the cooperations referred to, faculty members were mentioned most frequently; local administrators, graduate students, State administrators, and representative laymen were mentioned less frequently and in that order. All of these groups are generally included, with the exception of laymen.

Implicit in all these statements was an assumption that schools, colleges, and departments of education have primary responsibility for the development of suitable programs of professional education in administration. Cooperation with other groups and agencies seem for the most part to have been sought for the purpose of verification of conclusions arrived at by the schools, rather than for the purpose of involving them all in responsibility for cooperation and decisions at all stages of the process of developing programs.

Suggestions and implications-There are two methods which generally characterize the approach to the development of a philosophy of administration, (a) a job analysis of the work of the school administrator may be accepted as the basis of the program, or (b) a philosophy of administration is developed in relation to the whole philosophy of education in general. While the former method of approach may lead to a conception of administration that is too narrowly conceived as a profession in and of itself and apart from teaching, its use in combination with the second method of approach should minimize that possibility feared by so many students of the problem. The fundamental distinction between administration and teaching is largely one of function. The job analysis approach is necessary in order to identify these functions just as it has been used effectively to identify the teaching functions. There should be no "either, or" confusion here as appears in the thinking of many professional faculties as they consider these problems related to philosophy.

The implications with respect to program content which are involved in these two approaches are of course significant. The first approach used exclusively, results usually in a program which consists for the most part in a sequence of courses in the purely technical aspects of administration. The second approach results in a program based upon a more extensive range of so-called education and noneducation Both approaches are sound as far as they go. The thing to be avoided is what has been called "relative adherence" to one or the other of these approaches. The suggestion offered here is that we concern ourselves less with the alleged "purity" of our approach and resultant philosophy and more with the business of canvassing the total problem in terms of an approach that is defensibly sound rather than traditionally orthodox.

areas.

The time seems to have passed when the problem of developing programs for the education of administrators as well as for teachers is exclusively or even primarily the responsibility and concern of the

teachers colleges and universities. Other agencies and groups are giving expression to interests and concerns which should be recognized. The time seems to have arrived when institutions can well afford to waive considerations of primacy of interest and responsibility and become parties to the adoption of an approach which gives due recognition to all interests, and that involves all groups and agencies concerned, actively, in a cooperative attack upon the total problem.

Finally, it should be observed that responsibility and power of initiative in this cooperative undertaking rests within that group or agency or institution where consciousness of need and urgency, and the will to do, is most acute. It could well be hoped that this would mean our institutions of higher education.

II. Preparation and Competence of Graduate Teaching Staff for the Responsibilities Related to the Education of Administrators Conclusions.-Agreements can and should be reached within each institution with respect to certain distinctive qualifications essential to effective service in this field. These agreements should be concerned with qualification factors based upon a functional analysis of the responsibilities of the members of the staff-as related to the task imposed by the program and its objectives: Conclusions should be reached with respect to the most appropriate educational and experience background, qualitatively and quantitatively; demonstrated functional command of knowledge; on the job skills required, with emphasis upon leadership and teaching skills essential to effective utilization of more recently developed teaching procedures; and the personality traits most essential to satisfactory working relationships, with emphasis upon inter-faculty relationships within the institution as a whole as well as teacher-student relationships.

The present situation. The majority of institutions report that specific conclusions have been reached with respect to what the most distinctive equipment of professional instructors in the field of education for school administration should be.

A tabulation of all the specification items submitted provides a distribution of items within all of the categories which have been outlined. No single institution apparently has considered them all to the point of including them all in its report. There is great variation in emphasis and in point of view. Most general agreement is registered with respect to the importance of successful, practical field experience in the public schools.

Comments on the proposal submitted, that staff members should be "practicing professors" and should be part-time employees of school systems from time to time, were preponderantly favorable. Fifteen respondents gave evidence of such employment of staff members in terms of a literal intrepretation of the question. Reports from 20

additional institutions indicated that practicing school administrators are employed as instructors on a part-time basis. Altogether responses here re-affirmed general agreement as to the importance of practical experience with considerable emphasis upon the currency and continuity of such experience and contacts.

Encouraging reports of success in bringing about successful collaborations between so-called academic and professional personnel came from one-third of the responding institutions. The remaining institutions had little or nothing to report while a few presented statements of purely negative results in such an effort.

Suggestions and implications.-Effective implementation of a program of education for administration must inevitably stand or fall in terms of the adequacy of staff and teaching facilities. Increasing emphasis upon the functional aspects of professional programs in education for teaching and administration, and the continuing development of "new" teaching techniques and procedures, are making increasingly varied and more complex demands upon the competence of the teaching personnel as a teaching leadership group. The time has passed when teachers at the graduate level in this field can rest on their laurels of achievement in research or successful experience in the past and be content to pass on through lectures and assigned readings a body of theory and vicarious experience. More and more attention, therefore, should be given to an analysis of teaching functions at this level which will result in the identification of the knowledges, skills, experiences, and personal qualities most essential to effective teaching service in relation to student needs and purposes. These efforts should be continuous and searching.

Because the full utilization of many of the personnel and material resources of a university in the so-called "non-education" areas of content and experience is becoming increasingly obvious as a necessary part of an emerging broader program of professional education, the competence of staff members in bringing about the necessary collaborations and cooperations should be given increasing consideration. The disposition and the ability to promote and improve these relationships are more often than not quite seriously challenged. Surely they should be included as important parts of the "distinctive equipment of professional instructors in the field of education of school administrators."

An analysis of the nature of the problems involved in promoting and improving these relationships in any given situation should of course precede any program of action. Among the problems which such an analysis would reveal are the following:

(1) Differing basic philosophies with respect to degrees of specialization essential to differing kinds of graduate programs. Here the importance of developing a basic philosophy in school administration and a resultant

framework of objectives in professional education for administration cannot be over estimated. The education staff must be on firm ground here and be prepared to present a case which will stand up in the face of conflicting philosophies. The first step in promoting cooperating relationships is to win respect for the plans and offerings in the education program. This is not to say that these conflicting philosophies must become involved in a head-on collision with the honors going to the survivor. Rather it means that differences must be resolved. through a mutual recognition of the fact that these differences grow out of differences in purposes. It is mutual recognition of the validity of these differing purposes which must ultimately eventuate.

(2) The problem of administrative controls and clearance within the institution. The fact that resistance to the development of these relationships is sometimes centered in individuals who occupy strategically placed administrative positions presents peculiar difficulties in some institutions. The whole administrative set-up may militate against such relationships. Here the challenge may be either psychological or organizational, or both. These difficulties are not necessarily insuperable. Tenacity of purpose, tact, the winning of minor but, in the long run, important victories in the democratization of internal administration, contribute to ultimate success, challenging at many points the intelligence and the competence of all concerned.

III. Selection and Guidance of Students

Conclusions.-Selective admission requirements, compatible with the functions of administrative positions, should be established in all institutions which offer graduate programs for the education of school administrators. The number of persons so selected should bear some reasonable relationship to the number of employment opportunities available in the State or region served. Selection techniques which are now available should be fully utilized and efforts should be directed to improve upon these and to develop new ones. The whole process should be thorough and rigorous in its application.

Institutions should maintain guidance services directed to the improvement of the personalities and the vocational effectiveness of all students in training. To these ends they should maintain health services, both mental and physical; clinics to help students with special but remedial, disabilities; and a faculty interested in, alert to, and provided with, the time and the facilities to respond efficiently to the "counseling" needs of the students. These guidance services should be provided extensively and intensively during the first year of graduate study, and should continue through the period of adjustment to the job.

The present situation.-Two-thirds of the institutions canvassed reported systematic efforts directed toward identifying and interesting

potentially capable persons in the work of administration. The same number reported the use of specific means for selecting the most promising students in such matters as general ability, scholarship, health, personality, ability to grow, leadership ability, and professional interest. In most cases the use of specific means to select some students apparently does not preclude the admission of other students who arrive upon the campus unsolicited and unselected. Several institutions frankly admitted this in qualifying statements. In general, at the master's level "there are only two selective bases operating in this first-year professional program, namely, the completion of a four-year undergraduate college program, and sufficient money to permit attendance at the institution." 1 In statements submitted, descriptive of these specific means employed, it appears that the majority of institutions depend most upon informal contacts between faculty members and prospective students. Only one institution places any definite limitation upon the number of students admitted for graduate work in any 1 year. Two institutions report modest experimentation with objective selective techniques at the graduate

level.

Two-thirds of the institutions report that their guidance procedures are most effective at the graduate level.

Seven institutions reported that studies had been made at their institution of predictive measures of administrative ability. Eleven institutions reported the use of such measures in their guidance programs. One-third of the respondents reported the development of specifications for good administration and about the same number reported the use of such specifications in the development of curricular and guidance procedures. On the basis of the returns it appears that little use is made generally of objectively developed standards and measures in the implementation of selective and guidance policies at the graduate level. The little that is reported seems to be in a very early experimental stage.

Recognition is given in the great majority of institutions to the demonstrated competence of the student to plan his own program of study and activity as a criterion for admission to candidacy for advanced degrees. This seems to be especially true at the doctorate level.

That institutions are accepting some guidance responsibilities during the period of adjustment to the job following preservice training is indicated by the fact that 50 of the 62 institutions reporting state they do accept some responsibility for maintaining close contacts with former students from the point of view of aiding them in overcoming

1 Cocking, Walter D. and Williams, Kenneth R. The education of school administrators. Procedures used at selected institutions. Sponsored by the National association of colleges and departments of education and the Commission on teacher education of the American council on education. Washington, D. C., The Council, 1941. P. 70.