FACULTY INFORMAL STRUCTURE, PUPIL CONTROL IDEOLOGY AND PLURALISTIC IGNORANCE
| Date | 01 February 1975 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009736 |
| Pages | 81-89 |
| Published date | 01 February 1975 |
| Author | LOUIS J. SALERNO,DONALD J. WILLOWER |
| Subject Matter | Education |
THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION
VOLUME XIII, NUMBER 2 OCTOBER, 1975
FACULTY INFORMAL STRUCTURE, PUPIL CONTROL
IDEOLOGY AND PLURALISTIC IGNORANCE
LOUIS J. SALERNO AND DONALD J. WILLOWER
Pupil Control Ideology is expressed in terms of a custodial-humanistic continuum. A
cutodial orientation stresses the maintenance of order through strong discipline and punitive
sanctions; a humanistic orientation emphasizes trust and optimism concerning students'
ability to be self-disciplining. Pluralistic ignorance is defined as the shared misperception of
an attitude, norm or belief held by members of a group. 296 faculty members from 17
elementary and two high schools in a single school district completed three versions of the
PCI form and a sociometric scale. Findings mealed inter alia that there were positive
relationships between the individual teacher's PCI and his perception of the PCI both of
members of his informal group and teachers in the school district. Individual teachers also
perceived the PCI of the typical teacher in the district to be more custodial than his actual
PCI. Although perceptions of the PCI of members in the informal group were also
more custodial than actual measurements indicated, such perceptions were more
accurate.
INTRODUCTION
The concept of informal organization or informal structure has in-
trigued students of organization since the studies of Mayo and his as-
sociates,1 and the now classic work of Barnard.2 Also, during the thirties,
Moreno elaborated the sociometric techniques that enabled investigators
to chart informal group memberships within formal organizations.3 In
studies of public school organizations, sociometric techniques have been
used quite widely to depict the informal structure of classroom groups but
they have not been employed as extensively to chart faculty informal struc-
ture.
A more recent line of inquiry has examined public schools within a
social system perspective and has paid particular attention to the part
played by concern with client control in such organizations.4 It has been
argued that norms for social distance between teachers and pupils and for
strict pupil control pervade the teacher group and are a signal feature of
the subculture of that collectivity.5 It was further contended that an adap-
tive teacher response is the exhibition of behavior that conforms to these
norms, at least in settings where the teachers are highly visible to col-
leagues. This fosters pluralistic ignorance or shared misperceptions such
that teachers perceive other teachers to be more rigid in their views on
pupil control than is actually the case.
Previous studies have examined the pupil control ideology (PCI) of
LOUIS J. SALERNO (Ed. D. Penn State) is with the Warren County (Pa.) Area Voca-
tional-technical School. DONALD J. WILLOWER is professor of education, Penn State
University, and president of the University Council for Educational Administration.
To continue reading
Request your trial