The role of special education directors participating in Indiana joint service agreements as perceived by directors and chief school administrators

Cardinal Scholar

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Snyder, Jack F. en_US
dc.contributor.author Weigle, Sandra L. en_US
dc.coverage.spatial n-us-in en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2011-06-03T19:32:18Z
dc.date.available 2011-06-03T19:32:18Z
dc.date.created 1981 en_US
dc.date.issued 1981
dc.identifier LD2489.Z64 1981 .W44 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/handle/handle/181817
dc.description.abstract The purpose of the study was to compare the perceptions of directors of special education cooperatives and superintendents in determining the actual and ideal role of the special education director in-the State of Indiana. The population consisted of fifty-seven directors and forty-two superintendents.A twenty-five item questionnaire containing statements pertaining to the role of the director of special education was utilized. Two null hypotheses were tested by using Chi-square. The .05 level of significance was established as the critical probability level for the nonacceptance of hypotheses.Findings1. Directors of special education and superintendents indicated agreement in perception on fifteen of the twenty-five items of the questionnaire regarding the director having actual responsibility and authority and ideal--having responsibility and authority.2. Of the sixteen significant findings, ten were in the authority dimension of the questionnaire.3. Directors of special education perceived the role of special education director as ideally having more authority to prepare the special education budget, approve expenditures, assign and supervise special education personnel, determine types of programing alternatives to be offered in the instructional program, keep staff informed of current trends, methods, procedures, rules and regulations, and allocate existing physical space for special education programs.4. Superintendents perceived the role of special education director as having more actual responsibility to determine transportation needs for the program, receive, initiate and process psychological diagnostic services, conduct procedures for reviewing handicapped student's program, and develop, implement and supervise curriculum for special education programs.Conclusions1. A conflict in role perception between directors of special education and superintendents generally does not exist.2. Differences in role perception will more often result from conflict over authority.3. Determining transportation needs for the special education program will probably result in role conflict between directors of special education and superintendents. en_US
dc.description.sponsorship Department of Educational Leadership
dc.format.extent 3, xiii, 207 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm. en_US
dc.source Virtual Press en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Special education -- Indiana. en_US
dc.subject.lcsh School management and organization -- Indiana. en_US
dc.title The role of special education directors participating in Indiana joint service agreements as perceived by directors and chief school administrators en_US
dc.description.degree Thesis (D. Ed.) en_US
dc.identifier.cardcat-url http://liblink.bsu.edu/catkey/250633 en_US
dc.identifier.cardcat-url http://liblink.bsu.edu/uhtbin/catkey/1839549


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Doctoral Dissertations [3090]
    Doctoral dissertations submitted to the Graduate School by Ball State University doctoral candidates in partial fulfillment of degree requirements.

Show simple item record

Search Cardinal Scholar


Browse

My Account