research
Job Market Papers and PhD Dissertation
Abstract: District education offices are crucial to school-level policy implementation. Analyzing policy documents and interviews with over 75 stakeholders in Ghana, this study uses an institutional logic framework to examine four logics of district work: bureaucratic, political, civic, and professional. It reveals tensions between the district’s traditional top-down bureaucratic role, its political and civic roles embedded in decentralization reforms, and recent policies emphasizing a professional, instructional support role with schools. These competing logics are evident in the recent introduction of the delivery approach, which mandates performance contracts at all levels to enhance the implementation of policy priorities. The study presents a framework to understand the complex institutional environment district staff navigate to deliver education policy and support teaching and learning.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738059325000173?via%3Dihub
Abstract: Background: Sub-national actors and organizations are crucial mediators of policy implementation due to their proximity to schools. However, in low- and middle- income country contexts, little is known about how they support policy planning and delivery and ultimately, school improvement.
Purpose: To understand the management context of five District Education Directorates (DEDs) in Ghana, and the factors that enable or constrain them to plan and implement policy. Participants: 43 interviews and focus groups with regional and district education officials, district political actors, and basic school headteachers and teachers.
Research Design: A qualitative study of semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and education policy and planning documents.
Analysis: To understand how policy implementation happens within complex, multi-tiered bureaucracies, our theoretical framework uses the management functions described in Williams et al. (2021) to explore two different paradigms of how to change public bureaucracies. We coded and analysed interviews, focus groups and policy and planning documents based on this conceptual framework and developed district-wide narrative memos, before synthesizing the findings into the analysis.
Findings: We identify three areas of (mis)alignments in management practices: competing goals related to improved learning, accountability practices and expected actions and the availability of resources. These (mis)alignments largely constrain district efforts to improve education delivery in Ghana.
Implications: To address this delivery gap, we argue for addressing resource constraints and aligning the education system towards learning for all.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013161X241230527
Abstract: Despite low average learning outcomes in primary and secondary education in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is often great variation in sub-national education outcomes. Indeed, pockets of high educational outcomes exist which cannot be accounted for by student background, level of resources and other contextual features. The middle tier, understood as the sub-national actors responsible for education delivery between the national and school level, has attracted interest as a driver and solution to these education gaps. Yet little is known about how middle-tier actors in LMICs influence policy implementation and how they support schools to improve teaching and learning.
This research examines the role of three district education offices in supporting teaching and learning in primary and lower secondary schools in Ghana. Each case explores the district office’s priority activities, its management practices, the influence of politics and levels of relational trust. It draws on over 70 semi-structured interviews and focus groups collected in 2021 and 2022. Participants largely comprised district education officials (management, subject specialists and inspectors), as well as stakeholders in the wider education ecosystem: national and regional education officials, district political actors, headteachers and teachers. Adopting a convergence triangulation mixed method design, the research also analyzes nationally representative survey data on district office management practices and relational trust.
While all three districts operate under the same education hierarchy and face significant resource constraints, the study finds significant variation in how, and to what extent, these district education offices support teaching and learning. Collaborative district management team leadership, active and supportive and instructional-focussed school inspector visits, and shared leadership all play a crucial role in meaningful support for teaching and learning in schools. These findings point toward a new framework for district leadership which responds to the roles and contexts districts experience in LMICs. Overall, this study highlights the need for increased attention to the middle tier’s role in education quality and draws lessons for effective district education office practice in LMICs to improve teaching and learning.
Other Academic and Research Publications
Abstract: Foundational learning levels have stagnated since 2015, with nearly 70% of children in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) unable to read a simple text with comprehension by age 10. Global school disruptions and
closures due to the COVID-19 pandemic, conflict, and climate-related events have exacerbated the urgency for
education systems around the world to ensure that all children receive a quality education. To address this learning
crisis, education scholars and practitioners have recently been paying increasing attention to the role played by the
middle tier in effective policy implementation and instructional support for teachers.2
The middle tier comprises subnational actors and structures in charge of education delivery situated between the school and the national ministry of education (e.g., regional, district, and cluster- or circuit-level staff). This literature review explores recent scholarship on this issue, pointing to how staff in the middle tier can play an effective policy mediation and feedback role between the school and the broader education system.
https://scienceofteaching.site/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/RTI-SOT-Literature-Review_19SEP2.pdf
Abstract: This paper looks at the research and policy literatures on system level leadership and management in low and middle-income countries at the central and subnational level. It describes two paradigms – one drawn from principal-agent theory and the other from sociological approaches to organizational learning and system improvement – which have led to contrasting prescriptions for effective system leadership. Highlighting recent research and experience in three case countries (Brazil, Ghana, Rwanda) the paper reviews the limitations of some widely adopted policy interventions and diagnostic frameworks developed to improve education system leadership. It also explores new efforts to measure and support management and leadership capacity, especially at the
middle tier of educational systems. The paper argues that much of what is understood about improving educational systems in LMIC contexts still focuses on getting policies, plans, technical systems, and procedures right – neglecting the potential impact of strengthening leadership capacity. This contrasts with the three decades of research on school and system improvement in OECD countries, which describes expansive roles for leaders and leadership at every level to improve the implementation of system-wide reforms.
Summary: This mixed-method study examined two districts exhibiting strong leadership for foundational learning and measured an expansive set of domains across 17 different respondent types at the district, sector, and school level. In keeping with a positive deviance approach, the study design was exploratory, rather than evaluative, in nature. To complement the exploratory stance, the study also measured domains commonly identified as relevant to improving the functioning of the middle tier, including leadership and management, responsibilities and norms, accountability and incentives, influence and decision-making, data engagement, knowledge and skills, and resources and time use. The study also pioneered new measures, including an adapted social network analysis tailored to middle-tier instructional leadership and a time-tracking survey for school-facing middle-tier actors.
The findings of this study, in some cases, align with prevailing hypotheses about effective education systems, such as collaborative problem-solving, voluntary accountability norms, and strong relationships and peer-to-peer support. Also supporting the prevailing hypotheses about effective middle tiers of education systems, we found good alignment across actors in terms of orientation toward and knowledge of foundational literacy, providing a reasonable level of coherence in the signals sent to school leadership and teachers about what is important in the classroom and how to focus efforts. We also found evidence that having a clear and consistent policy framework with well-articulated objectives and associated outcome tracking provides an important foundation and inspiration for districts’ work.
The study findings are less aligned with prevailing hypotheses about the centrality of the middle tier in directly providing instructional coaching to teachers. While we found that district actors prioritize school visits and that all actors—from top political leadership to staff at the sector level—recognize and act on the importance of visiting schools, observing lessons, and engaging with teachers, we also found that the school leadership team, represented by the principal, school-based mentor, and subject advisor in this study, are the most consistent and frequent providers of instructional coaching to teachers. Even in a context such as Rwanda, with favorable district/sector-staff-to-school/teacher ratios, the middle tier is not the primary provider of instructional support to teachers. This stands in contrast to many of the current policies and technical assistance projects that place middle-tier actors squarely in the role of instructional coaches. Rather, we found that districts’ role is focused more on amplifying national policies and priorities and working within their structures to effectively implement policies and track progress toward objectives. Additionally, district actors establish strong norms around the importance of the classroom, quality instructional delivery, and student learning, and reinforce this with consistent presence in schools and classrooms.
Link available soon!
Abstract: Sociologists of education have long been interested in inequality in students’ educational achievement and attainment by family socioeconomic status (SES). Achievement (typically measured as test scores in subjects such as reading, math, and science) and attainment (measured as educational degrees and credentials) are crucial to status attainment (Blau & Duncan, 1967; Sewell & Hauser, 1972). Across a wide range of international settings, SES inequality in achievement and attainment inhibits social mobility (Breen & Jonsson, 2005; Jackson, 2013; Jerrim & Macmillan, 2015). However, the degree of inequality in achievement and attainment varies widely across countries (Pfeffer, 2008; Van de Werfhorst & Mijs, 2010). Why? A large literature in comparative sociology of education, as well as in economics, describes the importance of cross-national differences in education policies, particularly around differentiation (curricular tracking) and standardization (the provision of equal educational standards), as well as the expansion of the duration and/or intensity of schooling. More neglected in this comparative literature is the role of cross-national differences in inequality in non-school environments. In this chapter, we review international comparative sociological research on the effects of educational policies on SES inequality in educational achievement and attainment.
We define the scope of our review as follows. In terms of outcomes, we focus on SES inequality in achievement and attainment. We exclude studies examining average achievement or attainment, as well as the large literatures on inequality in achievement and attainment by race, ethnicity, immigration status, and gender. We concentrate primarily on K–12 education, with some limited discussion of early childhood and higher education. We focus on international comparative research (involving comparisons of two or more countries) and mainly on high- and middle-income countries. Regarding methodology, we concentrate on quantitative research.
DeliverEd (Delivery Approach) Working Papers
Abstract: In 2018, the Ghana Ministry of Education adopted a delivery approach to deliver on the goals of its new 2018–2030 Education Strategic Plan. The approach was led by the National Education Reform Secretariat (NERS) and led to the implementation of national-level policies and better coordination across Ghana’s 17 national agencies, including the Ghana Education Service (GES). This report is focused on the introduction of a delivery approach at the subnational level by the GES with support from the National Education Reform Secretariat between 2021 and 2022. Drawing primarily on qualitative data collected in May and June 2022 in three regions, five districts, and 10 primary or junior high schools (JHS) across Ghana, the study explores how Ghana’s delivery approach was received by sub-national-level actors and how new management practices interacted with and changed existing management practices and routines. It provides a thick description of the challenges of implementing a delivery approach from the perspective of sub-national actors. (PDF)
Abstract: One of the most common reform strategies to improve education delivery worldwide is the adoption of “delivery units” or “delivery approaches.” These often take the form of dedicated units, located in ministerial offices, that aim to improve the performance of the education service delivery chain and combine a common repertoire of functions—prioritization and target setting, measurement and monitoring, leveraging political sponsorship, accountability and incentives, and problem-solving—in various ways. Such delivery approaches are often modeled on high-profile examples, such as the UK Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit (PMDU) or Malaysia’s Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU). This report synthesizes the findings of a multi-country, multi-team research project into the effectiveness of delivery approaches at improving education service delivery. The main countries studied were Ghana, Jordan, and Pakistan, with smaller studies in Sierra Leone and a soon-to-be-completed study in Tanzania. We also conducted a global mapping of the design and adoption of delivery approaches. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were employed in different ways across our country cases, and all research was based on a common conceptual framework developed by Williams et al. (2021), under the DeliverEd program, which enabled us to synthesize a disparate set of research studies into a common portrait of the ways delivery approaches impacted the education systems across these cases. (PDF)
Abstract: Governments all around the world are adopting ambitious goals and reforms aimed at improving the quality-of-service delivery, particularly in the education sector. However, they often struggle to translate these reform intentions into tangible action because these high-level intentions must be carefully formulated into an actionable plan, transmitted through a complex and multi-sited bureaucratic system, and then put into practice by frontline bureaucrats. Achieving rapid changes in the functioning of service delivery bureaucracies can be challenging due to the potential bureaucratic inertia and resistance, as well as the complexity, coordination, discretion, and innovation required to achieve systemic change. Understanding how to improve bureaucratic functioning and policy delivery has thus emerged as one of the main challenges facing governments worldwide. In the past 20 years, delivery units, delivery labs, and other similar approaches have been adopted by some governments aiming to implement reforms or achieve high level targets. These delivery approaches have been adapted and adopted in various forms by dozens of governments worldwide, with their use in the education sector being particularly widespread. The primary objective of these delivery approaches is to improve policy delivery by changing bureaucratic functioning. Research under the DeliverEd project seeks to provide a new body of rigorous evidence on the potential effectiveness of delivery approaches for achieving these goals, led by an ongoing set of in-depth country-level case studies of the particular delivery approaches in Tanzania, Pakistan, Ghana, Jordan, and India. The purpose of this paper is to outline a preliminary conceptual framework and set of definitions that can be used by each country’s research teams to establish a common vocabulary and set of research questions to harmonize their independent analyses. In particular, this paper focuses on establishing a definition and scope for what constitutes a delivery approach, identifying a set of design features that are common to many delivery approaches, and highlighting a selected number of key dimensions along which the design of delivery approaches can differ. (PDF)