{"title":"遵从,混乱,还是连贯?主管、地区和学校如何从学校转型政策中达成一致性","authors":"A. Torres, Sandy Frost Waldron, Jason Burns","doi":"10.3102/01623737231161363","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This mixed-method study examines Michigan’s Partnership policy for school turnaround, which positions the district and superintendents as key policy implementation actors. We first interviewed 21 of 35 Partnership superintendents/leaders across Michigan and surveyed teachers to understand the initial response to the turnaround policy and the strategic planning process. We then used our understanding of these leaders’ responses to conduct a purposively sampled embedded multiple comparative case study of three varied districts. These case studies helped us more deeply understand and compare how districts engaged in the process of crafting coherence and school-level stakeholders’ perceptions of activities related to coherence and implementation of the reform. Based on these two levels of data collection and analysis, we found that many leaders used the opportunity to create new changes, roles, and partnerships, but the majority also symbolically adopted policy demands by aligning their turnaround plans with pre-existing efforts. Using cross-case comparisons of our three districts, we argue that some degree of strategic buffering from policy demands may be warranted, especially when districts have low capacity and face significant challenges recruiting and retaining teachers.","PeriodicalId":48079,"journal":{"name":"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compliance, Chaos, or Coherence? How Superintendents, Districts, and Schools Craft Coherence From School Turnaround Policy\",\"authors\":\"A. Torres, Sandy Frost Waldron, Jason Burns\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/01623737231161363\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This mixed-method study examines Michigan’s Partnership policy for school turnaround, which positions the district and superintendents as key policy implementation actors. We first interviewed 21 of 35 Partnership superintendents/leaders across Michigan and surveyed teachers to understand the initial response to the turnaround policy and the strategic planning process. We then used our understanding of these leaders’ responses to conduct a purposively sampled embedded multiple comparative case study of three varied districts. These case studies helped us more deeply understand and compare how districts engaged in the process of crafting coherence and school-level stakeholders’ perceptions of activities related to coherence and implementation of the reform. Based on these two levels of data collection and analysis, we found that many leaders used the opportunity to create new changes, roles, and partnerships, but the majority also symbolically adopted policy demands by aligning their turnaround plans with pre-existing efforts. Using cross-case comparisons of our three districts, we argue that some degree of strategic buffering from policy demands may be warranted, especially when districts have low capacity and face significant challenges recruiting and retaining teachers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737231161363\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737231161363","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Compliance, Chaos, or Coherence? How Superintendents, Districts, and Schools Craft Coherence From School Turnaround Policy
This mixed-method study examines Michigan’s Partnership policy for school turnaround, which positions the district and superintendents as key policy implementation actors. We first interviewed 21 of 35 Partnership superintendents/leaders across Michigan and surveyed teachers to understand the initial response to the turnaround policy and the strategic planning process. We then used our understanding of these leaders’ responses to conduct a purposively sampled embedded multiple comparative case study of three varied districts. These case studies helped us more deeply understand and compare how districts engaged in the process of crafting coherence and school-level stakeholders’ perceptions of activities related to coherence and implementation of the reform. Based on these two levels of data collection and analysis, we found that many leaders used the opportunity to create new changes, roles, and partnerships, but the majority also symbolically adopted policy demands by aligning their turnaround plans with pre-existing efforts. Using cross-case comparisons of our three districts, we argue that some degree of strategic buffering from policy demands may be warranted, especially when districts have low capacity and face significant challenges recruiting and retaining teachers.
期刊介绍:
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis (EEPA) publishes manuscripts of theoretical or practical interest to those engaged in educational evaluation or policy analysis, including economic, demographic, financial, and political analyses of education policies, and significant meta-analyses or syntheses that address issues of current concern. The journal seeks high-quality research on how reforms and interventions affect educational outcomes; research on how multiple educational policy and reform initiatives support or conflict with each other; and research that informs pending changes in educational policy at the federal, state, and local levels, demonstrating an effect on early childhood through early adulthood.