DOCUMENT RESUME EA 001 926 ED 026 716 The Schools and theCommunity: A CommunicationsStudy. Suburban Area StudyGroup, Silver Spring, Md. Washington, D.C. Spons Agency-Eugene andAgnes E. Meyer Foundation, Pub Date Jul 66 Note-456p. EDRS Price MF-$1.75HC-$22.90 *Community Attitudes,Community Bibliographies,Bibliographies, *Communications, Community Descriptors-Annotated Newspapers, *PublicRelations, n-uestionnaires, *School Surveys, *Guides,Information Services, Relationship of a 2-year study(1%4-1966) of communications This comprehensive report of seven relatedstudy between the schoolsand the communityincludes descriptions methodology for aneffective school-communitypublic projects.Procedures and produced as a resultof relations program aredescribed in aprofessional handbook Fourteen steps forfact-finding and analysisof need, administrative the overall study. study projects are(1) a planning, and programoperation areexplained. The seven information about publicschools in MontgomeryCounty, surveyof attitudes and (3) a school news Maryland, (2) a surveyof school-communityinformation services, (4) an identificationof county organizationsand their survey andcontent analysis, information programs in relationships to schools,(5) a survey ofschool-community of selected schoolpublic relations programsin 29 communities Maryland, (6) a survey preparation of aschool publicrelations acrossthe UnitedStates, and (7) the 300 items available inthe Washington,D.C. area. Appended bibliography of over procedures followedfor questionnaires areaccompanied by adescription of sampling, distribution,followup, and codingof responses. (JK) EA 001 9Z6 THE SCHOOLS AND THECOMMUNITY; A COMUNICATIONS STUDY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION &WELF4R.E. OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY ASRECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT.POINTS OF VIEV; OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE0;7 EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY. Publication of thisdocument wasfacilitated by the financialsupport of the Eugene and AgnesE. MeyerFoundation Copyright, July 1966 Suburban Area Study Group Montgomery County, Maryland "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY Mary B. Flex, President Suburban.__Are.a_S.tndy_Sirnup- TO ERIC AND ORGANIZATIONS OPERATING UNDER AGREEMENTS WITH THE U.S. OFFICE OF EDUCATION. FURTHER REPRODUCTION OUTSIDE THE ERIC SYSTEM REQUIRES PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNER." Address inquiries to: Suburban Area Study Group 109 Apple Grove Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904 ii On :lune 8, 1964, a letter to the schooladministration of Montgomery County announced the beginning of a newstudy. "It is with great pleasure that I wish toinform you of a new and potentially valuable studyproject that our group plans to undertake. It will be an attempt to formulate comprehensiveguidelines for improved school-community understanding. Our interest in this area of schoolaffairs is prompted by our recognition of the scopeof the com- munications problem in a school systemof this size and complexity. To keep the public adequatelyin- formed about the on-going program, tointerpret new developments fully, and to limit the spreadof mis- information about the schools seem to us tobe a task of immense proportions. We would like to devote our efforts toward clarifying this problem. Suburban Area Study Group, as thesponsoring organi- zation, has a 21-year record of being ascrupulously unbiased, independent, non-action groupdevoted to seeking accurate information about schoolsand re- searching in depth specifiedareas." Two years later, a study consistingof seven research pro- jects and the development of aprofessional handbook has been com- pleted. We present our findings to theschools and to the commu- nity in the hope that we will havecontributed to the development of mutual understanding that will lead toimproved educational oppor- tunities for children. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study, in our opinion, wasenriched by the wide variety of views represented. We are deeply indebted to the manypeople who have contributed their time and professional knowledgein either active participation,review of the manuscript and/or consultation. Hundreds of man hours have beendonated by professionals in school-community publicrelations, commercial public relations and communications, journalism,school administration, sociology,social psy- chology, operations research, samplingmethods, and statistics. In addition, citizens representing widely divergentcommunity organizations, past and pre- sent school board members, andthe school staff peronnel haveassisted. Our chief consultant, Dr. SamuelGoodman, has provided guidancefrom the inception of the study. Mr. David Kaplan and Dr. John Aird,with the as- sistance of Mr. Leon Pritzker and Mr.Joseph Waksberg, developed theresearch plan and analyzed the data for thecitizens' survey. Consultants who also served asreviewers of the manuscript were: Dr. Harold Breimeyer Mr. Albert Holliday Dr. Benjamin Carmichael Mr. Saul Lavisky Dr. James Conner Dr. Roland Pellegrin Mr. Junius Eddy Mr. Cody Pfanstiehl Dr. William Ellena Miss Dee Preutsch Dr. Gene Fusco Dr. Archibald Shaw Dr. Keith Goldhammer Mr. Goran Stackig Mr. Malcolm Halliday Dr. William Strasser Mr. Carrol Hanson Dr. James VanZwoll Specialized consultation and othei:assistance was given by: Mr. John Batcheldor Mrs. Pearl Isenberg Mrs. Vera Berkman Dr. Richard Kennan Mrs. Ellen Brain Dr. Gordon Lippett Mr. Thomas Coleman Mrs. William Livelsberger Dr. Edwin Davis Mr. William Lubbers Dr. William Dorfman Mr. Neil MacNeil Dr. Melvin Engelhardt Mrs. Laura Masters Mr. Roger Farquhar Dr. Joseph Margolin Capt. C. L. Gaasterlund Mrs. Frederick McCann Mr. Norman Gelman Dr. William McPherson Mrs. Bea Gudridge Mr. Saul Miller Mr. William Harper Mr. Robert Monahan Dr. Ray Hiebert Dr. Annabelle Motz Mr. John Hoover Dr. John Palmer --Continued on next page Continued-- Mr. Roger Pope Mr. Arthur Simonds Dr. Glen Robinson Dr. John Staehle Mr. Charles Saunders Mrs. Clovia Tilley Dr. John Scott Dr. Austin Van der Slicfl Dr. Frederick Seymour Mrs. Dorethy Waleski Dr. William Shannon Mr. Frank Wall Mrs. Laura Sharp Mrs. Eugene Weber Dr. Murray Weitzman Our appreciation is also expressed to these members of the Mont- gomery County Schools 2taff: Dr. Homer Elseroad Mrs. Henrietta Gula Dr. Frederick Brown Dr. Paul Henry Dr. Richard Collier Dr. James Jacobs Dr. James Craig Mrs. Agens Kain Dr. Richard Darling Dr. Theophil Muellen Dr, Marie de Carlo Dr. John Permenter Mrs. Norma Day Dr. Joseph Tarralo Dr. William Early Mr. Richard Wagner Dr. Elizabeth Wilson CONTENTS Page FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SECTION I. INTRODUCTION I-1 Background Study Approach Operational Procedure Summary Conclusions Recommendations SECTION II. PROFESSIONAL HANDBOOK 1 SECTION III. STUDY PROJECTS Section A - Survey of Attitudes and Informa- tion about Public Schools Section B - Survey of School-Community In- formation Services Section C - School News Survey and Content Analysis Section D - Montgomery County Organizations and Their Relationships to Schools Section E School-Community Information Programs in Maryland Section F - Survey of Selected School Public Relations Programs Section G - School Public Relations Biblio- graphy for the Washington, D. C. Area SECTION IV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOLS vii CONTENTS, Continued 2.4it SECTION V. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL V-1 Brief History of Suburban Area Study Group V-3 School-Newspaper Contacts: A Partial Study V-5 Talks on School Public Relations V-11 A Parent Looks at School Communications V-13 The Teacher and the Public V-21 Newsletter Highlights on School Public Responsibilities V-27 viii SECTION I INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND The Suburban Area Study Groupof Montgomery Countyis composed primarily is to study of parents of schoolchildren. The purpose of this citizen group pertinent information regardingthe school system. Members of the group are currently concerned withthe need for improved and morecomprehensive communi- cations between theschools and the community they serve. Further, the study participate in the education of group realizesthat citizens cannot effectively their children, nor can they astaxpayers adequately supportthe schools, with- out a firm understandingof school programs and policiesand a constructive in- terest in the problems ofthe entire educational community. The study group felt that school-communitycommunications should be studied in depth. STUDY APPROACH in one respect, the This communications studyinitially disclosed that, in that random area ofschool public relations isdecidedly non-methodical, effective practices. For this methods are commonlysubstituted for tested and introduce reason, the studyconcentrated heavily oncareful fact-finding to public relations. systematic rather thancasual approaches to school background in- The first 18 monthsof the study weredevoted to gathering Each of these studies,represents, formation for severalindividual studies. for consistent,productive in part, one areaof the understanding necessary school publicrelations. that would goals was the developmentof a methodology One of the project of an natural, sequentialorganization of the components lend itself to the of This methodology wasexpanded by offering a range information program. Handbook" was alternatives for many ofthese components. Thus, a "Professional planning and operationof developed that can be used as abasis for the solid of the study, therefore,is: acommunication program. The total contribution