leaders would be best able to correct the situation. One teacher put it this way: "His functions would be basically the same as those of the local directors and supervisors, but on a broader plane. He should keep in touch with the various programs and interested groups throughout the State; his chief function would be to coordinate and organize the entire State so that there would be a general pattern and philosophy among the public school districts."

The committee of experts recognized the need of this service in their statement, "Frequently the State director of special education is in the most strategic position to serve as the coordinating link," and in the competencies they described as necessary in order to perform this service.

The organization of discussion groups, workshops, statewide conferences, and inservice training programs was noted by 20 percent of the teachers. They wanted their State leaders to "be instrumental in the establishment of workshops, especially for the benefit of school systems without a local supervisor," and felt that the exchange of ideas made possible through such groups was extremely valuable to all who participated. They seemed to believe that their leaders should contribute, in all possible ways, to their professional growth.

The committee of experts agreed with the teachers on the importance of this service and described a number of skills necessary in providing inservice programs to teachers.

Teachers consistently indicated that there was a need for a well-organized program of public relations and community education dealing with the problems and programs of special education. Some 19 percent of them made such comments as "spearhead interest in special education that is lacking in many local districts. Teachers want their leaders to "work with untiring zeal to make known to all educators and to the public the crying need to aid exceptional children."

Although the committee of experts did not discuss abilities explicitly connected with public relations, they did point out that State personnel should be able "to arouse interest" and "to create a desire for local services."

That the State leader should foster legislation for the exceptional child and keep the local school systems informed about it was mentioned by 12 percent of the teachers; the ability to do so was emphasized by the committee.

The State director and specialist should provide a counseling and guidance service to teachers and local directors and supervisors, according to about onetenth of the teachers. This counseling service appeared to have a dual nature: First, "consultation with local teachers in the event that the locality has supervision that is inadequate, unhelpful, or lacking in understanding, or in the event that the problems go beyond the scope of the local administration"; and second, "consultation on administration at the local level in general."

The ability of the State specialist to help teachers and local supervisory personnel was stressed by the committee. Participating State educators indicated that they spent a great deal of their time in such consultative duties.

Other services noted by the teachers were: (1) Developing a teacher recruitment and certification program along with which it would be necessary to "encourage

colleges and universities of the State to offer courses that not only will be helpful to special education teachers, but will, in addition, attract young people to the field"; (2) setting of standards of preparation and performance and seeing that they are met (these include standards for admission to and discharge from special classes, courses of study, methods of instruction, and so forth); (3) conducting surveys and research studies; and (4) discovering, screening, and placement of exceptional children.

Generally speaking, teachers seem to feel that the supervisors at the State level should work with the local leaders in special education and "should perform those services for the local school systems that the local supervisor performs for the schools and the teachers." It would seem that the opinions of the teachers and those of the committee of experts tend to reinforce each other.

PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS

By far the greatest number of teachers mentioned that directors and supervisors should have a sympathetic and understanding attitude; a warm, approachable, and friendly manner; a spirit of cooperation and helpfulness; and a genuine love of

The teacher uses toys to interest children working on speech sounds.

This

and interest in people. These qualities would seem to be a part of the democratic approach to leadership, which so many teachers thought was necessary. idea was expressed in many forms; what they apparently want is "faith in the dignity and worth of the individual, regardless of his social position, or of his handicaps,” and behavior conforming to that belief. Necessary to this democratic approach are the ability to understand and accept people (children, teachers, and parents) and their ways of behavior, and the ability to adjust to the uniqueness of the individual child, group, or situation. It is manifested in the ability to work with many types of people, the openmindedness to see and use the ideas of others, respect for the efforts of the individual and the ability to give each person a sense of personal worth. In connection with these qualities, many teachers also mentioned sensitivity to the problems of others, tolerance, kindness, patience, tact, and all the characteristics which make up "the human touch" and which give the individual "power with, not power over, people."

Teachers seem to believe that director or specialist must be a positive sort of person. They want someone who is forceful, but not aggressive; someone whose buoyant optimism and idealism are tempered with a recognition of the realities of life; someone who has more than average warmth of personality, with a contagious sort of enthusiasm (some called it "burning zeal") toward the special education program. They desire someone who is inspirational in personality, character, and philosophy. They expect their directors to be ethical, personally and professionally, and to have a "consistent sense of values." Directors and specialists should also, they mention, be psychologically well balanced, emotionally mature, and should have "strength of character."

Teachers expect their leaders to be "keen-thinking, alert, and intelligent," to have an "objective outlook," and to show evidence of insight. They want a director or specialist to have a "sense of perspective which is felt and caught by his coworkers," and to be "progressive in thinking and understanding." They expect him to be the type of person who has vision and who is willing to experiment, implying that they want flexibility and adaptability.

The committee of experts, in their brief discussion of personality characteristics of State directors and specialists, discussed several concepts similar to those mentioned by the teachers. In part, they said that State leaders should "possess tact, patience, and an understanding of children, as well as self-understanding, creativeness, resourcefulness, and optimism." They described the qualities of imagination and idealism, as well as realism and mature judgment. Here, too, on the basic concepts, the committee and the teachers tend to agree.

The personality picture painted here is, of course, ideal; possibly no director or specialist would be entirely human if he or she possessed all of these characteristics to the degree desired by teachers. Nevertheless, we can assume that State leaders will have some-and we hope many-of these traits. These, together with the competencies described in the committee report and the proper experience and preparation, can perhaps lead to the development of a truly effective. State leader in special education.

SUMMARY

THE INFORMATION reported in this publication is the result of an exploratory study, directed toward the identification and description of competencies, experiences, and professional preparation which contribute to the success of directors and specialists in State departments of education who are concerned with the education of exceptional children. The facts and opinions which form the basis of this report were contributed by the following groups of special educators: 102 directors and specialists in State departments of education, 153 directors and supervisors in local school systems, 279 staff members in colleges and universities, 1,079 successful teachers in 10 areas of exceptionality, and a 10member committee of experts in this field. The validity of the findings rests mainly on the expertness of these participants, who represented a broad range of experience and preparation.

The special educators from State departments of education who contributed a large proportion of the data in this report were working in 36 States and the District of Columbia. Although they reported a wide variety of titles, 40 of them Could best be classified as "directors" and the other 62 as "specialists."

All 10 areas of exceptionality were represented by at least some of these directors and specialists. Children who are handicapped by speech problems, who are hard of hearing, crippled, or mentally retarded appeared to be receiving servce from the greatest number of State special education personnel, while children who are gifted were receiving service from the smallest number. In general, directors reported responsibility for five or more areas of exceptionality, while specialists reported responsibility for only one or two areas.

FINDINGS

Two types of State special education personnel are suggested by the findings of his study: first, the director who gives leadership to the total special education program within the State; and second, the specialist, who provides statewide conultation and service in a limited number of areas of exceptionality. According o the opinions expressed in this report, the two types are characterized not only y the number of areas served, but also by emphases in their work. This implies different kinds of competencies and professional preparation needed for success in ach job. It was the opinion of the committee that in those States where one erson is expected to perform in both capacities he would be unlikely to be altogether effective, regardless of the excellence of his preparation or the richness of is experiential background.

Competencies.-The committee members identified many distinctive competencies which would enable special education personnel to give statewide leadership and consultation to educational programs for handicapped and gifted children in da classes, residential schools, hospitals, or in their own homes. They repeated observed that persons would be most effective if they also had such traits as leadership ability, mature judgment, physical and mental health, idealism balanced with realism, and a willingness to keep up with new developments in the field.

For a director, the committee emphasized ability to: (1) Recruit and give professional leadership to the staff of special educators in the State department; (2 prepare and present a budget based on an understanding of the additional and varied costs involved in educating the various types of exceptional children; (3) interpret State laws affecting the program and provide appropriate information and counsel regarding proposed legislation; (4) give leadership to on-going programs and encourage the development of new programs; (5) participate in the establishment of professional standards and the development of college and university curriculums for teacher preparation; (6) help teachers keep up with the rapid technological changes affecting the handicapped and gifted through various types of in-service training; (7) establish and maintain working relationships with the many individuals and agencies concerned with exceptional children; (8 review current research, evaluate its significance, and participate in developing new research; and (9) plan and develop materials for publication. The committee further believed that directors and specialists should have a knowledge and understanding of: (10) Techniques of specialized instruction; (11) criteria for diagnosis and placement of handicapped and gifted pupils; (12) physical facilities and special instructional devices needed for each type of handicapping condition.

The committee indicated that the specialist will need many of the competencies which they identified as important for the director. For the specialist, however, they stressed supervisory and consultative competencies in one or two areas, such as mental retardation or speech and hearing. Since the specialist works closel with local communities, he should be particularly qualified to give technical consultation to classroom teachers, supervisors, and administrators. The committee also believed that specialists should carry responsibility for in-service training of

teachers.

Professional preparation. — The background of experience and preparation which is most valuable for both directors and specialists, according to the opinions of approximately 1,400 participants in this study, is in the field of education rather than psychology, medicine, or other closely related disciplines. Somewhat different combinations of preparation and experience were, however, suggested for directors and specialists. The director, it appears, could best prepare for his position through an academic major embracing the various areas of special education with a minor in general educational administration and supervision plus teaching and supervisory experience with exceptional children. The specialist could best prepare for his position through concentrated study in one area of special educa tion, plus teaching experience with both normal and one type of exceptional