Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Critical Role of Brokers in the Access and Use of Evidence at the School and District Level

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Using Research Evidence in Education

Part of the book series: Policy Implications of Research in Education ((PIRE,volume 2))

Abstract

With the push for data-driven decision making in the current accountability system, evidence use becomes vital to the improvement of low-performing schools. In this exploratory case study, we utilize social network theory and methods to examine how evidence is diffused and brokered by the educational leaders (central office, area superintendents, and school site administrators) across a large urban district, focusing particularly on whether evidence reaches leaders in low-performing schools. Our results suggest that very sparse data use ties exist across the entire district and that principals of underperforming schools, who are arguably in most need of evidence for improvement, are often disconnected from the overall data use structure. Furthermore, area superintendents, who are formally tasked with being the “source” of advice for data, are not always the most sought leaders within their areas. In addition, the communication patterns indicate a tendency to seek advice from outside the area for brokers in both formal and informal networks. Findings of this study give importance to the role of brokerage in districts’ evidence use for improving low-performing schools.

This research was supported by an award from the W. T. Grant Foundation (Grant #10174). All opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the W. T. Grant Foundation.

Authors “Alan J. Daly” and “Kara S. Finnigan” contributed equally to this work.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Pseudonym.

  2. 2.

    It is important to note that the area superintendents are central office administrators, but given the unique role they serve as a connection point to the schools and oversee the principals, and as such we have separated them out into their own administrative “level” for these analyses.

References

  • Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atteberry, A., & Bryk, A. S. (2010). Analyzing the role of social networks in school-based professional development initiatives. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), The ties of change: Social network theory and application in education (pp. 51–76). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, W. E., & Iyer, A. (1992). Information networks and market behavior. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 16, 305–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S., & Foster, P. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991–1013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., & Ofem, B. (2010). Overview: Social network theory and analysis. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), The ties of change: Social network theory and application in education (pp. 17–30). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S., Everett, M., & Freeman, L. (2002). UCINET for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E. (1993). Potential power and power use: An investigation of structure and behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 441–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1982). Toward a structural theory of action. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1997). A note on social capital and network content. Social Networks, 19(4), 355–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. In R. I. Sutton & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 1–83). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (2005). Brokerage and closure: An introduction to social capital. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K., & Krackhardt, D. (1999). Cognitive inconsistencies and non-symmetric friendship. Social Networks, 18(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrispeels, J. (2004). Learning to lead together: The promise and challenge of sharing leadership. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. (2001). 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. (2005). Shaping teacher sensemaking: School leaders and the enactment of reading policy. Educational Policy, 19, 476–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E., Honig, M. I., & Stein, M. K. (2009a). What’s the evidence on district’s use of evidence? In J. Bransford, D. J. Stipek, N. J. Vye, L. Gomez, & D. Lam (Eds.), Educational improvement: What makes it happen and why? (pp. 67–86). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E., Touré, J., & Yamashita, M. (2009b). Evidence, interpretation, and persuasion: Instructional decision making in the district central office. Teachers College Record, 111(4), 1115–1161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Confrey, J., & Makar, K. (2005). Critiquing and improving the use of data from high-stakes tests with the aid of dynamic statistics software. In C. Dede, J. P. Honan, & L. C. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 198–226). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copland, M. A. (2003). Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 375–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, R., & Parker, A. (2004). The hidden power of social networks: Understanding how work really gets done in organizations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, R., Borgatti, S., & Parker, A. (2002). Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review, 44(2), 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. (2010). A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 111, 111–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, A. J. (Ed.). (2010). Social network theory and educational change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, A. J. (2012). Data, dyads, and dissemination: Exploring data use and social networks in educational improvement. Teachers College Record, 114(11), 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. (2009). A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 11(2), 111–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. (2010). A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 111, 111–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. (2011). The ebb and flow of social network ties between district leaders under high stakes accountability. American Education Research Journal, 48(1), 39–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. (2012). Exploring the space between: Social networks, trust, and urban school district leaders. Journal of School Leadership, 22(3), 493–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2009). Conceptualizing policy implementation: Large-scale reform in an era of complexity. In D. Plank, B. Schneider, & G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 348–361). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Datnow, A., Hubbard, L., & Mehan, H. (2002). Extending educational reform: From one school to many. London: Routledge/Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Datnow, A., Park, V., & Wohlstetter, P. (2007). Achieving with data: How high-performing school systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education, Center on Educational Governance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Degenne, A., & Forsé, M. (1999). Introducing social networks. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnigan, K. S., & Daly, A. J. (2010). Learning at a system level: Ties between principals of low performing schools and central office leaders. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 179–195). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnigan, K. S., & Daly, A. J. (2012). Mind the gap: Organizational learning and improvement in an underperforming urban system. American Journal of Education, 119(1), 41–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finnigan, K., Daly, A. J., & Stewart, T. (2012). Organizational learning in schools under sanction. Education Research International, 2012(16), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finnigan, K. S., Daly, A. J., & Che, J. (2013). Systemwide reform in districts under pressure: The role of social networks in defining, acquiring and diffusing research evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(4), 476–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Firestone, W. A., & González, R. A. (2007). Culture and processes affecting data use in schools. In P. A. Moss (Ed.), Evidence and decision making (pp. 132–154). Malden: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choices in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 85–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halverson, R., Prichett, R. B., & Watson, J. G. (2007). Formative feedback systems and the new instructional leadership. Madison: University of Wisconsin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., Marsh, J., McCombs, J. S., Robyn, A., & Russell, J. (2007). Implementing standards-based accountability under no child left behind: Responses of superintendents, principals, and teachers in three states. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammerman, J. K., & Rubin, A. (2002). Visualizing a statistical world. Hands On!, 25(2), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hite, J., Williams, E., & Baugh, S. (2005). Multiple networks of public school administrators: An analysis of network content and structure. International Journal on Leadership in Education, 8(2), 91–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, M. I. (2003). Building policy from practice: District central office administrators’ roles and capacity for implementing collaborative education policy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 292–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, M. (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 

  • Honig, M. I., & Coburn, C. (2008). Evidence-based decision making in school district central offices: Toward a policy research agenda. Educational Policy, 22(4), 578–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, M. I., & Copland, M. A. (2008). Reinventing central offices to expand student learning. An issue brief of the center for comprehensive school reform and improvement. Washington, DC: Learning Point Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikemoto, G. S., & Marsh, J. A. (2007). Cutting through the “data driven” mantra: Different conceptions of data-driven decision making. In P.A. Moss (Ed.), Evidence and decision making (National society for the study of education yearbook, Vol. 106, Issue 1, pp. 105–131). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, K. A., Marsh, J. A., Ikemoto, G. S., Darilek, H., & Barney, H. (2006). Strategies to promote data use for instructional improvement: Actions, outcomes, and lessons from three urban districts. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 496–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2003). Social networks and organizations. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, M., Copland, M., & Swinerton, J. (2007). Understanding the promise and dynamics of data-informed leadership. In P. A. Moss (Ed.), Evidence and decision making (pp. 74–104). Malden: National Society for the Study of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krackhardt, D. (2001). Network conditions of organizational change. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, B. (2008). How to change 5000 schools: A practical and positive approach for leading change at every level. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22(1), 28–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K. S., Febey, K., & Schroeder, R. (2005). State-mandated accountability in high schools: Teachers’ interpretations of a new era. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(2), 177–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K. L., & Anderson, S. E. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Retrieved from The Wallace Foundation website: http://www.wallacefoundation.org/KnowledgeCenter/KnowledgeTopics/CurrentAreasofFocus/EducationLeadership/Documents/Learning-from-Leadership-Investigating-Links-Final-Report.pdf

  • Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, L. S. (2006). Making sense of data-driven decision making in education: Evidence from recent RAND research (OP-170). Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, J. A., McCombs, J. S., & Martorell, F. (2010). How instructional coaches support data-driven decision making: Policy implementation and effects in Florida Middle Schools. Educational Policy, 24(6), 872–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2003). From knowing to doing: A framework for understanding the evidence-into-practice agenda. Evaluation, 9(2), 125–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Day, J. (2002). Complexity, accountability, and school improvement. Harvard Educational Review, 70(3), 293–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Day, J. (2004). Complexity, accountability, and school improvement. In S. Fuhrman & R. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability systems (pp. 15–43). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obstfeld, D. (2005). Social networks, the Tertius Iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 100–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parise, L., & Spillane, J. (2010). Teacher learning and instructional change: How formal and on-the-job learning opportunities predict change in elementary school teachers’ practice. The Elementary School Journal, 110(3), 347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penuel, W. R., Riel, M. R., Krause, A., & Frank, K. A. (2009). Analyzing teachers’ professional interactions in a school as social capital: A social network approach. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 124–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., Koput, K. I. V., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P. (2000). A fifth grade teacher’s reconstruction of mathematics and literacy teaching: Exploring interactions among identity, learning, and subject matter. Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 273–307.

    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 

  • Stovel, K., & Shaw, L. (2012). Brokerage. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Supovitz, J. A. (2006). The case for district-based reform: Leading, building, and sustaining school improvement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Supovitz, J., & Klein, V. (2003). Mapping a course for improved student learning: How innovative schools use student performance data to guide improvement. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Togneri, W., & Anderson, S. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. Washington, DC: The Learning First Alliance and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, V. (2012). The use of research and evidence in policy and practice. Social Policy Report, 26(2), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1998). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wayman, J. C., & Stringfield, S. (2006). Technology-supported involvement of entire faculties in examination of student data for instructional improvement. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 549–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wayman, J. C., Cho, V., & Johnston, M. T. (2007). The data-informed district: A district-wide evaluation of data use in the Natrona County School District. Austin: The University of Texas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1985). Cosmos vs. chaos: Sense and nonsense in electronic contexts. Organizational Dynamics, 14(2), 50–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, B., & Berkowitz, S. D. (1998). Social structures: A network approach. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlstetter, P., Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2008). Creating a system for data-driven decision making: Applying the principal-agent framework. School Effectiveness and School Improvement Journal, 19(3), 239–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, V. M. (2006). Teachers’ use of data: Loose coupling, agenda setting, and team norms. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 521–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education Studies, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA

    Alan J. Daly

  2. Warner School of Education, University of Rochester, 414 LeChase Hall, Rochester, NY, 14627, USA

    Kara S. Finnigan

  3. Department of Education Studies, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA

    Nienke M. Moolenaar

  4. University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands

    Nienke M. Moolenaar

  5. Rochester City School District and Center for Education Policy Research, Rochester, NY, USA

    Jing Che

Authors
  1. Alan J. Daly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kara S. Finnigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nienke M. Moolenaar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jing Che
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alan J. Daly .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Warner School of Education, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA

    Kara S. Finnigan

  2. Dept. of Education Studies, University of California, La Jolla, California, USA

    Alan J. Daly

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Daly, A.J., Finnigan, K.S., Moolenaar, N.M., Che, J. (2014). The Critical Role of Brokers in the Access and Use of Evidence at the School and District Level. In: Finnigan, K., Daly, A. (eds) Using Research Evidence in Education. Policy Implications of Research in Education, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04690-7_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation