District Administrator Positionality in Knowledge Mobilization: Boundary Spanning in Ontario's Educational Context

• In Event: Positionality and Research Use in Educational Policy and Practice: Toward Evidence-Informed Decisions

Abstract

1. Objectives or purposes
The study addresses the session's core question of "who is taking what to whom and for what purpose" by examining how district administrators' positionality influences their boundary spanning effectiveness in educational governance across diverse district contexts (Williams, 2002; Coburn & Penuel, 2016).
2. Perspective(s) or theoretical framework
We build on two conceptual frameworks of knowledge mobilization in educational organizations (Author, 2020) and Weiss's (1979) theory of research utilization, with particular attention to boundary spanning and knowledge brokering in educational contexts (Sin, 2008). The (Author, 2020) framework examines how administrator positionality, their organizational role, authority, relationships, and contextual constraints influence their capacity to broker knowledge between research producers and practitioners (Cooper, Levin, & Campbell, 2009; Honig, 2006; Author, 2025.)

3. Methods, techniques, or modes of inquiry
We employed A multi-site qualitative study to address three questions: (1) How do different district administrator positions influence knowledge brokering approaches? (2) What organizational and contextual factors constrain or enable boundary spanning efforts across urban and rural districts? (3) How do administrators navigate tensions between symbolic and instrumental research use in different governance contexts?
4. Data sources, evidence, objects, or materials
Data collection included interviews with district leaders (n=18) representing diverse positional roles (central office staff, superintendents, directors, and research department leaders) across multiple Ontario school districts (large urban districts and small rural). The interviews captured administrators' experiences with research use, boundary spanning activities, knowledge brokering strategies, and organizational constraints. Document analysis of publicly available school board websites, strategic plans, and policy documents supplemented interview data. Data was analyzed using qualitative analysis software according to the conceptual framework. The analysis employed systematic coding, member checking and memo-writing to examine how positionality and organizational context shape research engagement approaches.
5. Results and/or substantiated conclusions
Findings reveal that district administrators' boundary spanning effectiveness is significantly constrained by both their positional roles and organizational contexts, with notable differences between urban and rural districts. Urban districts show more formalized research engagement structures while rural districts rely heavily on informal networks and regional collaborations. Accountability demands, and political pressures drive administrators toward symbolic rather than instrumental research engagement across all district types, despite their intermediary positioning. Administrators employ context-specific strategies to navigate these constraints, including leveraging professional networks, adapting research for local contexts, and building internal capacity, but their boundary spanning efforts are often overshadowed by pressures to validate existing initiatives rather than genuinely mobilize new research knowledge.
6. Scientific or scholarly significance
This work directly addresses the session's assertion that research use literature has "lumped large, diverse groups of people under umbrella labels like 'practitioner' or 'policymaker'" (Oliver & Cairney, 2019). By examining specific district administrator roles across varied organizational contexts rather than treating them as a homogeneous group, the study provides insights needed to improve research-policy-practice connections. The research advances knowledge of boundary spanning in educational contexts by demonstrating how both positionality and organizational context shape evidence-informed decision-making within specific governance structures (Williams, 2002; Coburn & Penuel, 2016).

Authors

• Sofia Malik, University of Texas at Austin

• Muhammad A Shah, Lusail University, Qatar