A comparison of selected factors which may influence the accreditation status of small, rural public high schools in Michigan's Upper Peninsula.

Abstract

This study examined the factors which contribute to the accreditation status of selected small rural public high schools in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. The study focused on fourteen schools with similar student enrollment, seven accredited by The University of Michigan and seven not accredited. The two groups of schools were compared on: (1) Financial climate. Data were gathered primarily through information published by the Michigan Department of Education. (2) Instructional program. The University of Michigan accreditation st and ards served as a basis to compare the programs offered in accredited and non-accredited schools. (3) Decision-makers' views of accreditation. The key decision-makers (the superintendent, the high school principal, and a representative of the board of education) were interviewed to determine their knowledge and attitudes regarding accreditation. Significant findings include the following: (1) Although both groups contain "wealthy" and "poor" districts, the financial conditions in the two groups of schools were generally similar. Both groups studied had equal fiscal power to generate similar instructional programs. (2) The decision-makers' attitude regarding accreditation was a key to determining the accreditation status of a school. In the accredited schools there was a broad, wide-spread commitment among all three groups of decision-makers as to the value of accreditation. In contrast, in the non-accredited schools the separate groups believed that accreditation was important only to them. (3) The concept of accreditation has had a positive effect in all fourteen schools studied. Individual decision-makers in each of the schools stated they used accreditation st and ards in long-term planning and decision-making. (4) Accredited schools generally had a more varied and well-rounded instructional program, a better equipped library with a certified librarian, and a more comprehensive guidance counseling program than the non-accredited schools. The administrators in the accredited schools indicated that accreditation, and the fear of losing it, provided additional leverage in dealing with the school board and public in convincing them of the importance of offering comprehensive programs. Administrators in the non-accredited schools either did not view or did not choose use the accreditation process as a lever to improve the school's instructional program.