1. 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)

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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)

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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

12. Results: US Schools Higher
Subdomain N
Mean
Standard Deviation
Standard Error
1.1 Maintaining a School-Wide Focus on Learning US
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*

13. Results: No Differences Between Countries
Subdomain N
Mean
Standard Deviation
Standard Error
1.1 Maintaining a School-Wide Focus on Learning US
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*

14. Results: Danish Schools Higher
Subdomain N
Mean
Standard Deviation
Standard Error
1.1 Maintaining a School-Wide Focus on Learning US
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.

15. 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)

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

17. 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’

18. 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.

19. 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

20. 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

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

22. Questions or Comments? Carolyn Kelley carolyn.kelley@wisc.edu
Helle Bjerg
Søren Hornskov
Marsha Modeste
The Comprehensive Assessment of Leadership for Learning
leadershipforlearning.org