Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The role of community education coordinators in community schools in the lower mainland and Victoria,… Gubbels, Joseph 1975

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

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A8 G82.pdf [ 5.67MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0055724.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0055724-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0055724-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0055724-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0055724-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0055724-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0055724-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0055724-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0055724.ris

Full Text

THE ROLE OF COMMUNITY EDUCATION COORDINATORS IN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS IN THE LOWER MAINLAND AND VICTORIA, BRITISH COLUMBIA by JOSEPH GUBBELS B.A., St. Patrick's College, Ottawa, May 1965 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Faculty of EDUCATION We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA June, 1975 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t 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 representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. tfoseph Gubbels Department of Adult Education The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date June, 19 75 ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to describe community education and to identify roles of community education coordinators. A literature review formed the basis of a research instrument which was devised and used to discover actual and ideal roles of coordinators in community schools in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British Columbia. Five pilot studies were executed to establish exclusive role descriptors. The role descriptors established were: instructor, public relations person, community developer, administrator, learner and coun-selor. A token distribution procedure was employed to determine the amount of time 21 coordinators 'actually' spent and 'would like' to spend at each role during an average week. A questionnaire was developed to gather personal data; the Eysenck Personality Inventory was selected to measure two personality characteristics - extraversion and neuroticism. For reliability purposes the token distribution instrument was adminis-tered to a random sample of coordinators two months after the i n i t i a l survey. The study described the personal characteristics of the coordi-nators, determined the mean percentage of time they actually spent and would like to spend at each role and determined the relationships among the roles and between the roles and personal characteristics. Community education is spreading rapidly in British Columbia and is in a constant state of change. The research instrument used in i i i i i t h i s study permits the jobs of the coordinators to be described and may be used as a basis f o r determining t h e i r role expectation, as a guide for dividing t h e i r work time, and to compare t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s with the average of other coordinators. The behaviours of the coordinators w i l l i n e v i tably depend, however, on the circumstances surrounding t h e i r job, t h e i r preparation for the job, and the attitudes of those involved i n the programs that they provide. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT i i LIST OF TABLES v i i LIST OF FIGURES ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENT . x CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION . 1 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 2 PROCEDURE OF THE STUDY 2 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY . 3 The Emergence of Community Education 3 Community Education i n British Columbia 6 PLAN OF THIS STUDY 11 II LITERATURE REVIEW 13 THE ROLE OF COMMUNITY EDUCATION 13 The Place of the School in Community Education . . . . 13 The Process of Community Education 14 The Characteristics of Community Education 15 THE ROLE OF COMMUNITY EDUCATION COORDINATORS 18 T i t l e of Coordinators 18 The Personal Characteristics of the Coordinators . . . 18 The Personality Characteristics of the Coordinators. . 19 iv V CHAPTER Page Leadership Qualities of the Coordinators 20 The Coordinators and School Staff 21 The Coordinators and the Advisory Council 22 The Coordinators and the Students 27 The Coordinators and Personal Needs 27 III METHOD 29 INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT 29 Development of Role Descriptors 29 Questionnaire 38 Eysenck Personality Inventory 39 INTERVIEW PROCEDURE -. 41 RELIABILITY OF INSTRUMENT . . 45 IV RESULTS 48 PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF COORDINATORS 48 Age, Sex, Marital Status 48 Eysenck Personality Inventory 50 Educational Achievements 51 Organization and Group Participation 54 Prior and Present Residence 55 ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS 56 Time and Salary 56 Titles, Schools and Staff 58 Policy and Budget 61 ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS 64 Role Distribution of the Coordinators 65 VI CHAPTER P a £ e Relationship Among the Roles of the Coordinators . . . 66 Relationship Between the Roles and Characteristics of the Coordinators 72 V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 82 SUMMARY . 82 Review of Literature 82 Method 84 Results 85 CONCLUSIONS 90 BIBLIOGRAPHY . 92 APPENDIX A 98 APPENDIX B • 1 0 2 APPENDIX C . 1 0 8 APPENDIX D APPENDIX E 1 1 7 APPENDIX F 122 LIST OF TABLES Table Fage 1. Mean, Standard Deviation and Test-Retest Correlation Coefficients of Roles and Discrepancies of Coordinators 47 2. Sex of the Coordinators 49 3. Marital Status of the Coordinators 50 4. Number of Degrees Attained by the Coordinators 51 5. Certification of the Coordinators 52 6. Major Field of the Coordinators 53 7. Prior Occupation of the Coordinators 53 8. Continuing Education of the Coordinators 54 9. Membership in Professional Organizations of the Coordinators 54 10. Membership in Local Groups of the Coordinators 55 11. Prior Residence of the Coordinators 55 12. Present Residence of the Coordinators 56 13. Weekly Total Hours of Full-time Coordinators . 57 14. Salary of the Coordinators 58 15. Title of the Coordinators 59 16. Title of Superior of the Coordinators 60 17. Type of Community School of the Coordinators 60 18. Number of Staff of the Coordinators 61 19. Policy Involvement in Community Schools 62 20. Budget Contributors to Community Schools 63 v i i v i i i Table Page 21. Budget of the Coordinators . . . . 64 22. Role Distribution of the Coordinators . . 66 23. Relationship Among Actual Roles of the Coordinators . . . 67 24. Relationship Among Ideal Roles of the Coordinators . . . . 68 25. Relationship Between Actual and Ideal Roles of the Coordinators 69 26. Correlation Between Actual-Ideal Discrepancy Scores . . . 71 27. Relationship Among Characteristics and Actual Roles of the Coordinators - Ordinal Data 73 28. Relationship Among Characteristics and Actual Roles of the Coordinators - Nominal Data 74 29. Relationship Among Characteristics and Ideal Roles of the Coordinators - Ordinal Data 75 30. Relationship Among Characteristics and Ideal Roles of the Coordinators - Nominal Data 76 31. Relationship Between Characteristics and Discrepancy Scores of the Coordinators 80 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Community School-Community Relationship 16 2. Community Council Representation . . . . . 23 3. Source of Formal and Informal Leadership 24 4. Relationship of Extraversion-Introversion Neuroticism-S t a b i l i t y to Early Scheme of Temperament 40 5. Age of the Coordinators 49 6. Location of Coordinators on Combined Eysenck Personality Inventory and Galen-Kent-Wundt Scheme of Temperaments. . 51 7. Length of Time as Coordinators 57' i x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The w r i t e r wishes to express his sincere appreciation to Dr. Gary Dickinson, Dr. Roger Boshier and Dr. James Thornton for t h e i r guidance, insights and encouragement during the course of th i s study. Gratitude i s extended to the 21 community education coordi-nators for t h e i r cooperation and enthusiasm. In the development of the research instrument the w r i t e r wishes to thank the students of Education V, the Adult Education graduate students, Mr. Jack Cooper, Mr. Jack Stevens and Mr. Don McKinnon for t h e i r valuable contributions and sug-gestions. Grateful acknowledgement i s made to Mr. John Hewson and Mrs. Heather Troche for t h e i r typing assistance. x CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The adequacy of the school system has been constantly questioned by the public. Innovations have been adopted throughout the years i n an attempt to make the system more e f f i c i e n t and e f f e c t i v e . The edu-cational system has evolved from being closely united with the community into a s e l f - s u s t a i n i n g e n t i t y . Thus, Clark (1971) stated that the public school system i s a massive bureaucratic agency, with l i t t l e p o s s i b i l i t y of input from the community i t serves. I t i s imperative that the entire educational process be evaluated and reconstructed to i d e n t i f y and meet the various needs of people i t should serve. Totten and Manley (1969) wrote that much contemporary education i s r i t u a l i s t i c . In many cases, teachers do not a r t i c u l a t e t h e i r teaching with the broad community resources available. In many schools, parental involvement i s considered a threat by the professional s t a f f of the school. Community education implies a process i n which resources within the community are u t i l i z e d for educational, c u l t u r a l or recreational a c t i v i t i e s . I t leads to the fulfilment of community needs. The centre of operation i s the community school. Minzey and Le Tarte (1972)' d i f f e r e n -t i a t e between community education and the community school by stating that the former i s the concept and the l a t t e r the delivery system, or the device which provides for carrying out the concept. 1 2 For a successful community education program there must be persons who integrate and coordinate the programs. These persons are known by various titles, but in this study will be referred to as community edu-cation coordinators. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY This study seeks to describe community education and the role of the community education coordinators by literature review and empirical research. The latter was devised to discover the actual and ideal roles of the community education coordinators in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British Columbia. The specific objectives of this study are: 1. To describe community education and identify the characteristics and roles of the community education coordinators as depicted in relevant literature; 2. To describe the actual roles of the community education coordinators in community schools in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British Columbia; 3. To describe the ideal roles as perceived by the community education coordinators in community schools in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British Columbia. PROCEDURE OF THE STUDY Based on the review of literature specific behaviours of the coordinators were selected. These formed the basis of five pilot studies which were designed to combine or eliminate behaviours and establish 3 independent role descriptors. The method of "token distribution" was used to determine the actual and ideal roles of the coordinators. A questionnaire was developed to gather personal data and the Eysenck Personality Inventory was selected to measure two personality charac-teristics - extraversion and neuroticism. The following section describes the background of the study -namely, the emergence of community education, community education in British Columbia, and the plan of the study. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY The Emergence of Community Education The role of education is constantly changing. In the development of the school system a l l formal training or education was the respon-sibility of the family and provided by its older members. As the com-munity developed, a portion of this responsibility was delegated to knowledgeable persons, or tutors from the community. Later, formal institutions were established to supplement individual education by a cooperative facility. The school became a centre of learning and activity for the entire community. This was the beginning of community education and characterized by the " l i t t l e red schoolhouse." Hughes (1972) said the schoolhouse then served as the community centre for a l l activities. The teacher sometimes lived with families. He taught and became familiar with their needs and desires as well as their children's expectations. Gradually, the school became more responsible for educating children and thus became the educational agency of the family. As the 4 school grew into a large, complex system, community members had less and less direct influence on its function and i t became isolated from the basic needs and aspirations of the community. Clark (1971) stated that the school system has become a multi-billion dollar business which operates on a part-time basis only for one segment of the population. Whitt (1971) stated that education is an investment and does not make sense for a school district to close down early each day and leave the tools of production idle for nearly two-thirds of each producing week day. Decker (1972) added that the school is viewed as having the highly specialized job of training childrens' minds and teaching them intel-lectual and vocational skilis. Emphasis is placed upon subject matter. Academic ability is the only measure of a child's success. Teachers are expected to be experts in subject matter fields and in the methods of transferring this knowledge. As an outgrowth of this emphasis, the school has become separated from the community and any attempt at participation from parents and interested citizens is considered by the school personnel as an inter-ference. Havinghurst and Neugarten (1969) said that in such cases the community outside the school is regarded as introducing problems of undesirable complexity for school personnel, and an attempt is made to keep the boundary between the community and the school clearly defined and respected, lest temptations arise to interfere with the school's operations. The pendulum is swinging back to community participation in matters pertaining to school; formal education is becoming the respon-sibility of everyone. Decker (1972) conceived of community education 5 to be eclectic and a combination of many educational movements. Its evolution occurred in periods when forces favouring a close school-community relationship were dominant. In the United States these forces paralleled social and economic phases of history. During these phases, attention was focused upon finding solutions to the needs and problems of people and communities. According to Minzey and Le Tarte (1972) these concerns are mainly in the area of solving problems related to prejudice, proverty, ignorance, inequality and crime. The dynamic and self-renewal processes implicit in community education demand that both the philosophy and its implementation undergo changes and modifications as times and problems change. The implementation of community education varies from one com-munity to another. There has been no systematic theoretical development. Van Voorhees (1972) stated that there is l i t t l e empirical research that either supports or denies the effectiveness of community education. Weaver (1972) wrote that most recent publications in community education have been more descriptive than definitive, more promotional than analy-tical and more practical than theoretical. Many community education practitioners continue to transplant practices suggested by others, often with considerable success and sometimes with disappointing results, but always without the benefit of a theoretical framework against which to check results. The first step in the building of a theory is the definition of terms. As far as the definition of community education is concerned, there has been no consensus. In the earlier stages of development i t 6 was limited to programs such as evening classes for adults and recreation, and became synonymous with extra-curricular activities for children and adults using the facilities of the school. Minzey (1972) summarized these activities: Agent student higher education institute community college segregationist militants vocational people others Purpose adult education, public relations, extended activities continuing education credit and non-credit classes neighbourhood schools community control job training and retraining promotion of fine arts, social work, poverty and disadvantaged programs, recreation, pre-school programs, compensatory education Such a conglomeration of meanings causes confusion, and the misuse of the term results in mistaking a part for the whole. There are many commonal ties in the above listing and a l l relate to some aspect of education and community. Community Education in British Columbia Community education has a short history in British Columbia. It was introduced in the mid-I960's along with innovations in educational programs, such as individualized instruction, open area schools, team teaching and perceptual learning. Increasing attention has been given 7 to the community school concept in British Columbia because of economic concerns (tax funds for educational purposes were not being utilized to the best possible advantage) and out of a social concern (that the educational system was not realizing its f u l l potential as a community service agency)„ Slipper (1968) wrote that the recent resurgence of interest in the community use of educational buildings in British Columbia arises because of concern that large units are only used for a limited period. This idea is stimulated particularly by political leaders. Concern for the greater use of school-community facilities and cooperation between school boards and government agencies in educational endeavours became apparent in reports published in British Columbia. These reports concerned the development of physical educational facilities, but evolved into a more comprehensive concern for community education. One report recommended that federal, provincial and municipal planners should consider the school and its surroundings as the centre of the community i t serves; duplication of buildings and areas could be avoided and costs of construction and maintenance and the employment of staff kept to a reasonable minimum (Pennington, 1967). It was recommended at a conference in 1968 that the schools be the focal point of human development for the community, that government and other agencies recognize and support the community school, increase its educational grants to provide for better school facilities and intro-duce legislation for joint cost sharing in the supplying of facilities for the use of the whole community. It was also recommended that school districts appoint community school coordinators, and that agencies and 8 citizens cooperate in planning educational and recreational facilities in the community (Pennington and Kallus, 1968). The British Columbia Teachers' Federation (1968) advocated the use of the talent and physical resources of the community, better school-community communications, the involvement and participation of parents in the work of the school (recognizing that education is a joint enter-prise of the home and the school) , the establishment of community service centres and the use of school buildings in the evenings and during vaca-tions . The Celdic Report (1970) proposed various concepts relating to community education. Among these were: the use of aids and volunteers to assist classroom teachers; the development of the curriculum to be based on the needs, interests and abilities of children; the establishment of neighbourhood councils, agencies and organizations to cooperate and coordinate their programs for the well being of the total community. The British Columbia Parent-Teachers' Federation (1968) recom-mended that provision be made in the Public Schools Act for the removal of obstacles to the joint financing of school-community activities and for the specification of the terms under which joint financing may be carried out; that regulations governing the use of school premises be amended; that the Attorney-General's Department, the Department of Edu-cation and the Department of Municipal Affairs publish a manual setting out aspects of jointly financing and operating school-community programs; and that an advisory service be established. The Report on Physical Education of 19 71 was the most comprehen-sive study in British Columbia which recommended the adoption of community education for the entire province. Its recommendations summarized a l l previous reports and briefs, interviews, and conferences and set out recommendations to be acted upon by agencies in the province (Pennington et al., 1968). An amendment to the Public Schools Act (1973) encouraged the use of school buildings for recreational, vocational and leisure acti-vities by a l l members of the community and permitted the use of school buses for extra-curricular activities. Also, the School Board may, under this amendment, enter into agreements with municipalities or regional districts for purposes of constructing, maintaining, operating or using jointly school facilities. In 1973, the British Columbia Parent Teachers' Federation prepared a report on the public's role in education. One of its major recomen-dations was the establishment of community schools which would provide common facilities for the use of the entire neighbourhood and through which the work of a l l agencies concerned with education could be co-ordinated. The focus would be on social and educational activities and stress the importance of citizen participation in decision-making. The British Columbia School Trustees' Association established a Provincial Community School Team (1973) with the cooperation of the Commissioner of Education and the Educational Research Institute of British Columbia. The aim of this team was to study the implications of community education to meet British Columbia educational needs, foster development on a province-wide basis and offer consultative services. This team published four working papers. 1 0 Based on the findings of the Ontario Report on the Utilization of Educational Facilities (1973), a report was also written on leisure services in British Columbia (Broom, 1974). It recommended a province-wide study of educational facilities, the development of provincial legislation and school board policy in order to facilitate the community use of schools. School design was also considered. The Social Planning Department of the City of Vancouver prepared a report on the role of the Board of Parks and Public Recreation (Jessup, 1974) in the development and operation of community schools in Vancouver. The purpose of this report was to determine an appropriate role for the Parks Board in planning, funding, staffing, management and programming of community schools. In September 1974 the University of British Columbia initiated Education V, a fifth year program to prepare students to teach in com-munity schools. Besides offering core courses in the philosphy of com-munity education, leadership and the role of the teacher in the community school, this program offers field work and experience with community groups, short intensive courses in related fields and activities such as conferences, seminars and workshops. The first community schools in British Columbia were Queen Mary in North Vancouver and James Bay in Victoria. These were officially established in September 1971. Simultaneously, the Surrey Parks Board appointed a Director of Community Schools to coordinate recreation programs in that district. The Vancouver School Board approved a multi-service construction combining recreational, educational, vocational, social 11 and government services known as the Britannia Community Service Centre. A similar program has been approved in Saanich in the form of a complex known as Spectrum Community School. Since 1971, 21 institutions in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia and Victoria have become community schools. Each has varied programs and administrative structures and no two schools are exactly alike. In most cases the coordinators are responsible to the principal and hired by the school board. In other cases there is a joint agreement between the school board, the parks board, the social planning board and the local neighbourhood. Community education is new to British Columbia and a confusing concept. There are as many definitions as persons involved. Many ques-tions arise such as: what is the difference between community education and the community school?; what distinguishes a community school from an ordinary school?; who is responsible for planning, financing and operating community education?; what is the role of the integrating link - the community education coordinators?; what are their respon-sibilities?; are they doing what they should be doing?; and are they doing what they would like to be doing? PLAN OF THIS STUDY Chapter II contains a review of literature pertaining to the role of community education and the coordinators. Chapter III describes the method employed in this study; the development of the instrument; 12 procedure; and the test re-test reliability of the instrument. Chapter IV presents results pertaining to the personal characteristics of co-ordinators; their roles; the relationship among their roles and among their roles and socio-economic characteristics. Chapter V gives the summary and conclusions of this study. The following chapter focuses on the literature review. The literature on community education is extensive. An ERIC search was made to discover articles, documents and research reports related to community education and the coordinator. A search was made through Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts and relevant books. Although there was material written on community education, very l i t t l e was devoted specifically to the coordinator. However, some doctoral dissertations (Blue, 1970; Berridge,1969; Scott, 1966; Stalcup, 1960; Walker, 1971) and one handbook (Whitt, 1971) were directly related to the coordinators. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW This literature review concerns the role of community education and community education coordinators. In this report 'role' includes the place of the school, the process, and the 'characteristics' of community education. The 'role' of the community education coordinators includes the tit l e of the coordinators, their personal characteristics, leadership qualities, relationship with the school, with the advisory councils, with the students, and their personal needs. THE ROLE OF COMMUNITY EDUCATION The Place of the School in Community Education Community education is implemented in the school as an extension of its traditional role. Mott (1959) pointed out that the public school has played the traditional role of common denominator in our society, and today is an institution truly representative of a l l classes, creeds and colours; also, the schools are geographically suited to serve as neighbourhood centres for recreation and democratic action. According to Minzey (1972) the community school plays a catalytic role as a co-ordinating agent in educational endeavours. Moon (Hickey and Van Voorhees, 1969) said that the community school can serve as a vehicle to focus 13 14 various agencies on a problem, thus eliminating duplication and maximizing resources. The Process of Community Education The key term to identify community education is "process." Rigby (19 72) viewed community education as a new process - involving school and community. This process shapes untapped physical and human resources into new dimensions for education, culture and social growth. Kilpatrick (Everett, 1938) said that education is part of the very fact of living. We learn what we live; what we learn is the process of living built into the structure of one's being. According to Horton (Everett, 1938) l i f e educates. Schools can give direction to the edu-cative process by becoming an organic part of l i f e itself. Both children and adults live in a world where needs and wants are bound together. Schools must combine the economic, social, intellectual, aesthetic and moral elements of our culture, just as people combine them in everyday l i f e . The process of community education begins with programs which satisfy particular needs. Minzey (Hickey and Van Voorhees, 1969) said community education is an evolutionary process which usually grows from an extension of school services and activities into areas previously thought to be outside the responsibility of schools. As the programs and services increase, those responsible are able to get more people involved in community activities. Activities give rise to feelings of individual and group identification. As a community they identify problems and they seek solutions. 15 Clark (19 72) summarized the process concept of community edu-cation. It is : - a means for putting ideas, needs and wants of people back into the educational system that serves' them; - a means for providing academic, vocational and recreational enrich-ment and leisure time experiences to a l l community members. - a means for cooperating with other educational agencies serving and working towards common goals and identifying overlapping of responsibilities and voids in services provided. - a means for community members to understand, evaluate and attempt to solve locally basic human problems. The Characteristics of Community Education The characteristics of community education are described as: the community for the school; the school for the community; community control; and the educative community. These characteristics are depicted in the following figure (Decker, 1972). It represents the mutual use of school-community facilities and resources for educational, recreational and cultural purposes forming an educative community in which the members participate in their own development. The community for the school signifies the discovery, development and the uses of the resources of the community as part of the educational facilities of the school (Seay, 1945). The whole community is conceived as a learning laboratory which is used as a school - a l l people being potential teachers and everything in the community being possible resources (Frank, 1971; Irwin, 1971). 16 Figure 1. Community School-Community Relationship The facilities and resources of the community must be used in the educational process. Schools belong to the people; they should be used at their convenience (Clark, 1972). The school must function as: - an educational centre, where children and adults have optimum opportunities for study and learning; - a neighbourhood centre for cultural and recreational activities, with the school serving as a focal point for leisure-time activities and involving recreation, group work, adult education, civic meetings, tutoring, senior citizens' activities, arts, crafts and drama; - a centre for social services, where individuals and families may obtain health and counselling services, legal aid and employment services; - a centre of neighbourhood and community l i f e - assisting citizens in the study and solution of neighbourhood problems (Hughes, 1972). 17 Community control is an outcome of the process of community education. This term is often used in the context of community involve-ment or decentralization. An educational system based upon community control is said to provide individuals access to decision-making within the educational institutions; i t proposes meaningful individual and group participation and involvement and encourages creative thinking and initiative (Minzey and Le Tarte, 1972). Community control alters basic power relationships and seeks to follow democratic procedures (Gordon and Kassin, 1971). The educative community is responsible for the development of a l l its members. Boles (1964) indicated that average school children spend two and one half times more hours per year in the community than they do in school. Community-learning may be more penetrating, satisfying and lasting than that which occurs in the classroom (Melby, 1965). Learning is not something that starts and stops when the school bell rings. McClosky (19 73) stated that persons in the community with an actual or potential capacity for education should assume the respon-sibil i t y for their educative role and implement that assumption by making educational contribution to the community as explicit and effective as possible. The educative community is best summarized in a brochure pub-lished by the Flint Board of Education (Totten and Manley, 1969). In - Get the people of the community into the school primarily by means of recreation and education.. Interested - Get them interested. Explain the problems and help the community to solve them. 18 Involved - Ask people to help. They are willing and able when given the opportunity. Informed - The informed person is the responsible citizen concerned with improvement. Having thus described the role of community education (the place of the school, the process and the characteristics), the second part of this chapter wil l present the role of the community education co-ordinators. THE ROLE OF COMMUNITY EDUCATION COORDINATORS Title of Coordinators The success or failure of community education depends upon the coordinator. This person is identified by various titles: Community School Coordinator; Community School Director; Community Service Director; Animateur; Administrator; or Assistant Principal, depending upon the reference group. Basically, these titles refer to the same person, who is the catalytic agent in the process of community education. For the purposes of this study, this agent is called the community education coordinator. The Personal Characteristics of the Coordinators A study of coordinators by the Community Education Centre of St. Thomas College indicated that two-thirds of the coordinators were 35 years of age or younger (Fish, 1973; De Santis, 1974). 19 The New York Times (Fish, 1973) suggested that women do not perceive themselves in the role of coordinators and usually are not enrolled in great numbers in community education training centres. Since community education is a new concept, few people are directly trained in this field. Many authors feel successful experience in education, youth work, recreation, community development, adult edu-cation or social work is recommended (Totten, 1970; Hickey and Van Voorhees, 1969; Whitt, 1971). Although Fish (1973) indicated that 50% of the coordinators had less than a Master's degree, Nance (1972) considered coordinators should possess a Master's Degree in order to relate to people at higher levels, but that this would not be necessary for those working at the local school level. Orientation programs are recommended for coordinators who do not have a university degree or specific training in community education. De Santis (19 74) stated that coordinators are generally selected from local or nearby areas. This has the advantage of the coordinators knowing and living in the socio-economic situation of the area. Berridge (1973) noted that community education requires f u l l -time coordinators to avoid disjointed programs. Bottom (1971) indicated that the position of the coordinators is a full-time job and often demands more than a forty hour week. The Personality Characteristics of the Coordinators Desired personality characteristics of the coordinators are described in the literature. Minzey and Le Tarte (1972) wrote that 20 they must be highly motivated, task-oriented and flexible, adaptable but consistent in order to respond to the real needs of the community. Other authors have described them in the following way: as persons with a sense of humour; as being enthusiastic, optimistic and cheerful. Their generosity and dedication expresses their accessibility to the community. Being sincere and conscientious, they will be respected and trusted by the community. They must be self-reliant, self-confident, and courageous in their efforts to propose innovations in the educational system. Above a l l , they must be understanding and democratic in their dealings with the community (Carrillo, 1973; Totten, 1970; Stevens, 1971; Kerensky and Melby, 1971; Whitt, 1971; Hickey and Van Voorhees, 1969; Melby, 1972; Walker, 1971; Sternberg and Sternberg, 1971; Nance, 1972; Lovett, 1971; Hughes, 1972; Murray, 1956; Loving, 1954). Leadership Qualities of the Coordinators Leadership qualities are essential for effective functioning in the community. Tannenbaum (1961) defined leadership as interpersonal influence exercised in situations and directed through the communication process, towards the attainment of a specific goal. People perform best under leaders who are creative and imaginative. The leaders marshall the forces of an organization to stimulate effort, to capture the imagination, to inspire people in cooperative efforts, to serve as model for sustained effort (Sergiovanni, 1969). Leaders must have a conviction that what they do will be bene-f i c i a l to the community where they work. The coordinators must be con-vinced that the philosophy of community education is defensible (Sophiea, 21 1964; Minzey and Le Tarte, 1972), act as facilitators (Committee on the Community School, 1974; Kerensky and Melby, 1973; Decker, 1975) of the community education process, as change agents working to effect positive change (Nance, 1972), as ombudspeople (Kerensky and Melby, 1973) and catalytic agents (Kerensky and Melby, 1973; Minzey, 1974; Hughes, 1972). Coordinators are motivators, expediters, learning specialists, masters of ceremonies and community-action agents (Whitt, 1971)-. The Coordinators and School Staff It is axiomatic that the school board, principal and school staff have accepted the concept of community education before coordinators are hired. Nevertheless, there are conflicting ideas regarding community education which may disrupt the traditional school. Thus, coordinators must be active exponents of community education by individual contact. In-service training for teachers must include methods of relieving teacher anxiety, of demonstrating the positive impact of community involvement and of stressing the importance of education to the needs of the commu-nity. When teachers recognize the positive effects of community education there is a better chance of them accepting the concept and offering cooperation. The following suggestions to improve coordinator-staff relation-ships have been proposed: Inform the staff concerning the programs (Carrillo, 1973; Whitt, 1971); - Involve the staff in identifying problems and in planning program operation (Lovett, 1971; Murray, 1956; Whitt, 1971); 22 Credit the staff involved and be a good listener (Kerensky and Melby, 1973; Melby, 1972); - Welcome criticism and suggestions (Kerensky and Melby, 1973; Burden and Whitt, 1973); - Work to involve parents with teachers and meet regularly with the principal to discuss programs (Stevens, 1971); - Aid the teachers in using the community resources in their curri-culum and negotiate with support staff regarding wages, hours and working conditions (Wilson, 1974; Whitt, 1971); - Stimulate team work to promote the image of the community school as a place for a l l the people (Herman, 1971; Turridge, 1973). In this way the coordinators will be constantly available to the staff to inform and cooperate with them in a l l respects. Additional staff are sometimes necessary. According to Berridge (1973) the coordinators must constantly seek qualified persons to teach in the programs. Immediate staff may consist of a secretary, a super-visor and instructors. Often the school staff can be utilized and re-organized to assume responsibility of a course. Volunteers and para-professionals from the community are an asset to the program. Para-professionals and volunteers, after necessary training, work well with similar persons in the community, especially with the poorer families (Hiemstra, 19 72). The Coordinators and the Advisory Council If a community school advisory council does not exist at the local level, the coordinators, must establish one. It is by means of 23 this council that coordinators function. The structure of the council will vary from one community to another, depending on the characteristics of the community. Seay (1974) and Nance (1972) consider council members must be true representatives of the community willing to give time and talents according to their capacity. They must assume an advisory and decision-making role and not be viewed as a 'rubber stamp' council. Kerensky and Melby (1971) wrote that these representatives serve to inform the school of the community's needs, desires and expectations, and to inform the community of problems and goals sensed by educators. Hiemstra (1972) depicted the advisory council as a represen-tative of the community. This is illustrated in the following figure. Figure 2. Community Council Representation 24 In order to differentiate community education programs from the community education process, certain techniques are important for establishing citizen involvement. Coordinators must recognize and in-volve leadership elements in the community (Whitt, 1971; Marburger, 1972; Hurwitz, 1974; Totten and Manley, 1969). Minzey and Le Tarte (1972) diagrammatically illustrated the source of formal and informal leadership in the following figure. This figure is an adaptation of illustrations on the sources of leadership by Hunter (1953). groups izations" Mghbr.J Upper L i m i t s Power Personnel I Issues^ Groups c a CO o <a £ E o CJ ial Cliqu tS^wer Limits Power Personnel S pecia E thnic Clubs local I iforrr Others Under Mructure Personnel Figure 3. Source of Formal and Informal Leadership The community advisory council should be based on results of a community leadership study. This will avoid a random selection of citizens who do not truly represent the community. It is from the advisory council that community leaders are also developed. Coordinators must be aware of the importance of developing leaders in order that programs will continue to operate regardless of his presence. Coordinators must relinquish leadership as quickly as others are ready to accept i t , and develop a widespread understanding 25 and acceptance of responsibility for persons whose lives are affected by the programs (Murray, 1956; Ramirez, 1953; Mayhew, 1972; Spence and Essert, 1968; Henry, 1953; Seay, 1974; McClosky, 1973; Melby, 1955; Stevens, 1971). The coordinators must organize with the advisory council a sys-tematic study and evaluation of the needs of the community. While co-ordinators may serve as initiators, i t is important that local people become involved. Communication that takes place between local people during the study is an important by-product of the process. Coordinators will need community support to carry out the study (Hickey and Van Voor-hees, 1969). There is a variety of educational programs and activities that can be initiated, but there are certain factors to be considered before beginning them, such as budgeting, facilities and existing programs in the community. It is the role of coordinators to assist the advisory council in discussing these factors. Community education requires additional expenses for the school district, even though reorganizing a traditional school into a community school can be accomplished with minimal increases (Whitt, 1971). The Flint experience has shown that i n i t i a l costs for a community school program are about six to eight percent of the school board total budget (Hiemstra, 19 72). The amount and sources of financing for community education will depend on the importance the local community places upon i t . Boozer (Hickey and Van Voorhees, 1969) wrote that to those indi-viduals and systems committed to community education funding for such 26 a program will be seen as an appropriate function of the regular edu-cational tax system. Facilities must be available in the school and community to begin community education programs. Some authors maintain that co-ordinators (and the advisory council) must arrange the pooling of existing facilities for the use of the community (Totten and Manley, 1969; Bartels, 1973; Punke, 1951). Facilities would include classroom space, recre-ational areas and equipment. In cases where facilities are inadequate or not available, plans must be made to acquire them. Many agencies and organizations already offer educational programs in the community. The coordinators with the advisory council must not duplicate programs. The coordinators with the advisory council must constantly evalu-ate activities to determine their effectiveness. Continuous evaluation serves to appraise the ongoing activities (Herman, 1971), and makes possible continuous accountability to the community (Seay, 1974). Communication with the public can be accomplished in a variety of ways. Personal contact is the most effective means of communication, permitting the public to meet the coordinators as real persons, clari-fying concerns and misunderstandings about the programs. Telephone calls and letters are means of getting the people involved and acknowled-ging participation in programs. The coordinators must know how to use the mass media properly, be able to develop a plan for its use in the community, and involve people in its use. Speakers in local groups are a means of diffusing information. Whitt (1971) suggested that a large 27 bulletin board be placed in a prominent place in the school to include lists of activities, personnel and other articles relating to community education, as well as public announcements. The Coordinators and the Students Although i t is not recommended that coordinators teach, often they are called upon to do so (Nance, 1972; Stevens, 1971; Whitt, 1971). Bottom (1971) stated that half-time teaching and principalship diminishes the effectiveness of the coordinators in the work of the community. Some authors (Nance, 1972; Seay, 1974; Totten and Manley, 1969) indicated that often the coordinators are asked to counsel people on such subjects as employment, finance and marriage. According to their background and preparation they can give a minimum of individual or group counseling or refer such people to counseling agencies. The Coordinators and Personal Needs The effectiveness of coordinators depends largely on their know-ledge and commitment to community education. They must remember they are students of community education and keep in touch with new develop-ments. They be avid readers (Kerensky and Melby, 1973) and participate in conferences and workshops on the local, provincial or national level. Coordinators must constantly examine the strengths and weaknesses of ideas and programs and synthesize the fragmented ideas into working units (Clark, 1971). When there are many coordinators in a specific area, they should schedule regular meetings to exchange experiences and f a c i l i -tate professional development. 28 This chapter has described the role of community education and reviewed literature concerning the characteristics of coordinators. The following chapter describes the methodology of this study. Having regard to the foregoing literature review the 'method' of this study was designed to extend knowledge concerning the personal and personality characteristics of coordinators, their actual and ideal roles, and the relationship between 'personal' characteristics and involvement in various community education 'behaviours.' In formulating the 'method' we faced the need to develop an instrument that could record the 'actual' and 'ideal' roles of coordinators without violating the highly subjective and fluid nature of their activities. The resolution of this problem is described below. CHAPTER III METHOD Based on the review of literature, 53 of community education coordinators "behaviours" were selected. These behaviours formed the basis of an instrument to measure the actual and ideal roles of the coordinators in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. Five pilot studies were designed to establish reasonable independent role descrip-tors. A questionnaire was developed and the Eysenck Personality Inven-tory (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1968) was selected to gather data regarding personal and personality characteristics of the coordinators. INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT Development of the Role Descriptors A questionnaire was created (Appendix A) in which a pilot popu-lation was instructed to rank each behaviour in order of importance under each role descriptor, rank each role descriptor and state the percentage of time the coordinators should spend at each "behaviour." Example: Rank each item in order of importance as an aspect of the community education coordinator's role. Counselor: 1. counsels children and adolescents 29 30 2. counsels adults. 3. refers members of the community to professional coun-selors, agencies or organizations to solve their problems. Rank each "role descriptor" and state the percentage of time the community education coordinator should spend at each. 1. Educator % 6. Public Relations % 2. Counselor % 7. Communicator % 3. Student % 8. Program Dev. % 4. Administrator % 9. Facilitator % 5. Supervisor % 10. Community Dev. % Forty-two students in the Education V program (at the University of British Columbia) and five coordinators were asked to f i l l out the questionnaire. Eight Education V students and five coordinators responded for a total of thirteen respondents. The results of this pilot study revealed that behaviours under each role descriptor were not judged to be exclusive to one general role descriptor and could be combined or stated more succinctly. The 53 behaviours were revised and reduced to 46. Another ques-tionnaire (Appendix B) was designed where respondents would check off the one role descriptor which in their view best labelled the described behaviour. The behaviours were arranged by means of random numbers. 31 Example: The community education coordinator: a. Teaches b . Develops programs The role descriptors were: Program Developer, Communicator, Community Developer, Learner, Instructor and Administrator. Forty-one Education V students and 25 students in Education 412 (Introduction to Adult Education) responded for a total of 60 respon-dents. The results (Appendix B) revealed there were s t i l l difficulties associated with distinguishing program developer from community developer and administrator. Communicator appeared to be too general and non-exclusive. Program developer was thus deleted and communicator replaced by public relations person in the preparation of the next questionnaire (Appendix C). Twenty-seven Education 412 students and 28 adult education graduate students were asked to f i l l out the questionnaire. The in-structions were similar to those for the second pilot study. Twenty-seven Education 412 students and 23 adult education graduate students responded for a total of 50 respondents. Twenty-four (60% of the total possible) checks in each category was accepted as evidence of the fact that the listed behaviour was deemed to be an activity which accurately characterized a program developer, u „ 0) 0 p. «J o l-l rH 60 OJ O > u a) cm a o u o *-> a) •H P. § a) B > o <u o o R CD fi cfl <U h3 U O u CJ 3 M 4-1 CO C H O c0U c •H • • 32 community developer, instructor, administrator and so on. The number indicated with an asterisk (*) in the following l i s t were accepted. A minimum of five behaviours for each role descriptor was deemed sufficient to 'identify' a role. Numbers 16 and 19, 6 and 30, 13, 23, and 38 were combined into one behaviour. This pilot study established four role descriptors, namely: Public Relations Person, Community Developer, Instructor and Administrator. The community education coordinator 1. Performs routine operations, such as work on correspondence, telephone, personal interviews and registration arrangements 3. Implements an ongoing evaluation to reassess community needs 4. Maintains records on personnel, attendance, budget, supplies and other aspects of community education programs 5. Provides communication opportuni-ties between the community school staff and the staff of other dis-trict schools 6. Prepares and administers an annual budget for the community education program 8. Studies the socio-economic struc-ture of the community 9. Selects and cares for facilities and equipment 1 a (0 o 1-1 CO u CD u s*. u o ui 4-> CD 4-1 tu •H p. U o o C O <U 3 Ti CO 3 r-i PI u iH e g <U u 4-1 XI o S > CO co 3 •H o <u <u c CM 4J O Q •J M 12 28* 31* 2 0 1 27* 8 3 1 u o 4-1 CO u 4J < 28* 0 38* 0 37* 2 2 8 27* 33 i c CO o i-l CD a> u U t-I OJ iH C .O O 4-1 0) •H PH I > o 0) c_> a crj M O u M 4-1 CO C M O cd < 13. Supervises the staff and volunteers in a l l educational, recreational and social activities 30. Prepares and submits reports to the school board and community on the progress of the community education programs 33. Develops a system of delegating supervision 34. Examines the ideas and programs of other coordinators for possible application in his school 36. Teaches children in a formal class-room environment 38. Hires, trains and maintains a competent staff 40. Teaches physical education 41. Displays a bulletin board in a public place to announce activities and to promote community education 43. Works to effect positive and bene-f i c i a l change within the community 45. Maintains community-school com-munication 46. Promotes, publicizes and interprets programs to the school staff and the community 0 26* 32* 0 0 34* 1 25* 1 37* 2 27* 39* 0 2 0 0 1 37* 0 1 0 39* 0 30* 6 0 0 4 4 33* 0 1 1 34 It a o co <D 1-1 d CD PM CJ •H CO rH C JO O 3 "H 4J 01 •H P . S cu S > o <D u cu ca a> • J M O •U O 3 M 4-1 CO U O 4J cd l-l U CO •H C 1 5 . Provides communication opportuni-ties between the community school and organizations which provide education, recreational and social services 2 8 * 1 6 . Works closely with the advisory council in assessing needs, setting goals, objectives, guidelines for community education 17 . Reviews with his staff materials prepared for educational programs 18 . Serves on community committees and participates in organizations and/or service clubs to develop rapport with lay leaders 1 9 . Organizes and develops an advisory council which represents social, interest groups in the community 23. Manages and organizes inservice training opportunities for the staff, volunteers, supervisors and advisory council members 2 4 * 2 4 * 12 2 5 * 10 2 5 * 2 5 * 2 5 . Assigns rooms and equipment, resolves conflicts and arranges the activity schedule 3 4 * 2 6 . Teaches adults in a formal class-room environment 4 0 * 2 7 . Develops educational, recreational and social activities to meet needs of people in the community 3 1 * 35 Not having the sufficient percentage of checks on the role des-criptors of learner, and after receiving suggestions to add counselor, another questionnaire was created. This questionnaire (Appendix D) was made up of behaviours which had a range of responses in the third pilot study. Counselor was also added. Behaviour number 2 was divided into two behaviours and numbers 10, 14, 34 and 39 clarified. The be-haviours were arranged by means of random numbers. Twenty-four adult education graduate students were asked to f i l l out the questionnaire. Twenty-one responded satisfactorily. Thirteen (60% of the total possible) checks in each category was accepted as evidence that the listed behaviour was deemed to be an activity which accurately characterized the counselor and instructor roles. The numbers with an asterisk (*) indicate those accepted.- As shown below, counselor and learner were thus added to the categories establishing six role descriptors of community education coordinators. u i c o i H CO U CO CO u >, u o u u pi, CD -P <D ->-) +-> O Bi t | P i U O to rH O Pi O CD 3 -rl Q) •rl CO 3 rH C U a to i - H p l i c u U 4-1 -H Pi J 3 0 B > f) co S 3 3 - H O 0 ) <U G "T3 O p v i 4 J U Q i-J H < C_> 1. Reads professional materials to continue own education in related field 2. Counsels children, adolescents and adults 4. Refers people to individuals, agencies and/or organizations that can help solve their problems 0 0 18* 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 20* 3 2 0 0 3 13* 36 u I c p n> O % r-i m u ?* . <u u >, u o u u pi CD 4J CD 4-> 4J O (Xi «rl D. O 03 i~l • C O Q) 3 -H <U •H CO 3 H C M C 2H C g (U C W *H g , O O B > ct) to B 3 3 - H O C U cu C "5 o pn 4-1 U Q H J M < U 6. Attends workshops, seminars and conferences to keep abreast of new developments in community education 1 1 16* Three district coordinators of community education (Vancouver, North Vancouver and Surrey) examined the following six role descriptors of the coordinators and made clarifications. INSTRUCTOR Teach adults in a formal classroom environment. Teach children in a formal classroom environment. Teach physical education PUBLIC RELATIONS PERSON Promotes, publicizes and interprets programs to the school staff and the community. Provides communication opportunities between the community school and organizations which provide education, recreational and social services. Provides communication opportunities between the community school staff and the staff of other district schools. Serves on community committees and participates in organizations and/or service clubs to develop rapport with lay leaders. 37 COMMUNITY DEVELOPER Develops educational, recreational and social activities to meet needs of people in the community. Organizes and develops an advisory council which represents social, interest groups in the community and works closely with them in assessing needs, setting goals, objectives and guidelines for com-munity education. Manages and develops a leadership training program for community members. Works to effect positive and beneficial change within the community. ADMINISTRATOR Maintains records on personnel, attendance, budget, supplies and other aspects of community education programs. Prepares and administers an annual budget and submits reports to the school board and community on the progress of the community education programs. Performs routine operations, such as work on correspondence, telephone, personal interviews and registration arrangements. Hires, trains and supervises a competent staff and volunteers in a l l educational, recreational and social activities. Assigns rooms and equipment, resolves conflicts and arranges the activity schedule. LEARNER Reads professional materials to continue own education in related field. Attends workshops, seminars and conferences to keep abreast of new de-velopment in community education. COUNSELOR Counsels children, adolescents and adults. Refers people to individuals, agencies and/or organizations that can help solve their problems. 38 Because of confusion in the word "manage" in the third activity of community developer, i t was suggested this word be deleted. It was recommended that the instructor role be rephrased in order to include "required and optional programs within or outside of official school curriculum" referring to children and simply state "instruct in adult education programs" referring to adults. Questionnaire A questionnaire (Appendix E) was developed to gather data regarding the personal characteristics of coordinators. This included age, sex, marital status, prior and present residence, educational qualifications, major field of study, prior occupation, continuing education, amount of time at present job, membership in professional organizations and groups, type of school, job t i t l e (and that of the immediate superior), salary, budget, policy and number of staff. The above information described the coordinators by age, sex and marital status, and indicated their educational and professional background. 'Prior residence' referred to the location of the coordinators (inside or outside of British Columbia) before working at their present community school; present residence indicated their actual residence within or outside the school district. 'Education qualifications' referred to the number of degrees and/or certificates received by the coordinators and their distribution (i.e., diplomas, Bachelor and Master Degrees, and B.C. Teachers Certificate). The 'major field of study' included their degree field (or the field of those working towards a degree). 39 'Prior occupation' referred to the coordinator's work experience imme-diately prior to employment at the school. 'Continuing education' re-ferred to participation in inservice programs, courses, workshops and seminars. The amount of time spent in the present job was also noted. 'Professional organizations' referred to organizations such as the B.C. Teachers Federation, Pacific Association of Continuing Education and the National Community Education Association. 'Groups' referred to organizations such as Lion's Club, Curling Club and the Y.M.C.A. It was necessary to distinguish the 'type' of community school as primary, junior secondary, senior secondary. The salary ranges, budget contributors and organizations involved in policy making in the community schools were also determined. The 'number of s t a f f means those working with the coordinators (i.e., full-time, part-time or volunteers). The coding schedule for this data is contained in Appendix F. Eysenck Personality Inventory The Eysenck Personality Inventory was used to measure two impor-tant personality characteristics of the coordinators identified as extraversion-introversion and neuroticism-stability. Extraversion refers to the outgoing, uninhibited, impulsive and sociable behaviour of a person. Neuroticism refers to the general emotional overresponsiveness and liab i l i t y to neurotic breakdown under stress. Empirical investi-gations have demonstrated these two dimensions of personality to be quite independent. Twenty-four questions based on item and factor analysis measure each dimension. Included is a response distortion (Lie) scale AO which detects attempts to falsify responses. The coordinators were asked to answer the 57 items by marking "Yes" or "No." Eysenck reports test-retest reliability of the E.P.I, on two groups of normal English subjects. The time elapsing between test and retest was approximately one year for one group and nine months for the other. Test-retest reliability ran between .84 and .94 for the complete test. The above data was taken from the Eysenck and Eysenck Manual (1964). The following figure shows the relationship between extraversion and neuroticism and the Galen-Kent-Wundt scheme of four temperaments (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1964). Figure 4. Relationship of Extraversion-Introversion Neuroticism-Stability to Early Scheme of Temperament 41 INTERVIEW PROCEDURE In order to determine the actual and ideal roles of the com-munity education coordinators, token distribution was employed. Six cards were printed, with each card stating the role and its constituent behaviours as shown below. CARD ONE INSTRUCTOR Teaches children in required program within the official school curri-culum. Teaches children in optional programs outside the official school curri-culum. Instructs in adult education programs. CARD TWO PUBLIC RELATIONS PERSON Promotes, publicizes and interprets programs to the school staff and the community. Provides communication opportunities between the community school and organizations which provide education, recreational and social services. Provides communication opportunities between the community school staff and the staff of other district schools. Serves on community committees and participates in organizations and/or service clubs to develop rapport with lay leaders. CARD THREE  COMMUNITY DEVELOPER Develops educational, recreational and social activities to meet needs of people in the community. 42 Organizes and develops an advisory council which represents social, interest groups in the community and works closely with them in assessing needs, setting goals, objectives and guidelines for com-munity education. Develops a leadership training program for community members. Works to effect positive and beneficial change within the community. CARD FOUR ADMINISTRATOR Maintains records on personnel, attendance, budget, supplies and other aspects of community education programs. Prepares and administers an annual budget and submits reports to the school board and community on the progress of the community education programs. Performs routine operations, such as work on correspondence, telephone, personal interviews and registration arrangements. Hires, trains and supervises a competent staff and volunteers in a l l educational, recreational and social activities. Assigns rooms and equipment, resolves conflicts and arranges the acti-vity schedule. CARD FIVE LEARNER Reads professional materials to continue own education in related field. Attends workshops, seminars and conferences to keep abreast of new de-velopments in community education. CARD SIX COUNSELOR Counsels children, adolescents and adults. 43 Refers people to individuals, agencies and/or organizations that can help solve their problems. The following instructions were organized and presented to the respondents. Instruction Sheet THESIS TITLE The Role of the Community Education Coordinators in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British Columbia. FIRST OBJECTIVE To identify the roles of the community education coordinators as depicted  in the literature. After a search through the literature, various roles of the coordinators have been selected. These roles have been grouped together under six major headings: Instructor, Public Relations Person, Community Developer, Administrator, Learner and Counselor. SECOND OBJECTIVE To describe the actual roles of the community education coordinators  in community schools in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British  Columbia. By means of a Token Distribution the coordinators will indicate the proportion of time during an average week in which they actually spend at each indicated role. Instructions Step I (The coordinators will receive the six descriptor cards.), Read each card carefully and set them on the desk in front of you in the order indicated. Step II (The coordinators will be asked how many hours they spend on the job in an average week. They will receive an equivalent number of tokens, each one representing one hour.) Distribute these tokens on each card according to the number of hours you actually spend at each function or activity until a l l tokens have been distributed. Step III Count the tokens on each card. (The corresponding number will be entered on the data sheet.) 44 THIRD OBJECTIVE To describe the ideal roles as perceived by the community education  coordinators in community schools in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British Columbia. Instructions Step I The same as Step I above. Step II (The coordinators will be asked how many hours they would like to spend on the job in one week. They will receive an equiva-lent number of tokens, each one representing one hour.) Distribute these tokens on each card according to the number of hours you would like to spend at each function or activity until a l l tokens have been distributed. Step III The same as Step III above. The coordinators were then handed the six cards and asked to read and place them on a desk. After the experimenter stated the first two objectives of the study, the coordinators were asked how many hours they actually work during an average week. An equal number of tokens (each representing one hour) was given to them. They were then asked to distribute the tokens on the cards according to how they actually spent their time during an average week at each function or activity until a l l tokens had been distributed. Upon finishing that task, the respondents were asked to count the number of tokens on each card. This number was recorded by the experimenter. After gathering a l l the tokens from the cards, the third objective of the study was stated. The coordinators were then asked how many hours they would like to work during an average week. They were given that number of tokens and asked to distribute them according to the number of hours they would like to spend at each function or activity. 45 Upon finishing the task, they were asked to count the number of tokens on each card. These numbers were recorded. When a l l the tokens and cards had been gathered up, the experi-menter explained the need to acquire specific personal data in order to determine the correlations with the responses from the role distri-butions. The questionnaire was then administered (Appendix E). When the coordinators had finished f i l l i n g out this questionnaire, the experimenter requested them to complete the Eysenck Personality Inventory. RELIABILITY OF INSTRUMENT Two months after the survey, a random sample of the coordinators repeated the token distribution procedure. The same tokens, descriptors and instructions were employed on the second occasion. Test-retest (Pearson Product-Moment) correlation coefficients were calculated for a l l the "Actual" behaviour, "Ideal" behaviour and discrepancy scores employed in this phase of the study. Eleven correlation coefficients attained an acceptable probability level (p < .05). Discrepancy scores are known to be more unreliable than non-discrepancy scores (Wylie, 1974). Casual observation suggested that the failure of 7 of the "behaviours" or discrepancy scores to attain an acceptable reliability coefficient was due more to factors such as those described by Bohrnstedt (Summers, 1970) which threaten internal validity and reliability than any gross deficiency in our measuring instrument. The most obvious 46 fact associated with the apparent unreliability of some scores (7 out of 18) was that the jobs and associated behaviour of the community edu-cation coordinators at the time of this study were in a profound state of flux. This is related to the amount of time on the job, the time (Winter) of the test and the time (Spring) of retest, when programs change, and the developing concept of community education in British Columbia. Furthermore, reliability is known to increase with sample size (Nunnally, 1959); the fact that only seven respondents were retested would not have enhanced reliability. Note that for this reliability procedure df = 5, i t is highly like that i f a greater number of coordi-nators had been re-tested a l l eighteen scores would have been reliable. Unfortunately, i t was not possible to 're-test' more than seven respon-dents. The following table indicates the mean scores, standard deviation and test-retest correlation coefficients of the roles and discrepancy scores. 47 Table 1 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND TEST-RETEST CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS OF ROLES AND DISCREPANCIES OF COORDINATORS Roles and Discrepancies (%) M l S.D^ M2 S.D>2 r Actual Instructor 13.72 7.52 11.26 4.79 .88* Ideal Instructor 12.77 5.73 10.01 3.49 .48 Discrepancy Instructor 2.28 8.91 .36 7.00 .83 Actual Public Relations 20.23 6.99 21.17 5.60 .58 Ideal Public Relations 19.98 3.72 20.73 7.41 .78 Discrepancy Public Relations -2.58 10.03 -.60 9.95 .82 * Actual Community Developer 19.92 8.68 21.81 6.27 .81 * Ideal Community Developer 24.89 6.44 25.81 7.97 .69 Discrepancy Community 7.70 .46 * Developer 5.80 5.02 3.99 Actual Administrator 31.34 8.59 29.77 9.36 .87 Ideal Administrator 21.83 10.89 23.05 5.60 .47 Discrepancy Administrator -9.51 8.01 -6.72 11.32 .26 * Actual Learner 10.00 3.49 9.36 3.49 .74 Ideal Learner 11.38 7.02 10.65 4.22 .69 Discrepancy Learner 1.80 3.90 1.80 .97 .56 Actual Counselor 6.72 2.37 8.22 2.35 .48 Ideal Counselor 9.12 4.23 9.74 6.21 .95 Discrepancy Counselor 2.90 3.51 1.51 4.85 .84 r < .67 df = 5 P < .05 CHAPTER IV RESULTS Data concerning 'personal' characteristics of the 21 coordinators was cast in contingency tables. E.P.I, extraversion, neuroticism and lie score means and S.D.'s were calculated. The actual and ideal roles of the coordinators were established by calculating the percentage of tokens distributed (in accord with the actual and ideal instructional sets) amongst the six role descriptors. Using this data the relation-ships among the ideal and actual roles were determined. Actual-ideal discrepancy scores were calculated for each respondent by subtracting the ideal 'hours' from the actual 'hours' spent in each role. The resul-tant discrepancy scores, along with the actual and ideal distributions, were correlated with the personal and personality data obtained with the questionnaire and the E.P.I. The first results discussed concern the 'personal' characteristics of coordinators. 'PERSONAL' CHARACTERISTICS OF COORDINATORS Age, Sex, Marital Status The mean age of the coordinators was 28 years (S.D. = 4.48). As shown in Figure 5, fourteen (67%) were 28 years old or younger. The youngest coordinator was 20 and the oldest 40. 48 49 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 <u 26 3? 24 22 20 ti 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Coordinators Mean - 28, S.D. = 4.48 Figure 5. Age of the Coordinators Exactly two-third of the coordinators were men and one-third women (Table 2). , Table 2 SEX OF THE COORDINATORS Sex Number Percentage Male Female Total 14 _7 21 67 33 100 Table 3 shows the distribution of respondents among marital status categories. Eight were single, eleven were married, one was widowed and one was separated. 50 Table 3 MARITAL STATUS OF THE COORDINATORS Marital Status Number Percentage Single 8 38 Married 11 52 Widowed 1 5 Separated JL _5 Total 21 100 Eysenck Personality Inventory Two coordinators (one male and one female) refused to complete the Eysenck Personality Inventory. The remaining respondents had a mean extraversion score of 13.00 (S.D. = 5.26), neuroticism mean of 9.81 (S.D. = 1.95) and l i e mean of 2.42 (S.D. = 1.69). Compared to the norms of the mean extraversion scores of 1,003 college students (M = 13.10) the coordinators were quite similar, but slightly more extra-verted than 132 English (U.K.) Student Teachers who according to Eysenck and Eysenck (1964) obtained a mean extraversion score of 12.40. The coordinators were less neurotic than either the U.K. Student Teachers, or the U.S. college students (M = 9.81, 10.70 and 10.90 respectively). According to the location of the combined scores of the coordinators on the Eysenck Personality Inventory and Galen-Kent-Wundt scheme (Figure 6), the coordinators appear to be socialable, outgoing and talkative; responsive, easygoing and lively; carefree and having leadership qualities. 1 Figure 6. Location of Coordinators on Combined Eysenck Personality Inventory and Galen-Kent-Wundt Scheme of Temperaments Educational Achievements Table 4 shows the number of degrees attained by the coordinat Six respondents had not attained a degree at the time of the survey. Table 4 NUMBER OF DEGREES ATTAINED BY THE COORDINATORS Degrees Number Percentage 0 6 29 1 10 48 2 3 14 3 _2 _9 Total 21 100 M = 2.00, S.D. = .92 52 Nearly half had at least one degree, three respondents had two degrees and two had three degrees. Table 5 shows the certification of the coordinators. Some co-ordinators were working towards a degree. Because some coordinators had more than one certificate (for example, diploma, Bachelor's Degree and B.C. Teacher's Certificate), the number reported exceeds the total number of respondents. Table 5 CERTIFICATION OF THE COORDINATORS Certification Number Percentage Diploma 7 33 Bachelor 16 76 Master 3 14 Teacher Cert. 11 52 Most had a Bachelor's degree, three had a Master's degree and seven had a diploma. Eleven of the respondents had a B.C. Teacher's Certi-ficate. More coordinators named Education as their major field of studies at the university than any other subject. Seven specified Arts; four Recreation; and two Social Sciences. The major field of the non-graduates is included in the following table. 53 Table 6 MAJOR FIELD OF THE COORDINATORS Field Number Percentage Social Sciences 2 10 Recreation 4 19 Education 8 38 Arts _7 33 Total 21 100 Table 7 shows the immediate 'prior occupations' of the coordi-nators. Six of the respondents worked in recreation programs immediately prior to their present occupation as coordinators and six were former community workers; five were teachers; two were counselors; one was a student and one was a journalist. Table 7 PRIOR OCCUPATION OF THE COORDINATORS Occupation Number Percentage Recreation 6 28 Counselor 2 10 Teacher 5 24 Community Worker 6 28 Student 1 5 Journalist 1 5 Total 21 100 54 Ten of the respondents had participated in workshops and ten in seminars; nine assisted at courses and seven in inservice training programs (Table 8). Table 8 CONTINUING EDUCATION OF THE COORDINATORS Activity Number Percentage Courses 9 43 Inservice 7 33 Workshop 10 47 Seminar 10 47 Organization and Group Participation Thirteen of the coordinators had memberships in 2 or 3 profes-sional organizations while two had no membership. Five had membership in one professional organization and one in four or five (Table 9). Table 9 MEMBERSHIP IN PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS OF THE COORDINATORS Number of Organizations Number Percentage 0 2 9 1-2 5 24 2-3 13 63 4-5 _1 _4 Total 21 100 M = 2.61, S.D. = 0.74 55 Ten coordinators had memberships in two or three local groups while seven did not belong to any local group. Two had membership in one group and two in four or five groups (Table 10). Table 10 MEMBERSHIP IN LOCAL GROUPS OF THE COORDINATORS No. of Groups Number Percentage 0 7 33 1 2 10 2-3 10 47 4 -5 _2 10 Total 21 100 M = 2.33, S.D. = 1.06 Prior and Present Residence Four coordinators had come from outside British Columbia, whereas seventeen had resided in British Columbia immediately prior to employment at the present community school (Table 11). Table 11 PRIOR RESIDENCE OF THE COORDINATORS Place Number Percentage Within B.C. 17 81 Outside B.C. _ 4 19_ Total 21 100 56 Fifteen coordinators lived within the local community school district at the time of the survey while six lived outside the district (Table 12). Table 12 PRESENT RESIDENCE OF THE COORDINATORS Place Number Percentage Within School District 15 71 Outside School District _6 29 Total 21 100 ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS Time and Salary Figure 7 shows the length of time the coordinators have been working at the community school. The mean length of time was ten months. Seven were working in their second school year as coordinators but ten had spent eight or less months on the job. Thus, most coordinators are 'new' at the community school. 57 CO 4-1 c o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Coordinators M = 10, S.D. 5.73 . Figure 7. Length of Time as Coordinators Of the 21 coordinators, nineteen were employed full-time and two half-time. Table 13 shows the total weekly hours of work for f u l l -time coordinators as indicated by the token distribution. The f u l l -time coordinators worked an average of 50 hours (S.D. = 7.90) a week. They would like to work an average of 40.47 (S.D. - 4.29) hours which is closer to their work contracts. This indicates that on the average the full-time coordinators are working 9.53 hours more than expected (according to their contract). Table 13 WEEKLY TOTAL HOURS OF FULL-TIME COORDINATORS Value Mean Total Hours Standard Deviation Actual Ideal Difference 50.00 40.47 9.53 7.90 4.29 7.12 58 The two half-time coordinators worked an average of 43 hours a week and would like to have worked only 20 hours which is in accord with their work contract. The distribution of the respondents among salary categories is shown in Table 14. The salaries of the two half-time coordinators were included in the first category. Fifteen coordinators were earning less than $15,000 per year; five between $15,000 and $20,000; and one more than $20,000 per year at the time of the survey. Table 14 SALARY OF THE COORDINATORS Salary Number Percentage 9,000-11,999 9 43 12,000-14,999 6 29 15,000-17,999 2 9 18,000-20,999 3 14 21,000-24,999 _1 _5 Total 21 . 100 Titles, Schools and Staff There was no common tit l e for coordinators of the community schools studied (Table 15). Fifteen were called 'community school coordinators.' (One month after the survey the school board of North Vancouver changed the tit l e to 'senior assistant principal.') Three 59 were called 'community school workers.' The others were called 'com-munity service director,' 'director of school and community affairs' and 'assistant principal.' Table 15 TITLE OF THE COORDINATORS Title Number Percentage Community School Worker 3 14 Community School Coordinator 15 71 Community Service Director 1 5 Director of School and Community Affairs 1 5 Assistant Principal _1 _5 Total 21 100 Table 16 shows the titles of the superiors of the coordinators. Fifteen respondents had a principal as their immediate superior. Four were formally responsible to the supervisor of instruction (community education) but for practical purposes responsible to the principal of the school. The coordinators who received substantial financial assis-tance from the Municipal Department of Parks and Recreation were respon-sible to an area manager and a supervisor of centre and facilities. 60 Table 16 TITLE OF SUPERIOR OF THE COORDINATORS Title Number Percentage Principal 15 71 Supervisor of In-struction (Com-munity Education) 4 19 Supervisor of Center and Facilities 1 5 Area Manager _2 _5_ Total 21 100 Table 17 shows the type of school studied. Fifteen community schools were Elementary, three were Junior Secondary and three Senior Secondary. Table 17 TYPE OF COMMUNITY SCHOOL OF THE COORDINATORS Type Number Percentage Elementary 15 72 Jr. Secondary 3 14 Sr. Secondary __3 14 Total 21 100 61 The average number of full-time staff working with coordinators was one person (S.D. = 2.22), the average part-time staff was seven (S.D. = 9.59), and the average number of volunteers was twenty-nine (S.D. = 22.32) (Table 18). Table 18 NUMBER OF STAFF OF THE COORDINATORS Standard Type Mean Deviation Full-time 1 2.22 Part-time 7 9.59 Volunteers 29 22.32 Policy and Budget The coordinators were asked to check the names of institutions involved in formulating community school policy (Table 19). Because more than one 'institution' makes policy for the schools, most coordi-nators checked several 'policy sources'; thus the total number of respon-ses is 62. However, note that the 'percents' refers to the number of coordinators, not the number of responses. Nineteen coordinators stated that the school board was 'primarily' involved in making policy for the school; fifteen said the local advisory council and fourteen the community school. The Municipal Department of Parks and Recreation, the Federal Department of Human Resources and the Municipal Department of Social Planning were also cited as 'policy institutions.' The category 'others' refers to the school principal, community council, recreation society, communnity resource centre and police. Table 19 POLICY INVOLVEMENT IN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS Institution Number Percentage School Board 19 90 Parks Board 5 24 Community School 14 67 Social Planning •1 5 Human Resources 3 14 Local Advisory Council 15 71 Others _5 24 Total 62 The budget included the personal salary of the coordinators, the salaries of the staff and other expenses Data received from the coordinators regarding the budget was not accurate as some were unable to state the exact amount of their expenses. In many community schools the budget is integrated entirely in the general school budget. Never-theless, the following data give a general idea of budgeting procedures. Table 20 shows the distribution of those institutions which contribute to the annual budget. As with policy involvement, most coordinators checked off several 'budget sources'; thus the total responses is 38. 63 The 'percents' refer to the number of coordinators, not the number of responses. The school board was indicated to be the largest contributor in the community schools. Five coordinators received funds from the Municipal Department of Parks and Recreation and five received federal monies. Two received funds from the Department of Human Resources. The category 'others' referred to United Way, municipality, provincial monies, the community and class fees. Table 20 BUDGET CONTRIBUTORS TO COMMUNITY SCHOOLS Institution Number Percentage School Board 2 1 100 Parks Board 5 24 Human Resources 2 10 Federal Monies 5 24 Others _ 5 24 Total 38 The coordinators were asked to state the actual annual budget and what they perceived to be an optimum ideal annual budget for com-munity education in the schools (Table 21). Three coordinators did not reply to the first question and five did not reply to the second. Six coordinators said they received less than $20,000, nine said they received between $20,000 and $31,000 and three said they received more than $31,000. Two considered less than $20,000 sufficient for their programs, seven considered a sum between $20,000 and $31,000 as suffi-cient, and seven would like to have more than $31,000 available for their programs. Table 21 BUDGET OF THE COORDINATORS Budget Actual No. % Ideal No. % Non-Respondents 3 14 5 24 00,000-10,999 3 14 0 0 11,000-20,999 3 14 2 10 21,000-30,999 * * 9 43 7 33 31,000-40,999 1 5 3 14 41,000-50,999 1 5 2 10 51,000-60,999 _1 _J5 _2 10 Total 21 100 21 100 * Medium category ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS The actual and ideal roles of the coordinators are described by stating the mean percentage of time they actually spent at each role and the mean percentage of time they would like to spend at each role and the S.D. The relationship among these roles is described as are 65 the relationships between the actual and ideal roles, discrepancy scores and the personal characteristics. Role Distribution of the Coordinators The roles of the coordinators were determined by means of token distribution in which coordinators distributed tokens on role descriptor cards. The number of tokens placed on each role descriptor card was used to calculate the percentage of time they actually spent or would like to spend in each role during an average week. The mean 'percentage of time' scores and S.D.'s for each role were then calculated. Table 22 shows the mean percentage scores and S.D. of the actual roles (percentage of time the coordinators actually spent in each role) and the ideal roles (percentage of time the coordinators would like to spend in each role. According to the actual roles, the coordinators indicated that close to one-third (30.18%) of their time was spent in administration. Close to one-quarter (23.38%) of their time was spent in community de-velopment and one-fifth (20.34%) of their time in public relations. The coordinators spent 9.96% of their time instructing, 8.36% of their time counseling and 7.78% of their time as a learner. The coordinators would like to spend (ideal role) close to one-third of their time in community development and one-fifth of their time in public relations. They would like to spend 17.64% of their time in administration, 11.48% as a learner, 10.02% counselling, and 9.80% in-structing. 66 Table 22 ROLE DISTRIBUTION OF THE COORDINATORS Roles Actual Mean % S.D. Ideal Mean % S.D. Differ-ence Mean % S.D. Instructor 9.96 9.80 9.41 7.17 -.54 8.51 Public Relations 20.34 6.99 20.79 7.18 .45 7.64 Community Developer 23.38 9.97 30.66 10.28 7.28 10.92 Administrator 30.18 11.52 17.64 8.02 -12.53 11.47 Learner 7.78 4.11 11.48 7.26 3.70 6.31 Counselor 8.36 6.10 10.02 6.10 1.66 4.21 Total 100.00 100.00 Difference scores were calculated by subtracting each coordina-tor 's•percentage ideal score from the percentage actual score for each role. The greatest difference was between the actual-ideal role of ad-ministrator indicating that the coordinators would like to spend 12.50% less time in administration. They would like to spend 7.28% more time in community development; 3.70% more time as a learner; 1.66% more time counseling; .54% less time instructing and .45% more time in public relations. Relationship Among the Roles of the Coordinators Pearson Product-Moment correlation coefficients were calculated between a l l actual roles, ideal roles and discrepancy scores. The accepted 67 level of significance was based on a probability greater than .05 for a two-tailed test. Table 23 shows the inter-correlation between the percentage of actual time assigned to each role and every other role. The Table 23 RELATIONSHIP AMONG ACTUAL ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS Roles Instructor Public Relations Community Developer Adminis-trator Coun-Learner selor Instructor 1.00 Public Relations AAA -.58 1.00 Community Developer Administrator -.25 -.18 .08 -.01 1.00 *** -.65 1.00 Learner -.23 -.04 .11 -.38 1.00 Counselor -.04 -.29 -.17 -.27 .27 1.00 *** r > .53, df = 20, p < .01 (two-tailed test) coordinators who said they spent large portions of time involved in instructing were significantly inclined to have spent less time in public relations than coordinators who said they spent l i t t l e time instructing (r = -.58). Similarly, those who spent more time in administration were inclined to have spent less time in community development than coordinators who spent less time in administration (r = -.65). The consistent negative correlations among the roles of instructor and administrator with the 68 other roles indicate that those who spent more time instructing and in administration tended to have spent less time in the other roles than the coordinators who spent less time instructing and in administration. Table 24 shows the inter-correlation between the percentage of time coordinators would like to spend at each role and every other role. Having regard to the direction of scoring, the more time the coordinators would like to spend instructing the less they would like to spend in public relations (r = -.55); the more time they would like to spend in public relations the less time they would like to spend in counselling (r = -.52); and the more time they would like to spend in administration the less time they would like to spend in community development (r = -.43). Table 24 RELATIONSHIP AMONG IDEAL ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS Public Community Adminis- Coun-Roles Instructor Relations Developer trator Learner selor Instructor 1.00 Public Relations *** -.55 1.00 Community Developer -.37 .04 1.00 Adminis trator -.08 .03 -.43* 1.00 Learner .01 -.10 -.33 -.41 1.00 Counselor .19 ** -.52 -.33 -.05. .01 1.00 * r > .42, df = 20, p < .05 (two-tailed test) ** r > .49, df = 20, p < .02 (two-tailed test) *** r > .53, df = 20, p < .01 (two-tailed test) 69 Table 25 shows the inter-correlation between the percentage of time the coordinators actually spent at each role and the percentage of time they would like to spend at each role. Coordinators who did more instructing would like to spend more time instructing (r = .54); and those who did more community development would like to spend more time in public relations (r = .42). Those who spent a greater amount of time as a learner would like to spend more time as a learner (r = .50), and those who spent more time counseling would like to spend more time Table 25 RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ACTUAL AND IDEAL ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS Actual Roles Ideal Roles Instructor Public Community Relations Developer Adminis-trator Learner Coun-selor Instructor *** .54 *** -.26 -.56 -.32 -.16 -.14 Public Relations * -.48 * .41 .42 .07 -.05 -.48' Community Developer .04 -.17 .41 -.30 .01 .02 Adminis trator -.29 • .38 -.27 .35 -.24 -.03 Learner -.03 -.09 .10 -.17 ** .50 -.03 Counselor .28 -.27 -.30 -.20 -.50 .76 * r > .42, df ** r > .49, df *** r > .53, df = 20, p < = 20, p < = 20, p < .05 (two-tailed test) .02 (two-tailed test) .01 (two-tailed test) 70 counseling (r = .76). The coordinators who spent the greatest amount of time in public relations would like to spend more time in public relations (r = .41), and those who spent the greatest amount of time in community development would like to spend more time in community develop-ment (r = .41). The latter two inter-correlations just failed to attain the .05 level of significance. The negative relationships indicate that the coordinators who spent more time instructing would like to spend less time in public relations (r =-.48); the more time spent counseling the less they would like to spend in public relations (r = -.48); and the more time the coordinators spent in instructing the less time they would like to spend in community development (r = -.56). The consistent negative corre-lations between the ideal role of instructor and the total actual roles; indicate that the more time the coordinators would like to spend in-structing the less time they were inclined to spend at the other roles. The total actual-ideal discrepancy score among the roles was obtained by calculating the absolute differences between the percentage of the actual and ideal roles score and summing across a l l roles. For Example: Public Relations Community Adminis- Coun-Roles Instructor Person Developer trator Learner selor Total Percentage Actual 12.00 20.00 16.00 40.00 6.00 6.00 100% Percent Ideal 10.00 17.50 17.50 37.50 7.50 10.00 100% Discrepancy Score -2.00 -2.50 +1.50 -2.50 +1.50 +4.00 14.00 71 Table 26 shows the inter-correlation between the discrepancy scores and the actual and ideal roles of the coordinators. Discrepancy scores measure the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the coordinators in their respective roles. The total mean discrepancy was 42.99 (S.D. = 22.39). Table 26 CORRELATION BETWEEN ACTUAL-IDEAL DISCREPANCY SCORES Variables r Actual Instructor .44* Actual Public Relations .25 Actual Community Developer -.43* Actual Administrator .38 Actual Learner .23 Actual Counselor .25 Ideal Instructor .52** Ideal Public Relations -.26 Ideal Community Developer .12 Ideal Administrator -.48* Ideal Learner .15 Ideal Counselor -.06 Mean = 42.99, S.D. = 22.39 * r > .42, df = 20, p < .05 (two-tailed test) ** r > .49, df = 20, p < .02 (two-tailed test) Having regard to the direction of scoring, the coordinators who spent the greatest amount of time instructing were inclined to be more dissatisfied than those who spent less time instructing (r = .44); those who spent the greatest amount of time in community development were inclined to be more satisfied than those who spent the least amount of • time in community development (r = -.43). The coordinators who would 72 like to spend more time instructing were inclined to be more dissatis-fied than those who would not like to spend more time instructing (r = .52) and those who would like to spend more time in administration were in-clined to be more satisfied than the coordinators who would like to spend less time in administration (r = -.48). Relationship Between the Roles and Characteristics of the Coordinators Pearson Product-Moment correlation coefficients were calculated between each of the characteristics of the coordinators (which were scored on ordinal scales - and thus met the assumptions for correlation) and percentage of 'time' spent in the actual and ideal roles (Tables 27 and 29). 'Personal characteristic' data which was nominal (and thus did not meet the assumptions for correlation) were subject to a one-way analysis of variance. Mean 'time' scores for the actual and ideal roles were compared. The resultant F-values are contained in Tables 28 and 30. The correlation between personal characteristics and actual-ideal discrepancy scores were also calculated. The accepted level of signi-ficance was based on a probability greater than .05 for a two-tailed test. The coordinators who said they spent a greater percentage of their time instructing tended to be older (r = .43) received higher salaries (r = .67), and they also tended to be more extraverted (r = .37) than those who spent less time instructing. Those who had a B.C. Teachers Certificate spent 14.38% of their time instructing whereas those without spent 5.09% of their time instructing (F = 4.55, p = .03) (and would also like to spend more time instructing than those without a certificate Table 27 RELATIONSHIP AMONG CHARACTERISTICS AND ACTUAL ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS ORDINAL DATA Actual Roles Public Community Characteristics Instructor Relations Developer Administrator Learner Counselor Age .43* -.32 -.20 .10 -.40 .08 Extraversion .37 -.33 -.14 -•05 .06 .05 Neuroticism .10 .00 -.29 .17 -.10 -.05 No. of Degrees .26 -.41 .19 -.29 -.22 .44* Professional Organizations -.04 .06 -.10 -.18 .25 .32 Groups .32 -.28 -.24 .20 -.17 -.08 Work/Months .26 .26 -.34 -.01 -.18 -.02 Salary .67*** -.56*** -.44* .15 -.11 .09 Full-time Staff .01 .14 .04 -.00 .24 -.08 Part-time Staff -.39 .37 .23 -.19 .01 .17 Volunteers -.11 .32 .13 -.15 .01 -.12 * r > .42, df = ** r > .49, df = *** r > .53, df = 20, p < .05 (two-tailed test) 20, p < .02 (two-tailed test) 20, p < .01 (two-tailed test) Table 28 RELATIONSHIP AMONG CHARACTERISTICS AND ACTUAL ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS NOMINAL DATA Characteristics Instructor F-Val. Prob. Public Relations F-Val. Prob. Community Developer F-Val. Prob. Administrator F-Val. Prob. Learner F-Val. Prob. Counselor Fr-Val. Prob Sex 1.04 .89 1.36 .74 4.86 .06* 2.08 .38 2.72 .23 1.37 .73 Marital Status 1.34 .29 .55 .64 3.09 .05* 5.61 .01* 1.16 .36 .39 .69 Diploma 8.76 .01* 1.45 .67 2.09 .25 2.84 .11 4.88 .06 1.97 .42 Bachelor 3.34 .25 1.20 .70 1.67 .66 2.99 .30 1.15 .99 11.30 .03* Masters 2.45 .23 3.07 .14 2.80 .18 1.69 .43 37.12 .07 4.11 .06 B.C. Teacher's Cert. 4.55 .03* .20 .72 2.44 .20 3.45 Major Field .71 .56 2.30 .11 .82 .50 .39 Previous Occupation .84 .54 1.29 .32 3.74 .02* 2.21 Courses 1.01 .90 1.33 .64 1.12 .84 1.28 Inservice 1.41 .56 1.57 .60 1.06 1.00 3.36 Workshops 4.90 .02* 1.11 .89 1.38 .64 1.54 Seminars 5.02 .02* 1.01 .98 1.51 .54 1.98 Prior Residence 1.05 .79 1.11 .75 2.01 .30 1.45 Present Residence 5.41 .01* 1.04 1.03 1.77 .37 1.17 School .17 .65 .28 .69 .48 .62 .19 .07 .69 .11 .74 .06 .53 .32 .53 .86 .66 1.56 1.23 .83 1.98 1.81 1.11 1.25 3.81 1.66 .18 .50 .33 .55 .29 .48 .88 .74 .06* .41 .65 1.41 3.12 1.63 3.93 1.42 6.01 5.30 3.42 2.44 7.73 .62 .05 .21 .06 .69 .01* .02* .08 .17 .01* Table 29 RELATIONSHIP AMONG CHARACTERISTICS AND IDEAL ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS ORDINAL DATA Ideal Roles P ubIIc Communi ty Characteristics Instructor Relations Developer Administrator Learner Counselor Age .16 -.31 .09 .23 -.38 .19 Extraversion .21 -.36 .27 -.14 -.03 -.07 Neuroticism ..08 -.16 -.24 .47* -.14 "' .05 No. of Degrees -.11 -.27 .23 -.28 -.07 .49** Professional Organizations -.12 -.13 -.22 .09 .11 .41 Groups .43* -.32 .12 -.01 -.22 -.07 Work/Months .08 -.19 -.12 .27 -.17 .18 Salary .38 -.41 .21 -.32 -.14 .26 Full-time Staff .01 -.16 -.19 .49** -.15 .03 Part-time Staff -.36 -.04 .20 .09 -.02 .03 Volunteers -.42* .29 -.28 .05 .46* .01 * r > .42, df = 20, p < .05 (two-tailed test) ** r > .49, df = 20, p < .02 (two-tailed test) Table 30 RELATIONSHIP AMONG CHARACTERISTICS AND IDEAL ROLES OF THE COORDINATORS NOMINAL DATA Public Community Instructor Relations Developer Administrator Learner Counselor Characteristics F-Val. Prob. F-Val. Prob. F-Val. Prob. F-Val. Prob. F-Val. Prob. F-Val. Prob. Sex . 1.56 .60 1.36 .60 3.04 .18 1.37 .72 2.69 .13 2.59 .25 Marital Status .16 .47 .07 .21 .31 .67 3.20 .04* 2.21 .12 .46 .68 Diploma 1.15 .78 4.03 .09 1.31 .78 3.64 .04* 3.76 .12 1.71 .52 Bachelor 1.16 .73 3.53 .23 2.01 .52 2.50 .17 2.58 .37 3.20 .27 Masters 1.53 .49 3.88 .08* 18.71 .12 1.30 .60 1.67 .44 6.49 .01* B.C. Teacher's Cert. 3.68 .05* 1.57 .49 1.05 .93 3.65 .06 1.23 .75 5.45 .01* Major Field .10 .28 .23 .60 .20 .53 .13 .36 .93 .45 4.39 .01* Previous Occupation .50 .69 1.07 .42 .52 .69 .76 .59 .76 .69 .86 .53 Courses 1.29 .68 2.71 .17 1.75 .38 1.92 .31 1.32 .71 6.98 .01* Inservice 1.40 .70 4.32 .08 1.49 .65 1.94 .30 3.83 .04* 1.23 .84 Workshops 1.07 .91 3.47 .07 2.05 .28 1.85 .35 1.57 .51 4.35 .03* Seminars 1.09 .90 4.56 .03* 1.56 .49 1.97 .31 2.28 .22 3.90 .05* Prior Residence 2.12 .58 ' l . l l 1.07 1.29 .62 4.89 .22 1.24 .66 6.06 .01* Present Residence 1.95 .42 1.40 .71 2.94 .09 2.00 .28 1.77 .49 4.02 .03* School .59 .57 1.12 .35 .54 .59 .42 .65 1.43 .26 5.80 .01* ON (F = 3.68, p = .05)). The coordinators with a diploma spent less time instructing (6.38%) than those without a diploma (11.75%), (F = 8.76, p = .01). Those who had attended a workshop spent 14.00% of their time instructing whereas those who had not attended a workshop spent 6.20% instructing (F = 4.90, p = .02). Coordinators who attended seminars spent 12.70% instructing whereas those who had not attended spent 7.40% instructing (F = 5.02, p = .02). Coordinators who lived within the local school district spent 19.82% of their time instructing while those who lived outside the school district spent 5.03% instructing (F = 5.41, p = .01). Coordinators who said they would like to spend more time in-structing tended to participate in more local groups (r = .43) and had less volunteers (r = -.42) than those who would like to spend less time instructing. Coordinators who indicated that they spent more time in public relations received a lower salary than those who spent less time in public relations (r = -.56). Those who spent more time in public re-lations tended to be younger (r = .32), less extraverted (r = -.33), had fewer degrees (r = -.41), had more part-time staff (r = .37) and more volunteers (r = .32), than coordinators who had spent less time in public relations. Although the latter five correlations do not meet the acceptable level of significance, a trend is clear. Coordinators who said they spent the greater percentage of time in community development tended to receive a lower salary (r = -.44) than those who spent the least time in community development. Women tended to spend a higher percentage of time (28.16%)in community 78 development than men (20.98%); married coordinators tended to spend more time in community development than single coordinators (F = 3.09, p = .05). Prior occupations tended to be significantly associated with percentage of time spent in community development. Teachers spent 15.95%; counselors, 18.75%; recreation workers, 20.65%; students, 28.89%; com-munity workers, 29.14% and journalists, 46.00% (F = 3.73, p = .02) of their time in community development. Married coordinators spent a greater percentage of time in adminis-tration than the single coordinators (F = .60, p = .01) and would like to spend more time (13.85%) in administration than the single coordinators (6.67%), (F = 3.20, p = .04). Coordinators who would like to spend more time in administration tended to be more neurotic (r = .47) and had more full-time staff (r = .49) than those who would like to spend less time in administration. Coordinators who spent the greatest percentage of time as a learner tended to be younger than those who spent less time as a learner (r = -.41). Those who attended inservice training would like to spend more time as a learner than those who did not attend (F = 3.83, p = .04). Coordinators who would like to spend more time as a learner had more volunteers than those who would like to spend less time as a learner (r = .46). The coordinators who had the most degrees spent more time coun-seling (r =.44) and would like to spend more time counseling (r = .49) than those with fewest degrees. Coordinators with a Bachelor's degree spent more time (9.18%) counseling than those without (F = 11.30, p = .03); 79 those with a Master's degree would like to spend more time counseling than those without (F = 6.49, p = .01); those with a B.C. Teacher's certificate would like to spend more time counseling than those without (F = 5.45, p = .01). The coordinators who attended workshops tended to spend less time counseling than those who had not (F = 6.01, p = .01), but those who attended workshops would like to spend more time counseling than those who had not (F = 4.35, p = .03). Similarly, those who attended seminars tended to spend less time counseling than those who had not (F = 5.30, p = .02), but those who attended seminars would like to spend more time counseling than those who had not (F = 3.90, p = .05). Those who attended courses would like to spend more time counseling than those who had not (F = 6.98, p = .01). The major field of study tended to be associated with the percen-tage of time coordinators spent counseling or would like to spend coun-seling. Those who received their degree (or were advancing towards a degree in Arts) spent 7.29% of their time counseling; those in recreation, 33.33%; those in education, 9.71%; and those in the social sciences, 16.75% (F = 3.11, p = .05). Those who received their degree in arts would like to spend 7.29% of their time counseling; those in recreation, 8.21%; those in education, 11.62%; and those in the social sciences, 20.00% (F = 4.39, p = .01). Coordinators in senior secondary schools tended to spend more time (18.26%) in counseling than those in junior secondary schools (7.33%) and primary schools (6.58%), (F = 7.73, p = .01); also those in senior secondary schools would like to spend more time (19.05%) in counseling 80 than those in junior secondary schools (7.13%) and primary schools (8.80%), (F = 5.80, p = .01). Coordinators who lived outside of B.C. immediately prior to becoming a coordinator would like to spend more time counseling (15.48%) than those who lived in B.C. (8.74%), ,(F = 6.06, p = .01). Those who lived within the local school district would like to spend more time counseling (13.29%) than those who did not (8.39%), (F = 4.02, p = .03). The following table shows the inter-correlation between actual-ideal discrepancy scores and coordinators characteristics. Table 31 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHARACTERISTICS AND DISCREPANCY SCORES OF THE COORDINATORS Characteristics r Salary .41 Full-time Staff -.35 Part-time Staff -.19 Volunteers -.02 Extraversion .30 Neuroticism -.21 r > .42, df = 20, p < .05 (two-tailed test) None of these correlations are significant at a .05 level. Salary level and dissatisfaction were positively associated; coordinators receiving higher salaries were more dissatisfied than those receiving lower 81 salaries (r = .41). The extraverted coordinators were more dissatisfied than introverted coordinators (r = .30) and the neurotic coordinators were more satisfied than the more stable coordinators (r = -.21). Co-ordinators with more full-time staff (r = -.35), more part-time staff (r = -.19), andmore volunteers (r = -.02) tended to be more satisfied than those with less full-time and part-time staff and volunteers. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Community education is an educational innovation rapidly spreading throughout North America and other parts of the world. The community school is the delivery system of community education and the community education coordinator is the impetus behind its development. SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to describe community education and to identify the roles of community education coordinators. A litera-ture review formed the basis of a research instrument which was devised and used to discover the actual and ideal roles of coordinators in community schools in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British Columbia. Review of Literature Community education is not an entirely new concept. The school began as a centre of learning for the whole community. As the community grew larger, the school evolved into a large, complex and bureaucratic system and concentrated solely on the education of children (with less direct influence from the community). 82 83 In many areas the pendulum is swinging back. Community parti-cipation in education, the use of school facilities for educational, cultural and recreational activities and the use of the resources and people in the community is becoming highly valued. Many authors refer to community education as a process which utilizes untapped physical and human resources for educational, cultural and social growth. It is an evolutionary process which develops from an extension of school services and activities to the development of the community in the mutual finding of solutions to its urgent needs. The specific goal of community education is to enhance the use of the community by the school as a learning laboratory, the use of the school as an educational service centre, and community participation in educational endeavours. These goals promote an educative community where the community as a whole responds and is responsible for its own educational development. Community education has evolved in British Columbia since 1965 out of an economic concern that tax funds for educational purposes were not being adequately utilized. Studies were made and reports published which suggested the community use of school facilities. The first three community schools in British Columbia were officially established in 1971. At the time of this survey in 1975 there were 21 community schools. Since then four more have been established. For the purposes of this study the people who direct community education were called community education coordinators. According to many authors the coordinators must either be trained in community education 84 or have experience in related fields such as education, recreation and community development. They must possess certain personality charac-teristics such as sociability, adaptability and dedication. Above a l l , they must have leadership qualities in order to be able to organize the community in cooperative efforts. A good positive relationship with the school staff is essential. Coordinators must work closely with an advisory council in organizing a systematic study of the community needs and in planning and evaluating programs. The coordinators are the vital link between the community and the community education process. They must have a knowledge of and an ability to communicate with the community. Although some authors recommended that the coordinators do not teach, others suggest teaching helps them to keep in contact with students. In order to be effective in the community education process, coordinators must keep in touch with new developments in the field by reading, participation at con-ferences, workshops and inservice training. Method A research instrument was developed to investigate the actual and ideal roles of coordinators. Based on the review of literature, 53 coordinator behaviours were selected as the basis of the instrument. Five pilot studies were executed to combine or eliminate behaviours and establish exclusive role descriptors. The role descriptors estab-lished were: instructor, public relations person, community developer, administrator, learner, and counselor. A questionnaire was developed 85 to gather personal data from the coordinators and the Eysenck Personality Inventory was selected to measure two personality characteristics. Token distribution was employed to determine how the coordinators actually spent or would like to spend their time during an average week. Six cards were printed - each stating the established role descriptor. The coordinators were handed the six cards. They were asked to read and place them on a desk. They were then asked to state the number of hours they actually worked during an average week and given tokens (each representing one 'work' hour) to be distributed on the role descriptor cards according to the way they spent their time during an average week. The same procedure was used to gather information regarding how they would like to spend their time during an average week. The personal data questionnaire and Eysenck Personality Inventory was then administered. Two months after the survey a random sample of the coordinators was selected to repeat the token distribution procedure in order to test the reliability of the instrument. Results This study described the personal characteristics of the coordi-nators, determined the mean percentage of time they actually spent or would like to spend at each 'role', and determined the relationships among the 'roles' and between the roles and personal characteristics. The mean age of the coordinators was 28 years. Two-thirds were men and one-third were women. One-half of the coordinators were married and eight were single. According to the Eysenck Personality Inventory 86 results the coordinators seemed to be sociable, outgoing and talkative, responsive, easygoing and lively, carefree and having leadership qualities. Most of the coordinators had a Bachelor's degree and one-half had a B.C. Teacher's Certificate. Most of the coordinators majored in either recreation, arts or education and before working at their present community school, had worked in recreation programs, as teachers or as community workers. Most coordinators had memberships in two or three professional organizations and local groups. Seventeen coordinators lived in British Columbia immediately prior to being employed at community school and fifteen lived within the local community school district at the time of the survey. The average length of time that the coordinators had worked at the community school (at the time of the survey) was ten months. One-third were working in their second year and two-thirds in their first years. Only two coordinators were working half-time. On the average the coordinators were working close to ten hours more per week than they expected and would like to work. More than two-thirds of the coordinators were earning less than $15,000. None of the coordinators were called community education coordi-nators. Most of them were called community school coordinators and had a principal as their immediate superior. Most of the coordinators worked in elementary schools. On the average the coordinators had one full-time and seven part-time staff and 29 volunteers. Most of the coordinators stated that the school board was involved in policy making and contributed to the annual budget. Other sources 87 included the parks board, social planning, human resources, the community school and the local advisory council. The coordinators actually spent close to one-third of their time in administration, one-quarter in community development and one-fifth in public relations. Their minor roles included those of instructor, counselor and learner in which they spent close to one-tenth of their time. Ideally they would like to spend one-third of their time in com-munity development, one-fifth in public relations, one-sixth in adminis-tration, and close to one-tenth of their time as a learner, counselor and instructor. The greatest difference was between the actual and ideal role of administrator indicating that the coordinators would like to spend 12.53% less time in administration. They would like to spend more time in community development (7.28%), as a learner (3.70%), as a counselor (1.66%), in public relations (.45%) and less time instructing (-.54%). The coordinators who actually spent more time instructing would like to spend more time instructing and less time in public relations and community development. Those who would like to spend more time instructing actually spent less time in the other roles. The coordi-nators who spent more time in community development would like to spend more time in community development and public relations. Those who spent more time as a learner would like to spend more time as a learner; those who spent more time in counseling would like to spend more time counseling and less time in public relations; and those who spent more time in public relations would like to spend more time in public rela-tions. 88 The discrepancy scores between the actual and ideal roles indi-cated that the coordinators who spent more time or would like to spend more time instructing tended to be more dissatisfied than those who spent less time or would like to spend less time instructing. The co-ordinators who spent more time in community development were inclined to be more satisfied than those who spent less time in community develop-ment, and those who would like to spend more time in administration were inclined to be more satisfied than those who would like to spend less time in administration. The coordinators who spent a greater percentage of their time instructing tended to be older, more extraverted and received a higher salary. Not surprisingly, those with a B.C. Teacher's certificate spent more time and would like to spend more time instructing. Coordinators with a diploma spent less time instructing and those who attended workshops and seminars spent more time, instructing. Those who lived within the local school district spent more time instructing. Coordinators who would like to spend more time instructing tended to participate in more local groups, tended to have less part-time staff and less volunteers. Coordinators who indicated that they spent more time in public relations tended to be younger, less extraverted and received a lower salary. Those who had less number of degrees, more part-time staff and more volunteers tended to spend a greater percentage of their time in public relations. Those who would like to spend more time in public relations had a Master's degree and a diploma, but those who attended seminars and inservice training would like to spend less time in public relations. 89 Coordinators who spent a greater percentage of their time in community development tended to receive a lower salary. Women and married coordinators tended to spend more time in community development and prior occupation tended to effect significantly the percentage of time spent in community development. The married coordinators spent more time and would like to spend more time in administration. Those who would like to spend more time in administration tended to be more neurotic. Coordinators with more full-time staff tended to spend more time in administration. The younger coordinators tended to spend more time and would like to spend more time as a learner. Those who attended inservice training and who had more volunteers would like to spend more time as a learner. Coordinators with a greater number of degrees and particularly a Bachelor's degree tended to spend more time counseling and those with a Master's degree and B.C. Teacher's certificate would like to spend more time counseling. Coordinators who attended workshops and courses tended to spend less time counseling but would like to spend more time counseling. Those who attended seminars would like to spend less time counseling. Major field of studies tended to influence the percentage of time spent in counseling. Coordinators in senior secondary schools tended to spend more time and would like to spend more time counseling. Those who lived outside of B.C. immediately prior to being employed in community school and those who lived within the local school district at the time of the survey would like to spend more time counseling. 90 The discrepancy scores indicated that the coordinators who re-ceived a higher salary were more dissatisfied. Those with more f u l l -time, part-time staff and volunteers tended to be more satisfied. The more extraverted, the more dissatisfied the coordinators were, but the more neurotic the more satisfied they were. CONCLUSIONS The establishment of community education in the community schools is new to British Columbia, having been in existence less than four years. Nevertheless, the concept is spreading rapidly and at the time of this study, there were already 21 coordinators employed. Of these 21 coordinators, two-thirds were working in their first year. Since the survey, four more coordinators have been hired. This study described the coordinators and their roles. As the first such study in British Columbia i t had the advantage of observing the coordinators in the i n i t i a l stages of development, but the disadvantage of studying the coordinators when the programs were in a constant state of change. By means of five pilot studies to develop the research instru-ment an effective job description for the coordinators was made. It is a basis for role expectations and can be used by the coordinators to divide work time and compare their activities with the average role behaviour of other coordinators. 1 Certain personal characteristics of the coordinators indicate lack of experience in the development and organization of programs which 91 may be a reflection of the recent introduction of the community education movement in the province. Compared to a study made in the United States (De Santis, 19 74) the coordinators in British Columbia are younger by an average of seven years. Close to one-third had no university degree and one-half had a B.C. Teachers' Certificate; approximately twelve co-ordinators had attended specific training in community education. The coordinators were aware of the need for further preparation in community education and would like to spend more time engaged in activities such as coursed, inservice training. Coordinators in this study worked more hours per week than re-quired by their contracts. On the average, they worked 9.53 hours per week more than they would like to work. Either the coordinators are not able to organize their time adequately to meet the demands of the job or they need more staff. Casual observation indicated that most coordi-nators were tired and overworked. This study suggested that the coordinators would like to spend substantially less time in administration and more time in community development. Coordinators, especially those in senior secondary schools, would like to spend more time counseling. This study indicated that the community education coordinators performed a wide variety of roles. The behaviours of the coordinators depend on the circumstances surrounding their job, preparation for the job and the general attitude of those involved in the programs. Being a new concept in British Columbia, community education, the role of the coordinator needs further development and evolvement before i t is completely accepted and stabilized as a workable and effective innovation in education. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bartels, Rodney L. Handbook of Model School Board Policies for Effec- tive Community Education Programs. Omaha, Nebraska: Educational Policy Development Association, 19 73. Berridge, Robert Irving. "A Study of the Opinions of Community Educa-tion Leaders and Community School Directors Regarding an Intensive Preparation Program for Community School Directors." Ed.D. disser-tation, Michigan State University, 1969. . Community Education Handbook. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1973. Blue, Fermin Keith. "The Flint Community School Director: Analysis of Role Conflict and Expectations." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970. Boles, Harold W. The Community School and its Administration, 2:5, January 1964. Bottom, Raymond. "The Community School Director - Fish or Foul?" Community Education Journal, 1:24-25 (August 1971). British Columbia Parent-Teacher Federation. The Community Concept. Vancouver, B.C.: B.C. Parent-Teacher Federation, 1968. . The Public's Role in Education. Vancouver, B.C.: B.C. Parent-Teacher Federation, 19 73. British Columbia Teachers' Federation. Involvement the Key to Better Schools. The Report of the Commission on Education of the British Columbia Teachers' Federation. Vancouver: B.C.T.F., September 1968. Broom, Eric F. Leisure Services in British Columbia. Report to the Honourable Ernest Hall, Provincial Secretary and Minister of Travel Industry, Province of British Columbia, Queens Printer, Victoria, B.C., February 1974. Burden, Larry and Robert L. Whitt. The Community School Principal - New Horizons. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1973. Carrillo, Tony S. "Strategies for Establishing a Community Education Program in Any Town, U.S.A." Community Education Journal, 3:6-9 (January 19 73) . 92 93 Clark, Phillip A. "If Two and Two and Fifty Make a Million." Community  Education Journal, 1:7-9 (February 1971). Clark, Phil. Guidelines for Relating Community Education and the Regular  School Instructional Program. Gainesville, Florida: Univeristy of Florida Center for Continuing Education, 19 72. Commission on Emotional and Learning Disorders in Children. One Million  Children. Toronto, Ontario: Leonard Crainford, 19 70. Committee on Community School. Community School Program Report. Eugene, Oregon: School District 4J State of Oregon, February 1974. Decker, Larry E. Foundations of Community Education. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1972. . People Helping People. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1975. De Santis, Vincent. "Portrait of a Community Education Director." Community Education Journal, 4:38-40 (January 1974). Everett, Samuel (ed.). The Community School. New York: Appleton-Century Co., Inc., 1938. Eysenck, Hans Jurgen and Sybil B. G. Eysenck. Manual of the Personality  Inventory. London: University of London Press, 1964. Fish, Thomas. "Programs and Personnel Reviewed in Statewide Community Education Surveys." Community Education in Minnesota, 1:5-10 (June 1973). Frank, Roland. Community Centered Education - One Response to Critics  of Education. Washington, D.C.: Educational Research Information Center, February 1971. Gordon, Sol and Doris Kassin. The Morgan School, Washington, D.C. New York: Center for Urban Education, 1971. Havinghurst, Robert L. and Bernice L. Neugarten. Society and Education. Boston: Allyne and Bacon Inc., 1969. Henry, Nelson B. (ed.). The Community School. Fifty-second Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953. Herman, Barry E. "Community School: New Thrust in Education." Educational Leadership, 28:419-423 (January 1971). Hickey, Howard W. and Curtis Van Voorhees (eds.). The Role of the School  in Community Education. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1969. 94 Hiemstra, Roger. The Educative Community. Lincoln, Nebraska: Professional Educators Pub. Inc., 1972. Hughes, John R. (ed.). The Community School and Its Concepts. Washington, D.C.: Educational Resources Information Center, 1972. Hunter, Floyd. Community Power Structure. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, 1953. Hurwitz, Mark. "The Public Schools - Of, By, and For the People." Community Education Journal, 4:7-11 (September-October 1974). Irwin, Martha. The Community is the Classroom. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1971. Jessup, John. The Role of the Board of Parks and Public Recreation in the Development and Operation of Community Schools in Vancouver  City. Vancouver, B.C.: Social Planning Department, November 1974. Kerensky, Vasil M. and Ernest 0. Melby. Education II - The Social Impera- tive. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1971. Lovett, Tom. "Adult Education and the Community School." Community  Development Journal, 6:183-185 (August 1971). Loving, Alvin Demar. "Crystallizing and Making Concrete the Community School Concept in Michigan Through Study of on-going Community School Practices." Ed.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1954. Marburger, Carl. "Let's Bring Back the Little Red Schoolhouse." Community Education Journal, 2:26-27 (March 1972). Mayhew, Thomas H. "An Examination of the Apparent Conflict, Between the Concepts of Community Education and the Concepts of other Phases of American Public Education." Ed.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 19 72. McClosky, Gordon. Year-Round Community Schools: A Framework for Adminis- trative Leadership. Washington, D.C.: American Association of School Administrators, 19 73. Melby, Ernest Oscar. Administering Community Education. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1955. . The Community School and Its Administration, 3:2, July 1965. . "Approaches to Role Change in Community Education." Phi Delta Kappan, 54:171-172 (November 1972). 95 Minzey, Jack D. "Community Education - the Facilitator for Others to do Their Thing." Journal of Health Education, Physical Education  and Recreation, 36-37 (April 1974). . "Community Education: An Amalgam of Many Views." Phi Delta Kappan, 54:150-154 (November 19 72). and Clyde E. Le Tarte. Community Education: From Program to Process. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1972. Mott, C. S. Harding. "The Flint Community School Concept As I See It." Journal of Educational Sociology, 23:4, 1959. Murray, Lessie Lee. "Factors Which Have Influenced the Development and Success of Two Selected Rural Community Schools." Ed.D. disser-tation, The University of Florida, 1956. Nance, Everette E. "The Community Education Coordinator." Community  Education Journal, 2:52-55 (November 1972). Nunnally, Jum C. Jr. Tests and Measurements. New York, N.Y.: McGraw-H i l l Book Company, Inc., 1959. Pennington, G. Gary. Elementary School Physical Education in B.C. Vancouver, B.C.: B.C. Physical Education Council, 1967. and I. Barbara Kallus. Quest for Quality - B.C. Conference of Elementary School Physical Education. Vancouver, B.C.: B.C. Physical Education Council, 1968. , Jack Stevens, Barbara Kallus, Peter Moody. Education Through Challenge and Adventure. Vancouver, B.C.: Educational Research Institute of B.C., 1971. Provincial Community School Team 1. Jack Stevens, Introducing the Community School Concept, 1973. 2. David Allan, Relevance of Community Education in Contemporary Society, 1973. 3. David Allan, Schools: A Case for Community Education, 1973. 4. Sharing the Community Space, 1974. Vancouver, B.C.: B.C. School Trustees Association. Public Schools Act - Province of B.C. Victoria, B.C.: K. M. MacDonald, July 1973. Punke, Harold H. Community Uses of Public School Facilities. New York: King's Crown Press, 1951. Ramirez, Emiliano Castro. "Activities and Procedures of Some Community Schools in the United States and Their Implications for the Phili-ppines." Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1953. 96 Rigby, Avard A. State Leadership In Community Education. Washington, D.C.: Educational Research Information Center, May 1972. Scott, Hugh Jerome. "A Descriptive Analysis of the Evolving Role of the School Community Agent in the Detroit Great Cities Improvement Project." Ed.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966. Seay, Maurice (ed.). American Education in the Post War Period, Curri- culum Reconstruction. Forty-fourth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1945. and associates. Community Education: A Developing Concept. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1974. Select Committee on the Utilization of Educational Facilities Interim Report Number One, June 1973, Interim Report Number Two, December 1973, Interim Report Number Three, July 1974. Toronto, Ontario: Select Committee on the Utilization of Educational Facilities. Sergiovanni, T. J. Organizations and Human Behavior: Focus on Schools. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1969. Slipper, W. School-Community Planning. Vancouver, B.C.: School Trustee Volume 24, No. 1, Winter 1968. Sophiea, Lawrence L. "An Examination and Appraisal of the Paul L. Best School, Ferndale, Michigan. Within the Framework of the Community School Concept." Ed.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1964. Spence, Ralph and Paul L. Essert. "Continuous Learning Through the Educative Community: An Exploration of the Family Educational, the Sequential-Unit, and the Complementary-Functional Systems." Adult Education, 18:260-271 (Summer 1968). Stalcup, Robert James. "A Study of Opinions Concerning the Professional Preparation of Educational Administrators for Community Education." Ed.D. dissertation, The University of Nebraska, Teachers College, 1960. Sternberg, Eugene D. and Barbara E. Sternberg. Community Centers and  Student Unions. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1971. Stevens, Jack. "The Community School." The Message, 3:2, March 1971. Summers, Gene F. Attitude Measurement. Chicago, Illinois: Rand McNally & Co., 1970. 97 Tannenbaum, Robert, Irving R. Weschler and Fred Massaric. Leadership and Organization: A Behavioral Science Approach. New York: McGraw-H i l l Book Company, Inc., 1961. Totten, W. Fred and Frank.J. Manley. The Community School: Basic Con- cepts, Function and Organization. Gabien, Michigan: Allied Educa-tion Council, 1969. . "Community Education - Best Hope for Society." School and Society, 98:410-413 (November 1970). . The Power of Community Education. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1970. Turnidge, Wallace Everett. "The Characteristics of Schools and Communi-ties Associated with Community Education: A Series of Case Studies." Ed.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, 1973. Van Voorhees, Curtis. "Community Education Needs Research for Survival." Phi Delta Kappan, 54:203-205 (November 1972). Walker, John Edward. "The Relationship Between the Personality Charac-teristics, Personal Factors and Effectiveness of Community School Directors." Ed.D. dissertation, Utah State University, 1971. Weaver, Donald C. "A Case for Theory Development in Community Education." Phi Delta Kappan, 54:154-158 (November 1972). Whitt, Robert L. A Handbook for the Community School Director. Midland, Michigan: Pendell Publishing Co., 1971. Wilson, George T. "Community Education - Some Growing Pains." Journal  of Health Education, Physical Education and Recreation, 46-47 (April 1974). Wylie, Ruth C. The Self-Concept. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 19 74. APPENDIX A 98 THE ROLE OF THE COMMUNITY EDUCATION COORDINATORS INSTRUCTIONS: PART I W i t h i n each o f the s e c t i o n s , rank each item i n order of importance as an aspect of the community educ a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r ' s r o l e . The most important aspect should be ranked f i r s t , the second most important aspect should be ranked second and so on PART I I Do the same as i n P a r t I. PART I I I I f 100$ r e p r e s e n t s the t o t a l working time of the com-munity e d u c a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r , what percentage should be spent i n each of the major c a t e g o r i e s o f a c t i v i t i e s . PART I A. EDUCATOR 1. teaches c h i l d r e n i n a f o r m a l classroom environment. 2. teaches a d u l t s i n a f o r m a l classroom environment. 3- teaches p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n as an o f f i c i a l p a r t of the s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m . manages and o r g a n i z e s i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r the community s c h o o l s t a f f , v o l u n t e e r t e a c h e r s or s u p e r v i s o r s and a d v i s o r y c o u n c i l members. 5- manages and develops a l e a d e r s h i p t r a i n i n g program f o r members of the community. B. COUNSELOR 1. coun s e l s c h i l d r e n and a d o l e s c e n t s . 2. c o u n s e l s a d u l t s . 3* r e f e r s members o f the community t o p r o f e s s i o n a l c o u n s e l o r s , agencies or o r g a n i z a t i o n s t o s o l v e t h e i r problems. C. STUDENT 1. examines i d e a s and programs of oth e r c o o r d i n a t o r s f o r s e l e c t i v e a p p l i c a t i o n t o h i s s i t u a t i o n . 2. reads p r o f e s s i o n a l m a t e r i a l s on community edu c a t i o n . 3« a t t e n d s and p a r t i c i p a t e s a t workshops, seminars and conferences r e l a t i n g t o community e d u c a t i o n . s t u d i e s c o n s t a n t l y the socio-economic s t r u c t u r e of the community. D. SUPERVISOR 1. s u p e r v i s e s the s t a f f o f the community e d u c a t i o n programs. 2. s u p e r v i s e s the v o l u n t e e r s i n the programs. 3- s u p e r v i s e s a l l e d u c a t i o n a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s . *K develops a system of d e l e g a t i n g s u p e r v i s i o n . 5- reviews with h i s s t a f f the m a t e r i a l which they prepare f o r the e d u c a t i o n a l programs. 99 100 E. ADMINISTRATOR 1. m a i n t a i n s complete and a c c u r a t e r e c o r d s on pe r s o n n e l , attendance, budget, s u p p l i e s and oth e r a s p e c t s of the community e d u c a t i o n programs. 2. prepares and a d m i n i s t e r s an annual budget f o r the com-munity e d u c a t i o n programs. 3 . prepares and submits p e r i o d i c r e p o r t s on the progress of community e d u c a t i o n to the s c h o o l board and to the community. 4. h i r e s , t r a i n s and maintains a competent s t a f f . 5. a s s i g n s rooms and equiptment, a d j u s t s c o n f l i c t s and arranges the schedule of a c t i v i t i e s . 6. performs r o u t i n e o p e r a t i o n s as correspondence, telephone, communications, p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s and r e g i s t r a t i o n arrangements. 7- s e l e c t s and ca r e s f o r the f a c i l i t i e s and equiptment needed f o r the a c t i v i t i e s . F. PUBLIC RELATIONS 1. promotes, p u b l i c i z e s and i n t e r p r e t s e x i s t i n g and planned programs t o the s c h o o l s t a f f and to the community. 2. propares newspaper and r a d i o p u b l i c i t y a r t i c l e s . 3- appears on t e l e v i s i o n and r a d i o programs. 4. a c t s as d i s c u s s i o n l e a d e r or moderator a t p u b l i c i n -t e r e s t meetings. 5. d i s p l a y s a b u l l e t i n board i n a p u b l i c p l a c e t o announce a c t i v i t i e s and promote the p h i l o s o p h y and pro g r e s s of community e d u c a t i o n . G. COMMUNICATOR 1. r e p r e s e n t s the s c h o o l d i s t r i c t i n a l l matters r e l a t e d t o the o v e r a l l p r o g r e s s of community e d u c a t i o n . 2. serves on community wide committees t o develop r a p p o r t with l a y l e a d e r s i n the community. 3- becomes a member of v a r i o u s o r g a n i z a t i o n s or s e r v i c e c l u b s t o develop r a p p o r t w i t h l a y l e a d e r s of the com-munity. 4. m a i n t a i n s communication between the s c h o o l and the com-munity and v i c e v e r s a . 5. serves as the communication l i n k between the s c h o o l d i s t r i c t and o r g a n i z a t i o n s which p r o v i d e e d u c a t i o n a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l and s o c i a l s e r v i c e s . H. COMMUNITY DEVELOPER I. b r i n g s people t o g e t h e r t o work harmoniously f o r the common good. 2. helps people t o e s t a b l i s h c o n f i d e n c e i n themselves, making them r e a l i z e t h a t they can s o l v e t h e i r own problems. 3. h e l p s people t o h e l p themselves. h. works t o e f f e c t p o s i t i v e , r a t i o n a l and b e n e f i c i a l change w i t h i n the community. 5. h e l p s people t o understand, r e a l i z e and f u l f i l l t h e i r p o t e n t i a l as competent able human beings. 101 I. PROGRAM DEVELOPER 1. implements an ongoing e v a l u a t i o n p l a n to r e a s s e s s the needs of the community and develop new programs or upgrade e x i s t i n g ones. 2. i d e n t i f i e s the agencies , s e r v i c e s and r e s o u r c e s a v a i l a b l e i n the community. 3» promotes the use of community r e s o u r c e s i n the develop-ment and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the programs. *J-. i d e n t i f i e s , i n t e r v i e w s and s e l e c t s v o l u n t e e r s t o p a r t i -c i p a t e and become i n v o l v e d i n the programs. 5. o r g a n i z e s and develops an a d v i s o r y c o u n c i l which r e -pre s e n t s the agencies , o r g a n i z a t i o n s , age and s o c i o -economic groups of the community. 6. develops e d u c a t i o n a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s t o meet the needs of the people of the community. ?. promotes the use o f the s c h o o l f a c i l i t i e s i n the develop-ment and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the programs. J. FACILITATOR 1. f a c i l i t a t e s u n d e r s t a n d i n g and improved working r e l a t i o n -s h i p s between the s c h o o l s t a f f , c u s t o d i a l s t a f f and v o l u n t e e r s . 2. a s s i s t s the t e a c h e r s t o use the r e s o u r c e s of the com-munity i n the development o f t h e i r c l a s s e s . 3« serves as a l i a i s o n between the community s c h o o l s t a f f and o t h e r s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s t a f f . p a r t i c i p a t e s i n the l o c a l s c h o o l s t a f f meetings to o f f e r a s s i s t a n c e when nec e s s a r y . 5- develops s t a f f o r i e n t a t i o n and involvement i n community ed u c a t i o n . 6. works c l o s e l y w i t h the a d v i s o r y c o u n c i l i n a s s e s s i n g needs, e v a l u a t i n g the needs, s e t t i n g g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s and s e t t i n g g u i d e l i n e s for.' a c t i v i t i e s . 7. a s s i s t s the a d v i s o r y c u n c i l i n e v a l u a t i n g the e f f e c t i v e -ness o f the a c t i v i t i e s . PART I I PART I I I 1. EDUCATOR • % 2. COUNSELOR % 3. STUDENT % h. SUPERVISOR % 5. ADMINISTRATOR % 6. PUBLIC RELATIONS % 7- COMMUNICATOR % 8. COMMUNITY DEVELOPER % 9- PROGRAM DEVELOPER % 10. FACILITATOR % APPENDIX B 102 DEVELOPMENT OF INSTRUMENT FOR THESIS T I T L E i The Role of the Community E d u c a t i o n C o o r d i n a t o r s i n the Community Schools of the Lower Mainland of B r i t i s h Columbia, i n c l u d i n g V i c t o r i a . INSTRUCTIONS: A community e d u c a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r i n a community s c h o o l i s i n v o l v e d i n many a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e d t o h i s primary r o l e as an educator. Some of these a c t i v i t i e s c o u l d be d e s c r i b e d as p r i m a r i l y concerned with program development, communications, com-munity development, l e a r n i n g , i n s t r u c t i o n and a d m i n i s t r -a t i o n . Below are some a c t i v i t i e s of the community e d u c a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r . Check the ONE o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r y which, i n your view, be s t summarizes the p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n o f a person i n v o l v e d i n each of the a c t i v i t i e s d e s c r i b e d . There are no r i g h t or wrong answers. We are i n t e r e s t e d i n which a c t i v i t i e s you re g a r d as t y p i c a l o f a program dev-e l o p e r , communicator, community d e v e l o p e r , l e a r n e r , i n s t r u c -t o r and a d m i n i s t r a t o r . TWO EXAMPLES: The Community E d u c a t i o n C o o r d i n a t o r : K O E H < o E H E H o CO w M EH M < • m LE IN AD a. Teaches., b. Develops programs. v / 1 v / 1 i ! BEGIN HERE: 1. Performs r o u t i n e o p e r a t i o n s , such as work on correspondence, telephone, p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s and r e g i s t r a t i o n arrangements. 2 24 1 0 0 32 2. Counsels c h i l d r e n , a d o l e s c e n t s and a d u l t s , or r e f e r s them t o p r o f e s -s i o n a l c o u n s e l o r s or s e r v i c e agen-c i e s . 2 17 28 0 11 2 3. Implements an ongoing e v a l u a t i o n t o r e a s s e s s community needs 19 3 3k 0 0 3 103 4. Maintains records on personnel, attendence, budget, supplies and other aspects of community education programs. 5. Provides communication opportuni-t i e s between the community school s t a f f and the s t a f f of other d i s -t r i c t schools. 6. Prepares and administers an annual budget for the community education programs. 7. Manages and develops a leadership t r a i n i n g program f o r community members. 8. Studies the socio-economic struc-ture of the community 9. Selects and cares f o r f a c i l i t i e s and equipment. 10. Reads professional materials on community education. 11. Helps people to e s t a b l i s h c o n f i -dence i n themselves and an a b i l i t y to solve t h e i r own problems 12. I d e n t i f i e s , interviews and selects volunteers i n a l l educational, re-creational and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s . 13. Supervises the s t a f f and volunteers i n a l l educational, r e c r e a t i o n a l and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s . 14. Consults teachers and other pro-fessionals regarding progress of community education programs. 15. Provides communication opportuni-t i e s between the community school and organizations which provide education, recreational and s o c i a l services. 16. Works closely with the advisory council i n assessing needs, s e t t i n g goals, objectives, guidelines for community a c t i v i t i e s . I?. Reviews with his s t a f f materials prepared f o r educational programs. 18. Serves on community committees and participates i n organizations rapport with l a y leaders. 19. Organizes and develops an advisory council which represents s o c i a l , interest groups i n the community. 2 0 . Acts as discussion leader or mod-erator at public i n t e r e s t meetings. 21. Participates i n the school s t a f f meetings to a s s i s t when necessary. 22. Promotes the use of community re-sources i n developing and admin-i s t e r i n g programs. 23. Manages and organizes inservice t r a i n i n g opportunities f o r the s t a f f , volunteers, supervisors and advisory council members. 2k, Assists teachers to use resources of the community i n the develop-ment of classes. 25. Assigns rooms and equipment, re-solves c o n f l i c t s and arranges the a c t i v i t y schedule. clubs to develop 26. Teaches adults i n a formal c l a s s -room environment. 27- Develops educational, re c r e a t i o n a l and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s to meet needs of people i n the community. 28. F a c i l i t a t e s understanding and im-proved working relationships "between the school s t a f f , custodial s t a f f and volunteers. 29. Helps people to understand, r e a l i z e and f u l f i l l t h e i r p o t e n t i a l as com-petent c i t i z e n s . 30. Prepares and submits reports to the school board and community on the progress of the community education programs. 31. I d e n t i f i e s agencies, services and resources i n the community. 32. Assists the- advisory council i n evaluating the effectiveness of the community a c t i v i t i e s . 33* Develops a system of delegating supervision. 3^. Examines the ideas and programs of other coordinators for possible application i n his school. 35* Helps people to help themselves. 36. Teaches children i n a formal c l a s s -room environment. 37- Brings people together to work harmoniously. 38. Hires, t r a i n s and maintains a competent s t a f f . 39• Participates i n workshops, seminars and conferences related to com-munity education. 40. Teaches physical education. 41. Displays a b u l l e t i n board i n a public place to announce a c t i -v i t i e s and to promote community education. 42. Develops s t a f f orientation and i n -volvement i n community education. 43- Works to effect p o s i t i v e and bene-f i c i a l change within the community. 44. Promotes the use of school f a c i l -i t i e s i n developing and administer-ing programs. 1 4 5 . Maintains community-school com-munication. 46. Promotes, publ i c i z e s and interprets programs to the school s t a f f and the community. APPENDIX C 108 DEVELOPMENT OF INSTRUMENT FOR THESIS TITLE: The Role of the Community E d u c a t i o n C o o r d i n a t o r s i n the Community Schools o f ;the Lower Mainland of B r i t i s h Columbia, i n c l u d i n g V i c t o r i a . INSTRUCTIONS! A community e d u c a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r i n a community s c h o o l i s i n v o l v e d i n many a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e d t o h i s primary r o l e as an educator. Some of these a c t i v i t i e s c o u l d be d e s c r i b e d as p r i m a r i l y concerned with p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s , community development, l e a r n i n g , i n s t r u c t i o n and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Below are some a c t i v i t i e s o f the community e d u c a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r . Check the ONE o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r y which, i n your view, b e s t summarizes the primary f u n c t i o n of a person i n v o l v e d i n each of the a c t i v i t i e s d e s c r i b e d . There are no r i g h t or wrong answers. We are "interested i n which a c t i v i t i e s you r e g a r d as t y p i c a l o f a p u b l i c r e l a -t i o n person, community developer, l e a r n e r , i n s t r u c t o r and a d m i n i s t r a t o r . " : -TWO EXAMPLESs c The Community E d u c a t i o n C o o r d i n a t o r i PUBLIC RELA-TION PERSON COMMUNITY DEVELOPER LEARNER INSTRUCTOR ADMINISTRATOR a. Teaches. b. Develops the community. v/ s / BEGIN HERE t 1. Performs r o u t i n e o p e r a t i o n s , such "as work on correspondence, telephone, p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s and r e g i s t r a t i o n arrangements. 2. Counsels c h i l d r e n , a d o l e s c e n t s and a d u l t s , or r e f e r s them t o p r o f e s -s i o n a l c o u n s e l o r s or s e r v i c e a g e n c i e s . 3 . Implements an ongoing e v a l u a t i o n to r e a s s e s s community needs 12 0 0 0 28* 8 21 0 7 3 1 31* 1 1 6 109 110 4. Maintains records on personnel, attendence, budget, supplies and other aspects of community education programs 5- Provides communication opportuni-^ t i e s between the community school s t a f f and the s t a f f of other d i s t r i c t schools. 6. Prepares and administers an annual budget for the community education programs. 7. Manages and develops a leadership t r a i n i n g program f o r community members. 8. Studies the socio-economic struct ture of the community. 9. Reads professional materials on corn^ munity education. 10. Selects and cares f o r f a c i l i t i e s and equiptment. 11. Helps people to e s t a b l i s h confix dence i n themselves and an a b i l i t y to solve t h e i r own problems, 12. I d e n t i f i e s , interviews and selects volunteers i n a l l educational, r e ^ creational and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s . 13. Supervises the s t a f f and volunteers i n a l l educational, r e c r e a t i o n a l • and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s . 14. Consults teachers and other pro^-fessionals regarding progress of community education programs. 15- Provides communication opportuni-t i e s between the community school and organizations which provide educational, r e c r e a t i o n a l and s o c i a l services. LA vc RE CO >H « 0 RE EH W E H w 1—1 PH O 0 H RU 1-3 is E H CQ D § > CO M T,E S PH E H 0 a T,E M o E H EH CO H M 1 0 1 0 38* 28* 5 0 0 7 1 2 0 0 37* 2 20 0 13 5-1 27* 8 2 2 2 8 9 | 2 3 1 8 27* 2 20 0 17 0 6 9 0 3 22 2 2 0 2 3^* 12 11 3 0 14 28* 7 0 1 4 16. Works clos e l y with the advisory council i n assessing needs, s e t t i n g goals, objectives, guidelines f o r community education. 17. Reviews with h i s s t a f f materials prepared for educational programs. 18. Serves on community committees and p a r t i c i p a t e s i n oganizations rapport with lay leaders. 19. Organizes and develops an advisory council which represents s o c i a l , i n t e r est groups i n the community. 20. Acts as discussion leader or mod-erator at public i n t e r e s t meetings. 21. Participates i n the school s t a f f meetings to a s s i s t when necessary. 22. Promotes the use of community re-sources i n developing and administ-ering programs. 4 23. Manages and organizes inservice t r a i n i n g opportunities for the s t a f f , volunteers, supervisors and advisory council members. 24. Assists teachers to use resources of the community i n the development of classes. 25. Assigns rooms and equiptment, r e -solves c o n f l i c t s and arranges the a c t i v i t y schedule. 26. Teaches adults i n a formal c l a s s -room environment. clubs to develop 27. Develops educational, r e c r e a t i o n a l and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s to meet needs of people i n the community. 112 28. F a c i l i t a t e s understanding and im-proved working rela t i o n s h i p s between the school s t a f f , custodial s t a f f and volunteers. 29. Helps people to understand, r e a l i z e and f u l f i l l t h e i r p o t e n t i a l as com-petent c i t i z e n s . 30. Prepares and submits reports to the school board and community on the progress of the community education. 31. I d e n t i f i e s agencies, services and re sources i n the community. 32. A s s i s t s the advisory c u n c i l i n evaluating the effectiveness of community a c t i v i t i e s . 33- Develops a system of delegating supervision. 3^. Examines the ideas and programs of other coordinators f o r possible a p p l i c a t i o n i n his school. 35. Helps people to help themselves. 36. Teaches children i n a formal c l a s s -room environment. 37. Brings people together to work harmoniously. 38. Hires, t r a i n s and maintains a competent s t a f f . 39* P a r t i c i p a t e s i n workshops, semin- . ars and conferences related to community education. kO. Teaches physical education. 41. Displays a b u l l e t i n board i n a public place to announce a c t i v i -t i e s and to promote community education. OS 1' 0 PC AT pq CO >H PC O oc 2 oc EH pq EH EH pq H PH PC O to O Q-t 2 O pq t=> H H PC t-H" S a w S EH H pq 0 s > < CO M 0 pq Q OH EH O Q 3 l-H < 19 1 0 0 20 2 21 0 15 1 8 5 1 1 25* 8 23 2 0 7 3 : 22 1 2 12 1 1 0 1 37* 0 6 5 2 27* 1 19 0 17 2 0 0 0 39* 0 12 13 0 8 7 2 0 0 1 37* 5 10 11 9 5 0 1 0 39* 0 30* 6 0 0 4 42. Develops s t a f f o r i e n t a t i o n and i n -volvement i n community e d u c a t i o n . 43 . Works t o e f f e c t p o s i t i v e and "bene-f i c i a l change w i t h i n the community. 44. Promotes the use o f s c h o o l f a c i l -i t i e s i n d e v e l o p i n g and a d m i n i s t e r i n g programs. 45. M a i n t a i n s community-school com-munications. 46. Promotes, p u b l i c i z e s and i n t e r p r e t s programs to the s c h o o l s t a f f and the community. 114 DEVELOPMENT CF INSTRUMBENT FOR THESIS TITLE: The Role of the Community Education Coordinators i n the Community Schools of the Lower Mainland of B r i t i s h Columbia, including V i c t o r i a . INSTRUCTIONS: A community education coordinator i n a community school i s involved i n many a c t i v i t i e s related to his primary role as an educator. Some of these a c t i v i t i e s could be described as primarily concerned with public r e l a t i o n s , community development, learning, i n s t r u c t i o n , administration and counseling, Below are some a c t i v i t i e s of the community education coordinator. Check the ONE occupational category which, i n your view, best summsizes the primary function of a person involved i n each of the a c t i v i t i e s described. There are no r i g h t or wrong answers. We are interested i n which a c t i v i t i e s you regard as t y p i c a l of a public r e l a t i o n person, community developer, learner, i n s t r u c t o r administrator and counselor. TWO EXAMPLES: The Community Education Coordinator: a. Teaches. b. Develops the community E H O !=> E H CO s E H E H CO o 1-3 CO Il ~ — 1 V > 0 0 18* 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 20* k 7 1 l 6 2 BEGIN HERE» 1. Reads professional materials to continue own education i n re l a t e d f i e l d . 2. Counsels children, adolescents and adults. 3. Discusses ideas r e l a t i n g to com-munity education with other coor-dinators. 115 4. Refers people t o i n d i v i d u a l s , agen- 1 c i e s and/or o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t can help s o l v e t h e i r problems. 5« Helps people to e s t a b l i s h c o n f i -dence i n themselves and f u l f i l l t h e i r p o t e n t i a l as competent c i t i z e n s . 6. Attends workshops, seminars and conferences to keep a b r e a s t of new developments i n community e d u c a t i o n . 7. Helps people to h e l p themselves. 8. Examines i d e a s and programs of other c o o r d i n a t o r s f o r p o s s i b l e r e l e v a n c e t o h i s s c h o o l . 116 « o K EH <6 O P2 EH EH O GO 13 M TR IN < w TE H , 3 O rH* W CO -j 3 2 0 0 4 ,3 13* 0 8 0 2 1 10 1 1 16* 0 3 0 0 13 0 3 0 5 0 1 5 0 15 0 APPENDIX E ) 117 CONFIDENTIAL •e c CONFIDENTIAL DATA SHEET1 NUMBEH A* Actual role of the community education coordinator. INSTRUCTOR T. PUBLIC RELATIONS PERSON 9. COMMUNITY DEVELOPER ADMINISTRATOR 4-LEARNER 1 COUNSELOR TOTAL K. Ideal role of community education coordinator* > -INSTRUCTOR 1 0 PUBLIC RELATIONS PERSON *. COMMUNITY DEVELOPER 3 ' ADMINISTRATOR LEARNER COUNSELOR TOTAL J* <$• Fersonal d a t a * What is your age years. 2 . What i s your sex? (check) Male ..... „_. . Female -3. What i s your marital status? (check) Single Married Widowed _ Separated 4 . Do you reside within the school dist r i c t in which you work? (check) Yes ' • "" NoJ 5 . What i s the name of the community school in which you work? &• Where did you l i r e immediately prior to becoming a community education coordinator at this/ school? City Province 118 119 7 » l i s t your university degrees and diplomas. Degree or Diploma Year received University 8. In what f i e l d did you do your most recent degree or diploma? (examplet arts, science, psychology) 9. Do you have a British Columbia Teachers' Certificate? (chee^ v« a • " No If so, which certificate^do you have? 1 0 . What was your occupation prior to becoming a community education co-ordinator? (example: social worker with municipality, recreation director with Parks Board) 1 1 . How many years did you spend in your previous occupation? years. 1 2 . What formal training have you had in community education? (example* courses, workshops, seminars) 1 3 . Where did you receive your formal training in community education? 1 4 . To how many professional organizations do you belong? (check) 1 . None 2 . 1 3 . 2 - 3] 4 . 4 - 5. 1 5 . In how many service, sports or church groups do you hold membership? (example* Lions, curling, men's club) (check) 1 . None ' - / 2 . i ' , 3 . 2 - 3 4 . 4 - 5 : 120 16. For how many months have you been working as community education coordinator in British Columbia? months 17. What is your job t i t l e ? 18. What is the job t i t l e of your immediate superior? 19* On the average how many hours do you spend on the job each week? hours 20. Below write the letter which represents your current salary category. A. $ 9,000.00 - $ 11,999.00 Category B:. $ 12,000.00 - % 14,999.00 C. $ 15,000.00 - 8 17,999.00 • D. $ 18,000.00 - $ 20,999.00 . E. , $ 21,000.00 - Z 24,000.00 21. From the following l i s t check a l l of the organizations that are directly involved in making policy for this community school. School Board , Parks Board Community School_ Social Planning Board Department of Human Resources^ Local Advisory Council Others (write) 22. Check the following organizations which contribute to the annual budget. (If more than one organization, indicate the percentage paid by each) School Board ' ' • f> Parks Board ; <f, Social Planning Board $> Department of Human Resources Federal monies (LIP grants) jo Others (write) f> Total 100 £ 23. What is the total annual budget for community education in this community school? dollars. » 24. What would you perceive to be an optimun annual budget for community education in this school? dollars. 121 2 5 . How many employed full-time staff are presently working with you in the community education programs?  2 6 . How many employed part-tine staff are presently working with you in the community education programs?__ 2 7 . How many unpaid volunteers are presently working with you in the community education programs?  Do Personal characteristics, 1. E_ ; 2o K__ 3 I 122 123 COLUMN NUMBER 1-2 3 7-8-9-10-11 12-13-14-15-16 17-18-19-20-21 22-23-24-25-26 27-28-29-30-31 32-33-34-35-36 37-38 39-40-41-42-43 44-45-46-47-48 49-50-51-52-53 54-55-56-57-58 59-60-61-62-63 64-65-66-67-68 69-70 71-72-73-74-75-76 1-2 3 7-8-9-10-11-12 13-14-15-16-17-18 19-20-21-22-23-24 25-26-27-28-29-30 31-32-23-34-35-36 37-38 39-40 41 42 43 44 45 46 CODING SCHEDULE ' VARIABLE I.D. card number actual % instructor " " pub.rei.per. " " com dev. " " administrator " " learner " " counselor t o t a l actual hours i d e a l % ins t r u c t o r " " pub.rei.per " " com.dev. " " administrator " " learner " "counselor t o t a l i d e a l hours instructor d.score % I.D. card number pub.rei.per.d.score % com.dev. " " " admin. " " " learner " " " counselor " " " t o t a l difference score age sex ma r i t a l status school p r i o r residence no.of degrees diplomas JOSEPH GUBBELS THESIS AD.ED. CODE 00 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00 00.00 00.00 00.00 ,00.00 00.00 00.00 00 000.00 00 0 000.00 000.00 000.00 000.00 000,00 00 00 male-1 female-2 single-1 married-2 widowed-3 elementary-1 j r . secondary-2 sr. secondary-3 lower mainland-1 outside lower mainland-2 8- 1 1- 2 2- 3 3- 4 yes-1 no-2 124 COLUMN NUMBER VARIABLE CODE 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59-60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 bachelor masters major field graduation B.C. teachers certificate prior occupation courses in com.ed inservice in com ed workshops in com.ed. seminars in com.ed professional organizations groups work/months time t i t l e t i t l e of supervisor policy school board policy parks board policy com.school policysocial planning yes-1 no-2 yes-1 no-2 arts-1 socill science-2 recreation-3 education-4 1969-1970- 1 1971-1972- 2 1973-1974- 3 yes-1 no-2 recreation-1 counselor-2 teacher-3 community worker-4 student-5 journalist-6 yes-1 no-2 yes-1 no-2 yes-1 no-2 yes-1 no-2 0- 1 1- 2 2- 3 - 3 4-5 - 4 0- 1 1- 2 2- 3 - 3 3- 4 - 4 00 full-time- 1 half-time- 2 community school worker- 1 community school coordinator-community service director- 3 director of school & com affai principal- 1 supervisor of instru.(com.ed.) supervisor of center & f a c i l . area manager- 4 yes-1 no-2 yes-1 no-2 yes-1 no-2 yes-1 no-2 125 COLUMN NUMBER VARIABLE CODE 68 policy dept.human res. yes-1 no-2 69 policy local advisory cou. yes-1 no-2 70 policy others yes-1 no-2 71 budget school board yes-1 no-2 72-73-74 % budget school board 000 75 budget parks board yes-1 no-2 76-77-78 % budget parks board 000 1-2 3 8-9 10 11-12 13 14-15 16 17 18 19 20 -21 22-23 24-25 26-27 28 29 30 I.D. card number budget human resources % budget human resources budget federal monies % budget federa monies budget others % budget others salary actual budget ideal budget full-time staff part-time staff volunteers extroversion neuroticism l i e Years prior occupation residence 00 0 yes-1 no-2 00 yes-1 no-2 00 y'es-1 no-2 00 $ 9,000.00 - $ 12,000.00 -15,000.00 -18,000.00 -21,000.00 -$00,000.00 - $ 11,000.00 -21,000.00 -31,000.00 -41,000.00 -51,000.00 -$10,000,00 - $ 21,000.00 -31,000.00 -41,000.00 -51,000.00 -0 00 00 00 00 0 0-1-1 2-4-2 5-7-3 8-above-4 within B.C. - 1 outside B.C. - 2 11,999. 14,999. 17,999. 20,999. 24 999. 10,999. 20,999. 30,999. 40,999. 50,999 60,999 20,999. 30,999. 40,999. 50,999. 60,999. 00-1 00-2 00-3 00-4 00-5 00-1 00-2 00-3 00-4 00-5 00 - 6 00-1 00-2 00-3 00-4 00-5 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

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"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055724/manifest

Comment

Related Items