|
The Power of Q-methodology: Getting Beyond Perceptions to Uncovering Actions (or Inactions)
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Matthew Militello,
University of Massachusetts, Amherst,
mattm@educ.umass.edu
|
| Sharon Rallis,
University of Massachusetts, Amherst,
sharonr@educ.umass.edu
|
| Abstract:
This paper explores the use of Q-methodology as a qualitative method for differentiating what participants in an alternative, district-based principal certification program express as their beliefs and demonstrate in their practice. This program trains aspiring principals to become instructional leaders who facilitate their teachers' practices for improved student learning. As evaluators we first looked at the impact of the training on participants' beliefs and understandings about instructional leadership through interviews and surveys. Next, we had to capture whether or not these new understandings changed participants' actions in practice. Resources, however, were not sufficient to allow time for shadowing principals to see how they actualized their learning in practice. We gathered all graduates to date and administered a Q-sort with statements drawn from the literature on effective leadership for learning practices. The paper will describe our methods and reveal our findings.
|
|
Developing Protocols for Qualitative Analysis of Education Sector Reform: Possibilities and Limitations of Research Protocols for Identifying and Informing on Non-linear, Iterative, and Generative Characteristics of Reform Processes
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| David Balwanz,
Academy for Educational Development,
dbalwanz@aed.org
|
| Jessica Jester Quijada,
Academy for Educational Development,
jquijada@aed.org
|
| Abstract:
The EQUIP2 team at the Academy for Educational Development is conducting case study analyses of Education Sector Reform in several different countries. Some of the reforms include: decentralization reforms in Zambia; adaptation of innovative and complementary school models in Guatemala; and school-based reforms in Namibia. The cases will outline the genesis, manifestation and development of specific reforms over a given period of time using an analytical framework highlighting specific factors influencing reform, including: Politics/Leadership; Finance/Resources; Institutional Framework; Institutional Capacity; Civil Society/Participation; and Driving Forces.
The research, in part, seeks to identify non-linear, iterative and generative characteristics of the reform process in each case and link that understanding to broader themes of system change, education quality improvement and roles of international donors.
This paper will outline the development and implementation of research protocols seeking to capture such characteristics and offer a discussion on some of the possibilities and limitations of such protocols in capturing information from the multiple contexts in which education reform takes place.
|
|
Success Case Study: A Retroactive Look at Impact Using the Success Case Method
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Ravneet Tiwana,
University of California, Los Angeles,
rtiwana@ucla.edu
|
| Abstract:
The Success Case Method, (Brinkerhoff, 2003), was used to qualitatively evaluate how the interventions of professional development and mentorship impacted the processes of successful teaching practices in the classroom. By using the program logic model to determine indicators of success, professional development and classroom observations as well as interviews were used to retroactively look at impact of an intervention. During a four-year evaluation descriptive and outcome data had been collected without examining how the intervention had successfully impacted social processes that led to outcomes. Hence, the Success Case Method was used to determine how the program's contextual factors were influenced by the professional development and mentorship, which lead to a more in-depth, focused, and complex understanding of quantitative outcome data.
|
| | |