“Connecting the Dots”

Analyzing District Partnership Team Networks to Center Equity in School Principal Preparation

Aziz Awaludin & Richard R. Halverson

Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis

University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA

​

April 24, 2025

​

Introduction

• Problems in Traditional Principal Preparation Programs (PPPs)
• Often prioritize theory over real-world practice (Turnbull et al., 2013; Herman et al., 2022a)
• University-District Partnerships: A Promising Model
• Bridge theory-practice gap (Orr, 2006; Darling-Hammond et al., 2007)

Introduction

• Keys to Successful Partnerships
• Shared goals and mutual understanding among institutes of higher education (IHEs), districts, and communities (Herman et al., 2022a)
• Regular dialogue and structured collaboration (e.g., PLCs) (Herman et al., 2022a, 2022b)
• Open communication and negotiated roles (Breault & Breault, 2010)
• Challenges in Collaborative Partnerships
• Differing values, power dynamics, and planning complexities (Clark & Clark, 1997)
• Potential misunderstandings about partnership goals and responsibilities (Sanzo et al., 2011)

Introduction

• Research Gaps:
• Need for a deeper understanding of how partnerships transform PPP structures
• Past studies (e.g., Oonk et al., 2022; Starr, 2020; Akkerman & Bruining, 2016) show that organizational learning is built upon coordination: rituals, routines, and intentional structures.
• Research Question: How does coordination, as a collaborative routine, function as both an initial mechanism and a driver of organizational learning that leads to programmatic changes?

Research Setting

• Wallace Foundation.
• Equity-Centered Pipeline Initiative (ECPI), 2021-2026.
• Goal: Support school districts to create an equity-centered leadership pathway with other education stakeholders.

Research Setting

• Erie City Schools (ECS) and Huron School District (HSD), both located on the West Coast, were selected for:
• Comparable actor network sizes and data volume
• Contrasting demographics, structures, and equity strategies (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2016)

Conceptual Framework

• Four Mechanisms in Boundary Crossing (Akkerman & Bruining, 2016; Akkerman & Bakker, 2011)
• Coordination → interaction, shared tools, communication methods
• Identification → awareness of roles, positions, and differences
• Reflection → critical insights into practices and beliefs
• Transformation → creation of new or hybrid practices
• Learning as an Iterative Cycle
• These mechanisms do not occur in isolation; they reinforce one another (Akkerman & Bruining, 2016)

Conceptual Framework

Note: This diagram is created based on the findings from research by Akkerman and Bruining (2016).

Research Design

• Comparative, sequential mixed-methods (QUAL → quan) design (Clark & Ivankova, 2015; Creswell & Creswell, 2017)
• Emphasizes qualitative insights, supplemented by social network analysis (SNA)
• Integration occurred during the interpretation phase

Qual Data

Qual Codes

Quan Data

• Survey items on PPP:
• “Who did you work with to systematically improve candidate access to principal preparation programs, and how did you work with them?”
• “Who did you work with to strengthen the emphasis on equity in principal preparation programs, and how did you work with them?”

District Partnership Team Network Size

Analysis

Results - Coordination as Key Drivers

• ECS & HSD DPTs held regular meetings, such as PLCs, Day at/with Wallace events, and independent meetings.

“And so, we did that in collaboration with ECS and actually we had our partner university that also happens to be our mentor university. So, we had somebody from our partner university facilitating our conversation.” (ECS University 1 Focus Group, 2022)

“[We] talk about adopting a common performance task across institutions (as a goal for Year 3), a conversation inspired by the mentor university. [We’re] working on developing that common language.” (HSD PLC, 2024)

Results - Coordination as Key Drivers

ECS - Times 1-3 Combined

HSD - Times 1-3 Combined

Results - SNA

• Similarity: Both ECS and HSD networks revealed inter-organizational interactions that served as potential avenues for coordination.
• Differences: ECS exhibited higher centralization than HSD did.

Results

• How coordination channels programmatic changes

Results - From Coordination to Change

• Coordination ↔ Reflection
• ECS: from inter-organizational interactions to having feedback loops

“I think the long term is that it is always the interaction between district and higher ed [COORDINATION]. And I think for us, it’ll give us a stronger program by continually being able to interact and sort of have feedback loops with the district of how our students are doing in their clinical work, how we might make those experiences even better ... And if they’re not, why are they missing? And what do we need to do differently so we can improve the program? [REFLECTION]” (ECS University A Focus Group, 2022)

• HSD: from collective research examination to collective learning

“We have collaboratively examined the Wallace research [COORDINATION] that consistently shows principals are vital to thriving school communities. Our collaborative work is set up to facilitate learning that will be scaled across the state … collectively learn from our implementation successes and challenges [REFLECTION].” (HSD ECPI Application, 2021)

Results - From Coordination to Change

• Coordination ↔ Transformation
• ECS: from co-teaching and weekly meeting to modifying syllabi

“And then they teach or co-teach the other classes. So, we put that together, made some revisions to the district experience based on local issues in ECS, and modified the syllabi for a couple of courses [TRANSFORMATION]. And then we went through the same thing. So, I taught the instructional improvement class in the summer in ECS. We looked at student artifacts, and we said what worked, and what didn’t work ... And the two of them met every week [COORDINATION]” (ECS University B Focus Group, 2022)

• HSD: from collaborative work to reshaping Quality Measures team

“So, our mentor university is University X, and we’ve been working with Charlie [COORDINATION]. And we reshaped that [Quality Measures] team based upon her feedback [TRANSFORMATION].” (HSD University C Focus Group, 2022)

Discussion and Conclusion

• Extends Akkerman & Bruining’s (2016) boundary-crossing framework by showing:
• learning mechanism in collaboration and
• that coordination is not only a starting point but an iterative driver of transformative learning.

​

Discussion and Conclusion

CHANGE

Recommendations

• University & District Leaders: Intentionally embed coordination practices as routines of a collaborative initiative.
• Educational Leaders: Strategically use SNA to diagnose partnership health, identify boundary spanners, and strengthen ties with under-engaged actors, especially community organizations.
• Researchers: Integrate SNA with qualitative methods to reveal relational dynamics and learning mechanisms and, thus, inform network-centric PPPs.

CALL for Equity Centered Leadership

www.call-ecl.org

call-ecl@wcer.wisc.edu

Research Team Authors

​

Aziz Awaludin

Richard R. Halverson

Thank You!