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.