Search results

1 – 10 of 11
Per page
102050
Citations:
Loading...
Content available
Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Alan J. Daly and Kara S. Finnigan

493

Abstract

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 51 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Kara S. Finnigan, Alan J. Daly and Jing Che

The purpose of this paper is to examine the way in which low‐performing schools and their district define, acquire, use, and diffuse research‐based evidence.

1309

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the way in which low‐performing schools and their district define, acquire, use, and diffuse research‐based evidence.

Design/methodology/approach

The mixed methods case study builds upon the prior research on research evidence and social networks, drawing on social network analyses, survey data and interview data to examine how educators in low‐performing schools and across the district use evidence (including which types and for what purposes), as well as the relationship between network structure and evidence use for school improvement.

Findings

Educators had narrow definitions of, and skepticism about, evidence, which limited its acquisition and use for school improvement. The authors found a lack of diffusion of evidence within schools and districtwide as a result of sparse connections among and between educators. Evidence was used in an instrumental, yet superficial, manner leading to weak interpretation of evidence and resulting in limited understanding of underlying problems and available solutions.

Research limitations/implications

The paper suggests the importance of using social network analyses to examine the diffusion of evidence, as well as the need to better understand how evidence is defined and used.

Practical implications

It is necessary to pay greater attention to how educators acquire evidence, as well as the ways in which it is used to impact school‐based decisions in low‐performing schools and districts. Moreover, the work suggests the influence of the district office on school‐level reform.

Originality/value

The paper contributes to the research on low‐performing schools and accountability policy by examining the larger districtwide context and integrates social network, survey, and interview data.

Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Stephen E. Anderson

The purpose of this paper is to present the author's commentary on the special issue of Journal of Educational Administration entitled “Systemwide reform: examining districts…

614

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to present the author's commentary on the special issue of Journal of Educational Administration entitled “Systemwide reform: examining districts under pressure”.

Design/methodology/approach

The major thesis of this commentary and reflection on the preceding papers is that there is a need to recognize that “school districts” as known in the USA are examples of a more general phenomenon of intermediary organizational entities in education systems in North America and elsewhere in the world and that there is a need to problematize, not take for granted, the form, purpose, and influence of these mediating layers of the school system on the quality and improvement of schools, and on the implementation of government policies that are intended to regulate and support education in schools.

Findings

This issue of the Journal of Educational Administration presents a series of papers that highlight different aspects and contemporary trends in school district practice and research – organizational characteristics associated with district effectiveness (see Trujillo this issue), how districts are responding to political and public demands for accountability (see Hamilton et al., this issue), the invention of school district authorities as portfolio managers of diverse school provider systems (see Marsh et al., this issue), and how social communication networks linking school and district staff interface with the use of evidence to support school improvement (see Finnigan and Daly, as well as Wohlstetter and Smith this issue).

Originality/value

The simple thesis of this commentary is to argue that school districts function as an intermediate level of education governance, management, and support within national and state education systems, and that current research and discussion on the school district role in improving and sustaining the quality of education would be strengthened by broadening the scope of research and discussion to alternative kinds of intermediate level governance and support systems that exist in North America and in other regions of the world.

Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Louise Stoll

The purpose of this paper is to present the author's commentary on the special issue of Journal of Educational Administration entitled “Systemwide reform: examining districts…

855

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to present the author's commentary on the special issue of Journal of Educational Administration entitled “Systemwide reform: examining districts under pressure”.

Design/methodology/approach

In framing her reflections, the author has looked across the five articles in the special issue, pulling out a number of themes from the perspective of her interest in capacity for learning. This interest stems from involvement over many years in research and development in school improvement and its leadership, and the conclusion that real and meaningful educational change requires much more than superficial tinkering with structures and practices in schools and districts.

Findings

The author's comments draw heavily from her own context, England where, it could be argued, an educational policy “experiment” is taking place but she also refers to other countries’ approaches and experiences.

Originality/value

The author's own work is underpinned by social and organizational learning theories, and so she welcomes the diversity of theoretical and methodological perspectives taken by the authors in this special issue in helping to view the special issue topic from different angles.

Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Karen Seashore Louis

The purpose of this paper is to present the author's commentary on the special issue of Journal of Educational Administration entitled “Systemwide reform: examining districts…

757

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to present the author's commentary on the special issue of Journal of Educational Administration entitled “Systemwide reform: examining districts under pressure”.

Design/methodology/approach

The author gives her personal opinions, draws upon her recent experiences in the national study of US district leadership for school improvement, recent engagement with one specific US district's improvement efforts and work with colleagues in Europe on how a nation's culture mediates global policy trends.

Findings

One striking feature is the degree to which the language of “New Public Management” (is suffused within all of the papers).

Originality/value

The author notes that each paper peels a layer of the opaque onion of systemic school reform initiatives in the USA and was struck by the papers’ insight into current policy and administrative dilemmas facing districts in the USA – and also by their uniquely American perspective.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 51 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Priscilla Wohlstetter, Joanna Smith and Andrew Gallagher

The purpose of this paper is to report findings from an exploratory study of New York's Children First Networks (CFNs); to examine what is known about the CFNs thus far, drawing…

393

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to report findings from an exploratory study of New York's Children First Networks (CFNs); to examine what is known about the CFNs thus far, drawing on new empirical research, as well as document review and analysis of secondary sources.

Design/methodology/approach

Organizational learning theory guided this qualitative study. As such, in‐depth interviews conducted with central office staff, network leadership teams, cluster leaders, and principals focused on the flow and management of information within the networks; the ways in which stakeholders developed shared meanings; how collective intelligence was built and transmitted; and organizational responses to the early experience of the CFNs.

Findings

Findings highlight the tools and processes the NYC Department of Education (DOE) has put into place to operationalize the CFNs. Respondents identified as critical the replacement of supervisory leadership from the district with customization of services provided by the network teams to promote principal‐led reforms. Increased efficiency was noted by interviewees, but a number of challenges in the reform’s implementation also surfaced that point to the limitations of the CFNs as a capacity‐building mechanism.

Research limitations/implications

As an exploratory study, this research is intended to inform larger‐scale, mixed‐methods investigations of school networks, especially those implementing reforms aimed at improving teaching and learning in schools. Research is needed into the resource exchanges between individuals and groups in networks, what differentiates high‐performing from lower‐performing networks, and how data are used to inform the evolution of network structures and practices.

Originality/value

This study is the first peer‐reviewed article on the evolution of New York City's Children First Networks.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 51 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Julie A. Marsh, Katharine O. Strunk and Susan Bush

Despite the popularity of school “turnaround” and “portfolio district” management as solutions to low performance, there has been limited research on these strategies. The purpose…

1138

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the popularity of school “turnaround” and “portfolio district” management as solutions to low performance, there has been limited research on these strategies. The purpose of this paper is to address this gap by exploring the strategic case of Los Angeles Unified School District's Public School Choice Initiative (PSCI) which combined both of these reforms. It examines how core mechanisms of change played out in schools and communities during the first two years of implementation.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper draws on a mixed methods study, combining data from surveys, case studies, leader interviews, observations, and document review. It is guided by a conceptual framework grounded in research on school turnaround and portfolio districts, along with the district's implicit theory of change.

Findings

The paper finds early success in attracting diverse stakeholder participation, supporting plan development, and ensuring transparency. However, data also indicate difficulty establishing understanding and buy‐in, engaging parents and community, attracting sufficient supply of applicants, maintaining neutrality and the perception of fairness, and avoiding unintended consequences of competition – all of which weakened key mechanisms of change.

Research limitations/implications

Data from parent focus groups and school sites may not be representative of the entire population of parents and schools, and data come from a short period of time.

Practical implications

The paper finds that developing processes and procedures to support complex reform takes time and identifies roadblocks others may face when implementing school turnaround and portfolio management. The research suggests districts invest in ways to ensure neutrality and create a level playing field. It also indicates that leaders should anticipate challenges to engaging parents and community members, such as language and literacy barriers, and invest in the development of unbiased, high‐quality information and opportunities that include sufficient time and support to ensure understanding.

Originality/value

This paper begins to fill a gap in research on popular reform strategies for improving low‐performing schools.

Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Laura S. Hamilton, Heather L. Schwartz, Brian M. Stecher and Jennifer L. Steele

The purpose of this paper is to examine how test‐based accountability has influenced school and district practices and explore how states and districts might consider creating…

1779

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine how test‐based accountability has influenced school and district practices and explore how states and districts might consider creating expanded systems of measures to address the shortcomings of traditional accountability. It provides research‐based guidance for entities that are developing or adopting new measures of school performance.

Design/methodology/approach

The study relies on literature review, consultation with expert advisers, review of state and district documentation, and semi‐structured interviews with staff at state and local education agencies and research institutions.

Findings

The research shows mixed effects of test‐based accountability on student achievement and demonstrates that teachers and administrators change their practices in ways that respond to the incentives provided by the system. The review of state and district measurement systems shows widespread use of additional measures of constructs, such as school climate and college readiness.

Research limitations/implications

There is a clear need for additional research on the short‐ and long‐term effects of expanded systems of measures. In particular, currently little is known about how the inclusion of input and process measures influences educators’ practices or student outcomes.

Practical implications

The research suggests several practical steps that can be taken to promote effective systems of measurement, including providing supports for high‐quality teaching to accompany new measures, offering flexibility to respond to local needs, and conducting validity studies that address the various purposes of the measures.

Originality/value

The paper provides new information about how states and districts are expanding their systems of measures for various purposes, and informs accountability policy by highlighting the benefits and limitations of current outcomes‐based approaches to accountability and by clarifying the trade‐offs and decisions that should be considered.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 51 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 28 June 2013

Tina Trujillo

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the district effectiveness literature. It begins by summarizing the school effectiveness research, the correlates of effective schools, and…

1572

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the district effectiveness literature. It begins by summarizing the school effectiveness research, the correlates of effective schools, and the conceptual and methodological characteristics of this field. It then describes the findings from a review of 50 studies of district effectiveness, the most frequently identified correlates of effective districts, and the conceptual and methodological features of this research. From there, it compares and contrasts the two fields, paying attention to the ways in which they frame notions of success, purposes of education, the contextualized nature of school performance, and theoretical explanations for student success.

Design/methodology/approach

Data sources for this literature review included 50 primary documents on district effectiveness. The studies were bound to those that presented the original results from investigations of the relationship between district‐level policies, routines, behaviors, or other characteristics and classroom‐level outcomes.

Findings

Several themes run through the literature on district effectiveness. These include findings that standards‐aligned curricula, coherent organizational structures, strong instructional leadership, frequent monitoring and evaluation, and focused professional learning lead to higher test scores. Most of these investigations are framed from technical perspectives that explore the relationship between organizational regulations and improved test performance. Less common are inquiries about the socio‐political and normative forces that shape districts’ improvement experiences. One consequence of this technical focus is that the field of district effectiveness has come to share several of the conceptual and methodological properties that characterized the former school‐level research.

Research limitations/implications

The article concludes by discussing the implications for the growing volume of district‐level research on educational leadership, district improvement, and educational equity.

Originality/value

This article details the ways in which a sharp focus on questions of what works in the district effectiveness literature has deepened researchers’ and practitioners’ knowledge of the specific mechanisms that may produce more desirable results in test performance, yet these questions alone, decoupled from corresponding inquiries about the complex, highly contextualized character of higher or lower scoring districts, leave researchers and practitioners vulnerable to the same scholarly and practical pitfalls of their predecessors.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 51 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

Abstract

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 61 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

1 – 10 of 11
Per page
102050