Modulo 8 Marzo Julio 2010

2. CONTENTS

Cover Page

Presentation

Problem Statement

Transformation Object

Justification

Objectives

Professional Practices

Research Process

Theoretical References

Methodology

Accrediting Results

Evaluation Guidelines

Bibliography

Matrix of the Module

2

3. PRESENTATION

The module “Organization and Management of the Teaching” has as objective to guide to the future

professionals of the teaching of the English Language in the Educative Management, giving core

knowledge about the organizational structure of the educative institutions and the management of

the teaching to promote the institutional development.

In this module, the students will get basic knowledge of the organizational structure of the educative

institutions in its different aspects such as: size, hierarchical and regulation, determining the basic

roles of the directives, teachers, headteachers, inspectors, just in case that in their work have the

necessity of developing any of these roles.

The present module is formed by three moments in which we articulate the research, the theoretical

explanation and the formulation of proposal alternatives to improve the quality of the organizational

and working roles in the educative institutions.

First Moment.- To characterize of the organizational reality of the educative institutions of Basic and

High school Curriculum levels which will enable the students to diagnose the organic and working

conditions in which the education is involved.

Second Moment. - Interpretation, analysis and theoretical contrasting of the collected information

about the organizational and management necessities which are planned in every educative

institution.

Third Moment. - At this moment the students will design a creative work which must include the

best proposal alternatives about the organizational and management of the teaching and the

efficient work of the teachers in the educational institutions.

4. PROBLEM STATEMENT

The organizational and Management of the teaching is a problem related to the structure of the

educative institutions and the efficiency in the daily accomplishment of the roles of every member of

the educative institutions.

3

In this aspect there are some difficulties which are affecting the organization and management of

the teaching, they are:

Little participation of the teachers of the English language

Little commitment with the profession, the institution and the community

Little knowledge of the organizational structure of the educative institutions

Limited knowledge of the law and regulation that rule the working of the educative

institutions

Restricted knowledge of the role that the staff should accomplish in the educative institution

that could be as teachers, headteachers, inspectors or principal.

The teaching is performed with an authoritarian leadership

These difficulties have many causes which are:

Little knowledge of the additional activities that teachers must perform

Little information about the organizational structure of the educative institutions

Little teacher’s interest about the educative institutions regulation

Tiny professional formation related to the organization and management of the teaching

As a consequence of these difficulties the teachers are not involved in the institutional activities

neither they participate with commitment in them.

To improve the teacher’s commitment in the institution, the professional must get knowledge and

experiences about the organization and management of the educative institutions to be involved in

directive staff and also to work in different roles into the teaching.

5. TRANSFORMATION OBJECT

The limited professional formation of the English teachers in the field of organization and

management of the teaching, the little interests and concern of them to know the laws and

regulations of the educational institutions regard to their organization and functionality and the lack

of commitment of the teachers with their profession, the institution and the community, have

restricted the network of the educative institutions with the community.

4

Consequently the teachers do not participate with a formal commitment, they have a slight

knowledge about laws and regulations of educational institutions and most of them perform an

authoritarian leadership.

In order to, the undergraduates of the English Language career perform their profession with

commitment, efficiency and interests in the educational institutions is necessary that they count

with a good knowledge and experiences about the organization and management of the teaching

and be able to be part of the directive staff and manage an educational institution.

6. JUSTIFICATION

The module “Organization and Management of the teaching” has the purpose of enable the future

professionals of the English language career to develop knowledge, abilities and skills in the

organization and management of the teaching in the educative institutions.

The theoretical references and practice about the educative management will let the students: to

evidence, analyze critical and reflexively the organizational and management necessities of the

educative institutions, to know the roles of the directive staff and state proposals to improve the

organization and management in the educational institutions and the efficiently work as teachers.

With the knowledge of the English language and its scientific-technical application , the future

professionals will also be able to present and expose their research works in English.

7. OBJECTIVES

To find out and analyze the problematic of the organizational and management of the

educational institutions of the basic and Sigh school Curriculum levels.

To gather information about the best models of organizational and management of the

educational institutions.

To state proposal alternatives of improvement to organize and manage educational institutions

efficiently.

5

8. PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES

They are part of the management staff of the educational institutions, language institutes and

academies.

They propose with enough arguments changes in the organizational system of the educational

institutions.

They formulate proposals about organizational and regulations to improve the functionality of

the educational institutions

They manage the English language in its four skills

They translate documents about organizational and management of the educational institutions

from Spanish into English and vice versa.

9. RESEARCH PROCESS.

Fist the students will analyze the problematic about organization and management of the

educational institutions of Basic and High School Curriculum levels and this will let them to diagnose

the organic functional conditions of the educational institutions.

This research will be developed in three moments:

Fist Moment.- Problematic diagnose of the organizational and management of the educational

institutions of Basic and High School Curriculum levels.

Second Moment.- Interpretation, analysis and theoretical contrasting of the information about the

organizational and management of the educational institutions of the Loja city.

Third Moment.- Determination of the alternatives to build the proposals of improvement of the

organizational and management of the educational institutions.

10. THEORETICAL REFERENCES

FIRST MOMENT

1. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL STRUCTURES

2. FROM INDIVIDUAL AND PROGRAMMATIC ACTION TO ORGANIZATIONAL REALIGNMENT

6

3. ORIGINATOR OF THE ``HORIZONTAL ORGANIZATION''

4. THE HORIZONTAL ORGANIZATION MANAGING A HORIZONTAL REVOLUTION

6. EDUCATIVE INSTITUTIONS AS ORGANIZATIONS

6.1. THE STRUCTURE OF AN EDUCATIVE CENTER

6.2. CONCEPT OF STRUCTURE

6.3. DIMENSIONS OF THE STRUCTURE

6.3.1. SIZE

6.3.2. COMPLEXITY

6.3.3. FORMALIZATION

6.3.4. MECHANISM OF COORDINATION

Educational Law

Entertainment

Challenges

SECOND MOMENT

7. MANUAL OF FUNCTIONS

7. 1. MANUAL OF FUNCTIONS OF THE STRATEGIC SUMMIT

7.2. MANUAL OF FUNCTIONS OF THE MIDDLE LINE

7 .3. MAMUAL OF FUNCTIONS OF THE OPERATIVE NUCLEUS

Education

Places

THIRD MOMENT

8. THEORIES OF EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT

8.1. DISTINGUISHING EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

8.2. CONCEPTUALISING EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT

8.3. THE RELEVANCE OF THEORY TO GOOD PRACTICE

8.4. FORMAL MODELS

8.5. MANAGERIAL LEADERSHIP

8.6. COLLEGIAL MODELS

8.7. POLITICAL MODELS

8.8. SUBJECTIVE MODELS

8.9. AMBIGUITY MODELS

7

Lifestyles

Family life

11. METHODOLOGY

To develop the research work about organization and management of the teaching we will do the

following activities:

First Moment

To find out about the causes and factors that intervene in the organization and management of the

teaching we will do the following activities:

Checking the basic bibliography about the theme

Elaboration of the instruments

Group or pair work to develop the problematic and the causes and factors that are implied

Individual and groupable presentations

Presentation and exposition of the reports

Discussions, role plays, panels and forums

Practices of the English language in a communicative context

Second Moment

To develop the systematization of the information we will do the following activities:

Analysis and interpretation of the collected information

Contrasting of the found information with the theoretical references

Study and analysis of the theoretical references

Applicability of the theoretical references with the results

Presentation and exposition of the reports

Systematization of the information

Writing reports

Laboratory practices to develop the basic linguistic skills of the English Language

Third Moment

To determine the alternatives of improvement about the organization and management of the

teaching we will do the following activities:

Systematization and discussion of the information

8

Individual and group presentations

Plenaries and panels about the theme

Presentation and exposition of the final report

Practice of the English language

Use of the technology

Writing essays in the English language

12. SUPPORTING WORKSHOPS

Organization and Management of the Teaching (500 Hours, 31 Credits )

Speaking Native Workshop ( 50 hours, 3 credits)

Discursive Language Practice Workshop (25 hours 1,5 credits)

13. ACCREDITING RESULTS

Tasks, lessons, homework, listening, speaking, reading and writing activities, presentations,

students’ attendance and others.

A report about the problematic of the theme

A report including the contrastation of the problematic with the theoretical references.

A report that systematizes the problematic of the organizational and management of the

teaching in the educative institutions in Basic and High School Curriculum levels.

14. EVALUATION, GRADING AND ACCREDITING

The evaluation: It will be permanent, that is to say daily, systematic and procedural. It will let us to

analyze critical and creatively the development of the teaching-learning process to guide and

improve the methodological, research activities and theory-conceptual activities which have been

established in the module planning.

The grading and accrediting: We will take into account all the proposed activities for each moment in

relation to the before parameters established:

Written tasks 30% 3

9

Individual and group participation 25% 2.5

Knowledge and performance in presentations 25% 2.5

Attendance tasks 20% 2

Total 100 % = 10

10

15. BIBLIOGRAPHY

1.BYRAM, Michael and FLEMING Michael, Language Learning in Intercultural Perspective.

Cambridge. 2004

2.CARTER, Ronald and McCARTHY. Michael, Exploring Spoken English. Cambridge. 2004

3.CELCE-MURCIA, Marianne, and OLSHTAIN, Elite. Discourse and context in Language teaching.

Cambridge 2004

4.FARREL, Mark with ROSSI, Franca and CERIANI, Regina, The World of English, Longman. 2004

5.HATCH, Evelyn. Discourse and Language Education. Cambridge 2003

6.HINKEL, Eli. Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning Cambridge 2004

7.O’ DELL, Felicity, English PANORAMA 2. A course for advanced learners Cambridge.

8.RICHARDS, Jack C. and TARRELL Thomas S. C. Professional Development for Language

Teachers Cambridge 2005

9.Organización y Gestión de la Docencia, Compilación de Dra. Teresa Arias, Mg. Sc. Rogelio

Castillo y Dr. Jorge Mogrovejo

10. Manual de funciones Administrativas, Autores: Mg Sc. Hugo Cueva, Mg. Sc. Miltón Álvarez

11. Estructura Organizativa del Colegio Militar “Tcrn. Lauro Guerrero” Dra. Marcia Criollo

12. Fast Track to First Certificate, Alan Stanton and Mary Stephens

13. New educational Law, Ministerio de Educación y Cultura.

11

MATRIX OF THE MODULE

INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS

THEORETICAL REFERENCES ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH STRATEGIES

PERIODS AND DATES

ACREDITING RESULTS

Fist Moment

To Diagnose of the organizational and management of the teaching in the educational institutions

1. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL STRUCTURES

2. FROM INDIVIDUAL AND PROGRAMMATIC ACTION TO ORGANIZATIONAL REALIGNMENT

3. ORIGINATOR OF THE ``HORIZONTAL ORGANIZATION'' 4. THE HORIZONTAL ORGANIZATION MANAGING A HORIZONTAL REVOLUTION6. EDUCATIVE INSTITUTIONS AS ORGANIZATIONS6.1. THE STRUCTURE OF AN EDUCATIVE CENTER



6.6. SIZE6.6.1. COMPLEXITY6.6.2. FORMALIZATION 6.6.3. MECHANISM OF

COORDINATION

Entertainment

Challenges

Pedagogical Agreement

Reading and critical analysis of theoretical references

Group work

Pair work

Roles plays

Field research

Processing of the information

Listening, speaking, Reading, writing, grammar and vocabulary strategies

Laboratory practice activities

From March 8th to April 23rd

Tasks

Lessons

Homework

Listening, speaking, reading and

writing activities

Presentations

Students´ Attendance

A report for the 1st moment

Total hours of the first moment: 142 H / 9 credits



PERIODS AND DATES

ACREDITING RESULTS

Second Moment

Interpretation, analysis and contrastation of the collected information with the theoretical references about the organization and management of the teaching in the educational institutions of the Loja city.


7. 1. MANUAL OF FUNCTIONS OF THE

STRATEGIC SUMMIT

7.2. MANUAL OF FUNCTIONS OF THE

MIDDLE LINE

7 .3. MAMUAL OF FUNCTIONS OF THE

OPERATIVE NUCLEUS

Education Places


Group work

Pair work

Roles plays

Field research




From April 26th to June 4th

Tasks

Lessons

Homework

Listening, speaking,

reading and writing

activities

Presentations


A report for the 2nd

moment

Total hours of the second moment: 142 / 9 credits

13



PERIODS AND DATES

ACREDITING RESULTS

Third Moment

To Set up proposal

alternatives to

improve the

organization and

management of the

teaching.


8.1. DISTINGUISHING EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP

AND MANAGEMENT

8.2. CONCEPTUALISING EDUCATIONAL

MANAGEMENT

8.3. THE RELEVANCE OF THEORY TO GOOD

PRACTICE

8.4. FORMAL MODELS






8.10. CULTURAL MODELS

Lifestyles Family


Group work

Pair work

Roles plays

Field research




From June 7th

to July 30th

Tasks

Lessons

Homework

Listening, speaking,

reading and writing

activities

Presentations


A final report that

includes the three

moments and the

proposal alternatives

Total hours of the third moment: 141 / 9 credits

Duration of the Module: 425 hours

14

DIAGNOSIS OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL AND MANAGEMENT OF THE

TEACHING IN THE

1. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL STRUCTURES: THE DYNAMICS OF

ORGANIZATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION

The ORGANIZATION of institutions of higher education has been seen as operating with ambiguous

purposes in vertically oriented structures that are only loosely connected. The rationale for this

ambiguity is twofold: (1) to allow for creative thinking, and (2) to respect “and even encourage” the

autonomy of different disciplines. But ambiguity of purpose and vertical organization are at odds

with thinking and expectations in an era of accountability and assessment, in which cross-

institutional, or horizontal, reporting and measurement of institutional performance are highly

regarded and increasingly demanded. Student affairs divisions are particularly challenged, given

their ambiguous purpose (to support holistic student learning and development); the perception

that they are support services, rather than core academic functions; and their primarily historically

and traditionally framed organizational structures. Student affairs divisions are appropriately

scrutinized to display how their ambiguous purpose is manifested in practice via organizational

effectiveness and responsiveness to institutional needs, and through documented contributions to

the development and achievement of desired student outcomes. The ability of student affairs

functional areas to document and demonstrate value provides a pertinent opportunity to reconsider

the organizational nature of student affairs programs, services, activities, and systems of support.

The frequent and increasingly predictable accusation that institutions of higher education operate in

"silos" is based on the primarily vertical organization of those institutions; their various schools,

colleges, business operations, student support services, real estate and economic development

arms, foundations, and athletic programs operate in parallel with one another, more focused on

promoting their own internal goals and objectives than on adhering to, elucidating, or accomplishing

broader institutional purposes. It is a common observation that professors in any discipline have a

greater sense of community and connection with professors in that same discipline in other

institutions than with professors in other disciplines in their own institution. Similarly, student affairs

professionals who find career contentment in residence life are more likely to collaborate locally,

regionally, and nationally with others who do the same work rather than to seek interdisciplinary

opportunities on their home campuses.

This vertical organizational structure is reinforced by centrifugal forces that create decentralization

and locate governance, responsibility, and resources peripherally, rather than centrally; funding

models in many institutions base the allocation of resources on credit hours, which drives money

into individual schools based on student enrollments in courses (Ehrenberg 2000). Schools within

16

larger institutions compete with each other for scarce resources and almost inevitably, and often by

necessity, promote their own interests rather than those of the university at large. Centralized

components of the institution “such as most student affairs offices, programs, and services” may

struggle for resources in this context.

In these vertically organized institutions, there are important (and essential) horizontal forces;

similarly, given the centrifugal, decentralized nature of decision making and resource allocation,

there are nonetheless certain centripetal forces that pull some decision making, governance, and

control to the center of the institution. Notable horizontal forces include, of course, central

administration, institutional accreditation, overall financial management, and certain levels of policy.

But development, alumn relations, communications and marketing, enrollment management, and

other core institutional functions are often performed to a greater or lesser extent by individual

schools as well as by the institution as a whole. Similarly, central funding and policy development are

centripetal forces -but the strength of those forces varies by institutional type, history, culture, and

perceptions of the need for public accountability.

The inherent and necessary tensions between these horizontal and vertical elements generate and

sustain complexity in institutions of higher education. Because each institution is of a particular type

and exists in its own context (i.e., public, private, rural, urban, etc.), the vertical and horizontal

structures vary in number and dimensions from institution to institution; but because they are

fundamental parts of postsecondary infrastructure, they each exist in some form at every institution

Student affairs programs have a strong centripetal pull and are, of necessity, horizontal; since they

(theoretically, at least) address the needs of all students in all schools, optimally they work across

“and have an integrative role in relation to” the vertical structures, or silos. The horizontal nature of

student services is easy to see: student health and counseling programs, recreation centers, student

health insurance plans, unions and student centers, and dining services are good examples; any

would be difficult (and inefficient and duplicative) to implement separately in individual schools.

Similarly, student policy (especially, academic and non-academic conduct) must be horizontal. First-

year experience and transition programs, general education courses, student government, and lower

division academic advising are other horizontal programs and services; providing them often

requires collaboration between academic and student affairs.

The identification of desired student learning outcomes creates a new horizontal force--

accountability for producing a group of outcomes for all students, regardless of their major, year in

school, division, or school of enrollment within the institution. This horizontal force, finding its roots

17

in accountability, challenges student affairs leadership to adopt a curricular approach to the

assessment, conceptualization, planning, implementation, and evaluation of programmatic and

student learning outcomes.

2. FROM INDIVIDUAL AND PROGRAMMATIC ACTION TO ORGANIZATIONAL

REALIGNMENT

Student affairs efforts to function horizontally have been highlighted in actions to develop learning

communities, promote positive and developmentally sound transitions into and out of the

institution, foster academic partnerships, and respond to calls for movement away from vertical

(silo) functioning. An examination of these efforts reveals strong individual commitments to

horizontal functioning in spite of organizational constraints. Individual efforts and resource-intensive

programs illustrate the opportunities of implementing horizontally oriented functions and

developing a more horizontal institutional orientation, but do not normally instigate or sustain

organic organizational change that spurs the systematic breaking or weakening of vertical barriers

and forces. Organizationally speaking, efforts to support greater horizontal functioning are often

based upon the exercise of astute political savvy by inspired leaders and key influencers of opinion

and through the force of strong human relations, rather than through policy-driven, mission-

centered, or otherwise explicit expectations for transdivisional collaboration or systematic change in

the structure, beliefs, or culture of the organization (Schroeder 1999). While student affairs alone

cannot reasonably be expected to alter the vertical and disciplinary structure of the academy (and

cannot impose such a restructuring on academic or other divisions), much can be done through

engagement in the organic and systematic realignment of programs and services that support

student learning and success, including, but not limited to, traditional student affairs programs and

services. Such organizational realignment can be fostered by a curricular approach to supporting the

student experience through programs, services, and policy.

A curricular approach to supporting the student experience helps to generate a scope and sequence

of programmatic activities centered upon desired student learning outcomes. For example, student

affairs officers can determine the desired learning of students at different developmental levels and

connect those desired learning goals to programmatic and organizational elements. The aim would

be to have a vertical force for organizational functioning that guides the extent to which each

program should contribute to the acquisition of learning objectives, and a horizontal force that

pushes programs to best meet the evolving developmental and learning needs of students as they

progress through the institution.

18

A curricular approach to supporting the student experience within student affairs allows for

appropriate vertical activity while insisting on balanced horizontal functioning. The former occurs

when each department within the division is held to its respective discipline-specific standards. The

latter, however, gains durability through imposing a common set of expectations across

departments and then, through assessment of learning outcomes, accruing a body of evidence to

gauge accountability. The centrifugal forces of traditional departmental functioning, such as

budgeting and tradition, are balanced by the centripetal force of common learning objectives owned

collectively by student affairs--which, in turn, is embedded within overall institutional accountability

for desired student outcomes. A similar analysis “and approach” would, of course, apply more

generally to the institution's overall support for student success, which depends upon the

integration of learning experiences as much as depth of learning in a discipline or major.

Student affairs organizational realignment, then, is based upon the centripetal force of common

learning outcome objectives. As an example, rather than the developmental competency of ability to

manage conflict being the primary responsibility of those specially trained in conflict management,

outcomes associated with conflict management are shared across a system horizontally. Staff

members own collectively the outcome of assisting students with managing conflict. The vertically

organized units that direct service delivery must realign themselves to work together to meet the

student learning outcome of conflict management skills. In curricular thinking, the modules, or

service delivery units, must both share a common outcome and array their curriculum to be

appropriately developmental and sequential. This is not the same thing as saying that every conflict

resolution effort must be the same; instead, it says that conflict resolution programs and activities

must be conscious of one another's existence, coordinated in a sound way that demonstrates

integrity of purpose, and designed, delivered, and assessed collaboratively.

These principles suggest the need for a level of organization and horizontal integration of services

that far exceeds traditional "cooperation" or "collaboration" within divisions of student affairs--and

for similar integration among activities that support learning provided throughout the institution

(Kuh 1996). Achieving such horizontal integration is the primary functional characteristic of an

institution for which the entire campus has become a learning community (Keeling 2004); it is that

integration that permits learning to occur, as Whitt (1999) has said, in "every nook and cranny" of

the institution. Horizontal integration supports the coupling of programs, services, and activities in

time, space, and geography.

19

Horizontal programmatic and curricular organization is expressed in a myriad of tangible ways. The

change from focus on workforce development to lifelong career skills in community colleges over

the past thirty years offers many examples of how horizontal linkages enhance higher education

practice.

In order for universities to create a comprehensive culture of evidence that actively supports

outcome-oriented learning by the whole student, programs and systems of support must be

developed across disciplines (Braxton 2006). That practice must include and integrate services and

learning opportunities traditionally located in divisions of student affairs with courses of study

traditionally in academic affairs. No longer can "full learning" be offered only to those students who

request it or have the instincts to search it out. If institutions of higher education are to create and

provide to the public a body of evidence that documents student learning and development across

the academy, then they must intentionally develop and implement comprehensive learning

opportunities that link faculty to staff and courses to out-of-classroom learning activities. Developing

these linkages is an interdependent, energy-requiring process that results in tighter coupling; once

tighter coupling is achieved, additional energy (monitoring, assessment, leadership) is necessary to

maintain and strengthen it.

That is, institutions illustrate strategies for supporting not only student engagement with content,

but also the more comprehensive effort to create a purposeful learning environment “a topography

of learning” that expects learning to happen everywhere and all the time. That sort of learning

results in learners who know more than "what;" they know "why, when, and under what

circumstances"; they are intellectually curious and are more likely to transfer that set of

competencies across their life spans.

It is in respect to policy and culture that colleges and universities do or do not embrace the

opportunity that assessment provides to link high standards with daily practice and student

outcomes. Assessment, as a strong horizontal force and tool, both reflects and demands closer

coupling in the interest of producing and documenting desired student outcomes. Achieving such

coupling requires the exercise of significant institutional will, which in itself is a combined force of

variable capacity, will, and strength--what may be considered institutional purpose. Institutional

purpose is generated and sustained in direct proportion to elements of institutional culture and

policy. If there is focused and powerful institutional purpose, assessment can become a strong force

to bring disparate elements of the campus together in the interest of common goals; absent such

strong purpose, though, assessment can seem incidental, suspicious, and annoying. Without the

20

continuous application of energy and institutional will, coupling weakens, linkages dissolve, and,

through a kind of organizational entropy, the centrifugal overcomes what is centripetal and vertical

structures dominate horizontal ones.

Ensuring transformative institutional environments where learning happens everywhere and all the

time, then, requires intentionality. Intentionality can be articulated through a process of

organizational reinvigoration and strategic realignment. Organic transformation often begins with

institutional self-assessment, a process that engages practitioners' critical self-reflection as to

current practices, cultural expectations, and existing communication and collaborative pathways.

Identification of current practices is a precursor to the development, or affirmation, of commonly

held desired student learning outcomes and programs associated with those outcomes. Overall

student learning outcomes derive from the institution's mission, vision, and values--and from its

commitments to students--not from a restatement of existing programs; that is, desired outcomes

represent what should be, not necessarily what has been or what is. It focuses on the way that the

institution's work is, or is not, aligned with its vision; that examination leads inevitably to questions

of structure and organization.

The ability to do good work within one's discipline or program area must include both competence

in a specific area of knowledge or function and commitment to horizontally defined and broadly held

student outcomes. Just as a career counselor cannot focus exclusively on career content and

counseling, but must also address the development of cognitive complexity and citizenship skills, so

a physicist must devote some of her attention to supporting student engagement, understanding

and addressing student learning, and assessing the contributions of her courses to critical thinking

and problem-solving capacities.

Both because of greater internal and external scrutiny and in support of the desire of ethical

professionals to do their best work, the articulation of desired learning outcomes and the creation of

a strong rationale for how programs and services address those outcomes are essential to telling a

convincing performance story. The process of developing commonly held student learning outcomes

requires a strong centripetal force along horizontal lines. Common planning time, dialogue on

beliefs, respect for disciplinary and other differences, and a commitment to follow through a process

to identify learning outcomes are necessary components of this process. Collaboration and common

purpose are further challenged, but ultimately strengthened, when programs, services, and indeed

all vertically organized units are then asked to define how their programs specifically address the

identified learning outcomes. The process of creating common outcomes and then connecting

21

programs, services, and units will likely identify areas of strong coupling between current activities

and desired learning, along with areas of weak coupling. Of course not all programs, services, or

units will address each outcome in the same ways or with the same emphasis, but the collective

impact of the work in all programs, services, and units should be aimed at supporting and advancing

every desired outcome.

3. ORIGINATOR OF THE “HORIZONTAL ORGANIZATION” JOINS DELOITTE &

TOUCHE

Ostroff is credited with originating the concept of "the horizontal organization," which is arguably

the first actionable alternative to the functional vertical hierarchy that has dominated since the

industrial revolution.

A horizontal organization is based on structuring organizations around the cross-functional processes

that deliver value to the customer. The concept has proven to dramatically improve performance

along the dimensions of speed, customer satisfaction/responsiveness, and efficiency and is now

being applied by hundreds of leading companies worldwide.

"Our clients are actively seeking ways to make their organizations more competitive through e-

business, CRM, and ERP initiatives, yet they have not aligned their organizations to function in these

new environments “a horizontal organization in many instances is the answer."

Horizontal organization has consistently been revealed as one of the most critical issues according to

numerous surveys. Companies such as Ford Motor Company, Xerox, Barclay's Bank, and American

Express have all transformed all or portions of their organizations along with hundreds of other

leading companies worldwide.

"The entire organization does not have to be designed horizontally," commented Ostroff, "but

simply those areas where this makes strategic sense, where it's competitively advantageous to

improve cross-functional performance “for example, when it's important to be quicker and more

agile, to be more customer focused or to deliver integrated solutions."

22

4. THE HORIZONTAL ORGANIZATION: WHAT THE ORGANIZATION OF THE

FUTURE ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT DELIVERS VALUE TO

CUSTOMERS

4.1. Creating the Horizontal Organization of the Future

The Horizontal Organization by Frank Ostroff discusses how effective organizations will be organized

and managed in the future. The traditional vertically controlled company is outdated and cannot

survive in today's competitive global economy. Quality is the key component for success. Customers

won't purchase products or services that do not meet their standards of high quality. Future

organizations will focus on quality, speed, customer services and integrated solutions to problems.

At first glance, it's easy to say this is nothing new. There is general agreement that vertical structures

are too rigid and slow. An excessive level of authority reduces communication and coordination of

activities.

Ostroff recognizes there is no one structure for each organization. Each organization has to evaluate

its own environment and develop an approach that fits its situation. Most organizations will have

both horizontal and vertical divisions in their organizational structure. This is where the information

provided in the book got my attention.

The transformation from a vertical organization to a horizontal one is not an overnight event; it takes

time. Obtaining the proper mix of vertical and horizontal structure within one company is no easy

task. However, case studies are used to illustrate companies that have made the transition. Although

the horizontal organization's culture emphasizes training, teamwork, employee empowerment,

loyalty and economic incentives based upon performance, the focus of the book is the role of

management.

Processes and activities that directly affect products or services are the main candidate for

horizontal structures. By identifying these core processes, the focus for structure becomes the entire

process not individual jobs. In the typical vertical organization, these core processes will be

organized through the structure. The horizontal organization attempts to bring them all together. In

other words, individual jobs and tasks are organized together as teams and made responsible for the

operation of that core process.

23

Ostroff identifies 12 principles to follow for the development and operation of horizontal

organizations. Among the principles that are of particular interest to human resource managers are

as follows:

Make teams, not individuals, the cornerstone of organizational design and performance;

Decrease hierarchy by eliminating non-value-added work and by giving team members the

authority to make decisions directly related to their activities within the process flow;

Emphasize multiple competencies and train people to handle issues and work in cross-

functional areas;

Measure for end-of-process performance objectives, as well as customer satisfaction,

employee satisfaction and financial contribution;

Build a corporate culture of openness, cooperation and collaboration, a culture that focuses

on continuous performance improvement and values employee empowerment,

responsibility and well-being.

5. MANAGING A HORIZONTAL REVOLUTION

When a company moves from a traditionally vertical organization to a more horizontal, "flattened"

entity, human resources' role is to refocus the troops - now called teams or work groups.

"Within this revolution, people across the organization are called on to assume more accountability

and exercise decision-making authority and to be trained in the application of self-managing

principles..." writes Stephen Covey in the introduction of The Horizontal Revolution: Reengineering

Your Organization Through Teams, by Morris A. Graham and Melvin J. LeBaron.

But what does that mean? For starters, it does not mean employees who are blindly following their

leader, nor does it mean renegade entrepreneurs setting out on their own.

In the best of worlds, Covey writes, corporate revolutions will yield invigorated employees who can

work "interdependently in cross-functional teams" and who are "able to generate creativity,

performance and innovation beyond the total of their individual capacities." In the worst of worlds,

traditional workplaces turned inside-out can foster mistrust, plummeting morale, and general

workforce malaise.

24

5.1. What´s in it for me?

Role ambiguity is a frequently cited source of frustration. An employee who once could say, "I am a

divisional vice president," and receive nods of apparent understanding, now wonders, "Who am I?

What does being a team member mean? What does it require of me? How am I attached to the

company and those around me?"

Getting employees to buy-in to the notion of a reorganized workplace and to understand and value

their recast roles and marching orders is difficult, says Zandy Leibowitz, a partner with Conceptual

Systems Inc., a consulting firm in Silver Spring, Md. She's seen many companies where "it's not

always clear" what employees are getting out of reorganization.

"The old employment contract said that if you did a good job, you'd have a job for life. The new deal

is that workers get to experience continuous learning and development," she continues. Along the

way they also may improve their portfolios and their marketability in the outside world. But in the

midst of a major transition, Leibowitz says, employees' reactions to those benefits may be "So

what?"

The harsh reality is that employees may not have a choice in whether or not they will accept the new

deal. Indeed, the first question all employees should ask is whether they still belong in the changing

organization. "They have a choice of becoming cynical and leaving the company, or taking advantage

of the offer that they are given," Leibowitz notes.

5.2. What's missing in the quest for successful change?

Authors Graham and LeBaron believe that the greatest challenge in moving to a horizontal structure

is making successful role transitions from "patriarchal caretaking to shared governance and

partnerships."

Organizations, they say, need to ensure that their managers and employees have:

A clear picture of the company's future and the overall horizontal purpose.

Clear expectations about their new roles as individuals and as team members.

An understanding of new processes and standards.

Training to carry out new responsibilities.

25

A knowledge of and respect for others' roles and responsibilities.

A common notion of how things are supposed to work.

Skills to reduce potential conflict among team members.

The realization that substantive change occurs slowly.

In addition, management must be prepared - and trained - to model the type of behavior that will

nurture social change in the organizational structure. Paying mere lip service to the "Great Team

Scheme" won't cut it, the authors write. "Some managers are like cowboy actors in an old Western

movie set, sitting on stationary wooden horses, elbows, flapping, pistols smoking, in front of the

camera."

The authors also caution that "telling middle managers that they are going to be coordinators,

facilitators, boundary managers and coaches is not giving them anything that is concrete. The more

appropriate response is that they are going to have to figure out where and for that they are

needed." Employees, with a little guidance, will have to do the same.

5.3. Defining competencies

Getting people to define and value their skills and competencies, instead of their titles and

paychecks, is critical to the change process. In her consulting work with organizations like Lever

Brothers and Merck Pharmaceutical, Leibowitz often uses a circular model that "establishes a link

between where the company is headed and what kinds of competencies people need to develop to

be a part of it." One version is designed for individuals and another for teams.

The first step of the model involves defining the business strategy. "We talk about what widgets are

going to look like three years from now," Leibowitz says. "We project what the company will look

like, what will give us added value, what the role of employees will be."

The next major step asks employees to assess themselves against a set of self- or team- or company-

defined competencies. These competencies may be a set of broad characteristics such as leadership,

adaptability and flexibility, or more finite skills, such as computer aptitude, problem-solving skills and

analytical abilities.

Using an assessment form, individuals (or team members) gauge their own competencies, then

provide one copy of the form to a boss or team leader. Additional copies are given to peers or

26

customers for their feedback. The answers, once scored and aggregated, give employees a picture of

where they fit in the organization.

"People need to be clear about what the organization needs more of or less of. Some people have

strengths here and weaknesses there," says. "Employees appreciate knowing their competencies

because they make clear what the playing field is. It shows that we're all playing by the same rules. It

takes us a step further and creates a common language for diverse contributors." Further, working

together with other employees and managers to define competencies helps build commitment and

trust.

Once competencies are defined, employees have a development discussion - focused on continuous

learning and career development - with the boss or team leader. It's an opportunity to ask, "How do

I put in place a plan to keep me (or my team) in line with the organization's goals?" Leibowitz says.

The idea is to find a mutually satisfying plan.

Finally, Leibowitz's model incorporates an application stage. "This means more than just sending a

person to a training program," she notes. "It's actual on-the-job training; it's working alongside

someone else or shadowing or mentoring them. It's exploring nontraditional ways to learn, because

everyone doesn't learn best in a classroom. It's about discovering how each person learns best and

then having them pick a way to achieve that type of learning."

5.4. Lever teams up

One company using Leibowitz's model to move from functional silos - such as marketing and sales -

into more focused team-based business processes is Lever Brothers.

After downsizing approximately 29 percent of its workforce, the Manhattan-based company went to

its employees and asked what it could do to help them meet their performance objectives.

The answers revealed that the company needed to explore new ways of managing change and

measuring performance. The employees wanted a process for setting team goals and measuring

their team's success.

Instead of using the word competencies, the company prefers the term success factors. Across the

business and at all levels, employees got involved in defining the factors necessary for Lever's future

success.

27

Leibowitz calls Lever "the ultimate horizontal organization" because every part of the managerial

process today is tied into a team. For example, the Dove soap product line now includes teams of

people from all areas of the business. From manufacturing to developing marketing plans, to

distributing the product to stores, all team members work toward a similar goal - such as reducing

the cycle time in getting the product off the assembly line, out the door and into a customer's hands.

Teams, not individuals, set their own project and production goals.

The new team orientation also means that marketing personnel may have direct contact with an

external customer, such as the buyer for a supermarket or discount drug chain - something that

wouldn't have happened before. One benefit has been a greater opportunity for employees to

receive feedback and input from their customers and colleagues.

"It's a total company effort," says one Lever employee. Whatever the project, "sales people need to

be able to work with marketing, who need to work with accounting, who need to work with product

development. ... It's all part of learning to serve our customers better and helping employees

perform better."

Separate teams are working on other goals, such as linking rewards and compensation. Lever has

found that money doesn't drive performance; career development opportunities drive performance.

The Lever restructuring is still in process, and the company is scheduled to conduct a pilot test at a

plant in June, with a large-scale rollout slated for next January.

5.5. The Value of Communication

"At first we didn't think the merging of cultures was a big issue," York says. The organization already

excelled at the systems side of running a bank-managing customer accounts, maintaining a customer

base, acquiring smaller banks and mortgage operations, etc. - which allowed it to increase assets

while whittling its workforce.

"What we didn't have," York recalls, "was a system that communicated the organization's value

system and helped our people understand the differences in the cultures from which they came and

how to develop a comfort level in the new culture." Many employees did not have a vision of what

was important or valued in the new organization. The result was a huge philosophical rift.

5.6. The Camp David Process

28

To overcome the communication gap, York helped initiate various reengineering processes

throughout Integra. One of the processes designed to help people break down the functional silos

and begin to operate in a team-based format was a discussion session York calls the "Camp David

process."

The first step involved working with management specialists at William M. Mercer Inc. Members of

Integra's HR group, for example, were asked to articulate their vision of the department's function

and their perception of the most pressing needs of the larger organization. The group asked

questions like, "What kind of HR function do we need?" "What is our vision of HR? How should

human resources be aligned with the organization?"

Another step identified strategic trends of the core banking business. "We looked at what kinds of

human capital and capabilities the organization needed to be able to accomplish the business plan,"

York says.

York broke the employees into eight cross-functional teams organized around strategic issues, such

as performance management and streamlining the bureaucracy. Among the specific goals were

developing individuals who were customer focused, and effective external and internal

communications for the overall organization. An entire team was dedicated to dealing with

communication.

York explains that Integra distinguishes itself from some of the large "money-centered" banks in the

region by emphasizing a community focus. "Our niche is being a super community bank and

understanding the needs of our customers."

York encouraged the HR staff to talk face to face with bank customers to get "a line of sight as to

what the customers need and want, and the kinds of skills and services they want to see when they

come into oily bank."

In addition, she wanted other internal employees - those who recruit, train or develop compensation

and reward systems - to understand how the company's vision and capabilities aligned with Integra's

customer needs and expectations.

5.7. Cross-Functional Communications

29

Internally, the only real communication being done before the reengineering was via periodic

newsletters from the marketing department. "We felt that was not effective communication," York

recalls. The team decided to analyze all existing communication products.

"We audited every piece of communication that went out - from forms to memos to manuals," York

says, "to find out 'Are we communicating consistently? Do we present a unified image? Does it really

address our employees' needs?'" The audit showed a communication system with multiple gaps.

Today, Integra has a formal process of distilling information "sound bites" to ensure consistent

messages throughout the company. Team leaders and department heads also receive weekly

briefing sheets on key company news. A series of "devil's advocate-type" questions and answers

ensures that people who need to communicate a particular message understand it.

Another successful tool, York says, is a "performance score card" to measure financial and

nonfinancial success. "It's the glue that holds together our performance management system. It's

the way we gauge how effectively we're achieving our objectives."

5.8. Hello, Left Hand?

Getting people in a bank - notorious for its traditional, vertically siloed functions - to change their

roles was a real challenge, York says. "The benefits people didn't talk to the compensation people.

The compensation people perceived that their function was only to develop comp programs. The

people who delivered services in the field weren't integrated with the benefits folks. It was

extremely compartmentalized, and appeared that the left hand didn't know what the right hand was

doing."

York recalls that many people were skeptical of the new processes. Although some did not like being

in teams, they weren't given an option to get out. One manager kept mourning her old boss, saying,

"I wish Bill was still here and things were the old way."

Among the Integra group were some who felt they lacked high-level recognition. Although all were

at the professional level, "many had never even spoken to upper management," York says. One

breakthrough was having them present their progress reports and plans directly to executive

management - something that would have been intimidating for individuals, but became an exciting

challenge for the team.

30

Another group of employees that 18 months earlier had been reluctant participants in the change

process suddenly tapped into their creativity, York says. "They put together a rap song to

communicate their business results." The catchy lyrics allowed them to show they had achieved

qualitative and quantitative results with measurable cost savings.

One woman in the benefits area, though doubting at first, became a champion of the reengineering

process after reading Reengineering the Corporation by Michael Hammer and James Champy.

Undergoing process training at Mercer also helped the woman understand the "HR lingo," which

York admits is something many employees weren't familiar with.

The Camp David process brought about positive, more unified feedback which was "extremely

motivating," York says, as well as a heightened sense of esteem and a clarification of roles. "When

the lights came on, that made it all worthwhile."

"Suddenly, people who were 'diamonds in the rough' came out and became stars. They finally felt

like they were set up to succeed."

5.9. Commitment to the Cause

Graham and LeBaron believe that when people really get involved "in the nature of their changing

roles, they gradually loosen up, unfreeze their perceptions, broaden their thinking and seriously

consider effective actions."

In the long run, they say, organizational success requires all participants to accept the collective

purpose and goals as their own. Without a commitment to the cause, people tend to pursue their

own agendas or "the way it's always been done." The responsibility of each team member is to

invest emotionally in the new organization - and to live with the consequences.

The horizontal organization is intended to free employees who have long worked within the confines

of functional departments and narrow job descriptions. Ideally, they will begin to "take on additional

responsibilities such as cross-functional training, data gathering, leadership, monitoring and self-

correction. They should thrive on autonomy; develop a sense of pride, self-respect, dignity and a

strong bond among themselves."

In a Washington Post article on federal downsizing, Jane Giles, a deputy administrator with the

Agricultural Research Service, offers this advice: "Change is difficult for many folks," but workers

31

facing big changes in their offices should "step up to the table and be part of the process. If you've

got questions, ask rather than worry. You might be worried about something you shouldn't be."

32

INTERPRETATION, ANALYSIS AND CONTRASTATION OF THE COLLECTED INFORMATION WITH THE THEORETICAL REFERENCES ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE TEACHING IN THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS OF THE LOJA CITY.

33


The development of societies brings the necessity to order the activities that need to be realized,

thus appear a first organization referring to the distribution of functions. For the development and

complexity of services the specialized organizations have to complete specific tasks directed to the

accomplishment of determined aims.

Any organization is social because its origin and service place it into the social, although they acquire

specific objectives in function of the social task assumed with time, so we talk about political,

cultural, economical organizations.

According to the former arguments we can say that “to organize educative institutions is to put into

relation the different elements of a reality in order to get the best realization of an educative

project.

According to David Isaacs, the educative organization “is a group of exact members with a division of

tasks and responsibilities according to general educative objectives”.

In this definition, the organization is clearly established as a system which subsystems and

constitutive elements are interactive and interdependent, and this means a mission, or reason for

being, common objectives, and an organizational structure, a regulation that establishes hierarchy,

functions, and specific tasks in relation to the educative object.


“When a new action is being planned or when the solution to a problem is being looked for, the

immediate organizer feels the necessity to analyze the structure. The roles of the members and the

relations between them constitute the basic core of any action, because the objectives and structure

have a total correspondence and we cannot conceive one without the other. When in a center we

discover that the hierarchical diagram is only a decorative paper because there do not exist a real

34

working relation between the teachers, there is more than routine work that makes that each

teacher works separately in their classrooms with their group of students. There is an obvious lack of

institutional objectives so that there is no need of a structure. Any model that is used is no more

than a defined theory, pure scheme of a dramatic piece in which it is costume to hide the

inefficiency of the organization.


Many times the hierarchy diagram reflects the structure of an organization. In each educative center

the structure will be different, because the tasks will be organized according to the objectives, taking

into account the human resources and materials that exist in a given moment, and therefore create

distinct relations between the groups or between people.

March and Simon define the structure as a gathering of the models of behavior of the organization

that are relatively stable and that change only very slowly.

Thompson, following another approach, says – “the internal difference and the models of relations

of what we call structure comes to refer to the structure as the basic mean for which the

organization establishes limits and criteria for the efficient actualization of its members – delimiting

responsibilities and establishing control over resources and other materials”.

Another definition is of Jackson Morgan, who defines the structure as –“the distribution of positions

of work and the administrative mechanisms that create a model of activities of work in interrelation

and allows the organization to direct, coordinate and control its activities of work.”

To define the constitutive elements of an organization to represent the division of work and the

relations that are established between them to determine, analyze and reach institutional

objectives, constitute a structure that can be analyzed from three basic dimensions: the size, the

complexity and the formalization.


The organizations are created and develop due to a complexity and cooperation that mean realizing

various group tasks with a major effort and with a major quality, since this organization builds itself

on a structure based on the division of tasks specializing the people rising their knowledge and

abilities, differentiating groups to respond various necessities, to coordinate each person and each

35

unit and integrate the interest and efforts of each member in the common march towards certain

objectives.

To determine the dimensions of the structure there exist different positions, but we will better take

the one of Hall Richard that distinguishes three dimensions that, clearly delimited in the structure,

allow, whatever the unit be, make a distinction between one structure and another that are:

6.8.1. SIZE

It is advised to begin the analysis of the school structure with the size, because this is an easy to

perceive basis and a key piece to understand how much happens in the organization and in its

members.

The size is defined by the number of teachers, students, administrative and services staff that

intervene in the organization, but to establish a coefficient of correlation it is possible to take the

number of teachers for the total amount of students registered in the institution or the total number

of staff for the total amount of students, and it is possible to make a relation between the two

coefficient that always reflect a macro image.

To resolve the problem of part-time employees Hall and Johnson recommend adding the total time

of these people and transform it to its equivalent in full-time.

Another important aspect that the size reflects in the rationalization of staff, taking it as the scale of

operation, is the optimization of human resources and the bettering of quality in education.

The size is also in correlation with the financial resources, since they constitute a determining factor

to reduce or increase the size of the structure.

6.8.2. COMPLEXITY

One of the first perceptions that one acquires when analyzing the structure of an organization is the

complexity that is represented by the horizontal, vertical and spatial differentiation between the

components of an organization and the interrelations or rules of the behavior of the members, in the

internal processes and with the surroundings, that require levels of coordination and communication

to achieve the efficient development of the proper activities of the institution.

36

When an organization is created it is easy to coordinate the functions between few people, but

whereas the organization increases in size difficulties appear, like the differentiation of tasks that is

positive, but it is necessary to connect areas and integrate efforts appreciating a new coordinating

tasks that makes new units necessary. This implies coordinators making the hierarchic differentiation

because the institution becomes more complex.

The complexity refers to the differentiation between the components of an organization, “it is

conceived as an effort of the group for the search for efficiency to achieve the objectives and this

brings differences in the behavior of the members, in the internal processes and in the relations

between the organization and its surroundings”.

We can easily identify three types of complexity: horizontal, vertical, and spatial.

6.8.2.1. Horizontal Differentiation

This refers to the departmentalization in which the division of activities is represented, according to

the grade of specialization of the people responsible for the operation grouping that will exist, which

needs a grade of coordination with the other departments.

The more positions and specialties exist in the organization the more complex before the eyes of the

observer. The organizations grow horizontally when they grow in size and the doing of the tasks is

subdivided.

6.3.2.2 Vertical Differentiation

This establishes hierarchy in the organization. When we realize an analysis of vertical differentiation

or design an organization we must not forget that the hierarchy is a consequence of the horizontal

organization. Whereas the organization grows, its objectives are more numerous (or the contrary),

the human dispersion and the necessity of integration, coordination and communication are bigger.

The person responsible of a department according to their specialization has determined functions

and deals with a group of subordinated people whose range of control has to be of a feasible

number and possible to deal with.

In an educative institution the vertical differentiation in successive circles reaches three levels.

37

The Directive Level is constituted by the people who occupy high functions inside the school system

and have the responsibility of the general structuring of teaching. This level signals the ultimate

aims, make the general action plans, supervise, tutor and apply the corrective means to reach the

institutional objectives according to the total results.

The Executive Level is constituted by the supervisors or inspectors and coordinators of the different

department, who also depend directly on the former level of which they can be tutors. Its function is

to drive and control the procedures and efficiency in the educative action and serve as a

communicative line between the former level and the operative level.

The Operative Level, in the case of an educative center it is constituted of the teacher, who has the

responsibility of planning, methodology, execution and control over the contents that are given to

the students, whose productivity depends on the efficiency of the teachers in the process.

Of the mentioned dimensions that complexity is probably what allows elaborating the structural

model or diagram with more security. It acquires a functional character if it is determined in the

dimensions that formalization determines.

6.3.2.3. Spatial Differentiation

It is in relation with the specifications of the center according to the place of the departments, units,

and environmental, physical sections and others. It is a continuous quantitative variable that if not

given the value according to its place, can cause problems such as a break in the line of decision,

difficulties in the central services, lack of group interrelation, etc.

6.3.3 FORMALIZATION

It is the grade of regulation with which the policy of the institution regulates itself and the type of

internal communication with which it works.

Formalization constitutes the variable that determines how, when and who has to realize the tasks.

It is another fundamental part of a structure that establishes the norms to regulate the operation,

the tasks and responsibilities that each department has inside an institution. It facilitates the

evaluation of the execution of the former tasks.

This way formalization is what establishes the norms and procedures to deal with situations and

conflicts created inside the organization. Even though it does not always give solutions, it serves as a

basis for making decisions.

38

6.3.3.1 Systems of operation of the organization

On another hand, inside the operation and formalization of an organization we can establish various

diagrams of flows of operation, coordination and communication that serve as a basis to better the

organizational structure. Between the main ones we can mention: System of formal authority,

System of regulated activity, System of informal communication, System of work group, and System

of decision ad-doc.

1. System of formal authority

The line of formal power lowering to hierarchy is represented by the diagram that serves to establish

and guide the structure and its operation according to the diagram type.

This system can be expressed by the following figure:

(a): FLOW OF FORMAL AUTHORITY

2. System of Regulated Activity

“Figure (b) represents the organization as a net of regulated flows of work of production through the

operative nucleus of orders and instructions going down in the administrative hierarchy to control

the operative nucleus, of feedback information based on the results (in a system of administrative

information or MIS), and of information and advice coming from the sides to the making of decision.

This is a vision of the organization compatible with the traditional notions of authority and hierarchy,

but, different from the first one, on that it emphasizes standardization more than direct surface.

39

(b) : FLOW OF REGULATED ACTIVITY

3. System of informal communication

This system is directly linked to mutual adjusting. Because the communication is informal it does not

have a hierarchic line. This implies deceiving the authority canals. It can function in simple

organizations but in complex ones this causes problems and there does not exist consistency of

communication, which very often does not involve responsibilities, it could lead to legal problems.

According to Mitzberg the following figure represents this system:

(c) : SYSTEM OF INFORMAL COMMUNICATION

4. System of work group

This system consists of making groups or associations of work, not necessarily in order of hierarchy

but also in relation to the necessity of the organization, this system is productive when we take

40

advantage of it to realize different activities such as planning, organization or to interchange

experiences and mutual evaluation.

(d): SYSTEM OF WORK GROUP

5. System of Decisions Ad Hoc

This system means that a decision of superior level is made through any member of the organization

as a process of innovation or improvement; it has to do with participation, self-criticism, and

participation.

(e): SYSTEM OF DECISIONS AD HOC

6.3.4. MECHANISMS OF COORDINATION

When we talk about the structure of the organization it is fundamental to take into consideration

the mechanisms of coordination to establish a system of division of work and to coordinate it

through certain mechanisms that according to Mintzberg can be: mutual adjusting, direct

supervision, standardization of work processes, standardization of the workers’ skills and

standardization of work productions.

a) Mutual Adjusting

41

“Mutual adjusting allows the coordination of work by a simple process of informal communication; it

is used in general in simple organization. When the organization grows a new mechanism of

coordination is necessary.

b) Direct Supervision

Direct supervision is a mechanism of coordination that allows watching over the activities of a group

of people to relation their work with the achievement reached. The supervision is also responsible of

efficiency and productivity of the group that controls in respect to reaching the organizational

objectives because it does not only have to control, this function also implies tutoring and feedback.

c) Standardization of Work Processes

This means that we can realize a standardization or specification of tasks, programs, planning and

systems of control to achieve predetermined organizational objectives.

Standardization of workers’ skills

This refers to the specific training that is necessary to develop a determined work in the case the

teachers count with their professionalisation. Even though the skills and methodologies are proper

to each individual, it is possible to implement permanent training to obtain better results.

Standardization of Productions of Work

“The productions are standardized when the result of the work, for example the dimensions of the

product or of the acting, are specified”

In an educative organization we can establish an achievement average higher than the general one

specified by the Education Law with the aim of improving the quality of the learning that implies a

bigger effort of teachers and students, but it is difficult to standardize the results in education

because we work to train and teach human beings. However the educational institutions always

work with ideal profiles.

42



Name of the person in charge: director / principal

APPOINTMENT: The director is the person named by the Ministry of Education and Culture. They are

of free appointment and removal.

SITUATION AND IMPORTANCE:

They are the highest authority, official representative of the institution. They are part of the

Directive Council and the General Assembly of Directive and Professors, Tutoring Organisms of the

institution. They are the first administrative and executive authority of the institution.

DEFINITION OF THE POSITION:

They are responsible for the execution of the laws, plans of study, programs, regulations,

agreements and restrictions of the school that are emanated of the Law of Education and Culture.

They are responsible for the total operation of the institution.

LOCATION IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE: Strategic Summit.

CARACTERISTICS OF THE WORK:

a) They are responsible before:

Ministry of Education and Culture

Provincial Director of Education

b) Depend on him:

43

Vice Director / Principal

Department of Orientation and Students’ Well Being

Humanistic Coordinator

Technical Coordinator

Center of Multimedia or Center of Learning Resources

Administrative Coordinator

Educative Unit of Production

General Inspector

c) Relations of Coordination:

Directive Council

Directives and Professors council

Institutional Planning Office

Committee of Acquisitions

Educative Unit of Production

d) Substitution:

In the absence of the director, the vice director substitutes him/her. In case of absence of the

director and vice director, the first person of the Directive Council will assume their responsibilities

and delegation continues in this order. The subrogation will last until the titular assume their

functions.

e) Main links:

Ministry of Education and Culture

Provincial Directors

Provincial Supervisors

Representative Elements of the Internal and External Community.

Public and Private Entities and Productive Sectors

The students’ parents

f) Received Information:

Plan of Action of the Government

44

Plan of Action of the Ministry of Education and Culture

Plan of Action of the Provincial Direction of Education.

Law of Education and Culture

Internal Regulation

Organic Law of Financial Administration and Control.

Plans and programs of study

Book of records of the Directive Council

General Inventory of the School

Manual of accounting of the controllership

Others

g) Main Emitted Information

Elaboration of the Mission, Objectives and Institutional Politics.

Institutional Plan

Plan of Development

Annual work report

Work distribution Table

Appointment of administrative and service staff

Statistics of the facility

Annual Evaluation of Administrative, Academic, Physic and Financial Activities,.

RESPONSIBILITIES:

Assume the responsibilities: the planning, the coordination, the organization and the control of all

activities of the educative process.

Has wide freedom to create or implement a suitable hierarchical line with the aim of being able to

reach the objectives of the center. It is responsible for the financial execution of the institutional

budget.

AUTORITY:

45

The director has full authority to conduct the institution according to the orientations emanated of

the Ministry of Education and Culture and the Institutional Plan of the Educative Facilities.

SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF THE DIRECTOR

In addition to the ones established by the Art. 96 of the Regulation of the Law of Education, their

functions are the following:

To be concerned about maintaining and consolidating the prestige of the institution on the basis

of its links with the community.

To resolve all petitions that will be presented on matters that are of their competence according

to the annual planning presented by each one of the departments of the institution.

To request to the Ministry of Education and Culture the designation of the teachers, technical

and administrative staff, submitted to the determined norms in the effective laws and

regulations.

To give possession of the staff in their charges, before the legal promise to the teachers and

employees of the institution.

To take responsibility of the good investment and collection of the economical resources,

submitted to the actual laws and regulations.

To elaborate economic, organizational and work plans of the new school year and subject them

to consideration of the Directive Council.

To elaborate the annual report of administrative, technical and pedagogical activities in

association with the vice director and present it to the Directive Council and the teachers.

To control the good work of all dependences of the institution requesting the due care and

delegating responsibilities to the different organisms, according to the norms of the Law of

Administration and Control of the goods of the State.

To order the renovation of the inventories according to the effective law and regulations.

To request to the Controller Organisms, the inspection of the institution or of any dependence

of the latter when they would consider it convenient or by petition of the Directive Council.

To order in writing to the Collector to realize the discounts for fines caused by nonattendance or

no fulfillment of their obligations to the teachers, administrative and service staff.

To review permanently the mission, objectives and politics of the institution.

To maintain constant links with the representatives of the social, political, productive,

economical, ecological, cultural and educational sectors.

46

To propitiate moments of dialogue and good relations with all the staff of the institution.

To authorize the financing office the investment in monthly dividends.

To impulse educative innovations, in accordance with the institutional change that drive the

socio-economical development of the area.

To promote and coordinate the institutional evaluation.

To watch over the departmental programming and the educative activities.

To watch over the handling of the financial and material resources and to take pertinent actions

when economical prejudices are caused to the institution.

To stimulate and sanction the staff that develops financial and administrative functions in

conformity with the legal dispositions, of regulation and other types.

To veil by an adequate administrative and financial organization is maintained.

To authorize the reposition of the previewed funds.

To dispose that the commission participate in drops, transfers, finish offs and legalize with his

signature the respective acts

To participate in the elaboration of the budget Invoice of the Institution and watch over its

development.

To legalize the payments that the institution requires together with the Collector.

To require the opportune handing in of the financial reports that will include the respective

states, for his analysis and legalization.

To revise and make known the financial reports to the Directive Council.

To negotiate the opportune reception of the transferences together with the Collector.

To authorize the impression of the valued species of the institution.

To designate the commission so that it realizes periodic economical polls.

To complete with the other functions assigned by the laws and regulations.

NAME OF THE POSITION: GENERAL MEETING OF DIRECTIVES AND PROFESSORS.

APPOINTMENT;

Law of Education and Culture and Regulations.


47

In the diagram, the General Meeting of Directives and Professors is an organism advisory of the

director which objective is to veil to the faithful accomplishment of the Institutional Plan, prepared

by the Directive Council.

OF ITS INTEGRATION:

The general meeting of directives and professors will be constituted of the following members:

the Director, Vice Director, General Inspector, teachers and Inspectors who work in the

institution.

LOCATION IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE:

Strategic summit.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WORK

The secretary titular of the institution will act as secretary.

The General Meeting of Directives and Professors will meet ordinarily at the beginning and at the

end of the school year. The convocation will be done in written way at least forty days beforehand.

SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF THE GENERAL MEETING OF DIRECTIVES AND PROFESSORS

The ordinary and extraordinary sessions will be realized before convocation of the Director, for itself

or by petition of the two thirds of its members, and during which the constant matters in the

convocation will be treated.

Its main functions are the ones established in the Art. 109 of the Regulation of the Law of Education

and moreover the following:

To suggest to the Directive Council and to the Director about how they must drive the

pedagogical areas, discipline, administration and the productive activity.

To fix and coordinate criteria on the work of evaluation and catch up of the students.

To promote initiatives in the environment of experimentation and pedagogical research.

To contribute to the productive process that develops in the Educative Production Units.

To designate in the first session of the school year his representative before the Committee of

Acquisitions.

48

To attend compulsorily to the meetings of the general meeting of directives and professors,

ordinary and extraordinary, previously summoned by the Director.

To resolve in the last instance the administrative, disciplinary problems and of any other order if

not expressively assigned to other authorities.

NAME OF THE POSITION: DIRECTIVE COUNCIL

APPOINTMENT:

The General Meeting of Directives and Professors


The Directive Council is an advisory organism of the Director.

It is the most important organism functioning in the Institution.

It is the natural cause of participation of all the educative establishments in the management and

control tasks.

It is the main governmental and legislative organism.

OF ITS INTEGRATION AND ELECTION:

The Directive Council will be constituted of:

The Director, who presides over it.

The Vice Director or Vice Directors according to the case;

Three main vowels with their respective substitutes, elected by the General Meeting of Directives

and Professors in the public schools. In semi-private schools the Educative Community designates

the first vowels and substitutes of the Directive Council, and the three main vowels and substitutes

are elected by the General Meeting of Directors and Professors. It will behave as Secretary the

principal of the institution. The secretary will inform but not vote.

The vowels of the Directive Council will be elected in the last ordinary session of the General

Meeting of Directives and Professors, thirty days after its election, before ratification of the

Provincial Direction. It will last two years in its functions and will be reelected after a period, unless

the number of teachers makes it impossible to complete this disposition.

49

To be elected, as vowel of the Directive Council requires: to be an full time teacher working as such;

to have worked in the institution for a minimum of two years, except in the schools of recent

creation; and not having been sanctioned with the suspension of teaching exercise.

POSITION IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE:

Strategic Summit.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WORK:

The Directive Council will meet ordinarily at least once a month; and extraordinarily when the

Director summons it, for itself or by petition of three of its members. It will meet in the presence of

at least four of its members.

In the case of temporal absence of one or more vowels, the substitutes will be summoned in the

order indicated. If the absence of the vowels or the substitutes is definitive the Director will summon

the General Meeting of Directives and Professors for the election of the main vowles and

substitutes, who will enter in function after ratification of the Provincial Direction and will act until

the end of the period.

SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF THE DIRECTIVE COUNCIL AND PROFESSORS

In addition to the functions of the Art. 107 of the Regulation of the Law of Education, They have

these ones:

To define the mission, objectives and institutional politics, to which will have to assist the

activities of the institution.

To advise permanently the Director in the decisions that will be taken in the: economic,

administrative, academic and productive.

To maintain an adequate coordination, with all authorities and organisms that conform the

institution.

To motivate the execution of activities of teaching and administrative improvement.

To approve the plans, programs and Project presented by the Technical-pedagogical

Department.

To take care of the exact collection of benefits of its legal inversion and all that refers to the

economic drive.

To control and take care of the correct administration of resources dedicated and coming from

the productive activity.

50

To study and resolve the causes and motives for the legal sanctions according to the effective

Laws and Regulations.

To request to the Ministry of Education and Culture the creation, restructuration or suppression

of specialties.

To foment and protect the edition of texts, pamphlets, and books of scientific and educative

value.

To regulate the benefit and/or rent of the workshops, sports fields, use of multiple use rooms

and bars.

To conform the permanent Commissions: of discipline, sports, culture, etc., and the ones they

will believe convenient.

To elaborate a Special Regulation for each one of the Permanent Commissions and of the others

that conform it.

To evaluate periodically the Institutional Plan and realize the necessary readjustments.

To stimulate the directive staff, teachers, administrative and of service for the faithful

accomplishment of duties and obligations with the institution and the community.

To elaborate the budget invoice, on the basis of the information given by the Accountant and

Collector.

To authorize to the Director the expenses or investments superior to the three minimum vital

salary according to the legal dispositions.

To know and approve the reports presented by the people responsible of the Departments and

commissions.

To designate the two servers who will do the physical verifications and updating of the

belongings of the institution.

To authorize the auction, drops and donations of the belongings of the institution.

To approve the annual plan of acquisitions and designate commissions for the execution of

acquisitions in the cases those require the integration of themselves.

To analyze the financial reports and make decisions to achieve the correct management of the

material and financial resources

To approve the budget Invoice of the institution and to remit it to the Ministry of Education with

the aim of definitive approval.


51

This part is the organization that serves as connection between the Strategic Summit and the

Operative Nucleus and to a minor degree with the Techno structure and Support Staff; the specific

function is the one of Control-Tutoring-Evaluation of the educative processes of the institution. It

also organizes the productive, academic and administrative processes. In this part of the

organization we find:

- VICE DIRECTOR / PRINCIPAL

- GENERAL INSPECTOR

- INSPECTOR OF THE BASIC LEVEL AND HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM

- ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR

- HUMANISTIC ACADEMIC COORDINATOR

- TECHNICAL COORDINATOR.

NAME OF THE POSITION: VICE DIRECTOR /PRINCIPAL

APPOINTMENT:

They are of free appointment and removal from the part of the Ministry of Education and Culture,

subject to the dispositions of the Law of Scale and wages of the National Magisterial

In the institutions of middle education with more than two thousand students and two periods of

daily work there will be two vice directors. In this case each vice director will attend the one the

academic function and the other the administrative function.


It is the second authority in the institution. It presides over the Meeting of Directors of Area, the

Meeting of Professors of Courses and the COBE. It coordinates the Permanent Commissions and the

Technical Pedagogical Commission.


It is responsible for coordinating and supervising the accomplishment of plans and programs of

study.


52

Middle line.


a. It is responsible before:

The Director /Principal

b. Depend on him:

DOBE


Technical Coordinator

CEME's o CRA (Center of learning Resources)


UEP

General Inspector

c. Relations of coordination:

Director / Principal

Orientation Council and Students’ Well Being

Meeting of Directors of Area

Permanent Commissions

Meeting of Professors of Courses

d. Substitution:

In the absence of the Vice Director the member of the Directive Council substitute him

e. Main links:

Vice Director of other schools

Supervisors

Civil servants of the Direction of Education

Meeting of Professors of Courses

f. Received information:

Law of Education and Culture

Plans and Programs of study

Book of Records of Meeting of Directors of Area

Book of Records of the Technical Pedagogical Commission

53

Chronogram of activities by selection of work

Productive Didactic Plan

Records of evaluation

Sheets of Pedagogic tutoring

g. Main Emitted information:

Annual work report and evaluation

School statistics

Academic activities evaluation

Table of distribution of activities

Advance of the Institutional Plan

Quarterly report of the accomplishment of work,

RESPONSABILITY:

Of the organization of the activities of the institution

Of the development of the school day

Of the organization of the technical pedagogical meetings

AUTHORITY:

They have full authority to make accomplish the objectives of the institution, the same that will be

achieved by the students with the help and direct orientation of the teachers.

SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF THE VICE DIRECTOR / PRINCIPAL

Apart from the ones established in the Art. 98 of the Law of Education and Culture, the following:

To advise and help the Director in all aspects of school politics and administrative

organization.

To have the academic, social, cultural and sports programming accomplished

To preside over the permanent commissions and the ones that are created according to the

necessities

To know and resolve problems such as: plans and programs of courses, before the report of

the Technical-pedagogical Commission and other propositions.

To review and orient the planning of work of the teachers in an opportune way.

To supervise the maintenance of discipline of the students and to control the good working

of the dependences and the attendance of the teachers.

54

To take care of the activities that are developed in the workshops, laboratories, farms that

constitute practical applications and favorable to the development of the community.

To veil permanently the work and development of the Educative Production Unit.

NAME OF THE POSITION: GENERAL INSPECTOR

APPOINTMENT:

The General Inspector will be named by the Ministry of Education and Culture

LOCATION AND IMPORTANCE:

The General Inspector is the immediate collaborator of the Director, Vice Director and responsible

for the driving and discipline of the institution.

He will incline to form habits of good behavior through the conscious exercise of auto-discipline.


His main objective is to participate in the execution of the Institutional Plan; accomplish and make

accomplish the laws, regulations and other dispositions taken by the authorities of the facility.


Middle line.


These functions will be exercised by professionals in psychology in conformity with the Law of

Education and Culture.

a. He is responsible before:

Vice Director and/or Director

b. Depend on him:

The General Subinspector, the Inspectors of courses o cycles, teachers and students.

c. Relations of coordination:

Committee of Discipline

Council of Orientation and Students’ Well Being

Occasional Commissions

General Meeting of Directives and Professors.

d. Substitution;

55

In the absence of the General Inspectors, the General Subinspector or the Inspectors of courses or

cycle will substitute him.

e. Main links:

Director and/or Vice Director



Technical Coordinator.

Department of Orientation and Students’ Well Being.

Chief of Production.

f. Main Received Information:

Institutional Educative Plan

Programs of work of Area of Physical Education

Work timetable of the teachers

Records of marks

Report of students behavior

Activities Calendar

Internal Regulation

g. Main emitted information:

To motivate the staff that has problems of nonattendance

To control the attendance of the teachers

To control the attendance of administrative staff

To control the attendance and punctuality of the students

News report

Dispositions imparted by the superior authorities of the facility.

AUTHORITY:

Emanate from the Director through the Vice Director, maintain hierarchical authority and of prestige

to be a competent professional.

RESPONSABILITY:

To create and instrument mechanisms that allow him maintain the best interpersonal relationships

and a good environment between all the staff of the institution.

56

To motivate permanently the students, activities and values that are in his benefit of them during

the formative process.

To dialogue with the teachers, students and family parents about personal and institutional

problems with the aim to achieve adequate solutions.

SPECIFICATIONS OF THE WORK:

The facilities like institutions of middle education will have a General Inspectors, designated by the

Ministry.

SPECIFIC FUNCIONS

In addition to the ones established in the Art. 101 of the Regulation of the Law of Education and

Culture, the following:

To direct and make responsible of the driving of the unit with the aim of maintaining in order

and harmony the operation of the school, in the teaching, administrative, student fields; and of

services.

To accomplish the work inherent to his appointment and the others that are originated inside

the process of formative development.

To present monthly in writing the reports of attendance of the teachers, administrative and

service staff and of the one that would be required by the corresponding authorities.

To inform daily about the disciplinary matters and summit them for the approval to the Vice

Director.

To notify the parents or students representatives, the nonattendance or the lack of punctuality

to class and the academic development of the students.

To qualify the discipline of the students, subject to psycho-pedagogical criteria with participation

of his collaborators.

To confer certificates of behavior and attendance before authorization of the Director.

To make responsible of the courses personally or through the Courses Inspectors for a better

presentation of the school in parades, public, sports, social, cultural and scientific acts.

To get to the institution at least fifteen minutes before the beginning of classes and to leave

when the work period finishes.

7.3. MAMUAL OF FUNCTIONS OF THE OPERATIVE NUCLEUS

57

The Operative Nucleus is found in the inferior part of the structural diagram, it connects with the

Middle Line and Strategic Summit mainly and to a minor degree with the Techno structural staff of

support.

In this part of the organization they accomplish specific functions like the academic, research and

production ones with the desire to better the educative process of the institution. There we find:

TEACHERS

HEAD TEACHERS

EDUCATIVE UNIT OF PRODUCTION

STUDENTS

NAME OF THE POSITION: TEACHERS

APPOINTMENT: DIRECTOR / PRINCIPAL- DIRECTIVE COUNSIL


Operative Nucleus

CLASS OF PROFESSORS FOR THE APPOINTMENT:

The teachers of middle level are

a. TITULARS: The ones who have appointment for the institution in which they work;

b. SUBSTITUTS: Those who replace titular teachers who are found in service commission or enjoying

a license;

c. ACCIDENTALS: The teachers designated to cover a vacancy that presents itself in the course of the

school year until a titular teacher is named, It won´t be for more than a school year time;

d. TEAHCER BY CONTRACT: Those teachers who accomplish specific functions for a determined

time and are paid with funds of special wages activities of the institution.

CHARACTRISTICS OF THE WORK:

The teachers will work twenty two hours of weekly class, distributed in the five work days; of which

twenty will be dedicated to teaching and two to the didactic planning, sessions of Meeting of Area,

Meeting of Course, Permanent Commissions and thesis tutoring.

The teachers of Arts, technological, workshop practice and field practice activities will have twenty-

four hours of class; the orientators twenty-six of which they will dedicate six to teaching and twenty

to work in the Orientation Department. The teachers who exercise medical or dentist functions will

work a weekly time equivalent to twenty-two hours of class, of which they can dedicate until six

periods for teaching, conforming to the dispositions of the Law of Scale and Wages of the National

58

Magisterial. The teacher with functions of doctor will be responsible for the health education

programs. The teachers with functions of laboratory and social work will work the time

corresponding to thirty periods weekly class.

The Directive Council will consider, inside the distribution of work, the periods necessary for the

development of special activities such as: course guides, extra-scholar activities, student

recuperation activities and team sports preparation.

The social workers without teaching appointment, nurses, auxiliaries and workshop masters will

summit themselves to the dispositions of the Law of Civil Service and Administrative career.

SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF TEACHERS

In addition to the ones established in the Art. 139 of the Regulation of the Law of Education and

Culture, the following:

In the practice of teaching the teacher has to be in accordance with the mission, objective and

politics of the institution.

To maintain good relations with the directives, administrative staff, parents and students.

To consign in the report book the facts required in it immediately finished the class. In notable

cases notes of misbehavior, nonattendance or lack of care in the other duties of the students,

communicate to the Inspection.

To use the didactic resources in adequate form, in such a way that the direction of learning be

efficient.

To dictate conferences when the authorities dispose it.

To collaborate with the corps of Inspection in the maintenance of discipline inside and outside

the institution.

To put in practice the technical-pedagogical suggestions given by the authorities and organisms

of the institution.

He is authorized to demand the presence of the parent or representative if he believes

convenient to inform on discipline and approval of their representatives.

To suggest to the Directive Council stimuli for the students to get noticed in the didactic

activities programmed during the school year.

To give an example of good relations and cordial treatment between co-workers in front of the

students and parents

To update professional documents each year, or when the case would be required at the

secretary and at financing office

59

Presence of the teachers is compulsory during the school or civic acts that the school organizes

or during acts in which it participates.

To converge with the necessary elements and punctually to the Meetings of Superiors and

Professors and to the Meetings of Courses.

In necessary cases the school will require the presence of the teachers outside work time. When

they are named members of a commission the teachers have to serve with all effectiveness that

their capacity allows them, and to conclude, the mission commended will have to be presented

in a report.

The teachers who take training-students are assigned for the accomplishment of regulation or

auxiliary practices have the responsibility of orientating and evaluating them.

The teachers will have to be aware constantly by announcements or existing dispositions in the

school, because its omission will not be justified in any way.

The relations with other members of the administrative and teaching staff have to be based on

considerations and mutual respect.

Before receiving their corresponding duties in July in the Sierra and in January on the Coast, the

teachers have to present to the Collector and to the Secretary a form of discharge of the

inventory of the belongings that he has used during the year. Certification is conferred by the

person in charge of the library and hold.

When terminating the year he has to present a course plan and the micro-planning with the

respective readjustments and will have validity of two years to do the tutoring and respective

evaluation.

To communicate with the due anticipation any missed class, in case of not giving notice, the

missed class will not be justified.

The technical teachers will execute actions of diffusion and cultural extension in the community.

To receive the writing contributions in dates and times notified in common in accordance with

the students.

The new system of quarter and annual evaluation will be realized in accordance with the

regulations established for the effect of the institution.

The technical teachers, in addition to the academic work, will be in charge of other functions like

the execution of projects in relation with his area.

The permanence in the institution is compulsory during the whole work day.

The teachers have to impulse and propitiate permanent approaches with the community.

NOMBRE: HEAD TEACHER

60

POSITION:

The head teacher will be designated at the beginning of the school year by the Director of the

institution and will last in their functions until the beginning of the next school year.


Operational nucleus

SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF THE PROFESSOR GUIDE

According to the Art. 117 of the Law of Education and Culture, the following:

Preside compulsorily the Course Meetings;

To coordinate the work of the teachers and students of the course, to participate in the

Orientation, Inspection staff and Parents Councils, to reach the best results in the educative

process.

To plan, exercise and evaluate their work in collaboration with the Orientation Department and

Students’ Well Being and Inspection;

To cooperate with the development of the association activities of class and to stimulate

participation of the students in academic, sports and social activities

To collaborate with the solution of students’ problems.

To establish mechanisms of communication with the parents to treat matters in relation to

discipline and progress of the students.

To plan, organize and participate in the students’ trips, according to the norms and regulations

To accomplish the other functions that were noted by the authorities of the institution and the

ones determined in the internal regulation.

NAME OF THE POSITION: STUDENTS

DESIGNATION:

The students who have obtained registration attend the educative institution.


Operative nucleus

DUTIES:

According to the Art. 141 of the Regulation of the Law of Education and Culture, the following:

61

To participate punctually in the process of training.

To attend punctually to classes and to the different civil, cultural, sports and social acts organized

by the course or the institution.

To keep due consideration and respect to the superiors, teachers and classmates inside and

outside of the institution.

To participate, under the direction of designated teachers, in the students’ cultural, social,

sports, environmental and health education activities, using their aptitudes and special skills.

To take the evaluation tests honestly and subject to the time determined by the authorities;

To observe in all their acts, inside and outside the facility a correct behavior;

To take care of their good presentation in clothes and personal hygiene;

To contribute to the good conservation of the building, annexes, furniture, didactic material and

other belongings of the institution. To assume the responsibility for the deterioration of any

good occasioned by them and pay the cost of its reparation or reposition;

To stay in the institution during the whole day of work.

RIGHTS:

According to the Art. 142 of the Regulation of the Law of Education and Culture, the following:

To receive a complete and integral education, according to their aptitudes and aspiration;

To receive efficient attention of their teachers, on pedagogical and formation aspects.

To interact in an environment of comprehension, security and tranquility;

To be respected in their dignity and integrity;

To present their aspirations and claims to the teachers and authorities of the institution in a

respectful way and to receive from the latter the corresponding answer in an opportune way;

To be evaluated in a fair way, considering their work and efforts, and noted with the results in

regulatory terms;

To receive orientation and stimulus in their activities to overcome the problems that would

present themselves in their study or in their relationship with the other members of the

institution.

To participate with educative aims in clubs, cooperatives, and other forms of student association

under the guidance of the teachers and in conformity with the pertinent regulations;

To use the services and facilities that the institution counts with according to the internal

regulation.

To request tutoring from their teachers on academic aspects;

To participate, through their associations, in the plan and execution of the social and cultural

62

activities in which the institution intervenes.

To be treated without discrimination of any type;

To receive opportune attention to their requirements of certificates, marks, solicitudes and

other processes in relation to their student life; and

Not be sanctioned without proof of their responsibility or offer of the opportunity of being

listened to and to defend themselves.

NAME OF THE ORGANISM: MEETING OF THE DIRECTORS OF AREA

DESIGNATION: DIRECTIV COUNCIL


In the diagram, the Meeting of directors of area is a tutoring organism at the level of the vice

Director; its main objective is to promote a permanent process of the education, and a continuous

and integrated coordinated educational work.

OF ITS INTEGRATION:

The Meeting of Directors of Area is constituted of all the directors of area designated by the

Directive Council and by the Chiefs of Orientation Department. It will be presided over by the Vice

Director. It will meet ordinarily once a month, and extraordinarily when needed.


Techno structure.

SPECIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE MEETING OF DIRECTORS OF AREA

In addition to the ones described in the Art. 113 of the Regulation of Education,

To know the diagram of specific activities for each term, presented by the Vice Director to have

it accomplished in the respective areas.

To maintain permanent control over the techno-pedagogical development of the teachers of the

area.

To observe the teachers who do not complete with the techno-pedagogical dispositions before

63

informing the director of the respective area.

To establish the economical necessities in the educative productive field, realizing a plan of

goods necessary for the school year.

To promote the relations of technical cultural scientific interchange through the realization of

seminars, panels, symposium, courses, etc., as much for the teachers as for the students.

To study the indexes of suspension, repetition and desertions in each course and subject and to

adopt the appropriate pedagogical means.

To request to the Director and Directive Council stimuli for the teachers that would have been

noticed in any relevant fact beneficiary to the institution.

NAME OF THE ORGANISM: MEETING OF THE TEACHERS OF AREA

APPOINTMENT: LAW OF EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND REGULATIONS


Inside the diagram the Meeting of Professors of Area is a tutoring organism at the level of the Vice

Director and is in charge of the productive didactics planning of its specialty.

OF ITS INTEGRATION:

The Meeting of Professor of Area will be constituted of the teachers of the subjects corresponding to

an academic area. The Director of this meeting will be designated by the Directive Council. The

meeting will elect the secretary among its members.

LOCATION IN THIE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE:

Techno structure

SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF THE MEETING OF TEAHCHERS OF AREA

In addition to the ones mentioned in the Art. 115 of the Regulation of the Law of Education, the

following:

To meet once a month or when necessary to analyze the planning and execution of the technical

teaching,

To review the existing didactic material and make the same, corresponding to each area to

64

present it in the Meeting of Directors of Area and work on the consecution of the didactic

material and team of the different areas.

To realize control of advance of the educative units of production in the environment of its

competence.

To inform terminally the Vice Director about the application and accomplishment of the

planning.

NAME OF THE ORGANISM: MEETING OF COURSE TEACHERS

APPOINTMENT: LAW OF EDUCATION AND CULTURE AND REGULATION


Inside the diagram the Meeting of Course Professors is a tutoring organism at the level of the Vice

Director, responsible for the technical-pedagogical work, the discipline matters and behaviors of the

course in collaboration with the Techno-Pedagogical Commission.

OF ITS INTEGRATION:

The Meeting of Course Professors will be constituted of the professors that work in a course or

group, the inspector of the course and the representative of the Department of Orientation and

Student’s Well Being. The teacher designated by the meeting will act as secretary during one year.

It will meet ordinarily after the exams of each term and to decide the promotion of the students; and

extraordinarily when the Director, Vice Director or the guide teacher orders it.


Techno structure

SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS OF THE MEETING OF COURSE PROFESSORS

In addition to the ones mentioned in the Regulation of the Law of Education Art. 111, the following:

The Meeting of Course teachers will be presided over by the head teacher that will be

responsible of how it develops and the resolutions to it reaches.

The secretary is elected by the Meeting of the Course and will be directly responsible for the

elaboration of the act and the handing in of the same to the Director before 24 hours after the

end of the meeting.

65

To study and resolve all the cases of students that require special treatment, in sanctions as well

as in the stimulus and communicate it to the competent authorities.

To know and study the problems that the teachers are confronted to in the exercise of teaching,

suggest solutions that allow improving the relation teacher-student.

To mark the discipline of the students to which the General Inspector or the course will inform

about the discipline according to the life sheet of the student.

To know the claims about marks presented in writing from the students’ part, to resolve and

solution before correspondingly consulting the authorities if the case is necessary.

The resolutions of the Meeting of Professors of Course will enter in validity after having been

approved by the Director, who has a term of 18 hours to submit their criteria, if they don’t do it

during this time it is considered approved.

66

SETTING UP PROPOSAL ALTERNATIVES TO IMPROVE THE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE TEACHING.

67


Educational management is a field of study and practice concerned with the operation of

educational organizations. The present author has argued consistently that educational

management has to be centrally concerned with the purpose or aims of education.

These purposes or goals provide the crucial sense of direction to underpin the management of

educational institutions. Unless this link between purpose and management is clear and close, there

is a danger of managerialism . . . a stress on procedures at the expense of educational purpose and

values_ (Bush, 1999). “Management possesses no super-ordinate goals or values of its own. The

pursuit of efficiency may be the mission statement of management” but this is efficiency in the

achievement of objectives which others define.

The process of deciding on the aims of the organization is at the heart of educational management.

In some settings, aims are decided by the principal, often working in association with senior

colleagues and perhaps a small group of lay stakeholders. In many schools, however, goal setting is a

corporate activity undertaken by formal bodies or informal groups.

School aims are strongly influenced by pressures from the external environment. Many countries

have a national curriculum and these often leave little scope for schools to decide their own

educational aims.

Institutions may be left with the residual task of interpreting external imperatives rather than

determining aims on the basis of their own assessment of student need. The key issue here is the

extent to which school managers are able to modify government policy and develop alternative

approaches based on school-level values and vision.


The concept of management overlaps with two similar terms, leadership and administration.

“Management” is widely used in Britain, Europe, and Africa, for example, while “administration” is

preferred in the United States, Canada, and Australia. “Leadership” is of great contemporary interest

68

in most countries in the developed World. Dimmock (1999) differentiates these concepts whilst also

acknowledging that there are competing definitions:

School leaders [experience] tensions between competing elements of leadership, management and

administration. Irrespective of how these terms are defined, school leaders experience difficulty in

deciding the balance between higher order tasks designed to improve staff, student and school

performance (leadership), routine maintenance of present operations (management) and lower

order duties (administration).

Administration is not associated with “lower order duties” in the U.S. but may be seen as the

overarching term, which embraces both leadership and management. Cuban (1988) provides one of

the clearest distinctions between leadership and management.

By leadership, I mean influencing others actions in achieving desirable ends . . . . Managing is

maintaining efficiently and effectively current organisational arrangements . . . . I prize both

managing and leading and attach no special value to either since different settings and times call for

varied responses.

Leadership and management need to be given equal prominence if schools are to operate effectively

and achieve their objectives. “Leading and managing are distinct, but both are important . . . . The

challenge of modern organisations requires the objective perspective of the manager as well as the

flashes of vision and commitment wise leadership provides”.

The English National College for School Leadership

The contemporary emphasis on leadership rather than management is illustrated starkly by the

opening of the English National College for School Leadership (NCSL) in November 2000. (NCSL)

stress on leadership has led to a neglect of management. Visionary and inspirational leadership are

advocated but much less attention is given to the structures and processes required to implement

these ideas successfully.

8.1.1. The Significance of the Educational Context

The Significance of the Educational Context Educational management as a field of study and practice

was derived from management principles first applied to industry and commerce, mainly in the

United States. Theory development largely involved the application of industrial models to

69

educational settings. As the subject became established as an academic field in its own right, its

theorists and practitioners began to develop alternative models based on their observation of, and

experience in, schools and colleges. By the 21st century the main theories, featured in this chapter,

have either been developed in the educational context or have been adapted from industrial models

to meet the specific requirements of schools and colleges. Educational management has progressed

from being a new field dependent upon ideas developed in other settings to become an established

field with its own theories and research.


Leadership and management are often regarded as essentially practical activities. Practitioners and

policy-makers tend to be dismissive of theories and concepts for their alleged remoteness from the

“real” school situation. Willower (1980), for example, asserts that the application of theories by

practicing administrators [is] a difficult and problematic undertaking. Indeed, it is clear that theories

are simply not used very much in the realm of practice. This comment suggests that theory and

practice are regarded as separate aspects of educational leadership and management. Academics

develop and refine theory while managers engage in practice. In short, there is a theory/ practice

divide, or “gap” (English, 2002): The theory-practice gap stands as the Gordian Knot of educational

administration. Rather than be cut, it has become a permanent fixture of the landscape because it is

embedded in the way we construct theories for use . . . The theory-practice gap will be removed

when we construct different and better theories that predict the effects of practice.


If practitioners shun theory then they must rely on experience as a guide to action. In deciding on

their response to a problem they draw on a range of options suggested by previous experience with

that type of issue. However, “it is wishful thinking to assume that experience alone will teach leaders

everything they need to know”.

Teachers sometimes explain their decisions as just “common sense.” However, such apparently

pragmatic decisions are often based on implicit theories. When a teacher or a manager takes a

decision it reflects in part that person's view of the organization. Such views or preconceptions are

coloured by experience and by the attitudes engendered by that experience. These attitudes take on

the character of frames of reference or theories, which inevitably influence the decision-making

70

process.

Theory serves to provide a rationale for decision-making. Managerial activity is enhanced by an

explicit awareness of the theoretical framework underpinning practice in educational institutions.

There are three main arguments to support the view that managers have much to learn from an

appreciation of theory, providing that it is grounded firmly (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) in the realities of

practice:

Reliance on facts as the sole guide to action is unsatisfactory because all evidence requires

interpretation.

Theory provides “mental models” (Leithwood 1999) to help in understanding the nature and effects

of practice.

Dependence on personal experience in interpreting facts and making decisions is narrow because it

discards the knowledge of others. Familiarity with the arguments and insights of theorists enables

the practitioner to deploy a wide range of experience and understanding in resolving the problems

of today. An understanding of theory also helps reduces the likelihood of mistakes occurring while

experience is being acquired.

Experience may be particularly unhelpful as the sole guide to action when the practitioner begins to

operate in a different context. Organizational variables may mean that practice in one school or

college has little relevance in the new environment. A broader awareness of theory and practice may

be valuable as the manager attempts to interpret behaviour in the fresh situation.

Of course, theory is useful only so long as it has relevance to practice in education. Hoyle (1986)

distinguishes between theory-for-understanding and theory-for-practice. While both are potentially

valuable, the latter is more significant for managers in education. The relevance of theory should be

judged by the extent to which it informs managerial action and contributes to the resolution of

practical problems in schools and colleges.

8.3.1. The Nature of Theory

There is no single all-embracing theory of educational management. In part this reflects the

astonishing diversity of educational institutions, ranging from small rural elementary schools to very

71

large universities and colleges. It relates also to the varied nature of the problems encountered in

schools and colleges, which require different approaches and solutions. Above all, it reflects the

multifaceted nature of theory in education and the social sciences: “Students of educational

management who turn to organizational theory for guidance in their attempt to understand and

manage educational institutions will not find a single, universally applicable theory but a multiplicity

of theoretical approaches each jealously guarded by a particular epistemic community”.

The existence of several different perspectives creates what Bolman and Deal (1997) describe as

“conceptual pluralism: a jangling discord of multiple voices. “ Each theory has something to offer in

explaining behaviour and events in educational institutions. The perspectives favoured by managers,

explicitly or implicitly, inevitably influence or determine decision-making.

Griffiths (1997) provides strong arguments to underpin his advocacy of “theoretical pluralism.” The

basic idea is that all problems cannot be studied fruitfully using a single theory. Some problems are

large and complex and no single theory is capable of encompassing them, while others, although

seemingly simple and straightforward, can be better understood through the use of multiple

theories . . . particular theories are appropriate to certain problems, but not others”

8.3.2. The Characteristics of Theory

Most theories of educational leadership and management possess three major characteristics:

Theories tend to be normative in that they reflect beliefs about the nature of educational institutions

and the behaviour of individuals within them. Simkins (1999) stresses the importance of

distinguishing between descriptive and normative uses of theory. “This is a distinction which is often

not clearly made. The former are those which attempt to describe the nature of organisations and

how they work and, sometimes, to explain why they are as they are. The latter, in contrast, attempt

to prescribe how organisations should or might be managed to achieve particular outcomes more

effectively”

Theories tend to be selective or partial in that they emphasize certain aspects of the institution at

the expense of other elements. The espousal of one theoretical model leads to the neglect of other

approaches.

Schools and colleges are arguably too complex to be capable of analysis through a single dimension.

Theories of educational management are often based on, or supported by, observation of practice in

educational institutions. English (2002, p. 1) says that observation may be used in two ways. First,

72

observation may be followed by the development of concepts, which then become theoretical

frames. Such perspectives based on data from systematic observation are sometimes called

“grounded theory”. Because such approaches are derived from empirical inquiry in schools and

colleges, they are more likely to be perceived as relevant by practitioners. Secondly, researchers may

use a specific theoretical frame to select concepts to be tested through observation. The research is

then used to “prove” or “verify” the efficacy of the theory.

Models of Educational Management: An Introduction

Several writers have chosen to present theories in distinct groups or bundles but they differ in the

models chosen, the emphasis given to particular approaches and the terminology used to describe

them. Two of the best known frameworks are those by Bolman and Deal (1997) and Morgan (1997).

The main theories are classified into six major models of educational management. All these models

are given significant attention in the literature of educational management and have been subject to

a degree of empirical verification. Table 1 shows the six models and links them to parallel leadership

models. The links between management and leadership models are given extended treatment in

Bush (2003).

Management model Leadership model

Formal managerial

Collegial Participative

Political Transactional

subjective Post-modern

Ambiguity Contingency

Cultural Moral

8.4. FORMAL MODELS

Formal model is an umbrella term used to embrace a number of similar but not identical

approaches. The title “formal” is used because these theories emphasize the official and structural

elements of organizations:

Formal models assume that organisations are hierarchical systems in which managers use rational

means to pursue agreed goals. Heads possess authority legitimised by their formal positions within

the organization and are accountable to sponsoring bodies for the activities of their organisation.

73

This model has seven major features:

They tend to treat organizations as systems. A system comprises elements that have clear

organizational links with each other. Within schools, for example, departments and other sub -units

are systemically related to each other and to the institution itself.

Formal models give prominence to the official structure of the organization. Formal structures are

often represented by organization charts, which show the authorized pattern of relationships

between members of the institution.

In formal models the official structures of the organization tend to be hierarchical. Teachers are

responsible to department chairs who, in turn, are answerable to principals for the activities of their

departments. The hierarchy thus represents a means of control for leaders over their staff.

All formal approaches typify schools as goal-seeking organizations. The institution is thought to have

official purposes, which are accepted and pursued by members of the organization. Increasingly,

goals are set within a broader vision of a preferred future for the school.

Formal models assume that managerial decisions are made through a rational process. Typically, all

the options are considered and evaluated in terms of the goals of the organization. The most

suitable alternative is then selected to enable those objectives to be pursued.

Formal approaches present the authority of leaders as a product of their official positions within the

organization. Principals’ power is positional and is sustained only while they continue to hold their

posts.

In formal models there is an emphasis on the accountability of the organization to its sponsoring

body. Most schools remain responsible to the school district. In many centralised systems, school

principals are accountable to national or state governments. In decentralised systems, principals are

answerable to their governing boards.

These seven basic features are present to a greater or lesser degree in each of the individual

theories, which together comprise the formal models. These are:

structural models;

systems models;

bureaucratic models;

rational models;

hierarchical models.


74

The type of leadership most closely associated with formal models is “managerial.”

Managerial leadership assumes that the focus of leaders ought to be on functions, tasks and

behaviours and that if these functions are carried out competently the work of others in the

organisation will be facilitated.

Most approaches to managerial leadership also assume that the behaviour of organisational

members is largely rational. Authority and influence are allocated to formal positions in proportion

to the status of those positions in the organisational hierarchy.

Dressler's (2001) review of leadership in Charter schools in the United States shows the significance

of managerial leadership: “Traditionally, the principal’s role has been clearly focused on

management responsibilities. Managerial leadership is focused on managing existing activities

successfully rather than visioning a better future for the school.

8.5.1. The Limitations of Formal Models

The various formal models pervade much of the literature on educational management.They are

normative approaches in that they present ideas about how people in organizations ought to

behave. Levacic et al (1999) argue that these assumptions underpin the educational reforms of the

1990s, notably in England:

A major development in educational management in the last decade has been much greater

emphasis on defining effective leadership by individuals in management posts in terms of the

effectiveness of their organisation, which is increasingly judged in relation to measurable outcomes

for students . . . This is argued to require a rational-technicist approach to the structuring of

decision-making.

There are five specific weaknesses associated with formal models:

1. It may be unrealistic to characterize schools and colleges as goal-oriented organizations. It is

often difficult to ascertain the goals of educational institutions. Formal objectives may have little

operational relevance because they are often vague and general, because there may be many

different goals competing for resources, and because goals may emanate from individuals and

groups as well as from the leaders of the organisation.

Even where the purposes of schools and colleges have been clarified, there are further problems

in judging whether objectives have been achieved. Policy-makers and practitioners often rely on

75

examination performance to assess schools but this is only one dimension of the educational

process.

2. The portrayal of decision-making as a rational process is fraught with difficulties. The belief that

managerial action is preceded by a process of evaluation of alternatives and a considered choice

of the most appropriate option is rarely substantiated. Much human behaviour is irrational and

this inevitably influences the nature of decision-making in education, for example, asserts that

rational practice is the exception rather than the norm.

3. Formal models focus on the organization as an entity and ignore or underestimate the

contribution of individuals. They assume that people occupy preordained positions in the

structure and that their be-haviour reflects their organizational positions rather than their

individual qualities and experience. Green-field (1973) has been particularly critical of this view.

Samier (2002) adopts a similar approach, expressing concern “about the role technical rationality

plays in crippling the personality of the bureaucrat, reducing him [sic] to a cog in a machine”.

4. A central assumption of formal models is that power resides at the apex of the pyramid.

Principals possess authority by virtue of their positions as the appointed leaders of their

institutions. This focus on official authority leads to a view of institutional management which is

essentially top down. Policy is laid down by senior managers and implemented by staff lower

down the hierarchy. Their acceptance of managerial decisions is regarded as unproblematic.

Organizations with large numbers of professional staff tend to exhibit signs of tension between

the conflicting demands of professionalism and the hierarchy. Formal models assume that

leaders, because they are appointed on merit, have the competence to issue appropriate

instructions to subordinates. Professional organizations have a differerent ethos with expertise

distributed widely within the institution. This may come into conflict with professional authority.

5. Formal approaches are based on the implicit assumption that organizations are relatively stable.

Individuals may come and go but they slot into predetermined positions in a static structure.

“Organisations operating in simpler and more stable environments are likely to employ less

complex and more centralised structures, with authority, rules and policies as the primary

vehicles for coordinating the work”

Assumptions of stability are unrealistic in contemporary schools. March and Olsen (1976,

p.21) are right to claim that “Individuals find themselves in a more complex, less stable and less

76

understood world than that described by standard theories of organisational choice.”

8.5.2. Are Formal Models Still Valid?

These criticisms of formal models suggest that they have serious limitations. The dominance of the

hierarchy is compromised by the expertise possessed by professional staff. The supposed rationality

of the decision-making process requires modification to allow for the pace and complexity of

change. The concept of organizational goals is challenged by those who point to the existence of

multiple objectives in education and the possible conflict between goals held at individual,

departmental and institutional levels. “Rationalistic- bureaucratic notions . . . have largely proven to

be sterile and to have little application to administrative practice in the “real world”

Despite these limitations, it would be inappropriate to dismiss formal approaches as irrelevant to

schools and colleges. The other models discussed in this chapter were all developed as a reaction to

the perceived weaknesses of formal theories. However, these alternative perspectives have not

succeeded in dislodging the formal models, which remain valid as partial descriptions of organization

and management in education.

Owens and Shakeshaft (1992) refer to a reduction of confidence in bureaucratic models, and a

“paradigm shift” to a more sophisticated analysis, but formal models still have much to contribute to

our understanding of schools as organisations.


Collegial models include all those theories that emphasize that power and decision-making should

be shared among some or all members of the organization. Collegial models assume that

organizations determine policy and make decisions through a process of discussion leading to

consensus. Power is shared among some or all members of the organization who are thought to

have a shared understanding about the aims of the institution.

Brundrett (1998) says that “collegiality can broadly be defined as teachers conferring and

collaborating with other teachers.” Little (1990) explains that “the reason to pursue the study and

practice of collegiality is that, presumably, something is gained when teachers work together and

something is lost when they do not.”

Collegial models have the following major features:

1. They are strongly normative in orientation. “The advocacy of collegiality is made more on the

basis of prescription than on research-based studies of school practice”

2. Collegial models seem to be particularly appropriate for organizations such as schools and

77

colleges that have significant numbers of professional staff. Teachers have an authority of

expertise that contrasts with the positional authority associated with formal models. Teachers

require a measure of autonomy in the classroom but also need to collaborate to ensure a

coherent approach to teaching and learning. Collegial models assume that professionals also

have a right to share in the wider decision-making process. Shared decisions are likely to be

better informed and are also much more likely to be implemented effectively.

3. Collegial models assume a common set of values held by members of the organization. These

common values guide the managerial activities of the organization and are thought to lead to

shared educational objectives. The common values of professionals form part of the justification

for the optimistic assumption that it is always possible to reach agreement about goals and

policies. Brundrett (1998) goes further in referring to the importance of “shared vision” as a

basis for collegial decision-making.

4. The size of decision-making groups is an important element in collegial management. They have

to be sufficiently small to enable everyone to be heard. This may mean that collegiality works

better in elementary schools, or in sub-units, than at the institutional level in secondary schools.

Meetings of the whole staff may operate collegially in small schools but may be suitable only for

information exchange in larger institutions.

The collegial model deals with this problem of scale by building-in the assumption that teachers

have formal representation within the various decision-making bodies. The democratic element

of formal representation rests on the allegiance owed by participants to their constituencies.

5. Collegial models assume that decisions are reached by consensus. The belief that there are

common values and shared objectives leads to the view that it is both desirable and possible to

resolve problems by agreement. The decision-making process may be elongated by the search

for compromise but this is regarded as an acceptable price to pay to maintain the aura of shared

values and beliefs. The case for consensual decision-making rests in part on the ethical

dimension of collegiality. Imposing decisions on staff is considered morally repugnant, and

inconsistent with the notion of consent.

8.6.1. Participative Leadership.

Because policy is determined within a participative framework, the principal is expected to

adopt participative leadership strategies. Heroic models of leadership are inappropriate when

78

influence and power are widely distributed within the institution. “The collegial leader is at

most a “first among equals” in an academic organisation supposedly run by professional

experts . . . the collegial leader is not so much a star standing alone as the developer of

consensus among the professionals who must share the burden of the decision.”

While transformational leadership is consistent with the collegial model, in that it assumes that

leaders and staff have shared values and common interests, the leadership model most relevant

to collegiality is “participative leadership,” which “assumes that the decision-making processes

of the group ought to be the central focus of the group. This is a normative model, underpinned

by three criteria:

Participation will increase school effectiveness.

Participation is justified by democratic principles.

Leadership is potentially available to any legitimate stakeholder.

Sergiovanni (1984) claims that a participative approach succeeds in “bonding” staff together

and in easing the pressures on school principals. “The burdens of leadership will be less if

leadership functions and roles are shared and if the concept of leadership density were to

emerge as a viable replacement for principal leadership.”

8.6.2. Limitations of Collegial Models

Collegial models have been popular in the academic and official literature on educational

management since the 1980s.

However, their critics point to a number of limitations:

1. Collegial models are so strongly normative that they tend to obscure rather than portray

reality. Precepts about the most appropriate ways of managing educational institutions

mingle with descriptions of behaviour. While collegiality is increasingly advocated, the

evidence of its presence in schools and colleges tends to be sketchy and incomplete. “The

collegial literature often confuses descriptive and normative enterprises . . . The collegial

idea of round table decision making does not accurately reflect the actual processes in most

institutions”

2. Collegial approaches to decision-making tend to be slow and cumbersome. When policy

proposals require the approval of a series of committees, the process is often tortuous and

time consuming. Participants may have to endure many lengthy meetings before issues are

resolved. This requires patience and a considerable investment of time. Several English

79

primary school heads interviewed by Webb and Vulliamy (1996) refer to the time-consuming

nature of meetings where “the discussion phase seemed to go on and on” and “I felt we

weren't getting anywhere.”

3. A fundamental assumption of democratic models is that decisions are reached by consensus.

It is believed that the outcome of debate should be agreement based on the shared values

of participants. In practice, though, teachers have their own views and may also represent

constituencies within the school or college. Inevitably these sectional interests have a

significant influence on committees' processes. The participatory framework may become

the focal point for disagreement between factions.

4. Collegial models have to be evaluated in relation to the special features of educational

institutions.

The participative aspects of decision-making exist alongside the structural and bureaucratic

components of schools and colleges. Often there is tension between these rather different

modes of management. The participative element rests on the authority of expertise

possessed by professional staff but this rarely trumps the positional authority of official

leaders or the formal power of external bodies. Brundrett (1998) claims that “collegiality is

inevitably the handmaiden of an ever increasingly centralised bureaucracy.”

5. Collegial approaches to school and college decision-making may be difficult to sustain

because principals remain accountable to various external groups. They may experience

considerable difficulty in defending policies that have emerged from a collegial process but

do not enjoy their personal support. Brundrett (1998) is right to argue that “heads need to

be genuinely brave to lend power to a democratic forum which may make decisions with

which the headteacher may not themselves agree”.

6. The effectiveness of a collegial system depends in part on the attitudes of staff. If they

actively support participation then it may succeed. If they display apathy or hostility, it

seems certain to fail. Wallace (1989) argues that teachers may not welcome collegiality

because they are disinclined to accept any authority intermediate between themselves and

the principal.

7. Collegial processes in schools depend even more on the attitudes of principals than on the

support of teachers. Participative machinery can be established only with the support of the

principal, who has the legal authority to manage the school. Hoyle (1986) concludes that its

80

dependence on the principal's support limits the validity of the collegiality model.

8.6.2.1. Contrived Collegiality

Hargreaves (1994) makes a more fundamental criticism of collegiality, arguing that it is being

espoused or “contrived” by official groups in order to secure the implementation of national

or state policy. Contrived collegiality has the following features (Hargreaves, 1994):

Administratively regulated rather than spontaneous.

Compulsory rather than discretionary.

Geared to the implementation of the mandates of government or the principal.

Fixed in time and place.

Designed to have predictable outcomes.

Webb and Vulliamy (1996) argue that collegial frameworks may be used for essentially

political activity, the focus of the next section of this chapter (Webb & Vulliamy, 1996):

The current climate encourages headteachers to be powerful and, if necessary, manipulative

leaders in order to ensure that policies and practices agreed upon are ones that they can

wholeheartedly support and defend.

8.6.3. Is Collegiality an Unattainable Ideal?

Collegial models contribute several important concepts to the theory of educational

management. Participative approaches are a necessary antidote to the rigid hierarchical

assumptions of the formal models. However, collegial perspectives underestimate the

official authority of the principal and present bland assumptions of consensus, which often

cannot be substantiated. Little (1990) following substantial research in the United States,

concludes that collegiality "turns out to be rare” . Collegiality is an elusive ideal but a

measure of participation is essential if schools are to be harmonious and creative

organisations.


8.7.1. Central Features of Political Models

Political models embrace those theories that characterize decision-making as a bargaining

process. Analysis focuses on the distribution of power and influence in organizations and on

the bargaining and negotiation between interest groups. Conflict is regarded as endemic

within organizations and management is directed towards the regulation of political

81

behaviour (Bush, 2003):

Political models assume that in organizations policy and decisions emerge through a process

of negotiation and bargaining. Interest groups develop and form alliances in pursuit of

particular policy objectives. Conflict is viewed as a natural phenomenon and power accrues

to dominant coalitions rather than being the preserve of formal leaders.

Baldridge's (1971) research in universities in the U.S. led him to conclude that the political

model, rather than the formal or collegial perspectives, best captured the realities of life in

higher education.

Political models have the following major features:

1. They tend to focus on group activity rather than the institution as a whole. Ball (1987) refers

to “baronial politics” and discusses the nature of conflict between the leaders of subgroups.

He adds that conflict between “barons” is primarily about resources and power.

2. Political models are concerned with interests and interest groups. Individuals are thought to

have a variety of interests that they pursue within the organization. In talking about “

interests”, we are talking about pre-dispositions embracing goals, values, desires,

expectations, and other orientations and inclinations that lead a person to act in one way

rather than another (Morgan, 1997.

3. Political models stress the prevalence of conflict in organizations. Interest groups pursue

their independent objectives, which may contrast sharply with the aims of other subunits

within the institution and lead to conflict between them. “Conflict will always be present in

organisations . . . its source rests in some perceived or real divergence of interests”

4. Political models assume that the goals of organizations are unstable, ambiguous and

contested. Individuals, interest groups and coalitions have their own purposes and act

towards their achievement. Goals may be disputed and then become a significant element in

the conflict between groups (Bolman & Deal, 1991):

The political frame . . . insists that organisational goals are set through negotiations among

the members of coalitions. Different individuals and groups have different objectives and

resources, and each attempt to bargain with other members or coalitions to influence goals

and decision-making process.

5. As noted above, decisions within political arenas emerge after a complex process of

82

bargaining and negotiation. “Organisational goals and decisions emerge from ongoing

processes of bargaining, negotiation, and jockeying for position among members of different

coalitions”.

6. The concept of power is central to all political theories. The outcomes of the complex

decision-making process are likely to be determined according to the relative power of the

individuals and interest groups involved in the debate. “Power is the medium through which

conflicts of interest are ultimately resolved.

Power influences who gets what, when and how . . . the sources of power are rich and

varied”

8.7.2. Sources of Power in Education

Power may be regarded as the ability to determine the behaviour of others or to decide the

outcome of conflict. Where there is disagreement it is likely to be resolved according to the

relative resources of power available to the participants. There are many sources of power

but in broad terms a distinction can be made between authority and influence. Authority is

legitimate power, which is vested in leaders within formal organizations. Influence depends

on personal characteristics and expertise.

There are six significant forms of power relevant to schools and colleges:

1. Positional power. A major source of power in any organization is that accruing to individuals

who hold an official position in the institution. Handy says that positional power is “legal” o

“legitimate” power. In schools, the principal is regarded as the legitimate leader and

possesses legal authority.

2. Authority of expertise. In professional organizations there is a significant reservoir of power

available to those who possess appropriate expertise. Teachers, for example, have specialist

knowledge of aspects of the curriculum. “The expert . . . often carries an aura of authority

and power that can add considerable weight to a decision that rests in the balance”

3. Personal power. Individuals who are charismatic or possess verbal skills or certain other

characteristics may be able to exercise personal power. These personal skills are

independent of the power accruing to individuals by virtue of their position in the

organization.

83

4. Control of rewards. Power is likely to be possessed to a significant degree by individuals who

have control of rewards. In education, rewards may include promotion, good references,

and allocation to favoured classes or groups. Individuals who control or influence the

allocation of these benefits may be able to determine the behaviour of teachers who seek

one or more of the rewards.

5. Coercive power. The mirror image of the control of rewards may be coercive power. This

implies the ability to enforce compliance, backed by the threat of sanctions. “Coercive

power rests on the ability to constrain, to block, to interfere, or to punish”.

Control of resources. Control of the distribution of resources may be an important source of

power in educational institutions, particularly in self-managing schools. Decisions about the

allocation of resources are likely to be among the most significant aspects of the policy

process in such organisations.

Control of these resources may give power over those people who wish to acquire them.

Consideration of all these sources of power leads to the conclusion that principals possess

substantial resources of authority and influence. However, they do not have absolute power.

Other leaders and teachers also have power, arising principally from their personal qualities

and expertise. These other sources of power may act as a counter-balance to the principal's

positional authority and control of rewards.

8.7.3. Transactional Leadership

The leadership model most closely aligned with political models is that of transactional

leadership. “Transactional leadership is leadership in which relationships with teachers are

based upon an exchange for some valued resource. To the teacher, interaction between

administrators and teachers is usually episodic, shortlived and limited to the exchange

transaction”

This exchange process is an established political strategy. As we noted earlier, principals hold

power in the form of key rewards such as promotion and references. However, they require

the co-operation of staff to secure the effective management of the school. An exchange

may secure benefits for both parties to the arrangement. The major limitation of such a

process is that it does not engage staff beyond the immediate gains arising from the

transaction. Transactional leadership does not produce long-term commitment to the values

84

and vision promoted by school leaders.

8.7.4. The Limitations of Political Models

Political models are primarily descriptive and analytical. The focus on interests, conflict

between groups, and power provides a valid and persuasive interpretation of the decision-

making process in schools. However, these theories do have four major limitations:

1. Political models are immersed so strongly in the language of power, conflict and

manipulation that they neglect other standard aspects of organizations. There is little

recognition that most organizations operate for much of the time according to routine

bureaucratic procedures. The focus is heavily on policy formulation while the

implementation of policy receives little attention. The outcomes of bargaining and

negotiation are endorsed, or may falter, within the formal authority structure of the school

or college.

2. Political models stress the influence of interest groups on decision-making. The assumption

is that organizations are fragmented into groups, which pursue their own independent goals.

This aspect of political models may be inappropriate for elementary schools, which may not

have the apparatus for political activity.The institutional level may be the center of attention

for staff in these schools, invalidating the political model's emphasis on interest group

fragmentation.

3. In political models there is too much emphasis on conflict and a neglect of the possibility of

professional collaboration leading to agreed outcomes. The assumption that teachers are

engaged in a calculated pursuit of their own interests underestimates the capacity of

teachers to work in harmony with colleagues for the benefit of their pupils and students.

4. Political models are regarded primarily as descriptive or explanatory theories. Their

advocates claim that these approaches are realistic portrayals of the decision-making

process in schools and colleges. There is no suggestion that teachers should pursue their

own self-interest, simply an assessment, based on observation, that their behaviour is

consistent with apolitical perspective. Nevertheless, the less attractive aspects of political

models may make them unacceptable to many educationists for ethical reasons.

8.7.5. Are Political Models Valid?

85

Political models provide rich descriptions and persuasive analysis of events and behaviour in

schools and colleges. The explicit recognition of interests as prime motivators for action is

valid, as are the concepts of conflict and power. For many teachers and school leaders,

political models “their experience of day-to-day reality in schools. Lindle (1999), a school

administrator in the United States, argues that it is a pervasive feature of schools.


8.8.1. Central Features of Subjective Models

Subjective models focus on individuals within organizations rather than the total institution

or its subunits. These perspectives suggest that each person has a subjective and selective

perception of the organization.

Events and situations have different meanings for the various participants in institutions.

Organizations are portrayed as complex units, which reflect the numerous meanings and

perceptions of all the people within them. Organizations are social constructions in the sense

that they emerge from the interaction of their participants. They are manifestations of the

values and beliefs of individuals rather than the concrete realities presented in formal

models.

Subjective models assume that organizations are the creations of the people within them.

Participants are thought to interpret situations in different ways and these individual

perceptions are derived from their background and values. Organizations have different the

experience of those members.

Subjective models became prominent in educational management as a result of the work of

Thomas Greenfield in the 1970s and 1980s. Greenfield was concerned about several aspects

of systems theory, which he regarded as the dominant model of educational organizations.

He argues that systems theory is “bad theory” and criticizes its focus on the institution as a

concrete reality:

Most theories of organisation grossly simplify the nature of the reality with which they deal.

The drive to see the organisation as a single kind of entity with a life of its own apart from

the perceptions and beliefs of those involved in it blinds us to its complexity and the variety

of organisations people create around themselves.

Subjective models have the following major features:

86

1. They focus on the beliefs and perceptions of individual members of organizations rather

than the institutional level or interest groups. The focus on individuals rather than the

organization is a fundamental difference between subjective and formal models, and creates

what Hodgkinson (1993) regards as an unbridgeable divide. “A fact can never entail a value,

and an individual can never become a collective”

2. Subjective models are concerned with the meanings placed on events by people within

organizations.

The focus is on the individual interpretation of behaviour rather than the situations and

actions themselves. “Events and meanings are loosely coupled: the same events can have

very different meanings for different people because of differences in the schema that they

use to interpret their experience”

3. The different meanings placed on situations by the various participants are products of their

values, background and experience. So the interpretation of events depends on the beliefs

held by each member of the organization. Greenfield (1979) asserts that formal theories

make the mistake of treating the meanings of leaders as if they were the objective realities

of the organization. “Too frequently in the past, organisation and administrative theory

has . . . taken sides in the ideological battles of social process and presented as `theory', the

views of a dominating set of values, the views of rulers, elites, and their administrators.

4. Subjective models treat structure as a product of human interaction rather than something

that is fixed or predetermined. The organization charts, which are characteristic of formal

models, are regarded as fictions in that they cannot predict the behaviour of individuals.

Subjective approaches move the emphasis away from structure towards a consideration of

behaviour and process. Individual behaviour is thought to reflect the personal qualities and

aspirations of the participants rather than the formal roles they occupy. “Organisations exist

to serve human needs, rather than the reverse”.

5. Subjective approaches emphasize the significance of individual purposes and deny the

existence of organizational goals. Greenfield (1973) asks “What is an organisation that it can

have such a thing as a goal?” The view that organizations are simply the product of the

interaction of their members leads naturally to the assumption that objectives are

87

individual, not organizational .

8.8.2. Subjective Models and Qualitative Research

The theoretical dialectic between formal and subjective models is reflected in the debate

about positivism and interpretivism in educational research. Subjective models relate to a

mode of research that is predominantly interpretive or qualitative. This approach to enquiry

is based on the subjective experience of individuals.

The main aim is to seek understanding of the ways in which individuals create, modify and

interpret the social world which they inhabit.

The main features of interpretive, or qualitative, research echo those of the subjective

models:

1. They focus on the perceptions of individuals rather than the whole organisation. The

subject's individual perspective is central to qualitative research.

2. Interpretive research is concerned with the meanings, or interpretations, placed on events

by participants. “All human life is experienced and constructed from a subjective

perspective”.

3. Research findings are interpreted using “grounded” theory. “Theory is emergent and must

arise from particular situations; it should be “grounded” on data generated by the research

act. Theory should not proceed research but follow it”

8.8.3. Postmodern Leadership

Subjective theorists prefer to stress the personal qualities of individuals rather than their

official positions in the organization. The subjective view is that leadership is a product of

personal qualities and skills and not simply an automatic outcome of official authority.

The notion of post-modern leadership aligns closely with the principles of subjective models.

Keough and Tobin say that “current postmodern culture celebrates the multiplicity of

subjective truths as defined by experience and revels in the loss of absolute authority.” They

identify several key features of postmodernism:

Language does not reflect reality.

Reality does not exist; there are multiple realities.

Any situation is open to multiple interpretations.

88

Situations must be understood at local level with particular attention to diversity.

Sackney and Mitchell (2001) stress the centrality of individual interpretation of events while also

criticising visionary leadership. “Leaders must pay attention to the cultural and symbolic structure of

meaning construed by individuals and groups . . . postmodern theories of leadership take the focus

of vision and place it squarely on voice” Instead of a compelling vision articulated by leaders, there

are multiple voices, and diverse cultural meanings.

8.8.4. The Limitations of Subjective Models

Subjective models are prescriptive approaches in that they reflect beliefs about the nature of

organizations.

They can be regarded as “anti-theories” in that they emerged as a reaction to the perceived

limitations of he formal models. Although subjective models introduce several important

concepts into the theory of educational management, they have four significant weaknesses,

which serve to limit their validity:

1. Subjective models are strongly normative in that they reflect the attitudes and beliefs of

their supporters. Willower (1980) goes further to describe them as “ideological.”

[Phenomenological] perspectives feature major ideological components and their partisans

tend to be true believers when promulgating their positions rather than offering them for

critical examination and test”.

Subjective models comprise a series of principles rather than a coherent body of theory:

“Greenfield sets out to destroy the central principles of conventional theory but consistently

rejects the idea of proposing a precisely formulated alternative”

2. Subjective models seem to assume the existence of an organization within which individual

behaviour and interpretation occur but there is no clear indication of the nature of the

organization. Organizations are perceived to be nothing more than a product of the

meanings of their participants. In emphasizing the interpretations of individuals, subjective

theorists neglect the institutions within which individuals behave, interact and derive

meanings.

3. Subjective theorists imply that meanings are so individual that there may be as many

interpretations as people. In practice, though, these meanings tend to cluster into patterns,

89

which do enable participants and observers to make valid generalizations about

organizations. “By focussing exclusively on the individual” as a theoretical . . . entity,

[Greenfield] precludes analyses of collective enterprises. Social phenomena cannot be

reduced solely to `the individual”

4. Subjective models they provide few guidelines for managerial action. Leaders are expected

to acknowledge the individual meanings placed on events by members of organizations. This

stance is much less secure than the precepts of the formal model.

8.8.5. The Importance of the Individual

The subjective perspective offers some valuable insights, which act as a corrective to the

more rigid features of formal models. The focus on individual interpretations of events is a

useful antidote to the uniformity of systems and structural theories. Similarly, the emphasis

on individual aims, rather than organizational objectives, is an important contribution to our

understanding of schools and colleges.

Subjective models have close links with the emerging, but still weakly defined, notion of

post-modern leadership. Leaders need to attend to the multiple voices in their organisations

and to develop a “power to,” not a “power over,” model of leadership. However, as Sackney

and Mitchell (2001) note, “we do not see how postmodern leadership . . . can be undertaken

without the active engagement of the school principal”

In other words, the subjective approach works only if leaders wish it to work, a fragile basis

for any approach to educational leadership.

Greenfield's work has broadened our understanding of educational institutions and exposed

the weaknesses of the formal models. However, it is evident that subjective models have

supplemented, rather than supplanted, the formal theories Greenfield set out to attack.


8.9.1. Central Features of Ambiguity Models

Ambiguity models stress uncertainty and unpredictability in organizations. These theories

assume that organizational objectives are problematic and that institutions experience

difficulty in ordering their priorities.

Sub-units are portrayed as relatively autonomous groups, which are connected only loosely

with one another and with the institution itself. Decision-making occurs within formal and

90

informal settings where participation is fluid. Ambiguity is a prevalent feature of complex

organizations such as schools and is likely to be particularly acute during periods of rapid

change (Bush, 2003):

Ambiguity models assume that turbulence and unpredictability are dominant features of

organizations.

There is no clarity over the objectives of institutions and their processes are not properly

understood.

Participation in policy making is fluid as members opt in or out of decision opportunities.

Ambiguity models are associated with a group of theorists, mostly from the United States,

who developed their ideas in the 1970s. They were dissatisfied with the formal models,

which they regarded as inadequate for many organizations, particularly during phases of

instability. The most celebrated of the ambiguity perspectives is the “garbage can” model

developed by Cohen and March (1986). March (1982) points to the jumbled reality in certain

kinds of organization:

Theories of choice underestimate the confusion and complexity surrounding actual decision

making. Many things are happening at once; technologies are changing and poorly

understood; alliances, preferences, and perceptions are changing; problems, solutions,

opportunities, ideas, people, and outcomes are mixed together in a way that makes their

interpretation uncertain and their connections unclear.

The data supporting ambiguity models have been drawn largely from educational settings,

leading March and Olsen (1976) to assert that “ambiguity is a major feature of decision

making in most public and educational organizations”

Ambiguity models have the following major features:

1. There is a lack of clarity about the goals of the organization. Many institutions are thought to

have inconsistent and opaque objectives. It may be argued that aims become clear only

through the behaviour of members of the organization

The organization appears to operate on a variety of inconsistent and ill-defined preferences.

It can be described better as a loose collection of changing ideas than as a coherent

structure. It discovers preferences through action more often than it acts on the basis of

preferences.

Educational institutions are regarded as typical in having no clearly defined objectives.

Because teachers work independently for much of their time, they may experience little

difficulty in pursuing their own interests. As a result schools and colleges are thought to have

91

no coherent pattern of aims.

2. Ambiguity models assume that organizations have a problematic technology in that their

processes are not properly understood. In education it is not clear how students acquire

knowledge and skills so the processes of teaching are clouded with doubt and uncertainty.

Bell (1980) claims that ambiguity infuses the central functions of schools.

3. Ambiguity theorists argue that organizations are characterized by fragmentation. Schools are

divided into groups which have internal coherence based on common values and goals. Links

between the groups are more tenuous and unpredictable. Weick (1976) uses the term

“loose coupling” to describe relationships between sub-units. “Loose coupling . . . carries

connotations of impermanence, dissolvability, and tacitness all of which are potentially

crucial properties of the `glue” that holds organizations together.

Client-serving bodies, such as schools, fit the loose coupling metaphor much better than, say,

car assembly plants where operations are regimented and predictable. The degree of

integration required in education is markedly less than in many other settings, allowing

fragmentation to develop and persist.

4. Within ambiguity models organizational structure is regarded as problematic. Committees

and other formal bodies have rights and responsibilities, which overlap with each other and

with the authority assigned to individual managers. The effective power of each element

within the structure varies with the issue and according to the level of participation of

committee members.

5. Ambiguity models tend to be particularly appropriate for professional client-serving

organizations. The requirement that professionals make individual judgments, rather than

acting in accordance with managerial prescriptions, leads to the view that the larger schools

and colleges operate in a climate of ambiguity.

6. Ambiguity theorists emphasize that there is fluid participation in the management of

organizations.

“The participants in the organization vary among themselves in the amount of time and

effort they devote to the organization; individual participants vary from one time to another.

As a result standard theories of power and choice seem to be inadequate”

92

7. A further source of ambiguity is provided by the signals emanating from the organization's

environment.

In an era of rapid change, schools may experience difficulties in interpreting the various

messages being transmitted from the environment and in dealing with conflicting signals.

The uncertainty arising from the external context adds to the ambiguity of the decision-

making process within the institution.

8. Ambiguity theorists emphasize the prevalence of unplanned decisions. The lack of agreed

goals means that decisions have no clear focus. Problems, solutions and participants interact

and choices somehow emerge from the confusion.

The rational model is undermined by ambiguity, since it is so heavily dependent on the

availability of information about relationships between inputs and outputs..between means

and ends. If ambiguity prevails, then it is not possible for organizations to have clear aims

and objectives.

9. Ambiguity models stress the advantages of decentralization. Given the complexity and

unpredictability of organizations, it is thought that many decisions should be devolved to

subunits and individuals. Weick (1976) argues that devolution enables organizations to

survive while particular subunits are threatened (Bush, 2003):

If there is a breakdown in one portion of a loosely coupled system then this breakdown is

sealed of and does not affect other portions of the organization . . . A loosely coupled system

can isolate its trouble spots and prevent the trouble from spreading.

The major contribution of the ambiguity model is that it uncouples problems and choices.

The notion of decision-making as a rational process for finding solutions to problems is

supplanted by an uneasy mix of problems, solutions and participants from which decisions

may eventually emerge. “In the garbage can model, there is no clear distinction between

means and ends, no articulation of organizational goals, no evaluation of alternatives in

relation to organizational goals and no selection of the best means”

8.9.2. Contingent Leadership

In a climate of ambiguity, traditional notions of leadership require modification. The

contingent model provides an alternative approach, recognizing the diverse nature of school

contexts and the advantages of adapting leadership styles to the particular situation, rather

93

than adopting a “one size fits all” stance. Yukl (2002) claims that “the managerial job is too

complex and unpredictable to rely on a set of standardised responses to events. Effective

leaders are continuously reading the situation and evaluating how to adapt their behaviour

to it” Contingent leadership depends on managers “mastering a large repertoire of

leadership practices”

8.9.3. The Limitations of Ambiguity Models

Ambiguity models add some important dimensions to the theory of educational

management. The concept of problematic goals, unclear technology and fluid participation

are significant contributions to organizational analysis. Most schools and colleges possess

these features to a greater or lesser extent, so ambiguity models should be regarded

primarily as analytical or descriptive approaches rather than normative theories. The

ambiguity model appears to be increasingly plausible but it does have four significant

weaknesses:

1. It is difficult to reconcile ambiguity perspectives with the customary structures and

processes of schools and colleges. Participants may move in and out of decision-making

situations but the policy framework remains intact and has a continuing influence on the

outcome of discussions. Specific goals may be unclear but teachers usually understand

and accept the broad aims of education.

2. Ambiguity models exaggerate the degree of uncertainty in educational institutions.

Schools and colleges have a number of predictable features, which serve to clarify the

responsibilities of their members. Students and staff are expected to behave in

accordance with standard rules and procedures. The timetable regulates the location

and movement of all participants. There are usually clear plans to guide the classroom

activities of teachers and pupils. Staff are aware of the accountability patterns, with

teachers responsible ultimately to principals who, in turn, are answerable to local or

State government.

Educational institutions are rather more stable and predictable than the ambiguity

perspective suggests:

“The term organised anarchy may seem overly colourful, suggesting more confusion,

disarray, and conflict than is really present”

94

3. Ambiguity models are less appropriate for stable organizations or for any institutions

during periods of stability. The degree of predictability in schools depends on the nature

of relationships with the external environment. Where institutions are able to maintain

relatively impervious boundaries, they can exert strong control over their own

processes. Popular schools, for example, may be able to insulate their activities from

external pressures.

4. Ambiguity models offer little practical guidance to leaders in educational institutions.

While formal models emphasize the head's leading role in policy-making and collegial

models stress the importance of team-work, ambiguity models can offer nothing more

tangible than contingent leadership.

8.9.4. Ambiguity or Rationality?

Ambiguity models make a valuable contribution to the theory of educational management.

The emphasis on the unpredictability of organizations is a significant counter to the view

that problems can be solved through a rational process. The notion of leaders making a

considered choice from a range of alternatives depends crucially on their ability to predict

the consequences of a particular action. The edifice of the formal models is shaken by the

recognition that conditions in schools may be too uncertain to allow an informed choice

among alternatives.

In practice, however, educational institutions operate with a mix of rational and anarchic

processes. The more unpredictable the internal and external environment, the more

applicable is the ambiguity metaphor:

“Organizations . . . are probably more rational than they are adventitious and the quest for

rational procedures is not misplaced. However . . . rationalistic approaches will always be

blown of course by the contingent, the unexpected and the irrational Cultural Models

CULTURAL MODELS

8.9.5. What Do We Mean By Culture?

Cultural models emphasize the informal aspects of organizations rather then their official

elements. They focus on the values, beliefs and norms of individuals in the organization and

how these individual perceptions coalesce into shared organizational meanings. Cultural

95

models are manifested by symbols and rituals rather than through the formal structure of

the organization (Bush, 2003):

Cultural models assume that beliefs, values and ideology are at the heart of organizations.

Individuals hold certain idea and vale-preferences, which influence how they behave and

how they view the behaviour of other members. These norms become shared traditions,

which are communicated within the group and are reinforced by symbols and ritual.

Beare, Caldwell, and Millikan (1992) claim that culture serves to define the unique qualities

of individual organizations: “An increasing number of . . . writers . . . have adopted the term

"culture" to define that social and phenomenological uniqueness of a particular

organisational community . . . We have finally acknowledged publicly that uniqueness is a

virtue, that values are important and that they should be fostered” .

8.9.6. Societal Culture

Most of the literature on culture in education relates to organizational culture and that is

also the main focus of this section. However, there is also an emerging literature on the

broader theme of national or societal culture. Walker and Dimmock (2002) refer to issues of

context and stress the need to avoid “decontextualized paradigms” in researching and

analyzing educational systems and institutions.

Dimmock and Walker (2002) provide a helpful distinction between societal and

organizational culture:

Societal cultures differ mostly at the level of basic values, while organizational cultures differ

mostly at the level of more superficial practices, as reflected in the recognition of particular

symbols, heroes and rituals.

This allows organizational cultures to be deliberately managed and changed, whereas

societal or national cultures are more enduring and change only gradually over longer time

periods.

Societal culture is one important aspect of the context within which school leaders must

operate. They must also contend with organizational culture, which provides a more

immediate framework for leadership action.

8.9.6.1. Central Features of Organizational Culture

1. It focuses on the values and beliefs of members of organizations. “Shared values, shared

beliefs, shared meaning, shared understanding, and shared sensemaking are all different

96

ways of describing culture . . . These patterns of understanding also provide a basis for

making one's own behaviour sensible and meaningful”

2. The cultural model focuses on the notion of a single or dominant culture in organizations but

this does not necessarily mean that individual values are always in harmony with one

another. “There may be different and competing value systems that create a mosaic of

organizational realities rather than a uniform corporate culture” Large, multipurpose

organizations, in particular, are likely to have more than one culture.

3. Organizational culture emphasizes the development of shared norms and meanings. The

assumption is that interaction between members of the organization, or its subgroups,

eventually leads to behavioural norms that gradually become cultural features of the school

or college.

4. These group norms sometimes allow the development of a monoculture in a school with

meanings shared throughout the staff – “the way we do things around here.” We have

already noted, however, that there may be several subcultures based on the professional

and personal interests of different groups. These typically have internal coherence but

experience difficulty in relationships with other groups whose behavioural norms are

different.

5. Culture is typically expressed through rituals and ceremonies, which are used to support and

celebrate beliefs and norms. Schools are rich in such symbols as assemblies, prize-givings

and corporate worship. “Symbols are central to the process of constructing meaning.” 6.

Organizational culture assumes the existence of heroes and heroines who embody the

values and beliefs of the organization. These honoured members typify the behaviours

associated with the culture of the institution. Campbell-Evans stresses that heroes or

heroines are those whose achievements match the culture: “Choice and recognition of

heroes . . . occurs within the cultural boundaries identified through the value filter . . . The

accomplishments of those individuals who come to be regarded as heroes are compatible

with the cultural emphases”

8.9.7. Moral Leadership

Leaders have the main responsibility for generating and sustaining culture and

communicating core values and beliefs both within the organization and to external

stakeholders (Bush, 1998). Principals have their own values and beliefs arising from many

years of successful professional practice. They are also expected to embody the culture of

the school or college. Schein (1997) argues that cultures spring primarily from the beliefs,

97

values and assumptions of founders of organizations. However, it should be noted that

cultural change is difficult and problematic. Hargreaves (1999) claims that “most people’s

beliefs, attitudes and values are far more resistant to change than leaders typically allow”.

The leadership model most closely linked to organizational culture is that of moral

leadership. This model assumes that the critical focus of leadership ought to be on the

values, beliefs and ethics of leaders themselves. Authority and influence are to be derived

from defensible conceptions of what is right or good.

Sergiovanni (1984) says that “excellent schools have central zones composed of values and

beliefs that take on sacred or cultural characteristics”. The moral dimension of leadership is

based on “normative rationality; rationality based on what we believe and what we consider

to be good” Moral leadership is consistent with organizational culture in that it is based on

the values, beliefs and attitudes of principals and other educational leaders. It focuses on the

moral purpose of education and on the behaviours to be expected of leaders operating

within the moral domain. It also assumes that these values and beliefs coalesce into shared

norms and meanings that either shape or reinforce culture. The rituals and symbols

associated with moral leadership support these values and underpin school culture.

8.9.8. Limitations of Organizational Culture

Cultural models add several useful elements to the analysis of school and college leadership

and management.

The focus on the informal dimension is a valuable counter to the rigid and official

components of the formal models. By stressing the values and beliefs of participants,

cultural models reinforce the human aspects of management rather than their structural

elements. The emphasis on the symbols of the organization is also a valuable contribution to

management theory while the moral leadership model provides a useful way of

understanding what constitutes a values-based approach to leadership. However, cultural

models do have three significant weaknesses:

1. There may be ethical dilemmas because cultural leadership may be regarded as the

imposition of a culture by leaders on other members of the organization. The search for a

monoculture may mean subordinating the values and beliefs of some participants to those

of leaders or the dominant group. (Morgan, 1997) refers to “a process of ideological control”

and warns of the risk of manipulation.

98

2. The cultural model may be unduly mechanistic, assuming that leaders can determine the

culture of the organization (Morgan, 1997). While they have influence over the evolution of

culture by espousing desired values, they cannot ensure the emergence of a monoculture.

As we have seen, secondary schools and colleges may have several subcultures operating in

departments and other sections. This is not necessarily dysfunctional because successful

subunits are vital components of thriving institutions.

3. The cultural model's focus on symbols such as rituals and ceremonies may mean that other

elements of organizations are underestimated. The symbols may misrepresent the reality of

the school or college. Hoyle (1986) refers to “innovation without change”. Schools may go

through the appearance of change but the reality continues as before.

8.9.9. Values and Action

The cultural model is a valuable addition to our understanding of organizations. The

recognition that school and college development needs to be preceded by attitudinal change

is salutary, and consistent with the maxim that teachers must feel “ownership” of change if

it is to be implemented effectively. “Since organization ultimately resides in the heads of the

people involved, effective organizational change always implies cultural change” (Morgan,

1997).

Cultural models also provide a focus for organizational action, a dimension that is largely

absent from the subjective perspective. Leaders may adopt a moral approach and focus on

influencing values so that they become closer to, if not identical with, their own beliefs. In

this way, they hope to achieve widespread support for or “ownership” of new policies. By

working through this informal domain, rather than imposing change through positional

authority or political processes, heads and principals are more likely to gain support for

innovation. An appreciation of organizational culture is an important element in the

leadership and management of schools and colleges.

Conclusion

8.9.10. Comparing the Management Models

The six management models discussed in this chapter represent different ways of looking at

educational institutions. Each screen offers valuable insights into the nature of management

in education but none provides a complete picture. The six approaches are all valid analyses

99

but their relevance varies according to the context. Each event, situation or problem may be

understood by using one or more of these models but no organization can be explained by

using only a single approach. There is no single perspective capable of presenting a total

framework for our understanding of educational institutions. “The search for an all-

encompassing model is simplistic, for no one model can delineate the intricacies of decision

processes in complex organizations such as universities and colleges” (Baldridge 1978 ).

The formal models dominated the early stages of theory development in educational

management. Formal structure, rational decision-making and “top-down” leadership were

regarded as the central concepts of effective management and attention was given to

refining these processes to increase efficiency. Since the 1970s, however, there has been a

gradual realization that formal models are “at best partial and at worst grossly deficient”

(Chapman, 1993).

The other five models featured in this volume all developed in response to the perceived

weaknesses of what was then regarded as “conventional theory.” They have demonstrated

the limitations of the formal models and put in place alternative conceptualizations of school

management. While these more recent models are all valid, they are just as partial as the

dominant perspective their advocates seek to replace.

There is more theory and, by exploring different dimensions of management, its total

explanatory power is greater than that provided by any single model.

Collegial models are attractive because they advocate teacher participation in decision-

making. Many principals aspire to collegiality, a claim that rarely survives rigorous scrutiny.

The collegial framework all too often provides the setting for political activity or “top-down”

decision-making (Bush, 2003).

The cultural model's stress on values and beliefs, and the subjective theorists' emphasis on

the significance of individual meanings, also appear to be both plausible and ethical. In

practice, however, these may lead to manipulation as leaders seek to impose their own

values on schools and colleges.

The increasing complexity of the educational context may appear to lend support to the

100

ambiguity model with its emphasis on turbulence and anarchy. However, this approach

provides few guidelines for managerial action and leads to the view that “there has to be a

better way.”

The six models differ along crucial dimensions but taken together they do provide a

comprehensive picture of the nature of management in educational institutions. Figure 2

compares the main features of the six models.

Elements ofmanagement

Formal Collegial Political Subjective Ambiguity Cultural

Levels at which goals are determined

Institutional Institutional Sub.-unit Individual Unclear Institutionalor Sub.-unit

Process why goals are determined

Set by leaders

Agreement Conflict Problematic may be imposed by leaders

Unpredictable Based on collective value

Relationship between goals and decisions

Decisions based on goals

Decisions based on agreed goals

Decisions based on goals of dominant …

Individual behaviour based on personal goals

Decisions unrelated to goals

Decisions based on goals of organisation of its sub-units

Nature of decision process

Rational Collegial Political Personal Garbage can Rational within a framework of values

Nature of the structure

Objective reality Hierarchical

Objective realitylateral

Setting for subunits activity

Constructed through human interaction

Problematic Physical manifestation of culture

links with environments

May be closed or openPrincipal accountable

Accountability blurred by shared decision making

Unstable external bodies portrayed as interest groups

Source of individual meanings

Source of uncertainty

Sources of values and beliefs

Style of leadership

Principal establishes goals and initiates policy

Principal seeks to promote consensus

Principal is both participant and mediator

Problematic may be perceived as a form of control

May be tactical or unobtrusive

Symbolic

Related leadership model

Managerial Participative Transactional Postmodern Contingent Moral

8.9.11. Attempts at Synthesis

101

Each of the models discussed in this volume offers valid insights into the nature of leadership

and management in schools and colleges. Yet all the perspectives are limited in that they do

not give a complete picture of educational institutions. “Organizations are many things at

once! They are complex and multifaceted. They are paradoxical. That's why the challenges

facing management are so difficult. In any given situation there may be many different

tendencies and dimensions, all of which have an impact on effective management” (Morgan,

1997).

The inadequacies of each theory, taken singly, have led to a search for a comprehensive

model that integrates concepts to provide a coherent analytical framework. Chapman (1993)

stresses the need for leaders to develop this broader perspective in order to enhance

organizational effectiveness: “Visionary and creative leadership and effective management in

education require a deliberate and conscious attempt at integration, enmeshment and

coherence”.

Enderud (1980), and Davies and Morgan (1983), have developed integrative models

incorporating ambiguity, political, collegial and formal perspectives. These syntheses are

based on the assumption that policy formation proceeds through four distinct phases which

all require adequate time if the decision is to be successful. These authors assume an initial

period of high ambiguity as problems; solutions and participants interact at appropriate

choice opportunities. This anarchic phase serves to identify the issues and acts as a

preliminary sifting mechanism. If conducted properly it should lead to an initial coupling of

problems with potential solutions.

The output of the ambiguous period is regarded as the input to the political phase. This stage

is characterized by bargaining and negotiations and usually involves relatively few

participants in small, closed committees. The outcome is likely to be a broad measure of

agreement on possible solutions.

In the third collegial phase, the participants committed to the proposed solution attempt to

persuade less active members to accept the compromise reached during the political stage.

The solutions are tested against criteria of acceptability and feasibility and may result in

minor changes. Eventually this process should lead to agreed policy outcomes and a degree

of commitment to the decision.

102

The final phase is the formal or bureaucratic stage during which agreed policy may be

subject to modification in the light of administrative considerations. The outcome of this

period is a policy which is both legitimate and operationally satisfactory (Bush, 2003).

Theodossin (1983) links the subjective to the formal or systems model using an analytical

continuum. He argues that a systems perspective is the most appropriate way of explaining

national developments while individual and subunit activities may be understood best by

utilizing the individual meanings of participants:

Theodossin's analysis is interesting and plausible. It helps to delineate the contribution of the

formal and subjective models to educational management theory. In focusing on these two

perspectives, however, it necessarily ignores the contribution of other approaches, including

the cultural model, which has not been incorporated into any of the syntheses applied to

education.

The Enderud (1980), and Davies and Morgan (1983), models are valuable in suggesting a

plausible sequential link between four of the major theories. However, it is certainly possible

to postulate different sets of relationships between the models. For example, a collegial

approach may become political as participants engage in conflict instead of seeking to

achieve consensus. It is perhaps significant that there have been few attempts to integrate

the management models since the 1980s.

8.9.12. Using Theory to Improve Practice

The six models present different approaches to the management of education and the

syntheses indicate a few of the possible relationships between them. However, the ultimate

test of theory is whether it improves practice. There should be little doubt about the

potential for theory to inform practice. School managers generally engage in a process of

implicit theorising in deciding how to formulate policy or respond to events.

Facts cannot be left to speak for themselves. They require the explanatory framework of

theory in order to ascertain their real meaning.

The multiplicity of competing models means that no single theory is sufficient to guide

practice. Rather, managers need to develop “conceptual pluralism” (Bolman & Deal, 1984) to

be able to select the most appropriate approach to particular issues and avoid a

unidimensional stance: “Managers in all organizations can increase their effectiveness and

their freedom through the use of multiple vantage points. To be locked into a single path is

likely to produce error and self-imprisonment”.

103

Conceptual pluralism is similar to the notion of contingent leadership. Both recognize the

diverse nature of educational contexts and the advantages of adapting leadership styles to

the particular situation rather than adopting a “one size fits all” stance. Appreciation of the

various models is the starting point for effective action. It provides a “conceptual tool-kit” for

the manager to deploy as appropriate in addressing problems and developing strategy.

Morgan (1997) argues that organizational analysis based on these multiple perspectives

comprises two elements:

A diagnostic reading of the situation being investigated, using different metaphors to identify

or highlight key aspects of the situation.

A critical evaluation of the significance of the different interpretations resulting from the

diagnosis.

These skills are consistent with the concept of the “reflective practitioner” whose managerial

approach incorporates both good experience and a distillation of theoretical models based

on wide reading and discussion with both academics and fellow practitioners. This

combination of theory and practice enables the leader to acquire the overview required for

strategic management.

While it is widely recognized that appreciation of theory is likely to enhance practice, there

remain relatively few published accounts of how the various models have been tested in

school or college-based research. More empirical work is needed to enable judgments on

the validity of the models to be made with confidence. The objectives of such a research

programme would be to test the validity of the models presented in this volume and to

develop an overarching conceptual framework. It is a tough task but if awareness of theory

helps to improve practice, as we have sought to demonstrate, then more rigorous theory

should produce more effective practitioners and better schools.

10. INDEX

1. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL STRUCTURES: THE DYNAMICS OF ORGANIZATION IN

HIGHER EDUCATION

2. FROM INDIVIDUAL AND PROGRAMMATIC ACTION TO ORGANIZATIONAL

REALIGNMENT

104

3. ORIGINATOR OF THE ``HORIZONTAL ORGANIZATION'' JOINS DELOITTE & TOUCHE

4. THE HORIZONTAL ORGANIZATION: WHAT THE ORGANIZATION OF THE FUTURE

ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT DELIVERS VALUE TO CUSTOMERS. - REVIEW - BRIEF

ARTICLE - BOOK REVIEW

4.1. Creating the Horizontal Organization of the Future

5. MANAGING A HORIZONTAL REVOLUTION

5.1. What´s in it for Me?

5.2. What's missing in the quest for successful change?

5.3. Defining competencies

5.4. Lever teams up

5.5. The Value of Communication

5.6. The Camp David Process

5.7. Cross-Functional Communications

5.8. Hello, Left Hand?

5.9. Commitment to the Cause





6.10.1. SIZE

6.10.2. COMPLEXITY

6.10.3. FORMALIZATION

6.10.3.1.Horizontal Differentiation

6.3.2.2. Vertical Differentiation

6.3.2.3. Spatial Differentiation

6.3.3.2 Systems of operation of the organization

1. System of formal authority

2. System of Regulated Activity

105

3. System of informal communication

4. System of work group

5. System of Decisions Ad Hoc

6.10.4. MECHANISM OF COORDINATION




7 .3. MAMUAL OF FUNCTIONS OF THE OPERATIVE NUCLEUS



8.1.1. The Significance of the Educational Context



8.3.1. The Nature of Theory

8.3.2. The Characteristics of Theory

8.4. FORMAL MODELS


8.5.1. The Limitations of Formal Models

8.5.2. Are Formal Models Still Valid?


8.6.1. Participative Leadership.

8.6.2. Limitations of Collegial Models

8.6.2.1. Contrived Collegiality

8.6.3. Is Collegiality an Unattainable Ideal?


8.7.1. Central Features of Political Models

8.7.2. Sources of Power in Education

8.7.3. Transactional Leadership

8.7.4. The Limitations of Political Models

106

8.7.5. Are Political Models Valid?


8.8.1. Central Features of Subjective Models

8.8.2. Subjective Models and Qualitative Research

8.8.3. Postmodern Leadership

8.8.4. The Limitations of Subjective Models

8.8.5. The Importance of the Individual


8.9.1. Central Features of Ambiguity Models

8.9.2. Contingent Leadership

8.9.3. The Limitations of Ambiguity Models

8.9.4. Ambiguity or Rationality?

8.9.5. What Do We Mean By Culture?

8.9.6. Societal Culture

8.9.6.1. Central Features of Organizational Culture

8.9.7. Moral Leadership

8.9.8. Limitations of Organizational Culture

8.9.9. Values and Action

8.9.10. Comparing the Management Models

8.9.11. Attempts at Synthesis

8.9.12. Using Theory to Improve Practice

107

Modulo 8 Marzo Julio 2010

Documents

Transcript of Modulo 8 Marzo Julio 2010