There is increasing pressure on the central office, particularly in large school districts, to improve student outcomes across schools and to close large achievement gaps between groups of students based largely on race and income (Louis, 2008; Honig 2012). Reforms intended to “raise the bar and close the gap” in student achievement are often implemented at the intersection of central office and schools. However, these efforts often do not achieve their intended outcomes. In this context, it is essential to understand the conditions under which reforms targeting the central office-school relationship succeed or fail. Given the pressing need for improved approaches to managing school systems, my dissertation explores the relationship between school leaders and central offices in two large, urban districts in Maryland. I use a qualitative inquiry strategy that incorporates interviews and document review to construct case studies of principals’ interactions with central office in the two districts. (Yin, 2013). I then use the framework of loose coupling theory (Orton & Weick, 1990; Wieck, 1976) to interpret the conditions under which the central office-school relationship leads to consistent or variable practices across schools. In the case studies, I examine three essential functions—budgeting, staffing, and academic programming—shared between principals and central office (Johnson, Marietta, Higgins, Mapp, & Grossman, 2015). I found that the two school districts took fundamentally different approaches—one centralized and the other decentralized—to managing their relationships with schools in the three functions. As a result, principals in each district had very different interactions with central office as they carried out their work. Examining these interactions through the lens of loose coupling theory sheds light on whether the districts’ approaches worked as intended. Under some conditions, the approaches worked as expected (e.g. centralization produced tight coupling). However, in other cases, the approach did not (e.g. centralization led to loose coupling). Two factors appeared to matter the most in determining whether an approach worked as intended: the capacity of principals and principals’ perceptions of the capacity of central office. Findings from the research show the importance of matching the district’s approach to capacities of those responsible for implementation. / Education Policy, Leadership, and Instructional Practice

Research establishes that a positive relationship exists between principal instructional leadership and student achievement (Brewer, 1993; Eberts and Stone, 1988; Hallinger and Heck, 1998; Leithwood, Seashore Louis, Anderson, and Wahlstrom, 2004). Likewise, research indicates that a principal’s ability to influence the purpose and goals of a school, its structure and social networks, its teachers’ commitment, instructional practices, and organizational culture produces statistically significant effects on student achievement (Hallenger and Heck, 1998). In short, school leadership matters. Unfortunately, we are facing a shortage of effective principals, forcing many district superintendents to sometimes settle and take what they can get when looking for principals (Farkas, Johnson, Duffett, Foleno and Foley, 2001). Confronted with a growing school leadership challenge, a number of urban school districts have developed their own principal training programs. Although several of these programs appear promising, it is unclear if school districts have been able to create principal preparation programs that focus on preparing instructional leaders and improve on traditional university-led programs, which are often critiqued as irrelevant and outdated. This study takes an in-depth look at two district-led aspiring principal programs to determine if they overcame the problems that have plagued university-led programs. Specifically, I examine if the two programs developed a solid knowledge base, overcame causal ambiguity and provided a set of learning experiences that went beyond canonical practices. To perform this examination I conducted a multiple case exploratory study utilizing qualitative research methodology. I conducted my analysis using a unique analytic lens – knowledge management – framing the findings presented here through this lens. This study finds that the programs examined had a solid knowledge base with an emphasis on instructional and community/shared leadership, providing descriptive knowledge (know-what) and procedural knowledge (know-how). However, both programs failed to create systematic, consistent access to causal knowledge (know-why). Data also revealed that despite the aforementioned shortcoming, both programs delivered on learning experiences that went beyond canonical practices. However, variability in program participants’ field experiences weakened claims that the programs studied provided experiences that mirrored the realities of practice consistently for all participants. / Education Policy and Management

Through this capstone, I explore the unique dynamics I encountered in the Delaware Department of Education during the department’s final year as a federal Race to the Top grant recipient. This document describes my intended work for the department, culminating in a two-year strategic plan. The goal of my theory of action was to ensure that the resources of the department were aligned to a focused set of priorities, reflecting a balance of accountability and support. Through the following sections I explore the rationale for my work, results achieved, and attempt an explanation of the results themselves. I close with implications for my own leadership, the site itself, and the sector as a whole. In the Review of Knowledge for Action, I explore the role of State Education Agencies (SEA) as both a support body and a monitoring and accountability agency, and develop a personal theory of action that guided my work within the department. The role of the SEA in the sector is a complex one where opportunity and tension exist simultaneously in the pursuit of creating conditions for improved academic outcomes for students. As I discuss, both the literature and the day-to-day operations of the department demonstrate challenges in this work. The Results and Analysis components of the capstone explain in greater detail the goals and outcomes of my strategic project, and expand on the complexities of the Delaware Department of Education leadership team. Through the use of the Note for Analyzing Workgroups (Harvard Business School, 1998) I explore both structures and embedded culture within the state and the department, and discuss how these impacted the strategic plan. In the Implications component I illuminate both tensions and opportunities for the department in light of the local and national turbulence around the balance of accountability and support. This capstone aims provide insights into the complex role of State Education Agencies as they seek to both fulfill their core function and take on an increasingly dynamic role influencing and impacting academic outcomes for students in their state.

In a post Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind environment, state education agencies (SEA’s) play an increasing role in influencing the policy and practices of schools and districts. Yet, the challenges of SEA’s are monumental. American students continue to be outperformed by their international peers. Schools and districts across America are struggling to make any headway on the persistent achievement gaps for poor and minority students. The system is in crisis, and the solutions are unknown. To meet this challenge of imagination, ingenuity, and learning, SEA’s must pivot from a predominantly compliance-oriented, highly bureaucratic culture to a more nimble learning-oriented culture. The central question is how can the SEA become a learning organization? Drawing from research on enabling learning in organizations, developing effective teams, and promoting adult development, I argue that by developing an internal learning-oriented team that leads the organization’s efforts to learn and by engaging with statewide stakeholders- defined as educators, parents, business, community leaders, and students in the challenging of assumptions, the SEA will shift its orientation to learning. In this capstone, I describe my efforts at the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) to support this pivot to a learning organization through the design and facilitation of a community-driven, design-thinking based strategic planning process that asks stakeholders to learn from each other, national experts, and RIDE staff and to parley that learning into a collaboratively defined statewide vision and strategy for public education. Furthermore, I describe RIDE’s efforts to learn from and enact this strategic plan. Analysis of this capstone reveal three key insights: (1) taking the time to build broad-based support for a statewide educational strategy matters greatly to building legitimacy and long-term sustainability; (2) despite their traditional compliance-oriented roles, SEA’s can form nimble learning oriented teams that impel learning throughout the entire organization; and (3) SEA’s can best shift their role through a open dialogue of continuous improvement that happens both within the agency and across the state.

Reliably delivering high quality academic outcomes at scale is a significant challenge facing the education sector. The more rigorous bar set by the Common Core has deepened this challenge for school systems. During the Ed. L.D. residency, my strategic project focused on developing an English-Language Arts improvement strategy to drive immediate student growth during the current school year and simultaneously lay the foundation for consistent long-term success. My capstone explores the role and limitations of creating shared instructional infrastructure across schools as a mechanism for improvement, the importance of capacity building investments, and the implications for organizational design to ensure the quality of both. My residency provided me with ample opportunities to learn about the balance between centralization and autonomy, the importance of relational trust in garnering authentic feedback, the power of culture, and the need to align leadership approaches to context.

What role does an enrollment system play in providing every child in the United States with a high-quality education? Integration and school choice literature highlight the saliency of the topic (Ben-Porath, 2012; Orfield and Frankenberg, 2013; Ryan, 2010; Viteritti, 2010). This capstone is designed to address how an increasingly diverse school district with a history of persistent political debate about school choice can create a sustainable enrollment system that affords every child access to a high-quality education. The paper details Framingham Public Schools’ efforts to engage in the early stages of a multi-stakeholder and multi-year effort toward this end. Moore’s (1995, 2013) strategic value triangle offers a helpful conceptual tool to develop a shared public value proposition for an improved enrollment system and the operational capacity and political legitimacy to accomplish that vision. The paper also explores the author’s leadership lessons in using a participatory approach to facilitate this work.

After a decade of focused attention and millions of dollars, school turnaround remains one of the education sector's most pressing challenges. Research shows that tackling it requires the implementation of tried and true levers—high-quality instruction, effective school leadership, and family engagement—at the highest possible levels, and that it requires a sophisticated interrogation of broader structural challenges such as segregation, poverty, and racism. This capstone explores a novel approach to school turnaround in Denver Public Schools (DPS), the Year Zero Redesign cohort. This approach strives to equip principals with the mindsets, skills, and autonomy to build partnerships with families, redesign their schools, and effectively lead dramatic change efforts. Through this inquiry, I explore the unique role of principals in system-level transformation; the way trust affects schools and communities; and the quest to redesign schools in alignment with the needs and preferences of students and families. I also examine how DPS, a large and ambitious school district, might learn to support this work in a rapidly evolving policy environment. I argue that taking time for intentional school design and leadership development—not instructional leadership development alone, but community and creative leadership development as well—holds great potential for more consistent results in school turnaround and school redesign. I also suggest that this and other creative approaches to turnaround will become possible only when system-level incentives and accountability measures allow for it. This capstone offers lessons for DPS as it seeks to create an ecosystem of excellent and diverse school models, and for practitioners and policymakers across the sector seeking to realize transformative change through community mobilization and school design.

This capstone chronicles my leadership in piloting, designing, and creating both a district-wide and school-based partnership definition along with partnership effectiveness elements and standards for the Boston Public Schools (BPS). From July 2015 to March 2016, I accomplished these tasks by using two guiding frameworks: the user-centered design processes known as Design Thinking and the Strategic Triangle. The Design Thinking process enabled me to collect and understand perspectives from multiple district stakeholders while designing and piloting initiatives. The Strategic Triangle leadership framework enabled me to optimize my leadership and garner buy-in while leading changes within the Boston Public Schools. To guide my efforts I asked one central question: How could I advance BPS’ work to design a process to create a school-based partnership definition and to test these standards at one of the district’s pilot schools? To answer this question, I have included encounter descriptions, findings, analysis, and recommendations about the leadership strategies I used to develop BPS’ new school-based partnership definition and standards. I’ve also included the development of a district wide definition and a school-based definition of partnership, along with the development of a team of leaders to support the design and pilot of the BPS’ partnership initiative. Additionally, I have included analytic evidence of how the pilot fared at the pilot school. In the Introduction, I present background information about BPS’ current strategic plan and specific initiatives regarding school-based partnerships. Within the Review of Knowledge for Action, I present relevant research that informed my theory of action, which guided my BPS’ work. Within my overview of the actual work, I include the following phases: (a) building strategic relationships; (b) developing effectiveness quality standards; (c) designing a partnership assessment tool; (d) coordinating and conducting the pilot; and (e) collecting feedback on the efficacy of BPS’ partnership tool, definition and standards. In my Outcomes section, I offer my perspective on what worked well and what didn’t, along with questions raised during the process. Finally, I share implications for myself, for BPS, and for the educational sector–that are outgrowths of my capstone analysis and my residency leadership experiences.

Public school districts across the nation are exploring the best ways to support their schools, students, and communities, but in the context of educational reform, districts are underused as a lever for change. Hartford Public Schools is a portfolio management district serving approximately 22,000 students, who get to choose the program that best suits their needs from 52 schools in Hartford and more schools in the surrounding area. To be effective, Hartford Public Schools has to ensure that it provides high-quality educational opportunities for all its students. This capstone explores the district’s process of transforming the central office by developing a senior leadership team to model the way for change in efforts to better support schools. I argue that developing a senior leadership team is an effective strategy for promoting change throughout the district when it includes a compelling direction, a value on teaming, a focus on learning, and a culture of trust. I describe my role in creating the conditions and establishing the culture that allow this new senior leadership team to thrive. This capstone offers important implications for district leaders, demonstrating that investing time, energy, and resources into developing high-functioning teams that learn to improve is critical for success. As the educational landscape evolves, teams who adapt quickly and learn together could be the key to ensuring district schools achieve at the same levels as the best schools in the nation.

This capstone outlines my strategic project around increasing equity in Santa Fe Public Schools (SFPS) during the 2015-16 school year. I sought to test the theory of action that effecting technical changes and solutions around inequity the district would pave the way to effect critical adaptive changes in the future, with the hypothesis that one type of change is not possible without the other. My strategic project consisted of two work streams. First, I led a Discipline Task Force comprised of district administrators and school staff to examine the equitable implementation of discipline practices across schools. We sought to answer three questions: Who is getting in trouble? What are they getting in trouble? Why are they getting in trouble? We found that students who are English Learners (EL), low-income, or special needs disproportionately incur disciplinary infractions. From a series of 50 follow-up interviews, we discovered that a significant negative bias toward newer immigrants exists among students, teachers and principals at many school sites. Second, I led a Registration Study Committee and subsequently participated on a Registration Implementation Team charged with increasing the efficacy of the Registration, Scheduling and Transfers (RST) process. We sought to answer these three key questions: Who is not getting a seat on the first day of school? Who is not getting a seat in the school of their choice? Why are they not getting seats? We discovered that low-income students are disproportionately both unable to register by the first day of school and excluded from the transfers process, due to a variety of individual circumstances. Beyond our findings around equity, I also sought to examine the conditions under which a working group is successful or unsuccessful in SFPS. I discovered that, due to an unclear hierarchy, a culture of trust and collaboration is especially important in order for teams to be functional. As a result, the district needs to implement technical changes and structures around team-building and norm-setting in order to begin the adaptive shift toward a trusting culture.