Search

Many school leaders responded to the controversies over critical race theory with denial. That approach can backfire, according to Emily Hodge, Francesca López, and Joshua Rosenberg. They suggest proactive messaging, which can help prevent leaders from falling into the trap of reactively defending their practices and letting the direction of the conversation be guided by those with the most extreme views.

This study takes advantage of natural variation in alignment and accountability to analyze educator sensemaking of a complex policy environment. It describes how educators in two large, high-accountability districts in New York and Florida made sense of multiple policy changes, including new standards, curriculum, assessments, and teacher evaluation. Drawing on interviews with 68 individuals, observations of instruction and professional development, and policy documents, findings suggest that high policy alignment represents a fundamental yet insufficient condition for educators to perceive policies as coherent and coordinated. Accountability strength and policy sequence were important factors in educators’ perceptions of coherence. In both districts, the pace and complexity of change contributed to policy overwhelm.

State educational agency content coordinators commonly experience tensions in their professional roles related to distinct sets of beliefs, or logics, about who “should” control what students learn: the state bureaucracy, the local community, or the broader profession. Using an institutional logics frame and drawing on interviews with coordinators for English/language arts representing about a third of U.S. states, we illustrate how individuals navigate these competing traditions of decision-making. Multiple logics shaped coordinators’ perceptions of their job responsibilities and goals, as well as the actions they felt were possible for them to take in creating and providing resources, communicating those resources to local stakeholders, and providing professional development. More consistent messaging to coordinators about the types of outreach the state views as acceptable would better support high-quality literacy instruction.

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) were released in 2010 with an appendix that claimed to outline a research-based case for the standards. In this article, we examine the CCSS Appendix ...

This study examines how a large metropolitan district presented the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) to its teachers, how secondary literacy teachers took up those messages, and the conceptions o...

Although research suggests that teachers turn to their state departments of education for curricular resources, little is known about the resources teachers find on state websites and the recommendations these resources make, especially for teaching writing. We analyze state-provided resources focused on writing ( n = 123) for their type, standard(s), and sponsor(s). We also analyze a subset of 40 resources to describe the epistemologies about writing instruction reflected in these resources. We find that just over half of states provide writing resources, that literacy and policy organizations are named about the same number of times as resource sponsors, and that resources tend to foreground structural and ideational epistemologies over social practice. This work helps identify the extent to which states focus on writing instruction, the types of resources states are providing, and the visions of writing instruction communicated through state-provided curricular resources.

Background A common set of standards enables the sharing of curricular and professional development resources across state lines. In a previous study of state-provided standards resources for English/language arts, we identified the number of state educational agencies linking to different organizations’ resources. We then identified the 10 most influential organizations; in other words, the organizations to which the highest number of states had linked as resource sponsors. However, little is known about the content of the resources from the most influential organizations. Purpose The first goal of this study was to describe the state-provided resources sponsored by the 10 most influential organizations, including the standards and topics addressed. The second goal was to identify the instructional messages about close reading present in those resources, as well as how consistent those messages were across resources and across organizations. Research Design This study used qualitative coding and descriptive analyses to identify standards and topics included in 177 individual resources in the form of articles, curriculum guidelines, instructional aids, professional development, and student work. We utilized social network analysis to visualize the connections between topics the resources addressed and their organizational sponsors. Then, we used qualitative coding and social network analysis to identify and visualize messages about close reading from a smaller set of resources. Conclusions This study finds that resources emphasized standards focused on reading closely and academic vocabulary. Resources focused most heavily on the topics of reading informational text, complex text and academic language, and reading literature; topics that were less represented included special student populations, curricular design, and narrative writing. This study also finds that the resources’ positions on how teachers should enact close reading diverged around the extent to which historical or background knowledge ought to be allowed to inform students’ reading. This work adds to a small but growing body of research applying social network analysis to visualize the relationships between organizations and ideas. We recommend that teachers, as well as state and district leaders, who are searching for helpful resources turn to literacy organizations like the National Council of Teachers of English and the International Literacy Association as organizations that are concerned with the profession as a whole rather than with one particular standards policy and may therefore present a broader and more integrated view of ELA instruction.

This manuscript explores how the changing policy context of common standards may have influenced the provision of curriculum materials in the United States. Many educational reforms do little to change the nature of classroom instruction, and prior research has argued that this constancy is, at least in part, due to the common use of instructional materials from a small set of large publishing companies (Rowan in J Educ Change 3(3–4):283–314, 2002). However, common standards have been in place in many states since 2010, creating the potential for states to create and share curricular materials with each other, as well as for new organizations to enter the curriculum marketplace. Instructional materials provide a direct link to the instructional core, and recent research demonstrates that individual teachers, schools, and districts are increasingly selecting instructional materials from a variety of online sources, including databases of open educational resources and open-access, yearlong curricula. These materials are created, curated, and/or disseminated by state education agencies, nonprofit organizations, for-profit companies, and education employees. In this essay, we describe this new context and provide several cases of the shifting landscape of supply and demand related to curriculum materials. Various configurations of organizations are taking innovative approaches to providing curriculum materials in the context of the Common Core State Standards, as well as to influencing the materials school systems adopt. Finally, we discuss the implications of this backdrop for curriculum policy and practice.

This chapter examines how social network analysis can be used to study education policy networks—specifically, state support for the Common Core State Standards. Researchers built a comprehensive database of more than 2000 English/language arts standards resources on state educational agency websites. Social network analysis was used to visualize the network of organizations and state educational agencies sponsoring each of these resources to identify the most powerful organizations involved in determining the meaning of the Common Core State Standards for classroom instruction. A second study used discourse network analysis to analyze similarities and differences in the content of the materials. A final component used an institutional theory lens to examine the extent to which state attributes such as Common Core-adoption are related to having shared organizational ties.

This article investigates the interaction between the Common Core State Standards and curricular tracking by examining instructional decision making across tracks in a large metropolitan district. This study draws on institutional logics as a framework to analyze 106 instructional decisions from 24 participants involved in middle school literacy instruction. In lower-track classes, participants often adapted the curriculum and adopted a more teacher-centered approach. About half of the rationales for those decisions reflected a logic of tracking, less than a fifth reflected a logic of differentiation, and almost a third reflected elements of both logics. These findings demonstrate that despite common standards, a tracked school structure continues to serve as a powerful signal about the curriculum and instruction seen as appropriate for different groups of students.

The authors provide practical, evidence-based advice for teachers and educational leaders looking for helpful curricular and professional resources that support students' literacy development in the era of the Common Core State Standards.

This study uses the example of the Emergency School Aid Act of 1972, a federal desegregation incentive program, to discuss the benefits and challenges of equity-oriented incentives. This study applies theories of policy instruments and the social construction of target populations to congressional records, archival program materials, and other historical sources to trace the origin and evolution of the incentives and mandates built into the Emergency School Aid Act. The study ultimately concludes that the program’s combination of a financial incentive with rigorous oversight offers lessons for how to incorporate equity-oriented incentives into current education policy.

Despite decades of critiques and scores of innovations designed to abolish or weaken it, the school district remains a central institution of the American educational system. Yet, although the district remains the primary agent of local democratic control and serves as the main unit for educational decisions, relatively little attention has been given to the historical evolution of the school district as an institutional form. Reformers and researchers alike often hold misperceptions and inaccurate assumptions about the nature of the school district’s development, precisely because the district has been understudied. The authors of this chapter offer a first step toward correcting that oversight by broadening our attention span, providing a solid historical overview of how the district has developed over the past two centuries, and exploring how scholars have analyzed districts at different points in our past. They focus on how the definition of what constitutes a school district has changed over time and on how perceptions of what it has meant to be a good or effective district has shifted throughout our history. They argue that the district has never been a static institution, that its changing forms and functions deserve greater recognition, and that conflicts regarding school districts often reflect deep and enduring frictions that are endemic to American social structures.

In this special issue, Researching 21st Century Education Policy Through Social Network Analysis, authors use social network analysis (SNA) to explore policy networks, broaden the current literature of sociological approaches to SNA, and/or incorporate new lenses for interpreting policy networks from political science or other academic disciplines. This editorial introduction first provides an overview of policy networks and their relevance in education. Then, the editors describe existing work applying the tools of SNA to education policy and highlight understudied areas before describing the articles included in this issue. These articles apply SNA to a variety of education policy issues, including large scale policies such as the Every Student Succeeds Act and the Common Core State Standards, charter schools, and the relationship between system and non-system actors. Articles highlight multiple applications of SNA, including how SNA can be used to advance theory, as well as describe and predict policy networks.

Rapid adoption of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), the Race to the Top (RTTT) competition, and backlash around these policies created widespread uncertainty among state educational agencies (SEAs). SEAs may have not had a clear direction about how to support standards implementation in a new context, and therefore, may have looked to their professional networks, their geographic neighbors or other highly regarded SEAs, or other sources for information and resources to guide their decisions about where to send teachers for information about standards. Drawing on institutional theory (Meyer & Rowan, 1977) and isomorphism specifically (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983), we posit that coercive forces (primarily due to RTTT application and CCSS status) as compared to mimetic and normative forces influenced the organizations to which SEAs turn for curriculum materials. Using Multiple Regression Quadratic Assignment Procedure and a data set of over 2,000 state-provided resources for secondary English Language Arts teachers from all 50 states and Washington, D.C., we indeed found that coercive forces had a relationship with shared organizational ties, demonstrating that RTTT application and CCSS adoption influenced resource provision.

As states continue to implement the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), state educational agencies (SEAs) are providing professional development and curricular resources to help districts and teachers understand the standards. However, little is known about the resources SEAs endorse, the states and/or organizations sponsoring these resources, and how states and organizations are connected. This study investigates the secondary English/language arts resources provided by 51 SEAs (2,023 resources sponsored by 51 SEAs and 262 intermediary organizations). Social network analysis of states and sponsoring organizations revealed a core-periphery network in which certain states and organizations were frequently named as the sponsors of resources, while other organizations were named as resource sponsors by only one state. SEAs are providing a variety of types of resources, including professional development, curriculum guidelines, articles, and instructional aids. This study offers insight into the most influential actors providing CCSS resources at the state level, as well as how SEAs are supporting instructional capacity through the resources they provide for teachers.