The inability of either bottom-up or top-down strategies, by themselves, to provide suitable
conditions for school improvement warrants a shift to school-focused knowledge use as a way
to encourage such improvement. This study examines the influence of a large array of factors,
derived from a knowledge utilization framework, on educators' use of several types of information for improvement purposes. Two hundred and thirty-three elementary school principals and
155 central board office staff members completed a survey instrument inquiring about most
useful sources of information for improving curriculum and instruction in grades 4 to 6. Results
provided support for categories of knowledge use factors in explaining variation in use of
information for school improvement—characteristics of the source of information, characteris
tics of the improvement setting, and interactive processes. These results are used to illustrate
how a school-focused knowledge use perspective combines many of the strengths and avoids
critical weaknesses of bottom-up and top-down strategies for change.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alkin, M.C., R. Daillak, and B. White.1979. Using evaluations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
2.
Argyris, C., and D. Schön.1978. Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
3.
Bandura, A.1977. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4.
Berman, P., and M.W. McLaughlin .1978. Implementing and sustaining innovations. Vol. 8 (Research Rep. No. R-1589/8-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
5.
Cantor, N., W. Mischel, and J. Schwartz.1982. Social knowledge: Structure, content, use and abuse. In Cognitive social psychology, edited by A. M. Isen and A. H. Hastorf, 33-72. New York: Elsevier .
6.
Cousins, J.B.1988. Factors influencing knowledge utilization: Principals' use of data concerning their own performance. Ph.D. diss. University of Toronto, Canada.
7.
Cousins, J.B., and L.M. Earl.1992. The case for participatory evaluation . Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis14:397-418.
8.
Cousins, J.B., and K.A. Leithwood.1986. Current empirical research on evaluation utilization. Review of Educational Research56331-65
9.
Cousins, J.B. , J.A. Ross, and F. Maynes. Forthcoming. The reported nature and consequences of teachers' joint work in three exemplary schools. Elementary School Journal.
10.
Crandall, D.P.1989. Implementation aspects of dissemination: Reflection toward an immodest proposal. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization11:79-106.
11.
Emrick, J., S. Peterson, and R. Agarwala-Rogers .1977. Evaluation of the National Diffusion Network. 2 Vols. Menlo Park, CA: Stanford Research Institute. [ED 147 340, ED 152 808]
12.
Fullan, M.1991. The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press and OISE Press.
13.
Greene, J.1987. Stakeholder participation in evaluation design: Is it worth the effort? Evaluation and Program Planning10:375-94.
14.
—. 1988. Stakeholder participation and utilization in program evaluation . Evaluation Review12:91-116.
15.
Hart, A.W.1990Impacts of the school social unit on teacher authority doing work redesignAmerican Educational Research Journal27:503-32.
16.
Holdaway, E.A.1986. Making research matter. Alberta Journal of Education32:249-64.
17.
House, E.1974. The politics of educational innovation. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
18.
Huberman, M.1983. Recipes for busy kitchens A situational analysis s of routing knowledge use m schools. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization4478-510.
19.
— 1987. Steps toward an integrated model of research utilization . Knowledge: Creation, Daffusion, Utilization8:586-611
20.
—. 1990. Linkage between researchers and practitioners: A qualitative study. American Educational Research Journal27363-91.
21.
Isen, A.M. and A.H. Hastorf1982Some perspectives on cognitive social psychology . In Cognitive social psychology, edited by A M. Isen and A. H Hastorf , 1-32. New York : Elsevier.
22.
Jantz, T., L. Hellervik, and D.C. Gilmore1986. Behavioral description interviewing: New, accurate, cost effective. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
23.
Joreskog, K.G. , and D. Sorbom1988. PRELIS: A program for multivariate data screening and data summarizing. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software, Inc.
Joyce, B., and B. Showers1988. Student achievement through staff developmentNew York: Longman.
26.
Kennedy, M.M.1984. How evidence alters understanding and decisions . Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis6:207-26.
27.
King, J.A., and E.M. Pechman.1982. The process of evaluation use in local school settings. Final report of NIE Grant #NIE-G-81-0900.
28.
. 1984. Pinning the wave to the shore: Conceptualizing evaluation use in school systems. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis6:241-53.
29.
Klein, S.S.1992a. A framework for redesigning and R&D-based national education dissemination system in the United States. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization13:256-86.
Klein, S.S., and M.K. Gwaltney.1991. Charting the education dissemination system. Knowledge : Creation, Diffusion, Utilization12:241-65.
32.
Larsen, J.K.1981. Knowledge utilization: Current issues. In The knowledge cycle, edited by R F. Rich , 149-81. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
33.
—. 1985. Effect of time on information utilization. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization7:143-58.
34.
Leviton, L.C., and E.F.X. Hughes.1981. Research on the utilization of evaluations: A review and synthesis. Evaluation Review7:525-28.
35.
Little, J.W.1982. Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions for school success. American Educational Research Journal19:325-40.
36.
Louis, K.S.1992. Comparative perspectives on dissemination and knowledge use policies. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization13:287-304.
37.
Louis, K.S., and R.A. Dentler.1988. Knowledge use and school improvement . Curriculum Inquiry18 (10): 33-62.
38.
Louis, K.S., and H. Simsek.1991. Paradigm shifts and organizational learning: Some theoretical lessons for restructuring schoolsPaper presented at the Annual Meeting of the University Council of Educational Administration, Baltimore, MD.
39.
McLaughlin, M.W.1990The Rand Change Agent Study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Researcher19 (9): 11-16.
40.
Mathisen, W.C.1990. The problem solving community: A valuable alternative to disciplinary communities? Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization11:410-27.
41.
Miles, M.B., and M. Huberman1984. Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of methods . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
42.
Nelson, M., and S. Sieber.1976. Innovation in urban secondary schools . School Review27:101-19.
43.
Nowakowski, J., ed. 1987. New directions for program evaluation: The client perspective on evaluation No. 36. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
44.
Ontano Ministry of Education.1983. Education in the junior division: A look at forty-two schools. Toronto: The Queen's Printer for Ontario .
45.
Patton, M.Q., P.S. Grimes, K.M. Guthrie, N.J. Brennan, B.D. French, and D.A. Blyth.1977In search of impact: An analysis of the utilization of federal health evaluation research. In Using social research in public policy making, edited by C. H. Weiss, 141-163. New YorkD C. Heath.
46.
Pfeffer, J., and J. Lawler1980Effects of job alternatives, extrinsic rewards and behavioral commitment on attitude toward the organization: A field test of the insufficient justification paradigm. Administrative Science Quarterly25.38-56.
47.
Rosenholtz, S.J.1989. Teachers' workplace: The social organiztion of schools . New York. Longman.
48.
Rowan, B.1990. Commitment and control: Alternative strategies for the organizational design of schools In Review of research in education. Vol 16. Edited by C. Cazden, 353-92. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association
49.
Rudduck, J.1991. Innovation and change: Developing involvement and understanding . Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
50.
Senge, P.M.1991. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
51.
Weiss, C.H.1981. Measuring the use of evaluation. In Utilizing evaluation: Concepts and measurement techniques, edited by J. A. Ciarlo, 17-33. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
52.
—. 1991. Reflections on 19th-century experience with knowledge diffusion. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization13:5-16
53.
Wingens, M.1990. Toward a general utilization theory: A systems theory reformulation of the two communities metaphor. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization12:27-42.
