Organizational Routines as Coupling Mechanisms

The institutional environment of America’s schools has changed substantially as government regulation has focused increasingly on the core technical work of schools—instruction. The authors explore the school administrative response to this changing environment, describing how government regulation becomes embodied in the formal structure of four schools. Working at coupling government regulation with classroom teaching, school leaders transformed the formal structure, paying particular attention to designing new organizational routines. Analyzing the performance of these routines, the authors show how both government regulation and the technical core featured prominently, if selectively, and explore how routines enabled coupling by promoting standardization through alignment with common standards, by monitoring teacher and student performance, and by making aspects of instruction transparent.

[1]  John D. Hewitt,et al.  Ceremonial Justice: Crime and Punishment in a Loosely Coupled System , 1979 .

[2]  S. Stodolsky.  The Subject Matters: Classroom Activity in Math and Social Studies , 1988 .

[3]  James P. Spillane,et al.  High-Stakes Accountability in Urban Elementary Schools: Challenging or Reproducing Inequality?1 , 2004, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[4]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[5]  Linda R. Valli,et al.  The Changing Roles of Teachers in an Era of High-Stakes Accountability , 2007 .

[6]  Julie A. Marsh,et al.  Chapter 2 Accountability and teaching practices: School-level actions and teacher responses , 2007 .

[7]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[8]  C. Shakeshaft.  The Gender Gap in Research in Educational Administration , 1989 .

[9]  D. Koretz,et al.  Measuring up : what educational testing really tells us , 2008 .

[10]  Deryl Davis Fulmer.  High Stakes Education: Inequality, Globalization, and Urban School Reform , 2006 .

[11]  Araújo,et al.  An Evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[12]  James P. Spillane,et al.  Distributed leadership in practice , 2007 .

[13]  Peter M. Steiner,et al.  Comparison Groups in Short Interrupted Time-Series: An Illustration evaluating No Child Left Behind , 2009 .

[14]  Tim Hallett,et al.  How Institutions Form , 2006 .

[15]  E. O. Stene.  An Approach to a Science of Administration , 1940, American Political Science Review.

[16]  B. Smith,et al.  It's about Time: Opportunities To Learn in Chicago's Elementary Schools. Improving Chicago's Schools. , 1998 .

[17]  K. Weick.  The social psychology of organizing , 1969 .

[18]  J. Borus.  : The Dynamics of Bureaucracy: A Study of Interpersonal Relations in two Government Agencies , 1956 .

[19]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[20]  P. Lipman.  High Stakes Education: Inequality, Globalization, and Urban School Reform , 2003 .

[21]  E. Johnsen.  Richard M. Cyert & James G. March, A Behavioral Theory of The Firm, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1963, 332 s. , 1964 .

[22]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[23]  James P. Spillane,et al.  Constancy and Change in Work Practice in Schools: The Role of Organizational Routines , 2011 .

[24]  Kenneth K. Wong,et al.  Can Integrated Governance Reconstruct Teaching? Lessons Learned from Two Low-Performing Chicago High Schools , 1998 .

[25]  Bruce Fuller,et al.  Strong States, Weak Schools: The Benefits and Dilemmas of Centralized Accountability , 2008 .

[26]  M. Carreira.  Leaving Children Behind, How "Texas-Style" Accountability Fails Latino Youth , 2005 .

[27]  Lance D. Fusarelli.  Tightly coupled policy in loosely coupled systems: institutional capacity and organizational change , 2002 .

[28]  C. Coburn,et al.  Beyond Decoupling: Rethinking the Relationship Between the Institutional Environment and the Classroom , 2004 .

[29]  Leslie Santee Siskin.  Realms Of Knowledge: Academic Departments In Secondary Schools , 1994 .

[30]  N. Hoffart.  Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory , 2000 .

[31]  A. Pallas,et al.  Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization , 1995 .

[32]  Leslie Santee Siskin.  Departments as Different Worlds: Subject Subcultures in Secondary Schools , 1991 .

[33]  Robert Dreeben,et al.  Coupling and Control in Educational Organizations. , 1986 .

[34]  Helen F. Ladd,et al.  Holding Schools Accountable: Performance-Based Reform in Education. , 1996 .

[35]  Griffin,et al.  Eighty-Second Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education , 2005 .

[36]  T. Deal,et al.  How Much Influence Do (and Can) Educational Administrators Have on Classrooms , 1980 .

[37]  Wendy Nelson Espeland,et al.  The Discipline of Rankings: Tight Coupling and Organizational Change , 2009 .

[38]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[39]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[40]  James G. Cibulka.  Two Eras of Urban Schooling , 1997 .

[41]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[42]  Helen F. Ladd,et al.  School-Based Accountability in North Carolina: The Responses of School Principals , 2002 .

[43]  Bruce Fuller,et al.  Gauging Growth: How to Judge No Child Left Behind? , 2007 .

[44]  J. March,et al.  Organizational Learning , 2008 .

[45]  Marshall W. Meyer.  Environments and organizations , 1978 .

[46]  Jaekyung Lee,et al.  Tracking Achievement Gaps and Assessing the Impact of NCLB on the Gaps , 2006 .

[47]  Wayne Au,et al.  High-Stakes Testing and Curricular Control: A Qualitative Metasynthesis , 2007 .

[48]  James G. March,et al.  The School as a Formal Organization , 2013 .

[49]  Tim Hallett.  The Myth Incarnate: Recoupling Processes, Turmoil, and Inhabited Institutions in an Urban Elementary School , 2010 .

[50]  W. Firestone,et al.  Performance-Based Assessment and Instructional Change: The Effects of Testing in Maine and Maryland , 1998 .

[51]  P. Blau,et al.  The Dynamics of Bureaucracy: A Study of Interpersonal Relations in Two Government Agencies. , 1956 .

[52]  Rodney T. Ogawa,et al.  Professional-Patron Influence on Site-Based Governance Councils: A Confounding Case Study , 1988 .

[53]  Susan H. Fuhrman.  From the capitol to the classroom : standards-based reform in the states , 2001 .

[54]  Susan H. Fuhrman,et al.  Redesigning accountability systems for education , 2003 .

[55]  Gail L. Sunderman,et al.  Predictable Failure of Federal Sanctions-Driven Accountability for School Improvement—And Why We May Retain It Anyway , 2009 .

[56]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  Great Minds in Management: The Process of Theory Development , 2006 .

[57]  B. Malen.  Tightening the Grip? The Impact of State Activism on Local School Systems , 2003 .

[58]  Jennifer Booher-Jennings.  Rationing Education in an Era of Accountability , 2006 .

[59]  Patricia Burch.  The New Educational Privatization: Educational Contracting and High Stakes Accountability , 2006 .

[60]  J. March,et al.  Handbook of organizations , 1966 .

[61]  K. Weick,et al.  Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization , 1990 .

[62]  T. Dee,et al.  The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Student Achievement. NBER Working Paper No. 15531. , 2009 .

[63]  L. Argote.  Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge , 1999 .

[64]  K. Weick.  Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems , 1976, Gestión y Estrategia.

[65]  M. Feldman,et al.  Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change , 2003 .

[66]  Susan S. Stodolsky,et al.  The Impact of Subject Matter on Curricular Activity: An Analysis of Five Academic Subjects , 1995 .

[67]  J. Cullen,et al.  Tinkering Toward Accolades: School Gaming Under a Performance Accountability System , 2006 .

[68]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[69]  Susan H. Fuhrman,et al.  The State of Education Policy Research , 2007 .

[70]  Louise Stoll,et al.  Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas , 2007 .

[71]  William A. Firestone,et al.  The Study of Loose Coupling: Problems, Progress, and Prospects. , 1984 .

[72]  Philip Hallinger,et al.  Policy Analysis at the Local Level: A Framework for Expanded Investigation , 1984 .

[73]  Susan H. Fuhrman.  Designing Coherent Education Policy: Improving the System , 1993 .

[74]  B. Fuller.  Chapter 1 Overview: Liberal learning in centralizing states , 2008 .

[75]  Cecil G. Miskel,et al.  Theory and research in educational administration , 2002 .