School administration in the United States has been autocratic, by and large, rather than democratic. Administration ill the Schools chosen for the Study ranged all the way, from autocracy to laissez-faire, with here and there real democracy in action. These differences are illustrated in the ways in which the original proposals for curriculum change were prepared.

In one place the principal, a brilliant and courageous educator, prepared in outline of a Curriculum departing radically from that of the conventional high school. It was passively accepted by the teachers. About one-third of the teachers and pupils followed the new plan while the other two-thirds continued with the traditional work. In another school the principal gave permission to 6 of the 90 teachers to inaugurate curriculum changes which they had planned. Two hundred and twenty pupils iii the school of 2500 were involved. The principal had not shared with the teachers in the thinking which led to changes in the curriculum, nor did he understand very clearly what the new plans involved. However, the six teachers were among the best in the school, so he told them to go ahead. In a third school the principal and teachers had met for two hours each week for a year to reconsider the school's purposes and practices and to plan together the changes which should be made for all students.

The history of these cases is illuminating. The brilliant plan conceived by the first principal came to grief because the teachers did not believe in it. It was his, not theirs. In the second case, the work of the six teachers was severely handicapped because of misunderstanding and criticism by other teachers and parents, and because of the principal's unwillingness or inability to give the pioneering teachers the support they needed. The plans of the third school were carried on satisfactorily, with modifications from time to time as the principal and all teachers continued to study, plan, work, and evaluate co-operatively.

The role of democratic leader is more difficult than that of benevolent autocrat. The school Heads found that it exacted patience and wisdom. Especially did it require faith in the intelligence and good will of teachers, pupils, and parents. One group of teachers writes this of their relationship with their principal: The principal works co-operatively with the faculty. It is his responsibility to free teachers for the best use of their talents."³ This statement now characterizes the spirit of most administrators in the Thirty Schools and indicates, in part, the role they attempted to play as democratic leaders.

In such a role, most of them realized that teachers, like other human beings, need a sense of security in their work.

Tenure---security of livelihood---is not enough. The administrators in the participating schools saw that they must create conditions in which teachers dared to be honest in expressing their convictions. The spirit of adventure was encouraged. Teachers in most of the schools were made to realize that they were not in danger of disapproval or criticism if they tried new ways, even if they did not always succeed. In most cases ' they knew with certainty that every serious, well-considered departure from the conventional way of doing things had the backing of the principal and that he would stand with them if criticism followed or if the results were not all that were expected.

| Previous Page | Top of Page | Next Page | | 8 Year Home | Chapter 2 Home | Index | Email Comment |