Initiating, developing, and sustaining networks for school improvement in districts

• In Event: Can Continuous Improvement Work in the Turbulent World of Urban Districts?

Abstract

This longitudinal comparative case study examines how network leaders operating networks for school improvement (NSIs) across two, large urban school districts in the United States interpreted and responded to varying degrees of environmental complexity within their local district contexts and implications for the sustained impact of each NSI’s work.

NSIs are theorized to catalyze learning within and among educational organizations by leveraging the tools of improvement science to collectively solve common problems of practice (Author et al., forthcoming). NSIs’ emphasis on collaboration and co-design through the rigorous application of continuous improvement processes represents a departure from other approaches to educational improvement that prioritize competition, implementation fidelity, and accountability (Author & Colleague, 2023). Such competing priorities can be particularly salient within the context of large, urban school districts, which have been a key target of many recent reform policies. Network leaders, who are responsible for developing the social and technical infrastructure to initiate and sustain NSI (Peurach et al., forthcoming), must navigate environmental pressures that are both complex and, at times, explicitly in conflict with the goals and processes of networked improvement. Further, alignment or misalignment between NSIs’ priorities and those in their local context can be consequential for progress toward network aims and sustaining NSIs’ core functions (Peurach et al., 2019; Yurkofsky et al., 2020).

We draw on data from a larger mixed methods study of over 40 NSIs funded by the Gates foundation throughout the U.S. to improve outcomes for traditionally underserved students. Here, we leverage a purposefully selected sample of NSI focused on instructional improvement within two large, urban school districts. Data sources include:
· archival documentation produced by network leaders through their involvement in the NSI initiative (2018-2023); and
· survey data collected through the annual administration of the Network Health and Development Survey (Bryk et al., forthcoming) to all network members, including school-base educators, supporting school and district leaders, and network leaders (2021-2024).

Initial analysis suggests conflict between district and network priorities and norms varied by district and was further consequential for network initiation and development. Norms of cross-school collaboration and inquiry were commonplace in District A, whereas District B maintained a culture of accountability, including regular testing, weeks of associated test prep, and district-mandated curricula. NSI leaders in both districts described challenges navigating shifting politics and demands; however, these challenges were particularly acute in District B. As a result, network leaders in District B described expending considerable time and capacity attempting to adapt NSI routines and aims to integrate network and district priorities. Crucially, despite never fully integrating district and network priorities in District B, leaders in both NSI developed networks that educators valued and that have robust sustainability aspirations.

This study contributes to our understanding of how leaders initiate and develop NSI given a range of district conditions, suggesting that while some contexts may present more fertile soil, it is possible for NSI to take root and even flourish given a range of district conditions.

Authors

• Megan Duff, UNC Chapel Hill

• Jennifer Lin Russell, Vanderbilt University

• Jennifer Zoltners Sherer, University of Pittsburgh