UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
UNIT: School of Education
AT GREENSBORO
DEPT: Educational Leadership and Cultural
Foundations
COURSE SYLLABUS
1.
Course Prefix and Number:
ELC 691
2.
Course Title: Principles
of Administration
3.
Credits: 3.0
4.
Course Prerequisites/Corequisites:
None
5.
For Whom Planned:
Required course in the Masters of School Administration program.
6. Instructor Information: Dr. Carolyn Riehl, cjriehl@uncg.edu, 334-3492
7.
Course Purpose/Catalog
Description: Purpose and scope of administration, schools of thought in
administration, processes of administration, and functions of administration.
8.
Teachers Academy Conceptual
Framework Mission Statement: The mission of professional education
at UNCG is to prepare and support the professional development of caring,
collaborative, and competent educators who work in diverse settings. This
mission is carried out in an environment that nurtures the active engagement
of all participants, values individual as well as cultural diversity and recognizes
the importance of reflection and integration of theory and practice. UNCG's
professional education programs are guided by shared commitments to: (a) equity
and excellence in teaching, research, and service; (b) professional integrity
and ethical deliberation in dealing with students and colleagues (university-based,
school-based, and community-based); (c) the construction of a professional
knowledge base through collaboration and collegiality; and (d) the dissemination
of professional knowledge, skills and dispositions through the preparation
and continuing professional development of teachers, principals and other
school personnel.
9.
Course Goals and/or Objectives/Student
Learning Outcomes: Instructor's statement of learning
outcomes OR goals/objectives from state or national professional standards
(please identify the organization, e.g. DPI, CEC, etc.)
Schools are one of the most common
and enduring types of formal organization in American public life. To work effectively in and with schools,
especially in the role of administrator, it is important to be able to see
deeply into how and why schools are organized as they are and how they could
be different. Thus, in this course,
we will think carefully and critically about schools as organizations. We will use key analytical and theoretical
perspectives to address practical issues and problems in the organization
and administration of public schooling.
We will focus especially closely on the experiences that persons from
diverse backgrounds have in schools and how schools could be organized more
effectively for these persons.
The primary goal for this course is to help students become more interested
in and adept at observing, interpreting, and managing organizational and administrative
problems in schools, in order to help schools meet the needs of the students
who learn in them, the teachers who work in them, and the broader society
that relies on them. By developing
fuller understandings of present conditions in schools, and by imagining possible
futures for schools, students will be invited to create their own approach
to administrative practice.
10.
Teaching Strategies:
lecture, class discussion, group work, conferences, student presentations,
electronic chat room, etc.
11. Evaluation Methods and Guidelines for Assignments:
Course grades will be determined as follows: organizational analysis
of a school case -- 50%; diversity case analysis – 30%; class participation
-- 20%. Your course grade, and the overall success
of the course, will depend upon a high level of group and individual participation
in the following activities.
Readings
and Related Class Activities
A significant component of our work
together is our collective encounter with the assigned readings. The readings are an important class resource,
and they deserve your careful attention. Students should be prepared to read the journal articles and
book chapters prior to the sessions for which they are listed, to develop
questions and commentary on the readings, to reflect on experiences in their
own backgrounds which relate to the readings, and to be actively engaged in
class discussions and activities pertaining to the readings.
Part of your grade will be based on your class participation. For this I am looking for steady attendance,
evidence that you have indeed read the assignments, and your contributions
to class discussions and other activities.
School
Organizational Analysis
In this course, you will have the opportunity to explore organizational
dynamics in schools through the study of cases.
We will have multiple opportunities in class to read brief case studies
of schools, to analyze them, and to consider implications for administrative
practice.
Each student will also write an original, extended organizational analysis
of a school case. For this assignment,
you will choose a school with which you are familiar and present a thorough
description and analysis of how it works as an organization and how it could
be improved. Although you should
use true information from a real school, the case write-up should be anonymous,
so that the identities of the school and its personnel cannot be determined
by a typical reader.
The case description and analysis should include at least the
following components (total length should be about 20-30 pages):
§
A very general introductory
description of the school – type of school, location, brief history,
number of students and staff, other descriptive information
§
A general description of
the school’s performance and a general assessment of the school’s
strengths and weaknesses (or successes and problems), using ABC data, school
attendance and dropout figures, your own impressions of the school, parent
or student comments, and so on
§
A description and analysis
of the goals and purposes of the school
§
A description and analysis
of the structural dimensions of the school
§
A description and analysis
of the human resource dimensions of the school
§
A description and analysis
of the political dimensions of the school
§
A description and analysis
of the cultural dimensions of the school
§
A description and analysis
of the school’s relationships to its external environment(s)
§
A summary discussion of suggestions
for improving the school, including an action plan that might guide the work
of the school’s administrator
The
case will be written in stages. You
will write each section after the topic has been discussed in class, and you
will have the opportunity to receive feedback on your drafts from the instructor
and/or other students.
It is important for you to remember that you should provide
evidence and justification for all of the comments and analyses you include
in your case. Available data
and written records from your school, interviews with school personnel, and
observations you make can be used as sources of information. It would be helpful if you included various
formal documents in your report, for example summary tables of ABC test scores
for the school. (These documents
will not count towards the suggested page length of the report, however.)
Impressionistic opinions generally do not offer sufficient warrant
for the depth of analysis you will need to provide in your case.
This assignment is intended to articulate with assignments
in other courses in the MSA core sequence, to help you integrate what you
learn in separate courses. If
you are enrolled in Dr. Williamson’s course on the principalship, you
may use the school culture analysis which he assigns as part of your case
analysis (provided, of course, that you are writing about the same school). If you enroll in ELC 694 (Organization
and Governance of Public Education) next term with Dr. Riehl, you will be
able to combine this term’s organizational analysis with the governance/policy
analysis for that course, to produce a comprehensive school case analysis.
Each
component of the organizational analysis, and the overall assignment, will
be evaluated according to the following criteria:
Evaluative Criteria for School Organizational
Analysis
|
Criterion |
High
Quality Work |
Low
Quality Work |
|
Choice
of case |
There
is much evidence that you have thought carefully about how this school
could help you examine and understand organizational dynamics |
It
appears that you are writing about this school merely because you have
some familiarity with it |
|
Range
and depth of observations made in description and analysis |
In
each section of the report, you have covered all of the most significant
aspects of the topic and have made many relevant and insightful observations
about the school |
You
have provided just one or two examples for each section of the case
analysis
|
|
Reliance
upon strong evidence and logical justification |
You
have used empirical data (reports, observations, interviews, etc.) as
a firm basis for your comments and analysis, and have built an argument
about the school using clear and reasonable logic. |
You
have provided scant evidence to justify your comments and analysis,
and have written only a sketchy, impressionistic account of the school. |
|
Connection
of your own reflections on the school with the concepts and issues talked
about in class |
You
use terms, concepts, and frameworks gleaned from class readings and
discussions, in ways that show you have thought deeply about them. There is evidence of an ongoing interaction
or conversation in your own mind between what you are doing in class
and what you are observing in your school. |
Your
use of terms, concepts, and frameworks from class is limited, perfunctory,
and not very thoughtful. |
|
Creativity
and integrity of the final analysis and suggestions for change
|
You
have gone beyond merely reporting on what you see and what you read;
you have truly integrated the two and added your own creative and thoughtful insights to your analysis |
Your
analysis and suggestions for change are limited in scope and not very
inventive or exciting. |
|
Quality
of the writing |
You
have made proper use of spelling and grammar, and proper use of the
APA format for reference citations.
Your case study is clearly organized and persuasive; you have
a logical flow of sentences and paragraphs, and evidence of attention
to the musicality of the language |
Your
paper has spelling or grammar errors, shows a lack of organization,
doesn’t flow smoothly from one idea or section to the next. You have not cited your references properly. |
|
Overall
quality of the case study
|
Your
case study gives a general impression that you know what you’re
talking about and have expressed it well |
Your
paper just doesn’t seem to shine. |
University of North Carolina at
Greensboro
College of Education
ELC 691: Principles of Administration
Professor Carolyn Riehl
Evaluation Form for School Organizational
Analysis
Student: _______________________________________
|
Criteria |
Poor |
|
Avg. |
|
Very Good |
|
Choice
of a rich and appropriate case
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Range
and depth of observations made in description and analysis
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4
|
5 |
|
Reliance
upon strong evidence and logical justification |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4
|
5 |
|
Connection
of your own reflections on the school with the concepts and issues talked
about in class
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Creativity
and integrity of the final analysis and suggestions for change
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4
|
5
|
|
Quality
of the writing
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Overall
grade for the case study |
F |
D
|
C |
B |
A |
Comments:
Diversity
Case Analysis
Each student will also prepare a shorter analysis (about 8-10 pages)
of their school that specifically addresses the issue of diversity. This analysis will focus on the experiences of a particular
individual or group within the school, how the school organization contributes
to those experiences, and how the organizational dynamics could be altered
so that the educational experiences of the individual or group might be improved.
For this assignment, you will choose a particular person or group to
study, preferably one who is different in important ways from you. (Ideally, the person or group will be
situated in the same school you used for your organizational case analysis.)
You will describe that person/group’s experiences in school,
drawing primarily on their own perspective but adding some of your own.
To do this, you will need to talk with them, their teachers, their
parents, and any others who can help you gain an “insider” perspective
on their experiences. It might
also be helpful for you to hang out with them for a while, to observe their
life in school and try to see it from their vantage point. You will also report on your own perspective,
based on your observations and impressions, and on any “objective”
information you may have such as test scores or grades.
In this section, you may include discussion of topics such as:
·
Who is this person (or group)?
What are they like? How
do they see themselves?
·
How does the school see this
student/group, and their particular qualities?
·
How is the student’s
home culture related to the school?
·
What learning resources does
the student have access to – special teachers, special curriculum, etc.?
What learning tasks does the student get to do?
·
How well is this student
doing in school? How aware is
the school of the student’s progress? How does the school assess this student’s
performance?
·
What is the quality of the
student’s relationships and experiences with teachers, other students
like and unlike herself, other school staff, etc.?
·
Does the student have friends?
·
Does the student participate
in extra-curricular activities?
·
How does the student experience
the authority system of the school; is the student frequently punished, etc.?
·
How does the student “fit
in” to the school, and why?
Then, with this information in mind, you will do an organizational
analysis of the school. How do
the school’s purposes and goals, structural features, human resource
dimension, political dynamics, and culture influence what happens to this
student? You will conclude with
suggestions for change. How could
the school organization be altered to help provide a more effective education
for the student?
It is very important that you write this diversity case analysis
anonymously, protecting the identity of the individual and/or group of students
you discuss.
This assignment will be graded according to criteria similar
to the larger case analysis, using the following rating sheet.
University of North Carolina at
Greensboro
College of Education
ELC 691: Principles of Administration
Professor Carolyn Riehl
Evaluation Form for Diversity Case
Analysis
Student:_______________________________________
|
Criteria |
Poor |
|
Avg. |
|
Very Good |
|
Choice
of an appropriate and significant group/person to study |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Range
and depth of observations about the student/group and their experiences
in the school |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4
|
5 |
|
Range
and depth of observations about the organizational dynamics of the school
and how they affect the student/group |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4
|
5 |
|
Reliance
upon strong evidence and logical justification |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4
|
5 |
|
Connection
of your own reflections on the school with the concepts and issues talked
about in class |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Creativity
and integrity of the final analysis and suggestions for change |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4
|
5
|
|
Quality
of the writing
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Overall
grade for the diversity case study |
F |
D
|
C |
B |
A |
Comments:
12.
Required Text(s)/Readings/References: Use full citations
There is a coursepack of readings, available at Copy Postal
One (801 W. Lee Street, in the mini-mall just east of Tate Street). Their telephone number is 273-0644.
There are also two required books, available at the University Bookstore
or from an online vendor:
Darling-Hammond, Linda. (1995). The
right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Earle, Jason, and Kruse, Sharon.
(1999). Organizational literacy for educators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers.
13.
Topical Outline:
This might also be your calendar. The
course outline should contain sufficient detail to permit assessment of agreement
between actual content and stated objectives and catalog description.
Weekly Schedule
Week 1 (August 22):
Course Introduction and Overview
Key Questions:
§
What are some important questions regarding
how schools are organized and administered and how they could be changed?
§
When you look at a school, what do you “see”?
§
How does skill in organizational analysis
fit into the North Carolina school administrator competencies?
Recommended
Readings:
Schlechty, Phillip
C., & Joslin, Anne Walker. (1984).
Images of schools. Teachers
College Record, 86(1),
156-170.
Morgan, Gareth.
(1997). Images of organization (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Grant, David,
& Oswick, Cliff. (Eds.) (1996). Metaphor and organizations.
Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Week 2 (August 29):
The School's Foundation: Purpose and Task
Key Questions:
What starting point would you use for designing and administering an
exemplary school? Why?
Can you articulate your foundational ideas and ideals to others?
What should the tasks of teaching and learning look like in public
schools?
If schools are intended to be places of education and socialization,
what does this imply about their core tasks?
Note: For
today's class, bring in your favorite resources and ideas about the core tasks
of schooling.
Readings:
Darling-Hammond,
Linda. (1995). The right to learn: A blueprint for
creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Chapter 4: "Teaching and Learning for Understanding," pp.
96-147.
Ohanian, Susan.
(2000). Goals 2000: What’s in a name?
Phi Delta Kappan, 81(5), 345-355.
Greene, Maxine.
(1995). Art and imagination: Reclaiming the sense
of possibility. Phi Delta
Kappan, 76(5), 378-382.
Recommended
Readings:
Greene, Maxine.
(1986). In search of a critical pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 56(4), 427-441.
Meier, Deborah.
(1995). The power of their ideas: Lessons from
a small school in Harlem. Boston: Beacon Press. Chapters 6-10.
Marx, Ronald
W., Blumenfeld, Phyllis C., Krajcik, Joseph S., & Soloway, Elliot. (1997). Enacting project-based science. Elementary School Journal, 97(4), 341-358.
Rowan, Brian.
(1990). Applying conceptions of teaching to organizational
reform. In Richard F. Elmore
and Associates. (1990).
Restructuring schools: The next generation of educational reform (pp. 31-58). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
May, 1999 issue
of The Elementary School Journal. Theme issue on non-subject-matter outcomes
of schooling.
Newmann, Fred
M., & Wehlage, Gary G. (1995).
Successful school restructuring: A report to the public and educators
by the Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Joseph Murphy.
(1991). Restructuring schools: Capturing and
assessing the phenomena. New York: Teachers College Press.
Starratt, Robert
J. (1994). Building an ethical school: A practical
response to the moral crisis in schools. Washington,
D.C.: Falmer Press.
Brown, Ann L.
(1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher, 23(8), 4-12.
John Seely Brown,
Allan Collins, and Paul Duguid. (1989).
Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18(1),
32-42.
Andrew C. Porter.
(1989). A curriculum out of balance: The case
of elementary school mathematics. Educational
Researcher, 18(5),
9-15.
Battistich, Victor,
Watson, Marilyn, Solomon, Daniel, Lewis, Catherine, & Schaps, Eric.
(1999). Beyond the three R's: A broader agenda
for school reform. Elementary
School Journal, 99(5),
415-432.
Elmore, Richard
F., and Associates. (1990). Restructuring schools: The next generation
of educational reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Week 3 (September 5): The School's Foundation: Purpose and
Task (cont’d.)
Key Questions:
§
How might schools be designed around the
needs of different students?
§
How might you incorporate more than academics
into a school’s purpose?
Readings:
Nieto, Sonia.
(1994). Lessons from students on creating a chance
to dream. Harvard Educational
Review, 64(4), 392-426.
(Reprinted in Working together toward reform.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review, 1996).
Smyth, John.
(2000). Reclaiming social capital through critical
teaching. Elementary School
Journal, 100(5), 491-511.
Recommended
Readings:
Starratt, Robert
J. (1991). Building an ethical school: A theory for
practice in educational leadership.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(2), 185-202.
Week 4 (September 12): Core Dimensions of Organizations;
The Metaphor of Bureaucracy; The School as a Bureaucratic Organization
Key Questions:
What images or metaphors best capture what American public schools
are like? How are these images helpful to school
administrators?
What is an organization?
What are the essential features of organizations?
What are the different kinds of organizations?
What are the typical features of a bureaucratic organization? Does this portrait fit schools?
How does a professional organization differ from other forms of bureaucracy?
Readings:
Earle, Jason,
and Kruse, Sharon. (1999). Organizational literacy for educators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers. Chapter 1 (Organizational
literacy and social patterns) and Chapter 2 (Bureaucratic social patterns
and schools).
Darling-Hammond,
Linda. (1995). The right to learn: A blueprint for
creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Chapters 1-3, focusing especially on Chapter 2: "The Limits of
the Education Bureaucracy," pp. 37-68.
Recommended
Readings:
Bolman, Lee G.,
& Deal, Terrence E. (1997).
Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Chapters 1-2.
Oakes, Jeannie.
(1992). Can tracking research inform practice?
Technical, normative, and political considerations. Educational Researcher, 21(4), 12-21.
House, Ernest
R. (1981). Three perspectives on innovation: Technological,
political, and
cultural. In Rolf Lehming and
Michael Kane (Eds.), Improving
schools: Using
what we know (pp. 17-41).
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Callahan, Raymond
E. (1962). Education and the cult of efficiency:
A study of the social forces that have shaped the administration of the public
schools. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Week 5 (September 19): The Metaphor of Community; The School
as a Communal Organization
Key questions:
What are the essential features of a communal organization and a community? Do these portraits fit schools?
How are the core dimensions of organizations reflected in communal
organizations?
How can the different models of organization co-exist in productive
tension?
Is it possible for schools to shift from one dominant organizational
model to another?
Readings:
Sergiovanni,
Thomas J. (1994). Organizations or communities? Changing the metaphor changes the theory.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(2), 214-226.
Sergiovanni,
Thomas J. (1994). Building community in schools. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Chapter 3.
Recommended
Readings:
Westheimer, Joel.
(1999). Communities and consequences: An inquiry
into ideology and practice in teachers' professional work. Educational Administration Quarterly,
35(1), 71-105.
Deborah Meier.
(1995). The power of their ideas: Lessons from
a small school in Harlem. Boston: Beacon Press. Chapters 1-5.
Westheimer, Joel.
(1998). Among school teachers: community, autonomy, and ideology
in teachers' work. New
York: Teachers College Press
February, 1999
issue of Educational Administration Quarterly. Theme
issue on school as community.
Furman, Gail
C. (1998). Postmodernism and community in schools:
Unraveling the paradox. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 34(3),
298-328.
Timperley, Helen
S., & Robinson, Viviane M. J. (1998).
Collegiality in schools: Its nature and implications for problem solving. Educational Administration Quarterly,
34(Supplement), 608-629.
Westheimer, Joel,
& Kahne, Joseph. (1993).
Building school communities: An experience-based model.
Phi Delta Kappan, 75,
324-328.
Stinchcombe,
Arthur L. (1965). Social structure and organizations.
In James G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations
(pp. 142-193). Chicago: Rand
McNally and Company.
Bryk, Anthony
S., & Driscoll, Mary E. (1988).
The high school as community: Contextual influences and consequences
for students and teachers. Madison,
WI: National Center on Effective Secondary Schools, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Sergiovanni,
Thomas J. (1994). Building community in schools. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Week 6 (September 26): Organizational Structure
Key Questions:
How can schools be designed to accomplish their tasks effectively?
How might administrators recognize and help solve structural-technical
problems in schools?
What patterns of school organization and administration have we inherited
from the past?
Can and should these patterns be changed?
Readings:
Darling-Hammond,
Linda. (1995). The right to learn: A blueprint for
creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Chapters 5 and 6.
Stevenson, Harold
W., & Stigler, James W. (1992).
The learning gap: Why our schools are failing and what we can learn
from Japanese and Chinese education. New York: Simon & Schuster. Chapters 7 and 9.
Hornbeck, David.
(2000). Service-learning and reform in the Philadelphia
Public Schools. Phi Delta
Kappan, 81(9), 665.
Weah, Wokie,
Simmons, Verna Cornelia, & Hall, McClellan. (2000). Service-learning
and multicultural/multiethnic perspectives: From diversity to equality.
Phi Delta Kappan, 81(9),
673-675.
Maguire, Sue.
(2000). A community school. Educational Leadership, 57(6), 18-21.
Klonsky, Susan,
& Klonsky, Michael. (1999). Countering anonymity through small schools.
Educational Leadership, 57(1),
38-41.
Little, Thomas
S., & Dacus, Nannette B. (1999).
Looping: Moving up with the class.
Educational Leadership, 57(1),
42-45.
Schnitzer, Denise
K., & Caprio, Michael J. (1999).
Academy rewards. Educational
Leadership, 57(1),
46-48.
Zahorik, John
A. (1999). Reducing class size leads to individualized
instruction. Educational Leadership,
57(1), 50-53.
Fashola, Okatokunbo
S., & Slavin, Robert E. (1998).
Schoolwide reform models: What works?
Phi Delta Kappan, 79(5),
370-379.
Recommended
Readings:
Sergiovanni,
Thomas J. (1994). Building community in schools. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Chapter on the German school.
Wood, George
H. (1992). Schools that work: America’s
most innovative public education programs. New York: Dutton.
Introduction
to the December, 1997 issue of Educational Administration Quarterly; theme issue on what will replace the comprehensive
high school.
Odden, Allan.
(2000). The costs of sustaining educational change
through comprehensive school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(6), 433-438.
Bolman, Lee G.,
& Deal, Terrence E.. (1997).
Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Chapters 3-5.
Berends, Mark,
& King, M. Bruce. (1994). A description of restructuring in nationally
nominated schools: Legacy of the iron cage? Educational Policy, 8(1), 28-50.
Weick, Karl E.
(1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled
systems. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 21, 1-19.
Rowan,
Brian, Raudenbush, Stephen W., & Cheong, Yuk Fai. (1993). Teaching
as
a nonroutine
task: Implications for the management of schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 29(4), 479-500.
Mason, DeWayne
A., & Stimson, Janet. (1996).
Combination and nongraded classes: Definitions and frequency in twelve
states. Elementary School Journal, 96(4), 439-452.
Siskin, Leslie
Santee, & Little, Judith Warren.
(Eds.). (1995). The subjects in question: Departmental
organization and the high school. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Siskin, Leslie
Santee. (1991). Departments as different worlds: Subject
subcultures in secondary schools. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 27(2), 134-160.
Monk, David H.
(1996). Resource allocation for education: An
evolving and promising base for policy-oriented research. Journal of School Leadership, 6, 216-242.
Stockard, Jean,
& Mayberry, Maralee. (1990). School environments and student achievement:
Toward a framework for understanding environmental influences.
Advances in Research and Theories of School Management and Educational
Policy, 1, 123-150.
Hedberg, Bo,
Nystrom, Paul, & Starbuck, William.
(1976). Camping on seesaws:
Prescriptions for a self-designing organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 41-65.
Week 7 (October 3): Human Resources in Organizations
Key Questions:
How can schools promote the meaningful participation of teachers, students,
and others who are part of the school?
What organizational issues are raised by efforts to increase teacher
professionalism in schools?
What can school principals, department chairs, and other educational
administrators do to promote teacher development and high-quality teaching?
Readings:
Darling-Hammond,
Linda. (1995). The right to learn: A blueprint for
creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Chapter 9.
Kruse, Sharon,
Louis, Karen Seashore, & Bryk, Anthony. (1994). Building
professional community in schools. Issues in Restructuring Schools, Issue
Report No. 6, pp. 3-6. Madison,
WI: University of Wisconsin, Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.
Lieberman, Ann.
(1995). Practices that support teacher development:
Transforming conceptions of professional learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 591-596.
Wineburg,
Sam, & Grossman, Pam. (1998).
Creating a community of learners among
high school teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(5), 350-353.
Bridges, Edwin
M. (1992). The incompetent teacher: Managerial
responses. Washington, DC: Falmer Press. Chapter 6.
Recommended
Readings:
Newmann, Fred
M., Wehlage, Gary G., and Lamborn, Susie D. (1992). The significance
and sources of student engagement. In Fred M. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement
in American secondary schools (pp. 11-39). New
York: Teachers College Press.
Bolman, Lee G.,
& Deal, Terrence E.. (1997).
Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Chapters 6-8.
Watson, Robert
S. (1994). The role of professional development in
restructuring schools. Journal
of Staff Development, 15(2),
24-27.
Louis, Karen
Seashore, Kruse, Sharon D., and Associates. (1995). Professionalism
and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Talbert, Joan
E. (1996). Primacy and promise of professional development
in the nation's education reform agenda: Sociological views. In Kathryn M. Borman, Peter W. Cookson,
Jr., Alan R. Sadovnik, and Joan Z. Spade (Eds.), Implementing educational
reform: Sociological perspectives on educational policy (pp. 283-311). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Wagner, Jon.
(1997). Discourse innovations in a restructuring
elementary school: Perspectives on linking research and practice. Elementary School Journal, 97(3), 271-292.
Little, Judith
Warren. (1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation:
Workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal,
19, 325-340.
Little, Judith
Warren. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and
initiative in teachers' professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509-536.
Richardson, Virginia.
(1990). Significant and worthwhile change in teaching
practice. Educational Researcher,
19(7), 10-18.
Richardson, Virginia.
(1992). The agenda-setting dilemma in a constructivist
staff development process. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 8(3), 287-300.
Hamilton, Mary
Lynn, & Richardson, Virginia. (1995).
Effects of the culture in two schools on the process and outcomes of
staff development. Elementary School Journal, 95(4), 367-85.
Popkewitz, Thomas
S., & Lind, K. (1989).
Teacher incentives as reforms: Teachers' work and the changing control
mechanism in education. Teachers College Record, 90, 575-594.
October 10: Fall Semester Break. No Class.
Week 8 (October 17): Politics in Organizations
Key Questions:
What micro political processes influence schools and their members?
What macro political processes influence schools as organizations?
How can educational administrators harness political resources in constructive
ways to improve schools?
Readings:
Earle, Jason,
and Kruse, Sharon. (1999). Organizational literacy for educators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers. Chapter 3: Political
social patterns and schools.
Wells, Amy Stuart,
and Serna, Irene. (1996).
The politics of culture: Understanding local political resistance to
detracking in racially mixed schools.
Harvard Educational Review, 66(1),
93-118. (Reprinted in Working together toward reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review,
1996).
Recommended
Readings:
Bolman, Lee G.,
& Deal, Terrence E.. (1997).
Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Chapters 9-11.
Marshall, Catherine.
(1991). The chasm between administrator and teacher
cultures: A micropolitical puzzle. In Joseph Blase (Ed.), The politics of life in schools:
Power, conflict, and cooperation (pp.
139-160). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
Ball, Stephen
J. (1987). The micro-politics of the school: Toward
a theory of school organization. New York: Methuen.
Blase, Joseph,
& Anderson, Gary L. (1995).
The micropolitics of educational leadership: From control to empowerment. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Dunlap, Diane
M., & Goldman, P. (1991). Rethinking power in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly,
27(1), 5-29.
Lieberman, Ann.
(1988). Teachers and principals: Turf, tension,
and new tasks. Phi Delta Kappan,
648-653.
Elmore, Richard
F. (1987). Reform and the culture of authority in
schools. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 23(4), 60-78.
Smylie, Mark
A., & Brownlee-Conyers, Jean. (1992).
Teacher leaders and their principals: Exploring the development of new working
relationships. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(2), 150-84.
Smylie, Mark
A. (1992). Teacher participation in school decision
making: Assessing willingness to participate. Educational Administration Quarterly,
14(1), 53-67.
Smylie, Mark
A., & Denny, Jack W. (1990). Teacher leadership: Tensions and ambiguities
in organizational perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26(3), 235-59.
Bacharach, Samuel
B., & Mundell, Bryan L. (1993).
Organizational politics in schools: Micro, macro, and logics of action. Educational Administration Quarterly,
29(4), 423-452.
Week 9 (October 24): Organizational Culture
Key Questions:
What is the internal culture of a school?
How does school culture affect school members?
How does school culture influence technical processes in schools?
How do schools relate to the wider social and cultural environment?
What can administrators do to improve school culture?
Readings:
Firestone, William
A., & Louis, Karen Seashore. (1999).
Schools as cultures. In
Joseph Murphy and Karen Seashore Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on
educational administration, 2nd ed.
(pp. 297-322). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Earle, Jason,
and Kruse, Sharon. (1999). Organizational literacy for educators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers. Chapter 4: Communal
social patterns and schools.
Recommended
Readings:
Maehr, Martin
L., Midgley, Carol, & Urdan, Timothy.
(1992). School leader
as motivator. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 28(3),
410-429.
Bolman, Lee G.
& Deal, Terrence E.. (1997).
Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Chapters 12-14.
Firestone, William
A., & Wilson, Bruce L. (1985).
Using bureaucratic and cultural linkages to improve instruction: The
principal's contribution. Educational Administration Quarterly, 21(2), 7-30.
Acker, Joan.
(1992). Gendering organizational theory. In A. Mills and P.
Tancred (Eds.),
Gendering organizational analysis
(pp. 248-260). Newbury Park,
CA: Sage Publications.
Week 10 (October 31): – Consolidating the Organizational
Analysis
·
Class will not meet
·
Use this time for independent work
Week 11 (November 7): Organizational Environments; Organizational
Sensemaking
Key questions:
How can schools be understood as "cognitive accomplishments"?
·
What are the key dimensions of schools’
relationships with their external environment?
How can school leaders influence the way persons make sense of school?
Readings:
Tyack,
David, & Tobin, William. (1994).
The "grammar" of schooling: Why has it been so hard to change? American Educational Research Journal,
31(3), 453-479.
Recommended
Readings:
Metz,
Mary Haywood. (1990). Real school: A universal drama amid disparate
experience. In D. E. Mitchell
and M. E. Goertz (Eds.), Education Politics for the New Century (pp. 75-91). London: Falmer Press.
Weiss,
Carol H. (1995). The four "I's" of school reform:
How interests, ideology, information, and institution affect teachers and
principals. Harvard Educational
Review, 65(4), 571-592.
Tyack,
David, & Cuban, Larry. (1995).
Tinkering toward utopia: A century of educational reform. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Weick, Karl E.
(1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Weick, Karl E.
(1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations:
The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 38, 628-652.
Weick, Karl E.
(1996). Fighting fires in educational administration.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(4),
565-578.
Meyer, John W.,
& Rowan, Brian. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal
structure as myth and ceremony. American
Journal of Sociology, 83,
340-363.
Meyer,
J. W., and B. Rowan. (1978). The structure of educational organizations.
In M. W. Meyer (Ed.), Environments and Organizations. San Francisco:
Jossey‑Bass, 1978.
Meyer, Marshall
W., & Zucker, Lynne G. (1989).
Permanently failing organizations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Week 12 (November 14): Creating Pluralistic and Inclusive
Schools: Introduction, Purposes and Goals
Key questions:
What are our
schools really doing to different students?
Readings:
Earle, Jason,
and Kruse, Sharon. (1999). Organizational literacy for educators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers. Chapter 5 (Patterns
of inequality: Earlier critical approaches to schooling) and Chapter 6 (Patterns
of inequality: More recent critical approaches to schooling).
Farrell, Edwin.
(1990). Hanging in and dropping out: Voices
of at-risk high school students. New York: Teachers College Press. Chapter 7: Boredom.
Friend, Richard
A. (1993). Choices, not closets: Heterosexism and
homophobia in schools. In Lois
Weis & Michele Fine (Eds.), Beyond silenced voices: Class, race, and
gender in United States schools
(pp. 209-235). Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Recommended
readings:
Earle, Jason,
and Kruse, Sharon. (1999). Organizational literacy for educators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers. Chapter 7 (Patterns
of inequality: Feminist approaches to schooling).
Week 13 (November 21): Creating Pluralistic and Inclusive Schools: Structure and Human Resources
Key questions:
How can schools
be organized differently to accommodate diverse students?
Readings:
Ladson-Billings,
Gloria. (1992). Reading between the lines and beyond the
pages: A culturally relevant approach to literacy teaching. Theory into Practice, 31(4), 312-320.
Knapp, Michael
S., & Associates. (1995). Teaching for meaning in high-poverty
classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press. Chapters 1 and 2.
Pinar, William
F. (1993). Notes on understanding curriculum as a
racial text. In Cameron McCarthy
and Warren Crichlow (Eds.), Race, identity, and representation in education (pp. 60-70). New York: Routledge.
Lawrence, Sandra
M., & Tatum, Beverly Daniel. (1997).
White educators as allies: Moving from awareness to action.
In Michelle Fine, Lois Weis, Linda C. Powell, and L. Mun Wong (Eds.),
Off white: Readings on race, power, and society (pp. 333-342).
Recommended
Readings:
Delpit, Lisa
D. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy
in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280-298.
Foster, Michele.
(1995). African American teachers and culturally
relevant pedagogy. In James A.
Banks and Cherry A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Multicultural
Education (pp. 570-581).
New York: Macmillan.
Louis, Karen
Seashore, & Smith, BetsAnn. (1992).
Cultivating teacher engagement: Breaking the iron law of social class. Chapter 5 (pp. 119-152) in Fred M. Newmann (Ed.), Student
Engagement and Achievement in American Secondary Schools. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Week 14 (November 28): Creating Pluralistic and Inclusive
Schools: Culture and Politics, Environment
Key questions:
·
What can principals do to promote pluralistic
and inclusive schooling?
Readings:
Riehl, C.
(2000). The principal's
role in creating inclusive schools for diverse students: A review of normative,
empirical, and critical literature on the practice of educational administration.
Review of Educational Research, 70(1).
Lipka, Jerry,
& McCarty, Teresa L. (1994).
Changing the culture of schooling:
Navajo and Yup'ik
cases. Anthropology and Education
Quarterly, 25(3),
266-284.
Kingston, Maureen
A. (1993). "Ante up": The essential ingredient
for social
change. Urban Education, 27(4), 413-429.
Week 15 (December 5): Wrap-Up and Course Evaluation
Recommended
Readings:
Greenfield, William
D., Jr. (1995). Toward a theory of school administration:
The centrality of leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(1), 61-85.
Brouillette, Liane. (1997). Revisiting an innovative high school: What happens when the
principal leaves? Educational
Administration Quarterly, 33(Supplement),
546-575.
14.
Other Information:
Any other items you normally include on your course syllabus such as Academic
Honor Code, Attendance Policy, Additional Requirements, etc.
Schedule for Written Assignments
Fall Term, 2000
|
Assignment |
Due
Date |
|
Organizational
Analysis of a School Case:
·
Introductory description; discussion of
school performance and strengths/weaknesses (draft)
·
Discussion of school goals and purposes
(draft)
·
Discussion of structural dimensions (draft)
·
Discussion of human resource dimensions
(draft)
·
Discussion of political dimensions (draft)
·
Discussion of cultural dimensions (draft)
·
Discussion of school-environment relationships
(draft)
·
Suggestions for improving school; action
plan (draft)
·
Final revision of entire case analysis
Diversity
case analysis:
·
Draft version
·
Final revision
|
·
September 12
·
September 19
·
October 3
·
October 17
·
October 24
·
November 7
·
November 14
·
November 21
·
December 5
·
November 7
·
December 5
|
15.
Recommended Text(s) and/or
Readings: A bibliography or list of references highlighting recent scholarship (pedagogy
and research) in the subject area
Another
book which I strongly recommend for you, but which is not required, is:
Bolman, Lee G. & Deal, Terrence
E.. (1997). Reframing organizations: Artistry,
choice, and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
16.
Alignment with State and
National Standards: Attach a matrix aligning the course goals/objectives with
INTASC and/or NBPTS, DPI guidelines or competencies, standards of your professional
organization (CEC, NCTM, NCTE, NCSS, NASD, etc.). See the CUI 553 matrix as an example.
If these were included as part of the course goals/objectives listed #9,
you do not have to repeat them in a matrix.