Identifying Challenges to Rural Education: Role Clarification for Administrators.

A survey examined perceptions among superintendents, principals, and special education administrators concerning the role of the special education administrator in West Virginia school systems. All 55 county school superintendents, all 55 district-level special education administrators, and 150 public school principals were sent a survey consisting of 40 specific tasks organized under 7 administrative functions. Respondents indicated whether the person responsible for administering special education actually performed each task, and the 4egree of importance of the task. Responses were received from 40 (73%) superintendents, 55 special education administrators (100%), and 107 (71%) principals. For the majority of the tasks, the three groups shared common perceptions regarding their importance and implementation, with the superintendents and special education administrators showing the most congruence, followed by superintendents and principals. Special education administrators and principals showed the least congruence in perceptions, with significant differences of perception regarding performance occurring on 19 of the 40 tasks and on degree of importance for 17 tasks. This perceptual incongruence between special education administrators and principals indicates a potential for conflict, especially at the program implementation level, and may result in less effective delivery of services to students. An examination of tasks performed at the sch-I1 level may determine whether this potential is actually realized. (TD) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY DIANE NONTQOURY__ ( PARENT ) TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) U.& DEPARTMENT Of EDUCATION Office of Educahenal flessarch and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) document nae been reproduced as wowed from the person or orpamzation ottieneting ,t 0 Minor chances nave bon made to .mproye reproduction guehty Pornliotw..wor Qprn.Ons$IatIdnlhsdocu Mont do nOt necessarily represent official OEM positon or policy Michael E. Sullivan, Ed.D. West Virginia Graduate College 100 Angus E. Peyton Drive So. Charleston, VW 25303 IDENTIFYING CHALLENGES TO RURAL EDUCATION: ROLE CLARIFICA110N FOR ADMINISTRATORS According to a survey of the Education Commission of the States in 1974, special education was perceived by governors to be the number one challenge to states (Savis, 1979). Since that survey, organizational and administrative challenges have increased with the adoption of Public Law 94-142 and its subsequent amendments, the implementing regulations of Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973 with its subsequent amendments and the ever-expanding volume of court cases supporting the rights of the handicapped (Lilly, 1979; Blackhurst and Berdine, 1985; Ysseldyke, Algozzine and Thurlow, 1992). Currently, inclusion activities related to the regular edumtion initiative (REI) challenge all school administrators. Providing leadership for this rapidly changing field has been the responsibility of the special education administrator, a professional educator about whom Kohl and Marro (1970) wrote: If what is known about organization in general holds true in special education, and there is no reason to believe it does not, the central position around which organizational concerns revolve is that of administrator of special education. This person, more than any other, will be involved either directly or indirectly in decisions that affect the lives of millions of people, the spending of billions of dollars, and the organization, administration, and supervision of thousands of programs for students with disabilities (p.2). As school systems strive to achieve special education goals, few educators question the vital role played by the special education administrator. However, evidence suggests that the role is still evoMng (Lashley, 1991; Sullivan and Leary, 1991). No consensus has emerged concerning functiern and tasks to be performed by the special education administrator. This role ambiguity suggests the potential for conflict which, if realized, may reduce the effectiveness of the delivery of services to exceptional students. Research to clarify the role of the special education administrator has been both minimal and conflicting. Mile a number of studies have explored the relationships between role, expectations, and conflict (Getzels and Guba, 1954; Gross, MasOn and McEachem, 1958), few have explored these relationships as they pertain to special education administrator behaviors.