A STATUS STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND PREPARATION PROGRAM NEEDS FOR BUILDING ADMINISTRATORS IN CLASS II AND CLASS III SCHOOLS IN NEBRASKA

During the decade of the 1970\u27s, a major movement was underway to reorganize pre-service and continuing education programs, plus on-the-job performance in terms of specified competencies for building administrators. It was generally accepted there was a need for more precision in pre-service training programs and more valid assessment procedures for measuring the performance of school administrators. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationships which existed among and between the perceptions held by building administrators in Class II and Class III schools in Nebraska, their superintendents, and their teachers when examining the performance and preparation program needs for building administrators. An opinionnaire was developed from the thirty statements or performance areas adopted by the Department of Educational Administration at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln as a definition of educational administration. The opinionnaire was utilized to determine the perceptions held by their immediate superordinate and subordinates regarding: (1) the performance of the building administrator, (2) the areas of performance which should be included in current preparation programs for building administrators, and (3) the areas of performance which should be included in future preparation programs for building administrators. Data obtained from one-way analysis of variance tests revealed there were no significant differences between the perceptions held by participating building administrators, their superintendents and their teachers when examining current and future preparation programs for building administrators. Also, there were no significant differences in the perceptions held by the three status groups when they examined the performance of their building administrator. Perceptions held by building administrators, their superintendents and their teachers were found to be similar. Data obtained from t-tests indicated there was a significant relationship among perceptions held by participants in each of the three status groups when they were asked for their perceptions of current and future preparation programs and the performance of their building administrators. An analysis of mean scores revealed that all three status groups rated the importance of the set of performance areas for current preparation programs significantly higher than they rated the actual performance of building administrators on the same set of performance areas. Similarly, all three status groups rated the importance of the set of performance areas for future preparation programs significantly higher than they rated the importance of the same set of performance areas of current preparation programs. Finally, all three status groups rated the importance of the set of performance areas for future preparation programs significantly higher than they rated the actual performance of building administrators on the same set of performance areas. Conclusions. There was considerable agreement among the perceptions held by all three groups regarding the preparation and performance of building administrators. The agreement among the perceptions held by the three groups also lent support to the validity of the thirty statements adopted by the Department of Educational Administration at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln as a definition of educational administration. Finally, the agreement among the three groups may lend support for the inclusion of these groups in the development of the linkage between preparation programs and the subsequent on-the-job performance of building administrators. Further investigation of individual or specific performance areas may generated valuable data regarding specific competencies to be included in preparation programs and the evaluation of building administrators