Value orientations of educational administrators and teacher union and professional association officers in Texas

Abstract

It was the purpose of this study to apply the concept of value analysis to the conflicting relationship inherently manifested in the process of teacher negotiations. The initial objective of the study was to determine the value orientations of a sample of educational administrators, teacher union officers, and professional association officers and, subsequently, to develop, for each defined group, a value profile from which to base a comparison of values. It was intended that the information derived with regard to similarities and differences in value structure among the referent groups provide the educational administrator with strategies for dealing more effectively with subordinates. The sample included educators from each of three referent groups in Texas: (1) educational administrators; (2) officers of the local affiliates of the Texas State Teachers Association; and (3) officers of the local affiliates of the American Federation of Teachers. The study was limited to fifty-one urban and suburban school districts in Texas with an average daily attendance of 10,000 or more students. Each potential respondent was mailed a research packet including a copy of the Rokeach Value Survey, Form D (93). The instrument consists of two sets of values, terminal (i.e., end states of existence) and instrumental (i.e., modes of behavior), each of which is composed of eighteen alphabetically arranged values. Respondents were asked to rank the values in each set in the order of their relative importance. A total of 77.44 percent (i.e., 230 respondents) were considered usable. The data were analyzed on an Amdahl 470 V/6 computer at Texas A&M University. Routine DSCRIM, a program designed for discriminant analysis, was initially run to determine significant differences across the three referent groups with regard to each of the eighteen values within the terminal and instrumental value sets, considered separately. Differences between the groups were subsequently identified by applying DSCRIM to each of four paired comparisons presented in the research hypotheses. The following conclusions were derived from the analysis of data...