Legitimacy through alternate means: schools without professionals in the private sector

Abstract

The new institutionalism predicts that professionalism is a key element of organizations’ ability to be seen as legitimate. Emphasizing the professionalism and formal credentials of its members lends legitimacy to the organization, protecting it from scrutiny. What happens when this norm of professionalism is absent? How do schools legitimate themselves, if not through professionalism? This paper examines a population of small, secular non‐elite private schools that overwhelmingly hire uncertified teachers. Using data from 60 private school principals in Toronto, Canada, I examine the ways in which private schools tap into alternate means of legitimacy. This study finds that small, secular ‘rogue’ private schools fail to invoke norms of professionalism as a means to garner constituent support and legitimacy. I argue that these schools substitute an innovative, unconventional ‘caring consumer ethos’ in place of teacher professionalism.

Keywords:

• professionalism
• teachers
• legitimacy
• private schooling
• consumerism

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Scott Davies, Janice Aurini, Art Budros, Tracey Adams, Bruce Arai, Pierre‐David Desjardins, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this article.

Notes

1. Private schools do not receive funding from the state. A private school is lawfully defined as an ‘institution in which instruction is provided at any time between the hours of 9am and 4pm on any school day for five or more pupils who are of or over compulsory school age in any of the subjects of elementary or secondary school study’ (Subsection 1(1) of Section 16 of the Ontario Education Act).

2. Friedman (2004) defines ‘rogue’ organizations as those who resist normative standards and fail to conform to institutional rules. The term ‘rogue’ is used in this study as it emphasizes organizations’ agency and does not imply that these schools are negligent, nor any negative connotations associated with the notion of deviance.

3. With respect to gender and ethnic diversity, rogue schools are as diverse as local Toronto state‐run schools.

4. Small size may indeed be a factor in rogue schools’ legitimation efforts. Reliant on enrolments, they must appeal to just enough parents to be viable, shedding so‐called ‘frills’ or non‐essential services (see Aurini 2006).