Principals in implementation networks reported moderate school improvement from working with external partners and other network schools, attributed largely to teacher collaboration¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r? · q2
Currency · newest study 1998 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? About 60 percent of principals attributed moderate improvement to working with external partners, and similar proportions to working with other network schools. → Initial Accomplishments of Implementation Networks: A Baseline Technical Report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project 1998 q2 i? External partners most often credited within-school teacher collaboration as the mechanism of improvement. → Initial Accomplishments of Implementation Networks: A Baseline Technical Report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project 1998 (2)

Evidence¶

Initial Accomplishments of Implementation Networks: A Baseline Technical Report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project 1998¶

Initial Accomplishments of Implementation Networks: A Baseline Technical Report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project. (1998). https://consortium.uchicago.edu

q2 · i? · associational · r?

Principal survey self-report data on the impact of working with external partners. About 60 percent attributed moderate improvement, 27 percent were more positive, and only 12 percent saw minimal improvement; improvements were mainly in organizational development such as new curricular programs and professional development opportunities.

"About 60 percent of the principals attributed moderate improvement to these relationships."

Initial Accomplishments of Implementation Networks: A Baseline Technical Report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project 1998 (2)¶

Initial Accomplishments of Implementation Networks: A Baseline Technical Report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project. (1998). https://consortium.uchicago.edu

q2 · i? · qualitative · r?

Interviews with 30 external partners of Annenberg networks. Almost two-thirds noted some school improvement, and "Nearly three-quarters of those who spoke of school improvement pointed particularly to the development of within-school teacher collaboration," with between-school teacher networking discussed by nearly one-third.

"Nearly three-quarters of those who spoke of school improvement pointed particularly to the development of within-school teacher collaboration."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• External partners played the central role in forming and running implementation networks, with most principal interaction directed at partners rather than other schools — related
• Network participation faced challenges of teacher time, resources, and fragmentation, with about 40 percent of principals reporting few useful resources — related
• Most principals in implementation networks reported moderate reductions in school-community isolation as a result of network participation — related
• In selected Chicago schools, external partners sparked documented improvements in instruction, parent involvement, or school climate — related
• Partner success varies substantially between schools based on teacher and administrator willingness to collaborate — related
• The NSF EXP collaboration network connected 238 researchers across 87 projects and 116 expertise areas — related
• External partners' influence is necessarily limited by their minor role in schools' attention and activity — related