Social Studies Update

Social 30-2 students are well into related issue #2.  If you are absent please let Mr. Pon know so that assignments can be given to you so you don't fall behind.

Motivation!

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assigns people to one of sixteen different categories or types, based on their answers to 126 questions, such as: "How easy or difficult do you find it to present yourself, consistently, over a long period as a person who is patient?" There are 4 different subscales of the test, which purport to measure different personality tendencies. Extraversion-introversion (E-I) distinguishes between people who are sociable and outgoing, versus those who are more inward looking. Sensing-intuition (S-N) sorts people according to their attention to practical realities as opposed to relying on their imagination. Thinking-feeling (T-F) shows the difference between relying on logic versus intuition when making decisions. Finally, judging-perceiving (J-P) refers to one's tendency to analyze and categorize one's experiences, as opposed to responding spontaneously. Sixteen different types emerge from the combination of the above four pairs of traits. The MBTI is probably the most popular self-insight psychological test in use today, with at least a million people per year completing it. It is widely used in business, industry, educational settings, and government because of its assumed ability to capture people's interests, needs, and values. MBTI profiles are often used in career counselling or as a basis for matching work partners or for selecting tasks that are best suited for one's MBTI type.
It just so happens that I have taken this test recently and my results were very interesting.  As stated above my four subscales include extraversion, sensing, thinking and judging. So, let us begin our discussion with the first subscale of extraversion.  This describes me to a tee, I personally like to “talk things out” with my co-workers and people in general. The following characteristics are also quite evident in my personality:
• Are active, energetic, and enthusiastic
• Think on your feet
• Establish networks of contacts
• Have breadth of interests
• Provide extensive information and feedback

As an example that supports the above characteristics, to be able to think on your feet in administration is imperative to being a successful administrator because of the different issues that can brought forth in a regular day of work.  For instance, student and teacher issues arise regularly in the office and being able to take each situation separately is no easy task.  Being an extravert allows me to be open to what can be called “fires” and analyzing each situation with a fresh view.  I have found that this is definitely a characteristic that I possess since I’ve moved into administration.

The second subscale revolves around “sensing” in my case.  I’m very practical and realistic in my leadership role at my school.  This specific characteristic is often seen in the form of making decisions that affect the school in the present and adapting to situations that occur.  The following characteristics identify the sensing nature that I think that possess:
• Are anchored in current realities and common sense
• Are practical and realistic
• Are observant and attend to details
• Retain and learn well from experiences
• Immediately apply what is communicated

The sensing characteristics presented here are hallmarks of my personality as I do observe and attend to details.  In my opinion, this is necessary as the operation of a school is achieved by looking at what is happening and making decisions that will affect how teachers and students feel about how their school is being managed.  For example, when a student is suspended the decision that is made impacts the behaviour patterns of the students.  One would hope that it would be a positive behaviour change where the consequence has filtered to those who would intend to cause problems.  For the most part this occurs and from my experience students and teachers appreciate when decisions that are practical and have an attention to detail are made.
The next subscale deals with the aspect of personality where thinking and feeling are paramount in the discussion of the MBTI.  The results that I received from my test results fell within the “thinking” component of this portion of the test.  In a nutshell, if I were to look at the list below the third item jumps out at me; analyze, evaluate, and critique.
• Are calm, reasonable, and under control
• Provide honest and frank feedback
• Analyze, evaluate, and critique
• Are objective and principled
• Have a clear thinking process using defined criteria

I am a firm believer that to lead one must also be able to first analyze a situation and develop an appropriate course of action that helps all that are involved.  The next step is to evaluate the choices and choose a course of action that will be most productive. Both of these initial steps are important but the critique after the decision is made is much more important, as it is this part of the process where one can pass judgment on whether or not the appropriate course of action was taken.  As we learned in university, this is where reflection is important and thus the “thinking” portion of the MBTI emerges in this part of the discussion.  Logic takes hold in this section of the MBTI and further strengthens the “thinking” subscale.  Moreover, I constantly review the decisions that I make during the school day whether it be a suspension or a lesson plan to hopefully make better decisions in the future.

Our last subscale of the MBTI that I most represent is the judging aspect.  This portion of the Myers-Briggs Test is where I feel I shine the most.  The list below highlights the characteristics of an administrator as sometimes we must act like the judge and jury in the decisions that are made at the school level.
• Are decisive
• Share decisions, then move ahead
• Are organized and efficient in your communication
• Are task and goal focused
• Provide clear expectations and timelines

As was stated, this subscale seems to describe me the best.  I’m very decisive when it comes to making decisions as I know that I have made sound judgements.  I feel that I’m organized and efficient with my communication when it comes to dealing with students and staff.  For instance, when approached by students or staff I tackle issues head on and make quick and calculated decisions.  In our school, we have a binder where our staff members report truancies.  This is an effective practice as I deal with student truancy daily to assist my staff to create the most ideal teaching environment.  This has helped me to become a more decisive and effective administrator that has clear expectations for both students and staff.
To conclude, the Myers-Briggs Test is an interesting tool used by educational institutions and having taken the test itself has given me insight into the personality that I bring to the proverbial educational table.  Further to this, this analysis has allowed me to look at the bigger picture when it comes to my extraversion, sensing, thinking and judging personality.  I hope to take what I’ve learned in the brief write up to my daily practice at work.


References Cited:
Moore, Timothy (2001) "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator". Encyclopedia of Psychology. Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology, 2nd ed. Gale Group, 2001.
Owens, Robert G and Valesky, Thomas C. (2007). Organizational Behavior in Education: Adaptive Leadership and School Reform, 9th Edition.  Publisher: Pearson Education Inc.

2011-2012 School Year in Motion

The new school year is well under way.  Students and staff are looking forward to a great year at Beaverlodge Regional High School.

Beaverlodge Regional High School 2011-2012 Edition!

Looking forward to a great year at Beaverlodge Regional High School.  Energized and ready to get the year started!

Human Dimension of Organization

Institutional theorists assert that the institutional environment can strongly influence the development of formal structures in an organization, often more profoundly than market pressures. Innovative structures that improve technical efficiency in early-adopting organizations are legitimized in the environment. Ultimately these innovations reach a level of legitimization where failure to adopt them is seen as "irrational and negligent" (or they become legal mandates). At this point new and existing organizations will adopt the structural form even if the form doesn't improve efficiency.  This statement alone depicts many schools across the country where efficiency is often marked by graduation completion rates or standardized testing results.  The bureaucratic structures that pervade schools of today are unique unto themselves as they must cater to a specific ethnic group, academic goal or developing a school culture that generates pride for ones school.
Meyer and Rowan argue that often these "institutional myths" are merely accepted ceremoniously in order for the organization to gain or maintain legitimacy in the institutional environment. Organizations adopt the "vocabularies of structure" prevalent in their environment such as specific job titles, procedures, and organizational roles. The adoption and prominent display of these institutionally-acceptable "trappings of legitimacy" help preserve an aura of organizational action based on "good faith". Legitimacy in the institutional environment helps ensure organizational survival. John Meyer and Brian Rowan, in particular, have done much to bring legitimacy back on the radar in their analysis of organizational and institutional myths.

Meyer and Rowan argue that institutions are legitimate not because they are efficient or provide in actuality what they say they do (Meyer and Rowan, 1983). Rather, institutions and organizations often do not map onto their blueprint, but become legitimized by reinforced practices, customs and rituals that have little to do with efficiency.  In my opinion, this perspective of the importance of efficiency that is presented by Meyer and Rowan is interesting because it highlights expectations of such things like standardized testing results.  Speaking from experience, as a teacher who teaches a standardized diploma exam; it can be extremely stressful in garnering the necessary results that your administration desires.  This type of bureaucratic top down theory brings forth two types of teachers, one that “teaches” to the exam to garner the best results or the other that attempts to create a better rounded student.  What would you choose?  According to Meyer and Rowan, you would opt for the prior but in the grand scheme of creating the ideal student and teacher you want both.   So, in a sense you are stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place.

As such, the question remains is this top down bureaucracy and efficiency expectation the ideal way to build a schools structure.  My thought process on this is a follows these formal structures of legitimacy can reduce efficiency and hinder the organization's competitive position in their technical environment. To reduce this negative effect, organizations often will decouple their technical core from these legitimizing structures. Organizations will minimize or ceremonialize evaluation and neglect program implementation to maintain external (and internal) confidence in formal structures while reducing their efficiency impact.  The organization of a school and the people that work within it need flexibility and this mentality is important to the foundation of a good school.  This course has so far shown me that organization can be structured but at the same time their has been an evolution of sorts within teaching communities.  For instance, projects like our Alberta Initiative on School Improvement (otherwise known as our AISI project), has created a linkage between educators for collaboration.  The mentality of reinventing the wheel has gone by the wayside and technology has helped to create a globalized teacher that is connected to colleagues across the province.  This has influenced my instructional goals as it has shown me that we as teachers who used to sit in our own little classrooms are “no longer alone”.  This project is just one way that we have begun to develop a better classroom teacher and ultimately a better student.

To conclude, it is still important to understand that what Meyer and Rowan argue is fundamentally true, as a leader of a school you must as was highlighted in a song by Johnny Cash…”walk the line”…to create a school that models a efficiency and structure but also allows for the flexibility within the school to create its own identity.  This study is ongoing as society changes, so will school identity, structure and culture.  As school leaders, we will always be looking for the next best idea to enhance our classrooms and allowing for innovation within our schools will only enhance the development of our society as a whole.


References Cited:
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1983). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. In W. Meyer, B. Rowan, & T. E. Deal (Eds.), Organizational environments ritual and rationality). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Owens, Robert G and Valesky, Thomas C. (2007). Organizational Behavior in Education: Adaptive Leadership and School Reform, 9th Edition.  Publisher: Pearson Education Inc.

Mission “Statement” Possible

Title: Mission “Statement” Possible
Case Study Introduction:
A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students and staff by ensuring management of the organization, operations, and resources for a safe, efficient and effective environment. The case study that I’m going to highlight revolves around the development of a school mission statement.  Through the analysis of this case several questions emerge that will formulate my analysis of the case study:
 Questions:
1.      How important is a school mission statement in establishing what learning activities are used for continuous improvement? Is it the mission ‘statement” or the mission?
2.      As an administrator, how much influence should you have on the mission statement and goals of the school? Wouldn’t this depend on what kind of leader you are?
3.      What input should the staff have on the development of the mission statement and goals developed for the school?

 
Description of the case:

      The school that is the focus of the case study is one of the smallest in the province and serves approximately 285 students per year from grades Pre-K through 12. This school had a mission statement that was developed many years ago by a superintendent, named Mr. NoInput, no longer employed by the school system. It was poorly developed and had no input from the faculty, staff, or community. Many of the unwritten goals of the system also have changed with the change of superintendents. The current administrator, Mr. Opendoor wanted the input of the faculty and staff on what they believed our mission as a school should be.
      The school improvement/leadership team at school noted that the mission statement was outdated, reflected only a goal for the 9-12 segment of the school community, and the school community had no idea what the mission statement was. The principal, Mr. Golfman understood that this needed to be brought before the faculty, knowing that it would only be meaningful if they had input in its development. The mission of the three main segments, elementary, middle, and high school, should develop goals and missions within their segment. Teachers met in small groups designated by the age group that they work with on a daily basis. Some teachers had difficulty with understanding exactly what a mission statement was to be. Those on the leadership team from each age level group worked with a teacher to explain the difference between a motto and a mission statement, which seemed to be the largest misconception. Each small group developed both goals and a driving force behind what they were trying to accomplish on a daily basis. While some of these meetings were face to face, email was also utilized to ensure that time was used effectively by all. Anyone who wished to provide input could offer suggestions.
      Once developed, the three lists of goals and missions were developed into one for the entire school by the leadership team. Finally, the faculty was asked to approve the final mission statement in a faculty meeting. The mission statement is awaiting final approval by the Board of Education. The mission statement is a driving force behind staff development, learning experiences in the school, and decisions made such as hiring new teachers and the way instructional funds are spent.  As such, Mr. Golfman was able to create a positive direction for his school with the information that his staff was able to gather from the small age level groups discussions.

Case Study Analysis:

In order to appropriately analyze the case study, a two fold approach is necessary to achieve a complete picture of what I believe to be a common problem in many new schools that are being built in the province of Alberta. So, to start my analysis I need to answer the three questions that I postulated at the beginning of this case preparation.  The second portion of my analysis is to evaluate the leadership style of the people involved in the case study.
Answers to the Questions:

1.      How important is a school mission statement in establishing what learning activities are used for continuous improvement?

     A mission statement is the stated philosophy of the school or school district. With this in mind, it is difficult to have direction for school functions such as instructional practices and professional development. The mission statement should be the driving force behind all lessons and let the school know where they are going. All involved, teachers, staff, and students, should know the direction in this they should be headed. In creating this mission statement, teachers were given the charge to determine how the lessons and activities planned offered the final result, or what we wanted to leave the children being able to do.  Mr. Golfman and Mr. Opendoor “openness”, no pun intended, created an environment during the mission statement construction that gave everyone a vested interest in the school they work and learn in.  In my opinion this creates a stronger vision for the school because you always want to have the entire school community feel connected to one another.



2.      As an administrator, how much influence should you have on the mission statement and goals of the school?

          Administrators should ensure that a school has a mission statement that provides a focus for all school functions including professional development and instructional strategies that promote continuous improvement. With that being said, I believe that the administrator should be a facilitator of the adoption of the school's mission. Teachers, parents, and (when appropriate) students should be directly involved in the development of the mission statement and the school beliefs. This mission should focus on the direction the school is headed for school improvement and what the teachers want the students to leave the school with and what the students want to leave knowing. Furthermore, once the mission is adopted, it is the administrator's charge to find ways to ensure that all (faculty, students, and community) with a vested interest in the mission are made aware of it and buy into the beliefs at hand. Then, as new programs are brought  before the administration, a question should be asked, "Does this go with our goals and mission?" From this perspective, administrators should use the mission to drive the direction of the choices they make as well. Administrators should know when the mission statement should be revisited because it is a "living document" that should be changed when it is no longer meaningful to those involved in utilizing it. It should be revisited several times through the year to determine if this is the direction our instruction and professional development is directed. This should be something that the administrator determines.


3.      What input should the staff have on the development of the mission statement and goals developed for the school?

      The staff should work together to determine where they are going. It is important for teachers to have a common goal. Without the input of teachers, the document will be used in a limited capacity. It is pertinent for all faculty and staff to be aware of what the statement says and what it means to their expectations in their classrooms. Teachers that use the mission statement frequently may talk with students about expectations and goal setting find it a way to communicate expectations with our students. This can be used in either academic or disciplinary issues. Once the mission is developed, teachers should evaluate the effectiveness they are making towards the goals and mission.

 Evaluation of Leadership Style:

The level of performance in this case study is proficient and creates transformational leadership in spades. There are several reasons that I feel that the level of performance is being demonstrated and could be improved upon. First, the leadership being demonstrated by the principal is involving the stakeholders of the school in the development of a mission statement. This shared responsibility demonstrates that the stakeholders have a vested interest in the mission. The professional learning and instructional practices within classrooms are driven based on the outcomes expected in the mission statement. This is a positive direction for the administrator to be focusing the direction of the teachers. I feel that the lack of a quality mission statement prior to this time and the wide range of ages being taught in this school may have been a barrier for the direction that the school may have been heading in prior to this point. Although the administrator was visible, he knew what was going on in each classroom, and ensuring that it was operating where all students were learning, all faculty members were not engaged in a common goal that we had in mind for the students. It appears that this is now changing.

Another reason that I feel that the level of leadership for this standard is in the range of proficiency is the staff development chosen by the staff and administration is centered on the mission statement and our goals. The leadership demonstrated by the administrator is delegating responsibility to members of the school improvement team. The school is using action research to track and document what works with the students and what does not. The instructional practices that teachers are utilizing are research based and used to develop lessons for the diverse backgrounds and challenges facing students. By providing differentiated strategies, teachers have found ways to increase student involvement. This allows students to have ownership of their work and for them to internalize their understandings. Teachers are utilizing some of the same shared responsibility the administrator exhibits. Most of the work samples are synthesis based. The hallways, including the high school hall, is now filled with student work and teacher and student commentary on this work. It shows students that their work is valued and the learning comes from real world applications of the learning. It is a total change of thought in what our expectations were and now are where student work is concerned.

Summer 2011

July 23rd 2011...Enjoyed the annual ELA 9 marking session with colleagues.  Two weeks at home so far...enjoying home cooked meals and good company.

Year end wrap up.

Here's to another year of teaching in the books.  A great staff at Beaverlodge Regional High School.  I hope all of you have a wonderful and well deserved break.

School Culture and Adaptive Leadership: Why is it important to be open to your surroundings?

Introduction

There is an old saying among anthropologists that fish would be the last creatures to discover water (Kluckholn, 1949, as cited in Finnan, 2000) even though it is the most ubiquitous and influential aspect of a fish’s existence. So it is with school culture and teaching. Just as water surrounds and envelopes fish shaping their perspectives and determining their courses of action, culture surrounds and envelopes teachers forming their perspectives and influencing their decisions and actions. Teachers work within a cultural context that influences every aspect of their pedagogy, yet this pervasive element of schools is elusive and difficult to define. Culture influences all aspects of schools, including such things as how the staff dresses (Peterson & Deal, 1998), what staff talk about in the teachers’ lounge (Kottler, 1997), how teachers decorate their classrooms, their emphasis on certain aspects of the curriculum, and teachers’ willingness to change (Hargreaves, 1997b). As Donahoe (1997) states, “If culture changes, everything changes” (p. 245).
A school’s environment and thereby a school’s culture is an ideal place to see adaptive leadership in action as administrators and teachers in leadership roles make decisions that effect an entire schools population.  The leadership theory that is presented in chapter 8 of the textbook, written by Owens and Valesky highlights the theories brought forth by Bernard Bass and James Burns through transformational and transactional leadership.  As a result, the following aspects are addressed: the definition of school culture, the effects of culture on schools in general and teachers in particular, the assumptions held by school personnel which defines the culture of individual schools, and the possible reasons for change to be accepted or rejected by schools.

School Culture Defined

Imagine entering a school. What do you see? What do you hear the teachers and other staff members saying? What do the bulletin boards look like? How easy was it to enter the school? What are the children saying and doing? How noisy is it? Do you feel welcome or afraid? What is the general “feel” of the environment? All these questions and more pertain to the underlying stream of values and rituals that pervade schools. This underlying stream is the culture of that particular school. Culture is the stream of “norms, values, beliefs, traditions, and rituals built up over time” (Peterson & Deal, 1998). It is a set of tacit expectations and assumptions that direct the activities of school personnel and students.

School culture is not a static entity. It is constantly being constructed and shaped through interactions with others and through reflections on life and the world in general (Finnan, 2000). School culture develops as staff members interact with each other, the students, and the community. It becomes the guide for behaviour that is shared among members of the school at large. Culture is shaped by the interactions of the personnel, and the actions of the personnel become directed by culture. It is a self-repeating cycle. To introduce change would necessitate an interruption of this cycle. Hollins (1996) argues that “schools are shaped by cultural practices and values and reflect the norms of the society for which they have been developed” (p. 31). Just as hydrogen is a major element of water, so are societal values a major ingredient of school culture. The general ideologies of society at large and the communities surrounding individual schools become reflected in the culture of schooling. In Anyon’s study of inner city schools (1995), she identified three factors that vitiated reform efforts in the schools involved in her study: sociocultural differences among participants, an abusive school environment, and educators’ expectations of failed reform. These three factors combined to create a school culture that negated any attempt at reform. Efforts at reform continually failed in those schools because the underlying stream of values and norms was indicative of the poverty, negativity, and abuse of the surrounding community. Anyon’s study suggests that in order to reform the schools, the community’s expectations and values would have to be reformed which will be reflected in the culture of the schools.  The research done by Anyon is interesting insofar as it resembles some characteristics of my school where school environment directly correlates to the socioeconomic background of our student population which is predominantly white and upper middle class.

The governance of schools also shapes culture (Hollins, 1996). The hierarchy of leadership at the provincial, district, and school levels creates the parameters within which cultures can be created. In other words, teachers are expected to follow the dictates of the principal and other administrators regardless of other cultural aspects of the school. Furthermore, students are expected to follow the dictates of teachers (and all other adults in the school) as well. This hierarchy contributes to the culture of schools heedless of individual teaching or leadership styles.  The rituals and procedures common to most public schools also play a part in defining a school’s culture (Goodlad, 1984; Deal, 1988; Donahoe, 1997; McLaren, 1999).  For example, having children stand or walk in lines, ringing bells to move children from one place to another, organizing the students and curriculum by age and grade level (Hollins, 1996), and systematically rewarding or punishing children for behaviour and/or academics (Miller, 1988) all add to the confluence of the culture of schools. These are examples of traditional ways of manipulating time and activity. Although there may be variations in the method of performing these procedures (i.e. a “tone” instead of a bell to signal the end of class) the results are the same: students and staff members are relegated to their prescribed positions and activities by subtle and not-so-subtle procedures and rituals.

To further emphasize the discussion in this portion of my research.  The theory that Bass supported,  “spoke of leaders to be either “follower focused” (i.e. emphasizing concern for people) or “task focused” (i.e. emphasizing rules and procedures for getting the task done)” Owens and Valesky (2007).  Both of these dimensions as it were bring forth characteristics of good leadership that are prevalent in our schools today.  The analysis of the first of Bass’ theories, “follower focused” leadership is where we will start.  For instance, the majority of our staff is involved with professional learning communities within our school division to enhance their classroom teaching.  This has created a new approach to developing school culture as we had moved to solely an academic approach; to an approach that creates a teaching environment that has adapted to the ever changing student profile of today.

All of the above factors contribute to a school’s culture and they each interact uniquely with students, teachers, administrators, parents, and everyone else involved with particular schools. This interaction is unique to each school, and sets the foundation for whether or not reform efforts will be successful. Furthermore, there are assumptions that underlie these factors, which will be addressed later.

The Effects of Culture on Teachers and Schools

School culture has been described as being similar to the air we breathe. No one notices it unless it becomes foul (Freiberg, 1998). The culture of a school can be a positive influence on learning or it can seriously inhibit the functioning of the school. In any working environment, employees and clientele prefer to be in a situation that is appealing and invitational. Hanson and Childs (1998) describe a school with a positive school climate as “a place where students and teachers like to be” (p.15). It is a place that has a climate of support and encouragement (Hanson and Childs, 1998), where physical comfort levels are optimal (such as heating, cooling, and lighting – Freiberg, 1998), and, as Peterson and Deal (1998) describe:
• Where staff has a shared sense of purpose, where they pour their hearts into teaching;
• Where the underlying norms are of collegiality, improvement, and hard work;
• Where rituals and traditions celebrate student accomplishment, teacher innovation, and parental commitment;
• Where the informal network of storytellers, heroes, and heroines provides a social web of information, support, and history;
• Where success, joy, and humour abound (p.29).

Peterson and Deal further point out that a school with a positive school culture is a place with a “shared sense of what is important, a shared ethos of caring and concern, and a shared commitment to helping students learn” (p. 29). Schools that are conducted in a culture exhibiting these positive qualities have teachers and staff members who are willing to take risks and enact reforms.  As it stands now, with the re-invention of our schools mission statement, that unto itself is a huge risk but is necessary to move the school forward.
On the other hand, schools with a toxic or negative culture are places where teachers are unwilling to change and where the tone is oppositional and acerbic. These are the types of places where nobody prefers to be. They are “places where negativity dominates conversations, interactions, and planning; where the only stories recounted are of failure” (Peterson and Deal, 1998). The shared ethos about reform among teachers in these schools is “this too shall pass” and “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” To these teachers, the way it has always been done is the right way. Whether positive or toxic, the introduction of change will serve to bring the dominant features of the school’s culture to the surface.
According to Sarason (1996) it is difficult to determine the nature of a school’s culture because our own personal experiences and values “put blinders on what we look at, choose to change, and evaluate… Because our values and assumptions are usually implicit and ‘second nature,’ we proceed as if the way things are is the way things should or could be” (p.136-137). We view the rituals, policies, activities, traditions, curriculum, and pedagogy in the school through the filter of our own values and experiences. We must understand and analyze our own cultural influences before we can examine a school’s. Sarason (1996) further points out that prior to observing a school, a person must:

…confront the fact that he or she was born into this society with its distinctive culture; that before entering any kind of school the observer had already developed conceptions of and attitudes toward being in school; that he or she had spent a dozen years in public schools during which pictures and conceptions of what schools are were crystallizing, if not being locked into conceptual and attitudinal concrete; and in the course of undergraduate and graduate education that same observer was hearing and reading about schools in the mass media and was being taught what schools are by college professors (p14).

This is true not only for people observing schools, but also of teachers and other school personnel. Teachers and other school workers are not culturally void when they enter a school. Their personal experiences, values, norms, and prior education all influence their views of curriculum, pedagogy, and change even before they step foot into a classroom. Any change that is proposed that runs counter to the teacher’s already developed culture and philosophy will be resisted. Teachers who contentedly stay in a school for a number of years do so because it is a place where the underlying stream of values and norms (the school culture) coincides with their own. On the other hand, a conflict of cultures may provide the impetus for teachers to leave (Hinde, 2002).  The bottom line for school change is that in order for any change to be effected it must correspond to the culture of the school.  This is an interesting statement because at my school we have a diverse culture of aboriginals, landed immigrants, and white, upper middle class students.  The milieu of students in this rural northern Alberta town has created a culture of globalized proportions and I feel that my staff has responded in a positive way to this diversity.

Assumptions Underlying School Culture

In her study of the interplay between the culture of the reform model “The
Accelerated Schools Project” and school/classroom cultures, Finnan (2000) identified five underlying assumptions that influence the success or failure of reform implementation. She defines assumptions as things that are taken for granted and are accepted as truth (p. 7). The assumptions that Finnan identified are:
• Assumptions adults hold for students
• Assumptions about leadership and decision-making
• Assumptions about adult roles and responsibilities
• Assumptions about best practices and structures for educating students
• Assumptions about the value of change (p. 9).

These assumptions are tacit understandings that are rarely brought to the fore in school cultures. On the other hand, most reform models (whether total school or just one aspect of the curriculum) are explicit in their assumptions. Finnan concludes that in order for reforms to be accepted by schools, the assumptions between the reform model and the school must be compatible. This requires the culture of the schools to be analyzed and brought to the conscience level of staff and administrators.

Observers of school culture must account for each of these assumptions in their observations. For instance, in the case of the first assumption concerning expectations adults have for students; do the adults in a particular school assume that all students have gifts, talents, and abilities, and that they are people worthy of respect (Hanson and Childs, 1998)? Or, rather, do they believe that students require instruction in basic skills before they can master higher-level skills? How do they feel about youth in general and their ability to learn? The answer to these questions determines whether or not certain reform models will be effective. For example, if the general attitude of adults were that students must master basic skills before advancing to higher order ones, than a program like Accelerated Schools would be met with much resistance. However, in such a school a phonics-based reading program or a program such as C.I.R.C. (Comprehensive Integrated Reading Curriculum), developed at Johns Hopkins, would be more amenable.

Concerning the second assumption (leadership and decision-making), observers should note whether or not the school promotes democratic involvement and shared decision-making or if it promotes an authoritarian/dictatorial style of leadership. The National Council for the Social Studies (2004) espouses a curriculum that prepares students for integration into a democratic society; therefore school leaders (teachers and administrators) should provide the tools and experiences necessary for students to participate in a democracy. Darling-Hammond (1997) also strongly endorses a more democratic curriculum, but notes that in order to provide a democratic education reformers will have to overcome many long-standing traditions and obstacles. In other words, the culture of most schools does not support democratic procedures despite rhetoric that may seem otherwise. In schools where the governance structure is such that the principal makes most decisions and the staff and parents are not involved are less likely to embrace change. However, when the opposite is in effect – teachers and community members are involved in decision-making – than reforms such as Accelerated Schools, Slavin’s Success For All (Weiler, 1998), and many other types of reform at the whole school level and at a smaller level would be more likely to be implemented successfully.

The third set of assumptions involves adults’ roles and responsibilities in the schools. Is it assumed that adults have strengths and a desire to take responsibility for student learning? Is it assumed that the staff is effective in working collegially and with students? Is it assumed that the school leader’s role is to foster a learning environment (Peterson and Deal, 1998)? What is the assumption that adults hold about parents in the community? Understanding the assumptions concerning the roles of adults is key in revealing the culture of schools and thus the probability of any reform initiative’s success or failure.  James Burns wrote, “I define leadership as leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivations-the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations-of both leaders and followers” (Burns, 1978).  The leader is not merely wielding power, but appealing to the values of the follower.  In this sense, values mean, “A principle, standard, or quality regarded as worthwhile or desirable,” (Webster’s New Riverside University Dictionary).  Burns insists that for leaders to have the greatest impact on the “led,” they must motivate followers to action by appealing to shared values and by satisfying the higher order needs of the led, such as their aspirations and expectations.  He said, “. . . transforming leadership ultimately becomes moral in that it raises the level of human conduct and ethical aspiration of both leader and the led, and thus it has a transforming effect on both.” As my school goes through the process of recreating a vision statement for our staff, our administration team is attempting to boost morale within our school by discussing such terminology as integrity and accountability as professionals.  This transforming nature is important to the evolution of school staff culture because we must remain vigilant and be able to adapt to change.

The fourth set of assumptions about best practices and structures for educating students is perhaps the most salient of all the assumptions. Structures relates to the rituals and procedures discussed in an earlier section. In the case of school procedures, a useful consideration is whether or not time and space are structured with the educational needs of the students in mind. Why are the lunch times in an elementary school scheduled when they are, for instance? Were they scheduled with the developmental needs of children in mind? Or perhaps they were scheduled for the purpose of maintaining order (for instance, 5th and 6th graders should not have lunch during the same period because it is easier to maintain discipline). Examining scheduling and other structures provide a realistic glimpse of the culture of schools. In the case of the assumption concerning best practices, one must ascertain what methods teachers frequently use and is endorsed by the leadership. Do the teachers apply methods that are in the students’ educational best interests or to maintain order and discipline? Is cooperative learning prominent? How much time do teachers spend preparing for tests? It is useful to determine how or whether students are tracked or sorted as well. In schools where teachers spend a considerable amount of time sorting students and trying to develop learning experiences for students of varied ability, many reforms, like the Accelerated Schools Project (Finnan, 2000), will be unlikely to be implemented successfully.

The final set of assumptions Finnan identifies involves the value of change in the school culture. If the general attitude about change is that it can be challenging and invigorating, then it is more likely that a reform will be initiated (Fullan, 1997). However, in some schools change is avoided because nothing positive ever resulted from past reform initiatives, so the assumption is that nothing positive will result from change now or in the future (Sarason, 1996; Finnan, 2000). Suggesting a new way of teaching a concept or lesson to a teacher who has taught for a number of years will give the observer a good indication of the underlying assumptions that the teacher has regarding change. Does the teacher welcome the innovation and is he or she willing to take the risk of trying it, or does the attitude that “this is the way I’ve always done it” prevail?

These five sets of assumptions that Finnan identified provide useful benchmarks for determining the culture of schools. As stated earlier, in order for change to be implemented at any level in the schools, the assumptions of the school and those of the proposed change must coincide. In an observational study concerned with discovering constitutional issues of classrooms (i.e. how rules and routines were established), Sarason (1996) identified certain assumptions underlying the reasoning of teachers. These assumptions dovetail with the general assumptions that were previously discussed that Finnan (2000) identified. Sarason found that the underlying assumptions of teachers regarding classroom constitutional issues were thus:

1. Teacher knows best.
2. Children cannot participate constructively in the development of a classroom constitution.
3. Children want and expect the teacher to determine the rules of the game.
4. Children are not interested in constitutional issues.
5. Children should be governed by what a teacher thinks is right or wrong, but a teacher should not be governed by what children think is right or wrong.
6. The ethics of adults are obviously different from and superior to the ethics of children.
7. Children should not be given responsibility for something they cannot handle or for which they are not accountable.
8. If constitutional issues were handled differently, chaos might result (p. 217).

Given these assumptions it is imperative to analyze the type of change that is most likely to be accepted, or how these assumptions can be changed to accommodate the proposed reform. However, Sarason (1996) points out that if assumptions were changed then the roles of teachers would change, and that would amount to a change in the life of the classroom for both students and teachers (p. 217). This is a large and disconcerting undertaking indeed.

The Culture of Change

The basis for the following remarks centers on the aforementioned theory that in order for change to be effected, the underlying assumptions of the school and of the reform must match (Sarason, 1996; Donahoe, 1997; Finnan 2000). Schools must be “recultured” (Hargreaves, 1997a) and not simply reformed or restructured. The culture of schools either frustrates or facilitates change (Schweiker-Marra, 1995). In some cases, a new culture must be instituted that will accommodate change.
In a study examining the relationship between school culture and teacher change,
Schweiker-Marra (1995) determined that the presence of 12 particular norms of school culture facilitated change. The first six norms involve teacher knowledge and qualities. They are (1) collegiality, (2) experimentation, (3) high expectations, (4) trust and confidence, (5) tangible support, and (6) referring to a knowledge base. In addition, administrators provide opportunities for professional development, and support the teachers in other tangible ways. The remaining six norms demonstrate effective teacher interaction with each other and their administrators (p.4). They are: (7) appreciation and recognition, (8) caring and humour, (9) involvement in decision-making, (10) protection of what’s important (in this case, the educational needs of the students are paramount and are the guiding influence in the culture of the school), (11) traditions, and (12) honest, open communication. Schweiker-Marra discovered that not only does the presence of these norms promote change, but that the norms increase as change progresses (p.9).

There is still another aspect that is vital to promoting change: the role of the principal and other school leaders. School leaders include the principal, teachers, and parents. They all play a role in shaping the culture of schools (Peterson and Deal, 1998; Hinde, 2002). School leaders determine and enact the basic assumptions of the school culture. The school principal in particular is the key to enacting change or frustrating it. Fullan (1991) identified characteristics of principals that facilitated change. He labelled these principals as “initiators” (p.154). Initiator principals work closely with staff to clarify and support the innovation, and they work collaboratively with other change agents (i.e. vice-principal and lead teachers) throughout the school year. They develop supportive organizational arrangements, consult, monitor, and reinforce the change process. Schools with principals who have these qualities are amenable to change.

Burns and much of the current literature also point out that the way leaders influence followers is based on their shared sense of what is important, worth doing well, and expending energy on it.  In a sense the more significant the endeavour, the more the undertaking itself takes on an importance greater than either the follower or leader. “Such leadership occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality. Their purposes, which might have started out as separate but related, as in the case of transactional leadership, become fused.” (Burns, 1978). The goals, then, take on a life of their own. In business, this leads to market domination and profit. In the military, this leads to professionals leading inspired subordinates through tough budgets, difficult deployments, the rigors of combat, and ultimately victory. Burns recognized that “transformational” leadership does not stand alone in the leadership lexicon. As mentioned, he coined another leadership term, “transactional.”

Factors Inhibiting Change

There are myriad factors that inhibit change in the schools. In our current culture of standards and assessments, many reforms are being mandated for the schools at both the provincial and federal level. However, Fullan (1997) points out that mandated change is unlikely to be effective. He states, “Mandates alter some things, but they don’t affect what matters. When complex change is involved, people do not and cannot change by being told to do so” (p.38). Again, even mandated change will not be implemented if the culture of the schools does not correlate with the mandates. Hargreaves (1997b) sums up the literature on failed reforms. He remarks that educational change falters or fails because:

• The change is poorly conceptualized or not clearly demonstrated. It is obvious who will benefit and how. What the change will achieve for students is not spelled out.
• The change is too broad and ambitious so that teachers have to work on too many fronts, or it is too limited and specific so that little real change occurs at all.
• The change is too fast for people to cope with, or too slow so that they become impatient or bored and move on to something else
• The change is poorly resourced or resources are withdrawn once the first flush of innovation is over. There is not enough money for materials or time for teachers to plan.
• There is no long-term commitment to the change to carry people through the anxiety, frustration, and despair of early experimentation and unavoidable setbacks.
• Key staff that can contribute to the change, or might be affected by it, are not committed. Conversely, key staff might become overinvolved as an administrative or innovative elite, from which other teachers feel excluded.
• Parents oppose the change because they are kept at a distance from it.
• Leaders are either too controlling, too ineffectual, or cash in on the early success of the innovation to move on to higher things.
• The change is pursued in isolation and gets undermined by other unchanged structures (p. viii).

Many well-intentioned reforms have been abandoned because of a combination of these negating effects. They all point to the need for examining the culture of schools before and during the change process. School culture affects the lives of all school personnel, including and especially teachers in their classrooms. Berman and McLaughlin (cited in Sarason, 1996) assessed the outcomes of efforts of educational change over several years. Among other things, they noted that a great deal of federally mandated reforms failed due to “school organizational climate and leadership” and “characteristics of schools and teachers” (p. 77).  They are indicative of the effect of school culture on the change process. Their findings reinforce the above-mentioned findings of Hargreaves (1997b) as well. Of particular interest here is their findings about teacher attributes regarding proposed reforms. They noted three teacher characteristics that had an effect on the outcome of the projects: years of teaching, sense of efficacy, and verbal ability. They discovered that number of years teaching had a negative effect on the change process – the longer a teacher taught the less likely the change was to improve student achievement and the less likely the project was going to achieve its goals. They also discovered that teachers with many years of experience were less likely to change their practices and more likely to abandon the reform project once provincial funding ran out. They found that teacher efficacy, the belief that a teacher can help even the most unmotivated student, had a positive effect on all outcomes. The study also concluded that teacher’s verbal ability had a strong correlation with improved student achievement only (p. 77).

Another characteristic of teachers that can facilitate, but more often frustrates, change is that teachers tend to teach the way they have been taught (Sarason, 1996). This includes not only elementary and secondary schooling experiences, but college/university experiences as well. The culture of the classroom reflects to some extent the aspects of other educational cultures to which the teacher has been exposed. Change that is introduced that is foreign to a teacher’s lived experiences is likely to be met with resistance.
In summing up his years of examination of research on school culture and change, Sarason (1996) recounts that of all the factors that defeat change proposals, nothing presents a more potent barrier to change than the power relationships in schools. The culture of schools is not only determined by these relationships, but they are subject to the least amount of scrutiny. In his words:

…schools were places where the students did what they were told to do. They answered questions-they did not ask them; their special (or not so special) interests and curiosities were to be kept private; they were not to take time away from the predetermined curriculum. In short, the culture of the classroom lacked almost all of the hallmarks of productive learning. And each level of the educational hierarchy viewed the level below it as teachers viewed students (emphasis in original, p. 333).

As Sarason points out, the problem of change is a problem of power. In order for the culture of schools to adjust to allow for change then power must be wielded in such a way as to allow others to gain a sense of ownership with the goals and process of change. It is often a delicate balance between mandating change (a process that is usually unsuccessful, as stated earlier) and bringing teachers to believe in the need for and efficacy of the reform so that they feel a sense of ownership. Schools that are successful in this endeavour will be able to enact lasting and effective change.

Final Thoughts

Sarason (1996) relates the following story that was anonymously left in the mailbox of Dr. Emory Cowen of the University of Rochester:
Common advice from knowledgeable horse trainers includes the adage, “If the horse you’re riding dies, get off.” Seems simple enough, yet, in the education business we don’t always follow that advice. Instead, we often choose from an array of alternatives which include:

1. Buying a stronger whip.
2. Trying a new bit or bridle.
3. Switching riders.
4. Moving the horse to a new location.
5. Riding the horse for longer periods of time.
6. Saying things like, “This is the way we’ve always ridden this horse.”
7. Appointing a committee to study horses.
8. Arranging to visit other sites where they ride dead horses efficiently.
9. Increasing the standards for riding dead horses.
10. Creating a test for measuring our riding ability.
11. Comparing how we’re riding now with how we did it 10 or 20 years ago.
12. Complaining about the state of horses these days.
13. Coming up with new styles of riding.
14. Blaming the horse’s parents. The problem is in the breeding.
15. Tightening the cinch.

This horse story encapsulates what many people think and feel about reform efforts in schools. The alternatives listed serve to examine and change superficial aspects of riding and of horses in general, but the horse is still dead. Many reform efforts target the superficial aspects of schools, but disregard the “values, beliefs, behaviours, rules, products, signs, and symbols” (Donahoe, 1997), which serve as the very foundation of the school – the culture.  There is no magic formula or checklist that dictates when one is more relevant than the other in any given situation. When to make the transition is an art borne of experience and education.  It can be said that as leaders, adaptation is a necessary component to the success of any leaders including school principals let alone horses!


References

Anyon, J. (1995). Race, social class, and educational reform in an inner-city school.
Teachers College Record, 97 (1), 69-94.

Bass, Bernard M (1997). “The Ethics of Transformational Leadership.” In Kellogg Leadership Studies Project, Transformational Leadership Working Papers Transformational Leadership Working Papers, The James MacGregor Burns Academy of Leadership.
Burns, James MacGregor (1978). Leadership. N.Y.: Harper and Row.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Deal, T. (1988). The symbolism of effective schools. In A. Westoby (Ed.) Culture and
power in educational organizations. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Donahoe, T. (1997). Finding the way: structure, time, and culture in school
improvement. In M. Fullan (Ed.) The challenge of school change. Illinois:
Skylight Training and Publishing.

Finnan, C. (April 2000) Implementing school reform models: Why is it so hard for some
schools and easy for others? Paper presented at the meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New Orleans. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED446356).

Freiberg, H. J. (1998). Measuring school climate: Let me count the ways. Educational
Leadership 56 (1), 22-26.

Fullan, M. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers
College Press.

Fullan, M. (1997). The complexity of the change process. In M. Fullan (Ed.), The
challenge of school change. Illinois: Skylight Training and Publishing.

Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. San Francisco: McGraw-Hill.

Hansen, J. M. and Childs, J. (1998). Creating a school where people like to be.
Educational Leadership 56 (1), 14-17.

Hargreaves, A. (1997). Cultures of teaching and educational change. In M. Fullan (Ed.),
The challenge of school change. Illinois: Skylight Training and Publishing.

Hargreaves, A. (1997). Introduction. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), Rethinking educational
change with heart and mind: 1997 ASCD yearbook. Virginia: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Hinde, E. R. (2002). Switching classes: Teachers’ conceptualizations of change in their
professional lives. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Arizona State University.

Hollins, E. (1996). Culture in school learning: Revealing the deep meaning. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kottler, J. (1997). What’s really said in the teachers’ lounge: Provocative ideas about
cultures and classrooms. California: Corwin Press.

McLaren, P. (1997). Schooling as a ritual performance. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield.

Miller, P. J. (1998). Factories, monitorial schools and Jeremy Bentham: The origins of
the ‘management syndrome’ in popular education. In A. Westoby (Ed.), Culture
and power in educational organizations. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
National Council for the Social Studies, (2004). National Council for the Social Studies
curriculum guidelines. Social Education 68 (4), 291-292.
Owens, Robert G and Valesky, Thomas C. (2007). Organizational Behavior in Education: Adaptive Leadership and School Reform, 9th Edition.  Publisher: Pearson Education Inc.
Peterson, K. and Deal T. (1998). How leaders influence the culture of schools.
Educational Leadership 56 (1), 28-30.

Sarason, S. (1996). Revisiting “the culture of the school and the problem of change.
New York: Teachers College Press.

Schweiker-Marra, K. (1995). Examining the relationship between school culture and
teacher change. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eastern Educational
Research Association, Hilton Head SC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED412182).

Weiler, J. (1998). Success for all: A summary of evaluations. ERIC/CUE Digest #139. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.

Adaptive Leadership

In this analysis, we take a look at the adaptive nature of leadership and how the organization of a school can be largely dependent on how its leaders adjust to various situations that present themselves on a daily basis.  Owens and Valesky (2007) discusses how “leadership cannot be a solo performance: by definition, as we shall see, the only way that leaders can exercise leadership is by working with and through other people, the followers.”  This statement opens the chapter in a way that looks at the concept of leadership as an entity that needs to be aware of its surroundings.  A school environment is an ideal place to see adaptive leadership in action as administrators and teachers in leadership roles make decisions that effect an entire schools population.  The leadership theory that is presented in chapter 8 of the textbook, written by Owens and Valesky highlights the theories brought forth by Bernard Bass and James Burns through transformational and transactional leadership.
The theory that Bass supported,  “spoke of leaders to be either “follower focused” (i.e. emphasizing concern for people) or “task focused” (i.e. emphasizing rules and procedures for getting the task done)” Owens and Valesky (2007).  Both of these dimensions as it were bring forth characteristics of good leadership that are prevalent in our schools today.  The analysis of the first of Bass’ theories, “follower focused” leadership is where we will start.  For instance, we are in the process of re-creating our school mission statement and vision of what our school needs to be, moving forward.  Our administrative team has asked our staff to help us put together “I Believe” statements to focus our discussions as the vision statement is created.  The positive support that is given to staff members by the administrative team in the school is paramount to the success of an activity such as this.  This follower focused approach to ultimately producing a positive outlook for our school and is showing our staff that we as an administrative team have a genuine concern of our teaching staffs’ morale.  Therefore, the purpose of this exercise is to hopefully reignite staff members that have felt stagnant in their teaching practice.
Further to Bass’ theories, James Burns coined the terms transformational and transactional leadership. Burns wrote, “I define leadership as leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivations-the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations-of both leaders and followers” (Burns, 1978).  The leader is not merely wielding power, but appealing to the values of the follower.  In this sense, values mean, “A principle, standard, or quality regarded as worthwhile or desirable,” (Webster’s New Riverside University Dictionary).  Burns insists that for leaders to have the greatest impact on the “led,” they must motivate followers to action by appealing to shared values and by satisfying the higher order needs of the led, such as their aspirations and expectations.  He said, “. . . transforming leadership ultimately becomes moral in that it raises the level of human conduct and ethical aspiration of both leader and the led, and thus it has a transforming effect on both.” As my school goes through the process of recreating a vision statement for our staff, our administration team is attempting to boost moral within our school by discussing such terminology as integrity and accountability as professionals.  This transforming nature is important to the evolution of school staff culture because we must remain vigilant and be able to adapt to change.
Burns and much of the current literature make the point that the way leaders influence followers is based on their shared sense of what is important, worth doing well, and expending energy on it.  In a sense the more significant the endeavour, the more the undertaking itself takes on an importance greater than either the follower or leader. “Such leadership occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality. Their purposes, which might have started out as separate but related, as in the case of transactional leadership, become fused.” (Burns, 1978). The goals, then, take on a life of their own. In business, this leads to market domination and profit. In the military, this leads to professionals leading inspired subordinates through tough budgets, difficult deployments, the rigors of combat, and ultimately victory. Burns recognized that “transformational” leadership does not stand alone in the leadership lexicon. As mentioned, he coined another leadership term, “transactional.”
Transactional leadership is based on a transaction or exchange of something of value the leader possesses or controls that the follower wants in return for his/her services. “The relations of most leaders and followers are transactional-leaders approach followers with an eye to exchanging one thing for another: jobs for votes, or subsidies for campaign contributions.” The transactional style is precisely what happens in a school scenario. In this case, the administrative team provides the leadership necessary to move forward in the evolution of school culture and leadership. Liontos explains, “This only works well when both leader and led understand and are in agreement about which tasks are important.” (Liontos, 1992).  Transformational leadership and transactional leadership are not at odds with one another, but complement each other as the circumstance dictate. There is no magic formula or checklist that dictates when one is more relevant than the other in any given situation. When to make the transition is an art borne of experience and education.  To conclude, it can be said that as leaders, adaptation is a necessary component to the success of any leaders including school principals.


References Cited:
Bass, Bernard M (1997). “The Ethics of Transformational Leadership.” In Kellogg Leadership Studies Project, Transformational Leadership Working Papers Transformational Leadership Working Papers, The James MacGregor Burns Academy of Leadership.
Burns, James MacGregor (1978). Leadership. N.Y.: Harper and Row.
Liontos, Lynn Balster (1992). “Transformational Leadership.” ERIC Digest 72.
Owens, Robert G and Valesky, Thomas C. (2007). Organizational Behavior in Education: Adaptive Leadership and School Reform, 9th Edition.  Publisher: Pearson Education Inc.

Organizational Theory

When you walk into a school you can immediately sense the way that it is organized as you observe the mannerisms of the student population and the staff.  In my opinion, the culture and organization of a school is a reflection of the administrative team that leads it.  As administrators, understanding the organization of a school is like putting together a jigsaw puzzle; there are so many pieces that you must consider operating a school efficiently. According to Owens and Valesky (2007), “we know that we can deliberately choose between two competing strategies of leading and organizing; a traditional top-down hierarchy or a more collegial participative approach.”  In this chapter, the analysis is interesting as it revolves around an evolution of three organizational theories, scientific management (Taylor), bureaucratic organizational theory (Weber), and classical organizational theory (Fayol).  Components of each of these theories are useful to the functionality of schools across Canada.  Therefore, the purpose of this examination is to look at the viability of these theories within the walls of today’s schools.

Scientific management had a tremendous influence on management practice in the early twentieth century. Although it does not represent a complete theory of management, it has contributed to the study of management and organizations in many areas, including human resource management and industrial engineering. Many of the tenets of scientific management are still valid today.  Frederick Taylor developed the scientific management theory which espoused careful specification and measurement of all organizational tasks.  An example of this within a school environment today would be provincial achievement and diploma exams; exams that are meant to give the province of Alberta the quantitative data that shows student understanding of curriculum.  Unfortunately, the organization of some schools focus on these examinations as a bench mark for scholastic achievement and further to this would equate this achievement to good teaching practice. However, the question that can be posed is whether or not this scientific approach to organization is a good approach to school organization.  From my perspective as an administrator who has taught within a small school environment, organizing a school to focus on student achievement alone does not give rise to the ideal educational environment.  As such, organizing a school with the best academic teachers more often than not takes away from the overall identity of the school.

As organizational theories evolved over time bureaucratic administration became the watchword in the 1940’s.  This theory means fundamentally the exercise of control on the basis of knowledge (Weber, 1947).  For the sociologist, power is principally exemplified within organizations by the process of control. Max Weber distinguished between authority and power by defining the latter as any relationship within which one person could impose his will, regardless of any resistance from the other, whereas authority existed when there was a belief in the legitimacy of that power. Weber classified organizations according to the nature of that legitimacy: Charismatic authority, based on the sacred or outstanding characteristic of the individual; Traditional authority: essentially a respect for custom; Rational legal authority, which was based on a code or set of rules (Weber, 1947).  Characteristics of Weber’s theories still pervade schools today in the form student leadership teams and the hierarchical organization of all schools.  Administrators can lead their staff through using charismatic authority, traditional authority and rational legal authority.  For instance, a principal may use policy to help formulate the best way of organizing a school, thereby using rational legal authority which their staff members must follow.  As an administrator, this type of organization produces the most efficient and organized school.  However, others may find this type of rigidity stifles creativity and leads to a movement away from authoritatively driven leadership.

In contrast to scientific management, which deals largely with jobs and work at the individual level of analysis, administrative management provides a more general theory of management. Henri Fayol is the major contributor to this school of management thought.  Fayol was a management practitioner who brought his experience to bear on the subject of management functions and principles. He argued that management was a universal process consisting of functions, which he termed planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling (Fayol, 1949).  The processes that Fayol outlines in his book are integral in the operation of schools today.  Fayol believed that all managers performed these functions and that the functions distinguished management as a separate discipline of study apart from accounting, finance, and production. Fayol also presented fourteen principles of management, which included maxims related to the division of work, authority and responsibility, unity of command and direction, centralization, subordinate initiative, and team spirit.  Although administrative management has been criticized as being rigid and inflexible and the validity of the functional approach to management has been questioned, this school of thought still influences management theory and practice. The functional approach to management is still the dominant way of organizing management knowledge, and many of Fayol's principles of management, when applied with the flexibility that he advocated, are still considered relevant especially within the schools of today.

Organization and leadership go hand in hand and this brief analysis has highlighted some of the evolutionary roads that management has taken.  Schools across the world use characteristics of each of the theories that have been analyzed so far.  In his book, General and Industrial Management, Henri Fayol listed his 14 managerial principles and as an administrator, the organization of a school goes beyond the traditional top down hierarchy or the collegial approach.  It is a meshing of the two extremes to find policies that work for the organization and betterment of the school itself. The three individual theories that have been mentioned in this analysis are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to organizational theories but they do provide a baseline from which today’s managers and administrators use.






References Cited:
Fayol, H. (1949) General and industrial management, translated from the French edition (Dunod) by Constance Storrs, Pitman.
Owens, Robert G and Valesky, Thomas C. (2007). Organizational Behavior in Education: Adaptive Leadership and School Reform, 9th Edition.  Publisher: Pearson Education Inc.
Weber, Max (1947) The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A. M. Henderson & Talcott Parsons,The Free Press.

History Television Website

Check out this link...a great place to look at history through television media.

http://www.history.ca/

Educational Research: Ferris Wheel Analogy

“EDUCATION” AND EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
    Educational research can be described as a Ferris wheel ride at the carnival; it travels in a circular manner where certain theories that are developed have their day at the top of the ride but invariably when the wheel comes around another more effective theory is there to get on and take its place.  This is where many researchers who use the scientific method would see the approach to educational research as a half-hearted attempt to validate theoretical ideas as opposed to supporting them with cold hard facts.  In their study of organizational behaviour, Owens and Valesky (2007), states that educational research is an “immature science…where education has no overarching paradigm.”  The fact that education is seen as an infant in terms of research speaks volumes to the misunderstood nature of our profession and how the short sightedness of credible scientists can belittle perfectly good research processes.  However, given my analogy of the Ferris wheel; my interpretation of a potential rider (i.e. educational theory) will serve as the primary focus of my analysis for this assignment as we take a look at the inherent problems of research in education.  Get ready for the ride!

     Every piece of research begins with an idea; so, when a theory emerges it has its beginnings in the line up for the ride.  The theory/rider might ask themselves the question of whether or not to get on the ride or to go find a bench somewhere to sit on.  As such, the first step in the educational research process involves identifying and clarifying the inherent problem that comes with theoretical research. We can identify and clarify research problems by specifying the variables involved in those problems, stating these variables in research questions or hypotheses, and operationally defining these variables or describing them in detail.  Consequently, this is where initial research methods can be questioned because the potential rider is unsure if the idea they are presenting is valid.  Furthermore, as the proverbial rider gets closer to the front of the line and is “too short” for the ride that could be equated to not having enough research to present the theory at hand.  This would come in the form of a lack of qualitative or quantitative data being presented to support the research, at which time the theory/rider would be asked to leave the line.

    Conversely, if the research is concise and is “tall enough”, the theory takes hold and becomes worthy of further research.  If these problems are identified then research can continue to the next level and in this case the theory/rider will pay the tickets to get on the ride.  As the rider sits down in the first chair they are excited about getting the ride started and the initial adrenaline rush provides the desire to continue with the research. But is this adrenaline misguided?  It can be argued that a critical educational science would not produce theoretical knowledge about educational practice, but the kind of educative self-knowledge that would reveal to practitioners the unquestioned beliefs and unstated assumptions in terms of which their practice was sustained.  The aim could be an ethical, informed reasoning which should lead to practical knowledge about what has to be done in a particular case in accordance with ethical insights. This type of analysis is the upswing of the ride and how the theory gains support in educational circles.  An example of this would be Bloom’s taxonomy, for decades this theory was taught to thousands of educators across the world and was used as the end all be all of multiple intelligence research.  Unfortunately, a mentality like this can blind you as a researcher to other ideas that may be better.  This brings us to the top of the ride where the idea has blossomed into a full blown practiced theory which has reached the pinnacle of theoretical knowledge.

      In order to maintain theories at their peak they not only must have support from academia through educational circles they must have financial support from the institutions that house the researchers.  So, another shortcoming of educational research is identified and that is the lack of “external sources of funding,” Owens and Valesky (2007).  This lack of funding can cause our proverbial ride to have to come to an end and therefore the value of the theory can be questioned.  It goes without saying that the kind of interpretation that is offered by a theoretician is open to criticism. It also goes without saying — and this might sound more provocative — that in a way it doesn’t matter in what manner a particular interpretation was brought about.  Any method — whatever that may be and mean in the context of understanding — can be as good as any other, provided it can withstand, firstly, the criticism of those who are involved in it when confronted with the interpretation, and secondly, the criticism of the scientific community.  Ultimately, any research needs financial support to continue and educational research is no different.  A lack of funding can cause educational theory to run out its usefulness and just like in any other carnival ride, you must get off the ride because you have no more tickets to stay on it.

     In this brief essay, we have discussed how educational research can be seen as a Ferris wheel ride in a carnival.  From waiting in line; to the sitting at the top of the ride; and then having to get off because you have no more tickets.  This analogy is one way of looking at how educational research has inherent problems in comparison to scientific quantitative and qualitative research. In my opinion, the fact that educational research is seen as an infant in research circles says volumes about our field and how we must remain diligent in creating valid educational theory that can stand up to the scientific community.  Educators must also continue to find valid educational research methods that are supported by academic institutions from a financial perspective.  Educational research has inherent problems but it is up to the one doing the research to minimize these problems with sound conceptual understanding of theories that are put forth. Thus, maintaining the validity and longevity of the research itself.

References Cited:
Owens, Robert G and Valesky, Thomas C. (2007). Organizational Behavior in Education: Adaptive Leaderhsip and School Reform, 9th Edition.  Publisher: Pearson Education Inc.