Vehicles of Logics: The Role of Policy Documents and Instructional Materials in Reform

• In Event: 33.065 - Materiality in Educational (Inter)action: Same Concern, Different Approaches

Abstract

To understand the complexities of education policy implementation, it is necessary to consider how artifacts associated with reform are imbued with ideas, meanings, and values. Artifacts play a role in change processes by transmitting logics within a field and by guiding work practices within organizations (D’Adderio, 2011). This empirical paper draws on neo-institutional theory and routines theory to reveal how artifacts carried particular logics and influenced coaching (Coburn & Woulfin, 2012; Pentland & Feldman, 2005; Scott, 2001). This paper argues that two types of artifacts, policy documents and instructional materials, carried logics of reading instruction and shaped educators’ engagement with the reform.

To investigate the role of artifacts in the implementation of an ambitious reading reform, I employed the case study approach. I used the methods of observation, interview, and document analysis to study a reading reform in one urban school district. Data sources included observations of three coaches’ work over 11 months and interviews with 29 informants, including coaches, teachers, principals, and district administrators. I also collected policy documents and artifacts from the state and district levels. I conducted deductive and inductive coding of interview transcripts, observation field notes, and documents.

My findings reveal that two logics of reading instruction, Just Read and Accountability First provided overarching rules for action (Woulfin, i.p.). The Just Read logic encouraged instruction instilling a love of reading for students. In contrast, the logic of Accountability First emphasized instruction matching the demands of the state’s standards and testing program. The two logics were embedded in a variety of artifacts, including policy documents and instructional materials. For instance, instructional materials provided suggestions for how teachers should set up a classroom library; this message aligns with the Just Read logic.

Reading coaches, principals, and teachers engaged with both types of artifacts and accessed their logics. However, policy documents and instructional materials carried the reading reform’s logics in differing ways. Instructional materials carried a relatively similar proportion of messages aligned with Accountability First and Just Read. In contrast, policy documents were much more likely to carry messages matching the principles and practices of Accountability First. Specifically, over 80% of messages from policy documents related to Accountability First. Thus, policy documents were teaching administrators, coaches, and teachers about standards based instruction and even test prep.

This piece contributes to research on organizational sociology by illuminating the role of policy documents and instructional materials in transmitting logics. This paper portrays the ways in which the Accountability First logic was particularly reliant upon policy documents as a carrier. This paper’s findings have implications for policy and practice. First, policymakers and reformers should attend to the ways in which artifacts carry an assortment of ideas about reform. It is necessary to take into account the strengths and limitations of different types of artifacts in carrying logics to educators within schools. Second, principals, coaches, and teachers should develop an awareness of how logics are transmitted by artifacts and should be prepared to engage with policy documents and instructional materials in strategic ways.

Author

• Sarah L. Woulfin, University of Connecticut