Title: 
Headings: 

Content: Hence, only those who are in
direct contact with the learners can know what is happening in the
schools and judge the effectiveness of teaching. Reliance by
bureaucracies on top-down hierarchical management results
inevitably in conflict: Effective bureaucracy is commonly built around rules
that specify appropriate behavior, rewards, and sanctions
that encourage such behavior, and monitoring to ascertain
whether goals are being met, whether rules are being
followed, and whether the rules and incentive system need to
be adjusted. All are rendered highly problematic in
education, because good education and the behaviors
conducive to it are inherently difficult to measure in an
objective, quantifiable, formal manner. The measurement
problem makes it difficult or impossible for education
administrators to know what they are doing—and their
controls, as a result, threaten to be ill suited to the ends
they want to achieve. ( p. 36)
Because the public schools are governed, funded, and directed
through the political process, the interests of parents and
students receive no more weight than the interests of any other
group. Indeed, Chubb and Moe argue that parents and students will
have less influence than others because of certain structural
features of the political process, namely the inherent power of
organized over disorganized groups. The many demands on schools
that result from this political process will be accommodated by the
educational system through the establishment of regulations,
guidelines and monitoring procedures. This political process leads
inevitably to highly bureaucratic modes of organization and
management. Rigidly hierarchical bureaucracies are not conducive
to effective learning because they do not promote or allow the
effective use of professional personnel, particularly those who are
in direct contact with students, namely teachers.