Administrative Theory, Relationships, and Preparation

Abstract

THE CURRENT state of theory in educational administration was described by Walton (119) as lacking a well-defined and organized subject matter and an elegant and simple theoretical structure; as literature, he added, it is singularly devoid of aesthetic qualities. The appearance three years ago in the issue, Educational Organization, Administration, and Finance, of the chapter by Chase and Guba (21) entitled Administrative Roles and Behavior, and the change this year to the present title of a chapter which similarly deals primarily with human relations seen from the point of view of the administrator, are additional evidence of the unformed, transitional state of theory in administration. A working bibliography of more than 400 references was collected for this survey. Approximately 25 percent of these studies reported research. The proportion is roughly the same as that reported by Chase and Guba (21) three years ago; however, the total amount seems to be somewhat larger. This suggests that there was an increasing interest in theory and related research in administration. While it would be possible to subsume much of the research here reported under the title of administrative roles and behavior, the questions which have been raised concerning the adequacy of role theory by several research scholars and students of administration (6, 7, 56) suggest that a more global view of administration is about to replace role theory. In addition, other theoretical orientations, such as decision making, perception, and purpose-centered organizational concepts, explicitly served as the basis for much of the research here reported. To include these under a role categorization for the sake of neatness would do violence to the concepts and working theories held by the scholars who reported such research.