"The Business of Teaching and Learning": Examining the Institutional Logic of Continuous Improvement in Educational Organizations

• In Event: 51.067 - Institutional Perspectives on Education Policy: New Directions in Theory and Research

Abstract

“Continuous Improvement” (CI) is the latest buzzword to dominate K-12 policy and practice circles. Derived from scientific management and total quality control in the private sector and widely used in healthcare, this current stream of CI involves iterative, structured cycles of data analysis to solve problems and test solutions. When paired with purposeful facilitated interorganizational networks, the intention of this process is to promote knowledge sharing, transparency, and accountability. After nearly two decades of “one size fits all” school reforms focused on quick turnaround (i.e., showing dramatic improvement within three years), the current reform movement has embraced incremental, locally-designed reform aimed at longer-term gains through disciplined decisionmaking practices. Despite its popularity, it remains to be seen whether this current stream of CI can truly take root in educational systems, leading to lasting change for these organizations.
To understand the selection and implementation of CI and its influence on organizational structural change, I examine the strategic case of two state-level intermediary organizations, the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE) and the California Office to Reform Education (CORE), that converged upon CI as an approach to support district and school improvement. As emergent, intermediary organizations and early adopters of CI, these two organizations present a unique and useful opportunity to examine how CI plays out and shapes organizational arrangements and practice. I explore the adoption and diffusion of CI utilizing an institutional logics approach, which identifies the symbolic and material aspects of institutions that shape organizational activity (Thornton et al., 1999). By analyzing evidence collected through interviews (n=25), observations (n=153 hours), and documentation, I sought to understand: 1) How and why did these organizations select CI as a policy solution?; and 2) How did the implementation of CI influence organizational structure and practice?
I argue that CCEE and CORE’s convergence in organizational structure and practice manifested institutional isomorphism catalyzed by the diffusion of a dominant field-level institutional logic: Collaborative Inquiry logic. I find that, while the two organizations exhibited nearly identical organizational arrangements and values, they differed substantially in how they engaged districts in decisionmaking and in their approach to utilizing CI with districts. These differences reflected their contexts and the multiple, conflicting logics at play (Greenwood et al., 2011). Specifically, I find that CORE and CCEE diluted their adoption of the Collaborative Inquiry logic in order to fit their unique contexts and environment, and serve the specific subset of districts participating in their respective networks.
This exploratory study offers two main contributions to the field. First, given the rapid adoption of CI across the nation, implications from the cases of early adopters may provide valuable information on the implementation challenges to expect and how to structure future CI efforts to mitigate these issues. Second, this study demonstrates the utility of institutional analysis in understanding policy enactment and implementation. I offer a concrete framework conceptualizing how the institutional and organizational dimensions intersect, and describe how organizational structure can manifest, illuminate, and reinforce underlying institutional logics.

Author

• Susan C. Bush-Mecenas, Northwestern University