A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF A SAMPLE OF 48 SUBURBAN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SYSTEM INVESTIGATED THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG THREE MAJOR VARIABLES--COMMUNITY STRUCTURE, COMMUNITY LEVEL OR POPULAR DECISION-MAKING AND INSTITUTIONAL DECISION-MAKING. DATA UTILIZED IN THE STUDY WERE VOTES CAST IN DISTRICT BOARD ELECTIONS AND REFERENDA, DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION ON SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND CENSUS MATERIALS. THE FIRST TWO WERE GATHERED THROUGH EXTENSIVE INTERVIEWS WITH THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS INVOLVED. THE STUDY WAS BASED ON THE HYPOTHESIS THAT THE AMERICAN POLITICAL CULTURE SEEKS THE SUPPRESSION OF CONFLICT, AND COMMUNITIES WERE COMPARED BY THEIR DIFFERENTIAL SUCCESSES IN REACHING THIS GOAL. RESULTS OF THE STUDY INDICATE THAT THE PRINCIPAL ASPECT OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE WHICH EXPLAINS AGGREGATE COMMUNITY BEHAVIOR TOWARD SCHOOLS IS THE STATUS FACTOR, THAT IS, THE PRESENCE IN THE SYSTEM OF LARGER PROPORTIONS OF PEOPLE WITH HIGH INCOMES, EDUCATION, AND OCCUPATION. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN STYLES OF DECISION-MAKING AT THE COMMUNITY LEVEL AND IN SCHOOL SYSTEM INSTITUTIONS SHOW THEORETICALLY ANALOGOUS PATTERNS. IN DISTRICTS OF RELATIVELY LOW CONFLICT, SCHOOL BOARDS USUALLY APPEAR TO GIVE THEIR SUPERINTENDENTS WIDE LATITUDES OF INITIATIVE AND DECISION WHILE IN HIGH CONFLICT SYSTEMS BOARD MEMBERS AND OTHER FUNCTIONARIES SEEM TO HAVE MORE POWER INDEPENDENT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT. THE KINDS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS QUESTIONED IN THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS ALSO DIFFER, WITH LOW CONFLICT AREAS INTERESTED IN QUESTIONS OF FINANCE AND CONSTRUCTION, AND HIGH CONFLICT DISTRICTS RAISING QUESTIONS ABOUT PERSONNEL AND MINOR POLICY MATTERS. NOMINATING CAUCUSES AND OTHER MEDIATING MECHANISMS ARE TYPICALLY USED IN LOW CONFLICT-HIGH RESOURCE COMMUNITIES AS A MAJOR PART OF THE CONFLICT-MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.