Journal of Primary Prevention, 2(3), Spring, 1982
Consultation to Educational Administrators J. ROBERT KAGEY and EDWARD C. MARTIN ABSTRACT:A community mental health center had developed an innovative consultation program for school principals. Forty-five of the area's 95 school principals from 14 districts are enrolled in the program. The services provided are individual consultation, support groups and conferences. The evaluation of the program consisted of a questionnaire and interviews. The individual consultation was perceived to be of greater value t h a n the other services. Overall, the program appeared to help relieve the isolation of principals a n d provide t h e m with a means for processing ideas and actions. The program did not appear to be as effective in increasing colleagueship and a support s y s t e m a m o n g principals.
Caplan {1963} delineates mental health consultation in terms of four self-explanatory categories: client-centered case consultation; consultee-centered case consultation; consultee-centered administrative consultation; and program-centered administrative consultation. These four types of intervention encompass progressively broader levels of prevention by reaching higher levels of leadership and broader program areas. Caplan notes, however, that mental health consultation in administrative areas is frequently hampered by the fact that "few mental health consultants have as thorough a knowledge of administrative problems as they have of the psychological complications of an individual client." Consultation to local school systems are among the most common types of mental health consultation. Evidence of mental health centers' difficulties in conducting administrative consultations to schools supports Caplan's statement. Vayda and Perlmutter {1977) found in their survey of primary prevention activities in 43 mental health centers that school systems were the single most important recipients of the centers' consultation services. In the surveyed schools, services to individual clients seems to predominate. "Caretaker training" {similar to Caplan's consultee-centered Dr. Kagey, Director of Consultation and Education Programs, and Mr. Martin, C o n s u l t a n t to School Administrators, are staff of the Consultation and Education Department, Herbert Lipton Community Mental Health Center, Fitchburg, Ma. The authors would like to recognize the contributions of Gretchen Hall, Noel Dandley, and Walter Lutz in g a t h e r i n g the data and editing the original manuscript. 0278-095X{82)1300-0153500.95
1 53
©1982 Human Sciences Press
154
Journal of Primary Prevention
consultation} was confined to teachers and counselors. There was some " p r o g r a m c o n s u l t a t i o n , " but most seemed to concern the implementation of mental health programs in schools as opposed to broader and more general questions of administration and program. Nagler and Cook (1973) found a similar orientation. Nearly threequarters of the consultation "elements" (i.e., contacts between mental health and school personnel} surveyed were with teachers and counselors, and over 95% of these elements were "case-oriented." Only 11% of the consultation elements were with principals and even these tended to be case-oriented (74% of the elements}. Nagler and Cook conclude: Analyzing the program in retrospect, the major emphasis on clinical matters is not at all surprising. The consultants, all staff members at the clinic, functioned primarily as clinicians when out in the field...the staff must have felt more comfortable in the quasi-clinician role--as a case consultant--than in the non-clinician role--as an agent of social change. The apparent difficulty of involving principals and other school administrators in mental health consultation is a significant impediment to primary prevention in the school. For one thing, good relations with top administration can facilitate the initiation and maintenance of consultation (Berkovitz, 1970; Forman & Hetznecker, 1972). For another, Alpert (1977} contends t h a t " 'institutional payoff' is m a x i m i z e d . . , by focus(ing) change efforts on persons or subgroups in the institution who lie higher on the organizational chart." Research indicates that school principals are prime candidates for consultee-centered administrative consultation--both because of their strategic positions as leaders of individual schools and because of the overwhelming demands their positions place on them. Studies of "school climate" have pointed to the importance of leadership by principals, as a central determinant of the social environment of schools {Halpin & Croft, 1962; Thomas, 1976}. School principals have been called upon to become conscious actors in the creation of positive mental health environments in the school (Johnson, 1976; Taintor, 1976). However, exercising effective leadership and achieving a positive mental health environment are no easy tasks for school principals. Sarason (1971) reports t h a t as an initiator or implementer of change, the principal is in a crucial role... {but) neither by previous experience nor formal training nor the processes of selection is the principal prepared for the requirements of leadership and the inevitable conflicts and problems that beset a leader.
K a g e y and Martin
15 5
The principal is the man or woman "in the middle" and is plagued by role overload, role conflict, illegitimate role demands, and feelings of inadequacy in ability to meet role demands {Vetter, 1976}. Cashburn (1976} describes the various tasks t h a t principals must perform in the areas of fiscal problems, staff, community, plant management, students, legal questions, etc. He points to principals' needs to balance bureaucratic and cooperative modes of doing business: "Only a master administrator knows how much shared decision-making to add to the bureaucracy to produce a quality school s y s t e m . " Brown's (1967} survey of teachers' perceptions of principals' leadership leads to the conclusion t h a t such master administrators are rare. Brown finds t h a t principals (at best} are strong either on meeting the needs of the school through the "apersonalized s y s t e m " or on responding to " t h e idiosyncratic personal and professional needs of fellow human beings on staff . . . . Few mortals could be strong on both." Given these difficulties, it is not surprising that Wiggins (1972} reports t h a t school climates tend to shape principals rather t h a n vice versa. His survey revealed the presence of a compelling school climate stability which has the effect of socializing the principal's behavior . . . . Climates did not change when principals were replaced. The principal's behavior became more significantly related to the organizational climate as the length of his incumbency increased. One of the most difficult aspects of the principal's position as potential leader is the isolation t h a t seems to inevitably come with the job--the lack of natural sources of advice and support. Philip Jackson (1977} has poignantly portrayed what isolation is like for the principal, summing it up with the phrase, "lonely at the top." Vetter (1976} cites the lack of recognition: " H e is expected to provide 'psychological strokes' for others and wonders who is giving him strokes." Similar feelings have been conveyed by former principal, Roland Barth, Director of Harvard's s t u d y of the Education School's relation to schools. His analysis and recommendations are worth quoting at length: Principals often need help in very specific idiosyncratic ways that can't be met through a crash course. Let's say that I have two teachers across the hall from each other who are constantly at each other's throats. What can I do about i t ? . . . Who in this building, under this roof, can I sit down with and get counsel? For most principals the answer to that question is nobody . . . . In my view then, what we need is an independent group to whom principals can turn for help on such
156
Journal of Primary Prevention
problems. Maybe this group is set up so that there is one person I can talk with every couple of weeks to share my problems and my progress {or lack of it). That model, I believe, has a lot of power, a lot of potential. (Hours, 1976)
Description of Program This article presents a consultation program to school principals that provides consultation and support to minimize the isolation that most often comes in the job. Operating out of a mental health center, this consultation program has taken the unorthodox approach of hiring a non-mental health professional--a former school principal--to direct the program. Program components include individual consultation, small groups, and half-day "mini-conferences" that bring in outside speakers. Located in New England, the Herbert Lipton Community Mental Health Center serves an industrial region surrounded b y rural countryside with a total population of 140,000. There are 15 towns in the area and 14 school districts. Twelve of the 14 districts have had principals in the program over its four-year existence, and principals from ten districts are currently involved. Participation in each district varies from about 30% of eligible principals to 100%. Of 95 principals in the catchment area, about 45 are enrolled each year. Participation is not limited to principals, although they constitute 80 to 90% of the enrolees. Other administrators involved include superintendents, directors of special education and guidance, and a director of curriculum areas. A $125 annual fee is charged for each administrator, which covers all activities.
Goals The main goal of the program is to assist principals in their efforts to be effective leaders by providing a professional support system that reduces isolation and increases management skills. More specifically, the program seeks 1) to assist in the acquisition of specific management skills in areas of need ranging from budgeting to decision-making procedures; 2) to provide a sounding board and assistance in the analysis of issues; and 3} to increase contact between principals and disseminate new ideas and practices related to the management of a school.
K a g e y and Martin
15 7
The mental health consultant does not approach the principals with any rigid blueprint of the "correct" or "healthy" school climate. The Center is committed to working with principals with a variety of styles, values, and capabilities. The Center does enter the relationship with some broad conceptions which are compatible with the great majority of the principals' educational philosophies. The following conceptions of leadership and climate are fostered: -- Clarity of purpose--principals must have a clear conception of their goals and be able to articulate and implement them. -- Respect for individual and community--a "healthy" school environment is one in which individuals have and show respect for one another both individually and collectively. Positive outlook--a leader should foster solutions to problems and interpersonal interactions that are not negative in tone and thrust. Openness--an open and collaborative atmosphere is preferable to a defensive and competitive one. Quality of program, staff and students--both students and staff know and respect quality when they see it. High quality work by all should be expected and acknowledged. -
-
-
-
-
-
Consultation Services The specific services offered over the past three years have been very consistent, with some variation in the number and themes of small group meetings and the recent addition of process consultation. Individual consultation and conferences have always been a major part of the program. During the 1978-79 school year the program implemented the following: 1. Individual Consulation. A consultant visits the school once a month to talk about professional issues about which the principal is concerned. The consultant listens, offers practical suggestions and helps the principal examine assumptions, identify alternatives and act in new ways. Principals have used consultants to discuss personnel issues, community relations, program development, leadership issues, organizational problems, and current "hot" issues. 2. Support Groups. Groups were led by the consultant or by other members of the Center staff who have skills in group leadership and a high interest in the topic. The goal of the groups was to involve the principals in sharing information and practices from
Journal of Primary Prevention
158
.
their own school experience. The idea was to break down some of the isolation of principals by putting them in touch with peers from other schools and even other school systems. The following groups met: a} Changing Curriculum--This group focused on how existing curricula can be reviewed and revised, and on how new curricula can be developed and adopted. b) Stress Management Workshop--This group focused on handling the stress often encountered by managers. c) Women Managers--This group continued from last year, but was open to new members. It focused on management skills and situations unique to being a woman manager. d) Evaluating, Supervising and Supporting Teachers--This group focused on the ticklish problem of being boss and educational colleagues. Discussions considered evaluation procedures and forms, evaluation conference techniques, managing conflict and methods of supporting teachers. e) Assistant Principals--This group discussed the difficulties and opportunities of the assistant principal's job. Speakers Conferences. During the year (1978-79), two conferences were held. Conferences lasted three hours, with a format that included a speaker and question period and informal discussion over refreshments. The topics were "The Psychology of Lives and Careers" and "Basic Skills and Minimum Competency: Assumptions, Problems and Possibilities." Attendance at the conferences averaged about fifteen.
Evaluation The principals' program was formally evaluated at the end of its third year by the Center's evaluation department. Over 200 hours were devoted to gathering data and preparing the report. Although informal evaluations and continued enrollment showed client satisfaction, a more formal survey of clients allowed better planning for the Center's services to school leaders. Thus, the evaluation was designed to be both summative and formative. Data were gathered in two ways, questionnaires and interviews. Questionnaires were mailed to all program participants (N =45). The questionnaire was designed to assess the extent to which program objectives were achieved and to evaluate specific dimensions of each activity. Of the 45 questionnaires distributed, 36 were completed and
~agey andMar~n
159
returned for a return rate of 80%. Additionally, ten persons were randomly selected from the pool of 45 program participants to be interviewed. The interview was designed to gather more in-depth information than was provided by the questionnaire and to address other related issues. Table 1 shows the overall programmatic gains as expressed by the questionnaire respondents. The table presents mean scores for each objective. As is indicated by the table, the primary gain that was realized was the acquisition of a sounding board for thoughts and feelings related to being a principal. The second and third-ranked gains were, respectively, receipt of objective feedback/advice on current situations, and the receipt of assistance in analyzing issues, solving problems, and exploring alternative solutions. The final column of Table I indicates what objectives participants wanted emphasized the following year. All respondents who participated in individual consultation {N=32) were requested to rate the consultation service along six dimensions, using a scale of 1 to 9 (1 represents n o use or value and 9 represents m a x i m u m value or effectiveness}. The mean ratings for each of the six dimensions is presented in Table 2. The quantitative results of the questionnaire were reinforced during the interview portion of the evaluation. Part of the expressed value of consultation is the objectivity of an outside opinion, b u t the major worth of the service seemed to be enhanced by the personal relationship of consultant and consultee, in particular, confidentiality and lack of threat. One interviewee indicated that he found it "very refreshing to sit down with somebody who really isn't going to write an evaluation on you and you can really let your hair down." Another person stated, "One thing that has been helpful to me is being able t9 pick somebody else's brain and draw upon someone else's experiences, without admitting to weakness . . . . You know it's confidential, so there's no threat there." One aspect of the individual consultation that was noted by school administrators as being beneficial is that the program operates in several school systems. Specifically, since the consultant works with many administrators in numerous school systems, he/she is in a position to transfer ideas of what is happening at one school throughout the program. For the school administrator, the sharing serves to reduce his/her sense of isolation and provides a means for gaining new ideas. Attendance was a major difficulty with some of the discussion groups. While eight to twelve principals consistently signed up for
Journal of Primary Prevention
160
TABLE i RANKING OF OVERALL PROGRAMMATIC GAINS AND PRIORITIES n= Gains
FOR NEXT YEAR
36
# Respondents
Mean *
Acquired a sounding board for thoughts and feelings related to being a principal.
32
4.13
Received objective feedback a n d advice on current situations and ~lans.
33
4.09
Received assistance in analyzing issues, solving ~roblems and exploring alternative solutions.
33
3.88
Reduced job-related ~ressure and the isolation of a leadership position.
33
3.67
Participated in the interchange of new ideas and practices.
33
3.15
33
3.03
Acquired specific manasement skills
29
2.90
Felt an increased sense of colleagueship with other school administrators.
33
2.79
Improved my ability to personally interact ~ith superiors and/or subordinates.
**
l
* Based on mean score of responses ** Ranking of priorities
Priorities
to this question;
for next year;
i = highest,
scale = I - 5. 8 = lowest.
these groups, an average of three to four principals attended, with changes in membership from week to week. The changing membership inhibited the development of group trust and made "opening up" difficult. This attendance problem did not affect the women managers group and the assistant principals group. Here attendance was more regular, and the discussions were more spirited and sharing. The
K a g e y and Martin
161
TABLE 2 INDIVIDUAL CONSULTATION (n
=
RATINGS
32)
DIMENSION
MEAN RATING *
Did consultant understand
issues
8.4
Ease of talking openly with consultant
8.2
How supportive was consultant
8.2
Consultant's
7.8
help in analyzing problem
Appropriateness of alternatives suggestions of consultation
and 7.5
OVERALL VALUE OF CONSULTATION
7.9
TABLE 3 REASONS CITED BY REGULAR ATTENDEES FOR NON-ATTENDANCE (n
=
18)
Reasons Cited
Emergencies
interfered with attendance
Miscellaneous
Number of times cited *
17 i0
Lack of attendance by other group members
3
Time involved did not equal benefits
2
The group was a low priority activity
i
* Multiple responses were solicited from respondents, some of whom may have attended several groups.
evaluation looked into the attendance problem. Results are given in Tables 3 and 4. All program participants were asked to evaluate each of the two conferences presented this year, "The Psychology of Lives and Careers: Their Implications for Education" and "Basic Skills and
Journal of Primary Prevention
162
TABLE 4 REASONS CITED BY INFREQUENT ATTENDEES FOR NON-ATTENDANCE
(n = 10) Reasons Cited
Number of times cited *
Schedule did not permit attendance Miscellaneous
13 6
Time of schedule group meetings
5
Time involved did not equal benefits
3
Content of group subject did not meet expectations Topic irrelevant Location
to work
of group meetings
Unsatisfactory
group leader
* Multiple respomses were solicited from respondents, of whom may have attended several groups.
some
Minimum Competency: Assumptions, Problems and Possibilities," along five dimensions. The five dimensions were interest, new ideas, clarity of presentation, peer support and overall value. Mean ratings were calculated by dividing the sum of individual ratings per dimension on a scale of 1 to 9 (1 represents n o use or value and 9 represents m a x i m u m value or effectiveness) by the total number of responses per dimension. The conferences had the largest response range, from 1 to 9, of all activities and the overall value was assessed at 6.6. "Interesting topics" was the highest rated dimension (7.4) and, despite hopes t h a t collegiality might be promoted at conferences, "peer support" was the lowest-rated dimension (4.6). Individual consultation appears to be the best received program component as indicated by the value of this activity being assessed at mean score of 7.9 on the scale of 1 (no value) to 9 {maximum value). Lack of attendance due to schedule conflicts and the interference of emergencies at school seemed to lessen the overall value of groups {mean score = 5.5, Scale 1-9}. Conferences were assessed with a mean value of 6.6 (Scale 1-9), a score lower than t h a t for individual consultation but higher than the score for groups. Similarly to groups, conference attendance was hampered by schedule conflicts and,
Kagey and Martin
secondly, by presentations.
163
respondents
having
previously
heard
similar
Conclusions The Mental Health Center's consultation program to school principals has been well received by those who have participated. The continued involvement of a large number of principals over a four-year period and the payment of the $125.00 annual fee in these tight fiscal times is perhaps the greatest indication of acceptance. The survey and interviews have provided data which indicate the program did provide a great deal of assistance in reducing isolation. By sharing problems and ideas with others tthe consultant and peer administrators}, the principals realized that problems are not unique and there are no pat answers or solutions to problems. As one administrator realized, "I was doing my job as well as anyone else was doing it." Most administrators were able to "get an idea what's happening elsewhere," thereby further reducing the sense of isolation. The evaluation indicated that individual consultation was the most positive component of the program. Hence, the amount of time given to individual consultations has been increased from 7 to 9 sessions per school year. Also based on the data, support groups were reduced from seven to two and the number of conferences was increased from two to five per year, with speakers from outside the field of education. Perhaps the most striking aspect of the data is the consistently high evaluation of the individual consultation {Table 21. The second author of this article provided all the individual consultation. Since this was this author's first year in the program, it is remarkable that ratings were so positive. It is hypothesized that such a quick, positive response may be largely due to the fact that the consultant is a former school principal. This past experience appears to have been invaluable in building relationships and providing meaningful consultation. The Mental Health Center's investment in this non-traditional program appears to have had a very positive effect on relationships between the Center and school systems. Many key community leaders have a better understanding of community mental health and the Center's services as a result of this consultation program. Also, superintendents have been very responsive when asked to support the Center's renewal of existing grants and new grant proposals. Hence it appeared that there are benefits for the Center as well as the school systems.
164
Journal of Primary Prevention
References Alpert, J.L. Some guidelines for school consultants. Journal of School Psychology, 1977, 15 (4), 308-319. Berkovitz, I.H. Mental health consultation to school personnel: Attitudes of school administrators and consultant priorities. Journal of School Health, 1970, 40, 348-354. Brown, A.F. Reactions to leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1967, 3, 62-73. Caplan, G. Types of mental health consultation. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1963, 33 (3), 470-481. Cashburn, E.H. Bureaucracy vs. shared decision making. NASSP Bulletin, 1976, 60 {399}, 62-68. Forman, M.A., & Hetznecker, W. Vagaries and varieties of school consultation. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 1972, 11 (4), 694-704. Halpin, W., & Croft, D.B. The Organizational Climate of Schools. U.S. Dept. of HEW: Office of Education, 1962. Houts, P.L. A principal and his school: An interview with Roland Barth. National Elementary Principal, 1976, 56 (2), 8-21. Jackson, P. Lonely at the top. School Review, May, 1977, 3 {85}, 425-432. Johnson, S.O. The principal's role in the humanizing process. NASSP Bulletin, 1976, 60 (399}, 1-3. Nagler, S. & Cook, P. E. Some ideological considerations underlying a mental health consultation program to the public schools. Community Mental Health Journa~ 1973, 9 (3), 244-252. Sarason, S. The culture of the school and the problem of change. Boston: Allyn, 1971. Taintor, Z. C. What schools can do to promote mental health. Journal of School Health, 1976, 46, 86-90. Thomas, R.A. The organizational climate of schools. The International Review of Education, 1976, 22 {4), 441-463. Vayda, A.M. & Perlmutter, F.D. Primary prevention in community mental health centers: A survey of current activity. Community Mental Health Journa~ 1977,13 (4), 343-351. Vetter, E.W. Role pressure and the school principal. NASSP Bulletin, 1976, 60 {403}, 11-23. Wiggins, T.W. A comparative investigation of principal behavior and school climate. The Journal of Educational Research, 1972, 66 (3), 103-105.
Consultation to Educational Administrators J. ROBERT KAGEY and EDWARD C. MARTIN ABSTRACT:A community mental health center had developed an innovative consultation program for school principals. Forty-five of the area's 95 school principals from 14 districts are enrolled in the program. The services provided are individual consultation, support groups and conferences. The evaluation of the program consisted of a questionnaire and interviews. The individual consultation was perceived to be of greater value t h a n the other services. Overall, the program appeared to help relieve the isolation of principals a n d provide t h e m with a means for processing ideas and actions. The program did not appear to be as effective in increasing colleagueship and a support s y s t e m a m o n g principals.
Caplan {1963} delineates mental health consultation in terms of four self-explanatory categories: client-centered case consultation; consultee-centered case consultation; consultee-centered administrative consultation; and program-centered administrative consultation. These four types of intervention encompass progressively broader levels of prevention by reaching higher levels of leadership and broader program areas. Caplan notes, however, that mental health consultation in administrative areas is frequently hampered by the fact that "few mental health consultants have as thorough a knowledge of administrative problems as they have of the psychological complications of an individual client." Consultation to local school systems are among the most common types of mental health consultation. Evidence of mental health centers' difficulties in conducting administrative consultations to schools supports Caplan's statement. Vayda and Perlmutter {1977) found in their survey of primary prevention activities in 43 mental health centers that school systems were the single most important recipients of the centers' consultation services. In the surveyed schools, services to individual clients seems to predominate. "Caretaker training" {similar to Caplan's consultee-centered Dr. Kagey, Director of Consultation and Education Programs, and Mr. Martin, C o n s u l t a n t to School Administrators, are staff of the Consultation and Education Department, Herbert Lipton Community Mental Health Center, Fitchburg, Ma. The authors would like to recognize the contributions of Gretchen Hall, Noel Dandley, and Walter Lutz in g a t h e r i n g the data and editing the original manuscript. 0278-095X{82)1300-0153500.95
1 53
©1982 Human Sciences Press
154
Journal of Primary Prevention
consultation} was confined to teachers and counselors. There was some " p r o g r a m c o n s u l t a t i o n , " but most seemed to concern the implementation of mental health programs in schools as opposed to broader and more general questions of administration and program. Nagler and Cook (1973) found a similar orientation. Nearly threequarters of the consultation "elements" (i.e., contacts between mental health and school personnel} surveyed were with teachers and counselors, and over 95% of these elements were "case-oriented." Only 11% of the consultation elements were with principals and even these tended to be case-oriented (74% of the elements}. Nagler and Cook conclude: Analyzing the program in retrospect, the major emphasis on clinical matters is not at all surprising. The consultants, all staff members at the clinic, functioned primarily as clinicians when out in the field...the staff must have felt more comfortable in the quasi-clinician role--as a case consultant--than in the non-clinician role--as an agent of social change. The apparent difficulty of involving principals and other school administrators in mental health consultation is a significant impediment to primary prevention in the school. For one thing, good relations with top administration can facilitate the initiation and maintenance of consultation (Berkovitz, 1970; Forman & Hetznecker, 1972). For another, Alpert (1977} contends t h a t " 'institutional payoff' is m a x i m i z e d . . , by focus(ing) change efforts on persons or subgroups in the institution who lie higher on the organizational chart." Research indicates that school principals are prime candidates for consultee-centered administrative consultation--both because of their strategic positions as leaders of individual schools and because of the overwhelming demands their positions place on them. Studies of "school climate" have pointed to the importance of leadership by principals, as a central determinant of the social environment of schools {Halpin & Croft, 1962; Thomas, 1976}. School principals have been called upon to become conscious actors in the creation of positive mental health environments in the school (Johnson, 1976; Taintor, 1976). However, exercising effective leadership and achieving a positive mental health environment are no easy tasks for school principals. Sarason (1971) reports t h a t as an initiator or implementer of change, the principal is in a crucial role... {but) neither by previous experience nor formal training nor the processes of selection is the principal prepared for the requirements of leadership and the inevitable conflicts and problems that beset a leader.
K a g e y and Martin
15 5
The principal is the man or woman "in the middle" and is plagued by role overload, role conflict, illegitimate role demands, and feelings of inadequacy in ability to meet role demands {Vetter, 1976}. Cashburn (1976} describes the various tasks t h a t principals must perform in the areas of fiscal problems, staff, community, plant management, students, legal questions, etc. He points to principals' needs to balance bureaucratic and cooperative modes of doing business: "Only a master administrator knows how much shared decision-making to add to the bureaucracy to produce a quality school s y s t e m . " Brown's (1967} survey of teachers' perceptions of principals' leadership leads to the conclusion t h a t such master administrators are rare. Brown finds t h a t principals (at best} are strong either on meeting the needs of the school through the "apersonalized s y s t e m " or on responding to " t h e idiosyncratic personal and professional needs of fellow human beings on staff . . . . Few mortals could be strong on both." Given these difficulties, it is not surprising that Wiggins (1972} reports t h a t school climates tend to shape principals rather t h a n vice versa. His survey revealed the presence of a compelling school climate stability which has the effect of socializing the principal's behavior . . . . Climates did not change when principals were replaced. The principal's behavior became more significantly related to the organizational climate as the length of his incumbency increased. One of the most difficult aspects of the principal's position as potential leader is the isolation t h a t seems to inevitably come with the job--the lack of natural sources of advice and support. Philip Jackson (1977} has poignantly portrayed what isolation is like for the principal, summing it up with the phrase, "lonely at the top." Vetter (1976} cites the lack of recognition: " H e is expected to provide 'psychological strokes' for others and wonders who is giving him strokes." Similar feelings have been conveyed by former principal, Roland Barth, Director of Harvard's s t u d y of the Education School's relation to schools. His analysis and recommendations are worth quoting at length: Principals often need help in very specific idiosyncratic ways that can't be met through a crash course. Let's say that I have two teachers across the hall from each other who are constantly at each other's throats. What can I do about i t ? . . . Who in this building, under this roof, can I sit down with and get counsel? For most principals the answer to that question is nobody . . . . In my view then, what we need is an independent group to whom principals can turn for help on such
156
Journal of Primary Prevention
problems. Maybe this group is set up so that there is one person I can talk with every couple of weeks to share my problems and my progress {or lack of it). That model, I believe, has a lot of power, a lot of potential. (Hours, 1976)
Description of Program This article presents a consultation program to school principals that provides consultation and support to minimize the isolation that most often comes in the job. Operating out of a mental health center, this consultation program has taken the unorthodox approach of hiring a non-mental health professional--a former school principal--to direct the program. Program components include individual consultation, small groups, and half-day "mini-conferences" that bring in outside speakers. Located in New England, the Herbert Lipton Community Mental Health Center serves an industrial region surrounded b y rural countryside with a total population of 140,000. There are 15 towns in the area and 14 school districts. Twelve of the 14 districts have had principals in the program over its four-year existence, and principals from ten districts are currently involved. Participation in each district varies from about 30% of eligible principals to 100%. Of 95 principals in the catchment area, about 45 are enrolled each year. Participation is not limited to principals, although they constitute 80 to 90% of the enrolees. Other administrators involved include superintendents, directors of special education and guidance, and a director of curriculum areas. A $125 annual fee is charged for each administrator, which covers all activities.
Goals The main goal of the program is to assist principals in their efforts to be effective leaders by providing a professional support system that reduces isolation and increases management skills. More specifically, the program seeks 1) to assist in the acquisition of specific management skills in areas of need ranging from budgeting to decision-making procedures; 2) to provide a sounding board and assistance in the analysis of issues; and 3} to increase contact between principals and disseminate new ideas and practices related to the management of a school.
K a g e y and Martin
15 7
The mental health consultant does not approach the principals with any rigid blueprint of the "correct" or "healthy" school climate. The Center is committed to working with principals with a variety of styles, values, and capabilities. The Center does enter the relationship with some broad conceptions which are compatible with the great majority of the principals' educational philosophies. The following conceptions of leadership and climate are fostered: -- Clarity of purpose--principals must have a clear conception of their goals and be able to articulate and implement them. -- Respect for individual and community--a "healthy" school environment is one in which individuals have and show respect for one another both individually and collectively. Positive outlook--a leader should foster solutions to problems and interpersonal interactions that are not negative in tone and thrust. Openness--an open and collaborative atmosphere is preferable to a defensive and competitive one. Quality of program, staff and students--both students and staff know and respect quality when they see it. High quality work by all should be expected and acknowledged. -
-
-
-
-
-
Consultation Services The specific services offered over the past three years have been very consistent, with some variation in the number and themes of small group meetings and the recent addition of process consultation. Individual consultation and conferences have always been a major part of the program. During the 1978-79 school year the program implemented the following: 1. Individual Consulation. A consultant visits the school once a month to talk about professional issues about which the principal is concerned. The consultant listens, offers practical suggestions and helps the principal examine assumptions, identify alternatives and act in new ways. Principals have used consultants to discuss personnel issues, community relations, program development, leadership issues, organizational problems, and current "hot" issues. 2. Support Groups. Groups were led by the consultant or by other members of the Center staff who have skills in group leadership and a high interest in the topic. The goal of the groups was to involve the principals in sharing information and practices from
Journal of Primary Prevention
158
.
their own school experience. The idea was to break down some of the isolation of principals by putting them in touch with peers from other schools and even other school systems. The following groups met: a} Changing Curriculum--This group focused on how existing curricula can be reviewed and revised, and on how new curricula can be developed and adopted. b) Stress Management Workshop--This group focused on handling the stress often encountered by managers. c) Women Managers--This group continued from last year, but was open to new members. It focused on management skills and situations unique to being a woman manager. d) Evaluating, Supervising and Supporting Teachers--This group focused on the ticklish problem of being boss and educational colleagues. Discussions considered evaluation procedures and forms, evaluation conference techniques, managing conflict and methods of supporting teachers. e) Assistant Principals--This group discussed the difficulties and opportunities of the assistant principal's job. Speakers Conferences. During the year (1978-79), two conferences were held. Conferences lasted three hours, with a format that included a speaker and question period and informal discussion over refreshments. The topics were "The Psychology of Lives and Careers" and "Basic Skills and Minimum Competency: Assumptions, Problems and Possibilities." Attendance at the conferences averaged about fifteen.
Evaluation The principals' program was formally evaluated at the end of its third year by the Center's evaluation department. Over 200 hours were devoted to gathering data and preparing the report. Although informal evaluations and continued enrollment showed client satisfaction, a more formal survey of clients allowed better planning for the Center's services to school leaders. Thus, the evaluation was designed to be both summative and formative. Data were gathered in two ways, questionnaires and interviews. Questionnaires were mailed to all program participants (N =45). The questionnaire was designed to assess the extent to which program objectives were achieved and to evaluate specific dimensions of each activity. Of the 45 questionnaires distributed, 36 were completed and
~agey andMar~n
159
returned for a return rate of 80%. Additionally, ten persons were randomly selected from the pool of 45 program participants to be interviewed. The interview was designed to gather more in-depth information than was provided by the questionnaire and to address other related issues. Table 1 shows the overall programmatic gains as expressed by the questionnaire respondents. The table presents mean scores for each objective. As is indicated by the table, the primary gain that was realized was the acquisition of a sounding board for thoughts and feelings related to being a principal. The second and third-ranked gains were, respectively, receipt of objective feedback/advice on current situations, and the receipt of assistance in analyzing issues, solving problems, and exploring alternative solutions. The final column of Table I indicates what objectives participants wanted emphasized the following year. All respondents who participated in individual consultation {N=32) were requested to rate the consultation service along six dimensions, using a scale of 1 to 9 (1 represents n o use or value and 9 represents m a x i m u m value or effectiveness}. The mean ratings for each of the six dimensions is presented in Table 2. The quantitative results of the questionnaire were reinforced during the interview portion of the evaluation. Part of the expressed value of consultation is the objectivity of an outside opinion, b u t the major worth of the service seemed to be enhanced by the personal relationship of consultant and consultee, in particular, confidentiality and lack of threat. One interviewee indicated that he found it "very refreshing to sit down with somebody who really isn't going to write an evaluation on you and you can really let your hair down." Another person stated, "One thing that has been helpful to me is being able t9 pick somebody else's brain and draw upon someone else's experiences, without admitting to weakness . . . . You know it's confidential, so there's no threat there." One aspect of the individual consultation that was noted by school administrators as being beneficial is that the program operates in several school systems. Specifically, since the consultant works with many administrators in numerous school systems, he/she is in a position to transfer ideas of what is happening at one school throughout the program. For the school administrator, the sharing serves to reduce his/her sense of isolation and provides a means for gaining new ideas. Attendance was a major difficulty with some of the discussion groups. While eight to twelve principals consistently signed up for
Journal of Primary Prevention
160
TABLE i RANKING OF OVERALL PROGRAMMATIC GAINS AND PRIORITIES n= Gains
FOR NEXT YEAR
36
# Respondents
Mean *
Acquired a sounding board for thoughts and feelings related to being a principal.
32
4.13
Received objective feedback a n d advice on current situations and ~lans.
33
4.09
Received assistance in analyzing issues, solving ~roblems and exploring alternative solutions.
33
3.88
Reduced job-related ~ressure and the isolation of a leadership position.
33
3.67
Participated in the interchange of new ideas and practices.
33
3.15
33
3.03
Acquired specific manasement skills
29
2.90
Felt an increased sense of colleagueship with other school administrators.
33
2.79
Improved my ability to personally interact ~ith superiors and/or subordinates.
**
l
* Based on mean score of responses ** Ranking of priorities
Priorities
to this question;
for next year;
i = highest,
scale = I - 5. 8 = lowest.
these groups, an average of three to four principals attended, with changes in membership from week to week. The changing membership inhibited the development of group trust and made "opening up" difficult. This attendance problem did not affect the women managers group and the assistant principals group. Here attendance was more regular, and the discussions were more spirited and sharing. The
K a g e y and Martin
161
TABLE 2 INDIVIDUAL CONSULTATION (n
=
RATINGS
32)
DIMENSION
MEAN RATING *
Did consultant understand
issues
8.4
Ease of talking openly with consultant
8.2
How supportive was consultant
8.2
Consultant's
7.8
help in analyzing problem
Appropriateness of alternatives suggestions of consultation
and 7.5
OVERALL VALUE OF CONSULTATION
7.9
TABLE 3 REASONS CITED BY REGULAR ATTENDEES FOR NON-ATTENDANCE (n
=
18)
Reasons Cited
Emergencies
interfered with attendance
Miscellaneous
Number of times cited *
17 i0
Lack of attendance by other group members
3
Time involved did not equal benefits
2
The group was a low priority activity
i
* Multiple responses were solicited from respondents, some of whom may have attended several groups.
evaluation looked into the attendance problem. Results are given in Tables 3 and 4. All program participants were asked to evaluate each of the two conferences presented this year, "The Psychology of Lives and Careers: Their Implications for Education" and "Basic Skills and
Journal of Primary Prevention
162
TABLE 4 REASONS CITED BY INFREQUENT ATTENDEES FOR NON-ATTENDANCE
(n = 10) Reasons Cited
Number of times cited *
Schedule did not permit attendance Miscellaneous
13 6
Time of schedule group meetings
5
Time involved did not equal benefits
3
Content of group subject did not meet expectations Topic irrelevant Location
to work
of group meetings
Unsatisfactory
group leader
* Multiple respomses were solicited from respondents, of whom may have attended several groups.
some
Minimum Competency: Assumptions, Problems and Possibilities," along five dimensions. The five dimensions were interest, new ideas, clarity of presentation, peer support and overall value. Mean ratings were calculated by dividing the sum of individual ratings per dimension on a scale of 1 to 9 (1 represents n o use or value and 9 represents m a x i m u m value or effectiveness) by the total number of responses per dimension. The conferences had the largest response range, from 1 to 9, of all activities and the overall value was assessed at 6.6. "Interesting topics" was the highest rated dimension (7.4) and, despite hopes t h a t collegiality might be promoted at conferences, "peer support" was the lowest-rated dimension (4.6). Individual consultation appears to be the best received program component as indicated by the value of this activity being assessed at mean score of 7.9 on the scale of 1 (no value) to 9 {maximum value). Lack of attendance due to schedule conflicts and the interference of emergencies at school seemed to lessen the overall value of groups {mean score = 5.5, Scale 1-9}. Conferences were assessed with a mean value of 6.6 (Scale 1-9), a score lower than t h a t for individual consultation but higher than the score for groups. Similarly to groups, conference attendance was hampered by schedule conflicts and,
Kagey and Martin
secondly, by presentations.
163
respondents
having
previously
heard
similar
Conclusions The Mental Health Center's consultation program to school principals has been well received by those who have participated. The continued involvement of a large number of principals over a four-year period and the payment of the $125.00 annual fee in these tight fiscal times is perhaps the greatest indication of acceptance. The survey and interviews have provided data which indicate the program did provide a great deal of assistance in reducing isolation. By sharing problems and ideas with others tthe consultant and peer administrators}, the principals realized that problems are not unique and there are no pat answers or solutions to problems. As one administrator realized, "I was doing my job as well as anyone else was doing it." Most administrators were able to "get an idea what's happening elsewhere," thereby further reducing the sense of isolation. The evaluation indicated that individual consultation was the most positive component of the program. Hence, the amount of time given to individual consultations has been increased from 7 to 9 sessions per school year. Also based on the data, support groups were reduced from seven to two and the number of conferences was increased from two to five per year, with speakers from outside the field of education. Perhaps the most striking aspect of the data is the consistently high evaluation of the individual consultation {Table 21. The second author of this article provided all the individual consultation. Since this was this author's first year in the program, it is remarkable that ratings were so positive. It is hypothesized that such a quick, positive response may be largely due to the fact that the consultant is a former school principal. This past experience appears to have been invaluable in building relationships and providing meaningful consultation. The Mental Health Center's investment in this non-traditional program appears to have had a very positive effect on relationships between the Center and school systems. Many key community leaders have a better understanding of community mental health and the Center's services as a result of this consultation program. Also, superintendents have been very responsive when asked to support the Center's renewal of existing grants and new grant proposals. Hence it appeared that there are benefits for the Center as well as the school systems.
164
Journal of Primary Prevention
References Alpert, J.L. Some guidelines for school consultants. Journal of School Psychology, 1977, 15 (4), 308-319. Berkovitz, I.H. Mental health consultation to school personnel: Attitudes of school administrators and consultant priorities. Journal of School Health, 1970, 40, 348-354. Brown, A.F. Reactions to leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1967, 3, 62-73. Caplan, G. Types of mental health consultation. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1963, 33 (3), 470-481. Cashburn, E.H. Bureaucracy vs. shared decision making. NASSP Bulletin, 1976, 60 {399}, 62-68. Forman, M.A., & Hetznecker, W. Vagaries and varieties of school consultation. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 1972, 11 (4), 694-704. Halpin, W., & Croft, D.B. The Organizational Climate of Schools. U.S. Dept. of HEW: Office of Education, 1962. Houts, P.L. A principal and his school: An interview with Roland Barth. National Elementary Principal, 1976, 56 (2), 8-21. Jackson, P. Lonely at the top. School Review, May, 1977, 3 {85}, 425-432. Johnson, S.O. The principal's role in the humanizing process. NASSP Bulletin, 1976, 60 (399}, 1-3. Nagler, S. & Cook, P. E. Some ideological considerations underlying a mental health consultation program to the public schools. Community Mental Health Journa~ 1973, 9 (3), 244-252. Sarason, S. The culture of the school and the problem of change. Boston: Allyn, 1971. Taintor, Z. C. What schools can do to promote mental health. Journal of School Health, 1976, 46, 86-90. Thomas, R.A. The organizational climate of schools. The International Review of Education, 1976, 22 {4), 441-463. Vayda, A.M. & Perlmutter, F.D. Primary prevention in community mental health centers: A survey of current activity. Community Mental Health Journa~ 1977,13 (4), 343-351. Vetter, E.W. Role pressure and the school principal. NASSP Bulletin, 1976, 60 {403}, 11-23. Wiggins, T.W. A comparative investigation of principal behavior and school climate. The Journal of Educational Research, 1972, 66 (3), 103-105.
