Organizing for Networked Improvement

• In Event: Organizing Networks to Accelerate School Improvement in Pursuit of Equitable Educational Opportunity

Abstract

Purpose:
The purpose of this paper is to better understand how improvement networks are organizing to create social learning systems. The paper explores the core activities and routines network hubs establish to create and sustain networked continuous improvement work and the way these structures change in response to organizational learning and contextual changes.

Context/Conceptual Framework:
The paper takes a developmental perspective to understand the emergence of networked improvement processes (Authors, et al, 2015; Authors et al., 2019). Improvement networks aim to develop as scientific, professional learning communities that are characterized by three central characteristics: grounded by shared goals, norms, theories, and practices; support learning and problem solving through disciplined inquiry; and coordinate and accelerate learning through strategic knowledge management (Authors et al., 2019). The development of a scientific professional learning community is hypothesized to require integrated attention to the technical processes that support systematic learning to improvement through data-based experimentation with practice changes and the social processes that structure and motivate network members' engagement in collaborative improvement routines.

Modes of Inquiry:
We utilized a comparative case study methodology with a strategically selected set of improvement networks. Given the emphasis on the developmental trajectories of networks we selected a subset of eight of the fifteen networks which have participated in the initiative from year one through year three representing distinct developmental trajectories based on their members’ responses to the Network Health Survey data (e.g., improvement in network functioning over time versus stagnation in early stages of development).

Data & Analysis:
We utilized survey data collected in year 1 and year 3 of the initiative to identify and explore patterns in network development. Then we drew on a broader corpus of data to draft case descriptions of how networks organized for improvement. We drew on documentation generated through the ongoing work of the initiative such as proposal documents, notes generated in monthly check-ins between network leaders and Gates program officers, formative evaluation reports, and open-ended survey item responses. Guided by our theoretical framework, we utilized a structured case summary (Miles, Huberman & Saldana, 2014) to generate cross case themes and findings.

Results:
Emerging findings point to key dimensions of variation in the way network hubs organized improvement activities. Networks vary in the extent to which they: (1) invested in understanding the root causes of a problem of practice versus moving directly to experimentation with practice changes; (2) focused on building educator capacity to engage in continuous improvement routines versus focusing on problem-specific practice changes; (3) fostered direct interaction between schools versus relying on the hub organization to learn from school-based improvement work and disseminate key insights to other schools. In ongoing analyses, we explore these points of variation in the context of broader trends in network development represented by the survey measures.

Significance:
Given its longitudinal comparative design this study provides a unique opportunity to explore the relative affordances of different modes of organizing networked improvement activities, which has relevance for those studying and leading improvement networks.

Authors

• Jennifer Lin Russell, Vanderbilt University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Jennifer Zoltners Sherer, University of Pittsburgh
  Non-Presenting Author

• Hanan Perlman, University of Pittsburgh
  Presenting Author

• Megan Duff, Vanderbilt University
  Non-Presenting Author