Learning Improvement Science to Lead: Conditions that Bridge Professional Development to Professional Action

Background: As more education practitioners adopt techniques of improvement science to address problems of practice, there is an increasing demand for leaders with the knowledge and capacity to lead improvement efforts. However, little research explores how school leaders learn to lead improvement science in their school context or the challenges they may face in doing so. To ensure leaders are supported in learning increasingly common school improvement frameworks, there is a need to understand better the contextual conditions that may influence how practitioners come to learn and lead improvement science in their school contexts. Purpose: The purpose of this research paper is twofold: first, to understand how contextual conditions throughout a learner’s journey into, during, and after an educational leadership program could influence aspiring and current leaders’ efforts to lead improvement science. Second, the study aimed to explore the broader question of how context influences a practitioner’s ability to mobilize new knowledge into action. The researchers introduced the concept of “improvement science fluency” as a methodological contribution to specify the capabilities required to learn and lead improvement science effectively. The research question guiding the inquiry was: “What are the conditions that influenced the development of educational leaders’ improvement science fluency?” Research Design: The study focused on participants who completed a 10-week improvement science course as part of an educational leadership preparatory program at a large public university in Southern California. The research team conducted semistructured interviews with 17 participants who met the inclusion criteria of recalling and using the course concepts in their work since graduating from the program. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded using a weighted coding schema to assess participants’ improvement science fluency in guiding principles, tools, and dispositions. The research team analyzed the data to identify conditions that influenced participants’ application and adaptation of improvement science, categorized as professional experiences prior to the course, experiences within the course, and conditions in the organizational environment post-course. Contrasting cases were considered to enhance the robustness of the analysis and acknowledge potential variations within the dataset. Conclusions/Recommendations: The findings provided insights into the contextual factors that challenge or support the application of improvement knowledge to action, offering implications for designing and enhancing school leadership preparation programs to cultivate effective educational leaders for sustainable school improvement. The study emphasizes that organizational role and slack play a crucial role in shaping practitioners’ authority, opportunities for practice and application, and access to continued training and coaching, ultimately impacting their fluency in improvement science. To effectively support moving improvement knowledge to action, the paper recommends: (1) activating prior knowledge to prepare for future learning; (2) attending to the importance of the learning problem and its relevance to practitioners’ roles, scaffolding for role by providing support for practicing new knowledge within professional contexts; (3) addressing the organizational context to create an environment conducive to innovation; and (4) offering follow-up learning opportunities through sustained communities of practice. The study concludes that changing practice is not solely a matter of will and skill but requires careful attention to the broader context before, during, and after the learning experience to support innovations in practice effectively.