Exploring organizational learning mechanisms in special education
| Pages | 490-516 |
| Published date | 06 July 2010 |
| Date | 06 July 2010 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231011054734 |
| Author | Chen Schechter,Niv Feldman |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Exploring organizational learning
mechanisms in special education
Chen Schechter and Niv Feldman
School of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
Abstract
Purpose – The notion of organizational learning (OL) has reached the forefront of both school change
discourse and academic inquiry. However, this notion has not yet undergone deliberate thinking and
research within the special education domain. The purpose of this paper is to address this gap in the
literature by empirically investigating OL through a structural concept – organizational learning
mechanisms (OLMs) – as embedded into the learning values (culture) of special education.
Design/methodology/approach – A case study of three student’s functioning levels (low,
intermediate, and high) in a special education school provided the context for studying OLMs and the
learning values (culture) influencing their productivity.
Findings – This paper supports the existence of and the capacity for systematic learning through
institutionalized structures and procedures in a special education school. This paper also illuminates
the effect of learning values (culture) on the effectiveness of OLMs in a special education school.
Research limitations/implications – Generalizing from this case study (a special education school
comprising three levels of student functioning) is quite problematic. However, this paper supports the
merit of empirically researching OL in special education schools through the structural-cultural
framework.
Originality/value – This paper provides a useful conceptual and empirical framework to evaluate
special education schools as learning organizations.
Keywords Learning organizations, Learning processes, Israel, Secondaryeducation
Paper type Case study
Introduction
Organizational learning is imperative for survival and competitiveness in dynamic,
complex, and uncertain environments (Garvin, 1993; Nonaka, 1991; Senge, 1990). In light
of the growing complexity of schoolwork (e.g. rising parental and political influences,
alarming increases in student violence, larger diversity of students’ needs), researchers
and practitioners have highlighted the critical importance of transforming schools into
learning organizations (Chapman, 1996; Fullan, 1995; Louis, 1994, 2006; Marks and
Louis, 1999; Silins and Mulford, 2002; Stevenson, 2001). In such organizations, teachers
continuously deliberate with one another on how to solve problems that relate to
teaching and learning (Fullan, 1993, 2000; Stoll et al., 2006). In order for the isolated
working teacher to take steps toward such interactive professionalism, schools nee d to
incorporate structures and processes for dialogue and deliberation (Schechter, 2002),
thus developing and sustaining learning networks for communal negotiation of
meaning (Giles and Hargreaves, 2003; Lipton and Melamede, 1997; Schechter, 2002;
Silins et al., 2002; Strain, 2000).
The special education field contains two main setting types: segregated special
education schools and inclusive schools that co-enroll regular and special education
students. This paper focuses on the self-contained special education schools (educating
children with disabilities whose needs cannot be met in ordinary/inclusive classrooms).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
JEA
48,4
490
Received August 2009
Revised November 2009
Accepted December 2009
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 48 No. 4, 2010
pp. 490-516
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/09578231011054734
In each special education school, a diverse staff of teachers, paramedical teachers,
assistants, and administrators (principal, deputy principal, and departmental heads)
must work collaboratively and dialogue continuously to assure optimal functioning
for the child with disabilities over the course of the entire school day. This requires an
organizational structure that establishes learning networks for joint thinkin g and
learning to enhance students’ welfare (Glatthorn, 1990; Reiter, 1994). Interestingly, no
explicit indication, either theoretical or empirical, has yet emerged to support the notion
of organizational learning (OL) in special education schools.
With this said, the present paper attempted to address the gap in the literature by
empirically investigating the structure of OL, through its learning mechanisms and
processes, as embedded into the culture (learning values) of special education.
Particularly, a case study of three student’s functioning levels (low, intermediate, and
high) in a special education school provided the context for exploring these learning
mechanisms and the learning values influencing their productivity.
The paper begins by discussing the unique characteristics of special education, and
then it describes the study’s analytic framework and methodology. The learning
mechanisms and learning values (culture) in a special education school are presented.
Discussion draws conclusions from the study and implications for further exploration of
the OLM framework in special education.
Special education
To address the widely diverse, atypical needs of the students it serves, special education
has traditionally involved providing something “extra” and “different” (Cook and
Schirmer, 2003). Kirk (1953) delineated eight features that distinguish special educa tion
from general education:
(1) special class organization;
(2) special materials;
(3) special diagnoses;
(4) special clinical teaching procedures;
(5) intensive use of learning principles;
(6) systematic instruction;
(7) individualized instruction; and
(8) parent education.
More recently, Hallahan and Kauffman (2000) summarized seven beliefs and pra ctices
underlying special education:
(1) individualized instruction;
(2) carefully sequenced series of tasks;
(3) emphasis on stimulation and awakening of the child’s senses;
(4) meticulous arrangement of the child’s environment;
(5) immediate reward for correct performance;
(6) tutoring in functional skills; and
(7) belief that every child should be educated to the greatest extent possib le.
Organizational
learning
mechanisms
491
To continue reading
Request your trial