Purpose: Our primary purpose is to examine the implementation of college- and- career- readiness content standards in Kentucky, Ohio, and Texas through the lens of distributed leadership theory, and to determine the affordances and challenges of this distributed leadership through the lens of policy attribute theory. Research Methods/Approach: We analyze data from 66 hour-long interviews of state and district administrators across the three states collected from Spring 2016 to Spring 2017. Using a deductive coding approach, we developed themes around distributed leadership as they pertain to the five attributes of policy implementation: specificity, consistency, authority, power, and stability. Findings: Using the distributed leadership and policy attribute theories, we find similar trends in state leaders distributing instructional leadership to regional, district, and organizational leaders to add specificity to the college and career readiness standards at the expense of compromising the consistency and power of the reform. This distribution of leadership is thought to contribute to the authority of the reform, though this authority is made tenuous by the instability of educational policies at the national and state levels. Implications: We highlight the need to examine the implementation of education policy using leadership frameworks and to understand leadership relationships between the state their regional and district partners. We extend the use of the distributed leadership theory beyond the K-16 level and the use of policy attribute theory to showcase where state actors can strengthen their reform initiatives.

中文翻译：

---

各州如何实施大学和职业准备标准？基于标准的改革的分布式领导分析

目的：我们的主要目的是通过分布式领导理论的视角检查肯塔基州、俄亥俄州和德克萨斯州的大学和职业准备内容标准的实施情况，并通过分布式领导力的视角确定这种分布式领导的可供性和挑战。政策属性理论。研究方法/方法：我们分析了从 2016 年春季到 2017 年春季对三个州的州和地区行政人员进行的长达 66 小时的访谈数据。使用演绎编码方法，我们围绕分布式领导开发了与五个属性相关的主题政策执行的特点：专一性、一致性、权威性、权力性、稳定性。发现：使用分布式领导和政策属性理论，我们发现类似的趋势是，州领导人将教学领导权分配给地区、地区和组织领导人，以增加大学和职业准备标准的特殊性，但以牺牲改革的一致性和力量为代价。这种领导权的分配被认为有助于增强改革的权威性，尽管由于国家和州级教育政策的不稳定性，这种权威性变得脆弱。启示：我们强调需要使用领导框架来检查教育政策的实施，并了解州与地区合作伙伴之间的领导关系。