Why School Turnaround Failed: Lethal Problems

Murphy, Joseph; Bleiberg, Joshua F.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-01434-6_4

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 151 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence this review has deliberately selected literature which specifically comments on the role of leadership in school improvement and turnaround. Indeed, most of the evidence over the past decade (2010–2021) that has focused on school turnaround, points towards the centrality of changes in leadership and leadership practices as being critical to ongoing improvement and success (Murphy and Bleiberg, 2018a, b).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The desire to tackle underperforming schools too quickly can mean that any real or in-depth diagnosis of why the school has declined so badly in the first place is bypassed. The rush to “fix the problem” often results in the deployment of turnaround or improvement strategies that are superficial, inappropriate, or simply the wrong fit for the issues that an underperforming school may face (Murphy and Bleiberg, 2018a, b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is suggested that a balance of leadership support and challenge is needed which is bespoke and appropriate to contextualised school needs. Blanket, top-down, turnaround solutions tend not to work long-term, plus they can sometimes be damaging to schools that are already in a vulnerable or fragile state (Murphy and Bleiberg, 2018a, b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Leading the improvement of underperforming schools: reviewing the contemporary evidence

Harris

Ismail

Jones

2023

IJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to outline how far the empirical evidence supports the centrality of leadership in the process of improving underperforming schools.Design/methodology/approachThis article draws on evidence from a contemporary, selected, review of the literature.FindingsThe findings show that leadership is the critical factor in the improvement of underperforming schools. Seven new themes, derived from the selected evidence, are presented that illuminate how leaders secure improvement in the most challenging of school contexts.Research limitations/implicationsThis review is not a systematic review of the evidence and does not claim to be. It provides a commentary based on selected contemporary evidence and therefore is not comprehensive account of all the relevant evidence pertaining to leading the improvement of underperforming schools. The evidence is derived from sources written in English; therefore, it is fully acknowledged that other sources, in other languages might exist but are not included or reflected.Practical implicationsThe practical implications are clearly laid out in the form of seven key themes about leading the improvement of underperforming schools that are of direct practical use.Originality/valueWith so many schools in high poverty areas finding themselves in difficulty, this contemporary review provides new insights about the leadership approaches and practices that continue to make a considerable difference to underperforming schools.

show abstract

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Leading the improvement of underperforming schools: reviewing the contemporary evidence

Harris

Ismail

Jones

2023

IJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All countries set specific criteria for successful schools, but these criteria are differently determined in each country (Leithwood and Day, 2007). In the USA, for example, success is measured by academic achievement in reading and mathematics (Murphy and Bleiberg, 2019), in Germany, by achievement in educational, financial and personnel matters (Huber and Gördel, 2006), in China, by school facilities, leadership and teaching quality (Liu, 2017), and in Israel, school success is measured by academic achievements and school climate (Ministry of Education, 2019).…”

Section: Successful Principal Successful Schoolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Low-performing schools are schools at the bottom of the ranking scale, which applies to about 10% of Israeli schools (Ministry of Education, 2019) and 5% of American schools (Childs and Russell, 2017). There are several explanations for a school’s underperformance, such as unattainable goals (Murphy and Bleiberg, 2019), lack of resources and supportive context (Herman, 2012), poor leadership, lack of focus on student learning (Duke, 2008; Murphy, 2010) and inexperienced teachers (Childs and Russell, 2017). However, organizational aspects, such as role definitions, routine structure, reward system and feedback loop, with reference to school failure are under-researched.…”

Section: The Israeli Issppmentioning

confidence: 99%

Successful, coasting and low-performing school principals in Israel: an explanatory model

Tubin

Farchi

2021

JEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present the successful school and principal (SSP) model, which has developed over 13 years of Israeli involvement in the ISSPP study.Design/methodology/approachThis is a conceptual paper summarizing the findings of more than 20 case studies of successful, coasting and low-performing schools and their principals, into the SSP model. In all the cases, ISSPP protocols were used to collect the data, and the findings were analyzed in accordance with the organizational approach and organizational routine theory.FindingsThe explanatory SSP model comprises three cyclical phases that explain cause–effect relationships and presents intervention points for school improvement toward success. The first phase is an organizational restructuring of two core routines: the school schedule routine and the school tracking routine, which shape and affect school staff behavior. The second phase is the priorities and values revealed in these behaviors and which shape the school as a learning environment. The third phase in school improvement is the institutional legitimacy derived from and reflecting the school’s priorities and values. All these phases are based on the principal as a crucial key player who turns the wheel.Originality/valueTheoretically, the SSP model explains cause–effect relationships and indicates possible interventions and improvements. Practically, the SSP model can influence principal preparation programs, novice principal mentoring and serve as a roadmap for school improvement.

show abstract

Inside school turnaround: What drives success?

Hill¹,

Desimone

Wolford

et al. 2022

J Educ Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study proposes an empirically grounded theory of how school reform implementation relates to effectiveness, useful for developing and studying many approaches to school reform both in the U.S. and abroad, and also for assessing how policymakers and implementers might leverage various aspects of implementation to create effective school improvement models at scale. Guided by a new framework that links Bryk and colleagues’ (2010) five essential supports and as reported by Desimone’s (2002) adaptation of Porter and colleagues’ (1986) policy attributes theory, we use a mixed-methods approach to study the implementation and effectiveness of school turnaround efforts in the School District of Philadelphia. We explore the relationships among key turnaround model components, approaches to model implementation, and academic achievement using a matched comparison design and estimating a series of regressions. Qualitative methods are used to contextualize findings and offer explanatory hypotheses.

show abstract

Why School Turnaround Failed: Lethal Problems

Cited by 6 publications

References 151 publications

Leading the improvement of underperforming schools: reviewing the contemporary evidence

Leading the improvement of underperforming schools: reviewing the contemporary evidence

Successful, coasting and low-performing school principals in Israel: an explanatory model

Inside school turnaround: What drives success?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About