THE ROLE OF NARRATIVES IN SUSTAINING REFORMS:
A CASE STUDY IN ORGANIZATIONAL MEMORY
by
JOSHUA S. FLOSI
A DISSERTATION
Presented to the Department of Educational Leadership
and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Doctor of Education
June 2009
11
University of Oregon Graduate School
Confirmation of Approval and Acceptance of Dissertation prepared by:
Joshua Flosi
Title:
"The Role of Narratives in Sustaining Reforms: A Case Study in Organizational Memory"
This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the Doctor of Education degree in the Department of Educational Leadership by:
David Conley, Chairperson, Educational Leadership
Philip McCullum, Member, Educational Leadership
Deborah Olson, Member, Special Education and Clinical Sciences
Alan Meyer, Outside Member, Management
and Richard Linton, Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies/Dean of the Graduate
School for the University of Oregon.
June 13, 2009
Original approval signatures are on file with the Graduate School and the University of Oregon
Libraries.
© 2009 Joshua S. Flosi
III
Joshua S. Flosi
An Abstract of the Dissertation of
for the degree of
IV
Doctor of Education
in the Department of Educational Leadership to be taken June 2009
Title: THE ROLE OF NARRATIVES IN SUSTAINING REFORMS: A CASE STUDY
IN ORGANIZATIONAL MEMORY
Approved: _
Dr. David Conley
This study employs a case-study methodology to examine the sustainability of
reforms at an innovative young high school. A variety of factors present obstacles to the
success of reforms, including loose organizational linkages and staff turnover. Using
Linde's framework of the paradigmatic narrative, this study explores how the stories
teachers tell each other about the origin and history of the school affect the way teachers
currently implement the founding vision in the face of loose organizational linkages and
staff turnover. In particular, this study focuses on the system of 9th- and 10th-grade
Language Arts and Social Studies team teaching.
CURRICULUM VITAE
NAME OF AUTHOR: Joshua S. Flosi
PLACE OF BIRTH: Denville, New Jersey
DATE OF BIRTH: November 14, 1973
GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED:
University of Oregon
Stanford University
DEGREES AWARDED:
Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership, 2009, University of Oregon
Master of Arts in History, 1996, Stanford University
Bachelor of Arts in History, 1995, Stanford University
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST:
Sustainability of Reforms
Proficiency-Based Education
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
English Teacher, Beaverton School District, Beaverton, Oregon, 2004-2009
English Teacher, Rosslyn Academy, Nairobi, Kenya, 2001-2004
History Teacher, The King's Academy, Sunnyvale, California, 1997-2001
v
VI
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am grateful for the guidance and support of my dissertation committee. My
advisor and chair, David Conley, continually challenged me to exceed my own
expectations. Phil McCullum gave meaningful feedback and encouragement from the
beginning of the doctoral program to the completion of this dissertation. Deborah
Olson's expertise in qualitative research was instrumental in designing the methodology
and navigating the human subjects approval process. Alan Meyer directed me to
essential resources for developing my understanding of organizational memory. In
addition, many other faculty and staff at the University of Oregon helped make this
dissertation possible. Special thanks are due to Ed Kame'enui for leading me through
the process of selecting a topic and generating a prospectus, Katy Lenn for providing me
with the skills to access the necessary resources, and Carla Bowers for helping me refine
my nebulous early ideas. I am also deeply indebted to the teachers and administrators at
Eagle Mountain High School for their willingness to allow me to retell their stories and
scrutinize their practice.
I would like to express my thanks to my fellow students in the Metro Cohort.
Through early mornings and late nights, we laughed and learned together. I could not
imagine a better group of people to share this journey with. I am also very thankful for
the gracious support from my family, without whose curiosity, encouragement and
assistance I could not have completed this project. And, of course, my wife, Laura, who
inspired me through it all. Her boundless joy and grace are an inspiration to me, our
children, and everyone she meets. She has been steadfast in her enthusiasm and
encouragement during the demanding process of this research. I cannot express how
grateful I am for the work she has done to allow me to complete this dissertation, and,
more importantly, for the joy she brings me every day.
Vll
To Laura, my joy
Vlll
IX
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem 1
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE............................................... 8
How Organizational Linkages Affect Reforms................................................... 8
Modes of Transmitting Organizational Memory 13
How Staff Turnover Affects Reforms 15
The Promising Role of Narrative in Sustaining Reforms 17
Linde's Paradigmatic Narrative 18
Analyzing the Paradigmatic Narrative 22
Where This Dissertation Fits in the Literature 24
III. METHODOLOGy 26
Rationale for Choosing Single-Case Design: Critical Case 26
Units of Analysis 27
Research Design 29
Selection of Interviewees 39
Limitations ofthe Methodology and Threats to Validity 44
IV. RESULTS 51
Description of the Case 51
Results From Expert Review of Data-Collection Materials 65
Chapter Page
x
Key Elements of the Paradigmatic Narrative at Eagle Mountain...................... 66
Current Implementation Status of Team-Teaching System 84
Factors Determining Placement on Matrix 88
Longevity Matrix............................................................................................... 93
Structural Obstacles Matrix............................................................................... 93
V. DISCUSSION 97
Criteria for Linde's Theory of the Paradigmatic Narrative 97
Relationship Between Familiarity With Narrative and Commitment to
Founding Vision 105
Determining Causality, Strength of Association, and Rival Explanations 106
Analysis of Rival Explanations and Causal Network 112
Conclusions 114
Limitations of This Study 115
Opportunities for Future Research 117
APPENDICES
A. INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS 119
B. FOUNDING NARRATIVE FRAGMENT MATRIX
INCORPORATING ELEMENTS FROM LINDE (2000) 124
C. ANNOUNCEMENT AT STAFF AND DEPARTMENT MEETINGS 126
D. DATA-COLLECTION MATRIX 129
E. EXPERT PANEL REVIEW PROTOCOL. 132
F. CONVERGENCE OF EVIDENCE 135
Chapter
Xl
Page
REFERENCES 137
Xll
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Longevity of Language Arts and Social Studies Teachers at EMHS 59
2. Key Elements of the Founding Vision as Expressed 72
3. Occasions for Remembering Within Eagle Mountain High SchooL 76
4. Implementation of Elements ofTeam Teaching 85
5. Relationship Between Teacher's Commitment to Team Teaching and
Longevity, Structural Factors, and Familiarity With the Founding Narrative 86
X111
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Convergence of Evidence.................................................................... 41
2. Interview Matrix 89
3. Role by Time Matrix.............................................................................................. 94
4. Structure by TeaIlling Matrix................................................................................. 95
5. Causal Network: Factors Affecting the Sustainability of Reforms at Eagle
Mountain High School 113
1CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this dissertation is to describe a research study regarding the role
of narratives in sustaining reforms at an innovative young school. The dissertation
begins with a statement of the problem: why it is difficult to sustain innovative reforms
in a comprehensive high school. This problem statement leads to a purpose statement
and research questions about the role of narrative. Following the statement of the
problem, this dissertation reviews the literature to develop the conceptual framework of
the study. This is followed by a description of the methodology, including the rationale
for a single-case study as well as protocols for conducting the data collection and
analysis. The dissertation then proceeds to a report of the results, followed by
discussions and conclusions. Finally, the dissertation ends with a brief discussion of the
limitations of the study and opportunities for future research.
Statement of the Problem
At the end ofAnimal Farm, George Orwell's allegorical fable of the Russian
Revolution, the pigs, the eloquent and visionary leaders of the communal farm
movement, gradually morph into the form of the men they so desperately tried to
supplant. The helpless farm animals look through the windows of the manor house to
2witness the final stage of the pigs' transformation. "The creatures outside looked from
pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was
impossible to say which was which" (Orwell, 1996, p. 139).
At times it seems like innovative new schools struggle against the same forces
that overcame Orwell's pigs. The initial euphoria surrounding revolutionary educational
reforms fades over time, often replaced by tedium, resignation, and burnout. Fink
(2000) calls this the "attrition of change," the slow regression from innovation to
conformity and stagnation. Eventually the innovative school becomes practically
indistinguishable from the traditional institutions it sought to replace.
Challenges of Innovative Reform
America has a "deeply ingrained utopian conviction" that schools are essential
to improving our society (Tyack & Cuban, 1995, p. 14). We believe that societal ills,
from teen pregnancy to a sluggish economy, result from or can be cured by our public
schools. Policymakers and parents, business leaders and teachers have long proposed
and implemented myriad reforms aimed at improving our educational system, and as a
result, improving our society. Unfortunately many of the best ideas fail to reach these
lofty goals. One key reason for this struggle is the concept of sustainability.
Sustaining educational reform is difficult. For decades, reformers and
researchers have worked to identify obstacles to successful, sustained reforms. Early
studies often laid the blame for failure on the design of the reform. These studies
3assumed that good reforms, what would currently be called "best practices," would
naturally supplant ineffective instructional practices, resulting in improved learning
(Cuban, 1990; Elmore, 2000). If a reform failed, it must have been poorly designed. In
the late 1960s and early 1970s, researchers began to consider the role of implementation
in the success of reforms. Reforms and policies may be well designed, but still fail to
take hold and make a difference if they are not implemented faithfully and consistently
(Gross, Giacquinta, & Bernstein, 1971; Sabatier & Mazmanian, 1981). For example, a
well-designed reform may be officially adopted into a school's curriculum. But if
teachers do not closely align their instructional practices with the published curriculum,
then the reform will not have an opportunity to impact student learning (Corbett,
Dawson, & Firestone, 1984).
Some reformers prefer incremental change, tinkering with pedagogical policies
until the right balance is found (Tyack & Cuban, 1995). Others have sought to
revolutionize the school system through dramatic shifts in the education paradigm
(Meier, 1995; Raywid, 1999; Sizer, 1992). One common opportunity for innovative
reforms comes when a community opens a new school (Fink, 2000; Miles, 1980). From
the design of the building to the hiring of staff, from the choice of curriculum to the
establishment of schedules and routines, new schools can literally build innovations
from the ground up. However, even new schools have to grapple with generations of
historical traditions, what Tyack and Cuban (1995) call the "grammar of schooling."
With years of personal experience, the public believes that it knows what a "real school"
4looks like. Deviation from that established model often faces strong community
resistance, even if the reforms are based on sound research. Parents and taxpayers
distrust schools when they don't resemble the adults' own school experience (Fink,
2000; Tyack & Cuban, 1995). The conservative forces exerted by the grammar of
schooling contribute to the attrition of change. And yet many reforms do last. In fact,
many reforms that have dramatically changed the grammar of schooling go unnoticed in
our discussions of reform precisely because they have become so institutionalized that
we no longer think of them as reforms. Compulsory attendance, age-graded schools,
kindergarten, middle schools, and Carnegie units are major components of our
education system that were once innovative reforms (Cuban, 1992).
The challenge of developing, implementing, and sustaining successful
educational reforms remains a major strand of research. This study seeks to contribute
to the field by examining one mechanism that may playa role in sustaining reforms: the
stories teachers tell each other about the origin and purpose of the reform.
Purpose Statement and Research Questions
The primary purpose of this dissertation is to examine the relevance of Linde's
(2000) theory of the paradigmatic narrative in the context of an innovative young high
school. The following research questions are considered in this study:
1. What role does the communication of the founding narrative of an innovative
young school play in the sustainability of reforms?
52. Can narratives help overcome the obstacles to sustaining reforms presented by
loose organizational linkages and staff turnover?
3. What is the relationship between an individual teacher's role in the
transmission of the paradigmatic narrative and his/her commitment to implementing the
founding reforms?
Sustainability of Reform
So what makes a reform last? Of course, there is no simple answer, but many
frameworks exist to guide the implementation of reforms. First, however, it will be
useful to define how we measure the success of a reform.
Definitions of Sustainability and Related Terms
Educational researchers and policymakers have used various terms over the
years to describe the process of reforms becoming ingrained as part of the normal
function ofthe school. Gross et al. (1971) measured the degree ofimplementation of a
reform by the way that organizational behavior conformed to goals and intentions of the
innovation. Incorporation suggests that the reform has become part of the body of an
organization. Routinization implies that the procedures of the reform have become part
of the daily routines (Miles, 1980). Continuation speaks to the longevity of the reform
beyond implementation, when the initial inputs of external resources are expended.
Corbett et al. (1984) compare this to the survival of a patient after being removed from
6life support. Institutionalization, the leading term in studies from the 1970s through the
1990s, also connotes that the reform has become established practice with full access to
necessary resources (Fink:, 2000). Miles (1980) points out the irony that because of its
focus on systematizing processes, "institutionalization ... can be the death of
innovation" (p. 7). Similarly, Anderson and Stiegelbauer (1994) argue that
institutionalization can have the effect of freezing or calcifying a reform, resulting in
stagnancy and eventual obsolescence. Sustainability, a more recent term, combines the
idea of codification with a sense of longevity (Datnow, 2005). In addition, sustainability
suggests a certain fragility that requires conscious action to uphold and protect.
Corbett et al. (1984) established four conditions for determining whether a
reform has been sustained: It is codified into rules, becomes part of training for
newcomers, survives budget challenges, and lasts even after departure of the initiating
leader. Tyack and Cuban (1995) add that successful school reforms must remain faithful
to the original design and demonstrate effectiveness in meeting the intended outcomes.
As Orwell's animals famously discovered, reforms may be adapted or co-opted in the
process of implementation. In other words, reforms change schools, but schools also
change reforms (Tyack & Cuban, 1995). Thus, fidelity in implementation is an
important factor to consider in evaluating the sustainability of a reform.
In addition to the criteria for evaluating reforms discussed above, Corbett et al.
(1984) explored eight conditions that impact the implementation and eventual
sustainability of reforms: (a) the availability of school resources, (b) incentives and
7disincentives for innovation, (c) organizational linkages, (d) existing goals and
priorities, (e) faculty cohesiveness, (f) staff and administration turnover, (g) the degree
of change required in instructional and administrative practice, and (h) the legacy of
previous reforms. Anderson and Stiegelbauer (1994) emphasize that sustainable reforms
also create structural conditions that support the continuation of the reform, including
training, funding, and community support.
8CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This section of the dissertation begins with a review of the literature on
organizational linkages, focusing particularly on how loose organizational structure
affects the sustainability of reforms. This is followed by an examination of modes of
organizational communication. The review then proceeds to discuss theories of staff
turnover and its impact on the sustainability of reforms. The literature on organizational
linkages and staff turnover both lead to the proposition that narratives may serve to
sustain reform in the face of inherent organizational challenges. Thus, the dissertation
continues with a review of the literature on narrative analysis, focusing on the theories
of Linde (2000, 2001). Finally, this section concludes with a statement about the gap in
the narrative literature and the way this study intends to fill that gap.
How Organizational Linkages Affect Reforms
Weick (1976) observes that researchers, and the public in general, often assume
that organizations operate in a rational manner. However, educational institutions in
particular "prove intractable to analysis through rational assumptions" (p. 1). That is,
schools do not always demonstrate what Meyer and Rowan (1977) call rationalized
formal structures-predictable, stable, bureaucratic systems. In fact, Meyer and Rowan
9assert, there is often a substantial disconnect between the formal structure and actual
activities of an organization. To address the variation and flexibility within educational
organizations, Weick introduced the concept of loose coupling. Loosely coupled
systems are more flexible to local adaptation, and therefore less easily standardized.
This allows for the possibility of elegant, organic solutions and adaptations, but it may
also inhibit the spread of advantageous external reforms (Weick, 1976).
Corbett et al. (1984) define organizational linkages as the degree of
independence within a system. In other words, how much do different parts of the
system function independently? According to their analysis, greater autonomy within
the organization leads to lower quality implementation. Formal mechanisms for
facilitating reform, such as administrative supervision, do not work as well in loosely
coupled organizations. This may be true of traditional compliance-based reforms, but if
incentives for reform rise above mere compliance, it may be possible to sustain reform
in loosely coupled organizations through more informal mechanisms. Meyer and Rowan
(1977) argue that decoupling allows an organization to transcend the constraints
imposed by rigid formalized institutional structures. Similarly, Pasternack and Viscio
(1998) describe a centerless corporation where innovation thrives in small units
empowered to pursue entrepreneurial opportunities. This shared spirit of innovation
may serve as an informal linkage in place of more formal or hierarchical organizational
bonds. However, the loose organizational structure of high schools has been faulted for
contributing to the failure of countless reforms (Elmore, 2000; Tyack & Cuban, 1995).
10
Organizational linkages have traditionally been categorized as vertical and
horizontal (Corbett et aI., 1984; Schwandt, 1995). Vertical linkages suggest a hierarchy
in which policy, supervision, and other communications are imposed from higher levels
of authority within the organization. In schools, vertical structures often include
curriculum adoption, the enforcement of policies, and whether teachers are following
agreements. Horizontal linkages are peer-to-peer relations. In schools, horizontal
communications include more than just staff meetings, but rather substantive
conversations about classroom practice. Horizontal linkages can be helpful for
distributing the collected wisdom of an organization (Schwandt, 1995).
The effective transfer of organizational memory may serve to mitigate the
effects ofloose coupling and staff turnover. Mintzberg (1975) identified two forms of
memory at work within an organization: hard and soft memory. Hard memory includes
school rules, policies, and processes. Soft memory is situated in people, documents, and
the social relationships within the school. Hanson (2001) suggests that hard knowledge
is less vulnerable to organizational memory loss over time. However, the inherently
vertical nature of the transmission of hard memory makes it less effective in a loosely
coupled organization. Tschannen-Moran, Uline, Hoy, and Mackley (2000) agree that
formalized "hard" memory can be effective, but only in stable and homogenous
environments. When the organizational culture is more complex, unstable or diverse,
the organizational memory needs to be more flexible or "soft." High staff turnover and
loose linkages are marks of unstable and complex organizational structure within
11
schools. In this kind of organizational culture, "soft" memory (e.g., behaviors,
documents, social relationships) may be more effective than "hard" memory (e.g.,
school rules, policies, and codified processes) at keeping the spirit of reform alive
(Mintzberg, 1975). However schools still face the structural obstacle that classroom
teachers rarely have formal opportunities to engage in substantive discussions. This is
what Argyris (1993) would call an organizational defense: a policy, practice, or action
that protects the organization from embarrassment or threat, thereby inhibiting
opportunities to learn. Many classrooms function as independent fiefdoms. Teachers, as
petty rulers, occasionally pay tribute to accrediting or supervisory authorities, but most
of the time they do not have the opportunity or necessity to cross their borders and
collaborate with peers.
The prospect for sustaining consistent, effective reforms across loosely coupled
classrooms may seem bleak. The loosely coupled organizational structure of schools
may inhibit the transfer of organizational knowledge because that knowledge is often
located in personal and social relationships rather than hierarchical structures (March,
1999). However, research in symbolic language, narrative, and discourse analysis
suggests a third way. Meyer and Rowan (1977) identify myth and ceremony as key to
bridging the gap between the formal structure and the actual activities of an
organization. Corbett et al. (1984) recognize that in addition to traditional vertical and
horizontal linkages, consistent beliefs about the vision of the school may serve to
embolden reforms that are closely aligned to that vision. This collective vision across
12
autonomous units of an organization is what Linde (2001) calls institution making. This
vision, communicated through narrative, serves to frame the organization's identity and
values, orient newcomers, and deal with contlict.
Clark (1972) introduced the concept of the organizational saga, a story based on
the unique accomplishments and history of an organization. As the saga develops, often
recounting the visionary leadership of an innovative founder, it engenders belief within
members of the organization. This belief, which Clark asserts is a crucial element
distinguishing saga from mere history, leads to loyalty, pride, and identity, resulting in
an individual's increased commitment to the vision and purpose of the organization.
Oberman's (1997) study of the Waldorf school movement presents a dramatic
example of organizational memory sustaining reforms in the absence of traditional
hierarchical structures. Each Waldorf school is run independently. There are loose
coalitions of schools, but no overarching administrative or accrediting authority like
school boards, state departments of education, or Catholic dioceses. Despite this lack of
systemic organizational linkages, there is remarkable continuity in the day-to-day
operations in Waldorf schools worldwide. Oberman argues that the rituals and symbols
of the Waldorf philosophy remind teachers of their common beliefs, which serve to
perpetuate organizational norms.
13
Modes of Transmitting Organizational Memory
The effective transmission of organizational memory is essential to the success
of reforms. If something is not remembered and shared within the organization, it is not
really learned (Kruse, 2003). Memory is both an individual neurological process and a
collective social process (Linde, 2000). By working together, forming social bonds, and
building communal memory, teachers can create a sense of shared meaning that keeps
reforms alive, focused and successful. Teachers need to be able to identify where we
have been, where we are going, how we will get there, and why (Fink, 2000; Kruse,
2003).
Of course, not all memory is inherently beneficial to a reform-minded
organization. Nostalgia can be a key element in teachers' resistance to innovative
change. Teachers' memories of a "better day," regardless of their historical accuracy,
may inhibit motivation to engage in the hard work of present reform (Goodson, Moore,
& Hargreaves, 2006). In addition, when organizational memory takes the form of rigid
ideology, it can be dangerous. If the link to the past obscures or inhibits productive
actions in the present, memory and ideology can be detrimental to growth and even
survival (Meyer & Starbuck, 1993). However, organizational memory can also be
employed to advance a vision of innovation, reminding members of their part in a
legacy of reform (Kruse, 2003; Linde, 2001).
Memory moves through an organization in a variety of forms. Schwandt (1995)
differentiates modes of communication into dissemination and distribution.
14
Disseminated knowledge is the purposeful transmission ofprocesses and policies, while
diffused knowledge is more informal communication. Dissemination often takes the
form of vertical, hierarchical communication. Policies are formed at an administrative
level and communicated through formal modes such as staff meetings, procedures, or
all-staff emails. Distributed knowledge tends to be more horizontal in nature. That is,
knowledge is shared between teachers in informal settings and modes (e.g., around the
lunch table or in person-to-person emails). However in a loosely coupled organizational
system, it is conceivable for dissemination to move in a horizontal fashion. For instance,
the communication of departmental agreements would qualify as dissemination, but it is
certainly horizontal in nature.
One important mode of building, transmitting, and reinforcing organizational
memory is storytelling. Scholars have long ignored this role of storytelling. This may be
attributed to Western culture's view of storytelling as a relic of childhood that should be
abandoned in favor of more serious adult pursuits (Campbell, 1988). However,
researchers in the growing field of discourse analysis are studying the roles stories play
in corporate society (Boje, 1991; Linde, 2000, 2001; Tyler, 2007). Stories allow people
to connect individual memory to organizational memory (Boje, 1991). In addition,
stories provide models for learning as a framework for the acquisition of new
knowledge (Tyler, 2007). In other words, people make sense of stories by telling them
to others. In the process they build meaning and reinforce their understanding of their
role within the culture of the organization. When listeners hear stories of the past, they
15
compare them to their present context and current events. This allows individuals to
examine their current practice in light of past successes and mistakes by learning from
the memory of the organization (Boje, 1991). This dissertation will address specific
theories of narratives in a subsequent section.
How Staff Turnover Affects Reforms
Organizations, as networks of human social interactions, are constantly
changing. This is particularly true of schools, where students move from class to class
throughout the day and over the years. Teachers may also move from school to school
within a district. The first 5 years of teaching often drive teachers to burnout. Because of
the relatively limited opportunities for career and financial advancement in teaching,
some of the longer-serving teachers move on to positions of administration or into the
mainstream workforce. These problems can be particularly acute in new schools. An
innovative school environment often draws teachers who are more likely to move on to
positions of leadership outside the classroom (Fink, 2000). This loss of experienced
staff may create a void of organizational memory, jeopardizing the status of innovative
reforms (Rusaw, 2004).
When newcomers arrive in an organization, they are faced with three kinds of
challenges: job function, hierarchical structures, and social networks (Louis, 1980). The
foremost concern for new hires is to figure out how to do their jobs. In teaching, this
means becoming familiar with the curriculum and designing new lessons in addition to
16
learning the basics: bell schedules, attendance systems, grade reporting, etc. New hires
also need to learn where authority lies. Who really wields the power in the school and
how does the new teacher find approval to get things done? In addition, a new staff
member must navigate complex systems of social networks. In general, this involves
figuring out where he or she fits in with the rest of the teachers. Levitt and March
(1996) argue that organizational routines can help overcome the challenges presented by
staff turnover. However, the loose organizational linkages of many high schools make
the routinization of memory difficult to achieve.
If new teachers do not get adequately socialized into the organization, the
sustainability of innovative reforms may suffer. Fink (2000) asserts that staff turnover
can create two distinct cultures within a recently founded school: originals and
newcomers. The originals may cling to their status as part of the founding group, in the
process building barriers to integrating new staff. Newcomers may feel this tension and
respond with resistance to the founding reforms, which may become associated with
individual personalities rather than sound educational practice.
While the challenges of integrating new staff can be debilitating for reform, staff
turnover can also provide opportunities for an innovative organization. The process of
inducting new hires into the organization can serve to recommit all group members to
established norms (Gardenswartz & Rowe, 2003). That is, long-established members of
the organization may have drifted in their practice from the founding vision and
17
agreements. By helping new staff learn the ropes, veterans may reinvigorate their
practice as well.
Linde (2000) describes the process of new hire socialization as a form of
induction. Some institutions have highly systematic induction processes, such as
military boot camp or medical school and residency. Less formal induction systems,
including schools, may benefit from using narratives to embed the norms and values of
the organization in the minds and behaviors of new staff. In addition to official
orientation activities, informal learning for new staff includes interactions between the
individual and the organizational environment (Brink, 2003) and stories reflecting the
beliefs of the organization (Rusaw, 2004). Regardless of the methods, new staff
members need to be inducted into the organization to begin to understand and contribute
to its goals (Linde, 2000).
The Promising Role of Narrative in Sustaining Reforms
The literature reviewed in the previous sections has led to the prospect that the
communication of organizational memory can help overcome the adverse effects of
loose organizational linkages and staff turnover. The following section examines in
more detail the role of narrative and details Linde's (2000) theory of the paradigmatic
narrative and its role in sustaining organizational culture and innovative reforms.
18
Linde's Paradigmatic Narrative
The stories teachers tell each other about the founding of a school may playa
role in sustaining the innovative reforms that the school was based on. The founding
vision of a new school greatly affects the direction it takes, from curriculum adoption
and hiring decisions to classroom design and daily bell schedules (Fink, 2000). Huber
(1996) asserts that this founding vision or "what an organization knows at its birth, will
determine what it searches for, what it experiences, and how it interprets what it
encounters" (p. 128). However, as Fink (2000) has shown, innovative schools often
face the "attrition of change" and come to resemble the traditional schools they sought
so enthusiastically to replace. Even in a school with a history of innovation, it is still
possible for reforms to fail if they are not implemented properly (Gross et aI., 1971).
Linde's (2000) theory of the paradigmatic narrative provides a framework for analyzing
the part that narratives can play in sustaining reforms within an organization.
In her study of the uses of narrative in a major American insurance company,
Linde (2001) identifies five practical media for transmitting organizational memory:
official biography and history, official periodical publications (i.e., newsletters),
speeches at meetings and other gatherings, training materials, and informal individual
conversations. If an organization had a charismatic founder, an official biography can be
a powerful tool for codifying the paradigmatic narrative. A newsletter or magazine may
publish formal features about the organization's history, or they may implicitly remind
members of their history through statements of goals, values, or even policies. Speeches
19
at staff meetings, graduations, conventions, and other formal gatherings may draw on
and reinforce a common memory to advance a present goal. Training for new staff, and
professional development in general, may call on members to revisit the history of the
organization through stories. Finally, individual retellings of narratives in the context of
informal conversations serve to index stories (Linde, 2001). That is, by referring to
familiar elements and context-rich associations (e.g., organizational jargon, inside jokes,
etc.), speakers assume their audience is familiar with the history. Boje (1991) calls this
terse storytelling. The speaker may only need to speak a few words to evoke a rich
volume of memory. The listener fills in the details, either verbally or mentally. In this
way indexing reinforces the strength of the narrative and further embeds it in the
organizational memory.
This last medium for transmitting organizational memory may be the most
powerful because it is so ubiquitous. It does not require a formal audience or a position
of authority (as official biographies, newsletters, and speeches do). Rather, every
member of the organization plays an incremental role in preserving memory through the
practice of daily conversations. In loosely coupled organizations, this form of
organizational communication is essential. This communication forms part of what
Pettigrew (1979) calls the "social tissue" that ascribes meaning to everyday tasks and
binds the organization together. Linde (2001) argues that if history does not exist in
narrative form in the context of relationships, then it cannot serve to inform and
influence the life of the institution. Even if the formal history is recorded in beautifully
20
crafted biographies, if it is not actually read and retold, it will not be acted upon, and
will therefore be forgotten.
Linde (2001) asserts that organizations employ narratives to reproduce power
structures, orient newcomers, and develop, identify, and deal with conflict. These
institution-making narratives remind members of their own identity and values as part
of the institution or what they must do to become part of it. Linde calls these
paradigmatic narratives because they establish the paradigm, or framework, within
which organizational memory exists. A paradigmatic narrative is rarely told as a
complete story, but rather recounted in fragments. Individual narratives within the
organization often find ways to link to components ofthis epic narrative.
Another feature of paradigmatic narratives is that they are most often
nonparticipant narratives (NPN). When a story is told, heard, and retold by people who
did not take part in the events being recounted, a sort of mythic quality may develop. As
Meyer (1982) observes, these stories become a mix of "historical facts, retrospective
justifications, and wishful thinking" (p. 50). Stories of this type would not continue to
be passed along unless both tellers and hearers believed that engaging in this form of
narrative could help them not only remember the past but also create an identity for
themselves within the institution.
One prominent example of a founding narrative serving to promote the
perpetuation of educational reforms is the story of Jane Lathrop Stanford. The co-
founder of Stanford University was instrumental in navigating the young university
21
through tumultuous times in its first 2 decades, including financial crises and faculty
revolts. A contentious figure in her day-she may have been poisoned (Cutler, 2003)-
Jane Stanford was already being beatified within a few decades of her death. George
Crothers, a graduate of the university's "pioneer" class of 1896 and later dean of the
Stanford Law School, gave a series of glowing speeches highlighting Jane Stanford's
continuing influence on the university in the 1930s (Crothers, 1932, 1933). According
to Crothers, the "guidance and ever-living spirit" of Jane Stanford remain evident. "For
centuries yet to come that vision and that spirit will inspire the lives and works of
Stanford students and create in them a love of that which is true and beautiful in life and
public service" (Crothers, 1933, p. 32). Today, over 100 years after her death, Jane
Stanford's influence and vision are still credited for the growth and success of her
university (Cutler, 2003; Wolfe, 2003). It is important to note that the accuracy of Jane
Stanford's biography is not particularly relevant, but rather how the stories of her life
and vision continue to be told today to influence the direction of the university.
Three-Part Process
Linde (2000) identifies a three-part process through which NPNs develop and
replicate the collective memory of an organization. First, the story becomes relevant to
an individual. This relevance may derive from personal experiences in the organization
or from the desire to become more deeply rooted in the organizational culture. Next, the
individual begins to tell her own story, incorporating elements of the paradigmatic
22
narrative. These elements may include the plot, characters, symbols, or language of the
familiar narrative as it is often told. Finally, the individual's story is heard and retold-
in part or in whole-and becomes part of the broader narrative.
Analyzing the Paradigmatic Narrative
Linde (2000) provides a series of questions to analyze the role and potential
impact of a paradigmatic narrative within an organization.
1. Who tells the narrative? The status of the narrator is important in Linde's
conception of the nonparticipant narrative. By connecting to the essential history and
core values ofthe organization, the storyteller is assuming a position of authority they
may not otherwise occupy in the organizational culture. This not only adds legitimacy
to her story but also serves to reinforce her status as an insider. As a result, retelling
parts ofthe paradigmatic narrative can expedite the process of new members' becoming
fully inducted into the organization.
2. Why is the narrative told? If the story is told as a series of unconnected
idiosyncratic events, it may not serve as a paradigmatic narrative. Instead, the
paradigmatic narrative contains recurring plot elements and symbolic patterns that
reveal the values and vision of the organization.
3. What are the events? The paradigmatic narrative is not expressly composed by
anyone individual. Instead, it is often told in fragments that become comprehensive
only in hindsight. The events may vary in each retelling, but a pattern gradually
23
develops that expresses the delicate balance between the founding and current values of
the organization.
4. What values are expressed in the narrative? One major purpose of a
paradigmatic narrative is to transmit and reinforce organizational values. Once those
values are defined, they can be identified in the individual stories that are told each day.
Stories that do not express these values may not be part of the narrative. In some cases,
stories that express contradictory values may be part of an unofficial, underground
narrative.
5. What are the relationships between the narrative and the reward structures of
the organization? In her study of a maj or American insurance company, Linde (2001)
found that the paradigmatic narrative clearly communicated that replicating the business
patterns of the founder would result in success and promotion within the organization.
Meyer and Starbuck (1993) found a similar effect in their study of corporate ideology.
As an instrument of induction, this narrative serves to help new employees conform to
the desired norms of the organization. In other words, the paradigmatic narrative is used
as a measure of success for individuals within the organization.
6. What are the occasions for retelling the narrative? A paradigmatic narrative
may be told in a variety of forms and occasions, including official publications,
speeches, training materials, and informal individual conversations. The audience may
range from a large group gathered specifically for the purpose of remembering to
24
individuals congregating in the lunch room. These opportunities for retelling pieces of
the paradigmatic narrative will be explored in more detail below.
Opportunities for Remembering
Throughout the life of an organization, there are countless opportunities for
activating sources of collective memory. These range from brief informal conversations
to well-crafted, memory-raising ceremonies. Linde (2001) categorizes these memory
triggers into regular occurrences, occasional occurrences, spaces, and artifacts. In
addition, she distinguishes between those events, locations and objects explicitly
designed for remembering and those not primarily intended for remembering, but used
to provoke memory nonetheless. The data analysis portion of this study will classify and
examine the opportunities for remembering at the case-study location.
Where This Dissertation Fits in the Literature
The role of narratives in perpetuating organizational memory has not been
extensively studied in the educational field. Oberman's (1997) study of Waldorf schools
employs a similar framework, focusing on the role of symbols and rituals to transmit the
values of the organization. Clark (1972) studied sagas in higher education, and
Pettigrew (1979) examined social dramas in a longitudinal study of a British boarding
school. However, there is a gap in the literature concerning the role of narrative in
American public schools. This current study will contribute to the field by examining
25
the role of narrative in sustaining the vision of reform in the context of a comprehensive
suburban high school.
26
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This methodology section begins with an explanation of the rationale for
choosing a case study methodology followed by a description of the units of analysis. It
proceeds to a discussion of the research design, including methods of data collection,
storage and analysis. This is followed by an examination of the limitations of the
methodology.
Rationale for Choosing Single-Case Design: Critical Case
Case studies can focus on either single or multiple cases in the data collection
and analysis. In the interest of triangulation and external validity, multiple cases are
often preferred. However, Yin (2003) presents five justifications for single-case studies:
critical case, typical case, longitudinal case, extreme case, and revelatory case.'The
purpose of this study is to explore a theory of how narrative relates to the sustainability
of reforms in the context of an innovative, young school (Linde, 2000, 2001). Therefore,
it is an example of a critical case.
In other sections of this dissertation, I define and operationalize the theory,
detailing the kinds of data I collected and what kind of results I would expect if the
theory were valid in this context. My data analysis section examines whether the theory
27
is supported by the results (whether the actual results resemble the expected results) and
whether the differences are due to contextual factors or theoretical flaws.
Units of Analysis
This study employs a multilayered unit of analysis. The case for this study is
Eagle Mountain High School (EMHS), a comprehensive public high school founded in
1999. Eagle Mountain is part of the Cotton Valley School District, a large suburban
district in the Pacific Northwest. (The name of the school, district, and all individuals
are pseudonyms.) The age of the school and its founding commitment to innovative
reform make it an ideal location to study the role of narrative in the sustainability of
reforms. Many of the founding administrators and teachers have moved on to other
positions, leaving new staff to wrestle with the history and vision of reform. The culture
and context of the school will be explored in detail in the section on the description of
the case.
One unit of analysis is the overarching narrative that encapsulates the vision for
the founding of the school. This story has been told, in various forms and fragments,
throughout the history of the school. The content of the narrative and individual
teachers' familiarity with it are a major focus of this study.
Another unit of analysis for this study is the system of team teaching in the 9th-
and 10th-grade Language Arts and Social Studies departments. This system is one
element of the founding vision of the school. Other key innovations that make the
28
school distinctive are (a) democratic decision-making processes; (b) open, flowing
architecture; (c) brightly-colored classrooms with moveable tables and collapsible
walls; (d) interdisciplinary teacher office areas clustered in small learning communities;
(e) biweekly advisory periods founded on a commitment to teacher-student
relationships; (f) career academies and service learning to connect curriculum to real-
world applications; and (g) trimester schedules for more flexible, student-centered
academic programming.
Any of these innovative reforms could trace its sustainability to the perpetuating
role of the narrative. However, this study focuses on team teaching for several reasons.
First, the team-teaching system is bounded in 9th- and 10th-grade Language Arts and
Social Studies classes. This allows for a more clearly defined pool of potential
interviewees than other reforms. In addition, using many of the other reforms as
outcome variables would require conducting interviews with or gathering data from
students. The theory of the paradigmatic narrative (as a tool of organizational memory)
applies primarily to teachers. Students, as consumers in the educational organization,
may have a role in perpetuating the organizational memory of a school, but Linde's
(2000) theory does not address this. Therefore, incorporating students into the study
would add a potentially confounding factor. Finally, team teaching serves as an
effective unit of analysis because of its history of uneven implementation. Some teams
consistently demonstrate all components of the team-teaching system, while others do
29
not engage in any elements of teaming. This variation in implementation may result in
potentially meaningful relationships in the final data analysis.
This study is designed to contribute to the literature on sustainability of reforms.
Therefore, the description of the case includes an analysis of the teaming system as it
was originally conceived and its current degree of implementation.
Individual teams, nested within the broader team-teaching system, make up the
primary units of analysis for this study. Interviews with team members are a major
component of the data collection. The variability between teams allows me to examine
the relationship between the stories teachers tell each other about the founding of the
school and the degree of current implementation of the team-teaching system.
Research Design
Collection of Evidence
Yin (2003) identifies six sources of evidence that case-study researchers can use
to gather data: interviews, documents, archival records, participant observations, direct
observations, and artifacts. The following paragraphs will consider the strengths and
weaknesses of these sources of evidence as they contribute to my study.
Interviews
This mode of data collection forms the bulk of my study. I am examining the
role of narrative in the sustainability of innovative reforms. One essential part of my
30
study is to identify what the narrative is. It is generally not one coherent story told by a
single narrator. Rather, it is more likely to be a series of interrelated elements told by all
participants. Each individual may tell and retell certain parts of the narrative that relate
to his/her unique experience and interests. Only by interviewing a range of individuals
was I able to reconstruct the paradigmatic narrative (Linde, 2000) that ties together the
years of experience. I interviewed current Eagle Mountain teachers and administrators
as well as those who were involved in the founding of the school but have moved on to
other positions (see Appendix A for interview protocols).
Compiling the paradigmatic narrative about the founding vision of the school
was a challenging, but manageable, process. The more intellectually strenuous
component of the interviewing process was determining how that narrative may have
influenced individual teachers' perceptions of and commitment to the team-teaching
system. Yin (2003) asserts that one strength of the case-study methodology is precisely
the flexibility to gather data on two levels at the same time. The researcher must be
nimble both in the design of questions and data-collection tables and in the actual
conduct of the interview.
Individual teachers have probably never given much thought to the connection
between the founding narrative and their perceptions ofteam teaching. To ensure that
interviewees had the opportunity to reflect on the familiar elements of the narrative and
their role in its transmission, I provided interview questions in advance. After
transcribing the text of the interviews, I made transcripts available for each interviewee
31
to review. It is quite possible that teachers may realize that they had more to say after
the interview has ended. This review gave the interviewees the opportunity to clarify
and add to their responses. However, I did not allow the interviewees to rescind or strike
their comments if they felt uncomfortable about the data in the transcript. No
interviewees requested such changes. Finally, I found that some responses were
insufficient for data analysis. Therefore, I conducted brief follow-up interviews to allow
respondents to clarify or add to elements of the transcript.
Yin (2003) makes two other suggestions that I incorporated in my interviewing
process. A case-study protocol allows for more flexibility in the line of questioning than
a survey protocol. Yin encourages the researcher to maintain a focus on the underlying
purpose of the interview while exhibiting the flexibility to pursue interesting leads. In
this process, the interviewer should use "how" questions instead of "why" questions
because Becker (1998, as cited in Yin, 2003) demonstrates that "why" questions make
the respondent more defensive. Nearly all of my interview questions began with "how."
A second suggestion from Yin is to treat all interviewees as if they are contributing new,
original data, even if I expect their responses to provide confirmatory data. This was
particularly important in my study because details of the narrative may vary in the
memory of individual teachers. This is consistent with Linde's (1993) assertion that the
established "facts" of a narrative may be based on spurious or umeliable claims of
authority.
32
As mentioned above, interviews served as the primary data-collection technique
for this study. One strength of the interview protocol is that it allows for a balance of the
consistency necessary to make valid judgments from the results with the flexibility to
allow for variations in individuals' relationship to the narrative. Another strength of
interviewing is that I could arrange to meet with individual teachers or pairs when it was
convenient for them, rather than trying to arrange schedules to allow for larger focus
groups.
The primary weakness of the interview method was that my access to the
narrative was second-hand. During the interviews, I did not observe and record the
narrative as it was told and retold. Rather, I recorded the narrative as teachers
remembered telling it and hearing it told. This did not allow me access to the subtleties
of interaction that are so important to discourse analysis. For example, I was not able to
observe the body language, vocal intonations, or power relationships that punctuate the
telling of stories within an organization. This may be a significant limitation of the
study. However, I did record data on the transmission of the narrative during
observations at staff meetings. This is discussed in the Participant Observation section
below. In addition, the units of analysis are individual teams and the outcome variable is
how these teams implement the founding reform. Therefore, interviews were sufficient
for accessing individuals' knowledge of and experience with the paradigmatic narrative.
In addition, the methodology of Linde's (2000) study, which formed the basis of her
33
theory of the paradigmatic narrative, relied heavily on interviews rather than direct
observations.
Whenever possible, I conducted interviews as teams. This addressed a second
weakness of the interview method. Individual teachers may not recall details of the
paradigmatic narrative without significant prompting from an interviewer. This
prompting could bias the results by leading interviewers toward certain responses and
away from others. However, when teams were interviewed together, the teachers
prompted each other in a way that may resemble the natural working of the team-
teaching system. In addition, the interaction of team partners allowed me to gather data
on the content and transmission of the narrative in a more natural, organic context.
Of course, in small-group interviews or focus groups some individuals may be
more inhibited, thus limiting my access to valuable information. In several cases,
teachers expressed that they did not feel comfortable doing a joint interview with their
partners. This necessitated one-on-one interviews to ensure that individuals had the
opportunity to express their ideas without undue pressure from their team partners.
Documentary Evidence
The goal of analyzing historical documents for this study was to ascertain the
vision of the school as it was articulated at its founding and as it has been
communicated over time. Some founding documents that pertained to my study include
publications, memos, and PowerPoint presentations used to communicate the direction
34
and vision of the school. School Improvement Plans, motivational posters (with school
philosophies and policies), the school website, and "design studio" pamphlets all
contain elements of the founding vision. One particularly useful collection of documents
was the Curriculum and Instruction binder that was presented to all teachers before the
first year. These documents, which are discussed in the results section of this
dissertation, were used to convey the founding vision to all new staff in the opening
year ofthe school. In addition, during the interviews, some teachers cited certain
documents as influential in their understanding and transmission of the founding
narrative, particularly the school website and documents included in summer reading
packets.
One advantage of document analysis is that I was able to look at documents at
my own pace and compare similarities and differences over time. A major disadvantage
of document analysis in my case was retrievability. That is, there may be documents out
there that I was not able to access.
Archival Records
The most useful archival records for this study were lists of teachers in the
Language Arts and Social Studies departments over the past 10 years. This information
was useful for me as I developed lists of possible interviewees. These documents also
helped corroborate interview data about classroom locations, team partners, and other
structural impediments to teaming. This information, in conjunction with interview data,
35
added to my understanding of how teaming has worked for different sets of partners
over the years. A further use of archival records was to gather data on the longevity of
teachers' service at EMHS and staff turnover. Teacher longevity will be one factor in
the data analysis discussed below. As demonstrated in the literature review, staff
turnover is a potential threat to the successful implementation of reforms. Therefore, the
patterns of staff turnover may reveal trends in the sustainability of the team-teaching
system.
The major advantage of using archival records is that it enhanced the quality of
my data analysis. The more information I had about teacher and team characteristics, the
more possible explanations and conclusions I could explore. Of course, the more data I
encountered, the more complicated my data-collection, storage, and analysis systems
became.
Participant Observations
Proponents of discourse analysis would argue that participant observation is
essential to uncovering the paradigmatic narrative in its myriad forms (Boje, 1991).
Stories are told in informal settings, sometimes in nearly incomprehensible fragments.
Only an intent listener with intimate contextual knowledge can collect, assemble and
interpret such narratives. As a teacher at Eagle Mountain, I am part of the context.
Observing and recording every episode of storytelling throughout the school
would have been unmanageable. However, it was feasible for me to record fragments of
36
the paradigmatic narrative or references to the founding vision as they were manifest in
meetings or other contexts where I was present. There was not much dialogue about the
narrative itself. Instead, fragments of the narrative, what Boje (1991) calls terse
storytelling, were generally employed to illustrate a point, advance a position or
establish a sense of common purpose. In the interest of systematic data collection and
preserving the rights of human subjects, I conducted observations only during staff
meetings and Language Arts/Social Studies department meetings. Limiting the
observations to clearly defined meetings helped me clearly delineate my potentially
intertwined roles as teacher and researcher.
I developed a protocol for collecting, recording and analyzing references to the
founding narrative (see Appendix B). This matrix included basic contextual details
(when and where), content (what was said), as well as the observable verbal and/or
physical responses of listeners. If members of Language Arts or Social Studies teams
were present, I documented their responses as well. This protocol is derived from
Linde's (2001) framework for analyzing the paradigmatic narrative as discussed above.
This targeted individual observation, in the midst of larger meetings, raised
issues about the rights of human subjects. At the beginning of the data-collection period,
I communicated to my fellow staff members that I would be conducting observations at
meetings. This year marks the 101h anniversary of the school, so activities for
remembering were common. Teachers did not appear to be overly concerned about one
of their peers documenting information about the transmission of organizational
37
memory. However, in my communications with staff (see Appendix C), I emphasized
that I would not be observing behaviors outside of staff and department meetings, and
that I would be using pseudonyms for the district, school, and all individuals in the data
collection and eventual dissertation. I provided a passive consent form to allow staff
members to opt out of the observations. If they elected to refrain from participating in
observations, I would not record any data (comments, reactions, behavior) for those
staff members. After receiving the consent form, if individuals remained concerned
about their privacy, I offered to meet with them to discuss their concerns and to devise
any additional protections. No teachers or other staff members opted out of the
observations or requested any additional protections for their privacy.
Direct Observations
I did not use direct observation in this study. During the pair interviews for
team-teaching partners, I could have included a component of discourse analysis,
observing the interaction ofthe partners in the context ofthe interview. The advantage
of this method would be that I could access the complexities of the teaming relationship.
However, that was not really within the scope of the research questions, so it would
have added unnecessary complication to the study. In addition, the interview context
was not an organic interaction between team partners; thus, any analysis of their
discourse would have suffered from the artificiality of the context.
38
Another possible forum for direct observation for this study would have been
observing teachers in their classrooms to determine the degree to which they were
implementing team-teaching reforms. The strength of this method was that I would not
be relying on teachers' self-reported commitment to team teaching. Teachers may claim
to be implementing the system more fully than they actually do. Of course, single
observations would not be an accurate or legitimate measure of fidelity to the reform. It
is quite possible for a teacher to implement the teaming system on a regular basis, but I
may have observed a day where teaming did not take place for any number of reasons
(e.g., test, team partner has a substitute, etc.). The amount of time necessary to observe
every team multiple times would have been a prohibitive weakness of this method,
particularly because the data gained from such observations would not likely have been
substantially different from that retrieved from a well-structured interview.
In addition, direct observation of teachers' classrooms would be far more
invasive than I intended this study to be. Such observations would heighten the risk to
the privacy of the individuals in the study. Observing individual teachers' classrooms to
ascertain fidelity to school policies may elevate the researcher to a position of undue
authority. In addition to being a researcher, I am also a teacher in the school. Such direct
observations, and the resulting imbalance of authority, could disrupt my peer
relationship with the Language Arts and Social Studies teachers, and potentially
jeopardize the interview process (my primary method of data collection).
39
Physical Artifacts
Linde (2001) asserts that physical artifacts and spaces serve as triggers for
memory. Physical artifacts did not playa large role in this study, except as opportunities
to remember elements of the paradigmatic narrative. In particular, the physical layout of
the school, including collapsible classroom walls, served to remind teachers of the
stories about team teaching embedded in the founding narrative. The primary advantage
of this form of data collection is that the physical artifacts of the school could be
accessed at any time (unlike the momentary conversations addressed in the previous
sections). The weakness of relying on physical artifacts is that they do not tell the story
themselves. They only serve as markers that reinforce or spark memory.
Selection of Interviewees
The pool of possible interviewees was relatively small. There are five 9th-grade
teams and five 10th-grade teams. I did not expect to elicit 100% participation from the
teams; however, I included them all in the selection process. I aimed to interview at
least one team from each of the four administrative "neighborhoods," at least two teams
from each grade level, and at least two teams with longevity and two teams of relative
newcomers. Because the interviews were voluntary, and I did not want to exert undue
pressure on my peers to serve as human subjects, I did not get an even distribution of
interviews from across the neighborhoods. I interviewed 12 teachers, nearly half of the
possible interview pool. Ten of those interviewees came from two neighborhoods. One
40
of the neighborhoods was not represented in the interviews. Five of the teachers were
from 9th-grade teams while the remaining seven taught 10th grade. Four of the
interviewees were founding staff members, four had been at the school for 4 or 5 years,
and four had been hired in the past 3 years. With the exception of the cluster of
interviewees from two neighborhoods, the selection of participants did meet the criteria
for diversity of experience.
Triangulation of Evidence
The sources of evidence discussed above contributed to the validity of the data
through triangulation. For example, fragments of the founding narrative were
corroborated by several individuals during the interview process. In addition, documents
from the founding of the school, research articles about the school, and observations
from staff meetings produced a pattern of data that coalesced into a coherent narrative.
Rather than relying on one potentially faulty source of evidence, this study benefited
from a convergence of evidence (Yin, 2003) resulting from multiple modes of data
collection (see Figure 1). As a result, the data were more robust, and the analysis and
conclusions may be more credible, authentic, and valid (Whittemore, Chase, & MandIe,
2001).
41
Documents and
presentations
Ar1icles about
the school
Observations
Interviews
with teachers
Interviews with
principals
FIGURE 1. Convergence of evidence.
Analyzing the Evidence
In his seminal handbook on case-study research, Yin (2003) outlines a process
of data analysis known as pattern matching. Using this approach, the researcher predicts
a theoretical pattern of results, then describes the actual pattern and compares the two.
This study was a critical case, intended to consider the accuracy of the propositions of a
particular theory about the role of narrative in sustaining reforms in the face of loose
organizational linkages and staff turnover. I began my data analysis by predicting what
the data should look like if the theory were applicable in this context.
After collecting data, I analyzed the similarities and differences in the data
patterns. I developed a data-collection matrix to manage the collection and analysis of
interview data (see Appendix D). Cells are divided into five major categories:
demographics; content of the narrative; transmission of the narrative; team-teaching
philosophy, commitment, and practice; and the role of narrative in team-teaching
philosophy and practice.
42
I sorted the data multiple ways. In the first sort, I looked at familiarity with the
narrative, transmission of the narrative, and fidelity to the team-teaching reform using
the technique of frequency counting (Miles & Huberman, 1994). This allowed me to
address my research question about how an individual's role in passing on the story of
the school's founding may contribute to that teacher's implementation of the founding
reforms. The second sort was by years of service at Eagle Mountain, using Miles and
Huberman's (1984) model of a role-by-time matrix. This allowed me to examine
whether predicted patterns existed between years of service and implementation of the
founding reforms. In a final sort, I examined the relationship between a teacher's
commitment to team teaching and structural factors that may facilitate or inhibit
teaming. I displayed the results of these analyses on matrices, including the relative
location of individual teachers and quotes from their interviews. These matrices are
presented in the results section and considered in more depth in the discussion section.
One of the major tasks in the data collection and analysis process was
identifying the core elements of the paradigmatic narrative. I made a chart, based on
frequency counting, that displayed the number of interviewees who referred to each
specific element of the founding vision. I created codes based on similar responses.
Then I categorized the coded responses into five groups derived from the core principles
cited in the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory's (NWREL, 2001) "Schools
Making Progress" article and interview data from the founding principal.
43
To address questions about the relationship between the transmission of the
founding narrative and the sustainability of the team-teaching reform, I examined the
strength of association (Miles & Huberman, 1984) and rival explanations (Yin, 2003).
Considering the explanatory power of rival explanations in relation to the theory under
consideration contributed support to the validity of the conclusions.
As I gathered data, patterns of causes, events, and consequences emerged.
Rather than focus on one linear chain in the web of events, I developed a causal network
(Miles & Huberman, 1994) to display and analyze data. I examine this causal network
in the discussion section of this dissertation.
Data Storage and Confidentiality
The data gathered in this study were primarily in three forms: (a) hard copies of
previously published documents, (b) handwritten interview and observation notes, and
(c) typed transcripts and digital audio recordings of interviews. I stored paper copies of
documents and notes in a locked filing cabinet in my office. Digital data, including
audio recordings and interview transcripts, were stored on my personal laptop computer.
I regularly backed up to two external hard drives to protect against the corruption or loss
of files. For both paper and digital documents, I used logical naming and filing systems
that allowed me to access the data efficiently while still protecting the confidentiality of
participants.
44
To protect the confidentiality of interviewees, I kept lists of pseudonyms
separate from the other sources of data. After the study is complete (and I no longer
need to follow up with interview participants), I will destroy the lists of pseudonyms,
thereby reducing the risk of participants being identified.
Limitations of the Methodology and Threats to Validity
The case-study methodology for this study primarily involved extracting and
recording the narratives that current staff members tell about the founding of Eagle
Mountain High School. Several limitations arose from this methodological approach,
including issues around the role of the researcher, the difficulty of accounting for
unspoken evidence, the potential artificiality of the interview format, and the problem of
contradictory narratives. In addition, the data collection and analytic techniques
introduced certain threats to validity. The following paragraphs address each of these
limitations and how I minimized their impact on the validity of the interpretations and
conclusions.
Role of the Researcher
If a paradigmatic narrative is present in an organization, often it is told in
fragments that would be unrecognizable to an outsider. In fact, part of the purpose of the
narrative is to establish the teller and listener as part of the inside group, emphasizing
their common membership in the organization. A researcher from the outside, who is
45
unfamiliar with the intricacies of the narrative, may miss subtle references and coded
allusions in the everyday conversations of staff members. Therefore, participant
observation is an important data-gathering technique for this kind of study.
As I report and interpret the data from this study, it is essential to address my
role as a participant observer. I have taught at Eagle Mountain for 5 of its IO years of
existence. During those years, I have taught ninth-grade English and been a part of two
team-teaching partnerships. I have also served as the head of the Language Arts
department, as a member of the Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment committee, and
in various other leadership roles. Ofthe 27 teachers currently in the Language Arts and
Social Studies departments, 11 have been at the school longer than I have, 6 came the
same year as I did, and 9 have been hired in the last 4 years. I know all of the teachers in
the study on a first-name basis, though I have more developed relationships with those
in my neighborhood.
In the interest of absolute objectivity, I could have attempted to ensure that the
background knowledge I brought to this study did not influence my data collection and
analysis. In reality, however, absolute objectivity is not attainable in participant
observations. I recognize that my interactions, relationships, and experiences at Eagle
Mountain constitute a frame for interpreting the data. If I tried to eliminate all of my
background knowledge about Eagle Mountain High School, the comprehensiveness of
the study and the eventual validity of the conclusions would be deeply compromised.
Rather than ignoring or suppressing my bank of knowledge and experience, I aimed to
46
be transparent about how I filtered the data through my prior knowledge of the school
and its dynamics.
My experiences at Eagle Mountain may have influenced the following elements
of this study: (a) the initial conception of the research questions; (b) assumptions about
the founding vision and narrative; (c) the choice ofteam teaching as the particular
element of the founding vision for analysis; (d) the development of interview questions,
particularly those relating to the essential elements of the team-teaching system; (e) a
filter for interpreting which statements are worth documenting and including in
representations of data; (f) familiarity with conflicts and controversies that may be
tangentially related to this study; and (g) the description ofthe case.
My familiarity with the history and daily operations of Eagle Mountain High
School, and the relationships I have formed with the staff, may have influenced the
objectivity of this study. However, these elements have also strengthened my position
as a participant observer, giving me access to nuances in the data that an external
observer may not be privy to. On balance, the benefits in data collection and analysis
outweighed the potential risks of subjectivity and bias.
Methodological Limitations
In the process of recording interview data, a somewhat paradoxical issue arises:
how to record what is not said. Of course, there are infinite possibilities of what teachers
may not say, and speculating about intentions can be dangerous territory for a researcher
47
to tread. However, there are several reasons to believe that teachers may not have told
me the complete story. First, I am one of their peers, so they know that they will need to
work with me in the future. In addition, because of my involvement in several major
administration initiatives and my enrollment in an administrative licensure program, I
have reason to suspect that some teachers may view me as a tool of the administration
rather than a nonpartisan observer. Finally, because this dissertation will be a public
document, some teachers may have been reluctant to speak openly for fear of being
identifiable in the final report ofthe research. I addressed each of these concerns in my
protocols and consent forms. Nonetheless, some reticence may have remained, resulting
in teachers' failure to reveal salient features of the narrative as they understand it. In
particular, the transition from the founding principal to the current one is a watershed
moment in the history of the school. It is possible that some teachers who have a rocky
relationship with the current principal may have withheld comments during interviews.
When this occurs, Linde (2001) recommends looking for opportunities to identify what
could or should have been said and wasn't. I document an example of this in the section
on "opportunities for remembering."
The use of interviews introduces a complication to the process of studying the
narrative. Boje (1991) and others have argued for studying the context of storytelling by
observing the behavior of tellers and listeners and applying the methods of discourse
analysis. Asking interviewees to recount their experiences with the paradigmatic
narrative is an artificial context. However, I conducted participant observations to
48
record the natural transmission of the narrative in staff and department meetings.
Interviews were still valuable because they allowed me to access the history of the
narrative as well as teachers' experiences in spontaneous or private conversations that a
researcher would not be present to observe.
Another important limitation derives from the question of whose narratives
become part of the organization's story. Can an official narrative coexist alongside
contradictory accounts or do competing narratives battle for limited space in the arena
of legitimacy? Linde (2001) observes that each organizational unit may have its own
history and memory within the context of the comprehensive institution. If these
memories overlap or contradict, Linde argues, the researcher should begin with the
official record and then proceed to the informal or competing accounts. For this study,
variations in narratives of the founding vision are profoundly important because they
may point to weak links in the mechanisms of transmitting organizational memory.
Threats to Validity
As with any data-collection and analytic techniques, the methods and
instruments used in this study presented certain threats to validity. One important
consideration was the issue of content validity in the interview protocols. That is, would
the interview questions generate responses that would help me answer my research
questions? To ensure that I did not lead (or mislead) interviewees, I employed an expert
panel review (see Appendix E). I chose two individuals who have intimate knowledge
49
of both the founding narrative and the team-teaching system at Eagle Mountain High
School. To maximize the range of experience and perspective on the panel, I chose an
expert who was a founding member of the faculty and another who had arrived in the
last 5 years. In addition, one was a Language Arts teacher and the other taught Social
Studies. One expert judge still served as an interviewee. I provided all interviewees with
the interview questions in advance, so members of the expert panel were not necessarily
biased by having seen drafts of the interview questions.
In addition to the interview protocols, another place where threats to validity
may reside is in the data analytic process. Whittemore et al. (2001) identify credibility,
authenticity, criticality and integrity as essential components of validity in qualitative
research. To ensure the credibility of my data analytic tools, I had the expert panel
review my data-collection matrices in conjunction with their evaluation of the interview
questions. By providing interview transcripts, conducting follow-up interviews, and
encouraging interviewees to clarify or correct any errors or omissions, I enhanced the
authenticity of my data and the subsequent analysis.
One of the biggest challenges in data analysis is avoiding what Whittemore et al.
(2001) call "uncritical verificationism" (p. 531). The goal of the study should be to
describe and interpret situations as truthfully as possible, even if that means the data do
not end up confirming the underlying assumptions or hypotheses. To enhance criticality
and integrity, I continually returned to the data and considered alternate explanations as
I analyzed and discussed my results. This was certainly not as easy as it sounds.
50
However, as I entered the data-collection process, I had a healthy degree of doubt about
whether the founding vision at Eagle Mountain High School constituted a paradigmatic
narrative and whether it had an effect on the sustainability of the founding reforms.
The limitations presented here, and any potential validity issues arising from
them, are further addressed in the section on the discussion of the data.
51
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
This chapter presents the results of the data collection. The first section is a
description of the case, focusing on the vision, organizational structure, and team-
teaching system at Eagle Mountain High School. This is followed by the results of the
expert review of data-collection materials. The bulk of this chapter compiles data from
interviews, observations and document review into a description of the founding
narrative using Linde's (200 1) framework. Finally, this chapter concludes with data on
the current implementation ofthe team-teaching system at Eagle Mountain.
Description of the Case
This section describes the high school selected for the case-study analysis. I
begin by outlining the vision, mission, conditions and context of the school, followed by
a description of the organizational culture and structure. This leads to details about the
team-teaching system, the founding reform that serves as the primary unit of analysis
for this study.
Triangulation of Data
Several sources of data contribute to this description of the case, including
interviews with the two principals, interviews with teachers, participant observations,
52
review of documents and presentations used for staff development, and externally
published articles about the school. The interviews with the two principals focused
entirely on the founding vision of the school and the modes oftransmitting that vision.
Interviews with teachers also addressed the team-teaching system.
Vision and Mission
According to founding principal Pam Armour, Eagle Mountain High School was
intended to be "the most innovative high school, using state ofthe art practice." The
founding vision of Eagle Mountain was derived from the philosophies espoused by the
Coalition of Essential Schools, the New American High School, and Breaking Ranks.
As the planning team began developing the goals for the school in 1997, they chose four
core principles: personalization and relationships, democratic decision-making,
community involvement, and professional learning communities (NWREL, 2001).
These principles guided everything from the design of the building to the kinds of
courses offered. Before the school opened, the founders sought to involve the greater
community in planning their school. Through phone and mail surveys and community
meetings, the planning team worked to gather substantial data from local parent and
business communities. Armour said that in these meetings parents repeatedly asked the
school to "Quit telling us whether our kids are headed to college." Armour interpreted
this to mean that parents wanted a variety of opportunities rather than traditional course
schedules governed by ability tracking. This led to a commitment at Eagle Mountain to
53
heterogeneous classes, open access to technology, and umestricted emollment in
Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses. In addition, the founders
developed a system of pathways, known as Career Academies, to help all students make
direct connections between their coursework and their postsecondary aspirations. As
Armour said, the superintendent had given her the mandate to "remove all barriers."
Another key element of the founding principles was personalization. The
planning team saw that large comprehensive high schools often create a factory-like
atmosphere, where students can drift through 4 years barely noticed by the system
(Oxley, Barton, & Klump, 2006). At Eagle Mountain, many concepts were implemented
to create the feeling of smaller learning communities as promoted by the Coalition of
Essential Schools (Sizer, 1992), including neighborhoods, advisories, and team
teaching.
The purpose of the team-teaching system is to allow instructors to build
relationships with a small group of students who spend most of their high school
experience (especially the first 2 years) in the same "neighborhood" within the school.
In addition, teachers are expected to align curriculum and design lessons, projects, and
assessments for joint classes (60-70 students and two teachers in the same room for up
to 140 minutes per day). Teachers regularly cited relationships and these other elements
as key factors in their philosophy of team teaching. The structure of the team-teaching
system is addressed in further detail below.
54
Conditions and Context
Eagle Mountain is a large comprehensive high school (approximately 2,000
students) in an affluent neighborhood of Cotton Valley, a large suburban district in the
Pacific Northwest. It was founded in 1999 as an innovative learning environment that
was supposed to be different from the traditional American high school. The students
are primarily white (71 %), although there are significant populations of Asian American
(14%) and Latino students (9%). The parent community is very involved in both
curricular and extracurricular activities, and 90% of students plan to attend college. The
International Baccalaureate (IB) program exerts a large influence over the curriculum
and master schedule.
Two demographic realities have exerted pressure on the school in recent years.
The growth of the English Language Leamer (ELL) population has strained the capacity
of core subject teachers. In addition, a significant population of lower SES students
(primarily White and Latino) has led to occasional socioeconomic class-related conflicts
within the student body.
Despite its reputation as an excellent academic school, Eagle Mountain
continues to struggle with unacceptably high failure rates for freshmen and sophomores
in core classes. This has been the subject of much data-driven discussion and various
ongoing interventions (including the team-teaching system).
55
Organizational Culture
The culture of Eagle Mountain is generally supportive of innovation and
autonomy within the context of professional expectations. That is, teachers are
encouraged to pursue innovative curriculum, instruction and assessment practices. The
founding principal encouraged creativity and innovation in the process of the founding
of the school and in its initial operation. She said she sought to create a "transparent,
respectful, collaborative, democratic culture.... Once people see what happens when
people are given the opportunity to speak their minds and own their voices in public
they do the same thing for their students." The current principal has continued to
support autonomy and innovation in classroom practice.
In some ways, the organizational culture resembles Ghoshal and Bartlett's
(1997) "individualized corporation." The administration aims to hire energetic,
committed teachers who are willing to take risks and try progressive approaches to
teaching. Thus, the administration recognizes (and for the most part respects) the
professional integrity and autonomy of individual teachers as "frontline managers"
engaging in entrepreneurial, integration, and renewal processes to design their
curriculum, instruction, and assessment in ways that the teachers believe are best for
their particular subject and students. According to Armour, "you don't get anywhere
superimposing or being dictatorial or mandating or being top-down with teachers. Even
if they beg you to do it." The organizational culture of the school grew out of this
respect for the professionalism and leadership potential in each teacher.
56
Organizational Structure
Consistent with the vision of the Coalition of Essential Schools and Breaking
Ranks, Eagle Mountain is divided into four smaller learning communities known as
"neighborhoods" (Barton, 2004; Sizer, 1992; Smylie, Lazarus, & Brownlee-Conyers,
1996). These neighborhoods function as semi-autonomous units. In many respects, it is
like a "centerless" organizational model (Pasternack & Viscio, 1998). Teachers' desks
are in an interdepartmental office cluster within the neighborhood. Thus, a Language
Arts teacher may share a four-desk pod with math, world language, social studies,
science, or business teachers. Departments exist, but most teachers associate themselves
with a neighborhood first because they have much more social and collegial interaction
with the other members of the neighborhood than with their departments. In addition,
departments do not have an executive "chair." Instead, departments are led by a
"contact," who serves as a liaison between the department and the administration and
Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment (CI&A) committee. Communication and
decision-making also flows through a series of other channels, including the Flight
Council and the Student-Staff Action Committee (Brewster & Railsback, 2003).
According to Armour, "The tenets that underlie that culture had everything to do with
democratic decision-making and staff getting together in a collaborative structure."
These multiple, overlapping components of organizational structure may lead to the
57
kind of holographic redundancy that enhances performance (Morgan, 2006). However,
this structure often leads to disruptions in the communication pipeline.
The Language Arts and Social Studies Departments are further divided into two-
person teams. Each team is responsible for teaching either 9th- or 10th-grade core
classes. The intended, or ideal, structure for these teams, which form the primary unit of
analysis for this study, is discussed below.
Staff Turnover
Like any organization, Eagle Mountain High School faces the challenge of staff
turnover. Because of the culture of democracy, innovation and autonomy, Eagle
Mountain could be seen as a career destination school. That is, teachers may arrive at
Eagle Mountain, recognize the elements that make it a unique and desirable school, and
decide to stay for a long time. Founding principal Pam Armour said,
We had a lot of staff who didn't really feel safe in their previous school
setting. Because they knew they would feel safe if this were a democratic
culture that respected all, this would be a place where people would not
feel fear.
Teachers who came and felt empowered by that democratic culture may have been more
inclined to stay for a long time.
On the other hand, certain elements of Eagle Mountain's culture may lead to
higher staff turnover. The school tends to hire innovative, energetic, young teachers.
Several teachers who had experience at other schools before coming to EMHS
commented on the culture of hard work among the staff. Alaina Cook said, "The work
58
ethic here is that people work very hard.... [The teachers] work and work and work.
It's amazing what they give." This might lead to staff turnover resulting from burnout.
In addition, the school's strong international focus (Uganda Sister School, World
Affairs Council, International Baccalaureate) draws teachers with international
experience and aspirations. As a result, each year one or two teachers leave to work
overseas. Finally, the school's commitment to teacher leadership has led to numerous
teachers pursuing administrative positions. Three of the administrators were former
EMHS teachers. The current staff has at least six teachers in administrative license
programs. In addition, at least five current or former staff members are in doctoral
programs in education.
These forces have led to a considerable degree of staff turnover. To display this,
I have grouped members of the Language Arts and Social Studies departments based on
their years of service at Eagle Mountain. I chose 5 years rather than 6 years as the cut
point between the two middle groups for two reasons: there are no teachers remaining in
either department who were hired in the 5th year, and the founding principal left after
the 5th year. Table 1 shows that nearly 60% of the teachers in these departments have
been hired in the last 5 years, and nearly 30% have arrived in the past 3 years. Only 5 of
27 teachers in the Language Arts and Social Studies departments remain from the
founding of the school.
Staff turnover within the Language Arts and Social Studies departments
averages about 14% per year. In one year, the turnover was as high as 7 teachers out of
59
TABLE 1. Longevity of Language Arts and Social Studies Teachers at EMHS
4
4
4
4
4
2
1
4
Longevity by department Number of teachers
._-_._"'-......"'......."''''......._-'''...._-_.-....'''.....'''_...._-_._--_. -~
10 years (founding staff)
Language Arts
Social Studies
6-9 years
Language Arts
Social Studies
---
4-5 years
Language Arts
Social Studies
..··_··..····_ ····· ~"m._~'._ _·..· ,...................................................................................... . _._..
1-3 years
Language Arts
Social Studies
27 (26%). In other years the departments only replaced one departed teacher. This rate
of tumover is much higher than the district average for certified staff, which is slightly
less than 9%. Of course, the district employs several thousand teachers, while the
Language Arts and Social Studies departments at Eagle Mountain are made up of only
27 teachers. Thus, the departure of one or two teachers can lead to substantial
fluctuations in the rate of stafftumover within the departments.
Communication and Organizational Linkages
As discussed earlier, Schwandt (1995) identifies two modes of communication:
dissemination and distribution. Disseminated knowledge tends to be top-down
directives or policies, while distributed knowledge is less formal and generally
horizontal in nature. At Eagle Mountain, dissemination is not always exclusively
vertical. The decentralized decision-making culture at Eagle Mountain allows
60
departments to determine their priorities and action plans. Communicating those
decisions, made among a group of peers (without even a formal department "chair"),
would be a form of horizontal dissemination.
The concepts of horizontal and vertical modes of communication may be
inadequate for describing communication at Eagle Mountain. The transmission and
exchange of knowledge and information at Eagle Mountain must navigate a complex
web of overlapping organizational units. It is not unusual for a single teacher to be part
of a neighborhood, a department, an interdisciplinary team, a Professional Learning
Community (PLC) or data team, a Critical Friends Group (CFG), and one or more
standing or ad hoc committees and task forces. Each committee or group will share
some, but not all, of its members with the other organizational units. These committees
have been extolled as "a five-part governance model" that serves to integrate each
neighborhood into the larger school community (Oxley et aI., 2006, p. 3). This may
result in the kind of positive redundancy expressed in Morgan's (2006) model of a
holographic mind. However, it often leads to gaps in communication and inconsistent
distribution of messages. Information does not necessarily get recontextualized into
useful a form when it moves between organizational units. For example, teachers
reported that they regularly felt disconnected from other neighborhoods and from
administrative decisions.
61
Ideal Structure for Team-Teaching System
According to the founding vision, as it was communicated in original
documents, interviews with founding staff members, and interviews with more recent
hires, the ideal structure for the team-teaching system involves several factors: team
teachers share the same students; adjoining classrooms with collapsible walls; back-to-
back class periods; a common planning period; only one teaming partner; and the same
students for the entire school year. The following subsections detail the intended
structure and potential challenges of each element of the ideal structure of team
teaching.
Team Teachers Share the Same Students
It is not unusual in the average high school for core-subject teachers to have
some overlap in their class rosters. At Eagle Mountain, the teaming system makes these
overlaps explicit and comprehensive. That is, all ofthe students in a ninth-grade
Language Arts class will be in the same Social Studies class as well. This is intended to
provide continuity for the students as they move from class to class. In the midst of
thousands of students, freshmen find familiar faces and build community with a small
group. This community feeling leads to a heightened sense of belonging, which, in turn,
contributes to greater student engagement and, eventually, higher achievement
(Coladarci & Cobb, 1996; Eberts & Schwartz, 1990; Sizer, 1992).
62
Adjoining Classrooms With Collapsible Walls
The architecture of Eagle Mountain was designed with the team-teaching system
in mind. Most of the classrooms have at least one collapsible wall, allowing the rooms
to incorporate two full classes at once. When teachers open the walls (often referred to
as opening the "doors," even though it is really a collapsible wall rather than a door),
they can teach both classes at once. The benefits of this may not be intuitive. Some may
wonder how two instructors teaching a class of 60-70 students leads to better learning
than one instructor with 30-35 students. Depending on the lesson, however, the larger
class environment can actually be quite beneficial. For example, one teacher can lead
the class in an activity while the team partner can work in small groups or one-on-one
with struggling students.
Back-to-Back Class Periods
Each class period at Eagle Mountain is 60-70 minutes long. lfthe teamed classes
are taught during consecutive class periods, then teachers can design extended lessons
that allow ample time for multiple learning styles and outcomes. For instance, a lesson
may begin with a period of direct instruction followed by related readings. Then
students may participate in an activity to reinforce or extend the readings, after which
they synthesize their learning through writing. Finally, the students can share their ideas
and revise their writing. It would be difficult to complete all of these components in a
single class period without rushing and therefore sacrificing the value of the learning
63
process. A two-hour class period allows for the teachers to allocate adequate time for
each phase of the lesson. If the periods are not back-to-back, the lesson may be
interrupted at an inopportune moment (e.g., in the middle of the activity or writing), and
student learning may suffer.
Common Planning Period
At Eagle Mountain, each teacher has one planning period per day. In the ideal
teaming system, team partners share the same planning period, and their desks are near
each other in the neighborhood office cluster. This common planning time (and
geographical proximity) is essential to designing integrated curriculum, instruction, and
assessments. In addition, because team partners share the same students, the common
plan time allows teachers to discuss the progress and needs of individual students. In
interviews, teachers repeatedly identified the common planning period (or its absence)
as the foundational factor in the success (or failure) of the teaming system. That is, even
if all of the other elements of the system were in place, without the collaborative
planning time, teachers were not able to fully implement the team-teaching model for
optimal student learning.
Only One Team Partner
The work ofteam partners is intensely collaborative. They spend a large portion
of their common planning time aligning curriculum and preparing meaningful lessons
64
for their combined classes. Therefore, it is essential that each teacher have only one
team partner. The additional workload of planning with more than one partner would
significantly limit the ability of the teacher to successfully team with either partner.
Teachers who have had multiple partners during the same term reported that this
additional level of complexity led to limited success with the teaming model.
Students Stay With One Team for the Entire Course
Core language arts and social studies classes at Eagle Mountain are I-year
courses. In the trimester system, each term is equivalent to one half of a year, so a full
year's worth of language arts or social studies occupies two trimesters in a student's
schedule. According to the founding vision, for the teaming system to work at its best,
students should remain with the same team for both trimesters. One of the key
mechanisms through which the team-teaching system aims to improve student
achievement is the development of a community culture (Barton, 2004; Oxley et aI.,
2006). By the end ofthe first 12-week trimester, teachers report that classes are usually
beginning to coalesce into a learning community. If the students are then uprooted and
transferred to another teacher, they must begin to build new community norms and
culture, even if the group of students remains the same. This can be quite disruptive for
the learning process, though teachers report that it is not as essential as the other
elements ofthe teaming model.
65
Results From Expert Review of Data-Collection Materials
After developing my interview protocols and data-collection matrices, I
empanelled a team of experts to review the data-collection materials. I enlisted two
teachers who were familiar with both the founding narrative and the team-teaching
system at Eagle Mountain High School. To increase the range of experience and
perspective on the panel, I chose two experts: One was a founding member of the
faculty, and the other had joined the staff within the last 5 years. In addition, one was a
Language Arts teacher and the other taught Social Studies. To help the expert judges
evaluate the interview questions and data-collection matrix in relation to the purpose of
the study, I included the proposal abstract and research questions in addition to some
specific questions about clarity, organization and bias (see Appendix E).
In general, the expert judges determined that my protocols were sound. They did
have a few suggestions for minor revisions, including simplifying the language of some
questions because interviewees would not be not familiar with the literature of discourse
analysis. One reviewer also suggested that I make a clearer distinction between
philosophy and practice of team teaching in the last two questions on the interview
protocol. Otherwise, teachers may not know how to answer the questions.
66
Key Elements of the Paradigmatic Narrative at Eagle Mountain
As discussed in the review of the literature, Linde (2000) provides a framework
of six questions for analyzing the paradigmatic narrative as it travels through an
organization:
1. Who tells the narrative?
2. Why is the narrative told?
3. What are the key events?
4. What values are expressed?
5. What are the relationships between the narrative and the reward structures of
the organization?
6. What are the occasions for retelling the narrative?
This section employs Linde's framework to access and evaluate the narrative of the
founding of Eagle Mountain High School.
Who Tells the Narrative?
At Eagle Mountain, the narrative is told in various forms by both old-timers and
newcomers, depending on the situation and purpose. Those who were present at the
founding of the school and its first few years are more aware of their role as storytellers.
In interviews, they tended to indicate that they have transmitted the story of the early
years of the school in both formal and informal ways to their peers. They recognized
that they had a high degree of familiarity with the narrative. For example, Jason
67
Jefferson, a founding member, said he could easily retell the whole story and had
repeatedly recounted fragments of the story in new-teacher seminars, staff-development
meetings, and various informal conversations. Another founding staff member,
Rosemary Grant, said, "I know just about everything about [the narrative] because I was
close to all of the planning team." She said that she regularly tells her team partner
about the early days.
Leslie Alter, the current principal, claimed that it takes about 3 years to fully
integrate into the Eagle Mountain philosophy. Not surprisingly, those who have been
hired in the last 3 years expressed much less familiarity with the narrative and less
comfort with retelling. For example, when Adam Bacon, in his 2nd year at Eagle
Mountain, was asked whether he had communicated the story of the founding of the
school to his fellow teachers, he exclaimed, "Oh, no!" In other parts of his interview,
Bacon expressed that he felt that his knowledge of the narrative was inadequate for him
to comfortably tell the story.
It seems intuitive that teachers who have been at the school longer would be
more familiar with the narrative and therefore more likely to retell parts of it. However
some of those recent hires who reported that they did not tell the story did, in fact,
recount elements of the narrative in the context of department meetings. These
fragmentary retellings were often preceded with a qualifying statement like, "I haven't
been here long, but from what I've heard ..." or "As I understand it, when the school
68
started we were supposed to...." The purpose for these kinds of statements is explored
in the next section.
Why Is the Narrative Told?
According to Linde (2000), individuals retell fragments of the narrative for a
variety of purposes, including establishing their role as an insider, building community,
and advancing their personal agendas. These last two purposes were particularly evident
in staff and department meetings at Eagle Mountain.
This is the 10th year of the school, and several activities have attempted to build
morale and foster collegiality by invoking the spirit of the founding. At the first staff
meeting of the year, teachers, counselors, and classified staff were asked to sit at tables
based on the year they were hired. Staff members then recounted to their table group a
favorite memory from their first year at Eagle Mountain. Selected memories were then
reported to the entire staff. As these explicit fragments of the paradigmatic narrative
were told, listeners reacted in both verbal and nonverbal ways. Several of the stories
elicited laughter and cheers. Staff members turned to each other and commented on
their recollection of or involvement in the episodes being retold. Others smiled, nodded
in recognition or made eye contact with peers, as if to say, "Do you remember that too?"
Staff members reported leaving that meeting feeling reconnected to their colleagues and
to the vision of the organization. This is an example of the narrative being explicitly
employed to build community.
69
The narrative has also been used to advance a particular agenda. By linking
current programs and goals to the founding vision, a teacher can establish or augment
the legitimacy of her position or proposal. For example, in a Language Arts department
meeting Ashley Steffens asserted, "We say we are about building community, but then
we don't make vertical looping a priority. So the community we build in ninth grade
doesn't carry over to 1alh grade." Matt Wilson, Stacey Harwood and Steve Richards
each echoed a variation of "We say we are about ..." to advance their particular
arguments for action or reform. The tone of these comments is usually authoritative, and
slightly derisive, as if the speakers, imbued with righteous indignation, are chastising
their peers, or the school in general, for failing to adhere to the revered founding
principles.
These references to the founding narrative are sometimes progressive, in support
of active innovation and reform. Other times, the narrative is invoked to maintain the
status quo in the face of a proposal that appeared to deviate from a teacher's
interpretation of the founding vision. In both cases, an appeal to the authority of the
founding narrative is almost always received with reverence, even by those who
disagree with the proposal. Listeners tend to respond by nodding their heads or speaking
simple phrases of affirmation. Even those who have previously expressed disagreement
with the proposal rarely respond in a way that would appear to challenge the
proponent's interpretation or invocation of the founding vision. For example, in the
cases mentioned above, no one responded with, "But that's not what the school was
70
founded on," or "That may be what we were founded on, but we should do something
different now."
One particularly interesting result of this use of the narrative is that it seems to
be employed to some degree by both old and new staff. Recent hires (i.e., those who
joined the staff within the last 3 years) tend to speak with less authority or certainty.
However they still draw on the narrative to bolster their assertions in department
meetings. For example, Jennifer Nelson, in her first year at Eagle Mountain, began a
comment about course forecasting by saying, "I thought I heard that in the beginning all
seniors were expected to take this class." By referring to "the beginning" she may have
increased the legitimacy of her position, particularly in an organization that places a
high value on its founding vision of innovation and reform.
What Are the Key Events?
The key events of Eagle Mountain's paradigmatic narrative can be classified in
two categories: the founding philosophy and the stories about the early days of the
school. They are generally closely related. For example, stories about the days when
there was only one lunch period carry a coded reference to the philosophical emphasis
on community and relationships. In meetings, teachers and administrators often make
reference to both strands of the narrative. However, they tend to have differing
purposes. Stories about events from the early days tend to be used to evoke nostalgia
71
and a sense of shared community, whereas appeals to the founding philosophy tend to
be used for advocacy.
In its article about the innovative reforms at Eagle Mountain High School, the
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (2001) identifies four core principles
guiding the school's planning and design: personalized and relevant student learning,
democratic decision-making, community engagement, and professional learning
communities. I have combined this framework with data from interviews, observations,
and early documents to generate five categories for grouping fragments or references to
the founding narrative and vision: Personalization and Relationships; Democracy-
Teacher Leadership, Decision-Making, Equity and Access; Rigor and Innovation;
Community Engagement and Relevance; and Challenges. Interviews with the principals
and PowerPoint presentations from planning team meetings were particularly
instrumental in developing these categories. Table 2 lists the elements of the narrative
by category and the number of interviewees who referred to each element in their
discussions of the narrative and their team-teaching practice.
Each element in Table 2 was mentioned by at least two teachers or
administrators during the interviews. Within each category, elements are sorted by the
number of interviewees who referred to the element. I did not account for the frequency
of an element within each interview. That is, one teacher may have referred to
democratic decision-making only one time in her interview while another teacher may
72
TABLE 2. Key Elements of the Founding Vision as Expressed
in the Paradigmatic Narrative
Element of founding narrative/vision
Personalization and Relationships
Smaller learning communities (neighborhoods)-
advisory, intimate and safe
Teaming and collaboration
No 1t h grade during first year
Democracy-teacher leadership, decision-making,
equity and access
Teacher leadership--clemocratic decision-making
Flexibility-professionalism, autonomy
Opportunity and access---course offerings, IB
Critical Friends Groups (CFG)
Rigor and Innovation
International Baccalaureate (IB)
Innovation---open to new ideas/programs, brain
based learning, project-based assessment,
cooperative learning, heterogeneous grouping
Architecture-layout
Trimester
Hard-working teachers
Charismatic founding principal
Community Engagement and Relevance
Community involvement-service learning,
internships, international perspective
Design team---community input
Challenges
Putting vision into practice
Class size---classroom space
Staff turnover
Building not physically ready
Democratic decision-making = endless meetings-
painful
Overextended---chasing educational fads
Blending students from two high schools
Planning team vs. rest of staff
Keeping up technology
Number of interviewees
who identified this element
(n = 14)
12
11
2
6
5
3
3
7
6
3
3
2
2
6
6
4
4
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
73
have recounted numerous stories about Eagle Mountain's democratic processes. In this
table, both interviews would count as one reference to this element.
Teachers generally do not perceive these elements as distinct, as they are coded
and categorized in Table 2. Instead, the core principles of the founding of the school
flow together in the retellings of the narrative. For instance, one teacher identified Eagle
Mountain's strengths as a "culture of rigor and collaboration and still a desire to ensure
personalization for all kids." Another said, "Many of the ideas I associate with the
founding of the school still influence my practice, specifically the emphasis on
collaboration, teaming, and teacher autonomy and leadership." This blending of
elements is key to the identity of the school. Innovation, collaboration, democracy, and
relationships are literally built into the architecture of the building, so it is not surprising
that teachers would express this integration in their retellings of the founding narrative.
What Values Are Expressed?
There are multiple levels of values expressed in the paradigmatic narrative at
Eagle Mountain. First are the core values discussed above: personalization and
relationships, democracy and access, rigor and innovation, and community
involvement? As fragments of the stories are told, these values are reinforced in the
teller and communicated to the listener (Boje, 1991). In addition, other values may be
expressed, including the nostalgic desire to restore the innovative spirit of the early
days. Some teachers also use the narrative to express frustration or resignation. One
74
Language Arts teacher said that when people talk about the history of the school, "Some
people are very discouraging. They say, 'This is the founding philosophy, but it's not
really happening, so don't even try.'"
The values expressed in the narrative are likely to be closely linked to the
purpose and opportunity for telling. For example, if a teacher is using the narrative to
help build a sense of community in the context of a formal meeting, she may draw on
fragments that express the values of personalization and relationship. On the other hand,
if she is venting to a colleague in the lunchroom, she might choose fragments of the
narrative that resonate with her frustration. Either way, the role of the narrative in
communicating values was clear when Brett Hughes said:
I picked [the founding vision] up informally (like during lunch
conversations) and formally (at staff development meetings). I came
away with the impression that the founding of the school was a seminal
event, and that we needed to be very aware of it. ... One of the
impressions I got was that this was a school that really emphasized
collaboration. It's part of the reason I still try to do it, though the hectic
daily pace often gets in the way. But I have to say that this message was
communicated successfully.... I really do feel that collaborating with
other teachers is very much an expected and necessary part of my job.
What Are the Relationships Between the Narrative and the
Reward Structures of the Organization?
At Eagle Mountain, there appear to be no explicit connections between the
narrative and the reward structures of the organization. In Linde's (2001) study of
narrative in a major American insurance company, she found that the relationship was
embedded within the narrative itself. That is, the narrative says that if you conduct your
75
business according to the model espoused by the charismatic founder, you will advance
within the hierarchy ofthe organization. In a public school like EMHS, salaries,
benefits, and teaching assignments are determined by longevity and educational
attainment as enumerated in a collective bargaining agreement. Therefore familiarity
with or adherence to the founding narrative does not contribute in any explicit way to a
teacher's advancement at the school.
There may be implicit rewards and benefits that accrue from an individual's
participation in the transmission of the narrative. For example, several teachers
expressed frustration about unequal access to the structural components of teaming.
Year after year, a few teachers consistently have common planning periods, back-to-
back classes, collapsible walls and the other necessary elements ofteaming. Meanwhile,
other teams are regularly left without those essential components. One teacher
suggested that this inequality could be related to a teacher's familiarity with and
participation in transmitting the narrative. However, accessing the data necessary to
reach such conclusions is beyond the scope of this study.
What Are the Occasions for Retelling the Narrative?
Linde (2001) categorizes the occasions for retelling the narrative into regular
occurrences, occasional occurrences, spaces, and artifacts. These categories are further
divided into events, locations and objects that are designed specifically for remembering
and those designed for other purposes but that still serve as opportunities to remember.
76
Table 3 arranges opportunities for remembering at Eagle Mountain into Linde's
categories.
TABLE 3. Occasions for Remembering Within Eagle Mountain High School
Time-regular
occurrences
Time-irregular
or occasional
Space
Artifacts
Designed for remembering
Graduation
Homecoming
End-of-school-year staff party
Preservice staff meetings,
including "welcome back"
ceremony
Preservice reading packet,
including articles about the
school
Retirement parties
Design studio
Trophy case
Newspaper clippings on bulletin
boards-athletics, drama
Athletic record board
Founding plaque
Framed groundbreaking
ceremony memorabilia in
offices
Yearbook
Trophies
Posters from drama productions
Not primarily designed for
remembering-but still
used for remembering
New Staff Orientation
Monthly staff meetings
Weekly staff calendar (website)
Monthly newsletter
Department meetings
Forecasting
Staff/neighborhood social events
New course proposals
Hiring process
Counselors providing guidance to
students and parents
Staff conversations
Murals in hallways-freedoms,
peace, sister school
Architecture-collapsible walls, open
computer labs, neighborhoods
Career Academy signs
Student newspaper-back issues
Website-section on
foundinglhistory
T-shirts celebrating past events ("10
years of excellence")
Note. Category headings from "Narrative in Institutions" (p. 526), by C. Linde, in D. Schiffrin,
D. Tannen, and H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The Handbook ofDiscourse Analysis, 2001, Malden,
MA: Blackwell.
As a relatively young school, Eagle Mountain does not have generations of
memory to archive and recall. Instead, the lifespan of the school from the initial
77
planning team to the present is about 12 years. Nonetheless, there is a vibrant sense of
history in the ceremonies, spaces, artifacts, and conversations that inhabit the school.
From staff meetings to state championship banners, from the school website to the
architecture of the building, history permeates the culture of Eagle Mountain. As
mentioned above, the preservice meeting at the start of the current school year illustrates
both formal and informal opportunities for remembering the paradigmatic narrative at
Eagle Mountain High School. The first part of the meeting was led by members ofthe
10-year anniversary committee, with the explicit goal of retelling important fragments
in the story of the school. One member of the committee introduced the purpose of the
meeting as "look[ing] to the past to see where we've come from, and maybe where we
are headed." Teachers, administrators, and classified staff were instructed to sit in table
groups based on the year they came to Eagle Mountain and discuss memorable events
from that year.
After about 10 minutes of animated conversations, each group shared some of
their favorite memories. The founding teachers talked about the sense of community
and purpose. In particular, they remembered that during the first year there was only one
lunch period and most staff members ate together in a common teachers' lounge. They
also joked about excessively hot classrooms and frantically assembling student desks
the weekend before school opened. Teachers who came the 2nd year echoed the
sentiments about purpose and unity. One expressed that coming to Eagle Mountain from
a more traditional school environment felt like arriving in "Shangri-la for teachers."
78
Particularly, he remembered being thrilled by challenging professional discussions,
insightful summer readings, and teacher input for school decisions.
As the meeting progressed, staff members recalled humorous moments, state
championships, and crises, including a lockdown during the spring carnival, an
evacuation due to burnt popcorn and the terror of 9/11. The teachers who arrived in the
6th year remembered that the school had grown so much that there were now two
lunches, and the former staff lounge was now being used as a science classroom. As
these details were recalled, several founding staff members looked at each other and
sighed-as if part of the community spirit of the early days had been lost.
Despite this moment of bittersweet nostalgia, the tone ofthe remembrances was
essentially upbeat and hopeful. The public and official nature of this recollection of
history may have served to suppress any unpleasant or controversial stories. For
example, the group hired in the school's 7th year arrived in the midst of a major
controversy about a cancelled drama performance. The furor drew national attention and
dragged on for nearly the entire school year. Several staff members resigned as a result
ofthe crisis, and one has since filed a lawsuit against the district. The teacher who
presented the 7th-year hires' recollections at the preservice meeting was deeply
involved in that crisis, yet his comments completely ignored the major event. Instead,
he told a hilarious story about some silly ongoing pranks in one of the neighborhoods.
The staffwere heartily laughing as the story went on. However, no mention was made
of one of the most contentious and divisive issues in the history of the school. This was
79
a clear example of Linde's (2001) observation that what is not said can still be a
significant part of the narrative.
This lively and entertaining session was overwhelmingly positive. People
seemed to enjoy sharing their memories in such a formal but lighthearted way. After
this formal opportunity for remembering, the meeting continued to draw on the history
of the school, but in informal ways. Additionally, these informal appeals to the narrative
tended to be in the form of coded fragments for the purpose of advocacy.
The next item on the agenda was a vote to approve a proposal to amend the
advisory system. Like team teaching, the advisory system was one of the founding
reforms. It was designed on the principle that students are more successful if they feel
part of a small community, and particularly if they have consistent healthy relationships
with adults (Brewster & Railsback, 2003). In its original design, the advisory system
included 2 weekly periods where students would start in their home room, but then
check out to other destinations to meet with teachers, make up tests, or work on group
projects with their peers (Barton, 2004). In practice, many students use the time
effectively, but many others seem to view the advisory period as an opportunity to
socialize, sleep, or worse. Administrators have reported that fights, vandalism, and drug
deals tend to be more common on advisory days.
Not surprisingly, this unstructured time has been controversial since the school
opened. On advisory days, normal class periods are 10 minutes shorter. Some teachers,
students, and parents feel that advisory is an indispensable opportunity for students and
80
teachers to connect outside of normal class hours. Others argue that it is an inefficient
waste of instructional time. The administration and staff have tinkered with the advisory
system over the past 10 years, making minor changes, but leaving essential questions
about advisory unresolved.
After the formal remembering and light-hearted reminiscing at the beginning of
the preservice meeting, Principal Alter led a discussion about making significant
changes to the advisory system. A committee had worked during the spring and summer
to craft a new system, and they seemed to be expecting a rubber-stamp vote at this
meeting. Before the voting process began, Alter reviewed Eagle Mountain's philosophy
of democratic decision-making-another core element of the founding narrative. She
started with a direct reference to the founding narrative by saying, "We are going back
to the root of how we make decisions. Any time we change a procedure or policy, we
use a five-finger vote." As Pam Armour, the founding principal, described in an
interview, "The tenets that underlie the culture had everything to do with democratic
decision-making and staff getting together in a collaborative structure."
However, this decision-making process has evolved over time. Upon hearing
reference to the five-finger vote, the staff began to turn and grumble to each other; some
made coded references to the "iPod vote." This fragment of the narrative referred to a
controversial policy decision where the hallowed five-finger voting system had broken
down. During the iPod debate, instead of serving as a consensus-building tool, the five-
finger vote had resulted in a deep split in the staff. The policy was eventually adopted
81
by an up-or-down vote of 50-49. In the bitter aftermath of the iPod vote, the staff did
not have a five-finger vote for nearly 2 years. At the beginning of the advisory debate,
the principal obliquely referred to the five-finger voting hiatus by saying, "It's been a
while since we've done this."
The meeting dragged on for another half hour. Administrators, teachers and
classified staff made direct and indirect references to the founding narrative to support
or oppose the change in the advisory system. Eventually a vote was taken and the
proposal passed.
This meeting served as an opportunity for remembering and transmitting Eagle
Mountain's paradigmatic narrative through the formal remembrance activity and
through the more practical business of the meeting.
Transmission of the founding narrative also happens at department meetings.
Kelly Rosen, in her 2nd year at Eagle Mountain, said, "You glean a lot from meetings.
That's where I've learned the most, when people say things like 'we founded this school
on these principles,' which you hear a lot."
Another tool for remembering is the packet of forms and reading materials that
the principal sends to all staff near the end of the summer each year. On at least two
occasions in the past 5 years, the packet has included an article specifically reviewing
the founding vision of Eagle Mountain. One year, the article was part of the Schools
Making Progress series published by the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
(2001). Before the current school year, the packet included an article prepared for a
82
presentation at the Model Schools Network annual conference. Both articles highlighted
innovative elements of Eagle Mountain's design, including the neighborhood system,
service learning, career academies, democratic decision-making, and team teaching. It is
not unusual for innovative schools to be profiled in these kinds of articles. The
important factor in the case of Eagle Mountain is that these articles have been explicitly
used as a tool for remembering. Principal Alter explained the purpose of these readings
by saying, "we really need to do something like that every year to remind people of
what we do, the programs we started and developed 10 years ago. They were done for a
reason, and they've been successful."
As a result of Eagle Mountain's national profile, reform-minded educators from
across the country have made pilgrimages to the school to learn what is working and
why. This reputation for innovation and success has led to the development of the
Design Studio program. School leaders come to Eagle Mountain for a 2-3 day visit,
during which they tour the school, observe classes and advisory sessions, and hear a
presentation about the founding vision and current programs. Consistent with the
founding ideal of teacher leadership, the Design Studio is organized and led primarily
by EMHS teachers. This serves to reinforce the stories of the founding of the school for
those teachers who participate. In addition, the whole staff participated in an intramural
Design Studio in August 2005 to help introduce them to or remind them ofthe stories of
the founding vision.
83
Physical objects and spaces can also serve to transmit the stories of the founding
ofthe school. In the main entrance lobby, there is a display case chronicling Eagle
Mountain's first 10 years through artifacts, photographs and newspaper clippings.
Carron Peters, in his 2nd year at EMHS, said he learned about the founding of the
school from "that display case at the front of the school. I've looked through the display
case at some of the pictures. It has pictures and a dedication plaque ... the early
artifacts of the school." These artifacts, explicitly intended for remembering, help
remind teachers and students of the origins and history of their school.
The design of Eagle Mountain is consciously unconventional, and its uniqueness
serves as a cue for memory. The founding principal, Pam Armour, described the
building as a place where decentralization of services led to personalization. Instead of
students coming to a central administrative office to meet with counselors or
administrators, the support services are located in the neighborhoods for familiarity,
easier access, and personalization. Classrooms could open their doors to create large
meeting spaces for all students in the neighborhood to participate in the democratic
decision-making process. Over time, overcrowding of classrooms and the distractions
from noise led to closing off some of the open spaces. As the current principal, Leslie
Alter, put it,
Philosophically it was a great idea. But it was so noisy you couldn't hear
anything. So we started closing them off. ... We used to be able to open
all of the walls in the neighborhood. And every student in the
neighborhood could be together for a massive meeting. But we outgrew
our ability to live in that space. So we had to close off those spaces.
84
When we opened we had the idea that we would be creating these large
open forums, but then we couldn't do it any more.
The physical spaces in many neighborhoods are no longer open, but other
components of the original design remain, including the collapsible classroom walls and
the decentralized services. In his study of the transmission of organizational memory in
Waldorf schools, Oberman (1997) observed that the physical spaces, including the
shapes and colors of the walls, can serve to remind students and staff of the school's
heritage. At Eagle Mountain, the distinctive shapes and colors of the neighborhood open
spaces remain, though they are not nearly as prominent as they had been at the
founding.
Current Implementation Status of Team-Teaching System
The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between the stories
teachers tell each other about the founding vision of the school and the sustainability of
the founding reforms. This study focuses on one of the founding reforms: the team-
teaching system. Data from interviews show a large degree of variation in the
implementation of the team-teaching model (Table 4). Some teachers actively
implement all parts of the teaming system, including collaborating on common
curriculum and assessments and opening the collapsible walls for enrichment activities.
Other teachers rarely even consult with their partners or align their lessons. Teachers
tend to be aware of the differential implementation, particularly those who are not
85
TABLE 4. Implementation of Elements of Team Teaching
Frequency of implementation-by teacher
About Every About once
Most once a few or twice a
Elements of teaming days week weeks trimester Never
Common curriculum design 5 1 2 1 0
Aligned daily lesson plans 2 1 2 3 1
Common assessments 0 0 3 6 0
Referring to lessons/activities 3 5 0 1 0
from the other class
Open classroom doors for joint 0 2 5 2 0
lessons/activities
Open classroom doors for 0 0 0 8
differentiated instruction
(pull-out groups)
Discussing student progress or 6 2 0 0
comparing grades for shared
students
Joint communication with parents 0 2 0 6
teaming to the fullest extent. For example, several teachers who are new to teaming or
new to their current team partner repeatedly used the word "yet" in their responses. This
suggests an aspiration to expand their teaming practice beyond its current
implementation. Adam Bacon, a 2nd-year teacher, said, "I'm not the greatest team
teacher. I would like to do better ... we may not be doing as much as we could.... It
seems to be something that is valued at this school." This variation in implementation
will be addressed in detail in the discussion section.
To explore the variation in teachers' implementation of the team-teaching
system, it is essential to consider a range of possible explanations. Table 5 shows data
compiled from interviews and coded into categories for commitment to team teaching
86
TABLE 5. Relationship Between Teacher's Commitment to Team Teaching and
Longevity, Structural Factors, and Familiarity With the Founding Narrative
Commitment to Involvement in
team teaching transmission of
philosophy and Structural founding
Teacher practice Longevity factors narrative
Courtney Strong Planning team All factors Strong
Knudson philosophy and consistently in knowledge,
practice place active
transmission
Jason Jefferson Strong Planning team All factors Strong
philosophy and consistently in knowledge,
practice place active
transmission
Rosemary Grant Strong 10 All factors Strong
philosophy and consistently in knowledge,
practice place active
transmission
Brett Hughes Strong 4 All factors Strong
philosophy, consistently in knowledge,
moderate place high-moderate
practice transmission
Kari Cannon Strong 10 Most factors Strong
philosophy, often in place knowledge,
moderate moderate
practice transmission
Karen Garcia Strong 5 Many factors in Moderate
philosophy, place, knowledge, little
moderate occasional transmission
practice obstacles
Alaina Cook Moderate 5 Consistent Moderate
philosophy, major structural knowledge, little
moderate obstacles transmission
practice
Clinton Harris Moderate 5 Consistent Strong
philosophy, Low major structural knowledge,
moderate obstacles moderate
practice transmission
Kelly Rosen Moderate 2 Major structural Weak
philosophy, obstacles 1st knowledge, little
moderate year, most transmission
practice factors in place
this year
87
TABLE 5. (Continued)
Teacher
Jennifer Nelson
Adam Bacon
Carron Peters
Commitment to
team teaching
philosophy and
practice
Low moderate
philosophy,
moderate
practice
Weak
philosophy, low
moderate
practice
Weak
philosophy and
practice
Longevity
2
2
Structural
factors
Many factors in
place,
occasional
obstacles
Major structural
obstacles 1st
year, most
factors in place
this year
Major structural
obstacles 1st
year, most
factors in place
this year
Involvement in
transmission of
founding
narrative
Weak
knowledge, little
transmission
Weak
knowledge, little
transmission
Weak
knowledge, little
transmission
longevity at Eagle Mountain, structural obstacles to teaming, and involvement in the
transmission of the founding narrative. Some teachers are actively implementing the
team-teaching system according to its original design, while others do not demonstrate a
high degree of commitment to the philosophy or practice of teaming. There is similar
variability in a teacher's familiarity with and involvement in transmitting the founding
narrative. In addition, teachers demonstrate a substantial range of longevity and
structural obstacles to teaming.
Data from Table 5 led to the creation of three matrices for representation and
analysis. The matrices were derived from Miles and Huberman's (1984) models of
frequency counting and role-by-time matrix. Chapter V includes a detailed discussion of
88
these matrices and the potential relationships between commitment to team teaching,
familiarity with the founding narrative, longevity and structural obstacles to teaming.
Factors Determining Placement on Matrix
The interview matrix (Figure 2) has two axes: familiarity with the founding
narrative, and commitment to team teaching. The familiarity axis includes both
familiarity with the founding narrative and involvement in transmitting the founding
narrative to others. The commitment axis also includes two elements: philosophy and
practice. The multifaceted nature of this matrix results in a significant degree of
complexity. However there is a logical progression within these variables. For example,
if a teacher is generally unfamiliar with the narrative and the founding philosophies of
the school, she is not likely to be active in transmitting the narrative to her peers. On the
other extreme, if a teacher is regularly engaged in transmitting the story of the founding
vision, then she is likely to be quite familiar with the major elements of that story.
Similarly, on the commitment to team teaching scale, if a teacher is not committed to
the philosophy (on the left side of the matrix), she will probably not be committed to the
practice. And if she is highly committed to the practice (on the right side of the matrix),
she would logically be committed in philosophy.
"~o~
--0 o~
~ E
il= '"o S
d ~~f-
~j:~
"'3 @
o "c ~~~
~ !;)
aJ-::
:S:.:i
~~Teaming is
the strength
ofihe 9th and
10'" grade
(:un·l(~llh)mo"
COllftney
Knudson (SS, 10)
"T helpcd develop thc
philosophies"
"EMHS wouldn't be the
same without teaming"
"I am a bit of an introvert so
[telling others about the
founding philosophies] has
been limited:'
"S{)me people are very di$co'uraging~saying
'this is thc founding philosophy, but it's not
really happening, so don't even try.'"
"Succcssful teams wcre the model that
showcd us what the schOl'1 wan led."
"Practicality wins oul over ideology."
"[ can't say I think about Ithe founding
philosophy] mueh in my planning."
"I know that there arc many levels of teaming and
it seems that all are welcome in this building."
"The most important factor to
my teaching"
"It drives everything I do here"
"I don't know much except that therc were certain philosophies of
not tracking and 5LCs and teaming in the neighborhoods."
"[Thc passion of the stories] makes me want to say OK, if
sometimes [teaming is] a pain in the rear cnd, it's something that's
important to do because it's important to the culture at EMH5."
Kelly Roscn
(LA, 2)
Jennifer Nelson
(LA, 1)
Kari CannLlI'
(SS. 10)
Karen Garcb
(55,5)
Alaina Cook
(LA,5)
"The founding stories have led me to
work harder to he an effective team
teacher than Totherwise would have."
"To turn away from teaming would be to
tum away tram the f{1Unding
philosophy of the school."
Clinton Harris
(SS,5)
Carron Peters
(55.2)
"1 don't feel wry aware"
of the narrative.
"1 feel!ike I should be
doing that" - referring to
stories of teams that have
the walls open every day.
"Not vcry familiar a1 all.
It's not exacHy nothing,
but not a whole lot. "
"We get so busy with the
day to day teaching of
our own dasses ... iCs
like ok, add that to tJ,C
tist of the 10 other
tJlings I'm trying (0 gct
done today."
"1 know very littl.e about the
founding of the school."
'"Teaming is not only important
for teachers but is also great
h)f . .:;;tuden1s.~'
"Here's the philosophy from what I
understand and here's what I'm
experieneing- is that a problem or
not?" [said 10 admin and dept mtgs.]
"Being a tcaeher is following through
with commitments, so if the admin.
changed things, you have to go with it"
.K.g,y: (suhject taught, years at EMUS)
o~
~..... '.f.j
o ......
~f~ Ei -g ~
-= g~
GI ""
- ~;;~ 00 ~
o c:.g
c oo
1-0_
:.. r/S ~
~~
c 2°B
o tZi <>::
Vi
III
E
III
C
l!
..
GI
>
~
~ ~
1'2 ].3z >. u:; go§
'~ ':: §
~ e~t .g ~
(f1 0 oB
= :2:...:1
'E
III
II.
Weak commitment
(Philosophy & Pmctice)
Stronger commitment in Philosophy!
Moderate commitment in Practice
Strong cOll1lnitment in
Philosophy and Practicc
Commitment to Teaming (Philosophy & Practice)
FIGURE 2. Interview matrix.
00
'-D
90
Of course, it is conceivable that a teacher could be actively involved in passing
on the story without knowing the details. That is, she could be transmitting an
inaccurate narrative. This matrix is not concerned with the accuracy of the storytelling,
but rather with the potential relationship between that process of storytelling and the
philosophy and practice of one of the founding reforms.
It is also possible that a teacher may be committed to the practice of teaming
without being deeply committed to the philosophy. For example, a teacher may be in
the habit of teaming and may continue the practice not for the sake of adhering to any
philosophical principle but because of inertia. However, this is unlikely because
successful team teaching (according to the model at EMHS) calls for a high level of
collaboration that requires more energy and commitment than traditional single-teacher
classrooms. Thus, attrition and entropy would likely result in a weaker commitment to
team-teaching practice in the absence of a strong commitment to the philosophy.
The results of the interviews confirmed the assumptions underlying the
progression of each axis. No teacher demonstrated a high degree of commitment to the
practice of teaming without first being committed to the philosophy. In addition, no
teacher was actively involved in transmitting the narrative without a strong sense of
confidence in her familiarity with the story.
In both cases, the middle portion of the matrix becomes more confusing. In their
interview responses, some teachers demonstrated a degree of ambivalence that made
placement around the middle more difficult. For example, Alaina Cook was wavering in
91
her commitment to team teaching. She talked glowingly of how teaming could produce
a meaningful impact for struggling students, but seemed resigned to the idea that it
could not work for every teacher. Rather than pushing the administration to provide the
necessary conditions for teaming, she acknowledged that "practicality wins out over
ideology."
Placement on the Familiarity Axis
Placement on the familiarity axis was determined by six interview questions,
including "How familiar are you with the story of the founding of the school?," "If you
were interviewing a new English or Social Studies teacher, what would you tell them is
unique or innovative about this school?" and "How have you told others about the
founding philosophies of the school?" (see Appendix A for interview protocols). In
addition, placement on this axis could be influenced by statements made at staff and
department meetings. For instance, in a department meeting about revising the honors
component of the 9th- and 10th-grade Language Arts and Social Studies teams, one
teacher said, "This goes counter to the philosophy of the school." Another added,
"That's something we talk about every year." In one particularly passionate moment, a
long-serving English teacher said, "It makes me want to cry to think about destroying
the core values that some of us came here for."
If a teacher rated herself low on the familiarity questions in the interview but
then demonstrated stronger familiarity by invoking the narrative in a meeting, she
92
would move up the familiarity axis. In fact, because meetings are more organic
environments for communicating elements of the founding narrative than interviews, I
assigned much greater weight to observation data for placement on the familiarity axis.
Placement on the Commitment Axis
Placement on the commitment axis was determined by a variety of interview
questions, including, "How important is teaming to your personal philosophy of
teaching?," "If a new administration came along and proposed eliminating the team-
teaching system, how would you respond?" and "How often do you implement the
essential elements of the team-teaching system?" For some teachers, implementation is
affected by structural factors, including schedule and classroom assignments, which
were addressed in an additional interview question.
If a teacher's answers to all three questions demonstrated a high commitment to
teaming, he would be placed farther along the right side of the axis. If, however, there
was a discrepancy in the degree of commitment expressed in the answers, he would be
placed closer to the middle. Clinton Harris showed a strong belief in the value of
teaming for his students, but admitted that he would not actively fight for the system.
He said this was due, in part, to the structural obstacles he had faced in his attempts to
team. But he added that "being a teacher is following through with commitments, so if
the administration changed things, you have to go with it." As a result, I placed Harris
near the middle, but slightly left of the center of the axis.
93
Longevity Matrix
To examine the relationship between a teacher's commitment to team teaching
and her longevity at Eagle Mountain High School, I created Figure 3. This graphic
representation of the data is based on Miles and Huberman's (1984) role~by~time
matrix. The placement on the horizontal axis (commitment to the philosophy and
practice of team teaching) is the same as Figure 2. Vertical placement was determined
by a teacher's years of service at Eagle Mountain. Some adjustment was made for
teachers who have not been part of the team teaching system every year. Many teachers
remained in the same section ofthe matrix (roughly divided into thirds) as in Figure 2.
Those whose vertical position on the longevity matrix is significantly different (in a
different third of the matrix) are outlined with a double line.
Structural Obstacles Matrix
To complete the analysis of the data in Table 5, I created a third matrix,
representing the relationship between a teacher's commitment to team teaching and
structural obstacles to teaming (Figure 4). Again, placement on the horizontal axis is the
same as on the interview matrix (Figure 2). Vertical placement was determined by
various structural factors that may facilitate or hinder a teacher's implementation of the
teaming model. These factors (outlined in more detail in the description of the case
Counney
Knudson (55. 10)
Rosemary
Grant (55, 10)
Jason Jefferson
(LA. 8)
Karen Garcia
(SS, 5)
Kelly Rosen
(LA. 2)
---
./ennifer Nelson
(LA. 1)
K0'.: (subjecl taught, years at EMHS)
C) = Significantly different position than
Familiarity Matrix (Figure 2)
o
""
'2 E
a ~
-2. ....
'0 ",.
0
.l:
U
It) x
.l:
121
:i:
c t-
';
..
c
:::I
0
-<;
:!!:
Gl
iil
1Il V)
III
..
1Il
III
.. ...1Il
Gl
>-
,.,.,
IN Carron Peters Adam Bacon(55,2) (S5.2)
Weak commitment
(Philosophy & Practice)
Stronger commitment in Philosophy!
Moderate commitment in Practice
Strong commitment in
Philosophy and Practice
Commitment to Teaming (Philosophy & Practice)
FIGURE 3. Role by time matrix.
1.0
.j::.
.S Courtney
Knudson (88, 10)
"None...we have
been very
supported ...
everything has
worken nut well ~.
"We arc rcally lucky. We teach
ncxt to each other. We can open
the doors, and we do. We sit
next to cach other. We havc
commOLl plan time, which we
value ... \Vc share common
students. We have an even
number "fsections. So we are
very fortunate."
Kari Cannon
(SS, 10)
Brett Hughes
(8S, 4)
Karen
iarcia (S S, 5)
Major obstacles first
year; structure in
place this year.
~: (subject taught, years at EMH8)
C) = Signif1cantly differcnt position than
Familiarity Matrix (Figure 2)
e g
:;; 0
t) ";:;
~ ~
if) 0
<J
'"
'"c,
e~ g
Cf) <'C .....
.!! ~~u ,- E
II :: 0
.. "'-en ..;:: ~
.a :; 2C :r. u0 2ii 'g ~
.. ,.;::: 0
.a
u
::I
..
..
til
B~Z~
.~ ~
C til
~ .§
~ ::S U
'" -~ 0
--'" ~...
III Bu
c S! El
- c: ~E _.Dr/) 0
II
CII
I-
o
..
8trong commitment in
Philosophy and Practice
"The philosophy changes when you don't
have those same resources to make
[teaming] work. 80 you have to cut back on
planning lessons together if you don't have
C0t11Ul0n plan.
"80 you have to amend the philosophy. The
practicality wins out over the ideology."
Kclly Rosen
(LA, 2)
Stronger commitment in Philosophyi
Moderate commitment in Practice
Commitment to Teaming (Philosophy & Practice)
Adam Bac·on
(88,2)
Major structural obstacles
4 out of 5 ycars,
Carron Peters
(88,2)
Wcak commitment
(Philosophy & Practice)
1)g
0..:.(
.s .§
~~~
r.: B
~~
•.,:;l E
-.. ';f.l
]-§
:;; ~
t:-s
::;) ::t
~ ~ I;;::~~~~~
FIGURE 4, Structure by teaming matrix.
I"Q
VI
96
above) include collapsible walls, common planning periods, back-to-back class periods,
and sharing the same students. Teachers who have consistently faced structural
obstacles to teaming were placed lower on the vertical axis. Those who have
encountered relatively few structural obstacles were placed higher. As with Figure 3, I
highlighted with a double line teachers whose vertical placement on this matrix is
significantly different from Figure 2. These differences will be discussed in Chapter V.
97
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION
This final section of the dissertation begins with an analysis of Eagle Mountain's
founding narrative through the frame of Linde's (2000) criteria for the paradigmatic
narrative. Next, I examine the relationship between the founding narrative and the
sustainability of the team-teaching system, using three matrices for data representation
and analysis. This analysis also includes consideration of rival explanations. This
chapter concludes with a discussion of the limitations of the study and implications for
future research.
Criteria for Linde's Theory of the Paradigmatic Narrative
IfLinde's (2000) theory of the paradigmatic narrative is an apt model for
describing the transmission of organizational memory at Eagle Mountain High School,
certain criteria would need to be met. First, a common narrative must be told, including
recurring elements related to the origins, charismatic founder, and core values of the
organization. This story should be a nonparticipant narrative. Next, there must be formal
and informal opportunities for remembering. Members use these opportunities to induct
new staff, create a shared sense of purpose and connection to the values and goals of the
organization, and advocate for policy agendas. Finally, communication of this narrative
98
would result in sustaining key elements of the founding vision, and a clear relationship
would exist between a member's familiarity with the narrative and his or her
commitment to the founding vision.
Key Elements of Narrative Retold
The paradigmatic narrative, as Linde (2000) defines it, is a collection of essential
fragments. It is not usually told as a single coherent story, though occasional
circumstances provide opportunities for remembering the story in its entirety. The role
of a charismatic founder often provides material for the narrative. However, many
elements of the paradigmatic narrative do not fit the shape of a traditional story structure
at all. Instead of episodes and actions, the narrative is often expressed as ideas and
values.
If a paradigmatic narrative were present at Eagle Mountain, it would involve
recurring stories of the experiences of the founders and the early years of the school. A
significant number of the stories would likely involve the founding principal,
characterizing her as a charismatic and visionary leader. Finally, a good portion of the
fragments would take the form of reflections on the ideas and values that drove the
founding of the school. These fragments may present themselves as components of
traditional story structure, or they may not.
The data from observations and interviews demonstrate that certain key elements
do, in fact, recur in the stories told at Eagle Mountain. Some fragments are retold in
99
story fonn, particularly accounts of the challenges that teachers and administrators faced
in the first years. Many of the fragments of the narrative at Eagle Mountain do not
follow a traditional story structure. Instead, they take the form of direct appeals to the
founding vision. In addition, many interviewees identified the influence of the founding
principal on their memory of the early days. Her perceived role as a visionary seems to
have galvanized the fragments of the narrative around her.
Elements ofNarrative Connect to Founding Vision and Values
Linde (2001) asserts that one distinctive characteristic of the paradigmatic
narrative (as opposed to day-to-day, ephemeral narratives) is that it connects to the
founding vision and values of the institution. She says, "for a member to know this story
means to know what the institution is, and what a member must do to be a part of it" (p.
521). As a result, if Linde's theory is an accurate tool for examining the case of Eagle
Mountain High School, the paradigmatic narrative must express the vision and values of
the early years. This is most certainly evident at Eagle Mountain. Teachers and
administrators repeatedly draw on the founding stories to pass on their understanding of
the innovative vision and values that guided the formation of the school culture. For
example, in a discussion about creating an honors track for ninth-grade language arts
and social studies classes, a teacher said, "I thought we were founded on the idea of
equal access for all." This does not refer to a specific event from the founding of the
school, but rather to the vision and values present in those early days.
100
Nonparticipant Narrative
One distinguishing factor of Linde's (2000) paradigmatic narrative is that it is a
nonparticipant narrative (NPN). That is, the teller and listener were not actors in the
original story. Therefore, the act of retelling keeps alive elements of history and
organizational memory that would otherwise fade into oblivion. Linde uses the
nonparticipant nature of the narrative to distinguish between the ongoing, overarching
paradigmatic narrative and the short-lived stories of day-to-day adventures, foibles and
calamities. For instance, the stories of the copier breaking down or the surprising
outburst from an irate boss may be told around the lunch table one day, but they do not
deserve a place in the enduring memory of the organization. Therefore, these events are
generally told by participants and then forgotten. On the other hand, Linde argues, if a
nonparticipant tells a story, it is inherently more likely to be part of the paradigmatic
narrative because the teller is choosing to draw on recurring stories he or she has heard
from others rather than on fleeting personal experiences. Linde says, "NPNs have an
extended life in the institution, since their very form assures us that they have been
retold at least once" (Linde, 2001, p. 521).
The founding narrative at Eagle Mountain is not exclusively a nonparticipant
narrative. At least 20 of the current teachers, administrators, counselors and support
staff at Eagle Mountain (including five members of the Language Arts and Social
Studies departments) have been at the school since its inception. Therefore, at least
101
some of the fragments ofthe founding narrative are told by those who actually
participated in the founding. Linde derived her theory from a 3-year study of
organizational communication and memory in a large American insurance company.
The organization was founded in the 1920s, so the current employees-those telling and
listening to the narrative--could not have been participants.
The key factor in matching this element of the pattern is not whether participants
are involved in retelling the narrative, but whether nonparticipants also engage in its
transmission. That is, the nonparticipant nature of the narrative in Linde's (2000) theory
is not necessarily exclusive. In a relatively young organization, it is to be expected that
founding members would be involved in transmitting the paradigmatic narrative. The
story rises to the threshold of a nonparticipant narrative if those who were not present at
the founding also engage in telling the stories. The results of my study demonstrate that
the stories of the founding vision at Eagle Mountain are told by both original members
and relative newcomers. Therefore, the narrative would qualify as a nonparticipant
narrative in Linde's framework.
Opportunities for Remembering: Formal and Informal
In some senses, a story exists only if it has a teller and an audience. Linde (2000,
200 1) identifies opportunities for remembering that allow tellers and listeners to
participate in the transmission of the paradigmatic narrative. These opportunities are
102
described in detail in the Results section of this dissertation. For the sake of pattern
matching, I will briefly discuss them here as well.
Linde (2000, 200 1) asserts that opportunities for remembering can be both
formal and informal. That is, some opportunities for transmitting the paradigmatic
narrative are intended specifically for remembering. In other cases, remembering
happens as an indirect or unintended consequence of some other activity. These
opportunities for remembering include spaces, artifacts, and regular and irregular
occurrences.
At Eagle Mountain, these formal and informal opportunities for remembering
abound: from explicit staff development activities organized by the 10-Year
Anniversary Committee to casual references to the founding vision in department
meetings; from the artifacts in the lobby display case celebrating the school's first 10
years to the decentralized and community-focused architectural design of the building.
Preserving memory through storytelling is a vital element of the culture of Eagle
Mountain High School.
Founding Vision Used for Induction, Shared Purpose, and Advocacy
Linde (2000) describes several uses of the paradigmatic narrative that should be
evident at Eagle Mountain if her theory is an accurate tool. First, it can be an instrument
for inducting new members into the culture of the organization. Listening to, and
eventually retelling, the stories of the founding vision incubates a sense of belonging
103
and collegiality that connects new members with the organization. Next, the stories of
the founding remind tellers and listeners alike of their roots. This can serve to realign an
individual teacher's values with the innovative vision of the school. In addition, it can
renew a sense of common purpose for all members of the organization, not just new
hires. Finally, the founding vision can be used for advocating a policy position. By
appealing to the history of the school, teachers and administrators can establish a
position of legitimacy to make their arguments more persuasive.
All three of these uses of the founding vision have been evident at Eagle
Mountain in some form. Stories of the founding of the school have regularly been used
to guide new teachers in their acculturation to Eagle Mountain. New staff have
participated in formal orientation activities, including Design Studios and other
activities consciously intended for remembering. In addition, many teachers reported
that their team partners would tell them stories about the history of the school to help
them understand what they perceived to be the unique and innovative spirit of Eagle
Mountain.
The whole staff has also been involved in team-building activities that drew
explicitly on the history of the school, including the Zoo retreat before the 6th year and
the 10-Year Celebration at the preservice meetings prior to the current school year. In
addition, the summer reading packets have regularly included articles for the whole staff
to read about the history and founding vision of Eagle Mountain.
104
The most common use of the stories of the founding vision seems to be for
advocacy. It is rare for a significant proposal to be discussed without coded or direct
references to the stories and values from the founding of the school.
Interestingly, the use of the founding narrative for advocacy is not limited to
those who are resistant to change. It is reasonable to expect that teachers would say,
"We've always done it this way, so we shouldn't change it." The founding narrative is
often employed this way. However, teachers also appeal to the innovative spirit of the
founding, and particularly the values of community, equity and access, to advocate for
progressive reform. These teachers might say something like, "I thought we believed in
building relationships with students. This is exactly the kind of change we need to live
up to that ideal." Regardless of whether the advocacy is progressive or resistant to
change, it is common to hear appeals to the founding narrative.
Communication of Narrative Results in Sustaining
Key Elements of Founding Vision
The final element of Linde's (2000) theory that we would expect to see ifthe
model applies to Eagle Mountain is some relationship between the communication of
the founding narrative and the sustainability of the founding reforms. If the stories of
the founding of the school truly form a paradigmatic narrative, they should have some
impact on current practice. Linde asserts that the narrative serves to realign the priorities
of the organization to maintain a common sense of values and purpose. This can be
105
essential to sustaining reforms in the face of staff turnover and loose organizational
linkages.
For this study, I considered whether the transmission of the paradigmatic
narrative was related to the sustainability ofthe team-teaching system, one of Eagle
Mountain's distinctive founding reforms. At first glance, there appears to be a positive
relationship between an individual teacher's familiarity with and involvement in
transmitting the founding narrative and her commitment to the philosophy and practice
ofteam-teaching. The following section will look at this finding more closely, and
consider rival explanations.
Relationship Between Familiarity With Narrative
and Commitment to Founding Vision
As shown in Table 5, data from interviews with Language Arts and Social
Studies teachers at Eagle Mountain High School reveal two interesting patterns. First,
there is a high degree of variability among teachers' commitment to the philosophy and
practice of team teaching. That is, some teachers are wholly committed to teaming
while others do not demonstrate much commitment to teaming at all. One teacher said
teaming "drives everything I do here," while another teacher said teaming is just "of
medium importance.... The number one important thing to me is to be the best history
teacher I can be" (suggesting that his social studies curriculum is more important than
integrated teaming). The following sections will explore this intriguing variability.
106
Second, there appears to be a relationship between a teacher's familiarity with
the founding vision and that teacher's philosophy and practice ofteam teaching. For
instance, Brett Hughes said,
The founding stories have led me to work harder to be an effective team
teacher than I otherwise would have. In some sense, I feel that to turn
away from teaming would be to turn away from the founding philosophy
of the school. I also have the feeling that, even though I think I'm
teaming fairly effectively, I could be doing better-as the founders
envisioned.
Carron Peters said he was "not very familiar at all" with the founding narrative. He went
on to admit that teaming is not a particularly high priority: "We get so busy with the
day-to-day teaching of our own classes ... it's like O.K., add that to the list of the 10
other things I'm trying to get done today."
This suggests a strong relationship between the founding narrative and
commitment to team teaching. As Figure 2 demonstrates, teachers who expressed very
little knowledge of the founding narrative, or very little comfort with transmitting that
narrative, tended to be less committed to the philosophy and practice of team teaching.
Similarly, those who expressed confidence in their familiarity with the narrative and
their role in communicating it to others demonstrated a high degree of commitment to
teaming.
Determining Causality, Strength of Association, and Rival Explanations
It is tempting to look at teachers' attitudes toward teaming, as expressed by Brett
Hughes and Carron Peters above, and the data in Figure 2 and conclude that the
107
variability in implementation of team teaching can be explained by a teacher's
familiarity with the founding narrative. Indeed, there may be a relationship. However,
before causal conclusions can be reached, it is necessary to consider techniques of
determining causality in a qualitative study. Miles and Huberman (1984) assert that it is
possible to assess causal factors in qualitative data by using a variety of techniques,
including constant conjunction, strength of association, plausibility, experiment, and
analogy. The data from this study best fit a causal analysis by strength of association. If
the variability in a teacher's commitment to team teaching is more closely associated
with that teacher's familiarity with the founding narrative than with other relevant
factors, then there may be a causal process in effect.
To assess the strength of association, it is necessary to consider rival
explanations (Yin, 2003). That is, are there alternative factors that may contribute to the
pattern of implementation of team teaching? And if so, do those rival explanations
account for what appears to be the effect of the founding narrative on the sustainability
of reforms? Table 5 shows data compiled from interviews and coded into categories for
commitment to team teaching, longevity at Eagle Mountain, structural obstacles to
teaming, and involvement in the transmission of the founding narrative. The following
sections will discuss these data and their potential explanatory power.
108
Commitment to Team Teaching May Grow With Longevity
One rival explanation for the variability in commitment to team teaching may
simply be longevity. That is, teachers may not become more committed to team
teaching because they learn more about the founding vision of the school through the
paradigmatic narrative. Instead, the key factors may be familiarity with the curriculum
or comfort with a team partner. For example, as a ninth-grade language arts teacher
works through her Lord ofthe Flies unit year after year, she will not need to spend as
much of her time planning individual lessons. She will have more time to collaborate on
integrating with her social studies partner. In addition, as she builds a relationship with
her partner, she may become more willing to risk abdicating some of the autonomy and
authority that she enjoys when she is not teaming. Several teachers identified familiarity
with their curriculum and comfort with their team partner as important factors in their
implementation of the teaming model.
Using a role-by-time matrix (Miles & Huberman, 1984), Figure 3 compares a
teacher's commitment to the philosophy and practice ofteam teaching to her years of
service at Eagle Mountain. The overall pattern between the two matrices is generally
similar. Teachers who are highly committed to teaming tend to be those who have been
at the school longer. Those who are less committed to teaming tend to be recent hires. In
the original matrix comparing familiarity with the narrative and commitment to teaming
(Figure 2), teachers were roughly grouped into three clusters. Most teachers in the role-
by-time matrix (Figure 3) remained in the same cluster. Only two teachers demonstrated
109
a significant change. I defined significance in this situation by movement into a
different third of the matrix. Because the parameters of this matrix did not allow for
horizontal movement, a vertical change into a different cluster would be classified as a
significant change. Brett Hughes has a strong knowledge of the founding vision and a
high-moderate involvement in the transmission of the narrative despite the fact that he
has only been at the school for 4 years. Kari Cannon, who has been at the school for 10
years, only has a moderate involvement in the transmission of the narrative.
There are several possible explanations for the movement of these two teachers
on the vertical axes. Kari Cannon's differential placement on the two matrices may be
partly a result of structural factors and personality. Her longevity may have contributed
to her commitment to teaming. However structural factors may have tempered her
teaming practice. Her self-professed shyness may have led to less involvement in the
transmission of the founding narrative. CaImon said, "I am a bit of an introvert so
[telling others about the founding of the school] has been limited." Similarly, Brett
Hughes' leadership roles may have impacted his placement on these matrices. Hughes is
a vocal and visionary teacher leader both in his department and in the teachers' union.
Therefore, he may be more likely to transmit the stories of the founding vision despite
his status as a relative newcomer (4 years at EMHS).
110
Commitment to Team Teaching May Be Affected by Structural Factors
Another rival explanation for the apparent relationship between a teacher's
familiarity with the founding narrative and her commitment to team teaching may
involve structural factors. Throughout the data-collection process, I encountered
teachers who expressed that they would like to have teamed more, but were limited by
certain obstacles. As detailed in the description of the case, ideal implementation of the
team-teaching system, as conceived in the founding vision and communicated in the
paradigmatic narrative, involves certain structural necessities. These structural factors
include: team teachers share the same students; adjoining classrooms with collapsible
walls; back-to-back class periods; a common planning period; only one teaming partner;
and the same students for the entire school year.
It is possible for a pair of teachers to consider themselves a team without all of
these factors in place. However, if several of these structural elements are missing,
teachers will probably not be able to implement the teaming system to its fullest
potential. This will certainly impact a teacher's practice ofteam teaching. If a teacher
faces few obstacles to teaming, she may have a more positive view ofthe possibilities of
the team-teaching system. Courtney Knudson, the teacher who demonstrated the highest
commitment to team-teaching practice, identified this influence of structural factors,
saymg,
We are really lucky. We teach next to each other. We can open the doors,
and we do. We sit next to each other. We have common plan time, which
111
we value.... We share common students. We have an even number of
sections. So we are very fortunate.
These structural factor help facilitate successful teaming.
If a teacher consistently faces structural obstacles year after year, it may affect
her philosophy of teaming as well. That is, a teacher who does not have the structural
conditions necessary for optimal teaming may conclude that team teaching is not really
a priority for the school. This could result in the teacher scaling back her view of
teaming as a goal. Several teachers who have repeatedly faced such structural obstacles
expressed that their philosophy of team teaching was impacted. Alaina Cook said,
Of course the philosophy changes when you don't have those same
resources to make [teaming] work. So you have to cut back on planning
lessons together if you don't have common plan. So you have to amend
the philosophy. The practicality wins out over the ideology.
In addition, some teachers even expressed frustration at what they perceived to be
systematic favoritism. One Language Arts teacher said, "it's really frustrating when it
doesn't work out for you and it does work out for other people, and it continues to work
out for others." Some teams consistently faced structural obstacles to teaming, while
others had all of the elements in place year after year.
To examine this rival explanation in more detail, I created a matrix (Figure 4)
derived from the data in Table 5. Teachers' placement on the horizontal axis
(commitment to teaming philosophy and practice) is the same as the other two matrices.
This time, the vertical axis represents the structural factors that facilitate or inhibit
implementation ofteam teaching. Most teachers moved a little as a result of this new
112
sort. Four teachers made significant changes. As with the role-by-time matrix above
(Figure 3), I defined a significant change as a vertical move into a different third of the
matrix. Two teachers moved into a lower third and two teachers moved into a higher
third. All four major movers were in the center of the horizontal axis. This suggests that
structural factors are more likely to impact the team-teaching philosophy of teachers
who are moderately committed to the teaming model.
Analysis of Rival Explanations and Causal Network
In all three matrices (Figures 2-4), a teacher's placement on the commitment to
teaming axis is the same. The difference is her vertical placement, based on the
variables of familiarity with the narrative, longevity, and structural obstacles. The
similarities in the overall patterns of the data suggest that these three factors may each
playa significant role in influencing a teacher's philosophy and practice oftearn
teaching. The strength of association is not significantly greater in any of the three
matrices. Therefore, it is not sufficient to conclude that a teacher's familiarity with the
founding narrative has a consequential, causal effect on her commitment to team
teaching.
Figure 5 is a causal network demonstrating factors that may inhibit or facilitate
the transmission of organizational memory and the sustainability of reforms. Factors
that block the sustainability of reforms include staff turnover, structural obstacles to
teaming, and loose organizational linkages. These elements lead to the attrition of
113
change or the failure to sustain the innovative reform. Factors that may playa role in
sustaining reforms at Eagle Mountain High School include longevity and the
transmission of the paradigmatic narrative.
Transmission of
Paradigmatic
Narrative
Loose
Organizational
Linkages
Structural
Obstacles
Attrition ofChange:
Reform not Sustained
Founding Reforms:
Team Teaching
Sustainability ofReforms:
Commitment to Philosophy and
Practice of Team Teaching
Staff
Turnover
Longevity
FIGURE 5. Causal network: Factors affecting the sustainability of reforms at
Eagle Mountain High School.
114
Conclusions
The purpose of this study was to examine the relevance of Linde's (2000) theory
of the paradigmatic narrative in the context of an innovative young high school. At this
point, it is appropriate to address the research questions that guided the study:
1. What role does the communication of the founding narrative of an innovative
young school play in the sustainability of reforms?
2. Can narratives help overcome the obstacles to sustaining reforms presented by
loose organizational linkages and staff turnover?
3. What is the relationship between an individual teacher's role in the
transmission of the paradigmatic narrative and his/her commitment to implementing the
founding reforms?
The pattern-matching analysis suggests that a paradigmatic narrative does exist
at Eagle Mountain High School. The organizational memory of the school is transmitted
through formal and informal opportunities for remembering. Teachers who were not
present at the founding of the school are familiar with elements of the narrative, and the
school seems to thrive on a vibrant sense of its own distinctive history.
The transmission of the founding narrative could playa role in the dissemination
of organizational memory in the face of loose organizational linkages and staff turnover.
A pattern exists suggesting a strong relationship between a teacher's familiarity with the
founding narrative and her commitment to one of the founding reforms. However, the
115
existence of legitimate and plausible rival explanations precludes the conclusion that the
paradigmatic narrative has a causal impact on the sustainable implementation of the
founding reforms.
This lack of direct causal links between the narrative and the sustainability of the
team-teaching system does not diminish the potential importance of the findings
regarding the existence and role of the narrative. The workings of a complex
organization, like a comprehensive high school, do not tend to lend themselves to
clearly delineated causality. And, in the end, the purpose of the study was not to
establish causality. Rather, the purpose of the study was to consider whether the theory
of the paradigmatic narrative is applicable in the context ofK-12 public education.
This study found that Linde's theory provides a useful frame for studying the
role of narratives in schools, particularly young schools with a distinct culture of
innovation. This study also aimed to examine the nature of the stories that are told
within the organization and to shed more light on the dynamics of the relationship
between storytelling and the day-to-day functions of a school. These findings may be
useful for future researchers as they continue to explore narratives in schools.
Limitations of This Study
This study faced several limitations that may have affected the results and
conclusions. First, only about one half ofthe members of the Language Arts and Social
Studies departments participated in the interviews. The participants demonstrated
116
substantial variability in their familiarity with the founding narrative and their
commitment to the team-teaching system. However several notable individuals did not
choose to participate in the interviews. In particular, one team of teachers consistently
implements many of the elements of team teaching at a high level. Interviewees
repeatedly referred to these teachers as the model team. The data in this study would be
more complete if they had chosen to participate in the interviews.
Similarly, the study may suffer from the limited participation of teachers who
are no longer at Eagle Mountain. I contacted several former members of the Language
Arts and Social Studies departments, but only one consented to an interview.
Another limitation derives from the changing educational environment. This
study is concerned with the sustainability of reforms, but it is not reasonable to expect
that an educational practice should be implemented in exactly the same form through
time. In particular, the past 10 years have seen a dramatic change in education policy
with the broad-ranging influence of the No Child Left Behind Act. The ensuing shift
toward standardization and assessment may have acted as a countervailing force to the
philosophies of collaboration and relationships that lay at the heart of the team-teaching
system. Similarly, the Cotton Valley School District has been encouraging teachers to
experiment with proficiency-based assessment and instructional processes. Not
surprisingly, Eagle Mountain High School has been an active player in this innovative
reform. The proficiency model is not inherently at odds with team teaching. However,
the focus of proficiency is exclusively on individual achievement, which may impel
117
teachers away from the collaborative learning model that is the core of teaming. Thus,
forces acting on district, state and federal levels may have influenced the results of this
study. The interview and observation protocols were not constructed to account for
these broader policy shifts and their potential impact on the sustainability of the team-
teaching system at Eagle Mountain High School.
Opportunities for Future Research
The landscape of educational reform is scattered with the wreckage of countless
well-intentioned reforms that could not overcome the attrition of change (Fink, 2000).
The design may have been sound, but the implementation lacked the necessary qualities
to become fully institutionalized and sustainable. As Orwell's pigs discovered,
revolutionary vision may succumb to the habits and patterns ofthe old system. The
more educational leaders can recognize and understand the mechanisms of successful
implementation, the more likely they will be able to sustain innovative reforms.
Organizational memory is a key component in this sustainability of reforms.
The role of narratives in the transmission of organizational memory has been
documented in the business world and, to a lesser degree, in higher education. However,
few studies have considered this relationship in K-12 public education. This study found
that a paradigmatic narrative exists at an innovative young high school. Future research
on this topic should further explore the relationship between the narrative and the
broader culture of the organization. Researchers may attempt to isolate the function of
118
the narrative from other factors that may contribute to the transmission of organizational
memory and the sustainability of reforms. In particular, further studies could attempt to
differentiate between longevity in the organization and familiarity with the paradigmatic
narrative as causal factors in sustainability. In addition, further studies could explore
individual teachers' awareness of the narrative, and how consciousness of a
paradigmatic narrative affects the status, sense of belonging, and/or teaching practice of
the tellers and listeners.
APPENDIX A
INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS
119
120
Interview Protocols
Introduction & Welcome
Introduce myself
Thank the teachers for agreeing to participate in the interview
Purpose ofthe Study
This study is part of my dissertation research for a doctoral degree at the
University of Oregon. I am examining the degree to which the stories teachers tell each
other about the founding philosophies of the school affect current practice. In particular,
I am interested in how the stories are passed along and whether they impact the
implementation of the 9th- and 10th-grade Language Arts and Social Studies team
teaching system. The data from this study will be used for a doctoral dissertation.
Role ofthe Researcher
As the researcher, I am committed to maintaining objectivity and protecting the
confidentiality of participants. This interview protocol will serve to guide the data
collection, maintain consistency across interviews, and generate reliable data.
Review ofConsent Form
Check off the following items:
____ Thank you for participating in this interview. During this interview, you will
be asked about your understanding of the founding philosophies of the
school, your personal philosophy and practice of team teaching, and your
role in organizational communication.
____ If you have any questions or concerns during or after the interview, please
feel free to ask me.
Everything said in this interview will be audiotaped. This will allow me to
----
transcribe your exact words. This is important as I attempt to reconstruct the
cornmon elements of the school's founding narrative. If you would prefer
not to be audiotaped, I can turn off the recorder.
I will be the only one who has access to the audiotapes. The audiotapes will
----
be erased after transcription.
____ To protect your confidentiality, I will use pseudonyms for the school,
district, teachers and all other identifiable information in the publication of
the dissertation. In reporting and analyzing the data, I will make every effort
121
to represent data in nonidentifiable forms. Despite these measures, it may
be possible for individuals familiar with the school to determine the identity
of respondents from their responses.
____ As participants in a group interview, you have the responsibility to respect
the confidentiality of your colleagues. If you want to discuss issues that
arise from this interview, please contact me rather than sharing confidential
details with others.
____ The interview will take about 45-60 minutes. If you have additional
thoughts or comments that you would like to add after the interview is over,
please feel free to contact me in person or by E-mail.
____ If there are any questions or parts of questions that you don't want to
answer, please say so. I will move on without asking anything further.
Interview Questions for Teachers
1. How many years have you been at the school (including the current year)?
2. How many team partners have you had in your time at the school?
3. Tell me about the founding of the school?
Probe: Who were some ofthe major players?
What were some ofthe key philosophies ofthe school at its inception?
What were some ofthe challenges ofthe founding ofthe school?
4. How familiar are you with the story of the founding of the school?
Probe: I know nothing about the founding ofthe school.
I have heard a few things, but couldn't tell you many details.
I could retell the basics ifnecessary.
I feel confident telling the key points ofthe founding ofthe school.
I could retell the whole story, including minor details.
5. Think back to what you were told about the school when you were
interviewing for your job. What were you told about this school?
Probe: What things did or did not live up to your expectations?
122
6. If you were interviewing a new English or Social Studies teacher, what would you
tell them is unique or innovative about this school?
7. How have you heard about the founding philosophies of the school?
Probe: website, design studio, preservice meetings, staffdevelopment, team
partner, conversations with other staff, hiring interviews
8. How have you told others about the founding philosophies of the school?
Probe: website, design studio, preservice meetings, staffdevelopment, team
partner, conversations with other staff, hiring interviews
9. In what ways are the original philosophies of the school still guiding your day-to-day
work in your 9th- or 10th-grade classes?
10. What do you perceive as the key elements of the team teaching system?
11. How important is teaming to your personal philosophy of teaching?
Probe: It is one ofthe most important negative factors in my quality ofteaching
It is usually a negative factor in my teaching
It does not benefit or take away from my teaching
It is usually a positive factor in my teaching
It is one ofthe most important positive factors in my quality ofteaching
12. If a new administration came along and proposed eliminating the team teaching
system, how would you respond?
Probe: Would you go with the/low?
Would you lead active resistance?
Would you consider leaving the school ifteaming were eliminated?
13. How often do you implement the following elements of the team teaching system:
Common curriculum design
Aligned daily lesson plans
Common assessments (assignments graded for both classes)
Referring to lessons/assignments/discussions from the other class
Open classroom doors for joint lessons/activities
Open classroom doors for differentiated instruction (pull-out groups)
Discussing student progress or comparing grades for shared students
Joint communications with parents
123
Probe: Most days
About once a week
Everyfew weeks
About once or twice a trimester
About once or twice a year
Never
14. Are there logistical or structural factors that affect your implementation ofteam
teaching?
Probe: multiple partners, multiple classrooms, lack ofshared classroom walls,
lack ofcommon planning period, uJ1familiar curriculum
15. How do the stories of the founding ofthe school affect your team teaching
philosophy (not necessarily practice)?
Probe: Has your philosophy qfteaming changed over time? Is that change
related to your changing perception qfthe founding vision?
16. How do the stories of the founding ofthe school affect your team teaching practice?
Interview Questionsfor Administrators-Eagle Mountain Founding Vision
1. Describe the process ofthe founding of the school. When did it begin? What was the
mandate? What were the key steps in the process?
2. What were some of the key philosophies ofthe school at its inception?
3. What were some of the challenges ofthe founding of the school?
4. How did you communicate the founding philosophies of the school to new staff
members? How did you facilitate staff members passing on the founding philosophies
of the school to the next generation of new staff?
APPENDIXB
FOUNDING NARRATIVE FRAGMENT MATRIX INCORPORATING
ELEMENTS FROM LINDE (2000)
124
Founding Narrative Fragment Matrix Incorporating Elements From Linde (2000)
Date/Time
.po>
~(!)
Location1:1
0
u
Purpose of meeting or conversation
Speaker - role / authority
(pseudonym)
Element of Narrative
What was said?
(!) Context in which narrative is invoked
.,. (What else is the speaker.....
1i:i talking about?)~
Z
Unique Circumstances or Antecedents
Listeners - who heard it?
members of LAISS teams?
(pseudonyms, of course)
(!)
r/J
s::
0 Responses - verbal~
~
Responses - physical
(nodding, eye-rolling, glancing at peers, etc.)
Comments - other observations
(values expressed?)
125
APPENDIXC
ANNOUNCEMENT AT STAFF AND DEPARTMENT MEETINGS
126
127
Announcement at Staff and Department Meetings
The purpose of this announcement was to inform staff that I would be conducting
observations at staff and department meetings. I also explained the consent process,
confidentiality issues, and uses of the data.
"As many of you know, I am working on my dissertation for a doctoral degree at the
University of Oregon. I am studying the role of narratives in sustaining reforms. In other
words, how do the stories teachers tell each other about the founding of the school affect
the way we do things today? In particular, I am studying the 9th- and 10th-grade
Language Arts and Social Studies team teaching system here at High School.
"The primary method of data collection will be interviews with Language Arts and
Social Studies teachers. In addition, I will be observing and recording data during staff
meetings and Language Arts/Social Studies department meetings. I will not be
documenting everything that is said in the meetings. The only data I will be recording
will be references to the history of the school and the story of its founding. I will
observe the context of the comments and how they are received. I expect that these
notes will make up a very small portion of the content of the meetings. I will not be
recording (audio or video) any portion of the meetings.
"I will use pseudonyms for note-taking and describing all of the data in the study,
including the names of teachers, administrators, and even the school and the district.
"I will not be observing or recording any conversations or behaviors outside of staff
meetings and Language Arts/Social Studies department meetings. That means, any
conversations that I am involved in outside of those meetings will not be part of the data
collection.
"The District Research Committee and the school administration have given their
approval for this study. In addition, the University of Oregon's Office for the Protection
of Human Subjects has reviewed and approved of my methods for collecting the data
and protecting your rights.
"The data collected during these observations, combined with interview data, will help
me determine the role that the story ofthe founding of the school plays in the
implementation of the founding reforms in our current practice.
"Your participation in these observations is entirely voluntary. If you would prefer that I
not record any comments that you make during staff or department meetings, you can
128
simply opt out. I will provide each of you with a consent form. If you choose to
participate in the study, you only need to read the consent form. If you choose to opt out
of the study, please sign and return the form to me before the next staff meeting.
"I will not begin collecting data until the next meeting to allow you time to review the
consent form and opt out if you choose.
"Thanks for your time and for considering participating in this study. Please feel free to
talk to me if you have any questions."
APPENDIXD
DATA-COLLECTION MATRIX
129
130
Data-Collection Matrix
As I collected, sorted and coded data from interviews, it was necessary for me to
have a structure to organize my results. This not only served a procedural purpose, but
also aided in the data processing. In fact, the data collection and reduction process,
including the design of the table and the process of assigning data to cells within the
table, could be considered part of the data analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1984).
Developing this table in advance also helped me maintain focus during the process of
designing questions and conducting interviews (Yin, 2003). Knowing what kinds of
data I was looking to process helped me know what kinds of questions to ask. This also
helped me avoid the pitfall of gaps in the data. This data table also serves as part of the
case study database, the raw data which could allow other researchers to independently
analyze my data free of my own analysis and conclusions (Yin, 2003).
Demographics Content of Narrative
Key Other Interviewee's
Interviewee Years at Current Number Depart- elements familiar generalPseudo- Eagle Team of Team
ment5 of elements familiarity
nyms' Mountain2 Partner3 Partners4 founding of with
narrative6 narrative? narrative8
ITo protect the confidentiality of individual participants, I kept a list of interviewee names and
pseudonyms separate from this data table.
2Including the current year. F = member of founding faculty. I sorted the chart by this category
to see ifpattems existed related to the length of a teacher's service at Eagle Mountain (Miles &
Huberman, 1984).
3Pseudonym, of course.
4In a teacher's career at EMHS.
5Language Arts or Social Studies.
6As this teacher retold it in the interview. Using this data, I developed a coding system to allow
for comparison across responses. This was the most text-intensive section of the matrix.
?Revealed after probing questions. Interviewees tended to know more of the narrative than they
initially recalled.
8Based on direct questions about familiarity and demonstrations of familiarity in other answers.
131
Transmission Team Teaching Role ofNarrativein Team Teaching
ofNarrative Philosophy, Commitment & Practice
Philosophy & Practice4
How inter- How inter- Personal Degree of Elements Impact of Impact of
viewee viewee has philosophy commit- of team narrative on narrativeheard passed on
ofteam ment to teaching team on team
about narrative to
teaching3 team evident in teaching teaching
narrative l others2 teaching practice philosophy practice
lIn what ways has the teacher heard the narrative told (e.g., school website, program planning
guide, department meetings, team partner, design studio, etc.)? I defined "heard" loosely, as Yin (2003)
does. Hearing, in this sense, may also include reading or observing.
2Part ofthe theory is that individuals within the organization pass on elements of the
paradigmatic narrative in daily interactions (Linde, 2000, 2001).
3All teachers in the system have developed a personal philosophy ofteam teaching (whether
they are consciously aware of it or not). I may have encountered issues of reflexivity here. Because
teachers were being asked about their personal philosophy of teaming in a formal setting, they may have
been inclined to tailor their responses to the "party line." The interview protocol addressed this issue to
some degree, but it may be impossible to eliminate altogether.
4These two elements were the most difficult to access. I asked teachers directly, but this may
have required a degree of reflection that they were not prepared to do (without a foundation in the
theoretical and empirical literature). Providing interview questions in advance and allowing opportunities
for follow-up clarification supported the validity of these data.
APPENDIXE
EXPERT PANEL REVIEW PROTOCOL
132
133
Expert Panel Review Protocol
I enlisted two teachers who were familiar with both the founding narrative and
the team teaching system at Eagle Mountain High School. To increase the range of
experience and perspective on the panel, one of the experts was a founding member of
the faculty and one joined the staff in the last 5 years. To help the expert judges evaluate
the interview questions and data-collection matrix in relation to the purpose of the
study, I included the proposal abstract and research questions in addition to the
following questions:
Review ofinterview questions
1. Is the language of the interview questions clear? Would you know how to
answer each question? Are there questions that you think should be revised for
clarity?
2. Is the order of the questions logical and appropriate? Do you have any
suggestions for reordering the questions?
3. Do any of the questions appear redundant? Can you identify distinctions
between similar questions?
4. Are there any questions that you anticipate might make interviewees
uncomfortable or likely to answer incompletely or untruthfully? Do you have
suggestions for revisions to make these questions more neutral?
5. Look closely at the probes for Questions 2, 7, and 9. Do the options cover the
range of possible answers? Are they appropriately balanced (unbiased)? Do you
have any suggestions for revising these options?
6. Do I need to add or change any interview questions to help me answer my
research questions?
Review ofdata matrix
1. Do the five main headings align with the subheadings?
2. Look again at the interview questions and the subheadings. Do the subheadings
provide a location for recording information from each question?
3. Is there at least one interview question that will provide data for each
subheading in the data-collection matrix? (I want to avoid having empty
134
columns resulting from the lack of an interview question that addresses the
subject of that column.)
4. Are there additional headings or subheadings that would help with the recording
and analysis of interview data?
5. Are there places where error or bias are likely to enter this data-collection
matrix?
6. Do I need to add or change any elements of my data-collection matrix to help
me answer my research questions?
APPENDIXF
CONVERGENCE OF EVIDENCE
135
136
Convergence of Evidence
This case study benefits from a convergence of evidence (Yin, 2003). The
diagram below represents the combination of data sources that I used to produce one of
the key elements of the study. Rather than relying on a single source of data, I used
multiple sources to derive the facts of the founding narrative at Eagle Mountain High
School.
Because Eagle Mountain was designed to be an innovative school, it has
repeatedly been the subject of articles about smaller learning communities, democratic
decision-making, and professional development. These articles provided an external
perspective on the origins of the school. Next, I reviewed documents from the early
days of the school, including curriculum binders and school-improvement plans. Several
PowerPoint presentations that were used to introduce new staff to the founding vision
also helped support my data.
During observations at staff and department meetings, I regularly heard direct
and coded references to the founding of the school. Using a data-collection protocol
derived from Linde (2000), I documented those references and the visible responses
from others present. Finally, I conducted interviews with teachers and principals, which
included questions about the key elements of the founding stories. I have identified
these interviews as separate data sources on this diagram because the founding vision
was the sole focus ofthe principal interviews while it was merely one facet of the
teacher interviews.
Articles about
the school
Interviews with
principals
Intervicvis
with teachers
Observations
DQcwncnts and
presentations
137
REFERENCES
Anderson, S. E., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1994). Institutionalization and renewal in a
restructured secondary school. School Organization, 14, 279-293.
Argyris, C. (1993). On organizational learning. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Barton, R. (2004). When big seems small. Northwest Education, 10(1),8-10. Retrieved
January 30, 2009, from http://www.nwrel.org/nwedu/l0-01/whenlc1oakJ
path1.pdf
Boje, D. M. (1991). The storytelling organization: A study of story performance in an
office-supply firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 106-126.
Brewster, C., & Railsback, 1. (2003). Building trusting relationships for school
improvement: Implications for principals and teachers. Portland, OR: Northwest
Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved January 30, 2009, from
http://www.nwrel.org/ request/2003sept/trust.pdf
Brink, K. E. (2003). New hire socialization: The dynamic relationships among
individual differences, cognition, affect, and behavior. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens.
Campbell, J. (1988). The power ofmyth. New York: Doubleday.
Clark, B. R. (1972). The organizational saga in higher education. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 17, 178-184.
Coladarci, T., & Cobb, C. (1996). Extracurricular participation, school size, and
achievement and self-esteem among high school students: A national look.
Journal ofResearch in Rural Education, 12, 189-192.
Cook, S. N., & Yanow, D. (1996). Culture and organizational learning. In M. D. Cohen
& L. S. Sproull (Eds.), Organizational learning (pp. 430-459). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Corbett, H. D., Dawson, J., & Firestone, W. (1984). School context and school change:
Implications for effective planning. Philadelphia: Research for Better Schools.
138
Crothers, G. E., (1932). The founding ofthe Leland Stanford Junior University. San
Francisco: Robertson.
Crothers, G. E. (1933). The educational ideals ofJane Lathrop Stanford. San Francisco:
Robertson.
Cuban, L. (1990). Reforming again, again, and again. Educational Researcher, 19, 3-
13.
Cuban, L. (1992). What happens to reforms that last? The case of the junior high school.
American Educational Research Journal, 29, 227-251.
Cutler, R W. P. (2003). The mysterious death ofJane Stanford. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Datnow, A. (2005). The sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in
changing district and state contexts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41,
121-153.
Eberts, R, & Schwartz, E. (1990). School reform, school size, and student achievement.
Economic Review, 26 (2), 2-16.
Elmore, R F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, DC:
The Albert Shanker Institute. Retrieved May 12,2008, from
http://www.ashankerinst.org/ Downloadslbuilding.pdf
Fink, D. (2000). Good schools/real schools: Why school reform doesn't last. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Gardenswartz, L., & Rowe, A. (2003). Diverse teams at work: Capitalizing on the
power ofdiversity. Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management.
Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. (1997). The individualized corporation: A fundamentally
new approach to management. New York: HarperBusiness.
Goodson, 1., Moore, S., & Hargreaves, A. (2006). Teacher nostalgia and the
sustainability of reform: The generation and degeneration of teachers' missions,
memory, and meaning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42, 42-61.
Gross, N., Giacquinta, 1. B., & Bernstein, M. (1971). Implementing organizational
innovations: A sociological analysis ofplanned educational change. New York:
Basic Books.
139
Hanson, M. (2001). Institutional theory and educational change. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 37, 637-661.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2000). Three dimensions of educational reform.
Educational Leadership, 57(7),30-34.
Hashweh, M. A. (2003). Teacher accommodative change. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 19,421-434.
Huber, G. P. (1996). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the
literature. In M. D. Cohen & L. S. Sproull (Eds.), Organizational learning (pp.
124-162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kruse, S. D. (2003). Remembering as organizational memory. Journal ofEducational
Administration, 41,332-347.
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1996). Organizational learning. In M. D. Cohen & L. S.
Sproull (Eds.), Organizational learning (pp. 515-540). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Linde, C. (1993). Life stories: The creation ofcoherence. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Linde, C. (2000). The acquisition of a speaker by a story: How history becomes
memory and identity. Ethos, 28, 608-632.
Linde, C. (2001). Narrative in institutions. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton
(Eds.), The handbook ofdiscourse analysis (pp. 518-536). Malden, MA:
Blackwell.
Lorenzo, A. L. (1998). A framework for fundamental change: Context, criteria, and
culture. Community College Journal ofResearch and Practice, 22,335-348.
Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in
entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly,
25,226-251.
March, J. G. (1999). The pursuit oforganizational intelligence. Oxford, England:
Blackwell.
McInyre, E., & Kyle, D. W. (2006). The success and failure of one mandated reform for
young children. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 1130-1144.
140
Meier, D. (1995). The power oftheir ideas: Lessonsfor Americafrom a small school in
Harlem. Boston: Beacon.
Meyer, A. D. (1982). How ideological structures supplant formal structures and shape
responses to environments. Journal ofManagement Studies, 19(1), 45-61.
Meyer, A. D., & Starbuck, W. H. (1993). Interactions between ideologies and politics in
strategy formulation. In K. H. Roberts (Ed.), New challenges to understanding
organizations (pp. 99-116). New York: Macmillan.
Meyer, J. T., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutional organizations: Formal structure as myth
and ceremony. American Journal ofSociology, 83,340-363.
Miles, M. B. (1980). School innovation from the ground up: Some dilemmas. New York
University Education Quarterly, 11(2),2-9.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of
new methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mintzberg, H. (1975). The manager's job: Folklore and fact. Harvard Business Review,
53,49-61.
Morgan, G. (2006). Images oforganization. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. (2001). Schools making progress. School
Description Series, No.1. Retrieved January 30, 2009, from
http://www.nwrel.org/csdi/ products/archived/SchoolsMakingProgress/
Southridge.pdf
Oberman,1. (1997, March 24). Waldorfhistory: Case study ofinstitutional memory.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Chicago.
Orwell, G. (1996). Animalfarm. New York: New American Library.
Oxley, D., Barton, R., & Klump, J. (2006). Creating small learning communities.
Principal's Research Review, 1(6), 1-6. Retrieved January 30, 2009, from
http://www.nwrel.org/csdi/ rss/products/SLCResearchReview.pdf
141
Pasternack, B. A., & Viscio, A. 1. (1998). The centerless corporation: A new modelfor
transforming our organization for growth andprosperity. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
Pettigrew, A. M. (1979). On studying organizational cultures. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 24,570-581.
Raywid, M. A. (1999). Central Park East Secondary School: The anatomy of success.
Journal ofEducationfor Students Placed at Risk, 4, 131-151.
Rusaw, A. C. (2004). How downsizing affects organizational memory in government:
Some implications for professional and organizational development. Public
Administration Quarterly, 28, 482-500.
Sabatier, P. A., & Mazmanian, D. A. (1981). The implementation of public policy: A
framework for analysis. In D. A. Mazmanian & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Effective
policy implementation (pp. 3-36). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Schwandt, D. R. (1995). Learning as an organization: A journey into chaos. In S.
Chawla & J. Renesch (Eds.), Learning organizations: Developing cultures for
tomorrow's workplace (pp. 365-379). Portland, OR: Productivity.
Sizer, T. R. (1992). Horace's school: Redesigning the American high school. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Smylie, M. A., Lazarus, V., & Brownlee-Conyers, J. (1996). Instructional outcome of
school-based participative decision making. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 18, 181-189.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Uline, C., Hoy, A., & Mackley, T. (2000). Creating smarter
schools through collaboration. Journal ofEducational Administration, 38,247-
271.
Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century ofpublic school
reform. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Tyler, J. A. (2007). Incorporating storytelling into practice: How HRD practitioners
foster strategic storytelling. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 18,559-
587.
Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1-19.
142
Whittemore, R, Chase, S. K., & MandIe, C. L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research.
Qualitative Health Research, 11,522-537.
Wolfe, S. (2003, September/October). Who killed Jane Stanford? Stanford Magazine.
Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/
magazine/ 2003/sepoct/features/jane.html
Yin, R K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.