Improvement teams with representation from teachers, principals, and district leadership gained broader buy-in than teams missing any level¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Teams lacking district leadership, principals, or teachers struggled to gain support at the corresponding level. → Bugler 2021

Evidence¶

Bugler 2021¶

Bugler, D. (2021). School District Collaboration: Lessons From Districts Participating in California Education Partners' California Language & Learning Initiative (CALLI). WestEd. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED616075

q2 · i? · qualitative · r2

Interviews with districts that continued into CALLI 201 found that rethought team composition mattered: teams that had lacked district-level leadership, principals, or teachers each struggled for buy-in at that level, per the article's interview findings. No effect size reported.

"teams that had not included district-level leadership had struggled to gain broad support in the district. Similarly, teams without principals had struggled to gain support in schools, and those without teachers had struggled to get teacher buy-in."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Core Teams identified communication challenges, school and district leadership turnover, and teacher burnout as barriers that influenced solution success — related
• Participants identified staff turnover as a critical factor threatening sustainability of pilot solutions — related
• High-performing CHSRI schools shared four practices for guiding and sustaining instructional improvement: defining leadership responsibilities, creatively distributing them, institutionalizing routines, and focusing team work on school-wide goals — related
• Integrating principals into district MiC leadership teams grounded CoP conversations in practice and helped teams interpret school-level achievement data — related
• Principals actively engaged in prioritizing math at their sites were more likely to organize teacher learning time and involve coaches — related
• Leadership teams can use CALL survey results to select the guide sections most useful for their improvement plan — related
• Few schools used 5Essentials data for improvement, citing opaque data, principal-focused measures, and lack of district-wide strategy — related
• Interviewees identified leadership prioritization, staff buy-in, and investments in staffing, training, partnerships, and funding as facilitators of trauma-engaged implementation — related
• Staff and students in three California schools describe collaboration among leaders, teachers and students as improving buy-in and creating student leadership opportunities — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• States broadened measures for identifying struggling schools while more districts reported improvement activities, particularly teacher professional development — related