Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 309–323 | Cite as

The Role of School District Science Coordinators in the District-Wide Appropriation of an Online Resource Discovery and Sharing Tool for Teachers

  • Victor R. Lee
  • Heather M. Leary
  • Linda Sellers
  • Mimi Recker


When introducing and implementing a new technology for science teachers within a school district, we must consider not only the end users but also the roles and influence district personnel have on the eventual appropriation of that technology. School districts are, by their nature, complex systems with multiple individuals at different levels in the organization who are involved in supporting and providing instruction. Varying levels of support for new technologies between district coordinators and teachers can sometimes lead to counterintuitive outcomes. In this article, we examine the role of the district science coordinator in five school districts that participated in the implementation of an online resource discovery and sharing tool for Earth science teachers. Using a qualitative approach, we conducted and coded interviews with district coordinators and teachers to examine the varied responsibilities associated with the district coordinator and to infer the relationships that were developed and perceived by teachers. We then examine and discuss two cases that illustrate how those relationships could have influenced how the tool was adopted and used to differing degrees in the two districts. Specifically, the district that had high support for online resource use from its coordinator appeared to have the lowest level of tool use, and the district with much less visible support from its coordinator had the highest level of tool use. We explain this difference in terms of how the coordinator’s promotion of teacher autonomy took distinctly different forms at those two districts.


School district technology adoption Digital libraries Earth science District science coordinators Online resources Complex systems 


  1. Ball DL, Cohen DK (1996) Reform by the book: what is–or might be–the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educ Res 25(9):6–8, 14Google Scholar
  2. Benkler Y (2006) The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
  3. Brantlinger E, Jimenez R, Klingner J, Pugach M, Richardson V (2005) Qualitative studies in special education. Except Child 71(2):195–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown M, Edelson D (2003) Teaching as design: can we better understand the ways in which teachers use materials so we can better design materials to support their changes in practice? Design brief. Center for Learning Technologies in Urban Schools, Evanston, ILGoogle Scholar
  5. Bryk A, Gomez L, Grunow A (2011) Getting ideas into action: building networked improvement communities in education. In: Hallinan MT (ed) Frontiers in sociology of education, vol 1. Springer, Netherlands, pp 127–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burch P, Spillane JP (2003) Elementary school leadership strategies and subject matter: reforming mathematics and literacy instruction. Elem Sch J 103(5):519–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Camburn E, Rowan B, Taylor JE (2003) Distributed leadership in schools: the case of elementary schools adopting comprehensive school reform models. Educ Eval Policy Anal 25(4):347–373. doi:10.3102/01623737025004347 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen DK (1990) A revolution in one classroom: the case of Mrs. Oublier. Educ Eval Policy Anal 12(3):327–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cronin-Jones LL (1991) Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation: two case studies. J Res Sci Teach 28(3):235–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis EA, Kracjik J (2005) Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educ Res 34(3):3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Emerson RM, Fretz RI, Shaw LL (1995) Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fishman B, Marx R, Blumenfeld P, Krajcik J, Soloway E (2004) Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. J Learn Sci 13(1):43–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gibson IW (2001) The role of school administrators in the process of effectively integrating educational technology into school learning environments: new research from the mid-west. In: Society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2001, vol 2001, no 1, pp 502–506Google Scholar
  14. Harry B, Sturges KM, Klingner JK (2005) Mapping the process: an exemplar of process and challenge in grounded theory analysis. Educ Res 34(2):3–13. doi:10.3102/0013189x034002003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Henrick E, Cobb P, Munter C (2010) Educational design research at the district level: a methodology for supporting instructional improvement in middle school mathematics at scale. Educational Design Research Conference, Athens, GAGoogle Scholar
  16. Honig MI (2006) Street-level bureaucracy revisited: frontline district central-office administrators as boundary spanners in education policy implementation. Am Educ Res J 28(4):357–383Google Scholar
  17. Honig MI, Hatch TC (2004) Crafting coherence: how schools strategically manage multiple, external demands. Educ Res 33(8):16–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kastens K, DeFelice B, Devaul H, DiLeonardo C, Ginger K, Larsen S et al (2005) Questions & challenges arising in building the collection of a digital library for education: lessons from five years of DLESE. D-Lib Mag 11(11). doi:10.1045/november2005-kastens
  19. Knapp MS, Plecki ML (2001) Investing in the renewal of urban science teaching. J Res Sci Teach 38(10):1089–1100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee VR (2010) Adaptations and continuities in the use and design of visual representations in US middle school science textbooks. Int J Sci Educ 32(8):1099–1126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee VR, Recker M, Sumner T (2013) Variable appropriation of an online resource discovery and sharing tool. Paper presented at the CSCW in education workshop, San Antonio, TXGoogle Scholar
  22. Maroulis S, Guimera R, Petry H, Stringer MJ, Gomez LM, Amaral LAN, Wilensky U (2010) Complex systems view of educational policy research. Science 330(6000):38–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maull K, Saldivar MG, Sumner T (2010) Online curriculum planning behavior of teachers. In: Third international conference on educational data mining, Pittsburgh, PA, pp 121–130Google Scholar
  24. Maull KE, Saldivar MG, Sumner T (2011). Understanding digital library adoption: a use diffusion approach. In: Proceedings of the 11th annual international ACM/IEEE joint conference on digital libraries, ACM, pp 259–268Google Scholar
  25. McLaughlin MW, Talbert JE (2001) Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  26. Papert S (1993) The children’s machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Penuel W, Fishman B, Cheng B, Sabelli N (2011) Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educ Res 40:331–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Remillard JT (2005) Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Rev Educ Res 75(2):211–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rivet AE, Krajcik JS (2004) Achieving standards in urban systemic reform: an example of a sixth grade project‐based science curriculum. J Res Sci Teach 41(7):669–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Saldaña J (2012) The coding manual for qualitative researchers, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  31. Schoenfeld AH (2011) How we think: a theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. Taylor & Francis US, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Shavelson R, Towne L (2002) Scientific research in education. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith MJ, Southard JB, Demery R (2002). EarthComm: earth system science in the community. It’s About Time, Inc., Mount Kisco, NYGoogle Scholar
  34. Spillane JP (2005) Distributed leadership. Educ Forum 69(2):143–150. doi:10.1080/00131720508984678 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Spillane JP (2006) Standards deviation: how schools misunderstand education policy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  36. Spillane JP, Halverson R, Diamond JB (2001) Investigating school leadership practice: a distributed perspective. Educ Res 30(3):23–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Spillane JP, Diamond JB, Burch P, Hallett T, Jita L, Zoltners J (2002) Managing in the middle: school leaders and the enactment of accountability policy. Educ Policy 16(5):731–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Spillane JP, Camburn E, Pareja A (2007) Taking a distributed perspective to the school principal’s workday. Leadersh Policy Sch 6(1):103–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sumner T, CCS Team (2010) Customizing science instruction with educational digital libraries. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual joint conference on digital libraries, ACM, pp 353–356Google Scholar
  40. Tyack DB, Cuban L (1995) Tinkering toward utopia: a century of public school reform. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilensky U, Resnick M (1999) Thinking in levels: a dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. J Sci Educ Technol 8(1):3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wilson SM (2003) California dreaming: reforming mathematics education. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  43. Ye L (2013) Integrating technology, curriculum, and online resources: a multilevel model study of impacts on science teachers and students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utah State University, Logan, UTGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Victor R. Lee
    • 1
  • Heather M. Leary
    • 2
  • Linda Sellers
    • 1
  • Mimi Recker
    • 1
  1. 1.Utah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.University of Colorado BoulderBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations