Coordinating instruction in two comprehensive school reforms.

Abstract

This dissertation attempts to understand the interaction of designs, environments and capabilities. The findings of this dissertation suggest that schools implementing comprehensive school reforms such as SFA and AC mastered some coordination tools but not others. Schools reached alignment while implementing some tools independently, but they could not reach a systemic alignment of all the coordination tools together. SFA and AC triggered incremental but not radical transformations in the forms of alignment operating within schools and classrooms. Coordination efforts were part of this progressive improvement process and as such, they showed mixed results in practice. All schools analyzed here suffered some level of transformation but only few of them experienced more profound changes. A mixture of design attributes, capabilities and environmental conditions explained the level of success or failure. Design elaboration and development, learning opportunities and incentives were relevant resources to coordinate instruction. A minimum level of elaboration and development were positive but beyond that, different arrangements were equally favorable. SFA and AC emphasized resources for the first year of implementation but few resources to sustain implementation over time. In both designs, incentives were poorly crafted, because designers assumed that enactors would be naturally oriented to enhance alignment. Design attributes were important pieces for instructional coordination but they were not enough to succeed in it. Capabilities were as significant as the designs themselves. In those places where capabilities were poor, CSR made marginal or slow transformations. On the contrary, in those places where capabilities were strong, transformations were deeper and more sustainable. Leadership and leader stability were key resources because they facilitated the alignment of schools and practitioners around core instructional goals. None of the districts was extremely incoherent as originally expected. They were relatively organized and committed with CSR implementation, particularly Sunnyside and Coverdale. Sunnyside and Coverdale exerted strong roles in schools but those interactions brought benefits and costs for alignment. As expected, where more consistent guidance was offered, schools and teachers had a better set of opportunities to enhance alignment. On the contrary, more disperse settings harmed the chances for coordination.