Making Sense of Assignment

Sören Augustinsson, Ulf Ericsson, Henrik Nilsson
{"title":"Making Sense of Assignment","authors":"Sören Augustinsson, Ulf Ericsson, Henrik Nilsson","doi":"10.7577/NJCIE.2770","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The primary aim of this paper is to narrow down the description of how school leaders interpret the assign-ment (the task) and identify the markers for how they look upon the conditions of doing a good job in Sweden. The aim is in the context of practice-based and process-oriented research. We use complexity and complexity theories to frame the emerging practice of leading and organizing. This is in contrast to techno-cratic homogenization—that is, law texts, steering documents, documentation, standardized methods, plan-ning, and ceremonies. A questionnaire was conducted with three open questions (n=363 out of a possible 548 participants) and four focus groups (n=21). Complexity, dilemmas, and inconsistency emerge in the respondents’ answers the closer they are to everyday action. The results show that complexity theories put focus on a conflict between the image of schools as complicated and complex. Complicated is accompanied by generalizing and weak contextualizing of control systems, standardized methods, planning, law texts, and evidence-based education—that is, the concept of technocratic homogenization. Complexity theories emphasize the life in organizations, everyday practice as leaders, and a conflict between weak and robust contextualizing from the perspective as practice-based and process-oriented research.","PeriodicalId":161134,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE)","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7577/NJCIE.2770","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The primary aim of this paper is to narrow down the description of how school leaders interpret the assign-ment (the task) and identify the markers for how they look upon the conditions of doing a good job in Sweden. The aim is in the context of practice-based and process-oriented research. We use complexity and complexity theories to frame the emerging practice of leading and organizing. This is in contrast to techno-cratic homogenization—that is, law texts, steering documents, documentation, standardized methods, plan-ning, and ceremonies. A questionnaire was conducted with three open questions (n=363 out of a possible 548 participants) and four focus groups (n=21). Complexity, dilemmas, and inconsistency emerge in the respondents’ answers the closer they are to everyday action. The results show that complexity theories put focus on a conflict between the image of schools as complicated and complex. Complicated is accompanied by generalizing and weak contextualizing of control systems, standardized methods, planning, law texts, and evidence-based education—that is, the concept of technocratic homogenization. Complexity theories emphasize the life in organizations, everyday practice as leaders, and a conflict between weak and robust contextualizing from the perspective as practice-based and process-oriented research.
合理分配工作
本文的主要目的是缩小对学校领导如何解释作业(任务)的描述,并确定他们如何看待在瑞典做好工作的条件的标记。目的是在基于实践和面向过程的研究背景下。我们使用复杂性和复杂性理论来构建新兴的领导和组织实践。这与技术官僚的同质化形成对比,即法律文本、指导文件、文档、标准化方法、计划和仪式。问卷调查包括三个开放式问题(548名参与者中的363名)和四个焦点小组(21名)。越接近日常行动,被调查者的回答中就会出现复杂性、困境和不一致性。结果表明,复杂性理论关注的是学校形象复杂与复杂之间的冲突。复杂伴随着控制系统、标准化方法、计划、法律文本和循证教育的泛化和弱背景化,即技术官僚同质化的概念。复杂性理论强调组织中的生活,作为领导者的日常实践,以及从基于实践和面向过程的研究角度出发的弱与强情境化之间的冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信