School Organization Study – Functions And Dimensions In
Organization
STUDYING
THE SCHOOL AS AN ORGANIZATION
The five main perspectives discussed in Chapter 2
and in this chapter give us a glimpse of the dynamics that form part of the
life of an organization. They are all simplifications - hence distortions - of
reality. They can give us increased insight, but they can also blind us. In our
view, there are three important principles in the study of the school as an
organization:
1. The school - i.e. the individual school - is the
point of departure for the study. It is also possible, and often useful, to
study schools at the system level or at the individual level. In our view, the
school is the unit for change. It is in the daily interaction between all the
school's parties that the quality of the teaching is decided. Our focus must be
the context of productive learning. However, it is important to understand
systemic conditions, because they help determine the school's frame of action.
Individuals are also essential to the analysis, because together they
constitute the social community which forms the life of the schools (see the
next chapter).
2. Contingency theory is our theoretical point of
departure. We wish to study relevant aspects of the schools from the point of
view of all five perspectives, but we do not want to make a priori claims that
certain solutions are superior to other ones. Everyday school life depends on
so many factors - some of which can be controlled, others cannot - that, in our
opinion, it is impossible to maintain faith in 'the ideal solution'.
3. Phenomenology will therefore become the natural
philosophy of science point of departure. Organizations must be viewed in the
contexts in which they appear. Historical and cultural insight is crucial to an
understanding of organizational phenomena. The external circumstances of the
schools must be understood in the context in which they appear. Data only
acquires meaning in the context in which it is created. Some of the knowledge
thus gained will have importance beyond a specific case - but it is only when
we understand the phenomenon that the theories acquire meaning.
Figure 3.3 The school as an organization
FUNCTIONS
IN ORGANIZATIONS
If organizations are to live, a number of functions
must be safeguarded and developed. Not all functions are always equally
important, nor is it the case that they must be performed in a specific way in
order to achieve optimal results. But all organizations have certain tasks in common:
Production - which deals with the way the work is carried out
in order to achieve the organization's objectives. How productive is the
learning process in our classrooms?
Management - which deals with the way the organization is run,
including planning, decision-making processes, co-ordination, guidance,
development of an institutional culture, and communication between individuals
and groups, the context of productive learning.
Development
work - which deals with the way needs are
analysed, ideas are attended to, new things are discovered, and the way the
development process is supported and carried out.
Information
treatment - which deals with the way information
is obtained, how it is taken, accommodated and retrieved when necessary, how it
is communicated, and how it is protected.
MAIN
DIMENSIONS IN ORGANIZATIONS
The functions briefly sketched above are carried out
in relation to certain main dimensions within the organization.
Figure 3.3 illustrates the mutual dependency that we
believe exists between five important dimensions of the school as an
organization: values, structures, relations, strategies and surroundings. When
we describe the relationship between these dimensions as mutual, this does not
necessarily imply that they are connected in a mechanical, automatic or linear
fashion. In some cases, changes in part of the system (e.g. altered work
structure) result in changes within other parts of the system (e.g.
relationships). In other cases the organization will, due to loose connections,
protect itself from the consequences of change in one of the partial systems.
Which connection releases mutual reactions, and the strength and direction of
such reactions, can only be understood on the basis of a thorough knowledge of
the dynamics of the individual school, among other things on how these
functions are safeguarded. In another context, we have discussed six schools
that have been evaluated using this model as a point of departure. If the model
is to be used in practice, a study of real-life situations (and preferably work
with one or more schools) is required (Dalin and Rolff 1993).
We do not assume that the significance of some
dimensions exceeds that of others. It is, for example, not necessarily the case
that all changes have to start with changed values. It is just as possible that
changed values, norms and attitudes are 'discovered' as a result of a new
behavioural pattern. Likewise, crisis situations in the local community can
lead to changes in the schools, but it is also possible that new thinking
within a school can lead to reactions from the surroundings (e.g. the
introduction of a new evaluation system). The individual dimensions in the
organizational model have the following contents.
Surroundings
Where the schools are concerned, the term
surroundings refers to both the local community and society at large, i.e. each
person and organization in the surroundings that a school needs to have contact
with in order to do its work. Schools are partly in a formal dependency
relationship with certain institutions in their surroundings (the superintendent,
the school board, the Department of Education, etc.); a mutual interaction is
partly expected (e.g. with other institutions which are responsible for
children and young people in the local community); up to a point, schools have
an informal and non-binding relationship to people and organizations.
Most schools have a relatively large degree of
freedom of action in relation to their surroundings. If a school generally
manages to take care of the functions expected of it by parents and recipients,
it will have great freedom to define its culture and form its day-to-day life.
However, if a school breaks with expectations (often unspoken ones), with norms
and traditions, and with our picture of what a school should be - then a
counter-reaction will set in.
In relation to its surroundings, schools have to
take a position on the following:
- How 'transparent' should schools be?
- Will a great degree of openness lead to
influential forces 'taking over'?
- Should the boundaries to the surroundings be
made so flexible that schools can 'open and close' as they see fit?
- Is there danger that the schools will isolate
themselves to such an extent that they fall 'out of synch' with society?
- What can schools do to create a constructive
relationship with their surroundings?
- What would the consequences be if parents and
students had a free choice of schools?
A 'learning school' has creative and mutual links to
its surroundings. This also applies to its relationship to the school
hierarchy. We could regard the school administration as a kind of service
organization. For example, it is possible to use existing rules in such a way
that they protect a school from pressure from wealthy parents, and allow
children from less privileged homes to take advantage of the school's
resources.
These children are usually not represented at
parent-teacher meetings, and receive little support at home; they need school
more than other children. If the schools were only to listen to active parents,
the weakest children would probably have even fewer opportunities.
This illustrates the relationship between openness
to the surroundings and the school's overall objectives. From the standpoint of
short-term objectives, it would often be right to show a constructive openness
to suggestions from parents and other people in the local community. The danger
with this form of 'openness' is that one easily ignores the fact that different
partners have a different degree of power and thus dissimilar opportunities for
expressing their interests. School management (however we may define it) must
be responsible for 'opening', or 'protecting' the schools from their
surroundings. In our opinion, this should happen via open dialogue where, among
other things, the dilemma presented in the example above is clarified.
This illustrates a major dilemma that non-profit
organizations have in relation to market organizations. For the latter, the
greatest possible openness and 'contact with customers' is crucial to the
operation. The motto is 'The customer is always right'. For public institutions
such as schools, which are meant to safeguard short-term and long-term learning
needs, and which have clients who are often more concerned with the former than
the latter, and which have as their aim the maintenance of equality of
opportunities just as much as high quality standards, the task is far more
complex.
School Organization Study – Functions And
Dimensions In Organization
School Development - Theories and Strategies [PDF]
$1.00
