Michelle Shumate

Increasingly, scholars and practitioners are interested in evaluating the effectiveness of interorganizational networks. We use a configuration approach to study network effectiveness. This research is a mixed-method study of 26 education networks in the United States. We measure network effectiveness by comparing 4th-grade literacy, 8th-grade literacy, and high-school graduation rates. We compare these scores with all school districts in the state using interrupted time series or parametric difference-in-differences approaches. Then, drawing from qualitative data from interviews and archives, we investigate the network governance, environmental characteristics, and theories of change associated with greater student achievement. We find three configurations associated with network effectiveness using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. One configuration combines decentralized governance with a project theory of change in the context of resource munificence. A second configuration associated with network effectiveness is to combine learning and systems alignment theories of change with smaller network size and resource munificence. The final configuration combines decentralized governance, a learning theory of change, less resource munificence, and larger network size and does not use a systems alignment theory of change. The results support the configurational approach, which suggests multiple configurations of factors in combination may result in network effectiveness.

As pressure increases to support social justice, coalitions try to understand their role in oppression while implementing practices to create equitable environments. Twenty-six education-focused community coalitions in the United States participated in the study. Coalition interviews and membership rosters are used to evaluate the degree to which these coalitions engage in community engagement practices conducive to empowerment. Involvement practices emphasize communication strategies and participatory design structures. Systems change practices emphasize agenda-setting processes and a level of awareness of structural sources that create social marginalization. This work investigates how these two practices create empowerment. This study uses fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to examine the impact of community poverty, coalition age, government representation, coalition size, school district size, and coalition governance on involvement and systems change practices. The results demonstrate combinations of these conditions in four mutually exclusive solutions for involvement practices and two mutually exclusive solutions for systems change practices. The paper ends by identifying cases that coincide with these solutions and how communities thoughtfully configure their collaborations to coincide with empowerment theory. Additionally, we identify potential trade-offs between involvement and systems change practices.