Authority, Status, and the Dynamics of Insider–Outsider Partnerships at the District Level

Abstract

As school districts move toward systemic approaches to instructional reform, they are increasingly collaborating with outside organizations in this complex work. While emerging research touts the benefits of insider–outsider collaboration, we know little about the underlying processes by which partnerships are negotiated and maintained at the district level. Drawing on data from a longitudinal case study of a collaborative effort between an urban school district and a university-based research center, we investigate the role of authority and status in an insider–outsider partnership at the district level. We use conceptual tools from frame analysis and sociological theories of authority to describe the process by which authority and status relations develop. We then show that both authority and status shape how negotiation between insiders and outsiders unfolds. We argue that those with authority have a greater range of tools for negotiation and thus have greater influence. Status relations are important but are often mediated by authority relations. In addition, we argue that the organizational structure of the district shapes how the process unfolds in consequential ways. We conclude with implications for scholarship on and the practice of insider–outsider collaborations at the district level.

We thank Joan Talbert, Kristin Crosland, Angie Eilers, and Judith Toure for help with data collection; Mika Yamashita and Judith Toure for help with data analysis; and Grotius Hugo and Tara Amin for administrative assistance. We also thank the district personnel and outside support providers for letting us learn from their process, for their honesty about the challenges they faced, and their persistence in the face of difficult circumstances. Finally, we thank fellow researchers on the Meta Study for ongoing conversations about the dynamics of co-construction as well as Joan Talbert, Warren Simmons, and the research group on policy implementation at UC Berkeley for their thoughtful comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Notes

¹ Partnership for District Reform is a pseudonym.

²The foundation that funded the initiative and these two research projects prefers to remain anonymous to protect the confidentiality of the school district involved in the study. We are grateful for their support.

³In addition to the district-level research activities described here, the two research teams also conducted longitudinal analysis in 10 case study schools in the district. We do not draw on these data in this article.

⁴ Dornbusch and Scott (1975) made an important distinction between the perceived validity of authority relations and perceived propriety of authority relations. It is possible to believe that the authority relations are appropriate (perceived validity), without personally liking the authority relations as they have developed (perceived propriety). In this instance, there appeared to be normative agreement about the appropriateness of this set of authority relations (validity), even though outsiders involved in the relationship did not much like them (propriety).

⁵ For more details on the dynamics of resonance, see Coburn (2006).

⁶ See Pace and Hemmings (2007) on this point related to classroom authority.