The Developmental Evaluation of School Improvement Networks

Abstract

The national education reform agenda has rapidly expanded to include attention to continuous improvement research in education. The purpose of this analysis is to propose a new approach to “developmental evaluation” aimed at building a foundation for continuous improvement in large-scale school improvement networks, on the argument that doing so is essential to producing the intellectual capital needed to replicate effective practices and desired outcomes throughout these networks. We begin by developing a rationale for developmental evaluation, both to illuminate the need and to discuss its coordination with other forms of evaluation. We continue by proposing a logic of developmental evaluation to support analyzing networks as learning systems. We then use that logic to structure a framework for developmental evaluation to support evaluators, network executives, and other stakeholders in analyzing and strengthening the foundation for continuous improvement in a given network. Our analysis suggests that building a foundation for continuous improvement among a large number of networks is an educational reform agenda unto itself, one that must be supported and sustained if these networks are to succeed at the level expected under current accountability regimes.

From Mass Schooling to Education Systems: Changing Patterns in the Organization and Management of Instruction

“…The theory of action is that establishing, maintaining, and continuously refining common ways of working, district-wide, create potential both to elevate the quality of routine educational work consistently across schools and to address particular educational needs and problems among schools, classrooms, and students (thereby reducing disparities). A networked education system operates in accord with principles of evolutionary learning systems, networked improvement communities, and design-based improvement (Bryk et al, 2015; Fishman, Penuel, Allen, Cheng, & Sabelli, 2013; Peurach, Glazer, & Lenhoff, 2016).…”

Under What Conditions Do School Districts Learn From External Partners? The Role of Absorptive Capacity

“…These benefits are cumulative and path dependent; the more absorptive capacity an organization has, the more it will benefit from engagement with new knowledge in the future (Cohen & Levinthal, 1990). In education, a number of scholars have recognized the utility of this concept (e.g., Daly & Finnigan, 2010; Honig, 2008; Peurach, Glazer, & Lenhoff, 2016). To date, however, it has not been operationalized in systematic ways.…”

“…Second, absorptive capacity depends on the presence of communication pathways —formal and informal structures within and between departments that enable people to access, share, make meaning of, and use knowledge to solve problems (Lane, Koka, & Pathak, 2006). With well-developed pathways, there are regular opportunities for communication around a given initiative (Peurach et al, 2016), helping individuals to create shared understandings (Gioia & Chittipeddi, 1991; Weick, 1995). Formal structures, like meetings or task forces, can provide opportunities to access relevant knowledge that exists inside and outside a given department (Schwartzman, 1989).…”

A developmental evaluation of research-practice-partnerships and their impacts

“…Developmental evaluation is a promising approach and it has the potential to support and influence dynamic cycles of continuous learning. It encourages adaptive decision-making (Patton, 2010;Peurach, Glazer, & Lenhoff, 2016). Programs such as knowledge networks have multiple stakeholders whose participation is fluid as people come and go, work together, and disconnect and reconnect with other.…”