How Much Influence Do (and Can) Educational Administrators Have on Classrooms

Abstract

In what ways do educational adminis trators influence classroom instruc tion and working relationships among teachers? Classrooms are the center arena for learning in school systems. Adminis trators, responsible for educational out comes, seek to influence classroom activi ties in a variety of ways. Superintendents (and school boards) formulate goals and district policies that transmit community expectations into classrooms. Principals observe, evaluate, and provide direct sup port and guidance to classroom teachers. Special administrators, indirectly and through the administrative hierarchy, pro vide direction and help to teachers in specialized areas: mathematics, reading, counseling, or learning disabilities. Underlying most of these administra tive activities is a core assumption that educational organizations are tightly knit and that activities of one level ? district, school, or classroom ? are linked with others. District policies are presumed to influence the activities of principals and teachers; a principal's instructional phi losophy is assumed to have an impact on how teachers teach within a specific school. As an additional assumption, the activities of various individuals within levels are also seen as connected. Hence the image of reading specialists collabo rating closely with classroom teachers, various district specialists coordinating their approaches to individual schools, and principals meeting frequently to discuss how their schools are instruction ally similar or different. The assumptions of organizational co hesion that have guided the actions of many school administrators (and educa tional researchers) may be misleading. A three-year study1 of the relationship be tween classroom instruction and organi zation and other structural features of schools and districts suggests a different view: 1. Methods of classroom instruction are virtually unaffected by organizational or administrative factors at the school or district levels. 2. The way teachers work together, as reflected by the presence or absence of teaching teams, is similarly unaffected by higher echelons. 3. The three levels of educational organizations ? district, school, and classroom ? operate independently, as do individuals within each level.2 Rather than being tightly knit and co hesive, educational organizations appear to consist of vertical and lateral *'seg ments, only loosely connected with one another. For administrators who wish to influence what happens behind the class room door, these findings raise questions about their ability to make a difference ? at least through traditional channels. For administrators working either to make classrooms more humane (individualized and fun) or more effective (basics and achievement scores); or for policy makers seeking to reform classroom instruction, the idea that the activities of various levels or participants are disconnected deserves serious attention. The purpose of this arti cle is to describe the research study, sum marize the main findings, and suggest some implications for administrative ac tion.3 The Research Study ? Thirty-four school districts in the San Francisco Bay area participated in the three-year study. The districts ranged in size ? from one to over 100 elementary schools; in wealth ? from very wealthy to very poor; and in location ? urban, suburban, and rural. Within the 34 districts, 103 elementary schools were selected randomly to partici pate in the study. The schools varied in size from those with teaching staffs of four to those with staffs of 30. Both superintendents and principals were interviewed (and completed short questionnaires) twice ? once in 1973 and again in 1975. In 18 of the elementary schools, teachers completed question naires in both 1973 and 1975. Administrators and teachers were asked to describe instructional and organiza tional patterns from their respective view points. Superintendents were asked about district organization ? including policies, roles and relationships, general instruc tional issues, the local community, and relationships between the community and the district. Principals were asked to characterize the way the school was or ganized, to describe typical instructional patterns, and to describe both the local community and school/community rela tionships. Teachers were asked to describe their classroom organization and their in structional approaches and techniques. By comparing perceptions of adminis trators and teachers from 1973 with those of 1975, it was possible to determine how district and school organization ? roles, policies, and administrative practices ? affected classroom organization and in struction over time (or vice versa).4 The study focused on two aspects of class rooms: individualized instruction and team teaching.5 The guiding theories as sumed that the two would be related, that both would be affected by organizational or administrative patterns at either the district or the school level, and that both individualized instruction and team teach