| Preface |
|
iii | |
| Dedication |
|
v | |
|
|
|
xiii | |
|
|
|
xv | |
| Summary |
|
xvii | |
| Acknowledgments |
|
xxvii | |
| Abbreviations |
|
xxix | |
|
|
|
1 | (6) |
|
|
|
3 | (1) |
|
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
Organization of the Report |
|
|
5 | (2) |
|
Research Background, Framework, and Methods |
|
|
7 | (18) |
|
What We Know from Prior Research |
|
|
7 | (4) |
|
School Districts and Instructional Improvement |
|
|
7 | (2) |
|
Intermediary Organizations and District Reform |
|
|
9 | (2) |
|
|
|
11 | (6) |
|
|
|
17 | (6) |
|
|
|
18 | (1) |
|
|
|
18 | (4) |
|
|
|
22 | (1) |
|
|
|
22 | (1) |
|
|
|
23 | (2) |
|
Setting the Stage: Overview of Study Districts and the IFL |
|
|
25 | (14) |
|
The Three Study Districts: Characteristics and Context |
|
|
25 | (2) |
|
Institute for Learning: Background and History |
|
|
27 | (5) |
|
Stage One: Early History and Evolution |
|
|
27 | (2) |
|
Stage Two: Shift to On-Site Support and Articulated Notions of High-Performing Districts |
|
|
29 | (1) |
|
Current Status and Scope of IFL Work |
|
|
30 | (2) |
|
IFL-District Partnerships in the Case Study Districts |
|
|
32 | (4) |
|
|
|
33 | (1) |
|
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
|
|
36 | (3) |
|
District Strategies to Improve Instruction: Implementation and Outcomes |
|
|
39 | (40) |
|
Principals' Instructional Leadership |
|
|
40 | (10) |
|
Consistent Emphasis on Professional Development and Supervision of Principals |
|
|
41 | (2) |
|
Greater Alignment of District Actions in Monroe and Roosevelt |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
Principals Varied in Degree of Reported Instructional Leadership Actions |
|
|
43 | (2) |
|
Factors Affecting District Efforts to Support Principals' Instructional Leadership |
|
|
45 | (4) |
|
IFL's Role in Supporting Instructional Leadership Was Consistent and Strong |
|
|
49 | (1) |
|
School-Based Coaches to Support the Professional Learning of Teachers |
|
|
50 | (8) |
|
Districts Implemented Different Coaching Models: Curriculum-Versus School-Centered Approaches |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
Coaching Role Valued in General, Yet Teachers Reported Strong Preferences for Individualized Interactions |
|
|
52 | (3) |
|
Factors Affecting the Implementation of School-Based Coaches |
|
|
55 | (2) |
|
IFL's Role in Influencing School-Based Coaching Models Varied |
|
|
57 | (1) |
|
|
|
58 | (8) |
|
Curriculum Guides Were a Driving Force for Improving Instruction in Two Districts |
|
|
58 | (2) |
|
Curriculum Guides Useful for the System, but Challenges Existed at the Classroom Level |
|
|
60 | (2) |
|
Factors Affecting Implementation and Perceived Usefulness of Curriculum Guides |
|
|
62 | (2) |
|
IFL Role in Affecting District Curricular Reforms Varied |
|
|
64 | (2) |
|
|
|
66 | (9) |
|
Strong Focus on Data in Jefferson and Monroe |
|
|
66 | (6) |
|
Factors Affecting Data Use |
|
|
72 | (3) |
|
IFL Role in District Use of Data to Inform Instruction Was Limited |
|
|
75 | (1) |
|
|
|
75 | (4) |
|
Overarching Findings About District Instructional Improvement: Common Constraints and Enablers |
|
|
79 | (20) |
|
A Comprehensive Set of Strategies Was Important for Addressing All Facets of Instruction |
|
|
80 | (2) |
|
Focus on a Limited Number of Initiatives Assisted in Implementing Reforms, but Tradeoffs Resulted |
|
|
82 | (2) |
|
Insufficient Capacity Was a Significant Obstacle to Instructional Improvement |
|
|
84 | (2) |
|
On-Site Assistance for Teachers and Principals Enhanced Instructional Capacity at the School Level |
|
|
86 | (1) |
|
Strategies That Were Aligned and Mutually Supportive Facilitated Reform; Misalignment Greatly Constrained Efforts |
|
|
87 | (2) |
|
Districts Struggled to Design Reform Strategies That Enabled Multiple Stakeholders to Engage in Instructional Improvement |
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
Achieving a Balance Between Standardization and Flexibility Proved Difficult for Districts |
|
|
90 | (2) |
|
Local Accountability Policies Created incentives and Disincentives That Affected the Quality of Implementation of Reform Strategies |
|
|
92 | (2) |
|
Policy Decisions at Higher Levels Influenced Policy Decisions and Actions at the District Level, Often with Unintended Consequences |
|
|
94 | (1) |
|
|
|
95 | (4) |
|
Impact of the Institute for Learning |
|
|
99 | (26) |
|
IFL Contribution to the Four Main Areas of Instructional Reform |
|
|
99 | (3) |
|
IFL Made Greatest Contribution to District Instructional Leadership Strategies |
|
|
100 | (1) |
|
IFL Had Less Influence on Other Areas of Reform |
|
|
101 | (1) |
|
IFL Resources: The Most Influential Ideas and Tools |
|
|
102 | (5) |
|
Learning Walks Supported Multiple Instructional Improvement Efforts |
|
|
104 | (2) |
|
Principles of Learning Provided a Common Language |
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
IFL's Overall Impact on Districts: The Bottom Line |
|
|
107 | (7) |
|
IFL Had a Strong Reported Impact on Organizational Culture |
|
|
107 | (2) |
|
IFL Was Reported to Affect Administrators' Capacity |
|
|
109 | (3) |
|
Less Evidence to Suggest IFL's Impact on Teachers |
|
|
112 | (2) |
|
Factors Affecting the IFL's Reported Impact on Districts |
|
|
114 | (8) |
|
The IFL Had Limited Capacity---and Possibly Limited Intentions---to Assist Districts with the Full Range of Instructional Improvement Efforts |
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
Leadership Buy-In at All Levels Enabled Partnership Efforts and Impact |
|
|
116 | (1) |
|
The Perception of IFL as a Vendor Hindered Its Effect on District Reform |
|
|
117 | (2) |
|
Trust in IFL Staff, Ideas, and Tools, and Their Perceived Credibility, Was Important for Building Teacher, Principal, and District Leader Support |
|
|
119 | (1) |
|
Practical Tools Supported Application of IFL Ideas but Raised Concerns About Superficial Implementation |
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
Turnover Challenged IFL Efforts to Sustain and Deepen Reform |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
|
|
122 | (3) |
|
Conclusions and Lessons Learned |
|
|
125 | (58) |
|
|
|
125 | (2) |
|
Lessons Learned for Policy and Practice |
|
|
127 | (7) |
|
Lessons for Instructional Improvement |
|
|
128 | (3) |
|
Lessons for District-Intermediary Partnerships |
|
|
131 | (3) |
|
|
|
134 | (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
137 | (26) |
|
B. Technical Notes on Research Methods |
|
|
163 | (8) |
|
C. Student Achievement Trends |
|
|
171 | (10) |
|
D. Principles of Learning |
|
|
181 | (2) |
| Bibliography |
|
183 | |
