia gn ost ic a ssessm en t cen t er. T h e d e p en d en t va r ia bles of t h e st u dy w er e p r ofession a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of t h e p a r t icip a t in g su p er in t en -d en t s (see F igu r e 1). T h es e s p ecifi c b eh av ior s w er e clu st er ed in fi ve ca t e gor ies: a ct iv it ies, r esou r ces, m ot iva t ion , s elf-a ssessm en t s a n d t im efr a m es.
E igh t y p u blic s ch ool s u p er in t en d en t s of sch ool d ist r ict s in a sou t h cen t r a l s t a t e p a r t ic-ip a t ed in t h e st u dy. T h ese w er e or ga n ized in t wo gr ou p s of 40 ea ch . On e gr ou p in clu d ed 40 p u blic sch ool su p er in t en d en t s w h o a t t en d ed a n a ss essm en t cen t er a t a u n iver sit y
-DECAS Gro up
DECAS As s e s s me nt
Wo rks ho p
No n-DECAS Gro up
Pro fe s s io nal De ve lo pme nt Be havio rs
Figure 1
Martha N. Ovando , Be n M. Harris and Pats y Me ne fe e Sc ho o l supe rinte nde nt de ve lo pme nt
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f Educ atio nal Manage me nt 1 2 / 2 [1 9 9 8 ] 8 2 –8 9
sp on sor ed wor k s h op. T h is wor k s h op is k n ow n a s t h e Dia gn ost ic E xecu t ive Com p e-t en cy As sess m en e-t Sy s e-t em (DE CAS). Ie-t w a s t h e on ly on e p r ov id in g a wor k s h op exclu sively for s u p er in t en d en cy lea d er s h ip a ss es s -m en t . T h is gr ou p is r efer r ed t o a s t h e DE CAS p a r t icip a n t s. T h e ot h er gr ou p in clu d ed 40 p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s w h o h a d n o h ist or y of p a r t icip a t in g in a n y a ss es sm en t cen t er, a n d it is r efer r ed t o a s t h e n on -DE CAS gr ou p. T h ese su p er in t en d en t s w er e id en t ifi ed fr om t h e Agen cy Dir ect or y of t h e St a t e P u blic Sch ools. Sch ool d is t r ict s t h a t h a d ch a r a ct er is-t ics clos ely r ela is-t ed is-t o is-t h e d is is-t r icis-t s id en is-t ifi ed in t h e DE CAS gr ou p w er e in clu d ed in t h e com p a r is on gr ou p in or d er t o a s su r e s im ila r it y. Ta ble I con t a in s d em ogr a p h ic ch a r a ct er is -t ics of -t h es e -t wo gr ou p s.
P a r t icip a n t r es p on s es w er e collect ed t h r ou gh a q u es t ion n a ir e r efer r ed t o a s t h e Sch ool E xecu t ive Su r vey (SE S). T h is in s t r u -m en t con sist ed of q u est ion s a n d ch eck lis t
item s th a t r equ ir ed r espon den ts to r epor t th eir in dividu a l pr ofession a l developm en t beh avior s over a per iod of on e yea r. It w a s or ga n ized follow in g th e r epr esen ta tive a ctivities iden tifi ed a n d tested for va lidity a n d r elia -bility by Bu r n h a m (1989). T h e in str u m en t item s wer e fu r th er cor r ela ted w ith th e exper i-en ce im pa ct levels of pr ofession a l r i-en ew a l exper ien ces discu ssed by Ha r r is (1989). Th e in str u m en t w a s or ga n ized in two pa r ts. P a r t on e r equ ested dem ogr a ph ic in for m a tion su ch a s cu r r en t position , distr ict stu den t en r oll-m en t, loca tion , h igh est de gr ee, pr eviou s a dm in istr a tive exper ien ce, eth n ic ba ck gr ou n d a n d gen der. P a r t two r equ ested in for m a tion r ela tive to pr ofession a l developm en t beh avior s of su per in ten den ts wh ich in clu ded in dividu a l a ctivities, r esou r ces, sou r ces of m otiva tion , com pletin g self-a ssessm en ts, a n d tim e fr a m e for im plem en ta tion
of in dividu a l pr ofession a l developm en t en deavor s.
Da ta a n a lysis w a s com pleted u sin g fr equ en cies, per cen ta ges, m ea n s, a n d sta n da r d devia -tion s. Addi-tion a lly, a t-test w a s com pu ted to deter m in e wh eth er sign ifi ca n t differ en ces existed between th e two gr ou ps pa r ticipa tin g in th is stu dy. Th e in depen den t va r ia ble w a s pa r ticipa tion in a dia gn ostic a ssessm en t cen -ter wor k sh op (DE CAS) a n d th e de pen den t va r ia bles wer e gr ou ped u n der fi ve h ea din gs. Th ese wer e: a ctivities, r esou r ces, m otiva tion , self-a ssessm en ts a n d tim e fr a m es. Th e level of sign ifi ca n ce w a s esta blish ed a t 0.5 level.
To explor e va r ia bles’ r ela tion sh ips w ith in ea ch of th e fi ve m a jor ca te gor ies of pr ofession a l developm en t, it w a s n ecessa r y to a n a -lyze a n d descr ibe fi n din gs for ea ch of th e va r i-a bles. A toti-a l of 38 de pen den t vi-a r ii-a bles wer e in clu ded. Th ese wer e a s follow s.
Activities
Th is ca te gor y r efer r ed to types of pr ofession a l developm en t oppor tu n ities su ch a s
wor k sh ops, con fer en ces, u n iver sities, in sti-tu tes, pr ofession a l m em ber sh ips, com m u n ity in volvem en t, politica l in volvem en t, bu sin ess in volvem en t, ta sk for ces, pr ofession a l libr a r y, pr ofession a l dia logu e, tr avel to oth er distr icts, a n d m en tor s.
Resources
Th e secon d ca te gor y in clu ded video r ecor der s, a u dio ta pes, com pu ter s, Sta te E du ca tion a l Agen cy, edu ca tion ser vice cen ter, r e gion a l u n iver sities, peer n etwor k s, pr ofession a l expe-r ien ce, life expeexpe-r ien ces, a n d fi n a n ces.
M otivation
T h e t h ir d ca t e gor y r efer r ed t o sou r ces of m ot iva t ion su ch a s : con t r a ct r en ew a l, r ecog-n it ioecog-n , s elf-im p r ovem eecog-n t , r ew a r d s or Table I
De mo graphic c harac te ris tic s o f s tudy partic ipants
DECAS Non-DECAS Total sample
Variables n % n n % n N % N
Sample
School districts 2 7 6 8 .0 1 9 4 8 .0 4 6 5 8 .0
M ales 3 7 9 3 .0 3 0 7 5 .0 6 7 6 4 .0
Females 6 1 5 .0 7 1 8 .0 1 3 1 6 .0
District size
Below 5,000 3 7 9 3 .0 3 7 9 3 .0 7 4 9 3 .0
Above 5,000 3 8 .0 3 8 .0 6 8 .0
Executive position
Superintendent 1 0 2 5 .0 1 0 2 5 .0 2 0 2 5 .0
Assistant superintendent 1 4 3 5 .0 1 4 3 5 .0 2 8 3 5 .0
Central office officer 1 6 4 0 .0 1 6 6 3 .0 3 2 4 0 .0
Degree attainment
PhD, EdD 3 8 .0 3 8 .0 6 8 .0
M aster’s 4 0 1 0 0 .0 4 0 1 0 0 .0 8 0 1 0 0 .0
Previous experience
Superintendent 1 0 2 5 .0 9 2 3 .0 1 9 2 4 .0
Assistant superintendent 1 4 3 5 .0 1 8 7 2 .0 3 2 4 0 .0
Central office officer 2 6 6 5 .0 2 8 7 0 .0 4 6 5 6 .0
Community type
< 50 miles 3 7 9 3 .0 3 6 9 0 .0 7 0 8 8 .0
> 50 miles 3 8 .0 4 1 0 .0 7 9 .0
Wealth (per pupil)
Below $4,000 3 6 9 0 .0 3 6 9 0 .0 7 2 9 0 .0
Above $4,000 4 1 0 .0 4 1 0 .0 8 1 3 .0
Student performance
Low performing 7 1 8 .0 9 2 3 .0 1 6 2 0 .0
High performing 3 3 8 3 .0 3 1 7 7 .0 6 4 8 0 .0
Note:
Martha N. Ovando , Be n M. Harris and Pats y Me ne fe e Sc ho o l supe rinte nde nt de ve lo pme nt
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f Educ atio nal Manage me nt 1 2 / 2 [1 9 9 8 ] 8 2 –8 9
in cen t ives, job su cces s, s t u d en t im p r ovem en t , d is t r ict im p r ovem en t , a n d p r ofes sion a l a dva n cem en t .
Time frames
T h e fou r t h ca t e gor y r ela t ed t o t h e t im e fr a m e in w h ich s ch ool execu t ives in it ia t ed self-r en ew a l a ct iv it ies a ft eself-r com p let in g s om e for m of s elf-a ss es s m en t . It in clu d ed on e yea r, six m on t h s, t h r ee m on t h s, a n d on e m on t h .
Self-assessments
T h e la st ca t e gor y r efer r ed t o t h e fr eq u en cy in w h ich a s sessm en t of p r ofes sion a l d evelop -m en t n eed s w er e co-m p let ed by ea ch s ch ool su p er in t en d en t , su ch a s yea r ly, m on t h ly, a n d w eek ly.
Findings
T h e fi n d in gs of t h is s t u dy a r e p r es en t ed fol-low in g t h e r es ea r ch q u es t ion s a n d t h e fi ve ca t e gor ies of p r ofes sion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s d es cr ib ed ea r lier. Re p or t ed h er e a r e on ly t h os e p r ofession a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s t h a t w er e fou n d t o b e d iffer en t a t t h e 0.5 level of sign ifi ca n ce es t a blis h ed in t h is st u dy.
Differences in the professional development behaviors of school superintendents
P a r t icip a n t s in b ot h gr ou p s (DE CAS a n d n on DE CAS) a r e a ct ive in volvem en t in p r ofes -sion a l gr ow t h en d eavor s. All r e p or t ed p a r t ici-p a t ion in a w id e r a n ge of a ct iv it ies, ava ila b il-it y of d iffer en t r es ou r ces, a va r iet y of sou r ces of m ot iva t ion , a n d exp ed ien t u s a ge of t im e fr a m es a n d self-a s sessm en t s.
Wh en com p a r i s on s w er e m a d e b et w een t h e over a ll r es p on s es of DE CAS a n d n on -DE CAS p u b li c s ch ool s u p er i n t en d en t s t o d et er m i n e w h et h er a n y d i ffer en ces ex i s t ed , d a t a a n a ly -s i -s r evea led t h a t t h er e w er e n o -s i gn i fi ca n t d i ffer en ces i n t h e p r ofes s i on a l d evelop m en t b eh av i or s of t h es e t w o gr ou p s. H ow ever, w h en s t a t i s t i ca l t es t s w er e com p let ed for i n d iv i d u a l v a r i a b les w i t h i n ea ch ca t e gor y, s om e s i gn i fi ca n t d i ffer en ces em er ged . T h er e w er e ei gh t s p eci fi c b eh av i or s t h a t w er e s i g-n i fi ca g-n t ly d i ffer eg-n t for t h e t w o gr ou p s. T h es e d i ffer en ces a r e s h ow n i n Ta b le II.
Ac tivitie s
Ou t of t h e 13 p r ofes s i on a l d evelop m en t a ct iv -i t -i es l-i s t ed , a t t en d -i n g u n -iver s -i t y cou r s e w or k w a s on e of t h e p r ofes s i on a l d evelop m en t b eh av i or s fou n d t o b e d i ffer en t . T h e d i ffer -en ce b et w e-en DE CAS a n d n on -DE CAS p u bli c s ch ool s u p er i n t en d en t s w a s fou n d t o b e s i g-n i fi ca g-n t a t t h e 0.021 level. A d i ffer eg-n ce w a s a ls o fou n d i n r ela t i on s h i p t o p a r t i ci p a t i on i n
p r ofes s i on a l i n s t i t u t es. T h e d i ffer en ce w a s d et er m i n ed t o b e s i gn i fi ca n t a t t h e 0.046 level. F u r t h er, a d i ffer en ce w a s ev i d en t i n r ela t i on s h i p t o t r aveli n g t o ot h er d i s t r i ct s a s a n a ct iv i t y for p r ofes s i on a l d evelop m en t . T h i s d i ffer en ce w a s a ls o fou n d t o b e s i gn i fi -ca n t a t t h e 0.019 level.
Table II
T-te st re sults fo r c umulative me ans fo r partic ipatio n in pro fe s s io nal de ve lo pme nt be havio rs
Standard Two-tail
Variable mean probability
Activities:
Workshops 1 .9 3 2 1 0 .9 7 5
Conferences 1 .9 3 2 1 0 .9 7 5
Universities/ colleges 1 .0 1 0 2 0 .0 2 1
Professional institutes 1 .0 4 7 0 0 .0 4 6
M emberships 1 .9 3 2 1 0 .9 7 5
Community involvement 1 .7 7 1 3 0 .6 2 3
Political involvement 1 .7 1 5 2 0 .3 9 9
Business involvement 1 .1 8 8 0 0 .5 4 4
Task forces 1 .6 7 1 1 0 .7 1 7
Professional library 1 .2 2 6 1 0 .6 6 8
Professional dialogue 1 .4 9 7 7 0 .6 5 2
Travel to other districts 1 .0 9 4 3 0 .0 1 9
M entors 1 .1 1 1 0 0 .6 8 5
Resources:
Video recorders 1 .8 4 5 0 0 .6 8 9
Audio tapes 1 .9 3 2 1 0 .9 7 5
Computers 1 .4 3 0 1 0 .0 2 3
State Education Agency 1 .8 9 0 0 0 .9 7 5
Educational service center 1 .9 3 2 1 0 .9 9 5
Universities/ colleges 1 .7 1 0 5 0 .0 2 3
Peer networks 1 .2 0 1 1 0 .6 4 3
Professional experience 1 .9 3 2 1 0 .9 7 5
Life experiences 1 .1 9 0 3 0 .6 1 1
Finances 1 .1 4 4 1 0 .0 2 4
M otivation:
Contract renewal 1 .1 9 9 2 0 .5 6 1
Recognition 1 .2 2 1 2 0 .0 2 6
Self-improvement 1 .9 5 5 3 0 .9 7 1
Rewards/ incentives 1 .7 7 2 4 0 .4 4 3
Job success 1 .1 1 7 0 0 .6 2 3
Student improvement 1 .9 3 2 1 0 .9 9 2
District improvement 1 .9 9 4 0 0 .9 9 7
Professional advancement 1 .8 2 1 0 0 .8 8 3
Self-assessments:
Yearly 1 .0 0 0 6 0 .0 3 1
M onthly 1 .7 0 4 0 0 .8 4 3
Weekly 1 .3 2 1 1 0 .8 3 3
Time frames:
One year 1 .1 1 0 4 0 .4 0 1
Six months 1 .2 6 8 2 0 .6 4 3
Three months 1 .0 0 3 1 0 .5 7 7
Martha N. Ovando , Be n M. Harris and Pats y Me ne fe e Sc ho o l supe rinte nde nt de ve lo pme nt
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f Educ atio nal Manage me nt 1 2 / 2 [1 9 9 8 ] 8 2 –8 9
Re so urc e s
T h er e w a s a ls o a d iffer en ce b et w een t h e DE CAS a n d t h e n on -DE CAS p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s in r ela t ion sh ip t o t h e u s e of com p u t er s a s a r es ou r ce for p r ofes sion a l d evelop m en t p u r p oses. T h is d iffer en ce w a s fou n d t o b e s ign ifi ca n t a t t h e 0.021 level.
Ad d it ion a lly, t h e n on -DE CAS gr ou p r e p or t ed u s in g u n iver s it y or colle ge a s a p r ofes s ion a l d evelop m en t r es ou r ce m or e t h a n t h e DE CAS gr ou p r e p or t ed u s in g t h em . T h is d iffer en t level of u se w a s fou n d t o b e s ign ifi -ca n t a t a 0.023 level.
F in a lly, fi n d in gs in d ica t e t h a t n on -DE CAS p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s h ave d iffer en t fi n a n cia l r es ou r ces t h a n t h e DE CAS p u blic sch ool s u p er in t en d en t s. T h is d iffer en ce w a s fou n d t o b e s ign ifi ca n t a t t h e 0.024 level.
Mo tivatio n
Mor e DE CAS p a r t icip a n t s a p p ea r ed t o v iew r ecogn it ion a s a m a jor sou r ce of m ot iva t ion t h a n t h e n on -DE CAS p a r t icip a n t s. T h is d if-fer en ce w a s fou n d t o b e s ign ifi ca n t a t t h e 0.026 level.
Se lf-asse ssme nts
A d iffer en ce in t h e com p let ion of yea r ly self-a s s es s m en t s exis t ed b et w een t h e n on -DE CAS p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s a n d t h e DE CAS p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s. T h is d iffer en ce w a s fou n d t o b e s ign ifi ca n t a t t h e 0.031 level.
Common characteristics of professional development behaviors of school superintendents
A com p a r a t ive a n a ly sis of t h e p r ofes sion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of t h e t wo gr ou p s r evea led t h a t som e s im ila r it ies for t h e t ot a l sa m p le exis t ed . T h u s, s im ila r it ies w er e fou n d w it h in ea ch of t h e fi ve p r ofes sion a l d evelop m en t ca t e gor ies for b ot h DE CAS a n d n on -DE CAS s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s. T h e exa m i-n a t ioi-n of t h e r a i-n k or d er ed r es p oi-n s es for a ll ca t e gor ies fu r t h er d et er m in ed com m on h igh a n d low fr eq u en cies for t h e d iffer en t b eh av -ior s. T h ese com m on ch a r a ct er is t ics ca n b e ob s er ved in Ta ble III.
Ac tivitie s
All p u blic s ch ool su p er in t en d en t s in b ot h gr ou p s r e p or t ed p a r t icip a t ion in wor k s h op s, con fer en ces, a n d m em b er s h ip in p r ofes sion a l or ga n iza t ion s a s t h eir h igh es t com m on ch a r -a ct er ist ics. T h e low es t r e p or t ed -a ct iv it y for b ot h gr ou p s r ela t ed t o m en t or r ela t ion sh ip s.
Re so urc e s
T h e h igh est com m on p r ofes sion a l d evelop -m en t b eh av ior r e p or t ed by b ot h gr ou p s r ela t ed t o t h e u se of ed u ca t ion s er v ice cen -t er s, in volvem en -t in p eer n e-t wor k s, a n d u se of t h e St a t e E d u ca t ion Agen cy.
Mo tivatio n
T h e h igh est com m on ch a r a ct er ist ics, r ela t ed t o sou r ces of m ot iva t ion for b ot h gr ou p s, w er e st u d en t im p r ovem en t , d ist r ict im p r ovem en t , a n d s elf-im p r ovem en t . On t h e ot h er h a n d , b ot h gr ou p s r e ga r d ed r ew a r d s a n d in cen t ives a s ver y low sou r ces of m ot iva t ion .
Se lf-asse ssme nt
T h er e w er e n o com m on a lt ies b et w een t h e t wo gr ou p s of sch ool su p er in t en d en t s r ela t ed t o selfa ssessm en t s for p r ofession a l d evelop -m en t p u r p oses. T h e DE CAS p u blic sch ool su p er in t en d en t s r e p or t ed h igh est fr eq u en -cies for w eek ly s elf-a sses sm en t s a n d low est scor es for yea r ly s elf-a ssessm en t s.
Con ver sely, n on DE CAS p u blic s ch ool su p er -in t en d en t s r e p or t ed h igh est fr eq u en cies for yea r ly self-a ss essm en t s a n d low est for w eek ly self-a ssessm en t s.
Time frame
Com m on ch a r a ct er ist ics w er e fou n d for a ll t im e fr a m es’ va r ia bles. Bot h DE CAS a n d n on -DE CAS gr ou p s r e p or t ed h igh est level of im p lem en t a t ion of in d iv id u a l p r ofession a l d evelop m en t a ct iv it ies w it h in a yea r. Sim i-la r ly, b ot h gr ou p s r e p or t ed t h e low est fr e-q u en cy for im p lem en t a t ion of p r ofession a l d evelop m en t a ct iv it ies on a m on t h ly b a sis.
Conclusion
T h e p u r p ose of t h is st u dy w a s t o id en t ify t h e p r ofes sion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s of p u blic sch ool su p er in t en d en t s. F u r t h er, a n a t t em p t w a s m a d e t o id en t ify d iffer en ces a n d sim ila r i-t ies b ei-t w een p u blic sch ool su p er in i-t en d en i-t s w h o p a r t icip a t ed in a Dia gn ost ic E xecu t ive Com p et en cy Assess m en t Sy s t em a n d t h ose w h o d id n ot p a r t icip a t e in a n y a s sessm en t a ct iv it y.
Martha N. Ovando , Be n M. Harris and Pats y Me ne fe e Sc ho o l supe rinte nde nt de ve lo pme nt
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f Educ atio nal Manage me nt 1 2 / 2 [1 9 9 8 ] 8 2 –8 9
lit er a t u r e a n d a t t en d con fer en ces on t op ics ou t s id e ed u ca t ion ” (p. 25) in or d er t o sh a r p en t h eir sk ills.
Few p r ofession a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s w er e fou n d t o b e s ign ifi ca n t ly d iffer en t b et w een t h e t wo gr ou p s (DE CAS a n d n on -DE CAS) in clu d ed in t h is s t u dy. T h u s, t h is st u dy h y p ot h es is w a s r eject ed for eigh t
p r ofes sion a l d evelop m en t b eh av ior s on ly. T h ese w er e a t t en d in g u n iver s it y or colle ge p r ogr a m s, a t t en d in g p r ofess ion a l in st it u t es, u sin g com p u t er s a s a r esou r ce for p r ofes-sion a l d evelop m en t , u sin g u n iver sit ies or colle ges a s r esou r ces for p r ofession a l d evelop m en t , t h e a ccess ib ilit y of fi n a n cia l r esou r ces, r ecogn it ion a s a sou r ce of
Table III
Ranke d pro fe s s io nal de ve lo pme nt be havio rs o f s c ho o l s upe rinte nde nts
DECAS Non-DECAS
Variable Rank Frequency % Rank Frequency %
Activities:
Workshops 1 3 4 0 1 0 0 .0 Workshops 1 3 4 0 1 0 0 .0
Conferences 1 3 4 0 1 0 0 .0 Conferences 1 3 4 0 1 0 0 .0
Professional memberships 1 3 4 0 1 0 0 .0 Professional memberships 1 3 4 0 1 0 0 .0
Travel to other districts 1 2 3 9 9 8 .0 Professional institutes 1 2 3 9 9 8 .0
Community involvement 1 1 3 7 9 3 .0 Universities/ colleges 1 1 3 8 9 5 .0
Professional dialogue 1 0 3 2 8 0 .0 Professional libraries 1 0 3 6 9 0 .0
Professional library 9 2 1 5 3 .0 Professional dialogue 9 3 4 8 5 .0
Business involvement 8 1 8 4 5 .0 Business involvement 8 2 7 6 8 .0
Task forces 7 1 1 2 8 .0 Community involvement 7 2 4 6 0 .0
Universities/ colleges 6 8 2 0 .0 Political involvement 6 1 9 4 8 .0
Political involvement 5 8 2 0 .0 Travel to other districts 5 1 2 3 0 .0
Institutes 4 8 2 0 .0 Task forces 4 6 1 5 .0
M entors 3 3 1 8 .0 M entors 3 6 1 5 .0
Resources:
Education service center (ESC) 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 .0 Education service center (ESC) 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 .0
Video recorders 9 3 7 9 3 .0 Finances 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 .0
Peer networks 8 3 5 8 8 .0 Peer networks 9 3 9 9 8 .0
State Education Agency 7 3 4 8 5 .0 State Education Agency 8 3 7 9 3 .0
Audio tapes 6 1 7 4 3 .0 Computers 8 3 7 9 3 .0
Life experiences 5 1 7 4 3 .0 Video recorders 8 3 7 9 3 .0
Professional experiences 4 1 6 4 0 .0 Universities/ colleges 7 3 6 8 3 .0
Finances 3 1 3 3 3 .0 Professional experiences 6 2 8 7 0 .0
Universities/ colleges 2 1 1 2 8 .0 Life experiences 5 2 0 5 0 .0
Computers 2 1 1 2 8 .0 Audio tapes 4 1 2 4 3 .0
M otivation:
Student improvement 8 4 0 1 0 0 .0 Student improvement 8 4 0 1 0 0 .0
District improvement 8 4 0 1 0 0 .0 District improvement 8 4 0 1 0 0 .0
Self-improvement 8 4 0 1 0 0 .0 Self-improvement 7 3 9 9 8 .0
Job success 7 3 9 9 8 .0 Job success 6 3 3 8 3 .0
Recognition 6 3 5 8 8 .0 Professional advancement 5 2 7 6 8 .0
Professional advancement 5 3 5 8 8 .0 Contract renewal 4 2 2 5 5 .0
Contract renewal 4 2 6 6 5 .0 Rewards/ incentives 3 1 1 2 8 .0
Rewards 3 1 9 4 8 .0 Recognition 3 1 1 2 8 .0
Self-assessment:
Yearly 1 2 5 .0 Yearly 3 2 2 5 5 .0
M onthly 2 8 2 0 .0 M onthly 2 1 1 2 8 .0
Weekly 3 3 0 7 5 .0 Weekly 1 7 1 7 .0
Time frames:
One year 4 2 7 6 8 .0 One year 4 2 1 5 3 .0
Six months 3 8 2 0 .0 Six months 3 1 1 2 8 .0
Three months 2 5 1 2 .0 Three months 2 7 1 7 .0
One month 1 0 0 .0 One month 1 1 2 .0
Note:
Martha N. Ovando , Be n M. Harris and Pats y Me ne fe e Sc ho o l supe rinte nde nt de ve lo pme nt
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f Educ atio nal Manage me nt 1 2 / 2 [1 9 9 8 ] 8 2 –8 9
Gay, L.R. (1987), E d u ca tion a l R esea rch : Com p eten -cies for A n a lysis a n d A p p lica tion (3rd ed .), Mer r il P u blish in g Com p a n y, Colu m bu s, OH . H a r r is, B.M. (1989), In S er v ice E d u ca tion for S ta ff
Dev elop m en t, Ally n & Ba con , Bos t on , M A. H a r r is, B.M. a n d Wa n , Y. (E d s ) (1991), “P er for
-m a n ce cr it er ia for sch ool execu t ives ”, In stru ction a l L ea d ersh ip, ava ila ble fr om T h e Un iver sit y of Texa s a t Au st in , De p a r t m en t of E d u ca -t ion a l Ad m in is-t r a -t ion , SZB # 310, Au s -t in , Texa s 78712.
H a r r is, B.M. a n d Wilson , L. (1991), “In s t r u ct ion a l lea d er sh ip sp ecifi ca t ion s for s ch ool execu -t ives”, J ou r n a l of Person n el E v a lu a -tion in E d u ca tion , Vol. 5, p p. 21-30.
H er m a n , J . (1989), “In st r u ct ion a l lea d er s h ip s k ills a n d com p et en cies of p u blic s ch ool s u p er in t en -d en t s”, u n p u blish e-d -d oct or a l -d iss er t a t ion , T h e Un iver sit y of Texa s a t Au s t in , TX. H or d , S.E . (1990), “An in ves t iga t ion of in s t r u
c-t ion a l lea d er sh ip p er ce p c-t ion s a m on g d is c-t r icc-t level execu t ives”, u n p u blish ed d oct or a l d is-ser t a t ion , T h e Un iver s it y of Texa s a t Au s t in , TX.
H o, W. (1992), “A st u dy of r ela t ion s h ip s b et w een in st r u ct ion a l st a ffin g com p et en cies of s u p er -in t en d en t s a n d select ed p er s on n el p r a ct ices”, u n p u blish ed d oct or a l d iss er t a t ion , T h e Un i-ver sit y of Texa s a t Au s t in , TX.
Killion , J .P. a n d La n zer ot t e, J .K. (1992), “Is t h e gr a ss gr een er on t h e ot h er s id e? Discover ies a b ou t t r a in in g in bu sin ess a n d in d u st r y ”, J ou r n a l of S ta ff Dev elop m en t, Vol. 13 N o. 4, p p. 6-11.
Kn e zek , D.G. (1993), “A t a s k a n a ly s is p r ofi lin g t h e in st r u ct ion a l lea d er sh ip r ole of t h e a s sis t a n t su p er in t en d en t for in s t r u ct ion w it h in la r ger sch ool d ist r ict s in Texa s”, u n p u blish ed d
oc-t or a l d is ser oc-t a oc-t ion , T h e Un iver s ioc-t y of Texa s a oc-t Au s t in , TX.
N a t ion a l Gover n or s ’ Ass ocia t ion Cen t er of P olicy Res ea r ch a n d An a ly sis (1986), T im e for R esu lts: T h e Gov er n ors’ 1991 R ep or t on E d u ca -tion , Wa sh in gt on , DC.
N a t ion a l P olicy Boa r d for E d u ca t ion a l Ad m in is-t r a is-t ion (1989), Im p r ov in g is-th e Prep a ra is-tion of S ch ool A d m in istra tors: A n A gen d a for R efor m , Ch a r lot t es v ille, VA.
Sch lech t y, P.C. (1985), “Dist r ict level p olicies a n d p r a ct ices su p p or t in g effect ive sch ool m a n a ge-m en t a n d cla ssr ooge-m in st r u ct ion ”, in Ky le, R.M .J . (E d .), R ea ch in g for E x cellen ce: A n E ffec-tiv e S ch ool S ou rceb ook , Gover n m en t P r in t in g Office, Wa sh in gt on , DC, p p. 117-29.
Sen ge, P.M . (1990), T h e Fifth Discip lin e: T h e A r t a n d Pra ctice of th e L ea r n in g Orga n iz a tion , Dou bled ay Dell P u blis h in g Gr ou p, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Sp a r k s, D. (1992), “E xecu t ive d evelop m en t a n d cu lt u r a l ch a n ge a t t h e For d Mot or Com p a n y ”, J ou r n a l of S ta ff Dev elop m en t, Vol. 13 N o. 4, p p. 2-5.
Sp a r k s, D. (1993), “T h r ee su p er in t en d en t s sp ea k ou t on p la n n in g a n d t h eir r ole a s st a ff d evel-op er s : a con ver s a t ion w it h Ma r y N eb gen , Dav id Sou s a , a n d Ray Willia m s ”, J ou r n a l of S ta ff Dev elop m en t, Vol. 14 N o. 2, p p. 22-5. Su n u n u , J .L. (1986), “Will t ech n ologies m a k e lea r n in g a n d t ea ch in g ea sier ?”, Ph i Delta Ka p p a n , Vol. 68 N o. 4, p p. 220-2.
