District Central Offices as Learning Organizations: How Sociocultural and Organizational Learning Theories Elaborate District Central Office Administrators' Participation in Teaching and Learning Improvement Efforts

Abstract

School district central office administrators face unprecedented demands to become key supporters of efforts to improve teaching and learning districtwide. Some suggest that these demands mean that central offices, especially in midsized and large districts, should become learning organizations but provide few guides for how central offices might operate as learning organizations. This article presents a conceptual framework that draws on organizational and sociocultural learning theories to elaborate what might be involved if central offices operated as learning organizations. Specific work practices that this conceptual framework highlights include central office administrators' participation in new school assistance relationships and their ongoing use of evidence from assistance relationships and other sources to inform central office policies and practices. Sense making and managing paradoxes are fundamental to these processes. I highlight these activities with empirical illustrations from research and experience, discuss conditions that help/hinder these activities, and suggest directions for district research and practice. School district central office administrators currently face unprecedented demands to play key leadership roles in efforts to strengthen teaching and learning districtwide. As many have noted, district central offices traditionally have served mainly as fiscal or administrative pass-throughs for federal and state initiatives or have managed certain local operations, such as school buses, facilities, purchasing, and the processing of school teachers and administrators

The Role of District Office Leaders in the Adoption and Implementation of the Common Core State Standards in Elementary Schools

“…Employing intervention language, superintendents and other district office leaders may be viewed and studied as policy implementation mediators (i.e., facilitators for implementation) and moderators (i.e., adapting a policy to their home district context; Bryk, Bender Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescu, & Easton, 2010;Honig, 2008;Rorrer & Skrla, 2005).…”

Governing Public School Districts: Insights from Economics, Political Science, and Business Management

“…Rizova (2011) proposes that there is an alternative analytical tool, Charles Ragin's method (2008Ragin's method ( , 2000Ragin's method ( , 1994Ragin's method ( , 1987 of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), 32 which 30 And an even worse problem where causal relationships are configurative and equifinal, as some scholars have suggested with respect to the effect of district organization and management on student learning (Honig, 2008(Honig, , 2009. 31 A salient exception to this generalization is Brynjolfsson and Hitt (2000).…”

Examining organizational learning in schools: The role of psychological safety, experimentation, and leadership that reinforces learning

“…We adapted the subscales for use in schools based on preliminary, cognitive pretesting and subsequent factor analyses, and offer the modified scales here as a tool for understanding how, from the perspective of teachers, organizational learning is manifest at a school site. This study serves the goal of providing better conceptual integration of prior organizational learning theories because it draws both on research on cognitive dimensions of organizational learning (e.g., Argyris & Schon, 1996) and sociocultural learning theory (e.g., Honig, 2008).…”