ABSTRACT
The rationale that underlies the objectives approach is deceptively simple and it has been conceptually critiqued on numerous occasions.1 The purpose of this chapter is not to replicate in detail these critiques, but rather to raise questions concerning this dominant approach by looking at what happens when these assumptions operate in action within a physical education department involved in change. This is why Alex is so central to the story. He genuinely believed in change as a rational process and with the best of intentions operated on this basis with his staff. By documenting the impact of these beliefs upon those within the department and their subsequent reactions to Alex’s proposals for change I hope to reinforce the point made by Fullan (1982) that change is never a wholly rational process. Furthermore, the following empirically grounded account attempts to disturb the prevalent ideology of school-centred innovation that fails
to acknowledge the presence and importance of conflict and struggle between different teachers and subject departments in the process of educational change. At best, this view treats the value conflicts that surround the idea of change in a very superficial manner while, at worst, it takes such conflicts to be pathological in nature. However, as Dalton (1988) reminds us, conflict, negotiation and compromise are all taken, given, challenged or negotiated. Fullan (1982, p. 91) sums it up well when he argues that disagreement and conflict are ‘not only inevitable but fundamental to successful change. Since any group of people possess multiple realities, any collective change attempt will necessarily involve conflict.’ Therefore, by focusing directly upon such disagreements and conflicts in the context of the messy realities of school life, this chapter attempts to make problematic the view that change is, or can be, a rational and value free process.
