ELLIOTT, William Edward, 1934- * A MODEL FOR THE CENTRALIZATION AND i DECENTRALIZATION OF POLICY AND AEMINISTRATION 1 IN LARGE CATHOLIC DIOCESAN SCHOOL SYSTBtS. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1970 ■J Education, administration u University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan | (&j Copyright by William Edward Elliott I 1971 j A MODEL FOR THE CENTRALIZATION AND DECENTRALIZATION OF POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION IN LARGE CATHOLIC DIOCESAN SCHOOL SYSTEMS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University William Edward Elliott, Ph.B., M.A * * * * * The Ohio State University 1970 Approved by Adviser College of Education ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to express his sincere appreciation to Doctor Donald P. Anderson, his major adviser, and to the members of his dis­ sertation committee, Doctors Carl Candoli and Jack R. Frymier, for their invaluable counsel and assistance throughout this study. Special thanks are owed to the experts and to the many public schoolmen, diocesan superintendents, and religious who took time from their busy schedules to read and react to the model proposed in this study. He is especially indebted to Bishops Clarence G. Issenmann and Clarence E. Elwell, at whose request and under whose patronage he began the doctoral program; and to Msgr. Richard E. McHale, the Episcopal Vicar for Education, and Msgr. William N. Novicky, the Diocesan Super­ intendent of Schools, for their encouragement and support.. He wishes to acknowledge also the warm hospitality of the admin­ istration and faculty of the Pontifical College Josephinum during hiB years of residency in Columbus, and the thoughtfulness of his colleagues in Cleveland during the final months of the dissertation. He would be completely remiss if he failed to mention the many helpful tasks per­ formed by the professional and secretarial staffs of the Cleveland Dioc­ esan School Office, especially the generosity of Mrs. Dorothea Gambrill and Miss Lynne Keegan who devoted several Saturdays and even vacation time to the typing of the manuscript. Finally, to his parents and to his brother, he wishes to express his heartfelt thanks for their patience and understanding, their encour­ agement and support, in this endeavor— as in all others. iii VITA. June 9, 1934 ....... Born - Cleveland, Ohio I960 ............... Ordained to the Roman Catholic priesthood 1961-1965 ......... Director, Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, St. Angela Parish, Fairview Park, Ohio; Instructor, Magnificat High School, Rocky River, Ohio 1965-1967 ......... Director, Our Lady of Lourdes High School, Cleveland, Ohio 1967 ............... M.A. in Educational Administration, John Carroll University, University Heights, Ohio 1968-1969 ......... Instructor, Pontifical College Josephinum, Worthington, Ohio 1970 ............... Assistant to the Superintendent, Catholic Diocese of Cleveland PUBLICATIONS "Confrontation in Metropolis," with Gary Buskirk and Jean Emmons, in Student Unrest in the Public Schools, edited by Raphael 0. Nystrand. Worthington, Ohio: Charles A. Jones Publishing Company [at press]. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Educational Administration. Professor Donald P. Anderson. Minor Fields: Curriculum K-12. Professor Jack R. Frymier. Educational Psychology. Professor Philip M. Clark. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................. ii VITA ........................................................ iv LIST OF TABLES .............................................. vii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.......................................... viii Chapter I. THE PROBLEM AND THE P R O C E D U R E ......................... 1. The P r o b l e m..................... 7 Importance o£ the s t u d y ......................... II Definition of t e r m s ............................. 15 The Procedure...................................... 19 Methodology .................................... 20 Limitations of the study ............... 22 II. THE ADVANTAGES OF CENTRALIZATION AND DECENTRALIZATION IN ORGANIZATION THEORY AND P R A C T I C E ................... 28 Advantages of Centralization ..................... 30 Lower costs ............................. 30 Improved control ................................. 32 Greater expertise ..................... ..... 35 Advantages of Decentralization ..................... 36 Reduction of the executives' burden ............. 37 Better decisions ................................. 38 Quicker action .................................. 40 Improved community relations ..................... 40 Improved m o r a l e ................................. 41 Development of personnel......................... 45 Increased innovation and adaptation ............. 46 Summary......................... 48 III. CENTRALIZATION AND DECENTRALIZATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEMS........................................ 57 Historical Background ............................... 57 Local c o n t r o l .................................. 57 Centralization within the States ................. 59 Federal rol e .................. ■................. 63 v Size, Cost, and Program Considerations ............. 66 Size criteria for elementary and secondary schools ............................. 67 Criteria for school districts .................. 82 General c r i t e r i a .............. 82 District size and e ffici e n c y................. 89 District size and community involvement ....... 96 Equalization of support ...................... 104 Conclusions....................................... 105 IV. REACTIONS AND RESPONSE............................... 121 The Establishment of R e g i o n s ...................... 122 The Role of the Bi s h o p ............................ 130 The Role of the Diocesan Bo a r d ..................... 135 The Role of the Diocesan School O f f i c e ............. 139 The Role of the Regional Bo a r d ..................... 143 Hiring and Assigning Personnel .................... 149 Provisions for Curriculum Services ................. 154 Provisions for Financial Support .................. 157 V. A MODEL FOR THE REORGANIZATION OF LARGE DIOCESAN SCHOOL SYSTEMS ....................................... 164 Rationale......................................... 164 The Present Organizational Structure ............... 167 The Proposed M o d e l ............................... 169 The diocesan l e v e l .............................. 169 The regional l e v e l .............................. 181 K-12 attendance a r e a ............................ 191 Equalizing educational opportunity ............... 196 Adjustments to the m o d e l ........................ 203 VI. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MODEL AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE STUDIES...................... 208 Implementation of the M o d e l ...................... 209 Implications for Future Studies .................... 212 APPENDIX A ................... ........ ........................... 215 216 C . ...................... 217 D ................... .................................... 218 E ........................................................ 219 BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................. 220 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Six-year Elementary Schools........... , ............ 79 2. Four-year Secondary Schools......................... 80 3. Six-year Secondary Schools .......................... 81 A. School District Size Factor (The Administrative Unit) . 90 5. Recommended District Enrollments .................... 107 6. Reactions to the Establishment of Regions ............. 123 7. Reactions to the Role of the Bis h o p............. 131 8. Reactions to the Role of the Diocesan Bo a r d ............ 136 9. Reactions to the Role of the Diocesan School Office . 140 10. Reactions to the Role of the Regional Bo a r d ............ 145 11. Reactions to Arrangementsfor Hiring and Assigning Personnel ............................... 150 12. Reactions to Provisions for Curriculum Services ........ 155 13. Reactions to Provisions for Financial Support ......... 158 14. Differential Parish Assessments ....................... 202 vii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Relationships among Administrators in Parish Schools . 5 2. Relationships among Staff Members in Diocesan Schools . 6 3. Relationships in Private Schools................. 7 4. Relationships in Various Kinds of Catholic School .... 9 5. Present Table of Organization ........................ 168 6. Proposed Table of Organization ............ 182 viii CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND THE PROCEDURE The history of Catholic schools in the United States parallels in many respects that of the public school system. In fact, long before ecumenism was the vogue, some proponents of Catholic education were also very active in the establishment of non-sectarian and public schools. In 1784, for example, John Carroll--later the first Catholic bishop of the United States— served on the board of directors of St. John's College, a non-denominational institution in Annapolis.* Two years later, Carroll chaired a public meeting in Baltimore called to raise funds for a non- j sectarian academy for that city. In the territory of Michigan, from the time of his arrival there in 1798 until his death in 1832, Father Gabriel Richard worked closely with public officials to establish elementary and secondary schools. Though histories of the university frequently fail to mention them, Father Richard and the Catholic Indians of the Territory played a major part in the founding