Enabling school structure, collective responsibility, and a culture of academic optimism. Toward a robust model of school performance in Taiwan
| Published date | 15 March 2013 |
| Date | 15 March 2013 |
| Pages | 176-193 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231311304698 |
| Author | Jason H. Wu,Wayne K. Hoy,C. John Tarter |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Enabling school structure,
collective responsibility, and a
culture of academic optimism
Toward a robust model of school
performance in Taiwan
Jason H. Wu
National Academy for Educational Research, New Taipei City, Taiwan,
Republic of China
Wayne K. Hoy
School of Policy and Educational Leadership, The Ohio State University,
Columbus, Ohio, USA, and
C. John Tarter
Department of Educational Leadership, Policy, and Technology Studies,
University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this research is twofold: to test a theory of academic optimism in Taiwan
elementary schools and to expand the theory by adding new variables, collective responsibility and
enabling school structure, to the model.
Design/methodology/approach – Structural equation modeling was used to test, refine, and
expand an organizational path model of student achievement first developed in the USA.
Findings – The proposed organizational model was supported in Taiwan and was consistent with the
initial studies done in the USA. Further, two concepts were added to the model, enabling structure and
collective responsibility,both of which had significant indirect effects on student achievement through
academic optimism. Moreover, the theoretical foundations (efficacy, trust, and academic emphasis) of
the latent construct of academic optimism were confirmed again in this sample of schools in Taiwan.
Originality/value – The findings support an organizational model of student achievement, which
has application in both the USA and Taiwan. The original model was supported, refined, and
extended. Academic optimism is at the center of the model and explains student achievement for all
students. Collective responsibility and enabling school structure both predict academic optimism
directly and student achievement indirectly.
Keywords Organizational culture, Academic optimism, Collective responsibility,
Enabling school structure, Collective efficacy, Academic emphasis, Academic achievement,
Taiwan, Students, United States of America
Paper type Research paper
Schools have many trappings of bureaucracy; they are structures with hierarchy of
authority, division of labor,impersonality, rules and regulations, and a career ladder for
advancement and success (Hoy and Miskel, 2012; Weber, 1947). Although Weber (1947)
argued that from a purely technical point of view a bureaucratic administration is
capable of producing the greatest degree of efficiency, bureaucracies are most often
stigmatized as rigid structures (Merton, 1957) that distor t communication (Blau and
Scott, 1962), stifle innovation (Hage and Aiken, 1970), promote conformity (Gouldner,
1954), and alienate and exploit workers (Adler and Borys, 1996).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
Received 17 June 2012
Revised 24 October 2012
Accepted 1 November 2012
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 51 No. 2, 2013
pp. 176-193
rEmeraldGroup Publishing Limited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/09578231311304698
176
JEA
51,2
However, contemporary studies of schools often neglect the organizational
structure in favor of symbolic analyses of culture (Bolman and Deal, 2008; Schein,
2004), political inquiries of power and policy (Flyvbjerg, 1998; Elmore, 2002), and
studies of the accommodation of individuals (Duckworth et al., 2009; Seligman, 2011).
Therefore, this inquiry intends to refocus on the role of organizational structure, and to
examine how it promote academic achievement for all students.
In one of the few recent studies of school structure, McGuigan and Hoy (2006)
demonstrated that structure had an indirect influence on the academic achievement of
students regardless of their socioeconomic background. In their study, structure was a
key variable in shaping a culture of academic optimism. Such a culture was sufficiently
robust as to be a strong competitor with socioeconomic status (SES) in the prediction of
academic achievement; in fact, academic optimism had a greater effect on school
achievement than SES in both reading and mathematics. The current study extends
the work as it returns to the issue of structure and achievement. There are thre e
questions guide this research:
(1) What is the nature of structure in Taiwan’s elementary schools?
(2) How is school structure related to academic optimism and student achievement?
(3) What is the relationship between school structure, collective responsibility,
and student achievement?
The goal of this investigation is to develop and test an explanatory model that relates
the concepts of enabling structure, collective responsibility, and academic optimism
to achievement. The current inquiry builds on earlier work (Wu, 2012) with the
introduction of enabling structure into the model.
Theoretical framework
We begin by describing the principal elements of our conceptual p erspective: structure,
collective responsibility, culture of academic optimism, and achievement.
Enabling structure
Adler and Borys (1996) argue that it is not the amount of bureaucracy but rather the
kind of structure that separates good str uctures from poor ones. They theorize that
how hierarchical arrangements of bureaucracies are constructed (centr alization) and
the ways in which rules are written and administered (formalization) can be used to
differentiate organizations that work for their members from those that do not.
Centralization is the hierarchy of authority that controls organizational decision
making. The exercise of power and authority for making decisions in traditional
organizations flows directly from the top, where power is concentrated, to the bottom
of the structure, where power is diffuse. When authority is concentrated at the top of
the hierarchy, directives from superiors are expected to be followed without question.
The purpose of hierarchy is to guarantee disciplined compli ance to directives (Weber,
1947). However, hierarchy can be conceived of as a structure that helps organizational
participants solve problems as contrasted with one that creates problems. Adler and
Borys (1996) call the former enabling structures while those that create problems and
impede solutions are termed hindering structures.
Formalization is the system of written rules, regulations, and procedures that
specifies routine practices. Formalization can assist or hinder. For example, enabling
rules help employees solve problems; in fact, enabling procedures provide a set of
177
A culture of
academic
optimism
To continue reading
Request your trial