BackHome
Refresh: Off
Paper Summary
Share...

Direct link:

A Longitudinal Study of Network Development

Thu, April 24, 5:25 to 6:55pm MDT (5:25 to 6:55pm MDT), The Colorado Convention Center, Floor: Ballroom Level, Four Seasons Ballroom 2-3

Abstract

Objectives or purposes:
The Improvement Network Health and Development Framework (INHD Framework) articulated by Authors (forthcoming) sets a vision for a complex new organizational form for practical problem solving: the networked improvement community (NIC). Our prior research examined network development at a single time point, establishing that this idealized design of a deliberatively formed problem-solving network can be operationalized in the public schooling context (Authors, forthcoming). This new analysis furthers our understanding of NICs by exploring developmental processes.

Perspective(s) or theoretical framework:
Improvement network development is a dynamic process with networks progressing through different stages over time (Stoll, et al., 2006). A critical task in exploring development is to conceptualize the core dimensions of a productive network. Drawing on theory and prior research we developed the INHD Framework to describe the development of an optimally functioning NIC.

Methodology:
This paper draws on the multi-methods data resources. First, we employ longitudinal, four-level hierarchical linear model analyses to examine developmental trends among a sample of 34 improvement networks. Following Vangrieken and colleagues (2017) we conceptualize the extent to which intentional communities meet theoretically proposed criteria as a way to describe their degree of maturity. We utilized our validated measures to identify a network’s level of maturation at multiple, annual time points enabling us to then characterize its developmental trajectory over time. We then identified different developmental patterns among networks. Based on these statistical findings, we are conducting comparative case studies, drawing on the project’s qualitative data resources, to examine possible organizational and context factors that have contributed to these differences in network development.

Data Sources:
Data were collected through the annual administration of the INHD Survey to all network members over five years. Networks launched at different time points, but we have a minimum of three years of survey data for all networks. In addition, we leverage two sources of archival documentation: (1) at the end of each funding year, hub leaders use a standard template to report on factors contributing to their progress, challenges they confront, and their goals for the upcoming year; and (2) monthly notes entered by program officers and network leaders that documents activities undertaken.

Results:
Initial statistical findings reveal variation in patterns in network development including both networks that began with weak reports but evolved productively over time and others that struggled throughout. Statistical analyses are exploring the influencing factors associated with varying patterns of network development such as network size, composition, hub leadership capacity, and policy contexts. These results set the stage for the in-depth case studies on a subset of these networks now occurring.

Scientific or scholarly significance of the study or work:
The need for longitudinal studies of professional learning networks has been noted by other scholars (Vescio, Ross & Adams, 2008). We know of no other longitudinal studies focusing on the organizational development of improvement networks to date. Understanding patterns of network development contributes to the growing body of scholarship on interorganizational collaboration for educational improvement and has practical implications for school improvement.

Authors