Date of Award:


Document Type:


Degree Name:

Master of Science (MS)


School of Teacher Education and Leadership

Committee Chair(s)

E.A. Jacobsen


E.A. Jacobsen


Inasmuch as this study is concerned primarily with state school administration and an educational survey concerned with administration, it appears proper to devote some attention to the evolution of these two things. The first consideration will be given to the development of state educational administration. When grants were made by congress to the various states for educational purposes, the responsibilities of administration went to the states. The state administrative systems evolved as a natural process. Cubberley traces this development from the time the boards consisted of ex officio state officers entirely, through the time when school men were ex officio members, on to the time when most obards were a combination of the two types, and finally shows the transition to the lay-appointive boards now approved in theory if not entirely in practice. It is the purpose of the writer of this study to determine, as may be possible, changes have taken place regarding certain aspects of state educational administration in Utah as viewed in terms of the recommendations made in 1926 by the survey staff. The attempt will be made not only to determine the changes as evidenced by the status of educational administration at present but also to trace changes that have been made during the period concerned. When no changes have been made, such facts will be shown. There is no intention to attempt to cover all phases of the original survey, because of the practical impossibility of doing so. It is intended that effort shall be directed toward that part of the survey which is concerned with administration by the state as governed by constitutional provisions, legislation, state board rulings, and opinions of the attorny general. Specifically, it is intended to relate the four factors mentioned above to changes which have come in the status and functions of the following: 1. State Board of Education, 2. State Superintendent of Public Insturction, 3. State Department of Education, 4. Financial equalization. It is not intended to attempt to show that changes have been made as a result of the recommendations made in 1926; rather it is intended to indicated the changes that have or have not been made in terms of the recomendations that were made by the survey staff.