Abstract
Using qualitative case study methods, we examine how educators describe continuous improvement and craft coherence for implementation. We find that educators attempted to build system-wide improvement capabilities, taking into consideration theories of action for continuous improvement and managing change given the realities of their local contexts. We identify educators’ orientations for crafting coherence as a mechanism by which they attempt to integrate improvement strategies to their local contexts. Two bridging approaches to crafting coherence were found: weaving and stacking. By using the notion of developing coherence as craft, we extend the field’s understanding of how leaders attempt to create shared meaning and practice throughout educational systems that are complex and dynamic. We discuss the implications for research and practice.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A pseudonym.
Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles are used across improvement science approaches, and typically consist of a way to test change ideas.
References
Biag, M., & Sherer, D. (2021). Getting better at getting better: Improvement dispositions in education. Teachers College Record, 123(4), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146812112300402
Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Harvard Education Press.
Bush-Mecenas, S. (2022). “The business of teaching and learning”: Institutionalizing equity in educational organizations through continuous improvement. American Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312221074404
Cannata, M., & Nguyen, T. (2020). Collaboration versus concreteness: Tensions in designing for scale. Teachers College Record, 122(12), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146812012201207
Chapman, C., & Muijs, D. (2014). Does school-to-school collaboration promote school improvement? A study of the impact of school federations on student outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25, 351–393.
Coburn, C. E. (2001). Collective sense-making about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145–170.
Coburn, C. E., Bae, S., & Turner, E. O. (2008). Authority, status, and the dynamics of insider–outsider partnerships at the district level. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 364–399.
Cohen, D. K., & Spillane, J. P. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. Review of Research in Education, 18, 3–50.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Plank, D. (2015). Supporting continuous improvement in California’s education system. Stanford: Policy Analysis for California Education.
Datnow, A. (2005). The sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in changing district and state contexts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 121–153.
Datnow, A., & Honig, M. I. (2008). Introduction to the special issue on scaling up teaching and learning improvement in urban districts: The promises and pitfalls of external assistance providers. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 323–327.
Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2009). Conceptualizing policy implementation: Large-scale reform in an era of complexity. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, & D. Plank (Eds.), American Educational Research Association Handbook of Education Policy Research (pp. 348–361). Routledge Publishers.
Fullan, M. (2016). The New Meaning of Educational Change (5th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Geertz, C. (1972). Notes on the Balinese cockfight. Daedalus, 134(4), 56–86.
Grunow, A., Hough, H., Park, S., Willis, J., & Krausen, K. (2018). Towards a common vision for continuous improvement for California. Palo Alto: Policy Analysis for California Education.
Harrison, C., Wachen, J., Brown, S., & Cohen-Vogel, L. (2019). A view from within: Lessons learned from partnering for continuous improvement. Teachers College Record, 121(9), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811912100902
Honig, M. (2006). Complexity and policy implementation: Challenges and opportunities for the field. In M. Honig (Ed.), New Directions in Education Policy Implementation: Confronting Complexity (pp. 1–23). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Honig, M. I., & Hatch, T. C. (2004). Crafting coherence: How schools strategically manage multiple, external demands. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 16–30.
Honig, M. I., & Ikemoto, G. S. (2008). Adaptive assistance for learning improvement efforts: The case of the Institute for Learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 328–363.
Hopkins, D., Stringfield, S., Harris, A., Stoll, L., & Mackay, T. (2014). School and system improvement: A narrative state-of-the-art review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 257–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2014.885452
Hough, H., Willis, A., Grunow, A., Krausen, K., Kwon, S., Mulfinger, L., & Park, S. (2017). Continuous Improvement in Practice. Policy Analysis for California Education, Stanford University.
McLaughlin, M. W. (1990). The rand change agent study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19(9), 11–16.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Redding, C., Cannata, M., & Miller, J. M. (2018). System learning in an urban school district: A case study of intra-district learning. Journal of Educational Change, 19(1), 77–101.
Rowan, B., & Miskel, C. G. (1999). Institutional theory and the study of educational organizations. Handbook of Research on Educational Administration, 2, 359–383.
Saldaña, J. (2016). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 387–431.
Spillane, J. P., & Burch, P. (2006). The institutional environment and instructional practice: Changing patterns of guidance and control in public education. The New Institutionalism in Education, 6, 87–102.
Spillane, J. P., Parise, L. M., & Sherer, J. Z. (2011). Organizational routines as coupling mechanisms: Policy, school administration, and the technical core. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 586–619.
Tichnor-Wagner, A., Allen, D., Socol, A. R., Cohen-Vogel, L., Rutledge, S., & Xing, Q. W. (2018). Studying implementation within a continuous-improvement process: What happens when we design with adaptations in mind? Teachers College Record. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812000506
Yin, R. (2013). Case study research (5th Edn.). Sage Publications.
Yurkofsky, M. (2022). From compliance to improvement: How school leaders make sense of institutional and technical demands when implementing a continuous improvement process. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(2), 300–346.
Yurkofsky, M. M., Peterson, A. J., Mehta, J. D., Horwitz-Willis, R., & Frumin, K. M. (2020). Research on continuous improvement: exploring the complexities of managing educational change. Review of Research in Education, 44(1), 403–433.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the many individuals who contributed to this paper. First, we thank all the participants who graciously gave us their time and shared their insights with us. We also thank Heather Hough and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions. We are also grateful to the sponsors of this research at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the funding organizations.
Funding
Funding was provided by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, (Grant No. OPP1190002).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Park, V., Kennedy, K.E., Gallagher, H.A. et al. Weaving and stacking: How school districts craft coherence towards continuous improvement. J Educ Change 24, 919–942 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-022-09471-5
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-022-09471-5