Improvement Science and School Leadership: A Case Study on the Journey to Dynamic School Improvement

• In Event: Improvement Science-Driven School Improvement: Successes, Challenges, and Promising Practices From the iLEAD Partnership

Abstract

Purpose

Improvement science (IS) in education is often lauded as a major advance in how educational organizations can accelerate improvements through disciplined inquiry, networked improvement, and adapting research to local contexts (Biag & Sherer, 2021; Bryk, 2015; LeMahieu et al., 2017; Lewis, 2015). However, this paradigmatic shift in how school innovations are created and implemented could come with significant political and organizational challenges inhibiting its effectiveness (Lewis, 2015; Yurkofsky et al., 2020).

In this case study of a school improvement-focused networked improvement community (NIC) piloted as part of the Carnegie Foundation’s iLEAD initiative, we assess the extent to which school and teacher leaders as well as central office staff are able to authentically integrate IS principles into their work and what roadblocks they encounter that challenge IS’s theory of change. Our findings will help to reconcile the intended processes necessary for IS with the organizational capacity and political dimension of schools.

Theoretical Framework

Even though they have different epistemological origins, the intent of IS, to accelerate improvement to meet our lofty educational goals, is no different than accountability. Both movements seek to change organizational processes and educational strategies to improve student outcomes and, in doing so, encourage tight coupling with organizational practices. We draw upon the theory of inhabited institutionalism, developed to explain the influence of accountability in schools, along with the associated mechanisms of recoupling and technical ceremonies to explore implementation of IS in our case study site (Hallett, 2010; Yurkofsky, 2020).

Data and Methods

This qualitative case study design seeks to understand the experience of teachers in the NIC and central office staff managing the NIC. A case study design is appropriate for this task since we seek to develop an in-depth understanding of how the users experience and integrate IS processes.

Our data include observations of NIC convenings and meetings as well as interviews with members of the NICs and central office leaders. We collected meeting observation data using a standardized protocol designed to measure integration of IS in Winter 2019-20. The first round of interviews were conducted in December 2019 using a semi-structured interview protocol. Data collection was interrupted by school closures, and we will collect more data in the 2021-22 school year once schools resume normal operation.

Preliminary Results

Partially as a reflection of data collection occurring at the outset of IS integration, school improvement teams often ran into significant roadblocks initially including difficulty in identifying change ideas, measures, and prioritizing IS over other district requirements. Teams that were more successful had a staff member dedicated to IS implementation and consistently reached out to central office staff for assistance. Educators were often open-minded about IS, framing IS as an attractive counter to accountability-driven policies.

Significance

As the appetite for test-driven accountability wanes, many school systems are integrating IS into school improvement processes. This study helps to build a knowledge base on the facility of IS integration into school improvement processes and the common enabling conditions for building IS organizational capacity.

Authors

• Samantha Viano, George Mason University

• Seth B Hunter, George Mason University

• Farnoosh Shahrokhi, George Mason University