Volume 19 Number 2
January 1980

Sigmund A. Boloz and Carl G. Foster

THE American educator has been in a continuous flux of change. He has interacted and reacted to such things as the courts, the community, and the students. His sole purpose has always been to provide meaningful, effective instruction for those who participate in his schools. The reservation educator has also been involved with change. He has been and is being dictated to by such things as H.R. 15, tribal pressure, and emergent traditional community values. Each change seems to promote thunderous ramifications in education and to the participants in the instructional processes. The purpose of this article is to present a guide to effective educational leadership, within the field, generally, and to the reservation administrator, specifically. Much attention will be focused on the line manager - i.e., the principal - with inferences drawn to all areas of administration.

Principals, historically, are the line managers of the institution. They have been and are responsible for the carrying out of the institution’s expectations. However, education is rapidly changing and reservation education is no different. Because of these changes, the present-day principal must examine: (1) the amount and the type of change taking place; (2) the manner in which change will be dealt with; and (3) the amount of change necessary to contribute to the overall improvement of the teaching-learning process of the school.

Lipham (see Note 7) strongly indicated that the principal is the critical factor in the success of any program in the school, and moreover, that he must have knowledge about leadership to effectively fulfill the principalship role. As a leader, the principal is seen as a change agent as distinguished from an administrator, in that his role is utilized to introduce new approaches and procedures to accomplish the school’s goals and objectives. Based upon numerous studies, a principal’s traits, behaviors, and competencies of leadership practices can only be defined in relation to the unique and differing conditions related to any situation. Therefore, principals on the reservation must be guided not by what someone, elsewhere, has done well, but by what is appropriate in the immediate environment.

As does any school, reservation schools have expectations, which range from formally recognized policies of the school to the informal needs of the student and the community. The formal needs seem to be easily dealt with, while the informal desires are perhaps more difficult. McNeil (see Note 10) felt that awareness of the informal needs is crucial to the educational setting, for they tend to move the formal expectations of the school in different ways. He classified these informal desires into the category of a hidden curriculum with its origin in the student body, with its own informal power and authority. McNeil further stressed that the principal must be continuously aware of this hidden curriculum in order to offer content that will be of value to the student.

School expectations, ideally, mirror the cultural values of the community. The reservation principal must recognize the continuous conflict and friction occurring between the community and the school toward education. He must not expect that when the first school bell rings all will go well. Continuous assessment and monitoring of the school’s/community’s formal-informal expectations are needed. When these are performed, the proper selection of leadership techniques can be introduced with instruction augmented.

The reservation principal is rapidly becoming aware that the once enjoyed autonomy is no longer. Pressures from the federal-state government, students, and the community are reducing this autonomy. At the same time, greater demands are being placed on getting the job done. Therefore, it is necessary to examine some methods and techniques that may be employed in getting the job done.

In any administrative position, a certain amount of risk taking is necessary. In educational administration, risk taking is justified only in relation to the amount of growth seen in the student. Barnard (see Note 1) indicated that administrators communicate to their staff only when the staff has accepted the direction as authoritative. He suggested that staff resistance will be minimal when: (1) communications are understandable; (2) they are consistent with organizational purposes; (3) they are compatible with personal interests; and (4) they are of a nature that subordination can comply with. Lipham (see Note 7), on the other hand, felt that administrators need to be concerned with fostering social behaviors that produce institutional productivity as well as individual satisfaction and reward. All, in turn, must be directly related to the institution’s expectations with risk taking practices introduced only when necessary for growth.

In addition, a 1974 California School Effectiveness Study concluded that higher achieving teachers had: (1) principals who supported instructional areas; (2) more instruction was in social studies with less time spent in math, physical education, and health; (3) classes that were divided into several different pace groups; and (4) individual classrooms that were divided into few groups and in which few material variations were utilized. Although this study has suggested that there are numerous variables involved in any program, it is evident that the principal is a strong variable toward program success or failure.

The quality of a program, as Lipham stated, depends upon the selection and functioning of professionally qualified personnel who are capable of contributing significantly to the expectations of the organization. However, the selection of staff is only the beginning. A continuous in-service program is also necessary. Since the reservations have a high turnover of personnel which, in turn, facilitates a reduction in curriculum execution, it must become paramount for each principal to assist the staff in the effectiveness and efficiency of their educational roles. The time has long since passed in which the reservation teacher can experiment at the expense of the child or the program. In-service can range from group presentations to one-to-one interactions.

Schiff (see Note 12) has suggested that in-service can include anything from before school orientation conferences to regularly scheduled workshops and community visitations. He further has stated that no matter what the desired technique is, each avenue must be so designed as to insure educational accountability. Also included, as Herzberg (see Note 6) has portrayed, is the person’s feelings toward job satisfaction. Therefore, persons involved in in-service programming must feel achievement, recognition, responsibility, and advancement. When applied properly, in-service can be a valuable tool to the reservation principal. It can facilitate teacher-community direction and promote intra-inter satisfaction.

The delegation of authority is a component that may create an atmosphere of satisfaction among all participants. But, this delegation can loom as a threat to some, or create insecurities for others. Yet, as McMahon (see Note 9) has stated, top managers retain the policy making role by: (1) outlining the limits within which delegated authority is to be exercised; (2) making it clear what is delegated; (3) providing the required back-up; (4) keeping communications open; (5) checking on results; and (6) maintaining a conducive climate. However, the principal must exercise caution in this delegation, for not all participants may be prepared for the acceptance of authority. Thus, along with delegation must come an adequate foresight of what authority and how much the participant can handle. Proper selection must be undertaken to insure the smooth transfer of selected authority to predetermined participants. The principal who is capable of making this transfer adequately is on the way to augmenting a more workable educational environment and a more directional instructional setting.

The process of education has been and still is an intense political issue. The Congress, federal-state agencies, local boards, and personnel are actively vying for some control over policies that govern instruction. Educational instruction on the reservation has been and is no different. Different factions are continuously manipulating-motivating others to their perceived instructional ends. The failure of the reservation principal to be aware of the school community as a highly complex political society may lead towards misunderstanding and friction with the end result being some form of termination or isolation. Situations such as tribal ranking or community ranking of the participants must be known. This awareness, therefore, establishes a foundation for direction and allows for the proper selection of techniques for various situations. The principal who is aware can minimize some of the informal variables that affect the educational structure and can take steps accordingly to promote acceptable instructional programming.

There is little question that the job must be done. However, the reservation principal must learn to become introspective. A continuous examination of personal values and personal need dispositions is necessary. In addition, an awareness of and feedback from the community, staff, and students must be paramount. A feeling of openness and a willingness to check with his peers and family must be established for the purpose of activating numerous techniques for various situations of friction and conflict.

The principalship demands dedication and often the wearing of numerous hats. The job is usually a 24-hour-a-day activity, which involves great dependence on the physical and psychological make-up of the participant. In order to survive, the principal must keep his personal, private life in perspective with the needs of the institution. Some periodically divorce themselves from the job, while others change scenery on weekends. No matter how one does it, it must be done in a way that provides rejuvenation.

The principal on the reservation is not different from any other administrator. He has been charged with the education of all concerned and the effectiveness of this charge will depend upon the selection of leadership styles. The proper selection, in turn, will be dictated by the amount of the principal’s awareness of the environment. Each must be a continuous interaction with the goal of making the task less difficult.

As a line manager, the reservation principal is the critical factor in the success of the school. Because of this responsibility, the principal must adequately define the principalship role and move in a directional manner toward getting the job done. To accomplish this, the reservation principal must be aware of possible hidden curriculums or environmental expectations. The principal must never assume anything, but must continuously assess and monitor the educational setting with a continuous refinement of directional leadership techniques.

All principals deal with people and make decisions that affect people. The amount of staff-student effectiveness and efficiency depends upon the amount of the principal’s effectiveness and efficiency. Therefore, it is paramount that avenues are opened and facilitated that allow for participant satisfaction, achievement, and advancement. Leadership techniques such as in-service, delegation of responsibility, and direction must be utilized for the augmentation of all concerned. Included also must be the principal’s ability to be introspective. Awareness of intra-values and need dispositions is necessary and must be continuous. A feeling of openness and willingness must be established and continued. The principal on the reservation, who becomes aware of his unique environment and its variables is the one who will be directional. He will be the one who facilitates the educational processes of the participants of that unique environment.

1. Barnard, Chester L. Function ofan Executive, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1938.

2. Case, C. "Navajo Education: Is There Hope?" Educational Leadership, November, 1971, pp. 129-132.

3. Cogan, Morris L. "The Principal and Supervision." National Elementary Principal, May/June, 1974, pp. 20-24.

4. Getzels, Jacom W., James M. Lipham, and Ronald F. Campbell. Educational Administration as a Social Process. Harper and Row, 1968.

5. Harris, Ben M. Supervisory Behavior in Education. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975.

6. Herzberg, Fredrick. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland: The World Publishing Company.

7. Lipham, James M. and James A. Hoeh. The Principalship: Foundations and Functions. New York: Harper and Row, 1974.

8. Lozeau, Gerard A. "The Role of the Principal." North Central Association Quarterly, Fall, 1977, pp. 335-340.

9. McMahon, James. "Making Delegation Work." Administrative Management, August, 1978, pp. 5253,

10 McNeil, John D. Curriculum: A Comprehensive Introduction. Canada: Little, Brown and Company, 1977.

11. Mize, Rita. "Principals Provide Strong Support in High-Achieving Schools." Thrust for Educational Leadership, January, 1978, pp. 29-30.

12. Schiff, Martin. "The Principal as a Personnel Leader." Educational Horizons, Spring, 1978, pp. 121125.

13. Sharples, Brian. "The Principal’s Predicament." Education Canada, Spring, 1978, pp. 9-15.

14. Szasz, Margaret. Education and the American Indian: The Road to Setf-Determination, 1928-1973. Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press, 1974.

15. Tye, Kenneth. "The Times Are a Changin’ for School Principals." Thrust for Educational Leadership, October, 1977, pp. 4-7.

Sigmund A. Boloz holds degrees from the University of Connecticut and Northern Arizona University. He was teacher and academic supervisor at Rough Rock Demonstration School and is presently at Ganado Public Schools, where he is curriculum advisor for District 19. (Ganado, AZ 86505).

Carl G. Foster received his B.S. at Concordia College, the M.A. degree from University of Northern Colorado; and the M.Ed. and Ed.D. degrees from the University of Arizona. Presently he is in the College of Education at Northern Arizona University.