UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The influence of principals in art program promotion in Newfoundland secondary schools Manuel, Ann Marie 1988

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-UBC_1988_A8 M36.pdf [ 4.05MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0054859.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054859-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054859-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054859-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054859-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054859-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054859-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

THE INFLUENCE OF PRINCIPALS IN ART P R O G R A M P R O M O T I O N IN NEWFOUNDLAND SECONDARY SCHOOLS by A N N MARIE M A N U E L  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT O F THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DECREE O F MASTER O F ARTS  in THE FACULTY O F G R A D U A T E STUDIES Visual and Performing Arts in Education  W e accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY O F BRITISH C O L U M B I A April 1988  ® A n n Marie M a n u e l , 1988  In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at The University of British C o l u m b i a , I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Visual and Performing Arts in Education The University of British C o l u m b i a 2075 W e s b r o o k Place Vancouver, Canada V6T1W5 Date: April 1988  ABSTRACT  The  purpose  of  this  study  was to  art courses have or have not The  underlying  premise  non-implementation needs  to  be  of  been offered  of  on  study  art  programs  the  extent  actually influence the administrators study  employed  procedures.  The  administered  to  an  ex  survey two  post was  facto  and  principals'  that  are  if  to  which  viewpoints,  be  the  reasons  assessed,  relevant  why  research  design  using  a  fifty  one  the  principal  using  and  groups  adoption. The  survey  questionnaire  secondary  for  information  factors  process of art program  conducted  hundred  is  to  in the  from  in Newfoundland secondary schools.  the  secondary  collected  determine,  research  which  school  was  principals  in  Newfoundland.  The  results  the of  of  the  study  show  that  decision making process involved a trained  the  art  making been  program  are  the  availability of three  process. The findings slowed  compounded system.  teacher, the  by  problems  by  the  Implications  of  in art  with  and the greatest  also show that the inherent  structure these  program  funds  factors  of  results  in  is  rural  policy  person  adoption. The  influencing unavailability  principal's attitude influence  adoption  education.  Newfoundland's for  a key  of  in art  These  this  discussed and suggestions for further research are outlined.  and  decision  programs has problems  denominational  development  toward  are  education  evaluation  are  TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract  i  Acknowledgements  vii  I. The Problem  1  A. B. C. D. E. F.  1 4 5 6 7 8  Introduction Statement of the Problem Research Questions Definition of Terms Design of the Study Limitations  ~.  II.  Review of the Literature A. The Principal B. The Principal and Art Education C. Secondary Art Education in Newfoundland  9 9 12 16  III.  C o n d u c t of the Study A. Research Questions B. The Pilot Study 1. Sample 2. Instrumentation 3. Data Collection C . The Final Study 1. Sample 2. Instrumentation 3. Data Collection D. Data Analysis  21 21 22 22 23 23 24 24 24 25 26  IV. Findings A. Description of the Sample 1. Representativeness of the Sample 2. Demographic Information on the Principal 3. Summary B. The Principal 1. Summary C . Art Program Adoption 1. Summary D. The Importance of Art in the Curriculum 1. Summary  28 28 28 33 38 39 47 47 59 61 65  V. Discussion A. The Principal B. Art Program Adoption C. The Importance of Art in the Curriculum  66 66 70 77  VI. Summary and Conclusions A. Restatement of the Problem and Research Questions  81 81  ii  B. Summary of the Findings 1. Influence of the Principal in Curriculum Decision Making 2. Art Program Adoption 3. The Importance of Art in the Curriculum 4. Denominationally Based Differences in the Findings C. Conclusions D. Policy Implications E. Suggestions for Further Research VII.  References  VIII. Appendix  : One  ..  84 84 84 85 86 86 88 92 _ 95  .".  100  IX. Appendix Two  TO7  X. Appendix Three  109  XI. Appendix  Four  m  XII. Appendix  Five  113  iii  LIST OF TABLES Table  Page  1.  Enrollment  in Newfoundland  2.  Newfoundland  3.  Denominational  4.  School Location  by Region  32  5.  School Location  by Popoulation  33  6.  Age of the  7.  Years of  8.  Education Attainment  9.  Education Background: Art  10.  Principals' Rating of Their Art  11.  Principals' Ratings of  29  Secondary Schools by Grade Level  Affiliation of the  30  Schools  31  Principals  34  Experience as Principal  of the  the  and Groups in Curriculum  12.  Secondary Schools  Principals' Ratings of the and Croups in Curriculum  .  35  Principals  36  Instruction  37  Knowledge  Extent  of  Input Made by  38  Individuals  Decision Making  Extent  of  Input Made by  Decision Making  iv  39  Individuals 40  13.  Principals' Involvement in Curriculum  14.  Principals' Ratings of  15.  Ratings of  16.  Input in Curriculum or  17.  Art  Input in Curriculum  Input According to  Lack of an Art  Denominational  42  45  Presence 46  According to  the  Denominational  School  48  Number  19.  Art  20.  W h y Art  21.  Why  22.  Mean Scores for  23.  Ratings of  24.  The Influence of Trained Teacher Availability  25.  Affiliation  Program  18.  the  41  Decision Making  Decision Making According to the  Programs Offered  Affiliation of the  Decision Making  of Years Art Courses Offered  49  Courses Offered  50  is Offered  51  Art is Not Offered  52  the  Factors Influencing Art  Influence of  Influence of Other  Program Adoption  Factors in Art  Factors in Art  Factors with Great Influence in Art  Program Adoption  54  Compared with  Program Adoption  Program Adoption  v  53  55  56  26.  Other  Factors Which May Influence Art  27.  Denominational Influence Art  28.  Differences  in Ratings of  Factors  Which 58  Factors According to  the  Presence or  Lack  an Art Program  59  29.  Art as an O p t i o n  30.  Principals' Ratings of the  31.  The Importance Placed on Art According to  Denominational  32.  The Importance Placed on Art According to  the  of an Art  33.  57  Program Adoption  The Influence of  of  Program Adoption  or Required Course  61  Importance of Art  62  Affiliation ... 63  Presence or Lack  Program  64  The Importance Placed on Art According to Previous Art Training  Principals' 65  vi  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  1 would  like  given  by  Gray  and  to  my  express my  advisor,  Dr.  preparation  this  Thanks  is  Newfoundland and  the  Echols,  to  their  thesis, each has helped  to  instill  to  the  extended  Department  provision  ln  renewed my curiosity  grateful  also  the  committee  addition  research which both  1 am extremely  for  Dr. Ron MacGregor, and  Frank  of  sincere appreciation  of  of  in  Moore,  Education, for on  me  guidance Dr.  James  throughout  an attitude  the  towards  and demanded scholarship.  Heather  information  and  members,  guidance  school principals w h o  to  support  participated art  consultant  her consistent  the  present  in this  status  interest of  art  study.  with  in the  the thesis  education  in  Newfoundland.  I wish to  express my  Department. the  constant  members. my  good  It  deep  appreciation  has been a privilege good  Special  humour thanks  friends,  encouragement,  belief  Rita  are  to  and care of extended  Irwin,  Raissa  in the work  to  the  family within the  experience this the to  graduate  my  family  Cipywnyk  and in me.  vii  and  support  Art  system born  students, faculty in  Newfoundland  Doug  Education  Willms  and and for  of staff to their  1. THE  A.  The  INTRODUCTION  present  system  established in the of  PROBLEM  the  lies  state  nor  Newfoundland, In  in- the the  final  votes  money the  nineteenth  Newfoundland  century  fact  church  in  that in  a  denominational  one  (Rowe, 1964, p. 105). The uniqueness  educational  its  is  many  control  resides  neither  ecclesiastical forms. In  totally  a history  of  Rowe (1952, p. 1) states  the  and  education  mid  system  with the  of  analysis the the  is  money  expended  major  denominational considerable  Provincial government which  through  makes the are  representative  district  implement  system  Department  denominations  powers,  the  controls  of  possible.  Education  represented.  This where  Under  denominational  the  education  department's  each  boards, policy  with  at  the  local level.  Within the  the  arts,  music  considerable participants the  denominational stands  interest has  been  participation  contrast,  although  curriculum,  any  system,  of art  in  alone the  or  popularity  in  in  by  has  a  and  the  historians  evangelical  drawing  historically  having  subject  attributed many  art  has  associated  documented high  to  the  religions  always with  the  held  been  a low  development.  aptitude large  (Rowe, a  subject  position.  shown  The  by  the  Irish population  and  1964,  part  of  in  the  p.  the  197).  In  elementary  higher  stemmed from its relative ease and acceptability as a subject for required  1  Of  grades public  examinations busy but an  required  "extra"  subject" to  (Rowe, 1976, p. minimal  subject  (p.  1905,  teaching, supervision or  which  could  202). While  art  took  "compensate  music  the  held  form  of  a solid mechanical  subjects  usually labelled practical, observational  she  and W o o d w o r k .  wished  "preferred  to  but  According to at different impact"  study. not  (p.  The  extent  impact  1949  to  can  be  assess,  with  1952 the  attributed  growing  was  (Rowe,  contained  Newfoundland  with  operated  growing  interest  part  the  in  to  in  art  government's 1964,  withing  the  p.  took  for  in  framework  schools. Although  on  a  However, of  difficult  with  within  a group  1949  twelve  he  fingers"  art  in  the  there was not  permanent of  the  the  full  Newfoundland  Newfoundland of  was  operated  years. While in  or  10).  opening  art education  of  First Aid,  choose what the  back  Geometry  including  with  Academy's variety  establishment  199).  could  the  beyond those in regular art  interest  provincial  Competition  the  a more  hundreds, with "very little  changed  which  deemed  Higher Education, 1915, p.  of this school has had on  reached a population  In  Art,  fell  kind  was  syllabuses dating  vocational,  some  students  art schools and studios were  early nineteen  situation  Academy of  difficult  or  in  paired  therefore  a student  of  several private  during the  202).  of the  work  study. It  in  drawing  It  insisted u p o n " (Council of  Rowe (1976)  times  2).  From these  "Practical  Newfoundland  is  1905, p.  that kept  a failure  position  of  Study  Education,  home  for  (Council  Nature  Higher  201). Art was an " o c c u p a t i o n "  following  programs,  which  classes.  recognizable of the  an  annual  resulting  artistic  shape  and  Arts  direction  and  development  community  and not  any specified age limit for  Letters in  art  within entry  into  this  from  juried  adults  submitted  competition,  in  would  no  concerted  the  establishment  In  1980  a  lamented time  could  be  Any  the  status  of  of  and  work  against  arts  Force,  attributed  facilities  in  the  the  non  more  to  Force  that the  the  of  on  the  of  have  been  adults. There  was  early 1980's with  the  had  in  been  Education  Prior  to  was  the  lack  4).  at  the  secondary  than any of the  on  art  preparation  (p.  commitment  as  of  load  art  that  hypothesized  lacked the  teaching of  Arts  school.  pinpointed  availability  level  of  secondary  funding  Also  came  might  until the  specialist teacher w h o  arts as part  however,  work  usually  Competition.  the  and  development.  which  children  Task  education  staffing,  program  Labrador  submissions  the  It  to  appeared  part  level  of  the  influences popularly  held  32).  By way  responding  to  recommendations  of  Education attempted  to  build a support  of  more  budgets, training, the  call for  student  work of  school board or school administration, (p.  the  competing  include  c o p e with the  Task  to  of the Junior Arts and Letters  designed for  the  been  Newfoundland  the  effectively to  have  inhibiting  courses  community.  effort to  limitations  factors  the  response  of  resource inservice of  personal  materials, training  secondary  summer  communication,  art  Department  encourage the  participation  have  15,  revision  and all  programs  October  Task Force, the  (under  courses  and workshops school  the  system to  secondary schools. Teaching guides  number  Moore,  of  bursaries been  1986)  1987), for  provided.  offered  Labrador West Catholic School Board) art programs  in  and  has in  specialist  teacher Despite  art this,  risen  slowly  (H.  some  cases  (ie.  have been d r o p p e d .  4 B. STATEMENT  The  THE  Newfoundland  Design  should  (Department schools art  OF  offer  Secondary  be  of  Education,  instead, to  83)  list  the  a total  three  Art  an At  In  Teaching  option, present  form,  it  not  of  and  forty  all  is  states high  that  as  not  all  reference  to  the  low  reference to of  two  Art  school  not,  programs. Department hundred  Guide  to  Newfoundland  takes the  lack of  of  as  1977).  program.  frequently  but  Visual  available,  an art  education  PROBLEM  and  students secondary  existing  status  of  programs,  Education figures (1987,  secondary schools, and  p.  only  twenty six secondary teachers teaching art one third time or more (p. 1).  The magnitude art  programs.  of this discrepancy raises the question of why there Since  principals  selection  of  in  administrative  the  courses and  non-implementation collected  on  the  The  problem  the  thoughts  to  which  the  are  superintendents  curriculum of  to  be  to  which  matters,  program  adequately relevant  are  in  the  a possible explanation  lies  adoption.  assessed, factors  prime  If  movers  the  information  and groups  reasons needs  actually  to  for be  influence  in this process.  is to  have or have not  related  process  extent  the administrators  and  are so few  determine, been offered  and opinions of principal,  influence art program  other  adoption.  from  the  principals' viewpoints,  why  art  courses  in Newfoundland secondary schools. A focus the  principal  individuals  can provide and  groups,  insight and  into the availability  on  extent factors  C. RESEARCH  1.  What  QUESTIONS  are  Newfoundland  participation,  2.  as  secondary school  compared  to  curriculum  decision making?  What  Newfoundland  are  influence space  of  and  specific funds,  secondary  factors,  on  that  the  of  principals'  other  school  perceptions  individuals  principals'  as  availability  of  a  decision  to  adopt  not  of  trained to  their  groups,  perceptions  such  or  or  of  in  the  teacher,  adopt  an  art  of  the  program? 3.  What  are  Newfoundland  importance 4.  Do  the  art  The  school  of art education in relation to perceptions  subjects  secondary  differ  of  between  the  principals'  other school subjects?  importance  principals  with  perceptions  of  art  art  in  training  and  relation  to  other  principals  without  to  general  training?  following  are the  researcher's  propositions  as they  relate  these  research questions. 1.  Newfoundland  secondary school principals rate  influence than all other  2.  Newfoundland  teacher  as the  not to  adopt  individuals or groups, in curriculum  secondary factor  an art  3. Newfoundland academic subjects.  themselves as having a greater  with  school the  principals  greatest  rate  influence  the in  the  decision making.  availability decision  of  a  trained  to  adopt  or  program.  secondary school principals rate  art  as less important than  the  6 4. There will  be a significant  difference  in the rating  of the importance  of art  between principals with art training and those without art training.  The  research  questions  generate  a number  of  subsidary  questions  which are  stated in full in Chapter Three.  D. DEFINITION OF TERMS  For  the purposes of this  study  the following  terms  are defined  and used as  indicated here.  Accredited  Art  Teacher  -  As defined  by  the  Newfoundland  Department  of  Education (Moore, 1986), this term refers to a secondary art teacher having ten or more courses at a university or college level.  Art Program - This term refers to o n e course or more  from the following: Art  and Design 3200, Art and Design 2200, Art History 3202, Art 1200, Grade Nine Art, Grade Eight Art, Grade Seven Art.  Curriculum Decision any  level  needs  with  Making - This refers to involvement  any of the following:  assessment, program  process wherein information  adoption,  program  initiation,  evaluation.  in making decisions at planning,  Decision  making  development, refers  to " a  an awareness of a problematic state of a system, influenced by  and values,  leads  to  a  choice  being  made  between  competing  alternatives" (Lipham & H o e h , 1974, p. 173).  School  Denomination  - This  term  refers  to  the Catholic,  Pentecostal, Seventh  7 Day Adventist and Integrated  Integrated  School  denominations  School Systems.  System  other  -  than  and/or  School  Levels  term  describes  are  II,  III.  servicing  religious United  predominant.  - This includes schools enrolling  I,  schools  Catholic, Pentecostal or Seventh Day Adventist.  and Anglican denominations  Secondary  This  Levels  I,  II,  III  are  a  any or all of Grades 7, 8, 9  credit  system  corresponding  to  Grades 10, 11 and 12.  E. DESIGN OF  This  study  THE STUDY  employed  procedures.  The  an ex  survey  instrument  is included  made  a  in  population  was  accompanied requesting a follow not  of  up  letter  strikes  stamped,  self  pilot the  week  the  initial  to  the  remainder  study  these  interviews  survey  interrupted  were  instrument.  the  mail  of  with  1987.  the  appear  survey  with  a  envelope  mailed  to  seven  sample  copy  of  the  respondents  was  mailed  and this  weeks had  a  week  principals second not  as Appendices ll, III  service  both which  the  pilot  made  it  and  the  covering  three  a  of  questionnaire  and  main  difficult  letter period  who  had  followup  responded IV. As  conducted with principals for the During  research  remainder  those  who  A  the  The  period. Within  After  utilizing  questionnaire.  1987  were  contact.  letters  a  June  addressed  to  of  in  September  questionnaire  date. Copies  improving  conducted in  using  design  1. Initial contact  and  sent  research  conducted  as Appendix  study  a  facto  response within a three  was  the  was  contacted  by  responded  letter that  pilot  post  purpose study  to  by part of  postal  accurately  determine  the return rate following  each letter.  F. LIMITATIONS  The following 1.  factors are limitations  The study  deals  with  the  of this  study.  perceptions  and  opinions  of  principals.  These  perceptions may be incorrect. 2.  The  findings  represent  59% of  the  sample  and  as  such  may  not  be  representative of the total population. 3.  Specific  factors  believed  to  influence  curriculum  decision  making  presented to the respondents. This may have resulted in the exclusion of  were other  factors of equal or greater influence. 4. The use of measurement  rating  error.  scales  and categories  are likely  to  produce  an  unknown  II. REVIEW O F THE LITERATURE  In  the  review  number of  of  of  the  literature  the  status of  the  important  on art  the  processes of  education  elements  The  Education in  A. THE  It  is  on  what  information  adoption,  arts  research  as  of this information Principal  it  to  has been divided  and  Art  Education,  a  principal, sources  advocacy, policy  relates  from  shaping  the  synthesize  purpose  into three and  and  of  the  sections.  Secondary  Art  Newfoundland.  the 1982,  Bevoise,  of  1984;  around the  support.  the  past  actually  p.  The  131).  the  principal,  Ornstein,  conceptual  participation  active  ranging  role",  in curriculum  and  there in  resulting  1986).  roles  Role ambiguity  "very  does  from  their  by  process has  manager on  any systematic of  educational  furnished to  each  a  change  multitude  instructional role  research  label  leader Has  of (De  revolved  principal within the school.  relationships  fragmentation  made  the  Information  is reflected  has been  literature  bases held by the  leadership  and  decade that  principal  authority  various  difficulties  to  gather  Newfoundland. An attempt is made to  this  Principal, The  within  descriptions  The  necessary to  PRINCIPAL  only  (Fullan,  in  of  study. The presentation are  was  bodies of research. These included research on the  information  They  it  (Ornstein,  in the  range  principals  decision making  are p.  of to  plagued 74)  with  by little  responses, from questions  empirical "no  regarding  (Bowes, et al., 1983, p.  9  definitional  21). A  role" their 1987  study  (Brubaker  &  principals  receive,  principals  as  more  time  Simon, sixty  reconceptualization  school"  in  and  1987, p.  governments,  management  of  the  Within  this  gaining  principal's that  power  viewed  s c h o o l " (Tanner,  There  in  power  "a  as  influencing  et  1983;  principal  as the  a  the  the  mixed  majority  the  signals  of  other  principal  same time  leadership  base and  is more  emerges  it  spend  calls for  structure  policy  of  these  1987).  1986, p.  in  the  schools  pivotal  role  in  are legislated  by  requirements  Although  school  unit  within  clear whether  decisions  or  the  based  touted as the  the  set  larger  the It  school  determination  a  belief  system.  principal is actually  whether  clearly understood. at  runs  305). Its basis is in the  making  extent  is clear,  of  however,  level. Change is at  a level  the  above  no the  30).  in the  literature that the  changes and implementing  Sloan,  "the  1970s, it is currently  changes occur of  as  requirements  regulation  early  is not  making  it  (Baxter,  decision  unit it  matter  1987, p.  one of  the  demands  curriculum  and  (Guthrie,  policy  planning as  at the  defined,  in the  reform  is general agreement  al.,  ill  56). Although  decision making  curriculum  longer  is  school  existing  of  amidst  categorize  literature while  decentralization  education  more  The  administration  of  individual  principals  leader,  is an idea rooted  needed  that  1987).  (Keefe,  direction  revealed  reorganization  principalship  the  next  Managers".  the  provincial  of  instructional  (Rallis & Highsmith,  Although  74)  percent  "General  as an  p.  1982;  key person  Rush, in  1979).  determining  principal's  "pivotal  role" is  policy at the school level (Bowes,  Sarich  (1982,  curriculum  p.  needs  2) and  identified establishing  the a  direction  and philosophy.  The  principal  curriculum about will  keep  14)  or  a 1983  in  in  monitoring  that the of  the  course  in  school  this  are  principal  talking  is  formation  making. Few studies report  of  will  legitimate  teacher  found  or  that  for  around  revealed  Although  change at the the  principal's  implementation  despite  the  implementation,  policy  21)  shaping  widely  of held  of  the  initiating, there  is  school level or  curriculum.  An  view  administrators  issues  that  authority  that  the  have a major  curriculum  decision  such a broad perspective on decision making.  have been many studies focussing on  the  control  of the principal within the school setting, there remains a need to extent  or  who  a  al., p.  implementation".  centres  regarding  an  will  "perceived their role as one of  curriculum  is responsible only  there  establish  Saskatchewan (Bowes, et  agreement  (Sloan, 1982)  the  thus  initiating  one w h o  is  and  be  who  it  principal is crucial in influencing  behaviour  study  Although  teachers  principal is the  the principals interviewed  and  administrator  study  offering,  that  11).  interventionist  influence  a token  the  rolling:  alternate  whether  have a bearing o n its success or failure (Sarich, 1982, p.  much  Alberta  supporting  progam an  -  that  evaluating  (p.  actor  attitude  almost all of  agreement  or  the  whether  offering  of  key  it. A n d once started, the  establish  Results  the  changes,  not  will  is  principal's influence  groups within the school district  in comparison to hierarchy.  that of  other  and  influence  establish the individuals  or  12 B. THE PRINCIPAL AND  With  specific focus  available  literature  process  for  on  ART  the  principal  describes  improvement  EDUCATION  the of  in  relation  principal  existing  as  art  to  a  art  person  programs  education,  much  critical  the  in  (Joseph,  1975;  of  the  advocacy Campbell,  1979; Goldfarb, 1979; Houston, 1981; C a n n o n , 1984; Eisner, 1988).  Reporting on the  records of  the  Alliance  Education,  Rush  for  Arts  1976 Arts Advocacy Project, sponsored by (1979,  p.  4)  notes  that  "many  administrators  attending  the  dialogues felt that the arts are important curricular areas and  reluctant  to  see  administrators  their  importance  participating  secondary  principals,  on which  to  in  exposure to  the arts" (p. 4).  In  which  a  study  perceptions of  the  of  the  respondents  objectives  of  arts  all students  anticipated  concern  of  with  education. strongly  program  despite  included  obtaining  difficulties their and  support  all  Their  "the  all pupils,  school  included lack not  of  in  "more  than  implementing of  supporting  such trained  a  50% of the a  personnel,  (p.  and  evidence  students,  from  their  1980)  over  92%  the  goals  and  for  arts  the  need  programs  are suitable  principal  respondents  comprehensive  program"  elementary  on  describing  reflected  the  Virginia  (Schumacher,  statements  comments  in  were  enthusiasm,  empirical  just art  principals  education the  this  agreed that arts education  K - 12. However,  various  arts  Despite  which  about  secondary  importance agreed  project,  accruing to  surveyed  education. Sixty percent for  this  expressed  show a benefit  diminished".  the  99).  developing  arts  education  These  difficulties  local  programs  and  convincing  worthwhile. noted,  others  By far  "the  considered important  the  major  greatest  difficulty  issue today  is h o w  basics - this is the key to funding  in  a  survey  of  aesthetic  Central  Midwestern  pointed  out  the  that  concern  maintain  a  of  even  in  and  peripheral  supervisory  personnel can facilitate  towards  (p.  While  it"  there  it (arts  of  Lab  and  or  in  is evidence that most  the  positiveness of  art  access  they  need  art  1978),  has  develop  the  conducted  by  the  been  researcher  an  education,  curriculum.  the  increase the  arts  arts program  by  their  in still  "Administrative  and  attitude  place for  art  on  art  in  our  schools. The  education,  is  related  is little evidence that indicates  education  education  were surveyed recognized the  is  in  relation  operationalized  to in  other the  should ideally be reflected reality, to  which  the  indicates  influence  of  a  when  those  and  school  opinions  and  very different  are translated  administrators, other (p. 22).  forces  into  within  the  school. in the lack  external  of  affecting  the  of  schools, the  political, picture  The status equal  factors  actions by school boards context  how  disciplines  Mahlman's (1980) statement that  economic  is  100).  arts  principals w h o  expressed by administrators  education to  or  it  administrator  help  personnel,  there  the  inhibit  as one  that  1).  importance how  and  (Broudy,  years  need for art education of some type, there much  school  aesthetic  role  development  education) will  key  recent  school personnel for  vague  was funding  Educational  though  program  an art program" (p.  attitudes  Regional  in  is  in  14 This is e c h o e d in a 1982 study (McNealy, p. 4) which attributed the state- of  art  economic  fluctuations.  Fullan  (1982)  education  reminds  to  us  administrative  that  whim,  although  there  specific educational changes are introduced and desirability,  "this  is not  41). Acknowledging the 51),  Fullan identifies  the  lack  the of  way  is  a  of  public  general  in response to  interest  and  assumption  that  existing need, values  it always is or even usually operates" (p.  information  following  lack  precarious  as the  on  the  actual  main factors  adoption  process (p.  associated with  adoption  of innovations (p. 41). 1. Existence and quality of 2. Access to  innovation  information  3. Advocacy from central 4. Teacher pressure /  administrators  support  5. Consultants and change agents 6. Community pressure / support / apathy / opposition 7. Availability of federal or other  funds  8. N e w central legislation or policy 9.  Problem  solving  incentives  for  (provincial) adoption  (addressing  specific  needs) 10. Bureaucratic incentives for  These  factors  that  may  exhaustive. Regional and as availability of trained  influence  adoption  the  process  local differences  of  unearth  adoption a host  personnel and availability of  space.  of  are other  by  no  means  factors, such  There  has  adoption factors  been  of  art  such  consultants effort  little  education  as as  was  very  use  instrumental  recommendations  to  in  arts  gauge  focussed  our  advocates  inservice  in  on  existing ideas for action put  While  this  and  information  funding  the  facilitation  the  extent  elementary  forward  have done  schools, critics  of  programs. An Alabama study  accreditation,  made  made  of  of art  to  relation  (Hooks,  as  well  to  1980)  as  the  identified  specialists  and  art  education.  However,  these  influences.  The  education  and  by arts advocates (p.  much  in  improve  the  the  ensuing  reiteration  of  131).  status  (McNealy, 1982; Goldfarb, 1979)  no  point  of  art  education  out  the  need  for  advocacy with a sophisticated model based approach. Current advocacy processes involve the  public  relations  community  seeking  in  missions aimed  general.  improvement  in  The  at various  efforts  existing  of  board  these  programs  and  level administrators  missions avoiding  are  the  and  centered power  on  politics  involved in establishing programs.  Public  relations  understanding (Hatfield, status  of  efforts and  1979, art  p.  as  serve such  14).  education  opposed  to  presumed  principal,  as evident  To  do  as  not  effect  a vehicle  ensure real  should  give  leaders  in  in the  leaders. To date, there  mainly  a  to  curriculum  identification decision  art  programs.  awareness  behaviour  or  bemoaning of  real  making  identified  been any research which  as a key person in the decision to adopt  in  consistent  literature review, can be  has not  increased  change  change,  way  for  and policy  of  the  leaders  (p.  as one  addresses the  14). of  as The  these  principal  16 C. SECONDARY  A  ART EDUCATION  1967 Royal Commission on  had  been  slow  and  IN  NEWFOUNDLAND  Education and Youth  unsystematic  in  the  education. M o r e than a decade later the in  Education  (1980)  illuminated  the  integration  Report of  magnitude  order to give the arts a secure place in the  A  look  at  Newfoundland's  number  of  reasons  massive  reorganization  and policy priorities preoccupation  Concern  for  for  inclusion  and  the  the  actual  administrator  arts  have  of  the  education  has shifted  quality of  of  the  arts. The at  has been a lack of time  and  money.  education  suggested degree  of  that  at the "in  the  commitment  and  low  priority.  of  of  "the  survival (p.  gap  arts  in  it  arts the  in Arts  done  in  suggests  a  "During  Confederation,  plant"  Education, it is only  elementary  school,  be  history  curriculum  level  a different is  not  the  financial inevitable (p.  iv).  since the  late  iv).  the  has  recommendations recommendations  been  arts experience and training.  secondary the  a  staffing  secondary level suffers  to  political  between  of  Arts  and  existing  lack  the  curriculum.  in  teacher  of  remains to  has resulted  the  all  survival issues" that saw an  the quality  survival  implementation  and  to  what  system following  were directed towards construction  of  Newfoundland  the Task Force o n  remained  the Task Force on the Arts in  1970's that interest  the  the  the  of  economic  why  with  According to  social,  observed that  In  attributed addition  to  there  malaise. The Task Force  wise  to  assume the  education. Many secondary  same  administrators  suffer  from  the  attitude  that  the  (p.  13). While this  report  refers to  to  assume,  current  figures,  visual art  Recent 607  given  Department  secondary  in  art  secondary  Education  Newfoundland  art  art  the  of  teachers. There  accredited  despite  are  the status that  the  fact  there are  coordinators  programs that  are  the  figures  Integrated  1986). While of  the  on  art  School no  only  can  offered  in in  41  be  unnecessary"  it  is reasonable  said  the  specifically  of  personal  for  in  well  as  availability  Until  recently  program  1986  the  7 to  9 Art,  curriculum  a brief  Minister  of  which  presented  Newfoundland  the  of  high is  on  as the  of  funds  the  schools the  East  in their schools than  such  and  October  do 23,  regional  quality  priority  placed  and  staff  have  programs.  development  art  education  has been  Education authorized  a revised  teaching  is designed for  is currently  majority  for these differences, the factors  of art  The  are and  teachers  communication,  perhaps  as  art  population  art programs  there  elementary  Newfoundland  that  curriculum  time  province.  Central  although  accredited  discrepancies suggests the  that full  one  concentration  is offered  show  only  twenty  working  greatest  explanation  adoption  the  and  arts education  same  are  Boards (H. M o o r e ,  influenced the  In  unintellectual  of  (1986)  coast. Fewer Catholic School Boards offer the  frills,  education.  schools  two  arts  in  the  non  slow. guide  specialist teacher. The  (1988)  under revision.  to  the  government  of  Teachers  Association  identified  Newfoundland existing  and  In  August  for  Grades  senior  Labrador  needs  in  high  (1986) teacher  training. According to offered  for  Art  Immersion, residents university  traditional  (p.  education The  problems  should  be  teach  turnover  is  Art.  of  the  basis.  students,  in  student This  representing  by  writing  this  1200 is designed to for  students  available" description  a  160 minutes  general  (Dept.  However,  supports  not  separate  teacher training  in  the  within  and  room  with  a week. Art  involves  a  50%  13  schools, carried  examination  "provide  at  public  purpose  by  fine  teachers  high  arts do  has  or not  caused  (p. 6).  Design  1200,  adequate  the  2200  facilities  3200  the  p.  1).  level,  of  program  and and  In  on  3200, for  a  1978  a  shared  only  through  to  Education, 1980, p.  The  commenting  no  32).  Art  visual  specialist teacher is  introduction that,  257 Grade  and basic experience in the  senior secondary school where 1981,  teachers  senior  province  examination.  (Department  an introductory  Education,  "it  and Design 2200 and 3200 are designed  evaluated,  high  these  the  of programs  Art  of  that  specialized areas" the  teachers  educated  a surplus of in  that  province's  by the statement  at  is  this  is  urged  be  stipulate  province. Many  Guide,  teachers  teachers  (1977)  brief  train at the  provide  of  who  in the of  is furthered  a shortage  art  Curriculum  taught  of  evaluation  arts  there  to  specialized  pedagogical sense to  necessitates leaving the  the  province, training  Psychology. The  of  Education guidelines  must  high  to  minimum  Eleven  of  in the  opportunity  number  in establishment and continuity  According  for  areas when  a specialist  return.  given the  sufficient  economic nor  11). Department  level art  a  "be  Educational  province" (p. 11). This position  makes neither in  Economics and  that  (1986)  areas that are considered specialized, such as French  Newfoundland  and  within the  brief, currently  and other  Home  of  the  despite  to  the  course  administrators'  desire  to  include  choice  for  the  access to  Art  small  been followed  states  educational  advocated  for  designed  all  modules  in  (p.  subjects  to  each  in  the  requiring  in  emphasize  program" the  the introduction  the  22). as  the  addition Therefore year)  required  at  the  little  because  junior  of  Art  the  To  is  this  Practical  making  to  to  Art,  Home  modules,  as  a  modular  Fine  Arts,  written by  are  they the  between  in  Economics,  including  basic  of  with of  some  modules  opportunity  "outstanding  for  artists" (p.  Art,  special  academics  a six 7  to  day to  Industrial would  be  cycle. 9,  two  Arts  and  be  simple  require  a  provide  are  recommended  Art  Criticism  53).  is  subjects  available, the specialists should be able to Art  area  approach  require  Grades  the  subject  recommended  classes  have  for  speaks of these  as recommended,  the  have  student  a  beyond  three  high  viewed  modules  complete,  particular,  of the work  limited  level  opportunities  because  training  the  83). In Art  no  Education, 1986). The  of  and  high  minimal facilities and equipment. "They should not  (p.  or  of  a report  junior  end,  curriculum  of  of  provision  courses for  following:  specialist teachers but, where a richer  been  education  Arts and Music. The report  include  be  of  (p.  labelled  teachers.  would  has  (Department  imagination.  82). These compulsory  in content  mandatory  require  and  as semester (half  student  arts  development  the  art  characteristics  which  equipment  of  neglect  there  1).  cognitive  creativity  difficult  expected  Music  the  this  and  to  visual  Economics, Industrial  being  Each  but  programs,  Reorganization Committee  of  to  facilities  school  largely because of the publication  implications  conducive  as  make  through  that  development  Home  school  to  Junior High  report  their  specialist teachers (p.  Recommendations  the  in  to  through  Reactions school  to  this  boards  affiliated  report  and  were  solicited  schools,  special interest  the  from  the  1988). The such  art  councils, and  educators  educators  Mathematics  and  increased  requirements  in  of  the  time  available  is  a concern  educators not  behalf  English, the  for  of  believe  Practical and  these  that  schools the  for to  next  do  less in  proposed  assessment since  "exploratory"  core  the  of  1980  hypothesized Task Forces,  the  to  step  educational internal  and  improvement,  the  impeding  on  can  external this  this  Faculty the  entrenched  the  report's  The  of  all  and  its  Education.  core subject areas February  traditional  15,  subjects,  recommendations  result  in  general  time  a  diminishment  reaction  allotment  for  for  from  the  art  Arts  is  guaranteed. The half year or semester is seen as providing  To  this  effect  of  the  existence  or  influence  status of  Association  the  areas.  including  communication,  education. An  report.  groups  in  implementation  time  report.  arts  there  No  of  for  committee  is  has not  effort  specific  education.  a license  been  has b e e n factors  These  arts education, remain as the  any made  that  were  reports  from  only research  Newfoundland.  a focus change  art  both  Fine Arts,  in Art  development  reviewing the  on art education in  summary,  for  immediate  verify  as  of  of  recommended  experience  terms  University  personal  enough, with only one year of study  proposal  In  Memorial  (H. M o o r e ,  of  Teachers  representatives  speaking on  as  a number  Newfoundland  Recent criticisms have c o m e from and  from  the  provide forces  would  understanding the plight  principal  of  insight on  appear  art to  as a into  pivotal the  program be  the  person  extent adoption. logical  secondary art education in  of  in  the the  With  process  of  influence  of  a  view  to  point  in  starting  Newfoundland.  111. CONDUCT OF THE STUDY  This  chapter  restates  The pilot study,  the  research questions  and  selection of the sample for the  states the study,  subsidary  questions.  instrumentation and data  collection procedures are described.  A. RESEARCH  1.  What  QUESTIONS  are  Newfoundland  participation,  secondary school principals'  as compared  to  school system, in curriculum a.  Do  these  that  of  other  perceptions  individuals  or  of  groups  their  in  the  decision making?  perceptions  vary  according  to  denominational  vary  according  to  presence  affiliation  of the school? b.  Do  these  perceptions  art program 2.  What  are  influence space  and  specific funds,  lack  of  an  in the school?  Newfoundland of  or  on  secondary  factors, the  school  principals'  perceptions  such  as  availability  of  decision  to  adopt  not  or  a  trained to  adopt  of  the  teacher, an  art  program? a.  Do  these  perceptions  vary  according  to  the  denominational  affiliation of the school? b.  Do  these  perceptions  an art program 3.  What  are  vary  according  to  the  presence or  lack  of  of  the  in a school?  Newfoundland  secondary 21  school  principals'  perceptions  importance a.  of art education in relation to  Do  these  affiliation b.  Do  perceptions  vary  other school subjects?  according  to  according to  the  the  denominational  of the school?  these  perceptions  vary  presence or  lack  of  an art program? 4.  Do  the  subjects  perceptions differ  of  the  importance  between  principals  undertaken  because  with  of  art  art  in  training  relation  and  to  other  principals  without  ascertain  whether  art training?  B. THE PILOT  STUDY  A  was  pilot  study  perceptions shared  by  discover Finally,  developed principals.  any  In  additional  through  refinement  by  the  of the  the  the  perceptions  content  study  was  researcher from  addition,  pilot  it  pilot  that  the  and format  necessary to a review  study  might  researcher  be  of  afforded shared  could  the  literature  the  opportunity  by  determine  other the  were to  principals. need  for  of the questionnaire for the final study.  1. Sample Sixty pilot  Newfoundland  secondary  school  principals  comprised  the  sample  for  study. This number consisted of ten principals randomly selected from  of six geographical regions within the  province.  the each  2.  Instrumentation  The pilot items  questionnaire  divided  Section  B  developed  into three  required  by  The  information  on  the  principal's  information  twenty  background  participation  on art program  seven  information.  in  curriculum  adoption.  Collection  pilot  questionnaire  accompanied two  researcher consisted of  categories. Section A requested  decision making. Section C sought  3. Data  the  the  in  postal  it  difficult  administered  by a covering  weeks the  of  was  initial  letter  contact  questionnaire. Within services occurred to  questionnaires deadline, for  ascertain mailed,  a  during  the  of  interview  of  1987. Each  with  mail out rates  thirty  nine  of  respondents  the  addition  improving  a  opportunity  the  the  for the responses.  focus to  addressed envelope.  After  a second letter  and  letter, which  each  Of  were  letter.  returned  by  the  specified  purpose  open  the  ended with  made  and geographical area. The  researcher, followed  of  sixty  percent.  elaborate  validity  made  the  questionnaire. There was an attempt  on  copy  was mailed. Interruption  conducted with five principals for the  schedule, designed by the with  was  this final  principals representing each denomination  but  questionnaire  letter  following  a response rate of sixty five  to  framework  the  return  total  cross checking the validity  to  up  seven weeks a third  of  questionnaire  May  and a stamped self  was followed  During June 1987 interviews were  interview  in  a similar format questions.  anecdotal  instrument,  This  material  provided  a  to  the  provided which,  in  contextual  C. THE FINAL  STUDY  1. Sample The  final  questionnaire  principals  in  believed  Newfoundland,  available resources. Although  the  total  population  of at  342 311  hundred  excluding that  a  the  two  researcher  to  by  surveyed  total  schools, the  secondary school principals while  251  fifty  pilot  of  the  one  study  population  Department  secondary  schools. Of  a  the  and  secondary  school  respondents.  survey  would  It  not  exhaust  Education school directory  directory  principals  lists  establish  contacted,  was  refers  the  total  162 are exclusively  89 are principals of schools that are either All  Grade, K-7, K-8, or K-9.  2.  Instrumentation  The final  questionnaire  questionnaire.  For  N o changes were  The  six  page  questions  clarity  remained minor  made to the  questionnaire  divided  into  Background Information,  the  in  changes were instrument  called  three  same  for  format  and  made  in  two  They  response are  Section B: The Role of the  as  as the  category  as a result of the five  anonymous  categories.  content  pilot  headings.  interviews.  to  twenty  follows:  seven  Section  A:  Principal and Section C: Art  Program A d o p t i o n .  Section  A:  Demographic  Background information  Information about  the  required  responses  respondents  was  to  asked  twelve for,  education and years experience as a principal. Information about  questions.  such the  as age,  school and  community  was  also  sought,  denominational affiliation, also asked to  Section rating well  their  as  student  population,  geographical region and community  rate their knowledge of Art on a Likert-type  B: The of  including  the  Role  of  the  involvement involvement  Principal asked one  scale.  question curriculum  of  groups  individuals.  questions sought elaboration on the principals'  involvement.  Section C: Art  twelve  requested schools.  on This  identify  Program A d o p t i o n the  existence  and  followed  by  was  reasons for  art  consisted of extent two  programs  one  to  open  might  have  junior  and  portion  adopt  or  ended  not  to  question  been senior  adopt  Principals  high  should  principals  importance, in relation to  to  open  be  indicate  Two  respondents  open  ended  questions. Information was in  art  questions  or omitted  at  that  in the  individual sought  to  program  of  influence of specific factors on program  principals to were  the  decision making, as  offerings  ended  an art  omitted.  requested  course  rate the  asked the  art  of  being included  studies. Respondents were asked to decision  on  aspects of or  taught,  size. Principals were  in various other  grades  then  or  identify asked  optional  or  how  they  the  course. Following any factors whether  required viewed  this,  they  they  felt  thought  courses. The art,  in  final  terms  of  other subject areas.  3. Data C o l l e c t i o n In  September  procedures contact  was  used  1987 in  followed  the the up  final  questionnaire Within  was  pilot  study.  a  with  a second letter  administered  seven  week  and copy  of  following  period, the  the  the initial  questionnaire.  Following a second interruption final  letter  was  redrafted  to  in postal services a third letter acknowledge  the  study was continuing despite the interruption  D. DATA  t-tests  Section  A:  and  oneway  Background  Frequencies  and  means  were  importance  of  of  groups  curriculum  program  in  indicating  the  in service.  in  also  relation  variance. Demographic  provided  used to  to  description  present  other  decision  a  the  and  the  of  ratings  subjects, as well  making  data collected the  sample.  principals  as ratings  influence  of  in  gave  of  input  factors  in  adoption.  t-tests  principals'  were  ratings  assigned  influence  of  of  to  used their  the  to  test  input  in  input  specific factors  of on  for  significant  curriculum  other art  decision  groups  program  differences  and  adoption  between  making  and the  individuals.  Data  were  the  ratings on  the  also analysed using  test.  G r o u p e d t-tests in these school. the  art  analysis of  Information  the  this  by  the questionnaire were tested for significance using paired t-tests,  grouped  they  strike  ANALYSIS  The data from  Paired  postal  was mailed. The  ratings This  ratings  schools  were  with  depending on the  test  was  given  to  art  also used to  also the  programs  ascertain if there was a significant presence or  used to  identify  importance and  in  of  Art  any in  lack  of  an art  significant relation  schools without  art  to  difference  program  differences other  programs.  in  the  between  subjects,  in  Differences  in  these  ratings  between  principals  with  art  instruction  and  instruction were also tested for significance by this  method.  A  to  oneway  differences affiliation Day  analysis between  of  Adventist  the  of  variance  any  school.  of  these  Due  systems, the  was  to  the  necessary ratings  when  small sample  responses from  form one category rather than the original  these two.  principals  test  for  any  considering of  without  were  significant  denominational  Pentecostal and  principals  art  Seventh  collapsed  to  IV. F I N D I N G S  The results they  of  answer  the  the  survey are presented  and  Sample, The  are  therefore  grouped  Principal, Art  in the  order  under  the  Program Adoption  the Curriculum. The information  the final questionnaire and as such, does not  A.  DESCRIPTION  THE  Department  Newfoundland listed  for  schools. the  this  remaining  completed principals to  870  form  251  students.  9, of  (20.1%)  respondents  a  Grades  7  to  pilot  contacted  by  for  a  response  data  of  Art  of in  findings  study.  category  with  respondents between  mail, rate  a  of  on  an enrollment 801  represented  schools  with  300  (20.1%).  corresponds  with  the  Department  28  A  and  pilot  311  study.  Of  returned The  ranging were  or  900.  of  from  collapsed  100  enrollment total  of  percent.  of  342  addresses  total  148  nine  enrollment  between  to  the of  are  the  a  populations  enrollment  201  with  for  total fifty  student  1, with  there  revealed  contacted  secondary school  collected  reports  III  represent small schools with enrollment  information  Description  Imporance  crosscheck  Level  principals  schools with  and  However,  were  schools  of  include the  (1987)  principals  The  and The  Directory  60  categories; from  percentage under  with  questionnaire  nine  schools.  number,  represent  category  This  schools  headings  questions  Sample  Education  secondary  the Of  of  research  SAMPLE  1. Representativeness of the The  the  presented in this Chapter represents the  of  OF  of  less,  The of  400 students  of  Education  148 10 to to  highest 100  and  of  the  77.6%  of  the  and  (1987)  under. figures  on  the  population  Newfoundland are  only  Information  which  indicate,  as  with  this  secondary schools have populations  39  secondary  on  the  schools  enrollment  in  with  sample,  numbering  enrollment  the  majority  under  between  of  400. There  501  and  900.  Newfoundland secondary schools is presented  in Table 1.  Table 1 Enrollment in Newfoundland Secondary Schools  Enrollment  100 101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801  & -  under 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900  Sample  Population  N (%)  N (%)  28 24 28 28 15 07 05 02 02  Total  (20.1) (17.3) (20.1) (20.1) (10.8) (05.0) (03.6) (01.5) (01.5)  73 67 64 54 45 14 10 06 09  *139 (100.0)  (21.3) (19.6) (18.7) (15.8) (13.2) (04.1) (02.9) (01.8) (02.6)  342 (100.0)  * 9 non responses to this question  Forty  seven  schools and  with  percent Grades  senior high  of 7 to  the Level  principals  who  responded  111 (Grade 12)  grades. Junior high  schools,  or  represent  any portion  Grades  7 - 9 or  these grades, are the second highest represented group with  of any  secondary  these  junior  portion  of  a total of 39.9%.  30 Principals Table  of  the  2 lists the  All  Grade  number  the school. Department a  separate  Grade  7  under  the  as part  population figures  category  on  K  -  for  of III  cannot  of  schools, which  of  the  7  made -  large  number  program.  category  Grades  according  III  or with do  K  It  is  -  6.  these  of  not  indicate  Level  III,  the  grade  levels taught  on school type elementary  clear  Therefore grade  K -  to  Education figures (1987)  their  be  principals  include  they  comparison  levels. However,  reasonable  do  schools  whether a  total  13.5%. in  not  have  that  have  are to  grouped the  total  comparison  with  representativeness  of  the  sample.  Table 2 Newfoundland  Secondary Schools by Grade Level  Sample  Grade  Population  N (%)  N  7-III 7-9 K-lll  69 (46.6) 59 (39.9) 20 (13.5)  Total  148 (100.0)  * Figures Schools  unavailable  As shown  in Table  from  3, of  the  1987  those w h o  Department  answered the  (%)  * ( * ) 125 (38.6) * ( * )  of  342  Education  question  on  (100.0)  Directory  of  denominational  affiliation,  52.4%  are  principals  in  schools are the  next  largest group  the  and  Seventh  Pentecostal  11.6%. This order  order  as indicated  figures Grades  of  the  (36%)  Day  figures  the  to  Level  III,  56%  are  in  Principals  of  Integrated  Catholic  "Other")  proportionally  Education  system  and  with  to  the  (1987). These  of schools having a portion the  of  by principals in  (including  corresponds  Department  show that of the total number 7  systems  affiliation  from  system.  and they are followed  Adventist  denominational  by  Integrated  of  or all of  35.1%  in  the  Catholic system.  Table 3 Denominational Affiliation  of the Schools  Sample  Denomination  Integrated Catholic Pentecostal,  N  077 053 017  Adventist  Total  *147  *  1 non  Of  the  response to this  principals  located  in  13.6%  for  who  Eastern Western  Population  (%)  N  (52.4) (36.0) (11.6)  191 120 031  (100.0)  342  (%)  (55.8) (35.1) (09.1) (100.0)  question  completed  Newfoundland,  the  questionnaire  followed  Newfoundland  and  by  41.5%  20.4%  12.2%  in  in the  represent  the  Central  Southern  schools region, region.  Comparison of in  these response rates to the  Eastern Newfoundland  and Northern  and  under  population  representation  of  reveal over the  representation  population  in  Central  Newfoundland. These figures can be seen in Table 4.  Table 4 " School Location by Region  Sample  Region  N (%)  Eastern Central Western Southern Northern Labrador  61 30 20 18 08 10  Total  *  1 non response to this  It  is worth  were  Population  noting  acquired  tallies  provided  by  the  Directory  of  Schools does  schools,  it  Department  divisions  made  was by  necessary  112 89 44 41 35 21  (41.5) (20.4) (13.6) (12.2) (05.5) (06.8)  *147  (100.0)  figures  which  (%)  (32.7) (26.8) (12.9) (12.0) (10.2) (06.2)  342  (100.0)  question  that in Table 4, the  through  N  done of  by  the  researcher  Education. Since the  not  provide  to  gather  represent and  the are  population not  figures  Department  of  Education  a geographical breakdown  of  secondary  the  each denomination. A  data  problem  based of  on  the  accuracy may  geographical arise since  33 these  divisions  differ  according to  denomination. A copy of  these district  maps  appear as Appendix V.  The  highest  located are of  in  from  percentage towns  towns  with with  respondents (15.6%)  gives a complete  (22.4%)  of  schools  a population the  represented  between  population  less  1000  than  and  by  the  2499. Eighteen  1000. The  third  represent schools in rural, unincorporated  breakdown  of  principals  school location according to  largest  are  percent number  towns. Table 5  population.  Table 5 School Location by Population  Population  N  %  rural under 1,000 1,000 - 2,499 2,500 - 4,999 5,000 - 9,999 10,000 - 49,999 50,000 - 250,000  23 27 33 19 19 13 13  15.6 18.4 22.4 13.0 13.0 08.8 08.8  *147  100.0  Total  *  1 non response to this  2.  Demographic information on the  In  addition  to  questionnaire principals w h o  collecting  requested  question  data  on  Principal the  demographic  answered the  question  schools  information  represented, on  on age, the  the  Section  principal.  majority (46.6%)  A  of  the  Of  the  133  are  between  41  and 50 years old. Thirty five 51  and  59.  percent  between  ages  Principals  range of  ages given was from 26 to  30  are between years  old  31 and 40 and 11% are and  under  total  7%.  59 years old. Table 6 shows the  The  number  of principals in each age category.  Table 6 Age of the Principals  N  %  09 47 62 15  06.8 35.3 46.6 11.3  •133  100.0  Age  30 31 41 51  & under - 40 - 50 - 59  Total  *  15 non responses to this  The  highest  years or Sixty-nine for  ten  between  percentage  less, followed percent years  or  of  of  respondents  (51.3%)  have  held  a  principalship  by 29.9% with experience ranging from  the  less.  question  principals Twenty-eight  have  been  percent  principal have  at  been  11 to  their at  ten  20 years.  present  school  same  school  the  11 and 20 years. These findings are presented in Table 7.  Table 7 Years of  Experience as Principal  As Principal  Years  10 11 21 31  N  & under -20 - 30 - 40  At present school  (%)  N  74 (51.3) 43 (29.9) 22 (15.3) 05 (03.5)  Total  *144  (%)  100 (68.9) 041 (28.3) 004 (02.8) 000 (00.0)  (100.0)  *145  (100.0)  * 4 and 3 non responses to these questions  ln  terms  of  education,  the  highest  Masters degree. This is followed graduate  work  has  been  by 22.4% w h o  completed  begun doctoral work. The majority not  had  (29.3%)  any  art  principals  university  instruction who  instruction  8 and 9.  have  while  recreational or community  percentage  by  of  the centre  art  respondents  the  principals  responses were from their  education  instruction,  remaining  (59.9%)  hold  a  hold a Bachelor's degree. Some  13.6% of  throughout had  of  39.5%  60.5% have  3%  have  principals w h o  have  (70.7%). have  had  programs. These findings  and  Of  had  the  43  formal  or  instruction  are detailed  through in Tables  Table  8  Education Attainment  of the  Principals  Education  N  %  Bachelor Degree Some graduate work Masters Degree Some Doctoral work Phd., EdD.  33 20 88 05 01  22.4 13.6 59.9 03.4 00.7  *147  100.0  Total  * 1 non response to  this  question  Table 9 Education Background: Art  Art  Instruction  Instruction  Yes  N  %  43  29.3  No  104  70.7  Total  *147  100.0  *  1 non response to this  Principals with art.  were  ratings Eighty  asked  to  ranging from one  percent  to  and  "great". A  rate  their  Table 10.  knowledge  1, Very Great, to of  " n o n e " . Only breakdown  N  %  University courses  26  60.5  Rec. & comm. centre courses  17  39.5  question  the  143  indicated that they considered their average"  Type of Instruction  of  7%  these  principals  their  art  7, which  knowledge of  rated  of  on  meant  who art to  knowledge  percentages and  the  a  Likert no  answered  type  knowledge this  be between as "more  scale  than  of  question "less than average"  frequencies is given  in  Table 10 Principals' 'Ratings of their Art Knowledge  Art  Knowledge  N  %  Very Great Great M o r e than average Average Less than average Little None  00 03 07 17 39 37 40  00.0 02.0 04.9 11.9 27.3 25.9 28.0  *143  100.0  Total  *  5 non responses to this  question  3. S u m m a r y It  is reasonable to  the  population. The  less  and  The  are  assume from majority  located  largest  in  small  percentage  of  Newfoundland where there  Demographic  information  between  ages of  less. art  the  Most  principals  instruction.  of  data that the  schools have towns  of  responses  sample is, representative  a population  populations represent  of  between  schools  is the largest concentration of  400  have  and  50 and  have  a Masters degree,  Correspondingly,  most  of  the  been  of  students  1000  located  and in  or  2499. Eastern  population.  provided by respondents reveal that most  41  their knowledge of art to  the  a principal for  however  very  principals  in  few the  principals are ten have  sample  be anywhere from less than average to  years or had  any  consider  none at all.  39 B. THE  PRINCIPAL  Principals were have type  in  asked to  curriculum  decision  scale from which  input",  2  is  represents viewed  by  followed  "above  "no  making.  average",  input".  the  extent  means were  principals by  rate the  seen  as  having  principals  input various individuals  Responses were  collected  calculated. A rating of  3  As  of  is in  "average", Table  the  11,  4 the  highest  themselves  is  "below  of  (Mean = 2.106)  having  special  the  next  interest  highest  groups,  students,  respectively.  Table  according to  input categories.  Table  12  level  provides  of  input,  parents a  followed and  percentage  home  by  breakdown  and  5  Education  is  input  (Mean = 1.333),  and  superintendents  2.745, are  school  and  Likert  "extensive  average" of  groups a  1 indicates  (Mean = 2.224). Other staff members, with a mean score of as  using  Department  level  and  perceived  board  school of  the  Individuals  and  trustees,  associations, responses  11  Principals' Ratings of the Extent Curriculum Decision Making  of  Input  Made  by  Croup  Mean  Department of Education Principals Superintendents Other Staff School Board Trustees Special Interest Croups Students Parents H o m e & School Association  1.333 2.106 2.224 2.745 3.432 4.045 4.084 4.121 4.307  Groups  in  Table 12 Principals' Ratings of the Extent Curriculum Decision Making  of  Input  Made  by  Individuals  and  Croups  Rating of the extent  Above Average  Average  Below Average  %  %  %  %  76.4 38.3 32.9 13.1 06.8 00.7 00.0 00.0 00.0  16.0 29.1 31.5 31.7 22.0 03.6 07.6 03.5 03.5  05.6 19.1 21.7 28.3 18.2 10.7 16.7 18.2 14.2  02.1 10.6 08.4 21.4 27.3 34.3 39.4 44.8 48.9  Dept. of Education Principals Superintendents Staff Trustees H o m e & Sch Assoc. Special Interest Grps Students Parents  An  open ended question asked principals to  themselves  by indicating what  their  elaborate on the  level of  input  entails. Responses reflected  an ambiguity  as to  involvement,  ranging  "no  Forty-nine of was  with  percent  Department that  deciding  answers  of  of  of  setting  which  from  principals w h o  Education priorities  courses  are  of input  Extensive  Croup  what  principals  involvement"  in  curriculum  to  be  The  offered  and  second  to  highest  planning  (43.2%)  and  -  %  00.0 02.8 05.6 05.5 25.8 50.7 36.4 33.6 33.3  gave  decision making perceive as their "final  responded saw themselves as  requirements.  None  ratings they  in curriculum  in  implementors  rated  (46.6%),  authority".  response  followed  assessing staff  by and  41 budget  requirements  (39.9%). Table 13 provides the  frequencies and percentages  for the responses given to this open ended question.  Table 13 Principals' Involvement  in Curriculum Decision Making  Involvement  N  %  Implementing Dept of Ed. requirements Setting priorities, planning Setting courses Assessing budget requirements Problem solving Evaluation development Final authority Piloting programs Very little involvement Selling programs  72 69 64 59 23 18 17 17 15 10  48.6 46.6 43.2 39.9 15.5 12.2 11.5 11.5 10.1 06.8  Paired  t-tests  curriculum all other  decision  principals'  making  with  ratings  their  of  ratings  their  own  the  extent  of  groups and individuals. The differences between  significance in  compared  and the  curriculum  (Mean= 1.3429)  results obtained  decision  making  significantly  higher  indicate  made than  level  of  input  in  input  made  by  means were tested  for  of  principals rate the  by  the  the  extent  Department  rating  of  of  their  (Mean = 2.1071). Although principals rate themselves as having slightly than  than  do  the  school  board  superintendents,  the  difference  of  input  Education own  input  more  input  between  the  means  is  not  significantly remaining  a statistically  greater groups  compared  to  level  significant of  input  one. in  and individuals. Table  principals  and  Principals  curriculum  rate themselves decision  14 shows the  provides  the  level  making  means for of  as  having  than  the  each group  significance  of  as  their  differences.  Table  14  Principals'  Ratings of  Input in Curriculum  Croup  Decision  Making  Mean  S.D.  t  Probability'  Principals Students  2.1014 4.0580  1.059  -21.70  0.000  Principals Other Staff  2.1000 2.7357  0.841  -08.94  0.000  Principals Parents  2.1176 4.1103  1.145  -20.30  0.000 '  Principals Special Interest Groups  2.1406 4.0234  1.412  -15.09  0.000  Principals H o m e & School Assoc.  2.1111 4.3111  1.245  -20.54  0.000  Principals Superintendents  2.1007 2.2374  1.143  -01.41  0.161  Principals Trustees  2.1008 3.4341  1.631  -09.28  0.000  Principals Dept. of Ed.  2.1071 1.3429  1.457  06.21  0.000  * significant  at the  .05 level  Differences  in  the  decision making The  input  Catholic  Day  made  with  of  do  of  the  the  principals  of  groups,  only  rate  of  school  input  their own  A  input  oneway  any  rated system  of  the  higher  by  Integrated higher  (Mean = 3.0392). parents  school.  highest  by  Integrated  the  systems a  home  Seventh school  principals  in  (Mean = 2.0000).  higher  and  the  affiliated  Integrated  do  Integrated  the  the  Pentecostal and  than  give  rating  school  to  the  associations  schools.  Of  Pentecostal and Adventist  superintendent  (Mean = 2.6184)  higher  show  as the  by the  and  on  existed  principals  schools  Pentecostal  significantly  results  as well  systems (Mean = 3.7059), than  significantly  and and  in  differences  school. The  (Mean = 3.9474)  of  principals  the  Adventist  variance was conducted  significant  significantly  Principals  Catholic  board  by  curriculum  of  rated  (Mean = 1.5294).  schools  in  (Mean = 1.8235)  these systems  higher  than  (Mean = 2.0000).  analysis of  statistically  affiliation  the  is  (Mean —1.9459)  parents  input  affiliation  Principals of  rating  Adventist  denominational the  followed  1.3684.  trustees,  of  Education  Pentecostal and  and  students,  of  higher  extent  denominational  lowest  input  Pentecostal  the  the  (Mean = 1.2200),  score  own  of  Department  (Mean = 2.3469),  of  contribution  the  principals  their  Catholic  than  by  ratings  based on  schools give  rate  Principals  exist  a mean  Adventist  principals the  do  affiliated  principals  principals'  that  these  based the  than  on  representing  rate do  Adventist  (Mean = 3.5882)  the  of  schools  Pentecostal and  to  the  extent  Catholic affiliated  also  ratings  student in  Day  input  is  Integrated Adventist  principals (Mean = 4.4490). other  principals  in  the  principals do  the  Seventh  of  than  if  denominational  input  school  determine  the  teaching Catholic  rate  the  principals  staff  system  input  of  in  the  Integrated  (Mean = 4.1216)  and  Adventist  principals  rate  significantly  also  higher  Catholic schools (Mean = 4.3265). the  input  ( M e a n = 3.9375)  of  than  home do  and the  Pentecostal and  school  associations  Catholic  principals  (Mean = 4.4510).  When the  considering denominational  way  also the of  principals  rate  case in the  their  ratings  affiliation,  own they  input  in  assign to  there  is no  curriculum extent  Education, school board trustees, superintendents  Table  15 details the  the school.  differences  in these  ratings  of  significant decision  input  by  difference  making. This is the  Department  and special interest  based on  the  in  groups.  denomination  of  45 Table 15 Ratings of  Input According to  Denominational  Affiliation  Integrated  Catholic  Pent, Advent  Group  Mean  Mean  Mean  Sig. Level  Dept of Education Principals Superintendents Other Staff Trustees Students Special Interest Croups Parents H o m e & School Assoc.  1.3684 1.9459 2.2133 2.6184 3.4000 3.9474 4.0000 4.1216 4.3056  1.2200 2.3469 2.3600 3.0392 3.4681 4.4490 4.0420 4.3265 4.4510  1.5294 2.0000 1.8235 2.4706 3.3571 3.7059 4.0714 3.5882 3.9375  none none none  * significantly different at the 0.05 Low score = High input  level  The  principals'  individuals  and  program  in the  principals  rate  of  staff,  other  The input  biggest  ratings  of  groups  varies  input  in  curriculum  according  to  the  decision presence  making or  lack  none *  none * *  by  various  of  an  school. The responses indicate that in schools with art the  input  higher  input  of  than  differences  and the  the  *  of  all other do  recorded  the  groups principals  are  special interest  in  the  and individuals, with the of  schools without  ratings  they  assign to  groups. Both ratings  in schools with art programs than in schools without art  art  of  input  programs.  art  programs exception programs. their are  own higher  A  grouped  t-test  these  ratings.  extent  of their  difference of  trustees  Although  and  principals  to  test  of  for  schools  significant. As shown  other the  staff,  parents,  Department  difference  in  However,  the  rating  groups  is  interest  conducted  significant  with  art  differences  programs  do  between rate  the  input higher than d o principals of schools without programs,  is not  students,  was  these  ratings  home  of  significantly  of  the  there  is  no  presence or  schools  higher  16, with  regards  to  the  input  and school associations, superintendents,  Education,  based on  principals'  in Table  the  than  with  art  the  statistically  lack of  an  programs  rating  given  art  gave by  significant program. to  special  principals  of  schools without art programs.  Table 16 Input in Curriculum Decision Making According to Art Program  Art  Croup  Dept. of Education Principals Superintendents Other Staff Trustees Special Interest Groups Parents Students H o m e & School Assoc.  * significant at the .05 level Low score = High input  Offered  No  the Presence  or  Lack  of  an  Art  Mean  Mean  t  1.2571 1.9851 2.2286 2.7778 3.3382 3.8696 4.0571 4.0714 4.3000  1.4054 2.2162 2.2192 2.7123 3.5313 4.2381 4.1831 4.0959 4.3143  -1.31 -1.23 0.05 0.36 -0.87 -2.35 -0.96 -0.18 -0.10  Probabilil  0.190 0.221 0.962 0.722 0.384 0.019 0.339 0.857 0.922  1. Summary In summary, while  principals perceive the  highest  degree  input  having  a  of  greater  including  in  amount  superintendents.  significant,  the  of  Education to  curriculum  decision making, they  of  than  input  Although  difference  Department  between  most the  all of  other these  ratings  of  and  differences own  making  includes implementing  Department  of  individuals,  are  input  statistically  compared  their ratings of superintendents' input is not. Principals' involvement decision  the  see themselves as  groups  their  have  in  to  curriculum  Education requirements  as  well as setting priorities, planning and setting courses.  Significant  differences  extent  school  associations. Principals of  of  groups  and  input of  are  of the  most  of  which  of  art  special interest  based exist  in  schools with  programs. groups  In  art  programs  rate  themselves, higher than particular,  is significantly  the  rating  Section art  C  of  education  the in  higher  in  do  question  This of  and  the  input  the  principals assign  schools that  do  of  the offer  not.  ADOPTION  questionnaire  requested  information  Newfoundland  secondary  schools. Of  on  the  the  current  148  responded to the questionnaire, 72 indicated their schools offer choice.  perception  principals  art as a course choice, as o p p o s e d to those schools that do  C. ART PROGRAM  the  students, other teaching staff, parents and home  individuals, including  schools without  input  denominationally  represents whether  or  48.6% not  of  Art  the  sample.  is offered  In  Table  17  state  principals  of who  Art as a course responses to  as a course choice  in  the  the  school,  48 are presented according to the  denominational  groups represented. A Chi square  test revealed that these differences are not statistically  Table Art  significant.  17  Programs Offered According to the  Denominational Affiliation  of the School  Denomination  Integrated  Catholic  Pent. & Advent.  N (%)  N (%)  N (%)  35 (23.8) 42 (28.6)  31 (21.1) 22 (15.0)  06 (04.1) 11 (07.5)  Art Offered  Yes No  Of with  these  72  44.6%  programs, started  (19.9%)  have  number  of  been  years  secondary schools.  67.7%  within in Art  the  existence has  been  of the  have last for  been two ten  offered  in  operation  years. Only years as  a  or  13  course  Total  N  72 75  for  five  years  of  these  72  more. Table choice  in  school  18  or  (%)  (49.0) (51.0)  less  programs  shows  the  Newfoundland  Table  18  Number  of Years Art Courses  Offered  Years  N  %  01 02 03 04 05 06 07 10 12 13 14 15 20 27  12 17 07 03 05 03 05 05 02 01 01 01 02 01  18.5 26.2 10.8 04.6 07.7 04.6 07.7 07.7 03.1 01.5 01.5 01.5 03.1 01.5  Total  *65  100  * 7 non  Of  the  29.7  responses to this  72 schools offering Art,  %  offer  there are fewer  Grade  high  these  schools, Art Art  level. Of  History  8  Art,  art programs  junior  and  question  the  and  30.4% of 27%  offer  in place at the  senior  level  is  represented  Frequencies of these course offerings  offer  Grade  in  9  at" the Art.  1200  14.9%, Art 2%  it  Grade  The  7  findings  level, show  senior secondary level than at  courses, Art  and Design 2200 is in  3202  them  of  the  is taught  and  Design  schools  can be seen in Table  with 19.  in  20.4%.  3200 in art  the of  6.1%  programs.  Table 19 Art Courses Offered  Course offered  N  %  Grade 7 Art Grade 8 Art Grade 9 Art Art 1200 Art & Design 2200 Art & Design 3200 Art History 3202  45 44 40 30 22 09 03  30.4 29.7 27.0 20.4 14.9 06.1 02.0  Through  open  ended  Art  been  included  has  those  schools  offering  Education requirements Art to  or Art,  principals  excluded 27.7%  as their  creativity  of  were  from  their  these  reason for  be an important aspect of  a means of fostering 20.  questions  student  its  asked to  provide  reasons  schools'  course  offerings.  Of  Department  of  principals  cite  the  inclusion. Sixteen percent  development,  while  and originality. These findings  why  consider  14.9% view  it as  are shown in Table  Table 20 W h y Art is Offered  Reason  N  %  Dept of Education requirements Student development Foster creativity Student interest Personal development Available teacher Another m o d e of expression Exposure to aspects of Art Easy credit Available facilities Increase school interest levels  41 24 22 17 16 08 08 05 05 03 02  27.7 16.2 14.9 11.5 10.8 05.4 05.4 03.4 03.4 02.0 01.4  As  the  offer of  findings  Art,  the  a qualified  and they  most  problem.  in  Table  21  common  teacher. Ten  government are  in  show,  schools  those  reason (27.7%) percent  as a prohibitive  small  of  and  view  factor. with  the Nine  fewer  51.4%  of  given for its lack  of  percent teaching  schools  do  not  exclusion is the  lack  funds  from  feel that, units,  that  school given  the  timetabling  board fact is  a  Table  21  Why Art is Not  Offered  Reason  N  %  N o qualified teacher Lack of money from board & govt Small school - timetabling Lack of facilities Not enough teaching units Low priority Overcrowded curriculum Low pupil interest Low staff interest N o specific curriculum  41 14 13 11 10 09 07 06 03 01  27.7 09.5 08.8 07.4 06.8 06.1 04.7 04.1 02.0 00.7  Principals were  asked to  adoption.  frequency  The  indicate the to  rate the of  extent  of  responses  principals' overall rating  of  influence of factors on art  were  used  influence  of  to  provide  program  means  which  these factors. Means closer  1 in value indicate "greater influence" and means closer to  5 represent  "no  influence".  Trained teacher availability funds the  as  second  program  school  board  consultants' parent  in  (Mean = 2.239) third  interest,  support,  support,  is rated the  place.  and  staff  support,  special interest  (Mean = 1.698), with availability  principals'  These  availability  highest  are  of  followed,  space,  school associations. Table 22 shows the  in  program  availability  group  attitudes  pressure  of and  means for  (Mean = 2.478)  order quality,  media the  of  resources, interest  each of  these  toward  influence,  student  of  of  by  interest, incentives,  home  individuals  and or  groups  in  percentage  the of  order  of  rated  influence.  responses according  to  A  influence  breakdown categories  of  these  ratings  is provided  in Table  23.  Table 22 M e a n Scores for  Factors Influencing  Art  Program  Adoption  Factor  Mean  Teacher availability Availability of funds Principals' attitudes School board interest Availability of space Program quality Student interest Consultants' support Staff support M e d i a resources Incentives Parent support Special Interest Crp pressure H o m e & Sch Assoc. interest  1.698 2.239 2.478 2.486 2.515 2.542 2.560 2.676 2.710 3.000 3.182 3.533 4.091 4.095  *  Low score  =  High  influence  by  Table 23 Ratings of Influence  of  Factors in Art Program Adoption  Factors  Teacher availability Availability of funds School board interest Principals' attitude Availability of space Student interest Consultants' support Program quality Staff support M e d i a resources Incentives Parent support H o m e & sch assoc. interest Special int grp pressure  The  results  trained  of  teacher  paired  t-tests  availability  factor. These findings  Great  Above Average  Average  Below Average  None  %  %  %  %  %  58.3 34.8 26.8 25.7 25.7 24.6 20.6 17.6 13.8 07.5 03.8 03.7 00.8 00.0  23.7 32.6 28.3 33.1 31.6 26.9 31.6 39.7 34.1 25.6 22.7 09.6 02.4 06.1  11.5 15.9 23.9 19.9 19.9 24.6 22.1 25.2 29.0 35.3 38.6 35.6 24.6 20.5  02.9 07.2 11.6 10.3 11.0 15.7 11.0 06.1 13.8 22.6 21.2 31.9 31.0 31.8  03.6 09.4 09.4 11.0 11.8 08.2 14.7 11.5 09.4 09.0 13.6 19.3 41.3 41.7  indicate  significantly  that  principals  higher  are shown in Table 24.  than  rate  the  the  influence  influence  of  any  of  the other  Table 24 The Influence of Trained Teacher Availability Other Factors in Art Program A d o p t i o n  Compared  with  the  Influence  Factor  Trained Teacher  Factors  Mean  Mean  t  Availability of funds Principals' attitude School board interest Availability of space Program quality Student interest Consultants' support Staff support Media resources Incentives Parent support H o m e & Sch assoc. pressure Special interest grp pressure  2.2190 2.4741 2.4818 2.5111 2.5231 2.5489 2.6741 2.7153 3.0000 3.1832 3.5373 4.0960 4.0992  1.7080 1.7111 1.7007 1.7111 1.7077 1.7143 1.6963 1.7007 1.7121 1.6794 17164 1.7280 1.7099  -04.20 -05.98 -06.04 -06.58 -06.63 -06.42 -07.46 -08.79 -11.00 -12.30 -16.18 -20.01 -20.42  of  Probabilil  0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000  * significant at the 0.05 level Low score = High influence  When  asked  program teacher, frequently  to  choose  adoption,  65.5%  followed  by  cited  factor  three of  factors the  50.7% w h o (32.4%)  which  principals listed the  was the  These figures can be seen in Table 25.  hold  the  highest  cited  the  availability  availability  principals'  of  attitudes  influence of  a  the  art  trained  funds. The third toward  in  most  program.  Table 25 Factors with Great Influence  in Art  Program Adoption  Factor  N  %  Teacher availability Availability of funds Principals' attitude  97 75 48  65.5 50.7 32.4  An  open  already  ended  question  included,  which  asked may  the  principals  influence  art  to  list  program  any  other  adoption.  factors,  not  Although  the  response rate was low for this question (23%), of those responding, 50% stated that Art  is not  Twenty-seven Other  percent  principals  in competition career paths in  Table  open  a priority  26,  ended  feel  (17.6%) for  with the that  think  limited  the  timetable  consistent  question  size  that Art  preclude taking Art are  Department  which  their  and the  space. Two  Education and school boards. school  high  prohibits  the  principals (5.9%)  asked  responses  them  to  list  in schools today.  offering  academic requirements  principals the  made  most  Art. are  suggested that  courses in school. These findings,  with  influencing art program adoption  of  of  as presented to  the  important  final factors  Table 26 Other Factors Which May Influence Art Program Adoption  Factor  N  %  Not a priority with Dept. of Ed. Small school size High academic requirements compete for time Career paths preclude Art  17 09  50.0 26.5  06 02  17.6 05.9  Total  34  100  Differences program  the  adoption  school.  Principals  program home  in  quality,  and  space,  of  of  do  based  on  Pentecostal  Catholic  board  the  A  oneway  analysis of  denominational  the  influence  the  pressure  higher  attitudes  and  staff  Integrated,  schools  than  do  affiliated toward  support  as  factors  affiliation  rate  student  group  the  the  a  of  the  interest, and  in  the  consider  the  program,  having  art  pressure  principals  principals  on  availability  greater  of  influence  Pentecostal and Adventist schools.  variance was conducted  differences  these  special interest  Catholic  principals'  of  denominational  Adventist  support,  systems.  interest  than d o principals in the  and  parent  association  funds,  school  exist  incentives,  and  availability  ratings  of  school  Integrated  principals'  in these ratings  to  ascertain whether  or  not  the  are statistically significant. The results,  as presented in Table 27, reveal that the only statistically significant difference is between  the  Principals  in  ratings the  of  the  influence  Pentecostal and  of  incentives  Adventist  systems  (i.e.  image  rate  this  of factor  the  school).  significantly  58 higher than do the principals in the  Integrated and Catholic systems.  Table 27 Denominational Adoption  Differences  in  Ratings  of  Factors  Which  Influence  Art  Program  Integrated  Catholic  Pent., Advent.  Factor  Mean  Mean  Mean  Sig  Teacher availabilty Availability of funds Student interest Program quality Principals' attitudes Availability of space School board interest Consultants' support Staff suppport Media resources Incentives Parent support Special interest grp pressure Home & Sch assoc. pressure  1.6712 2.2877 2.5493 2.5634 2.6027 2.6250 2.6438 2.7917 2.8767 2.8857 3.2676 3.5479 4.0714 4.0725  1.6800 2.1200 2.6939 2.5778 2.2917 2.2400 2.2600 2.5714 2.4800 3.1667 3.2609 3.5532 4.2128 4.2045  1.9333 2.4286 2.2308 2.3571 2.4286 2.9231 2.4286 2.5714 2.7143 3.0714 2.5714 3.4286 3.7857 3.9167  none none none none none none none none none none *  none none none  * significant at the 0.05 level Low score = High influence  Grouped  t-tests  differences  in  were these  program.  The  results,  with art  programs  rate  conducted ratings,  determine  according  presented the  to  in  influence  Table of  to  the 28,  their  if  there  presence  reveal attitudes  that  are or  any  significant  lack  of  an  principals  in  schools  toward  the  art  art  program,  59 program  quality,  significantly  consultants'  greater  influence  schools without art  support in art  and  program  school  board  adoption  than  interest do  the  as  having  principals  of  programs.  Table 28 The Influence  of  Factors According to the  Presence or Lack of an Art  Program  Art Offered  N o Art  Factor  Mean  Mean  t  Probability*  Teacher availability Principals' attitudes School board interest Funds Program quality Student interest Consultants' support Space Staff support Incentives Media resources Parent support H o m e & Sch assoc. interest Special interest grp pressure  1.7941 2.1194 2.2647 2.2985 2.3030 2.3731 2.4179 2.4853 2.5882 3.0923 3.1667 3.4925 4.0000 4.0781  1.6056 2.8261 2.7000 2.1831 2.7846 2.7463 2.9275 2.5441 2.8286 3.2687 2.8358 3.5735 4.1905 4.1029  1.08 -3.33 -2.05 0.53 -2.35 -1.74 -2.28 -0.26 -1.23 -0.96 1.79 -0.46 1.18 -0.15  0.281 0.001 0.042 0.594 0.020 0.083 0.024 0.794 0.222 0.339 0.075 0.649 0.240 0.879  * significant at the 0.05 level Low score = High influence  1. Summary Fewer  than  choice. past  half  The  two  of  majority  years  and  the of  schools included  in  schools that  offer  predominantly  at  do the  the  sample Art  Junior  offer  have high  done  Art so  level. W h e n  as a course only  in  asked  the why  they  include Art  Department  of  indicate one  in the  curriculum,  principals indicate  Education requirement.  of  the  reasons they  Principals of  do  not  offer  that it  is because it  schools without  Art  art  is a  programs  as a course choice is  the  unavailability of trained teachers.  Among  all the  factors  having a significantly the decision to by  the  The  art  program  principals art  or not  to  adopt  funds  and  by  of  influence  denominational  affiliation  adoption  than  by  of  all  principals  of  the  rated  the  school,  Catholic  and  interest  of  also  rated  that  do  lack  of  in the  schools without  the  art  Other  committment  as well as the effect  higher  factors from  with the higher  Integrated  does  the  is rated as  by the  offering  of small school size.  of  art  according  to  of  incentives  schools that  program  the  program than  Education and  as having a the  the  consultant,  the  to  be offered  are  courses  program  offer  do  program  Art  in  Adventist  the  of  closely the  Pentecostal and  adopt  as affecting  Department  differ  principals. In  quality of the  toward  influence  attitude toward  schools  pinpointed the  attitudes  programs. The support  in  teacher  influence of all other factors, in  factors  decision to  school board and the  significantly  not.  own  a trained  principals'  these  significantly  higher influence  of  of  an art program. This is followed the  of  programs, principals see their  significantly  availability  greater influence, than the  adopt  availability  program.  studied, the  than  adoption the  in  schools  were  school  the  board  D. THE IMPORTANCE  In  considering  required they  as  feel  should  of  should  Art  the be  of  it  at  program  be  CURRICULUM  junior  of Of  high  studies, the  level  53.8%  remaining  should of  the  be  optional  principals  principals,  37.9%  also think Art  required  and  7%  are  should  be an option.  undecided.  Table  Art  level, the  Four  29  or  indicate think  8.3% remain undecided. At the senior high  principals (88.9%)  should  THE  the  optional.  be required, while  majority think  whether  part  it  OF ART IN  percent  provides  the  frequencies for these responses.  Table 29 Art as an Option  or Required Course  Option  Required  N (%)  N (%)  078 (53.8) 128 (88.9)  55 (37.9) 06 (04.2)  Level  Junior high Senior high  The majority Math  (88.6%)  56.7%> of it  of  to  (93.7%),  principals rate Art to and  Science  (83.2%).  principals consider Art to  be  equal.  Home  The  majority  of  Economics (85.4%)  be  "not  When  be "not principals and  Undecided  N  12 10  as important" comparing  rate  Industrial  Art  Arts  to  (08.3) (06.9)  as English (87.4%),  Art  as important"  (%)  to  while be  (84.0%).  Social  Studies,  42.6% perceive equal  Fifty  to  one  Music percent  perceive Art to be equal in importance to as  "not  as  important". Table  30  C o m p u t e r Science, while 48% rate  shows the  frequencies and  means for  it  these  responses.  Table 30 Principals'  Ratings of the  Art is... ...than  Importance of Art  M o r e important N (%)  English Science Math Social Studies Music H o m e Economics Industrial Arts Computer Science  A  oneway  differences The  comparing  of  (01.4) (00.7) (01.4) (00.7) (02.1) (07.6) (06.8) (00.7)  variance  016 023 014 060 133 123 121 073  was  conducted  in these ratings according to  results  principals  analysis  02 01 02 01 03 11 10 01  Equal N (%)  of  the  test,  rate  Art  significantly  its'  importance  differences in the ratings.  shown  to  in Table higher  English.  Not as important N (%)  (11.2) (16.1) (10.0) (42.6) (93.7) (85.4) (84.0) (51.4)  to  125 119 124 080 006 010 013 065  reveal  any  (87.4) (83.2) (88.6) (56.7) (04.2) (06.9) (09.0) (45.8)  significant  denominational affiliation of the "school. 31, reveal that  than  do  However,  the there  the  Integrated are  no  Catholic  affiliated  principals other  when  significant  Table  31  The Importance  Placed on Art According to  Art compared  * significant  at the  A  t-test  grouped  show  that  to  the  tested  principals  of  without art  programs  importance  of  schools with  for  presence  higher  significant  Integrated  Catholic  Mean  Mean  Pent., Advent. Mean  3.0000 3.0000 3.0789 3.7632 4.1184 4.7763 4.8514 4.8553  3.1200 2.9615 3.0385 3.9412 4.1200 4.5000 4.6078 4.5385  3.0000 3.0000 2.8667 4.0000 4.2000 4.6000 4.7333 4.7333  none none none none none none none *  0.05 level  significantly  in  Affiliation  to  Music H o m e Economics Industrial Arts Computer Science Social Studies Science Math English  according  Denominational  Art art  significant  or  lack  schools with  than  Music  of  differences an  art  art  (Mean = 3.1389). However,  was  rated  programs  differences were  higher  in  in the  than  rate do  in the  ratings the  given  school.  importance  principals  of  other  those without  ratings.  elective  programs,  Art,  Results of  Art  schools  as shown in Table 32, while  comparison with  as opposed to  found  these  program  programs  (Mean = 2.9429)  in  the  subjects no  other  Table 32 The Importance Program  Placed  on  Art  Art  According  Art Offered  English Science Social Studies Math Music Home Economics Industrial Arts Computer Science  * significant  A  to  grouped  instruction than  do  are not  the  Presence  No  4.7324 4.6197 4.1159 4.7536 2.9429 2.8873 2.9155 3.7143  or  Lack  of  an  Art  Art  4.7260 4.6986 4.1507 4.7500 3.1389 3.0822 3.1644 4.0000  0.05 -0.59 -0.20 0.03 -2.36 -1.53 -1.88 -1.55  0.961 0.558 0.842 0.977 0.020 0.128 0.062 0.123  at the 0.50 level  t-test tend  those  revealed to  give  principals  that a  although  higher  without  rating art  principals to  Art  instruction,  who in  the  have  relation  had to  differences  previous  other in  art  subjects,  the  significant. The results of the group t-test are shown in Table 33.  ratings  Table 33 The importance  Placed on Art According to Previous Art Training  Art Training  Art compared  Mean  N o Art Training Mean  t  2.8500 3.0500 3.0513 3.9744 3.9744 4.4500 4.6000 4.6923  3.0396 3.0396 3.0400 3.8400 4.1900 4.7327 4.7723 4.7677  -1.31 0.07 0.12 0.64 -1.11 -1.88 -1.18 -0.52  to  H o m e Economics Industrial Arts Music Computer Science Social Studies Science English Math  * significant at the  Probabilit  0.191 0.945 0.907 0.522 0.271 0.062 0.241 0.604  0.05 level  1. Summary Most  principals  Junior  and Senior high  than  the  academic  considered Catholic higher  think  to  than  do  should  remain  as  school levels. Art  subjects  be  affiliated  Art  equal  but  in  schools  importance  rate  principals  equal  the  of  an  course  is generally viewed  in  importance to  to  of  Art  in  schools, however,  as important". Principals of  schools with art  programs  the  other  schools,  viewed  important than of  Art  higher  In  these  Art  is  Art  than  differences are not  those  statistically  who  have  significant.  not  had  art  is  important  to  still  rate Art  Music. Principals with previous art instruction  the  Principals  relation  as  both  electives. Art  Science.  "not  electives.  at  as less  the  Computer  importance  Integrated  optional  training,  of  English seen as  higher  significantly rate the  is  than more  importance  however  these  V. DISCUSSION  in  this  chapter  the  presented  in  Adoption  and  principals  during  Chapter The  The  power  school  interviews  structure of  the of  sets  Art  in  the  of  the  order  The  they  have  Principal,  Art  Curriculum. C o m m e n t s  during  supporting the findings  within  the  hierarchy top,  respectively. The of  the  been  Program made  by  used  as  places  the  local school boards  and  pilot  study  are  under discussion.  The  principals  usual line of  their  decision making to  by the  Department  of  superintendents  is seen by  of  this  the  study  body  consider findings  authority,  Education. The extent  education  by the  overriding  of these policies. However, the  in curriculum  the  followed  that, in contrast to the input  of  findings  Education as the  requirements.  impiementors  board  in  headings  conducted  Education at the  principals,  Department  and  under  discussed  PRINCIPAL  Department  the  5  are  Importance  contextual information  A. THE  findings  system  support  which  provides  themselves  principals  of  guidelines  primarily  principals consider the  input  view  as  of this study also indicate  be second only to of  this  the  extent  input  of  made  made by the local school  as slightly  less than  the  input  made by principals.  The  review  defined, the  of  is the  principals'  the  literature  pivotal power  suggests  authority rests  in  within  the  the the  principalship, school. The  implementation  66  of  although common  curriculum  not  clearly  belief  is that  (Bowes, et al.,  1983).  While  provided (1982)  the  by the  which  results  of  respondents  stated  that  of  the  authority base to school.  One  structure, impose  the  principal's  who  said "I'm  power the  based  Another  principal  amount  of  old  is  one w h o  on  student indicated  influence,  also supports  Education  top.  of  money where offer  this  makes the  final  interest  and  the  in the  acting as  consider  principal  their  in  the  within  the  can impress  and  mouth  comment  of  decision as to  school and  to  Sloan  formation  be offered  board  your  of  is'. H o w  much  program". This perception  teacher  "although  committees  the  information  findings  influence  The school  by  through  the  of the courses to  supported  that  base,  policies, principals  power  give us to  also  authority  decision making. In addition  the  your  this  have a major  is on  'put  prepared to  offered,  of  articulating  government  is the  money are you  study  curriculum  Department  principal,  it  in this  confirm  include the determination  said "the but  study  administrators  or policy shaping issues of implementors  this  another what  of  principal  courses are  interest  and  qualifications".  boards  have  an  meetings,  principals  can  extensive have  a  strong influence in curriculum decision and policy making".  As evidenced in the rating of  of their  the  power  findings  input in curriculum of  the  school  reveal that through  curriculum  decision  include participation  There  results and these supporting  are no  making  comments, the principals' high  decision making does not board  a variety extends  or of  the  Department  avenues, the  beyond  the  input  usual  deny the of of  line  existence  Education. The the of  principal  in  authority  to  principals view  the  in policy making and shaping.  denominationally  based differences  in the  way  input  made  level  by  of  the  input  representing Adventist  Department  does  the  differ,  different  schools  align  closely  perceptions principals  by  can  be  although  themselves  to  not  with  principals the  the  attributed,  in  usual  to  part,  of  superintendents'  among  the  The  of  the  and  structural  and  line  line of  difference  Integrated  the  principals  Pentecostal  be second in the  of  to  the  perception  themselves.  perceptions  of  significantly,  Principals  superintendents  the  compared  Education. The view  denominations.  authority. They perceive the followed  of  of  power,  in  these  Catholic  based  differences  of  the  Pentecostal and Seventh Day Adventist systems. Since these schools are fewer number, to  they  are governed centrally  local school boards. This runs opposite  Catholic  and  Pentecostal  Integrated  school  Adventist  school  and  resulting in more control  Significant groups the  by one  input  individuals  of  Principals made  other  in  by  the  home  principals  in the  fact  these  that  absence  of  community would  in curriculum  denominationally  and  a in  in  staff,  based  students, and  school  the  As  decentralized structure  central  present  governing  strong,  unified  local  systems  in  decision parents  Adventist  associations  are  governing  general,  individual  governed body  the  bodies,  voices,  the  ratings  making,  and  occur  home  systems and  of  the  perhaps  and  rate  parents  in  input  made  by  the  ratings  of  school associations.  the higher  extent  or  parents  logically have a higher participation  by  provincial  school and  board, home  in curriculum  of  than  Integrated and Catholic systems. This also may be two  of  decision making.  differences,  curriculum  Pentecostal and  boards  provincial school board as o p p o s e d to  boards.  in  input  do  the  due  to  the  school  boards.  In  the  which  represents  the  and  school  associations  decision making, if  they  should take of  the  that  that  initiative.  interests  of  the  In  whole  equality  of  educational  status  of  art  future  community,  school higher  involvement  of  other  differences  Integrated  system  designed  the  do  groups in  the  to  serve  the  to  parish  In  a  educated,  outlook  o n the  with  art  significantly  programs.  One  intrinsic  to  the  committment  of  students  by  development  ran  more  higher  schools  groups  have  an  principals.  of  of  Catholics.  the  representation does  it  ensure  This  makes  the  to  within  the  it  This  the  The  a good  whole  to  of  status,  staff  democratic  be  a  result  of  two  boards.  While  the  the  Catholic  system  has  differences  between  the  two  made by a Catholic principal.  many years, by and  show  type  teaching  apparent  because  it  was  school system had and  enlightened social  other  principals,  comment  Integrated  higher  goal.  and  denominations,  in the following  priest  is  input  Catholic system, for  ensure the  schools serve. N o r  considered,  only  input  whim.  Catholic is  Generally speaking, the still  the  serves a number  systems are referred Within  vulnerable  rate  than  historical  been  opportunities  to administrative  principals  significantly  does this  group, these  education  in addition  Integrated  no way  board.  with  a  large easier.  probably  Better  informed,  broader  educated  education system.  programs, higher  principal  factor,  especially if we  board  and principal  principals  than  do  commented decided to  committment,  rate  the that  drop  the  influence  principals "community  of  of  special  schools  pressure  can  without be  or change a course". In lieu of  concentrated  advocacy efforts  from  interest  a  art big  school  within  the  community  can  focus  change. Although that  of  other  the  input  attention  the  input  groups  and  provided  by  of  to  specific  special interest  individuals,  these  other  which  reveal that in schools offering  input  of  all  other  than do the  groups  of  of  the  the  the  high  it  been  the  is  schools represented in this  level,  any to  is reasonable to  provided  operates  for  higher  than  independently  supported  by  the  of  findings  Art as a course choice, principals rate  do  years. It w o u l d  recommendation  this,  groups. This  individuals  schools that  school  not  impetus  decision making  the  higher  ADOPTION  last two  the  way  programs.  within the  has  no  principals of schools without Art  choice. Most  there  in  provide  groups is significantly  curriculum  Fewer than half  and  it  and  in  B. ART PROGRAM  junior  problems  the  have art  increase  Art  programs  of  has  occurred  Education  mandatory  at  assume that anticipation  motivation  for  school  boards  as a course them  programs are at  within  this  level. Yet  implementation  junior  of  and  art  directed  the  Art  have established  appear that since most  Department make  study offer  high  of  level. Despite  recommended  changes has  principals  establish  to  art  programs.  The  government  philosophical order  to  areas.  The  regarding  one  provide goal course  offered which  incentive groups  students is  with  to  enable  choices  at  the  for  a  Art  school  the  senior  offer  courses with  exploratory students  to  experience  to  make  high  courses  other  elective  in  range  a  better  school  Art  informed  level.  One  of  is  a  areas  in  subject decisions principal,  reflecting  on  the  need  to  level, noted that "what senior  high, kids, not  attributed  study might  However, number junior  to  Art  programs  of  is that the on  lack of  the  part  provides  only  high  programs.  Art Of  one courses  the  is  senior  high  is most  is  that  does  the  a course  all  be  seen  3200.  require  as a compromise Art  History  junior  high  is offered know  if  in  they  courses offered  students  likelihood,  by the  experience  Since  there  reasonable to  the  Art  the  are  few  the  to  of  of  can  what  art  of  the 1200,  be offered  not  offering  of  these  of  and Design 2200  that  the  number which  and  when  of was  in schools. It  Art  senior  and  and  can  Design  courses,  is  schools. Generalist teachers 3200 courses would,  approaching  specialists teaching  assume there are even fewer  than  fact  a specialist teacher  newest  feeling  the  courses, Art  least number  same Art  lieu  for  lower  likely  hiring  in  3202,  as a course choice in  are intimidated  course.  not  explanation  Art  generalist teacher,  who  school  dramatically  the  offered  high  possible  designed for  and  the  at all, don't  senior high Art  of  at  is that when Art  having been introduced to Art  ignorance  senior  high  2200  starting  entail.  this  therefore  up,  happens in schools n o w  like it". The implication be  build  within  teachers who  the  the  Art  province  are adequately  in  History it  is  trained  to teach the Art History 3202 course.  Although schools an  there that  uphill  are  offer battle  denominational  no Art  significant  denominational  as a course choice, art  which  differences  does played  have an  a  differences education  denominational  important  role  in  in  the  number  has historically base.  At  supporting  one Music,  of  waged time, much  to the  detriment It  just  seems to  Music, of  of art education. O n e principal remarked that  not  preserved  Salvation Army in  between  the  purposes, has no significant  are  offered  "the  offer  If  successful. and  school  is  having  has  While  more  Pentecostal dimension.  been  input and  It  art  note  the  the  in  in  the  to  midst in  1987,  curriculum  one  attributed  up of  of  principals, that  The music  connection of  the  music  Art  the  it  decision who principal  and  in schools". The  lack  up of  would  rate  art  and  view  than  do  be  the  are they  schools.  to  have  the  been  Pentecostal half  is not  themselves  might  that  programs  than  difference  making  courses  p e r i o d " . They  less  principals  Art  suggestion  appear  schools  this  not  Integrated  courses,  school  intents  or  all  principal's  number  Catholic  offer  for  whether  a catch  the  period,  Integrated  curriculum  seem  a  progress  be  programs. Although  Adventist  would  there's  in  schools  that  tradition  instrumental  church, in  98% of  a catch  Adventist  to  doubt  based differences  half  to  Newfoundland.  only  and  "the  discrepancy  than  schools offer  interesting  in  the art programs in place in the  more  Day  have a great  - the no  importance  art education.  with  now  the  Nuns  institution  noted  can  are  diminish  there  Seventh  Integrated it  a  to  assigned an  culture  I have  expense of  denominationally in  has  music  an  connection  as compared to  indeed  as  principal  Catholic schools  attempting  the  province.  religion  as another  of  island  has a long tradition  education at the  However,  this  necessarily academic. The  having  tradition  me,  of  significant,  themselves the lower best  the  as  Catholic, on source  this of  explanation  for  the  slow  development  of  secondary  art  education  in  the  Integrated school system.  When  asked  most  of  why  the  implementing may  be  Art  goal Art  of  are  to  guarantee for courses in  statements courses  student.  found  for  To  the  some  desirability  factor.  line  the  with  art  to of  the  survive  economic,  in  the  course  fostering extent  of  this  question  the  to  Department  for be  should provide of  is  no  Department  of  recommendations.  As  considerations  the  the  inclusion  objectives the  as  having  and  study  of  of  the  development  seen  were  there  include  the  they  requirements  reasons given for  and can  these  political  similiar  curriculum,  said  Without  social or  were  creativity  the  programs,  descriptions. These  Principals may feel they  contribution  art  accurately  adoption. Other offerings  While  policy.  more  in  programs  adopt  are  curriculum  courses  requirements.  requirements local  Art  with  schools  enforcement  program  the  include  Education  some  the  to  schools  of  for  left  able  of  Education  scrutiny,  they  with no of  principals  motivation  Education  were  Department  Department  such,  they  a  social  a response that  Education  says  Art  is in  courses  can  make to secondary students' education.  Of  those  to  include  trained given  principals in schools with Art  courses in  the  curriculum  However,  lack  of  teacher. reason  provided commonly  by  for the  cited  art programs, very few  not  being  school  able  board  reason. It  teacher to  and  would  offerings  availability  include the  appear  due  Art  provincial that  as  to  was  said they were the  availability  the  most  a subject.  governement  these  reasons  are  of  a  frequently  Lack of was  able  funds  the  used  next as  an  attempt  to  shift  the  blame  Education. The  third  reason  the  school  secondary  for  lack  given  of  for  art  programs  being  experience, was  the  the  small student  timetabling  is  finding  can  teach  other  subjects.  Responses  considered  is the  enlistment  of  of  indicated  a present  courses in  a small  factor in creating course  population. While the  that  in  of  on  populations  Art  problem  most  student  of  include  by far the  smaller  Department  to  pose a problem in a small school, by  the  unable  school. A small school is seen as a prohibitive simply because of  onto  staff  lack of  immediate  options  facilities may  problem  brought  a specialist teacher  that  the  member  only  who  other  may  or  who option  may  not  have some art education background or experience.  When  principals  influence and  in  the  the  that  toward  asked  program  principals'  attitudes to  art  were  the  attitudes  the  the  availability  toward  the  of  a  program  concerned with the  lack  these art  things  may  education.  As  if  be one  one were  to  which  trained  were  have  great  teacher,  funds  chosen.  Principals'  in the responses  make funds  findings  support  principal  on  secondary  the level  available; he's not the Arts  speculations in  suffered  stated,  be  put  by  the  lack  an  funds  the  underlying  face  it.  keen on  it  anxious to  suggested of  of  "Let's  he's not  forth  of  and  assume a broader perspective,  going to  Education, which from  physical problems  considered a symptom  attitude can make or break a program. If  Force  factors  open ended questions. O n e possible reason for this discrepancy may be  availability. However,  to  three  program were never included as a factor  teacher  toward  select  adoption,  principals are primarily  of  to  1980 that  commitment  find  The  attitude  principal's  he's not  going  space.". These  Newfoundland  arts from  the  education  at  Task the  secondary school  administrators.  Principals it  indicated  has not  been,  The  efforts  art  program  Although by  a  that  and  nor  is it  secondary art  now,  not  include  Department's  qualified  necessitates  feel  teacher,  a  the  compromise  by the  that  of  that  holds  implementation. The reality of the  situation  said,  know.  "A  lot  happens to teach with of  of  this  is luck  have the  something financial  you  interest  else.".  or  provisions  made  by  Education. This is confirmed  there's  not  battle the  much whole  incentive time.  equate both  do  school  of  be  art  hired  unit  program  a teacher  he would program  who who  have  to  adoption  and  the  Department  principal's comment  that  "sometimes  something  board  unit.  offered  by one principal  art  an  teaching  for  direction, for  Education.  teaching  extra  chance we  incentives  the  Department  an  guarantee  in this  by another  to  If the  by  inclination  Principals  for  because  adoption  another  is summed up  If  the  of  courses have to  provision no  for  for  Art  has suffered  Department  provision  dictates  lack  the  Department  financial  policy the  education  a priority with  incentives provided  do  the  they  different. You're fighting an  said 'we  would  like you to  uphill  introduce  the program and we'll give you a teacher' - d o n e . " .  Important influence  denominational of  and Adventist school they  factors  groups to  the  adoption  school principals  associations  similiarly  on  differences  and  perceive  special  exist of  art  assign a high interest  incentives,  parent  have a great influence in the  in  the  ratings  assigned  programs. Just rating  groups support  in  to  the  as the input  curriculum and  decision to  the  of  the  Pentecostal home  decision  pressure  to  and  making,  from  these  adopt an art program. The  significantly school the  higher  influence  serves the  comparison  of  community.  of  art  incentives  can  be  directly  related  This is a consideration which  education  with  music  education.  to  how  inevitably  In  the  the  results  words  of  in one  Pentecostal school principal, Music seems more practical for public relations reasons but because the  students  are  community.  always  been  Art  involved is  at  in  a  something  traditional  considered first.  In  our  on Music comes easily because of have  made  funds  available  don't think they would  The  incentives  and  Seventh  to  adopt  an  Day Adventist  for  art  program  systems. They  a  opportunity programs  to  attend  could  drawing  school  possibly  purchase  play  elective  as  Music  area the  music in the  over  in has  emphasis  church. Churches of  instruments.  I  do the same for art supplies.  inclusion of Art  acts  carries  disadvantage.  particular  the  select few. As such, the areas,  that  mostly  in  result  in  role  smaller  systems  are  for  students  Integrated  the  in  the that  Pentecostal cater  to  a  and Music programs, as well as other  card the  a crucial  choice  who  system.  of  some  also  have  Exclusion students  of  the these  to  attend  schools within other denominational systems.  In  contrast  to  this,  principal, school board funds to  school  principals  interest  in the  program  be higher in importance  denominations, more  Catholic  nuts  and  ln  the bolts.  words We'll  of  than one  balance  consider and the  do the Catholic  the  the  attitudes  availability of  of  space and  principals representing the principal,  books  so  "Catholics tend  there's  no  red  the  other to  be  lines.  We  haven't  The  made that much progress.".  findings  reveal  influence  of  program  quality  influence  of  suspicions that the and  their  all  of  that  attitudes  and  the  the of  indicate  factors  It  in  want  badly  them  the  principal is the  statement  biggest  to  Borsa's  However,  more  junior  difference  in  attributed,  Junior  High  inclusion  of  the in  the  the  sentiment by  by  in  the  you  principal  also  interest, the  confirms  the  suggested  to  administrative  by  Mahlman  results  of  the  than  Education, which  echoed  considerations  one  higher  process. This  Arts  rate  school board  significantly  adoption  administrative  OF ART  (1978)  level  this  attitude  (1980) study  and which  give way in significance in  attitude that  and  committment.  "there's  can always find  courses  THE  most  responded  than  importance part,  IN  study,  to  did  This  always funds  space. The  the  attitude  is  if  you  of  the  in  CURRICULUM  principals that  so  the  the  Art  for  assigned to  Reorganization. The Art  program,  principals  factor.".  principals  high  programs,  support  articulated  and  art  education was related the  underlying  C. THE IMPORTANCE  be  clearly  enough  the  Force on  is also  is  process to  epitomized  the  the  that physical and financial  adoption  Similar  in  secondary art This  (1982).  toward  have  consultants'  1980 Task  committment.  McNealy  schools that  own  other  plight  in  Art Art  felt  should at  put  junior  high  forth  the  made in  curriculum  should  be  courses  recommendations belief  Art  be  an  a required  senior at  these in  the  the  affords  course  high two  the  at  level.  This  levels  can  Report  Report  option.  on  the  that  the  student  the  is  experience high  level.  bought to  necessary to In  into  adopt  Due  to  anticipation  this  art  requirement  belief  the  rectify  limited by  lacks the  at  Grade  the  future  as leverage to  situation  many  students  electives  offered,  if  the  since  be  student for  no  seen  is  not  continuation  other  if  are  offered.  high  art  a  themselves in.  courses  often  Music,  Music. This  have  school boards  find  in  senior  may  junior  currently Art  the  principals  making  interested in  electives  at  convince their  the  of  selections  requirements,  to  number  level  these  course  remains  prerequisites  7  informed  It  default,  student  of  better  or used it  programs.  will  compulsory,  make  become or  if  the  occurs especially  This  situation  may  very well determine the student's future course selections.  In  schools that  higher  than  assume that in  the  have Art  programs, principals  all  other  the  principals  curriculum  elective  as  a  of  has the potential to  Although  the  difference  in the  ratings  the  including  schools that  positive  therefore  principals'  subjects,  rate  offer  experience,  importance  Music.  Art  It  is  of  lacks  its  experience  given Art  in terms  with of  art  education  importance  in  to  inclusion  prerequisites  reach a higher number of the student  previous  much  reasonable  courses, view  which  Art  and  population.  does  relation  make to  a  other  subjects, none of these differences is significant. The fact that principals may  or  may  number  of  affecting  art  not  have  art programs program  In  had  offered,  previous or the  instruction ratings  in  Art  does  not  principals assign to  affect the  the  factors  adoption.  considering  the  importance  given  Art  in  the  curriculum,  one  principal  79 provided a response reminiscent of the in  the  curriculum  during  the  early  rationales given for the  1900's. Commenting  on  inclusion of  both  the  Art  past  and  present status of art education, the principal stated that People did Art as one Very little preparation Art  as  something  people w h o to Another failure  of  is required  you  have it  those things  are  born  you do instead of  Civics.  before  the  exam. They think  with.  It's  an  inbuilt  don't,  you're  will improve. If you  of  bias. The not  going  learn to draw. It doesn't have academic connotations. principal  by  felt  that  Newfoundland  the  lack  society to  of  secondary  art  programs  recognize the value of  was  due  to  art education  a  in  the  passed  on  same way they have recognized the value of other disciplines. We  think  rough  in terms  and  of  harsh  getting a job  environment.  The  because we reluctance  live in a rather to  change  is  a  result of strong status quo conservatism. W e haven't been all that adventurous traditional The  influence  through  of  in  bringing  in  new  programs. W e  tend  to  stick  to  subjects. traditional  generations,  and  has been  more  basic  concerns,  addressed as a factor  which  are  contributing  to  a lack  of  general public support for Art (Borsa, 1978).  These comments, coupled with the questionnaire findings, indicate that there been 1900's. iv)  very  little  change  It  is the  belief  in of  the the  that since 1970 education  quality  perception  of  Task Force on interests  of survival. However, it would  art the  have shifted  education Arts from  in  since  the  has early  Education (1980,  survival issues  appear that the development  to  p. the  of secondary  school  art  education  has  escaped  progress  made  serious in  the  consideration  development.  The  establishment  Newfoundland  secondary schools is summarized  by the  on of  both art  following  levels  of  education  in  comment  made  by a principal. I  still  think  Non-existent beyond  we're at  turning  underneath.  giving  the over  lip  high rocks  service  school and  to  level. hoping  it.  Absolute  We're  only  something  lip  service.  one comes  step out  from  VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  This chapter presents an overview of the contents of Chapters 1 to  5. There is  a  a summary  restatement  of  the  of  the  findings,  problem  and  conclusions  research questions, followed  drawn  from  these  findings  by  and  their  policy  implications. The chapter concludes with recommendations for further research.  A. RESTATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM  This  study  making  was  concerned  process involved  study,  the  principal  in  is  with art  AND  RESEARCH  identifying program  identified  as  factors  adoption  the  key  QUESTIONS  that in  influence  the  decision  secondary schools. In  actor  in  this  decision  to  determine  this  making  process.  As  discussed in  Chapter  1,  the  central  problem  was  why  there  are so few art programs in Newfoundland secondary schools. It was felt by researcher that the program status set  of  out  major  adoption  adoption  may  secondary art to  points.  curriculum  identification  determine,  serve  as  from  Information was  the  the  importance  factors  which  a basis for  education  decision making, and  of  the  in  extent  a great  change  and  on  the  of  principals'  viewpoints, extent  influence assign  subjects.  81  to  of of Art  influence  in  improvement  Newfoundland. For this  principals'  sought  have  in  reason, this  information principals'  the  on  the study three  influence  factors  on  art  in  relation  art  in  program to  other  82 The following  1.  What  is a restatement  are  Newfoundland  of the research questions.  secondary  school  principals'  perceptions  of  their  /  participation,  as compared to  the  participation  of  other  individuals  or  groups  in  the school system, in curriculum decision making? 2.  What  influence  are of  Newfoundland  What  are  importance 4.  Do  subjects  decision to  Newfoundland  perceptions  differ  of  between  principals'  availability  adopt or not to secondary  of Art in relation to  the  school  specific factors, such as the  and space, on the 3.  secondary  of  perceptions  a trained  adopt an art  school  principals'  of  teacher,  the funds  program?  perceptions  of  the  other school subjects?  the  importance  principals  with  of  art  Art  in  training  relation and  to  other  principals  school  without  art  training?  Each  of  these  questions  questions  sought  perceptions  to  generated  determine  based on  the  if  a  there  study  is  procedures  in  asked  to  and 251  ex  post  both  complete  a  pilot  and  the  27 item  pilot study.  of  the  questionnaire:  questions. in  each of  school or  These these  based  on  school.  a questionnaire  study.  sample. Interviews  subsidary  any differences  in the  research using final  of  affiliation  facto  principals in the  as part of the  were  denominational  the presence or lack of" an art program  This  number  A 60  were  total  of  principals  for 311 in  data  collection  principals  were  the  study  pilot  conducted with five  principals  Chapter  2  education, the  reviewed and  secondary  literature  art  on  education  the in  principal,  most  decision  studies  revealed  implementation administrators  of  the  a major  decision  what this  compared to the  With  the  set  level of  ln  in the  The  of  In  the  work  contrast,  literature  involves and the  of  art  literature  on  in  level  found shaping  revealed  a  of  that issues  need  this  in  (1982)  school  policy  extent  principal Sloan  Sloan  or  and  of the  involved  formation  available  influence  the  be  policies,  influence  making.  to  principal  participation  exception  principal  previously  have  curriculum  determine  making.  the  Newfoundland.  principalship, attention was focussed on the  curriculum  of  recent  to  influence  influence of other groups and individuals in the school  district  hierarchy.  Recent research on the factors which influence program lack  of  research connecting  secondary There  this  schools. Existing studies  has  not  been  any  Particular  not  attention  to  any  status  focussed on  art  programs  already  art  education  literature  the  art  the  education in  in  place. of  the  highlighted  the  influence the adoption process.  secondary art  progress made in the  been  the  in  of  illuminated  to  consideration  extent to which specific factors  lack of  information  adoption  education  development  research completed  that  of  in  Newfoundland  art education. To date, there has  can offer  insights  into the  reasons why  there are so few art programs.  Chapter the  3  described  the  conduct  questionnaire. Chapter 4  of  the  presented the  study,  detailing  findings  of  the  the  administration  study  in  the  of  order  of  the  research questions  answered. A  discussion of  these  results  is found  in  Chapter 5.  B. SUMMARY  OF THE FINDINGS  1. Influence of the The results of influential  in  second to the  this  the  making. They  influence of the of  the  school  as implementors  brokers  in  findings  emphasize  power  the  of  and this  of  consider  Department board  Department  process  structure,  Decision  Making  study indicate that principals perceive themselves to  curriculum  influence  both  Principal in Curriculum  degree  the of  of  degree  of  of  influence  Principals  view  Education requirements course  work  to  Education and slightly more  superintendent.  determining  reinforce  their  be very  offerings  of  influence  Sloan is  in  the  (1982).  obtained  and  be than  themselves as  power  school.  These  Within through  the  usual  input  on  committees. It includes setting priorities and setting courses.  2. Art Program Results schools  of  have  junior high  The  this  Adoption study  art  indicate  that  programs.  Of  the  a trained  teacher, the  than  existing  half  of  programs,  Newfoundland the  majority  secondary are at  the  level.  availability  of  attitude  towards  program  adoption. Although the  as  fewer  immediate  an  art  roadblocks  program  to  are  availability  viewed  availability of  program  as the  of  funds key  and the  factors  principals'  influencing  art  a teacher and the funds are seen  adoption,  the  principals'  attitude  can  be  seen  as an  funding  underlying  in the  symptoms  Through  problem. While  adoption  process cannot  of the attitude of  open  ended  the  influences  inhibiting  the  principal.  questions,  principals  small  school  program  size. The  promotion.  extensive  pinpointed  courses and the identification  in  program  art  administrators  3. The Most and  leads  principals senior  feel  high  levels.  one  is  importance  to  the  slightly  did  not  Art  a  significantly higher  Mathematics. toward program  less important  art  such  was  matters  principals' attitude as a major  or not  to  adopt  an optional  viewed  is, art  principals  than  as  less  elective  Social  comparing  findings  provide  which  as  factor  are  key  programs.  course at  important  both  than  and Science. However, it  other  when  education,  adoption.  in  factor  the  the  junior  academic  is considered  areas such as Music and  Studies.  to  has  its  Computer Science and  Principals'  importance  insight  been  into  pinpointed  to  the as  to  Home  previous  art  training  alter these results. However, principals with art training  rating These  committment  mentioned  principal  Economics. Art was also seen as equal in importance only  of  Education as a major  conclusion. That  be  such as English, Mathematics  equal in  and  Curriculum  should  Art  the  availability  can be considered  lack  of  frequently  of  of the  adopt  in the  that Art  Another  to  in the decision to  Importance of Art  subjects be  adoption,  the  Department  influence  setting  teacher  be overlooked, they  on the part of the school boards and the factor  of  English,  attitude a  Science  principals  major  influence  gave and have in  4. D e n o m i n a t i o n a l l y The  results  of  this  various groups the  and  differences  showed  affiliation in the  adoption.  However,  programs  offered  dispels  study  individuals  denominational  based  Based Differences in the  in of  the  are  according  the  curriculum  factors  there  that  no to  schools  schools. The  in  programs.  each  system,  Comments  denominational influence  findings  significant  inequalities  denominational  it  beyond  is  made  differences  in  differences are perpetuated  the  by  in  religion  show  that,  the  in  are  principals  influence  of  during  institutionalized of  fewer  sense. the  in art  This  to  of  the  than  do  number  of  fewer  art  has  revealed  a result  Historical  art  information  programs  which  be  program  number  interviews may  to  denominationally  the  system.  system  development  by the structure  in  proportion  Integrated  program  the  considered influential  previous speculation that Catholic schools offer  Integrated  of  Similiarly, there  are  each  perception  decision making varies according  school.  which  Findings  and  of  the some  traditional  denominational system  rather  than by behaviour of the denominations themselves.  C.  CONCLUSIONS  The following on  the  is a summary of  findings  of  this  study.  from one province, they for  a number  adoption of  on  programs. art  program  major  Although  conclusions that can be drawn based these  have a degree of  reasons. While  process, the  existing  effect  of  the  findings  the  can be  Consideration adoption  focus  of  conclusions are  generalizability to of  used to the  has produced  the  study  help  a larger revolves  explain the  denominational findings  based  that  on  data  population around  present  education  the state  system's  can be generalized  to of  most  rural  influence  sufficiently  1.  areas of  The  held  Canada, in addition  by  the  principal  general to apply to  recent  increase  recommendations  in  made  in  this, the  art  the  high  art  programs  Report  by  the  Committee. The increase may also be a result art curriculum  does not  2. Principals are the  require  responses on the  curricular  subjects areas other than  junior  in  to  decision  the  making,  are  attributed  to  Art.  can  Junior  of  extent  be  High  fact  Reorganization  that the  junior  high  a specialist teacher.  key actors  in the  decision making  process of  art  program  adoption. 3. The  input  of  special interest  significant role in the 4.  The  input  influence  in  of the  adoption  home  and  curriculum  groups of  art  curriculum  decision  making  plays  a  programs.  school  decision  in  associations making  and  parents  process within  has  the  a  significant  Pentecostal and  Seventh Day Adventist systems. 5.  Principals in  immediate  the  attention  art  program  6.  The  lack  Integrated  system  in any incentive  or  of  secondary  art  given by principals to the  9.  targeted  inservice  programs  as a group  programs  who  designed to  need  increase  Principals view the  Principals equate  the  a  reflection  of  in visual arts can result  importance  availability  principal as the three  is  the  importance  curriculum.  7. Increased experience and training  the  be  adoption.  principals place on art in the  8.  can  of  of Art  a trained  in relation to  of  a higher  other  subjects.  teacher, funds  key factors influencing unavailability  in  art program  a trained  teacher  and the  rating  attitude  of  adoption. and  funds  with  the  lack of  committment  However, things who  the  from the  results  of  may be related to do  not  from  art program  adoption.  10. Incentives, to  the  consider Art  commitment  used  this  the  to  school boards and the study  belief  that  of  Education as an  support the  and the  adoption  of  art  lack  of  these  education. Principals perceived lack  excuse for  image art  of Education.  the  be very important may use the  Department  influence  the  principals' attitude toward  such as financial  significantly  support  Department  of  the  programs  of  the  lack  of  school,  can  be  programs  in  each  of the denominational systems. 11.  The  structure  of  the  denominational  education  constraints on the ability of small rural schools to  system  has  imposed  offer Art as a course choice.  D. POLICY IMPLICATIONS  1.  The  Newfoundland  (Canadian  Society  Department  for  Education  of  Education  through  needs  to  adopt  Art)  national  art  the  national  policy  the  CSEA's  education  policy  guidelines.  Developed need  to  national  from  a study  formulate policy  provincial  position a  by  and art  paper  (1987),  regional  documents  education". when  Any  regional  which  such  clearly  document  local  districts  the  "could  be  budgetary  distress and as an important checklist for curriculum committees materials" (p. 45).  "the  state  as  constructing new instructional  and  advocates  employed  with the task of  position  for  Baxter  are  facing faced  2.  Advocacy  program  efforts  adoption,  The review advocacy  of  is the  programs  a concerted this  conditions  3.  literature  missions  Although  hierarchy  efforts  of  description  to  authority  of  has  the  date, the  conditions  for  focus  of  lack  of  be remedied, advocates need  to  existing is to  in  the  art  predominant  programs.  politics  of  Newfoundland,  shown  that  question  of  the of  of  the  on  attention to  focus  education  of  support  the  If  the  establishing it  is likely  principal  from on  policy  the  as  the  as  the  availability well  and school  from  school  position  be  usual  for  programs. that  similar  one  of  the  figures  in  the  for  this  as  attitudes  principals'  toward  need  formulation  has to  to  This  extensive  address  education.  appear  attention  of  associations, parents  those and  in  the  According  magnify  of funds and space. Advocates also need the  a  (1987,  programs.  structure,  art  attitudes  art  In  Baxter  people in policy  secured  within  principal.  Canada,  making. Advocacy efforts  underlying  study,  the  must  principal,  decision  this  attention, home  attention  their  order  art  principals'  physical problems their  in  whose  curriculum  results  focus  principal as one of the pivotal  in  influence  of  particpate  shift  a national  influence  focus  has shown that to  to  creating  decision and policy making.  implementation,  the  towards  planning.  in Newfoundland  should  need  p. 45) identifies  to  directed  exist in small, rural schools elsewhere in Canada.  advocates  study  be  deals specifically with  leaders in curriculum  and  must  improvement  effort  study  Advocacy  Art  Art  as well as program  the  secondary art make  in  power,  special interest  on  the to the  groups,  such as local art groups. Baxter (p. 45) includes the enlistment  of support  these  the  and other  groups  as an advocacy approach in  line  with  from  national  art  education policy model.  4. There is a need for the the  politics  of  art  program  adoption  of  adoption  a model  as well  for  as  advocacy which addresses  the  improvement  of  existing  programs.  This model w o u l d more  need to  move  accurately address the  beyond the  issue of  usual public relations  educational opportunity.  missions to  A decision making  model adapted by MacGregor (1985, p. 44) includes the socio-political influences which of  need to  this  the  be considered. The findings  model  which  psychological  environments  acknowledges the  environments  include  in  consideration  of  of  this  interplay the the  of  study  support  the  operational  decision  making  historical  framework  the  structure  as well as  process. and  These  attitudes,  beliefs and values which are basic to the decision making process.  5.  Equality  of  educational  Department  of  Education's  opportunity incentives  should directed  be at  the  central  improving  the  issue  in  status  the  of  art  education.  The  Department  stress  the  of  Education  importance  students  the  despite  these  of  opportunity statements,  art  to  makes  repeated  education  and  experience it. The  program  adoption  has  philosophical the  necessity  results been  of  the  statements of  which  affording  study  show  miminal. Saying so  all that does  not  necessarily  incentives  to  educational needs  to  make  adopt  it art  its  This  is  a  goal  committment.  over a long term, in support  6.  Government  require  The  present  government's and  recent  services liaise  of  with  invitation. the  Moore, that  education power  art  not  merely  of  art  coordinators  The  the  by  inclusion  of  change be  It  financial  equate  support.  the  investing  art  If  government more  in  directly a  another  of  different  the  money,  curriculum  approach  the  value  of  Education  of  consultant's  board  level.  the  education  employs  the  responsibility  This  art coordinators working  within  1988). It  is  to  upon  inservice programs  for  teachers  (H.  is reasonable to  assume  and  of  art  level. Educational leaders with  the  reached  serious  art  in  done  development  are  as  the  are so few  - teacher  information:  is  school  consultant  seen  structure  Department  program  never  a  regarding  February 15,  regarding  develop a model for  present  of  principals  in the schools.  usually provides  communication,  remains at the  of  that  lipservice,  done  necessitates  consultant. at  consultant  information  dissemination  be  the  information  time  full  effect  can  education  one  can  The  and  for  development.  coordinators  7.  provision  However, since there there  to  needs to  the  of art programs  program  personal  any  of  dissemination  province, the  shown  implementation.  status  art  has  with  This  recommendations  a model for  study  programs  opportunity show  so.  by  these  impediment  reason why  the  the  value  efforts.  to  the  Department  of  Lack  of  successful Education  implementation.  the  denominational  education  system  requires  examination of  alternatives for  The review of  the  literature  art program  has shown that the structure  education system has resulted in the large  number  of  adoption.  division of  sharing  of  alternative  alter  leaders to  of  art an  this  art  search for  schools  of  On  the findings  1. As there to  art  rural (1987,  by  is a need for education education  located in  services. The  as  a  factor  be any immediate it  schools of  FURTHER  of  One  denominations  advocates  and  an increase in  the  such  differing  the  changes in the  is essential for  schools.  varying  inhibiting  alternative  is  denominations.  sharing  the  the  Another  same  space  the community at large.  RESEARCH  this  study, further  research is recommended in  areas.  suggested  p.  these  one school or within  FOR  the following  small  between  E. SUGGESTIONS  basis of  of  alternatives that can facilitate  within  teacher  involves  the  situation. Therefore  programs  located either within  the  replication  school  programs. It is unlikely there will  number  a  pinpoint  of  curriculum  areas with a  study  adoption  may  into  with  this  system that  province  schools, sometimes  of  denominational  the  small  findings  of the  in has  panel  members  research which Canada. specific that  In  participating  reported  rural  areas and "face  a study  connects relevant  particular,  applications  123)  in  almost  two  the to  body  Canadian thirds  numerous staffing,  of  non-art of art all  by  Baxter  (1987),  education research  research  dealing  education. American  expenditure  and  with  DeYoung  schools  are  instructional  problems frequently  2.  There  is  education  a  dissimiliar to those of metropolitan"  need  programs  for  the  which  evaluation  takes  into  of  an  areas.  implementation  consideration  the  model  interplay  of  for  art  economic,  social, geographical and political factors which affect the status of art education.  3. There is a need for the by  the  Department  education and the implementation  of  development  Education that  factors  directly  at  affecting the  and evaluation of  is sensitive  this. Such  to  the  a program  school level, where  the  an inservice program present should  status be  principal's  of  art  geared  for  support  is  to  be actively sought.  4. It  is necessary to  education  system  aimed at the  assess  on  equality  system take the  of services rather than the curriculum  5.  empirical  administrators  of  of  the  educational  form of  effect  research  of  structure  opportunity.  of  the  At  denominational  present,  financial considerations of  the system on the quality  development program.  connects  need for  alternatives  the  decision making to  understand and effect  6. There is an immediate  an art  which  have in curriculum  is essential in order to  adopt  effects  of  the  criticisms replication  program  and  development.  Further  program  the  influence the  various  status of  change in this  art  levels  of  education  process.  research which develops and evaluates viable  for  small  schools in  rural  areas that  wish  to  7. Ethnographic research, focussing on  decision making processes involved in art  education,  understanding  is necessary to  administrators  further the  in this process.  of  the  influence  of  various  VII. REFERENCES  Baxter, L R . (1987). A national of  Borsa,  The  status  Alberta: unpublished  D., Chomas, Skaalid,  H.S. (1978).  of  art  education:  Case  studies.  University  of  Master's thesis.  J., Hall,  B. (1983).  Saskatchewan  Broudy,  policy for Canada. Canadian Review  Art Education Research, 14, 35-47.  J . M . (1978).  Bowes,  art education  I.,  Illaszewicz,  Implementing  C,  curriculum:  Loder,  R., Shepherd,  The role  of  the  A., &  principal.  Education Administrator, 15(2), 13-26.  Survey  of  aesthetic  attitudes  of  key school  personnel.  Central midwestern regional educational lab., Inc. St. Louis, M O . ,  1-81.  Brubaker, D.L. & Simon, L.H. (1987). H o w d o principals view themselves, others? NASSP Bulletin, 71, 72-78.  Campbell, A. (1979). Reaching others  through  Cannon,  A  D . C . (1984).  Response  National art education  Council  of  Higher  Withers,  King's  nation  at risk  from  executive  director,  association. NASSP Bulletin, 68(470), 15-17.  Education  examinations of the  to  the arts. Art Education, 32, 24-25.  (1905).  council  Syllabus  and  regulations  for  the  of higher education, Nfld. St. John's: J.W.  Printer. 95  Council  of  Higher  Education  examinations of  the  (1915).  council  Syllabus  of  higher  and  regulations  for  the  e d u c a t i o n , N f l d . St. John's: J.W.  Withers, King's Printer.  De  Bevoise, W .  (1984).  Synthesis of  research  on  the  principal  as  instructional  leader. Educational L e a d e r s h i p , 41(5), 14-20.  DeYoung,  A.  (1987).  integrated  The  review  status  and  of  American  commentary.  rural  Review  education  of  research:  Educational  An  Research,  57(2), 123-148.  Eisner, E. (1988). The principal's role in arts education. P r i n c i p a l , 67(3),  Fullan, M . (1982). The m e a n i n g of  Coldfarb,  R. (1979). The  art  and  6-9.  e d u c a t i o n a l c h a n g e . Toronto: OISE Press.  politics  of  arts  advocacy. Art  E d u c a t i o n , 32,  22-23.  Guthrie,  J.W.  (1986).  School  based  management:  The  next  needed  education  reform. P h i Delta K a p p a n , 68(4), 305-309.  Hatfield,  T.  (1979).  Publicity,  what we have. Art  Hooks,  R.L. (1980). in  the  publications  promotion:  Making  the  most  of  E d u c a t i o n , 32, 14-17.  Identifying  public  and  and  s c h o o l s of  verifying  factors  Alabama between  of Alabama: unpublished doctoral dissertation.  facilitating 1965  and  art  education  1978. University  Houston,  P.D. (1981). Stalking the  E d u c a t i o n , 34(5),  school  administrator:  J.W.  (1987).  the  arts.  Art  18-19.  Joseph, B. (1975). Political action for art education. Art  Keefe,  Advocating  The  critical  questions  of  E d u c a t i o n , 28(3), 34-35.  instructional  leadership.  NASSP  B u l l e t i n , 71(498), 49-56.  Lipham,  J.  and  Hoeh,  J.A.  (1974).  The  principalship:  Foundations  and  f u n c t i o n s . N e w York: Harper and Row.  MacCregor, Art  R. (1985).  Policy making  and  policy  changing. C a n a d i a n Review  of  E d u c a t i o n R e s e a r c h , 12, 39-47.  Mahlman, J. (1980). The real issues in art education. P r i n c i p a l , 60, 21-23.  McNealy,  E.C. (1982). The  Ohio  Moore,  H.  report  behavior  relationship  State University, unpublished doctoral  (1986).  Newfoundland  Newfoundland  attitude  Statistics  Department  Department of  the  on  of  art of  Newfoundland  programs  E d u c a t i o n , Sept.,  and  (1980).  school  principals.  dissertation.  education  Education  of  Newfoundland.  1-4.  Comin'  Labrador  in  task  to force  our on  senses: the  The  arts  in  e d u c a t i o n . St. John's.  Newfoundland  Department  of  St. John's: Department  Education of  (1981).  Course  Education, Division of  description: Instruction.  Art  1200.  Newfoundland  Department  of  Education  (1982).  d e s i g n 3200. St. John's: Department  Newfoundland  Department  of  Education  of  Department  of  description:  Education, Division of  (1982).  design 2200. St. John's: Department  Newfoundland  Course  Course  Education (1987). Directory.  of  Education (1986). The  St. John's:  and  Instruction.  description:  Education, Division of  of  Art  Art  and  Instruction.  Department  of Education.  Newfoundland  Department  reorganization of  committee.  St. John's:  report  Department  of  of  the  junior  Education,  high  Division  Instruction.  Newfoundland  Department  of  Education  (1977).  Visual  art  teaching  guide.  St.  John's.  Newfoundland  Teachers'  presented  to  Association  the  (1986).  Government  of  Exploring  new  Newfoundland  pathways: and  A  Labrador.  brief St.  John's.  Ornstein, A . C . (1986). Curriculum, instruction, and the  Rallis,  S.F. & Delta  role of the  Highsmith,  relationship  principal. NASSP B u l l e t i n , 70(489), 74-81.  M . G . (1987).  K a p p a n , 68(4),  and supervision - Their  300-304.  The  myth  of  the  "great  principal".  Phi  Rowe,  F.W. (1976).  Education and  culture  in  N e w f o u n d l a n d . Toronto:  McCraw  Hill.  Rowe,  F.W. (1952). The  history  of  education  in  N e w f o u n d l a n d . Toronto:  The  Ryerson Press.  Rowe,  F.W. (1964). The d e v e l o p m e n t  of  education  in  N e w f o u n d l a n d . Toronto:  The Ryerson Press.  Tanner,  D.  (1987).  Improving  the  B u l l e t i n , 71(498), 30-34.  curriculum  -  Guidelines for  principals.  NASSP  VIII. APPENDIX  The  ONE  Questionnaire  100  102 5.  Please indicate the geographical region of Newfoundland in which your school is located.  6.  Northern Newfoundland  []  1.  []  2.  Southern Newfoundland  []  3.  Western Newfoundland  []  4.  Eastern Newfoundland  []  5.  Central Newfoundland  []  6.  Labrador  H o w long have you been a principal at your present school? Number of years:  7.  .  ••  Please indicate the total number of years you have been a principal. Number of years:  8.  What year were you born?  9.  What is the highest academic preparation or qualification you now have? []  10.  11.  1.  some university or college  []  2.  Bachelors degree or equivalent  []  3.  some graduate work  []  4.  Masters degree or equivalent  [ ]  5.  some doctoral work  []  6.  Ph.D./Ed.D.  Have you ever had any art instruction? (see item 11 for clarification of art instruction) []  1.  Yes  []  2.  No  If you answered YES to question 10 please indicate the type of art instruction you have had.  12.  [ ]  1.  private lessons  []  2.  informal (community centre, recreation)  [ ]  3.  formal (extension courses)  []  4.  formal (university)  []  5.  other  O n the basis of your experiences in art how would you rate your knowledge of art? Very Great 1  Very Little 2  3  4  5  6  7  SECTION B: THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL 13.  103  ln your opinion, to what extent do the following groups or individuals usually share in the decision making about the curriculum in your school? (This includes setting courses, planning, development, evaluation development, etc..)  O n a scale from 1 to 5, 1  indicates Extensive Input and 5 indicates No Input.  i.  students  ii.  other staff members  iii.  parents  iv.  Extensive  No  Input  Input  1  1  2  3  4  5  []  []  []  []  []  []  []  []  []  []  special interest groups,ie.sports or arts groups  v.  home and school association  vi.  principal  vii.  school board superintendent  viii.  school board trustees  ix.  provincial dept. of education  14.  Please describe what your level of involvement in curriculum decision making entails.  15.  Are there aspects of decision making that are important in your role as principal but are not covered by the categories in question 13? If YES. please describe.  S E C T I O N C: ART P R O G R A M A D O P T I O N  16.  Does your school offer an art program (one or more courses)? []  1.  Yes  []  2.'  No  17.  If YES to question 16, how long has your school offered art as a course choice?  18.  If Yes to question 16, please list the course(s) offered.  19.  If your school does include art in the curriculum, what are the reasons?  20.  If your school is unable to include art in the curriculum, what are the reasons?  104  105 21.  Please indicate to what extent you feel the following factors influence the decision to adopt or not to adopt an art course. O n a scale from 1 to 5, 1 indicates Great Influence and 5 indicates N o Influence. Great  No  Influence 1 i.  availability of funds  ii.  quality of program  iii.  availability of space  iv.  availability of trained teacher  v.  availability of media  Influence 2  3  4  resources.ie. slide tapes vi.  student interest  vii.  teacher / staff support  viii.  parent support  ix.  special interest group pressure  x.  home and school association interest  • xi.  principals attitudes toward program  22.  xii.  consultants support  xiii.  school board interest  xiv.  incentives, ie. image of school  O u t of the fourteen factors listed in question 21, choose three factors which you feel have the most influence.  ii. iii.  23.  Please list any other factors not listed in question 21 that might influence this decision.  5  24.  25.  []  1.  Option  [ ]  2.  Required  [ ]  3.  Undecided  Should art at the senior high level be an option or a required course? []  26.  106  Should art at the junior high level be an option or a required course?  1.  Option  [ ]  2.  Required  [ ]  3.  Undecided  In terms of importance in the curriculum, how d o you view art in relation to the following subjects? more Art is...  not as  important  important  English  []  []  [J  ii.  Sciences  []  []  []  iii.  Social Studies  []  []  []  i.  27.  equally  important  iv.  Mathematics  []  []  []  v.  Music  []  []  []  vi. vii.  H o m e Economics Industrial Arts  [] []  [] []  [] []  viii.  Computer Science  []  []  []  In your view, what are the most important factors influencing art curriculum adoption in schools?  THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO COMPLETE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE Please return to: Ann Manuel, Art Education, Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia, 2125 Main Mall, Vancouver, British C o l u m b i a V6T 1Z5  IX. A P P E N D I X T W O  The Cover Letter:  Initial Contact  107  108 Visual and P e r f o r m i n g Arts in Education THE UNIVERSITY O F BRITISH C O L U M B I A Faculty of Education, 2125 Main Mall Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1Z5  September 5, 1987  Dear Principal: I am a Newfoundland teacher currently engaged in graduate study in art education at the University of British Columbia. My research is on the role of the principal and factors that influence the adoption of art programs in Newfoundland secondary schools. In order to make my study a success I need your help. I would appreciate it if you would complete the enclosed questionnaire which is designed to provide information on your perceptions of influences on art curriculum adoption. Please be assured that your response will be kept confidential. N o individual name or names of school districts are required. Your consent to participate in this study will be indicated by the completion of this questionnaire, however, you d o have the right to refuse participation by not returning the questionnaire. The questionnaire is brief and can be completed within fifteen minutes. I realize that this is a very busy time in the school year but l do hope you find the time to complete and return this by September 30, 1987. A self addressed, stamped envelope is provided for this purpose. I am most willing to share the research results completed the study. You need only to write to the questionnaire and request this information. Thank you very much for your assistance.  Sincerely,  Ann Manuel Art Education  with you once address indicated  I have on the  X. A P P E N D I X  THREE  The First Follow Up  109  Letter  Visual and P e r f o r m i n g Arts in Education THE UNIVERSITY O F BRITISH C O L U M B I A Faculty of Education, 2125 Main Mall Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1Z5  September 30, 1987  Dear Principal: Aproximately three weeks ago a questionnaire decision making was sent to your school.  concerning your role in  curriculum  The questionnaire is an integral part of a study which is being conducted exclusively with secondary school principals in Newfoundland. In order to acheive any meaningful results because of the relatively small sample size, it is critical that virtually all questionnaires be returned. Due to the anonymity of the responses I have no way of knowing whether you have already returned your questionnaire. If you have, I would like to thank you for your participation. However, if you have not already mailed the completed questionnaire I would encourage you to do so. I realize that this is a busy time of the school year and emphasize that it should take approximately fifteen minutes to complete the items. Should you require another questionnaire I convenience. Thank you for your support and cooperation.  Sincerely,  Ann Manuel Art Education  have  enclosed  one  for  your  XI. APPENDIX  FOUR  The Second Follow Up Letter  111  112 Visual and Performing Arts in Education THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH C O L U M B I A Faculty of Education, 2125 Main Mall Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1Z5  November 6,  1987  Dear Principal: Aproximately seven weeks ago a questionnaire concerning your role in curriculum decision making was sent to your school. This was followed four weeks later by a second copy of the questionnaire. The arrival of this may have been delayed by the recent postal strike. Despite the delay, the study is continuing and your help is needed. I realize so early small it take the  and appreciate the many demands you in the school year. However, since the is important that all questionnaires be fifteen minutes needed to complete and  have upon your time especially sample size for this project is returned. I encourage you to return the form.  Thank you for your time and cooperation. Best wishes for a great school year!  Sincerely,  Ann Manuel Art Education  XII. APPENDIX FIVE  School District  Divisions  113  114 M a p of Integrated School Districts  115 Map of Catholic S c h o o l Districts  


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items