View/Open - Drake University

. 'vided. "I IJal-entS are sitting back and thinking the. ., , d , Knowing good
things arc foine on here." offered a secondary teacher.
The mandates HF 227? warranted little Concern from small districts that had a long
hlst(3l-y of enfafins their patrons not only in district planning efforts and informational
nleetinfs. hut Were \'cry comfol~able in serving as the gathering place for \rarious community
act .i\'ities that had nothing to do with school. There was a real sense that the community had
tnourn for a long time not only what was going on with the school, bur because of the very
intimate setting. often what was going on with individual students. An elementary teacher
summed up her feelings in this way. "We are like a family. If something is going on with a
child. it affects all of us." It was a clear belief that the public wanted and deserved to know
how efforts to change the school would effect the teaching, learning, and well-being of the
district's children (Cohen & Hill. 2001). The small school districts and the communities that
support them talk about "their" children and seemed to know intuitively how organizations,
3 ~ila>.bc cspcciall!. small schools. could be best conceived as "social or~anisms." Scott
( IOc)K) \peaks of larger jurisdictions but makes the point that in such organizations.
.*intcrc.onncctic>ns are so complex and dimly understood that planning always risks
unkncn~.ingl!. cutting into its living tissue" (p. 139).
B(i ~-ricr.~
The f;lilllre to recoCnize hidden constraints during the planning stage-
thenl disco,vcred \yell inlo the implementation phase (Majone 6 Wildavsk!- 1977'
112
to hare
intervieu,ces. ~ ~ \ pnrticipnnts . ~ ~ mentioned ~ l the perceived "stafls md stops" throughout the
i,,,p~enlcnt;llion prc>cess, but clearly the most formidable harrierS
nloncy, tllc ch;lnge proccss. and tcncher turn@\'er.
"'ere lime.