Sociology

In sociology there are two main contrasting views to how the subject of sociology should be approached and studied, as a science or not. In this essay I will be explaining the arguments of each side of the discussion fully, and aim to show the positive and negative points of either approach to studying sociology. The first argument I will analyse is Positivism. Positivists support the view that sociology should be studied as a science, arguing that society and the activities of the individuals in society as a whole hold main similarities and attributes to the physical or natural world.

Positivists believe that social factors are largely involved in determining human behaviour, an example being that positivists think that people wish to seek partners in order to allow them to marry and produce children, letting them fulfil societies expectations of them. Positivists use scientific methodology, which means that their procedures resemble methods of collecting data that are usually seen in practice in natural sciences. Examples of some of these methods are questionnaires, structured interviews or statistics.

Using scientific procedures in the Positivists view means that more accurate results will be collected, they hold the view that it is possible to see society in an objective way. An example of this is Durkheim, who believed the social facts of society could be considered in the same way as objects and events of the natural world. He thought that social facts did not only consist of things that could be observed objectively or in a direct manner, but also belief systems which exist in the consciousness of individuals.

To look at these belief systems in a scientific manner Durkheim thought that they couldn’t be changed at will, but were controlled by society making them available to scientific approaches. Correlation is another part of scientific methodology, where by looking at different social facts correlations are found between them, where there is evidence of a relationship between two or more different factors. Durkheim found that in his study of suicide there was a relationship between suicide and religions, (e. g. Protestantism and a high suicide rate).

After correlations are found between social facts the researcher may believe that one social fact causes another to make a hypothesis, such as crime causes a person to become working class, or being working class causes a person to commit crime. One problem with this part of the positivist scientific methodology is that some correlations found by researchers may just be by chance or indirect. This can happen where two social facts are found together but in actual fact don’t have any direct connections to each other.

It can happen that a third social fact has a relationship with both the other social facts, which can cause them to be linked. An example of this is gender being the cause of both level of criminality and location in the class hierarchy, which illustrates that aren’t actually linked, but are both related to gender. In positivists research they also believe that if findings are verified and found in many different contexts such as in different societies around the world and during different time periods the research can be see as being a law of human behaviour, which is the main aim of the positivist perspective.

This is where a statement is found to be true in all circumstances, a comparison being scientific laws such as gravity being established, positivists hold the view that these laws can be found in human behaviour. Durkheim thought he had found a law of human behaviour when his research into suicide had the conclusion that suicide rates always increased when in society there was a drastic change in the economy.

Using scientific methodology such as questionnaires does have the positive of being reliable, as the data could be collected repeatedly and it is likely to achieve the same conclusions over and over again, but also has the weakness that people can lie and be biased in the questionnaires towards themselves. Another problem is that questionnaires restrict the answers of the individual being asked the questions, which also can happen in structured interviews where the individual cant put across what they want to say because of the structured questions and style of the interview.

Also questionnaires and scientific methodology doesn’t take into account the individual differences that could be involved in the issue that is being researched. An example of this is suicide. Research into the matter of suicide has been criticised when it has been done using scientific matters as Douglas made the criticism of Durkheim’s research that not all suicides can be treated as the same type of act as they could have different or contrasting meanings behind them, e. g. lderly Eskimo’s will kill themselves for the sake of their society, where as a someone in a western society may kill themselves because they are depressed.

Also, in Durkheim’s research into suicide, J. D Douglas criticized him saying that the statistics used weren’t valid, as the decision to if the sudden death was a suicide is made by the coroner, who in turn is influenced by the family and friends of the victim. This creates the possibility of there being systematic bias in the decision, having the consequence of not very reliable statistics to base his conclusions on.

Another weakness of scientific methodology is it can result in generalisations in the conclusions, where the researcher will split the data collected into different categories, as Durkheim carried out in his study into suicide, which can be too reductionist, missing out important factors in the issue being researched such as the background of the suicides etc. Another method used in sociological research is observation, which positivists believe that the social world can be objectively observed and classified.

Observation is not only used by positivists, but is also used by many anti-positivist sociologists who have observed situations in connection with subjects like education and suicide, where Atkinson observed the processes involved in the decisions made by coroners in the coroners courts. One problem with using observation is that it is restrictive in the type of situations it can be used in, such as in the study of the subject of politics, sociologists are prohibited from observing the British Cabinet.

Also because the results are based on how the situation was observed through the researcher, it is possible for there to be interference from the researcher in the data collected. Another group that support the idea of sociology being a science is realists, who see much of sociology being scientific. An example of this is the realist’s sociologist Keat, who saw Marxist sociology as scientific as the models developed by Marx was evaluating processes and institutions in society based on empirical data.

Realists suggest that both natural and sociological sciences have the same aim in the research carried out which is to develop theories and create perspectives to explain the world based on collected evidence. Auguste Comte was a founder of sociology, and through founding the subject attempted to show it as a science using a scientific manner in his research, studying social phenomena. He talked about discovering the laws social phenomena being the main aim behind the subject of sociology, and scientific methods being the best way of accomplishing this.

He also thought that society as a whole was greater than the individuals within it, which in other words meant that society was more complex than the number of people in it, that it involved many other variables. One procedure that Comte supported was the HD procedure, which was where you started with a theory, created a hypothesis based on that theory, slected a research method that could be verified and analysise the data collected through this method to see if the hypothesis was correct.

One problem with this procedure is that although it does have reliable data that is collected, and a straight forward procedure involved, a negative aspect of creating a hypothesis to work with before carrying out the research is that it brings in the possibility that the researcher will pick a research method which will be biased to the hypothesis by be the method most likely to prove it. An example of where this happened was the research into aids attempting to prove it as a ‘gay plague’. Another example of a positivist theory was made by Karl Popper, who created the theory of falsification.

Popper believed that the best way to see if a theory or conclusion was true was to let it stand the test of time. In this he meant that the longer a theory was supported and unreputed by other sociologists, the more true it was. Popper was critical towards Marx, saying that he was unscientific because he didn’t use empirical data and that Marx’s theory couldn’t be proved wrong or right as Marx left his theory open to when the revolution would actually happen, meaning that if a revolution didn’t happen in that time period, Marx would still be able to argue that it was going to happen ‘some day in the future’.

The other side of the argument of should sociology be scientific is held by anti positivists, such as Max Weber. Weber claims that to come to true conclusions the motives of a situation or a persons actions must first be understood. An example of this is if a person is fishing, are they doing it because its their hobby, or maybe because they are hungry. One process supported by Weber was verstehen, which is where the sociologist imagines himself or herself as the person or in the position of the person whose being studied.

Weber thought that the motives behind an action are just as important as the actions themselves for coming to the truth behind a subject. There third perspective involved in the debate is Post Modernism, which believe in the grand narrative, or that there is no such thing as just having one dominant theory. Post Modernists believe the best results and theories are academic pick and mix’s, where conclusions are drawn from many different perspectives and theories to get an all round finding that includes all the different points of view involved.

Post Modernists also think that there is no such thing as one objective truth, and that no one method or way of looking at sociology can arrive at true conclusions as in reality, society is always changing as is the norms and values within society. One post modernist who believes that there is no one technique that can find the truth (a belief held by epistemology) is Lyotard, who sees all epistemology as being based on more the researchers opinions instead of being based on objective knowledge. This is known as being a metanarrative.

If I were to look up the word ‘sociology’ the dictionary would tell me that it’s the study of the development, structure, and functioning of human society. For some, sociology can be a hard word to define, considering it can mean so many different things based on how that particular person looks at it. Now if you were to ask me what I think sociology mearns, at first I couldn’t really tell you. Once I had time to think about it I would more than likely say it is the study of why people are the way they are and how that affects and is effected by the world around us.

Around this same time last year I was doing research for a career project. I didn’t know very much about sociology and had no thought or intention of choosing a job in that field for my project. I was browsing through jobs though that had a high job outlook and stumbled upon Social Anthropology. I had never heard of this career and didn’t really know what it meant. After doing more research and “googling”, I realized that this job consisted of all the things I had always been curious about. I never really understood other societies or why people behaved the way they did.

I know now that anthropology has so many more components to it than the social aspect of it, but that is the main reason why I chose to do my project on it. For awhile I thought I would actually want to go to school to be an Anthropologist, but outside influences made me think otherwise. My interest in social anthropology is actually how I ended up in this class. The fact that history plays a part in it is a plus, because I love learning about history as well. Sociology just sounded interesting to me and there wasn’t much else I was interested in taking.

Furthermore, I learned a little bit about some of the more famous names in social anthropology, such as Franz Boas, Ruth Benedict, Zora Neale Hurston, Lewis Henry Morgan, and Claude Levi-Strauss. They all contributed to the science in their own ways, influenced by some and influencing others. Boas is known as the “father of modern cultural anthropology”, while Levi-Strauss was known as the “founder of structuralism”, and Morgan being one of the more controversial anthropologists. Lewis Henry Morgan was among the few to be cited by sociologist Karl Marx and social scientist Friedrich Engel.

Franz Boas was also known as the “father of American anthropology”. He was a mentor to many great names in American anthropology. His works were highly influential, works such as The Mind of Primitive Man, Anthropology and Modern Life, and The Kwakiult Ethnography. As a young child Franz was allowed to think for himself and do his own thing. His interest in sciences only grew as he got older. He knew he wanted to pursue anthropology after taking a trip to the arctic and becoming fascinated with the people there.

Claude Levi-Strauss was one of the more influential anthropologists of the 20th century. He did a lot of field work among primitive tribes and he thought that their way of life was in no way beneath the way of life of civilized societies. He was influenced by Marxism as well. Structuralism focused on society and the people that make up that society, along with their inner life. Levi-Strauss’ more important works includes The Savage Mind, Structural Anthropology, and Tristes Tropiques. So, back to why I no longer thought going to school for anthropology was a good suit for me.

I was constantly asked, “What would I do with a degree in anthropology? ” and to be honest I don’t think that I am ambitious enough for what it may require. I did learn however, that having a degree in anthropology opened the door to a number of jobs such as education, health care, museum curation, social work, international development, government, organizational psychology, non-profit management, marketing, publishing, and forensics. I may not pursue a degree in this field, but I will always have an interest in it.

Although anthropology can be considered a branch of sociology, there are ways that they differ. They both deal with the idea that our behavior is shaped by the people we surround ourselves with and cultural traditions. Anthropologists typically study non-Western societies, such as primitive cultures. On the other hand sociologists study modern Western societies. Another difference would be that anthropologists are more likely to do participant observation, while sociologists deal more with surveys. There are major differences between the two, but their overall goal of “peeling ack the layers” of societies and cultures are ssimilar. What does this all mean to me? I am only looking forward to gaining more knowledge in anthropology and look forward to learning more about sociology. In this class I hope to gain a better understanding of our own government, because of its current state. I want to know why change isn’t as easy as it may seem. I would just like to listen and learn and possibly gain some knowledge that will in turn make me a better person and allow me to be the change I want to see.

What are the key functions of education from a Functionalist Perspective? Ever since the education system was invented, there have been a lot of ideas and criticisms of how it should work. The most famous sociological groups, functionalists and Marxists, were part of this and still are today. They both think that their views are best for society. Talcott Parsons believes that the education system has three main functions. Firstly it socializes young people into key cultural values such as equality of opportunity, competition and religious morality.

Education is said by functionalists (especially Durkheim) to emphasize moral responsibilities in society that people should have towards each other. If these norms were not passed down through generations then there would be a tendency for individualism (where people believe that they are more important than social groups). Citizenship and religious education were introduced as compulsory subjects in schools to see that young people did things with thought for the society. The second function is to do with the skills that education teaches children, from literacy and numeracy to more job-specific skills.

Occupational jobs are becoming more specialized and this in turn will lead to more years in education. The final function of education, according to functionalists is the allocating of roles of young people in society. Examinations and qualifications are said to allocate people for their most suited job. The equality of opportunity took place and so higher talented people are given the most functionally important jobs for the society. Parsons was criticized as he failed to consider that the values transmitted by the educational system may be those of a ruling minority rather than society as a whole.

Like parsons, functionalists Davis and Moore saw education as a means of selecting or shifting people for different levels of the jobs market and ensuring that the most talented and qualified individuals are allocated to the most important jobs with high rewards. Society is therefore meritocracy in which people are rewarded for intelligence, ability and effort. They where criticized because the relationship between academic credentials and occupational reward is not close. Income is only weakly linked to educational attainment. There is doubt about the proposition that the educational system grades people in terms of ability.

It has been argued that intelligence is so difficult to pin down that school achievement can never equal ‘intelligence’. While Marxists do share many ideas of functionalists e. g. the fact that education prepares us for out acceptance of the values of society they also see how the education system is alienating children. Functionalists, on the other hand, seem unable to see this and believe that the education system can only do well to children by teaching them norms and values. Functionalists where criticized because as Marxists say, education system is not meritocratic as there are the influence of class, ethnicity and gender.

“We see and understand things not as they are but as we are. ” Discuss this claim in relation to at least two ways of knowing. Many things we see and understand can be affected by the society we live in, the beliefs we have, and our perceptions of the world. What I am going to try and do in this essay is discuss whether we see things and understand things not as they are, but as we are. In this essay, I will discuss several external factors which affect people and, therefore, interfere with of way of seeing and understanding. There are several issues to be discussed which can affect the way human beings understand and see hings.

There are sociologists, like David ‰mile Durkheim, who state that “society is supreme over the individual”. By saying this he wants to show us the power the society exerts on the individual. This may lead to a change in perception, and the way the individual will see and understand things. There are several ways of knowing, there is a short term P E A R L (Perception, Emotion, Reason, Language). Therefore, the society the individual lives on, the language he speaks, and cultural habits involving religion, will definitely affect the way the individual understand things.

We see several issues in this modern world which can prove my statement above. As some of you may know, Israel and Palestine have been in conflict for more than one century now. The individuals living in both societies, even though they are very close to each other (in terms of distance), the way they see and understand things are very different, very far away from each other. A individual raised inside Israel will probably have the same beliefs the others in the society do, and therefore would protect the cause of Israel against Palestine. As David ‰mile Durkheim, famous French sociologist says, “society is supreme over the individual”.

This same situation happening with the individual in Israel will also happen, despite differently, with the individual in Palestine. This individual in Palestine will probably believe his god is Allah, and that the Israelis are intruders into their territory. This clearly shows us that due to their difference in cultural backgrounds, and beliefs, creates 2 very distinct ways of seeing and understanding things, which in this case ended up in a conflict which have already resulted in the deaths of over 110 000 people, which is the same umber of people living in Charleston (US).

In this situation the distinct way of seeing and understanding things have generated this war, however there are others situation where people try to understand the others way of understanding in harmony. It is also possible to have different ways of seeing and understanding things inside the same country. As we can see, in Brazil there are over 67 tribes, in which they speak their own language, and practice their own rituals. It is certain that the vast majority of these Indians don’t share the same beliefs as the people living in he big cities (e. g. Rio de Janeiro).

The Brazilian society as a whole accept these ditterences, and there is no contlict in between them, only in some separate cases dealing with territory utility, or other specific reason. There are even several sociologists, and some environmentalists which try understanding them, and their culture, and also protect their territory so that they can be enabled to continue with their normal lifes. However this relationship with the native Braszilian tribes has not always been like this, from 1500 to 1900 it is estipulated that over 200 000 natives ave been killed.

In early years there were little access to ways of knowledge, and communication was very difficult. These could be one of the factors determining on this occupation. What I wanted to show by using this Brazilian tribes example, was that the difference in ways of seeing and understanding things don’t necessarily cause conflict. The natives share distinct perception from the world, they practice an extremely unique method which varies from tribe to tribe, and therefore they would see certain things we see as normal, with other eyes.

For example: when there is rain, ome tribes, like the Tupi’s, believe it is an offer from god so that they can raise some more crops. Meanwhile and individual from the city would see it as a normal thing, as a natural element from the precipitation cycle. Culture and religion is known for distorting our visual perception. This is, seeing things not as they are, but as we are. They affect directly on the formation of the individuals, and build them up in order to believe in their own way.

Plato, a very famous philosopher, student of Socrates which was born in Greece, developed an allegory, known as The Cave. Plato imagined individuals living in an underground cave, with their legs and neck chained so that they could not move. Behind them was a fire, which would reflect them on the opposite wall of the cave. Puppet players would play with their puppets on front of the fire, so that the shadows created by it were reflected on the wall.

The people passing through the cave entrance talking would generate an echo which the individuals living on the cave would believe were coming from the shadows on the wall. Until one day, one prisoner is taken off the cave, and shown the real world, he hen realizes that all the things he believed were actually illusions, and weren’t true. When the prisoner who was set free returned to the cave to tell the other about the truth, they didn’t believed him, and killed him because they felt offended. Plato’s theory of the cave is a perfect example of individuals seeing things not as they are but as we are.

It shows the impact of the society, which would blindly believe those shadows were true, and would refuse to open their mind, as if they were formed by it. Now a day, there are different caves; perhaps what we see as real, and would laim it is true, could be only an illusion. Therefore, as a conclusion we can see that by Joining up the three example given, we can say that the individual are extremely affected by the society they live on, the religious beliefs they have, and therefore the individual will not see things as they are but as they are.

The formation of the individuals is extremely affected by these exteriors factors which will certainly distort their image of what is real and what isn’t. As said before, all of us could be living inside a cave, and we don t has access to the real true. Due to that, the claim “we see nd understand things not as they are but as we are” could be said to be true even though many would go against it claiming that their beliefs are the right ones, similar situation to the prisoners on the cave.

One feature of a moral panic is stigmatisation. This means that Individuals Involved in that particular moral panic are labelled. For example, Mods and Rockers didn’t often fight however, after a small conflict at a seaside location many people believed that the mods and the rockers were in a consistent conflict and In turn many media sources began using words such as “antisocial” and “violent” in relation to any youth belonging to this particular subculture.

Labelling these groups as the cause of the roblem can therefore lead to self-fulfilling prophecy which causes more Mods and Rockers to believe that they should (and are expected to) act in a violent way towards each other, this makes the problem significantly more apparent In society. Another feature of a moral panic is the media amplification of a problem. For example, after Acid House gained a reputation for hosting large parties that were ‘ecstasy fuelled’. Many media sources exaggerated the extent to which there was a discrepancy of morality.

After a death related to the use of ecstasy many newspapers began to publish news which was anti-acid house despite the fact that the death was not actually related to an overdose of the drug but instead the extent to which the girl had drunk water during the party she had been at. This therefore shows that the media use a small issue in order to sell papers; they exaggerate the primary issue and even -allegedly- during the Mods and Rockers fights, even encouraged the violent behaviour that had rarely been seen beforehand. ton

There are various definitions of culture which have been put forward by various scholars but this various definition share common features about culture. One of the features is that culture is shared therefore must be viewed from a group perspective rather than individual. Culture is intangible therefore various aspects of culture are usually inferred. for the purpose of this study culture will be defined as the beliefs, knowledge, art, morals, law, customs which distinguish one group from the other i. e. Culture is a set of assumption that members in an organization share in common. It is equivalent to an individual personality and provides direction, meaning and basis for action.

Culture and International Business

Culture plays a major role in determining the effectiveness of international business. When organization move from local to global business particularly with foreign direct investment managing change become extremely difficult as managers should consider the impact of organizational culture on such decisions.

At the firm level culture influences strategy formulation, organization design, decision making, motivation, perception and leadership. In addition organizational culture dictates the management style to use, negotiation and human resource management. 2 Beside it influence on management culture influences other functions of business such as marketing, supply chain management, accounting and virtually every facet of business (lewis, 2003). How effectively management manage culture in their organization will determine the success or failure in implementation of a strategy.

James burke who was the CEO of Johnson & Johnson stated that the reason behind the excellent performance of the company and it ability to handle crisis is their culture. On the other hand the president of Mitsubishi fuso truck blamed the company’s culture of concealment for cover up of defects in product. In Enron case it was revealed that the company’s culture of intimidation and arrogance discouraged most employees from revealing the shady deals perpetrated by management. Therefore it is clear that culture affect behavior and managers should consider the organization culture when making decisions.

Recent studies have supported the role culture play in organization. According to one of the study a culture which emphasis on result and high standard has been the reason behind outstanding performance of Home depot and Campbell soup. According to many managers the ability of a manager to manage change in organization really means how his ability to manage culture i. e. no radical change can be made in organization without changing the company’s culture .

This is a study of the bureaucratic characteristics of Turkish elementary and secondary schools Little is known about the organization and foundation of these schools. This study Is d beginning In an effort to develop d body of literature In these schools. Max Weber’s (in Gerth ; Mills, 1946) thinking and Hall’s (1961) operationalization of bureaucracy form the theoretical foundation for the study.

Because the construct of alienation is the main construct that has been studied with relation to bureaucracy, this study also examines the relationships between ureaucracy and sense of power as a measure of alienation. Context Organizations surround us. Bureaucracy Is d blueprint for organlzlng human activities for a desired end. It is a sociological phenomenon that has evolved throughout the history ot clvlllzauon. As a sociological tool It has been used to bulld pyramids, to invade nations, to cure illnesses, to keep criminals incarcerated, to land on Mars, to massacre millions, to educate. nd so on. It Is the tool of power, an “effective” device to control and direct human effort and behavior. The bureaucratic theory of Max Weber has been a point of departure for the development and odification of organization structure to Influence the flow of Interrelationships within organizations (Hall, 1963). The degree of bureaucracy in an organization sets the boundaries tor human action. These boundaries that regulate people’s treedom have a by-product known as alienation.

The construct of alienation has been studied with relation to bureaucracy. It has been demonstrated that people who work in bureaucracies have a limited “say” In what they do. For good or for evil, bureaucracy is the machinery to control human behavior. What matters is how to use this device without alienating people. chools are one of the forms of bureaucracy where a large portion of our lives is spent Schools prepare youth for bureaucracies. If the schools are the places that prepare people tor bureaucratized lite. hen, the teachers in them are the agents of bureaucracies. If teachers are alienated, society may also be alienated It is possible that certain problems ascribed to bureaucracies can be related to d certain degree of bureaucracy In organizations. All organizations are bureaucratic toa degree. Human lite, even before It begins and after It ends, is in contact with bureaucratic organizations. Organizations will ontinue to dominate and alienate our lives It is worthwhile to understand what bureaucracy Is and what problems are associated with It. ureducracles surround The orlgln ot the Bureaucratic Theory Since translations of Max Weber’s works into the English language during the second part of the 1940s, a vast literature on organizations, In general, and on bureaucracy, 1 Of6 In partlcular, nas Deen generated. Max weDer (Ge in favor of bureaucratic organization: argued as Tollows The decisive reason for the advantage of bureaucratic organization has always been its purely technical superiority over any form of organization. The fully developed bureaucratic mechanism compares with other organizations exactly as does the machine with the non-mechanical modes of production.

Precision, speed, unambiguity, knowledge of files, continuity, discretion, unity, strict subordination, reduction of friction, and of material and personal costs – these are raised to the optimum point in the strictly bureaucratic administration, and especially in its monocratic form. As compared with the collegiate, honorific, and avocation forms of administration, trained bureaucracy is superior on all these points. (p. 214) Max Weber (Etzioni, 1961) listed organizational attributes that when present, constitute the bureaucratic form of organization.

1. A continuous organization of official functions bound by rules.
2. A specific sphere of competence.
3. The organization of offices follows the principal of hierarchy; that is, each lower office is under the control and supervision of a higher one.
4. The rules which regulate the conduct of an office may be technical rules or norms.
5. It is a matter of principle that members of the administrative staff should be completely separated from ownership of the means of production or administration.
6. In order to enhance the organizational freedom, the resources of the organization have to be free of any outside control and the positions cannot be monopolized by any incumbent.
7. Administrative acts, decisions, and any rules are formulated and recorded in writing. (pp. 53-54)

Based on the theory developed by Max Weber, researchers used bureaucratic theory as an analytical tool to examine organizational structure. Until the 1960s, case studies were used to assess bureaucratic characteristics of organizations. These studies were called unidimensional approach to the study of organization. Researchers who used the unidimensional approach believed that all characteristics of bureaucracy must be present to a high degree in an organization before it can be called a bureaucracy.

During the late 1950s this approach was questioned. Researchers started to think that all characteristics of bureaucracy might not be present in an organization at the same time. Some characteristics can be stronger than others. Characteristics could be independent of each other. Bureaucratic characteristics or dimensions could create different configurations of bureaucracies. Since the 1960s, imensional approaches to study bureaucracy have been used. Hall (1961) was among the first to measure bureaucratic dimensions in organizations empirically.

Hall (1961) was the first to develop a survey instrument to measure the degree of bureaucratization in organizations. After an extensive literature review, he identified six dimensions of bureaucracy: hierarchy of authority, division of labor, rules and regulations, procedural speclTlcatlons, Impersonallty, ana tecnnlcal competence. HIS instrument (Organizational Inventory) has 62 items. All dimensions have 10 items xcept for hierarchy of authority, which has 12 items. Modified versions of his instrument have been used in educational settings to assess school bureaucratization.

Researchers have added more items to his instrument during modifications. Hall’s instrument was first modified by the Canadian researcher, MacKay (1964), to measure six dimensions of bureaucracy in educational settings. In Canada, Robinson (1966), Kolesar (1967) and Punch (1967) continued to use and refine the Mackay’s instrument. These Canadian researchers were followed by Anderson (1970), Isherwood ( 1971), and Sousa (1980) in the U. S. Researchers using modified versions of Hall’s instrument have consistently found six dimensions of bureaucracy clustered around two overall higher-order dimensions.

Hall (1961) warned that one of the six dimensions could be an abureaucratic dimension. He found that the technical 4 competence dimension was inversely correlated with three dimensions. Mackay (1964) and Robinson (1966) also found that the dimensions did not converge under a single overall dimension. Punch (1967) found that six dimensions formed two higher order dimensions. Hierarchy of authority, rules and regulations, procedural pecifications, and impersonality clustered together while division of labor and technical competence clustered together.

The higher order dimension formed by the first set of dimensions is a measure of bureaucratization while the higher order dimension formed by the second set of dimensions is a partial measure of professionalism. Isherwood and Hoy (1973) confirmed that Hall’s six dimensions cluster under two separate second order dimensions. Purpose The purpose of this study is to explore the utility of Hall’s conceptualization of bureaucracy in analyzing the organizational structure of Turkish elementary and econdary schools. Research on educational organizations in Turkey is not as advanced as it is in the western countries.

Turkey adopted its centralized ministry system from European nations. No empirical studies were found on structural characteristics of Turkish public schools. Researchers do not have an empirical base to help them understand how organizations function. It is hoped that this study will start a literature base on the subject and provide a tool to assess the organizational structure of schools that is desperately needed in Turkey. Also an empirical llustration from Turkey might provide a useful addition to the literature because the literature on school organizations in developing countries is very limited.

Researchers know little about how school bureaucracy functions in other cultures.

Questions

1. How are the bureaucratic dimensions of Turkish elementary and secondary schools related?
2. What are the relationships between the bureaucratic dimensions of Turkish elementary schools and the demographic variables?
3. What are tne relatlonships between tne Dureaucratlc Olmenslons 0T lur s elementary and secondary schools and teachers’ sense of power?

Definitions Major Variables

A bureaucracy is an organizational form designed to accomplish large-scale administrative tasks by systematically coordinating the work of many individuals (Blau, 1956).

Hierarchy of authority (HA) is “the extent to which the locus of decision making is prestructured by the organization”(Hall, 1968, p. 95). Division of labor or specialization (DL) is “the extent to which work tasks are subdivided by functional specialization within the organization” (Hall, 1968, p. 95). Rule enforcement or rules and regulations (RR) is “the degree to which the behaviors of organizational members re subject to organizational control” (Hall, 1968; p. 95).

Procedural specification (PS) is “the extent to which organizational members must follow organizationally defined techniques in dealing with situations they encounter” (Hall, 1968, p. 95). Impersonality (IM) is “the extent to which both organizational members and outsiders are treated without regard to individual qualities”(Hall, 1968, p. 95). This dimension has two distinct factors. (1) Friendly climate (CLM) is the degree to which relations in the organization are friendly and warm. (2) Formality (FRM) is the degree to which nteractions among people are formal and free from emotions.

The second factor was accepted as the measure of impersonality. The friendliness of the school climate is most likely to be an outcome variable rather than a structural variable. This variable was analyzed separately. Promotions based on technical competence (TC) is “the extent to which organizationally defined “universalistic” standards are utilized in the personnel selection and advancement (Hall, 1968, p. 95). Control is the degree to which bureaucratic authority is utilized to regulate teacher behaviors.

Expertise is the degree to which professional authority is utilized to regulate teacher Sense of power (SP) is the extent to which a teacher believes he/she is able to influence the course of events in the school that holds significance for him/her (Moeller 1962). 6 Teacher’s friendship with school administrators was measured by responses to the statement, ” I have a friendship with school administrators outside the school,” on a five-point Likert type scale ranging from 1 = definitely inaccurate to 5 = definitely accurate . Demographic Variables Name of city is the school district where the teacher works.

It is operationalized as the name of the township: Karabuk (1), Safranbolu (2), Eflani (3), Eskipazar (4), Yenice (5), and Ovacik (6). Number of sessions is a two-category variable. Teachers were grouped into two categories ( ) teacners wno work at scnools tnat run one sesslon a cay ana teachers who work at schools that run two sessions a day. Level of the school refers to grades in the teacher’s school. Teachers in elementary school (K-5) were coded as one, teachers in middle schools (6-8) were coded as two, and teachers in high schools (9-11) were coded as three.

Size variables are (1) the number of teachers who are on the payroll of the teacher’s school, (2) number of students enrolled in the teacher’s school, (3) student-teacher ratio in the teacher’s school, (4) number of classrooms in the teacher’s school, and (5) number of administrators in the teacher’s school. Age of the teacher’s school is the number of years passed since the foundation of the school. Urbanization is a three-level categorical variable: teachers who work in urban schools, teachers who work in suburban schools, and teachers who work in rural schools. Urban was coded as one, suburban was coded as two, and rural was coded s three.

Occupation of principal’s father was a five-level categorical variable: teachers who work under principals whose fathers were farmers (coded 1), teachers who work under principals whose fathers were blue collar workers (coded 2), teachers who work under principals whose fathers were small business owners (coded 3), teachers who work under principals whose fathers were civil servants (coded 4), and teachers who work under principals whose fathers were professionals (code 5). 7 Sex is the gender of the teacher. Male teachers were coded as one while female teachers were coded two.

Socio-economic status of teacher was measured by three variables (1) growing up location of teacher, (2) number of sisters and brothers of teacher, and (3) father’s occupation of teacher. The grown-up location of teacher was operationalized as rural (1), town (2), city (3), big city (4), and all (5). Father’s occupation was categorized as small business owner (1), civil servant (2), blue-collar worker (3), and farmer (4). Socio economic status of students (SES) is the teacher’s principal’s perception of students socioeconomic status measured on a five point likert type scale.

Principals ere asked to rate students in their school on a five-point scale ranging from very poor (1) to very wealthy (5). Political ties of teachers were measured on a five-point Likert- type scale. Teachers were asked to respond to following statement: “l know influential people who can help me if I am in trouble in this school. ” Response options ranged from definitely inaccurate (1) to definitely accurate (5). Experience of teacher was measured by four variables:

1. age of teacher,
2. total service years of teacher in teaching,
3. total years in administrative positions
4. work experience outside teaching.

The last variable, the work experience outside teaching, was a categorical variable. Teachers who had work experience outside teaching were assigned one while teachers who did not have work experience outside teaching were assigned two. Overall alienation from work was utilized to cnec tne vallOl ty 0T sense 0T power scale. leacners were asKea to response to tne following question: “Do you wish your child to pursue a career in teaching? ” Those who said “”yes” were assigned “two” and those who said “no” were assigned “one. ” Teacher’s birthplace had two possible responses. Those who were born in the province, Karabuk, were assigned a “two. Those who were born outside the province were assigned a “one. ” Training had three potential responses. Teachers who were not graduated from teacher colleges were assigned a “one,” teachers who were not graduated from teacher colleges but 8 earned teaching certificate by attending extra training were assigned a “two,” and regular teachers who were graduated from teacher colleges were assigned a “three. ” Experience of principals had three measures:

1. age of teacher’s principal,
2. total ears in administrative positions,
3. total service years in education sector.

These measures were obtained during school visitations. Percentage of male is the percentage of male teachers in teacher’s school. Organization of the Study The relevant literature is reviewed in the second chapter. The third chapter deals with instrumentation and methodology. The findings of the pilot study are reported in the fourth chapter. The findings of the research sample are in the fifth chapter. After discussions of findings, recommendations for further research are presented in the sixth chapter.