Whistle Blowers in Schools: Dissidents or Reformers

Whistleblowing has traditionally been viewed as detrimental to organizational interests. Managers, on the other hand, can boost their organization's performance and efficiency by encouraging whistling. Though whistleblowing was not widely accepted as a true statement, members of organizations, particularly public employees, were unable to reveal wrongdoings for years in school due to the possibility of reprisal for blowing the whistle (Park & Lewis 2018). Whistleblowing has historically been regarded as damaging to organizational interests. Managers, on the other hand, can improve the performance and efficiency of their organization by encouraging whistling. Though whistleblowing was not commonly regarded as a truth, members of organizations, particularly public employees, were unable to disclose wrongdoings for years in school due to the risk of retaliation for blowing the whistle (Fredin, Venkatesh, Riley, & Eldridge 2018). Whistleblowers can be reformers as well as dissenters. Whistleblowers merely carry out their jobs, which they regard as requiring them to report problems as soon as they are identified. They resist the real power structure because they defend the organization's officially declared policies as well as alternative moral or professional standards. These whistleblowers are frequently caught off guard and badly harmed by retaliation. People who are purposefully contrarian frequently forecast the outcome better (Pillay, Ramphul, Dorasamy & Meyer 2018).Mehrotra, Mishra, Srikanth, Tiwari, and Kumar (2020) reported that as a result of lawsuits, over 90% of whistleblowers were blackballed, forced to leave their positions, or lost their life savings. Furthermore, in many nations, whistleblowing is frowned upon. Employees are the most effective parties in limiting the occurrence of wrongdoing in firms, and one of the responses that they exhibit in response to wrongdoing is whistleblowing. Witnesses to any crime, however, may choose not to report it for fear of retaliation. Using whistleblowers to uncover infractions is a successful technique. Whistleblowing can help create greater openness, accountability, and good governance (Previtali & Cerchiello 2018). However, recent research indicates that filing a whistleblower complaint can be difficult. Whistleblowers frequently face unfavorable consequences like as promotion, termination, and safety concerns. However, even though whistleblowing is critical for aiding school change and is generally perceived as consistent with serving the public or society at large, there is a persisting gap in the factors that impact whistleblowing in government institutions, particularly in schools. As a result, the researcher is curious to learn whether teachers in the school are reformers or dissidents when it comes to whistleblowing.长期以来，举报（whistleblowing）一直被视为有损组织利益的行为。但管理者却可通过鼓励员工举报，提升组织的绩效与运营效率。尽管举报尚未被广泛视作一种合理的诉求，但多年来，组织成员尤其是公职人员，因担心举报后遭到报复，始终无法在校内披露不当行为（Park & Lewis, 2018）。 举报历来被认为会损害组织利益。与之相对，管理者可通过鼓励举报来优化组织绩效与运行效率。尽管举报并未被普遍认可为一种正当行为，组织成员尤其是公职人员，因举报可能招致报复，多年来始终无法在校内披露不当行为（Fredin, Venkatesh, Riley, & Eldridge, 2018）。 举报者既可是改革者，也可是异议者。他们仅是在履行本职工作——认为自身职责需在发现问题后第一时间进行上报。他们之所以对抗现实中的权力结构，是因为他们既维护组织官方公布的政策，也秉持替代性的道德或职业准则。这类举报者往往猝不及防，并因报复行为遭受严重伤害。刻意持反对立场的人，往往能更准确地预判事件结果（Pillay, Ramphul, Dorasamy & Meyer, 2018）。Mehrotra、Mishra、Srikanth、Tiwari与Kumar（2020）的研究显示，因诉讼纠纷，超过90%的举报者遭到职场封杀、被迫离职，或是耗尽毕生积蓄。此外，在诸多国家，举报行为均不受待见。员工是遏制企业不当行为发生的最有效主体，而举报正是他们应对不当行为的应对方式之一。但任何犯罪行为的目击者，都可能因惧怕报复而选择不报案。 借助举报者揭露违规行为是一种行之有效的手段。举报有助于提升透明度、强化问责制并实现良治（Previtali & Cerchiello, 2018）。然而近期研究表明，提交举报申诉往往困难重重。举报者常会面临诸多不利后果，诸如晋升受阻、被解雇以及遭遇安全威胁等。尽管举报对推动学校改革至关重要，且普遍被认为契合服务公众乃至整个社会的宗旨，但针对政府机构尤其是学校内影响举报行为的因素，目前仍存在显著研究空白。因此，本研究旨在探究校内教师在举报行为中究竟属于改革者还是异议者。