Spillane, James P. & Diamond, John B. (2007). Distributed Leadership in Practice. Reviewed by Cynthia Carver, Michigan State University

Spillane, James P. & Diamond, John B. (2007). Distributed Leadership in Practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Pp. 193     $30     ISBN 978-0-8077-4806-0 Reviewed by Cynthia Carver Michigan State University April 27, 2008 Sharing leadership with others is not exactly a new idea. Highly regarded leaders have often distributed or shared leadership responsibilities with members of their organizations, large and small. But what do we know about distributing leadership, especially in a school-based context? What is gained and lost under these arrangements, and by whom? What conditions support the practice of leaders and followers working together, and what are the associated costs? Similarly, what are the structures and artifacts that characterize this form of leadership? And how exactly does one learn to engage others in this work with skill, but also a measure of grace? In this edited volume by James Spillane (School of Education and Social Policy and Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University) and John Diamond (Harvard Graduate School of Education), readers may not happen upon answers to all of their questions, but they will find a thoughtful, as well as imaginative look at the practice of school leadership through a distributed perspective. Readers new to Spillane’s work, as well as those who have followed this body of research over time, will find the book structured in a way that invites ongoing conversation with the text’s central ideas. Spillane and Diamond begin by carefully outlining the assumptions and definitions that frame their understanding of a distributed perspective on leadership practice; the same analytic framework that guided the 5-year investigation of leadership practice reported here. Across the next six chapters, members of the research team give life to this framework by introducing us to the work of principals and teacher leaders in a sub-set of schools drawn from the larger study. Set in Chicago-area elementary schools, each chapter tells a uniquely different, yet complete story. Together, they provide a particularly rich and textured illustration of distributed leadership in practice, particularly the tools and routines that serve to mediate leadership practice in each site. In the final chapter, the authors revisit their framework, reviewing the advantages and the pitfalls of examining school leadership through a distributed perspective. While the image of a heroic leader continues to dominate the literature on school leadership (with its attendant focus on leadership roles and functions) this book takes a radically different view, one grounded in the situated practice of principals and teachers in schools. Importantly, by placing the emphasis on practice, the authors intentionally move away from a focus on the thinking and actions of recognized leaders to the interactions of leaders and their followers, as mediated through the use of tools and routines in a particular context. In the authors’ words: This distributed view of leadership shifts focus from school principals and other formal and informal leaders to the web of leaders, followers, and their situations that give form to leadership practice (p. 7). Precisely because of this shift in attention, the book has the power to transform how one looks at leadership. In the opening chapter, Spillane & Diamond clearly explain what their perspective is, and what it is not. Throughout the discussion, they effectively address the broad critiques that have been leveled at their work over the years by focusing on the descriptive potential of the framework. In this chapter, they argue the importance of viewing school leadership through the lens of practice, which they define as “the actual doing of leadership in particular places and times” (p. 6). Drawing on distributed cognition and activity theory, the authors then briefly introduce us to the three key elements across which leadership is “stretched” in this framework: leaders, followers, and situation. With regard to leaders, a distributed perspective acknowledges the variety of individuals, from principals to teacher leaders, who help to define and give shape to leadership practices. As a result of focusing attention on the interactions of multiple actors (versus a single heroic leader), they further argue that equal attention needs to be paid to the role of followers in this framework. Finally, Spillane & Diamond highlight the importance of organizational tools and routines, as critical aspects of the situation, that serve to mediate the work of leaders and followers. As the next six chapters will illustrate, tools and routines serve as the central organizer of their analytic work. As one might expect, the chapters that follow use the distributed perspective framework to describe and explain a school-based case of leadership practice. One by one, these cases help the reader to get inside the analytic potential of this approach by continually revisiting terms and introducing new ways of applying the framework. Set in the Chicago area, the five elementary schools represented in this study were all identified as “improving” at the time they were selected, yet still struggled with the challenges often associated with urban school contexts: confusing curricular expectations; shifting student population; limited resources; tangled bureaucracy. As a result, we get the sense that these schools mirror those in urban communities around the country. Methodologically, these cases draw on interview and observational data collected over a period of several months to two years by the research team. Chapters 2 through 5 specifically counter the notion of a heroic leader by highlighting the importance of multiple leaders working together with followers, around tools and routines, to enact reform. The focus on “reciprocal interdependency” between leaders and followers is clear and instructive in these cases, as is the attention paid to tools and routines. Importantly, Chapters 6 and 7 then challenge us to further refine our understandings of leadership by looking through the lens of subject matter, in this case literacy and mathematics. These last two chapters are particularly informative and fresh, and will leave readers with new insights as they pursue work with school leaders. The first case in the volume is authored by Amy Coldren and features the story of Mrs. Nelson at Hillside School. In this case, we see how instruction is strengthened by the use of organizing tools and routines, including a review of students’ writing folders, the deliberate attempt to link school-wide assessment practices with teaching strategies, and the systematic review of lesson plans. In her discussion of the case, Coldren explains how these artifacts operate as boundary objects and boundary practices (Wenger, l998), meaningfully connecting leaders’ work to teachers’ work. The next case, written by Richard Halverson, focuses on the “systems of practice” that emerge at Adams School as routines and tools, namely Breakfast Club, the 5-Week Assessment Routine and the School Improvement Plan, shape teachers’ experience of professional community in the building. This case helps to illustrate the ways tools can be used by school leaders to shape new practices, which in turn support the development of professional community. Notably, across both cases we begin to see the power of all teachers in a building having access to the same set of tools and routines for focusing their collective work on instruction, and for reinforcing a shared vocabulary for teaching and learning. Chapter 4, written by co-editor John Diamond, examines the nuanced ways that leaders at Kelly School effectively use a combination of “microtasks” – weekly professional development sessions, teachers’ classroom use of a skill chart, and culturally relevant classroom routines – to raise teacher expectations and sense of responsibility for their African American students’ learning. Diamond’s case is purposefully written to illustrate how these tasks are “stretched” over multiple leaders, a key idea within a distributed perspective. Then, lest we start thinking only success cases count within a distributed framework, Tim Hallett shares the story of Costen Elementary. Revealing what he coins the “underside” of leadership, we meet Mrs. Kox, a new principal who challenges the familiar but insular way of doing things in her building. With good intentions, she introduces a variety of activities designed to raise accountability and de-privatize practice, e.g. regular classroom visits, new grading procedures, alignment of curriculum and instruction to district standards, review of lesson plans. Her response from teachers? Resistance, and lots of it. This last case serves to remind us that Spillane’s distributed framework was never intended to be a blueprint or strategy for reform. Rather, this set of cases repeatedly demonstrate the more appropriate use of this framework as an analytic tool for (re)considering leadership practice in an existing setting. The last two cases in this set, authored respectively by Jennifer Sherer and Patricia Burch, offer yet another lens for looking at leadership practice: subject matter. Sherer takes us back to Adams School (the site of Breakfast Club and the 5-Week Assessment) where she examines school leaders uneven efforts to bring about reform in literacy and mathematics. Importantly, this occurs in spite of leaders access to the same routines and tools. In the case of language arts, these tools were used in a variety of creative ways by a range of formal and informal leaders. In the case of mathematics, tool use took a less helpful linear and sequential path. Sherer attributes these differences, in part, to the curricular and epistemological differences between literacy and mathematics. Burch then shares the story of Baxter Elementary, a setting where teachers have a history of working collaboratively within a strong professional culture. Still, like Adams School, we see how the same group of teachers and teacher leaders, with access to the same tools and routines, approach curricular reform in literacy and mathematics in dramatically different ways. In both cases, we are left feeling more hopeful and positive about leaders ability to change literacy instruction over that in mathematics. Looking back at these cases, the careful reader will have noticed that the emphasis throughout has been on leaders’ use of tools and routines, with significantly less attention paid to followers and the larger communities of practice in which these cases of leadership practice are set. Given their emphasis on the situated nature of leaders’ practice, this emphasis is warranted and will contribute in meaningful ways to the theoretical work of this model, as well as to the field’s understandings of leadership more broadly. At the same time, their discussion of followers – limited to a couple short paragraphs – introduces an important dimension of leadership practice that deserves more attention by researchers and practitioners, alike. This final point draws attention to the challenges of theorizing about leadership practice and studying it in a way that captures its full complexity. While no book can be expected to do it all, the field will no doubt benefit from further efforts to develop and refine the wealth ideas presented by this framework, as found in this slim volume. Reflecting on the overall utility of the framework in their final chapter, Spillane and Diamond urge readers to see its potential as a diagnostic tool for practitioners, as well as an analytic tool for researchers. From a diagnostic lens, the power of this small book can be summed up in a single thought: savvy leaders use a variety of artifacts and tools to create organizational routines that focus collective attention on the core tasks of instruction. Having shared ideas from this book with principals with whom I work, I see first-hand the power of using this text to introduce school leaders to new images of the possible. The six case studies that structure this volume are perfect for practitioners who may have limited time, but who still hunger for ideas that inform their approach to leadership. A very readable companion volume would be Distributed Leadership, Spillane’s (2006) earlier effort to outline his views on a distributed perspective. Readers will find in this single text a complete and mature rendering of Spillane and colleagues distributed perspective on leadership, one that is both theoretical and practical. To use a distributed perspective on leadership as an analytic tool, however, researchers interested in using this framework will want to acquaint themselves with additional reading, as this text only provides a glimpse of the theoretically rich work that Spillane et al have undertaken since initiating this study. Fortunately, a wide range of articles and reports stemming from this body of research are now in circulation (e.g. Coldren & Spillane, 2007; Spillane, Diamond & Jita, 2003; Spillane, Halverson & Diamond; 2004). In summary, this volume represents a new beginning for a useful and important development in the field of school leadership. As one who also works closely with principals committed to developing their skills as instructional leaders, a distributed approach, as defined here, promises a fresh and needed perspective on the day-to-day practice of school leadership. However, this book’s greatest contribution may simply be the conversation it starts. Spillane and Diamond open their book by acknowledging the various and conflicting notions attributed to distributed leadership today. They then highlight the value that comes – through dialogue and debate – from our collective efforts to make sense of a new idea. With that in mind, their opening seems a fitting way to close this review. The appeal of a distributed perspective lies partially in the ease with which it becomes many things to many people…. Usages vary. Some use it as though it were a blueprint or recipe for effective school leadership…. Others use it as a conceptual or analytical lens… some move back and forth, sometimes unknowingly, between normative and theoretical stances. Such diversity in usage and understanding is to be expected; it is the way that ideas work in the world of practice, scholarship and development. Ideas, as they percolate or trickle through various conversations, become understood in new ways, taking on new meaning and getting put to new uses… Perhaps the best we can hope for concerning distributed leadership – and any set of ideas for that matter – is that they continue to be part of conversations about school improvement (pp. 1-2). References Coldren, A. F. & Spillane, J. P. (2007). Making connections to teaching practice. Educational Policy, 21(2), 369-396. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Spillane, J. P., Diamond, J. B. & Jita, L. (2003). Leading instruction: The distribution of leadership for instruction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(5), 533-543. Spillane, J., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. (2004). Toward a theory of school leadership practice: Implications of a distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press. About the Reviewer Cynthia Carver is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Teacher Education at Michigan State University, where her research and teaching interests focus on the policy and practice of new teacher support and development, including the role principals play in supporting new teachers and their mentors.