ES 3219: Early Years Education,ES 3219: Early Years Education, Week 3:Week 3: Weber:Weber: the Bureaucratization of Early the Bureaucratization of Early

Years EducationYears Education

Simon Boxley, 2007Simon Boxley, 2007

Max Weber (1864-1920):

• German theorist who argued for a ‘scientific’ approach to the research of social situations in order to uncover the importance of the relationship between material conditions, meaning and consciousness in understanding social action.

• Interested in historical development of western societies and the rise of the modern political state: looking at its economic, political, legal and religious facets

• Research focus was on the complex interrelationships between modern economic development and individual behaviour, with an emphasis on the significance of cultural and political factors in this relationship.

• Wanted to understand how monopolies over resources such as wealth, spirituality and violence were constituted – as the development of rationalization.

• Often represented as one of the founders of modern sociology and/or a representative of ‘classical’ sociology.

Marx and WeberInfluenced by German theorists of social thought/action and Marxist economics, Weber's views have some obvious similarities to Marx's notion of alienation:

• Both agree that modern methods of organisation have tremendously increased the effectiveness and efficiency of production.

• Both agree that this has allowed an unprecedented domination of man over the world of nature.

• Both agree that the new world of rationalised efficiency threatens to turn into a monster and dehumanise its creators.Weber rejected Marx’s assertion that the mode of production is responsible exclusively for the worker’s alienation:

• Bureaucratisation means the separation of the soldier from the means of violence, the teacher from the means of learning.

• Weber proposes instead that rationalisation as enacted in bureaucratic processes are the real alienating force.

• Whereas for Marx, the operation of capitalism is irrational because so riven by contradictions,, for Weber, the institutions of capitalism are the embodiment of instrumental rationality.

Rationalisation• Principle of development inherent in

the process of civilisation and western society, and rational containment of everyday modern life.

• Refers to the widespread use of technical and procedural reasoning as a way of controlling practical outcomes and mastering everyday life.

• Process by which nature, society and individual action are increasingly mastered by an orientation to planning, technical procedure and rational action.

Rationalisation & BureaucracyThe three phases of the development of reason

into bureaucracy:

1) The progressive mathematization of knowledge and experience, starting with the natural sciences and developing to include many aspects of life – it’s universal quantification; alongside this, the eradication of pre-modern ‘magical’ thinking’;

2) The development of the need for rational proofs in science and in everyday life;

3) As a result of this organisation of knowledge and experience, and of the need for proofs, the establishment of a technically educated and organized officialdom – including (bureau-professional) teachers. This marks the transition from theoretical to practical reason – the historical form of reason. (Marcuse, 1988, p. 204)

RationalityWhen analysing the historical form of rationality realised as industrialization and bureaucracy, Weber divides rationality into

• formal rationality (Zweckrationalität or ‘purposeful rationality’ or ‘subjective rationality’) – in this case humans only enter into equations insofar as they represent variables in the calculations of gain and profit;

• material rationality (Wertrationalität or ‘value rationality’ or ‘objective rationality’) – the economic maintenance of humans is considered in such a way as to take in value judgements.

Rationality “[F]ormal rationality does not go

beyond its own structure and has nothing but its own system as the norm of its calculations and calculating actions” (Marcuse, 1988, p.214)

It is thus dependant upon something other than itself for its development.

The apparatuses of capitalism and bureaucracy are in fact instruments of a force outside of themselves.

Rationality Subjugation to the bureaucratic order is

established because it puts at the individual’s “calculable disposal the world of goods and performances of which the single individual no longer has an overview of a comprehension.” (Marcuse, 1988, p.220)

The inability of the individual to understand or grasp the means of production of the society results in their subjection to its calculating managers. “The formal rationality of capitalism celebrates its triumph in… computers, which calculate everything, no matter what the purpose, and which are put to use as mighty instruments of political manipulation.” (ibid., p.225)

Rationality and irrationality Zweckrationalität and

Wertrationalität are contrasted with irrationality. Morality and rationality are also thereby separated

Rationality cannot be employed to assess competing ethical standards. “it follows that what is ‘worth’ knowing cannot itself be determined rationally, but must rest upon values which specify why certain phenomena are ‘of interest’.” (Giddens, 1972, p.42)

Four forms of social action1. Traditional action: this is habitual or routine action that

isn’t subjected to rational analysis. The actor has no explicitly considered/stated goal because action is informed by an orientation to a fixed body of traditional beliefs, where ends and means are fixed by custom, e.g. attending university because it was always assumed that you would.

2. Affectual action: this is action that is motivated by sentiment rather than reason, not orientated to a specific end, but is a reflection of the emotional state of the actor, e.g. attending a particular university because your friend will be there.

3. Wertrational action (value-based) The use of rational means to achieve a goal that is value-based. The purpose of the action is the realisation of that value. As valued ends are paramount, this can be viewed as irrational behaviour if the ends are pursued without calculation of the ‘possible costs’, e.g. attending university to engage in the self-development that higher education offers, regardless of the official ‘outcome’.

4. Zweckrational action (instrumental action): systematic rational orientation to activity. The use of rational means to attain rational goals: the actor means of action exclusively in terms of their rational efficiency, e.g. attending university to gain a degree that will improve your employment chances.

The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

The protestant ethic was not the cause of modern capitalism, but provided the impetus for the pursuit of monetary gain which allowed for the growth of rationalising activity. Once established, the spread of capitalism no longer needed a religious ethic and instead transformed most forms of social conduct into the zweckrational type.

‘… modern rational capitalism has need, not only of the technical means of production, but of a calculable legal system and of administration in terms of formal rules [which reflect] the specific and peculiar rationalism of Western culture. […] For though the development of economic rationalism is partly dependent on rational technique and law, it is at the same time determined by the ability and disposition of men to adopt certain types of practical rational conduct.’ (Weber, 1930; pp. 25-6)

The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

The spirit of capitalism:‘… the earning of more and more money […] is thought of so purely as an end in itself, that from the point of view of the happiness of, or utility to, the single individual, it appears almost entirely transcendental and absolutely irrational. Man is dominated by the making of money, by acquisition as the ultimate purpose of his life.’ (Weber, 1930; p. 53)

The protestant work ethic that is a central component of capitalism occurs in a very particular interpretation of Calvinist beliefs concerning an individual’s place on earth and their potential place in heaven.

Wealth, coupled with self-denial became the basis for interpreting one’s relationship with God. Wealth was not to be frittered away, but used frugally:

‘When the limitation of consumption is combined with this release of acquisitive activity, the inevitable practical result is obvious: accumulation of capital through ascetic compulsion to save. The restraints which were imposed on the consumption of wealth naturally served to increase it by making possible the productive investment of capital.’ (Weber, 1930: p. 172)

Bureaucracy

• Policy requires administration to see it through.

• Bureaucracy is a particular form of rationalisation that is concerned with the operation of large-scale organisations

• Bureaucracy a component of modern society and is the result of two factors;1)Changes occurring in the conditions and organisation

of society 2)Changes occurring in the system of rationality and

decision making• Bureaucratic organisation differs from the

administration of feudal societies in two ways:1)Administrative activities are carried out under

procedurally correct legal enactments2)Society becomes the ‘quantitative extension’ of

administrative tasks, which generates the need for a large bureaucratic organisation

Bureaucracy• Bureaucracy is a form of administrative rationality and a

form of domination because it promotes Zweckrationalität (‘purposeful-rationality’) over Wertrationalität (‘value-rationality’).

• Technical orientation to means and ends rules out decision making in terms of values, promotes technical guidelines and formalised decision making at the expense of appeals to ethical values.

• Networks of functions and rules of procedure form an ‘apparatus’ of administration that subordinates everyday life to functional norms– “Bureaucratization offers above all the optimum possibility for

carrying through the principle of specializing administrative functions according to purely objective considerations. Individual performances are allocated to functionaries who have specialised training and who by constant practice learn more and more. The ‘objective’ discharge of business primarily means a discharge of business according to calculable rules and ‘without regard for persons’.” (Weber, 1991, p.215)

• Bureaucracy is welcomed by capitalism which develops more fully, the more bureaucracy ‘dehumanizes’, that is succeeds in eliminating from business love, hatred and all purely emotional, personal and irrational elements.

Bureaucracy

• What Weber calls the ‘discipline of officialdom’ becomes an ‘attitude-set’ for obedience and habitual activity (ibid., p.229).

• The discipline becomes the basis of all order.

• Getting rid of the documentation does not in itself free people from the orientation to stick to habitual rules and regulations.

• The continuation of the bureaucratic machine with or without particular individuals in charge means that any radical (revolutionary) change in the system of bureaucracy is “technically more and more impossible” (ibid., p.230)

Bureaucracy and education

• The teacher is a form of trained bureaucrat. Like other bureaucrats their power is ‘overtowering’ no matter who it derives from, because it is secretive and specialised.– “Bureaucracy seeks to increase the superiority

of the professionally informed by keeping their knowledge and intentions secret.” (ibid., p.233)

• What layers of bureaucracy can you identify in contemporary schooling? How are these maintained by specialist knowledge?

‘Ideal Type’ Bureaucracy• The ‘ideal type’ is a neutral construct for the analysis of social

situations. • The ‘ideal type’ of a social situation has ‘logically consistent’

features and is never intended to relate directly to reality, but merely serve as a description to which the social commentator can compare reality.

• The ‘ideal bureaucracy’: • Presupposes a chain of authority that is hierarchically organised, with clearly defined offices, functions and responsibilities• System of impersonal rules governs the actions of members and prevails over personal inclination or sentiment• Rights and responsibilities of officials are explicitly stated and proscribed within written regulations that outline a specialised division of labour• Officials receive contractually-fixed salaries and do not own their positions or the means of production • The system of promotion for officials is based on achievement of the organisation’s goals• Officials treat people in terms of ‘cases’ rather than individuals and remain impersonal in their contact with the public• Written documentation and record keeping is the ‘evidence base’ and justification for decision making

Bureaucracy

• The impersonality that is so important for attaining and maintaining the efficiency of the organisation is dehumanising (alienating) for the individual.

• Bureaucracy promotes the centralisation of power in the hands at the top of the organisation (oligarchy), so that, in practice, those who control organisations also control the quality of their individual members’ lives.– ‘The performance of each individual worker is

mathematically measured, each man becomes a little cog in the machine and aware of this, his one preoccupation is whether he can become a bigger cog … it is horrible to think that the world could one day be filled with these little cogs, little men hanging to their jobs, and striving towards little ones … this passion for bureaucracy is enough to drive one to despair.’ (Weber 1913 cited in Ray 1999: p. 187)

Charisma Historically natural leaders in all societies have been

neither officeholders nor incumbents of an occupation but, rather, men who were considered to hold gifts of body, mind or spirit which were not available to everybody.

These ‘gifts’ took the form of ‘charisma’, in Weber’s particular sense. Charisma knows no agency of control, it is subject only to inner restraint.

As he has no office, the charismatic or ‘notable’ (leader) must maintain his recognition by proving himself. “In contrast to any kind of bureaucratic organization of

offices, the charismatic structure knows nothing of a form or of an ordered procedure of appointment or dismissal, It knows no regulated ‘career’, ‘advancement’, ‘salary’, or regulated and expert training of the holder of charisma or of his aids.” (Weber, 1991, p. 246)

What part could charisma play in the modern school? How does this match up with the notion of passion we find among early-years workers?

“The ‘Rationalization’ of Education and Training”

Education and training are central to the production and maintenance of the administrators of the bureaucratic order – people like teachers and educational officers of various kinds.

The two sources of officials’ power identified by Weber are specialist training privileged knowledge.

A problem arising from this for Marxist interpretations of educational change is that even those forms of Marxism which are based in the immediacy of workers struggle and foreground trade unions and works councils must fail in their efforts to gain control: workers’ power must be an illusion, because it is a delusion to suppose that even the most experienced workers understand the running of factories, schools and such like. Modern management is “based entirely on calculation, knowledge of demand and technical schooling – all things which need to be practiced increasingly by specialists, and which the trade unionists, the real workers, have absolutely no opportunity to learn about. Therefore, whether they like it or not, they too will rely on non-workers, on ideologues from the intellectual strata.” (ibid., p. 298)

“The ‘Rationalization’ of Education and Training”

All educational institutions are increasingly dominated by the special examinations of ‘trained expertness’ essential for the specialisation of bureaucracy: “The modern development of full bureacratization brings the system of rational, specialized, and expert examinations to the fore.” (ibid., p.241)

Weber tracks the rise of the ‘qualification’, the “certificate of education [which] becomes what the test for ancestors has been in the past… a prerequisite for equality of birth, a qualification for a canonship, and for state office.” (ibid., p.241) “When we hear from all sides the demand for an

introduction of regular curricula and special examinations, the reason behind it is, of course, not a suddenly awakened ‘thirst for education’ but the desire for restricting the supply of these positions and the monopolization by the owners of educational certificates”. (ibid., p,241).

Because of the financial implications of working over long periods towards the attainment of educational certificates, this system will favour ‘property’ over ‘charisma’.

“The ‘Rationalization’ of Education and Training”

Discipline and self-limitation are the hallmarks of the modern vocation of teaching.

“The charismatic properties of professorial personalities should be excluded as far as possible from influencing their teaching.” (Giddens, 1972, p.49)

Weber favoured the completion of the process of rationalisation of the university (and perhaps of the school) because of his belief that the only platform upon which competing values might be fought over is the political platform, not the academic. The promotion of value positions results in the promotion or retardation of careers on the basis of non strictly intellectual considerations.

Weber and Marxism

Marcuse and other Marxists argue that Weber’s rationality is capitalist through and through, and, because of this workers are bound to rebel against it.

Given the exigencies of the capitalist mode of production, it is in evitable that political power, its planning and executive aspects fall to specialists – Weber regards such a state of affairs as permanent – the ‘iron cage’ – Marxists regard this as contingent, arising from the conflating of formal rationality with capitalist rationality.

Early Years Education

Which aspects of contemporary Early Years education could be said to be Bureacratized?

Which aspects of EY Educations reflect prevailing zweckrationalität?

Is there any room for ‘charisma’ in Early Years teaching?

References

Giddens, A. (1971) Capitalism and Modern Social Theory: An Analysis of the writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Giddens, A. (1972) Politics and sociology in the thought of Max Weber, London : Macmillan

Hughes, J., Martin, P. and Sharrock, W. (1995) Understanding Classical Sociology: Marx, Weber, Durkheim London: Sage

Marcuse, H. (1988) ‘Industrialization and Capitalism in the Work of Max Weber’ in Marcuse, H., Negations: Essays in Critical Theory, London: Free Association Books

Morrison, K. (1995) Formations of Modern Social Thought. Marx, Durkheim, Weber London: Sage

Ray, L. (1999) Theorising Classical Sociology Buckingham: Open University Press

Turner, B. (1991) From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology London: Routledge trans. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills