organizational structure and the institutional environment: the case of public schools

Organizational Structure and the Institutional Environment: The Case of Public SchoolsAuthor(s): Brian RowanSource: Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Jun., 1982), pp. 259-279Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of the Johnson Graduate School of Management, CornellUniversityStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2392303 .

Accessed: 31/08/2013 03:58

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.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Sage Publications, Inc. and Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University are collaboratingwith JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Administrative Science Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.214.27.178 on Sat, 31 Aug 2013 03:58:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cjohn

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cjohn

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2392303?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Organizational Structure and the Institutional Envi- ronment: The Case of Public Schools

Brian Rowan

? 1982 by Cornell University. 0001 -8392/82/2702-0259/$00.75

Work on this paper was partially supported by a grant from the Texas Christian Univer- sity Research Foundation. The author wishes to thank John W. Meyer, W. Richard Scott, Lynn Zucker, and two anonymousASQ reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of the paper. Revisions of the manuscript were supported bya grant from the National Institute of Education, Department of Education, under Contract No. 400-80-0103. The contents of this paper do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Depart- ment of Education and the National Insti- tute of Education.

This paper develops an institutional approach to the problem of administrative expansion in public schools. It is argued that public schools add and subtract administrative positions to come into isomorphism with prevailing norms, values, and technical lore in the institutional environment. Using historical data on school districts in California, the natural histories of three specific types of administrative services were traced from their emergence as innovations to their diffusion and retention at the local level. The historical data revealed that administrative services supported by balanced institutional environments diffused morewidelyandwere morestably retained atthe local level than were services supported by imbalanced institutional environments. Further data analysis contrasted the institutional approach with more common approaches that stress size as a causal factor promoting innovation and structural differentiation. The data revealed that organizational size alone was an insufficient explanation for structural expansion and demonstrated the utility of examining the institutional determinants of organizational structures-

Recent discussions of institutional environments (Hirsch, 1972; McNeil and Minihan, 1977; Zald, 1978) and their effects on organizational structures and processes (Dowling and Pfeffer, 1975; Hirsch, 1975; Meyer and Rowan, 1977) have demonstrated that the institutional school of organization theory is a vital perspective in current research. This paper develops an institutional approach to the problem of administrative expansion in public school districts and demonstrates an important proposition in institutional analysis, that organizational structures become isomorphic with norms, values, and technical lore institutionalized in society (Parsons, 1956).

The isomorphism of organizations and environments is analyzed here from a natural history perspective, which sees administrative expansion as a process of innovation that un- folds in three stages. Innovations in administrative services begin with a period of institution building, in which new service units are defined and rationalized by lobbying publics, professions, legislatures, and regulatory agencies. As institution building proceeds, emergent services gain legitimacy and are perceived as useful additions to local school operations. This spurs a period of diffusion, in which local school districts adopt newly institutionalized service units. As adoptions become widespread, the rate of diffusion slows and a period of stabilization begins. In this stage, the rules and standards institutionaliz- ing service units remain fixed, and local districts retain newly added structures.

The natural history model outlines an ideal sequence leading to isomorphism between organizations and institutions. In practice, however, such a sequence may not occur. In education, for example, many innovations emerge but do not diffuse widely, or they diffuse widely but do not achieve stability (Passow, 1976). One of the important goals of this study is to account for differences in the diffusion and stabilization of innovative administrative units. The argument developed here points to the state of "balance" (Benson, 1975) of the institutional environment. Balance is defined as the establishment of

259/Administrative Science Quarterly 27 (1982): 259-279



ideological consensus and harmonious working relations among legislatures, publics, regulatory agencies, and professional associations. The basic idea is that innovative administrative services tend to diffuse widely and be retained for long periods in domains with balanced institutional systems, whereas in domains characterized by imbalance, diffusion is less widespread and retention more precarious. The specific processes that lead to balance are beyond the scope of this paper, but interested readers are directed to a number of previous studies discussing this issue. Blumer (1971), Spector and Kitsuse (1973), and Mercer and Richardson (1975), for example, discussed how crusading citizens groups lobbied institutional agencies in order to promote reforms, while other studies discussed the conditions under which such crusades were successful (Wilensky, 1964; Jenkins and Perrow, 1977).

This approach to innovation supplements more common approaches to the problem, such as those that see organizational size as the main factor promoting the addition of new structures to organizations (e.g., Blau, 1970; Moch and Morse, 1972). Although numerous empirical analyses have demonstrated the relationship between organizational size and the addition of newstructural units, such research has generally suffered from two shortcomings. First, cross-sectional research designs have led to a focus on the problem of structural expanision (in innovation research adoption, in structural research differentiation) without a similar emphasis on whether or not newly added structures are retained. That is most researchers of organizational structure have treated the issue of expansion as problematic without also seeing that the retention of structures is also problematic (an exception is Freeman and Hannan, 1975).

A second problem with structural research has been a general failure to consider the problem of what specific types of innovations or structural units will be adopted. For example, we know from decades of structural research that larger organizations are more likely to add new structures, but we know next to nothing about which of many possible alternative structures a given organization will adopt (an exception is Hage and Dewar, 1973). Clearly, organizations do not choose new structures at random. But what forces shape the innovation process?

In educational organizations, institutionalized norms, values, and technical lore play an extremely important role in innovation. Expanding organizations shopping for new domains to occupy or new structures to add are forced by pressures for conformity to adopt structures that have the support and endorsement of key agencies in the institutional environment. Baldridge and Burnham (1975) pointed to one reason for this. Educational innovations tend to have high levels of technical uncertainty and, as a result, can seldom be justified on the basis of solid technical evidence. Instead, educational innovations tend to gain legitimacy and acceptance on the basis of social evaluations, such as the endorsement of legislatures or professional agencies. School systems are highly sensitive to these social evaluations and tend to become isomorphic with them (Meyer and Rowan, 1978). As a result, school structures tend to reflect current institutionalized beliefs about what structures are most a ppropriate.

26OIASQ, June 1982



Structure and Institutional Environment

Although it is common to believe that the adoption of institutionalized structures protects and stabilizes organizational structures (Meyer and Rowan, 1977), it is important to note that institutionalized beliefs and regulations supporting local structures need not remain stable. As Zald (1978) pointed out, in the absence of solid technical evaluations, social evaluations can be unstable. Moral or technical crises can arise, as can competition from alternative structures in other institutional sectors, and the norms, values, and technical lore supporting organizational structures can be destabilized. An important purpose of this paper is to show that local school systems respond as actively to the decline of institutional endorsement as they do to its growth. Structures that lose the support of institutional environments are neither adopted nor retained by local school systems.

Thus, an institutional approach to the study of the addition of new structural units appears useful, especially in discussions about educational organizations. Because school systems are "domesticated' organizations (Carlson, 1967) subject to the demands of their institutional environments, they are sensitive to normative standards developed externally. As innovative structures enter the institutional system and are endorsed by social control agencies, they diffuse over time to local schools. During one period, expanding organizations might rush to adopt science programs, because this is the type of innovation currently endorsed by legislatures and professional agencies, whereas at a nother time they may add electronic data processing units. When trends in the institutional environment, most notably trends in institution building, are examined, such waves of innovation adoption can be foreseen. So too can waves of innovation rejection be foreseen. It is often the case that educational innovations suffer institutional crises, a loss of positive evaluation or endorsement. When negative evaluations emerge, even from only a portion of the institutional environment, local school systems hesitate to adopt or retain the innovations in question. The innovation is no longer diffused widely, and local schools that have adopted it soon drop it. Thus, processes occurring in the institutional environment shape both the adoption and retention of new structures in local schools.

HYPOTHESES

Many institutional environments consist of numerous social control agencies. In this study, the key members of the institutional environment of local school systems were defined as the state and federal legislatures and their constituencies, the state education agency, the state-level professional associations, and the teacher-training institutions in the state. It was assumed that these groups played the major roles in organizing, systematizing, and stabilizing new educational services in the domains studied. These agencies acted in three major areas. The first area was legislation; legislatures played a key role when, at the behest of one or more constituencies, they authorized or mandated new programs. The second area was professionalization: legislatures, professional associations, and teacher training institutions worked jointly to define the types of personnel needed for programs to develop courses of study in teachers' colleges to give these personnel a scientific knowl-

261 /ASQ, Ju ne 1982



edge base, and to develop credentialing requirements to certify their expertise. The third area was the development of administrative channels to regulate the implementation of programs or services and to provide consultation to local units. In this area, the state education agency was the central actor.

Following Benson (1975), it is argued that these numerous agencies form a network and that members of this network strive to maintain a state of balance. Balance emerges in particular domains of activity as the social control network develops ideological consensus and coordinated working relations, whereas imbalance emerges when consensus and cooperation are not achieved or are lost.

The evolution of balance in social control networks, especially during the institution-building stage, is critical to the diffusion of innovations. A central hypothesis of the institutional school is that organizations tend to become isomorphic with institutionalized norms, values and technical lore (Parsons, 1956; Meyer and Rowan, 1977). The argument here is that the emergence of balance in particular domains promotes institutionalization by transforming novel services into concrete structural units. Thus, as used here, institutionalization refers to the process by which innovations become increasingly organized, systematized, and stabilized.

From the above definition, it can be seen why balanced social control networks promote institutionalization. Various members of the network each contribute to the process by which innovations are defined and specified. An example is the diffusion of cafeteria services in education. A major act in this domain was the 1946 National School Lunch Act, which made funds available to local schools for subsidized school lunches. Although this act gave the primary support for a new school service, other actions by members of the social control environment of schools were necessary before this service could be adopted locally. Personnel to administer and implement the program were necessary, as was a means for transferring monies from the federal to the local level. Numerous agencies became involved in these problems. For example, personnel problems were dealt with by schools of education, which developed courses in school nutrition that eventually led to credentials in this special field. State education agencies established offices to coordinate the transfer of funds from national to local levels, while state legislatures developed rules about how local districts should account for such funds. Thus, the creation of this new domain of educational service involved the coordination and cooperation of numerous agencies in the institutional environment. Types of personnel were defined, their roles were specified, and the means for delivering services and accounting for activities were developed. All of this required mutually supporting structures and activities and the evolution of consensus among a host of agencies in the institutional environment.

There are a number of reasons why such activities should promote the adoption of new services. First, the evolution of balance in the institutional environment legitimizes new structures. As legislatures and professional agencies develop programs and grant credentials, new programs gain status as important collective goals and are imbued with a glow of

2621ASQ, June 1982




lawfulness and scientific rationality. By adopting such structures, local organizations obtain legitimacy in the eyes of local publics and, thereby, gain goodwill. Second, cost benefits are associated with the adoption of institutionalized structures. By adopting such structures, local organizations need not incur development and promotional costs. Finally, the adoption of institutionalized structures is less risky than the adoption of novel or illegitimate structures. Sanctions are seldom imposed on organizations using structures endorsed by key social control agencies.

It is important to remember that the emergence of balance during institution building is not inevitable. Many innovative structures gain the endorsement of one or more but not all agencies in the social control network. Nor is the maintenance of an established balance inevitable. Crises such as those suggested by Zald (1978) can bring about a state of dissensus within a social control network. The important question for this paper is not why such changes occur but rather what effects such changes have on the organizational structure of local educational organizations. Two hypotheses are suggested: Hypothesis 1: As institutional environments move toward a state of balanced positive evaluations and harmonious working relations in a given domain, the structures supported by such efforts are likely to be adopted at the local level. Hypothesis 2: As institutional environments move into crisis periods and move away from balance in a given domain, the structures formerly supported are neither likely to be adopted nor likely to be retained.

PROCEDURES

The main goal of the study was to reconstruct natural histories of institution building, diffusion, and stabilization in three specific domains of education in the California public school system between 1930 and 1970 and to examine the degree to which these natural histories supported the hypotheses. The three domains of education chosen for study were: (1) school health; (2) school psychology; and (3) school curriculum.

Two major historical documents were used to gather data on the institution-building actions of the numerous agencies involved in the educational system of California. These documents, which concentrate on state activities rather than on federal actions, were chosen because the federal government did not become active in the domains under study until very late in the time series. The first important state document used was The School Code, a compendium of legislation on schools, first codified in 1930 and updated frequently thereafter. This document was used to trace state laws authorizing education programs and also to chart certification requirements. A second important data source was The California Public School Direc- tory, published annually since 1927 by the State Department of Public Instruction. This document lists the organization chart for the Department of Public Instruction, the programs and credentials offered by teacher-training colleges in the state, and the names of the state-level professional associations in education. In addition to these sources, which focus on formal actions and associations, numerous magazines and bulletins on California schools issued by the state education agency as well as secondary sources on California education, were searched to

2631ASQ, June 1982



understand "behind-the-scenes" events that occurred concur- rently with formal actions. By far the most important of these was the journal California Schools, published throughout the period by the state education agency. Agency staff used this journal to disseminate information about state-level educational issues and trends, to mobilize support for agency agendas, and to rationalize agency actions.

Legislative histories were relatively easy to construct by searching The School Code at five-year intervals for the period 1930-1970. Professionalization was more difficult to reconstruct, in part because it had a number of dimensions, including the development of a scientific knowledge base, the granting of credentials, and the development of professional associations. In order to reconstruct the course of professionalization, The Directory was searched at five-year intervals for information about (1) program titles in teacher training colleges as evidence of the development of a knowledge base in the domains chosen for study and (2) the dates of founding of state-level professional associations. Data on credentialing was obtained by searching The School Code. Information about state-level administration was obtained from searches of The Directory, which lists the organization chart of the state education agency. The job titles listed there gave some indication of the pro- grammatic structure and emphasis of the agency. Behind-the- scenes activities of department personnel were also often described in reports originating in the agency.

A remaining problem was to gauge the effects of institution building on the adoption and retention of innovative structures by local school districts. In the early periods covered by this study, most California school districts were not locally administered, but relied instead on the County Superintendent's office for administrative supervision. Only the legal entities called City School Districts were locally administered during this time. Only these districts were included in the study because, unlike other districts, they were locally administered throughout the period of the study, and they were less likely than other districts to be merged or discontinued during the periods studied. Moreover, as Tyack (1974) pointed out, these districts were the early forerunners of modern school organizations. Thus, City School Districts have a number of ideal properties for time-series analysis. Of the 45 City School Districts in California in 1930, a random sample of 30, listed in the Appendix, was chosen for inclusion in the study.

Some of the very largest districts in the state were included, as well as numerous suburban districts in both the northern and southern parts of the state. Also included were a few districts located in the rural northern area of the state. Although the sample contained wide variations in size and other attributes, it cannot be assumed to be a random sample of all California schools, since in the early years covered by this study, City Districts were larger and probably more able to innovate than other districts.

A district was judged to have adopted a structure in a given domain when it listed an administrative officer with a job title relevant to the type of work done in a domain. As an example, a district was judged to have added structures in school health if it listed a Director of School Health, a school physician, or a

2641ASQ, June 1982




nurse on its staff. These data were obtained by searching The Directory, which contains the names and job titles of personnel for all districts in the state, at five-year intervals.

Although the use of administrative titles as an index of adoption has several problems, its use can be defended on several grounds. It is possible, of course, for a district to have structures in a given domain without having a specialized administrator. Nevertheless, job titles should roughly reflectadoption. From a practical standpoint, conformity to institutionalized rules requires that personnel in certain types of occupations be ap- pointed, and it often requires paperwork, which is an administrative function. From a symbolic standpoint, administrative titles reflect the "mission" of organizations, and it is not uncommon for titles to follow the jargon used in various domains. In any event, inaccuracies created by using job titles as an index of adoption are likely to bias conservatively the data on diffusion.

NATURAL HISTORIES

The natural history for each of the three domains studied is presented below and is accompanied by a separate figure which reports, at five-year intervals, the proportion of districts in the sample with administrative positions in a given domain. Each figure also includes a trace of activities in the institutional environment. This trace stresses information gathered from The School Code and The Directory and, thus, emphasizes formal actions concerned with developing legislation, professionalization, and state-level administration in that domain. Federal actions in these three areas are also listed, as appropri- ate. The traces do not show the development of funding patterns in the domains under study; however, except in the years after 1955 in curriculum and 1947 in school psychology, specific fundings were not attached to any of the domains. The traces also do not show routine continuations of legislative programs.

Health Services

California was a leader in defining and regulating the domain of school health. As early as 1909, the state legislature had passed legislation permitting school personnel to make medical inspections of children (Gulick and Ayres, 1913). The original purpose of such inspections was to combat the spread of serious infectious diseases, which, at the time, were the leading causes of death among school-age children (Wilson, 1964) and a serious public health problem.

After the passage of the 1909 legislation, crusaders engaged in much institution building. Initial efforts concentrated on alerting educators to the connection between health problems and learning problems, and numerous pamphlets on this topic were circulated throughout the state (Gulick and Ayres, 1913). At the same time, efforts were made to rationalize the practice of medical inspection. The difficulty was that the 1909 legislation made no mention of who was to perform medical inspection, how often they should be made, or what records should be kept. Educators also worried about the costs of such programs. The early experiences of cities such as Los Angeles and Oakland proved helpful in this regard. Their records showed that medical inspections of school children often uncovered

2651ASQ, June 1982



serious health problems; the records also gave some measure of the costs of implementing this type of program (Gulick and Ayres, 1913).

By the 1930s, early experiences with medical inspection had clarified many of the uncertainties about service delivery in this domain. The prevailing opinion was that at least yearly medical inspection was needed and that only trained personnel should be allowed to inspect children (Wood and Rowell, 1928), thus, the education profession then took the lead. By 1930, training programs in school health and hygiene had been instituted in schools of education in California. Legislative action soon followed. In 1935, The School Code mandated yearly medical inspection in local school districts. In addition, the 1935 legislation imposed certification requirements for nurses, optome- trists, dental and medical inspectors, and supervisors of health services. This trend continued for another decade. In 1945, the yearly testing of children's hearing and sight was mandated.

Although these legal requirements concerning school health remained stable for the remainder of the period covered in this study, some destabilizing forces were introduced into the domain during the 1950s. Perhaps the most significant was the increased success of the medical profession and public health officials in controlling communicable diseases. By the 1960s, after the advent of immunization,the leading cause of death among children was no longer communicable disease, but accidents (Wilson, 1964). As a result, immunization requirements for entry into school were instituted. This lessened the need for medical inspection.

With the loss of its core function, the domain of school health entered a period of uncertainty in California. As the threat of epidemics decreased, joint meetings of educators, public health officials, and physicians in the state began to be held to discuss health programs (Hill, 1951). By the 1950s, it was clear to most people in the domain of school health that yearly medical inspections by physicians were not worth the cost (Foote, 1961), but little agreement could be reached on new tasks for school health officials, despite considerable discus- sion (AMA, 1963).

In light of these trends, it seems reasonable to distinguish between conditions in the institutional environment before and after 1950. Between 1909 and 1945, various constituencies had coalesced around the issue of medical inspection and had evolved a state of balance. But in later periods, there are signs that domain consensus and work coordination were on the decline. Patterns of service delivery were uncertain, and the major rationale for the domain, medical inspection, was gone. A chief question is what effect these conditions had on the adoption and retention of health personnel at the local level. In Figure 1, the percentage of districts with a health officer- a physician, nurse, or director of school health - is shown. The time series shows that from 1930 to 1950 there was a trend toward increasing school health personnel, with the exception of a slight dip during the war years. In 1930, 30 percent of the districts had a health officer. By 1950, that number had increased to 75 percent, but after 1950, there was a decline. By 1970, only 60 percent of the districts listed a health officer. These trends are consistent with the theoretical perspective

2661ASQ, June 1982




Figure 1: Diffusion of health personnel.

Chronicle of Events in the Institutional Environment

(1) 1930: Programs in school health and child hygiene taught in state colleges (2) 1930: State law allows schools to inspect health of students (3) 1935: State law requires schools to inspect health of students at least once

a year (4) 1935: State law provides for certification of school health officials (5) 1945: State law mandates testing of students' hearing and sight at least

once a year (6) 1960: Association of School Nurses formed (7) 1970: Bureau of School Health added to Department of Public Instruction

90

(6) 80

~~~ 70 I~~~~~~(5) 0 70p

, 60

1 | / (7)

50 .Q / ~~~~~~~(3, 4)

D- 40 _ 0 a) 0)

c / (1, 2) ? 30

20 -

10

l l l~ ~~ I I I I

Year 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970

described above. The first twenty years of the time series were periods of institution building, with much coordination and consensus, and during these years districts added health personnel. But as the institutional environment slipped out of balance, the trend toward diffusion ended and a decline began.

Psychological Services

In the domain of health services, the state legislature was the earliest initiator of institution building. In school psychology, however, the earliest activities began in the education profession. As early as the turn of the century, Thorndike had begun the work on educational measurement that was to serve as the technical and scientific base of educational psychology. Nevertheless, that work might have remained obscure and peripheral to education had it not been for crusading groups such as the Mental Hygiene Movement, which, during the 1 920s and afterward, promoted mental hygiene as an important

267/ASQ, June 1982



collective goal. This movement gave interest groups, such as the parents of the mentally retarded, the impetus to demand access to public education for exceptional children, which led to the diffusion of school psychological services.

As early as 1930, the basic framework for programs in educational psychology was established. Schools of education in the state offered programs in testing and measurement and in mental hygiene, and the Department of Public Instruction had formed a Bureau of Mental Hygiene. The first chief of the bureau laid out the framework for institution building in this domain in the state superintendent's 1931 biennial report:

The function of the Bureau of Mental Hygiene was expanded in 1931 and became responsible forall classes of exceptional children not then being cared for by the State Department of Education. This included the mentally retarded, grade retarded, behavior problems, which we may classify as nervous, emotionally unstable, delinquent, and children of exceptionally high mental ability.... (Hill, 1931: 113)

Despite the grand claims for authority, the duties of the first chief were mostly centered on mobilizing political support. The chief bombarded the public with lectures, pamphlets, and magazine articles and held teachers' institutes and extension courses to promote an awareness of problems related to mental hygiene (Hill, 1931). Nevertheless, substantial achievements were long in coming. During the 1940s, the parents of mentally retarded children were the first to bring public pressure to bear on the legislature to utilize psychological services in the schools. For five successive sessions they lobbied the legislature in order to obtain access to schools for their children, and finally, in 1947, they met with success (Mercer and Richardson, 1975). In that year, the California legislature passed a bill that mandated that districts with more than fifteen retarded students provide them with services, made the first provisions for credentialing school psychologists, and provided funds to cover the "excess costs" of training retarded students. School psychologists played a key role in these new programs, since it was they who were granted sole responsibility for diagnosing student mental abilities.

The 1950s were a time of consolidation in the domain. Soon after the 1947 bill was enacted, educational psychologists throughout the state met for the first time and formed what was to become the state professional association for this occupation (Bower, 1952). At the same time, the state education agency worked behind the scenes on the first chief's agenda. Links with other state agencies were formed underthe auspices of interdepartmental committees, while special committees within the department began discussions about services for gifted and emotionally disturbed students. These latter discussions led to hearings in the state legislature in 1952, 1954, and 1956, but did not lead to legislative action because, as one legislator put it, "parents of these children . .. never organized to exert pressure on the legislature to provide help" (Bower, 1958: 64). As of 1957, the legislature was merely willing to fund a study of these issues.

Nevertheless, the consolidation and institution building of the 1950s paved the way for a second wave of major program innovation in the 1960s. In 1961, the legislature created the

268/ASQ, June 1982




Mentally Gifted Minors Program which provided funds for students who tested in the upper two percent of the 1.Q. distribution. This was closely followed in 1963 by a bill enacting programs for the neurologically impaired and for those with behavior disorders (Pearson and Fuller, 1969). At the same time, the federal government became active in the domain. Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provided funds for mentally retarded and emotionally disturbed students (Pearson and Fuller, 1969).

When the data on the diffusion of psychological personnel psychologists, psychometrists, and psychiatrists -were examined, support for the institutional approach was once again found. Figure 2 shows that before the 1947 bill, when balance had not yet been achieved in the network of social control agencies, the proportion of districts adopting psycholog-

Figure 2: Diffusion of psychological personnel.


(1) 1930: Programs in educational psychology taught in state colleges (2) 1930: Bureau of Mental Hygiene added to Department of Public Instruction (3) 1947: State law mandates education of mentally retarded (4) 1947: State law provides funds for education of mentally retarded (5) 1947: State law provides for certification of school psychologists (6) 1952: Association of School Psychologists founded (7) 1961: State law enacts program for mentally gifted minors (8) 1963: State law enacts programs for emotionally disturbed and neurologi-

cally impaired (9) 1965: Federal law (ESEA Title I) provides funds for education of mentally

retarded and emotionally disturbed

90

80

C: C 70 0

0I

. 60 (9) 0 0

(8)

50 50 (7)

3: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(6) [ 40 *

0 30 (3,4,5)

Co

Q)C ? 20 Q)

10 (1,(2)

Yea r 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970

269/ASQ, Ju ne 1982



ical services was very low. The first psychological personnel, in fact, did not appear until 1940 in the districts in the sample, despite the fact that courses in school psychology had long been taught in schools of education. Between 1945 and 1950, just after the crucial bill on the mentally retarded was passed, the proportion of districts reporting a psychologist, psychome- trist, or psychiatrist on their staff jumped from 10 percent to 33 percent. During the 1950s, as the social control network consolidated its position, that proportion remained stable. Then, with the advent of new programs during the 1960s, the proportion again rose. In 1960, 37 percent of the districts reported a psychologist, and in 1970, the proportion climbed to 50 percent.

Curriculum Services

It is generally conceded that the major era of curriculum building in California occurred between 1930 and 1950. Efforts began in 1927, when the California Curriculum Commission was established by a legislative act. The Commission, which was ap- pointed by the state board of education, was authorized to prescribe the course of study for all schools in the state. Because schools of education in the state had long been involved in discussions of curriculum building, it seems safe to say that in 1927 a state of balance existed in the domain of curriculum.

Nevertheless, there were still areas of major uncertainty. The initial activities of the commission involved the publication, by the state education agency, of two guides to curriculum reform. A guide for the elementary curriculum was published in 1930 and a guide for the intermediate grades in 1936. Free copies were sent to all schools by the state education agency with the suggestion that: the guide be studied with teachers underthe direction of a competent person in order that the progressive practices may be properly interpreted and put into operation in the classroom.... (California Journal of Elementary Education, August, 1936: 1)

Although these guides substantially reduced uncertainities in the domain of curriculum, several important steps remained. First, the guides did not become official courses of study until 1938, when a course of study in math was created. At the same time, major work on a social studies curriculum was underway, with many state-level meetings among a broad range of people in the educational community (Simpson, 1946). This curriculum did not become formal until 1946. And in 1939 another major specification took place, when certification requirements for supervisors of curriculum were legislated.

The institution building of this period was not entirely successful. For example, the new "progressive" curriculum was re- sisted by many in the state. As Douglass (quoted in Lindsay, 1944: 222) noted, "it is certain that reaction in many com- munities is against a curriculum that is child centered in outlook.' Moreover, the specifics of these reforms were questioned by those within the school system and by the public. The math curriculum of 1938 came under attack by educators in the state, in part because it had changed the pace and sequence of math instruction from customary design and because California students generally performed well below national norms on mathematics achievement tests (Fal k, 1968).

270/ASQ, June 1982




Thus, in 1946,the math curriculum was again revised, essen- tially returning it to its previous design. In addition, the social studies curriculum of 1946 came under immediate attack by one citizens' group as "a course of study to propagandize socialism" (Simpson and McPherson, 1947). The attack was so vitriolic that it eventually led to hearings in the state senate on whetherthe Curriculum Commission had the rightto prescribe curriculum within the state. The California Congress of Parents and Teachers, the California League of Women Voters, and the California Teachers' Association rallied to support the commission and the social studies curriculum, but the senate committee holding hearings concluded that, although no legal violation had occurred, the commission had, in its opinion, adopted a Isubversive" high school historytext. As a result, a new senate watchdog committee was set up to monitor the activities of the Curriculum Commission (Simpson, 1947).

With these events, curriculum reform at the state level sub- sided, and curriculum development became more decen- tralized. The commission formally retained the right to prescribe a state course of study and to recommend to the State Board of Education a state textbook series, but a policy allowing local districts to use supplementary texts gave local districts more flexibility. Nevertheless, the 1957 launching of Sputnik spawned further institution building when, as a result, the State Superintendent called school officials to Sacramento for a reexamination of many programs (Simpson, 1958). Similar concerns arose at the federal level, and in 1958 the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) was passed, which provided funds to strengthen instruction in math, science, and foreign languages (Pearson and Fuller, 1969). In 1959, the state legislature appropriated the funds necessary to receiving NDEA monies. The plan was to use these funds to expand supervisory services in these fields of study (Hall, 1959), but, in fact, funds were used mostly to purchase new equipment and materials (Johnson, 1962).

Figure 3 shows the effects of events in this domain on the diffusion of curriculum personnel, supervisors or directors of curriculum. Three waves of diffusion, each roughly correspond- ing to institution building, appear. The first occurred between 1935 and 1940, after the release of the Curriculum Commis- sion's guidelines and the requirements for the certification of curriculum supervisors. In 1935 only 10 percent of the districts in the sample listed a curriculum supervisor. In 1940, after this position was legally defined and a scope of work forthe position specified, 27 percent of the districts listed such an officer. A second wave of diffusion came between 1945 and 1950, when the proportion of districts with a curriculum supervisor rose from 20 percent to40 percent. This period roughly corresponds to the period of revision in the math and social studies curricula in the state. A third wave, much less dramatic than the first two, came between 1955 and 1965 and roughly corresponds to the period of institution building connected with the passage of NDEA.

It is interesting to note the difference between these data and the diffusion data for the other two domains. Unlike the patterns for school health and psychology, the data for curriculum show sharp rises followed by immediate drops. For example, the diffusion associated with the original course of

27 1/ASQ, June 1 982



Figure 3: Diffusion of curriculum personnel.


(1) 1936: Curriculum Commission completes guidelines for curriculum (2) 1938: Course of study adopted for math (3) 1939: State law provides for certification of supervisors of curriculum (4) 1946: Math curriculum revised (5) 1946: Social studies curriculum adopted (6) 1950: Social studies curriculum revised (7) 1958: Federal law (NDEA) provides funds for science, math, and foreign

language instruction

90

80

C: C: 0 n 70 a)

0-

E

3 60 .2_

g 50 _ ~~~~~~~~~~~(6) 50 U,

.t, + ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(7) 40

0 (3)

C 30 (2)

20

10

Year 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970

study was short-lived. After 1940 there was a decline in districts reporting curriculum officers. A plausible explanation is that once curricula were implemented, they met with failure (e.g., as revealed by test scores) and/or local resistance. There was also a notable drop in the proportion of districts with curriculum officers immediately following the 1945-1950 period of diffusion. Again, a plausible explanation is that the new social studies curriculum was destabilized by public and legislative criticism and that, once mandated programs were put in place, the personnel supervising their implementation were removed. The passage of the NDEA also had only small effects on the proportion of districts reporting curriculum supervisors. Al- though this is in part due to the fact that districts spent these funds for materials and equipment, it is also consistent with the idea that institutional environments that are not in balance do not support structural expansion. Certainly the post-1 950 domain of curriculum was not balanced. A state legislative body was acting as a "twatchdog"t over a commission that it had

272/ASQ, June 1982



It is difficult to ascertain directly the size of districts for much of the time series. Be- tween 1930 and 1970, the state education agency aggregated district data to the county level for reporting purposes. Nevertheless, the assumption of continu- ous growth seems plausible.

2

The determining factor in the decision to employ regression analysis to these data was the lack of availability at the re- searcher's computer center of alternative computational programs.


created in more friendly times. Thus, the data again appear to support the institutional approach. The domain of curriculum, which had been destablized many times and which finished the time series in a state of imbalance, appeared less able to support local structures stably than the more placid and balanced domains of school health and psychology.

INSTITUTIONAL VERSUS STRUCTURAL INTERPRETATION

The natural histories appear to support the contention that institution building, particularly when accompanied by a balanced social control network, promotes diffusion. Neverthe- less, the data presented above are subject to an alternative interpretation having little to do with institutional conditions. Throughout the time series, the districts in the sample were growing in size and complexity.1 It is possible that this growth, rather than institution building, accounted for the diffusion of structures observed in Figures 1 through 3. This section dis- cusses the relation between this interpretation, which is similar to structural theories of the role of organizational size and complexity in structural expansion, and an institutional approach.

To approach this problem, the data were analyzed using a form of generalized least squares, called by Hannan and Young (1977) least squares with dummyvariables (LSDV). The unit of analysis was the individual district, and the procedure pooled cross sections of the time series. The data were analyzed separately for each of the three domains. The dependent variable in each analysis was a dummy variable, coded 1 if a district listed an officer in the domain and 0 if it did not. There were three independent variables. The first was simply an autocorrelation term, coded 1 if the district listed an officer in the previous time period and 0 if it did not. The second independent variable was time, which was coded as the year of observation. The third independent variable was a count of the total number of occupational titles listed by a district in a given time period. Given the absence of enrollment data for the period 1930- 1950, this variable was used as a proxy for organizational size, although it is more accurately a reflection of district complexity. This last measure is the major variable of interest in a structural explanation of adoption.

A possible problem with the procedure used here is that a dummy dependent variable was used in the regression analysis. Goldberger (1972) has noted certain problems with using linear regression techniques with dichotomous dependent variables, including the potential for heteroskedasticity and for predicting values of the dependent variable larger than unity. In general, heteroskedasticity is most likely when means for the dependent variables are close to 0 or 1. In these data, this is not a problem since the means for dependent variables are .53 for health positions, .23 for psychology, and .26 for curriculum. Moreover, none of the equations predicted out-of-range values. Thus, as in other social science research (e.g., Hallinan and Tuma, 1978), regression analysis was deemed an acceptable methodological procedure for analyzing these time-series data.2 A second methodological problem in this analysis was the use of organizational complexity as a proxy for organizational size. Although size and complexity are correlated, the failure to include a specific size term in the regression analyses probably

273/ASQ, June 1982



inflated the autocorrelation terms. A final issue concerns the interpretation of the LSDV results. The procedure used here contained dummy independent variables for all but one case and thus yielded 29 district-specific regression coefficients. These coefficients are not reported, although the amount of variance in the dependent variable that they accounted for is noted in Table 1.

Table 1 shows the results of the LSDV analysis. The model, which was estimated separately for each domain, posits that adoption in a given district is a function of whether or not the district had adopted a given structure in the preceding time period, the size/complexity of the district, and the time period. The results confirmed the contention of structural theorists that adoption is a function of organizational size and complexity. In each domain, the effects of the size/complexity variable were strong and significant.

Table 1

Adoption of Administrative Units

Health Psychology Curriculum

Adoption t-1 B .28 B .25 B .06

b .26** b .28** b .06 (.06) (.079) (.05)

Size/ complexity B .55 B .34 B .50

b .032** b .02** b .03** (.006) (.006) (.007)

Year B -.25 B .13 B -.052 b -.01* b .005* b -.002

(.003) (.003) (.003) R2 district -

specific terms .18 .11 .16

Total R2 .52 .49 .33

Note: Results obtained through LSDV regression analysis. B is standardized regression coefficient, b is unstandardized coefficient, standard error is in parentheses.

* Estimate is one and a half times standard error. ** Estimate is two times standard error.

Other results, however, cannot be accounted for by a simple structural theory; the differences in the autocorrelation term across the different domains are an example. The equations for school health and school psychology had strong and statisti- cally significant autocorrelation terms, while the equation for curriculum did not. The effects of time were also different in the different domains. In school health, time had a strong negative effect; in school psychology, the effect was positive and marginally significant; in curriculum, no effect of time could be inferred.

These results are consistent with an institutional approach to organizational expansion. For example, the natural histories demonstrated that the domain of curriculum was very unstable over the period of the study and thus, according to the ideas developed above, should not be as able to stably support structures as the other more stable domains. Both the natural history data and the LSDV data paint a picture of the domain of curriculum as one in which cycles of reform and crisis followed

274/ASQ, J une 1982




one another with the consequence for local districts that they could not stably maintain administrative structures dealing with curriculum.

The differences in the stability of adoptions in the different domains are more clearly revealed in Table 2, which shows the proportion of instances in which a personnel-type position observed in any district was observed in that same district five and ten years later. That is, the table reports the proportion of positions of each type surviving over five- and ten-year intervals for the period 1930-1970. The results are similar to the LSDV regressions. At both five- and ten-year intervals, positions in school health were the most stable, positions in school psychology ranked in the middle, and positions in curriculum were the least stable. For example, in 86 percent of the instances in which a district listed a health officer, that same district had a health officer five years later. This was true of 78 percent of the observed psychology positions, but only 55 percent of the observed curriculum positions. Thus, there is strong evidence that stable institutional environments, such as those in the domains of health and psychology, were more able to support local innovations than were unstable environments, such as the one in the domain of curriculum.

Table 2

Stability of Administrative Positions

Perdentage Surviving

Over 5-year lags Over 10-year lags

Health 86 80 Psychology 78 62 Curriculum 55 41

Alternative explanations of these differences in stability appear less plausible than an interpretation based on the balance of institutional environments. For example, it seems unlikely that the differences in the autocorrelation term (or the differences shown in Table 2) are due to the possibility that different districts adopted the different innovations. Of the 30 districts in the sample, 28 added health officers at one time or another, whereas 23 adopted curriculum officers, and 23 adopted psychology officers. In addition, 29 districts adopted two or more types of officers during the study. Nor do institutionalized funding patterns appear to account for these differences. Health officers had to be funded solely at district expense, whereas psychologists and curriculum officers received some external funding support, and yet school health positions showed higher levels of stability. Also, the external prestige of the professions involved does not appear to account adequately for the observed differences. Although it may be accurate to say that physicians and psychologists have greater prestige in the community at large than do curriculum specialists, data from a larger study of the stability of administrative positions (Rowan, 1982) showed that many occupational specialties having similar or lower prestige had higher levels of retention on school staffs than did curriculum supervisors. Finally, it is unlikely that the differences in stability were due to differences in the people occupying positions. The data on stability were for

275/ASQ, June 1982



positions, not people, and districts sometimes listed positions even when no persons were currently occupying them.

It is also difficult to use structural theories of innovation and differentiation to interpretthe differences in the effects of time across the various domains. Again, an interpretation based on the institutional approach seems plausible. The results showed that organizations were less likely to adopt school health structures later in the time series. The negative effect of time on the adoption of health officers can be interpreted as a reflection of the uncertainty in the domain of school health after 1950. As the domain struggled to find a new rationale for its existence, organizations became less likely to add school health officers. A similar interpretation can be made of the lack of effect of time in the domain of curriculum. Since this domain experienced waves of crisis and reform, no clear time trend should appear in the data. In contrast, the growing consensus in the field of school psychology and the addition of new func- tions and programs in the latter stages of the time series can be interpreted as accounting for the positive effect of time on adoption in this domain.

Such findings about time, when combined with the natural histories, make a useful addition to structural theories of innovation and differentiation. When organizations are decom- posed into their constituent parts, it becomes evident that the choices of expanding organizations about what units to add are not random but are, rather, partially determined by conditions in the institutional envrionment. As a result, some insight into the direction of organizational change in any given historical period can be gained. Organizations seeking to expand appear more likely to add units that are institutionalized rather than those that are novel or undergoing crisis. An illustration of this appears in the data. Although school psychology existed as a defined discipline in the 1930s, it was novel and unsupported at first, especially as compared to the more clearly defined and more abundantly supported health professions. As a result, expanding organizations in the 1930s were more likely to add health officers than psychologists. But in the 1 960s, the tables turned. School health lost much of its institutional definition, and while districts dropped health officers, they adopted psychologists.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings reported here show the utility of an institutional approach to the problem of structural expansion. They demon- strate that organizations tend to become isomorphic with institutionalized norms, standards, and technical lore and that this process is aided by the evolution of balance within social control networks. Although this approach does not disconfirm the structural theorists' assertion that larger organizations are more likely to add structural units than smaller ones, it does supplement this view. The institutional approach begins to explain why expanding organizations prefer one type of structure over another and why some structures, once adopted, are retained for longer times than others. The data analyzed here also point to the utility of decomposing organizational structures into their component parts, although care should be taken in choosing this unit of analysis (Freeman, 1978). The decom- posed structural data revealed that processes of structural adoption and retention tended to differ in different domains

276/ASQ, June 1982




with similar variables having different effects depending on prevailing institutional conditions.

These insights give new direction to organization theory, especially the study of regulated organizations like schools, welfare agencies, and mental health clinics. Studies of structural change, whether they are of innovation or of differentiation, cannot afford to neglect the issue of structural persistence. The data analyzed here make it clear that structures, once spawned, do not inevitably persist and that an important variable affecting persistence is the state of balance in social control networks. Domains in institutional environments that lack ideological consensus or harmonious working relations appear less able to stabilize structures than do those that are in balance. Thus, the data suggest that it would be fruitful to link changes in regulated social service organizations to changes in their institutional environments and to examine more closely the links of sub- units, not to one another, but to the institutions and agencies that give them definition and support.

A critical problem for such future analyses will be the measurement of "balance" in environmental fields. In this study, states of balance or imbalance were inferred from historical sources. Future studies, however, might consider a more precise measurement procedure. For example, if questionnaire data on agency viewpoints are available, it might be possible to develop indices of attitudinal similarity based on measures of population diversity. Such indices might more precisely measure the state of ideological balance within networks and more accurately test its effects on organizations. Similarly, questionnaire data or organizational records on exchange frequency or on interagency coordination might be used to gauge the amount of work coordination within agency networks. Such procedures could more precisely specify the relationship of organizations to their institutional environments.

The contention here is that studies of institutional systems, rather than of single organizations, are needed, as well as studies of how institutional environments in fields like education are affected by changes in other institutional systems, for example mental health or society as a whole. Only then will the intimate relation of organizational structure to the wider social system become evident and the promise of institutional analysis be fulfilled.

REFERENCES

American Medical Association 1963 Proceedings: Ninth Annual

Conference on Physicians and Schools. Chicago: American Medical Association.

Baldridge, J. Victor, and Robert A. Burnham 1975 "Organizational innovation: In-

dividual, organizational, and environmental impacts." Ad- ministrative Science Quarterly, 20: 165-176.

Benson, J. Kenneth 1975 "The interorganizational net-

work as a political economy." Administrative Science Quar- terly, 20: 229-249.

Blau, Peter M. 1970 "A formal theory of differentia-

tion in organizations." Ameri- can Sociological Review, 35: 201 -218.

Blumer, Herbert 1971 "Social problems as collective

behavior." Social Problems, 18: 298-305.

Bower, Eli M. 1952 "Mental health and education

in California." California Schools, 22: 343-345.

1958 "The emotionally disturbed child: A challenge to public education." California Schools, 28: 62-68.

Carlson, Richard 0. 1967 Adoption of Educational Inno-

vations. Eugene, OR: Univer- sity of Oregon Press.

Dowling, John, and Jeffrey Pfeffer 1975 "Organizational legitimacy."

Pacific Sociological Review, 18: 122-136.

Falk, Charles J. 1968 The Development and Organi-

zation of Education in Califor- nia. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

277/ASQ, J u ne 1982



Foote, Franklin M. 1961 "Health services." In Report of

the Eighth National Conference on Physicians and Schools. Chicago: American Medical Association.

Freeman, John 1978 "The unit of analysis in organi-

zational research." In Marshall W. Meyer and Associates (eds.), Environments and Or- ganizations: 335-351. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Freeman, John, and Michael T. Hannan 1975 "Growth and decline processes

in organizations." American Sociological Review, 40: 215- 228.

Goldberger, Arthur 1972 Econometric theory. New York:

Wiley.

Gulick, Luther, and Leonard P. Ayres 1913 Medical Inspection of Schools.

New York: Survey Associates.

Hage, Jerald, and Robert Dewar 1973 "Elite values versus organiza-

tional structure in predicting innovations." Administrative Sci- ence Quarterly, 18: 279-290.

Hall, Wallace W. 1959 "Significant 1959 legislation

and the schools." California Schools, 30: 345-347.

Hallinan, Maureen, and Nancy B. Tuma 1978 "Classroom effects on

changes in children's friend- ships." Sociology of Education, 51: 270-281.

Hannan, Michael T., and Alice You ng 1977 "Estimation in panel models:

Results on pooling cross- sections and time series." In D. Heise (ed.), Sociological Methodology: 52-83. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hill, Lillian B. 1931 "Report of Bureau Chief." In

Biennial Report of the State Superintendent of Public In- struction, Part 1: 1 13-1 14. Sac- ramento, CA: State Printing Of- fice.

Hill, Patricia 1951 "California conference on

physicians and schools." California Schools, 20: 192- 202.

Hirsch, Paul M. 1972 "Processing fads and fashions:

An organization-set analysis of cultural industry systems." American Journal of Sociology, 77: 639-659.

1975 "Organizational effectiveness and the institutional environment." Administrative Science Quarterly, 22: 475-490.

Jenkins, J. Craig, and Charles Per- row 1977 "Insurgency of the powerless:

Farm workers movement (1 946-1 972)." American Sociological Review, 42: 249- 267.

Johnson, Donald W. 1962 "The effects of Title ll of

NDEA as reported by adminis- trators of California districts." California Schools, 33: 217- 230

Lindsay, Frank B. 1944 "Summary of the Berkeley

conference of public school curriculum workers." California Schools, 15: 213-255.

McNeil, Kenneth, and Edward Minihan 1977 "Regulation of medical devices

and organizational behavior in hospitals." Administrative Sci- ence Quarterly, 22: 475-490.

Mercer, Jane R., and John G. Richardson 1975 "Mental retardation as a social

problem." In Nicholas Hobbs (ed.), Issues in the Classifica- tion of Children: 463-496. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Meyer, John W., and Brian Rowan 1977 "Institutionalized organiza-

tions: Formal structure as myth and ceremony." American Journal of Sociology, 83: 440- 463.

1978 "The structure of educational organizations." In Marshall W. Meyer and Associates (eds.), Environments and Organiza- tions: 78-109. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Moch, Michael, and Edwin V. Morse 1972 "Size, centralization, and or-

ganizational adoption of innovations." American Sociological Review, 42: 716-725.

Parsons, Talcott 1956 "Suggestions for a sociological

approach to the theory of organization-I." Administra- tive Science Quarterly, 1: 63-85.

Passow, A. Harry 1976 Secondary Education: Retro-

spect and Prospect. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Pearson, Jim, and Edgar Fuller, eds. 1969 Education in the States: Histor-

ical Development and Outlook. Washington, DC: National Edu- cation Association.

Rowan, Brian 1982 "Instructional management in

historical perspective: Evi- dence on differentiation in school districts." Educational Administration Quarterly, 18: 43-59.

Simpson, Roy E. 1946 "The study of history, geogra-

phy, and related subjects in the California Schools." California Schools, 17: 231 -239.

1947 "Report on the senate committee on education." California Schools, 18: 169-171.

1958 "National security and the role of the public schools." Califor- nia Schools, 29: 42 -43.

Simpson, Roy E., and H. M. McPherson 1947 "A summary of actions of the

state board of education and the state curriculum commission in adopting 'Building America.' " California Schools, 18: 59-69.

Spector, M., and J. I. Kitsuse 1973 "Social Problems: A reformula-

tion." Social Problems, 21: 145-1 58.

Tyack, David B. 1974 The One Best System. Cam-

bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wilensky, Harold J. 1964 "The professionalization of

everyone?" American Journal of Sociology, 69: 137 -1 58.

Wilson, Charles C. 1964 School Health Services.

Washington, DC: National Edu- cation Association.

Wood, Thomas D., and Hugh Grant Rowell 1928 Health Supervision and Medical

Inspection in Schools. Philadel- phia: Saunders.

Zald, Mayer 1978 "The social control of indus-

tries." Social Forces, 57: 79- 102.

278/ASQ, June 1982




APPENDIX: Cities Used in Historical Study

Alameda Bakersfield Berkeley Chico Eureka Fresno Glendale Inglewood Long Beach Oakland Oroville Palo Alto Pasadena Petaluma Piedmont Pomona Richmond Riverside Sacramento Salinas San Diego San Francisco San Luis Obispo San Rafael Santa Ana Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Santa Monica Vallejo

279/ASQ, J une 1982



organizational structure and the institutional environment: the case of public schools

Documents