Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Highway to reform: The coupling of district reading policy and instructional practice

  • Published:
Journal of Educational Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article presents findings on teachers’ implementation of a reading reform in an urban school district. Findings are based in observation, interview, and document data related to 12 elementary teachers’ responses to a new reading program, the Teachers College Reading and Writing Workshop. Utilizing coupling theory and the concept of routines, the paper presents a nuanced portrayal of classroom-level policy implementation. The paper depicts mini-lessons, independent reading, conferencing, and instructional materials as building blocks of the new reading program, and I expose the intensity of messaging on each of these elements. I use Qualitative Comparative Analysis to analyze teachers’ routines for reading instruction and show that independent reading was a common foundational step in teachers’ workshop routines. This analytic technique answers questions about the combinations of conditions resulting in mini-lesson instruction. This paper extends the research on the implementation of instructional policy and has implications for policymakers, administrators, and teachers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The mini-lesson was selected as the outcome of interest based on the extant literature; please see the “Findings” section for details.

  2. Lincoln Unified is a pseudonym to maintain the confidentiality of the district.

  3. http://www.readingrockets.org/article/41

    http://www.gse.harvard.edu/~snow/Aspen_snow.html.

  4. I checked with teachers, coaches, and principals to ensure that I was observing an appropriate block of time.

  5. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/02/the-right-approach-to-reading-instruction.

References

  • Achinstein, B., & Ogawa, R. T. (2006). (In)fidelity: What the resistance of new teachers reveals about professional principles and prescriptive educational policies. Harvard Educational Review, 76(1), 30–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anagnostopoulos, D., & Rutledge, S. (2007). Making sense of school sanctioning policies in urban high schools: Charting the depth and drift of school and classroom change. Teachers College Record, 109(5), 1261–1302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booher-Jennings, J. (2005). Below the bubble: “educational triage” and the texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 231–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burch, P. (2007). Educational policy and practice from the perspective of institutional theory: Crafting a wider lens. Educational Researcher, 36(2), 84–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calkins, L., Ehrenworth, M., & Lehman, C. (2012). Pathways to the common core: accelerating achievement. New York: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calkins, L., Tolan, K., & Ehrenworth, M. (2010). Units of study for teaching reading. New York: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E. (2001a). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E. (2001b). Making sense of reading: Logics of reading in the institutional environment and the classroom. (Unpublished Ph.D.). Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

  • Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77(3), 211–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E. (2005). The role of non-system actors in the relationship between policy and practice: The case of reading instruction in California. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(1), 23–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E. (2006). Framing the problem of reading instruction: Using frame analysis to uncover the microprocesses of policy implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 343–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E., Pearson, P. D., & Woulfin, S. L. (2010). Reading policy in an era of accountability. In M. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. Moje, & P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol IV ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E., & Woulfin, S. L. (2012). Reading coaches and the relationship between policy and practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 5–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 327–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K. (2011). Teaching and its predicaments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Bhatt, M. P. (2012). The importance of infrastructure development to high-quality literacy instruction. The Future of Children, 22(2), 117–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Moffitt, S. L. (2009). The ordeal of equality: Did federal legislation fix the schools?. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correnti, R., & Rowan, B. (2007). Opening up the black box: Literacy instruction in schools participating in three comprehensive school reform programs. American Educational Research Journal, 44(2), 298–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cress, D. M., & Snow, D. A. (2000). The outcomes of homeless mobilization: The influence of organization, disruption, political mediation, and framing. American Journal of Sociology, 105(4), 1063–1104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crotty, M. (1998). Introduction: The research process. In The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspectives in the research process. London: Sage Publications.

  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. (2007). Where the rubber meets the road: Rethinking the connection between high-stakes testing policy and classroom instruction. Sociology of Education, 80(4), 285–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 94–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, N. (2001). Social skill and the theory of fields. Sociological Theory, 19(2), 105–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallett, T. (2010). The myth incarnate: Recoupling processes, turmoil, and inhabited institutions in an urban elementary school. American Sociological Review, 75(1), 52–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallett, T., & Ventresca, M. (2006). Inhabited institutions: Social interactions and organizational forms in Gouldner’s patterns of industrial bureaucracy. Theoretical Sociology, 35, 213–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, E. H., & Mesmer, H. A. E. (2013). Upping the ante of text complexity in the common core state standards: Examining its potential impact on young readers. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 44–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, J., Assaf, L., & Paris, S. (2001). High-stakes testing in reading: Today in texas, tomorrow? Reading Teacher, 54(5), 482–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honig, M. I. (2006). Street-level bureaucracy revisited: Frontline district central-office administrators as boundary spanners in education policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(4), 357–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, M., Spillane, J. P., Jakopovic, P., & Heaton, R. M. (2013). Infrastructure redesign and instructional reform in mathematics: Formal structure and teacher leadership. The Elementary School Journal, 114(2), 200–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. (1994). Enhancing teaching. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Reading Association Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Committee. (2012). Literacy implementation guidance for the ELA common core state standards. Retrieved from http://www.reading.org/Libraries/association-documents/ira_ccss_guidelines.pdf.

  • Kersten, J., & Pardo, L. (2007). Finessing and hybridizing: Innovative literacy practices in reading first classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 61(2), 146–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. (1995). Logging data. In Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

  • McDonnell, L. M., & Elmore, R. F. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2), 133–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, M. W. (1990). The rand change agent study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19, 11–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintrop, H., & Trujillo, T. (2007). The practical relevance of accountability systems for school improvement: A descriptive analysis of California schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29(4), 319–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Governors Association. (2009). Fifty-one states and territories join common core state standards initiative. Retrieved from http://www.nga.org/cms/home/news-room/news-releases/page_2009/col2-content/main-content-list/title_fifty-one-states-and-territories-join-common-core-state-standards-initiative.html.

  • Orlikowski, W. J. (1996). Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 63–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orton, J. D., & Weick, K. E. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 203–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P. D. (2004). The reading wars. Educational Policy, 18(1), 216–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P. D. (2007). An endangered species act for literacy education. Journal of Literacy Research, 39(2), 145–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pentland, B. T., & Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 793–815. doi:10.1093/icc/dth070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pentland, B. T., Hærem, T., & Hillison, D. (2010). Comparing organizational routines as recurrent patterns of action. Organization Studies, 31(7), 917–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter-Magee, K. (2015). Misdirection and self-interest: How heinemann and lucy calkins are rewriting the common core. Retrieved from http://edexcellence.net/commentary/education-gadfly-daily/common-core-watch/2012/misdirection-and-self-interest-how-Heinemann-and-Lucy-Calkins-are-rewriting-the-Common-Core.html.

  • Pressley, M., Allington, R., Wharton-McDonald, R., Block, C. C., & Morrow, L. (2001). Learning to read: Lessons from exemplary first grades. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. (1992). “Casing” and the process of social inquiry. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 217–226). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy-sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rigby, J. G. (2013). Three logics of instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly. doi:10.1177/0013161X13509379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C., Drass, K., & Davey, S. (2006). Fuzzy-set/qualitative comparative analysis 2.0. Tucson, AZ: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenshine, B. (1985). Direct instruction. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R., & Davis, G. F. (2006). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural, and open system perspectives. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherer, J. Z., & Spillane, J. P. (2007). Constancy and change in work practice in schools: The role of organizational routines. Unpublished manuscript (Under Review).

  • Smith, M. S., & O’Day, J. (1990). Systemic school reform. Journal of Education Policy, 5(5), 233–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P. (2004). Standards deviation: How schools misunderstand education policy. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J., & Burch, P. (2006). The institutional environment and instructional practice: Changing patterns of guidance and control in public education. In H. Meir & B. Rowan (Eds.), The new institutionalism in education (Vol. 6, pp. 87–102). Albany: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P., Parise, L. M., & Sherer, J. Z. (2011). Organizational routines as coupling mechanisms: Policy, school administration, and the technical core. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 586–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 387–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Clark, K., & Walpole, S. (2000). Effective schools and accomplished teachers: Lessons about primary grade reading instruction in high poverty schools. The Elementary School Journal, 101(2), 121–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trujillo, T. M., & Woulfin, S. L. (2014). Equity-oriented reform amid standards-based accountability: A qualitative comparative analysis of an Intermediary’s instructional practices. American Educational Research Journal, 51(2), 253–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyack, D. B. (1974). The one best system: A history of american urban education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Leadership, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, 249 Glenbrook Road, Unit 3093, Storrs, CT, 06269-3093, USA

    Sarah L. Woulfin

Authors
  1. Sarah L. Woulfin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah L. Woulfin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Woulfin, S.L. Highway to reform: The coupling of district reading policy and instructional practice. J Educ Change 16, 535–557 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-015-9261-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-015-9261-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation