Exploring the Role of Cultural and Policy Context in Distributed Leadership Practices in the US and Denmark The Comprehensive Assessment of Leadership for Learning: CALL and CALL-DK NERA Congress 2016 Helsinki, Finland Carolyn Kelley (UW-Madison), Helle Bjerg (University College Capital, UCC), Søren Hornskov (University College Capital, UCC), Marsha Modeste (Penn State)

Introduction and background The authors explore the research potential of the CALL survey and share knowledge on the interplay of policy and leadership practice in schools, especially the forms of distributed leadership. We use the CALL survey to collect data for comparative research. CALL was designed to assess leadership for learning in educational practice. The discussions and analysis presented here were co-funded by a network grant from the Danish Ministry of Research. Søren

Purpose To measure distributed instructional leadership practices in schools in the US and Denmark To explore how policy and cultural context shape distributed leadership practices in schools To inform the distributed leadership literature with respect to the measurement of tasks and the relationships between context and leadership tasks Note: I created this slide and wanted to share it as an alternative possibly to some of the previous slide contents. We can delete it but I thought I’d share it first.\ Marsha

Research questions What can CALL tell us about distributed leadership practices in the US and Denmark? How may the contexts of cultural professional norms and policy shape these practices? Marsha

Two findings Stronger leadership practices associated with the role of the formal leader as instructional leader in the US Stronger leadership practices associated with socially distributed leadership in Denmark Marsha

CALL* Leadership Model Focus on Learning Formative and Summative Assessment of Teaching and Learning Building Professional Learning Communities Acquiring and Allocating Resources Maintaining a Safe and Effective Learning Environment *Comprehensive Assessment of Leadership for Learning Helle

Comparison of policy contexts The United States Denmark Reform Strong school-level accountability for student performance since 2001 Increased accountability pressure with 2014 reform Professional education Graduate-level school leadership programs No formal, specialized preparation program Professional norms Teacher autonomy, local reform to encourage collaboration, increasing acceptance of test metrics and standards since NCLB Teacher autonomy, participation and decentralization, no strong tradition/practices of standards and testing Political conceptualization of school leadership Instructional leadership; increased recognition of distributed leadership Management, value-based leadership, public sector leadership Joint presentation

Conceptual Framework: Distributed Leadership Helle Spillane (2006) defines leadership as the product of the interaction between leaders, followers, and their situation. Research in this tradition shifts the focus of attention in leadership research from the leader, to the distribution of leadership as measured by the tasks, tools and routines that shape organizational behavior (Halverson & Clifford, 2013; Sherer & Spillane, 2011; Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, 2001; 2004) Capturing accurate data on task-based leadership practices distributed throughout the school organization is challenging, and requires careful attention to the specific tasks being measured, and to the use of measurement instruments that can capture input from across the school organization (see Spillane et al., 2008 and Spillane & Orlina, 2005). Follower Situation (Spillane, 2006)

Distributed Leadership Reflects a Conceptual Shift Tasks Tools Routines Helle Because leadership is distributed throughout the organization, it is important to collect data from across the school organization to capture the tasks, tools and routines that represent artifacts of leadership practice.

Methods and Data Sources Independent Samples T-test 600+ Respondents | CALL-US 300+ Respondents | CALL-DK Average (Mean) Subdomain Scores (D1 - D4) Average (Mean) Item-level Scores 8 minutes Marsha The methods for this analysis involve an examination of the average scores from participants in the Danish and US versions of CALL to see if there were any statistically significant and meaningful differences in the scores across the two surveys.

Procedures and Analysis Data Gathering - Fall 2015 Calculating the Mean Scores - SPSS Version 23 Exploratory Analysis 1. Selected Subdomains • 1.1 – Maintaining a School-Wide Focus on Learning • 1.2 – Formal Leaders Recognized as Instructional Leaders • 1.3 – Integrated Instructional Design • 3.3 – Socially Distributed Leadership • 4.2 – Structuring and Maintaining Time 2. All Subdomains 3. Shared Items Marsha

Results: US Schools Higher Subdomain N Mean Standard Deviation Standard Error 1.1 Maintaining a School-Wide Focus on Learning US - 619 3.525*** 0.805 0.032 DK - 309 2.487*** 0.915 0.052 1.2 Formal Leaders are Recognized as Instructional Leaders US - 618 3.984*** 0.810 0.033 DK - 313 3.050*** 0.046 1.3 Integrated Instructional Design 3.210 1.016 0.041 DK - 310 3.275 0.852 0.048 3.3 – Socially Distributed Leadership US - 610 2.776*** 0.959 0.039 DK - 308 3.173*** 0.589 0.034 4.2 Structuring and Maintaining Time US - 580 2.655*** 1.124 0.047 DK - 303 2.957*** 0.973 0.056 Marsha p<0.001***, p<0.01**, p<0.05*

Results: No Differences Between Countries Subdomain N Mean Standard Deviation Standard Error 1.1 Maintaining a School-Wide Focus on Learning US - 619 3.525*** 0.805 0.032 DK - 309 2.487*** 0.915 0.052 1.2 Formal Leaders are Recognized as Instructional Leaders US - 618 3.984*** 0.810 0.033 DK - 313 3.050*** 0.046 1.3 Integrated Instructional Design 3.210 1.016 0.041 DK - 310 3.275 0.852 0.048 3.3 – Socially Distributed Leadership US - 610 2.776*** 0.959 0.039 DK - 308 3.173*** 0.589 0.034 4.2 Structuring and Maintaining Time US - 580 2.655*** 1.124 0.047 DK - 303 2.957*** 0.973 0.056 p<0.001***, p<0.01**, p<0.05*

Results: Danish Schools Higher Subdomain N Mean Standard Deviation Standard Error 1.1 Maintaining a School-Wide Focus on Learning US - 619 3.525*** 0.805 0.032 DK - 309 2.487*** 0.915 0.052 1.2 Formal Leaders are Recognized as Instructional Leaders US - 618 3.984*** 0.810 0.033 DK - 313 3.050*** 0.046 1.3 Integrated Instructional Design 3.210 1.016 0.041 DK - 310 3.275 0.852 0.048 3.3 – Socially Distributed Leadership US - 610 2.776*** 0.959 0.039 DK - 308 3.173*** 0.589 0.034 4.2 Structuring and Maintaining Time US - 580 2.655*** 1.124 0.047 DK - 303 2.957*** 0.973 0.056 p<0.001***, p<0.01**, p<0.05* For the items in subdomain 1.3, Integrated Instructional Design, we find no statistically significant difference in the mean scores between CALL-US and CALL-DK.

Findings: Leadership Practices across Contexts Role of the Formal Leader Role of Teachers Instructional Design Higher US scores on leadership practices associated with distributed leadership creating a joint focus on learning and instruction Maintaining a School-wide Focus on Learning (1.1), Formal Leaders are Recognized as Instructional Leaders (1.2), Collaborative School-wide Focus on Teaching and Learning (3.1) Higher Danish scores for practices associated with leadership practices that are “stretched out” or distributed across formal and informal leaders Socially Distributed Leadership (3.3) and Structuring and Maintaining Time (4.2) No significant difference across the two contexts in the rate at which teachers and leaders are engaging in practices to align instructional programs with the goals of the school Integrated Instructional Design (1.3)

Findings and Discussion Formal Leadership Socially Distributed Leadership Teaching and Learning Distributed Leadership 16 min Marsha from methods to this slide

Discussion and Implications: Formal Leadership for distributed leadership The alignment of school vision and goals focusing on learning and teaching and how these are followed up by formal leaders and within cooperation of the staff Overall a higher degree of distributed leadership in the form of alignment through particular practices (organisational routines) and tasks of leaders and staff defining the ways in which joint visions and goals are integrated and shaping accountability, collaboration and, possibly, instructional design Helle ’condutor’

Discussion and Implications: Socially Distributed Leadership Socially distributed leadership in the form of greater influence and decision making capacity on scheduling, time use etc. Imprints of a Danish practice of self-governing teams Signs of existing structures and routines supporting distributed leadership towards democratic leadership Helle what can se se/ what do we think what do we ask.

Conclusions: Cultural and Policy Context and Distributed Leadership Practices In our study, The macro-tasks of distributed leadership for learning generally translated across borders Professional training, policy, and professional culture shaped the enactment of micro-tasks Principals engage in leadership tasks to build a strong shared vision, consistent with U.S. policy and training in preparation programs Socially distributed leadership emerged as strong in the DK professional culture of democratic participation in school decision-making We anticipate that policy borrowing will increase enactment of certain micro-tasks over time Helle

Distributed and Democratic Leadership Our study uses Spillane’s definition of distributed leadership as an analytic lens to understand how leadership takes place in organizations The comparative data suggest that school types may emerge in the analysis of distributed leadership in schools, including democratic participation models that emphasize socially distributed leadership (DK) Distributed leadership does not imply that formal leadership is unimportant; another school type featured principals enactment of leadership tasks to create structures and routines that engage teacher collaboration around teaching and learning (US) Helle

Implications for Distributed Leadership Distributed Leadership and Policy Context Theory Survey and Practices Helle

Questions or Comments? Carolyn Kelley carolyn.kelley@wisc.edu Helle Bjerg hbj@ucc.dk Søren Hornskov sbho@ucc.dk Marsha Modeste mem67@psu.edu The Comprehensive Assessment of Leadership for Learning leadershipforlearning.org