This paper examines interactions between educational systems and environments, focusing on the stance leaders take toward instructional guidance in their environment. After analyzing interview and focus group data from 49 school and system leaders across three systems (i.e., Montessori, International Baccalaureate, Catholic), we found differences by system in leaders’ stances toward their environment. These stances provided context for the educational infrastructure of each system and for the challenges leaders faced. Rather than taking it as a given that instructional practice is loosely coupled to educational policy, these findings help to illuminate a variety of relationships between systems, environments, and classroom practice, and suggest such variety has implications for school and system improvement.
BanksK.MaixnerR. A. (2016). Social justice education in an urban charter Montessori school. Journal of Montessori Research, 2(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v2i2.5066
2.
BeattyB. (2011). The dilemma of scripted instruction: Comparing teacher autonomy, fidelity, and resistance in the Froebelian kindergarten, Montessori, Direct Instruction, and Success for All. Teachers College Record, 113(3), 395–430.
3.
BerendsM. (2020). Social perspectives on school choice. In BerendsM.PrimusA.SpringerM. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on school choice (2nd ed., pp. 32–45). Routledge.
4.
BlaushildN. L. (2023). “It’s just something that you have to do as a teacher”: Investigating the intersection of educational infrastructure redesign, teacher discretion, and educational equity in the elementary ELA classroom. Elementary School Journal, 124(2), 219–244. https://doi.org/10.1086/727432
5.
BoalA.NakamotoJ. (2020). School change: How does IB Primary Years Programme implementation impact school climate?International Baccalaureate Organization.
6.
BrownK. E.LewisC. (2017). A comparison of reading and math achievement for African American third grade students in Montessori and other magnet schools. Journal of Negro Education, 86(4), 439–448. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroeducation.86.4.0439
7.
BrykA. S.LeeV. E.HollandP. B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Harvard University Press.
8.
CallahanC. (2003). Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate programs for talented students in American high schools: A focus on science and mathematics. National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
9.
CattaroG. M.CooperB. S. (2007). Developments in Catholic schools in the USA: Politics, policy, and prophesy. In GraceG. R.O’KeefeJ. (Eds.), International handbook of Catholic education: Challenges for school systems in the 21st century (pp. 61–83). Springer.
10.
CattaroG. M.RussoC. J. (Eds.). (2015). Gravissimum Educationis: Golden opportunities in American Catholic education 50 years after Vatican II. Rowman & Littlefield.
11.
ChildressS. M.DoyleD. P.ThomasD. A. (2009). Leading for equity: The pursuit of excellence in the Montgomery County Public Schools. Harvard Education Press.
12.
CoburnC. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 145–170.
13.
CocaV.JohnsonD.Kelley-KempleT. (2011). Working to my potential: The postsecondary experiences of CPS students in the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme. The Consortium on Chicago School Research.
14.
CohenD. K. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 311–329.
15.
CohenD. K.PeurachD. J.GlazerJ. L.GatesK. E.GoldinS. (2013). Improvement by design: The promise of better schools. University of Chicago Press.
16.
CohenD. K.SpillaneJ. P. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. Review of Research in Education, 18, 3–49.
17.
CohenD. K.SpillaneJ. P.PeurachD. J. (2018). The dilemmas of educational reform. Educational Researcher, 47(3), 204–212.
18.
CorbinJ.StraussA. L. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage.
19.
CossentinoJ. (2006). Big work: Goodness, vocation, and engagement in the Montessori method. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(1), 63–92.
DebsM. C. (2016). Racial and economic diversity in US public Montessori schools. Journal of Montessori Research, 2(2), 15–34.
22.
DebsM. C.BrownK. E. (2017). Students of color and public Montessori schools: A review of the literature. Journal of Montessori Research, 3(1), 1–15.
23.
DiehlD. K.GolannJ. W. (2023). An integrated framework for studying how schools respond to external pressures. Educational Researcher, 52(5), 296–305. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X231159599
24.
DillonM. (2018). Postsecular catholicism: Relevance and renewal. Oxford.
25.
DiMaggioP. J.PowellW. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
26.
DimmockC.TanC. Y.NguyenD.TranT. A.DinhT. T. (2021). Implementing education system reform: Local adaptation in school reform of teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Development, 80, 1–14.
27.
DixK.Sniedze-GregoryS. (2020). The impact of the IB Primary Years Programme on student well-being and other related social-emotional learning outcomes. International Baccalaureate Organization.
28.
DornerL. M.SpillaneJ. P.PustejovskyJ. (2011). Organizing for instruction: A comparative study of public, charter, and Catholic schools. Journal of Educational Change, 12(1), 71–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-010-9147-5.
DukeD. L. (2005). Education empire: The evolution of an excellent suburban school system. State University of New York Press.
31.
ErvinB.WashP. D.MeccaM. E. (2010). A 3-year study of self-regulation in Montessori and non-Montessori classrooms. Montessori Life: A Publication of the American Montessori Society, 22(2), 22–31.
32.
FarrellC. C. (2015). Designing school systems to encourage data use and instructional improvement: A comparison of school districts and charter management organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(3), 438–471. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X1453980
33.
Foundations and Donors Interested in Catholic Activities. (2020). Managing governance change in PreK-12 Catholic schools.
34.
GamsonD. A.HodgeE. M. (2016). Education research and the shifting landscape of the American school district, 1816 to 2016. Review of Research in Education, 40(1), 216–249.
35.
GoldschmidtE. P.WalshM. (2013). Catholic elementary schools: What are the models?Journal of Catholic Education, 17(1), 110–134. https://doi.org/10.15365/joce.1701072013
36.
GoughA.SharpleyB.Vander PalS.GriffithsM. (2014). The International Baccalaureate Primary Years Programme in Victorian Government primary schools, Australia. International Baccalaureate Organization.
37.
GraceG. R.O’KeefeJ. (Eds.) (2007). International handbook of Catholic education: Challenges for school systems in the 21st century. Springer.
38.
GrocholewskiZ. (2008). The Catholic school according to the Code of Canon Law. Journal of Catholic Education, 12(2), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.15365/joce.1202032013
39.
GroomeT. H. (2022). What makes education Catholic: Spiritual foundations. Orbis Books.
HautalaT.HelanderJ.KorhonenV. (2018). Loose and tight coupling in educational organizations: An integrative literature review. Journal of Educational Administration, 56(2), 236–258.
42.
HegsethW. M. (2021). Respect by design: How different educational systems interact with mutual respect in classrooms [Doctoral dissertation]. https://doi.org/10.7302/1364
43.
HegsethW. M. (2023). Attempting equity in classroom practice: A debate across educational systems. Elementary School Journal, 124(1), 129–156. https://doi.org/10.1086/725728
44.
HegsethW. M. (2024). Implementing along a continuum: Comparing the embedded agency of leaders and the coupling orientation of educational systems. American Journal of Education, 130(4), 555–582. https://doi.org/10.1086/730993
45.
HegsethW. M. (under review). A whole new common sense: How educational systems change culture to improve assumptions and treatment of youth.
46.
HegsethW. M.MillerA.O’ConnorM. (in preparation). Managing educational infrastructure to promote equity and well-being: A comparative analysis of public, charter, and Catholic leaders.
47.
HonigM. I. (2012). District central office leadership as teaching: How central office administrators support principals’ development as instructional leaders. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48, 733–774.
48.
HopkinsM.SpillaneJ. P.JakopovicP.HeatonR. M. (2013). Infrastructure redesign and instructional reform in mathematics: Formal structure and teacher leadership. The Elementary School Journal, 114(2), 200–224.
49.
International Baccalaureate Organization. (2013, August). What is an IB education?
50.
JohnsonS. M.MariettaG.HigginsM. C.MappK. L.GrossmanA. S. (2014). Achieving coherence in district improvement: Managing the relationship between the central office and schools. Harvard Education Press.
51.
KhanS.VanWynsbergheR. (2008). Cultivating the under-mined: Cross-case analysis as knowledge mobilization. Forum:Qualitative Social Research, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-9.1.334
52.
KushnerS.CochiseA.CourtneyM.SinnemaC.BrownG. (2016). International Baccalaureate Primary Years Programme in Aotearoa New Zealand: A case study in whole-school innovation. International Baccalaureate Organization.
53.
KyburgR. M.Hertberg-DavisH.CallahanC. M. (2007). Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate programs: Optimal learning environments for talented minorities?Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(2), 172–215.
54.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2021). I’m here for the hard re-set: Post pandemic pedagogy to preserve our culture. Equity & Excellence in Education, 54(1), 68–78.
55.
Larbi-CherifA.GlazerJ. L.IsonA. (2024). Continuous improvement in urban districts: Bringing environments back in. American Journal of Education, 130(3), 363–394. https://doi.org/10.1086/729598
56.
LawrenceP.LorschJ. (1967). Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 1–30.
57.
LillardA.Else-QuestN. (2006). The early years: Evaluating Montessori education. Science, 313, 1893–1894.
58.
LillardA. S. (2019). Shunned and admired: Montessori, self-determination, and a case for radical school reform. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 939–965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09483-3
59.
LillardA. S.HeiseM. J.RicheyE. M.TongX.HartA.BrayP. M. (2017). Montessori preschool elevates and equalizes child outcomes: A longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(1783), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01783
60.
LincolnY. S.GubaE. G. (2000). The only generalization is: There is no generalization. In GommR.HammersleyM.FosterP. (Eds.), Case study method (pp. 27–44). Sage.
61.
LortieD. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. The University of Chicago Press.
62.
MarksH. M. (2009). Perspectives on Catholic schools. In BerendsM.SpringerM. G.BallouD.WalbergH. J. (Eds.), Handbook of research on school choice (1st ed., pp. 479–500). Routledge.
63.
MarshJ. A.AllbrightT. N.BrownD. R.BulkleyK. E.StrunkK. O.HarrisD. N. (2021). The process and politics of educational governance change in New Orleans, Los Angeles, and Denver. American Educational Research Journal, 58(1), 107–159. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831220921475
64.
MarshJ. A.KerrK. A.IkemotoG. S.DarilekH.SultorpM.ZimmerR.BarneyH. (2005). The role of districts in fostering instructional improvement: Lessons from three urban districts partnered with the Institute for Learning (pp. 1–222). RAND Corp.
65.
MärzV.KelchtermansG.DumayX. (2016). Stability and change of mentoring practices in a capricious policy environment: Opening the “black box of institutionalization.”American Journal of Education, 122, 303–336.
66.
MedwellJ.CookerL.BaileyL.WinchipE. (2017). The impact of the PYP exhibition on the development of international-mindedness, critical thinking and attributes of the IB learner profile. International Baccalaureate Organization.
67.
MeyerJ. W. (1983). Conclusion: Institutionalization and the rationality of formal organizational structure. In MeyerJ. W.ScottW. R. (Eds.), Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality. Sage.
68.
MeyerJ. W.RowanB. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–63.
69.
MeyerJ. W.ScottW. R.DealT. E. (1980). Institutional and technical sources of organizational structure explaining the structure of educational organizations. Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance, School of Education.
70.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldanaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. Sage.
71.
MillerJ. M. (2007). Challenges facing Catholic schools: A view from Rome. In GraceG. R.O’KeefeJ. (Eds.), International handbook of Catholic education: Challenges for school systems in the 21st century (pp. 449–480). Springer.
72.
MillerA. F.ReyesJ.WyttenbachM.EzeugwuG. (2023). The limits of the “system of schools” approach: Superintendent perspectives on change efforts in U.S. Catholic school systems. Journal of Educational Change, 24(4), 943–970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-022-09475-1
73.
MontessoriM. (2008). The Montessori method. Wilder Publications, LLC.
NeumerskiC. M.CohenD. K. (2019). The heart of the matter: How reforms unsettle organizational identity. Educational Policy, 33(6), 882–915. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904819866918
76.
NugentS. A.KarnesF. A. (2002). The Advanced Placement program and the International Baccalaureate programme: A history and update. Gifted Child Today, 25(1), 30–39.
77.
ParkV.DatnowA. (2017). Ability grouping and differentiated instruction in an era of data-driven decision making. American Journal of Education, 123(2), 281–306.
PeurachD. J.CohenD. K.YurkofskyM.SpillaneJ. P. (2019). From mass schooling to educational systems: Changing patterns in the organization and management of instruction. Review of Research in Education, 43, 32–67. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821131
80.
PeurachD. J.FosterA. T.LyleA. M.SeeberE. R. (2021). Democratizing educational innovation and improvement: The policy contexts of improvement research in education. CPRE Working Paper No. 21-03.
81.
PeurachD. J.NeumerskiC. M. (2015). Mixing metaphors: Building infrastructure for large scale school turnaround. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 379–420.
82.
PeurachD. J.YurkofskyM. M.BlaushildN.SutherlandD. H.SpillaneJ. P. (2020). Analyzing instructionally focused education systems: Exploring the coordinated use of complementary frameworks. Peabody Journal of Education, 95(4), 336–355.
83.
PeurachD. J.YurkofskyM. M.SutherlandD. H. (2019). Organizing and managing for excellence and equity: The work and dilemmas of instructionally focused education systems. Educational Policy, 33(6), 812–845.
PowellW. W.RerupC. (2017). Opening the black box: The microfoundations of institutions. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.LawrenceT. B.MeyerR. E. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd ed., pp. 311–337). SAGE.
86.
RathundeK.CsikszentmihalyiM. (2005). Middle school students’ motivation and quality of experience: A comparison of Montessori and traditional school environments. American Journal of Education, 111(3), 341–371.
87.
ReedM. K. (2008). Comparison of the place value understanding of Montessori elementary students. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 1(1), 1–26.
88.
RigbyJ.WalshE. D.BotenS.DenoA.HarrisonM. S.MerrellR.PritchettS.SeamanS. (2019). A view from the field: The process of improving equitable systems leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(5), 484–500.
89.
RigbyJ. G.WoulfinS. L.MärzV. (2016). Understanding how structure and agency influence education policy implementation and organizational change. American Journal of Education, 122, 295–302.
90.
RowanB. (2002). Teachers’ work and instructional management, Part I: Alternative views of the task of teaching. In HoyW. K.MiskelC. G. (Eds.), Theory and research in educational administration (Vol. 1, pp. 129–149). Information Age Publishing.
91.
RowanB. (2006). The new institutionalism and the study of educational organizations: Changing ideas for changing times. In RowanB.MeyerH. D. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in education (pp. 15–32). State University of New York Press.
92.
RowanB.MiskelC. G. (1999). Institutional theory and the study of educational organizations. In MurphyJ.LouisK. S. (Eds.), Handbook of research in educational administration (pp. 359–382). Jossey-Bass.
93.
RynikerD. H.ShohoA. R. (2001). Student perceptions of their elementary classrooms: Montessori vs. traditional environments. Montessori Life, 13(1), 45–48.
94.
ScottW. R. (2008). Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests (3rd ed.). Sage.
95.
ScottW. R.DavisG. (2007). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural, and open system perspectives. Prentice-Hall.
96.
ShanklandR.GenoliniC.FrançaL. R.GuelfiJ. D.IonescuS. (2010). Student adjustment to higher education: The role of alternative educational pathways in coping with the demands of student life. Higher Education, 59(3), 353–366.
97.
ShirrellM.HopkinsM.SpillaneJ. P. (2019). Educational infrastructure, professional learning, and changes in teachers’ instructional practices and beliefs. Professional Development in Education, 45(4), 599–613.
98.
SmithM.O’DayJ. (1990). Systemic school reform. In FuhrmanS.MalenB. (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp. 233–267). The Falmer Press.
99.
SpillaneJ. P. (1996). School districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Educational Policy, 10(1), 63–87.
100.
SpillaneJ. P.BlaushildN. L.NeumerskiC. M.SeeligJ. L.PeurachD. P. (2022). Striving for coherence, struggling with incoherence: A comparative study of six educational systems organizing for instruction. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 44(4), 567–592. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737221093382
101.
SpillaneJ. P.HopkinsM.SweetT. M. (2018). School district educational infrastructure and change at scale: Teacher peer interactions and their beliefs about mathematics instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 55(3), 532–571.
102.
SpillaneJ. P.PeurachD. J.CohenD. K. (2019). Comparatively studying educational system (re)building cross-nationally: Another agenda for cross-national educational research?Educational Policy, 33(6), 916–945.
103.
SpillaneJ. P.SeeligJ. L.BlaushildN. L.CohenD. K.PeurachD. J. (2019). Educational system building in a changing educational sector: Environment, organization, and the technical core. Educational Policy, 33(6), 846–881.
104.
TarcP. (2009). Global dreams, enduring tensions: International Baccalaureate in a changing world. Peter Lang.
105.
ThorntonP. H.OcasioW.LounsburyM. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford University Press.
106.
TobinJ.HsuehY.KarasawaM. (2009). Preschool in three cultures revisited: China, Japan, and the United States. University of Chicago Press.
107.
WeastJ. (2014). Confronting the achievement gap: A district level perspective. In McCartneyK.YoshikawaH.ForcierL. B. (Eds.), Improving the odds for America’s children: Future directions in policy and practice (pp. 101–120). Harvard Education Press.
WoulfinS. L. (2016). Duet or duel? A portrait of two logics of reading instruction in an urban school district. American Journal of Education, 122, 337–365.
113.
YurkofskyM. M.PeurachD. J. (2023). The paradox of leading amidst uncertainty: Maintaining balance on an unstable beam. Journal of Educational Administration, 61(3), 185–204.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
