The Acquisition and Use of Evidence District-Wide

• In Event: Diverse Perspectives on Understanding the Policy Uses of Education Research

Abstract

When No Child Left Behind (NCLB) passed it reoriented educators toward alignment between federal dollars and research-based evidence, or “scientifically based research.” However, scant research exists regarding the acquisition and use of research and other types of evidence in districts, especially those "in need of improvement" (Honig & Coburn, 2008). To fill this gap, our paper examines the extent to which educators acquire and use evidence to bring about improvement under NCLB sanctions.

We build upon two theoretical areas: organizational learning (OL) and social network analysis (SNA). OL, with its long history in non-educational sectors, has emerged as an important lens in understanding improvement. OL involves refining theories superficially (“single loop”) or through the questioning of assumptions and refinement of ideas or approaches based upon changing norms and priorities (“double loop”) (Argyris & Schon, 1978). According to March (1991), organizations that “learn” require a balance between exploration (experimentation) and exploitation of existing knowledge. As such, connections around evidence are highly relevant to this lens. In addition, given the import of social processes we draw upon SNA in framing our study. Scholars argue that because systems are comprised of an interdependence of action (Giddens, 1979), the network of ties may moderate, influence, and determine the speed and depth of change (Krackhardt, 2001; Mohrman, Tenkasi & Mohrman, 2003). Through networks, organizational members share and develop new knowledge and practices (Ahuja, 2000; Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998). Underlying relationships, thus, are critical to understanding OL and the acquisition and use of evidence districtwide.

Our paper focuses on an urban district serving 34,000 students, most of whom are low income, students of color. Data were collected between 2009 and 2011 including surveys focusing on evidence acquisition and use, OL, and networks, as well as case studies of three secondary schools. Data include surveys with school/district leaders (n=113) and school staff (n= 173), and interviews with educators (n=54). We utilized UCINET, SPSS, and Nvivo for data analysis.

We found that RCSD leaders have become more densely connected over time with more reciprocated ties, suggesting greater sharing of ideas and practices. However, many leaders recognized for bringing research into the system are peripheral players and formal discussions of research are rare. Furthermore, ties relating to experimentation and innovation have declined districtwide. School staff relied heavily on principals for evidence but these individuals rarely connected to each other or central office staff. School staff consulted data (not research) to make decisions but used these in superficial ways. Instead, staff relied on experiential evidence to determine solutions, often repackaging or expanding prior reforms. Our qualitative data triangulated these results.

The field of education lacks a solid empirical base in understanding evidence acquisition and use. This is particularly concerning considering the number of youth adversely impacted by underperforming educational systems. Our exploratory study is important to the field because it helps to uncover the barriers to the acquisition and use of evidence districtwide. The timing is important given the increasing numbers of urban schools/districts underperforming under NCLB.

Authors

• Kara S. Finnigan, University of Rochester

• Alan J. Daly, University of California - San Diego