Emerging State-Level Instructional Policy in Computer Science Education as Experienced by District Administrators

• In Event: Understanding and Supporting District Systems Change Around Computer Science Education

Abstract

This study aims to understand emerging state-level computer science education (CSed) policies, focusing on how district leaders are experiencing, engaging with, and participating in implementation associated with these policies.
The United States is currently undergoing a substantial shift within its education systems, with priorities around achieving equity in a new domain—computer science—now represented in policy across all 50 states. Over half of state departments of education have staffed positions focused on CSed (29) and dedicated funding for districts (27). Close to 80% have adopted CSed standards (35), and 40% (20) require that high school-level CS courses be offered (Code.org, n.d.). Motivations for these new instructional policies range from addressing issues of broadening participation in computing, to beliefs in the broad importance of new set of computing-related competencies, to civic priorities around having a technologically proficient public (Blikstein & Moghadam, 2019; Santo, Vogel, & Ching, 2019; Weintrop, Holbert & Tissenbaum, 2020).
In this quickly unfolding policy landscape, how are district administrators experiencing these new CSed policies? While research is beginning to show that more robust state-policy adoption is associated with positive outcomes including increased offerings of high school CS courses and increased participation of female students (Code.org, 2019), there is little view into the ‘black box’ of state policy implementation as it’s being engaged with by district leaders. Central office administrators play a critical role in ‘bridging’ and ‘buffering’ their existing instructional systems with new external policies in order to ‘craft coherence’ (Honig & Hatch, 2004), and, as such, understanding how emerging CSed policies are ‘landing’ represents a key area of policy learning in this new area of instruction.
This study sought to speak to this gap. First, it aimed to situate existing state CSed policy mechanisms withinin existing policy theory. The study’s first step used the framework of alignment and accountability as outlined by Coburn, Hill, and Spillane (2016) in order categorize these emerging policy mechanisms as they either focused on coherent supports for implementation (alignment) or on requirements, incentives and enforcement of compliance (accountability). We then purposely sampled 5 states that had varied balances of accountability and alignment CSed policies, conducted interviews and focus groups with 23 district and state leaders, and gathered supporting policy documentation.
Our findings detail approaches state leaders made around policy implementation, and how district leaders experienced and interpreted these emerging policies. The study findings take two forms, first of a theoretical treatment of emerging CSed policy mechanisms within the alignment and accountability framework (Coburn, Hill, & Spillane, 2016), which provides a descriptive analysis of what state instructional policy mechanisms are currently being employed and situating them within this existing policy framework. Our second area of findings, based on interview and focus group data with state and district leaders, highlights tensions around emerging policy communication, what policies they saw as mutually reinforcing, their perceptions around

accountability efforts, and the benefits of district leader involvement in policy development and specification.
We share implications for further research in this area, as well as recommendations for policy- makers focused on CSed.

Authors

• Rafi Santo, Telos Learning

• Leigh Ann DeLyser, CSforALL