Sustaining school improvement in a high-need school. Longitudinal analysis of Robbins Elementary School (USA) from 1993 to 2015
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-03-2016-0034 |
| Pages | 297-315 |
| Date | 02 May 2017 |
| Published date | 02 May 2017 |
| Author | Nathern Okilwa,Bruce Barnett |
| Subject Matter | Education,Administration & policy in education,School administration/policy,Educational administration,Leadership in education |
Sustaining school improvement
in a high-need school
Longitudinal analysis of Robbins Elementary
School (USA) from 1993 to 2015
Nathern Okilwa and Bruce Barnett
Department of Education Leadership and Policy Studies,
University of Texas San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to examine how Robbins ES has sustained high academic
performance over almost 20 years despite several changes in principals.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper analyzed longitudinal data based on: state-level academic
and demographic data; two earlier studies of the school; and recent interviews with teachers, the principal,
and parent leaders.
Findings –The analyses of these longitudinal data revealed four ongoing factors were responsible for
sustained academic performance: high expectations, distributed leadership, collective responsibility for
student performance, and data-based decision making. However, challenges that persistently confront
Robbins staff include limited resources (e.g. technology and library materials), high mobility rate, and some
cases of unsupportive parents.
Originality/value –This study adds to understanding how high-need urbanscho olsca nsustain high academic
performance in spite of changes in principals, shifting community demographics, and high student mobility.
Keywords Principals, Leadership, High performance, School improvement, High need schools
Paper type Research paper
Increased accountability in educational systems around the world has begun to identify
schools with unique student and community characteristics and low student performance
(Duke, 2012b). These so called, “high-need schools”mirror many of the characteristics of
urban education settings, as noted by Duke (2008b, 2012b):
•high levels of ethnic minorities, immigrants, mobility, homeless families, children in
foster care, incarcerated students,drug abuse, and English Language Learners(ELLs);
•large percentages of students not achieving at expected levels of achievement;
•high numbers of student truancies, suspensions, and dropouts coupled with low
attendance and graduation rates; and
•significant problems with the learning environment, including high teacher and
leader turnover, high teacher absenteeism, and low staff morale.
The resources, infrastructure, leadership, teaching staff, and students in high-need urban
schools tend to be different than suburban and rural schools. In many cases, teachers in
urban schools have fewer instructional resources at their disposal and have less control over
the curriculum than teachers in high-poverty rural schools (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2006). As a result, teachers with high absenteeism, low morale, and constant
turnover are common occurrences (Barnett and Stevenson, 2015; Duke 2008b, 2012b).
Finally, leadership turnover, especially turnoverof superintendents and principals, creates
instability and inconsistent program implementation (Haberman, n.d.). Filling principal
vacancies in high-need urban schools is difficult with substantially fewer applications for
these positions than in suburban and rural schools (The New Teacher Project, 2006).
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 55 No. 3, 2017
pp. 297-315
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/JEA-03-2016-0034
Received 15 March 2016
Revised 1 November 2016
Accepted 2 November 2016
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
297
Sustaining
school
improvement
Compounding this recruitment problem, many principal vacancies occur just before the
beginning of the school year, making itdifficult to recruit and select high-quality candidates.
Many districts alsoreport not having adequate poolsof assistant principals capable offilling
principal vacancies (The New Teacher Project, 2006).
Clearly, schools situated in high-need contexts pose significant challenges to local
educational agencies as well as the state and other stakeholders. When one such school
defies the odds by transforming its culture coupled with achieving and sustaining academic
excellence, it attracts a great deal of interest. This is the case of Robbins Elementary School
(Robbins ES) located in an urban setting in a major city in Texas. Our investigation of
Robbins ES continues a line of research aimed at examining organizational change and
sustainability of student performance and is unique because it covers a 20-year time period
from 1993-2014. We rely, in part, on research reports of Robbins conducted over the years,
which limits our access to consistently detailed data and context that is often captured in
other case studies of sustainability (e.g. Brookover and Lezotte, 1979; Bryk et al., 2011;
Duke and Landahl, 2011).
The purpose of this study is to examine how Robbins ES has sustained high academic
performance for over 20 years. In order to better understand how high-need schools sustain
success, we begin by exploring conceptualizations of the change management process.
We then present existing research on successful high-need schools and review studies
examining how schools are able to sustain successful outcomes for students over time.
To position our study of sustainability, we describe the 20-year history of successful
academic performance at Robbins ES as well as the data sources and analysis of the factors
associated with its sustained success. Next, we present our findings, which are reflected in
four key themes. Finally, we discuss our findings and compare them with other studies of
sustainability, noting the particular challenges high-need schools, like Robbins, must
constantly confront when working to sustain student success.
Theoretical framework: change management and sustainability
A variety of organizational change management frameworks have been developed that
account for how innovations sprout, become implemented, and are sustained. On one hand,
these conceptualizations capture the change process in a series of broad phases.
For instance, Bryk et al. (2011) conceive the change process as consisting of initiation and
sustaining phases. During initiation, the organization is attempting to alter the status quo
and introduce new reforms. These reforms are sustained as organizational members’roles
and responsibilities become permanent and part of the expected routine. In terms of
high-needschools, the initiation phaseconstitutes initial,and sometimes drastic, effortsto turn
around student performance. During the sustaining phase, the focus of our investigation,
these schools striveto maintain and improve student performance after the initialturnaround
has occurred.Similarly, Lewin’s (1948)representation of change –unfreezing,moving to a new
level, and refreezing –reflects another series of general phases or steps. Finally, Bullock and
Batten’s (1985) synthesis of change models reveals a four-phase process: exploration,
planning, action, and integrat ion that organizations encoun ter when successfully
implementing an innovation.
On the other hand, some conceptualizations provide a more in-depth account of the
change management process, including factors responsible for sustaining and
institutionalizing innovations. One of the most often-cited frameworks was developed by
Kotter (1996), who conceptualized that change occurs in eight sequential steps, nested in
three distinct phases:
•Phase 1 –creating a climate for change: (1) establish a sense of urgency, (2) create a
guiding coalition, (3) develop a vision and strategy.
298
JEA
55,3
To continue reading
Request your trial