Local education authorities and student learning: the effects of policies and practices

Abstract

This article addresses an issue that has not been well explored in empirical research, namely whether local education agencies (districts) have an impact on student learning. We assumed that local district effects on learning would be largely indirect, mediated by how teachers work together in schools (in professional communities) and the quality of instruction that is provided. Based on the literature, we also assumed that promoting data-driven decision making was an insufficient stimulus for student learning, and we therefore chose to examine another current policy strategy that is being widely adopted by local authorities: the development of networks for learning among schools. Using survey data and structural equation modeling, our results suggest that the development of networks has a positive relationship with instruction and subsequent learning, while district emphasis on learning targets and data use has a negative relationship. The discussion offers a number of interpretations of the findings, and suggests further arenas for inquiry.

Clones, drones and dragons: ongoing uncertainties around school leader development

“…The job of leading a school has become evermore entangled with expanding policy demands. These flow into schools in the form of accountability policies and practices emphasising standardised student achievement (Walker and Ko 2011a), school-based management (Cheng 2009), learning targets and data use (Lee, Louis, and Anderson 2012) and a multitude of curriculum innovations. At the same time, the personal, relational and ethical dimensions of a principal's job remain crucial to staff and student self-esteem, well-being, social growth and other non-academic outcomes (Supovitz, Sirinides, and May 2010;Hallinger 2011).…”

Enhancing pre-K-12 student learning outcomes: The need for synergies of policy-makers, school administrators and parents

“…Synergy among group roles is meant to encourage stakeholders' collaboration to build a much stronger school system as understanding their interconnections is key (Hopkins et al, 2014). According to Lee et al (2012), development of networks has a positive correlation with instruction and subsequent learning. In other words, the proposed synergic alignment aims to re-echo the glaring inevitability of collaboration and partnership among education stakeholders because everyone has a stake in what is done at each end.…”

Support for School-to-school Networks: How Networking Teachers Perceive Support Activities of a Local Coordinating Agency

“…However, especially for networks that are based in one local constituency and aim for local system-wide improvement, local coordinating agencies have emerged as suitable supporters for school networking processes. Evidence from international research suggests that local coordinating agencies play an important role in supporting school improvement processes in general, for instance, by initiating professional learning communities (Hannay and Earl, 2012;Jäger, 2014), providing professional development opportunities for instructional improvement (Jäger, 2014;Seashore Louis et al, 2010), developing a vision and development perspective for system-wide improvement (Fullan, 2010;Rorrer et al, 2008) or advancing evidence-based decision-making processes (Chrispeels and Harris, 2006;Lee et al, 2012) (for an overview, see Järvinen et al, 2015). In addition, local agencies are key actors in the initiation and support of school-to-school networks (Araújo et al, 2013;Aston et al, 2013;Jäger, 2014;Jopling and Hadfield, 2015), thereby 'creating an enabling environment for innovation' (Jopling and Hadfield, 2015).…”