THE ROLE OF HIGH SCHOOL DEPARTMENT CHAIRS IN A LARGE ... · high school department chairs. There are several views that have emerged over time concerning the role of the department

THE ROLE OF HIGH SCHOOL DEPARTMENT CHAIRS IN A LARGE SUBURBAN SCHOOL SYSTEM

by

Aria Burnette Orris

Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the

Virginia Polytechnic Institue and State University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

in

Educational Administration

APPROVED:

Wayne M. Worner, Chairman

~Kenneth Underwood liouston Conley

Doris Torrice t.Jmmie Fortune

October, 1988

Blacksburg, Virginia

THE ROLE OF HIGH SCHOOL DEPARTMENT CHAIRS

IN A LARGE SUBURBAN SCHOOL SYSTEM

by

Aria Burnette Orris

Committee Chairman: Wayne M. Worner Educational Administration

(ABSTRACT)

While the literature indicates that virtually all high

schools have department chairs, little research has been

done that examines the role of the department chair or how

they spend their time. The publication of A Nation At Risk

and the reports that followed have placed greater emphasis

on instructional leadership leading many to suggest that

department chairs are being under utilized within their

school.

The purpose of this study was to describe how high

school department chairs spend their time; what principals,

teachers, and department chairs believe should be the role

of the department chair; and to examine the discrepancies

between reported time spent and reported role the department

chair should have in the areas of supervision, curriculum,

personnel, management, communications, and staff

development.

A descriptive survey method was used in the study. The

sample consisted of 22 high school principals, 88 department

chairs, and 264 teachers in a large suburban school system.

From a list of items identified through a search of the

literature as tasks performed by department chairs, the

respondents were asked to indicate the amount of time spent

on each task and the importance of each task to the role the

department chair should have. Descriptive statistics

including frequencies, percentages and means were used to

report results.

It was found that all groups were in general agreement

as to how department chairs spend their time, but disagreed

on the amount of time spent. Principals and department

chairs perceived department chairs spent more time on most

tasks than did teachers. The greatest amount of time spent

by department chairs was on tasks related to management and

communication.

All groups agreed that the role of the department chair

should be expanded to increase responsibilities in

management, communications, personnel, and curriculum.

However, an expansion of the role in staff development was

seen as more important by principals and department chairs

than by teachers. Principals indicated greater support for

a role expansion in supervision than did department chairs

or teachers.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Without the support and guidance of a number of people

I could not have completed this project.

To Wayne Worner, my doctoral committee chairman, thank

you for your patience and guidance. When I strayed you were

there, always with a smile. Thank goodness you had a good

sense of humor! To Jimmie Fortune, thank you for listening

to me and making me feel good. You always seemed to say the

right thing. To Doris Torrice, who provided me with

insight, and through example, has taught me much about being

a good teacher and administrator, I extend a particular

thanks. Your presence on my committee had a special

meaning. A most sincere thank you also to my other

committee members, Kenneth Underwood and Houston Conley, for

their encouragement and advice.

Appreciation is also expressed to the principals,

department chairs, and teachers in Fairfax County, Virginia,

for their time and help in completing the questionnaire, and

to my superintendent, Jay D. Jacobs, for his encouragement

and support of this research.

Finally, I'd like to thank the person who was always

there by my side cheering me on, my husband and best friend,

Ray. Without his support and love I couldn't have made it!

iv

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated with love to the memory

of my mother, Geraldine Hicks Burnette, who gave to me an

appreciation for education that I'll always treasure and

countless other gifts that I did not always recognize at the

time. This one was for you Mama.

v

Table of Contents

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Role of the Department Chair

Review of the Research

Potential of Department Chair

Purpose of the Study

Need for the Study

Limitations of Study

Definitions of Terms

Organization of Study

CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY

Purpose

Research Questions

Research Method

Population and Sample

Instrumentation

Data Collection

Analysis of the Data

CHAPTER III

FINDING

Demographic Data

vi

1

3

7

18

19

20

22

22

23

24

24

24

24

25

25

27

29

33

36

36

36

Table of Contents (continued)

Analysis of the Data . 45

Research Question 1: How do high school department chairs spend their time in the areas of supervision, curriculum, personnel, management, communication, and staff development? . . 45

Research Question 2: What do principals, department chairs, and teachers believe should be the role of the high school department chair as defined by responsibilities in supervision, curriculum, management, communication, and staff development? . . 60

Research Question 3: What are the discrepancies between reported time spent and reported role department chairs should have in supervision, curriculum, personnel, management, communication, and staff development? . . 75

CHAPTER IV 90

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, AND CONCLUSIONS 90

Introduction • 90

Sample . 90

Data Collection 91

Data Analysis 91

Demographic Information . 92

Summary . 93

Findings • 101

Conclusions 104

Recommendations 106

In Retrospect 109

Comments . 110

vii

Table of Contents (continued)

REFERENCES .113

APPENDIX A. Source of Items Identified as Tasks Performed by Department Chairs . . . . .116

APPENDIX B. Letter and Survey Sent to Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers .• 121

APPENDIX C. Person Identified as Serving the Role of Department Chair for Industrial Arts ... 140

APPENDIX D. Follow-Up Letter .

APPENDIX E. Crosstabs of "Time Spent" versus ''Role Importance" for Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers . , . , ,

APPENDIX F. Need for Staff Development for Department Chairs as Perceived by Principals and

.142

.• 144

Department Chairs ... , . . ... , , .166

VITA 168

viii

List of Tables

Table Page

1. Alpha Coefficient for Category Items. 30

2. Summary of Survey Returns . 32

3. Ranges Used in the Analysis of Total Scores . 34

4. Demographic Information on Department Chairs •. 37

5 • Demographic Information Concerning Position . 39

6 . Periods Assigned for Departmental Duties 42

7. Periods Taught by Department Chair 43

8. Number of Members in the Department . 44

9. Tasks Identified by 66% or more of the Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers as Taking a Moderate to Major Amount of the Department Chair's Time. . 47

10. Tasks Identified by 68% or more of the Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers as Taking a Minor to No Amount of the Department Chair's Time 50

11. Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions as to the Amount of Time Spent by the Department Chair by Category and Item . . 51

12. Approximate Number of Hours Per Week Spent by the Department Chair Performing Departmental Duties as Perceived by Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers • • • • . 55

13. The Percentage of Time Spent by the Department Chair on Departmental Duties in Each of the Six as Perceived by Principals, Department Chairs and Teachers . . . • . • . . . . . . . . 56

14. Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Estimates of Weekly Department Chair Expenditure of Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

15. Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions as to What Should be The Role of the Department Chair by Category and Item . • . . . • 62

ix

Table

16. Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions of the Time Required to Perform the Duties Described in the Role the Department Chair

Page

Should have . . . . . . . . 72

17. Relationship of Reported Time Spent and Reported Role the Department Chair Should Have in Supervision . . . . . . . • . , 78

18. Relationship of Reported Time Spent and Reported Role the Department Chair Should Have in Management . . . . . . . . 81

19. Relationship of Reported Time Spent and Reported Role the Department Chair Should Have in Personnel , . . • . . . , . . . . . . , . 82

20. Relationship of Reported Time Spent and Reported Role the Department Chair Should Have in Communication . . . . . . .

21. Relationship of Reported Time Spent and Reported Role the Department Chair Should Have in Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . .

22. Relationship of Reported Time Spent and Reported Role the Department Chair Should Have in

84

. 85

Staff Development . . . , . . . . . . . . , 87

23. Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions of Role Conflict Between Time Spent and Importance to the Role the Department Chair Should Have . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

x

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

In discussing the role of the department chair in

secondary schools, Hord and Murphy (1985) wrote:

The role of the department chairperson or department head can be portrayed as one of "paper pusher" at the one extreme and as "commander in chief" at the other, depending on who is describing the role. Because there has been little study that defines and describes the role, a wide variety of data-free perceptions abound. ( p. 2)

The position of department chair developed over a

period of years out of necessity (Novack, 1958). As school

enrollment grew, the one room school house became no longer

practical. Additional classrooms and teachers led to the

concept of "principal teacher," the teacher who assumed the

major responsibilities in the operation of the school. As

the management of the school became a full time job, the

position of principal was established. The principal became

the overseer of the school with the responsibility of all

facets of its operation. With the establishment of legal

support for the secondary school and compulsory attendance

laws, school systems continued to expand. By the 1870's

experienced teachers were used to supervise other teachers

in the same subject fields (Kidd, 1965). As the school

population continued to increase, the principal,

1

2

overburdened with numerous responsibilities, saw the need

for department heads to provide assistance. Gwynn (1961)

concurred in this opinion, attributing the development of

the department chair to the growth in enrollment and the

consolidation of secondary schools. Verchota (1971)

provided the following explanation for the development of

department chairs in secondary schools: "Departments were

conceived when principals realized that they needed help in

supervising instruction and attending to certain

administrative details associated with instruction" (p.

128). Grieder (1963) pointed out that "as small high

schools consolidated into larger units, the appointment or

staff election of department heads or chairmen becomes

feasible" (p. 8).

The view was expressed by Williams (1964) that until

World War I subject areas were not closely supervised. It

was his opinion that new emphasis on teaching techniques and

instructional materials following the war led to a need for

direct supervision in the form of department heads. The

principal became more a generalist and less a specialist in

curriculum leaving the latter role to the department chair

(Verchota, 1971). Others felt that since high schools

prepared students for college, they patterned themselves

3

after colleges with a departmental organization (Hipps,

1965; Novak, 1958).

Regardless of how it evolved, the position of

department head is currently well established. Callahan

pointed out:

The department head position appears in the organizational charts and faculty rosters of school districts in every state. The reason for this is simple: the chairman fills an administrative vacuum created by the rapid growth of public education in America during this century. (1971, p. 21)

Though the position is established, the role and the

responsibilities of the department chair is another matter.

Role of the Department Chair

It was suggested by Getzels and Guba (1957) that roles

are defined in terms of expectations held by the

organization for the incumbent by the occupants of other

roles within the organization as well as those expectations

held by the incumbent. They also suggested that a role

incumbent's effectiveness can be measured by the extent to

which the behaviors of the incumbent fulfills those

expectations. When the role expectations of the

organization and the incumbent are incompatible the

incumbent will probably experience stress. A review of the

4

literature suggests that such a condition may exist for many

high school department chairs.

There are several views that have emerged over time

concerning the role of the department chair. Hipps noted

this confusion when he wrote:

The weakest link in the line and staff organization is the department head. There is little agreement within the profession on the administrative and supervisory functions of the department head. (1965, p, 487)

It would seem that the department head is expected to serve

the role of a curriculum specialist and an administrator.

This has been a persistent problem that was identified over

50 years ago by Koch (1930) when he said:

There can be no denying the fact that the department headship is in confusion. There is apparently little agreement among school administrators as to what, in actual practice, its function should be. (p, 336)

Two views regarding the role of the department chair

have emerged according to Beck and Rosenberger (1971). One

view is that the chair is a line administrative position,

the other holds that it is supervisory and a staff position.

They described the difference:

Line positions are those which carry the authority of the organization and are held by those responsible for all or most of the functions of school operation. Staff positions are advisory in nature and are usually held by those having a specialized competency, skill, or knowledge, (p. 48)

It was their contention that a department chair cannot serve

both functions. In discussing the incompatibility of the

5

administrative and supervisory aspects of the department

chair's role they pointed out:

The department chairman in the secondary school should be a supervisor, not a line administrator. For if he is seen as an extension of the arm of the principal, he has greatly diminished effectiveness as a supervisor. The literature of supervision is replete with assertions that the operating base of a supervisor is his factual or technical mastery, consultative skill, and advisory persuasiveness. The contribution most likely to be made by a department chairman is subject matter mastery and technical competence-ingredients that made the best supervision. (p. 49)

The role conflict was also recognized by Verchota

(1971) when he said in discussing the nature of the role of

the department chair, "he has usually been asked to be a

teacher first and administrator afterward. This has created

a classical example of role conflict which usually produces

frustration" (p. 128).

Thomas Sergiovanni, in his book Handbook for Effective

Department Leadership (1984), expressed the view that there

are five areas of leadership responsibility the department

chair must exercise. The five areas and a brief description

of each includes:

1. Educational leadership - development and articulation of educational programs including the following issues: curriculum and teaching objectives; teaching styles, methods and procedures; classroom learning climates; teacher, student and program evaluation; curriculum content; lesson and unit planning; scheduling; group; curriculum and teaching innovations.

6

2. Organizational leadership - ensuring that decisions are made to achieve the organizational goals and objectives and not for the purpose of making day-to-day operation of the system easier.

3. Supervisory leadership - improvement of instruction by teachers based on the department chair's ability to get teachers to identify with and commit to the goals and objectives of the department and school.

4. Administrative leadershio - development of more efficient ways to handle information and evaluate existing administrative procedures in an effort to reduce them.

5. Team leadership - the establishment support and mutual trust between the administration, department chairs and teachers in order to work towards the improvement of the educational program.

Sergiovanni summarized the department chairs leadership role

in the following way:

The effective chairperson works: to achieve school and department educational objectives (educational leadership) through teachers who identify with and are committed to these objectives (supervisory leadership) within a department and school structure which supports the objectives and facilitates the work of teachers (organizational leadership) over an extended period of time (administrative leadership) in cooperation with other chairpersons and the principal (team leadership). (1984, p. 11)

He pointed out that if department chairs are to assume

increased responsibilities for leadership they must be given

more responsibility and authority than presently exists.

7

Review of the Research

In a search of the literature on the role of the

department chair several things become obvious. The first

is that there is not a great deal of information available

on the role of the department chair. Second, the

information that is available can be divided into three

categories:

1. Research on the role of the department chairs in

institutions of higher education.

2. Nonresearch based articles consisting of the

author's suggestions based on personal experience

in the position.

3. Research on the role of the department chair in

secondary schools.

Due to the nature of public school organizations, a

large portion of the information written about institutions

of higher education or by educators from those institutions

may not be transferred directly to the high school setting

(Hord & Murphy, 1985). Cited as observable differences

between institutions of higher education and high schools

are "community expectations, contractual limitations, and

the nature of the student body" (p. 7).

The information regarding the role of the department

chair within the school is extremely limited. Greenfield

8

pointed out that, "Among those the majority were

prescriptive reports, that is, non-empirical exhortations

regarding the role and function of the chair and/or

department" (1985, p. 22).

What is it that the department chair really does? A

1948 study entitled "The Department Head in Instructional

Supervision" was conducted by the Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). The 124

department heads surveyed were from 20 schools in 18 cities

in six states. It was found the department heads

participated in the following tasks:

1. selecting textbooks 2. selecting supplies and equipment 3. initiating new teachers 4. surveying instructional materials 5. appraising and reorganizing courses 6. planning for efficient use of supplies and

equipment 7. preparing instructional materials 8. planning some phase of remedial instruction 9. developing and trying out new courses. (p. 45)

A 1959 study by the Rochester, Minnesota, Public School

System identified the following items as tasks performed by

department chairs in order of frequency mentioned:

1. selecting textbooks 2. scheduling department meetings 3. building courses of study 4. making annual requisitions for instructional

materials 5. supervising classes 6. preparing the budget 7. advising new teachers 8. studying methods of teaching 9. advising principal

9

10. attending curriculum meetings 11. interviewing teacher candidates 12. attending coordination meetings of high school

staff 13. helping in the assignment of teachers 14. coordinating the work of the department. (King &

Moon, 1960, p. 20-24)

While on special assignment for the San Mateo Union

High School District in California, Michael Callahan

conducted a study on department chairs and departmental

leadership. After conducting interviews with hundreds of

administrators, department chairs, and classroom teachers in

nearly 20 school districts throughout California and Oregon,

he wrote a book entitled, The Effective School Department

Head (1971). In the book, Callahan identified four areas of

responsibility for the department chair. Each of the four

categories is listed below with a summary of each:

1. Personnel. This category included participating in employment interviews, orienting new teachers to the department, and assisting in teacher assignment.

2. Classroom Supervision. Among the duties identified in this area were making classroom observations, conferencing with teachers, preparing reports on observations, and supervising substitute and student teachers.

3. Curriculum Development. The tasks identified included developing performance objectives, serving as a departmental curriculum consultant, improving communications within the department, planning for conferences and staff development, and selecting instructional materials.

4. Manager. The duties identified as management included keeping an inventory of supplies and equipment, requisitioning equipment and supplies,

10

arranging for repair of equipment, administering the department budget, answering correspondence, and planning and conducting department meetings.

A study conducted by Gimm (1974) in 40 secondary

schools in the metropolitan area of Minneapolis and St. Paul

examined the perceptions of the actual and ideal role of

secondary school department chairs as perceived by

principals, department chairs, and teachers. Items on the

survey were divided into the three categories of

supervision, management and curriculum. Significant

differences were found between the actual and ideal

perception for supervision and curriculum activities, but

not for management. All groups agreed that management

activities should be performed "frequently," thus

confirming the importance of the department chair's role in

departmental management activities. All groups indicated

that supervision tasks performed by the department chair

were minimal. While all groups indicated that the

department chair should do more in supervision than was

currently being done, the principals were more enthusiastic

than department chairs or teachers, The three groups agreed

that the department chair was doing more in curriculum

development than in supervision. Gimm also found that

principals were more optimistic about the department chair's

role, perceiving that department chairs were doing more than

11

the department chairs, themselves, or teachers perceived

they were doing. Department chairs identified more closely

with teachers than principals in all categories on both

actual and ideal roles.

In Smith's 1979 study of secondary department chairs in

the 17 secondary schools of the Lancaster-Lebanon

Intermediate Unit in Pennsylvania, a significant difference

was found in the perception of principals, department

chairs, and teachers in what is and what should be the role

of the department chair. In general, each group felt that

all functions should become a more essential aspect of the

department chair's role. As a result of the study, Smith

concluded that building principals recognized the potential

of the department chair, but had not implemented changes to

use the chairs to full advantage.

In a study of 19 secondary schools in the central New

Jersey counties of Middlesex and Ocean, Kuzminski (1979)

found similar results when he examined the relationship

between principals', teachers', and department chairs'

perception of the role of the secondary school department

chair and the perceived effectiveness of the department

chair. It was found the three groups differed in their

perceptions of the role of the department chair. The

greatest discrepancies between responses of principals and

12

department chairs occurred in the area of supervision.

Principals placed greater importance in supervision than did

department chairs. He found greater agreement between

principals and department chairs in the areas of curriculum

development and management. These findings corresponded to

those of Gimm (1974). Like Gimm (1974), he found principals

perceived that department chairs were doing more than

department chairs, themselves, indicated they were; while

teachers, perceived department chairs were doing less than

department chairs indicated.

Bruce Thomas (1984) conducted a study that investigated

the effective utilization of department chairpersons in

Class AA high schools in Minnesota. The findings indicated

that department chairs and principals agreed on the

functions that department chairs should perform. They

further agreed each function should be considered a more

essential part of the role of the chair. There were

significant differences, however, in their perceptions on

the following items:

maintaining a departmental inventory in-service activities evaluating student progress demonstrating new teaching strategies classroom observations conducting follow-up conferences.

For the items mentioned, principals indicated the functions

were more essential to the role than did department chairs.

13

A study in Janesville, Wisconsin, conducted by Worner

(1986) was undertaken to determine if the role of the

department chair (referred to in that system as

instructional manager) was:

a. accurately and adequately defined

b. similar from school to school

c. appropriate to the needs of the district

d. in need of revision (p. 1).

Department chairs and principals in the five secondary

schools were provided a survey consisting of tasks performed

by department chairs. After responding to each item in

terms of the importance of the task and time required to

perform the task, they were asked to identify the three

"most important" functions. The six items most frequently

identified as the "most important" included:

1. Budget planning and preparation. 2. Participation in selection and/or development of

new curriculum programs/materials. 3. Implementation of departmental plans and

procedures. 4. Budget administration (inventory, ordering,

monitoring, fee collection). 5. Evaluation of curriculum and programs. 6. Conducting department meetings (p. 7).

Based on the results of the survey, Worner surmised

that there was a considerable degree of consistency across

schools and subject areas in regards to the most important

14

items and those that take the most time. In summary he

said:

Clearly the role of the instructional manager as "representative" and "presider" and functions related to budgeting, materials acquisition, and other paper flow, represent the "most important'' functions from the viewpoint of the respondents. A second category of activities loosely defined as instructional leadership, followed by staff development functions, appeared in the second tier of most important functions. It was these two sets of activities which created the most frustration and some ambiguity among respondents due primarily to the perceived lack of time to carry out the functions. (p. 13)

At the 1985 annual meeting of the American Educational

Research Association Hord and Murphy (1985) detailed the

results of a three year study of 30 American high schools,

conducted by the Research on the Improvement Process (RIP)

Program at the Research and Development Center for Teacher

Education, The University of Texas at Austin. As described

by Hord and Murphy (1985), the RIP high school research

focused on the study of change, the kinds of changes taking

place, and the role and influence of the various constituent

groups on the change process, including high school

department head. The study was based on self-reporting

inventories by department chairs and personnel interviews of

principals, teachers, and department chairs. Based on their

research five categories of functions that department chairs

served were developed. The following descriptions of the

15

functions and the tasks that comprise each function have

been either quoted or paraphrased:

Function I.

Function II.

Function III.

Function IV.

Function V.

Serves as a communication liaison. Acts as a department spokesman meeting with and fostering communication vertically from teachers to principal and division level; coordinates course schedules, and student placement.

Serves as department administrator. Conducts department meetings; designs budget; selects textbooks; maintains equipment and inventories; works with substitutes; provide leadership; interviews and recommends prospective teaches; evaluates teachers; hires and terminates teachers.

Assists teachers in improving performance, Observes and assesses classroom teaching; confers with teachers about observation; assists teachers in instructional activities; plans inservices; supports, encourages and creates opportunities for growth.

Participates in program improvement and change. Appraises program quality; reviews and evaluates materials; keeps informed of new trends and programs; stimulates teachers' awareness of research and program development; provides leadership in curriculum development, implementation, revision and improvement.

Fosters cooperative relationships. Supports the relationships of colleagues, students, and parents; fosters cohesive and cooperative interpersonal relationships; confers with other departments, expresses acceptance, humor, praise as appropriate; responds positively to challenges; communicates with the community. (p. 12)

Based on their research, they concluded that the

presence or absence of three factors seemed to particularly

16

influence the role of the department chair. These factors

were clear policy, monetary compensation, and slack time.

Two additional factors were also mentioned. They were the

existence (or lack of) of a clearly defined policy (job

description) and training. It was their opinion that

department chairs lacking these factors would operate at the

function level described in 1 and 2. "The existence of

policies that clearly define the job as an instructional

helper supports the development of the department head's

role as an improver of programs and teachers" (p. 27).

However, it was pointed out that even in the absence of a

job description or formal policy some department chairs

emerged as leaders who developed and implemented inservice

programs for their teachers. The study also identified few

training opportunities designed specifically for department

chairs.

Carolyn Anderson and Glen Nicholson (1987) investigated

who performed what functions of instructional leadership in

eight comprehensive high schools of a large school district

in the Southwest. In this study they drew the following

conclusion about the role of the department chairperson:

The most important functions of the department chairperson role involved allocation of personnel and materials along with transmission and interpretation of school goals. The department chairperson as advocate generates needed information, resources, policies and programs and applies them on behalf of the instructional program of that department. (pp. 29-32)

17

In a 17 state survey of principals in 43 large urban

high school Fish (1976) found that there was a positive

relationship between effective department chairpersons and

explicit job descriptions. Of the nine schools where the

principal did not rate the department chairs effective, five

reported that department chairs had neither job description

nor contract recognition; their role was left to a "general

understanding" (p. 109).

Much of the research about the role of the department

chair in secondary schools appears contradictory. Kuzminski

(1979), in a study of the perceptions of the role of

department chairs among teachers, principals and chairs

concluded that the role of the chair is poorly defined and

perceived differently by the three reference groups in the

secondary school. Similar conclusions were found by Ritter

(1979), Gimm (1974) and Smith (1979). In contrast, studies

by Sampson (1986), Thomas (1984) and Pedicone (1981)

revealed agreement in role perceptions between principals

and department chairs; however, all recommend development of

a job description. It should be noted that the agreement

among principals and department chairs was found in the more

recent studies, which may suggest that there is better

communication of expectations between the two groups.

18

Potential of the Department Chair

The resource potential of department chairs has been

recognized by some for many years. As early as 1965, High

suggested that "Department heads are--f irst and foremost--

classroom teachers. As classroom teachers and as subject

specialists, they are in a prime position to assist other

members of their respective divisions in analyzing and

improving instructional practices" (p. 213). Wrigg (1972)

pointed out the weakness of expecting the principal to be

all things to all subject areas, warning that a gap in

credibility between the administration and teachers is

created when administrators do not have the expertise to

provide effective supervision.

In 1969 Bingaman expressed the opinion that, "High

school principals are missing a golden opportunity by

failing to delegate considerable responsibility and

authority to department chairmen in the area of supervision

and curriculum improvement in the comprehensive high school

of today" (p. 27). In an article published in the Bulletin

of the National Association of Secondary School Principals,

Turner (1983) echoed Bingaman's view, stating that "the

department head is a relatively untapped source of badly

needed help for our embattled schools," (p.25). He

continued, "a primary responsibility of the department head

19

should be encouraging and assisting teachers to become more

competent instructors'' (p. 26). Marcial (1984,) agreed,

indicating further, that if the department head is skilled

in supervisory procedures, he or she is in a better position

than the principal to conduct such a procedure. Hord and

Murphy (1985) suggested that, "Administrators also view

heads as subject specialists who know their subject and who

know their teacher colleagues" (p. 4).

Diane Lindsay (1981) also discussed better utilization

of department chairs, but warned that administrators should

give a great deal of thought to whether a department head is

a supervisor/master teacher or a full-fledged member of the

management team. She emphasized the conflict that may occur

when the role is not clearly defined. Similar statements

were made by Kidd (1965) in a discussion of whether

department chairs are line or staff members.

Purpose of the Study


school department chairs spend their time and examine

preferences as to the role they should have in a large

suburban school system.

20

The research questions were as follows:

1. How do high school department chairs spend their

time in the areas of supervision, curriculum,

personnel, management, communication and staff

development?

2. What do principals, department chairs and teachers

believe should be the role of high school department

chairs as defined by responsibilities in supervision,

curriculum, personnel, management, communication, and

staff development?

3. What are the discrepancies between reported time

spent and reported role department chairs should have

in supervision, curriculum, personnel, management,

communication, and staff development?

Need for the Study

The literature indicates virtually all high schools

have department chairs, but that the role of the department

chair is ambiguous. Articles have been written which

suggest a number of tasks in which the department chair

should be engaged. Most of these articles are not based on

empirical studies (Greenfield, 1985). Many were written by

those associated with institutions of higher education where

direct transfer to secondary schools is doubtful (Hord &

21

Murphy, 1985). Research on the department chair in

secondary schools is sparse (Greenfield, 1985).

The publication of A Nation at Risk (1983) and the

reports which followed have placed greater emphasis on

instructional leadership and improvement of instruction,

which may suggest an expanded role for the department chair

in the area of instruction. Department chairs have been

identified as a valuable resource available to secondary

administrators, one that could be used to, among other

things, improve instruction (Beck & Rosenberger, 1971;

Greenfield, 1985; High, 1965; Marcial, 1984; Verchota,

1971). The Carnegie Task Force suggested in A Nation

Prepared (1986), that schools should develop a more diverse

staffing structure in order to capitalize on the knowledge,

skills, and accumulated wisdom of the most able teachers.

Leading such staffing would be "lead teachers" who would

coordinate the work of the school's instructional staff

(Mandel & Tucker, 1986). It would seem that the concept of

lead teacher may blend naturally with the position of

department chair.

Using empirical data, a profile describing how the high

school department chair in a large suburban school system

spends his/her time and the perceived role the department

chair should have has been developed. The information

22

provided by this study could be useful in consideration of

organizational changes which might be desirable involving

department chairs. The results might also be useful to the

Virginia State Department of Education and the local school

system in addressing staff development needs for department

chairs.

Limitations of the Study

1. This study was based on the responses received from

department chairs, principals, and teachers of the Fairfax

County Public School system, Virginia, limiting

generalization outside of that population.

2. The survey was conducted by mail. When a mail survey is

used there is the possibility that the questions could be

misinterpreted by the respondents.

3. The survey was limited to high school department chairs

in four subjects (English, science, foreign language, and

industrial arts).

Definitions of the Terms

Department chair (head, chairman, chairperson, or chair)

A member of the faculty who in addition to doing some

teaching in a department has some responsibilities for

23

administering the affairs of the department (Dictionary of

Education. 3rd edition, 1972).

Role Importance

The importance of a task to the role the department

chair should have at some future time.

Time Spent

The time spent by the department chair performing tasks

as part of the duties of a department chair. Used in this

study as a proxy for current role description.

Organization of the Study

This study is divided into four chapters. Chapter I

contains background information, a review of the literature,

the purpose of the study, need for the study, limitations of

the study, and definition of terms. Chapter II describes

the methodology used in the study. Chapter III presents the

findings and interpretations of the study. Chapter IV

provides the summary of the study, findings, conclusions,

recommendations, and implications resulting from the study.

CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY

Purpose





Research Questions

The research questions were:

1. How do high school department chairs spend their

time in the areas of supervision, curriculum,


development?

2. What do principals, department chairs and teachers

believe should be the role of high school department

chairs as defined by responsibilities in supervision,

curriculum, personnel, management, communications, and

staff development?

3. What are the discrepancies between reported time

spent and reported role department chairs should have

in supervision, curriculum, personnel, management,

communications, and staff development?

24

25

Research Method

In an effort to answer the questions listed above a

descriptive survey was used. Quoting Ary, Jacobs, and

Razavich with respect to descriptive research:

Descriptive research studies are designed to obtain information concerning the current status of phenomena. They are directed toward determining the nature of the situation as it exists at the time of the study . Their aim is to describe 'what exists' with respect to variables or conditions in a situation. (1972, p. 286)

Population and Sample

Included in this study were all 22 schools in Fairfax

County, Virginia, serving grades 9-12. Fairfax County is a

large suburban school system with enrollment of

approximately 130,000 students in grades K-12 (1987-88

school year). At the time of the study it was the tenth

largest school system in the nation. The subjects in this

study were the principals of those schools; the department

chairs of English, science, foreign language and industrial

arts in each school; and teachers in each of the previously

mentioned departments from each school. The names of the

principals were obtained from the central office. A list of

teachers and department chairs in the four departments being

surveyed was obtained from central and area subject

specialists. Using these lists three teachers per

26

department were randomly selected from each school in all

departments except industrial arts. Some schools had only

one or two teachers in the department of industrial arts,

thus the selection was limited by the number of members in

the department. It was recognized that because of the small

size of the industrial arts department, schools may group

industrial arts with other small departments and have a

department chair for the combined vocational, technology, or

fine and practical arts. Each school was contacted and

asked to identify the person who served the role of

department chair for industrial arts teachers. In many

cases this person did not teach industrial arts.

In Fairfax County, the department chairs in English and

science are routinely assigned a period for performing

departmental duties. This is not generally the case in

foreign language and industrial arts. Selection of these

departments assured representation of chairs with a

"departmental period" and those without. The departments of

science and industrial arts were further selected because of

the high volume of equipment and supplies that are ordered,

maintained, and inventoried within these departments.

27

Instrumentation

From a search of the literature on the role and

responsibilities of department chairs, a list of activities

performed by department chairs was developed and revised

(Appendix A). In the process of development the initial

list of tasks was reviewed by six former department chairs

and two principals. They were asked to review the tasks for

appropriateness of items. As a result several items were

eliminated and two added to the list. A survey instrument

was designed consisting of 41 items. To facilitate

analysis, the items were organized into six categories as

follows:

1. Supervision

2. Curriculum Development

3. Management

4. Personnel

5. Communication

6. Staff Development

In addition to the survey, a questionnaire was developed to

gather demographic information about the principals,

department chairs and teachers.

A copy of the instrument was sent to 10 principals, 20

department chairs and 20 teachers who were not a part of the

population being studied. Each person was asked to identify

28

the relative amount of time that the department chair spends

on each activity using one of four ratings. The ratings

were as follows:

1= Is not a responsibility (no time spent)

2= Requires a minor amount of time

3= Requires a moderate amount of time

4= Requires a major amount of time

Each participant was also instructed to rate each of the

items in terms of whether or not the tasks should be the

responsibility of the department chair. The ratings used

were as follows:

1= Should not be a responsibility

2= Should be of minor importance

3= Should be of moderate importance

4= Should be of major importance

After completing the questionnaire, each respondent was

asked to indicate any ambiguity in wording or format, and to

respond to the appropriateness of items within assigned

categories. They were also asked to indicate the

approximate length of time required to complete the

instrument. After a review of the responses from the pilot

study the questionnaire was adjusted. As a result of the

information received from the pilot, one question was

dropped leaving a 40 item survey. Several questions were

29

reworded for clarity. It was the opinion of the respondents

that all items were appropriate.

Internal Consistency of Items

An alpha coefficient for reliability was calculated for

each of the six individual categories within the survey.

According to Brown (1983),

Measures of internal consistency indicate the degree to which the items comprising a text are intercorrelated. Thus they are designed to answer the question: Do all items measure the same characteristic? These indices place primary emphasis on the internal structure of the text, specifically the relationships between items (p. 83. )

The results of the calculations can be seen on Table 1.

The reliabilities obtained suggested that the items within

categories were intercorrelated. The greatest internal

consistency of items was found in supervision which had an

alpha coefficient of 0.91 for the "role importance" of the

department chair. All six categories and subdivisions of

"time spent" and "role importance" had reliability

coefficients of 0.78 or greater except for "role importance"

in communication which was 0.70.

Data Collection

The survey and cover letter was sent through the county

mail system on February 2, 1988, to 22 principals, 88

30

Table 1

Alpha Coefficient for Category Items

Category

Supervision

Curriculum

Personnel

Management

Staff Development

Communications

N = 267

Time Spent

.85

.86

.78

.82

.82

.80

Role as it should be

.91

.83

.79

.83

.86

.70

Number of items

8

9

5

7

6

5

31

department chairs and 240 teachers (Appendix B). An

additional letter was enclosed to those identified as

department chairs in industrial arts to explain that their

name was provided by the school as the person who performed

the role of department chair (Appendix C). The return date

for the survey was given as February 16, 1988. A follow-up

letter was mailed on February 24, 1988 (Appendix D) with a

deadline of March 4, 1988.

Of the 350 surveys mailed on February 2, 1988,

responses from the first mailing were received from 20 of

the 22 principals, 79 of the 88 department chairs and 168 of

the 240 teachers for response rates of 91%, 90% and 70%

respectively. The follow-up letter mailed on February 24,

1988, resulted in returns from two principals, 5 department

chairs and 43 teachers increasing the response rates to 100%

of the principals, 95% of the department chairs and 88% of

the teachers (Table 2).

To test for nonresponse bias, telephone interviews were

conducted for 10% of the non-respondents. No systematic

differences were found to exist between the respondents and

those interviewed by telephone.

Subjects

Principals

Department Chairs

Teachers

32

Table 2

Summary of Survey Returns

Number Mailed

22

88

240

Number Received

22

84

211

Percent Return

100

95

88

33


One of the 22 high schools within this system served as

a magnet school for science and technology. County

regulations specify the administrative role of the

departm~nt chair in this school. Because the duties and

responsibilities of the department chairs in this school

were different from the other 21 schools, they were not

included in the data analysis for the 40 item survey,

Questions 1 and 2 were examined using frequencies,

percents and means. Analysis of question 3 was based on

total scores for both "time spent" and "role importance" in

each category (e.g. management, supervision, etc.}. A total

score for each of the categories of supervision, curriculum,

personnel, management, staff development, and communication

was calculated for both "time spent" and "role importance"

by finding the sum of all individual items within a

category. The total scores for each category were then

placed into the following ranges:

Low Responsibility

Medium Responsibility

High Responsibility

Table 3 provides a complete breakdown of the ranges used for

total scores in each category. No effort was made to weight

items, thus all items in each category were treated as

Table 3

Ranges Used in the Analysis of Total Scores

Category Minimum Maximum Responsibility Range (No. of Items) Score Score Low Medium High

Supervision(8) 8 32 8-16 17-24 25-32 Curriculum(9) 9 36 9-18 19-27 28-36 Personnel(5) 5 20 5-10 11-15 16-20 Management(7) 7 28 7-14 15-21 22-28 Staff Development(6) 6 24 6-12 13-18 19-24 Communications(5) 5 20 5-10 11-15 16-20 w

~

35

equal. This was done in an effort to capture tendencies by

category in lieu of item weighting procedures. Crosstabs of

"time spent" versus "role importance'' were also performed on

all 40 items on the survey for principals, department chairs

and teachers. The results of the 120 crosstabs were then

combined into 40 conflict matrix tables. The conflict

matrix table for each item is presented in Appendix E and

provides a more detailed analysis of "time spent" and "role

importance" responses to each item.

In the data treatment no provisions were made to record

data reported as parts of a number. In cases where

respondents gave ranges, (6-8 years) the average (7) was

recorded.

Responses to the forty items of the survey were

analyzed using SPSSX. Data are reported as frequencies,

means, standard deviations, and percentages.

CHAPTER III

FINDINGS

A survey containing forty items identified through a

search of the literature as tasks performed by department

chairs was sent to 22 principals from schools that serves

grades 9-12; the person who served the function of

department chair in each school from the departments of

English, science, foreign language and industrial arts;

three teachers from each of the departments listed above

with the exception of industrial arts whose selection was

limited by the number of members in the department.

The 350 surveys mailed resulted in a return rate of

100% of the principals, 95% of the department chairs and 88%

of the teachers. A summary of the demographic data

collected from department chairs forms the basis for the

following discussion. A summary of those data is reported

in Table 4.

Demographic Data

Of the department chairs surveyed, 58.3% were female

and 41.7% male. Fifty-eight percent of the department

chairs were 41-50 years old. Approximately 20% were over 50

years and 22% under 40 years of age. Of the department

chairs responding, 98.8% were white and 1.2% oriental.

36

37

Table 4

Demographic Information on Department Chairs

Characteristics N

Gender Female Male

. . . . . 4 9 . • 3 5

Age

Race

26-35 years . 36-40 ..... 41-45 . 46-50 . 51-55 . . ... 56 or older .

White Oriental

. . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

. . . . . . . . . 2 6 . . . . . . . . . . 22

. . . . . . 10 . . . 7

. . . . 82 . . . 1

Education Bachelor Degree. . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Bachelor's plus ...........•. 21 Master Degree . . . . . . . 9 Master's plus ............. 48 Doctorate . . . . . . • . 1

Years Teaching 3-9 10-15 . 16-20 . 21-25 . . 26 or more

8 20

. 18 . . 19

17 Years as Department Chair

1-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 4-6 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 7-13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 14-25 . . . . . . . . . 9

Department membership English ..... Science . . . . . Foreign Language Industrial Arts . Other .

N = 84

• • • • • • • • • • • 2 2 . . . . . . 21

. 20 . • . 8

. 13

%

58.3 41. 7

8.3 11. 9 31. 0 26.2 11. 9 8.3

97.6 1. 2

3.6 25.0 10.7 5 7. 1

1. 2

9.5 23.8 21. 4 22.6 20.3

48.8 26.2 13.1 10.7

26.2 25.0 23.8 9.5 15.5

38

The majority of the department chairs had an advanced

degree with 11% having a Master's Degree, and 59% having a

Master's Degree plus additional hours (Table 4). Three

department chairs (3.7%) held a Bachelor's Degree and 26%, a

Bachelor's Degree plus additional hours past that degree.

Only one chair held a doctorate (l.2%).

The years of teaching experience for department chairs

varied, with the minimum number of years taught being three

and the maximum 32 years (Table 4). Only ten percent of the

chairs had fewer than 10 years of experience. The remaining

department chairs were almost equally split in four

divisions: 10-15, 16-20, 21-25, 26 or more.

As can be seen in Table 4, 50% of the department chairs

had been in their position three years or less. Twenty-six

percent had been chairs from 4-6 years, 13% from 7-14 years,

and 11% from 15-25 years.

There was no job description for department chairs

according to 65% of the chairs responding (Table 5).

Thirty-one percent indicated that there was a description

and 2.4% expressed the opinion that there was a vague

description of the position. One percent of the chairs did

not know whether there was a job description.

39

Table 5

Demographic Information Concerning The Department Chair Position Within The School

Characteristic N

Job Description No •••• . . . . 52 Yes .... ....... 25

Length of Contract 193 days. 200 Other ..

Periods Taught by DC 3 . .

. . . . . 57 8

. . . 15

7 4 ..... . . . . . . . . . 63 5 I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 . . 10 6 or more . . . . . . . 4

Method of Selection By Current Principal By Previous Principal Elected . . . . . . . . Other . . . . . . . . .

Frequency Principal Meets with DCs Once a Month . . . . Two or More a Month . . . . . Other . . . . . . . . . .

Frequency DC Meets with Members Once a Month . . . Two or More a Month . . . . . Other . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . 31 . 39

9 . . . 5

. . . 41 ..... 35

. . . . 8

. . 55

. . 23 6

Student Population (Size of School) 1000-1500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

. .. 34 . 21

7

1501-2000 ....... . 2001-2500 . . . . . . . . 2501-3000 . . . . . 3001 or more. .

N = 84

. . . . 6

%

63.1 29.7

67.9 9.5

17.8

8.3 75.0 11. 9 4.8

36.9 46.4 10.7 6.0

48.8 41. 7

9.5

65.4 27.4

7.2

19 .1 40.5 25.0 8.3 7.1

40

Seventy-one percent of the department chairs were on a

regular teacher contract of 193 days. Exceptions were the

industrial arts department chairs (most of whom were on

contracts in excess of 193 days).

Almost half the current department chairs (46%) were

selected by a previous principal (Table 5). Current

principals chose 37% percent of the department chairs, 11%

were elected and 6% were chosen by other means.

Ninety-two percent of the department chairs indicated

that they met regularly with the principal in department

chair meetings (Table 5). The frequency of the meetings

varied from 49% reporting meetings of once a month, 42%

indicating two or more meetings a month to 9.5% indicating

either less frequent than monthly or sporadic meetings.

Two-thirds of the department chairs reported meeting

with their department members once a month (Table 5). An

additional 27% met more frequently. Only 7% of the

department chairs indicated that they met less often.

Forty-one percent of the department chairs were in

schools that had student populations from 1501 to 2000

(Table 5). Nineteen percent of the schools had populations

less than 1501 and one fourth had between 2001-2500

students. Only 15% of the department chairs reported

41

working in schools with a population greater than 2501

students.

All English and science department chairs had one

assigned period for departmental duties, as did 70% of the

foreign language department chairs (Table 6). While 86% of

those serving the role of department chair for industrial

arts indicated they had no period for departmental duties

(Table 6), 42% indicated they taught only four periods

(Table 7). Since all schools in this school system had a

minimum of six period per day (which generally included one

period for classroom planning) these statistics conflict.

Forty percent of those who served as the industrial arts

chairperson were from other departments.

Of the four departments surveyed the largest was

English with 66% reporting 16 or more members in the

department (Table 8). Only 24% of the science and 5% of the

foreign language departments had that number of teachers.

The majority of the science (80%) and foreign language (70%)

departments consisted of 10-15 members. No English or

science department reported having fewer than 10 members

compared to 20% of the foreign language departments and 80%

of the industrial arts.

No department chair in this school system received

supplemental salary for serving as department chair.

42

Table 6

Periods Assigned for Departmental Duties

Periods for Dept. Foreign Ind. Duties English Science Language Arts

0 6(30%) 18(86%)

1 21(95%) 20(95%) 13(65%) 2(10%)

2 or more 1 ( 5%) 1(5%) 1(5%) 1 ( 5%)

43

Table 7

Number of Periods Taught by Department Chair

Periods Foreign Ind. Teaching English Science Language Arts

3 2(9%) 1(5%) 1(5%) 3(14%)

4 20(91%) 20(95%) 17(85%) 6(28%)

5 2(10%) 8(38%)

6 4(20%)

44

Table 8

Number of Members in the Department

Number for Dept. Foreign Ind. Members English Science Language Arts

1-9 0 0 5(25%) 16(80%)

10-15 8(36%) 16(76%) 14(70%) 2(10%)

15+ 14(64%) 5(24%) 1(5%) 2(10%)

45


Questions 1 and 2 were analyzed using frequencies,

percents, and means. Analysis of question 3 was based on

category total scores for both "time spent'' and "role

importance" in each category. A total score for each of the

categories of supervision, curriculum, personnel,

management, staff development and communication was obtained

for both "time spent" and "role importance" for each subject

by finding the sum of all individual items within a

category. Individual total scores for each category were

then divided into three ranges of high, medium and low. No

effort was made to weight items, thus all items in each

category were treated as equal. This was done in an effort

to capture tendencies by category in lieu of item weighting

procedures. Crosstabs of "time spent" and "role importance"

were performed on all 40 items. The results can be found in

Appendix E.

Research Question 1: How department chairs spend their time

The purpose of research question 1 was to determine how

department chairs spend their time in the areas of

supervision, curriculum, personnel, management,


46

In an examination of the time spent on various

activities by department chairs as perceived by principals,

department chairs, and teachers, it appears as though all

three groups were in general agreement as to how department

chairs spend their time. There was, however, a discrepancy

among the groups in the amount of time spent on various

tasks. Principals and department chairs indicated that

department chairs spent more time on most tasks than did

teachers.

Greatest Amount of Time

In the identification of the tasks that occupied the

greatest amount of the department chair's time, there were

eight items identified by 66% or more of all groups as

taking a moderate to major amount of the department chair's

time. One additional item was identified by department

chairs and principals and four others, by principals, alone.

Table 9 provides a summary of these items.

The eight tasks on which principals, department chairs,

and teachers agreed, were tasks associated with management

and communication. All groups indicated that the department

chair spent a moderate to major amount of time in performing

the following tasks (Table 9):

Table 9

Tasks Identified by 66% or more of the Principals, Department Chairs and Teachers as Taking A Moderate to

Major Amount of the Department Chair's Time

Item Description

8. Encourage, Stimulate and Motivate 9. Coordinate curriculum

11. Work in developing curriculum 13. Selection of inst. materials 21. Teacher assignment in department 22. Plan and conduct meetings 24. Prepare and monitor budget 26. Order supplies and equipment 27. Maintain an inventory 28. Complete forms and gather data 36. Act as department spokesman 37. Act as a liaison 38. Interpret policies and procedures

Principals (P) Department Chairs (DC) Teachers (T)

N = 21 N = 79 N = 189

Category Response p DC

Supervision x x Curriculum x Curriculum x Curriculum x Personnel x Management x x Management x x Management x x Management x x Management x x Communication x x Communication x x Communication x x

Group T

.,,. -J

x x x x x x x x

48

Management

Item 22. Planning and conducting department meetings Item 24. Preparing and monitoring the department

budget Item 26. Ordering supplies and equipment Item 27. Maintaining an inventory of textbooks,

equipment and supplies Item 28. Completing forms and gathering departmental

data requested by the school administration or county

Communication

Item 36. Item 37.

Item 38.

Acting as department spokesman Acting as a liaison between teachers and the administration Interpreting administration policies and procedures to members of the department.

The task identified by principals and department

chairs, but not teachers was:

Item 8. Encouraging, stimulating and motivating teachers.

Sixty-five percent of the teachers perceived department

chairs spend either no time, or a minor amount of time on

this task.

The four tasks identified by principals only as taking

a moderate to major amount of time were:

Item 9. Item 11.

Item 13.

Item 21.

Coordinating curriculum within the department Working with teachers in developing curriculum Assisting in selection and evaluation of textbooks and other instructional materials. Assisting in establishing the schedules and teaching assignments of teachers in the department.

49

Least Amount of Time

Sixteen items were reported by 80% or more of either

the principals, department chairs, or teachers as taking

either no time or a minor amount of time. A summary can be

found in Table 10.

Of the 16 items, there was agreement among all groups

on 9 items (see Table 10). Included among the 9 tasks were

6 of the 8 items in the category of supervision. The tasks

in supervision included:

Item 1 . Item 2 .

Item 3 .

Item 5 •

Item 6 • Item 7 .

Observing teachers in the classroom Holding conferences with teachers concerning classroom observation Preparing written reports of classroom observation Reviewing teacher lesson plans on a regular basis Evaluating teachers Monitoring student progress in courses within the department.

For 5 of the 6 items listed above, there was overwhelming

agreement as 80% or more of the principals, department

chairs and teachers reported that no time is spent by the

department chair on items 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 (Table 11).

Table 11 shows other items agreed upon by 80% or more

of all three groups as taking a minor amount of time if any

are:

Item 15. Establishing a curriculum resource center for the staff

Item 16. Visiting other schools to observe their program

Table 10

Tasks Identified by 68% or more Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers as Taking a Minor to No

Amount of the Department Chair's Time

Item Description

1. Observe teachers 2. Conferences on observation 3. Write reports of observation 4. Work with teachers on techniques 5. Review lesson plans 6. Evaluate teachers 7. Monitor student progress

10. Test and evaluate programs 12. Assist in modifying curriculum 15. Establish resource center

016. Observe programs in other schools 39. Recruit students into courses 18. Work with substitutes 19. Interview prospective teachers 20. Assist in selection of teachers 23. Arrange room assisgnments 29. Arrange interclass visitation 30. Demo instructional techniques 31. Assess needs for inservice 32. Develop & implement inservices 34. Encourage membership in prof orgn. 40. Assist in resolving conflicts

Principals (P) Department Chairs (DC) Teacher (T)

N= 21 N= 79 N= 189

Category Response Group P DC T

Supervision Supervision Supervision Supervision Supervision Supervision Supervision Curriculum Curriculum Curriculum Curriculum Curriculum Personnel Personnel Personnel Management Staff Dev Staff Dev Staff Dev Staff Dev Staff Dev Communication

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x

x x x x x x x

x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

01 0

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 16. 16. 39.

17. 18. 19. 20. 21.

Table 11

Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions as to the Amount of Time Department Chairs Spend by Category and Item

Supervision

Percent Respondents

ITEM DESCRIPTION NO TIME MIN AMT TIME MOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME

p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC T p

Obser.ve teachers 71. 4 82.3 83.1 23.8 13.9 13.2 4.8 3.8 3.2 0 0 0.5 Conferences on observation 81.0 84.8 83.8 19.0 12.7 13.2 0 2.5 3.7 0 0 0.5 Write reports of observation 85.7 94.9 92.0 14.3 3.8 5.3 0 1. 3 2.7 0 0 0 Work with teachers on techniques 19.0 39.2 58.6 52.4 31.6 29.6 28.6 26.6 11. 3 0 2.5 0.5 ffeview lesson plane 81.0 96.2 92.0 19.0 3.8 6.9 0 0 0.5 0 0 0.5 Evaluate teachers 95.2 97.5 93.l 4.8 1. 3 4.8 0 1. 3 1.6 0 0 0.5 Monitor student progress 19.0 60.8 68.l 76.2 31. 6 23.9 4.8 5.1 6.4 0 2.5 1. 6 Encourage, stimulate, motivate 4.8 6.3 16.9 28.6 17. 7 47.1 57.1 54.4 24.3 9.5 21. 5 11. 6 x

Curriculum

NO TIME HIN AMT TIME MOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME ITEM DESCRIPTION


Coordinate curriculua 0 12.7 13.2 19.0 31.6 29.1 66.7 40.5 37.6 14.3 15.2 20.1 x Teet and evaluat~ programs 10.0 43.0 38.7 60.0 31.6 34.9 25.0 19.0 16.7 5.0 6.3 9.7 Work in developing curriculua 4.8 16.5 27.1 19.0 41.8 38.8 61.9 29.1 18.1 14.3 12.7 16.0 x Assist in aodifying curriculum 4.8 31.6 40.4 71.4 36.7 35.1 19.0 22.8 19.2 4.8 8.9 5.3 Assist in textbooks selection o.o 16.5 16.4 23.8 31.6 37.6 42.9 40.5 29.1 33.3 11.4 16.9 x Infora teachers of new trends 0 5.1 11. 1 42.9 38.0 40.2 47.6 40.5 34. 4 9.5 16.5 14.3 Establish resource center 33.3 39.2 45.5 47.6 41.8 36.5 19.0 17.7 11. 1 0 1. 3 6.9 Observe prograas in other schools 42.9 59.0 69.4 42.9 35.9 28.3 9.5 5.1 8.0 4.8 0 4.3 Recruit students into courses 9.5 29.1 43.6 52.4 34.2 36.1 19.0 25.3 14.4 19.0 11.4 6.9

Personnel

NO TIME MIN AMT TIME MOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME ITEM DESCRIPTION


Orientate new teachers 0 11.4 21. 2 42.9 39.2 39.2 33.3 38.0 28.0 23.8 11. 4 11. 6 Work with substitutes 9.5 25.3 39.2 57.1 40.5 32.8 19.0 24.t 22.2 14.3 10. 1 5.8 Assist with interviews of teachers 14.3 55.7 46.3 47.6 29.1 30.9 28.6 8.9 16.0 9.5 6.3 6.9 Assist in selection of teachers 23.8 60.8 49.2 47.6 26.6 32.6 19.0 7.6 13.4 9.5 5.1 4.8 Assist in scheduling in the dept. 0.0 16.5 18.2 14.3 24. 1 24.6 61.9 35.4 35.4 23.8 24.1 21.9 x

* DC

x

* DC

* DC

* 66X or more of respondents indicated moderate to major aaount of time

T

T

T

01 .....

22. 23. 24 •· 25. 26. 27. 28.

29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34.

35. 36. 37. 38. 40.

Table 11 (continued)

Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions as to the Amount of Time Department Chairs Spend by Category and Item

Mana11e•ent

NO TIME MIN AMT TIME MOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME ITEM DESCRIPTION p DC T p DC T p .DC T p DC T

Plan and conduct •eetin11a 0 0 1.6 4.8 6.3 15.9 33.3 54.4 37.6 61.9 39.2 45.0 Arran11e room aaai11naenta 9.5 50.6 42.8 33.3 21.5 28.3 47.6 19.0 16.6 9.5 8.9 12.3 Prepare and •onitor bud11et 0 15.2 12.8 28.6 11.4 11. 7 47.6 38.0 34.0 23.8 35.4 41.5 Repair • replacement ot equip•ent 0 8.9 24.5 47.6 35.4 28.7 47 .6 31.6 27.1 4.8 24.1 19.7 Order supplies and equip•ent 0 2.5 4.8 9.5 6.3 12.7 66.7 39.2 36.0 23.8 51.9 46.6 Maintain an inventory 4.8 2.5 7.9 4.8 20.3 18.0 57 .1 30.4 42.9 33.3 46.8 31.2 Complete for•• and 11ather data 0 0 4.3 19.0 23.1 20.9 57.1 32.1! 36.4 23.8 44.9 38.5

Staff Development

NO TIME MIN AMT TIME MOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME ITEM DESCRIPTION p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC T

Arran11e interclass visitation 52.4 67.1 69.3 28.6 25.3 23.8 14.3 7.6 6.9 4.8 0 0 De•o instructional techniques 23.8 40.5 45.6 57.1 36.7 36.9 14.3 17.7 13.4 4.8 5.1 4.3 Assess needs for inaervice 23.8 43.6 43.9 52.4 30.8 40.6 23.8 19.2 13.4 0 6.4 2.1 Develop & imple•ent inservices 4.8 35.9 39.4 57.1 33.3 38.8 33.3 20.5 17.6 4.8 10.3 4.3 Encoura11e exchange of ideas and strategiea 0 7.6 18.6 42.9 32.9 41. 6 33.3 31.6 26.6 23.8 27.8 13.3 Encourage membership in prof organizationa 4.8 11. 4 33.5 66.7 50.6 46.8 14.3 25.3 13.3 14.3 12.7 6.4

co-unication

NO TIME MIN AMT TIME MOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME ITEM DESCRIPTION p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC T

Foster public relations 4.8 6.3 25.7 38.1 36.7 43.9 42.9 31.6 20.9 14.3 25.3 9.6 Act as depart•ent spokes.an 0 0 0 14.3 10.1 21.8 28.6 40.6 36.1 67.1 49.4 43.1 Act as a liaison 0 1.3 3.7 14.2 10.3 22.9 38.1 33.1 30.9 47.6 66.1 42.6 Interpret policies and procedures 0 1.3 2.7 19.0 U.2 29.9 47.6 44.2 28.7 33.3 39.2 39.4 Assist in reaolvinl conflicts 33.3 31.6 67.8 42.9 39.2 29.9 19.0 21.5 8.6 4.8 7.6 3.7

• p DC

x x x x x x x x x x

• p DC

• p DC

x x x x x x

• 66X or more of respondents indicated •oderate to •&Jor a•ount ot time

T

x x x x x

T

T

x ll x

01 N

53

Item 28. Completing forms and gathering departmental data requested by the school or county administration.

Eighty percent or more of the department chairs

reported that they spend a minor amount of time (if any} on

the following task:

Item 19. Interviewing prospective teachers.

In addition to the 16 items on which all groups agreed

(see Table 10), 80% or more of the department chairs and

teachers agreed that little time is spent on one additional

item:

Item 20. Assisting with selection of new teachers.

Teachers and principals agreed that department chairs

spent little time on the following task:

Item 30. Demonstrating instructional techniques to other teachers.

There were four items on which 80% of the teachers

reported that the department chair spent either no or a

minor amount of time (Table 10). Included in these items

were:

Item 31. Item 34.

Item 39. Item 40.

Assessing needs for inservices Encouraging membership in professional organizations and attendance at professional conferences and workshops Recruiting students into courses Assisting in resolving conflicts.

54

Hours Spent Per Week

Responses from the three reference groups as to the

approximate number of hours per week spent by the department

chair on departmental duties offered further evidence that

principals felt department chairs spend more time on

departmental duties than do department chairs or teachers.

Table 12 presents a summary of the estimated time spent by

department chairs on departmental duties. Principals and

department chairs estimated that slightly more than eight

hours/week are spent by the department chair on departmental

duties. Teacher estimates of weekly expenditure of time

were somewhat lower, at 6.7 hours/week. All of these

estimates exceeded the five periods per week (roughly five

hours) commonly provided to chairs in English, science,

math, social studies and most foreign language department

chairs.

When asked to indicate the percent of time currently

spent by the department chair in each of the six categories

being examined, the responses of department chairs and

teachers were within 2% in each of the six categories (see

Table 13), The principals' responses were very close to

those of department chairs and teachers with two exceptions.

Principals perceived that department chairs spent about 8%

more time in curriculum and 8% less time in management than

was reported by department chairs or teachers.

55

Table 12

The Approximate Number Of Hours Per Week Spent By The Department Chair Performing Departmental Duties As

Perceived By Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers

Reference Group

Principals

Department Chairs

Teachers

Mean hrs/week

8.2

8.1

6.7

SD N

5.0 20

4.8 75

4.9 170

56

Table 13

The Percent Of Time Spent by the Department Chair on Departmental Duties in Each of the Six Categories as

Perceived by Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers

Category

Management Communication Curriculum Personnel Staff Development Supervision

Principals Department Chairs Teachers

% Of Time p DC

22.4 31. 7 18.2 21. 6 24.2 13.7 10.3 11. 0 11. 4 9.3

5.5 5.2

N = 19 N = 77 N = 185

T

31. 3 21. 9 16.2

9.5 8.9 5.6

SD p DC T

13.8 19.2 18. 7 8.6 16.4 17.7

10.3 10.3 12.9 5.5 6.7 7.5 7.3 7.0 7.2 6.1 4.9 6.5

57

The perception of the principals that department chairs

spend a moderate to major amount of time on curriculum was

further evidenced by their identification of these items as

tasks in which department chairs spent a moderate to major

amount of time (see Table 11).

Based on the information in Tables 12 and 13, a summary

table was created that reports the perceptions of the three

groups as to the number of minutes per week spent by the

department chair in each category (see Table 14).

Summary of Research Question 1

There was general agreement among all groups as to how

department chairs spend their time, but some disagreement as

to the amount of time spent. Principals and department

chairs indicated that department chairs spend more time on

most tasks than teachers perceived.

All groups agreed that department chairs spend the

greatest amount of time on the management and communication

tasks of:

planning and conducting department meetings preparing and monitoring the budget ordering supplies and equipment maintaining an inventory completing forms and gathering departmental data acting as a department spokesman acting as a liaison interpreting policies and procedures.

58

Table 14

Summary of Princiapl, Department Chair, and Teacher Estimates of Weekly Expenditure of

Time by the Department Chair

Category

Management Communication Curriculum Personnel Staff Dev. Supervision Other

p

1. 84 1.49 1. 98

.84

.93

.45

.66

Hours/Week DC T

2.57 2.10 1. 75 1.47 1.11 1. 09

.89 .64

.75 .60

.42 .38

.61 .44

59

While principals and department chairs indicated that a

moderate to major amount of time was spent encouraging,

stimulating, and motivating teachers, teachers perceived the

department chair spends a minor amount of time on this task.

In addition, principals perceived a moderate to major

amount of time was spent by the department chairs on the

following items:

coordinating curriculum working with teachers to develop curriculum assisting in selection of instructional materials assisting in scheduling teacher assignments.

There was agreement among the groups that the tasks

occupying the least amount of the department chair's time

were the supervision tasks of:

observing teachers holding conferences concerning observations writing up observation reports reviewing lesson plans evaluating teachers.

Eighty percent or more of all groups agreed four other

tasks occupy a minor amount if any of the department chair's

time. Those items included:

monitoring student progress in courses observing programs in other schools arranging interclass visitation establishing a curriculum resource center for staff

Three additional items were identified by 80% or more

teachers as not taking much time; one by department chairs

and one by teachers and department chairs.

60

Principals and department chairs estimated that the

time spent by department chairs was approximately eight

hours/week. Teachers indicated that department chairs spent

less time, reporting approximately seven hours/week spent on

departmental duties. The responses from all groups

indicated that more time was spent by the department chair

on departmental duties than was provided as release time.

Research Question 2: The Role department chairs should have

The purpose of research question 2 was to determine

what principals, department chairs, and teachers believe

should be the role of high school department chairs as

defined by responsibilities in supervision, curriculum,


development?

In an examination of the data collected, several trends

became apparent. As was the case in their responses to how

department chairs spend their time, principals rated each

item higher than did department chairs or teachers;

department chairs rated items higher in importance than did

teachers. Two-thirds or more of the principals indicated 38

of the 40 items were of moderate to major importance in

describing the role the department chair should have. Using

the same criteria, 30 items were identified by department

61

chairs and 21 by teachers as being of moderate to major

importance (see Table 15), Principals had higher

expectations for the role of department chair than did

teachers. The department chairs' role expectations of what

department chairs should do fell between those of principals

and teachers.

With few exceptions, two-thirds of all groups agreed

that tasks identified in the categories of curriculum,

personnel, management, and communications should be of

moderate to major importance to the role of the department

chair. Those items on which all groups agreed listed by

category were:

Curriculum

Item 9. Item 11.

Item 12.

Item 13.

Item 14.

Personnel

Item 17. Item 19.

Item 20. Item 21.

Coordinating curriculum within the department Working with teachers in developing curriculum Assisting teachers in modifying curriculum to meet the needs of their students Assisting in selection and evaluation of textbooks and other instructional materials Keeping teachers informed of new trends and programs

Assisting in the orientation of new teachers Assisting with interviews of prospective new teachers Assisting in the selection of new teachers Assisting in establishing the schedules and teaching assignments of teachers in the department

I. 2. 3. 4. 5 .. 6. 7. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 39.

17. 18. 19. 20. 21.

Table 15

Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions as to What Should be The Role of The Department Chair by Category and Item

Supervision

Percent Respondents

ITEH DESCRIPTION NO IMPORTANCE MIN IMPORTANCE HOD IMPORTANCE MAJ IMPORTANCE * p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC T p l>C

Observe teachers 0 28.6 "°. 1 0 I I. 7 18.7 28.6 35. 1 32.6 71. 4 24.7 8.6 x Conferences on observation 0 32.1 42.8 4.8 15.4 18.6 28.6 26.9 28.2 66.7 25.6 10.6 x Write reports of observation 0 38.5 56. 1 4.8 19.1 18.2 28.6 24.4 17.2 66.7 17.9 8.6 x Work with teachers on techniques 0 9.0 18.9 0 10.3 23.2 14.3 26.9 34.6 85.7 53.8 23.2 x x Review lesson plans 19.0 51. 9 63.5 9.5 18.2 23.8 42.9 18.2 9.0 28.6 1I.7 3.7 x Evaluate teachers 38. 1 51. 3 59.9 9.5 11. 5 14.4 23.8 23.1 16.6 28.6 14. 1 9.1 Monitor student progress 4.8 27.8 41. 0 4.8 27.8 26.6 52.4 26.6 25.0 38. 1 17.7 7.4 x Encourage, stimulate, motivate 0 0 3.2 0 2.5 13.2 9.5 19.0 27.5 90.5 78.5 56.1 x x

Curriculum

NO IMPORTANCE HIN IMPORTANCE HOD IMPORTANCE HAJ IMPORTANCE • ITEH DESCRIPTION

p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC

Coordinate curriculum 0 2.5 2.6 0 10.1 1 8.5 19.0 20.3 32.2 81.0 67.1 56.6 x x Test and evaluate programs 0 10.5 8.5 15.0 14.5 27.7 35.0 36.8 35. 1 50.0 38.2 28.7 x x Work in developing curriculum 0 1. 3 3.7 9.5 8.9 16.0 23.8 34.2 38.5 66.7 55.7 41. 7 x x Assist in modifying curriculum 0 7.6 5.3 0 12.7 23 ... 38.1 27.8 39.4 61. 9 51. 9 31. 9 x x Assist in textbooks selection 0 0 4.2 4.8 13.9 14.8 33.3 32.9 37.0 61. 9 53.2 43.9 x x Inform teachers of new trends 0 1. 3 I. 3 0 8.9 16.0 33.3 36.7 38.3 66.7 53.2 44.7 x x Establish resource center 9.5 16.2 13.8 9.5 11. 4 22.3 52.4 53.0 36.2 28.6 30.4 27.7 x x Observe programs in other schools 0 5.1 9.0 38.1 24.1 35.1 23.8 39.2 36.2 38.1 31. 6 19.7 x Recruit students into courses 0 16.2 21. 7 33.3 24.1 31. 2 33.3 26.6 28.6 33.3 34. 2 18.5 x

Personnel

NO IMPORTANCE HIN IMPORTANCE MOD IMPORTANCE MAJ IMPORTANCE • ITEM DESCRIPTION

p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC

Orientate new teachers 0 1.3 2.1 14.3 7.6 9.5 23.8 31.6 28.0 61. 9 59.5 60.3 x x Work.with substitutes 0 10.1 16.4 23.8 20.3 21. 7 42.9 32.9 28.0 33.3 36.7 33.9 x x Assist with interviews of teachers 0 6.1 10.6 0 10.1 12.2 42.9 24.1 30.7 57.1 60.8 46.6 x x Assist in selection of teachers 0 6.3 11. 6 0 10. 1 14.3 42.9 21.6 29.1 57.1 62.0 35.0 x x Assist in scheduling in the dept. 0 2.6 2.6 4.8 3.8 6.9 23.8 20.5 29.6 71.4 73.1 60.8 x x

• 66X or aore of respondents indicated moderate to major importance

T

x

T

x x x x x

T

x x x x

en ~

22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28.

29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34.

35. 36. 37. 38, 40.

Table 15 (continued)

Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions as to What Should be The Role of The Department Chair by Category and Item

Mana11ement

NO TIME MIN AMT TIME HOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME ITEM DESCRIPTION


Plan and conduct meetinll• 0 0 1.6 4.8 6.3 15.9 33.3 54.4 37.6 61. 9 39.2 45.0 x Arran11e room aaai11ruaenta 9.5 50.6 42.8 33.3 21.5 28.3 47.8 19.0 16.8 9.5 8.9 12.3 Prepare and monitor bud11et 0 15.2 12.8 28.6 11.4 11. 7 47.6 38.0 34.0 23.8 35.4 41.5 x Repair & replace•ent of equip•ent 0 8.9 24.5 47.8 35.4 28.7 47.8 31.8 27.1 4.8 24.1 19. 7 Order auppliea and equip•ent 0 2.5 4.8 9.5 6.3 12. 7 66.7 39.2 36.0 23.8 51.9 46.8 x Maintain an inventory 4.8 2.5 7.9 4.8 20.3 18.0 57 .1 30.4 42.9 33.3 46.8 31.2 x Complete for•• and 11ather data 0 0 4.3 19.0 23.1 20.9 57 .1 32.1 36.4 23.8 44.9 38.5 x

Staff Development

NO TIME HIN AMT TIME HOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME ITEM DESCRIPTION

p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC T

Arrange interclass visitation 52.4 67. 1 69.3 28.6 25.3 23.8 14.3 7.8 6.9 4.8 0 0 Demo instructional techniques 23.8 40.5 45.5 57 .1 38.7 38.9 14.3 1'1. 7 13.4 4.8 5.1 4.3 Asaess needs for inservice 23.8 43.8 43.9 52.4 30.8 40.6 23.8 19.2 13.4 0 6.4 2.1 Develop & imple•ent inservices 4.8 35.9 39.4 57. 1 33.3 38.8 33,3 20.5 17.6 4.8 10.3 4.3 Encourage exchange of ideaa and strate11ies 0 7.6 18.6 42.9 32.9 41.5 33.3 31.6 26.6 23.8 27.8 13.3 Encoura11e membership in prof or1anizations 4.8 11. 4 33.5 66.7 50.6 48.8 14.3 25.3 13.3 14.3 12. 7 6.4

Communication

NO TIME HIN AMT TIME HOD AMT TIME MAJ AMT TIME ITEM DESCRIPTION p DC T p DC T p DC T p DC T p

Foster public relations 4.8 6.3 25.7 38. 1 38.7 43.9 42.9 31.6 20.9 14.3 25.3 9.6 Act as department spokesman 0 0 0 14.3 10.1 21.8 28.6 40.5 35.1 57 .1 49.4 43.1 x Act as s liaison 0 1.3 3.7 14.2 10.3 22.9 38.1 33.1 30.9 47.6 55 .1 42.6 x Interpret policies and procedures 0 1.3 2.7 19.0 111. 2 29.9 47 .6 44.2 28.7 33.3 39.2 39.4 x Assist in resolving conflicts 33.3 31.6 57,8 42.9 39.2 29.9 19.0 21.5 8.6 4.8 7.6 3. 7

• DC

x x x x x

• p DC

• DC

x x x

• 66X or more of respondents indicated •oderate to major amount of time

T

x x x x x

T

T

x x x

en (,)

Management

Item 22. Item 24.

Item 25.

Item 26. Item 27.

Item 28.

64

Planning and conducting department meetings Preparing and monitoring the department budget Arranging for repair and replacement of equipment Ordering supplies and equipment Maintaining an inventory of text books, equipment and supplies Completing forms and gathering departmental data requested by the school or division

Communications

Item 35.

Item 36. Item 37.

Fostering good public relations and communication within the community Acting as a department spokesman Acting as a liaison between teachers and the administration.

There was not agreement among the groups in the

categories of staff development and supervision. Table 15

identifies the differences among the responses of

principals, department chairs and teachers in the categories

of supervision, and staff development.

Supervision

Supervision is the category in which the greatest

discrepancy was discovered. As can be seen in Table 15 the

perceptions of the principals were different from those of

department chairs and teachers.

65

Teachers

In general, teachers did not perceive supervisory tasks

as being an important responsibility when identifying the

role the department chair should have. This is evidenced by

their responses as reported in Table 15. Out of the eight

items listed under supervision, 80% of the teachers agreed

that one item was of moderate to major importance. It was:

Item 8. Encouraging, stimulating and motivating teachers.

Sixty-six percent or more of the teachers were in agreement

that the following tasks should either not be a

responsibility or should be of only minor importance to the

role of the department chair:

Item 3.

Item 5. Item 6. Item 7.

Preparing written reports of classroom observations Reviewing teacher lesson plans Evaluating teachers Monitoring student progress in courses within the department.

There was little agreement among teachers as to desired role

for the department chair on the following tasks:

Item 1. Item 2.

Item 4.

Observing teachers in the classroom Holding conferences with teachers concerning classroom observations Working with teachers to improve their instructional techniques.

The modal response for items 1 and 2 was that of no

responsibility, with 40% of the teachers so reporting.

However, 20% of the teachers responded minor importance and

66

30% moderate importance. Item 4 was perceived as more

important than items 1 and 2. The modal response for item 4

was moderate importance (35%), but the remaining teachers

distributed their responses across the other three answer

selections, providing no clear consensus as to the relative

importance of this task.

Department Chairs

Department chairs tended to agree with teachers that

the tasks in supervision were not as important to the role

of the department chair as tasks identified in other

categories. More than 66% of the department chairs were of

the opinion that two of the eight items in supervision were

of moderate to major importance (Table 15). Those items

reported by department chairs were:

Item 4.

Item 8.

Working with teachers to improve their instructional techniques (80%) Encouraging, stimulating and motivating teachers (90%).

It is clear department chairs were united in their vision

that the role of the department chair should be to

encourage, stimulate, and motivate teachers, and work with

teachers to improve their instruction. However, there were

differences of opinion among the department chairs as to the

importance of the following items:

Item 1. Item 2.

Item 3.

Item 7.

67

Observing teachers in the classroom Holding conferences with teachers concerning classroom observations Preparing written reports of classroom observations Monitoring student progress in courses within the department.

As can be seen from Table 15, their responses were dispersed

among the four categories with no clear agreement.

Approximately 30% of the chairs responded that observing

teachers and conferencing with them about the visit should

not be a responsibility, while over 50% indicated it should

be of moderate to major importance. Items 3 and 7 reflected

a similar pattern with slightly more department chairs than

in items 1 and 2 indicating no responsibility and slightly

fewer reporting moderate to major importance. These four

items represent a conflicting view among department chairs.

There was greater agreement among department chairs on

item 6, evaluating teachers. Over 50% indicated that this

should not be a responsibility of the department chair

(Table 15).

Principals

Principals disagreed with teachers and department

chairs as to the importance of the items in supervision.

Sixty-six percent or more of all principals believe seven of

the eight items in supervision should be of moderate to

68

major importance in the role of the department chair. The

one item in supervision upon which principals differed was

item 6, evaluating teachers. While more than half the

principals indicated it should be of moderate to major

importance, almost 40% said it should not be a

responsibility. Of the 40 items on the survey, this item

was one of the few on which principals were not in

agreement.

More than 66% of the principals indicated that five of

the eight items in supervision were of major importance.

These five items with the percent responding major

importance included:

Item 1. Item 2.

Item 3.

Item 4.

Item 8.

Observing teachers in the classroom (71%) Holding conferences with teaches concerning classroom observations (67%) Preparing written reports of classroom observations (67%) Working with teachers to improve their instructional techniques (85%) Encouraging, stimulating, and motivating teachers (91%).

While principals agreed that reviewing teacher lesson

plans on a regular basis (item 5), and monitoring student

progress (item 7) were important, they did not feel that

these items were as important as the five items previously

mentioned (see Table 15).

69

Staff Development

Principals and department chairs were in general

agreement on the importance of items within the category of

staff development. As can be noted on Table 15 there were

differences between the perceptions of the teachers and

those of principals and department chairs. Sixty-six

percent or more of the principals indicated all items in the

category were of moderate to major importance. All but one

item was identified by 66% of the department chairs as such.

However, 66% of the teachers reported only one item in staff

development was of moderate to major importance.

Teachers

With the exception of one item, teachers reported the

tasks in staff development should be of minor to moderate

importance (Table 15). The exception to this was:

Item 33. Encouraging teachers to exchange ideas and teaching strategies.

Eighty-five percent of the teachers indicated that this item

should be of moderate to major importance.

Department Chairs

While 66% or more of the department chairs responded

that five of the six items were of moderate to major

70

importance, department chairs agreed with the teachers that

the most important task in staff development was encouraging

teachers to exchange ideas and teaching strategies (Table

15 } • Those tasks identified by 66% or more of the chairs as

of moderate to major importance were:

Item 30.

Item 31.

Item 32.

Item 33.

Item 34.

Demonstrating or arranging demonstration of instructional techniques Assessing teachers' needs for inservice education Developing and/or implementing inservice activities Encouraging teachers to exchange ideas and teaching strategies Encouraging membership in professional organizations and attendance at professional conferences and workshops.

Department chairs did not view arranging interclass

visitation as being an important function of the department

chair. While 66% or more identified five of the six items

as of moderate to major importance, the items in staff

development were not rated as important by as large a

percent of department chairs as were those items in

management, communication, and personnel.

Principals

Principals were in agreement that staff development

should be of moderate to major importance in the role the

department chair should have. Seventy-five percent or more

71

responded that all items in this category should be of

moderate to major importance, including:

Item 29.

Item 30.

Item 3 1 .

Item 32.

Item 33.

Item 34.

Arranging interclass visitation among teachers Demonstrating or arranging demonstration of instructional techniques Assessing teachers' needs for inservice education Developing and/or implementing inservice activities Encouraging teachers to exchange ideas and teaching strategies Encouraging membership in professional organizations and attendance at professional conferences and workshops.

Hours Needed By The Department Chair

As can be seen from Table 16, principals indicated that

department chairs needed more time to perform the role they

described than did either department chairs or teachers.

The principals estimated 18.1 hrs/week would be needed to

perform the tasks described. Department chairs estimated 12

hours and teachers, 10.6 hrs/week. It should be noted that

the role of the department chair described by principals

would result in increased responsibilities in every

category. Principals indicated that 38 of the 40 items

should be of moderate to major importance in the role of the

department chair, compared to 30 items identified as such by

department chairs and 21 by teachers (see Table 15 page 62).

72

Table 16

Principals, Department Chairs and Teachers Perceptions of the Time Required to Perform the Duties Described in the

Role the Department Chair Should Have

Reference Group

Principals

Department Chairs

Teachers

Hours/Week Mean

18.1

12.0

10.6

SD N

9.3 21

7.0 73

7.5 166

73

Summary of Research Question 2

There was general agreement among the groups that the

tasks identified in management, communications, personnel,

and curriculum should be of moderate to major importance in

describing what role department chairs should have. There

was less agreement regarding tasks in staff development, and

supervision.

While principals and department chairs indicated that

the majority of the items in staff development were of

moderate to major importance, teachers perceived only one

item to be. Teachers agreed that encouraging teachers to

exchange ideas and teaching strategies was of moderate to

major importance.

There were differences both among the groups and within

the groups regarding items in the category of supervision.

Principals expressed the greatest consistency within their

group with 95% identifying all except two items as being of

moderate to major importance. The tasks identified as

important by 95% of the principals were:

observing teachers in classroom holding conferences about observations preparing written reports of observations working with teachers to improve instruction monitoring student progress in department encouraging and stimulating teachers.

Principals disagreed among themselves on the importance of

evaluating teachers, item 6. While over 50% indicated that

74

it should be of moderate to major importance, 38% felt it

should not be a responsibility of the department chair.

This was one of the few items on which principals disagreed

among themselves.

Teachers agreed that department chairs should have a

minor role, if any, in the following supervision tasks:

preparing written reports of observations reviewing teacher lesson plans regularly evaluating teachers monitoring student progress in courses.

They did not agree among themselves as to the role the

department chair should have in:

observing teachers in the classroom holding conferences concerning observations working with teachers to improve instruction.

Department chairs were clear that the role should

include these tasks:

working with teachers to improve instruction encouraging and stimulating teachers.

There were differences of opinion among department chairs as

to the importance of the following tasks:

observing teachers in the classroom holding conferences concerning observations working with teachers to improve instruction monitoring student progress in courses.

Principals estimated that 18 hrs/week would be

necessary to perform the tasks that should be done. The

estimates of department chairs and teachers were lower at 12

and 11 hours respectively. Principals identified a greater

75

number of tasks than did department chairs or teachers as

being of moderate to major importance in their responses to

the role the department chair should have.

Research Question 3: Discrepancies between time and role

The purpose of research question number 3 was to

determine the discrepancies between reported time spent and

reported role department chairs should have in supervision,

curriculum, personnel, management, communication and staff

development.

It is recognized that examination of time spent on

tasks and role importance of tasks may not necessarily be

measuring the same factor. It is further recognized that

tasks which take a great deal of time may be of little

importance in determining the role the department chair

should have. Also, items which take only a little time may

be of major importance. With these factors recognized as

shortcomings in such a comparison, an examination of the

discrepancies between reported time spent and reported

desired role of the department chair was conducted in the

categories of supervision, curriculum, personnel,

management, communication, and staff development.

76

Conflict Matrix

A matrix was developed for each category relating time

spent to role importance. No conflict exists when the time

spent and role importance are in agreement (low time spent,

low role importance; medium time spent, medium role

importance; high time spent, high role importance). A

conflict occurs when the perceived time spent is different

than the perceived role importance (low time spent, high

importance; high time spent, low importance). Refer to

Table 17 on page 78 for an example. Responses that fall

along the diagonal are not in conflict. Those responses

which fall above or below the diagonal are.

In each category examined, a large percentage of all

three reference groups indicated that the tasks comprising

the categories were of greater importance than the time

spent on the tasks.

Supervision

The category that offered the greatest discrepancy

among the three groups between time spent and reported

desired role of the department chair was supervision.

Identification of seven of the eight tasks in supervision as

taking the least amount of the department chair's time

indicated agreement among the groups that little if any time

77

is currently spent by the department chair in supervision

(Table 10) .

There was disagreement among the three groups as to the

role the department chair should have in supervision. Total

scores in supervision represented the greatest discrepancy

between reported time spent and reported role importance of

the department chairs among principals. Ninety-one percent

of all principals indicated a conflict in the time

spent/role importance of the department chair expressing the

view that role importance was greater than time spent (Table

1 7 ) • The figures for teachers differed. Fifty-five

percent indicated no conflict in time spent on departmental

duties versus importance to the role the department chair

should have. In other words they felt that the time spent

by the department chair on tasks identified in the category

labeled supervision was consistent with the importance of

the responsibility of the tasks. No respondent reported

that the time spent on supervision was greater than the

importance to the role of the department chair.

Thirty-four percent of the department chairs saw no

discrepancy in how the department chair spends time versus

the reported role the department chair should have (Table

17). The remaining 66% saw the role importance being

greater than the time spent in the category of supervision.

78

Table 17

Relationship Of Reported Time Spent And Reported Role The Department Chair Should Have In Supervision

Supervision Supervision Role

Time

High

Medium

Low

Low

91(T) 25(DC)

O(P)

Med

6(T) l(DC) 2(P)

57(T) 29(DC)

2(P)

Missing Obs

Teachers (T) Department Chairs (DC) Principals (P)

12 3 0

Percent Agreement and Conflict By

Group % No conflict % Role Importance Greater Than

Time Spent

T 98/177 = 55.4 79/177 = 44.6

DC 26/76 = 34.2 50/77 = 65.8

p 2/21 = 9.5 19/21 = 90.5

Group

High

1 ( T) O(DC) O(P)

2(T) 2(DC) 1 ( p)

20(T) 9(DC)

16(P)

Total

177 76 21

% Time Spent Greater Than

Role Importance

0

0

0

79

In the item analysis there was no item in which 50% or

more of the teachers recommended above a minor amount of

time for any task in supervision. A comparison of time

spent/role importance showed that there were only two items

that were rated above minor importance by 50% of more of the

teachers when indicating the role the department chair

should have in the category of supervision (Table 15).

Those two items were to work with teachers to improve

instructional techniques (item 4), and to encourage,

stimulate and motivate teachers (item 8).

For four items, over fifty percent of the department

chairs indicated that the tasks should be of moderate to

major importance in identifying the role the department

chair should have (Table 15). In addition to the two items

selected by the teachers, were the tasks of observing

teachers in the classroom and holding conferences with

teachers concerning classroom observations. In the time

analysis, the only task in which 50% or more of the

department chairs scored any item above minor amount of time

was item number 8, to encourage, stimulate, and motivate

(Table 11). This was also the only item that over 50% of

the principals scored above minor importance in the time

analysis. All items in the category of supervision had 50%

80

or more of the principals reporting the tasks above minor

importance in the role analysis (Table 15).

Management

Based on the total scores for management, approximately

60% of all principals, department chairs and teachers

reported no conflict in the time spent/role importance

relationship (Table 18). This category had the highest "no

conflict" percentage for all three groups. Six percent of

the teachers and 5% of the principals expressed the view

that more time was spent on management by the department

chair than the ideal role importance would indicate should

be spent. One percent of the department chairs agreed. The

responses of 35% of each group indicated that the category

of management is of greater importance than the time spent

on management tasks.

Personnel

Approximately 76% of all groups have total scores that

indicate a conflict between time spent/role importance in

personnel with all groups indicating that the role

importance is greater than the time spent (Table 19). Two

percent of the teachers thought that the time spent by the

81

Table 18

Relationship Of Reported Time Spent And Reported Role The Department Chair Should Have in Management

Management

Time Low

High

Medium 5(T)

Low 4(T)


Management Role

Med

6(T) l(DC) 1 ( p)

42(T) 24(DC)

5(P)

lO(T) l(DC)

Missing Obs

6 4 1

Percent Agreement And Conflict By

Group % No conflict % Role Importance Greater Than

Time Spent

T 107/183= 58.5 65/183 = 35.5

DC 48/75 = 64.0 26/75 = 34.6

p 12/20 = 60.0 7/20 = 35.0

Group

High

6(T) 24(DC)

7(P)

49(T) 24(DC)

6(P)

6(T) 1 (DC) 1 ( p)

Total

183 75 20


Role Importance

11/183 = 6.0

1/75 = 1. 3

1/20 = 5.0

82

Table 19

Relationship Of Reported Time Spent And Reported Role The Department Chair Should Have In Personnel

Personnel

Time Low

High

Medium 3(T)

Personnel Role

Med

1 ( T)

19(T) 5(DC) 3(P)

Low 8(T) 5(DC)

44(T) 13(DC)

3(P)


Missing Obs

3 1 0

High

15 ( T) 6(DC) 3(P)

45(T) 26(DC) lO(P)

51(T) 23(DC)

2 ( p)

Total

186 78 21

Percent Agreement And Conflict By Group

Group

T

DC

p

% No conflict % Role Importance Greater Than

Time Spent

42/186 = 22.5

16/78 = 20.5

6/21 = 28.6

140/186 = 75.3

51/78 = 79.5

15/21 = 71.4


Role Importance

4/186 = 2

0

0

83

department chair in personnel was greater than the

importance of that role for the department chair.

Communication

The category of communication received total scores

that suggested agreement among all groups in their

perceptions of time spent/role importance (Table 20).

Slightly over half of each group have scores that show no

conflict of time spent/role importance with the remaining

showing greater role importance than time spent. Three

percent of the teachers and department chairs felt that the

time spent was greater than the role importance for

communication. All others expressed the opinion that the

role importance was greater than the time spent.

Curriculum

Almost three-fourths of the principals and department

chairs felt that there was a conflict in time spent/role

importance in the category of curriculum (Table 21). Both

groups agreed that the role importance was greater than the

time spent on the tasks. Fifty-eight percent of the

teachers felt that there was a conflict in the time

spent/role importance indicating that the role importance

was greater than the time spent in curriculum. Less than

84

Table 20

Relationship Of Reported Time Spent And Reported Role The Department Chair Should Have In Communication

Communication

Time

High

Medium

Low

Low

1 (DC)

3 ( T)

6(T) 1 (DC)

Communication

Med

3(T) 1 (DC)

42(T) 12(DC)

4(P)

16(T) 2(DC) 1 ( p)

Role

High

30(T) 3(DC) 2(P)

40(T) 28(DC) 6(P)

8(T) 29(DC)

8(P)

Missing Obs Total


4 2 0

185 77 21


Group

T

DC

p

% No conflict % Role Importance % Time Spent

93/185 = 50.3

42/77 = 54.5

12/21 = 57.0

Greater Than Greater Than Time Spent Role Importance

86/185 = 46.5

33/77 = 42.9

9/21 = 43.0

6/185 = 3.2

2/77 = 2.6

0

85

Table 21

Relationship Of Reported Time Spent And Reported Role The Deparatment Chair should Have in Curriculum

Curriculum

Time

High

Medium

Low

Low

1 ( T)

16 ( T) 5(DC) O(P)

Curriculum Role

Med

3 5 ( T) 9(DC) 2 ( p)

36(T) ll(DC)

1 ( p)

Missing Obs


10 4 1


High

18(T) 6(DC) 3 ( p)

35(T) 28(DC) lO(P)

38(T) 16(DC) 4(P)

Total

179 75 20

Group % No conflic~ j% Role I ,

Importancej % Time Spent Greater Than Greater Than

Time Spent Role Importance

T 74/179 = 41. 3 104/179 = 58.1 1/179 = • 6

DC 20/75 = 26.7 55/75 = 73.3 0

p 5/20 = 25.0 15/20 = 75.0 0

86

one percent of the teachers thought that time spent was

greater than role importance (Table 21).

Staff Development

There was agreement between department chairs and

teachers on the conflict of time spent/role importance in

staff development (Table 22). Approximately 63% of both

groups felt that the role importance was greater than the

time spent by the department chair in this category.

Principals expressed the same view, but with 80% indicating

a conflict where role importance was greater than time

spent. Two percent of the teachers felt that time spent was

greater than role importance.

Summary of Question 3

In summary all groups felt that there was a conflict in

all categories of time spent/role importance. All believed

that each category was more important than the time being

spent by department chairs in the category. The categories

showing the least conflict of time spent/role importance

were management and communication. The category of greatest

discrepancy among groups was supervision (Table 23). While

91% of the principals indicated that the role importance was

greater than the time spent in supervision, only 66% of the

87

Table 22

Relationship of Reported Time Spent And Reported Role The Department Chair Should Have in Staff Development

Staff Development Staff Development Role

Time Low

High 1 ( T)

Medium 3 ( T) 25(T) ll(DC) 2(P)

High

8(T) 7(DC) 2(P)

19(T) 16(DC)

7 ( p)

Low 33(T) 9(DC)

60(T) 36(T) 18(DC) 15(DC)


Missing Obs

4 3 0

5(P) 5 ( p)

Total

185 76 21


Group

T

DC

p

% No conflict % Role Importance % Time Spent

66/185 = 37.5

27/76 = 35.5

4/21 = 19.0

Greater Than Greater Than Time Spent Role Importance

117/185 = 63.2

49/76 = 64.5

17/21 = 81.0

4/185 = 2

0

0

Table 23

Principal, Department Chair, and Teacher Perceptions of Role Conflict Between Time Spent and Importance to the

Role the Department Chair Should Have

Category % No Conflict %Role Importance Between Time Spent Greater than Time And Role Importance Spent

p DC T p DC

Supervision 9.5 34.2 55.4 90.5 65.8

Curriculum 25.0 26.7 41. 3 75.0 73.3

Personnel 28.6 20.5 22.5 71. 4 79.5

Management 60.0 64.0 58.5 35.0 34.6

Staff Dev 19.0 35.5 37.5 81. 0 64.5

Communication 50.3 54.5 57.0 43.0 42.9

T

44.6 CX> CX>

58.1

75.3

35.5

63.2

46.5

89

department chairs, and 45% of the teachers agreed. Other

categories in which a large percentage of all groups

indicated role importance was greater than time spent

included personnel and curriculum.

CHAPTER IV

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction





Sample

This study consisted of 21 schools in Fairfax County

serving grades 9-12. The subjects were the principals of

those schools; the department chairs of English, science,

foreign language and industrial arts in each school; and

teachers in each of the previously mentioned departments

from each school. The names of the principals were

obtained from the central office. A list of teachers and

department chairs in the four departments being examined was

obtained from central and area subject specialists. Using

these lists three teachers per department were randomly

selected from each school in all departments except

industrial arts. The number of industrial arts teachers

surveyed was limited in some schools by the number of

teachers in the department.

90

91

Data Collection

Through a search of the literature, a survey consisting

of 40 items identified as tasks that department chairs

commonly perform and a questionnaire to gather demographic

information were distributed to each subject. On the left-

hand side of each survey item the subject was instructed to

rate from 1-4 the amount of time spent by the department

chair on each of the 40 tasks. Using a similar scale on the

right-hand side, the subject was asked to indicate the

importance of the tasks to the role of the department chair.

The response rate was 100% for principals, 95% for

department chairs, and 88% for teachers.

Data Analysis

Responses to the forty items of the survey were

analyzed using SPSSX. Data were reported as frequencies,

means, standard deviations, and percentages. Because of the

policy and regulation differences discovered in the

administrative organization and responsibilities of

department chairs in one school, those data were eliminated

from the analysis.

The analysis of question 3 was based on total scores

for each of the six categories for both "time spent'' and

"role importance." Total scores for categories were

92

obtained for each subject by adding the ratings of all items

within a category. Individual total scores for each category

were then redistributed into three categories: high,

medium, and low. This method assumed equal weight of all

items within a category. This was done in an effort to

capture tendencies. Crosstabs of time spent versus role

importance were performed on all 40 items on the survey for

principals, department chairs, and teachers. The results of

the 120 crosstabs were then combined into 40 conflict matrix

tables. The conflict matrix table for each item is

presented in Appendix E.

Demographic Information

The average department chair in the study was assigned

to a school with a student population of 1501-2000, was

white and well-educated, having completed additional hours

past the Master's degree. Fifty-eight percent of the

department chairs were females. The average department

chair was between 41 and 50 years of age, with 19 years

teaching experience, and had been a department chair for 5.5

years. Most functioned without a job description and worked

a regular teaching contract of 193 days. English was the

largest department with 64% having more than 16 department

members. Science and foreign language departments averaged

93

10-15 members, while industrial arts departments had less

than 10 members. All the English and science department

chairs had a release period, as did 70% of the foreign

language department chairs. There was conflicting data

concerning the release period of the person who served as

department chair for industrial arts. While 40% of those

serving as department chair for industrial arts indicated

they taught fewer than five classes during a six period day,

only 15% reported having a period for departmental duties.

Forty percent of those identified by the school as serving

as department chair for industrial arts teachers were from

other departments.

The department chair in this study was typically

selected by a previous principal. Principals met one or

more times a month with their department chairs. In

addition, department chairs scheduled one or more meetings

per month with members of their departments. No department

chair in this school system received supplemental salary for

duties performed as department chair.

Summary

Research Question 1: How do high school department chairs

spend their time in the areas of supervision, curriculum,

94


development?

All groups were in general agreement as to how

department chairs spend their time, but there was some

disagreement on the amount of time spent. Principals and

department chairs perceive that department chairs spend more

time on the various tasks than do teachers. Estimates of

weekly expenditure of time spent by the department chair on

departmental duties by principals and department chairs were

in close agreement at 8.2 and 8.1 hours/week, respectively.

Teachers perceive department chairs spend slightly less time

as evidenced by their estimate of 6.7 hours.

The tasks occupying the greatest amount of the

department chair's time were found in the categories of

management and communication. Those tasks include:

planning and conducting department meetings preparing and monitoring the budget ordering supplies and equipment maintaining an inventory completing forms and gathering departmental data acting as a department spokesman acting as a liaison interpreting policies and procedures.

In addition principals perceive that a moderate to

major amount of time is spent by the department chairs on

the following items:

coordinating curriculum working with teachers to develop curriculum assisting in selection of instructional materials assisting in scheduling teacher assignments.

95

Outside management and communications, only two tasks

were reported by 50% or more of the teachers as taking more

than a minor amount of the department chair's time. They

were:

coordinating curriculum assisting in selection and evaluation of instructional materials.

The least amount of time is spent in the category of

supervision. There was agreement among the groups that

department chairs spend essentially no time on tasks

associated with evaluation and/or improvement of instruction

through direct supervision or monitoring of teachers

including:

observing teachers holding conferences about the observations preparing written reports of observation monitoring student progress in the department reviewing teacher lesson plans evaluating teachers.

Research Question 2: What do the principals, department

chairs, and teachers believe should be the role of high

school department chairs as defined by responsibilities in

supervision, curriculum, personnel, management,


Research question 2 attempted to identify the role

principals, department chairs, and teachers believe the

department chair should have. All groups agreed that the

96

role of the department chair should be expanded to increase

responsibilities in all categories. There were, however,

differences found among the groups as to the focus and

magnitude of that change. As was the case in research

questions 1, principals rated most items higher than did

department chairs or teachers.

Sixty-six percent or more of the principals indicated

that 38 of the 40 items on the survey were of moderate to

major importance while 30 were reported by department chairs

and 21 by teachers. There was general agreement of the

importance of items among the three groups in the categories

of management, communication, personnel, and curriculum.

The 18 tasks on which all groups agreed were:

Curriculum

coordinating curriculum within the department working with teachers in developing curriculum assisting teachers in modifying curriculum assisting in selection and evaluation of materials keeping teachers informed of new trends

Personnel

assisting in the orientations of new teachers assisting with interviews of teachers assisting in the selection of new teachers assisting in scheduling and in teaching assignments

Management

planning and conducting department meetings preparing and monitoring the budget arranging for repair and replacement of equipment ordering supplies and equipment maintaining an inventory of books & equipment completing forms and gathering departmental data

97

Communication

fostering good relations and communication acting as a department spokesman acting as a liaison

In the categories of curriculum and staff development,

principals indicate that recruiting of students and

arranging interclass visitation among teachers is more

important than department chairs perceive it to be.

Department chairs believe visiting other schools to observe

programs is more important than do principals.

Only one item in staff development was identified by

66% of the teachers as being of moderate to major

importance. That item was encouraging teachers to exchange

ideas and strategies.

There was less agreement among the groups with regard

to the items listed as supervision. Principals described an

expanded role in this area to include the following tasks:

observing teachers in the classroom holding conferences about the observations preparing written reports of observation working with teachers to improve instruction monitoring student progress in the department encouraging and stimulating teachers.

Principals did not agree among themselves about one item.

While over half indicated evaluation of teachers should be

of moderate to major importance, almost 40% indicated it

should not be a responsibility.

98

Department chairs and teachers agreed with principals

that chairs should encourage and stimulate teachers. They

agreed within their groups that the role should not include

evaluation of teachers or written reports of observations.

They differed within their groups as to whether department

chairs should be responsible for the following:

observing teachers in the classroom holding conferences concerning observations working with teachers to improve instruction.

While principals had high~r expectations for the

department chair (38 of 40 items identified by 66% as of

moderate to major importance), they also recognized that the

task would require more time. Principals estimated that 18

hours/week would be required for the department chair to do

the tasks that should be done. Estimates by department

chairs and teachers of time needed were 12 and 11 hours/week

respectively.

Research Question 3: What are the discrepancies between

reported time spent and reported ideal role of department

chairs in supervision, curriculum, personnel, management,


Research question 3 examined the discrepancies between

reported time spent and reported ideal role of the

department chair. Using crosstabs, discrepancies were

99

sought between reported time spent on a task and reported

role importance. Conflict was discovered between "time

spent'' and "role importance" in all six categories for all

three groups. The conflict was one in which role importance

within a category was consistently rated higher than the

amount of time currently spent on tasks within the category.

The ranges were from a low of 40% conflict by all groups in

the category of management to a high of 90% conflict

expressed by principals in supervision (see Table 23).

For three categories all groups were in close agreement

in the degree of conflict identified between role importance

and time spent. From the lowest to the highest conflict in

order were: management (40%), communication (43%), and

personnel (75%).

The category in which the conflict was lowest was

management where a conflict matrix relating amount of time

spent to role importance showed close agreement among groups

with approximately 40% of each group in conflict. Thirty-

five percent of those indicated that the role importance was

greater than the time spent.

There was agreement among the groups in the

categories of communication and personnel. Role importance

in communication was identified as being greater than time

spent by 43% of each group. In the category of personnel

100

this discrepancy grew to three-fourths of each group who

felt that the role importance was greater than the time

spent.

In the category of staff development principals

expressed greater discrepancy between time spent and role

importance than did teachers or department chairs. Four-

fifths of the principals indicated that the role importance

was greater than time spent compared to approximately two-

thirds of the teachers and department chairs.

Teachers reported less discrepancy between time spent

and role importance in curriculum than did principals or

department chairs. Approximately three-fourths of the

department chairs and principals had total scores indicating

that the role importance was greater than the time spent,

with 58% of the teachers agreeing.

The greatest difference among the three groups in the

conflict between "time spent" and "role importance" was in

the category of supervision. Principals showed the

greatest discrepancy with 90% indicating that role

importance was greater than time spent. This was twice the

percentage of teachers' view of conflict in supervision

tasks. Department chairs were between the two groups.

101

Six of the eight items identified by teachers as taking

the greatest amount of time were also identified as tasks

that were most important to the role.

Findings

1. There was general agreement among""principals, department

chairs, and teachers as to how the department chairs spend

their time. There were, however, differences in perception

among the groups as to the amount of time actually spent.

Principals' perceived department chairs spend slightly more

time on departmental duties than department chairs reported;

teachers perceived department chairs spend less time than

department chairs indicated.

2. All three groups believed department chairs spend more

time on departmental duties than they were provided as

release time.

3. All groups agreed that the majority of the department

chair's time is spent on tasks associated with management

and communication. Items in these categories were also

identified by all groups as tasks important to the role the

department chair should have. Therefore, the important

nature of the "paper pusher" and "communicator" cannot be

102

overlooked. All groups expressed expectations that the

chair continue with these tasks in addition to other tasks

that were suggested.

4. Principals were of the opinion that department chairs

spend more time on curriculum than did either department

chairs or teachers. It was also a category in which a need

for increased responsibility in the role was expressed by

all groups, but less so by teachers.

5. There was agreement among the groups that the category

in which the least amount of time was spent by the

department chair was supervision.

6. In suggesting the role the department chair should have,

all groups were in general agreement concerning the

importance of the items in the categories of management,

communication, personnel, and curriculum. The three groups

indicated a conflict in time spent/role importance in all

four categories in which role importance was greater than

time spent. This was especially true of tasks in curriculum

and personnel, suggesting a need for expansion of the role

responsibilities of department chairs in these categories.

Principals and department chairs indicated that staff

103

development was more important than teachers perceived.

Principals perceived the importance of supervision to be

considerably greater than did teachers or department chairs.

These findings relative to the role in supervision were the

same as those found by Kuzminski (1979) and Gimm (1974).

7. The majority of the respondents believe the department

chair should do more of most tasks than they currently do.

Two-thirds of the principals reported 38 of the 40 tasks as

being of moderate to major importance in the role the

department chair should have, 30 reported by department

chairs, and 21 by teachers. This compares to only 13 items

identified by two-thirds of the principals, nine by

department chairs and eight by teachers as tasks on which a

moderate to major amount of time is spent by the department

chair at the present time.

8. Principals expressed an interest in an expanded role

for the department chair in tasks associated with

supervision. While there was disagreement among the

principals regarding whether the department chairs should

evaluate teachers, they were united in their view the

department chair should be observing teachers; conferencing

concerning the observations; preparing written reports of

104

observations; working with teachers to improve instruction;

and encouraging, stimulating, and motivating teachers. The

differences observed in their responses to evaluation may

have been caused by lack of clarity in the question. The

intent of the question was to determine if department chairs

should be involved in evaluation of teachers.

Department chairs and teachers reported with mixed

responses within their groups as to the role the department

chair should have in supervision in regards to observing,

conferencing, and doing written reports on observations, but

were in agreement that evaluation of teachers was of minor

importance to the role the department chair should have.

Conclusions

1. Based on the results of this study it appears that high

school department chairs represent an untapped source

of extended leadership within the school system in the

areas of curriculum, personnel, staff development, and

supervision. Principals seem to recognize the

potential and welcome the leadership department chairs

could provide. There is, however, some reluctance

expressed by the department chairs to assume an

expanded role in supervision. Furthermore, teachers

105

are not particularly interested in an expansion of the

role of department chairs in this area.

2. Principals and teachers may tend to respond to the

tasks to be performed by department chairs in terms of

how the tasks would benefit them. The job of the

principals and teachers is eased by the department

chair as the chair assumes greater responsibilities in

management, communication, personnel, and curriculum.

Principals are probably the prime beneficiary of an

expanded role for the department chair in supervision

and staff development.

3. There are differences of opinion among the three groups

as to the current role of the department chair and the

role the department chair should have. All groups

described the current role as being one of management

and communication. In addition, principals indicated

that the current role includes curriculum. In

contrast, all groups expressed an interest in expanding

the role of the department chair from management and

communication to include personnel and curriculum.

Principals and department chairs expressed a desire to

expand the role in staff development. Supported by

106

principals, but not as enthusiastically by department

chairs and teachers, was an expansion of the role in

the category of supervision.

Recommendations

To Policy Makers:

1. The results of this study should be disseminated to the

school board, superintendent, administrators, department

chairs, and teachers within the county to provide a base for

discussion of the role of the department chair.

2. A clear definition of the role of the department chair

should be established. Job descriptions should be developed

which define the responsibilities and authority of the

chair.

3. Based on the job description a list of processes should

be identified to guide selection of future department

chairs.

4. If the role of the department chair is to be expanded

beyond the management and communication tasks that are

107

currently performed, training should be made available to

department chairs and those aspiring to the position which

would better enable them to perform the job of department

chair. Suggestions for training include supervision of

instruction, evaluation of instructional programs, and

curriculum development (Appendix F). Additional topics for

consideration are organizational skills and team building.

5. Consideration should be given to implementation of a

pilot program with an expansion of the current role of

department chair in communication and management to include

supervision, curriculum, personnel, and staff development.

Besides training, this would necessitate providing

department chairs with additional release time.

To Other Researchers:

If this research were to be repeated there are several

suggestions that should be considered. While initially it

appeared that this was a simple study, the complexity was

revealed in the analysis of the massive amount of data.

Each of the 40 items in the survey had four levels of

responses from three groups for both "time spent" and "role

importance" resulting in 24 possible responses for each

item. It is therefore suggested that the complexity of the

108

survey be reduced. One way of accomplishing this would be

by having subjects respond with a yes or no as to whether

the task should be the role of the department chair. Those

responding yes would then indicate if the task should be a

minor or major responsibility.

Secondly, while it was interesting to see the

perceptions of principals and teachers as to how department

chairs spend their time, the department chair is probably in

the best position to provide that information. Thus, I

would recommend the elimination of principals and teachers

from research question 1.

For Further Study:

Recommendation for further study including the following:

1. A replication of this study in a different school system

or across several school systems.

2. A case study of department chairs in a school in which

their role is supervisory to identify the nature of the

climate and relationship of department chairs to their

teachers when the chair is such a position.

3. A study of the leadership style of department chairs and

members of their department and the relationship of those

109

styles to the perception of effectiveness of the department

chair by department members.

4. A study focusing on the identification of the person(s)

who teachers perceive to be the instructional leader(s)

within the school and who the teachers believe is best

qualified to (a) work with them on instructional improvement

and (b) evaluation of their instruction.

In Retrospect

There are conditions that existed in Fairfax County at

the time of the survey that may have impacted the responses

of the subjects. The system was in the first year of

implementation of a rigorous new teacher performance

evaluation process that will, in the future, result in a

significant pay increase for those teachers who are

identified as the most outstanding teachers. The new

evaluation procedure resulted in an increase in time spent

by administrators on classroom observations and the reports

that followed. It also required difficult decisions to be

made by administrators as they evaluated and rated teachers.

In the fall prior to the survey, one principal

submitted a proposal to the superintendent requesting

110

funding for training and additional release time for her

department chairs to enable them to assume an expanded role

in instructional improvement. The high school principals

had been discussing this proposal and its benefits. The

uniformity of agreement among principals on the survey may

have been a result of these discussions.

As is often the case in major changes, the morale level

of the teachers was lowered by the increased anxiety

generated by the evaluation system. This may have affected

their responses on the survey, particularly in the area of

supervision~ Under the pressure of increased observations

from administrators there may have been a fear that the

department chair, whom most see as a helper, would be one

more person looking over their shoulder.

Comments

Since the beginning of this research I have talked with

hundred of educators including teachers, department chairs,

and principals. Their responses concerning the role of the

department chair always seemed to relate back to two items;

the personality and qualifications of the individual

department chairs. From the discussions, it appeared that

teachers who felt more positive about their department chair

were more apt to indicate the role of the department chair

111

should be increased. Those who were displeased expressed a

reluctance to expand the role, apparently for fear that

their current department chair would assume the new expanded

role. Concern was also expressed by teachers as to the

number of years served by department chairs. A comment from

a teacher summarizes the view expressed by some teachers and

principals:

Department chair positions should be revolving with a change at least every three years. Most department chairs in my building are like Supreme Court Justices, there for life. There's no pleasant method for change or replacement even when there are obvious needs for change.

Principals, department chairs, and teachers agreed in

their comments that if the role was to be expanded

additional time and training would be needed. As one

principal put it, "The chair should be the instructional

leader within the discipline. However, it is crucial that

the chair be given more pay, authority, training, and time

if the position is to have the status it should have."

Frustration was expressed by a department chair who

indicated:

I changed little in the right hand column (role as it should be) because it is inconceivable that the department chair would be given more than one planning period per day. This is not sufficient time to make the department chair a true instructional leader.

Comments from other chairs frustrated by the lack of time

for departmental duties were echoed in this response:

112

There does not seem to be enough time in the day to carry out all of the related duties, science fairs, surveys, department communications, and still teach four classes. The demands of a department chair far exceed the one extra period provided. A large percentage of work is done well beyond contract time on a frequent basis.

A number of department chairs and teachers and a few

principals were of the opinion that a increase in the

supervision role by the department chair may prove to be

harmful to the relationship that currently exists between

department chair and teacher. One department chair

expressed the sentiment this way:

I do not believe we should become involved in the evaluation process as doing so will totally change our relationship with our colleagues. Department chairs should be in a position that enables them to help coordinate and develop the curriculum, not one in which we are viewed as passing judgement.

REFERENCES

Anderson, C. S., & Nicholson, G. I. (1987). Instructional leadership--Can it be measured validly? Who performs what functions? NASSP Bulletin, .1_1(502), 28-40.

Aplin, C. O. (1979). Supervisory role expectations of the department chairperson as perceived by teachers, principals, and department chairperson. Dissertation Abstracts International. 40(10), 5256-A. (University Microfilms No. 8008588)

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavich, A. (1972). Introduction to research in education. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Beck, W. R., & Rosenberger, D. S. (1971). Department chairman: Where does he fit in? Clearing House, 46, 48.

Berrier, G. G. (1974). Department chairman: What does he do? Clearing House, 48(7), 432-36.

Berry, J. R. (1977). A study of the current role of the department chairman in selected secondary schools in the state of Alabama. Dissertation Abstracts International, .;!1(12), 7421-A. (University Microfilms No. 7712172)

Bingaman, P. R. (1969). Consider the department chairman. Pennsylvania School Journal, 118, 27.

Buser, R. & Manlove, D. (1966) The department head: Myths and Reality. NASSP Bulletin, 50(313), 99-107.

Callahan, M. G. (1971). The effective school department head. West Nyack, New York, Parker Publishing Co.

Carnegie Task Force on Teaching as a Profession. A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century. A Report of the Task Force on Teaching as a Profession, May, 1986.

Clark, C. E. (1978). The method of selection, term of office and responsibilities of academic department heads in selected Philadelphia and suburban senior high schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 39(4), 1944-A. (University Microfilms No. 7817371)

113

114

Fish, K. L. (1976). Department Chairmen in Urban High Schools. NASSP Bulletin, 60, 106-110.

Getzels, J. W., & Guba, E. G. (1957, Winter). behavior and the administrative process. Review, 65, 423-441.

Social School

Gimm, D. G. (1974). Perceptions of the actual and ideal role of the secondary school department chairman by principals, department chairmen, and teachers in public schools in the metropolitan area of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Dissertation Abstracts International, l.Q.(7), 4074-A. (University Microfilms No. 7500166)

Good, C. V. (Ed.). (1973). Dictionary of education (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 172.

Greenfield, W. (1985). Value leadership: The department chairmen's role in instructional improvement. Illinois school research and development, .21.(2), 22-27.

Grieder, C. (1963). Let school department heads be responsible for supervision of instruction. Nations Schools, 11, 8.

Gwynn, J. M. (1961). Theory and Practice of Supervision. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

High, P. B. head.

(1965). The supervisory role of the department Clearing House, 213-15.

Hipps, G. M. (1965). Supervision: a basic responsibility of the department head. Clearing House, 39, 487-91.

Hord, S. M., & Murphy, S. C. (1985). The high school department head: Powerful or powerless in guiding change? A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Chicago, IL) EA 018 229.

Koch, H. C. (1930). Is the department headship in secondary schools a professional myth? School Review, ~, 336.

Kidd, J. L. (1965). The department headship and the supervisory role. NASSP Bulletin, 49, 70-76.

King, F. & Moon, J. (1960). The department head in the public secondary school. NASSP Bulletin, 44, 20-24.

115

Kirkland, G. G. (1978). The role of the department head in large, public senior high schools. Dissertation Abstract International, ~(11), 6436-A. (University Microfilms No. 7911451)

Kuzminski, C. (1980). Relationship between principal's, teacher's, and chairperson's perception of the role of the secondary school department chairperson and the perceived effectiveness of the department chairperson. Dissertation Abstracts International, 40(8), 4329-A. (University Microfilms No. 8000864)

Lindsay, D. (1981). You decide: Are department heads management or labor? Executive Educator, 1(10), 24-25.

Mandel, D. & Tucker, M. (1986). The Carnegie Report-A call for redesigning the schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 68(1), 24-27.

Marcial, G. E. (1984). Department supervisors-are they line or staff administrators? NASSP Bulletin, 68(472), 87-89.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education, 1983.

Novack, B. J. (1958) The department headship today. Educational Administration and Supervision, 44, 91-100.

Pedicone, J, J, (1981). Role expectations of department chairpersons in Wisconsin Senior High Schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, ~(10), 4238-A. (University Microfilms No. 8129796)

Ritter, W. E. (1979). Responsibilities of department chairpersons as perceived by exemplary high school principals. Dissertation Abstracts International, 40(12), 6079-A. (University Microfilms No. 8012872)

Sampson, L. (1986). The method of selection, term of office and the duties of secondary school department heads in rural high schools of Northwest Georgia. Dissertation Abstracts International, .11., 45-A. (University Microfilms No. 8606088)

116

Sergiovanni, T. J, (1984). Handbook for effective department leadership: Concepts and practices in today's secondary schools (2nd ed.). Massachusetts, Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Smith, B. 0. (1979). Perceptions of department chairpersons, principals and teachers concerning the functions of department chairpersons in selected Pennsylvania High Schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 39(11), 6456-A. (University Microfilms No. 7910024)

Thomas, B. R. (1984). The role of department chairpersons in selected class AA high schools in Minnesota. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45(07), 1951-A. (University Microfilms No. 8423835)

Turner, H. E. (1983). The department head an untapped source of instructional leadership. NASSP Bulletin, Q.1(464), 25-28.

Verchota, J. (1971) The department chairman: manager or specialist. The High School Journal, 128-32.

Wrigg, W. (1972). A case for survival: Chairmen should not be the victim of restructuring. Clearing House, 1..1, 20-21.

Williams, S. (1964). Educational administration in secondary schools. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Worner, W. (1986). Report of Instructional Manager Survey. Janesville, Wisconsin. Unpublished paper.

APPENDIX A

Source of Items Identified as Task Performed by Department Chairs

117

118

The following items have been identified through a search of the literature as being items performed by department chairs i~ some high schools. They have been coded as follows:

1. Sergiovanni (1984) 3. Callahan (1971)

2. Worner (1986) 4. ASCD (1948)

5. Lindsay (1981) 7. High (1965) 9. Sampson (1986)

11. Clark (1978)

6. Busher (1966) 8. Kirkland (1978)

13. Kuzminski (1979) 15. Alpine (1979)

10. Berry (1976) 12. Pedicone (1981) 14. Thomas (1984) 16. Hord & Murphy (1985)

1,2,3,5,6,7,8, 9,10,11,12,13, 14,15,16

1,2,3,5,6,7,10, 13,14,15,16

1,3,6,7,10,13, 16

3 15I6t81 9 I 10 t 16

3,12,13

1,3,5,6,7,8,10, 12,13,14

3 ) .~ 1 ' 12 ' 1 3 ' 16

1,3,6,12,13,14, 15,16

Observe teachers in the classroom

Hold conferences with teachers concerning classroom observations

Prepare written reports of classroom observations

Work with teachers to improve their instructional techniques

Review teacher lesson plans on a regular basis

Evaluate teachers

Monitor student progress in courses within the department

Coordinate curriculum within the department

1,6,13,14,15,16

1,3,5,6,7,8,9, 10,13,14,15,16

10,12,13

1,2,3,5,6,8,9, 10,11,12,13,14, 16

3,8,9,11,13,14, 15,16

3,12,15,16

1,3,6,10,ll,13, 15,16

3,9,16

1,2,3,6,8,9,11, 13,14,15,16

1,2,3,4,5,9,11, 13,14,15,16

1,2,3,4,5,8,9, 10,11,12,14,15, 16

119

Provide for testing and evaluation of new and existing programs

Work with teachers in developing curriculum

Assist teachers in modifying curriculum to meet the needs of their students

Assist in selection and evaluation of textbooks and other instructional materials

Encourage membership in professional organizations and attendance at professional conferences and workshops

Keep teacher informed of new trends and programs

Establish a curriculum resource center for the staff

Visit other schools to observe their program

Assist in the orientation of new teacher

Work with substitutes in the department to insure continuity of instruction

Assist with the interviews of prospective teachers

1,2,4,8,9,10, 11,12,14,15,16

1,2,3,8,10,11, 12,13,14,15,16

1,2,3,4,5,6,7, 8,9,10,11,12, 13,14,15,16

1,8,10,12,15

1,2,3,5,8,9,10, 11,12,13,14,16

3,12

1,2,3,4,5,6,8, 10,12,14

1,2,3,4,8,9,10, 14,16

1,2,3,13,16

1,2,3,6,8,11, 13,14,16

1,3,5,8,13,l6

1,3,4,8,12,13, 14,13,16

120

Assist in the selection of new teachers

Assist in establishing the schedules and teaching assignments of teachers in the department

Plan and conducts department meetings

Arrange room assignments for teachers in the department

Prepare and monitor the department budget

Arrange for repair and replacement of equipment

Order supplies and equipment

Maintain an inventory of textbooks, equipment, and supplies

Complete forms and gather departmental data requested by the school administration or county

Foster good public relations and communication within the community

Act as a department spokesman

Act as a liaison between teachers and the administration

5,13,15,16

3,13,16

1,6,9,10,13,14

1,2,3,5,6,8,13, 14,16

1,2,3,5,6,8,9, 13,14,15,16

3,13,16

1,3,8,9,13

2,16

1,11,16

121

Interpret administration policies and procedures to members of the department

Arrange interclass visitation among teachers

Demonstrate or arrange demonstration of instructional techniques

Assess teachers' needs for inservice activities

Develop and/or implement inservice activities

Encourage teachers to exchange ideas and teaching strategies

Encourage membership in professional organizations and attendance at professional conferences and workshops

Recruit students into various courses

Assist in resolving teacher/teacher or parent/teacher conflicts

APPENDIX B

Letter and Survey Sent to Principals, Department Chairs, and Teachers

122

FAIRFAX COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Dear Educator:

123

February 1, 1988 Administrative Area I

6520 Diana Lane Alexandria, Virginia 2 2 31 O

The position of department chair has come under great scrutiny in recent years. With the principal being called on to be an instructional leader and with greater emphasis being placed on improvement of instruction, the department chair is viewed by many as a pivotal position in the school organization. I am conducting a study to examine how department chairs in Fairfax County high schools spend their time and to identify what principals, department chairs and teachers believe the role of the department chair should be.

You are one of 17 people in your school who has been selected to provide valuable insight on this issue. Please complete the enclosed survey and questionnaire and return to me in the enclosed envelope by February 16, 1988. Because of the small sample of participants in the study it is extremely important to have a high return rate. You have been assigned a number that will be used to verify the return of your survey. That number is written in pencil in the upper right hand corner of your survey and address label. If the survey with your number is not returned you will receive a follow-up letter. None of the surveys collected will be reported individually so there will be no way individual answers could be identified. Your anonymity is assured. If you still have concerns about returning the survey, erase or mark over your number, but please return it.

This study is not an evaluation of department chairs, principals, or teachers, but is designed to try to answer the questions of how the department chairs spend their time and what their role should be as viewed by principals, department chairs and teachers.

The information gathered in the study will be examined by county leaders as decisions concerning the future role of the department chairs are made. You have a stake in that decision and this is your opportunity to express your views!

Please make sure that you answer all questions on the survey. In the first section you are asked to select a number that represents your views. Please select one number only, do not give ranges but select the number that in your estimation is the best representation of the answer.

If you have any questions concerning the study or any questions on the survey please call me during the day at 960-9820 or at nights at 569-2648

Sincerely,

Sissie Orris Instructional Services

124

SURVEY FOR. PRllfCIPALS

The following is a list of responsibilities theoretically given to department chairs in some high schools. The left hand column represents the amount of time the department chair actually spends on the tasks listed below. The items have been divided into 7 categories. Within each category indicate the relative amount of time that you feel your department chairs spends on each activity. In the right hand colU111n, indicate the degree to which you feel that these tasks should be the responsibility of the department chair at your school. Please circle the appropriate response.

light eo1-~ft Col-n- spent OD actiYity 1o1e of DC should be l • not a responsibility 2 • minor amount of time

l • not a responsibility 2 • minor importance

3 • moderate amount of time 4 • major amount of time

3 • moderate importance 4 • major importance

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

SUPD.VISIOW

l, Observe teachers in the classroom

2. Hold conferences with teachers concerning classroom observations

3, Prepare written reports of classroom observation

4. Work with teachers to improve their instructional techniques

S. Review teacher lesson plans on a regular basis

6. Evaluate teachers

7, Monitor student progress in course within the department

8. Encourage, stimulate and motivate teachers

CUU.ICULUM

9. Coordinate curriculUlll within the department

10. Provide for testing and evaluation of new and existing programs

11. Work with teachers in developing curricul11111

12. Assist teachers in modifying curriculum to meet the needs of their students

13. Assist in selection and evaluation of textbooks and other instructional materials

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

4-5

6-7

8-9

12-13

.!!:11. 16-17

20-21

125

Right Columi Left Collmn Ti- spent on acti•ity Role of DC should be l • not a responsibility 2 • minor amount of time




2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

14, Keep teachers informed of new trends and programs

15. Establish a curriculum resource center for the staff

16. Visit other schools to observe their program

PUSOllDL

17. Assist in the orientation of new teachers

18. Work. with substitutes in the department to insure continuity of instruction

19. Assist with interview of prospective teachers

20. Assist in the selection of new teachers

21. Assist in establishing the schedules and teaching assignments of teachers in the department

22, Plan and conduct department meetings

23. Arrange room assignments for teachers in the department.

24, Prepare and monitor the department budget

25, Arrange for repair and replacement of equipment

26. Order supplies and equipment

27. Maintain an inventory of text books, equipment and supplies

28. Complete forms and gather departmental data requested by the school or county administration

STAFP DIVZLOPMDT

29. Arrange interclass visitation among teachers

30. Demonstrate or arrange demonstration of instructional techniques

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

lQ.:l!. 32-33

34-35

.&lZ. 38-39

.!Q=!l 42-43

!±!!!... 48-48

50-51

52-53

54-55

58-59

126

Left Colmm light Colmm Ti81! spent on activity lole of DC should be 1 • not a responsibility 1 • not a responsibility 2 a minor amount of time 2 • minor importance 3 • moderate amount of time 3 • moderate importance 4 • major amount of time 4 • major importance

2 3 4 31. Assess teachers' needs for inservice education 2 3 4 64-65

2 3 4 32. Develop and/or implement inservice activities 2 3 4 ~

1 2 3 4 33. Encourage teachers to exchange ideas and teaching 2 3 4 68-69 strategies

1 2 3 4 34. Encourage membership in professional organizations 2 3 4 70-71

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

and attendance at professional conferences and workshops

COIMDRICATIOR

35. Foster good public relations and communication within the community

36. Act as department spokesman

37. Act as a liaison between teachers and the administration

38. Interpret administration policies and procedures to members of the department

39. Recruit students into various courses

40. Assist in resolving teacher/teacher or parent/teacher conflicts

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

4-5

6-7

8-9

.!1:.!1 14-15

127

Questions 41-47: Assuming that 100% of the time that the department chair spends on deparblental duties (excluding teaching duties) is contained in the 7 categories that follow, estimate the percentage of time spent by the English department chair in each of the categories. (You may need to refer back to the survey to refresh your memory as to responsibilities covered in each category.) For the other three departments indicate whether the department chair spends more than (+), less than (-), or an equal (•) amount of time in each category when compared to the English department chair

Category % of ti- spent English Science Foreign Lang Ind, Arts

41. Supervision + + + 16-20

42. Curriculum + + + ~

43. Personnel + + + 26-30

44. Management + + + 31-35

45. Staff Development + + + 36-40

46. Communications + + + 41-45

47. Other (nonteaching) + + + 46-50

48, Indicate the approximate boars per week the English department chair spends on performing departmental duties (nooteacbing). For the other three departments indicate if the time spent is more, less, or equal to the time spent by the English chair in each category 51-55

(hoars) English ---- Science + Foreign Lang + Industrial Arts +

49. How many hour/week should be assigned to your English department chair to perform the job that is indicated by your responses to the role of the department chair as it should be (represented in the right column of survey)? For the other three departments indicate as above. 56-60

(boars) English ---- Science + Foreign Lang + Industrial Arts +

50, As you consider the selection of department chairs, what personal characteristics or professional qualities do you believe will be most important as you perceive the position over the last decade?

1.

2

128

51. Select the area that represents in your opinion the most severe staff development need for current department chairs. (Check one selection only please.) i!_

Supervision of Instruction 2 ~- Organizational Skills

3 Human Relations Skills 4 ~- Team Building

5 ~- Personnel Management 6 Evaluation of Instructional programs

7 Curriculum Development 8 ~- Development of Mission Statement

Please answer the following questions by circling or inserting the appropriate answer.

l. Gender (l) Female (2) Hale 4

2. Number of years as principal (excluding current year). 5-6

3. Number of years as principal of this school (excluding current year). 7-8

4. Is there a Wt'itten job description for department chairs in your school? 9 (l) NO (2) YES

5. Number of department chairs in your school grades 9-12. 10-11

6. Do any of the department chairs receive salary supplements for being a department chair? (1) NO (2) YES Q

7. How many of the department chairs receive one or more periods (excluding their teacher planning period) to perform departmental duties? 13

8. Please indicate if department chairs in the following departments receive a department planning period:

English NO YES 14 Science NO YES IT Foreign Lang NO YES 16 Industrial Arts NO YES 17

9. Have you ever served as a department chair? (l) NO (2) YES 18

10. Which of the following descriptive statements most accurately describes decision malting in your school? 19

The principal makes most management decisions, with little input from the instructional staff.

2 The principal makes most management decisions, usually after seeking relevant input from the staff.

3 The principal makes many management decisions, after seeking relevant input from the instructional staff. In addition, some management decisions are made with participation by the staff.

4 In addition to (3) above, the principal has delegated some management decisions to department chairs. The principal helps and monitors, but does not make these decisions for the persons or groups to which they are delegated.

129

Questions 11-17. In each of the following areas, indicate using the code listed how the decisions within a department are made.

11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

l• Decision made by principal 2• Decision made by principal after consulting department chair 3• Decision made by department chair after consulting principal. 4• Decision made by department chair

Allocation of resources 1 2 3 Teacher assignments 1 2 3 Scheduling of classes 1 2 3 Selection of instructional materials 1 2 3 Coordination of curriculum 1 2 3 Selection of new teachers 1 2 3 Evaluation of teachers 1 2 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

18. What is the term of appointment for department chairs in your school?

19. How often do you review your selection of department chairs?

Your comments regarding the role of the high school department chair are welcomed.

COMMENTS:

Please check the front and back of each page to make sure that you have answered all questions. Return in the enclosed envelope to Sissie Orris, Area I Office.

130

SOl.'llY POil DIPil'Dllll'I' CBAllS

The following is a list of responsibilities theoretically given to department chairs in some high schools. 'nle left hand column represents the amount of time the department chair actually spends on the tasks listed below. 'nle items have been divided into 7 categories. Within each category indicate the relative amount of time that you spend on each activity. In the right hand column, indicate the degree to which you feel that these tasks should be the responsibility of the department chair at your school. Please circle the appropriate response.

tight eo1-Left Col-n- spent OD actiYity 1o1e of DC sboald be l • not a responsibility 2 • minor amount of time




2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

SUPDVISIOR

1. Observe teachers in the classroom

2. Hold conferences with teachers concerning classroom observations

3. Prepare written reports of classroom observation

4. Work with teachers to improve their instructional techniques

5. Review teacher lesson plans on a regular basis


7. Monitor student progress in course within the department


CIJUICDJ.111

9. Coordinate curriculum within the department


11. Work with teachers in developing curriculum


13. Assist in selection and evaluation of textbooks and other instructional materials

l 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

4-5

.ll.:.!l ~

.!!:!l

24-25

26-27

131

'Left Col1911 Ti- speat oa activity

light Colimn lole of DC should be

l • not a responsibility 2 • minor amount of time



3 a moderate importance 4 a major importance

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

14. Keep teachers informed of new trends and programs

15. Establish a curriculum resource center for the staff


17. Assist in the orientation of new teachers

18. Work with substitutes in the department to insure continuity of instruction

19. Assist with interview of prospective teachers

20. Assist in the selection of new teachers

21. Assist in establishing the schedules and teaching assignments of teachers in the department

l 2 3 4 22. Plan and conduct department meetings

l 2 3 4 23. Arrange room assignments for teachers in the department.

2 3 4 24. Prepare and monitor the department budget

2 3 4 25. Arrange for repair and replacement of equipment

2 3 4 26. Order supplies and equipment

l 2 3 4 27. Maintain an inventory of text books, equipment and supplies

l 2 3 4 28. Complete for'lllS and gather departmental data requested by the school or county administration

ST.&l'P DBVBLOPllD?

l 2 3 4 29. Arrange interclass visitation among teachers

l 2 3 4 30. Demonstrate or arrange demonstration of instructional techniques

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

!2:!!. 42-43

~

.&ll

.&21. i!:ll ~

Left Col-u- spent on acti•ity 1 • not a responsibility 2 • minor amount of time 3 • moderate amount of time 4 • major amount of time

2 3 4 31. Assess teachers'

132

needs for inservice education

2 3 4 32. Develop and/or implement inservice activities

light eo1-1o1e of DC should be l • not a responsibility 2 • minor importance 3 • moderate importance 4 • major importance

2 3 4 ~

2 3 4 66-67

2 3 4 33. Encourage teachers to exchange ideas and teaching 2 3 4 ~ strategies

l 2 3 4 34. Encourage membership in professional organizations 2 3 4 and attendance at professional conferences and workshops

1 2 3 4 35. Foster good public relations and communication within the community

2 3 4 36. Act as department spokesman

2 3 4 37. Act as a liaison between teachers and the administration

l 2 3 4 38. Interpret administration policies and procedures to members of the department

2 3 4 39. Recruit students into various courses

2 3 4 40. Assist in resolving teacher/teacher or parent/teacher conflicts

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

lQ:Z.!.

4-5

Questions 41-47: Assuming that 1001 of the time that you spend on departmental duties is contained in the 7 categories below, estimate the percentage of time spent in each of the categories. (You may need to refer back to the survey to refresh your memory as to task covered in each category.) The total must add up to 1001.

41. Supervision ~

42. Curriculum .!!::!1. 43. Personnel ~

44. Management 22-23

45. Staff Development ~

46. Communications ~

47. Other (nonte!lching) ~

133

48. Indicate the approximate hours per veelt that you spend on performing departmental duties (nonteaching). 30-31

, 49. How many hour/week should be aasigned to the department chair to perform the job that is indicated by your responses to the role of the department chair as it sboald be (represented in the right column of survey)? 32-33

Please answer the following questions by checking or inserting the appropriate response.

1. Gender: (1) Female (2) Male

2. Race: (1) Black (2) Hispanic (3) Oriental (4) White (5) Other

3. Age: (1) 20-25 (2) 26-30 (3) 31-35 (4) 36-40 (5) 41-45 (6) 47-50 (7) 51-55 (8) 56 or more

4. Your level of professional training: (1) Bachelor Degree (2) Bachelor + (3) Masters (4) Masters + (5) Doctorate

5. You are a member of which department?

(1) English (2) Science (3) Foreign Lang (4) Ind Arts (5) Other

6. How many years have you been teaching (excluding current year)?~-----

7. How many years have you served as department chair in your school?~----

8. What is the length of your school contract? 1 194 days __ 2 200 days 3 Other

9. Do you have a job description for department chairs in your school?

10. How many periods of release time do you have daily for departmental duties (excluding your planning period)?

11. How many periods do you teach daily? -----

12. How many members are in your department including yourself?

34

.ll

36

37

38

39-40

~

43

44

45

46

13. How were you selected as department chair? (1) appointed by current principal (3) elected by department members

49 (2) appointed by previous principal (4) other (please explain)

14. Does the principal or his/her designee hold regular meetings with the 50 department chairs? (1) NO ( 2) YES

15. How often does the principal or designee meet with the department chairs? 51

16. How often do you have department meetings? --------------- 52

134

17. What is the approximate student population in your school? (1) 1000-1500 (2) 1501-2000 (3) 2001-2500 (4) 2501-3000 (5) 3001-3500 (6) 3501-or more

Questions 18-24. In each of the following areas indicate how decisions are made within your department.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

l• Decision made by principal 2• Decision made by principal after consulting department chair 3• Decision made by department chair after consulting principal 4• Decision made by department chair

Allocation of resources 2 Teacher assignments 2 Scheduling of classes 2 Selection of instructional materials 2 Coordination of curriculum 2 Selection of new teachers 2 Evaluation of teachers 2

3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4

53

25. Which one of the following descriptive statements most accurately describes 61 the situation in your school?

1. The principal makes most management decisions, with little input from the instructional staff.

2 The principal makes most management decisions, usually after seeking relevant input from the staff.

3 The principal makes many management decisions, after seeking relevant input from the instructional staff. In addition, some management decisions are made with participation by the staff.

4 In addition to (3) above, the principal has delegated some management decisions to department chairs. The principal helps and monitors, but does not make these decisions for the persons or groups to which they are delegated.

26. Select the area that represents in your opinion the most severe staff development need for current department chairs. (Check oae selection only please). 62

_1 Supervision of Instruction 2 Organizational Skills

3 Human Relations Skills 4 Team building

_s Personnel Management 6 Evaluation of Instructional Programs

7 Curriculum Development _8 Development of Mission Statement

135

Your comments regarding the role of the high school department chair are welcome. COMMENTS:

Please check front and back of each page to make sure that you have answered all questions. Return in the enclosed envelope to Sissie Orris, Area I Office.

136

The following is a list of responsibilities theoretically given to department chairs in some high schools. The left hand column, represents the amount of time the. department chair actually 1pends on the task1 li1ted below. The items have been divided into 7 categories. Within each category indicate the relative amount of time that you feel your department chair spends on each activity. In the right hand column, indicate the degree to which you feel that these tasks should be the responsibility of the department che.J.r at your school. Please circle the appropriate response.

Left Col-T.l• apeat on acthity

lipt Col-Sole of DC eboald be

1 • not a responsibility 2 • minor amount of time

1 • not a responsibility 2 • minor iaportance

3 • moderate amount of time 4 • aajor 111110unt of time

3 • mode~ate importance 4 • aajor iaportance

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

SUPDVISIC>m

l. Observe teachers in the claaarooa

2. Rold conferences with teachers concerning classroom observations

3. Prepare written reports of classroom observation

4. Work with teacher• to iaprove their in1tructional techniques

5. Review teacher lesson plans on a re~ular basis


7. Monitor student progress in course within the department


CUUICULDll

9. Coordinate curriculum within the department


11. Work with teachers in developing curriculum


13. Assi1t in selection and evaluation of textbook• and other in1tructional aaterial1

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

8-9

~ . .!!:.!1

~

18-19

20-21

137

lipt eo1-Left eo1-T1• •peat oa mctirity 1a1e of DC •hould be 1 • not a responsibility 2 • minor amount of time

1 • not a responsibility 2 • minor importance

3 • 110derate amount of time 4 • aajor A110unt of time

3 • llOderate importance 4 • aajor importance

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

14. , Keep teachers intoned of new trends and prograu

15. !stablish a curriculUlll resource center for the· staff


JlllSIWll,

17. Aasist in the orientation of new teachers

18. Work with substitutes in the department to insure continuity of instruction

19. Aasiat with interview of prospective teachers

20. Aasist in the selection of new teachers

21. Aasist in establishin~ the schedules and teaching assignments of teachers in the department

2 3 4 22. Plan and conduct department meetings

2 3 4 23. Arrange room assignments for teachers in the department.

2 3 4 24. Prepare and monitor the department budget

2 3 4 25. Arrange for repair and replacement of equipment

2 3 4 26. Order supplies and equipment

1 2 3 4 27, Maintain an inventory of text books, equipment and equipment

l 2 3 4 28. Complete forms and gather departmental data requested by the school or county administration

2 3 4 29. Arrange interclass visitation.among teachers

2 3 4 30. De110nstrate or arrange deaonstration of instructional techniques

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

l 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

lQ:ll

~

1!:.ll

~

1!:1!

40-41

42-43

~

.•6-47

48-48

50-51

52-53

54-55

~

~

Left Col-Ti• •pent on acthity 1 • not a reaponsibility 2 • llinor aaount of time 3 • moderate amount of time 4 • -jor aount of time

1 2 3 4 31. Assess teacher•'

138

needa for inaervice education

2 3 4 32 •• Develop and/or implement inaervice activitiea

light Col-lole of DC ahould be 1 • not a responsibility 2 • llinor importance 3 • moderate importance 4 • major importance

1 2 3 4 ~

1 2 3 4 ~

2 3 4 33. Encourage teachers to exchange ideaa and teaching 1 2 3 4 68-69

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

•trategiea

34. Encourage membership in profesaional organization• 1 2 3 4 and attendance at professional conference& and vorkllhopa

COllllllllCATIOlf

35. Foster good public relations and co11111Unication within the co11111Unity

36. Act as department spokesman

37. Act as a liaison between teachers and the administration

38. Interpret administration policies and procedures to members of the department

39. Recruit students into various courses

40. Assist in resolving teacher/teacher or parent/teacher conflict

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

1 2 3 4

2 3 4

2 3 4

2Q:!!.

4-5

6-7

10-11

. 11=!.l 14-15

Questions 41-47: Assumin~ that 100% of the time that your department chair spends on departmental duties (excluding teaching duties is contained in the 7 categories below, estimate the percenta~e of time spent by your chair in each of the cate~ories. (You may need to refer back to the survey to refresh your memory as to task covered in each category.) The total must add up to 100%.

41. Supervision

42. Curriculum

43. Personnel

44. Management

45. Staff Development

46. Co111111nications

47. Other (nonteaching) __ _

16-17

18-19

20-21

~

24-25

26-27

28-29

139

48. Indicate the approximate boura per week your department chair apencls on performing departmental duties <-teacbiag), ___ ~

49. Bow many hour/week ahoul.d be uaigned to the department chair ,to perfot'lll the job that 1a indicated by your responses to the role of the department chair as it aboald be (represented in the right column of aurvey)? ~

Please answer the following questions by checking or inaerting the appropriate response.

1. Gender: (1) Female (2) Male 34

2. Age: (1) 20-25 (2) 26-30 (3) 31-35 (4) 36-40 35 (5) 41-45 (6) 47-50 (7) 51-55 (8) 56 or 11c>re

3. Your level of professional training: (1) Bachelor Degree (2) Bachelor + (3) Hu tea ~ (4) !tasters + ( 5) Doctorate

4. You are a member of which department? (1) English (2) Science (3) Foreign Lang (4) Ind Arts 37

5. Bow many years have you been teaching? 38-39

6. Bov often do you have department meetings? --------------

7. To the best of your knowled~e does your department chair or another department chair in your school get a salary supplement for duties aa department chair? 41

8. How many periods/day does your department chair have for department~l duties (excluding a planning period)?

Questions 9-15. In each of the following areas indicate how decisions are made within y-r department.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

l• Decision made by principal 2• Decision made by principal after consulting department chair 3• Decision made by department chair after consulting principal 4• Decision made by department chair

Allocation of resources 2 Teacher assignments 2 Scheduling of classes 2 Selection of instructional materials 2 Coordination of curriculum 2 Selection of new teachers 2 Evaluation of teachers 2

3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4

43 44 "45 46 47 48 49

140

16. Which one of the following descriptive statements 110at accurately describes 1Q. the situation in your school?

1

_2

_3

4

'nle principal makes llOSt management decisions, with little input from the instructional staff.

nte principal makes llOSt management decisions, usually after seeking relevant input from the staff.

nte ~rincipal makes many management decisions, after seeking relevant input froa the instructional staff. In addition, some aanagement decisions are made with participation by the staff.

In addition to (3) above, the principal has delegated some management decisions to department chairs. nte principal helps and monitors, but does not aake these decisions for the persona or groups to which they are d•legated.

Your co-nta regarding the role of the high school departHnt cheir:are welcome. COMMEHT:

Please check front and back of each page to make sure that you have answered all questions. Return in the enclosed envelope to Sissie Orris, Area I Office.

APPENDIX C

Person Identified as Serving the Role of Department Chair for Industrial Arts

141

142

February 1, 1988

Dear Participant:

You have been identified by your principal as the person who serves the role of department chair for the industrial arts (technology) teachers. Some people who have been so identified are members of other departments such as business, fine arts, etc. As the person so identified you are asked to complete the enclosed questionnaire.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincere~y,

Sissie Orris

APPENDIX D

Follow-Up Letter

143

144

February 24, 1988

Dear Educator:

Several weeks ago you received a survey concerning the role of the department chair in Fairfax County. As of this date I have not received your response. Several surveys were returned without identification numbers, if yours was among this group please disregard this letter.

I recognize what a busy time of the year it is for your, but your input is vital to the study. Enclosed is another copy of the survey should you have misplaced yours. It would be appreciated if you would take a few minutes to complete and return the survey to me by March 4, 1988.

As I indicated in my previous letter, the reporting of the data will be by group and not individual responses. If you have concerns about being identified, remove the identification number that has been assigned to you.

I thank you for your time and contribution.

Sincerely,

Sissie Orris Instructional Services Area I Off ice

APPENDIX E

Crosstabs of "Time Spent'' versus "Role Importance" for Principals, Department Chairs, and Teacher

145

Item U

A

M A

A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

Item #2

A

M A

l\o Time

Minor mt Time

oder ate mt Time

Major A mt Time

146

Relationship of Reported Time Spent and Reported Role The Department Chair Should Have By Item

Observe teachers

No Role Minor Moderate Major Importance Importance ·Importance

T = 70 T = 26 T = 45 T = 16 DC = 21 DC = 7 DC = 20 DC = 14

p = 3 p = 12

T = 6 T = 9 T = 10 DC = 2 DC = 5 DC = 4

p = 3 p = 2

T = 6 DC = 1 DC = 1

p = 1

T = 1

Conferences on observation

'.\o Role Minor Moderate !'!&.)Or Importance Importance Importance

T = i5 T = 27 T = 10 T = li DC = 24 DC = 8 DC = l i DC = 15

p = 1 p = 3 p = 13

T = 5 T = i T = ; .) T = 1 DC = 4 DC = 2 DC = 4

p = 3 p = 1

T = 1 T = 4 T = 2 DC = 1 DC = 1

T = 1

Item t3

No Time

Minor Am t Time

M A

ode rate mt Time

Major t Time

Item #4

A

M A

A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

147

Write reports of observation

No Role Minor Moderate Importance Iaportance

T = 105 T = 27 T = 27 DC = 29 DC = 15 DC = 16

p = 1 p = 4

T = 7 T = 3 DC = 1

p = 2

T = 3 DC = 1

Work with teachers on instructional techniques

No Role Minor Moderate Importance Importance

T = 30 T = 24 T = 31 DC = 6 DC = 3 DC = 6

p = 1

T = 6 T = 19 T = 17 DC = 5 DC = 6

p = 2

T = 17 DC = 8

Major Importance

T .. 14 DC = 12

p • 13

DC = 2 p = 1

T = 2

Major Importance

T = 25 DC = 13

p = 3

T = 13 DC = 14

p = 9

T = 4 DC = 13

p = 6

T = 1 DC = 2

Item #5

A

M A

A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

Item #6

M A

~o

Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major A mt Time

148

Review lesson plans

No Role Minor Importance

T = 119 T = 34 DC = 38 DC = 13

p = 4 p = 1

T = 2 T = 10 DC = 1

p = 1

T = 1

Evaluate teachers


T = 112 T = 24 DC = 39 DC = 8

p = 7 p = 2

r = 1 T = 3

p = 1

DC = 1

Moderate Major Importance Importance

T = 15 T = 7 DC = 14 DC = 7

p = 8 p = 4

T = 1 DC = 2

p = 1 p = 2

T = 1


T = 26 T = 14 DC = 1; DC = 10

p = 5 p = 6

T = 3 T = 2 DC = l

T = 2 T = l

T = 1

Item t7

No Time

Minor t Time

M A

oder ate mt Time

Major A mt Time

Item #8

A

H A

A

No Time

Minor mt Time

oderate mt Time

Major mt Time

149

~onitor student progress


T = 73 T = 20 DC = 20 DC = 7

p = 1

T = 3 T = 27 DC = 1 DC = ·15

p = 1

T = 1 T = 2

T = 1

Encourage, stimulate, and motivate


T = 3 T = 2

T = 2 T = 21 DC = 2

T = 2

T = 1


T = 28 T = 9 DC = 12 DC = 7

p = 2 p = 1

T = 12 T • 3 DC = 5 DC = 4

p = 9 p = 6

T = 7 T = 1 DC = 3 DC = 1

p = 1

T = 1 T = 1 DC = 2

!ioderate Major Importance Importance

T = 10 T = 19 DC = 1 DC = 2

p = 1

T = 28 T = 38 DC = 5 DC = 7

p = 6

T = 13 T = 31 DC = 5 DC = 38

p = 2 p = 10

T = 2 T = 19 DC = 3 DC = 14

p = 2

Item #9

No Time

Minor A at Time

M A

A

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

150

Coordinate curriculua


T = 4 T = 3 DC = 2 DC = 2

T = 1 T = 9 DC = 6

T = 4

Item #10 Test and evaluate programs

No Time

Minor A mt Time

ode rate M A mt Time

Major A mt Time

No

T = DC =

Role Minor Importance

17 T = 20 7 DC = 7

p = 1

T = 28 DC = 4

p = 2

T = 3


T = 7 T = 11 DC = 2 DC = 4

T = 19 T = 28 DC = 7 DC • 12

p = 2 p = 2

T = 35 T = 34 DC II 6 DC = 24

p =- 2 p = 12

T = 1 T = 37 DC = 12

p = 3


T = 21 T = 16 DC = 11 DC = 6

p = 1

T = 23 T = 14 DC = 10 DC = 10

p = 5 p = 5

T = 17 T = 11 DC = 7 DC = 7

p = 1 p = 4

T = 4 T = 14 DC = 5

p = 1

151

Item tll Work in developing curriculum

No Tiae

Minor t Time

ode rate M Am t Time

Major Am t Time

No

T = DC =


7 T = 11 1 DC = 3

T = 18 DC = 4

p = 1

T = 1

p = 1

Item tl2 Assist in modifying curriculum

A

M A

A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

No

T = DC =

Role Hi nor Importance

10 T = 18 1 DC = 4

T = 25 DC = 4

T = 2 DC = 1


T = 20 T = 12 DC = 3 DC = 6

p = 1

T = 33 T = 23 DC = 16 DC = 12

p = 1 p = 2

T = 18 T = 16 DC = 6 DC = 16

p = 3 p = 9

T = 2 T = 28 DC = 1 DC = 9

p = 1 p = 2


T = 28 T = 20 DC = 6 DC = 8

p = 1

T = 25 T = 17 DC = 12 DC = 12

p = 6 p = 9

T = 19 T = 15 DC = 4 DC = 13

p = 3 p = 2

T = 1 T = 9 DC = 7

p = 1

152

Item f 13 A•aiat in textbooks selection

No Time

Minor t Time

oder ate M Am t Tiae

Major A mt Time

No

T =

T =


7 T = 8 DC = 3

p = 1

1 T = 19 DC = 6

T = 1 DC = 2

Item t14 Inform teachers of new trends

A

M A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major t Time

No

T =

T =


1 T = 7 DC = 1

T = 17 DC = 6

T = 2

1 T = 4

Moderate Major I•portance Importance

T = 7 T = 9 DC = 3 DC '"' 7

T = 31 T = 20 DC = 11 DC = 8

p = 3 p = 1

T = 31 T = 25 DC = 10 DC = 18

p = 3 p = 6

T = 2 T = 30 DC = 1 DC = 8 -p - 1 -p - 6


T = 5 T = 8 DC = 1 DC = 1

T = 25 T = 34 DC = 14 DC = 10

p = 1 p = 8

T = 42 T = 23 DC = 11 DC = 19

p = 6 p = 4

T = 1 T = 20 DC = 2 DC = 11

p = 2

153

Item t15 Establish resource center

No Time

Minor A at Time


Major A mt Time

No

T = DC =

p = T =

T =


22 T = 20 12 DC = 5

2 p = 1

2 T = 21 DC = 4

p = 1

2 T = 1

Item #16 Observe progrms in other schools

No Time

Minor A mt Time

ode rate M A mt Time

Major A mt Time

No

T = DC =

T =

T =


14 T = 43 3 DC = 11

p = 5

2 T = 18 DC = 8

p = 3

T = 3

2 T = 1

Hoder ate Major Importance Importance

T = 24 T = 20 DC = 7 DC = 1

p = 4

T = 28 T = 19 DC = 19 DC = 9

p = 5 p = 4

T = 14 T = 5 DC = 7 DC = 6

p = 2 p = 2

T = 3 T = 9 DC = 1


T = 30 T = 26 DC = 17 DC = 13

p = 1 p = 3

T = 26 T = 7 DC = 12 DC = 8

p = 3 p = 3

T = 10 : T = 2 DC = 1 DC :: 3

p :: 1 p :: 1

T = 2 T = 3

p = 1

154

Item 117 Orientate new teachers

A

M A

A

No Tiae

Minor at Time

ode rate mt Time

Major at Time

No

T = DC =

T = DC =

T =


1 T = 1 3 DC = 11

2 T = 14 1 DC = 5

p = 3

1 T = 3

Item #18 Work with substitues

A

M A

No Time

Minor mt Time

oder ate mt Time

Major Am t Tiae

No

T = DC =

T =

T =


28 T = 17 8 DC = 5

p = 1

2 T = 21 DC = 11

p = 4

1 T = 2

T = 1


T = 13 T = 25 DC = 3 '>C = 5

T = 16 T = 43 DC = 9 DC • 15

p = 3 p = 3

T = 24 T • 26 DC = 12 DC = 17

p = 2 p = 5

T = 1 T = 21 DC = 9

p = 5


T = 12 T = 17 DC = 4 DC = 3

p = 1

T = 19 T = 21 DC = 10 DC = 10

p = 5 p = 3

T = 23 T = 17 DC = 10 DC = 8

p = 2 p = 2

T = 10 DC = 1 DC = 7

p = 1 p = 2

155

Itea t19 Assist with interviews of teachers

M A

A

No Tiae

Minor t Tiae

oder ate mt Tiae

Major mt Time

No

T = DC =

T =


18 T = 10 3 DC = 8

T = 13

3

Item #20 Assist in selection of teachers

No Tiae

Minor A mt Time


Major A mt Tiae

No

T = DC =

T =

T =


19 T = 14 4 DC = 7

2 T = 13 p = 1

2


T = 26 T = 35 DC = 10 DC = 21

p = 1 p = 2

T = 15 T .. 30 DC = 8 DC = 15

p = 6 p = 4

T = 14 T = 13 DC = 1 DC • 6

p = 2 p = 4

T = 2 T = 11 DC = 5

p = 2


T = 29 T = 32 DC = 11 DC = 24

p = 2 p = 3

T = 14 T = 32 DC = 6 DC = 14

p = 5 p = 5

T = 10 T = 13 DC = 6

p = 2 p = 2

T = 1 T = 8 DC • 4

p = 2

156

Item t21 Assist in scheduling and teacher assignments in the department

No Tiae

Minor A at Tiae

M A

A

ode rate at Tiae

Major mt Tiae

No Role

T = 4 . DC = 2

T = 1

Minor Moderate Importance Importance

T = 4 T = 9 DC = 1 DC = 4

T = s. T = 13 DC = 1 DC = 7

p = 1

T ·= 2 T = 30 DC = 5

p = 4

T = 4

Item #22 Plan and conduct department meetings

A

H A

A

No Time

Hi nor mt Time

oder ate mt Time

Major mt Time

No Role

T = 1

T = 1

Minor Moderate Importance Importance

T = 2 T = 15 DC = 1 DC = 2

T = 4 T = 37 DC = 18

p = 4

T = 1 T = 6

Major Importance

T = 17 DC = 6

T • 26 DC = 9

p s 2

T = 35 DC = 22

p = 8

T = 36 DC = 19

p = 5

Major Importance

T = 2

T = 13 DC = 2

p = 1

T = 31 DC = 24

p = 3

T = 78 DC = 30

p = 12

157

Item #23 Arrange room assignments

A

M A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major A mt Time

No

T = DC

p = T =

T =


33 T = 16 6 DC = 15 1

3 T = 27 DC = 6

p = 3

1 T = 4

DC = 1

Item #24 Prepare and monitor budget

A

H A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major t Time

No

T = DC

T =


4 T = 7 2 DC = 7

T = 5

p = 1

T = 3 DC = 1

1 T = 1

- ..• ~f~r.

Moderate t•L:,, ··or Importance Importance

T = 17 T = 15 DC • 6 DC • 12

T = 12 T = 11 DC = 7 DC = 4

p = 3 p = 1

T = 13 T = 14 DC = 5 DC = 9

p = 5 p = 4

T = 1 T = 22 DC = 7

p = 2


T = 3 T = 10 DC = 2 DC = 1

T = 7 T = 10 DC = 7 DC = 2

p = 2 p = 3

T = 32 T = 29 DC = 13 DC = 15

p = 5 p = 4

T = 1 T = 71 DC = 1 DC = 25

p = 1 p = 4

158

Item t25 Arrange for repair and replacement of equipment

A

M A

No Tiae

Minor mt Time

oder ate mt Time

Major A mt Time

No

T = DC

T = DC =


22 T = 8 4 DC = 2

5 T = 23 3 DC = 11

p = 2

T = 4

p = 1

DC = 1

Item #26 Order supplies and equipment

A

H A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major Am t Time

No

T = DC =


5 T = 2 1

T = 7 DC = 3

T = 6 DC = 2

p = 1

DC = 1

Moderate Importance

T = 9 DC = 1

T = 15 DC = 7

p = 6

T = 25 DC = 15

p = 6

T = 4 DC = 1

~oderate Importance

DC = 1

T = 8 DC = 2

T = 37 DC = 14

p = 8

T = 6 DC = 4

p = 1

Major Importance

T = 7

T = 12 DC = 5

p = 1

T = 22 DC = 9

p = 3

T = 33 DC = 16

p = 1

Major Importance

T = 2

T = 9

p = 1

T = 25 DC = 15

p = 5

T = 83 DC = 35

p = 4

159

Item t27 Maintain inventories

A

H A

A

No Tiae

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

No Role

T = 6

p = 1

T = 1

Minor Importance

T = 3 DC = 1

T = 15 DC = 6

T = 5 DC = 1

p = 1

T = 1 DC = 2

p = 1

Item t28 Complete forms and gather data

A

M A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major Am t Time

No

T =

T =


3 T = 3

T = 15 DC = 8

p = 1

1 T = 7 DC = 1

p = 2

T = 4 DC = 6


T = 1 T = 5 DC = 1

T = 6 T = 12 DC = 5 DC = 4

p = 1

T = 41 T = 35 DC = 13 DC = 10

p = 6 p = 4

T = 5 T = 54 DC = 3 DC = 31

p = 6


T = 2

T = 6 T = 18 DC = 4 DC = 6

p = 2 p = 1

T = 43 T = 17 DC = 13 DC = 9

p = 6 p = 4

T = 8 T = 61 DC = 3 DC = 24

p = 1 p = 4

160

Item t29 Arrange interclass visitation

A

M A

A

No Time

Hi nor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

No

T = DC =

T =

T =


36 T = 36 5 DC = 17

p = 1

1 T = 21 DC = 6

1 T = 3

Moderate Importance

T = 40 DC = 17

p = 8

T = 19 DC = 8

p = 4

"T = 7 DC = 3

p = 2

Item #30 Demonstrate instructional techniques

A

M A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major All t Tiae

No Role

T = 19 DC = 4

T = 1

Minor !'lode rate Importance Importance

T = 25 T = 26 DC = 10 DC = 12

p = 2 p = 3

T = 25 T = 32 DC = 5 DC = 12

p = 2 p = 5

T = 2 T = 20 DC = 6

p = 1

T = 1

p = 1

Major Importance

T = 20 DC = 12

p = 2

T = 4 DC = 5

p = 2

T = 2 DC = 3

p = 1

p = 1

Major Importance

T = 15 DC = 5

T = 12 DC = 11

p = 5

T = 3 DC = 7

p = 2

T = 7 DC • 3

p = 1

161

Item t31 Assess needs for inservice

A

H A

A

No Tiae

Minor at Time

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

No Role

T = 19 DC = 7

T = 2

Minor Importance

T = 27 DC = 8

p = 2

T = 30 DC = 8

Item #32 Develop and implement inservices

No Time

Minor A mt Time

ode rate H Am t Time

Major Am t Time

No

T = DC =

T = DC =


21 T = 19 8 DC = 4

p = 1

1 T = 35 1 DC = 12

T = 2

Moderate Major Importance Iaportance

T = 20 T = 18 DC = 11 DC = 6

p .. 2 p = 1

T = 27 T = 17 DC = 11 DC = 5

p = 6 p .. 5

T = 19 T = 5 DC = 8 DC = 6

p = 1 p = 4

T = 4 DC = 5


T = 25 T = 10 DC = 12 DC = 3

T = 25 T = 12 DC = 10 DC = 3

p = 6 p = 6

T = 22 T = 8 DC = 8 DC = 6

p = 3 p = 4

T = 1 T = 7 DC = 7

p = 1

162

Item 133 Encourage exchange of ideas and strategies

M A

A

No Time

Minor t Time

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

No Role

T = 2

T = 1

Minor Importance

T = 7

T = 18 DC = 3

T = 1

T = 1

Moderate Importance

T = 11 DC • 2

T .. 30 DC = 7

p s 4

T = 25 DC • 10

p = 2

DC = 1

Major Iaportance

T = 16 DC = 3

T .. 30 DC • 16

p = 5

T s 25 DC • 13

p = 5

T = 23 DC = 20

p = 5

Item #34 Encourage membership in professional organizations

No Time

Minor A mt Time


Major t Time

No

T = DC =

T =

T =

DC =


20 T = 21 1 DC = 3

p = 1

5 T = 39 DC = 10

p = 4

1 T = 4

T = 1 1


T = 13 T = 10 DC = 2 DC = 2

T = 32 T = 12 DC = 17 DC = 11

p = 3 p = 7

T = 13 T = 8 DC = .12 DC = 7

p = 3

T = 2 T = 9 DC = 9

p = 3

163

Item t35 Foster public relations

A

M A

No Tiae

Minor at Time

ode rate at Time

Major Am t Time

No

T = DC =

T =


13 T = 9 2

1 T = 37 DC = 5

T = 2 DC = 2

T = 1 DC = 1

Item #36 Act as a department spokesman

A

M A

No Time

Minor mt Time

ode rate mt Time

Major t Time

No

T =


T = 6 DC = 2

p = 1

1 T = 3

Moderate Major Importance laportance

T = 14 T = 13 DC = '.~

T = 21 T = 23 DC = 12 DC = 12

p = 5 p = 3

T = 22 T = 16 DC = 10 DC a 11

p = 3 p = 6

T = 3 T = 14 DC = 19

p = 3


T = 10 T = 25 DC = 2 DC = 4

p = 1 p = 1

T = 25 T = 38 DC = _10 DC = 21

p = 2 p = 4

T = 4 T = 77 DC = 1 DC = 35

p = 1 p = 11

Item t37 Act as a liaison

No Tiae

Minor t Time

oder ate M Aa t Time

Major A mt Time

T

T

No Role

= 2

= 1

164

Minor Importance

T a 1

T = 4 DC = 1

p = 1

T = 1

DC = 2

Item #38 Interpret policies and procedures

No Time

Minor A mt Time

H A

A

ode rate mt Time

Major mt Time

No

T = DC =

T =


1 T = 1 1

T = 15 DC = 3

p = 2

1 T = 1 DC = 1

p = 2

T = 1 DC = 1

Moderate Major Iaportance I.aportance

T a 4 DC = 1

T = 14 T = 26 DC = 2 DC = 4

p = 1 p = 1

T = 23 T = 35 DC = 5 DC = 19

p = 3 p = 5

T = 4 T = 75 DC = 1 DC = 40

p = 1 p = 9


T = 1 T = 2

T = li T = 24 DC = 4 DC = 3

p = 2

T = 23 T = 30 DC = u DC = 22

p = 3 p = 5

T = 5 T = 68 DC = 3 DC a 27

p = 7

165

Item t39 Recruit students into courses

A

M A

A

No Time

Minor mt Time

oder ate mt Time

Major mt Time

No

T = DC =

T =


38 T = 21 10 DC = 8

p = 1

5 T = 34 DC = 11

p = 5

T = 3

p = 1

T = 1

Item t40 Assist in resolving conflicts

No Time

Minor A mt Time


Major t Time

No

T = DC =

p = T =

DC =

T =


56 T = 28 11 DC = 6

3

4 T = 20 1 DC = 10

p = 1

1 DC = 2


T = 16 T = 9 DC = 2 DC = 1

p = 1

T = 21 T = 8 DC = 10 DC = 6

p = 4 p = 2

T = 16 T = 8 DC = 9 DC = 11

p = 2 p = 1

T = 10 DC = 9

p = 4


T = 19 T = 6 DC = 4 DC = 2

p = 4

T = 25 T = 7 DC = 14 DC = 6

p = 7 p = 1

T = 9 T = 6 DC = 8 DC = 7

p = 2 p = 2

DC = 6 p = 1

APPENDIX F

Need for Staff Development for Department Chairs as Perceived by Principals and Department Chairs

166

167

Greatest Need for Staff Development as Perceived by Principals and Department Chairs

Area of Need

Supervision of Inst.

Organizational Skills

Human Relations Skills

Team Building

Personnel Management

Evaluation of Inst. Prg.

Curriculum Development

Development of Mission

Principals Department Chairs

N = 18 N = 80

Number and Percent Responding P DC

8(44.4%) 18(22.5%)

1 ( 5. 6%) 9(11.3%)

0 3(3.8%)

3(16.7%) 8(10.0%)

1(5.6%) 7(8.8%)

4(22.2%) 13(16.3%)

1(5.6%) 14 ( 1 7. 5%)

0 8(10%)

The two page vita has been removed from the scanned

document. Page 1 of 2

The two page vita has been removed from the scanned

document. Page 2 of 2

Documents

THE ROLE OF HIGH SCHOOL DEPARTMENT CHAIRS IN A LARGE ... · high school department chairs. There are several views that have emerged over time concerning the role of the department