Common usage of the term bureaucracy is pejorative. To most people, bureaucracy is synonymous with red tape, rigid rules, autocratic superiors, and alienated and apathetic employees. But organizations of any size, including schools, have bureaucratic structures because they need appropriately designed formal procedures and hierarchical structures to prevent chaos and promote efficiency. Two conflicting views of the consequences of bureaucracy emerge from the literature. Some studies demonstrate that structure alienates and frustrates, whereas other research finds structure increases satisfaction and innovation. This study is consistent with an earlier attempt to reconcile these two theoretically opposing perspectives by creating and testing a new construct termed enabling structure. Evidence is mounting that schools can be designed with formalized procedures and hierarchical structures that help rather than hinder.

This review of human capital theory begins in 1776 and ends in the 1960s, when the theoretical and empirical foundations of the field were articulated and established. The review is organized to provide a general reference to human capital theory, its historical development, and its major methodological approaches. While human capital research has not been limited to education, it usually includes empirical measures of education and produces results that affect educators and education policy. Review of the foundation studies that were conceived by Nobel prize laureates and historically prominent economists supports the position that educators should draw their own informed conclusions and define the agenda of future human capital research.

A parsimonious measure of organizational climate of high schools is developed and tested in this research. The Organizational Climate Index (OCI) captures open and healthy dimensions of high school climates at the student, teacher, principal, and community levels. Next the relationship between the climate of schools and faculty trust is examined in a large, diverse sample of high schools (N=97). Different dimensions of high school climate explain distinct aspects of faculty trust-faculty trust in colleagues, in principals, and in clients (students and parents).

In this study, a theoretical model to explain school achievement in high schools is developed and tested. Collective efficacy is the key variable in a proposed theoretical system that also includes academic press and socioeconomic status. The authors postulate that both socioeconomic status and academic press have positive effects on school achievement in mathematics as well as improve the collective efficacy of the school. Collective efficacy, in turn, is hypothesized to have a positive effect on school mathematics achievement. Finally, the analysis concludes with a discussion of strategies to enhance collective efficacy of schools.

This research examines the importance of a school climate characterized by high levels of academic emphasis. Effective schools research is reviewed to develop a conceptual model undergirding the measurement of academic emphasis. In addition, social cognitive theory is employed as a theoretical framework explaining the development and effect of academic emphasis on student achievement. With the use of hierarchical linear modeling, the authors show that academic emphasis is important to differences among urban elementary schools in student mathematics and reading achievement. The relationship between current academic achievement and students’ prior achievement and demo- graphic characteristics is also modeled in this study.