In light of our readings and discussions, what are the strengths and limitations of the structure you inhabit?


For this particular response, I am going to focus on several previous districts where I have worked in comparison to the district where I currently work. District A lacked any structure whatsoever. Each principal served as site-based administrator with little direction or leadership from the local board or Superintendent. In fact, I only met the Superintendent once while I was there. One morning in the spring of the year, she arrived at the urban school where I was teaching eighth grade in her leather suit. The students were, to say the least, unimpressed and I was mortified that the students barely had enough to eat for breakfast that morning and the Superintendent was so “out of touch” with the reality of the students’ lives. The system was not structured and I would not even say the system was based on the HR frame. I would probably categorize the system as highly political. The strengths were limited and the limitations were many. How were we to help our students when we had little support for the local board of education and a Superintendent who was so “out of touch” with reality?

District B was based on the HR framework. There were numerous strengths to this framework as the Superintendent was in touch with the students, teachers and administrators of the district. He knew the students and employees and celebrated their accomplishments. He was also present when they suffered loss in their lives. The Superintendent was highly visible at the local school setting and had an “open door” policy at all times. The district was also highly structured as they offered specific programs and support for the local schools. As a Coordinator of the Gifted Program and teacher, I experienced much support and encouragement from my administrators. I felt the Central Office was very warm and inviting. I believe the district is successful because of the combination of frames that are evident.

District C is also based on the HR frame and is structured, yet allows for creativity among the stakeholders. There are numerous programs being implemented and numerous support personnel within the district. The resources are implemented in a most appropriate manner as they support students, teachers and families. The Superintendent and local school board members are highly visible. The Associate Superintendents are supportive and encouraging to the stakeholders. There are numerous benefits, yet the limitations are few. As I stated earlier, the district is structured, yet allows creativity and input from the administrators at monthly meetings and a very active Teacher and Associate Council. The Superintendent facilitates the Council meetings.

In conclusion, I believe the most healthy and viable organizations allow for a combination of frames within the structure from the local board to the individual classrooms.