This qualitative case study utilized distributed leadership theory and Capobianco and Feldman's (2006) conceptualization of conditions for collaborative action research (CAR) to describe the implementation of CAR as professional development (PD) and school improvement strategy in two educational contexts, one alternative school and one rural, in a Midwestern state. Findings indicate that distributed leadership facilitates CAR as a powerful PD tool and results in development of action plans for school improvement; however, conditions are necessary for CAR to effect professional practice.
AllenA. E. (2003). Elementary principals' perceptions of the impact of Virginia's standards-based accountability reform initiative on their professional roles (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest. (UMI Number 3078464)
2.
AllensworthE., PonisciakS., & MazzeoC. (2009). The schools teachers leave: Teacher mobility in Chicago Public Schools.Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research, University of Chicago.
3.
BarrettN., CowenJ., TomaE., & TroskeS. (2015). Working with what they have: Professional development as a reform strategy in rural schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 30(10), 1–18.
4.
BaskervilleR. L., & Wood-HarperA. T. (1996). A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. Journal of Information Technology, 11, 235–246.
5.
BertalanffyL. (1973). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications.New York: G. Braziller.
6.
BoldenR. (2011). Distributed leadership in organizations: A review of theory and research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13, 251–269.
7.
BormanN. K., & DowlingN. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367–409.
8.
BruceC. D., FlynnT., & Stagg-PetersonS. (2011). Examining what we mean by collaboration in collaborative action research: A cross case analysis. Educational Action Research, 19(4), 433–452. doi: 10.1080/09650792.2011.625667
9.
CapobiancoB. M., & FeldmanA. (2006). Promoting quality for teacher action research: Lessons learned from science teachers' action research. Educational Action Research, 14(4), 497–512. doi: 10.1080/09650790600975668
10.
CapobiancoB. M., & FeldmanA. (2010). Repositioning teacher action research in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(8), 909–915.
11.
CapobiancoB., HorowitzR., Canuel-BrownD., & TrimarchiR. (2004). Action research for teachers. The Science Teacher, 71(3), 48–53.
12.
CapobiancoB. M., LincolnS., Canuel-BrowneD., & TrimarchiR. (2006). Examining the experiences of three generation of teacher researchers through collaborative science teacher inquiry. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(3), 61–78.
13.
CrowG. M., HausmanC. S., & ScribnerJ. P. (2002). Reshaping the role of school principal. In MurphyJ. (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century. The one hundred and first yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (pp. 261–288). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.
Darling-HammondL., WeiR.C., AndreeA., RichardsonN., & OrphanosS. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad.Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council. Retrieved from learningforward.org/docs/pdf/nsdcstudy2009.pdf
17.
DesimoneL. (2011). A primer on effective professional development. Kappan, 92(6), 68–71.
18.
DesimoneL., & StuckeyD. (2014). Sustaining professional development. In MartinL., KraglerS., QuatrocheD., & BausermanK. (Eds.), Handbook of professional development in education: Successful models and practices, Prek-12 (pp. 467–482). New York: Guilford Publications.
DouglasM. (1992). Risk and blame: Essays in cultural theory.London: Routledge.
22.
ElmoreR. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership.Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute.
23.
Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-95 § 114, Stat. 1177 (2015–2016)
24.
FeldmanA. (2007). Validity and quality in action research. Educational Action Research, 15(1), 21–32. doi: 10.1080/09650790601150766
25.
FeldmanA., & MinstrellJ. (2000). Action research as a research methodology for the study of the teaching and learning of science. In KellyE., & LeshR. (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 429–455). Mahwah, NH: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26.
FowlesJ., ButlerJ. S., CowenJ. M., StreamsM. E., & TomaE. F. (2014). Public employee quality in a geographic context: A study of rural teachers. American Review of Public Administration, 44(5), 503–521. doi: 10.1177/0275074012474714
27.
FullanM. (2001). Leading in a culture of change.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
28.
GaretM. S., WayneA. J., StancavageF., TaylorJ., WaltersK., SongM., BrownS., HurlburtS., ZhuP., SepanikS., & DoolittleF. (2010). Middle school mathematics professional development impact study: Executive summary. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20104009/pdf/20104010.pdf
29.
GlanzJ. (2005). Action research as instructional supervision: Suggestions for principals. NASSP Bulletin, 89(643), 17–25. doi: 10.1177/019263650508964303
30.
GloverT.A., NugentG. C., ChumneyF. L., IhloT., ShapiroE. S., GuardK., KoziolN., BovairdJ. (2016). Investigating rural teachers' professional development, instructional knowledge, and classroom practice. Journal of Resesarch in Rural Education, 31(3), 1–16.
31.
Great Schools. (2016). XXXX public school report. Retrieved April 20, 2016 from www.greatschools.org
32.
GronnP. (2000). Distributed properties: A new architecture for leadership. Educational Management & Administration, 28(3), 317–338.
33.
GuskeyT. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 381–391. doi: 10.1080/135406002100000512
34.
GuskeyT. R. (2003, April). The characteristics of effective professional development: A synthesis of lists. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
35.
GuskeyT. R. (2009). Closing the knowledge gap on effective professional development. Educational Horizons, 87(4), 224–233.
36.
HagevikR., AydenizM., & RowellC. G. (2012). Using action research in middle level teacher education to evaluate and deepen reflective practice. Teacher and Teacher Education, 28(5), 675–684.
37.
HarrisA. (2004). Distributed leadership and school improvement: Leading or misleading?Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 32(1), 11–24.
38.
HarrisA. (2011). Distributed leadership: Implications for the role of the principal. Journal of Management Development, 31(1), 7–17.
HarrisA., & LambertL. (2003). Building leadership capacity for school improvement.Milton Keyes: Open University Press.
41.
Harwell (2003). Teacher professional development: It's not an event, it's a process. National Staff Development Council. Retrieved September 10, 2017 from http://www.ncpn.info/downloads/HarwellPaper.pdf
42.
HeckR. H., & HallingerP. (2010). Testing a longitudinal model of distributed leadership effects on school improvement. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 867–885.
43.
HerseyP., & BlanchardK. H. (1993). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (5th edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
44.
HillH. C., BeisiegelM., & JacobR. (2013). Professional development research. Educational Researcher, 42(9), 476–487.
45.
HineG. S. C. (2013). The importance of action research in teacher education programs. Issues in Educational Research, 23(2), 151–163.
46.
HopkinsD., & JacksonD. (2002). Building capacity for leading and learning. In HarrisA., DayC., HadfieldM., HopkinsD., HargreavesA., and ChapmanC. (Eds.), Effective leadership for school improvement (pp. 84–105). London: Routledge.
47.
HoppeyD. T. (2006). The man in the principal's office: Revisiting Harry Wolcott's research during an era of increased complexity and high-stakes accountability (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest. (UMI Number 3228733)
48.
HowleyA., ChadwickK., & HowleyC. (2002). Networking for the nuts and bolts: The ironies of professional development in rural principals. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 17(3), 171–187.
49.
HunzickerJ. (2011). Effective professional development for teachers: A checklist. Professional Development in Education, 37(2), 177–179. doi: 10.1080/19415257.2010.523955
50.
IngersollR. M., & MayH. (2011). Recruitment, retention and the minority teacher shortage. The Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
51.
JonesM. O. (2015). Program evaluation of alternative schools in North Carolina: A companion dissertation. Journal of Organizational and Educational Leadership, 1(1), 1–26.
52.
KemmisS. (2009). Action research as a practice-based practice. Educational Action Research, 17(3), 463–474. doi: 10.1080/09650790903093284
53.
LarwoodL. (2005). A promising practice: Low incidence teacher education in rural and remote California. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24(3), 25–29.
LincolnY. S., & GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
56.
ManfraM. (2009). Action research: Exploring the theoretical divide between practical and critical approaches. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 3(1), 32–46.
57.
MarzanoR. J., WatersT., McNultyB. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results.Aurora, CO: ASCD.
58.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59.
MuellerT. G., & BrewerR. D. (2013). Rethinking professional development in rural communities for students with autism spectrum disorder. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 32(3), 11.
60.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107–110, 20 U.S.C. § 6319 (2002).
61.
NoffkeS. E. (1989). The social context of action research: A comparative and historical analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Retrieved September 2, 2017 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED308756.pdf
62.
OpferV. D., & PedderD. (2010). Benefits, status, and effectiveness of continuous professional development for teachers in England. The Curriculum Journal, 21(4), 413–431.
63.
OstermanK., FurmanG., & SernakK. (2014). Action research in EdD programs in educational leadership. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 9(1), 85–105.
64.
PenuelW. R., & GallagherL. P. (2009). Preparing teachers to design instruction for deep understanding in middle school earth science. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(4), 461–508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508400903191904
65.
PounderD., ReitzugU., & YoungM. (2002). Preparing school leaders for school improvements, social justice, and community. In MurphyJ. (ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century. The one hundred and first yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (pp. 261–288). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.
66.
PriceJ. N., & ValliL. (2005). Preservice teachers becoming agents of change: Pedagogical implications for action research. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(1), 57–72.
RogersD., Mason BolickC., AndersonA., GordonE., McGlinn ManfraM., & YowJ. (2007). It's about the kids: Transforming teacher-student relationships through action research. The Clearinghouse: A Journal of Educational Strategies and Ideas, 80(5), 217–222.
69.
RonfeldtM., LoebS., & WyckoffJ. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4–36. doi:10.3102/0002831212463813
70.
RossJ. A., & BruceC. D. (2012). Evaluating the impact of collaborative action research on teachers: A quantitative approach. Teacher Development, 16(4), 537–561.
71.
ShakirF. J., IssaJ. H., & MustafaP. O. (2011). Perceptions towards distributed leadership in school improvement. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(10), 256–265.
72.
ShakouriN. (2013). On the viability of action research in education. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 3(1), 103–112.
73.
SimonN. S., & JohnsonS. M. (2015). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and can do. Teachers College Record, 117(3), 1–36.
74.
SpillaneJ. P. (2006). Distributed leadership.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
75.
SteedE. A., PomerleauT., MuscottH., & RohdeL. (2013). Program-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports in rural preschools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 32, 38–46.
76.
TimperleyH. S. (2005). Distributed leadership: Developing theory from practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(4), 395–420. doi: 10.1080/00220270500038545
77.
YoonK. S., DuncanT., Wen-Yu LeeS., ScarlossB., & ShapleyK. L. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southwest/pdf/rel_2007033_sum.pdf
78.
ZichnerK., & NoffkeS. E. (2001). Practitioner research. In RichardsonV. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 298–332). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
