Search results

In this paper, which was presented at the joint annual conferences of the Philosophy of Education Society of Australasia and the Group for Research in Educational Administration and Theory held at the University of New England, Armidale, in September 1986, the author examines, from the perspective of the new philosophy of science, some of the arguments of two important critics of traditional views of science of administration; notably the arguments of Richard Bates and Thomas Greenfield. The author concludes that the new emerging views of science can sustain a science of administration that escapes their major criticisms.

For nearly two decades, in the field of educational administration, Bates’s critical theory has been one of the most vigorous challenges to the value neutral approach of traditional theories. He has been a key voice claiming that such theories are ideological and mainly concerned with protecting vested interests and class divisions in society. Despite their theoretical endurance and practical implications, the main ideas advocated by Bates’s critical theory have not been examined seriously in the field. This paper analyses the main ideas of Bates’s critical social theory in three ways. First, the major intellectual influences that shaped Bates’s theory are examined. Second, those areas where Bates and Greenfield shared similar views yet took different approaches are considered. Finally, the main arguments that critics raised against Bates are examined and evaluated.

Suggests that it is reasonable to expect researchers in the field of educational administration to establish the relative value of the knowledge they propound. Draws on the branch of philosophy devoted to the study of the nature of knowledge; epistemology. Argues for new forms of awareness, criteria and processes to help with the growth of trustworthy knowledge. Concludes that there is a need for a post‐paradigm approach that celebrates coherence and multi‐perspectivism.

Traditional approaches to educational administration have generally reflected a managerial perspective which owed much to the principles of scientific management developed by F. W. Taylor. Technical concerns which have dwelt on “efficiency” and administration control have, however, ignored and masked the inequalities and ideologies around which organizations are structured. It is argued that critical theory may offer a means of exposing the forms of domination which repress human beings. For the German philosopher Jurgen Habermas critique is a powerful device to unmask unnecessary forms of domination which have been perpetuated by distorted communication. In contrast undistorted or ideal communication entails a pervasive democratic interaction which acknowledges that all participants have the capacity to take part in the making of meaningful decisions.

Among recent criticisms levelled against traditional administrative theory those raised by adherents to the Critical Theory perspective have gained considerable influence. This paper examines their claim that Habermasian Critical Theory in particular is in a better position to solve the theoretical and practical problems of educational administration. The focal points of discussion are Habermas's fundamental categories of “interests” and the “ideal speech situation” since their theoretical coherence is a minimum requirement for the theory's validity and practical applicability. It is concluded that Critical Theory, while being the most ambitious attempt to date to provide a new, post‐positivist framework for social and administrative studies, has insufficient epistemological resources to justify its claims. As a result, the theory is driven to rational a prioris which deprive it of empirical content and relevance. Since Critical Theory claims to have reunited theory with practice, lack of empirical content would seem to disqualify the claim and render questionable the theory's value for educational administration.

The concept of climate is a recurring theme of the three sections of this article. The inadequacy of climate as a metaphor is addressed in the first section. Teachers do, however, use the term “climate” in an explanatory and predictive way. When evaluators and researchers work with teachers they have a particular responsibility both in provision of data and in the use of concepts which frame the data. These and related issues form the second section. The third and major section portrays a model of culture which acknowledges overt and covert meanings as well as the interaction of the different levels of the model, namely beliefs, values, norms and standards, and finally behaviour. The discussion develops a linkage from the culture of the organisation to wider societal influences. School climate is placed as the most superficial level of the interactive model of school culture.

A survey of 166 women exiting prison in a large mid‐western U.S. state examined the extent to which demographics, family history and relationships, institutional experiences, offence history, and physical and emotional needs were associated with re‐arrest one year after release. Analyses revealed that three independent variables and two interactional effects accounted for 40% of the variability in re‐arrest: employment in the year prior to incarceration, history of psychiatric hospitalization, participation in prison industries programs, and the interaction of prior psychiatric hospitalization with in‐prison substance abuse programming and with employment history. Interviews with 55 women over five points in time revealed important interpersonal and environmental elements for 20 women six months out who had not been arrested. Implications for program and policy development are discussed.

Using material from contemporary New Zealand experience as a case study, this paper presents a functional analysis of the organizational problems facing secondary schools, develops a typology of dilemmas posed as a result of these problems, and discusses the manner in which various educational agencies, including the central Department, Teachers' Organizations and the recent Educational Development Conference have attempted to persuade schools to resolve these dilemmas in particular ways. Comments are also made on the internal characteristics of schools which may influence their resolution of these dilemmas in different ways thus leading to a growing heterogeneity within the state educational system.

Research in educational administration is in need of a general theoretical perspective which could be used to guide the development of an empirical base for a comprehensive, ecologically valid, theory of administration. This paper presents a description of Roger Barker's Behavior Setting Theory and attempts to argue its utility as a broad‐based conceptual framework for research on educational administration.

An attempt is made to redefine educational leadership and to create a new “practical theory” of educative leadership which is of relevance to all concerned with the management of education. The approach, techniques and early outcomes of a research project in Australia designed in 1985 and mounted in 1986 to create the new “theory” are reported.