We’ve Said it’s a Learning Organisation but does It Know (and what is It Anyway)?

  • Joy Murray


Most teachers can list the ingredients for effective change and the attributes of a change agent (see for example Miles, Saxl & Lieberman, 1988) and can quote a battery of techniques for reaching agreement about what needs changing. But why is it the results of change programs are so haphazard? Can systems be changed (do systems exist as entities?) or only people? And are they changed or do they change? Recent writing on educational change suggests that the change process is a messy business (Fullan, 1993a; Fullan, 1993b; Fullan 1994). Michael Fullan (1993a:20) talks about the ‘New Paradigm of Change’ and describes change as a ‘Journey not a Blueprint’. The first part of this paper explores some of the territory behind the tools currently used in effecting change, and suggests reasons for why success is somewhat haphazard. The second part of the paper offers an example of an attempt to effect change in a large school system ‘to promote schools as learning communities.’ (NSW DSE, 1995).


Living System Change Agent Irish Journal Teacher Development Autonomous Learner 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andersen, P. B., 1994, The semiotics of auto-poiesis. A catastrophe-theoretic approach, Cybernetics and Human Knowing 2(4): 53–55.Google Scholar
  2. Asayesh, G., 1993, Using systems thinking to change systems, Journal of Staff Development Fall 14 (4):8–13.Google Scholar
  3. Deal, T., 1985, The symbolism of effective schools, The Elementary SchoolJournal 85(5):601–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Deal, T. and Kennedy, A., 1982, Corporate cultures, Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  5. Dell, P., 1985, Understanding Bateson and Maturana: Toward a biological foundation for the social sciences, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 11(1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Donaldson, R. E., 1992, Cybernetics and human knowing: One possible prolegomenon, Cybernetics and Human Knowing 1(1):5–9.Google Scholar
  7. Efran, J. and Lukens, M D., 1985, The world according to Humberto Maturana, Networker May–June pp. 23-28 & 72-75.Google Scholar
  8. Fell, L. and Russell, D., 1993, Co-Drifting: The Biology of Living Together, Unpublished manuscript: Fell, Russell and Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Fell, L. and Russell, D., 1994, Towards a biological explanation of human understanding, Cybernetics and Human Knowing 2(4):3–15.Google Scholar
  10. Fullan M., 1993a, Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform, The Falmer Press, London.Google Scholar
  11. Fullan M., 1993b, Why teachers must become change agents, Educational Leadership March.Google Scholar
  12. Fullan M, 1994, Turning Systemic Thinking on its Head, Paper prepared for the United States Department of Education, July.Google Scholar
  13. Heylinghen, F. and Joslyn, C., 1995, systems theory, in: The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, (R. Audi, ed), pp. 784–785, Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Kandel, E. R. and Hawkins, R. D., 1992, The biological basis of learning and individuality, Scientific American September, pp. 52-61.Google Scholar
  15. Kenny, V. and Gardner, G., 1988, Construction of self-organising systems, The Irish Journal of Psychology 9(1): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maturana, H., 1978, Biology of language: Epistemology of reality, in: Psychology and Biology of Language and Thought, (G.A. Miller and E. Lenneberg, eds) Academic Press, New York, in: C. L. Mendez, F. Coddou, and H. Maturana, 1988, The Irish Journal of Psychology, 9 (1):144-172.Google Scholar
  17. Maturana, H. R. and Varela, F. J., 1987, The Tree on Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding, New Science Library: Shambhala, London.Google Scholar
  18. Miles, M. B., Saxl, E. R. and Lieberman, A., 1988, What skills do educational “change agents” need? An empirical view, Curriculum Inquiry, 18(2): 157–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. New South Wales Department of School Education, 1995, Schools as Learning Communities: A discussion paper, Training and Development Directorate.Google Scholar
  20. Senge, P. M., 1990, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Doubleday/Currency: New York.Google Scholar
  21. Sluzki, C. E., 1985, A minimal map of cybernetics, Networker, May–June, p. 26.Google Scholar
  22. Stacey, R., 1992, Managing the Unknowable, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, in: Change Forces Probing the Depths of Educational Reform, p19, M. Fullan, 1993, The Falmer Press, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joy Murray
    • 1
  1. 1.New South Wales Department of School EducationTraining and Development DirectorateRozelleAustralia

Personalised recommendations