Search

Using qualitative case study methods, we examine how educators describe continuous improvement and craft coherence for implementation. We find that educators attempted to build system-wide improvement capabilities, taking into consideration theories of action for continuous improvement and managing change given the realities of their local contexts. We identify educators' orientations for crafting coherence as a mechanism by which they attempt to integrate improvement strategies to their local contexts. Two bridging approaches to crafting coherence were found: weaving and stacking. By using the notion of developing coherence as craft, we extend the field's understanding of how leaders attempt to create shared meaning and practice throughout educational systems that are complex and dynamic. We discuss the implications for research and practice.

The work of principals has become increasingly challenging and complex, as they are expected to lead school improvement, manage a host of competing demands, and attend to the needs of diverse stakeholders. However, the emotions related to principals' work, particularly in relation to educational reform, has been understudied in recent years. This paper investigates the emotional dimensions of principals' work with respect to school improvement and change, and how the people, practices, policies, and patterns in their school contexts intersect with their emotions and actions. Analyzing 42 interviews with 19 U.S. principals engaged in reform, we explain how managing change and teacher staffing and collaboration were particularly emotional processes for principals. Principals acted as mediators and managers of the emotional climate of their schools while also processing their own emotions. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to examine the data conversation moves enacted by leaders and to bridge organizational leadership for equity and data-informed decision making to practice. I argue that data discussion moves with the purpose of improving equity and learning must reflect core tenets of organizational leadership for equity--specifically eliminating deficit thinking and focusing on inquiry for improvement. Research Method: I employ case study methods to explore how data use routines and discussion moves unfold in context. The analysis for this article stems from data collected over a 2-year period at an elementary school, consisting of 106.5 hours of observation, 25 semistructured interviews, and document reviews. Analysis was an iterative process, beginning with holistic case studies, open coding, and then a focused coding that lead to a finalized typology of data conversation moves. Findings: Leaders engaged in data conversation moves that invited an inquiry stance and a strength-based approach to understanding how student data could inform instructional improvement and support, such as (a) Triangulating, (b) Reframing Deficit Thinking to Building on Student Learning Assets, (c) Pedagogical Linking and Student-Centered Positioning, and (d) Extending. Implications: This study contributes to the growing body of research that examines the micro-processes of data use practice by honing in on conversation moves that educators engage in to shift discussion toward student learning and professional inquiry. The findings highlight how data use for inquiry, learning, and equity requires leadership practices that forge capacity building routines with facilitation of data conversation moves.

Ensuring equitable opportunities and outcomes for all students is a top priority of many educators and policymakers across the globe. Data use can be an important lever for achieving equity, but how this can occur is not well understood. In this article, we draw upon knowledge gained in a decade of in-depth qualitative research to examine the ways in which data use helps to open or close doors for students. We discuss data use practices that influence equity goals: (1) accountability-driven data use and data use for continuous improvement; (2) using data to confirm assumptions and using data to challenge beliefs, and (3) tracking and flexible grouping to promote student growth. Along each of these dimensions, there are active decision makers, complex processes of data use at play, and a great deal of variation both within and across contexts. Ultimately, educators and policymakers are faced with critical choices regarding data use that can profoundly affect students' daily educational experiences and trajectories.

Only a few studies, primarily limited to small samples, have examined the relationship between leukocyte telomere length (LTL) data generated by Southern blots, expressed in kilobases, versus quantitative PCR data, expressed in the telomere product/a single gene product (T/S). In the present study, we compared LTL data generated by the two methods in 681 elderly participants (50% African Americans, 50% of European origin, 49.2% women, mean age 73.7±2.9 years) in the Health Aging and Body Composition Study. The correlation between the data generated by the two methods was modest (R (2) = .27). Both methods captured the age effect on LTL and the longer LTL in women than in men. However, only the Southern blot method showed a significantly longer LTL in African Americans than in European decent individuals, which might be attributed to the larger measurement error of the quantitative PCR-based method than the Southern blots.

Despite data-driven decision making being a ubiquitous part of policy and school reform efforts, little is known about how teachers use data for instructional decision making. Drawing on data from a qualitative case study of four elementary schools, we examine the logic and patterns of teacher decision making about differentiation and ability grouping. We find that district and school policies conditioned teachers' decision making through mandated time for instructional differentiation, curricular tools, and online program adoption. Educators used various strategies reflecting different logics, types of data used, and sources of decision making. Implications for theory and research are discussed.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine how data are used in classroom placement routines. The authors explore educators' assumptions about the purposes of the classroom placement routine, detailing the ostensive (i.e. structure and template) and performative aspects of the routine itself, and the implications of data use for equity and leadership practices. Design/methodology/approach: Using a multi-site case study involving in-depth interviews of teacher and school leaders and observations of meetings, the authors examined the role that data played in classroom placement routines in three elementary schools in the USA. Findings: Findings show that educators across schools collected similar types of multi-dimensional data; however, analysis and decision-making processes varied based on their assumptions and goals. Assessing student needs holistically and balancing students across classes based on academic diversity, behavioral or socio-emotional needs, gender and teacher workload were consistent patterns. There was a distinct difference between collecting data and actually using it as a basis of decision making. Research limitations/implications: These findings highlight the importance of using in-depth observations to understand data use in schools. Educators' assumptions and philosophies about classroom placement contributed to the pattern of discussion and decisions made throughout the routines. Delving deeper into how data are used in specific routines and organizational contexts can illuminate how data use is socially constructed and enacted for equity. Practical implications: Educators who guide school routines have the power to maintain taken-for-granted assumptions about students, or to create counter-narratives. Originality/value: This study provides insights into classroom and student placement processes by emphasizing the social and interactional dimensions of data use as they unfold in practice. It also extends empirical knowledge about the purposes, dimensions, and uses of data-driven decision making models.

School leaders are often drowning in data but are unsure which forms of data will help them create a portrait of student achievement that will motivate staff to look beyond simple trends and delve deeper into root causes. Teachers often wish for more guidance on the kinds of data analysis and teaching strategies that will help them move the needle in classroom instruction. The authors offer five key principles of data use that can guide leaders in promoting deeper inquiry around data in their schools and districts so all students have the opportunity to achieve at high levels. These principles include articulating your purpose and commitment to equity, emphasizing the importance of pausing and reflecting before you make decisions on the basis of the data, being careful when using data to differentiate instruction, focusing on student engagement, and using your professional judgment. A key lesson? Note the authors, "Focus on the principles of effective data use, and not just the practices. Centering on the goals of improving education for all students, promoting an inquiry mind-set, and supporting teacher professionalism will help leaders use data for long-term continual improvement."

Purpose: Increasing evidence suggests the importance of relationships between district and site leaders. However, there is limited empirical evidence regarding the social infrastructure between and among leaders especially as related to the exchange of advice related to reform. Moreover, we have limited understanding regarding the mechanisms that are associated with how certain leaders occupy influential social positions. Method: Using social network data from district and site leaders, we conducted social network analysis and regression models to examine the relationship between a leader's network position measured by incoming, outgoing, and close ties; personality traits; and leader self-efficacy controlling for demographics. Findings: Findings indicate that leaders with more incoming advice relationships from other leaders were associated with more years of experience in the district, being self-identified as "neurotic," reporting higher efficacy in leading reform, and less efficacy in management. Leaders with more outgoing advice ties also self-identified as "neurotic" and reported lower efficacy in management. Leaders who were readily sought in terms of advice were explained by the number of years in the district and the self-reported personality traits of "neurotic," "extraverted," and "conscientious." Leaders who were able to more efficiently connect to other leaders for advice were explained by being "neurotic," "extraverted," and "conscientious" as well as reporting low efficacy for management. Implications: Results suggest the importance of considering both personality traits as well as perceptions of efficacy in terms of understanding how leaders come to occupy influential social position in an advice network related to reform.

Although there is an emerging body of research that examines data-driven decision making (DDDM) in schools, little attention has been paid to how local leaders strategically frame sensemaking around data use. This exploratory case examines how district and school leaders consciously framed the implementation of DDDM in one urban high school. Leaders strategically constructed diagnostic, motivating, and prognostic frames to promote a culture of using data for continuous improvement. Our findings demonstrate that leaders developed (a) diagnostic frames centered on the need to confront student achievement and opportunity gaps; (b) motivating frames concentrated on school improvement as shared collective responsibility; and (c) prognostic frames focused on making incremental change to sustain reform efforts and the creation of common goals to monitor progress. The findings suggest that framing is an important leadership tactic that needs careful consideration when reforms are introduced and implemented. (Contains 1 table and 8 notes.)

Purpose: An increasing number of schools and districts across the US are requiring teachers to collaborate for the purpose of data-driven decision making. Research suggests that both data use and teacher collaboration are important ingredients in the school improvement process. Existing studies also reveal the complexities of teacher collaboration and the importance of context in shaping teachers' collaborative work, especially with data. Yet, the intersection of teacher collaboration and data use has been understudied. The purpose of this paper is to examine the affordances and constraints that exist in the context of established teacher collaboration time for the purposes of data-driven decision making. Design/methodology/approach: The paper draws upon qualitative case study data gathered in six schools that structured teacher time for collaboration on data use. Findings: An analysis of the data revealed that a variety of leadership activities and organizational conditions shaped teachers' collaborative work with data. These included leadership focused on thoughtful use of data and the framing of data-driven decision making in terms of collective responsibility; the establishment of norms for teacher collaboration; the implementation of data discussion protocols; and teacher groupings and subject matter subcultures. Originality/value: Knowing how and when a leadership activity or organizational condition becomes either an affordance or a constraint to teacher collaboration around data use has important implications for leadership and educational change. The findings of this study also help to lay the groundwork for future research regarding teacher collaboration around data use. (Contains 1 table.)

Background: Data-driven decision making continues to be a common feature of educational reform agendas across the globe. In many U.S. schools, the teacher team meeting is a key setting in which data use is intended to take place, with the aim of planning instruction to address students' needs. However, most prior research has not examined how the use of data shapes teachers' dialogue about their students' ability and achievement. Purpose: This study examines how teachers talk about student ability and achievement in the era of data-driven decision making and how their talk is shaped by the use of data within teams, their school contexts, and broader accountability systems. Research Design: The study draws on interview and observational data gathered from teacher teams in four elementary schools. In each of these schools, teachers were expected to use data to inform instructional differentiation. Data collection efforts involved regular visits to each school over the course of one year to interview teachers and conduct observations of teacher team meetings. In the process of analysis, interview transcripts and field notes were coded, and themes were extracted within and across codes. Findings: Across schools, teachers used common labels (e.g., "low," "middle," "GATE") to describe students of different achievement levels and the programs they were involved in. The use of labels and student categories was relational and comparative and influenced by the accountability and policy contexts in which teachers worked. At the same time, regular meetings in which teachers jointly examined data on student learning provided a space for teachers to examine students' strengths and weaknesses on a variety of measures and talk in terms of student growth. Teachers questioned whether assessment data provided an accurate picture of student achievement and acknowledged the role of student effort, behavior, and family circumstances as important factors that were not easily measured. These discussions opened up deeper inquiry into the factors that supported or hindered student learning. The implementation of the Common Core State Standards also led some teachers to question prior categorizations of student ability. Conclusions/Recommendations: The findings from this study suggest that educational reforms and policies regarding data use influence educators' conceptions of student achievement and ability. On the one hand, accountability policies can narrow the dialogue about students. On the other hand, educational reforms and policies could also lead to new ways of thinking about student learning and to an examination of a broader range of data, and provide opportunities for professional learning.

The expectation that teachers will use student achievement data to improve their instruction is a major feature of national and local reform agendas. The theory of action behind data-driven decision making is a mostly causal model of professional action, whereby teachers diagnose weaknesses and implement solutions. The purpose of this article is to examine how high school teachers, situated within their policy and work contexts, use data to inform instructional decisions. Using a framework that draws upon sense-making and co-construction theories on reform implementation, we analyze qualitative data gathered in 4 urban public high schools in the United States. Findings reveal that the process of data use by teachers is complex, multilayered, and influenced by teacher interpretations and social interactions. Teachers used a variety of forms of data to inform their decision making and struggled to reconcile policies promoting data-driven decision making with local beliefs and practices. Implications for research and policy are discussed. (Contains 2 tables and 1 footnote.)

Since the establishment of educational rights for children with disabilities in the 1970s, special education in the US has included a growing share of students and has constituted an ever-growing share of education budgets. Previous research has focused on the disproportionate assignment to special education of low-income and minority students, concluding that special education mainly reproduces social disadvantages. This article argues that privileged parents--by virtue of their ability to navigate complex legal and scientific practices and discourses that are seen as guarantees of fairness and neutrality in special education--are able to secure advantageous resources for their children through special education. Through analysis of the distribution and content of "due process" hearing requests in the California special education system, this article shows how advocacy in this part of the system depends on parents' cultural and economic capital. Specifically, reimbursement claims in due process hearings show how having economic capital can be used to leverage public education resources, while parents' testimony in hearings shows the importance of having cultural capital. In concluding, the emphasis on parental involvement in both regular and special education is discussed and alternatives to the individualized system of rights in special education are considered. (Contains 6 notes and 2 tables.)

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was passed to ensure that 100 percent of students would be proficient by 2014. Progress toward that goal is measured annually and results suggest that while some schools improve, increasing numbers are identified as in need of improvement (INI) and are subject to sanctions. We examined perceived levels of threat rigidity, efficacy, and leadership in 549 California principals whose schools were INI or not. Results suggest that principals in INI schools identified more threat-rigid response and perceived less self-efficacy than in non-INI setting. Results did not indicate differences between principals in perceived transformational and transactional leadership. (Contains 10 tables and 1 note.)

The purpose of this paper is to examine leadership practices in school systems that are implementing data-driven decision-making employing the theory of distributed leadership. With the advent of No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) in the US, educational leaders are now required to analyse, interpret and use data to make informed decisions in all areas of education, ranging from professional development to student learning. The emphasis on data-driven decision-making practices to bring about improved student outcomes is relatively a new feature of the education reform landscape and thus requires educators to learn and develop new competences. Leadership is one crucial bridge that can support and direct these new learning efforts. Using qualitative data from a case study of four urban school systems, the authors' findings indicate that: (1) leaders at all levels co-constructed the vision and implementation of productive data-driven decision-making by creating an ethos of learning and continuous improvement rather than one of blame; (2) in order to give data relevance, leaders also distributed decision-making authority in a manner that empowered different staff members to utilise their expertise; and (3) the school systems directed their resources on building human and social capacity mainly by focusing on modelling and knowledge brokering amongst their staff. The paper concludes with a discussion of research and policy implications based on the findings. (Contains 1 table.)

The purpose of this article is to improve our understanding of data-driven decision-making strategies that are initiated at the district or system level. We apply principal-agent theory to the analysis of qualitative data gathered in a case study of 4 urban school systems. Our findings suggest educators at the school level need not only systemic support but also enough decision-making autonomy to make site-level decisions on the basis of data. Secondly, we found that building expertise and capacity at the school site for data-driven decision-making is necessary but not a sufficient condition for success. Finally, in designing an accountability system, the imbalance in the distribution of information between the central office and the schools must be accommodated. Implications for further research and policy, based on these findings, are also discussed. (Contains 3 tables.)

This article focuses on how the Success for All Foundation (SFAF)--the nonprofit intermediary organization that promotes Success for All--works with educators in schools to increase capacity for learning and instruction. Success for All is a comprehensive school reform model that primarily centers on early literacy intervention. Building on research on intermediary organizations and situated learning, we examine how SFAF structures professional development and the types of relationships the organization cultivates with practitioners. At a glance, although much of the theory, strategy, and tools driving the SFAF's approach to school reform seem technically oriented and highly prescribed, our investigation indicates that the deeper process of creating knowledge for school improvement is a collaborative, situated endeavor. Moreover, the study reveals that the process of learning and professional development within the program is a result of the ongoing, dynamic interplay among the SFAF, local conditions, and the broader policy context. Implications for policy and practice are discussed. (Contains 1 footnote.)