| Richard Ingersoll
NCES
Organizational control in secondary schools, school centralization and school conflict, and rethinking institutional theories of organization
FINAL REPORT:
Study 1: Organizational Control in Secondary Schools
This paper compares and tests two prominent and contradictory views of organizational control in schools. One view holds that schools lack appropriate levels of teacher accountability and are too decentralized. The other holds that schools lack appropriate levels of teacher input and are too centralized. The data used come from the nationally representative 1988 Schools and Staffing Survey, collected by the U.S. Department of Education. The sample consists of 25,985 teachers and 6,183 school administrators. The analysis first examines the extent to which the influence and control exercised by teachers varies across different kinds of decisions and policies within schools. It then investigates how these levels vary among different types of schools and how they compare to the influence and control exercised by school administrators. Finally, the analysis assesses the relationship between teachers' and administrators' influence and the degree of cohesion or conflict among teachers, administrators and students in schools. The results indicate that in most schools teachers are reported to have substantially less influence than are principals over a range of decisions and policies. Moreover, the data indicate that increased teacher influence is far more important for the working environment within schools than is increased administrative influence. In particular, the results draw attention to the importance of faculty influence over the, often overlooked, social and behavioral domain within schools. Faculty are infrequently reported to have substantial control over behavioral and tracking decisions, but, it is facultycontrol over these issues that exhibits the strongest relationship to a positive school working environment.
Study 2: School Centralization and School Conflict.
The subject of organizational centralization and control in schools has become of great interest and importance in the realms of both educational research and educational policy. But, it is also marked by substantial disagreement over the degree to which schools ought to be centralized and teachers controlled. This article addresses this debate by comparing and testing its two most prominent and contradictory viewpoints. One view holds that school faculties lack sufficient accountability and school administrators lack sufficient authority, and hence, seeks to increase the organizational control of teachers. The other perspective holds that school faculties are overly constrained and school administrators overly authoritarian, and hence, seeks to increase the control and autonomy exercised by teachers. The data used come from the nationally representative 1988 Schools and Staffing Survey, collected by the U.S.
This paper directly compares these two viewpoints by assessing the relationship between both administrators' and teachers' control over two key policy areas - curriculum and discipline - and the degree of reported cohesion or conflict between students, teachers, and administrators in schools.The results support the view that schools are overly centralized and contradict the view that schools are overly decentralized. Schools in which teachers are reported to have more control over key policies, are schools reporting less student misbehavior, more cooperation among faculty and more positive relations among teachers and administrators. On the other hand, the degree of control exercised by school principals and that of school governing boards has less impact on reported levels of disorder and conflict in schools. Finally, the results also suggest the importance of distinguishing the domain of policy control. One of the key predictors of a conflict-free school is the degree of faculty control over the often underemphasized domain of behavioral and discipline policy.
Study 3: Rethinking Institutional Theories of Organization: The Case for Schools.
Contemporary institutional theories of organization have made great strides in revealing the extent to which ostensibly rational organizations are actually social actors shaped according to the surrounding social environment. This paper evaluates this view by examining its analysis of schools considered prototypical examples of institutionalized organizations. Investigation of the theoretical framework underlying the institutional analysis of schools reveals, however, that despite its rejection of the rational perspective, institutionalists, ironically, adopt several of the same assumptions of organizational behavior. Subsequently, by examining national data this paper offers a revised view of the nature, determinants and consequences of the organization of schools - one more fully accounting for their fundamental institutional character.
Back to Funded Research Fellows Page |