| Summary: | Faculty of Humanities
School of Education
PHD
9605681F
njabulison@mstp.org.za === Since the 1990s, the corporate concept of learning organizations has been
promoted as a solution to problems caused by ever-changing educational
reforms and as a model for schools in the twenty-first century. Through an indepth
analysis of two South African secondary schools in Gauteng, this study
examines how organizational learning is nurtured and sustained, and considers
whether and how the concept of learning organizations is applicable in schools.
Three perspectives on learning organizations are considered: the normative,
developmental and capability perspectives. The investigative framework links
theories on organizational memory, organizational learning, organizational
change and complexity theory to provide insights into why some organizations
are ‘smarter’ than others and why educational reforms and innovations often fail.
The study used a multi-method approach, within a nested case design, at two
contrasting schools, each facing the challenges of a changing society and
education system, but under very different conditions: a state school in a poor
informal settlement and a wealthy faith-based, independent school. Research
participants included two principals, four heads of departments, ten teachers and
fourteen learners. Although learners were included, the study focuses primarily
on teachers and school leaders. At each school, key informants were selected
from among those acknowledged to have contributed significantly to the school,
either individually or as team members. In-depth interviews, as well as teachers’
narrative accounts of their own learning and unlearning, and a variety of schoolgenerated
documents provided the data set. Two approaches were used for the
stories of learning and unlearning – personal writing and elicitation through
narrative interviews.
Findings pertain to participating schools, but also provide a basis for more
general claims. In ethos, practices and leadership, both schools reflect a deep
commitment to improving learners’ lives. However, schools cannot operate as
learning organizations unless they can harness individual staff members’
aspirations as well. Internal and external circumstances impeded organizational
learning and reciprocal professional commitment among staff. These included:
personal problems; an individualistic school learning system with limited social
interaction; concomitant anxiety about collaborative professional learning; a value
system that favours competition; routine rather than reflective contexts for
professional learning and communication; and unacknowledged gender issues.
Another feature of a learning organization is a reflective openness to change. Yet
both schools strive for stability and conformity to rules, and neither has
developed tools for recognizing turning points, disjunctures and triggers for
change. Learning organizations emphasize collective learning; yet teachers and
department heads are ‘starving’ for personal recognition, especially in cases
where they have become multi-skilled in the course of career advancement. The
study also analyses complexities of school leadership and resulting trade-offs
that have to be made between satisfying the diverse needs of school members
and responding to external demands, especially at the level of policy. Overall, the
vi
study demonstrates that while the related concepts of learning organizations and
organizational learning are generative for understanding, structuring and leading
schools, the definitive purposes of schools and the external pressures one them
preclude a simple transfer from the corporate world.
|
|---|
