INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE AND ORAGNIZATION IN SECONDARY SCHOOL
PROBLEMS:
The problems associated with school structure at the secondary level are in the unhappy position of being at the same time both compelling and elusive. Although there is an obvious urgency for developing a more comprehensive repertory of organizational responses to changing pupil intake and educational technologies, the organizational patterns of a school, though pervasive in their influence, are not as immediately apprehended as, say, its physical layout or its headmaster's personality. It is perhaps for the latter reason that organizational studies of the school have been dominated by administrative issues in which the leadership style of the headmaster or principal figures prominently, e.g. Hemphill and Coons (1950), Halpin and Croft (1963). These studies have tended to ignore the 'objective' elements of structure (such as the formal distribution of authority and amount of paperwork) and have depended on teachers' perceptions of their organizational environment, e.g. McKay (1964), Barakat (1966), McKague (1969)
SOLUTIONS:
Increased pressures on the budgets of governments at all levels, and the large role education plays in these budgets, has led to a reexamination of public spending on primary and secondary education in many countries.’ As with health care, increased emphasis has been placed on the control of rising education budgets. At the same time, there is increasing support in many countries for greater decentralization of the provision of education services. This decentralization is intended to increase competition, and so both improve the quality of education and control expenditures, as well as increase choice and local control.
A number of factors have prompted experimentation and innovation in the organization of the modern secondary school and in the operational relationship of persons involved in the life of the school. These factors include the problem of increased enrollment, the scarcity of qualified teachers in many subjects, the demand for improvements in curriculum and services, the pressure for economy and efficiency, the trend toward larger schools, the new relations between school and community, and the dissatisfaction with traditional organizational patterns. To achieve maximally the aims of the secondary school, greater attention must be given the question of how the secondary school should be organized.
RESULT:
The problems associated with school structure at the secondary level are in the unhappy position of being at the same time both compelling and elusive. Although there is an obvious urgency for developing a more comprehensive repertory of organizational responses to changing pupil intake and educational technologies, the organizational patterns of a school, though pervasive in their influence, are not as immediately apprehended as, say, its physical layout or its headmaster's personality. It is perhaps for the latter reason that organizational studies of the school have been dominated by administrative issues in which the leadership style of the headmaster or principal figures prominently, e.g. Hemphill and Coons (1950), Halpin and Croft (1963). These studies have tended to ignore the 'objective' elements of structure (such as the formal distribution of authority and amount of paperwork) and have depended on teachers' perceptions of their organizational environment, e.g. McKay (1964), Barakat (1966), McKague (1969)
SOLUTIONS:
Increased pressures on the budgets of governments at all levels, and the large role education plays in these budgets, has led to a reexamination of public spending on primary and secondary education in many countries.’ As with health care, increased emphasis has been placed on the control of rising education budgets. At the same time, there is increasing support in many countries for greater decentralization of the provision of education services. This decentralization is intended to increase competition, and so both improve the quality of education and control expenditures, as well as increase choice and local control.
A number of factors have prompted experimentation and innovation in the organization of the modern secondary school and in the operational relationship of persons involved in the life of the school. These factors include the problem of increased enrollment, the scarcity of qualified teachers in many subjects, the demand for improvements in curriculum and services, the pressure for economy and efficiency, the trend toward larger schools, the new relations between school and community, and the dissatisfaction with traditional organizational patterns. To achieve maximally the aims of the secondary school, greater attention must be given the question of how the secondary school should be organized.
RESULT:
The
structure of education should be a facilitating agent through which the
purposes of the school can be more effectively achieved. Consequently, students
of school administration agree that there is no sanctity either in any set of
mechanics or in any particular form of organization. Structure is a means and
not an end in realizing the objectives of the modern secondary school
However,
all too frequently organizational patterns and procedures have acquired a
degree of acceptance that approaches sanctity in many schools. There is no
valid reason for accepting the present type of organization merely because it
has proved reasonably successful in certain school districts. Best decisions
regarding organization can be expected to emerge only if efforts are focused
first on the educational needs of the students and on the kinds of experiences
the school wants to provide them. - The primary question today is, How do we organize secondary schools to educate young people for
self-fulfillment, for selfgrowt? It is vital that a functional and
dynamic concept of organization guide our planning and action as we seek to
improve our secondary schools, as we search for an answer to that question.
Comments
Post a Comment