{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014264264264264264, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.324175824175824, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Coordination and Control of Instruction in Schools

This secondary analysis of survey data from principals and teachers of elementary schools uses Meyer and Rowan's characterization of schools as “institutionalized organizations.” Institutionalized organizations buffer their technical activities from formal organizational features by decoupling technical activities and by avoiding inspection of outcomes. These are contrasted with technical organizations, which use control and coordination to adjust and harmonize internal administrative structure to technical activities. The analysis hypothesizes that, under conditions of increased environmental demand and more complex technology, a program of school funding which is designed to prevent a decoupling response (California's ECE Program) will produce coordination and control responses like those in technical organizations. It was predicted that, under these conditions schools would show coordination marked by mutual adjustment and horizontal coordination. Data from thirteen California elementary schools participating in the ECE program were contrasted with data from eighteen schools which were not in the program. Results suggest that, with respect to coordination, ECE schools do respond to task uncertainty and increased interdependence like technical organizations.