Systems of Settings Sustain Improvement: A Ten-Year Case Study of a Southern California Middle School

• In Event: Sustaining Productive Teacher Collaborations: Infrastructures Across International Contexts

Abstract

Purpose
We study a middle school in Southern California (i.e., DMS) to examine settings (Sarason 1972, 1996) as infrastructure to sustain improvement: a regular time and place for small teams of educators to work together toward well-understood, common goals. We ask:
1) How were student achievement gains associated with a system of settings at DMS over a decade?
2) How did this system of settings allow staff and researchers to participate in improvement work to sustain that work over this time?

Theoretical Framework
We approach sustaining change through systems of settings (Saunders et al., 2009), introduced over 50 years ago by Sarason (1972) who argued that all organizational change depends on stable times and places for peer-facilitated and goal-driven collaborations among educators. Tappel et al. (2022) argue that sustaining change depends on how innovations become part of observable routines that are adaptable and used by an increasing number of personnel.

Methods and Data
Settings at DMS were stable times and places for teams of teachers, teacher leaders, and school administrators to work together for improvement. Teacher team settings are led by designated teacher leaders, and teacher leaders meet monthly to debrief, plan, and prepare their team meetings. Settings for teacher leaders are organized by school administrators who also maintain a monthly setting.

This case study was conducted during DMS’s transition to Common Core state standards and assessments. Most DMS students were Latino (57%) with some Black (21%), some White (11%), and some Asian and Pacific Islander students (7%). Half qualified for free or reduced lunch, 8% for special education, and a quarter were Ever-English Learners.

Researchers met monthly with school administrators and attended various teacher meetings and annual summer workshops. We documented discussions, decisions, and plans and collected artifacts produced by DMS staff. Achievement data come from the California Standards Test (2008-2012) the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (2015-2019).

Findings
Table 1 summarizes the chronology of improvement initiatives at DMS from 2008-09 through 2018-19. Work across these areas was staggered, with no more than one new initiative per year.


Table 1. Content and Chronology of DMS Improvement Initiatives (2008-2019)


Figure 1. Achievement Results (in ELA and Math) for 8th graders Statewide and at DMS


Achievement levels statewide and at DMS were about the same in 2008 (Figure 1). From 2010 to 2012, DMS 8th grade results improved by .46 SDs while statewide results improved by .11 SDs. By 2015, DMS 8th graders were .01 SD units from “Met Proficiency” while 8th graders statewide were .30 units below Met. By 2019, DMS 8th graders were nearly a half SD above Met while statewide 8th graders remained .21 SD units below Met. These results hold up by economic disadvantage and Ever-EL status.

Significance

We illustrate the power of a system of settings to sustain improvement. Our study focused on meso-level infrastructure (Woulfin et al., 2023). More work is needed on macro (e.g., district leadership) and micro-level (e.g., classroom practice, teacher agency) infrastructures as well.

Authors

• Bryant Jensen, Brigham Young University

• William M. Saunders, University of California - Los Angeles

• Taylor Topham, Northwestern University