University.The following statistics have become familiar. In 1970In -1971 percent of the public elementary and secondary classroom teachers were women, only 15.2 percent of the principals and assistant principals and 1.4 percent of the superintendents and deputy, associate, and assistant superintendents were women.' In 1976, women comprised 66 percent of all classroom teachers, 12.9 percent of all principals and assistant principals, and 5.4 percent of the superintendents and assistant superintendents.~ During a period of time that might be considered a high point in the current women's movement, and during a time when ample evidence attesting to women's leadership capability was available, the number of women principals actually declined. The miniscule proportion of women administrators at the highest levels increase, but the relative numbers of females and males in these positions remained extremely discrepant. ' _ PERSISTENCE OF THE MYTHThe data to dispel the belief that women are incapable of effective administrative performance have existed for many years. Table ~1 summarizes studies comparing male and female administrative behavior during the past two decades. In nearly every comparison of actual administrative performance, whether on the basis of administrators' own responses, superiors' ratings, or subordinates' ratings, there have been either no sex differences or women have received higher ratings. Clearly, the women who have served as public school administrators have provided at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 16, 2015 eaq.sagepub.com Downloaded from

No abstract

No abstract

It is hypothesized that the growing body of empirical data concerning the naive psychology of the assignment of cause — attribution theory — yields a substantial number of concepts which are logically assumed to offer significant potential insight into the administrative process. In order to stimulate the research necessary to test this hypothesis the existing research is presented and a theoretical formulation entitled Administrative Attribution Theory is offered. The structural framework of this conceptualization rests with five constructs: (1) asymmetry, i.e., attributions reflect a general positive bias; (2) concomitance, i.e., attributions vary with pre‐conditioned mind sets; (3) enhancement, i.e., attributions provide the individual psychological control of the environment; (4) process, i.e., the attributional process is highly generalizable, and (5) reconstruction, i.e., existing attributions may be altered through the manipulation of external variables. Examples of researchable questions are given to further facilitate field testing in educational administration.

Using a set of in‐basket materials that suggest specific leadership styles, 135 graduate students in educational administration evaluated hypothetical superintendents who were depicted as female or male and rule bound or flexible. Overall, the fictitious female superintendent was rated as less fair and less flexible than her male counterpart. Moreover, the female superintendent described as rule bound was rated as more inflexible than the male who exhibited identical behaviors and the woman described as flexible was rated as less flexible than the identidal male. When these results were viewed in the context of a body of literature that shows women administrators to be fully as effective as men and in the context of the small number of women in educational leadership positions, they strongly suggest that sex bias has operated to the disadvantage of women and the education profession.