学校文化作为学校全体成员共同创造和经营的生活方式，反映着学校的精神面貌，关系着学校的存续与发展。在当代学校变革中，学校文化建设具有极为重要的作用，其能促使组织成员形成稳定的共同愿景和一致的行为模式，确保学校获得强劲而持续的生命力。作为学校成员的群体基本假设，学校隐性文化通常比公开的校训、口号和制度等显性内容，更能影响组织成员的思维方式、行为选择和情感反应。基于此，聚焦学校隐性文化的理论建构及管理，有利于对学校文化做出更为全面和深入的审视。 以沙因的文化三层次学说与社会学新制度主义为理论视角，构建数据收集框架。运用个案研究法，通过对六所形态各异的学校中的管理者、教师、学生进行访谈，对课堂、会议、师生活动等展开观察，以及实物收集等方法获取研究数据。以理论视角为“脚手架”，基于数据分析结果，构建学校隐性文化的分析框架，以此揭示学校隐性文化的类型、生成机制、功能、冲突及其管理策略，进而解决隐性文化“从哪来”、“到哪去”的研究问题，得出研究结论。 首先，学校隐性文化可以分为使命型、适应型、章程型、交往型四种类型。使命型隐性文化包括学校人才培养基本假设、教师动机至善基本假设、学生顺从至善基本假设，以及师生专业技能基本假设；适应型隐性文化包括教师脱耦执行基本假设、师生应试中心基本假设；章程型隐性文化包括科层权威基本假设和安全底线基本假设；交往型隐性文化包括教师间乐群—亲密基本假设、零和竞争基本假设，学生间的兴趣/成绩—亲密基本假设，师生间的关怀/知识—亲密基本假设，以及弹性—公平基本假设。四种类型的学校隐性文化共同决定着学校组织成员的思维方式、行为偏好与情感反应。 其次，使命型、适应型、章程型、交往型学校隐性文化分别通过设计—明述客观化机制、设计—默会客观化机制、自发—明述客观化机制与自发—默会客观化机制生成；生成过程分为能动者设计/自发互动，与制度背景的相互作用，习惯化与理论化、客观化、学习、沉淀六个步骤。 再次，学校隐性文化发挥着场域控制、组织稳定、群体凝聚和个体社会化四个层次的功能。在场域控制方面，使命型、适应型、章程型、交往型学校隐性文化分别有助于教育场域控制组织目标，确保育人功能；控制组织实践，把控办学底线；控制组织秩序，保证行政效能；控制成员交往，体现人性关怀。在组织稳定方面，四种类型的隐性文化，分别能促进组织成员遵循共享理念，明确发展方向；遵照行为惯例，节约管理成本；遵守组织规则，稳定科层结构；遵从交往模式，减少人际冲突。在群体凝聚方面，四种类型的隐性文化，分别通过共识凝聚、行为凝聚、制度凝聚、关系凝聚，以塑造责任意识，培养团队精神，促进体制认同，编织情感纽带。在个体社会化方面，四种类型的隐性文化，分别能够推动组织成员价值观社会化、行为社会化、身份社会化、交往社会化，使成员易于获得成就感、安全感、归属感和幸福感。 最后，文化冲突是学校隐性文化功能失调的主要原因。学校隐性文化冲突主要表现为动机至善基本假设与安全底线基本假设、科层权威基本假设与专业技能基本假设、弹性基本假设与公平基本假设的隐性文化间冲突；顺从至善基本假设与自我角色否定、科层权威基本假设与管理者权威丧失、应试中心基本假设与师生交往需求的隐性文化与个体基本假设之间的冲突；动机至善基本假设与教师职业化、科层权威基本假设与组织变革、学生亲密基本假设与教育公平、脱耦执行基本假设与管理效率的隐性文化与显性文化之间冲突。根据其冲突的表现及危害，制定冲突策略，以规避冲突对组织合法性、群体团结、个体角色认同产生的消极影响。 根据上述结论，从特色展示走向内生动力的显性文化建设，从精神范畴走向实践范畴的隐性文化蜕变，从静态稳定走向动态平衡的学校文化全景观塑造可以成为学校文化建设的未来之路。

School culture is a way of life which created and managed by all members, it reflects the spirit of the school, and is related to the existence and development of the school. In the contemporary school reform, the construction of school culture plays an extremely important role, it enables members of the organization to form a stable common vision and a unified behavior pattern, and ensures the strong and sustained vitality of the school. As the basic group assumptions among school members, school tacti culture usually has a deeper influence upon the way of thinking, behavioral preferences and emotional responses of school members than the explicit content, such as, school mottos, slogans and regulation. Based on this, focusing on the theoretical construction and management of hidden culture in schools is helpful to have a more comprehensive and in-depth examination of school culture examination. In this study, Schein's three levels’ organizational culture model and the nNew iInstitutionalism theory in sSociology were employed as the theoretical perspective to scaffold to inform theconstruct data collection framework, analyze the categories, functions and mechanism of school tacit culture. Then, the case studies were conducted through interviews with school managers, teachers and students from six schools with varied backgrounds, observations of classroom teaching, conference and activities of teachers and students, and artifact collection. The data analysis was informed by the theoretical scaffold to generate the analytic framework. The analytic framework was then used to examine as categorized school tacit culture respectively in terms of the categories, mechanism, functions, and conflicts and conflicts management, so as to explore such tacit culture issues as “where to come” and “where to go” and get final conclusions. Firstly, school tacit culture can be categorized into four specific types, namely mission-based tacit culture, adaptation-based tacit culture, rules-based tacit culture, and relationship-based tacit culture. Mission-based tacit culture was based on the basic assumptions of talents cultivation, teachers with best motivation, students with high compliance, and professional knowledge and skills of teachers and students. Adaptation-based tacit culture was based on the basic assumptions of teachers’ decoupling-execution, examination-orientation of teachers and students. Rules-based tacit culture was based on the basic assumptions of bureaucratic authority and safety baseline. Relationship-based tacit culture was based on the basic assumptions of teachers’ enjoyment of socialization with intimacy, zero-sum competition, students’ interest and performance with intimacy, teachers’ care and knowledge with intimacy, and elasticity and equity. It was found that four types of school tacit culture together determined the ways of thinking, behavioral preference and emotional responses of school members. Secondly, the four types of school tacit culture, i.e., mission-based tacit culture, adaptation-based tacit culture, rules-based tacit culture, and relationship-based tacit culture, developed through design-explicit objectification mechanism, design-tacit objectification mechanism, and spontaneousness-explicit objectification mechanism, spontaneousness-tacit objectification mechanism respectively. The development of school tacit culture included six steps, namely agentic and spontaneous designment, interactions with institutional factors, habituation and theorization, objectification, acquirement, and accumulation. Thirdly, school tacit culture played the functions of field control, organization stability, group unity and personal socialization. In terms of the function of field control, the four types of school tacit culture respectively helped the educational field control organizational goals and ensured the talent cultivation functions, controlled the organizational practices and ensure the school baseline, controlled the organizational order and ensured the administration efficiency, controlled the socialization of school members and ensured the humanistic care. In terms of the function of organization stability, the four types of school tacit culture respectively promoted school members’ embrace of shared vision to make clear understanding of development goals; respect for action routine to low administration cost; observance of organization rules to stabilize the hierarchical structure; compliance in socializing pater to avoid interpersonal conflicts. In terms of the function of group unity, the four types of school tacit culture can lead to awareness of responsibilities, team spirit, identification with system, and emotional bonds though consensus uniting, behavior uniting, institute uniting and relation uniting respectively. In terms of the found of personal socialization, the four types of school tacit culture can respectively promote socialized values, behaviors, identifications, and interactions of school members and enhance their feelings of achievement, safety, belongingness, and happiness. Finally, cultural conflicts were the major reason for dysfunction of school tacit culture. Conflicts between different tacit culture assumptions (i.e., teachers with best motivation v.s. safety baseline, hierarchical structure v.s. professional knowledge and skills, elasticity v.s. equity), conflicts between tacit culture and personal basic assumptions (i.e. , following the best v.s. self-identify denying, hierarchical authority v.s. authority loss of administrators, examination-orientation v.s. socializing needs of teachers and students), conflicts between tacit culture and explicit culture (i.e., best motivation v.s. professionalization of teachers, intimacy of students and educational equity, decoupling-execution v.s. of administration efficiency). Based on the manifestation of aforementioned cultural conflicts, management strategies can be made to avoid the negative effects of cultural conflicts on organization legality, group unity and personal identity. In conclusion, the explicit culture building that focuses on endogenous power instead of merely displaying special features, the tacit culture evolution that emphasizes the transitions from spirits to practice, the tacit culture improvement that manages conflicts for cooperation, and the systematic culture building that in pursuit of dynamic equilibrium instead of static stability can be the potential choices of future school culture building.