Absorptive capacity: A conceptual framework for understanding district central office learning
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Ahuja, G., & Katila, R. (2001). Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 197–220.
Bickel, W. E., & Hattrup, R. A. (1995). Teachers and researchers in collaboration: Reflections on the process. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 35–62.
Borman, G., Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A., Madden, N. A., & Chambers, B. (2005). The national randomized field trial of Success for All: Second-year outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 42(4), 673–696.
Bray, L. E., & Russell, J. L. (2016). Going off script: Structure and agency in individualized education program meeting. American Journal of Education, 122(3), 367–398.
Brookhart, S. M., & Loadman, W. E. (1992). School-university collaboration and perceived professional rewards. Journal of Research in Education, 2(1), 68–76.
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1998). Organizing knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3), 90–111.
Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Bulkley, K. E., & Burch, P. (2011). The changing nature of private engagement in public education: For-profit and nonprofit organizations and educational reform. Peabody Journal of Education, 86(3), 236–251.
Burch, P. E. (2002). Constraints and opportunities in changing policy environments: Intermediary organizations’ response to complex district context. In A. M. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 111–126). New York: Teachers College Press.
Burch, P. E., & Spillane, J. P. (2004). Leading from the middle: Mid-level district staff and instructional improvement. Chicago: Cross City Campaign for Urban School Reform.
Burch, P. E., & Spillane, J. P. (2005). How subjects matter in district office practice: Instructionally relevant policy in urban school district redesign. Journal of Educational Change, 6, 51–76.
Burt, R. S. (2001). Attachment, decay, and social network. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 619–643.
Chrispeels, J. (2004). Learning to lead together: The promise and challenge of sharing leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
Cobb, P. A., Jackson, K., Smith, T., Sorum, M., & Henrick, E. (2013). Design research with educational systems: Investigating and supporting improvements in the quality of mathematics teaching and learning at scale. In W. R. Penuel, B. J. Fishman, A. R. Allen, & B. H. Cheng (Eds.), Design-based implementation research: Theories, methods, and exemplars (Vol. 112, pp. 320–349). New York, NY: National Society of the Study of Education Yearbook.
Coburn, C. E., & Penuel, W. R. (2016). Research-practice partnerships in education: Outcomes, dynamics, and open questions. Educational Researcher, 45(1), 48–54.
Coburn, C. E., & Turner, E. O. (2012). The practice of data use: An introduction. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 99–111.
Coburn, C. E., Bae, S., & Turner, E. O. (2008). Authority, status, and the dynamics of insider-outsider partnerships at the district level. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 364–399.
Coburn, C. E., Honig, M. I., & Stein, M. K. (2009). What is the evidence on districts’ use of evidence? In J. D. Bransford, D. J. Stipek, N. J. Vye, L. M. Gomez, & D. Lam (Eds.), The role of research in educational improvement (pp. 67–86). Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
Coburn, C. E., Russell, J. L., Kaufman, J. H., & Stein, M. K. (2012). Supporting sustainability: Teachers’ advice networks and ambitious instructional reform. American Journal of Education, 119(1), 137–182.
Cohen, M. D. (1994). Organizational routines are stored in procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study. Organization Science, 5(4), 554–568.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. The Economic Journal, 99(1), 569–596.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.
Corcoran, T. B., Fuhrman, S. H., & Belcher, C. L. (2001). The district role in instructional improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(1), 78–84.
Corcoran, T., & Lawrence, N. (2003). Changing district culture and capacity: The impact of the Merck Institute for Science Education Partnership. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania.
Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. S. (2010). A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 11, 111–138.
Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. S. (2012). Exploring the space between: Social networks, trust, and urban school district leaders. Journal of School Leadership, 22(3), 493–530.
Datnow, A., & Honig, M. I. (2008). Introduction to the special issue, Scaling up teaching and learning improvement in urban districts: The promises and pitfalls of external assistance providers. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 323–327.
Desimone, L. (2000). Making comprehensive school reform work. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.
Donovan, M. S., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2003). Learning and instruction: A SERP research agenda. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Donovan, M. S., Snow, C. E., & Daro, P. (2013). The SERP approach to problem-solving research, development, and implementation. In B. Fishman, W. R. Penuel, A.-R. Allen, & B. Cheng (Eds.), Design-based implementation research: Theories, methods, and exemplars (Vol. 112, pp. 400–425). New York, NY: National Society of the Study of Education Yearbook.
Donovan, M. S., Wigdor, A. K., & Snow, C. E. (2003). Strategic education research partnership. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.
Earl, L. M., & Cousins, J. B. (1995). Participatory evaluation in education: Studies of evaluation use and organizational learning. London: Taylor & Francis.
Eraut, M., & Hirsh, W. (2007). The significance of workplace learning for individuals, groups, and organizations. SKOPE monograph 9. Oxford: SKOPE Research Centre.
Feldman, M. S., & March, J. G. (1981). Information in organizations as signal and symbol. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(2), 171–186.
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 94–118.
Finnigan, K. S., Daly, A. J., & Stewart, T. J. (2012). Organizational learning in schools under sanction. Education Research International, 2012, 1–10.
Firestone, W. A. (1989). Using reform: Conceptualizing district initiative. Educational Evaluation Policy and Analysis, 11(2), 151–164.
Firestone, W. A., & Fisler, J. L. (2002). Politics, community, and leadership in a school-university partnership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(4), 449–493.
Freedman, R., & Salmon, D. (2001). The dialectic nature of research collaborations: The relational literacy curriculum. In T. Ravid & M. G. Handler (Eds.), The many faces of school-university collaboration: Characteristics of successful partnerships. Englewood, CO: Teachers Ideas Press.
Fullan, M. (1980). The role of human agents internal to school districts in knowledge utilization. Ontario: The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Fullan, M. (2006). The future of educational change: System thinkers in action. Journal of Educational Change, 7, 113–122.
Fullan, M., Bertani, A., & Quinn, J. (2004). Leading in tough times: New lessons for districtwide reform. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 42–46.
Ghoshal, S., Korine, H., & Szulanski, G. (1994). Interunit communication in multinational corporation. Management Science, 40(1), 96–110.
Gifford, B. R. (1986). The evolution of the school-university partnership for educational renewal. Education and Urban Society, 19(1), 77–106.
Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge flows within the multi-national corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 473–496.
Hannaway, J. (1989). Managers managing: The workings of an administrative system. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hannaway, J. (1993). Political pressure and decentralization in institutional organizations: The case of school districts. Sociology of Education, 66(3), 147–163.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–111.
Hargadon, A. (2003). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 498–501.
Hassel, B., & Steiner, L. (2012). Guide to working with external partners: Partnerships to improve teaching and learning. Washington, DC: American Institutes of Research.
Hatch, T. (2001). Incoherence in the system: Three perspectives on the implementation of multiple initiatives in one district. American Journal of Education, 109(4), 407–437.
Hightower, A. M., Knapp, M. S., Marsh, J. A., & McLaughlin, M. W. (Eds.). (2003). School districts and instructional renewal. New York: Teachers College.
Honig, M. I. (2003). Building policy from practice: District central office administrators’ roles and capacity for implementing collaborative education policy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 292–338.
Honig, M. I. (2004a). District central office-community partnerships: From contracts to collaboration to control. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Educational administration, policy, and reform: Research and measurement (pp. 59–90). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Honig, M. I. (2004b). The new middle management: Intermediary organizations in education policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(1), 65–87.
Honig, M. I. (2008). District central offices as learning organizations: How sociocultural and organizational learning theories elaborate district central office administrators’ participation in teaching and learning improvement efforts. American Journal of Education, 114(4), 627–664.
Honig, M. I. (2009). “External” organizations and the politics of urban educational leadership: The case of new small autonomous school initiatives. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(3), 394–413.
Honig, M. I., Copland, M. A., Rainey, L., Lorton, J. A., & Newton, M. (2010). Central office transformation for district-wide learning improvement. Seattle, Washington: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
Honig, M. I., & Ikemoto, G. S. (2008). Adaptive assistance for learning improvement efforts: The case of the Institute for Learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 328–363.
Honig, M. I., Venkateswaran, N., McNeil, P., & Myers-Twitchell, J. (2014). Leaders’ use of research for fundamental change in school district central offices: Processes and challenges. In K. S. Finnigan & A. J. Daly (Eds.), Using research evidence in education: From the schoolhouse door to Capitol Hill. New York: Springer.
Horn, I., Kane, B. D., & Wilson, J. (2015). Making sense of student performance data: Data use logics and mathematics teachers’ learning opportunities. American Educational Research Journal, 52(2), 208–242.
Hubbard, L. (2010). Research to practice: The case of Boston Public Schools, Education Matters and the Boston Plan for Excellence. In C. E. Coburn & M. K. Stein (Eds.), Research and practice in education: Building alliances, bridging the divide (pp. 55–72). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Ikemoto, G. S., & Honig, M. I. (2010). Tools to deepen practitioners’ engagement with research: The case of the Institute for Learning. In C. E. Coburn & M. K. Stein (Eds.), Research and practice in education: Building alliances, bridging the divide (pp. 93–108). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Jansen, J. J. P., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2005). Managing potential and realized capacity: How do organizational antecedents matter? Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 999–1015.
Keating, P. J., & Clark, R. W. (1988). Accent on leadership: The Puget Sound Educational Consortium. In K. A. Sirotnik & J. I. Goodlad (Eds.), School-university partnerships in action: Concepts, cases and concerns (pp. 148–166). New York: Teachers College Press.
Kerr, K. A., Marsh, J. A., Ikemoto, G. S., Darilek, H., & Barney, H. (2006). Strategies to promote data use for instructional improvement: Actions, outcomes, and lessons from three urban districts. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 496–520.
Kronley, R. A., & Handley, C. (2003). Reforming relationships: School districts, external organizations, and systemic change. Providence, RI: Annenberg Institute for School Reform, Brown University.
Lane, P. J., Koka, B. R., & Pathak, S. (2006). The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the construct. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 833–863.
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(1), 461–477.
Lane, P. J., Salk, J. E., & Lyles, M. A. (2001). Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 1139–1161.
Le Floch, K. C., Boyle, A., & Therriault, S. B. (2008). State systems of support under NCLB: Design components and quality considerations. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N., & Yashkina, A. (2007). Distributing leadership to make schools smarter: Taking the ego out of the system. Leadership and Policy in Schhols, 6(1), 37–67.
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1981). A model of adaptive organizational search. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2, 307–333.
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340.
Little, J. W. (2012). Understanding data use practices among teachers: The contribution of micro-process studies. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 143–166.
López-Turley, R. N., & Stevens, C. (2015). Lessons from a school district-university research partnership: The Houston Education Research Consortium. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37, 6S–15S.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
Marsh, J. A., Kerr, K. A., Ikemoto, G. S., Darilek, H., Suttorp, M., Zimmer, R. W., et al. (2005). The role of districts in fostering instructional improvement: Lessons from three urban districs partnered with the Institute for Learning. Washington, DC: RAND Corporation.
Massell, D., & Goertz, M. E. (2002). District strategies for building instructional capacity. In A. M. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 43–60). New York: Teachers College Press.
McEvily, B., Peronne, V., & Zaheer, S. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science, 14, 91–103.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2003). Reforming districts: How districts support school reform. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
McMillen, J. C., Lenze, S. L., Hawley, K. M., & Osborne, V. A. (2009). Revisiting practice-based research networks as a platform for mental health services research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 36, 308–321.
Meyer, J. W., Scott, W. R., & Strang, D. (1987). Centralization, fragmentation, and school district complexity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(2), 186–201.
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.
Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2003). From knowing to doing: A framework for understanding the evidence-into-practice agenda. Evaluation, 9(2), 125–148.
Palinkas, L. A., Aarons, G. A., Chorpita, B. F., Hoagwood, K., Landsverk, J., & Weisz, J. R. (2009). Cultural exchange and the implementation of evidence-based practices: Two case studies. Research on Social Work Practice, 19(5), 602–612.
Pea, R. D. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Solomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Pentland, B. T., & Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 484–510.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge.
Powell, W. W., & Grodal, S. (2006). Networks of innovators. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116–145.
Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240–267.
Rentner, D. S. (2013). Year 3 of implementing the Common Core State Standards: An overview of states’ progress and challenges. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy, George Washington University.
Rorrer, A. K., Skrla, L., & Scheurich, J. J. (2008). Districts as institutional actors in educational reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(3), 307–358.
Rosenkopf, L., & Almeida, P. (2003). Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility. Management Science, 49, 751–766.
Rosenquist, B. A., Hendrick, E. C., & Smith, T. (2015). Research-practice partnerships to support the development of high quality mathematics for all students. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 20, 42–57.
Rowan, B. (2002). The ecology of school improvement: Notes on the school improvement industry in the United States. Journal of Educational Change, 3(3–4), 283–314.
Russell, J. L., Knutson, K., & Crowley, K. (2013). Informal learning organizations as part of an educational ecology: Lessons from collaboration across the formal-informal divide. Journal of Educational Change, 14, 259–281.
Schlecty, P. C., & Whitford, B. L. (1988). Shared problems and shared vision: Organic collaboration. In K. A. Sirotnik & J. I. Goodlad (Eds.), School-university partnerships in action: Concepts, cases and concerns. New York: Teachers College Press.
Shenkar, O., & Li, J. (1999). Knowledge search in international cooperative ventures. Organization Science, 10(2), 448–469.
Sherer, J. Z., & Spillane, J. P. (2011). Constancy and change in work practice in schools: The role of organizational routines. Teachers College Record, 113(3), 611–657.
Smith, J., & Wohlstetter, P. (2006). Understanding the different faces of partnering: A typology of public-private partnerships. School Leadership & Management, 26(3), 249–268.
Spillane, J. P. (1996). School districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Educational Policy, 10(1), 63–87.
Spillane, J. P. (1998). State policy and the non-monolithic nature of the local school district: Organizational and professional considerations. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 33–63.
Spillane, J. P., & Thompson, C. L. (1997). Reconstructing conceptions of local capacity: The local education agency’s capacity for ambitious instructional reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(2), 185–203.
Stock, G. N., Greis, N. P., & Fischer, W. A. (2001). Absorptive capacity and new product development. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 12(1), 77–91.
Stoll, L. (2009). Capacity building for school improvement or creating capacity for learning? A changing landscape. Journal of Educational Change, 10, 115–127.
Supovitz, J. A. (2006). The case for district-based reform: Learning, building, and sustaining school improvement. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
Supovitz, J. A. (2008). Melding internal and external support for school improvement: How the district role changes when working closely with external instructional support providers. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 459–478.
Supovitz, J. A., & Weathers, J. (2004). Dashboard lights: Monitoring implementation of district instructional reform strategies. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter), 27–43.
Togneri, W., & Anderson, S. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools (pp. 1–74). Washington, DC: Learning First Alliance.
Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996–1004.
Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.
Van den Bosch, F. A. J., Volberda, H. W., & de Boer, M. (1999). Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organization Science, 10(5), 551–568.
Vaughan, D. (1996). The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Volberda, H. W., Foss, N. J., & Lyles, M. A. (2010). Absorbing the concept of absorptive capacity: Realize its potential in the organization field. Organization Science, 21(4), 931–951.
Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R. (1991). Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 57–91.
Walter, J., Lechner, C., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2007). Knowledge transfer between and within alliance partners: Private versus collective benefits of social capital. Journal of Business Research, 60(7), 698–710.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wentworth, L., Carranza, R., & Stipek, D. (2016). A university and district partnership closes the research-to-classroom gap. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(8), 66–69.