The study reported in this article examined the relationship between members of a restructuring network and the members'formal district systems. Using the lens of new institutional theory, the article explores the unintended consequences of changing individual schools outside the context of the district to which each network member belonged. The findings revealed the institutional scripts that disrupted or constrained organizational learning within district systems despite the successful restructuring efforts in individual schools.
Anderson, L., & Shirley, J. R. (1995, June). High school principals and school reform: Lessons learned from a statewide study of Project Re:Learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31, 405-423.
2.
Argyris, C. (1986). Skilled incompetence. Harvard Business Review, 64 (5), 74-79.
Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
5.
Beer, M.& Eisenstat, R. (1996). Developing an organizational capable of implementing strategy and learning. Human Relations, 49 (5), 597-619.
6.
Benson, K. J. (1977). Organizations: Adialectical view. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 1-13.
7.
Berends, M., Bodilly, S., & Kirby, S. (2002, October). Looking back over a decade of wholeschool reform: The experience of New American Schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 84 (2), 168-175.
8.
Berends, M., Chun, J., Schuyler, G., Stockly, S.,& Briggs, R. J. (2002). Challenges of conflicting school reforms: Effects of New American Schools in a high-poverty district (MR-1483-EDU). Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/publications/electronic/ed.html
9.
Bjork, L., & Richardson, M. (1997). Institutional barriers to educational leadership training: A case study. The Educational Forum, 62, 74-81.
10.
Blase, J.,& Blase, J. R. (1994). Empowering teachers: What successful principals do. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
11.
Bodilly, S. J. (1998). Lessons from New American Schools scale up phase: Prospects for bringing designs to multiple schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/publications/electronic/ed.html
12.
Bogatch, I.,& Brooks, C. (1994). Linking school level innovations with an urban school district's central office. Journal of School Leadership, 4,12-27.
13.
Byrk, A., Camburn, E., & Louis, K. (1999). Professional community in Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35,751-781.
14.
Conley, D. T. (1997). Roadmap to restructuring: Charting the course of change in American Education. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management.
15.
Cook, S., & Yanov, D. (1996). Culture and organizational learning. In M. Cohen & L. Sproull (Eds.), Organizational learning (pp. 430-459). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
Corcoran, T., Fuhrman, S.,& Belcher, C. (2001). The district role in instructional improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 83 (1), 78-84.
17.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1992). Reframing the school reform agenda. The School Administrator, 4 (9), 22-27.
18.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1995). Policy for restructuring. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), The work of restructuring schools: Building from the ground up. New York: Teachers College Press.
19.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). The right to learn and the advancement of teaching: Research, policy, and practice for democratic education. Educational Researcher, 25 (6), 5-17.
20.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
21.
Eisner, E. (1985). The art of educational evaluation. London: Falmer.
22.
Fay, B. (1987). Critical social science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
23.
Fligstein, N. (1985). The spread of the multidivisional form among large firms, 1919-1979. American Sociological Review, 50, 377-391.
24.
Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer.
25.
Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London: Falmer.
26.
Giroux, H. (1988). Schooling and the struggle for public life. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
27.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
28.
Goldsberry, L. (1995). The evolution of a restructuring school: The New Suncook case. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), The work of restructuring schools (pp. 136-156). New York: Teachers College Press.
29.
Hanson, D. (2001, December). Institutional theory and educational change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 637-661.
30.
Hargreaves, A., Earl, L., & Ryan, J. (1996). Schooling for change. London: Falmer.
31.
Keedy, J. (1994). The twin engines of school reform for the 90's. Journal of School Leadership, 4, 94-111.
32.
Kofman, F., & Senge, P. (1993). Communities of commitment: The heart of learning organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 22 (2), 5-23.
33.
Lashway, L. (1998). Creating the learning organization. ERIC Digest (No. 121). Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management.
34.
Leithwood, K., Lawrence, L.,& Sharrett, L. (1998). Conditions fostering organizational learning in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34, 243-276.
35.
Leithwood, K., & Steinbach, R. (1995). Expert problem solving: Evidence from school and district leaders. New York: SUNY Press.
36.
Lieberman, A., & Grolnick, M. (1996). Networks and reform in American education. Teachers College Record, 98 (1), 7-45.
37.
Lieberman, A., & Grolnick, M. (1997). Networks, reform, and the professional development of teachers. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), Rethinking educational change with heart and mind (pp. 192-215). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
38.
Lieberman, A.,& McLaughlin, M. (1992). Networks for educational change: Powerful and problematic. Phi Delta Kappan, 73 (9), 591-596.
39.
Louis, K. S., & Miles, M. (1990). Improving the urban high school: What works and why. New York: Teachers College Press.
40.
Mawhinney, H. (1994). Institutional effects of strategic efforts at community enrichment. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 324-341.
41.
McTaggert, R. (2001). Guiding principles for participatory action research. In C. Conrad, J. Grant Haworth, & L. Lattuca (Eds.), Qualitative research in higher education: ASHE reader series (pp. 263-274). Needham Heights, MA: Pearson Custom.
42.
Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1983). The structure of educational organizations. In J. Meyer & R. Scott (Eds.), Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality (pp. 71-98). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
43.
Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1991). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. In P. DiMaggio & W. Powell (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 41-62). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
Mitchell, D. (1996). Institutional theory and the social structure of education. In R. Crowson, W. L. Boyd,& H. Mawhinney, (Eds.), The politics of education and the new institutionalism: Reinventing the American school (pp. 167-188). Washington, DC: Falmer.
45.
Mitchell, J., & Rusch, E. (1995, April). Restructuring schools: The power of principal efficacy. Paper presented to Division A at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
46.
Mumby, D. (1988). Communication and power in organizations: Discourse, ideology, and domination. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
47.
Newmann, F., & Wehlege, G. (1995). Successful school restructuring. Madison: University of Wisconsin.
48.
Ogawa, R.,& Bossert, S. (1995). Leadership as an organizational quality. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31, 224-243.
49.
Rorrer, A. (2002, Fall). Educational leadership and institutional capacity for equity. UCEA Review, 43 (3), 1-4.
50.
Rorrer, A. (2003, November). Deinstitutionalizing inequity: Straddling the margin of tolerance. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the University Council for Educational Administration, Portland, Oregon.
51.
Rowan, B.,& Miskel, C. (1999). Institutional theory and the study of educational organizations. In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration: A project of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 359-383). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
52.
Rusch, E. A. (1994). Gaining voice: Democratic praxis in restructured schools. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.
53.
Rusch, E. A. (1998). The perils of Pathfinders: Acase study of the micropolitics of a restructuring network. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, California.
54.
Schein, E. (1994). Organizational and managerial culture as a facilitator or inhibitor of organizational learning. Organizational and managerial culture: Working papers. Retrieved from http://learning.mit.edu/res/wp/10004/html
55.
Scott, W. R.,& Meyer, J. (1991). The organization of societal sectors. In P. J. DiMaggio& W. W. Powell (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organization analysis (pp. 108-140). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
56.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday.
57.
Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G.,& Smith, B. (1999). The dance of change. New York: Doubleday.
58.
Shor, I., & Friere, P. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: Dialogues on transforming education. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
59.
Sizer, T. (1995, February). On lasting school reform: Aconversation with Ted Sizer. Educational Leadership, 52 (5), 4-9.
60.
Slavin, R. (1998). Showme the evidence! Proven and promising programs for America's schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
61.
Smythe, J. (Ed.). (1989). Critical perspectives on educational leadership. Philadelphia: Falmer.
62.
Stake, R. (1998). Case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
63.
Tewel, K. J. (1995). New schools for a new century. Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press.
64.
Wheatley, M. (1993). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
65.
Wohlstetter, P., & Smith, A. (March, 2000). A different approach to systemic reform: Network structures in Los Angeles. Phi Delta Kappa, 81 (7), 508-515.
