Theories and Approaches to Learning

Theories and Approaches to Learning Write about helpful and unhelpful approaches to learning during your own education. What was positive about those approaches? Did they reflect or express any particular theories of learning? Life is a learning experience. When I was a young girl I was so confident and positive about what I wanted. Maths and Science were my favourite subjects but I was not given freedom to learn as I wanted to learn these subjects. I realized this after I gained a very good experience in teaching primary school children. Student motivation is rooted in students subjective experiences, especially those connected to their willingness to engage in lessons and learning activities and their reasons for doing so. (Brophy, 2004, p. 4) According to Brophy, I must say learning is, interesting fun and exciting when the curriculum is well matched to students interests and abilities and the teacher emphasizes hands-on activities in order to keep the students busy and engaged. When the teacher teaches the right things the right way, motivation takes place by itself. If students are not enjoying learning, something is wrong with the curriculum and teachers instruction. At times I felt my school life was boring and frustrating because I hated all subjects except Maths and Science. I had to sit and listen to longtime instructions and copy the notes from the chalk board. I managed myself for learning because I had to show the Progress Report with good grades to my dad. Ê »Science is like everything, I guess and I think everything has a science to it. [When] baking cookies you have to add the right amount of eggs and milk and stuff like that (Kaufman, Moss, Osborn, 2003, p. 48) As I agree with Kaufman, Moss Osborns point of view, these two subjects add lot of fun to learning as they contain lot of practical activities which are conducted in the school laboratory. I loved to learn through doing and touching, it is because I had trouble sitting still and learning. My worst day during Science period was when my teacher said no when I offered him my help to fix the Bunsen burner to the gas cylinder. He said ‘you are still young so must stay away. Now I understand that I was a kinaesthetic learner that time, my teacher could have engaged me in his work because I could be better able to understand information by doing hands-on activities. I am not going to blame my teacher for this because at the time of my learning teacher centred education was given importance by educators. If teachers are able to understand childrens learning needs, it will reduce lot of frustration like homework incompletion, failures in assessments and sports and speaking in public. A s long as I know sometimes kids are just doing what works for them but, the curriculum in practice when I was in school did not cater the childs individual needs and the educators did not consider the childs learning style. I know that cognitive focuses on the inner mental activities such as thinking, memory, knowing, and problem-solving so, I think at cognitive stage the children should be catered carefully according to their learning needs. I gained lot of experience in teaching, today I am an experienced teacher, I wish I was my teacher when I was in school because when I was a child I did not get what I give to the pupils in my classroom now. As a teacher, I work in my classroom according to my childrens expectations. I believe in group work, differentiated planning, reading a lot for fun, guided reading, shared reading, classroom policies, and ongoing assessments which help me know the level of progress frequently. The few hyperactive boys in my classroom are always my helpers; they are always engaged in classroom jobs. In a typical classroom, some children process information best by hearing the teacher explain it, some learn by seeing whats on the chalkboard, and others learn through hands-on exercises. Nowadays colleges have increasingly begun teaching new students about learning styles so they can develop effective study habits. Three basic learning styles are auditory, kinaesthetic, and visual. Auditory learners prefer listening to explanations over reading them and like to study by reciting information aloud. These types of learners may want to have background music while studying, or they may be distracted by noises and need a quiet space to study. Kinaesthetic learners learn by doing and touching. They may have trouble sitting still while studying, and they are better able to understand information by writing it down or doing hands on activities. Visual learners process new information by reading, looking at pictures, or watching a demonstration but, they may grow impatient listening to an explanation. I still remember the learning style and classroom setting when I was small which is mostly similar to what shown on the video clip of ‘The four UK teachers experience in a Kenyan school. At least for ten years my classroom strength was 35-40 children, our tables and chairs were laid in rows, teachers table and the chalk board was at the front of the class. The classroom layout was so congested, though we learnt how to move around without any incidents, our teachers never approached each table in order to assist the individual needs. Teacher instruction was mostly lecture based and activities contained more board work. We were never treated according to our learning styles which are auditory, kinaesthetic, and visual instead the whole class was given the same type of activities only the able children understood them and completed on time and the rest were neglected. Regret to say that our teachers failed to realise that all of us are designed to absorb information differently; each learning style results in people with various interests, desires and talents and learning is more fun and effective when the teachers look into multiple learning styles. Children learn more efficiently on their own way and can reach their potential by working smarter. Once a teacher identifies the childs learning style, she can give that child the freedom to learn which will support his work at home, at school, and in life. Once my English language teacher asked us to write a simple paragraph on ‘Good Schools, since I like role play activities, I wrote the paragraph and drew pictures of girls and wrote two dialogues in the speech bubbles as they speak the positive things in the school. My teacher saw my work and crossed out the picture and said ‘this is not required here. That time I took this as my teachers valid point of view but later when I became a te acher I thought my teacher should have appreciated my speech bubbles and corrected the sentences or showed me what rules I should follow when I write statements in the speech bubbles. In this way the teacher put a full stop to my desire in learning or trying new concepts. The educators should be able to understand the learning styles of the learners and should provide opportunities accordingly. A kinaesthetic learner should be given more activity based work, for an example- in maths lesson for addition; this type of a learner can be given counters rather than asking him to work out the sums mentally. Kinaesthetic learners should be able to experience and explore the learning aids/ models which are available in the classroom or lab. Learners with strength for visual learning tend to process information by visualizing and seeing it. During a PD training which I attended recently I learnt that about 65% of the population prefers to learn visually. Visual learners in schools can be given opportunities to use colors to organize, receive written instructions and lists, look at graphics like film, flow charts, or diagrams, use visualization when memorizing information, take detailed notes and draw graphics as they learn by looking. People with strength for a uditory learning tend to remember information they hear and discuss. According to what I learnt, about 30% of the population prefers learning with an auditory style. Auditory learners in the classroom can be given recordings of materials like video clips of rhymes or documentaries to be learned; can participate in discussions or discussion groups, have questions read out loud, receive verbal instructions and read written information out loud. It is very sad to say at the time of my learning in the schools I did not see teachers had any knowledge of the types of learners and teach them according to their needs but learning was on going in the classroom. If this is the case how did I learn? This is a very difficult question for me to answer. The learning theories of the school where I studied were forced me to learn in the way I did not want to, the classroom instruction in my school life was mostly suitable for visual learners as there were activities like reading text with pictures, key points of the lesson given on the chalk board and copying texts from the chalk board to the note books. There were hardly any resources around the classrooms; the teaching aids were the text books, chalk board and the chalks. I liked to spend more time in the Science lab its because of the laboratory equipment which our Science/Maths teacher used during practical lessons. I enjoyed these subjects though there were limited resources available in the school lab; the teachers conducted the lessons as for the whole class without realizing the individual needs of the children. I did not study the English language as the way I studied Maths/Science. English was taught through visualizing things, long instructions and reading paragraphs in tex ts. If teachers use a lecture style for instruction, the English language learner will not receive as much comprehensible input. (Haynes, 2007, p. 6) Haynes argument is right. I became impatient listening for long periods during English. Once my English teacher caught me reading my favourite story book in the class and said ‘you must spend time with your text books, you should never read story books it is a waste of time. I followed her instructions and never read story books ever since she told me. Why did not this teacher realize that reading open doors for many worlds? Had I read a lot or be encouraged to read that time I would have had a rich vocabulary when I entered the High school. Another day a story teller visited our school to read stories to each year group and involved the students in making story props and acting out the stories. This was the most enjoyable moment during my English lesson; I had an opportunity to learn new vocabularies too. Everyone had fun during this lesson because the story teller involved each and every student in a kind of activity. Another issue was no school policies were read to us on the first day of school as there were no many policies constructed for the school at that time. We knew how to go in a line to the library, hitting and verbally abusing the peers not allowed, wore neat uniform every day, respect the teachers and so on but we were never taught any of these. I think the hidden curriculum in my school was stronger than the curriculum which was in use that time. Then I moved to a college for my higher education. I can say from my college experience that many higher education instructors still do not realize that students vary in the way that they process and understand information or attempt to respond to those differences in their pedagogical efforts. Effective teaching cannot be limited to the delivery of information; instead it needs to be based on a model of minds at work. Effective instructors are those who understand the importance of involving all of their students in learning how to learn. Effective learners are created when instructors affirm the presence and validity of diverse learning. At the college level the cognitive development occurs at the same pace but the learners experience different kind of problems or issues due to many changes. One of them is ‘culture shock. Newcomers have usually left behind family members, friends, teachers, and pets. They are no longer surrounded by a familiar language and culture. Children often do not have the full support of their parents because the parents are experiencing culture shock, too. (Haynes, 2007, p. 2) I agree with Hayens because the greater the difference between the students new culture and the students primary culture, the greater the shock. During this stage, I as a newcomer was excited about the new lives. Everything was wonderful and we were having great time learning about the environment. For me the differences between the new culture and the old one become more apparent. I rejected my new surroundings because there was so much that I did not understand. At times I felt sleepy, irritable, uninterested, or depressed; there were few more students who felt the same as I did. In my college the English language learners were frustrated because they could not communicate and are bombarded with unfamiliar surroundings, unreadable social signals, and an unrelenting barrage of new sounds. I was homesick and missed my family, friends, and familiar sights and sounds but, our instructors failed to realise this and started their duty stuffing our brain with Physics, Chemistry and Biolo gy. I was compelled to listen and follow what they instructed but, I did not know how much I learnt at that stage. In fact, I was surprised and overwhelmed by the lectures though we were forced to learn what we were supposed to, because the instructors knew so much about the subject taught. At times I asked myself, how did the instructors prepare themselves so well in order to answer all types of questions asked by the students? I saw them as good role models from the way they socialized with others, and delivered the content of the subjects during lectures. Listening to a lecture involves active attempts to construct new knowledge but, most of the time I felt that the instructors could have included videos to their instructions, involved us in presentations or group discussions as I loved these types of activities. ACTIVITY 2: Why are theories of learning important? Write down some initial thoughts about your own priorities at this stage of your development as a (head) teacher. To what extent do your own current priorities coincide with the priorities mentioned above? There are many different theories of how people learn. What important and useful is to consider their application to how our students learn and we teach our educational programs. It is interesting to think about our own particular way of learning and to recognize that everyone does not learn the way we do. In my opinion one of the main points is a teacher should know that each student does not learn in the same way others do. This means if the teacher chooses just one style of teaching such as direct instruction or collaborative learning or inquiry learning the students will not be maximizing their learning potential. For sure a teacher cannot reach every student on the same level during one lesson, but implementing a variety of learning styles throughout the course allows all the students to experience the chance to learn in at least a way that matches their learning style. Most of the materials used to educate students beyond primary school are largely text and lecture based, which have significant limitations. Those students are not involved in group work or discussion activities. Reading is a very important learning mode but, not all students learn effectively from reading. There are students who do not like reading a lot but, respond better to visual and audio stimuli of lecture but often get lost in the material or lose interest in the presentation. In this type of a learning environment, students have limited opportunity to ask questions or may be uncomfortable asking a question in front of the class. So the learning theories we have should cater the individual needs of the children. I believe student learn best by trying to make sense of something on their own with the help of the teacher along the way. Therefore the learners should be involved in activity based learning and given the freedom to use the classroom resources around them. Another im portant point is that the best way to learn is by having students construct their own knowledge instead of having someone construct it for them. For an example, for giving them the concept of Addition they should be given counters or an abacus to find the sum of two numbers rather than explaining this on the chalk board. For the language development they should be given activities for listening and writing which will be an interesting activity too. Science and Geography can be taught through pictures, video clips, lab work with a lot of experiments and the use of internet. At times I did not get the clear concepts of the subject taught when I attended the lecture type classes but I had an opportunity to understand better when I was asked to teach the same concept to someone else on my own. An experienced teacher should always use cognitive terminology such as classify, analyze, predict, and create when assigning tasks to the students, this helps the students to explore and research to find lot of information about the subject. We should encourage student critical thinking and inquiry by asking them thoughtful, open-ended questions, and encourage them to ask questions to each other. Further, we should provide enough time for students to construct their own meaning when learning something new. We should acknowledge that, students understanding and prior experiences about a concept before teaching them, which is as vital as breathing. Group discussions that we organize should encourage communication between the teacher and the students and also between the students. All learning and some elements of non-learning begin with situations where there is a disjuncture between a learners biography (past experiences) and their construction of present experience. (Jarvis, Holford Griffin, 2003, p. 70) As Jarvis, Holford Griffin explain educators should pay importance to the childs prior learning experience in order to give them the proper foundation on learning. In the school where I work the children speak English as a second language therefore I had to construct my learning theories according to their past experience with the language of English. One of the word level objectives of English for first graders is ‘to represent in writing the three phonemes in CVC words, spelling them first in rhyming sets, then in non-rhyming sets. This is a very simple objective but difficult for a first grader in my school as their prior knowledge in English is zero due to use of no English at home. In that case if I as a teacher insist them to learn this objective then I will be committing a crime for not having any knowledge on their biography. So it is vital for me to spend correcting prior knowledge before new learning can occur, in fact we in our school where I work now spend at least 2-3 weeks at the beginning of the first term to learn the biography of the children. Teachers must be fair in distributing their praise and all students should receive praise. They should look for positive things to say about a students work even when pointing out problems or mistakes during lesson. Some might receive praise for bigger achievements than others but, even the lower performer needs a regular pat on the back. Teacher should also give praise or verbal rewards to the class as a whole to encourage the class and build team unity. True, the learning theories help support planning and teaching, help to critically evaluate classroom practice and help in the diagnosis of classroom problems but in my opinion the important person who constructs the learning theories in the classroom is the teacher who is not given enough opportunities to implement these in her classroom to experience the consequences. I hear teachers of other schools say that excess amount of paper work and work load do not provide enough time to engage the children on learning. In the school where I work our teachers are not given extra duties such as after school duty, snack duty etc in order to make sure that they spend more time in the classroom and prepare for students learning. We have special subject teachers for ICT, Physical Education and second languages so the class teachers can concentrate only on the core subjects like Literacy, Numeracy, Science and Geography. One may ask, why do our teachers are kept away from teaching ICT? In my opi nion ICT should be integrated in learning however, in some cases, teachers feel ICT increases their workload, with some tasks taking longer time to complete. This can often be traced to one or more of: a lack confidence or lack of ICT skills, ineffective networks or a lack of appropriate training or technical support. To reduce teacher workloads in our schools in future, ICT strategies will be included specific workload aims although this should not be at the impression of continuing to find ways in which ICT can raise quality and pupil performance. (We are planning to improve ICT strategic planning through strategic aims, hardware, software, connectivity, technical support and staff training and development in future and involve the teachers in integrating ICT to learning). Staff meeting or Curriculum meeting is conducted only once a week, which helps the teachers to spend more time with their work in the classroom and during their non contact periods they are supposed to prepare additional activities for the lesson they have planned. Progress Report for the pupils are being sent only thrice a year rather than every month, the teachers in our school have to spend less time dealing with behavioural issues because we have well constructed standardized policies for discipline, behaviour, uniform, food and bus and the Social worker is highly involved in implementing the policies. In our school calendar there are few days allocated as ‘Staff in Students out for professional development which is very important for the educators to upgrade their skills. I have seen few schools in this country utilize the student time I mean have shortened day in order to organise PD for the staff. In some schools teachers spend most of their time on disciplining the children and dealing with behavioural issues because of the weak hidden curriculum in place and no proper plan or policies to manage these types of issues there. Some educators want to expose themselves as good teachers or professional and show that they can manage the children very well, so they spend more time on putting up class displays, classroom management and less time on teaching the children. I have seen educators who work only for survival, their aim is to spend the days in the school and get monthly wage on time. The overall goal of the teachers should be to help and support students develop into self motivating learners. Students who are encouraged to become motivated lifelong learners will be more successful in and out of the classroom. When I worked as a teacher in other schools I had to teach all the subjects including IT and Physical Education, send monthly progress report home, prepare student portfolio for each child in my class, do after school duties and attend meetings with the Principal for four days in a week. I must say at that time I was frustrated for not having enough time to concentrate on the learning of my students and I was able to realise that they were not gaining anything according to their learning style. So, when I became as a head of a school I made sure that the teachers are given more time to spend for the children not with paper work and so on. The Social Worker and I are directly involved in solving behavioural issues in the school so the teachers will not have to spend time on this issue. The school policies and curriculum should be child centred and focus only on their learning. Educators should spend more time on pupils learning for which the strong hidden curriculum of the school should be helpful so that the teachers can construct proper planning for their teaching rather than wasting their time on other issues like behaviour and discipline. What I am trying to explain is that the learning theories we construct should focus on the childs academic and intellectual development. ACTIVITY 3: Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation List eight ways in which you motivate pupils in your classroom and school. Explain which motivational forms are intrinsic and which extrinsic. We know nothing about motivation. All we can do is write books about it. Peter Drucker I have read a lot about ‘Motivation in books and on websites. I think Drucker is concerned about the nature of understanding the term ‘Motivation. I know what motivation is but, I do not think that I have made a closer inspection to it ever in my career. I have motivated the learners to read a lot, work smarter, behave well and be a good role model through rewards and appreciation as the way the factory workers are encouraged by ‘end of year bonus so that production improves and absenteeism falls. No one can know the future at least in any detail. In preparing the future, students should be able to develop viable occupational skills. Learning a discipline and doing it well provides the foundation for a sense of purpose, security and confidence in adulthood. In addition to this the students should prepare for change. As we see, change is best handled and even welcomed, when individuals possess a well developed mental skills associated with original creative and independent thinking. Further, according to Martin V. Cavington, the greatest legacy of education is to encourage in our students a will to learn and to continue learning as personal circumstances-change in short to promote a capacity for self renewal. Today many students drop out of school without a single achievement for which they can feel uniquely responsible for it. More ever the majority of the students fail achieve their potential due to lack of motivation in schools and home. How to always be motivated? Keeping our motivation high is the key factor to achieve our goals. We all face setbacks in life but, the ability to turn it into a lesson and move through a positive direction should be our aim for which motivation is highly required. If we are not motivated, we will experience difficulties in turning our great ideas into great results, wake up in the morning without any desire, ask people around us for support, give up our tasks before finishing them, postpone important decisions and wish that we will have a set of helping tips to overcome our setbacks. If we as adults will have to face a great deal of inconveniences due to lack of motivation, what will happen to those who just started their life in schools as children? What will be the consequences for being not motivated by important factors? How motivation takes place in classrooms and schools? A primary concern for educators is how to balance the use of extrinsic incentives as needed to promote student task engagement while establishing a climate that also fosters intrinsic motivation. (Alderman, 1999, p. 213) The motivation comes from the pleasure one gets from the task he does or from the sense of satisfaction in completing or even working on it. As Alderman explains, we should equally balance extrinsic and intrinsic motivation in order to promote engaging students on task. According to what I understood intrinsic motivation means motivation which comes from inside an individual rather than from any external or outside rewards, such as money, trophies or grades. Extrinsic motivation refers to motivation that comes from outside an individual. The motivating factors are external, or outside, rewards such as money, trophies or grades. These rewards provide satisfaction and pleasure that the task itself may not provide. Is intrinsic motivation the solution for increasing student engagement? One perspective is that intrinsic motivation to learn is a necessary, but insufficient, component for academic achievement in classrooms; that is, one can enjoy learning or have an interest in a subject, but lack the strategies necessary for continuing motivation (Alderman, 1999, p. 218) According to Aldermans argument, an extrinsically motivated student will work on a task even when he has little interest in it because of the anticipated satisfaction he will get from some rewards. The rewards can be something as minor as a smiley face to something major like a trophy or free computer game. For example, an extrinsically motivated child who dislikes maths may work hard on maths problems because he wants the reward for completing it right. For me it is very difficult to agree with Aldermans point of views on ‘motivating extrinsically will result positively as I have teaching experience with children of some (sorry to say) arrogant parents, rich parents who are proud of their wealth and children who enjoy the most lavish life in this country which is completely different where I come from. I have implemented many strategies for motivating children in my class; I never had an opportunity to discriminate intrinsic and extrinsic motivation until I come across some readings on these topics by Jerome S. Bruner and Alderman. All I knew were about motivating children to be engaged on task. Two years back I had few children in my class, whose parents especially the mothers were not supportive at all; their children most of the time turned in completed homework, they had poor reading skills and had unacceptable behaviour in the classroom. In order to motivate them towards task, I used to tell them if they complete work on time or behave well they will get a smiley sticker or a badge but, I always had reply from these kids ‘I dont need I can buy them when I go out with my driver or ‘who cares of those cheap stickers or ‘I have got plenty of them at home. In such a place where I am in, most of the children are not attracted by those extrinsic motivations rather they would like to get motivated by intrinsic factors. I have spent a lot of time trying to think of ways to motivate my more reluctant students. I have tried fear† If you are late again, I will call home†. I have tried rewards â€Å"If you follow the classroom code of conduct you will earn points that you can redeem for a free homework pass or computer game. As a motivational support fear and rewards do work, for a while but, I did not want to threaten my students, and I did not want to bribe them. I want them to develop a will to come to class and learn. I wanted their motivation to be intrinsic. The question then was how I get my students to become more intrinsically motivated so that the classroom experience is more enjoyable for everyone. When Iencouraged mystudents self motivation by structuringmy class and my teaching I met their needs which are love, respect, emotional support and to move about the classroom freely. I followed many ways to motivate the children but now, I can differentiate them according to intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors. Intrinsic motivation takes place when there is a positive relationship between the learners and the educators. As Jerome Bruner (1966), explains that extrinsic reinforcement may lead to a desirable kind of activity and cause its repetition but will not ultimately encourage sound learning. His belief was that intrinsic rewards are more important than extrinsic rewards in the long term. Intrinsic motivational factors I implemented in my classroom and school were, 1- When I asked my students to volunteer to be my assistant and assigned jobs for them more learning went on than if I did all the teaching myself. 2- When I had those students who could not sit still for very long and lose focus easily did their maths questions on the board, they were more likely to stay focused and learn which develop the interest of involvement. 3- When I greeted my students at the classroomdoor early morning with a smile and allocate games and puzzles for them to d Theories and Approaches to Learning Theories and Approaches to Learning Write about helpful and unhelpful approaches to learning during your own education. What was positive about those approaches? Did they reflect or express any particular theories of learning? Life is a learning experience. When I was a young girl I was so confident and positive about what I wanted. Maths and Science were my favourite subjects but I was not given freedom to learn as I wanted to learn these subjects. I realized this after I gained a very good experience in teaching primary school children. Student motivation is rooted in students subjective experiences, especially those connected to their willingness to engage in lessons and learning activities and their reasons for doing so. (Brophy, 2004, p. 4) According to Brophy, I must say learning is, interesting fun and exciting when the curriculum is well matched to students interests and abilities and the teacher emphasizes hands-on activities in order to keep the students busy and engaged. When the teacher teaches the right things the right way, motivation takes place by itself. If students are not enjoying learning, something is wrong with the curriculum and teachers instruction. At times I felt my school life was boring and frustrating because I hated all subjects except Maths and Science. I had to sit and listen to longtime instructions and copy the notes from the chalk board. I managed myself for learning because I had to show the Progress Report with good grades to my dad. Ê »Science is like everything, I guess and I think everything has a science to it. [When] baking cookies you have to add the right amount of eggs and milk and stuff like that (Kaufman, Moss, Osborn, 2003, p. 48) As I agree with Kaufman, Moss Osborns point of view, these two subjects add lot of fun to learning as they contain lot of practical activities which are conducted in the school laboratory. I loved to learn through doing and touching, it is because I had trouble sitting still and learning. My worst day during Science period was when my teacher said no when I offered him my help to fix the Bunsen burner to the gas cylinder. He said ‘you are still young so must stay away. Now I understand that I was a kinaesthetic learner that time, my teacher could have engaged me in his work because I could be better able to understand information by doing hands-on activities. I am not going to blame my teacher for this because at the time of my learning teacher centred education was given importance by educators. If teachers are able to understand childrens learning needs, it will reduce lot of frustration like homework incompletion, failures in assessments and sports and speaking in public. A s long as I know sometimes kids are just doing what works for them but, the curriculum in practice when I was in school did not cater the childs individual needs and the educators did not consider the childs learning style. I know that cognitive focuses on the inner mental activities such as thinking, memory, knowing, and problem-solving so, I think at cognitive stage the children should be catered carefully according to their learning needs. I gained lot of experience in teaching, today I am an experienced teacher, I wish I was my teacher when I was in school because when I was a child I did not get what I give to the pupils in my classroom now. As a teacher, I work in my classroom according to my childrens expectations. I believe in group work, differentiated planning, reading a lot for fun, guided reading, shared reading, classroom policies, and ongoing assessments which help me know the level of progress frequently. The few hyperactive boys in my classroom are always my helpers; they are always engaged in classroom jobs. In a typical classroom, some children process information best by hearing the teacher explain it, some learn by seeing whats on the chalkboard, and others learn through hands-on exercises. Nowadays colleges have increasingly begun teaching new students about learning styles so they can develop effective study habits. Three basic learning styles are auditory, kinaesthetic, and visual. Auditory learners prefer listening to explanations over reading them and like to study by reciting information aloud. These types of learners may want to have background music while studying, or they may be distracted by noises and need a quiet space to study. Kinaesthetic learners learn by doing and touching. They may have trouble sitting still while studying, and they are better able to understand information by writing it down or doing hands on activities. Visual learners process new information by reading, looking at pictures, or watching a demonstration but, they may grow impatient listening to an explanation. I still remember the learning style and classroom setting when I was small which is mostly similar to what shown on the video clip of ‘The four UK teachers experience in a Kenyan school. At least for ten years my classroom strength was 35-40 children, our tables and chairs were laid in rows, teachers table and the chalk board was at the front of the class. The classroom layout was so congested, though we learnt how to move around without any incidents, our teachers never approached each table in order to assist the individual needs. Teacher instruction was mostly lecture based and activities contained more board work. We were never treated according to our learning styles which are auditory, kinaesthetic, and visual instead the whole class was given the same type of activities only the able children understood them and completed on time and the rest were neglected. Regret to say that our teachers failed to realise that all of us are designed to absorb information differently; each learning style results in people with various interests, desires and talents and learning is more fun and effective when the teachers look into multiple learning styles. Children learn more efficiently on their own way and can reach their potential by working smarter. Once a teacher identifies the childs learning style, she can give that child the freedom to learn which will support his work at home, at school, and in life. Once my English language teacher asked us to write a simple paragraph on ‘Good Schools, since I like role play activities, I wrote the paragraph and drew pictures of girls and wrote two dialogues in the speech bubbles as they speak the positive things in the school. My teacher saw my work and crossed out the picture and said ‘this is not required here. That time I took this as my teachers valid point of view but later when I became a te acher I thought my teacher should have appreciated my speech bubbles and corrected the sentences or showed me what rules I should follow when I write statements in the speech bubbles. In this way the teacher put a full stop to my desire in learning or trying new concepts. The educators should be able to understand the learning styles of the learners and should provide opportunities accordingly. A kinaesthetic learner should be given more activity based work, for an example- in maths lesson for addition; this type of a learner can be given counters rather than asking him to work out the sums mentally. Kinaesthetic learners should be able to experience and explore the learning aids/ models which are available in the classroom or lab. Learners with strength for visual learning tend to process information by visualizing and seeing it. During a PD training which I attended recently I learnt that about 65% of the population prefers to learn visually. Visual learners in schools can be given opportunities to use colors to organize, receive written instructions and lists, look at graphics like film, flow charts, or diagrams, use visualization when memorizing information, take detailed notes and draw graphics as they learn by looking. People with strength for a uditory learning tend to remember information they hear and discuss. According to what I learnt, about 30% of the population prefers learning with an auditory style. Auditory learners in the classroom can be given recordings of materials like video clips of rhymes or documentaries to be learned; can participate in discussions or discussion groups, have questions read out loud, receive verbal instructions and read written information out loud. It is very sad to say at the time of my learning in the schools I did not see teachers had any knowledge of the types of learners and teach them according to their needs but learning was on going in the classroom. If this is the case how did I learn? This is a very difficult question for me to answer. The learning theories of the school where I studied were forced me to learn in the way I did not want to, the classroom instruction in my school life was mostly suitable for visual learners as there were activities like reading text with pictures, key points of the lesson given on the chalk board and copying texts from the chalk board to the note books. There were hardly any resources around the classrooms; the teaching aids were the text books, chalk board and the chalks. I liked to spend more time in the Science lab its because of the laboratory equipment which our Science/Maths teacher used during practical lessons. I enjoyed these subjects though there were limited resources available in the school lab; the teachers conducted the lessons as for the whole class without realizing the individual needs of the children. I did not study the English language as the way I studied Maths/Science. English was taught through visualizing things, long instructions and reading paragraphs in tex ts. If teachers use a lecture style for instruction, the English language learner will not receive as much comprehensible input. (Haynes, 2007, p. 6) Haynes argument is right. I became impatient listening for long periods during English. Once my English teacher caught me reading my favourite story book in the class and said ‘you must spend time with your text books, you should never read story books it is a waste of time. I followed her instructions and never read story books ever since she told me. Why did not this teacher realize that reading open doors for many worlds? Had I read a lot or be encouraged to read that time I would have had a rich vocabulary when I entered the High school. Another day a story teller visited our school to read stories to each year group and involved the students in making story props and acting out the stories. This was the most enjoyable moment during my English lesson; I had an opportunity to learn new vocabularies too. Everyone had fun during this lesson because the story teller involved each and every student in a kind of activity. Another issue was no school policies were read to us on the first day of school as there were no many policies constructed for the school at that time. We knew how to go in a line to the library, hitting and verbally abusing the peers not allowed, wore neat uniform every day, respect the teachers and so on but we were never taught any of these. I think the hidden curriculum in my school was stronger than the curriculum which was in use that time. Then I moved to a college for my higher education. I can say from my college experience that many higher education instructors still do not realize that students vary in the way that they process and understand information or attempt to respond to those differences in their pedagogical efforts. Effective teaching cannot be limited to the delivery of information; instead it needs to be based on a model of minds at work. Effective instructors are those who understand the importance of involving all of their students in learning how to learn. Effective learners are created when instructors affirm the presence and validity of diverse learning. At the college level the cognitive development occurs at the same pace but the learners experience different kind of problems or issues due to many changes. One of them is ‘culture shock. Newcomers have usually left behind family members, friends, teachers, and pets. They are no longer surrounded by a familiar language and culture. Children often do not have the full support of their parents because the parents are experiencing culture shock, too. (Haynes, 2007, p. 2) I agree with Hayens because the greater the difference between the students new culture and the students primary culture, the greater the shock. During this stage, I as a newcomer was excited about the new lives. Everything was wonderful and we were having great time learning about the environment. For me the differences between the new culture and the old one become more apparent. I rejected my new surroundings because there was so much that I did not understand. At times I felt sleepy, irritable, uninterested, or depressed; there were few more students who felt the same as I did. In my college the English language learners were frustrated because they could not communicate and are bombarded with unfamiliar surroundings, unreadable social signals, and an unrelenting barrage of new sounds. I was homesick and missed my family, friends, and familiar sights and sounds but, our instructors failed to realise this and started their duty stuffing our brain with Physics, Chemistry and Biolo gy. I was compelled to listen and follow what they instructed but, I did not know how much I learnt at that stage. In fact, I was surprised and overwhelmed by the lectures though we were forced to learn what we were supposed to, because the instructors knew so much about the subject taught. At times I asked myself, how did the instructors prepare themselves so well in order to answer all types of questions asked by the students? I saw them as good role models from the way they socialized with others, and delivered the content of the subjects during lectures. Listening to a lecture involves active attempts to construct new knowledge but, most of the time I felt that the instructors could have included videos to their instructions, involved us in presentations or group discussions as I loved these types of activities. ACTIVITY 2: Why are theories of learning important? Write down some initial thoughts about your own priorities at this stage of your development as a (head) teacher. To what extent do your own current priorities coincide with the priorities mentioned above? There are many different theories of how people learn. What important and useful is to consider their application to how our students learn and we teach our educational programs. It is interesting to think about our own particular way of learning and to recognize that everyone does not learn the way we do. In my opinion one of the main points is a teacher should know that each student does not learn in the same way others do. This means if the teacher chooses just one style of teaching such as direct instruction or collaborative learning or inquiry learning the students will not be maximizing their learning potential. For sure a teacher cannot reach every student on the same level during one lesson, but implementing a variety of learning styles throughout the course allows all the students to experience the chance to learn in at least a way that matches their learning style. Most of the materials used to educate students beyond primary school are largely text and lecture based, which have significant limitations. Those students are not involved in group work or discussion activities. Reading is a very important learning mode but, not all students learn effectively from reading. There are students who do not like reading a lot but, respond better to visual and audio stimuli of lecture but often get lost in the material or lose interest in the presentation. In this type of a learning environment, students have limited opportunity to ask questions or may be uncomfortable asking a question in front of the class. So the learning theories we have should cater the individual needs of the children. I believe student learn best by trying to make sense of something on their own with the help of the teacher along the way. Therefore the learners should be involved in activity based learning and given the freedom to use the classroom resources around them. Another im portant point is that the best way to learn is by having students construct their own knowledge instead of having someone construct it for them. For an example, for giving them the concept of Addition they should be given counters or an abacus to find the sum of two numbers rather than explaining this on the chalk board. For the language development they should be given activities for listening and writing which will be an interesting activity too. Science and Geography can be taught through pictures, video clips, lab work with a lot of experiments and the use of internet. At times I did not get the clear concepts of the subject taught when I attended the lecture type classes but I had an opportunity to understand better when I was asked to teach the same concept to someone else on my own. An experienced teacher should always use cognitive terminology such as classify, analyze, predict, and create when assigning tasks to the students, this helps the students to explore and research to find lot of information about the subject. We should encourage student critical thinking and inquiry by asking them thoughtful, open-ended questions, and encourage them to ask questions to each other. Further, we should provide enough time for students to construct their own meaning when learning something new. We should acknowledge that, students understanding and prior experiences about a concept before teaching them, which is as vital as breathing. Group discussions that we organize should encourage communication between the teacher and the students and also between the students. All learning and some elements of non-learning begin with situations where there is a disjuncture between a learners biography (past experiences) and their construction of present experience. (Jarvis, Holford Griffin, 2003, p. 70) As Jarvis, Holford Griffin explain educators should pay importance to the childs prior learning experience in order to give them the proper foundation on learning. In the school where I work the children speak English as a second language therefore I had to construct my learning theories according to their past experience with the language of English. One of the word level objectives of English for first graders is ‘to represent in writing the three phonemes in CVC words, spelling them first in rhyming sets, then in non-rhyming sets. This is a very simple objective but difficult for a first grader in my school as their prior knowledge in English is zero due to use of no English at home. In that case if I as a teacher insist them to learn this objective then I will be committing a crime for not having any knowledge on their biography. So it is vital for me to spend correcting prior knowledge before new learning can occur, in fact we in our school where I work now spend at least 2-3 weeks at the beginning of the first term to learn the biography of the children. Teachers must be fair in distributing their praise and all students should receive praise. They should look for positive things to say about a students work even when pointing out problems or mistakes during lesson. Some might receive praise for bigger achievements than others but, even the lower performer needs a regular pat on the back. Teacher should also give praise or verbal rewards to the class as a whole to encourage the class and build team unity. True, the learning theories help support planning and teaching, help to critically evaluate classroom practice and help in the diagnosis of classroom problems but in my opinion the important person who constructs the learning theories in the classroom is the teacher who is not given enough opportunities to implement these in her classroom to experience the consequences. I hear teachers of other schools say that excess amount of paper work and work load do not provide enough time to engage the children on learning. In the school where I work our teachers are not given extra duties such as after school duty, snack duty etc in order to make sure that they spend more time in the classroom and prepare for students learning. We have special subject teachers for ICT, Physical Education and second languages so the class teachers can concentrate only on the core subjects like Literacy, Numeracy, Science and Geography. One may ask, why do our teachers are kept away from teaching ICT? In my opi nion ICT should be integrated in learning however, in some cases, teachers feel ICT increases their workload, with some tasks taking longer time to complete. This can often be traced to one or more of: a lack confidence or lack of ICT skills, ineffective networks or a lack of appropriate training or technical support. To reduce teacher workloads in our schools in future, ICT strategies will be included specific workload aims although this should not be at the impression of continuing to find ways in which ICT can raise quality and pupil performance. (We are planning to improve ICT strategic planning through strategic aims, hardware, software, connectivity, technical support and staff training and development in future and involve the teachers in integrating ICT to learning). Staff meeting or Curriculum meeting is conducted only once a week, which helps the teachers to spend more time with their work in the classroom and during their non contact periods they are supposed to prepare additional activities for the lesson they have planned. Progress Report for the pupils are being sent only thrice a year rather than every month, the teachers in our school have to spend less time dealing with behavioural issues because we have well constructed standardized policies for discipline, behaviour, uniform, food and bus and the Social worker is highly involved in implementing the policies. In our school calendar there are few days allocated as ‘Staff in Students out for professional development which is very important for the educators to upgrade their skills. I have seen few schools in this country utilize the student time I mean have shortened day in order to organise PD for the staff. In some schools teachers spend most of their time on disciplining the children and dealing with behavioural issues because of the weak hidden curriculum in place and no proper plan or policies to manage these types of issues there. Some educators want to expose themselves as good teachers or professional and show that they can manage the children very well, so they spend more time on putting up class displays, classroom management and less time on teaching the children. I have seen educators who work only for survival, their aim is to spend the days in the school and get monthly wage on time. The overall goal of the teachers should be to help and support students develop into self motivating learners. Students who are encouraged to become motivated lifelong learners will be more successful in and out of the classroom. When I worked as a teacher in other schools I had to teach all the subjects including IT and Physical Education, send monthly progress report home, prepare student portfolio for each child in my class, do after school duties and attend meetings with the Principal for four days in a week. I must say at that time I was frustrated for not having enough time to concentrate on the learning of my students and I was able to realise that they were not gaining anything according to their learning style. So, when I became as a head of a school I made sure that the teachers are given more time to spend for the children not with paper work and so on. The Social Worker and I are directly involved in solving behavioural issues in the school so the teachers will not have to spend time on this issue. The school policies and curriculum should be child centred and focus only on their learning. Educators should spend more time on pupils learning for which the strong hidden curriculum of the school should be helpful so that the teachers can construct proper planning for their teaching rather than wasting their time on other issues like behaviour and discipline. What I am trying to explain is that the learning theories we construct should focus on the childs academic and intellectual development. ACTIVITY 3: Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation List eight ways in which you motivate pupils in your classroom and school. Explain which motivational forms are intrinsic and which extrinsic. We know nothing about motivation. All we can do is write books about it. Peter Drucker I have read a lot about ‘Motivation in books and on websites. I think Drucker is concerned about the nature of understanding the term ‘Motivation. I know what motivation is but, I do not think that I have made a closer inspection to it ever in my career. I have motivated the learners to read a lot, work smarter, behave well and be a good role model through rewards and appreciation as the way the factory workers are encouraged by ‘end of year bonus so that production improves and absenteeism falls. No one can know the future at least in any detail. In preparing the future, students should be able to develop viable occupational skills. Learning a discipline and doing it well provides the foundation for a sense of purpose, security and confidence in adulthood. In addition to this the students should prepare for change. As we see, change is best handled and even welcomed, when individuals possess a well developed mental skills associated with original creative and independent thinking. Further, according to Martin V. Cavington, the greatest legacy of education is to encourage in our students a will to learn and to continue learning as personal circumstances-change in short to promote a capacity for self renewal. Today many students drop out of school without a single achievement for which they can feel uniquely responsible for it. More ever the majority of the students fail achieve their potential due to lack of motivation in schools and home. How to always be motivated? Keeping our motivation high is the key factor to achieve our goals. We all face setbacks in life but, the ability to turn it into a lesson and move through a positive direction should be our aim for which motivation is highly required. If we are not motivated, we will experience difficulties in turning our great ideas into great results, wake up in the morning without any desire, ask people around us for support, give up our tasks before finishing them, postpone important decisions and wish that we will have a set of helping tips to overcome our setbacks. If we as adults will have to face a great deal of inconveniences due to lack of motivation, what will happen to those who just started their life in schools as children? What will be the consequences for being not motivated by important factors? How motivation takes place in classrooms and schools? A primary concern for educators is how to balance the use of extrinsic incentives as needed to promote student task engagement while establishing a climate that also fosters intrinsic motivation. (Alderman, 1999, p. 213) The motivation comes from the pleasure one gets from the task he does or from the sense of satisfaction in completing or even working on it. As Alderman explains, we should equally balance extrinsic and intrinsic motivation in order to promote engaging students on task. According to what I understood intrinsic motivation means motivation which comes from inside an individual rather than from any external or outside rewards, such as money, trophies or grades. Extrinsic motivation refers to motivation that comes from outside an individual. The motivating factors are external, or outside, rewards such as money, trophies or grades. These rewards provide satisfaction and pleasure that the task itself may not provide. Is intrinsic motivation the solution for increasing student engagement? One perspective is that intrinsic motivation to learn is a necessary, but insufficient, component for academic achievement in classrooms; that is, one can enjoy learning or have an interest in a subject, but lack the strategies necessary for continuing motivation (Alderman, 1999, p. 218) According to Aldermans argument, an extrinsically motivated student will work on a task even when he has little interest in it because of the anticipated satisfaction he will get from some rewards. The rewards can be something as minor as a smiley face to something major like a trophy or free computer game. For example, an extrinsically motivated child who dislikes maths may work hard on maths problems because he wants the reward for completing it right. For me it is very difficult to agree with Aldermans point of views on ‘motivating extrinsically will result positively as I have teaching experience with children of some (sorry to say) arrogant parents, rich parents who are proud of their wealth and children who enjoy the most lavish life in this country which is completely different where I come from. I have implemented many strategies for motivating children in my class; I never had an opportunity to discriminate intrinsic and extrinsic motivation until I come across some readings on these topics by Jerome S. Bruner and Alderman. All I knew were about motivating children to be engaged on task. Two years back I had few children in my class, whose parents especially the mothers were not supportive at all; their children most of the time turned in completed homework, they had poor reading skills and had unacceptable behaviour in the classroom. In order to motivate them towards task, I used to tell them if they complete work on time or behave well they will get a smiley sticker or a badge but, I always had reply from these kids ‘I dont need I can buy them when I go out with my driver or ‘who cares of those cheap stickers or ‘I have got plenty of them at home. In such a place where I am in, most of the children are not attracted by those extrinsic motivations rather they would like to get motivated by intrinsic factors. I have spent a lot of time trying to think of ways to motivate my more reluctant students. I have tried fear† If you are late again, I will call home†. I have tried rewards â€Å"If you follow the classroom code of conduct you will earn points that you can redeem for a free homework pass or computer game. As a motivational support fear and rewards do work, for a while but, I did not want to threaten my students, and I did not want to bribe them. I want them to develop a will to come to class and learn. I wanted their motivation to be intrinsic. The question then was how I get my students to become more intrinsically motivated so that the classroom experience is more enjoyable for everyone. When Iencouraged mystudents self motivation by structuringmy class and my teaching I met their needs which are love, respect, emotional support and to move about the classroom freely. I followed many ways to motivate the children but now, I can differentiate them according to intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors. Intrinsic motivation takes place when there is a positive relationship between the learners and the educators. As Jerome Bruner (1966), explains that extrinsic reinforcement may lead to a desirable kind of activity and cause its repetition but will not ultimately encourage sound learning. His belief was that intrinsic rewards are more important than extrinsic rewards in the long term. Intrinsic motivational factors I implemented in my classroom and school were, 1- When I asked my students to volunteer to be my assistant and assigned jobs for them more learning went on than if I did all the teaching myself. 2- When I had those students who could not sit still for very long and lose focus easily did their maths questions on the board, they were more likely to stay focused and learn which develop the interest of involvement. 3- When I greeted my students at the classroomdoor early morning with a smile and allocate games and puzzles for them to d

Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth

Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony Author(s): John W. Meyer and Brian Rowan Reviewed work(s): Source: American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 83, No. 2 (Sep. , 1977), pp. 340-363 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www. jstor. org/stable/2778293 . Accessed: 25/01/2012 14:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www. jstor. org/page/info/about/policies/terms. jspJSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email  protected] org. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Sociology. http://www. jstor. orgInstitutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremonyl John W. Meyer and Brian Rowan Stanford University Many formal organizational structures arise as reflections of rationalized institutional rules. The elaboration of such rules in modern states and societies accounts in part for the expansion and increased complexity of formal organizational structures. Institutional rules function as myths which organizationsincorporate,gaining legitimacy, resources, stability, and enhanced survival prospects.Organizations whose structures become isomorphic with the myths of the institutional environment-in contrast with those primarily structured by the demands of technical production and exchange-decrease internal coordination and control in order to maintain legitimacy. Structures are decoupled from each other and from ongoing activities. In place of coordination, inspection, and evaluation, a logic of confidence and good faith is employed. Formal organizationsare generall y understood to be systems of coordinated and controlled activities that arise when work is embedded in complex networks of technical relations and boundary-spanningexchanges.But in modern societies formal organizational structures arise in highly institutionalized contexts. Professions, policies, and programs are created along with the products and services that they are understoodto producerationally. This permits many new organizations to spring up and forces existing ones to incorporatenew practices and procedures. That is, organizationsare driven to incorporate the practices and procedures defined by prevailing rationalizedconcepts of organizationalwork and institutionalized in society.Organizationsthat do so increase their legitimacy and their survival prospects, independent of the immediate efficacy of the acquired practices and procedures. Institutionalized products, services, techniques, policies, and programs function as powerful myths, and many organizations adopt them ce remonially. But conformity to institutionalized rules often conflicts sharply 1 Work on this paper was conducted at the Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching (SCRDT) and was supported by the National Institute of Education (contract no. NE-C-00-3-0062). The views expressed here do not, of course, reflect NIE positions.Many colleagues in the SCRDT, the Stanford Organizations Training Program, the American Sociological Association's work group on Organizations and Environments, and the NIE gave help and encouragement. In particular, H. Acland, A. Bergesen, J. Boli-Bennett, T. Deal, J. Freeman, P. Hirsch, J. G. March, W. R. Scott, and W. Starbuck made helpful suggestions. 340 AJS Volume 83 Number 2 Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony with efficiency criteria and, conversely, to coordinate and control activity in order to promote efficiency undermines an organization's ceremonial conformityand sacrificesits support and legitimacy.To maintain ceremonial conformity, o rganizationsthat reflect institutional rules tend to buffer their formal structures from the uncertainties of technical activities by becoming loosely coupled, building gaps between their formal structures and actual work activities. This paper argues that the formal structures of many organizations in postindustrial society (Bell 1973) dramatically reflect the myths of their institutional environments instead of the demands of their work activities.The first part describesprevailing theories of the origins of formal structures and the main problem the theories confront. The second part discusses an alternative source of formal structures:myths embeddedin the institutional environment. The third part develops the argument that organizations reflecting institutionalized environments maintain gaps between their formal structures and their ongoing work activities. The final part summarizes by discussing some researchimplications. Throughout the paper, institutionalized rules are distin guished sharply from prevailing social behaviors.Institutionalized rules are classifications built into society as reciprocated typifications or interpretations (Berger and Luckmann 1967, p. 54). Such rules may be simply taken for granted or may be supported by public opinion or the force of law (Starbuck 1976). Institutions inevitably involve normative obligations but often enter into social life primarily as facts which must be taken into account by actors. Institutionalization involves the processesby which social processes, obligations, or actualities come to take on a rulelike status in social thought and action.So, for example, the social status of doctor is a highly institutionalized rule (both normative and cognitive) for managing illness as well as a social role made up of particular behaviors, relations, and expectations. Research and development is an institutionalized category of organizationalactivity which has meaning and value in many sectors of society, as well as a collection of actual research and development activities. In a smaller way, a No Smoking sign is an institution with legal status and implications, as well as an attempt to regulate smoking behavior.It is fundamental to the argument of this paper that institutional rules may have effects on organizational structures and their implementationin actual technical work which are very different from the effects generated by the networks of social behavior and relationshipswhich compose and surrounda given organization. PREVAILING THEORIES OF FORMAL STRUCTURE A sharp distinction should be made between the formal structure of an organization and its actual day-to-day work activities. Formal structure is 341American Journal of Sociology a blueprint for activities which includes, first of all, the table of organization: a listing of offices, departments, positions, and programs. These elements are linked by explicit goals and policies that make up a rational theory of how, and to what end, ac tivities are to be fitted together. The essence of a modern bureaucratic organization lies in the rationalized and impersonal character of these structural elements and of the goals that link them.One of the central problems in organization theory is to describe the conditions that give rise to rationalized formal structure. -In conventional theories, rational formal structure is assumed to be the most effective way to coordinate and control the complex relational networks involved in modern technical or work activities (see Scott 1975 for a review). This assumption derives from Weber's (1930, 1946, 1947) discussions of the historical emergence of bureaucraciesas consequencesof economic markets and centralized states. Economic markets place a premium on rationality and coordination.As markets expand, the relational networks in a given domain become more complex and differentiated, and organizationsin that domain must manage more internal and boundary-spanning interdependencies. Such factors as size (Blau 1970) and technology (Woodward 1965) increasethe complexity of internal relations, and the division of labor among p organizationsincreasesboundary-spanning roblems (Aiken and Hage 1968; Freeman 1973;Thompson 1967). Because the need for coordinationincreases under these conditions, and because formally coordinated work has competitive advantages, organizations with rationalized formal structures tend to develop.The formation of centralized states and the penetration of societies by political centers also contribute to the rise and spreadof formal organization. When the relational networks involved in economic exchange and political managementbecome extremely complex,bureaucraticstructuresare thought to be the most effective and rational means to standardize and control subunits. Bureaucratic control is especially useful for expanding political centers, and standardizationis often demanded by both centers and peripheral units (Bendix 1964, 1968).Political cente rs organize layers of offices that manage to extend conformity and to displace traditional activities throughout societies. a The problem. revailingtheoriesassumethatthe coordination nd controlof P h activityare the criticaldimensionson whichformal organizations avesucceeded in the modern world. This assumption is based on the view that organizations function according to their formal blueprints: coordination is routine, rules and proceduresare followed, and actual activities conform to the prescriptions of formal structure. But much of the empirical research on organizations casts doubt on this assumption.An earlier generation of researchers concluded that there was a great gap between the formal and the informal organization (e. g. , Dalton 1959; Downs 1967; Homans 1950). A related 342 Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony observation is that formal organizations are often loosely coupled (March and Olsen 1976; Weick 1976): structural elements are only loosely linked to each other and to activities, rules are often violated, decisions are often unimplemented, or if implemented have uncertain consequences, technologies are of problematic efficiency, and evaluation and inspection systems are ubverted or renderedso vague as to provide little coordination. Formal organizations are endemic in modern societies. There is need for an explanation of their rise that is partially free from the assumption that, in practice, formal structures actually coordinate and control work. Such an explanation should account for the elaboration of purposes, positions, policies, and procedural rules that characterizes formal organizations, but must do so without supposingthat these structuralfeatures are implemented in routine work activity. INSTITUTIONAL SOURCES OF FORMAL STRUCTUREBy focusing on the management of complex relational networks and the exercise of coordination and control, prevailing theories have neglected an alternative Weberian source of formal structure: the legiti macy of rationalized formal structures. In prevailing theories, legitimacy is a given: assertions about bureaucratization rest on the assumption of norms of rationality (Thompson 1967). When norms do play causal roles in theories of bureaucratization,it is because they are thought to be built into modern societies and personalities as very general values, which are thought to facilitate formal organization.But norms of rationality are not simply general values. They exist in much more specific and powerful ways in the rules, understandings, and meanings attached to institutionalized social structures. The causal importance of such institutions in the process of bureaucratizationhas been neglected. Formalstructures are not only creaturesof their relationalnetworksin the social organization. In modern societies, the elements of rationalizedformal structure are deeply ingrained in, and reflect, widespreadunderstandingsof social reality.Many of the positions, policies, programs, and pro ceduresof modern organizations are enforced by public opinion, by the views of important constituents, by knowledge legitimated through the educational system, by social prestige, by the laws, and by the definitions of negligence and prudence used by the courts. Such elements of formal structure are manifestations of powerful institutional rules which function as highly rationalized myths that are binding on particular organizations. In modern societies, the myths generatingformal organizationalstructure have two key properties.First, they are rationalized and impersonal prescriptions that identify various social purposes as technical ones and specify in a rulelike way the appropriatemeans to pursue these technical purposes 343 American Journal of Sociology rationally (Ellul 1964). Second, they are highly institutionalized and thus in some measure beyond the discretion of any individual participant or organization. They must, therefore,be taken for granted as legitimate, apart from evaluations of their impact on work outcomes. Many elements of formal structure are highly institutionalized and function as myths.Examplesincludeprofessions,programs,and technologies: Large numbers of rationalized professions emerge (Wilensky 1965; Bell 1973). These are occupations controlled, not only by direct inspection of work outcomes but also by social rules of licensing, certifying, and schooling. The occupations are rationalized, being understood to control impersonal techniques rather than moral mysteries. Further, they are highly institutionalized: the delegation of activities to the appropriate occupations is socially expected and often legally obligatory over and above any calculations of its efficiency.Many formalized organizational programs are also institutionalized in society. Ideologies define the functions appropriateto a business-such as sales, production, advertising, or accounting; to a university-such as instruction and research in history, engineering, and li terature; and to a hospital-such as surgery, internal medicine, and obstetrics. Such classifications of organizational functions, and the specifications for conducting each function, are prefabricated formulae available for use by any given organization. Similarly, technologies are institutionalized and become myths binding on organizations.Technical procedures of production, accounting, personnel selection, or data processing become taken-for-granted means to accomplish organizational ends. Quite apart from their possible efficiency, such institutionalized techniques establish an organization as appropriate, rational, and modern. Their use displays responsibility and avoids claims of negligence. The impact of such rationalized institutional elements on organizations and organizing situations is enormous. These rules define new organizing situations, redefineexisting ones, and specify the means for coping rationally with each.They enable, and often require, participants to organize along prescribedlines. And they spread very rapidly in modern society as part of the rise of postindustrial society (Bell 1973). New and extant domains of activity are codifiedin institutionalizedprograms,professions,or techniques, and organizationsincorporatethe packaged codes. For example: The discipline of psychology creates a rationalized theory of personnel selection and certifies personnel professionals. Personnel departments and functionaries appear in all sorts of extant organizations, and new specialized personnel agencies also appear.As programs of research and development are created and professionals with expertise in these fields are trained and defined, organizations come under increasing pressure to incorporate R & D units. As the prerational profession of prostitution is rationalized along medical lines, bureaucratized organizations-sex-therapy clinics, massage parlors, and the like-spring up more easily. As the issues of safety and environmental pollution arise, and as relevant 344 Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony i a b professions nd programs ecomeinstitutionalizedn laws, unionideologies, t nd public opinion,organizationsncorporate hese programsand profesi sions. The growth of rationalized institutional structures in society makes formal organizations more common and more elaborate. Such institutions are myths which make formal organizationsboth easier to create and more necessary. After all, the building blocks for organizationscome to be littered around the societal landscape; it takes only a little entrepreneurialenergy to assemble them into a structure. And because these building blocks are considered proper, adequate, rational, and necessary, organizations must incorporate them to avoid illegitimacy.Thus, the myths built into rationalized institutional elements create the necessity, the opportunity, and the impulse to organize rationally, over and above pressures in this direction created by the need to manage proximate relational n etworks: Proposition 1. As rationalizedinstitutionalrules arise in given domains of f work activity,formal organizations orm and expand by incorporatingthese rules as structuralelements. Two distinct ideas are implied here: (1A) As institutionalized myths define new domains of rationalized activity, formal organizationsemerge in these domains. iB) As rationalizing institutional myths arise in existing domains of activity, extant organizationsexpand their formal structures so as to become isomorphicwith these new myths. To understandthe largerhistorical process it is useful to note that: Proposition 2. The more modernizedthe society, the more extendedthe i rationalizedinstitutionalstructure n given domainsand the greaterthe number of domainscontainingrationalizedinstitutions. Modern institutions, then, are thoroughly rationalized, and these rationalized elements act as myths giving rise to more formal organization.When propositions 1 and 2 are combined, two more specific ideas follow : (2A) Formalorganizationsare more likely to emergein more modernizedsocieties, even with the complexity of immediate relational networks held constant. (2B) Formal organizationsin a given domain of activity are likely to have more elaborated structures in more modernized societies, even with the complexity of immediate relational networks held constant. Combiningthe ideas above with prevailingorganizationtheory, it becomes clear that modern societies are filled with rationalizedbureaucraciesfor two reasons. First, as the prevailing theories have asserted, relational etworks become increasingly complex as societies modernize. Second, modern societies are filled with institutional rules which function as myths depicting various formal structures as rational means to the attainment of desirable ends. Figure 1 summarizes these two lines of theory. Both lines suggest that the postindustrial society-the society dominated by rational organization even more than by the forces of production -arises both out of the 345 American Journal of Sociology The prevalence of rationalized institutional elements The presence and elaboration of formal organizational structures Societal Societal odernization The complexity of networks of social organization and exchange FIG. 1. -The origins and elaboration of formal organizational structures complexity of the modern social organizationalnetwork and, more directly, as an ideologicalmatter. Once institutionalized, rationality becomes a myth with explosive organizingpotential, as both Ellul (1964) and Bell (1973)though with rather different reactions-observe. The Relation of Organizationsto Their Institutional Environments The observationis not new that organizationsare structuredby phenomena in their environments and tend to become isomorphic with them.One explanation of such isomorphism is that formal organizations become matched with their environmentsby technical and exchange interdependencies. This line of reasoning can be seen in the works of Aiken and Hage (1968), Hawley (1968), and Thompson (1967). This explanation asserts that structural elements diffuse because environments create boundary-spanning exigencies for organizations, and that organizations which incorporate structural elements isomorphic with the environment are able to manage such interdependencies.A second explanation for the parallelismbetween organizations and their environments-and the one emphasized here-is that organizations structurally reflect socially constructed reality (Berger and Luckmann 1967). This view is suggested in the work of Parsons (1956) and Udy (1970), who see organizations as greatly conditioned by their general institutional environments and therefore as institutions themselves in part. Emery and Trist (1965) also see organizations as responding directly to environmental structuresand distinguishsuch effects sharply from those that occur through boundary-spanningexchanges.According to the institutional conception as developed here, organizations tend to disappear as distinct and bounded units. Quite beyond the environmental interrelations suggested in opensystems theories, institutional theories in their extreme forms define organizations as dramatic enactments of the rationalizedmyths pervading modern societies, rather than as units involved in exchange-no matter how complex-with their environments. 346 Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony The two explanations of environmental isomorphism are not entirely inconsistent.Organizations both deal with their environments at their boundariesand imitate environmentalelements in their structures. However, the two lines of explanation have very different implications for internal organizationalprocesses, as will be argued below. The Origins of Rational Institutional Myths Bureaucratization is caused in part by the proliferation of rationalized myths in society, and this in turn involves the evolution of the whole modern institutional system. Although t he latter topic is beyond the scope of this paper, three specific processes that generate rationalizedmyths of organizational structure can be noted.The elaboration f complexrelationalnetworks. -As the relational networks o in societies become dense and interconnected, increasing numbers of rationalized myths arise. Some of them are highly generalized:for example, the principlesof universalism (Parsons 1971), contracts (Spencer 1897), restitution (Durkheim 1933), and expertise (Weber 1947) are generalizedto diverse occupations, organizational programs, and organizational practices. Other myths describespecificstructuralelements. These myths may originatefrom narrow contexts and be applied in different ones.For example, in modern societies the relational contexts of business organizationsin a single industry are roughly similarfrom place to place. Under these conditions a particularly effective practice, occupationalspecialty, or principle of coordinationcan be codified into mythlike form. The laws, the educational and credentialing systems, and public opinion then make it necessary or advantageous for organizationsto incorporatethe new structures. The degree of collective organization of the environment. The myths generated by particular organizational practices and diffused through relational networks have legitimacy based on the supposition that they are rationally effective. But many myths also have official legitimacy based on legal mandates. Societies that, through nation building and state formation, have developed rational-legal orders are especially prone to give collective (legal) authority to institutions which legitimate particular organizational structures. The rise of centralized states and integrated nations means that organized agents of society assume jurisdiction over large numbers of activity domains (Swanson 1971).Legislative and judicial authorities create and interpret legal mandates; administrative agencies-such as state and federal gover nments, port authorities, and school districts-establish rules of practice; and licenses and credentials become necessary in order to practice occupations. The stronger the rational-legal order, the greater the extent to which rationalized rules and procedures and personnel become 347 American Journal of Sociology institutional requirements. New formal organizations emerge and extant organizationsacquire new structural elements. Leadershipeforts of local organizations. The rise of the state and the expansion of collective jurisdiction are often thought to result in domesticated organizations(Carlson1962) subject to high levels of goal displacement (Clark 1956; Selznick 1949; and Zald and Denton 1963). This view is misleading: organizations do often adapt to their institutional contexts, but they often play active roles in shaping those contexts (Dowling and Pfeffer 1975; Parsons 1956; Perrow 1970; Thompson 1967). Many organizations actively seek charters from collective authorities and manage to institutionalize their goals and structures in the rules of such authorities.Efforts to mold institutional environmentsproceed along two dimensions. First, powerful organizations force their immediate relational networks to adapt to their structures and relations. For instance, automobile producers help create demands for particular kinds of roads, transportation systems, and fuels that make automobiles virtual necessities; competitive forms of transportationhave to adapt to the existing relational context. But second, powerful organizations attempt to build their goals and proceduresdirectly into society as institutional rules.Automobile producers, for instance, attempt to create the standards in public opinion defining desirable cars, to influence legal standards defining satisfactory cars, to affect judicial rules defining cars adequate enough to avoid manufacturerliability, and to force agents of the collectivity to purchase only their cars. Rivals must then compet e both in social networks or markets and in contexts of institutional rules which are defined by extant organizations. In this fashion, given organizational forms perpetuate themselves by becoming institutionalized rules.For example: Schooladministrators ho createnew curricula r trainingprograms tw o a i tempt to validatethem as legitimateinnovationsn educationalheoryand t I t c governmental equirements. f they are successful, he new procedures an r o a be perpetuated s authoritatively equired r at least satisfactory. r w s a New departments ithinbusiness nterprises,uchas personnel, dvertise a ing, or research nddevelopment epartments, ttemptto professionalizey d a b t r c creating ulesof practiceandpersonnel ertificationhat areenforced y the b schools,prestigesystems,and the laws. Organizations nder attack in competitiveenvironments-smallfarms, a o passenger ailways, r RollsRoyce-attempt to establishthemselves s cenr tral to the culturaltraditionsof their societiesin orderto receiv eofficial protection. The Impact of Institutional Environments on Organizations Isomorphismwith environmentalinstitutions has some crucial consequences for organizations: (a) they incorporate elements which are legitimated externally, rather than in terms of efficiency; (b) they employ external or 348 Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony eremonialassessment criteriato define the value of structuralelements; and (c) dependence on externally fixed institutions reduces turbulence and maintains stability. As a result, it is argued here, institutional isomorphism promotes the success and survival of organizations. Incorporatingexternally legitimated formal structures increases the commitment of internal participants and externalconstituents. And the use of externalassessmentcriteriathat is, moving toward the status in society of a subunit rather than an independent system-can enable an organization to remain successful by social definition, bufferingit from failure.Changingformalstructu res. -By designing a formal structure that adheres to the prescriptionsof myths in the institutional environment, an organization demonstrates that it is acting on collectively valued purposes in a proper and adequate manner (Dowling and Pfeffer 1975; Meyer and Rowan 1975). The incorporationof institutionalized elements provides an account (Scott and Lyman 1968) of its activities that protects the organizationfrom having its conduct questioned. The organization becomes, in a word, legitimate, and it uses its legitimacy to strengthen its support and secure its survival.From an institutional perspective, then, a most important aspect of isomorphism with environmental institutions is the evolution of organizational language. The labels of the organization chart as well as the vocabulary used to delineate organizational goals, procedures, and policies are analogous to the vocabularies of motive used to account for the activities of individuals (Blum and McHugh 1971; Mills 1940). Just as jealousy, anger, altruism, and love are myths that interpret and explain the actions of individuals, the myths of doctors, of accountants, or of the assembly line explain organizationalactivities.Thus, some can say that the engineerswill solve a specific problem or that the secretaries will perform certain tasks, without knowing who these engineers or secretarieswill be or exactly what they will do. Both the speaker and the listeners understandsuch statements to describehow certain responsibilitieswill be carried out. Vocabularies of structure which are isomorphic with institutional rules provide prudent, rational, and legitimate accounts. Organizationsdescribed in legitimated vocabulariesare assumedto be oriented to collectively defined, and often collectively mandated, ends. The myths of personnel ervices, for example, not only account for the rationality of employment practices but also indicate that personnel services are valuable to an organization. Employees, applicants, mana gers, trustees, and governmental agencies are predisposed to trust the hiring practices of organizations that follow legitimated procedures-such as equal opportunity programs, or personality testing-and they are morewilling to participate in or to fund such organizations. On the other hand, organizations that omit environmentally legitimated elements of structure or create unique structures lack acceptable 349 American Journal of Sociology egitimated accounts of their activities. Such organizationsare more vulnerable to claims that they are negligent, irrational, or unnecessary. Claims of this kind, whether made by internal participants, external constituents, or the government, can cause organizations to incur real costs. For example: With the rise of modernmedicalinstitutions,largeorganizationshat do t not arrange edical-careacilitiesfor theirworkers ometo be seenas neglim f c gent-by the workers, y managementactions,by insurers, y courtswhich b f b legallydefinenegligence, nd oft en by laws. The costs of illegitimacy n ina i urance remiums nd legalliabilitiesare very real. p a e Similarly, nvironmentalafetyinstitutions akeit important or organis m f zations to create formalsafety rules, safety departments, nd safety proa grams. No Smokingrules and signs, regardless f their enforcement, re o a necessary o avoidcharges f negligence nd to avoidthe extremeof illegitit o a mation:the closingof buildings y the state. b The rise of professionalizedconomicsmakesit useful for organizations e to incorporate roupsof economists nd econometric nalyses. Thoughno g a a one may read,understand, r believethem,econometric nalyseshelplegitio a ate the organization's lans in the eyes of investors,customers(as with p DefenseDepartmentcontractors), nd internalparticipants. uchanalyses a S can also providerationalaccountings fter failuresoccur:managers hose a w plans have failed can demonstrateo investors,stockholders, nd superiors t a that procedures ere prudentand that decisions were made by rational w means. Thus, rationalized institutions create myths of formal structure which shape organizations. Failure to incorporatethe proper elements of structure is negligent and irrational; the continued flow of support is threatened and internal dissidents are strengthened.At the same time, these myths present organizations with great opportunities for expansion. Affixing the right labels to activities can change them into valuable services and mobilize the commitments of internal participants and external constituents. Adopting external assessmentcriteria. -In institutionally elaborated environments organizations also become sensitive to, and employ, external criteria of worth. Such criteriainclude, for instance, such ceremonialawards as the Nobel Prize, endorsementsby important people, the standard prices of professionalsand consultants, or the prestige of programsor personnelin external social circles.For example, the conventions of modern accounting attempt to assign value to particular components of organizations on the basis of their contribution-through the organization's production function-to the goods and services the organization produces. But for many units-service departments, administrativesectors, and others-it is utterly unclear what is being produced that has clear or definablevalue in terms of its contribution to the organizationalproduct. In these situations, ccountants employ shadow prices: they assume that given organizational units are necessaryand calculate their value from their prices in the world outside the organization. Thus modern accounting creates ceremonial production 350 Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony functions and maps them onto economicproductionfunctions: organizations assign externally defined worth to advertising departments, safety departments, managers, econometricians, and occasionally even sociologists, whether or not these units contribute measurably to the production of outputs.Monetary price s, in postindustrial society, reflect hosts of ceremonial influences,as do economic measuresof efficiency,profitability, or net worth (Hirsch 1975). Ceremonialcriteria of worth and ceremonially derived production functions are useful to organizations:they legitimate organizationswith internal participants, stockholders,the public, and the state, as with the IRS or the SEC. They demonstrate socially the fitness of an organization.The incorporationof structureswith high ceremonialvalue, such as those reflecting the latest expert thinking or those with the most prestige, makes the credit position of an organizationmore favorable. Loans, donations, or investments are more easily obtained. Finally, units within the organization use ceremonial assessments as accounts of their productive service to the organization. Their internal power rises with their performance on ceremonial measures (Salancik and Pfeffer 1974). Stabilization. -The rise of an elaborateinstitutional environment stabiliz es both external and internal organizational relationships.Centralized states, trade association, unions, professional associations, and coalitions among organizationsstandardize and stabilize (see the review by Starbuck 1976). Market conditions, the characteristics of inputs and outputs, and technological procedures are brought under the jurisdiction of institutional meanings and controls. Stabilization also results as a given organization becomes part of the wider collective system. Support is guaranteed by agreements instead of depending entirely on performance. For example, apart rom whether schools educate students, or hospitals cure patients, people and governmental agencies remain committed to these organizations, funding and using them almost automatically year after year. Institutionally controlled environments buffer organizations from turbulence (Emery and Trist 1965; Terreberry 1968). Adaptations occur less rapidly as increased numbers of agreements are enacted. Collecti vely granted monopolies guarantee clienteles for organizations like schools, hospitals, or professional associations.The taken-for-granted (and legally regulated) quality of institutional rules makes dramatic instabilities in products, techniques, or policies unlikely. And legitimacy as accepted subunits of society protects organizationsfrom immediate sanctions for variations in technical performance: Thus,American chooldistricts(likeothergovernmental nits) have near s u monopolies nd are very stable. They must conformto widerrules about a o a properclassifications nd credentials f teachers nd students,and of topics a of study. But they are protectedby ruleswhichmakeeducationas defined 351American Journal of Sociology by these classifications compulsory. Alternative or private schools are possible, but must conform so closely to the required structures and classifications as to be able to generate little advantage. Some business organizations obtain very high levels of institutional stabilization. A large defense contractor may be paid for following agreed-on procedures, even if the product is ineffective. In the extreme, such organizations may be so successful as to survive bankruptcy intact-as Lockheed and Penn Central have done-by becoming partially components of the state.More commonly, such firms are guaranteed survival by state-regulated rates which secure profits regardless of costs, as with American public utility firms. Large automobile firms are a little less stabilized. They exist in an environment that contains enough structures to make automobiles, as conventionally defined, virtual necessities. But still, customers and governments can inspect each automobile and can evaluate and even legally discredit it. Legal action cannot as easily discredit a high school graduate. Organizational success and survival. Thus, organizational success depends on factors other than efficient coordination and control of productive activities. Independent of their pro ductive efficiency, organizations which exist in highly elaborated institutional environments and succeed in becoming isomorphic with these environments gain the legitimacy and resources needed to survive. In part, this depends on environmental processes and on the capacity of given organizational leadership to mold these processes (Hirsch 1975). In part, it depends on the ability of given organizations to conform to, and become legitimated by, environmental institutions.In institutionally elaborated environments, sagacious conformity is required: leadership (in a university, a hospital, or a business) requires an understanding of changing fashions and governmental programs. But this kind of conformity-and the almost guaranteed survival which may accompany itis possible only in an environment with a highly institutionalized structure. In such a context an organization can be locked into isomorphism, ceremonially reflecting the institutional environment in its structure, functionarie s, and procedures.Thus, in addition to the conventionally defined sources of organizational success and survival, the following general assertion can be proposed: Proposition 3. Organizationsthat incorporatesocietally legitimatedrationalized elements in their formal structuresmaximize their legitimacy and a increasetheir resources nd survivalcapabilities. This proposition asserts that the long-run survival prospects of organizations increase as state structures elaborate and as organizations respond to institutionalized rules.In the United States, for instance, schools, hospitals, and welfare organizations show considerable ability to survive, precisely because they are matched with-and almost absorbed by-their institutional environments. In the same way, organizations fail when they deviate 352 Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony from the prescriptionsof institutionalizingmyths: quite apart from technical efficiency, organizations which innovate in important structural ways bear considerablecosts in legitimacy.Figure 2 summarizes the general argument of this section, alongside the established view that organizationssucceed through efficiency. INSTITUTIONALIZED STRUCTURES AND ORGANIZATIONAL ACTIVITIES Rationalized formal structures arise in two contexts. First, the demands of local relational networks encourage the development of structures that coordinateand control activities. Such structurescontribute to the efficiency of organizations and give them competitive advantages over less efficient competitors.Second, the interconnectedness of societal relations, the collective organizationof society, and the leadershipof organizationalelites create a highly institutionalized context. In this context rationalized structures present an acceptable account of organizationalactivities, and organizations gain legitimacy, stability, and resources. All organizations, to one degree or another, are embedded in both relational and institutionalized contexts and are theref ore concernedboth with coordinatingand controlling their activities and with prudently accounting for them.Organizations in highly institutionalized environments face internal and boundary-spanning contingencies. Schools, for example, must transport students to and from school under some circumstancesand must assign teachers, students, and topics to classrooms. On the other hand, organizations producing in markets that place great emphasis on efficiency build in units whose relation to production is obscure and whose efficiency is determined, not by a true production function, but by ceremonialdefinition.Nevertheless, the survival of some organizationsdepends more on managing the demands of internal and boundary-spanningrelations, while the survival of others depends more on the ceremonial demands of highly institutionalized environments. The discussion to follow shows that whether an organization'ssurvival dependsprimarilyon relationalor on institutional demands determines the tigh tness of alignments between structures and activities. Elaboration institutional of rationalized myths Organizational conformity with institutional myths Legitimacy and resources Organizational Survival fficiency FIG. 2. -Organizational survival 353 American Journal of Sociology Types of Organizations Institutionalized myths differ in the completenesswith which they describe cause and effect relationships, and in the clarity with which they describe standards that should be used to evaluate outputs (Thompson 1967). Some organizations use routine, clearly defined technologies to produce outputs. When output can be easily evaluated a market often develops, and consumers gain considerable rights of inspection and control. In this context, efficiency often determines success.Organizations must face exigencies of close coordinationwith their relational networks, and they cope with these exigencies by organizing around immediate technical problems. But the rise of collectively organized s ociety and the increasing interconnectedness of social relations have eroded many market contexts. Increasingly, such organizations as schools, R & D units, and governmental bureaucraciesuse variable, ambiguous technologies to produce outputs that are difficult to appraise, and other organizations with clearly defined technologies find themselves unable to adapt to environmental turbulence.The uncertainties of unpredictable technical contingencies or of adapting to environmental change cannot be resolved on the basis of efficiency. Internal participants and external constituents alike call for institutionalized rules that promote trust and confidencein outputs and buffer organizationsfrom failure (Emery and Trist 1965). Thus, one can conceive of a continuum along which organizationscan be ordered. At one end are production organizations under strong output controls (Ouchi and McGuire 1975) whose success depends on the management of relational networks.At the other end are institutio nalized organizations whose success depends on the confidence and stability achieved by isomorphism with institutional rules. For two reasons it is important not to assume that an organization'slocation on this continuum is based on the inherent technical properties of its output and therefore permanent. First, the technical properties of outputs are socially defined and do not exist in some concrete sense that allows them to be empirically discovered. Second, environments and organizations often redefine the nature of products, services, and technologies.Redefinition sometimes clarifies techniques or evaluative standards. But often organizations and environments redefine the nature of techniques and output so that ambiguity is introduced and rights of inspection and control are lowered. For example, Americanschools have evolved from producing rather specific training that was evaluated according to strict criteria of efficiency to producing ambiguously defined services that are eva luated according to criteria of certification (Callahan 1962; Tyack 1974; Meyer and Rowan 1975). 354Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony Structural Inconsistencies in Institutionalized Organizations Two very general problems face an organization if its success depends primarily on isomorphism with institutionalized rules. First, technical activities and demands for efficiency create conflicts and inconsistencies in an institutionalized organization'sefforts to conform to the ceremonialrules of production. Second, because these ceremonial rules are transmitted by myths that may arise from differentparts of the environment, the rules may conflict with one another.These inconsistenciesmake a concernfor efficiency and tight coordination and control problematic. Formal structures that celebrate institutionalized myths differ from structures that act efficiently. Ceremonialactivity is significant in relation to categorical rules, not in its concrete effects (Merton 1940; March and Simon 1958). A sick worker must be treated by a doctor using accepted medical procedures; whether the worker is treated effectively is less important. A bus company must service required routes whether or not there are many passengers.A university must maintain appropriatedepartments independently of the departments' enrollments. Activity, that is, has ritual significance:it maintains appearancesand validates an organization. Categoricalrules conflict with the logic of efficiency. Organizationsoften face the dilemma that activities celebratinginstitutionalized rules, although they count as virtuous ceremonial expenditures, are pure costs from the point of view of efficiency. For example, hiring a Nobel Prize winner brings great ceremonial benefits to a university. The celebrated name can lead to researchgrants, brighter students, or reputational gains.But from the point of view of immediate outcomes, the expenditure lowers the instructional return per dollar expended and lowers the univer sity's ability to solve immediate logistical problems. Also, expensive technologies, which bring prestige to hospitals and business firms, may be simply excessive costs from the point of view of immediate production. Similarly,highly professionalized consultants who bring external blessings on an organization are often difficult to justify in terms of improved productivity, yet may be very important in maintaining internal and external legitimacy.Other conflicts between categorical rules and efficiency arise because institutional rules are couched at high levels of generalization (Durkheim 1933) whereas technical activities vary with specific, unstandardized, and possibly unique conditions. Because standardized ceremonial categories must confront technical variations and anomalies, the generalized rules of the institutional environment are often inappropriateto specific situations.A governmentally mandated curriculum may be inappropriate for the students at hand, a conventional medi cal treatment may make little sense given the characteristics of a patient, and federal safety inspectors may intolerably delay boundary-spanningexchanges. 355 American Journal of Sociology Yet another source of conflict between categorical rules and efficiency is the inconsistency among institutionalized elements. Institutional environments are often pluralistic (Udy 1970), and societies promulgate sharply inconsistent myths.As a result, organizationsin search of external support and stability incorporate all sorts of incompatible structural elements. Professions are incorporatedalthough they make overlapping jurisdictional claims. Programs are adopted which contend with each other for authority over a given domain. For instance, if one inquireswho decides what curricula will be taught in schools, any number of parties from the various governments down to individual teachers may say that they decide. In institutionalized organizations, then, concern with the efficiency of day-to-da y activities creates enormousuncertainties.Specificcontexts highlight the inadequacies of the prescriptionsof generalizedmyths, and inconsistent structural elements conflict over jurisdictional rights. Thus the organization must struggle to link the requirementsof ceremonialelements to technical activities and to link inconsistent ceremonialelements to each other. Resolving Inconsistencies There are four partial solutions to these inconsistencies. First, an organization can resist ceremonial requirements. But an organization that neglects ceremonialrequirementsand portrays itself as efficient may be unsuccessful in documenting its efficiency.Also, rejecting ceremonial requirements neglects an important source of resourcesand stability. Second, an organization can maintain rigid conformity to institutionalized prescriptions by cutting off external relations. Although such isolation upholds ceremonial requirements, internal participants and external constituents may soon become disill usioned with their inability to manage boundary-spanning exchanges. Institutionalized organizationsmust not only conform to myths but must also maintain the appearancethat the myths actually work. Third, an organization can cynically acknowledgethat its structure is inconsistent with work requirements.But this strategy denies the validity of institutionalized myths and sabotages the legitimacy of the organization. Fourth, an organization can promise reform. People may picture the present as unworkablebut the future as filled with promisingreformsof both structure and activity. But by defining the organization'svalid structure as lying in the future, this strategy makes the organization'scurrent structure illegitimate. Instead of relying on a partial solution, however, an organization can resolve conflicts between ceremonial rules and efficiency by employing two interrelated devices: decoupling and the logic of confidence.Decoupling. -Ideally, organizations built around efficiency at tempt to 356 Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony maintain close alignments between structures and activities. Conformity is enforced through inspection, output quality is continually monitored, the efficiencyof various units is evaluated, and the various goals are unified and coordinated. But a policy of close alignment in institutionalized organizations merely makes public a record of inefficiency and inconsistency. Institutionalized organizations protect their formal structures from evaluation on the basis of technical performance:inspection, valuation, and control of activities are minimized, and coordination,interdependence,and mutual adjustments among structural units are handled informally. Proposition 4. Because attempts to control and coordinate activities in institutionalizedorganizationslead to conflictsand loss of legitimacy,elements of structureare decoupledrom activitiesandfrom each other. f Some well-known properties of organizations illustrate the decoupling process : Activities are performed beyond the purview of managers. In particular, organizations actively encourageprofessionalism,and activities are delegated to professionals.Goals are made ambiguous or vacuous, and categorical ends are substituted for technical ends. Hospitals treat, not cure, patients. Schools produce students, not learning. In fact, data on technical performance are eliminated or renderedinvisible. Hospitals try to ignore information on cure rates, public services avoid data about effectiveness, and schools deemphasize measures of achievement. Integration is avoided, program implementation is neglected, and inspection and evaluation are ceremonialized. Human relations are made very important.The organization cannot formally coordinate activities because its formal rules, if applied, would generate inconsistencies. Therefore individuals are left to work out technical interdependencies informally. The ability to coordinate things in violation of the rules-that is, to get along with other people-is highly valued. The advantages of decoupling are clear. The assumption that formal structures are really working is buffered from the inconsistencies and anomalies involved in technical activities.Also, because integration is avoided disputes and conflicts are minimized, and an organization can mobilize support from a broader range of external constituents. Thus, decoupling enables organizations to maintain standardized, legitimating, formal structures while their activities vary in response to practical considerations. The organizationsin an industry tend to be similar in formal structure-reflecting their common institutional origins-but may show much diversity in actual practice. The logic of confidence nd goodfaith. -Despite the lack of coordination a nd control, decoupledorganizationsare not anarchies. Day-to-day activities proceed in an orderly fashion. What legitimates institutionalized organizations, enabling them to appear useful in spite of the lac k of technical valida357 American Journal of Sociology tion, is the confidenceand good faith of their internal participants and their external constituents. Considerations of face characterize ceremonial management (Goffman 1967). Confidence in structural elements is maintained through three practices-avoidance, discretion, and overlooking (Goffman 1967, pp. 1218).Avoidance and discretion are encouraged by decoupling autonomous subunits; overlooking anomalies is also quite common. Both internal participants and external constituents cooperate in these practices. Assuring that individual participants maintain face sustains confidencein the organization, and ultimately reinforcesconfidencein the myths that rationalizethe organization'sexistence. Delegation, professionalization,goal ambiguity, the elimination of output data, and maintenance of face are all mechanismsfor absorbinguncertainty while preserving the formal structure of the organization (March and Simon 1958).They contribute to a general aura of confidence within and outside the organization. Although the literature on informal organization often treats these practices as mechanisms for the achievement of deviant and subgroup purposes (Downs 1967), such treatment ignores a critical feature of organization life: effectively absorbing uncertainty and maintaining confidencerequirespeople to assume that everyone is acting in good faith. The assumption that things are as they seem, that employees and managers are performing their roles properly, allows an organization to perform its daily routines with a decoupled structure.Decoupling and maintenanceof face, in other words, are mechanismsthat maintain the assumptionthat people are acting in good faith. Professionalization is not merely a way of avoiding inspection-it binds both supervisors and subordinates to act in good faith. So in a smaller way does strategic leniency (Blau 1956). And so do the public displays of moraleand satisfaction which are characte ristic of many organizations. Organizations employ a host of mechanisms to dramatize the ritual commitments which their participants make to basic structural elements.These mechanisms are especially common in organizations which strongly reflect their institutionalized environments. 5 Proposition . The morean organization'sstructureis derivedrom instituf tionalizedmyths,themoreit maintains elaborate isplays of confidence, atisfacs d tion, and goodfaith, internallyand externally. The commitments built up by displays of morale and satisfaction are not simply vacuous affirmations of institutionalized myths. Participants not only commit themselves to supporting an organization'sceremonial facade but also commit themselves to making things work out backstage.The committed participants engage in informal coordination that, although often formally inappropriate, keeps technical activities running smoothly I and avoids public embarrassments. n this sense the confidenceand good faith 358 For mal Structure as Myth and Ceremony generated by ceremonial action is in no way fraudulent. It may even be the most reasonableway to get participants to make their best efforts in situations that are made problematic by institutionalized myths that are at odds with immediate technical demands.Ceremonial inspection and evaluation. -All organizations,even those maintaining high levels of confidence and good faith, are in environments that have institutionalized the rationalizedrituals of inspection and evaluation. And inspection and evaluation can uncover events and deviations that undermine legitimacy. So institutionalized organizations minimize and ceremonializeinspection and evaluation. In institutionalized organizations, in fact, evaluation accompanies and produces illegitimacy.The interest in evaluation research by the American federal government, for instance, is partly intended to undercut the state, local, and private authorities which have managed social services in the United States. The federal authorities, of course, have usually not evaluated those programswhich are completely under federal jurisdiction; they have only evaluated those over which federal controls are incomplete. Similarly, state governments have often insisted on evaluating the special fundings they create in welfare and education but ordinarily do not evaluate the programswhich they fund in a routine way.Evaluation and inspection are public assertions of societal control which violate the assumption that everyone is acting with competence and in good faith. Violating this assumption lowers morale and confidence. Thus, evaluation and inspection undermine the ceremonial aspects of organizations. 6 Proposition . Institutionalizedorganizationsseek to minimize inspection and evaluationby bothinternalmanagersand externalconstituents. Decoupling and the avoidance of inspection and evaluation are not merely devices used by the organization.External constituents, too, avoid inspecting and con trolling institutionalized organizations (Meyer and Rowan 1975). Accreditingagencies, boards of trustees, government agencies, and individuals accept ceremoniallyat face value the credentials,ambiguous goals, and categorical evaluations that are characteristic of ceremonial organizations. In elaborate institutional environments these external constituents are themselves likely to be corporately organized agents of society.Maintaining categorical relationships with their organizational subunits is more stable and more certain than is relying on inspection and control. Figure 3 summarizesthe main argumentsof this section of our discussion. SUMMARY AND RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS Organizational structures are created and made more elaborate with the rise of institutionalized myths, and, in highly institutionalized contexts, 359 American Journal of Sociology of structural The decoupling and from each other subunits from activity Isomor phism with an elaborated institutional environment â€⠀œ Rituals of ood faith The avoidance and effective FIG. 3. -The confidence and of inspection evaluation effects of institutional isomorphism on organizations organizationalaction must support these myths. But an organization must also attend to practical activity. The two requirementsare at odds. A stable solution is to maintain the organizationin a loosely coupled state. No position is taken here on the overall social effectiveness of isomorphic and loosely coupled organizations. To some extent such structures buffer activity from efficiency criteria and produce ineffectiveness.On the other hand, by bindingparticipants to act in good faith, and to adhere to the larger rationalities of the wider structure, they may maximize long-run effectiveness. It should not be assumed that the creation of microscopicrationalities in the daily activity of workers effects social ends more efficiently than commitment to larger institutional claims and purposes. Research Implications The argumentpr esented here generates several major theses that have clear researchimplications. 1. Environmentsand environmentaldomainswhich have institutionalized a greater number of rational myths generate more formal organization.This thesis leads to the research hypothesis that formal organizations rise and become more complex as a result of the rise of the elaborated state and other institutions for collective action. This hypothesis should hold true even when economic and technical development are held constant. Studies could trace the diffusion to formal organizations of specific institutions: professions, clearly labeled programs, and the like. For instance, the effects of the rise of theories and professions of personnel selection on the creation of personnel departments in organizations could be studied.Other studies could follow the diffusion of sales departments or researchand development departments. Organizationsshould be found to adapt to such environmental changes, even if no evid ence of their effectiveness exists. Experimentally, one could study the impact on the decisions of organizational managers, in planning or altering organizationalstructures, of hypothetical variations in environmentalinstitutionalization. Do managersplan differentlyif they are informedabout the existence of establishedoccupations or prog