Purpose: School leaders are central to the development of work-related ties among school staff. Although prior work has examined the predictors of the presence of work-related ties, little is known about the breakup or dissolution of ties among school staff. This study examines the extent of tie dissolution among school staff, as well as both the individual- and organizational-level predictors of the breakup of ties. Research Methods: This study uses social network analysis of 4 years of survey data from 14 elementary schools in one suburban U.S. district. Social network models predict the likelihood of the breakup of a tie between school staff in three types of networks: close colleague networks, and instructional advice networks in mathematics and language arts. Findings: Work-related ties between school staff dissolve at high rates from year to year, and ties that dissolve generally do not re-form. Aspects of the formal school organization—particularly changing grade levels and losing leadership positions—predict the breakup of ties, while individual-level factors such as commitment to the school, perceptions of school leadership, and beliefs about instruction generally do not predict tie dissolution. Implications for Research and Practice: School leaders should carefully consider grade reassignments and changes in leadership positions, as these changes strongly predict the breakup of ties between school staff. School leaders should also invest in the promotion and maintenance of cross-grade ties after changes to grade-level assignments.
AdkinsC. L. (1995). Previous work experience and organizational socialization: A longitudinal examination. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 839-862.
2.
BarrR.DreebenR. (1983). How schools work. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3.
BidwellC. E. (1965). The school as a formal organization. In MarchJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 972-1022). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
4.
BidwellC. E.KasardaJ. D. (1987). Structuring in organizations: Ecosystem theory evaluated. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
5.
BlazarD. (2015). Grade assignments and the teacher pipeline: A low-cost lever to improve student achievement?Educational Researcher, 44, 213-227.
6.
BourdieuP. (1986). The forms of capital. In RichardsonJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York, NY: Greenwood.
7.
BratterJ. L.KingR. B. (2008). “But will it last?” Marital instability among interracial and same-race couples. Family Relations, 57, 160-171.
8.
Bridwell-MitchellE. N.CoocN. (2016). The ties that bind: How social capital is forged and forfeited in teacher communities. Educational Researcher, 45, 7-17.
9.
BrownellM. T.YeagerE.RennellsM. S.RileyT. (1997). Teachers working together: What teacher educators and researchers should know. Teacher Education and Special Education, 20, 340-359.
10.
BrykA. S.SchneiderB. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
11.
BrykA. S.SebringP. B.AllensworthE.LuppescuS.EastonJ. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
12.
BurtR. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 345-423.
13.
CamburnE.RowanB.TaylorJ. E. (2003). Distributed leadership in schools: The case of elementary schools adopting comprehensive school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 347-373.
14.
CarlisleJ. F.BerebitskyD. (2010). Literacy coaching as a component of professional development. Reading and Writing, 24, 773-800.
15.
ChooC. W. (2002). Sensemaking, knowledge creation and decision making: Organizational knowing as emergent strategy. In ChooC. W.BontisN. (Eds.), Strategic management of intellectual capital and organizational knowledge (pp. 79-88). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
16.
CoburnC. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 145-170.
17.
CoburnC. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77, 211-244.
18.
CoburnC. E.ChoiL.MataW. (2010). “I would go to her because her mind is math”: Network formation in the context of a district-based mathematics reform. In DalyA. J. (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 33-50). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19.
CoburnC. E.RussellJ. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30, 203-235.
20.
CohenD. K. (1988). Teaching practice: Plus que ça change. In JacksonP. W. (Ed.), Contribution to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice (pp. 27-84). Berkeley, CA: McCutcheon.
21.
ColemanJ. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 94-120.
22.
DalyA. J.FinniganK. S. (2010). A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 11, 111-138.
23.
DalyA. J.MoolenaarN. M.BolivarM.BurkeP. (2010). Relationships in reform: The role of teachers’ social networks. Journal of Educational Administration, 48, 359-391.
24.
DavisK. S. (2003). Change is hard: What science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science Education, 87, 3-30.
25.
ErautM. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 113-136.
26.
ErautM.HirshW. (2007). The significance of workplace learning for individuals, groups, and organizations. Oxford, England: SKOPE.
27.
FeldS. L. (1982). Social structural determinants of similarity among associates. American Sociological Review, 47, 797-801.
28.
FelmleeD.SprecherS.BassinE. (1990). The dissolution of intimate relationships: A hazard model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53, 13-30.
29.
FinniganK. S.DalyA. J.LiouY. (2016). How leadership churn undermines learning and improvement in low-performing school districts. In DalyA. J.FinniganK. S. (Eds.), Thinking and acting systemically: Improving school districts under pressure (pp. 183-208). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
30.
FrankK. A.ZhaoY.BormanK. (2004). Social capital and the diffusion of innovations within organizations: The case of computer technology in schools. Sociology of Education, 77, 148-171.
31.
FrankK. A.ZhaoY.PenuelW. R.EllefsonN.PorterS. (2011). Focus, fiddle, and friends: Experiences that transform knowledge for the implementation of innovations. Sociology of Education, 84, 137-156.
32.
GoddardY. L.GoddardR. D.Tschannen-MoranM. (2007). A theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 109, 877-896.
33.
GrissomJ. A.KeiserL. R. (2011). A supervisor like me: Race, representation, and the satisfaction and turnover decisions of public sector employees. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30, 557-580.
34.
GrodskyE.GamoranA. (2003). The relationship between professional development and professional community in American schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14, 1-29.
35.
GuimeraR.UzziB.SpiroJ.AmaralL. A. N. (2005). Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance. Science, 308, 697-702.
36.
HallettT. (2010). The myth incarnate: Recoupling processes, turmoil, and inhabited institutions in an urban elementary school. American Sociological Review, 75, 52-74.
37.
HallinanM. (1978). The process of friendship formation. Social Networks, 1, 193-210.
38.
HallinanM.WilliamsR. (1987). The stability of students’ interracial friendships. American Sociological Review, 52, 653-664.
39.
HeatonT. B. (2002). Factors contributing to increasing marital stability in the United States. Journal of Family Issues, 23, 392-409.
40.
IbarraH. (1992). Homophily and differential access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 422-447.
41.
IbarraH.KilduffM.TsaiW. (2005). Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research. Organization Science, 16, 359-371.
42.
InkpenA. C.TsangE. W. K. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 146-165.
43.
JacksonK.BruegmannE. (2009). Teaching students and teaching each other: The importance of peer learning for teachers. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(4), 85-108.
44.
KardosS. M.JohnsonS. M. (2007). On their own and presumed expert: New teachers’ experience with their colleagues. Teachers College Record, 109, 2083-2106.
45.
KimC. M. (2011). The effect of teachers’ social networks on teaching practices and class composition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
46.
KossinetsG. (2006). Effects of missing data in social networks. Social Networks, 28, 247-268.
47.
KruseS. D.LouisK. S.BrykA. S. (1995). An emerging framework for analyzing school-based professional community. In LouisK. S.KruseS. D. (Eds.), Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools (pp. 3-22). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
48.
LaddH. F. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions: How predictive of planned and actual teacher movement?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 235-261.
49.
LazarsfeldP.MertonR. K. (1954). Friendship as social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. In BergerM. A.AbelT.PageC. (Eds.), Freedom and control in modern society (pp. 18-66). New York, NY: Van Nostrand.
50.
LeanaC. R.PilF. K. (2006). Social capital and organizational performance: Evidence from urban public schools. Organization Science, 17, 353-366.
51.
LeendersR. T. A. J. (1996). Evolution of friendship and best friendship choices. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 21, 133-148.
52.
LinN. (1982). Social resources and instrumental action. In MarsdenP. V.LinN. (Eds.), Social structure and network analysis (pp. 131-145). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
53.
LinN. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
54.
LittleJ. W. (2003). Inside teacher community: Representations of classroom practice. Teachers College Record, 105, 913-945.
55.
LordB.MillerB. (2000). Teacher leadership: An appealing and inescapable force in school reform?Newton, MA: Educational Development Center.
56.
LortieD. C. (2009). School principal: Managing in public. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
57.
LouisK. S.KruseS. D. (1995). Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
58.
LouisK. S.MarksH. M.KruseS. D. (1996). Teachers’ professional community in restructuring schools. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 757-798.
59.
LouryG. C. (1987). Why should we care about group inequality?Social Philosophy and Policy, 5, 249-271.
60.
MakelM. C.PluckerJ. A. (2014). Facts are more important than novelty: Replication in the education sciences. Educational Researcher, 43, 304-316.
61.
ManginM. M.StoelingaS. R. (Eds.). (2008). Effective teacher leadership: Using research to inform and reform. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
62.
MarsdenP. V. (1987). Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 52, 122-131.
63.
MatsumuraL. C.SartorisM.BickelD. D.GarnierH. E. (2009). Leadership for literacy coaching: The principal’s role in launching a new coaching program. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 665-693.
64.
McLaughlinM. W.TalbertJ. E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
65.
McPhersonM.Smith-LovinL.CookJ. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444.
66.
MeyerJ. W.RowanB. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.
67.
MillerR. J.RowanB. (2006). Effects of organic management on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 219-253.
68.
MollicaK. A.GrayB.TrevinoL. K. (2003). Racial homophily and its persistence in newcomers’ social networks. Organization Science, 14, 123-136.
69.
MongeP. R.ContractorN. (2003). Theories of communication networks. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
70.
MoolenaarN. M.KarstenS.SleegersP.DalyA. J. (2014). Linking social networks and trust at multiple levels: Examining Dutch elementary schools. In Van MaeleD.ForsythP. B.Van HoutteM. (Eds.), Trust and school life: The role of trust for learning, teaching, leading, and bridging (pp. 207-228). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
71.
MorrisonE. W. (1993). Newcomer information seeking: Exploring types, modes, sources, and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 557-589.
72.
MyungJ.LoebS.HorngE. (2011). Tapping the principal pipeline: Identifying talent for future school leadership in the absence of formal succession management programs. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 695-727.
73.
NahapietJ.GhoshalS. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23, 242-266.
74.
OrtonJ. D.WeickK. E. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Academy of Management Journal, 15, 203-223.
75.
OstB.SchimanJ. C. (2015). Grade-specific experience, grade reassignments, and teacher turnover. Economics of Education Review, 46, 112-126.
76.
OstroffC.KozlowskiS. (1992). Organizational socialization as a learning process: The role of information acquisition. Personnel Psychology, 45, 849-874.
77.
PenuelW. R.RielM.JoshiA.PearlmanL.KimC. M.FrankK. A. (2010). The alignment of the informal and formal organizational supports for reform: Implications for improving teaching in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 57-95.
78.
PenuelW. R.RielM.KrauseA. E.FrankK. A. (2009). Analyzing teachers’ professional interactions in a school as social capital: A social network approach. Teachers College Record, 111, 124-163.
79.
PilF. K.LeanaC. R. (2009). Applying organizational research to public school reform: The effects of teacher human and social capital on student performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 1101-1124.
80.
PittsV.SpillaneJ. P. (2009). Using social network methods to study school leadership. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 32, 185-207.
81.
PolikoffM. S. (2012). The redundancy of mathematics instruction in U.S. elementary and middle schools. Elementary School Journal, 113, 230-251.
82.
PrintyS.MarksH. M.BowersA. J. (2009). Integrated leadership: How principals and teachers share instructional influence. Journal of School Leadership, 19, 504-532.
83.
PustejovskyJ.SpillaneJ. P. (2009). Question-order effects in social network name generators. Social Networks, 31, 221-229.
84.
RiveraM. T.SoderstromS. T.UzziB. (2010). Dynamics of dyads in social networks: Assortative, relational, and proximity mechanisms. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 91-115.
85.
RosenholtzS. J. (1991). Teachers’ workplace: The social organization of schools. New York, NY: Longman.
86.
RowanB. (1990). Commitment and control: Alternative strategies for the organizational design of schools. Review of Research in Education, 16, 353-389.
87.
RungerG.WassermanS. (1980). Longitudinal analysis of friendship networks. Social Networks, 2, 143-154.
88.
SaavedraS.Reed-TsochasF.UzziB. (2008). Asymmetric disassembly and robustness in declining networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 16466-16471.
89.
ShrumW.CheekN. H.HunterS. M. (1988). Friendship in school: Gender and racial homophily. Sociology of Education, 61, 227-239.
90.
SmallM. (2009). Unanticipated gains: Origins of network inequality in everyday life. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
91.
SmylieM. A. (1995). Teacher learning in the workplace: Implications for school reform. In GuskeyT. R.HubermanA. M. (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices (pp. 92-113). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
92.
SmylieM. A.DennyJ. W. (1990). Teacher leadership: Tensions and ambiguities in organizational perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26, 235-259.
93.
SmylieM. A.HartA. W. (1999). School leadership for teacher learning and change: A human and social capital development perspective. In MurphyJ. T.LouisK. S. (Eds.), Handbook of educational administration: A project of the American Educational Research Association (2nd ed., pp. 421-442). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
94.
SnijdersT. A. B.SteglichC.VandeBuntG. G. (2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32, 44-60.
95.
SpillaneJ. P. (2004). Standards deviation: How local schools misunderstand policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
96.
SpillaneJ. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
97.
SpillaneJ. P.DiamondJ. B. (2007). Distributed leadership in practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
98.
SpillaneJ. P.DiamondJ. B.BurchP.HallettT.JitaL.ZoltnersJ. (2002). Managing in the middle: School leaders and the enactment of accountability policy. Educational Policy, 16, 731-762.
99.
SpillaneJ. P.HealeyK.KimC. M. (2010). Leading and managing instruction: Using social network analysis to explore formal and informal aspects of the elementary school organization. In DalyA. J. (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 129-156). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
100.
SpillaneJ. P.HopkinsM.SweetT. (2017). Teacher interactions and beliefs about mathematics instruction: School district educational infrastructure and change at scale. American Educational Research Journal. Manuscript submitted for publication.
101.
SpillaneJ. P.HopkinsM.SweetT. (2015). Intra- and inter-school interactions about instruction: Exploring the conditions for social capital development. American Journal of Education, 122, 71-110.
102.
SpillaneJ. P.KimC. M.FrankK. A. (2012). Instructional advice and information seeking behavior in elementary schools: Exploring tie formation as a building block in social capital development. American Educational Research Journal, 49, 1112-1145.
103.
SpillaneJ. P.PariseL. M.ShererJ. Z. (2011). Organizational routines as coupling mechanisms: Policy, school administration, and the technical core. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 586-620.
104.
SpillaneJ. P.ShirrellM.HopkinsM. (2016). Designing and deploying a professional learning community (PLC) organizational routine: Bureaucratic and collegial structures in tandem. Les Dossiers des Sciences de l’Education, 35, 97-122.
105.
SupovitzJ. A.SirinidesP.MayH. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 31-56.
106.
SweetT. M.ThomasA. C.JunkerB. W. (2013). Hierarchical network models for education research hierarchical latent space models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 38, 295-318.
107.
Tschannen-MoranM.GareisC. R. (2015). Faculty trust in the principal: An essential ingredient in high-performing schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 53, 66-92.
108.
UzziB. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 35-67.
109.
UzziB.SpiroJ. (2005). Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem. American Journal of Sociology, 111, 447-504.
110.
WassermanS.FaustK. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
111.
WeickK. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1-19.
112.
York-BarrJ.DukeK. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74, 225-316.
113.
ZhaoY.FrankK. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 807-840.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
