Running head: 21st CENTURY SUPERVISION 1

Instructional Supervision of a 21st Century Learning Framework: Evaluating the Impact of a

District Initiative on Teachers Instructional Practices

Meredith Mitchell

George Mason University

EDLE 818 Spring 2016

Dr. Loran Edward Stephenson

21ST CENTURY SUPERVISION 2

Instructional Supervision of a 21st Century Learning Framework: Evaluating the Impact

of a District Initiative on Teachers Instructional Practices

In the past several decades, public education in America has been increasingly driven by

testing and accountability measures which impact the daily lives of schools, teachers, and most

importantly, students (Au, 2007; Hursh, 2007). While testing and accountability measures aim

to quantify student learning in an effort to enhance the educational experience of our nations

young people, many people have felt the effects and consequences of a test driven culture and

these consequences do not always directly relate to outcomes that are beneficial for children and

their futures (Au, 2007). In recent years, educational experts have rallied support and conducted

research to investigate what skills are truly necessary and relevant for students. Organizations

such as the Partnership for 21st Century Learning, the Organization for Economic Cooperation

and Development (OECD), and other research based groups, have begun to highlight the

necessity of refocusing our educational system on the significant issue of equipping students

with the skillsets they need to be productive in todays global economy (Kay & Greenhill, 2011;

Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt & Roblin, 2012). The research that undergirds the 21st century

learning reform is rooted in the idea that it is not rote memorization of facts and content

knowledge, which is what the majority of mandated national and state standardized assessments

currently measure, that matters; it is the ability to create, collaborate, communicate and think

critically that will allow young scholars to be equipped with what they need in todays job

market (Supovitz, 2009; Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt & Roblin,

2012). With the onset of this educational reform, there is an increasing need to understand how a

21st century learning reform is implemented by teachers and instructional leaders and how the

resulting teacher practices are supervised.

21ST CENTURY SUPERVISION 3

Purpose

These findings will not only hold utility for the current reform based in 21st century

learning, but will also highlight best practices for shaping pedagogy for subsequent reforms in

the future. The exploration of a districts 21st century learning initiative will be significant to the

developing understanding of the burgeoning educational reform and is particularly relevant at a

time where many educators and researchers alike have noted the shortcomings of todays

accountability centric culture of education (Au, 2007). This study will provide an evaluation of

the changes to teacher instructional practices and the subsequent instructional supervision

practices that will serve to highlight the key differences pre and post reform. This study may

also serve to highlight the lack of instructional evolution and development that occurs in spite of

the reform efforts.

Rationale and Significance

As the body of research on 21st century teaching and learning gains momentum, many

school districts have adopted measures and practices to commit to teaching these educational

ideals, which is an important first step in educational reform (Gunn & Hollingsworth, 2013).

While the explicit adoption of a shared vision of 21st century learning is important, merely

stating our intention of better equipping students for the future cannot and will not suffice.

School districts that have adopted the vision will need to have clear and strategic plans in place

detailing how to integrate these skillsets with current curricular programs and determine how

their instructional leaders will ensure the actual work of this vision is carried out (Gunn &

Hollingsworth, 2013; Neumerski, 2012). Additionally, it will be imperative to employ

educational leaders to monitor and supervise the implementation of this reform. These particular

instruction and supervision issues can be framed through the following research questions:
21ST CENTURY SUPERVISION 4

1) How does the district wide implementation of a 21st century learning framework

impact the teaching practices of the districts teachers?

2) How do instructional leaders supervise the fidelity of implementation of a district

wide 21st century learning reform?

Theoretical Framework

This study will contribute to the understanding of the 21st century learning reform

framework. The term 21st century learning has been used in several different frameworks to

encapsulate a group of skills that students will need to be successful in the future (Kay &

Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt & Roblin, 2012). While the literature largely

converges on the four broad categories known as the 4 Cs (collaboration, creativity,

communication, and critical thinking), the research from the P21 organization serves also to

promote student directed instructional delivery models, such as project-based learning, and

administrative practices that inherently encourage use of these skills (Kay & Greenhill, 2011;

Kay & Greenhill, 2012). The relatively new literature base is constantly expanding beyond the

scope of simply identifying theoretical qualities of the reform, and is now inclusive of these

aforementioned, and other, instructional and leadership practices (Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay &

Greenhill, 2012). The developing 21st century learning framework serves as the foundation for

this study in that it will highlight instructional and supervision practices of one particular school

district.

Data Sources and Methods

A qualitative study will collect data from teachers and instructional leaders that will

illuminate the nature of the practices involved in the implementation and supervision of a 21st

century learning reform.

21ST CENTURY SUPERVISION 5

Sample Selection

Site Selection. The study will be conducted within a large, mid-Atlantic school district

that has adopted a framework for 21st century learning and packaged their definitions in an

initiative called the Portrait of a Graduate. The district has already taken the first step of

defining their vision for the nature of the initiative and has identified the instructional practices

that are indicative of successful implementation. Therefore, this study will largely focus on

utilizing the districts conception of 21st century learning to evaluate teachers and instructional

leaders understandings and implementation of the 21st century learning reform. The particular

schools included in the study will be purposefully selected because members of the

administration of the school have served on a committee to help develop the district initiative for

21st century learning. This is noteworthy because it signifies that both the district and school

leadership have expressed their vision and intention for 21st century learning in the classroom,

meaning the instructional leaders and teachers within these schools are more likely to understand

and to have actively engaged in the implementation of 21st century teaching and learning. The

schools in the sample will represent both the elementary and secondary level and will reflect the

economically and ethnically diverse nature of the district.

Participants. Given that this study aims to deeply understand the experience of a

particular group, the study will utilize maximum variation sampling to incorporate multiple

types of leaders (including administrators, instructional coaches, and department chairs) as well

as multiple types of teachers representative of different school sites, grade levels, subject areas,

and demographics (Merriam, 2009).

Data Collection and Analysis

21ST CENTURY SUPERVISION 6

By observing teaching practice, including teacher behaviors, instructional planning, and

assessment practices, and using open-ended interviewing with teachers about their

understandings and practice, it will be possible to understand the ways in which a district can

effectively, or ineffectively, communicate and implement a reform at scale within a district. The

study will also collect data through observations and interviews of multiple levels of educational

leaders within the district regarding their actions in the reform, which will elucidate the ways in

which a district approaches the supervision of education within a changing educational

paradigm. Interview questions will focus on teachers and instructional leaders evaluation of

the changes to their practice both pre and post reform and observations will serve as evidence of

current practices. All data will be transcribed, coded, and recorded into a data collection matrix

that will allow for the utilization of the constant comparative method and the triangulation of

data (Merriam, 2009). As themes emerge, I will employ member checks, reflexivity of my own

analyses, and peer review as strategies to promote the validity and reliability of my research

(Merriam, 2009).

Findings and Conclusions

I anticipate my research will reveal information regarding the roles of instructional

leaders, the needs and perceptions of teachers participating in a school reform, the challenges

various stakeholders encounter throughout a reform process, as well as the mechanisms through

which changes in practice actually occur. It is likely that various instructional leaders will work

collaboratively to integrate and redefine their roles in order to support the inclusion of 21st

century learning in their school settings. These instructional leaders necessarily will work with

teachers who bring their own perspectives regarding the reform which may, in turn, shape the

nature of the reform process. It is also likely that opposition, structural challenges, and personnel
21ST CENTURY SUPERVISION 7

and professional development issues will arise throughout the process. This study may serve to

illuminate ways in which these obstacles were overcome. This research aims to contribute to the

significant gap in the literature by exploring how the educational theory of 21st century learning

translates into actual practice.

21ST CENTURY SUPERVISION 8

References

Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: a qualitative metasynthesis.

Educational Researcher, 36, 258-267.

Kay, K. & Greenhill, V. (2011). Twenty-first century students need 21st century skills. In G. Wan

& D. Gut (Eds.), Bringing schools into the 21st century (pp. 41-65). Netherlands:

Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0268-4_3

Kay, K. & Greenhill, V. (2012) The leaders guide to 21st century education: 7 steps for schools

and districts (pp. xiii-23). New Jersey: Pearson Resources for 21st Century Learning.

Hursh, D. (2007). Assessing No Child Left Behind and the rise of neoliberal education

policies. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 493-518.

Gunn, T. & Hollingsworth, M. (2013). The implementation and assessment of shared 21st

century learning vision: A district-based approach. Journal of Research on Technology

in Education, 45(3), 201-228. doi:10.1080/15391523.2013.10782603

Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Neumerski, C. (2012). Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: What do we know about

principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here?

Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2), 310-347. doi: 10.1177/0013161X12456700

Supovitz, J. (2009). Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from

the last decade of testing and accountability reform. Journal of Educational Change, 10,

211-227.
21ST CENTURY SUPERVISION 9

Voogt, J. & Roblin, N. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st

century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of

Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299-321. doi:10.1080/00220272.2012.668938