Organizational identity and institutional pressure: Digitalization of the primary education

(1)

Organizational identity and institutional pressure:

Digitalization of the primary education

Master’s Thesis Msc BA – Organizational & Management Control

MSc BA - Organizational & Management Control

Faculty of Economics and Business

Supervisor: Dr. E.G. van de Mortel

Co-assessor: Dr. M.P. van der Steen

Name: Nick, M., van Gool

Student number: s2221241

Date: 20-06-2016

(2)

2

Abstract

This paper investigated the influence of a school’s identity on the way they dealt with the digitalization of primary education, when institutional pressures are also affecting this process. Where the identity of an organization serves to distinguish itself from others in the industry, institutional pressures can cause firms to adopt similar practices and thereby become more and more alike. By conducting interviews at schools of eight different denominations – constituting two different identity categories – we investigated the influence of the school’s identity and the institutional pressures on how a school dealt with digitalization of the primary education. The results show that the identity of the school has a great influence on the way in which the digital devices are deployed. Differences were found in whether or not there were digital devices dedicated to all pupils of one or more groups, the application of the devices, the proportion of lessons in which they were used and the digital activities of the teacher. The influence of the generic institutional pressures – i.e. pressures equal to all schools, regardless of denomination – was informing, by creating awareness of new developments regarding the use of IT. However, even if institutional pressures led to the adoption of new practices, these were customized to fit with the identity of the school.

(3)

3

1. Introduction

“Tablets are conquering the primary education” is what RTL news headlines on the 24th

of June 2015. The usage of digital devices as the main educative instrument has risen sharply in the last few years. An inventory by Kennisnet shows that eighty percent of the teachers uses tablets or laptops on a regular basis in class. Furthermore, schools where all pupils have their own tablet or laptop has grown from just one percent in 2013 to six percent in 2015 (Kennisnet, (a), 2015). Some first figures about the effect of digital devices on pupils performance seem to be positive. Pupils with a so-called ‘adaptive’ learning program (software that takes into account the previous answers to alter the degree of difficulty to the user’s abilities) learn quicker than those who are educated by books (Molenaar, Van Campen & Van Gorp, 2016). Another pro of tablets and laptops is that they are easy-to-use, which enhances the motivation and effort displayed by the pupils (Henderson & Yeow, 2012). In addition, these digital devices are highly mobile and have approximately the same size as traditional books, this especially counts for tablets.

Many primary schools experience pressure from several bodies to ‘swim with the tide’ to also digitize their education. The sector organization PO-Raad, for example, is heavily stimulating the use of IT devices in class by supporting and guiding school boards with their implementation, sharing knowledge and being a partner in the ‘Breakthrough project Education & IT’, among others (PO-Raad, (a), 2016). Furthermore, the national professional body of school leaders, AVS, provides trainings for their members concerning the organizational and didactical affairs of digitalization (AVS, (a), 2016). In addition, schools feel the need to keep up with other schools and experience pressure to digitize in order to be viewed as a modern and successful school. The more schools using IT in class, the greater the pressure on those that are lacking behind.

(6)

6 teacher changes from explaining course material and correcting exercises to being more of a facilitator and monitor (Crichton, Pegler & White, 2012). Viriyapong and Harfield (2013) add that digitizing primary education causes a shift from teachers controlling the learning process to each pupil having the lead in their own development process. This might conflict with schools, such as the anthroposophical school, that highly value the classical form of educating, with the teacher having quite a central role (WatIsDeVrijeSchool, 2016). In short, the deployment of digital devices can have quite some impact on the daily affairs at school, which may interfere with the uses that used to make up the school’s identity. However, the magnitude might differ depending on the current view on education (i.e. does the school have a pupil-driven and individually-oriented identity or a teacher-driven and collectively-oriented identity). This possible fit or misfit with the identity leaves schools with an important issue for consideration when digitizing the education.

As stated earlier, schools experience pressure from their environment to digitize. Such pressures, exerted by the environment, are called institutional pressures (Asworth, Boyne & Delbridge, 2009). Institutional pressure can lead the firms to change their existing ways of working in order to adhere to the calls from the environment. This ultimately restricts the number of accepted organizational forms by which firms acquire legitimacy (Deephouse, 1996; Roberts & Greenwood, 1997). As a consequence, firms adapt to similar models of organization in response to these institutional pressures, which is called isomorphism (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). This institutional view fits the environment of schools, where governmental regulations, changes in society, teaching unions and associations, sector organizations and competitors are all capable of exerting pressure on the organization. For instance, Antunes and Thomas (2007) state that schools tend to imitate others that are judged to be successful.

(7)

7 1.1 Research Questions

This paper aims to provide insights into the relation between an organization’s identity and the effect of institutional pressures. More specifically, it tries to uncover how the organization’s identity influences the way organizations deal with change that is affected by the institutional environment. This is done by investigating digitalization in the primary education, the institutional pressures present in this and the influence of the school’s identity. To this end, the following research question is posed:

“How do organizational identity and institutional pressures influence the digitalization of primary education?”

The following sub-questions will help us answer the main research question:

1. What is the current state of the digitalization of primary education?

2. What is organizational identity and what categories can be identified for schools? 3. What are isomorphic pressures and what do they look like w.r.t. digitizing education?

4. How do the different school identities take form in practice and how do they influence the digitalization?

5. How do schools in practice experience the isomorphic pressures w.r.t digitalization?

6. Which force – organizational identity or institutional pressure – is stronger in determining the organization of digitalization?

Answers to these questions were obtained by using an interview method. Interviews are able to provide detailed information regarding the viewpoints and experiences of the interviewee on a specific topic (Turner, 2010), which suits the in-depth understanding required in this research. A total of eight interviews were conducted at primary schools with different denominations. All of the interviewees were in a main position to take decisions on the deployment of digital devices at their school, and were also aware of and guardian of the school’s identity.

1.2 Academic and Societal Contribution

(8)

8 an addition to the above-mentioned gap. Second, research investigating institutional pressures in the public sector is still relatively limited. This is despite the fact that Frumkin and Galaskiewicz (2004) already showed that public organizations might even be more susceptible to institutional pressures than firms from the private sector. By investigating digitalization in the primary education through an institutional lens, this paper aims to add to the literature on institutional theory in the public sector. Next to the theoretical contribution, this paper can also be of practical interest. By investigating the influence of the school’s identity together with the presence of institutional pressures, insights can be gained into how schools are able to maintain their identity during institutional change. This could serve to inform schools at the beginning stage of digitalization on how they can deploy digital devices in a way that fits with their own identity.

1.3 Structure of the Paper

(9)

9

2. Context

This section starts by providing some background information on the changes that primary schools have dealt with in the past century. Furthermore, the current issue of digitalization of the primary education is outlined. The chapter ends with some background information about the a subset of the denominations in the Netherlands. These denominations will also be categorized based on two dimensions, which will be used in chapter 3.

2.1 Primary Schools: Past and Present

It was not until the year 1901 that education for children in the age of 7 to 12 became compulsory, by the acceptance of the ‘Compulsory Education Law’ of the Dutch Parliament (Rijksoverheid, (a), 2016). Although many children already occasionally went to school, this law ensured education for young children and prevented early school leavers. Children went to so-called primary schools in which they were educated classically in groups of children of the same age. A certain amount of teaching materials had to be acquired during the year in order to be promoted to the next year (Profi-leren, 2016). Until 1917, these schools were mainly public in nature, which means that they were not founded based on an ideological or didactical perspective. This was because only public schools received financial support from the government. After changes in the law made in 1917, ‘bijzondere scholen’ became entitled to financial support to the same extent as public schools (Rijksoverheid, (a), 2016). This gave way to a growth of primary schools with an ideological approach, such as Roman-Catholic and Protestant-Christian schools.

(10)

10 schools to tackle (language) deficits, which were arising due to the multicultural nature of the Dutch society. In addition, around this time many mergers took place between schools, due to the increase in autonomy they were granted. Schools received a so-called ‘lump-sum’ – a certain amount of money – that could be spent at its own discretion to pay the salaries and teaching materials.

Schools today largely still exist in the same forms. However, there – of course – are some developments taking place. Due to a declining population in some areas of the Netherlands, small schools are having budgeting problems, which results in partnerships and mergers. In addition, so-called ‘Broad Schools’ or ‘Integral Child Centers’ are becoming more popular. Next to a primary school, such Broad Schools can consist of child daycare, playgroups, libraries and partnerships with local sports clubs, among others. The idea is that Broad Schools provide children with more opportunities to personally develop themselves than stand-alone schools. Another trend is the digitalization of education, in which digital devices are used in addition or even replace traditional teaching materials such as books.

2.2 Digitalization in the Primary Education

As indicated, the use of digital devices in the primary education is rising (Kennisnet, (a), 2015). One of the main reasons for schools to digitize their education is to create a better fit with nowadays society and the perceptions of children (Meijer, Emmelot, Felix & Karssen, 2014). Namely, the use of IT in everyday life has increased largely. An inquiry by the ‘Central Bureau of Statistics’ found that ninety percent of the Dutch uses the internet on a daily basis (CBS, 2015). In addition, thirty-two percent of the children in the age of 0 to 10 have been found to use tablets and smartphones on a frequent basis, when parents are in the possession of such a device (O4NT, 2016). Another reason and characteristic of using digital devices in education is the possibility to provide ‘adaptive learning’ (Kennisnet, (b), 2014). This adaptive learning means that pupils can learn at their own level and at their own pace. Other reasons can vary from an expected increase in performance, quicker feedback on exercises and cheaper acquisition than books, among others (Meijer et al., 2014).

(11)

11 Next to the requirements for going digital such as a stable and powerful IT-network infrastructure, training teachers and guarding online privacy (Rich-Kern, 2015), schools also need to decide on how the devices are going to be used and what apps or programs will be worked with. For example, one of the most popular educational platforms used is the Snappet-platform, which consists of a bundle of apps for each of the core courses of primary schools. It is an adaptive learning platform and is used by over 1200 schools in the Netherlands. Another popular program for either laptops or tablets is Rekentuin. It is a mathematical program – used by over 1400 primary schools – in which children have to use mathematics in order to take care of a virtual garden. Rekentuin is also an adaptive program, which ensures that the users are working at the right level of their abilities. Other frequently used apps or programs are Bru-taal (a language app, awarded best app for primary education), Topo Nederland (topography app) and Het Lettercircus (another language app). Besides these, there are numerous other apps and programs designed for primary education.

Regarding the purposes for which the digital devices are used, schools indicated that the most frequent uses are for reading materials, searching for information, doing exercises, writing essays and making tests (Kennisnet, (d), 2016). However, the actual application of tablets and laptops can vary significantly. For instance, at O4NT / Steve Jobs schools – which are a brand new type of school in the Netherlands – nearly everything is taught digitally. The children are working on their tablets for a specific course at their own pace and level, and have to go the ‘course specialist’ in case they need explanation (SJS, 2016). On the opposite, a Christian school indicates to use IT only in specific lectures dedicated to this purpose. In these once-per-week lectures children are being taught the basics of the Microsoft Office programs and get to work with a few others, such as a programming tool (CBS Op Dreef, 2016).

(12)

12 In order to reap the intended benefits of employing digital devices in class, it seems that schools with an identity that emphasizes autonomous, self-steering and independent pupils are ahead of those schools that value the traditional way of education. The former, which will be characterized as schools with a pupil-driven and individually-oriented identity, are empowering pupils to guide the learning process and rely greatly on autonomy and responsibility of the children. This is in line with the requirements for digital education as stated by Li et al. (2010). In addition, these schools acknowledge individual differences by letting the pupils work at their own pace and level, which represents a close fit with the main benefit of digital education; adaptive learning (Molenaar et al., 2016).

On the other hand, the schools with a more teacher-driven and collectively-oriented identity seem less ready. At these schools, the teacher plays a more dominant role in both determining the daily program as well as stimulating the pupils and providing them with tasks. This role of the teacher appears contradicting with the need for facilitators and monitors in a digitalized education (Crichton et al., 2012). Furthermore, the collective nature of these schools comes down to the fact that there is roughly one pace in which all pupils are expected to learn throughout the year. In addition, collective activities during the day, in which all pupils partake, are highly valued. These collective orientations are also less combinable with the more individualistic nature of digital education (Spitzer, 2012).

2.3 Schools by Denomination

As outlined above, the consequences of digitalization on the schools is expected to vary quite a lot, depending on the fit or misfit with the current identity of the school. Schools with a pupil-driven and individually-oriented identity seem more ready for the intended use of digital devices than those with a teacher-driven and collectively-oriented identity. Therefore, this classification will be used to distinguish between the identities of the denominations in the Netherlands. This subdivision is made at this early stage to provide focus in the following discussion, and it will return in the section on school identity in chapter three.

(13)

13 the O4NT / Steve Jobs school was added since it concerns a new and upcoming type of school with special interest in the use of digital devices. However, it must be noted that all of these last four denominations are educational approaches which are combined with a ‘basic’ denomination, such as the Public, Roman-Catholic or Protestant-Christian. Since the Public denomination does not take an educational approach, a religion or a philosophy about life as the basis of education, it was regarded as the most neutral denomination. Therefore, the schools of the pupil-driven / individually-oriented category in this study are all of the Public denomination, which facilitates analysis of the results. Figure 1 shows an overview of the size of each denomination, measured as the number of establishments in the Netherlands.

Figure 1: Number of schools per denomination (Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap, 2016)

So, the following description provides a background on several school denominations, which will subdivided into schools that are pupil-driven and stress the individual, and those that are more teacher-driven and focus on the collective.

2.3.1 Denominations with a pupil-driven / individual orientation

(14)

14 learning process. The children are granted a degree of autonomy, responsibility and independence. Moreover, the individuality of each child is recognized, which allows some deviations in the pace and / or level of doing the tasks. This, however, does not mean that nothing is done classically and that the teacher has no influence whatsoever, but it is more an indication of where the emphasis is put.

Dalton schools

The existence of the first Dalton schools in the Netherlands dates back to the 1920’s. Nowadays, there are 368 accredited Dalton primary schools spread across the country, which amounts to approximately five percent of the total number of schools. The Dalton schools have an educational approach based on the ideas of Helen Parkhurst, who came in opposition to the traditional classical form of education in which children sit still and listen (NDV, (b), 2016). She thought children would be more motivated when they experience freedom and independence when working on their tasks. In this way the children would also learn to carry responsibility for their work and that they are more willing to help each other out. Furthermore, these ideas rest on the assumption that children like to learn, as long as it is interesting to them. All these principles are still the basis of what Dalton education is today. These fundamentals are translated into five core values of Dalton education: responsibility, independence, collaboration, effectiveness and reflection (NDV, (a), 2016). The responsibility pillar represents the freedom that children need to receive – within preset boundaries – to perform their school work, and the accompanying responsibility that comes with this freedom. Related to this is the independence value, which means that children get the freedom to make their own choices and work on their assignments independently. Next, collaboration stands for the fact that pupils and teachers all work together in completing their tasks. They can help each other out when someone experiences problems. This also allows them to reflect on the work of oneself and that of others, which represents the reflection pillar of Dalton schools. The last core value is effectiveness, which stands for the fact that all these working practices together should ensure a higher yield than traditional education.

Jenplan schools

(15)

15 in the center is that the pupils have the lead in their development process. The children are given a degree of freedom to decide on what tasks they work. This also suits with the experience-based-learning approach of Jenaplan schools, which means that the children have a say in what tasks they do or what is covered in a specific lecture. In addition, everyone works at the boundaries of their own capabilities, creating challenges as well as a feeling of competence (NJV, (b), 2016). After approximately six weeks, the teacher and pupil reflect on the progress of the last weeks and together create a plan for the coming six weeks. In this way, the children learn to reflect on their own work. Finally, collaboration with other pupils of the ‘tribal-group’ is deemed an important aspect of Jenaplan education, as they learn to have respect and recognition of each other.

Montessori schools

Montessori schools have their genesis – just as Dalton and Jenaplan schools – in the 1920’s, after the law regulations made it possible to deviate from a communal lecture schedule. There are around 160 Montessori primary schools in the Netherlands, which is approximately 2,5 percent of the total number of schools. The basis for Montessori education comes from the pedagogue Maria Montessori, who was a supporter of a degree of freedom in education. She was of the opinion that children develop themselves best when they experience freedom of choice and pace concerning the task they do. Montessori states that children will perform at their best, as long as they are raised in a prepared environment, equipped with adequately educated facilitators in a group with a vertical age structure (NMV, 2016). These ideas still form the basis of what Montessori schools look like today. The classrooms are equipped with the right tools, each of which has its own place. Children can get to take the tools they need, which are returned to the exact same location when they are finished. In addition, pupils are put in groups with a variation in age of maximum three years (e.g. 6-9 year olds and 9-12). This vertical age structure is believed to encourage collaboration between the children. For instance, the youngest kids in the groups can ask the older ones for help. Furthermore, since the freedom of choice and pace in the work should be intrinsically motivating, no grades and school reports are issued. Instead, pupils correct their own work and progress is monitored by the teacher. Finally, the teachers – who are called leaders – need to obtain a Montessori-certificate in order to demonstrate that they are knowledgeable and capable of executing the principles of Montessori education.

O4NT / Steve Jobs schools

(16)

16 to be educated in a way that has a closer fit with nowadays world. By this he meant that pupils have to be enabled to learn individually, at their own pace and level, aimed at developing one’s unique talent, supported by the most modern teaching resources. Therefore, the children get a sense of freedom in their learning process, letting them indicate what is interesting for them to do. In addition, the reflection of nowadays society comes to the fore in frequently doing group assignments (by using electronic communication tools as well) and giving presentations to develop the needed skills of speaking in front of groups. But the most eye-catching aspect of the O4NT / Steve Jobs schools is that nearly everything is done with the use of iPads. As the internet takes such an important place in today’s world, learning how to search for the right information, filter it on relevance and apply this information is deemed to be crucial. Furthermore, O4NT / Steve Jobs schools do not have traditional teachers, but instead there are course specialist similar to secondary school. This means that children have to go a specific course specialist in order to get explanation on that course. In addition, each child has a coach, which serves as a counselor and mentor and stays with the pupil for several years.

2.3.2 Denominations with a teacher-driven / collective orientation

The schools in this subsection have a more teacher-driven and collectively-oriented approach. In general, this means that the teacher is guiding the learning process of the children, by determining the daily schedule and providing a stimulus for working at tasks. Furthermore, these schools adopt one main pace at which the whole class learns simultaneously. Next to this, collective activities play an important role at these denominations. Equal to the other category, having a teacher-driven / collective orientation does not mean that nothing is done individually or that pupils have no freedom of choice at all, but the classification indicates where the emphasis is put.

Public schools

(17)

17 life in a multicultural society (VOO, 2016). Next, public schools represent the traditional way of educating, involving classical lessons and a daily program that is provided by the teacher. Furthermore, the children are grouped based on age, they have to acquire a certain amount of learning materials during the year and are subjected to a promotion versus redo-evaluation at the end of the year.

Roman-Catholic schools

The Roman-Catholic schools have a longstanding existence in the Netherlands. Especially after the law in 1917 granting financial support also to non-public schools – making it easier for the schools to financially survive – their population increased. As of today, there are around 2000 Roman-Catholic schools in the Netherlands, constituting approximately 30 percent of the total amount. In these schools religion and philosophy take a prominent place. This means that the Christianity and the Roman-Catholic traditions are taken as the basis in the educational approach, but at the same time it is put in place in a contemporary fashion suiting nowadays life. Trust, mutual respect and involvement serve as important principles in Roman-Catholic education, with the aim of providing education in the service of society. Furthermore, in raising children for life in future society the schools rely on a climate of norms and values such as solidarity, tolerance and taking care of each other (i.e. especially the weak) (RVKO, 2016). Next to this, lessons about the religion are usual at Roman-Catholic schools just as the celebration of Christian feasts. The Roman-Catholic schools also point to the individuality of each child, in the sense that respect for differences and caring for each other are demanded. Although pupils that are lagging behind receive additional support and those who are highly intelligent are provided additional materials1, the nature of educating is classical and teacher-driven. Furthermore, the teachers of Roman-Catholic schools are required to have a certificate of Christian primary education. This certificate is intended to ensure that they possess the knowledge needed to provide education on a religious basis and to give shape to the identity.

Protestant-Christian schools

There are around 1700 primary schools of Protestant-Christian nature in the Netherlands, constituting approximately 30 percent of the total. These schools take Jesus Christ and the Bible as the guiding principles for the education. This means that mutual respect and acceptance are important aspects of the daily affairs. Children are taught to be aware of others and to take care of each other when needed. Furthermore, the school days are opened and closed with a prayer. Next to this, there is frequent room

1

(18)

18 for singing religious songs together and storytelling from the Bible. Also, Christian feasts are celebrated as part of the religious expression (PCB-Beatrix, 2016). The aim is to educate and raise children to be prepared for the future society in way that is consistent with the Christianity. Although usually all children of different backgrounds and religions are permitted, the Christianity is the basis from which they are educated. In addition, the teachers are expected to be active participants in the profession of the Christian religion. This serves to ensure that the confessional principles can be transmitted to the pupils.

Anthroposophical schools

(19)

19

3. Theoretical framework

This section starts by reviewing the literature on the concepts organizational identity and isomorphism. Furthermore, the relation between these concepts and the issue of digitizing education in primary schools is made. Subsequently, the link between organizational identity and isomorphism is treated. The review ends with a conceptual model, visualizing the relations between the concepts.

3.1 Organizational Identity

3.1.1 What is organizational identity?

An organization’s identity is described as the attributes of an organization that are central and enduring, which differentiate it from other organizations (Albert and Whetten, 1985; Whetten, 2006). Gioia, Patvardhan, Hamilton and Corley (2013) more elaborately explain these three pillars of organizational identity. They state that central attributes are – among others – values, labels and practices that are deemed to be the core of “who we are” in an organization (p.125). These central attributes are argued to be the most essential features of the identity, since it would be difficult to speak of identity in absence of them. Next, the enduring feature of an identity represents the continuity over time which an identity is expected to have (p.126). Lastly, an organization’s identity distinguishes itself from other similar organizations in the field (p.126). Evans (2015) states that this so-called optimal distinctiveness ensures that organizations are seen as similar in general, yet distinctive to others in the industry.

Although organizational identity has its relations with organizational culture, the two concepts are not synonyms (Whetten, 2006). Whetten (2006) states that while some cultural aspects might constitute part of the organizational identity, there will also be cultures (or aspects of it) that – for example – do not make the company distinguishable from others (therefore not constituting part of the identity). Hatch and Schultz (2000) describe the difference between the two concepts by means of three dualities: textual vs. contextual, explicit vs. tacit, and instrumental vs. emergent. They state that an organization’s identity is more textual, explicit and instrumental in nature, whereas a culture is more contextual, tacit and emergent.

(20)

20 when being compared with other firms, people shift focus towards those elements of the identity that are still perceived to be better than those of competitors. This reduces the questioning of the own identity and thereby the need to change. In addition, firms can also adapt to changes in a customized way that is then consistent with their organizational identity (Whetten, 2006). Elements of the change are then adjusted in such a manner that they do not challenge (aspects of) the identity.

Organizational changes that do not question the identity of a firm are more easily adopted. People tend to employ information and knowledge that is consistent with the identity of the organization (Brown & Starkey, 2000). Changes that do not require (large) alterations to the self-image of a firm better suit the cognitive identity schemas held in mind (Gustafson & Reger, 1995), which are therefore easier to implement. Thus, an organization’s identity has the potential to influence if and how change is implemented. Namely, a firm’s resources, knowledge, and skills are all influenced by the things that constitute the identity of an organization, which subsequently has an effect on how changes are dealt with (Nag et al., 2007).

3.1.2 School identity

In a similar vein to organizational identity, De Wolff (2000) describes a school identity as representing that what is collectively shared, enduring, makes the school distinctive and is central. Ter Avest and Bakker (2007) add to this that it is the outstanding features of a school, that what is in common among its members and is of a certain durability, what makes up the school’s identity. The main aspects indicated by headmasters and teachers in which the identity of a school comes to the fore are ‘the way people interact with one another’, ‘the educational approach that is in place’ and ‘the vision on the pupils’ (CPS & Marnix Academy, 2012). These three aspects are the most frequently mentioned characteristics of a school in which the identity becomes visible.

(21)

21 pupils’ captures the view of the school on the children regarding their desire to take initiative versus the need for stimulant, and whether individual differences are leading versus the group process. This last aspect of identity in essence encapsulates both the pupil-driven versus teacher-driven and individual-orientation versus collective-orientation dimensions of the two categories. Based on the above, the classification made in chapter 2 – between pupil-driven / individually-oriented and teacher-driven / collectively-oriented – appears to be a good representation of the three most important aspects of school identity.

3.1.3 School identity and digitalization

Next, how each of the two categories of school identity deal with digitalization could be different. Schools that have a pupil-driven and individually-oriented identity are empowering pupils to guide their own development process and therefore rely greatly on autonomy and responsibility of the children. This is in line with the statement of Li et al. (2010) that digital education requires a redesign of the traditional way of educating to reflect the self-steering nature, the greater autonomy and responsibility that the children have in digitized education. Furthermore, these schools acknowledge individual differences by letting the pupils work at their own pace and level, which represents a close fit with the main benefit of digital education; adaptive learning (Molenaar et al., 2016). On the other side, those schools with a more teacher-driven and collectively-oriented identity have the teachers provide the daily schedule. The teacher plays a more dominant role in terms of explaining, guiding and stimulating the pupils. This role of the teacher appears contradicting with the need for facilitators and monitors in a digitalized education (Crichton et al., 2012). Furthermore, the collective nature of these schools comes down to the fact that there is one main pace in which all pupils are expected to learn throughout the year. In addition, collective activities during the day, in which all pupils partake, are highly valued. These collective orientations are also less combinable with the more individualistic nature of digital education (Spitzer, 2012).

(22)

22 3.2 Institutional Theory

3.2.1 OIE, NIE & NIS

Institutional theory is a theoretical lens through which organizational continuity and change are often researched (Burns & Scapens, 2000). It is a broad theory, consisting of three streams, each having its own core visions: Old Institutional Economics (OIE), New Institutional Economics (NIE) and New Institutional Sociology (NIS). The essence of the three schools of thought are outlined shortly.

First, OIE sees an institution “as a way of thought or action of some prevalence and permanence,

which is embedded in the habits of a group or the customs of a people” (Hamilton, 1932, p. 84). This

means that institutions are constantly being reproduced and routinized (Burns & Scapens, 2000). Burns and Scapens (2000) add to this that there is a constant duality between institutions guiding actions of people, and the actions of people over time influencing the institutions. Two important aspects of OIE are rules and routine as they form the link between institutions on the one hand and observable human actions on the other. OIE offers a good perspective for investigating the details of how an institution changes over time. However, OIE is quite internally focused, mainly dealing with competing values and power structures (Hussain & Hoque, 2002).

Next, the stream of NIE assumes full rationality of human actors with a focus on making optimal decisions. Efficiency is the main driver of organizational change (Williamson, 1981), as possible improvements could be made. The “observed organizational designs, or governance structures, are

thought to be those that minimize the costs associated with opportunism, meanwhile economizing on bounded rationality” (Roberts & Greenwood, 1997, p.348). Thereby, it is assumed that all

organizations are organized in a way that is most efficient for them. The large variety in firms is subsequently said to be the consequence of the specific circumstances each organization faces. Namely, the specific characteristics to each firm imply that the optimal configuration is also different for each organization. One of the critiques on NIE is that it is said to be ‘under socialized’ by not taking into account the socially embedded nature of human actors, instead focusing solely on maximizing utility (Granovetter, 1985).

(23)

23 desires (in the form of propagating an own identity) in this study provides a realistic basis for investigation.

3.2.2 Isomorphism

Institutional pressure, from a NIS perspective, emphasizes the pressure organizations experience from the external environment on their way of doing business (Asworth, Boyne & Delbridge, 2009). This environmental pressure restricts the number of accepted organizational forms by which firms acquire legitimacy (Deephouse, 1996; Roberts & Greenwood, 1997). According to Asworth et al. (2009), organizations do not necessarily change in order to become more efficient, but to increase their legitimacy by adhering to stakeholder expectations. Since organizations with the same external environment face the same institutional pressures, they also have the same restricted number of approved organizational forms that provide legitimacy (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). This causes organizations to increasingly become homogenous to each other (Bailey, 2013).

This process of homogenization is also referred to as isomorphism. DiMaggio and Powell (1983) define isomorphism as the process of constraints on a unit, which forces it to resemble other units in the population that face similar environmental conditions. They add to this that, in the extreme case, the number of different organizational forms is reflected by the diversity in environments. According to DiMaggio and Powell (1983) there are three different mechanisms through which isomorphism takes place: ‘coercive isomorphism’, ‘normative isomorphism’ and ‘mimetic isomorphism’ (p.150-151).

Coercive isomorphism

(24)

24 Normative isomorphism

The second isomorphic mechanism is called normative isomorphism. Normative pressures stem from professional bodies relevant to the focal organization (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983, p.152). Organizations can over time adapt their routines and structures to conform to those preached by the professional communities in their environment, through the use of social rewards or sanctions (Teodoro, 2014). Normative pressures thus contain the pressures organizations experience to conform to standards set by professional bodies in order to remain legitimized (Asworth et al., 2009).

Schools experience normative pressure from the sector organization, educational associations and professional bodies. For instance, the sector organization PO-Raad stimulates the use of IT in primary schools and works closely together with the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (in Dutch OCW) to foster the use of IT by schools (PO-Raad, (b), 2016). Furthermore, PO-Raad provides a roadmap for implementing IT and helps schools with their implementation (PO-Raad, (a), 2016). In addition, the professional body AVS provides training days for school leaders on the organizational and didactical issues concerning digitalization (AVS, (a), 2016). Next, there is also pressure stemming from the public organization ‘Kennisnet’ and the collaborative initiative ‘Breakthrough project Education & IT’, which is a partnership between PO-Raad, Kennisnet and the Ministries of OCW and Economic Affairs (in Dutch EZ). Both Kennisnet and the Breakthrough project provide advice, expertise and stimulate the adoption of IT in class. These are all generic pressures, in the sense that they can potentially be experienced to an equal amount by each school regardless of their denomination. In this way normative pressure appears to be able to homogenize the deployment of IT in the primary education.

However, there are also educational associations specific to the denomination of the schools. These associations might have a different view on the digitalization of education based on the fit with their identity. The Dutch Jenaplan Association (NJV) sees a wide application of IT as something that fits nicely with some of the core principles of Jenplan education (NJV, (c), 2016). On the other hand, the Association of Anthroposophical Schools (VVS) does not really display a vision about the use of digital devices in class on their website (VVS, (c), 2016). It, therefore, seems plausible that normative pressure specific to the denomination of the school could serve to homogenize within specific identities, but be a cause of variation in the digitalization of education between different identities.

Mimetic isomorphism

(25)

25 to be more successful or more legitimate (Bailey, 2013). In addition, Haveman (1993) states that organizations experiencing uncertainty try to economize on searching costs and therefore imitate others. Furthermore, Asworth et al. (2009) add that when the link between organizational means and ends is less clear, firms also have the tendency to copy others without having evidence of improved performance.

Schools are no exception to this pressure, as Antunes and Thomas (2007) state that schools tend to imitate others that are perceived to be successful. The increase in digitized schools creates a pressure on those that are lacking behind. Digitized schools are perceived as modern and fitting present day life (Kennisnet, (b), 2014). Furthermore, some first results show that the use of digital devices – with an adaptive learning software – increases performance of the pupils (Molenaar, Van Campen & Van Gorp, 2016). In addition, the rise in use of tablets and laptops shows the popularity of digital devices in class. These pressures can be experienced by all school, regardless of their denomination. In this way the mimetic pressure could cause homogenization in the digitalization of primary education. On the other hand, copying or imitating other schools could also take place at a more specific level. Namely, the mimetic pressure leading to the imitation of others that are perceived to be more successful or legitimate might also be experienced at the denomination level. In this way, schools experience pressure to copy or imitate successful others of the same denomination, since these are perceived as the right comparison. Then mimetic pressure would cause homogenization within the specific identities, but serves to cause variation between these different identities.

3.3 Organizational / School Identity and Isomorphic Pressure

Organizational identity and isomorphic pressure seem to be opposite forces. Whereas isomorphic pressures cause the homogenization of organizations over time (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983), an organization’s identity serves to distinguish itself from others in the field (Albert & Whetten, 1985; Whetten, 2006). In addition, the organization’s identity is, by its definition, represented by the attributes that are enduring and differentiating, indicating stability and variety.

(26)

26 provide much insight on the interaction between isomorphic pressures and identity, which we are looking for.

Research on organizational identity and isomorphic pressures is also scarce in the wider organizational literature. Glynn and Abzug (2002) are one of the few that did research in this area. By analyzing empirical data on organizational names and the changes they have gone through, they found that organizations adapted their names in accordance with the institutional pressures. More specifically, they took the organizations’ names as a proxy for identity and found that these names tend to become isomorphic over time (Glynn & Abzug, 2002). Although an organization’s name is part of the identity, it, by far, does not grasp the whole that constitutes the identity of a firm. It therefore provides little prediction on the influence of the organizational identity on isomorphic pressures.

When looking at the consequences of digitalization on schools, the most profound seem to be the opportunity for adaptive learning (i.e. customized learning at the pace and level of each individual), and the shifted role of teachers towards being a facilitator instead of instructor. It thereby requires a shift from the traditional way of educating. The two types of school identities described earlier are classified as being pupil-driven / individually-oriented and teacher-driven / collectively-oriented. These types of identity on their own seem to be able to influence the way schools deal with the digitalization of primary education. However, the presence of institutional pressures regarding digitalization could be of effect on the outcome as well. On the one hand, isomorphic pressures could work through the identity, enhancing the effect of identity on digitalization. Namely, mimetic isomorphism can be trait-based, which means that decisions are copied only from those organizations with similar characteristics (Brouthers, O’Donnell & Hadjimarcou, 2005). The same goes for normative isomorphism, in which the institutions linked to the school identity are the most important references. In this way, schools would adopt practices regarding digitalization that are in line with their identity, enhancing the variation between the two types of identities. On the other hand, institutional pressures could work at a more general level, reducing, or even nullifying the effect of identity on digitalization. Outcome-based imitation reflects this general form of mimetic isomorphism, in which copying is based on the success of other organizations regardless of the specific traits of that firm (Brouthers et al., 2005). Again, the same holds for normative pressures, coming from important bodies, which are experienced by all schools irrespective of their identity. In this case, isomorphic pressures can be expected to reduce variation in the digitalization of primary education.

(27)

27 3.4 Conceptual Model

Figure 2 shows the conceptual model constructed based on the previous discussion of literature. On the center of the figure, the effect of school identity is shown, which is intended to differentiate itself from others in the field. These identities can be divided based on the pupil-driven / individually-oriented nature of the schools versus the more teacher-driven / collectively-individually-oriented identity. Since the purpose of an identity is to differentiate itself from similar others, this potentially causes heterogeneity in the digitalization of education. From above, the influence of the isomorphic pressures that work through the school identity are illustrated. These pressures enhance the homogeneity within the identities and thereby serve to strenghten the differentiation in digitalization between the identities. Finally, the isomorphic pressures coming from below represent the generic institutional pressures experienced by all schools to digitize the education. These pressures could directly affect the implementation of digital devices in class, thereby causing homogenization.

(28)

28

4. Methodology

This paper seeks to uncover the mechanisms of how an organization’s identity in the presence of isomorphic pressures influences digitalization in primary education. To this end, an in-depth understanding of the phenomena is required, making a qualitative research desirable (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Namely, a qualitative study provides rich data, which helps the researcher get a more profound understanding of a phenomenon (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Furthermore, in contrast to quantitative methods – which mainly rely on ‘hard’ data such as facts and numbers – qualitative methods deal with ‘softer’ data and are therefore more subjective and interpretative in nature (Barnham, 2015). This suits the nature and the area of the research. Since the relations between organizational identity and institutional pressures in situations of organizational change are not quite clear, and the aim of the study is to gain more insights into this, a qualitative research is desirable.

4.1 Interview Method

The qualitative research takes place in the form of interviews. Interviews are able to provide detailed information regarding the viewpoints and experiences of the interviewee on a specific topic (Turner, 2010), which suits the in-depth understanding required in this research. The data for this study was collected through semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews have the advantage that they ensure some predefined topics and questions will be covered, but also allow the interviewer to go deeper into interesting things being mentioned (Miles & Gilbert, 2006). In addition, due to time constraints each interviewee was interviewed only once – making a semi-structured interview the best suited option (Bernard, 1988).

(29)

29 4.2 Interview Questions

The semi-structured interview consisted of three main sections, in reflection of the main components of the conceptual model. After the introductory questions about the background of the interviewee and the school, the first main topic covered digitalization at their school. Questions in this section served to get insights into the personal vision of the interviewee on digitalization in primary education, as well as the current state at the specific school. Information was retrieved on things as the different types of digital devices being used, the amount of use and the type of programs deployed. The second section dealt with the identity of the school and its relation with the (non-)use of digital devices in class. The questions about the role of the pupils and the teachers, and the focus on the individual versus collective were used to verify the identity of the school with the categorization made in chapter three. Subsequent questions covered the link with the characteristics of the school’s identity and the way they use digital devices. Next, the third section treated the institutional pressures that school’s experience. This section covered both the generic and denomination-specific isomorphic pressures. It started with examining the perceived relations with and influences of the bodies exerting generic or denomination-specific normative pressures. Subsequently, the questions focused on the degree to which the interviewee was aware of and influenced by the visions and pursuits of these bodies with respect to digitalization. The interviews concluded with two overarching questions, inviting the interviewee to indicate the degree to which the identity was a dominant influence on the way they (do not) use the digital devices, and the extent to which the isomorphic pressures were dominant in this. The interview questions are enclosed in appendix A.

4.3 Selecting Interviewees

There are around 6430 primary schools in the Netherlands (counted in 20152). Figure 3 shows an overview of the spread of the primary schools. Due to the aim and timeframe of the study, a selection was made to determine which of these schools were approached for an interview. In chapter two and three, a distinction was made between schools with a pupil-driven / individually-oriented identity and those with a teacher-driven / collectively-oriented one. Eight of the denominations in the Netherlands were reviewed and placed in either of the categories (see p.12-13 in chapter 2 for an explanation on how the denominations were selected). This resulted in four denominations in each identity category. Because of the limited timeframe of the study, an interview was held at one school of each of the eight denominations, giving a total of eight interviews. In search for the specific schools to be contacted, the focus was placed on schools with an average or above average number of pupils (average approximates 225 pupils (Onderwijs in Cijfers, 2016)). Especially the real small schools, with pupil

(30)

30 numbers below 100, could distort the findings. For example, providing customized, individualized education might take place because of the small group size, instead of being based on the identity. Furthermore, the schools contacted were located in the north of the Netherlands, with one exception3 (Figure 3 shows the geographical location of the participating schools indicated with a letter). Although differences with schools of other regions might always exist, the region in itself is deemed of little influence with respect to digitalization.

The intent was to take all the interviews with the headmaster of the schools. As the headmaster of the school is responsible for formulating and implementing the strategy, policy and mission4, he or she most likely holds the best knowledge about the identity of the school and the digitalization process. In addition, the headmaster carries the final responsibility for the school and is therefore the person that best experiences pressures from the environment. For these reasons, contact was sought with the headmaster of the schools.

Of each of the denominations a list of two potential participants was constructed. Calls were made with the schools, sometimes taking up to five phone calls before getting in touch with the headmaster. Then, the purpose of the study was explained and permission for an interview was asked. For five of the eight denominations, a school from the in advanced compiled list agreed to cooperate. For the other three denominations new potential participants were sought and contacted. Finally, after contacting another one to three schools, a participant for the remaining denominations was also found. A list of the interviewees, their position, the name of the school and the accompanying denomination is shown in Table 1. In seven of the eight schools, the headmaster was interviewed. The remaining interviewee was the IT-policymaker of the school, who was responsible for the deployment of IT in the school. Next to this, he was also informed with the identity of the school and the activities of the headmaster. Therefore, he was seen as an equally capable participant in the study, and at the same time provided insights from a different functional position. The inclusion of an additional perspective ensures a more complete view, which increases reliability (Van Aken et al., 2012).

3_{The O4NT / Steve Jobs schools are upcoming, but are not that widespread yet. Since no school willing to} participate was found in the north, the contact area was enlarged. The school that wanted to participate is located in Almere.

(31)

31 Figure 3: Overview of all the primary schools in the Netherlands (retrieved from scholenopdekaart.nl),

including the location of the interviewed schools

(32)

32 Table 1

List of interviewees, their position, name of the school and school denomination

School Denomination Position of interviewee Name of interviewee

OBS Theo Thijssen Dalton Headmaster Cassandra Zwiers

OBS De Vuurvogel Jenaplan Headmaster Irma Veenhuizen

Openbare Montessori Basisschool Zwolle

Montessori Headmaster Roeland Omlo

OBS Digitalis O4NT / Steve Jobs Headmaster Monique van Zantwijk

OBS G.A. de Ridder Public IT-policymaker Ronald Bakker

Sint Nicolaasschool Roman-Catholic Headmaster Alice Duursma CBS Het Krijt Protestant-Christian Headmaster Yco Huizinga

De Toermalijn Anthroposophical Headmaster Harry Drenthe

4.4 Data Analysis

The analysis of the data started as soon as the data collection began. The interviews were transcribed immediately after the interview was finished. Next, the data analysis started right away to check whether things were going according to plan or if adjustments needed to be made to the interview questions. It resulted in one interview question being rephrased. This overlapping of data collection and data analysis makes it possible to shift focus when needed (Eisenhardt, 1989).

First of all, the interview transcripts were read multiple times and important sentences, paragraphs or other pieces of text were highlighted along the way. The interview questions provided structure in this analysis, by delimiting specific pieces of information. Furthermore, the transcript of each individual school was analyzed in detail, constructing a coherent picture of each interview concerning their state of digitalization, the identity and the perceived isomorphic pressures. Subsequently, the interviews of the schools belonging to the same identity were compared with each other to look for similarities and differences. For each of the two types of identities, a coherent picture was made. Tables were constructed to highlight important insights and to facilitate comparison of different interviews. In addition, the results will be treated in several different sections consistent with the interview questions, which provides a degree of structure.

(33)

(34)

34

5. Results

In this chapter the results of the interviews are outlined. These are treated on the basis of several topics, in accordance with the conceptual model of chapter 3. First, some general info about the schools is provided, which serves to get a clearer picture of the schools and the interviewees. Next, the identity of the schools is discussed on the basis of a pupil-driven or teacher-driven orientation, and a focus on the individual versus the collective. The schools are categorized based on these dimensions and the consistency with the division made in chapter 2 and 3 is checked. Subsequently, the actual practice of digitalization at each of the identity categories is mapped. This provides insights into the number, the type, and the deployment of digital devices at each school. Thereafter, the link between the identity of the school and the deployment of digital devices is treated. Finally, the generic and denomination-specific institutional pressures experienced by the schools are provided. The chapter ends with discussing the link between the institutional pressures and digitalization. In addition, for controllability, the questions used for each section are indicated in the heading or subheading (e.g. Q1, Q2 & Q3 means that the results in that section are based on the first three questions of the interview).

5.1 General Information about Schools and Interviewees (Q1, Q2 & Q3)

This section serves to provide some background information about the schools and the interviewees in order to get a broader picture of the eight schools. Furthermore, the information provided could also serve to identify possible reasons for potential deviations in the results. Table 2 shows a summary of the background information.

(35)

35 Table 2

General info about the school and the interviewees

Interviewee School Denomination # pupils (# groups) Part of foundation? (# schools) Years in function Years at this school

Vision on use of digital devices

Cassandra Zwiers

OBS Theo Thijssen Dalton 270 (10) Yes (13) 18 1 - IT should be supporting

Irma Veenhuizen OBS De Vuurvogel Jenaplan 175 (8) Yes (13) 5,5 5,5 - Use advantages of IT where possible - But it should be a means, not an end - IT is needed to fit with the

experience-world of children Roeland Omlo Openbare

Montessori

Basisschool Zwolle

Montessori 300 (11) Yes (40) 8 8 - Important to use IT next to other

materials

- It is a piece of the whole; a means Monique van

Zantwijk

OBS Digitalis O4NT / Steve Jobs

260 (12) Yes (42) 8 5 - Create a fit with today’s generation - Use of strong digitalized environment to fit with current time

- IT is a means, not an end Ronald Bakker OBS G.A. de

Ridder

Public 311 (13) Yes (11) 2 (as full-timer)

2 - It keeps going further

- Possible advantages for improving work of pupil and teacher

- Need to use it as a means to an end

(36)

36

Catholic - IT is a means, not an end

Yco Huizinga CBS Het Krijt Protestant-Christian

330 (14) Yes (19) 25 5 - Maintaining a balance between

school and home is important - It is part of our time, but digital devices are not everything

- IT must not be a goal, but a means Harry Drenthe Vrijeschool De

Toermalijn

Anthroposo-phical

171 (8) Yes (16) 10 2 - Use IT as a means, not an end

(37)

37 5.2 School Identity

This section provides an overview of the results about the identity of the schools. First, the results are shown concerning opinions of the interviewees about the roles of the teacher and the pupil in guiding the development process of the children. Second, the focus of the school is outlined with respect to an individual versus classical orientation. The third section shortly checks the fit of the results with the classification of identities made earlier on in chapter 2 and 3.

5.2.1 Teacher-driven versus pupil-driven (Q7, Q8 & Q12)

From the interviews, five of the schools (Public, Protestant-Christian, Roman-Catholic, Anthroposophical and O4NT) indicate a very important role for the teacher in determining the daily schedule and guiding the children in their development process. This generally means that the order of the lessons and the tasks to be made are determined and provided by the teacher. The headmaster of the Roman-Catholic school illustrates this by stating that “we give lectures in a steering way, which

means that these are very well prepared lessons, with a lot of structure and a lot of nice things in it from the teacher”. In addition, the headmaster of the Anthroposophical school says that “the anthroposophical school policy is very narrative, very much telling, in which teachers are very important”. Three of the schools indicate that – next to the steering role for the teacher – the pupils

also have some say in their development process. In these cases, the teacher remains guiding, but the pupils are granted some freedom in the order in which tasks are done or in composing learning goals. This is illustrated by the IT-policymaker of the Public school who says that “the higher you are in

terms of groups, the more you get to work with ‘weektaken’ (i.e. weekly schedules). Then the freedom of choice is somewhat greater, by saying I will do this first and that later. But still, the teacher is taking the lead in this”. Moreover, the headmaster of the Protestant-Christian schools states that “the pupils do not decide, but it is also not the case that the teacher decides on everything. The educational roadmap is clear, but then we ask children: How are you going to achieve this? But on weekly basis, it is quite clear what needs to be done”. In line with this, the headmaster of the O4NT school said “in the morning, there are three workshops of three quarters of an hour each… These are divided into a arithmetic round or a Dutch round or a reading round… That is all in the schedule… But the afternoon program is – for a part – more free, in that the children really can choose based on interest”.

Organizational identity and institutional pressure: Digitalization of the primary education