Notes on Meyer, J. et. al. (1978). The Structure of Educational Organizations

Prepared by Ariadna73 Page 1 of 2

Macrolevel interpretation of the school in modern society The organization of schooling: Another interpretation

The growth of corporate schooling - Relate national development to the organization of education - Modern schools produce education for society, not for individuals or families - Education is coordinated by shared social understandings that define the

roles, topics and contents

Major implications for educational organizations - Basic change in social structure - Society becomes schooled - Education becomes the central agency defining personnel for the modern sate

and economy

The organizational management of standardized classifications Rising of large-scale educational bureaucracies Educational organizations are created to produce schooling for corporate society Avoid illegitimacy and discreditation

The avoidance of evaluation and inspection Schools attend to classification, but not to instruction School administrators in the US do not have tenure and that helps desprofessionalizing the administration

Decoupling: Discrepancy between what schools do and how they evaluate the outcomes

What is Decoupling? Administrators need to be careful and avoid inspecting internal processes of the school because by decoupling formal structures from activities, uncertainty about the effectiveness of the ritual categories is reduced

- Avoiding inspection increases commitments of internal participants - A good deal of the value of education has little to do with the efficiency of

instructional activities Interaction is characterized by good faith and decoupling

- Decoupling protects the ritual classification scheme from uncertainties arising in the technical core

- Decoupling allows schools to adapt to inconsistent and conflicting institutionalized rules

Administrators want to maintain a "schooling rule" institutionalized in society - Local and pluralistic basis of control help this pattern - The logic of confidence or "Face of work"

• Avoidance is maximized when there is segmentation and limited interaction across units

• Discretion is maximized when control is minimized • Overlooking embarrassing incidents avoids labeling individuals

Overview of the argument Schooling becomes the dominant form of educational organization Educational organizations have been very successful and have satisfied everyone

Notes on Meyer, J. et. al. (1978). The Structure of Educational Organizations

Prepared by Ariadna73 Page 2 of 2

A great deal of adaptation and change occurs without disrupting actual activities

Implications for research and theory. Schools and other organizations are affected by their institutional environments

Propositions comparing societies The formal structure of educational organizations tends to correspond with environmental categories Educational content is organizationally most loosely coupled in societies with pluralistic systems of control The more education is important, the more loosely coupled its internal structure and the more control rests on professionalization and logics of confidence

Propositions comparing education with other institutions Instructional work is less closely inspected than similar work in not institutionalized organizations such as businesses and armies Educational structures are more responsive to pressures

Propositions comparing educational organizations The formal structure of educational organizations responds to environmental categories Educational organizations are internally coordinated by their categories Loosely coupled organizations respond more effectively to environmental pressures

Propositions comparing internal components of organization Feedback concerning the work and output of teachers tends to be eliminated Response to external pressures is programmatic or categorical change, minimizing the impact on structure Loose coupling permits more groups to perceive that they have power

Implications for organizational theory Organizations must have the confidence of their environments, not simply be in rational exchange with them

- Organizations must be legitimate and contain legitimate accounts or explanations for their internal order and external products

- The formal structure of an organization is a social myth - It is taken over from the accounts already built into the environment

Prevailing environmental theories and categories without altering activity Organizational structure has two faces: conforming to environment and classifying and controlling activity To save face, organizational structure must always be decoupled from its activity