Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems defined by practices rather than structure¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 1 study (1 theoretical), q1 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 2 claims rest on one study

Description¶

Following Weick (1976), the paper portrays educational organizations as "loosely coupled systems" in which groups interact "without compromising their identity." Loose coupling carries "connotations of impermanence, dissolvability, and tacitness," enhances capacity to innovate and adapt, and gives groups autonomy to deal with unexpected events; tightly coupled organizations are deterministic because interaction is predefined by structure.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Organizational analysis must give priority to people's practices and actions rather than structure-based discourses

Constraints¶

• Tight coupling implies rigidity, high dependence between groups, and low capacity for adaptation

Target Learners¶

• teachers and school groups participating in collaborative reform

Target Learning Objectives¶

• organizational learning and adaptation in schools

Claims¶

• Current PLC formulations trivialize teacher practice, which the authors argue severely limits the model's usefulness [+W]
• Teacher resistance as an exercise of teacher agency is a fundamental challenge to current PLC formulations [+W]

Related Theories¶

• Weick's enactment model: understanding the environment by actively transforming it through action

Examples¶

• Design professional learning communities around situated teacher agency and practice, not attitude change
• Professional Learning Communities

Key Sources¶

• Riveros, A., Newton, P., & Burgess, D. (2012). A Situated Account of Teacher Agency and Learning: Critical Reflections on Professional Learning Communities. Canadian Journal of Education, 35(1). https://journals.sfu.ca/cje/index.php/cje