Advertisement

Barriers to Turnaround

  • Joseph F. Murphy
  • Joshua F. Bleiberg
Chapter
Part of the Education, Equity, Economy book series (EEEC, volume 6)

Abstract

“The conventions of school contexts” (Griffin, 1995, p. 44) and school social conditions exert a dramatic influence on turnaround. As Rosenholtz (1989) concluded in her landmark volume on teacher work: “Teachers like members of most organizations, shape their beliefs and actions largely in conformance with the structures, policies, and traditions of the workday world around them” (pp. 2–3).

References

  1. American Institutes for Research. (2011). School turnaround: A pocket guide.Reauthorizing ESEA: Making research relevant. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.Google Scholar
  2. Anrig, G. (2015). Lessons from School Improvement Grants that worked. New York, NY: The Century Foundation.Google Scholar
  3. Baroody, K. (2011). Turning around the nation’s lowest-performing schools: Five steps districts can take to improve their chances of success. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.Google Scholar
  4. Berends, M., Bodilly, S. J., & Kirby, S. N. (2002). Facing the challenges of whole-school reform: New American schools after a decade. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  5. Boles, K., & Troen, V. (1994). Teacher leadership in a professional development school. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  6. Boles, K., & Troen, V. (1996). Teacher leaders and power: Achieving school reform from the classroom. In G. Moller & M. Katzenmeyer (Eds.), Every teacher as a leader: Realizing the potential of teacher leadership (pp. 41–62). San Francisco, NC: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  7. Buckner, K. G., & McDowelle, J. O. (2000, May). Developing teacher leaders: Providing encouragement, opportunities, and support. NASSP Bulletin, 84(616), 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chrispeels, J. H. (1992). Purposeful restructuring: Creating a culture for learning and achievement in elementary schools. Bristol, PA: Falmer.Google Scholar
  9. Clark, D. L., & Meloy, J. M. (1989). Renouncing bureaucracy: A democratic structure for leadership in schools. In T. J. Sergiovanni & J. A. Moore (Eds.), Schooling for tomorrow: Directing reform to issues that count (pp. 272–294). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  10. Clifford, M. (2013). Learning to lead school turnaround: The Mississippi LEADS professional development model. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(1), 49–62.Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  12. Council of the Great City Schools. (2015). School Improvement Grants: Progress report from America’s great city schools. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.Google Scholar
  13. Coyle, M. (1997, May/June). Teacher leadership vs. school management: Flatten the hierarchies. Teacher Leadership, 70(5), 236–239.Google Scholar
  14. Crowther, F., Kaagan, S. S., Ferguson, M., & Hann, L. (2002). Developing teacher leaders: How teacher leadership enhances school success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  15. Dee, T. S. (2012). School turnarounds: Evidence from the 2009 Stimulus. Cambridge, MA: Program on Education Policy and Governance, Harvard University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Donaldson, G. A. (2001). Cultivating leadership in schools: Connecting people, purpose, and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  17. Doyle, M. (2000, April). Making meaning of teacher leadership in the implementation of a standards-based mathematics curriculum. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  18. Duke, D. L. (1994). Drift, detachment, and the need for teacher leadership. In D. R. Walling (Ed.), Teachers as leaders: Perspectives on the professional development of teachers (pp. 255–273). Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.Google Scholar
  19. Duke, D. L. (2012). Tinkering and turnarounds: Understanding the contemporary campaign to improve low-performing schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 17(1–2), 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elmore, R. F. (1987). Reform and the culture of authority in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 23(4), 60–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Feiman-Nemser, S., & Floden, R. F. (1986). The cultures of teaching. In C. W. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 505–526). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. Frost, D., & Durrant, J. (2003a). Teacher leadership: Rationale, strategy, and impact. School Leadership & Management, 23(2), 173–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frost, D., & Durrant, J. (2003b). Teacher-led development work: Guidance and support. London, UK: David Fulton.Google Scholar
  24. Fullan, M. (1994). Teacher leadership: A failure to conceptualize. In D. R. Walling (Ed.), Teachers as leaders: Perspectives on the professional development of teachers (pp. 241–254). Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.Google Scholar
  25. Gold, E., Norton, M. H., Good, D., & Levin, S. (2012). Philadelphia’s renaissance schools initiative: 18 month interim report. Philadelphia, PA: Research for Action.Google Scholar
  26. Griffin, G. A. (1995, September). Influences of shared decision making on school and classroom activity: Conversations with five teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 96(1), 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hamilton, M. P., Heilig, J. V., & Pazey, B. L. (2014). A nostrum of school reform? Turning around reconstituted urban Texas high schools. Urban Education, 49(2), 182–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hart, A. W. (1990). Impacts of the school social unit on teacher authority during work redesign. American Educational Research Journal, 27(3), 503–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hart, A. W. (1994, November). Creating teacher leadership roles. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(4), 472–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hart, A. W. (1995). Reconceiving school leadership: Emergent view. The Elementary School Journal, 96(1), 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hart, R., & Baptist, B. (1996). Developing teacher leaders: A state initiative. In G. Moller & M. Katzenmeyer (Eds.), Every teacher as a leader: Realizing the potential of teacher leadership (pp. 85–100). San Francisco, NC: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  32. Hassel, E. A., & Steiner, L. (2003). Starting fresh: A new strategy for responding to chronically low performing schools. Chapel Hill, NC: Public Impact.Google Scholar
  33. Heissel, J. A., & Ladd, H. F. (2016). School turnaround in North Carolina: A regression discontinuity analysis. Washington, DC: CALDER.Google Scholar
  34. Heller, D. A. (1994). The problem with power. In D. R. Walling (Ed.), Teachers as leaders: Perspectives on the professional development of teachers (pp. 287–297). Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.Google Scholar
  35. Herman, R., Dawson, P., Dee, T., Greene, J., Maynard, R., Redding, S., & Darwin, M. (2008). Turning around chronically low-performing schools. IES practice guide. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.Google Scholar
  36. Hess, G. A. (2003). Reconstitution—Three years later monitoring the effect of sanctions on Chicago high schools. Education and Urban Society, 35(3), 300–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Huberman, M., Parrish, T., Hannan, S., Arellanes, M., & Shambaugh, L. (2011). Turnaround schools in California: Who are they and what strategies do they use? Washington, DC: American Institute for Research.Google Scholar
  38. Institute for Educational Leadership. (2001). Leadership for student learning: Redefining the teacher as leader. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  39. Johnson, B. L. (1998). Organizing for collaboration: A reconsideration of some basic organizing principles. In D. G. Pounder (Ed.), Restructuring schools for collaboration: Promises and pitfalls (pp. 9–25). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  40. Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2001). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop as leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  41. Keedy, J. L. (1999). Examining teacher instructional leadership within the small group dynamics of collegial groups. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(7), 785–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Killion, J. P. (1996). Moving beyond the school: Teacher leaders in the district office. In G. Moller & M. Katzenmeyer (Eds.), Every teacher as a leader: Realizing the potential of teacher leadership (pp. 63–84). San Francisco, NC: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  43. Klein, A. (2012a, April 15). What’s the payoff for $4.6 billion in School Improvement Grants? The Hechinger Report.Google Scholar
  44. Klein, A. (2012b). Turnaround momentum still fragile. Education Week, 31(28), 1–3.Google Scholar
  45. Kober, N., & Rentner, D. S. (2011). More to do, but less capacity to do it: States’ progress in implementing the Recovery Act education reforms. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.Google Scholar
  46. Kowal, J. M., & Hassel, E. A. (2005). Turnarounds with new leaders and staff (Vol. 43). Washington, DC: The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement.Google Scholar
  47. Kowalski, T. J. (1995). Preparing teachers to be leaders: Barriers in the work-place. In M. J. O’Hair & S. J. Odell (Eds.), Educating teachers for leadership and change (pp. 243–256). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  48. Kutash, J., Nico, E., Gorin, E., Rahmatullah, S., & Tallant, K. (2010). The school turnaround field guide. Boston, MA: Foundational Strategy Group.Google Scholar
  49. Lachlan-Hache, J., Naik, M., & Casserly, M. (2012). The School Improvement Grant rollout in America’s great city schools: School Improvement Grants. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.Google Scholar
  50. Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  51. Le Floch, K. C., O’Day, J., Birman, B., Hurlburt, S., Nayfack, M., Halloran, C., …, & Hulsey, L. (2016). Case studies of schools receiving School Improvement Grants: Final report (NCEE 2016-4002). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  52. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1999). Teachers: Transforming their world and their work. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  53. Lieberman, A., Saxl, E. R., & Miles, M. B. (1988). Teacher leadership: Ideology and practice. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), Building a professional culture in schools (pp. 148–166). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  54. Little, J. W. (1987). Teachers as colleagues. In V. Richardson-Koehler (Ed.), Educators’ handbook: A research perspective (pp. 491–518). White Plains, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
  55. Little, J. W. (1988). Assessing the prospects for teacher leadership. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), Building a professional culture in schools (pp. 78–105). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  56. Little, J. W. (1990). The perspective of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509–536.Google Scholar
  57. Little, J. W., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1993). Introduction. Perspectives on cultures and contexts of teaching. In J. W. Little & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), Teachers’ work: Individuals, colleagues, and contexts (pp. 1–8). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  58. Lortie, D. (1975). School teacher. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  59. Malen, B., Croninger, R., Muncey, D., & Redmond-Jones, D. (2002). Reconstituting schools: “Testing” the “theory of action”. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Manthei, J. (1992). The mentor teacher as leader: The motives, characteristics and needs of seventy-three experienced teachers who seek a new leadership role. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  61. Marsh, J. A., Strunk, K. O., & Bush, S. (2013). Portfolio district reform meets school turnaround: Early implementation findings from the Los Angeles Public School Choice Initiative. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(4), 498–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Marsh, J. A., Strunk, K. O., Bush-Mecenas, S. C., & Huguet, A. (2014). The evolving role of parents in the Los Angeles Public School Choice Initiative. Educational Policy, 29(1), 51–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mass Insight. (2010). School turnaround models emerging turnaround strategies and results. Boston, MA: Mass Insight.Google Scholar
  64. Mathis, W. J. (2009). NCLB’s ultimate restructuring alternatives: Do they improve the quality of education? Education Policy Research Unit. East Lansing, MI: The Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice.Google Scholar
  65. McGuinn, P. (2012). Stimulating reform: Race to the top, competitive grants and the Obama education agenda. Educational Policy, 26(1), 136–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. McMurrer, J. (2012a). Schools with federal improvement grants face challenges in replacing principals and teachers. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.Google Scholar
  67. McMurrer, J. (2012b). Changing the school climate is the first step to reform in many schools with federal improvement grants. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.Google Scholar
  68. McMurrer, J., & McIntosh, S. (2012). State implementation and perceptions of Title I School Improvement Grants under the Recovery Act: One year later. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.Google Scholar
  69. Mead, S. (2007). Easy way out. Education Next, 7(1), 52–56.Google Scholar
  70. Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1975). Notes on the structure of educational organizations: Revised version. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  71. Mitchell, A. (1997, Fall). Teacher identity: A key to increased collaboration. Action in Teacher Education, 19(3), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Murphy, J. (2005). Connecting teacher leadership and school improvement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  73. Murphy, J., Beck, L., Crawford, M., Hodges, A., & McGaughy, C. L. (2001). The productive high school: Creating personalized academic communities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  74. O’Day, J., & Bitter, C. (2003). Evaluation study of the immediate intervention/underperforming schools program and the high achieving. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.Google Scholar
  75. Odell, S. J. (1997). Preparing teachers for teacher leadership. Action in Teacher Education, 19(3), 120–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Peck, C., & Reitzug, U. C. (2014). School turnaround fever: The Paradoxes of a historical practice promoted as a new reform. Urban Education, 49(1), 8–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Pellicer, L. O., & Anderson, L. W. (1995). A handbook for teacher leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  78. Perlman, C. L., & Redding, S. (2011). Handbook on effective implementation of School Improvement Grants. Washington, DC: Center on Innovation & Improvement.Google Scholar
  79. Peurach, D. J., & Neumerski, C. M. (2015). Mixing metaphors: Building infrastructure for large scale school turnaround. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 379–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Picucci, A. C., Brownson, A., Kahlert, R., & Sobel, A. (2002a). Driven to succeed: High-performing, high-poverty, turnaround middle schools. Volume I: Cross-case analysis of high-performing, high-poverty, turnaround middle schools. Volume I. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana Center and the STAR Center at The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  81. Picucci, A. C., Brownson, A., Kahlert, R., & Sobel, A. (2002b). Driven to succeed: High-performing, high-poverty, turnaround middle schools. Volume II: Case studies of high-performing, high-poverty, turnaround middle schools. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana Center and the STAR Center at The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  82. Printy, S. M. (2004). The professional impact of communities of practice. UCEA Review, 46(1), 2023.Google Scholar
  83. Rhim, L. M., & Redding, S. (2014). The state role in school turnaround: Emerging best practices. San Francisco, NC: WestEd.Google Scholar
  84. Rosenberg, L., Christianson, M., Angus, M., Rosenthal, E., & Wei, T. (2014). A focused look at rural schools receiving School Improvement Grants. Washington, DC: National Center on Education and the Economy.Google Scholar
  85. Rosenberg, L., Christianson, M. D., & Angus, M. H. (2015). Improvement efforts in rural schools: Experiences of nine schools receiving School Improvement Grants. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(2), 194–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Rosenholtz, S. J. (1989). Teachers’ workplace: The social organization of schools. White Plains, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
  87. Schmidt-Davis, J., & Bottoms, G. (2012). Turnaround high school principals: Recruit, prepare and empower leaders of change. High schools that work. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board.Google Scholar
  88. Scott, C. (2008). A call to restructure restructuring: Lessons from the No Child Left behind Act in five states. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.Google Scholar
  89. Scott, C. (2009). Improving low-performing schools: Lessons from five years of studying school restructuring Under No Child Left Behind. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.Google Scholar
  90. Scott, C. (2011a). Changing tires en route: Michigan rolls out millions in School Improvement Grants. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.Google Scholar
  91. Scott, C., & McMurrer, J. (2015). Mission impossible? What states with large percentages of rural schools tell us about federal School Improvement Grants. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(2), 211–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Scott, C., McMurrer, J., McIntosh, S., & Dibner, K. (2012). Opportunities and obstacles: Implementing stimulus-funded School Improvement Grants in Maryland, Michigan, and Idaho. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.Google Scholar
  93. Scott, G. A. (2011b). Race to the Top: Reform efforts are under way and information sharing could be improved. Report to Congressional Committees. GAO-11-658. Washington, DC: US Government Accountability Office.Google Scholar
  94. Sergiovanni, T. J. (1991). The principalship: A reflective practice perspective (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  95. Silva, D. Y., Gimbert, B., & Nolan, J. (2000). Sliding the doors: Locking and unlocking possibilities for teacher leadership. Teachers College Record, 102(4), 779–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Smylie, M. A. (1992). Teacher participation in school decision making: Assessing willingness to participate. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(1), 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Smylie, M. A. (1995). New perspectives on teacher leadership. The Elementary School Journal, 96(1), 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Smylie, M. A. (1996). Research on teacher leadership: Assessing the state of the art. In B. J. Biddle, T. L. Good, & I. F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of teachers and teaching (pp. 521–592). Dordrecht, The Netherlands/Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  99. Smylie, M. A., & Brownlee-Conyers, J. (1992). Teacher leaders and their principals: Exploring the development of new working relationships. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(2), 150–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Smylie, M. A., Conley, S., & Marks, H. M. (2002). Exploring new approaches to teacher leadership for school improvement. In J. Murphy (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century (pp. 162–188). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  101. Smylie, M. A., & Hart, A. W. (1999). School leadership for teacher learning: A human and social capital development perspective. In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed., pp. 421–441). San Francisco, NC: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  102. Steiner, L. (2009). Tough decisions: Closing persistently low-performing schools. Lincoln, IL: Academic Development Institute.Google Scholar
  103. Stone, M., Horejs, J., & Lomas, A. (1997, Fall). Commonalities and differences in teacher leadership at the elementary, middle, and high school level. Action in Teacher Education, 19(3), 49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Strunk, K. O., Marsh, J. A., Hashim, A., Bush, S., & Weinstein, T. (2012). The efficacy of the Los Angeles Unified School District Public School Choice Initiative for student achievement outcomes: Early evidence from the first year. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California.Google Scholar
  105. Suleiman, M., & Moore, R. (1997). Teachers’ roles revisited: Beyond classroom management. Paper presented at the ATE summer workshop, Tarpon Springs, FL.Google Scholar
  106. Sykes, G., & Elmore, R. F. (1989). Making schools manageable. In J. Hannaway & R. Crowson (Eds.), The politics of reforming school administration. 1988 Yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (pp. 77–94). New York, NY: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  107. Tanenbaum, C., Boyle, A., Graczewski, C., James-Burdumy, S., Dragoset, L., Hallgren, K., et al. (2015). State capacity to support school turnaround. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.Google Scholar
  108. Thompson, C. L., Brown, K. M., Townsend, L. W., Henry, G. T., & Fortner, C. K. (2011). Turning around North Carolina’s lowest achieving schools (2006–2010). Chapel Hill, NC: Consortium for Educational Research and Evaluation.Google Scholar
  109. Wasley, P. A. (1991). Teachers who lead: The rhetoric of reform and realities of practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  110. Weick, K. E. (1976, March). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Whitaker, T. (1995). Informed teacher leadership—The key to successful change in the middle level school. NASSP Bulletin, 79(567), 76–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Wilson, M. (1993, March). The search for teacher leaders. Educational Leadership, 50(6), 24–27.Google Scholar
  113. Yatsko, S., Lake, R., Bowen, M., & Cooley Nelson, E. (2015). Federal School Improvement Grants (SIGs): How capacity and local conditions matter. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(1), 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Yatsko, S., Lake, R., Nelson, E. C., & Bowen, M. (2012). Tinkering toward transformation: A look at federal School Improvement Grant implementation. Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph F. Murphy
    • 1
  • Joshua F. Bleiberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Peabody CollegeVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations