Data, Dyads, and dynamics: Exploring data use and social networks in educational improvement

Teachers College Record

Volumn 114, Issue 11, 2012, Pages

  Daly, Alan J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875064729     PISSN: 01614681     EISSN: 14679620     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (207)

1. Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17-40.
2. Agullard, K., & Goughnour, D. S. (2006). Central office inquiry: Assessing organization, roles, and actions to support school improvement. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
3. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425-455.
4. Anderson, L. (2010). Embedded, emboldened, and (net)working for change: Supportseeking and teacher agency in urban, high-needs schools. Harvard Educational Review, 80(4), 541-572.
5. Ansell, C., Reckhow, S., & Kelly, A. (2009). How to reform a reform coalition: Outreach, agenda expansion, and brokerage in urban school reform. Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 717-743.
6. 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 Education Press.
7. Baker, W. E., & Iyer, A. (1992). Information networks and market behavior. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 16, 305-332.
8. Baker-Doyle, K. J., & Yoon, S. A. (2010). Making expertise transparent: Using technology to strengthen social networks in teacher professional development. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 115-126). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
9. Bakkenes, I., De Brabander, C., & Imants, J. (1999). Teacher isolation and communication network analysis in primary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 166-202.
10. Balkundi, P., & Harrison, D. (2006). Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inferences about network structures effects on team viability and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 49-68.
11. Balkundi, P., & Kilduff, M. (2005). The ties that lead: A social network approach to leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 941-961.
12. Bidwell, C. E. (2001). Analyzing schools as organizations: Long-term permanence and short-term change. Sociology of Education, 1(Extra Issue), 100-114.
13. Booher-Jennings, J. (2005). Below the bubble: "Educational triage" and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 231-268.
14. Borgatti, S. P. (2003). The key player problem. In R. Breiger, K. Carley, & P. Pattison (Eds.), Dynamic social network modeling and analysis: Workshop summary and papers (pp. 241-252). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences Press.
15. Borgatti, S., & Cross, R. (2003). A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 49(4), 432-445.
16. Borgatti, S., & Everett, M. (1999). Models of core periphery structures. Social Networks, 21, 375-395.
17. Borgatti, S., & Foster, P. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991-1013.
18. Borgatti, S., Jones, C., & Everett, M. (1998). Network measures of social capital. Connections, 21, 27-36.
19. Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323, 892-895.
20. 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 Education Press.
21. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
22. Boudett, K. P., City, E. A., & Murnane, R. J. (2007). Data wise: A step-by-step guide to using assessment results to improve teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
23. Boudett, K. P., & Moody, L. (2005). Organizing for collaborative work. In K. P. Boudett, E. A. City, & R. J. Murnane (Eds.), Datawise: A step-by-step guide to using assessment results to improve teaching and learning (pp. 11-28). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
24. Boyd, N. G., & Taylor, R. R. (1998). A developmental approach to the examination of friendship in leader follower relationships. Leadership Quarterly, 9, 1-25.
25. Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the right place at the right time: A structural analysis of individual differences in an organization. Administration Science Quarterly, 29, 518-539.
26. 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.
27. Brunner, C., Fasca, C., Heinze, J., Honey, M., Light, D., Mandinach, E., & Wexler, D. (2005). Linking data and learning: The Grow Net work study. Journal of Education for Stu dents Placed at Risk, 10(3), 241-267.
28. Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for school improvement. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
29. Burch, P. (2006). The new educational privatization: Educational contrasting and high stakes accountability. Teachers College Record, 108(12), 2582-2610.
30. Burt, R. S. (1982). Toward a structural theory of action. New York, NY: Academic Press.
31. Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. Burt, R. S. (1997). A note on social capital and network content. Social Networks, 19(4), 355-373.
33. 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, CT: JAI Press.
34. Burt, R. S. (2005). Brokerage and closure: An introduction to social capital. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
35. Camburn, E., Rowan, B., & Taylor, J. (2003). Distributed leadership in schools: The case of elementary schools adopting comprehensive school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(4), 347-373.
36. Celio, M. B., & Harvey, J. (2005). Buried treasure: Developing an effective management guide from mountains of educational data. Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education.
37. Chen, E., Heritage, M., & Lee, J. (2005). Identifying and monitoring students' learning needs with technology. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(3), 309-332.
38. Choppin, J. (2002, April). Data use in prac tice: Examples from the school level. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
39. Christensen, C. M., Johnson, C., & Horn, M. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
40. 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.
41. Coburn, C. E. (2005). Shaping teacher sensemaking: School leaders and the enactment of reading policy. Educational Policy, 19, 476-509.
42. Coburn, C. E. (2010). Partnership for District Reform: The challenges of evidence use in a major urban district. In C. E. Coburn & M. K. Stein (Eds.), Research and practice in education: Building alliances, bridging the divide (pp. 167-182). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.
43. Coburn, C. E., Choi, L., & Mata, W. (2010). "I would go to her because her mind is math": Network formation in the context of a district-based mathematics reform. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 77-95). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
44. Coburn, C. E., Honig, M. I., & Stein, M. K. (2009). 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.
45. Coburn, C. E., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District policy and teachers' social networks. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203-235.
46. Coburn, C. E., & Talbert, J. E. (2006). Conceptions of evidence use in school districts: Mapping the terrain. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 469-495.
47. Coburn, C. E., Touré, J., & Yamashita, M. (2009). Evidence, interpretation, and persuasion: Instructional decision making in the district central office. Teachers College Record, 111(4), 1115-1161.
48. Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
49. Cole, R. P., & Weinbaum, E. H. (2007, April). Chain reaction: How teacher communication networks change individual attitudes about reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
50. Cole, R. P., & Weinbaum, E. H. (2010). Changes in attitude: Peer influence in high school reform. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 77-96). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
51. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120.
52. 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, CA: Jossey-Bass.
53. Confrey, J., Makar, K., & Kazak, S. (2004). Undertaking data analysis of student outcomes as professional development for teachers. ZDM, 36(1), 1-9.
54. Constant, D., Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1996). The kindness of strangers: On the usefulness of weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science, 7, 119-135.
55. Copland, M. A. (2003). Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 375-395.
56. Cromey, A., & Hanson, M. (2000). An ex ploratory analysis of school-based stu dent assessment systems. Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
57. Cross, R. (2001). A relational view of information seeking: Tapping people and inanimate sources in intentional search. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, D.C.
58. 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.
59. 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.
60. Cummings, J., & Cross, R. (2003). Structural properties of work groups and their consequences for performance. Social Networks, 25, 197-210.
61. Daly, A. J. (Ed.). (2010). Social network theory and educational change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
62. Daly, A. J., & Chrispeels, J. (2008). A question of trust: Predictive conditions for adaptive and technical leadership in educational contexts. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7(1), 30-63.
63. 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.
64. Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. (2010). Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 111, 111-138.
65. 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.
66. Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. (in press). Exploring the space between: Social networks, trust, and urban school district leaders. Journal of School Leadership.
67. Daly, A. J., Moolenaar, N., Bolivar, J., & Burke, P. (2010). Relationships in reform: The role of teachers' social networks. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(3), 20-49.
68. Datnow, A., Hubbard, L., & Mehan, H. (2002). Extending educational reform: From one school to many. London, England: Routledge/Falmer.
69. 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, NY: Routledge.
70. 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.
71. Degenne, A., & Forsé, M. (1999). Introducing social networks. London, England: Sage.
72. Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers' instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81-112.
73. Diamond, J. B. (2006, August). Where the rubber meets the road: Rethinking the connection between high-stakes testing policy and classroom practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
74. Diamond, J. B., & Cooper, K. (2007). The uses of testing data in urban elementary schools: Some lessons from Chicago. NSSE Yearbook, 106(1), 241-263.
75. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2002). Leading schools in a data-rich world. In K. Leithwood, P. Hallinger, G. Furman, P. Gronn, J. MacBeath, B. Mulford, & K. Riley (Eds.), The second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 1003-1022). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
76. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2006). Leading schools in a data-rich world. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
77. Feldman, J., & Tung, R. (2001, April). Whole school reform: How schools use the data-based inquiry and decision making process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
78. Fernandez, R. M., & Gould, R. V. (1994). A dilemma of state power: Brokerage and influence in the national health policy domain. American Journal of Sociology, 99, 1455-1491.
79. 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.
80. 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, MA: Blackwell.
81. Forman, M. L. (2007). Developing an action plan: Two Rivers Public Charter School fo cuses on instruction. In K. P. Boudett & J. L. Steele (Eds.), Data wise in action: Stories of schools using data to improve teaching and learning (pp. 107-124). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
82. Frank, K. A. (2009). Quasi-ties: Directing resources to members of a collective. American Behavioral Scientist, 52, 1613-1645.
83. Frank, K., Kim, C. M., & Belman, D. (2010). Utility theory, social networks, and teacher decision making: Modeling networks' influences on teachers attitudes and practices. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), The ties of change: Social network theory and application in education (pp. 233-242). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.
84. Frank, K., & Zhao, Y. (2005). Subgroups as a meso-level entity in the social organization of schools. In L. Hedges & B. Schneider (Eds.), Social organization of schools (pp. 279-318). New York, NY: Sage.
85. Frank, K. A., Zhao, Y., & Borman, K. (2004). Social capital and the diffusion of innovations within organizations: Application to the implementation of computer technology in schools. Sociology of Education, 77(2), 148-171.
86. Frank, K. A., Zhao, Y., Penuel, W. R., Ellefson, N., & Porter, S. (2011). Focus, fiddle, and friends: Experiences that transform knowledge for the implementation of innovations. Sociology of Education, 84(2), 137-156.
87. Friedkin, N. E. (2004). Social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 409-425.
88. Ghoshal, S., Korine, H., & Szulanski, G. (1994). Interunit communication in multinational corporations. Management Science, 40(1), 96-110.
89. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510.
90. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.
91. Granovetter, M. S. (1982). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. In P. V. Marsden & N. Lin (Eds.), Social structure and network analysis (pp. 105-130). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
92. Grossman, P. L., & Stodolsky, S. S. (1995). Content as context: The role of school subjects in secondary school teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(8), 5-11.
93. Gulati, R. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choices in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 85-112.
94. Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293-317.
95. Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked expertise: Professional and educational perspectives. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
96. Halverson, R., Grigg, J., Prichett, R., & Thomas, C. (2007). The new instructional leadership: Creating data-driven instructional systems in school. Journal of School Leadership, 17(2), 159-194.
97. Hamilton, L., Halverson, R., Jackson, S., Mandinach, E., Supovitz, J., & Wayman, J. (2009). Using student achievement data to support instructional decision making (NCEE 2009-4067). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practiceguides/dddm_pg_092909.pdf.
98. 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, CA: RAND.
99. Hammerman, J. K., & Rubin, A. (2002). Visualizing a statistical world. Hands On!, 25(2).
100. Hansen, M. (2002). Knowledge networks: Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 13(3), 232-248.
101. Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
102. Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers' work and culture in the postmodern age. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
103. Heritage, M., & Yeagley, R. (2005). Data use and school improvement: Challenges and prospects. NSSE Yearbook, 104(2), 320-339.
104. Herman, J., & Gribbons, B. (2001). Lessons learned in using data to support school in quiry and continuous improvement: Final report to the Stuart Foundation. Los Ange les: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.
105. Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371-406.
106. Hite, J. M., Hite, S. J., Mugimu, C. B., & Nsubuga, Y. K. (2010). Strategic "co-opetition": Headteacher networking in Uganda's secondary schools. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 197-220). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.
107. Holcomb, E. L. (2001). Asking the right questions: Techniques for collaboration and school change (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
108. 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.
109. 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.
110. Honig, M. I., & Ikemoto, G. (2008). Adaptive assistance for learning improvement efforts: The case of the Institute for Learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 328-363.
111. Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (1999). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
112. Ikemoto, G. S., & Marsh, J. A. (2007). Cutting through the "data driven" mantra: Different conceptions of data-driven decision making. NSSE Yearbook, 106(1), 105-131.
113. Ingram, D., Louis, K. S., & Schroeder, R. G. (2004). Accountability policies and teacher decision making: Barriers to the use of data to improve practice. Teachers College Record, 106, 1258-1287.
114. Jackson, M. O. (2009). An overview of social networks and economic applications. In J. Benhabib, A. Bisin, & M. O. Jackson (Eds.), The handbook of social economics (pp. 1-96). New York, NY: Elsevier Press.
115. Jones, C., Hesterly, W. S., & Borgatti, S. P. (1997). A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 22(4), 911-945.
116. Keeney, L. (1998). Using data for school improvement: Report on the second practitioners' conference for Annenberg Challenge sites. Tools for Accountability Project, Houston, TX. Retrieved from http://annenberginstitute.org/tools/using_data/using_data.pdf
117. 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.
118. Kilduff, M., & Krackhardt, D. (2008). Interpersonal networks in organizations: Cognition, personality, dynamics, and culture: Structural analysis in the social sciences. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
119. Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2003). Social networks and organizations. London, England: Sage.
120. 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, MA: National Society for the Study of Education.
121. Krackhardt, D. (1992). The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations. In N. Nohria & R. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form and action: (pp. 216-239). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
122. Krackhardt, D. (1996). Social networks and the liability of newness for managers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 3, 159-173.
123. Krackhardt, D. (1999). The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations. In S. B. Bacharach, S. B. Andrews, & D. Knoke (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations (pp. 183-210). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
124. Krackhardt, D., & Kilduff, M. (1990). Friendship patterns and culture: The control of organizational diversity. American Anthropologist, 92, 142-154.
125. Lachat, M. A., & Smith, S. (2005). Practices that support data use in urban high schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(3), 333-349.
126. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
127. Levine, T. H., & Marcus, A. S. (2010). How the structure and focus of teachers' collaborative activities facilitate and constrain teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 389-398.
128. Lima, J. A. (2003). Trained for isolation: The impact of departmental cultures on student teachers' views and practices of collaboration. Journal of Education for Teaching, 29(3), 197-218.
129. Lima, J. A. (2007). Teachers' professional development in departmentalized, loosely coupled organizations: Lessons for school improvement from a case study of two curriculum departments. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 18(3), 273-301.
130. Little, J. W. (2007). Teachers' accounts of classroom experience as a resource for professional learning and instructional decision making. In P. A. Moss (Ed.), Evidence and decision making (pp. 217-240). Malden, MA: National Society for the Study of Education.
131. 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.
132. Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K. L., & Anderson, S. E. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Retrieved from http://www.wallacefoundation. org/KnowledgeCenter/KnowledgeTopics/CurrentAreasofFocus/Educa tionLeadership/Documents/Learning-from-Leadership-Investigating-Links-Final- Report.pdf
133. Makar, K., & Confrey, J. (2002). Comparing two distributions: Investigating secondary teachers' statistical thinking. Retrieved from http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/ 1/10_18_ma.pdf
134. Mandinach, E. B., & Honey, M. (2008). Data-driven school improvement: Linking data and learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
135. Marsh, J. A., McCombs, J. S., Martorell, F. (2010). How instructional coaches support datadriven decision making: Policy implementation and effects in Florida middle schools. Educational Policy, 24(6), 872-907.
136. Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, L. S. (2006). Making sense of data-driven de cision making in education: Evidence from recent RAND research (OP-170). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
137. McFarland, D. A. (2004). Resistance as a social drama-A study of change-oriented encounters. American Journal of Sociology, 109(6), 1249-1318.
138. McFarland, D. A. (2005). Why work when you can play? Dynamics of formal and informal organization in classrooms. In L. Hedges & B. Schneider (Eds.), The social organization of schooling (pp. 147-174). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
139. McFarland, D. A. (2006). Curricular flows: Trajectories, turning points, and assignment criteria in high school math careers. Sociology of Education, 79, 177-205.
140. McGrath, C., & Krackhardt, D. (2003). Network conditions for organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(3), 324-336.
141. McLaughlin, M. W. (1990). The Rand change agent study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19(9), 11-16.
142. Means, B., Gallagher, L., & Padilla, C. (2007). Teachers' use of student data management systems to improve instruction. Report prepared for U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
143. Mieles, T., & Foley, E. (2005). From data to decisions: Lessons from school districts using data warehousing. Providence, RI: Annenberg.
144. Mohrman, S., Tenkasi, R., & Mohrman, A. (2003). The role of networks in fundamental organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(3), 301-323.
145. Moolenaar, N. M. (2010). Ties with potential: Nature, antecedents, and consequences of social networks in school teams. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
146. Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., & Sleegers, P. J. (2010). Occupying the principal position: Examining relationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and schools' innovative climate. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 623-670.
147. Moolenaar, N., Daly, A. J., & Sleegers, P. (2011). Ties with potential: Social network structure and innovation in Dutch schools. Teachers College Record, 113(9), 1983-2017.
148. Moretti, F. (2011). Library lab: Network theory, plot analysis. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University.
149. Morrison, E. W. (2002). Newcomers' relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1149-1160.
150. Newman, M. E. J., Barabasi, A. L., & Watts, D. J. (2006). The structure and dynamics of networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
151. Obstfeld, D. (2005). Social networks, the Tertius Iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 100-130.
152. 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. Elementary School Journal, 110(3), 323-346.
153. Penuel, W. R., Riel, M., Joshi, A., Pearlman, L., Kim, C. M., & Frank, K. A. (2010). The alignment of the informal and formal organizational supports for reform: Implications for improving teaching in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(1), 57-95.
154. 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.
155. Pil, F., & Leana, C. (2009) Applying organization research to public school reform. Academy of Management Journal, 52(6), 1101-1124.
156. Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
157. Portz, J. (1996). Problem definitions and policy agendas: Shaping the educational agenda in Boston. Policy Studies Journal, 24(3), 371-386.
158. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. IV., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116-145.
159. Provan, K. G., & Sebastian, J. (1998). Networks within networks: Service link overlap, organizational cliques, and network effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 453-462.
160. Raider, H., & Krackhardt, D. (2001). Intraorganizational networks. In J. A. C. Baum (Ed.), Companion to organizations (pp. 58-74). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
161. Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240-267.
162. Ritter, G. W., & Boruch, R. F. (1999). The political and institutional origins of a randomized controlled trial on elementary and school class size. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21, 111-126.
163. Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
164. Schildkamp, K., & Kuiper, W. (2010). Data informed curriculum reform: Which data, what purposes, and promoting and hindering factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 482-496.
165. Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
166. Sherer, J. Z., & Spillane, J. P. (2010). Constancy and change in work practice in schools: The role of organizational routines. Teachers College Record, 113(3), 611-657.
167. Simmel, G. (1950). The sociology of Georg Simmel (K. Wolff, Comp. & Trans). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
168. Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., & Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of how urban school systems improve student achievement. Washington, DC: MDRC and the Council of Great City Schools.
169. Song, S., Nerur, S., & Teng, J. (2007). An exploratory study on the roles of network structure and knowledge processing orientation in the work unit knowledge management. Advances in Information Systems, 38(2), 8-26.
170. Spillane, J. P. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers' efforts to reconstruct their practice: The mediating role of teachers' zones of enactment. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 143-175.
171. 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.
172. Spillane, J. P., Healey, K., & Kim, C. M. (2010). Leading and managing instruction: Using social network analysis to explore formal and informal aspects of the elementary school organization. In A. J. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 129-156). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
173. Spillane, J. P., Hunt, B., & Healey, K. (2009). Managing and leading elementary schools: Attending to the formal and informal organization. International Studies in Educational Administration, 37(1), 5-28.
174. 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.
175. Stringfield, S., Wayman, J. C., & Yakimowski-Srebnick, M. E. (2005). Scaling up data use in classrooms, schools, and districts. In C. Dede, J. P. Honan, & L. C. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 133-152). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
176. Stuart, T. E. (1998). Network positions and propensities to collaborate: An investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high-technology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 43, 668-698.
177. Supovitz, J., & Klein, V. (2003). Mapping a course for improved student learning: How innovative schools use student performance data to guide improvement. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
178. Supovitz, J. A., Merrill, E., & Conger, M. (2010, April). Productive teacher use of student performance and related data in professional learning communities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.
179. Symonds, K. W. (2004). After the test: Closing the achievement gaps with data. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates. Retrieved from http://www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/ symonds.pdf
180. Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 27-43.
181. Taylor, R. R., Hanlon, S. C., & Boyd, N. G. (1992). Can leaders and subordinates be friends? A classroom approach for addressing an important managerial dilemma. Journal of Management Education, 16, 39-55.
182. Tenkasi, R., & Chesmore, M. (2003). Social networks and planned organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(3), 281-300.
183. Thornton, P. H. (1999). The sociology of entrepreneurship. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 19-46.
184. Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996-1004.
185. Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476.
186. Tschannen-Moran, M. (2004). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
187. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development. (2010). Use of education data at the local level from accountability to instructional improvement (Contract No. ED-01-CO-0040). Washington, DC: Author.
188. Useem, E. L., Christman, J. B., Gold, E., & Simon, E. (1997). Reforming alone: Barriers to organizational learning in urban school change initiatives. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 2(1), 55-78.
189. Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61, 674-698.
190. Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35-67.
191. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1998). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
192. Wayman, J. C. (2005). Involving teachers in data-driven decision making: Using computer data systems to support teacher inquiry and reflection. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(3), 295-308.
193. Wayman, J. C., Brewer, C., & Stringfield, S. (2009, April). Leadership for effective data use. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
194. Wayman, J. C., & Cho, V. (2008). Preparing educators to effectively use student data systems. In T. J. Kowalski & T. J. Lasley (Eds.), Handbook on data-based decision-making in education (pp. 89-104). New York, NY: Routledge.
195. 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: University of Texas.
196. Wayman, J. C., Snodgrass Rangel, V. W., Jimerson, J. B., & Cho, V., (2010). Improving data use in NISD: Becoming a Data-Informed District. Austin: University of Texas.
197. 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.
198. Wayman, J. C., Stringfield, S., & Yakimowski, M. (2004). Software enabling school improvement through the analysis of student data. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk.
199. Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council.
200. Weick, K. E. (1985). Cosmos vs. chaos: Sense and nonsense in electronic contexts. Organizational Dynamics, 14(2), 50-64.
201. Weinbaum, E. H., Cole, R. P., Weiss, M. J., & Supovitz, J. A. (2008). Going with the flow: Communication and reform in high schools. In J. A. Supovitz & E. H. Weinbaum (Eds.), The implementation gap (pp. 68-102). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
202. Wellman, B., & Berkowitz, S. D. (1998). Social structures: A network approach. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
203. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
204. 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.
205. Yayavaram, S., & Ahuja, G. (2008). Impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledgebase malleability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53( 2), 333-362.
206. Young, V. M. (2006). Teachers' use of data: Loose coupling, agenda setting, and team norms. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 521-548.
207. Young, V. (2008). Supporting teachers' use of data: The role of organization and policy. In E. B. Mandinach & M. Honey (Eds.), Data driven school improvement: Linking data and learning (pp. 87-106). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.