Generating a Networked Improvement Community to Improve Secondary Mathematics Teacher Preparation: Network Leadership, Organization, and Operation

• In Event: 14.016 - Catalyzing a Social Structure for Educational Improvement: Initiating Networked Improvement Communities

Abstract

This paper analyzes the formation of a national consortium of over 60 universities and 80 school systems, formed to address the undersupply of new secondary mathematics teachers who are well prepared to help their students attain the goals of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. The Mathematics Teacher Education Partnership NIC (MTEP) has been organized using the Networked Improvement Community (NIC) model which outlines five “critical domains of effort related to initiating and fostering the ongoing development” of NICs.

The MTEP was organized in November 2012 following an exploration of alternative designs by the leadership team. Beginning summer 2013, MTEP participated in a project designed to develop and refine the Network Initiation Framework. This paper presents a post-hoc analysis of the formation of the MTEP-NIC based on the first domain of the framework—“network leadership, organization and operation”—based on primary documents produced since the networks inception.

Major results are outlined according to key constituent elements of the Framework’s first domain, including areas of progress, of continuing concern, and of continuing adaptation.

Convening the network. MTEP-NIC was organized under the auspices of a national higher education association, which was able to mobilize leaders of higher education institutions. A leadership team of secondary mathematics educators provided both visibility and professional warrant that engaged faculty members in the work.

Membership. Criteria for membership in the NIC were established and used to identify an initial set of institutions and faculty members. However, these criteria are being revisited given interest from additional institutions and changing priorities of some initial members.

Participation structures. Following intensive work on problem analysis (cf. Domain 2), MTEP-NIC was organized into five “research action clusters” (RACs) focusing on particular aspects of the problem space. As the RACs have launched, definitions of rules for participation have been fluid across time and across RACs.

Leadership team and hub function. To provide both national leadership and content expertise, the hub functions for MTEP-NIC are distributed between the convening organization and the university of one of the MTEP-NIC founders. A leadership team has guided its development; however, there have been several shifts in both membership and roles to meet changing needs, most recently to better represent the interests of the RACs.

Communications infrastructure. Updates are provided to both university leaders and faculty members but on an “as-needed” basis. The need for more robust communications—both routines and supporting technology—has become critical in ensuring effective communications across the RACs in order to ensure a continuing sense of identity (cf. Domain 5).

There are many challenges in developing the leadership and organization of a NIC. Moreover, given that a NIC must itself be constantly improving means that structures need to be revisited to be more effective and to address changing circumstances. Creating a network of NICs seems to be particularly promising in continuing to learn about NIC formation.

Authors

• W. Gary Martin, Auburn University

• Howard Gobstein, Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities