Social Capital and Knowledge Development: Educational Infrastructure, Physical Infrastructure, and School Staff Interactions

• In Event: Facing the Sustainability Challenge: Making Lasting, School-Wide Changes Through Professional Development

Abstract

Objectives
The educational infrastructure of schools and school systems, including organizational routines, leadership positions, and curricula, are important determinants of teachers’ on-the-job interactions about their work (Author, 2015; Coburn & Russell, 2008). The physical infrastructure of schools, as measured by the proximity of teachers’ workspaces, also strongly predicts the work-related interactions of school staff (Author, 2017). Little research, however, has examined the ways that these forms of infrastructure interact. This paper examines whether and how schools’ educational and physical infrastructures interact to impact school staff interactions about instruction.

Theoretical Framework
This paper is framed using theories of social capital, defined as resources attained through relations with others (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988). Social interactions enable the development of social capital by allowing access to resources that enable knowledge and skill development, which can in turn contribute to improvement in performance (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Coburn, 2001; Daly & Finnigan, 2010; Daly, Moolenaar, Bolivar, & Burke, 2010; Frank, Zhao, & Borman, 2004; Louis, Marks, & Kruse, 1996; Moolenaar, Karsten, Sleegers, & Daly, 2014).

Methods
Analyses utilize social network analysis and analysis of interviews. Network analyses use Hierarchical Latent Space Models (Sweet, Thomas, & Junker, 2013) to predict the likelihood of ties between two school staff members; the variable of interest in these models is the interaction of a measure of educational infrastructure (such as teaching the same grade level, assignment to a leadership position, or assignment to a coaching position) and a measure of the physical proximity of those individuals’ workspaces in the school building. Network analyses are supplemented by interview analyses that explore how school staff members discuss both educational and physical infrastructure as they describe their interactions with their peers.

Data Sources
This paper uses longitudinal (2010-2015) data from all 14 elementary schools in one mid-sized U.S. public school system. Each year, school staff members were surveyed about their work practices, on-the-job interactions, and the room numbers of their workspaces, which were located on school floor plans and used to calculate distances between workspaces. Survey response rates were generally above 90%. In 2011 and 2015, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of 30-35 school staff in five district schools.

Preliminary Results
Physical distance between workspaces is a stronger predictor of within-grade ties than of ties outside of grade levels, suggesting an interaction between schools’ educational and physical infrastructures (Author, 2017). Additional analyses will interact physical proximity measures with indicators for whether school staff held a leadership or coaching role, to determine whether these aspects of educational and physical infrastructure interact.

Significance
Efforts to build and sustain school improvement have generally focused on building the educational infrastructure of schools and school systems, largely ignoring the physical infrastructure of schools (Author, 2017). This paper’s analyses will inform efforts to build educational infrastructure that take into account the physical layouts of schools and encourage those interactions among school staff most likely to lead to sustained improvements in performance.

Authors

• Matthew A. Shirrell, The George Washington University

• James P. Spillane, Northwestern University