The reincarnation of the effective schools research: rethinking the literature on district effectiveness

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to analyze the district effectiveness literature. It begins by summarizing the school effectiveness research, the correlates of effective schools, and the conceptual and methodological characteristics of this field. It then describes the findings from a review of 50 studies of district effectiveness, the most frequently identified correlates of effective districts, and the conceptual and methodological features of this research. From there, it compares and contrasts the two fields, paying attention to the ways in which they frame notions of success, purposes of education, the contextualized nature of school performance, and theoretical explanations for student success. Design/methodology/approach -Data sources for this literature review included 50 primary documents on district effectiveness. The studies were bound to those that presented the original results from investigations of the relationship between district-level policies, routines, behaviors, or other characteristics and classroom-level outcomes. Findings -Several themes run through the literature on district effectiveness. These include findings that standards-aligned curricula, coherent organizational structures, strong instructional leadership, frequent monitoring and evaluation, and focused professional learning lead to higher test scores. Most of these investigations are framed from technical perspectives that explore the relationship between organizational regulations and improved test performance. Less common are inquiries about the sociopolitical and normative forces that shape districts' improvement experiences. One consequence of this technical focus is that the field of district effectiveness has come to share several of the conceptual and methodological properties that characterized the former school-level research.Research limitations/implications -The article concludes by discussing the implications for the growing volume of district-level research on educational leadership, district improvement, and educational equity. Originality/value -This article details the ways in which a sharp focus on questions of what works in the district effectiveness literature has deepened researchers' and practitioners' knowledge of the specific mechanisms that may produce more desirable results in test performance, yet these questions alone, decoupled from corresponding inquiries about the complex, highly contextualized character of higher or lower scoring districts, leave researchers and practitioners vulnerable to the same scholarly and practical pitfalls of their predecessors.

Improving instructional practice through peer observation and feedback: A review of the literature

“…This descriptive approach also helped informed conclusions about the generalizability of peer observation and feedback beyond the context of the studies by reflecting some of the standards of reporting in the field (American Educational Research Association [AERA], 2006; American Psychological Association [APA], 2020). Finally, although we recognize that research can be guided by key issues, debates, barriers, gaps in the literature, or practical concerns (APA, 2020) we were particularly attentive to the presence or absence of theoretical and conceptual frameworks because of critiques and findings that education research is relatively atheoretical (e.g., Ford, Lavigne, Fiegener, & Si, 2020;Teddlie & Reynolds, 2000;Trujillo, 2013Trujillo, , 2016 and is at risk of becoming even more so, diminishing our ability to reach conclusions about larger patterns in human development and learning (Dimitriadis, 2009).…”

Place-based governance and leadership in decentralised school systems: evidence from England

“…In addition an effective 'middle tier' can also help to: secure local ownership, accountability and legitimacy; achieve economies of scale; address and ameliorate inclusion and disadvantage issues; integrate education with wider services; and focus attention on shared strategic challenges, such as demographic change. Trujillo (2013) concludes that 'districts matter for student outcomes' (p.442), but argues that many studies in this area have limited validity and reliability, an overly narrow conceptualisation of schooling and school outcomes, and an under-theorised understanding of how and why educational outcomes differ across different contexts.…”

Teacher Trust in District Administration: An Overlooked Relational Support for Teachers

“…They bridge critical boundaries between schools and the larger external context in which schools must adapt. District effectiveness research leans toward the view that actions, or in some cases inactions, by district leaders spread into schools in ways that affect teacher working conditions directly and student outcomes indirectly (Chhuon, Gilkey, Gonzalez, Daly, & Chrispeels, 2008; Diamond, 2012; Rorrer, Skrla, & Scheurich, 2008; Sharratt & Fullan, 2009; Trujillo, 2013). Districts can be highly centralized, loosely coupled, or somewhere in between (Firestone, 2009), and these organizational arrangements ultimately have differential consequences for school routines, processes, practices, and accomplishments.…”

“…At the executive level, the work of district administrators often involves setting a future direction for academic success, building relational and professional networks, providing resources and access to expertise to support teacher growth, and forming connections across organizational boundaries (Rorrer et al, 2008; Trujillo, 2013; Waters & Marzano, 2006). These general actions have largely been enacted in recent years through capacity-building strategies such as instructional coaches, some form of professional learning community, performance measurement, and performance-based evaluation frameworks (Coburn & Russell, 2008; Stein & Coburn, 2008).…”