1. Learning-oriented Organizational Improvement Processes

2. From ”Strong Districts” research …
A coherent approach to improvement which usually includes a small number of key improvement goals consistently pursued over sustained periods of time
Proceed in manageable stages using the early stages as learning opportunities
Do not overload schools with excessive number of initiatives

3. From ”Strong Districts” …
Encourage improvement efforts in schools guided by explicit and well-tested frameworks, policies and practices, as well as widely shared goals that permit local adaptation. All stakeholders have clearly defined roles to play in this approach to school improvement.
Integrate new initiatives into existing routines and practices. Established structures and procedures are maintained and built. Care is taken to ensure continuity and extension of core values.
Build the capacities needed by school staff for successful school improvement.

4. Building capacities
Human capital development (knowledge, skill, attitudes) through professional development – “explicit knowledge” emphasis
Social capital development (relationships providing access to resources) through networks – “tacit knowledge” emphasis

5. Social capital through informal networks
Daly, A. (ed.) (2010). Social Network Theory and Educational Change. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Educational Press. Finnegan, K., Daly, A., Che, J. (2013). System wide reform in districts under pressure: the role of social networks in defining, acquiring, using and diffusing research evidence, Journal of Educational Administration, 51,

6. Example of a Network (Finnegan et al, 2012)
Note. Adapted from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, and

7. Implications from research on informal network structures about what districts can do …
Stimulate overall connectivity
Nurture horizontal connections
Existing tacit knowledge varies across groups
Establish a strong district core
Ties between educators at different “levels” NB source of resources
Encourage bridging across clusters

8. Effective informal network building continued …
Encourage both strong and weak ties
Access to expertise is key to successful improvement
Exploit the influence of opinion leaders
Who has the most influence in the district (the brokers)?
Build trust among network members
A prerequisite to risking change
(see Adams, C., Miskell, R. (2016). Teacher trust in district administration, Educational Administration Quarterly, 52, )

9. Social capital development through formal networks
Effective leadership networks or
Principal learning teams
1st study
Leithwood, K., Azah, V. (2016). Characteristics of effective leadership networks, Journal of Educational Administration, 54, 4.
2nd study
Part of the Leading Student Achievement (LSA) evaluation

10. Motivation: Evidence about Sources of School Leaders’ Learning
A central office leader with close knowledge of my school
2.88
Another central office leader not directly responsible for my school
2.49
One or more of my own staff members
Scheduled PD sessions provided by my district
2.76
PD opportunities provided by the LSA project
2.56
Sessions facilitated by branches of the Ministry of Education (Student Achievement Supports, Learning to 18, Leadership
2.50
My Principal Learning Team (network)
3.01
Other networks in which I participate
2.78
My professional reading (print and online)
3.15
University-sponsored program(s)
1.72
Principal association-sponsored professional learning

11. Initial Framework Network Structuree Positive Network Outcomes:
Cognitive
Affective
Network
Health
Network
Leadership
Unintended
Challenges
Network
Connectivity

12. Cognitive Outcomes
I learn a great deal from participating in my networks
3.20
Much of what I learn in my networks are general principles or guidelines that I find useful in making decisions about what to do in my own school
2.96
Much of what I learn through my networks are quite specific actions or strategies that apply directly to my own school improvement work
3.05
Much of what I learn through my network, while often interesting, is not useful to me in providing leadership in my own school
3.14
Participation in my network has provided me with a broader understanding of my district’s efforts to improve student achievement and well-being
3.07
I have a much better understanding of the province’s goals and initiatives for improving education as a result of my network participation
2.85
Participation in my network has improved my ability to help my teachers improve their classroom instruction

13. Affective Network Outcomes
Participation in my professional network(s) is an important source of my job satisfaction
3.02
I have gained a significant amount of confidence in being able to provide leadership in my school as a result of my network participation
2.91
My network participation has increased my commitment to making a positive difference for students in my own school
My network participation has increased my commitment to helping other schools improve their students’ achievement and well-being
2.85

14. Collective Outcome Measure (2nd Study Only)
Improved the flow of ideas across school leaders in my district.
Improved the flow of ideas between school and district leaders in my district.
Increased the level of cooperation and willingness to work together among leaders in our districts.
Increased the search for innovative ideas and practices on the part of leaders in our district.

15. The Evidence (1st Study)
Two focus groups (12)
Survey responses of 450 school leaders were members of district-wide principal networks

16. 2nd Study ... A “replication” (but not exactly)
Smaller sample size (n=340)
Expanded outcomes (collective)
Additional leadership measures
Additional health measures (dark side)
Omit unintended consequences

17. Overall results similar for both studies
The model (framework) was a very good fit with the data (as a whole explained 51% of the variation in Network Outcomes).
Network Leadership had the largest total effect on Network Outcomes (R2 = .56)
followed closely by the effects of
Network Health (R2 = .49)
and
Network Connectivity (R2 = .46)

18. Network Leadership Effective leadership in networks is: Widely shared
Helps develop clear purposes and focus
Monitors network progress
Provides support of various sorts to network members.

19. Network Health A healthy network is one which has:
Explicit purpose and clear expectations
Effective communication mechanisms
Collaborative environments
Trusting relationships.

20. Network Connectivity
A network in which members are effectively connected includes:
Frequent interactions among members (often face-to-face)
Provides members with ready access to both local knowledge and external expertise when needed.

21. Network Structure
Size of the network (influenced by the typical ways in which members interact)
Some members characteristics influence a network’s effectiveness (e.g., range of roles).

22. Not significant in first study so omitted from the second study
Unintended Challenge
A selection of some of the often unanticipated difficulties and frustrations that network members encounter as part of their network membership.
Not significant in first study so omitted from the second study

23. Implications for district leaders about formal leadership networks
Networks as key sources of professional learning
Training for network leadership
Specific features of productive networks
Technology-assisted interaction (relatively large networks)
Face-to-face interaction (relatively small networks)