County Leadership and Continuous Improvement in Small Rural Districts

• In Event: At the Nexus of Continuous Improvement and School District Research: Possibilities, Dilemmas, and Provocations

Abstract

Although many educational initiatives focus on urban school districts, 42% of school districts are rural (Guiterrez & Terrones, 2023). These school districts serve an increasingly diverse (Kebede et al., 2021) population of approximately 7.7 million students (Guiterrez & Terrones, 2023). Leaders in rural districts have similar responsibilities for supporting instruction as their urban counterparts but may carry out these tasks in contextually different ways (O’Shea & Zuckermann, 2022), often amidst limited funding and support (Guiterrez & Terrones, 2023).

Recent state-level policy aims to build districts’ capacity by asking county offices to support districts around continuous improvement (CI) efforts. However, there are still major questions about how county offices might build their capacity for doing this work, especially given their historical focus on monitoring and compliance (Manansala & Cottingham 2019).

We draw on theories of organizational learning (Levitt & March, 1988) and boundary infrastructure (Bowker & Starr, 1999) to examine the role of county offices in building CI-centered educational systems via a case study of a networked improvement community (NIC) focused on K-8 mathematics.

Methods

As part of a larger study of different types of research-practice partnerships, we theoretically sampled our NIC as a paradigmatic case of a NIC (Creswell, 2007). In 2016 to 2018, we conducted 44 interviews, 26 observations, and administered a 25-minute survey with a response rate of 62% from 35 participants. We analyzed the extent of organizational learning in two rural districts by examining the extent educators took up research-based mathematics ideas associated with the NIC and documenting any shifts in policies and routines. We then analyzed how the county office supported district organizational learning via the development of a CI boundary infrastructure.

Findings and Discussion

We find evidence of organizational learning in our two rural districts involved in the NIC. We see shifts in educators’ collective knowledge related to four research-based mathematics ideas – the importance of rich tasks, multiple ways of engaging in math, growth mindset, and depth not speed in problem-solving, as well as shifts in district and school-level policies and routines. Strikingly, although county leaders noted many potential discontinuities between researchers and practitioners – that is, sociocultural differences with respect to roles, perspectives, goals and language – teachers, school leaders, instructional coaches, and districts leaders described very few actual discontinuities.

We argue that the occurrence of organization learning, despite these potential discontinuities, occurred through the county office’s efforts to develop a CI boundary infrastructure that created important opportunities for mathematics learning. By boundary infrastructure (Authors et al., 2020), we refer to the interconnected network of enacted roles (boundary spanners), intentionally designed interaction structures (boundary practices), and artifacts (boundary objects) that helped NIC participants navigate sociocultural differences between research and practice and engage with research-based mathematics ideas.

Ultimately, this paper highlights the importance of county offices in CI efforts and shows how county offices can support the development of CI-centered educational systems in small rural contexts via boundary infrastructures.

Authors

• Angel Xiao Bohannon, NORC at the University of Chicago

• Caitlin Farrell, University of Colorado - Boulder

• Spencer Cook, Northwestern University