CULTURAL ANALYSIS 1
Case Study: Cultural Analysis Assignment
Brittany Krieger
School of Education, Liberty University
Case Study: Cultural Analysis Assignment
Greendale Elementary School, a mid-sized suburban school in the Riverdale Public
Schools district, educates approximately 800 students from a wide range of cultural and
economic backgrounds. Greendale cultivates an environment centered on inclusion and equitable
CULTURAL ANALYSIS 2
learning opportunities, with about 18% of students participating in specialized services under the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004). Viewing Greendale through a cultural
lens reveals how values, beliefs, and norms shape both instructional practices and staff
interactions. Collaboration, student-centered approaches, and a commitment to equity guide daily
routines, from Professional Learning Communities to grade-level planning and individualized
education program (IEP) meetings. The cultural perspective also highlights how consensus is
established on school goals and tasks and how staff roles often extend beyond formal job
descriptions to support the school’s mission of inclusive education.
Culture and Cultural Differences
The organizational culture at Greendale Elementary is characterized by a balance of
collaboration, professionalism, and structured authority. Core values such as equity, inclusion,
and individualized learning are reflected in observable behaviors, including differentiated
instruction, frequent team meetings, and active participation in IEP planning sessions (Torres,
2022). Norms such as recognizing staff contributions, celebrating student achievements, and
maintaining structured collaboration routines reinforce Greendale’s commitment to these values.
Distinct subcultures exist within Greendale Elementary. Special education staff operate in a
compliance-oriented environment, prioritizing accurate documentation and legal mandates, while
general education teachers focus primarily on classroom instruction and student engagement.
Support staff, including counselors and instructional specialists, function in
advisory and facilitative roles, emphasizing guidance, counseling, and professional development.
These cultural distinctions become visible in both formal processes and informal routines, such
as collaborative problem-solving during lunch supervision or spontaneous mentoring moments in
the classroom (Teasley, 2017).
CULTURAL ANALYSIS 3
The school’s dual structure of functional specialization combined with grade-level teams
fosters expertise but also requires careful integration. While collaboration is a shared belief,
communication gaps and varying participation across units demonstrate that cultural alignment is
ongoing work (Bolman & Deal, 2021; Williams, 2020).
Organizational Consensus
Consensus at Greendale Elementary emerges from the interplay of centralized guidance
and collaborative decision-making (Bolman & Deal, 2021). The school’s mission of equity and
inclusion is embedded in both district-level policies and building-level routines. Tasks and
instructional priorities are developed through grade-level PLCs, where teachers review student
performance data, share strategies, and adjust interventions collaboratively (Clark, 2019).
IEP meetings provide a clear example of how consensus is operationalized. These
multidisciplinary teams, consisting of general and special educators, administrators, assessment
staff, and families, jointly determine accommodations and instructional strategies. Similarly,
grade-level teams develop coordinated lesson plans through structured meetings in which
teachers contribute individual perspectives to create unified classroom goals (Torres, 2022).
Despite structured processes, inconsistencies can occur when communication breaks
down or responsibilities overlap. For example, general education teachers may implement
strategies without full awareness of IEP modifications if special education teachers cannot attend
planning sessions. These challenges highlight the importance of clear documentation, structured
feedback loops, and regular follow-up to ensure that consensus translates into consistent
classroom practices (Williams, 2020).
CULTURAL ANALYSIS 4
Role Versus Job Description
Staff roles at Greendale Elementary frequently expand beyond formal job descriptions,
reflecting the school’s adaptive and collaborative culture. Teachers, while responsible for
classroom instruction and assessment, often mentor new staff, facilitate parent communication,
support extracurricular programs, and participate in compliance documentation. A teacher
leading a literacy intervention program outside their regular class schedule exemplifies this
extension of responsibilities (Teasley, 2017). Instructional specialists model instructional
strategies, lead professional development, and assist teachers with lesson planning, highlighting
the dynamic nature of their roles (Bolman & Deal, 2021).
As the campus educational diagnostician at Greendale Elementary, the formal job
description centers on conducting psychoeducational evaluations, interpreting assessment data,
determining eligibility for special education services, and ensuring compliance with IDEA and
district guidelines. In practice, however, the role extends well beyond these defined duties. The
diagnostician frequently supports teachers in developing intervention plans, assists with progress
monitoring systems, coaches staff on implementing accommodations, and provides guidance
when classroom concerns arise. The diagnostician also serves as a bridge between general and
special education by participating in grade-level planning, contributing to PLC discussions, and
facilitating communication to ensure instructional decisions remain aligned with students’ IEPs.
These expanded responsibilities illustrate how Greendale’s collaborative culture encourages
diagnosticians to function not only as evaluators but also as instructional partners and
problemsolvers whose work supports both compliance and daily student success.
These extended roles support collaboration and responsiveness to student needs, but they
can introduce ambiguity regarding accountability. Recognizing and formalizing these informal
CULTURAL ANALYSIS 5
contributions enhances coordination and ensures that flexibility strengthens rather than hinders
the school’s overall effectiveness (Clark, 2019; Williams, 2020).
Conclusion
Through a cultural lens, Greendale Elementary School demonstrates a collaborative,
inclusion-focused environment guided by equity and student-centered learning. Cultural
differences among functional units reflect distinct subcultures and observable behaviors, visible
in communication patterns, planning routines, and daily interactions. Consensus is cultivated
through structured collaborative processes such as PLCs, IEP teams, and grade-level meetings,
though communication gaps and overlapping responsibilities can limit consistency. Staff roles
extend beyond formal job descriptions, promoting adaptability while occasionally introducing
ambiguity. Strengthening communication channels, clarifying role boundaries, and reinforcing
integration across units can further align the school’s culture with its mission, ensuring equitable
and effective outcomes for all students.
References
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2021). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
(7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
CULTURAL ANALYSIS 6
Clark, J. T. (2019). The impact of school culture upon an educational institution. Cedarville
University Education Research Projects. Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/education_research_projects/10
Teasley, M. L. (2017). Organizational culture and schools: A call for leadership and
collaboration. Curriculum & Supervision Quarterly, 39(1), 3-12.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1074903917716453
Torres, L. L. (2022). School organizational culture and leadership: Theoretical trends and new
analytical proposals. Education Sciences, 12(4), Article 254.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040254
Williams, N. J. (2020). Embedding school cultures and climates that promote effective
implementation of evidence-based practices. Frontiers in Education, 5, Article 112.
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00112
