Agents of change? How district leaders shape absorptive capacity within research–practice partnerships
Purpose This study explores how district leaders shape the absorptive capacity of research–practice partnerships (RPPs) when addressing local problems of practice. Design/methodology/approach Drawing from Farrell et al. (2019), we focus on three core partnership domains shaping absorptive capacity: (a) prior knowledge, (b) communication pathways and (c) strategic knowledge leadership. We then employ a mixed-methods, multiple-case study design (Yin, 2013), highlighting two districts participating in a five-year National Science Foundation grant (2019–2024) to improve math instruction and learning. Data collected include semi-structured interviews ( N = 180), the Visions of High-Quality Mathematics Instruction Rubric (VHQMI), social network surveys, meeting observations ( N = 80) and the effective teams rubric (ETR). Findings Data suggest that district leaders variably shape an RPP’s absorptive capacity to engage in joint-partnership work. Notably, these differences are related to the degree to which district leaders promote or hinder the assimilation of new knowledge among other stakeholders within the RPP network. Originality/value Indeed, we do not yet know how district leaders moderate stakeholder involvement within a given RPP network and how such involvement might influence the partnership’s absorptive capacity to address local problems of practice.
Authors
- Kathleen Pitvorec (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7073-7487)
- Shelby Cosner (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1813-5803)
- Michael D. Siciliano (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8688-8685)
- Craig De Voto (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2434-6749)
Institutions
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- University of Georgia (US)
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Educational Administration
- Published
- 2025-06-19
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1108/jea-08-2024-0275
- Primary Topic
- Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00