In this study, elementary and secondary principals, from the states Ohio and Illinois, were not found to have different priorities for the selection of teachers regardless of the area/focal position being sought. The higher selection priorities are enthusiasm for teaching, communication skills, and interviewer's evaluation. The lower priorities are reference information, grade point average, and self-purposing. More research is needed to clarify how these criteria actually are used. Administrators and potential candidates need to be aware of and concentrate on the higher priorities in relation both to how they are demonstrated and to how they are evaluated.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DipboyeR. L.1992. Selection Interviews: Process Perspectives.Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Publishing.
2.
JohnsonB. R.1976. “What Administrators Look for in Teacher Interviews,”Phi Delta Kappan, 58: 283–284.
3.
PlaceA. W., KowalskiT. J., and YoungI. P.“The Effects of Applicant Age and Academic Achievement in Screening Decisions for the Employment of Secondary Teachers,” paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, October 1992.
4.
WallichL. R.“The Effect of Age and Sex on the Pre-Screening for Selection of Teacher Candidates,” unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 1984.
5.
YoungI. P., and AllisonB. H.1982. “Effects of Candidate Age and Experience on School Superintendents and Principals in Selecting Teachers,”Planning and Changing, 13: 245–256.
6.
YoungI. P., and JosephG.“Effects of Chronological Age, Skill Obsolescence, Quality of Information and Focal Position on Screening Decisions,” paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, April 1987.
7.
YoungI. P., and McMurrayB.1986. “Effects of Chronological Age, Focal Position, Quality of Information and Quantity of Information on Screening Decisions for Teacher Candidates,”Journal of Research and Development in Education, 19(4): 1–10.
8.
YoungI. P., and RyersonD.1986. “Teacher Selection: Legal, Practical, and Theoretical Aspects,”UCEA Monograph Series, Tempe, AZ.
9.
YoungI. P., and SchmidtH.“Effects of Sex, Chronological Age and Instructional Level on Screening Decisions Made by Principals,” paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, April 1987.
10.
YoungI. P., and VossG. M.1986. “Administrators’ Perceptions of Teacher Candidates: Effects of Chronological Age, Amount of Information and Type of Teaching Position,”Journal of Educational Equity and Leadership, 6: 27–44.
