1. The Changing Organizational Field of Education: The Case of Canadian Supplementary Education Janice Aurini, University of Waterloo Scott Davies, McMaster University Presentation for the International Supplementary Education Workshop June 6, 2010

2. Outline Intro: Supplementary Education in Canada Organizational Fields Growing Complexity Variation by Sector Conclusion

3. Our Research Questions 1. Where does SE fit within the broadening organizational field of education of education? 2. What variations within SE reflect these trends? 3. Can this framework be used comparatively?

4. Organizational Field Approach “..those organizations that, in the aggregate, constitute a recognized area of institutional life...” (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983: 143) Utility of approach: ▫ recognizes fuller set of organizations that compete/interact with regular state schools ▫recognizes different organizing logics – market, state and non-profit - within the field

5. Context: Canadian Supplementary Education (SE) in the Form of Private Tutoring Use: ▫25-30% of Canadian parents ▫Growth industry Profile: ▫>$100,000 CDN (or 79,000 EUR; 113,000 KRW) ▫> High school educated ▫Involved parents ▫Immigrant and Canadian born Rationale: ▫“Struggling” students  Most parents who have hired tutor estimate child is an A/B student ▫Less satisfied, but not dissatisfied with public schools

6. Great variety Delivery: ▫One-on-one, small and large group instruction ▫Individuals, independents, online, learning centres Providers: ▫For-profit, non-profit, volunteers, school-based From Shadow to Generic Forms: ▫Shadow: Homework support ▫Generic skill building: Reading and math ▫Newer Forms: Self-esteem, teaching kids how to learn Teachers: ▫Mostly non-certified

7. 7 Example: SE Businesses in Ontario, 1996-2007

8. Example: With Oxford Learning, better grades are just the beginning ▫Life-long tools like high self-esteem, an active, agile mind, and an understanding of how to study, learn and think. Only Oxford Learning puts all these outcomes within your child’s reach — along with better grades — with our cognitive approach to learning, where we focus on helping children learn how to learn.

9. Research Question 1: 1)Where does SE fit within the larger organizational field of education in Canada?

10. 1) Canadian SE SE reflects expansion/demand and org diversity SE absorbs some of the surplus demand for ed ▫Limited nature of publicly provided instruction Despite popularity  periphery Weak connections to: ▫Formal schooling: Curriculum, teaching, learning ▫Stratification processes: Tracking, access to PSE ▫Socialization/Culture: Life course, family processes

11. Organizational Field of Ed: Canada Powerful “core”: -dominant public system -stable, equalized funding -well paid teachers -less variation between schools -public confidence And few “coupling” mechanisms : -weak tracking/multiple entry points -no high stakes tests -flat postsecondary sector *provincial variations – formal connections Core: Public schools and PSE Supplementary Providers SuppliersPrivate Schools Religious Schools Advocacy Groups

12. Theorizing Loose/Tight Connections CharacteristicPeriphery - Looser ConnectionsCore - Tighter Connections Formal Schooling Centralization Funding Quality Member Support Connections Decentralized Ed system Stable, strong funding Consistent Quality Some/High confidence No support – outsiders Centralized Ed system Weak/varied public funding Varied quality Low confidence Formal connections – tutoring as a literal extension of school day StratificationAccess Opportunity Outcomes Low stakes test Weak tracking Flat PSE High stakes test Tracking Hierarchical postsecondary SocializationStability Competition Professional norms Evolving/unstable cultural norms e.g., lesson culture, intensive and “free-range” forms of parenting Diffuse notions of credential competition Professions – resist Tradition; strong cultural norms Coherent notions of credential Competition Professionals – encourage?

13. Research Question 2: 3) Do variations within SE reflect trends in the organizational field? Clarification: We define SE broadly to include any academic instruction not directly leading to recognized credentials, grades or credits

14. Variations Within SE Education’s organizational field is increasingly diverse, as reflected in SE, which can vary along 3 axes: 1) sectors – whether providers are states, markets, or non-profit philanthropists 2) degree of formalism (from individual to highly organized) 3) whether or not it ‘shadows’ mainline education

15. 3 Organizing Logics of SE in Canada Market Government Philanthropic

16. a) Sectors and Demand for SE SECTORMECHANISMS Public Governance (e.g. Summer programs) Accountability regimes want raised system performance, particularly at lower end Market (e.g. private tutoring)Demand from competing families Civil society / Philanthropic / Non-Profit sector Volunteer organizations that support disadvantaged students – partly in reaction to competition

17. b) Degree of Formalism SECTORINFORMALFORMAL Public Governance After school casual tutoring Summer Learning Programs MarketLone tutorCorporate Franchises Non-profitIndividual Volunteers Non-profit Organizations

18. c) Shadowing vs Independence Independent Content Shadow Education Develop own curriculum (i.e. generic skills) Mirror school curriculum Set distinct goals (i.e. Build self esteem) Aimed at school requirements

19. Summary: Concept of ‘organizational field’ captures growing complexity and diversification of contemporary education SE provides a window on this process: outgrowth of surplus demand generated by higher ed expansion and rise of accountability regimes SE varies by sectors, degrees of formalism and independence, illustrating greater variety within educational fields

20. 3) Conclusion: Towards Comparative Questions Can we use this framework in other national contexts? Can it capture variation internationally? Can we operationalize it in survey questions / research agendas?