Big Mountain High School Case Study Analysis Education Essay

In this instance survey analysis, I will give a brief sum-up of the instance and the jobs I found along with particulars. I will besides supply recommendations for the territory and school leading that will turn to the awaited barriers to alter. I will establish my recommendations on the needed readings for this class every bit good as other theoreticians and their research applicable to the instance survey.
Big Mountain High School serves over 1450 pupils in grades 10-12. Large Mountain is the lone high school in the county, and besides the largest high school in the province. Its geographical location is known for its wilderness and beauty. Because of its location it is mostly a rural territory where many of the attending pupils commute more than 30 stat mis every twenty-four hours to have day-to-day direction. The population of the school ranges from diverse socio-economic backgrounds. As evidenced in the instance, 40 % of the pupils will travel on to go toing 4-year colleges, while 20 % of the pupils attend 2-year colleges. For pupils that are non college edge, as an excess educational option, the territory provides them with a vocational plan ( Smith & A ; Louis, Winter 1999 ) .
The Superintendent of the territory is Mr. Bob Carpenter a indigen of the territory. He has been the overseer for four old ages and he is described as being magnetic, a individual who makes determinations and gets things done. He is extremely respected amongst the instructors and staff because he meets straight with the instructors and listens to what they have to state. Mr. Carpenter is besides described as utilizing a bottom-up leading manner doctrine.
The chief Mr. Vogel has held the place for 15 old ages. He is known as being a dedicated manager, candid and carnival to his staff. Mr. Vogel besides adopted a bottom-up leading manner doctrine. Some nevertheless, see him to be “ crusty and impersonal ” and even unapproachable. He makes hiring determinations, nominates the section chairs, normally communicates with instructors in short staff meetings, and maintains that disposal has full authorization over the processs and policies in the school.
The sections at Big Mountain high school were given entire authorization and liberty as how they distribute the instruction assignments, how course of study and direction is designed and they besides make the determinations on budget allotments. Meetings between the principal and section caputs are non regular events, they normally meet one time every three hebdomads and the meetings are normally really short.
Finally, there are the instructors. The territory ranks the highest paid among other territories in the province, supplying the territory with a big pool of extremely qualified appliers. Teachers at Big Mountain command how they teach, have small or no treatments over learning methods, the type of direction, and have small or no input in the determination doing procedure that takes topographic point in the school. Faculty is divided and with really small interdisciplinary engagement.
There are several leading issues present in the instance. The major issues revolve around the ability of the leading to expeditiously take the school during a much needed alteration. In the instance of the mandated course of study alteration as required by the province, the treatments of the new course of study raised personal and pedagogical differences amongst the module. If the end of the leading is to further growing and alter the way in which the school is traveling, it would be wise for the leading to take a human resource frame attack as discussed in Bolman & A ; Deal, where under the human resource frame, leaders provide and foster equal engagement in the determination devising ( Bolman & A ; Deal, 2008 ) .
At Big Mountain, the caputs of section have a significant sum of influence and authorization, and are perceived by the module as decision makers and determination shapers. These differences in power have led to a deficiency of interdisciplinary engagement between section caputs and module members where Hargreaves & A ; Fink refer to as, traditional power blocks ( Hargreaves & A ; Fink, April 2004 ) .
This deficiency of interdisciplinary engagement and the misinterpretation of a collaborative leading, as become a top-down hierarchy leading, instead than a sensed bottom-up leading as expressed by the chief Mr. Vogel. It is obvious that the principal in this school will non be developing meaningful relationships with the staff. His neglect for the sentiments of the instructors during his short module meetings, along with his important leading manner resemble what Fullan ( 2001 ) describes as coercive and bossy leading.
As the freshly appointed caput for the Language Arts Department, Mr. Chester non merely appointed to the commission merely those who agree with him, he besides restricted the engagement from the instructors that will be implementing the course of study. By making so, he derailed Bolman & A ; Deal ‘s model attack, and the construct of the structural frame where the attempts of groups and persons are coordinated, and besides the human resource frame, where affecting others gives them a sense of belonging and ownership ( Bolman & A ; Deal, 2008 ) .
Even though ab initio the principal shared the determination devising with the commission, he rapidly reversed that determination and decided to do the determinations himself. However, subsequently he decided to name Chester to take the new alterations commission to implement the new course of study. One once more his rushed determination was made without the engagement and the input from the instructors, go forthing it small room to win and showing the deficiency of communicating and alliance edifice, necessary when turn toing alteration ( Kanter, Summer 1999 ) .
As the overseer, Bob Carpenter was non of much aid to the principal in set uping and developing a successful civilization of committed members within the organisation. Although important and magnetic, his strong interaction accomplishments, the ability to construct relationships while run intoing with instructors and listening to their concerns when the principal was non supportive, have earned him the regard of the instructors, minimising the authorization of the principal. As the overseer, Bob failed as a function theoretical account, and a wise man to the principal. He came across as holding his ain political docket, showing the deficiency of his leading qualities. Qualities required when constructing a successful organisation.

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>